MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415328723 · doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/11/040

A simulation framework for the <i>LiteBIRD</i> instruments

2025· preprint· en· W4415328723 on OpenAlexafffund
M Tomasi, L. Pagano, C Baccigalupi, A. J. Banday, M. Bortolami, G. Galloni, M. Galloway, T. Ghigna, S. Giardiello, E. Hivon, N Krachmalnicoff, S. Micheli, Y. Nagano, G. Patanchon, D. Poletti, Giuseppe Puglisi, N. Raffuzzi, M. Reinecke, Yusuke Takase, G. Weymann-Despres, Debabrata Adak, Erwan Allys, J. Aumont, R. Aurvik, M. Ballardini, R. B. Barreiro, N. Bartolo, S. Basak, M. Bersanelli, A Besnard, T Brinckmann, Erminia Calabrese, P. Campeti, E. Carinos, A. Carones, F. J. Casas, Kmc Cheung, M Citran, Lionel Clermont, F Columbro, Gabriele Coppi, A Coppolecchia, F. Cuttaia, Bo Peng, P de Bernardis, E. de la Hoz, Mario de Lucia, S Della Torre, P. Diego-Palazuelos, H. K. Eriksen, Thomas Essinger-Hileman, C Franceschet, U Fuskeland, M. Gerbino, M. Gervasi, C. Gimeno-Amo, E. Gjerløw, A. Gruppuso, M. Hazumi, S Henrot-Versillé, L. T. Hergt, Baptiste Jost, Kimiko KOHRI, L. Lamagna, T. Lari, M. Lattanzi, C. Leloup, F. Levrier, A.I. Lonappan, M. López-Caniego, G. Luzzi, J. F. Macías–Pérez, B. Maffei, E. Martínez-González, S. Masi, S. Matarrese, T. Matsumura, L. Montier, G. Morgante, L. Mousset, Ryo Nagata, F. Noviello, Ippei Obata, Antonio Occhiuzzi, A Paiella, D. Paoletti, G Pascual-Cisneros, F Piacentini, Michele Pinchera, G Polenta, L. Porcelli, M Remazeilles, A. Ritacco, A. Rizzieri, J. A. Rubiño-Martín, M. Ruiz-Granda, J. Sanghavi, V. Sauvage, Maresuke Shiraishi, G. Signorelli, S. L. Stever, R. M. Sullivan, Konstantinos Tassis, L. Terenzi, L. Vacher, B. Van Tent, P. Vielva, I. K. Wehus, M. Zannoni, Yanqiu Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicSimulation Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNuclear PhysicsCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueJapan Aerospace Exploration AgencyCentre National d’Etudes SpatialesJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceNorges ForskningsrådMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and TechnologyIstituto Nazionale di AstrofisicaCanadian Space AgencyDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsCosmic microwave backgroundPipeline (software)Pipeline transportCosmic background radiationPython (programming language)SkySatelliteCosmic rayKinematicsCosmology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract LiteBIRD , the Lite (Light) satellite for the study of B-mode polarization and Inflation from cosmic background Radiation Detection, is a space mission focused on primordial cosmology and fundamental physics. In this paper, we present the LiteBIRD Simulation Framework (LBS), a Python package designed for the implementation of pipelines that model the outputs of the data acquisition process from the three instruments on the LiteBIRD spacecraft: LFT (Low-Frequency Telescope), MFT (Mid-Frequency Telescope), and HFT (High-Frequency Telescope). LBS provides several modules to simulate the scanning strategy of the telescopes, the measurement of realistic polarized radiation coming from the sky (including the Cosmic Microwave Background itself, the Solar and Kinematic dipole, and the diffuse foregrounds emitted by the Galaxy), the generation of instrumental noise and the effect of systematic errors, like pointing wobbling, non-idealities in the Half-Wave Plate, et cetera . Additionally, we present the implementation of a simple but complete pipeline that showcases the main features of LBS. We also discuss how we ensured that LBS lets people develop pipelines whose results are accurate and reproducible. A full end-to-end pipeline has been developed using LBS to characterize the scientific performance of the LiteBIRD experiment. This pipeline and the results of the first simulation run are presented in Puglisi et al. (2025).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.740
Threshold uncertainty score0.258

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cosmology and Astroparticle PhysicsSame topicSimulation Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207