Paper detail

The Dark Energy Survey Supernova Program: Cosmological biases from supernova photometric classification

Cosmological analyses of samples of photometrically-identified Type Ia supernovae (SNe Ia) depend on understanding the effects of 'contamination' from core-collapse and peculiar SN Ia events. We employ a rigorous analysis on state-of-the-art simulations of photometrically identified SN Ia samples and determine cosmological biases due to such 'non-Ia' contamination in the Dark Energy Survey (DES) 5-year SN sample. As part of the analysis, we test on our DES simulations the performance of SuperNNova, a photometric SN classifier based on recurrent neural networks. Depending on the choice of non-Ia SN models in both the simulated data sample and training sample, contamination ranges from 0.8-3.5 %, with the efficiency of the classification from 97.7-99.5 %. Using the Bayesian Estimation Applied to Multiple Species (BEAMS) framework and its extension 'BEAMS with Bias Correction' (BBC), we produce a redshift-binned Hubble diagram marginalised over contamination and corrected for selection effects and we use it to constrain the dark energy equation-of-state, $w$. Assuming a flat universe with Gaussian $Ω_M$ prior of $0.311\pm0.010$, we show that biases on $w$ are $<0.008$ when using SuperNNova and accounting for a wide range of non-Ia SN models in the simulations. Systematic uncertainties associated with contamination are estimated to be at most $σ_{w, \mathrm{syst}}=0.004$. This compares to an expected statistical uncertainty of $σ_{w,\mathrm{stat}}=0.039$ for the DES-SN sample, thus showing that contamination is not a limiting uncertainty in our analysis. We also measure biases due to contamination on $w_0$ and $w_a$ (assuming a flat universe), and find these to be $<$0.009 in $w_0$ and $<$0.108 in $w_a$, hence 5 to 10 times smaller than the statistical uncertainties expected from the DES-SN sample.

preprint2021arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access84 authors1 topic

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 map preview

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.