arxiv: v2 [astro-ph.co] 31 Jul 2015

Transcription

1 Mon. Not. R. Atron. Soc., () Printed 3 Augut 5 (MN LATEX tyle file v.) The BOSS-WiggleZ overlap region I: Baryon Acoutic Ocillation arxiv:56.39v [atro-ph.co] 3 Jul 5 Florian Beutler, Chri Blake, Jun Koda,3, Felipe A. Marín, Hee-Jong Seo 4, Antonio J. Cueta 5, Donald P. Schneider 6,7 Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Cyclotron Road, Berkeley, CA 947, USA Centre for Atrophyic & Supercomputing, Swinburne Univerity of Technology, P.O. Box 8, Hawthorn, VIC 3, Autralia 3 INAF, Oervatorio Atronomico di Brera, via E. Bianchi 46, Department of Phyic and Atronomy, Ohio Univerity, 5B Clippinger Lab, Athen, OH ICC, Univerity of Barcelona, IEEC-UB, Martí i Franquè, E-88, Barcelona, Spain 6 Department of Atronomy and Atrophyic, The Pennylvania State Univerity, Univerity Park, PA 68 7 Intitute for Gravitation and the Como, The Pennylvania State Univerity, Univerity Park, PA 68 3 Augut 5 INTRODUCTION The Baryon Acoutic Ocillation (BAO) ignal i a relict of the early Univere, where photon preure caued oundwave to move out of over-denitie (Peeble & Yu 97; Sunyaev & Zeldovich 97; Bond & Eftathiou 987). Thee ound-wave became imprinted in the ditribution of Comic Microwave Background (CMB) photon a well a in the matter denity field. Over time, the denity field evolved through gravitational collape and comic expanion. While gravitational interaction can mear out the BAO ignal, a complete detruction would require interaction over very large cale (today 5Mpc), making the BAO feature a very robut obervable. ABSTRACT We tudy the large-cale clutering of galaxie in the overlap region of the Baryon Ocillation Spectrocopic Survey (BOSS) CMASS ample and the WiggleZ Dark Energy Survey. We calculate the auto-correlation and cro-correlation function in the overlap region of the two dataet and detect a Baryon Acoutic Ocillation (BAO) ignal in each of them. The BAO meaurement from the cro-correlation function repreent the firt uch detection between two different galaxy urvey. After applying denity-field recontruction we report ditance-cale meaurement D V r fid /r = (97±45,3±65,±)Mpc from CMASS, the cro-correlation and WiggleZ, repectively. The ditance cale derived from the two dataet are conitent, and are alo robut againt witching the diplacement field ued for recontruction between the two urvey. We ue correlated mock realization to calculate the covariance between the three BAO contraint. Thi approach can be ued to contruct a correlation matrix, permitting for the firt time a rigorou combination of WiggleZ and CMASS BAO meaurement. Uing a volume-caling technique, our reult can alo be ued to combine WiggleZ and future CMASS DR reult. Finally, we how that the relative velocity effect, a poible ource of ytematic uncertainty for the BAO technique, i conitent with zero for our ample. Key word: urvey, comology: obervation, dark energy, ditance cale, large cale tructure of Univere The BAO ignal in the denity field at different redhift can be related to the BAO ignal meaured in the CMB and therefore allow employment of the o called tandard ruler technique (Blake & Glazebrook 3; Seo & Eientein 3). We can compare the apparent ize of the BAO ignal meaured in galaxy urvey with the abolute ize of thi ignal meaured in the CMB and ue thi to map out the expanion hitory of the Univere. Simulation have hown that the BAO ignal i unaffected by ytematic uncertaintie down to the ub-percent level (Eientein, Seo & White 7; Guzik & Berntein 7; Smith et al. 7, 8; Angulo et al. 8; Padmanabhan & White 9; Mehta et al. ) and hence repreent one of the mot reliable tool available for preciion comology. fbeutler@lbl.gov The mot precie BAO meaurement ha recently been c RAS

