Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 4 cited by

Halo-defined cosmic voids stabilize below redshift 1, their evolution set by cosmic expansion and described by linear growth.

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 ↗

Cosmic voids traced by halos become stable at late times, and the matter around them evolves linearly, supporting their use as clean dark-energy probes.

T0 review reviewed 2026-08-04 challenge →

load-bearing objection A well-executed simulation study with a genuinely new relative-size framework; the stabilization claim is plausible but needs a quantitative test, and the rank-conservation interpretation is overstated. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2509.07092 v1 pith:JEBST6QG submitted 2025-09-08 astro-ph.CO

Why Cosmic Voids Matter: Pristine Evolution

Nico Schuster , Nico Hamaus , Alice Pisani , Klaus Dolag , Jochen Weller This is my paper
classification astro-ph.CO
keywords cosmic voidsvoid evolutionlinear growth factorhalo biasvoid size functiondensity profilesdark energyhydrodynamical simulations
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 reading

Using hydrodynamical simulations from redshift 5.04 to the present, the paper argues that halo-defined cosmic voids—voids carved out by the galaxy-halo population—can only be compared across cosmic time if they are binned by their rank (percentile by radius) within their contemporary void population, not by absolute size. In that relative framework, the apparent 'inverse' evolution of halo void density profiles disappears and is revealed as a selection effect of the evolving void size function amplified by halo bias. The central physical claim is that the halo void population stabilizes below z ≃ 1: comoving density profiles, size functions, and core densities align, meaning later evolution is driven by cosmic expansion rather than ongoing halo formation. Around these stable voids, the surrounding dark-matter density field follows linear growth theory, with deviations only as nonlinear growth in small voids and suppressed growth in the largest voids. If right, late-time voids are predictable, passive tracers of expansion, which is exactly what dark-energy probes from upcoming surveys need.

Core claim

The paper's central discovery is that a void's properties are tied more fundamentally to its rank within its contemporary population than to its absolute size. Comparing voids of fixed comoving radius across redshifts mixes populations because the void size function evolves strongly—CDM voids merge and grow while halo voids fragment into more numerous smaller voids as new halos form. For halo voids this mixing produces an apparent inverse evolution of density profiles (compensation walls seemingly shrinking over time) that is a tracer-selection artifact, amplified by halo bias, not physical. Restacking profiles in quartile bins of the contemporary radius distribution removes the artifact and

What carries the argument

The two load-bearing tools are (1) a relative size framework—each redshift's voids are ranked by effective radius and split into quartiles (or quintiles), so equal-count bins compare voids of the same contemporary rank instead of the same physical size—and (2) the linear growth factor D+(a), applied backwards from a low-redshift baseline via δ(x,z) = D̂(z,z*) δ(x,z*) to predict the evolving matter profiles around halo voids. The rank binning removes the selection effect created by the evolving void size function; the backward growth prediction isolates where linear theory holds.

Load-bearing premise

That a void's rank (percentile by radius) among its contemporaries is a stable identity marker across cosmic time, so that stacking by rank at different redshifts compares the same underlying voids even though individual voids cannot be tracked.

What would settle it

In a simulation with saved particle IDs, track individual halo voids across snapshots and check whether voids at the same radius percentile at z=1 and z=0 are the same objects or their descendants; if percentile membership shuffles severely between epochs, the reported stabilization is an artifact of percentile rebinning.

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

If this is right

  • Analyses of halo-void density profiles and lensing signals should bin voids by percentile of the contemporary radius distribution; fixed comoving-radius bins will otherwise mix populations and mimic inverse evolution.
  • Below z ≃ 1 the halo-void population acts as a passive tracer of cosmic expansion, so its stacked profiles can be predicted from a low-redshift baseline with linear growth theory.
  • Deviations from linear growth are localized: nonlinear wall growth around small voids and suppressed growth in the largest voids, so the residuals themselves could be used to test dark energy or modified gravity.
  • The self-similarity across simulation resolutions implies the same evolutionary stages—fragmentation, then stabilization—occur at scales and epochs set by the tracer population, allowing results from one tracer or halo-mass regime to be scaled to another.
  • For weak lensing and the Alcock-Paczynski test, the close agreement between predicted and measured matter profiles around stable voids provides a clean theoretical baseline across a wide redshift range.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The rank-conservation premise is testable: in a simulation with particle-ID tracking, one could verify that the same descendant voids occupy the same radius percentile across snapshots; without that, the stabilization could be a rebinning artifact (the paper itself notes individual halo voids cannot be tracked).
  • If the stabilization is physical, the comoving void size function for low-mass-halo tracers should become nearly time-independent below z ≈ 1, a direct prediction for spectroscopic surveys.
  • The suppressed growth seen in the largest voids implies a scale-dependent effective growth rate inside voids relative to their walls; void-galaxy redshift-space distortions or stacked lensing at two redshifts could detect it.
  • The same relative-size recipe may clean up other void statistics where inverse trends appear, such as massive-neutrino or modified-gravity analyses, by removing the population-mixing selection effect before interpreting the physics.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

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 / 5 minor

Summary. The paper uses the Magneticum hydrodynamical simulations (midres, highres, ultra-hr) to study the evolution of voids identified in CDM and halo tracers from z = 5.04 to z = 0. The main claims are: (i) a relative size framework (stacking by radius percentile rather than by fixed comoving radius) is necessary to avoid selection effects caused by the evolving void size function; (ii) within this framework, the halo-void population stabilizes at z ≲ 1, with evolution driven by cosmic expansion rather than by ongoing halo formation; and (iii) the CDM density around halo voids is remarkably well described by linear growth theory, with deviations on small scales (non-linear growth) and in the largest voids (suppressed growth, possibly due to dark energy). The paper supports these claims with multi-resolution comparisons, a tracer-selection test (halo vs. CDM profiles around the same voids), and a parameter-free linear-growth prediction using the background cosmology's D+(a).

Significance. If the main claims hold, the paper provides a practical framework for analyzing voids in upcoming surveys (DESI, Euclid, Roman): it identifies a regime where halo-void properties are stable and where matter profiles can be predicted from linear theory without free parameters. The relative-size framework is a potentially useful methodological contribution that could mitigate known selection effects. Strengths include the use of multiple simulation resolutions, the explicit comparison of halo and CDM tracers around the same voids (Figures 7 and 8), and the public release of the profile code and data. The linear-growth prediction is genuinely parameter-free: D+(a) is computed from the assumed WMAP7 cosmology (Eq. 6.1) and the baseline profile is taken directly from simulation, leaving no fitted parameters. However, the central interpretation that a void's rank in the contemporary population is a conserved, physically meaningful identifier is not directly tested, and the quantitative linear-growth comparison in the evolving-population section has a coordinate-mapping subtlety that needs clarification.

major comments (2)
  1. [§5.2, Figs. 9-10] The paper's central claim that a void's properties are 'more fundamentally tied to its rank within its contemporary population than to its absolute size' rests on the assumption that a fixed radius percentile at different redshifts selects the same underlying population. This assumption is not tested. Section 5.1 explicitly states that 'individual halo voids cannot be reliably tracked over time,' and voids are re-identified independently at each snapshot. If voids merge or fragment, a fixed percentile at z=1 and z=0 may contain different objects, and the apparent late-time alignment of profiles in r/r_v may be a consequence of the percentile normalization (equal numbers per bin by construction) rather than a physical freeze. The authors should provide evidence that rank tracks a conserved population property—for example, by matching voids across snapshots with the CDM density field, by s
  2. [§6.1, Eq. (6.2), Figs. 11-12] The linear-growth prediction is formulated in Eq. (6.2) for density contrast as a function of comoving coordinate x: δ(x,z) = D̂(z,z⋆) δ(x,z⋆). However, Figures 11 and 12 show profiles and predictions versus r/r_v, while voids are re-identified at each redshift and have different r_v distributions. The paper does not state how the baseline profile at z_min is mapped to the radial coordinate of a different void population at higher z. If the same r/r_v bin is simply multiplied by D̂, the prediction is not the linear-theory prediction for the same physical region, because r_v evolves with redshift (as seen in the evolving VSF, Figure 3). This affects the quantitative claim of agreement at the |Δρ/ρ̄| ≲ 0.05 level, especially for z > 1 where r_v changes substantially. The authors should either clarify the coordinate mapping (e.g., show that r_v is constant for matched populations in the red
minor comments (5)
  1. [§4.2, Fig. 3] The text states that the comoving VSF aligns 'almost perfectly at redshifts z ≲ 1.32' for highres, but the snapshots shown are z = 0.25, 0.29, 0.47, 0.67, 0.90, 1.18, and 1.98. There is no snapshot at z = 1.32; please clarify whether 1.32 is an interpolated value or a typo.
  2. [§6.1, Figs. 11-12] The residuals in the lower panels are described as 'data - prediction,' but the text says the backward method 'slightly underestimates the errors of the predictions,' making the plots a worst-case scenario. This is fine as a caveat, but it should be stated clearly in the figure captions so readers interpret the residuals correctly.
  3. [§6.1, Fig. 12] The interpretation of the 'suppressed growth in the largest voids' as 'potentially driven by the influence of dark energy' is speculative and not tested in this work. The authors should label this explicitly as a hypothesis, not a conclusion, and perhaps suggest a concrete test (e.g., running a simulation with a different dark-energy model).
  4. [§5.3, velocity profiles] The velocity-profile analysis is mentioned only in prose ('While not depicted in this work'). Since the paper makes claims about the 'turning point' and the balance between outflow and new halo formation, it would be helpful to include at least one figure or to explain why these profiles are omitted.
  5. [§3.2, Table 2] The definition of Θ(r_j) uses two Heaviside functions, but the notation is a bit terse. It would help to define the bin edges explicitly as r − δr and r + δr, and to state that δr is a constant fraction of r_v.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: the linear-growth prediction is parameter-free and falsifiable, and the relative-size framework is an empirical comparison rather than a definitional result.

