pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.25171 · v2 · submitted 2026-04-28 · 🌌 astro-ph.CO

Recognition: unknown

Multi-tracers, multi-surveys: a joint Fisher analysis of DESI+PFS

Nhat-Minh Nguyen
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 03:25 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.CO
keywords multi-tracer analysiscross-spectraDESI surveyPFS surveyFisher forecastgalaxy bias calibrationneutrino massEFT nuisance parameters
0
0 comments X

The pith

Cross-spectra between galaxy populations in DESI and PFS calibrate bias parameters from data, tightening fσ8, neutrino mass, and Ωm constraints.

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

Full-shape galaxy power spectrum analyses must marginalize over roughly 12 effective-field-theory nuisance parameters per tracer per redshift bin, which broad priors leave as a major limit on cosmological precision. The paper proposes a multi-tracer Fisher analysis that uses observed cross-spectra between populations, both inside the full DESI footprint and in the PFS overlap region, to calibrate those parameters directly from the data in a volume-partitioned joint matrix. Forecasts show the internal DESI channel alone improves σ(fσ8) by 33 percent, σ(Mν) by 80 percent, and σ(Ωm) by 49 percent over a single-tracer baseline at kmax = 0.20 h Mpc−1, with the PFS overlap adding further gains after marginalizing residual stochasticity. A sympathetic reader cares because the method supplies a model-independent alternative to simulation-based priors while targeting the same b1σ8 calibration that breaks the leading degeneracy.

Core claim

The multi-tracer multi-survey analysis demonstrates that cross-spectra within DESI (LRG, ELG, QSO) and across the PFS overlap calibrate the b1σ8 prior from data to σ ≈ 0.13, breaking its degeneracy with fσ8 and delivering the quoted improvements in σ(fσ8), σ(Mν), and σ(Ωm). The dominant channel is the internal-DESI multi-tracer combination; PFS overlap supplies additional tightening once residual cross-population stochasticity is marginalized. The approach matches the calibration goal of simulation-based priors but replaces HOD mocks with observed cross-spectra as a model-independent check.

What carries the argument

Volume-partitioned joint Fisher matrix combining auto- and cross-power spectra from up to four tracers across DESI and PFS footprints, which calibrates EFT bias and stochastic parameters directly from the observed data.

If this is right

  • The internal-DESI multi-tracer channel reduces the cost of marginalizing twelve EFT nuisance parameters per tracer per bin by calibrating b1σ8 from cross-spectra.
  • PFS overlap supplies additional tightening of 9-24 percent on the same parameters after marginalizing residual cross-population stochasticity.
  • The framework supplies a model-independent check on shifts in b1σ8 that simulation-based priors might introduce.
  • The same joint-Fisher construction extends to any collection of overlapping spectroscopic surveys.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If real-data cross-spectra yield a b1σ8 calibration that differs from simulation-based priors, the discrepancy itself becomes a diagnostic for unmodeled systematics.
  • The method could be run as an internal consistency test alongside any single-tracer analysis to flag when nuisance-parameter marginalization is driving the final error budget.
  • Extending the same volume-partitioned matrix to future overlapping surveys would allow direct comparison of data-driven versus simulation-driven bias calibrations at higher redshifts.

Load-bearing premise

Observed cross-spectra between different galaxy populations can calibrate the b1σ8 prior to σ ≈ 0.13 without introducing unmodeled biases from residual stochasticity or survey-specific systematics.

