# BOSS DR9 Publications and Results

## Data Associated with BOSS DR9 Publications

### DR9 Galaxy Clustering Science results presented in BOSS publications

Below we list measurements, covariance matrices and analysis tools that have been presented and utilized in BOSS DR9 galaxy clustering papers. The covariance matrices for all measurements are calculated from the 600 mock DR9 CMASS realizations, created using PTHalos, described in Manera et al. (2013). Please cite this paper if the errors are used in any analysis.

CMASS DR9 results of clustering wedges from: Kazin, Sánchez et al. (2013). Also featured in Anderson et al. (2013) (anisotropic clustering results) and Sánchez, Kazin et al. (2013).

- A
tarball of the posteriors of
`H`(`z`) and`D`_{A}(`z`), clustering wedges measurements and covariance matrices (and their inverses). All results are both for pre- and post-reconstruction.

- A
tarball of the posteriors of
The CMASS galaxy monopole and quadrupole correlation functions, pre-reconstruction, measured in: Anderson et al. (2013) (Figure 9, top row)

The CMASS galaxy monopole and quadrupole correlation functions, post-reconstruction, measured in: Anderson et al. (2013) (Figure 9, bottom row)

The CMASS galaxy correlation function, unreconstructed, measured in: Anderson et al. (2012) (Figure 3)

The CMASS galaxy correlation function, reconstructed, from: Anderson et al. (2012)(Figure 3)

The CMASS galaxy power spectrum, unreconstructed, from: Anderson et al. (2012) (Figure 8)

The CMASS galaxy power spectrum, reconstructed, from: Anderson et al. (2012) (Figure 8)

The CMASS galaxy correlation function as measured in: Sánchez et al. (2012) (Figure 2)

The CMASS galaxy correlation functions as measured in: Nuza et al. (2012) (Figures 6 and 7)

The multipoles of the CMASS correlation function from: Reid et al. (2012), Also featured in Samushia et al. (2013)

- A tarball of measurements and covariance matrices, as well as a README file for instructions on how to properly combine measurements from the NGC and SGC.
- C code that calculates the perturbation theory multipoles used in these papers can be found in a public SVN repository.

Covariance matrices for all measurements are derived from the DR9 mock catalogs, from: Manera et al. (2013)

Enhanced redshift space distortions, from: Tojeiro et al. (2012)

- Best-fit values of
`f`σ_{8}at`z`=0.3, 0.45 and 0.6 for the passive bias model and their covariance (Table 1). N.B. we reduced the number of redshifts samples from 4 to 3 to reduce covariances between adjacent redshift slices (see Section 5.1). [file]. - Best-fit values of
`f`at`z`=0.3, 0.45 and 0.6 for the passive bias model and their covariance (Table 1). N.B. we reduced the number of redshifts samples from 4 to 3 to reduce covariances between adjacent redshift slices (see Section 5.1). [file]. - Table 2 + best-fit parameters. Covariance matrix here is given with more significant digits than the version on the paper, and should be preferred for any calculations. [file].

- Best-fit values of

### CosmoMC Modules

- Patch to incorporate the Anderson et al. (2012) measurement of the reconstructed BAO feature [file], with README file.
- Patch to incorporate the Reid et al. (2012) and Samushia et al. (2013) measurements of the redshift-space multipoles of the correlation function [file], with README file.

## Figures from BOSS Science Results

Anderson et al. (2012): BAO Hubble diagram D_{V}(z), overlaid with WMAP flat ΛCDM prediction. |

Anderson et al. (2012): BAO Hubble diagram D_{V}(z) divided by the WMAP flat ΛCDM best-fit. This version only shows the ΛCDM prediction region. |

Anderson et al. (2012): BAO Hubble diagram D_{V}(z) divided by the WMAP flat ΛCDM best-fit. This version shows the ΛCDM, OCDM, wCDM prediction regions. |

Anderson et al. (2012): BAO Hubble diagram D_{V}(z) divided by the WMAP flat ΛCDM best-fit. This overlays the constraint region from the SNe, holding DV(0.57) fixed. |

Anderson et al. (2012): BAO Hubble diagram D_{V}(z) divided by the WMAP flat ΛCDM best-fit. This version only shows the ΛCDM prediction region. Includes Riess et al. H_{0} value. |

Anderson et al. (2012): BAO Hubble diagram D_{V}(z) divided by the WMAP flat ΛCDM best-fit. This version shows the ΛCDM, OCDM, wCDM prediction regions. Includes Riess et al. H_{0} value. |

| ||

Kazin, Sánchez et al. (2013): The significance of the detection of the anisotropic baryon acoustic feature in the CMASS DR9 volume (blue line) compared to simulations pre- and post-reconstruction |

| ||

Kazin, Sánchez et al. (2013): Clustering wedges and best-fit model pre- and post-reconstruction |

Kazin, Sánchez et al. (2013): Likelihood profiles obtained using clustering wedges pre- and post-reconstruction with two types of templates (RPT-based and dewiggled). |

Reid et al. (2012): Observed large scale two-dimensional clustering as a function of separation perpendicular to and along the line-of-sight (colors) versus best fit theoretical model (black). |

Reid et al. (2012): Observed small(er) scale two-dimensional clustering as a function of separation perpendicular to and along the line-of-sight (colors) versus best fit theoretical model (black). |

Reid et al. (2012): Constraints from anisotropic clustering on cosmological parameters, compared with WMAP7 flat ΛCDM. |

Sánchez et al. (2012): DR9 footprint in Galactic coordinates. |

Sánchez et al. (2012): CMASS ΞΎ(s) compared with best-fit ΛCDM model. |

Sánchez et al. (2012): Marginalized constraints in the
Ω_{m}-h plane for the ΛCDM parameter space. |

Sánchez et al. (2012): Marginalized constraints in the
Ω_{m}-Ω_{k} plane for the OCDM parameter space. |

Sánchez et al. (2012): Marginalized constraints in the
Ω_{m}-w_{DE} plane for the wCDM parameter space. |

Tojeiro et al. (2012): The relative improvement on σ_{8}
constraints (assuming ΛCDM and GR) obtained by using passive galaxies and
the galaxy bias model of Fry (1996). |