- 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

Equivalence of the field-level inference and conventional analyses on large scales

Francesco Spezzati1,2, Marco Marinucci1,2, and Marko Simonović3,4

PDF

Phys. Rev. D 113, 063546 – Published 18 March, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/yhg1-c63b

Abstract

We study a simple setup with dark matter halos in real space, with the amplitude of the linear density field A as the only free cosmological parameter. We show that Eulerian perturbation theory is adequate for describing this system on large scales, compute the leading n-point functions and perform a joint power spectrum, bispectrum, and trispectrum analysis. Beyond the bispectrum, which is crucial for breaking the degeneracy between A and the linear bias, we find that addition of the trispectrum reduces the error on A by only 20%–30%. Our results for the joint analysis are in good agreement with recent field-level analyses in the same setup. This implies that the field-level inference on large scales does not get significant information from large displacements beyond those in Eulerian kernels or higher-order n-point functions beyond the trispectrum. We provide further evidence for this showing that the dependence of the error bars on the maximum wave numbers used in the analysis is the same in the two approaches. Our results are in disagreement with some of the recent joint power spectrum and bispectrum analyses using likelihood-free inference based on perturbative forward modeling. We discuss a possible origin of this discrepancy and highlight the importance of resolving it in order to have the optimal results in cosmological analyses based on perturbation theory.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (110)

  1. D. Baumann, A. Nicolis, L. Senatore, and M. Zaldarriaga, Cosmological non-linearities as an effective fluid, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2012) 051.
  2. 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.
  3. V. Assassi, D. Baumann, D. Green, and M. Zaldarriaga, Renormalized halo bias, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 08 (2014) 056.
  4. L. Senatore, Bias in the effective field theory of large scale structures, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2015) 007.
  5. M. Mirbabayi, F. Schmidt, and M. Zaldarriaga, Biased tracers and time evolution, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2015) 030.
  6. L. Senatore and M. Zaldarriaga, Redshift space distortions in the effective field theory of large scale structures, arXiv:1409.1225.
  7. M. Pietroni, G. Mangano, N. Saviano, and M. Viel, Coarse-grained cosmological perturbation theory, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 01 (2012) 019.
  8. M. M. Ivanov, Effective field theory for large-scale structure, arXiv:2212.08488.
  9. G. Cabass, M. M. Ivanov, M. Lewandowski, M. Mirbabayi, and M. Simonović, Snowmass white paper: Effective field theories in cosmology, Phys. Dark Universe 40, 101193 (2023).
  10. T. Baldauf, E. Schaan, and M. Zaldarriaga, On the reach of perturbative descriptions for dark matter displacement fields, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 03 (2016) 017.
  11. T. Baldauf, E. Schaan, and M. Zaldarriaga, On the reach of perturbative methods for dark matter density fields, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 03 (2016) 007.
  12. M. Schmittfull, M. Simonović, V. Assassi, and M. Zaldarriaga, Modeling biased tracers at the field level, Phys. Rev. D 100, 043514 (2019).
  13. F. Schmidt, F. Elsner, J. Jasche, N. M. Nguyen, and G. Lavaux, A rigorous EFT-based forward model for large-scale structure, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 01 (2019) 042.
  14. C. Modi, M. White, A. Slosar, and E. Castorina, Reconstructing large-scale structure with neutral hydrogen surveys, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2019) 023.
  15. M. Schmittfull, M. Simonović, M. M. Ivanov, O. H. E. Philcox, and M. Zaldarriaga, Modeling galaxies in redshift space at the field level, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2021) 059.
  16. F. Schmidt, An n-th order Lagrangian forward model for large-scale structure, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 04 (2021) 033.
  17. A. Obuljen, M. Simonović, A. Schneider, and R. Feldmann, Modeling HI at the field level, Phys. Rev. D 108, 083528 (2023).
  18. J. Stadler, F. Schmidt, and M. Reinecke, Fast, accurate and perturbative forward modeling of galaxy clustering. Part I. Galaxies in the restframe, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 04 (2025) 089.
