- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review D

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

Extending evolution mapping to massive neutrinos with COMET

Andrea Pezzotta1,2,*, Alexander Eggemeier3, Giosuè Gambardella4,5, Lukas Finkbeiner1, Ariel G. Sánchez1, Benjamin Camacho Quevedo4,5,6,7,8, Martin Crocce4,5, Nanoom Lee9,10, Gabriele Parimbelli4,7 et al.

Román Scoccimarro9

  • *Contact author: andrea.pezzotta@inaf.it
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 112, 023520 – Published 9 July, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/vy3h-p92n

Abstract

We introduce an extension of the evolution mapping framework to cosmological models that include massive neutrinos. The original evolution mapping framework exploits a degeneracy in the linear matter power spectrum when expressed in Mpc units, which compresses its dependence on cosmological parameters into those that affect its shape and a single extra parameter σ12, defined as the rms linear variance in spheres of radius 12 Mpc. We show that by promoting the scalar amplitude of fluctuations, As, to a shape parameter, we can additionally describe the suppression due to massive neutrinos at any redshift to sub-0.01% accuracy across a wide range of masses and for different numbers of mass eigenstates. This methodology has been integrated into the public comet package, enhancing its ability to emulate predictions of state-of-the-art perturbative models for galaxy clustering, such as the effective field theory (EFT) model. Additionally, the updated software now accommodates a broader cosmological parameter space for the emulator, enables the simultaneous generation of multiple predictions to reduce computation time, and incorporates analytic marginalization over nuisance parameters to expedite posterior estimation. Finally, we explore the impact of different infrared resummation techniques on galaxy power spectrum multipoles, demonstrating that any discrepancies can be mitigated by EFT counterterms without impacting the cosmological parameters.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (98)

  1. A. Aghamousa, J. Aguilar, S. Ahlen, S. Alam, L. E. Allen, C. Allende Prieto, J. Annis, S. Bailey, C. Balland et al. (DESI Collaboration), The DESI experiment part I: Science, targeting, and survey design, arXiv:1611.00036.
  2. R. Laureijs, J. Amiaux, S. Arduini, J. L. Auguères, J. Brinchmann, R. Cole, M. Cropper, C. Dabin, L. Duvet, A. Ealet et al., Euclid definition study report, arXiv:1110.3193.
  3. Y. Mellier, Abdurro’uf, J. A. A. Barroso, A. Achúcarro, J. Adamek, R. Adam, G. E. Addison, N. Aghanim, M. Aguena et al. (Euclid Collaboration), Euclid. I. Overview of the Euclid mission, Astron. Astrophys. 697, A1 (2025).
  4. D. Spergel, N. Gehrels, C. Baltay, D. Bennett, J. Breckinridge, M. Donahue, A. Dressler, B. S. Gaudi, T. Greene, O. Guyon et al., Wide-field infrarred survey telescope-astrophysics focused telescope assets WFIRST-AFTA 2015 report, arXiv:1503.03757.
  5. Z. Ivezic, T. Axelrod, W. N. Brandt, D. L. Burke, C. F. Claver, A. Connolly, K. H. Cook, P. Gee, D. K. Gilmore, S. H. Jacoby et al. (LSST Collaboration), Large synoptic survey telescope: From science drivers to reference design, Serb. Astron. J. 176, 1 (2008).
  6. B. Hadzhiyska, K. Wolz, S. Azzoni, D. Alonso, C. García-García, J. Ruiz-Zapatero, and A. Slosar, Cosmology with 6 parameters in the Stage-IV era: Efficient marginalisation over nuisance parameters, Open J. Astrophys. 6, 23 (2023).
  7. P. Carrilho, C. Moretti, and A. Pourtsidou, Cosmology with the EFTofLSS and BOSS: Dark energy constraints and a note on priors, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 01 (2023) 028.
  8. T. Simon, P. Zhang, V. Poulin, and T. L. Smith, Consistency of effective field theory analyses of the BOSS power spectrum, Phys. Rev. D 107, 123530 (2023).
  9. E. Lawrence, K. Heitmann, M. White, D. Higdon, C. Wagner, S. Habib, and B. Williams, The Coyote Universe. III. Simulation suite and precision emulator for the nonlinear matter power spectrum, Astrophys. J. 713, 1322 (2010).
  10. Z. Zhai, J. L. Tinker, M. R. Becker, J. DeRose, Y.-Y. Mao, T. McClintock, S. McLaughlin, E. Rozo, and R. H. Wechsler, The aemulus project. III. Emulation of the galaxy correlation function, Astrophys. J. 874, 95 (2019).
  11. T. Nishimichi, M. Takada, R. Takahashi, K. Osato, M. Shirasaki, T. Oogi, H. Miyatake, M. Oguri, R. Murata, Y. Kobayashi, and N. Yoshida, Dark quest. I. Fast and accurate emulation of halo clustering statistics and its application to galaxy clustering, Astrophys. J. 884, 29 (2019).
  12. M. Knabenhans, J. Stadel, D. Potter, J. Dakin, S. Hannestad, T. Tram, S. Marelli, A. Schneider, R. Teyssier, P. Fosalba et al. (Euclid Collaboration), Euclid preparation: IX. EuclidEmulator2—power spectrum emulation with massive neutrinos and self-consistent dark energy perturbations, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 505, 2840 (2021).
  13. R. E. Angulo, M. Zennaro, S. Contreras, G. Aricò, M. Pellejero-Ibañez, and J. Stücker, The BACCO simulation project: Exploiting the full power of large-scale structure for cosmology, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 507, 5869 (2021).
  14. G. Aricò, R. E. Angulo, S. Contreras, L. Ondaro-Mallea, M. Pellejero-Ibañez, and M. Zennaro, The BACCO simulation project: A baryonification emulator with neural networks, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 506, 4070 (2021).
  15. M. Zennaro, R. E. Angulo, M. Pellejero-Ibáñez, J. Stücker, S. Contreras, and G. Aricò, The BACCO simulation project: Biased tracers in real space, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 524, 2407 (2023).
  16. M. Pellejero Ibañez, R. E. Angulo, M. Zennaro, J. Stücker, S. Contreras, G. Aricò, and F. Maion, The bacco simulation project: Bacco hybrid Lagrangian bias expansion model in redshift space, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 520, 3725 (2023).
  17. J. Kwan, K. Heitmann, S. Habib, N. Padmanabhan, E. Lawrence, H. Finkel, N. Frontiere, and A. Pope, Cosmic emulation: Fast predictions for the galaxy power spectrum, Astrophys. J. 810, 35 (2015).
  18. Y. Kobayashi, T. Nishimichi, M. Takada, R. Takahashi, and K. Osato, Accurate emulator for the redshift-space power spectrum of dark matter halos and its application to galaxy power spectrum, Phys. Rev. D 102, 063504 (2020).
  19. A. Chudaykin, M. M. Ivanov, O. H. E. Philcox, and M. Simonović, Nonlinear perturbation theory extension of the Boltzmann code class, Phys. Rev. D 102, 063533 (2020).
  20. G. D’Amico, L. Senatore, and P. Zhang, Limits on wCDM from the EFTofLSS with the PyBird code, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 01 (2021) 006.
  21. A. Eggemeier, B. Camacho-Quevedo, A. Pezzotta, M. Crocce, R. Scoccimarro, and A. G. Sánchez, comet: Clustering observables modelled by emulated perturbation theory, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 519, 2962 (2022).
  22. J. Donald-McCann, K. Koyama, and F. Beutler, Matryoshka II: Accelerating effective field theory analyses of the galaxy power spectrum, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 518, 3106 (2023).
