Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 66 references

Cosmological Remapping for Efficient Generation of 21 cm Intensity Mapping Mocks

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Cosmological remapping can turn one halo catalog into accurate 21 cm intensity-mapping mocks for WMAP7, Planck18, and CPL cosmologies, with power spectra matching dedicated simulations to within 5–10 percent.

desk verdict A practical remapping paper with solid halo-level validation, but the 21 cm C_l agreement for CPL and Planck18 is asserted in the text without target curves, so the map-level claim currently rests on WMAP7 alone. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.14588 v2 pith:FTNCW6FL submitted 2025-06-17 astro-ph.CO

Rahima Mokeddem , Bruno B. Bizarria , Jiajun Zhang , W.S. Hipólito-Ricaldi , Carlos Alexandre Wuensche , Elcio Abdalla , Filipe B. Abdalla , Amilcar R. Queiroz
show 5 more authors
Thyrso Villela Bin Wang Chang Feng Edmar C. Gurjão Alessandro Marins
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.CO
keywords cosmologicalremappingrescalinghalocatalogs21cmintensitymappingoccupationdistributionneutralhydrogenbrightnesstemperaturemockgeneration
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper argues that cosmological remapping, which rescales the lengths, masses, and redshifts of an existing N-body simulation's halo catalog, can generate halo catalogs for target cosmologies without running new full simulations, and that these catalogs are accurate enough to build 21 cm intensity-mapping mocks. Starting from the Horizon Run 4 WMAP5 simulation, it produces halo catalogs for WMAP7, Planck18, and CPL cosmologies. The remapped halo power spectra match dedicated N-body simulations within about 5 percent for $k\gtrsim10^{-2}\,h/\mathrm{Mpc}$, and the derived 21 cm brightness-temperature angular power spectra match within 5–10 percent. A reader should care because this offers a cheap route to the many mocks needed for survey design, pipeline testing, and cosmological forecasts for experiments like BINGO.

What carries the argument

The carrying object is the remapping pair of rescaling factors, $s$ (lengths and positions) and $s_m$ (masses), determined by minimizing the linear-variance mismatch $\delta^2_{\mathrm{rms}}$ of Eq. (2.5) between original and target cosmologies. Position shifts are applied through a Zel'dovich displacement field computed from the halo over-density and a bias factor, with a Gaussian filter at the nonlinear scale controlling variance. The second ingredient is the HI halo occupation distribution of Eq. (2.13), a five-parameter relation assigning $M_{\mathrm{HI}}$ to halo mass, which turns remapped halos into brightness-temperature maps via Eq. (2.14), with 100 random-observer light cones to beat cosmic variance. Appendix A supplies quantitative guardrails: accurate remapping requires $s\lesssim1.1$ and $s_m\lesssim1.25$; larger $s_m$ is the stronger warning sign of failure.

What would settle it

Run a dedicated N-body simulation with Planck18 or CPL parameters at comparable volume and resolution, build its 21 cm mocks with the same HOD pipeline, and compare $C_\ell$ to the remapped Planck18 or CPL mocks; exceeding the 5–10 percent band beyond cosmic variance would falsify the accuracy claim. A second check is to measure the $M_{\mathrm{HI}}$–$M_h$ relation in two different cosmologies; a shift outside the five-parameter fit of Eq. (2.13) would falsify the cosmology-independence assumption.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that remapping is not just a shortcut for power spectra but carries through to the observable 21 cm signal. Rescaling lengths by $s$ and masses by $s_m$, shifting halo positions with a displacement field derived from the Zel'dovich approximation, and then populating the rescaled halos with neutral hydrogen through the five-parameter HOD relation of Eq. (2.13) reproduces the halo clustering of the target cosmology: WMAP7 and CPL residuals against OuterRim and Mira-Titan M003 remain within 5 percent for $k\gtrsim10^{-2}\,h/\mathrm{Mpc}$, matter power spectra stay below 10 percent for all three targets including Planck18, and 21 cm $C_\ell$ mocks come within 5–10 percent. The paper is explicit that only WMAP7 receives a direct map-level comparison against a target simulation; Planck18 is checked against the theoretical power spectrum, and the HOD relation itself is assumed cosmology-independent.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the HOD relation of Eq. (2.13) maps halo mass to HI mass in a cosmology-independent way, and that this mapping, validated at the map level only for WMAP7, stays valid for Planck18 and CPL; if it does not, the 21 cm mocks inherit a bias that the power-spectrum comparisons do not detect.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • One existing large N-body run, here Horizon Run 4, can serve as the seed for halo catalogs in many target cosmologies, so parameter surveys no longer need one full simulation per cosmology.
  • The 5–10 percent agreement of the 21 cm $C_\ell$ means remapped mocks are usable for BINGO-band analyses and similar single-dish intensity-mapping surveys, within the stated scale range.
  • Remapping accuracy has predictable limits: transitions with $s$ deviations within about 10 percent and $s_m$ deviations within about 25 percent stay reliable, while larger $s_m$ predicts residuals above 50 percent, so the rescaling factors themselves flag when the method should not be trusted.
  • The same remapped halo catalogs can feed downstream uses beyond 21 cm, such as galaxy formation modeling and galaxy-survey mocks, because the method preserves large-scale clustering.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the HOD relation is genuinely cosmology-independent, the pipeline extends to arbitrary target cosmologies inside the $s$/$s_m$ guardrails, including dark-energy models beyond CPL, without any new calibration.
  • The missing direct map-level benchmark for Planck18 and CPL leaves a gap: their claimed 5–10 percent $C_\ell$ accuracy rests on halo power-spectrum agreement plus the WMAP7 map-level test, and a cosmology-dependent HI-mass mapping would evade all current checks.
  • A testable extension is to compare remapped Planck18 and CPL mocks against a dedicated simulation's HI maps, or to measure the $M_{\mathrm{HI}}$–$M_h$ relation in two cosmologies; a shift outside the five-parameter fit would break the cosmology-independence assumption.
  • The quantitative $s$/$s_m$ thresholds suggest a practical pre-flight check: before remapping to any new cosmology, compute the two factors and reject targets where $s_m$ deviates by more than roughly 25 percent, rather than running the full pipeline.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper applies the cosmological remapping technique of Angulo & White and Mead & Peacock to the Horizon Run 4 WMAP5 halo catalog, generating halo catalogs for WMAP7, Planck18, and a CPL dynamical dark-energy model. It validates the remapped halo and matter power spectra against the OuterRim (WMAP7) and MiraTitan M003 (CPL) simulations and against CLASS theory, reporting roughly 5% agreement in halo P(k) for k greater than about 1e-2 h/Mpc and matter P(k) residuals below 10%. The halos are then populated with HI using a five-parameter HOD from [39], light cones are constructed, and 21 cm brightness-temperature angular power spectra are computed. For WMAP7 the C_l are compared with mocks built from OuterRim, with residuals stated as 5-10%; for CPL and Planck18 the C_l are shown only for the remapped mocks, with no target comparison. Appendix A quantifies remapping accuracy as a function of the rescaling parameters s and s_m and gives empirical thresholds for reliable remapping.

