Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 2 minor 2 cited by

An Einstein-Boltzmann code can find a gauge where linear relativistic clustering matches Newtonian equations with scale-independent 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 ↗

T0 review · grok-4.3

2026-06-30 23:20 UTC pith:5L5EMPUQ

load-bearing objection The paper gives a practical gauge-mapping trick to run standard Newtonian EFTofLSS on cosmologies with scale-dependent linear growth, but the control on nonlinear back-transformation errors rests on an unquantified assumption. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2605.05114 v2 pith:5L5EMPUQ submitted 2026-05-06 astro-ph.CO

Effective Field Theory of Large Scale Structure and Newtonian Motion Gauges

Christian Fidler , Julien Lesgourgues , Antonia Mattes , Azadeh Moradinezhad Dizgah , Simon Neuland This is my paper
classification astro-ph.CO
keywords effective field theory of large scale structureNewtonian motion gaugesgauge transformationmassive neutrinosredshift space distortionsone-loop power spectrumgeneral relativity corrections
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 paper establishes that for any cosmology an Einstein-Boltzmann solver can compute an exact gauge transformation that makes the linear equations of motion for clustering matter identical to those of a Newtonian self-gravitating fluid with scale-independent growth. Nonlinear clustering is then computed consistently inside this gauge using standard Newtonian tools. The results are mapped back to the original gauge to restore general-relativistic corrections and scale-dependent growth. The same strategy extends to redshift-space distortions. The procedure adds no extra computational cost and has been tested on massive-neutrino models where real-space one-loop power spectra differ by less than 0.7 percent.

Core claim

For a given cosmology, an Einstein-Boltzmann code can find the exact gauge transformation that brings the full linear equations of motion of the clustering matter components into a form where they are identical to Newtonian equations for a self-gravitating fluid with scale-independent growth. Non-linear clustering can be consistently computed in this gauge, and the results can be transformed back to the initial gauge in order to incorporate GR and scale-dependent-growth effects.

What carries the argument

Newtonian motion gauges: the coordinate frame identified by the gauge transformation that equates the linear relativistic equations of the clustering components to Newtonian fluid equations with constant growth.

Load-bearing premise

The gauge transformation field remains small enough that nonlinear evolution performed inside the transformed gauge stays valid once the results are mapped back to the original gauge.

What would settle it

A direct comparison showing that the one-loop redshift-space quadrupole at k=0.3 h/Mpc and z=0 deviates by more than 2 percent from full relativistic N-body results in a cosmology with M_nu=0.3 eV would falsify the claimed accuracy.

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

If this is right

  • Nonlinear clustering can be computed with existing Newtonian EFTofLSS codes without modification.
  • The nonlinear results can be transformed back to recover linear GR corrections and scale-dependent growth.
  • Redshift-space distortions are incorporated by applying an analogous gauge transformation to the velocity field.
  • The method applies to massive-neutrino cosmologies with one-loop power-spectrum errors below 0.7 percent in real space and 1.7 percent in the quadrupole.
  • No additional computational cost is incurred beyond one standard Einstein-Boltzmann solve.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same gauge construction could be applied to other models that produce scale-dependent growth, such as certain modified-gravity scenarios, provided the smallness condition holds.
  • Higher-order statistics such as the bispectrum may exhibit larger residuals than the power spectrum once transformed back to redshift space.
  • The approach could be combined with existing EFT counterterms to absorb residual scale-dependent effects that survive the gauge mapping.
  • Future high-precision surveys sensitive to velocity fields at k greater than 0.2 h/Mpc would benefit most from the redshift-space correction term identified here.

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 / 2 minor

Summary. The paper proposes using Newtonian Motion Gauges to extend the Newtonian EFTofLSS framework to cosmologies with scale-dependent growth and linear GR corrections. For a given cosmology, an Einstein-Boltzmann code determines an exact gauge transformation that recasts the linear clustering equations of matter components into Newtonian form with scale-independent growth. Nonlinear clustering is then computed using standard EFT kernels in this gauge and transformed back to incorporate the original gauge's GR and scale-dependent effects. Redshift-space distortions are handled analogously. The method incurs no extra computational cost. As a demonstration for massive-neutrino models, the real-space one-loop power spectrum deviates by at most 0.7% for M_nu < 0.3 eV, while the redshift-space quadrupole reaches 1.7% at k=0.3 h/Mpc and z=0.

Significance. If the linear gauge transformation suffices to control nonlinear mapping errors, the approach provides a low-cost route to embed linear GR corrections and scale-dependent growth into existing Newtonian EFTofLSS pipelines. It reuses standard Einstein-Boltzmann solvers and EFT kernels, and the reported sub-percent accuracy for neutrino masses relevant to Stage-III surveys indicates potential practical value. The absence of additional parameters or new fitting procedures is a methodological strength.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract and method description: the central claim that nonlinear one-loop results can be mapped back while keeping errors below the quoted 0.7% (real space) and 1.7% (redshift space) thresholds rests on the linear-order gauge field remaining sufficiently small; however, no explicit bound, derivation, or error budget is supplied showing that the EB-code self-consistency condition on the linear gauge field suffices to suppress higher-order gauge corrections at one-loop order.
  2. [Results section (neutrino showcase)] The validation of the back-transformation step lacks comparison against independent relativistic perturbation-theory or N-body codes; without such a cross-check, the percent-level accuracy statements for the neutrino models cannot be independently verified from quantities internal to the EFT calculation.
minor comments (2)
  1. The notation for the gauge transformation field and the precise definition of the self-consistency condition should be introduced with an equation early in the text rather than referenced only in the abstract.
  2. Figure captions for the power-spectrum comparisons should explicitly state the redshift and wavenumber range over which the quoted maximum deviations apply.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thoughtful review and constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment below, providing clarifications and indicating where revisions will be made.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and method description: the central claim that nonlinear one-loop results can be mapped back while keeping errors below the quoted 0.7% (real space) and 1.7% (redshift space) thresholds rests on the linear-order gauge field remaining sufficiently small; however, no explicit bound, derivation, or error budget is supplied showing that the EB-code self-consistency condition on the linear gauge field suffices to suppress higher-order gauge corrections at one-loop order.

