MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023573336 · doi:10.1086/377252

First‐Year<i>Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe</i>(<i>WMAP</i>) Observations: Foreground Emission

2003· article· en· W2023573336 on OpenAlexaff
C. L. Bennett, Robert Hill, G. Hinshaw, M. R. Nolta, N. Odegard, Lyman A. Page, David N. Spergel, J. L. Weiland, E. L. Wright, M. Halpern, N. Jarosik, A. Kogut, M. Limon, S. S. Meyer, Gregory S. Tucker, Edward J. Wollack

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCMB cold spotPhysicsAstrophysicsSpectral indexCosmic microwave backgroundSynchrotronGalactic planeGalaxyAnisotropyAstronomySpectral lineOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The WMAP mission has mapped the full sky to determine the geometry, content, and evolution of the universe. Full-sky maps are made in five microwave frequency bands to separate the temperature anisotropy of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) from foreground emission, including diffuse Galactic emission and Galactic and extragalactic point sources. We define masks that excise regions of high foreground emission, so CMB analyses can be carried out with minimal foreground contamination. We also present maps and spectra of the individual emission components, leading to an improved understanding of Galactic astrophysical processes. The effectiveness of template fits to remove foreground emission from the WMAP data is also examined. These efforts result in a CMB map with minimal contamination and a demonstration that the WMAP CMB power spectrum is insensitive to residual foreground emission. We use a maximum entropy method to construct a model of the Galactic emission components. The observed total Galactic emission matches the model to less than 1%, and the individual model components are accurate to a few percent. We find that the Milky Way resembles other normal spiral galaxies between 408 MHz and 23 GHz, with a synchrotron spectral index that is flattest (β s ∼ -2.5) near star-forming regions, especially in the plane, and steepest (β s ∼ -3) in the halo. This is consistent with a picture of relativistic cosmic-ray electron generation in star-forming regions and diffusion and convection within the plane. The significant synchrotron index steepening out of the plane suggests a diffusion process in which the halo electrons are trapped in the Galactic potential long enough to suffer synchrotron and inverse Compton energy losses and hence a spectral steepening. The synchrotron index is steeper in the WMAP bands than in lower frequency radio surveys, with a spectral break near 20 GHz to β s < -3. The modeled thermal dust spectral index is also steep in the WMAP bands, with β d ≈ 2.2. Our model is driven to these conclusions by the low level of total foreground contamination at ∼60 GHz. Microwave and Hα measurements of the ionized gas agree well with one another at about the expected levels. Spinning dust emission is limited to ≲5% of the Ka-band foreground emission, assuming a thermal dust distribution with a cold neutral medium spectrum and a monotonically decreasing synchrotron spectrum. A catalog of 208 point sources is presented. The reliability of the catalog is 98%; i.e., we expect five of the 208 sources to be statistically spurious. The mean spectral index of the point sources is α ∼ 0 (β ∼ -2). Derived source counts suggest a contribution to the anisotropy power from unresolved sources of (15.0 ± 1.4) × 10 -3 μK 2 sr at Q band and negligible levels at V band and W band. The Sunyaev-Zeldovich effect is shown to be a negligible "contamination" to the maps.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.004

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 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

Citations993
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal Supplement SeriesSame topicCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesFrench-language works237,207