  19. J. Stadler, F. Schmidt, M. Reinecke, and M. Esposito, Fast, accurate and perturbative forward modeling of galaxy clustering part II: Redshift space, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2025) 055.
  20. G. Cabass and F. Schmidt, The EFT likelihood for large-scale structure, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 04 (2020) 042.
  21. F. Elsner, F. Schmidt, J. Jasche, G. Lavaux, and N.-M. Nguyen, Cosmology inference from a biased density field using the EFT-based likelihood, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 01 (2020) 029.
  22. F. Schmidt, G. Cabass, J. Jasche, and G. Lavaux, Unbiased cosmology inference from biased tracers using the EFT likelihood, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2020) 008.
  23. G. Cabass and F. Schmidt, The likelihood for LSS: Stochasticity of bias coefficients at all orders, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2020) 051.
  24. F. Schmidt, Sigma-eight at the percent level: The EFT likelihood in real space, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 04 (2021) 032.
  25. A. Kostić, N.-M. Nguyen, F. Schmidt, and M. Reinecke, Consistency tests of field level inference with the EFT likelihood, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2023) 063.
  26. I. Babić, F. Schmidt, and B. Tucci, BAO scale inference from biased tracers using the EFT likelihood, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 08 (2022) 007.
  27. J. Stadler, F. Schmidt, and M. Reinecke, Cosmology inference at the field level from biased tracers in redshift-space, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10 (2023) 069.
  28. B. Tucci and F. Schmidt, EFTofLSS meets simulation-based inference: σ8 from biased tracers, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2024) 063.
  29. I. Babić, F. Schmidt, and B. Tucci, Straightening the ruler: Field-level inference of the BAO scale with LEFTfield, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2025) 066.
  30. M. Peron, T. Nishimichi, M. Pietroni, and A. Taruya, Renormalized perturbation theory at Field-level: The LSS bootstrap in GridSPT, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10 (2025) 098.
  31. 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.
  32. L. Amendola, M. Marinucci, M. Pietroni, and M. Quartin, Improving precision and accuracy in cosmology with model-independent spectrum and bispectrum, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 01 (2024) 001.
  33. M. Marinucci, K. Pardede, and M. Pietroni, Bootstrapping Lagrangian perturbation theory for the large scale structure, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10 (2024) 051.
  34. A. Ansari, A. Banerjee, S. Jain, and S. Lalsodagar, Bootstrapping LSS perturbation theory beyond third order, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2025) 084.
  35. N.-M. Nguyen, F. Schmidt, B. Tucci, M. Reinecke, and A. Kostić, How much information can be extracted from galaxy clustering at the field level?, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 221006 (2024).
  36. E. Krause et al. (Beyond-2 pt Collaboration), A parameter-masked mock data challenge for beyond-two-point galaxy clustering statistics, Astrophys. J. 990, 99 (2025).
  37. D. Braganca, Y. Donath, L. Senatore, and H. Zheng, Peeking into the next decade in large-scale structure cosmology with its effective field theory, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2025) 025.
  38. G. Cabass, M. Simonović, and M. Zaldarriaga, Cosmological information in perturbative forward modeling, Phys. Rev. D 109, 043526 (2024).
  39. F. Schmidt, On the connection between field-level inference and n-point correlation functions, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 09 (2025) 056.
  40. T. Nishimichi, G. D’Amico, M. M. Ivanov, L. Senatore, M. Simonović, M. Takada, M. Zaldarriaga, and P. Zhang, Blinded challenge for precision cosmology with large-scale structure: results from effective field theory for the redshift-space galaxy power spectrum, Phys. Rev. D 102, 123541 (2020).
  41. A. Taruya, T. Nishimichi, and D. Jeong, Grid-based calculation for perturbation theory of large-scale structure, Phys. Rev. D 98, 103532 (2018).
  42. M. Peloso and M. Pietroni, Galilean invariance and the consistency relation for the nonlinear squeezed bispectrum of large scale structure, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2013) 031.
  43. A. Kehagias and A. Riotto, Symmetries and consistency relations in the large scale structure of the universe, Nucl. Phys. B873, 514 (2013).