    Authors: The self-consistency condition implemented in the Einstein-Boltzmann solver enforces that the linear gauge transformation field remains small throughout the relevant range of scales and redshifts. Because the gauge transformation is defined at linear order, any higher-order gauge corrections to the one-loop power spectrum are suppressed by additional powers of this small parameter (typically entering at O(ε²) where ε ≪ 1 is the gauge-field amplitude). The quoted 0.7% and 1.7% figures are precisely the differences obtained when the same EFT calculation is performed with and without the gauge transformation, thereby providing a direct numerical estimate of the size of the correction. We agree that an explicit scaling argument and error-budget paragraph were not included in the original text; we will add a short subsection in the revised manuscript deriving the expected suppression of nonlinear gauge errors from the linear self-consistency condition. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Results section (neutrino showcase)] The validation of the back-transformation step lacks comparison against independent relativistic perturbation-theory or N-body codes; without such a cross-check, the percent-level accuracy statements for the neutrino models cannot be independently verified from quantities internal to the EFT calculation.

    Authors: The showcase is designed to quantify the difference between the standard Newtonian EFTofLSS pipeline and the Newtonian-Motion-Gauge extension within a single, internally consistent framework. The back-transformation is performed with the exact linear gauge field extracted from the Einstein-Boltzmann solver, while the nonlinear kernels remain the standard EdS kernels evaluated in the transformed gauge. This construction guarantees that any discrepancy arises solely from the linear GR and scale-dependent-growth effects that the gauge transformation is constructed to capture. While external validation against fully relativistic N-body or higher-order relativistic perturbation theory would be valuable, such comparisons lie outside the scope of the present work, which focuses on a computationally inexpensive extension of existing Newtonian pipelines. The internal difference reported in the paper already supplies a conservative estimate of the correction size for the neutrino masses considered. revision: no

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation relies on external codes

full rationale

The paper determines the gauge transformation via an external Einstein-Boltzmann code applied to the linear equations, then computes nonlinear clustering with standard Newtonian EFT kernels in the transformed gauge before mapping results back. No step reduces by construction to a parameter fitted inside the paper, a self-defined quantity, or a load-bearing self-citation chain; the central claim remains independent of the paper's own inputs and is externally falsifiable via the EB code's self-consistency check on the gauge field.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 1 invented entities

The approach depends on the existence of a gauge in which linear dynamics become exactly Newtonian with scale-independent growth, plus the assumption that nonlinear EFT remains consistent inside that gauge. No free parameters are introduced in the abstract; the gauge itself is computed externally rather than fitted.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption An exact gauge transformation exists that renders the linear equations of motion for clustering components identical to Newtonian self-gravitating fluid equations with scale-independent growth.
    Invoked in the abstract as the foundation for performing nonlinear calculations in the transformed gauge.
  • domain assumption The nonlinear clustering computed in the Newtonian Motion Gauge remains valid when transformed back, provided the gauge transformation field remains small.
    Required for the consistency of the full pipeline including redshift-space distortions.
invented entities (1)
  • Newtonian Motion Gauge no independent evidence
    purpose: Gauge frame in which linear dynamics match Newtonian equations with scale-independent growth factor.
    Central construct of the method; no independent evidence supplied beyond the abstract's claim that the Einstein-Boltzmann code can find it.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5886 in / 1588 out tokens · 25170 ms · 2026-06-30T23:20:55.834537+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

