Robustness of cosmic birefringence measurement against Galactic foreground emission and instrumental systematics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The polarization of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) can be used to search for parity-violating processes like that predicted by a Chern-Simons coupling to a light pseudoscalar field. Such an interaction rotates E modes into E modes in the observed CMB signal through an effect known as cosmic birefringence. Even though isotropic birefringence can be confused with the rotation produced by a miscalibration of the detectors' polarization angles, the degeneracy between both effects is broken when Galactic foreground emission is used as a calibrator. In this work, we use realistic simulations of the High-Frequency Instrument of the Planck mission to test the impact that Galactic foreground emission and instrumental systematics have on the recent birefringence measurements obtained through this technique. Our results demonstrate the robustness of the methodology against the miscalibration of polarization angles and other systematic effects, like intensity-to-polarization leakage, beam leakage, or cross-polarization effects. However, our estimator is sensitive to the EB correlation of polarized foreground emission. Here we propose to correct the bias induced by dust EB by modeling the foreground signal with templates produced in Bayesian component-separation analyses that fit parametric models to CMB data. Acknowledging the limitations of currently available dust templates like that of the Commander sky model, high-precision CMB data and a characterization of dust beyond the modified blackbody paradigm are needed to obtain a definitive measurement of cosmic birefringence in the future.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".