English

Euclid: Forecasts for $k$-cut $3 \times 2$ Point Statistics

Cosmology and Nongalactic Astrophysics 2021-07-21 v2

Abstract

Modelling uncertainties at small scales, i.e. high kk in the power spectrum P(k)P(k), due to baryonic feedback, nonlinear structure growth and the fact that galaxies are biased tracers poses a significant obstacle to fully leverage the constraining power of the {\it Euclid} wide-field survey. kk-cut cosmic shear has recently been proposed as a method to optimally remove sensitivity to these scales while preserving usable information. In this paper we generalise the kk-cut cosmic shear formalism to 3×23 \times 2 point statistics and estimate the loss of information for different kk-cuts in a 3×23 \times 2 point analysis of the {\it Euclid} data. Extending the Fisher matrix analysis of~\citet{blanchard2019euclid}, we assess the degradation in constraining power for different kk-cuts. We work in the idealised case and assume the galaxy bias is linear, the covariance is Gaussian, while neglecting uncertainties due to photo-z errors and baryonic feedback. We find that taking a kk-cut at 2.6 h Mpc12.6 \ h \ {\rm Mpc} ^{-1} yields a dark energy Figure of Merit (FOM) of 1018. This is comparable to taking a weak lensing cut at =5000\ell = 5000 and a galaxy clustering and galaxy-galaxy lensing cut at =3000\ell = 3000 in a traditional 3×23 \times 2 point analysis. We also find that the fraction of the observed galaxies used in the photometric clustering part of the analysis is one of the main drivers of the FOM. Removing 50% (90%)50 \% \ (90 \%) of the clustering galaxies decreases the FOM by 19% (62%)19 \% \ (62 \%). Given that the FOM depends so heavily on the fraction of galaxies used in the clustering analysis, extensive efforts should be made to handle the real-world systematics present when extending the analysis beyond the luminous red galaxy (LRG) sample.

Keywords

Cite

@article{arxiv.2012.04672,
  title  = {Euclid: Forecasts for $k$-cut $3 \times 2$ Point Statistics},
  author = {P. L. Taylor and T. Kitching and V. F. Cardone and A. Ferté and E. M. Huff and F. Bernardeau and J. Rhodes and A. C. Deshpande and I. Tutusaus and A. Pourtsidou and S. Camera and C. Carbone and S. Casas and M. Martinelli and V. Pettorino and Z. Sakr and D. Sapone and V. Yankelevich and N. Auricchio and A. Balestra and C. Bodendorf and D. Bonino and A. Boucaud and E. Branchini and M. Brescia and V. Capobianco and J. Carretero and M. Castellano and S. Cavuoti and A. Cimatti and R. Cledassou and G. Congedo and L. Conversi and L. Corcione and M. Cropper and E. Franceschi and B. Garilli and B. Gillis and C. Giocoli and L. Guzzo and S. V. H. Haugan and W. Holmes and F. Hormuth and K. Jahnke and S. Kermiche and M. Kilbinger and M. Kunz and H. Kurki-Suonio and S. Ligori and P. B. Lilje and I. Lloro and O. Marggraf and K. Markovic and R. Massey and E. Medinaceli and S. Mei and M. Meneghetti and G. Meylan and M. Moresco and B. Morin and L. Moscardini and S. Niemi and C. Padilla and S. Paltani and F. Pasian and K. Pedersen and W. J. Percival and S. Pires and G. Polenta and M. Poncet and L. Popa and F. Raison and M. Roncarelli and E. Rossetti and R. Saglia and P. Schneider and A. Secrou and G. Seidel and S. Serrano and C. Sirignano and G. Sirri and F. Sureau and P. Tallada Crespí and D. Tavagnacco and A. N. Taylor and H. I. Teplitz and I. Tereno and R. Toledo-Moreo and E. A. Valentijn and L. Valenziano and T. Vassallo and Y. Wang and J. Weller and A. Zacchei and J. Zoubian},
  journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:2012.04672},
  year   = {2021}
}

Comments

10 pages, 5 figures. Accepted by the Open Journal of Astrophysics

R2 v1 2026-06-23T20:49:36.402Z