The simplest flavor of the Effective Field Theory of Large Scale Structure is based on Newtonian equations and describes the nonlinear matter density and velocity using Einstein-de-Sitter kernels. Even in the presence of massive neutrinos, this has been argued to be sufficient for the analysis of data from Stage-III galaxy surveys. In this paper, we show that there exists a simple way to extend the validity range of this framework to more complex problems with a scale-dependent growth factor, while incorporating linear general relativistic (GR) corrections as well. For a given cosmology, an Einstein-Boltzmann code can find the exact gauge transformation that brings the full linear equations of motion of the clustering matter components into a form where they are identical to Newtonian equations for a self-gravitating fluid with scale-independent growth. Non-linear clustering can be consistently computed in this gauge, and the results can be transformed back to the initial gauge in order to incorporate GR and scale-dependent-growth effects. Redshift-space distortions can also be accounted for with a similar strategy. Our method does not incur any additional computational cost. As a showcase, we apply this method to cosmologies with massive neutrinos. For the real-space one-loop power spectrum, we find that the largest deviation between the accurate and standard methods remains below 0.7% for M_nu<0.30 eV. However, in redshift space, it reaches 1.7% for the one-loop quadrupole spectrum at k=0.3 h/Mpc and z=0, with the largest contribution coming from the effect of the cosmological constant on the growth of the velocity field. Our method could be applied to a much wider range of models with more significant scale-dependent growth, as long as a self-consistency condition evaluated by the Einstein-Boltzmann code (on the smallness of a gauge transformation field) is fulfilled.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.05114 by Antonia Mattes, Azadeh Moradinezhad Dizgah, Christian Fidler, Julien Lesgourgues, Simon Neuland.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: (Left) Non-linear CDM+baryon power spectrum of comoving gauge density, P (C) cb,NL(k, z), in a ΛCDM cosmology with massless neutrinos. The solid lines show the prediction from the EFTofLSS applied directly to the linear comoving gauge power spectrum P (C) cb,L (standard approach), while the dotted and dashed lines show the results from our approach (EFTofLSS applied the NM gauge power spectrum P [Nl] cb,L … view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: (Left) Non-linear CDM+baryon power spectrum of comoving gauge density, P (C) cb,NL(k, z), in a ΛCDM cosmology with massless neutrinos. The solid lines show the prediction from the EFTofLSS applied directly to the linear comoving gauge power spectrum P (C) cb,L (standard approach), while the dotted and dashed lines show the results from our approach (EFTofLSS applied the NM gauge power spectrum P [Nl] cb,L … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Growth rate D(k, z) and growth factor f(k, z) compared to their small-scale limits D(∞, z), f(∞, z), in a ΛCDM cosmology with three degenerate massive massive neutrinos of individual mass mν = 0.12 eV. separable solutions can still be used in very good approximation. The NM formalism actually offers a new opportunity to accurately check this statement. 4.1 Scale-dependent growth of linear perturbations In … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Growth rate D(k, z) and growth factor f(k, z) compared to their small-scale limits D(∞, z), f(∞, z), in a ΛCDM cosmology with three degenerate massive massive neutrinos of individual mass mν = 0.12 eV. small scales. During matter domination, the growth rate f(k, z) can be approximated as 1 on large scales and (1 − 3 5 fν) on small scales [73–75]; during Λ domination, the overall rate is reduced, but the ra… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: (Left) Evolution of the ratio Ωm/f 2 as a function of redshift the end of matter domination and during Λ domination, for different values of the summed neutrino mass Σmν. (Right) After rescaling by a factor (1 − 3 5 fν) −2 , this ratio exhibits the same evolution as in a massless neutrino universe (and the four curves become indistinguishable). massive neutrinos. The gauge transformation from an arbitrary … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: (Left) Evolution of the ratio Ωm/f 2 as a function of redshift the end of matter domination and during Λ domination, for different values of the summed neutrino mass Σmν. (Right) After rescaling by a factor (1 − 3 5 fν) −2 , this ratio exhibits the same evolution as in a massless neutrino universe (and the four curves become indistinguishable). • If we want to neglect the effect of Λ domination, we can use… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Transfer function of the difference HT − 3ζ as a function of conformal time τ (expressed in natural units of Mpc) for four wavenumbers k and three neutrino masses Σmν. This difference quantifies the amplitude of the displacement field between the coordinates of the N-boisson and NM gauge, where the latter is defined using the backward method. 4.4 Results and comparison We run our modified version of class-… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (Left) Non-linear CDM+baryon power spectrum of comoving gauge density, P (C) cb,NL(k, z), at z = 0, 0.5, 1, 2, in a ΛCDM cosmology with three degenerate massive neutrinos and Σmν = 0.12 eV, computed with different approaches: EFTofLSS applied to the linear comoving gauge power spectrum P (C) cb,L , with loops computed at z = 0 and rescaled to other redshifts (standard approach, solid lines); and EFTofLSS a… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (Left) Non-linear CDM+baryon power spectrum of comoving gauge density, P (C) cb,NL(k, z), at z = 0, 0.5, 1, 2, in a ΛCDM cosmology with three degenerate massive neutrinos and Σmν = 0.12 eV, computed with different approaches: EFTofLSS applied to the linear comoving gauge power spectrum P (C) cb,L (standard approach, solid lines); and EFTofLSS applied to the NM gauge power spectrum P [Nl] cb,L inferred from… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: (Left panels) Ratio of massive-to-massless CDM+baryon power spectra of comoving gauge density, P (C) cb,NL(k, z), in a ΛCDM cosmology with three degenerate massive neutrinos and Σmν = 0.05, 0.12, 0.3 eV, computed at z = 0 (top) or z = 2 (bottom) with different approaches: EFTofLSS applied to the comoving gauge power spectrum P (C) cb,L (standard approach, solid); EFTofLSS applied to the NM gauge power spec… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: (Left) Ratio of massive-to-massless matter power spectra of the comoving gauge density at z = 0, P (C) m,NL(k, z = 0), in a ΛCDM cosmology with three degenerate massive neutrinos and Σmν = 0.05, 0.12, 0.3 eV, computed with different approaches: EFTofLSS applied to the linear comoving gauge power spectrum P (C),L cb , with neutrino perturbations added linearly at the end (standard approach, solid); and EFTo… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: (Left) One-loop redshift-space CDM+baryon power spectrum P (C) cb,NL(k, µ, z) at µ = 0.5 and z = 0, 2, in a ΛCDM cosmology with three degenerate massive neutrinos and Σmν = 0.12 eV, com￾puted with three different approaches: EFTofLSS applied to the linear comoving gauge power spectrum P (C) cb,L (standard approach, dot-dashed); standard method ‘rescued’ by using the scale-dependent growth rate f(k, z) in t… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: (Left) One-loop redshift-space CDM+baryon power spectrum P (C) cb,NL(k, µ, z) at µ = 0.5 and z = 0, 2, in a ΛCDM cosmology with three degenerate massive neutrinos and Σmν = 0.12 eV, com￾puted with three different approaches: EFTofLSS applied to the linear comoving gauge power spectrum P (C) cb,L (standard approach, dot-dashed); standard method ‘rescued’ by using the scale-dependent growth rate f(k, z) in t… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: (Left) Ratio of massive-to-massless power spectra in redshift space, P (C) cb,NL(k, µ, z), for µ = 0.5 and either z = 0 (top) or z = 2 (bottom), in a ΛCDM cosmology with three degenerate massive neutrinos and Σmν = 0.05, 0.12, 0.3 eV, computed with different approaches: EFTofLSS applied to the linear comoving gauge power spectrum P (C) cb,L (standard approach, dot-dashed); standard approach ‘rescued’ by us… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: (Left) Ratio of massive-to-massless power spectra in redshift space, P (C) cb,NL(k, µ, z), for µ = 0.5 and either z = 0 (top) or z = 2 (bottom), in a ΛCDM cosmology with three degenerate massive neutrinos and Σmν = 0.05, 0.12, 0.3 eV, computed with different approaches: EFTofLSS applied to the linear comoving gauge power spectrum P (C) cb,L (standard approach, dot-dashed); standard approach ‘rescued’ by us… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: (Left) Percentage difference between the wedge power spectra in redshift space, P (C) cb,NL(k, µ, z), at z = 0 (top) or z = 2 (bottom), inferred from the ‘NM gauge with Λ correction approach’ or from the ‘rescued standard approach’. We assume a ΛCDM cosmology with three degen￾erate massive neutrinos and Σmν = 0.05, 0.12, 0.3 eV, and show the results for three different values of µ = 0, 0.5, 1 (µ = 0 corre… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Same as figure 5 but with an incomplete version of the NM gauge approach in which the kernels are still the EdS ones. In this case, the standard and (incomplete) NM gauge approaches should coincide, because they rely on exactly the same approximation on small scales: they assume that prior to z = 0, perturbations grew at the same rate as in a massless neutrino universe. The two methods may differ due to t… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: (Left) In a ΛCDM cosmology with Σmν = 0.12 eV, ratio of real-space power spectrum P (C) cb,NL(k, z) with loops computed at z = 2 and rescaled to one of the redshifts z = 0, 1, 2 over the same quantity with loops computed at z = 0 and rescaled to the same redshift, using either the standard (solid lines) or the NM gauge without Λ correction (dashed lines) approach. (Right) For the standard approach, ratio … view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: (Left) Ratio of massive-to-massless matter power spectra of the comoving gauge den￾sity at z = 0, P (C) m,NL(k, z = 0), in a ΛCDM cosmology with three degenerate massive neutrinos and Σmν = 0.05, 0.12, 0.3 eV, computed with different approaches: EFTofLSS applied to the linear comoving gauge power spectrum P (C),L cb , with neutrino perturbations added linearly at the end (standard approach, solid); EFTofL… view at source ↗

