Beyond the 3rd moment: a practical study of using lensing convergence CDFs for cosmology with DES Y3
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Widefield surveys probe clustered scalar fields – such as galaxy counts, lensing potential, etc. – which are sensitive to different cosmological and astrophysical processes. Constraining such processes depends on the statistics that summarize the field. We explore the cumulative distribution function (CDF) as a summary of the galaxy lensing convergence field. Using a suite of N-body light-cone simulations, we show the CDFs' constraining power is modestly better than the second and third moments, as CDFs approximately capture information from all moments. We study the practical aspects of applying CDFs to data, using the Dark Energy Survey (DES Y3) data as an example, and compute the impact of different systematics on the CDFs. The contributions from the point spread function and reduced shear approximation are $\lesssim 1~{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$ of the total signal. Source clustering effects and baryon imprints contribute 1–10 per cent. Enforcing scale cuts to limit systematics-driven biases in parameter constraints degrade these constraints a noticeable amount, and this degradation is similar for the CDFs and the moments. We detect correlations between the observed convergence field and the shape noise field at 13σ. The non-Gaussian correlations in the noise field must be modelled accurately to use the CDFs, or other statistics sensitive to all moments, as a rigorous cosmology tool.
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 | 0.016 | 0.076 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".