Paper detail

Comparison of cosmological parameter inference methods applied to supernovae lightcurves fitted with SALT2

We present a comparison of two methods for cosmological parameter inference from supernovae Ia lightcurves fitted with the SALT2 technique. The standard chi-square methodology and the recently proposed Bayesian hierarchical method (BHM) are each applied to identical sets of simulations based on the 3-year data release from the Supernova Legacy Survey (SNLS3), and also data from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS), the Low Redshift sample and the Hubble Space Telescope (HST), assuming a concordance LCDM cosmology. For both methods, we find that the recovered values of the cosmological parameters, and the global nuisance parameters controlling the stretch and colour corrections to the supernovae lightcurves, suffer from small biasses. The magnitude of the biasses is similar in both cases, with the BHM yielding slightly more accurate results, in particular for cosmological parameters when applied to just the SNLS3 single survey data sets. Most notably, in this case, the biasses in the recovered matter density $Ω_{\rm m,0}$ are in opposite directions for the two methods. For any given realisation of the SNLS3-type data, this can result in a $\sim 2 σ$ discrepancy in the estimated value of $Ω_{\rm m,0}$ between the two methods, which we find to be the case for real SNLS3 data. As more higher and lower redshift SNIa samples are included, however, the cosmological parameter estimates of the two methods converge.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors1 topic

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.

Institutions

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 map preview

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.