[no title]
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present constraints on extensions to the standard cosmological model of a spatially flat Universe governed by general relativity, a cosmological constant (Λ), and cold dark matter (CDM) by varying the spatial curvature ΩK, the sum of the neutrino masses ∑mν, the dark energy equation of state parameter w, and the Hu-Sawicki f(R) gravity fR0 parameter. With the combined 3 × 2 pt measurements of cosmic shear from the Kilo-Degree Survey (KiDS-1000), galaxy clustering from the Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey (BOSS), and galaxy-galaxy lensing from the overlap between KiDS-1000, BOSS, and the spectroscopic 2-degree Field Lensing Survey, we find results that are fully consistent with a flat ΛCDM model with $ \Omega_K=0.011^{+0.054}_{-0.057} $, ∑mν < 1.76 eV (95% CL), and $ \mathit{w}=-0.99^{+0.11}_{-0.13} $. The fR0 parameter is unconstrained in our fully non-linear f(R) cosmic shear analysis. Considering three different model selection criteria, we find no clear preference for either the fiducial flat ΛCDM model or any of the considered extensions. In addition to extensions to the flat ΛCDM parameter space, we also explore restrictions to common subsets of the flat ΛCDM parameter space by fixing the amplitude of the primordial power spectrum to the Planck best-fit value, as well as adding external data from supernovae and lensing of the cosmic microwave background (CMB). Neither the beyond-ΛCDM models nor the imposed restrictions explored in this analysis are able to resolve the ∼3σ tension in S8 between the 3 × 2 pt constraints and the Planck temperature and polarisation data, with the exception of wCDM, where the S8 tension is resolved. The tension in the wCDM case persists, however, when considering the joint S8 − w parameter space. The joint flat ΛCDM CMB lensing and 3 × 2 pt analysis is found to yield tight constraints on $ \Omega_{\mathrm{m}}=0.307^{+0.008}_{-0.013} $, $ \sigma_8=0.769^{+0.022}_{-0.010} $, and $ S_8=0.779^{+0.013}_{-0.013} $.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.037 | 0.008 |
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".