Cosmological constraints from cosmic shear two-point correlation functions with HSC survey first-year data

By T. Hamana, Masato Shirasaki, S. Miyazaki, C. Hikage, M. Oguri, S. More, R. Armstrong, A. Leauthaud, Rachel Mandelbaum, H. Miyatake and 10 more. Nippon Tenmon Gakkai obun kenkyu hokoku, 2019

173 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We present measurements of cosmic shear two-point correlation functions (TPCFs) from Hyper Suprime-Cam Subaru Strategic Program (HSC) first-year data, and derive cosmological constraints based on a blind analysis. The HSC first-year shape catalog is divided into four tomographic redshift bins ranging from $z=0.3$ to 1.5 with equal widths of $\Delta z =0.3$. The unweighted galaxy number densities in each tomographic bin are 5.9, 5.9, 4.3, and $2.4\:$arcmin$^{-2}$ from the lowest to highest redshifts, respectively. We adopt the standard TPCF estimators, $\xi _\pm$, for our cosmological analysis, given that we find no evidence of significant B-mode shear. The TPCFs are detected at high significance for all 10 combinations of auto- and cross-tomographic bins over a wide angular range, yielding a total signal-to-noise ratio of 19 in the angular ranges adopted in the cosmological analysis, $7^{\prime }<\theta <56^{\prime }$ for $\xi _+$ and $28^{\prime }<\theta <178^{\prime }$ for $\xi _-$. We perform the standard Bayesian likelihood analysis for cosmological inference from the measured cosmic shear TPCFs, including contributions from intrinsic alignment of galaxies as well as systematic effects from PSF model errors, shear calibration uncertainty, and source redshift distribution errors. We adopt a covariance matrix derived from realistic mock catalogs constructed from full-sky gravitational lensing simulations that fully account for survey geometry and measurement noise. For a flat $\Lambda$ cold dark matter model, we find $S\,_8 \equiv \sigma _8\sqrt{\Omega _{\rm m}/0.3}=0.804_{-0.029}^{+0.032}$, and $\Omega _{\rm m}=0.346_{-0.100}^{+0.052}$. We carefully check the robustness of the cosmological results against astrophysical modeling uncertainties and systematic uncertainties in measurements, and find that none of them has a significant impact on the cosmological constraints.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Instrumentation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/171117477499fa77480123580776ce5456977c46

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Astronomy and Astrophysics

In Instrumentation

Citations in the corpus

The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: DR6 Gravitational Lensing Map and Cosmological Parameters (2023, methodology): “Many are consistent with the ΛCDM model derived from the primary CMB anisotropy in the early universe (e.g., Freedman et al. 2019; Alam et al. 2021; Hamana et al. 2020; Doux et al. 2022; Yu et al. 2022; Aricò et al. 2023) but some are in tension, with varying levels of significance.”
hmcode-2020: improved modelling of non-linear cosmological power spectra with baryonic feedback (2020, background): “…et al. 2020; Heymans et al. 2020), DES (e.g., Abbott et al. 2018), or HSC (e.g., 2 Taken from the node cosmologies of Heitmann et al. (2014) and Lawrence et al. (2017) MNRAS 000, 1–17 (2020) Hikage et al. 2019; Hamana et al. 2020), although they do contain the Planck Collaboration VI (2018) space.”