Perturbation theory for modeling galaxy bias: Validation with simulations of the Dark Energy Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We describe perturbation theory (PT) models of galaxy bias for applications to photometric galaxy surveys. We model the galaxy-galaxy and galaxy-matter correlation functions in configuration space and validate against measurements from mock catalogs designed for the Dark Energy Survey (DES). We find that an effective PT model with five galaxy bias parameters provides a good description of the 3D correlation functions above scales of $4\text{ }\text{ }\mathrm{Mpc}/h$ and $z<1$. Our tests show that at the projected precision of the DES Year 3 analysis, two of the nonlinear bias parameters can be fixed to their coevolution values, and a third (the ${k}^{2}$ term for higher derivative bias) set to zero. The agreement is typically at the 2% level over scales of interest, which is the statistical uncertainty of our simulation measurements. To achieve this level of agreement, our fiducial model requires using the full nonlinear matter power spectrum (rather than the one-loop PT one). We also measure the relationship between the nonlinear and linear bias parameters and compare them to their expected coevolution values. We use these tests to motivate the galaxy bias model and scale cuts for the cosmological analysis of the Dark Energy Survey; our conclusions are generally applicable to all photometric surveys.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".