A Unified Analysis of Four Cosmic Shear Surveys
Chihway Chang, Michael Wang, Scott Dodelson, Tim Eifler, Catherine, Heymans, Michael Jarvis, M. James Jee, Shahab Joudaki, Elisabeth Krause, Alex, Malz, Rachel Mandelbaum, Irshad Mohammed, Michael Schneider, Melanie Simet,, Michael Troxel

TL;DR
This paper performs a unified analysis of four recent cosmic shear surveys to assess the robustness of their cosmological constraints, revealing how analysis choices impact results and finding consistency among the latest surveys and with Planck CMB data.
Contribution
It introduces a unified pipeline to compare four cosmic shear surveys, highlighting the influence of analysis choices on cosmological constraints and assessing their consistency.
Findings
The surveys' $S_8$ constraints vary significantly with analysis choices.
DES-SV and KiDS-450 are consistent and have acceptable goodness-of-fit.
Combined $S_8$ constraint aligns with Planck CMB results.
Abstract
In the past few years, several independent collaborations have presented cosmological constraints from tomographic cosmic shear analyses. These analyses differ in many aspects: the datasets, the shear and photometric redshift estimation algorithms, the theory model assumptions, and the inference pipelines. To assess the robustness of the existing cosmic shear results, we present in this paper a unified analysis of four of the recent cosmic shear surveys: the Deep Lens Survey (DLS), the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope Lensing Survey (CFHTLenS), the Science Verification data from the Dark Energy Survey (DES-SV), and the 450 deg release of the Kilo-Degree Survey (KiDS-450). By using a unified pipeline, we show how the cosmological constraints are sensitive to the various details of the pipeline. We identify several analysis choices that can shift the cosmological constraints by a…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
