CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 437Cosmology and Gravitation TheoriesGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaDark Matter and Cosmic Phenomena

Dark Energy Survey Year 3 results: Cosmology from cosmic shear and robustness to data calibration

Open access
Amon, A., Gruen, D., Troxel, M. A., MacCrann, N., Dodelson, S., Choi, A., Doux, C., Secco, L. F. +140 more·2022·Physical Review D
DOI 10.1103/physrevd.105.023514
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This work, together with its companion paper, Secco, Samuroff et al. [Phys. Rev. D 105, 023515 (2022)], present the Dark Energy Survey Year 3 cosmic-shear measurements and cosmological constraints based on an analysis of over 100 million source galaxies. With the data spanning $4143\text{ }\text{ }{\mathrm{deg}}^{2}$ on the sky, divided into four redshift bins, we produce a measurement with a signal-to-noise of 40. We conduct a blind analysis in the context of the Lambda-Cold Dark Matter ($\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Lambda}}\mathrm{CDM}$) model and find a 3% constraint of the clustering amplitude, ${S}_{8}\ensuremath{\equiv}{\ensuremath{\sigma}}_{8}({\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Omega}}}_{\mathrm{m}}/0.3{)}^{0.5}=0.75{9}_{\ensuremath{-}0.023}^{+0.025}$. A $\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Lambda}}\mathrm{CDM}$-Optimized analysis, which safely includes smaller scale information, yields a 2% precision measurement of ${S}_{8}=0.77{2}_{\ensuremath{-}0.017}^{+0.018}$ that is consistent with the fiducial case. The two low-redshift measurements are statistically consistent with the Planck Cosmic Microwave Background result, however, both recovered ${S}_{8}$ values are lower than the high-redshift prediction by $2.3\ensuremath{\sigma}$ and $2.1\ensuremath{\sigma}$ ($p$-values of 0.02 and 0.05), respectively. The measurements are shown to be internally consistent across redshift bins, angular scales and correlation functions. The analysis is demonstrated to be robust to calibration systematics, with the ${S}_{8}$ posterior consistent when varying the choice of redshift calibration sample, the modeling of redshift uncertainty and methodology. Similarly, we find that the corrections included to account for the blending of galaxies shifts our best-fit ${S}_{8}$ by $0.5\ensuremath{\sigma}$ without incurring a substantial increase in uncertainty. We examine the limiting factors for the precision of the cosmological constraints and find observational systematics to be subdominant to the modeling of astrophysics. Specifically, we identify the uncertainties in modeling baryonic effects and intrinsic alignments as the limiting systematics.

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 · 10.1103/physrevd.105.023514

Cites

208 of 208 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • The S8 tension is at the level of 3.1σ with KiDS-100, which gives S8=0.766+0.020-0.014, and 2.5σ with DES-Y3, which gives S8=0.759+0.025-0.025, while Planck prefers a higher value S8=0.834+0.016-0.016.

    “This tension is becoming statistically significant and is now at the level of 3.1σ with KiDS-100 [77], that gives S 8 = 0.766 +0.020 -0.014 , and 2.5σ with DES-Y3 [78], that gives S 8 = 0.759 +0.025 -0.025 , while Planck prefers a higher value for S 8 = 0.834 +0.016 -0.016 .”

    From Challenges of the Standard Cosmological Model (2022) · cites this paper as [78]

    Table III (A. Fiducial results; page unavailable) gives the DES-Y3 central value S8 = 0.759 and upper uncertainty +0.025, but its lower uncertainty is −0.023, not −0.025. The same section reports a 2.3σ difference from Planck in S8, rather than the cited 2.5σ. (LLM, conf=0.89)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • In a ΛCDM + Ωk model, S8 is in disagreement at about 3.8σ with KiDS-1000 and more than 3.5σ with DES-Y3.

    “S 8 in disagreement at about 3.8σ with KiDS-1000 [77], and more than 3.5σ with DES-Y3 [78].”

    From Challenges of the Standard Cosmological Model (2022) · cites this paper as [78]

    The Fiducial results (Table III) report the DES-Y3 S8 measurement, so the paper supports its use as the DES-Y3 comparison point. It does not report a ΛCDM + Ωk comparison or a greater-than-3.5σ disagreement; its reported Planck comparison is about 2.3σ under its ΛCDM analysis. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Varying Ωk exacerbates the well-known tensions on H0 and S8.

    “by varying Ω k , both the well-known tensions on H 0 and S 8 are exacerbated”

    From Challenges of the Standard Cosmological Model (2022) · cites this paper as [78]

    The Introduction describes the H₀ and S₈ tensions, but does not say that varying Ωk exacerbates either one. The Cosmic-shear signal section assumes flat spatial geometry; a search for Ωk and curvature found no analysis of their effect on the tensions in our copy. Page numbers were not available in the indexed passages. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 16

  1. N. Kaiser, G. Wilson, and G. A. Luppino, arXiv:astro-ph/ 0003338.
  2. L. Van Waerbeke, Y. Mellier, T. Erben, J. C. Cuillandre, F. Bernardeau, R. Maoli, E. Bertin, H. J. McCracken, O. Le Fèvre, B. Fort, M. Dantel-Fort, B. Jain, and P. Schneider, Astron. Astrophys. 358, 30 (2000).
  3. M. J. Jee, J. A. Tyson, M. D. Schneider, D. Wittman, S. Schmidt, and S. Hilbert, Astrophys. J. 765, 74 (2013). · DOI
  4. N. MacCrann et al. (DES Collaboration), arXiv: 2012.08567 [Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. (to be published)]. · arXiv
  5. W. G. Hartley, A. Choi et al. (DES Collaboration), arXiv:2012.12824 [Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. (to be published)]. · arXiv
  6. S. Everett et al. (DES Collaboration), arXiv:2012.12825 [Astrophys. J. Suppl. (to be published)]. · arXiv
  7. O. Friedrich et al. (DES Collaboration), arXiv:2012.08568 [ · arXiv
  8. M. Lemos, P. Raveri et al. (DES Collaboration), arXiv: 2012.09554 [Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. (to be published)]. · arXiv
  9. R. Cawthon et al. (DES Collaboration), arXiv:2012.12826 [ · arXiv
  10. M. A. Troxel, N. MacCrann, J. Zuntz, T. Eifler, E. Krause, S. Dodelson, D. Gruen, J. Blazek, O. Friedrich, S. Samuroff et al., Phys. Rev. D 98, 043528 (2018). · DOI
  11. A. Leauthaud, R. Massey, J.-P. Kneib, and J. Rhodes, Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 172, 219 (2007). · DOI
  12. R. H. Wechsler, J. DeRose, M. T. Busha, M. R. Becker, E. Rykoff, and A. Evrard, arXiv:2105.12105. · arXiv
  13. J. DeRose, M. R. Becker, and R. H. Wechsler, arXiv: 2105.12104. · arXiv
  14. M. R. Becker, CALCLENS: Weak lensing simulations, Ph.D. thesis, The University of Chicago, 2013.
  15. M. Asgari, C. Heymans, H. Hildebrandt, L. Miller, P. Schneider, A. Amon, A. Choi, T. Erben, C. Georgiou, J. Harnois-Deraps, and K. Kuijken, Astron. Astrophys. 624, A134 (2019). · DOI
  16. K. M. Górski, E. Hivon, A. J. Banday, B. D. Wandelt, F. K. Hansen, M. Reinecke, and M. Bartelmann, Astrophys. J. 622, 759 (2005). · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Amon, A., Gruen, D., Troxel, M. A., MacCrann, N., Dodelson, S., Choi, A., Doux, C., Secco, L. F., Samuroff, S., Krause, E., Cordero, J., Myles, J., DeRose, J., Wechsler, R. H., Gatti, M., Navarro-Alsina, A., Bernstein, G. M., Jain, B., Blazek, J., Alarcon, A., Ferté, A., Lemos, P., Raveri, M., Campos, A., Prat, J., Sánchez, C., Jarvis, M., Alves, O., Andrade-Oliveira, F., Baxter, E., Bechtol, K., Becker, M. R., Bridle, S. L., Camacho, H., Carnero Rosell, A., Carrasco Kind, M., Cawthon, R., Chang, C., Chen, R., Chintalapati, P., Crocce, M., Davis, C., Diehl, H. T., Drlica-Wagner, A., Eckert, K., Eifler, T. F., Elvin-Poole, J., Everett, S., Fang, X., Fosalba, P., Friedrich, O., Gaztanaga, E., Giannini, G., Gruendl, R. A., Harrison, I., Hartley, W. G., Herner, K., Huang, H., Huff, E. M., Huterer, D., Kuropatkin, N., Leget, P., Liddle, A. R., McCullough, J., Muir, J., Pandey, S., Park, Y., Porredon, A., Refregier, A., Rollins, R. P., Roodman, A., Rosenfeld, R., Ross, A. J., Rykoff, E. S., Sanchez, J., Sevilla-Noarbe, I., Sheldon, E., Shin, T., Troja, A., Tutusaus, I., Tutusaus, I., Varga, T. N., Weaverdyck, N., Yanny, B., Yin, B., Zhang, Y., Zuntz, J., Aguena, M., Allam, S., Annis, J., Bacon, D., Bertin, E., Bhargava, S., Brooks, D., Buckley-Geer, E., Burke, D. L., Carretero, J., Costanzi, M., da Costa, L. N., Pereira, M. E. S., De Vicente, J., Desai, S., Dietrich, J. P., Doel, P., Ferrero, I., Flaugher, B., Frieman, J., García-Bellido, J., Gaztanaga, E., Gerdes, D. W., Giannantonio, T., Gschwend, J., Gutierrez, G., Hinton, S. R., Hollowood, D. L., Honscheid, K., Hoyle, B., James, D. J., Kron, R., Kuehn, K., Lahav, O., Lima, M., Lin, H., Maia, M. A. G., Marshall, J. L., Martini, P., Melchior, P., Menanteau, F., Miquel, R., Mohr, J. J., Morgan, R., Ogando, R. L. C., Palmese, A., Paz-Chinchón, F., Petravick, D., Pieres, A., Romer, A. K., Sanchez, E., Scarpine, V., Schubnell, M., Serrano, S., Smith, M., Soares-Santos, M., Tarle, G., Thomas, D., To, C., Weller, J., & DES Collaboration
Affiliations
  • Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology (US)
  • SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory (US)
  • Duke University (US)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
  • Carnegie Mellon University (US)
  • The Ohio State University (US)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • University of Chicago (US)
  • University of Arizona (US)
  • University of Manchester (GB)
  • Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (US)
  • Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) (BR)
  • École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (CH)
  • Argonne National Laboratory (US)
  • Jet Propulsion Laboratory (US)
  • University of Sussex (GB)
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • Laboratório Interinstitucional de e-Astronomia (BR)
  • Department of Physics and Astronomy, Watanabe 416, 2505 Correa Road, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822, USA
