arxiv: 2605.12877 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-13 · 🌌 astro-ph.CO · astro-ph.IM

Recognition: no theorem link

Machine-learning applications for weak-lensing cosmology

Masato Shirasaki

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-14 19:02 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.CO astro-ph.IM

keywords weak lensingcosmologymachine learningdark matterlarge scale structuregalaxy surveyssystematicscosmological parameters

0 comments

The pith

Machine learning can help overcome limitations in traditional weak-lensing cosmology analyses.

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

This review discusses recent progress in using machine learning for weak gravitational lensing in cosmology. Weak lensing traces the distribution of dark matter by measuring how it bends light from distant galaxies. Conventional approaches struggle with noise, selection effects, and the complexity of large datasets when deriving cosmological parameters. The paper shows that machine learning offers tools to better extract signals and reduce biases in these analyses. A sympathetic reader would see this as a way to get more precise information about the universe's expansion and structure growth from current surveys.

Core claim

The paper reviews how machine-learning techniques can mitigate the limitations inherent in traditional analyses and enhance the scientific return of current and upcoming weak-lensing datasets by improving the extraction of cosmological information from galaxy shape measurements.

What carries the argument

Machine learning models applied to weak-lensing data for tasks including shear measurement, map reconstruction, and cosmological parameter estimation.

If this is right

Enhanced ability to handle systematic uncertainties in shape measurements from galaxy images.
Tighter constraints on parameters like the matter density and dark energy equation of state from weak-lensing surveys.
More efficient processing of the large volumes of data expected from next-generation telescopes.
Improved separation of signals from different cosmological models or extensions to general relativity.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

Applying these ML methods could allow better cross-checks with other cosmological probes like cosmic microwave background observations.
Future tests on realistic mock data including all known systematics would be needed to confirm reliability.
Development of interpretable ML models might help physicists understand which features drive the improvements.
Integration with simulation-based inference techniques could further boost the power of weak-lensing analyses.

Load-bearing premise

The machine learning approaches are sufficiently mature and do not introduce new systematic errors when applied to actual observational data.

What would settle it

Finding that cosmological parameters inferred via machine learning from real weak-lensing survey data show significant discrepancies with those from standard methods, exceeding expected statistical errors.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.12877 by Masato Shirasaki.

**Figure 1.1.** Figure 1.1: A schematic summary of machine-learning applications to weak-lensing [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_1_1.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 1.2.** Figure 1.2: Conceptual illustration of likelihood-free inference in a one-dimensional [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_1_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 1.3.** Figure 1.3: An example of noise reduction applied to lensing convergence maps ob [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_1_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 1.4.** Figure 1.4: Examples of lensing convergence fields generated by neural networks [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_1_4.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

This article reviews recent advances in the application of machine learning to weak-lensing cosmology. Weak gravitational lensing provides a unique and powerful probe of the total matter distribution in the Universe, independent of its physical state. By directly tracing the spatial distribution of otherwise invisible dark matter within the cosmic web, weak lensing has become a cornerstone for studying both the nature of dark matter and the physics governing large-scale structure formation. We begin by introducing the conventional estimators used to extract weak-lensing signals from modern galaxy-imaging surveys and by summarizing established methods for deriving cosmological information from these observables. We then discuss the limitations inherent in traditional analyses and outline how machine-learning techniques can mitigate these challenges. Finally, we explore future prospects for machine-learning-based approaches, highlighting their potential to further enhance the scientific return of current and upcoming weak-lensing datasets.

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 review summarizing existing ML methods for weak lensing rather than offering new techniques or results.

read the letter

The main thing to know is that this paper is a review of machine learning applications in weak-lensing cosmology. It walks through conventional estimators for extracting lensing signals from galaxy surveys, the standard ways to turn those into cosmological parameters, and the usual limitations like noise and systematics. It then points to ML approaches from the recent literature as ways to ease those limits and improve returns from current and upcoming datasets. No new derivations or tests appear in the work itself. What it does well is lay out a clear progression from traditional methods to ML alternatives, which gives a readable map of how the field has tried to handle dark matter and large-scale structure probes. The structure stays focused on practical challenges and prospective gains without overstating maturity. The soft spots are straightforward: as a summary it adds no original validation or quantitative comparison, so its reliability hinges on how well it covers and represents the cited papers. If key recent ML papers are missed or if some methods are presented as more ready for real data than they are, that would weaken it, but the abstract keeps the tone prospective rather than definitive. This paper is for readers who want a compact overview of the intersection, such as students or researchers moving into weak lensing who are not already deep in the ML literature. Experts already tracking the area will likely find little that is new. It deserves peer review because a balanced review on this topic can help organize the literature for the community, even if it needs checks on coverage and accuracy.

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. This review paper introduces conventional weak-lensing estimators used in galaxy-imaging surveys and methods for cosmological inference from them, summarizes their limitations, outlines how machine-learning techniques drawn from the literature can mitigate those limitations, and discusses future prospects for enhancing the scientific return of current and upcoming weak-lensing datasets.

Significance. If the literature summary is accurate and balanced, the manuscript offers a useful synthesis of how ML methods can address systematics in weak-lensing cosmology. It could help guide researchers toward mature applications that improve constraints on dark matter and large-scale structure from surveys such as LSST and Euclid, while highlighting open challenges in generalizability.

major comments (2)

[§4] §4 (ML mitigation of traditional limitations): the discussion of ML for shear estimation and power-spectrum inference does not quantify the residual bias levels reported in the cited works relative to traditional methods, leaving the central claim that ML 'mitigates' limitations without concrete performance deltas that would allow readers to assess net gain.
[§5] §5 (future prospects): the section asserts that ML approaches will 'further enhance' scientific return but provides no forward-looking error-budget analysis or comparison against the expected statistical precision of Stage-IV surveys, making the prospective claim difficult to evaluate against the weakest assumption that new systematics will not offset gains.

minor comments (3)

[Abstract] The abstract and §1 could include the approximate time window of the reviewed literature (e.g., post-2018) to clarify scope.
[§2] Notation for conventional estimators (e.g., shear and convergence) is introduced without a dedicated table or equation list, which would aid readability for non-specialists.
A few citations to foundational weak-lensing papers appear to be omitted or could be updated to include the most recent Stage-III results.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive comments and positive recommendation. We address the two major comments below and have revised the manuscript to incorporate quantitative details where feasible.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [§4] §4 (ML mitigation of traditional limitations): the discussion of ML for shear estimation and power-spectrum inference does not quantify the residual bias levels reported in the cited works relative to traditional methods, leaving the central claim that ML 'mitigates' limitations without concrete performance deltas that would allow readers to assess net gain.

Authors: We agree that explicit performance deltas strengthen the review. In the revised manuscript we have added representative residual bias values drawn from the cited literature for both ML shear estimation (e.g., multiplicative bias reductions relative to traditional shape-measurement pipelines) and ML power-spectrum inference, allowing direct comparison to conventional methods. revision: yes
Referee: [§5] §5 (future prospects): the section asserts that ML approaches will 'further enhance' scientific return but provides no forward-looking error-budget analysis or comparison against the expected statistical precision of Stage-IV surveys, making the prospective claim difficult to evaluate against the weakest assumption that new systematics will not offset gains.

Authors: We accept the point. The revised §5 now includes a concise forward-looking error-budget discussion that references the expected statistical precision targets of Stage-IV surveys (LSST, Euclid) and notes how ML gains could be limited by new systematics, while retaining the original qualitative outlook. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; literature review without internal derivations

full rationale

This manuscript is a review article that introduces conventional weak-lensing estimators, summarizes their limitations from the existing literature, and outlines how machine-learning methods (also drawn from prior works) can address those limitations. No new derivations, equations, fitted parameters, or quantitative predictions are asserted by the authors themselves. All claims rest on summaries of external references rather than any self-referential reduction, self-citation load-bearing premise, or renaming of results by construction. The central prospective claim about enhanced scientific return is therefore independent of any internal circular chain.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

This is a review article summarizing existing literature on machine learning for weak lensing; no new free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are introduced by the authors.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5428 in / 980 out tokens · 31230 ms · 2026-05-14T19:02:20.638750+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

191 extracted references · 191 canonical work pages · 76 internal anchors

[1]

Steps towards nonlinear cluster inversion through gravitational distortions: III. Including a redshift distribution of the sources

C. Seitz and P. Schneider, Astron. Astrophys.318, 687 (1997) [arXiv:astro-ph/9601079 [astro- ph]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997
[2]

