4.7 Article

Why multitracer surveys beat cosmic variance

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 432, Issue 1, Pages 318-326

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stt465

Keywords

cosmology: theory

Funding

  1. Sociedade Brasileira de Fisica (SBF)
  2. American Physical Society (APS)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Galaxy surveys that map multiple species of tracers of large-scale structure can improve the constraints on some cosmological parameters far beyond the limits imposed by a simplistic interpretation of cosmic variance. This enhancement derives from comparing the relative clustering between different tracers of large-scale structure. We present a simple but generic expression for the Fisher information matrix of surveys with any (discrete) number of tracers, and show that the enhancement of the constraints on bias-sensitive parameters are a straightforward consequence of this multitracer Fisher matrix. In fact, the relative clustering amplitudes between tracers are eigenvectors of this multitracer Fisher matrix. The diagonalized multitracer Fisher matrix clearly shows that while the effective volume is bounded by the physical volume of the survey, the relational information between species is unbounded. As an application, we study the expected enhancements in the constraints of realistic surveys that aim at mapping several different types of tracers of large-scale structure. The gain obtained by combining multiple tracers is highest at low redshifts, and in one particular scenario we analysed that the enhancement can be as large as a factor of greater than or similar to 3 for the accuracy in the determination of the redshift distortion parameter, and a factor of greater than or similar to 5 for the local non-Gaussianity parameter f(NL). Radial and angular distance determinations from the baryonic features in the power spectrum may also benefit from the multitracer approach.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available