full rationale

The paper's central derivations do not reduce to their own inputs. The linear-growth test (Sec. 6, Eqs. 6.1 and 6.2) computes D+(a) from the fixed WMAP7 ΛCDM background and uses a measured baseline profile at z_min as input; no parameter is fitted to the predicted redshifts. The backward prediction is genuine extrapolation, and the paper explicitly reports deviations (non-linear growth in small voids, suppressed growth in the largest voids), so the test is falsifiable and not forced. The relative-size framework (Sec. 5.2) divides voids into radius percentiles at each redshift; the observed alignment of profiles across redshifts is an empirical finding, not guaranteed by the binning. The authors further test robustness to the number of bins and to tracer choice. The statement in Sec. 5.1 that 'individual halo voids cannot be reliably tracked over time' is an acknowledged limitation on interpreting rank bins as a conserved population, but it does not make any step circular. Self-citations to [80, 81] are used for profile-estimation methods and prior context; the new conclusions are supported by Magneticum measurements and comparisons, not imported by citation. No uniqueness theorem is invoked, and no fitted quantity is relabeled as a prediction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are introduced. The analysis uses standard cosmological assumptions and the Magneticum simulations. The free parameters are selection choices (mass cuts, merging threshold, subsampling) rather than fitted parameters. The self-similarity assumption is the most paper-specific axiom.

free parameters (3)
  • Halo mass cut M_h = 1e12 Msun/h (midres), 1e11 Msun/h (highres)
    Hand-chosen thresholds to ensure well-resolved tracers; directly affects which voids are identified and the inferred stabilization epochs (z≲0.67 in mr, z≲1.32 in hr). Section 4.1, Figure 1.
  • VIDE merging threshold = 1e-9
    Set to the VIDE default to prevent void merging; determines the void catalog and thus all derived statistics. Section 3.1.
  • CDM subsampling fraction for void identification = 0.066% of CDM particles in mr, 0.034% in hr
    Fixed to match halo number density at z=0.29; sets the physical scale of CDM voids and affects the comparison with halo voids. Section 4.1, Figure 2.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption Flat ΛCDM cosmology with WMAP7 parameters (Ω_m=0.272, Ω_Λ=0.728, h=0.704, σ_8=0.809, n_s=0.963)
    The Magneticum simulations are run under this cosmology; all results are conditional on it. Section 2.
  • standard math Linear growth factor D+(a) from Eq. (6.1) accurately describes the homogeneous background growth of density perturbations
    Used for the backward predictions in Section 6. This is a standard result from linear perturbation theory in ΛCDM.
  • domain assumption Hydrodynamic simulations provide a faithful representation of the nonlinear matter distribution for void statistics
    The analysis relies on Magneticum as a proxy for the universe, including its baryonic and AGN feedback models. Section 2.
  • ad hoc to paper Void populations are self-similar across resolutions and mass cuts
    The relative framework relies on the claim that different resolutions probe the same evolutionary stages at different epochs. This is asserted from visual comparison of Figures 3-10 and not proven quantitatively. Section 5.3.

reviewed 2026-08-04 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Why Cosmic Voids Matter: Pristine Evolution." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JEBST6QG

@misc{pith2026250907092,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Why Cosmic Voids Matter: Pristine Evolution},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JEBST6QG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.07092}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

We utilize the Magneticum suite of hydrodynamical simulations to investigate the formation and evolution of cosmic voids from $z = 5.04$ to present day, using cold dark matter and (sub-) halo tracers in high-density samples. This includes the evolution of their global properties, such as size, shape, inner density, and average density, as well as their radial density profiles. Our results provide several key conclusions for void analyses in modern surveys. We demonstrate that a relative size framework is required, mitigating methodological selection effects and revealing the true physical evolution of densities around halo-defined voids. This necessity arises from our findings that a void's properties are more fundamentally tied to its rank within its contemporary population than to its absolute size. Using this framework, we show that the evolution of halo voids stabilizes at redshifts below $z \simeq 1$, driven primarily by cosmic expansion rather than ongoing halo formation. We further find that the matter evolution around these stable voids is remarkably well-described by linear growth theory, with deviations appearing as non-linear growth on small scales and suppressed growth in the largest voids, potentially driven by the influence of dark energy. This late-time stability and the predictable evolution confirm voids as pristine laboratories for probing the nature of dark energy with upcoming surveys.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. Baryons in the Darkest Sites of the Universe

    astro-ph.CO 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Stacking 3455 CHIME/FRB sightlines on 1288 SDSS voids shows a 3.2 sigma DM deficit toward centers, implying 60 percent baryon underdensity consistent with galaxy underdensity and hydrodynamical simulations.