What would settle it

Applying the multi-tracer pipeline to actual DESI and PFS data and finding that the resulting constraints on fσ8, Mν, or Ωm fail to tighten by the forecasted percentages or that the data-derived b1σ8 prior produces cosmological results inconsistent with the single-tracer baseline.

read the original abstract

Marginalizing over roughly 12 effective-field-theory (EFT) nuisance parameters per tracer per redshift bin is a dominant systematic cost in full-shape galaxy power spectrum analyses. Simulation-based priors (SBP) tighten these parameters but rely on N-body simulations and halo-occupation-distribution (HOD) models. We propose a multi-tracer Fisher analysis as a model-independent alternative: cross-spectra between galaxy populations calibrate EFT bias and stochastic parameters from data alone, through two channels -- within a survey and across overlapping surveys -- combined in a volume-partitioned joint Fisher. We forecast across the $14{,}000\;\mathrm{deg}^2$ Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI) footprint, including the $\sim\!1{,}200\;\mathrm{deg}^2$ Prime Focus Spectrograph (PFS) overlap at $z\in[0.6,1.6]$ with up to 4 tracers (PFS-ELG, DESI-ELG, DESI-LRG, DESI-QSO). The internal-DESI channel (LRG, ELG, and QSO over the full footprint) provides most of the gain, improving $\sigma(f\sigma_8)$ by 33%, $\sigma(M_\nu)$ by 80%, and $\sigma(\Omega_m)$ by 49% over a single-tracer broad-prior baseline at $k_{\rm max}=0.20\,h\,\mathrm{Mpc}^{-1}$. Adding the PFS$\,\times\,$DESI overlap further tightens these by 9%, 24%, and 9%, respectively, after marginalizing over residual cross-population stochasticity. A parameter-importance decomposition shows that the dominant driver is calibration of the $b_1\sigma_8$ prior, tightened from a flat prior to $\sigma\approx 0.13$, which breaks the $b_1\sigma_8$--$f\sigma_8$ degeneracy of single-tracer analyses. The multi-tracer multi-survey approach targets the same $b_1$ calibration as SBPs, using observed cross-spectra rather than HOD mocks as a model-independent check on SBP-driven $b_1\sigma_8$ shifts. The framework extends to any number of overlapping spectroscopic surveys.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper claims that a multi-tracer, multi-survey Fisher analysis combining auto- and cross-spectra from DESI (LRG, ELG, QSO) over 14,000 deg² and the ~1,200 deg² PFS overlap at z∈[0.6,1.6] calibrates EFT nuisance parameters (including b1σ8) model-independently from data, yielding 33% tighter σ(fσ8), 80% on σ(Mν), and 49% on σ(Ωm) from the internal-DESI channel alone at kmax=0.20 h Mpc−1 relative to single-tracer broad-prior baselines, with additional 9/24/9% gains from the PFS overlap after marginalizing residual cross-population stochasticity; a parameter-importance decomposition identifies the tightened b1σ8 prior (to σ≈0.13) as the dominant driver breaking the b1σ8–fσ8 degeneracy.

Significance. If the calibration is robust, the work provides a useful data-driven alternative to simulation-based priors for reducing the EFT nuisance-parameter cost in full-shape analyses, with direct applicability to overlapping spectroscopic surveys; the explicit decomposition of gains into prior-tightening versus volume effects is a clear strength for interpretability.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the headline improvements rest on cross-spectra calibrating b1σ8 to σ≈0.13 without bias, but the joint covariance of auto- and cross-spectra (within DESI and DESI×PFS) after marginalizing additional stochastic parameters per pair may not protect against unmodeled correlated residuals from survey-specific systematics (e.g., fiber assignment differences between PFS-ELG and DESI-ELG); this directly affects whether the reported 33% gain on σ(fσ8) is realistic.
  2. [the volume-partitioned joint Fisher construction] the volume-partitioned joint Fisher construction and the model for Pij(k,μ): the assumption that the same EFT expansion applies to all cross terms while marginalizing residual cross-population stochasticity allows unbiased b1 recovery is load-bearing for the degeneracy-breaking claim, yet no explicit test (e.g., against mocks with injected systematics) is described to confirm the effective prior width remains σ≈0.13.
minor comments (1)
  1. The abstract states 'roughly 12 effective-field-theory (EFT) nuisance parameters per tracer per redshift bin'; an explicit table or equation listing the full set of free parameters per tracer would improve clarity on the marginalization.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of our manuscript and for providing constructive comments that help improve the clarity and robustness of our analysis. We address each major comment point by point below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the headline improvements rest on cross-spectra calibrating b1σ8 to σ≈0.13 without bias, but the joint covariance of auto- and cross-spectra (within DESI and DESI×PFS) after marginalizing additional stochastic parameters per pair may not protect against unmodeled correlated residuals from survey-specific systematics (e.g., fiber assignment differences between PFS-ELG and DESI-ELG); this directly affects whether the reported 33% gain on σ(fσ8) is realistic.

