Dark Energy Survey Year 3 results: optimized $w$CDM simulation-based inference with weak lensing map-level hybrid statistics
Résumé fourni par la source
We present cosmological constraints from the Dark Energy Survey Year 3 (DES Y3) weak lensing data using hierarchical hybrid statistics within a Bayesian simulation-based inference framework that is based on the Gower Street simulations. To maximize the precision of the inference, we have developed a new, information-theory based, data compression of the weak lensing maps to just seven highly informative summary statistics. The hybrid scheme exploits the high information content of the power spectrum, compressing both the power spectrum and neural-based summaries that are designed to extract further information. Our simulation-based approach enables principled forward modelling of all major sources of systematic uncertainty and survey properties into realistic mock observations, including the survey mask, photometric redshift uncertainties, intrinsic galaxy alignments, multiplicative shear calibration bias, source galaxy clustering, non-Gaussian shape noise, and non-linear structure formation. The summary statistics are then used in a Bayesian simulation-based inference pipeline. The inference is validated through coverage tests and checks for robustness against baryonic feedback. Assuming a $w$CDM cosmology, our analysis yields $S_8 = 0.808 \pm 0.017$, $Ω_{\rm m} = 0.325 \pm 0.024$, and $w < -0.766$ (marginalized posterior 68 per cent credible intervals). This rigorous combination of information theory, physics- and neural network-based extreme data compression, and principled Bayesian analysis improves the figure of merit for $(Ω_{\rm m}, S_8, w)$ by 60 per cent over the previous state-of-the-art, and by almost a factor of 3 over two-point analyses of the same data. They are the most precise joint constraints on $(Ω_{\rm m}, S_8, w)$ from weak gravitational lensing data alone of any survey to date. We intend to apply this analysis to the more recent DES Y6 data.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.