Minkowski Functionals of SDSS-III BOSS: Hints of Possible Anisotropy in the Density Field?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We present measurements of the Minkowski functionals extracted from the SDSS-III BOSS catalogs. After defining the Minkowski functionals, we describe how an unbiased reconstruction of these statistics can be obtained from a field with masked regions and survey boundaries, validating our methodology with Gaussian random fields and mock galaxy snapshot data. From the BOSS galaxy data, we generate a set of four density fields in three dimensions corresponding to the northern and southern skies of LOWZ and CMASS catalogs, smoothing over large scales (Gaussian smoothing scale of 35 Mpc) such that the field is perturbatively non-Gaussian. We extract the Minkowski functionals from each data set separately, and measure their shapes and amplitudes by fitting a Hermite polynomial expansion. For the shape parameter of the Minkowski functional curves a 0, that is related to the bispectrum of the field, we find that the LOWZ-South data presents a systematically lower value of a 0 = −0.080 ± 0.040 than its northern sky counterpart a 0 = 0.032 ± 0.024. Although the significance of this discrepancy is not very high, it potentially indicates some systematics in the data or that the matter density field exhibits anisotropy at low redshift. By assuming a standard isotropic flat ΛCDM cosmology, the amplitudes of the Minkowski functionals from the combination of northern and southern sky data give the constraints Ωc h 2 n s = 0.110 ± 0.006 and 0.111 ± 0.008 for CMASS and LOWZ, respectively, which is in agreement with the Planck ΛCDM best-fit Ωc h 2 n s = 0.116 ± 0.001.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".