4.7 Article

Super-sample covariance in simulations

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW D
卷 89, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.89.083519

关键词

-

资金

  1. U.S. Dept. of Energy [DE-FG02-13ER41958]
  2. Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics at the University of Chicago [NSF PHY-0114422, NSF PHY-0551142]
  3. David and Lucile Packard Foundation
  4. World Premier International Research Center Initiative (WPI Initiative)
  5. FIRST program Subaru Measurements of Images and Redshifts (SuMIRe), CSTP, Japan
  6. JSPS Promotion of Science [23340061]
  7. MEXT, Japan
  8. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien
  9. Division Of Physics [1125897] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  10. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [23340061, 26610058] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Using separate universe simulations, we accurately quantify super-sample covariance (SSC), the typically dominant sampling error for matter power spectrum estimators in a finite volume, which arises from the presence of super survey modes. By quantifying the power spectrum response to a background mode, this approach automatically captures the separate effects of beat coupling in the quasilinear regime, halo sample variance in the nonlinear regime and a new dilation effect which changes scales in the power spectrum coherently across the survey volume, including the baryon acoustic oscillation scale. It models these effects at typically the few percent level or better with a handful of small volume simulations for any survey geometry compared with directly using many thousands of survey volumes in a suite of large-volume simulations. The stochasticity of the response is sufficiently small that in the quasilinear regime, SSC can be alternately included by fitting the mean density in the volume with these fixed templates in parameter estimation. We also test the halo model prescription and find agreement typically at better than the 10% level for the response.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据