1: \begin{abstract}

2: We study how well the Gaussian approximation 

3: %\textcolor{red}{(here, the

4: % word ``Gaussian'' means the power spectrum of the convergence field

5: % follows gaussian distribution)}

6:  is valid for computing

7: the covariance matrices of the convergence power and bispectrum in weak gravitational lensing analyses.

8: We focus on its impact on the cosmological parameter estimations by comparing the results with and without

9: non-Gaussian error contribution in the covariance matrix.

10: We numerically derive the covariance matrix as well as the cosmology dependence of the spectra from a large set of 

11: $N$-body simulations performed for various cosmologies and carry out Fisher matrix forecasts 

12: for tomographic weak lensing surveys with three source redshifts.

13: After showing the consistency of the power and bispectra measured from our simulations with

14: the state-of-the-art fitting formulas,

15: we investigate the covariance matrix assuming a typical ongoing survey 

16: across 1500 deg$^2$ with the mean source number density of 30 arcmin$^{-2}$ 

17: at the mean redshift $z_s=1.0$.

18: Although the shape noise contributes a significant fraction to the total error budget and it mitigates the 

19: impact of the non-Gaussian error for this source number density, we find that the non-Gaussian error 

20: degrades the cumulative signal-to-noise ratio up 

21: to the maximum multipole of 2000 by a factor of about 2 (3) in the power (bi-) spectrum analysis.

22: Its impact on the final cosmological parameter forecast with $6$ parameters can be as large as $15\%$ 

23: in the size of the one-dimensional statistical error.

24: This can be a problem in future wide and deep weak lensing surveys for precision cosmology.

25: We also show how much the dark energy figure of merit is affected by the non-Gaussian error contribution and

26: demonstrate an optimal survey design with a fixed observational time.

27: \end{abstract}

28: