MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411088773 · doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/06/005

Full-Shape analysis of the power spectrum and bispectrum of DESI DR1 LRG and QSO samples

2025· article· en· W4411088773 on OpenAlexaff
Sergi Novell-Masot, Héctor Gil-Marín, Licia Verde, J. Aguilar, S. P. Ahlen, S. Bailey, S. BenZvi, D. Bianchi, D. Brooks, E. Buckley‐Geer, A. Carnero Rosell, E. Chaussidon, T. Claybaugh, Shaun Cole, Andrei Cuceu, Kyle Dawson, Axel de la Macorra, R. Demina, Arjun Dey, Biprateep Dey, Peter Doel, Simone Ferraro, Andreu Font-Ribera, J. E. Forero-Romero, E. Gaztañaga, Satya Gontcho A Gontcho, Alma X. González‐Morales, G. Gutiérrez, H. K. Herrera-Alcantar, K. Honscheid, Cullan Howlett, S. Juneau, R. Kehoe, D. Kirkby, Theodore Kisner, Anthony Kremin, C. Lamman, Martin Landriau, L. Le Guillou, M. E. Levi, C. Magneville, Marc Manera, Aaron Meisner, R. Miquel, John Moustakas, A. Muñoz-Gutiérrez, Adam D. Myers, S. Nadathur, Gustavo Niz, H. E. Noriega, Will J. Percival, C. Poppett, Francisco Prada, Ignasi Pérez-Ràfols, Ashley J. Ross, Graziano Rossi, Lado Samushia, E. Sánchez, David J. Schlegel, M. Schubnell, Hee‐Jong Seo, J. Silber, D. Sprayberry, G. Tarlé, M. Vargas-Magaña, B. A. Weaver, Pauline Zarrouk, Rongpu Zhou, Hu Zou

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Toronto
FundersDivision of Astronomical SciencesInstitut de Ciències del CosmosScience and Technology Facilities CouncilAgencia Estatal de InvestigaciónOffice of ScienceUniversitat de BarcelonaCommissariat à l'Énergie Atomique et aux Énergies AlternativesBanco Bilbao Vizcaya ArgentariaNational Science FoundationFundación BBVAMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónGordon and Betty Moore FoundationU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsBispectrumPhysicsSpectral densityNon-GaussianityCosmological perturbation theorySpectrum (functional analysis)Power (physics)CosmologyStatistical physicsAstrophysicsCosmic microwave backgroundStatisticsQuantum mechanicsAnisotropy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present the first joint analysis of the power spectrum and bispectrum using the Data Release 1 (DR1) of the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI), focusing on Luminous Red Galaxies (LRGs) and quasars (QSOs) across a redshift range of 0.4 ≤ z ≤ 2.1. By combining the two- and three-point statistics, we are able to partially break the degeneracy between the logarithmic growth rate, f ( z ), and the amplitude of dark matter fluctuations, σ s8 ( z ), which cannot be measured separately in analyses that only involve the power spectrum. In comparison with the (fiducial) Planck ΛCDM cosmology we obtain f / f fid = {0.888 -0.089 +0.186 ,0.977 -0.220 +0.182 ,1.030 -0.085 +0.368 }, σ s8 / σ fid s8 = {1.224 -0.133 +0.091 ,1.071 -0.163 +0.278 ,1.00 0 -0.223 +0.088 } respectively for the three LRG redshift bins, corresponding to a cumulative 10.1% constraint on f , and of 8.4% on σ s8 , including the systematic error budget. Additionally, we obtain constraints for the ShapeFit compressed parameters describing the isotropic scaling parameter, α iso ( z ), the Alcock-Paczyński parameter, α AP ( z ), the combined growth of structure parameter fσ s8 ( z ), and the combined shape parameter m ( z )+ n ( z ). Their cumulative constraints from our joint power spectrum-bispectrum analysis are respectively σ α iso = 0.9% (9% improvement with respect to our power spectrum-only analysis); σ α AP = 2.3% (no improvement with respect to power spectrum-only analysis, which is expected given that the bispectrum monopole has no significant anisotropic signal); σ fσ s8 = 5.1% (9% improvement); σ m+n = 2.3% (11% improvement). These results are fully consistent with the main DESI power spectrum analysis, demonstrating the robustness of the DESI cosmological constraints, and compatible with Planck ΛCDM cosmology.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.314

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.216 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cosmology and Astroparticle PhysicsSame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207