Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 286 references

Combining SKA-Mid continuum and HI tracers in an N×2pt analysis is forecast to reach roughly one-percent precision on ΛCDM parameters.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · grok-4.5

2026-07-14 05:57 UTC pith:3PROBFT2

load-bearing objection Solid, transparent Fisher forecast for SKA-Mid AA4 N imes2pt that delivers the advertised ~1% ΛCDM numbers under clearly flagged optimistic non-linear modelling; useful planning material, not a methodological advance. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.11254 v1 pith:3PROBFT2 submitted 2026-07-13 astro-ph.CO

Cosmology from Nx2pt Analyses of SKAO Wide-Area Surveys

Ian Harrison , Ziad Sakr , Giulia Piccirilli , Chandra Shekhar Saraf , Jacobo Asorey , Benedict Bahr-Kalus , Jos\'e Fonseca , Marina Migliaccio
show 2 more authors
David Parkinson Cora Uhlemann
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.CO PACS 98.80.Es98.65.Dx95.36.+x95.35.+d
keywords SKAON×2ptweak lensingHI intensity mappinggalaxy clusteringcosmological forecastsΛCDMdynamical dark energy
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper forecasts how well cosmology can be measured by combining several radio large-scale-structure probes from the full SKA-Mid AA4 array. Continuum galaxies supply clustering, weak lensing and galaxy–galaxy lensing; neutral-hydrogen intensity maps and spectroscopic HI galaxies supply additional clustering. Because the probes respond differently to redshift and scale, their joint auto- and cross-spectra break degeneracies that any single tracer leaves intact. Under the assumed survey specifications the combination yields roughly one-percent errors on the main ΛCDM parameters, with useful though looser constraints on dynamical dark energy, the sum of neutrino masses and spatial curvature. The same multi-tracer approach also self-calibrates nuisance quantities such as galaxy bias and intrinsic alignments, giving an independent low-redshift check on the cosmological model.

Core claim

An N×2pt analysis that jointly uses SKA-Mid AA4 continuum galaxy clustering, weak lensing and galaxy–galaxy lensing together with HI intensity mapping and HI galaxy clustering is forecast to deliver approximately one-percent precision on the principal ΛCDM parameters, with the combination of continuum and HI probes supplying the decisive degeneracy breaking.

What carries the argument

N×2pt analysis: the set of auto- and cross-angular power spectra among continuum clustering, weak lensing, galaxy–galaxy lensing, HI intensity maps and HI galaxies, analysed jointly so that shared cosmology is constrained while tracer-specific nuisances are marginalised.

Load-bearing premise

The forecasts treat non-linear clustering scales with only linear galaxy bias and a simple Kaiser plus free damping model, which the authors themselves call mildly optimistic; realistic extra non-linear bias parameters would loosen the quoted errors.

What would settle it

Once AA4 continuum and HI wide-area surveys exist, measure the actual joint parameter covariance from the real N×2pt data vector; if the realised uncertainties on Ωm and σ8 substantially exceed the forecast one-percent level after the same cuts and marginalisations, the claim fails.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • SKA-Mid AA4 can sit between Stage-III and Stage-IV optical surveys as an independent radio verification of the cosmological model.
  • Dynamical dark-energy (w0,wa), neutrino-mass and curvature constraints improve markedly once continuum and HI probes are combined rather than used alone.
  • Internal cross-correlations calibrate radio-specific nuisances (bias, redshift distributions, intrinsic alignments) without sole reliance on external optical or CMB data.
  • Weak-lensing detection itself requires the long baselines of the full AA4 array; without it the continuum contribution collapses to bias-dominated clustering.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same multi-tracer framework could later incorporate bispectrum or reconstructed foreground-cleaned HI modes that the paper deliberately omits, potentially recovering the missing cross-spectra with continuum galaxies.
  • Because the continuum and HI windows peak at different redshifts, the joint data vector is especially sensitive to any redshift-dependent departure from ΛCDM growth that optical surveys alone might miss.
  • If non-linear bias modelling proves more costly than assumed, the paper’s hierarchy of probes still supplies a clear prioritisation: continuum weak lensing remains the highest-value AA4 deliverable for cosmology.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents Fisher-matrix forecasts for N imes2pt cosmological analyses with SKA-Mid AA4, combining continuum galaxy clustering, weak lensing and galaxy–galaxy lensing (3 imes2pt) with HI intensity mapping and HI spectroscopic galaxy clustering into a 5 imes2pt set. Survey specifications follow the Medium-Deep Band 2 and Wide Band 1 designs of Bacon et al. (2020). Under linear bias, NLA intrinsic alignments, and simple Kaiser+FoG/BAO-damping RSD modelling, the combined SKAO probes alone are forecast to reach ~1% precision on ΛCDM parameters (Table 2: 1.59% on Ωm, 0.77% on σ8). Extensions to w0waCDM, ΛCDM+Mν and ΛCDM+Ωk are also explored, together with a preliminary SNR forecast for continuum–CMB lensing cross-correlations. Planck 2018 primary CMB and lensing are added as external data.

Significance. If the modelling assumptions hold, the work supplies a concrete, multi-probe forecast that places SKA-Mid AA4 between Stage-III and Stage-IV optical surveys and quantifies the value of combining continuum and HI tracers for dark energy, neutrino mass and curvature. The explicit nuisance-parameter lists, scale cuts and comparison to Euclid (Blanchard et al. 2020) make the results useful for survey planning and for prioritising AA4 continuum weak lensing. The forecasts are pure and free of circularity; the authors themselves flag the optimistic non-linear treatment, which keeps the claim properly conditional.

major comments (2)
  1. Sections 3.1 and 3.3 (and the abstract claim of ~1% precision) rest on linear galaxy bias remaining adequate to ℓ=1000 and k=0.15 h Mpc⁻¹, with only free FoG/BAO-damping parameters and no additional non-linear bias terms. The authors correctly label this “mildly optimistic.” Because the Table 2 “All (Cont.+HI)” row is the central result, a short sensitivity test (or explicit statement of how the errors degrade under a more conservative non-linear bias model) is needed so that the ~1% claim is not overstated.
  2. Section 4: the “All” combination is restricted to a 5×2pt set; cross-spectra between HI intensity maps and continuum galaxies (and between HI IM and HI galaxies) are omitted on foreground and covariance grounds. While the text acknowledges this choice, the abstract and conclusions still present the result as a full N×2pt analysis. Clarifying the quantitative impact of the omitted cross-spectra (or stating that the forecast is deliberately incomplete) would strengthen the central claim.
minor comments (4)
  1. Table 1 lists five HI-galaxy bins but writes six entries for PS,i, σp,i and σv,i; the extra zeros should be removed for consistency.
  2. Figure 1 caption and surrounding text refer to a “window function” recovered from SKA–Euclid cross-correlations; a brief definition of what is plotted (n(z)b(z) or the full kernel) would aid readability.
  3. Section 5 reports (S/N)κg ≈ 41 (Planck) and ≈ 69 (SO) but does not fold these cross-spectra into the Fisher matrices of Section 4; a one-sentence reminder that they remain outside the main forecasts would avoid confusion.
  4. A few typographical slips remain (e.g., “signficantly”, “indeepradiocontinuum”, “ackowledges”); a light copy-edit pass is recommended.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: pure Fisher forecast with external fiducials and no fitted-to-predicted reduction.

full rationale

This paper is a standard Fisher-matrix forecast of N imes2pt cosmological constraints from notional SKA-Mid AA4 surveys (continuum 3×2pt + HI galaxies + HI intensity mapping). Fiducial cosmological parameters are taken from conventional Planck/ΛCDM values (Table 1); survey specifications (areas, n(z), biases, noise) are taken from Bacon et al. (2020) and related literature; nuisance parameters (linear biases, NLA-IA, FoG/BAO damping, HI density evolution) are marginalised, not tuned to force the quoted percent-level errors. The central claim (∼1 % precision on ΛCDM parameters for the “All Cont.+HI” combination, Table 2) is simply the numerical output of that Fisher calculation under the stated modelling assumptions. There is no self-definitional loop, no parameter fitted to data and then re-presented as a prediction, no load-bearing uniqueness theorem imported from the authors’ prior work, and no renaming of a known empirical pattern. Self-citations (e.g. to companion AASKAII chapters) supply survey descriptions or methodological context and are not used to close a logical circle. The authors themselves flag the linear-bias / mildly-optimistic non-linear treatment (Sections 3.1, 3.3), so the result is transparently conditional rather than circular. Score 0 is therefore the correct assessment.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard Fisher-matrix forecasting under assumed survey specifications, linear bias, and a limited set of nuisance parameters. No new physical entities are introduced; free parameters are the usual cosmological and astrophysical nuisance parameters that are marginalised.

free parameters (4)
  • ten continuum galaxy linear bias parameters b_i
    Marginalised as free nuisance parameters; fiducial values listed in Table 1.
  • three NLA intrinsic-alignment parameters A_IA, β_IA, η_IA
    Marginalised; fiducials given in Table 1.
  • HI galaxy bias, shot-noise, FoG and BAO-damping parameters (22 total)
    Marginalised per redshift bin; listed in Table 1.
  • c_HI,1 and c_HI,2 for HI intensity mapping
    Amplitude and redshift evolution of HI bias and density; fixed to literature values but treated as free when varied.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption Fisher-matrix forecasts with Gaussian likelihood accurately predict parameter constraints for the chosen multipole/k ranges.
    Standard in the field but known to be approximate once non-Gaussian covariance or systematics dominate; invoked throughout Section 4.
  • ad hoc to paper Linear galaxy bias remains an adequate description up to ℓ=1000 and k=0.15 h Mpc⁻¹.
    Authors themselves label this “mildly optimistic” (Sections 3.1, 3.3).
  • domain assumption Survey specifications (area, n_gal, noise, redshift distributions) match the Medium-Deep Band 2 and Wide Band 1 surveys of Bacon et al. (2020).
    Taken as given; any change in AA4 performance would rescale the forecasts.
  • ad hoc to paper Cross-spectra between HI intensity maps and photometric continuum galaxies can be neglected because of foreground cleaning.
    Stated in Section 4; reduces the analysis from a potential 10×2pt to 5×2pt.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 20137 in / 2574 out tokens · 28983 ms · 2026-07-14T05:57:30.916351+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

SKAO surveys will provide an unprecedented window into the large-scale structure of the universe through HI 21cm galaxy and intensity mapping surveys, and radio continuum surveys. We present forecasts for the cosmological constraining power of ``$N\times2\mathrm{pt}$'' analyses -- which combine galaxy clustering, galaxy weak lensing, galaxy-galaxy lensing signals and 21cm Intensity Maps. By assuming cosmology surveys from an SKA-Mid AA4, we show that such an $N\times2\mathrm{pt}$ analysis will be able to deliver measurements of $\sim1\%$ precision on $\Lambda$CDM cosmological parameters. We also explore dynamical dark energy in the $w_0, w_a$ model, the sum of neutrino masses $\rm M_\nu$, and the background curvature $\Omega_{\rm k}$.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.11254 by Benedict Bahr-Kalus, Chandra Shekhar Saraf, Cora Uhlemann, David Parkinson, Giulia Piccirilli, Ian Harrison, Jacobo Asorey, Jos\'e Fonseca, Marina Migliaccio, Ziad Sakr.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Reconstruction of SKA-Mid window function from cross-correlation with Euclid-like galaxy survey. The green solid line is the fiducial SKA-Mid window function and the orange points denote the recovered distribution. measurement between optical galaxy and CMB lensing data, as performed in the references dis￾cussed in Section 2 above. However, the signal-to-noise will be high enough with future surveys to mea… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The constraining power of 𝑁 × 2pt combinations of SKA-Mid AA4 data. Red shows the 3 × 2pt combination of continuum galaxy clustering, weak lensing and galaxy-galaxy lensing. Blue shows the additive combination of 1 × 2pt from HI galaxies and 1 × 2pt from HI Intensity Mapping (IM). Green shows the combination of all of these in a 5 × 2 combination. Note in particular certain combinations where the different… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: As [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The constraining power of 𝑁 × 2pt combinations of SKA-Mid AA4 data, as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The constraining power of 𝑁 × 2pt combinations of SKA-Mid AA4 data, as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_5.png] view at source ↗

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

286 extracted references · 11 canonical work pages · 9 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Detection of the Cosmological 21 cm Signal in Auto-correlation at z 1 with the Canadian Hydrogen Intensity Mapping Experiment

    Amiri, Mandana and others. Detection of the Cosmological 21 cm Signal in Auto-correlation at z 1 with the Canadian Hydrogen Intensity Mapping Experiment. 2025. arXiv:2511.19620

    arXiv 2025

  2. [2]

    and Irfan, Melis O

    Carucci, Isabella P. and Irfan, Melis O. and Bobin, J \'e r \^o me. Recovery of 21 cm intensity maps with sparse component separation. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2020. doi:10.1093/mnras/staa2854. arXiv:2006.05996

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/staa2854 2020

  3. [3]

    arXiv e-prints , keywords =

    Dark Energy Survey Year 6 Results: Cosmological Constraints from Galaxy Clustering and Weak Lensing. arXiv e-prints , keywords =. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2601.14559 , archivePrefix =. 2601.14559 , primaryClass =

    doi:10.48550/arxiv.2601.14559

  4. [4]

    Simulated multi-tracer analyses with HI intensity mapping

    Witzemann, Amadeus and Alonso, David and Fonseca, Jos \'e and Santos, Mario G. Simulated multitracer analyses with H i intensity mapping. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2019. doi:10.1093/mnras/stz778. arXiv:1808.03093

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/stz778 2019

  5. [5]

    and others

    Blanchard, A. and others. Euclid preparation. VII. Forecast validation for Euclid cosmological probes. Astron. Astrophys. 2020. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202038071. arXiv:1910.09273

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202038071 2020

  6. [6]

    doi:10.5281/zenodo.16951020 , url =

    Seethapuram Sridhar, Sarrvesh and Science Operations and Breen, shari and Whitney, Stuard and Ball, Lewis , title =. doi:10.5281/zenodo.16951020 , url =

    doi:10.5281/zenodo.16951020

  7. [7]

    and others

    Pardede, K. and others. Euclid preparation. Galaxy power spectrum and bispectrum modelling. arXiv e-prints , eid =. 2026

    2026

  8. [8]

    Improving CMB constraints on early Universe physics with LSS: a multi-probe forecast including cross-covariance

    Kou, Rapha. Improving CMB constraints on early Universe physics with LSS: a multi-probe forecast including cross-covariance. JCAP. 2025. doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/08/031. arXiv:2504.13913

    work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/08/031 2025

  9. [9]

    and others

    Kondapally, R. and others. The LOFAR Two-meter Sky Survey: Deep Fields Data Release 1 - III. Host-galaxy identifications and value added catalogues. Astron. Astrophys. 2021. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202038813. arXiv:2011.08201

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202038813 2021

  10. [10]

    The LOFAR Two-Metre Sky Survey. VI. Optical identifications for the second data release. Astron. Astrophys. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347333 , archivePrefix =. 2309.00102 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347333

  11. [11]

    and Umeh, Obinna and Clarkson, Chris and Camera, Stefano

    Jolicoeur, Sheean and Maartens, Roy and De Weerd, Eline M. and Umeh, Obinna and Clarkson, Chris and Camera, Stefano. Detecting the relativistic bispectrum in 21cm intensity maps. JCAP. 2021. doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2021/06/039. arXiv:2009.06197

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2021/06/039 2021

  12. [12]

    and Fitchett, Michael J

    Smail, Ian and Ellis, Richard S. and Fitchett, Michael J. Gravitational lensing of distant field galaxies by rich clusters: I. - faint galaxy redshift distributions. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 1994. doi:10.1093/mnras/270.2.245. arXiv:astro-ph/9402048

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/270.2.245 1994

  13. [13]

    Adame, A. G. and others. DESI 2024 VI: cosmological constraints from the measurements of baryon acoustic oscillations. JCAP. 2025. doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/02/021. arXiv:2404.03002

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/02/021 2024

  14. [14]

    KiDS-1000 Cosmology: Multi-probe weak gravitational lensing and spectroscopic galaxy clustering constraints

    Heymans, Catherine and others. KiDS-1000 Cosmology: Multi-probe weak gravitational lensing and spectroscopic galaxy clustering constraints. Astron. Astrophys. 2021. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039063. arXiv:2007.15632

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039063 2021

  15. [15]

    Abbott, T. M. C. and others. Dark Energy Survey Year 3 results: Cosmological constraints from galaxy clustering and weak lensing. Phys. Rev. D. 2022. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.105.023520. arXiv:2105.13549

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.105.023520 2022

  16. [16]

    Joint analysis of DES Year 3 data and CMB lensing from SPT and Planck II: Cross-correlation measurements and cosmological constraints

    Chang, C. and others. Joint analysis of Dark Energy Survey Year 3 data and CMB lensing from SPT and Planck. II. Cross-correlation measurements and cosmological constraints. Phys. Rev. D. 2023. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.107.023530. arXiv:2203.12440

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.107.023530 2023

  17. [17]

    and others

    Planck Collaboration and Aghanim, N. and others. Planck 2018 results. I. Overview and the cosmological legacy of Planck. Astron. Astrophys. 2020. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833880. arXiv:1807.06205

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833880 2018

  18. [18]

    and others

    Planck Collaboration and Aghanim, N. and others. Planck 2018 results. V. CMB power spectra and likelihoods. Astron. Astrophys. 2020. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936386. arXiv:1907.12875

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936386 2018

  19. [19]

    and others

    Planck Collaboration and Aghanim, N. and others. Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters. Astron. Astrophys. 2020. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833910. arXiv:1807.06209

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833910 2018

  20. [20]

    and others

    Planck Collaboration and Aghanim, N. and others. Planck 2018 results. VIII. Gravitational lensing. Astron. Astrophys. 2020. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833886. arXiv:1807.06210

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833886 2018

  21. [21]

    HI intensity mapping for clustering-based redshift estimation

    Cunnington, Steven and Harrison, Ian and Pourtsidou, Alkistis and Bacon, David. HI intensity mapping for clustering-based redshift estimation. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2019. doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2928. arXiv:1805.04498

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2928 2019

  22. [22]

    H \, i constraints from the cross-correlation of eBOSS galaxies and Green Bank Telescope intensity maps

    Wolz, Laura and others. H \, i constraints from the cross-correlation of eBOSS galaxies and Green Bank Telescope intensity maps. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2022. doi:10.1093/mnras/stab3621. arXiv:2102.04946

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/stab3621 2022

  23. [23]

    Masui, K. W. and others. Measurement of 21 cm brightness fluctuations at z 0.8 in cross-correlation. Astrophys. J. Lett. 2013. doi:10.1088/2041-8205/763/1/L20. arXiv:1208.0331

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/2041-8205/763/1/l20 2013

  24. [24]

    HI and cosmological constraints from intensity mapping, optical and CMB surveys

    Pourtsidou, Alkistis and Bacon, David and Crittenden, Robert. HI and cosmological constraints from intensity mapping, optical and CMB surveys. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2017. doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1479. arXiv:1610.04189

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1479 2017

  25. [25]

    Anderson, C. J. and others. Low-amplitude clustering in low-redshift 21-cm intensity maps cross-correlated with 2dF galaxy densities. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2018. doi:10.1093/mnras/sty346. arXiv:1710.00424

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/sty346 2018

  26. [26]

    H \, i intensity mapping with MeerKAT: power spectrum detection in cross-correlation with WiggleZ galaxies

    Cunnington, Steven and others. H \, i intensity mapping with MeerKAT: power spectrum detection in cross-correlation with WiggleZ galaxies. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2022. doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3060. arXiv:2206.01579

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3060 2022

  27. [27]

    and Pettorino, Valeria and Camera, Stefano and Martinelli, Matteo

    Casas, Santiago and Carucci, Isabella P. and Pettorino, Valeria and Camera, Stefano and Martinelli, Matteo. Constraining gravity with synergies between radio and optical cosmological surveys. Phys. Dark Univ. 2023. doi:10.1016/j.dark.2022.101151. arXiv:2210.05705

    doi:10.1016/j.dark.2022.101151 2023

  28. [28]

    Tuning the cosmic instrument: robust cosmology through combined probes

    Reeves, Alexander and Nicola, Andrina and Refregier, Alexandre. Tuning the cosmic instrument: robust cosmology through combined probes. JCAP. 2025. doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/06/042. arXiv:2502.01722

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/06/042 2025

  29. [29]

    Cosmology from weak lensing, galaxy clustering, CMB lensing and tSZ: I. 10x2pt Modelling Methodology

    Fang, Xiao and Krause, Elisabeth and Eifler, Tim and Ferraro, Simone and Benabed, Karim and S., Pranjal R. and Ay c oberry, Emma and Dubois, Yohan and Miranda, Vivian. Cosmology from weak lensing, galaxy clustering, CMB lensing, and tSZ I. 10 2pt modelling methodology. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2024. doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3808. arXiv:2308.01856

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3808 2024

  30. [30]

    The Simons Observatory: Science goals and forecasts

    Ade, Peter and others. The Simons Observatory: Science goals and forecasts. JCAP. 2019. doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2019/02/056. arXiv:1808.07445

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2019/02/056 2019

  31. [31]

    and others

    Abitbol, M. and others. The Simons Observatory: science goals and forecasts for the enhanced Large Aperture Telescope. JCAP. 2025. doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/08/034. arXiv:2503.00636

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/08/034 2025

  32. [32]

    Efficient computation of CMB anisotropies in closed FRW models

    Lewis, Antony and Challinor, Anthony and Lasenby, Anthony. Efficient computation of CMB anisotropies in closed FRW models. Astrophys. J. 2000. doi:10.1086/309179. arXiv:astro-ph/9911177

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1086/309179 2000

  33. [33]

    Cosmology and Source Redshift Distributions from Combining Radio Weak Lensing with CMB Lensing

    Kalaja, Alba and Harrison, Ian and Coulton, William R. Cosmology and source redshift distributions from combining radio weak lensing with CMB lensing. JCAP. 2025. doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/07/001. arXiv:2412.14713

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/07/001 2025

  34. [34]

    and others

    Bacon, David J. and others. Cosmology with Phase 1 of the Square Kilometre Array: Red Book 2018: Technical specifications and performance forecasts. Publ. Astron. Soc. Austral. 2020. doi:10.1017/pasa.2019.51. arXiv:1811.02743

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1017/pasa.2019.51 2018

  35. [35]

    arXiv e-prints , keywords =

    Anticipated Performance of the Square Kilometre Array -- Phase 1 (SKA1). arXiv e-prints , keywords =. doi:10.48550/arXiv.1912.12699 , archivePrefix =. 1912.12699 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1912.12699 1912

  36. [36]

    2015 , publisher=

    Advancing Astrophysics with the Square Kilometre Array (AASKA14) , author=. 2015 , publisher=

    2015

  37. [37]

    A cross-correlation analysis of CMB lensing and radio galaxy maps

    Piccirilli, Giulia and Migliaccio, Marina and Branchini, Enzo and Dolfi, Arianna. A cross-correlation analysis of CMB lensing and radio galaxy maps. Astron. Astrophys. 2023. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244799. arXiv:2208.07774

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244799 2023

  38. [38]

    and Bahr-Kalus, Benedict and Bilicki, Maciej and Camera, Stefano and Hopkins, Andrew M

    Saraf, Chandra Shekhar and Parkinson, David and Asorey, Jacobo and Hale, Catherine L. and Bahr-Kalus, Benedict and Bilicki, Maciej and Camera, Stefano and Hopkins, Andrew M. and Tanidis, Konstantinos. EMU: Cross-correlating EMU Pilot Survey 1 with Dark Energy Survey to constrain the radio galaxy redshift distribution. arXiv e-prints , eid =. 2025. arXiv:2...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  39. [39]

    Nakoneczny, S. J. and others. Cosmology from LOFAR Two-metre Sky Survey Data Release 2: Cross-correlation with the cosmic microwave background. Astron. Astrophys. 2024. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347728. arXiv:2310.07642

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347728 2024

  40. [40]

    $\mathbf{12\times2}$pt combined probes: pipeline, neutrino mass, and data compression

    Reeves, Alexander and Nicola, Andrina and Refregier, Alexandre and Kacprzak, Tomasz and Valle, Luis Fernando Machado Poletti. 12 2 pt combined probes: pipeline, neutrino mass, and data compression. JCAP. 2024. doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2024/01/042. arXiv:2309.03258

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2024/01/042 2024

  41. [41]

    Cross-correlating radio continuum surveys and CMB lensing: constraining redshift distributions, galaxy bias and cosmology

    Alonso, David and Bellini, Emilio and Hale, Catherine and Jarvis, Matt J. and Schwarz, Dominik J. Cross-correlating radio continuum surveys and CMB lensing: constraining redshift distributions, galaxy bias and cosmology. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2021. doi:10.1093/mnras/stab046. arXiv:2009.01817

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/stab046 2021

  42. [42]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Priyamvad Tripathi and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  43. [43]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Lina Levin and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  44. [44]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Francesco de Gasperin and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  45. [45]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Caterina Tiburzi and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  46. [46]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Dharam Lal and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  47. [47]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Marc Besancon and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  48. [48]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Manjari Bagchi and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  49. [49]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Valentina Vacca and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  50. [50]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Hiroaki Yamamoto and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  51. [51]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Federico Abbate and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  52. [52]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Salvador Curiel and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  53. [53]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Lucy Oswald and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  54. [54]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Myriam Gitti and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  55. [55]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Avishek Basu and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  56. [56]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Xiaohui Sun and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  57. [57]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Yingjie Li and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  58. [58]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Zehao Lin and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  59. [59]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Jun Xu and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  60. [60]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Antonio Garufi and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  61. [61]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Marco Regis and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  62. [62]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Rainer Schoedel and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  63. [63]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Aritra Basu and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  64. [64]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Cristiana Spingola and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  65. [65]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Surajit Mondal and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  66. [66]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Wen Chen and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  67. [67]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Andrea Tarchi and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  68. [68]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Vivek Venkatraman Krishnan and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  69. [69]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Brian Hare and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  70. [70]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Joseph D Gelfand and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  71. [71]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Haruka Sakemi and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  72. [72]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Ye Xu and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  73. [73]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Satoko Sawada-Satoh and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  74. [74]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Ran Wang and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  75. [75]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Baerbel Koribalski and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  76. [76]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Junsong Cang and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  77. [77]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Takuya Akahori and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  78. [78]

    Lagos and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =

    Claudia D.P. Lagos and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  79. [79]

    Shannon and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =

    Ryan M. Shannon and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

  80. [80]

    2026 ,publisher =

    Jacobo Asorey&Hale and author2 and author3 and author4 and author5 ,title =. 2026 ,publisher =

    2026

Showing first 80 references.