A 2.5% measurement of the growth rate from small-scale redshift space clustering of SDSS-III CMASS galaxies
read the original abstract
We perform the first fit to the anisotropic clustering of SDSS-III CMASS DR10 galaxies on scales of ~ 0.8 - 32 Mpc/h. A standard halo occupation distribution model evaluated near the best fit Planck LCDM cosmology provides a good fit to the observed anisotropic clustering, and implies a normalization for the peculiar velocity field of M ~ 2 x 10^13 Msun/h halos of f*sigma8(z=0.57) = 0.450 +/- 0.011. Since this constraint includes both quasi-linear and non-linear scales, it should severely constrain modified gravity models that enhance pairwise infall velocities on these scales. Though model dependent, our measurement represents a factor of 2.5 improvement in precision over the analysis of DR11 on large scales, f*sigma8(z=0.57) = 0.447 +/- 0.028, and is the tightest single constraint on the growth rate of cosmic structure to date. Our measurement is consistent with the Planck LCDM prediction of 0.480 +/- 0.010 at the ~1.9 sigma level. Assuming a halo mass function evaluated at the best fit Planck cosmology, we also find that 10% of CMASS galaxies are satellites in halos of mass M ~ 6 x 10^13 Msun/h. While none of our tests and model generalizations indicate systematic errors due to an insufficiently detailed model of the galaxy-halo connection, the precision of these first results warrant further investigation into the modeling uncertainties and degeneracies with cosmological parameters.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
The 3D clustering of Lyman Alpha Emitters measured with DESI
DESI LAE clustering measurements give a linear bias of 2.31-2.62 with constraints on radiative transfer effects and halo occupation from correlation functions and power spectra.
-
Revisiting the 'Lensing is Low' Problem with UNIONS
New UNIONS galaxy-galaxy lensing data around CMASS galaxies indicates no significant lensing is low problem, with joint HOD fits to GGL and GC favoring a slightly lower matter power spectrum amplitude than Planck.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.