http://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&user=Cbischoff&feedformat=atomCMB-S4 wiki - User contributions [en]2019-09-17T21:19:16ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.26.4http://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=Simulation_and_Forecasting_Logbook&diff=9259Simulation and Forecasting Logbook2019-09-16T14:14:58Z<p>Cbischoff: /* Logbook Entries (reverse chronological) */</p>
<hr />
<div>This is an index page for logbook-style postings that cover the interconnected topics of sky modeling, simulations, and forecasting for CMB-S4. <br />
<br />
Some guidelines for use:<br />
* '''Postings should include enough context''' so that a reader can jump in and figure out what is going on. It is ''not'' necessary to write an extensive introduction to every posting -- context can be in the form of links to older postings, paper citations, etc.<br />
* Postings should represent a snapshot of work in progress. It's ok to post incomplete results, but recommended that you include notes about what is missing, what you are still planning to work on, etc. <br />
* If you have work that extends or improves an old posting, you should add it as a new posting (that includes links back to the old work as appropriate). Don't update old postings, as they should provide a chronological record of progress.<br />
* On this index page, add a link to your posting with the date, a descriptive posting title, and your full name. This logbook covers a wide range of topics, so titles will be really important to keep it useful. Don't name your posting something like "Forecasting for S4"!<br />
* Links should be added in reverse-chronological order (newest at the top). Your posting can either be written up on another wiki page or it can be a link to some externally hosted webpage (useful if you want to include a javascript plots pager).<br />
<br />
<br />
== Logbook Entries (reverse chronological) ==<br />
<br />
* '''2019 September 16''': [[PureB by Messenger Method]] (Michael Ray, Colin Bischoff)<br />
* '''2019 August 29''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20190829_noise_params_DSR/ Noise parameters for the DC5 DSR-like data challenge] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2019 June 6''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20190607_LATSTM/ LAT CDT-STM Noise Levels] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2019 May 19''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20190519_about_DSR_AppendixA_plots_and_table/ sigma(r) vs r: plots and tables for the DSR] (Ben Racine and Raphael Flauger)<br />
* '''2019 May 17''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20190509_b3_obseff Observing efficiency reality check] (Clem)<br />
* '''2019 May 11''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20190511_sigmar_vs_r_galcuts/ sigma(r) vs r: possible figures for the DSR (v4): Galactic cuts added (In progress)] (Ben Racine and Raphael Flauger)<br />
* '''2019 May 11''': [[Update_on_Fisher_forecasts]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2019 May 7''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20190507_sigmar_vs_r_combined_hits/ sigma(r) vs r: possible figures for the DSR (v3): More realistic combination and fixed 20GHz] (Ben Racine and Raphael Flauger)<br />
* '''2019 May 6''': [[Update_on_Fisher_forecasts]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2019 April 30''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20190430_sigmar_vs_r_forDSR/ sigma(r) vs r: possible figures for the DSR (v2): more optimal weighting] (Ben Racine and Raphael Flauger)<br />
* '''2019 April 29''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20190501_obseff Efficiency for Reijo's observation pattern sims] (Clem)<br />
* '''2019 April 29''': [[Fisher forecasts for inverse noise variance weighting]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2019 April 22''': [[WAFTT results part 3]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2019 April 18''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20190418_sigmar_vs_r/ sigma(r) vs r: possible figures for the DSR] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2019 April 11''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20190410_closedloop_BK15_S4 Zero order closed loop test of performance based scaling - ML search] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2019 March 31''': [[Analysis results for configurations 30-33]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2019 March 30''': [[Characterization of simulations for configurations 30-33]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2019 March 26''': [[Simulations for configurations with different frequency coverage]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2019 March 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20190326_bkfinal_05 Zero order closed loop test of performance based scaling - BK15 regen power spectra] (Clem)<br />
* '''2019 March 25''': [[Deeper SAT from Chile II]] (Reijo Keskitalo and Julian Borrill)<br />
* '''2019 March 25''': [[Wider SAT from the Pole II]] (Reijo Keskitalo and Julian Borrill)<br />
* '''2019 March 25''': [[Deep SAT from the Pole]] (Reijo Keskitalo and Julian Borrill)<br />
* '''2019 March 18''': [https://cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php/Optimal_lensing_fermilab Details on optimal lensing Fermilab presentation / 02.xx real delensing] (Marius Millea)<br />
* '''2019 March 18''': [[High cadence LAT from Chile]] (Reijo Keskitalo)<br />
* '''2019 March 18''': [[WAFTT results part 2]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2019 March 18''': [[Wider SAT from the Pole]] (Reijo Keskitalo)<br />
* '''2019 March 8''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook//20190308_MLsearch_no85no145/ Maximum likelihood search results without 85GHz and 145GHz] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2019 March 3''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20190303_MLsearch_bpmax_dep/ Maximum likelihood search results: dependence on the multipole range] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2019 February 20''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20190220_noiseparams_bk15_forS4/ BK15 noise levels for S4 sims] (Ben Racine) <br />
* '''2019 February 20''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20190220_S4_NET_forecasts_III/ CMB-S4 NET follow-ups II] (Denis Barkats, Ben Racine-updated on Feb 25) <br />
* '''2019 February 18''': [[Correlation of reconstructed lensing template to ideal II]] (Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2019 February 18''': [[Fisher calcs of 04b/04c for larger value of r]] (Raphael posted by Clem)<br />
* '''2019 February 14''': [[Deeper SAT from Chile]] (Reijo Keskitalo)<br />
* '''2019 January 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20190130_Matrix_first_try/ Matrix-based purification analysis: First try] (B.Racine, J.Willmert) ''Updated 2019 Feb 17th''<br />
* '''2019 January 23''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20190123_S4_NET_forecasts_II/ CMB-S4 NET follow-ups I] (Denis Barkats, J. Kovac, Ben Racine-updated on Feb 25) <br />
* '''2019 January 15''': [[Correlation of reconstructed lensing template to ideal]] (Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2019 January 20''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20190120_dc02_ML_LT/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 02.00 with two different lensing templates] (C. Umiltà)<br />
* '''2019 January 17''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20190117_MLsearch04d/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04d.00, new BK14 mask reanalysis] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2019 January 15''': [[Noise models and sky fractions for WAFTT]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2019 January 11''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20190111_bkfinal_04bcd BK-style power spectra of 04/04b/04c/04d masks (adding BK14 mask)] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 December 9''': [[Optimal Bayesian delensing progress update]] (Marius Millea) <br />
* '''2018 December 7''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181207_bkfinal_02lt BK-style power spectra of 02 with Carron lensing templates] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 December 7''': [[Problems with PS2HAT estimator at low ell]] (Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2018 December 7''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181116_bpbias_study Bandpower bias study] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 December 7''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181207_expval_input_ML_search Maximum likelihood search with expectation values as input] (C. Umiltà)<br />
* '''2018 November 28''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181128_toy_sims Effective sky fraction] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 November 21''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181111_dc04_flatpriors/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04, v2] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 November 21''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181111_dc04_flatpriors/index_abc.html Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04b and 04c, v2] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 November 16''': [[Analytic approximation for r likelihood]] (C. Bischoff) ''Updated 2018-11-20''<br />
* '''2018 November 12''': [[Detection significance for r=0.003]] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 November 9''': [[Bad realizations in gsync/gdust sims]] (Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2018 November 8''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181108_dc02_ML_LT Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 02.00 with an ideal lensing template] (C. Umiltà)<br />
* '''2018 November 5''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181105_toy_sims Attempt to understand sigma(r) results with different hit maps] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 October 29''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181018_1Dmodel_tapering_study Simple 1D model to study the effect of different observation strategies on the bandpower statistics.] (Ben Racine, Victor Buza, John Kovac) ''Updated 2018 Dec 14th''<br />
* '''2018 October 29''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181029_bkfinal_02lt BK-style power spectra of 02 with ideal lensing templates] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 October 26''': [[Checking BB purity in re-analysis for alternate masks]] (Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2018 October 23''': [[Estimated observing efficiency for past and current telescopes, version 2]] (C. Bischoff, Y. Chinone, T. Crawford, M. Hasselfield)<br />
* '''2018 October 14''': [[Estimates of delensing efficiency]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2018 October 14''': [[Analysis of 04, 04b, 04c simulations]] (Raphael) [[Analysis of 04, 04b, 04c simulations comp]] (Ben)<br />
* '''2018 September 30''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180930_dc04_0to9/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04, models 0 to 9] (Ben Racine) ''Updated 2018 Oct 2nd''<br />
* '''2018 September 30''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180930_dc04_abc_model_0123789_ML/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04b and 04c, model 00, 01, 02, 03, 07, 08 and 09] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 September 30''': [[Ready for delensing use lensing maps 02.00]] (Julien Carron)<br />
* '''2018 September 28''': [[Towards lensing template]] (Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2018 September 27''': [[Lensing reconstructions 02.00]] (Julien Carron)<br />
* '''2018 September 26''': [[Lensing map reconstruction from 02.00 sims w/ and w/o foreground+inhomogeneous noise]] (Toshiya Namikawa)<br />
* '''2018 September 25''': [[Estimated observing efficiency for past and current telescopes]] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 September 25''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180925_bkfinal_04bc BK-style power spectra of 04/04b/04c masks for 00/01/02/03/07/08/09 foreground models] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 September 12''': [[Low ell noise from past and current telescopes]] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 September 5''': [[Phi reconstruction on 02.00 sims III]] (Anton Baleato)<br />
* '''2018 August 31''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180831_dc04_abc_model00_07_ML_proper_bp/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04b and 04c, for sky models 00 and 07] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 August 31''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180831_dc04_fixed_bp/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04, fixed bandpasses] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 August 27''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180827_bkfinal_04 Sims with nominal Chile and Pole masks III - BK-style power spectra of 04b.YY and 04c.YY] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 August 27''': [[Sims with nominal Chile and Pole masks II]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 August 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180826_dc04_fixed/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04, fixed] (V.Buza, B.Racine)<br />
* '''2018 August 24''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180824_bkfinal_04/ BK-style power spectra of v04.00-06 sims (CDT report config) FIXED] (Caterina Umilta)<br />
* '''2018 August 24''': [[Amplitude modulated Gaussian dust sims]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 August 17''': [[Sims with nominal Chile and Pole masks]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 August 10''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180810_noise/ Achieved performance roundup] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 August 7''': [[Pre-reference-design noise specifications for large-aperture forecasting]] (Tom Crawford, Matthew Hasselfield, Gil Holder, Lloyd Knox)<br />
* '''2018 August 6''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180805_s4opt/ Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4, 44cm vs 52cm aperture (w/ high-res/low-res 20 GHz)] (V.Buza)<br />
* '''2018 July 9''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180708_dc04/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04] (V.Buza)<br />
* '''2018 July 6''': [[Phi reconstruction on 02.00 sims II]] (Anton Baleato and Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2018 June 11''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180611_s4opt/ Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4, 44cm aperture] (V.Buza) -- see corrected August 6th Update!<br />
* '''2018 June 11''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180609_S4_noise_simulation_arbitrary_coverage/ Recipe to generate performance based S4 simulations with arbitrary sky distribution (in progress)] (B.Racine, V.Buza)<br />
* '''2018 April 29''': [[Phi reconstruction on 02.00 sims]] (Anton Baleato)<br />
* '''2018 April 25''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180425_r_equivalent_maps/ Smallfield r-equivalent Maps] (Kenny Lau)<br />
* '''2018 April 4''': [[Sky masks for simulations III]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 March 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180323_bkfinal_04/ BK-style power spectra of v04.00-06 sims (CDT report config) BROKEN] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 March 16''': [[ILC noise for large apertures at CDT noise levels]] (Raphael Flauger posted by Clem)<br />
* '''2018 March 16''': [[Sky masks for simulations II]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 February 19''': [[Sky masks for simulations]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 February 18''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180218_s4opt/ Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4, v3] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2018 February 7''': [[Sim map sets to demonstrate "real delensing" (02.00 and 02.09)]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 February 6''': [[Data Challenge Map Sets 04.YY]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 December 8''': [[Vansyngel Model]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 November 6''': [[Bandpass Convention - What does flat mean]] (Clem P.) - followup notes added Nov 20<br />
* '''2017 September 27''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170927_dc02/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 02] (Bischoff, Buza, Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 September 13''': [[Bias on r from Band Center Errors]] (Palladino, Willmert, Bischoff)<br />
* '''2017 September 8''': [[Checking dust decorrelation in Raphael MHD based dust sim]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 September 6''': [[New NET Calculator and Validation]] (Denis Barkats)<br />
* '''2017 September 1''': [[Resolution at 20 GHz]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 August 31''': [[Bias on r from additive systematics]] (Palladino, Willmert, Bischoff)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170818_bkfinal_03.00/ BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v03.00,.03 CMB-S4 simulation maps] (Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 August 18 ''': [[Neff_and_Beam_Calibration| Neff and Beam Calibration]] (Dan)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [[Ideal delensing templates from flat-sky QE, first pass]] (Kyle Story)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170818_HR/ High-Res studies for CMB-S4 (draft, v2)] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [[Comments from Anthony Challinor and Rupert Allison regarding the impact of Galactic Foregrounds on lensing]] (Neelima)<br />
* '''2017 August 11''': [[Joint Synchrotron and Dust Maps from Simulations]] (B. Hensley)<br />
* '''2017 August 9''': [[Dust Emission From Halos]] (Jim & Jean-Baptiste)<br />
* '''2017 August 9''': [[SZ Clusters update]] (Mat & Nick)<br />
* '''2017 August 4''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170804_HR/ High-Res studies for CMB-S4 (preliminary draft)] (Victor Buza); perhaps a reference of interest https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.02259<br />
* '''2017 July 10''': [[Additive systematics for data challenge 03]] (Bischoff, Palladino, Buza, Kovac)<br />
* '''2017 July 6''': [[Detection significance and sky fraction, dust decorrelation]](Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 July 3''': [[Toy highly decorrelated dust model]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 June 27''': [[Checking dust decorrelation in models d1/d4/d7 and hipdt]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 June 23''': [[Dust_delensing_firstlook|Dust delensing update]] (Alex)<br />
* '''2017 June 23''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170623_bkfinal_02.00/ BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v02.00–06 CMB-S4 simulation maps] (Justin Willmert) ''Updated 2017 Sep 08''<br />
* '''2017 June 22''': [[Warm-up exercise for delensing]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 June 19''': [[SZ Clusters update]] (Mat, Nick)<br />
* '''2017 June 11''': [[Notes from May 31 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 June 9''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170525_s4syst/ Introducing systematics for CMB-S4] ((Victor Buza), with input from Colin Bischoff, John Kovac)<br />
* '''2017 June 9''': [[Dust_delensing_firstlook]] (Alex)<br />
* '''2017 June 9''': [[r-forecasting: high and low ell coordination|r-forecasting: update on high and low ell coordination]] (Neelima+Colin Hill writing)<br />
* '''2017 June 1''': [[Residuals for DC 01.01 and DC 01.02]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 June 1''': [[Levels of foregrounds in Gaussian and PySM simulations]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 May 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170511_s4dc1/ S4 DC 01.xx analysis, v2] (Victor Buza, Colin Bischoff, Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 May 26 ''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170411_bkfinal_01.00/ Updated v01.02 in "BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v01.00–02 CMB-S4 simulation maps"] (Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 May 15''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170515_chkS4/ N_ell spectra for CMB-S4 DC2.0] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2017 May 15''': [[Rev 2 PySM a2d4f1s3 maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 May 12''': [[r-forecasting: high and low ell coordination|r-forecasting: high and low ell coordination]] (lensers writing)<br />
* '''2017 May 8''': [[Checking PySM maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 May 2''': [[Notes from April 26 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Steve)<br />
* '''2017 May 1''': [[r-forecasting: delensing discussion|r-forecasting delensing discussion]] (Neelima and Blake)<br />
* '''2017 April 28 ''': [[Update_on_Neff_Forecasts| Update on Neff Forecasts]] (Dan)<br />
* '''2017 April 26 ''': [http://www.cosmo.bnl.gov/www/msyriac/web/work/sigma8plots.html Update on cluster number counts forecast including w_a] (Mat and Nick)<br />
* '''2017 April 21 ''': [[lensing-DE|Update on a lensing-based DE forecast]] (Jo, Siddharth)<br />
* '''2017 April 18 ''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170411_bkfinal_01.00/ BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v01.00–02 CMB-S4 simulation maps] (Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 April 18 ''': [[S4-Lensing|S4 measurement requirements for neutrino mass and delensing - first pass]] (Neelima/Blake)<br />
* '''2017 April 17 ''': [[HiDPol|HI-based dust polarization model for r forecasts]] (Tuhin)<br />
* '''2017 April 05 ''': [[lensing-DE|Notes on one path to lensing-based DE forecasts]] (Jo)<br />
* '''2017 April 05 ''': [[Notes from April 5 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 April 05''': [https://cmb-s4.org/CMB-S4workshops/images/Sigma8_z_prep.pdf Sigma8(z) SPT clusters (placeholder) ] (S Bocquet)<br />
* '''2017 April 04''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170404_s4opt/ Updated Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4 (using bands v1.99)] (Victor Buza, Updated 2017.04.21)<br />
* '''2017 March 31 ''': [[Data Challenge analysis - DC1.0, DC1.1, DC1.2]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 March 30 ''': [[Notes from March 28 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim & Steve)<br />
* '''2017 March 29''': [[CMB-S4 frequency bands v1.99]] (John Kovac, Band-definition working group)<br />
* '''2017 March 28''': [[Adding higher res delensing "band"]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 March 27''': [[01.01 sim input maps - first try]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 March 23''': [[01.00 sim input maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 March 20''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170221_S4_NET_forecasts/ S4 Band sensitivity comparison follow-up] (Denis Barkats, John Kovac)<br />
* '''2017 March 17''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20170317_s4dc1/ S4 DC1.0 analysis] (Victor Buza, Colin Bischoff, Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 March 17 ''': [[Media:Telecon_03172017_optimization_for_CMBS4.pdf]]: Optimization methodology for SO (Josquin)<br />
* '''2017 March 16 ''': [[ P_k_science_case| P(k) science case]] (Colin, Simone, Nick, David)<br />
* '''2017 March 15 ''': [[Notes from March 15 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 March 15 ''': [[CMB halo lensing sensitivity as a function of map sensitivity and resolution]] (Jim & Jean-Baptiste)<br />
* '''2017 March 15 ''': [[w and gamma | w and Delta gamma constraints from sigma_8 (z)]] (Mat & Nick)<br />
* '''2017 March 10 ''': [[Notes from March 8 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim & Steve)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[reionization_requirements| Reionization science]] (Simone & Marcelo)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[High ell topics | High ell topics ]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[SZ_s8_z | sigma 8 of z constraints ]] (Mat, Nick)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[Szcounts | Number counts update for 1.0', 1.5', 2.0']] (Nick, Mat)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[SZastro | SZ astrophysics with DESI ]](Nick, Simone, Emanuel, David)<br />
* '''2017 February 24''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170224_cmbs4_dc1_final/ BK-style processing of DC1.0 maps to spectra] (Justin Willmert, Colin Bischoff)<br />
* '''2017 February 15 ''': [[Extragalactic lensing sims| Update on extragalactic phase-2 lensing sims]] (Marcelo, George, Dick, others)<br />
* '''2017 February 15 ''': [[Plan for next Galactic Phase-2sims| Plan for next Galactic phase-2 sims]] (Jo, Ben)<br />
* '''2017 February 10 ''': [[Resolution of foreground-cleaned map]] (Mat, Neelima, Blake, Alex, others)<br />
* '''2017 February 10 ''': [[Nongaussian dust in lensing]] (Alex, Mat, Neelima, Blake, others)<br />
* '''2017 January 30''': [[Aliased power in noise maps]] (Bischoff, Updated 2017-02-02)<br />
* '''2017 January 23''': [[CMBS4 Band Sensitivity Comparison]] (Charlie Hill)<br />
* '''2017 January 12''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/cbischoff/20170112_data_challenge_1/ Maps for CMB-S4 data challenge 1] (Bischoff, Pryke, Buza)<br />
* '''2016 December 21''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20161220_chkS4/ N_ell spectra for the CMB-S4 data challenge, and updated &sigma;(r) checkpoints] (Victor Buza, Updated 2017.02.01)<br />
* '''2016 November 30''': [[First steps to sim input maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2016 November 4''': [[Tophat bands for Data Challenge]] (Bischoff)<br />
* '''2016 July 8''': [[fsky|Dependence of foregrounds on sky fraction]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2016 July 8''': [[SciBookPowspecTheoryFig|Three choices for Science Book Figure 5 (theory power spectrum & current BB points)]] (Tom C.)<br />
* '''2016 July 8''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20160707_s4plots/ S4 Inflation Chapter Plot Suggestions, V2] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 July 6''': [[w_cosntraint|Preliminary w constraint]] (Alessandro)<br />
* '''2016 June 24''': [[nsr|Preliminary ns-r plot for discussion]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2016 June 16''': [[DelensingImpact| Impact Of Delensing On sigma(r)]] (Neelima/Mat)<br />
* '''2016 June 16''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20160616_s4plots/ S4 Inflation Chapter Plot Suggestions] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 June 10''': [[MapBasedRb| Map-based &sigma;(r) forecasts V2]] (David/Jo/Ben)<br />
* '''2016 June 3''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20160531_fisher/ &sigma;(r) forecasting checkpoints, V2] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 June 3''': [[ BTTfixedeffort | Forecasts for fnl BTT beam/fixed effort]] (Daan)<br />
* '''2016 May 31''': [[ForecastPatchyReion| Forecasts for patchy reionization]] (Vera, Alex, Nick)<br />
* '''2016 May 26''': [[Forecasting | Forecasts on neutrino mass]] (Nam, Mat, Neelima)<br />
* '''2016 May 26''': [[ KSZ| Forecasts on kSZ S/N]] (Simone, Emmanuel, Colin)<br />
* '''2016 May 26''': [[ Forecastfiso_planck| Forecast on correlated and anti-correlated CDM isocurvature f_iso]] (Kimmy, Cora, updated with plots 20160602)<br />
* '''2016 May 24''': [[ BTTNoiseBeam | Forecasts on fnl BTT beam/FWHM]] (Daan)<br />
* '''2016 May 22''': [[ ForecastAxions| Update on the axion isocurvature constraints for changing sensitivity and resolution]] (Renee)<br />
* '''2016 May 21''': [[ Forecastpann| Forecast on dark matter annihilation parameter p_ann]] (Kimmy, Cora)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[NeffNoiseBeam| Forecasts on Neff and Yp]] (Joel, Alex)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastEDE| Forecasts on Early Dark Energy]] (Erminia)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastCompIsocurv| Forecasts on compensated isocurvature varying sensitivity, resolution and sky coverage]] (Julian, Ely)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastBirefring| Forecasts on birefringence varying sensitivity and resolution]] (Vera, Alex)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastStrings| Forecasts on string tension varying sensitivity and resolution]] (Renee)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[RobustForecast| Cosmological forecasts including component separation and iterative delensing]] (Stephen Feeney and Josquin Errard)<br />
* '''2016 May 19''': [[MapBasedR| Map-based &sigma;(r) forecasts]] (David A.)<br />
* '''2016 May 18''': [[Shear_calibration_LSST|LSST shear calibration with CMB S4]] (Emmanuel Schaan)<br />
* '''2016 May 13''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20150505_fisher/ &sigma;(r) forecasting checkpoints] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 May 13''': [[NonGaussianitiesTTT| CMBS-4 forecasts local and equilateral scalar Ngs using TTT]] (daan)<br />
* '''2016 May 13''': [[ForecastingSims|Simulations for r forecasts]] (Jo/Ben/David)<br />
* '''2016 May 6''': [[DMInteractionsComplementarity|DM interactions: complementarity]] (Vera)<br />
* '''2016 May 6''': [[Scenarios| Scenarios]] (Scott, Vera)<br />
* ''' 2016 May 3''': [[ForecastAxions |Effect of S4 specs on axion density parameters]] (Renee)<br />
* '''2016 April 30''': [[ForecastNu| Effect of S4 specs on neutrino parameters]] (Erminia)<br />
* '''2016 April 28''': [http://web.stanford.edu/~wlwu/posting/20160421_lensres/ Delensing residuals with low-ell foregrounds] (Kimmy Wu)<br />
* '''2016 April 28''': [[NonGaussianities| CMBS-4 forecast for tensor NGs]] (daan)<br />
* '''2016 April 19''': [[ForecastingStep1| Checking basic parameters for nominal case]] (Jo + multiple authors)<br />
* '''2016 April 5''': [[Forecasting|Setting up non-r Fisher-based parameter forecasts]] (Jo + others)<br />
* '''2016 March 31''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20150331_fisher/ Fisher projections for &sigma;(r) based on achieved performance] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 January 27''': [https://cmb-s4.org/CMB-S4workshops/index.php/File:sptpol_ptsrc_polfrac_500d.pdf Quick estimate of mean-squared polarization fraction for SPTpol sources] (Tom Crawford)</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=PureB_by_Messenger_Method&diff=9258PureB by Messenger Method2019-09-16T14:13:20Z<p>Cbischoff: </p>
<hr />
<div>''Michael Ray, Colin Bischoff, 2019-09-16''<br />
----<br />
<br />
This posting describes an alternate pure-B estimator applied to the 95 GHz DC 04.00 maps with ''A<sub>L</sub>''=1. It uses the "messenger method" ([https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013A%26A...549A.111E/abstract Elsner & Wandelt 2012]) to Wiener filter the maps. We treat the E-mode part of the signal covariance as if it was noise covariance ([https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017PhRvD..96d3523B/abstract Bunn & Wandelt 2017]), so filter equation becomes:<br />
<br />
map<sub>wf</sub> = (S<sub>B</sub>/(S<sub>B</sub>+S<sub>E</sub>+N)) * map,<br />
<br />
where <tt>S<sub>E,B</sub></tt> are the E-mode and B-mode parts of the signal covariance.<br />
<br />
For these simulations with unfiltered skies, the signal covariance is diagonal in the spherical harmonic basis. We treat the noise covariance as diagonal in the pixel basis (not strictly true because of the white + 1/&#x2113; noise spectrum in the data challenge maps). The messenger method iteratively solves fo the Wiener-filtered map by introducing a messenger field, <tt>t</tt>, with covariance matrix, <tt>T</tt>, that is proportional to the identity matrix, so it can be written easily in any basis. For each step of the algorithm, we transform back and forth between pixel space and spherical harmonic space, with the messenger field carrying information between the two bases.<br />
<br />
As a first demonstration, we applied this technique to the 95 GHz DC 04.00 maps (Gaussian foregrounds, circular 3% fsky mask). The signal covariance matrices (in spherical harmonic space) are set to lensed-LCDM EE and BB spectra (purely diagonal), multiplied by ''B<sub>&#x2113;</sub><sup>2</sup>'' and zeroed for &#x2113; &lt; 30 (this last choice appears to have consequences for the bandpower window functions). We did not include any foreground contribution to the signal covariance. The noise covariance is diagonal in pixel space, with values equal to 0.01 &mu;K<sup>2</sup> times the inverse of the mask (checked against a set of noise maps). For unobserved pixels, the noise covariance is set to a very large but finite value.<br />
<br />
The messenger method includes parameter, &lambda;, which scales the covariance of the messenger field. Convergence proceeds more quickly for large values of &lambda;, but the final solution is obtained for &lambda; = 1. This means that we want to implement a "cooling schedule" for efficient filtering. In our implementation, &lambda; starts at a value of 1300, is decreased to 100 on the second iteration, and then is reduced by factor &eta; = 0.825 on each subsequent iteration. When &lambda; reaches 1, we iterate an additional 5 times. We have experimented fairly extensively with other cooling schedules and found that this method gives good convergence in a reasonable amount of time. (We are able to filter a single set of Q and U maps in 34 minutes on a single processor.)<br />
<br />
Figures 1 and 2 show a map before and after filtering. The input maps is dominated by LCDM E modes. The output map contains B modes from foregrounds and lensing. The output map color scale has been zoomed in so that we can see that the pure-B filtering operation has extended the map into the unobserved region.<br />
<br />
{|<br />
|[[File:Q input map.png|frame|Figure 1: Input Q signal plus noise map. This is zoomed in on the unmasked region of the map.]]<br />
|[[File:Q output map.png|frame|Figure 2: Output Q signal plus noise map. This has been filtered through our pure B estimator. This map is also zoomed in on the unmasked region although the algorithm extends the map into the unmasked region.]]<br />
|}<br />
<br />
After applying the filter, we calculate the BB spectrum with anafast and bin with &Delta;&#x2113;=35, to match the pure-S2hat analysis. Noise bias is measured from 100 noise-only simulations. Bandpower window functions (Figures 4 and 5) and suppression factors are calculated by running &#x2113;-by-&#x2113; simulations (but only 6 realizations per &#x2113; value so far). Figure 3 shows noise-debiased and suppression-factor-corrected power spectra for 100 LCDM+foregrounds+noise simulations. The expectation value line is calculated by applying the bandpower window functions to a LCDM+foregrounds model that matches the sims. <br />
<br />
There is some noticeable bias in the last bin especially. Something is clearly off with the calculations for this bin (see bandpower window functions) and needs to be investigated.<br />
<br />
[[File:Filtered specs mean vs expectation.png|frame|Figure 3: Band powers of 100 filtered signal plus noise simulations. These were filtered using the messenger method estimator. Also shown is the mean and the expectation value calculated using band power window functions and BB theory spectra.|center]]<br />
<br />
Figures 4 and 5 show bandpower window functions for input B modes >> output BB (left) and input E modes >> output BB (right). These were calculated by running just six simulations for each &#x2113; value, and could be made less noisy with additional computation. The purity of the estimator can be seen by comparing the absolute level of the two sets of functions; the first ell bin responds has response to B modes that is ~1000x greater than the response to E modes. Our initial reaction was that this is not an extremely impressive level of purity (though it is better than simply masking and running anafast). However, keep in mind that we are using a Wiener filter that knows about the noise level, so it might choose to keep modes that are slightly ambiguous if they result in a net decrease in bandpower variance.<br />
<br />
The input B >> output BB window functions show a prominent bump for &#x21113; < 30. This is probably due to the choice we made to zero the E and B signal covariance matrices in that range (which does match the sim construction). Our naive expectation based on the Wiener filter equation was that the filter would kill that &#x2113; range because it contains no signal, but clearly this is not happening. We plan to investigate this by calculating window functions without zeroing that part of the covariance matrix.<br />
<br />
The 10th &#x2113; bin shows odd behavior, with no upper end cutoff and very different normalization from other bins. This might just be a bug in the binning code. That bin also showed the largest bias in Figure 3, which might be related.<br />
<br />
{|<br />
|[[File:Messenger bb2bb bpwf.png|frame|Figure 4: BB to BB band power window functions using messenger method pure-B estimator.]]<br />
|[[File:Messenger ee2bb bpwf.png|frame|Figure 5: EE to BB band power window functions using messenger method pure-B estimator.]]<br />
|}<br />
<br />
Figure 6 shows the variance calculated from BB bandpowers of the first 100 signal + noise maps by pure-S2hat and by this estimator. The Wiener filter / messenger method estimator produces lower variance for all bins (but the last bin shouldn't be trusted, for reasons discussed above). We believe that at least part of this improvement is because the Wiener filter considers both signal and noise variance, so it could decide to keep more modes for a signal-dominated case. There results are from sims with ''A<sub>L</sub>'' = 1, which is a pretty large B-mode signal when compared to the CMB-S4 forecasted 95 GHz noise. We expect that the improvement would be much smaller for maps that have been delensed.<br />
<br />
[[File:Variance comparison.png|frame|Figure 6: Comparison of messenger method and S2hat estimator when it comes to the variance in each bin.|center]]<br />
<br />
There are several steps that are still needed before this estimator can be used as part of a full Data Challenge analysis:<br />
* Look into the effect of zeroing signal covariance for &#x2113; < 30. Is this responsible for the low-&#x2113; feature in the bandpower window functions?<br />
* Figure out what is going on with the 10th &#x2113; bin.<br />
* Incorporate this filter into a pipeline infrastructure that can run on all maps, take cross-spectra, calculate TT, EE, TE, EB, TB, etc.</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=PureB_by_Messenger_Method&diff=9257PureB by Messenger Method2019-09-16T11:56:23Z<p>Cbischoff: </p>
<hr />
<div>''Michael Ray, Colin Bischoff, 2019-09-xx''<br />
----<br />
<br />
This posting describes an alternate pure-B estimator applied to the 95 GHz DC 04.00 maps. It uses the "messenger method" ([https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013A%26A...549A.111E/abstract Elsner & Wandelt 2012]) to Wiener filter the maps. We treat the E-mode part of the signal covariance as if it was noise covariance ([https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017PhRvD..96d3523B/abstract Bunn & Wandelt 2017]), so filter equation becomes:<br />
<br />
map<sub>wf</sub> = (S<sub>B</sub>/(S<sub>B</sub>+S<sub>E</sub>+N)) * map,<br />
<br />
where <tt>S<sub>E,B</sub></tt> are the E-mode and B-mode parts of the signal covariance.<br />
<br />
For these simulations with unfiltered skies, the signal covariance is diagonal in the spherical harmonic basis. We treat the noise covariance as diagonal in the pixel basis (not strictly true because of the white + 1/&#x2113; noise spectrum in the data challenge maps). The messenger method iteratively solves fo the Wiener-filtered map by introducing a messenger field, <tt>t</tt>, with covariance matrix, <tt>T</tt>, that is proportional to the identity matrix, so it can be written easily in any basis. For each step of the algorithm, we transform back and forth between pixel space and spherical harmonic space, with the messenger field carrying information between the two bases.<br />
<br />
As a first demonstration, we applied this technique to the 95 GHz DC 04.00 maps (Gaussian foregrounds, circular 3% fsky mask). The signal covariance matrices (in spherical harmonic space) are set to the standard lensed-LCDM E and B-mode spectra (purely diagonal). We did not include any foreground contribution to the signal covariance. The noise covariance is diagonal in pixel space, with values equal to 0.01 &mu;K<sup>2</sup> times the inverse of the mask (checked against a set of noise maps). For unobserved pixels, the noise covariance is set to a very large but finite value.<br />
<br />
The messenger method includes parameter, &lambda;, which scales the covariance of the messenger field. Convergence proceeds more quickly for large values of &lambda;, but the final solution is obtained for &lambda; = 1. This means that we want to implement a "cooling schedule" for efficient filtering. In our implementation, &lambda; starts at a value of 1300, is decreased to 100 on the second iteration, and then is reduced by factor &eta; = 0.825 on each subsequent iteration. When &lambda; reaches 1, we iterate an additional 5 times. We have experimented fairly extensively with other cooling schedules and found that this method gives good convergence in a reasonable amount of time. (We are able to filter a single set of Q and U maps in 34 minutes on a single processor.)<br />
<br />
Figures 1 and 2 show a map before and after filtering. The input maps is dominated by LCDM E modes. The output map contains B modes from foregrounds and lensing. The output map color scale has been zoomed in so that we can see that the pure-B filtering operation has extended the map into the unobserved region.<br />
<br />
{|<br />
|[[File:Q input map.png|frame|Figure 1: Input Q signal plus noise map. This is zoomed in on the unmasked region of the map.]]<br />
|[[File:Q output map.png|frame|Figure 2: Output Q signal plus noise map. This has been filtered through our pure B estimator. This map is also zoomed in on the unmasked region although the algorithm extends the map into the unmasked region.]]<br />
|}<br />
<br />
After applying the filter, we calculate the BB spectrum with anafast and bin with &Delta;&#x2113;=35, to match the pure-S2hat analysis. Noise bias is measured from 100 noise-only simulations. Bandpower window functions (Figures 4 and 5) and suppression factors are calculated by running &#x2113;-by-&#x2113; simulations (but only 6 realizations per &#x2113; value so far). Figure 3 shows noise-debiased and suppression-factor-corrected power spectra for 100 LCDM+foregrounds+noise simulations. The expectation value line is calculated by applying the bandpower window functions to a LCDM+foregrounds model that matches the sims. <br />
<br />
There is some noticeable bias in the last bin especially. Something is clearly off with the calculations for this bin (see bandpower window functions) and needs to be investigated.<br />
<br />
[[File:Filtered specs mean vs expectation.png|frame|Figure 3: Band powers of 100 filtered signal plus noise simulations. These were filtered using the messenger method estimator. Also shown is the mean and the expectation value calculated using band power window functions and BB theory spectra.|center]]<br />
<br />
<br />
As one can see, the expectation value for our estimator runs directly through the middle of our simulations and is very close to our mean. It is worth noting that there is definitely something out of the ordinary happening in our last bin. In this bin, we routinely get results that do not agree with the rest of the data. Because of this, we generally ignore results from the last bin given that we are not too worried with what is happening at that ell range anyway. Shown below are plots of BB to BB and EE to BB band power window functions for both the messenger method estimator and the S2hat estimator. Band power window functions for the messenger estimator were calculated with an input signal C_ell = 1 on the sky. This means that the actual input power for deriving band power window functions is 1 * B_ell squared, where B_ell squared contains the effect of the beam. We also ran 6 simulations at each ell with this input power and then took the mean of the output across these six simulations to get the final band power window functions. Summing the window functions across ell values gives us the total suppression factor.<br />
<br />
Figures 4 and 5 show bandpower window functions for input B modes &rightarrow; output BB <br />
<br />
{|<br />
|[[File:Messenger bb2bb bpwf.png|frame|Figure 4: BB to BB band power window functions using messenger method pure-B estimator.]]<br />
|[[File:Messenger ee2bb bpwf.png|frame|Figure 5: EE to BB band power window functions using messenger method pure-B estimator.]]<br />
|}<br />
<br />
Again, it is visually apparent that there is something odd going on in the last bin for the messenger method estimator.<br />
<br />
Below are plots the variance in each bin across the 100 realizations which were filtered. The exact same simulations were used as input to the two methods compared (signal plus noise simulations at 95 GHz using the 04.00 experiment configuration).<br />
<br />
<br />
[[File:Variance comparison.png|frame|Figure : Comparison of messenger method and S2hat estimator when it comes to the variance in each bin.|center]]<br />
<br />
As shown above, the messenger method beats the S2hat estimator in terms of variance per bin. We believe the main reason for this is that the S2hat estimator uses a simple weighting of 1/N to filter the maps. Since the signal plus noise simulations have a sizeable amount of BB lensing signal contained within them, the fact that we are doing a weiner filter (and thus taking into account the signal covariance) means that we would expect to get a large improvement over an estimator which only knows about noise covariance. For delensed simulations, we would expect to see less of an improvement from the messenger method over the S2hat filtering.</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=PureB_by_Messenger_Method&diff=9251PureB by Messenger Method2019-09-15T13:15:32Z<p>Cbischoff: </p>
<hr />
<div>''Michael Ray, Colin Bischoff, 2019-09-xx''<br />
----<br />
<br />
This posting describes an alternate pure-B estimator applied to the 95 GHz DC 04.00 maps. It uses the "messenger method" ([https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013A%26A...549A.111E/abstract Elsner & Wandelt 2012]) to Wiener filter the maps. We treat the E-mode part of the signal covariance as if it was noise covariance ([https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017PhRvD..96d3523B/abstract Bunn & Wandelt 2017]), so filter equation becomes:<br />
<br />
map<sub>wf</sub> = (S<sub>B</sub>/(S<sub>B</sub>+S<sub>E</sub>+N)) * map,<br />
<br />
where <tt>S<sub>E,B</sub></tt> are the E-mode and B-mode parts of the signal covariance.<br />
<br />
For these simulations with unfiltered skies, the signal covariance is diagonal in the spherical harmonic basis. We treat the noise covariance as diagonal in the pixel basis (not strictly true because of the white + 1/&#x2113; noise spectrum in the data challenge maps). The messenger method iteratively solves fo the Wiener-filtered map by introducing a messenger field, <tt>t</tt>, with covariance matrix, <tt>T</tt>, that is proportional to the identity matrix, so it can be written easily in any basis. For each step of the algorithm, we transform back and forth between pixel space and spherical harmonic space, with the messenger field carrying information between the two bases.<br />
<br />
As a first demonstration, we applied this technique to the 95 GHz DC 04.00 maps (Gaussian foregrounds, circular 3% fsky mask). The signal covariance matrices (in spherical harmonic space) are set to the standard lensed-LCDM E and B-mode spectra (purely diagonal). We did not include any foreground contribution to the signal covariance. The noise covariance is diagonal in pixel space, with values equal to XX &mu;K<sup>2</sup> times the inverse of the mask. For unobserved pixels, the noise covariance is set to a very large but finite value.<br />
<br />
The messenger method includes parameter, &lambda;, which scales the covariance of the messenger field. Convergence proceeds more quickly for large values of &lambda;, but the final solution is obtained for &lambda; = 1. This means that we want to implement a "cooling schedule" for efficient filtering. In our implementation, &lambda; starts at a value of 1300, is decreased to 100 on the second iteration, and then is reduced by factor &eta; = 0.825 on each subsequent iteration. When &lambda; reaches 1, we iterate an additional 5 times. We have experimented fairly extensively with other cooling schedules and found that this method gives good convergence in a reasonable amount of time. (We are able to filter a single set of Q and U maps in 34 minutes on a single processor.)<br />
<br />
Figures 1 and 2 show a map before and after filtering. The input maps is dominated by LCDM E modes. The output map contains B modes from foregrounds and lensing. The output map color scale has been zoomed in so that we can see that the pure-B filtering operation has extended the map into the unobserved region.<br />
<br />
{|<br />
|[[File:Q input map.png|frame|Figure 1: Input Q signal plus noise map. This is zoomed in on the unmasked region of the map.]]<br />
|[[File:Q output map.png|frame|Figure 2: Output Q signal plus noise map. This has been filtered through our pure B estimator. This map is also zoomed in on the unmasked region although the algorithm extends the map into the unmasked region.]]<br />
|}<br />
<br />
The algorithm takes in a set of two maps, corresponding to a Q and U measurement, and outputs a B only weiner filtered set of Q and U maps. One can visually see that although the input map has a defined edge, the algorithm extends the output map into the unobserved region. This is because the code is coming up with a full sky weiner filtered map and thus any power detected at low ell will result in map fluctuations at large angular scales. It is also visually apparent that the input Q map contains mostly E modes (fluctuations that appear straight up and down or straight across), while the output Q map looks like it's all B modes (diagonal fluctuations). This is exactly what we would hope to see from a pure-B estimator. Note that there is a scale difference between the two plots. This is because the input map contains E signal, so the Q map will have a larger amplitude in each pixel for the input map than the output map which contains only B modes.<br />
<br />
There is still some noise bias in the output map, however we can remove that through using monte carlo methods. There is also a suppression factor involved in the output data which is the reason for the scale difference in plots. This factor is corrected for through the use of band power window functions. Both the noise debiasing and suppression factor correction are made at the power spectrum level only. We are not capable of applying noise and suppression factor corrections to maps.<br />
<br />
Shown below is a plot of 100 spectra which are cleaned signal plus noise maps at 95 GHz taken from the 04.00 CMBS4 experiment configuration. The bins used in this analysis began at ell of 20, and went up through ell of 370 with a bin size of 35. So, bin number zero is ell of 20 - 55. Bin 9 (last bin) is ell of 335 - 370. Also included is the mean of these 100 spectra and the expectation value which was calculated using band power window functions and theory BB spectra.<br />
<br />
<br />
[[File:Filtered specs mean vs expectation.png|frame|Figure 3: Band powers of 100 filtered signal plus noise simulations. These were filtered using the messenger method estimator. Also shown is the mean and the expectation value calculated using band power window functions and BB theory spectra.|center]]<br />
<br />
<br />
As one can see, the expectation value for our estimator runs directly through the middle of our simulations and is very close to our mean. It is worth noting that there is definitely something out of the ordinary happening in our last bin. In this bin, we routinely get results that do not agree with the rest of the data. Because of this, we generally ignore results from the last bin given that we are not too worried with what is happening at that ell range anyway. Shown below are plots of BB to BB and EE to BB band power window functions for both the messenger method estimator and the S2hat estimator. Band power window functions for the messenger estimator were calculated with an input signal C_ell = 1 on the sky. This means that the actual input power for deriving band power window functions is 1 * B_ell squared, where B_ell squared contains the effect of the beam. We also ran 6 simulations at each ell with this input power and then took the mean of the output across these six simulations to get the final band power window functions. Summing the window functions across ell values gives us the total suppression factor.<br />
<br />
<br />
[[File:Messenger bb2bb bpwf.png|frame|Figure 4: BB to BB band power window functions using messenger method pure-B estimator.|center]]<br />
[[File:Messenger ee2bb bpwf.png|frame|Figure 5: EE to BB band power window functions using messenger method pure-B estimator.|center]]<br />
[[File:S2hat bb2bb bpwf.png|frame|Figure 6: BB to BB band power window functions using S2hat pure-B estimator|center]]<br />
<br />
<br />
Again, it is visually apparent that there is something odd going on in the last bin for the messenger method estimator.<br />
<br />
Below are plots the variance in each bin across the 100 realizations which were filtered. The exact same simulations were used as input to the two methods compared (signal plus noise simulations at 95 GHz using the 04.00 experiment configuration).<br />
<br />
<br />
[[File:Variance comparison.png|frame|Figure : Comparison of messenger method and S2hat estimator when it comes to the variance in each bin.|center]]<br />
<br />
