4.7 Article

Constraining the halo mass function with observations

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 463, Issue 2, Pages 1666-1677

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stw2072

Keywords

gravitational lensing: weak; supernovae: general; cosmological parameters; cosmology: observations; large-scale structure of Universe

Funding

  1. CAPES
  2. Science Without Borders fellowship from the Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq)
  3. CNPq
  4. FAPERJ

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The abundances of dark matter haloes in the universe are described by the halo mass function (HMF). It enters most cosmological analyses and parametrizes how the linear growth of primordial perturbations is connected to these abundances. Interestingly, this connection can be made approximately cosmology independent. This made it possible to map in detail its near-universal behaviour through large-scale simulations. However, such simulations may suffer from systematic effects, especially if baryonic physics is included. In this paper, we ask how well observations can constrain directly the HMF. The observables we consider are galaxy cluster number counts, galaxy cluster power spectrum and lensing of Type Ia supernovae. Our results show that Dark Energy Survey is capable of putting the first meaningful constraints on the HMF, while both Euclid and J-PAS (Javalambre-Physics of the Accelerated Universe Astrophysical Survey) can give stronger constraints, comparable to the ones from state-of-the-art simulations. We also find that an independent measurement of cluster masses is even more important for measuring the HMF than for constraining the cosmological parameters, and can vastly improve the determination of the HMF. Measuring the HMF could thus be used to cross-check simulations and their implementation of baryon physics. It could even, if deviations cannot be accounted for, hint at new physics.

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