Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 49 references

A trailing lognormal approximation of the Lyman-$\alpha$ forest: comparison with full hydrodynamic simulations at $2.2\leq z\leq 2.7$

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A lognormal model of the Lyman-α forest that is evolved 0.6 in redshift below the data recovers the hydrogen photoionization rate at z = 2.2–2.7 to within about 1σ.

desk verdict A simple redshift-offset fix genuinely improves lognormal Lyα forest parameter recovery, but the headline Γ12 claim rests on a calibration done with the true parameters in hand. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.04055 v2 pith:LMYSR2YU submitted 2025-01-07 astro-ph.CO

Bhaskar Arya This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.CO
keywords Lyman-αforestlognormalapproximationintergalacticmediumphotoionizationratefluxpowerspectrumMCMCparameterestimationIGMthermalstatestatistics
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper argues that a lognormal model of the intergalactic density field can recover the hydrogen photoionization rate $\Gamma_{12}$ from Lyman-$\alpha$ forest statistics at $2.2 \leq z \leq 2.7$, provided the model spectra are generated at a redshift $0.6$ lower than the hydrodynamical simulation data. Earlier versions of the same model overproduced Lyman-$\alpha$ absorbers and consequently overestimated $\Gamma_{12}$ by more than $3\sigma$; the redshift offset reduces the excess mildly non-linear densities that produce the forest. With this 'trailing' prescription, the paper reports $\Gamma_{12}$ recovered at $\lesssim 1\sigma$ (with $z=2.4$ at about $1.5\sigma$), and the thermal parameters $T_0$ and $\gamma$ are recovered more accurately as well. The physical reason for the plateau at $\delta z \approx 0.6$ is stated to be unclear. If the claim holds, a fast semi-analytical model could make full parameter-space exploration of the IGM and cosmology feasible for upcoming large surveys.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the trailing lognormal model: a lognormal baryonic density field built from a Jeans-smoothed linear matter power spectrum, but evaluated at $z_{\mathrm{model}} = z_{\mathrm{SPH}} - \delta z$ rather than at the data redshift. The fixed offset $\delta z = 0.6$ does the essential work by lowering the amplitude of the mildly non-linear overdensities along the line of sight, which reduces the overabundant Lyman-$\alpha$ absorbers without requiring an inflated photoionization rate. The model is then fit to the mean flux and flux power spectrum through MCMC over $\{x_J, T_0, \gamma, \Gamma_{12}\}$; the trailing prescription also removes the need for the extra scaling parameter used in the earlier version, simplifying the setup and speeding up convergence.

What would settle it

Run the fixed-offset trailing lognormal model against a second, independent hydrodynamical simulation at $z=2.5$ with a different thermal history; if the recovered $\Gamma_{12}$ differs from that simulation's input by more than about $1\sigma$, the offset is not a generic property of the lognormal approximation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that earlier failures of the lognormal approximation do not require abandoning it; the model fails because it puts too much mass in the mildly non-linear overdensities ($\Delta_b \sim 1$–$10$) that dominate Lyman-$\alpha$ absorption. Generating the model at $z_{\mathrm{model}} = z_{\mathrm{SPH}} - \delta z$, with $\delta z = 0.6$, flattens the density and column-density distributions enough to remove the excess absorbers, while leaving the recovered $\Gamma_{12}$ close to the true value. The paper demonstrates this with MCMC fits to the mean transmitted flux and the flux power spectrum of the reference SPH simulation, using a 2D $\chi^2$ calibration to fix $\delta z$. In those fits the true $\Gamma_{12}$ lies within $1\sigma$ of the recovered median at all tested redshifts except $z=2.4$ (about $1.5\sigma$), and the recovered $T_0$ and $\gamma$ improve by roughly 20% and 70% in error size relative to the earlier model, which also removes the bimodal and 'inverted' temperature-density relation seen at $z \geq 2.5$.