As shown above, the messenger method beats the S2hat estimator in terms of variance per bin. We believe the main reason for this is that the S2hat estimator uses a simple weighting of 1/N to filter the maps. Since the signal plus noise simulations have a sizeable amount of BB lensing signal contained within them, the fact that we are doing a weiner filter (and thus taking into account the signal covariance) means that we would expect to get a large improvement over an estimator which only knows about noise covariance. For delensed simulations, we would expect to see less of an improvement from the messenger method over the S2hat filtering.</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=Estimated_observing_efficiency_for_past_and_current_telescopes,_version_2&diff=8936Estimated observing efficiency for past and current telescopes, version 22019-05-09T17:47:25Z<p>Cbischoff: </p>
<hr />
<div>''Colin Bischoff, Yuji Chinone, Tom Crawford, Matt Hasselfield, 2018-10-23''<br />
----<br />
<br />
This posting is an update on a [[Estimated observing efficiency for past and current telescopes|previous posting from 2018-09-25]]. The goal is to try to identify any factors that lead to different observing efficiency between Atacama and South Pole.<br />
<br />
===References===<br />
We assess results from recent CMB polarization experiments that have been published in the following papers:<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014PhRvL.112x1101A BICEP2 2014] (150 GHz)<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...811..126B BICEP2 + Keck Array 2015] (150 GHz) &mdash; this is the same dataset that was used for BICEP/Keck/Planck joint analysis<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016PhRvL.116c1302B BICEP2 + Keck Array 2016] (95 and 150 GHz)<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018arXiv181005216A BICEP2 + Keck Array 2018] (95, 150, and 220 GHz)<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014JCAP...10..007N ACTpol 2014] (150 GHz)<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017JCAP...06..031L ACTpol 2017] (150 GHz)<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...741..111Q QUIET 2011] (43 GHz)<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...760..145Q QUIET 2012] (95 GHz)<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018JCAP...09..005K ABS 2018] (150 GHz)<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...848..121P POLARBEAR 2017] (150 GHz)<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...807..151K SPTpol 2015] (95 and 150 GHz, but only using 150 GHz here)<br />
<br />
===Method===<br />
To investigate observing efficiency, we compare different measures of survey weight, which is defined with units of &mu;K<sup>-2</sup> and accumulates linearly with detector count or integration time.<br />
<br />
The &ldquo;tod weight&rdquo; is calculated from array sensitivity and integration time as<br />
tod_weight = &tau; / NEQ<sup>2</sup><br />
* Note that we use here a convention for NEQ that corresponds to instantaneous sensitivity to whatever combination of Q and U is being measured. By this convention, most experiments should have NEQ that is similar to NET (up to minor factors of polarization efficiency), not a factor of sqrt(2) higher.<br />
* Since survey weight accumulates linearly, we can calculate the total 150 GHz BICEP2/Keck survey weight from the most recent publication as BICEP2 2010&ndash;2012 + Keck 2012&ndash;2013 + Keck 2014 + Keck 2015.<br />
<br />
The &ldquo;bandpower weight&rdquo; is calculated from N<sub>&#x2113;</sub> and effective fsky of the BB bandpowers as<br />
bandpower_weight = 2 * 4&pi; * fsky / N<sub>&#x2113;</sub><br />
* The factor of 2 counts both EE and BB survey weight and is needed to match the NEQ convention discussed above.<br />
* N<sub>&#x2113;</sub> and effective fsky are estimated from the error bars of published bandpowers. This is discussed in more detail in a [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180810_noise/ 2018-08-10 posting]. The bandpower error bars constrain N<sub>&#x2113;</sub> / sqrt(fsky), so for experiments where we weren't able to reliably break this degeneracy it is possible to change the bandpower weight while keeping the bandpower errors fixed. This is noted explicitly on the figure for the case of ABS&mdash;we made a rough estimate of fsky = 3% but added dotted lines that range from 1.5% (lower left end) to 6% (upper right end). This issue affects the QUIET points too, but we haven't added dotted lines there.<br />
<br />
The bandpower weight represents final results after all efficiency hits while the tod weight represents accumulated sensitivity. If we fully understand all of the various efficiency factors, then we should be able to get these numbers to agree.<br />
<br />
===Results===<br />
Figure 1 below shows the bandpower / tod weight ratio vs bandpower weight, color-coded by observing frequency. For each experiment, there are two or three points spaced vertically. These all represent the same bandpowers, but count total observing time differently and arrive at different tod weights.<br />
<br />
[[File:CMB_achieved_efficiency_v2.png|frame|Figure 1: survey weight ratio vs bandpower-derived survey weight|center]]<br />
<br />
* The bottom points uses the most expansive definition of observing time, which is just the duration between when the experiment started operating and when it finished. <br />
** For BICEP2/Keck, this is just calendar years. BICEP2 ran for three years (2010 through 2012). The 2015 paper added two years of Keck Array (2012, 2013). The 2016 paper added Keck data from 2014. The 2018 paper added Keck data from 2015.<br />
** For ACTpol, the 2014 paper was based on just 94 days of operation (2013-09-11 through 2013-12-14). The 2017 paper included an additional 133 days (2014-08-20 through 2014-12-31).<br />
** For QUIET, the 2011 paper was based on 232 days of operation (2008-10-24 through 2009-06-13). The 2012 paper was based on 497 days of operation (2009-08-12 through 2010-12-22).<br />
** For ABS, the 2018 paper was based on 464 days of operation (2012-09-13 through 2013-12-21).<br />
** For POLARBEAR, the 2017 paper was based on 668 days of operation. Season 1 was May 2012 through June 2013 and season 2 was September 2013 through April 2014.<br />
** For SPTpol, the 2015 paper was based on 395 days of operation (April 2012 through April 2013).<br />
* The upper filled points attempt to count just the days spent on normal operations.<br />
** For BICEP2/Keck and SPT, we drop the austral summer deployment season that is typically spent on instrument repairs, upgrades, and calibration. BICEP2 is an expection, as it operated more or less continuously from 2010-02-15 to 2012-11-06 except for a campaign of calibrations from 2011-01-01 to 2011-03-01.<br />
** For ACTpol, we kept only 63% (45%) of the observing time from season 1 (2) to account for night-time only observations.<br />
** For QUIET, the time spent on observations is 3458 hours for 43 GHz and 7426 hours for 95 GHz, taken from the text of the respective papers. These durations include calibrations and Galactic field data, excluding only blocks of downtime due to &ldquo;occasional snow, power outages, and mechanical failures&rdquo;.<br />
** For ABS, the time spent on observations is 6723 hours, taken from the text of the paper.<br />
** For POLARBEAR, the time spent on observations is 4700 hours, taken from the text of the paper.<br />
* In some cases, there is an additional unfilled point that counts only the remaining time after cuts.<br />
** For BICEP2, we used 8.6e9 detector-seconds from Table 7 of BK-II and replaced the array sensitivity with per-detector sensitivity.<br />
** For ABS, we used 461,237 TES-hours from Table 3 of ABS 2018 and replaced the array sensitivity with per-detector sensitivity<br />
** For QUIET, we counted only hours targeting the CMB fields and used 69.4% cut efficiency at 43 GHz (Table 3 of QUIET 2011, pipeline A) and 63.5% cut efficiency at 95 GHz (Table 1 of QUIET 2012, PCL pipeline).<br />
** For POLARBEAR, we used 1400 hours of data after cuts. POLARBEAR 2017 lists 2800 hours of data passing cuts, but 50% of that data is lost from cutting to scan turnarounds.<br />
<br />
===Discussion===<br />
Our interpretation of this figure is as follows:<br />
# If we take the ratio of the two points connected by the line, this is telling us what fraction of the total number of calendar days were spent in standard science observing mode. This ratio is fairly similar for most experiments (60&ndash;65%), but it is notably high for BICEP2 (85%) and low for POLARBEAR (29%). This loss of observing efficiency is not primarily site specific, with much of the downtime due to repairs and upgrades. However, this factor probably does include some downtime due to snowstorms in Atacama while for Pole the summer deployment season conveniently overlaps with the worst observing conditions.<br />
# The next ratio is between the upper filled point and the unfilled point. This represents the loss of observation time due to data cuts (and scheduling). It is quite similar for BICEP2 (33%), ABS (34%), and POLARBEAR (30%). QUIET comes out a bit higher at 43 GHz (54%) and 95 GHz (46%), but is seems reasonable that we would cut less data at low frequencies.<br />
# Finally we can compare the unfilled points, which should include all the efficiency hits from downtime and data cuts with 1, the value that we ought to obtain if all factors are accounted for. We don't have a good explanation for this factor. Potential explanations are that the assumed array sensitivities are a bit too good or that apodized / non-uniform map coverage is inefficient in some way. The values of this factor are 79% for BICEP2, 60% for POLARBEAR, 39% for ABS (or 55%, if we assume ABS fsky=0.06), and 63% (52%) for QUIET 43 (95) GHz (but remember that QUIET could be suffering from similar fsky uncertainty as ABS).<br />
<br />
Of the three factors listed above, only #2 is clearly site-specific, yet it seems to be quite similar between BICEP/Keck, ABS, and POLARBEAR. This survey is obviously imprecise, but it provides some evidence that observing efficiency is not very different between Atacama and Pole, all else being equal. It would be an invaluable exercise if people with deep knowledge of each experiment (and access to data) could produce detailed breakdowns of the factors needed to get agreement between the accumulated tod survey weight and the bandpower-derived version.</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=Simulation_and_Forecasting_Logbook&diff=8915Simulation and Forecasting Logbook2019-04-29T16:07:59Z<p>Cbischoff: /* Logbook Entries (reverse chronological) */ fixed posting date</p>
<hr />
<div>This is an index page for logbook-style postings that cover the interconnected topics of sky modeling, simulations, and forecasting for CMB-S4. <br />
<br />
Some guidelines for use:<br />
* '''Postings should include enough context''' so that a reader can jump in and figure out what is going on. It is ''not'' necessary to write an extensive introduction to every posting -- context can be in the form of links to older postings, paper citations, etc.<br />
* Postings should represent a snapshot of work in progress. It's ok to post incomplete results, but recommended that you include notes about what is missing, what you are still planning to work on, etc. <br />
* If you have work that extends or improves an old posting, you should add it as a new posting (that includes links back to the old work as appropriate). Don't update old postings, as they should provide a chronological record of progress.<br />
* On this index page, add a link to your posting with the date, a descriptive posting title, and your full name. This logbook covers a wide range of topics, so titles will be really important to keep it useful. Don't name your posting something like "Forecasting for S4"!<br />
* Links should be added in reverse-chronological order (newest at the top). Your posting can either be written up on another wiki page or it can be a link to some externally hosted webpage (useful if you want to include a javascript plots pager).<br />
<br />
<br />
== Logbook Entries (reverse chronological) ==<br />
* '''2019 April 29''': [[Fisher forecasts for inverse noise variance weighting]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2019 April 22''': [[WAFTT results part 3]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2019 April 11''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20190410_closedloop_BK15_S4 Zero order closed loop test of performance based scaling - ML search] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2019 March 31''': [[Analysis results for configurations 30-33]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2019 March 30''': [[Characterization of simulations for configurations 30-33]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2019 March 26''': [[Simulations for configurations with different frequency coverage]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2019 March 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20190326_bkfinal_05 Zero order closed loop test of performance based scaling - BK15 regen power spectra] (Clem)<br />
* '''2019 March 25''': [[Deeper SAT from Chile II]] (Reijo Keskitalo and Julian Borrill)<br />
* '''2019 March 25''': [[Wider SAT from the Pole II]] (Reijo Keskitalo and Julian Borrill)<br />
* '''2019 March 25''': [[Deep SAT from the Pole]] (Reijo Keskitalo and Julian Borrill)<br />
* '''2019 March 18''': [https://cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php/Optimal_lensing_fermilab Details on optimal lensing Fermilab presentation / 02.xx real delensing] (Marius Millea)<br />
* '''2019 March 18''': [[High cadence LAT from Chile]] (Reijo Keskitalo)<br />
* '''2019 March 18''': [[WAFTT results part 2]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2019 March 18''': [[Wider SAT from the Pole]] (Reijo Keskitalo)<br />
* '''2019 March 8''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook//20190308_MLsearch_no85no145/ Maximum likelihood search results without 85GHz and 145GHz] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2019 March 3''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20190303_MLsearch_bpmax_dep/ Maximum likelihood search results: dependence on the multipole range] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2019 February 20''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20190220_noiseparams_bk15_forS4/ BK15 noise levels for S4 sims] (Ben Racine) <br />
* '''2019 February 20''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20190220_S4_NET_forecasts_III/ CMB-S4 NET follow-ups II] (Denis Barkats, Ben Racine-updated on Feb 25) <br />
* '''2019 February 18''': [[Correlation of reconstructed lensing template to ideal II]] (Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2019 February 18''': [[Fisher calcs of 04b/04c for larger value of r]] (Raphael posted by Clem)<br />
* '''2019 February 14''': [[Deeper SAT from Chile]] (Reijo Keskitalo)<br />
* '''2019 January 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20190130_Matrix_first_try/ Matrix-based purification analysis: First try] (B.Racine, J.Willmert) ''Updated 2019 Feb 17th''<br />
* '''2019 January 23''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20190123_S4_NET_forecasts_II/ CMB-S4 NET follow-ups I] (Denis Barkats, J. Kovac, Ben Racine-updated on Feb 25) <br />
* '''2019 January 15''': [[Correlation of reconstructed lensing template to ideal]] (Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2019 January 20''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20190120_dc02_ML_LT/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 02.00 with two different lensing templates] (C. Umiltà)<br />
* '''2019 January 17''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20190117_MLsearch04d/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04d.00, new BK14 mask reanalysis] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2019 January 15''': [[Noise models and sky fractions for WAFTT]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2019 January 11''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20190111_bkfinal_04bcd BK-style power spectra of 04/04b/04c/04d masks (adding BK14 mask)] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 December 9''': [[Optimal Bayesian delensing progress update]] (Marius Millea) <br />
* '''2018 December 7''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181207_bkfinal_02lt BK-style power spectra of 02 with Carron lensing templates] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 December 7''': [[Problems with PS2HAT estimator at low ell]] (Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2018 December 7''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181116_bpbias_study Bandpower bias study] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 December 7''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181207_expval_input_ML_search Maximum likelihood search with expectation values as input] (C. Umiltà)<br />
* '''2018 November 28''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181128_toy_sims Effective sky fraction] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 November 21''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181111_dc04_flatpriors/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04, v2] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 November 21''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181111_dc04_flatpriors/index_abc.html Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04b and 04c, v2] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 November 16''': [[Analytic approximation for r likelihood]] (C. Bischoff) ''Updated 2018-11-20''<br />
* '''2018 November 12''': [[Detection significance for r=0.003]] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 November 9''': [[Bad realizations in gsync/gdust sims]] (Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2018 November 8''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181108_dc02_ML_LT Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 02.00 with an ideal lensing template] (C. Umiltà)<br />
* '''2018 November 5''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181105_toy_sims Attempt to understand sigma(r) results with different hit maps] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 October 29''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181018_1Dmodel_tapering_study Simple 1D model to study the effect of different observation strategies on the bandpower statistics.] (Ben Racine, Victor Buza, John Kovac) ''Updated 2018 Dec 14th''<br />
* '''2018 October 29''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181029_bkfinal_02lt BK-style power spectra of 02 with ideal lensing templates] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 October 26''': [[Checking BB purity in re-analysis for alternate masks]] (Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2018 October 23''': [[Estimated observing efficiency for past and current telescopes, version 2]] (C. Bischoff, Y. Chinone, T. Crawford, M. Hasselfield)<br />
* '''2018 October 14''': [[Estimates of delensing efficiency]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2018 October 14''': [[Analysis of 04, 04b, 04c simulations]] (Raphael) [[Analysis of 04, 04b, 04c simulations comp]] (Ben)<br />
* '''2018 September 30''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180930_dc04_0to9/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04, models 0 to 9] (Ben Racine) ''Updated 2018 Oct 2nd''<br />
* '''2018 September 30''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180930_dc04_abc_model_0123789_ML/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04b and 04c, model 00, 01, 02, 03, 07, 08 and 09] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 September 30''': [[Ready for delensing use lensing maps 02.00]] (Julien Carron)<br />
* '''2018 September 28''': [[Towards lensing template]] (Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2018 September 27''': [[Lensing reconstructions 02.00]] (Julien Carron)<br />
* '''2018 September 26''': [[Lensing map reconstruction from 02.00 sims w/ and w/o foreground+inhomogeneous noise]] (Toshiya Namikawa)<br />
* '''2018 September 25''': [[Estimated observing efficiency for past and current telescopes]] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 September 25''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180925_bkfinal_04bc BK-style power spectra of 04/04b/04c masks for 00/01/02/03/07/08/09 foreground models] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 September 12''': [[Low ell noise from past and current telescopes]] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 September 5''': [[Phi reconstruction on 02.00 sims III]] (Anton Baleato)<br />
* '''2018 August 31''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180831_dc04_abc_model00_07_ML_proper_bp/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04b and 04c, for sky models 00 and 07] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 August 31''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180831_dc04_fixed_bp/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04, fixed bandpasses] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 August 27''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180827_bkfinal_04 Sims with nominal Chile and Pole masks III - BK-style power spectra of 04b.YY and 04c.YY] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 August 27''': [[Sims with nominal Chile and Pole masks II]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 August 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180826_dc04_fixed/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04, fixed] (V.Buza, B.Racine)<br />
* '''2018 August 24''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180824_bkfinal_04/ BK-style power spectra of v04.00-06 sims (CDT report config) FIXED] (Caterina Umilta)<br />
* '''2018 August 24''': [[Amplitude modulated Gaussian dust sims]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 August 17''': [[Sims with nominal Chile and Pole masks]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 August 10''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180810_noise/ Achieved performance roundup] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 August 7''': [[Pre-reference-design noise specifications for large-aperture forecasting]] (Tom Crawford, Matthew Hasselfield, Gil Holder, Lloyd Knox)<br />
* '''2018 August 6''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180805_s4opt/ Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4, 44cm vs 52cm aperture (w/ high-res/low-res 20 GHz)] (V.Buza)<br />
* '''2018 July 9''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180708_dc04/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04] (V.Buza)<br />
* '''2018 July 6''': [[Phi reconstruction on 02.00 sims II]] (Anton Baleato and Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2018 June 11''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180611_s4opt/ Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4, 44cm aperture] (V.Buza) -- see corrected August 6th Update!<br />
* '''2018 June 11''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180609_S4_noise_simulation_arbitrary_coverage/ Recipe to generate performance based S4 simulations with arbitrary sky distribution (in progress)] (B.Racine, V.Buza)<br />
* '''2018 April 29''': [[Phi reconstruction on 02.00 sims]] (Anton Baleato)<br />
* '''2018 April 25''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180425_r_equivalent_maps/ Smallfield r-equivalent Maps] (Kenny Lau)<br />
* '''2018 April 4''': [[Sky masks for simulations III]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 March 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180323_bkfinal_04/ BK-style power spectra of v04.00-06 sims (CDT report config) BROKEN] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 March 16''': [[ILC noise for large apertures at CDT noise levels]] (Raphael Flauger posted by Clem)<br />
* '''2018 March 16''': [[Sky masks for simulations II]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 February 19''': [[Sky masks for simulations]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 February 18''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180218_s4opt/ Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4, v3] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2018 February 7''': [[Sim map sets to demonstrate "real delensing" (02.00 and 02.09)]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 February 6''': [[Data Challenge Map Sets 04.YY]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 December 8''': [[Vansyngel Model]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 November 6''': [[Bandpass Convention - What does flat mean]] (Clem P.) - followup notes added Nov 20<br />
* '''2017 September 27''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170927_dc02/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 02] (Bischoff, Buza, Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 September 13''': [[Bias on r from Band Center Errors]] (Palladino, Willmert, Bischoff)<br />
* '''2017 September 8''': [[Checking dust decorrelation in Raphael MHD based dust sim]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 September 6''': [[New NET Calculator and Validation]] (Denis Barkats)<br />
* '''2017 September 1''': [[Resolution at 20 GHz]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 August 31''': [[Bias on r from additive systematics]] (Palladino, Willmert, Bischoff)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170818_bkfinal_03.00/ BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v03.00,.03 CMB-S4 simulation maps] (Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 August 18 ''': [[Neff_and_Beam_Calibration| Neff and Beam Calibration]] (Dan)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [[Ideal delensing templates from flat-sky QE, first pass]] (Kyle Story)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170818_HR/ High-Res studies for CMB-S4 (draft, v2)] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [[Comments from Anthony Challinor and Rupert Allison regarding the impact of Galactic Foregrounds on lensing]] (Neelima)<br />
* '''2017 August 11''': [[Joint Synchrotron and Dust Maps from Simulations]] (B. Hensley)<br />
* '''2017 August 9''': [[Dust Emission From Halos]] (Jim & Jean-Baptiste)<br />
* '''2017 August 9''': [[SZ Clusters update]] (Mat & Nick)<br />
* '''2017 August 4''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170804_HR/ High-Res studies for CMB-S4 (preliminary draft)] (Victor Buza); perhaps a reference of interest https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.02259<br />
* '''2017 July 10''': [[Additive systematics for data challenge 03]] (Bischoff, Palladino, Buza, Kovac)<br />
* '''2017 July 6''': [[Detection significance and sky fraction, dust decorrelation]](Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 July 3''': [[Toy highly decorrelated dust model]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 June 27''': [[Checking dust decorrelation in models d1/d4/d7 and hipdt]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 June 23''': [[Dust_delensing_firstlook|Dust delensing update]] (Alex)<br />
* '''2017 June 23''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170623_bkfinal_02.00/ BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v02.00–06 CMB-S4 simulation maps] (Justin Willmert) ''Updated 2017 Sep 08''<br />
* '''2017 June 22''': [[Warm-up exercise for delensing]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 June 19''': [[SZ Clusters update]] (Mat, Nick)<br />
* '''2017 June 11''': [[Notes from May 31 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 June 9''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170525_s4syst/ Introducing systematics for CMB-S4] ((Victor Buza), with input from Colin Bischoff, John Kovac)<br />
* '''2017 June 9''': [[Dust_delensing_firstlook]] (Alex)<br />
* '''2017 June 9''': [[r-forecasting: high and low ell coordination|r-forecasting: update on high and low ell coordination]] (Neelima+Colin Hill writing)<br />
* '''2017 June 1''': [[Residuals for DC 01.01 and DC 01.02]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 June 1''': [[Levels of foregrounds in Gaussian and PySM simulations]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 May 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170511_s4dc1/ S4 DC 01.xx analysis, v2] (Victor Buza, Colin Bischoff, Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 May 26 ''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170411_bkfinal_01.00/ Updated v01.02 in "BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v01.00–02 CMB-S4 simulation maps"] (Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 May 15''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170515_chkS4/ N_ell spectra for CMB-S4 DC2.0] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2017 May 15''': [[Rev 2 PySM a2d4f1s3 maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 May 12''': [[r-forecasting: high and low ell coordination|r-forecasting: high and low ell coordination]] (lensers writing)<br />
* '''2017 May 8''': [[Checking PySM maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 May 2''': [[Notes from April 26 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Steve)<br />
* '''2017 May 1''': [[r-forecasting: delensing discussion|r-forecasting delensing discussion]] (Neelima and Blake)<br />
* '''2017 April 28 ''': [[Update_on_Neff_Forecasts| Update on Neff Forecasts]] (Dan)<br />
* '''2017 April 26 ''': [http://www.cosmo.bnl.gov/www/msyriac/web/work/sigma8plots.html Update on cluster number counts forecast including w_a] (Mat and Nick)<br />
* '''2017 April 21 ''': [[lensing-DE|Update on a lensing-based DE forecast]] (Jo, Siddharth)<br />
* '''2017 April 18 ''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170411_bkfinal_01.00/ BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v01.00–02 CMB-S4 simulation maps] (Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 April 18 ''': [[S4-Lensing|S4 measurement requirements for neutrino mass and delensing - first pass]] (Neelima/Blake)<br />
* '''2017 April 17 ''': [[HiDPol|HI-based dust polarization model for r forecasts]] (Tuhin)<br />
* '''2017 April 05 ''': [[lensing-DE|Notes on one path to lensing-based DE forecasts]] (Jo)<br />
* '''2017 April 05 ''': [[Notes from April 5 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 April 05''': [https://cmb-s4.org/CMB-S4workshops/images/Sigma8_z_prep.pdf Sigma8(z) SPT clusters (placeholder) ] (S Bocquet)<br />
* '''2017 April 04''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170404_s4opt/ Updated Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4 (using bands v1.99)] (Victor Buza, Updated 2017.04.21)<br />
* '''2017 March 31 ''': [[Data Challenge analysis - DC1.0, DC1.1, DC1.2]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 March 30 ''': [[Notes from March 28 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim & Steve)<br />
* '''2017 March 29''': [[CMB-S4 frequency bands v1.99]] (John Kovac, Band-definition working group)<br />
* '''2017 March 28''': [[Adding higher res delensing "band"]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 March 27''': [[01.01 sim input maps - first try]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 March 23''': [[01.00 sim input maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 March 20''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170221_S4_NET_forecasts/ S4 Band sensitivity comparison follow-up] (Denis Barkats, John Kovac)<br />
* '''2017 March 17''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20170317_s4dc1/ S4 DC1.0 analysis] (Victor Buza, Colin Bischoff, Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 March 17 ''': [[Media:Telecon_03172017_optimization_for_CMBS4.pdf]]: Optimization methodology for SO (Josquin)<br />
* '''2017 March 16 ''': [[ P_k_science_case| P(k) science case]] (Colin, Simone, Nick, David)<br />
* '''2017 March 15 ''': [[Notes from March 15 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 March 15 ''': [[CMB halo lensing sensitivity as a function of map sensitivity and resolution]] (Jim & Jean-Baptiste)<br />
* '''2017 March 15 ''': [[w and gamma | w and Delta gamma constraints from sigma_8 (z)]] (Mat & Nick)<br />
* '''2017 March 10 ''': [[Notes from March 8 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim & Steve)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[reionization_requirements| Reionization science]] (Simone & Marcelo)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[High ell topics | High ell topics ]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[SZ_s8_z | sigma 8 of z constraints ]] (Mat, Nick)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[Szcounts | Number counts update for 1.0', 1.5', 2.0']] (Nick, Mat)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[SZastro | SZ astrophysics with DESI ]](Nick, Simone, Emanuel, David)<br />
* '''2017 February 24''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170224_cmbs4_dc1_final/ BK-style processing of DC1.0 maps to spectra] (Justin Willmert, Colin Bischoff)<br />
* '''2017 February 15 ''': [[Extragalactic lensing sims| Update on extragalactic phase-2 lensing sims]] (Marcelo, George, Dick, others)<br />
* '''2017 February 15 ''': [[Plan for next Galactic Phase-2sims| Plan for next Galactic phase-2 sims]] (Jo, Ben)<br />
* '''2017 February 10 ''': [[Resolution of foreground-cleaned map]] (Mat, Neelima, Blake, Alex, others)<br />
* '''2017 February 10 ''': [[Nongaussian dust in lensing]] (Alex, Mat, Neelima, Blake, others)<br />
* '''2017 January 30''': [[Aliased power in noise maps]] (Bischoff, Updated 2017-02-02)<br />
* '''2017 January 23''': [[CMBS4 Band Sensitivity Comparison]] (Charlie Hill)<br />
* '''2017 January 12''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/cbischoff/20170112_data_challenge_1/ Maps for CMB-S4 data challenge 1] (Bischoff, Pryke, Buza)<br />
* '''2016 December 21''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20161220_chkS4/ N_ell spectra for the CMB-S4 data challenge, and updated &sigma;(r) checkpoints] (Victor Buza, Updated 2017.02.01)<br />
* '''2016 November 30''': [[First steps to sim input maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2016 November 4''': [[Tophat bands for Data Challenge]] (Bischoff)<br />
* '''2016 July 8''': [[fsky|Dependence of foregrounds on sky fraction]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2016 July 8''': [[SciBookPowspecTheoryFig|Three choices for Science Book Figure 5 (theory power spectrum & current BB points)]] (Tom C.)<br />
* '''2016 July 8''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20160707_s4plots/ S4 Inflation Chapter Plot Suggestions, V2] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 July 6''': [[w_cosntraint|Preliminary w constraint]] (Alessandro)<br />
* '''2016 June 24''': [[nsr|Preliminary ns-r plot for discussion]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2016 June 16''': [[DelensingImpact| Impact Of Delensing On sigma(r)]] (Neelima/Mat)<br />
* '''2016 June 16''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20160616_s4plots/ S4 Inflation Chapter Plot Suggestions] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 June 10''': [[MapBasedRb| Map-based &sigma;(r) forecasts V2]] (David/Jo/Ben)<br />
* '''2016 June 3''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20160531_fisher/ &sigma;(r) forecasting checkpoints, V2] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 June 3''': [[ BTTfixedeffort | Forecasts for fnl BTT beam/fixed effort]] (Daan)<br />
* '''2016 May 31''': [[ForecastPatchyReion| Forecasts for patchy reionization]] (Vera, Alex, Nick)<br />
* '''2016 May 26''': [[Forecasting | Forecasts on neutrino mass]] (Nam, Mat, Neelima)<br />
* '''2016 May 26''': [[ KSZ| Forecasts on kSZ S/N]] (Simone, Emmanuel, Colin)<br />
* '''2016 May 26''': [[ Forecastfiso_planck| Forecast on correlated and anti-correlated CDM isocurvature f_iso]] (Kimmy, Cora, updated with plots 20160602)<br />
* '''2016 May 24''': [[ BTTNoiseBeam | Forecasts on fnl BTT beam/FWHM]] (Daan)<br />
* '''2016 May 22''': [[ ForecastAxions| Update on the axion isocurvature constraints for changing sensitivity and resolution]] (Renee)<br />
* '''2016 May 21''': [[ Forecastpann| Forecast on dark matter annihilation parameter p_ann]] (Kimmy, Cora)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[NeffNoiseBeam| Forecasts on Neff and Yp]] (Joel, Alex)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastEDE| Forecasts on Early Dark Energy]] (Erminia)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastCompIsocurv| Forecasts on compensated isocurvature varying sensitivity, resolution and sky coverage]] (Julian, Ely)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastBirefring| Forecasts on birefringence varying sensitivity and resolution]] (Vera, Alex)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastStrings| Forecasts on string tension varying sensitivity and resolution]] (Renee)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[RobustForecast| Cosmological forecasts including component separation and iterative delensing]] (Stephen Feeney and Josquin Errard)<br />
* '''2016 May 19''': [[MapBasedR| Map-based &sigma;(r) forecasts]] (David A.)<br />
* '''2016 May 18''': [[Shear_calibration_LSST|LSST shear calibration with CMB S4]] (Emmanuel Schaan)<br />
* '''2016 May 13''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20150505_fisher/ &sigma;(r) forecasting checkpoints] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 May 13''': [[NonGaussianitiesTTT| CMBS-4 forecasts local and equilateral scalar Ngs using TTT]] (daan)<br />
* '''2016 May 13''': [[ForecastingSims|Simulations for r forecasts]] (Jo/Ben/David)<br />
* '''2016 May 6''': [[DMInteractionsComplementarity|DM interactions: complementarity]] (Vera)<br />
* '''2016 May 6''': [[Scenarios| Scenarios]] (Scott, Vera)<br />
* ''' 2016 May 3''': [[ForecastAxions |Effect of S4 specs on axion density parameters]] (Renee)<br />
* '''2016 April 30''': [[ForecastNu| Effect of S4 specs on neutrino parameters]] (Erminia)<br />
* '''2016 April 28''': [http://web.stanford.edu/~wlwu/posting/20160421_lensres/ Delensing residuals with low-ell foregrounds] (Kimmy Wu)<br />
* '''2016 April 28''': [[NonGaussianities| CMBS-4 forecast for tensor NGs]] (daan)<br />
* '''2016 April 19''': [[ForecastingStep1| Checking basic parameters for nominal case]] (Jo + multiple authors)<br />
* '''2016 April 5''': [[Forecasting|Setting up non-r Fisher-based parameter forecasts]] (Jo + others)<br />
* '''2016 March 31''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20150331_fisher/ Fisher projections for &sigma;(r) based on achieved performance] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 January 27''': [https://cmb-s4.org/CMB-S4workshops/index.php/File:sptpol_ptsrc_polfrac_500d.pdf Quick estimate of mean-squared polarization fraction for SPTpol sources] (Tom Crawford)</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=Fermilab-2019:_Cosmology_with_CMB-S4&diff=8566Fermilab-2019: Cosmology with CMB-S42019-03-14T16:51:02Z<p>Cbischoff: /* Thursday March 14th */</p>
<hr />
<div><br />
== Workshop overview ==<br />
<br />
The Fermilab workshop continues a successful series of meetings bringing together the CMB experimental and theoretical community to plan a coordinated, stage-4 ground-based CMB experiment. <br />
<br />
The meeting will be held at Fermilab, March 13-15, 2019. The first 2 days will be a collaboration meeting and the 3rd will be our first project meeting; everyone is welcome to all 3 days.<br />
<br />
== Meeting Info & Registration ==<br />
<br />
[http://indico.fnal.gov/e/cmbs4collaboration2019 Official Workshop Website: Registration, Participants, Hotels, Logistics].<br />
<br />
'''Location: IARC Building at Fermilab''' http://iarc.fnal.gov/<br />
<br />
'''Remote Connection Information: '''<br />
<br />
'''Zoom link: https://fnal.zoom.us/j/356003665'''<br />
<br />
One tap mobile:<br><br />
+16465588656,,356003665# US (New York)<br><br />
+16699006833,,356003665# US (San Jose)<br />
<br />
Dial by your location: <br />
+1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)<br><br />
Meeting ID: 356 003 665<br><br />
Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/acu5oQsITY<br />
<br />
Slack channel #fermilab2019 on the CMB-S4 workspace, or use https://cmb-s4.slack.com/messages/CCMNTUDC1<br />
<br />
== About This Wiki==<br />
<br />
As for previous workshops, we will use this wiki to organize the sessions, to capture the input from them, and to develop next steps. Participants are encouraged to edit the wiki directly, including uploading plots or a few slides.<br />
<br />
Hints for formatting this wiki can be found [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Formatting here]<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
== Agenda ==<br />
<br />
=== Wednesday March 13th ===<br />
<br />
'''Morning Sessions Chair: Brad Benson'''<br />
<br />
'''08:30 Welcome and Spokesperson Update'''<br />
* '''08:30''' FNAL Welcome (Nigel Lockyer) and Meeting Logistics (Brad Benson) [[Media:2019_03_CMBS4_Fermilab_Welcome.pdf]]<br />
* '''08:45''' Spokesperson update (Julian Borrill, John Carlstrom) [https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Hjsw0zmFjQRpRM52sC1lbfgH1FfZV1ntN9Bp_ofR9zE Slides]<br />
* '''09:15''' Agency update (Drew Baden, Nigel Sharp)<br />
<br />
'''09:30 Collaboration Update '''<br />
* '''09:30''' Governing Board (Nils Halverson) [[Media:CMB-S4_GB_Activities_Fermilab_Meeting_2019-03-12.pdf]]<br />
* '''09:45''' Membership (John Ruhl) [https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1_OzqTXBoGqSZn2BYjpDAt0gx6ZLfKaxGyr0wa4Q9w24/edit?usp=sharing Slides]<br />
* '''10:00''' - Publication and Speakers (Kevin Huffenberger) [https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1gt12BffbFeRXJL9J9h7bX7_Pf8jLi3Erry2MSxCVpyk/edit?usp=sharing Slides]<br />
<br />
'''10:15''' ''Coffee Break''<br />
<br />
'''10:45''' DSR Review and Science'''<br />
* '''10:45''' Summary of DSR review and planned response (Julian Borrill) [https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1vgqQwN9Q54XiBUzB42H2Hlq6cE7BO6UGLnKGc-z70N0 Slides]<br />
* '''11:05''' r (Clem Pryke) [https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/18UsMRhIHlk8mrWkIuoSwpLPfTPXZbwceW0EhQ4ixGQ8 Slides]<br />
* '''11:15''' Neff (Joel Meyers) [[Media:Light_Relics_Fermilab_2019.pdf]]<br />
* '''11:25''' Mass mapping (Lindsey Bleem) [https://cmb-s4.org/wiki/images/Mass_mapping_31919_v1.pdf Slides]<br />
* '''11:35''' Gas mapping (Nick Battaglia) [[Media:CMBS4GasMappingFNAL19.pdf]]<br />
* '''11:45''' Transients (Nathan Whitehorn) [[Media:CMBS4TransientsFNAL19.pdf]]<br />
* '''11:55''' Science case to measurements requirements (Gil Holder) [https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1bRtYR_Od-lI_xwKaR5RKCabj6jCCt-3zV8XkFkQIkBs/edit?usp=sharing Slides][https://drive.google.com/open?id=1HPBnf098ErUUdqQjXpCddColre0iHXhP pdf]<br />
* '''12:15''' Measurement requirements to technical requirements (Jeff McMahon) [https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1w60FJp0fabUBF_OLFIbEaDntlPBx7K3DeDq_0GfGTZo/edit#slide=id.g51c952aeca_1_28 Slides]<br />
<br />
'''12:30 Lunch & JSAC (Junior Scientist) Event'''<br />
<br />
* Junior Scientist Event - register here: https://goo.gl/forms/wdQ0wl5hEh2cLUVl1 <br />
<br />
'''Afternoon Sessions Chair: Abby Vieregg'''<br />
<br />
'''1:30 DSR Reference Design'''<br />
* '''1:30''' Reference design overview (Steve Padin) [[Media:CMBS4RefDesignOverview.pdf]]<br />
* '''1:50''' SATs (John Kovac) [https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1pLFNJIJPVincoF-KPp2jQBPfDkcxcgY9SQAoGyPXgAI/edit#slide=id.p1 Slides]<br />
* '''2:05''' LATs (Mike Niemack) [[Media:LATs_20190313.pdf]]<br />
* '''2:20''' Detectors and readout (Clarence Chang) [[Media:CMB-S4_FNAL_DSR_DR.pdf]]<br />
* '''2:35''' SItes and Integration & commissioning (Brad Benson, Sara Simon) [https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1gIkb_21oy1SM__cBeLmZmZnlhNUzowRRV6h8TJu3m08/edit?usp=sharing Slides]<br />
* '''2:50''' SAT siting decision tree (John Ruhl) [https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1NL06LQ2te-bo3LF350T9Lf2D8lTcWqV_AVqjGNqB-Sk/edit?usp=sharing Slides]<br />
* '''3:10''' Budget and schedule (Brenna Flaugher) [[Media:BF-March-Collab-schedule-slides-1.pdf]]<br />
'''3:30''' ''Coffee Break''<br />
<br />
'''4:00 NSF MSRI Proposals'''<br />
* '''4:00''' CMB-S4 MSRI-1 (5+5) (John Carlstrom) [[Media:MSRI-R1-Carlstrom.pdf]]<br />
* '''4:10''' SO MSRI-1 (5+5) (Mark Devlin/Kam Arnold) [[Media:MSRI1-for-S4.pdf]]<br />
* '''4:20''' SPO MSRI-1 (5+5) (John Kovac) [[Media:SPO_MSRI_scope_LNAL_Mar2019.pdf]]<br />
* '''4:30''' CCAT-prime MSRI-1 (5+5) (Mike Niemack) [[Media:CCATprime_CMBS4_20190313r.pdf]]<br />
<br />
'''4:40 Fireslides (Chair: Sasha Rahlin) [[Media:fireslides.pdf]]'''<br />
<br />
'''5:30 Group photo at Wilson Hall'''<br />
<br />
'''5:45 Poster Session at Wilson Hall'''<br />
<br />
'''6:00-8:00 Social event and food at Wilson Hall'''<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
=== Thursday March 14th ===<br />
<br />
'''08:30 Path to CD-1 / PDR'''<br />
* '''8:30''' Path to CD-1 / PDR (John Carlstrom, Julian Borrill)[[Media:Path_To_CD-1_PDR.pdf]]<br />
** Reference Material: [[File:DOE_Order_413-3B.pdf]]<br />
** Reference Material: [[File:LargeFacilitiesManual_nsf17066.pdf]]<br />
** Reference Material: [[File:CMB-S4_DesignDecisionPrinciples-v190228.pdf]]<br />
* '''9:15''' Project Perspectives (Charles Lawrence) [[Media:TheProjectPerspective.pdf]]<br />
* '''9:30''' Questions and Discussion<br />
<br />
'''10:00''' ''Coffee Break''<br />
<br />
* '''10:30''' Interactive Session: Path to Baseline Design (Chairs: Jeff McMahon, Abigail Vieregg) [https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1P2AsQkPJPP_2y6clK11aPDemBu0jRV4cyYtfQlQ4edo/edit#slide=id.g51c90b7fcc_0_0 Slides], [https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1OOaYpTe9e4XSfV3fMlobDwlTSsLOnQkVJQ7imFTwhP8 Julian slides]<br />
** [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1m1gj34O_8ve9GJ2i1oaYAyAD-N18TzNaCIQ0S3H0z9M/edit Notes]<br />
** Working group leads present timeline for decision making <br />
** Collated current list of R&D priorities (Technical Coordinators)<br />
** Discuss list of R&D items that funding was requested from DOE in February (Brenna Flaugher) [[Media:BF-March-Collab-R&D.pdf]]<br />
<br />
'''12:30 Lunch'''<br />
<br />
'''1:30 Submitted Talks (Chair: Adam Anderson)'''<br />
*'''1:30''' Modulations of the CMB (Daniel Grin)[[File:S4_modulation_2019_grin.pdf]]<br />
* '''1:50''' Non-Gaussian information in the small-scale CMB: from lensing to galaxy velocities (Simone Ferraro)<br />
* '''2:10''' CMB-S4 Delensing (Marius Milea)<br />
* '''2:30''' Update on uMUX R&D towards CMB-S4 (Zeesh Ahmed)<br />
* '''2:50''' Recent Advances in Next-Generation Frequency-Multiplexed TES readout (Tijmen de Haan) <br />
* '''3:10''' Demonstration of the low-l performance and control of systematic errors for Polarbear-1 (Neil Goeckner-Wald) [[Media:S4_March_Polarbear.pdf]]<br />
<br />
'''3:30''' ''Coffee Break''<br />
<br />
* '''4:00''' Update on European coordination for ground-based CMB experiments (Carlo Baccigalupi)<br />
<br />
'''4:30''' ''Collaboration Wrap-up (Spokespeople)''<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
=== Friday March 15th ===<br />
<br />
'''8:30 Project Day'''<br />
* '''8:30''' Integrated project plan (Jim Yeck)<br />
* '''9:00''' Preparations for DOE/CD-1 and NSF PDR (Mark Reichanadter)<br />
* '''9:30''' Critical path, technical decision timeline, design reviews (Brenna Flaugher)<br />
* '''10:00''' Cost, schedule, contingency overview (Kathy Bailey)<br />
<br />
'''10:30''' ''Coffee Break''<br />
<br />
* '''10:45''' preliminary Project Execution Plan (pPEP) Session (Jim Yeck)<br />
** '''11:00''' pPEP Project Governance & Project Office (Jim Yeck)<br />
** '''11:15''' pPEP Agency Scope & Responsibilities (Jim Yeck)<br />
** '''11:30''' Institutional Roles (Jim Yeck)<br />
* '''11:45''' Systems engineering and risk status (Zeesh Ahmed, Nadine Kurita)<br />
<br />
'''12:15''' '''Lunch and Sidet Tours'''<br />
<br />
'''1:30''' <br />
* '''1:30''' R&D plan and priorities (Brenna Flaugher)<br />
* '''2:00''' Interm Integrated project office (JIm Yeck)<br />
* '''2:15''' Technical coordination plans (Jeff McMahon, Abigail Vieregg)<br />
* '''2:45''' In-kind contributions (Julian Borrill)<br />
* '''3:00''' Detectors and readout - Discussion of next steps<br />
* '''3:15''' Site infrastructure - Discussion of critical path and next steps (Brad Benson)<br />
<br />
* '''3:45''' Project wrap-up<br />
<br />
'''17:00''' End of meeting</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=Speakers_bureau_talks_list&diff=8169Speakers bureau talks list2019-01-11T19:04:47Z<p>Cbischoff: /* Past talks */</p>
<hr />
<div>===Proposed talks===<br />
<br />
{|class="wikitable"<br />
! Announced !! Date !! Venue !! Speaker !! Title/Topic !! Abstract !! Slides<br />
<!-- Generic Template <br />
|- <br />
| 01 Jan 2021 <br />
| Fancypants Conference <br />
| Postdoc McSpeaker <br />
| CMB-S4 strikes back<br />
| In this talk I will present many, many wonderful things about CMB-S4, and the many, many wonderful people who contribute. <br />
| [[Media:myslides.pdf]]<br />
--><br />
|}<br />
<br />
===Approved talks===<br />
<br />
{|class="wikitable"<br />
! Announced !! Date !! Venue !! Speaker !! Title/Topic !! Abstract !! Slides<br />
<!-- Generic Template <br />
|- <br />
| 25 May 2018<br />
| 4-11 July 2018<br />
| ICHEP 2018, Seoul<br />
| Plenary <br />
| Masashi Hazumi <br />
| Plenary talk on CMB cosmology<br />
| <br />
| [[Media:myslides.pdf]]<br />
--> <br />
<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| 29 November - 1 December 2018 <br />
| Novel Instrumentation for Fundamental Physics Workshop, Puerto Rico<br />
https://indico.cern.ch/event/748721/<br />
| Clarence Chang<br />
| Update on the ongoing activities<br />
| <br />
| [[Media:myslides.pdf]]<br />
<br />
<br />
|}<br />
<br />
===Past talks===<br />
<br />
{|class="wikitable"<br />
! Announced !! Date !! Venue !! Speaker !! Title/Topic !! Abstract !! Slides<br />
<br />
|-<br />
|<br />
| 7 December 2019<br />
| AAS 223, Seattle<br />
| Colin Bischoff<br />
| The search for primordial gravitational waves with CMB polarization<br />
| Observations of Cosmic Microwave Background B-mode polarization at large angular scales are a uniquely powerful method to search for primordial gravitational waves, such as those predicted by theories of inflation. A major milestone would be to either detect this signature of gravitational waves or else to set an upper limit on the tensor-to-scalar ratio, r < 0.001, which would rule out the most compelling models of large-field inflation. This goal will be met by Stage-3 experiments currently coming online, the CMB Stage-4 project planned for next decade, as well as new balloon-borne and satellite telescopes. Galactic foregrounds and gravitational lensing of E-mode polarization pose major challenges for these measurements, but are already being addressed by current projects. I will discuss the goals and common design features of experiments targeting the primordial gravitational wave signal, as well as forecasts developed for CMB Stage-4.<br />
| [[Media:20190107_bischoff_aas.pdf]]<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| 22-24 September 2018<br />
| International Symposium on Cosmology and Ali CMB Polarization Telescope, Shanghai<br />
https://indico.leeinst.sjtu.edu.cn/event/44/overview<br />
| Peter Timbie<br />
| CMB-S4 overview and a general discussion of detector development<br />
| <br />
| [[Media:myslides.pdf]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<br />
| 15-18 October 2018<br />
| CMB Foregrounds, Tenerife <br />
http://www.iac.es/congreso/cmbforegrounds18/<br />
| Julian Borrill <br />
| CMB-S4 overview<br />
| <br />
| [[Media:myslides.pdf]]<br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<br />
| 4-9 November 2018<br />
| 8th KIAS Workshop on Cosmology and Structure Formation<br />
http://home.kias.re.kr/cosmology2018/<br />
| Francois Bouchet <br />
| CMB-S4 overview<br />
| <br />
| [[Media:myslides.pdf]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| Recontres Du Vietnam <br />
| Raphael Flauger<br />
| Plenary talk, including CMB-S4 <br />
| <br />
| [[Media:myslides.pdf]]<br />
|- <br />
|<br />
| 14-21 July, 2018<br />
| COSPAR, Pasadena<br />
| John Carlstrom<br />
| The Next Generation Ground-Based Cosmic Microwave Background Experiment, CMB-S4<br />
| <br />
Measurements of the CMB have driven our understanding of the universe and the physics that govern its evolution from primordial quantum fluctuations to its present state. They provide the foundation for the remarkable 6-parameter cosmological model, ΛCDM, which fits all cosmological data, although there are some tensions that may possibly hint at new physics. Far from being the last word in cosmology, the model raises deep questions: Is Inflation correct? What is its energy scale? What is the dark matter? What is the nature of dark energy? Are there light sterile neutrinos, or other light relics? This talk will describe progress on the next generation ground-based CMB experiment, CMB-S4, that is being designed to have sufficient sensitivity and control of systematics to make breakthroughs in many of these areas, i.e., to cross critical thresholds in parameter values or show that ΛCDM is incomplete.<br />
| [[Media:E1-2-0023-18-Carlstrom-Posted.pdf]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| 4-11 July 2018<br />
| ICHEP 2018, Seoul<br />
| Masashi Hazumi <br />
| Plenary talk on CMB cosmology<br />
|<br />
| [[Media:myslides.pdf]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| 1 Jun 2018<br />
| 1-7 July 2018 <br />
| Marcel Grossman Meeting <br />
| Carlo Baccigalupi<br />
| The Status of the CMB Stage IV Experiment<br />
| Abstract: The 'Stage-4' ground-based cosmic microwave background (CMB) experiment, CMB-S4, consists of dedicated telescopes equipped with highly sensitive superconducting cameras operating at the South Pole, the high Chilean Atacama plateau, and possibly northern hemisphere sites. CMB-S4 will be designed to cross critical thresholds in testing inflation, determining the number and masses of the neutrinos, constraining possible new light relic particles, providing precise constraints on the nature of dark energy, and testing general relativity on large scales. In this contribution, we review the status of the project.<br />
