MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408659033 · doi:10.1093/mnras/staf433

Boosting H <scp>i</scp>-Galaxy Cross-Clustering Signal through Higher-Order Cross-Correlations

2025· article· en· W4408659033 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Eishica Chand, Arka Banerjee, Simon Foreman, Francisco Villaescusa-Navarro

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLeaf Properties and Growth Measurement
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsCluster analysisGalaxyBoosting (machine learning)Cross-correlationAstrophysicsStatistical physicsAstronomyStatisticsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract After reionization, neutral hydrogen (${\rm H\, \small {I}}$) traces the large-scale structure (LSS) of the Universe, enabling ${\rm H\, \small {I}}$ intensity mapping (IM) to capture the LSS in 3D and constrain key cosmological parameters. We present a new framework utilizing higher-order cross-correlations to study ${\rm H\, \small {I}}$ clustering around galaxies, tested using real-space data from the IllustrisTNG300 simulation. This approach computes the joint distributions of k-nearest neighbor (kNN) optical galaxies and the ${\rm H\, \small {I}}$ brightness temperature field smoothed at relevant scales (the kNN-field framework), providing sensitivity to all higher-order cross-correlations, unlike two-point statistics. To simulate ${\rm H\, \small {I}}$ data from actual surveys, we add random thermal noise and apply a simple foreground cleaning model, filtering out Fourier modes of the brightness temperature field with k∥ &amp;lt; kmin, ∥. Under current levels of thermal noise and foreground cleaning, typical of a Canadian Hydrogen Intensity Mapping Experiment (CHIME)-like survey, the ${\rm H\, \small {I}}$-galaxy cross-correlation signal in our simulations, using the kNN-field framework, is detectable at &amp;gt;30σ across r = [3, 12] h−1 Mpc. In contrast, the detectability of the standard two-point correlation function (2PCF) over the same scales depends strongly on the foreground filter: a sharp k∥ filter can spuriously boost detection to 8σ due to position-space ringing, whereas a less sharp filter yields no detection. Nonetheless, we conclude that kNN-field cross-correlations are robustly detectable across a broad range of foreground filtering and thermal noise conditions, suggesting their potential for enhanced constraining power over 2PCFs.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.549
Threshold uncertainty score0.563

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicLeaf Properties and Growth MeasurementFrench-language works237,207