text: 312,92,1285176923920965632,91420905,Alex Smith,"My new paper ""The Completed SDSS-IV Extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: N-body Mock Challenge for the Quasar Sample"" is on the arXiv today, which is part of the release of the final @eBOSSurvey cosmology results <LINK> <LINK> The aim of the mock challenge was to test the models used in the eBOSS quasar clustering analysis on a wide range of mock catalogues. We include observational effects, use different models to add quasars to the mocks, and cover a range of different cosmologies By looking at the scatter in the results between the different mocks, we can estimate a systematic uncertainty in our measurements These uncertainties are included in the errors for the measurements in configuration space (<LINK>) and in Fourier space (<LINK>) @BillWrightCosmo No, we didn't look at the effect of cosmologies with non-zero neutrino mass. But we made mocks with a wide range of cosmological parameters to get a conservative estimate of the systematic uncertainty @BillWrightCosmo I think it's the same for the other tracers. But even taking the conservative errors due to cosmology that we use, this is only a small part of the total error in the measurements, so shouldn't affect the neutrino mass constraints. This will be more important to test for DESI",https://arxiv.org/abs/2007.09003,"The growth rate and expansion history of the Universe can be measured from large galaxy redshift surveys using the Alcock-Paczynski effect. We validate the Redshift Space Distortion models used in the final analysis of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey (eBOSS) Data Release 16 quasar clustering sample, in configuration and Fourier space, using a series of HOD mock catalogues generated using the OuterRim N-body simulation. We test three models on a series of non-blind mocks, in the OuterRim cosmology, and blind mocks, which have been rescaled to new cosmologies, and investigate the effects of redshift smearing and catastrophic redshifts. We find that for the non-blind mocks, the models are able to recover $f\sigma_8$ to within 3% and $\alpha_\parallel$ and $\alpha_\bot$ to within 1%. The scatter in the measurements is larger for the blind mocks, due to the assumption of an incorrect fiducial cosmology. From this mock challenge, we find that all three models perform well, with similar systematic errors on $f\sigma_8$, $\alpha_\parallel$ and $\alpha_\bot$ at the level of $\sigma_{f\sigma_8}=0.013$, $\sigma_{\alpha_\parallel}=0.012$ and $\sigma_{\alpha_\bot}=0.008$. The systematic error on the combined consensus is $\sigma_{f\sigma_8}=0.011$, $\sigma_{\alpha_\parallel}=0.008$ and $\sigma_{\alpha_\bot}=0.005$, which is used in the final DR16 analysis. For BAO fits in configuration and Fourier space, we take conservative systematic errors of $\sigma_{\alpha_\parallel}=0.010$ and $\sigma_{\alpha_\bot}=0.007$. ","The Completed SDSS-IV Extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: