Paper detail

Detecting anomalies in CMB maps: a new method

Ever since WMAP announced its first results, different analyses have shown that there is weak evidence for several large-scale anomalies in the CMB data. While the evidence for each anomaly appears to be weak, the fact that there are multiple seemingly unrelated anomalies makes it difficult to account for them via a single statistical fluke. So, one is led to considering a combination of these anomalies. But, if we "hand-pick" the anomalies (test statistics) to consider, we are making an \textit{a posteriori} choice. In this article, we propose two statistics that do not suffer from this problem. The statistics are linear and quadratic combinations of the $a_{\ell m}$'s with random co-efficients, and they test the null hypothesis that the $a_{\ell m}$'s are independent, normally-distributed, zero-mean random variables with an $m$-independent variance. The motivation for such statistics is generality; equivalently, it is a non \textit{a posteriori} choice. But, a very useful by-product of considering such statistics is this: Because most physical models that lead to large-scale anomalies result in coupling multiple $\ell$ and $m$ modes, the "coherence" of this coupling should get enhanced if a combination of different modes is considered. Using fiducial data, we demonstrate that the method works and discuss how it can be used with actual CMB data to make quite general statements about how incompatible the data are with the null hypothesis.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author1 topic

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 map preview

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.