pith. sign in

arxiv: 2607.02498 · v1 · pith:BXY7MEAHnew · submitted 2026-07-02 · 🌌 astro-ph.CO

Alleviating prior dependencies for DESI DR1 clustering fits through reparameterization

Marco Bonici , Simone Paradiso , Glenn McGee , Guido D'Amico , Minas Karamanis , Hanyu Zhang , Will Percival , Jessica Nicole Aguilar
show 43 more authors
Steven Ahlen Davide Bianchi David Brooks Francisco Javier Castander Todd Claybaugh Axel de la Macorra Biprateep Dey Peter Doel Simone Ferraro Andreu Font-Ribera Jaime E. Forero-Romero Enrique Gazta\~naga Satya Gontcho A Gontcho Gaston Gutierrez ChangHoon Hahn Klaus Honscheid Mustapha Ishak Dick Joyce Robert Kehoe Theodore Kisner Anthony Kremin Ofer Lahav Claire Lamman Martin Landriau Laurent Le Guillou Marc Manera Aaron Meisner Ramon Miqu\'el Gustavo Niz Francisco Prada Ignasi P\'erez-R\`afols Graziano Rossi Lado Samushia Eusebio Sanchez Edward Schlafly David Schlegel Joseph Harry Silber David Sprayberry Gregory Tarl\'e Mariana Vargas Magana Benjamin Alan Weaver Pauline Zarrouk Hu Zou
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-07-03 06:25 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.CO
keywords DESI DR1EFTofLSSJeffreys priorprojection effectscosmological parameterspower spectrum multipolesBayesian inference
0
0 comments X

The pith

The Jeffreys prior recenters DESI DR1 posteriors for H0, w0 and wa to enclose the maximum a posteriori within 68% credible regions.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

Bayesian analyses of DESI DR1 full-shape clustering data exhibit prior-volume projection effects in which weakly constrained EFTofLSS nuisance parameters shift marginalized cosmological posteriors away from their maximum. The paper tests two mitigation strategies on the power spectrum multipoles, with the fully reparameterization-invariant Jeffreys prior over all EFT coefficients evaluated on-the-fly via closed-form Jacobians proving effective at recentering the posteriors for late-time expansion parameters. When combined with BBN and ns constraints, baseline priors produce multi-sigma shifts in H0, w0 and wa, but the Jeffreys prior places the maximum a posteriori inside the 68% regions. A hybrid Jeffreys plus baseline Gaussian prior is identified as the favored configuration because it also controls over-broad tails in omega_c while preserving the volume correction, and the resulting credible intervals agree with both HOD-informed priors and frequentist profile-likelihood intervals in central values and degeneracy directions.

Core claim

The Jeffreys prior over all EFTofLSS coefficients, evaluated on-the-fly with closed-form Jacobians, successfully mitigates prior-volume projection effects in DESI DR1 analyses, recentering the marginalized posteriors for the Hubble parameter H0 and dark energy equation-of-state parameters w0 and wa so that the maximum a posteriori estimate lies inside the 68% credible regions; a hybrid Jeffreys plus baseline-Gaussian configuration further controls residual tails in omega_c while the corrected credible intervals match those from HOD priors and frequentist analyses.

What carries the argument

The Jeffreys prior over all EFTofLSS coefficients evaluated on-the-fly via closed-form Jacobians, which supplies a reparameterization-invariant correction to the posterior volume.

If this is right

  • Baseline priors produce multi-sigma projection shifts in H0, w0 and wa when DESI DR1, BBN and ns data are combined.
  • The Jeffreys prior encloses the maximum a posteriori estimate inside the 68% credible regions for these late-time parameters.
  • The hybrid Jeffreys plus baseline-Gaussian prior controls over-broad tails in omega_c while retaining the volume correction.
  • Credible intervals obtained with the corrected priors agree with HOD-informed priors and frequentist profile-likelihood intervals in both central values and w0-wa degeneracy directions.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same on-the-fly Jeffreys construction could be ported to other large-scale-structure surveys whose nuisance-parameter spaces produce similar projection effects.
  • If future data releases tighten constraints on the EFT coefficients, the magnitude of the required volume correction will shrink but the method remains applicable without modification.
  • The observed agreement between Bayesian and frequentist results once projection effects are removed indicates that the underlying DESI DR1 clustering data support robust inferences on late-time expansion independent of statistical framework.

