The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Shear calibration biases in weak-lensing surveys
Open accessAbstract
We investigate biases induced by the conversion between the observed image shape and shear distortion in current weak-lensing analysis methods. Such overall calibration biases cannot be detected by the standard tests such as E/B decomposition or calibration with stars. We find that the non-Gaussianity of the point spread function has a significant effect and can lead to an error of up to 15 per cent on the linear amplitude of fluctuations σ8, depending on the method of analysis. This could explain some of the discrepancies seen in recent amplitude determinations from weak lensing. Using an elliptical Laguerre expansion method we develop a re-Gaussianization method that reduces the error to a calibration error of the order of 1 per cent, even for poorly resolved galaxies. We also discuss a new type of shear selection bias, which results in up to roughly an 8 per cent underestimation of the signal. It is expected to scale with redshift, inducing errors in the growth factor extraction if not properly corrected for. Understanding and correcting for such effects is crucial if weak lensing is to become a high-precision probe of cosmology.
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
Cited by
KiDS-450: cosmological parameter constraints from tomographic weak gravitational lensing
Hildebrandt, H., Viola, M., Heymans, C., Joudaki, S., Kuijken, K., Blake, C., Erben, T., Joachimi, B., Klaes, D., Miller, L., et al. (2017) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2805 · Cited by 1,021
Mandelbaum, R., Seljak, U., Kauffmann, G., Hirata, C. M., & Brinkmann, J. (2006) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10156.x · Cited by 728
Self-citationIntrinsic 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
Self-citationSecond data release of the Hyper Suprime-Cam Subaru Strategic Program
Aihara, H., AlSayyad, Y., Ando, M., Armstrong, R., Bosch, J., Egami, E., Furusawa, H., Furusawa, J., Goulding, A., Harikane, Y., et al. (2019) · Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan · doi:10.1093/pasj/psz103 · Cited by 511
The Shear Testing Programme – I. Weak lensing analysis of simulated ground-based observations
Heymans, C., Van Waerbeke, L., Bacon, D., Berge, J., Bernstein, G., Bertin, E., Bridle, S., Brown, M. L., Clowe, D., Dahle, H., et al. (2006) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10198.x · Cited by 508
Metadata
- Authors
- Hirata, C., & Seljak, U.
- Venue
- Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2003-08
- Volume
- 343
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 459-480
- ISSN
- 0035-8711 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2966
- OpenAlex
- W2139609674
- Cited by
- 395
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 8.89
- 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: Shear calibration biases in weak-lensing surveys. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06683.x
- The paper
- Hirata, C., & Seljak, U. (2003). Shear calibration biases in weak-lensing surveys. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06683.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.