Paper detail

Confronting missing observations with probability weights: Fourier space and generalised formalism

Due to instrumental limitations, the nature of which vary from case to case, spectroscopic galaxy redshift surveys usually do not collect redshifts for all galaxies in the population of potential targets. Especially problematic is the entanglement between this incompleteness and the true cosmological signal, arising from the fact that the proportion of successful observations is typically lower in regions with higher density of galaxies. The result is a fictitious suppression of the galaxy clustering that, if not properly corrected, can impact severely on cosmological-parameter inference. Recent developments in the field have shown that an unbiased estimate of the 2-point correlation function in the presence of missing observations can be obtained by weighting each pair by its inverse probability of being targeted. In this work we expand on the concept of probability weights by developing a more mature statistical formalism, which provides us with a deeper understanding of their fundamental properties. We take advantage of this novel perspective to handle the problem of estimating the inverse probability, specifically, we discuss how to efficiently determine the weights from a finite set of realisations of the targeting and how to model exactly the resulting sampling effects. This allows us to derive an inverse-probability-based estimator for the power spectrum, which is the main result of this work, but also to improve robustness and computational efficiency of the already existing configuration-space estimator. Finally, we propose a strategy to further extend the concept of inverse probability, providing examples of how traditional missing-observation countermeasures can be included in this more general picture. The effectiveness of the different models and weighting schemes discussed in this work is demonstrated using realisations of an idealised simple survey strategy.

preprint2019arXivOpen 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.

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 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.