A. Pocino,I. Tutusaus,F. J. Castander,P. Fosalba,M. Crocce,A. Porredon,Stefano Camera,V. F. Cardone,S. Casas,Thomas D. Kitching,F. Lacasa,Matteo Martinelli,Alkistis Pourtsidou,Z. Sakr,S. Andreon,N. Auricchio,C. Baccigalupi,A. Balaguera-Antolínez,Marco Baldi,Andrea Balestra,S. Bardelli,R. Bender,A. Biviano,C. Bodendorf,D. Bonino,A. Boucaud,E. Bozzo,E. Branchini,M. Brescia,Jarle Brinchmann,C. Burigana,R. Cabanac,V. Capobianco,A. Cappi,C. S. Carvalho,M. Castellano,G. Castignani,S. Cavuoti,A. Cimatti,R. Clédassou,Carlos Colodro-Conde,G. Congedo,C. J. Conselice,L. Conversi,Y. Copin,L. Corcione,A. Costille,J. Coupon,H. M. Courtois,Mark Cropper,Jean-Gabriel Cuby,António da Silva,S. de la Torre,D. Di Ferdinando,F. Dubath,C. A. J. Duncan,X. Dupac,S. Dusini,S. Farrens,Pedro G. Ferreira,I. Ferrero,F. Finelli⋆,S. Fotopoulou,M. Frailis,E. Franceschi,S. Galeotta,B. Garilli,W. Gillard,B. Gillis,C. Giocoli,G. Gozaliasl,J. Graciá-Carpio,F. Grupp,L. Guzzo,W. A. Holmes,F. Hormuth,K. Jahnke,E. Keihänen,S. Kermiche,Alina Kiessling,C. C. Kirkpatrick,M. Kunz,H. Kurki-Suonio,S. Ligori,P. B. Lilje,I. Lloro,D. Maino,E. Maiorano,O. Mansutti,O. Marggraf,N. Martinet,F. Marulli,Richard Massey,S. Maurogordato,E. Medinaceli,S. Mei,M. Meneghetti,R. Benton Metcalf,G. Meylan,M. Moresco,B. Morin,L. Moscardini,E. Munari,Reiko Nakajima,C. Neissner,R. C. Nichol,S. M. Niemi,J. W. Nightingale,C. Padilla,S. Paltani,F. Pasian,L. Patrizii,K. Pedersen,Will J. Percival,V. Pettorino,S. Pires,G. Polenta,M. Poncet,L. Popa,D. Potter,L. Pozzetti,F. Raison,A. Renzi,Jason Rhodes,G. Riccio,E. Romelli,M. Roncarelli,E. Rossetti,R. Saglia,Ariel G. Sánchez,Domenico Sapone,R. Scaramella,Peter Schneider,V. Scottez,A. Secroun,G. Seidel,S. Serrano,C. Sirignano,G. Sirri,L. Stančo,F. Sureau,Andy Taylor,M. Tenti,I. Tereno,Romain Teyssier,R. Toledo-Moreo,A. Tramacere,E. A. Valentijn,L. Valenziano,J. Väliviita,T. Vassallo,Matteo Viel,Y. Wang,N. Welikala,L. Whittaker,A. Zacchei,G. Zamorani,J. Zoubian,E. Zucca
Astronomy and Astrophysics（2021）
引用2|浏览8
暂无评分
摘要
The accuracy of photometric redshifts (photo-zs) particularly affects the results of the analyses of galaxy clustering with photometrically-selected galaxies (GCph) and weak lensing. In the next decade, space missions like Euclid will collect photometric measurements for millions of galaxies. These data should be complemented with upcoming ground-based observations to derive precise and accurate photo-zs. In this paper, we explore how the tomographic redshift binning and depth of ground-based observations will affect the cosmological constraints expected from Euclid. We focus on GCph and extend the study to include galaxy-galaxy lensing (GGL). We add a layer of complexity to the analysis by simulating several realistic photo-z distributions based on the Euclid Consortium Flagship simulation and using a machine learning photo-z algorithm. We use the Fisher matrix formalism and these galaxy samples to study the cosmological constraining power as a function of redshift binning, survey depth, and photo-z accuracy. We find that bins with equal width in redshift provide a higher Figure of Merit (FoM) than equipopulated bins and that increasing the number of redshift bins from 10 to 13 improves the FoM by 35% and 15% for GCph and its combination with GGL, respectively. For GCph, an increase of the survey depth provides a higher FoM. But the addition of faint galaxies beyond the limit of the spectroscopic training data decreases the FoM due to the spurious photo-zs. When combining both probes, the number density of the sample, which is set by the survey depth, is the main factor driving the variations in the FoM. We conclude that there is more information that can be extracted beyond the nominal 10 tomographic redshift bins of Euclid and that we should be cautious when adding faint galaxies into our sample, since they can degrade the cosmological constraints.
