MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4317692843 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stad219

Quantifying the redshift space distortion of the bispectrum III : detection prospects of the multipole moments

2023· article· en· W4317692843 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Arindam Mazumdar, Debanjan Sarkar, Somnath Bharadwaj

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAzrieli FoundationBen-Gurion University of the Negev
KeywordsBispectrumMultipole expansionPhysicsRedshiftGalaxyStatistical physicsComputational physicsAstrophysicsSpectral densityStatisticsQuantum mechanicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The redshift space anisotropy of the bispectrum is generally quantified using multipole moments. The possibility of measuring these multipoles in any survey depends on the level of statistical fluctuations. We compute the statistical fluctuations in the measurement of bispectrum multipoles for a Euclid like galaxy survey based on second-order perturbation theory and present two quantities: the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) which quantifies the detectability of a multipole and the rank correlation which quantifies the correlation in measurement errors between any two multipoles. Based on SNR values, we find that Euclid can potentially measure the bispectrum multipoles up to ℓ = 4 across various triangle shapes, formed by the three k vectors in Fourier space. In general, SNR is maximum for the linear triangles. SNR values also depend on the scales and redshifts of observation. While, ℓ ≤ 2 multipoles can be measured with SNR > 5 even at linear/quasi-linear ($k_1 \lesssim 0.1 \, {\rm Mpc}^{-1}$) scales, for ℓ > 2 multipoles, we require to go to small scales or need to increase bin sizes. These estimates are based on bins of extent Δln k1 = 0.1, Δμ = 0.05, and Δt = 0.05, where k1 is the length of the largest side, and (μ, t), respectively, quantify the size and shape of the triangles. For most multipole pairs, the errors are only weakly correlated across much of the triangle shapes barring a few in the vicinity of squeezed and stretched triangles. This makes it possible to combine the measurements of different multipoles to increase the effective SNR.

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)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations10
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→