    Authors: We thank the referee for pointing out this potential limitation. Our analysis does include marginalization over additional stochastic parameters for each cross-population pair to account for residual stochasticity. However, we recognize that unmodeled correlated systematics, such as those arising from differing fiber assignment procedures between DESI and PFS, could in principle introduce biases not fully captured by this marginalization. To strengthen the manuscript, we will add a dedicated paragraph in the discussion section explicitly addressing this caveat and noting that the forecasted gains assume such systematics are controlled or subdominant after mitigation strategies. This addition provides important context without changing the quantitative results. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [the volume-partitioned joint Fisher construction] the volume-partitioned joint Fisher construction and the model for Pij(k,μ): the assumption that the same EFT expansion applies to all cross terms while marginalizing residual cross-population stochasticity allows unbiased b1 recovery is load-bearing for the degeneracy-breaking claim, yet no explicit test (e.g., against mocks with injected systematics) is described to confirm the effective prior width remains σ≈0.13.

    Authors: The referee accurately identifies the foundational assumptions in our volume-partitioned joint Fisher approach. We model the cross-power spectra Pij(k,μ) using the same EFT bias expansion for all tracer pairs, with the marginalization over per-pair stochastic terms intended to ensure unbiased recovery of the shared b1σ8 parameter. This is a standard assumption in multi-tracer analyses and is justified by the perturbative nature of the EFT at the scales considered (kmax=0.20 h/Mpc). Since this is a Fisher forecast study, we do not perform mock-based validations with injected systematics in the current work. We will revise the text to more clearly state these assumptions and their role in the degeneracy breaking, and we will add a note suggesting that mock validation would be a valuable extension in future work. This addresses the concern by enhancing transparency. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Standard Fisher forecast with independent cross-spectra information; no reduction to inputs by construction

full rationale

The paper constructs a volume-partitioned joint Fisher matrix from the auto- and cross-power spectra of up to four tracers (LRG, ELG, QSO) over the DESI footprint plus PFS overlap. Cosmological parameters (fσ8, Mν, Ωm) and EFT nuisance parameters (including b1σ8 and stochastic terms) are jointly estimated; the reported tightenings (33% on σ(fσ8), etc.) are the direct numerical output of inverting this matrix after marginalization. The b1σ8 prior width σ≈0.13 is an output of the same covariance, not an external input or self-referential fit. No self-citation, ansatz, or uniqueness theorem is load-bearing for the central forecast; the model assumptions (EFT expansion, marginalization of residual stochasticity) are stated explicitly and the calculation is self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the Fisher matrix being a good approximation for these parameters and on the cross-spectra providing sufficient independent information to tighten the b1σ8 prior without new biases.

free parameters (1)
  • EFT nuisance parameters per tracer per bin
    Roughly 12 per tracer per redshift bin are marginalized; the method aims to tighten their effective priors but they remain free parameters in the analysis.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Fisher matrix formalism accurately captures the information content and degeneracies for the chosen parameters and kmax
    Invoked throughout the forecast setup.
  • ad hoc to paper Residual cross-population stochasticity can be marginalized without erasing the calibration benefit from cross-spectra
    Explicitly stated as a step after which further tightening still occurs.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5729 in / 1514 out tokens · 25001 ms · 2026-05-08T03:25:24.385730+00:00 · methodology

Review history (2 revisions) →

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

55 extracted references · 49 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Cosmological Non-Linearities as an Effective Fluid

