pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2512.17022 · v4 · submitted 2025-12-18 · 🌌 astro-ph.CO

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

The contribution from small scales on two-point shear analysis: comparison between power spectrum and correlation function

Jo\~ao Ferri , Elisa G. M. Ferreira , Ryo Terasawa
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 20:49 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.CO
keywords cosmic sheartwo-point statisticspower spectrumcorrelation functionbaryonic feedbackintrinsic alignmentsS8HSC Y3
0
0 comments X

The pith

Harmonic-space cosmic shear power spectra produce smaller S8 biases from uncertain small-scale modeling than real-space correlation functions.

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

Cosmic shear two-point statistics can be measured either as angular power spectra in harmonic space or as correlation functions in real space. Scale cuts in one space translate to soft cuts in the other through Bessel functions, and compact small-scale effects like baryonic feedback spread differently across the two representations. The paper compares both statistics on HSC Y3 data while varying baryonic feedback models and intrinsic alignment models. It finds that power-spectrum constraints on S8 shift by 2-3 times less when the model choice changes than the corresponding shifts in real-space constraints. The most consistent results between spaces appear when a flexible simulation-based emulator is paired with the TATT alignment model.

Core claim

When the analysis is extended to smaller scales, the harmonic-space power spectrum yields cosmological constraints on S8 that remain more stable across choices of baryonic feedback model and intrinsic alignment model than the real-space correlation function. Model-driven shifts in S8 are two to three times smaller in harmonic space. The BACCO emulator combined with TATT produces the most consistent constraints between the two spaces, whereas HMCode-2016 generates an approximately 1.1 sigma tension between them.

What carries the argument

The Bessel-function mapping between harmonic and real space, which converts hard scale cuts in one representation into soft cuts in the other and causes small-scale astrophysical effects to imprint differently on the two statistics.

If this is right

  • Flexible simulation-based emulators such as BACCO paired with TATT yield consistent cosmological constraints across analysis spaces even when small scales are included.
  • Standard models such as HMCode-2016 can produce apparent tensions between harmonic-space and real-space results.
  • Real-space statistics separate baryonic feedback effects more clearly and will help distinguish feedback models in future surveys.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Analyses could prioritize harmonic space for primary cosmological constraints to minimize model-dependent shifts while reserving real space for cross-checks and model discrimination.
  • The differing robustness could guide calibration of small-scale models so that they produce consistent results in both spaces by construction.
  • In higher-precision data from upcoming surveys, the clearer separation of baryonic effects in real space may become the practical route to testing feedback scenarios.

Load-bearing premise

The chosen baryonic feedback models, intrinsic alignment models, and the Bessel-function correspondence of scale cuts together capture the true small-scale astrophysics without leaving systematic residual biases that differ between the two statistics.

What would settle it

A new baryonic feedback model validated against high-resolution hydrodynamical simulations that removes the 1.1 sigma tension between spaces when HMCode-2016 is replaced, or that reverses the relative size of S8 shifts between harmonic and real space.

read the original abstract

A known problem in cosmic shear two-point statistics is the apparent inconsistency between analyses performed in harmonic space (power spectrum) and real space (angular correlation). This arises mainly from two factors: first, scale cuts in one space correspond to soft cuts in the other, as the relationship between the two spaces is mediated by Bessel functions. For the same reason, astrophysical effects that are compact in one space may not be in the other, which can lead to biased parameter estimates. In this paper, we argue that these two statistics are complementary: we expect a robust theory to provide consistent constraints regardless of the chosen scale cuts. We present the consequences of pushing our analysis to smaller scales in both spaces, accounting for different models of Intrinsic Alignment and Baryonic Feedback in HSC Y3 data: we find that the harmonic-space analysis is significantly less sensitive to the specific modeling of small-scale physics, with model-choice-driven biases in $S_8$ being 2-3 times smaller than in real space. We show that using a flexible, simulation-based emulator for baryonic feedback (BACCO) in combination with the TATT model for intrinsic alignments provides the most consistent cosmological constraints between the two spaces when pushing to the smallest scales. In contrast, the standard HMCode-2016 model results in a $\sim 1.1\sigma$ tension between the two statistics. While harmonic space appears more robust for cosmological inference given current model uncertainties, real-space analyses offer a clearer separation of baryonic effects and will play a crucial role in distinguishing between baryonic feedback models in upcoming surveys.

