Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Toward testing gravity with LSST using EG

C. D. Leonard1,*, S. Alam2, R. Mandelbaum3, M. M. Rau1, S. Singh3,4, and C. M. A. Zanoletti1 (LSST Dark Energy Science Collaboration)

  • *Contact author: danielle.leonard@newcastle.ac.uk

Phys. Rev. D 113, 043547 – Published 25 February, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/49vk-h19p

Abstract

EG is a summary statistic that combines cosmological observables to achieve a test of gravity that is relatively model independent. Here, we consider the power of a measurement of EG using galaxy-galaxy lensing and galaxy clustering with sources from the Vera C. Rubin Observatory’s Legacy Survey of Space and Time (LSST), and lenses from the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI). We first update the theoretical framework for the covariance of EG to accommodate this Stage IV scenario. We then demonstrate that EG offers in principle a model-agnostic test of gravity using only linear-scale information, with the caveat that a careful treatment of galaxy bias is required. We finally address the persistent issue of EG’s theoretical dependence on the measured value of ΩM0. We propose a framework that takes advantage of the posterior predictive test to consistently incorporate uncertainty on ΩM0 in tests of gravity with EG, which should be of general use beyond the LSST + DESI scenario. Our forecasting study using this method shows that the prior information available for ΩM0 is instrumental in determining the power of EG in the LSST + DESI context. For the full survey dataset, with priors on ΩM0 from existing cosmic microwave background data, we find that for some modified gravity scenarios considered, we are likely to be able to reject the general relativity null hypothesis.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (84)

  1. A. H. Wright, K. Kuijken, H. Hildebrandt et al., The fifth data release of the Kilo Degree Survey: Multi-epoch optical/NIR imaging covering wide and legacy-calibration fields, Astron. Astrophys. 686, A170 (2024).
  2. DES Collaboration, T. Abbott, M. Adamów et al., The dark energy survey data release 2, Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 255, 20 (2021).
  3. H. Aihara, Y. AlSayyad, M. Ando et al., Third data release of the Hyper Suprime-Cam Subaru strategic program, Publ. Astron. Soc. Jpn. 74, 247 (2022).
  4. S. Joudaki, A. Mead, C. Blake et al., KiDS-450: Testing extensions to the standard cosmological model, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 471, 1259 (2017).
  5. C. Blake, A. Amon, M. Asgari et al., Testing gravity using galaxy-galaxy lensing and clustering amplitudes in KiDS-1000, BOSS, and 2dFLenS, Astron. Astrophys. 642, A158 (2020).
  6. T. Abbott, M. Aguena, A. Alarcon et al., Dark energy survey year 3 results: Constraints on extensions to λCDM with weak lensing and galaxy clustering, Phys. Rev. D 107, 083504 (2023).
  7. Ž. Ivezić et al., LSST: From science drivers to reference design and anticipated data products, Astrophys. J. 873, 111 (2019).
  8. R. Scaramella et al., Euclid preparation-I. The Euclid Wide Survey, Astron. Astrophys. 662, A112 (2022).
  9. R. Akeson et al., The wide field infrared survey telescope: 100 Hubbles for the 2020s, arXiv:1902.05569.
  10. S. Joudaki, P. G. Ferreira, N. A. Lima, and H. A. Winther, Testing gravity on cosmic scales: A case study of Jordan-Brans-Dicke theory, Phys. Rev. D 105, 043522 (2022).
  11. R. Liu, G. Valogiannis, N. Battaglia, and R. Bean, Constraints on f(R) and normal-branch Dvali-Gabadadze-Porrati modified gravity model parameters with cluster abundances and galaxy clustering, Phys. Rev. D 104, 103519 (2021).
  12. L. Piga, M. Marinucci, G. d’Amico, M. Pietroni, F. Vernizzi, and B. S. Wright, Constraints on modified gravity from the BOSS galaxy survey, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 04 (2023) 038.
  13. A. Silvestri, L. Pogosian, and R. V. Buniy, Practical approach to cosmological perturbations in modified gravity, Phys. Rev. D 87, 104015 (2013).
  14. E. Bellini and I. Sawicki, Maximal freedom at minimum cost: Linear large-scale structure in general modifications of gravity, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2014) 050.
  15. D. B. Thomas, Cosmological gravity on all scales: Simple equations, required conditions, and a framework for modified gravity, Phys. Rev. D 101, 123517 (2020).
  16. S. Srinivasan, D. B. Thomas, F. Pace, and R. Battye, Cosmological gravity on all scales. Part II. Model independent modified gravity N-body simulations, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 06 (2021) 016.
  17. C. Zanoletti and C. D. Leonard, Principal components for model-agnostic modified gravity with 3×2  pt data, Phys. Rev. D 112, 063547 (2025).
  18. M. Tsedrik, B. Bose, P. Carrilho, A. Pourtsidou, S. Pamuk, S. Casas, and J. Lesgourgues, Stage-IV cosmic shear with modified gravity and model-independent screening, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10 (2024) 099.
  19. P. Zhang, M. Liguori, R. Bean, and S. Dodelson, Probing gravity at cosmological scales by measurements which test the relationship between gravitational lensing and matter overdensity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 141302 (2007).
  20. R. Reyes, R. Mandelbaum, U. Seljak, T. Baldauf, J. E. Gunn, L. Lombriser, and R. E. Smith, Confirmation of general relativity on large scales from weak lensing and galaxy velocities, Nature (London) 464, 256 (2010).
  21. C. Blake, S. Joudaki, C. Heymans et al., RCSLenS: Testing gravitational physics through the cross-correlation of weak lensing and large-scale structure, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 456, 2806 (2016).
  22. S. Alam, H. Miyatake, S. More, S. Ho, and R. Mandelbaum, Testing gravity on large scales by combining weak lensing with galaxy clustering using CFHTLenS and BOSS CMASS, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 465, 4853 (2017).
  23. A. Amon, C. Blake, C. Heymans et al., KiDS+ 2dFLenS+ GAMA: Testing the cosmological model with the EG statistic, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 479, 3422 (2018).
  24. E. Jullo, S. De La Torre, M.-C. Cousinou, S. Escoffier, C. Giocoli, R. B. Metcalf, J. Comparat, H.-Y. Shan, M. Makler, J.-P. Kneib et al., Testing gravity with galaxy-galaxy lensing and redshift-space distortions using CFHT-Stripe 82, CFHTLenS, and BOSS CMASS datasets, Astron. Astrophys. 627, A137 (2019).
  25. S. Singh, S. Alam, R. Mandelbaum, U. Seljak, S. Rodriguez-Torres, and S. Ho, Probing gravity with a joint analysis of galaxy and CMB lensing and SDSS spectroscopy, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 482, 785 (2019).
  26. S. Rauhut, C. Blake, U. Andrade, H. Noriega, J. Aguilar, S. Ahlen, S. BenZvi, D. Bianchi, D. Brooks, T. Claybaugh et al., Testing gravitational physics by combining DESI DR1 and weak lensing datasets using the E_G estimator, Open J. Astrophys. 8, 145197 (2025).