    D. Baumann, A. Nicolis, L. Senatore and M. Zaldarriaga,Cosmological Non-Linearities as an Effective Fluid,JCAP07(2012) 051 [1004.2488]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2012

  2. [2]

    The Effective Field Theory of Cosmological Large Scale Structures

    J.J.M. Carrasco, M.P. Hertzberg and L. Senatore,The Effective Field Theory of Cosmological Large Scale Structures,JHEP09(2012) 082 [1206.2926]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2012

  3. [3]

    Carroll, S

    S.M. Carroll, S. Leichenauer and J. Pollack,Consistent effective theory of long-wavelength cosmological perturbations,Phys. Rev. D90(2014) 023518 [1310.2920]

    work page arXiv 2014

  4. [4]

    Senatore and M

    L. Senatore and M. Zaldarriaga,Redshift Space Distortions in the Effective Field Theory of Large Scale Structures,1409.1225

    work page arXiv

  5. [5]

    D’Amico, J

    G. D’Amico, J. Gleyzes, N. Kokron, K. Markovic, L. Senatore, P. Zhang et al.,The Cosmological Analysis of the SDSS/BOSS data from the Effective Field Theory of Large-Scale Structure,JCAP05(2020) 005 [1909.05271]

    work page arXiv 2020

  6. [6]

    Ivanov, M

    M.M. Ivanov, M. Simonovi´ c and M. Zaldarriaga,Cosmological Parameters from the BOSS Galaxy Power Spectrum,JCAP05(2020) 042 [1909.05277]

    work page arXiv 2020

  7. [7]

    Colas, G

    T. Colas, G. D’amico, L. Senatore, P. Zhang and F. Beutler,Efficient Cosmological Analysis of the SDSS/BOSS data from the Effective Field Theory of Large-Scale Structure,JCAP06 (2020) 001 [1909.07951]

    work page arXiv 2020

  8. [8]

    Ivanov, M

    M.M. Ivanov, M. Simonovi´ c and M. Zaldarriaga,Cosmological Parameters and Neutrino Masses from the CMB and Galaxy Clustering,Phys. Rev. D101(2020) 083504 [1912.08208]

    work page arXiv 2020

  9. [9]

    Reanalyzing DESI DR1: 2. Constraints on Dark Energy, Spatial Curvature, and Neutrino Masses

    A. Chudaykin, M.M. Ivanov and O.H.E. Philcox,Reanalyzing DESI DR1: 2. Constraints on Dark Energy, Spatial Curvature, and Neutrino Masses,2511.20757

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  10. [10]

    Cabass, M.M

    G. Cabass, M.M. Ivanov, O.H.E. Philcox, M. Simonovi´ c and M. Zaldarriaga,Constraints on Single-Field Inflation from the BOSS Power Spectrum and Bispectrum,2201.07238

    work page arXiv

  11. [11]

    D’Amico, M

    G. D’Amico, M. Lewandowski, L. Senatore and P. Zhang,Limits on primordial non-Gaussianities from BOSS galaxy-clustering data,Phys. Rev. D111(2025) 063514 [2201.11518]

    work page arXiv 2025

  12. [12]

    Chudaykin, M

    A. Chudaykin, M.M. Ivanov and O.H.E. Philcox,Reanalyzing DESI DR1. III. Constraints on inflation from galaxy power spectra and bispectra,Phys. Rev. D113(2026) 063552 [2512.04266]

    work page arXiv 2026

  13. [13]

    Ivanov, E

    M.M. Ivanov, E. McDonough, J.C. Hill, M. Simonovi´ c, M.W. Toomey, S. Alexander et al., Constraining Early Dark Energy with Large-Scale Structure,Phys. Rev. D102(2020) 103502 [2006.11235]

    work page arXiv 2020

  14. [14]

    D’Amico, L

    G. D’Amico, L. Senatore, P. Zhang and H. Zheng,The Hubble Tension in Light of the Full-Shape Analysis of Large-Scale Structure Data,JCAP05(2021) 072 [2006.12420]

    work page arXiv 2021

  15. [15]