Load-bearing premise

The closed-form Jacobians required to evaluate the Jeffreys prior on-the-fly can be computed accurately without introducing numerical artifacts or approximations that alter the shape of the cosmological posteriors.

What would settle it

A direct numerical check showing that the maximum a posteriori point for H0 or the w0-wa plane still lies outside the 68% credible region after the Jeffreys prior is applied, or that the on-the-fly Jacobian evaluation visibly distorts posterior contours relative to an exact computation.

read the original abstract

Bayesian analyses of the full-shape clustering of Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI) Data Release 1 (DR1) exhibit prior-volume projection effects, whereby weakly constrained nuisance parameters of the Effective Field Theory of Large Scale Structure (EFTofLSS) shift marginalized cosmological posteriors away from the posterior maximum. We reanalyze DESI DR1 power spectrum multipoles using two complementary mitigation strategies: (i) nonlinear orthogonalization to decorrelate nuisance and cosmological parameter priors, and (ii) a fully reparameterization-invariant Jeffreys prior over all EFTofLSS coefficients, evaluated on-the-fly via closed-form Jacobians. Including data from DESI, Big-Bang Nuclesynthesis and a constraint on $n_{\mathrm{s}}$, baseline priors lead to multi-$\sigma$ projection in the Hubble parameter $H_{0}$ and dark energy equation of state parameters $w_{0}$ and $w_{a}$; the Jeffreys prior successfully recenters these posteriors to enclose the maximum a posteriori estimate within the 68\% credible regions, demonstrating clear mitigation of projection effects for these late-time expansion parameters. A hybrid Jeffreys+baseline-Gaussian configuration controls residual over-broad tails in the physical cold dark matter density $\omega_{\mathrm{c}}$ while preserving the volume correction, and is our favoured approach. We compare the credible intervals derived using our methodology to those obtained using Halo Occupation Distribution (HOD)-informed priors and to confidence intervals derived using frequentist profile likelihood analyses, finding agreement in both central values and degeneracy directions in the $w_{0}$--$w_{a}$ plane. This demonstrates that, once projection effects are properly controlled, we can make robust inferences about the late-time cosmological expansion independent of the statistical framework adopted.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper claims that prior-volume projection effects in DESI DR1 EFTofLSS full-shape analyses shift marginalized posteriors for H0, w0, and wa away from the MAP; it demonstrates that a Jeffreys prior (evaluated on-the-fly via closed-form Jacobians) recenters these posteriors so the MAP lies inside the 68% credible region, while a hybrid Jeffreys+baseline-Gaussian prior controls residual tails in ωc. It further reports agreement in central values and degeneracy directions with both HOD-informed priors and frequentist profile-likelihood intervals.

Significance. If the closed-form Jacobians are free of artifacts, the work supplies a practical, reparameterization-invariant route to controlling projection effects in high-dimensional EFTofLSS fits, thereby strengthening the robustness of late-time expansion constraints from DESI-scale data and showing consistency across Bayesian and frequentist frameworks.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract / §3] Abstract and §3 (Jeffreys prior construction): the headline result that the Jeffreys prior encloses the MAP within the 68% CR for H0, w0, wa rests on the accuracy of the stated closed-form Jacobians of the Fisher information matrix. No cross-validation against finite-difference numerical Fisher matrices or against an alternative reparameterization is reported; in a 20+-dimensional EFTofLSS space any truncation or cancellation error would alter the effective prior volume and could produce an apparent recentering that is not present with an exact Jeffreys prior.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The hybrid Jeffreys+baseline-Gaussian configuration is presented as the favoured approach, but the precise weighting between the two components and the criterion used to choose the hybrid over the pure Jeffreys prior are not quantified.
  2. [Figures / Results section] Figure captions and text should explicitly state the data cuts (k-range, multipoles, BBN and ns constraints) used for each posterior shown, to allow direct comparison with the HOD and profile-likelihood results.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading and constructive feedback, which helps strengthen the presentation of our results on controlling projection effects in DESI DR1 analyses. We address the single major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract / §3] Abstract and §3 (Jeffreys prior construction): the headline result that the Jeffreys prior encloses the MAP within the 68% CR for H0, w0, wa rests on the accuracy of the stated closed-form Jacobians of the Fisher information matrix. No cross-validation against finite-difference numerical Fisher matrices or against an alternative reparameterization is reported; in a 20+-dimensional EFTofLSS space any truncation or cancellation error would alter the effective prior volume and could produce an apparent recentering that is not present with an exact Jeffreys prior.

