Towards precision cosmology with Voids x CMB correlations (I): Roman-Agora mock catalogs and pipeline validation
Pith reviewed 2026-05-22 11:48 UTC · model grok-4.3
The pith
Analog matching on halo mass reproduces Roman emission-line galaxy statistics while voids supply independent constraints on galaxy-halo connections
A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.
Core claim
Analog matching based on halo mass alone, or halo mass and galaxy-type indicators, successfully reproduces the expected Roman emission-line galaxy statistics, while reproducing two-dimensional galaxy clustering does not guarantee consistent void properties, demonstrating that voids provide independent constraints on galaxy-halo connections.
What carries the argument
Analog matching: nearest-neighbor search in a multi-dimensional parameter space of halo mass, environment, and galaxy attributes to assign halo counterparts from a reference catalog to galaxies in a target simulation.
If this is right
- Voids can be used to validate mock catalogs for cosmological analyses involving cross-correlations with the CMB.
- Different galaxy-halo models that agree on clustering statistics can be distinguished using void properties.
- The mock catalogs serve as a benchmark for assessing the impact of mock accuracy on cosmological observables from LSS x CMB studies.
- The general analog matching approach can be applied to any combination of simulation and reference catalog.
Where Pith is reading between the lines
- Future surveys could incorporate void measurements to break degeneracies in galaxy formation models that persist after clustering matches.
- Extending the matching parameter space with additional environmental measures might further improve consistency in higher-order void statistics.
- The results suggest applying void-finding algorithms consistently between mocks and observations to enable fair comparisons in precision cosmology.
Load-bearing premise
Nearest-neighbor matching in the chosen multi-dimensional parameter space preserves the higher-order statistics needed for void identification and void-CMB cross-correlations.
What would settle it
A direct comparison revealing significant differences in void size distributions or void-CMB cross-correlation amplitudes between the analog-matched mocks and the reference catalog when using only halo mass matching.
Figures
read the original abstract
We construct and validate a set of multi-purpose mock galaxy catalogs designed to capture, to different degrees of accuracy, the main characteristics of the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope survey. These catalogs provide a foundation for void statistics and various CMB cross-correlation analyses. Our approach differs from traditional halo occupation or abundance matching methods by directly translating a reference mock catalog -- containing basic properties of the host halos -- into a new simulation (in our case Agora). This technique, which we call analog matching, assigns a halo counterpart in the new simulation to each reference galaxy through a nearest-neighbor search in a multi-dimensional parameter space. This space can include halo mass, environmental measures and other galaxy-specific attributes. By varying the composition of this parameter vector, we can generate catalogs of differing complexity and test how galaxy-halo prescriptions influence LSS statistics and CMB-related observables. We find that analog matching based on halo mass alone, or halo mass and galaxy-type indicators, successfully reproduces the expected Roman emission-line galaxy statistics. We also show that reproducing two-dimensional galaxy clustering does not guarantee consistent void properties. Our results highlight the importance of matching void statistics for improved mock accuracy, and demonstrate that measuring voids provides independent and sensitive constraints on galaxy-halo connections beyond the matter power spectrum. An important by-product of our setup is that it is fully general and can be applied to any combination of simulation and reference catalog, provided that the desired parameter space for both is specified. The resulting Roman-Agora mock catalogs offer a versatile resource for LSS x CMB studies and a benchmark for assessing the impact of mock accuracy on cosmological observables.
Editorial analysis
A structured set of objections, weighed in public.
Referee Report
Summary. The manuscript introduces an 'analog matching' technique to generate mock catalogs for the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope by performing nearest-neighbor assignment of halos from a reference catalog to the Agora simulation in a multi-dimensional parameter space (halo mass, environment, galaxy attributes). It validates that mass-only or mass-plus-type matching reproduces Roman ELG number densities and basic statistics, while showing that successful reproduction of two-dimensional galaxy clustering does not guarantee matching void properties, thereby arguing that void statistics supply independent constraints on galaxy-halo connections for LSS x CMB analyses.
