4.7 Article

Lensing without borders - I. A blind comparison of the amplitude of galaxy-galaxy lensing between independent imaging surveys

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 510, Issue 4, Pages 6150-6189

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stab3586

Keywords

cosmology: observations; large-scale structure of Universe

Funding

  1. NSF MRI [AST 1828315]
  2. U.D Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of High Energy Physics [DE-SC0019301]
  3. David and Lucille Packard foundation
  4. Alfred.P Sloan foundation
  5. European Research Council [647112]
  6. Max Planck Society
  7. Alexander von Humboldt Foundation
  8. Royal Society
  9. Heisenberg grant of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [Hi 1495/5-1]
  10. ERC Consolidator Grant [770935]
  11. European Research Council Consolidator Grant [770935]
  12. U.S. Department of Energy
  13. U.S. National Science Foundation
  14. Ministry of Science and Education of Spain
  15. Science and Technology Facilities Council of the United Kingdom
  16. Higher Education Funding Council for England
  17. National Center for Supercomputing Applications at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
  18. Kavli Institute of Cosmological Physics at the University of Chicago
  19. Center for Cosmology and Astro-Particle Physics at the Ohio State University
  20. Mitchell Institute for Fundamental Physics and Astronomy at Texas AM University
  21. Financiadora de Estudos e Projetos
  22. Fundacao Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro
  23. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico
  24. Ministerio da Ciencia
  25. Tecnologia e Inovacao
  26. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
  27. Argonne National Laboratory
  28. University of California at Santa Cruz
  29. University of Cambridge
  30. Centro de Investigaciones Energeticas
  31. Medioambientales y Tecnologicas-Madrid
  32. University of Chicago
  33. University College London
  34. DES-Brazil Consortium
  35. University of Edinburgh
  36. Eidgenossische Technische Hochschule (ETH) Zurich
  37. Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
  38. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
  39. Institut de Ciencies de l'Espai (IEEC/CSIC)
  40. Institut de Fisica d'Altes Energies
  41. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
  42. Ludwig-Maximilians Universitat Munchen
  43. associated Excellence Cluster Universe
  44. University of Michigan
  45. NFS's NOIRLab
  46. University of Nottingham
  47. Ohio State University
  48. University of Pennsylvania
  49. University of Portsmouth
  50. SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory
  51. Stanford University
  52. University of Sussex
  53. Texas AM University
  54. OzDES Membership Consortium
  55. National Science Foundation [AST-1138766, AST-1536171, AST-1238877]
  56. MICINN [ESP2017-89838, PGC2018-094773, PGC2018-102021, SEV-2016-0588, SEV-2016-0597, MDM-2015-0509]
  57. ERDF funds from the European Union
  58. CERCA program of the Generalitat de Catalunya
  59. Brazilian Instituto Nacional de Ciencia e Tecnologia (INCT) do e-Universo (CNPq) [465376/2014-2]
  60. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of High Energy Physics [DE-AC02-07CH11359]
  61. FIRST program from the Japanese Cabinet Office
  62. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology (MEXT)
  63. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS)
  64. Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST)
  65. Toray Science Foundation
  66. NAOJ
  67. Kavli IPMU
  68. KEK
  69. ASIAA
  70. National Aeronautics and Space Administration through the Planetary Science Division of the NASA Science Mission Directorate [NNX08AR22G]
  71. ESO Telescopes at the La Silla Paranal Observatory [177.A-3016, 177.A-3017, 177.A-3018, 179.A-2004]
  72. ERC
  73. NOVA
  74. NWO-M
  75. Department of Energy, Laboratory Directed Research and Development program at SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory [DE-AC02-76SF00515]
  76. Panofsky Fellowship
  77. FAPERJ
  78. CNPq
  79. CONICET
  80. Brazilian funding agency FAPERJ
  81. Imperial College
  82. Cerro Tololo Inter-American Observatory at NSF's NOIRLab [2012B-0001]
  83. European Research Council under the European Union
  84. ERC [240672, 291329, 306478]
  85. Princeton University
  86. University of Padova
  87. University Federico II (Naples)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Lensing without borders is a cross-survey collaboration aimed at assessing the consistency of galaxy-galaxy lensing signals across different data sets and testing systematic errors. The study compares the amplitude of Delta sigma using lens samples from different surveys and finds good agreement between empirically estimated and reported systematic errors. A correlation between lensing amplitude and survey depth is detected in some lenses, possibly due to unrecognized galaxy blends and imperfections in photometric redshift calibration. The analysis suggests that lensing systematics alone are unlikely to fully explain the 'lensing is low' effect.
Lensing without borders is a cross-survey collaboration created to assess the consistency of galaxy-galaxy lensing signals (Delta sigma) across different data sets and to carry out end-to-end tests of systematic errors. We perform a blind comparison of the amplitude of Delta sigma using lens samples from BOSS and six independent lensing surveys. We find good agreement between empirically estimated and reported systematic errors which agree to better than 2.3 sigma in four lens bins and three radial ranges. For lenses with z(L) > 0.43 and considering statistical errors, we detect a 3-4 sigma correlation between lensing amplitude and survey depth. This correlation could arise from the increasing impact at higher redshift of unrecognized galaxy blends on shear calibration and imperfections in photometric redshift calibration. At z(L) > 0.54, amplitudes may additionally correlate with foreground stellar density. The amplitude of these trends is within survey-defined systematic error budgets that are designed to include known shear and redshift calibration uncertainty. Using a fully empirical and conservative method, we do not find evidence for large unknown systematics. Systematic errors greater than 15 per cent (25 per cent) ruled out in three lens bins at 68 per cent (95 per cent) confidence at z < 0.54. Differences with respect to predictions based on clustering are observed to be at the 20-30 per cent level. Our results therefore suggest that lensing systematics alone are unlikely to fully explain the 'lensing is low' effect at z < 0.54. This analysis demonstrates the power of cross-survey comparisons and provides a promising path for identifying and reducing systematics in future lensing analyses.

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