Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

BAO cosmology in non-spatially flat background geometry from BOSS+eBOSS and lessons for future surveys

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2402.03427 v2 pith:HMQD2X4X submitted 2024-02-05 astro-ph.CO

classification astro-ph.CO
keywords cosmologycatalogassumptionassumptionscurvaturetemplatethusboss
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

We study the impact of the assumption of a non-flat fiducial cosmology on the measurement, analysis and interpretation of BAO distance variables, along and across the line-of-sight. The assumption about cosmology enters in the choice of the base template, as well as on the transformation of tracer's redshifts into distances (the catalog cosmology): here we focus on the curvature assumption, separately and jointly, on both. We employ BOSS and eBOSS publicly available data and show that for the statistical precision of this data set, distance measures and thus cosmological inference are robust to assumptions about curvature both of the template and the catalog. Thus the usual assumptions of flat fiducial cosmologies (but also assumptions of non-flat cosmologies) do not produce any detectable systematic effects. For forthcoming large-volume surveys, however, small but appreciable residual systematic shifts can be generated which may require some care. These are mostly driven by the choice of catalog cosmology if it is significantly different from true cosmology. In particular, the catalog (and template) cosmology should be chosen, possibly iteratively, in such a way that the recovered BAO scaling variables are sufficiently close to unity. At this level of precision, however, other previously overlooked effects become relevant, such as a mismatch between the sound horizon as seen in the BAO and the actual sound horizon in the early Universe. If unaccounted for, such effect may be misinterpreted as cosmological and thus bias the curvature (and cosmology) constraints. We present best practices to avoid this.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. The BAO scale -- how standard is the standard ruler?

    astro-ph.CO 2026-03 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    The BAO sound-horizon scale extracted from simulated galaxy clustering differs from the standard integral definition enough to bias DESI Year-5-level cosmological constraints on Ω_m and N_eff unless corrected.

  2. BAO miscalibration cannot rescue late-time solutions to the Hubble tension

    astro-ph.CO 2025-10 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    Even after rescaling BAO data to prefer H0≈73 km/s/Mpc, none of six tested late-time dark-energy models can resolve the Hubble tension once unanchored SNeIa and CMB geometry are included.

Pith tools