Load-bearing premise

Everything rests on the assumption that a fixed offset of 0.6 in redshift makes the lognormal density field at $z - 0.6$ statistically equivalent to the full hydrodynamic field at $z$ across the whole redshift and parameter range tested.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the trailing lognormal recovers $\Gamma_{12}$, $T_0$, and $\gamma$ at about $1\sigma$ over $2.2 \leq z \leq 2.7$, the same pipeline can explore joint astrophysical and cosmological parameter space at these redshifts without running a full hydrodynamical simulation for every model evaluation.
  • Because $\delta z$ appears to plateau near $0.6$ across the tested range, it can be held fixed in MCMC runs, shortening the analysis time by roughly a factor of four and removing degeneracies involving the offset.
  • The model reproduces the mean flux and flux power spectrum well enough that it can generate mock spectra and covariance matrices for large upcoming surveys.
  • The improved recovery of the thermal history, including the disappearance of the bimodal and inverted temperature-density relation, means the lognormal model no longer produces a pathological temperature-density relation at these redshifts.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The paper leaves the physical origin of $\delta z \approx 0.6$ open; as an extension, if this offset is interpreted as an effective delay of nonlinear growth, its value may depend on redshift, thermal history, or cosmology, and portability should be tested against an independent hydrodynamical simulation before applying the model to real data.
  • The same redshift-offset trick could be applied to higher-order flux statistics, such as the bispectrum or wavelet scattering coefficients, where the excess absorber population could bias the constraints more strongly than it biases the mean flux and power spectrum.
  • A testable extension would be to replace the Gaussian log-density field with a skewed density field at the same redshift; if the required $\delta z$ shrinks, that would show exactly what the offset is compensating for.
  • The paper suggests treating $\delta z$ as a free parameter in future MCMC runs; doing so would reveal whether the $1\sigma$ recovery persists when the offset is not fixed and whether $\delta z$ is degenerate with $\Gamma_{12}$ or the Jeans scale.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper proposes a modification to the lognormal seminumerical model of the Lyα forest: instead of simulating the lognormal density field at the same redshift as the hydrodynamic simulation, the model is evolved at z_model = z_SPH − δz, with δz fixed to 0.6. Using the Sherwood SPH simulation as data, the author runs MCMC fits to the mean transmitted flux and flux power spectrum at z = 2.2–2.7 with free parameters {log xJ, log T0, γ, log Γ12}, and reports that Γ12 is recovered within ≲1σ (except z = 2.4 at ~1.5σ), with improved recovery of T0 and γ compared to previous work. The paper also examines the density PDF and column density distributions to explain the improvement.