Significance. If the cross-cosmology validation is completed, the paper offers a practical, computationally inexpensive route to 21 cm intensity mapping mocks for a range of cosmologies, which is directly relevant to BINGO and similar experiments. The use of independent N-body simulations for the WMAP7 and CPL halo clustering comparisons is a genuine strength, and the explicit discussion of remapping parameter limits in Appendix A is useful guidance for practitioners. The central end-to-end C_l validation, however, is currently demonstrated only for WMAP7, and the cross-cosmology claim rests on an untested cosmology-independent HOD assumption. With those gaps closed, the method could be a valuable community tool for pipeline testing and forecasts.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4.2, Figure 6] The statement that 'the same results are found' for CPL and Planck18 is not supported by the figure: Figure 6 shows only the remapped C_l in four frequency bins, with no target C_l curves and no residual panels. The angular power spectrum is the only quantity that exercises the full chain from remapped halo masses through the HOD to brightness temperature, so the claimed 5-10% C_l agreement for CPL and Planck18 is currently unverified. Please add, for CPL, the corresponding C_l from MiraTitan M003 halo catalogs, and for Planck18 either an N-body-based target if one is available or an explicit statement that no end-to-end C_l validation is performed, with residual panels in both cases.
  2. [§2.2, Eq. (2.13)] The HI HOD of Eq. (2.13) is an empirical five-parameter relation calibrated to a single simulation, and the text asserts that it is 'cosmology-independent' without providing a test. For WMAP7, the only C_l comparison, the target simulation is close to the calibration cosmology of the HOD, so that comparison does not test transferability. Since the remapped halo masses M' = s_m M feed directly into Eq. (2.13), any cosmology dependence of the HI-halo mass relation would bias the CPL and Planck18 mocks in a way that the halo and matter power-spectrum checks do not reveal. Please either validate the HOD in at least one additional cosmology (for example with a hydrodynamic simulation) or explicitly quantify this as an unvalidated assumption in the error budget of the mocks.
  3. [§4.1 and Appendix A] For Planck18, Table 3 gives s=0.8616 (13.8% deviation from unity) and s_m=0.7601 (24.0% deviation), while Appendix A.1 defines the accurate-remapping range as s deviations below 10% and s_m deviations below 25%. The Planck18 remap is therefore outside the stated optimal range in s, yet Section 4.1 reports matter power-spectrum residuals below 10%, and the conclusions extend 5-10% accuracy to the Planck18 mocks. The paper should reconcile this, for example by explaining that the Appendix thresholds are conservative or by applying the halo mass and box size thresholds mentioned in Appendix A and reporting the resulting residuals for Planck18.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§2.2, Eq. (2.13)] The exponential term in Eq. (2.13) is missing its parentheses and minus sign; it should read c exp[-(log10 M - d)^2 / f^2].
  2. [§2.2, step list] In the bullet list at the end of Section 2.2, the brightness-temperature rescaling step refers to 'Equation (2.14)', but the rescaling is defined in Eq. (2.15).
  3. [References] Reference [33] is cited for the statement that more than 95% of HI lies within the virial radius of dark matter halos in IllustrisTNG, but the reference listed is the COLOSSUS toolkit paper; this citation should be corrected to the appropriate IllustrisTNG HI study.
  4. [Tables 4 and 5] Tables 4 and 5 list inconsistent values for the WMAP7-like 2 model (s=1.075 versus 1.0659 and s_m=1.271 versus 1.2389); please harmonize the two tables.
  5. [Abstract and Appendix A] The abstract and conclusions promise an analysis of halo mass and box size thresholds, but Appendix A only gives thresholds on the rescaling parameters s and s_m; no quantitative halo mass or box size threshold is provided or applied in the main results.
  6. [§5, Conclusions] The phrase 'the first time' in Section 5 sits awkwardly with the authors' previous remapped 21 cm mock paper [48] and with the BINGO HOD mocks of [39]; please rephrase to state precisely what is new, such as the first multi-cosmology remapped C_l comparison.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

The matter P(k) 'validation' is partly self-consistency because Eq. (2.9) imposes the target linear power spectrum; the independent halo and C_l comparisons are not circular, while the CPL/Planck18 C_l claim lacks target curves.

  1. self definitional [Section 4.1 (matter P(k) comparison); construction enters via Eq. (2.9) in Section 2.1; see also Section 3.2.]
    "In addition to halo power spectrum comparisons, we present the matter power spectra P(k) derived from the debiased remapped halo spectra and compare them with the theoretical predictions for each target cosmology. As shown in Fig. 4, the residuals between the simulated matter power spectra and the theoretical predictions remain consistently below 10%."

    Equation (2.9) constructs the displacement correction from the ratio of the target linear power spectrum to the original one, δf_k' = [sqrt(Δ'^2_lin(k',z')/Δ^2_lin(sk',z)) − 1] f_k'. The remapped density field is therefore deliberately built to have the target linear matter power spectrum. Comparing the debiased remapped matter P(k) with the theoretical target P(k) is a self-consistency check of the implementation, not an independent validation of the remapping. The genuinely external tests are the halo P(k) comparisons against OuterRim and MiraTitan (Figs. 2–3) and the WMAP7 C_l comparison against OuterRim (Fig. 5), which do not reduce to the construction.