2 Florian Beutler et al. reported by the Baryon Ocillation Spectrocopic Survey (BOSS) collaboration (%, Anderon et al. 3) at a redhift of z =.57. BOSS alo achieved a % BAO ditance contraint with the LOWZ ample at z =.3 (Tojeiro 4). The WiggleZ galaxy urvey (Drinkwater et al. ) produced a 4% contraint at redhift z =.6 (Blake et al. ; Kazin et al. 4) and the 6-degree Field Galaxy Survey (6dFGS) (Jone et al. 9) yielded a 5% contraint at z =. (Beutler et al. ). Uing the SDSS- DR7(Abazajian et al. 9)mainample, Ro et al.(4) reported a 4% BAO contraint. Future galaxy urvey point to Baryon Acoutic Ocillation a their main cience driver (e.g. DESI, Schelgel et al. ) and will puh well below percent-level preciion over a large redhift range. In thi paper we tudy the BAO ignal in the overlap region of the two larget galaxy urvey available to date, the CMASS ample of BOSS DR (Ahn et al. 4) and the WiggleZ galaxy urvey (Drinkwater et al. ). We ue the BOSS DR ample, ince the overlap between BOSS and WiggleZ doe not increae with DR. The two urvey have been produced independently, being ubject to different eeing condition, intrumental noie, reduction pipeline and obervation trategie. While BOSS targeted mainly Luminou Red Galaxie (LRG) and ha a galaxy bia around b, WiggleZ elected blue Emiion Line Galaxie (ELG) with a bia around b. Since we retrict our analyi to the overlap region between the two urvey, our dataet have the ame ample variance. Thi allow a tet of poible ytematic uncertaintie in galaxy clutering meaurement. In thi tudy we focu on BAO meaurement while a companion paper (Marin et al. 5) invetigate redhift-pace ditortion in the overlap region. The typical candidate for poible ytematic error in galaxy clutering tudie are redhift pace ditortion a well a non-linear clutering, accompanied by a non-linear galaxy bia. Non-linear evolution i normally connected to the denity peak of the matter denity field and hence we expect that galaxie which it in high denity region, uch a LRG, hould have tronger non-linear effect compared to field galaxie, uch a ELG. On the other hand, field galaxie have a larger redhift pace ditortion ignal, which i a ource of poible ytematic if not modeled correctly. In addition to the propertie of the denity field itelf, there are alo urvey pecific apect uch a incompletene that can modify the meaured clutering tatitic. Another poible ytematic bia for BAO meaurement i the relative velocity effect. The different velocitie of baryon and dark matter after decoupling can affect early galaxy formation procee. At place where the relative velocity i large, baryon can ecape gravitational potential. The firt tar in the Univere will form wherever the relative velocity i low, ince thi i where the baryon will condene into the gravitational potential of the dark matter. The relative velocity decay with redhift and i negligible at the redhift of the BOSS and WiggleZ galaxie. The quetion i whether the modulation of tructure formation due to the relative velocity effect at high redhift i carried in the tracer galaxie we oberve today to meaure BAO. Yoo & Seljak (3) argue that galaxie which conit predominantly of old tar (uch a LRG) could carry thi effect, while young galaxie might not. Thi would reult in a modulation of the BAO ignal in BOSS, but not in WiggleZ. In the overlap region between BOSS and WiggleZ we can meaure the BAO poition in the ame volume and compare whether the two urvey yield the ame reult, allowing the placement of contraint on the poible impact of the relative velocity effect. In the next ection we will introduce the two dataet ued in our analyi, BOSS-CMASS and WiggleZ. Section 3 decribe our correlation function etimate followed by a dicuion of our mock catalogue in Section 4. In Section 5 we preent our technique of denity field recontruction followed by a dicuion of our model for the correlation function in Section 6. We then compare the obtained diplacement field and perform the correlation function fit in Section 7. In Section 8 we determine the correlation between BOSS-CMASS and WiggleZ. In Section 9 we introduce the relative velocity effect and perform fit to the data to contrain the relative velocity bia. We conclude in Section. For clarity we will ue the name, WiggleZ- BW and cc-bw for the CMASS, WiggleZ and crocorrelation reult limited to the overlap region between the two urvey. We adopt a flat ΛCDM comology with Ω m =.7. The ame model i ued to contruct template for the BAO fit and hence our meaurement hould be ued in conjunction with r fid (z d ) = 5.8Mpc. DATASETS. The BOSS urvey BOSS, a part of SDSS-III (Eientein et al. ; Dawon et al. 3) meaured pectrocopic redhift of.5 million galaxie (and 5 quaar) making ue of the SDSS multi-fibre pectrograph (Bolton et al. ; Smee et al. 3). The galaxie are elected from multicolor SDSS imaging (Fukugita et al. 996; Gunn et al. 998; Smith et al. ; Gunn et al. 6; Doi et al. ) and cover a redhift range of z =.5 -.7, where the urvey i plit into two ample called LOWZ (z = ) and CMASS (z = ). In thi analyi we only ue the CMASS ample. The urvey i optimized for the meaurement of the BAO cale and hence cover a large comic volume (V eff =.3 9 [Mpc/h] 3 ) with a denity of n 3 4 [h/mpc] 3, high enough to enure that hot noie i not the dominant error contribution at the BAO cale (White ). Mot CMASS galaxie are red with a prominent 4 Å break in their pectral energy ditribution. Halo Occupation tudie have hown that galaxie elected like the CMASS galaxie are mainly central galaxie reiding in dark matter halo of 3 M /h, with a 5 - % atellite fraction (White ). CMASS galaxie are highly biaed (b ), which boot the clutering ignal including BAO with repect to the hot noie level. We include three different incompletene weight to account for hortcoming of the CMASS dataet (ee Ro et al. and Anderon et al. 3 for detail): A redhift failure weight, w rf, a fibre colliion weight, w fc, and a ytematic weight, w y, which i a combination of a tellar denity weight and a eeing condition weight. Each Sound horizon cale calculated with CAMB (Lewi et al. ). c RAS, MNRAS,

3 The BOSS-WiggleZ overlap region I 3 6 NGC 3 SGC DEC [ ] 4 DEC [ ] N9 N N5 5 5 RA [ ] - - S S S RA [ ] Figure. Sky coverage of BOSS-CMASS DR (black) and WiggleZ (red). The left plot how the north galactic cap (NGC), while the right plot how the outh galactic cap (SGC). Five of the ix WiggleZ region are covered by CMASS, with region S being only partly covered. We only plot a random fraction of 3% of all galaxie. galaxy i thu counted a w c = (w rf +w fc )w y. () Figure how the ky coverage of BOSS-CMASS with the north galactic cap (NGC) on the left and the outh galactic cap (SGC) on the right.. The WiggleZ urvey The WiggleZ Dark Energy Survey (Drinkwater et al. ) i a large-cale galaxy redhift urvey of bright emiionline galaxie (ELG), which wa carried out at the Anglo- Autralian Telecope between Augut 6 and January uing the AAOmega pectrograph (Sharp et al. 6). Target were elected via joint ultraviolet and optical magnitude and color cut uing input imaging from the Galaxy Evolution Explorer (GALEX) atellite (Martin et al. 5). The urvey i now complete, compriing 4 redhift and covering 86 deg in ix eparate ky area. The redhift range i roughly. < z <. with a mean redhift at z =.6. Figure how the ky coverage of WiggleZ (red), where we name the different patche S, S3, S, N9, N, and N5. The trategy for completene correction in WiggleZ i different to the method ued in CMASS. Intead of weighting the data galaxie, the incompletene ha been introduced into the random catalogue (Blake et al. ) and hence no completene weighting i needed for thi dataet..3 Definition of the overlap region We define the overlap region between CMASS and WiggleZ by plitting the ky into. deg bin and electing all bin which contain CMASS a well a WiggleZ random galaxie. The redhift range i defined by CMASS and i given by.43 < z <.7. Figure how the ix WiggleZ region (red), of which five are covered by the BOSS-CMASS ample (black), with region S being only partly covered. The five overlap region are hown eparately in Figure. Mot of the incompletene in thee plot i caued Table. Effective volume and number of galaxie of the five ditinct CMASS-WiggleZ overlap region (ee Figure ) a well a the total volume of the two urvey. The effective volume i calculated uing Eq. and P = h 3 Mpc 3 for CMASS and P = 5h 3 Mpc 3 for WiggleZ. The name and tand for the CMASS and WiggleZ ample retricted to the overlap region between the two. S S N9 N N5 combined Region V eff N gal [ 7 h 3 Mpc 3 ] CMASS-DR CMASS-DR CMASS-DR CMASS-DR WiggleZ by the WiggleZ urvey, while the empty tripe in region N are a reult of miing photometry and hence miing galaxie in CMASS. The relative importance of ample variance and hot noie in a galaxy clutering meaurement i determined by thequantityn(z)p(k),wheren(z)i thegalaxynumberdenity andp(k) i the galaxy power pectrum amplitude at the BAO cale. Therefore we can trade a maller galaxy denity c RAS, MNRAS,

4 4 Florian Beutler et al. 6 S 5 S 4 4 DEC [ ] DEC [ ] RA [ ] 4 N RA [ ] 38 8 N 33 N DEC [ ] DEC [ ] DEC [ ] RA [ ] RA [ ] 5 RA [ ] 5 3 Figure. The overlap region between BOSS-CMASS (black) and WiggleZ (red). Mot of the angular incompletene i caued by WiggleZ, while the empty tripe in region N are caued by incomplete photometric data in CMASS. To generate thee region, we divided the ky into. deg bin and included all bin which contain CMASS a well a WiggleZ random galaxie. We only plot a random fraction of % of all galaxie. Here P i fixed to the amplitude of the power pectrum at the wavenumber of the firt BAO peak, k.6h/mpc, which turn out to be P = h 3 Mpc3 for CMASS and P = 5h 3 Mpc3 for WiggleZ. The larger value of np in the CMASS ample lead to a larger effective volume compared to WiggleZ (by about a factor of ). The different volume for CMASS and WiggleZ in each overlap region, a well a the combined volume, are ummarized in Table. The redhift ditribution for the two ample limited to the overlap region i plotted in Figure 3. 3 ESTIMATING THE CORRELATION FUNCTION We calculate the correlation function by counting the number of galaxy-galaxy pair, DD(), a a function of cale, a well a galaxy-random, DR(), and random-random, RR() pair. We then ue the correlation function etimator # with a larger galaxy bia and vice vera. The WiggleZ urvey ha a higher galaxy number denity compared to CMASS, while CMASS galaxie have a larger bia and hence a larger power pectrum amplitude. The CMASS ample ha been deigned with the target np = 3, while WiggleZ ha aimed for np =. The bet quantity to compare the two urvey i the effective volume, where we ue the equation uggeted by Tegmark (997): Z n(~x)p. () Veff = d3 x + n(~x)p z Figure 3. Redhift ditribution of (red) and (blue) combining the five eparate region. uggeted by Landy & Szalay (993): DD() nr DR() nr ξ() = +, (3) RR() nd RR() nd PNd PNr wi (~x) and nd = wi (~x) repreent where nr = the um over the weight for all random and data galaxie, repectively. We include the invere denity weighting of Feldman, Kaier & Peacock (994): wi (~x) =, + n(~x)p (4) c RAS, MNRAS,

5 The BOSS-WiggleZ overlap region I 5 with P = h 3 Mpc 3 for CMASS and P = 5h 3 Mpc 3 for WiggleZ. In the cae of CMASS we alo include the completene weighting of Eq.. The cro-correlation function between two tracer A and B can be calculated a ( ξ AB() = + DA D B () n A r n B r R A R B () n A d nb d ( ) RA D B () n B r. R A R B () n B d ) ( ) DA R B () n A r R A R B () n A d Figure 4 how the correlation function for (top), (bottom) and the cro-correlation (cc- BW, middle). The three figure on the left preent the reult before denity field recontruction, while the figure on the right diplay the reult after recontruction (ee Section 5 for a dicuion of our recontruction technique). The five correlation function for the individual region of CMASS- BW and are indicated a grey line. Uing the covariance matrix (ee next ection) we can combine the correlation function of the five ub-region (colored data point). The auto-correlation function of both urvey, a well a the cro-correlation function before and after recontruction, how a clear BAO ignal at around Mpc/h. We alo meaured the cro-correlation coefficient defined a r () = ξ cc BW() ξ CMASS BW()ξ WiggleZ BW () and preented in Figure 5. In linear theory we expect thi quantity to be [ + rtheory() 3 = (βa +βb)+ (βaβb)] 5 (+ 3 βa + 5 β A )(+ 3 βb + (7) 5 β B ). Auming b A =, b B = and f = bβ =.76 reult in r theory =.997. Thi expectation i included in Figure 5 (black dahed line). The mock realization how a large correlation coefficient after denity field recontruction. We currently do not have a model for the correlation function hape pot recontruction (White 5) and therefore we only ue the pre-recontruction reult in our fitting in Section 9. Figure 5 alo how a mall correlation coefficient before recontruction (blue data point). We ued Gauian error ditribution to obtain the uncertaintie on the data point in Figure 5, however, the error on r have a ignificant non- Gauian component. In Marin et al. (5) we performed fit to the auto- and cro-correlation function having r a a free parameter. We find that r i conitent with for cale above Mpc/h (ee Figure 5 in Marin et al. 5). 4 MOCK REALISATIONS We produced 48 mock catalogue for each of the five overlap region uing the COLA technique (Taev, Zaldarriaga & Eientein 3). Thee mock catalogue will be preented in a eparate paper together with the detail of the COLA implementation we employed (Koda et al. 5). Thee mock catalogue have alo been ued in Kazin et al. (4) and Marin et al. (5). Each imulation ue 96 3 particle in a [6Mpc/h] 3 box reulting in a particle ma of M /h, allowing u to reolve CMASS a well a WiggleZ ize halo. The (5) (6) ()] ()ξ ()/[ξ ξ cc-bw pre-recon data.8 pot-recon data pre-recon mock mean.6 pot-recon mock mean Figure 5. The meaured correlation coefficient before (blue) and after (black) denity field recontruction. The dahed line how the expectation of linear theory. The blue data point are hifted by.5mpc/h to the right for clarity. The olid line indicate the mean correlation coefficient of the mock realization before (red) and after (magenta) denity field recontruction. The error on the data point i derived from the variation in the 48 mock catalogue (grey line). When fitting the correlation coefficient in Section 9 we only ue the data before recontruction, ince we do not have a model for the correlation function pot recontruction. halo are identified uing a friend-of-friend algorithm with a linking length of. time the mean particle eparation. We ue Halo Occupation ditribution model to populate thee halo with galaxie o that the mock realization match the meaured projected correlation function w p(r p), where r p i the angular eparation between a galaxy pair. The fiducial comology of thee mock catalogue i flat ΛCDM with Ω m =.73, Ω b =.456, H = 7.5Mpc/km/, σ 8 =.8 andn =.96. The comparion of thecorrelation function meaured in the mock catalogue and the data correlation function are hown in Figure 6. The mock match the WiggleZ and CMASS clutering on large cale while they lightly overetimate the clutering amplitude of the cro-correlation function. The dicrepancie are le ignificant after recontruction (three panel on the right in Figure 6). 4. Covariance matrix Uing the mock realization of the individual ub-region we can produce covariance matrice for each of the autoand cro-correlation function. We calculate the covariance matrix uing C ij = 48 [ ][ ξn( i) ξ( i) ξ ] n( j) ξ( j), (8) 479 n= with ξ n( i) being the n-th correlation function etimate at eparation i and the um i over all 48 mock realization. The mean value i defined a ξ( i) = 48 ξ n( i). (9) 48 n= c RAS, MNRAS,