Significance. If the claim holds, the trailing lognormal model is an attractive fast surrogate for hydrodynamical Lyα forest simulations for parameter estimation and mock generation. The manuscript is clearly written and provides a reproducible analysis pipeline: MCMC with cobaya, Gelman-Rubin convergence checks, public Sherwood data, and detailed flux-statistics comparisons. The main unresolved issue is that the key hyperparameter δz is calibrated using the true values of the very quantities the paper claims to recover, so the demonstrated accuracy is conditional rather than predictive. The paper is in scope for JCAP and the method could be useful after additional validation.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3.1, Eq. (2.10)] The fixed offset δz = 0.6 is obtained from the χ² grid in Fig. 1 with Γ12, T0, and γ fixed to their true SPH values. Table 2 and Fig. 5 then use this same δz to claim Γ12 recovery at ≲1σ. This is not a blind test: the calibration step uses information that is unavailable when analyzing real data. The authors acknowledge this ("we use it to our advantage") and suggest leaving δz free as future work, but the supporting evidence for the headline claim should include either a test with δz marginalized or self-calibrated in the MCMC, or a cross-validation on an independent simulation, redshift, or thermal history. Without such a test, the portability of the ≲1σ statement to new data is not established.
  2. [§3.2, Fig. 4] The best-fit models systematically underestimate the flux power spectrum in the two smallest k-bins and overestimate the mean transmitted flux at all redshifts (see also the ratio panel of Fig. 4). Because the mean flux is one of only two statistics used and directly controls the normalization of Γ12, this systematic can bias the recovered photoionization rate. The paper reports acceptable χ²ν values, but it should quantify the impact of this mismatch—for example by reweighting or excluding the low-k bins, or by adding a systematic error term—before claiming unbiased Γ12 recovery.
  3. [§3.1, Fig. 2] The δz plateau at 0.6 only holds for z ≥ 2.2; at z = 2.0 and 2.1 the best-fit δz is 0.4–0.5, and the text explicitly states that the physical reason for the plateau is unclear. This means the constancy of δz is an empirical assumption on a single Sherwood box. The conclusions claim the model can be used for joint astrophysical and cosmological parameter estimation, but no test is shown for other cosmologies, thermal histories, or box sizes. A robustness test (e.g., a second Sherwood box or a different reionization history) is needed to support the generalization.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract and §3.2] The abstract states that "values of Γ12 are recovered at ≲1−σ", but §3.2 reports a ~1.5σ discrepancy at z = 2.4; this exception should be stated in the abstract or the claim should be qualified.
  2. [Table 2] The header "log xJ ... true / best-fit" is confusing because xJ has no true value; the paper notes this in the text, but the table should use a placeholder (e.g., "—") for clarity.
  3. [Eq. (3.1)] The list of log xJ,th values contains five entries for the six redshifts {2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7}; please add the missing value or correct the list.
  4. [Fig. 5] The caption describes "Gray triangles and shaded regions are median and (16, 84) percentiles", but the figure itself uses black circles for the best-fit; please make the notation consistent in the caption, legend, and main text.
  5. [References] The reference list contains inconsistent journal name formatting (e.g., [33] uses "Monthly Notices" while others use "MNRAS"); a uniform style would improve readability.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Gamma12 recovery is a self-calibrated test: the trailing offset delta_z = 0.6 is fit to the same SPH flux statistics while holding the true Gamma12, T0, gamma fixed, so the headline 'recovery' is partly forced by construction.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 3.1 (2-parameter fit), applied via Eq. (2.10) and used in Section 3.2 / Table 2]
    "To this end, we do a simple chi^2-minimization using a 2D grid in log xJ - delta_z and find the values of {xJ, delta_z} which best fit the simulation statistics. For the other three parameters, Gamma12, T0, gamma, we use their corresponding true values in the SPH simulation. ... The reason behind flattening of delta_z for z >= 2.2 is still unclear, but we use it to our advantage by fixing delta_z = 0.6 at these redshifts instead of treating it like a free parameter in MCMC runs."

    The central claim that Gamma12 is recovered at <~1 sigma is tested with delta_z fixed to 0.6, but that value was obtained in Section 3.1 by least-squares matching to the very same SPH mean flux and flux power spectrum while holding Gamma12, T0, and gamma at their true values. Thus the 'prediction' of Gamma12 recovery is conditioned on a parameter tuned to reproduce the data at the true Gamma12. The MCMC retains freedom in xJ, T0, gamma, and Gamma12, so the recovery is not wholly mechanical; nevertheless, the key offset that removes the multi-sigma bias reported in A24 is calibrated on the answer the paper claims to recover.