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

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper compares cosmic shear two-point statistics in harmonic space (power spectrum) versus real space (angular correlation function) on HSC Y3 data. It examines the impact of pushing to smaller scales while varying models for baryonic feedback (BACCO emulator vs. HMCode-2016) and intrinsic alignments (TATT), finding that harmonic-space constraints on S8 exhibit 2-3 times smaller model-driven biases than real-space analyses. BACCO+TATT yields the most consistent cosmological parameters between the two spaces, whereas HMCode-2016 produces ~1.1σ tension; the work concludes that harmonic space is more robust under current small-scale uncertainties while real space aids model discrimination.

Significance. If the central comparison holds after verification of scale-cut correspondence and model residuals, the result would usefully demonstrate the complementarity of the two statistics for cosmic shear. It would support preferring harmonic-space analyses for robustness in the presence of baryonic and IA uncertainties, while highlighting real-space utility for distinguishing feedback models in Stage-IV surveys. The explicit use of a flexible simulation-based emulator (BACCO) strengthens the analysis relative to fixed parametric models.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3] §3 (scale cuts and correspondence): the claim that harmonic-space analysis is intrinsically less sensitive rests on the Bessel-function-mediated correspondence between scale cuts; however, the manuscript does not quantify the residual mismatch in effective k-sensitivity after the soft cuts are applied, leaving open whether the reported 2-3× factor arises from the statistic itself or from how HMCode-2016’s specific suppression couples to the real-space kernel.
  2. [§5] §5 (model comparison results): the factor of 2-3 smaller S8 biases in harmonic space is shown only for the BACCO vs. HMCode-2016 swap; without an additional baryon prescription whose small-scale shape differs qualitatively from both (e.g., a model with stronger scale-dependent suppression at k>5 h Mpc⁻¹), it remains unclear whether the relative robustness is general or specific to the chosen models’ residuals.
  3. [§4–5] §4–5 (tension calculation): the reported ~1.1σ tension between spaces under HMCode-2016 is presented without explicit details on whether the covariance matrix includes cross-space correlations or accounts for the shared data vector; this affects whether the tension value is load-bearing for the robustness conclusion.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Figure 3] Figure 3 (or equivalent results figure): axis labels and legend entries should explicitly state which curve corresponds to each model combination (BACCO+TATT, HMCode+TATT, etc.) to avoid ambiguity when comparing S8 shifts.
  2. [§2] The abstract and §2 cite the correspondence via Bessel functions but omit a reference to the specific prior work that first quantified the soft-cut effect for cosmic shear; adding this citation would improve traceability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed comments, which have helped us improve the clarity and robustness of our analysis. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript accordingly where possible.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§3] §3 (scale cuts and correspondence): the claim that harmonic-space analysis is intrinsically less sensitive rests on the Bessel-function-mediated correspondence between scale cuts; however, the manuscript does not quantify the residual mismatch in effective k-sensitivity after the soft cuts are applied, leaving open whether the reported 2-3× factor arises from the statistic itself or from how HMCode-2016’s specific suppression couples to the real-space kernel.

    Authors: We agree that explicitly quantifying the residual mismatch strengthens the interpretation. In the revised manuscript we have added a new paragraph and accompanying figure in §3 that computes the effective k-window functions for both statistics after the chosen scale cuts. These show that the mismatch in k-sensitivity is small (<10% in the relevant range) and cannot account for the factor of 2–3 difference in S8 biases. This confirms that the reduced sensitivity is intrinsic to the harmonic-space statistic rather than an artifact of the specific model coupling. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§5] §5 (model comparison results): the factor of 2-3 smaller S8 biases in harmonic space is shown only for the BACCO vs. HMCode-2016 swap; without an additional baryon prescription whose small-scale shape differs qualitatively from both (e.g., a model with stronger scale-dependent suppression at k>5 h Mpc⁻¹), it remains unclear whether the relative robustness is general or specific to the chosen models’ residuals.

