Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-03T14:39:01.657Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Probing the consistency of cosmological contours for supernova cosmology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 July 2023

P. Armstrong Open the ORCID record for P. Armstrong [Opens in a new window] ,
H. Qu Open the ORCID record for H. Qu [Opens in a new window] ,
D. Brout Open the ORCID record for D. Brout [Opens in a new window] ,
T. M. Davis Open the ORCID record for T. M. Davis [Opens in a new window] ,
R. Kessler Open the ORCID record for R. Kessler [Opens in a new window] ,
A. G. Kim Open the ORCID record for A. G. Kim [Opens in a new window] ,
C. Lidman Open the ORCID record for C. Lidman [Opens in a new window] ,
M. Sako Open the ORCID record for M. Sako [Opens in a new window]  and
B. E. Tucker Open the ORCID record for B. E. Tucker [Opens in a new window]
P. Armstrong*
Affiliation:
Mt Stromlo Observatory, The Research School of Astronomy and Astrophysics, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia
H. Qu
Affiliation:
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
D. Brout
Affiliation:
Department of Astronomy, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA
T. M. Davis
Affiliation:
School of Mathematics and Physics, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
R. Kessler
Affiliation:
Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
A. G. Kim
Affiliation:
Physics Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, USA
C. Lidman
Affiliation:
Mt Stromlo Observatory, The Research School of Astronomy and Astrophysics, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia Centre for Gravitational Astrophysics, College of Science, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia
M. Sako
Affiliation:
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
B. E. Tucker
Affiliation:
Mt Stromlo Observatory, The Research School of Astronomy and Astrophysics, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia National Centre for the Public Awareness of Science, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia The ARC Centre of Excellence for All-Sky Astrophysics in 3 Dimensions (ASTRO 3D), Canberra, ACT, Australia
*
Corresponding author: P. Armstrong; Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

As the scale of cosmological surveys increases, so does the complexity in the analyses. This complexity can often make it difficult to derive the underlying principles, necessitating statistically rigorous testing to ensure the results of an analysis are consistent and reasonable. This is particularly important in multi-probe cosmological analyses like those used in the Dark Energy Survey (DES) and the upcoming Legacy Survey of Space and Time, where accurate uncertainties are vital. In this paper, we present a statistically rigorous method to test the consistency of contours produced in these analyses and apply this method to the Pippin cosmological pipeline used for type Ia supernova cosmology with the DES. We make use of the Neyman construction, a frequentist methodology that leverages extensive simulations to calculate confidence intervals, to perform this consistency check. A true Neyman construction is too computationally expensive for supernova cosmology, so we develop a method for approximating a Neyman construction with far fewer simulations. We find that for a simulated dataset, the 68% contour reported by the Pippin pipeline and the 68% confidence region produced by our approximate Neyman construction differ by less than a percent near the input cosmology; however, they show more significant differences far from the input cosmology, with a maximal difference of 0.05 in $\Omega_{M}$ and 0.07 in w. This divergence is most impactful for analyses of cosmological tensions, but its impact is mitigated when combining supernovae with other cross-cutting cosmological probes, such as the cosmic microwave background.

Keywords

Cosmological parameterstype Ia supernovaeastrostatistics
Type
Research Article
Information
Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia , Volume 40 , 2023 , e038
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Astronomical Society of Australia

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Brout, D., Hinton, S. R., & Scolnic, D. 2021, ApJ, 912, L26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brout, D., et al. 2019 a, ApJ, 874, 150Google Scholar
Brout, D., et al. 2019 b, ApJ, 874, 106Google Scholar
Brout, D., et al. 2022, ApJ, 938, 110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conley, A., et al. 2011, ApJS, 192, 1Google Scholar
D’Andrea, C. B., et al. 2018, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1811.09565 Google Scholar
Dark Energy Survey Collaboration, et al. 2016, MNRAS, 460, 1270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guy, J., et al. 2007, AAP, 466, 11Google Scholar
Harris, C. R., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinton, S. 2016, JOSS, 1, 45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinton, S., & Brout, D. 2020, JOSS, 5, 2122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinton, S. R., et al. 2019, ApJ, 876, 15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunter, J. D. 2007, CSE, 9, 90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jennings, E., & Madigan, M. 2017, A&C, 19, 16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jennings, E., Wolf, R., & Sako, M. 2016, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1611.03087 Google Scholar
Kelsey, L., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 519, 3046Google Scholar
Kessler, R., & Scolnic, D. 2017, ApJ, 836, 56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kessler, R., et al. 2009, PASP, 121, 1028CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kessler, R., et al. 2019 a, MNRAS, 485, 1171Google Scholar
Kessler, R., et al. 2019 b, PASP, 131, 094501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kunz, M., et al. 2012, Astrostatistical Challenges for the New Astronomy, 63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lasker, J., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 485, 5329Google Scholar
Science Collaboration, LSST, et al. 2009, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:0912.0201 Google Scholar
Mandel, K. S., Thorp, S., Narayan, G., Friedman, A. S., & Avelino, A. 2021, MNRAS, 510, 3939CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marriner, J., et al. 2011, ApJ, 740, 72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitra, A., Kessler, R., More, S., Hlozek, R., & The LSST Dark Energy Science Collaboration. 2022, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2210.07560 Google Scholar
Möller, A., & de Boissière, T. 2020, MNRAS, 491, 4277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neyman, J. 1937, PTRSL, 236, 333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pedregosa, F., et al. 2011, JMLR, 12, 2825Google Scholar
Perlmutter, S., et al. 1999, ApJ, 517, 565Google Scholar
Popovic, B., Brout, D., Kessler, R., & Scolnic, D. 2021, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2112.04456 Google Scholar
Qu, H., Sako, M., Möller, A., & Doux, C. 2021, AJ, 162, 67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riess, A. G., et al. 1998, AJ, 116, 1009Google Scholar
Rubin, D., et al. 2015, ApJ, 813, 137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sánchez, B. O., et al. 2022, ApJ, 934, 96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, G., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 504, 4111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, G., et al. 2023, MNRAS, arXiv:2301.10644 Google Scholar
Toy, M., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2302.05184 Google Scholar
Tripp, R. 1998, AAP, 331, 815CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vincenzi, M., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 518, 1106Google Scholar
Virtanen, P., et al. 2020, NM, 17, 261Google Scholar