| [[Media:Carlo_Baccigalupi_S4_MGM15.pdf]]<br />
[[Media:Carlo_Baccigalupi_S4_MGM15.odp]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| 19 Jun 2018 <br />
| POLAR2018<br />
| John Carlstrom <br />
| Status and Future of Cosmic Microwave Background Measurements from Antarctica <br />
| <br />
| [[Media:E1-2-0023-18-Carlstrom-Posted.pdf]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| <br />
| 17-22 June 2018<br />
| Workshop: WHIM and Cluster Outskirts: Lost and Found Baryons in the Local Universe, UA-Huntsville<br />
| Jim Bartlett <br />
| Gas Feedback<br />
|<br />
| [[Media:myslides.pdf]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| 25 May 2018<br />
| 04-08 Jun 2018 <br />
| PASCO, Case Western <br />
| John Ruhl <br />
| Plenary talk on CMB-S4 <br />
| <br />
| [[Media:ruhl_pascos_final.pdf]] <br />
[[Media:Ruhl_pascos_final.key]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<br />
| 15 April 2018 <br />
| AAS<br />
| Brad Benson<br />
| CMB-S4 excerpt from "The Hubble Constant from the Cosmic Microwave Background"<br />
| <br />
| [[media:2018_04_15_Benson_CMB_Hubble_CMBS4_slides.pdf]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<br />
| 17-24 March 2018 <br />
| Rencontres de Moriond: Cosmology<br />
| Victor Buza <br />
| CMB-S4 Performance-Based Constraints On Primordial Gravitational Waves<br />
| <br />
The next-generation ground-based cosmic microwave background experiment, CMB-S4, will achieve new thresholds in the search for the B-mode polarization signature of primordial gravitational waves. To quantify these thresholds, as well as to propose an informed experimental configuration that will reach them, the CMB-S4 forecasting working group has developed a Fisher forecasting machinery targeted towards optimizing tensor-to-scalar parameter constraints in the presence of galactic foregrounds and gravitational lensing of the CMB. In this talk I will describe this framework and explain the uniqueness of this particular approach in basing the forecasts on scalings from actual analyses and multi-year achieved performances of the currently deployed BICEP/Keck series of experiments. In addition, I will detail our work on developing map-level noise simulations, and using various sky models, models of instrumental systematics, and analysis methods to explore the robustness of our findings, which most recently appeared in the CMB-S4 CDT report. Finally, I will talk about employing the Fisher framework in tandem with the simulations work to arrive at the currently proposed CMB-S4 strawman configuration. <br />
<br />
| [[Media:Moriond2018_Buza.pdf]]<br />
<br />
<br />
|- <br />
| 22 Jan 2018<br />
| 18-23 March 2018<br />
| Snowcluster<br />
| Nick Battaglia<br />
| On Cluster Profiles with CMB-S4<br />
| <br />
The next generation cosmic microwave background (CMB) experiment, CMB-S4, will make unprecedented measurements of secondary anisotropies in the CMB. I will focus on observations of the thermal and kinetic<br />
Sunyaev-Zel’dovich (SZ) effects, which will provide new windows into the thermodynamic properties of galaxy groups and clusters. I will<br />
show how we can constrain important baryonic processes, like feedback, that govern group and cluster formation through the high fidelity SZ<br />
profile measurements from CMB-S4. Additionally, I will describe the prospects to constrain fundamental physics from SZ observations and<br />
how to mitigate the modeling uncertainties associated with the baryonic processes that currently limit these constraints.<br />
| [[Media:Battaglia_Snowcluster_2018.pdf]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<br />
| 31 Jan 2018 <br />
| CMB in Germany<br />
| John Carlstrom<br />
| CMB-S4 update<br />
| <br />
| [[Media:]]<br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<br />
| 2 Aug 2017 <br />
| NRAO Futures 2017<br />
| Zeesh Ahmed<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| [[File:AhmedFutures2017CMB-S4.pdf]]<br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<br />
| 6 Jan 2017 <br />
| B modes from space workshop<br />
| Lloyd Knox<br />
| CMB-S4 update<br />
| <br />
| [[Media:]]<br />
<br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<br />
| 2 Mar 2017 <br />
| SLAC Colloquium<br />
| Suzanne Staggs<br />
| Update following Feb 2017 CMB-S4 meeting<br />
|<br />
| [[file:CMB-and-S4-Staggs-SLAC-20170302-final.pptx]] <br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<br />
| 5 Aug 2016 <br />
| NRAO Futures 2016<br />
| Zeesh Ahmed<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| [[file:AhmedFuturesCMBsummary.pdf]]<br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<br />
| July 2016 <br />
| ICHEP 2016<br />
| Jeff McMahon<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| [[media:McMahon_ICHEP2016.pdf]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
|- <br />
|<br />
| 28 Jan 2016 <br />
| Astronomy and Astrophysics Advisory Committee (AAAC)<br />
| John Carlstrom<br />
| CMB-S4 update<br />
| <br />
| [[file:CarlstromCMB-S4_AAAC_160128.pdf]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
|}</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=File:20190107_bischoff_aas.pdf&diff=8168File:20190107 bischoff aas.pdf2019-01-11T19:02:50Z<p>Cbischoff: Slides for Colin Bischoff talk at AAS 223</p>
<hr />
<div>Slides for Colin Bischoff talk at AAS 223</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=Simulation_and_Forecasting_Logbook&diff=8153Simulation and Forecasting Logbook2018-12-10T18:09:10Z<p>Cbischoff: Copied Marius' posting link from deprecated r Forecasting Logbook</p>
<hr />
<div>This is an index page for logbook-style postings that cover the interconnected topics of sky modeling, simulations, and forecasting for CMB-S4. <br />
<br />
Some guidelines for use:<br />
* '''Postings should include enough context''' so that a reader can jump in and figure out what is going on. It is ''not'' necessary to write an extensive introduction to every posting -- context can be in the form of links to older postings, paper citations, etc.<br />
* Postings should represent a snapshot of work in progress. It's ok to post incomplete results, but recommended that you include notes about what is missing, what you are still planning to work on, etc. <br />
* If you have work that extends or improves an old posting, you should add it as a new posting (that includes links back to the old work as appropriate). Don't update old postings, as they should provide a chronological record of progress.<br />
* On this index page, add a link to your posting with the date, a descriptive posting title, and your full name. This logbook covers a wide range of topics, so titles will be really important to keep it useful. Don't name your posting something like "Forecasting for S4"!<br />
* Links should be added in reverse-chronological order (newest at the top). Your posting can either be written up on another wiki page or it can be a link to some externally hosted webpage (useful if you want to include a javascript plots pager).<br />
<br />
<br />
== Logbook Entries (reverse chronological) ==<br />
* '''2018 December 9''': [[Optimal Bayesian delensing progress update]] (Marius Millea) ''Updated 2018 Oct 2nd''<br />
* '''2018 December 7''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181207_bkfinal_02lt BK-style power spectra of 02 with Carron lensing templates] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 December 7''': [[Problems with PS2HAT estimator at low ell]] (Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2018 December 7''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181116_bpbias_study Bandpower bias study] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 December 7''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181207_expval_input_ML_search Maximum likelihood search with expectation values as input] (C. Umiltà)<br />
* '''2018 November 28''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181128_toy_sims Effective sky fraction] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 November 21''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181111_dc04_flatpriors/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04, v2] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 November 21''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181111_dc04_flatpriors/index_abc.html Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04b and 04c, v2] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 November 16''': [[Analytic approximation for r likelihood]] (C. Bischoff) ''Updated 2018-11-20''<br />
* '''2018 November 12''': [[Detection significance for r=0.003]] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 November 9''': [[Bad realizations in gsync/gdust sims]] (Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2018 November 8''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181108_dc02_ML_LT Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 02.00 with an ideal lensing template] (C. Umiltà)<br />
* '''2018 November 5''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181105_toy_sims Attempt to understand sigma(r) results with different hit maps] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 October 29''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181018_1Dmodel_tapering_study Simple 1D model to study the effect of different observation strategies on the bandpower statistics.] (Ben Racine, Victor Buza, John Kovac)<br />
* '''2018 October 29''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181029_bkfinal_02lt BK-style power spectra of 02 with ideal lensing templates] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 October 26''': [[Checking BB purity in re-analysis for alternate masks]] (Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2018 October 23''': [[Estimated observing efficiency for past and current telescopes, version 2]] (C. Bischoff, Y. Chinone, T. Crawford, M. Hasselfield)<br />
* '''2018 October 14''': [[Estimates of delensing efficiency]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2018 October 14''': [[Analysis of 04, 04b, 04c simulations]] (Raphael) [[Analysis of 04, 04b, 04c simulations comp]] (Ben)<br />
* '''2018 September 30''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180930_dc04_0to9/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04, models 0 to 9] (Ben Racine) ''Updated 2018 Oct 2nd''<br />
* '''2018 September 30''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180930_dc04_abc_model_0123789_ML/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04b and 04c, model 00, 01, 02, 03, 07, 08 and 09] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 September 30''': [[Ready for delensing use lensing maps 02.00]] (Julien Carron)<br />
* '''2018 September 28''': [[Towards lensing template]] (Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2018 September 27''': [[Lensing reconstructions 02.00]] (Julien Carron)<br />
* '''2018 September 26''': [[Lensing map reconstruction from 02.00 sims w/ and w/o foreground+inhomogeneous noise]] (Toshiya Namikawa)<br />
* '''2018 September 25''': [[Estimated observing efficiency for past and current telescopes]] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 September 25''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180925_bkfinal_04bc BK-style power spectra of 04/04b/04c masks for 00/01/02/03/07/08/09 foreground models] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 September 12''': [[Low ell noise from past and current telescopes]] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 September 5''': [[Phi reconstruction on 02.00 sims III]] (Anton Baleato)<br />
* '''2018 August 31''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180831_dc04_abc_model00_07_ML_proper_bp/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04b and 04c, for sky models 00 and 07] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 August 31''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180831_dc04_fixed_bp/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04, fixed bandpasses] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 August 27''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180827_bkfinal_04 Sims with nominal Chile and Pole masks III - BK-style power spectra of 04b.YY and 04c.YY] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 August 27''': [[Sims with nominal Chile and Pole masks II]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 August 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180826_dc04_fixed/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04, fixed] (V.Buza, B.Racine)<br />
* '''2018 August 24''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180824_bkfinal_04/ BK-style power spectra of v04.00-06 sims (CDT report config) FIXED] (Caterina Umilta)<br />
* '''2018 August 24''': [[Amplitude modulated Gaussian dust sims]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 August 17''': [[Sims with nominal Chile and Pole masks]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 August 10''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180810_noise/ Achieved performance roundup] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 August 7''': [[Pre-reference-design noise specifications for large-aperture forecasting]] (Tom Crawford, Matthew Hasselfield, Gil Holder, Lloyd Knox)<br />
* '''2018 August 6''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180805_s4opt/ Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4, 44cm vs 52cm aperture (w/ high-res/low-res 20 GHz)] (V.Buza)<br />
* '''2018 July 9''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180708_dc04/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04] (V.Buza)<br />
* '''2018 July 6''': [[Phi reconstruction on 02.00 sims II]] (Anton Baleato and Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2018 June 11''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180611_s4opt/ Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4, 44cm aperture] (V.Buza) -- see corrected August 6th Update!<br />
* '''2018 June 11''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180609_S4_noise_simulation_arbitrary_coverage/ Recipe to generate performance based S4 simulations with arbitrary sky distribution (in progress)] (B.Racine, V.Buza)<br />
* '''2018 April 29''': [[Phi reconstruction on 02.00 sims]] (Anton Baleato)<br />
* '''2018 April 25''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180425_r_equivalent_maps/ Smallfield r-equivalent Maps] (Kenny Lau)<br />
* '''2018 April 4''': [[Sky masks for simulations III]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 March 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180323_bkfinal_04/ BK-style power spectra of v04.00-06 sims (CDT report config) BROKEN] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 March 16''': [[ILC noise for large apertures at CDT noise levels]] (Raphael Flauger posted by Clem)<br />
* '''2018 March 16''': [[Sky masks for simulations II]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 February 19''': [[Sky masks for simulations]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 February 18''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180218_s4opt/ Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4, v3] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2018 February 7''': [[Sim map sets to demonstrate "real delensing" (02.00 and 02.09)]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 February 6''': [[Data Challenge Map Sets 04.YY]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 December 8''': [[Vansyngel Model]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 November 6''': [[Bandpass Convention - What does flat mean]] (Clem P.) - followup notes added Nov 20<br />
* '''2017 September 27''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170927_dc02/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 02] (Bischoff, Buza, Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 September 13''': [[Bias on r from Band Center Errors]] (Palladino, Willmert, Bischoff)<br />
* '''2017 September 8''': [[Checking dust decorrelation in Raphael MHD based dust sim]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 September 6''': [[New NET Calculator and Validation]] (Denis Barkats)<br />
* '''2017 September 1''': [[Resolution at 20 GHz]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 August 31''': [[Bias on r from additive systematics]] (Palladino, Willmert, Bischoff)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170818_bkfinal_03.00/ BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v03.00,.03 CMB-S4 simulation maps] (Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 August 18 ''': [[Neff_and_Beam_Calibration| Neff and Beam Calibration]] (Dan)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [[Ideal delensing templates from flat-sky QE, first pass]] (Kyle Story)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170818_HR/ High-Res studies for CMB-S4 (draft, v2)] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [[Comments from Anthony Challinor and Rupert Allison regarding the impact of Galactic Foregrounds on lensing]] (Neelima)<br />
* '''2017 August 11''': [[Joint Synchrotron and Dust Maps from Simulations]] (B. Hensley)<br />
* '''2017 August 9''': [[Dust Emission From Halos]] (Jim & Jean-Baptiste)<br />
* '''2017 August 9''': [[SZ Clusters update]] (Mat & Nick)<br />
* '''2017 August 4''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170804_HR/ High-Res studies for CMB-S4 (preliminary draft)] (Victor Buza); perhaps a reference of interest https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.02259<br />
* '''2017 July 10''': [[Additive systematics for data challenge 03]] (Bischoff, Palladino, Buza, Kovac)<br />
* '''2017 July 6''': [[Detection significance and sky fraction, dust decorrelation]](Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 July 3''': [[Toy highly decorrelated dust model]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 June 27''': [[Checking dust decorrelation in models d1/d4/d7 and hipdt]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 June 23''': [[Dust_delensing_firstlook|Dust delensing update]] (Alex)<br />
* '''2017 June 23''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170623_bkfinal_02.00/ BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v02.00–06 CMB-S4 simulation maps] (Justin Willmert) ''Updated 2017 Sep 08''<br />
* '''2017 June 22''': [[Warm-up exercise for delensing]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 June 19''': [[SZ Clusters update]] (Mat, Nick)<br />
* '''2017 June 11''': [[Notes from May 31 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 June 9''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170525_s4syst/ Introducing systematics for CMB-S4] ((Victor Buza), with input from Colin Bischoff, John Kovac)<br />
* '''2017 June 9''': [[Dust_delensing_firstlook]] (Alex)<br />
* '''2017 June 9''': [[r-forecasting: high and low ell coordination|r-forecasting: update on high and low ell coordination]] (Neelima+Colin Hill writing)<br />
* '''2017 June 1''': [[Residuals for DC 01.01 and DC 01.02]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 June 1''': [[Levels of foregrounds in Gaussian and PySM simulations]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 May 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170511_s4dc1/ S4 DC 01.xx analysis, v2] (Victor Buza, Colin Bischoff, Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 May 26 ''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170411_bkfinal_01.00/ Updated v01.02 in "BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v01.00–02 CMB-S4 simulation maps"] (Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 May 15''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170515_chkS4/ N_ell spectra for CMB-S4 DC2.0] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2017 May 15''': [[Rev 2 PySM a2d4f1s3 maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 May 12''': [[r-forecasting: high and low ell coordination|r-forecasting: high and low ell coordination]] (lensers writing)<br />
* '''2017 May 8''': [[Checking PySM maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 May 2''': [[Notes from April 26 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Steve)<br />
* '''2017 May 1''': [[r-forecasting: delensing discussion|r-forecasting delensing discussion]] (Neelima and Blake)<br />
* '''2017 April 28 ''': [[Update_on_Neff_Forecasts| Update on Neff Forecasts]] (Dan)<br />
* '''2017 April 26 ''': [http://www.cosmo.bnl.gov/www/msyriac/web/work/sigma8plots.html Update on cluster number counts forecast including w_a] (Mat and Nick)<br />
* '''2017 April 21 ''': [[lensing-DE|Update on a lensing-based DE forecast]] (Jo, Siddharth)<br />
* '''2017 April 18 ''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170411_bkfinal_01.00/ BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v01.00–02 CMB-S4 simulation maps] (Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 April 18 ''': [[S4-Lensing|S4 measurement requirements for neutrino mass and delensing - first pass]] (Neelima/Blake)<br />
* '''2017 April 17 ''': [[HiDPol|HI-based dust polarization model for r forecasts]] (Tuhin)<br />
* '''2017 April 05 ''': [[lensing-DE|Notes on one path to lensing-based DE forecasts]] (Jo)<br />
* '''2017 April 05 ''': [[Notes from April 5 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 April 05''': [https://cmb-s4.org/CMB-S4workshops/images/Sigma8_z_prep.pdf Sigma8(z) SPT clusters (placeholder) ] (S Bocquet)<br />
* '''2017 April 04''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170404_s4opt/ Updated Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4 (using bands v1.99)] (Victor Buza, Updated 2017.04.21)<br />
* '''2017 March 31 ''': [[Data Challenge analysis - DC1.0, DC1.1, DC1.2]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 March 30 ''': [[Notes from March 28 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim & Steve)<br />
* '''2017 March 29''': [[CMB-S4 frequency bands v1.99]] (John Kovac, Band-definition working group)<br />
* '''2017 March 28''': [[Adding higher res delensing "band"]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 March 27''': [[01.01 sim input maps - first try]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 March 23''': [[01.00 sim input maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 March 20''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170221_S4_NET_forecasts/ S4 Band sensitivity comparison follow-up] (Denis Barkats, John Kovac)<br />
* '''2017 March 17''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20170317_s4dc1/ S4 DC1.0 analysis] (Victor Buza, Colin Bischoff, Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 March 17 ''': [[Media:Telecon_03172017_optimization_for_CMBS4.pdf]]: Optimization methodology for SO (Josquin)<br />
* '''2017 March 16 ''': [[ P_k_science_case| P(k) science case]] (Colin, Simone, Nick, David)<br />
* '''2017 March 15 ''': [[Notes from March 15 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 March 15 ''': [[CMB halo lensing sensitivity as a function of map sensitivity and resolution]] (Jim & Jean-Baptiste)<br />
* '''2017 March 15 ''': [[w and gamma | w and Delta gamma constraints from sigma_8 (z)]] (Mat & Nick)<br />
* '''2017 March 10 ''': [[Notes from March 8 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim & Steve)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[reionization_requirements| Reionization science]] (Simone & Marcelo)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[High ell topics | High ell topics ]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[SZ_s8_z | sigma 8 of z constraints ]] (Mat, Nick)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[Szcounts | Number counts update for 1.0', 1.5', 2.0']] (Nick, Mat)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[SZastro | SZ astrophysics with DESI ]](Nick, Simone, Emanuel, David)<br />
* '''2017 February 24''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170224_cmbs4_dc1_final/ BK-style processing of DC1.0 maps to spectra] (Justin Willmert, Colin Bischoff)<br />
* '''2017 February 15 ''': [[Extragalactic lensing sims| Update on extragalactic phase-2 lensing sims]] (Marcelo, George, Dick, others)<br />
* '''2017 February 15 ''': [[Plan for next Galactic Phase-2sims| Plan for next Galactic phase-2 sims]] (Jo, Ben)<br />
* '''2017 February 10 ''': [[Resolution of foreground-cleaned map]] (Mat, Neelima, Blake, Alex, others)<br />
* '''2017 February 10 ''': [[Nongaussian dust in lensing]] (Alex, Mat, Neelima, Blake, others)<br />
* '''2017 January 30''': [[Aliased power in noise maps]] (Bischoff, Updated 2017-02-02)<br />
* '''2017 January 23''': [[CMBS4 Band Sensitivity Comparison]] (Charlie Hill)<br />
* '''2017 January 12''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/cbischoff/20170112_data_challenge_1/ Maps for CMB-S4 data challenge 1] (Bischoff, Pryke, Buza)<br />
* '''2016 December 21''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20161220_chkS4/ N_ell spectra for the CMB-S4 data challenge, and updated &sigma;(r) checkpoints] (Victor Buza, Updated 2017.02.01)<br />
* '''2016 November 30''': [[First steps to sim input maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2016 November 4''': [[Tophat bands for Data Challenge]] (Bischoff)<br />
* '''2016 July 8''': [[fsky|Dependence of foregrounds on sky fraction]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2016 July 8''': [[SciBookPowspecTheoryFig|Three choices for Science Book Figure 5 (theory power spectrum & current BB points)]] (Tom C.)<br />
* '''2016 July 8''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20160707_s4plots/ S4 Inflation Chapter Plot Suggestions, V2] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 July 6''': [[w_cosntraint|Preliminary w constraint]] (Alessandro)<br />
* '''2016 June 24''': [[nsr|Preliminary ns-r plot for discussion]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2016 June 16''': [[DelensingImpact| Impact Of Delensing On sigma(r)]] (Neelima/Mat)<br />
* '''2016 June 16''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20160616_s4plots/ S4 Inflation Chapter Plot Suggestions] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 June 10''': [[MapBasedRb| Map-based &sigma;(r) forecasts V2]] (David/Jo/Ben)<br />
* '''2016 June 3''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20160531_fisher/ &sigma;(r) forecasting checkpoints, V2] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 June 3''': [[ BTTfixedeffort | Forecasts for fnl BTT beam/fixed effort]] (Daan)<br />
* '''2016 May 31''': [[ForecastPatchyReion| Forecasts for patchy reionization]] (Vera, Alex, Nick)<br />
* '''2016 May 26''': [[Forecasting | Forecasts on neutrino mass]] (Nam, Mat, Neelima)<br />
* '''2016 May 26''': [[ KSZ| Forecasts on kSZ S/N]] (Simone, Emmanuel, Colin)<br />
* '''2016 May 26''': [[ Forecastfiso_planck| Forecast on correlated and anti-correlated CDM isocurvature f_iso]] (Kimmy, Cora, updated with plots 20160602)<br />
* '''2016 May 24''': [[ BTTNoiseBeam | Forecasts on fnl BTT beam/FWHM]] (Daan)<br />
* '''2016 May 22''': [[ ForecastAxions| Update on the axion isocurvature constraints for changing sensitivity and resolution]] (Renee)<br />
* '''2016 May 21''': [[ Forecastpann| Forecast on dark matter annihilation parameter p_ann]] (Kimmy, Cora)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[NeffNoiseBeam| Forecasts on Neff and Yp]] (Joel, Alex)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastEDE| Forecasts on Early Dark Energy]] (Erminia)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastCompIsocurv| Forecasts on compensated isocurvature varying sensitivity, resolution and sky coverage]] (Julian, Ely)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastBirefring| Forecasts on birefringence varying sensitivity and resolution]] (Vera, Alex)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastStrings| Forecasts on string tension varying sensitivity and resolution]] (Renee)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[RobustForecast| Cosmological forecasts including component separation and iterative delensing]] (Stephen Feeney and Josquin Errard)<br />
* '''2016 May 19''': [[MapBasedR| Map-based &sigma;(r) forecasts]] (David A.)<br />
* '''2016 May 18''': [[Shear_calibration_LSST|LSST shear calibration with CMB S4]] (Emmanuel Schaan)<br />
* '''2016 May 13''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20150505_fisher/ &sigma;(r) forecasting checkpoints] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 May 13''': [[NonGaussianitiesTTT| CMBS-4 forecasts local and equilateral scalar Ngs using TTT]] (daan)<br />
* '''2016 May 13''': [[ForecastingSims|Simulations for r forecasts]] (Jo/Ben/David)<br />
* '''2016 May 6''': [[DMInteractionsComplementarity|DM interactions: complementarity]] (Vera)<br />
* '''2016 May 6''': [[Scenarios| Scenarios]] (Scott, Vera)<br />
* ''' 2016 May 3''': [[ForecastAxions |Effect of S4 specs on axion density parameters]] (Renee)<br />
* '''2016 April 30''': [[ForecastNu| Effect of S4 specs on neutrino parameters]] (Erminia)<br />
* '''2016 April 28''': [http://web.stanford.edu/~wlwu/posting/20160421_lensres/ Delensing residuals with low-ell foregrounds] (Kimmy Wu)<br />
* '''2016 April 28''': [[NonGaussianities| CMBS-4 forecast for tensor NGs]] (daan)<br />
* '''2016 April 19''': [[ForecastingStep1| Checking basic parameters for nominal case]] (Jo + multiple authors)<br />
* '''2016 April 5''': [[Forecasting|Setting up non-r Fisher-based parameter forecasts]] (Jo + others)<br />
* '''2016 March 31''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20150331_fisher/ Fisher projections for &sigma;(r) based on achieved performance] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 January 27''': [https://cmb-s4.org/CMB-S4workshops/index.php/File:sptpol_ptsrc_polfrac_500d.pdf Quick estimate of mean-squared polarization fraction for SPTpol sources] (Tom Crawford)</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=Simulation_and_Forecasting_Logbook&diff=8081Simulation and Forecasting Logbook2018-11-20T16:04:05Z<p>Cbischoff: /* Logbook Entries (reverse chronological) */</p>
<hr />
<div>This is an index page for logbook-style postings that cover the interconnected topics of sky modeling, simulations, and forecasting for CMB-S4. <br />
<br />
Some guidelines for use:<br />
* '''Postings should include enough context''' so that a reader can jump in and figure out what is going on. It is ''not'' necessary to write an extensive introduction to every posting -- context can be in the form of links to older postings, paper citations, etc.<br />
* Postings should represent a snapshot of work in progress. It's ok to post incomplete results, but recommended that you include notes about what is missing, what you are still planning to work on, etc. <br />
* If you have work that extends or improves an old posting, you should add it as a new posting (that includes links back to the old work as appropriate). Don't update old postings, as they should provide a chronological record of progress.<br />
* On this index page, add a link to your posting with the date, a descriptive posting title, and your full name. This logbook covers a wide range of topics, so titles will be really important to keep it useful. Don't name your posting something like "Forecasting for S4"!<br />
* Links should be added in reverse-chronological order (newest at the top). Your posting can either be written up on another wiki page or it can be a link to some externally hosted webpage (useful if you want to include a javascript plots pager).<br />
<br />
<br />
== Logbook Entries (reverse chronological) ==<br />
* '''2018 November 16''': [[Analytic approximation for r likelihood]] (C. Bischoff) ''Updated 2018-11-20''<br />
* '''2018 November 12''': [[Detection significance for r=0.003]] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 November 9''': [[Bad realizations in gsync/gdust sims]] (Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2018 November 8''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181108_dc02_ML_LT Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 02.00 with an ideal lensing template] (C. Umiltà)<br />
* '''2018 November 5''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181105_toy_sims Attempt to understand sigma(r) results with different hit maps] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 October 29''': [http://bicep2.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181018_1Dmodel_tapering_study Simple 1D model to study the effect of different observation strategies on the bandpower statistics.] (Ben Racine, Victor Buza, John Kovac)<br />
* '''2018 October 29''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181029_bkfinal_02lt BK-style power spectra of 02 with lensing templates] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 October 26''': [[Checking BB purity in re-analysis for alternate masks]] (Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2018 October 23''': [[Estimated observing efficiency for past and current telescopes, version 2]] (C. Bischoff, Y. Chinone, T. Crawford, M. Hasselfield)<br />
* '''2018 October 14''': [[Estimates of delensing efficiency]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2018 October 14''': [[Analysis of 04, 04b, 04c simulations]] (Raphael) [[Analysis of 04, 04b, 04c simulations comp]] (Ben)<br />
* '''2018 September 30''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180930_dc04_0to9/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04, models 0 to 9] (Ben Racine) ''Updated 2018 Oct 2nd''<br />
* '''2018 September 30''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180930_dc04_abc_model_0123789_ML/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04b and 04c, model 00, 01, 02, 03, 07, 08 and 09] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 September 30''': [[Ready for delensing use lensing maps 02.00]] (Julien Carron)<br />
* '''2018 September 28''': [[Towards lensing template]] (Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2018 September 27''': [[Lensing reconstructions 02.00]] (Julien Carron)<br />
* '''2018 September 26''': [[Lensing map reconstruction from 02.00 sims w/ and w/o foreground+inhomogeneous noise]] (Toshiya Namikawa)<br />
* '''2018 September 25''': [[Estimated observing efficiency for past and current telescopes]] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 August 27''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180925_bkfinal_04bc BK-style power spectra of 04/04b/04c masks for 00/01/02/03/07/08/09 foreground models] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 September 12''': [[Low ell noise from past and current telescopes]] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 September 5''': [[Phi reconstruction on 02.00 sims III]] (Anton Baleato)<br />
* '''2018 August 31''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180831_dc04_abc_model00_07_ML_proper_bp/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04b and 04c, for sky models 00 and 07] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 August 31''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180831_dc04_fixed_bp/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04, fixed bandpasses] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 August 27''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180827_bkfinal_04 Sims with nominal Chile and Pole masks III - BK-style power spectra of 04b.YY and 04c.YY] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 August 27''': [[Sims with nominal Chile and Pole masks II]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 August 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180826_dc04_fixed/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04, fixed] (V.Buza, B.Racine)<br />
* '''2018 August 24''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180824_bkfinal_04/ BK-style power spectra of v04.00-06 sims (CDT report config) FIXED] (Caterina Umilta)<br />
* '''2018 August 24''': [[Amplitude modulated Gaussian dust sims]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 August 17''': [[Sims with nominal Chile and Pole masks]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 August 10''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180810_noise/ Achieved performance roundup] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 August 7''': [[Pre-reference-design noise specifications for large-aperture forecasting]] (Tom Crawford, Matthew Hasselfield, Gil Holder, Lloyd Knox)<br />
* '''2018 August 6''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180805_s4opt/ Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4, 44cm vs 52cm aperture (w/ high-res/low-res 20 GHz)] (V.Buza)<br />
* '''2018 July 9''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180708_dc04/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04] (V.Buza)<br />
* '''2018 July 6''': [[Phi reconstruction on 02.00 sims II]] (Anton Baleato and Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2018 June 11''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180611_s4opt/ Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4, 44cm aperture] (V.Buza) -- see corrected August 6th Update!<br />
* '''2018 June 11''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180609_S4_noise_simulation_arbitrary_coverage/ Recipe to generate performance based S4 simulations with arbitrary sky distribution (in progress)] (B.Racine, V.Buza)<br />
* '''2018 April 29''': [[Phi reconstruction on 02.00 sims]] (Anton Baleato)<br />
* '''2018 April 25''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180425_r_equivalent_maps/ Smallfield r-equivalent Maps] (Kenny Lau)<br />
* '''2018 April 4''': [[Sky masks for simulations III]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 March 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180323_bkfinal_04/ BK-style power spectra of v04.00-06 sims (CDT report config) BROKEN] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 March 16''': [[ILC noise for large apertures at CDT noise levels]] (Raphael Flauger posted by Clem)<br />
* '''2018 March 16''': [[Sky masks for simulations II]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 February 19''': [[Sky masks for simulations]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 February 18''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180218_s4opt/ Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4, v3] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2018 February 7''': [[Sim map sets to demonstrate "real delensing" (02.00 and 02.09)]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 February 6''': [[Data Challenge Map Sets 04.YY]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 December 8''': [[Vansyngel Model]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 November 6''': [[Bandpass Convention - What does flat mean]] (Clem P.) - followup notes added Nov 20<br />
* '''2017 September 27''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170927_dc02/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 02] (Bischoff, Buza, Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 September 13''': [[Bias on r from Band Center Errors]] (Palladino, Willmert, Bischoff)<br />
* '''2017 September 8''': [[Checking dust decorrelation in Raphael MHD based dust sim]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 September 6''': [[New NET Calculator and Validation]] (Denis Barkats)<br />
* '''2017 September 1''': [[Resolution at 20 GHz]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 August 31''': [[Bias on r from additive systematics]] (Palladino, Willmert, Bischoff)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170818_bkfinal_03.00/ BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v03.00,.03 CMB-S4 simulation maps] (Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 August 18 ''': [[Neff_and_Beam_Calibration| Neff and Beam Calibration]] (Dan)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [[Ideal delensing templates from flat-sky QE, first pass]] (Kyle Story)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170818_HR/ High-Res studies for CMB-S4 (draft, v2)] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [[Comments from Anthony Challinor and Rupert Allison regarding the impact of Galactic Foregrounds on lensing]] (Neelima)<br />
* '''2017 August 11''': [[Joint Synchrotron and Dust Maps from Simulations]] (B. Hensley)<br />
* '''2017 August 9''': [[Dust Emission From Halos]] (Jim & Jean-Baptiste)<br />
* '''2017 August 9''': [[SZ Clusters update]] (Mat & Nick)<br />
* '''2017 August 4''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170804_HR/ High-Res studies for CMB-S4 (preliminary draft)] (Victor Buza); perhaps a reference of interest https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.02259<br />
* '''2017 July 10''': [[Additive systematics for data challenge 03]] (Bischoff, Palladino, Buza, Kovac)<br />
* '''2017 July 6''': [[Detection significance and sky fraction, dust decorrelation]](Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 July 3''': [[Toy highly decorrelated dust model]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 June 27''': [[Checking dust decorrelation in models d1/d4/d7 and hipdt]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 June 23''': [[Dust_delensing_firstlook|Dust delensing update]] (Alex)<br />
* '''2017 June 23''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170623_bkfinal_02.00/ BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v02.00–06 CMB-S4 simulation maps] (Justin Willmert) ''Updated 2017 Sep 08''<br />
* '''2017 June 22''': [[Warm-up exercise for delensing]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 June 19''': [[SZ Clusters update]] (Mat, Nick)<br />
* '''2017 June 11''': [[Notes from May 31 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 June 9''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170525_s4syst/ Introducing systematics for CMB-S4] ((Victor Buza), with input from Colin Bischoff, John Kovac)<br />
* '''2017 June 9''': [[Dust_delensing_firstlook]] (Alex)<br />
* '''2017 June 9''': [[r-forecasting: high and low ell coordination|r-forecasting: update on high and low ell coordination]] (Neelima+Colin Hill writing)<br />
* '''2017 June 1''': [[Residuals for DC 01.01 and DC 01.02]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 June 1''': [[Levels of foregrounds in Gaussian and PySM simulations]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 May 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170511_s4dc1/ S4 DC 01.xx analysis, v2] (Victor Buza, Colin Bischoff, Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 May 26 ''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170411_bkfinal_01.00/ Updated v01.02 in "BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v01.00–02 CMB-S4 simulation maps"] (Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 May 15''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170515_chkS4/ N_ell spectra for CMB-S4 DC2.0] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2017 May 15''': [[Rev 2 PySM a2d4f1s3 maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 May 12''': [[r-forecasting: high and low ell coordination|r-forecasting: high and low ell coordination]] (lensers writing)<br />
* '''2017 May 8''': [[Checking PySM maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 May 2''': [[Notes from April 26 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Steve)<br />
* '''2017 May 1''': [[r-forecasting: delensing discussion|r-forecasting delensing discussion]] (Neelima and Blake)<br />
* '''2017 April 28 ''': [[Update_on_Neff_Forecasts| Update on Neff Forecasts]] (Dan)<br />
* '''2017 April 26 ''': [http://www.cosmo.bnl.gov/www/msyriac/web/work/sigma8plots.html Update on cluster number counts forecast including w_a] (Mat and Nick)<br />
* '''2017 April 21 ''': [[lensing-DE|Update on a lensing-based DE forecast]] (Jo, Siddharth)<br />
* '''2017 April 18 ''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170411_bkfinal_01.00/ BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v01.00–02 CMB-S4 simulation maps] (Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 April 18 ''': [[S4-Lensing|S4 measurement requirements for neutrino mass and delensing - first pass]] (Neelima/Blake)<br />
* '''2017 April 17 ''': [[HiDPol|HI-based dust polarization model for r forecasts]] (Tuhin)<br />
* '''2017 April 05 ''': [[lensing-DE|Notes on one path to lensing-based DE forecasts]] (Jo)<br />
* '''2017 April 05 ''': [[Notes from April 5 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 April 05''': [https://cmb-s4.org/CMB-S4workshops/images/Sigma8_z_prep.pdf Sigma8(z) SPT clusters (placeholder) ] (S Bocquet)<br />
* '''2017 April 04''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170404_s4opt/ Updated Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4 (using bands v1.99)] (Victor Buza, Updated 2017.04.21)<br />
* '''2017 March 31 ''': [[Data Challenge analysis - DC1.0, DC1.1, DC1.2]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 March 30 ''': [[Notes from March 28 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim & Steve)<br />
* '''2017 March 29''': [[CMB-S4 frequency bands v1.99]] (John Kovac, Band-definition working group)<br />
* '''2017 March 28''': [[Adding higher res delensing "band"]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 March 27''': [[01.01 sim input maps - first try]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 March 23''': [[01.00 sim input maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 March 20''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170221_S4_NET_forecasts/ S4 Band sensitivity comparison follow-up] (Denis Barkats, John Kovac)<br />
* '''2017 March 17''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20170317_s4dc1/ S4 DC1.0 analysis] (Victor Buza, Colin Bischoff, Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 March 17 ''': [[Media:Telecon_03172017_optimization_for_CMBS4.pdf]]: Optimization methodology for SO (Josquin)<br />
* '''2017 March 16 ''': [[ P_k_science_case| P(k) science case]] (Colin, Simone, Nick, David)<br />
* '''2017 March 15 ''': [[Notes from March 15 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 March 15 ''': [[CMB halo lensing sensitivity as a function of map sensitivity and resolution]] (Jim & Jean-Baptiste)<br />
* '''2017 March 15 ''': [[w and gamma | w and Delta gamma constraints from sigma_8 (z)]] (Mat & Nick)<br />
* '''2017 March 10 ''': [[Notes from March 8 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim & Steve)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[reionization_requirements| Reionization science]] (Simone & Marcelo)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[High ell topics | High ell topics ]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[SZ_s8_z | sigma 8 of z constraints ]] (Mat, Nick)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[Szcounts | Number counts update for 1.0', 1.5', 2.0']] (Nick, Mat)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[SZastro | SZ astrophysics with DESI ]](Nick, Simone, Emanuel, David)<br />
* '''2017 February 24''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170224_cmbs4_dc1_final/ BK-style processing of DC1.0 maps to spectra] (Justin Willmert, Colin Bischoff)<br />
* '''2017 February 15 ''': [[Extragalactic lensing sims| Update on extragalactic phase-2 lensing sims]] (Marcelo, George, Dick, others)<br />
* '''2017 February 15 ''': [[Plan for next Galactic Phase-2sims| Plan for next Galactic phase-2 sims]] (Jo, Ben)<br />
* '''2017 February 10 ''': [[Resolution of foreground-cleaned map]] (Mat, Neelima, Blake, Alex, others)<br />
* '''2017 February 10 ''': [[Nongaussian dust in lensing]] (Alex, Mat, Neelima, Blake, others)<br />
* '''2017 January 30''': [[Aliased power in noise maps]] (Bischoff, Updated 2017-02-02)<br />
* '''2017 January 23''': [[CMBS4 Band Sensitivity Comparison]] (Charlie Hill)<br />
* '''2017 January 12''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/cbischoff/20170112_data_challenge_1/ Maps for CMB-S4 data challenge 1] (Bischoff, Pryke, Buza)<br />
* '''2016 December 21''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20161220_chkS4/ N_ell spectra for the CMB-S4 data challenge, and updated &sigma;(r) checkpoints] (Victor Buza, Updated 2017.02.01)<br />
* '''2016 November 30''': [[First steps to sim input maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2016 November 4''': [[Tophat bands for Data Challenge]] (Bischoff)<br />
* '''2016 July 8''': [[fsky|Dependence of foregrounds on sky fraction]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2016 July 8''': [[SciBookPowspecTheoryFig|Three choices for Science Book Figure 5 (theory power spectrum & current BB points)]] (Tom C.)<br />
* '''2016 July 8''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20160707_s4plots/ S4 Inflation Chapter Plot Suggestions, V2] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 July 6''': [[w_cosntraint|Preliminary w constraint]] (Alessandro)<br />
* '''2016 June 24''': [[nsr|Preliminary ns-r plot for discussion]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2016 June 16''': [[DelensingImpact| Impact Of Delensing On sigma(r)]] (Neelima/Mat)<br />
* '''2016 June 16''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20160616_s4plots/ S4 Inflation Chapter Plot Suggestions] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 June 10''': [[MapBasedRb| Map-based &sigma;(r) forecasts V2]] (David/Jo/Ben)<br />
* '''2016 June 3''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20160531_fisher/ &sigma;(r) forecasting checkpoints, V2] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 June 3''': [[ BTTfixedeffort | Forecasts for fnl BTT beam/fixed effort]] (Daan)<br />
* '''2016 May 31''': [[ForecastPatchyReion| Forecasts for patchy reionization]] (Vera, Alex, Nick)<br />
* '''2016 May 26''': [[Forecasting | Forecasts on neutrino mass]] (Nam, Mat, Neelima)<br />
* '''2016 May 26''': [[ KSZ| Forecasts on kSZ S/N]] (Simone, Emmanuel, Colin)<br />
* '''2016 May 26''': [[ Forecastfiso_planck| Forecast on correlated and anti-correlated CDM isocurvature f_iso]] (Kimmy, Cora, updated with plots 20160602)<br />
* '''2016 May 24''': [[ BTTNoiseBeam | Forecasts on fnl BTT beam/FWHM]] (Daan)<br />
* '''2016 May 22''': [[ ForecastAxions| Update on the axion isocurvature constraints for changing sensitivity and resolution]] (Renee)<br />
* '''2016 May 21''': [[ Forecastpann| Forecast on dark matter annihilation parameter p_ann]] (Kimmy, Cora)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[NeffNoiseBeam| Forecasts on Neff and Yp]] (Joel, Alex)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastEDE| Forecasts on Early Dark Energy]] (Erminia)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastCompIsocurv| Forecasts on compensated isocurvature varying sensitivity, resolution and sky coverage]] (Julian, Ely)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastBirefring| Forecasts on birefringence varying sensitivity and resolution]] (Vera, Alex)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastStrings| Forecasts on string tension varying sensitivity and resolution]] (Renee)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[RobustForecast| Cosmological forecasts including component separation and iterative delensing]] (Stephen Feeney and Josquin Errard)<br />
* '''2016 May 19''': [[MapBasedR| Map-based &sigma;(r) forecasts]] (David A.)<br />
* '''2016 May 18''': [[Shear_calibration_LSST|LSST shear calibration with CMB S4]] (Emmanuel Schaan)<br />
* '''2016 May 13''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20150505_fisher/ &sigma;(r) forecasting checkpoints] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 May 13''': [[NonGaussianitiesTTT| CMBS-4 forecasts local and equilateral scalar Ngs using TTT]] (daan)<br />
* '''2016 May 13''': [[ForecastingSims|Simulations for r forecasts]] (Jo/Ben/David)<br />
* '''2016 May 6''': [[DMInteractionsComplementarity|DM interactions: complementarity]] (Vera)<br />
* '''2016 May 6''': [[Scenarios| Scenarios]] (Scott, Vera)<br />
* ''' 2016 May 3''': [[ForecastAxions |Effect of S4 specs on axion density parameters]] (Renee)<br />
* '''2016 April 30''': [[ForecastNu| Effect of S4 specs on neutrino parameters]] (Erminia)<br />
* '''2016 April 28''': [http://web.stanford.edu/~wlwu/posting/20160421_lensres/ Delensing residuals with low-ell foregrounds] (Kimmy Wu)<br />
* '''2016 April 28''': [[NonGaussianities| CMBS-4 forecast for tensor NGs]] (daan)<br />
* '''2016 April 19''': [[ForecastingStep1| Checking basic parameters for nominal case]] (Jo + multiple authors)<br />
* '''2016 April 5''': [[Forecasting|Setting up non-r Fisher-based parameter forecasts]] (Jo + others)<br />
* '''2016 March 31''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20150331_fisher/ Fisher projections for &sigma;(r) based on achieved performance] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 January 27''': [https://cmb-s4.org/CMB-S4workshops/index.php/File:sptpol_ptsrc_polfrac_500d.pdf Quick estimate of mean-squared polarization fraction for SPTpol sources] (Tom Crawford)</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=File:04c_AL106.png&diff=8080File:04c AL106.png2018-11-20T16:02:31Z<p>Cbischoff: Cbischoff uploaded a new version of File:04c AL106.png</p>
<hr />
<div>Marginalized r likelihood for experiment config 04c and AL=0.106</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=File:04c_AL106.png&diff=8079File:04c AL106.png2018-11-20T16:02:17Z<p>Cbischoff: Cbischoff uploaded a new version of File:04c AL106.png</p>
<hr />
<div>Marginalized r likelihood for experiment config 04c and AL=0.106</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=Analytic_approximation_for_r_likelihood&diff=8078Analytic approximation for r likelihood2018-11-20T15:59:30Z<p>Cbischoff: </p>
<hr />
<div>''Colin Bischoff, 2018-11-16'' // ''updated 2018-11-20''<br />
----<br />
<br />
In a [[Detection_significance_for_r=0.003|previous posting]], I ran BICEP/Keck-style CosmoMC likelihood analysis for bandpowers corresponding to the model expectation value for r=0.003 + foregrounds + lensing residual. This allowed me to calculate the detection significance for r in those particular scenarios: experiment config 04b (Chile sky coverage) with residual A<sub>L</sub>=0.27 or 0.337 and experiment config 04c (Pole sky coverage) with residual A<sub>L</sub>=0.081 or 0.106. Victor's Fisher analysis allows us to calculate &sigma;(r) for other scenarios, but we would like to estimate statistics like detection significance which rely on the non-Gaussian shape of the likelihood.<br />
<br />