    Smith, V

    T.L. Smith, V. Poulin, J.L. Bernal, K.K. Boddy, M. Kamionkowski and R. Murgia,Early dark energy is not excluded by current large-scale structure data,Phys. Rev. D103(2021) 123542 [2009.10740]

    work page arXiv 2021

  16. [16]

    D’Amico, Y

    G. D’Amico, Y. Donath, L. Senatore and P. Zhang,Limits on clustering and smooth quintessence from the EFTofLSS,JCAP03(2024) 032 [2012.07554]

    work page arXiv 2024

  17. [17]

    Tsedrik et al.,Interacting dark energy constraints from the full-shape analyses of BOSS DR12 and DES Year 3 measurements,2502.03390

    M. Tsedrik et al.,Interacting dark energy constraints from the full-shape analyses of BOSS DR12 and DES Year 3 measurements,2502.03390

    work page arXiv

  18. [18]

    Rogers, R

    K.K. Rogers, R. Hloˇ zek, A. Lagu¨ e, M.M. Ivanov, O.H.E. Philcox, G. Cabass et al.,Ultra-light axions and the S 8 tension: joint constraints from the cosmic microwave background and galaxy clustering,JCAP06(2023) 023 [2301.08361]. – 21 –

    work page arXiv 2023

  19. [19]

    A. He, R. An, M.M. Ivanov and V. Gluscevic,Self-interacting neutrinos in light of large-scale structure data,Phys. Rev. D109(2024) 103527 [2309.03956]

    work page arXiv 2024

  20. [20]

    A. He, M.M. Ivanov, R. An, T. Driskell and V. Gluscevic,Bounds on velocity-dependent dark matter-baryon scattering from large-scale structure,JCAP05(2025) 087 [2502.02636]. [21]DESIcollaboration,DESI 2024 V: Full-Shape galaxy clustering from galaxies and quasars, JCAP09(2025) 008 [2411.12021]. [22]DESIcollaboration,DESI 2024 VII: cosmological constraints ...

    work page arXiv 2025

  21. [21]

    Chudaykin, M

    A. Chudaykin, M.M. Ivanov and O.H.E. Philcox,Reanalyzing DESI DR1. I.ΛCDM constraints from the power spectrum and bispectrum,Phys. Rev. D113(2026) 063502 [2507.13433]

    work page arXiv 2026

  22. [22]

    Ivanov, J.M

    M.M. Ivanov, J.M. Sullivan, S.-F. Chen, A. Chudaykin, M. Maus and O.H.E. Philcox, Reanalyzing DESI DR1: 4. Percent-Level Cosmological Constraints from Combined Probes and Robust Evidence for the Normal Neutrino Mass Hierarchy,2601.16165

    work page arXiv

  23. [23]

    Chudaykin, M

    A. Chudaykin, M.M. Ivanov and O.H.E. Philcox,Reanalyzing DESI DR1: 5. Cosmological Constraints with Simulation-Based Priors,2602.18554

    work page arXiv

  24. [24]

    Chudaykin, M.M

    M. Chudaykin, M.M. Ivanov, O.H.E. Philcox and M. Simonovi´ c,Nonlinear perturbation theory extension of the Boltzmann code CLASS,Phys. Rev. D102(2020) 063533 [2004.10607]

    work page arXiv 2020

  25. [25]

    Large-Scale Galaxy Bias

    V. Desjacques, D. Jeong and F. Schmidt,Large-Scale Galaxy Bias,Phys. Rept.733(2018) 1 [1611.09787]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2018

  26. [26]

    Chudaykin, M.M

    A. Chudaykin, M.M. Ivanov and T. Nishimichi,Priors and scale cuts in EFT-based full-shape analyses,Phys. Rev. D113(2026) 063524 [2410.16358]

    work page arXiv 2026

  27. [27]

