The DESI-Lensing Mock Challenge: large-scale cosmological analysis of 3x2-pt statistics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current generation of large galaxy surveys will test the cosmological model by combining multiple types of observational probes. Realising the statistical promise of these new datasets requires rigorous attention to all aspects of analysis including cosmological measurements, modelling, covariance and parameter likelihood. In this paper we present the results of an end-to-end simulation study designed to test the analysis pipeline for the combination of the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI) Year 1 galaxy redshift dataset and separate weak gravitational lensing information from the Kilo-Degree Survey, Dark Energy Survey and Hyper-Suprime-Cam Survey. Our analysis employs the 3x2-pt correlation functions including cosmic shear and galaxy-galaxy lensing, together with the projected correlation function of the spectroscopic DESI lenses. We build realistic simulations of these datasets including galaxy halo occupation distributions, photometric redshift errors, weights, multiplicative shear calibration biases and magnification. We calculate the analytical covariance of these correlation functions including the Gaussian, noise and super-sample contributions, and show that our covariance determination agrees with estimates based on the ensemble of simulations. We use a Bayesian inference platform to demonstrate that we can recover the fiducial cosmological parameters of the simulation within the statistical error margin of the experiment, investigating the sensitivity to scale cuts. This study is the first in a sequence of papers in which we present and validate the large-scale 3x2-pt cosmological analysis of DESI-Y1.
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 | 0.005 | 0.025 |
| 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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".