-
Euclid preparation. LensMC, weak lensing cosmic shear measurement with forward modelling and Markov Chain Monte Carlo sampling
Authors:
Euclid Collaboration,
G. Congedo,
L. Miller,
A. N. Taylor,
N. Cross,
C. A. J. Duncan,
T. Kitching,
N. Martinet,
S. Matthew,
T. Schrabback,
M. Tewes,
N. Welikala,
N. Aghanim,
A. Amara,
S. Andreon,
N. Auricchio,
M. Baldi,
S. Bardelli,
R. Bender,
C. Bodendorf,
D. Bonino,
E. Branchini,
M. Brescia,
J. Brinchmann,
S. Camera
, et al. (217 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
LensMC is a weak lensing shear measurement method developed for Euclid and Stage-IV surveys. It is based on forward modelling to deal with convolution by a point spread function with comparable size to many galaxies; sampling the posterior distribution of galaxy parameters via Markov Chain Monte Carlo; and marginalisation over nuisance parameters for each of the 1.5 billion galaxies observed by Eu…
▽ More
LensMC is a weak lensing shear measurement method developed for Euclid and Stage-IV surveys. It is based on forward modelling to deal with convolution by a point spread function with comparable size to many galaxies; sampling the posterior distribution of galaxy parameters via Markov Chain Monte Carlo; and marginalisation over nuisance parameters for each of the 1.5 billion galaxies observed by Euclid. The scientific performance is quantified through high-fidelity images based on the Euclid Flagship simulations and emulation of the Euclid VIS images; realistic clustering with a mean surface number density of 250 arcmin$^{-2}$ ($I_{\rm E}<29.5$) for galaxies, and 6 arcmin$^{-2}$ ($I_{\rm E}<26$) for stars; and a diffraction-limited chromatic point spread function with a full width at half maximum of $0.^{\!\prime\prime}2$ and spatial variation across the field of view. Objects are measured with a density of 90 arcmin$^{-2}$ ($I_{\rm E}<26.5$) in 4500 deg$^2$. The total shear bias is broken down into measurement (our main focus here) and selection effects (which will be addressed elsewhere). We find: measurement multiplicative and additive biases of $m_1=(-3.6\pm0.2)\times10^{-3}$, $m_2=(-4.3\pm0.2)\times10^{-3}$, $c_1=(-1.78\pm0.03)\times10^{-4}$, $c_2=(0.09\pm0.03)\times10^{-4}$; a large detection bias with a multiplicative component of $1.2\times10^{-2}$ and an additive component of $-3\times10^{-4}$; and a measurement PSF leakage of $α_1=(-9\pm3)\times10^{-4}$ and $α_2=(2\pm3)\times10^{-4}$. When model bias is suppressed, the obtained measurement biases are close to Euclid requirement and largely dominated by undetected faint galaxies ($-5\times10^{-3}$). Although significant, model bias will be straightforward to calibrate given the weak sensitivity.
△ Less
Submitted 1 May, 2024;
originally announced May 2024.
-
AstroInformatics: Recommendations for Global Cooperation
Authors:
Ashish Mahabal,
Pranav Sharma,
Rana Adhikari,
Mark Allen,
Stefano Andreon,
Varun Bhalerao,
Federica Bianco,
Anthony Brown,
S. Bradley Cenko,
Paula Coehlo,
Jeffery Cooke,
Daniel Crichton,
Chenzhou Cui,
Reinaldo de Carvalho,
Richard Doyle,
Laurent Eyer,
Bernard Fanaroff,
Christopher Fluke,
Francisco Forster,
Kevin Govender,
Matthew J. Graham,
Renée Hložek,
Puji Irawati,
Ajit Kembhavi,
Juna Kollmeier
, et al. (23 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
Policy Brief on "AstroInformatics, Recommendations for Global Collaboration", distilled from panel discussions during S20 Policy Webinar on Astroinformatics for Sustainable Development held on 6-7 July 2023.
The deliberations encompassed a wide array of topics, including broad astroinformatics, sky surveys, large-scale international initiatives, global data repositories, space-related data, regi…
▽ More
Policy Brief on "AstroInformatics, Recommendations for Global Collaboration", distilled from panel discussions during S20 Policy Webinar on Astroinformatics for Sustainable Development held on 6-7 July 2023.
The deliberations encompassed a wide array of topics, including broad astroinformatics, sky surveys, large-scale international initiatives, global data repositories, space-related data, regional and international collaborative efforts, as well as workforce development within the field. These discussions comprehensively addressed the current status, notable achievements, and the manifold challenges that the field of astroinformatics currently confronts.
The G20 nations present a unique opportunity due to their abundant human and technological capabilities, coupled with their widespread geographical representation. Leveraging these strengths, significant strides can be made in various domains. These include, but are not limited to, the advancement of STEM education and workforce development, the promotion of equitable resource utilization, and contributions to fields such as Earth Science and Climate Science.
We present a concise overview, followed by specific recommendations that pertain to both ground-based and space data initiatives. Our team remains readily available to furnish further elaboration on any of these proposals as required. Furthermore, we anticipate further engagement during the upcoming G20 presidencies in Brazil (2024) and South Africa (2025) to ensure the continued discussion and realization of these objectives.
The policy webinar took place during the G20 presidency in India (2023). Notes based on the seven panels will be separately published.
△ Less
Submitted 9 January, 2024;
originally announced January 2024.
