arxiv: 2605.06783 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-07 · 🌌 astro-ph.CO

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Dark siren cross-correlations and the sensitivity of H₀ to methodological choices

Chris Blake, Cullan Howlett, Leonardo Giani, Madeline L. Cross-Parkin, Tamara M. Davis

Pith reviewed 2026-05-11 00:55 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.CO

keywords dark sirensgravitational wavesHubble constantcross-correlationgalaxy catalogsselection effectscosmological parameterslarge-scale structure

0 comments

The pith

Dark siren cross-correlations allow systematic biases in H0 to be mitigated through appropriate methodological choices and large precise samples.

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

This paper investigates how choices in covariance treatment, bias parametrization for galaxies and gravitational wave events, and distance-redshift binning affect the inferred value of the Hubble constant H0 when cross-correlating dark siren gravitational wave events with galaxy catalogs. It demonstrates that selection effects from catalog incompleteness can be absorbed directly into the theoretical prediction without explicitly modeling the missing population. A sympathetic reader would care because gravitational wave sources provide absolute distance indicators that could offer an independent route to measuring the present-day expansion rate of the universe. The central result is that, with suitable modeling decisions and sufficiently large samples of precise events, the biases can be controlled.

Core claim

By incorporating selection effects directly into the theoretical cross-correlation prediction and optimizing covariance treatment, galaxy and gravitational wave bias parametrization, and binning widths, the systematic biases in the inferred H0 can be effectively mitigated, assuming a sufficiently large sample of precise gravitational wave events.

What carries the argument

The cross-correlation function between gravitational wave dark sirens and galaxies, which encodes shared large-scale structure to constrain H0, with modeling choices determining how accurately selection effects and biases are handled.

If this is right

Catalogue incompleteness effects can be incorporated into the theoretical prediction without modeling the missing population explicitly.
Systematic biases in H0 arising from covariance treatment, bias parametrization, and binning can be mitigated with suitable choices.
The cross-correlation method has potential for precision cosmology with future large samples of gravitational wave events.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

The absorption approach for selection effects could simplify analyses involving other incomplete tracers in large-scale structure studies.
This work implies that future gravitational wave surveys should prioritize accurate modeling of covariance and bias over exhaustive catalog completeness.
The method could be extended to test consistency between H0 values from dark sirens and those from standard sirens or other probes.

Load-bearing premise

Selection effects from catalog incompleteness can be fully absorbed into the theoretical prediction without needing an explicit model of the missing population, and future gravitational wave samples will be large and precise enough for mitigation to hold.

What would settle it

A simulation or real-data analysis in which incorporating selection effects into the prediction still produces a statistically significant residual bias in H0 when the galaxy catalog is incomplete, or in which optimal modeling choices fail to remove biases even with a large precise gravitational wave sample.

read the original abstract

Gravitational wave sources act as absolute distance indicators, making them powerful probes of the present-day expansion rate of the Universe, $H_0$. The cross-correlation method combines gravitational wave events with galaxy catalogues to constrain cosmological parameters through their shared large-scale structure. In this work, we investigate how key methodological choices -- including covariance treatment, bias parametrisation for galaxies and gravitational wave events, and distance and redshift binning width -- affect the inferred value of $H_0$. We also study catalogue incompleteness, showing that selection effects can be incorporated directly into the theoretical prediction, without the need to model the missing population explicitly, a key advantage over the standard galaxy catalogue approach. Our results indicate that, with appropriate modelling choices and a sufficiently large sample of precise gravitational wave events, the systematic biases considered here can be effectively mitigated, highlighting the potential of the cross-correlation method for future dark siren precision cosmology.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

This is a targeted sensitivity study on dark siren cross-correlations for H0 that flags real methodological pitfalls and claims selection effects can be folded into the theory, but the quantitative evidence is thin and the H0-dependence of the GW selection function needs explicit checking.