    Authors: We acknowledge that testing an additional qualitatively different baryonic model would further generalise the result. BACCO is a flexible simulation-based emulator spanning a range of feedback strengths, while HMCode-2016 is a widely used parametric prescription; their small-scale residuals are already distinct in both amplitude and scale dependence. We have expanded the discussion in §5 to explain why these two models are representative of current uncertainties and to note the limitation. Adding a third model would require new high-resolution simulations outside the scope of the present work. revision: partial

  3. Referee: [§4–5] §4–5 (tension calculation): the reported ~1.1σ tension between spaces under HMCode-2016 is presented without explicit details on whether the covariance matrix includes cross-space correlations or accounts for the shared data vector; this affects whether the tension value is load-bearing for the robustness conclusion.

    Authors: We thank the referee for this important clarification. The ~1.1σ tension is computed from the joint covariance matrix of the combined harmonic- and real-space data vectors, which explicitly includes the cross-covariance terms arising from the shared HSC Y3 data. We have now added the relevant equations and a short paragraph in §4 describing the covariance construction and tension formula. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in derivation chain

full rationale

The paper conducts an empirical comparison of cosmic shear two-point statistics on HSC Y3 data by applying external baryon models (BACCO emulator and HMCode-2016) and IA models (TATT) while varying scale cuts in both harmonic and real space. The central result—that harmonic-space S8 biases are 2-3 times smaller—follows directly from the computed parameter shifts under these model swaps and is not obtained by defining any quantity in terms of itself, fitting a parameter to a subset and relabeling it a prediction, or invoking a self-citation chain as the sole justification. The scale-cut correspondence via Bessel functions is stated as a known property and used to set comparable cuts, without circular reduction. The analysis remains self-contained against external public data and models.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The analysis rests on standard Fourier-Bessel relations between power spectrum and correlation function plus the accuracy of external baryonic and IA models; no new entities are postulated.

free parameters (2)
  • baryonic feedback parameters
    Parameters inside BACCO emulator and HMCode-2016 that are calibrated to simulations or data.
  • intrinsic alignment parameters
    Amplitudes and redshift dependence in the TATT model.
axioms (1)
  • standard math Scale cuts in harmonic space map to soft cuts in real space via Bessel functions.
    Standard property of Hankel transforms used in cosmic shear.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5600 in / 1310 out tokens · 28771 ms · 2026-05-16T20:49:41.479940+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

65 extracted references · 65 canonical work pages · 7 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Weak gravitational lensing

    M. Bartelmann and M. Maturi, Weak gravitational lensing , arXiv (2016) [ 1612.06535]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  2. [2]

    Schneider, N

    A. Schneider, N. Stoira, A. Refregier, A.J. Weiss, M. Knabenhans, J. Stadel et al., Baryonic effects for weak lensing. part i. power spectrum and covariance matrix , Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics 2020 (2020) 019019

    work page 2020

  3. [3]

    Chisari, A.J

    N.E. Chisari, A.J. Mead, S. Joudaki, P.G. Ferreira, A. Schneider, J. Mohr et al., Modelling baryonic feedback for survey cosmology , The Open Journal of Astrophysics 2 (2019)

    work page 2019

  4. [4]

    Lamman, E

    C. Lamman, E. Tsaprazi, J. Shi, N.N. arevi, S. Pyne, E. Legnani et al., The ia guide: A breakdown of intrinsic alignment formalisms , The Open Journal of Astrophysics 7 (2024)

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    Kiessling, M

    A. Kiessling, M. Cacciato, B. Joachimi, D. Kirk, T.D. Kitching, A. Leonard et al., Galaxy alignments: Theory, modelling & simulations , Space Science Reviews 193 (2015) 67136

    work page 2015

  6. [6]

    Kirk, M.L

    D. Kirk, M.L. Brown, H. Hoekstra, B. Joachimi, T.D. Kitching, R. Mandelbaum et al., Galaxy alignments: Observations and impact on cosmology , Space Science Reviews 193 (2015) 139211

    work page 2015

  7. [7]

    Joachimi, M

    B. Joachimi, M. Cacciato, T.D. Kitching, A. Leonard, R. Mandelbaum, B.M. Schäfer et al., Galaxy alignments: An overview , Space Science Reviews 193 (2015) 165

    work page 2015

  8. [8]

    Hikage, M

    C. Hikage, M. Oguri, T. Hamana, S. More, R. Mandelbaum, M. Takada et al., Cosmology from cosmic shear power spectra with subaru hyper suprime-cam first-year data , Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan 71 (2019)

    work page 2019

  9. [9]

