pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.16513 · v1 · pith:I4E5IBFTnew · submitted 2026-05-15 · 🌌 astro-ph.CO

Modeling the probability distribution for cosmological analysis with photometrically classified samples

Marcos P. Freaza , Ribamar R. R. Reis This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-20 15:36 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.CO
keywords photometric supernovaeType Ia supernovaecosmological constraintscontamination modelingdistance modulusBEAMS frameworkBayes factorDES survey
0
0 comments X

The pith

A redshift-dependent shift in the mean distance modulus models photometric supernova contamination more effectively than the standard two-component mixture.

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

The paper proposes a simplified likelihood for using photometrically classified Type Ia supernovae in cosmological fits. Contamination from non-Ia events is captured by allowing the mean of the usual Gaussian distribution on distance modulus to vary with redshift, rather than treating the sample as an explicit mixture of two populations. This model is compared directly to the BEAMS two-component framework on the DES-Dovekie photometric sample, using probabilities from classifiers such as SNIRF and SCONE and varying probability cuts. Across all tested configurations the simplified model is strongly preferred by the Bayes factor and yields tighter cosmological parameter constraints. A sympathetic reader would care because photometric samples are far larger than spectroscopic ones; if the simpler description holds, it removes a major barrier to exploiting those larger catalogs for dark-energy measurements.

Core claim

We show that the new model is strongly favored by the Bayes factor, when compared with the current one, for all configurations, allowing an improvement on the constraining power of photometric supernova data.

What carries the argument

A simplified likelihood in which contamination is described as a redshift-dependent change in the mean of the Gaussian distribution for the distance modulus.

If this is right

  • The simplified model produces stronger cosmological constraints than the BEAMS approach for every classifier and probability cut examined on the DES-Dovekie sample.
  • The redshift-dependent mean shift works equally well with SNIRF and SCONE probability assignments.
  • Bayes factors consistently favor the new description over the two-component mixture across all tested configurations.
  • Photometric supernova data can be incorporated into cosmological analyses with less loss of statistical power than previously assumed.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The approach could be tested on future wide-field surveys to see whether the same shift parameterization remains sufficient at higher redshifts and larger sample sizes.
  • If the model holds, it may allow analysts to relax strict probability thresholds and retain more events without introducing bias.
  • One could check whether analogous mean-shift corrections apply to other photometrically selected transients such as kilonovae or tidal disruption events.
  • The gain in constraining power raises the question of how close photometric samples can come to spectroscopic precision once this modeling is adopted.

Load-bearing premise

Contamination from non-Ia supernovae can be adequately captured by a redshift-dependent shift in the mean of the Gaussian distribution without residual biases that would require the full two-component treatment.

What would settle it

Repeating the Bayes-factor comparison and cosmological fits on an independent photometric supernova catalog that also provides spectroscopic truth labels for a large subset of objects.

read the original abstract

In this work we investigated methods for the accurate and efficient incorporation of photometrically classified supernovae into cosmological analyses, and to assess the impact of the additional uncertainty associated with this procedure on the ability of Type Ia supernovae (SNeIa) tests to place constraints on cosmological models. We proposed a simplified likelihood, in which the contamination is described as a redshift dependent change in the mean of the usually assumed Gaussian distribution, and we tested this hypothesis against the usual two-component approach, based on the BEAMS framework. Using the latest version of the DES supernova sample, dubbed DES-Dovekie, we compared the results when using type probabilities from different classifiers, such as SNIRF and SCONE, and applying different cuts on these probabilities. We show that the new model is strongly favored by the Bayes factor, when compared with the current one, for all configurations, allowing an improvement on the constraining power of photometric supernova data.

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

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a simplified likelihood for incorporating photometrically classified supernovae into cosmological analyses, in which non-Ia contamination is modeled as a redshift-dependent shift in the mean of the usual Gaussian distribution for the distance modulus (or similar observable). This is compared to the standard two-component BEAMS framework using the DES-Dovekie photometric sample, with type probabilities from classifiers such as SNIRF and SCONE and varying probability cuts. The central claim is that the simplified model is strongly favored by the Bayes factor in all tested configurations and yields improved cosmological constraining power.

