Paper detail

Scale dependent non-Gaussianities in the CMB data identified with Minkowski Functionals and Scaling Indices

In order to test for non-Gaussianities with respect to scale-dependencies we use so-called surrogate maps, in which possible phase correlations of the Fourier phases of the original WMAP data and simulations, respectively, are destroyed by applying a shuffling scheme to the maps. A statistical comparison of the original maps with the surrogate maps then allows to test for the existence of higher order correlations in the original maps, also and especially on well-defined Fourier modes. Using Minkowski functionals as an image analysis technique we calculate the deviation between the original data and 500 surrogates for different hemispheres in the sky and find ecliptic hemispherical asymmetries between northern and southern ecliptic sky. We find strong deviations from Gaussianity in the WMAP data when considering the low-l range with l = [2,20]. The analysis technique of the scaling indices leads to a slightly lower deviation. Although the underlying foreground reduction methods of the maps differ from each other, we find similar results for the WMAP 7yr ILC map and the WMAP 7yr (needlet-based) NILC map in the low-l range. Our results point once more to a cosmological nature of the signal. For a higher l range with l = [120,300] the results differ between the two image analysis techniques and between the two maps which makes an intrinsic nature of the signal on this l range less likely. When we decrease the size of the analysed sky regions for the low-l study, we do not find signatures of NG in the northern sky. In the south we find individual spots which show deviations from Gaussianity. In addition, we investigate non-Gaussian CMB simulations that depend on the f_NL parameter of the local type. These simulations cannot account for the detected signatures on the low-l range.

preprint2012arXivOpen 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.