MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4365211516 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2304.05196

The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: Mitigating the impact of extragalactic foregrounds for the DR6 CMB lensing analysis

2023· preprint· en· W4365211516 on OpenAlexafffund
N. MacCrann, Blake D. Sherwin, Frank J. Qu, Toshiya Namikawa, Mathew S. Madhavacheril, Irene Abril-Cabezas, Rui An, Jason E. Austermann, Nicholas Battaglia, Elia S. Battistelli, James A. Beall, Boris Bolliet, J. Richard Bond, Hongbo Cai, Erminia Calabrese, William R. Coulton, Omar Darwish, Shannon M. Duff, Adriaan J. Duivenvoorden, Jo Dunkley, Gerrit S. Farren, Simone Ferraro, Joseph E. Golec, Yilun Guan, Dongwon Han, Carlos Hervías-Caimapo, J. Colin Hill, Matt Hilton, Renée Hložek, Johannes Hubmayr, Joshua Kim, Zack Li, Arthur Kosowsky, Thibaut Louis, J. J. McMahon, Gabriela A. Marques, Kavilan Moodley, Sigurd Næss, Michael D. Niemack, Lyman Page, Bruce Partridge, Emmanuel Schaan, Neelima Sehgal, Cristobál Sifón, Edward J. Wollack, Maria Salatino, Joel N. Ullom, Jeff Van Lanen, Alexander van Engelen, Lukas Wenz

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRadio Astronomy Observations and Technology
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of Toronto
FundersHigh Energy PhysicsOffice of ScienceNational Institute of Standards and TechnologyAgencia Nacional de Investigación y DesarrolloSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungScience and Technology Facilities CouncilUniversity of TorontoNational Research FoundationU.S. Department of EnergyEuropean CommissionNational Energy Research Scientific Computing CenterNational Science FoundationCompute CanadaJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationUniversity of PennsylvaniaMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and TechnologyPrinceton UniversityNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueAlfred P. Sloan FoundationGovernment of Ontario
KeywordsCosmic microwave backgroundPhysicsAstrophysicsCosmologyWeak gravitational lensingSkyTelescopePlanckSouth Pole TelescopeSpectral densityAstronomyGalaxyRedshiftAnisotropyOpticsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate the impact and mitigation of extragalactic foregrounds for the CMB lensing power spectrum analysis of Atacama Cosmology Telescope (ACT) data release 6 (DR6) data. Two independent microwave sky simulations are used to test a range of mitigation strategies. We demonstrate that finding and then subtracting point sources, finding and then subtracting models of clusters, and using a profile bias-hardened lensing estimator, together reduce the fractional biases to well below statistical uncertainties, with the inferred lensing amplitude, $A_{\mathrm{lens}}$, biased by less than $0.2σ$. We also show that another method where a model for the cosmic infrared background (CIB) contribution is deprojected and high frequency data from Planck is included has similar performance. Other frequency-cleaned options do not perform as well, incurring either a large noise cost, or resulting in biased recovery of the lensing spectrum. In addition to these simulation-based tests, we also present null tests performed on the ACT DR6 data which test for sensitivity of our lensing spectrum estimation to differences in foreground levels between the two ACT frequencies used, while nulling the CMB lensing signal. These tests pass whether the nulling is performed at the map or bandpower level. The CIB-deprojected measurement performed on the DR6 data is consistent with our baseline measurement, implying contamination from the CIB is unlikely to significantly bias the DR6 lensing spectrum. This collection of tests gives confidence that the ACT DR6 lensing measurements and cosmological constraints presented in companion papers to this work are robust to extragalactic foregrounds.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.210
Threshold uncertainty score0.687

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.155 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicRadio Astronomy Observations and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207