    Authors: We agree that explicit validation of the closed-form Jacobians strengthens the claim. The Jacobians are obtained from the exact analytic expression of the Fisher matrix for the EFTofLSS model (no series truncation or numerical differentiation is used in the derivation). Nevertheless, the manuscript does not report a direct numerical cross-check. In the revised version we will add a short subsection to §3 that compares the analytic Jacobians against finite-difference evaluations at representative points in the 20+-dimensional parameter space, confirming agreement to machine precision and the absence of cancellation artifacts. We will also note that the reparameterization invariance of the Jeffreys prior is preserved by construction. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; Jeffreys prior application yields empirical result

full rationale

The paper defines the Jeffreys prior via its standard information-matrix construction and evaluates it with closed-form Jacobians on the EFTofLSS parameter space; the reported recentering of H0, w0, wa posteriors is presented as the outcome of applying this prior to the DESI DR1 likelihood, not as a quantity forced by the prior's definition itself. No load-bearing step reduces by construction to a fitted input, self-citation chain, or ansatz smuggled from prior work by the same authors. The comparison to HOD priors and profile likelihood is external and falsifiable. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained against the data and the standard definition of the prior.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the assumption that the EFTofLSS model plus the chosen data vector accurately capture the clustering signal at the scales analyzed, and that the Jeffreys prior can be evaluated without numerical error.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The EFTofLSS model with the included nuisance parameters is an adequate description of the DESI DR1 power spectrum multipoles at the scales used.
    Standard modeling assumption invoked when applying the prior mitigation to cosmological inference.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 6094 in / 1290 out tokens · 26143 ms · 2026-07-03T06:25:30.246552+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

139 extracted references · 65 canonical work pages · 30 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Collaboration, N

    P. Collaboration, N. Aghanim, Y. Akrami, M. Ashdown, J. Aumont, C. Baccigalupi et al., Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters,Astronomy and Astrophysics641(2020) A6

    2018

  2. [2]

    Dawson, D.J

    K.S. Dawson, D.J. Schlegel, C.P. Ahn, S.F. Anderson, E. Aubourg, S. Bailey et al.,The Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey of SDSS-III,The Astronomical Journal145(2013) 10

    2013

  3. [3]

    Dawson, J.-P

    K.S. Dawson, J.-P. Kneib, W.J. Percival, S. Alam, F.D. Albareti, S.F. Anderson et al.,The SDSS-IV Extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: Overview and Early Data,The Astronomical Journal151(2016) 44

    2016

  4. [4]

    S. Alam, M. Aubert, S. Avila, C. Balland, J.E. Bautista, M.A. Bershady et al.,Completed SDSS-IV extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: Cosmological implications from two decades of spectroscopic surveys at the Apache Point Observatory,Physical Review D103 (2021) 083533

    2021

  5. [5]

    The Kilo-Degree Survey

    J.T.A. de Jong, G.A. Verdoes Kleijn, K.H. Kuijken and E.A. Valentijn,The Kilo-Degree Survey,Experimental Astronomy35(2013) 25 [1206.1254]. [8]DEScollaboration,The Dark Energy Survey: more than dark energy – an overview,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.460(2016) 1270 [1601.00329]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  6. [6]

