Comparison with the Core Cosmology Library (CCL)¶

We compare theoretical prediction for LSST Y1 setup between MGL and CCL. We pick some fiducial \(\Lambda \mathrm{CDM}\) cosmology, linear bias constant within a bin, nonlinear intrinsic alignment and BACCO-emulator for nonlinear prescription. Despite different extrapolation routines between MGL and CCL for high wave-numbers and redshifts outside of BACCO’s range, we reach a very good agreement on all scales in our analysis:

../_images/cls_mgl_vs_cll_crosscorr_abs.png

../_images/cls_mgl_vs_cll_galclust_abs.png

Errorbars are computed from a Gaussian analytical covariance, shaded areas correspond to some arbitrary scale-cuts. The differences between extrapolation routines are demonstrated below. CCL assumes halofit for nonlinear power spectrum with \(z>1.5\), while MGL either uses HMcode2020 or linear power spectrum from BACCO.

../_images/pmm_of_k_mgl_vs_ccl_extrapolation.png

../_images/pmm_of_k_mgl_vs_ccl_highz_extrapolation.png

One can perform further comparison tests by modifying and running Jupyter notebooks mgl_vs_ccl_bacco.ipynb and mgl_vs_ccl_hmcode.ipynb.