MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3036863734 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.102.103502

Constraining early dark energy with large-scale structure

2020· article· en· W3036863734 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicDark Matter and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science FoundationGovernment of CanadaFlatiron HealthRussian Science FoundationCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchSimons Foundation
KeywordsCosmic microwave backgroundPhysicsDark energyHubble's lawAstrophysicsRedshiftGalaxyDark matterSpectral densityBaryon acoustic oscillationsBaryonAge of the universeUniverseCosmologyStatisticsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An axion-like field comprising $\ensuremath{\sim}10%$ of the energy density of the Universe near matter-radiation equality is a candidate to resolve the Hubble tension; this is the ``early dark energy'' (EDE) model. However, as shown in Hill et al., the model fails to simultaneously resolve the Hubble tension and maintain a good fit to both cosmic microwave background (CMB) and large-scale structure (LSS) data. Here, we use redshift-space galaxy clustering data to sharpen constraints on the EDE model. We perform the first EDE analysis using the full-shape power spectrum likelihood from the Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey (BOSS), based on the effective field theory (EFT) of LSS. The inclusion of this likelihood in the EDE analysis yields a 25% tighter error bar on ${H}_{0}$ compared to primary CMB data alone, yielding ${H}_{0}=68.5{4}_{\ensuremath{-}0.95}^{+0.52}\text{ }\text{ }\mathrm{km}/\mathrm{s}/\mathrm{Mpc}$ (68% C.L.). In addition, we constrain the maximum fractional energy density contribution of the EDE to ${f}_{\mathrm{EDE}}<0.072$ (95% C.L.). We explicitly demonstrate that the EFT BOSS likelihood yields much stronger constraints on EDE than the standard BOSS likelihood. Including further information from photometric LSS surveys,the constraints narrow by an additional 20%, yielding ${H}_{0}=68.7{3}_{\ensuremath{-}0.69}^{+0.42}\text{ }\text{ }\mathrm{km}/\mathrm{s}/\mathrm{Mpc}$ (68% C.L.) and ${f}_{\mathrm{EDE}}<0.053$ (95% C.L.). These bounds are obtained without including local-Universe ${H}_{0}$ data, which is in strong tension with the CMB and LSS, even in the EDE model. We also refute claims that Markov-chain Monte Carlo analyses of EDE that omit SH0ES from the combined dataset yield misleading posteriors. Finally, we show that upcoming Euclid/DESI-like spectroscopic galaxy surveys will greatly improve the EDE constraints. We conclude that current data preclude the EDE model as a resolution of the Hubble tension, and that future LSS surveys can close the remaining parameter space of this model.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.398
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.324 · 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