The completed SDSS-IV extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: cosmological implications from multitracer BAO analysis with galaxies and voids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT We construct cosmic void catalogues with the dive void finder upon SDSS BOSS DR12 and eBOSS DR16 galaxy samples with BAO reconstruction, and perform a joint BAO analysis using different types of galaxies and the corresponding voids. The BAO peak is evident for the galaxy–galaxy, galaxy–void, and void–void correlation functions of all data sets, including the ones cross-correlating LRG and ELG samples. Two multitracer BAO fitting schemes are tested, one combining the galaxy and void correlation functions with a weight applied to voids, and the other using a single BAO dilation parameter for all clustering measurements. Both methods produce consistent results with mock catalogues, and on average ∼10 per cent improvements of the BAO statistical uncertainties are observed for all samples, compared to the results from galaxies alone. By combining the clustering of galaxies and voids, the uncertainties of BAO measurements from the SDSS data are reduced by 5–15 per cent, yielding 0.9 per cent, 0.8 per cent, 1.1 per cent, 2.3 per cent, and 2.9 per cent constraints on the distance $D_{_{\rm V}}(z)$, at effective redshifts 0.38, 0.51, 0.70, 0.77, and 0.85, respectively. When combined with BAO measurements from SDSS MGS, QSO, and Lyα samples, as well as the BBN results, we obtain $H_0 = 67.58 \pm 0.91\, {\rm km}\, {\rm s}^{-1}\, {\rm Mpc}^{-1}$, Ωm = 0.290 ± 0.015, and $\Omega _\Lambda h^2 = 0.3241 \pm 0.0079$ in the flat-ΛCDM framework, where the 1σ uncertainties are around 6 per cent, 6 per cent, and 17 per cent smaller respectively, compared to constraints from the corresponding anisotropic BAO measurements without voids and LRG–ELG cross-correlations.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".