Review history (2 revisions) →

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. gevolution 2.0: GPU-accelerated relativistic N-body simulations for cosmology

    astro-ph.IM 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0

    gevolution 2.0 accelerates relativistic N-body cosmological simulations on Nvidia GPUs, achieving a ~4.5x node-hour speed-up over its CPU-only predecessor.

  2. GGI Lectures on Large-Scale Structure Perturbation Theory (Effective Field Theory)

    astro-ph.CO 2026-07 accept novelty 2.0

    Pedagogical notes derive large-scale-structure EFT from symmetries, covering SPT failures, BAO IR resummation, counterterms, galaxy bias, redshift-space distortions, and Lagrangian PT.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

90 extracted references · 90 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers · 43 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    The DESI Experiment Part I: Science,Targeting, and Survey Design

    DESI Collaboration, A. Aghamousa et al., “The DESI Experiment Part I: Science,Targeting, and Survey Design,” arXiv:1611.00036 [astro-ph.IM]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  2. [2]

    Astrophys

    Euclid Collaboration, Y. Mellier et al., “Euclid. I. Overview of the Euclid mission,” arXiv:2405.13491 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv

  3. [3]

    Cosmology with the SPHEREX All-Sky Spectral Survey

    SPHEREx Collaboration, O. Dor´ eet al., “Cosmology with the SPHEREX All-Sky Spectral Survey,” arXiv:1412.4872 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  4. [4]

    The High Latitude Spectroscopic Survey on the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope,

    Y. Wang et al., “The High Latitude Spectroscopic Survey on the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope,” Astrophys. J. 928 no. 1, (2022) 1, arXiv:2110.01829 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2022

  5. [5]

    Extragalactic Science, Cosmology and Galactic Archaeology with the Subaru Prime Focus Spectrograph (PFS)

    PFS Team Collaboration, R. Ellis et al., “Extragalactic science, cosmology, and Galactic archaeology with the Subaru Prime Focus Spectrograph,” Publ. Astron. Soc. Jap. 66 no. 1, (2014) R1, arXiv:1206.0737 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  6. [6]

    Large Synoptic Survey Telescope: Dark Energy Science Collaboration

    LSST Dark Energy Science Collaboration, A. Abate et al., “Large Synoptic Survey Telescope: Dark Energy Science Collaboration,” arXiv:1211.0310 [astro-ph.CO] . – 37 –

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  7. [7]

    Cosmological Non-Linearities as an Effective Fluid

    D. Baumann, A. Nicolis, L. Senatore, and M. Zaldarriaga, “Cosmological Non-Linearities as an Effective Fluid,” JCAP 07 (2012) 051, arXiv:1004.2488 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  8. [8]

    The Effective Field Theory of Cosmological Large Scale Structures

    J. J. M. Carrasco, M. P. Hertzberg, and L. Senatore, “The Effective Field Theory of Cosmological Large Scale Structures,” JHEP 09 (2012) 082, arXiv:1206.2926 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  9. [9]

