pith. sign in

arxiv: 2510.09147 · v2 · submitted 2025-10-10 · 🌌 astro-ph.CO

Euclid preparation. XCVIII. Cosmology Likelihood for Observables in Euclid (CLOE). 5: Extensions beyond the standard modelling of theoretical probes and systematic effects

Euclid Collaboration: L. W. K. Goh (1) , A. Nouri-Zonoz (2) , S. Pamuk (3) , M. Ballardini (4 , 5 , 6) , B. Bose (7) , G. Ca\~nas-Herrera (8
show 379 more authors
9 10) S. Casas (11) G. Franco-Abell\'an (12) S. Ili\'c (13 14) F. Keil (14) M. Kunz (2) A. M. C. Le Brun (15) F. Lepori (16) M. Martinelli (17 18) Z. Sakr (19 14 20) F. Sorrenti (2) E. M. Teixeira (21) I. Tutusaus (14) L. Blot (22 15) M. Bonici (23 24) C. Bonvin (2) S. Camera (25 26 27) V. F. Cardone (17 P. Carrilho (7) S. Di Domizio (28 29) R. Durrer (2) S. Farrens (1) S. Gouyou Beauchamps (30 31) S. Joudaki (32 33) C. Moretti (34 35 36 37 38) A. Pezzotta (39 40) A. G. S\'anchez (40) D. Sciotti (17 K. Tanidis (41) A. Amara (42) S. Andreon (43) N. Auricchio (6) C. Baccigalupi (37 38 34) D. Bagot (44) M. Baldi (45 6 46) S. Bardelli (6) P. Battaglia (6) A. Biviano (36 37) E. Branchini (28 29 43) M. Brescia (47 48) V. Capobianco (27) C. Carbone (24) J. Carretero (32 49) M. Castellano (17) G. Castignani (6) S. Cavuoti (48 50) K. C. Chambers (51) A. Cimatti (52) C. Colodro-Conde (53) G. Congedo (7) C. J. Conselice (54) L. Conversi (55 56) Y. Copin (57) F. Courbin (58 59) H. M. Courtois (60) M. Cropper (61) A. Da Silva (62 63) H. Degaudenzi (64) S. de la Torre (65) G. De Lucia (36) H. Dole (66) M. Douspis (66) F. Dubath (64) X. Dupac (56) S. Escoffier (67) M. Farina (68) F. Faustini (17 69) S. Ferriol (57) F. Finelli (6 70) P. Fosalba (30 S. Fotopoulou (71) M. Frailis (36) E. Franceschi (6) M. Fumana (24) S. Galeotta (36) B. Gillis (7) C. Giocoli (6 J. Gracia-Carpio (40) A. Grazian (72) F. Grupp (40 73) L. Guzzo (74 43 75) H. Hoekstra (10) W. Holmes (76) F. Hormuth (77) A. Hornstrup (78 79) K. Jahnke (80) M. Jhabvala (81) B. Joachimi (82) E. Keih\"anen (83) S. Kermiche (67) A. Kiessling (76) M. Kilbinger (1) B. Kubik (57) M. K\"ummel (73) H. Kurki-Suonio (84 85) O. Lahav (82) S. Ligori (27) P. B. Lilje (86) V. Lindholm (84 I. Lloro (87) G. Mainetti (88) D. Maino (74 24 E. Maiorano (6) O. Mansutti (36) O. Marggraf (89) K. Markovic (76) N. Martinet (65) F. Marulli (90 R. Massey (91) E. Medinaceli (6) S. Mei (92 93) Y. Mellier (94 95) M. Meneghetti (6 E. Merlin (17) G. Meylan (96) A. Mora (97) M. Moresco (90 L. Moscardini (90 C. Neissner (98 S.-M. Niemi (8) C. Padilla (98) S. Paltani (64) F. Pasian (36) K. Pedersen (99) W. J. Percival (23 100 101) V. Pettorino (8) S. Pires (1) G. Polenta (69) M. Poncet (44) L. A. Popa (102) F. Raison (40) R. Rebolo (53 103 104) A. Renzi (105 106) J. Rhodes (76) G. Riccio (48) E. Romelli (36) M. Roncarelli (6) R. Saglia (73 D. Sapone (107) B. Sartoris (73 36) J. A. Schewtschenko (7) T. Schrabback (108) A. Secroun (67) E. Sefusatti (36 G. Seidel (80) M. Seiffert (76) P. Simon (89) C. Sirignano (105 G. Sirri (46) A. Spurio Mancini (109) L. Stanco (106) J. Steinwagner (40) P. Tallada-Cresp\'i (32 A. N. Taylor (7) I. Tereno (62 110) S. Toft (111 112) R. Toledo-Moreo (113) F. Torradeflot (49 32) A. Tsyganov (114) J. Valiviita (84 T. Vassallo (73 G. Verdoes Kleijn (115) A. Veropalumbo (43 28) Y. Wang (116) J. Weller (73 G. Zamorani (6) E. Zucca (6) M. Bolzonella (6) E. Bozzo (64) C. Burigana (117 R. Cabanac (14) M. Calabrese (118 A. Cappi (6 119) D. Di Ferdinando (46) J. A. Escartin Vigo (40) L. Gabarra (41) W. G. Hartley (64) J. Mart\'in-Fleitas (120) M. Maturi (19 121) N. Mauri (52 R. B. Metcalf (90 M. P\"ontinen (84) C. Porciani (89) I. Risso (122) V. Scottez (94 123) M. Sereno (6 M. Tenti (46) M. Viel (37 34 35) M. Wiesmann (86) Y. Akrami (124 125) I. T. Andika (126 127) S. Anselmi (106 105 128) M. Archidiacono (74 F. Atrio-Barandela (129) A. Balaguera-Antolinez (53 130) D. Bertacca (105 72 M. Bethermin (131) A. Blanchard (14) H. B\"ohringer (40 132 133) S. Borgani (134 M. L. Brown (54) S. Bruton (135) A. Calabro (17) B. Camacho Quevedo (37 30 F. Caro (17) C. S. Carvalho (110) T. Castro (36 F. Cogato (90 S. Conseil (57) S. Contarini (40) A. R. Cooray (136) O. Cucciati (6) S. Davini (29) F. De Paolis (137 138 139) G. Desprez (115) A. D\'iaz-S\'anchez (140) J. J. Diaz (53) J. M. Diego (3) P. Dimauro (17 141) A. Enia (45 Y. Fang (73) A. G. Ferrari (46) P. G. Ferreira (41) A. Finoguenov (84) A. Franco (138 137 K. Ganga (92) J. Garc\'ia-Bellido (124) T. Gasparetto (36) E. Gaztanaga (31 F. Giacomini (46) F. Gianotti (6) G. Gozaliasl (142 84) A. Gruppuso (6 M. Guidi (45 C. M. Gutierrez (143) H. Hildebrandt (144) J. Hjorth (99) J. J. E. Kajava (145 146) Y. Kang (64) V. Kansal (147 148) D. Karagiannis (4 149) K. Kiiveri (83) C. C. Kirkpatrick (83) S. Kruk (56) F. Lacasa (150 66) M. Lattanzi (5) V. Le Brun (65) L. Legrand (151 152) M. Lembo (95 5) G. Leroy (153 91) J. Lesgourgues (11) L. Leuzzi (90 T. I. Liaudat (154) S. J. Liu (68) A. Loureiro (155 156) J. Macias-Perez (157) G. Maggio (36) M. Magliocchetti (68) F. Mannucci (158) R. Maoli (159 17) C. J. A. P. Martins (160 161) L. Maurin (66) M. Miluzio (56 162) P. Monaco (134 G. Morgante (6) S. Nadathur (33) K. Naidoo (33) A. Navarro-Alsina (89) S. Nesseris (124) L. Pagano (4 F. Passalacqua (105 K. Paterson (80) L. Patrizii (46) D. Potter (16) A. Pourtsidou (7 163) S. Quai (90 M. Radovich (72) P.-F. Rocci (66) S. Sacquegna (137 M. Sahl\'en (164) D. B. Sanders (51) E. Sarpa (34 J. Schaye (10) A. Schneider (16) M. Schultheis (119) E. Sellentin (165 C. Tao (67) G. Testera (29) R. Teyssier (166) S. Tosi (28 A. Troja (105 M. Tucci (64) C. Valieri (46) A. Venhola (167) D. Vergani (6) F. Vernizzi (168) G. Verza (169) N. A. Walton (170)
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-18 08:21 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.CO
keywords EuclidCLOEgalaxy clusteringmagnification biasmassive neutrinosmodified gravitycosmological likelihoodforecasts
0
0 comments X

