Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 447

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Bayesian galaxy shape measurement for weak lensing surveys – III. Application to the Canada–France–Hawaii Telescope Lensing Survey

Open access
Miller, L., Heymans, C., Kitching, T. D., van Waerbeke, L., Erben, T., Hildebrandt, H., Hoekstra, H., Mellier, Y., Rowe, B. T. P., Coupon, J., Dietrich, J. P., Fu, L., Harnois-Déraps, J., Hudson, M. J., Kilbinger, M., Kuijken, K., Schrabback, T., Semboloni, E., Vafaei, S., Velander, M.·2013·Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

Abstract

A likelihood-based method for measuring weak gravitational lensing shear in deep galaxy surveys is described and applied to the Canada–France–Hawaii Telescope (CFHT) Lensing Survey (CFHTLenS). CFHTLenS comprises 154 deg2 of multi-colour optical data from the CFHT Legacy Survey, with lensing measurements being made in the i′ band to a depth i′AB < 24.7, for galaxies with signal-to-noise ratio νSN ≳ 10. The method is based on the lensfit algorithm described in earlier papers, but here we describe a full analysis pipeline that takes into account the properties of real surveys. The method creates pixel-based models of the varying point spread function (PSF) in individual image exposures. It fits PSF-convolved two-component (disc plus bulge) models to measure the ellipticity of each galaxy, with Bayesian marginalization over model nuisance parameters of galaxy position, size, brightness and bulge fraction. The method allows optimal joint measurement of multiple, dithered image exposures, taking into account imaging distortion and the alignment of the multiple measurements. We discuss the effects of noise bias on the likelihood distribution of galaxy ellipticity. Two sets of image simulations that mirror the observed properties of CFHTLenS have been created to establish the method's accuracy and to derive an empirical correction for the effects of noise bias.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/mnras/sts454

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 42 references

Cited by

See all 447

Metadata

Authors
Miller, L., Heymans, C., Kitching, T. D., van Waerbeke, L., Erben, T., Hildebrandt, H., Hoekstra, H., Mellier, Y., Rowe, B. T. P., Coupon, J., Dietrich, J. P., Fu, L., Harnois-Déraps, J., Hudson, M. J., Kilbinger, M., Kuijken, K., Schrabback, T., Semboloni, E., Vafaei, S., & Velander, M.
Venue
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
Published
2013-01-14
Volume
429
Issue
4
Pages
2858-2880
ISSN
  • 0035-8711 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2966
OpenAlex
W2039411883
Cited by
447
References
42
FWCI
27.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Bayesian galaxy shape measurement for weak lensing surveys – III. Application to the Canada–France–Hawaii Telescope Lensing Survey. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/mnras/sts454
The paper
Miller, L., Heymans, C., Kitching, T. D., van Waerbeke, L., Erben, T., Hildebrandt, H., Hoekstra, H., Mellier, Y., Rowe, B. T. P., Coupon, J., Dietrich, J. P., Fu, L., Harnois-Déraps, J., Hudson, M. J., Kilbinger, M., Kuijken, K., Schrabback, T., Semboloni, E., Vafaei, S., & Velander, M. (2013). Bayesian galaxy shape measurement for weak lensing surveys – III. Application to the Canada–France–Hawaii Telescope Lensing Survey. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/sts454

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.