BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

G. Rossmanith

G. Rossmanith contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
astro-ph.COphysics.data-an

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 15 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
3works
0followers
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2011arXiv

Search for non-Gaussianities in the WMAP data with the Scaling Index Method

In the recent years, non-Gaussianity and statistical isotropy of the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) was investigated with various statistical measures, first and foremost by means of the measurements of the WMAP satellite. In this Review, we focus on the analyses that were accomplished with a measure of local type, the so-called Scaling Index Method (SIM). The SIM is able to detect structural characteristics of a given data set, and has proven to be highly valuable in CMB analysis. It was used for comparing the data set with simulations as well as surrogates, which are full sky maps generated by randomisation of previously selected features of the original map. During these investigations, strong evidence for non-Gaussianities as well as asymmetries and local features could be detected. In combination with the surrogates approach, the SIM detected the highest significances for non-Gaussianity to date.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2010arXiv

Probing non-Gaussianities on Large Scales in WMAP5 and WMAP7 Data using Surrogates

Probing Gaussianity represents one of the key questions in modern cosmology, because it allows to discriminate between different models of inflation. We test for large-scale non-Gaussianities in the cosmic microwave background (CMB) in a model-independent way. To this end, so-called first and second order surrogates are generated by first shuffling the Fourier phases belonging to the scales not of interest and then shuffling the remaining phases for the length scales under study. Using scaling indices as test statistics we find highly significant signatures for both non-Gaussianities and asymmetries on large scales for the WMAP data of the CMB. We find remarkably similar results when analyzing different ILC-maps based on the WMAP five and seven year data. Such features being independent from the map-making procedure would disfavor the fundamental principle of isotropy as well as canonical single-field slow-roll inflation - unless there is some undiscovered systematic error in the collection or reduction of the CMB data or yet unknown foreground contributions.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2009arXiv

Non-Gaussian Signatures in the five-year WMAP data as identified with isotropic scaling indices

We continue the analysis of non-Gaussianities in the CMB by means of the scaling index method (SIM, Raeth, Schuecker & Banday 2007) by applying this method on the 5-year WMAP data. We compare each of the results with 1000 Monte Carlo simulations mimicing the Gaussian properties of the best fit $ΛCDM$-model. Based on the scaling indices, scale-dependent empirical probability distributions, moments of these distributions and $χ^2$-combinations of them are calculated, obtaining similar results as in the former analysis of the 3-year data: We derive evidence for non-Gaussianity with a probability of up to 97.3% for the mean when regarding the KQ75-masked full sky and summing up over all considered length scales by means of a diagonal $χ^2$-statistics. Looking at only the northern or southern hemisphere, we obtain up to 98.5% or 96.6%, respectively. For the standard deviation, these results appear as 95.6% for the full sky (99.7% north, 89.4% south) and for a $χ^2$-combination of both measurements as 97.4% (99.1% north, 95.5% south). By performing an analysis of rotated hemispheres, we detect an obvious asymmetry in the data. In addition to these investigations, we present a method of filling the mask with Gaussian noise to eliminate boundary effects caused by the mask. With the help of this technique, we identify several local features on the map, of which the most significant one turns out to be the well-known cold spot. When excluding all these spots from the analysis, the deviation from Gaussianity increases, which shows that the discovered local anomalies are not the reason of the global detection of non-Gaussianity, but actually were damping the deviations on average. Our analyses per band and per year suggest, however, that it is very unlikely that the detected anomalies are due to foreground effects.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access