联合宇宙探测器暗能量测量内部一致性检验与后验预测分布分析

C. Doux, E. Baxter, P. Lemos, C. Chang, A. Alarcon, A. Amon, A. Campos, A. Choi, M. Gatti, D. Gruen, M. Jarvis, N. MacCrann, Y. Park, J. Prat, M. Rau, M. Raveri, S. Samuroff, J. DeRose, W. Hartley, B. Hoyle, M. Troxel, J. Zuntz, T. Abbott, M. Aguena, S. Allam, J. Annis, S. Ávila, David Bacon, E. Bertin, S. Bhargava, D. Brooks, D. Burke, M. C. Kind, J. Carretero, R. Cawthon, M. Costanzi, L. Costa, M. Pereira, S. Desai, H. Diehl, J. Dietrich, P. Doel, S. Everett, I. Ferrero, P. Fosalba, J. Frieman, J. Garcı́a-Bellido, D. Gerdes, T. Giannantonio, R. Gruendl, J. Gschwend, G. Gutiérrez, S. Hinton, D. Hollowood, K. Honscheid, E. Huff, D. Huterer, B. Jain, D. James, E. Krause, K. Kuehn, N. Kuropatkin, O. Lahav, C. Lidman, M. Lima, M. Maia, F. Menanteau, R. Miquel, R. Morgan, J. Muir, R. Ogando, A. Palmese, F. Paz-Chinchón, A. Plazas, E. Sanchez, Scarpine, M. Schubnell, S. Serrano, I. Sevilla-Noarbe, M. Smith, E. Suchyta, M. Swanson, G. Tarlé, Chun-Hao To, D. Tucker, T. Varga, J. Weller, R. Wilkinson, A. Alarcon,
{"title":"联合宇宙探测器暗能量测量内部一致性检验与后验预测分布分析","authors":"C. Doux, E. Baxter, P. Lemos, C. Chang, A. Alarcon, A. Amon, A. Campos, A. Choi, M. Gatti, D. Gruen, M. Jarvis, N. MacCrann, Y. Park, J. Prat, M. Rau, M. Raveri, S. Samuroff, J. DeRose, W. Hartley, B. Hoyle, M. Troxel, J. Zuntz, T. Abbott, M. Aguena, S. Allam, J. Annis, S. Ávila, David Bacon, E. Bertin, S. Bhargava, D. Brooks, D. Burke, M. C. Kind, J. Carretero, R. Cawthon, M. Costanzi, L. Costa, M. Pereira, S. Desai, H. Diehl, J. Dietrich, P. Doel, S. Everett, I. Ferrero, P. Fosalba, J. Frieman, J. Garcı́a-Bellido, D. Gerdes, T. Giannantonio, R. Gruendl, J. Gschwend, G. Gutiérrez, S. Hinton, D. Hollowood, K. Honscheid, E. Huff, D. Huterer, B. Jain, D. James, E. Krause, K. Kuehn, N. Kuropatkin, O. Lahav, C. Lidman, M. Lima, M. Maia, F. Menanteau, R. Miquel, R. Morgan, J. Muir, R. Ogando, A. Palmese, F. Paz-Chinchón, A. Plazas, E. Sanchez, Scarpine, M. Schubnell, S. Serrano, I. Sevilla-Noarbe, M. Smith, E. Suchyta, M. Swanson, G. Tarlé, Chun-Hao To, D. Tucker, T. Varga, J. Weller, R. Wilkinson, A. Alarcon,","doi":"10.1093/MNRAS/STAB526","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Beyond-$\\Lambda$CDM physics or systematic errors may cause subsets of a cosmological data set to appear inconsistent when analyzed assuming $\\Lambda$CDM. We present an application of internal consistency tests to measurements from the Dark Energy Survey Year 1 (DES Y1) joint probes analysis. Our analysis relies on computing the posterior predictive distribution (PPD) for these data under the assumption of $\\Lambda$CDM. We find that the DES Y1 data have an acceptable goodness of fit to $\\Lambda$CDM, with a probability of finding a worse fit by random chance of ${p = 0.046}$. Using numerical PPD tests, supplemented by graphical checks, we show that most of the data vector appears completely consistent with expectations, although we observe a small tension between large- and small-scale measurements. A small part (roughly 1.5%) of the data vector shows an unusually large departure from expectations; excluding this part of the data has negligible impact on cosmological constraints, but does significantly improve the $p$-value to 0.10. The methodology developed here will be applied to test the consistency of DES Year 3 joint probes data sets.","PeriodicalId":8431,"journal":{"name":"arXiv: Cosmology and Nongalactic Astrophysics","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dark energy survey internal consistency tests of the joint cosmological probes analysis with posterior predictive distributions\",\"authors\":\"C. Doux, E. Baxter, P. Lemos, C. Chang, A. Alarcon, A. Amon, A. Campos, A. Choi, M. Gatti, D. Gruen, M. Jarvis, N. MacCrann, Y. Park, J. Prat, M. Rau, M. Raveri, S. Samuroff, J. DeRose, W. Hartley, B. Hoyle, M. Troxel, J. Zuntz, T. Abbott, M. Aguena, S. Allam, J. Annis, S. Ávila, David Bacon, E. Bertin, S. Bhargava, D. Brooks, D. Burke, M. C. Kind, J. Carretero, R. Cawthon, M. Costanzi, L. Costa, M. Pereira, S. Desai, H. Diehl, J. Dietrich, P. Doel, S. Everett, I. Ferrero, P. Fosalba, J. Frieman, J. Garcı́a-Bellido, D. Gerdes, T. Giannantonio, R. Gruendl, J. Gschwend, G. Gutiérrez, S. Hinton, D. Hollowood, K. Honscheid, E. Huff, D. Huterer, B. Jain, D. James, E. Krause, K. Kuehn, N. Kuropatkin, O. Lahav, C. Lidman, M. Lima, M. Maia, F. Menanteau, R. Miquel, R. Morgan, J. Muir, R. Ogando, A. Palmese, F. Paz-Chinchón, A. Plazas, E. Sanchez, Scarpine, M. Schubnell, S. Serrano, I. Sevilla-Noarbe, M. Smith, E. Suchyta, M. Swanson, G. Tarlé, Chun-Hao To, D. Tucker, T. Varga, J. Weller, R. Wilkinson, A. Alarcon,\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/MNRAS/STAB526\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Beyond-$\\\\Lambda$CDM physics or systematic errors may cause subsets of a cosmological data set to appear inconsistent when analyzed assuming $\\\\Lambda$CDM. We present an application of internal consistency tests to measurements from the Dark Energy Survey Year 1 (DES Y1) joint probes analysis. Our analysis relies on computing the posterior predictive distribution (PPD) for these data under the assumption of $\\\\Lambda$CDM. We find that the DES Y1 data have an acceptable goodness of fit to $\\\\Lambda$CDM, with a probability of finding a worse fit by random chance of ${p = 0.046}$. Using numerical PPD tests, supplemented by graphical checks, we show that most of the data vector appears completely consistent with expectations, although we observe a small tension between large- and small-scale measurements. A small part (roughly 1.5%) of the data vector shows an unusually large departure from expectations; excluding this part of the data has negligible impact on cosmological constraints, but does significantly improve the $p$-value to 0.10. The methodology developed here will be applied to test the consistency of DES Year 3 joint probes data sets.\",\"PeriodicalId\":8431,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"arXiv: Cosmology and Nongalactic Astrophysics\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-11-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"13\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"arXiv: Cosmology and Nongalactic Astrophysics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/MNRAS/STAB526\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv: Cosmology and Nongalactic Astrophysics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/MNRAS/STAB526","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

