MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1481951957 · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/812/2/154

DECONSTRUCTING THERMAL SUNYAEV–ZEL’DOVICH—GRAVITATIONAL LENSING CROSS-CORRELATIONS: IMPLICATIONS FOR THE INTRACLUSTER MEDIUM

2015· article· en· W1481951957 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntracluster mediumCosmic microwave backgroundPlanckWeak gravitational lensingGalaxyBaryonGalaxy clusterHaloGravitational lensDark matter

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent first detections of the cross-correlation of the thermal Sunyaev–Zel'dovich (tSZ) signal in Planck cosmic microwave background (CMB) temperature maps with gravitational lensing maps inferred from the Planck CMB data and the CFHTLenS galaxy survey provide new probes of the relationship between baryons and dark matter. Using cosmological hydrodynamics simulations, we show that these cross-correlation signals are dominated by contributions from hot gas in the intracluster medium (ICM), rather than diffuse, unbound gas located beyond the virial radius (the "missing baryons"). Thus, these cross-correlations offer a tool with which to study the ICM over a wide range of halo masses and redshifts. In particular, we show that the tSZ—CMB lensing cross-correlation is more sensitive to gas in lower-mass, higher-redshift halos and gas at larger cluster-centric radii than the tSZ—galaxy lensing cross-correlation. Combining these measurements with primary CMB data will constrain feedback models through their signatures in the ICM pressure profile. We forecast the ability of ongoing and future experiments to constrain the parameters of a phenomenological ICM model, including the mean amplitude of the pressure–mass relation, the redshift evolution of this amplitude, and the mean outer logarithmic slope of the pressure profile. The results are promising, with ≈5%–20% precision constraints achievable with upcoming experiments, even after marginalizing over cosmological parameters.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.287 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations36
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesFrench-language works237,207