Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 60 references

Compressing the Lyman-alpha forest correlations into Legendre multipoles yields a positive-definite covariance matrix without smoothing and returns BAO parameters fully consistent with the full 2D analysis.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-02 18:50 UTC pith:HG4GQLXG

load-bearing objection A genuinely useful multipole covariance framework for Lyα BAO, honestly presented, but the mock-based unbiasedness claim is the weak link: the same mocks under-predict data variance by 30–75% and fail the cross-hexadecapole fit. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2603.04281 v2 pith:HG4GQLXG submitted 2026-03-04 astro-ph.CO

DESI DR2 Baryon Acoustic Oscillations from the Lyman Alpha Forest Multipoles

N. G. Kara\c{c}ayl{\i} , A. Cuceu , J. Aguilar , S. Ahlen , S. Bailey , S. BenZvi , D. Bianchi , A. Brodzeller
show 50 more authors
D. Brooks T. Claybaugh A. de la Macorra Biprateep Dey P. Doel J. Estrada S. Ferraro A. Font-Ribera J. E. Forero-Romero E. Gazta\~naga S. Gontcho A Gontcho A. X. Gonzalez-Morales G. Gutierrez C. Hahn H. K. Herrera-Alcantar K. Honscheid C. Howlett M. Ishak R. Joyce R. Kehoe D. Kirkby T. Kisner A. Kremin O. Lahav M. Landriau J.M. Le Goff L. Le Guillou M. E. Levi M. Manera P. Martini A. Meisner R. Miquel J. Moustakas A. Mu\~noz-Guti\'errez S. Nadathur N. Palanque-Delabrouille W. J. Percival F. Prada I. P\'erez-R\`afols G. Rossi E. Sanchez D. Schlegel M. Schubnell H. Seo J. Silber D. Sprayberry G. Tarl\'e B. A. Weaver R. Zhou H. Zou
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.CO
keywords baryon acoustic oscillationsLyman-alpha forestDESI DR2Legendre multipolescovariance matrixAlcock-Paczynski parameterisotropic BAO scalequasar cross-correlation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper claims that the Lyman-alpha forest BAO measurement can be compressed from a full 2D correlation-function grid into a few Legendre multipoles—monopole and quadrupole—without losing the BAO signal in a way that matters. This compression shrinks the data vector from roughly nine thousand numbers to 148, which makes the sample covariance matrix positive-definite without the ad hoc smoothing the baseline analysis requires. Using DESI DR2 data, the paper measures the isotropic BAO scale and the Alcock-Paczynski ratio, finding values fully consistent with the baseline analysis, though with slightly larger errors and much weaker constraints on nuisance parameters. If correct, the result provides a smoothing-free, mock-compatible covariance framework for future Lyman-alpha BAO and full-shape analyses.

Core claim

The central discovery is that the monopole and quadrupole of the Lyman-alpha auto- and cross-correlation functions carry essentially all the BAO information, even when the underlying correlations are distorted by continuum fitting and metal contamination. Projecting the model, distortion matrix, and covariance onto the Legendre basis in a coherent way yields alpha_iso = 0.9997 ± 0.0096 and alpha_AP = 0.9986 ± 0.0276 at z_eff = 2.348, matching the baseline DESI DR2 result within one-third of the quoted uncertainty. The hexadecapole adds only about 2% to BAO precision and degrades the mock fit, so the analysis is performed with ell_max = 2.

What carries the argument

The Legendre multipole decomposition: the 2D correlation function xi(r, mu) is projected onto Legendre polynomials via a finite sum over mu bins, and the same projection is applied to the model and to the covariance matrix in both axes (C -> P_ell C P_ell^T). This coherent compression reduces the data vector from about 9,300 to 148 elements, making the sample covariance matrix positive-definite without smoothing and allowing Hartlap and Percival corrections to be applied.

Load-bearing premise

The validation of unbiased BAO parameters relies on ten mock realizations that under-predict the data variance and fail to reproduce the cross-hexadecapole, so the claim that the multipole measurement is unbiased on real data assumes these mocks faithfully capture the small-scale and metal clustering.