full rationale

The central remapping derivation is not circular: scaling parameters (s, s_m) are obtained by minimizing the variance difference (Eq. 2.5), and the resulting halo catalogs are tested against independent N-body simulations (OuterRim for WMAP7, MiraTitan M003 for CPL). The 21 cm C_l comparison for WMAP7 uses an independent target (OuterRim) with the same external HOD from [39], so that end-to-end test is meaningful. The HOD of Eq. (2.13) is taken from an ELUCID-calibrated fit in [39], not fit in this paper; applying it across cosmologies is an assumption about cosmology-independence, not a circular step. The only genuinely circular element is the matter P(k) comparison to theory: Eq. (2.9) embeds the target linear power spectrum into the displacement field, so agreement with the theoretical P(k) is largely a consistency check rather than an external validation; for Planck18 this is the only validation available, since no N-body target was used. In addition, the statement that 'the same results are found' for CPL and Planck18 C_l is not supported by target C_l curves in Fig. 6, which is a support gap rather than circularity. Overall, the central claims retain independent content, so the circularity score is low.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the near-universality of the mass function, a constant halo bias, and a cosmology-independent HOD relation. The HOD parameters are the main free inputs taken from prior literature. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • HOD HI-mass parameters a, b, c, d, f = a=0.78-0.03z, b=-0.23+0.68z, c=0.92-0.32z, d=11+0.038z, f=0.79+0.18z, valid for 0<z<0.66
    Taken from [39] as a fit to the ELUCID simulation. The paper assumes these values are cosmology-independent and applies them unchanged to WMAP7, Planck18 and CPL mocks.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The halo mass function is near-universal across cosmologies when expressed in terms of sigma(M,z), as in Tinker et al. (2008).
    Invoked in Section 2.1 around Eqs. (2.1) to (2.5); the remapping aligns the original and target mass functions by minimizing the rms difference in linear variance.
  • domain assumption The halo bias b in Eq. (2.10) is roughly constant over the scales used for the remapping displacement field.
    Section 2.1 states 'treating b as roughly constant suffices for the precision required in this work'; a single bias from Colossus is used to convert halo density to matter density.
  • domain assumption The HI mass-halo mass relation from [39] is cosmology-independent.
    Section 2.2 states 'This relation provides a cosmology-independent way to populate the halos with HI, making it suitable for use across different cosmologies.' This is load-bearing for applying one HOD fit to WMAP7, Planck18 and CPL.
  • standard math The Zel'dovich approximation provides a valid linear displacement field for shifting halos.
    Used in Section 2.1, Eqs. (2.6) to (2.9); nonlinear scales are filtered with a Gaussian window, but the paper acknowledges that nonlinear effects are not fully captured.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Cosmological Remapping for Efficient Generation of 21 cm Intensity Mapping Mocks." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FTNCW6FL

@misc{pith2026250614588,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Cosmological Remapping for Efficient Generation of 21 cm Intensity Mapping Mocks},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FTNCW6FL}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.14588}
}
abstract

We present a novel application of cosmological rescaling, or "remapping," to generate 21 cm intensity mapping mocks for different cosmologies. The remapping method allows for computationally efficient generation of N-body catalogs by rescaling existing simulations. In this work, we employ the remapping method to construct dark matter halo catalogs, starting from the Horizon Run 4 simulation with WMAP5 cosmology, and apply it to different target cosmologies, including WMAP7, Planck18 and Chevallier-Polarski-Linder (CPL) models. These catalogs are then used to simulate 21 cm intensity maps. We use the halo occupation distribution (HOD) method to populate halos with neutral hydrogen (HI) and derive 21 cm brightness temperature maps. Our results demonstrate the effectiveness of the remapping approach in generating cosmological simulations for large-scale structure studies, offering an alternative for testing observational data pipelines and performing cosmological parameter forecasts without the need for computationally expensive full N-body simulations. We also analyze the precision and limitations of the remapping, in light of the rescaling parameters $s$ and $s_m$, as well as the effects of the halo mass and box size thresholds.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

66 extracted references · 41 canonical work pages

  1. [39]

    Zhang and others,The BINGO project

    J. Zhang and others,The BINGO project. III. Beam, transfer function, and data analysis simulations,Astron. Astrophys.664(2022) A19

    work page 2022

  2. [1]

    Aghanim et al.Planck 2018 results

    Planck Collaboration, N. Aghanim et al.Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters, Astron. Astrophys.641(2020) A6, [arxiv:1807.06209]

    arXiv 2020

  3. [2]

    G. F. Smoot et al.,Structure in the COBE Differential Microwave Radiometer First-Year Maps,Astrophys. J. Lett.396(1992) L1

    work page 1992

  4. [3]

    Komatsu et al.,Five-Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe Observations: Cosmological Interpretation,Astrophys

    E. Komatsu et al.,Five-Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe Observations: Cosmological Interpretation,Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser.180(2009) 330-376, [arxiv:0803.0547]

    arXiv 2009

  5. [4]

    Perlmutter et al.,Cosmology from type Ia supernovae, arxiv:astro-ph/9812473 (1998)

    S. Perlmutter et al.,Cosmology from type Ia supernovae, arxiv:astro-ph/9812473 (1998)

    arXiv 1998

  6. [5]

    A. G. Riess et al.,Observational evidence from supernovae for an accelerating universe and a cosmological constant,Astron. J.116(1998) 1009

    work page 1998

  7. [6]

    L. Anderson et al,The clustering of galaxies in the SDSS-III Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: measuring DA and H at z = 0.57 from the baryon acoustic peak in the Data Release 9 spectroscopic Galaxy sample,Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.439(2014) 83-101, [arxiv:1303.4666]

    arXiv 2014

  8. [7]

    D. J. Eisenstein et al,Detection of the Baryon Acoustic Peak in the Large-Scale Correlation Function of SDSS Luminous Red Galaxies,Astrophys. J.633(2005) 560-574, [arxiv:astro-ph/0501171]

    arXiv 2005

Show all 66 references
  1. [8]

    Tröster et al.,Cosmology with Phase 1 of the Square Kilometre Array Red Book 2018: Technical specifications and performance forecasts,Astron

    T. Tröster et al.,Cosmology with Phase 1 of the Square Kilometre Array Red Book 2018: Technical specifications and performance forecasts,Astron. Astrophys.633(2019) L10

    2019

  2. [9]

    L. F. Secco et al.,Dark Energy Survey Year 3 results: Cosmology from cosmic shear and robustness to modeling uncertainty,Phys. Rev. D105(2022) 023515

    2022

  3. [10]

    Kuijken et al,KiDS-Legacy: Cosmological constraints from cosmic shear with the complete Kilo-Degree Survey, arxiv:2503.19441 (2025)

    K. Kuijken et al,KiDS-Legacy: Cosmological constraints from cosmic shear with the complete Kilo-Degree Survey, arxiv:2503.19441 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  4. [11]

    S. K. Choi et al.,The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: ACT DR4 Maps and Cosmological Parameters,Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser.245(2020) 36, [arxiv:2007.07205]. – 18 – 101 103 105 107 P(k) × factor pk_w7l6 pk_w7l5 pk_w7l4 pk_w7l3 pk_w7l2 pk_w7l pk_pl6 pk_pl5 pk_pl4 pk_pl3 pk_pl2 pk_pl p...

    2020 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Amendola et al.,Euclid preparation: I

    Euclid Collaboration, L. Amendola et al.,Euclid preparation: I. The Euclid survey: mission, science, and operations,Astron. Astrophys.662(2022) A1, [arxiv:2202.09744]

    2022 arXiv

  6. [13]

    Aubert et al,The DESI First Data Release: Cosmological Constraints from Galaxy Clustering and Lensing, arxiv:2308.08645 (2023)

    DESI Collaboration, M. Aubert et al,The DESI First Data Release: Cosmological Constraints from Galaxy Clustering and Lensing, arxiv:2308.08645 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  7. [14]

    Chevallier and D

    M. Chevallier and D. Polarski,Accelerating Universes with Scaling Dark Matter,Int. J. Mod. Phys. D10(2001) 213-223. – 19 – 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 P(k) 10 2 10 1 k 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 Residual wmap7-like 6 wmap7-like 5 wmap7-like 4 wmap7-like 3 wmap7-li...

