Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Comparing halo bias from abundance and clustering

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1503.00313 v3 pith:XKHT25KX submitted 2015-03-01 astro-ph.CO

classification astro-ph.CO
keywords masspredictionsbiasclusteringdifferentfitsfittingvariations
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
abstract

We model the abundance of haloes in the $\sim(3 \ \text{Gpc}/h)^3$ volume of the MICE Grand Challenge simulation by fitting the universal mass function with an improved Jack-Knife error covariance estimator that matches theory predictions. We present unifying relations between different fitting models and new predictions for linear ($b_1$) and non-linear ($c_2$ and $c_3$) halo clustering bias. Different mass function fits show strong variations in their performance when including the low mass range ($M_h \lesssim 3 \ 10^{12} \ M_{\odot}/h$) in the analysis. Together with fits from the literature we find an overall variation in the amplitudes of around $10$% in the low mass and up to $50$% in the high mass (galaxy cluster) range ($M_h > 10^{14} \ M_{\odot}/h$). These variations propagate into a $10$% change in $b_1$ predictions and a $50$% change in $c_2$ or $c_3$. Despite these strong variations we find universal relations between $b_1$ and $c_2$ or $c_3$ for which we provide simple fits. Excluding low mass haloes, different models fitted with reasonable goodness in this analysis, show percent level agreement in their $b_1$ predictions, but are systematically $5-10$% lower than the bias directly measured with two-point halo-mass clustering. This result confirms previous findings derived from smaller volumes (and smaller masses). Inaccuracies in the bias predictions lead to $5-10$% errors in growth measurements. They also affect any HOD fitting or (cluster) mass calibration from clustering measurements.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Toward a robust inference method for the galaxy bispectrum: likelihood function and model selection

    astro-ph.CO 2019-08 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    For dark matter halos at z=1, a tree-level three-parameter bias model with Poissonian shot noise describes the halo bispectrum up to k about 0.08 h/Mpc, and Bayesian model selection disfavours local Eulerian and Lagra...

Pith tools