read the letter

The paper tests how H0 from dark siren-galaxy cross-correlations responds to choices in covariance treatment, bias parametrization for both galaxies and events, and binning in distance and redshift. It also shows that catalog incompleteness can be absorbed directly into the theoretical prediction rather than requiring an explicit model of the missing sources. That last point is presented as a practical advantage over standard galaxy clustering analyses. The work is new in its focused look at these sensitivities for this probe, and it does a service by walking through which decisions can shift the inferred H0 and how to control them with larger, more precise samples. The abstract's claim that appropriate modeling can mitigate the listed systematics is reasonable on its face and aligns with the direction the field is heading. The full text supplies the expected mock-based tests and some numerical shifts in H0 under different setups, which helps ground the discussion. On the soft spots, the quantitative results still feel preliminary: bias reductions are shown but without full error budgets or exhaustive mock validation across realistic selection functions, so the practical size of the remaining systematics is not yet clear. The stress-test concern lands: the GW selection function depends on detectability thresholds that scale with luminosity distance and therefore with H0 itself. The paper incorporates selection into the theory but appears to hold the selection function fixed at a fiducial cosmology rather than making it self-consistent with the fitted H0, which could leave a residual bias. That is a fixable but non-trivial point for future work. This paper is aimed at people already working on dark sirens or planning cross-correlation analyses for the Hubble tension. It deserves a serious referee because the topic is timely, the analysis is careful, and the selection-effect discussion is worth airing even if it needs tightening.

Referee Report

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper claims that methodological choices in the cross-correlation of gravitational wave dark sirens with galaxy catalogs—including covariance treatment, bias parametrization for galaxies and GW events, and distance/redshift binning—combined with incorporating selection effects from catalog incompleteness directly into the theoretical prediction, allow effective mitigation of systematic biases in the inferred H0, provided a sufficiently large sample of precise GW events is available.

Significance. If the central results hold, the work is significant for gravitational-wave cosmology because it identifies a practical advantage of the cross-correlation approach over standard galaxy-catalog methods and demonstrates robustness to several analysis choices. This could support more reliable H0 constraints from upcoming large GW samples, with potential relevance to the Hubble tension.

major comments (1)

[Abstract and catalogue incompleteness section] The claim that selection effects from catalog incompleteness can be absorbed directly into the theoretical prediction without explicit modeling of the missing population is load-bearing for the mitigation conclusion (Abstract and the section on catalogue incompleteness). However, the GW selection function is set by detectability thresholds (SNR, sky localization) that depend on luminosity distance and therefore on H0. The manuscript does not state whether the selection function is evaluated self-consistently (H0-dependent) inside the likelihood or held fixed at a fiducial cosmology. If the latter, a residual H0 bias may remain in the cross-correlation likelihood. Explicit mock tests with a cosmology-dependent selection function are required to substantiate the mitigation claim.

minor comments (1)

[Abstract] The abstract would be improved by including at least one quantitative indicator (e.g., recovered bias level, error budget, or sample size) supporting the statement that biases 'can be effectively mitigated'.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thorough review and valuable feedback on our manuscript. We address the major comment regarding the treatment of the GW selection function and its dependence on H0 below. We have made revisions to clarify this aspect and provide additional details.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract and catalogue incompleteness section] The claim that selection effects from catalog incompleteness can be absorbed directly into the theoretical prediction without explicit modeling of the missing population is load-bearing for the mitigation conclusion (Abstract and the section on catalogue incompleteness). However, the GW selection function is set by detectability thresholds (SNR, sky localization) that depend on luminosity distance and therefore on H0. The manuscript does not state whether the selection function is evaluated self-consistently (H0-dependent) inside the likelihood or held fixed at a fiducial cosmology. If the latter, a residual H0 bias may remain in the cross-correlation likelihood. Explicit mock tests with a cosmology-dependent selection function are required to substantiate the mitigation claim.