What would settle it

Run the multipole pipeline on the full 300-mock ensemble from the same simulation suite and check whether the mean recovered alpha_iso and alpha_AP equal unity within one-third of the DR2 uncertainty; if they do not, the unbiasedness claim fails. A simpler test: compute the covariance matrix from the data in two independent halves of the sky and verify that the parameter shifts are consistent with the quoted errors.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • The multipole formalism provides a covariance matrix that is positive-definite from a single dataset realization, removing the need for ad hoc smoothing.
  • Because the data vector is small, mock realizations can be used to supplement covariance estimation, as in galaxy clustering analyses, after scaling the mock variance amplitude to match the data.
  • The isotropic BAO distance and the Alcock-Paczynski parameter from multipoles are consistent with the full 2D baseline, supporting the robustness of the DESI DR2 Lyman-alpha BAO measurement.
  • Nuisance parameter constraints weaken markedly in the multipole basis, so full-shape analyses will require the hexadecapole or a return to the 2D grid.
  • The non-detection of the high-column-density bias in the multipole basis shows that this representation dilutes line-of-sight-specific systematics, which is a caveat for interpreting nuisance parameters.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • One implication left implicit: the multipole compression could enable a fully analytic or mock-driven covariance for future Lyman-alpha surveys without any smoothing prescription, provided the mock variance is recalibrated.
  • The strong correlation between alpha_AP and a metal-line bias (Si III 1207 Å) in the multipole basis suggests that future analyses may need to marginalize over metal parameters with priors or include the hexadecapole to break the degeneracy.
  • The method could be extended to the dipole of the cross-correlation to probe relativistic effects, but only after trivial systematic contributions are modeled; the paper finds the dipole does not improve BAO constraints.
  • A testable extension: applying the same Legendre compression to the full 2D analysis in Region B, or to full-shape power spectra, could reveal whether the information loss is as small as it is for BAO.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents an alternative BAO measurement from the DESI DR2 Lyman-alpha forest, replacing the usual two-dimensional (r_perp, r_parallel) correlation-function analysis with a Legendre multipole decomposition of the auto-correlation (Lyα×Lyα) and cross-correlation (Lyα×QSO). The compression reduces the data vector from roughly 9,300 elements to 148, allowing a positive-definite sample covariance matrix to be estimated from HEALPix subsamples without the ad-hoc smoothing used in the baseline DESI analysis. The authors introduce finite-sample covariance corrections (Hartlap and Percival factors) and a weighted-mean bias correction in Appendix A. After validating on ten CoLoRe-QL mocks, they select ℓmax=2 and report αiso=0.9997±0.0096 and αAP=0.9986±0.0276 at z_eff=2.348, corresponding to H(z_eff)=238.7±3.4 km/s/Mpc and D_M(z_eff)=5.79±0.10 Gpc for r_d=147.09 Mpc, stated to be entirely consistent with the DESI DR2 baseline analysis.

Significance. If the result holds, the paper offers a practical, smoothing-free route to covariance estimation for Lyα BAO analyses and connects Lyα forest clustering to the standard galaxy-clustering multipole formalism. The idea is well motivated: the data-vector compression is dramatic, the covariance is positive definite, and the BAO measurements agree with the baseline DESI DR2 result. The paper also contains useful technical details, including finite-sample covariance corrections and a public implementation in the vega package, which are strengths. However, the broad significance is conditional on the transfer of mock-based validation to real data: the mocks used for that validation under-predict the data variance by 30–75% and fail to describe the cross-hexadecapole, while several nuisance parameters are fixed to values taken from the baseline analysis. These limitations are acknowledged by the authors, but they leave the central unbiasedness claim less secure than the presentation suggests.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. IV A and Sec. IV C] The unbiasedness of the ℓmax=2 BAO measurement is established only through ten CoLoRe-QL mocks, yet the paper itself documents that these mocks are not fully faithful to the data: the data variance is 75% larger for Lyα×Lyα and 30% larger for Lyα×QSO (Sec. IV A), and the mock stack gives a poor fit to the cross-hexadecapole (χ²/ν=1.95, PTE≈0.03%, Sec. IV C). Since the choice ℓmax=2 is explicitly motivated by the bad mock fit at ℓ=4, the same small-scale quasar and metal clustering that drives the hexadecapole discrepancy is not reliably modeled. The sentence in Sec. VI, "We would need to improve our simulations, focusing on quasar and metal clustering, to reliably test our model," is an honest statement of this limitation, but it is a load-bearing issue for the central claim that the multipole measurement is unbiased in real data. I would like to see a quantitative sensitivity analysis t
  2. [Sec. V] Three nuisance parameters are fixed to values taken from the DESI-DR2-Lyα analysis: β_HCD=0.5, L_HCD=5 Mpc/h, and Δr∥=0.5 Mpc/h. The paper only reports a check for Δr∥=0, not for the HCD parameters. This matters because the multipole representation cannot constrain β_HCD and L_HCD, b_HCD is consistent with zero, and the correlation between α_AP and, e.g., the SiII(1260) bias is enhanced relative to the baseline. If the true HCD parameters differ from the fixed values, the BAO parameters could absorb the difference through nuisance-parameter degeneracies. I request a sensitivity test on real data in which β_HCD and L_HCD are varied over a plausible range (e.g., the prior width used in DESI-DR2-Lyα) and the shifts in αiso and αAP are reported relative to the quoted statistical errors. Without this, the claim that the fixed choices have no impact on BAO parameters is not fully supported.
  3. [Sec. IV B and Sec. IV C] The validation threshold is defined as recovering α=1 within one-third of the DR2 uncertainty using the ℓmax=2 covariance, but the average of ten mocks is used while the mock variances are known to be 30–75% smaller than the data variances. This makes the statistical power of the validation test difficult to interpret: the stacked mock data vector has smaller noise than the real data, and the mocks do not reproduce the data covariance. A more robust validation would include a demonstration that the recovered α values are insensitive to the known mock-data variance mismatch, or a comparison of the mock and data likelihood surfaces. The paper should at least discuss whether the 75%/30% variance offset makes the one-third-of-DR2 threshold conservative or optimistic.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract in the paper header and the abstract in the full text differ numerically: the former quotes 0.93% precision, H(z_eff)=239.5±3.4 km/s/Mpc, and D_M=5.80±0.10 Gpc, while the latter quotes 0.96%, H=238.7±3.4 km/s/Mpc, and D_M=5.79±0.10 Gpc. Please harmonize.
  2. [Sec. IV C and Fig. 4] The text says the ℓmax=4 fit has "nearly zero probability (0.03%)" while the Fig. 4 caption says "PTE of zero." Please use the numerical value consistently.
  3. [Sec. VI] Typo: "hexacadepole" should be "hexadecapole".
  4. [Eq. (11)] Typo: "fitting fucntion" should be "fitting function".
  5. [Sec. II / Data availability] The paper says the data will be made public with DR2 and that figure data will be on Zenodo after publication. It would strengthen reproducibility to state a specific timeline or provide the multipole data vectors as supplementary material at submission.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the BAO parameters are free fits to an external CAMB template; fixed nuisance parameters from the baseline analysis are not load-bearing.