摘要

在假设$\Lambda$CDM进行分析时,物理或系统错误可能导致宇宙学数据集的子集出现不一致。我们提出了内部一致性测试在暗能量调查第一年(DES Y1)联合探测器分析测量中的应用。我们的分析依赖于在$\Lambda$CDM假设下计算这些数据的后验预测分布(PPD)。我们发现DES Y1数据对$\Lambda$CDM具有可接受的拟合优度,通过随机机会发现较差拟合的概率为${p = 0.046}$。使用数值PPD测试,辅以图形检查,我们表明大多数数据向量似乎与预期完全一致,尽管我们观察到大尺度和小尺度测量之间存在小张力。数据向量的一小部分(大约1.5%)显示与预期的偏差异常大;排除这部分数据对宇宙学约束的影响可以忽略不计,但确实显著提高了$p$-值至0.10。这里开发的方法将用于测试DES第3年联合探测数据集的一致性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Dark energy survey internal consistency tests of the joint cosmological probes analysis with posterior predictive distributions
Beyond-$\Lambda$CDM physics or systematic errors may cause subsets of a cosmological data set to appear inconsistent when analyzed assuming $\Lambda$CDM. We present an application of internal consistency tests to measurements from the Dark Energy Survey Year 1 (DES Y1) joint probes analysis. Our analysis relies on computing the posterior predictive distribution (PPD) for these data under the assumption of $\Lambda$CDM. We find that the DES Y1 data have an acceptable goodness of fit to $\Lambda$CDM, with a probability of finding a worse fit by random chance of ${p = 0.046}$. Using numerical PPD tests, supplemented by graphical checks, we show that most of the data vector appears completely consistent with expectations, although we observe a small tension between large- and small-scale measurements. A small part (roughly 1.5%) of the data vector shows an unusually large departure from expectations; excluding this part of the data has negligible impact on cosmological constraints, but does significantly improve the $p$-value to 0.10. The methodology developed here will be applied to test the consistency of DES Year 3 joint probes data sets.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信