Arnaud de Mattia
on behalf of the DESI collaboration
Nice, March 25th
Thanks to our sponsors and
72 Participating Institutions!
Physics program
- Galaxy and quasar clustering
- Lyman-alpha forest
- Clusters and cross-correlations
- Galaxy and quasar physics
- Milky Way Survey
- Transients and low-z
Physics program
- Galaxy and quasar clustering
- Lyman-alpha forest
- Clusters and cross-correlations
- Galaxy and quasar physics
- Milky Way Survey
- Transients and low-z
10 years = \(10 \times \)
8 years
\(\sim 60\)M extra-galactic redshifts over 17k \(\mathrm{deg}^2\)
imaging surveys (2014 - 2019) + WISE (IR)
target selection
spectroscopic observations
spectra and redshift measurements
focal plane 5000 fibers
wide-field corrector
6 lenses, FoV \(\sim 8~\mathrm{deg}^{2}\)
Kitt Peak, AZ
4 m mirror
focal plane 5000 fibers
fiber view camera
ten 3-channel spectrographs
49 m, 10-cable fiber run
Kitt Peak, AZ
86 cm
Exposure time (dark): 1000 s
Configuration of the focal plane
CCD readout
Go to next pointing
140 s
0.1 mm
wavelength
fiber number
\(z = 2.1\) QSO
\(z = 0.9\) ELG
Ly\(\alpha\)
CIV
CIII
[OII] doublet at \(3727 \AA\) up to \(z = 1.6\)
[OII]
Ly\(\alpha\) at \(1216 \AA\) down to \(z = 2.0\)
Observations from May 14th 2021 to April 9th 2024
approved
construction started
first light
survey started
DR1 data sample
DR1 results
DR2 sample secured
DR3
DR2 results
2015
16
17
18
19
20
22
23
24
21
25
26
27
higher completeness (deeper)
extended mag cut
March 19th 2025
First batch of DESI DR2 cosmological analyses: https://data.desi.lbl.gov/doc/papers/dr2
• DESI Collaboration et al. (2025), DESI DR2 Results I: Baryon Acoustic Oscillations from the Lyman Alpha Forest
• DESI Collaboration et al. (2025), DESI DR2 Results II: Measurements of Baryon Acoustic Oscillations and Cosmological Constraints
Companion supporting papers:
Lodha et al. (2025), Extended Dark Energy analysis
Elbers et al. (2025), Constraints on Neutrino Physics
Andrade et al. (2025), Validation of the DESI DR2 BAO mesurements
Casas et al. (2025), Validation of the DESI DR2 Lyα BAO analysis using synthetic datasets
Brodzeller et al. (2025), Construction of the Damped Lyα Absorber Catalog for DESI DR2 Lyα BAO
DR1 public!
Sound waves in primordial plasma
At recombination (\(z \simeq 1100\))
Sound horizon scale at the drag epoch
\(r_\mathrm{d} \simeq 150\; \mathrm{Mpc}\)
standard ruler
CMB (\(z \simeq 1100\))
Sound waves in primordial plasma
At recombination (\(z \simeq 1100\))
Sound horizon scale at the drag epoch
\(r_\mathrm{d} \simeq 150\; \mathrm{Mpc}\)
standard ruler
CMB (\(z \simeq 1100\))
LSS
distribution of galaxies (cartoonish)
transverse comoving distance
sound horizon \(r_\mathrm{d}\)
distribution of galaxies (cartoonish)
Hubble distance \(c/H(z)\)
sound horizon \(r_\mathrm{d}\)
Probes the expansion history (\(\green{D_\mathrm{M}, D_H}\)), hence the energy content (e.g. dark energy)