full rationale

The central derived quantities, alpha_iso and alpha_AP, are free parameters in a likelihood fit to the multipole data vector. They are not defined from, nor fitted to, the baseline DESI-DR2-Ly-alpha values; the agreement with the baseline is a post-fit comparison that could have failed. The model uses a CAMB linear power spectrum with a standard peak/smooth decomposition and external fitting functions for nonlinearities, and the covariance corrections (Hartlap and Percival) are standard finite-sample corrections, not quantities renamed as predictions. The nuisance parameters fixed from the baseline analysis are not shown to force the BAO result: the paper states that b_HCD is best-fit zero, so beta_HCD and L_HCD enter only as products with b_HCD and effectively drop out at the best fit, and it explicitly tests Delta_r_parallel = 0 with insignificant effect. The mock validation is an external check rather than a fitted input; the disclosed variance mismatch (75% for Ly-alpha x Ly-alpha, 30% for Ly-alpha x QSO) and the poor mock cross-hexadecapole fit are validation-fidelity concerns, not circularity. No equation in the paper equates the reported BAO scale to any prior fit or to the baseline result by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

9 free parameters · 6 axioms · 0 invented entities

The analysis introduces no new physical entities. It inherits the full DESI Lyα empirical model: linear Kaiser theory plus non-linear corrections, metal and distortion matrices, and fixed/fitted nuisance parameters. The BAO scaling parameters are the measured outputs; the ledger lists the fitted nuisance parameters and the modeling assumptions the central claim rests on.

free parameters (9)
  • b_α (Lyα forest bias) = -0.171 ± 0.008
    Fitted nuisance parameter (Table I); jointly inferred with BAO scales; affects amplitude of the auto-correlation model.
  • β_α (Lyα RSD parameter) = 0.997 ± 0.091
    Fitted nuisance parameter (Table I); degenerate with α_AP in multipole space.
  • Metal bias parameters (b_SiII(1190), b_SiII(1193), b_SiIII(1207), b_SiII(1260), b_CIV(eff)) = Table I; roughly -1e-3 to -1.9e-2
    Metal contamination creates spurious peaks; these five biases are fitted and are more weakly constrained than in baseline, relevant to the α_AP correlation.
  • b_HCD (high-column-density bias) = 0.00 ± 0.02
    Fitted nuisance parameter; best-fit zero, consistent with inability to detect HCD contribution in multipole space (§V).
  • b_Q (quasar bias) = 3.477 ± 0.083
    Fitted nuisance parameter in the cross-correlation model (Table I).
  • σ_v (quasar velocity/finger-of-god scale) = 1.70 ± 2.67 Mpc/h
    Fitted nuisance parameter; weakly constrained in the multipole fit (Table I).
  • ξ_TP0 (proximity effect amplitude) = 0.0 ± 1.5
    Fitted nuisance parameter; best-fit zero with large uncertainty (§V, Table I).
  • a_noise (noise amplitude) = 4.29 ± 2.49 ×10^-4
    Fitted nuisance parameter for small-scale noise (Table I).
  • β_HCD, L_HCD, Δr∥ (fixed nuisance inputs) = β_HCD=0.5, L_HCD=5 Mpc/h, Δr∥=0.5 Mpc/h
    Not fitted here; fixed by hand to values from DESI-DR2-Lyα prior/best fit (§V). The authors test Δr∥=0 and find no significant effect; β_HCD/L_HCD affect line-of-sight HCD modeling.
axioms (6)
  • domain assumption The linear-theory Kaiser model plus the empirical non-linear correction F_NL (Arinyo-i-Prats et al. 2015) describes the Lyα auto and cross power spectra after Legendre projection.
    Eqs. (10)-(11), §III A; if this model is inaccurate for ℓ≤2, α_iso/α_AP can be biased.
  • domain assumption Continuum-fitting distortions and metal-line contamination are fully captured by the projected distortion and metal matrices (Pℓ D and M) computed on the (r,µ) grid.
    §III A; the paper's demonstration that multipoles 'can be used' depends on these matrices being correct after angular projection.
  • domain assumption HEALPix nside=16 sub-samples are independent, giving N_h=1147; Hartlap-Percival corrections account for finite-sample covariance uncertainty.
    Eqs. (5)-(9), §III and §V; if pixels are correlated or likelihood non-Gaussianity is not captured, errors are underestimated.
  • domain assumption The ten CoLoRe-QL mocks are sufficiently realistic to certify unbiased BAO recovery.
    §IV; data variance is 75%/30% higher than mocks and the cross-hexadecapole fits poorly, so this assumption is only partially supported.
  • domain assumption The BAO template from CAMB at the Planck fiducial cosmology has the correct peak shape; only the peak component is rescaled by α_iso/α_AP.
    Eq. (10), §III A; standard BAO methodology.
  • standard math Standard Legendre orthonormality and sample-covariance bias corrections (Hartlap, Percival, Appendix A) are valid for this compressed data vector.
    Eqs. (4), (6)-(9), Appendix A; the math is standard.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 20512 in / 19426 out tokens · 179355 ms · 2026-08-02T18:50:34.670114+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We present an alternative measurement of the Baryon Acoustic Oscillation (BAO) using the Legendre multipole representation of the Ly$\alpha$ forest correlation functions from the second data release (DR2) of the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument survey. Compressing the auto- and cross-correlation functions into Legendre multipoles yields a positive-definite covariance matrix without any smoothing -- unlike the baseline DR2 analysis -- thanks to a significantly reduced data vector size. We introduce the statistical corrections required to debias the finite-sample covariance matrix estimate and demonstrate that monopole and quadrupole terms for both auto- and cross-correlations can be used even when the correlation functions are distorted by continuum errors and contaminated by metals. This formalism has slightly diminished the constraining power of the BAO scale, while considerably weakening constraints on nuisance parameters. We measure the isotropic BAO scale with $0.93\%$ precision at $z_\mathrm{eff}=2.35$, the Hubble parameter $H(z_\mathrm{eff})=(239.5\pm3.4)~(147.09~\mathrm{Mpc}/r_d) ~\mathrm{km~s}^{-1}~\text{Mpc}^{-1}$, and the transverse comoving distance $D_M(z_\mathrm{eff})=(5.80 \pm 0.10)~(r_d/147.09~\mathrm{Mpc})$~Gpc for a given value of the sound horizon ($r_d$). Our BAO results are entirely consistent with the baseline DR2 analysis.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2603.04281 by A. Brodzeller, A. Cuceu, A. de la Macorra, A. Font-Ribera, A. Kremin, A. Meisner, A. Mu\~noz-Guti\'errez, A. X. Gonzalez-Morales, B. A. Weaver, Biprateep Dey, C. Hahn, C. Howlett, D. Bianchi, D. Brooks, D. Kirkby, D. Schlegel, D. Sprayberry, E. Gazta\~naga, E. Sanchez, F. Prada, G. Gutierrez, G. Rossi, G. Tarl\'e, H. K. Herrera-Alcantar, H. Seo, H. Zou, I. P\'erez-R\`afols, J. Aguilar, J. E. Forero-Romero, J. Estrada, J.M. Le Goff, J. Moustakas, J. Silber, K. Honscheid, L. Le Guillou, M. E. Levi, M. Ishak, M. Landriau, M. Manera, M. Schubnell, N. G. Kara\c{c}ayl{\i}, N. Palanque-Delabrouille, O. Lahav, P. Doel, P. Martini, R. Joyce, R. Kehoe, R. Miquel, R. Zhou, S. Ahlen, S. Bailey, S. BenZvi, S. Ferraro, S. Gontcho A Gontcho, S. Nadathur, T. Claybaugh, T. Kisner, W. J. Percival.

Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. BAO constraining power for various analysis choices [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. The average correlation matrix of ten [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Average of ten Ly [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. The best-fit BAO parameters to the average of ten [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. DESI DR2 best-fitting model vs data for Ly [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Our DR2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references · 49 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    M. Levi, C. Bebek, T. Beers, R. Blum, R. Cahn, D. Eisen- stein, B. Flaugher, K. Honscheid, R. Kron, O. Lahav, P. McDonald, N. Roe, D. Schlegel, and representing the DESI collaboration, The DESI Experiment, a whitepa- per for Snowmass 2013, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:1308.0847 (2013), arXiv:1308.0847 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  2. [2]

    DESI Collaboration, The DESI Experiment Part I: Science,Targeting, and Survey Design, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:1611.00036 (2016), arXiv:1611.00036 [astro- ph.IM]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  3. [3]

    DESI Collaboration, The DESI Experiment Part II: Instrument Design, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:1611.00037 (2016), arXiv:1611.00037 [astro-ph.IM]. 13

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  4. [4]

    DESI Collaboration, Overview of the Instrumentation for the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument, Astron. J. 164, 207 (2022), arXiv:2205.10939 [astro-ph.IM]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  5. [5]

    DESI Collaboration, DESI 2024 III: baryon acoustic oscillations from galaxies and quasars, J. Cosmol. As- tropart. Phys.2025, 012 (2025), arXiv:2404.03000 [astro- ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  6. [6]

    DESI Collaboration, DESI 2024 IV: Baryon Acoustic Os- cillations from the Lyman alpha forest, J. Cosmol. As- tropart. Phys.2025, 124 (2025), arXiv:2404.03001 [astro- ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  7. [7]

    DESI Collaboration, DESI DR2 results. I. Baryon acous- tic oscillations from the Lyman alpha forest, Phys. Rev. D112, 083514 (2025), arXiv:2503.14739 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  8. [8]

    DESI Collaboration, DESI DR2 results. II. Measure- ments of baryon acoustic oscillations and cosmolog- ical constraints, Phys. Rev. D112, 083515 (2025), arXiv:2503.14738 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  9. [9]

    DESI Collaboration, DESI 2024 VI: cosmological con- straints from the measurements of baryon acoustic oscil- lations, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys.2025, 021 (2025), arXiv:2404.03002 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  10. [10]

    DESI Collaboration, DESI 2024 V: Full-Shape galaxy clustering from galaxies and quasars, J. Cosmol. As- tropart. Phys.2025, 008 (2025), arXiv:2411.12021 [astro- ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  11. [11]

    N. G. Busca, T. Delubac, J. Rich, S. Bailey, A. Font- Ribera, D. Kirkby, J.-M. Le Goff, M. M. Pieri, A. Slosar, et al., Baryon acoustic oscillations in the Lyαforest of BOSS quasars, Astron. Astrophys.552, A96 (2013)

    2013

  12. [12]

    Font-Ribera, D

    A. Font-Ribera, D. Kirkby, N. Busca, J. Miralda-Escud´ e, N. P. Ross, A. Slosar, J. Rich,et al., Quasar-Lymanα forest cross-correlation from BOSS DR11: Baryon Acous- tic Oscillations, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys.2014, 027 (2014), arXiv:1311.1767 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  13. [13]

    Slosar, V

    A. Slosar, V. Irˇ siˇ c, D. Kirkby,et al., Measurement of baryon acoustic oscillations in the Lyman-αforest fluc- tuations in BOSS data release 9, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys.2013, 026 (2013)

    2013

  14. [14]

    du Mas des Bourboux, J

    H. du Mas des Bourboux, J. Rich, A. Font-Ribera, V. de Sainte Agathe, J. Farr, T. Etourneau, J.-M. Le Goff, A. Cuceu,et al., The Completed SDSS-IV Extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: Baryon Acous- tic Oscillations with LyαForests, Astrophys. J.901, 153 (2020), arXiv:2007.08995 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  15. [15]