Significance. If the results hold, the work supplies a flexible, general-purpose framework for mock generation that can be applied to arbitrary simulation-reference pairs and serves as a benchmark for quantifying how galaxy-halo modeling choices propagate into void-CMB cross-correlations. The explicit demonstration that 2D clustering reproduction is insufficient for void consistency is a useful contribution, highlighting the sensitivity of higher-order LSS observables.
major comments (2)
- [Results section on void properties] The central claim that 'reproducing two-dimensional galaxy clustering does not guarantee consistent void properties' (abstract and results section) depends on the untested assumption that nearest-neighbor selection in the chosen parameter vector preserves the higher-order correlations (local density, tidal field) required by the void-finding algorithm. If the environment coordinate is only a coarse proxy, the matched catalog can match the 2-point function while systematically shifting void sizes, shapes, and CMB cross-correlations, weakening the evidence for independent constraints.
- [§3] §3 (method): the analog-matching procedure is described without quantitative validation that the selected parameter space reproduces the exact inputs to the void finder (e.g., density or tidal-field distributions); a direct comparison of these fields between reference and matched catalogs is needed to support the claim that voids add independent information.
minor comments (2)
- [Abstract] The abstract states that mass-only matching 'successfully reproduces the expected Roman emission-line galaxy statistics' but does not specify which statistics (number density, luminosity function, or color distributions) or the quantitative tolerance used.
- [Results figures] Figures comparing void size or shape distributions would benefit from explicit error bars or statistical tests (e.g., KS p-values) to quantify the reported differences.
Simulated Author's Rebuttal
We thank the referee for the constructive and insightful report. The comments identify valuable opportunities to strengthen the validation of our analog-matching approach and its implications for void statistics. We address each major comment below and commit to revisions that directly respond to the concerns raised.
read point-by-point responses
-
Referee: [Results section on void properties] The central claim that 'reproducing two-dimensional galaxy clustering does not guarantee consistent void properties' (abstract and results section) depends on the untested assumption that nearest-neighbor selection in the chosen parameter vector preserves the higher-order correlations (local density, tidal field) required by the void-finding algorithm. If the environment coordinate is only a coarse proxy, the matched catalog can match the 2-point function while systematically shifting void sizes, shapes, and CMB cross-correlations, weakening the evidence for independent constraints.
Authors: We agree that the environment measure functions as a proxy and that explicit validation of higher-order fields would reinforce the interpretation. Our results already demonstrate that catalogs matched on halo mass plus environment reproduce two-point clustering yet produce statistically distinct void populations; this discrepancy itself indicates that the chosen parameter vector does not fully preserve the correlations required by the void finder. To address the concern directly, the revised manuscript will include quantitative comparisons of the local density and tidal-field distributions (PDFs and Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests) between the reference and matched catalogs, together with an assessment of how residual differences propagate into void sizes and CMB cross-correlations. revision: yes
-
Referee: [§3] §3 (method): the analog-matching procedure is described without quantitative validation that the selected parameter space reproduces the exact inputs to the void finder (e.g., density or tidal-field distributions); a direct comparison of these fields between reference and matched catalogs is needed to support the claim that voids add independent information.
Authors: We acknowledge that §3 currently emphasizes the matching algorithm and its validation for number densities and two-point statistics without explicit field-level comparisons. In the revised version we will expand §3 to present direct quantitative comparisons of the density and tidal-field distributions (including cumulative distribution functions and summary statistics) between the reference catalog and the analog-matched realizations. These additions will provide the requested support for the claim that void statistics supply independent constraints on galaxy-halo connections. revision: yes
Circularity Check
No circularity: validation relies on direct statistical comparisons between matched catalogs and reference expectations
full rationale
The paper's core procedure is analog matching via nearest-neighbor search in a user-specified multi-dimensional parameter space (halo mass, environment, galaxy attributes) applied to a reference catalog to produce Roman-like mocks in the Agora simulation. All reported results consist of explicit comparisons: number densities, 2D clustering, and void properties are measured on the output catalogs and contrasted against the input reference or against each other when the matching vector is varied. No quantity is defined in terms of itself, no fitted parameter is relabeled as a prediction, and no load-bearing premise reduces to a self-citation or prior ansatz by the same authors. The demonstration that void statistics differ even when 2D clustering matches is an empirical outcome of those controlled comparisons, not a tautology. The work is therefore self-contained against its own internal benchmarks and external reference catalogs.
Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger
axioms (2)
- domain assumption The reference mock catalog provides an accurate enough representation of galaxy properties for the purpose of matching.
