4.7 Article

Optimizing primordial non-Gaussianity measurements from galaxy surveys

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 485, Issue 3, Pages 4160-4166

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/sty3150

Keywords

cosmology: observations; inflation; large-scale structure of Universe

Funding

  1. European Research Council through the Darksurvey grant [614030]
  2. UK Science and Technology Facilities Council [ST/N000668/1]
  3. UK Space Agency [ST/N00180X/1]
  4. Science and Technology Facilities Council [ST/M002853/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  5. UK Space Agency [ST/N00180X/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  6. STFC [ST/N000668/1, ST/M002853/1] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Galaxy clustering data from current and upcoming large-scale structure surveys can provide strong constraints on primordial non-Gaussianity through the scale-dependent halo bias. To fully exploit the information from galaxy surveys, optimal analysis methods need to be developed and applied to the data. Since the halo bias is sensitive to local non-Gaussianity predominately at large scales, the volume of a given survey is crucial. Consequently, for such analyses we do not want to split into redshift bins, which would lead to information loss due to edge effects, but instead analyse the full sample. We present an optimal technique to directly constrain local non-Gaussianity parametrized by f(NL)(loc), from galaxy clustering by applying redshift weights to the galaxies. We derive a set of weights to optimally measure the amplitude of local non-Gaussianity, f(NL)(loc), discuss the redshift weighted power spectrum estimators, outline the implementation procedure and test our weighting scheme against lognormal catalogues for two different surveys: the quasar sample of the Extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey (eBOSS) and the emission line galaxy sample of the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI) survey. We find an improvement of 30 per cent for eBOSS and 6 per cent for DESI compared to the standard Feldman, Kaiser, and Peacock weights, although these predictions are sensitive to the bias model assumed.

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