Paper detail

Hemispherical power asymmetry: parameter estimation from CMB WMAP5 data

We reexamine the evidence of the hemispherical power asymmetry, detected in the CMB WMAP data using a new method. At first, we analyze the hemispherical variance ratios and compare these with simulated distributions. Secondly, working within a previously-proposed CMB bipolar modulation model, we constrain model parameters: the amplitude and the orientation of the modulation field as a function of various multipole bins. Finally, we select three ranges of multipoles leading to the most anomalous signals, and we process corresponding 100 Gaussian, random field (GRF) simulations, treated as observational data, to further test the statistical significance and robustness of the hemispherical power asymmetry. For our analysis we use the Internally-Linearly-Coadded (ILC) full sky map, and KQ75 cut-sky V channel, foregrounds reduced map of the WMAP five year data (V5). We constrain the modulation parameters using a generic maximum a posteriori method. In particular, we find differences in hemispherical power distribution, which when described in terms of a model with bipolar modulation field, exclude the field amplitude value of the isotropic model A=0 at confidence level of ~99.5% (~99.4%) in the multipole range l=[7,19] (l=[7,79]) in the V5 data, and at the confidence level ~99.9% in the multipole range l=[7,39] in the ILC5 data, with the best fit (modal PDF) values in these particular multipole ranges of A=0.21 (A=0.21) and A=0.15 respectively. However, we also point out that similar or larger significances (in terms of rejecting the isotropic model), and large best-fit modulation amplitudes are obtained in GRF simulations as well, which reduces the overall significance of the CMB power asymmetry down to only about 94% (95%) in the V5 data, in the range l=[7,19] (l=[7,79]).

preprint2008arXivOpen 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.