Paper detail

Is there concordance within the concordance $Λ$CDM model?

We use a complete and rigorous statistical indicator to measure the level of concordance between cosmological data sets, without relying on the inspection of the marginal posterior distribution of some selected parameters. We apply this test to state of the art cosmological data sets, to assess their agreement within the $Λ$CDM model. We find that there is a good level of concordance between all the experiments with one noticeable exception. There is substantial evidence of tension between the CMB, temperature and polarization, measurements of the Planck satellite and the data from the CFHTLenS weak lensing survey even when applying ultra conservative cuts. These results robustly point toward the possibility of having unaccounted systematic effects in the data, an incomplete modelling of the cosmological predictions or hints toward new physical phenomena.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author2 topics

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.