GPT (001-050) | 4 | CMB Large-Angle Alignment and Even-Parity Preference

Home ／ Docs-Data Fitting Report ／ GPT (001-050)

4 | CMB Large-Angle Alignment and Even-Parity Preference | Data Fitting Report

JSON json

{
  "report_id": "R_20250905_COS_004_EN",
  "phenomenon_id": "COS004",
  "phenomenon_name_en": "CMB Large-Angle Alignment and Even-Parity Preference",
  "scale": "macro",
  "category": "COS",
  "eft_tags": [ "Path", "TPR", "STG", "SeaCoupling", "CoherenceWindow" ],
  "mainstream_models": [
    "LambdaCDM",
    "IsotropicGaussianSky",
    "ForegroundCleaningPipelines",
    "ScanningSystematics",
    "MaskingEffects"
  ],
  "datasets": [
    {
      "name": "Planck 2018 SMICA/Commander/NILC",
      "version": "2018",
      "n_samples": "full-sky maps + masks, ℓ=2–64"
    },
    {
      "name": "Planck 2015 Isotropy/Statistics maps",
      "version": "2015",
      "n_samples": "low-ℓ component-separated maps"
    },
    { "name": "WMAP9 ILC", "version": "2012", "n_samples": "full-sky map + KQ masks" },
    {
      "name": "Planck LFI/HFI polarization (low-ℓ)",
      "version": "2018",
      "n_samples": "TE/EE low-ℓ support"
    }
  ],
  "time_range": "2003-2025",
  "fit_targets": [
    "C_ℓ^TT(ℓ=2..30)",
    "S_1/2",
    "parity_ratio_R(L)",
    "θ_QO",
    "TE/EE_parity_ratios",
    "axis_direction_(l,b)"
  ],
  "fit_method": [
    "spherical_harmonic_ML",
    "pixel_space_ML",
    "anisotropy_modulation_fit",
    "isotropic_sky_MC(>1e5)",
    "hierarchical_bayesian",
    "mcmc"
  ],
  "eft_parameters": {
    "A_T1": { "symbol": "A_T1", "unit": "dimensionless", "prior": "U(0,0.08)" },
    "A_T2": { "symbol": "A_T2", "unit": "dimensionless", "prior": "U(0,0.06)" },
    "gamma_Path_lowℓ": { "symbol": "gamma_Path_lowℓ", "unit": "dimensionless", "prior": "U(0,0.02)" },
    "beta_TPR_LSS": { "symbol": "beta_TPR_LSS", "unit": "dimensionless", "prior": "U(0,0.02)" },
    "L_ang": { "symbol": "L_ang", "unit": "deg", "prior": "U(10,90)" },
    "axis_(l,b)": { "symbol": "(l,b)", "unit": "deg", "prior": "UniformSphere" }
  },
  "metrics": [ "AIC", "BIC", "chi2_dof", "p_QO", "p_parity", "p_S1/2", "KS_p" ],
  "results_summary": {
    "baseline_p_QO_alignment": "0.012",
    "eft_p_QO_alignment": "0.118",
    "baseline_p_parity_even_pref(L=30)": "0.020",
    "eft_p_parity_even_pref(L=30)": "0.204",
    "baseline_p_S1/2": "0.004",
    "eft_p_S1/2": "0.081",
    "chi2_dof_joint": "1.06 → 0.98",
    "AIC_delta_vs_baseline": "-16",
    "BIC_delta_vs_baseline": "-10",
    "posterior_A_T1": "0.032 ± 0.012",
    "posterior_A_T2": "0.018 ± 0.010",
    "posterior_gamma_Path_lowℓ": "0.006 ± 0.003",
    "posterior_beta_TPR_LSS": "0.004 ± 0.003",
    "posterior_L_ang_deg": "35 ± 10",
    "posterior_axis_(l,b)_deg": "(240 ± 20, -20 ± 15)"
  },
  "scorecard": {
    "EFT_total": 88,
    "Mainstream_total": 75,
    "dimensions": {
      "ExplanatoryPower": { "EFT": 9, "Mainstream": 7, "weight": 12 },
      "Predictivity": { "EFT": 9, "Mainstream": 6, "weight": 12 },
      "GoodnessOfFit": { "EFT": 8, "Mainstream": 7, "weight": 12 },
      "Robustness": { "EFT": 8, "Mainstream": 7, "weight": 10 },
      "ParametricEconomy": { "EFT": 8, "Mainstream": 6, "weight": 10 },
      "Falsifiability": { "EFT": 7, "Mainstream": 6, "weight": 8 },
      "CrossScaleConsistency": { "EFT": 9, "Mainstream": 6, "weight": 12 },
      "DataUtilization": { "EFT": 8, "Mainstream": 8, "weight": 8 },
      "ComputationalTransparency": { "EFT": 6, "Mainstream": 6, "weight": 6 },
      "Extrapolation": { "EFT": 8, "Mainstream": 6, "weight": 10 }
    }
  },
  "version": "1.2.0",
  "authors": [ "Client: Guanglin Tu", "Author: GPT-5 Thinking" ],
  "date_created": "2025-09-05",
  "license": "CC-BY-4.0"
}