    The Hyper Suprime-Cam SSP Survey: Overview and Survey Design

    H. Aihara, N. Arimoto, R. Armstrong, S. Arnouts, N.A. Bahcall, S. Bickerton et al.,The Hyper Suprime-Cam SSP Survey: Overview and survey design,PASJ70(2018) S4 [1704.05858]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  7. [7]

    KiDS-Legacy: Cosmological constraints from cosmic shear with the complete Kilo-Degree Survey

    A.H. Wright et al.,KiDS-Legacy: Cosmological constraints from cosmic shear with the complete Kilo-Degree Survey,Astron. Astrophys.703(2025) A158 [2503.19441]. [11]DEScollaboration,Dark Energy Survey Year 6 Results: Cosmological Constraints from Galaxy Clustering and Weak Lensing,2601.14559. [12]DESIcollaboration,DESI DR2 results. II. Measurements of baryo...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  8. [8]

    Neutrino mass from Cosmology

    J. Lesgourgues and S. Pastor,Neutrino mass from Cosmology,Adv. High Energy Phys.2012 (2012) 608515 [1212.6154]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  9. [9]

    Constraints on Neutrino Physics from DESI DR2 BAO and DR1 Full Shape

    W. Elbers et al.,Constraints on neutrino physics from DESI DR2 BAO and DR1 full shape, Phys. Rev. D112(2025) 083513 [2503.14744]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  10. [10]

    Chebat et al.,Cosmological neutrino mass: a frequentist overview in light of DESI, 2507.12401

    D. Chebat et al.,Cosmological neutrino mass: a frequentist overview in light of DESI, 2507.12401. – 24 –

    work page arXiv

  11. [11]

    Eisenstein, W

    D.J. Eisenstein, W. Hu and M. Tegmark,Cosmic Complementarity:H 0 andΩ m from Combining Cosmic Microwave Background Experiments and Redshift Surveys,The Astrophysical Journal504(1998) L57

    1998

  12. [12]

    Kaiser,Clustering in real space and in redshift space,MNRAS227(1987) 1

    N. Kaiser,Clustering in real space and in redshift space,MNRAS227(1987) 1

    1987

  13. [13]

    Mellieret al.(Euclid), Astron

    Euclid Collaboration, Y. Mellier, Abdurro’uf, J.A. Acevedo Barroso, A. Ach´ ucarro, J. Adamek et al.,Euclid. I. Overview of the Euclid mission,arXiv e-prints(2024) arXiv:2405.13491

    work page arXiv 2024

  14. [14]

    Wide-Field InfrarRed Survey Telescope-Astrophysics Focused Telescope Assets WFIRST-AFTA 2015 Report

    D. Spergel, N. Gehrels, C. Baltay, D. Bennett, J. Breckinridge, M. Donahue et al.,Wide-Field InfrarRed Survey Telescope-Astrophysics Focused Telescope Assets WFIRST-AFTA 2015 Report,arXiv e-prints(2015) arXiv:1503.03757

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  15. [15]

    Ivezi´ c, S.M

    ˇZ. Ivezi´ c, S.M. Kahn, J.A. Tyson, B. Abel, E. Acosta, R. Allsman et al.,LSST: From Science Drivers to Reference Design and Anticipated Data Products,The Astrophysical Journal873 (2019) 111

    2019

  16. [16]

    M. Levi, C. Bebek, T. Beers, R. Blum, R. Cahn, D. Eisenstein et al.,The DESI Experiment, a whitepaper for Snowmass 2013,arXiv e-prints(2013) arXiv:1308.0847

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  17. [17]

    The DESI Experiment Part I: Science,Targeting, and Survey Design

    DESI Collaboration, A. Aghamousa, J. Aguilar, S. Ahlen, S. Alam, L.E. Allen et al.,The DESI Experiment Part I: Science,Targeting, and Survey Design,arXiv e-prints(2016) arXiv:1611.00036

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  18. [18]

    Collaboration, A.G

    D. Collaboration, A.G. Adame, J. Aguilar, S. Ahlen, S. Alam, G. Aldering et al.,Validation of the Scientific Program for the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument,The Astronomical Journal167(2024) 62

    2024

  19. [19]

    Collaboration, A.G

    D. Collaboration, A.G. Adame, J. Aguilar, S. Ahlen, S. Alam, G. Aldering et al.,The Early Data Release of the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument,The Astronomical Journal168 (2024) 58

    2024

  20. [20]

    The DESI Experiment Part II: Instrument Design

    DESI Collaboration, A. Aghamousa, J. Aguilar, S. Ahlen, S. Alam, L.E. Allen et al.,The DESI Experiment Part II: Instrument Design,arXiv e-prints(2016) arXiv:1611.00037

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  21. [21]

    Collaboration, B

    D. Collaboration, B. Abareshi, J. Aguilar, S. Ahlen, S. Alam, D.M. Alexander et al.,Overview of the Instrumentation for the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument,The Astronomical Journal164(2022) 207

    2022

  22. [22]

    Silber, P

    J.H. Silber, P. Fagrelius, K. Fanning, M. Schubnell, J.N. Aguilar, S. Ahlen et al.,The Robotic Multiobject Focal Plane System of the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI),The Astronomical Journal165(2023) 9

    2023

  23. [23]

    Miller, P

    T.N. Miller, P. Doel, G. Gutierrez, R. Besuner, D. Brooks, G. Gallo et al.,The Optical Corrector for the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument,The Astronomical Journal168 (2024) 95

    2024

  24. [24]

    Schlafly, D

    E.F. Schlafly, D. Kirkby, D.J. Schlegel, A.D. Myers, A. Raichoor, K. Dawson et al.,Survey Operations for the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument,The Astronomical Journal166 (2023) 259

    2023

  25. [25]

    J. Guy, S. Bailey, A. Kremin, S. Alam, D.M. Alexander, C. Allende Prieto et al.,The Spectroscopic Data Processing Pipeline for the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument,The Astronomical Journal165(2023) 144

    2023

  26. [26]

    Poppett, L

    C. Poppett, L. Tyas, J. Aguilar, C. Bebek, D. Bramall, T. Claybaugh et al.,Overview of the Fiber System for the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument,AJ168(2024) 245

    2024

  27. [27]

    Hahn, M.J

    C. Hahn, M.J. Wilson, O. Ruiz-Macias, S. Cole, D.H. Weinberg, J. Moustakas et al.,The DESI Bright Galaxy Survey: Final Target Selection, Design, and Validation,The Astronomical Journal165(2023) 253. – 25 –

    2023

  28. [28]

    R. Zhou, B. Dey, J.A. Newman, D.J. Eisenstein, K. Dawson, S. Bailey et al.,Target Selection and Validation of DESI Luminous Red Galaxies,The Astronomical Journal165(2023) 58

    2023

  29. [29]

    Raichoor, J

    A. Raichoor, J. Moustakas, J.A. Newman, T. Karim, S. Ahlen, S. Alam et al.,Target Selection and Validation of DESI Emission Line Galaxies,The Astronomical Journal165(2023) 126

    2023

  30. [30]

    Chaussidon, C

    E. Chaussidon, C. Y` eche, N. Palanque-Delabrouille, D.M. Alexander, J. Yang, S. Ahlen et al., Target Selection and Validation of DESI Quasars,The Astrophysical Journal944(2023) 107

    2023

  31. [31]

    Myers, J

    A.D. Myers, J. Moustakas, S. Bailey, B.A. Weaver, A.P. Cooper, J.E. Forero-Romero et al., The Target-selection Pipeline for the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument,The Astronomical Journal165(2023) 50

    2023

  32. [32]

    Data Release 1 of the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument

    DESI Collaboration, M.A. Karim, A.G. Adame, D. Aguado, J. Aguilar, S. Ahlen et al.,Data Release 1 of the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument,arXiv e-prints(2025) arXiv:2503.14745 [2503.14745]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  33. [33]

    DESI 2024 III: Baryon Acoustic Oscillations from Galaxies and Quasars

    DESI Collaboration, A.G. Adame, J. Aguilar, S. Ahlen, S. Alam, D.M. Alexander et al., DESI 2024 III: Baryon Acoustic Oscillations from Galaxies and Quasars,arXiv e-prints (2024) arXiv:2404.03000

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  34. [34]

    Adame, J

    A.G. Adame, J. Aguilar, S. Ahlen, S. Alam, D.M. Alexander, M. Alvarez et al.,DESI 2024 VI: cosmological constraints from the measurements of baryon acoustic oscillations,

    2024

  35. [35]

    DESI 2024 V: Full-Shape Galaxy Clustering from Galaxies and Quasars

    A.G. Adame, J. Aguilar, S. Ahlen, S. Alam, D.M. Alexander, M. Alvarez et al.,DESI 2024 IV: Baryon Acoustic Oscillations from the Lyman alpha forest, . [41]DESIcollaboration,DESI 2024 V: Full-Shape galaxy clustering from galaxies and quasars, JCAP09(2025) 008 [2411.12021]. [42]DESIcollaboration,DESI 2024 VII: cosmological constraints from the full-shape mo...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  36. [36]

    Ishak, J

    M. Ishak, J. Pan, R. Calderon, K. Lodha, G. Valogiannis, A. Aviles et al.,Modified Gravity Constraints from the Full Shape Modeling of Clustering Measurements from DESI 2024,arXiv e-prints(2024) arXiv:2411.12026

    work page arXiv 2024

  37. [37]

    Blake and K

    C. Blake and K. Glazebrook,Probing Dark Energy Using Baryonic Oscillations in the Galaxy Power Spectrum as a Cosmological Ruler,The Astrophysical Journal594(2003) 665

    2003

  38. [38]

    Seo and D.J

    H.-J. Seo and D.J. Eisenstein,Probing Dark Energy with Baryonic Acoustic Oscillations from Future Large Galaxy Redshift Surveys,The Astrophysical Journal598(2003) 720

    2003

  39. [39]

    Peebles,The large-scale structure of the universe, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ (1, 1980)

    P.J.E. Peebles,The large-scale structure of the universe, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ (1, 1980)

    1980

  40. [40]

    Liddle and D.H

    A.R. Liddle and D.H. Lyth,Cosmological Inflation and Large-Scale Structure, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2000), DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781139175180

    work page doi:10.1017/cbo9781139175180 2000

  41. [41]

    Koyama,Cosmological tests of modified gravity,Reports on Progress in Physics79(2016) 046902

    K. Koyama,Cosmological tests of modified gravity,Reports on Progress in Physics79(2016) 046902

    2016

  42. [42]

    Joyce, L

    A. Joyce, L. Lombriser and F. Schmidt,Dark Energy Versus Modified Gravity,Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science66(2016) 95

    2016

  43. [43]

    Ishak,Testing general relativity in cosmology,Living Reviews in Relativity22(2019) 1

    M. Ishak,Testing general relativity in cosmology,Living Reviews in Relativity22(2019) 1

    2019

  44. [44]

    S. Alam, C. Arnold, A. Aviles, R. Bean, Y.-C. Cai, M. Cautun et al.,Towards testing the theory of gravity with DESI: summary statistics, model predictions and future simulation requirements,Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2021(2021) 050

    2021

  45. [45]

    Huterer,Growth of cosmic structure,Astronomy and Astrophysics Review31(2023) 2

    D. Huterer,Growth of cosmic structure,Astronomy and Astrophysics Review31(2023) 2

    2023

  46. [46]

    Bernardeau, S

    F. Bernardeau, S. Colombi, E. Gazta˜ naga and R. Scoccimarro,Large-scale structure of the Universe and cosmological perturbation theory,Physics Reports367(2002) 1. – 26 –

    2002

  47. [47]

    Baumann, A

    D. Baumann, A. Nicolis, L. Senatore and M. Zaldarriaga,Cosmological non-linearities as an effective fluid,Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2012(2012) 051

    2012

  48. [48]

    Carrasco, M.P

    J.J.M. Carrasco, M.P. Hertzberg and L. Senatore,The effective field theory of cosmological large scale structures,Journal of High Energy Physics2012(2012) 82

    2012

  49. [49]

    Porto, L

    R.A. Porto, L. Senatore and M. Zaldarriaga,The Lagrangian-space Effective Field Theory of large scale structures,Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2014(2014) 022

    2014

  50. [50]

    Biased Tracers in Redshift Space in the EFT of Large-Scale Structure

    A. Perko, L. Senatore, E. Jennings and R.H. Wechsler,Biased Tracers in Redshift Space in the EFT of Large-Scale Structure,arXiv e-prints(2016) arXiv:1610.09321

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  51. [51]

    Lewandowski, A

    M. Lewandowski, A. Maleknejad and L. Senatore,An effective description of dark matter and dark energy in the mildly non-linear regime,Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics 2017(2017) 038

    2017

  52. [52]

    Ivanov,Effective Field Theory for Large Scale Structure,arXiv e-prints(2022) arXiv:2212.08488

    M.M. Ivanov,Effective Field Theory for Large Scale Structure,arXiv e-prints(2022) arXiv:2212.08488

    work page arXiv 2022

  53. [53]

    Cosmological Non-Linearities as an Effective Fluid

    D. Baumann, A. Nicolis, L. Senatore and M. Zaldarriaga,Cosmological Non-Linearities as an Effective Fluid,JCAP07(2012) 051 [1004.2488]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  54. [54]

    Analytic Prediction of Baryonic Effects from the EFT of Large Scale Structures

    M. Lewandowski, A. Perko and L. Senatore,Analytic Prediction of Baryonic Effects from the EFT of Large Scale Structures,JCAP05(2015) 019 [1412.5049]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  55. [55]

    The Effective Field Theory of Large-Scale Structure in the presence of Massive Neutrinos

    L. Senatore and M. Zaldarriaga,The Effective Field Theory of Large-Scale Structure in the presence of Massive Neutrinos,1707.04698

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  56. [56]

    Aviles, A

    A. Aviles, A. Banerjee, G. Niz and Z. Slepian,Clustering in massive neutrino cosmologies via Eulerian Perturbation Theory,JCAP11(2021) 028 [2106.13771]

    work page arXiv 2021

  57. [57]

    Z. Lu, T. Simon and P. Zhang,Preference for evolving dark energy in light of the galaxy bispectrum,2503.04602

    work page arXiv

  58. [58]

    D’Amico, Y

    G. D’Amico, Y. Donath, L. Senatore and P. Zhang,Limits on clustering and smooth quintessence from the EFTofLSS,JCAP03(2024) 032 [2012.07554]

    work page arXiv 2024

  59. [60]

    Infrared Resummation for Biased Tracers in Redshift Space

    M.M. Ivanov and S. Sibiryakov,Infrared Resummation for Biased Tracers in Redshift Space, JCAP07(2018) 053 [1804.05080]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  60. [61]

    Colas, G

    T. Colas, G. d’Amico, L. Senatore, P. Zhang and F. Beutler,Efficient cosmological analysis of the SDSS/BOSS data from the Effective Field Theory of Large-Scale Structure,Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2020(2020) 001

    2020

  61. [62]

    d’Amico, J

    G. d’Amico, J. Gleyzes, N. Kokron, K. Markovic, L. Senatore, P. Zhang et al.,The cosmological analysis of the SDSS/BOSS data from the Effective Field Theory of Large-Scale Structure,Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2020(2020) 005

    2020

  62. [63]

    Ivanov, M

    M.M. Ivanov, M. Simonovi´ c and M. Zaldarriaga,Cosmological parameters from the BOSS galaxy power spectrum,Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2020(2020) 042

    2020

  63. [64]

    D’Amico, L

    G. D’Amico, L. Senatore and P. Zhang,Limits on wCDM from the EFTofLSS with the PyBird code,Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2021(2021) 006

    2021

  64. [65]