  23. M. Maus, S. Chen, M. White, J. Aguilar, S. Ahlen, A. Aviles, S. Brieden, D. Brooks, T. Claybaugh, S. Cole et al., An analysis of parameter compression and full-modeling techniques with Velocileptors for DESI 2024 and beyond, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 01 (2025) 138.
  24. D. Linde, A. M. Dizgah, C. Radermacher, S. Casas, and J. Lesgourgues, CLASS-OneLoop: Accurate and unbiased inference from spectroscopic galaxy surveys, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2024) 068.
  25. M. Bonici, G. D’Amico, J. Bel, and C. Carbone, Effort: A fast and differentiable emulator for the effective field theory of the large scale structure of the universe, arXiv:2501.04639.
  26. A. G. Sánchez, A. N. Ruiz, J. G. Jara, and N. D. Padilla, Evolution mapping: A new approach to describe matter clustering in the non-linear regime, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 514, 5673 (2022).
  27. A. G. Sánchez, Arguments against using h−1Mpc units in observational cosmology, Phys. Rev. D 102, 123511 (2020).
  28. M. Esposito, A. G. Sánchez, J. Bel, and A. N. Ruiz, Evolution mapping II: Describing statistics of the non-linear cosmic velocity field, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 534, 3906 (2024).
  29. A. Eggemeier, N. Lee, R. Scoccimarro, B. Camacho-Quevedo, A. Pezzotta, M. Crocce, and A. G. Sánchez, Boosting galaxy clustering analyses with non-perturbative modelling of redshift-space distortions, arXiv:2501.18597.
  30. J. J. M. Carrasco, M. P. Hertzberg, and L. Senatore, The effective field theory of cosmological large scale structures, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2012) 082.
  31. A. Perko, L. Senatore, E. Jennings, and R. H. Wechsler, Biased tracers in redshift space in the EFT of large-scale structure, arXiv:1610.09321.
  32. M. M. Ivanov, M. Simonović, and M. Zaldarriaga, Cosmological parameters from the BOSS galaxy power spectrum, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2020) 042.
  33. A. Pezzotta, C. Moretti, M. Zennaro, A. Moradinezhad Dizgah, M. Crocce, E. Sefusatti, I. Ferrero, K. Pardede, A. Eggemeier, A. Barreira et al. (Euclid Collaboration), Euclid preparation—XLI. Galaxy power spectrum modelling in real space, Astron. Astrophys. 687, A216 (2024).
  34. J. Lesgourgues and S. Pastor, Massive neutrinos and cosmology, Phys. Rep. 429, 307 (2006).
  35. M. Chevalier and D. Polarski, Accelerating universes with scaling dark matter, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 10, 213 (2001).
  36. E. V. Linder, Exploring the expansion history of the Universe, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 091301 (2003).
  37. A. Semenaite, A. G. Sánchez, A. Pezzotta, J. Hou, A. Eggemeier, M. Crocce, C. Zhao, J. R. Brownstein, G. Rossi, and D. P. Schneider, Beyond LCDM constraints from the full shape clustering measurements from BOSS and eBOSS, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 521, 5013 (2023).
  38. C. Moretti, M. Tsedrik, P. Carrilho, and A. Pourtsidou, Modified gravity and massive neutrinos: Constraints from the full shape analysis of boss galaxies and forecasts for stage iv surveys, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 12 (2023) 025.
  39. N. Aghanim, Y. Akrami, M. Ashdown, J. Aumont, C. Baccigalupi, M. Ballardini, A. J. Banday, R. B. Barreiro, N. Bartolo, S. Basak et al. (Planck Collaboration), Planck 2018 results—VI. Cosmological parameters, Astron. Astrophys. 641, A6 (2020).
  40. D. Blas, M. Garny, T. Konstandin, and J. Lesgourgues, Structure formation with massive neutrinos: going beyond linear theory, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2014) 039.
  41. M. Zennaro, J. Bel, F. Villaescusa-Navarro, C. Carbone, E. Sefusatti, and L. Guzzo, Initial conditions for accurate N-body simulations of massive neutrino cosmologies, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 466, 3244 (2017).
  42. M. Zennaro, J. Bel, J. Dossett, C. Carbone, and L. Guzzo, Cosmological constraints from galaxy clustering in the presence of massive neutrinos, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 477, 491 (2018).
  43. F. Villaescusa-Navarro, F. Marulli, M. Viel, E. Branchini, E. Castorina, E. Sefusatti, and S. Saito, Cosmology with massive neutrinos I: Towards a realistic modeling of the relation between matter, haloes and galaxies, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 03 (2014) 011.
  44. E. Castorina, E. Sefusatti, R. K. Sheth, F. Villaescusa-Navarro, and M. Viel, Cosmology with massive neutrinos II: On the universality of the halo mass function and bias, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2014) 049.
  45. S. Vagnozzi, T. Brinckmann, M. Archidiacono, K. Freese, M. Gerbino, J. Lesgourgues, and T. Sprenger, Bias due to neutrinos must not uncorrect’d go, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 09 (2018) 001.
  46. H. E. Noriega, A. Aviles, S. Fromenteau, and M. Vargas-Magaña, Fast computation of non-linear power spectrum in cosmologies with massive neutrinos, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2022) 038.
  47. P. McDonald and A. Roy, Clustering of dark matter tracers: Generalizing bias for the coming era of precision LSS, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 08 (2009) 020.
  48. V. Assassi, D. Baumann, D. Green, and M. Zaldarriaga, Renormalized halo bias, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 08 (2014) 056.
  49. V. Desjacques, D. Jeong, and F. Schmidt, Large-scale galaxy bias, Phys. Rep. 733, 1 (2018).
  50. A. Eggemeier, R. Scoccimarro, and R. E. Smith, Bias loop corrections to the galaxy bispectrum, Phys. Rev. D 99, 123514 (2019).
  51. K. C. Chan, R. Scoccimarro, and R. K. Sheth, Gravity and large-scale nonlocal bias, Phys. Rev. D 85, 083509 (2012).
  52. E. Castorina, C. Carbone, J. Bel, E. Sefusatti, and K. Dolag, DEMNUni: The clustering of large-scale structures in the presence of massive neutrinos, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2015) 043.
  53. L. Hui and K. P. Parfrey, Evolution of galaxy bias, generalized, Phys. Rev. D 77, 043527 (2008).
  54. K. Parfrey, L. Hui, and R. K. Sheth, Scale-dependent halo bias from scale-dependent growth, Phys. Rev. D 83, 063511 (2011).
  55. R. Scoccimarro, H. M. P. Couchman, and J. A. Frieman, The bispectrum as a signature of gravitational instability in redshift space, Astrophys. J. 517, 531 (1999).
  56. F. Villaescusa-Navarro, A. Banerjee, N. Dalal, E. Castorina, R. Scoccimarro, R. Angulo, and D. N. Spergel, The imprint of neutrinos on clustering in redshift space, Astrophys. J. 861, 53 (2018).
  57. F. Verdiani, E. Bellini, C. Moretti, E. Sefusatti, C. Carbone, and M. Viel, Redshift-space distortions in massive neutrinos cosmologies, arXiv:2503.06655.
  58. A. Chudaykin and M. M. Ivanov, Measuring neutrino masses with large-scale structure: Euclid forecast with controlled theoretical error, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2019) 034.
  59. A. Aviles, A. Banerjee, G. Niz, and Z. Slepian, Clustering in massive neutrino cosmologies via Eulerian Perturbation Theory, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2021) 028.
  60. H. E. Noriega, A. Aviles, H. Gil-Marín, S. Ramirez-Solano, S. Fromenteau, M. Vargas-Magaña, J. Aguilar, S. Ahlen, O. Alves, S. Brieden et al., Comparing compressed and full-modeling analyses with FOLPS: Implications for DESI 2024 and beyond, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 01 (2025) 136.
