# Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Journal Article

#### Dark Energy Survey Year 3 Results: clustering redshifts – calibration of the weak lensing source redshift distributions with redMaGiC and BOSS/eBOSS

##### MPS-Authors

##### External Resource

No external resources are shared

##### Fulltext (public)

There are no public fulltexts stored in PuRe

##### Supplementary Material (public)

There is no public supplementary material available

##### Citation

Gatti, M., Giannini, G., Bernstein, G. M., Alarcon, A., Myles, J., Amon, A., et al. (2021).
Dark Energy Survey Year 3 Results: clustering redshifts – calibration of the weak lensing source redshift distributions with
redMaGiC and BOSS/eBOSS.* Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society,* *511*(1),
1223-1247. doi:10.1093/mnras/stab3311.

Cite as: http://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-000A-AEA7-6

##### Abstract

We present the calibration of the Dark Energy Survey Year 3 (DES Y3) weak lensing (WL) source galaxy redshift distributions n(z) from clustering measurements. In particular, we cross-correlate the WL source galaxies sample with redMaGiC galaxies (luminous red galaxies with secure photometric redshifts) and a spectroscopic sample from BOSS/eBOSS to estimate the redshift distribution of the DES sources sample. Two distinct methods for using the clustering statistics are described. The first uses the clustering information independently to estimate the mean redshift of the source galaxies within a redshift window, as done in the DES Y1 analysis. The second method establishes a likelihood of the clustering data as a function of n(z), which can be incorporated into schemes for generating samples of n(z) subject to combined clustering and photometric constraints. Both methods incorporate marginalization over various astrophysical systematics, including magnification and redshift-dependent galaxy-matter bias. We characterize the uncertainties of the methods in simulations; the first method recovers the mean z of tomographic bins to RMS (precision) of ∼0.014. Use of the second method is shown to vastly improve the accuracy of the shape of n(z) derived from photometric data. The two methods are then applied to the DES Y3 data.