Paper detail

Dark Energy Survey Year 3 Results: Optimizing the Lens Sample in Combined Galaxy Clustering and Galaxy-Galaxy Lensing Analysis

We investigate potential gains in cosmological constraints from the combination of galaxy clustering and galaxy-galaxy lensing by optimizing the lens galaxy sample selection using information from Dark Energy Survey (DES) Year 3 data and assuming the DES Year 1 Metacalibration sample for the sources. We explore easily reproducible selections based on magnitude cuts in $i$-band as a function of (photometric) redshift, $z_{\rm phot}$, and benchmark the potential gains against those using the well established redMaGiC sample. We focus on the balance between density and photometric redshift accuracy, while marginalizing over a realistic set of cosmological and systematic parameters. Our optimal selection, the MagLim sample, satisfies $i < 4 \, z_{\rm phot} + 18$ and has $\sim 30\%$ wider redshift distributions but $\sim 3.5$ times more galaxies than redMaGiC. Assuming a wCDM model and equivalent scale cuts to mitigate nonlinear effects, this leads to $40\%$ increase in the figure of merit for the pair combinations of $Ω_m$, $w$, and $σ_8$, and gains of $16\%$ in $σ_8$, $10\%$ in $Ω_m$, and $12\%$ in $w$. Similarly, in LCDM we find an improvement of $19\%$ and $27\%$ on $σ_8$ and $Ω_m$, respectively. We also explore flux-limited samples with a flat magnitude cut finding that the optimal selection, $i < 22.2$, has $\sim 7$ times more galaxies and $\sim 20\%$ wider redshift distributions compared to MagLim, but slightly worse constraints. We show that our results are robust with respect to the assumed galaxy bias and photometric redshift uncertainties with only moderate further gains from increased number of tomographic bins or the inclusion of bin cross-correlations, except in the case of the flux-limited sample, for which these gains are more significant.

preprint2021arXivOpen 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.

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.