Journal
MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 471, Issue 4, Pages 3827-3844Publisher
OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stx1828
Keywords
gravitational lensing: weak; galaxies: evolution; large-scale structure of Universe; cosmology: observations
Categories
Funding
- Carnegie Mellon University
- Department of Energy Early Career Award program
- NASA [NNX15AL17G]
- Alfred P. Sloan Foundation
- National Science Foundation
- U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science
- University of Arizona
- Brazilian Participation Group
- Brookhaven National Laboratory
- University of Florida
- French Participation Group
- German Participation Group
- Harvard University
- Instituto de Astrofisica de Canarias
- Michigan State/Notre Dame/JINA Participation Group
- Johns Hopkins University
- Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
- Max Planck Institute for Astrophysics
- Max Planck Institute for Extraterrestrial Physics
- New Mexico State University
- New York University
- Ohio State University
- Pennsylvania State University
- University of Portsmouth
- Princeton University
- Spanish Participation Group
- University of Tokyo
- University of Utah
- Vanderbilt University
- University of Virginia
- University of Washington
- Yale University
- NASA [NNX15AL17G, 799149] Funding Source: Federal RePORTER
Ask authors/readers for more resources
We study the covariance properties of real space correlation function estimators - primarily galaxy-shear correlations, or galaxy-galaxy lensing - using SDSS data for both shear catalogues and lenses (specifically the BOSS LOWZ sample). Using mock catalogues of lenses and sources, we disentangle the various contributions to the covariance matrix and compare them with a simple analytical model. We show that not subtracting the lensing measurement around random points from the measurement around the lens sample is equivalent to performing the measurement using the lens density field instead of the lens overdensity field. While the measurement using the lens density field is unbiased (in the absence of systematics), its error is significantly larger due to an additional term in the covariance. Therefore, this subtraction should be performed regardless of its beneficial effects on systematics. Comparing the error estimates from data and mocks for estimators that involve the overdensity, we find that the errors are dominated by the shape noise and lens clustering, which empirically estimated covariances (jackknife and standard deviation across mocks) that are consistent with theoretical estimates, and that both the connected parts of the four-point function and the supersample covariance can be neglected for the current levels of noise. While the trade-off between different terms in the covariance depends on the survey configuration (area, source number density), the diagnostics that we use in this work should be useful for future works to test their empirically determined covariances.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available