Paper detail

Measuring lensing ratios with future cosmological surveys

The ratio between the CMB lensing/galaxy counts and the galaxy shear/galaxy counts cross-correlations combines the information from different cosmological probes to infer cosmographic measurements that are less dependent on astrophysical uncertainties and can constrain the geometry of the Universe. We discuss the future perspectives for the measurement of this lensing ratio as previously introduced, i.e. with the use of the Limber and flat-sky approximations and neglecting all the effects on the galaxy survey from observing on the past lightcone. We then show how the cosmological information in this estimator is affected by the Limber approximation and by the inclusion of the redshift space distorsions (RSD) and magnification lensing contributions to the galaxy number counts. We find that the magnification lensing contribution induces a multipole dependence of the lensing ratio that we show to be detectable at a statistical significant level combining post-$Planck$ CMB surveys and a Euclid-like experiment. We propose an improved estimator which takes into account this angular scale dependence. Using this extended formalism, we present forecasts for upcoming and future cosmological surveys and we show at which extent the lensing ratio information can improve the CMB constraints on cosmological parameters. We get that for extended cosmological models where the neutrino mass, the spatial curvature and the dark energy equation of state are allowed to vary, the constraints from $Planck$ on these parameters and on $H_0$ can be reduced by $\sim 40\%$ with the inclusion of a single lensing ratio and by $\sim 60-70\%$ adding the joint measurement of 9 lensing ratios with a Euclid-like survey. We also find that neglegcting the contribution from magnification lensing can induce a bias on the derived cosmological parameters in a combined analysis.

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.