My ansatz is that the shape of the r likelihood can be well described with the H-L likelihood ([http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008PhRvD..77j3013H Hamimeche & Lewis; PRD 77, 10, 103013; 2008]). That likelihood is meant to describe CMB power spectra, but the BB spectrum is linear in r (more or less) so we might expect this choice to work well. For a one-dimensional likelihood with r as the only parameter, the form of the H-L likelihood simplifies (scalar multiplication commutes) and we can write it as<br />
<br />
-log(L) = ( x - log x - 1 ) * ( r<sub>f</sub> + N )<sup>2</sup> / &sigma;<sup>2</sup><br />
x = ( r<sub>ML</sub> + N ) / ( r + N )<br />
<br />
where <br />
* <tt>r</tt> is the likelihood parameter, <br />
* <tt>r<sub>ML</sub></tt> is the maximum-likelihood r value, <br />
* <tt>&sigma;</tt> is &sigma;(r) calculated assuming a fiducial model with r = <tt>r<sub>f</sub></tt>,<br />
* <tt>N</tt> is a "noise bias" that contains contributions from instrumental noise, residual foregrounds, and residual lensing.<br />
<br />
In practice, if we want a representative likelihood curve for a particular value of r, we can use a Fisher code to calculate &sigma;(r) then set <tt>r<sub>ML</sub></tt> = <tt>r<sub>f</sub></tt> = r and <tt>&sigma;</tt> = &sigma;(r). However, we still need to get an estimate of parameter <tt>N</tt> from the CosmoMC-derived likelihoods.<br />
<br />
For the four scenarios shown in my previous posting, I reran the CosmoMC likelihood with somewhat tighter convergence criteria and at a higher temperature to get a better measurement in the tails of the distribution. Then I fit each curve to the model by minimizing a K-S statistic. The results are shown in the following table, along with detection significance calculated both from the CosmoMC likelihood and from the analytic fit. <br />
<br />
The table also includes a degrees of freedom statistic calculated as <br />
<br />
k = 2 * ( r<sub>ML</sub> + N )<sup>2</sup> / &sigma;<sup>2</sup><br />
<br />
We might expect that this parameter should come out with a common value for the two Chile scenarios and a common value for the two Pole scenarios, with a ratio that corresponds to the relative sky area. I do find that both Pole scenarios correspond to <tt>k</tt> ~ 525 but I find very high and inconsistent values of <tt>k</tt> for the two Chile scenarios. I think the reason is that parameter <tt>N</tt> mostly affects the skewness of the distribution. The Pole likelihoods have significant skewness and I get a reliable fit. The Chile likelihoods have less skewness, so there is equal preference for any large value of <tt>N</tt>. Perhaps the best estimate of <tt>k</tt> for the Chile mask would be to start from the Pole mask value of <tt>k</tt>, then multiply by some map-derived estimate of the relative sky areas.<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
'''UPDATE 2018-11-20''': I added new columns to the table and new lines to the figures showing how the likelihood shape and detection significance change if we fix <tt>k</tt> to 525 for Pole and 10000 for Chile. <br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Using the degrees of freedom parameter, we can write down an analytic model for the r likelihood by picking r, doing a Fisher calculation for &sigma;(r), and then calculating <tt>N</tt> from the above equation.<br />
<br />
{| class="wikitable"<br />
! Site !! A<sub>L</sub> !! !! <tt>r<sub>ML</sub></tt> !! <tt>&sigma;</tt> !! <tt>N</tt> !! <tt>k</tt> !! significance (original) !! significance (fit) !! <tt>k*</tt> !! significance (fix <tt>k=k*</tt>)<br />
|-<br />
| Chile || 0.270 || || 0.00256 || 0.00102 || 0.195 || 28446 || 2.5 &sigma; || 2.5 &sigma; || 10000 || 2.6<br />
|-<br />
| Chile || 0.337 || || 0.00255 || 0.00112 || 0.076 || 9803 || 2.3 &sigma; || 2.3 &sigma; || 10000 || 2.3 <br />
|-<br />
| Pole || 0.081 || || 0.00268 || 0.00080 || 0.010 || 492 || 3.8 &sigma; || 4.0 &sigma; || 525 || 3.9<br />
|-<br />
| Pole || 0.106 || || 0.00269 || 0.00088 || 0.012 || 569 || 3.5 &sigma; || 3.5 &sigma; || 525 || 3.5<br />
|}<br />
<br />
The figures below show the CosmoMC likelihood (blue) and the analytic model (orange) for the four scenarios that I used. The lower panels of each figure shows the fractional difference between the original likelihood and the model, which does increase out in the tails.<br />
<br />
[[File:04b_AL270.png|frame|Figure 1: Marginalized r likelihood for experiment config 04b and A<sub>L</sub>=0.270|center]]<br />
<br />
[[File:04b_AL337.png|frame|Figure 2: Marginalized r likelihood for experiment config 04b and A<sub>L</sub>=0.337|center]]<br />
<br />
[[File:04c_AL081.png|frame|Figure 3: Marginalized r likelihood for experiment config 04c and A<sub>L</sub>=0.081|center]]<br />
<br />
[[File:04c_AL106.png|frame|Figure 4: Marginalized r likelihood for experiment config 04c and A<sub>L</sub>=0.106|center]]</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=File:04c_AL106.png&diff=8077File:04c AL106.png2018-11-20T15:57:41Z<p>Cbischoff: Cbischoff uploaded a new version of File:04c AL106.png</p>
<hr />
<div>Marginalized r likelihood for experiment config 04c and AL=0.106</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=File:04c_AL081.png&diff=8076File:04c AL081.png2018-11-20T15:57:19Z<p>Cbischoff: Cbischoff uploaded a new version of File:04c AL081.png</p>
<hr />
<div>Marginalized r likelihood for experiment config 04c and AL=0.081</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=File:04b_AL337.png&diff=8075File:04b AL337.png2018-11-20T15:56:55Z<p>Cbischoff: Cbischoff uploaded a new version of File:04b AL337.png</p>
<hr />
<div>Marginalized r likelihood for experiment config 04b and AL=0.337</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=File:04b_AL270.png&diff=8074File:04b AL270.png2018-11-20T15:56:30Z<p>Cbischoff: Cbischoff uploaded a new version of File:04b AL270.png</p>
<hr />
<div>Marginalized r likelihood for experiment config 04b and AL=0.270</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=Analytic_approximation_for_r_likelihood&diff=8073Analytic approximation for r likelihood2018-11-20T15:55:28Z<p>Cbischoff: update to posting</p>
<hr />
<div>''Colin Bischoff, 2018-11-16''<br />
----<br />
<br />
In a [[Detection_significance_for_r=0.003|previous posting]], I ran BICEP/Keck-style CosmoMC likelihood analysis for bandpowers corresponding to the model expectation value for r=0.003 + foregrounds + lensing residual. This allowed me to calculate the detection significance for r in those particular scenarios: experiment config 04b (Chile sky coverage) with residual A<sub>L</sub>=0.27 or 0.337 and experiment config 04c (Pole sky coverage) with residual A<sub>L</sub>=0.081 or 0.106. Victor's Fisher analysis allows us to calculate &sigma;(r) for other scenarios, but we would like to estimate statistics like detection significance which rely on the non-Gaussian shape of the likelihood.<br />
<br />
My ansatz is that the shape of the r likelihood can be well described with the H-L likelihood ([http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008PhRvD..77j3013H Hamimeche & Lewis; PRD 77, 10, 103013; 2008]). That likelihood is meant to describe CMB power spectra, but the BB spectrum is linear in r (more or less) so we might expect this choice to work well. For a one-dimensional likelihood with r as the only parameter, the form of the H-L likelihood simplifies (scalar multiplication commutes) and we can write it as<br />
<br />
-log(L) = ( x - log x - 1 ) * ( r<sub>f</sub> + N )<sup>2</sup> / &sigma;<sup>2</sup><br />
x = ( r<sub>ML</sub> + N ) / ( r + N )<br />
<br />
where <br />
* <tt>r</tt> is the likelihood parameter, <br />
* <tt>r<sub>ML</sub></tt> is the maximum-likelihood r value, <br />
* <tt>&sigma;</tt> is &sigma;(r) calculated assuming a fiducial model with r = <tt>r<sub>f</sub></tt>,<br />
* <tt>N</tt> is a "noise bias" that contains contributions from instrumental noise, residual foregrounds, and residual lensing.<br />
<br />
In practice, if we want a representative likelihood curve for a particular value of r, we can use a Fisher code to calculate &sigma;(r) then set <tt>r<sub>ML</sub></tt> = <tt>r<sub>f</sub></tt> = r and <tt>&sigma;</tt> = &sigma;(r). However, we still need to get an estimate of parameter <tt>N</tt> from the CosmoMC-derived likelihoods.<br />
<br />
For the four scenarios shown in my previous posting, I reran the CosmoMC likelihood with somewhat tighter convergence criteria and at a higher temperature to get a better measurement in the tails of the distribution. Then I fit each curve to the model by minimizing a K-S statistic. The results are shown in the following table, along with detection significance calculated both from the CosmoMC likelihood and from the analytic fit. <br />
<br />
The table also includes a degrees of freedom statistic calculated as <br />
<br />
k = 2 * ( r<sub>ML</sub> + N )<sup>2</sup> / &sigma;<sup>2</sup><br />
<br />
We might expect that this parameter should come out with a common value for the two Chile scenarios and a common value for the two Pole scenarios, with a ratio that corresponds to the relative sky area. I do find that both Pole scenarios correspond to <tt>k</tt> ~ 525 but I find very high and inconsistent values of <tt>k</tt> for the two Chile scenarios. I think the reason is that parameter <tt>N</tt> mostly affects the skewness of the distribution. The Pole likelihoods have significant skewness and I get a reliable fit. The Chile likelihoods have less skewness, so there is equal preference for any large value of <tt>N</tt>. Perhaps the best estimate of <tt>k</tt> for the Chile mask would be to start from the Pole mask value of <tt>k</tt>, then multiply by some map-derived estimate of the relative sky areas.<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
'''UPDATE 2018-11-20''': I added new columns to the table and new lines to the figures showing how the likelihood shape and detection significance change if we fix <tt>k</tt> to 525 for Pole and 10000 for Chile. <br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Using the degrees of freedom parameter, we can write down an analytic model for the r likelihood by picking r, doing a Fisher calculation for &sigma;(r), and then calculating <tt>N</tt> from the above equation.<br />
<br />
{| class="wikitable"<br />
! Site !! A<sub>L</sub> !! !! <tt>r<sub>ML</sub></tt> !! <tt>&sigma;</tt> !! <tt>N</tt> !! <tt>k</tt> !! significance (original) !! significance (fit) !! <tt>k*</tt> !! significance (fix <tt>k=k*</tt>)<br />
|-<br />
| Chile || 0.270 || || 0.00256 || 0.00102 || 0.195 || 28446 || 2.5 &sigma; || 2.5 &sigma; || 10000 || 2.6<br />
|-<br />
| Chile || 0.337 || || 0.00255 || 0.00112 || 0.076 || 9803 || 2.3 &sigma; || 2.3 &sigma; || 10000 || 2.3 <br />
|-<br />
| Pole || 0.081 || || 0.00268 || 0.00080 || 0.010 || 492 || 3.8 &sigma; || 4.0 &sigma; || 525 || 3.9<br />
|-<br />
| Pole || 0.106 || || 0.00269 || 0.00088 || 0.012 || 569 || 3.5 &sigma; || 3.5 &sigma; || 525 || 3.5<br />
|}<br />
<br />
The figures below show the CosmoMC likelihood (blue) and the analytic model (orange) for the four scenarios that I used. The lower panels of each figure shows the fractional difference between the original likelihood and the model, which does increase out in the tails.<br />
<br />
[[File:04b_AL270.png|frame|Figure 1: Marginalized r likelihood for experiment config 04b and A<sub>L</sub>=0.270|center]]<br />
<br />
[[File:04b_AL337.png|frame|Figure 2: Marginalized r likelihood for experiment config 04b and A<sub>L</sub>=0.337|center]]<br />
<br />
[[File:04c_AL081.png|frame|Figure 3: Marginalized r likelihood for experiment config 04c and A<sub>L</sub>=0.081|center]]<br />
<br />
[[File:04c_AL106.png|frame|Figure 4: Marginalized r likelihood for experiment config 04c and A<sub>L</sub>=0.106|center]]</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=Simulation_and_Forecasting_Logbook&diff=8072Simulation and Forecasting Logbook2018-11-16T23:39:21Z<p>Cbischoff: /* Logbook Entries (reverse chronological) */</p>
<hr />
<div>This is an index page for logbook-style postings that cover the interconnected topics of sky modeling, simulations, and forecasting for CMB-S4. <br />
<br />
Some guidelines for use:<br />
* '''Postings should include enough context''' so that a reader can jump in and figure out what is going on. It is ''not'' necessary to write an extensive introduction to every posting -- context can be in the form of links to older postings, paper citations, etc.<br />
* Postings should represent a snapshot of work in progress. It's ok to post incomplete results, but recommended that you include notes about what is missing, what you are still planning to work on, etc. <br />
* If you have work that extends or improves an old posting, you should add it as a new posting (that includes links back to the old work as appropriate). Don't update old postings, as they should provide a chronological record of progress.<br />
* On this index page, add a link to your posting with the date, a descriptive posting title, and your full name. This logbook covers a wide range of topics, so titles will be really important to keep it useful. Don't name your posting something like "Forecasting for S4"!<br />
* Links should be added in reverse-chronological order (newest at the top). Your posting can either be written up on another wiki page or it can be a link to some externally hosted webpage (useful if you want to include a javascript plots pager).<br />
<br />
<br />
== Logbook Entries (reverse chronological) ==<br />
* '''2018 November 16''': [[Analytic approximation for r likelihood]] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 November 12''': [[Detection significance for r=0.003]] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 November 9''': [[Bad realizations in gsync/gdust sims]] (Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2018 November 8''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181108_dc02_ML_LT Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 02.00 with an ideal lensing template] (C. Umiltà)<br />
* '''2018 November 5''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181105_toy_sims Attempt to understand sigma(r) results with different hit maps] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 October 29''': [http://bicep2.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181018_1Dmodel_tapering_study Simple 1D model to study the effect of different observation strategies on the bandpower statistics.] (Ben Racine, Victor Buza, John Kovac)<br />
* '''2018 October 29''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181029_bkfinal_02lt BK-style power spectra of 02 with lensing templates] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 October 26''': [[Checking BB purity in re-analysis for alternate masks]] (Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2018 October 23''': [[Estimated observing efficiency for past and current telescopes, version 2]] (C. Bischoff, Y. Chinone, T. Crawford, M. Hasselfield)<br />
* '''2018 October 14''': [[Estimates of delensing efficiency]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2018 October 14''': [[Analysis of 04, 04b, 04c simulations]] (Raphael) [[Analysis of 04, 04b, 04c simulations comp]] (Ben)<br />
* '''2018 September 30''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180930_dc04_0to9/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04, models 0 to 9] (Ben Racine) ''Updated 2018 Oct 2nd''<br />
* '''2018 September 30''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180930_dc04_abc_model_0123789_ML/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04b and 04c, model 00, 01, 02, 03, 07, 08 and 09] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 September 30''': [[Ready for delensing use lensing maps 02.00]] (Julien Carron)<br />
* '''2018 September 28''': [[Towards lensing template]] (Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2018 September 27''': [[Lensing reconstructions 02.00]] (Julien Carron)<br />
* '''2018 September 26''': [[Lensing map reconstruction from 02.00 sims w/ and w/o foreground+inhomogeneous noise]] (Toshiya Namikawa)<br />
* '''2018 September 25''': [[Estimated observing efficiency for past and current telescopes]] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 August 27''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180925_bkfinal_04bc BK-style power spectra of 04/04b/04c masks for 00/01/02/03/07/08/09 foreground models] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 September 12''': [[Low ell noise from past and current telescopes]] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 September 5''': [[Phi reconstruction on 02.00 sims III]] (Anton Baleato)<br />
* '''2018 August 31''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180831_dc04_abc_model00_07_ML_proper_bp/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04b and 04c, for sky models 00 and 07] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 August 31''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180831_dc04_fixed_bp/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04, fixed bandpasses] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 August 27''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180827_bkfinal_04 Sims with nominal Chile and Pole masks III - BK-style power spectra of 04b.YY and 04c.YY] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 August 27''': [[Sims with nominal Chile and Pole masks II]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 August 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180826_dc04_fixed/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04, fixed] (V.Buza, B.Racine)<br />
* '''2018 August 24''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180824_bkfinal_04/ BK-style power spectra of v04.00-06 sims (CDT report config) FIXED] (Caterina Umilta)<br />
* '''2018 August 24''': [[Amplitude modulated Gaussian dust sims]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 August 17''': [[Sims with nominal Chile and Pole masks]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 August 10''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180810_noise/ Achieved performance roundup] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 August 7''': [[Pre-reference-design noise specifications for large-aperture forecasting]] (Tom Crawford, Matthew Hasselfield, Gil Holder, Lloyd Knox)<br />
* '''2018 August 6''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180805_s4opt/ Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4, 44cm vs 52cm aperture (w/ high-res/low-res 20 GHz)] (V.Buza)<br />
* '''2018 July 9''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180708_dc04/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04] (V.Buza)<br />
* '''2018 July 6''': [[Phi reconstruction on 02.00 sims II]] (Anton Baleato and Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2018 June 11''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180611_s4opt/ Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4, 44cm aperture] (V.Buza) -- see corrected August 6th Update!<br />
* '''2018 June 11''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180609_S4_noise_simulation_arbitrary_coverage/ Recipe to generate performance based S4 simulations with arbitrary sky distribution (in progress)] (B.Racine, V.Buza)<br />
* '''2018 April 29''': [[Phi reconstruction on 02.00 sims]] (Anton Baleato)<br />
* '''2018 April 25''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180425_r_equivalent_maps/ Smallfield r-equivalent Maps] (Kenny Lau)<br />
* '''2018 April 4''': [[Sky masks for simulations III]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 March 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180323_bkfinal_04/ BK-style power spectra of v04.00-06 sims (CDT report config) BROKEN] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 March 16''': [[ILC noise for large apertures at CDT noise levels]] (Raphael Flauger posted by Clem)<br />
* '''2018 March 16''': [[Sky masks for simulations II]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 February 19''': [[Sky masks for simulations]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 February 18''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180218_s4opt/ Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4, v3] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2018 February 7''': [[Sim map sets to demonstrate "real delensing" (02.00 and 02.09)]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 February 6''': [[Data Challenge Map Sets 04.YY]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 December 8''': [[Vansyngel Model]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 November 6''': [[Bandpass Convention - What does flat mean]] (Clem P.) - followup notes added Nov 20<br />
* '''2017 September 27''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170927_dc02/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 02] (Bischoff, Buza, Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 September 13''': [[Bias on r from Band Center Errors]] (Palladino, Willmert, Bischoff)<br />
* '''2017 September 8''': [[Checking dust decorrelation in Raphael MHD based dust sim]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 September 6''': [[New NET Calculator and Validation]] (Denis Barkats)<br />
* '''2017 September 1''': [[Resolution at 20 GHz]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 August 31''': [[Bias on r from additive systematics]] (Palladino, Willmert, Bischoff)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170818_bkfinal_03.00/ BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v03.00,.03 CMB-S4 simulation maps] (Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 August 18 ''': [[Neff_and_Beam_Calibration| Neff and Beam Calibration]] (Dan)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [[Ideal delensing templates from flat-sky QE, first pass]] (Kyle Story)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170818_HR/ High-Res studies for CMB-S4 (draft, v2)] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [[Comments from Anthony Challinor and Rupert Allison regarding the impact of Galactic Foregrounds on lensing]] (Neelima)<br />
* '''2017 August 11''': [[Joint Synchrotron and Dust Maps from Simulations]] (B. Hensley)<br />
* '''2017 August 9''': [[Dust Emission From Halos]] (Jim & Jean-Baptiste)<br />
* '''2017 August 9''': [[SZ Clusters update]] (Mat & Nick)<br />
* '''2017 August 4''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170804_HR/ High-Res studies for CMB-S4 (preliminary draft)] (Victor Buza); perhaps a reference of interest https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.02259<br />
* '''2017 July 10''': [[Additive systematics for data challenge 03]] (Bischoff, Palladino, Buza, Kovac)<br />
* '''2017 July 6''': [[Detection significance and sky fraction, dust decorrelation]](Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 July 3''': [[Toy highly decorrelated dust model]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 June 27''': [[Checking dust decorrelation in models d1/d4/d7 and hipdt]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 June 23''': [[Dust_delensing_firstlook|Dust delensing update]] (Alex)<br />
* '''2017 June 23''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170623_bkfinal_02.00/ BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v02.00–06 CMB-S4 simulation maps] (Justin Willmert) ''Updated 2017 Sep 08''<br />
* '''2017 June 22''': [[Warm-up exercise for delensing]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 June 19''': [[SZ Clusters update]] (Mat, Nick)<br />
* '''2017 June 11''': [[Notes from May 31 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 June 9''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170525_s4syst/ Introducing systematics for CMB-S4] ((Victor Buza), with input from Colin Bischoff, John Kovac)<br />
* '''2017 June 9''': [[Dust_delensing_firstlook]] (Alex)<br />
* '''2017 June 9''': [[r-forecasting: high and low ell coordination|r-forecasting: update on high and low ell coordination]] (Neelima+Colin Hill writing)<br />
* '''2017 June 1''': [[Residuals for DC 01.01 and DC 01.02]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 June 1''': [[Levels of foregrounds in Gaussian and PySM simulations]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 May 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170511_s4dc1/ S4 DC 01.xx analysis, v2] (Victor Buza, Colin Bischoff, Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 May 26 ''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170411_bkfinal_01.00/ Updated v01.02 in "BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v01.00–02 CMB-S4 simulation maps"] (Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 May 15''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170515_chkS4/ N_ell spectra for CMB-S4 DC2.0] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2017 May 15''': [[Rev 2 PySM a2d4f1s3 maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 May 12''': [[r-forecasting: high and low ell coordination|r-forecasting: high and low ell coordination]] (lensers writing)<br />
* '''2017 May 8''': [[Checking PySM maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 May 2''': [[Notes from April 26 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Steve)<br />
* '''2017 May 1''': [[r-forecasting: delensing discussion|r-forecasting delensing discussion]] (Neelima and Blake)<br />
* '''2017 April 28 ''': [[Update_on_Neff_Forecasts| Update on Neff Forecasts]] (Dan)<br />
* '''2017 April 26 ''': [http://www.cosmo.bnl.gov/www/msyriac/web/work/sigma8plots.html Update on cluster number counts forecast including w_a] (Mat and Nick)<br />
* '''2017 April 21 ''': [[lensing-DE|Update on a lensing-based DE forecast]] (Jo, Siddharth)<br />
* '''2017 April 18 ''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170411_bkfinal_01.00/ BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v01.00–02 CMB-S4 simulation maps] (Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 April 18 ''': [[S4-Lensing|S4 measurement requirements for neutrino mass and delensing - first pass]] (Neelima/Blake)<br />
* '''2017 April 17 ''': [[HiDPol|HI-based dust polarization model for r forecasts]] (Tuhin)<br />
* '''2017 April 05 ''': [[lensing-DE|Notes on one path to lensing-based DE forecasts]] (Jo)<br />
* '''2017 April 05 ''': [[Notes from April 5 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 April 05''': [https://cmb-s4.org/CMB-S4workshops/images/Sigma8_z_prep.pdf Sigma8(z) SPT clusters (placeholder) ] (S Bocquet)<br />
* '''2017 April 04''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170404_s4opt/ Updated Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4 (using bands v1.99)] (Victor Buza, Updated 2017.04.21)<br />
* '''2017 March 31 ''': [[Data Challenge analysis - DC1.0, DC1.1, DC1.2]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 March 30 ''': [[Notes from March 28 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim & Steve)<br />
* '''2017 March 29''': [[CMB-S4 frequency bands v1.99]] (John Kovac, Band-definition working group)<br />
* '''2017 March 28''': [[Adding higher res delensing "band"]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 March 27''': [[01.01 sim input maps - first try]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 March 23''': [[01.00 sim input maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 March 20''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170221_S4_NET_forecasts/ S4 Band sensitivity comparison follow-up] (Denis Barkats, John Kovac)<br />
* '''2017 March 17''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20170317_s4dc1/ S4 DC1.0 analysis] (Victor Buza, Colin Bischoff, Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 March 17 ''': [[Media:Telecon_03172017_optimization_for_CMBS4.pdf]]: Optimization methodology for SO (Josquin)<br />
* '''2017 March 16 ''': [[ P_k_science_case| P(k) science case]] (Colin, Simone, Nick, David)<br />
* '''2017 March 15 ''': [[Notes from March 15 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 March 15 ''': [[CMB halo lensing sensitivity as a function of map sensitivity and resolution]] (Jim & Jean-Baptiste)<br />
* '''2017 March 15 ''': [[w and gamma | w and Delta gamma constraints from sigma_8 (z)]] (Mat & Nick)<br />
* '''2017 March 10 ''': [[Notes from March 8 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim & Steve)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[reionization_requirements| Reionization science]] (Simone & Marcelo)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[High ell topics | High ell topics ]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[SZ_s8_z | sigma 8 of z constraints ]] (Mat, Nick)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[Szcounts | Number counts update for 1.0', 1.5', 2.0']] (Nick, Mat)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[SZastro | SZ astrophysics with DESI ]](Nick, Simone, Emanuel, David)<br />
* '''2017 February 24''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170224_cmbs4_dc1_final/ BK-style processing of DC1.0 maps to spectra] (Justin Willmert, Colin Bischoff)<br />
* '''2017 February 15 ''': [[Extragalactic lensing sims| Update on extragalactic phase-2 lensing sims]] (Marcelo, George, Dick, others)<br />
* '''2017 February 15 ''': [[Plan for next Galactic Phase-2sims| Plan for next Galactic phase-2 sims]] (Jo, Ben)<br />
* '''2017 February 10 ''': [[Resolution of foreground-cleaned map]] (Mat, Neelima, Blake, Alex, others)<br />
* '''2017 February 10 ''': [[Nongaussian dust in lensing]] (Alex, Mat, Neelima, Blake, others)<br />
* '''2017 January 30''': [[Aliased power in noise maps]] (Bischoff, Updated 2017-02-02)<br />
* '''2017 January 23''': [[CMBS4 Band Sensitivity Comparison]] (Charlie Hill)<br />
* '''2017 January 12''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/cbischoff/20170112_data_challenge_1/ Maps for CMB-S4 data challenge 1] (Bischoff, Pryke, Buza)<br />
* '''2016 December 21''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20161220_chkS4/ N_ell spectra for the CMB-S4 data challenge, and updated &sigma;(r) checkpoints] (Victor Buza, Updated 2017.02.01)<br />
* '''2016 November 30''': [[First steps to sim input maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2016 November 4''': [[Tophat bands for Data Challenge]] (Bischoff)<br />
* '''2016 July 8''': [[fsky|Dependence of foregrounds on sky fraction]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2016 July 8''': [[SciBookPowspecTheoryFig|Three choices for Science Book Figure 5 (theory power spectrum & current BB points)]] (Tom C.)<br />
* '''2016 July 8''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20160707_s4plots/ S4 Inflation Chapter Plot Suggestions, V2] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 July 6''': [[w_cosntraint|Preliminary w constraint]] (Alessandro)<br />
* '''2016 June 24''': [[nsr|Preliminary ns-r plot for discussion]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2016 June 16''': [[DelensingImpact| Impact Of Delensing On sigma(r)]] (Neelima/Mat)<br />
* '''2016 June 16''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20160616_s4plots/ S4 Inflation Chapter Plot Suggestions] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 June 10''': [[MapBasedRb| Map-based &sigma;(r) forecasts V2]] (David/Jo/Ben)<br />
* '''2016 June 3''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20160531_fisher/ &sigma;(r) forecasting checkpoints, V2] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 June 3''': [[ BTTfixedeffort | Forecasts for fnl BTT beam/fixed effort]] (Daan)<br />
* '''2016 May 31''': [[ForecastPatchyReion| Forecasts for patchy reionization]] (Vera, Alex, Nick)<br />
* '''2016 May 26''': [[Forecasting | Forecasts on neutrino mass]] (Nam, Mat, Neelima)<br />
* '''2016 May 26''': [[ KSZ| Forecasts on kSZ S/N]] (Simone, Emmanuel, Colin)<br />
* '''2016 May 26''': [[ Forecastfiso_planck| Forecast on correlated and anti-correlated CDM isocurvature f_iso]] (Kimmy, Cora, updated with plots 20160602)<br />
* '''2016 May 24''': [[ BTTNoiseBeam | Forecasts on fnl BTT beam/FWHM]] (Daan)<br />
* '''2016 May 22''': [[ ForecastAxions| Update on the axion isocurvature constraints for changing sensitivity and resolution]] (Renee)<br />
* '''2016 May 21''': [[ Forecastpann| Forecast on dark matter annihilation parameter p_ann]] (Kimmy, Cora)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[NeffNoiseBeam| Forecasts on Neff and Yp]] (Joel, Alex)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastEDE| Forecasts on Early Dark Energy]] (Erminia)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastCompIsocurv| Forecasts on compensated isocurvature varying sensitivity, resolution and sky coverage]] (Julian, Ely)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastBirefring| Forecasts on birefringence varying sensitivity and resolution]] (Vera, Alex)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastStrings| Forecasts on string tension varying sensitivity and resolution]] (Renee)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[RobustForecast| Cosmological forecasts including component separation and iterative delensing]] (Stephen Feeney and Josquin Errard)<br />
* '''2016 May 19''': [[MapBasedR| Map-based &sigma;(r) forecasts]] (David A.)<br />
* '''2016 May 18''': [[Shear_calibration_LSST|LSST shear calibration with CMB S4]] (Emmanuel Schaan)<br />
* '''2016 May 13''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20150505_fisher/ &sigma;(r) forecasting checkpoints] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 May 13''': [[NonGaussianitiesTTT| CMBS-4 forecasts local and equilateral scalar Ngs using TTT]] (daan)<br />
* '''2016 May 13''': [[ForecastingSims|Simulations for r forecasts]] (Jo/Ben/David)<br />
* '''2016 May 6''': [[DMInteractionsComplementarity|DM interactions: complementarity]] (Vera)<br />
* '''2016 May 6''': [[Scenarios| Scenarios]] (Scott, Vera)<br />
* ''' 2016 May 3''': [[ForecastAxions |Effect of S4 specs on axion density parameters]] (Renee)<br />
* '''2016 April 30''': [[ForecastNu| Effect of S4 specs on neutrino parameters]] (Erminia)<br />
* '''2016 April 28''': [http://web.stanford.edu/~wlwu/posting/20160421_lensres/ Delensing residuals with low-ell foregrounds] (Kimmy Wu)<br />
* '''2016 April 28''': [[NonGaussianities| CMBS-4 forecast for tensor NGs]] (daan)<br />
* '''2016 April 19''': [[ForecastingStep1| Checking basic parameters for nominal case]] (Jo + multiple authors)<br />
* '''2016 April 5''': [[Forecasting|Setting up non-r Fisher-based parameter forecasts]] (Jo + others)<br />
* '''2016 March 31''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20150331_fisher/ Fisher projections for &sigma;(r) based on achieved performance] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 January 27''': [https://cmb-s4.org/CMB-S4workshops/index.php/File:sptpol_ptsrc_polfrac_500d.pdf Quick estimate of mean-squared polarization fraction for SPTpol sources] (Tom Crawford)</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=File:04c_AL106.png&diff=8071File:04c AL106.png2018-11-16T23:37:50Z<p>Cbischoff: Marginalized r likelihood for experiment config 04c and AL=0.106</p>
<hr />
<div>Marginalized r likelihood for experiment config 04c and AL=0.106</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=File:04c_AL081.png&diff=8070File:04c AL081.png2018-11-16T23:37:35Z<p>Cbischoff: Marginalized r likelihood for experiment config 04c and AL=0.081</p>
<hr />
<div>Marginalized r likelihood for experiment config 04c and AL=0.081</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=File:04b_AL337.png&diff=8069File:04b AL337.png2018-11-16T23:37:19Z<p>Cbischoff: Marginalized r likelihood for experiment config 04b and AL=0.337</p>
<hr />
<div>Marginalized r likelihood for experiment config 04b and AL=0.337</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=File:04b_AL270.png&diff=8068File:04b AL270.png2018-11-16T23:36:58Z<p>Cbischoff: Marginalized r likelihood for experiment config 04b and AL=0.270</p>
<hr />
<div>Marginalized r likelihood for experiment config 04b and AL=0.270</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=Analytic_approximation_for_r_likelihood&diff=8067Analytic approximation for r likelihood2018-11-16T23:36:25Z<p>Cbischoff: Created page with "''Colin Bischoff, 2018-11-16'' ---- In a previous posting, I ran BICEP/Keck-style CosmoMC likelihood analysis for bandpowers correspond..."</p>
<hr />
<div>''Colin Bischoff, 2018-11-16''<br />
----<br />
<br />
In a [[Detection_significance_for_r=0.003|previous posting]], I ran BICEP/Keck-style CosmoMC likelihood analysis for bandpowers corresponding to the model expectation value for r=0.003 + foregrounds + lensing residual. This allowed me to calculate the detection significance for r in those particular scenarios: experiment config 04b (Chile sky coverage) with residual A<sub>L</sub>=0.27 or 0.337 and experiment config 04c (Pole sky coverage) with residual A<sub>L</sub>=0.081 or 0.106. Victor's Fisher analysis allows us to calculate &sigma;(r) for other scenarios, but we would like to estimate statistics like detection significance which rely on the non-Gaussian shape of the likelihood.<br />
<br />
My ansatz is that the shape of the r likelihood can be well described with the H-L likelihood ([http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008PhRvD..77j3013H Hamimeche & Lewis; PRD 77, 10, 103013; 2008]). That likelihood is meant to describe CMB power spectra, but the BB spectrum is linear in r (more or less) so we might expect this choice to work well. For a one-dimensional likelihood with r as the only parameter, the form of the H-L likelihood simplifies (scalar multiplication commutes) and we can write it as<br />
<br />
-log(L) = ( x - log x - 1 ) * ( r<sub>f</sub> + N )<sup>2</sup> / &sigma;<sup>2</sup><br />
x = ( r<sub>ML</sub> + N ) / ( r + N )<br />
<br />
where <br />
* <tt>r</tt> is the likelihood parameter, <br />
* <tt>r<sub>ML</sub></tt> is the maximum-likelihood r value, <br />
* <tt>&sigma;</tt> is &sigma;(r) calculated assuming a fiducial model with r = <tt>r<sub>f</sub></tt>,<br />
* <tt>N</tt> is a "noise bias" that contains contributions from instrumental noise, residual foregrounds, and residual lensing.<br />
<br />
In practice, if we want a representative likelihood curve for a particular value of r, we can use a Fisher code to calculate &sigma;(r) then set <tt>r<sub>ML</sub></tt> = <tt>r<sub>f</sub></tt> = r and <tt>&sigma;</tt> = &sigma;(r). However, we still need to get an estimate of parameter <tt>N</tt> from the CosmoMC-derived likelihoods.<br />
<br />
For the four scenarios shown in my previous posting, I reran the CosmoMC likelihood with somewhat tighter convergence criteria and at a higher temperature to get a better measurement in the tails of the distribution. Then I fit each curve to the model by minimizing a K-S statistic. The results are shown in the following table, along with detection significance calculated both from the CosmoMC likelihood and from the analytic fit. <br />
<br />
The table also includes a degrees of freedom statistic calculated as <br />
<br />
k = 2 * ( r<sub>ML</sub> + N )<sup>2</sup> / &sigma;<sup>2</sup><br />
<br />
We might expect that this parameter should come out with a common value for the two Chile scenarios and a common value for the two Pole scenarios, with a ratio that corresponds to the relative sky area. I do find that both Pole scenarios correspond to <tt>k</tt>&sim;525 but I find very high and inconsistent values of <tt>k</tt> for the two Chile scenarios. I think the reason is that parameter <tt>N</tt> mostly affects the skewness of the distribution. The Pole likelihoods have significant skewness and I get a reliable fit. The Chile likelihoods have less skewness, so there is equal preference for any large value of <tt>N</tt>. Perhaps the best estimate of <tt>k</tt> for the Chile mask would be to start from the Pole mask value of <tt>k</tt>, then multiply by some map-derived estimate of the relative sky areas.<br />
<br />
Using the degrees of freedom parameter, we can write down an analytic model for the r likelihood by picking r, doing a Fisher calculation for &sigma;(r), and then calculating <tt>N</tt> from the above equation.<br />
<br />
{| class="wikitable"<br />
! Site !! A<sub>L</sub> !! !! <tt>r<sub>ML</sub></tt> !! <tt>&sigma;</tt> !! <tt>N</tt> !! <tt>k</tt> !! significance (original) !! significance (fit)<br />
|-<br />
| Chile || 0.270 || || 0.00256 || 0.00102 || 0.195 || 28446 || 2.5 &sigma; || 2.5 &sigma;<br />
|-<br />
| Chile || 0.337 || || 0.00255 || 0.00112 || 0.076 || 9803 || 2.3 &sigma; || 2.3 &sigma;<br />
|-<br />
| Pole || 0.081 || || 0.00268 || 0.00080 || 0.010 || 492 || 3.8 &sigma; || 4.0 &sigma;<br />
|-<br />
| Pole || 0.106 || || 0.00269 || 0.00088 || 0.012 || 569 || 3.5 &sigma; || 3.5 &sigma;<br />
|}<br />
<br />
The figures below show the CosmoMC likelihood (blue) and the analytic model (orange) for the four scenarios that I used. The lower panels of each figure shows the fractional difference between the original likelihood and the model, which does increase out in the tails.<br />
<br />
[[File:04b_AL270.png|frame|Figure 1: Marginalized r likelihood for experiment config 04b and A<sub>L</sub>=0.270|center]]<br />
<br />
[[File:04b_AL337.png|frame|Figure 2: Marginalized r likelihood for experiment config 04b and A<sub>L</sub>=0.337|center]]<br />
<br />
[[File:04c_AL081.png|frame|Figure 3: Marginalized r likelihood for experiment config 04c and A<sub>L</sub>=0.081|center]]<br />
<br />
[[File:04c_AL106.png|frame|Figure 4: Marginalized r likelihood for experiment config 04c and A<sub>L</sub>=0.106|center]]</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=Simulation_and_Forecasting_Logbook&diff=8047Simulation and Forecasting Logbook2018-11-12T16:46:19Z<p>Cbischoff: </p>
<hr />
<div>This is an index page for logbook-style postings that cover the interconnected topics of sky modeling, simulations, and forecasting for CMB-S4. <br />
<br />
Some guidelines for use:<br />
* '''Postings should include enough context''' so that a reader can jump in and figure out what is going on. It is ''not'' necessary to write an extensive introduction to every posting -- context can be in the form of links to older postings, paper citations, etc.<br />
* Postings should represent a snapshot of work in progress. It's ok to post incomplete results, but recommended that you include notes about what is missing, what you are still planning to work on, etc. <br />
* If you have work that extends or improves an old posting, you should add it as a new posting (that includes links back to the old work as appropriate). Don't update old postings, as they should provide a chronological record of progress.<br />
* On this index page, add a link to your posting with the date, a descriptive posting title, and your full name. This logbook covers a wide range of topics, so titles will be really important to keep it useful. Don't name your posting something like "Forecasting for S4"!<br />
* Links should be added in reverse-chronological order (newest at the top). Your posting can either be written up on another wiki page or it can be a link to some externally hosted webpage (useful if you want to include a javascript plots pager).<br />
<br />
<br />
== Logbook Entries (reverse chronological) ==<br />
* '''2018 November 12''': [[Detection significance for r=0.003]] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 November 9''': [[Bad realizations in gsync/gdust sims]] (Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2018 November 8''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181108_dc02_ML_LT Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 02.00 with an ideal lensing template] (C. Umiltà)<br />
* '''2018 November 5''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181105_toy_sims Attempt to understand sigma(r) results with different hit maps] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 October 29''': [http://bicep2.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181018_1Dmodel_tapering_study Simple 1D model to study the effect of different observation strategies on the bandpower statistics.] (Ben Racine, Victor Buza, John Kovac)<br />
* '''2018 October 29''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20181029_bkfinal_02lt BK-style power spectra of 02 with lensing templates] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 October 26''': [[Checking BB purity in re-analysis for alternate masks]] (Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2018 October 23''': [[Estimated observing efficiency for past and current telescopes, version 2]] (C. Bischoff, Y. Chinone, T. Crawford, M. Hasselfield)<br />
* '''2018 October 14''': [[Estimates of delensing efficiency]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2018 October 14''': [[Analysis of 04, 04b, 04c simulations]] (Raphael) [[Analysis of 04, 04b, 04c simulations comp]] (Ben)<br />
* '''2018 September 30''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180930_dc04_0to9/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04, models 0 to 9] (Ben Racine) ''Updated 2018 Oct 2nd''<br />
* '''2018 September 30''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180930_dc04_abc_model_0123789_ML/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04b and 04c, model 00, 01, 02, 03, 07, 08 and 09] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 September 30''': [[Ready for delensing use lensing maps 02.00]] (Julien Carron)<br />
* '''2018 September 28''': [[Towards lensing template]] (Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2018 September 27''': [[Lensing reconstructions 02.00]] (Julien Carron)<br />
* '''2018 September 26''': [[Lensing map reconstruction from 02.00 sims w/ and w/o foreground+inhomogeneous noise]] (Toshiya Namikawa)<br />
* '''2018 September 25''': [[Estimated observing efficiency for past and current telescopes]] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 August 27''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180925_bkfinal_04bc BK-style power spectra of 04/04b/04c masks for 00/01/02/03/07/08/09 foreground models] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 September 12''': [[Low ell noise from past and current telescopes]] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 September 5''': [[Phi reconstruction on 02.00 sims III]] (Anton Baleato)<br />
* '''2018 August 31''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180831_dc04_abc_model00_07_ML_proper_bp/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04b and 04c, for sky models 00 and 07] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 August 31''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180831_dc04_fixed_bp/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04, fixed bandpasses] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 August 27''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180827_bkfinal_04 Sims with nominal Chile and Pole masks III - BK-style power spectra of 04b.YY and 04c.YY] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 August 27''': [[Sims with nominal Chile and Pole masks II]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 August 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180826_dc04_fixed/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04, fixed] (V.Buza, B.Racine)<br />
* '''2018 August 24''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180824_bkfinal_04/ BK-style power spectra of v04.00-06 sims (CDT report config) FIXED] (Caterina Umilta)<br />
* '''2018 August 24''': [[Amplitude modulated Gaussian dust sims]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 August 17''': [[Sims with nominal Chile and Pole masks]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 August 10''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180810_noise/ Achieved performance roundup] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 August 7''': [[Pre-reference-design noise specifications for large-aperture forecasting]] (Tom Crawford, Matthew Hasselfield, Gil Holder, Lloyd Knox)<br />
* '''2018 August 6''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180805_s4opt/ Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4, 44cm vs 52cm aperture (w/ high-res/low-res 20 GHz)] (V.Buza)<br />
* '''2018 July 9''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180708_dc04/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04] (V.Buza)<br />
* '''2018 July 6''': [[Phi reconstruction on 02.00 sims II]] (Anton Baleato and Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2018 June 11''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180611_s4opt/ Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4, 44cm aperture] (V.Buza) -- see corrected August 6th Update!<br />
* '''2018 June 11''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180609_S4_noise_simulation_arbitrary_coverage/ Recipe to generate performance based S4 simulations with arbitrary sky distribution (in progress)] (B.Racine, V.Buza)<br />
* '''2018 April 29''': [[Phi reconstruction on 02.00 sims]] (Anton Baleato)<br />
* '''2018 April 25''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180425_r_equivalent_maps/ Smallfield r-equivalent Maps] (Kenny Lau)<br />
* '''2018 April 4''': [[Sky masks for simulations III]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 March 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180323_bkfinal_04/ BK-style power spectra of v04.00-06 sims (CDT report config) BROKEN] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 March 16''': [[ILC noise for large apertures at CDT noise levels]] (Raphael Flauger posted by Clem)<br />
* '''2018 March 16''': [[Sky masks for simulations II]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 February 19''': [[Sky masks for simulations]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 February 18''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180218_s4opt/ Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4, v3] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2018 February 7''': [[Sim map sets to demonstrate "real delensing" (02.00 and 02.09)]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 February 6''': [[Data Challenge Map Sets 04.YY]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 December 8''': [[Vansyngel Model]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 November 6''': [[Bandpass Convention - What does flat mean]] (Clem P.) - followup notes added Nov 20<br />
* '''2017 September 27''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170927_dc02/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 02] (Bischoff, Buza, Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 September 13''': [[Bias on r from Band Center Errors]] (Palladino, Willmert, Bischoff)<br />
* '''2017 September 8''': [[Checking dust decorrelation in Raphael MHD based dust sim]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 September 6''': [[New NET Calculator and Validation]] (Denis Barkats)<br />
* '''2017 September 1''': [[Resolution at 20 GHz]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 August 31''': [[Bias on r from additive systematics]] (Palladino, Willmert, Bischoff)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170818_bkfinal_03.00/ BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v03.00,.03 CMB-S4 simulation maps] (Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 August 18 ''': [[Neff_and_Beam_Calibration| Neff and Beam Calibration]] (Dan)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [[Ideal delensing templates from flat-sky QE, first pass]] (Kyle Story)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170818_HR/ High-Res studies for CMB-S4 (draft, v2)] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [[Comments from Anthony Challinor and Rupert Allison regarding the impact of Galactic Foregrounds on lensing]] (Neelima)<br />
* '''2017 August 11''': [[Joint Synchrotron and Dust Maps from Simulations]] (B. Hensley)<br />
* '''2017 August 9''': [[Dust Emission From Halos]] (Jim & Jean-Baptiste)<br />
* '''2017 August 9''': [[SZ Clusters update]] (Mat & Nick)<br />
* '''2017 August 4''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170804_HR/ High-Res studies for CMB-S4 (preliminary draft)] (Victor Buza); perhaps a reference of interest https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.02259<br />
* '''2017 July 10''': [[Additive systematics for data challenge 03]] (Bischoff, Palladino, Buza, Kovac)<br />
* '''2017 July 6''': [[Detection significance and sky fraction, dust decorrelation]](Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 July 3''': [[Toy highly decorrelated dust model]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 June 27''': [[Checking dust decorrelation in models d1/d4/d7 and hipdt]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 June 23''': [[Dust_delensing_firstlook|Dust delensing update]] (Alex)<br />
* '''2017 June 23''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170623_bkfinal_02.00/ BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v02.00–06 CMB-S4 simulation maps] (Justin Willmert) ''Updated 2017 Sep 08''<br />
* '''2017 June 22''': [[Warm-up exercise for delensing]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 June 19''': [[SZ Clusters update]] (Mat, Nick)<br />
* '''2017 June 11''': [[Notes from May 31 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 June 9''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170525_s4syst/ Introducing systematics for CMB-S4] ((Victor Buza), with input from Colin Bischoff, John Kovac)<br />
* '''2017 June 9''': [[Dust_delensing_firstlook]] (Alex)<br />
* '''2017 June 9''': [[r-forecasting: high and low ell coordination|r-forecasting: update on high and low ell coordination]] (Neelima+Colin Hill writing)<br />
* '''2017 June 1''': [[Residuals for DC 01.01 and DC 01.02]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 June 1''': [[Levels of foregrounds in Gaussian and PySM simulations]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 May 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170511_s4dc1/ S4 DC 01.xx analysis, v2] (Victor Buza, Colin Bischoff, Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 May 26 ''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170411_bkfinal_01.00/ Updated v01.02 in "BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v01.00–02 CMB-S4 simulation maps"] (Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 May 15''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170515_chkS4/ N_ell spectra for CMB-S4 DC2.0] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2017 May 15''': [[Rev 2 PySM a2d4f1s3 maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 May 12''': [[r-forecasting: high and low ell coordination|r-forecasting: high and low ell coordination]] (lensers writing)<br />
* '''2017 May 8''': [[Checking PySM maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 May 2''': [[Notes from April 26 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Steve)<br />
