Detection of the significant impact of source clustering on higher order statistics with DES Year 3 weak gravitational lensing data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT We measure the impact of source galaxy clustering on higher order summary statistics of weak gravitational lensing data. By comparing simulated data with galaxies that either trace or do not trace the underlying density field, we show that this effect can exceed measurement uncertainties for common higher order statistics for certain analysis choices. We evaluate the impact on different weak lensing observables, finding that third moments and wavelet phase harmonics are more affected than peak count statistics. Using Dark Energy Survey (DES) Year 3 (Y3) data, we construct null tests for the source-clustering-free case, finding a p-value of p = 4 × 10−3 (2.6σ) using third-order map moments and p = 3 × 10−11 (6.5σ) using wavelet phase harmonics. The impact of source clustering on cosmological inference can be either included in the model or minimized through ad hoc procedures (e.g. scale cuts). We verify that the procedures adopted in existing DES Y3 cosmological analyses were sufficient to render this effect negligible. Failing to account for source clustering can significantly impact cosmological inference from higher order gravitational lensing statistics, e.g. higher order N-point functions, wavelet-moment observables, and deep learning or field-level summary statistics of weak lensing maps.
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 | 0.006 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".