Paper detail

Increasing evidence for hemispherical power asymmetry in the five-year WMAP data

(Abridged)Motivated by the recent results of Hansen et al. (2008) concerning a noticeable hemispherical power asymmetry in the WMAP data on small angular scales, we revisit the dipole modulated signal model introduced by Gordon et al. (2005). This model assumes that the true CMB signal consists of a Gaussian isotropic random field modulated by a dipole, and is characterized by an overall modulation amplitude, A, and a preferred direction, p. Previous analyses of this model has been restricted to very low resolution due to computational cost. In this paper, we double the angular resolution, and compute the full corresponding posterior distribution for the 5-year WMAP data. The results from our analysis are the following: The best-fit modulation amplitude for l <= 64 and the ILC data with the WMAP KQ85 sky cut is A=0.072 +/- 0.022, non-zero at 3.3sigma, and the preferred direction points toward Galactic coordinates (l,b) = (224 degree, -22 degree) +/- 24 degree. The corresponding results for l <~ 40 from earlier analyses was A = 0.11 +/- 0.04 and (l,b) = (225 degree,-27 degree). The statistical significance of a non-zero amplitude thus increases from 2.8sigma to 3.3sigma when increasing l_max from 40 to 64, and all results are consistent to within 1sigma. Similarly, the Bayesian log-evidence difference with respect to the isotropic model increases from Delta ln E = 1.8 to Delta ln E = 2.6, ranking as &#34;strong evidence&#34; on the Jeffreys&#39; scale. The raw best-fit log-likelihood difference increases from Delta ln L = 6.1 to Delta ln L = 7.3. Similar, and often slightly stronger, results are found for other data combinations. Thus, we find that the evidence for a dipole power distribution in the WMAP data increases with l in the 5-year WMAP data set, in agreement with the reports of Hansen et al. (2008).

preprint2009arXivOpen 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.