* '''2017 May 1''': [[r-forecasting: delensing discussion|r-forecasting delensing discussion]] (Neelima and Blake)<br />
* '''2017 April 28 ''': [[Update_on_Neff_Forecasts| Update on Neff Forecasts]] (Dan)<br />
* '''2017 April 26 ''': [http://www.cosmo.bnl.gov/www/msyriac/web/work/sigma8plots.html Update on cluster number counts forecast including w_a] (Mat and Nick)<br />
* '''2017 April 21 ''': [[lensing-DE|Update on a lensing-based DE forecast]] (Jo, Siddharth)<br />
* '''2017 April 18 ''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170411_bkfinal_01.00/ BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v01.00–02 CMB-S4 simulation maps] (Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 April 18 ''': [[S4-Lensing|S4 measurement requirements for neutrino mass and delensing - first pass]] (Neelima/Blake)<br />
* '''2017 April 17 ''': [[HiDPol|HI-based dust polarization model for r forecasts]] (Tuhin)<br />
* '''2017 April 05 ''': [[lensing-DE|Notes on one path to lensing-based DE forecasts]] (Jo)<br />
* '''2017 April 05 ''': [[Notes from April 5 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 April 05''': [https://cmb-s4.org/CMB-S4workshops/images/Sigma8_z_prep.pdf Sigma8(z) SPT clusters (placeholder) ] (S Bocquet)<br />
* '''2017 April 04''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170404_s4opt/ Updated Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4 (using bands v1.99)] (Victor Buza, Updated 2017.04.21)<br />
* '''2017 March 31 ''': [[Data Challenge analysis - DC1.0, DC1.1, DC1.2]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 March 30 ''': [[Notes from March 28 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim & Steve)<br />
* '''2017 March 29''': [[CMB-S4 frequency bands v1.99]] (John Kovac, Band-definition working group)<br />
* '''2017 March 28''': [[Adding higher res delensing "band"]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 March 27''': [[01.01 sim input maps - first try]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 March 23''': [[01.00 sim input maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 March 20''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170221_S4_NET_forecasts/ S4 Band sensitivity comparison follow-up] (Denis Barkats, John Kovac)<br />
* '''2017 March 17''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20170317_s4dc1/ S4 DC1.0 analysis] (Victor Buza, Colin Bischoff, Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 March 17 ''': [[Media:Telecon_03172017_optimization_for_CMBS4.pdf]]: Optimization methodology for SO (Josquin)<br />
* '''2017 March 16 ''': [[ P_k_science_case| P(k) science case]] (Colin, Simone, Nick, David)<br />
* '''2017 March 15 ''': [[Notes from March 15 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 March 15 ''': [[CMB halo lensing sensitivity as a function of map sensitivity and resolution]] (Jim & Jean-Baptiste)<br />
* '''2017 March 15 ''': [[w and gamma | w and Delta gamma constraints from sigma_8 (z)]] (Mat & Nick)<br />
* '''2017 March 10 ''': [[Notes from March 8 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim & Steve)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[reionization_requirements| Reionization science]] (Simone & Marcelo)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[High ell topics | High ell topics ]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[SZ_s8_z | sigma 8 of z constraints ]] (Mat, Nick)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[Szcounts | Number counts update for 1.0', 1.5', 2.0']] (Nick, Mat)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[SZastro | SZ astrophysics with DESI ]](Nick, Simone, Emanuel, David)<br />
* '''2017 February 24''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170224_cmbs4_dc1_final/ BK-style processing of DC1.0 maps to spectra] (Justin Willmert, Colin Bischoff)<br />
* '''2017 February 15 ''': [[Extragalactic lensing sims| Update on extragalactic phase-2 lensing sims]] (Marcelo, George, Dick, others)<br />
* '''2017 February 15 ''': [[Plan for next Galactic Phase-2sims| Plan for next Galactic phase-2 sims]] (Jo, Ben)<br />
* '''2017 February 10 ''': [[Resolution of foreground-cleaned map]] (Mat, Neelima, Blake, Alex, others)<br />
* '''2017 February 10 ''': [[Nongaussian dust in lensing]] (Alex, Mat, Neelima, Blake, others)<br />
* '''2017 January 30''': [[Aliased power in noise maps]] (Bischoff, Updated 2017-02-02)<br />
* '''2017 January 23''': [[CMBS4 Band Sensitivity Comparison]] (Charlie Hill)<br />
* '''2017 January 12''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/cbischoff/20170112_data_challenge_1/ Maps for CMB-S4 data challenge 1] (Bischoff, Pryke, Buza)<br />
* '''2016 December 21''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20161220_chkS4/ N_ell spectra for the CMB-S4 data challenge, and updated &sigma;(r) checkpoints] (Victor Buza, Updated 2017.02.01)<br />
* '''2016 November 30''': [[First steps to sim input maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2016 November 4''': [[Tophat bands for Data Challenge]] (Bischoff)<br />
* '''2016 July 8''': [[fsky|Dependence of foregrounds on sky fraction]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2016 July 8''': [[SciBookPowspecTheoryFig|Three choices for Science Book Figure 5 (theory power spectrum & current BB points)]] (Tom C.)<br />
* '''2016 July 8''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20160707_s4plots/ S4 Inflation Chapter Plot Suggestions, V2] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 July 6''': [[w_cosntraint|Preliminary w constraint]] (Alessandro)<br />
* '''2016 June 24''': [[nsr|Preliminary ns-r plot for discussion]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2016 June 16''': [[DelensingImpact| Impact Of Delensing On sigma(r)]] (Neelima/Mat)<br />
* '''2016 June 16''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20160616_s4plots/ S4 Inflation Chapter Plot Suggestions] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 June 10''': [[MapBasedRb| Map-based &sigma;(r) forecasts V2]] (David/Jo/Ben)<br />
* '''2016 June 3''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20160531_fisher/ &sigma;(r) forecasting checkpoints, V2] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 June 3''': [[ BTTfixedeffort | Forecasts for fnl BTT beam/fixed effort]] (Daan)<br />
* '''2016 May 31''': [[ForecastPatchyReion| Forecasts for patchy reionization]] (Vera, Alex, Nick)<br />
* '''2016 May 26''': [[Forecasting | Forecasts on neutrino mass]] (Nam, Mat, Neelima)<br />
* '''2016 May 26''': [[ KSZ| Forecasts on kSZ S/N]] (Simone, Emmanuel, Colin)<br />
* '''2016 May 26''': [[ Forecastfiso_planck| Forecast on correlated and anti-correlated CDM isocurvature f_iso]] (Kimmy, Cora, updated with plots 20160602)<br />
* '''2016 May 24''': [[ BTTNoiseBeam | Forecasts on fnl BTT beam/FWHM]] (Daan)<br />
* '''2016 May 22''': [[ ForecastAxions| Update on the axion isocurvature constraints for changing sensitivity and resolution]] (Renee)<br />
* '''2016 May 21''': [[ Forecastpann| Forecast on dark matter annihilation parameter p_ann]] (Kimmy, Cora)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[NeffNoiseBeam| Forecasts on Neff and Yp]] (Joel, Alex)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastEDE| Forecasts on Early Dark Energy]] (Erminia)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastCompIsocurv| Forecasts on compensated isocurvature varying sensitivity, resolution and sky coverage]] (Julian, Ely)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastBirefring| Forecasts on birefringence varying sensitivity and resolution]] (Vera, Alex)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastStrings| Forecasts on string tension varying sensitivity and resolution]] (Renee)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[RobustForecast| Cosmological forecasts including component separation and iterative delensing]] (Stephen Feeney and Josquin Errard)<br />
* '''2016 May 19''': [[MapBasedR| Map-based &sigma;(r) forecasts]] (David A.)<br />
* '''2016 May 18''': [[Shear_calibration_LSST|LSST shear calibration with CMB S4]] (Emmanuel Schaan)<br />
* '''2016 May 13''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20150505_fisher/ &sigma;(r) forecasting checkpoints] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 May 13''': [[NonGaussianitiesTTT| CMBS-4 forecasts local and equilateral scalar Ngs using TTT]] (daan)<br />
* '''2016 May 13''': [[ForecastingSims|Simulations for r forecasts]] (Jo/Ben/David)<br />
* '''2016 May 6''': [[DMInteractionsComplementarity|DM interactions: complementarity]] (Vera)<br />
* '''2016 May 6''': [[Scenarios| Scenarios]] (Scott, Vera)<br />
* ''' 2016 May 3''': [[ForecastAxions |Effect of S4 specs on axion density parameters]] (Renee)<br />
* '''2016 April 30''': [[ForecastNu| Effect of S4 specs on neutrino parameters]] (Erminia)<br />
* '''2016 April 28''': [http://web.stanford.edu/~wlwu/posting/20160421_lensres/ Delensing residuals with low-ell foregrounds] (Kimmy Wu)<br />
* '''2016 April 28''': [[NonGaussianities| CMBS-4 forecast for tensor NGs]] (daan)<br />
* '''2016 April 19''': [[ForecastingStep1| Checking basic parameters for nominal case]] (Jo + multiple authors)<br />
* '''2016 April 5''': [[Forecasting|Setting up non-r Fisher-based parameter forecasts]] (Jo + others)<br />
* '''2016 March 31''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20150331_fisher/ Fisher projections for &sigma;(r) based on achieved performance] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 January 27''': [https://cmb-s4.org/CMB-S4workshops/index.php/File:sptpol_ptsrc_polfrac_500d.pdf Quick estimate of mean-squared polarization fraction for SPTpol sources] (Tom Crawford)</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=Detection_significance_for_r%3D0.003&diff=8046Detection significance for r=0.0032018-11-12T16:45:05Z<p>Cbischoff: Created page with "''Colin Bischoff, 2018-11-12'' ---- A science target for the small area survey is to detect r=0.003 at five sigma. While our Fisher forecast can quickly provide sigma(r) for..."</p>
<hr />
<div>''Colin Bischoff, 2018-11-12''<br />
----<br />
<br />
A science target for the small area survey is to detect r=0.003 at five sigma. While our Fisher forecast can quickly provide sigma(r) for specified experiment configuration, foregrounds, and cosmological parameters, detection significance is not accurately determined from a Gaussian approximation to the r likelihood. In particular, for small sky areas the likelihood is significantly skewed and cuts off sharply for r&rarr;0, which improves our confidence to rule out r=0.<br />
<br />
To obtain some estimates of detection significance, I used CosmoMC to run a full BICEP/Keck-style likelihood for four experiment configurations. The A<sub>L</sub> values correspond to either four or seven years of delensing effort in each case, with numbers drawn from John+Victor's spreadsheet.<br />
* Chile sky mask ([[Survey_Performance_Expectations#Experiment_Definition_04|data challenge 04b]]), residual A<sub>L</sub>=0.270<br />
* Chile sky mask ([[Survey_Performance_Expectations#Experiment_Definition_04|data challenge 04b]]), residual A<sub>L</sub>=0.337<br />
* Pole sky mask ([[Survey_Performance_Expectations#Experiment_Definition_04|data challenge 04c]]), residual A<sub>L</sub>=0.081<br />
* Pole sky mask ([[Survey_Performance_Expectations#Experiment_Definition_04|data challenge 04c]]), residual A<sub>L</sub>=0.106<br />
<br />
For all experiment configurations, I assumed r=0.003 and [[Sky_Models#Sky_model_00|foreground model 00]] with A<sub>dust</sub>=4.25 &mu;K<sup>2</sup> at 353 GHz (&beta;<sub>dust</sub>=1.6, T<sub>dust</sub>=19.6 K, &alpha;<sub>dust</sub>=-0.4) and A<sub>sync</sub>=3.8 &mu;K<sup>2</sup> at 23 GHz (&beta;<sub>sync</sub>=-3.1, &alpha;<sub>sync</sub>=-0.6). I constructed a bandpower covariance matrix from [http://bicep2.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180925_bkfinal_04bc/ the set of power spectra described here]. The covariance matrix construction rescales signal levels to match the cosmology+foregrounds model described here, and it observes a distinction between signal and noise degrees of freedom.<br />
<br />
In place of simulated bandpowers, I used the model expectation values for each of my four configurations. This is meant to represent an average experimental outcome for each case, but it would be better to repeat this analysis on an ensemble of simulations.<br />
<br />
With the bandpowers and their covariance in hand, I ran each configuration through CosmoMC to obtain the marginalized likelihood for r. The full likelihood includes the following eight dimensions:<br />
* r <br />
* A<sub>dust</sub><br />
* &beta;<sub>dust</sub>, with Gaussian prior [1.6, 0.11]<br />
* &alpha;<sub>dust</sub>, with flat prior on the interval [-1, 0]<br />
* A<sub>sync</sub><br />
* &beta;<sub>sync</sub>, with Gaussian prior [-3.1, 0.3]<br />
* &alpha;<sub>sync</sub>, with flat prior on the interval [-1, 0]<br />
* &Delta;<sub>dust</sub> (decorrelation parameter), assuming that decorrelation scales linearly with &#x2113;<br />
Note that A<sub>L</sub> was not a free parameter in the likelihood -- it was fixed to appropriate value for each experiment configuration.<br />
<br />
Figure 1 shows the marginalized likelihoods for r from this analysis (peak normalized). The likelihood curves for Pole cut off more sharply for r&rarr;0 than the corresponding curves for Chile, because the sky area observed from Pole is much smaller. I think it is a coincidence that the high-side tails match so well for &ldquo;Chile, A<sub>L</sub>=0.270&rdquo; and &ldquo;Pole, A<sub>L</sub>=0.106&rdquo;. Summary statistics, including detection significance, are provided here. I haven't tried to figure out the cause of the low bias in the likelihood peak -- because I used model expectation values instead of bandpowers, I think that the global maximum likelihood point (before marginalization) must correspond to the model input parameters (unless there are small disagreements in the shape of the lensing and/or tensor theory spectra).<br />
<br />
{| class="wikitable"<br />
! Site !! A<sub>L</sub> !! peak(r) !! sigma(r) !! L(0) / L<sub>peak</sub> !! detection significance<br />
|-<br />
| Chile || 0.270 || 0.00249 || 0.00102 || 5.23e-2 || 2.4 &sigma;<br />
|-<br />
| Chile || 0.337 || 0.00257 || 0.00111 || 7.01e-2 || 2.3 &sigma;<br />
|-<br />
| Pole || 0.081 || 0.00261 || 0.00080 || 4.30e-4 || 3.9 &sigma;<br />
|-<br />
| Pole || 0.106 || 0.00273 || 0.00089 || 2.81e-3 || 3.4 &sigma;<br />
|}<br />
<br />
[[File:Cmbs4_04bc_rlik.png|frame|Figure 1: Marginalized likelihood on r for four experiment configurations|center]]<br />
<br />
Below I have included an alternate version of the likelihood figure, where each curve has been centered at zero and rescaled by sigma(r). These curves might be useful as templates to estimate detection significance for other values of r, if they are rescaled according to a Fisher estimate of sigma(r).<br />
<br />
[[File:Cmbs4_04bc_rlik_scale.png|frame|Figure 2: Likelihood curves rescaled by sigma(r) and shifted to peak at zero|center]]</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=File:Cmbs4_04bc_rlik_scale.png&diff=8045File:Cmbs4 04bc rlik scale.png2018-11-12T16:44:17Z<p>Cbischoff: Marginalized likelihood on r, assuming r=0.003 for Chile vs Pole sky masks and lensing residuals listed in plot legend. For each curve, the x-axis has been shifted rescaled by sigma(r) and shifted so that the likelihood curve peaks at zero.</p>
<hr />
<div>Marginalized likelihood on r, assuming r=0.003 for Chile vs Pole sky masks and lensing residuals listed in plot legend. For each curve, the x-axis has been shifted rescaled by sigma(r) and shifted so that the likelihood curve peaks at zero.</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=File:Cmbs4_04bc_rlik.png&diff=8044File:Cmbs4 04bc rlik.png2018-11-12T16:20:51Z<p>Cbischoff: Marginalized likelihood on r, assuming r=0.003 for Chile vs Pole sky masks and lensing residuals listed in plot legend</p>
<hr />
<div>Marginalized likelihood on r, assuming r=0.003 for Chile vs Pole sky masks and lensing residuals listed in plot legend</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=Simulation_and_Forecasting_Logbook&diff=7997Simulation and Forecasting Logbook2018-10-24T04:51:47Z<p>Cbischoff: /* Logbook Entries (reverse chronological) */</p>
<hr />
<div>This is an index page for logbook-style postings that cover the interconnected topics of sky modeling, simulations, and forecasting for CMB-S4. <br />
<br />
Some guidelines for use:<br />
* '''Postings should include enough context''' so that a reader can jump in and figure out what is going on. It is ''not'' necessary to write an extensive introduction to every posting -- context can be in the form of links to older postings, paper citations, etc.<br />
* Postings should represent a snapshot of work in progress. It's ok to post incomplete results, but recommended that you include notes about what is missing, what you are still planning to work on, etc. <br />
* If you have work that extends or improves an old posting, you should add it as a new posting (that includes links back to the old work as appropriate). Don't update old postings, as they should provide a chronological record of progress.<br />
* On this index page, add a link to your posting with the date, a descriptive posting title, and your full name. This logbook covers a wide range of topics, so titles will be really important to keep it useful. Don't name your posting something like "Forecasting for S4"!<br />
* Links should be added in reverse-chronological order (newest at the top). Your posting can either be written up on another wiki page or it can be a link to some externally hosted webpage (useful if you want to include a javascript plots pager).<br />
<br />
<br />
== Logbook Entries (reverse chronological) ==<br />
* '''2018 October 23''': [[Estimated observing efficiency for past and current telescopes, version 2]] (C. Bischoff, Y. Chinone, T. Crawford, M. Hasselfield)<br />
* '''2018 October 14''': [[Estimates of delensing efficiency]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2018 October 14''': [[Analysis of 04, 04b, 04c simulations]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2018 September 30''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180930_dc04_0to9/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04, models 0 to 9] (Ben Racine) ''Updated 2018 Oct 2nd''<br />
* '''2018 September 30''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180930_dc04_abc_model_0123789_ML/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04b and 04c, model 00, 01, 02, 03, 07, 08 and 09] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 September 30''': [[Ready for delensing use lensing maps 02.00]] (Julien Carron)<br />
* '''2018 September 28''': [[Towards lensing template]] (Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2018 September 27''': [[Lensing reconstructions 02.00]] (Julien Carron)<br />
* '''2018 September 26''': [[Lensing map reconstruction from 02.00 sims w/ and w/o foreground+inhomogeneous noise]] (Toshiya Namikawa)<br />
* '''2018 September 25''': [[Estimated observing efficiency for past and current telescopes]] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 August 27''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180925_bkfinal_04bc BK-style power spectra of 04/04b/04c masks for 00/01/02/03/07/08/09 foreground models] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 September 12''': [[Low ell noise from past and current telescopes]] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 September 5''': [[Phi reconstruction on 02.00 sims III]] (Anton Baleato)<br />
* '''2018 August 31''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180831_dc04_abc_model00_07_ML_proper_bp/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04b and 04c, for sky models 00 and 07] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 August 31''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180831_dc04_fixed_bp/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04, fixed bandpasses] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 August 27''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180827_bkfinal_04 Sims with nominal Chile and Pole masks III - BK-style power spectra of 04b.YY and 04c.YY] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 August 27''': [[Sims with nominal Chile and Pole masks II]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 August 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180826_dc04_fixed/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04, fixed] (V.Buza, B.Racine)<br />
* '''2018 August 24''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180824_bkfinal_04/ BK-style power spectra of v04.00-06 sims (CDT report config) FIXED] (Caterina Umilta)<br />
* '''2018 August 24''': [[Amplitude modulated Gaussian dust sims]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 August 17''': [[Sims with nominal Chile and Pole masks]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 August 10''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180810_noise/ Achieved performance roundup] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 August 7''': [[Pre-reference-design noise specifications for large-aperture forecasting]] (Tom Crawford, Matthew Hasselfield, Gil Holder, Lloyd Knox)<br />
* '''2018 August 6''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180805_s4opt/ Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4, 44cm vs 52cm aperture (w/ high-res/low-res 20 GHz)] (V.Buza)<br />
* '''2018 July 9''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180708_dc04/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04] (V.Buza)<br />
* '''2018 July 6''': [[Phi reconstruction on 02.00 sims II]] (Anton Baleato and Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2018 June 11''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180611_s4opt/ Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4, 44cm aperture] (V.Buza) -- see corrected August 6th Update!<br />
* '''2018 June 11''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180609_S4_noise_simulation_arbitrary_coverage/ Recipe to generate performance based S4 simulations with arbitrary sky distribution (in progress)] (B.Racine, V.Buza)<br />
* '''2018 April 29''': [[Phi reconstruction on 02.00 sims]] (Anton Baleato)<br />
* '''2018 April 25''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180425_r_equivalent_maps/ Smallfield r-equivalent Maps] (Kenny Lau)<br />
* '''2018 April 4''': [[Sky masks for simulations III]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 March 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180323_bkfinal_04/ BK-style power spectra of v04.00-06 sims (CDT report config) BROKEN] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 March 16''': [[ILC noise for large apertures at CDT noise levels]] (Raphael Flauger posted by Clem)<br />
* '''2018 March 16''': [[Sky masks for simulations II]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 February 19''': [[Sky masks for simulations]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 February 18''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180218_s4opt/ Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4, v3] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2018 February 7''': [[Sim map sets to demonstrate "real delensing" (02.00 and 02.09)]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 February 6''': [[Data Challenge Map Sets 04.YY]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 December 8''': [[Vansyngel Model]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 November 6''': [[Bandpass Convention - What does flat mean]] (Clem P.) - followup notes added Nov 20<br />
* '''2017 September 27''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170927_dc02/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 02] (Bischoff, Buza, Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 September 13''': [[Bias on r from Band Center Errors]] (Palladino, Willmert, Bischoff)<br />
* '''2017 September 8''': [[Checking dust decorrelation in Raphael MHD based dust sim]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 September 6''': [[New NET Calculator and Validation]] (Denis Barkats)<br />
* '''2017 September 1''': [[Resolution at 20 GHz]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 August 31''': [[Bias on r from additive systematics]] (Palladino, Willmert, Bischoff)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170818_bkfinal_03.00/ BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v03.00,.03 CMB-S4 simulation maps] (Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 August 18 ''': [[Neff_and_Beam_Calibration| Neff and Beam Calibration]] (Dan)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [[Ideal delensing templates from flat-sky QE, first pass]] (Kyle Story)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170818_HR/ High-Res studies for CMB-S4 (draft, v2)] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [[Comments from Anthony Challinor and Rupert Allison regarding the impact of Galactic Foregrounds on lensing]] (Neelima)<br />
* '''2017 August 11''': [[Joint Synchrotron and Dust Maps from Simulations]] (B. Hensley)<br />
* '''2017 August 9''': [[Dust Emission From Halos]] (Jim & Jean-Baptiste)<br />
* '''2017 August 9''': [[SZ Clusters update]] (Mat & Nick)<br />
* '''2017 August 4''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170804_HR/ High-Res studies for CMB-S4 (preliminary draft)] (Victor Buza); perhaps a reference of interest https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.02259<br />
* '''2017 July 10''': [[Additive systematics for data challenge 03]] (Bischoff, Palladino, Buza, Kovac)<br />
* '''2017 July 6''': [[Detection significance and sky fraction, dust decorrelation]](Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 July 3''': [[Toy highly decorrelated dust model]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 June 27''': [[Checking dust decorrelation in models d1/d4/d7 and hipdt]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 June 23''': [[Dust_delensing_firstlook|Dust delensing update]] (Alex)<br />
* '''2017 June 23''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170623_bkfinal_02.00/ BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v02.00–06 CMB-S4 simulation maps] (Justin Willmert) ''Updated 2017 Sep 08''<br />
* '''2017 June 22''': [[Warm-up exercise for delensing]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 June 19''': [[SZ Clusters update]] (Mat, Nick)<br />
* '''2017 June 11''': [[Notes from May 31 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 June 9''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170525_s4syst/ Introducing systematics for CMB-S4] ((Victor Buza), with input from Colin Bischoff, John Kovac)<br />
* '''2017 June 9''': [[Dust_delensing_firstlook]] (Alex)<br />
* '''2017 June 9''': [[r-forecasting: high and low ell coordination|r-forecasting: update on high and low ell coordination]] (Neelima+Colin Hill writing)<br />
* '''2017 June 1''': [[Residuals for DC 01.01 and DC 01.02]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 June 1''': [[Levels of foregrounds in Gaussian and PySM simulations]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 May 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170511_s4dc1/ S4 DC 01.xx analysis, v2] (Victor Buza, Colin Bischoff, Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 May 26 ''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170411_bkfinal_01.00/ Updated v01.02 in "BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v01.00–02 CMB-S4 simulation maps"] (Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 May 15''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170515_chkS4/ N_ell spectra for CMB-S4 DC2.0] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2017 May 15''': [[Rev 2 PySM a2d4f1s3 maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 May 12''': [[r-forecasting: high and low ell coordination|r-forecasting: high and low ell coordination]] (lensers writing)<br />
* '''2017 May 8''': [[Checking PySM maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 May 2''': [[Notes from April 26 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Steve)<br />
* '''2017 May 1''': [[r-forecasting: delensing discussion|r-forecasting delensing discussion]] (Neelima and Blake)<br />
* '''2017 April 28 ''': [[Update_on_Neff_Forecasts| Update on Neff Forecasts]] (Dan)<br />
* '''2017 April 26 ''': [http://www.cosmo.bnl.gov/www/msyriac/web/work/sigma8plots.html Update on cluster number counts forecast including w_a] (Mat and Nick)<br />
* '''2017 April 21 ''': [[lensing-DE|Update on a lensing-based DE forecast]] (Jo, Siddharth)<br />
* '''2017 April 18 ''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170411_bkfinal_01.00/ BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v01.00–02 CMB-S4 simulation maps] (Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 April 18 ''': [[S4-Lensing|S4 measurement requirements for neutrino mass and delensing - first pass]] (Neelima/Blake)<br />
* '''2017 April 17 ''': [[HiDPol|HI-based dust polarization model for r forecasts]] (Tuhin)<br />
* '''2017 April 05 ''': [[lensing-DE|Notes on one path to lensing-based DE forecasts]] (Jo)<br />
* '''2017 April 05 ''': [[Notes from April 5 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 April 05''': [https://cmb-s4.org/CMB-S4workshops/images/Sigma8_z_prep.pdf Sigma8(z) SPT clusters (placeholder) ] (S Bocquet)<br />
* '''2017 April 04''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170404_s4opt/ Updated Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4 (using bands v1.99)] (Victor Buza, Updated 2017.04.21)<br />
* '''2017 March 31 ''': [[Data Challenge analysis - DC1.0, DC1.1, DC1.2]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 March 30 ''': [[Notes from March 28 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim & Steve)<br />
* '''2017 March 29''': [[CMB-S4 frequency bands v1.99]] (John Kovac, Band-definition working group)<br />
* '''2017 March 28''': [[Adding higher res delensing "band"]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 March 27''': [[01.01 sim input maps - first try]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 March 23''': [[01.00 sim input maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 March 20''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170221_S4_NET_forecasts/ S4 Band sensitivity comparison follow-up] (Denis Barkats, John Kovac)<br />
* '''2017 March 17''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20170317_s4dc1/ S4 DC1.0 analysis] (Victor Buza, Colin Bischoff, Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 March 17 ''': [[Media:Telecon_03172017_optimization_for_CMBS4.pdf]]: Optimization methodology for SO (Josquin)<br />
* '''2017 March 16 ''': [[ P_k_science_case| P(k) science case]] (Colin, Simone, Nick, David)<br />
* '''2017 March 15 ''': [[Notes from March 15 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 March 15 ''': [[CMB halo lensing sensitivity as a function of map sensitivity and resolution]] (Jim & Jean-Baptiste)<br />
* '''2017 March 15 ''': [[w and gamma | w and Delta gamma constraints from sigma_8 (z)]] (Mat & Nick)<br />
* '''2017 March 10 ''': [[Notes from March 8 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim & Steve)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[reionization_requirements| Reionization science]] (Simone & Marcelo)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[High ell topics | High ell topics ]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[SZ_s8_z | sigma 8 of z constraints ]] (Mat, Nick)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[Szcounts | Number counts update for 1.0', 1.5', 2.0']] (Nick, Mat)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[SZastro | SZ astrophysics with DESI ]](Nick, Simone, Emanuel, David)<br />
* '''2017 February 24''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170224_cmbs4_dc1_final/ BK-style processing of DC1.0 maps to spectra] (Justin Willmert, Colin Bischoff)<br />
* '''2017 February 15 ''': [[Extragalactic lensing sims| Update on extragalactic phase-2 lensing sims]] (Marcelo, George, Dick, others)<br />
* '''2017 February 15 ''': [[Plan for next Galactic Phase-2sims| Plan for next Galactic phase-2 sims]] (Jo, Ben)<br />
* '''2017 February 10 ''': [[Resolution of foreground-cleaned map]] (Mat, Neelima, Blake, Alex, others)<br />
* '''2017 February 10 ''': [[Nongaussian dust in lensing]] (Alex, Mat, Neelima, Blake, others)<br />
* '''2017 January 30''': [[Aliased power in noise maps]] (Bischoff, Updated 2017-02-02)<br />
* '''2017 January 23''': [[CMBS4 Band Sensitivity Comparison]] (Charlie Hill)<br />
* '''2017 January 12''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/cbischoff/20170112_data_challenge_1/ Maps for CMB-S4 data challenge 1] (Bischoff, Pryke, Buza)<br />
* '''2016 December 21''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20161220_chkS4/ N_ell spectra for the CMB-S4 data challenge, and updated &sigma;(r) checkpoints] (Victor Buza, Updated 2017.02.01)<br />
* '''2016 November 30''': [[First steps to sim input maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2016 November 4''': [[Tophat bands for Data Challenge]] (Bischoff)<br />
* '''2016 July 8''': [[fsky|Dependence of foregrounds on sky fraction]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2016 July 8''': [[SciBookPowspecTheoryFig|Three choices for Science Book Figure 5 (theory power spectrum & current BB points)]] (Tom C.)<br />
* '''2016 July 8''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20160707_s4plots/ S4 Inflation Chapter Plot Suggestions, V2] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 July 6''': [[w_cosntraint|Preliminary w constraint]] (Alessandro)<br />
* '''2016 June 24''': [[nsr|Preliminary ns-r plot for discussion]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2016 June 16''': [[DelensingImpact| Impact Of Delensing On sigma(r)]] (Neelima/Mat)<br />
* '''2016 June 16''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20160616_s4plots/ S4 Inflation Chapter Plot Suggestions] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 June 10''': [[MapBasedRb| Map-based &sigma;(r) forecasts V2]] (David/Jo/Ben)<br />
* '''2016 June 3''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20160531_fisher/ &sigma;(r) forecasting checkpoints, V2] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 June 3''': [[ BTTfixedeffort | Forecasts for fnl BTT beam/fixed effort]] (Daan)<br />
* '''2016 May 31''': [[ForecastPatchyReion| Forecasts for patchy reionization]] (Vera, Alex, Nick)<br />
* '''2016 May 26''': [[Forecasting | Forecasts on neutrino mass]] (Nam, Mat, Neelima)<br />
* '''2016 May 26''': [[ KSZ| Forecasts on kSZ S/N]] (Simone, Emmanuel, Colin)<br />
* '''2016 May 26''': [[ Forecastfiso_planck| Forecast on correlated and anti-correlated CDM isocurvature f_iso]] (Kimmy, Cora, updated with plots 20160602)<br />
* '''2016 May 24''': [[ BTTNoiseBeam | Forecasts on fnl BTT beam/FWHM]] (Daan)<br />
* '''2016 May 22''': [[ ForecastAxions| Update on the axion isocurvature constraints for changing sensitivity and resolution]] (Renee)<br />
* '''2016 May 21''': [[ Forecastpann| Forecast on dark matter annihilation parameter p_ann]] (Kimmy, Cora)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[NeffNoiseBeam| Forecasts on Neff and Yp]] (Joel, Alex)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastEDE| Forecasts on Early Dark Energy]] (Erminia)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastCompIsocurv| Forecasts on compensated isocurvature varying sensitivity, resolution and sky coverage]] (Julian, Ely)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastBirefring| Forecasts on birefringence varying sensitivity and resolution]] (Vera, Alex)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastStrings| Forecasts on string tension varying sensitivity and resolution]] (Renee)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[RobustForecast| Cosmological forecasts including component separation and iterative delensing]] (Stephen Feeney and Josquin Errard)<br />
* '''2016 May 19''': [[MapBasedR| Map-based &sigma;(r) forecasts]] (David A.)<br />
* '''2016 May 18''': [[Shear_calibration_LSST|LSST shear calibration with CMB S4]] (Emmanuel Schaan)<br />
* '''2016 May 13''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20150505_fisher/ &sigma;(r) forecasting checkpoints] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 May 13''': [[NonGaussianitiesTTT| CMBS-4 forecasts local and equilateral scalar Ngs using TTT]] (daan)<br />
* '''2016 May 13''': [[ForecastingSims|Simulations for r forecasts]] (Jo/Ben/David)<br />
* '''2016 May 6''': [[DMInteractionsComplementarity|DM interactions: complementarity]] (Vera)<br />
* '''2016 May 6''': [[Scenarios| Scenarios]] (Scott, Vera)<br />
* ''' 2016 May 3''': [[ForecastAxions |Effect of S4 specs on axion density parameters]] (Renee)<br />
* '''2016 April 30''': [[ForecastNu| Effect of S4 specs on neutrino parameters]] (Erminia)<br />
* '''2016 April 28''': [http://web.stanford.edu/~wlwu/posting/20160421_lensres/ Delensing residuals with low-ell foregrounds] (Kimmy Wu)<br />
* '''2016 April 28''': [[NonGaussianities| CMBS-4 forecast for tensor NGs]] (daan)<br />
* '''2016 April 19''': [[ForecastingStep1| Checking basic parameters for nominal case]] (Jo + multiple authors)<br />
* '''2016 April 5''': [[Forecasting|Setting up non-r Fisher-based parameter forecasts]] (Jo + others)<br />
* '''2016 March 31''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20150331_fisher/ Fisher projections for &sigma;(r) based on achieved performance] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 January 27''': [https://cmb-s4.org/CMB-S4workshops/index.php/File:sptpol_ptsrc_polfrac_500d.pdf Quick estimate of mean-squared polarization fraction for SPTpol sources] (Tom Crawford)</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=Estimated_observing_efficiency_for_past_and_current_telescopes,_version_2&diff=7996Estimated observing efficiency for past and current telescopes, version 22018-10-24T04:51:36Z<p>Cbischoff: update to 2018-09-25 posting</p>
<hr />
<div>''Colin Bischoff, Yuji Chinone, Tom Crawford, Matt Hasselfield, 2018-10-23''<br />
----<br />
<br />
This posting is an update on a [[Estimated observing efficiency for past and current telescopes|previous posting from 2018-09-25]]. The goal is to try to identify any factors that lead to different observing efficiency between Atacama and South Pole.<br />
<br />
===References===<br />
We assess results from recent CMB polarization experiments that have been published in the following papers:<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014PhRvL.112x1101A BICEP2 2014] (150 GHz)<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...811..126B BICEP2 + Keck Array 2015] (150 GHz) &mdash; this is the same dataset that was used for BICEP/Keck/Planck joint analysis<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016PhRvL.116c1302B BICEP2 + Keck Array 2016] (95 and 150 GHz)<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018arXiv181005216A BICEP2 + Keck Array 2018] (95, 150, and 220 GHz)<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014JCAP...10..007N ACTpol 2014] (150 GHz)<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017JCAP...06..031L ACTpol 2017] (150 GHz)<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...741..111Q QUIET 2011] (43 GHz)<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...760..145Q QUIET 2012] (95 GHz)<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018JCAP...09..005K ABS 2018] (150 GHz)<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...848..121P POLARBEAR 2017] (150 GHz)<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...807..151K SPTpol 2015] (95 and 150 GHz, but only using 150 GHz here)<br />
<br />
===Method===<br />
To investigate observing efficiency, we compare different measures of survey weight, which is defined with units of &mu;K<sup>-2</sup> and accumulates linearly with detector count or integration time.<br />
<br />
The &ldquo;tod weight&rdquo; is calculated from array sensitivity and integration time as<br />
tod_weight = &tau; / NEQ<sup>2</sup><br />
* Note that we use here a convention for NEQ that corresponds to instantaneous sensitivity to whatever combination of Q and U is being measured. By this convention, most experiments should have NEQ that is similar to NET (up to minor factors of polarization efficiency), not a factor of sqrt(2) higher.<br />
* Since survey weight accumulates linearly, we can calculate the total 150 GHz BICEP2/Keck survey weight from the most recent publication as BICEP2 2010&ndash;2012 + Keck 2012&ndash;2013 + Keck 2014 + Keck 2015.<br />
<br />
The &ldquo;bandpower weight&rdquo; is calculated from N<sub>&#x2113;</sub> and effective fsky of the BB bandpowers as<br />
bandpower_weight = 2 * 4&pi; * fsky / N<sub>&#x2113;</sub><br />
* The factor of 2 counts both EE and BB survey weight and is needed to match the NEQ convention discussed above.<br />
* N<sub>&#x2113;</sub> and effective fsky are estimated from the error bars of published bandpowers. This is discussed in more detail in a [http://bicep2.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180810_noise/ 2018-08-10 posting]. The bandpower error bars constrain N<sub>&#x2113;</sub> / sqrt(fsky), so for experiments where we weren't able to reliably break this degeneracy it is possible to change the bandpower weight while keeping the bandpower errors fixed. This is noted explicitly on the figure for the case of ABS&mdash;we made a rough estimate of fsky = 3% but added dotted lines that range from 1.5% (lower left end) to 6% (upper right end). This issue affects the QUIET points too, but we haven't added dotted lines there.<br />
<br />
The bandpower weight represents final results after all efficiency hits while the tod weight represents accumulated sensitivity. If we fully understand all of the various efficiency factors, then we should be able to get these numbers to agree.<br />
<br />
===Results===<br />
Figure 1 below shows the bandpower / tod weight ratio vs bandpower weight, color-coded by observing frequency. For each experiment, there are two or three points spaced vertically. These all represent the same bandpowers, but count total observing time differently and arrive at different tod weights.<br />
<br />
[[File:CMB_achieved_efficiency_v2.png|frame|Figure 1: survey weight ratio vs bandpower-derived survey weight|center]]<br />
<br />
* The bottom points uses the most expansive definition of observing time, which is just the duration between when the experiment started operating and when it finished. <br />
** For BICEP2/Keck, this is just calendar years. BICEP2 ran for three years (2010 through 2012). The 2015 paper added two years of Keck Array (2012, 2013). The 2016 paper added Keck data from 2014. The 2018 paper added Keck data from 2015.<br />
** For ACTpol, the 2014 paper was based on just 94 days of operation (2013-09-11 through 2013-12-14). The 2017 paper included an additional 133 days (2014-08-20 through 2014-12-31).<br />
** For QUIET, the 2011 paper was based on 232 days of operation (2008-10-24 through 2009-06-13). The 2012 paper was based on 497 days of operation (2009-08-12 through 2010-12-22).<br />
** For ABS, the 2018 paper was based on 464 days of operation (2012-09-13 through 2013-12-21).<br />
** For POLARBEAR, the 2017 paper was based on 668 days of operation. Season 1 was May 2012 through June 2013 and season 2 was September 2013 through April 2014.<br />
** For SPTpol, the 2015 paper was based on 395 days of operation (April 2012 through April 2013).<br />
* The upper filled points attempt to count just the days spent on normal operations.<br />
** For BICEP2/Keck and SPT, we drop the austral summer deployment season that is typically spent on instrument repairs, upgrades, and calibration. BICEP2 is an expection, as it operated more or less continuously from 2010-02-15 to 2012-11-06 except for a campaign of calibrations from 2011-01-01 to 2011-03-01.<br />
** For ACTpol, we kept only 63% (45%) of the observing time from season 1 (2) to account for night-time only observations.<br />
** For QUIET, the time spent on observations is 3458 hours for 43 GHz and 7426 hours for 95 GHz, taken from the text of the respective papers. These durations include calibrations and Galactic field data, excluding only blocks of downtime due to &ldquo;occasional snow, power outages, and mechanical failures&rdquo;.<br />
** For ABS, the time spent on observations is 6723 hours, taken from the text of the paper.<br />
** For POLARBEAR, the time spent on observations is 4700 hours, taken from the text of the paper.<br />
* In some cases, there is an additional unfilled point that counts only the remaining time after cuts.<br />
** For BICEP2, we used 8.6e9 detector-seconds from Table 7 of BK-II and replaced the array sensitivity with per-detector sensitivity.<br />
** For ABS, we used 461,237 TES-hours from Table 3 of ABS 2018 and replaced the array sensitivity with per-detector sensitivity<br />
** For QUIET, we counted only hours targeting the CMB fields and used 69.4% cut efficiency at 43 GHz (Table 3 of QUIET 2011, pipeline A) and 63.5% cut efficiency at 95 GHz (Table 1 of QUIET 2012, PCL pipeline).<br />
** For POLARBEAR, we used 1400 hours of data after cuts. POLARBEAR 2017 lists 2800 hours of data passing cuts, but 50% of that data is lost from cutting to scan turnarounds.<br />
<br />
===Discussion===<br />
Our interpretation of this figure is as follows:<br />
# If we take the ratio of the two points connected by the line, this is telling us what fraction of the total number of calendar days were spent in standard science observing mode. This ratio is fairly similar for most experiments (60&ndash;65%), but it is notably high for BICEP2 (85%) and low for POLARBEAR (29%). This loss of observing efficiency is not primarily site specific, with much of the downtime due to repairs and upgrades. However, this factor probably does include some downtime due to snowstorms in Atacama while for Pole the summer deployment season conveniently overlaps with the worst observing conditions.<br />
# The next ratio is between the upper filled point and the unfilled point. This represents the loss of observation time due to data cuts (and scheduling). It is quite similar for BICEP2 (33%), ABS (34%), and POLARBEAR (30%). QUIET comes out a bit higher at 43 GHz (54%) and 95 GHz (46%), but is seems reasonable that we would cut less data at low frequencies.<br />
# Finally we can compare the unfilled points, which should include all the efficiency hits from downtime and data cuts with 1, the value that we ought to obtain if all factors are accounted for. We don't have a good explanation for this factor. Potential explanations are that the assumed array sensitivities are a bit too good or that apodized / non-uniform map coverage is inefficient in some way. The values of this factor are 79% for BICEP2, 60% for POLARBEAR, 39% for ABS (or 55%, if we assume ABS fsky=0.06), and 63% (52%) for QUIET 43 (95) GHz (but remember that QUIET could be suffering from similar fsky uncertainty as ABS).<br />
<br />
Of the three factors listed above, only #2 is clearly site-specific, yet it seems to be quite similar between BICEP/Keck, ABS, and POLARBEAR. This survey is obviously imprecise, but it provides some evidence that observing efficiency is not very different between Atacama and Pole, all else being equal. It would be an invaluable exercise if people with deep knowledge of each experiment (and access to data) could produce detailed breakdowns of the factors needed to get agreement between the accumulated tod survey weight and the bandpower-derived version.</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=File:CMB_achieved_efficiency_v2.png&diff=7995File:CMB achieved efficiency v2.png2018-10-24T04:17:51Z<p>Cbischoff: Scatter plot summarizing observing efficiency for several past / current experiments (version 2)</p>
<hr />
<div>Scatter plot summarizing observing efficiency for several past / current experiments (version 2)</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=User:Cbischoff&diff=7772User:Cbischoff2018-09-28T02:15:20Z<p>Cbischoff: </p>
<hr />
<div>email: bischocn@ucmail.uc.edu</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=Estimated_observing_efficiency_for_past_and_current_telescopes&diff=7770Estimated observing efficiency for past and current telescopes2018-09-27T16:13:34Z<p>Cbischoff: /* Conclusions */</p>
<hr />
<div>''Colin Bischoff, 2018-09-25''<br />
----<br />
<br />
In this posting, I try to estimate the relative observing efficiency for telescopes at South Pole vs Chile. It is hard to get a clean answer to this question because every experiment has its own unique circumstances and there are a limited number of data points to examine. <br />
<br />
The method I will use here is to compare a survey weight (units of &mu;K<sup>-2</sup>) calculated from published BB bandpowers to a survey weight calculated from instantaneous sensitivity and observing time. Note that survey weight is the quantity that should scale linearly with efforts, so the survey weight at 150 GHz for the BK14 paper is equal to the BICEP2 2010--2012 survey weight plus Keck Array 150 GHz survey weight for 2012--2014.<br />
<br />
* The "bandpower weight" is easier to define unambiguously -- in a [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180810_noise/ previous posting] I calculated the ''N''<sub>&#x2113;</sub> and effective ''f''<sub>sky</sub> for many different experiments that have published BB results. From these results, I calculate the bandpower weight as '''''f''<sub>sky</sub> / ''N''<sub>&#x2113;</sub>'''. Note that I am using the white noise ''N''<sub>&#x2113;</sub> and ''f''<sub>sky</sub> -- see [[Low_ell_noise_from_past_and_current_telescopes|my previous posting]] for a look at low-&#x2113; noise.<br />
* The "tod weight" is calculated from instantaneous sensitivity (NEQ) of the full experiment and observing time (&tau;) as '''&tau; / NEQ<sup>2</sup>'''. While this definition is quite simple, there are many possible choices for how to select &tau; and it can be difficult to do this in a consistent way across experiments.<br />
<br />
The idea behind these statistics is that tod weight describes the experiment on paper, ''i.e.'' "I will put together an array of detectors with NEQ = 15 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> and then observe for three years". The bandpower weight describes the results that were actually obtained, including data cuts, instrument downtime, filtering, inefficiencies in sky coverage, etc, etc. Note however that I am using actual array NEQ as reported in published results to calculate tod weight, so detector yield, noisy detectors, and increased NEQ from marginal weather all get baked into the tod weight to some extent and should not lead to a discrepancy between the two statistics.<br />
<br />
Figure 1 is a plot of the ratio of tod weight to bandpower weight for BICEP/Keck, ACTpol, ABS, and QUIET. I didn't include SPTpol or POLARBEAR because I couldn't array NEQ numbers for those instruments. Points are color-coded according to observing band (red for 95 GHz, green for 150 GHz, and blue for 220 GHz). A larger value of the weight ratio (y-axis) means that the statistical power of the bandpower result fell short of what we might expect from the instrument sensitivity and time on sky. The tod weight is ~100 times larger than the bandpower weight for most experiments. While we all know that there are many significant factors that cause observing efficiency to be less than a naive calculation would indicate, I haven't spent any time thinking about whether there are any order ~10 numbers that would be needed to make these two statistics comparable -- I wouldn't recommend reading much into the absolute scale of the y-axis, but it would be interesting to cross-check with an ''ab initio'' sensitivity calculator such as [https://github.com/chill90/BoloCalc BoloCalc].<br />
<br />
For each experiment I include two points (connected by a line) that make different choices for how to define observing time. The upper point uses a strict definition that calculates &tau; as the number of seconds between when the experiment first started observing and when it completed. For the lower point, I tried to count only the stretches of time that were spent in standard observing mode, ''i.e.'' excluding downtimes for maintenance / upgrades. For ABS and BICEP2 150 GHz, I added an additional unfilled point that counts only the observing time after data cuts. <br />
<br />
[[File:CMB_achieved_efficiency.png|frame|Figure 1: survey weight ratio vs bandpower-derived survey weight|center]]<br />
<br />
== Details for figure inputs ==<br />
<br />
* BICEP/Keck 150 GHz includes points from [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014PhRvL.112x1101A BK-I 2014], [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...811..126B BK-V 2015] (same dataset used for BKP joint analysis), [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016PhRvL.116c1302B BK-VI 2016] (BK14), and the upcoming BK15 results. <br />
** For BICEP2, I used an array NEQ of 17 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> with &tau; = 3 years. For the lower point, &tau; is reduced to 936 days (2010-02-15 to 2012-11-06, except for 2011-01-01 to 2011-03-01) to remove time spent on deployment and calibration campaigns. The unfilled circle counts BICEP2 data after cuts. From Table 7 of [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...792...62A BK-II], the data volume surviving cuts is 8.6e9 detector-seconds and I used a typical detector sensitivity of 305.6 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> (from Fig 22 of the same paper).<br />
** The BK-V result adds in Keck Array data from 2012 (11.5 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for five receivers) and 2013 (9.5 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for five receivers). These each have nominal &tau; = 1 year. For the lower points, I deducted time spent on deployment and calibration campaigns, ending up with 240 days in 2012 and 223 days in 2013.<br />
** The BK14 result adds in Keck Array data from 2014 (13.3 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for three receivers). This NEQ estimate is from an internal posting and is not included in the paper. &tau; = 1 year, or 240 days after deducting deployment / calibration.<br />
** The BK15 result adds in Keck Array data from 2015 (19.5 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for one receiver). This NEQ estimate is from an internal posting and is not included in the paper. &tau; = 1 year, or 242 days after deducting deployment / calibration.<br />
* BICEP/Keck 95 GHz includes points from [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016PhRvL.116c1302B BK-VI 2016] (BK14) and the upcoming BK15 results.<br />
