Table A.1.

Same as Table. 5, but for (Ω_m, Σ₈) instead of (Ω_m, σ₈), with Σ₈ = σ₈(Ω_m/0.3)^α and α = 0.63. Fisher forecasts for a Euclid-like nontomographic analysis. The precision on Σ₈ and Ω_m is given as a percentage of the fiducial values for the probes taken individually and when combined with the γ-2PCF. We also report the figure of merit (FoM) as defined in the Dark Energy Task Force (Albrecht et al. 2006). The last columns display the expected gain over the γ-2PCF analysis for the scales available in the DUSTGRAIN-pathfinder simulations. Results for non-Gaussian statistics are also presented as part of the HOWLS project; we stress, however, that a non-Gaussian likelihood would be necessary to assess the robustness of these three probes.

Statistics	Individual			Added γ-2PCF			Gain over γ-2PCF
	δΣ8/Σ8	δΩm/Ωm	FoM	δΣ8/Σ8	δΩm/Ωm	FoM	δΣ8	δΩm	FoM
2nd order statistics
γ-2PCF	0.13%	1.17%	2.49 × 105	−	−	−	−	−	−
κ-2PCF	0.16%	1.88%	1.37 × 105	0.13%	1.10%	2.67 × 105	×1.00	×1.07	×1.07
HOS (Gaussian)
κ-PDF	0.12%	0.70%	4.82 × 105	0.09%	0.60%	7.16 × 105	×1.45	×1.95	×2.87
Peaks	0.13%	0.70%	4.16 × 105	0.11%	0.64%	5.14 × 105	×1.11	×1.84	×2.06
MFs	0.27%	0.74%	2.53 × 105	0.11%	0.49%	7.09 × 105	×1.18	×2.40	×2.84
BNs	0.34%	1.27%	9.55 × 104	0.12%	0.85%	3.77 × 105	×1.10	×1.38	×1.51
Pers. BNs	0.12%	0.60%	6.76 × 105	0.10%	0.53%	8.07 × 105	×1.25	×2.23	×3.23
Pers. heat.	0.13%	0.86%	3.35 × 105	0.11%	0.72%	4.84 × 105	×1.18	×1.63	×1.94
ST	0.12%	0.63%	4.82 × 105	0.10%	0.55%	6.99 × 105	×1.24	×2.13	×2.80
All HOS	0.03%	0.27%	4.84 × 106	0.03%	0.27%	4.89 × 106	×3.99	×4.41	×19.62
HOS (non-Gaussian)
HOM	0.21%	0.65%	5.95 × 105	0.12%	0.42%	1.09 × 106	×1.10	×2.76	×4.36
	0.28%	1.56%	2.43 × 105	0.12%	0.45%	8.73 × 105	×1.10	×2.59	×3.50
	0.08%	0.27%	2.08 × 106	0.08%	0.27%	2.13 × 106	×1.57	×4.40	×8.54