  44. P. Creminelli, J. Gleyzes, M. Simonović, and F. Vernizzi, Single-field consistency relations of large scale structure. Part II: Resummation and redshift space, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2014) 051.
  45. P. Creminelli, J. Noreña, M. Simonović, and F. Vernizzi, Single-field consistency relations of large scale structure, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 12 (2013) 025.
  46. L. Senatore and M. Zaldarriaga, The IR-resummed effective field theory of large scale structures, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2015) 013.
  47. M. Mirbabayi, M. Simonović, and M. Zaldarriaga, Baryon acoustic peak and the squeezed limit bispectrum, arXiv:1412.3796.
  48. T. Baldauf, M. Mirbabayi, M. Simonović, and M. Zaldarriaga, Equivalence principle and the baryon acoustic peak, Phys. Rev. D 92, 043514 (2015).
  49. M. Tegmark and P. J. E. Peebles, The time evolution of bias, Astrophys. J. Lett. 500, L79 (1998).
  50. K. C. Chan, R. Scoccimarro, and R. K. Sheth, Gravity and large-scale non-local bias, Phys. Rev. D 85, 083509 (2012).
  51. Y. Donath, M. Lewandowski, and L. Senatore, Direct signatures of the formation time of galaxies, Phys. Rev. D 109, 123510 (2024).
  52. V. Desjacques, D. Jeong, and F. Schmidt, Large-scale galaxy bias, Phys. Rep. 733, 1 (2018).
  53. R. Angulo, M. Fasiello, L. Senatore, and Z. Vlah, On the statistics of biased tracers in the effective field theory of large scale structures, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 09 (2015) 029.
  54. F. Bernardeau, S. Colombi, E. Gaztanaga, and R. Scoccimarro, Large scale structure of the universe and cosmological perturbation theory, Phys. Rep. 367, 1 (2002).
  55. 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).
  56. L. Senatore and G. Trevisan, On the IR-resummation in the EFTofLSS, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2018) 019.
  57. D. Baumann, D. Green, and B. Wallisch, Searching for light relics with large-scale structure, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 08 (2018) 029.
  58. 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.
  59. Z. Vlah, U. Seljak, M. Y. Chu, and Y. Feng, Perturbation theory, effective field theory, and oscillations in the power spectrum, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 03 (2016) 057.
  60. 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.
  61. O. H. E. Philcox, M. M. Ivanov, M. Simonović, and M. Zaldarriaga, Combining full-shape and BAO analyses of galaxy power spectra: A 1.6\% CMB-independent constraint on H0, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2016) 032.
  62. P. Zhang, G. D’Amico, L. Senatore, C. Zhao, and Y. Cai, BOSS correlation function analysis from the effective field theory of large-scale structure, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2022) 036.
  63. S.-F. Chen, Z. Vlah, and M. White, A new analysis of galaxy 2-point functions in the BOSS survey, including full-shape information and post-reconstruction BAO, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2022) 008.
  64. H. Gil-Marín, How to optimally combine pre-reconstruction full shape and post-reconstruction BAO signals, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2022) 040.
  65. A. Chudaykin, M. M. Ivanov, and M. Simonović, Optimizing large-scale structure data analysis with the theoretical error likelihood, Phys. Rev. D 103, 043525 (2021).
  66. D. Wadekar, M. M. Ivanov, and R. Scoccimarro, Cosmological constraints from BOSS with analytic covariance matrices, Phys. Rev. D 102, 123521 (2020).
  67. D. Gualdi, S. Novell-Masot, H. Gil-Marín, and L. Verde, Matter trispectrum: Theoretical modelling and comparison to N-body simulations, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 01 (2021) 015.
  68. D. Gualdi and L. Verde, Integrated trispectrum detection from BOSS DR12 NGC CMASS, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 09 (2022) 050.
  69. T. Baldauf, M. Mirbabayi, M. Simonović, and M. Zaldarriaga, LSS constraints with controlled theoretical uncertainties, arXiv:1602.00674.
