4.7 Review

Correlation of CMB with large-scale structure. II. Weak lensing

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW D
卷 78, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.78.043520

关键词

-

资金

  1. Alfred P. Sloan Foundation
  2. National Science Foundation
  3. U.S. Department of Energy
  4. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
  5. Japanese Monbukagakusho
  6. Max Planck Society
  7. Higher Education Funding Council for England
  8. NASA Office of Space Science
  9. Space Telescope Science Institute [NAS 526555]
  10. U.S. Department of Energy [DE-AC02-05CH11231]
  11. Packard Foundation
  12. NSF [CAREER-0132953]
  13. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien [0810820] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  14. Division Of Astronomical Sciences [0810820] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We investigate the cot-relation of gravitational lensing of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) with several tracers of large-scale structure, including luminous red galaxies (LRGs), quasars, and radio Sources. The lensing field is reconstructed based on the CMB maps from the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) satellite; the LRGs and quasars are observed by the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS); and the radio sources are observed in the NRAO VLA Sky Survey (NVSS). Combining all three large-scale Structure samples, we find evidence for a positive cross correlation at the 2.5 sigma level (1.8 sigma for the SDSS samples and 2.1 sigma for NVSS); the cross correlation amplitude is 1.06 +/- 0.42 times that expected for the WMAP cosmological parameters. Our analysis extends other recent analyses in that we carefully determine bias-weighted redshift distribution of the Sources. which is needed for a meaningful cosmological interpretation of the detected signal. We investigate contamination of the signal by galactic emission, extragalactic radio and infrared sources, thermal and kinetic Sunyaev-Zel'dovich effects, and the Rees-Sciama effect, and find all of them to be negligible.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据