Galaxy bias in the era of LSST: perturbative bias expansions

Upcoming imaging surveys will allow for high signal-to-noise measurements of galaxy clustering at small scales. In this work, we present the results of the LSST bias challenge, the goal of which is to compare the performance of different nonlinear galaxy bias models in the context of LSST Y10 data. Specifically, we compare two perturbative approaches, Lagrangian perturbation theory (LPT) and Eulerian PT (EPT) to two variants of Hybrid Effective Field Theory (HEFT), with our fiducial implementation of these models including terms up to second order in the bias expansion as well as nonlocal bias and deviations from Poissonian stochasticity. We consider different simulated galaxy samples and test the performance of the bias models in a tomographic joint analysis of LSST-Y10-like galaxy clustering, galaxy-galaxy-lensing and cosmic shear. We find both HEFT methods as well as LPT and EPT combined with non-perturbative predictions for the matter power spectrum to yield unbiased constraints on cosmological parameters up to at least a maximal scale of $k_{\mathrm{max}}=0.4 \; \mathrm{Mpc}^{-1}$ for all samples considered, even in the presence of assembly bias. While we find that we can reduce the complexity of the bias model for HEFT without compromising fit accuracy, this is not generally the case for the perturbative models. We find significant detections of non-Poissonian stochasticity in all cases considered, and our analysis shows evidence that small-scale galaxy clustering predominantly improves constraints on galaxy bias rather than cosmological parameters. These results therefore suggest that the systematic uncertainties associated with current nonlinear bias models are likely to be subdominant compared to other sources of error for tomographic analyses of upcoming photometric surveys, which bodes well for future galaxy clustering analyses using these high signal-to-noise data. [abridged]Comment: 47 pages, 19 figures, 1 table, to be submitted to JCA

Correction to: Cluster identification, selection, and description in Cluster randomized crossover trials: the PREP-IT trials

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article

Galaxy bias in the era of LSST: perturbative bias expansions

Upcoming imaging surveys will allow for high signal-to-noise measurements of galaxy clustering at small scales. In this work, we present the results of the Rubin Observatory Legacy Survey of Space and Time (LSST) bias challenge, the goal of which is to compare the performance of different nonlinear galaxy bias models in the context of LSST Year 10 (Y10) data. Specifically, we compare two perturbative approaches, Lagrangian perturbation theory (LPT) and Eulerian perturbation theory (EPT) to two variants of Hybrid Effective Field Theory (HEFT), with our fiducial implementation of these models including terms up to second order in the bias expansion as well as nonlocal bias and deviations from Poissonian stochasticity. We consider a variety of different simulated galaxy samples and test the performance of the bias models in a tomographic joint analysis of LSST-Y10-like galaxy clustering, galaxy-galaxy-lensing and cosmic shear. We find both HEFT methods as well as LPT and EPT combined with non-perturbative predictions for the matter power spectrum to yield unbiased constraints on cosmological parameters up to at least a maximal scale of kmax = 0.4 Mpc-1 for all samples considered, even in the presence of assembly bias. While we find that we can reduce the complexity of the bias model for HEFT without compromising fit accuracy, this is not generally the case for the perturbative models. We find significant detections of non-Poissonian stochasticity in all cases considered, and our analysis shows evidence that small-scale galaxy clustering predominantly improves constraints on galaxy bias rather than cosmological parameters. These results therefore suggest that the systematic uncertainties associated with current nonlinear bias models are likely to be subdominant compared to other sources of error for tomographic analyses of upcoming photometric surveys, which bodes well for future galaxy clustering analyses using these high signal-to-noise data

Implementing stakeholder engagement to explore alternative models of consent: An example from the PREP-IT trials

Introduction: Cluster randomized crossover trials are often faced with a dilemma when selecting an optimal model of consent, as the traditional model of obtaining informed consent from participant's before initiating any trial related activities may not be suitable. We describe our experience of engaging patient advisors to identify an optimal model of consent for the PREP-IT trials. This paper also examines surrogate measures of success for the selected model of consent. Methods: The PREP-IT program consists of two multi-center cluster randomized crossover trials that engaged patient advisors to determine an optimal model of consent. Patient advisors and stakeholders met regularly and reached consensus on decisions related to the trial design including the model for consent. Patient advisors provided valuable insight on how key decisions on trial design and conduct would be received by participants and the impact these decisions will have. Results: Patient advisors, together with stakeholders, reviewed the pros and cons and the requirements for the traditional model of consent, deferred consent, and waiver of consent. Collectively, they agreed upon a deferred consent model, in which patients may be approached for consent after their fracture surgery and prior to data collection. The consent rate in PREP-IT is 80.7%, and 0.67% of participants have withdrawn consent for participation. Discussion: Involvement of patient advisors in the development of an optimal model of consent has been successful. Engagement of patient advisors is recommended for other large trials where the traditional model of consent may not be optimal