full rationale

The lognormal construction itself (Eqs. 2.1-2.9) is a standard semianalytic prescription with no circularity; the Jeans smoothing, lognormal mapping, photoionization equilibrium, and Voigt profile are parameter-free given the chosen inputs. The self-citations to A23 and A24 are used for benchmarking and comparison, which is normal and does not by itself constitute load-bearing circularity. The serious issue is the trailing offset delta_z: it is introduced as the model's remedy for the known over-production of Lyman-alpha absorbers, and its fixed value 0.6 is selected in Section 3.1 by fitting the model to the SPH flux statistics with Gamma12, T0, and gamma held at their true values. The subsequent MCMC runs, which fix delta_z = 0.6, therefore do not provide an independent test of Gamma12 recovery: the offset already encodes information about the true parameters, and the reported ~1-sigma recovery (except z = 2.4 at ~1.5-sigma) is in part a restatement of the calibration. The MCMC's freedom in the other parameters means the claim is not entirely forced, so the paper is not fully circular, but the headline result is substantially self-calibrated. A blinded test, or one where delta_z is marginalized or fit per redshift bin without using the true parameters, would be needed to establish that the method can genuinely constrain Gamma12 on new data. Score 6 reflects this partial, construction-level circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The model rests on a lognormal density assumption, a power-law temperature-density relation, photoionization equilibrium, and a calibrated redshift offset δz. The offset and the Jeans length are fitted to the data; T0, γ, and Γ12 are MCMC targets rather than predictions from first principles.

free parameters (5)
  • δz (redshift offset) = 0.6 (fixed for z >= 2.2)
    Fit to SPH flux statistics with true {T0,γ,Γ12}; used to reduce overproduction of absorbers.
  • xJ (Jeans length) = log xJ / (h^-1 Mpc) ≈ -0.94 to -1.39 across z (median values, Table 2)
    Free parameter in MCMC, constrained from mean flux and flux power spectrum.
  • T0 (IGM temperature at mean density) = log T0 ≈ 4.01-4.12 (median, Table 2)
    Target parameter estimated in MCMC.
  • γ (temperature-density slope) = 1.45-1.68 (median, Table 2)
    Target parameter estimated in MCMC.
  • Γ12 (hydrogen photoionization rate) = log Γ12 ≈ -0.09 to 0.11 (median, Table 2)
    Target parameter estimated in MCMC; the paper claims recovery within ~1σ.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption The baryonic density field follows a lognormal distribution (Eq. 2.5).
    Central modeling assumption; the paper notes that the log-density being Gaussian ignores higher-order moments.
  • domain assumption Baryonic power spectrum is obtained by Jeans smoothing the linear dark-matter power spectrum (Eq. 2.1).
    Baryons trace dark matter at large scales and are pressure-smoothed at small scales; an approximation.
  • domain assumption The IGM is in photoionization equilibrium with a homogeneous photoionization rate (Eq. 2.6).
    Standard assumption for Lyα forest modeling.
  • domain assumption The IGM temperature follows a power-law temperature-density relation T = T0 (1+δ)^(γ−1).
    Standard two-parameter prescription for IGM thermal state.
  • ad hoc to paper A lognormal density field at redshift z_SPH − δz is statistically equivalent to the SPH field at z_SPH.
    The 'trailing' approximation; no physical derivation, and the paper states the reason for δz plateau is unclear.
  • ad hoc to paper δz is constant at 0.6 over 2.2≤z≤2.7.
    Empirically chosen from Fig. 2 and fixed in MCMC; not derived.
  • standard math The linear matter power spectrum from CAMB with Planck 2014 cosmology matches Sherwood.
    Input used for both lognormal model and Sherwood simulations.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A trailing lognormal approximation of the Lyman-$\alpha$ forest: comparison with full hydrodynamic simulations at $2.2\leq z\leq 2.7$." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LMYSR2YU

@misc{pith2026250104055,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A trailing lognormal approximation of the Lyman-$\alpha$ forest: comparison with full hydrodynamic simulations at $2.2\leq z\leq 2.7$},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LMYSR2YU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.04055}
}
abstract

