Euclid preparation. LXXXV. Toward a DR1 application of higher-order weak lensing statistics
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is the second paper in the HOWLS (higher-order weak lensing statistics) series exploring the usage of non-Gaussian statistics for cosmology inference within Euclid. With respect to our first paper, we develop a full tomographic analysis based on realistic photometric redshifts that allows us to derive Fisher forecasts in the ($σ_8$, $w_0$) plane for a Euclid-like data release 1 (DR1) setup. We find that the five higher-order statistics (HOS) that satisfy the Gaussian likelihood assumption of the Fisher formalism (one-point probability distribution function, $\ell$1-norm, peak counts, Minkowski functionals, and Betti numbers) each outperform the shear two-point correlation functions by a factor of $2.5$ on the $w_0$ forecasts, with only marginal improvement when used in combination with two-point estimators, suggesting that every HOS is able to retrieve both the non-Gaussian and Gaussian information of the matter density field. The similar performance of the different estimators is explained by a homogeneous use of multi-scale and tomographic information, optimized to lower computational costs. These results hold for the three mass mapping techniques of the Euclid pipeline, aperture mass, Kaiser--Squires, and Kaiser--Squires plus, and they are unaffected by the application of realistic star masks. Finally, we explored the use of HOS with the Bernardeau--Nishimichi--Taruya (BNT) nulling scheme approach, finding promising results toward applying physical scale cuts to HOS.
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.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it