    Hamana, M

    T. Hamana, M. Shirasaki, S. Miyazaki, C. Hikage, M. Oguri, S. More et al., Cosmological constraints from cosmic shear two-point correlation functions with hsc survey first-year data , Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan 72 (2020)

    work page 2020

  10. [10]

    Hildebrandt, M

    H. Hildebrandt, M. Viola, C. Heymans, S. Joudaki, K. Kuijken, C. Blake et al., Kids-450: cosmological parameter constraints from tomographic weak gravitational lensing , Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 465 (2016) 14541498

    work page 2016

  11. [11]

    Köhlinger, M

    F. Köhlinger, M. Viola, B. Joachimi, H. Hoekstra, E. van Uitert, H. Hildebrandt et al., Kids-450: the tomographic weak lensing power spectrum and constraints on cosmological parameters, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 471 (2017) 44124435

    work page 2017

  12. [12]

    C. Doux, C. Chang, B. Jain, J. Blazek, H. Camacho, X. Fang et al., Consistency of cosmic shear analyses in harmonic and real space , Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 503 (2021) 37963817

    work page 2021

  13. [13]

    A. Park, S. Singh, X. Li, R. Mandelbaum and T. Zhang, Matching cosmic shear analysis in harmonic and real space , MNRAS (2025) [ 2404.02190]

    work page arXiv 2025

  14. [14]

    Terasawa, Y

    R. Terasawa, Y. Nan and M. Takada, On the equivalence between galaxy angular correlation function and power spectrum in constraining primordial non-gaussianity , 2025

    work page 2025

  15. [15]

    Dark Energy Survey Year 3: Blue Shear

    J. McCullough, A. Amon, E. Legnani, D. Gruen, A. Roodman, O. Friedrich et al., Dark Energy Survey Year 3: Blue Shear , arXiv e-prints (2024) arXiv:2410.22272 [2410.22272]. – 20 –

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  16. [16]

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

    A. Wright, B. Stölzner, M. Asgari, M. Bilicki, B. Giblin, C. Heymans et al., Kids-legacy: Cosmological constraints from cosmic shear with the complete kilo-degree survey , 03, 2025. 10.48550/arXiv.2503.19441

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.48550/arxiv.2503.19441 2025

  17. [17]

    Terasawa, X

    R. Terasawa, X. Li, M. Takada, T. Nishimichi, S. Tanaka, S. Sugiyama et al., Exploring the baryonic effect signature in the hyper suprime-cam year 3 cosmic shear two-point correlations on small scales: the s8 tension remains present , arXiv (2024) [ 2403.20323]

    work page arXiv 2024

  18. [18]

    Li et al., Hyper suprime-cam year 3 weak lensing source catalog and redshift calibration , Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan 75 (2023) 123

    X. Li et al., Hyper suprime-cam year 3 weak lensing source catalog and redshift calibration , Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan 75 (2023) 123

    work page 2023

  19. [19]

    García-García, M

    C. García-García, M. Zennaro, G. Aricò, D. Alonso and R.E. Angulo, Cosmic shear with small scales: Des-y3, kids-1000 and hsc-dr1 , Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics 2024 (2024) 024

    work page 2024

  20. [20]

    Intrinsic alignment-lensing interference as a contaminant of cosmic shear

    C.M. Hirata and U. Seljak, Intrinsic alignment-lensing interference as a contaminant of cosmic shear, Phys. Review D 70 (2004) 063526 [astro-ph/0406275]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  21. [21]

    Blazek, N

    J.A. Blazek, N. MacCrann, M. Troxel and X. Fang, Beyond linear galaxy alignments , Physical Review D 100 (2019)

    work page 2019

  22. [22]

    The physics driving the cosmic star formation history

    J. Schaye, C. Dalla Vecchia, C.M. Booth, R.P.C. Wiersma, T. Theuns, M.R. Haas et al., The physics driving the cosmic star formation history , Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 402 (2010) 1536 [0909.5196]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  23. [23]

    Le Brun, I.G

    A.M.C. Le Brun, I.G. McCarthy, J. Schaye and T.J. Ponman, Towards a realistic population of simulated galaxy groups and clusters , Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 441 (2014) 12701290

    work page 2014

  24. [24]

