2019 Phenomenology of large scale structure in scalar-tensor theories: Joint prior covariance of
Phenomenology of large scale structure in scalar-tensor theories: Joint prior covariance of
w DE
,
Σ
, and
μ
in Horndeski theories
Abstract: Ongoing and upcoming cosmological surveys will significantly improve our ability to probe the equation of state of dark energy, wDE, and the phenomenology of Large Scale Structure. They will allow us to constrain deviations from the ΛCDM predictions for the relations between the matter density contrast and the weak lensing and the Newtonian potential, described by the functions Σ and µ, respectively. In this work, we derive the theoretical prior for the joint covariance of wDE, Σ and µ, expected in general sca…
View preprint versions
Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Select...
46
3
3
1
Citation Types
1
24
0
0
Year Published
2019
2026
Publication Types
Select...
38
8
4
Relationship
10
40
Authors
Journals
Cited by 48 publications
(25 citation statements)
References 60 publications
1
24
0
0
“…Finally, as pointed out in [64] based on analytical considerations in the QSA limit, and later confirmed by a numerical sampling of Horndeski solutions [37,83], one expects a strong correlation between µ and Σ, with (Σ − 1)(µ − 1) ≥ 0. To violate the latter condition, independent sectors/terms of the Horndeski theory would need to conspire to evolve in just the right way for no apparent reason.…”
Section: A Implications For Horndeskisupporting
confidence: 55%
“…Finally, as pointed out in [64] based on analytical considerations in the QSA limit, and later confirmed by a numerical sampling of Horndeski solutions [37,83], one expects a strong correlation between µ and Σ, with (Σ − 1)(µ − 1) ≥ 0. To violate the latter condition, independent sectors/terms of the Horndeski theory would need to conspire to evolve in just the right way for no apparent reason.…”
Section: A Implications For Horndeskisupporting
confidence: 55%
“…At the level of 1σ, however, it is possible to see how both µ(z) and Σ(z) deviate from the GR limit for n = 1, while for a free n, µ(z) was consistent with unity. Indeed, for this specific choice of n we find that µ(z) ≈ Σ(z), which is a condition that arises for stable Horndeski theories of gravity [77].…”
Section: Fixing Nmentioning
confidence: 71%
“…The most important feature of the Horndeski prior is a strong positive correlation between μ and Σ, with preference for (Σ − 1)(μ − 1) ≥ 0, which was anticipated in ref. 39 on the basis of analytical considerations and later confirmed by a numerical sampling of Horndeski solutions 41,47 . These 33 parameters associated with Ω X , μ and Σ, along with the remaining cosmological parameters, were fitted to several combinations of datasets using MGCosmoMC 33,34,48 (https://github.com/ sfu-cosmo/MGCosmoMC), which is a modification of CosmoMC 49 (https://cosmologist.info/cosmomc).…”
Section: Reconstruction and The Role Of The Theory Priormentioning
confidence: 75%
“…Figure 1 shows the joint reconstruction of Ω X (z), μ(z) and Σ(z) from a combination of CMB, baryon acoustic oscillation (BAO), supernova, weak gravitational lensing and redshift space distortion data, along with the derived reconstruction of γ(z). The reconstruction was performed with and without a theoretical prior, derived previously from simulations of Horndeski theories 41 . One can clearly see the important role played by the theory prior in preventing overfitting of the data.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
