All Figures

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.1cm,clip]{8522f1a.ps}\vspace*{3mm} ... ...1b.ps}\vspace*{3mm} \includegraphics[width=8.1cm,clip]{8522f1c.ps} \end{figure}$ Figure 1: Sky coverage of the W1, W2 and W3 fields used in this work. Each CCD is drawn as a small rectangle and each M EGAC AM field is a squared mosaic of 36 rectangles. The small white holes are regions with missing data.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=6.4cm,clip]{8522f2.ps}\end{figure}$ Figure 2: The pattern of the PSF anisotropy in an example pointing ${\rm W}3+2+0-{\rm CFHTLS\_W}\_i\_143023+543031$ . Ticks represent the observed ellipticities at stellar locations. On top of the figure a 10% ellipticity modulus is shown for comparison.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[height=6cm,width=6.5cm,clip]{8522f3.ps}\end{figure}$ Figure 3: The average galaxy weight (with arbitrary normalisation) as a function of i'_AB in the range of [21.5; 24.5].
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\hspace*{0.5mm}\includegraphics[height=7.3cm,width=6.4cm,angl... ...cludegraphics[height=7.35cm,width=6.4cm,angle=-90,clip]{8522f4c.ps} \end{figure}$ Figure 4: Two-point statistics from the combined 57 pointings. The error bars of the E-mode include statistical noise added in quadrature to the non-Gaussian cosmic variance. Only statistical uncertainty contributes to the error budget for the B-mode. Red filled points show the E-mode, black open points the B-mode. The enlargements in each panel show the signal in the angular range $35\hbox {$^\prime $ }$ - $230\hbox {$^\prime $ }$ .
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.6cm,clip]{8522f5.ps}\end{figure}$ Figure 5: The top-hat E-mode shear signals of W1 up to $200\hbox {$^\prime $ }$ , of W2 up to $120\hbox {$^\prime $ }$ and of W3 up to $230\hbox {$^\prime $ }$ are shown. The error bars includes statistical noise and cosmic variance for each individual field.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.5cm,height=7.5cm]{8522f6a.ps}\includegraphics[width=8.cm,height=7.5cm, bb = 80 50 370 300]{8522f6b.ps}\end{figure}$ Figure 6: Left panel: binned scatter plot of the shear estimates (one component) using the two pipelines. Dark colours show highest density of points. The bin size is 0.05 in e₁. Right panel: the aperture-mass variance from W1, W2 and W3 measured with the two pipelines up to scale 210 arcmin, using only objects which are detected in both pipelines. For clarity of the comparison, the error bars only show the statistical errors, but the cosmological analysis of this work includes the whole error budget (see text). These error bars are larger than the one of Fig. 4 because number of common objects are smaller the full catalogue. Note that the large negative B-mode on small scales is not present in the full catalogue, see Fig. 4.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[height=6.35cm,width=7.15cm,clip]{8522f7.ps}\end{figure}$ Figure 7: The cross-correlation function $\xi _{\rm sys}$ (Eq. 13) between galaxies and stars is shown as a function of angular scale up to $230\hbox {$^\prime $ }$ (black filled). The amplitude of the cross-correlation is always at least one order of magnitude smaller than the shear signal $\xi _{\rm E}$ (red open).
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.4cm,clip]{8522f8.ps} \end{figure}$ Figure 8: Magnitude distributions for the Deep (solid line) and Wide (dotted). We use the ratio Wide/Deep for the rescaling of our redshift distribution. The Wide effective number density takes into account all weak lensing selection criteria and has been multiplied by their corresponding weights (Fig. 3).
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.7cm,clip]{8522f9.ps} \end{figure}$ Figure 9: Final normalised redshift distribution. Galaxies are selected in the range [0; 4], and the best-fit is given for function given in Eq. (14). Note that the fit is only performed in the interval [0; 2.5].
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\mbox{\includegraphics[width=8.3cm,clip]{8522f10a.ps} \includegraphics[width=8.3cm,clip]{8522f10b.ps} } \end{figure}$ Figure 10: Left panel: likelihood contours ( $1,2\sigma$ ) for $\Omega _{\rm m}$ and $\sigma _8$ , from the shear correlation function between 1 and 230 arcmin (red solid lines), shear top-hat variance between 1 and 230 arcmin (blue dashed), and aperture-mass dispersion between 2 and 230 arcmin (green dotted-dashed). A flat, scale-free $\Lambda$ CDM model with $\Omega _{\rm b}=0.044$ is assumed. We marginalise over h and the redshift parameters. Right panel: 1 $\sigma$ likelihood contours for $\Omega _{\rm m}$ and $\sigma _8$ , from the aperture-mass variance between 2 and 35 arcmin (red solid lines), for scales larger than 35 arcmin (blue dashed) and for scales larger than 85 arcmin (green dotted-dashed).
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.8cm,clip]{8522f11.ps} \end{figure}$ Figure 11: The best-fit $\sigma _8$ as function of the minimum angular scale $\theta _{\rm min}$ that is used for the $\chi ^2$ -analysis. Results are shown for S03 (open symbols and $1\sigma$ error bars) and PD96 (filled symbols). The difference between the two non-linear models decreases at large scales.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\resizebox{18cm}{!}{ \includegraphics{8522f12a.ps} \includegraphics[scale=1.325]{8522f12b.ps} } \end{figure}$ Figure 12: Left panel: comparison ( $1, 2, 3\sigma$ ) between our results (bold lines) and the 100 square degree survey (B07, filled contours), using $\xi _{\rm E}$ in both cases. The redshift distribution is fitted in the range of [0.2;1.5] to be consistent with B07. Right panel: comparison ( $1,2\sigma$ ) between WMAP3 (green contours, Spergel et al. 2007) and our $\langle M_{\rm ap}^2 \rangle$ -results between 2 and 230 arcmin (purple). The combined contours of WMAP3 and CFHTLS Wide are shown in orange.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.9cm,clip]{8522f13.ps} \end{figure}$ Figure 13: Comparison ( $1,2\sigma$ ) between WMAP3 (green contours, Spergel et al. 2007) and our $\langle M_{\rm ap}^2 \rangle$ -results in linear scale only ( $85\hbox {$^\prime $ }$ - $230\hbox {$^\prime $ }$ , purple). The combined contours of WMAP3 and CFHTLS Wide are shown in orange.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[height=7.3cm,width=7.5cm,clip]{8522f14.ps} \end{figure}$ Figure 14: The measured $\xi _{\rm E}$ and $\xi _{\rm B}$ (open symbols and error bars) with the lensing-only best-fit curve (solid blue line) and the allowed fractional $\pm 1\sigma$ -contribution of $\xi _{\rm GI}$ to the total signal (shaded cyan region).
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\mbox{\includegraphics[width=6.5cm,height=6cm,clip]{8522f15a.ps} \includegraphics[width=6.5cm,height=6cm,clip]{8522f15b.ps} } \end{figure}$ Figure A.1: Left panel: the observed ellipticities of all stars in the 57 pointings. The red cross marks the (0, 0) position. Right panel: the residual star ellipticity after PSF anisotropy correction. In both plots, the mean values of the two ellipticity components are given.