** The BK14 result uses 2014 Keck Array data (17.4 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for two receivers). This NEQ estimate is from an internal posting and is not included in the paper. &tau; = 1 year, or 240 days after deducting deployment / calibration.<br />
** The BK15 result adds in Keck Array data from 2015 (13.5 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for two receivers). This NEQ estimate is from an internal posting and is not included in the paper. &tau; = 1 year, or 242 days after deducting deployment / calibration.<br />
* BICEP/Keck 220 GHz is from the upcoming BK15 results. Array NEQ is 41.6 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for two receivers. This NEQ estimate is from an internal posting and is not included in the paper. &tau; = 1 year, or 242 days after deducting calibration.<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018arXiv180101218K ABS] has array NEQ of 41 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> and observed for 464 days (2012-09-13 to 2013-12-21). For the lower (filled) point, I used &tau; = 1634 + 209 + 1745 + 3135 = 6723 hours (Section 3 of Kusaka 2018). For the unfilled point, I used 461,237 TES-hours on Field A after cuts (bottom line of Table 3 of Kusaka 2018) and used a per-TES sensitivity of 580 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup>.<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...741..111Q QUIET 43 GHz] has array NEQ of 69 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> and observed for 232 days (2008-10-24 to 2009-06-13). For the lower point, I used &tau; = 3458 hours (Section 3 of QUIET 2011).<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...760..145Q QUIET 95 GHz] has array NEQ of 87 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> and observed for 497 days (2009-08-12 to 2010-12-22). For the lower point, I used &tau; = 7426 hours (Section 3 of QUIET 2012).<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014JCAP...10..007N ACTpol season 1] has array NEQ of 19 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> and observed for 94 days (2013-09-11 to 2013-12-14). For the lower point, I multiplied by &tau; by 63% to account for the fact that their analysis used only nighttime data for fields D1, D5, and D6 (Section 3.1 of N&aelig;ss 2014).<br />
* For [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017JCAP...06..031L ACTpol season 2], I kept the season 1 accumulated tod weight and added an additional 133 days (2014-08-20 to 2014-12-31) with array NEQ of 11.3 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> (inverse-quadrature sum of 23 and 12.9 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for PA1 and PA2, respectively). For the lower point, the ACTpol season 2 observing time was scaled by a factor of 45% to account for D5 and D6 nighttime data only. It seems like Louis 2017 reanalyzes the season 1 data with somewhat different choices than N&aelig;ss 2014, so this addition of weights might not be strictly accurate.<br />
<br />
== Conclusions ==<br />
<br />
The goal of this analysis was to try to separate instrument design parameters, like array NEQ, from site-specific parameters, like weather. This is only approximately possible, since we know that detector sensitivity will fluctuate with sky temperature. <br />
<br />
That said, the difference between upper and lower points for each experiment primarily tells us about how smoothly that experiment ran (except in the case of ACTpol, where it mostly accounts for nighttime only observing). While BICEP2 stands out as being a notably smooth-running experiment (cryostat stayed cold for three calendar years!), most of the other lines have fairly similar length. Across four calendar years of Keck observations, the number of days spent in standard observing mode was always around 240 (66%). QUIET and ABS also spent 60-65% of their calendar time in standard observing mode.<br />
<br />
I will assume that CMB-S4 will be a well-run and well-staffed experiment at both South Pole and Atacama sites, in which case we can focus on comparing the lower points between experiments. The weight ratio for these points describes a combination of weather cuts, variations in detector noise over time or between detectors that is not captured in array NEQ, noise correlations that don't integrate down in maps, analysis inefficiencies, and probably other factors that I haven't thought of. <br />
<br />
* We see a clear trend with observing frequency with the expected sign -- 95 GHz instruments do the best job of translating their instantaneous sensitivity into bandpower sensitivity. For BICEP/Keck, the weight ratio is about twice as large for 150 GHz as for 95 GHz, but the 220 GHz weight ratio is only ~20% higher than 150 GHz. Current noise forecasts are based off BICEP/Keck achieved performance, so these factors are already baked in.<br />
* At fixed observing frequency, the BICEP/Keck at South Pole does roughly twice as well as the Atacama experiments in converting instantaneous sensitivity to bandpower sensitivity. It is hard to know how much confidence to have in this conclusion, since it is based on just two points of comparison -- BK vs ABS at 150 GHz and BK vs QUIET at 95 GHz.<br />
* It is very interesting that this factor of two persists even after we account for data cuts in BICEP2 and ABS. This implies that weather cuts are not driving the difference in observing efficiency. <br />
* Also note that my bandpower weight statistic describes total effort in a way that is agnostic towards deep+narrow vs shallow+wide survey strategy. We might worry that Atacama-based telescopes are forced to survey a larger sky area and this is sub-optimal strategy for noise-dominated ''r'' detection efforts (you might not agree, depending on your optimism about delensing), but that distinction won't show up in this posting.<br />
<br />
To go beyond what is presented here would probably require digging down into the detailed accounting of how each experiment ended up with its particular sensitivity. Matt Hasselfield and Tom Crawford have done some of this for ACTpol and SPTpol as part of the LAT forecasting effort. It would be interesting to compare their results with the 10,000 ft view shown here.<br />
<br />
== Tabulated results ==<br />
<br />
The table below compiles all the numbers used for Figure 1.<br />
<br />
* tod weight A uses the full duration of the experiment (upper end of the line)<br />
* tod weight B uses the duration of standard operations (lower end of the line)<br />
* tod weight C uses the data volume after cuts (unfilled symbols, for BICEP2 and ABS only)<br />
<br />
{| class="wikitable"<br />
! Experiment !! Frequency !! bandpower weight !! tod weight A !! ratio A !! tod weight B !! ratio B !! tod weight C !! ratio C<br />
|-<br />
| BK14 || 95 GHz || 1478 || 104162 || 70 || 68490 || 46 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| BK15 || 95 GHz || 3501 || 276178 || 79 || 182539 || 52 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| BICEP2 || 150 GHz || 2905 || 327363 || 113 || 279828 || 96 || 92086 || 32<br />
|-<br />
| BK-V || 150 GHz || 6245 || 915250 || 147 || 650109 || 104 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| BK14 || 150 GHz || 7514 || 1093530 || 146 || 767335 || 102 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| BK15 || 150 GHz || 8638 || 1176380 || 136 || 822265 || 95 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| BK15 || 220 GHz || 101 || 18249 || 181 || 12100 || 120 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| ACTpol (year 1) || 150 GHz || 42 || 22498 || 539 || 14173 || 340 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| ACTpol (year 2) || 150 GHz || 197 || 112490 || 571 || 54670 || 278 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| QUIET || 43 GHz || 35 || 4210 || 120 || 2615 || 75 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| QUIET || 95 GHz || 33 || 5673 || 171 || 3532 || 106 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| ABS || 150 GHz || 77 || 23849 || 310 || 14398 || 187 || 4936 || 64<br />
|}</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=R_Forecasting_Logbook&diff=7713R Forecasting Logbook2018-09-26T01:55:38Z<p>Cbischoff: /* Logbook Entries (reverse chronological) */</p>
<hr />
<div>This is an index page for logbook-style postings that cover the interconnected topics of sky modeling, simulations, and r forecasting for CMB-S4. <br />
<br />
Some guidelines for use:<br />
* '''Postings should include enough context''' so that a reader can jump in and figure out what is going on. It is ''not'' necessary to write an extensive introduction to every posting -- context can be in the form of links to older postings, paper citations, etc.<br />
* Postings should represent a snapshot of work in progress. It's ok to post incomplete results, but recommended that you include notes about what is missing, what you are still planning to work on, etc. <br />
* If you have work that extends or improves an old posting, you should add it as a new posting (that includes links back to the old work as appropriate). Don't update old postings, as they should provide a chronological record of progress.<br />
* On this index page, add a link to your posting with the date, a descriptive posting title, and your full name. This logbook covers a wide range of topics, so titles will be really important to keep it useful. Don't name your posting something like "Forecasting for S4"!<br />
* Links should be added in reverse-chronological order (newest at the top). Your posting can either be written up on another wiki page or it can be a link to some externally hosted webpage (useful if you want to include a javascript plots pager).<br />
<br />
== Telecon Notes ==<br />
<br />
[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1886yT1b6QDuWvsbAu5HmVv2Cl4pfH00YpK5Fv8dNzcM/edit?usp=sharing Telecon notes for r-forecasting]<br />
<br />
== Logbook Entries (reverse chronological) ==<br />
* '''2018 September 25''': [[Estimated observing efficiency for past and current telescopes]] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 August 27''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180925_bkfinal_04bc BK-style power spectra of 04/04b/04c masks for 00/01/02/03/07/08/09 foreground models] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 September 12''': [[Low ell noise from past and current telescopes]] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 September 5''': [[Phi reconstruction on 02.00 sims III]] (Anton Baleato)<br />
* '''2018 August 31''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180831_dc04_abc_model00_07_ML_proper_bp/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04b and 04c, for sky models 00 and 07] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 August 31''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180831_dc04_fixed_bp/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04, fixed bandpasses] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 August 27''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180827_bkfinal_04 Sims with nominal Chile and Pole masks III - BK-style power spectra of 04b.YY and 04c.YY] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 August 27''': [[Sims with nominal Chile and Pole masks II]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 August 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180826_dc04_fixed/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04, fixed] (V.Buza, B.Racine)<br />
* '''2018 August 24''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180824_bkfinal_04/ BK-style power spectra of v04.00-06 sims (CDT report config) FIXED] (Caterina Umilta)<br />
* '''2018 August 24''': [[Amplitude modulated Gaussian dust sims]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 August 17''': [[Sims with nominal Chile and Pole masks]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 August 10''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180810_noise/ Achieved performance roundup] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 August 7''': [[Pre-reference-design noise specifications for large-aperture forecasting]] (Tom Crawford, Matthew Hasselfield, Gil Holder, Lloyd Knox)<br />
* '''2018 August 6''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180805_s4opt/ Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4, 44cm vs 52cm aperture (w/ high-res/low-res 20 GHz)] (V.Buza)<br />
* '''2018 July 9''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180708_dc04/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04] (V.Buza)<br />
* '''2018 July 6''': [[Phi reconstruction on 02.00 sims II]] (Anton Baleato and Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2018 June 11''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180611_s4opt/ Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4, 44cm aperture] (V.Buza) -- see corrected August 6th Update!<br />
* '''2018 June 11''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180609_S4_noise_simulation_arbitrary_coverage/ Recipe to generate performance based S4 simulations with arbitrary sky distribution (in progress)] (B.Racine, V.Buza)<br />
* '''2018 April 29''': [[Phi reconstruction on 02.00 sims]] (Anton Baleato)<br />
* '''2018 April 25''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180425_r_equivalent_maps/ Smallfield r-equivalent Maps] (Kenny Lau)<br />
* '''2018 April 4''': [[Sky masks for simulations III]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 March 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180323_bkfinal_04/ BK-style power spectra of v04.00-06 sims (CDT report config) BROKEN] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 March 16''': [[ILC noise for large apertures at CDT noise levels]] (Raphael Flauger posted by Clem)<br />
* '''2018 March 16''': [[Sky masks for simulations II]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 February 19''': [[Sky masks for simulations]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 February 18''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180218_s4opt/ Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4, v3] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2018 February 7''': [[Sim map sets to demonstrate "real delensing" (02.00 and 02.09)]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 February 6''': [[Data Challenge Map Sets 04.YY]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 December 8''': [[Vansyngel Model]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 November 6''': [[Bandpass Convention - What does flat mean]] (Clem P.) - followup notes added Nov 20<br />
* '''2017 September 27''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170927_dc02/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 02] (Bischoff, Buza, Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 September 13''': [[Bias on r from Band Center Errors]] (Palladino, Willmert, Bischoff)<br />
* '''2017 September 8''': [[Checking dust decorrelation in Raphael MHD based dust sim]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 September 6''': [[New NET Calculator and Validation]] (Denis Barkats)<br />
* '''2017 September 1''': [[Resolution at 20 GHz]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 August 31''': [[Bias on r from additive systematics]] (Palladino, Willmert, Bischoff)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170818_bkfinal_03.00/ BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v03.00,.03 CMB-S4 simulation maps] (Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 August 18 ''': [[Neff_and_Beam_Calibration| Neff and Beam Calibration]] (Dan)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [[Ideal delensing templates from flat-sky QE, first pass]] (Kyle Story)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170818_HR/ High-Res studies for CMB-S4 (draft, v2)] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [[Comments from Anthony Challinor and Rupert Allison regarding the impact of Galactic Foregrounds on lensing]] (Neelima)<br />
* '''2017 August 11''': [[Joint Synchrotron and Dust Maps from Simulations]] (B. Hensley)<br />
* '''2017 August 9''': [[Dust Emission From Halos]] (Jim & Jean-Baptiste)<br />
* '''2017 August 9''': [[SZ Clusters update]] (Mat & Nick)<br />
* '''2017 August 4''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170804_HR/ High-Res studies for CMB-S4 (preliminary draft)] (Victor Buza); perhaps a reference of interest https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.02259<br />
* '''2017 July 10''': [[Additive systematics for data challenge 03]] (Bischoff, Palladino, Buza, Kovac)<br />
* '''2017 July 6''': [[Detection significance and sky fraction, dust decorrelation]](Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 July 3''': [[Toy highly decorrelated dust model]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 June 27''': [[Checking dust decorrelation in models d1/d4/d7 and hipdt]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 June 23''': [[Dust_delensing_firstlook|Dust delensing update]] (Alex)<br />
* '''2017 June 23''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170623_bkfinal_02.00/ BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v02.00–06 CMB-S4 simulation maps] (Justin Willmert) ''Updated 2017 Sep 08''<br />
* '''2017 June 22''': [[Warm-up exercise for delensing]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 June 19''': [[SZ Clusters update]] (Mat, Nick)<br />
* '''2017 June 11''': [[Notes from May 31 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 June 9''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170525_s4syst/ Introducing systematics for CMB-S4] ((Victor Buza), with input from Colin Bischoff, John Kovac)<br />
* '''2017 June 9''': [[Dust_delensing_firstlook]] (Alex)<br />
* '''2017 June 9''': [[r-forecasting: high and low ell coordination|r-forecasting: update on high and low ell coordination]] (Neelima+Colin Hill writing)<br />
* '''2017 June 1''': [[Residuals for DC 01.01 and DC 01.02]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 June 1''': [[Levels of foregrounds in Gaussian and PySM simulations]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 May 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170511_s4dc1/ S4 DC 01.xx analysis, v2] (Victor Buza, Colin Bischoff, Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 May 26 ''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170411_bkfinal_01.00/ Updated v01.02 in "BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v01.00–02 CMB-S4 simulation maps"] (Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 May 15''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170515_chkS4/ N_ell spectra for CMB-S4 DC2.0] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2017 May 15''': [[Rev 2 PySM a2d4f1s3 maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 May 12''': [[r-forecasting: high and low ell coordination|r-forecasting: high and low ell coordination]] (lensers writing)<br />
* '''2017 May 8''': [[Checking PySM maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 May 2''': [[Notes from April 26 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Steve)<br />
* '''2017 May 1''': [[r-forecasting: delensing discussion|r-forecasting delensing discussion]] (Neelima and Blake)<br />
* '''2017 April 28 ''': [[Update_on_Neff_Forecasts| Update on Neff Forecasts]] (Dan)<br />
* '''2017 April 26 ''': [http://www.cosmo.bnl.gov/www/msyriac/web/work/sigma8plots.html Update on cluster number counts forecast including w_a] (Mat and Nick)<br />
* '''2017 April 21 ''': [[lensing-DE|Update on a lensing-based DE forecast]] (Jo, Siddharth)<br />
* '''2017 April 18 ''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170411_bkfinal_01.00/ BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v01.00–02 CMB-S4 simulation maps] (Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 April 18 ''': [[S4-Lensing|S4 measurement requirements for neutrino mass and delensing - first pass]] (Neelima/Blake)<br />
* '''2017 April 17 ''': [[HiDPol|HI-based dust polarization model for r forecasts]] (Tuhin)<br />
* '''2017 April 05 ''': [[lensing-DE|Notes on one path to lensing-based DE forecasts]] (Jo)<br />
* '''2017 April 05 ''': [[Notes from April 5 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 April 05''': [https://cmb-s4.org/CMB-S4workshops/images/Sigma8_z_prep.pdf Sigma8(z) SPT clusters (placeholder) ] (S Bocquet)<br />
* '''2017 April 04''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170404_s4opt/ Updated Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4 (using bands v1.99)] (Victor Buza, Updated 2017.04.21)<br />
* '''2017 March 31 ''': [[Data Challenge analysis - DC1.0, DC1.1, DC1.2]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 March 30 ''': [[Notes from March 28 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim & Steve)<br />
* '''2017 March 29''': [[CMB-S4 frequency bands v1.99]] (John Kovac, Band-definition working group)<br />
* '''2017 March 28''': [[Adding higher res delensing "band"]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 March 27''': [[01.01 sim input maps - first try]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 March 23''': [[01.00 sim input maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 March 20''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170221_S4_NET_forecasts/ S4 Band sensitivity comparison follow-up] (Denis Barkats, John Kovac)<br />
* '''2017 March 17''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20170317_s4dc1/ S4 DC1.0 analysis] (Victor Buza, Colin Bischoff, Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 March 17 ''': [[Media:Telecon_03172017_optimization_for_CMBS4.pdf]]: Optimization methodology for SO (Josquin)<br />
* '''2017 March 16 ''': [[ P_k_science_case| P(k) science case]] (Colin, Simone, Nick, David)<br />
* '''2017 March 15 ''': [[Notes from March 15 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 March 15 ''': [[CMB halo lensing sensitivity as a function of map sensitivity and resolution]] (Jim & Jean-Baptiste)<br />
* '''2017 March 15 ''': [[w and gamma | w and Delta gamma constraints from sigma_8 (z)]] (Mat & Nick)<br />
* '''2017 March 10 ''': [[Notes from March 8 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim & Steve)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[reionization_requirements| Reionization science]] (Simone & Marcelo)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[High ell topics | High ell topics ]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[SZ_s8_z | sigma 8 of z constraints ]] (Mat, Nick)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[Szcounts | Number counts update for 1.0', 1.5', 2.0']] (Nick, Mat)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[SZastro | SZ astrophysics with DESI ]](Nick, Simone, Emanuel, David)<br />
* '''2017 February 24''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170224_cmbs4_dc1_final/ BK-style processing of DC1.0 maps to spectra] (Justin Willmert, Colin Bischoff)<br />
* '''2017 February 15 ''': [[Extragalactic lensing sims| Update on extragalactic phase-2 lensing sims]] (Marcelo, George, Dick, others)<br />
* '''2017 February 15 ''': [[Plan for next Galactic Phase-2sims| Plan for next Galactic phase-2 sims]] (Jo, Ben)<br />
* '''2017 February 10 ''': [[Resolution of foreground-cleaned map]] (Mat, Neelima, Blake, Alex, others)<br />
* '''2017 February 10 ''': [[Nongaussian dust in lensing]] (Alex, Mat, Neelima, Blake, others)<br />
* '''2017 January 30''': [[Aliased power in noise maps]] (Bischoff, Updated 2017-02-02)<br />
* '''2017 January 23''': [[CMBS4 Band Sensitivity Comparison]] (Charlie Hill)<br />
* '''2017 January 12''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/cbischoff/20170112_data_challenge_1/ Maps for CMB-S4 data challenge 1] (Bischoff, Pryke, Buza)<br />
* '''2016 December 21''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20161220_chkS4/ N_ell spectra for the CMB-S4 data challenge, and updated &sigma;(r) checkpoints] (Victor Buza, Updated 2017.02.01)<br />
* '''2016 November 30''': [[First steps to sim input maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2016 November 4''': [[Tophat bands for Data Challenge]] (Bischoff)<br />
* '''2016 July 8''': [[fsky|Dependence of foregrounds on sky fraction]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2016 July 8''': [[SciBookPowspecTheoryFig|Three choices for Science Book Figure 5 (theory power spectrum & current BB points)]] (Tom C.)<br />
* '''2016 July 8''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20160707_s4plots/ S4 Inflation Chapter Plot Suggestions, V2] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 July 6''': [[w_cosntraint|Preliminary w constraint]] (Alessandro)<br />
* '''2016 June 24''': [[nsr|Preliminary ns-r plot for discussion]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2016 June 16''': [[DelensingImpact| Impact Of Delensing On sigma(r)]] (Neelima/Mat)<br />
* '''2016 June 16''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20160616_s4plots/ S4 Inflation Chapter Plot Suggestions] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 June 10''': [[MapBasedRb| Map-based &sigma;(r) forecasts V2]] (David/Jo/Ben)<br />
* '''2016 June 3''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20160531_fisher/ &sigma;(r) forecasting checkpoints, V2] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 June 3''': [[ BTTfixedeffort | Forecasts for fnl BTT beam/fixed effort]] (Daan)<br />
* '''2016 May 31''': [[ForecastPatchyReion| Forecasts for patchy reionization]] (Vera, Alex, Nick)<br />
* '''2016 May 26''': [[Forecasting | Forecasts on neutrino mass]] (Nam, Mat, Neelima)<br />
* '''2016 May 26''': [[ KSZ| Forecasts on kSZ S/N]] (Simone, Emmanuel, Colin)<br />
* '''2016 May 26''': [[ Forecastfiso_planck| Forecast on correlated and anti-correlated CDM isocurvature f_iso]] (Kimmy, Cora, updated with plots 20160602)<br />
* '''2016 May 24''': [[ BTTNoiseBeam | Forecasts on fnl BTT beam/FWHM]] (Daan)<br />
* '''2016 May 22''': [[ ForecastAxions| Update on the axion isocurvature constraints for changing sensitivity and resolution]] (Renee)<br />
* '''2016 May 21''': [[ Forecastpann| Forecast on dark matter annihilation parameter p_ann]] (Kimmy, Cora)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[NeffNoiseBeam| Forecasts on Neff and Yp]] (Joel, Alex)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastEDE| Forecasts on Early Dark Energy]] (Erminia)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastCompIsocurv| Forecasts on compensated isocurvature varying sensitivity, resolution and sky coverage]] (Julian, Ely)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastBirefring| Forecasts on birefringence varying sensitivity and resolution]] (Vera, Alex)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastStrings| Forecasts on string tension varying sensitivity and resolution]] (Renee)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[RobustForecast| Cosmological forecasts including component separation and iterative delensing]] (Stephen Feeney and Josquin Errard)<br />
* '''2016 May 19''': [[MapBasedR| Map-based &sigma;(r) forecasts]] (David A.)<br />
* '''2016 May 18''': [[Shear_calibration_LSST|LSST shear calibration with CMB S4]] (Emmanuel Schaan)<br />
* '''2016 May 13''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20150505_fisher/ &sigma;(r) forecasting checkpoints] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 May 13''': [[NonGaussianitiesTTT| CMBS-4 forecasts local and equilateral scalar Ngs using TTT]] (daan)<br />
* '''2016 May 13''': [[ForecastingSims|Simulations for r forecasts]] (Jo/Ben/David)<br />
* '''2016 May 6''': [[DMInteractionsComplementarity|DM interactions: complementarity]] (Vera)<br />
* '''2016 May 6''': [[Scenarios| Scenarios]] (Scott, Vera)<br />
* ''' 2016 May 3''': [[ForecastAxions |Effect of S4 specs on axion density parameters]] (Renee)<br />
* '''2016 April 30''': [[ForecastNu| Effect of S4 specs on neutrino parameters]] (Erminia)<br />
* '''2016 April 28''': [http://web.stanford.edu/~wlwu/posting/20160421_lensres/ Delensing residuals with low-ell foregrounds] (Kimmy Wu)<br />
* '''2016 April 28''': [[NonGaussianities| CMBS-4 forecast for tensor NGs]] (daan)<br />
* '''2016 April 19''': [[ForecastingStep1| Checking basic parameters for nominal case]] (Jo + multiple authors)<br />
* '''2016 April 5''': [[Forecasting|Setting up non-r Fisher-based parameter forecasts]] (Jo + others)<br />
* '''2016 March 31''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20150331_fisher/ Fisher projections for &sigma;(r) based on achieved performance] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 January 27''': [https://cmb-s4.org/CMB-S4workshops/index.php/File:sptpol_ptsrc_polfrac_500d.pdf Quick estimate of mean-squared polarization fraction for SPTpol sources] (Tom Crawford)</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=R_Forecasting_Logbook&diff=7712R Forecasting Logbook2018-09-26T01:55:04Z<p>Cbischoff: /* Logbook Entries (reverse chronological) */</p>
<hr />
<div>This is an index page for logbook-style postings that cover the interconnected topics of sky modeling, simulations, and r forecasting for CMB-S4. <br />
<br />
Some guidelines for use:<br />
* '''Postings should include enough context''' so that a reader can jump in and figure out what is going on. It is ''not'' necessary to write an extensive introduction to every posting -- context can be in the form of links to older postings, paper citations, etc.<br />
* Postings should represent a snapshot of work in progress. It's ok to post incomplete results, but recommended that you include notes about what is missing, what you are still planning to work on, etc. <br />
* If you have work that extends or improves an old posting, you should add it as a new posting (that includes links back to the old work as appropriate). Don't update old postings, as they should provide a chronological record of progress.<br />
* On this index page, add a link to your posting with the date, a descriptive posting title, and your full name. This logbook covers a wide range of topics, so titles will be really important to keep it useful. Don't name your posting something like "Forecasting for S4"!<br />
* Links should be added in reverse-chronological order (newest at the top). Your posting can either be written up on another wiki page or it can be a link to some externally hosted webpage (useful if you want to include a javascript plots pager).<br />
<br />
== Telecon Notes ==<br />
<br />
[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1886yT1b6QDuWvsbAu5HmVv2Cl4pfH00YpK5Fv8dNzcM/edit?usp=sharing Telecon notes for r-forecasting]<br />
<br />
== Logbook Entries (reverse chronological) ==<br />
* '''2018 September 25''': [[Estimated_observing_efficiency_for_past_and_current_telescopes]] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 August 27''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180925_bkfinal_04bc BK-style power spectra of 04/04b/04c masks for 00/01/02/03/07/08/09 foreground models] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 September 12''': [[Low ell noise from past and current telescopes]] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 September 5''': [[Phi reconstruction on 02.00 sims III]] (Anton Baleato)<br />
* '''2018 August 31''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180831_dc04_abc_model00_07_ML_proper_bp/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04b and 04c, for sky models 00 and 07] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 August 31''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180831_dc04_fixed_bp/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04, fixed bandpasses] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 August 27''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180827_bkfinal_04 Sims with nominal Chile and Pole masks III - BK-style power spectra of 04b.YY and 04c.YY] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 August 27''': [[Sims with nominal Chile and Pole masks II]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 August 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180826_dc04_fixed/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04, fixed] (V.Buza, B.Racine)<br />
* '''2018 August 24''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180824_bkfinal_04/ BK-style power spectra of v04.00-06 sims (CDT report config) FIXED] (Caterina Umilta)<br />
* '''2018 August 24''': [[Amplitude modulated Gaussian dust sims]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 August 17''': [[Sims with nominal Chile and Pole masks]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 August 10''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180810_noise/ Achieved performance roundup] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 August 7''': [[Pre-reference-design noise specifications for large-aperture forecasting]] (Tom Crawford, Matthew Hasselfield, Gil Holder, Lloyd Knox)<br />
* '''2018 August 6''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180805_s4opt/ Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4, 44cm vs 52cm aperture (w/ high-res/low-res 20 GHz)] (V.Buza)<br />
* '''2018 July 9''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180708_dc04/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04] (V.Buza)<br />
* '''2018 July 6''': [[Phi reconstruction on 02.00 sims II]] (Anton Baleato and Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2018 June 11''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180611_s4opt/ Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4, 44cm aperture] (V.Buza) -- see corrected August 6th Update!<br />
* '''2018 June 11''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180609_S4_noise_simulation_arbitrary_coverage/ Recipe to generate performance based S4 simulations with arbitrary sky distribution (in progress)] (B.Racine, V.Buza)<br />
* '''2018 April 29''': [[Phi reconstruction on 02.00 sims]] (Anton Baleato)<br />
* '''2018 April 25''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180425_r_equivalent_maps/ Smallfield r-equivalent Maps] (Kenny Lau)<br />
* '''2018 April 4''': [[Sky masks for simulations III]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 March 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180323_bkfinal_04/ BK-style power spectra of v04.00-06 sims (CDT report config) BROKEN] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 March 16''': [[ILC noise for large apertures at CDT noise levels]] (Raphael Flauger posted by Clem)<br />
* '''2018 March 16''': [[Sky masks for simulations II]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 February 19''': [[Sky masks for simulations]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 February 18''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180218_s4opt/ Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4, v3] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2018 February 7''': [[Sim map sets to demonstrate "real delensing" (02.00 and 02.09)]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 February 6''': [[Data Challenge Map Sets 04.YY]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 December 8''': [[Vansyngel Model]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 November 6''': [[Bandpass Convention - What does flat mean]] (Clem P.) - followup notes added Nov 20<br />
* '''2017 September 27''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170927_dc02/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 02] (Bischoff, Buza, Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 September 13''': [[Bias on r from Band Center Errors]] (Palladino, Willmert, Bischoff)<br />
* '''2017 September 8''': [[Checking dust decorrelation in Raphael MHD based dust sim]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 September 6''': [[New NET Calculator and Validation]] (Denis Barkats)<br />
* '''2017 September 1''': [[Resolution at 20 GHz]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 August 31''': [[Bias on r from additive systematics]] (Palladino, Willmert, Bischoff)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170818_bkfinal_03.00/ BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v03.00,.03 CMB-S4 simulation maps] (Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 August 18 ''': [[Neff_and_Beam_Calibration| Neff and Beam Calibration]] (Dan)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [[Ideal delensing templates from flat-sky QE, first pass]] (Kyle Story)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170818_HR/ High-Res studies for CMB-S4 (draft, v2)] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [[Comments from Anthony Challinor and Rupert Allison regarding the impact of Galactic Foregrounds on lensing]] (Neelima)<br />
* '''2017 August 11''': [[Joint Synchrotron and Dust Maps from Simulations]] (B. Hensley)<br />
* '''2017 August 9''': [[Dust Emission From Halos]] (Jim & Jean-Baptiste)<br />
* '''2017 August 9''': [[SZ Clusters update]] (Mat & Nick)<br />
* '''2017 August 4''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170804_HR/ High-Res studies for CMB-S4 (preliminary draft)] (Victor Buza); perhaps a reference of interest https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.02259<br />
* '''2017 July 10''': [[Additive systematics for data challenge 03]] (Bischoff, Palladino, Buza, Kovac)<br />
* '''2017 July 6''': [[Detection significance and sky fraction, dust decorrelation]](Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 July 3''': [[Toy highly decorrelated dust model]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 June 27''': [[Checking dust decorrelation in models d1/d4/d7 and hipdt]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 June 23''': [[Dust_delensing_firstlook|Dust delensing update]] (Alex)<br />
* '''2017 June 23''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170623_bkfinal_02.00/ BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v02.00–06 CMB-S4 simulation maps] (Justin Willmert) ''Updated 2017 Sep 08''<br />
* '''2017 June 22''': [[Warm-up exercise for delensing]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 June 19''': [[SZ Clusters update]] (Mat, Nick)<br />
* '''2017 June 11''': [[Notes from May 31 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 June 9''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170525_s4syst/ Introducing systematics for CMB-S4] ((Victor Buza), with input from Colin Bischoff, John Kovac)<br />
* '''2017 June 9''': [[Dust_delensing_firstlook]] (Alex)<br />
* '''2017 June 9''': [[r-forecasting: high and low ell coordination|r-forecasting: update on high and low ell coordination]] (Neelima+Colin Hill writing)<br />
* '''2017 June 1''': [[Residuals for DC 01.01 and DC 01.02]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 June 1''': [[Levels of foregrounds in Gaussian and PySM simulations]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 May 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170511_s4dc1/ S4 DC 01.xx analysis, v2] (Victor Buza, Colin Bischoff, Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 May 26 ''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170411_bkfinal_01.00/ Updated v01.02 in "BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v01.00–02 CMB-S4 simulation maps"] (Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 May 15''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170515_chkS4/ N_ell spectra for CMB-S4 DC2.0] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2017 May 15''': [[Rev 2 PySM a2d4f1s3 maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 May 12''': [[r-forecasting: high and low ell coordination|r-forecasting: high and low ell coordination]] (lensers writing)<br />
* '''2017 May 8''': [[Checking PySM maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 May 2''': [[Notes from April 26 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Steve)<br />
* '''2017 May 1''': [[r-forecasting: delensing discussion|r-forecasting delensing discussion]] (Neelima and Blake)<br />
* '''2017 April 28 ''': [[Update_on_Neff_Forecasts| Update on Neff Forecasts]] (Dan)<br />
* '''2017 April 26 ''': [http://www.cosmo.bnl.gov/www/msyriac/web/work/sigma8plots.html Update on cluster number counts forecast including w_a] (Mat and Nick)<br />
* '''2017 April 21 ''': [[lensing-DE|Update on a lensing-based DE forecast]] (Jo, Siddharth)<br />
* '''2017 April 18 ''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170411_bkfinal_01.00/ BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v01.00–02 CMB-S4 simulation maps] (Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 April 18 ''': [[S4-Lensing|S4 measurement requirements for neutrino mass and delensing - first pass]] (Neelima/Blake)<br />
* '''2017 April 17 ''': [[HiDPol|HI-based dust polarization model for r forecasts]] (Tuhin)<br />
* '''2017 April 05 ''': [[lensing-DE|Notes on one path to lensing-based DE forecasts]] (Jo)<br />
* '''2017 April 05 ''': [[Notes from April 5 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 April 05''': [https://cmb-s4.org/CMB-S4workshops/images/Sigma8_z_prep.pdf Sigma8(z) SPT clusters (placeholder) ] (S Bocquet)<br />
* '''2017 April 04''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170404_s4opt/ Updated Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4 (using bands v1.99)] (Victor Buza, Updated 2017.04.21)<br />
* '''2017 March 31 ''': [[Data Challenge analysis - DC1.0, DC1.1, DC1.2]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 March 30 ''': [[Notes from March 28 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim & Steve)<br />
* '''2017 March 29''': [[CMB-S4 frequency bands v1.99]] (John Kovac, Band-definition working group)<br />
* '''2017 March 28''': [[Adding higher res delensing "band"]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 March 27''': [[01.01 sim input maps - first try]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 March 23''': [[01.00 sim input maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 March 20''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170221_S4_NET_forecasts/ S4 Band sensitivity comparison follow-up] (Denis Barkats, John Kovac)<br />
* '''2017 March 17''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20170317_s4dc1/ S4 DC1.0 analysis] (Victor Buza, Colin Bischoff, Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 March 17 ''': [[Media:Telecon_03172017_optimization_for_CMBS4.pdf]]: Optimization methodology for SO (Josquin)<br />
* '''2017 March 16 ''': [[ P_k_science_case| P(k) science case]] (Colin, Simone, Nick, David)<br />
* '''2017 March 15 ''': [[Notes from March 15 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 March 15 ''': [[CMB halo lensing sensitivity as a function of map sensitivity and resolution]] (Jim & Jean-Baptiste)<br />
* '''2017 March 15 ''': [[w and gamma | w and Delta gamma constraints from sigma_8 (z)]] (Mat & Nick)<br />
* '''2017 March 10 ''': [[Notes from March 8 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim & Steve)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[reionization_requirements| Reionization science]] (Simone & Marcelo)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[High ell topics | High ell topics ]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[SZ_s8_z | sigma 8 of z constraints ]] (Mat, Nick)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[Szcounts | Number counts update for 1.0', 1.5', 2.0']] (Nick, Mat)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[SZastro | SZ astrophysics with DESI ]](Nick, Simone, Emanuel, David)<br />
* '''2017 February 24''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170224_cmbs4_dc1_final/ BK-style processing of DC1.0 maps to spectra] (Justin Willmert, Colin Bischoff)<br />
* '''2017 February 15 ''': [[Extragalactic lensing sims| Update on extragalactic phase-2 lensing sims]] (Marcelo, George, Dick, others)<br />
* '''2017 February 15 ''': [[Plan for next Galactic Phase-2sims| Plan for next Galactic phase-2 sims]] (Jo, Ben)<br />
* '''2017 February 10 ''': [[Resolution of foreground-cleaned map]] (Mat, Neelima, Blake, Alex, others)<br />
* '''2017 February 10 ''': [[Nongaussian dust in lensing]] (Alex, Mat, Neelima, Blake, others)<br />
* '''2017 January 30''': [[Aliased power in noise maps]] (Bischoff, Updated 2017-02-02)<br />
* '''2017 January 23''': [[CMBS4 Band Sensitivity Comparison]] (Charlie Hill)<br />
* '''2017 January 12''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/cbischoff/20170112_data_challenge_1/ Maps for CMB-S4 data challenge 1] (Bischoff, Pryke, Buza)<br />
* '''2016 December 21''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20161220_chkS4/ N_ell spectra for the CMB-S4 data challenge, and updated &sigma;(r) checkpoints] (Victor Buza, Updated 2017.02.01)<br />
* '''2016 November 30''': [[First steps to sim input maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2016 November 4''': [[Tophat bands for Data Challenge]] (Bischoff)<br />
* '''2016 July 8''': [[fsky|Dependence of foregrounds on sky fraction]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2016 July 8''': [[SciBookPowspecTheoryFig|Three choices for Science Book Figure 5 (theory power spectrum & current BB points)]] (Tom C.)<br />
* '''2016 July 8''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20160707_s4plots/ S4 Inflation Chapter Plot Suggestions, V2] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 July 6''': [[w_cosntraint|Preliminary w constraint]] (Alessandro)<br />
* '''2016 June 24''': [[nsr|Preliminary ns-r plot for discussion]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2016 June 16''': [[DelensingImpact| Impact Of Delensing On sigma(r)]] (Neelima/Mat)<br />
* '''2016 June 16''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20160616_s4plots/ S4 Inflation Chapter Plot Suggestions] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 June 10''': [[MapBasedRb| Map-based &sigma;(r) forecasts V2]] (David/Jo/Ben)<br />
* '''2016 June 3''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20160531_fisher/ &sigma;(r) forecasting checkpoints, V2] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 June 3''': [[ BTTfixedeffort | Forecasts for fnl BTT beam/fixed effort]] (Daan)<br />
* '''2016 May 31''': [[ForecastPatchyReion| Forecasts for patchy reionization]] (Vera, Alex, Nick)<br />
* '''2016 May 26''': [[Forecasting | Forecasts on neutrino mass]] (Nam, Mat, Neelima)<br />
* '''2016 May 26''': [[ KSZ| Forecasts on kSZ S/N]] (Simone, Emmanuel, Colin)<br />
* '''2016 May 26''': [[ Forecastfiso_planck| Forecast on correlated and anti-correlated CDM isocurvature f_iso]] (Kimmy, Cora, updated with plots 20160602)<br />
* '''2016 May 24''': [[ BTTNoiseBeam | Forecasts on fnl BTT beam/FWHM]] (Daan)<br />
* '''2016 May 22''': [[ ForecastAxions| Update on the axion isocurvature constraints for changing sensitivity and resolution]] (Renee)<br />
* '''2016 May 21''': [[ Forecastpann| Forecast on dark matter annihilation parameter p_ann]] (Kimmy, Cora)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[NeffNoiseBeam| Forecasts on Neff and Yp]] (Joel, Alex)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastEDE| Forecasts on Early Dark Energy]] (Erminia)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastCompIsocurv| Forecasts on compensated isocurvature varying sensitivity, resolution and sky coverage]] (Julian, Ely)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastBirefring| Forecasts on birefringence varying sensitivity and resolution]] (Vera, Alex)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastStrings| Forecasts on string tension varying sensitivity and resolution]] (Renee)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[RobustForecast| Cosmological forecasts including component separation and iterative delensing]] (Stephen Feeney and Josquin Errard)<br />
* '''2016 May 19''': [[MapBasedR| Map-based &sigma;(r) forecasts]] (David A.)<br />
* '''2016 May 18''': [[Shear_calibration_LSST|LSST shear calibration with CMB S4]] (Emmanuel Schaan)<br />
* '''2016 May 13''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20150505_fisher/ &sigma;(r) forecasting checkpoints] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 May 13''': [[NonGaussianitiesTTT| CMBS-4 forecasts local and equilateral scalar Ngs using TTT]] (daan)<br />
* '''2016 May 13''': [[ForecastingSims|Simulations for r forecasts]] (Jo/Ben/David)<br />
* '''2016 May 6''': [[DMInteractionsComplementarity|DM interactions: complementarity]] (Vera)<br />
* '''2016 May 6''': [[Scenarios| Scenarios]] (Scott, Vera)<br />
* ''' 2016 May 3''': [[ForecastAxions |Effect of S4 specs on axion density parameters]] (Renee)<br />
* '''2016 April 30''': [[ForecastNu| Effect of S4 specs on neutrino parameters]] (Erminia)<br />
* '''2016 April 28''': [http://web.stanford.edu/~wlwu/posting/20160421_lensres/ Delensing residuals with low-ell foregrounds] (Kimmy Wu)<br />
* '''2016 April 28''': [[NonGaussianities| CMBS-4 forecast for tensor NGs]] (daan)<br />
* '''2016 April 19''': [[ForecastingStep1| Checking basic parameters for nominal case]] (Jo + multiple authors)<br />
* '''2016 April 5''': [[Forecasting|Setting up non-r Fisher-based parameter forecasts]] (Jo + others)<br />
* '''2016 March 31''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20150331_fisher/ Fisher projections for &sigma;(r) based on achieved performance] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 January 27''': [https://cmb-s4.org/CMB-S4workshops/index.php/File:sptpol_ptsrc_polfrac_500d.pdf Quick estimate of mean-squared polarization fraction for SPTpol sources] (Tom Crawford)</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=Estimated_observing_efficiency_for_past_and_current_telescopes&diff=7710Estimated observing efficiency for past and current telescopes2018-09-25T22:31:34Z<p>Cbischoff: </p>
<hr />
<div>''Colin Bischoff, 2018-09-25''<br />
----<br />
<br />
In this posting, I try to estimate the relative observing efficiency for telescopes at South Pole vs Chile. It is hard to get a clean answer to this question because every experiment has its own unique circumstances and there are a limited number of data points to examine. <br />
<br />
The method I will use here is to compare a survey weight (units of &mu;K<sup>-2</sup>) calculated from published BB bandpowers to a survey weight calculated from instantaneous sensitivity and observing time. Note that survey weight is the quantity that should scale linearly with efforts, so the survey weight at 150 GHz for the BK14 paper is equal to the BICEP2 2010--2012 survey weight plus Keck Array 150 GHz survey weight for 2012--2014.<br />
<br />
* The "bandpower weight" is easier to define unambiguously -- in a [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180810_noise/ previous posting] I calculated the ''N''<sub>&#x2113;</sub> and effective ''f''<sub>sky</sub> for many different experiments that have published BB results. From these results, I calculate the bandpower weight as '''''f''<sub>sky</sub> / ''N''<sub>&#x2113;</sub>'''. Note that I am using the white noise ''N''<sub>&#x2113;</sub> and ''f''<sub>sky</sub> -- see [[Low_ell_noise_from_past_and_current_telescopes|my previous posting]] for a look at low-&#x2113; noise.<br />
* The "tod weight" is calculated from instantaneous sensitivity (NEQ) of the full experiment and observing time (&tau;) as '''&tau; / NEQ<sup>2</sup>'''. While this definition is quite simple, there are many possible choices for how to select &tau; and it can be difficult to do this in a consistent way across experiments.<br />
<br />
The idea behind these statistics is that tod weight describes the experiment on paper, ''i.e.'' "I will put together an array of detectors with NEQ = 15 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> and then observe for three years". The bandpower weight describes the results that were actually obtained, including data cuts, instrument downtime, filtering, inefficiencies in sky coverage, etc, etc. Note however that I am using actual array NEQ as reported in published results to calculate tod weight, so detector yield, noisy detectors, and increased NEQ from marginal weather all get baked into the tod weight to some extent and should not lead to a discrepancy between the two statistics.<br />
<br />
Figure 1 is a plot of the ratio of tod weight to bandpower weight for BICEP/Keck, ACTpol, ABS, and QUIET. I didn't include SPTpol or POLARBEAR because I couldn't array NEQ numbers for those instruments. Points are color-coded according to observing band (red for 95 GHz, green for 150 GHz, and blue for 220 GHz). A larger value of the weight ratio (y-axis) means that the statistical power of the bandpower result fell short of what we might expect from the instrument sensitivity and time on sky. The tod weight is ~100 times larger than the bandpower weight for most experiments. While we all know that there are many significant factors that cause observing efficiency to be less than a naive calculation would indicate, I haven't spent any time thinking about whether there are any order ~10 numbers that would be needed to make these two statistics comparable -- I wouldn't recommend reading much into the absolute scale of the y-axis, but it would be interesting to cross-check with an ''ab initio'' sensitivity calculator such as [https://github.com/chill90/BoloCalc BoloCalc].<br />
<br />
For each experiment I include two points (connected by a line) that make different choices for how to define observing time. The upper point uses a strict definition that calculates &tau; as the number of seconds between when the experiment first started observing and when it completed. For the lower point, I tried to count only the stretches of time that were spent in standard observing mode, ''i.e.'' excluding downtimes for maintenance / upgrades. For ABS and BICEP2 150 GHz, I added an additional unfilled point that counts only the observing time after data cuts. <br />
<br />
[[File:CMB_achieved_efficiency.png|frame|Figure 1: survey weight ratio vs bandpower-derived survey weight|center]]<br />
<br />
== Details for figure inputs ==<br />
<br />
* BICEP/Keck 150 GHz includes points from [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014PhRvL.112x1101A BK-I 2014], [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...811..126B BK-V 2015] (same dataset used for BKP joint analysis), [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016PhRvL.116c1302B BK-VI 2016] (BK14), and the upcoming BK15 results. <br />
** For BICEP2, I used an array NEQ of 17 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> with &tau; = 3 years. For the lower point, &tau; is reduced to 936 days (2010-02-15 to 2012-11-06, except for 2011-01-01 to 2011-03-01) to remove time spent on deployment and calibration campaigns. The unfilled circle counts BICEP2 data after cuts. From Table 7 of [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...792...62A BK-II], the data volume surviving cuts is 8.6e9 detector-seconds and I used a typical detector sensitivity of 305.6 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> (from Fig 22 of the same paper).<br />
** The BK-V result adds in Keck Array data from 2012 (11.5 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for five receivers) and 2013 (9.5 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for five receivers). These each have nominal &tau; = 1 year. For the lower points, I deducted time spent on deployment and calibration campaigns, ending up with 240 days in 2012 and 223 days in 2013.<br />
** The BK14 result adds in Keck Array data from 2014 (13.3 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for three receivers). This NEQ estimate is from an internal posting and is not included in the paper. &tau; = 1 year, or 240 days after deducting deployment / calibration.<br />
** The BK15 result adds in Keck Array data from 2015 (19.5 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for one receiver). This NEQ estimate is from an internal posting and is not included in the paper. &tau; = 1 year, or 242 days after deducting deployment / calibration.<br />
* BICEP/Keck 95 GHz includes points from [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016PhRvL.116c1302B BK-VI 2016] (BK14) and the upcoming BK15 results.<br />
** The BK14 result uses 2014 Keck Array data (17.4 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for two receivers). This NEQ estimate is from an internal posting and is not included in the paper. &tau; = 1 year, or 240 days after deducting deployment / calibration.<br />
** The BK15 result adds in Keck Array data from 2015 (13.5 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for two receivers). This NEQ estimate is from an internal posting and is not included in the paper. &tau; = 1 year, or 242 days after deducting deployment / calibration.<br />
* BICEP/Keck 220 GHz is from the upcoming BK15 results. Array NEQ is 41.6 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for two receivers. This NEQ estimate is from an internal posting and is not included in the paper. &tau; = 1 year, or 242 days after deducting calibration.<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018arXiv180101218K ABS] has array NEQ of 41 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> and observed for 464 days (2012-09-13 to 2013-12-21). For the lower (filled) point, I used &tau; = 1634 + 209 + 1745 + 3135 = 6723 hours (Section 3 of Kusaka 2018). For the unfilled point, I used 461,237 TES-hours on Field A after cuts (bottom line of Table 3 of Kusaka 2018) and used a per-TES sensitivity of 580 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup>.<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...741..111Q QUIET 43 GHz] has array NEQ of 69 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> and observed for 232 days (2008-10-24 to 2009-06-13). For the lower point, I used &tau; = 3458 hours (Section 3 of QUIET 2011).<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...760..145Q QUIET 95 GHz] has array NEQ of 87 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> and observed for 497 days (2009-08-12 to 2010-12-22). For the lower point, I used &tau; = 7426 hours (Section 3 of QUIET 2012).<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014JCAP...10..007N ACTpol season 1] has array NEQ of 19 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> and observed for 94 days (2013-09-11 to 2013-12-14). For the lower point, I multiplied by &tau; by 63% to account for the fact that their analysis used only nighttime data for fields D1, D5, and D6 (Section 3.1 of N&aelig;ss 2014).<br />
* For [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017JCAP...06..031L ACTpol season 2], I kept the season 1 accumulated tod weight and added an additional 133 days (2014-08-20 to 2014-12-31) with array NEQ of 11.3 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> (inverse-quadrature sum of 23 and 12.9 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for PA1 and PA2, respectively). For the lower point, the ACTpol season 2 observing time was scaled by a factor of 45% to account for D5 and D6 nighttime data only. It seems like Louis 2017 reanalyzes the season 1 data with somewhat different choices than N&aelig;ss 2014, so this addition of weights might not be strictly accurate.<br />
<br />
== Conclusions ==<br />
<br />
The goal of this analysis was to try to separate instrument design parameters, like array NEQ, from site-specific parameters, like weather. This is only approximately possible, since we know that detector sensitivity will fluctuate with sky temperature. <br />
<br />
That said, the difference between upper and lower points for each experiment primarily tells us about how smoothly that experiment ran (except in the case of ACTpol, where it mostly accounts for nighttime only observing). While BICEP2 stands out as being a notably smooth-running experiment (cryostat stayed cold for three calendar years!), most of the other lines have fairly similar length. Across four calendar years of Keck observations, the number of days spent in standard observing mode was always around 240 (66%). QUIET and ABS also spent 60-65% of their calendar time in standard observing mode.<br />
<br />
I will assume that CMB-S4 will be a well-run and well-staffed experiment at both South Pole and Atacama sites, in which case we can focus on comparing the lower points between experiments. The weight ratio for these points describes a combination of weather cuts, variations in detector noise over time or between detectors that is not captured in array NEQ, noise correlations that don't integrate down in maps, analysis inefficiencies, and probably other factors that I haven't thought of. <br />
<br />
* We see a clear trend with observing frequency with the expected sign -- 95 GHz instruments do the best job of translating their instantaneous sensitivity into bandpower sensitivity. For BICEP/Keck, the weight ratio is about twice as large for 150 GHz as for 95 GHz, but the 220 GHz weight ratio is only ~20% higher than 150 GHz.<br />
* At fixed observing frequency, the BICEP/Keck at South Pole does roughly twice as well as the Atacama experiments in converting instantaneous sensitivity to bandpower sensitivity. It is hard to know how much confidence to have in this conclusion, since it is based on just two points of comparison -- BK vs ABS at 150 GHz and BK vs QUIET at 95 GHz.<br />
* It is very interesting that this factor of two persists even after we account for data cuts in BICEP2 and ABS. This implies that weather cuts are not driving the difference in observing efficiency. <br />
* Also note that my bandpower weight statistic describes total effort in a way that is agnostic towards deep+narrow vs shallow+wide survey strategy. We might worry that Atacama-based telescopes are forced to survey a larger sky area and this is sub-optimal strategy for noise-dominated ''r'' detection efforts (you might not agree, depending on your optimism about delensing), but that distinction won't show up in this posting.<br />
<br />
To go beyond what is presented here would probably require digging down into the detailed accounting of how each experiment ended up with its particular sensitivity. Matt Hasselfield and Tom Crawford have done some of this for ACTpol and SPTpol as part of the LAT forecasting effort. It would be interesting to compare their results with the 10,000 ft view shown here.<br />
<br />
== Tabulated results ==<br />
<br />
The table below compiles all the numbers used for Figure 1.<br />
<br />
* tod weight A uses the full duration of the experiment (upper end of the line)<br />
* tod weight B uses the duration of standard operations (lower end of the line)<br />
* tod weight C uses the data volume after cuts (unfilled symbols, for BICEP2 and ABS only)<br />
<br />
{| class="wikitable"<br />
! Experiment !! Frequency !! bandpower weight !! tod weight A !! ratio A !! tod weight B !! ratio B !! tod weight C !! ratio C<br />
|-<br />
| BK14 || 95 GHz || 1478 || 104162 || 70 || 68490 || 46 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| BK15 || 95 GHz || 3501 || 276178 || 79 || 182539 || 52 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| BICEP2 || 150 GHz || 2905 || 327363 || 113 || 279828 || 96 || 92086 || 32<br />
|-<br />
| BK-V || 150 GHz || 6245 || 915250 || 147 || 650109 || 104 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| BK14 || 150 GHz || 7514 || 1093530 || 146 || 767335 || 102 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| BK15 || 150 GHz || 8638 || 1176380 || 136 || 822265 || 95 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| BK15 || 220 GHz || 101 || 18249 || 181 || 12100 || 120 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| ACTpol (year 1) || 150 GHz || 42 || 22498 || 539 || 14173 || 340 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| ACTpol (year 2) || 150 GHz || 197 || 112490 || 571 || 54670 || 278 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| QUIET || 43 GHz || 35 || 4210 || 120 || 2615 || 75 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| QUIET || 95 GHz || 33 || 5673 || 171 || 3532 || 106 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| ABS || 150 GHz || 77 || 23849 || 310 || 14398 || 187 || 4936 || 64<br />
|}</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=Estimated_observing_efficiency_for_past_and_current_telescopes&diff=7709Estimated observing efficiency for past and current telescopes2018-09-25T22:29:21Z<p>Cbischoff: /* Conclusions */</p>
<hr />
<div>''Colin Bischoff, 2018-09-25''<br />
----<br />
<br />
In this posting, I try to estimate the relative observing efficiency for telescopes at South Pole vs Chile. It is hard to get a clean answer to this question because every experiment has its own unique circumstances and there are a limited number of data points to examine. <br />
<br />
The method I will use here is to compare a survey weight (units of &mu;K<sup>-2</sup>) calculated from published BB bandpowers to a survey weight calculated from instantaneous sensitivity and observing time. Note that survey weight is the quantity that should scale linearly with efforts, so the survey weight at 150 GHz for the BK14 paper is equal to the BICEP2 2010--2012 survey weight plus Keck Array 150 GHz survey weight for 2012--2014.<br />
<br />
* The "bandpower weight" is easier to define unambiguously -- in a [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180810_noise/ previous posting] I calculated the ''N''<sub>&#x2113;</sub> and effective ''f''<sub>sky</sub> for many different experiments that have published BB results. From these results, I calculate the bandpower weight as '''''f''<sub>sky</sub> / ''N''<sub>&#x2113;</sub>'''.<br />
* The "tod weight" is calculated from instantaneous sensitivity (NEQ) of the full experiment and observing time (&tau;) as '''&tau; / NEQ<sup>2</sup>'''. While this definition is quite simple, there are many possible choices for how to select &tau; and it can be difficult to do this in a consistent way across experiments.<br />
<br />
The idea behind these statistics is that tod weight describes the experiment on paper, ''i.e.'' "I will put together an array of detectors with NEQ = 15 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> and then observe for three years". The bandpower weight describes the results that were actually obtained, including data cuts, instrument downtime, filtering, inefficiencies in sky coverage, etc, etc. Note however that I am using actual array NEQ as reported in published results to calculate tod weight, so detector yield, noisy detectors, and increased NEQ from marginal weather all get baked into the tod weight to some extent and should not lead to a discrepancy between the two statistics.<br />
<br />
Figure 1 is a plot of the ratio of tod weight to bandpower weight for BICEP/Keck, ACTpol, ABS, and QUIET. I didn't include SPTpol or POLARBEAR because I couldn't array NEQ numbers for those instruments. Points are color-coded according to observing band (red for 95 GHz, green for 150 GHz, and blue for 220 GHz). A larger value of the weight ratio (y-axis) means that the statistical power of the bandpower result fell short of what we might expect from the instrument sensitivity and time on sky. The tod weight is ~100 times larger than the bandpower weight for most experiments. While we all know that there are many significant factors that cause observing efficiency to be less than a naive calculation would indicate, I haven't spent any time thinking about whether there are any order ~10 numbers that would be needed to make these two statistics comparable -- I wouldn't recommend reading much into the absolute scale of the y-axis, but it would be interesting to cross-check with an ''ab initio'' sensitivity calculator such as [https://github.com/chill90/BoloCalc BoloCalc].<br />
<br />
For most experiments I include two points (connected by a line) that make different choices for how to define observing time. The upper point uses a strict definition that calculates &tau; as the number of seconds between when the experiment first started observing and when it completed. For the lower point, I tried to count only the stretches of time that were spent in standard observing mode, ''i.e.'' excluding downtimes for maintenance / upgrades. For ABS and BICEP2 150 GHz, I added an additional unfilled point that counts only the observing time after data cuts. <br />
<br />
[[File:CMB_achieved_efficiency.png|frame|Figure 1: survey weight ratio vs bandpower-derived survey weight|center]]<br />
<br />
== Details for figure inputs ==<br />
<br />
* BICEP/Keck 150 GHz includes points from [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014PhRvL.112x1101A BK-I 2014], [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...811..126B BK-V 2015] (same dataset used for BKP joint analysis), [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016PhRvL.116c1302B BK-VI 2016] (BK14), and the upcoming BK15 results. <br />
** For BICEP2, I used an array NEQ of 17 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> with &tau; = 3 years. For the lower point, &tau; is reduced to 936 days (2010-02-15 to 2012-11-06, except for 2011-01-01 to 2011-03-01) to remove time spent on deployment and calibration campaigns. The unfilled circle counts BICEP2 data after cuts. From Table 7 of [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...792...62A BK-II], the data volume surviving cuts is 8.6e9 detector-seconds and I used a typical detector sensitivity of 305.6 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> (from Fig 22 of the same paper).<br />
** The BK-V result adds in Keck Array data from 2012 (11.5 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for five receivers) and 2013 (9.5 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for five receivers). These each have nominal &tau; = 1 year. For the lower points, I deducted time spent on deployment and calibration campaigns, ending up with 240 days in 2012 and 223 days in 2013.<br />
** The BK14 result adds in Keck Array data from 2014 (13.3 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for three receivers). This NEQ estimate is from an internal posting and is not included in the paper. &tau; = 1 year, or 240 days after deducting deployment / calibration.<br />
** The BK15 result adds in Keck Array data from 2015 (19.5 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for one receiver). This NEQ estimate is from an internal posting and is not included in the paper. &tau; = 1 year, or 242 days after deducting deployment / calibration.<br />
* BICEP/Keck 95 GHz includes points from [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016PhRvL.116c1302B BK-VI 2016] (BK14) and the upcoming BK15 results.<br />
** The BK14 result uses 2014 Keck Array data (17.4 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for two receivers). This NEQ estimate is from an internal posting and is not included in the paper. &tau; = 1 year, or 240 days after deducting deployment / calibration.<br />
** The BK15 result adds in Keck Array data from 2015 (13.5 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for two receivers). This NEQ estimate is from an internal posting and is not included in the paper. &tau; = 1 year, or 242 days after deducting deployment / calibration.<br />
* BICEP/Keck 220 GHz is from the upcoming BK15 results. Array NEQ is 41.6 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for two receivers. This NEQ estimate is from an internal posting and is not included in the paper. &tau; = 1 year, or 242 days after deducting calibration.<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018arXiv180101218K ABS] has array NEQ of 41 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> and observed for 464 days (2012-09-13 to 2013-12-21). For the lower (filled) point, I used &tau; = 1634 + 209 + 1745 + 3135 = 6723 hours (Section 3 of Kusaka 2018). For the unfilled point, I used 461,237 TES-hours on Field A after cuts (bottom line of Table 3 of Kusaka 2018) and used a per-TES sensitivity of 580 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup>.<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...741..111Q QUIET 43 GHz] has array NEQ of 69 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> and observed for 232 days (2008-10-24 to 2009-06-13). For the lower point, I used &tau; = 3458 hours (Section 3 of QUIET 2011).<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...760..145Q QUIET 95 GHz] has array NEQ of 87 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> and observed for 497 days (2009-08-12 to 2010-12-22). For the lower point, I used &tau; = 7426 hours (Section 3 of QUIET 2012).<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014JCAP...10..007N ACTpol season 1] has array NEQ of 19 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> and observed for 94 days (2013-09-11 to 2013-12-14). For the lower point, I multiplied by &tau; by 63% to account for the fact that their analysis used only nighttime data for fields D1, D5, and D6 (Section 3.1 of N&aelig;ss 2014).<br />
* For [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017JCAP...06..031L ACTpol season 2], I kept the season 1 accumulated tod weight and added an additional 133 days (2014-08-20 to 2014-12-31) with array NEQ of 11.3 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> (inverse-quadrature sum of 23 and 12.9 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for PA1 and PA2, respectively). For the lower point, the ACTpol season 2 observing time was scaled by a factor of 45% to account for D5 and D6 nighttime data only. It seems like Louis 2017 reanalyzes the season 1 data with somewhat different choices than N&aelig;ss 2014, so this addition of weights might not be strictly accurate.<br />
<br />
== Conclusions ==<br />
<br />
The goal of this analysis was to try to separate instrument design parameters, like array NEQ, from site-specific parameters, like weather. This is only approximately possible, since we know that detector sensitivity will fluctuate with sky temperature. <br />
<br />
That said, the difference between upper and lower points for each experiment primarily tells us about how smoothly that experiment ran (except in the case of ACTpol, where it mostly accounts for nighttime only observing). While BICEP2 stands out as being a notably smooth-running experiment (cryostat stayed cold for three calendar years!), most of the other lines have fairly similar length. Across four calendar years of Keck observations, the number of days spent in standard observing mode was always around 240 (66%). QUIET and ABS also spent 60-65% of their calendar time in standard observing mode.<br />
<br />
I will assume that CMB-S4 will be a well-run and well-staffed experiment at both South Pole and Atacama sites, in which case we can focus on comparing the lower points between experiments. The weight ratio for these points describes a combination of weather cuts, variations in detector noise over time or between detectors that is not captured in array NEQ, noise correlations that don't integrate down in maps, analysis inefficiencies, and probably other factors that I haven't thought of. <br />
<br />
* We see a clear trend with observing frequency with the expected sign -- 95 GHz instruments do the best job of translating their instantaneous sensitivity into bandpower sensitivity. For BICEP/Keck, the weight ratio is about twice as large for 150 GHz as for 95 GHz, but the 220 GHz weight ratio is only ~20% higher than 150 GHz.<br />
* At fixed observing frequency, the BICEP/Keck at South Pole does roughly twice as well as the Atacama experiments in converting instantaneous sensitivity to bandpower sensitivity. It is hard to know how much confidence to have in this conclusion, since it is based on just two points of comparison -- BK vs ABS at 150 GHz and BK vs QUIET at 95 GHz.<br />
* It is very interesting that this factor of two persists even after we account for data cuts in BICEP2 and ABS. This implies that weather cuts are not driving the difference in observing efficiency. <br />
* Also note that my bandpower weight statistic describes total effort in a way that is agnostic towards deep+narrow vs shallow+wide survey strategy. We might worry that Atacama-based telescopes are forced to survey a larger sky area and this is sub-optimal strategy for noise-dominated ''r'' detection efforts (you might not agree, depending on your optimism about delensing), but that distinction won't show up in this posting.<br />
<br />
To go beyond what is presented here would probably require digging down into the detailed accounting of how each experiment ended up with its particular sensitivity. Matt Hasselfield and Tom Crawford have done some of this for ACTpol and SPTpol as part of the LAT forecasting effort. It would be interesting to compare their results with the 10,000 ft view shown here.<br />
<br />
== Tabulated results ==<br />
<br />
The table below compiles all the numbers used for Figure 1.<br />
<br />
* tod weight A uses the full duration of the experiment (upper end of the line)<br />
* tod weight B uses the duration of standard operations (lower end of the line)<br />
* tod weight C uses the data volume after cuts (unfilled symbols, for BICEP2 and ABS only)<br />
<br />
{| class="wikitable"<br />
! Experiment !! Frequency !! bandpower weight !! tod weight A !! ratio A !! tod weight B !! ratio B !! tod weight C !! ratio C<br />
|-<br />
| BK14 || 95 GHz || 1478 || 104162 || 70 || 68490 || 46 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| BK15 || 95 GHz || 3501 || 276178 || 79 || 182539 || 52 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| BICEP2 || 150 GHz || 2905 || 327363 || 113 || 279828 || 96 || 92086 || 32<br />
|-<br />
| BK-V || 150 GHz || 6245 || 915250 || 147 || 650109 || 104 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| BK14 || 150 GHz || 7514 || 1093530 || 146 || 767335 || 102 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| BK15 || 150 GHz || 8638 || 1176380 || 136 || 822265 || 95 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| BK15 || 220 GHz || 101 || 18249 || 181 || 12100 || 120 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| ACTpol (year 1) || 150 GHz || 42 || 22498 || 539 || 14173 || 340 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| ACTpol (year 2) || 150 GHz || 197 || 112490 || 571 || 54670 || 278 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| QUIET || 43 GHz || 35 || 4210 || 120 || 2615 || 75 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| QUIET || 95 GHz || 33 || 5673 || 171 || 3532 || 106 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| ABS || 150 GHz || 77 || 23849 || 310 || 14398 || 187 || 4936 || 64<br />
|}</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=Estimated_observing_efficiency_for_past_and_current_telescopes&diff=7708Estimated observing efficiency for past and current telescopes2018-09-25T21:50:55Z<p>Cbischoff: /* Details for figure inputs */</p>
<hr />
<div>''Colin Bischoff, 2018-09-25''<br />
----<br />
<br />
In this posting, I try to estimate the relative observing efficiency for telescopes at South Pole vs Chile. It is hard to get a clean answer to this question because every experiment has its own unique circumstances and there are a limited number of data points to examine. <br />
<br />
The method I will use here is to compare a survey weight (units of &mu;K<sup>-2</sup>) calculated from published BB bandpowers to a survey weight calculated from instantaneous sensitivity and observing time. Note that survey weight is the quantity that should scale linearly with efforts, so the survey weight at 150 GHz for the BK14 paper is equal to the BICEP2 2010--2012 survey weight plus Keck Array 150 GHz survey weight for 2012--2014.<br />
<br />
* The "bandpower weight" is easier to define unambiguously -- in a [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180810_noise/ previous posting] I calculated the ''N''<sub>&#x2113;</sub> and effective ''f''<sub>sky</sub> for many different experiments that have published BB results. From these results, I calculate the bandpower weight as '''''f''<sub>sky</sub> / ''N''<sub>&#x2113;</sub>'''.<br />
* The "tod weight" is calculated from instantaneous sensitivity (NEQ) of the full experiment and observing time (&tau;) as '''&tau; / NEQ<sup>2</sup>'''. While this definition is quite simple, there are many possible choices for how to select &tau; and it can be difficult to do this in a consistent way across experiments.<br />
<br />
The idea behind these statistics is that tod weight describes the experiment on paper, ''i.e.'' "I will put together an array of detectors with NEQ = 15 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> and then observe for three years". The bandpower weight describes the results that were actually obtained, including data cuts, instrument downtime, filtering, inefficiencies in sky coverage, etc, etc. Note however that I am using actual array NEQ as reported in published results to calculate tod weight, so detector yield, noisy detectors, and increased NEQ from marginal weather all get baked into the tod weight to some extent and should not lead to a discrepancy between the two statistics.<br />
<br />
Figure 1 is a plot of the ratio of tod weight to bandpower weight for BICEP/Keck, ACTpol, ABS, and QUIET. I didn't include SPTpol or POLARBEAR because I couldn't array NEQ numbers for those instruments. Points are color-coded according to observing band (red for 95 GHz, green for 150 GHz, and blue for 220 GHz). A larger value of the weight ratio (y-axis) means that the statistical power of the bandpower result fell short of what we might expect from the instrument sensitivity and time on sky. The tod weight is ~100 times larger than the bandpower weight for most experiments. While we all know that there are many significant factors that cause observing efficiency to be less than a naive calculation would indicate, I haven't spent any time thinking about whether there are any order ~10 numbers that would be needed to make these two statistics comparable -- I wouldn't recommend reading much into the absolute scale of the y-axis, but it would be interesting to cross-check with an ''ab initio'' sensitivity calculator such as [https://github.com/chill90/BoloCalc BoloCalc].<br />
<br />
For most experiments I include two points (connected by a line) that make different choices for how to define observing time. The upper point uses a strict definition that calculates &tau; as the number of seconds between when the experiment first started observing and when it completed. For the lower point, I tried to count only the stretches of time that were spent in standard observing mode, ''i.e.'' excluding downtimes for maintenance / upgrades. For ABS and BICEP2 150 GHz, I added an additional unfilled point that counts only the observing time after data cuts. <br />
<br />
[[File:CMB_achieved_efficiency.png|frame|Figure 1: survey weight ratio vs bandpower-derived survey weight|center]]<br />
<br />
== Details for figure inputs ==<br />
<br />
* BICEP/Keck 150 GHz includes points from [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014PhRvL.112x1101A BK-I 2014], [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...811..126B BK-V 2015] (same dataset used for BKP joint analysis), [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016PhRvL.116c1302B BK-VI 2016] (BK14), and the upcoming BK15 results. <br />
** For BICEP2, I used an array NEQ of 17 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> with &tau; = 3 years. For the lower point, &tau; is reduced to 936 days (2010-02-15 to 2012-11-06, except for 2011-01-01 to 2011-03-01) to remove time spent on deployment and calibration campaigns. The unfilled circle counts BICEP2 data after cuts. From Table 7 of [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...792...62A BK-II], the data volume surviving cuts is 8.6e9 detector-seconds and I used a typical detector sensitivity of 305.6 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> (from Fig 22 of the same paper).<br />
** The BK-V result adds in Keck Array data from 2012 (11.5 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for five receivers) and 2013 (9.5 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for five receivers). These each have nominal &tau; = 1 year. For the lower points, I deducted time spent on deployment and calibration campaigns, ending up with 240 days in 2012 and 223 days in 2013.<br />
** The BK14 result adds in Keck Array data from 2014 (13.3 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for three receivers). This NEQ estimate is from an internal posting and is not included in the paper. &tau; = 1 year, or 240 days after deducting deployment / calibration.<br />
** The BK15 result adds in Keck Array data from 2015 (19.5 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for one receiver). This NEQ estimate is from an internal posting and is not included in the paper. &tau; = 1 year, or 242 days after deducting deployment / calibration.<br />
* BICEP/Keck 95 GHz includes points from [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016PhRvL.116c1302B BK-VI 2016] (BK14) and the upcoming BK15 results.<br />
** The BK14 result uses 2014 Keck Array data (17.4 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for two receivers). This NEQ estimate is from an internal posting and is not included in the paper. &tau; = 1 year, or 240 days after deducting deployment / calibration.<br />
** The BK15 result adds in Keck Array data from 2015 (13.5 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for two receivers). This NEQ estimate is from an internal posting and is not included in the paper. &tau; = 1 year, or 242 days after deducting deployment / calibration.<br />
* BICEP/Keck 220 GHz is from the upcoming BK15 results. Array NEQ is 41.6 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for two receivers. This NEQ estimate is from an internal posting and is not included in the paper. &tau; = 1 year, or 242 days after deducting calibration.<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018arXiv180101218K ABS] has array NEQ of 41 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> and observed for 464 days (2012-09-13 to 2013-12-21). For the lower (filled) point, I used &tau; = 1634 + 209 + 1745 + 3135 = 6723 hours (Section 3 of Kusaka 2018). For the unfilled point, I used 461,237 TES-hours on Field A after cuts (bottom line of Table 3 of Kusaka 2018) and used a per-TES sensitivity of 580 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup>.<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...741..111Q QUIET 43 GHz] has array NEQ of 69 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> and observed for 232 days (2008-10-24 to 2009-06-13). For the lower point, I used &tau; = 3458 hours (Section 3 of QUIET 2011).<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...760..145Q QUIET 95 GHz] has array NEQ of 87 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> and observed for 497 days (2009-08-12 to 2010-12-22). For the lower point, I used &tau; = 7426 hours (Section 3 of QUIET 2012).<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014JCAP...10..007N ACTpol season 1] has array NEQ of 19 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> and observed for 94 days (2013-09-11 to 2013-12-14). For the lower point, I multiplied by &tau; by 63% to account for the fact that their analysis used only nighttime data for fields D1, D5, and D6 (Section 3.1 of N&aelig;ss 2014).<br />
* For [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017JCAP...06..031L ACTpol season 2], I kept the season 1 accumulated tod weight and added an additional 133 days (2014-08-20 to 2014-12-31) with array NEQ of 11.3 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> (inverse-quadrature sum of 23 and 12.9 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for PA1 and PA2, respectively). For the lower point, the ACTpol season 2 observing time was scaled by a factor of 45% to account for D5 and D6 nighttime data only. It seems like Louis 2017 reanalyzes the season 1 data with somewhat different choices than N&aelig;ss 2014, so this addition of weights might not be strictly accurate.<br />
<br />
== Conclusions ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Tabulated results ==<br />
<br />
The table below compiles all the numbers used for Figure 1.<br />
<br />
* tod weight A uses the full duration of the experiment (upper end of the line)<br />
* tod weight B uses the duration of standard operations (lower end of the line)<br />
* tod weight C uses the data volume after cuts (unfilled symbols, for BICEP2 and ABS only)<br />
<br />
{| class="wikitable"<br />
! Experiment !! Frequency !! bandpower weight !! tod weight A !! ratio A !! tod weight B !! ratio B !! tod weight C !! ratio C<br />
|-<br />
| BK14 || 95 GHz || 1478 || 104162 || 70 || 68490 || 46 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| BK15 || 95 GHz || 3501 || 276178 || 79 || 182539 || 52 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| BICEP2 || 150 GHz || 2905 || 327363 || 113 || 279828 || 96 || 92086 || 32<br />
|-<br />
| BK-V || 150 GHz || 6245 || 915250 || 147 || 650109 || 104 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| BK14 || 150 GHz || 7514 || 1093530 || 146 || 767335 || 102 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| BK15 || 150 GHz || 8638 || 1176380 || 136 || 822265 || 95 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| BK15 || 220 GHz || 101 || 18249 || 181 || 12100 || 120 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| ACTpol (year 1) || 150 GHz || 42 || 22498 || 539 || 14173 || 340 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| ACTpol (year 2) || 150 GHz || 197 || 112490 || 571 || 54670 || 278 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| QUIET || 43 GHz || 35 || 4210 || 120 || 2615 || 75 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| QUIET || 95 GHz || 33 || 5673 || 171 || 3532 || 106 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| ABS || 150 GHz || 77 || 23849 || 310 || 14398 || 187 || 4936 || 64<br />
|}</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=Estimated_observing_efficiency_for_past_and_current_telescopes&diff=7707Estimated observing efficiency for past and current telescopes2018-09-25T21:45:53Z<p>Cbischoff: /* Tabulated results */</p>
<hr />
<div>''Colin Bischoff, 2018-09-25''<br />
----<br />
<br />
In this posting, I try to estimate the relative observing efficiency for telescopes at South Pole vs Chile. It is hard to get a clean answer to this question because every experiment has its own unique circumstances and there are a limited number of data points to examine. <br />
<br />
The method I will use here is to compare a survey weight (units of &mu;K<sup>-2</sup>) calculated from published BB bandpowers to a survey weight calculated from instantaneous sensitivity and observing time. Note that survey weight is the quantity that should scale linearly with efforts, so the survey weight at 150 GHz for the BK14 paper is equal to the BICEP2 2010--2012 survey weight plus Keck Array 150 GHz survey weight for 2012--2014.<br />
<br />
* The "bandpower weight" is easier to define unambiguously -- in a [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180810_noise/ previous posting] I calculated the ''N''<sub>&#x2113;</sub> and effective ''f''<sub>sky</sub> for many different experiments that have published BB results. From these results, I calculate the bandpower weight as '''''f''<sub>sky</sub> / ''N''<sub>&#x2113;</sub>'''.<br />
* The "tod weight" is calculated from instantaneous sensitivity (NEQ) of the full experiment and observing time (&tau;) as '''&tau; / NEQ<sup>2</sup>'''. While this definition is quite simple, there are many possible choices for how to select &tau; and it can be difficult to do this in a consistent way across experiments.<br />
<br />
The idea behind these statistics is that tod weight describes the experiment on paper, ''i.e.'' "I will put together an array of detectors with NEQ = 15 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> and then observe for three years". The bandpower weight describes the results that were actually obtained, including data cuts, instrument downtime, filtering, inefficiencies in sky coverage, etc, etc. Note however that I am using actual array NEQ as reported in published results to calculate tod weight, so detector yield, noisy detectors, and increased NEQ from marginal weather all get baked into the tod weight to some extent and should not lead to a discrepancy between the two statistics.<br />
<br />
Figure 1 is a plot of the ratio of tod weight to bandpower weight for BICEP/Keck, ACTpol, ABS, and QUIET. I didn't include SPTpol or POLARBEAR because I couldn't array NEQ numbers for those instruments. Points are color-coded according to observing band (red for 95 GHz, green for 150 GHz, and blue for 220 GHz). A larger value of the weight ratio (y-axis) means that the statistical power of the bandpower result fell short of what we might expect from the instrument sensitivity and time on sky. The tod weight is ~100 times larger than the bandpower weight for most experiments. While we all know that there are many significant factors that cause observing efficiency to be less than a naive calculation would indicate, I haven't spent any time thinking about whether there are any order ~10 numbers that would be needed to make these two statistics comparable -- I wouldn't recommend reading much into the absolute scale of the y-axis, but it would be interesting to cross-check with an ''ab initio'' sensitivity calculator such as [https://github.com/chill90/BoloCalc BoloCalc].<br />
<br />
For most experiments I include two points (connected by a line) that make different choices for how to define observing time. The upper point uses a strict definition that calculates &tau; as the number of seconds between when the experiment first started observing and when it completed. For the lower point, I tried to count only the stretches of time that were spent in standard observing mode, ''i.e.'' excluding downtimes for maintenance / upgrades. For ABS and BICEP2 150 GHz, I added an additional unfilled point that counts only the observing time after data cuts. <br />
<br />
[[File:CMB_achieved_efficiency.png|frame|Figure 1: survey weight ratio vs bandpower-derived survey weight|center]]<br />
<br />
== Details for figure inputs ==<br />
<br />
* BICEP/Keck 150 GHz includes points from [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014PhRvL.112x1101A BK-I 2014], [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...811..126B BK-V 2015] (same dataset used for BKP joint analysis), [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016PhRvL.116c1302B BK-VI 2016] (BK14), and the upcoming BK15 results. <br />
** For BICEP2, I used an array NEQ of 17 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> with &tau; = 3 years. For the lower point, &tau; is reduced to 936 days (2010-02-15 to 2012-11-06, except for 2011-01-01 to 2011-03-01) to remove time spent on deployment and calibration campaigns.<br />
** The BK-V result adds in Keck Array data from 2012 (11.5 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for five receivers) and 2013 (9.5 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for five receivers). These each have nominal &tau; = 1 year. For the lower points, I deducted time spent on deployment and calibration campaigns, ending up with 240 days in 2012 and 223 days in 2013.<br />
** The BK14 result adds in Keck Array data from 2014 (13.3 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for three receivers). This NEQ estimate is from an internal posting and is not included in the paper. &tau; = 1 year, or 240 days after deducting deployment / calibration.<br />
** The BK15 result adds in Keck Array data from 2015 (19.5 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for one receiver). This NEQ estimate is from an internal posting and is not included in the paper. &tau; = 1 year, or 242 days after deducting deployment / calibration.<br />
* BICEP/Keck 95 GHz includes points from [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016PhRvL.116c1302B BK-VI 2016] (BK14) and the upcoming BK15 results.<br />
** The BK14 result uses 2014 Keck Array data (17.4 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for two receivers). This NEQ estimate is from an internal posting and is not included in the paper. &tau; = 1 year, or 240 days after deducting deployment / calibration.<br />
** The BK15 result adds in Keck Array data from 2015 (13.5 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for two receivers). This NEQ estimate is from an internal posting and is not included in the paper. &tau; = 1 year, or 242 days after deducting deployment / calibration.<br />
* BICEP/Keck 220 GHz is from the upcoming BK15 results. Array NEQ is 41.6 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for two receivers. This NEQ estimate is from an internal posting and is not included in the paper. &tau; = 1 year, or 242 days after deducting calibration.<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018arXiv180101218K ABS] has array NEQ of 41 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> and observed for 464 days (2012-09-13 to 2013-12-21). For the lower (filled) point, I used &tau; = 1634 + 209 + 1745 + 3135 = 6723 hours (Section 3 of Kusaka 2018). For the unfilled point, I used 461,237 TES-hours on Field A after cuts (bottom line of Table 3 of Kusaka 2018) and used a per-TES sensitivity of 580 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup>.<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...741..111Q QUIET 43 GHz] has array NEQ of 69 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> and observed for 232 days (2008-10-24 to 2009-06-13). For the lower point, I used &tau; = 3458 hours (Section 3 of QUIET 2011).<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...760..145Q QUIET 95 GHz] has array NEQ of 87 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> and observed for 497 days (2009-08-12 to 2010-12-22). For the lower point, I used &tau; = 7426 hours (Section 3 of QUIET 2012).<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014JCAP...10..007N ACTpol season 1] has array NEQ of 19 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> and observed for 94 days (2013-09-11 to 2013-12-14). For the lower point, I multiplied by &tau; by 63% to account for the fact that their analysis used only nighttime data for fields D1, D5, and D6 (Section 3.1 of N&aelig;ss 2014).<br />
* For [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017JCAP...06..031L ACTpol season 2], I kept the season 1 accumulated tod weight and added an additional 133 days (2014-08-20 to 2014-12-31) with array NEQ of 11.3 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> (inverse-quadrature sum of 23 and 12.9 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for PA1 and PA2, respectively). For the lower point, the ACTpol season 2 observing time was scaled by a factor of 45% to account for D5 and D6 nighttime data only. It seems like Louis 2017 reanalyzes the season 1 data with somewhat different choices than N&aelig;ss 2014, so this addition of weights might not be strictly accurate.<br />
<br />
== Conclusions ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Tabulated results ==<br />
<br />
The table below compiles all the numbers used for Figure 1.<br />
<br />
* tod weight A uses the full duration of the experiment (upper end of the line)<br />
* tod weight B uses the duration of standard operations (lower end of the line)<br />
* tod weight C uses the data volume after cuts (unfilled symbols, for BICEP2 and ABS only)<br />
<br />
{| class="wikitable"<br />
! Experiment !! Frequency !! bandpower weight !! tod weight A !! ratio A !! tod weight B !! ratio B !! tod weight C !! ratio C<br />
|-<br />
| BK14 || 95 GHz || 1478 || 104162 || 70 || 68490 || 46 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| BK15 || 95 GHz || 3501 || 276178 || 79 || 182539 || 52 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| BICEP2 || 150 GHz || 2905 || 327363 || 113 || 279828 || 96 || 92086 || 32<br />
|-<br />
| BK-V || 150 GHz || 6245 || 915250 || 147 || 650109 || 104 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| BK14 || 150 GHz || 7514 || 1093530 || 146 || 767335 || 102 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| BK15 || 150 GHz || 8638 || 1176380 || 136 || 822265 || 95 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| BK15 || 220 GHz || 101 || 18249 || 181 || 12100 || 120 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| ACTpol (year 1) || 150 GHz || 42 || 22498 || 539 || 14173 || 340 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| ACTpol (year 2) || 150 GHz || 197 || 112490 || 571 || 54670 || 278 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| QUIET || 43 GHz || 35 || 4210 || 120 || 2615 || 75 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| QUIET || 95 GHz || 33 || 5673 || 171 || 3532 || 106 || -- || --<br />
|-<br />
| ABS || 150 GHz || 77 || 23849 || 310 || 14398 || 187 || 4936 || 64<br />
|}</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=File:CMB_achieved_efficiency.png&diff=7706File:CMB achieved efficiency.png2018-09-25T18:18:17Z<p>Cbischoff: Cbischoff uploaded a new version of File:CMB achieved efficiency.png</p>
<hr />
<div>Scatter plot summarizing observing efficiency for several past / current experiments</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=Estimated_observing_efficiency_for_past_and_current_telescopes&diff=7705Estimated observing efficiency for past and current telescopes2018-09-25T18:17:48Z<p>Cbischoff: still working on posting</p>
<hr />
<div>''Colin Bischoff, 2018-09-25''<br />
----<br />
<br />
In this posting, I try to estimate the relative observing efficiency for telescopes at South Pole vs Chile. It is hard to get a clean answer to this question because every experiment has its own unique circumstances and there are a limited number of data points to examine. <br />
<br />
The method I will use here is to compare a survey weight (units of &mu;K<sup>-2</sup>) calculated from published BB bandpowers to a survey weight calculated from instantaneous sensitivity and observing time. Note that survey weight is the quantity that should scale linearly with efforts, so the survey weight at 150 GHz for the BK14 paper is equal to the BICEP2 2010--2012 survey weight plus Keck Array 150 GHz survey weight for 2012--2014.<br />
<br />
* The "bandpower weight" is easier to define unambiguously -- in a [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180810_noise/ previous posting] I calculated the ''N''<sub>&#x2113;</sub> and effective ''f''<sub>sky</sub> for many different experiments that have published BB results. From these results, I calculate the bandpower weight as '''''f''<sub>sky</sub> / ''N''<sub>&#x2113;</sub>'''.<br />
* The "tod weight" is calculated from instantaneous sensitivity (NEQ) of the full experiment and observing time (&tau;) as '''&tau; / NEQ<sup>2</sup>'''. While this definition is quite simple, there are many possible choices for how to select &tau; and it can be difficult to do this in a consistent way across experiments.<br />
<br />
The idea behind these statistics is that tod weight describes the experiment on paper, ''i.e.'' "I will put together an array of detectors with NEQ = 15 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> and then observe for three years". The bandpower weight describes the results that were actually obtained, including data cuts, instrument downtime, filtering, inefficiencies in sky coverage, etc, etc. Note however that I am using actual array NEQ as reported in published results to calculate tod weight, so detector yield, noisy detectors, and increased NEQ from marginal weather all get baked into the tod weight to some extent and should not lead to a discrepancy between the two statistics.<br />
<br />
Figure 1 is a plot of the ratio of tod weight to bandpower weight for BICEP/Keck, ACTpol, ABS, and QUIET. I didn't include SPTpol or POLARBEAR because I couldn't array NEQ numbers for those instruments. Points are color-coded according to observing band (red for 95 GHz, green for 150 GHz, and blue for 220 GHz). A larger value of the weight ratio (y-axis) means that the statistical power of the bandpower result fell short of what we might expect from the instrument sensitivity and time on sky. The tod weight is ~100 times larger than the bandpower weight for most experiments. While we all know that there are many significant factors that cause observing efficiency to be less than a naive calculation would indicate, I haven't spent any time thinking about whether there are any order ~10 numbers that would be needed to make these two statistics comparable -- I wouldn't recommend reading much into the absolute scale of the y-axis, but it would be interesting to cross-check with an ''ab initio'' sensitivity calculator such as [https://github.com/chill90/BoloCalc BoloCalc].<br />
<br />
For most experiments I include two points (connected by a line) that make different choices for how to define observing time. The upper point uses a strict definition that calculates &tau; as the number of seconds between when the experiment first started observing and when it completed. For the lower point, I tried to count only the stretches of time that were spent in standard observing mode, ''i.e.'' excluding downtimes for maintenance / upgrades. For ABS and BICEP2 150 GHz, I added an additional unfilled point that counts only the observing time after data cuts. <br />
<br />
[[File:CMB_achieved_efficiency.png|frame|Figure 1: survey weight ratio vs bandpower-derived survey weight|center]]<br />
<br />
== Details for figure inputs ==<br />
<br />
* BICEP/Keck 150 GHz includes points from [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014PhRvL.112x1101A BK-I 2014], [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...811..126B BK-V 2015] (same dataset used for BKP joint analysis), [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016PhRvL.116c1302B BK-VI 2016] (BK14), and the upcoming BK15 results. <br />
** For BICEP2, I used an array NEQ of 17 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> with &tau; = 3 years. For the lower point, &tau; is reduced to 936 days (2010-02-15 to 2012-11-06, except for 2011-01-01 to 2011-03-01) to remove time spent on deployment and calibration campaigns.<br />
** The BK-V result adds in Keck Array data from 2012 (11.5 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for five receivers) and 2013 (9.5 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for five receivers). These each have nominal &tau; = 1 year. For the lower points, I deducted time spent on deployment and calibration campaigns, ending up with 240 days in 2012 and 223 days in 2013.<br />
** The BK14 result adds in Keck Array data from 2014 (13.3 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for three receivers). This NEQ estimate is from an internal posting and is not included in the paper. &tau; = 1 year, or 240 days after deducting deployment / calibration.<br />
** The BK15 result adds in Keck Array data from 2015 (19.5 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for one receiver). This NEQ estimate is from an internal posting and is not included in the paper. &tau; = 1 year, or 242 days after deducting deployment / calibration.<br />
* BICEP/Keck 95 GHz includes points from [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016PhRvL.116c1302B BK-VI 2016] (BK14) and the upcoming BK15 results.<br />
** The BK14 result uses 2014 Keck Array data (17.4 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for two receivers). This NEQ estimate is from an internal posting and is not included in the paper. &tau; = 1 year, or 240 days after deducting deployment / calibration.<br />
** The BK15 result adds in Keck Array data from 2015 (13.5 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for two receivers). This NEQ estimate is from an internal posting and is not included in the paper. &tau; = 1 year, or 242 days after deducting deployment / calibration.<br />
* BICEP/Keck 220 GHz is from the upcoming BK15 results. Array NEQ is 41.6 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for two receivers. This NEQ estimate is from an internal posting and is not included in the paper. &tau; = 1 year, or 242 days after deducting calibration.<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018arXiv180101218K ABS] has array NEQ of 41 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> and observed for 464 days (2012-09-13 to 2013-12-21). For the lower (filled) point, I used &tau; = 1634 + 209 + 1745 + 3135 = 6723 hours (Section 3 of Kusaka 2018). For the unfilled point, I used 461,237 TES-hours on Field A after cuts (bottom line of Table 3 of Kusaka 2018) and used a per-TES sensitivity of 580 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup>.<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...741..111Q QUIET 43 GHz] has array NEQ of 69 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> and observed for 232 days (2008-10-24 to 2009-06-13). For the lower point, I used &tau; = 3458 hours (Section 3 of QUIET 2011).<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...760..145Q QUIET 95 GHz] has array NEQ of 87 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> and observed for 497 days (2009-08-12 to 2010-12-22). For the lower point, I used &tau; = 7426 hours (Section 3 of QUIET 2012).<br />
* [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014JCAP...10..007N ACTpol season 1] has array NEQ of 19 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> and observed for 94 days (2013-09-11 to 2013-12-14). For the lower point, I multiplied by &tau; by 63% to account for the fact that their analysis used only nighttime data for fields D1, D5, and D6 (Section 3.1 of N&aelig;ss 2014).<br />
* For [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017JCAP...06..031L ACTpol season 2], I kept the season 1 accumulated tod weight and added an additional 133 days (2014-08-20 to 2014-12-31) with array NEQ of 11.3 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> (inverse-quadrature sum of 23 and 12.9 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> for PA1 and PA2, respectively). For the lower point, the ACTpol season 2 observing time was scaled by a factor of 45% to account for D5 and D6 nighttime data only. It seems like Louis 2017 reanalyzes the season 1 data with somewhat different choices than N&aelig;ss 2014, so this addition of weights might not be strictly accurate.<br />
<br />
== Conclusions ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== Tabulated results ==</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=Estimated_observing_efficiency_for_past_and_current_telescopes&diff=7704Estimated observing efficiency for past and current telescopes2018-09-25T02:57:23Z<p>Cbischoff: Created page with "''Colin Bischoff, 2018-09-24'' ---- In this posting, I try to estimate the relative observing efficiency for telescopes at South Pole vs Chile. It is hard to get a clean answ..."</p>
<hr />
<div>''Colin Bischoff, 2018-09-24''<br />
----<br />
<br />
In this posting, I try to estimate the relative observing efficiency for telescopes at South Pole vs Chile. It is hard to get a clean answer to this question because every experiment has its own unique circumstances and there are a limited number of data points to examine. <br />
<br />
The method I will use here is to compare a survey weight (units of &mu;K<sup>-2</sup>) calculated from published BB bandpowers to a survey weight calculated from instantaneous sensitivity and observing time. Note that survey weight is the quantity that should scale linearly with efforts, so the survey weight at 150 GHz for the BK14 paper is equal to the BICEP2 2010--2012 survey weight plus Keck Array 150 GHz survey weight for 2012--2014.<br />
<br />
* The "bandpower weight" is easier to define unambiguously -- in a [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180810_noise/ previous posting] I calculated the ''N''<sub>&#x2113;</sub> and effective ''f''<sub>sky</sub> for many different experiments that have published BB results. From these results, I calculate the bandpower weight as '''''f''<sub>sky</sub> / ''N''<sub>&#x2113;</sub>'''.<br />
* The "tod weight" is calculated from instantaneous sensitivity (NEQ) of the full experiment and observing time (&tau;) as '''&tau; / NEQ<sup>2</sup>'''. While this definition is quite simple, there are many possible choices for how to select &tau; and it can be difficult to do this in a consistent way across experiments.<br />
<br />
The idea behind these statistics is that tod weight describes the experiment on paper, ''i.e.'' "I will put together an array of detectors with NEQ = 15 &mu;K s<sup>1/2</sup> and then observe for three years". The bandpower weight describes the results that were actually obtained, including data cuts, instrument downtime, filtering, inefficiencies in sky coverage, etc, etc. Note however that I am using actual array NEQ as reported in published results to calculate tod weight, so detector yield, noisy detectors, and increased NEQ from marginal weather all get baked into the tod weight to some extent and should not lead to a discrepancy between the two statistics.<br />
<br />
Figure 1 is a plot of the ratio of tod weight to bandpower weight for BICEP/Keck, ACTpol, ABS, and QUIET. I didn't include SPTpol or POLARBEAR because I couldn't array NEQ numbers for those instruments. Points are color-coded according to observing band (red for 95 GHz, green for 150 GHz, and blue for 220 GHz). A larger value of the weight ratio (y-axis) means that the statistical power of the bandpower result fell short of what we might expect from the instrument sensitivity and time on sky. For most experiments I include two points (connected by a line) that make different choices for how to define observing time. See below the figure for details.<br />
<br />
[[File:CMB_achieved_efficiency.png|frame|Figure 1|center]]<br />
<br />
...posting still in progress...</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=File:CMB_achieved_efficiency.png&diff=7703File:CMB achieved efficiency.png2018-09-25T02:53:31Z<p>Cbischoff: Scatter plot summarizing observing efficiency for several past / current experiments</p>
<hr />
<div>Scatter plot summarizing observing efficiency for several past / current experiments</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=R_Forecasting_Logbook&diff=7660R Forecasting Logbook2018-09-13T17:38:55Z<p>Cbischoff: /* Logbook Entries (reverse chronological) */</p>
<hr />
<div>This is an index page for logbook-style postings that cover the interconnected topics of sky modeling, simulations, and r forecasting for CMB-S4. <br />
<br />
Some guidelines for use:<br />
* '''Postings should include enough context''' so that a reader can jump in and figure out what is going on. It is ''not'' necessary to write an extensive introduction to every posting -- context can be in the form of links to older postings, paper citations, etc.<br />
* Postings should represent a snapshot of work in progress. It's ok to post incomplete results, but recommended that you include notes about what is missing, what you are still planning to work on, etc. <br />
* If you have work that extends or improves an old posting, you should add it as a new posting (that includes links back to the old work as appropriate). Don't update old postings, as they should provide a chronological record of progress.<br />
* On this index page, add a link to your posting with the date, a descriptive posting title, and your full name. This logbook covers a wide range of topics, so titles will be really important to keep it useful. Don't name your posting something like "Forecasting for S4"!<br />
* Links should be added in reverse-chronological order (newest at the top). Your posting can either be written up on another wiki page or it can be a link to some externally hosted webpage (useful if you want to include a javascript plots pager).<br />
<br />
== Telecon Notes ==<br />
<br />
[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1886yT1b6QDuWvsbAu5HmVv2Cl4pfH00YpK5Fv8dNzcM/edit?usp=sharing Telecon notes for r-forecasting]<br />
<br />
== Logbook Entries (reverse chronological) ==<br />
* '''2018 September 12''': [[Low ell noise from past and current telescopes]] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 September 5''': [[Phi reconstruction on 02.00 sims III]] (Anton Baleato)<br />
* '''2018 August 31''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180831_dc04_abc_model00_07_ML_proper_bp/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04b and 04c, for sky models 00 and 07] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 August 31''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180831_dc04_fixed_bp/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04, fixed bandpasses] (Ben Racine)<br />
* '''2018 August 27''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180827_bkfinal_04 Sims with nominal Chile and Pole masks III - BK-style power spectra of 04b.YY and 04c.YY] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 August 27''': [[Sims with nominal Chile and Pole masks II]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 August 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180826_dc04_fixed/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04, fixed] (V.Buza, B.Racine)<br />
* '''2018 August 24''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180824_bkfinal_04/ BK-style power spectra of v04.00-06 sims (CDT report config) FIXED] (Caterina Umilta)<br />
* '''2018 August 24''': [[Amplitude modulated Gaussian dust sims]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 August 17''': [[Sims with nominal Chile and Pole masks]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 August 10''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180810_noise/ Achieved performance roundup] (C. Bischoff)<br />
* '''2018 August 7''': [[Pre-reference-design noise specifications for large-aperture forecasting]] (Tom Crawford, Matthew Hasselfield, Gil Holder, Lloyd Knox)<br />
* '''2018 August 6''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180805_s4opt/ Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4, 44cm vs 52cm aperture (w/ high-res/low-res 20 GHz)] (V.Buza)<br />
* '''2018 July 9''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180708_dc04/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 04] (V.Buza)<br />
* '''2018 July 6''': [[Phi reconstruction on 02.00 sims II]] (Anton Baleato and Clem Pryke)<br />
* '''2018 June 11''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180611_s4opt/ Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4, 44cm aperture] (V.Buza) -- see corrected August 6th Update!<br />
* '''2018 June 11''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180609_S4_noise_simulation_arbitrary_coverage/ Recipe to generate performance based S4 simulations with arbitrary sky distribution (in progress)] (B.Racine, V.Buza)<br />
* '''2018 April 29''': [[Phi reconstruction on 02.00 sims]] (Anton Baleato)<br />
* '''2018 April 25''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180425_r_equivalent_maps/ Smallfield r-equivalent Maps] (Kenny Lau)<br />
* '''2018 April 4''': [[Sky masks for simulations III]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 March 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180323_bkfinal_04/ BK-style power spectra of v04.00-06 sims (CDT report config) BROKEN] (Clem)<br />
* '''2018 March 16''': [[ILC noise for large apertures at CDT noise levels]] (Raphael Flauger posted by Clem)<br />
* '''2018 March 16''': [[Sky masks for simulations II]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 February 19''': [[Sky masks for simulations]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 February 18''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180218_s4opt/ Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4, v3] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2018 February 7''': [[Sim map sets to demonstrate "real delensing" (02.00 and 02.09)]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2018 February 6''': [[Data Challenge Map Sets 04.YY]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 December 8''': [[Vansyngel Model]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 November 6''': [[Bandpass Convention - What does flat mean]] (Clem P.) - followup notes added Nov 20<br />
* '''2017 September 27''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170927_dc02/ Maximum likelihood search results for Data Challenge 02] (Bischoff, Buza, Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 September 13''': [[Bias on r from Band Center Errors]] (Palladino, Willmert, Bischoff)<br />
* '''2017 September 8''': [[Checking dust decorrelation in Raphael MHD based dust sim]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 September 6''': [[New NET Calculator and Validation]] (Denis Barkats)<br />
* '''2017 September 1''': [[Resolution at 20 GHz]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 August 31''': [[Bias on r from additive systematics]] (Palladino, Willmert, Bischoff)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170818_bkfinal_03.00/ BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v03.00,.03 CMB-S4 simulation maps] (Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 August 18 ''': [[Neff_and_Beam_Calibration| Neff and Beam Calibration]] (Dan)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [[Ideal delensing templates from flat-sky QE, first pass]] (Kyle Story)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170818_HR/ High-Res studies for CMB-S4 (draft, v2)] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2017 August 18''': [[Comments from Anthony Challinor and Rupert Allison regarding the impact of Galactic Foregrounds on lensing]] (Neelima)<br />
* '''2017 August 11''': [[Joint Synchrotron and Dust Maps from Simulations]] (B. Hensley)<br />
* '''2017 August 9''': [[Dust Emission From Halos]] (Jim & Jean-Baptiste)<br />
* '''2017 August 9''': [[SZ Clusters update]] (Mat & Nick)<br />
* '''2017 August 4''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170804_HR/ High-Res studies for CMB-S4 (preliminary draft)] (Victor Buza); perhaps a reference of interest https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.02259<br />
* '''2017 July 10''': [[Additive systematics for data challenge 03]] (Bischoff, Palladino, Buza, Kovac)<br />
* '''2017 July 6''': [[Detection significance and sky fraction, dust decorrelation]](Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 July 3''': [[Toy highly decorrelated dust model]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 June 27''': [[Checking dust decorrelation in models d1/d4/d7 and hipdt]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 June 23''': [[Dust_delensing_firstlook|Dust delensing update]] (Alex)<br />
* '''2017 June 23''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170623_bkfinal_02.00/ BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v02.00–06 CMB-S4 simulation maps] (Justin Willmert) ''Updated 2017 Sep 08''<br />
* '''2017 June 22''': [[Warm-up exercise for delensing]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 June 19''': [[SZ Clusters update]] (Mat, Nick)<br />
* '''2017 June 11''': [[Notes from May 31 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 June 9''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170525_s4syst/ Introducing systematics for CMB-S4] ((Victor Buza), with input from Colin Bischoff, John Kovac)<br />
* '''2017 June 9''': [[Dust_delensing_firstlook]] (Alex)<br />
* '''2017 June 9''': [[r-forecasting: high and low ell coordination|r-forecasting: update on high and low ell coordination]] (Neelima+Colin Hill writing)<br />
* '''2017 June 1''': [[Residuals for DC 01.01 and DC 01.02]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 June 1''': [[Levels of foregrounds in Gaussian and PySM simulations]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 May 26''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170511_s4dc1/ S4 DC 01.xx analysis, v2] (Victor Buza, Colin Bischoff, Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 May 26 ''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170411_bkfinal_01.00/ Updated v01.02 in "BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v01.00–02 CMB-S4 simulation maps"] (Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 May 15''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170515_chkS4/ N_ell spectra for CMB-S4 DC2.0] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2017 May 15''': [[Rev 2 PySM a2d4f1s3 maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 May 12''': [[r-forecasting: high and low ell coordination|r-forecasting: high and low ell coordination]] (lensers writing)<br />
* '''2017 May 8''': [[Checking PySM maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 May 2''': [[Notes from April 26 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Steve)<br />
* '''2017 May 1''': [[r-forecasting: delensing discussion|r-forecasting delensing discussion]] (Neelima and Blake)<br />
* '''2017 April 28 ''': [[Update_on_Neff_Forecasts| Update on Neff Forecasts]] (Dan)<br />
* '''2017 April 26 ''': [http://www.cosmo.bnl.gov/www/msyriac/web/work/sigma8plots.html Update on cluster number counts forecast including w_a] (Mat and Nick)<br />
* '''2017 April 21 ''': [[lensing-DE|Update on a lensing-based DE forecast]] (Jo, Siddharth)<br />
* '''2017 April 18 ''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170411_bkfinal_01.00/ BK-style power spectra for 1000 realizations of v01.00–02 CMB-S4 simulation maps] (Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 April 18 ''': [[S4-Lensing|S4 measurement requirements for neutrino mass and delensing - first pass]] (Neelima/Blake)<br />
* '''2017 April 17 ''': [[HiDPol|HI-based dust polarization model for r forecasts]] (Tuhin)<br />
* '''2017 April 05 ''': [[lensing-DE|Notes on one path to lensing-based DE forecasts]] (Jo)<br />
* '''2017 April 05 ''': [[Notes from April 5 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 April 05''': [https://cmb-s4.org/CMB-S4workshops/images/Sigma8_z_prep.pdf Sigma8(z) SPT clusters (placeholder) ] (S Bocquet)<br />
* '''2017 April 04''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170404_s4opt/ Updated Performance-based Fisher optimization for CMB-S4 (using bands v1.99)] (Victor Buza, Updated 2017.04.21)<br />
* '''2017 March 31 ''': [[Data Challenge analysis - DC1.0, DC1.1, DC1.2]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2017 March 30 ''': [[Notes from March 28 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim & Steve)<br />
* '''2017 March 29''': [[CMB-S4 frequency bands v1.99]] (John Kovac, Band-definition working group)<br />
* '''2017 March 28''': [[Adding higher res delensing "band"]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 March 27''': [[01.01 sim input maps - first try]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 March 23''': [[01.00 sim input maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2017 March 20''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170221_S4_NET_forecasts/ S4 Band sensitivity comparison follow-up] (Denis Barkats, John Kovac)<br />
* '''2017 March 17''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20170317_s4dc1/ S4 DC1.0 analysis] (Victor Buza, Colin Bischoff, Justin Willmert)<br />
* '''2017 March 17 ''': [[Media:Telecon_03172017_optimization_for_CMBS4.pdf]]: Optimization methodology for SO (Josquin)<br />
* '''2017 March 16 ''': [[ P_k_science_case| P(k) science case]] (Colin, Simone, Nick, David)<br />
* '''2017 March 15 ''': [[Notes from March 15 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 March 15 ''': [[CMB halo lensing sensitivity as a function of map sensitivity and resolution]] (Jim & Jean-Baptiste)<br />
* '''2017 March 15 ''': [[w and gamma | w and Delta gamma constraints from sigma_8 (z)]] (Mat & Nick)<br />
* '''2017 March 10 ''': [[Notes from March 8 telecon on science requirements for clusters/high-ell]] (Jim & Steve)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[reionization_requirements| Reionization science]] (Simone & Marcelo)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[High ell topics | High ell topics ]] (Jim)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[SZ_s8_z | sigma 8 of z constraints ]] (Mat, Nick)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[Szcounts | Number counts update for 1.0', 1.5', 2.0']] (Nick, Mat)<br />
* '''2017 March 8 ''': [[SZastro | SZ astrophysics with DESI ]](Nick, Simone, Emanuel, David)<br />
* '''2017 February 24''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20170224_cmbs4_dc1_final/ BK-style processing of DC1.0 maps to spectra] (Justin Willmert, Colin Bischoff)<br />
* '''2017 February 15 ''': [[Extragalactic lensing sims| Update on extragalactic phase-2 lensing sims]] (Marcelo, George, Dick, others)<br />
* '''2017 February 15 ''': [[Plan for next Galactic Phase-2sims| Plan for next Galactic phase-2 sims]] (Jo, Ben)<br />
* '''2017 February 10 ''': [[Resolution of foreground-cleaned map]] (Mat, Neelima, Blake, Alex, others)<br />
* '''2017 February 10 ''': [[Nongaussian dust in lensing]] (Alex, Mat, Neelima, Blake, others)<br />
* '''2017 January 30''': [[Aliased power in noise maps]] (Bischoff, Updated 2017-02-02)<br />
* '''2017 January 23''': [[CMBS4 Band Sensitivity Comparison]] (Charlie Hill)<br />
* '''2017 January 12''': [http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/cbischoff/20170112_data_challenge_1/ Maps for CMB-S4 data challenge 1] (Bischoff, Pryke, Buza)<br />
* '''2016 December 21''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20161220_chkS4/ N_ell spectra for the CMB-S4 data challenge, and updated &sigma;(r) checkpoints] (Victor Buza, Updated 2017.02.01)<br />
* '''2016 November 30''': [[First steps to sim input maps]] (Clem P.)<br />
* '''2016 November 4''': [[Tophat bands for Data Challenge]] (Bischoff)<br />
* '''2016 July 8''': [[fsky|Dependence of foregrounds on sky fraction]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2016 July 8''': [[SciBookPowspecTheoryFig|Three choices for Science Book Figure 5 (theory power spectrum & current BB points)]] (Tom C.)<br />
* '''2016 July 8''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20160707_s4plots/ S4 Inflation Chapter Plot Suggestions, V2] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 July 6''': [[w_cosntraint|Preliminary w constraint]] (Alessandro)<br />
* '''2016 June 24''': [[nsr|Preliminary ns-r plot for discussion]] (Raphael)<br />
* '''2016 June 16''': [[DelensingImpact| Impact Of Delensing On sigma(r)]] (Neelima/Mat)<br />
* '''2016 June 16''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20160616_s4plots/ S4 Inflation Chapter Plot Suggestions] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 June 10''': [[MapBasedRb| Map-based &sigma;(r) forecasts V2]] (David/Jo/Ben)<br />
* '''2016 June 3''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20160531_fisher/ &sigma;(r) forecasting checkpoints, V2] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 June 3''': [[ BTTfixedeffort | Forecasts for fnl BTT beam/fixed effort]] (Daan)<br />
* '''2016 May 31''': [[ForecastPatchyReion| Forecasts for patchy reionization]] (Vera, Alex, Nick)<br />
* '''2016 May 26''': [[Forecasting | Forecasts on neutrino mass]] (Nam, Mat, Neelima)<br />
* '''2016 May 26''': [[ KSZ| Forecasts on kSZ S/N]] (Simone, Emmanuel, Colin)<br />
* '''2016 May 26''': [[ Forecastfiso_planck| Forecast on correlated and anti-correlated CDM isocurvature f_iso]] (Kimmy, Cora, updated with plots 20160602)<br />
* '''2016 May 24''': [[ BTTNoiseBeam | Forecasts on fnl BTT beam/FWHM]] (Daan)<br />
* '''2016 May 22''': [[ ForecastAxions| Update on the axion isocurvature constraints for changing sensitivity and resolution]] (Renee)<br />
* '''2016 May 21''': [[ Forecastpann| Forecast on dark matter annihilation parameter p_ann]] (Kimmy, Cora)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[NeffNoiseBeam| Forecasts on Neff and Yp]] (Joel, Alex)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastEDE| Forecasts on Early Dark Energy]] (Erminia)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastCompIsocurv| Forecasts on compensated isocurvature varying sensitivity, resolution and sky coverage]] (Julian, Ely)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastBirefring| Forecasts on birefringence varying sensitivity and resolution]] (Vera, Alex)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[ForecastStrings| Forecasts on string tension varying sensitivity and resolution]] (Renee)<br />
* '''2016 May 20''': [[RobustForecast| Cosmological forecasts including component separation and iterative delensing]] (Stephen Feeney and Josquin Errard)<br />
* '''2016 May 19''': [[MapBasedR| Map-based &sigma;(r) forecasts]] (David A.)<br />
* '''2016 May 18''': [[Shear_calibration_LSST|LSST shear calibration with CMB S4]] (Emmanuel Schaan)<br />
* '''2016 May 13''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20150505_fisher/ &sigma;(r) forecasting checkpoints] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 May 13''': [[NonGaussianitiesTTT| CMBS-4 forecasts local and equilateral scalar Ngs using TTT]] (daan)<br />
* '''2016 May 13''': [[ForecastingSims|Simulations for r forecasts]] (Jo/Ben/David)<br />
* '''2016 May 6''': [[DMInteractionsComplementarity|DM interactions: complementarity]] (Vera)<br />
* '''2016 May 6''': [[Scenarios| Scenarios]] (Scott, Vera)<br />
* ''' 2016 May 3''': [[ForecastAxions |Effect of S4 specs on axion density parameters]] (Renee)<br />
* '''2016 April 30''': [[ForecastNu| Effect of S4 specs on neutrino parameters]] (Erminia)<br />
* '''2016 April 28''': [http://web.stanford.edu/~wlwu/posting/20160421_lensres/ Delensing residuals with low-ell foregrounds] (Kimmy Wu)<br />
* '''2016 April 28''': [[NonGaussianities| CMBS-4 forecast for tensor NGs]] (daan)<br />
* '''2016 April 19''': [[ForecastingStep1| Checking basic parameters for nominal case]] (Jo + multiple authors)<br />
* '''2016 April 5''': [[Forecasting|Setting up non-r Fisher-based parameter forecasts]] (Jo + others)<br />
* '''2016 March 31''': [http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~buza/20150331_fisher/ Fisher projections for &sigma;(r) based on achieved performance] (Victor Buza)<br />
* '''2016 January 27''': [https://cmb-s4.org/CMB-S4workshops/index.php/File:sptpol_ptsrc_polfrac_500d.pdf Quick estimate of mean-squared polarization fraction for SPTpol sources] (Tom Crawford)</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=Low_ell_noise_from_past_and_current_telescopes&diff=7659Low ell noise from past and current telescopes2018-09-13T17:38:28Z<p>Cbischoff: Posting describing BB low ell noise from past/current experiments</p>
<hr />
<div>''Colin Bischoff, 2018-09-13''<br />
----<br />
<br />
This posting documents (and slightly expands on) slides 6 and 7 from my presentation '''[[Media:Small_area_forecast.pdf |Noise forecasting for small-area survey]]''' from the 2018 Princeton workshop.<br />
<br />
I use the products from my posting '''[http://bicep.rc.fas.harvard.edu/CMB-S4/analysis_logbook/20180810_noise/ 2018 August 10: Achieved performance roundup]''' which consist of noise bandpowers (N_l) and f_sky as a function of ell for many recently published CMB polarization results. <br />
<br />
I fit the N_l to a model of white plus 1/ell^alpha noise. The first figure shows the ell_knee (i.e. the scale at which the N_l is twice the white noise level) plotted vs telescope aperture. The main takeaway is that past experiments divide into two categories -- small aperture experiments (BICEP/Keck, ABS, QUIET) with ell_knee of ~50 and larger aperture experiments (POLARBEAR, ACTpol, SPTpol) with ell_knee of ~450. <br />
<br />
Some additional notes:<br />
* For POLARBEAR, I was unable to simultaneously solve for N_l and f_sky (because they haven't published their EE error bars). As a fall back, I assumed an effective sky area of 25 square-degrees that is constant in ell. From discussion with Yuji Chinone, it sounds like the size of the BB error bar in POLARBEAR's lowest ell bin is driven by lack of modes over such a small sky area but my analysis attributes it to excess low-ell noise. We expect to see very different results for upcoming POLARBEAR results, which cover a much larger sky area and use a rapidly-rotating half-wave plate.<br />
* The bottom left corner of the figure includes seven different (but not wholly independent) BICEP/Keck points: BICEP2 (150 GHz), BKP (150 GHz), BK14 (95 and 150 GHz), and BK15 (95, 150, and 220 GHz).<br />
* For QUIET, the power with smaller ell_knee is 43 GHz and the point with higher ell_knee is 95 GHz, perhaps reflecting a difference in atmospheric noise.<br />
* Rather than focusing on aperture size, an alternate interpretation of this plot is to divide the experiments into a group with heavily baffled / enclosed telescopes (BICEP/Keck, ABS, QUIET) and a group with less baffling.<br />
<br />
[[File:Aperture_lknee.png|center|frame|Figure 1]]<br />
<br />
Figure 1 suggests that it is possible to achieve equally low ell_knee from both South Pole and Atacama sites. A potential objection to this claim is that the Atacama-based small-aperture telescopes (ABS and QUIET) both have significantly higher white noise than BICEP/Keck. If the low ell noise does not integrate down, then an ABS-like experiment with BICEP/Keck white noise level could end up completely dominated by the low ell noise. <br />
<br />
To explore this question, I examine the multiple data points from BICEP/Keck at 95 and 150 GHz (Figure 2). The figure shows white noise power on the x-axis vs noise power at ell=50 on the y-axis. To guide the eye, I drew dotted lines from the origin through the first 150 GHz data point (BICEP2) and first 95 GHz data point (BK14). If low ell noise integrates down with white noise, then we would expect subsequent data points to lie on these lines. In fact, we see that the points fall slightly above the line. This indicates that the low ell noise is not integrating down quite as well as the white noise. However, it doesn't seem to be a large effect and the 150 GHz low ell noise does seem to integrate down properly from BKP through BK15 (albeit over a much shorter lever arm). It's hard to make a firm statement without a deeper study, but my takeaway is that we can expect the low ell noise to mostly integrate down as sensitivity improves.<br />
<br />
[[File:BK_lowellnoise.png|center|frame|Figure 2]]<br />
<br />
A slightly different question that would be interesting to investigate is whether the low ell noise integrates down with ''increased detector count''. If we hypothesize that this noise has atmospheric origin, then it should integrate down over time because the atmosphere fluctuates. However, if all the detectors in a large focal plane see common-mode atmospheric noise, then adding more detectors may not yield the expected improvement to the low ell noise. An interesting test would be to compare Keck Array 95 GHz noise (288 detectors per focal plane) to BICEP3 95 GHz noise (~2400 detectors).</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=File:BK_lowellnoise.png&diff=7657File:BK lowellnoise.png2018-09-13T15:08:19Z<p>Cbischoff: Figure showing how BICEP/Keck low ell noise integrates down over time (at both 95 and 150 GHz)</p>
<hr />
<div>Figure showing how BICEP/Keck low ell noise integrates down over time (at both 95 and 150 GHz)</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=File:Aperture_lknee.png&diff=7656File:Aperture lknee.png2018-09-13T14:46:10Z<p>Cbischoff: ell_knee for polarization N_l as a function of aperture size</p>
<hr />
<div>ell_knee for polarization N_l as a function of aperture size</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=Princeton-2018:_Cosmology_with_CMB-S4&diff=7637Princeton-2018: Cosmology with CMB-S42018-09-11T17:24:45Z<p>Cbischoff: /* Saturday September 8th */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Workshop overview ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Workshop Photo:<br />
''' <br /><br />
[[File:CMB-S4_2018-1-photo.jpg|600px]]<br />
<br/><br />
<br />
The Princeton workshop continues a successful series of meetings bringing together the CMB experimental and theoretical community to plan a coordinated, stage-4 ground-based CMB experiment.<br />
The workshop is supported by Princeton University with a generous contribution from the Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics.<br />
<br />
This meeting will focus on moving us towards the Decadal Survey and project formation. Each day will have a different flavor:<br />
* Thursday - Collaboration, Project and Decadal Survey Report updates and discussion<br />
* Friday - Broader community building ahead of the Decadal Process<br />
* Saturday - Parallel Science & Technical Council sessions<br />
<br />
== Meeting Info & Registration ==<br />
<br />
[http://phyindico.princeton.edu/indico/event/12/page/0 Official Workshop Website: Registration, Participants, Hotels, Logistics].<br />
<br />
[[File:workshop-map-venue.png]] <br /><br />
Registration begins outside McDonnell A02 at 8 am on Thursday, 6 Sept 2018. <br />
Parking is in lot 21 (see map). <br />
<br />
'''Remote Connection Information:'''<br />
<br />
https://bluejeans.com/ <br /><br />
Meeting ID: 211 655 218<br /><br />
*1.888.240.2560 (US Toll Free)<br />
*1.408.317.9253 (US (Primary, San Jose)) <br />
*1.408.740.7256 (US (San Jose)) <br /><br />
*Global Numbers: https://www.bluejeans.com/numbers<br />
<br />
Slack channel #princeton2018 on the CMB-S4 workspace, or use https://cmb-s4.slack.com/messages/CCMNTUDC1<br />
<br />
== About This Wiki==<br />
<br />
As for previous workshops, we will use this wiki to organize the sessions, to capture the input from them, and to develop next steps. Participants are encouraged to edit the wiki directly, including uploading plots or a few slides.<br />
<br />
Hints for formatting this wiki can be found [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Formatting here]<br />
<br />
== Agenda ==<br />
<br />
<br />
=== Thursday September 6th ===<br />
<br />
'''08:00''' ''Breakfast'' <br />
<br />
'''08:30''' Welcome & Logistics (Suzanne Staggs Herman Verlinde, chair of the Physics Department) [[File:Logistics-pton-20180906.pdf]]<br />
<br />
''' Status & Context'''<br /><br />
'''08:45''' Introduction & Collaboration Update (Julian Borrill) [[File:Cmbs4_collaboration.pdf]]<br /> <br />
'''09:05''' DSR Update (John Carlstrom) [[File:DSR-Carlstrom.pdf]]<br /><br />
'''09:25''' Project Update (Jim Yeck) [[File:S4 Princeton Workshop Yeck.pdf]]<br /><br />
'''09:45''' Q&A<br />
<br />
'''DSR - Science Council''' <br /><br />
'''10:00''' Introduction (Lloyd Knox) [[File:DSR_ScienceCouncil_Princeton2018.pdf]]<br /> <br />
'''10:15''' Gravitational Waves & Inflation (Raphael Flauger) [[File: GWPrinceton.pdf]]<br /><br />
<br />
'''10:30''' ''Coffee Break''<br />
<br />
'''11:00''' Light Relics (Daniel Green & Joel Meyers) [[File:LightRelics_Meyers_Princeton_S4.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''11:15''' Neutrino Mass (Marilena Loverde & Blake Sherwin) [[File:S4WGNeutrinoMassReport.pdf]]<br /><br />
'''11:30''' Dark Energy & Dark Matter (Vera Gluscevic & Nick Battaglia) [[File:DMDE CMBS4 Princeton2018.pdf]]<br /><br />
'''11:45''' Galaxy Formation & Evolution (Marcelo Alvarez & Colin Hill) [[File:CMB-S4 Galaxy Formation and Evolution (Princeton).pdf]] <br /><br />
'''12:00''' Legacy Catalogs (Lindsey Bleem) [[https://cmb-s4.org/wiki/images/Legacy_catalog_update_princeton_9_6_18.pdf here]]<br /><br />
'''12:15''' Q&A<br />
<br />
'''12:30''' ''Lunch & JSAC Event''<br />
<br />
'''DSR - Technical Council'''<br /><br />
'''13:30''' Introduction (McMahon/Vieregg) [[File:TechCouncilPrinceton2018.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''13:45''' Sites & Infrastructure (Kam Arnold, Brad Benson) [https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XB3Kt80dbh9qoyvvnppN6RYispp_XFrB/view?usp=sharing Site Presentation PDF]<br /><br />
'''14:00''' Large Telescopes (Mike Niemack, Steve Padin) [[File:LargeTelescopesLargeCryostatsStatusPrincetonV2.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''14:15''' Small Telescopes (John Kovac, Chao-Lin Kuo, Aikito Kusaka) [[File:SmallTelescopes_Princeton_Thursday_slides.pdf]]<br /><br />
'''14:30''' Detectors & Readout (Clarence Chang, Kent Irwin, Adrian Lee) [[File:DetectorsReadout.pdf]]<br /><br />
'''14:45''' Data Acquisition & Control (Laura Newburgh, Nathan Whitehorn) [[File:S4_DAQ.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''15:00''' Data Management (Matthew Hasselfield) [[File:Data_management_20180906_v1.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''15:15''' Integration & Commissioning (Kam Arnold, Bradford Benson) [[File:IntegrationCommissioningPrinceton2018.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''15:30''' Options (Steve Padin) [[File:OptionsPrincetonV1.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''15:45''' Q&A<br />
<br />
'''16:00''' Fireslides 1 [[File:FireSlides_Thursday_post.pdf]]<br />
<br />
'''16:30''' Poster Session, Cocktails & Light Dinner<br />
<br />
------<br />
<br />
=== Friday September 7th ===<br />
<br />
'''08:00''' ''Breakfast''<br />
<br />
'''The CMB Circa September 2018'''<br />
<br />
'''08:30''' Harmonic Overtones (Marc Kamionkowski) [[File:Morningmarc.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''08:55''' On-sky performance of the CLASS Q-band telescope (John Appel) [[File:CLASS_S4_20180907_final.pdf]]<br /><br />
'''09:05''' SPIDER: an update, with foregrounds. Lots of them. [[File:Cmbs4_aug2018.red.mini.pdf]] (Bill Jones) <br /><br />
'''09:15''' Current state of the BICEP/Keck instrument, data and analysis (Clem Pryke) [[File:BK2018.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''09:25''' Planck 2018 and setting the stage for Stage-4 (Marius Millea) [[File:Planck2018.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''09:35''' Ground, Balloon, Space Complementarity (Shaul Hanany) [[File:PrincetonS4_2018V2.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''09:50''' BK-SPT3G forward plans (John Kovac) [[File:BK-SPT3G_forward.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''10:05''' Simons Observatory forward plans (Jo Dunkley) [[File:SO_plans.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''10:20''' The Big Step Up to CMB-S4 (Gil Holder) [[File:S4_Princeton_holder.pdf]] <br />
<br />
'''10:35''' ''Coffee Break''<br />
<br />
'''Adjacent Science & Emerging Ideas'''<br />
<br />
'''11:15''' Millimeter/Submillimeter Large Telescopes and Instruments (Phil Mauskopf) [[File:mauskopf_princeton_cmbs4.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''11:30''' Intensity mapping meets the CMB: Complementary Cosmology across the radio spectrum (Laura Newburgh) [[File:2018_09_S4_IntensityMappingCMB.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''11:45''' SPHERE-X (Jamie Bock) [[File:Spherex_cmbs4_2018.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''12:00''' Weak Lensing (Elisabeth Krause) [[https://cmb-s4.org/wiki/images/Krause_LSSTxS4_2018.pdf slides_here]]<br />
<br />
'''12:15''' '' Group Photo & Lunch''<br />
<br />
'''13:15''' Reionization Studies in the CMB-S4 Era (Adam Lidz) [[File:cmbs4_sep7_18_lidz.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''13:30''' A biased view of open questions in galaxy formation (Norm Murray) [[File:CMB-S4_Murray.pdf]]<br /><br />
'''13:45''' Polarized dust foreground models from HI data (Susan Clark) [[File:Clark_S4_ForegroundModels.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''14:00''' Properties of the magnetized dusty interstellar medium with Planck [[File:Aumont_Princeton_CMB-S4_090718.pdf]] (Jonathan Aumont)<br />
<br />
'''Talks From Collaboration Members'''<br />
<br />
'''14:15''' Inflationary vs. Reionization Features from Current and Future Data (Cora Dvorkin) [[File:DvorkinCMBS4.pdf]]<br /><br />
'''14:25''' Stress-testing nonstandard neutrino physics with CMB-S4 (Francis-Yan Cyr-Racine) [[File:CMB-S4_princeton18_cyr-racine.pdf]]<br /><br />
'''14:35''' Searching for Dark Matter Interactions in the CMB (Kimberly Boddy) [[File:Boddy.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''14:45''' Foreground immune CMB lensing with shear-only reconstruction (Emmanuel Schaan) [[https://cmb-s4.org/wiki/images/Cmb_shear_schaan.pdf slides]]<br /><br />
'''14:55''' Cosmology from cross correlating S4 lensing with photometric galaxy counts (Blake Sherwin) [[File:NeutrinoXCorrs.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''15:05''' Higher order corrections to CMB lensing cross correlations (Vanessa Boehm) [[https://cmb-s4.org/wiki/images/HighOrderCorr.pdf slides]]<br /><br />
'''15:15''' CMB lensing on small scales (Simone Ferraro) [[File:Ferraro_s4_princeton.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''15:25''' kSZ cosmology without the cluster optical depth degeneracy (Mathew Madhavacheril) [[File:Madhavacheril_S4kSZ_v1.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''15:35''' Q&A<br />
<br />
'''15:50''' ''Coffee Break''<br />
<br />
'''16:05''' Fireslides 2 [[File:FireSlides_Friday_post.pdf]]<br />
<br />
'''16:30''' Wrap-Up Panel - Roger Blandford, Chris Carilli, Bonnie Fleming, George Fuller, Risa Wechsler, (Matias Zaldarriaga was called away)<br /><br />
<br />
Contributed material for panel discussion by panelists and audience:<br /><br />
*(Charge) [[File:Panel-slide.pdf]]<br />
*From George Fuller: [[File:Fuller-CMB-S4.Princeton.pdf]]<br /><br />
*From Roger Blandford:[[File:Cmbs4rdb.pdf]]<br /><br />
*From Chris Carilli: [[File:Carilli-CMBS4.pdf]]<br/><br />
<br />
'''17:45''' Next Steps & Action Items<br />
<br />
'''Parallel Afternoon Session for Project Team'''<br />
<br />
'''15:00''' Charge for Decadal Survey Report Review on 12/11-13 in DC <br /><br />
'''15:30''' Possible DSR Review Committee and Planning Details <br /><br />
'''16:00''' Review of Overall Timeline and Boundary Conditions <br /><br />
'''16:30''' Critical Issues Identified in Project Planning <br /><br />
'''17:00''' Preparations/Guidance for Saturday Sessions <br /><br />
<br />
------<br />
<br />
=== Saturday September 8th ===<br />
<br />
'''PLEASE REMEMBER TO COMPLETE THE MEMBERSHIP SURVEY [[https://goo.gl/forms/GjFla4oPdLnVjugp2 HERE]]'''<br />
<br />
'''08:30''' ''Breakfast''<br />
<br />
'''09:00''' Parallel Sessions<br />
<br />
''Science Council:''<br />
* 09:00 Noise & Forecasting (70 min)<br />
** 09:00 r Forecasting Update (Clem Pryke) * Slides not actually shown at meeting * [[File:r_forecast_update.pdf]]<br />
** 09:10 small-area survey report from Noise Tiger Team (NTT) (Colin Bischoff) [[File:Small_area_forecast.pdf]]<br />
** 09:20 Discussion<br />
** 09:40 Report from NTT on large-area survey forecasting (Matthew Hasselfield) [[File:Noise-tiger-lat_v1.pdf]]<br />
** 09:50 Simons Observatory approach to TT, TE, EE, phi phi, tSZ, kSZ forecasting (Colin Hill) [[File:JCH_SO.pdf]]<br />
** 10:00 Discussion<br />
* 10:10 White Paper Organization (50 min)<br />
**[[Notes:]]<br />
* 11:00 Coffee Break<br />
* 11:30 Science Council AWG Breakout Sessions<br />
<br />
''Technical Council:''<br />
* 09:00 Project Planning<br />
* Slides<br />
** [[File:Sites_infrastructure.pdf]]<br />
** [[File:Lat_telescope.pdf]]<br />
** [[File:Lat_cryostat.pdf]]<br />
** [[File:Sat.pdf]]<br />
** [[File:Detectors_readout.pdf]]<br />
** [[File:Daq_control.pdf]]<br />
** [[File:Data_management.pdf]]<br />
** [[File:Integration_commissioning.pdf]]<br />
** [[File:Systems_engineering.pdf]]<br />
** [[File:Risk_opportunity.pdf]]<br />
** [[File:Wrap_up.pdf]]<br />
<br />
'''13:00''' ''Lunch (on your own)''<br />
<br />
'''14:00 onwards''' Rooms available for breakout sessions as required</div>Cbischoffhttp://www.cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php?title=Princeton-2018:_Cosmology_with_CMB-S4&diff=7636Princeton-2018: Cosmology with CMB-S42018-09-11T17:23:38Z<p>Cbischoff: /* Saturday September 8th */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Workshop overview ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Workshop Photo:<br />
''' <br /><br />
[[File:CMB-S4_2018-1-photo.jpg|600px]]<br />
<br/><br />
<br />
The Princeton workshop continues a successful series of meetings bringing together the CMB experimental and theoretical community to plan a coordinated, stage-4 ground-based CMB experiment.<br />
The workshop is supported by Princeton University with a generous contribution from the Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics.<br />
<br />
This meeting will focus on moving us towards the Decadal Survey and project formation. Each day will have a different flavor:<br />
* Thursday - Collaboration, Project and Decadal Survey Report updates and discussion<br />
* Friday - Broader community building ahead of the Decadal Process<br />
* Saturday - Parallel Science & Technical Council sessions<br />
<br />
== Meeting Info & Registration ==<br />
<br />
[http://phyindico.princeton.edu/indico/event/12/page/0 Official Workshop Website: Registration, Participants, Hotels, Logistics].<br />
<br />
[[File:workshop-map-venue.png]] <br /><br />
Registration begins outside McDonnell A02 at 8 am on Thursday, 6 Sept 2018. <br />
Parking is in lot 21 (see map). <br />
<br />
'''Remote Connection Information:'''<br />
<br />
https://bluejeans.com/ <br /><br />
Meeting ID: 211 655 218<br /><br />
*1.888.240.2560 (US Toll Free)<br />
*1.408.317.9253 (US (Primary, San Jose)) <br />
*1.408.740.7256 (US (San Jose)) <br /><br />
*Global Numbers: https://www.bluejeans.com/numbers<br />
<br />
Slack channel #princeton2018 on the CMB-S4 workspace, or use https://cmb-s4.slack.com/messages/CCMNTUDC1<br />
<br />
== About This Wiki==<br />
<br />
As for previous workshops, we will use this wiki to organize the sessions, to capture the input from them, and to develop next steps. Participants are encouraged to edit the wiki directly, including uploading plots or a few slides.<br />
<br />
Hints for formatting this wiki can be found [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Formatting here]<br />
<br />
== Agenda ==<br />
<br />
<br />
=== Thursday September 6th ===<br />
<br />
'''08:00''' ''Breakfast'' <br />
<br />
'''08:30''' Welcome & Logistics (Suzanne Staggs Herman Verlinde, chair of the Physics Department) [[File:Logistics-pton-20180906.pdf]]<br />
<br />
''' Status & Context'''<br /><br />
'''08:45''' Introduction & Collaboration Update (Julian Borrill) [[File:Cmbs4_collaboration.pdf]]<br /> <br />
'''09:05''' DSR Update (John Carlstrom) [[File:DSR-Carlstrom.pdf]]<br /><br />
'''09:25''' Project Update (Jim Yeck) [[File:S4 Princeton Workshop Yeck.pdf]]<br /><br />
'''09:45''' Q&A<br />
<br />
'''DSR - Science Council''' <br /><br />
'''10:00''' Introduction (Lloyd Knox) [[File:DSR_ScienceCouncil_Princeton2018.pdf]]<br /> <br />
'''10:15''' Gravitational Waves & Inflation (Raphael Flauger) [[File: GWPrinceton.pdf]]<br /><br />
<br />
'''10:30''' ''Coffee Break''<br />
<br />
'''11:00''' Light Relics (Daniel Green & Joel Meyers) [[File:LightRelics_Meyers_Princeton_S4.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''11:15''' Neutrino Mass (Marilena Loverde & Blake Sherwin) [[File:S4WGNeutrinoMassReport.pdf]]<br /><br />
'''11:30''' Dark Energy & Dark Matter (Vera Gluscevic & Nick Battaglia) [[File:DMDE CMBS4 Princeton2018.pdf]]<br /><br />
'''11:45''' Galaxy Formation & Evolution (Marcelo Alvarez & Colin Hill) [[File:CMB-S4 Galaxy Formation and Evolution (Princeton).pdf]] <br /><br />
'''12:00''' Legacy Catalogs (Lindsey Bleem) [[https://cmb-s4.org/wiki/images/Legacy_catalog_update_princeton_9_6_18.pdf here]]<br /><br />
'''12:15''' Q&A<br />
<br />
'''12:30''' ''Lunch & JSAC Event''<br />
<br />
'''DSR - Technical Council'''<br /><br />
'''13:30''' Introduction (McMahon/Vieregg) [[File:TechCouncilPrinceton2018.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''13:45''' Sites & Infrastructure (Kam Arnold, Brad Benson) [https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XB3Kt80dbh9qoyvvnppN6RYispp_XFrB/view?usp=sharing Site Presentation PDF]<br /><br />
'''14:00''' Large Telescopes (Mike Niemack, Steve Padin) [[File:LargeTelescopesLargeCryostatsStatusPrincetonV2.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''14:15''' Small Telescopes (John Kovac, Chao-Lin Kuo, Aikito Kusaka) [[File:SmallTelescopes_Princeton_Thursday_slides.pdf]]<br /><br />
'''14:30''' Detectors & Readout (Clarence Chang, Kent Irwin, Adrian Lee) [[File:DetectorsReadout.pdf]]<br /><br />
'''14:45''' Data Acquisition & Control (Laura Newburgh, Nathan Whitehorn) [[File:S4_DAQ.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''15:00''' Data Management (Matthew Hasselfield) [[File:Data_management_20180906_v1.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''15:15''' Integration & Commissioning (Kam Arnold, Bradford Benson) [[File:IntegrationCommissioningPrinceton2018.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''15:30''' Options (Steve Padin) [[File:OptionsPrincetonV1.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''15:45''' Q&A<br />
<br />
'''16:00''' Fireslides 1 [[File:FireSlides_Thursday_post.pdf]]<br />
<br />
'''16:30''' Poster Session, Cocktails & Light Dinner<br />
<br />
------<br />
<br />
=== Friday September 7th ===<br />
<br />
'''08:00''' ''Breakfast''<br />
<br />
'''The CMB Circa September 2018'''<br />
<br />
'''08:30''' Harmonic Overtones (Marc Kamionkowski) [[File:Morningmarc.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''08:55''' On-sky performance of the CLASS Q-band telescope (John Appel) [[File:CLASS_S4_20180907_final.pdf]]<br /><br />
'''09:05''' SPIDER: an update, with foregrounds. Lots of them. [[File:Cmbs4_aug2018.red.mini.pdf]] (Bill Jones) <br /><br />
'''09:15''' Current state of the BICEP/Keck instrument, data and analysis (Clem Pryke) [[File:BK2018.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''09:25''' Planck 2018 and setting the stage for Stage-4 (Marius Millea) [[File:Planck2018.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''09:35''' Ground, Balloon, Space Complementarity (Shaul Hanany) [[File:PrincetonS4_2018V2.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''09:50''' BK-SPT3G forward plans (John Kovac) [[File:BK-SPT3G_forward.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''10:05''' Simons Observatory forward plans (Jo Dunkley) [[File:SO_plans.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''10:20''' The Big Step Up to CMB-S4 (Gil Holder) [[File:S4_Princeton_holder.pdf]] <br />
<br />
'''10:35''' ''Coffee Break''<br />
<br />
'''Adjacent Science & Emerging Ideas'''<br />
<br />
'''11:15''' Millimeter/Submillimeter Large Telescopes and Instruments (Phil Mauskopf) [[File:mauskopf_princeton_cmbs4.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''11:30''' Intensity mapping meets the CMB: Complementary Cosmology across the radio spectrum (Laura Newburgh) [[File:2018_09_S4_IntensityMappingCMB.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''11:45''' SPHERE-X (Jamie Bock) [[File:Spherex_cmbs4_2018.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''12:00''' Weak Lensing (Elisabeth Krause) [[https://cmb-s4.org/wiki/images/Krause_LSSTxS4_2018.pdf slides_here]]<br />
<br />
'''12:15''' '' Group Photo & Lunch''<br />
<br />
'''13:15''' Reionization Studies in the CMB-S4 Era (Adam Lidz) [[File:cmbs4_sep7_18_lidz.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''13:30''' A biased view of open questions in galaxy formation (Norm Murray) [[File:CMB-S4_Murray.pdf]]<br /><br />
'''13:45''' Polarized dust foreground models from HI data (Susan Clark) [[File:Clark_S4_ForegroundModels.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''14:00''' Properties of the magnetized dusty interstellar medium with Planck [[File:Aumont_Princeton_CMB-S4_090718.pdf]] (Jonathan Aumont)<br />
<br />
'''Talks From Collaboration Members'''<br />
<br />
'''14:15''' Inflationary vs. Reionization Features from Current and Future Data (Cora Dvorkin) [[File:DvorkinCMBS4.pdf]]<br /><br />
'''14:25''' Stress-testing nonstandard neutrino physics with CMB-S4 (Francis-Yan Cyr-Racine) [[File:CMB-S4_princeton18_cyr-racine.pdf]]<br /><br />
'''14:35''' Searching for Dark Matter Interactions in the CMB (Kimberly Boddy) [[File:Boddy.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''14:45''' Foreground immune CMB lensing with shear-only reconstruction (Emmanuel Schaan) [[https://cmb-s4.org/wiki/images/Cmb_shear_schaan.pdf slides]]<br /><br />
'''14:55''' Cosmology from cross correlating S4 lensing with photometric galaxy counts (Blake Sherwin) [[File:NeutrinoXCorrs.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''15:05''' Higher order corrections to CMB lensing cross correlations (Vanessa Boehm) [[https://cmb-s4.org/wiki/images/HighOrderCorr.pdf slides]]<br /><br />
'''15:15''' CMB lensing on small scales (Simone Ferraro) [[File:Ferraro_s4_princeton.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''15:25''' kSZ cosmology without the cluster optical depth degeneracy (Mathew Madhavacheril) [[File:Madhavacheril_S4kSZ_v1.pdf]] <br /><br />
'''15:35''' Q&A<br />
<br />
'''15:50''' ''Coffee Break''<br />
<br />
'''16:05''' Fireslides 2 [[File:FireSlides_Friday_post.pdf]]<br />
<br />
'''16:30''' Wrap-Up Panel - Roger Blandford, Chris Carilli, Bonnie Fleming, George Fuller, Risa Wechsler, (Matias Zaldarriaga was called away)<br /><br />
<br />
Contributed material for panel discussion by panelists and audience:<br /><br />
*(Charge) [[File:Panel-slide.pdf]]<br />
*From George Fuller: [[File:Fuller-CMB-S4.Princeton.pdf]]<br /><br />
*From Roger Blandford:[[File:Cmbs4rdb.pdf]]<br /><br />
*From Chris Carilli: [[File:Carilli-CMBS4.pdf]]<br/><br />
<br />
'''17:45''' Next Steps & Action Items<br />
<br />
'''Parallel Afternoon Session for Project Team'''<br />
<br />
'''15:00''' Charge for Decadal Survey Report Review on 12/11-13 in DC <br /><br />
'''15:30''' Possible DSR Review Committee and Planning Details <br /><br />
'''16:00''' Review of Overall Timeline and Boundary Conditions <br /><br />
'''16:30''' Critical Issues Identified in Project Planning <br /><br />
'''17:00''' Preparations/Guidance for Saturday Sessions <br /><br />
<br />
------<br />
<br />
=== Saturday September 8th ===<br />
<br />
'''PLEASE REMEMBER TO COMPLETE THE MEMBERSHIP SURVEY [[https://goo.gl/forms/GjFla4oPdLnVjugp2 HERE]]'''<br />
<br />
'''08:30''' ''Breakfast''<br />
<br />
'''09:00''' Parallel Sessions<br />
* Science Council:<br />
** 09:00 Noise & Forecasting (70 min)<br />
*** 09:00 r Forecasting Update (Clem Pryke) * Slides not actually shown at meeting * [[File:r_forecast_update.pdf]]<br />
*** 09:10 small-area survey report from Noise Tiger Team (NTT) (Colin Bischoff) [[File:Small_area_forecast.pdf]]<br />
*** 09:20 Discussion<br />
*** 09:40 Report from NTT on large-area survey forecasting (Matthew Hasselfield) [[File:Noise-tiger-lat_v1.pdf]]<br />
*** 09:50 Simons Observatory approach to TT, TE, EE, phi phi, tSZ, kSZ forecasting (Colin Hill) [[File:JCH_SO.pdf]]<br />
*** 10:00 Discussion<br />
** 10:10 White Paper Organization (50 min)<br />
***[[Notes:]]<br />
** 11:00 Coffee Break<br />
** 11:30 Science Council AWG Breakout Sessions<br />
<br />
* Technical Council:<br />
** 09:00 Project Planning<br />
** Slides<br />
*** [[File:Sites_infrastructure.pdf]]<br />
*** [[File:Lat_telescope.pdf]]<br />
*** [[File:Lat_cryostat.pdf]]<br />
*** [[File:Sat.pdf]]<br />
*** [[File:Detectors_readout.pdf]]<br />
*** [[File:Daq_control.pdf]]<br />
*** [[File:Data_management.pdf]]<br />
*** [[File:Integration_commissioning.pdf]]<br />
*** [[File:Systems_engineering.pdf]]<br />
*** [[File:Risk_opportunity.pdf]]<br />
*** [[File:Wrap_up.pdf]]<br />
<br />
'''13:00''' ''Lunch (on your own)''<br />
<br />
'''14:00 onwards''' Rooms available for breakout sessions as required</div>Cbischoff