    2001

  8. [15]

    E. V. Linder,The Supernova Legacy Survey: Measurement ofΩM,Ω Λ, andwfrom the First Year Data Set,Astrophys. J.585(2003) 617-622, [arxiv:astro-ph/0208512]

    2003 arXiv

  9. [16]

    Bartelmann and P

    M. Bartelmann and P. Schneider,Weak gravitational lensing,Phys. Rept.340(2001) 291-472

    2001

  10. [17]

    S. W. Allen, A. E. Evrard and A. B. Mantz,Cosmological Parameters from Observations of Galaxy Clusters,Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys.49(2011) 409-470

    2011

  11. [18]

    G. M. Voit,Cosmology with Clusters of Galaxies,Rev. Mod. Phys.77(2005) 207-258

    2005

  12. [19]

    A. J. S. Hamilton,Linear Redshift Distortions: a Review,The Evolving Universe, Astrophysics and Space Science Library231(1998) 185-275

    1998

  13. [20]

    McDonald and et al.,The Lyman-alpha Forest atz= 2−4: II

    P. McDonald and et al.,The Lyman-alpha Forest atz= 2−4: II. Physical Properties from a Hydrodynamical Simulation,Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser.163(2006) 80-109

    2006

  14. [21]

    Ramírez-Pérez et al.,The Lyman-αforest catalogue from the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument Early Data Release,Mon

    C. Ramírez-Pérez et al.,The Lyman-αforest catalogue from the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument Early Data Release,Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.528(2024) 6666-6685, – 20 – 103 104 105 P(k) wmap7-like planck-like 4 planck-like 3 planck-like 2 planck-like 10 2 10 1 k 1.2 1.0 0.8 0...

    2024 arXiv

  15. [22]

    Cunnington et al,HI intensity mapping with MeerKAT: power spectrum detection in cross-correlation with WiggleZ galaxies,Mon

    S. Cunnington et al,HI intensity mapping with MeerKAT: power spectrum detection in cross-correlation with WiggleZ galaxies,Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.518(2022) 6262–6272

    2022

  16. [23]

    I. P. Carucci et al,Hydrogen intensity mapping with MeerKAT: Preserving cosmological signal by optimising contaminant separation, arxiv:2412.06750 (2024)

    2024

  17. [24]

    Abdalla et al,The BINGO project-I

    E. Abdalla et al,The BINGO project-I. Baryon acoustic oscillations from integrated neutral gas observations,Astron. Astrophys.664(2022) A14

    2022

  18. [25]

    C. A. Wuensche and the BINGO Collaboration,The BINGO telescope: a new instrument exploring the new 21 cm cosmology window,J. Phys. Conf. Ser.1269(2019) 012002, [arxiv:1803.01644]

    2019 arXiv

  19. [26]

    C. A. Wuensche et al.,The BINGO project. II. Instrument description,Astron. Astrophys.664 (2022) A15, [arxiv:2107.01634]

    2022 arXiv

  20. [27]

    Amiri et al.,An overview of CHIME, the Canadian hydrogen intensity mapping experiment, Astrophys

    M. Amiri et al.,An overview of CHIME, the Canadian hydrogen intensity mapping experiment, Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser.261(2022) 29

    2022

  21. [28]

    Chen,The Tianlai Project: a 21CM Cosmology Experiment,Int

    X. Chen,The Tianlai Project: a 21CM Cosmology Experiment,Int. J. Mod. Phys. Conf. Ser. 12(2012) 256-263, [arxiv:1212.6278]. – 21 – 103 104 105 P(k) wmap7-like planck-like 4 planck-like 3 planck-like 2 planck-like 10 1 k 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 Residual Figure 10. zoom in on Matter...

    2012 arXiv

  22. [29]

    Bigot-Sazy et al.,HI Intensity Mapping with FAST,Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series502(2016) 41, [arxiv:1511.03006]

    M.-A. Bigot-Sazy et al.,HI Intensity Mapping with FAST,Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series502(2016) 41, [arxiv:1511.03006]

    2016 arXiv

  23. [30]

    W. Hu, X. Wang, F. Wu, Y. Wang, P. Zhang and X. Chen,Forecast for FAST: from galaxies survey to intensity mapping,Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.493(2020) 5854-5870, [arxiv:1909.10946]

    2020 arXiv

  24. [31]

    G. F. Smoot and I. Debono,21 cm intensity mapping with the Five hundred metre Aperture Spherical Telescope,Astron. Astrophys.597(2017) A136, [arxiv:1407.3583]

    2017 arXiv

  25. [32]

    D. J. Bacon et al.,Cosmology with Phase 1 of the Square Kilometre Array Red Book 2018: Technical specifications and performance forecasts,Publ. Astron. Soc. Aust.37(2020) e007

    2020

  26. [33]

    Villaescusa-Navarro et al.,COLOSSUS: A Python Toolkit for Cosmology, Large-scale Structure, and Dark Matter Halos,Astrophys

