RECORD
Large Angular Scale CMB Anisotropy Induced by Cosmic Strings
Astrophysics · Submitted 5 Sep 1996
abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review
The authors' main claim By comparing with the observed temperature anisotropy, we set the normalization for the cosmic string mass-per-unit-length $\mu$, obtaining $G\mu/c^2=1.05 {}^{+0.35}_{-0.20} \times10^{-6}$, which is consistent with all other observational constraints on cosmic strings.
The compiled record
The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.
Open the compiled record
The abstract, sentence by sentence
We simulate the anisotropy in the cosmic microwave background (CMB) induced by cosmic strings. By numerically evolving a network of cosmic strings we generate full-sky CMB temperature anisotropy maps. Based on $192$ maps, we compute the anisotropy power spectrum for multipole moments $\ell \le 20$. By comparing with the observed temperature anisotropy, we set the normalization for the cosmic string mass-per-unit-length $\mu$, obtaining $G\mu/c^2=1.05 {}^{+0.35}_{-0.20} \times10^{-6}$, which is consistent with all other observational constraints on cosmic strings. We demonstrate that the anisotropy pattern is consistent with a Gaussian random field on large angular scales.
background contribution method result interpretation main claim
| # | sentence | role | the authors' own work | states the main conclusion | strength |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| s0 | We simulate the anisotropy in the cosmic microwave background (CMB) induced by cosmic strings. | contribution 0.94 | 0.96 | 0.04 | asserted 0.84 |
| s1 | By numerically evolving a network of cosmic strings we generate full-sky CMB temperature anisotropy maps. | method 0.99 | 0.96 | 0.03 | asserted 1.00 |
| s2 | Based on $192$ maps, we compute the anisotropy power spectrum for multipole moments $\ell \le 20$. | method 0.94 | 0.97 | 0.05 | asserted 1.00 |
| s3 | By comparing with the observed temperature anisotropy, we set the normalization for the cosmic string mass-per-unit-length $\mu$, obtaining $G\mu/c^2=1.05 {}^{+0.35}_{-0.20} \times10^{-6}$, which is consistent with all other observational constraints on cosmic strings. | result 0.99 | 0.96 | 0.76 | asserted 0.91 |
| s4 | We demonstrate that the anisotropy pattern is consistent with a Gaussian random field on large angular scales. | result 0.91 | 0.94 | 0.20 | asserted 0.91 |
What was examined, and what was not
- arXiv listing abstract v1
- full text
- figures and tables
- references and citing sentences
- relations to other papers
- P abstract
- S sections
- T body sentences
- C citations
- R cross-paper relations
The paper
Original abstract
We simulate the anisotropy in the cosmic microwave background (CMB) induced by cosmic strings. By numerically evolving a network of cosmic strings we generate full-sky CMB temperature anisotropy maps. Based on $192$ maps, we compute the anisotropy power spectrum for multipole moments $\ell \le 20$. By comparing with the observed temperature anisotropy, we set the normalization for the cosmic string mass-per-unit-length $\mu$, obtaining $G\mu/c^2=1.05 {}^{+0.35}_{-0.20} \times10^{-6}$, which is consistent with all other observational constraints on cosmic strings. We demonstrate that the anisotropy pattern is consistent with a Gaussian random field on large angular scales.
Human review
References
How the literature uses it
3 arXiv papers cite this in 3 sentences
Papers citing it · 2 sentences without a confident label
Cites it as background 1 paper
-
Bounds on phenomenological parameters such as the string tension and number density have also been obtained using the predicted effects of strings on CMB anisotropy [ref] , the expected emission of high-energy rays from cusps and kinks [ref] and possible signatures in the 21cm line [ref] .
Evolution of FLRW spacetime after the birth of a cosmic string · Introduction · 0.83
Discussion
Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.