Comparing the DES-SN5YR and Pantheon+ SN cosmology analyses: Investigation based on "Evolving Dark Energy or Supernovae systematics?"

TL;DR

This study investigates potential systematics in supernova distance measurements that could influence dark energy evolution signals, confirming the robustness of DES-SN5YR results despite some offsets.

Contribution

We reproduce and analyze the sources of offsets between DES-SN5YR and Pantheon+ supernova samples, demonstrating that the evidence for evolving dark energy remains significant.

Findings

Offset partly due to improved supernova modeling in DES-SN5YR

Selection function differences cause additional offsets

Evidence for evolving dark energy persists despite offsets

Abstract

Recent cosmological analyses measuring distances of Type Ia Supernovae (SNe Ia) and Baryon Acoustic Oscillations (BAO) have all given similar hints at time-evolving dark energy. To examine whether underestimated SN Ia systematics might be driving these results, Efstathiou (2024) compared overlapping SN events between Pantheon+ and DES-SN5YR (20% SNe are in common), and reported evidence for a $\sim$0.04 mag offset between the low and high-redshift distance measurements of this subsample of events. If these offsets are arbitrarily subtracted from the entire DES-SN5YR sample, the preference for evolving dark energy is reduced. In this paper, we reproduce this offset and show that it has two sources. First, 43% of the offset is due to DES-SN5YR improvements in the modelling of supernova intrinsic scatter and host galaxy properties. These are scientifically-motivated modelling updates implemented in DES-SN5YR and their associated uncertainties are captured within the DES-SN5YR systematic error budget. Even if the less accurate scatter model and host properties from Pantheon+ are used instead, the DES-SN5YR evidence for evolving dark energy is only reduced from 3.9$\sigma$ to 3.3$\sigma$. Second, 38% of the offset is due to a misleading comparison because different selection functions characterize the DES subsets included in Pantheon+ and DES-SN5YR and therefore individual SN distance measurements are expected to be different because of different bias corrections. In conclusion, we confirm the validity of the published DES-SN5YR results.