Paper detail

Planck CMB Anomalies: Astrophysical and Cosmological Secondary Effects and the Curse of Masking

Large-scale anomalies have been reported in CMB data with both WMAP and Planck data. These could be due to foreground residuals and or systematic effects, though their confirmation with Planck data suggests they are not due to a problem in the WMAP or Planck pipelines. If these anomalies are in fact primordial, then understanding their origin is fundamental to either validate the standard model of cosmology or to explore new physics. We investigate three other possible issues: 1) the trade-off between minimising systematics due to foreground contamination (with a conservative mask) and minimising systematics due to masking, 2) astrophysical secondary effects (the kinetic Doppler quadrupole and kinetic Sunyaev-Zel'dovich effect), and 3) secondary cosmological signals (the integrated Sachs-Wolfe effect). We address the masking issue by considering new procedures that use both WMAP and Planck to produce higher quality full-sky maps using the sparsity methodology (LGMCA maps). We show the impact of masking is dominant over that of residual foregrounds, and the LGMCA full-sky maps can be used without further processing to study anomalies. We consider four official Planck PR1 and two LGMCA CMB maps. Analysis of the observed CMB maps shows that only the low quadrupole and quadrupole-octopole alignment seem significant, but that the planar octopole, Axis of Evil, mirror parity and cold spot are not significant in nearly all maps considered. After subtraction of astrophysical and cosmological secondary effects, only the low quadrupole may still be considered anomalous, meaning the significance of only one anomaly is affected by secondary effect subtraction out of six anomalies considered. In the spirit of reproducible research all reconstructed maps and codes will be made available for download here http://www.cosmostat.org/anomaliesCMB.html.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 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.