MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4376983138 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.107.103505

CMB constraints on the early Universe independent of late-time cosmology

2023· article· en· W4376983138 on OpenAlexaff
Pablo Lemos, Antony Lewis

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMila - Quebec Artificial Intelligence Institute
FundersScience and Technology Facilities Council
KeywordsCosmic microwave backgroundPhysicsCosmologyUniverseAstronomyMetric expansion of spaceNon-standard cosmologyTheoretical physicsAstrophysicsDark energyQuantum mechanicsAnisotropy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The cosmic microwave background (CMB) is a powerful probe of early-universe physics but is only observed after passing through large-scale structure, which changes the observed spectra in important model-dependent ways. This is of particular concern given recent claims of significant discrepancies with low redshift datasets when a standard $\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Lambda}}\mathrm{CDM}$ model is assumed. By using empirical measurements of the CMB lensing reconstruction, combined with weak priors on the smoothness of the lensing spectrum, foregrounds, and shape of any additional integrated Sachs-Wolfe effect, we show how the early-universe parameters can be constrained from CMB observations almost independently of the late-time evolution. This provides a way to test new models for early-universe physics, and measure early-universe parameters, independently of late-time cosmology. Using the empirical measurement of lensing keeps the size of the effect of late-time modeling uncertainty under control, leading to only modest increases in error bars of most early-universe parameters compared to assuming a full evolution model. We provide robust constraints on early-$\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Lambda}}\mathrm{CDM}$ model parameters using the latest Planck PR4 data and show that with future data marginalizing over a single lensing amplitude parameter is sufficient to remove sensitivity to late-time cosmological model only if the spectral shape matches predictions.

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)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.005

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.359 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations35
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D.Same topicCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesFrench-language works237,207