RCSLenS: testing gravitational physics through the cross-correlation of weak lensing and large-scale structure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The unknown nature of ‘dark energy’ motivates continued cosmological tests of large-scale gravitational physics. We present a new consistency check based on the relative amplitude of non-relativistic galaxy peculiar motions, measured via redshift-space distortion, and the relativistic deflection of light by those same galaxies traced by galaxy–galaxy lensing. We take advantage of the latest generation of deep, overlapping imaging and spectroscopic data sets, combining the Red Cluster Sequence Lensing Survey, the Canada–France–Hawaii Telescope Lensing Survey, the WiggleZ Dark Energy Survey and the Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey. We quantify the results using the ‘gravitational slip’ statistic EG, which we estimate as 0.48 ± 0.10 at z = 0.32 and 0.30 ± 0.07 at z = 0.57, the latter constituting the highest redshift at which this quantity has been determined. These measurements are consistent with the predictions of General Relativity, for a perturbed Friedmann–Robertson–Walker metric in a Universe dominated by a cosmological constant, which are EG = 0.41 and 0.36 at these respective redshifts. The combination of redshift-space distortion and gravitational lensing data from current and future galaxy surveys will offer increasingly stringent tests of fundamental 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 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 | 0.011 | 0.049 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".