6 6 Florian Beutler et al BOSS-BW pre-recon BOSS-BW pot-recon cc-bw pre-recon -4 cc-bw pot-recon data ub-region data combined bet fitting model pre-recon - pot-recon Figure 4. The correlation function of (top), (bottom) and the cro-correlation (middle) in the overlap region between CMASS and WiggleZ. The grey line how the correlation function for the five individual ub-region (ee Figure ), while the colored data point how the combined correlation function calculated from Eq.. The error bar are the diagonal of the combined covariance matrice (ee Figure 7). Note, that the catter in the grey line doe not repreent the error in the data point, ince each grey line correpond to a different volume and i weighted accordingly. The black line how the bet fit to the individual correlation function correponding to the upper part of Table. Intead of analyzing the auto-correlation function and five cro-correlation function individually, we choe to combine the correlation function to obtain two autocorrelation function for and a well a one cro-correlation function. We combined the correlation function of the five individual ub-region uing the covariance matrice calculated above and following the procedure outlined in White () and Blake et al. (). Each ub-region i weighted by it correponding uncertainty C ξ tot () = 5 region i [C i ] ξ i (), () with C i being the covariance matrice of the individual ubregion. The invere covariance matrix for the combined correlation function i given by C = 5 region i [C i ], () which follow from Eq.. The combined covariance matrice before and after denity field recontruction are preented in Figure 7. The combined correlation function for, and the cro-correlation function are hown in Figure 4 a colored data point. We alo compare the correlation function with the CMASS-DR correlation function in Figure 8. While c RAS, MNRAS,

7 The BOSS-WiggleZ overlap region I pre-recon pot-recon cc-bw pre-recon cc-bw pot-recon mock mock mean data pre-recon pot-recon Figure 6. Comparion between the mock realization and the (red, top) (blue, bottom) and cro-correlation function (black, middle). The grey line how the 48 mock realization with the mean given by the colored data point and the error repreenting the variance. The colored line indicate the meaurement in the data. The dahed black line mark the fitting range which goe from 5Mpc/h to 8Mpc/h. the correlation function before recontruction i in excellent agreement with CMASS-DR, we find the prominent BAO peak at lightly larger cale compared to CMASS-DR. We will dicu thi apect further when fitting thee correlation function in Section 7.. It ha been hown that the invere covariance C derived from a finite number of realization underetimate the uncertaintie (Anderon 3; Hartlap, Simon & Schneider 6;Percival et al.3).inthecaeofgauian errorand tatitically independent bin, thi effect can be accounted for by multiplying the variance etimated from the likelihood ditribution with m σ = +B(N bin N p) +A+B(N p +), () where N mock i the number of mock realization, N bin i c RAS, MNRAS,

8 8 Florian Beutler et al. pre-recon 5 pot-recon cc-bw 5 5 cc-bw Figure 7. The correlation matrix for the combined, cro-correlation (cc-bw) and correlation function before (left) and after (right) denity field recontruction. Thee matrice are combination of the individual matrice for the five eparate region uing Eq.. For each region we ue 48 mock realization for and. The color indicate the level of correlation, where red i high correlation, green i no correlation and blue i high anti-correlation. Since each et of and mock catalogue ha been produced from the ame imulation (ee Section 4), there i a coniderable amount of correlation between the three correlation function, mimicking the ituation of the real data. Given that we ue a fitting range of r = 5-8Mpc/h with 5Mpc/h bin, thi matrix ha 6 6 bin for each correlation function and bin in total. 5 pre-recon 5 pot-recon CMASS-DR CMASS-DR Figure 8. Comparion of the (red data point) and CMASS-DR (red dahed line) correlation function before (left) and after (right) denity field recontruction. Pot recontruction one can ee that the BAO peak in i at larger cale compared to CMASS-DR, which lead to a maller value of D V a i alo viible in the reulting likelihood ditribution (ee Figure ). the number of bin, N p i the number of free parameter and A = (N mock N bin )(N mock N bin 4), (3) B = A(N mock N bin ). (4) Furthermore, the ample variance need to be multiplied by N mock m v = m σ N mock N bin. (5) Since the bin in a correlation function are not tatitically independent, thee correction factor are only an approximation. Given the 48 mock realization in our analyi, 6 bin and 5 free parameter (ee Section 7.), we have m σ =.33 and m v =.95. However, when fitting all three correlation function imultaneouly (78 bin), thi factor can rie to m v =.4, ignificantly contributing to our error budget. 5 DENSITY FIELD RECONSTRUCTION In linear theory, the co-moving poition of the BAO peak i et after the epoch of decoupling, providing the foundation of it ue a a tandard ruler. There are, however, non-linear effect, which can change the BAO peak poition, a well a c RAS, MNRAS,