X. Li, H. Miyatake, W. Luo, S. More, M. Oguri, T. Hamana, R. Mandelbaum, M. Shirasaki, M. Takada and R. Armstrong,et al.Publ. Astron. Soc. Jap.74, no.2, 421-459-459 (2022) doi:10.1093/pasj/psac006 [arXiv:2107.00136 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1093/pasj/psac006 2022
[3]

D. N. Limber, Astrophys. J.119, 655 (1954) doi:10.1086/145870

work page doi:10.1086/145870 1954
[4]

Analysis of two-point statistics of cosmic shear: I. Estimators and covariances

P. Schneider, L. van Waerbeke, M. Kilbinger and Y . Mellier, Astron. Astrophys.396, 1-20 (2002) doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20021341 [arXiv:astro-ph/0206182 [astro-ph]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20021341 2002
[5]

Kaiser and G

N. Kaiser and G. Squires, Astrophys. J.404, 441-450 (1993) doi:10.1086/172297

work page doi:10.1086/172297 1993
[6]

Dark Matter in ms1224 from Distortion of Background Galaxies

G. Fahlman, N. Kaiser, G. Squires and D. Woods, Astrophys. J.437, 56-62 (1994) doi:10.1086/174974 [arXiv:astro-ph/9402017 [astro-ph]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1086/174974 1994
[7]

Cluster lens reconstruction using only observed local data -- an improved finite-field inversion technique

S. Seitz and P. Schneider, Astron. Astrophys.305, 383 (1996) [arXiv:astro-ph/9503096 [astro- ph]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996
[8]

Detection of (dark) matter concentrations via weak gravitational lensing

P. Schneider, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.283, 837-853 (1996) doi:10.1093/mnras/283.3.837 [arXiv:astro-ph/9601039 [astro-ph]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/283.3.837 1996
[9]

J., Zwaan , M

T. Hamana, M. Takada and N. Yoshida, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.350, 893 (2004) doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07691.x [arXiv:astro-ph/0310607 [astro-ph]]

work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07691.x 2004
[10]

Construction of the one-point PDF of the local aperture mass in weak lensing maps

F. Bernardeau and P. Valageas, Astron. Astrophys.364, 1 (2000) [arXiv:astro-ph/0006270 [astro-ph]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000
[11]

Constraining neutrino mass with tomographic weak lensing one-point probability distribution function and power spectrum

J. Liu and M. S. Madhavacheril, Phys. Rev. D99, no.8, 083508 (2019) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.99.083508 [arXiv:1809.10747 [astro-ph.CO]]. 1 Machine-learning applications for weak-lensing cosmology 21

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.99.083508 2019
[12]

Barthelemy, S

A. Barthelemy, S. Codis and F. Bernardeau, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.503, no.4, 5204-5222 (2021) doi:10.1093/mnras/stab818 [arXiv:2012.03831 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab818 2021
[13]

Thiele, J

L. Thiele, J. C. Hill and K. M. Smith, Phys. Rev. D102, no.12, 123545 (2020) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.102.123545 [arXiv:2009.06547 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.102.123545 2020
[14]

Boyle, C

A. Boyle, C. Uhlemann, O. Friedrich, A. Barthelemy, S. Codis, F. Bernardeau, C. Giocoli and M. Baldi, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.505, no.2, 2886-2902 (2021) doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1381 [arXiv:2012.07771 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1381 2021
[15]

Giblin, Y

B. Giblin, Y . C. Cai and J. Harnois-D´eraps, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.520, no.2, 1721-1737 (2023) doi:10.1093/mnras/stad230 [arXiv:2211.05708 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad230 2023
[16]

Density split statistics: Cosmological constraints from counts and lensing in cells in DES Y1 and SDSS data

D. Gruenet al.[DES], Phys. Rev. D98, no.2, 023507 (2018) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.98.023507 [arXiv:1710.05045 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.98.023507 2018
[17]

Friedrichet al.[DES], Phys

O. Friedrichet al.[DES], Phys. Rev. D98, no.2, 023508 (2018) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.98.023508 [arXiv:1710.05162 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.98.023508 2018
[18]

Thiele, G

L. Thiele, G. A. Marques, J. Liu and M. Shirasaki, Phys. Rev. D108, no.12, 123526 (2023) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.108.123526 [arXiv:2304.05928 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.108.123526 2023
[20]

J., Zwaan , M

M. Jarvis, G. Bernstein and B. Jain, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.352, 338-352 (2004) doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07926.x [arXiv:astro-ph/0307393 [astro-ph]]

work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07926.x 2004
[21]

Gattiet al.[DES], Phys

M. Gattiet al.[DES], Phys. Rev. D106, no.8, 083509 (2022) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.106.083509 [arXiv:2110.10141 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.106.083509 2022
[22]

R. C. H. Gomeset al.[DES], Phys. Rev. D112, no.12, 123515 (2025) doi:10.1103/sxlz-t9gb [arXiv:2508.14018 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1103/sxlz-t9gb 2025
[23]

J. Liu, A. Petri, Z. Haiman, L. Hui, J. M. Kratochvil and M. May, Phys. Rev. D91, no.6, 063507 (2015) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.91.063507 [arXiv:1412.0757 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.91.063507 2015
[24]

Cosmological constraints from Subaru weak lensing cluster counts

T. Hamana, J. Sakurai, M. Koike and L. Miller, Publ. Astron. Soc. Jap.67, no.3, 34 (2015) doi:10.1093/pasj/psv034 [arXiv:1503.01851 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/pasj/psv034 2015
[25]

Cosmology constraints from shear peak statistics in Dark Energy Survey Science Verification data

T. Kacprzaket al.[DES], Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.463, no.4, 3653-3673 (2016) doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2070 [arXiv:1603.05040 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2070 2016
[26]

H. Shan, X. Liu, H. Hildebrandt, C. Pan, N. Martinet, Z. Fan, P. Schneider, M. Asgari, J. Harnois-D´eraps and H. Hoekstra,et al.Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.474, no.1, 1116-1134 (2018) doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2837 [arXiv:1709.07651 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2837 2018
[27]

KiDS-450: Cosmological Constraints from Weak Lensing Peak Statistics - II: Inference from Shear Peaks using N-body Simulations

N. Martinet, P. Schneider, H. Hildebrandt, H. Shan, M. Asgari, J. P. Dietrich, J. Harnois- D´eraps, T. Erben, A. Grado and C. Heymans,et al.Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.474, no.1, 712-730 (2018) doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2793 [arXiv:1709.07678 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2793 2018
[28]

Harnois-D ´eraps, N

J. Harnois-D ´eraps, N. Martinet, T. Castro, K. Dolag, B. Giblin, C. Heymans, H. Hilde- brandt and Q. Xia, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.506, no.2, 1623-1650 (2021) doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1623 [arXiv:2012.02777 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1623 2021
[29]

Z ¨urcheret al.[DES], Mon

D. Z ¨urcheret al.[DES], Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.511, no.2, 2075-2104 (2022) doi:10.1093/mnras/stac078 [arXiv:2110.10135 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac078 2075
[30]

X. Liu, S. Yuan, C. Pan, T. Zhang, Q. Wang and Z. Fan, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.519, no.1, 594-612 (2022) doi:10.1093/mnras/stac2971 [arXiv:2210.07853 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac2971 2022
[31]

G. A. Marques, J. Liu, M. Shirasaki, L. Thiele, D. Grand ´on, K. M. Huffenberger, S. Cheng, J. Harnois-D´eraps, K. Osato and W. R. Coulton, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.528, no.3, 4513- 4527 (2024) doi:10.1093/mnras/stae098 [arXiv:2308.10866 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae098 2024
[32]

J. F. Hennawi and D. N. Spergel, Astrophys. J.624, 59 (2005) doi:10.1086/428749 [arXiv:astro-ph/0404349 [astro-ph]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1086/428749 2005
[33]

An optimal filter for the detection of galaxy clusters through weak lensing

M. Maturi, M. Meneghetti, M. Bartelmann, K. Dolag and L. Moscardini, Astron. Astrophys. 442, 851 (2005) doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20042600 [arXiv:astro-ph/0412604 [astro-ph]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20042600 2005
[34]

M., Foley , R

L. Marian, R. E. Smith, S. Hilbert and P. Schneider, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.423, 1711 (2012) doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20992.x [arXiv:1110.4635 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20992.x 2012
[35]

M., Foley , R

T. Hamana, M. Oguri, M. Shirasaki and M. Sato, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.425, 2287-2298 (2012) doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21582.x [arXiv:1204.6117 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21582.x 2012
[36]

X. Yang, J. M. Kratochvil, S. Wang, E. A. Lim, Z. Haiman and M. May, Phys. Rev. D84, 043529 (2011) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.84.043529 [arXiv:1109.6333 [astro-ph.CO]]. 22 Masato Shirasaki

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.84.043529 2011
[37]

The Origin of Weak Lensing Convergence Peaks

J. Liu and Z. Haiman, Phys. Rev. D94, no.4, 043533 (2016) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.043533 [arXiv:1606.01318 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.94.043533 2016
[38]

Sabyr, Z

A. Sabyr, Z. Haiman, J. M. Z. Matilla and T. Lu, Phys. Rev. D105, no.2, 023505 (2022) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.105.023505 [arXiv:2109.00547 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.105.023505 2022
[39]

Matsubara, Astrophys

T. Matsubara, Astrophys. J.584, 1-33 (2003) doi:10.1086/345521

work page doi:10.1086/345521 2003
[40]

C., Trotta , R., Berkes , P., Starkman , G

D. Munshi, L. van Waerbeke, J. Smidt and P. Coles, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.419, 536 (2012) doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19718.x [arXiv:1103.1876 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19718.x 2012
[41]

Matsubara and S

T. Matsubara and S. Kuriki, Phys. Rev. D104, no.10, 103522 (2021) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.104.103522 [arXiv:2011.04954 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.104.103522 2021
[42]

Cosmology with Minkowski functionals and moments of the weak lensing convergence field

A. Petri, Z. Haiman, L. Hui, M. May and J. M. Kratochvil, Phys. Rev. D88, no.12, 123002 (2013) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.88.123002 [arXiv:1309.4460 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.88.123002 2013
[43]

J. M. Kratochvil, E. A. Lim, S. Wang, Z. Haiman, M. May and K. Huffenberger, Phys. Rev. D 85, 103513 (2012) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.85.103513 [arXiv:1109.6334 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.85.103513 2012
[44]

Statistical and Systematic Errors in Measurement of Weak-Lensing Minkowski Functionals: Application to Canada-France-Hawaii Lensing Survey

M. Shirasaki and N. Yoshida, Astrophys. J.786, 43 (2014) doi:10.1088/0004-637X/786/1/43 [arXiv:1312.5032 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/0004-637x/786/1/43 2014
[45]

Armijo, G

J. Armijo, G. A. Marques, C. P. Novaes, L. Thiele, J. A. Cowell, D. Grand´on, M. Shirasaki and J. Liu, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.537, no.4, 3553-3560 (2025) doi:10.1093/mnras/staf257 [arXiv:2410.00401 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staf257 2025
[46]

Cheng and B

S. Cheng and B. M ´enard, [arXiv:2112.01288 [astro-ph.IM]]

work page arXiv
[47]

Cheng, Y

S. Cheng, Y . S. Ting, B. M´enard and J. Bruna, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.499, no.4, 5902- 5914 (2020) doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3165 [arXiv:2006.08561 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3165 2020
[48]

Ribli, B

D. Ribli, B. ´A. Pataki, J. M. Zorrilla Matilla, D. Hsu, Z. Haiman and I. Csabai, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.490, no.2, 1843-1860 (2019) doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2610 [arXiv:1902.03663 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2610 2019
[49]

Cheng, G

S. Cheng, G. A. Marques, D. Grand ´on, L. Thiele, M. Shirasaki, B. M ´enard and J. Liu, JCAP 01, 006 (2025) doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/01/006 [arXiv:2404.16085 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/01/006 2025
[50]

J. A. Newman and D. Gruen, Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys.60, 363-414 (2022) doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-032122-014611 [arXiv:2206.13633 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-032122-014611 2022
[51]

R. E. Smithet al.[VIRGO Consortium], Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.341, 1311 (2003) doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06503.x [arXiv:astro-ph/0207664 [astro-ph]]

work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06503.x 2003
[52]

The Coyote Universe I: Precision Determination of the Nonlinear Matter Power Spectrum

K. Heitmann, M. White, C. Wagner, S. Habib and D. Higdon, Astrophys. J.715, 104-121 (2010) doi:10.1088/0004-637X/715/1/104 [arXiv:0812.1052 [astro-ph]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/0004-637x/715/1/104 2010
[53]

