Effects of redshift uncertainty on cross-correlations of CMB lensing and galaxy surveys

Abstract

We explore the effects of incorporating redshift uncertainty into measurements of galaxy clustering and crosscorrelations of galaxy positions and CMB lensing maps. We use a simple Gaussian model for a redshift distribution in a redshift bin with two parameters, the mean, z0, and the width, σz. We vary these parameters, as well as the galaxy bias, bg(z), and cosmological parameters σ8(z) and Ωm in a Fisher analysis across 12 redshift bins from z = 0 − 7. We find that incorporating redshift uncertainties degrades constraints on cosmological parameters in the LSST/CMB-S4 era by about a factor of 10 compared to the case of perfect redshift knowledge. In our fiducial analysis of LSST/CMB-S4 including redshift uncertainties, we project constraints on σ8(z) for z < 3 of less than 5%. Galaxy imaging surveys are expected to have priors on redshift parameters from photometric redshift algorithms and other methods. When adding priors with the expected precision for LSST redshift algorithms, the constraints on σ8(z) can be improved by a factor of 2-3 compared to the case of no priors. We also find that 'self-calibrated' constraints on the redshift parameters from just the auto-correlation and cross-correlation measurements (with no priors) are competitive with photometric redshift techniques. In the LSST/CMB-S4 era, we find uncertainty on the redshift parameters (z0, σz) to be below 0.004(1+z) at z < 1. For all parameters, constraints improve significantly if smaller scales can be used. We also project constraints for nearer term survey combinations: DES/SPT-SZ, DES/SPT-3G and LSST/SPT-3G. arXiv:1809.09251v1 [astro-ph.CO]

Dark Energy Survey Year 3 Results: Calibration of Lens Sample Redshift Distributions using Clustering Redshifts with BOSS/eBOSS

“…where 𝜎 𝑗 is the standard deviation of the redshift distribution. We note that photometric redshift scatter is often approximated as a Gaussian function (Cawthon 2020, LSST Science Collaboration 2009. If 𝑛(𝑧) is a Gaussian (i.e., 𝑛(𝑧)…”

CMB lensing reconstruction biases in cross-correlation with large-scale structure probes

“…The noise and systematics of CMB lensing are quite different, so the cross-correlation between the galaxy density, galaxy lensing, and CMB lensing fields, as well as their full joint analysis, make appealing cosmological probes. A joint analysis helps to improve cosmological constraints by breaking degeneracies, for example involving galaxy bias, and by constraining nuisance parameters associated with sources of systematic error in galaxy measurements [16][17][18][19] (e.g. lensing multiplicative bias, photometric redshift errors).…”

Photo-z outlier self-calibration in weak lensing surveys

“…Does CMB lensing help constrain the photo-z parameters? CMB lensing has been shown to help with shear calibration [32,59,60], intrinsic alignments [61,62], as well as photo-z errors [33]. We compare the fiducial 3 × 2 LSST analysis with the 6 × 2 analysis of LSST + CMB lensing from a CMB S4-like experiment.…”

“…• Inclusion of CMB lensing. We build on [32] and [33] and ask whether CMB lensing helps with calibrating photo-z Gaussian uncertainties and outliers for LSST.…”