The pith

Euclid's CLOE likelihood now incorporates magnification bias in spectroscopic galaxy clustering and handles massive neutrinos plus modified gravity in photometric probes.

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

The paper extends the Cosmology Likelihood for Observables in Euclid pipeline to test models beyond the standard LCDM framework. It adds the magnification bias term to the two-point correlation function used for spectroscopic galaxy clustering measurements. The implementation of primary photometric probes is adapted to include effects from massive neutrinos and modified gravity theories. These updates are checked by running full posterior forecasts on synthetic data sets designed to mimic Euclid observations and comparing results to earlier studies. A reader would care because the extensions let Euclid place sharper limits on the properties of dark energy and dark matter using its full suite of observables.

Core claim

We have extended CLOE to incorporate the magnification bias term into the spectroscopic two-point correlation function of galaxy clustering and adapted the implementation of Euclid primary photometric probes to account for massive neutrinos and modified gravity extensions, with validation through dedicated forecasts on synthetic Euclid-like data by sampling the full posterior distribution and comparing with previous literature.

What carries the argument

The CLOE likelihood pipeline with added magnification bias term in spectroscopic clustering and updated modeling of massive neutrinos and modified gravity in photometric observables.

If this is right

  • Euclid measurements of galaxy clustering can now include the magnification bias contribution when fitting cosmological models.
  • Photometric observables can be used to constrain models that include massive neutrinos.
  • Modified gravity extensions can be tested directly with the adapted photometric likelihood functions.
  • Full posterior sampling on synthetic data confirms consistency with prior literature results for these extensions.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The noted directions for novel inference and machine learning techniques could reduce the computational cost of exploring large parameter spaces in beyond-LCDM analyses.
  • These CLOE updates may support more flexible joint analyses that combine Euclid data with other surveys once real observations begin.
  • Further refinements to the beyond-LCDM modeling identified in the work could improve the pipeline's ability to handle additional systematic effects.

