Source author record

Matti Savelainen

Matti Savelainen appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

2works
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

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

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2013arXiv

Constraints on neutrino density and velocity isocurvature modes from WMAP-9 data

We use WMAP 9-year and other CMB data to constrain cosmological models where the primordial perturbations have both an adiabatic and a (possibly correlated) neutrino density (NDI), neutrino velocity (NVI), or cold dark matter density (CDI) isocurvature component. For NDI and CDI we use both a phenomenological approach, where primordial perturbations are parametrized in terms of amplitudes at two scales, and a slow-roll two-field inflation approach, where slow-roll parameters are used as primary parameters. For NVI we use only the phenomenological approach, since it is difficult to imagine a connection with inflation. We find that in the NDI and NVI cases larger isocurvature fractions are allowed than in the corresponding models with CDI. For uncorrelated perturbations, the upper limit to the primordial NDI (NVI) fraction is 24% (20%) at k = 0.002 Mpc^{-1} and 28% (16%) at k = 0.01 Mpc^{-1}. For maximally correlated (anticorrelated) perturbations, the upper limit to the NDI fraction is 3.0% (0.9%). The nonadiabatic contribution to the CMB temperature variance can be as large as 10% (-13%) for the NDI (NVI) modes. Bayesian model comparison favors pure adiabatic initial mode over the mixed primordial adiabatic and NDI, NVI, or CDI perturbations. At best, the betting odds for a mixed model (uncorrelated NDI) are 1:3.4 compared to the pure adiabatic model. For the phenomenological generally correlated mixed models the odds are about 1:100, whereas the slow-roll approach leads to 1:13 (NDI) and 1:51 (CDI).

preprint2012arXiv

Constraints on scalar and tensor perturbations in phenomenological and two-field inflation models: Bayesian evidences for primordial isocurvature and tensor modes

We constrain cosmological models where the primordial perturbations have both an adiabatic and a (possibly correlated) cold dark matter (CDM) or baryon isocurvature component. We use both a phenomenological approach, where the primordial power spectra are parametrized with amplitudes and spectral indices, and a slow-roll two-field inflation approach where slow-roll parameters are used as primary parameters. In the phenomenological case, with CMB data, the upper limit to the CDM isocurvature fraction is α<6.4% at k=0.002Mpc^{-1} and 15.4% at k=0.01Mpc^{-1}. The median 95% range for the non-adiabatic contribution to the CMB temperature variance is -0.030<α_T<0.049. Including the supernova (or large-scale structure, LSS) data, these limits become: α<7.0%, 13.7%, and -0.048<α_T< 0.042 (or α<10.2%, 16.0%, and -0.071<α_T<0.024). The CMB constraint on the tensor-to-scalar ratio, r<0.26 at k=0.01Mpc^{-1}, is not affected by the nonadiabatic modes. In the slow-roll two-field inflation approach, the spectral indices are constrained close to 1. This leads to tighter limits on the isocurvature fraction, with the CMB data α<2.6% at k=0.01Mpc^{-1}, but the constraint on α_T is not much affected, -0.058<α_T<0.045. Including SN (or LSS) data, these limits become: α< 3.2% and -0.056<α_T<0.030 (or α<3.4% and -0.063<α_T<-0.008). When all spectral indices are close to each other the isocurvature fraction is somewhat degenerate with the tensor-to-scalar ratio. In addition to the generally correlated models, we study also special cases where the perturbation modes are uncorrelated or fully (anti)correlated. We calculate Bayesian evidences (model probabilities) in 21 different cases for our nonadiabatic models and for the corresponding adiabatic models, and find that in all cases the data support the pure adiabatic model.