MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2758050529 · doi:10.14288/1.0354241

Weak gravitational lensing cross-correlations

2017· article· en· W2758050529 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tilman Tröster

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Collections · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdaptive optics and wavefront sensing
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStrong gravitational lensingPhysicsWeak gravitational lensingGravitational lensing formalismAstrophysicsGalaxyRedshift

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The matter content of the Universe is dominated by dark matter. Beyond its abundance and its lack of non-gravitational interactions with standard model matter, little is known about the nature of dark matter. This thesis attempts to illuminate different aspects of dark matter by using gravitational lensing in conjunction with other cosmological probes. Gravitational lensing describes the deflection of light by gravitational potentials and is a direct and unbiased probe of the matter distribution in the Universe. We investigate the weakly interacting massive particle (WIMP) model of dark matter by performing a tomographic and spectral cross-correlation between weak gravitational lensing from the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope Lensing Survey (CFHTLenS), Red Cluster Sequence Lensing Survey (RCSLenS), and Kilo-Degree Survey (KiDS), and gamma rays from Fermi-LAT. The non-detection of a correlation allows us to constrain the allowed masses, annihilation cross-sections, and decay rates of WIMP dark matter. Even though most matter in the Universe is dark matter, about 16% is baryonic matter. To make precision measurements of the dark matter distribution with gravitational lensing, it is therefore necessary to understand the behaviour and distribution of baryonic matter. We measure and analyse the cross-correlation between weak gravitational lensing from RCSLenS and the thermal Sunyaev-Zeldovich (tSZ) effect from the Planck satellite to constrain the effect of baryon physics on the matter distribution. Models of gravitational lensing often make use of a range of approximations. We study the effect of dropping these approximations on the cross-correlation between gravitational lensing and tSZ by performing a detailed calculation up to fourth order in the gravitational potential. We find that the common approximations are sufficiently accurate even for future surveys. Finally, we explore the growth of structure and the effect of residual weak lensing systematics in a tomographic cross-correlation between weak gravitational lensing from KiDS and lensing of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) from Planck.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen CollectionsSame topicAdaptive optics and wavefront sensingFrench-language works237,207