ADVERTISEMENT

If you are seeing this message, you may be experiencing temporary network problems. Please wait a few minutes and refresh the page. If the problem persists, you may wish to report it to your local Network Manager.

It is also possible that your web browser is not configured or not able to display style sheets. In this case, although the visual presentation will be degraded, the site should continue to be functional. We recommend using the latest version of Microsoft or Mozilla web browser to help minimise these problems.

Wiley InterScience

< Previous Abstract  |  Next Abstract >

Save Article to My Profile      Download Citation      Request Permissions

Abstract |  References  |  Full Text: HTML, PDF (Size: 457K)  | Related Articles | Citation Tracking

The Shear Testing Programme – I. Weak lensing analysis of simulated ground-based observations
Catherine Heymans 1★ , Ludovic Van Waerbeke 2 , David Bacon 3 , Joel Berge 4 , Gary Bernstein 5 , Emmanuel Bertin 6 , Sarah Bridle 7 , Michael L. Brown 3 , Douglas Clowe 8 , Håkon Dahle 9 , Thomas Erben 10 , Meghan Gray 11 , Marco Hetterscheidt 10 , Henk Hoekstra 12 , Patrick Hudelot 13 , Mike Jarvis 5 , Konrad Kuijken 14 , Vera Margoniner 15 , Richard Massey 16 , Yannick Mellier 6,17 , Reiko Nakajima 5 , Alexandre Refregier 4 , Jason Rhodes 18 , Tim Schrabback 10 and David Wittman 15
  1 Max-Planck-Institut für Astronomie, Königstuhl, 69117 Heidelberg, Germany   2 University of British Columbia, 6224 Agricultural Rd, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z1, Canada   3 Institute for Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Royal Observatory, Blackford Hill, Edinburgh EH9 3HJ   4 Service d'Astrophysique, CEA Saclay, F-91191 Gif sur Yvette, France   5 Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA   6 Institut d'Astrophysique de Paris, UMR7095 CNRS, Université Pierre & Marie Curie, 98 bis boulevard Arago, 75014 Paris, France   7 Department of Physics and Astronomy, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT   8 Steward Observatory, University of Arizona, 933 N. Cherry Ave, Tuscon, AZ 85721, USA   9 Institute of Theoretical Astrophysics, University of Oslo, PO Box 1029, Blindern, N-0315 Oslo, Norway   10 Institut für Astrophysik und Extraterrestrische Forschung, Universität Bonn, Auf dem Hügel 71, 53121 Bonn, Germany   11 School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2RD   12 University of Victoria, Elliott Building, 3800 Finnerty Rd, Victoria, BC V8P 5C2, Canada   13 Observatoire Midi-Pyrénées, UMR5572, 14 Avenue Edouard Belin, 31000 Toulouse, France   14 Leiden Observatory, PO Box 9513, NL-2300 RA, Leiden, the Netherlands   15 Department of Physics, University of California at Davis, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616, USA   16 California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125, USA   17 Observatoire de Paris, LERMA 61, avenue de l'Observatoire, 75014 Paris, France   18 Jet Propulsion Laboratory, 4800 Oak Grove Drive, Pasadena, CA 91109, USA
Correspondence to   E-mail: heymans@physics.ubc.ca
Copyright 2006 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2006 RAS
KEYWORDS
gravitational lensing • cosmology: observations • large-scale structure of Universe

ABSTRACT

Abstract1 INTRODUCTION2 METHODS3 STEP SIMULATION DATA4 ANALYSISREFERENCES

The Shear Testing Programme (STEP) is a collaborative project to improve the accuracy and reliability of all weak lensing measurements in preparation for the next generation of wide-field surveys. In this first STEP paper, we present the results of a blind analysis of simulated ground-based observations of relatively simple galaxy morphologies. The most successful methods are shown to achieve percent level accuracy. From the cosmic shear pipelines that have been used to constrain cosmology, we find weak lensing shear measured to an accuracy that is within the statistical errors of current weak lensing analyses, with shear measurements accurate to better than 7 per cent. The dominant source of measurement error is shown to arise from calibration uncertainties where the measured shear is over or underestimated by a constant multiplicative factor. This is of concern as calibration errors cannot be detected through standard diagnostic tests. The measured calibration errors appear to result from stellar contamination, false object detection, the shear measurement method itself, selection bias and/or the use of biased weights. Additive systematics (false detections of shear) resulting from residual point-spread function anisotropy are, in most cases, reduced to below an equivalent shear of 0.001, an order of magnitude below cosmic shear distortions on the scales probed by current surveys.

Our results provide a snapshot view of the accuracy of current ground-based weak lensing methods and a benchmark upon which we can improve. To this end we provide descriptions of each method tested and include details of the eight different implementations of the commonly used Kaiser, Squires & Broadhurst method (KSB+) to aid the improvement of future KSB+ analyses.


Accepted 2006 February 15. Received 2005 December 23; in original form 2005 June 6

DIGITAL OBJECT IDENTIFIER (DOI)
10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10198.x About DOI

Related Articles

  • Find other articles like this in Wiley InterScience
  • Find articles in Wiley InterScience written by any of the authors

Wiley InterScience is a member of CrossRef.

Cross Ref Member