Detecting Neutrino Mass by Combining Matter Clustering, Halos, and Voids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We quantify the information content of the nonlinear matter power spectrum, the halo mass function, and the void size function, using the Quijote N -body simulations. We find that these three statistics exhibit very different degeneracies among the cosmological parameters, and thus the combination of all three probes enables the breaking of degeneracies, in turn yielding remarkably tight constraints. We perform a Fisher analysis using the full covariance matrix, including all auto- and cross correlations, finding that this increases the information content for neutrino mass compared to a correlation-free analysis. The multiplicative improvement of the constraints on the cosmological parameters obtained by combining all three probes compared to using the power spectrum alone are: 137, 5, 8, 20, 10, and 43, for Ω m , Ω b , h , n s , σ 8 , and M ν , respectively. The marginalized error on the sum of the neutrino masses is σ ( M ν ) = 0.018 eV for a cosmological volume of 1 h − 1 Gpc 3 , using k max = 0.5 h Mpc − 1 , and without cosmic microwave background (CMB) priors. We note that this error is an underestimate insomuch as we do not consider super-sample covariance, baryonic effects, and realistic survey noises and systematics. On the other hand, it is an overestimate insomuch as our cuts and binning are suboptimal due to restrictions imposed by the simulation resolution. Given upcoming galaxy surveys will observe volumes spanning ∼ 100 h − 1 Gpc 3 , this presents a promising new avenue to measure neutrino mass without being restricted by the need for accurate knowledge of the optical depth, which is required for CMB-based measurements. Furthermore, the improved constraints on other cosmological parameters, notably Ω m , may also be competitive with CMB-based measurements.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".