    Alcock and B

    C. Alcock and B. Paczynski, An evolution free test for non-zero cosmological constant, Nature (London)281, 358 (1979)

    1979

  16. [16]

    Kaiser, Clustering in real space and in redshift space, Mon

    N. Kaiser, Clustering in real space and in redshift space, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.227, 1 (1987)

    1987

  17. [17]

    Cuceu, A

    A. Cuceu, A. Font-Ribera, B. Joachimi, and S. Nadathur, Cosmology beyond BAO from the 3D distribution of the Lyman-αforest, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.506, 5439 (2021), arXiv:2103.14075 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  18. [18]

    Cuceu, A

    A. Cuceu, A. Font-Ribera, S. Nadathur, B. Joachimi, and P. Martini, Constraints on the Cosmic Expansion Rate at Redshift 2.3 from the Lyman-αForest, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 191003 (2023), arXiv:2209.13942 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  19. [19]

    Cuceu, A

    A. Cuceu, A. Font-Ribera, P. Martini, B. Joachimi, S. Nadathur, J. Rich, A. X. Gonz´ alez-Morales, H. du Mas des Bourboux, and J. Farr, The Alcock-Paczy´ nski effect from Lyman-αforest correlations: analysis valida- tion with synthetic data, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.523, 3773 (2023), arXiv:2209.12931 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  20. [20]

    Cuceu, H

    A. Cuceu, H. K. Herrera-Alcantar, C. Gordon, C. Ram ´ ırez-P´ erez, E. Armengaud, A. Font-Ribera, J. Guy, B. Joachimi, P. Martini, S. Nadathur, I. P´ erez- R` afols, J. Rich,et al., DESI DR1 Lyαforest: 3D full-shape analysis and cosmological constraints, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2509.15308 (2025), arXiv:2509.15308 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv 2025

  21. [21]

    Cuceu, H

    A. Cuceu, H. K. Herrera-Alcantar, C. Gordon, P. Mar- tini, J. Guy, A. Font-Ribera, A. X. Gonzalez-Morales, et al., Validation of the DESI 2024 Lyαforest BAO anal- ysis using synthetic datasets, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 2025, 148 (2025), arXiv:2404.03004 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  22. [22]

    Casas, H

    L. Casas, H. K. Herrera-Alcantar, J. Chaves-Montero, A. Cuceu, A. Font-Ribera, M. Lokken, M. Abdul Karim, C. Ram ´ ırez-P´ erez,et al., Validation of the DESI DR2 LyαBAO analysis using synthetic datasets, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2503.14741 (2025), arXiv:2503.14741 [astro-ph.IM]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  23. [23]

    Turner, P

    W. Turner, P. Martini, N. G. Kara¸ caylı,et al., New Measurements of the LyαForest Continuum and Effec- tive Optical Depth with LyCAN and DESI Y1 Data, Astrophys. J.976, 143 (2024), arXiv:2405.06743 [astro- ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  24. [24]

    Turner, A

    W. Turner, A. Cuceu, P. Martini,et al., Prob- ing the limits of cosmological information from the Lyman-αforest 2-point correlation functions, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2509.14322 (2025), arXiv:2509.14322 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  25. [25]

    Alamet al., The clustering of galaxies in the completed SDSS-III Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: cos- mological analysis of the DR12 galaxy sample, Mon

    S. Alamet al., The clustering of galaxies in the completed SDSS-III Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: cos- mological analysis of the DR12 galaxy sample, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.470, 2617 (2017), arXiv:1607.03155 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  26. [26]

    DESI Collaboration, Data Release 1 of the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2503.14745 (2025), arXiv:2503.14745 [astro- ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  27. [27]

    J. H. Silber, P. Fagrelius, K. Fanning, M. Schubnell, et al., The Robotic Multiobject Focal Plane System of the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI), As- tron. J.165, 9 (2023), arXiv:2205.09014 [astro-ph.IM]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  28. [28]

    T. N. Milleret al., The Optical Corrector for the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument, Astron. J.168, 95 (2024), arXiv:2306.06310 [astro-ph.IM]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  29. [29]

    Poppett, L

    C. Poppett, L. Tyas,et al., Overview of the Fiber System for the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument, Astron. J.168, 245 (2024)

    2024

  30. [30]

    E. F. Schlafly, D. Kirkby, D. J. Schlegel, A. D. Myers, A. Raichoor, K. Dawson,et al., Survey Operations for the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument, Astron. J. 166, 259 (2023), arXiv:2306.06309 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  31. [31]

    J. Guy, S. Bailey, A. Kremin,et al., The Spectro- scopic Data Processing Pipeline for the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument, Astron. J.165, 144 (2023), arXiv:2209.14482 [astro-ph.IM]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  32. [32]

