Joint analysis of Dark Energy Survey Year 3 data and CMB lensing from SPT and<i>Planck</i>. I. Construction of CMB lensing maps and modeling choices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Joint analyses of cross-correlations between measurements of galaxy positions, galaxy lensing, and lensing of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) offer powerful constraints on the large-scale structure of the Universe. In a forthcoming analysis, we will present cosmological constraints from the analysis of such cross-correlations measured using Year 3 data from the Dark Energy Survey (DES), and CMB data from the South Pole Telescope (SPT) and Planck. Here we present two key ingredients of this analysis: (1) an improved CMB lensing map in the SPT-SZ survey footprint and (2) the analysis methodology that will be used to extract cosmological information from the cross-correlation measurements. Relative to previous lensing maps made from the same CMB observations, we have implemented techniques to remove contamination from the thermal Sunyaev Zel'dovich effect, enabling the extraction of cosmological information from smaller angular scales of the cross-correlation measurements than in previous analyses with DES Year 1 data. We describe our model for the cross-correlations between these maps and DES data, and validate our modeling choices to demonstrate the robustness of our analysis. We then forecast the expected cosmological constraints from the galaxy survey-CMB lensing auto and cross-correlations. We find that the galaxy-CMB lensing and galaxy shear-CMB lensing correlations will on their own provide a constraint on S8=σ8ωm/0.3 at the few percent level, providing a powerful consistency check for the DES-only constraints. We explore scenarios where external priors on shear calibration are removed, finding that the joint analysis of CMB lensing cross-correlations can provide constraints on the shear calibration amplitude at the 5% to 10% level. © 2023 American Physical Society.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".