Papers › GREAT3 results I: systematic errors in shear estimation and the impact of real galaxy...
GREAT3 results I: systematic errors in shear estimation and the impact of real galaxy morphology
Rachel Mandelbaum, Barnaby Rowe, Robert Armstrong, Deborah Bard, Emmanuel Bertin, James Bosch, Dominique Boutigny, Frederic Courbin, William A. Dawson, Annamaria Donnarumma, Ian Fenech Conti, Raphael Gavazzi, Marc Gentile, Mandeep S. S. Gill, David W. Hogg, Eric M. Huff, M. James Jee, Tomasz Kacprzak, Martin Kilbinger, Thibault Kuntzer, Dustin Lang, Wentao Luo, Marisa C. March, Philip J. Marshall, Joshua E. Meyers, Lance Miller, Hironao Miyatake, Reiko Nakajima, Fred Maurice Ngole Mboula, Guldariya Nurbaeva, Yuki Okura, Stephane Paulin-Henriksson, Jason Rhodes, Michael D. Schneider, Huanyuan Shan, Erin S. Sheldon, Melanie Simet, Jean-Luc Starck, Florent Sureau, Malte Tewes, Kristian Zarb Adami, Jun Zhang, Joe Zuntz
The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.
We present first results from the third GRavitational lEnsing Accuracy Testing (GREAT3) challenge, the third in a sequence of challenges for testing methods of inferring weak gravitational lensing shear distortions from simulated galaxy images. GREAT3 was divided into experiments to test three specific questions, and included simulated space- and ground-based data with constant or cosmologically-varying shear fields. The simplest (control) experiment included parametric galaxies with a realistic distribution of signal-to-noise, size, and ellipticity, and a complex point spread function (PSF). The other experiments tested the additional impact of realistic galaxy morphology, multiple exposure imaging, and the uncertainty about a spatially-varying PSF; the last two questions will be explored in Paper II. The 24 participating teams competed to estimate lensing shears to within systematic error tolerances for upcoming Stage-IV dark energy surveys, making 1525 submissions overall. GREAT3 saw considerable variety and innovation in the types of methods applied. Several teams now meet or exceed the targets in many of the tests conducted (to within the statistical errors). We conclude that the presence of realistic galaxy morphology in simulations changes shear calibration biases by ∼1 per cent for a wide range of methods. Other effects such as truncation biases due to finite galaxy postage stamps, and the impact of galaxy type as measured by the S\'{e}rsic index, are quantified for the first time. Our results generalize previous studies regarding sensitivities to galaxy size and signal-to-noise, and to PSF properties such as seeing and defocus. Almost all methods' results support the simple model in which additive shear biases depend linearly on PSF ellipticity.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections