<i>Planck</i>intermediate results. XIX. An overview of the polarized thermal emission from Galactic dust
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents an overview of the polarized sky as seen by Planck HFI at 353 GHz, which is the most sensitive Planck channel for dust polarization. We construct and analyse maps of dust polarization fraction and polarization angle at 1° resolution, taking into account noise bias and possible systematic effects. The sensitivity of the Planck HFI polarization measurements allows for the first time a mapping of Galactic dust polarized emission on large scales, including low column density regions. We find that the maximum observed dust polarization fraction is high (pmax = 19.8%), in particular in some regions of moderate hydrogen column density (NH < 2 × 1021 cm-2). The polarization fraction displays a large scatter at NH below a few 1021 cm-2. There is a general decrease in the dust polarization fraction with increasing column density above NH ≃ 1 × 1021 cm-2 and in particular a sharp drop above NH ≃ 1.5 × 1022 cm-2. We characterize the spatial structure of the polarization angle using the angle dispersion function. We find that the polarization angle is ordered over extended areas of several square degrees, separated by filamentary structures of high angle dispersion function. These appear as interfaces where the sky projection of the magnetic field changes abruptly without variations in the column density. The polarization fraction is found to be anti-correlated with the dispersion of polarization angles. These results suggest that, at the resolution of 1°, depolarization is due mainly to fluctuations in the magnetic field orientation along the line of sight, rather than to the loss of grain alignment in shielded regions. We also compare the polarization of thermal dust emission with that of synchrotron measured with Planck, low-frequency radio data, and Faraday rotation measurements toward extragalactic sources. These components bear resemblance along the Galactic plane and in some regions such as the Fan and North Polar Spur regions. The poor match observed in other regions shows, however, that dust, cosmic-ray electrons, and thermal electrons generally sample different parts of the line of sight.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.120 | 0.077 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".