MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4226119674 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acc65b

The Aemulus Project. V. Cosmological Constraint from Small-scale Clustering of BOSS Galaxies

2023· article· en· W4226119674 on OpenAlexaff
Zhongxu Zhai, Jeremy L. Tinker, Arka Banerjee, Joseph DeRose, Hong Guo, Yao-Yuan Mao, S. McLaughlin, Kate Storey-Fisher, Risa H. Wechsler

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersSLAC National Accelerator LaboratoryOffice of ScienceNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationU.S. Department of EnergySpace Telescope Science InstituteNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsRedshiftGalaxySigmaPlanckCorrelation function (quantum field theory)BossHaloCosmologyAstronomyQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We analyze clustering measurements of BOSS galaxies using a simulation-based emulator of two-point statistics. We focus on the monopole and quadrupole of the redshift-space correlation function, and the projected correlation function, at scales of 0.1 ∼ 60 h −1 Mpc. Although our simulations are based on wCDM with general relativity (GR), we include a scaling parameter of the halo velocity field, γ f , defined as the amplitude of the halo velocity field relative to the GR prediction. We divide the BOSS data into three redshift bins. After marginalizing over other cosmological parameters, galaxy bias parameters, and the velocity scaling parameter, we find f σ 8(z = 0.25) = 0.413 ± 0.031, f σ 8(z = 0.4) = 0.470 ± 0.026, and f σ 8(z = 0.55) = 0.396 ± 0.022. Compared with Planck observations using a flat Lambda cold dark matter model, our results are lower by 1.9σ, 0.3σ, and 3.4σ, respectively. These results are consistent with other recent simulation-based results at nonlinear scales, including weak lensing measurements of BOSS LOWZ galaxies, two-point clustering of eBOSS LRGs, and an independent clustering analysis of BOSS LOWZ. All these results are generally consistent with a combination of γ f 1 / 2 σ 8 ≈ 0.75 . We note, however, that the BOSS data is well fit assuming GR, i.e., γ f = 1. We cannot rule out an unknown systematic error in the galaxy bias model at nonlinear scales, but near-future data and modeling will enhance our understanding of the galaxy–halo connection, and provide a strong test of new physics beyond the standard model.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.216 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations58
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→