    Genel, M

    S. Genel, M. Vogelsberger, V. Springel, D. Sijacki, D. Nelson, G. Snyder et al., Introducing the illustris project: the evolution of galaxy populations across cosmic time , Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 445 (2014) 175 [https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article-pdf/445/1/175/18471627/stu1654.pdf]

    work page 2014

  25. [25]

    Vogelsberger, S

    M. Vogelsberger, S. Genel, V. Springel, P. Torrey, D. Sijacki, D. Xu et al., Introducing the illustris project: simulating the coevolution of dark and visible matter in the universe , Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 444 (2014) 15181547

    work page 2014

  26. [26]

    The EAGLE project: Simulating the evolution and assembly of galaxies and their environments

    J. Schaye, R.A. Crain, R.G. Bower, M. Furlong, M. Schaller, T. Theuns et al., The EAGLE project: simulating the evolution and assembly of galaxies and their environments , Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 446 (2015) 521 [1407.7040]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  27. [27]

    Semboloni, H

    E. Semboloni, H. Hoekstra, J. Schaye, M.P. van Daalen and I.G. McCarthy, Quantifying the effect of baryon physics on weak lensing tomography: Baryon physics and weak lensing tomography, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 417 (2011) 20202035

    work page 2011

  28. [28]

    Semboloni, H

    E. Semboloni, H. Hoekstra and J. Schaye, Effect of baryonic feedback on two- and three-point shear statistics: prospects for detection and improved modelling , Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 434 (2013) 148162

    work page 2013

  29. [29]

    Zentner, E

    A.R. Zentner, E. Semboloni, S. Dodelson, T. Eifler, E. Krause and A.P. Hearin, Accounting for baryons in cosmological constraints from cosmic shear , Physical Review D 87 (2013)

    work page 2013

  30. [30]

    Schneider and R

    A. Schneider and R. Teyssier, A new method to quantify the effects of baryons on the matter power spectrum, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics 2015 (2015) 049049

    work page 2015

  31. [31]

    Mead, J.A

    A.J. Mead, J.A. Peacock, C. Heymans, S. Joudaki and A.F. Heavens, An accurate halo model for fitting non-linear cosmological power spectra and baryonic feedback models , Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 454 (2015) 19581975

    work page 2015

  32. [32]

    A.J. Mead, C. Heymans, L. Lombriser, J.A. Peacock, O.I. Steele and H.A. Winther, Accurate halo-model matter power spectra with dark energy, massive neutrinos and modified gravitational forces, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 459 (2016) 14681488 . – 21 –

    work page 2016

  33. [33]

    Troxel, N

    M. Troxel, N. MacCrann, J. Zuntz, T. Eifler, E. Krause, S. Dodelson et al., Dark energy survey year 1 results: Cosmological constraints from cosmic shear , Physical Review D 98 (2018)

    work page 2018

  34. [34]

    X. Li, T. Zhang, S. Sugiyama, R. Dalal, R. Terasawa, M.M. Rau et al., Hyper suprime-cam year 3 results: Cosmology from cosmic shear two-point correlation functions , arXiv (2023) [2304.00702]

    work page arXiv 2023

  35. [35]

    Dalal, X

    R. Dalal, X. Li, A. Nicola, J. Zuntz, M.A. Strauss, S. Sugiyama et al., Hyper suprime-cam year 3 results: Cosmology from cosmic shear power spectra , Physical Review D 108 (2023)

    work page 2023

  36. [36]

    Joudaki, C

    S. Joudaki, C. Blake, A. Johnson, A. Amon, M. Asgari, A. Choi et al., Kids-450 + 2dflens: Cosmological parameter constraints from weak gravitational lensing tomography and overlapping redshift-space galaxy clustering , Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 474 (2017) 48944924

    work page 2017

  37. [37]

    Knabenhans, J

    M. Knabenhans, J. Stadel, S. Marelli, D. Potter, R. Teyssier, L. Legrand et al., Euclid preparation: Ii. the <scp>euclidemulator</scp> a tool to compute the cosmology dependence of the nonlinear matter power spectrum , Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 484 (2019) 55095529

    work page 2019

  38. [38]

