arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 2407.11296astro-ph.COastro-ph.IM
收藏

21 cm 高斯过程成分分离中前景空间变化的建模

Modeling Foreground Spatial Variations in 21 cm Gaussian Process Component Separation

Kangning Diao, Richard D. P. Grumitt, Yi Mao

AI总结:

本文针对21 cm成分分离中前景空间变化问题,提出不合并模型和分层高斯过程模型,在模拟HI强度映射观测上验证了考虑核参数空间变化可显著提升宇宙学信号恢复精度与鲁棒性。

摘要:

高斯过程(GPs)已被广泛用作21 cm数据分析中成分分离的非参数模型。该方法利用了宇宙学信号和前景信号在频谱行为上的显著差异,并通过GP协方差核对其进行建模。以往的方法在所有视线(LoS)方向上采用全局GP核。在本工作中,我们研究了允许前景核参数存在空间变化的贝叶斯方法,并在模拟的HI强度映射观测数据上对其进行了测试。我们考虑了一个不合并(NP)模型,该模型通过为每条视线独立拟合各自的协方差核来处理每条视线;以及一个分层高斯过程(HGP)模型,该模型允许不同视线之间的核参数发生变化,并通过全局超先验进行正则化。我们发现,考虑GP核参数的空间变化能够显著改善宇宙学信号的恢复,残差分布的标准差最多降低30%,并且模型的预测性能得到提升。允许GP核参数存在空间变化还改善了HI功率谱和小波散射变换系数的恢复。虽然NP模型在残差分布衡量下取得了更优的恢复效果,但它需要大量的计算资源,面临严峻的收敛挑战,并且容易过拟合。相反,HGP模型在信号恢复的准确性和鲁棒性之间取得了平衡。对HGP模型的进一步改进将需要更具物理动机的前景空间变化建模。

英文摘要:

Gaussian processes (GPs) have been extensively utilized as nonparametric models for component separation in 21 cm data analyses. This exploits the distinct spectral behavior of the cosmological and foreground signals, which are modeled through the GP covariance kernel. Previous approaches have employed a global GP kernel along all lines of sight (LoS). In this work, we study Bayesian approaches that allow for spatial variations in foreground kernel parameters, testing them against simulated HI intensity mapping observations. We consider a no-pooling (NP) model, which treats each LoS independently by fitting for separate covariance kernels, and a hierarchical Gaussian Process (HGP) model that allows for variation in kernel parameters between different LoS, regularized through a global hyperprior. We find that accounting for spatial variations in the GP kernel parameters results in a significant improvement in cosmological signal recovery, achieving up to a 30% reduction in the standard deviation of the residual distribution and improved model predictive performance. Allowing for spatial variations in GP kernel parameters also improves the recovery of the HI power spectra and wavelet scattering transform coefficients. Whilst the NP model achieves superior recovery as measured by the residual distribution, it demands extensive computational resources, faces formidable convergence challenges, and is prone to overfitting. Conversely, the HGP model strikes a balance between the accuracy and robustness of the signal recovery. Further improvements to the HGP model will require more physically motivated modeling of foreground spatial variations.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