MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4290187041 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201525820

<i>Planck</i>2015 results

2015· article· en· W4290187041 on OpenAlexaff
R. Adam, P. A. R. Ade, N. Aghanim, M. Arnaud, M. Ashdown, J. Aumont, C. Baccigalupi, A. J. Banday, R. B. Barreiro, N. Bartolo, E. Battaner, K. Benabed, Alexandre Benoît, A. Benoit-Lévy, J.-P. Bernard, M. Bersanelli, B. Bertincourt, P. Bielewicz, J. J. Bock, L. Bonavera, J. R. Bond, J. Borrill, F. R. Bouchet, F. Boulanger, M. Bucher, C. Burigana, Erminia Calabrese, J.-F. Cardoso, A. Catalano, A. Challinor, A. Chamballu, H. C. Chiang, P. R. Christensen, D. L. Clements, S. Colombi, L. P. L. Colombo, C. Combet, F. Couchot, A. Coulais, B. P. Crill, A. Curto, F. Cuttaia, L. Danese, R. D. Davies, Roger J. Davis, P. de Bernardis, A. de Rosa, G. de Zotti, J.‐M. Delouis, F.–X. Désert, J. M. Diego, H. Dole, S. Donzelli, O. Doré, M. Douspis, A. Ducout, X. Dupac, G. Efstathiou, F. Elsner, T. A. Enßlin, H. K. Eriksen, E. Falgarone, J. Fergusson, F. Finelli⋆, O. Forni, M. Frailis, A. A. Fraisse, E. Franceschi, A. Frejsel, S. Galeotta, S. Galli, K. Ganga, T. Ghosh, M. Giard, Y. Giraud–Héraud, E. Gjerløw, J. González-Nuevo, K. M. Górski, S. Gratton, A. Gruppuso, J. E. Gudmundsson, F. K. Hansen, D. Hanson, D. L. Harrison, S. Henrot–Versillé, D. Herranz, S. R. Hildebrandt, E. Hivon, W. A. Holmes, A. Hornstrup, W. Hovest, K. M. Huffenberger, G. Hurier, A. H. Jaffe, T. R. Jaffe, W. C. Jones, M. Juvela, E. Keihänen, R. Keskitalo, T. S. Kisner, R. Kneißl, J. Knoche, M. Kunz, H. Kurki‐Suonio, G. Lagache, J.‐M. Lamarre, A. Lasenby, M. Lattanzi, C. R. Lawrence, M. Le Jeune, J. P. Leahy, E. Lellouch, R. Leonardi, J. Lesgourgues, F. Levrier, M. Liguori, P. B. Lilje, M. Linden-Vørnle, M. López-Caniego, P. M. Lubin, J. F. Macías–Pérez, F. Mannucci, D. Maino, N. Mandolesi, A. Mangilli, M. Maris, P. G. Martin, E. Martínez-González, S. Masi, S. Matarrese, P. McGehee, A. Melchiorri, L. Mendes, A. Mennella, M. Migliaccio, S. Mitra, M.-A. Miville-Deschênes, A. Moneti, L. Montier, R. Moreno, G. Morgante, D. Mortlock, A. Moss, S. Mottet, D. Munshi, J. A. Murphy, P. Naselsky, F. Nati, P. Natoli, C. B. Netterfield, H. U. Nørgaard-Nielsen, F. Noviello, D. Novikov, I. Novikov, C. A. Oxborrow, F. Paci, L. Pagano, F. Pajot, D. Paoletti, F. Pasian, G. Patanchon, T. J. Pearson, O. Perdereau, L. Perotto, F. Perrotta, V. Pettorino, F. Piacentini, M. Piat, E. Pierpaoli, D. Pietrobon, S. Plaszczynski, E. Pointecouteau, G. Polenta, G. W. Pratt, G. Prézeau, S. Prunet, J.‐L. Puget, J. P. Rachen, M. Reinecke, M. Remazeilles, C. Renault, A. Renzi, I. Ristorcelli, G. Rocha, C. Rosset, M. Rossetti, G. Roudier, B. Rusholme, M. Sandri, D. Santos, A. Sauvé, М. Савелайнен, G. Savini, D. Scott, M. D. Seiffert, E. P. S. Shellard, L. D. Spencer, V. Stolyarov, R. Stompor, R. Sudiwala, D. Sutton, A.-S. Suur-Uski, J.-F. Sygnet, J. A. Tauber, L. Terenzi, L. Toffolatti, M. Tomasi, M. Tristram, J. Tuovinen, L. Valenziano, J. Väliviita, B. Van Tent, L. Vibert, P. Vielva, F. Villa, L. A. Wade, B. D. Wandelt, R. A. Watson, I. K. Wehus, D. Yvon, A. Zacchei, A. Zonca

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsTrinity CollegeUniversity of British ColumbiaMcGill UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersFundação para a Ciência e a TecnologiaTekesScience and Technology Facilities CouncilInstitut National de Physique Nucléaire et de Physique des ParticulesMinistério da Ciência, Tecnologia e Ensino SuperiorCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationChina Scholarship CouncilCentre National d’Etudes SpatialesPartnership for Advanced Computing in Europe AISBLMax-Planck-GesellschaftUK Space AgencyScience Foundation Ireland
KeywordsPlanckPhysicsCMB cold spotCosmic microwave backgroundAstrophysicsSkyCalibrationSatellitePolarization (electrochemistry)Solar SystemComputational physicsRemote sensingAstronomyOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the processing applied to the cleaned, time-ordered information obtained from the Planck High Frequency Instrument (HFI) with the aim of producing photometrically calibrated maps in temperature and (for the first time) in polarization. The data from the entire 2.5-year HFI mission include almost five full-sky surveys. HFI observes the sky over a broad range of frequencies, from 100 to 857 GHz. To obtain the best accuracy on the calibration over such a large range, two different photometric calibration schemes have been used. The 545 and 857 GHz data are calibrated using models of planetary atmospheric emission. The lower frequencies (from 100 to 353 GHz) are calibrated using the time-variable cosmological microwave background dipole, which we call the orbital dipole. This source of calibration only depends on the satellite velocity with respect to the solar system. Using a CMB temperature of TCMB = 2.7255 ± 0.0006 K, it permits an independent measurement of the amplitude of the CMB solar dipole (3364.3 ± 1.5 μK), which is approximatively 1σ higher than the WMAP measurement with a direction that is consistent between the two experiments. We describe the pipeline used to produce the maps ofintensity and linear polarization from the HFI timelines, and the scheme used to set the zero level of the maps a posteriori. We also summarize the noise characteristics of the HFI maps in the 2015 Planck data release and present some null tests to assess their quality. Finally, we discuss the major systematic effects and in particular the leakage induced by flux mismatch between the detectors that leads to spurious polarization signal.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.206

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0620.053

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations264
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomy and AstrophysicsSame topicCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesFrench-language works237,207