Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

The choice of Planck CMB likelihood in cosmological analyses

Published 10 Oct 2025 in astro-ph.CO | (2510.09430v1)

Abstract: We compare cosmological parameters from different Planck sky maps and likelihood pipelines, assessing robustness of cosmological results with respect to the choice of the latest Planck maps-likelihood combination. We show that, for the Planck multipole range retained in combination with ground-based observations, different products give very similar cosmological solutions; small remaining differences are reduced by the addition of other CMB datasets to Planck. In particular, constraints on extended cosmological models benefit from the addition of small-scale power from ground-based experiments and are completely insensitive to the choice of Planck maps and likelihood. For this work we derive and release a nuisance-marginalized dataset and CamSpec-NPIPE-lite likelihood for the Planck NPIPE data injected into the CamSpec likelihood - which are usually used to obtain the reference Planck PR4 cosmology. Using the extracted CMB spectra we show that the additional constraining power for cosmology is coming from polarization at all scales and from temperature at multipoles above 1500 when going from PR3 to PR4. We also show that full marginalization over the CamSpec foreground nuisance parameters can impact parameter inference and model selections when truncating some scales; our new likelihood enables correct combinations with other CMB datasets.

Summary

No one has generated a summary of this paper yet.

Paper to Video (Beta)

No one has generated a video about this paper yet.

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Tweets

Sign up for free to view the 1 tweet with 0 likes about this paper.