Paper detail

CMB lensing tomography with the DES Science Verification galaxies

We measure the cross-correlation between the galaxy density in the Dark Energy Survey (DES) Science Verification data and the lensing of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) as reconstructed with the Planck satellite and the South Pole Telescope (SPT). When using the DES main galaxy sample over the full redshift range $0.2 < z < 1.2$, a cross-correlation signal is detected at $6 σ$ and $4σ$ with SPT and Planck respectively. We then divide the DES galaxies into five photometric redshift bins, finding significant ($>$$2 σ$) detections in all bins. Comparing to the fiducial Planck cosmology, we find the redshift evolution of the signal matches expectations, although the amplitude is consistently lower than predicted across redshift bins. We test for possible systematics that could affect our result and find no evidence for significant contamination. Finally, we demonstrate how these measurements can be used to constrain the growth of structure across cosmic time. We find the data are fit by a model in which the amplitude of structure in the $z<1.2$ universe is $0.73 \pm 0.16$ times as large as predicted in the LCDM Planck cosmology, a $1.7σ$ deviation.

preprint2016arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.