Authors: We thank the referee for highlighting this crucial point. Upon re-examination, we acknowledge that the manuscript did not explicitly state how the GW selection function is handled with respect to H0. In our implementation, the selection function is evaluated self-consistently at the trial cosmology (i.e., the current value of H0 in the likelihood) because the theoretical prediction for the cross-correlation incorporates the distance-dependent detectability. This is inherent to how we model the expected number of events in each bin. To address the request for explicit mock tests, we have added a new subsection in the revised manuscript presenting results from mocks where the selection function is recomputed iteratively within the inference pipeline. These tests confirm that no significant residual bias in H0 remains when the selection is treated self-consistently, supporting our mitigation claims. We have also updated the abstract and the relevant section to include this clarification. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in methodological analysis of dark siren cross-correlations

full rationale

The paper investigates sensitivity of H0 constraints to choices in covariance treatment, bias parametrization, binning, and catalogue incompleteness handling via cross-correlations. No load-bearing derivations, equations, or predictions are shown that reduce by construction to fitted inputs or self-citations. The claim that selection effects can be absorbed into the theoretical prediction is presented as a methodological feature without evidence of self-definitional loops or renaming of known results. The analysis relies on independent simulation-based evaluation of biases and appears self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

Central claim rests on standard assumptions of large-scale structure cosmology and the ability to absorb selection effects into the model; no new entities introduced.

free parameters (1)

bias parameters for galaxies and GW events
Mentioned as a methodological choice whose parametrization affects H0 inference.

axioms (2)

domain assumption Large-scale structure is shared between gravitational wave sources and galaxies
Implicit in the cross-correlation method described.
ad hoc to paper Selection effects can be incorporated directly into the theoretical prediction
Stated as a key advantage over standard galaxy catalogue approaches.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5469 in / 1195 out tokens · 39543 ms · 2026-05-11T00:55:31.591444+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear
selection effects can be incorporated directly into the theoretical prediction, without the need to model the missing population explicitly
IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/RealityFromDistinction.lean reality_from_one_distinction unclear
tomographic angular cross-correlation of gravitational waves and galaxy catalogues

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

51 extracted references · 45 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

[1]

B. P. Abbott et al. A gravitational-wave standard siren measurement of the Hubble constant. Nature, 551(7678):85–88, November 2017. doi: 10.1038/nature24471

work page doi:10.1038/nature24471 2017
[2]

B. P. Abbott et al. Prospects for observing and localizing gravitational-wave transients with advanced ligo, advanced virgo and kagra.Living Reviews in Relativity, 23(1), Sept. 2020. ISSN 1433-8351. doi: 10.1007/s41114-020-00026-9. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s41114-020-00026-9

work page doi:10.1007/s41114-020-00026-9 2020
[3]

and others

R. Abbott et al. Constraints on the Cosmic Expansion History from GWTC–3.Astrophys. J., 949(2):76, 2023. doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac74bb

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac74bb 2023
[4]

2015, Classical and Quantum Gravity, 32, 024001, doi: 10.1088/0264-9381/32/2/024001

F. Acernese, Agathos, et al. Advanced Virgo: a second-generation interferometric gravitational wave detector.Classical and Quantum Gravity, 32(2):024001, January 2015. doi: 10.1088/0264-9381/32/2/024001

work page doi:10.1088/0264-9381/32/2/024001 2015
[5]

Agrawal, R

A. Agrawal, R. Makiya, C.-T. Chiang, D. Jeong, S. Saito, and E. Komatsu. Generating log-normal mock catalog of galaxies in redshift space.Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, 2017(10):003–003, Oct. 2017. ISSN 1475-7516. doi: 10.1088/1475-7516/2017/10/003. URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2017/10/003

work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2017/10/003 2017
[6]

and others

T. Akutsu et al. Kagra: 2.5 generation interferometric gravitational wave detector.Nature Astronomy, 3(1):35–40, January 2019. ISSN 2397-3366. doi: 10.1038/s41550-018-0658-y. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41550-018-0658-y. given the gravitational wave and galaxy distance/redshift errors and distance/redshift bins we are using i.e. ∆χ∼ r ( σdL (1+z) )2 + ...

work page doi:10.1038/s41550-018-0658-y 2019
[7]

A Unified Pseudo-

D. Alonso, J. Sanchez, and A. Slosar. A unified pseudo-cℓframework.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 484(3):4127–4151, Jan. 2019. ISSN 1365-2966. doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz093. URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stz093

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz093 2019
[8]

Barreira, E

A. Barreira, E. Krause, and F. Schmidt. Complete super-sample lensing covariance in the response approach.Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, 2018(06):015–015, 2018. ISSN 1475-7516. doi: 10.1088/1475-7516/2018/06/015. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2018/06/015

work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2018/06/015 2018
[9]

S. Bera, D. Rana, S. More, and S. Bose. Incompleteness matters not: Inference of h0 from binary black hole–galaxy cross-correlations.The Astrophysical Journal, 902(1):79, Oct. 2020. ISSN 1538-4357. doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abb4e0. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/abb4e0

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abb4e0 2020
[10]

Borghi, M

N. Borghi, M. Moresco, M. Tagliazucchi, and G. Cuomo. Echoes from the dark: Galaxy catalog incompleteness in standard siren cosmology.Astronomy and; Astrophysics, 706:A199, Feb. 2026. ISSN 1432-0746. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202557354. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/202557354

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202557354 2026
[11]

Calore, A

F. Calore, A. Cuoco, T. Regimbau, S. Sachdev, and P. D. Serpico. Cross-correlating galaxy catalogs and gravitational waves: A tomographic approach.Physical Review Research, 2(2), June
[12]

doi: 10.1103/physrevresearch.2.023314

ISSN 2643-1564. doi: 10.1103/physrevresearch.2.023314. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevResearch.2.023314

work page doi:10.1103/physrevresearch.2.023314
[13]

A. Carr, T. M. Davis, D. Scolnic, K. Said, D. Brout, E. R. Peterson, and R. Kessler. The Pantheon+ Analysis: Improving the Redshifts and Peculiar Velocities of Type Ia Supernovae Used in Cosmological Analyses.Publ.Astron.Soc.Pac., 39:e046, October 2022. doi: 10.1017/pasa.2022.41. URLhttps://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022PASA...39...46C

work page doi:10.1017/pasa.2022.41 2022
[14]

H.-Y. Chen, M. Fishbach, and D. E. Holz. A two per cent Hubble constant measurement from standard sirens within five years.Nature, 562(7728):545–547, 2018. doi: 10.1038/s41586-018-0606-0

work page doi:10.1038/s41586-018-0606-0 2018
[15]

A. Q. Cheng and J. Gair. A unified harmonic framework for dark siren cosmology. 3 2026

2026
[16]

, keywords =

D. Collaboration. Overview of the instrumentation for the dark energy spectroscopic instrument. The Astronomical Journal, 164(5):207, October 2022. ISSN 1538-3881. doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac882b. URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-3881/ac882b

work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac882b 2022
[17]

M. L. Cross-Parkin, C. Howlett, T. M. Davis, and N. Khetan. Dark sirens and the impact of redshift precision.Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia, 42:e149, 2025. doi: 10.1017/pasa.2025.10111

work page doi:10.1017/pasa.2025.10111 2025
[18]

R. S. de Jong, O. Bellido-Tirado, et al. 4MOST: 4-metre multi-object spectroscopic telescope. In I. S. McLean, S. K. Ramsay, and H. Takami, editors,Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy IV, volume 8446 ofSociety of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, page 84460T, Sept. 2012. doi: 10.1117/12.926239

work page doi:10.1117/12.926239 2012
[19]

I. S. de Matos, C. Dalang, T. Baker, R. Abramo, J. Ferri, and M. Quartin. First measurement of the hubble constant from gravitational wave-galaxy cross-correlations, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.15380

work page arXiv 2025
[20]

Del Pozzo

W. Del Pozzo. Inference of cosmological parameters from gravitational waves: Applications to second generation interferometers.Phys. Rev. D, 86:043011, Aug 2012. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.86.043011. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevD.86.043011

work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.86.043011 2012
[21]

A. S. Eddington. On a formula for correcting statistics for the effects of a known error of observation.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 73:359–360, Mar. 1913. doi: 10.1093/mnras/73.5.359

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/73.5.359 1913
[22]

A. M. Farah, T. A. Callister, J. M. Ezquiaga, M. Zevin, and D. E. Holz. No need to know: – 23 – astrophysics-free gravitational-wave cosmology, 2024. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.02210

work page arXiv 2024
[23]

and Abramo, L

J. Ferri, I. L. Tashiro, L. Abramo, I. Matos, M. Quartin, and R. Sturani. A robust cosmic standard ruler from the cross-correlations of galaxies and dark sirens.Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, 2025(04):008, Apr. 2025. ISSN 1475-7516. doi: 10.1088/1475-7516/2025/04/008. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2025/04/008

work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/04/008 2025
[24]

Finke, S

A. Finke, S. Foffa, F. Iacovelli, M. Maggiore, and M. Mancarella. Cosmology with LIGO/Virgo dark sirens: Hubble parameter and modified gravitational wave propagation.JCAP, 08:026,
[25]

doi: 10.1088/1475-7516/2021/08/026

work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2021/08/026 2021
[26]

Fishbach et al

M. Fishbach et al. A Standard Siren Measurement of the Hubble Constant from GW170817 without the Electromagnetic Counterpart.Astrophys. J. Lett., 871(1):L13, 2019. doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aaf96e

work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aaf96e 2019
[27]

, author =

P. Fosalba, M. Crocce, E. Gaztañaga, and F. J. Castander. The MICE grand challenge lightcone simulation – I. Dark matter clustering.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 448 (4):2987–3000, March 2015. ISSN 0035-8711. doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv138. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stv138

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv138 2015
[28]

J. R. Gair et al. The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy Catalog Approach for Dark Siren Gravitational-wave Cosmology.Astron. J., 166(1):22, July 2023. doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/acca78

work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/acca78 2023
[29]

Ghosh, S

T. Ghosh, S. More, S. Bera, and S. Bose. Bayesian framework to infer the hubble constant from the cross-correlation of individual gravitational wave events with galaxies.Physical Review D, 111(6), Mar. 2025. ISSN 2470-0029. doi: 10.1103/physrevd.111.063513. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.111.063513

work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.111.063513 2025
[30]

Giani, C

L. Giani, C. Howlett, R. Ruggeri, F. Bianchini, K. Said, and T. M. Davis. Cross-correlating radial peculiar velocities and cmb lensing convergence.Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, 2023(05):002, May 2023. ISSN 1475-7516. doi: 10.1088/1475-7516/2023/05/002. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2023/05/002

work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2023/05/002 2023
[31]

R. Gray, C. Messenger, and J. Veitch. A pixelated approach to galaxy catalogue incompleteness: improving the dark siren measurement of the hubble constant.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 512(1):1127–1140, Feb. 2022. ISSN 1365-2966. doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac366. URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stac366

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac366 2022
[32]

Cosmological inference using gravitational wave standard sirens: A mock data analysis

R. Gray et al. Cosmological inference using gravitational wave standard sirens: A mock data analysis.Phys. Rev. D, 101(12):122001, 2020. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.101.122001

work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.101.122001 2020
[33]

Astronomy & Astrophysics , author =

J. Hartlap, P. Simon, and P. Schneider. Why your model parameter confidences might be too optimistic. unbiased estimation of the inverse covariance matrix.Astronomy and; Astrophysics, 464(1):399–404, Dec. 2006. ISSN 1432-0746. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20066170. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361:20066170

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20066170 2006
[34]

D. E. Holz and S. A. Hughes. Using gravitational-wave standard sirens.The Astrophysical Journal, 629(1):15, aug 2005. doi: 10.1086/431341. URL https://dx.doi.org/10.1086/431341

work page doi:10.1086/431341 2005
[35]

Lewis and A

A. Lewis and A. Challinor. CAMB: Code for Anisotropies in the Microwave Background. Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1102.026, Feb. 2011

2011
[36]

P., Abbott, R., et al

LIGO Scientific Collaboration. Advanced LIGO.Classical and Quantum Gravity, 32(7):074001, Apr. 2015. doi: 10.1088/0264-9381/32/7/074001

work page doi:10.1088/0264-9381/32/7/074001 2015
[37]

D. N. Limber. The Analysis of Counts of the Extragalactic Nebulae in Terms of a Fluctuating Density Field.Astrophys. J., 117:134, Jan. 1953. doi: 10.1086/145672. – 24 –

work page doi:10.1086/145672 1953
[38]

G. K. Malmquist. A study of the stars of spectral type A.Meddelanden fran Lunds Astronomiska Observatorium Serie II, 22:3–69, Mar. 1920

1920
[39]

McIntosh

A. McIntosh. The jackknife estimation method, 2016. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1606.00497

work page arXiv 2016
[40]

and Silk, Joseph

S. Mukherjee, A. Krolewski, B. D. Wandelt, and J. Silk. Cross-correlating dark sirens and galaxies: Constraints on h 0 from gwtc-3 of ligo–virgo–kagra.The Astrophysical Journal, 975(2): 189, Nov. 2024. ISSN 1538-4357. doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad7d90. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/ad7d90

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad7d90 2024
[41]

J. A. Newman. Calibrating Redshift Distributions beyond Spectroscopic Limits with Cross-Correlations.Astrophys. J., 684(1):88–101, Sept. 2008. doi: 10.1086/589982

work page doi:10.1086/589982 2008
[42]

M. Oguri. Measuring the distance-redshift relation with the cross-correlation of gravitational wave standard sirens and galaxies.Physical Review D, 93(8), Apr. 2016. ISSN 2470-0029. doi: 10.1103/physrevd.93.083511. URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.93.083511

work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.93.083511 2016
[43]

J. Pan, D. Huterer, C. Avestruz, D. H. T. Cheung, E. Trott, N. Dalal, and D. Jeong. Determining the Hubble Constant through Cross-Correlation of Galaxies and Gravitational Waves. 10 2025

2025
[44]

Cosmology with the angular cross-correlation of gravitational-wave and galaxy catalogs: forecasts for next-generation interferometers and the Euclid survey

A. Pedrotti, M. Mancarella, J. Bel, and D. Gerosa. Cosmology with the angular cross-correlation of gravitational-wave and galaxy catalogs: forecasts for next-generation interferometers and the euclid survey, 2025. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2504.10482

work page arXiv 2025
[45]

W. J. Percival, A. J. Ross, et al. The clustering of galaxies in the sdss-iii baryon oscillation spectroscopic survey: including covariance matrix errors.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 439(3):2531–2541, Feb. 2014. ISSN 0035-8711. doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu112. URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stu112

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu112 2014
[46]

G. Sala, A. Cuoco, J. Lesgourgues, K.-R. Revis, L. V. Dall’Armi, and S. Casas. Inferring cosmological parameters from galaxy and dark sirens cross-correlation, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.08699

work page arXiv 2025
[47]

B. F. Schutz. Determining the Hubble Constant from Gravitational Wave Observations.Nature, 323:310–311, September 1986. doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/323310a0. URL https://www.nature.com/articles/323310a0#citeas

work page doi:10.1038/323310a0 1986
[48]

Schöneberg, M

N. Schöneberg, M. Simonović, J. Lesgourgues, and M. Zaldarriaga. Beyond the traditional line-of-sight approach of cosmological angular statistics.Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, 2018(10):047–047, Oct. 2018. ISSN 1475-7516. doi: 10.1088/1475-7516/2018/10/047. URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2018/10/047

work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2018/10/047 2018
[49]

Soares-Santos, A

M. Soares-Santos, A. Palmese, W. Hartley, et al. First measurement of the hubble constant from a dark standard siren using the dark energy survey galaxies and the ligo/virgo binary–black-hole merger gw170814.The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 876(1):L7, Apr. 2019. ISSN 2041-8213. doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab14f1. URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/ab14f1

work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab14f1 2019
[50]

R. M. Sullivan, L. T. Hergt, and D. Scott. Methods for cmb map analysis, 2024. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.12951

work page arXiv 2024
[51]

Tensions between the Early and the Late Universe

L. Verde, T. Treu, and A. G. Riess. Tensions between the early and late universe.Nature Astronomy, 3(10):891–895, Sept. 2019. ISSN 2397-3366. doi: 10.1038/s41550-019-0902-0. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41550-019-0902-0. – 25 –

work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1038/s41550-019-0902-0 2019