Pith. Sign in

RECORD

An Enlarged Cosmic Shear Survey with the William Herschel Telescope

Astrophysics · Submitted 8 Apr 2004

abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review

The authors' main claim We find that the normalisation of the matter power spectrum on 8 h^{-1}Mpc scales is sigma_8=(1.02+/-0.15)(0.3/Omega_m)^{0.5}, where the 68%CL error includes noise, sample variance, covariance between angular scales, systematic effects, redshift uncertainty and marginalisation over other parameters.

how it is stated · asserted 1.00 read the record →

Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗
Cite ▾
arXiv IDastro-ph/0404195 (version 2)
Pith IDQDSL7IW6, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review
CitationAlexandre Refregier, David J. Bacon, Michael L. Brown, Richard Ellis, Richard Massey. "An Enlarged Cosmic Shear Survey with the William Herschel Telescope." arXiv:astro-ph/0404195 (2004). https://pith.science/paper/QDSL7IW6
Claim paper

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Open the compiled record

Compiled by classifier-1.13.0 via TypeSafe API, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 5,729 input tokens.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.03 · states limitation 0.55 · human participants 0.02 · controlled comparison 0.08 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.99 · compares with prior results 0.98 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v2. Results and the main claim are underlined; .

We report the results of a cosmic shear survey using the 4.2m William Herschel Telescope on La Palma, to a depth of R=25.8 (z~0.8), over 4 square degrees. The shear correlation functions are measured on scales from 1' to 15', and are used to constrain cosmological parameters. We ensure that our measurements are free from instrumental systematics by performing a series of tests, including a decomposition of the signal into E- and B-modes. We also reanalyse the data independently, using the shear measurement pipeline developed for the COMBO-17 survey. This confirms our results and also highlights various effects introduced by different implementations of the basic "KSB" shear measurement method. We find that the normalisation of the matter power spectrum on 8 h^{-1}Mpc scales is sigma_8=(1.02+/-0.15)(0.3/Omega_m)^{0.5}, where the 68%CL error includes noise, sample variance, covariance between angular scales, systematic effects, redshift uncertainty and marginalisation over other parameters. We compare these results with other cosmic shear surveys and with recent constraints from the WMAP experiment.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#sentencerolethe authors' own workstates the main conclusionstrength
s0 We report the results of a cosmic shear survey using the 4.2m William Herschel Telescope on La Palma, to a depth of R=25.8 (z~0.8), over 4 square degrees. contribution 0.86 0.97 0.04 asserted 1.00
s1 The shear correlation functions are measured on scales from 1' to 15', and are used to constrain cosmological parameters. method 0.81 0.96 0.05 asserted 1.00
s2 We ensure that our measurements are free from instrumental systematics by performing a series of tests, including a decomposition of the signal into E- and B-modes. method 0.99 0.96 0.02 asserted 1.00
s3 We also reanalyse the data independently, using the shear measurement pipeline developed for the COMBO-17 survey. method 0.96 0.94 0.02 asserted 0.98
s4 This confirms our results and also highlights various effects introduced by different implementations of the basic "KSB" shear measurement method. method 0.34 0.85 0.04 asserted 1.00
s5 We find that the normalisation of the matter power spectrum on 8 h^{-1}Mpc scales is sigma_8=(1.02+/-0.15)(0.3/Omega_m)^{0.5}, where the 68%CL error includes noise, sample variance, covariance between angular scales, systematic effects, redshift uncertainty and marginalisation over other parameters. result 1.00 0.97 0.86 asserted 1.00
s6 We compare these results with other cosmic shear surveys and with recent constraints from the WMAP experiment. interpretation 0.58 0.76 0.04 asserted 0.85

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: empirical study 1.00 · evidence from observation or experiment 0.99.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read
  • arXiv listing abstract v2
not examined
  • full text
  • figures and tables
  • references and citing sentences
  • relations to other papers
levels run
  • P abstract
not run
  • S sections
  • T body sentences
  • C citations
  • R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

The paper
Original abstract

We report the results of a cosmic shear survey using the 4.2m William Herschel Telescope on La Palma, to a depth of R=25.8 (z~0.8), over 4 square degrees. The shear correlation functions are measured on scales from 1' to 15', and are used to constrain cosmological parameters. We ensure that our measurements are free from instrumental systematics by performing a series of tests, including a decomposition of the signal into E- and B-modes. We also reanalyse the data independently, using the shear measurement pipeline developed for the COMBO-17 survey. This confirms our results and also highlights various effects introduced by different implementations of the basic "KSB" shear measurement method. We find that the normalisation of the matter power spectrum on 8 h^{-1}Mpc scales is sigma_8=(1.02+/-0.15)(0.3/Omega_m)^{0.5}, where the 68%CL error includes noise, sample variance, covariance between angular scales, systematic effects, redshift uncertainty and marginalisation over other parameters. We compare these results with other cosmic shear surveys and with recent constraints from the WMAP experiment.

Human review
References

Discussion

Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.