    F. Villaescusa-Navarro et al.,COLOSSUS: A Python Toolkit for Cosmology, Large-scale Structure, and Dark Matter Halos,Astrophys. J.866(2018) 135

    2018

  27. [34]

    Alonso,P

    D. Alonso,P. G. Ferreira and M. G. Santos,Fast simulations for intensity mapping experiments,Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.444(2014) 3183-3197, [arxiv:1405.1751]

    2014 arXiv

  28. [35]

    H. S. Xavier, F. B. Abdalla and B. Joachimi,Improving lognormal models for cosmological fields,Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.459(2016) 3693-3710, [arxiv:1602.08503]. – 22 –

    2016 arXiv

  29. [36]

    Zhang, A

    J. Zhang, A. A. Costa, B. Wang, J.-h. He, Y. Luo and X. Yang,The Parameter-free Finger-of-God Model and Its Application to 21 cm Intensity Mapping,Astrophys. J.895(2020) 34, [arxiv:1912.09695]

    2020 arXiv

  30. [37]

    Seehars et al.,J

    S. Seehars et al.,J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys.2016(2016) 001, 10.1088/1475-7516/2016/03/001

    2016 doi

  31. [38]

    Asorey et al.,HIR4: cosmology from a simulated neutral hydrogen full sky using Horizon Run 4,Mon

    J. Asorey et al.,HIR4: cosmology from a simulated neutral hydrogen full sky using Horizon Run 4,Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.495(2020) 1788-1806, [arxiv:2001.00833]

    2020 arXiv

  32. [40]

    R. E. Angulo and S. D. M. White,One simulation to fit them all - changing the background parameters of a cosmological N-body simulation,Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.405(2010) 143-154, [arxiv:0912.4277]

    2010 arXiv

  33. [41]

    R. K. Sheth and G. Tormen,Large-scale bias and the peak background split,Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.308(1999) 119-126, [arxiv:astro-ph/9901122]

    1999 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Tinkeret al.,Toward a Halo Mass Function for Precision Cosmology: The Limits of Universality,Astrophys

    J. Tinkeret al.,Toward a Halo Mass Function for Precision Cosmology: The Limits of Universality,Astrophys. J.688(2008) 709-728, [arxiv:0803.2706]

    2008 arXiv

  35. [43]

    A. J. Mead and J. A. Peacock,Remapping dark matter halo catalogues between cosmological simulations,Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.440(2014) 1233-1247, [arxiv:1308.5183]

    2014 arXiv

  36. [44]

    A. J. Mead and J. A. Peacock,Remapping simulated halo catalogues in redshift space,Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.445(2014) 3453-3465, [arxiv:1408.1047]

    2014 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Renneby, S

    M. Renneby, S. Hilbert and R. E. Angulo,Halo mass and weak galaxy-galaxy lensing profiles in rescaled cosmological N-body simulations,Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.479(2018) 1100-1124, [arxiv:1710.03251]

    2018 arXiv

  38. [46]

    A. J. Mead, J. A. Peacock, L. Lombriser and B. Li,Rapid simulation rescaling from standard to modified gravity models,Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.452(2015) 4203-4221, [arxiv:1412.5195]

    2015 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Zennaro, R

    M. Zennaro, R. E. Angulo, G. Aricò, S. Contreras and M. Pellejero-Ibáñez,How to add massive neutrinos to yourΛCDM simulation - extending cosmology rescaling algorithms,Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.489(2019) 5938-5951, [arxiv:1905.08696]

    2019 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Mokeddem, W

    R. Mokeddem, W. S. Hipolito-Ricaldi and J. Zhang,Studying the effect of remapping on the 21cm map mocks,Astron. Nachr.344(2023) e220098

    2023

  41. [49]

    W. H. Press and P. Schechter,Formation of Galaxies and Clusters of Galaxies by Self-Similar Gravitational Condensation,Astrophys. J.187(1974) 425-438

    1974

  42. [50]

    Ya. B. Zel’dovich,Gravitational instability: An approximate theory for large density perturbations.,Astron. Astrophys.5(1970) 84-89

    1970

  43. [51]

    Diemer,COLOSSUS: A Python Toolkit for Cosmology, Large-scale Structure, and Dark Matter Halos,Astrophys

