Paper detail

Accounting for Correlations When Fitting Extra Cosmological Parameters

Current cosmological tensions motivate investigating extensions to the standard $Λ$CDM model. Additional model parameters are typically varied one or two at a time, in a series of separate tests. The purpose of this paper is to highlight that information is lost by not also examining the correlations between these additional parameters, which arise when their effects on model predictions are similar, even if the parameters are not varied simultaneously. We show how these correlations can be quantified with simulations and Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods. As an example, we assume that $Λ$CDM is the true underlying model, and calculate the correlations expected between the phenomenological lensing amplitude parameter, $A_L$, the running of the spectral index, $n_{\rm run}$, and the primordial helium mass fraction, $Y_P$, when these parameters are varied one at a time along with the $Λ$CDM parameters in fits to the $\textit{Planck}$ 2015 temperature power spectrum. These correlations are not small, ranging from 0.31 ($A_L-n_{\rm run}$) to $-0.93$ ($n_{\rm run}-Y_P$). We find that the values of these three parameters from the $\textit{Planck}$ data are consistent with $Λ$CDM expectations within $0.9σ$ when the correlations are accounted for. This does not explain the 1.8-2.7$σ$ $\textit{Planck}$ preference for $A_L>1$, but provides an additional $Λ$CDM consistency test. For example, if $A_L>1$ was a symptom of an underlying systematic error or some real but unknown physical effect that also produced spurious correlations with $n_{\rm run}$ or $Y_P$ our test might have revealed this. We recommend that future cosmological analyses examine correlations between additional model parameters in addition to investigating them separately, one a time.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.