MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4292234245 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629018

<i>Planck</i>intermediate results

2016· article· en· W4292234245 on OpenAlexaff
N. Aghanim, M. Ashdown, J. Aumont, C. Baccigalupi, M. Ballardini, A. J. Banday, R. B. Barreiro, N. Bartolo, S. Basak, K. Benabed, J.-P. Bernard, M. Bersanelli, P. Bielewicz, L. Bonavera, J. R. Bond, J. Borrill, F. R. Bouchet, C. Burigana, E. Calabrese, J.-F. Cardoso, Julien Carron, H. C. Chiang, L. P. L. Colombo, B. Comis, D. Contreras, F. Couchot, A. Coulais, B. P. Crill, A. Curto, F. Cuttaia, P. de Bernardis, A. de Rosa, G. de Zotti, J. Delabrouille, F.–X. Désert, Eleonora Di Valentino, C. Dickinson, J. M. Diego, O. Doré, A. Ducout, X. Dupac, S. Dusini, F. Elsner, T. A. Enßlin, H. K. Eriksen, Y. Fantaye, F. Finelli⋆, F. Forastieri, M. Frailis, E. Franceschi, A. Frolov, S. Galeotta, S. Galli, K. Ganga, R. T. Génova-Santos, M. Gerbino, Y. Giraud-Héraud, J. González-Nuevo, K. M. Górski, A. Gruppuso, J. E. Gudmundsson, F. K. Hansen, S. Henrot–Versillé, D. Herranz, E. Hivon, Zhiqi Huang, A. H. Jaffe, W. C. Jones, E. Keihänen, R. Keskitalo, K. Kiiveri, N. Krachmalnicoff, M. Kunz, H. Kurki‐Suonio, J.-M. Lamarre, M. Langer, A. Lasenby, M. Lattanzi, C. R. Lawrence, M. Le Jeune, J. P. Leahy, François Levrier, M. Liguori, P. B. Lilje, V. Lindholm, M. López-Caniego, Yin-Zhe Ma, J. F. Macías–Pérez, G. Maggio, D Maino, N. Mandolesi, M. Maris, P. G. Martin, E. Martínez-González, S. Matarrese, N. Mauri, J. D. McEwen, P. R. Meinhold, A. Melchiorri, A. Mennella, M. Migliaccio, M.-A. Miville-Deschênes, D. Molinari, A. Moneti, G. Morgante, A. Moss, P. Natoli, L. Pagano, D. Paoletti, G. Patanchon, L. Patrizii, L. Perotto, V. Pettorino, F. Piacentini, L. Polastri, G. Polenta, J. P. Rachen, B. Racine, M. Reinecke, M. Remazeilles, A. Renzi, G. Rocha, C. Rosset, M. Rossetti, G. Roudier, J. A. Rubiño-Martín, B. Ruiz-Granados, M. Sandri, M. Savelainen, D. Scott, C. Sirignano, G. Sirri, L. D. Spencer, A.-S. Suur-Uski, J. A. Tauber, D. Tavagnacco, M. Tenti, L. Toffolatti, M. Tomasi, M. Tristram, T. Trombetti, J. Väliviita, F. Van Tent, P. Vielva, F. Villa, N. Vittorio, B. D. Wandelt, I. K. Wehus, A. Zacchei, A. Zonca

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity 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
KeywordsPlanckPhysicsCosmic microwave backgroundParity (physics)Polarization (electrochemistry)AnisotropyParticle physicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parity-violating extensions of the standard electromagnetic theory cause in vacuo rotation of the plane of polarization of propagating photons. This effect, also known as cosmic birefringence, has an impact on the cosmic microwave background (CMB) anisotropy angular power spectra, producing non-vanishing T–B and E–B correlations that are otherwise null when parity is a symmetry. Here we present new constraints on an isotropic rotation, parametrized by the angle α, derived from Planck 2015 CMB polarization data. To increase the robustness of our analyses, we employ two complementary approaches, in harmonic space and in map space, the latter based on a peak stacking technique. The two approaches provide estimates for α that are in agreement within statistical uncertainties and are very stable against several consistency tests.Considering the T–B and E–B information jointly, we find from the harmonic analysis and from the stacking approach. These constraints are compatible with no parity violation and are dominated by the systematic uncertainty in the orientation of Planck’s polarization-sensitive bolometers.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.221

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0660.022

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations91
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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