CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 47Cosmology and Gravitation TheoriesGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaDark Matter and Cosmic Phenomena

Testing gravity on large scales by combining weak lensing with galaxy clustering using CFHTLenS and BOSS CMASS

Open access
Alam, Shadab, Miyatake, Hironao, More, Surhud, Ho, Shirley, Mandelbaum, Rachel·2017·Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
DOI 10.1093/mnras/stw3056
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

We measure a combination of gravitational lensing, galaxy clustering and redshift-space distortions (RSDs) called EG. The quantity EG probes both parts of metric potential and is insensitive to galaxy bias and σ8. These properties make it an attractive statistic to test lambda cold dark matter, general relativity and its alternate theories. We have combined CMASS Data Release 11 with CFHTLenS and recent measurements of β from RSD analysis, and find EG(z = 0.57) = 0.42 ± 0.056, a 13 per cent measurement in agreement with the prediction of general relativity EG(z = 0.57) = 0.396 ± 0.011 using the Planck 2015 cosmological parameters. We have corrected our measurement for various observational and theoretical systematics. Our measurement is consistent with the first measurement of EG using cosmic microwave background lensing in place of galaxy lensing at small scales, but shows 2.8σ tension when compared with their final results including large scales. This analysis with future surveys will provide improved statistical error and better control over systematics to test general relativity and its alternate theories.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/mnras/stw3056

Cites

3 of 3 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?

  • Alam et al. (2017b) corrected their results for systematic effects including scale dependence bias, difference in lensing and clustering windows and redshift weighting, intrinsic alignment, cosmic variance, calibration bias, and cutoff scale limitations.

    “They corrected their results for systematics effects including scale dependence bias affecting its complete cancellation, difference in lensing and clustering windows and redshift weighting, intrinsic alignment of galaxies on lensing, cosmic variance, calibration bias in lensing, and limitations due to the choice of cutoff scale .”

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

  • Alam et al. (2017b) ran simulations and found theoretical observational systematic errors are smaller than statistical errors in the measurement.

    “They run simulations and found that these theoretical observational systematic errors are smaller than the statistical errors in the measurement.”

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Alam, S., Miyatake, H., More, S., Ho, S., & Mandelbaum, R.
Affiliations
  • Royal Observatory (GB)
  • California Institute of Technology (US)
  • Kavli Institute for the Physics and Mathematics of the Universe (JP)
  • Carnegie Mellon University (US)
Corresponding author
Alam, Shadab
ORCID
Venue
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2016-11-23
Volume
465
Issue
4
Pages
4853-4865
ISSN
  • 0035-8711 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2966
DOI
10.1093/mnras/stw3056
OpenAlex
W2548386242
Cited by
47
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 5
FWCI
2.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • NASA (12-EUCLID11-0004)
  • NSF (AST1412966)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Cosmology and Gravitation Theories
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Galaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Nuclear and High Energy Physics › Dark Matter and Cosmic Phenomena
Keywords
gravitational lensing, galaxy clustering, redshift-space distortions, metric potentials, modified gravity, tests of general relativity, CMASS, CFHTLenS, CMB lensing, large-scale structure, LambdaCDM

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