• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Constraining neutrino masses with weak-lensing multiscale peak counts Virginia Ajani,1, ∗ Austin Peel,2 Valeria Pettorino,1 Jean-Luc Starck,1 Zack Li,3 and Jia Liu4, 3 1AIM, CEA, CNRS, Universit´eParis-Saclay, Universit´eParis Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cit´e,F-91191 Gif-sur-Yvette, France 2Laboratoire d'Astrophysique, Ecole Polytechnique F´ed´erale de Lausanne (EPFL), Observatoire de Sauverny, CH-1290 Versoix, Switzerland 3Department of Astrophysical Sciences, Princeton University, 4 Ivy Lane, Princeton, NJ 08544, USA 4Berkeley Center for Cosmological Physics, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA Massive neutrinos influence the background evolution of the Universe as well as the growth of structure. Being able to model this effect and constrain the sum of their masses is one of the key challenges in modern cosmology. Weak lensing cosmological constraints will also soon reach higher levels of precision with next-generation surveys like LSST, WFIRST and Euclid. In this context, we use the MassiveNus simulations to derive constraints on the sum of neutrino masses Mν , the present- day total matter density Ωm, and the primordial power spectrum normalization As in a tomographic setting. We measure the lensing power spectrum as second-order statistics along with peak counts as higher-order statistics on lensing convergence maps generated from the simulations. We investigate the impact of multi-scale filtering approaches on cosmological parameters by employing a starlet (wavelet) filter and a concatenation of Gaussian filters. In both cases peak counts perform better than the power spectrum on the set of parameters [Mν ,Ωm, As] respectively by 63%, 40% and 72% when using a starlet filter and by 70%, 40% and 77% when using a multi-scale Gaussian. More importantly, we show that when using a multi-scale approach, joining power spectrum and peaks does not add any relevant information over considering just the peaks alone. While both multi-scale filters behave similarly, we find that with the starlet filter the majority of the information in the data covariance matrix is encoded in the diagonal elements; this can be an advantage when inverting the matrix, speeding up the numerical implementation. For the starlet case, we further identify the minimum resolution required to obtain constraints comparable to those achievable with the full wavelet decomposition and we show that the information contained in the coarse-scale map cannot be neglected. I. INTRODUCTION tained by combining the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) temperature fluctuation data with CMB lensing The presence of massive neutrinos affects the back- and Baryon Acoustic Oscillations (BAO), leading to a ground evolution of the Universe as well as the evolution constraint of Mν < 0:12 eV at 95% confidence level [7]. of cosmological perturbations and structure formation Weak gravitational lensing by large-scale structure has [1]. Constraining the value of the sum of neutrino masses proven to be a powerful tool to achieve constraints on is one of the key science goals of modern cosmology. This cosmological parameters and its importance to preci- is not only an interesting goal per se, but it is also worth sion cosmology is borne out in the scientific results of exploring because in the presence of massive neutrinos, galaxy surveys such as the Canada-France-Hawaii Tele- modified gravity models may mimic the standard cosmo- scope Lensing Survey (CFHTLenS) [8], the Kilo-Degree logical (ΛCDM) model, as discussed in [2{4]. This is due Survey (KiDS) [9], the Dark Energy Survey (DES) [10] to the fact that massive neutrinos modify structure for- and Hyper SuprimeCam (HSC) [11, 12]. In particular, mation, typically reducing clustering, and can therefore it encodes the evolution of structure growth under the allow for larger non-standard couplings than in the ab- influence of massive neutrinos, representing a powerful sence of massive neutrinos. Being able to measure mas- tool to explore these effects and extract the correspond- sive neutrinos can also allow us to disentangle ΛCDM ing cosmological information. Future galaxy surveys like arXiv:2001.10993v2 [astro-ph.CO] 5 Jan 2021 from alternative scenarios. From neutrino oscillation ex- Euclid [13] will be sensitive to the properties of weakly periments [5], we only have information about the differ- interacting particles in the eV mass range, such as mas- ence of the masses squared. Hence, to fix a scale for the sive neutrinos, and will use weak lensing as a cosmological neutrino masses, it is necessary to assume a mass hier- probe to test different models and improve our knowledge archy: for a normal hierarchy (i:e: m1 < m2 < m3) the of cosmological parameters. lower bound on the sum of neutrino masses Mν mν Moreover, in recent years, it has been shown that ≡ ν is currently predicted to be Mν > 0:06 eV while for an weak-lensing statistics higher than second order can help P inverted hierarchy (i:e: m3 < m1 < m2) Mν > 0:1 eV break degeneracies, as they take into account the non- [6]. The latest results on the upper bound have been ob- Gaussian information encoded by the non-linear process of structure formation, such as the bispectrum [14, 15], Minkowski functionals [16, 17], and peak counts [18{25]. In this context, we perform Bayesian inference to derive ∗ [email protected] cosmological constraints on the sum of neutrino masses 2 Mν , the matter density parameter Ωm, and the primor- dial power spectrum amplitude As, for a survey with Eu- clid-like noise. We use as synthetic data the lensing con- 1 κ γ1 γ2 vergence maps from MassiveNus simulations [26, 27]. Us- A = − − − ; (3) 0 γ2 1 κ + γ1 1 ing the same suite of simulations, [28], [29], and [30] have − − already shown for a LSST-like survey [31] that combining @ A the lensing power spectrum with higher-order statistics where (γ1; γ2) are the components of a spin-2 field γ can provide tighter constraints on parameters. For this called shear, and κ is a scalar quantity called convergence. purpose, we perform our analysis using the lensing power They describe respectively the anisotropic stretching and spectrum and peak counts as summary statistics follow- the isotropic magnification of the galaxy shape when light ing [32]. We extend the study by considering a survey passes through large-scale structure. Equation (2) and with Euclid-like noise, and to smooth the noisy conver- Eq. (3) define the shear and the convergence fields as gence maps we employ a multi-scale approach, investi- second-order derivatives of the lensing potential: gating a concatenation of Gaussian filters and separately 1 a starlet filter [33], which was shown to be a powerful γ1 (@1@1 @2@2) γ2 @1@2 (4) tool in the context of weak-lensing peak counts by [34]. ≡ 2 − ≡ The paper is organised as follows: Sec. II describes the theoretical framework of weak gravitational lensing 1 1 2 κ (@1@1 + @2@2) = : (5) useful for the paper and the simulations we use. Then, ≡ 2 2r we illustrate the survey and noise settings, the filtering techniques that we employ for the comparison and the The weak-lensing field is a powerful tool for cosmological details of the summary statistics. In Sec. III we describe inference. The shear is more closely related to actual the interpolation method implemented to build the like- observables (i.e., galaxy shapes), while the convergence, lihood, the covariance matrices, the results estimators as a scalar field, can be more directly understood in terms that we employ to quantify our results and the settings of the matter density distribution along the line of sight. of the MCMC. The cosmological parameter constraints This can be seen by inserting the lensing potential defined are shown in Sec.IV. We conclude in Sec.V. in Eq. (1) inside Eq. (5) and using the fact that the gravitational potential Φ is related to the matter density contrast δ = ∆ρ/ρ¯ through the Poisson equation 2Φ = 2 r II. METHODOLOGY 4πGa ρδ¯ . Expressing the mean matter density in terms 2 of the critical density ρc;0 = 3H0 =(8πG), the convergence field can be rewritten as A. Weak lensing 3H2Ω χlim dχ κ(θ~) = 0 m g(χ)f (χ)δ(f (χ)θ;~ χ); (6) The effect of gravitational lensing at comoving angular 2c2 a(χ) K K Z0 distance fK (χ) can be described by the lensing potential where H0 is the Hubble parameter at its present value, and χ 0 2 0 fK (χ χ ) 0 0 (θ;~ χ) dχ Φ(f (χ )θ;~ χ ) ; (1) χlim 0 2 − 0 K 0 0 fK (χ χ) ≡ c 0 fK (χ)fK (χ ) g(χ) dχ n(χ ) − (7) Z ≡ f (χ0) Zχ K which defines how much the gravitational potential Φ arising from a mass distribution changes the direction of is the lensing efficiency. Equation (6) relates the conver- ~ a light path. In this expression K is the spatial curvature gence κ to the 3D matter overdensity field δ(fK (χ)θ; χ), constant of the universe, χ is the comoving radial coor- and it describes how the lensing effect on the matter den- dinate, θ~ is the angle of observation, and c is the speed sity distribution is quantified by the lensing strength at a of light. As we are in ΛCDM, the two Bardeen gravita- distance χ that directly depends on the normalised source tional potentials are here assumed to be equal and the galaxy distribution n(z)dz = n(χ)dχ and on the geome- metric signature is defined as (+1; 1; 1; 1). In par- try of the universe through fK (χ) along the line of sight. ticular, under the Born approximation− −the− effect of the For a complete derivation see [35] and [36].

Load more

  17

Copy Link