  2. Optimization of Tessellation-based Statistics: Void Statistics

    astro-ph.CO 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Subsampling and averaging stabilizes Delaunay and Voronoi tessellation void statistics (VSF, VTCF, VPS), reducing scatters attributed to tessellation instabilities and boosting BAO signal-to-noise and cosmological con...

  3. Towards precision cosmology with Void x CMB correlations (II): Impact of mock catalogs on the Void x CMB lensing signal

    astro-ph.CO 2026-05 conditional novelty 5.0

    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.

  4. Towards precision cosmology with Voids x CMB correlations (I): Roman-Agora mock catalogs and pipeline validation

    astro-ph.CO 2025-12 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    The authors introduce analog matching to generate Roman Space Telescope mock catalogs that reproduce emission-line galaxy statistics and highlight the need to match void properties separately from two-point clustering...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

160 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages · cited by 4 Pith papers · 39 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Gregory and L.A

    S.A. Gregory and L.A. Thompson,The Coma/A1367 supercluster and its environs., Astrophys. J.222(1978) 784

    1978

  2. [2]

    J˜ oeveer, J

    M. J˜ oeveer, J. Einasto and E. Tago,Spatial distribution of galaxies and of clusters of galaxies in the southern galactic hemisphere, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.185(1978) 357

    1978

  3. [3]

    Kirshner, J

    R.P. Kirshner, J. Oemler, A., P.L. Schechter and S.A. Shectman,A million cubic megaparsec void in Bootes ?, Astrophys. J.248(1981) L57

    1981

  4. [4]

    Zeldovich, J

    I.B. Zeldovich, J. Einasto and S.F. Shandarin,Giant voids in the Universe, Nature300 (1982) 407

    1982

  5. [5]

    Bertschinger,The self-similar evolution of holes in an Einstein-de Sitter universe, ApJS58 (1985) 1

    E. Bertschinger,The self-similar evolution of holes in an Einstein-de Sitter universe, ApJS58 (1985) 1

    1985

  6. [6]

    van de Weygaert and E

    R. van de Weygaert and E. van Kampen,Voids in Gravitational Instability Scenarios - Part One - Global Density and Velocity Fields in an Einstein - De-Sitter Universe, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.263(1993) 481

    1993

  7. [7]

    Bennett, M

    C.L. Bennett, M. Halpern, G. Hinshaw, N. Jarosik, A. Kogut, M. Limon et al.,First-Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Preliminary Maps and Basic Results, ApJS148(2003) 1 [astro-ph/0302207]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  8. [8]

    Aghanim, Y

    Planck Collaboration, N. Aghanim, Y. Akrami, F. Arroja, M. Ashdown, J. Aumont et al., Planck 2018 results. I. Overview and the cosmological legacy of Planck, Astron. Astrophys. 641(2020) A1 [1807.06205]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  9. [9]

    Riess, A.V

    A.G. Riess, A.V. Filippenko, P. Challis, A. Clocchiatti, A. Diercks, P.M. Garnavich et al., Observational Evidence from Supernovae for an Accelerating Universe and a Cosmological Constant, AJ116(1998) 1009 [astro-ph/9805201]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  10. [10]

    Perlmutter, G

    S. Perlmutter, G. Aldering, G. Goldhaber, R.A. Knop, P. Nugent, P.G. Castro et al., Measurements ofΩandΛfrom 42 High-Redshift Supernovae, Astrophys. J.517(1999) 565 [astro-ph/9812133]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  11. [11]

    Adame, J

    A.G. Adame, J. Aguilar, S. Ahlen, S. Alam, D.M. Alexander, M. Alvarez et al.,DESI 2024 VI: cosmological constraints from the measurements of baryon acoustic oscillations, JCAP 2025(2025) 021 [2404.03002]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  12. [12]

    Adame, J

    A.G. Adame, J. Aguilar, S. Ahlen, S. Alam, D.M. Alexander, C. Allende Prieto et al.,DESI 2024 VII: cosmological constraints from the full-shape modeling of clustering measurements, JCAP2025(2025) 028 [2411.12022]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  13. [13]