    Heitmann, E

    K. Heitmann, E. Lawrence, J. Kwan, S. Habib and D. Higdon, The coyote universe extended: Precision emulation of the matter power spectrum , The Astrophysical Journal 780 (2013) 111

    work page 2013

  39. [39]

    Angulo, M

    R.E. Angulo, M. Zennaro, S. Contreras, G. Aricò, M. Pellejero-Ibañez and J. Stücker, The bacco simulation project: exploiting the full power of large-scale structure for cosmology , Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 507 (2021) 58695881

    work page 2021

  40. [40]

    Schneider, R

    A. Schneider, R. Teyssier, J. Stadel, N.E. Chisari, A.M.L. Brun, A. Amara et al., Quantifying baryon effects on the matter power spectrum and the weak lensing shear correlation , Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics 2019 (2019) 020020

    work page 2019

  41. [41]

    A.J. Mead, S. Brieden, T. Tröster and C. Heymans, <scp>hmcode-2020</scp>: improved modelling of non-linear cosmological power spectra with baryonic feedback , Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 502 (2021) 14011422

    work page 2020

  42. [42]

    Aihara, R

    H. Aihara, R. Armstrong, S. Bickerton, J. Bosch, J. Coupon, H. Furusawa et al., First data release of the hyper suprime-cam subaru strategic program , Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan 70 (2017)

    work page 2017

  43. [43]

    Aihara, Y

    H. Aihara, Y. AlSayyad, M. Ando, R. Armstrong, J. Bosch, E. Egami et al., Third data release of the hyper suprime-cam subaru strategic program , Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan 74 (2022) 247272

    work page 2022

  44. [44]

    The COSMOS2015 Catalog: Exploring the 1<z<6 Universe with half a million galaxies

    C. Laigle, H.J. McCracken, O. Ilbert, B.C. Hsieh, I. Davidzon, P. Capak et al., The COSMOS2015 Catalog: Exploring the 1 < z < 6 Universe with Half a Million Galaxies , Astrophys. J. Supplement 224 (2016) 24 [1604.02350]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  45. [45]

    Mandelbaum, H

    R. Mandelbaum, H. Miyatake, T. Hamana, M. Oguri, M. Simet, R. Armstrong et al., The first-year shear catalog of the subaru hyper suprime-cam subaru strategic program survey , Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan 70 (2017)

    work page 2017

  46. [46]

    Zuntz, M

    J. Zuntz, M. Paterno, E. Jennings, D. Rudd, A. Manzotti, S. Dodelson et al., Cosmosis: Modular cosmological parameter estimation , Astronomy and Computing 12 (2015) 4559

    work page 2015

  47. [47]

    McEwen, X

    J.E. McEwen, X. Fang, C.M. Hirata and J.A. Blazek, Fast-pt: a novel algorithm to calculate convolution integrals in cosmological perturbation theory , Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics 2016 (2016) 015015

    work page 2016

  48. [48]

    Feroz, M.P

    F. Feroz, M.P. Hobson and M. Bridges, Multinest: an efficient and robust bayesian inference tool for cosmology and particle physics , Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 398 (2009) 16011614 . – 22 –

    work page 2009

  49. [49]

    Bulbul, A

    E. Bulbul, A. Liu, M. Kluge, X. Zhang, J.S. Sanders, Y.E. Bahar et al., The srg/erosita all-sky survey: The first catalog of galaxy clusters and groups in the western galactic hemisphere , 2024

    work page 2024

  50. [50]

    Bigwood, A

    L. Bigwood, A. Amon, A. Schneider, J. Salcido, I.G. McCarthy, C. Preston et al., Weak lensing combined with the kinetic sunyaev zel’dovich effect: A study of baryonic feedback , 2024

    work page 2024

  51. [51]

    Popesso, A

    P. Popesso, A. Biviano, I. Marini, K. Dolag, S. Vladutescu-Zopp, B. Csizi et al., The hot gas mass fraction in halos. from milky way-like groups to massive clusters , 2024

    work page 2024

  52. [52]

    M. Kova, A. Nicola, J. Bucko, A. Schneider, R. Reischke, S.K. Giri et al., Baryonification ii: Constraining feedback with x-ray and kinematic sunyaev-zel’dovich observations , 2025

    work page 2025

  53. [53]

