The universal multiplicity function: counting haloes and voids
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We present a novel combination of the excursion-set approach with the peak theory formalism in Lagrangian space and provide accurate predictions for halo and void statistics over a wide range of scales. The set-up is based on an effective moving barrier. Besides deriving the corresponding numerical multiplicity function, we introduce a new analytical formula reaching the percent level agreement with the exact numerical solution obtained via Monte Carlo realisations down to small scales, ∼ 10 12 h -1 M ⊙ . In the void case, we derive the dependence of the effective moving barrier on the void formation threshold, δ v , by comparison against the Lagrangian void size function measured in the DEMNUni simulations. We discuss the mapping from Lagrangian to Eulerian space for both haloes and voids; adopting the spherical symmetry approximation, we obtain a strong agreement at intermediate and large scales. Finally, using the effective moving barrier, we derive Lagrangian void density profiles accurately matching measurements from cosmological simulations, a major achievement towards using void profiles for precision cosmology with the next generation of galaxy surveys.
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.
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 it