Campuses:
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Next revision | Previous revision | ||
| foregroundstelecon20220714 [2022/07/14 09:58] – created hanany | foregroundstelecon20220714 [2022/07/21 09:47] (current) – hanany | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| - | ====== Telecon Notes July 7, 2022 ====== | + | ====== Telecon Notes July 14, 2022 ====== |
| [[https:// | [[https:// | ||
| [[https:// | [[https:// | ||
| - | Attendance: | + | Attendance: |
| Regrets: | Regrets: | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
| === Agenda + Notes: === | === Agenda + Notes: === | ||
| + | * MR didn't have a chance to make changes for his Figures. Delayed for next week. | ||
| + | * Discussed a bunch of Sebastian' | ||
| + | * Waiting for Mathew to fix the likelihood and his plots - Shaul will write to them again. | ||
| + | |||
| + | e-mail from HK | ||
| + | |||
| + | Hi Shaul and all, | ||
| + | |||
| + | I'm looking at the equations in the appendix now, and I'm not entirely | ||
| + | sure what you're referring to as "not consistent" | ||
| + | the Gaussian likeliood, and in this case the free parameters are r and | ||
| + | A_l. Equations A2 and A3 defines the GBR estimator, and in this case the | ||
| + | free parameters are (at this stage) C_l's, rather than r and A_l. Are | ||
| + | you proposing that we should replace C_l in Eq. A2-A3 with the full | ||
| + | expression? If so, it's important to note that we are *not* using the | ||
| + | (r,A_l) model in the GBR approach, but rather have a grid of models with | ||
| + | different r's (and A_l = 1) computed directly with CAMB, so the C_l | ||
| + | models aren't the same. In effect, for the Gaussian likelihood analysis | ||
| + | one assumes that the BB spectra scale linearly with r all the way from | ||
| + | r=1 to 0, and that's obviously not exactly true. That's why we use preer | ||
| + | to use a precomputed CAMB grid instead, in which case the non-linearity | ||
| + | is taken into account. | ||
| + | |||
| + | If this is what you're referring to, I think it's better to describe | ||
| + | this in words, than actually change the equations. Alternatively, | ||
| + | might be cleaner to just replace the big C_l model in Eq. A4 with a | ||
| + | general C_l(r,A_l), and then specify in the text that these differ | ||
| + | between the two approaches. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Whatever you prefer, I'm leaving for vacation this afternoon, so Mathew | ||
| + | should implement this when he gets back. Alternatively, | ||
| + | this in early August. Irrespective of when it happens, I don't really | ||
| + | think that this is a major hold-up to finishing the paper. Rather, what | ||
| + | is needed, is *one* person getting full editorial rights for the entire | ||
| + | paper, and simply writes it up end-to-end. That can probably be done in | ||
| + | a matter of two or three days with continuous writing time. Having | ||
| + | individual people write separate section will take very long to | ||
| + | converge, I think... | ||
| + | |||
| + | Thanks, and have a nice summer :-) | ||