Dark Energy Survey year 1 results: Joint analysis of galaxy clustering, galaxy lensing, and CMB lensing two-point functions

Abstract

We perform a joint analysis of the auto and cross-correlations between three cosmic fields: the galaxy density field, the galaxy weak lensing shear field, and the cosmic microwave background (CMB) weak lensing convergence field. These three fields are measured using roughly 1300 sq. deg. of overlapping optical imaging data from first year observations of the Dark Energy Survey (DES) and millimeter-wave observations of the CMB from both the South Pole Telescope Sunyaev-Zel'dovich survey and Planck. We present cosmological constraints from the joint analysis of the two-point correlation functions between galaxy density and galaxy shear with CMB lensing. We test for consistency between these measurements and the DES-only two-point function measurements, finding no evidence for inconsistency in the context of flat ΛCDM cosmological models. Performing a joint analysis of five of the possible correlation functions between these fields (excluding only the CMB lensing autospectrum) yields S 8 ≡ σ 8ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi−0.025 and Ω m ¼ 0.260 þ0.029 −0.019 . We test for consistency between these five correlation function measurements and the Planck-only measurement of the CMB lensing autospectrum, again finding no evidence for inconsistency in the context of flat ΛCDM models. Combining constraints from all six twopoint functions yields S 8 ¼ 0.776 þ0.014 −0.021 and Ω m ¼ 0.271 þ0.022 −0.016 . These results provide a powerful test and confirmation of the results from the first year DES joint-probes analysis.

DES Y1 results: Splitting growth and geometry to test ΛCDM

“…Like the previous DES Y1 papers [3,136,137], we are not able to constrain the redshift power-law slope α IA , but we are able to constrain the amplitude A IA . For comparison, in ΛCDM, our DES, DES þ Ext-geo, and DES þ Ext-all posteriors all give A IA ¼ 0.4 AE 0.2, which is compatible with (and about twice as constraining as) what is reported in Ref.…”

“…[18][19][20][21]. Independent CMB measurements from ACT and WMAP give σ 8 constraints consistent with those from Planck [22], while constraints based solely on reconstructed Planck CMB lensing maps are consistent with σ 8 constraints from both DES and measurements of CMB temperature and polarization [23,24].…”

The impact of signal-to-noise, redshift, and angular range on the bias of weak lensing 2-point functions

“…For a contemporary survey such as KiDS and DES, the vast majority of their observed galaxies used for weak lensing fall below a unit redshift, see e.g. van Uitert et al (2018); Hildebrandt et al (2020); Abbott et al (2019). Accordingly, these surveys can roughly be recognized in the first four redshift bins of Fig.…”

“…When jointly analyzed with galaxy clustering, it can constrain the gravitational slip parameter (Daniel et al 2008) and thereby discriminate between different types of gravitational theories. Considerable observational efforts are thus invested into weak lensing, including the Kilo Degree Survey (Hildebrandt et al 2020), Dark Energy Survey (Abbott et al 2019) and the Hyper Suprime-Cam (Mandelbaum et al 2018).…”

Cross-correlation of CMB Polarization Lensing with High-z Submillimeter Herschel-ATLAS Galaxies

“…Cosmological and astrophysical applications of the CMB lensing-galaxy clustering crosscorrelations include the study of the galaxy bias evolution (e.g., Bleem et al 2012;Sherwin et al 2012;DiPompeo et al 2014;Allison et al 2015;Bianchini et al 2015Bianchini et al , 2016, the measurement of the growth of structure (e.g., Giannantonio et al 2016;Pullen et al 2016;Bianchini & Reichardt 2018;Peacock & Bilicki 2018;Omori et al 2019), the calibration of cosmic shear measurements (Baxter et al 2016), and the investigation of primordial non-Gaussianities (Giannantonio & Percival 2014). Moreover, cross-correlations are becoming a standard probe to be included in the general cosmological parameters estimation framework (e.g., Abbott et al 2019). The advantage of a cross-correlation analysis is twofold.…”