4.7 Article

NON-GAUSSIAN ERROR CONTRIBUTION TO LIKELIHOOD ANALYSIS OF THE MATTER POWER SPECTRUM

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
卷 726, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0004-637X/726/1/7

关键词

cosmology: theory; large-scale structure of universe

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) of Japan
  2. World Premier International Research Center Initiative of MEXT of Japan
  3. Mitsubishi Foundation
  4. Japan Society for Promotion of Science (JSPS) [21740168]
  5. [18740132]
  6. [18540277]
  7. [18654047]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We study the sample variance of the matter power spectrum for the standard. cold dark matter universe. We use a total of 5000 cosmological N-body simulations to study in detail the distribution of best-fit cosmological parameters and the baryon acoustic peak positions. The obtained distribution is compared with the results from the Fisher matrix analysis with and without including non-Gaussian errors. For the Fisher matrix analysis, we compute the derivatives of the matter power spectrum with respect to cosmological parameters using directly full nonlinear simulations. We show that the non-Gaussian errors increase the unmarginalized errors by up to a factor of five for k(max) = 0.4 h Mpc(-1) if there is only one free parameter, provided other parameters are well determined by external information. On the other hand, for multi-parameter fitting, the impact of the non-Gaussian errors is significantly mitigated due to severe parameter degeneracies in the power spectrum. The distribution of the acoustic peak positions is well described by a Gaussian distribution, with its width being consistent with the statistical interval predicted from the Fisher matrix. We also examine systematic bias in the best-fit parameter due to the non-Gaussian errors. The bias is found to be smaller than the 1 sigma statistical error for both the cosmological parameters and the acoustic scale positions.

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