Does jackknife scale really matter for accurate large-scale structure covariances?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The jackknife method gives an internal covariance estimate for large-scale structure surveys and allows model-independent errors on cosmological parameters. Using the SDSS-III BOSS CMASS sample, we study how the jackknife size and number of resamplings impact the precision of the covariance estimate on the correlation function multipoles and the error on the inferred baryon acoustic scale. We compare the measurement with the MultiDark Patchy mock galaxy catalogues, and we also validate it against a set of lognormal mocks with the same survey geometry. We build several jackknife configurations that vary in size and number of resamplings. We introduce the Hartlap factor in the covariance estimate that depends on the number of jackknife resamplings. We also find that it is useful to apply the tapering scheme to estimate the precision matrix from a limited number of resamplings. The results from CMASS and mock catalogues show that the error estimate of the baryon acoustic scale does not depend on the jackknife scale. For the shift parameter α, we find an average error of 1.6 per cent, 2.2 per cent and 1.2 per cent, respectively, from CMASS, Patchy, and lognormal jackknife covariances. Despite these uncertainties fluctuate significantly due to some structural limitations of the jackknife method, our α estimates are in reasonable agreement with published pre-reconstruction analyses. Jackknife methods will provide valuable and complementary covariance estimates for future large-scale structure surveys.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.019 | 0.160 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".