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\mbox{\includegraphics[width=5cm, height=6.cm]{8522f16a.ps} \... ...22f16b.ps} \includegraphics[width=5cm, height=6.cm]{8522f16c.ps} } \end{figure}$ Figure A.2: The calibration bias m and the residual offset c of our pipeline estimated using STEP simulations. Left panel: the results of STEP1 for the first component of shear. PSF models are labeled from 0 to 5. Middle and right panels: the results of STEP2 for the two shear components. PSF models are labeled from A to F.

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.1cm,clip]{8522f1a.ps}\vspace{3mm} ... ...1b.ps}\vspace{3mm} \includegraphics[width=8.1cm,clip]{8522f1c.ps} \end{figure}$	Figure 1: Sky coverage of the W1, W2 and W3 fields used in this work. Each CCD is drawn as a small rectangle and each M EGAC AM field is a squared mosaic of 36 rectangles. The small white holes are regions with missing data.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=6.4cm,clip]{8522f2.ps}\end{figure}$	Figure 2: The pattern of the PSF anisotropy in an example pointing ${\rm W}3+2+0-{\rm CFHTLS\_W}\_i\_143023+543031$ . Ticks represent the observed ellipticities at stellar locations. On top of the figure a 10% ellipticity modulus is shown for comparison.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[height=6cm,width=6.5cm,clip]{8522f3.ps}\end{figure}$	Figure 3: The average galaxy weight (with arbitrary normalisation) as a function of i'_AB in the range of [21.5; 24.5].
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.6cm,clip]{8522f5.ps}\end{figure}$	Figure 5: The top-hat E-mode shear signals of W1 up to $200\hbox {$^\prime $ }$ , of W2 up to $120\hbox {$^\prime $ }$ and of W3 up to $230\hbox {$^\prime $ }$ are shown. The error bars includes statistical noise and cosmic variance for each individual field.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[height=6.35cm,width=7.15cm,clip]{8522f7.ps}\end{figure}$	Figure 7: The cross-correlation function $\xi _{\rm sys}$ (Eq. 13) between galaxies and stars is shown as a function of angular scale up to $230\hbox {$^\prime $ }$ (black filled). The amplitude of the cross-correlation is always at least one order of magnitude smaller than the shear signal $\xi _{\rm E}$ (red open).
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.4cm,clip]{8522f8.ps} \end{figure}$	Figure 8: Magnitude distributions for the Deep (solid line) and Wide (dotted). We use the ratio Wide/Deep for the rescaling of our redshift distribution. The Wide effective number density takes into account all weak lensing selection criteria and has been multiplied by their corresponding weights (Fig. 3).
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.7cm,clip]{8522f9.ps} \end{figure}$	Figure 9: Final normalised redshift distribution. Galaxies are selected in the range [0; 4], and the best-fit is given for function given in Eq. (14). Note that the fit is only performed in the interval [0; 2.5].
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.8cm,clip]{8522f11.ps} \end{figure}$	Figure 11: The best-fit $\sigma _8$ as function of the minimum angular scale $\theta _{\rm min}$ that is used for the $\chi ^2$ -analysis. Results are shown for S03 (open symbols and $1\sigma$ error bars) and PD96 (filled symbols). The difference between the two non-linear models decreases at large scales.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.9cm,clip]{8522f13.ps} \end{figure}$	Figure 13: Comparison ( $1,2\sigma$ ) between WMAP3 (green contours, Spergel et al. 2007) and our $\langle M_{\rm ap}^2 \rangle$ -results in linear scale only ( $85\hbox {$^\prime $ }$ - $230\hbox {$^\prime $ }$ , purple). The combined contours of WMAP3 and CFHTLS Wide are shown in orange.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[height=7.3cm,width=7.5cm,clip]{8522f14.ps} \end{figure}$	Figure 14: The measured $\xi _{\rm E}$ and $\xi _{\rm B}$ (open symbols and error bars) with the lensing-only best-fit curve (solid blue line) and the allowed fractional $\pm 1\sigma$ -contribution of $\xi _{\rm GI}$ to the total signal (shaded cyan region).
Open with DEXTER