Paper detail

Constraining cosmology with pairwise velocity estimator

In this paper, we develop a full statistical method for the pairwise velocity estimator previously proposed, and apply Cosmicflows-2 catalogue to this method to constrain cosmology. We first calculate the covariance matrix for line-of-sight velocities for a given catalogue, and then simulate the mock full-sky surveys from it, and then calculate the variance for the pairwise velocity field. By applying the $8315$ independent galaxy samples and compressed $5224$ group samples from Cosmicflows-2 catalogue to this statistical method, we find that the joint constraint on $Ω^{0.6}_{\rm m}h$ and $σ_{8}$ is completely consistent with the WMAP 9-year and Planck 2015 best-fitting cosmology. Currently, there is no evidence for the modified gravity models or any dynamic dark energy models from this practice, and the error-bars need to be reduced in order to provide any concrete evidence against/to support $Λ$CDM cosmology.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 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.