HOD-dependent systematics in Emission Line Galaxies for the DESI 2024 BAO analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI) will provide precise measurements of Baryon Acoustic Oscillations (BAO) to constrain the expansion history of the Universe and set stringent constraints on dark energy. Therefore, precise control of the global error budget due to various systematic effects is required for the DESI 2024 BAO analysis. In this work, we estimate the level of systematics induced in the DESI BAO analysis due the assumed Halo Occupation Distribution (HOD) model for the Emission Line Galaxy (ELG) tracer. We make use of mock galaxy catalogs constructed by fitting various HOD models to early DESI data, namely the One-Percent survey data. Our analysis includes typical HOD models for the ELG tracer used in the literature as well as extensions to the baseline models. Among the extensions, we consider various recipes for galactic conformity and assembly bias. We use 25 AbacusSummit simulations under the ΛCDM cosmology for each HOD model and perform independent analyses in Fourier space and in configuration space. To recover the BAO signal from our mocks we perform BAO reconstruction and apply the control variates technique to reduce sample variance noise. Our BAO analyses can recover the isotropic BAO parameter α iso within 0.1% and the Alcock Paczynski parameter α AP within 0.3%. Overall, we find that the systematic error due to the HOD dependence is below 0.17%, with the Fourier space analysis being more robust against the HOD systematics. We conclude that our analysis pipeline is robust enough against the HOD systematics for the ELG tracer in the DESI 2024 BAO analysis, for the assumptions made.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".