  27. A. R. Pullen, S. Alam, and S. Ho, Probing gravity at large scales through CMB lensing, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 449, 4326 (2015).
  28. A. R. Pullen, S. Alam, S. He, and S. Ho, Constraining gravity at the largest scales through CMB lensing and galaxy velocities, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 460, 4098 (2016).
  29. Y. Zhang, A. R. Pullen, S. Alam et al., Testing general relativity on cosmological scales at redshift z≈1.5 with quasar and CMB lensing, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 501, 1013 (2021).
  30. L. Wenzl, R. Bean, S.-F. Chen, G. S. Farren, M. S. Madhavacheril, G. A. Marques, F. J. Qu, N. Sehgal, B. D. Sherwin, and A. van Engelen, Constraining gravity with a new precision EG estimator using Planck + SDSS BOSS data, Phys. Rev. D 109, 083540 (2024).
  31. L. Wenzl, R. An, N. Battaglia, R. Bean, E. Calabrese, S.-F. Chen, S. K. Choi, O. Darwish, J. Dunkley, G. S. Farren et al., Atacama cosmology telescope: DR6 gravitational lensing and SDSS BOSS cross-correlation measurement and constraints on gravity with the EG statistic, Phys. Rev. D 111, 043535 (2025).
  32. A. Pourtsidou, Testing gravity at large scales with H I intensity mapping, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 461, 1457 (2016).
  33. M. M. Abidi, C. Bonvin, M. Jalilvand, and M. Kunz, Model-independent test for gravity using intensity mapping and galaxy clustering, Phys. Rev. D 107, 063514 (2023).
  34. N. Grimm, C. Bonvin, and I. Tutusaus, Testing general relativity through the EG statistic using the Weyl potential and galaxy velocities, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 211004 (2024).
  35. R. Patki, N. Battaglia, and R. Bean, Probing gravity at large scales with KSZ-reconstructed velocities and CMB lensing, Phys. Rev. D 113, 023527 (2026).
  36. W. J. Percival, L. Samushia, A. J. Ross, C. Shapiro, and A. Raccanelli, Redshift-space distortions, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 369, 5058 (2011).
  37. T. Baldauf, R. E. Smith, U. Seljak, and R. Mandelbaum, Algorithm for the direct reconstruction of the dark matter correlation function from weak lensing and galaxy clustering, Phys. Rev. D 81, 063531 (2010).
  38. R. Mandelbaum, C. M. Hirata, U. Seljak, U. Seljak, J. Guzik, N. Padmanabhan, C. Blake, M. R. Blanton, R. Lupton, and J. Brinkmann, Systematic errors in weak lensing: Application to SDSS galaxy-galalxy weak lensing, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 361, 1287 (2005).
  39. S. More, S. Sugiyama, H. Miyatake et al., Hyper Suprime-Cam Year 3 results: Measurements of clustering of SDSS-BOSS galaxies, galaxy-galaxy lensing, and cosmic shear, Phys. Rev. D 108, 123520 (2023).
  40. A. Dvornik et al., KiDS-1000: Combined halo-model cosmology constraints from galaxy abundance, galaxy clustering, and galaxy-galaxy lensing, Astron. Astrophys. 675, A189 (2023).
  41. C. D. Leonard, P. G. Ferreira, and C. Heymans, Testing gravity with EG: Mapping theory onto observations, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 12 (2015) 051.
  42. N. Kaiser, Clustering in real space and in redshift space, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 227, 1 (1987).
  43. C. Hernández-Aguayo, J. Hou, B. Li, C. M. Baugh, and A. G. Sánchez, Large-scale redshift space distortions in modified gravity theories, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 485, 2194 (2019).
  44. G. Dvali, G. Gabadadze, and M. Porrati, 4D gravity on a brane in 5D Minkowski space, Phys. Lett. B 485, 208 (2000).
  45. C. Deffayet, Cosmology on a brane in Minkowski bulk, Phys. Lett. B 502, 199 (2001).
  46. F. Schmidt, Self-consistent cosmological simulations of DGP braneworld gravity, Phys. Rev. D 80, 043001 (2009).
  47. F. Schmidt, Self-consistent cosmological simulations of DGP braneworld gravity, Phys. Rev. D 80, 043001 (2009).
  48. Https://github.com/BartolomeoF/nDGPemu.
  49. B. Fiorini, K. Koyama, and T. Baker, Fast production of cosmological emulators in modified gravity: The matter power spectrum, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 12 (2023) 045.
  50. W. Hu and I. Sawicki, Models of f(R) cosmic acceleration that evade solar system tests, Phys. Rev. D 76, 064004 (2007).
  51. I. Sáez-Casares, Y. Rasera, and B. Li, The e-MANTIS emulator: Fast predictions of the non-linear matter power spectrum in f(r)cdm cosmology, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 527, 7242 (2024).
  52. Https://pypi.org/project/emantis/.
  53. M. Lochner, D. Scolnic, H. Almoubayyed et al., The impact of observing strategy on cosmological constraints with LSST, Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 259, 58 (2022).
  54. R. Zhou, B. Dey, J. A. Newman et al., Target selection and validation of DESI luminous red galaxies, Astron. J. 165, 58 (2023).
  55. LSST DESC, R. Mandelbaum, T. Eifler, R. Hložek, T. Collett, E. Gawiser, D. Scolnic, D. Alonso, H. Awan, R. Biswas, J. Blazek et al., The LSST Dark Energy Science Collaboration (DESC) science requirements document, arXiv:1809.01669.
  56. B. A. Reid, H.-J. Seo, A. Leauthaud, J. L. Tinker, and M. White, A 2.5 per cent measurement of the growth rate from small-scale redshift space clustering of SDSS-III CMASS galaxies, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 444, 476 (2014).
  57. E. Kitanidis and M. White, Cross-correlation of Planck CMB lensing with DESI-like LRGs, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 501, 6181 (2021).
  58. D. Kodwani, P. G. Ferreira, and D. Alonso, The effect on cosmological parameter estimation of a parameter dependent covariance matrix, Open J. Astrophys. 2 (2019).
  59. S. Singh, R. Mandelbaum, U. Seljak, A. Slosar, and J. Vazquez Gonzalez, Galaxy-galaxy lensing estimators and their covariance properties, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 471, 3827 (2017).
  60. P. S. Behroozi, R. H. Wechsler, and H.-Y. Wu, The ROCKSTAR phase-space temporal halo finder and the velocity offsets of cluster cores, Astrophys. J. 762, 109 (2012).
  61. L. Wang, B. Reid, and M. White, An analytic model for redshift-space distortions, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 437, 588 (2014).
  62. J. Hartlap, P. Simon, and P. Schneider, Why your model parameter confidences might be too optimistic—unbiased estimation of the inverse covariance matrix, Astron. Astrophys. 464, 399 (2007).
  63. B. Bose, M. Cataneo, T. Tröster, Q. Xia, C. Heymans, and L. Lombriser, On the road to per cent accuracy IV: ReACT–computing the non-linear power spectrum beyond ΛCDM, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 498, 4650 (2020).
  64. DES Collaboration, T. M. C. Abbott, F. B. Abdalla, S. Avila et al., Dark Energy Survey Year 1 Results: Constraints on extended cosmological models from galaxy clustering and weak lensing, Phys. Rev. D 99, 123505 (2019).
  65. P. A. Ade, N. Aghanim, M. Arnaud, M. Ashdown, J. Aumont, C. Baccigalupi, A. Banday, R. Barreiro, N. Bartolo, E. Battaner et al., Planck 2015 results-XIV. Dark energy and modified gravity, Astron. Astrophys. 594, A14 (2016).
  66. A. Mead, S. Brieden, T. Tröster, and C. Heymans, HMcode-2020: Improved modelling of non-linear cosmological power spectra with baryonic feedback, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 502, 1401 (2021).
  67. R. Takahashi, M. Sato, T. Nishimichi, A. Taruya, and M. Oguri, Revising the halofit model for the nonlinear matter power spectrum, Astrophys. J. 761, 152 (2012).
  68. S.-F. Chen, Z. Vlah, and M. White, Consistent modeling of velocity statistics and redshift-space distortions in one-loop perturbation theory, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2020) 062.
  69. J. E. McEwen, X. Fang, C. M. Hirata, and J. A. Blazek, FAST-PT: A novel algorithm to calculate convolution integrals in cosmological perturbation theory, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 09 (2016) 015.
  70. N. E. Chisari, D. Alonso, E. Krause, C. D. Leonard, P. Bull, J. Neveu, A. Villarreal, S. Singh, T. McClintock, J. Ellison et al., Core cosmology library: Precision cosmological predictions for LSST, Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 242, 2 (2019).
  71. A. Gelman, X.-L. Meng, and H. Stern, Posterior predictive assessment of model fitness via realized discrepancies, Statistica Sinica 6, 733 (1996).
  72. A. Nicola, A. Amara, and A. Refregier, Consistency tests in cosmology using relative entropy, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 01 (2019) 011.
  73. N. Porqueres, A. Heavens, D. Mortlock, and G. Lavaux, Bayesian forward modelling of cosmic shear data, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 502, 3035 (2021).
  74. C. Doux, E. Baxter, P. Lemos et al., Dark energy survey internal consistency tests of the joint cosmological probes analysis with posterior predictive distributions, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 503, 2688 (2021).
  75. T. M. Abbott, M. Aguena, A. Alarcon et al., Dark Energy Survey Year 3 results: Cosmological constraints from galaxy clustering and weak lensing, Phys. Rev. D 105, 023520 (2022).
  76. Planck Collaboration, N. Aghanim, Y. Akrami et al., Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters, Astron. Astrophys. 641, A6 (2020).
  77. B. Hu, M. Raveri, M. Rizzato, and A. Silvestri, Testing Hu–Sawicki f(R) gravity with the effective field theory approach, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 459, 3880 (2016).
  78. D. Wang, Can f (R) gravity relieve H 0 and σ8 tensions?, Eur. Phys. J. C 81, 482 (2021).
  79. T. Baker, P. G. Ferreira, C. D. Leonard, and M. Motta, New gravitational scales in cosmological surveys, Phys. Rev. D 90, 124030 (2014).
  80. C. Skordis, The tensor-vector-scalar theory and its cosmology, Classical Quantum Gravity 26, 143001 (2009).
  81. C. R. Harris, K. J. Millman, S. J. van der Walt et al., Array programming with NumPy, Nature (London) 585, 357 (2020).
  82. P. Virtanen, R. Gommers, T. E. Oliphant et al., scipy 1.0: Fundamental algorithms for scientific computing in python, Nat. Methods 17, 261 (2020).
  83. J. D. Hunter, Matplotlib: A 2D graphics environment, Comput. Sci. Eng. 9, 90 (2007).
  84. https://github.com/c-d-leonard/EG_forecasts.

Outline

Information

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation