Paper detail

Quantifying Suspiciousness Within Correlated Data Sets

We propose a principled Bayesian method for quantifying tension between correlated datasets with wide uninformative parameter priors. This is achieved by extending the Suspiciousness statistic, which is insensitive to priors. Our method uses global summary statistics, and as such it can be used as a diagnostic for internal consistency. We show how our approach can be combined with methods that use parameter space and data space to identify the existing internal discrepancies. As an example, we use it to test the internal consistency of the KiDS-450 data in 4 photometric redshift bins, and to recover controlled internal discrepancies in simulated KiDS data. We propose this as a diagnostic of internal consistency for present and future cosmological surveys, and as a tension metric for data sets that have non-negligible correlation, such as LSST and Euclid.

preprint2019arXivOpen 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.