MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3097542555 · doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2021/05/028

CMB lensing power spectrum estimation without instrument noise bias

2021· preprint· en· W3097542555 on OpenAlexaff
Mathew S. Madhavacheril, Kendrick M. Smith, Blake D. Sherwin, Sigurd Næss

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRadio Astronomy Observations and Technology
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersScience and Technology Facilities Council
KeywordsCosmic microwave backgroundEstimatorPhysicsNoise (video)Spectral densityTrispectrumCosmic varianceWeak gravitational lensingGaussian noiseNoise powerAlgorithmComputational physicsStatistical physicsAstrophysicsComputer scienceOpticsPower (physics)StatisticsMathematicsGalaxyNon-GaussianityArtificial intelligenceTelecommunicationsRedshift

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The power spectrum of cosmic microwave background (CMB) lensing will be measured to sub-percent precision with upcoming surveys, enabling tight constraints on the sum of neutrino masses and other cosmological parameters. Measuring the lensing power spectrum involves the estimation of the connected trispectrum of the four-point function of the CMB map, which requires the subtraction of a large Gaussian disconnected noise bias. This reconstruction noise bias receives contributions both from CMB and foreground fluctuations as well as instrument noise (both detector and atmospheric noise for ground-based surveys). The debiasing procedure therefore relies on the quality of simulations of the instrument noise which may be expensive or inaccurate. We propose a new estimator that makes use of at least four splits of the CMB maps with independent instrument noise. This estimator makes the CMB lensing power spectrum completely insensitive to any assumptions made in modeling or simulating the instrument noise. We show that this estimator, in many practical situations, leads to no substantial loss in signal-to-noise. We provide an efficient algorithm for its computation that scales with the number of splits m as 𝒪(m 2 ) as opposed to a naive 𝒪(m 4 ) expectation.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.523
Threshold uncertainty score0.977

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cosmology and Astroparticle PhysicsSame topicRadio Astronomy Observations and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207