Paper detail

Cross-bispectra Constraints on Modified Gravity Theories from Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope and Rubin Observatory Legacy Survey of Space and Time

One major goal of upcoming large-scale-structure surveys is to constrain dark energy and modified gravity theories. In particular, galaxy clustering and gravitational lensing convergence are probes sensitive to modifications of general relativity. While the standard analysis for these surveys typically includes power spectra or 2-point correlation functions, it is known that the bispectrum contains more information, and could offer improved constraints on parameters when combined with the power spectra. However, the use of bispectra has been limited so far to one single probe, e.g. the lensing convergence bispectrum or the galaxy bispectrum. In this paper, we extend the formalism to explore the power of cross-bispectra between different probes, and exploit their ability to break parameter degeneracies and improve constraints. We study this on a test case of lensing convergence and galaxy density auto- and cross-bispectra, for a particular sub-class of Horndeski theories parametrized by $c_M$ and $c_B$. Using the 2000 deg$^2$ notional survey of the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope with overlapping photometry from the Rubin Observatory Legacy Survey of Space and Time, we find that a joint power spectra and bispectra analysis with three redshift bins at $l_{\rm max} = 1000$ yields $σ_{c_M} = 1.0$ and $σ_{c_B} = 0.3$, both a factor of $\sim$1.2 better than the power spectra results; this would be further improved to $σ_{c_M} = 0.7$ and $σ_{c_B} = 0.2$ if $l_{\rm max} = 3000$ is taken. Furthermore, we find that using all possible cross-bispectra between the two probes in different tomographic bins improves upon auto-bispectra results by a factor of 1.3 in $σ_{c_M}$, 1.1 in $σ_{c_B}$ and 1.3 in $σ_{Ω_m}$. We expect that similar benefits of using cross-bispectra between probes could apply to other science cases and surveys.

preprint2020arXivOpen 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.