9 The BOSS-WiggleZ overlap region I 9 it hape. The mot ignificant effect i non-linear damping of the BAO peak (Eientein, Seo & White 7; Seo et al. 8). Thi effect i often modeled with a Gauian damping term. Although we are intereted in the BAO peak poition and not in it amplitude, damping can hift the peak poition, becaue of the non-ymmetric hape of the correlation function around the BAO peak (Eientein, Seo & White 7; Guzik & Berntein 7; Smith et al. 7, 8; Angulo et al. 8; Mehta et al. ). Additionally, Crocce & Scoccimarro (8) found that mode coupling can lead to hift in the BAO peak poition. Interetingly, mode coupling a well a non-linear damping can be removed by a technique called denity field recontruction, meaning that the meaured ditribution of galaxie itelf can be ued to reduce the impact of thee non-linear effect by etimating the diplacement of galaxie from their initial poition in the denity field (Eientein et al. 7; Padmanabhan & White 9; Mehta et al. ). Denity field recontruction enhance the ignal-to-noie ratio of the BAO ignature uing extra information contained in the higher order correlation of the galaxy ditribution (Eientein et al. 7). We apply denity field recontruction to the oberved denity field following the formalim of Padmanabhan et al. (). Firt we mooth the oberved and random field with a Gauian filter of the form [ ] (kσmooth ) G(k) = exp, (6) where we chooe Σ mooth = 5Mpc/h (Xu et al. ). The over-denity field i then calculated in real-pace a δ( x) = ρg( x) n r, (7) ρ r( x) n g with ρ g(x) and ρ r(x) being the denity of the moothed galaxy and random ditribution, repectively. The normalization i defined a n r n g = Nr i w i( x) Ng i w i( x). (8) In linear perturbation theory, the diplacement field Ψ(x) i related to the redhift-pace denity field by (Nuer & Davi 994) Ψ( x)+β [ ] Ψlo ( x) = δ( x) b, (9) where Ψ lo i the line-of-ight component of the diplacement field. Tranforming thi equation into Fourier pace anduingtheapproachφ(x) = k φ(k)exp(ikx)andδ(x) = δ(k)exp(ikx) we get k φ(k) [ k x +k y +k z(+β) ] = δ(k) b, () which we olve for φ(k) for every wavenumber k. The diplacement field i than given by Ψ(k) = i k φ(k), k which we Fourier tranfer back into configuration pace. Our approach ue the plane-parallel approximation, which i valid for the mall angular coverage of the five individual field tudied in thi analyi (Blake et al. ). We then apply the diplacement to our galaxie by hifting their x, y and line-of ight poition following lo = old (+f) Ψ lo ( x), () x,y = old Ψ x,y( x). () We do not apply the factor of (+f) in the cae of the random galaxie, ince the random ditribution doe not contain redhift pace ditortion. During recontruction we ue the growth rate f =.7 a well a the linear bia b =.9 for (Beutler et al. 4) and b =. for WiggleZ- BW (Blake et al. ). The three plot on the right of Figure 4 how the correlation function for (top), (bottom) and cro-correlation (cc-bw, middle) after applying denity field recontruction. 6 MODELING THE LARGE SCALE CORRELATION FUNCTION Our model for the galaxy correlation function follow the procedure of Anderon et al. (3). The galaxy correlation function i given by where ξ() = B ξ m(α)+a() (3) A() = a + a +a3. (4) The matter correlation function i obtained through (Eientein, Seo & White 7) k dk ξ m() = σ π P(k)j(k)e k (5) with σ = Mpc/h and the monopole power pectrum i given by [ ] P(k) = P m,lin (k) +(O lin (k) )e [k Σ nl]/. (6) We fix Σ nl = 8.8Mpc/h before recontruction and Σ nl = 4.4Mpc/h after recontruction (Anderon et al. 3; Magana et al. 4). The function O lin (k) repreent the ocillatory part of the fiducial linear power pectrum and P m(k) i the mooth power pectrum monopole. To obtain P m,lin (k) we fit the fiducial linear power pectrum, P lin (k), with an Eientein & Hu (998) no-wiggle power pectrum, P nw(k), together with five polynomial term: P m,lin (k) = B P nw(k)+ c k + c 3 k + c3 +c4 +c5k. (7) k The ocillatory part of the power pectrum i given by O lin (k) = P lin(k) P m,lin (k). (8) Our model in Eq. 3 ha five free parameter (B, α, a 3). To turn the contraint on α into a phyical parameter we ue with D V(z) = α = DV(z)rfid (9) DV fid(z)r [ (+z) D cz ] /3 A(z), (3) H(z) c RAS, MNRAS,

10 Florian Beutler et al. (x) [Mpc/h] Ψ Ψ (x) [Mpc/h] Figure 9. Comparion of the diplacement in the catalogue uing the diplacement field (x-axi) and the diplacement field (y-axi). The plot how a random election of 5% of all galaxie in the five overlap region. where D A(z) i the angular diameter ditance and H(z) i the Hubble parameter. 7 TESTING FOR BAO SYSTEMATICS Although the linear bia model wa alway believed to be ufficient for cale a large a the BAO ignal, ome tudie uing halo catalogue from N-body imulation ugget that there are cale-dependent bia effect even on BAO cale (Noh et al. 9; Dejacque et al. ; Wang & Zhan 3). Thi mean that the BAO ignal can vary, depending on the tracer choen to map the underlying denity field. In the following ection of thi paper, we will fit the large cale correlation function of CMASS and WiggleZ, and compare the diplacement field derived from the two urvey. Since we retrict our analyi to a common volume, we expect the reult to be correlated. Since the two urvey trace the underlying denity field differently, we can tet for ytematic effect in the BAO analyi. 7. Comparing the CMASS and WiggleZ diplacement field In Section 5 we derived two diplacement field uing the and galaxie, repectively. Here we are intereted to learn () whether one of the diplacement field lead to better BAO contraint and () whether there are any ytematic hift in the BAO poition depending on which diplacement field i ued for the recontruction. We apply the diplacement field derived uing the WiggleZ urvey to the CMASS galaxie and the diplacement field derived from the CMASS urvey to the WiggleZ galaxie reulting in four dataet: uing the diplacement field, uing the diplacement field, 3 uing the diplacement field, 4 uing the diplacement field. Figure 9 compare the two diplacement for each CMASS- BW galaxy. We quantify the correlation between the diplacement field uing the correlation coefficient (Ψ A i Ψ A)( Ψ B i Ψ B) r(a,b) = i σaσ B (3) where Ψ repreent the mean of the diplacement and σ x = i (xi x), umming over all galaxie i. The correlation coefficient for the region (S, S, N9, N, N5) = (.65,.64,.67,.68,.8) for the galaxie and (.49,.74,.76,.73,.75) for the galaxie. The mallet region (S) how the lowet correlation coefficient, indicating that volume effect do play a role in thi cae. The mean difference between the and diplacement field uing CMASS galaxie i Ψ = Ψ CMASS BW Ψ WiggleZ BW =.47 ±.6 Mpc/h, while for the WiggleZ catalogue Ψ =.5±.Mpc/h (the error are the error on the mean between all galaxie). We therefore find moderate difference between the two diplacement field. The difference between the two diplacement field doe depend linearly on the amplitude of the diplacement, (Ψ CMASS+Ψ WiggleZ )/, ahown infigurefor thegalaxie (red)and the galaxie (blue). Such a dicrepancy could be caued by an incorrect aumption of the bia parameter when deriving the diplacement field. To further invetigate the impact of the two different diplacement field on the BAO cale, we now calculate the correlation function uing both diplacement field. The correlation function after combining the five different region are preented in Figure. In the next ection we will fit thee correlation function and derive BAO contraint. 7. Fitting the large cale correlation function We tart with fitting the individual correlation function of and a well a the crocorrelation function. We earch for the bet fitting parameter defined by the minimum χ, given by χ = ij D T i C ij D j, (3) where D i a vector containing the difference between the data and the model. Uing the fitting range 5 8Mpc/h in 5Mpc/h bin reult in 6 element for the vector D. We ue the python-baed MCMC ampler emcee (Foreman-Mackey et al. 3) to derive the likelihood. The reult are hown in Table. We can clearly ee that the contraint for all three correlation function improve ignificantly after recontruction. The reulting BAO contraint are wore, however, if we witch the diplacement field between the two urvey (thee reult are labeled a (witched) intable ).The ame reultoccur inthemock realization, where 58% of the mock catalogue how a larger uncertainty on α when uing the c RAS, MNRAS,

11 The BOSS-WiggleZ overlap region I (x) [Mpc/h] (x) - Ψ Ψ galaxie galaxie ξ() (witched) [Ψ (x) + Ψ (x)]/ [Mpc/h] Figure. Comparion of the (red) and WiggleZ- BW (blue) galaxie uing the and diplacement field, repectively. The x-axi i the mean diplacement, while the y-axi how the difference. The data point are hifted by.5mpc/h to the right for clarity. The uncertaintie are derived from the mock realization. diplacement field for recontruction intead of the WiggleZ- BW diplacement field. Similarly 59% of the mock realization how poorer contraint when uing the diplacement field. The reulting likelihood ditribution for all fit are preented in Figure including a comparion to the CMASS-DR reult. The likelihood ditribution are reaonably approximated by Gauian. In the limit of ample variance dominated uncertaintie the three correlation function would carry the ame amount of information and only one of them would need to be analyzed. In the hot noie limit all three correlation function would be independent and would need to be analyzed together to make maximal ue of the available information. In the cae of and, hot noie doe contribute ignificantly to the error budget, o that a combined analyi i beneficial. Therefore we now fit all three correlation function together uing the combined covariance matrix hown in Figure 7. The fit ha 3 free parameter, one caling parameter, α, the three bia parameter, B CMASS BW, B cc BW and B WiggleZ BW a well a three polynomial term per correlation function. The data vector for thi fit i given by D = ξ model ξ model ( ) ξ data ( ). ( 6) ξ ξ cc-bw model ( ) ξ cc-bw. data ( 6) data ( ) ξ cc-bw model ( 6) ξ cc-bw ξ model ξ model data ( 6). ( ) ξ data ( ). ( 6) ξ data ( 6) (33) ξ() ξ() cc-bw cc-bw (witched) (witched) Figure. Comparion of the correlation function for CMASS- BW (top), (bottom) and the cro-correlation function (cc-bw, middle) after denity field recontruction uing the two diplacement field derived from the and galaxie, repectively. The label (witched) indicate the cae where the diplacement field of the other urvey ha been ued for recontruction. The red data point are hifted to the right by Mpc/h for clarity. c RAS, MNRAS,

12 Florian Beutler et al. containing 3 6 = 78 bin in total. The reult are hown in the lower part of Table. In the cae of prerecontruction, thi fit i driven by the cro-correlation function, which ha ignificantly maller uncertaintie than any of the auto-correlation function and lead to a value of α =.95 ±.68. After recontruction it i the CMASS- BW contraint which drive the combined fit, leading to α =.966 ±.3. The combined contraint on α i wore than the only contraint on α, which i mainly caued by the large caling factor of m v =.4 (ee Eq. 5), needed for thi fit. 7.3 Comparion to mock realization The quetion now i whether the meaured α value for and are conitent. We can tet thi, by uing the 48 correlated mock realization, which we ued to calculate the covariance matrix in Section 4.. We calculate the correlation function for each mock catalogue and repeat the fitting procedure decribed in the lat ection. Figure 4 how the ditribution of the different contraint on α for the mock realization, together with the reult found for the data (red data point). The ellipe in thee plot are the σ tandard deviation including the correlation between the different meaurement. We only plot reult which have a value of α between.6 < α <.4 a well a an error on α le than 5%. For we have 38 out of 48 mock catalogue which fulfill thee criteria, while for there are 4 and 3 for the cro-correlation. Uing the mock realization the tandard deviation for αareσ α = (.39,.36,.55) for,cc-bwand, repectively. While the mock realization predict the bet BAO contraint to be in the cro-correlation function, in the data the mot accurate ditance cale meaurement (pot-recontruction) i in. Thi reult i, however, conitent with ample variance, and we have many mock realization which how a imilar behavior. Figure 3 compare the ditribution of error for the mock realization with the data. The ignal-to-noie ratio of the auto-correlation function i given by n AP AA n AP AA +, (34) while the ignal-to-noie ratio of the cro-correlation function cale with (Smith et al. 8) nan BP AB. (35) (nap AA +)(n BP BB +)+n An BPAB AumingnP = 3 for andnp = for WiggleZ- BW a well a P CMASS BW = 4P WiggleZ BW (P cc BW = P WiggleZ BW ), we find.75,.4 and.5 for, cc-bw and, repectively. Thi rough etimate of the expected ignal-to-noie ratio agree well with the reult of the mock realization. We can therefore conclude that in our actual data meaurement the contraint ha an error lightly larger than expected, the crocorrelation function error i cloe to the expected error and the error i maller than expected. To determine whether the three different BAO contraint agree, we contruct the vector T = (α CMASS BW α cc BW,α CMASS BW α WiggleZ BW ). Uing the mock cat- /r ] fid (z)r P[D V /r ] fid (z)r P[D V /r ] fid (z)r P[D V cc-bw combined-bw CMASS-DR fid D V (z)r /r [Mpc] cc-bw combined-bw CMASS-DR pre-recon fid D V (z)r /r [Mpc] cc-bw combined-bw CMASS-DR pot-recon fid D V (z)r /r [Mpc] pot-recon with witched Ψ(x) r Figure. Likelihood ditribution for D fid V derived from r (red), (blue) and the cro-correlation function (black), before (top) and after (middle) denity field recontruction. The dahed red line how the CMASS-DR contraint of (Anderon et al. 3). The bottom panel diplay the reult where the diplacement field derived from the two urvey have been witched. c RAS, MNRAS,

