Atacama Cosmology Telescope DR6 and DESI: Structure growth measurements from the cross-correlation of DESI legacy imaging galaxies and CMB lensing from ACT DR6 and <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <mml:mi>P</mml:mi> <mml:mi>l</mml:mi> <mml:mi>a</mml:mi> <mml:mi>n</mml:mi> <mml:mi>c</mml:mi> <mml:mi>k</mml:mi> </mml:math> PR4
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We measure the growth of cosmic density fluctuations on large scales and across the redshift range 0.3 < z < 0.8 through galaxy clustering and the cross-correlation of the ACT data release 6 cosmic microwave background (CMB) lensing map and galaxies from the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument Legacy Survey, using three galaxy samples spanning the redshifts of 0.3 ≲ z ≲ 0.45 , 0.45 ≲ z ≲ 0.6 , 0.6 ≲ z ≲ 0.8 . We adopt a scale cut where nonlinear effects are negligible, so that the cosmological constraints are derived from the linear regime. We determine the amplitude of matter fluctuations over all three redshift bins using Atacama Cosmology Telescope (ACT) data alone to be S 8 ≡ σ 8 ( Ω m / 0.3 ) 0.5 = 0.772 ± 0.040 in a joint analysis combining the three redshift bins and ACT lensing alone. Using a combination of ACT and data we obtain S 8 = 0.765 ± 0.032 . The lowest redshift bin used is the least constraining and exhibits a ∼ 2 σ tension with the other redshift bins; thus we also report constraints excluding the first redshift bin, giving S 8 = 0.785 ± 0.033 for the combination of ACT and . This result is in excellent agreement at the 0.3 σ level with measurements from galaxy lensing, but is 1.8 σ lower than predictions based on primary CMB data. Understanding whether this hint of discrepancy in the growth of structure at low redshifts arises from a fluctuation, from systematics in data, or from new physics is a high priority for forthcoming CMB lensing and galaxy cross-correlation analyses.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
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".