Absolute size at \(z = 0\): \(H_0 \orange{r_\mathrm{d}}\)
correlation function
BAO peak
line of sight
monopole
correlation function
BAO peak
line of sight
monopole
isotropic
comoving transverse distance
Hubble distance \(c/H(z)\)
sound horizon (standard ruler)
isotropic
anisotropic
BAO peak
line of sight
line of sight
monopole
quadrupole
low S/N
BAO detection: \(14.7\sigma\)
0.1 < z < 0.4
0.4 < z < 0.6
0.6 < z < 0.8
0.8 < z < 1.1
1.1 < z < 1.6
Absorption in QSO spectra by neutral hydrogen in the intergalactic medium: \(\lambda_\mathrm{abs} = (1 + z_\mathrm{HI}) \times 1215.17 \; \AA \)
Transmitted flux fraction \(F = e^{-\tau}\) probes the fluctuation in neutral hydrogen density, \(\tau \propto n_\mathrm{HI} \)
credit: Andrew Pontzen
Ly\(\alpha\) forest auto-correlation
\(\langle \delta_F(\mathbf{x}) \delta_F(\mathbf{x + s}) \rangle\)
Ly\(\alpha\) forest - QSO cross-correlation
\(\langle \delta_F(\mathbf{x}) Q(\mathbf{x + s}) \rangle\)
DESI DR2 BAO measurements
DESI DR2 BAO measurements
DESI DR2 BAO measurements
DESI DR2 BAO measurements
DESI DR2 BAO measurements
DESI DR2 BAO measurements
DESI DR2 BAO measurements
Consistent with each other,
and complementary
DESI DR2 BAO measurements
1. Planck PR4 CamSpec
2. Planck PR4 + ACT DR6 lensing
SPA = SPT+Planck+ACT
\(\Lambda\)
pressure
density
CPL
\(+0.5\sigma\) compared to DR1
Combining all DESI + CMB + SN
\(+0.3\sigma\) compared to DR1
Combining all DESI + CMB + SN
Dovekie \(3.3\sigma\)
doesn't fit the SN!
doesn't fit the BAO!
\(w\mathrm{CDM}\) not flexible enough to fit all 3 datasets!
\(w_0w_a\mathrm{CDM}\) fits all 3 datasets!
Internal CMB degeneracies limiting precision on the sum of neutrino masses
Broken by BAO
Internal CMB degeneracies limiting precision on the sum of neutrino masses
Broken by BAO, which favors low \(\Omega_\mathrm{m}\)
Internal CMB degeneracies limiting precision on the sum of neutrino masses
Broken by BAO, which favors low \(\Omega_\mathrm{m}\)
Variations of the CMB likelihood
Internal CMB degeneracies limiting precision on the sum of neutrino masses
Broken by BAO, which favors low \(\Omega_\mathrm{m}\)
Limit relaxed for \(w_0w_a\mathrm{CDM}\)
DESI already has the most precise BAO measurements ever (40% more precise than DR1)
DESI in mild, growing, tension with Planck \((2.3\sigma)\) and SN \((\sim 2\sigma)\) when interpreted in the ΛCDM model
Tightest upper bound on \(\sum m_\nu\), increasing tension with neutrino oscillations
Evidence for time-varying Dark Energy equation of state has increased with the DR2 BAO data by \(0.3\sigma\): CMB: \(3.1\sigma\), SN: \(2.8 - 4.2\sigma\). \(w_0w_a\mathrm{CDM}\) fixes above tensions (not \(H_0\)!).
In November 2024: DR1 Full-Shape results (probing the growth of structure)
\(S_8 = \sigma_8(\Omega_\mathrm{m} / 0.3)^{0.5}\)
General Relativity
In November 2024: DR1 Full-Shape results (probing the growth of structure)
With DR2 - stay tuned (\(\sim\) September 2026)!
