A measurement of the Hubble constant from Type II supernovae
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Progressive increases in the precision of the Hubble-constant measurement via Cepheid-calibrated Type Ia supernovae (SNe Ia) have shown a discrepancy of ∼4.4σ with the current value inferred from Planck satellite measurements of the cosmic microwave background radiation and the standard $\Lambda $cold dark matter (ΛCDM) cosmological model. This disagreement does not appear to be due to known systematic errors and may therefore be hinting at new fundamental physics. Although all of the current techniques have their own merits, further improvement in constraining the Hubble constant requires the development of as many independent methods as possible. In this work, we use SNe II as standardisable candles to obtain an independent measurement of the Hubble constant. Using seven SNe II with host-galaxy distances measured from Cepheid variables or the tip of the red giant branch, we derive H$_0= 75.8^{+5.2}_{-4.9}$ km s−1 Mpc−1 (statistical errors only). Our value favours that obtained from the conventional distance ladder (Cepheids + SNe Ia) and exhibits a difference of 8.4 km s−1 Mpc−1 from the Planck + ΛCDM value. Adding an estimate of the systematic errors (2.8 km s−1 Mpc−1) changes the ∼1.7σ discrepancy with Planck +ΛCDM to ∼1.4σ. Including the systematic errors and performing a bootstrap simulation, we confirm that the local H0 value exceeds the value from the early Universe with a confidence level of 95 per cent. As in this work, we only exchange SNe II for SNe Ia to measure extragalactic distances, we demonstrate that there is no evidence that SNe Ia are the source of the H0 tension.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".