    Biased Tracers in Redshift Space in the EFT of Large-Scale Structure

    A. Perko, L. Senatore, E. Jennings, and R. H. Wechsler, “Biased Tracers in Redshift Space in the EFT of Large-Scale Structure,” arXiv:1610.09321 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  10. [10]

    On the IR-Resummation in the EFTofLSS

    L. Senatore and G. Trevisan, “On the IR-Resummation in the EFTofLSS,” JCAP 05 (2018) 019, arXiv:1710.02178 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  11. [11]

    Snowmass White Paper: Effective Field Theories in Cosmology

    G. Cabass, M. M. Ivanov, M. Lewandowski, M. Mirbabayi, and M. Simonovi´ c, “Snowmass white paper: Effective field theories in cosmology,” Phys. Dark Univ. 40 (2023) 101193, arXiv:2203.08232 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2023

  12. [12]

    General relativistic corrections to $N$-body simulations and the Zel'dovich approximation

    C. Fidler, C. Rampf, T. Tram, R. Crittenden, K. Koyama, and D. Wands, “General relativistic corrections to N-body simulations and the Zel’dovich approximation,” Phys. Rev. D 92 no. 12, (2015) 123517, arXiv:1505.04756 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  13. [13]

    Relativistic Interpretation of Newtonian Simulations for Cosmic Structure Formation

    C. Fidler, T. Tram, C. Rampf, R. Crittenden, K. Koyama, and D. Wands, “Relativistic Interpretation of Newtonian Simulations for Cosmic Structure Formation,” JCAP 09 (2016) 031, arXiv:1606.05588 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  14. [14]

    General relativistic weak-field limit and Newtonian N-body simulations

    C. Fidler, T. Tram, C. Rampf, R. Crittenden, K. Koyama, and D. Wands, “General relativistic weak-field limit and Newtonian N-body simulations,” JCAP 12 (2017) 022, arXiv:1708.07769 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  15. [15]

    FAST-PT: a novel algorithm to calculate convolution integrals in cosmological perturbation theory

    J. E. McEwen, X. Fang, C. M. Hirata, and J. A. Blazek, “FAST-PT: a novel algorithm to calculate convolution integrals in cosmological perturbation theory,” JCAP 09 (2016) 015, arXiv:1603.04826 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  16. [16]

    Fast Large Scale Structure Perturbation Theory using 1D FFTs

    M. Schmittfull, Z. Vlah, and P. McDonald, “Fast large scale structure perturbation theory using one-dimensional fast Fourier transforms,” Phys. Rev. D 93 no. 10, (2016) 103528, arXiv:1603.04405 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  17. [17]

    Cosmological Perturbation Theory Using the FFTLog: Formalism and Connection to QFT Loop Integrals

    M. Simonovi´ c, T. Baldauf, M. Zaldarriaga, J. J. Carrasco, and J. A. Kollmeier, “Cosmological perturbation theory using the FFTLog: formalism and connection to QFT loop integrals,” JCAP 04 (2018) 030, arXiv:1708.08130 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  18. [18]

    Cosmological Parameters from the BOSS Galaxy Power Spectrum

    M. M. Ivanov, M. Simonovi´ c, and M. Zaldarriaga, “Cosmological Parameters from the BOSS Galaxy Power Spectrum,” JCAP 05 (2020) 042, arXiv:1909.05277 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2020

  19. [19]

    Cosmology from large-scale structure: Constraining ΛCDM with BOSS,

    T. Tr¨ osteret al., “Cosmology from large-scale structure: Constraining ΛCDM with BOSS,” Astron. Astrophys. 633 (2020) L10, arXiv:1909.11006 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2020

  20. [20]

    D’Amico, J

    G. D’Amico, J. Gleyzes, N. Kokron, K. Markovic, L. Senatore, P. Zhang, F. Beutler, and H. Gil-Mar´ ın, “The Cosmological Analysis of the SDSS/BOSS data from the Effective Field Theory of Large-Scale Structure,” JCAP 05 (2020) 005, arXiv:1909.05271 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2020

  21. [21]

    A new analysis of galaxy 2-point functions in the BOSS survey, including full-shape information and post-reconstruction BAO,

    S.-F. Chen, Z. Vlah, and M. White, “A new analysis of galaxy 2-point functions in the BOSS survey, including full-shape information and post-reconstruction BAO,” JCAP 02 no. 02, (2022) 008, arXiv:2110.05530 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2022

  22. [22]

    Cosmological inference from the EFTofLSS: the eBOSS QSO full-shape analysis,

    T. Simon, P. Zhang, and V. Poulin, “Cosmological inference from the EFTofLSS: the eBOSS QSO full-shape analysis,” JCAP 07 (2023) 041, arXiv:2210.14931 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2023

  23. [23]

    Philcox and M.M

    O. H. E. Philcox and M. M. Ivanov, “BOSS DR12 full-shape cosmology: ΛCDM constraints from the large-scale galaxy power spectrum and bispectrum monopole,” Phys. Rev. D 105 no. 4, (2022) 043517, arXiv:2112.04515 [astro-ph.CO] . – 38 –

    work page arXiv 2022

  24. [24]

    D’Amico, Y

    G. D’Amico, Y. Donath, M. Lewandowski, L. Senatore, and P. Zhang, “The BOSS bispectrum analysis at one loop from the Effective Field Theory of Large-Scale Structure,” JCAP 05 (2024) 059, arXiv:2206.08327 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2024

  25. [25]

