<i>Euclid</i>: Cosmology forecasts from the void-galaxy cross-correlation function with reconstruction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have investigated the cosmological constraints that can be expected from measurement of the cross-correlation of galaxies with cosmic voids identified in the Euclid spectroscopic survey, which will include spectroscopic information for tens of millions of galaxies over 15 000 deg 2 of the sky in the redshift range 0.9 ≤ z < 1.8. We have done this using simulated measurements obtained from the Flagship mock catalogue, the official Euclid mock that closely matches the expected properties of the spectroscopic dataset. To mitigate anisotropic selection-bias effects, we have used a velocity field reconstruction method to remove large-scale redshift-space distortions from the galaxy field before void-finding. This allowed us to accurately model contributions to the observed anisotropy of the cross-correlation function arising from galaxy velocities around voids as well as from the Alcock–Paczynski effect, and we studied the dependence of constraints on the efficiency of reconstruction. We find that Euclid voids will be able to constrain the ratio of the transverse comoving distance D M and Hubble distance D H to a relative precision of about 0.3%, and the growth rate fσ 8 to a precision of between 5% and 8% in each of the four redshift bins covering the full redshift range. In the standard cosmological model, this translates to a statistical uncertainty ΔΩ m = ±0.0028 on the matter density parameter from voids, which is better than what can be achieved from either Euclid galaxy clustering and weak lensing individually. We also find that voids alone can measure the dark energy equation of state to a 6% precision.
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 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".