MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6989567842

B EYOND P LANCK: IV. Simulations and validation

2023· article· ca· W6989567842 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueBiblioteca Digital da Memória Científica do INPE (National Institute for Space Research) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageca
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceNorges ForskningsrådTekesNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationChina Scholarship CouncilCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoPartnership for Advanced Computing in Europe AISBLKillam TrustsMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and TechnologyUniversidade de São PauloEuropean CommissionUniversitetet i OsloFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
KeywordsRealization (probability)SuiteCosmic microwave backgroundKey (lock)Posterior probabilityStatistical modelPipeline (software)Estimation theoryPrior probabilityStochastic process
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

End-to-end simulations play a key role in the analysis of any high-sensitivity cosmic microwave background (CMB) experiment, providing high-fidelity systematic error propagation capabilities that are unmatched by any other means. In this paper, we address an important issue regarding such simulations, namely, how to define the inputs in terms of sky model and instrument parameters. These may either be taken as a constrained realization derived from the data or as a random realization independent from the data. We refer to these as posterior and prior simulations, respectively. We show that the two options lead to significantly different correlation structures, as prior simulations (contrary to posterior simulations) effectively include cosmic variance, but they exclude realization-specific correlations from non-linear degeneracies. Consequently, they quantify fundamentally different types of uncertainties. We argue that as a result, they also have different and complementary scientific uses, even if this dichotomy is not absolute. In particular, posterior simulations are in general more convenient for parameter estimation studies, while prior simulations are generally more convenient for model testing. Before BEYONDPLANCK, most pipelines used a mix of constrained and random inputs and applied the same hybrid simulations for all applications, even though the statistical justification for this is not always evident. BEYONDPLANCK represents the first end-to-end CMB simulation framework that is able to generate both types of simulations and these new capabilities have brought this topic to the forefront. The BEYONDPLANCK posterior simulations and their uses are described extensively in a suite of companion papers. In this work, we consider one important applications of the corresponding prior simulations, namely, code validation. Specifically, we generated a set of one-year LFI 30 GHz prior simulations with known inputs and we used these to validate the core low-level BEYONDPLANCK algorithms dealing with gain estimation, correlated noise estimation, and mapmaking.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.005

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiblioteca Digital da Memória Científica do INPE (National Institute for Space Research)Same topicCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesFrench-language works237,207