Paper detail

Cross-Correlation of CFHTLenS Galaxy Number Density and Planck CMB Lensing

We measure the cross-power spectrum between galaxy density from Canada-France-Hawaii-Telescope Lensing Survey (CFHTLenS) catalogues and gravitational lensing convergence from Planck data release 1 (2013) and 2 (2015). We investigate three main galaxy samples: $18.0<i_{\rm AB}<22.0$, $18.0<i_{\rm AB}<23.0$, $18.0<i_{\rm AB}<24.0$ in the redshift range $0.2<z<1.3$ in each of the four CFHTLenS wide fields. By comparing the measured cross-spectrum with model predictions, linear galaxy-dark matter biases of $b=0.82^{+0.24}_{-0.23}, 0.83^{+0.19}_{-0.18}, 0.82^{+0.16}_{-0.14}$ are inferred at significances of $3.5, 4.5, 5.6σ$ using the Planck 2015 release. These measurements are marginally consistent with biases derived from galaxy-galaxy auto-correlations: $b=1.15^{+0.02}_{-0.01}, 1.08^{+0.01}_{-0.01}$ and $0.96^{+0.01}_{-0.01}$ respectively. Using the 2013 Planck release, we obtain biases of $b=1.33^{+0.29}_{-0.28}, 1.19^{+0.23}_{-0.23}, 1.16^{+0.19}_{-0.18}$, showing significant differences between the releases.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 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.