13 The BOSS-WiggleZ overlap region I 3 Table. Summary of the fitting reult. The firt ector report the fit to, and cro-correlation (cc-bw) function individually, while the econd ector how the combined fit to all three correlation function. For each cae we lit the reult pre- and pot recontruction, a well a the reult where we witched the diplacement field Ψ(x) ued for recontruction (witched). The error on each parameter are obtained by marginalizing over all other parameter. The fitting range i 5-8Mpc/h in 5Mpc/h bin leading to 6 bin and 5 free parameter (bia, three polynomial and α) in cae of the fit to the individual correlation function. When fitting all correlation function imultaneouly (lat three row) there are 3 6 = 78 degree of freedom and 3 free parameter. The likelihood ditribution are hown in Figure. Our fiducial ound horizon i r fid (z d) = 5.8Mpc. urvey α D V (z) rfid (z) r (z) [Mpc] χ pre-recon /(6 5) pot-recon.97 ±. 97 ± 45.6/(6 5) pot-recon (witched).976 ±.9 98 ± 59 3./(6 5) cc-bw pre-recon /(6 5) cc-bw pot-recon.5 ±.3 3 ± /(6 5) cc-bw pot-recon (witched) /(6 5) pre-recon /(6 5) pot-recon.33 ±. ±.4/(6 5) pot-recon (witched) /(6 5) combined-bw pre-recon.95 ±.68 ± /(78 3) combined-bw pot-recon.966 ± ± /(78 3) combined-bw pot-recon (witched) /(78 3) # cc-bw D Vr fid /r = 68 ± Mpc (Anderon et al. 3). Since ue about 7% of the CMASS-DR galaxie, we can approximate the correlation coefficient, r, to be about.7, implying that thee contraint are fairly independent. We can quantify the ignificance of the deviation between two correlated meaurement with X σ A +σ B r(σa,σb)σaσb, (36) σ α Figure 3. The error on α meaured in the 48 mock realization of (red), (blue) and the crocorrelation function (black). The uncertainty σ α itaken to be the mean of the upper and lower 68% confidence level. The value meaured in the data are hown by the correpondingly colored vertical dahed line. alogue we obtain a correlation coefficient for the two component of the vector T of 6.6%, which allow u to contruct a covariance matrix and calculate χ = T T C T with two degree of freedom. Pot recontruction we get χ /d.o.f. =.5/ when uing the mean uncertainty predicted from the mock, and 4./ when uing (averaged) σ error from the actual meaurement. The three different BAO meaurement are therefore tatitically conitent. The BAO peak in lead to a ditance contraint of D Vr fid /r = 97 ± 45Mpc (pot recontruction), which i low compared to the CMASS-DR reult of where r(σ A,σ B) i the correlation coefficient. Thi lead to a ignificance of.σ for the deviation between CMASS-DR and. The WiggleZ urvey ha a ditance contraint of D Vr fid /r = ± Mpc, which we can compare to D Vr fid /r = Mpc meaured in Kazin et al. (4). The WiggleZ contraint ha a lightly different redhift range compared to our contraint (.4 < z <.8) and doe include the additional ky region S3 (ee Figure ), therefore a direct comparion i not poible. Ro et al. (4) plit the CMASS ample baed on k+e corrected i-bandabolute magnitude and [r i].55 color, yielding two ub-ample with bia b =.65 (blue) and b =.3 (red). Studie of the BAO cale in thee ub-ample revealed no tatitically ignificant deviation, in agreement with our finding. Different to Ro et al. (4) our tudy i baed on two entirely different urvey and therefore alo include poible ytematic due to intrumentation, telecope ite condition or reduction pipeline. Thi value ha been corrected by the ratio of the fiducial ound horizon to allow direct comparion with our contraint. c RAS, MNRAS,

