Paper detail

Forecasts on neutrino mass constraints from the redshift-space two-point correlation function

We provide constraints on the accuracy with which the neutrino mass fraction, $f_ν$, can be estimated when exploiting measurements of redshift-space distortions, describing in particular how the error on neutrino mass depends on three fundamental parameters of a characteristic galaxy redshift survey: density, halo bias and volume. In doing this, we make use of a series of dark matter halo catalogues extracted from the BASICC simulation. The mock data are analysed via a Markov Chain Monte Carlo likelihood analysis. We find a fitting function that well describes the dependence of the error on bias, density and volume, showing a decrease in the error as the bias and volume increase, and a decrease with density down to an almost constant value for high density values. This fitting formula allows us to produce forecasts on the precision achievable with future surveys on measurements of the neutrino mass fraction. For example, a Euclid-like spectroscopic survey should be able to measure the neutrino mass fraction with an accuracy of $δf_ν \approx 6.7\times10^{-4}$, using redshift-space clustering once all the other cosmological parameters are kept fixed to the $Λ$CDM case.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access6 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.