Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Joint Bayesian analysis of large angular scale CMB temperature anomalies

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1902.10155 v2 pith:D6QRAFOA submitted 2019-02-26 astro-ph.CO

Joint Bayesian analysis of large angular scale CMB temperature anomalies

classification astro-ph.CO
keywords modelpowercosmicanomaliesasymmetryhemisphericalanalysisscale
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Cosmic microwave background measurements show an agreement with the concordance cosmology model except for a few notable anomalies: Power Suppression, the lack of large scale power in the temperature data compared to what is expected in the concordance model, and Cosmic Hemispherical Asymmetry, a dipolar breakdown of statistical isotropy. An expansion of the CMB covariance in Bipolar Spherical Harmonics naturally parametrizes both these large-scale anomalies, allowing us to perform an exhaustive, fully Bayesian joint analysis of the power spectrum and violations of statistical isotropy up to the dipole level. Our analysis sheds light on the scale dependence of the Cosmic Hemispherical Asymmetry. Assuming a scale-dependent dipole modulation model with a two-parameter power law form, we explore the posterior pdf of amplitude $A(l = 16)$ and the power law index $\alpha$ and find the maximum a posteriori values $A_*(l = 16) = 0.064 \pm 0.022$ and $\alpha_* = -0.92 \pm 0.22$. The maximum a posteriori direction associated with the Cosmic Hemispherical Asymmetry is $(l,b) = (247.8^o, -19.6^o)$ in Galactic coordinates, consistent with previous analyses. We evaluate the Bayes factor $B_{SI-DM}$ to compare the Cosmic Hemispherical Asymmetry model with the isotropic model. The data prefer but do not substantially favor the anisotropic model ($B_{SI-DM}=0.4$). We consider several priors and find that this evidence ratio is robust to prior choice. The large-scale power suppression does not soften when jointly inferring both the isotropic power spectrum and the parameters of the asymmetric model, indicating no evidence that these anomalies are coupled.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.