    Ivanov, C

    M.M. Ivanov, C. Cuesta-Lazaro, S. Mishra-Sharma, A. Obuljen and M.W. Toomey,Full-shape analysis with simulation-based priors: Constraints on single field inflation from BOSS,Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 063538 [2402.13310]

    work page arXiv 2024

  28. [28]

    Ivanov, A

    M.M. Ivanov, A. Obuljen, C. Cuesta-Lazaro and M.W. Toomey,Full-shape analysis with simulation-based priors: Cosmological parameters and the structure growth anomaly,Phys. Rev. D111(2025) 063548 [2409.10609]

    work page arXiv 2025

  29. [29]

    Zhang, M

    H. Zhang, M. Bonici, G. D’Amico, S. Paradiso and W.J. Percival,HOD-informed prior for EFT-based full-shape analyses of LSS,JCAP04(2025) 041 [2409.12937]

    work page arXiv 2025

  30. [30]

    Akitsu, Mapping the galaxy-halo connection to the galaxy bias: implication to the HOD-informed prior (2024), arXiv:2410.08998 [astro-ph.CO]

    K. Akitsu,Mapping the galaxy-halo connection to the galaxy bias: implication to the HOD-informed prior,2410.08998

    work page arXiv

  31. [31]

    Alarcon, M

    A. Alarcon, M. Eriksen and E. Gazta˜ naga,Cosmological constraints from multiple tracers in spectroscopic surveys,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.473(2018) 1444 [1609.08510]

    work page arXiv 2018

  32. [32]

    Mergulhão, H

    T. Mergulhão, H. Rubira, R. Voivodic and L.R. Abramo,The effective field theory of large-scale structure and multi-tracer,JCAP04(2022) 021 [2108.11363]

    work page arXiv 2022

  33. [33]

    Mergulhão, H

    T. Mergulhão, H. Rubira and R. Voivodic,The effective field theory of large-scale structure and multi-tracer II: redshift space and realistic tracers,JCAP01(2024) 008 [2306.05474]

    work page arXiv 2024

  34. [34]

    Rubira and F

    H. Rubira and F. Conteddu,Multi-tracer beyond linear theory,JCAP10(2025) 111 [2504.18245]

    work page arXiv 2025

  35. [35]

    Qin et al.,J-PAS and PFS Surveys in the Era of Dark Energy and Neutrino Mass Measurements,Astrophys

    F. Qin et al.,J-PAS and PFS Surveys in the Era of Dark Energy and Neutrino Mass Measurements,Astrophys. J.997(2026) 251 [2505.04275]

    work page arXiv 2026

  36. [36]

    Zhao et al.,A multitracer analysis for the eBOSS galaxy sample based on the effective field theory of large-scale structure,MNRAS532(2024) 2018 [2308.06206]

    R. Zhao et al.,A multitracer analysis for the eBOSS galaxy sample based on the effective field theory of large-scale structure,MNRAS532(2024) 2018 [2308.06206]. – 22 –

    work page arXiv 2024

  37. [37]

    The DESI Experiment Part I: Science,Targeting, and Survey Design

    M. Takada et al.,Extragalactic science, cosmology, and Galactic archaeology with the Subaru Prime Focus Spectrograph,PASJ66(2014) R1. [41]DESIcollaboration,The DESI Experiment Part I: Science,Targeting, and Survey Design, 1611.00036. [42]DESIcollaboration,DESI DR2 results. II. Measurements of baryon acoustic oscillations and cosmological constraints,Phys....

