Paper detail

Joining bits and pieces of reionization history

Cosmic Microwave Background temperature and polarization anisotropies from Planck have estimated a lower value of the optical depth to reionization ($τ$) compared to WMAP. A significant period in the reionization history would then fall within $6<z< 10$, where detection of galaxies with Hubble Frontier Fields program and independent estimation of neutral hydrogen in the inter galactic medium by Lyman-$α$ observations are also available. This overlap allows an analysis of cosmic reionization which utilizes a direct combination of CMB and these astrophysical measurements and potentially breaks degeneracies in parameters describing the physics of reionization. For the first time we reconstruct reionization histories by assuming photo-ionization and recombination rates to be free-form and by allowing underlying cosmological parameters to vary with CMB (temperature and polarization anisotropies and lensing) data from Planck 2018 release and a compilation of astrophysical data. We find an excellent agreement between the low-$\ell$ Planck 2018 HFI polarization likelihood and astrophysical data in determining the integrated optical depth. By combining both data, we report for a minimal reconstruction $τ=0.051^{+0.001+0.002}_{-0.0012-0.002}$ at 68\% and 95\% CL, which, for the errors in the current astrophysical measurements quoted in the literature, is nearly twice better than the projected cosmic variance limited CMB measurements. For the duration of reionization, redshift interval between 10\% and complete ionization, we get $2.9^{+0.12+0.29}_{-0.16-0.26}$ at 68\% and 95\% CL, which improves significantly on the corresponding result obtained by using Planck 2015 data. By a Bayesian analysis of the combined results we do not find evidence beyond monotonic reionization histories, therefore multi-phase reionization scenario is disfavored compared to minimal alternatives.

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.