    Niedermann and M.S

    F. Niedermann and M.S. Sloth,New early dark energy is compatible with current LSS data, Physical Review D103(2021) 103537

    2021

  65. [66]

    Kumar, R.C

    S. Kumar, R.C. Nunes and P. Yadav,Updating non-standard neutrinos properties with Planck-CMB data and full-shape analysis of BOSS and eBOSS galaxies,Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2022(2022) 060. – 27 –

    2022

  66. [67]

    Simon, G.F

    T. Simon, G.F. Abell´ an, P. Du, V. Poulin and Y. Tsai,Constraining decaying dark matter with BOSS data and the effective field theory of large-scale structures,Physical Review D106 (2022) 023516

    2022

  67. [68]

    Nunes, S

    R.C. Nunes, S. Vagnozzi, S. Kumar, E. Di Valentino and O. Mena,New tests of dark sector interactions from the full-shape galaxy power spectrum,Physical Review D105(2022) 123506

    2022

  68. [69]

    Philcox and M.M

    O.H.E. Philcox and M.M. Ivanov,BOSS DR12 full-shape cosmology:ΛCDM constraints from the large-scale galaxy power spectrum and bispectrum monopole,Physical Review D105 (2022) 043517

    2022

  69. [70]

    Zhang, G

    P. Zhang, G. D’Amico, L. Senatore, C. Zhao and Y. Cai,BOSS Correlation Function analysis from the Effective Field Theory of Large-Scale Structure,Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2022(2022) 036

    2022

  70. [71]

    S.-F. Chen, Z. Vlah and M. White,A new analysis of galaxy 2-point functions in the BOSS survey, including full-shape information and post-reconstruction BAO,Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2022(2022) 008

    2022

  71. [72]

    Lagu¨ e, J.R

    A. Lagu¨ e, J.R. Bond, R. Hloˇ zek, K.K. Rogers, D.J.E. Marsh and D. Grin,Constraining ultralight axions with galaxy surveys,Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2022 (2022) 049

    2022

  72. [73]

    Simon, P

    T. Simon, P. Zhang, V. Poulin and T.L. Smith,Consistency of effective field theory analyses of the BOSS power spectrum,Physical Review D107(2023) 123530

    2023

  73. [74]

    Carrilho, C

    P. Carrilho, C. Moretti and A. Pourtsidou,Cosmology with the EFTofLSS and BOSS: dark energy constraints and a note on priors,Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics 2023(2023) 028

    2023

  74. [75]

    Sch¨ oneberg, G.F

    N. Sch¨ oneberg, G.F. Abell´ an, T. Simon, A. Bartlett, Y. Patel and T.L. Smith,Comparative analysis of interacting stepped dark radiation,Physical Review D108(2023) 123513

    2023

  75. [76]

    Smith, V

    T.L. Smith, V. Poulin and T. Simon,Assessing the robustness of sound horizon-free determinations of the Hubble constant,Physical Review D108(2023) 103525

    2023

  76. [77]

    Allali, F

    I.J. Allali, F. Rompineve and M.P. Hertzberg,Dark sectors with mass thresholds face cosmological datasets,Physical Review D108(2023) 023527

    2023

  77. [78]

    Simon, P

    T. Simon, P. Zhang and V. Poulin,Cosmological inference from the EFTofLSS: the eBOSS QSO full-shape analysis,Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2023(2023) 041

    2023

  78. [79]

    Simon, P

    T. Simon, P. Zhang, V. Poulin and T.L. Smith,Updated constraints from the effective field theory analysis of the BOSS power spectrum on early dark energy,Physical Review D107 (2023) 063505

    2023

  79. [80]

    D’Amico, Y

    G. D’Amico, Y. Donath, L. Senatore and P. Zhang,Limits on clustering and smooth quintessence from the EFTofLSS,Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2024 (2024) 032

    2024

  80. [81]

    Large-Scale Galaxy Bias

    V. Desjacques, D. Jeong and F. Schmidt,Large-Scale Galaxy Bias,Phys. Rept.733(2018) 1 [1611.09787]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

Showing first 80 references.