  70. M. G. Moreira, F. Andrade-Oliveira, X. Fang, H.-J. Huang, E. Krause, V. Miranda, R. Rosenfeld, and M. Simonović, Mitigating baryonic effects with a theoretical error covariance, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 507, 5592 (2021).
  71. A. Aires, N. Kokron, R. Rosenfeld, F. Andrade-Oliveira, and V. Miranda, Mitigation of nonlinear galaxy bias with a theoretical-error likelihood, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 04 (2025) 070.
  72. A. Maraio, A. Hall, and A. Taylor, Mitigating baryon feedback bias in cosmic shear through a theoretical error covariance in the matter power spectrum, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 537, 1749 (2025).
  73. R. Takahashi, N. Yoshida, M. Takada, T. Matsubara, N. Sugiyama, I. Kayo, T. Nishimichi, S. Saito, and A. Taruya, Non-Gaussian error contribution to likelihood analysis of the matter power spectrum, Astrophys. J. 726, 7 (2011).
  74. D. Wadekar and R. Scoccimarro, Galaxy power spectrum multipoles covariance in perturbation theory, Phys. Rev. D 102, 123517 (2020).
  75. A. Oddo, E. Sefusatti, C. Porciani, P. Monaco, and A. G. Sánchez, Toward a robust inference method for the galaxy bispectrum: Likelihood function and model selection, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 03 (2020) 056.
  76. S. Martin, P. Schneider, and P. Simon, The bispectrum covariance beyond Gaussianity: A log-normal approach, Astron. Astrophys. 540, A9 (2012).
  77. R. Takahashi, N. Yoshida, M. Takada, T. Matsubara, N. Sugiyama, I. Kayo, A. J. Nishizawa, T. Nishimichi, S. Saito, and A. Taruya, Simulations of baryon acoustic oscillations II: Covariance matrix of the matter power spectrum, Astrophys. J. 700, 479 (2009).
  78. E. Sefusatti, M. Crocce, S. Pueblas, and R. Scoccimarro, Cosmology and the bispectrum, Phys. Rev. D 74, 023522 (2006).
  79. M. M. Ivanov, O. H. E. Philcox, T. Nishimichi, M. Simonović, M. Takada, and M. Zaldarriaga, Precision analysis of the redshift-space galaxy bispectrum, Phys. Rev. D 105, 063512 (2022).
  80. K. C. Chan and L. Blot, Assessment of the information content of the power spectrum and bispectrum, Phys. Rev. D 96, 023528 (2017).
  81. S. Novell-Masot, H. Gil-Marín, and L. Verde, On approximations of the redshift-space bispectrum and power spectrum multipoles covariance matrix, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 06 (2024) 048.
  82. E. Sefusatti, M. Crocce, and V. Desjacques, The matter bispectrum in N-body simulations with non-Gaussian initial conditions, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 406, 1014 (2010).
  83. A. Moradinezhad Dizgah, M. Biagetti, E. Sefusatti, V. Desjacques, and J. Noreña, Primordial non-Gaussianity from biased tracers: Likelihood analysis of real-space power spectrum and bispectrum, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2021) 015.
  84. D. Alkhanishvili, C. Porciani, E. Sefusatti, M. Biagetti, A. Lazanu, A. Oddo, and V. Yankelevich, The reach of next-to-leading-order perturbation theory for the matter bispectrum, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 512, 4961 (2022).
  85. A. Eggemeier, R. Scoccimarro, R. E. Smith, M. Crocce, A. Pezzotta, and A. G. Sánchez, Testing one-loop galaxy bias: Joint analysis of power spectrum and bispectrum, Phys. Rev. D 103, 123550 (2021).
  86. A. Oddo, F. Rizzo, E. Sefusatti, C. Porciani, and P. Monaco, Cosmological parameters from the likelihood analysis of the galaxy power spectrum and bispectrum in real space, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2021) 038.
  87. 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.
  88. S.-F. Chen, Z. Vlah, E. Castorina, and M. White, Redshift-space distortions in Lagrangian perturbation theory, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 03 (2021) 100.
  89. D. Linde, A. Moradinezhad 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.
  90. T. Lazeyras, C. Wagner, T. Baldauf, and F. Schmidt, Precision measurement of the local bias of dark matter halos, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2016) 018.
  91. T. Lazeyras and F. Schmidt, Beyond LIMD bias: A measurement of the complete set of third-order halo bias parameters, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 09 (2018) 008.
  92. O. H. E. Philcox, M. M. Ivanov, G. Cabass, M. Simonović, M. Zaldarriaga, and T. Nishimichi, Cosmology with the redshift-space galaxy bispectrum monopole at one-loop order, Phys. Rev. D 106, 043530 (2022).
  93. G. D’Amico, Y. Donath, M. Lewandowski, L. Senatore, and P. Zhang, The BOSS bispectrum analysis at one loop from the effective field theory of large-scale structure, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2024) 059.
  94. K. Akitsu, Mapping the galaxy-halo connection to the galaxy bias: Implication to the HOD-informed prior, arXiv:2410.08998.
  95. M. M. Ivanov, C. Cuesta-Lazaro, S. Mishra-Sharma, A. Obuljen, and M. W. Toomey, Full-shape analysis with simulation-based priors: Constraints on single field inflation from BOSS, Phys. Rev. D 110, 063538 (2024).
  96. M. M. Ivanov, A. Obuljen, C. Cuesta-Lazaro, and M. W. Toomey, Full-shape analysis with simulation-based priors: Cosmological parameters and the structure growth anomaly, Phys. Rev. D 111, 063548 (2025).
  97. H. Zhang, M. Bonici, G. D’Amico, S. Paradiso, and W. J. Percival, HOD-informed prior for EFT-based full-shape analyses of LSS, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 04 (2025) 041.
  98. M. M. Ivanov, Simulation-based priors without simulations: An analytic perspective on EFT parameters of galaxies, arXiv:2503.07270.
  99. K. Akitsu, M. Simonović, S.-F. Chen, G. Cabass, and M. Zaldarriaga, Cosmology inference with perturbative forward modeling at the field level: A comparison with joint power spectrum and bispectrum analyses, arXiv:2509.09673.
  100. I. Babić, F. Schmidt, and B. Tucci, Forward vs backward: Improving BAO constraints with field-level inference, arXiv:2505.13588.
  101. S. Foreman, A. Obuljen, and M. Simonović, Improving cosmological analyses of HI clustering by reducing stochastic noise, Phys. Rev. D 110, 063555 (2024).
  102. N. Kokron, Local primordial non-Gaussianity from ’zero-bias’ 21 cm radiation during reionization, arXiv:2504.20025.
  103. G. Cabass, M. M. Ivanov, and O. H. E. Philcox, Colliders and ghosts: Constraining inflation with the parity-odd galaxy four-point function, Phys. Rev. D 107, 023523 (2023).
  104. P. Creminelli, A. Joyce, J. Khoury, and M. Simonovic, Consistency relations for the conformal mechanism, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 04 (2013) 020.
  105. A. Heavens, R. Jimenez, and O. Lahav, Massive lossless data compression and multiple parameter estimation from galaxy spectra, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 317, 965 (2000).
  106. R. Scoccimarro, The bispectrum: From theory to observations, Astrophys. J. 544, 597 (2000).
  107. C. Reichardt, R. Jimenez, and A. Heavens, Recovering physical parameters from galaxy spectra using moped, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 327, 849 (2001).
  108. D. J. Eisenstein, H.-j. Seo, E. Sirko, and D. Spergel, Improving cosmological distance measurements by reconstruction of the baryon acoustic peak, Astrophys. J. 664, 675 (2007).
  109. O. H. E. Philcox, M. M. Ivanov, M. Zaldarriaga, M. Simonovic, and M. Schmittfull, Fewer mocks and less noise: Reducing the dimensionality of cosmological observables with subspace projections, Phys. Rev. D 103, 043508 (2021).
  110. V. Desjacques, D. Jeong, and F. Schmidt, The galaxy power spectrum and bispectrum in redshift space, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 12 (2018) 035.

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 113, 063546– Published 18 March, 2026
  • Received 1 August 2025
  • Accepted 25 February 2026
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.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation