Go to the U of M home page
School of Physics & Astronomy
Probe Mission Study Wiki

User Tools


forecasts_20181120

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
forecasts_20181120 [2018/11/20 12:24] hananyforecasts_20181120 [2018/11/20 12:28] (current) hanany
Line 3: Line 3:
   * Assuming that "cosmic variance limited" means the noise variance is 1/10 of the signal variance, I find PICO to be cosmic variance limited in EE out to ell = 2314. If I make that more conservative, requiring the noise variance to be 1/100 of the signal variance, I find ell = 1698.   * Assuming that "cosmic variance limited" means the noise variance is 1/10 of the signal variance, I find PICO to be cosmic variance limited in EE out to ell = 2314. If I make that more conservative, requiring the noise variance to be 1/100 of the signal variance, I find ell = 1698.
  
-  * I've quickly rerun the forecast using 60% of the sky to confirm I didn't make any mistakes and I get \sigma(\tau) to be 2e-3, as before:+  * I've quickly rerun the forecast using 60% of the sky to confirm I didn't make any mistakes and I get \sigma(\tau) to be 2e-3, as before (for Version 4.1):
  
     components: sync+dust     components: sync+dust
Line 18: Line 18:
     noise in the cleaned CMB map [uK-arcmin] = 9.02e-01     noise in the cleaned CMB map [uK-arcmin] = 9.02e-01
  
 +we're also assuming that the spectral indices are constant over N_side = 4 patches (which is optimistic)
  
 These forecasts were run using the CMB4cast Fisher matrix code (http://portal.nersc.gov/project/mp107/index.html, Errard & Feeney et al.), assuming access to T, E, B and d information, with the deflection estimated using the iterative EB estimator. The code assumes Planck-2015-level synchrotron and dust foregrounds, forecasting the experiment's ability to clean these foregrounds using a parametric maximum-likelihood approach, assuming the foreground spectral indices are constant on patches of size ~15 degrees across (N_side = 4). This is all probably a little out-of-date, being based on the Planck 2015 results and cosmology, but it doesn't seem to give a significantly different answer to Raphael's code (and I can rerun with a different tau if you'd like). These forecasts were run using the CMB4cast Fisher matrix code (http://portal.nersc.gov/project/mp107/index.html, Errard & Feeney et al.), assuming access to T, E, B and d information, with the deflection estimated using the iterative EB estimator. The code assumes Planck-2015-level synchrotron and dust foregrounds, forecasting the experiment's ability to clean these foregrounds using a parametric maximum-likelihood approach, assuming the foreground spectral indices are constant on patches of size ~15 degrees across (N_side = 4). This is all probably a little out-of-date, being based on the Planck 2015 results and cosmology, but it doesn't seem to give a significantly different answer to Raphael's code (and I can rerun with a different tau if you'd like).
- 
  
forecasts_20181120.1542738249.txt.gz · Last modified: 2018/11/20 12:24 by hanany