MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2921558679 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab0f30

The Redshift Dependence of the Alcock–Paczynski Effect: Cosmological Constraints from the Current and Next Generation Observations

2019· article· en· W2921558679 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsRedshiftDark energyGalaxyUniverseCosmologyCluster analysisEquation of stateGalaxy clusterCurrent (fluid)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The tomographic Alcock–Paczynski (AP) test is a robust large-scale structure (LSS) measurement that receives little contamination from the redshift space distortion. It has placed tight cosmological constraints by using small and intermediate clustering scales of the LSS data. However, previous works have neglected the cross-correlation among different redshift bins, which could cause the statistical uncertainty being underestimated by ∼20%. In this work, we further improve this method by including this multi-redshift’s full correlation. We apply it to the SDSS DR12 galaxies sample and find out that, for ΛCDM, the combination of AP with the Planck+BAO data set slightly reduces (within 1σ) Ω m to 0.304 ± 0.007 (68.3% CL). This then leads to a larger H 0 and also mildly affects Ω b h 2 and n s as well as the derived parameters z *, r *, and z re but not τ, A s , and σ 8. For the flat wCDM model, our measurement gives Ω m = 0.301 ± 0.010 and w = −1.090 ± 0.047, where the additional AP measurement reduces the error budget by ∼25%. When including more parameters into the analysis, the AP method also improves the constraints on Ω k , , and N eff by 20%–30%. Early universe parameters such as and r, however, are unaffected. Assuming the dark energy equation of state , the Planck+BAO+SNe Ia+H 0+AP data sets prefer a dynamical dark energy at ≈1.5σ CL. Finally, we forecast the cosmological constraints expected from the DESI galaxy survey and find that combining AP with the CMB+BAO method would improve the w 0–w a constraint by a factor of ∼10.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations14
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→