The Coyote Universe II: Cosmological Models and Precision Emulation of the Nonlinear Matter Power Spectrum

K. Heitmann, D. Higdon, M. White, S. Habib, B. J. Williams and C. Wagner, Astrophys. J. 705, 156-174 (2009) doi:10.1088/0004-637X/705/1/156 [arXiv:0902.0429 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/0004-637x/705/1/156 2009
[54]

The Coyote Universe III: Simulation Suite and Precision Emulator for the Nonlinear Matter Power Spectrum

E. Lawrence, K. Heitmann, M. White, D. Higdon, C. Wagner, S. Habib and B. Williams, Astrophys. J.713, 1322-1331 (2010) doi:10.1088/0004-637X/713/2/1322 [arXiv:0912.4490 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/0004-637x/713/2/1322 2010
[55]

M., Foley , R

S. Agarwal, F. B. Abdalla, H. A. Feldman, O. Lahav and S. A. Thomas, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.424, 1409-1418 (2012) doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21326.x [arXiv:1203.1695 [astro- ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21326.x 2012
[56]

Revising the Halofit Model for the Nonlinear Matter Power Spectrum

R. Takahashi, M. Sato, T. Nishimichi, A. Taruya and M. Oguri, Astrophys. J.761, 152 (2012) doi:10.1088/0004-637X/761/2/152 [arXiv:1208.2701 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/0004-637x/761/2/152 2012
[57]

PkANN - II. A non-linear matter power spectrum interpolator developed using artificial neural networks

S. Agarwal, F. B. Abdalla, H. A. Feldman, O. Lahav and S. A. Thomas, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.439, no.2, 2102-2121 (2014) doi:10.1093/mnras/stu090 [arXiv:1312.2101 [astro- ph.CO]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/stu090 2014
[58]

Euclid preparation: II. The EuclidEmulator -- A tool to compute the cosmology dependence of the nonlinear matter power spectrum

M. Knabenhanset al.[Euclid], Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.484, 5509-5529 (2019) doi:10.1093/mnras/stz197 [arXiv:1809.04695 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/stz197 2019
[59]

R. E. Angulo, M. Zennaro, S. Contreras, G. Aric `o, M. Pellejero-Iba ˜nez and J. St ¨ucker, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.507, no.4, 5869-5881 (2021) doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2018 [arXiv:2004.06245 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2018 2021
[60]

K. R. Moran, K. Heitmann, E. Lawrence, S. Habib, D. Bingham, A. Upadhye, J. Kwan, D. Higdon and R. Payne, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.520, no.3, 3443-3458 (2023) doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3452 [arXiv:2207.12345 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3452 2023
[61]

Z. Chen, Y . Yu, J. Han and Y . Jing, Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron.68, no.8, 289512 (2025) doi:10.1007/s11433-025-2671-0 [arXiv:2502.11160 [astro-ph.CO]]. 1 Machine-learning applications for weak-lensing cosmology 23

work page doi:10.1007/s11433-025-2671-0 2025
[62]

D. H. Rudd, A. R. Zentner and A. V . Kravtsov, Astrophys. J.672, 19-32 (2008) doi:10.1086/523836 [arXiv:astro-ph/0703741 [astro-ph]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1086/523836 2008
[63]

M. P. van Daalen, J. Schaye, C. M. Booth and C. D. Vecchia, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.415, 3649-3665 (2011) doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18981.x [arXiv:1104.1174 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18981.x 2011
[64]

The clustering of baryonic matter. II: halo model and hydrodynamic simulations

C. Fedeli, E. Semboloni, M. Velliscig, M. Van Daalen, J. Schaye and H. Hoekstra, JCAP08, 028 (2014) doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2014/08/028 [arXiv:1406.5013 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2014/08/028 2014
[66]

A. Mead, J. Peacock, C. Heymans, S. Joudaki and A. Heavens, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 454, no.2, 1958-1975 (2015) doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2036 [arXiv:1505.07833 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2036 1958
[67]

A. Mead, C. Heymans, L. Lombriser, J. Peacock, O. Steele and H. Winther, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.459, no.2, 1468-1488 (2016) doi:10.1093/mnras/stw681 [arXiv:1602.02154 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/stw681 2016
[68]