    Abdul-Karim, J

    DESI Collaboration, M. Abdul-Karim, J. Aguilar, S. Ahlen, S. Alam, L. Allen et al.,DESI DR2 Results II: Measurements of Baryon Acoustic Oscillations and Cosmological Constraints, arXiv e-prints(2025) arXiv:2503.14738 [2503.14738]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  14. [14]

    Sloan Digital Sky Survey (http://www.sdss3.org/)

  15. [15]

    Dawson, D.J

    K.S. Dawson, D.J. Schlegel, C.P. Ahn, S.F. Anderson, ´E. Aubourg, S. Bailey et al.,The Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey of SDSS-III, AJ145(2013) 10 [1208.0022]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  16. [16]

    The Dark Energy Survey Collaboration,The Dark Energy Survey,arXiv e-prints(2005) astro [astro-ph/0510346]. – 30 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  17. [17]

    Dawson, J.-P

    K.S. Dawson, J.-P. Kneib, W.J. Percival, S. Alam, F.D. Albareti, S.F. Anderson et al.,The SDSS-IV Extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: Overview and Early Data, AJ 151(2016) 44 [1508.04473]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  18. [18]

    Pisani, E

    A. Pisani, E. Massara, D.N. Spergel, D. Alonso, T. Baker, Y.-C. Cai et al.,Cosmic voids: a novel probe to shed light on our Universe, BAAS51(2019) 40 [1903.05161]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  19. [19]

    Moresco, L

    M. Moresco, L. Amati, L. Amendola, S. Birrer, J.P. Blakeslee, M. Cantiello et al.,Unveiling the Universe with emerging cosmological probes,Living Reviews in Relativity25(2022) 6 [2201.07241]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  20. [20]

    Di Valentino, J.L

    E. Di Valentino, J.L. Said, A. Riess, A. Pollo, V. Poulin, A. G´ omez-Valent et al.,The CosmoVerse White Paper: Addressing observational tensions in cosmology with systematics and fundamental physics,Physics of the Dark Universe49(2025) 101965

    2025

  21. [21]

    Cai and M

    Y.-C. Cai and M. Neyrinck,Cosmology with Cosmic Voids,arXiv e-prints(2025) arXiv:2503.22532 [2503.22532]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  22. [22]

    Biswas, E

    R. Biswas, E. Alizadeh and B.D. Wandelt,Voids as a precision probe of dark energy, Phys. Rev. D82(2010) 023002 [1002.0014]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  23. [23]

    Pan, M.S

    D.C. Pan, M.S. Vogeley, F. Hoyle, Y.-Y. Choi and C. Park,Cosmic voids in Sloan Digital Sky Survey Data Release 7, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.421(2012) 926 [1103.4156]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  24. [24]

    Lavaux and B.D

    G. Lavaux and B.D. Wandelt,Precision Cosmography with Stacked Voids, Astrophys. J.754 (2012) 109 [1110.0345]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  25. [25]

    Sutter, G

    P.M. Sutter, G. Lavaux, B.D. Wandelt and D.H. Weinberg,A First Application of the Alcock-Paczynski Test to Stacked Cosmic Voids, Astrophys. J.761(2012) 187 [1208.1058]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  26. [26]

    Hamaus, B.D

    N. Hamaus, B.D. Wandelt, P.M. Sutter, G. Lavaux and M.S. Warren,Cosmology with Void-Galaxy Correlations, Phys. Rev. Lett.112(2014) 041304 [1307.2571]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  27. [27]

    Pisani, P.M

    A. Pisani, P.M. Sutter, N. Hamaus, E. Alizadeh, R. Biswas, B.D. Wandelt et al.,Counting voids to probe dark energy, Phys. Rev. D92(2015) 083531 [1503.07690]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  28. [28]

    Mao, A.A

    Q. Mao, A.A. Berlind, R.J. Scherrer, M.C. Neyrinck, R. Scoccimarro, J.L. Tinker et al., Cosmic Voids in the SDSS DR12 BOSS Galaxy Sample: The Alcock-Paczynski Test, Astrophys. J.835(2017) 160 [1602.06306]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  29. [29]

    Hamaus, M.-C

    N. Hamaus, M.-C. Cousinou, A. Pisani, M. Aubert, S. Escoffier and J. Weller,Multipole analysis of redshift-space distortions around cosmic voids, JCAP7(2017) 014 [1705.05328]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  30. [30]

    Sahl´ en,Cluster-void degeneracy breaking: Neutrino properties and dark energy, Phys

    M. Sahl´ en,Cluster-void degeneracy breaking: Neutrino properties and dark energy, Phys. Rev. D99(2019) 063525 [1807.02470]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  31. [31]

    Nadathur, A

    S. Nadathur, A. Woodfinden, W.J. Percival, M. Aubert, J. Bautista, K. Dawson et al.,The completed SDSS-IV extended baryon oscillation spectroscopic survey: geometry and growth from the anisotropic void-galaxy correlation function in the luminous red galaxy sample, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.499(2020) 4140 [2008.06060]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  32. [32]

    Hamaus, A

    N. Hamaus, A. Pisani, J.-A. Choi, G. Lavaux, B.D. Wandelt and J. Weller,Precision cosmology with voids in the final BOSS data, JCAP2020(2020) 023 [2007.07895]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  33. [33]

    Correa, D.J

    C.M. Correa, D.J. Paz, A.G. S´ anchez, A.N. Ruiz, N.D. Padilla and R.E. Angulo, Redshift-space effects in voids and their impact on cosmological tests. Part I: the void size function, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.500(2021) 911 [2007.12064]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  34. [34]

    Davies, M

    C.T. Davies, M. Cautun, B. Giblin, B. Li, J. Harnois-D´ eraps and Y.-C. Cai,Constraining cosmology with weak lensing voids, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.507(2021) 2267 [2010.11954]. – 31 –

    arXiv 2021

  35. [35]

    Vielzeuf, A

    P. Vielzeuf, A. Kov´ acs, U. Demirbozan, P. Fosalba, E. Baxter, N. Hamaus et al.,Dark Energy Survey Year 1 results: the lensing imprint of cosmic voids on the cosmic microwave background, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.500(2021) 464 [1911.02951]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  36. [36]

    Aubert, M.-C

    M. Aubert, M.-C. Cousinou, S. Escoffier, A.J. Hawken, S. Nadathur, S. Alam et al.,The completed SDSS-IV extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: growth rate of structure measurement from cosmic voids, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.513(2022) 186 [2007.09013]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  37. [37]

    Kov´ acs, P

    A. Kov´ acs, P. Vielzeuf, I. Ferrero, P. Fosalba, U. Demirbozan, R. Miquel et al.,Dark Energy Survey Year 3 results: Imprints of cosmic voids and superclusters in the Planck CMB lensing map, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.515(2022) 4417 [2203.11306]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  38. [38]

    Sheth and R

    R.K. Sheth and R. van de Weygaert,A hierarchy of voids: much ado about nothing, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.350(2004) 517 [astro-ph/0311260]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  39. [39]

    Conroy, A.L

    C. Conroy, A.L. Coil, M. White, J.A. Newman, R. Yan, M.C. Cooper et al.,The DEEP2 Galaxy Redshift Survey: The Evolution of Void Statistics from z ˜1 to z ˜0, Astrophys. J.635 (2005) 990 [astro-ph/0508250]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  40. [40]

    Jennings, Y

    E. Jennings, Y. Li and W. Hu,The abundance of voids and the excursion set formalism, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.434(2013) 2167 [1304.6087]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  41. [41]

    Nadathur,Testing cosmology with a catalogue of voids in the BOSS galaxy surveys, Mon

    S. Nadathur,Testing cosmology with a catalogue of voids in the BOSS galaxy surveys, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.461(2016) 358 [1602.04752]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  42. [42]

    Sahl´ en,´I

    M. Sahl´ en,´I. Zubeld ´ ıa and J. Silk,Cluster-Void Degeneracy Breaking: Dark Energy, Planck, and the Largest Cluster and Void, Astrophys. J.820(2016) L7 [1511.04075]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  43. [43]

    Contarini, T

    S. Contarini, T. Ronconi, F. Marulli, L. Moscardini, A. Veropalumbo and M. Baldi, Cosmological exploitation of the size function of cosmic voids identified in the distribution of biased tracers, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.488(2019) 3526 [1904.01022]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  44. [44]

    Verza, A

    G. Verza, A. Pisani, C. Carbone, N. Hamaus and L. Guzzo,The void size function in dynamical dark energy cosmologies, JCAP2019(2019) 040 [1906.00409]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  45. [45]

    Contarini, A

    S. Contarini, A. Pisani, N. Hamaus, F. Marulli, L. Moscardini and M. Baldi,Cosmological Constraints from the BOSS DR12 Void Size Function, Astrophys. J.953(2023) 46 [2212.03873]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  46. [46]

    Verza, G

    G. Verza, G. Degni, A. Pisani, N. Hamaus, E. Massara, A. Benson et al.,Cosmology with voids from the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope,arXiv e-prints(2024) arXiv:2410.19713 [2410.19713]

    arXiv 2024

  47. [47]

    Hamaus, P.M

    N. Hamaus, P.M. Sutter and B.D. Wandelt,Universal Density Profile for Cosmic Voids, Physical Review Letters112(2014) 251302 [1403.5499]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  48. [48]

    Pisani, G

    A. Pisani, G. Lavaux, P.M. Sutter and B.D. Wandelt,Real-space density profile reconstruction of stacked voids, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.443(2014) 3238 [1306.3052]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  49. [49]

    Y.-C. Cai, A. Taylor, J.A. Peacock and N. Padilla,Redshift-space distortions around voids, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.462(2016) 2465 [1603.05184]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  50. [50]

    Hamaus, A

    N. Hamaus, A. Pisani, P.M. Sutter, G. Lavaux, S. Escoffier, B.D. Wandelt et al.,Constraints on Cosmology and Gravity from the Dynamics of Voids,Physical Review Letters117(2016) 091302 [1602.01784]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  51. [51]

    Hawken, B.R

    A.J. Hawken, B.R. Granett, A. Iovino, L. Guzzo, J.A. Peacock, S. de la Torre et al.,The VIMOS Public Extragalactic Redshift Survey. Measuring the growth rate of structure around cosmic voids, Astron. Astrophys.607(2017) A54 [1611.07046]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  52. [52]

    Achitouv,New constraints on the linear growth rate using cosmic voids in the SDSS DR12 datasets, Phys

    I. Achitouv,New constraints on the linear growth rate using cosmic voids in the SDSS DR12 datasets, Phys. Rev. D100(2019) 123513 [1903.05645]. – 32 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  53. [53]

    Correa, D.J

    C.M. Correa, D.J. Paz, N.D. Padilla, A.N. Ruiz, R.E. Angulo and A.G. S´ anchez,Non-fiducial cosmological test from geometrical and dynamical distortions around voids, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.485(2019) 5761 [1811.12251]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  54. [54]

    Hawken, M

    A.J. Hawken, M. Aubert, A. Pisani, M.-C. Cousinou, S. Escoffier, S. Nadathur et al., Constraints on the growth of structure around cosmic voids in eBOSS DR14, JCAP2020 (2020) 012 [1909.04394]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  55. [55]

    Correa, D.J

    C.M. Correa, D.J. Paz, N.D. Padilla, A.G. S´ anchez, A.N. Ruiz and R.E. Angulo, Redshift-space effects in voids and their impact on cosmological tests - II. The void-galaxy cross-correlation function, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.509(2022) 1871 [2107.01314]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  56. [56]

    Hamaus, M

    N. Hamaus, M. Aubert, A. Pisani, S. Contarini, G. Verza, M.C. Cousinou et al.,Euclid: Forecasts from redshift-space distortions and the Alcock-Paczynski test with cosmic voids, Astron. Astrophys.658(2022) A20 [2108.10347]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  57. [57]

    Woodfinden, S

    A. Woodfinden, S. Nadathur, W.J. Percival, S. Radinovic, E. Massara and H.A. Winther, Measurements of cosmic expansion and growth rate of structure from voids in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey between redshift 0.07 and 1.0, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.516(2022) 4307 [2205.06258]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  58. [58]

    Radinovi´ c, S

    S. Radinovi´ c, S. Nadathur, H.A. Winther, W.J. Percival, A. Woodfinden, E. Massara et al., Euclid: Cosmology forecasts from the void-galaxy cross-correlation function with reconstruction, Astron. Astrophys.677(2023) A78 [2302.05302]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  59. [59]

    Krause, T.-C

    E. Krause, T.-C. Chang, O. Dor´ e and K. Umetsu,The Weight of Emptiness: The Gravitational Lensing Signal of Stacked Voids, Astrophys. J.762(2013) L20 [1210.2446]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  60. [60]

    Clampitt and B

    J. Clampitt and B. Jain,Lensing measurements of the mass distribution in SDSS voids, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.454(2015) 3357 [1404.1834]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  61. [61]

    Chantavat, U

    T. Chantavat, U. Sawangwit and B.D. Wandelt,Void Profile from Planck Lensing Potential Map, Astrophys. J.836(2017) 156 [1702.01009]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  62. [62]

    Y.-C. Cai, M. Neyrinck, Q. Mao, J.A. Peacock, I. Szapudi and A.A. Berlind,The lensing and temperature imprints of voids on the cosmic microwave background, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.466(2017) 3364 [1609.00301]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  63. [63]

    S´ anchez, J

    C. S´ anchez, J. Clampitt, A. Kovacs, B. Jain, J. Garc ´ ıa-Bellido, S. Nadathur et al.,Cosmic voids and void lensing in the Dark Energy Survey Science Verification data, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.465(2017) 746 [1605.03982]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  64. [64]

