Calibrating cosmological simulations with implicit likelihood inference using galaxy growth observables

TL;DR

This paper introduces a novel likelihood-free inference method using neural network emulators to efficiently calibrate cosmological simulations against galaxy growth observations, revealing parameter degeneracies and constraints.

Contribution

It develops an implicit likelihood inference framework with neural emulators for calibrating cosmological simulations, enabling efficient parameter estimation from galaxy observables.

Findings

ILI accurately recovers observables with less than 0.5% error.

Degeneracies exist between key cosmological and astrophysical parameters.

Stellar mass functions help break degeneracies in star formation rate density.

Abstract

In a novel approach employing implicit likelihood inference (ILI), also known as likelihood-free inference, we calibrate the parameters of cosmological hydrodynamic simulations against observations, which has previously been unfeasible due to the high computational cost of these simulations. For computational efficiency, we train neural networks as emulators on ~1000 cosmological simulations from the CAMELS project to estimate simulated observables, taking as input the cosmological and astrophysical parameters, and use these emulators as surrogates to the cosmological simulations. Using the cosmic star formation rate density (SFRD) and, separately, stellar mass functions (SMFs) at different redshifts, we perform ILI on selected cosmological and astrophysical parameters (Omega_m, sigma_8, stellar wind feedback, and kinetic black hole feedback) and obtain full 6-dimensional posterior distributions. In the performance test, the ILI from the emulated SFRD (SMFs) can recover the target observables with a relative error of 0.17% (0.4%). We find that degeneracies exist between the parameters inferred from the emulated SFRD, confirmed with new full cosmological simulations. We also find that the SMFs can break the degeneracy in the SFRD, which indicates that the SMFs provide complementary constraints for the parameters. Further, we find that the parameter combination inferred from an observationally-inferred SFRD reproduces the target observed SFRD very well, whereas, in the case of the SMFs, the inferred and observed SMFs show significant discrepancies that indicate potential limitations of the current galaxy formation modeling and calibration framework, and/or systematic differences and inconsistencies between observations of the stellar mass function.