Load-bearing premise

The synthetic Euclid-like data sets used for validation faithfully reproduce the statistical properties, selection effects, and systematic uncertainties that will be present in the actual Euclid observations.

What would settle it

Running the extended CLOE on real Euclid data and checking whether the recovered constraints on cosmological parameters match those obtained from independent analysis codes would test the extensions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2510.09147 by 10), 100, 101), 103, 104), 105, 106), 110), 112), 119), 121), 123), 125), 127), 128), 130), 132, 133), 137, 138, 139), 14, 14), 141), 146), 148), 149), 15), 152), 156), 161), 162), 163), 17), 18), 20), 24, 24), 26, 27), 28), 29, 29), 30, 31), 32), 33), 34, 34), 35, 35), 36, 36), 37, 37), 38, 38), 40), 43, 43), 46), 48), 49), 5, 5), 50), 56), 59), 6, 6), 63), 66), 69), 70), 72, 73), 75), 79), 84), 85), 9, 91), 93), 95), A. Amara (42), A. Balaguera-Antolinez (53, A. Biviano (36, A. Blanchard (14), A. Calabro (17), A. Cappi (6, A. Cimatti (52), A. Da Silva (62, A. D\'iaz-S\'anchez (140), A. Enia (45, A. Finoguenov (84), A. Franco (138, A. G. Ferrari (46), A. Grazian (72), A. Gruppuso (6, A. G. S\'anchez (40), A. Hornstrup (78, A. Kiessling (76), A. Loureiro (155, A. M. C. Le Brun (15), A. Mora (97), A. Navarro-Alsina (89), A. Nouri-Zonoz (2), A. N. Taylor (7), A. Pezzotta (39, A. Pourtsidou (7, A. R. Cooray (136), A. Renzi (105, A. Schneider (16), A. Secroun (67), A. Spurio Mancini (109), A. Troja (105, A. Tsyganov (114), A. Venhola (167), A. Veropalumbo (43, B. Bose (7), B. Camacho Quevedo (37, B. Gillis (7), B. Joachimi (82), B. Kubik (57), B. Sartoris (73, C. Baccigalupi (37, C. Bonvin (2), C. Burigana (117, C. Carbone (24), C. C. Kirkpatrick (83), C. Colodro-Conde (53), C. Giocoli (6, C. J. A. P. Martins (160, C. J. Conselice (54), C. M. Gutierrez (143), C. Moretti (34, C. Neissner (98, C. Padilla (98), C. Porciani (89), C. S. Carvalho (110), C. Sirignano (105, C. Tao (67), C. Valieri (46), D. Bagot (44), D. Bertacca (105, D. B. Sanders (51), D. Di Ferdinando (46), D. Karagiannis (4, D. Maino (74, D. Potter (16), D. Sapone (107), D. Sciotti (17, D. Vergani (6), E. Bozzo (64), E. Branchini (28, E. Franceschi (6), E. Gaztanaga (31, E. Keih\"anen (83), E. Maiorano (6), E. Medinaceli (6), E. Merlin (17), E. M. Teixeira (21), E. Romelli (36), E. Sarpa (34, E. Sefusatti (36, E. Sellentin (165, Euclid Collaboration: L. W. K. Goh (1), E. Zucca (6), F. Atrio-Barandela (129), F. Caro (17), F. Cogato (90, F. Courbin (58, F. De Paolis (137, F. Dubath (64), F. Faustini (17, F. Finelli (6, F. Giacomini (46), F. Gianotti (6), F. Grupp (40, F. Hormuth (77), F. Keil (14), F. Lacasa (150, F. Lepori (16), F. Mannucci (158), F. Marulli (90, F. Pasian (36), F. Passalacqua (105, F. Raison (40), F. Sorrenti (2), F. Torradeflot (49, F. Vernizzi (168), G. Ca\~nas-Herrera (8, G. Castignani (6), G. Congedo (7), G. De Lucia (36), G. Desprez (115), G. Franco-Abell\'an (12), G. Gozaliasl (142, G. Leroy (153, G. Maggio (36), G. Mainetti (88), G. Meylan (96), G. Morgante (6), G. Polenta (69), G. Riccio (48), G. Seidel (80), G. Sirri (46), G. Testera (29), G. Verdoes Kleijn (115), G. Verza (169), G. Zamorani (6), H. B\"ohringer (40, H. Degaudenzi (64), H. Dole (66), H. Hildebrandt (144), H. Hoekstra (10), H. Kurki-Suonio (84, H. M. Courtois (60), I. Lloro (87), I. Risso (122), I. T. Andika (126, I. Tereno (62, I. Tutusaus (14), J. A. Escartin Vigo (40), J. A. Schewtschenko (7), J. Carretero (32, J. Garc\'ia-Bellido (124), J. Gracia-Carpio (40), J. Hjorth (99), J. J. Diaz (53), J. J. E. Kajava (145, J. Lesgourgues (11), J. Macias-Perez (157), J. Mart\'in-Fleitas (120), J. M. Diego (3), J. Rhodes (76), J. Schaye (10), J. Steinwagner (40), J. Valiviita (84, J. Weller (73, K. C. Chambers (51), K. Ganga (92), K. Jahnke (80), K. Kiiveri (83), K. Markovic (76), K. Naidoo (33), K. Paterson (80), K. Pedersen (99), K. Tanidis (41), L. A. Popa (102), L. Blot (22, L. Conversi (55, L. Gabarra (41), L. Guzzo (74, L. Legrand (151, L. Leuzzi (90, L. Maurin (66), L. Moscardini (90, L. Pagano (4, L. Patrizii (46), L. Stanco (106), M. Archidiacono (74, M. Baldi (45, M. Ballardini (4, M. Bethermin (131), M. Bolzonella (6), M. Bonici (23, M. Brescia (47, M. Calabrese (118, M. Castellano (17), M. Cropper (61), M. Douspis (66), M. Farina (68), M. Frailis (36), M. Fumana (24), M. Guidi (45, M. Jhabvala (81), M. Kilbinger (1), M. K\"ummel (73), M. Kunz (2), M. Lattanzi (5), M. L. Brown (54), M. Lembo (95, M. Magliocchetti (68), M. Martinelli (17, M. Maturi (19, M. Meneghetti (6, M. Miluzio (56, M. Moresco (90, M. Poncet (44), M. P\"ontinen (84), M. Radovich (72), M. Roncarelli (6), M. Sahl\'en (164), M. Schultheis (119), M. Seiffert (76), M. Sereno (6, M. Tenti (46), M. Tucci (64), M. Viel (37, M. Wiesmann (86), N. Auricchio (6), N. A. Walton (170), N. Martinet (65), N. Mauri (52, O. Cucciati (6), O. Lahav (82), O. Mansutti (36), O. Marggraf (89), P. Battaglia (6), P. B. Lilje (86), P. Carrilho (7), P. Dimauro (17, P. Fosalba (30, P.-F. Rocci (66), P. G. Ferreira (41), P. Monaco (134, P. Simon (89), P. Tallada-Cresp\'i (32, R. B. Metcalf (90, R. Cabanac (14), R. Durrer (2), R. Maoli (159, R. Massey (91), R. Rebolo (53, R. Saglia (73, R. Teyssier (166), R. Toledo-Moreo (113), S. Andreon (43), S. Anselmi (106, S. Bardelli (6), S. Borgani (134, S. Bruton (135), S. Camera (25, S. Casas (11), S. Cavuoti (48, S. Conseil (57), S. Contarini (40), S. Davini (29), S. de la Torre (65), S. Di Domizio (28, S. Escoffier (67), S. Farrens (1), S. Ferriol (57), S. Fotopoulou (71), S. Galeotta (36), S. Gouyou Beauchamps (30, S. Ili\'c (13, S. J. Liu (68), S. Joudaki (32, S. Kermiche (67), S. Kruk (56), S. Ligori (27), S. Mei (92, S.-M. Niemi (8), S. Nadathur (33), S. Nesseris (124), S. Paltani (64), S. Pamuk (3), S. Pires (1), S. Quai (90, S. Sacquegna (137, S. Toft (111, S. Tosi (28, T. Castro (36, T. Gasparetto (36), T. I. Liaudat (154), T. Schrabback (108), T. Vassallo (73, V. Capobianco (27), V. F. Cardone (17, V. Kansal (147, V. Le Brun (65), V. Lindholm (84, V. Pettorino (8), V. Scottez (94, W. G. Hartley (64), W. Holmes (76), W. J. Percival (23, X. Dupac (56), Y. Akrami (124, Y. Copin (57), Y. Fang (73), Y. Kang (64), Y. Mellier (94, Y. Wang (116), Z. Sakr (19.

Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Relative percentage differences between the ξ µµ contribution as calculated by CLOE and COFFE, for the monopole (blue), quadrupole (green), and hexadecapole (orange) at the four mean redshifts. The grey dotted line denotes equality (zero per cent difference) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Relative percentage differences between the ξ gµ contribution as calculated by CLOE and COFFE, for the monopole (blue), quadrupole (green), and hexadecapole (orange) at the four mean redshifts. The grey dotted line denotes equality (zero per cent difference). 3.3. Forecasts on cosmological constraints After validating the implementation of the magnification signal, we conduct a Bayesian likelihood analysis… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: One- and two-dimensional marginalised posteriors of the cosmo￾logical parameters when magnification bias is taken into account within the theoretical modelling of the multipole 2PCF ξobs,ℓ(s) in CLOE (solid contours, light blue) versus when it is not (dotted contours, dark blue). The fiducial values are denoted by the dotted grey lines. to recover the fiducial cosmology (denoted by the grey dotted lines) f… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Angular power spectra of WL (left), XC (middle), and GCph (right) at fiducial values of ΛCDM parameters of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Comparison of the one- and two-dimensional marginalised pos￾terior distributions of a subset of cosmological parameters in w0waCDM model for the 3×2pt and WL analyses. Dashed lines and contours corre￾spond to results with the use_Weyl flag enabled, while solid lines and contours show results with the use_Weyl flag disabled. the tightening of the upper bound has been possible. The lat￾est release from the D… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Angular power spectra of WL (left) and XC (right), for different values of parameters µ0 and Σ0 alongside the ΛCDM predictions, across different redshift bins. 10 7 10 6 10 5 C G C p h ii ( ) CDM 0 =0.0, 0 =0.0 CDM 0 =0.0, 0 =0.5 10 1 10 2 10 3 10 7 10 6 10 5 C G C p h ii ( ) CDM 0 = 0.5, 0 =0.0 10 1 10 2 10 3 CDM 0 = 0.5, 0 =0.5 Bin 1×1 5×5 10×10 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Angular power spectrum of photometric galaxy clustering (GCph) for different values of parameters µ0 and Σ0. where we have used the matter density contrast of CDM+baryons (cb) δcb. This effect on its own suppresses the matter power on the smallest scales by a factor of (1 − 2 fν). 2. The minimum scale, kmin, for which neutrinos were unable to cluster at some time during the evolution of the Uni￾verse, is g… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Top: Normalized angular power spectra for the GCph probe calculated using CLOE (dashed lines) and MontePython (solid lines). Different colours indicate various redshift bin combinations. Bottom: The ratio of CLOE to MontePython results for two different galaxy bias models available in CLOE, distinguished by their respective linestyles. The colours correspond to the same redshift bins as in the top panel. F… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Response of the photometric galaxy clustering angular power spectrum to a doubling of the neutrino mass. We show the response for CLOE with and without the GC_use_cold_matter_tracer in solid and dashed lines respectively. The different colours correspond to different correlations of bins. We compare the responses to MontePython with the cb prescription shown in dotted black lines. mation schemes for neutri… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Forecast for the sensitivity of Euclid’s 3×2pt probe to the neu￾trino parameters. We present one- and two-dimensional marginalised posteriors for some selected cosmological parameters. The dashed lines represent the fiducial cosmology. The quoted uncertainties are the two￾sided 68% CL limits for all parameters, except for P mν and ∆Neff, where we quote one-sided 95% CL upper limits. breaks this degeneracy… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Euclid is expected to establish new state-of-the-art constraints on extensions beyond the standard LCDM cosmological model by measuring the positions and shapes of billions of galaxies. Specifically, its goal is to shed light on the nature of dark matter and dark energy. Achieving this requires developing and validating advanced statistical tools and theoretical prediction software capable of testing extensions of the LCDM model. In this work, we describe how the Euclid likelihood pipeline, Cosmology Likelihood for Observables in Euclid (CLOE), has been extended to accommodate alternative cosmological models and to refine the theoretical modelling of Euclid primary probes. In particular, we detail modifications made to CLOE to incorporate the magnification bias term into the spectroscopic two-point correlation function of galaxy clustering. Additionally, we explain the adaptations made to CLOE's implementation of Euclid primary photometric probes to account for massive neutrinos and modified gravity extensions. Finally, we present the validation of these CLOE modifications through dedicated forecasts on synthetic Euclid-like data by sampling the full posterior distribution and comparing with the results of previous literature. In conclusion, we have identified in this work several functionalities with regards to beyond-LCDM modelling that could be further improved within CLOE, and outline potential research directions to enhance pipeline efficiency and flexibility through novel inference and machine learning techniques.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript describes extensions to the CLOE likelihood pipeline for Euclid cosmology analysis. It incorporates the magnification bias term into the spectroscopic two-point correlation function of galaxy clustering and adapts the photometric probes (weak lensing and galaxy clustering) to include massive neutrinos and modified gravity effects. Validation is performed via full posterior sampling on synthetic Euclid-like datasets, with comparisons to prior literature forecasts. The paper concludes by noting areas for further improvement in beyond-LCDM modelling and suggests future directions involving machine learning techniques.

Significance. If the implementations are accurate, this work meaningfully advances Euclid's readiness to constrain extensions beyond LCDM, including neutrino mass and modified gravity, which are central to dark energy and dark matter science. The reuse and extension of an existing validated pipeline is a practical strength, and the use of full posterior sampling on synthetic data provides a direct test of the likelihood. However, the overall significance is moderated by the need for clearer demonstration that the new physics terms are exercised in the validation.

major comments (2)
  1. [Validation and forecasts] Validation and forecasts section: the synthetic Euclid-like data used for posterior sampling are not explicitly stated to incorporate massive neutrinos or modified gravity effects. If the mocks are generated under standard LCDM assumptions (a common default), the exercise primarily verifies consistency with LCDM rather than confirming that the new implementations correctly capture neutrino suppression or scale-dependent growth modifications in the photometric observables. This directly affects the central claim that the adaptations have been validated.
  2. [Adaptations for photometric probes] Section describing photometric probe adaptations: the modifications for massive neutrinos and modified gravity are presented as additions to the existing implementation, but no explicit equations or parameter mappings are shown for how the growth factor or power spectrum are altered in the weak lensing and photometric clustering predictions. Without these, it is difficult to assess whether the extensions are complete and free of implementation inconsistencies.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Conclusion] The abstract and conclusion mention potential improvements via machine learning but do not provide concrete examples or references to existing ML-based inference methods in cosmology likelihoods.
  2. [Magnification bias incorporation] Notation for the magnification bias term in the spectroscopic correlation function should be cross-referenced to the specific equation number where it is first introduced.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major point below and will revise the text accordingly to improve clarity and strengthen the validation description.

read point-by-point responses
  1. Referee: Validation and forecasts section: the synthetic Euclid-like data used for posterior sampling are not explicitly stated to incorporate massive neutrinos or modified gravity effects. If the mocks are generated under standard LCDM assumptions (a common default), the exercise primarily verifies consistency with LCDM rather than confirming that the new implementations correctly capture neutrino suppression or scale-dependent growth modifications in the photometric observables. This directly affects the central claim that the adaptations have been validated.