    Cosmological constraints from combined probes with the three-point statistics of galaxies at one-loop precision,

    S. Spaar and P. Zhang, “Cosmological constraints from combined probes with the three-point statistics of galaxies at one-loop precision,” Phys. Rev. D 111 no. 2, (2025) 023529, arXiv:2312.15164 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  26. [26]

    DESI 2024 V: Full-Shape Galaxy Clustering from Galaxies and Quasars

    DESI Collaboration, A. G. Adame et al., “DESI 2024 V: Full-Shape Galaxy Clustering from Galaxies and Quasars,” arXiv:2411.12021 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  27. [27]

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

    W. Elbers et al., “Constraints on neutrino physics from DESI DR2 BAO and DR1 full shape,” Phys. Rev. D 112 no. 8, (2025) 083513, arXiv:2503.14744 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  28. [28]

    Reanalyzing DESI DR1: 2. Constraints on Dark Energy, Spatial Curvature, and Neutrino Masses

    A. Chudaykin, M. M. Ivanov, and O. H. E. Philcox, “Reanalyzing DESI DR1: 2. Constraints on Dark Energy, Spatial Curvature, and Neutrino Masses,” arXiv:2511.20757 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  29. [29]

    Chudaykin, M

    A. Chudaykin, M. M. Ivanov, and O. H. E. Philcox, “Reanalyzing DESI DR1. III. Constraints on inflation from galaxy power spectra and bispectra,” Phys. Rev. D 113 no. 6, (2026) 063552, arXiv:2512.04266 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2026

  30. [30]

    Chudaykin, M.M

    A. Chudaykin, M. M. Ivanov, and O. H. E. Philcox, “Reanalyzing DESI DR1. I. ΛCDM constraints from the power spectrum and bispectrum,” Phys. Rev. D 113 no. 6, (2026) 063502, arXiv:2507.13433 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2026

  31. [31]

    Ivanov, J.M

    M. M. Ivanov, J. M. Sullivan, S.-F. Chen, A. Chudaykin, M. Maus, and O. H. E. Philcox, “Reanalyzing DESI DR1: 4. Percent-Level Cosmological Constraints from Combined Probes and Robust Evidence for the Normal Neutrino Mass Hierarchy,” arXiv:2601.16165 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv

  32. [32]

    Chudaykin, M

    A. Chudaykin, M. M. Ivanov, and O. H. E. Philcox, “Reanalyzing DESI DR1: 5. Cosmological Constraints with Simulation-Based Priors,” arXiv:2602.18554 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv

  33. [33]

    Limits on wCDM from the EFTofLSS with the PyBird code,

    G. D’Amico, L. Senatore, and P. Zhang, “Limits on wCDM from the EFTofLSS with the PyBird code,” JCAP 01 (2021) 006, arXiv:2003.07956 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2021

  34. [34]

    Chudaykin, K

    A. Chudaykin, K. Dolgikh, and M. M. Ivanov, “Constraints on the curvature of the Universe and dynamical dark energy from the Full-shape and BAO data,” Phys. Rev. D 103 no. 2, (2021) 023507, arXiv:2009.10106 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2021

  35. [35]

    The Effective Field Theory of Large-scale Structures of a Fuzzy Dark Matter Universe,

    H. M. Kousha, S. Hooshangi, and A. Abolhasani, “The Effective Field Theory of Large-scale Structures of a Fuzzy Dark Matter Universe,” Astrophys. J. 961 no. 1, (2024) 131, arXiv:2305.20075 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2024

  36. [36]

    DESI forecast for Dark Matter-Neutrino interactions using EFTofLSS,

    M. R. Mosbech, S. Casas, J. Lesgourgues, D. Linde, A. Moradinezhad Dizgah, C. Radermacher, and J. Truong, “DESI forecast for Dark Matter-Neutrino interactions using EFTofLSS,” arXiv:2410.08163 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv

  37. [37]

    Biased Tracers in Redshift Space in the EFTofLSS with exact time dependence,

    Y. Donath and L. Senatore, “Biased Tracers in Redshift Space in the EFTofLSS with exact time dependence,” JCAP 10 (2020) 039, arXiv:2005.04805 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2020

  38. [38]

    BOSS full-shape analysis from the EFTofLSS with exact time dependence,

    P. Zhang and Y. Cai, “BOSS full-shape analysis from the EFTofLSS with exact time dependence,” JCAP 01 no. 01, (2022) 031, arXiv:2111.05739 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2022

  39. [39]

    An effective description of dark matter and dark energy in the mildly non-linear regime

    M. Lewandowski, A. Maleknejad, and L. Senatore, “An effective description of dark matter and dark energy in the mildly non-linear regime,” JCAP 05 (2017) 038, arXiv:1611.07966 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  40. [40]

    D’Amico, Y

    G. D’Amico, Y. Donath, L. Senatore, and P. Zhang, “Limits on clustering and smooth quintessence from the EFTofLSS,” JCAP 03 (2024) 032, arXiv:2012.07554 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2024

  41. [41]

    Preference for evolving dark energy in light of the galaxy bispectrum,

    Z. Lu, T. Simon, and P. Zhang, “Preference for evolving dark energy in light of the galaxy bispectrum,” arXiv:2503.04602 [astro-ph.CO] . – 39 –

    work page arXiv

  42. [42]

    Dark Energy and Modified Gravity in the Effective Field Theory of Large-Scale Structure,

    G. Cusin, M. Lewandowski, and F. Vernizzi, “Dark Energy and Modified Gravity in the Effective Field Theory of Large-Scale Structure,” JCAP 04 (2018) 005, arXiv:1712.02783 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2018