- domain assumption Nearest-neighbor matching in the chosen parameter space preserves the statistics relevant for voids and CMB cross-correlations.
Lean theorems connected to this paper
-
IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.leanwashburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear?
unclearRelation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.
analog matching... nearest-neighbor search in a multi-dimensional parameter space... halo mass, environmental measures and other galaxy-specific attributes
-
IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/AlexanderDuality.leanalexander_duality_circle_linking unclear?
unclearRelation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.
reproducing two-dimensional galaxy clustering does not guarantee consistent void properties... voids provide independent constraints on galaxy-halo connections
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.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Towards precision cosmology with Void x CMB correlations (II): Impact of mock catalogs on the Void x CMB lensing signal
Void x CMB lensing from Roman mocks is robust to catalog construction choices and forecasts S/N of 13-31 sigma with Planck, SO, and CMB-S4-like data for 2D and 3D voids.
Reference graph
Works this paper leans on
-
[2]
Abbott, T. M. C., Aguena, M., Alarcon, A., et al. 2023, Phys. Rev. D, 107, 023531, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.107.023531
-
[3]
Abdalla, E., Abellán, G. F., Aboubrahim, A., et al. 2022, Journal of High Energy Astrophysics, 34, 49, doi:10.1016/j.jheap.2022.04.002
work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1016/j.jheap.2022.04.002 2022
-
[4]
Achitouv, I. 2019, Phys. Rev. D, 100, 123513, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.100. 123513
-
[5]
2021, MNRAS, 504, 4667, doi:10
Alam, S., de Mattia, A., Tamone, A., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 504, 4667, doi:10. 1093/mnras/stab1150
work page 2021
-
[6]
1979, Nature, 281, 358, doi:10.1038/281358a0
Alcock, C., & Paczynski, B. 1979, Nature, 281, 358, doi:10.1038/281358a0
-
[7]
Alfaro, I. G., Rodriguez, F., Ruiz, A. N., Luparello, H. E., & Lambas, D. G. 2022, A&A, 665, A44, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202243542
-
[8]
2019, MNRAS, 484, 4127, doi:10.1093/mnras/stz093
Alonso, D., Sanchez, J., Slosar, A., & LSST Dark Energy Science Collaboration. 2019, MNRAS, 484, 4127, doi:10.1093/mnras/stz093
-
[10]
Arsenov, N., Kovács, A., Pérez Sar, M., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.17696, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2509.17696
work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2509.17696 2025
-
[11]
2022, MNRAS, 513, 186, doi:10.1093/mnras/stac828 Balaguera-Antolínez, A., Montero-Dorta, A
Aubert, M., Cousinou, M.-C., Escoffier, S., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 513, 186, doi:10.1093/mnras/stac828 Balaguera-Antolínez, A., Montero-Dorta, A. D., & Favole, G. 2024, A&A, 685, A61, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202348694
-
[13]
Bardeen, J. M., Bond, J. R., Kaiser, N., & Szalay, A. S. 1986, ApJ, 304, 15, doi:10.1086/164143
-
[14]
Basu, K., Hernández-Monteagudo, C., & Sunyaev, R. A. 2004, A&A, 416, 447, doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20034298
-
[15]
Bayer, A. E., Zhong, Y ., Li, Z., et al. 2025, J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys., 2025, 016, doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/05/016
-
[16]
Behroozi, P., Wechsler, R. H., Hearin, A. P., & Conroy, C. 2019, MNRAS, 488, 3143, doi:10.1093/mnras/stz1182
-
[17]
Behroozi, P. S., Wechsler, R. H., & Wu, H.-Y . 2013, ApJ, 762, 109, doi:10. 1088/0004-637X/762/2/109
work page 2013
-
[18]
Benson, A. 2011, Galacticus: A Semi-Analytic Model of Galaxy Formation, As- trophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1108.004.http://ascl.net/ 1108.004
work page 2011
-
[19]
Benson, A. J. 2001, MNRAS, 325, 1039, doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001. 04470.x
-
[20]
Berlind, A. A., & Weinberg, D. H. 2002a, ApJ, 575, 587, doi:10.1086/341469 —. 2002b, ApJ, 575, 587, doi:10.1086/341469
-
[21]
Biswas, R., Alizadeh, E., & Wandelt, B. D. 2010, Phys. Rev. D, 82, 023002, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.82.023002
-
[22]
Blanton, M. R., Eisenstein, D., Hogg, D. W., & Zehavi, I. 2006, ApJ, 645, 977, doi:10.1086/500918
-
[23]
2012, Journal of Low Temperature Physics, 167, 859, doi:10.1007/s10909-012-0505-y
Bleem, L., Ade, P., Aird, K., et al. 2012, Journal of Low Temperature Physics, 167, 859, doi:10.1007/s10909-012-0505-y
-
[24]
Bos, E. G. P., van de Weygaert, R., Dolag, K., & Pettorino, V . 2012, MNRAS, 426, 440, doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21478.x
-
[25]
Bower, R. G., Benson, A. J., Malbon, R., et al. 2006, MNRAS, 370, 645, doi:10. 1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10519.x
-
[26]
2017, MNRAS, 466, 3364, doi:10
Cai, Y .-C., Neyrinck, M., Mao, Q., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 466, 3364, doi:10. 1093/mnras/stw3299
work page 2017
-
[27]
Cai, Y .-C., Taylor, A., Peacock, J. A., & Padilla, N. 2016, MNRAS, 462, 2465, doi:10.1093/mnras/stw1809
- [28]
-
[29]
2024, A&A, 689, A171, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202348970
Camacho-Ciurana, G., Lee, P., Arsenov, N., et al. 2024, A&A, 689, A171, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202348970
-
[30]
Carbone, C., Petkova, M., & Dolag, K. 2016, J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys., 2016, 034, doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2016/07/034
-
[31]
Carlstrom, J. E., Ade, P. A. R., Aird, K. A., et al. 2011, PASP, 123, 568, doi:10. 1086/659879
work page 2011
-
[32]
Castorina, E., Carbone, C., Bel, J., Sefusatti, E., & Dolag, K. 2015, J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys., 2015, 043, doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2015/07/043
-
[33]
2018, MNRAS, 476, 3195, doi:10
Cautun, M., Paillas, E., Cai, Y .-C., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 476, 3195, doi:10. 1093/mnras/sty463
work page 2018
-
[34]
Chang, C., Omori, Y ., Baxter, E. J., et al. 2023, Phys. Rev. D, 107, 023530, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.107.023530
-
[35]
Chantavat, T., Sawangwit, U., Sutter, P. M., & Wandelt, B. D. 2016, Phys. Rev. D, 93, 043523, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.043523
-
[36]
Chen, S.-F., Lee, H., & Dvorkin, C. 2021, J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys., 2021, 030, doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2021/05/030
-
[37]
Chuang, C.-H., Yepes, G., Kitaura, F.-S., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 487, 48, doi:10. 1093/mnras/stz1233
work page 2019
-
[39]
Conrado, A. M., González Delgado, R. M., García-Benito, R., et al. 2024, A&A, 687, A98, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202449414
-
[40]
Conroy, C., Wechsler, R. H., & Kravtsov, A. V . 2006, ApJ, 647, 201, doi:10. 1086/503602
work page 2006
-
[41]
2023, ApJ, 953, 46, doi:10.3847/ 1538-4357/acde54 —
Contarini, S., Pisani, A., Hamaus, N., et al. 2023, ApJ, 953, 46, doi:10.3847/ 1538-4357/acde54 —. 2024, A&A, 682, A20, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347572
-
[42]
2019a, MNRAS, 488, 3526, doi:10
Contarini, S., Ronconi, T., Marulli, F., et al. 2019a, MNRAS, 488, 3526, doi:10. 1093/mnras/stz1989 —. 2019b, MNRAS, 488, 3526, doi:10.1093/mnras/stz1989
-
[43]
Cora, S. A., Vega-Martínez, C. A., Hough, T., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 479, 2, doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1131
-
[44]
Correa, C. M., Paz, D. J., Padilla, N. D., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 485, 5761, doi:10. 1093/mnras/stz821 —. 2022a, MNRAS, 509, 1871, doi:10.1093/mnras/stab3070 —. 2022b, MNRAS, 509, 1871, doi:10.1093/mnras/stab3070