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2014

  38. [38]

    Baleato Lizancos, U

    A. Baleato Lizancos, U. Seljak, M. Karamanis, M. Bonici and S. Ferraro,Selecting samples of galaxies with fewer Fingers-of-God,JCAP07(2025) 014 [2501.10587]

    work page arXiv 2025

  39. [39]

    Extracting Primordial Non-Gaussianity without Cosmic Variance

    U. Seljak,Extracting primordial non-gaussianity without cosmic variance,Phys. Rev. Lett.102 (2009) 021302 [0807.1770]

    work page arXiv 2009

  40. [40]

    How to evade the sample variance limit on measurements of redshift-space distortions

    P. McDonald and U. Seljak,How to evade the sample variance limit on measurements of redshift-space distortions,JCAP10(2009) 007 [0810.0323]

    work page arXiv 2009

  41. [41]

    PFS Collaboration,Target selection and validation for subaru ’onohi’ula pfs cosmology survey, 2026

    2026

  42. [42]

    Orsi, C.M

    A. Orsi, C.M. Baugh, C.G. Lacey, A. Cimatti, Y. Wang and G. Zamorani,Probing dark energy with future redshift surveys: a comparison of emission line and broad-band selection in the near-infrared,Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society405(2010) 1006 [https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article-pdf/405/2/1006/4001505/mnras0405-1006.pdf]

    2010

  43. [43]

    Planck Collaboration,Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters,Astron. Astrophys. 641(2020) A6 [1807.06209]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2018

  44. [44]

    Precision measurement of the local bias of dark matter halos

    T. Lazeyras, C. Wagner, T. Baldauf and F. Schmidt,Precision measurement of the local bias of dark matter halos,JCAP02(2016) 018 [1511.01096]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2016

  45. [45]

    Simonovi´ c, T

    M. Simonovi´ c, T. Baldauf, M. Zaldarriaga, J.J. Carrasco and J.A. Kollmeier,Cosmological perturbation theory using the FFTLog,JCAP04(2018) 030 [1708.08130]

    work page arXiv 2018

  46. [46]

    Kobayashi and K

    Y. Kobayashi and K. Akitsu,ps_1loop_jax: a JAX-based one-loop galaxy power spectrum code, 2026

    2026

  47. [47]

    CosmoPower-JAX: high-dimensional Bayesian inference with differentiable cosmological emulators

    D. Piras and A. Spurio Mancini,CosmoPower-JAX: high-dimensional Bayesian inference with differentiable cosmological emulators,2305.06347

    work page arXiv

  48. [48]

    Jense, I

    H.T. Jense, I. Harrison, E. Calabrese, A. Spurio Mancini, B. Bolliet, J. Dunkley et al.,A complete framework for cosmological emulation and inference with CosmoPower,RAS Tech. Instrum.4(2025) rzaf002 [2405.07903]

    work page arXiv 2025

  49. [49]

    Ivanov,Cosmological constraints from the power spectrum of eBOSS emission line galaxies,Phys

    M.M. Ivanov,Cosmological constraints from the power spectrum of eBOSS emission line galaxies,Phys. Rev. D104(2021) 103514 [2106.12580]

    work page arXiv 2021

  50. [50]

    Ivanov, O.H.E

    M.M. Ivanov, O.H.E. Philcox, G. Cabass, T. Nishimichi, M. Simonovi´ c and M. Zaldarriaga, Cosmology with the galaxy bispectrum multipoles: Optimal estimation and application to BOSS data,Phys. Rev. D107(2023) 083515 [2302.04414]

    work page arXiv 2023

  51. [51]

    Bakx, M.M

    T. Bakx, M.M. Ivanov, O.H.E. Philcox and Z. Vlah,One-Loop Galaxy Bispectrum: Consistent Theory, Efficient Analysis with COBRA, and Implications for Cosmological Parameters, 2507.22110

    work page arXiv

  52. [52]

    Fernández-García et al.,DESI DR2 reference mocks: clustering results from Uchuu-BGS and LRG,2507.01593

    E. Fernández-García et al.,DESI DR2 reference mocks: clustering results from Uchuu-BGS and LRG,2507.01593

    work page arXiv

  53. [53]

    Vaisakh et al., 2026

    R. Vaisakh et al., 2026

    2026

  54. [54]

    Ishiyama et al., 2026

    T. Ishiyama et al., 2026

    2026

  55. [55]

    PFS Collaboration, 2026. – 23 –

    2026