اشترك بالحزمة الذهبية واحصل على وصول غير محدود شمرا أكاديميا
تسجيل مستخدم جديدClarifying the Hubble constant tension with a Bayesian hierarchical model of the local distance ladder
227
0
0.0
(
0
)
اسأل ChatGPT حول البحث
ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
Estimates of the Hubble constant, $H_0$, from the distance ladder and the cosmic microwave background (CMB) differ at the $sim$3-$sigma$ level, indicating a potential issue with the standard $Lambda$CDM cosmology. Interpreting this tension correctly requires a model comparison calculation depending on not only the traditional `$n$-$sigma$ mismatch but also the tails of the likelihoods. Determining the form of the tails of the local $H_0$ likelihood is impossible with the standard Gaussian least-squares approximation, as it requires using non-Gaussian distributions to faithfully represent anchor likelihoods and model outliers in the Cepheid and supernova (SN) populations, and simultaneous fitting of the full distance-ladder dataset to correctly propagate uncertainties. We have developed a Bayesian hierarchical model that describes the full distance ladder, from nearby geometric anchors through Cepheids to Hubble-Flow SNe. This model does not rely on any distributions being Gaussian, allowing outliers to be modeled and obviating the need for arbitrary data cuts. Sampling from the $sim$3000-parameter joint posterior using Hamiltonian Monte Carlo, we find $H_0$ = (72.72 $pm$ 1.67) ${rm km,s^{-1},Mpc^{-1}}$ when applied to the outlier-cleaned Riess et al. (2016) data, and ($73.15 pm 1.78$) ${rm km,s^{-1},Mpc^{-1}}$ with SN outliers reintroduced. Our high-fidelity sampling of the low-$H_0$ tail of the distance-ladder likelihood allows us to apply Bayesian model comparison to assess the evidence for deviation from $Lambda$CDM. We set up this comparison to yield a lower limit on the odds of the underlying model being $Lambda$CDM given the distance-ladder and Planck XIII (2016) CMB data. The odds against $Lambda$CDM are at worst 10:1 or 7:1, depending on whether the SNe outliers are cut or modeled, or 60:1 if an approximation to the Planck Int. XLVI (2016) likelihood is used.
قيم البحث
اقرأ أيضاً
In a recent paper, we argued that systematic uncertainties related to the choice of Cepheid color-luminosity calibration may have a large influence on the tension between the Hubble constant as inferred from distances to Type Ia supernovae and the co
smic microwave background as measured with the Planck satellite. Here, we investigate the impact of other sources of uncertainty in the supernova distance ladder, including Cepheid temperature and metallicity variations, supernova magnitudes and GAIA parallax distances. Excluding Milky Way Cepheids based on parallax calibration uncertainties, for the color excess calibration we obtain $H_0 = 70.8pm 2.1$ km/s/Mpc, in $1.6,sigma$ tension with the Planck value.
We use the largest sample to date of spectroscopic SN Ia distances and redshifts to look for evidence in the Hubble diagram of large scale outflows caused by local voids suggested to exist at z<0.15. Our sample combines data from the Pantheon sample
with the Foundation survey and the most recent release of lightcurves from the Carnegie Supernova Project to create a sample of 1295 SNe over a redshift range of 0.01<z<2.26. We make use of an inhomogeneous and isotropic Lemaitre-Tolman-Bondi metric to model a void in the SN Ia distance-redshift relation. We conclude that the SN luminosity distance-redshift relation is inconsistent at the 4-5 sigma confidence level with large local underdensities (|delta| > 20%, where the density contrast delta = Delta rho /rho) proposed in some galaxy count studies, and find no evidence of a change in the Hubble constant corresponding to a void with a sharp edge in the redshift range 0.023<z<0.15. With empirical precision of sigma_H_0 = 0.60%, we conclude that the distance ladder measurement is not affected by local density contrasts, in agreement with cosmic variance of sigma_H_0 = 0.42% predicted from simulations of large-scale structure. Given that uncertainty in the distance ladder value is sigma_H_0=2.2%, this does not affect the Hubble tension. We derive a 5 sigma constraint on local density contrasts on scales larger than 69 megaparsec h^-1 of delta < 27%. The presence of local structure does not appear to impede the possibility of measuring the Hubble constant to 1% precision.
We investigate a generalized form of the phenomenologically emergent dark energy model, known as generalized emergent dark energy (GEDE), introduced by Li and Shafieloo [Astrophys. J. {bf 902}, 58 (2020)] in light of a series of cosmological probes a
nd considering the evolution of the model at the level of linear perturbations. This model introduces a free parameter $Delta$ that can discriminate between the $Lambda$CDM (corresponds to $Delta=0$) or the phenomenologically emergent dark energy (PEDE) (corresponds to $Delta=1$) models, allowing us to determine which model is preferred most by the fit of the observational datasets. We find evidence in favor of the GEDE model for Planck alone and in combination with R19, while the Bayesian model comparison is inconclusive when Supernovae Type Ia or BAO data are included. In particular, we find that $Lambda$CDM model is disfavored at more than $2sigma$ CL for most of the observational datasets considered in this work and PEDE is in agreement with Planck 2018+BAO+R19 combination within $1sigma$ CL.
The current cosmological probes have provided a fantastic confirmation of the standard $Lambda$ Cold Dark Matter cosmological model, that has been constrained with unprecedented accuracy. However, with the increase of the experimental sensitivity a f
ew statistically significant tensions between different independent cosmological datasets emerged. While these tensions can be in portion the result of systematic errors, the persistence after several years of accurate analysis strongly hints at cracks in the standard cosmological scenario and the need for new physics. In this Letter of Interest we will focus on the $4.4sigma$ tension between the Planck estimate of the Hubble constant $H_0$ and the SH0ES collaboration measurements. After showing the $H_0$ evaluations made from different teams using different methods and geometric calibrations, we will list a few interesting new physics models that could solve this tension and discuss how the next decade experiments will be crucial.
The current Hubble constant tension is usually presented by comparing constraints on $H_0$ only. However, the post-recombination background cosmic evolution is determined by two parameters in the standard $Lambda$CDM model, the Hubble constant ($H_0$
) and todays matter energy fraction ($Omega_{rm{m}}$). If we therefore compare all constraints individually in the $H_0$-$Omega_{rm{m}}$ plane, (1) various constraints can be treated as independently as possible, (2) single-sided constraints are easier to consider, (3) compatibility among different constraints can be viewed in a more robust way, (4) the model dependence of each constraint is clear, and (5) whether or not a nonstandard model is able to reconcile all constraints in tension can be seen more effectively. We perform a systematic comparison of different constraints in the $H_0$-$Omega_{rm{m}}$ space based on a flat $Lambda$CDM model, treating them as separately as possible. Constraints along different degeneracy directions consistently overlap in one region of the space, with the local measurement from Cepheid variable-calibrated supernovae being the most outlying, followed by the time-delay strong-lensing result. Considering the possibility that some nonstandard physics may reconcile the constraints, we provide a general discussion on nonstandard models with modifications at high, mid, or low redshifts, and the effect of local environmental factors. Due to the different responses of individual constraints to a modified model, it is not easy for nonstandard models to reconcile all constraints if none of them have unaccounted-for systematic effects.
سجل دخول لتتمكن من نشر تعليقات
التعليقات
جاري جلب التعليقات
سجل دخول لتتمكن من متابعة معايير البحث التي قمت باختيارها
