Paper detail

Joint Planck and WMAP Assessment of Low CMB Multipoles

The remarkable progress in cosmic microwave background (CMB) studies over past decade has led to the era of precision cosmology in striking agreement with the $Λ$CDM model. However, the lack of power in the CMB temperature anisotropies at large angular scales (low-$\ell$), as has been confirmed by the recent Planck data also (up to $\ell=40$), although statistically not very strong (less than $3σ$), is still an open problem. One can avoid to seek an explanation for this problem by attributing the lack of power to cosmic variance orcan look for explanations i.e., different inflationary potentials or initial conditions for infl ation to begin with, non-trivial topology, ISW effect etc. Features in the primordial power spectrum (PPS) motivated by the early universe physics has been the most common solution to address this problem. In the present work we also follow this approach and consider a set of PPS which have features and constrain the parameters of those using WMAP 9 year and Planck data employing Markov-Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) analysis. The prominent feature of all the models of PPS that we consider is an infra-red cut off which leads to suppression of power at large angular scales. We consider models of PPS with maximum three extra parameters and use Akaike information criterion ($AIC$) and Bayesian information criterion ($BIC$) of model and Bayesian information criterion ($BIC$) of model selection to compare the models. For most models, we find good constraints for the cut off scale $k_c$, however, for other parameters our constraints are not that good. We find that sharp cut off model gives best likelihood value for the WMAP 9 year data, but is as good as power law model according to $AIC$. For the joint WMAP 9+Planck data set, Starobinsky model is slightly preferred by $AIC$ which is also able to produce CMB power suppression up to $\ell\leq30$ to some extent.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors1 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.