MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Very weak lensing in the CFHTLS wide: cosmology from cosmic shear in the linear regime

2007· article· en· W3121195376 on OpenAlexaff
Liping Fu, E. Semboloni, Henk Hoekstra, M. Kilbinger, Ludovic Van Waerbeke, I. Tereno, Y. Mellier, Catherine Heymans, J. Coupon, K. Benabed, J. Benjamin, E. Bertin, Olivier Doré, Michael J. Hudson, O. Ilbert, C. Marmo, H. J. McCracken, Brice Ménard

Bibliographic record

VenueSpringer Link (Chiba Institute of Technology) · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of TorontoUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsCosmologyAstrophysicsRedshiftGalaxyWeak gravitational lensingOmegaObservational cosmologyCOSMIC cancer databaseDark matterSpectral densitySigmaAmplitudeRedshift surveyMatter power spectrumAstronomyStatisticsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aims.We present an exploration of weak lensing by large-scale structure in the linear regime, using the third-year (T0003) CFHTLS Wide data release. Our results place tight constraints on the scaling of the amplitude of the matter power spectrum $\sigma_8$ with the matter density $\Omega_{\rm m}$. Methods.Spanning 57 square degrees to $i^{\prime}_{AB} = 24.5$ over three independent fields, the unprecedented contiguous area of this survey permits high signal-to-noise measurements of two-point shear statistics from 1 arcmin to 4 degrees. Understanding systematic errors in our analysis is vital in interpreting the results. We therefore demonstrate the percent-level accuracy of our method using STEP simulations, an E/B-mode decomposition of the data, and the star-galaxy cross correlation function. We also present a thorough analysis of the galaxy redshift distribution using redshift data from the CFHTLS T0003 Deep fields that probe the same spatial regions as the Wide fields. Results.We find $\sigma_8(\Omega_{\rm m} / 0.25)^{0.64} = 0.785$ ± 0.043 using the aperture-mass statistic for the full range of angular scales for an assumed flat cosmology, in excellent agreement with WMAP3 constraints. The largest physical scale probed by our analysis is 85 Mpc, assuming a mean redshift of lenses of 0.5 and a ΛCDM cosmology. This allows for the first time to constrain cosmology using only cosmic shear measurements in the linear regime. Using only angular scales $\theta> 85$ arcmin, we find $\sigma_8(\Omega_{\rm m} / 0.25)_{{\rm lin}}^{0.53} = 0.837$ ± 0.084, which agree with the results from our full analysis. Combining our results with data from WMAP3, we find $\Omega_{\rm m}=0.248$ ± 0.019 and $\sigma_8=0.771$ ± 0.029.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.216 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations289
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpringer Link (Chiba Institute of Technology)Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207