    K. M. G´ orski, E. Hivon, A. J. Banday, B. D. Wan- delt, F. K. Hansen, M. Reinecke, and M. Bartelmann, HEALPix: A Framework for High-Resolution Discretiza- tion and Fast Analysis of Data Distributed on the Sphere, Astrophys. J.622, 759 (2005), arXiv:astro-ph/0409513 [astro-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  33. [33]

    Font-Ribera, J

    A. Font-Ribera, J. Miralda-Escud´ e, E. Arnau, B. Carithers, K.-G. Lee, P. Noterdaeme, I. Pˆ aris, P. Petitjean, J. Rich, E. Rollinde, N. P. Ross, D. P. 14 Schneider, M. White, and D. G. York, The large-scale cross-correlation of Damped Lyman alpha systems with the Lyman alpha forest: first measurements from BOSS, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys.2012, 059 (201...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  34. [34]

    Brodzeller, M

    A. Brodzeller, M. Wolfson, D. M. Santos, M. Ho, T. Tan, M. M. Pieri, A. Cuceu,et al., Construction of the Damped LyαAbsorber Catalog for DESI DR2 LyαBAO, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2503.14740 (2025), arXiv:2503.14740 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  35. [35]

    B. Wang, J. Zou, Z. Cai, J. X. Prochaska, Z. Sun, J. Ding, A. Font-Ribera, A. Gonzalez, H. K. Herrera-Alcantar, V. Irsic, X. Lin, D. Brooks, S. Chabanier, R. d. Bel- sunce, N. Palanque-Delabrouille, G. Tarle, and Z. Zhou, Deep Learning of Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument Mock Spectra to Find Damped LyαSystems, Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser.259, 28 (2022)

    2022

  36. [36]

    M.-F. Ho, S. Bird, and R. Garnett, Damped Lyman- αabsorbers from Sloan digital sky survey DR16Q with Gaussian processes, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.507, 704 (2021), arXiv:2103.10964 [astro-ph.GA]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  37. [37]

    Martini, A

    P. Martini, A. Cuceu, L. Ennesser, A. Brodzeller,et al., Validation of the DESI 2024 Lyman alpha forest BAL masking strategy, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys.2025, 137 (2025), arXiv:2405.09737 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  38. [38]

    Ram ´ ırez-P´ erez, I

    C. Ram ´ ırez-P´ erez, I. P´ erez-R` afols, A. Font-Ribera,et al., The Lyman-αforest catalogue from the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument Early Data Release, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.528, 6666 (2024), arXiv:2306.06312 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  39. [39]

    J. E. Bautista, N. G. Busca, J. Guy, J. Rich, M. Blomqvist, H. du Mas des Bourboux, M. M. Pieri, A. Font-Ribera,et al., Measurement of baryon acoustic oscillation correlations at z = 2.3 with SDSS DR12 Lyα-Forests, Astron. Astrophys.603, A12 (2017), arXiv:1702.00176 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  40. [40]

    Planck Collaboration, Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmo- logical parameters, Astron. Astrophys.641, A6 (2020), arXiv:1807.06209 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  41. [41]

    Busca, J

    N. Busca, J. Rich, J. Bautista, A. Cuceu, A. Font-Ribera, J. Guy, H. K. Herrera-Alcantar, J. Stermer, C. Balland, et al., The effects of continuum fitting on Lyman-αfor- est correlations, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys.2025, 020 (2025), arXiv:2506.15262 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv 2025

  42. [42]

    Sellentin and A

    E. Sellentin and A. F. Heavens, Parameter inference with estimated covariance matrices, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 456, L132 (2016), arXiv:1511.05969 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  43. [43]

    Hartlap, P

    J. Hartlap, P. Simon, and P. Schneider, Why your model parameter confidences might be too optimistic. Unbiased estimation of the inverse covariance matrix, Astron. As- trophys.464, 399 (2007), arXiv:astro-ph/0608064 [astro- ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  44. [44]

    W. J. Percival, A. J. Ross, A. G. S´ anchez, L. Samushia, et al., The clustering of Galaxies in the SDSS-III Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: including covariance matrix errors, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.439, 2531 (2014), arXiv:1312.4841 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  45. [45]

    Lewis, A

    A. Lewis, A. Challinor, and A. Lasenby, Efficient Compu- tation of Cosmic Microwave Background Anisotropies in Closed Friedmann-Robertson-Walker Models, Astrophys. J.538, 473 (2000), arXiv:astro-ph/9911177 [astro-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  46. [46]