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
  • Instituto de Astrofisica de Canarias, E-38205 La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain
  • Center for Astrophysical Surveys, National Center for Supercomputing Applications, 1205 West Clark Street, Urbana, Illinois 61801, USA
  • Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (US)
  • Institute of Space Sciences (ES)
  • University of California, Santa Cruz (US)
  • Institute for High Energy Physics (ES)
  • University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
  • University of Geneva (CH)
  • Department of Physics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, USA
  • Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology, P. O. Box 2450, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305, USA
  • University of Lisbon (PT)
  • Kavli Institute for the Physics and Mathematics of the Universe (JP)
  • ETH Zurich (CH)
  • Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, P. O. Box 500, Batavia, Illinois 60510, USA
  • Centro de Investigaciones Energéticas, Medioambientales y Tecnológicas (ES)
  • Brookhaven National Laboratory (US)
  • Max Planck Institute for Extraterrestrial Physics (DE)
  • University of Edinburgh (GB)
  • University of Portsmouth (GB)
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
  • University College London (GB)
  • Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois 60637, USA
  • University of Trieste (IT)
  • Laboratório Interinstitucional de e-Astronomia, Rua Gal. José Cristino 77, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro 20921-400, Brazil
  • Centro de Investigaciones Energéticas, Medioambientales y Tecnológicas (CIEMAT), Madrid, Spain
  • Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad (IN)
  • Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
  • University of Oslo (NO)
  • Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (ES)
  • National Observatory (BR)
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
  • Center for Astrophysics Harvard & Smithsonian (US)
  • Lowell Observatory (US)
  • Universidade de São Paulo (BR)
  • Texas A&M University (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Princeton University (US)
  • Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats (ES)
  • National Center for Supercomputing Applications (US)
  • University of Southampton (GB)
ORCID
Venue
Physical Review D
Publisher
American Physical Society (APS)
Published
2022-01-13
Volume
105
Issue
2
Pages
023514
ISSN
  • 2470-0010 (ISSN-L)
  • 2470-0029
DOI
10.1103/physrevd.105.023514
OpenAlex
W3173079094
Cited by
437
References
202
Citations by year
2026: 66 · 2025: 107 · 2024: 98 · 2023: 84 · 2022: 71 · 2021: 11
FWCI
36.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Physical review. D/Physical review. D. (publishedVersion)
  • Research Archive of Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad (Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad) (acceptedVersion)
  • UA Campus Repository (The University of Arizona) (acceptedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • ArTS Archivio della ricerca di Trieste (University of Trieste https://www.units.it/) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) (submittedVersion)
  • Sussex Research Online (University of Sussex) (submittedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
  • DIGITAL.CSIC (Spanish National Research Council (CSIC)) (submittedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion)
  • Hispana (submittedVersion)
  • Infoscience (Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • CINECA IRIS Institutial Research Information System (University of Genoa) (submittedVersion)
  • Biblos-e Archivo (Universidad Autónoma de Madrid) (submittedVersion)
  • LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Padua Research Archive (University of Padova) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Energy (DE-AC02-07CH11359)
  • National Science Foundation (AST-1138766, AST-1536171)
  • Science and Technology Facilities Council
  • Higher Education Funding Council for England
  • National Centre for Supercomputing Applications
  • University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
  • University of Chicago
  • Center for Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, Ohio State University
  • Ohio State University
  • Texas A&M University
  • Financiadora de Estudos e Projetos
  • Fundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro
  • Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
  • Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação
  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
  • Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación (ESP2017-89838, PGC2018-094773, PGC2018-102021, SEV-2016-0588, SEV-2016-0597, MDM-2015-0509)
  • European Commission
  • Generalitat de Catalunya
  • Seventh Framework Programme
  • European Research Council (240672, 291329, 306478)
  • Office of Science
  • High Energy Physics
  • Ministry of Science and Education of Spain
  • Mitchell Institute for Fundamental Physics and Astronomy
  • Brazilian Instituto Nacional de Ciência e Tecnologia (INCT) do e-Universo (465376/2014-2)
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
cosmic shear, S8, clustering amplitude, LambdaCDM model, cosmological constraints, redshift calibration, galaxy blending, weak gravitational lensing, observational systematics, baryon acoustic oscillations, redshift-space distortions

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