14 4 Florian Beutler et al. α α α α α cc-bw α cc-bw Figure 4. Thee plot how the ditribution of α for the mock realization of, and cc-bw. We only plot reult which have a value of α between.6 < α <.4 a well a an error on α le than 5%. The ellipe repreent the σ ditribution drawn from the variance and correlation coefficient. Note that the ellipe ha not been derived from the black point drawn in thee plot but intead from jack-knife ample to avoid outlier. The red datapoint how our meaurement potrecontruction from Table. The agreement between the red data point and the black ellipe i only required if the comology of the mock i the true comology. 8 DETERMINING THE CORRELATION BETWEEN BAO CONSTRAINTS IN CMASS AND WIGGLEZ r In the lat ection we et contraint on the quantity D fid V r uing the and auto-correlation function a well a their cro-correlation function. The contraint from the auto-correlation function ue almot all WiggleZ information within the redhift range.43 < z <.7, excluding only region S3, which i mall in comparion. The entire CMASS ample, however, cover a ky area much larger than the overlap region. In thi ection we will determine the correlation of and cro-correlation contraint found in the lat ection with the CMASS-DR contraint of Anderon et al. (3). We will then contruct a covariance matrix which allow u to ue our reult together with the reult of CMASS-DR for comological parameter contraint. We will alo provide an etimate of the correlation for the future CMASS-DR contraint. Firt we divide the two urvey into the following ubregion: BOSS-CMASS, excluding overlap region. BOSS-CMASS, in overlap region (). 3 WiggleZ, excluding overlap region. 4 WiggleZ, in overlap region] (). For each region, the parameter of interet i the contraint on the caling parameter α. Auming no correlation between the different region, the final contraint for each urvey are given by α B = + α W = + V(α )+V(α ) V +V, (37) V3(α3 )+V4(α4 ) V 3 +V 4, (38) where the ubcripted number refer to the four urvey ubregion decribed above, and V i the volume given in Table. The ubcripted B tand for BOSS-CMASS and W tand for WiggleZ. The correlation between α B and α W i given by r (α B,α W) r (α,α 4)V V 4 V BV W, (39) where the correlation coefficient between the contraint in the overlap region, r (α,α 4), can be calculated from the 48 mock realization a 48 r (α α )(α 4 α 4) (α,α 4) = 48 (α α ). (4) 48 (α 4 α 4) For practical reaon we ue a jack-knife approach, in which we determine α for the mean of N realization, excluding each of the 48 mock realization in turn. The correlation coefficient between and in the overlap region i r (α,α 4) =.3. Similarly, we can define the correlation coefficient between the auto-correlation function and the cro-correlation function giving r (α C,α 4) =.57 and r (α,α C) =.584, where the ubcripted C tand for the cro-correlation function. To obtain the correlation coefficient between our contraint and the CMASS DR contraint of Anderon et al. (3), we ue the volume of CMASS-DR (a given in c RAS, MNRAS,

15 The BOSS-WiggleZ overlap region I 5 Table ) in Eq. 39 and et V 4 = V W. Therefore the data vector D = (CMASS-DR, cc-bw, ) = (56, 3, ) Mpc ha the following correlation matrix: R DR = = r (α B,α C) r (α B,α 4) r (α C,α 4) ,. (4) The covariance matrix i given by C = V T RV, where the vector V contain the variance of the individual contraint. In our cae we have V DR = (,65,)Mpc, where we adopted the CMASS-DR uncertainty (left) from Anderon et al. (3) together with the (right) and cro-correlation function (middle) uncertaintie from Table. Thi approach lead to the following covariance matrix C DR = and the invere i given by C DR = (4) 5. (43) Since the overlap volume between CMASS and WiggleZ will not change with DR, thi formalim can be recaled to obtain the correlation between our reult and future CMASS data releae. For example, uing a comic volume of.3h 3 Gpc 3 for DR we find the following correlation matrix R DR = (44) Thi covariance matrix i only correct auming that any correlation between thee urvey can be caled with volume. SofarwehaveonlyuedWiggleZgalaxie intheredhift range.43 < z <.7, ignoring a ignificant fraction of WiggleZ galaxie at higher and lower redhift. We can combine our reult with the high redhift (.6 < z <.) WiggleZ meaurement reported in Kazin et al. (4) and given by D Vr fid /r = 56±86Mpc. Thi meaurement ha an effective redhift of z eff =.73. The effective volume of WiggleZ in the redhift range.6 < z <.7 (overlap between the high redhift WiggleZ meaurement and the CMASS redhift range) i 6. 7 h 3 Mpc 3. The correlation matrix including the high redhift WiggleZ data point (labeled by ext.) would be R ext DR = with the data vector CMASS-DR D ext = cc-bw WiggleZ-highz = (45) 56 3 Mpc (46) 56 and the variance vector i VDR ext = (,65,,86)Mpc. Thi reult make the additional aumption that the correlation coefficient we found for the CMASS redhift range can be caled to the overlap redhift range.6 < z <.7. We do not combine our meaurement with the low and medium redhift bin reported in Kazin et al. (4) ince both overlap with the BOSS-LOWZ redhift range. Therefore the reult reported in thi ection can be combined with the BOSS-LOWZ (Anderon et al. 3; Tojeiro 4) meaurement traightforwardly. The aumed fiducial comologie ued in the different meaurement above are not the ame, reulting in different fiducial ound horizon. The ound horizon ued in the CMASS-DR analyi i r fid = 49.8 Mpc, Kazin et al. (4) have r fid = 48.6Mpc and our analyi ue r fid = 5.8Mpc. When comparing the meaurement of D V above with acomological model one ha to include the ratio of the fiducial ound horizon and the ound horizon of that model. 9 THE RELATIVE VELOCITY EFFECT In thi ection we dicu one poible ource of ytematic uncertainty for BAO contraint, the relative velocity effect (Teliakhovich & Hirata ). We firt introduce the idea of the relative velocity effect and dicu our model, before fitting the model to the data. While dark matter perturbation tart to grow directly after the end of inflation, baryon perturbation cannot grow until they decouple from the photon, about 38 year later. The different velocitie of dark matter and baryon after decoupling mean that there i a relative velocity between the two component (Teliakhovich & Hirata ; Fialkov et al. 4). The relative velocity can allow baryon to ecape the dark matter potential and prevent the formation of the firt tar in region with high relative velocity(fialkov et al. ; McQuinn & O Leary ; Naoz, Yohida & Gnedin ). Thi modulation would elect region with mall relative velocity to firt undergo reioniation. Since the relative velocity effect decay with + z, it mainly affect the high-redhift Univere. However, it ha been peculated that galaxie which form at high redhift carry thi election proce down to low redhift, perhap through procee uch a altering the metal abundance or upernovae feedback (Yoo, Dalal & Seljak ). In Fourier pace the relative velocity effect ha an ocillatory patternon large cale which i out of phae with the Baryon Acoutic Ocillation (Yoo & Seljak 3). In configuration pace the relative velocity effect modifie the clutering amplitude primarily below the ound horizon, leading to a hift of the BAO peak (Slepian & Eientein 4). The hypothei i that old galaxie till carry the election of the relative velocity effect, while young galaxie do not. Under thi hypothei we can meaure the relative velocity bia by comparing clutering tatitic of BOSS and WiggleZ, ince BOSS mainly targeted (old) luminou red galaxie, while WiggleZ elected young tar forming galaxie (ELG). Our analyi method therefore aume that BOSS galaxie are affected by the relative velocity effect, while WiggleZ galaxie are not. c RAS, MNRAS,