    Baker, J

    T. Baker, J. Clampitt, B. Jain and M. Trodden,Void lensing as a test of gravity, Phys. Rev. D98(2018) 023511 [1803.07533]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  65. [65]

    Y. Fang, N. Hamaus, B. Jain, S. Pandey, G. Pollina, C. S´ anchez et al.,Dark Energy Survey year 1 results: the relationship between mass and light around cosmic voids, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.490(2019) 3573 [1909.01386]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  66. [66]

    Bonici, C

    M. Bonici, C. Carbone, S. Davini, P. Vielzeuf, L. Paganin, V. Cardone et al.,Euclid: Forecasts from the void-lensing cross-correlation, Astron. Astrophys.670(2023) A47 [2206.14211]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  67. [67]

    Martin, M.J

    H.L. Martin, M.J. Hudson, A. Woodfinden, L. Baumont, T. de Boer, P.A. Burger et al., Lensing without mass: The matter density profile in cosmic voids from UNIONS,arXiv e-prints(2025) arXiv:2507.13450 [2507.13450]

    arXiv 2025

  68. [68]

    Hamaus, P.M

    N. Hamaus, P.M. Sutter, G. Lavaux and B.D. Wandelt,Testing cosmic geometry without dynamic distortions using voids, JCAP12(2014) 013 [1409.3580]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  69. [69]

    K.C. Chan, N. Hamaus and V. Desjacques,Large-scale clustering of cosmic voids, Phys. Rev. D90(2014) 103521 [1409.3849]. – 33 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  70. [70]

    Chuang, F.-S

    C.-H. Chuang, F.-S. Kitaura, Y. Liang, A. Font-Ribera, C. Zhao, P. McDonald et al.,Linear redshift space distortions for cosmic voids based on galaxies in redshift space, Phys. Rev. D95 (2017) 063528 [1605.05352]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  71. [71]

    Kreisch, A

    C.D. Kreisch, A. Pisani, C. Carbone, J. Liu, A.J. Hawken, E. Massara et al.,Massive Neutrinos Leave Fingerprints on Cosmic Voids, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. (2019) 1877 [1808.07464]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  72. [72]

    Voivodic, H

    R. Voivodic, H. Rubira and M. Lima,The halo void (dust) model of large scale structure, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2020(2020) 033

    2020

  73. [73]

    Kreisch, A

    C.D. Kreisch, A. Pisani, F. Villaescusa-Navarro, D.N. Spergel, B.D. Wandelt, N. Hamaus et al.,The GIGANTES Data Set: Precision Cosmology from Voids in the Machine-learning Era, Astrophys. J.935(2022) 100 [2107.02304]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  74. [74]

    B.Y. Wang, A. Pisani, F. Villaescusa-Navarro and B.D. Wandelt,Machine-learning Cosmology from Void Properties, Astrophys. J.955(2023) 131 [2212.06860]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  75. [75]

    Thiele, E

    L. Thiele, E. Massara, A. Pisani, C. Hahn, D.N. Spergel, S. Ho et al.,Neutrino Mass Constraint from an Implicit Likelihood Analysis of BOSS Voids, Astrophys. J.969(2024) 89 [2307.07555]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  76. [76]

    Cosmology from one galaxy in a void?

    B.Y. Wang and A. Pisani,Cosmology from One Galaxy in a Void?, Astrophys. J.970(2024) L32 [2405.04447]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  77. [77]

    Modelling the BOSS void-galaxy cross-correlation function using a neural-network emulator

    T.S. Fraser, E. Paillas, W.J. Percival, S. Nadathur, S. Radinovi´ c and H.A. Winther,Modelling the BOSS void-galaxy cross-correlation function using a neural-network emulator, JCAP2025 (2025) 001 [2407.03221]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  78. [78]

    Lehman, N

    K. Lehman, N. Schuster, L. Lucie-Smith, N. Hamaus, C.T. Davies and K. Dolag, Cosmological Inference with Cosmic Voids and Neural Network Emulators,arXiv e-prints (2025) arXiv:2502.05262 [2502.05262]

    work page arXiv 2025

  79. [79]

    Salcedo, A

    A.N. Salcedo, A. Pisani and N. Hamaus,Multi-probe cosmology forecasts from HOD-based forward modeling of galaxy and void statistics,arXiv e-prints(2025) arXiv:2504.08221 [2504.08221]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  80. [80]

    Why Cosmic Voids Matter: Nonlinear Structure & Linear Dynamics

    N. Schuster, N. Hamaus, K. Dolag and J. Weller,Why cosmic voids matter: nonlinear structure & linear dynamics, JCAP2023(2023) 031 [2210.02457]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

Showing first 80 references.

This paper was first reviewed by deepseek-v4-flash on August 4, 2026.