Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2203.11159

Which is a better cosmological probe: Number counts or cosmic magnification?

Didam Duniya·Mazuba Kumwenda
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The next generation of cosmological surveys will have unprecedented measurement precision, hence they hold the power to put theoretical ideas to the most stringent tests yet. However, in order to realise the full potential of these measurements, we need to ensure that we apply the most effective analytical tools. We need to identify which cosmological observables are the best cosmological probes. Two commonly used cosmological observables are galaxy redshift number counts and cosmic magnification. Both of these observables have been investigated extensively in cosmological analyses, but only separately. In the light of interacting dark energy (IDE) emerging as a plausible means of alleviating current cosmological tensions, we investigate both observables on large scales in a universe with IDE, using the angular power spectrum: taking into account all known terms, including relativistic corrections, in the observed overdensity. Our results suggest that (given multi-tracer analysis) measuring relativistic effects with cosmic magnification will be relatively better than with galaxy redshift number counts, at all redshifts z. Conversely, without relativistic effects, galaxy redshift number counts will be relatively better in probing the imprint of IDE, at all z. At low z (up to around z = 0.1), relativistic effects enable cosmic magnification to be a relatively better probe of the IDE imprint; while at higher z (up to z < 3), galaxy redshift number counts become the better probe of IDE imprint. However, at z = 3 and higher, our results suggest that either of the observables will suffice.

Explore related subjects

astro-ph.COgr-qc

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Didam Duniya, Mazuba Kumwenda. 2022-03-21. Which is a better cosmological probe: Number counts or cosmic magnification?. https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras%2Fstad1231

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Constraining spinning primordial black holes with interstellar dust heating

Primordial black holes (PBHs) are a well-motivated dark matter candidate, and their cosmic abundance is constrained by a variety of observational probes. PBHs in the mass range $10^{15}\,\text{g}\,{-}\,10^{17}\,\text{g}$ are evaporating today via Hawking radiation, a process that can heat interstellar dust and modify its thermal emission. Recent studies have used this effect to place constraints on the abundance of non-spinning PBHs. We extend this approach by investigating the influence of PBH spin on dust-heating constraints. Furthermore, we account for secondary photons that originate not only from the decay of gauge bosons but also from the decay of hadrons produced via the fragmentation of primary quarks and gluons emitted through Hawking radiation. By comparing the dust heating rate induced by spinning PBHs with the maximum cooling rate of dust, considering both silicate and graphite grains, we derive new upper limits on the fraction of dark matter in the form of PBHs, $f_{\rm PBH}$. Our results show that the constraints depend on both PBH mass and spin. Smaller PBHs with higher spin yield stronger limits. For example, in the cases we investigated, the strongest constraint is $f_{\rm PBH} \sim 1.5 \times 10^{-4}$ for $M_{\rm PBH} = 10^{15}{\rm g}$ and spin parameter $a_{*} = 0.9999$. Although these limits are less stringent than existing constraints in the same mass range, they provide a distinct and complementary approach to constraining the abundance of PBHs.

astro-ph.CO↗
arXiv2026

Two-parameter continuous deformation of Starobinsky inflation as a bridge between Planck and ACT DESI data with $N_\star\in(50,60)$

We present a family of plateau-type inflationary potentials, eq.~\eqref{Vgeneral}, and analyze a two-parameter $\alpha\beta$-Starobinsky specialization that interpolates continuously between a \emph{maximal} plateau ($V\!\to\!V_0$) and a \emph{submaximal} plateau ($V\!\to\!V_\infty 0$ with $x_\star\gg 1/\beta$ the slow-roll scaling laws change to $n_s\simeq 1-\frac{4}{3N_\star},\, r\simeq\mathcal{C}(\alpha,\beta)\,N_\star^{-4/3},$ with an explicit coefficient $\mathcal{C}(\alpha,\beta)$ set by the plateau truncation. This deformation lifts $n_s$ at fixed $N_\star$ while further suppressing $r$, reconciling the Planck~2018 constraint $n_s=0.9649\pm0.0042$ (68\% CL) and BICEP/Keck18 data $r_{0.05}<0.036$ (95\% CL), with the higher central values $n_s\sim0.97$--$0.98$ preferred by ACT+DESI~DR2 (BAO), within the theoretically motivated interval $N_\star\in(50,60)$ and without exotic reheating. We provide an exact identity for $V/V'$ enabling analytic control of $N_\star$, a practical crossover criterion $\beta\,x_\star\ll1$ vs.\ $\gg1$, and a transparent mapping between $(\alpha,\beta)$ and the observables $(n_s,r,N_\star)$. These yield sharp, testable signatures, particularly the softened $N_\star$-scaling of $r$, that distinguish a maximal from a submaximal plateau with upcoming CMB and LSS data.

astro-ph.CO↗
arXiv2026

A Tale of Two Gauges: Effective Field Theory for Relativistic Behavior of Cosmological Axions

In this work, we present a formalism to model the relativistic behavior of axions. The relativistic behavior of axions is surprisingly difficult to model precisely, as it involves oscillations on timescales much shorter than the Hubble timescale. To overcome this challenge, one typically resorts to some form of effective treatment, focusing only on the time-averaged description of the exact oscillations. Salehian, Namjoo & Kaiser provide a systematic framework for such treatment, based on the effective field theory formalism. While the aforementioned study was formulated for axion perturbations in the Newtonian gauge with no anisotropic stress, we extend the formalism to the synchronous gauge that is more conventionally used for numerical implementation in a realistic cosmological setting. Unlike their work, however, we propose a fluid interpretation in which the axion field can be identified as a perfect fluid at all times, both in the exact and effective regimes. Moreover, we present the effective field theory for the Newtonian gauge with non-zero anisotropic stress, making the original formulation more general and useful for scenarios where the matter content of the universe is multi-component. These results lay the theoretical foundation for a companion paper where we discuss how the axion field should be incorporated alongside other species in common cosmological Boltzmann solvers.

astro-ph.CO↗