MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7106861881

Detection of the Cosmological 21 cm Signal in Auto-correlation at z ~ 1 with the Canadian Hydrogen Intensity Mapping Experiment

2025· article· W7106861881 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueArXiv.org · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRadio Astronomy Observations and Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntensity mappingSpectral densityDetection theorySignal processingRobustness (evolution)Hydrogen lineSIGNAL (programming language)Intensity (physics)Statistical power
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the first detection of the cosmological 21 cm intensity mapping signal in auto-correlation at z ~ 1 with the Canadian Hydrogen Intensity Mapping Experiment (CHIME). Using 94 nights of observation, we have measured the 21 cm auto-power spectrum over a frequency range from 608.2 MHz to 707.8 MHz (z = 1.34 to 1.01) at 0.4 h Mpc^-1 < k < 1.5 h Mpc^-1, with a detection significance of 12.5 sigma. Our analysis employs significant improvements to the CHIME data processing pipeline compared to previous work, including novel radio frequency interference (RFI) detection and masking algorithms, achromatic beamforming techniques, and foreground filtering before time averaging to minimize spectral leakage. We establish the robustness and reliability of our detection through a comprehensive suite of validation tests. We also measure the 21 cm signal in two independent sub-bands centered at z ~ 1.08 and z ~ 1.24 with detection significance of 8.7 sigma and 9.2 sigma, respectively. We briefly discuss the theoretical interpretation of these measurements in terms of a power spectrum model, deferring the details to a companion paper. This auto-power spectrum detection demonstrates CHIME's capability to probe large-scale structure through 21 cm intensity mapping without reliance on external galaxy surveys.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.962

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 designObservational
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArXiv.orgSame topicRadio Astronomy Observations and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207