-
[45]
Correa, C. M., Paz, D. J., Sánchez, A. G., et al. 2021a, MNRAS, 500, 911, doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3252 —. 2021b, MNRAS, 500, 911, doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3252
-
[46]
Dalal, N., White, M., Bond, J. R., & Shirokov, A. 2008, ApJ, 687, 12, doi:10. 1086/591512
work page 2008
-
[47]
Das, S., Sherwin, B. D., Aguirre, P., et al. 2011, Phys. Rev. Lett., 107, 021301, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.107.021301
-
[48]
2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.08884, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2509.08884
Degni, G., Sarpa, E., Aubert, M., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.08884, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2509.08884
-
[49]
The DESI Experiment Part I: Science,Targeting, and Survey Design
Demirbozan, U., Nadathur, S., Ferrero, I., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 534, 2328, doi:10.1093/mnras/stae2206 DESI Collaboration, Aghamousa, A., Aguilar, J., et al. 2016, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1611.00036, doi:10.48550/arXiv.1611.00036
work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/stae2206 2024
-
[50]
2016, MNRAS, 463, 1797, doi:10
Dolag, K., Komatsu, E., & Sunyaev, R. 2016, MNRAS, 463, 1797, doi:10. 1093/mnras/stw2035 Domínguez-Gómez, J., Pérez, I., Ruiz-Lara, T., et al. 2023, Nature, 619, 269, doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06109-1
-
[51]
Dancing in the dark: galactic properties trace spin swings along the cosmic web
Dubois, Y ., Pichon, C., Welker, C., et al. 2014a, MNRAS, 444, 1453, doi:10. 1093/mnras/stu1227 —. 2014b, MNRAS, 444, 1453, doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1227 —. 2014c, MNRAS, 444, 1453, doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1227
work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1227
-
[52]
Efstathiou, G. 2025, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A, 383, 20240022, doi:10.1098/rsta.2024.0022
-
[53]
Faltenbacher, A., & White, S. D. M. 2010, ApJ, 708, 469, doi:10.1088/ 0004-637X/708/1/469
work page 2010
-
[54]
2019, MNRAS, 490, 3573, doi:10.1093/ mnras/stz2805
Fang, Y ., Hamaus, N., Jain, B., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 490, 3573, doi:10.1093/ mnras/stz2805
work page 2019
-
[55]
2016, MNRAS, 461, 3421, doi:10
Favole, G., Comparat, J., Prada, F., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 461, 3421, doi:10. 1093/mnras/stw1483 Fernández-García, E., Betancort-Rijo, J. E., Prada, F., et al. 2025, A&A, 695, A19, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451264
-
[56]
Fraser, T. S., Paillas, E., Percival, W. J., et al. 2025, J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys., 2025, 001, doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/06/001
-
[57]
Fry, J. N. 1996, ApJ, 461, L65, doi:10.1086/310006
- [59]
-
[60]
Geach, J. E., Smail, I., Best, P. N., et al. 2008, MNRAS, 388, 1473, doi:10. 1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13481.x
-
[61]
Gonzalez-Perez, V ., Cui, W., Contreras, S., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 498, 1852, doi:10.1093/mnras/staa2504 Article number, page 15 of 19 A&A proofs:manuscript no. main Górski, K. M., Hivon, E., Banday, A. J., et al. 2005, ApJ, 622, 759, doi:10. 1086/427976
-
[62]
Wide-Field InfraRed Survey Telescope (WFIRST) Final Report
Green, J., Schechter, P., Baltay, C., et al. 2012, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1208.4012, doi:10.48550/arXiv.1208.4012
work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1208.4012 2012
-
[63]
Gregory, S. A., & Thompson, L. A. 1978, ApJ, 222, 784, doi:10.1086/156198
-
[64]
2015, MNRAS, 453, 4368, doi:10.1093/ mnras/stv1966
Guo, H., Zheng, Z., Zehavi, I., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 453, 4368, doi:10.1093/ mnras/stv1966
work page 2015
-
[65]
Hadzhiyska, B., Bose, S., Eisenstein, D., Hernquist, L., & Spergel, D. N. 2020, MNRAS, 493, 5506, doi:10.1093/mnras/staa623
-
[66]
Hahn, O., Porciani, C., Carollo, C. M., & Dekel, A. 2007, MNRAS, 375, 489, doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.11318.x
-
[67]
Hamaus, N., Pisani, A., Choi, J.-A., et al. 2020, J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys., 2020, 023, doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2020/12/023
-
[68]
Hamaus, N., Sutter, P. M., Lavaux, G., & Wandelt, B. D. 2015, J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys., 2015, 036, doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2015/11/036
-
[69]
Hamaus, N., Sutter, P. M., & Wandelt, B. D. 2014, Phys. Rev. Lett., 112, 251302, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.251302
-
[70]
2022, A&A, 658, A20, doi:10.1051/ 0004-6361/202142073
Hamaus, N., Aubert, M., Pisani, A., et al. 2022, A&A, 658, A20, doi:10.1051/ 0004-6361/202142073
work page 2022
-
[72]
Hang, Q., Alam, S., Cai, Y .-C., & Peacock, J. A. 2021, MNRAS, 507, 510, doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2184
-
[73]
Hawken, A. J., Granett, B. R., Iovino, A., et al. 2017, A&A, 607, A54, doi:10. 1051/0004-6361/201629678
work page 2017
-
[74]
2020, MNRAS, 495, 5040, doi:10
Hearin, A., Korytov, D., Kovacs, E., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 495, 5040, doi:10. 1093/mnras/staa1495
work page 2020
-
[75]
Hearin, A. P., Watson, D. F., Becker, M. R., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 444, 729, doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1443 Hernández-Monteagudo, C. 2019, in Highlights on Spanish Astrophysics X, ed. B. Montesinos, A. Asensio Ramos, F. Buitrago, R. Schödel, E. Villaver, S. Pérez-Hoyos, & I. Ordóñez-Etxeberria, 134–139 Hernández-Monteagudo, C., Rubiño-Martín, J. A., & Sunyaev, R...
-
[76]
M., Ho, S., Padmanabhan, N., Seljak, U., & Bahcall, N
Hirata, C. M., Ho, S., Padmanabhan, N., Seljak, U., & Bahcall, N. A. 2008, Phys. Rev. D, 78, 043520, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.78.043520
-
[77]
Ho, S., Hirata, C., Padmanabhan, N., Seljak, U., & Bahcall, N. 2008, Phys. Rev. D, 78, 043519, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.78.043519 Jõeveer, M., Einasto, J., & Tago, E. 1978, MNRAS, 185, 357, doi:10.1093/ mnras/185.2.357
-
[78]
2025, MNRAS, 536, 1303, doi:10
Jeffrey, N., Whiteway, L., Gatti, M., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 536, 1303, doi:10. 1093/mnras/stae2629
work page 2025
-
[79]
2013a, MNRAS, 434, 2167, doi:10.1093/ mnras/stt1169 —
Jennings, E., Li, Y ., & Hu, W. 2013a, MNRAS, 434, 2167, doi:10.1093/ mnras/stt1169 —. 2013b, MNRAS, 434, 2167, doi:10.1093/mnras/stt1169
-
[80]
Kaiser, N. 1984, ApJ, 284, L9, doi:10.1086/184341 —. 1987, MNRAS, 227, 1, doi:10.1093/mnras/227.1.1
-
[81]
Kauffmann, G., White, S. D. M., Heckman, T. M., et al. 2004, MNRAS, 353, 713, doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.08117.x
-
[82]
2016, MNRAS, 457, 4340, doi:10.1093/mnras/stw248
Klypin, A., Yepes, G., Gottlöber, S., Prada, F., & Heß, S. 2016, MNRAS, 457, 4340, doi:10.1093/mnras/stw248
-
[83]
Knox, L. 1995, Phys. Rev. D, 52, 4307, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.52.4307 Kovács, A., Vielzeuf, P., Ferrero, I., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 515, 4417, doi:10. 1093/mnras/stac2011
-
[84]
Krolewski, A., Ferraro, S., & White, M. 2021, J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys., 2021, 028, doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2021/12/028
-
[85]
Landy, S. D., & Szalay, A. S. 1993, ApJ, 412, 64, doi:10.1086/172900
-
[86]
Euclid Definition Study Report
Laureijs, R., Amiaux, J., Arduini, S., et al. 2011, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1110.3193, doi:10.48550/arXiv.1110.3193
work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1110.3193 2011
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.