MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400116705 · doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2024/06/076

On the detectability of the moving lens signal in CMB experiments

2024· article· en· W4400116705 on OpenAlexaff
Selim C. Hotinli, E. Pierpaoli

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsCosmic microwave backgroundSIGNAL (programming language)Lens (geology)Cosmological perturbation theoryAstrophysicsCosmologyOpticsAnisotropy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Upcoming cosmic microwave background (CMB) experiments are expected to detect new signals probing interaction of CMB photons with intervening large-scale structure. Among these the moving-lens effect, the CMB temperature anisotropy induced by cosmological structures moving transverse to our line of sight, is anticipated to be measured to high significance in the near future. In this paper, we investigate two possible strategies for the detection of this signal: pairwise transverse-velocity estimation and oriented stacking. We expand on previous studies by including in the analysis realistic simulations of competing signals and foregrounds. We confirm that the moving lens effect can be detected at ≥ 10 σ level by a combination of CMB-S4 and LSST surveys. We show that the limiting factors in the detection depend on the strategy: for the stacking analysis, correlated extragalactic foregrounds, namely the cosmic infrared background and thermal Sunyaev Zel'dovich effect, play the most important role. The addition of foregrounds make the signal-to-noise ratio be most influenced by large and nearby objects. As for the pairwise detection, halo lensing and pair number counts are the main issues. In light of our findings, we elaborate on possible strategies to improve the analysis approach for the moving lens detection with upcoming experiments. We also deliver to the community all the simulations and tools we developed for this study.

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score0.151

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cosmology and Astroparticle PhysicsSame topicCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesFrench-language works237,207