4.7 Article

Self-calibration of weak lensing systematic effects using combined two- and three-point statistics

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 503, Issue 2, Pages 2300-2317

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stab413

Keywords

gravitational lensing: weak; methods: analytical; cosmological parameters; large-scale structure of Universe

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study shows that using the weak lensing bispectrum alongside the power spectrum is effective in reducing systematic errors and significantly shrinking the credible regions for cosmological parameters. A joint analysis of power spectrum and bispectrum can self-calibrate systematic effects to stringent levels required by future weak lensing surveys, reducing the need for external calibration data.
We investigate the prospects for using the weak lensing bispectrum alongside the power spectrum to control systematic uncertainties in a Euclid-like survey. Three systematic effects are considered: the intrinsic alignment of galaxies, uncertainties in the means of tomographic redshift distributions, and multiplicative bias in the measurement of the shear signal. We find that the bispectrum is very effective in mitigating these systematic errors. Varying all three systematics simultaneously, a joint power spectrum and bispectrum analysis reduces the area of credible regions for the cosmological parameters Omega(m) and sigma(8) by a factor of 90 and for the two parameters of a time-varying dark energy equation of state by a factor of almost 20, compared with the baseline approach of using the power spectrum alone and of imposing priors consistent with the accuracy requirements specified for Euclid. We also demonstrate that including the bispectrum self-calibrates all three systematic effects to the stringent levels required by the forthcoming generation of weak lensing surveys, thereby reducing the need for external calibration data.

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