Impacts and Statistical Mitigation of Missing Data on the 21 cm Power Spectrum: A Case Study with the Hydrogen Epoch of Reionization Array
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The precise characterization and mitigation of systematic effects is one of the biggest roadblocks impeding the detection of the fluctuations of cosmological 21 cm signals. Missing data in radio cosmological experiments, often due to radio frequency interference (RFI), pose a particular challenge to power spectrum analysis as this could lead to the ringing of bright foreground modes in the Fourier space, heavily contaminating the cosmological signals. Here we show that the problem of missing data becomes even more arduous in the presence of systematic effects. Using a realistic numerical simulation, we demonstrate that partially flagged data combined with systematic effects can introduce significant foreground ringing. We show that such an effect can be mitigated through inpainting the missing data. We present a rigorous statistical framework that incorporates the process of inpainting missing data into a quadratic estimator of the 21 cm power spectrum. Under this framework, the uncertainties associated with our inpainting method and its impact on power spectrum statistics can be understood. These results are applied to the latest Phase II observations taken by the Hydrogen Epoch of Reionization Array, forming a crucial component in power spectrum analyses as we move toward detecting 21 cm signals in the ever more noisy RFI environment.
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 | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".