Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Comparing approximate methods for mock catalogues and covariance matrices I: correlation function

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1806.09477 v2 pith:QAKDTBLK submitted 2018-06-25 astro-ph.CO

Comparing approximate methods for mock catalogues and covariance matrices I: correlation function

classification astro-ph.CO
keywords methodsapproximatecovariancen-bodydensitymatricesclusteringfunction
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

This paper is the first in a set that analyses the covariance matrices of clustering statistics obtained from several approximate methods for gravitational structure formation. We focus here on the covariance matrices of anisotropic two-point correlation function measurements. Our comparison includes seven approximate methods, which can be divided into three categories: predictive methods that follow the evolution of the linear density field deterministically (ICE-COLA, Peak Patch, and Pinocchio), methods that require a calibration with N-body simulations (Patchy and Halogen), and simpler recipes based on assumptions regarding the shape of the probability distribution function (PDF) of density fluctuations (log-normal and Gaussian density fields). We analyse the impact of using covariance estimates obtained from these approximate methods on cosmological analyses of galaxy clustering measurements, using as a reference the covariances inferred from a set of full N-body simulations. We find that all approximate methods can accurately recover the mean parameter values inferred using the N-body covariances. The obtained parameter uncertainties typically agree with the corresponding N-body results within 5% for our lower mass threshold, and 10% for our higher mass threshold. Furthermore, we find that the constraints for some methods can differ by up to 20% depending on whether the halo samples used to define the covariance matrices are defined by matching the mass, number density, or clustering amplitude of the parent N-body samples. The results of our configuration-space analysis indicate that most approximate methods provide similar results, with no single method clearly outperforming the others.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Fewer simulations, sharper covariances: Reducing mock covariance noise with Zeldovich approximation control variates

    astro-ph.CO 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Control variates with Zeldovich mocks reduce covariance matrix variance by up to an order of magnitude on large scales in DESI-like mocks.