Weak lensing combined with the kinetic Sunyaev–Zel’dovich effect: a study of baryonic feedback
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Extracting precise cosmology from weak lensing surveys requires modelling the non-linear matter power spectrum, which is suppressed at small scales due to baryonic feedback processes. However, hydrodynamical galaxy formation simulations make widely varying predictions for the amplitude and extent of this effect. We use measurements of Dark Energy Survey Year 3 weak lensing (WL) and Atacama Cosmology Telescope DR5 kinematic Sunyaev–Zel’dovich (kSZ) to jointly constrain cosmological and astrophysical baryonic feedback parameters using a flexible analytical model, ‘baryonification’. First, using WL only, we compare the $S_8$ constraints using baryonification to a simulation-calibrated halo model, a simulation-based emulator model, and the approach of discarding WL measurements on small angular scales. We find that model flexibility can shift the value of $S_8$ and degrade the uncertainty. The kSZ provides additional constraints on the astrophysical parameters, with the joint WL + kSZ analysis constraining $S_8=0.823^{+0.019}_{-0.020}$. We measure the suppression of the non-linear matter power spectrum using WL + kSZ and constrain a mean feedback scenario that is more extreme than the predictions from most hydrodynamical simulations. We constrain the baryon fractions and the gas mass fractions and find them to be generally lower than inferred from X-ray observations and simulation predictions. We conclude that the WL + kSZ measurements provide a new and complementary benchmark for building a coherent picture of the impact of gas around galaxies across observations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".