    Kirkby, D

    D. Kirkby, D. Margala, A. Slosar, S. Bailey, N. G. Busca, T. Delubac, J. Rich,et al., Fitting methods for baryon acoustic oscillations in the Lyman-αforest fluctuations in BOSS data release 9, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys.2013, 024 (2013), arXiv:1301.3456 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  47. [47]

    Arinyo-i-Prats, J

    A. Arinyo-i-Prats, J. Miralda-Escud´ e, M. Viel, and R. Cen, The non-linear power spectrum of the Lyman al- pha forest, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys.2015, 017 (2015), arXiv:1506.04519 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  48. [48]

    A. J. S. Hamilton, Uncorrelated modes of the non-linear power spectrum, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.312, 257 (2000)

    2000

  49. [49]

    Font-Ribera and J

    A. Font-Ribera and J. Miralda-Escud´ e, The effect of high column density systems on the measurement of the Lyman-αforest correlation function, J. Cosmol. As- tropart. Phys.2012, 028 (2012)

    2012

  50. [50]

    K. K. Rogers, S. Bird, H. V. Peiris, A. Pontzen, A. Font- Ribera, and B. Leistedt, Correlations in the three- dimensional Lyman-alpha forest contaminated by high column density absorbers, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 476, 3716 (2018), arXiv:1711.06275 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  51. [51]

    T. Tan, J. Rich, E. Chaussidon, J. M. Le Goff, C. Bal- land, E. Armengaud,et al., Modeling of the high column density systems in the Lyman-Alpha forest, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys.2025, 074 (2025), arXiv:2506.13005 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv 2025

  52. [52]

    Slosar, A

    A. Slosar, A. Font-Ribera, M. M. Pieri, J. Rich, J.-M. Le Goff,et al., The Lyman-αforest in three dimensions: measurements of large scale flux correlations from BOSS 1st-year data, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys.2011, 001 (2011), arXiv:1104.5244 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  53. [53]

    J. Guy, S. G. A. Gontcho, E. Armengaud, A. Brodzeller, A. Cuceu, A. Font-Ribera, H. K. Herrera-Alcantar, N. G. Kara¸ caylı, A. Mu˜ noz-Guti´ errez, M. M. Pieri, I. P´ erez-R` afols, C. Ram ´ ırez-P´ erez, C. Ravoux, J. Rich, M. Walther,et al., Characterization of contami- nants in the Lyman-alpha forest auto-correlation with DESI, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Ph...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  54. [54]

    Bault, D

    A. Bault, D. Kirkby, J. Guy, A. Brodzeller,et al., Impact of systematic redshift errors on the cross-correlation of the Lyman-αforest with quasars at small scales using DESI Early Data, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys.2025, 130 (2025), arXiv:2402.18009 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  55. [55]

    Etourneau, J.-M

    T. Etourneau, J.-M. L. Goff, J. Rich, T. Tan, A. Cuceu, et al., Mock data sets for the Eboss and DESI Lyman- αforest surveys, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys.2024, 077 (2024), arXiv:2310.18996 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  56. [56]

    J. Farr, A. Font-Ribera, H. du Mas des Bourboux, A. Mu˜ noz-Guti´ errez, F. J. S´ anchez, A. Pontzen, A. Xo- chitl Gonz´ alez-Morales,et al., LyaCoLoRe: synthetic datasets for current and future Lyman-αforest BAO surveys, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys.2020, 068 (2020), arXiv:1912.02763 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  57. [57]

    Ram ´ ırez-P´ erez, J

    C. Ram ´ ırez-P´ erez, J. Sanchez, D. Alonso, and A. Font- Ribera, CoLoRe: fast cosmological realisations over large volumes with multiple tracers, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys.2022, 002 (2022), arXiv:2111.05069 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  58. [58]

    Bonvin, L

    C. Bonvin, L. Hui, and E. Gazta˜ naga, Asymmetric galaxy correlation functions, Phys. Rev. D89, 083535 (2014), arXiv:1309.1321 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  59. [59]

    Irˇ siˇ c, E

    V. Irˇ siˇ c, E. Di Dio, and M. Viel, Relativistic effects in Lyman-αforest, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys.2016, 051 (2016), arXiv:1510.03436 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  60. [60]

    Blomqvist, H

    M. Blomqvist, H. du Mas des Bourboux, N. G. Busca, V. de Sainte Agathe, J. Rich,et al., Baryon acoustic oscil- lations from the cross-correlation of Lyαabsorption and 15 quasars in eBOSS DR14, Astron. Astrophys.629, A86 (2019), arXiv:1904.03430 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019