Paper detail

KiDS+VIKING-450: Improved cosmological parameter constraints from redshift calibration with self-organising maps

We present updated cosmological constraints for the KiDS+VIKING-450 cosmic shear data set (KV450), estimated using redshift distributions and photometric samples defined using self-organising maps (SOMs). Our fiducial analysis finds marginal posterior constraints of $S_8\equivσ_8\sqrt{Ω_{\rm m}/0.3}=0.716^{+0.043}_{-0.038}$; smaller than, but otherwise consistent with, previous work using this data set ($|ΔS_8| = 0.023$). We analyse additional samples and redshift distributions constructed in three ways: excluding certain spectroscopic surveys during redshift calibration, excluding lower-confidence spectroscopic redshifts in redshift calibration, and considering only photometric sources which are jointly calibrated by at least three spectroscopic surveys. In all cases, the method utilised here proves robust: we find a maximal deviation from our fiducial analysis of $|ΔS_8| \leq 0.011$ for all samples defined and analysed using our SOM. To demonstrate the reduction in systematic biases found within our analysis, we highlight our results when performing redshift calibration without the DEEP2 spectroscopic data set. In this case we find marginal posterior constraints of $S_8=0.707_{-0.042}^{+0.046}$; a difference with respect to the fiducial that is both significantly smaller than, and in the opposite direction to, the equivalent shift from previous work. These results suggest that our improved cosmological parameter estimates are insensitive to pathological misrepresentation of photometric sources by the spectroscopy used for direct redshift calibration, and therefore that this systematic effect cannot be responsible for the observed difference between $S_8$ estimates made with KV450 and Planck CMB probes.

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.