Paper detail

Optimizing galaxy samples for clustering measurements in photometric surveys

When analyzing galaxy clustering in multi-band imaging surveys, there is a trade-off between selecting the largest galaxy samples (to minimize the shot noise) and selecting samples with the best photometric redshift (photo-z) precision, which generally include only a small subset of galaxies. In this paper, we systematically explore this trade-off. Our analysis is targeted towards the third year data of the Dark Energy Survey (DES), but our methods hold generally for other data sets. Using a simple Gaussian model for the redshift uncertainties, we carry out a Fisher matrix forecast for cosmological constraints from angular clustering in the redshift range $z = 0.2-0.95$. We quantify the cosmological constraints using a Figure of Merit (FoM) that measures the combined constraints on $Ω_m$ and $σ_8$ in the context of $Λ$CDM cosmology. We find that the trade-off between sample size and photo-z precision is sensitive to 1) whether cross-correlations between redshift bins are included or not, and 2) the ratio of the redshift bin width $δz$ and the photo-z precision $σ_z$. When cross-correlations are included and the redshift bin width is allowed to vary, the highest FoM is achieved when $δz \sim σ_z$. We find that for the typical case of $5-10$ redshift bins, optimal results are reached when we use larger, less precise photo-z samples, provided that we include cross-correlations. For samples with higher $σ_{z}$, the overlap between redshift bins is larger, leading to higher cross-correlation amplitudes. This leads to the self-calibration of the photo-z parameters and therefore tighter cosmological constraints. These results can be used to help guide galaxy sample selection for clustering analysis in ongoing and future photometric surveys.

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.