1 / 18

Component Separation of Polarized Data Application to PLANCK

Component Separation of Polarized Data Application to PLANCK. Jonathan Aumont. J-F. Mac ías-Pérez, M. Tristram, D. Santos. 15-09-2005. Summary. Component separation with polarized data method Description of the simulations CMB + Dust + Synchrotron + Noise

janice
Download Presentation

Component Separation of Polarized Data Application to PLANCK

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Component Separation of Polarized Data Application to PLANCK Jonathan Aumont J-F. Macías-Pérez, M. Tristram, D. Santos 15-09-2005

  2. Summary • Component separation with polarized data method • Description of the simulations • CMB + Dust + Synchrotron + Noise • Component separation on Planck simulations • CMB + Noise • CMB + Foregrounds + Noise • Effect of the foregrounds on the CMB reconstruction • Discrimination of the tensor to scalar ratio • With Planck • With a next generation CMB polarization experiment

  3. Data model (1) Data in the spherical harmonics space for X = { T,E,B }: Example: 2 frequencies, 2 components data:

  4. Data model (2) Density matrices: Then data read: Matrix expressions:

  5. Spectral matching • Expectation-Maximization (EM) algorithm [Dempster et al. JRSS 1977]: Set of parameters: q i = { RS ( l ), RN ( l ), A } • Iterations: • E-step: expectation of the likelihood for q i (gaussian prior) • M-step: maximization of the likelihood to compute q i+1 • In this work: • A is fixed – semi-blind separation • 5000 EM iterations [Delabrouille, Cardoso & Patanchon MNRAS 2003]

  6. Q Q Q I I I I, Q and U sky maps simulations • CMB • Spectra generated with CAMB [Lewis et al. ApJ 2000] for concordance model according to WMAP [Bennett et al. ApJS 2003] with gravitational lensing • Thermal dust emission: • Power-law model • Normalized with respect to Archeops 353 GHz data [Ponthieu et al. A&A 2005] (cf. M. Tristram talk) • Galactic synchrotron emission: • Template maps [Giardino et al. A&A 2002]: • Isotropic spectral index ( a = -2.7) White noise maps for each frequency

  7. Planck separation (CMB + Noise) • 200 Planck simulations (14 month survey, [30, 40, 70, 100, 143, 217, 353 GHz]), CMB + Noise, r = 0.7 • nside = 128, 5000 EM iterations BB TT EE TE EB TB Separation is efficient for TT, EE, TE, TB and EB Separation of BB up to l ~ 100

  8. Planck separation (CMB + Foregrounds + Noise) (1) 200 Planck simulations, CMB + Dust + Synchrotron+ Noise nside = 128, 5000 EM iterations CMB TT BB EE TE EB TB Separation is efficient for TT, EE, TE, TB and EB Separation of BB up to l ~ 100

  9. Planck separation (CMB + Foregrounds + Noise) (2) Dust EE TT BB TE TB EB Separation is efficient for TT, EE, BB, TE, TB, and EB

  10. Planck separation (CMB + Foregrounds + Noise) (3) Synchrotron EE BB TT TE TB EB Separation is efficient for TT, EE, BB, TE, TB, and EB

  11. Planck separation (CMB + Foregrounds + Noise), nside = 512, r = 0.1 TT TT TT EE EE EE BB BB BB TE TE TE Separation is efficient for TT, EE, TE For CMB BB, separation up to l ~ 40

  12. Effect of foregrounds on the recontruction of the CMB (1) TT BB EE TE EB TB Error bars nearly twice larger in the case with foregrounds Bias occurs at lower l for BB in the case with foregrounds

  13. Effect of foregrounds on the recontruction of the CMB (2) EE BB TT EB TB Larger error bars with foregrounds Differences within the error bars TE

  14. Bias angular scale and signal to noise ratio l = 138 s/n = 7.5 . 10-3 l = 118 s/n = 1.5 . 10-2 CMB + foregrounds +noise CMB + noise This method allows separation for signal to noise ratios of order 10-2for Planck Signal to noise ratio reachable in the case of presence of foregrounds is twice larger

  15. Tensor to scalar ratio reachable with the Planck satellite (1) r = 10 -2 r = 0.7 r = 10 -1 Reconstruction is possible for r ≥ 0.1, for a Planck 14 months survey

  16. Tensor to scalar ratio reachable with the Planck satellite (2) CMB CMB + foregrounds r < 0.7cannot be caracterized by TT, EE and TE r ≥ 0.1 are reachable with BB for Planck r ~ 10-2 may be reach with improvement of the method TT EE TE BB

  17. Separation with the SAMPAN prototype Satellite experiment with polarized bolometers at 100, 143, 217, 353 GHz Sensitivity 10 times better than Planck Simulations with CMB + Dust r = 10 -2 r = 10 -1 r = 10 -4 r = 10 -3 For SAMPAN, r is reachable up to 10-3

  18. Conclusions • Component separation method for temperature can be applied to polarization • Separation is efficient for CMB, dust and synchrotron emissions in the Planck case • Foregrounds contamination reduces the sensitivity of the determination of the CMB spectra Further work needed to improve the method and to add beam and incomplete sky coverage effects [Aumont et al. in preparation] Polarized dust templates needed • Planck will be able to constrain r ≥ 0.1 • SAMPAN would be able to constrain r≥ 10-3 • Further applications like detection of the primordial magnetic field [Aumont et al. in preparation]

More Related