Researcher profile

Simon Samuroff

Simon Samuroff contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 13 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
2works
0followers
1topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Modeling Intrinsic Galaxy Alignment in the MICE Simulation

The intrinsic alignment (IA) of galaxies is potentially a major limitation in deriving cosmological constraints from weak lensing surveys. In order to investigate this effect we assign intrinsic shapes and orientations to galaxies in the light-cone output of the MICE simulation, spanning $\sim5000\,{\rm deg}^2$ and reaching redshift $z=1.4$. This assignment is based on a 'semi-analytic' IA model that uses photometric properties of galaxies as well as the spin and shape of their host halos. Advancing on previous work, we include more realistic distributions of galaxy shapes and a luminosity dependent galaxy-halo alignment. The IA model parameters are calibrated against COSMOS and BOSS LOWZ observations. The null detection of IA in observations of blue galaxies is accounted for by setting random orientations for these objects. We compare the two-point alignment statistics measured in the simulation against predictions from the analytical IA models NLA and TATT over a wide range of scales, redshifts and luminosities for red and blue galaxies separately. We find that both models fit the measurements well at scales above $8\,h^{-1}{\rm Mpc}$, while TATT outperforms NLA at smaller scales. The IA parameters derived from our fits are in broad agreement with various observational constraints from red galaxies. Lastly, we build a realistic source sample, mimicking DES Year 3 observations and use it to predict the IA contamination to the observed shear statistics. We find this prediction to be within the measurement uncertainty, which might be a consequence of the random alignment of blue galaxies in the simulation.

preprint2020arXiv

Dark Energy Survey Year 1 Results: Cosmological Constraints from Cluster Abundances and Weak Lensing

We perform a joint analysis of the counts and weak lensing signal of redMaPPer clusters selected from the Dark Energy Survey (DES) Year 1 dataset. Our analysis uses the same shear and source photometric redshifts estimates as were used in the DES combined probes analysis. Our analysis results in surprisingly low values for $S_8 =σ_8(Ω_{\rm m}/0.3)^{0.5}= 0.65\pm 0.04$, driven by a low matter density parameter, $Ω_{\rm m}=0.179^{+0.031}_{-0.038}$, with $σ_8-Ω_{\rm m}$ posteriors in $2.4σ$ tension with the DES Y1 3x2pt results, and in $5.6σ$ with the Planck CMB analysis. These results include the impact of post-unblinding changes to the analysis, which did not improve the level of consistency with other data sets compared to the results obtained at the unblinding. The fact that multiple cosmological probes (supernovae, baryon acoustic oscillations, cosmic shear, galaxy clustering and CMB anisotropies), and other galaxy cluster analyses all favor significantly higher matter densities suggests the presence of systematic errors in the data or an incomplete modeling of the relevant physics. Cross checks with X-ray and microwave data, as well as independent constraints on the observable--mass relation from SZ selected clusters, suggest that the discrepancy resides in our modeling of the weak lensing signal rather than the cluster abundance. Repeating our analysis using a higher richness threshold ($λ\ge 30$) significantly reduces the tension with other probes, and points to one or more richness-dependent effects not captured by our model.