-
Measurement errors and scaling relations in astrophysics: a review
Authors:
S. Andreon,
M. A. Hurn
Abstract:
This review article considers some of the most common methods used in astronomy for regressing one quantity against another in order to estimate the model parameters or to predict an observationally expensive quantity using trends between object values. These methods have to tackle some of the awkward features prevalent in astronomical data, namely heteroscedastic (point-dependent) errors, intrins…
▽ More
This review article considers some of the most common methods used in astronomy for regressing one quantity against another in order to estimate the model parameters or to predict an observationally expensive quantity using trends between object values. These methods have to tackle some of the awkward features prevalent in astronomical data, namely heteroscedastic (point-dependent) errors, intrinsic scatter, non-ignorable data collection and selection effects, data structure and non-uniform population (often called Malmquist bias), non-Gaussian data, outliers and mixtures of regressions. We outline how least square fits, weighted least squares methods, Maximum Likelihood, survival analysis, and Bayesian methods have been applied in the astrophysics literature when one or more of these features is present. In particular we concentrate on errors-in-variables regression and we advocate Bayesian techniques.
△ Less
Submitted 23 October, 2012;
originally announced October 2012.
-
The enrichment history of the intracluster medium: a Bayesian approach
Authors:
S. Andreon
Abstract:
This work measures the evolution of the iron content in galaxy clusters by a rigorous analysis of the data of 130 clusters at 0.1<z<1.3. This task is made difficult by a) the low signal-to-noise ratio of abundance measurements and the upper limits, b) possible selection effects, c) boundaries in the parameter space, d) non-Gaussian errors, e) the intrinsic variety of the objects studied, and f) ab…
▽ More
This work measures the evolution of the iron content in galaxy clusters by a rigorous analysis of the data of 130 clusters at 0.1<z<1.3. This task is made difficult by a) the low signal-to-noise ratio of abundance measurements and the upper limits, b) possible selection effects, c) boundaries in the parameter space, d) non-Gaussian errors, e) the intrinsic variety of the objects studied, and f) abundance systematics. We introduce a Bayesian model to address all these issues at the same time, thus allowing cross-talk (covariance). On simulated data, the Bayesian fit recovers the input enrichment history, unlike in standard analysis. After accounting for a possible dependence on X-ray temperature, for metal abundance systematics, and for the intrinsic variety of studied objects, we found that the present-day metal content is not reached either at high or at low redshifts, but gradually over time: iron abundance increases by a factor 1.5 in the 7 Gyr sampled by the data. Therefore, feedback in metal abundance does not end at high redshift. Evolution is established with a moderate amount of evidence, 19 to 1 odds against faster or slower metal enrichment histories. We quantify, for the first time, the intrinsic spread in metal abundance, 18+/-3 %, after correcting for the effect of evolution, X-ray temperature, and metal abundance systematics. Finally, we also present an analytic approximation of the X-ray temperature and metal abundance likelihood functions, which are useful for other regression fitting involving these parameters. The data for the 130 clusters and code used for the stochastic computation are provided with the paper.
△ Less
Submitted 4 September, 2012;
originally announced September 2012.
-
Comment on "Bayesian astrostatistics: a backward look to the future" by Tom Loredo, arXiv:1208.3036
Authors:
S. Andreon
Abstract:
This short note points out two of the incongruences that I find in the Loredo (2012) comments on Andreon (2012), i.e. on my chapter written for the book "Astrostatistical Challenges for the New Astronomy". First, I find illogic the Loredo decision of putting my chapter among those presenting simple models, because one of the models illustrated in my chapter is qualified by him as "impressing for h…
▽ More
This short note points out two of the incongruences that I find in the Loredo (2012) comments on Andreon (2012), i.e. on my chapter written for the book "Astrostatistical Challenges for the New Astronomy". First, I find illogic the Loredo decision of putting my chapter among those presenting simple models, because one of the models illustrated in my chapter is qualified by him as "impressing for his complexity". Second, Loredo criticizes my chapter at one location confusing it with another paper by another author, because my chapter do not touch the subject mentioned by Loredo (2012) critics, the comparison between Bayesian and frequentist fitting models.
△ Less
Submitted 27 August, 2012;
originally announced August 2012.
-
Understanding better (some) astronomical data using Bayesian methods
Authors:
S. Andreon
Abstract:
Current analysis of astronomical data are confronted with the daunting task of modeling the awkward features of astronomical data, among which heteroscedastic (point-dependent) errors, intrinsic scatter, non-ignorable data collection (selection effects), data structure, non-uniform populations (often called Malmquist bias), non-Gaussian data, and upper/lower limits. This chapter shows, by examples…
▽ More
Current analysis of astronomical data are confronted with the daunting task of modeling the awkward features of astronomical data, among which heteroscedastic (point-dependent) errors, intrinsic scatter, non-ignorable data collection (selection effects), data structure, non-uniform populations (often called Malmquist bias), non-Gaussian data, and upper/lower limits. This chapter shows, by examples, how modeling all these features using Bayesian methods. In short, one just need to formalize, using maths, the logical link between the involved quantities, how the data arise and what we already known on the quantities we want to study. The posterior probability distribution summarizes what we known on the studied quantities after the data, and we should not be afraid about their actual numerical computation, because it is left to (special) Monte Carlo programs such as JAGS. As examples, we show how to predict the mass of a new object disposing of a calibrating sample, how to constraint cosmological parameters from supernovae data and how to check if the fitted data are in tension with the adopted fitting model. Examples are given with their coding. These examples can be easily used as template for completely different analysis, on totally unrelated astronomical objects, requiring to model the same awkward data features.
△ Less
Submitted 15 December, 2011;
originally announced December 2011.
