MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4392288976 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stae605

Exploring the non-Gaussianity of the cosmic infrared background and its weak gravitational lensing

2024· article· en· W4392288976 on OpenAlexafffund
J Lee, J. Richard Bond, Pavel Motloch, Alexander van Engelen, George Stein

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNuclear Safety and Security CommissionUniversity of TorontoCompute CanadaCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchGovernment of OntarioNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationU.S. Department of EnergyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsNon-GaussianityGravitational lensWeak gravitational lensingAstrophysicsCosmic infrared backgroundCOSMIC cancer databaseStrong gravitational lensingCosmologyAstronomyGravitationGravitational lensing formalismCosmic microwave backgroundGalaxyRedshiftOpticsAnisotropy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Gravitational lensing deflects the paths of photons, altering the statistics of cosmic backgrounds and distorting their information content. We take the cosmic infrared background (CIB), which provides plentiful information about galaxy formation and evolution, as an example to probe the effect of lensing on non-Gaussian statistics. Using the Websky simulations, we first quantify the non-Gaussianity of the CIB, revealing additional detail on top of its well-measured power spectrum. To achieve this, we use needlet-like multipole-band filters to calculate the variance and higher-point correlations. Using our simulations, we show the two-, three- and four-point spectra, and compare our calculated power spectra and bispectra to Planck values. We then lens the CIB, shell-by-shell with corresponding convergence maps, to capture the broad redshift extent of both the CIB and its lensing convergence. The lensing of the CIB changes the three- and four-point functions by a few tens of per cent at large scales, unlike with the power spectrum, which changes by less than two per cent. We expand our analyses to encompass the full intensity probability distribution functions (PDFs) involving all n-point correlations as a function of scale. In particular, we use the relative entropy between lensed and unlensed PDFs to create a spectrum of templates that can allow estimation of lensing. The underlying CIB model is missing the important role of star bursting, which we test by adding a stochastic lognormal term to the intensity distributions. The novel aspects of our filtering and lensing pipeline should prove useful for any radiant background, including line intensity maps.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society→Same topicCosmology and Gravitation Theories→French-language works237,207→