Constraints on <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>f</mml:mi> <mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo> <mml:mi>R</mml:mi> <mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> gravity from thermal-Sunyaev-Zel’dovich-effect-selected SPT galaxy clusters and weak lensing mass calibration from DES and HST
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present constraints on the f ( R ) gravity model using a sample of 1005 galaxy clusters in the redshift range 0.25–1.78 that have been selected through the thermal Sunyaev-Zel’dovich effect from South Pole Telescope data and subjected to optical and near-infrared confirmation with the multicomponent matched filter algorithm. We employ weak gravitational lensing mass calibration from the Dark Energy Survey Year 3 data for 688 clusters at z < 0.95 and from the Hubble Space Telescope for 39 clusters with 0.6 < z < 1.7 . Our cluster sample is a powerful probe of f ( R ) gravity, because this model predicts a scale-dependent enhancement in the growth of structure, which impacts the halo mass function (HMF) at cluster mass scales. To account for these modified gravity effects on the HMF, our analysis employs a semianalytical approach calibrated with numerical simulations. Combining calibrated cluster counts with primary cosmic microwave background temperature and polarization anisotropy measurements from the Planck 2018 release, we derive robust constraints on the f ( R ) parameter f R 0 . Our results, log 10 | f R 0 | < − 5.32 at the 95% credible level, are the tightest current constraints on f ( R ) gravity from cosmological scales. This upper limit rules out f ( R ) -like deviations from general relativity that result in more than a ∼ 20 % enhancement of the cluster population on mass scales M 200 c > 3 × 10 14 M ⊙ .
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.047 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.206 | 0.075 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".