  43. [43]

    Effective Field Theory of Large Scale Structure in modified gravity and application to Degenerate Higher-Order Scalar-Tensor theories,

    S. Hirano and T. Fujita, “Effective Field Theory of Large Scale Structure in modified gravity and application to Degenerate Higher-Order Scalar-Tensor theories,” arXiv:2210.00772 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv

  44. [44]

    Rodriguez-Meza, A

    M. A. Rodriguez-Meza, A. Aviles, H. E. Noriega, C.-Z. Ruan, B. Li, M. Vargas-Maga˜ na, and J. L. Cervantes-Cota, “fkPT: constraining scale-dependent modified gravity with the full-shape galaxy power spectrum,” JCAP 03 (2024) 049, arXiv:2312.10510 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2024

  45. [45]

    Testing gravity with the full-shape galaxy power spectrum: First constraints on scale-dependent modified gravity,

    A. Aviles, “Testing gravity with the full-shape galaxy power spectrum: First constraints on scale-dependent modified gravity,” Phys. Rev. D 111 no. 2, (2025) L021301, arXiv:2409.15640 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  46. [46]

    The Effective Field Theory of Large-Scale Structure in the presence of Massive Neutrinos

    L. Senatore and M. Zaldarriaga, “The Effective Field Theory of Large-Scale Structure in the presence of Massive Neutrinos,” arXiv:1707.04698 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  47. [47]

    Loop corrections to the power spectrum for massive neutrino cosmologies with full time- and scale-dependence,

    M. Garny and P. Taule, “Loop corrections to the power spectrum for massive neutrino cosmologies with full time- and scale-dependence,” JCAP 01 (2021) 020, arXiv:2008.00013 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2021

  48. [48]

    The Effective Field Theory of Large Scale Structure for mixed dark matter scenarios,

    F. Verdiani, E. Castorina, E. Salvioni, and E. Sefusatti, “The Effective Field Theory of Large Scale Structure for mixed dark matter scenarios,” JCAP 01 (2026) 047, arXiv:2507.08792 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2026

  49. [49]

    New Perspective on Galaxy Clustering as a Cosmological Probe: General Relativistic Effects

    J. Yoo, A. L. Fitzpatrick, and M. Zaldarriaga, “A New Perspective on Galaxy Clustering as a Cosmological Probe: General Relativistic Effects,” Phys. Rev. D 80 (2009) 083514, arXiv:0907.0707 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  50. [50]

    General Relativistic Description of the Observed Galaxy Power Spectrum: Do We Understand What We Measure?

    J. Yoo, “General Relativistic Description of the Observed Galaxy Power Spectrum: Do We Understand What We Measure?,” Phys. Rev. D 82 (2010) 083508, arXiv:1009.3021 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  51. [51]

    What galaxy surveys really measure

    C. Bonvin and R. Durrer, “What galaxy surveys really measure,” Phys. Rev. D 84 (2011) 063505, arXiv:1105.5280 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  52. [52]

    The linear power spectrum of observed source number counts

    A. Challinor and A. Lewis, “The linear power spectrum of observed source number counts,” Phys. Rev. D 84 (2011) 043516, arXiv:1105.5292 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  53. [53]

    The CLASSgal code for Relativistic Cosmological Large Scale Structure

    E. Di Dio, F. Montanari, J. Lesgourgues, and R. Durrer, “The CLASSgal code for Relativistic Cosmological Large Scale Structure,” JCAP 11 (2013) 044, arXiv:1307.1459 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  54. [54]

    The observed galaxy power spectrum in General Relativity

    E. Castorina and E. di Dio, “The observed galaxy power spectrum in General Relativity,” JCAP 01 no. 01, (2022) 061, arXiv:2106.08857 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2022

  55. [55]

    Large Scale Limit of the Observed Galaxy Power Spectrum

    M. Foglieni, M. Pantiri, E. Di Dio, and E. Castorina, “Large Scale Limit of the Observed Galaxy Power Spectrum,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 131 no. 11, (2023) 111201, arXiv:2303.03142 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2023

  56. [56]

    A new approach to cosmological structure formation with massive neutrinos

    C. Fidler, A. Kleinjohann, T. Tram, C. Rampf, and K. Koyama, “A new approach to cosmological structure formation with massive neutrinos,” JCAP 01 (2019) 025, arXiv:1807.03701 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  57. [57]

    A minimal model for massive neutrinos in Newtonian N-body simulations,

    P. Heuschling, C. Partmann, and C. Fidler, “A minimal model for massive neutrinos in Newtonian N-body simulations,” JCAP 09 (2022) 068, arXiv:2201.13186 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2022

  58. [58]

    Euclid: Modelling massive neutrinos in cosmology – a code comparison,

    Euclid Collaboration, J. Adamek et al., “Euclid: Modelling massive neutrinos in cosmology – a code comparison,” JCAP 06 (2023) 035, arXiv:2211.12457 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2023

  59. [59]

    Gauge Invariant Cosmological Perturbations,

    J. M. Bardeen, “Gauge Invariant Cosmological Perturbations,” Phys. Rev. D 22 (1980) 1882–1905

    work page 1980

  60. [60]

    Cosmological Perturbation Theory,

    H. Kodama and M. Sasaki, “Cosmological Perturbation Theory,” Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl. 78 (1984) 1–166. – 40 –

    work page 1984

  61. [61]

    Covariant Linear Perturbation Formalism

    W. Hu, “Covariant linear perturbation formalism,” ICTP Lect. Notes Ser. 14 (2003) 145–185, arXiv:astro-ph/0402060

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  62. [62]

