The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Intrinsic and extrinsic galaxy alignment
Open accessAbstract
We show with analytic models that the assumption of uncorrelated intrinsic ellipticities of target sources that is usually made in searches for weak gravitational lensing arising from large-scale mass inhomogeneities (‘field lensing’) is unwarranted. If the orientation of the galaxy image is determined either by the angular momentum or by the shape of the halo in which it forms, then the image should be aligned preferentially with the component of the tidal gravitational field perpendicular to the line of sight. Long-range correlations in the tidal field will thus lead to long-range ellipticity–ellipticity correlations that mimic the shear correlations arising from weak gravitational lensing. We calculate the ellipticity–ellipticity correlation expected if halo shapes determine the observed galaxy shape, and we discuss uncertainties (which are still considerable) in the predicted amplitude of this correlation. The ellipticity–ellipticity correlation induced by angular momenta should be smaller. We consider several methods for discriminating between the weak-lensing (extrinsic) and intrinsic correlations, including the use of redshift information. An ellipticity–tidal-field correlation also implies the existence of an alignment of images of galaxies near clusters. Although the intrinsic alignment may complicate the interpretation of field-lensing results, it is inherently interesting as it may shed light on galaxy formation as well as on structure formation.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The statistics of peaks of Gaussian random fields
Bardeen, J. M., Bond, J. R., Kaiser, N., & Szalay, A. S. (1986) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1086/164143 · Cited by 3,270
Cited by
Desjacques, V., Jeong, D., & Schmidt, F. (2018) · Physics Reports · doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2017.12.002 · Cited by 817
Dark Energy Survey Year 1 results: Cosmological constraints from cosmic shear
Troxel, M. A., MacCrann, N., Zuntz, J., Eifler, T. F., Krause, E., Dodelson, S., Gruen, D., Blazek, J., Friedrich, O., Samuroff, S., et al. (2018) · Physical Review D · doi:10.1103/physrevd.98.043528 · Cited by 656
Heymans, C., Grocutt, E., Heavens, A., Kilbinger, M., Kitching, T. D., Simpson, F., Benjamin, J., Erben, T., Hildebrandt, H., Hoekstra, H., et al. (2013) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1093/mnras/stt601 · Cited by 649
Intrinsic alignment-lensing interference as a contaminant of cosmic shear
Hirata, C. M., & Seljak, U. (2004) · Physical Review D · doi:10.1103/physrevd.70.063526 · Cited by 586
Cosmology with cosmic shear observations: a review
Kilbinger, M. (2015) · Reports on Progress in Physics · doi:10.1088/0034-4885/78/8/086901 · Cited by 604
Metadata
- Authors
- Catelan, P., Kamionkowski, M., & Blandford, R. D.
- Venue
- Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2001-01-01
- Volume
- 320
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- L7-L13
- ISSN
- 0035-8711 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2966
- OpenAlex
- W2102602464
- Cited by
- 440
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 9.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Intrinsic and extrinsic galaxy alignment. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04105.x
- The paper
- Catelan, P., Kamionkowski, M., & Blandford, R. D. (2001). Intrinsic and extrinsic galaxy alignment. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04105.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.