With CMB + BAO alone
tracers / redshift bins
data vector
tracers / redshift bins
BAO modelling
tracers / redshift bins
imaging systematics
tracers / redshift bins
data splits
data vector / covariance
modelling choices
continuum fitting
data splits
Removing low-\(z\) SN
"Replacing CMB": DESY3 \(3\times2\)pt
\(3.3\sigma\)
Analysis pipeline mostly the same as DR1
Again, blind analysis to mitigate observer / confirmation biases (catalog-level blinding)
Anisotropic BAO measurements for QSO (and low-\(z\) ELG)
Minor updates:
- revised min fitting range (\(60 < s / [\mathrm{Mpc}/h] < 150\))
- revised systematic budget (theory, fiducial cosmology, HOD): \(\sigma_\mathrm{stat+syst} < 1.09 \sigma_\mathrm{stat}\)
Many more robustness tests
Analysis pipeline mostly the same as DR1
Again, blind analysis to mitigate observer / confirmation biases (data vector-level blinding)
Improved modelling of metals and continuum-fitting distortions
Analysis pipeline mostly the same as DR1
Again, blind analysis to mitigate observer / confirmation biases (data vector-level blinding)
Improved modelling of metals and continuum-fitting distortions
New catalog of Damped Lyman-\(\alpha\) systems (masked)
Improved mocks and associated studies
Revised fitting range and priors on nuisance parameters
Include a small (0.3%) theory systematic uncertainty for non-linear BAO shift, \(\sigma_\mathrm{stat+syst} < 1.06 \sigma_\mathrm{stat}\)
Robust to various Planck likelihoods:
- CamSpec (baseline)
- Plik (PR3)
- LiLLiPoP-LolliPoP (PR4)
Observations from May 14th 2021 to June 12th 2022
| asgn. comp. DR1 | # good z DR1 |
asgn. comp. DR2 | z. comp DR2 |
# of good z DR2 | |
| BGS | 64% | 0.3M | 76% | 99% | 1.2M |
| LRG | 69% | 2.1M | 83% | 99% | 4.5M |
| ELG | 35% | 2.4M | 54% | 74% | 6.5M |
| QSO | 87% | 1.2M | 94% | 68% | 2M |
more observations
LRG2 (worst case)
\(2.8\sigma \, (\mathrm{DR1}) \Rightarrow 2.3\sigma \, (\mathrm{DR2})\)
clustering
We fit the "full shape" (FS) of the galaxy power spectrum multipoles
RSD
observed redshift = Hubble flow and peculiar velocities (RSD = "redshift space distortions")
shape
(\( \Omega_\mathrm{cdm} h^2, \Omega_\mathrm{b} h^2, n_\mathrm{s}, \sum m_\nu \))
growth of structure \(f\sigma_8\) sensitive to the theory of gravity and dark energy
We fit the "full shape" (FS) of the galaxy power spectrum multipoles
\(\omega_\mathrm{b}\): BBN, \(n_\mathrm{s} \sim \mathcal{G}(0.9649, 0.042^2)\)
\(\omega_\mathrm{b}\): BBN, \(n_\mathrm{s} \sim \mathcal{G}(0.9649, 0.042^2)\)
\(\omega_\mathrm{b}\): BBN, \(n_\mathrm{s} \sim \mathcal{G}(0.9649, 0.042^2)\)
\(\omega_\mathrm{b}\): BBN, \(n_\mathrm{s} \sim \mathcal{G}(0.9649, 0.042^2)\)
\(\omega_\mathrm{b}\): BBN, \(n_\mathrm{s} \sim \mathcal{G}(0.9649, 0.042^2)\)
\(\omega_\mathrm{b}\): BBN, \(n_\mathrm{s} \sim \mathcal{G}(0.9649, 0.042^2)\)
\(\omega_\mathrm{b}\): BBN, \(n_\mathrm{s} \sim \mathcal{G}(0.9649, 0.042^2)\)
\(S_8 = \sigma_8 (\Omega_\mathrm{m} / 0.3)^{0.5}\) best constrained by weak lensing surveys
Perturbed FLRW metric
\(ds^2=a(\tau)^2[-(1+2\orange{\Psi})d\tau^2+(1-2\orange{\Phi})\delta_{ij}dx^i dx^j]\)
At late times:
(mass) \(k^2\orange{\Psi} = -4\pi G a^2 \green{\mu(a,k)} \blue{\sum_i\rho_i\Delta_i}\)
(light) \(k^2(\orange{\Phi} + \orange{\Psi})=-8\pi G a^2 \green{\Sigma(a,k)} \blue{\sum_i\rho_i\Delta_i}\)
gravitational potentials
density perturbations
\(\Sigma_0\) constrained by
- CMB (ISW and lensing)
- galaxy lensing
compared to CMB-nl + DESY3 (3x2pt) only: \(\sigma(\mu_0) / 2.5\), \(\sigma(\Sigma_0) / 2\)
DESI constrains