MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2626732881 · doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2017/08/028

A Bayesian framework for cosmic string searches in CMB maps

2017· article· en· W2626732881 on OpenAlexaff
Razvan Ciuca, Oscar F. Hernández

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMarianopolis College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCosmic microwave backgroundCosmic stringPhysicsString (physics)COSMIC cancer databaseSkyCosmic background radiationBayesian probabilityAstrophysicsStatisticTheoretical physicsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceQuantum mechanicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There exists various proposals to detect cosmic strings from Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) or 21 cm temperature maps. Current proposals do not aim to find the location of strings on sky maps, all of these approaches can be thought of as a statistic on a sky map. We propose a Bayesian interpretation of cosmic string detection and within that framework, we derive a connection between estimates of cosmic string locations and cosmic string tension $G\mu$. We use this Bayesian framework to develop a machine learning framework for detecting strings from sky maps and outline how to implement this framework with neural networks. The neural network we trained was able to detect and locate cosmic strings on noiseless CMB temperature map down to a string tension of $G\mu=5 \times10^{-9}$ and when analyzing a CMB temperature map that does not contain strings, the neural network gives a 0.95 probability that $G\mu\leq2.3\times10^{-9}$.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.357
Threshold uncertainty score0.351

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations24
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cosmology and Astroparticle PhysicsSame topicCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesFrench-language works237,207