pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2206.07773 · v2 · submitted 2022-06-15 · 🌌 astro-ph.CO

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

CMB lensing from Planck PR4 maps

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 18:08 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.CO
keywords CMB lensingPlanck PR4NPIPEquadratic estimatorslensing power spectrumcosmological parameterssigma_8Omega_m
0
0 comments X

The pith

Reconstructing CMB lensing from Planck PR4 maps with optimal filtering increases signal-to-noise by nearly 20 percent and delivers the tightest lensing power spectrum measurement to date.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper reconstructs the gravitational lensing effect on the cosmic microwave background using the latest Planck data release called PR4. By switching to more optimal filtering in the analysis, the team raises the signal-to-noise ratio of the lensing map by nearly 20 percent. The result is the most accurate measurement yet of the strength of this lensing signal, coming in at 1.004 plus or minus 0.024 times the value expected from the 2018 Planck best-fit model. This precision also sharpens limits on key numbers in the standard cosmological model when the lensing data is paired with other observations like baryon acoustic oscillations.

Core claim

The authors reconstruct the cosmic microwave background lensing potential from the Planck PR4 maps using quadratic estimators with more optimal filtering. This yields a 20 percent increase in reconstruction signal-to-noise and constrains the amplitude of the CMB-marginalized lensing power spectrum to 1.004 plus or minus 0.024 in units of the Planck 2018 best-fit value, the tightest constraint to date. For a base Lambda CDM cosmology, CMB lensing alone gives sigma_8 Omega_m to the power 0.25 equal to 0.599 plus or minus 0.016, and combination with baryon acoustic oscillations tightens constraints on sigma_8, H_0, and Omega_m. Polarized maps by themselves now constrain the lensing power to 7%.

What carries the argument

Quadratic estimators with more optimal filtering applied to the PR4 CMB temperature and polarization maps

If this is right

  • The lensing power spectrum amplitude is now known to roughly 2.4 percent precision.
  • Lensing data alone with weak priors constrains the combination sigma_8 Omega_m to the 0.25 power to 0.599 plus or minus 0.016.
  • Adding baryon acoustic oscillation data produces 68 percent limits of sigma_8 equal to 0.814 plus or minus 0.016, H_0 equal to 68.1 plus 1.0 minus 1.1 km per second per megaparsec, and Omega_m equal to 0.313 plus 0.014 minus 0.016.
  • Planck polarization maps alone reach a 7 percent constraint on the lensing power spectrum.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same filtering upgrade could be applied to data from future CMB experiments to extract similar sensitivity gains.
  • The updated lensing map offers a new cross-check against galaxy weak-lensing measurements of structure growth.
  • Tighter lensing constraints may help bound the total neutrino mass when combined with other cosmological probes.

Load-bearing premise

That residual systematics and foregrounds in the PR4 maps are sufficiently controlled by the optimal filtering so that the reported 20 percent signal-to-noise gain and amplitude constraint are not biased.

What would settle it

An independent reconstruction of the lensing power spectrum from the same PR4 maps or from another experiment that finds an amplitude differing from 1.004 by more than 0.024 would challenge the central result.

read the original abstract

We reconstruct the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) lensing potential on the latest Planck CMB PR4 (NPIPE) maps, which include slightly more data than the 2018 PR3 release, and implement quadratic estimators using more optimal filtering. We increase the reconstruction signal to noise by almost $20\%$, constraining the amplitude of the CMB-marginalized lensing power spectrum in units of the Planck 2018 best-fit to $1.004 \pm 0.024$ ($68\%$ limits), which is the tightest constraint on the CMB lensing power spectrum to date. For a base $\Lambda$CDM cosmology we find $\sigma_8 \Omega_m^{0.25} = 0.599\pm 0.016$ from CMB lensing alone in combination with weak priors and element abundance observations. Combination with baryon acoustic oscillation data gives tight $68\%$ constraints on individual $\Lambda$CDM parameters $\sigma_8 = 0.814\pm 0.016$, $H_0 = 68.1^{+1.0}_{-1.1}$km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$, $\Omega_m = 0.313^{+0.014}_{-0.016}$. Planck polarized maps alone now constrain the lensing power to $7\%$.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

0 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript reconstructs the CMB lensing potential from the latest Planck PR4 (NPIPE) maps using quadratic estimators with more optimal filtering than in the PR3 release. It reports an ~20% increase in reconstruction signal-to-noise, yielding a constraint on the amplitude of the CMB-marginalized lensing power spectrum of 1.004 ± 0.024 (68% limits) relative to the Planck 2018 best-fit, claimed as the tightest to date. From lensing alone (with weak priors and element abundances) it derives σ8 Ωm^{0.25} = 0.599 ± 0.016; combined with BAO it gives σ8 = 0.814 ± 0.016, H0 = 68.1^{+1.0}_{-1.1} km s^{-1} Mpc^{-1}, and Ωm = 0.313^{+0.014}_{-0.016}. Polarized maps alone now constrain lensing power to 7%.

Significance. If the result holds, this constitutes a useful incremental advance by delivering higher-precision CMB lensing constraints from improved data processing. The reported 20% S/N gain and the amplitude measurement (with 68% limits) directly tighten cosmological parameter inferences, especially σ8 and Ωm combinations, and the polarized-only result is a notable secondary finding. The work is a straightforward re-analysis whose value lies in the quantitative update and consistency with prior Planck results.

minor comments (1)
  1. The abstract and §4 would benefit from an explicit statement of the exact multipole range used for the amplitude fit and the precise definition of the 'CMB-marginalized' lensing power spectrum to avoid any ambiguity in the reported 1.004 ± 0.024 value.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive assessment of our manuscript and for recommending acceptance. The referee's summary correctly captures the key improvements from the PR4 maps and optimal filtering, as well as the resulting constraints on the lensing amplitude and cosmological parameters.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in the derivation chain

full rationale

The paper applies standard quadratic estimators to the PR4 (NPIPE) maps with improved filtering to reconstruct the lensing potential and extract its power spectrum amplitude. The reported value 1.004 ± 0.024 is measured directly from the new maps and only normalized to the 2018 best-fit for presentation; the measurement itself is not defined by or fitted to that prior result. No self-definitional steps, fitted inputs renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citations appear in the derivation. The central result is a straightforward data product whose validity rests on simulation-based validation external to the present analysis, rendering the chain self-contained.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The analysis rests on standard assumptions of LambdaCDM for parameter interpretation and on the accuracy of the Planck map-making pipeline; no new free parameters or invented entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Standard LambdaCDM background cosmology and weak priors plus element abundance observations are sufficient to convert lensing measurements into parameter constraints.
    Invoked when reporting σ8 Ωm^0.25 and combined constraints with BAO.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5534 in / 1287 out tokens · 28938 ms · 2026-05-16T18:08:05.391499+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 18 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Late-time reconstruction of non-minimally coupled gravity with a smoothness prior

    astro-ph.CO 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Non-parametric reconstruction of non-minimally coupled gravity with a smoothness prior on CMB, DESI BAO, supernovae, and DES data yields a 2.8σ hint for coupling and a preference for phantom divide crossing stabilized...

  2. Cosmological analysis of the DESI DR1 Lyman alpha 1D power spectrum

    astro-ph.CO 2026-01 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    DESI DR1 Lyman-alpha data yields Δ²★=0.379±0.032 and n★=-2.309±0.019 at k★=0.009 km⁻¹s and z=3, sharpening N_eff, α_s, and β_s constraints by factors of 1.18-1.90 when combined with other probes.

  3. DESI DR2 Results II: Measurements of Baryon Acoustic Oscillations and Cosmological Constraints

    astro-ph.CO 2025-03 accept novelty 7.0

    DESI DR2 BAO data exhibits 2.3 sigma tension with CMB in Lambda-CDM but prefers evolving dark energy (w0 > -1, wa < 0) at 3.1 sigma with CMB and 2.8-4.2 sigma when including supernovae.

  4. DESI 2024 VI: Cosmological Constraints from the Measurements of Baryon Acoustic Oscillations

    astro-ph.CO 2024-04 accept novelty 7.0

    First-year DESI BAO data are consistent with flat LambdaCDM and, when combined with CMB, show a 2.5-3.9 sigma preference for evolving dark energy (w0 > -1, wa < 0) that strengthens with certain supernova datasets.

  5. New Isocurvature Constraints from JWST UV Luminosity Function

    astro-ph.CO 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    First UVLF-based constraints on model-agnostic isocurvature power spectra for CDM, baryon, neutrino, and dark radiation modes yield consistent 95% credible envelopes over k ~ 0.5-10 Mpc^{-1}.

  6. Into the Gompverse: A robust Gompertzian reionization model for CMB analyses

    astro-ph.CO 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    A Gompertzian reionization model with three nuisance parameters demotes optical depth to a derived quantity, reducing its uncertainty by a factor of three and revealing potential neutrino mass tension in CMB analyses.

  7. Bounding axion dark energy

    astro-ph.CO 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    An analytic bound on axion parameters in thawing quintessence is derived independently of initial conditions and used with cosmological observations plus quantum gravity constraints to exclude large regions of axion d...

  8. Non-minimally coupled quintessence with sign-switching interaction

    astro-ph.CO 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    A new quintessence model with non-minimal coupling produces an effective sign-switching interaction that fits current data better than LambdaCDM or w0waCDM and accounts for late-time dark energy weakening without phan...

  9. Evidence for deviation in gravitational light deflection from general relativity at cosmological scales with KiDS-Legacy and CMB lensing

    astro-ph.CO 2026-02 conditional novelty 6.0

    KiDS-Legacy weak lensing plus CMB data yields a 3 sigma deviation in light deflection from GR in a Lambda CDM background, with the signal driven by large-scale CMB lensing amplitudes.

  10. DESI 2024 VII: Cosmological Constraints from the Full-Shape Modeling of Clustering Measurements

    astro-ph.CO 2024-11 accept novelty 6.0

    DESI DR1 full-shape clustering yields Ω_m = 0.2962 ± 0.0095 and σ_8 = 0.842 ± 0.034 in flat ΛCDM, tightening to H_0 = 68.40 ± 0.27 km/s/Mpc with CMB and DESY3, while favoring w_0 > -1, w_a < 0 and limiting neutrino ma...

  11. Ultra-light axion constraints from Planck and ACT: the role of nonlinear modelling

    astro-ph.CO 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Naive nonlinear modelling of non-cold matter produces an artificial preference for a subdominant ultralight axion dark matter component at m ≈ 10^{-24} eV via a lensing-like enhancement in the CMB power spectrum.

  12. Cosmological Impact of Redshift-Dependent Type Ia Supernovae Calibration

    astro-ph.CO 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    A phenomenological redshift-dependent SNIa magnitude correction shows no evidence in ΛCDM but is preferred at 4.3σ with dynamical dark energy, reducing Hubble tension to 1.5σ.

  13. Disentangling cosmic distance tensions with early and late dark energy

    astro-ph.CO 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Early dark energy resolves CMB-BAO tension and, combined with thawing quintessence, reduces overall cosmological tensions without phantom crossing.

  14. Is the $w_0w_a$CDM cosmological parameterization evidence for dark energy dynamics partially caused by the excess smoothing of Planck PR4 CMB anisotropy data?

    astro-ph.CO 2026-04 conditional novelty 5.0

    Planck PR4 CMB data mildly favors dynamical dark energy, but this preference weakens when accounting for possible excess smoothing, indicating the signal may partly arise from data processing issues.

  15. Measuring neutrino mass in light of ACT DR6 and DESI DR2

    astro-ph.CO 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    New ACT and DESI data yield model-dependent upper limits on sum of neutrino masses, with holographic dark energy giving the tightest bounds and a consistent preference for degenerate hierarchy.

  16. Constraints on Neutrino Physics from DESI DR2 BAO and DR1 Full Shape

    astro-ph.CO 2025-03 conditional novelty 5.0

    DESI DR2 BAO and full-shape data plus CMB yield ∑m_ν < 0.0642 eV (95% CL) under ΛCDM, in 3σ tension with oscillation lower limits, relaxed to <0.163 eV in w0waCDM.

  17. New constraints on primordial non-Gaussianity from large-scale cross-correlations of CMB lensing and the cosmic infrared background

    astro-ph.CO 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Dust-cleaned CIB and CMB lensing cross-correlations yield f_NL^local = 43 ± 23, tightening constraints on local primordial non-Gaussianity.

  18. Extended Dark Energy analysis using DESI DR2 BAO measurements

    astro-ph.CO 2025-03 conditional novelty 4.0

    Extended analysis of DESI DR2 data confirms robust evidence for dynamical dark energy with phantom crossing preference, stable under parametric and non-parametric modeling.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 50 canonical work pages · cited by 18 Pith papers · 35 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Aghanim et al

    N. Aghanim et al. (Planck), Planck 2018 results. VIII. Gravitational lensing, Astron. Astrophys. 641, A8 (2020), arXiv:1807.06210 [astro-ph.CO]

  2. [2]

    B. D. Sherwin et al. (ACT), The Atacama Cosmology Tele- scope: Two-Season ACTPol Lensing Power Spectrum, Submit- ted to: Phys. Rev. D (2016), arXiv:1611.09753 [astro-ph.CO]

  3. [3]

    Bianchini et al

    F. Bianchini et al. (SPT), Constraints on Cosmological Param- eters from the 500 deg2 SPTpol Lensing Power Spectrum, As- trophys. J. 888, 119 (2020), arXiv:1910.07157 [astro-ph.CO]

  4. [4]

    W. L. K. Wu et al., A Measurement of the Cosmic Microwave Background Lensing Potential and Power Spectrum from 500 deg2 of SPTpol Temperature and Polarization Data, Astrophys. J. 884, 70 (2019), arXiv:1905.05777 [astro-ph.CO]

  5. [5]

    Darwish et al., The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: A CMB lensing mass map over 2100 square degrees of sky and its cross- correlation with BOSS-CMASS galaxies, Mon

    O. Darwish et al., The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: A CMB lensing mass map over 2100 square degrees of sky and its cross- correlation with BOSS-CMASS galaxies, Mon. Not. Roy. As- tron. Soc. 500, 2250 (2020), arXiv:2004.01139 [astro-ph.CO]

  6. [6]

    Akrami et al

    Y . Akrami et al. (Planck),Planck intermediate results. LVII. Joint Planck LFI and HFI data processing, Astron. Astrophys. 643, A42 (2020), arXiv:2007.04997 [astro-ph.CO]

  7. [7]

    CMB Lensing Reconstruction on the Full Sky

    T. Okamoto and W. Hu, CMB lensing reconstruction on the full sky, Phys. Rev. D67, 083002 (2003), arXiv:astro-ph/0301031 [astro-ph]

  8. [8]

    Mass Reconstruction with CMB Polarization

    W. Hu and T. Okamoto, Mass reconstruction with CMB polar- ization, Astrophys. J. 574, 566 (2002), arXiv:astro-ph/0111606 [astro-ph]

  9. [9]

    A. S. Maniyar, Y . Ali-Ha¨ımoud, J. Carron, A. Lewis, and M. S. Madhavacheril, Quadratic estimators for CMB weak lensing, Phys. Rev. D 103, 083524 (2021), arXiv:2101.12193 [astro- ph.CO]

  10. [10]

    The Simons Observatory: Science goals and forecasts

    J. Aguirre et al. (Simons Observatory), The Simons Ob- servatory: Science goals and forecasts, JCAP 1902, 056, arXiv:1808.07445 [astro-ph.CO]

  11. [11]

    Mirmelstein, J

    M. Mirmelstein, J. Carron, and A. Lewis, Optimal filtering for CMB lensing reconstruction, Phys. Rev. D100, 123509 (2019), arXiv:1909.02653 [astro-ph.CO]

  12. [12]

    Planck 2015 results. IX. Diffuse component separation: CMB maps

    R. Adam et al. (Planck), Planck 2015 results. IX. Diffuse com- ponent separation: CMB maps, Astron. Astrophys. 594, A9 (2016), arXiv:1502.05956 [astro-ph.CO]

  13. [13]

    Akrami et al

    Y . Akrami et al. (Planck), Planck 2018 results. IV . Diffuse component separation, Astron. Astrophys. 641, A4 (2020), arXiv:1807.06208 [astro-ph.CO]

  14. [14]

    Component separation with flexible models. Application to the separation of astrophysical emissions

    J.-F. Cardoso, M. Martin, J. Delabrouille, M. Betoule, and G. Patanchon, Component separation with flexible models. Ap- plication to the separation of astrophysical emissions, (2008), arXiv:0803.1814 [astro-ph]

  15. [15]

    Multi-resolution internal template cleaning: An application to the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe 7-yr polarization data

    R. Fernandez-Cobos, P. Vielva, R. B. Barreiro, and E. Martinez- Gonzalez, Multi-resolution internal template cleaning: An ap- 9 http://healpix.sourceforge.net plication to the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe 7- yr polarization data, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 420, 2162 (2012), arXiv:1106.2016 [astro-ph.CO]

  16. [16]

    P. A. R. Ade et al. (Planck), Planck 2013 results. XIV . Zodiacal emission, Astron. Astrophys. 571, A14 (2014), arXiv:1303.5074 [astro-ph.CO]

  17. [18]

    QuickPol: Fast calculation of effective beam matrices for CMB polarization

    E. Hivon, S. Mottet, and N. Ponthieu, QuickPol: Fast calcula- tion of effective beam matrices for CMB polarization, Astron. Astrophys. 598, A25 (2017), arXiv:1608.08833 [astro-ph.CO]

  18. [19]

    Planck 2018 results. V. CMB power spectra and likelihoods

    N. Aghanim et al. (Planck), Planck 2018 results. V . CMB power spectra and likelihoods, Astron. Astrophys. 641, A5 (2020), arXiv:1907.12875 [astro-ph.CO]

  19. [20]

    K. M. Smith, O. Zahn, and O. Dore, Detection of Gravita- tional Lensing in the Cosmic Microwave Background, Phys. Rev. D76, 043510 (2007), arXiv:0705.3980 [astro-ph]

  20. [21]

    CMB temperature lensing power reconstruction

    D. Hanson, A. Challinor, G. Efstathiou, and P. Bielewicz, CMB temperature lensing power reconstruction, Phys. Rev. D 83, 043005 (2011), arXiv:1008.4403 [astro-ph.CO]

  21. [22]

    Lensing Reconstruction with CMB Temperature and Polarization

    M. Kesden, A. Cooray, and M. Kamionkowski, Lensing recon- struction with CMB temperature and polarization, Phys. Rev. D 67, 123507 (2003), astro-ph/0302536

  22. [23]

    K. T. Story et al. (SPT), A Measurement of the Cosmic Mi- crowave Background Gravitational Lensing Potential from 100 Square Degrees of SPTpol Data, Astrophys. J. 810, 50 (2015), arXiv:1412.4760 [astro-ph.CO]

  23. [24]

    A bias to CMB lensing measurements from the bispectrum of large-scale structure

    V . B¨ohm, M. Schmittfull, and B. D. Sherwin, Bias to CMB lensing measurements from the bispectrum of large-scale struc- ture, Phys. Rev.D94, 043519 (2016), arXiv:1605.01392 [astro- ph.CO]

  24. [25]

    On the effect of non-Gaussian lensing deflections on CMB lensing measurements

    V . B¨ohm, B. D. Sherwin, J. Liu, J. C. Hill, M. Schmittfull, and T. Namikawa, Effect of non-Gaussian lensing deflections on CMB lensing measurements, Phys. Rev. D98, 123510 (2018), arXiv:1806.01157 [astro-ph.CO]

  25. [26]

    D. Beck, G. Fabbian, and J. Errard, Lensing Reconstruc- tion in Post-Born Cosmic Microwave Background Weak Lens- ing, Phys. Rev. D98, 043512 (2018), arXiv:1806.01216 [astro- ph.CO]

  26. [27]

    Fabbian, A

    G. Fabbian, A. Lewis, and D. Beck, CMB lensing recon- struction biases in cross-correlation with large-scale structure probes, JCAP 1910 (10), 057, arXiv:1906.08760 [astro-ph.CO]

  27. [28]

    Pratten and A

    G. Pratten and A. Lewis, Impact of post-Born lensing on the CMB, JCAP 1608 (08), 047, arXiv:1605.05662 [astro-ph.CO]

  28. [29]

    J. R. Stevens et al., Designs for next generation CMB survey strategies from Chile, Proc. SPIE Int. Soc. Opt. Eng. 10708, 1070841 (2018), arXiv:1808.05131 [astro-ph.IM]

  29. [30]

    Full covariance of CMB and lensing reconstruction power spectra

    J. Peloton, M. Schmittfull, A. Lewis, J. Carron, and O. Zahn, Full covariance of CMB and lensing reconstruction power spec- tra, Phys. Rev. D95, 043508 (2017), arXiv:1611.01446 [astro- ph.CO]. 15

  30. [31]

    S. J. Osborne, D. Hanson, and O. Dor ´e, Extragalactic Fore- ground Contamination in Temperature-based CMB Lens Re- construction, JCAP 1403, 024 (2014), arXiv:1310.7547 [astro- ph.CO]

  31. [32]

    P. A. R. Ade et al. (Planck), Planck 2013 results. XVII. Gravita- tional lensing by large-scale structure, Astron. Astrophys. 571, A17 (2014), arXiv:1303.5077 [astro-ph.CO]

  32. [33]

    Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters

    N. Aghanim et al. (Planck), Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmolog- ical parameters, Astron. Astrophys. 641, A6 (2020), [Erratum: Astron.Astrophys. 652, C4 (2021)], arXiv:1807.06209 [astro- ph.CO]

  33. [34]

    Bias-Hardened CMB Lensing

    T. Namikawa, D. Hanson, and R. Takahashi, Bias-hardened CMB lensing, MNRAS 431, 609 (2013), arXiv:1209.0091 [astro-ph.CO]

  34. [35]

    Lensing of the CMB: Non Gaussian aspects

    M. Zaldarriaga, Lensing of the CMB: Non-Gaussian aspects, Phys. Rev. D 62, 063510 (2000), arXiv:astro-ph/9910498

  35. [36]

    Weak Lensing of the CMB: A Harmonic Approach

    W. Hu, Weak lensing of the CMB: A harmonic approach, Phys. Rev. D 62, 043007 (2000), arXiv:astro-ph/0001303 [astro-ph]

  36. [37]

    The shape of the CMB lensing bispectrum

    A. Lewis, A. Challinor, and D. Hanson, The shape of the CMB lensing bispectrum, JCAP 03, 018, arXiv:1101.2234 [astro- ph.CO]

  37. [38]

    Cobaya: Code for Bayesian Analysis of hierarchical physical models

    J. Torrado and A. Lewis, Cobaya: Code for Bayesian Anal- ysis of hierarchical physical models, JCAP 05, 057 (2021), arXiv:2005.05290 [astro-ph.IM]

  38. [39]

    GetDist: a Python package for analysing Monte Carlo samples

    A. Lewis, GetDist: a Python package for analysing Monte Carlo samples, (2019), https://getdist.readthedocs.io, arXiv:1910.13970 [astro-ph.IM]

  39. [40]

    P. A. R. Ade et al. (Planck), Planck 2015 results. XV . Gravitational lensing, Astron. Astrophys. 594, A15 (2016), arXiv:1502.01591 [astro-ph.CO]

  40. [41]

    R. J. Cooke, M. Pettini, and C. C. Steidel, One Percent Deter- mination of the Primordial Deuterium Abundance, Astrophys. J. 855, 102 (2018), arXiv:1710.11129 [astro-ph.CO]

  41. [42]

    Mossa et al., The baryon density of the Universe from an improved rate of deuterium burning, Nature 587, 210 (2020)

    V . Mossa et al., The baryon density of the Universe from an improved rate of deuterium burning, Nature 587, 210 (2020)

  42. [43]

    The 6dF Galaxy Survey: Baryon Acoustic Oscillations and the Local Hubble Constant

    F. Beutler, C. Blake, M. Colless, D. H. Jones, L. Staveley- Smith, L. Campbell, Q. Parker, W. Saunders, and F. Watson, The 6dF Galaxy Survey: Baryon Acoustic Oscillations and the Local Hubble Constant, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.416, 3017 (2011), arXiv:1106.3366 [astro-ph.CO]

  43. [44]

    A. J. Ross, L. Samushia, C. Howlett, W. J. Percival, A. Bur- den, and M. Manera, The clustering of the SDSS DR7 main Galaxy sample – I. A 4 per cent distance measure at z = 0.15, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.449, 835 (2015), arXiv:1409.3242 [astro-ph.CO]

  44. [45]

    The Completed SDSS-IV extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: Cosmological Implications from two Decades of Spectroscopic Surveys at the Apache Point observatory

    S. Alam et al. (eBOSS), Completed SDSS-IV extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: Cosmological im- plications from two decades of spectroscopic surveys at the Apache Point Observatory, Phys. Rev. D 103, 083533 (2021), arXiv:2007.08991 [astro-ph.CO]

  45. [46]

    CMB power spectra and cosmological parameters from Planck PR4 with CamSpec

    E. Rosenberg, S. Gratton, and G. Efstathiou, CMB power spec- tra and cosmological parameters from Planck PR4 with Cam- Spec, (2022), arXiv:2205.10869 [astro-ph.CO]

  46. [47]

    2021, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 4, 8, 10.21105/astro.1910.00483

    G. Efstathiou and S. Gratton, A Detailed Description of the CamSpec Likelihood Pipeline and a Reanalysis of the Planck High Frequency Maps 10.21105/astro.1910.00483 (2019), arXiv:1910.00483 [astro-ph.CO]

  47. [48]

    Gratton and A

    S. Gratton and A. Challinor, Understanding parameter differ- ences between analyses employing nested data subsets, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 499, 3410 (2020), arXiv:1911.07754 [astro-ph.IM]

  48. [49]

    Marzouk, A

    K. Marzouk, A. Lewis, and J. Carron, Constraints on τNL from Planck temperature and polarization, (2022), arXiv:2205.14408 [astro-ph.CO]

  49. [50]

    Zonca, L

    A. Zonca, L. Singer, D. Lenz, M. Reinecke, C. Rosset, E. Hivon, and K. Gorski, healpy: equal area pixelization and spherical harmonics transforms for data on the sphere in python, Journal of Open Source Software 4, 1298 (2019)

  50. [51]

    K. M. G ´orski, E. Hivon, A. J. Banday, B. D. Wandelt, F. K. Hansen, M. Reinecke, and M. Bartelman, HEALPix - A Frame- work for high resolution discretization, and fast analysis of data distributed on the sphere, Astrophys. J. 622, 759 (2005), arXiv:astro-ph/0409513