Optimised angular power spectra for spectroscopic galaxy surveys

TL;DR

The paper introduces a hybrid method for analyzing spectroscopic galaxy surveys' angular power spectra, significantly reducing computational costs while maintaining accuracy and including important cosmological effects.

Contribution

A novel hybrid approach that subdivides thick redshift bins into thinner ones, enabling efficient and accurate cosmological parameter constraints without bias from lensing effects.

Findings

Constraints comparable to standard analysis

Tighter constraints than 2D tomographic methods

No bias from lensing effects in the hybrid method

Abstract

The angular power spectrum is a gauge-independent observable that is in principle the natural tool for analysing galaxy number counts. In practice, the problem is that the computational requirements for next-generation spectroscopic surveys such as Euclid and the Square Kilometre Array are currently unfeasible. We propose a new method to save computational time for spectroscopic angular power spectra. This hybrid method is modelled on the Fourier power spectrum approach of treating relatively thick redshift bins (redshift width ~0.1) as separate surveys. In the hybrid method, each thick bin is further subdivided into thin bins (redshift width ~0.01); all the correlations within each thick bin are computed, while cross-bin correlations beyond the thick bins are neglected. Constraints on cosmological parameters from the hybrid method are comparable to those from the standard galaxy power spectrum analysis - but they have the advantage that cosmic evolution, wide-angle and lensing effects are naturally included, while no Alcock-Paczynski correction is needed. The hybrid method delivers much tighter constraints than a 2D tomographic approach that is typical for photometric surveys, which considers only thick bins and the correlations between them. Furthermore, for standard cosmological parameters our method is not biased by neglecting the effects of lensing on number counts, while the tomographic method is strongly biased.