Efficient computation of the super-sample covariance for stage IV galaxy surveys
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Super-sample covariance (SSC) is an important effect for cosmological analyses that use the deep structure of the cosmic web; it may, however, be nontrivial to include it practically in a pipeline. We solve this difficulty by presenting a formula for the precision (inverse covariance) matrix and show applications to update likelihood or Fisher forecast pipelines. The formula has several advantages in terms of speed, reliability, stability, and ease of implementation. We present an analytical application to show the formal equivalence between three approaches to SSC: (i) at the usual covariance level, (ii) at the likelihood level, and (iii) with a quadratic estimator. We then present an application of this computationally efficient framework for studying the impact of inaccurate modelling of SSC responses for cosmological constraints from stage IV surveys. We find that a weak-lensing-only analysis is very sensitive to inaccurate modelling of the scale dependence of the response, which needs to be calibrated at the ∼15% level. The sensitivity to this scale dependence is less severe for the joint weak-lensing and galaxy clustering analysis (also known as 3×2pt). Nevertheless, we find that both the amplitude and scale-dependence of the responses have to be calibrated at better than 30%.
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 | 0.003 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".