    Authors: We agree that the manuscript does not explicitly state the cosmological model used to generate the synthetic data. The mocks were produced under standard ΛCDM assumptions, which is the conventional approach for baseline pipeline testing. The validation of the extensions themselves is achieved through full posterior sampling using the updated CLOE implementation and by comparing the resulting forecasts directly to prior literature results that incorporate massive neutrinos and modified gravity. We will revise the validation section to state the mock assumptions explicitly and to clarify how the literature comparison exercises the new physics terms in the photometric observables. revision: yes

  2. Referee: Section describing photometric probe adaptations: the modifications for massive neutrinos and modified gravity are presented as additions to the existing implementation, but no explicit equations or parameter mappings are shown for how the growth factor or power spectrum are altered in the weak lensing and photometric clustering predictions. Without these, it is difficult to assess whether the extensions are complete and free of implementation inconsistencies.

    Authors: The current text describes the adaptations at the level of pipeline integration rather than re-deriving the underlying theory. To address the request for greater transparency, we will add the relevant equations for the modified growth factor and power spectrum, together with the parameter mappings applied to the weak lensing and photometric galaxy clustering predictions, in the revised manuscript. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: CLOE extensions are additive implementations validated externally

full rationale

The paper describes software modifications to an existing likelihood pipeline (CLOE) for adding magnification bias to spectroscopic clustering and adapting photometric probes for massive neutrinos and modified gravity. Validation consists of running forecasts on synthetic Euclid-like data and comparing posterior results to prior literature. No equations or derivations are presented that reduce a claimed prediction to a fitted input or self-citation by construction; the central claims are implementation statements plus numerical checks against independent mocks and external results. This is self-contained against external benchmarks with no load-bearing self-referential steps.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Based on the abstract alone the work relies on standard cosmological perturbation theory and the prior CLOE implementation; no new free parameters, ad-hoc axioms, or invented entities are introduced beyond the usual extensions (massive neutrinos, modified gravity).

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Standard cosmological perturbation theory remains valid when adding magnification bias, massive neutrinos, and modified gravity to the probe modeling.
    Invoked when adapting the spectroscopic correlation function and photometric probes.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 8335 in / 1180 out tokens · 33840 ms · 2026-05-18T08:21:22.389850+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

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 4 Pith papers

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

  1. \textit{Euclid} preparation. Baryon acoustic oscillations extraction techniques: comparison and optimisation

    astro-ph.CO 2026-05 conditional novelty 4.0

    End-to-end validation on Euclid-like mocks shows RecSym and RecIso reconstruction yield unbiased BAO measurements, improving figure of merit for Omega_m and H0 rs by factor of ~3 across 0.9<z<1.8.

  2. Euclid preparation. Three-dimensional galaxy clustering in configuration space: Three-point correlation function estimation

    astro-ph.CO 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Euclid collaboration develops and validates direct and spherical-harmonic estimators plus a random-split optimization for measuring the three-point galaxy correlation function at the scale of the full Euclid survey.

  3. cloelike: A Python Library for Cosmological Likelihood Inference in the Euclid Era

    astro-ph.CO 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 3.0

    cloelike is a new open Python package implementing composable Gaussian likelihoods for WL, GCph, GGL, full-shape spectra, and BAO in joint probe combinations for Euclid analyses.

  4. cloelib: A Flexible Python Library for Computing Cosmological Observables in the Euclid Era

    astro-ph.CO 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 3.0

    cloelib is a modular JAX-based Python library for cosmological observables intended as reference infrastructure for Euclid's first data release.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

108 extracted references · 108 canonical work pages · cited by 4 Pith papers · 6 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archiveprefix author booktitle chapter edition editor howpublished institution eprint journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type volume year label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts #0 'before.all := #1 ...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 global.max substring 't := if while FUNCTION word.in bbl.in " " * FUNCTION format....

  3. [3]

    F., Aboubrahim , A., et al

    Abdalla , E., Abellán , G. F., Aboubrahim , A., et al. 2022, JHEAP, 34, 49

  4. [4]

    2021, Modified Gravity and Cosmology

    Akrami , Y., Bahamonde , S., Blázquez-Salcedo , J., et al. 2021, Modified Gravity and Cosmology. An Update by the CANTATA Network (Springer)

  5. [5]

    & Paczynski , B

    Alcock , C. & Paczynski , B. 1979, , 281, 358

  6. [6]

    2004, Phys

    Amendola, L. 2004, Phys. Rev. D, 69, 103524

  7. [7]

    2008, JCAP, 04, 013

    Amendola, L., Kunz, M., & Sapone, D. 2008, JCAP, 04, 013

  8. [8]

    Euclid: Field-level inference of primordial non-Gaussianity and cosmic initial conditions

    Andrews , A., Jasche , J., Lavaux , G., et al. 2024, A&A, submitted, arXiv:2412.11945

  9. [9]

    2022, MNRAS, 515, 4161

    Arnold, C., Li, B., Giblin, B., Harnois-Déraps, J., & Cai, Y.-C. 2022, MNRAS, 515, 4161

  10. [10]

    2013, JCAP, 02, 001

    Audren, B., Lesgourgues, J., Benabed, K., & Prunet, S. 2013, JCAP, 02, 001

  11. [11]

    2024, , 683, A220

    Ballardini , M., Akrami , Y., Finelli , F., et al. 2024, , 683, A220

  12. [12]

    2011, JCAP, 07, 034

    Blas, D., Lesgourgues, J., & Tram, T. 2011, JCAP, 07, 034

  13. [13]

    2025, arXiv:2501.04639

    Bonici, M., D'Amico, G., Bel, J., & Carbone, C. 2025, arXiv:2501.04639

  14. [14]

    & Durrer , R

    Bonvin , C. & Durrer , R. 2011, , 84, 063505

  15. [15]

    2020, MNRAS, 498, 4650

    Bose, B., Cataneo, M., Tröster, T., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 498, 4650

  16. [16]

    2023, , 519, 4780

    Bose , B., Tsedrik , M., Kennedy , J., et al. 2023, , 519, 4780

  17. [17]

    2013, Classical and Quantum Gravity, 30, 214005

    Brax , P. 2013, Classical and Quantum Gravity, 30, 214005

  18. [18]

    & King , L

    Bridle , S. & King , L. 2007, New Journal of Physics, 9, 444

  19. [19]

    & Lesgourgues , J

    Brinckmann , T. & Lesgourgues , J. 2019, Physics of the Dark Universe, 24, 100260

  20. [20]

    Carrasco , J. J. M., Hertzberg , M. P., & Senatore , L. 2012, JHEP, 2012, 82

  21. [21]

    M., Sawicki , I., Silvestri , A., & Trodden , M

    Carroll , S. M., Sawicki , I., Silvestri , A., & Trodden , M. 2006, New Journal of Physics, 8, 323

  22. [22]

    Euclid: Constraints on f(R) cosmologies from the spectroscopic and photometric primary probes

    Casas , S., Cardone , V. F., Sapone , D., et al. 2023, , submitted, arXiv:2306.11053

  23. [23]

    & di Dio, E

    Castorina, E. & di Dio, E. 2022, JCAP, 01, 061

  24. [24]

    & Lewis , A

    Challinor , A. & Lewis , A. 2011, , 84, 043516

  25. [25]

    & Polarski , D

    Chevallier , M. & Polarski , D. 2001, International Journal of Modern Physics D, 10, 213

  26. [26]

    DES Collaboration: Abbott , T. M. C., Abdalla , F. B., Avila , S., et al. 2019, , 99, 123505

  27. [27]

    DESI 2024 VII: Cosmological Constraints from the Full-Shape Modeling of Clustering Measurements

    DESI Collaboration: Adame , A. G., Aguilar , J., Ahlen , S., et al. 2024 a , arXiv:2411.12022

  28. [28]

    G., Aguilar , J., Ahlen , S., et al

    DESI Collaboration: Adame , A. G., Aguilar , J., Ahlen , S., et al. 2024 b , AJ, 167, 62

  29. [29]

    Constraints on Neutrino Physics from DESI DR2 BAO and DR1 Full Shape

    DESI Collaboration: Elbers , W., Aviles , A., Noriega , H. E., et al. 2025, arXiv:2503.14744

  30. [30]

    2018, , 733, 1

    Desjacques , V., Jeong , D., & Schmidt , F. 2018, , 733, 1

  31. [31]

    2000, Phys

    Dvali , G., Gabadadze , G., & Porrati , M. 2000, Phys. Lett. B, 485, 208

  32. [32]

    2023, , 523, 3649

    Elvin-Poole , J., MacCrann , N., Everett , S., et al. 2023, , 523, 3649

  33. [33]

    2025, , 693, A249

    Euclid Collaboration , Lesgourgues , J., Schwagereit , J., et al. 2025, , 693, A249

  34. [34]

    2025, , 695, A230

    Euclid Collaboration: Adamek , J., Fiorini , B., Baldi , M., et al. 2025, , 695, A230

  35. [35]

    S., Frusciante , N., Sakr , Z., et al

    Euclid Collaboration: Albuquerque , I. S., Frusciante , N., Sakr , Z., et al. 2025, arXiv:2506.03008

  36. [36]

    2025, , 693, A58

    Euclid Collaboration: Archidiacono , M., Lesgourgues , J., Casas , S., et al. 2025, , 693, A58

  37. [37]

    2020, , 642, A191

    Euclid Collaboration: Blanchard , A., Camera , S., Carbone , C., et al. 2020, , 642, A191

  38. [38]

    2024, , 689, A275

    Euclid Collaboration: Bose , B., Carrilho , P., Marinucci , M., et al. 2024, , 689, A275

  39. [39]

    F., Joudaki , S., Blot , L., et al

    Euclid Collaboration: Cardone , V. F., Joudaki , S., Blot , L., et al. 2025, A&A, submitted

  40. [40]

    2025, A&A, 697, A5

    Euclid Collaboration: Castander , F., Fosalba , P., Stadel , J., et al. 2025, A&A, 697, A5

  41. [41]

    Euclid Collaboration: Ca n as-Herrera , G., Goh , L. W. K., Blot , L., et al. 2025, A&A submitted

  42. [42]

    2024, , 685, A167

    Euclid Collaboration: Jelic-Cizmek , G., Sorrenti , F., Lepori , F., et al. 2024, , 685, A167

  43. [43]

    2025, A&A submitted

    Euclid Collaboration: Joudaki , S., Pettorino , V., Blot , L., et al. 2025, A&A submitted

  44. [44]

    2021, , 505, 2840

    Euclid Collaboration: Knabenhans , M., Stadel , J., Potter , D., et al. 2021, , 505, 2840

  45. [45]

    2024, A&A, in press, https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/202452184, arXiv:2409.03524

    Euclid Collaboration: Koyama , K., Pamuk , S., Casas , S., et al. 2024, A&A, in press, https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/202452184, arXiv:2409.03524

  46. [46]

    2022, , 662, A93

    Euclid Collaboration: Lepori , F., Tutusaus , I., Viglione , C., et al. 2022, , 662, A93

  47. [47]

    2025, , 693, A249

    Euclid Collaboration: Lesgourgues , J., Schwagereit , J., Bucko , J., et al. 2025, , 693, A249

  48. [48]

    2025, A&A, 697, A1

    Euclid Collaboration: Mellier , Y., Abdurro'uf , Acevedo Barroso , J., et al. 2025, A&A, 697, A1

  49. [49]

    2025, , 695, A232

    Euclid Collaboration: R \'a cz , G., Breton , M.-A., Fiorini , B., et al. 2025, , 695, A232

  50. [50]

    F., Martinelli , M., et al

    Euclid Collaboration: Tanidis , K., Cardone , V. F., Martinelli , M., et al. 2024, , 683, A17

  51. [51]

    2024, JCAP, 11, 057

    Franco Abell\'an, G., Ca\ nas Herrera, G., Martinelli, M., et al. 2024, JCAP, 11, 057

  52. [52]

    F., et al

    Frusciante , N., Pace , F., Cardone , V. F., et al. 2024, , 690, A133

  53. [53]

    Giri, S. K. & Schneider, A. 2021, JCAP, 12, 046

  54. [54]

    2015, Int

    Gleyzes, J., Langlois, D., & Vernizzi, F. 2015, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D, 23, 1443010

  55. [55]

    Wide-Field InfraRed Survey Telescope (WFIRST) Final Report

    Green , J., Schechter , P., Baltay , C., et al. 2012, arXiv:1208.4012

  56. [56]

    2022, JCAP, 11, 035

    G\"unther, S., Lesgourgues, J., Samaras, G., et al. 2022, JCAP, 11, 035

  57. [57]

    J., Hobson , M

    Handley , W. J., Hobson , M. P., & Lasenby , A. N. 2015 a , , 450, L61

  58. [58]

    J., Hobson , M

    Handley , W. J., Hobson , M. P., & Lasenby , A. N. 2015 b , , 453, 4384

  59. [59]

    2009, , 507, 683

    Hildebrandt, H., van Waerbeke, L., & Erben, T. 2009, , 507, 683

  60. [60]

    Horndeski , G. W. 1974, International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 10, 363

  61. [61]

    & Sawicki , I

    Hu , W. & Sawicki , I. 2007, , 76, 064004

  62. [62]

    & Shafer , D

    Huterer , D. & Shafer , D. L. 2018, Reports on Progress in Physics, 81, 016901

  63. [63]

    2019, arXiv:1905.09687

    Ishak , M., Baker , T., Bull , P., et al. 2019, arXiv:1905.09687

  64. [64]

    M., Tyson , J

    Ivezi \'c , Z ., Kahn , S. M., Tyson , J. A., et al. 2019, , 873, 111

  65. [65]

    2021, JCAP, 07, 045

    Jelic-Cizmek, G. 2021, JCAP, 07, 045

  66. [66]

    2016, Ann

    Joyce, A., Lombriser, L., & Schmidt, F. 2016, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci., 66, 95

  67. [67]

    1987, , 227, 1

    Kaiser , N. 1987, , 227, 1

  68. [68]

    1992, , 388, 272

    Kaiser , N. 1992, , 388, 272

  69. [69]

    1998, , 498, 26

    Kaiser, N. 1998, , 498, 26

  70. [70]

    R., Zanjani, M

    Khalife, A. R., Zanjani, M. B., Galli, S., et al. 2024, JCAP, 04, 059

  71. [71]

    2017, , 472, 2126

    Kilbinger , M., Heymans , C., Asgari , M., et al. 2017, , 472, 2126

  72. [72]

    2016, Reports on Progress in Physics, 79, 046902

    Koyama , K. 2016, Reports on Progress in Physics, 79, 046902

  73. [73]

    Lange , J. U. 2023, , 525, 3181

  74. [74]

    Euclid Definition Study Report

    Laureijs , R., Amiaux , J., Arduini , S., et al. 2011, ESA/SRE(2011)12, arXiv:1110.3193

  75. [75]

    2013, Neutrino Cosmology (Cambridge University Press)

    Lesgourgues, J., Mangano, G., Miele, G., & Pastor, S. 2013, Neutrino Cosmology (Cambridge University Press)

  76. [76]

    Levi, M. E. et al. 2019, arXiv: 1907.10688

  77. [77]

    Linder , E. V. 2003, , 90, 091301

  78. [78]

    2021, , 103, 123504

    Liu , X., Liu , D., Gao , Z., et al. 2021, , 103, 123504

  79. [79]

    C., Joachimi, B., et al

    Mahony, C., Fortuna, M. C., Joachimi, B., et al. 2022, , 513, 1210

  80. [80]

    2004, , 615, 573

    Matsubara , T. 2004, , 615, 573

Showing first 80 references.