  61. N. Kaiser, Clustering in real space and in redshift space, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 227, 1 (1987).
  62. A. J. S. Hamilton, Measuring omega and the real correlation function from the redshift correlation function, Astrophys. J. Lett. 385, L5 (1992).
  63. J. C. Jackson, A critique of Rees’s theory of primordial gravitational radiation, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 156, 1P (1972).
  64. R. Scoccimarro, Redshift-space distortions, pairwise velocities, and nonlinearities, Phys. Rev. D 70, 083007 (2004).
  65. A. Taruya, T. Nishimichi, and S. Saito, Baryon acoustic oscillations in 2D: Modeling redshift-space power spectrum from perturbation theory, Phys. Rev. D 82, 063522 (2010).
  66. A. G. Sánchez, R. Scoccimarro, M. Crocce, J. N. Grieb, S. Salazar-Albornoz, C. Dalla Vecchia, M. Lippich, F. Beutler, J. R. Brownstein, C.-H. Chuang et al., The clustering of galaxies in the completed SDSS-III Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: Cosmological implications of the configuration-space clustering wedges, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 464, 1640 (2017).
  67. D. Bianchi, M. Chiesa, and L. Guzzo, Improving the modelling of redshift-space distortions—I. A bivariate Gaussian description for the galaxy pairwise velocity distributions, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 446, 75 (2015).
  68. J. N. Grieb, A. G. Sánchez, S. Salazar-Albornoz, R. Scoccimarro, M. Crocce, C. Dalla Vecchia, F. Montesano, H. Gil-Marín, A. J. Ross, F. Beutler et al., The clustering of galaxies in the completed SDSS-III Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: Cosmological implications of the Fourier space wedges of the final sample, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 467, 2085 (2017).
  69. A. Semenaite, A. G. Sánchez, A. Pezzotta, J. Hou, R. Scoccimarro, A. Eggemeier, M. Crocce, C.-H. Chuang, A. Smith, C. Zhao, J. R. Brownstein, G. Rossi, and D. P. Schneider, Cosmological implications of the full shape of anisotropic clustering measurements in BOSS and eBOSS, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 512, 5657 (2022).
  70. L. Senatore and M. Zaldarriaga, Redshift space distortions in the effective field theory of large scale structures, arXiv:1409.1225.
  71. M. Crocce and R. Scoccimarro, Memory of initial conditions in gravitational clustering, Phys. Rev. D 73, 063520 (2006).
  72. D. J. Eisenstein, H.-J. Seo, and M. White, On the robustness of the acoustic scale in the low-redshift clustering of matter, Astrophys. J. 664, 660 (2007).
  73. D. J. Eisenstein, H.-J. Seo, E. Sirko, and D. N. Spergel, Improving cosmological distance measurements by reconstruction of the baryon acoustic peak, Astrophys. J. 664, 675 (2007).
  74. S. Matarrese and M. Pietroni, Baryonic acoustic oscillations via the renormalization group, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 23, 25 (2008).
  75. M. Crocce and R. Scoccimarro, Nonlinear evolution of baryon acoustic oscillations, Phys. Rev. D 77, 023533 (2008).
  76. T. Baldauf, M. Mirbabayi, M. Simonović, and M. Zaldarriaga, Equivalence principle and the baryon acoustic peak, Phys. Rev. D 92, 043514 (2015).
  77. D. Blas, M. Garny, M. M. Ivanov, and S. Sibiryakov, Time-sliced perturbation theory II: Baryon acoustic oscillations and infrared resummation, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2016) 028.
  78. M. M. Ivanov and S. Sibiryakov, Infrared resummation for biased tracers in redshift space, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2018) 053.
  79. A. Taruya, Constructing perturbation theory kernels for large-scale structure in generalized cosmologies, Phys. Rev. D 94, 023504 (2016).
  80. G. D’Amico, M. Marinucci, M. Pietroni, and F. Vernizzi, The large scale structure bootstrap: Perturbation theory and bias expansion from symmetries, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10 (2021) 069.
  81. M. Garny, D. Laxhuber, and R. Scoccimarro, Perturbation theory with dispersion and higher cumulants: Framework and linear theory, Phys. Rev. D 107, 063539 (2023).
  82. M. Hartmeier and M. Garny, Minimal basis for exact time dependent kernels in cosmological perturbation theory and application to ΛCDM and w0waCDM, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 12 (2023) 027.
  83. S. Saito, M. Takada, and A. Taruya, Nonlinear power spectrum in the presence of massive neutrinos: Perturbation theory approach, galaxy bias, and parameter forecasts, Phys. Rev. D 80, 083528 (2009).
  84. G. Parimbelli, C. Carbone, J. Bel, B. Bose, M. Calabrese, E. Carella, and M. Zennaro, DEMNUni: Comparing nonlinear power spectra prescriptions in the presence of massive neutrinos and dynamical dark energy, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2022) 041.
  85. C. Alcock and B. Paczynski, An evolution free test for non-zero cosmological constant, Nature (London) 281, 358 (1979).
  86. W. E. Ballinger, J. A. Peacock, and A. F. Heavens, Measuring the cosmological constant with redshift surveys, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 282, 877 (1996).
  87. C. E. Rasmussen and C. K. I. Williams, Gaussian Processes for Machine Learning (The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2005).
  88. S. L. Bridle, R. Crittenden, A. Melchiorri, M. P. Hobson, R. Kneissl, and A. N. Lasenby, Analytic marginalization over CMB calibration and beam uncertainty, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 335, 1193 (2002).
  89. J. Ruiz-Zapatero, B. Hadzhiyska, D. Alonso, P. G. Ferreira, C. García-García, and A. Mootoovaloo, Analytical marginalization over photometric redshift uncertainties in cosmic shear analyses, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 522, 5037 (2023).
  90. Z. Vlah, U. Seljak, M. Yat Chu, and Y. Feng, Perturbation theory, effective field theory, and oscillations in the power spectrum, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 03 (2016) 057.
  91. D. J. Eisenstein and W. Hu, Power spectra for cold dark matter and its variants, Astrophys. J. 511, 5 (1999).
  92. K. Osato, T. Nishimichi, F. Bernardeau, and A. Taruya, Perturbation theory challenge for cosmological parameters estimation: Matter power spectrum in real space, Phys. Rev. D 99, 063530 (2019).
  93. J. Hamann, S. Hannestad, J. Lesgourgues, C. Rampf, and Y. Y. Y. Wong, Cosmological parameters from large scale structure—geometric versus shape information, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2010) 022.
  94. J. N. Grieb, A. G. Sánchez, S. Salazar-Albornoz, and C. Dalla Vecchia, Gaussian covariance matrices for anisotropic galaxy clustering measurements, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 457, 1577 (2016).
  95. L. Pozzetti, C. M. Hirata, J. E. Geach, A. Cimatti, C. Baugh, O. Cucciati, A. Merson, P. Norberg, and D. Shi, Modelling the number density of Hα emitters for future spectroscopic near-IR space missions, Astron. Astrophys. 590, A3 (2016).
  96. F. J. Castander, P. Fosalba, J. Stadel, D. Potter, J. Carretero, P. Tallada-Crespí, L. Pozzetti, M. Bolzonella, G. A. Mamon, and L. Blot (Euclid Collaboration), Euclid. V. The Flagship galaxy mock catalogue: A comprehensive simulation for the Euclid mission, Astron. Astrophys. 697, A5 (2025).
  97. J. D. Hunter, matplotlib: A 2d graphics environment, Comput. Sci. Eng. 9, 90 (2007).
  98. https://pypi.org/project/comet-emu/

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 112, 023520– Published 9 July, 2025
  • Received 5 May 2025
  • Accepted 20 June 2025
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI. Open access publication funded by the Max Planck Society.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation