CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 49Cosmology and Gravitation TheoriesDark Matter and Cosmic PhenomenaGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena

Linear and non-linear Modified Gravity forecasts with future surveys

Open access
Casas, Santiago, Kunz, Martin, Martinelli, Matteo, Pettorino, Valeria·2017·Physics of the Dark Universe
DOI 10.1016/j.dark.2017.09.009
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.dark.2017.09.009

Cites

87 of 87 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Euclid, SKA1, SKA2 and DESI (with Planck priors) can constrain present values of modified gravity parameters to 2-3% using linear scales, reducing to about 1% or less when nonlinear scales are included.

    “they find that future surveys Euclid, SKA1, SKA2 and DESI (in combination with Planck priors) can constrain the present values (i.e., at ) of the parameters , , and to 2–3% when only linear scales are used but these reduce to about 1% or less when nonlinear scales are included.”

    From Testing general relativity in cosmology (2019) · cites this paper as Casas et al. (2017)

  • Using nonlinear scales reduces and even breaks degeneracies between modified gravity parameters in different bins and with the overall amplitude of the matter power spectrum.

    “They find that using nonlinear scales reduces and even breaks degeneracies between MG parameters in different bins and also with the overall amplitude of the matter power spectrum.”

    From Testing general relativity in cosmology (2019) · cites this paper as Casas et al. (2017)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

6 of the 93 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Casas, S., Kunz, M., Martinelli, M., & Pettorino, V.
Affiliations
  • Heidelberg University (DE)
  • University of Geneva (CH)
  • Leiden University (NL)
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
Corresponding author
Casas, Santiago
ORCID
Venue
Physics of the Dark Universe
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-12
Volume
18
Pages
73-104
ISSN
2212-6864 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.dark.2017.09.009
OpenAlex
W2594432756
Cited by
48
References
93
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 2
FWCI
3.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Physics of the Dark Universe (acceptedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • COST (CANTATA/CA15117)
  • Heidelberg Graduate School for Fundamental Physics
  • SFB-Transregio TR33 “The Dark Universe”
  • Foundation for Fundamental Research on Matter
  • Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research/Ministry of Science and Education
  • Swiss National Science Foundation (200020_162614)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Cosmology and Gravitation Theories
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Nuclear and High Energy Physics › Dark Matter and Cosmic Phenomena
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Galaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Keywords
modified gravity, gravitational slip, Poisson equation, Euclid, weak gravitational lensing, galaxy clustering, nonlinear structure formation, semi-analytical approximation, SKA1, DESI, cosmological surveys

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review