Unified and Consistent Structure Growth Measurements from Joint ACT, SPT, and Planck CMB Lensing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present the tightest cosmic microwave background (CMB) lensing constraints to date on the growth of structure by combining CMB lensing measurements from the Atacama Cosmology Telescope (ACT), the South Pole Telescope (SPT) and \textit{Planck}. Each of these surveys individually provides lensing measurements with similarly high statistical power, achieving signal-to-noise ratios of approximately 40. The combined lensing bandpowers represent the most precise CMB lensing power spectrum measurement to date with a signal-to-noise ratio of 61 and an amplitude of $A_\mathrm{lens}^\mathrm{recon} = 1.025 \pm 0.017$ with respect to the theory prediction from the best-fit CMB \textit{Planck}-ACT cosmology. The bandpowers from all three lensing datasets, analyzed jointly, yield a $1.6\%$ measurement of the parameter combination $S_8^\mathrm{CMBL} \equiv σ_8\,(Ω_m/0.3)^{0.25} = 0.825^{+0.015}_{-0.013}$. Including Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI) Baryon Acoustic Oscillation (BAO) data improves the constraint on the amplitude of matter fluctuations to $σ_8 = 0.829 \pm 0.009$ (a $1.1\%$ determination). When combining with uncalibrated supernovae from \texttt{Pantheon+}, we present a $4\%$ sound-horizon-independent estimate of $H_0=66.4\pm2.5\,\mathrm{km\,s^{-1}\,Mpc^{-1}} $. The joint lensing constraints on structure growth and present-day Hubble rate are fully consistent with a $Λ$CDM model fit to the primary CMB data from \textit{Planck} and ACT. While the precise upper limit is sensitive to the choice of data and underlying model assumptions, when varying the neutrino mass sum within the $Λ\mathrm{CDM}$ cosmological model, the combination of primary CMB, BAO and CMB lensing drives the probable upper limit for the mass sum towards lower values, comparable to the minimum mass prior required by neutrino oscillation experiments.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".