Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Characterization of the Polarization Beam Response of SPT-3G Using Point Sources

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 2602.06334 v2 pith:SF4LB6V6 submitted 2026-02-06 astro-ph.CO astro-ph.IM

Characterization of the Polarization Beam Response of SPT-3G Using Point Sources

classification astro-ph.CO astro-ph.IM
keywords beampoweranalysismeasurementspolarizationspectrumspt-3gbeta
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Precise measurements of cosmic microwave background (CMB) polarization require rigorous control of instrumental systematics. For the South Pole Telescope's third-generation camera (SPT-3G), which observes in three bands centered near 95, 150, and 220 GHz, accurate beam characterization is critical for interpreting the polarized mm-wave sky. We present direct measurements of SPT-3G's polarized beam response from observations of 100 bright extragalactic point sources. Previous SPT-3G power spectrum analyses introduced a phenomenological parameter, $\beta_{\rm pol}$, to describe the polarization preserved in beam sidelobes, and found evidence for significant depolarization from the requirement of inter-frequency polarization power spectrum consistency. Our direct measurements yield $\beta_{\rm pol}=0.89\pm0.10$ at 95 GHz, $1.08\pm0.10$ at 150 GHz, and $0.90\pm0.22$ at 220 GHz, indicating minimal sidelobe depolarization. We validate these results with systematic tests of posterior sampling versus bootstrap resampling, real-space versus Fourier-space analysis, temperature-to-polarization leakage handling, covariance determination, and source selection. Compared to values inferred from previous cosmological analyses, our results differ by an effective $1.3\sigma$. This apparent discrepancy is model dependent, because the point source analysis derives much of its $\beta_{\rm pol}$ constraining power from higher multipoles than the power spectrum analysis. These measurements therefore admit three explanations for the frequency-dependent residuals observed in the power spectrum analysis: a statistical fluctuation, the need for more sophisticated polarized beam models, or systematics other than beam depolarization.

discussion (0)

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