MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Measurement of a Cosmographic Distance Ratio with Galaxy and Cosmic Microwave Background Lensing

2017· article· en· W2398308633 on OpenAlexafffund
Hironao Miyatake, Mathew S. Madhavacheril, Neelima Sehgal, Anže Slosar, David N. Spergel, Blake D. Sherwin, Alexander van Engelen

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of Toronto
FundersHigh Energy PhysicsInstitut national des sciences de l'UniversJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceNational Research Council CanadaCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueOffice of ScienceJet Propulsion LaboratoryMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and TechnologyNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationU.S. Department of EnergyCalifornia Institute of TechnologyCanadian Space AgencyNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlfred P. Sloan FoundationUniversity of Hawai'iNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsCosmic microwave backgroundGalaxyRedshiftPlanckCosmologyDark matterWeak gravitational lensingHaloGravitational lensRedshift surveyAstronomyOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We measure the gravitational lensing shear signal around dark matter halos hosting constant mass galaxies using light sources at z∼1 (background galaxies) and at the surface of last scattering at z∼1100 (the cosmic microwave background). The galaxy shear measurement uses data from the CFHTLenS survey, and the microwave background shear measurement uses data from the Planck satellite. The ratio of shears from these cross-correlations provides a purely geometric distance measurement across the longest possible cosmological lever arm. This is because the matter distribution around the halos, including uncertainties in galaxy bias and systematic errors such as miscentering, cancels in the ratio for halos in thin redshift slices. We measure this distance ratio in three different redshift slices of the constant mass (CMASS) sample and combine them to obtain a 17% measurement of the distance ratio, r=0.390_{-0.062}^{+0.070}, at an effective redshift of z=0.53. This is consistent with the predicted ratio from the Planck best-fit cold dark matter model with a cosmological constant cosmology of r=0.419.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations27
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review Letters→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→