MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3034615510 · doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1663

Beyond ΛCDM with H i intensity mapping: robustness of cosmological constraints in the presence of astrophysics

2020· article· en· W3034615510 on OpenAlexaff
S. Camera, Hamsa Padmanabhan

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics
FundersMinistero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca
KeywordsPhysicsIntensity mappingRobustness (evolution)AstrophysicsCosmologyAstronomyCosmological modelRedshiftGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Mapping the unresolved intensity of the 21-cm emission of neutral hydrogen (H i) is now regarded as one the most promising tools for cosmological investigation in the coming decades. Here, we investigate, for the first time, extensions of the standard cosmological model, such as modified gravity and primordial non-Gaussianity, taking self-consistently into account. The present constraints on the astrophysics of H i clustering in the treatment of the brightness temperature fluctuations. To understand the boundaries within which results thus obtained can be considered reliable, we examine the robustness of cosmological parameter estimation performed via studies of 21-cm intensity mapping, against our knowledge of the astrophysical processes leading to H i clustering. Modelling of astrophysical effects affects cosmological observables through the relation linking the overall H i mass in a bound object, to the mass of the underlying dark matter halo that hosts it. We quantify the biases in estimates of standard cosmological parameters and those describing modified gravity and primordial non-Gaussianity that are obtained if one misconceives the slope of the relation between H i mass and halo mass, or the lower virial velocity cut-off for a dark matter halo to be able to host H i. Remarkably, we find that astrophysical uncertainties will not affect searches for primordial non-Gaussianity – one of the strongest science cases for H i intensity mapping – despite the signal being deeply linked to the H i bias.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.089
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.089
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations19
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society→Same topicCosmology and Gravitation Theories→French-language works237,207→