Sample variance in weak lensing: how many simulations are required?

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Abstract

Constraining cosmology using weak gravitational lensing consists of comparing a measured feature vector of dimension NbN_b with its simulated counterpart. An accurate estimate of the Nb×NbN_b\times N_b feature covariance matrix C\mathbf{C} is essential to obtain accurate parameter confidence intervals. When C\mathbf{C} is measured from a set of simulations, an important question is how large this set should be. To answer this question, we construct different ensembles of NrN_r realizations of the shear field, using a common randomization procedure that recycles the outputs from a smaller number Ns≤NrN_s\leq N_r of independent ray-tracing NN--body simulations. We study parameter confidence intervals as a function of (Ns,NrN_s,N_r) in the range 1≤Ns≤2001\leq N_s\leq 200 and 1≤Nr≲1051\leq N_r\lesssim 10^5. Previous work has shown that Gaussian noise in the feature vectors (from which the covariance is estimated) lead, at quadratic order, to an O(1/Nr)O(1/N_r) degradation of the parameter confidence intervals. Using a variety of lensing features measured in our simulations, including shear-shear power spectra and peak counts, we show that cubic and quartic covariance fluctuations lead to additional O(1/Nr2)O(1/N_r^2) error degradation that is not negligible when NrN_r is only a factor of few larger than NbN_b. We study the large NrN_r limit, and find that a single, 240Mpc/h/h sized 5123512^3-particle NN--body simulation (Ns=1N_s=1) can be repeatedly recycled to produce as many as Nr=few×104N_r={\rm few}\times10^4 shear maps whose power spectra and high-significance peak counts can be treated as statistically independent. As a result, a small number of simulations (Ns=1N_s=1 or 22) is sufficient to forecast parameter confidence intervals at percent accuracy.

Explore this paper’s authors, topics and related work.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Reviews 0

Write a reviewWrite

No reviews yet.

Discussion 0

Add a commentWrite

No comments yet.