Systematic errors in future weak-lensing surveys: requirements and prospects for self-calibration

被引:323
|
作者
Huterer, D [1 ]
Takada, M
Bernstein, G
Jain, B
机构
[1] Univ Chicago, Kavli Inst Cosmol Phys & Astron, Chicago, IL 60637 USA
[2] Univ Chicago, Dept Astrophys, Chicago, IL 60637 USA
[3] Tohoku Univ, Astron Inst, Sendai, Miyagi 9808578, Japan
[4] Univ Penn, Dept Phys & Astron, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
cosmological parameters; large-scale structure of Universe;
D O I
10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09782.x
中图分类号
P1 [天文学];
学科分类号
0704 ;
摘要
We study the impact of systematic errors on planned weak-lensing surveys and compute the requirements on their contributions so that they are not a dominant source of the cosmological parameter error budget. The generic types of error we consider are multiplicative and additive errors in measurements of shear, as well as photometric redshift errors. In general, more powerful surveys have stronger systematic requirements. For example, for a SuperNova/Acceleration Probe (SNAP)-type survey the multiplicative error in shear needs to be smaller than 1 per cent of the mean shear in any given redshift bin, while the centroids of photometric redshift bins need to be known to be better than 0.003. With about a factor of 2 degradation in cosmological parameter errors, future surveys can enter a self-calibration regime, where the mean systematic biases are self-consistently determined from the survey and only higher order moments of the systematics contribute. Interestingly, once the power-spectrum measurements are combined with the bispectrum, the self-calibration regime in the variation of the equation of state of dark energy w(a) is attained with only a 20-30 per cent error degradation.
引用
收藏
页码:101 / 114
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Self-calibration of photometric redshift scatter in weak-lensing surveys
    Zhang, Pengjie
    Pen, Ue-Li
    Bernstein, Gary
    MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY, 2010, 405 (01) : 359 - 374
  • [2] Non-negative Matrix Factorization for Self-calibration of Photometric Redshift Scatter in Weak-lensing Surveys
    Zhang, Le
    Yu, Yu
    Zhang, Pengjie
    ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL, 2017, 848 (01):
  • [3] Shear calibration biases in weak-lensing surveys
    Hirata, C
    Seljak, U
    MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY, 2003, 343 (02) : 459 - 480
  • [4] Photo-z outlier self-calibration in weak lensing surveys
    Schaan, Emmanuel
    Ferraro, Simone
    Seljak, Uros
    JOURNAL OF COSMOLOGY AND ASTROPARTICLE PHYSICS, 2020, (12):
  • [5] A proposal on the galaxy intrinsic alignment self-calibration in weak lensing surveys
    Zhang, Pengjie
    MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY, 2010, 406 (01) : L95 - L99
  • [6] Catastrophic photometric redshift errors: weak-lensing survey requirements
    Bernstein, Gary
    Huterer, Dragan
    MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY, 2010, 401 (02) : 1399 - 1408
  • [7] Optimal surveys for weak-lensing tomography
    Amara, Adam
    Refregier, Alexandre
    MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY, 2007, 381 (03) : 1018 - 1026
  • [8] UNIONS: The impact of systematic errors on weak-lensing peak counts
    Aycoberry, Emma
    Ajani, Virginia
    Guinot, Axel
    Kilbinger, Martin
    Pettorino, Valeria
    Farrens, Samuel
    Starck, Jean-Luc
    Gavazzi, Raphael
    Hudson, Michael J.
    ASTRONOMY & ASTROPHYSICS, 2023, 671
  • [9] Self-calibration for three-point intrinsic alignment autocorrelations in weak lensing surveys
    Troxel, M. A.
    Ishak, M.
    MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY, 2012, 423 (02) : 1663 - 1673
  • [10] Baryon impact on weak lensing peaks and power spectrum: Low-bias statistics and self-calibration in future surveys
    Yang, Xiuyuan
    Kratochvil, Jan M.
    Huffenberger, Kevin
    Haiman, Zoltan
    May, Morgan
    PHYSICAL REVIEW D, 2013, 87 (02):