A 5 per cent measurement of the Hubble–Lemaître constant from Type II supernovae
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The most stringent local measurement of the Hubble–Lemaître constant from Cepheid-calibrated Type Ia supernovae (SNe Ia) differs from the value inferred via the cosmic microwave background radiation (Planck+ΛCDM) by ∼5σ. This so-called Hubble tension has been confirmed by other independent methods, and thus does not appear to be a possible consequence of systematic errors. Here, we continue upon our prior work of using Type II supernovae to provide another, largely independent method to measure the Hubble–Lemaître constant. From 13 SNe II with geometric, Cepheid, or tip of the red giant branch (TRGB) host-galaxy distance measurements, we derive H$_0= 75.4^{+3.8}_{-3.7}$ km s−1 Mpc−1 (statistical errors only), consistent with the local measurement but in disagreement by ∼2.0σ with the Planck+ΛCDM value. Using only Cepheids (N = 7), we find H$_0 = 77.6^{+5.2}_{-4.8}$ km s−1 Mpc−1, while using only TRGB (N = 5), we derive H$_0 = 73.1^{+5.7}_{-5.3}$ km s−1 Mpc−1. Via 13 variants of our data set, we derive a systematic uncertainty estimate of 1.5 km s−1 Mpc−1. The median value derived from these variants differs by just 0.3 km s−1 Mpc−1 from that produced by our fiducial model. Because we only replace SNe Ia with SNe II – and we do not find statistically significant difference between the Cepheid and TRGB H0 measurements – our work reveals no indication that SNe Ia or Cepheids could be the sources of the ‘H0 tension.’ We caution, however, that our conclusions rest upon a modest calibrator sample; as this sample grows in the future, our results should be verified.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".