MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1512924735 · doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slu094

Intrinsic alignments in the cross-correlation of cosmic shear and cosmic microwave background weak lensing

2014· article· en· W1512924735 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
A Hall, Andy Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society Letters · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersScience and Technology Facilities Council
KeywordsPhysicsCosmic microwave backgroundAstrophysicsWeak gravitational lensingRedshiftAmplitudeCOSMIC cancer databaseGalaxyCosmic background radiationCross-correlationOpticsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We demonstrate that the intrinsic alignment of galaxies with large-scale tidal fields sources an extra contribution to the recently detected cross-correlation of galaxy shear and weak lensing of the microwave background. The extra term is the analogy of the ‘GI’ term in standard cosmic shear studies, and results in a reduction in the amplitude of the cross-correlation. We compute the intrinsic alignment contribution in linear and non-linear theory, and show that it can be at roughly the 15 per cent level for the Canada–France–Hawaii Telescope Stripe 82 redshift distribution, if the canonical amplitude of intrinsic alignments is assumed. The new term can therefore potentially reconcile the apparently low value of the measured cross-correlation with standard Λ cold dark matter. We discuss various small-scale effects in the signal and the dependence on the source redshift distribution. We discuss the exciting possibility of self-calibrating intrinsic alignments with a joint analysis of cosmic shear and weak lensing of the microwave background.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.551

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations51
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society LettersSame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207