Parameter estimation biases due to contributions from the Rees-Sciama effect to the integrated Sachs-Wolfe spectrum

The subject of this paper is an investigation of the non-linear contributions to the spectrum of the integrated Sachs-Wolfe (iSW) effect. We derive the corrections to the iSW autospectrum and the iSW-tracer cross-spectrum consistently to third order in perturbation theory and analyse the cumulative...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inMonthly notices of the Royal Astronomical Society Vol. 416; no. 2; pp. 1302 - 1310
Main Authors Schäfer, Björn Malte, Kalovidouris, Angelos Fotios, Heisenberg, Lavinia
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Oxford, UK Blackwell Publishing Ltd 11.09.2011
Wiley-Blackwell
Oxford University Press
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:The subject of this paper is an investigation of the non-linear contributions to the spectrum of the integrated Sachs-Wolfe (iSW) effect. We derive the corrections to the iSW autospectrum and the iSW-tracer cross-spectrum consistently to third order in perturbation theory and analyse the cumulative signal-to-noise ratio for a cross-correlation between the Planck and Euclid data sets as a function of multipole order. We quantify the parameter sensitivity and the statistical error bounds on the cosmological parameters Ωm, σ8, h, ns and w from the linear iSW effect and the systematical parameter estimation bias due to the non-linear corrections in a Fisher formalism, analysing the error budget in its dependence on multipole order. Our results include the following: (i) the spectrum of the non-linear iSW effect can be measured with 0.8σ statistical significance, (ii) non-linear corrections dominate the spectrum starting from ℓ≃ 102, (iii) an anticorrelation of the CMB temperature with tracer density on high multipoles in the non-linear regime, (iv) a much weaker dependence of the non-linear effect on the dark energy model compared to the linear iSW effect and (v) parameter estimation biases amount to less than 0.1σ and weaker than other systematics.
Bibliography:ArticleID:MNR19125
istex:1B380A3100277760EE40A83431470B3C42E9B12C
ark:/67375/WNG-QJTD1XM2-H
ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0035-8711
1365-2966
DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19125.x