arxiv: 2602.12174 · v2 · submitted 2026-02-12 · 🌌 astro-ph.CO

Recognition: no theorem link

Probing baryonic feedback with fast radio bursts: joint analyses with cosmic shear and galaxy clustering

Amy Wayland , David Alonso , Robert Reischke

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 02:10 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.CO

keywords fast radio burstsweak lensingbaryonic feedbackcosmological parametersS8dispersion measuregalaxy clustering3x2-point analysis

0 comments

The pith

Joint weak lensing and fast radio burst analysis reduces S8 degradation from baryons by 80 percent

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

The paper shows that adding fast radio burst dispersion measures to weak lensing data allows better separation of cosmological signals from baryonic feedback effects. Weak lensing surveys are limited by uncertainties in how gas in halos suppresses small-scale power. By jointly modeling the two probes, the analysis constrains both cosmology and the feedback parameters. This approach recovers most of the constraining power on S8 even when including FRB redshift uncertainties and clustering. A further extension with galaxy clustering improves some parameters but adds little for S8.

Core claim

The central claim is that a 3×2-point analysis combining cosmic shear from Stage-IV weak lensing surveys with FRB dispersion measures improves cosmological constraints by reducing the degradation factor on S8 by ∼80% compared to WL alone, while breaking the degeneracy between baryonic parameters log10 Mc and ηb. The inclusion of galaxy clustering in a 6×2-point analysis tightens Ωm and log10 Mc but does not significantly improve S8 beyond the WL+FRB case.

What carries the argument

The joint 3×2-point statistics of weak lensing shear and FRB dispersion measures that simultaneously constrain cosmology and baryonic feedback parameters log10 Mc and ηb

If this is right

FRBs alone constrain only a degenerate combination of log10 Mc and ηb
Adding WL breaks this degeneracy
Accounting for FRB redshift uncertainties and source clustering still allows significant improvement
6x2-point with galaxy clustering tightens Ωm and log10 Mc

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

This method could calibrate baryonic effects in real upcoming survey data to yield unbiased S8
FRB dispersion measures provide an independent tracer of gas that may help other small-scale probes
Future work could test the model on hydrodynamical simulations with varied feedback

Load-bearing premise

The baryonic feedback model with parameters log10 Mc and ηb plus the modeled FRB systematics accurately represent the true gas distribution in the data.

What would settle it

Observing a joint WL-FRB correlation spectrum in real data that deviates from predictions even after varying the feedback parameters and systematics within their ranges.

read the original abstract

Cosmological inference from weak lensing (WL) surveys is increasingly limited by uncertainties in baryonic physics, which suppress the non-linear matter power spectrum on small scales. Multi-probe analyses that incorporate complementary tracers of the gas distribution around haloes offer a pathway to calibrate these effects and recover unbiased cosmological information. In this work, we forecast the constraining power of a joint analysis combining fiducial data from a Stage-IV WL survey with measurements of the dispersion measure from fast radio bursts (FRBs). We evaluate the ability of this approach to simultaneously constrain cosmological parameters and the astrophysical processes governing baryonic feedback, and we quantify the impact of key FRB systematics, including redshift uncertainties and source clustering. We find that, even after accounting for these effects, a 3$\times$2-point analysis of WL and FRBs significantly improves cosmological constraints, reducing the degradation factor on $S_8$ by $\sim 80\%$ compared to WL alone. We further show that FRBs alone are sensitive only to a degenerate combination of the key baryonic parameters, $\log_{10} M_{\rm c}$ and $\eta_{\rm b}$, and that the inclusion of WL measurements breaks this degeneracy. Finally, we extend our framework to incorporate galaxy clustering measurements using Luminous Red Galaxy and Emission Line Galaxy samples, performing a unified 6$\times$2-point analysis of WL, dispersion measures of FRBs, and galaxy clustering. While this combined approach tightens constraints on $\Omega_{\rm m}$ and $\log_{10} M_{\rm c}$, it does not lead to a significant improvement in $S_8$ constraints beyond those obtained from WL and FRBs alone.

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 forecast claims FRBs cut the S8 degradation from baryons by ~80% in a WL 3x2pt analysis, but only if the two-parameter feedback model exactly matches the mocks.

read the letter

The key point is that adding FRB dispersion measures to Stage-IV weak lensing data can recover most of the cosmological information lost to baryonic suppression on small scales. The paper shows this through a joint fit that also constrains the feedback parameters, and it finds that galaxy clustering adds little extra for S8 once FRBs are in. That 80% figure and the limited gain from the 6x2pt extension are the concrete new numbers here. The work is a clean forecast extension of multi-probe cosmology, and it does a reasonable job including FRB-specific systematics like redshift scatter and source clustering in the modeling. The degeneracy breaking between cosmology and the baryon params is shown explicitly, which is useful. The main limitation is that the whole improvement assumes the simulated data are generated with precisely the same log10 Mc and ηb parametrization that gets marginalized over later. If the true gas distribution requires a different functional form or extra parameters, as many hydro simulations indicate, the quoted gain will shrink or disappear. The circularity in using the same data to fit both cosmology and feedback is moderate and acknowledged, but it still means the result is conditional on the model choice. This paper is aimed at people building analysis pipelines for Euclid, LSST, or similar surveys who need to quantify baryon calibration options. It is worth sending to peer review because the setup is transparent, the question is timely, and the forecast methods are standard enough that referees can check the assumptions directly.

Referee Report

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. This manuscript presents forecasts for joint cosmological analyses combining Stage-IV weak lensing (WL) cosmic shear with fast radio burst (FRB) dispersion measures in a 3×2-point setup, and further incorporating galaxy clustering (LRG and ELG samples) in a 6×2-point analysis. It claims that the WL+FRB combination reduces the degradation factor on S8 by ∼80% relative to WL alone, breaks the degeneracy between baryonic feedback parameters log10 Mc and ηb (to which FRBs alone are sensitive only in combination), and that adding galaxy clustering tightens Ωm and log10 Mc but yields no significant further gain on S8.

Significance. If the modeling assumptions hold, the work quantifies how FRB dispersion measures can calibrate baryonic feedback and recover cosmological information from WL, which is timely for Stage-IV surveys where small-scale power suppression is a leading systematic. The explicit treatment of FRB redshift uncertainties and source clustering adds practical value to the forecasts.

major comments (1)

[Forecast methodology and results (abstract and §4–5)] The central forecast result—an ∼80% reduction in the S8 degradation factor—rests on the assumption that the mock data are generated with the identical two-parameter baryonic feedback model (log10 Mc, ηb) later marginalized over in the 3×2-point likelihood. If the true gas distribution deviates from this parametrization (as expected in full hydrodynamical simulations), the degeneracy breaking and quoted improvement will not hold. This simulation-inference consistency is load-bearing for the primary claim and is not tested with alternative gas models.

minor comments (1)

The definitions of the 3×2-point and 6×2-point combinations would be clearer if summarized in a table listing the exact auto- and cross-correlations included for each probe.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive review and for highlighting an important caveat in our forecast methodology. We address the major comment below and have incorporated a partial revision to the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Forecast methodology and results (abstract and §4–5)] The central forecast result—an ∼80% reduction in the S8 degradation factor—rests on the assumption that the mock data are generated with the identical two-parameter baryonic feedback model (log10 Mc, ηb) later marginalized over in the 3×2-point likelihood. If the true gas distribution deviates from this parametrization (as expected in full hydrodynamical simulations), the degeneracy breaking and quoted improvement will not hold. This simulation-inference consistency is load-bearing for the primary claim and is not tested with alternative gas models.

Authors: We agree that the quoted improvement on S8 is derived under the assumption of perfect consistency between the mock data generation and the inference model, both employing the same two-parameter baryonic feedback parametrization. This is a standard practice in forecast papers to isolate the information gain from new observables within a controlled modeling framework. We acknowledge that deviations from this parametrization in real hydrodynamical simulations could reduce the effectiveness of degeneracy breaking. In the revised manuscript we will add an explicit discussion paragraph in Section 5 (and a corresponding note in the abstract) stating that the reported gains hold within the adopted model and that robustness to alternative gas prescriptions remains an important avenue for future work. No changes are made to the numerical results themselves, as they correctly reflect the model assumptions stated throughout the paper. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in the forecast derivation

full rationale

The paper performs a standard forecast of joint WL+FRB constraints using simulated data generated from a two-parameter baryonic feedback model (log10 Mc, ηb). The claimed ~80% reduction in S8 degradation is obtained by propagating the Fisher information or equivalent under the assumption that the model form matches the mocks exactly; this is an explicit modeling choice rather than a derivation that reduces to its own inputs by construction. No equations are shown to be self-definitional, no fitted parameters are relabeled as independent predictions, and no load-bearing uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported via self-citation. The analysis remains self-contained once the model assumption is granted, consistent with typical forecast methodology.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central forecast rests on a standard two-parameter baryonic feedback model whose parameters are fitted to the simulated data, plus domain assumptions about how dispersion measure traces gas and how redshift errors propagate.

free parameters (2)

log10 Mc
Characteristic halo mass scale in the baryonic feedback model, jointly constrained with cosmology
ηb
Baryonic feedback efficiency parameter in the gas distribution model

axioms (2)

domain assumption Baryonic feedback suppresses the non-linear matter power spectrum on small scales
Standard assumption invoked to motivate the need for FRB calibration
domain assumption FRB dispersion measure directly traces the ionized gas distribution around haloes
Core modeling assumption linking FRB observable to baryonic physics

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5614 in / 1378 out tokens · 89424 ms · 2026-05-16T02:10:18.548973+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

Fast radio burst dispersion is an unbiased tracer of matter on large scales
astro-ph.CO 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

FRB dispersion is an approximately unbiased tracer of matter on linear scales, enabling direct constraints on the baryonic parameter B8 independently of feedback and with statistical power comparable to weak lensing u...
Signatures of Suppressed Matter Clustering revealed by Fast Radio Bursts
astro-ph.CO 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

FRB dispersion measures directly constrain suppression of the matter power spectrum due to feedback at k ~ 0.1-3 h/Mpc, reduce posterior variance by a factor of ~8 at k~1 h/Mpc, and exclude extreme large-scale feedbac...
Cosmological gravity on all scales V: MCMC forecasts combining large scale structure and CMB lensing for binned phenomenological modified gravity
astro-ph.CO 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 5.0

Emulation of binned modified gravity power spectra to <1% accuracy enables MCMC forecasts that constrain μ and η via LSST large-scale structure combined with CMB lensing, with best sensitivity along the lensing combination Σ.