    B. Diemer,COLOSSUS: A Python Toolkit for Cosmology, Large-scale Structure, and Dark Matter Halos,Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser.239(2018) 35

    2018

  44. [52]

    Lesgourgues,The Cosmic Linear Anisotropy Solving System (CLASS) I: Overview, arxiv:1104.2932 (2011)

    J. Lesgourgues,The Cosmic Linear Anisotropy Solving System (CLASS) I: Overview, arxiv:1104.2932 (2011)

    2011 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Y. Luo, X. Kang, G. Kauffmann and J. Fu,Resolution-independent modelling of environmental effects in semi-analytic models of galaxy formation that include ram-pressure stripping of both hot and cold gas,Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.458(2016) 366-378, [arxiv:1602.00003]

    2016 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Wang et al.,ELUCID: A Comprehensive Galaxy Formation Model within a Large-volume N-body Simulation,Astrophys

    H. Wang et al.,ELUCID: A Comprehensive Galaxy Formation Model within a Large-volume N-body Simulation,Astrophys. J.831(2016) 164

    2016

  47. [55]

    K. M. Gorski,HEALPix: A framework for high-resolution discretization and fast analysis of data distributed on the sphere,Astrophys. J.622(2005) 759. – 23 –

    2005

  48. [56]

    Dunkley et al.,Five-Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe Observations: Likelihoods and Parameters from the WMAP Data,Astrophys

    J. Dunkley et al.,Five-Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe Observations: Likelihoods and Parameters from the WMAP Data,Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser.180(2009) 306-329, [arxiv:0803.0586]

    2009 arXiv

  49. [58]

    Dubinski, J

    J. Dubinski, J. Kim, C. Park and R. Humble,GOTPM: a parallel hybrid particle-mesh treecode, New Astron.9(2004) 111–126

    2004

  50. [59]

    Lewis and A

    A. Lewis and A. Challinor,Camb: Code for anisotropies in the microwave background, Astrophys. Source Code Library(2011) ascl–1102

    2011

  51. [60]

    Jenkins,Second-order Lagrangian perturbation theory initial conditions for resimulations, Mon

    A. Jenkins,Second-order Lagrangian perturbation theory initial conditions for resimulations, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.403(2010) 1859–1872

    2010

  52. [61]

    Heitmann et al.,THE MIRA–TITAN UNIVERSE: PRECISION PREDICTIONS FOR DARK ENERGY SURVEYS,Astrophys

    K. Heitmann et al.,THE MIRA–TITAN UNIVERSE: PRECISION PREDICTIONS FOR DARK ENERGY SURVEYS,Astrophys. J.820(2016) 108

    2016

  53. [62]

    Heitmann et al.,The Outer Rim Simulation: A Path to Many-core Supercomputers, Astrophys

    K. Heitmann et al.,The Outer Rim Simulation: A Path to Many-core Supercomputers, Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser.245(2019) 16

    2019

  54. [63]

    Komatsu,Seven-year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Cosmological Interpretation,Astrophys

    E. Komatsu,Seven-year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Cosmological Interpretation,Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser.192(2011) 18, [arxiv:1001.4538]

    2011 arXiv

  55. [64]

    J. Koda, C. Blake, F. Beutler, E. Kazin and F. Marin,Fast and accurate mock catalogue generation for low-mass galaxies,Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.459(2016) 2118-2129, [arxiv:1507.05329]

    2016 arXiv

  56. [65]

    J. Kim, C. Park, B. L’Huillier and S. E. Hong,Horizon Run 4 Simulation: Coupled Evolution of Galaxies and Large-scale Structures of the Universe,J. Korean Astron. Soc.48(2015) 213–228, [arxiv:1508.05107]

    2015 arXiv

  57. [66]

    K. M. Górski et al.,HEALPix: A Framework for High-Resolution Discretization and Fast Analysis of Data Distributed on the Sphere,Astrophys. J.622(2005) 759-771, [arx

    2005

  58. [67]

    Hand, M.-Y

    N. Hand, M.-Y. Chu, Y. Feng, R. Scoccimarro, A. J. S. Hamilton and M. R. Blanton,nbodykit: An Open-source, Massively Parallel Toolkit for Large-scale Structure,Astron. J.156(2018) 160, [arxiv:1712.05834]. – 24 –

    2018 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.