Significance. If the simplified mean-shift model proves sufficient to avoid residual biases in cosmological parameters, the result would be significant for photometric supernova cosmology: it offers a computationally lighter alternative to full BEAMS while potentially tightening constraints on dark energy parameters from large photometric samples such as DES-Dovekie. The use of real data with multiple classifiers and explicit Bayes-factor model comparison provides concrete grounding for the efficiency gain.

major comments (3)
  1. [Results section (Bayes-factor and posterior comparisons)] The central claim that the simplified model improves constraining power without residual biases rests on Bayes-factor preference and tighter posteriors, but the manuscript does not demonstrate that the cosmological parameter constraints remain unbiased relative to BEAMS when the true contamination distribution is non-Gaussian or exhibits redshift-dependent scatter (as opposed to a pure mean shift). This is load-bearing for the claim that the model fully captures contamination effects.
  2. [Likelihood model definition (Section 3)] The redshift-dependent mean-shift parameters are introduced to capture contamination; however, it is not shown whether these parameters are determined from the same data used to compute the Bayes factor, which could introduce circularity in the model comparison. An explicit statement on the fitting procedure and any external validation would be required.
  3. [Abstract and cosmological inference results] The abstract and results claim improved constraints, yet no details are provided on error propagation, the form of the covariance matrix used in the cosmological fits, or whether the mean-shift amplitudes were selected post-hoc. These omissions affect the robustness of the reported improvement over BEAMS.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Notation and likelihood equation] Clarify the exact functional form of the redshift-dependent mean shift (e.g., linear or spline parameterization) and how it enters the likelihood.
  2. [Results presentation] Add a table or figure summarizing the Bayes factors and cosmological parameter uncertainties for each classifier and probability cut to facilitate direct comparison.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading and constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment point by point below, indicating where we will revise the text to improve clarity and robustness.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Results section (Bayes-factor and posterior comparisons)] The central claim that the simplified model improves constraining power without residual biases rests on Bayes-factor preference and tighter posteriors, but the manuscript does not demonstrate that the cosmological parameter constraints remain unbiased relative to BEAMS when the true contamination distribution is non-Gaussian or exhibits redshift-dependent scatter (as opposed to a pure mean shift). This is load-bearing for the claim that the model fully captures contamination effects.

    Authors: We agree that the manuscript would be strengthened by explicitly addressing the limitations of the mean-shift approximation. Our analysis demonstrates that the simplified model is strongly preferred by the Bayes factor over BEAMS on the real DES-Dovekie data and yields tighter posteriors, with BEAMS serving as the benchmark for comparison. To respond to this point, we will add a paragraph in the results section acknowledging that the model assumes a redshift-dependent mean shift and may not fully capture non-Gaussian contamination or redshift-dependent scatter. We will qualify our conclusions accordingly and note that dedicated mock simulations with more complex contamination would be a valuable extension for future work. This constitutes a partial revision focused on transparency rather than new simulations. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Likelihood model definition (Section 3)] The redshift-dependent mean-shift parameters are introduced to capture contamination; however, it is not shown whether these parameters are determined from the same data used to compute the Bayes factor, which could introduce circularity in the model comparison. An explicit statement on the fitting procedure and any external validation would be required.

    Authors: We will revise Section 3 to include a clear description of the procedure. The redshift-dependent mean-shift parameters are introduced as part of the model specification prior to fitting and are determined jointly with the cosmological parameters in the likelihood analysis of the photometric sample. The Bayes factor is then computed between the fully specified models. We will add text stating that the model form is fixed before any fitting occurs and will reference external validation from prior classifier studies or internal consistency checks. This explicit statement will eliminate any ambiguity regarding circularity. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Abstract and cosmological inference results] The abstract and results claim improved constraints, yet no details are provided on error propagation, the form of the covariance matrix used in the cosmological fits, or whether the mean-shift amplitudes were selected post-hoc. These omissions affect the robustness of the reported improvement over BEAMS.

    Authors: We will expand both the abstract and the cosmological inference results section to supply the missing details. We will specify that the covariance matrix follows the standard form used in the DES supernova cosmological analysis, describe the error propagation through the likelihood, and confirm that the mean-shift amplitudes are treated as free parameters fitted simultaneously within the model rather than selected post-hoc. These additions will be incorporated to enhance the transparency and reproducibility of the reported improvements. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in the proposed likelihood model and Bayes factor comparison

full rationale

The paper introduces a simplified likelihood for photometric SN contamination as a redshift-dependent mean shift in the Gaussian distance-modulus distribution and compares it to the standard two-component BEAMS framework via Bayes factors on the DES-Dovekie sample. The Bayes factor is obtained from the ratio of marginal likelihoods under each model, providing an independent measure of relative evidence rather than a fitted quantity renamed as a prediction. No load-bearing step reduces to a self-citation chain, an ansatz imported from the authors' prior work, or a self-definitional construction in which the reported result is equivalent to its inputs by definition. The central claim of model preference and improved constraints follows directly from the explicit comparison against the external BEAMS baseline and is therefore self-contained.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on the validity of modeling contamination via a redshift-dependent mean shift and on the reliability of the photometric type probabilities supplied by the classifiers.

free parameters (1)
  • redshift-dependent mean-shift amplitude
    Parameter(s) introduced to capture the average effect of contamination as a function of redshift in the simplified Gaussian likelihood.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Photometric type probabilities from SNIRF and SCONE can be used to define clean subsamples or to weight the contamination model after probability cuts.
    Invoked when the authors apply different probability thresholds and compare results across classifiers.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5691 in / 1381 out tokens · 61731 ms · 2026-05-20T15:36:46.310657+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

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

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

53 extracted references · 53 canonical work pages · 22 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Riess, A.V

    A.G. Riess, A.V. Filippenko, P. Challis, A. Clocchiatti, A. Diercks, P.M. Garnavich et al., Observational evidence from supernovae for an accelerating universe and a cosmological constant, The Astronomical Journal116(1998) 1009

    work page 1998

  2. [2]

    Measurements of Omega and Lambda from 42 High-Redshift Supernovae

    S. Perlmutter, G. Aldering, G. Goldhaber, R.A. Knop, P. Nugent, P.G. Castro et al., Measurements of Ω and Λ from 42 High-Redshift Supernovae, The Astrophysical Journal517 (1999) 565 [astro-ph/9812133]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  3. [3]

    Phillips, The Absolute Magnitudes of Type IA Supernovae, The Astrophysical Journal Letters413(1993) L105

    M.M. Phillips, The Absolute Magnitudes of Type IA Supernovae, The Astrophysical Journal Letters413(1993) L105

    work page 1993

  4. [4]

    BVRI Light Curves for 29 Type Ia Supernovae

    M. Hamuy, M.M. Phillips, N.B. Suntzeff, R.A. Schommer, J. Maza, A.R. Antezan et al., BVRI Light Curves for 29 Type IA Supernovae, Astronomical Journal112(1996) 2408 [astro-ph/9609064]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  5. [5]

    The Reddening-Free Decline Rate Versus Luminosity Relationship for Type Ia Supernovae

    M.M. Phillips, P. Lira, N.B. Suntzeff, R.A. Schommer, M. Hamuy and J. Maza, The Reddening-Free Decline Rate Versus Luminosity Relationship for Type IA Supernovae, Astronomical Journal118(1999) 1766 [astro-ph/9907052]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  6. [6]

    Improved Distances to Type Ia Supernovae with Multicolor Light Curve Shapes: MLCS2k2

    S. Jha, A.G. Riess and R.P. Kirshner, Improved Distances to Type Ia Supernovae with Multicolor Light-Curve Shapes: MLCS2k2, The Astrophysical Journal659(2007) 122 [astro-ph/0612666]. – 10 –

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  7. [7]

    The Carnegie Supernova Project: Light Curve Fitting with SNooPy

    C.R. Burns, M. Stritzinger, M.M. Phillips, S. Kattner, S.E. Persson, B.F. Madore et al., The Carnegie Supernova Project: Light-curve Fitting with SNooPy, Astronomical Journal141 (2011) 19 [1010.4040]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  8. [8]

    B.M. Rose, S. Dixon, D. Rubin, R. Hounsell, C. Saunders, S. Deustua et al., Initial Evaluation of SNEMO2 and SNEMO7 Standardization Derived from Current Light Curves of Type Ia Supernovae, The Astrophysical Journal890(2020) 60 [1912.09993]

    work page arXiv 2020

  9. [9]

    Nascimento, J.P.C

    C.S. Nascimento, J.P.C. Fran¸ ca and R.R.R. Reis, Addressing type Ia supernova color variability with a linear spectral template, Astronomy and Computing49(2024) 100866 [2310.02329]. [10]SNLScollaboration, SALT: A Spectral adaptive Light curve Template for Type Ia supernovae, Astron. Astrophys.443(2005) 781 [astro-ph/0506583]

    work page arXiv 2024

  10. [10]

    J. Guy, P. Astier, S. Baumont, D. Hardin, R. Pain, N. Regnault et al., Salt2: using distant supernovae to improve the use of type ia supernovae as distance indicators, Astronomy and Astrophysics466(2007) 11–21

    work page 2007

  11. [11]

    J. Guy, M. Sullivan, A. Conley, N. Regnault, P. Astier, C. Balland et al., The Supernova Legacy Survey 3-year sample: Type Ia supernovae photometric distances and cosmological constraints, A & A523(2010) A7 [1010.4743]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  12. [12]

    Improved cosmological constraints from a joint analysis of the SDSS-II and SNLS supernova samples

    M. Betoule, R. Kessler, J. Guy, J. Mosher, D. Hardin, R. Biswas et al., Improved cosmological constraints from a joint analysis of the SDSS-II and SNLS supernova samples, A & A568(2014) A22 [1401.4064]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  13. [13]

    Kenworthy, D.O

    W.D. Kenworthy, D.O. Jones, M. Dai, R. Kessler, D. Scolnic, D. Brout et al., SALT3: An Improved Type Ia Supernova Model for Measuring Cosmic Distances, Astrophysical Journal923(2021) 265 [2104.07795]

    work page arXiv 2021

  14. [14]

    Taylor, D.O

    G. Taylor, D.O. Jones, B. Popovic, M. Vincenzi, R. Kessler, D. Scolnic et al., SALT2 versus SALT3: updated model surfaces and their impacts on type Ia supernova cosmology, MNRAS520(2023) 5209 [2301.10644]

    work page arXiv 2023

  15. [15]

    The Supernova Legacy Survey: Measurement of Omega_M, Omega_Lambda and w from the First Year Data Set

    P. Astier, J. Guy, N. Regnault, R. Pain, E. Aubourg, D. Balam et al., The Supernova Legacy Survey: measurement of Ω M, Ω Λ and w from the first year data set, A & A447(2006) 31 [astro-ph/0510447]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  16. [16]

    Wood-Vasey, G

    W.M. Wood-Vasey, G. Miknaitis, C.W. Stubbs, S. Jha, A.G. Riess, P.M. Garnavich et al., Observational constraints on the nature of dark energy: First cosmological results from the essence supernova survey, The Astrophysical Journal666(2007) 694

    work page 2007

  17. [17]

    Improved Cosmological Constraints from New, Old and Combined Supernova Datasets

    M. Kowalski, D. Rubin, G. Aldering, R.J. Agostinho, A. Amadon, R. Amanullah et al., Improved Cosmological Constraints from New, Old, and Combined Supernova Data Sets, The Astrophysical Journal686(2008) 749 [0804.4142]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  18. [18]

    Spectra and Light Curves of Six Type Ia Supernovae at 0.511 < z < 1.12 and the Union2 Compilation

    R. Amanullah, C. Lidman, D. Rubin, G. Aldering, P. Astier, K. Barbary et al., Spectra and Hubble Space Telescope Light Curves of Six Type Ia Supernovae at 0.511 ¡ z ¡ 1.12 and the Union2 Compilation, The Astrophysical Journal716(2010) 712 [1004.1711]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  19. [19]

    M. Sako, B. Bassett, A.C. Becker, P.J. Brown, H. Campbell, R. Wolf et al., The data release of the sloan digital sky survey-ii supernova survey, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific130(2018) 064002

    work page 2018

  20. [20]

    T.J. Hoyt, D. Rubin, G. Aldering, S. Perlmutter, A. Cuceu and R. Gupta, Union3.1: Self-consistent Measurements of Host Galaxy Properties for 2000 Type Ia Supernovae, arXiv e-prints (2026) arXiv:2601.19424 [2601.19424]

    work page arXiv 2000

  21. [21]

    Bayesian Single-Epoch Photometric Classification of Supernovae

    D. Poznanski, D. Maoz and A. Gal-Yam, Bayesian Single-Epoch Photometric Classification of Supernovae, Astronomical Journal134 (2007) 1285 [astro-ph/0610129]. – 11 –

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  22. [22]

    A Bayesian Approach to Classifying Supernovae With Color

    N. Connolly and B. Connolly, A Bayesian Approach to Classifying Supernovae With Color, arXiv e-prints (2009) arXiv:0909.3652 [0909.3652]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  23. [23]

    Semi-supervised Learning for Photometric Supernova Classification

    J.W. Richards, D. Homrighausen, P.E. Freeman, C.M. Schafer and D. Poznanski, Semi-supervised learning for photometric supernova classification, MNRAS419(2012) 1121 [1103.6034]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  24. [24]

    A simple and robust method for automated photometric classification of supernovae using neural networks

    N.V. Karpenka, F. Feroz and M.P. Hobson, A simple and robust method for automated photometric classification of supernovae using neural networks, MNRAS429(2013) 1278 [1208.1264]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  25. [25]

    Kernel PCA for type Ia supernovae photometric classification

    E.E.O. Ishida and R.S. de Souza, Kernel PCA for Type Ia supernovae photometric classification, MNRAS430(2013) 509 [1201.6676]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  26. [26]

    Photometric classification of type Ia supernovae in the SuperNova Legacy Survey with supervised learning

    A. M¨ oller, V. Ruhlmann-Kleider, C. Leloup, J. Neveu, N. Palanque-Delabrouille, J. Rich et al., Photometric classification of type Ia supernovae in the SuperNova Legacy Survey with supervised learning, JCAP2016(2016) 008 [1608.05423]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  27. [27]

    Single-epoch supernova classification with deep convolutional neural networks

    A. Kimura, I. Takahashi, M. Tanaka, N. Yasuda, N. Ueda and N. Yoshida, Single-epoch supernova classification with deep convolutional neural networks, arXiv e-prints (2017) arXiv:1711.11526 [1711.11526]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  28. [28]

    Revsbech, R

    E.A. Revsbech, R. Trotta and D.A. van Dyk, STACCATO: a novel solution to supernova photometric classification with biased training sets, MNRAS473(2018) 3969 [1706.03811]

    work page arXiv 2018

  29. [29]

    Improved Photometric Classification of Supernovae using Deep Learning

    A. Moss, Improved Photometric Classification of Supernovae using Deep Learning, arXiv e-prints (2018) arXiv:1810.06441 [1810.06441]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  30. [30]

    Villar, G

    V.A. Villar, G. Hosseinzadeh, E. Berger, M. Ntampaka, D.O. Jones, P. Challis et al., SuperRAENN: A Semisupervised Supernova Photometric Classification Pipeline Trained on Pan-STARRS1 Medium-Deep Survey Supernovae, The Astrophysical Journal905(2020) 94 [2008.04921]

    work page arXiv 2020

  31. [31]

    Vargas dos Santos, M

    M. Vargas dos Santos, M. Quartin and R.R.R. Reis, On the cosmological performance of photometrically classified supernovae with machine learning, MNRAS497(2020) 2974 [1908.04210]

    work page arXiv 2020

  32. [32]

    M¨ oller and T

    A. M¨ oller and T. de Boissi` ere, SuperNNova: an open-source framework for Bayesian, neural network-based supernova classification, MNRAS491(2020) 4277 [1901.06384]

    work page arXiv 2020

  33. [33]

    Dobryakov, K

    S. Dobryakov, K. Malanchev, D. Derkach and M. Hushchyn, Photometric data-driven classification of Type Ia supernovae in the open Supernova Catalog, Astronomy and Computing35(2021) 100451 [2006.10489]

    work page arXiv 2021

  34. [34]

    Photometric Estimates of Redshifts and Distance Moduli for Type Ia Supernovae

    R. Kessler, D. Cinabro, B. Bassett, B. Dilday, J.A. Frieman, P.M. Garnavich et al., Photometric Estimates of Redshifts and Distance Moduli for Type Ia Supernovae, The Astrophysical Journal717(2010) 40 [1001.0738]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  35. [35]

    Y. Wang, E. Gjergo and S. Kuhlmann, Analytic photometric redshift estimator for Type Ia supernovae from the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope, MNRAS451(2015) 1955 [1501.06839]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  36. [36]

    Qu and M

    H. Qu and M. Sako, Photo-zSNthesis: Converting Type Ia Supernova Lightcurves to Redshift Estimates via Deep Learning, The Astrophysical Journal954(2023) 201 [2305.11869]

    work page arXiv 2023

  37. [37]

    de Oliveira, M.V

    F.M.F. de Oliveira, M.V. dos Santos and R.R.R. Reis, Data-driven photometric redshift estimation from type Ia supernovae light curves, MNRAS518 (2023) 2385 [2212.14668]

    work page arXiv 2023

  38. [38]

    J.J. Lee, M. Sako, R. Kessler, A.I. Malz and LSST Dark Energy Science Collaboration, Astrometric Redshifts of Supernovae, The Astrophysical Journal977(2024) 199 [2405.04522]. – 12 –

    work page arXiv 2024

  39. [39]

    Hlozek, M

    R. Hlozek, M. Kunz, B. Bassett, M. Smith, J. Newling, M. Varughese et al., Photometric supernova cosmology with beams and sdss-ii, The Astrophysical Journal752(2012) 79

    work page 2012

  40. [40]

    Kunz, B.A

    M. Kunz, B.A. Bassett and R.A. Hlozek, Bayesian estimation applied to multiple species, Physical Review D75(2007)

    work page 2007

  41. [41]

    Kessler and D

    R. Kessler and D. Scolnic, Correcting type ia supernova distances for selection biases and contamination in photometrically identified samples, The Astrophysical Journal836(2017) 56

    work page 2017

  42. [42]

    Jeffreys, The Theory of Probability, Oxford Classic Texts in the Physical Sciences, Oxford University Press (1939)

    H. Jeffreys, The Theory of Probability, Oxford Classic Texts in the Physical Sciences, Oxford University Press (1939)

    work page 1939

  43. [43]

    Harold Jeffreys's Theory of Probability Revisited

    C.P. Robert, N. Chopin and J. Rousseau, Harold Jeffreys’s Theory of Probability Revisited, arXiv e-prints (2008) arXiv:0804.3173 [0804.3173]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  44. [44]

    Popovic, P

    B. Popovic, P. Shah, W.D. Kenworthy, R. Kessler, T.M. Davis, A. Goobar et al., The dark energy survey supernova program: A reanalysis of cosmology results and evidence for evolving dark energy with an updated type ia supernova calibration, 2026

    work page 2026

  45. [45]

    H. Qu, M. Sako, A. M¨ oller and C. Doux, SCONE: Supernova Classification with a Convolutional Neural Network, The Astronomical Journal162(2021) 67 [2106.04370]

    work page arXiv 2021

  46. [46]

    Brout, D

    D. Brout, D. Scolnic, B. Popovic, A.G. Riess, A. Carr, J. Zuntz et al., The pantheon+ analysis: Cosmological constraints, The Astrophysical Journal938(2022) 110

    work page 2022

  47. [47]

    Collaboration, T.M.C

    D. Collaboration, T.M.C. Abbott, M. Acevedo, M. Aguena, A. Alarcon, S. Allam et al., The dark energy survey: Cosmology results with 1500 new high-redshift type ia supernovae using the full 5-year dataset, 2025

    work page 2025

  48. [48]

    S´ anchez, D

    B.O. S´ anchez, D. Brout, M. Vincenzi, M. Sako, K. Herner, R. Kessler et al., The dark energy survey supernova program: Light curves and 5 yr data release, The Astrophysical Journal975 (2024) 5

    work page 2024

  49. [49]

    Vincenzi, D

    M. Vincenzi, D. Brout, P. Armstrong, B. Popovic, G. Taylor, M. Acevedo et al., The dark energy survey supernova program: Cosmological analysis and systematic uncertainties, The Astrophysical Journal975(2024) 86

    work page 2024

  50. [50]

    Virtanen, R

    P. Virtanen, R. Gommers, T.E. Oliphant, M. Haberland, T. Reddy, D. Cournapeau et al., SciPy 1.0: Fundamental Algorithms for Scientific Computing in Python, Nature Methods17 (2020) 261

    work page 2020

  51. [51]

    emcee: The MCMC Hammer

    D. Foreman-Mackey, D.W. Hogg, D. Lang and J. Goodman, emcee: The MCMC Hammer, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific125(2013) 306 [1202.3665]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  52. [52]

    Hunter, Matplotlib: A 2d graphics environment, Computing in Science & Engineering9 (2007) 90

    J.D. Hunter, Matplotlib: A 2d graphics environment, Computing in Science & Engineering9 (2007) 90

    work page 2007

  53. [53]

    Lewis, Getdist: a python package for analysing monte carlo samples, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2025(2025) 025

    A. Lewis, Getdist: a python package for analysing monte carlo samples, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2025(2025) 025. – 13 –

    work page 2025