MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3198480638 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202142052

Impact of survey geometry and super-sample covariance on future photometric galaxy surveys

2022· article· en· W3198480638 on OpenAlexafffund
S. Gouyou Beauchamps, F. Lacasa, I. Tutusaus, M Aubert, Philippe Baratta, Adélie Gorce, Z. Sakr

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeMinisterio de Ciencia, Innovación y UniversidadesAgence Nationale de la RechercheEuropean CommissionCentre National d’Etudes SpatialesMcGill UniversityCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsSkyGalaxyCovariancePhysicsRedshift surveyRedshiftUniverseGaussianAstrophysicsGaussian random fieldStatisticsGaussian processMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Photometric galaxy surveys probe the late-time Universe where the density field is highly non-Gaussian. A consequence is the emergence of the super-sample covariance (SSC), a non-Gaussian covariance term that is sensitive to fluctuations on scales larger than the survey window. In this work, we study the impact of the survey geometry on the SSC and, subsequently, on cosmological parameter inference. We devise a fast SSC approximation that accounts for the survey geometry and compare its performance to the common approximation of rescaling the results by the fraction of the sky covered by the survey, fSKY, dubbed ‘full-sky approximation’. To gauge the impact of our new SSC recipe, that we call ‘partial-sky’, we perform Fisher forecasts on the parameters of the (w0, wa)-CDM model in a 3 × 2 point analysis, varying the survey area, the geometry of the mask, and the galaxy distribution inside our redshift bins. The differences in the marginalised forecast errors –with the full-sky approximation performing poorly for small survey areas but excellently for stage-IV-like areas– are found to be absorbed by the marginalisation on galaxy bias nuisance parameters. For large survey areas, the unmarginalised errors are underestimated by about 10% for all probes considered. This is a hint that, even for stage-IV-like surveys, the partial-sky method introduced in this work will be necessary if tight priors are applied on these nuisance parameters. We make the partial-sky method public with a new release of the public code PySSC.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.087
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.108

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.087
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations14
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomy and Astrophysics→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→