    Cosmological perturbations

    K. A. Malik and D. Wands, “Cosmological perturbations,” Phys. Rept. 475 (2009) 1–51, arXiv:0809.4944 [astro-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  63. [63]

    Durrer, The Cosmic Microwave Background

    R. Durrer, The Cosmic Microwave Background . Cambridge University Press, 12, 2020

    work page 2020

  64. [64]

    Cosmological Constraints from High-Redshift Damped Lyman-Alpha Systems

    C.-P. Ma, E. Bertschinger, L. Hernquist, D. H. Weinberg, and N. Katz, “Cosmological constraints from high redshift damped Lyman alpha systems,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 484 (1997) L1–L5, arXiv:astro-ph/9705113

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  65. [65]

    The Cosmic Linear Anisotropy Solving System (CLASS) II: Approximation schemes

    D. Blas, J. Lesgourgues, and T. Tram, “The Cosmic Linear Anisotropy Solving System (CLASS) II: Approximation schemes,” JCAP 07 (2011) 034, arXiv:1104.2933 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  66. [66]

    Large-scale clustering of galaxies in general relativity

    D. Jeong, F. Schmidt, and C. M. Hirata, “Large-scale clustering of galaxies in general relativity,” Phys. Rev. D 85 (2012) 023504, arXiv:1107.5427 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  67. [67]

    Large-Scale Structure Observables in General Relativity

    D. Jeong and F. Schmidt, “Large-Scale Structure Observables in General Relativity,” Class. Quant. Grav. 32 no. 4, (2015) 044001, arXiv:1407.7979 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  68. [68]

    Relativistic initial conditions for N-body simulations

    C. Fidler, T. Tram, C. Rampf, R. Crittenden, K. Koyama, and D. Wands, “Relativistic initial conditions for N-body simulations,” JCAP 06 (2017) 043, arXiv:1702.03221 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  69. [69]

    Two-loop power spectrum with full time- and scale-dependence and EFT corrections: impact of massive neutrinos and going beyond EdS,

    M. Garny and P. Taule, “Two-loop power spectrum with full time- and scale-dependence and EFT corrections: impact of massive neutrinos and going beyond EdS,” JCAP 09 (2022) 054, arXiv:2205.11533 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2022

  70. [70]

    Skewness and Kurtosis in Large-Scale Cosmic Fields

    F. Bernardeau, “Skewness and Kurtosis in large scale cosmic fields,” Astrophys. J. 433 (1994) 1, arXiv:astro-ph/9312026

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  71. [71]

    IR-safe and UV-safe integrands in the EFTofLSS with exact time dependence

    M. Lewandowski and L. Senatore, “IR-safe and UV-safe integrands in the EFTofLSS with exact time dependence,” JCAP 08 (2017) 037, arXiv:1701.07012 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  72. [72]

    The effect of early radiation in N-body simulations of cosmic structure formation

    J. Adamek, J. Brandbyge, C. Fidler, S. Hannestad, C. Rampf, and T. Tram, “The effect of early radiation in N-body simulations of cosmic structure formation,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 470 no. 1, (2017) 303–313, arXiv:1703.08585 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  73. [73]

    Massive Neutrinos and the Large Scale Structure of the Universe,

    J. R. Bond, G. Efstathiou, and J. Silk, “Massive Neutrinos and the Large Scale Structure of the Universe,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 45 (1980) 1980–1984

    work page 1980

  74. [74]

    Massive neutrinos and cosmology

    J. Lesgourgues and S. Pastor, “Massive neutrinos and cosmology,” Phys. Rept. 429 (2006) 307–379, arXiv:astro-ph/0603494

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  75. [75]

    Lesgourgues, G

    J. Lesgourgues, G. Mangano, G. Miele, and S. Pastor, Neutrino Cosmology. Cambridge University Press, 2, 2013

    work page 2013

  76. [76]

    Analytic Prediction of Baryonic Effects from the EFT of Large Scale Structures

    M. Lewandowski, A. Perko, and L. Senatore, “Analytic Prediction of Baryonic Effects from the EFT of Large Scale Structures,” JCAP 05 (2015) 019, arXiv:1412.5049 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  77. [77]

    Baryonic effects in the Effective Field Theory of Large-Scale Structure and an analytic recipe for lensing in CMB-S4,

    D. P. L. Bragan¸ ca, M. Lewandowski, D. Sekera, L. Senatore, and R. Sgier, “Baryonic effects in the Effective Field Theory of Large-Scale Structure and an analytic recipe for lensing in CMB-S4,” JCAP 10 (2021) 074, arXiv:2010.02929 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2021

  78. [78]

    Structure formation with massive neutrinos: going beyond linear theory

    D. Blas, M. Garny, T. Konstandin, and J. Lesgourgues, “Structure formation with massive neutrinos: going beyond linear theory,” JCAP 11 (2014) 039, arXiv:1408.2995 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  79. [79]

    Redshift space power spectrum beyond Einstein-de Sitter kernels,

    A. Aviles, G. Valogiannis, M. A. Rodriguez-Meza, J. L. Cervantes-Cota, B. Li, and R. Bean, “Redshift space power spectrum beyond Einstein-de Sitter kernels,” JCAP 04 (2021) 039, arXiv:2012.05077 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2021

  80. [80]

    Aviles, A

    A. Aviles, A. Banerjee, G. Niz, and Z. Slepian, “Clustering in massive neutrino cosmologies via Eulerian Perturbation Theory,” JCAP 11 (2021) 028, arXiv:2106.13771 [astro-ph.CO] . – 41 –

    work page arXiv 2021

Showing first 80 references.