Lyman-$\alpha$(Ly$\alpha$) forest in the spectra of distant quasars encodes the information of the underlying cosmic density field at smallest scales. The modelling of the upcoming large and high-fidelity forest data using cosmological hydrodynamical simulations is computationally challenging and therefore, requires accurate semi-analytical techniques. One such approach is based on the assumption that baryonic density fields in the intergalactic medium (IGM) follow lognormal distribution. Keeping this in mind, we extend our earlier work to improve the lognormal model of the Ly$\alpha$ forest in recovering the parameters characterizing IGM state, particularly the hydrogen photoionization rate ($\Gamma_{12}$), between $2.2 \leq z \leq 2.7$, by simulating the model spectra at a slightly lower redshift than the Sherwood smooth particle hydrodynamical simulations (SPH) data. The recovery of thermal parameters, namely, the mean-density IGM temperature ($T_0$) and the slope of the temperature-density relation ($\gamma$) is also alleviated. These parameters are estimated through a Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) technique, using the mean and power spectrum of the transmitted flux. We find that the usual lognormal distribution of IGM densities tend to over-predict the number of Ly$\alpha$ absorbers seen in SPH simulation. A lognormal model simulated at a lower redshift than SPH data can address this limitation to a certain extent. We show that with such a "trailing" model of lognormal distribution, values of $\Gamma_{12}$ are recovered at $\lesssim 1-\sigma$. We argue that this model can be useful for constraining cosmological parameters.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

49 extracted references · 32 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    M. Rauch, The lyman alpha forest in the spectra of quasistellar objects , Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics 36 (1998) 267–316, [https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.astro.36.1.267]

    doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.36.1.267 1998

  2. [2]

    D. H. Weinberg, The lyman- α forest as a cosmological tool , in AIP Conference Proceedings, AIP, 2003. DOI. – 11 –

    work page 2003

  3. [3]

    A. A. Meiksin, The physics of the intergalactic medium , Reviews of Modern Physics 81 (oct,

    work page

  4. [4]

    McQuinn, The evolution of the intergalactic medium , Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics 54 (sep, 2016) 313–362

    M. McQuinn, The evolution of the intergalactic medium , Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics 54 (sep, 2016) 313–362

    work page 2016

  5. [5]

    Measuring the temperature of the intergalactic medium

    J. Schaye, T. Theuns, A. Leonard and G. Efstathiou, Measuring the temperature of the intergalactic medium, in Building Galaxies; from the Primordial Universe to the Present (F. Hammer, T. X. Thuan, V. Cayatte, B. Guiderdoni and J. T. Thanh Van, eds.), p. 455, Jan., 2000. astro-ph/9905364. DOI

    work page Pith review arXiv 2000

  6. [6]

    J. S. Bolton, M. G. Haehnelt, M. Viel and V. Springel, The lyman a forest opacity and the metagalactic hydrogen ionization rate at z ∼ 2 − 4, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 357 (mar, 2005) 1178–1188

    work page 2005

  7. [7]

    Gaikwad, M

    P. Gaikwad, M. Rauch, M. G. Haehnelt, E. Puchwein, J. S. Bolton, L. C. Keating et al., Probing the thermal state of the intergalactic medium at z >5 with the transmission spikes in high-resolution Ly α forest spectra, MNRAS 494 (June, 2020) 5091–5109, [ 2001.10018]

    arXiv 2020

  8. [8]

    Gaikwad, R

    P. Gaikwad, R. Srianand, M. G. Haehnelt and T. R. Choudhury, A consistent and robust measurement of the thermal state of the IGM at 2 ≤ z ≤ 4 from a large sample of ly α forest spectra: evidence for late and rapid he reionization , Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 506 (jul, 2021) 4389–4412

    work page 2021

Show all 49 references
  1. [9]

    Liebscher, W

    D.-E. Liebscher, W. Priester and J. Hoell, Lyman-alpha forest and the evolution of the universe., Astronomische Nachrichten 313 (Sept., 1992) 265–273

    1992

  2. [10]

    Weinberg, Measuring Cosmological Parameters with the Lyman-alpha Forest , in APS April Meeting Abstracts, APS Meeting Abstracts, p

    D. Weinberg, Measuring Cosmological Parameters with the Lyman-alpha Forest , in APS April Meeting Abstracts, APS Meeting Abstracts, p. 8WK.05, Apr., 1998

    1998

  3. [11]

    Seljak, P

    U. Seljak, P. McDonald and A. Makarov, Cosmological constraints from the cosmic microwave background and Lyman α forest revisited, MNRAS 342 (July, 2003) L79–L84, [astro-ph/0302571]

    2003 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Mandelbaum, P

    R. Mandelbaum, P. McDonald, U. Seljak and R. Cen, Precision cosmology from the Lyman α forest: power spectrum and bispectrum , MNRAS 344 (Sept., 2003) 776–788, [astro-ph/0302112]

    2003 arXiv

  5. [13]

    S. Bird, M. Fernandez, M.-F. Ho, M. Qezlou, R. Monadi, Y. Ni et al., Priya: A new suite of lyman-alpha forest simulations for cosmology , 2023

    2023

  6. [14]

    Tohfa, S

    H. Tohfa, S. Bird, M.-F. Ho, M. Quezlou and M. Ferandez, Forecast cosmological constraints with the 1d wavelet scattering transform and the lyman- α forest, 2023

    2023

  7. [15]

    N. K. Khan, G. Kulkarni, J. S. Bolton, M. G. Haehnelt, V. Irˇ siˇ c, E. Puchwein et al.,Particle initialization effects on Lyman- α forest statistics in cosmological SPH simulations , arXiv e-prints (Oct., 2023) arXiv:2310.07767, [ 2310.07767]

    2023 arXiv

  8. [16]

    S. H. Hansen, J. Lesgourgues, S. Pastor and J. Silk, Constraining the window on sterile neutrinos as warm dark matter , Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 333 (07,

  9. [17]

    M. Viel, J. Lesgourgues, M. G. Haehnelt, S. Matarrese and A. Riotto, Constraining warm dark matter candidates including sterile neutrinos and light gravitinos with WMAP and the lyman-alpha forest, Physical Review D 71 (mar, 2005)

    2005

  10. [18]

    J. Baur, N. Palanque-Delabrouille, C. Y` eche, A. Boyarsky, O. Ruchayskiy, ´E. Armengaud et al., Constraints from Ly- α forests on non-thermal dark matter including resonantly-produced sterile neutrinos , J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys. 2017 (Dec., 2017) 013, [ 1706.03118]. – 12 –

    2017 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Irˇ siˇ c, M

    V. Irˇ siˇ c, M. Viel, M. G. Haehnelt, J. S. Bolton, S. Cristiani, G. D. Becker et al.,New constraints on the free-streaming of warm dark matter from intermediate and small scale Lyman-α forest data, Phys. Rev. D 96 (July, 2017) 023522, [1702.01764]

    2017 arXiv

  12. [20]

    S. Bose, M. Vogelsberger, J. Zavala, C. Pfrommer, F.-Y. Cyr-Racine, S. Bohr et al., ETHOS - an Effective Theory of Structure Formation: detecting dark matter interactions through the Lyman-α forest, MNRAS 487 (July, 2019) 522–536, [1811.10630]

    2019 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Garzilli, A

    A. Garzilli, A. Magalich, T. Theuns, C. S. Frenk, C. Weniger, O. Ruchayskiy et al., The Lyman-α forest as a diagnostic of the nature of the dark matter , MNRAS 489 (Nov., 2019) 3456–3471, [1809.06585]

    2019 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Palanque-Delabrouille, C

    N. Palanque-Delabrouille, C. Y` eche, N. Sch¨ oneberg, J. Lesgourgues, M. Walther, S. Chabanier et al., Hints, neutrino bounds, and WDM constraints from SDSS DR14 Lyman- α and Planck full-survey data , J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys. 2020 (Apr., 2020) 038, [ 1911.09073]

    2020 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Pedersen, A

    C. Pedersen, A. Font-Ribera, T. D. Kitching, P. McDonald, S. Bird, A. Slosar et al., Massive neutrinos and degeneracies in Lyman-alpha forest simulations , J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys. 2020 (Apr., 2020) 025, [ 1911.09596]

    2020 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Garzilli, A

    A. Garzilli, A. Magalich, O. Ruchayskiy and A. Boyarsky, How to constrain warm dark matter with the Lyman- α forest, MNRAS 502 (Apr., 2021) 2356–2363, [ 1912.09397]

    2021 arXiv

  17. [25]

    A. K. Sarkar, K. L. Pandey and S. K. Sethi, Using the redshift evolution of the Lyman- α effective opacity as a probe of dark matter models , J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys. 2021 (Oct.,

    2021

  18. [26]

    Font-Ribera, Dark Energy with DESI , in 42nd COSPAR Scientific Assembly , vol

    A. Font-Ribera, Dark Energy with DESI , in 42nd COSPAR Scientific Assembly , vol. 42, pp. E1.1–15–18, July, 2018

    2018

  19. [27]

    N. G. Kara¸ caylı, A. Font-Ribera and N. Padmanabhan, Optimal 1D Ly α forest power spectrum estimation - I. DESI-lite spectra , MNRAS 497 (Oct., 2020) 4742–4752, [ 2008.06421]

    2020 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Walther, E

    M. Walther, E. Armengaud, C. Ravoux, N. Palanque-Delabrouille, C. Y` eche and Z. Luki´ c, Simulating intergalactic gas for DESI-like small scale Lyman α forest observations, J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys. 2021 (Apr., 2021) 059, [ 2012.04008]

    2021 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Ding, C.-H

    Z. Ding, C.-H. Chuang, Y. Yu, L. H. Garrison, A. E. Bayer, Y. Feng et al., The DESI N -body Simulation Project II: Suppressing Sample Variance with Fast Simulations , arXiv e-prints (Feb., 2022) arXiv:2202.06074, [2202.06074]

    2022 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Gontcho A Gontcho and I

    S. Gontcho A Gontcho and I. P´ erez R` afols,First measurements of Lyman alpha correlations from DESI, in APS April Meeting Abstracts , vol. 2022 of APS Meeting Abstracts, p. H13.005, Apr., 2022

    2022

  23. [31]

    Dalton, S

    G. Dalton, S. C. Trager, D. C. Abrams, D. Carter, P. Bonifacio, J. A. L. Aguerri et al., WEA VE: the next generation wide-field spectroscopy facility for the William Herschel Telescope, in Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy IV (I. S. McLean, S. K. Ramsay a...

    2012

  24. [32]

    Kraljic, C

    K. Kraljic, C. Laigle, C. Pichon, S. Peirani, S. Codis, J. Shim et al., Forecasts for WEA VE-QSO: 3D clustering and connectivity of critical points with Lyman- α tomography, arXiv e-prints (Jan., 2022) arXiv:2201.02606, [ 2201.02606]

    2022 arXiv

  25. [33]

    B. Arya, T. R. Choudhury, A. Paranjape and P. Gaikwad, Lognormal seminumerical simulations of the lyman α forest: comparison with full hydrodynamic simulations , Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 520 (feb, 2023) 4023–4036

    2023

  26. [34]

    B. Arya, T. R. Choudhury, A. Paranjape and P. Gaikwad, A modified lognormal approximation of the Lyman- α forest: comparison with full hydrodynamic simulations at 2 ≤ z ≤ 2.7, J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys. 2024 (Apr., 2024) 063, [ 2310.12720]. – 13 –

    2024 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Planck Collaboration, P. A. R. Ade, N. Aghanim, C. Armitage-Caplan, M. Arnaud, M. Ashdown et al., Planck 2013 results. XVI. Cosmological parameters , A&A 571 (Nov., 2014) A16, [1303.5076]

    2013 arXiv

  28. [36]

    CAMB: Code for Anisotropies in the Microwave Background

    A. Lewis and A. Challinor, “CAMB: Code for Anisotropies in the Microwave Background.” Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1102.026, Feb., 2011

    2011

  29. [37]

    J. S. Bolton, E. Puchwein, D. Sijacki, M. G. Haehnelt, T.-S. Kim, A. Meiksin et al., The Sherwood simulation suite: overview and data comparisons with the Lyman α forest at redshifts 2 ≤ z ≤ 5, MNRAS 464 (Jan., 2017) 897–914, [ 1605.03462]

    2017 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Kulkarni, J

    G. Kulkarni, J. F. Hennawi, J. O˜ n orbe, A. Rorai and V. Springel, CHARACTERIZING THE PRESSURE SMOOTHING SCALE OF THE INTERGALACTIC MEDIUM , The Astrophysical Journal 812 (oct, 2015) 30

    2015

  31. [39]

    Rorai, G

    A. Rorai, G. D. Becker, M. G. Haehnelt, R. F. Carswell, J. S. Bolton, S. Cristiani et al., Exploring the thermal state of the low-density intergalactic medium at z = 3 with an ultrahigh signal-to-noise QSO spectrum , MNRAS 466 (Apr., 2017) 2690–2709, [ 1611.03805]

    2017 arXiv

  32. [40]

    T. R. Choudhury, R. Srianand and T. Padmanabhan, Semianalytic Approach to Understanding the Distribution of Neutral Hydrogen in the Universe: Comparison of Simulations with Observations, ApJ 559 (Sept., 2001) 29–40, [ astro-ph/0012498]

    2001 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Bi, Lyman-Alpha Absorption Spectrum of the Primordial Intergalactic Medium , ApJ 405 (Mar., 1993) 479

    H. Bi, Lyman-Alpha Absorption Spectrum of the Primordial Intergalactic Medium , ApJ 405 (Mar., 1993) 479

    1993

  34. [42]

    Springel, The cosmological simulation code gadget-2 , Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 364 (dec, 2005) 1105–1134

    V. Springel, The cosmological simulation code gadget-2 , Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 364 (dec, 2005) 1105–1134

    2005

  35. [43]

    Lewis and S

    A. Lewis and S. Bridle, Cosmological parameters from CMB and other data: A monte carlo approach, Physical Review D 66 (nov, 2002)

    2002

  36. [44]

    Lewis, Efficient sampling of fast and slow cosmological parameters , Physical Review D 87 (may, 2013)

    A. Lewis, Efficient sampling of fast and slow cosmological parameters , Physical Review D 87 (may, 2013)

    2013

  37. [45]

    Torrado and A

    J. Torrado and A. Lewis, Cobaya: code for bayesian analysis of hierarchical physical models , Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics 2021 (may, 2021) 057

    2021

  38. [46]

    Gelman and D

    A. Gelman and D. B. Rubin, Inference from Iterative Simulation Using Multiple Sequences , Statistical Science 7 (Jan., 1992) 457–472

    1992

  39. [47]

    Schaye, Explaining the Lyman-alpha forest , arXiv e-prints (Dec., 2001) astro–ph/0112022, [astro-ph/0112022]

    J. Schaye, Explaining the Lyman-alpha forest , arXiv e-prints (Dec., 2001) astro–ph/0112022, [astro-ph/0112022]

    2001

  40. [48]

    Rorai, J

    A. Rorai, J. F. Hennawi and M. White, A New Method to Directly Measure the Jeans Scale of the Intergalactic Medium Using Close Quasar Pairs , ApJ 775 (Oct., 2013) 81, [ 1305.0210]. – 14 –

    2013 arXiv

  41. [2002]

    544–546, [https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article-pdf/333/3/544/3218304/333-3-544.pdf]

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.