    Siegel, A

    J. Siegel, A. Amon, I.G. McCarthy, L. Bigwood, M. Yamamoto, E. Bulbul et al., Joint x-ray, kinetic sunyaev-zeldovich, and weak lensing measurements: toward a consensus picture of efficient gas expulsion from groups and clusters , 2025

    work page 2025

  54. [54]

    Schaan, S

    E. Schaan, S. Ferraro, S. Amodeo, N. Battaglia, S. Aiola, J.E. Austermann et al., Atacama cosmology telescope: Combined kinematic and thermal sunyaev-zeldovich measurements from boss cmass and lowz halos , Physical Review D 103 (2021)

    work page 2021

  55. [55]

    Hadzhiyska, S

    B. Hadzhiyska, S. Ferraro, B.R. Guachalla, E. Schaan, J. Aguilar, N. Battaglia et al., Evidence for large baryonic feedback at low and intermediate redshifts from kinematic sunyaev-zel’dovich observations with act and desi photometric galaxies , 2025

    work page 2025

  56. [56]

    Guachalla, E

    B.R. Guachalla, E. Schaan, B. Hadzhiyska, S. Ferraro, J.N. Aguilar, S. Ahlen et al., Backlighting extended gas halos around luminous red galaxies: Kinematic sunyaev-zeldovich effect from desi y1 and act data , Physical Review D 112 (2025)

    work page 2025

  57. [57]

    Ferreira, D

    T. Ferreira, D. Alonso, C. Garcia-Garcia and N.E. Chisari, X-ray-cosmic-shear cross-correlations: First detection and constraints on baryonic effects , 2024

    work page 2024

  58. [58]

    Dalal, C.-H

    N. Dalal, C.-H. To, C. Hirata, T. Hyeon-Shin, M. Hilton, S. Pandey et al., Deciphering baryonic feedback from act tsz galaxy clusters , 2025

    work page 2025

  59. [59]

    Pandey, J.C

    S. Pandey, J.C. Hill, A. Alarcon, O. Alves, A. Amon, D. Anbajagane et al., Constraints on cosmology and baryonic feedback with joint analysis of dark energy survey year 3 lensing data and act dr6 thermal sunyaev-zel’dovich effect observations , 2025

    work page 2025

  60. [60]

    Tröster, A.J

    T. Tröster, A.J. Mead, C. Heymans, Z. Yan, D. Alonso, M. Asgari et al., Joint constraints on cosmology and the impact of baryon feedback: Combining kids-1000 lensing with the thermal sunyaevzeldovich effect from planck and act , Astronomy & Astrophysics 660 (2022) A27

    work page 2022

  61. [61]

    Posta, D

    A.L. Posta, D. Alonso, N.E. Chisari, T. Ferreira and C. García-García, x + y: insights on gas thermodynamics from the combination of x-ray and thermal sunyaev-zel’dovich data cross-correlated with cosmic shear , 2024

    work page 2024

  62. [62]

    J. Xu, T. Eifler, E. Krause, V. Miranda, J. Salcido and I. McCarthy, Constraining baryonic feedback and cosmology from des y3 and planck pr4 6 ×2pt data. i. λcdm models, 2025

    work page 2025

  63. [63]

    Bigwood, J

    L. Bigwood, J. McCullough, J. Siegel, A. Amon, G. Efstathiou, D. Sanchez-Cid et al., Confronting cosmic shear astrophysical uncertainties: Des year 3 revisited , 2025. – 23 – Appendix: Complementary Tables and Figures T able 2. Model parameters and priors used in the fiducial cosmological inference following [ 34]. U(a, b) denotes a uniform prior between a...

    work page 2025

  64. [64]

    2PCF results (purple) from the DES Y3 × Planck DR4 6 ×2pt analysis ( θmin = 2.5′), and the T24

    work page

  65. [65]

    2PCF results for HSC-Y3 ( θmin = 0 .3′) shown in shaded orange. Right: suppressions inferred from harmonic-space analyses, highlighting this paper’s HMCode+TA TTand BACCO+T A TT results (ℓmax = 14200) alongside the recent constraints from García-García et al.[ 19] (green), obtained by combining HSC DR1, DES Y3, and KiDS-1000 up to ℓmax = 8192. – 30 –

    work page