Paper detail

SNIa-Cosmology Analysis Results from Simulated LSST Images: from Difference Imaging to Constraints on Dark Energy

The Vera Rubin Observatory Legacy Survey of Space and Time (LSST) is expected to process ${\sim}10^6$ transient detections per night. For precision measurements of cosmological parameters and rates, it is critical to understand the detection efficiency, magnitude limits, artifact contamination levels, and biases in the selection and photometry. Here we rigorously test the LSST Difference Image Analysis (DIA) pipeline using simulated images from the Rubin Observatory LSST Dark Energy Science Collaboration (DESC) Data Challenge (DC2) simulation for the Wide-Fast-Deep (WFD) survey area. DC2 is the first large-scale (300 deg$^2$) image simulation of a transient survey that includes realistic cadence, variable observing conditions, and CCD image artifacts. We analyze ${\sim}$15 deg$^2$ of DC2 over a 5-year time-span in which artificial point-sources from Type Ia Supernovae (SNIa) light curves have been overlaid onto the images. We measure the detection efficiency as a function of Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) and find a $50\%$ efficiency at $\rm{SNR}=5.8$. The magnitude limits for each filter are: $u=23.66$, $g=24.69$, $r=24.06$, $i=23.45$, $z=22.54$, $y=21.62$ $\rm{mag}$. The artifact contamination is $\sim90\%$ of detections, corresponding to $\sim1000$ artifacts/deg$^2$ in $g$ band, and falling to 300 per deg$^2$ in $y$ band. The photometry has biases $<1\%$ for magnitudes $19.5 < m <23$. Our DIA performance on simulated images is similar to that of the Dark Energy Survey pipeline applied to real images. We also characterize DC2 image properties to produce catalog-level simulations needed for distance bias corrections. We find good agreement between DC2 data and simulations for distributions of SNR, redshift, and fitted light-curve properties. Applying a realistic SNIa-cosmology analysis for redshifts $z<1$, we recover the input cosmology parameters to within statistical uncertainties.

preprint2021arXivOpen 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.

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.