N. E. Chisari, M. L. A. Richardson, J. Devriendt, Y . Dubois, A. Schneider, A. L. Brun, M.C., R. S. Beckmann, S. Peirani, A. Slyz and C. Pichon, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.480, no.3, 3962-3977 (2018) doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2093 [arXiv:1801.08559 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2093 2018
[69]

Barreira, D

A. Barreira, D. Nelson, A. Pillepich, V . Springel, F. Schmidt, R. Pakmor, L. Hern- quist and M. V ogelsberger, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.488, no.2, 2079-2092 (2019) doi:10.1093/mnras/stz1807 [arXiv:1904.02070 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz1807 2079
[70]

N. E. Chisari, A. J. Mead, S. Joudaki, P. Ferreira, A. Schneider, J. Mohr, T. Tr ¨oster, D. Alonso, I. G. McCarthy and S. Martin-Alvarez,et al.Open J. Astrophys.2, no.1, 4 (2019) doi:10.21105/astro.1905.06082 [arXiv:1905.06082 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.21105/astro.1905.06082 2019
[71]

Aric `o, R

G. Aric `o, R. E. Angulo, C. Hern ´andez-Monteagudo, S. Contreras, M. Zennaro, M. Pellejero- Iba˜nez and Y . Rosas-Guevara, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.495, no.4, 4800-4819 (2020) doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1478 [arXiv:1911.08471 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1478 2020
[72]

A. Mead, S. Brieden, T. Tr ¨oster and C. Heymans, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.502, no.1, 1401-1422 (2021) doi:10.1093/mnras/stab082 [arXiv:2009.01858 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab082 2021
[73]

Osato, J

K. Osato, J. Liu and Z. Haiman, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.502, no.4, 5593-5602 (2021) doi:10.1093/mnras/stab395 [arXiv:2010.09731 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab395 2021
[74]

S. K. Giri and A. Schneider, JCAP12, no.12, 046 (2021) doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2021/12/046 [arXiv:2108.08863 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2021/12/046 2021
[75]

doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2834 , archiveprefix =

A. Acuto, I. G. McCarthy, J. Kwan, J. Salcido, S. G. Stafford and A. S. Font, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.508, no.3, 3519-3534 (2021) doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2834 [arXiv:2109.11855 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2834 2021
[76]

Salcido, I

J. Salcido, I. G. McCarthy, J. Kwan, A. Upadhye and A. S. Font, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 523, no.2, 2247-2262 (2023) doi:10.1093/mnras/stad1474 [arXiv:2305.09710 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad1474 2023
[77]

Schaller, J

M. Schaller, J. Schaye, R. Kugel, J. C. Broxterman and M. P. van Daalen, Mon. Not. Roy. As- tron. Soc.539, no.2, 1337-1351 (2025) doi:10.1093/mnras/staf569 [arXiv:2410.17109 [astro- ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staf569 2025
[78]

Schneider, M

A. Schneider, M. Kova ˇc, J. Bucko, A. Nicola, R. Reischke, S. K. Giri, R. Teyssier, T. Tr¨oster, A. Refregier and M. Schaller,et al.JCAP12, 043 (2025) doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/12/043 [arXiv:2507.07892 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/12/043 2025
[79]

Kova ˇc, A

M. Kova ˇc, A. Nicola, J. Bucko, A. Schneider, R. Reischke, S. K. Giri, R. Teyssier, M. Schaller and J. Schaye, JCAP11, 046 (2025) doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/11/046 [arXiv:2507.07991 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/11/046 2025
[80]

On the variation of the initial mass function,

T. Hamana, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.326, 326 (2001) doi:10.1046/j.1365- 8711.2001.04607.x [arXiv:astro-ph/0104244 [astro-ph]]

work page doi:10.1046/j.1365- 2001
[81]

Size Bias in Galaxy Surveys

F. Schmidt, E. Rozo, S. Dodelson, L. Hui and E. Sheldon, Phys. Rev. Lett.103, 051301 (2009) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.103.051301 [arXiv:0904.4702 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.103.051301 2009
[82]

Lensing Bias in Cosmic Shear

F. Schmidt, E. Rozo, S. Dodelson, L. Hui and E. Sheldon, Astrophys. J.702, 593-602 (2009) doi:10.1088/0004-637X/702/1/593 [arXiv:0904.4703 [astro-ph.CO]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/0004-637x/702/1/593 2009

Showing first 80 references.