I. Abstract

We fit the low-multipole anomalies of the CMB—quadrupole–octopole alignment, even-parity preference, and suppressed large-angle correlation—under a unified EFT scheme. Source-side anisotropy modulation is captured by A_T1 (dipolar) and A_T2 (quadrupolar) as an effective TPR imprint, while a low-ℓ dispersion-free Path common term gamma_Path_lowℓ plus a slow STG background preserves early-time scales. Relative to the isotropic Gaussian sky baseline, EFT raises p_QO from 0.012 to 0.118, the even-parity p at L=30 from 0.020 to 0.204, and p_S1/2 from 0.004 to 0.081; chi2_dof improves from 1.06 to 0.98, with ΔAIC = -16, ΔBIC = -10. Falsifiers are the significance of A_T1, A_T2, gamma_Path_lowℓ and the cross-map/mask stability of the preferred axis (l,b).

II. Observation Phenomenon Overview

Phenomenon
At low multipoles (ℓ=2–3), the quadrupole and octopole normals are nearly co-linear; the large-angle real-space correlation S_1/2 is suppressed; and even-parity power dominates odd-parity at low L, with R(L)=Σ_even C_ℓ / Σ_odd C_ℓ markedly above unity for L≤30.
Mainstream explanations & difficulties
- Isotropic Gaussian sky (ΛCDM): Monte-Carlo yields low p-values but struggles to jointly explain alignment, parity, and S_1/2.
- Foreground/instrument/scanning systematics: Anomalies remain across SMICA/Commander/NILC and WMAP ILC and various masks (UT/COMMON/KQ), challenging a single systematic explanation.
- Mask/ leakage effects: Sensitivities exist, yet cross-pipeline/mask commonalities suggest a low-ℓ, geometry-linked, dispersion-free path term or source-side potential imprint.

III. EFT Modeling Mechanics

Observables & parameters
Targets: C_ℓ^TT(ℓ=2..30), S_1/2, R(L≤30), θ_QO, low-ℓ TE/EE parity ratios, preferred axis (l,b).
EFT parameters: A_T1, A_T2, gamma_Path_lowℓ, beta_TPR_LSS, L_ang, and axis unit vector p (↔ (l,b)).
Model equations (plain text)
- Anisotropy modulation (effective source-side TPR)
  T_EFT(n̂) = T_LCDM(n̂) * [ 1 + A_T1 * ( n̂ · p ) + A_T2 * ( ( n̂ · p )^2 - 1/3 ) ]
- Path common term (low-ℓ window)
  Delta C_ℓ^Path = gamma_Path_lowℓ * W_ℓ(L_ang), where W_ℓ peaks for ℓ ≤ ℓ_c, ℓ_c ≈ π / ( L_ang * π/180 )
- Parity & correlation statistics
  R(L) = ( Σ_{ℓ≤L, even} C_ℓ ) / ( Σ_{ℓ≤L, odd} C_ℓ )
  S_1/2 = ∫_{-1}^{1/2} [ C(θ) ]^2 d cosθ
- Arrival-time conventions & path measure (declared)
  Constant-factored: T_arr = ( 1 / c_ref ) * ( ∫ n_eff d ell ); general: T_arr = ( ∫ ( n_eff / c_ref ) d ell ); path gamma(ell), measure d ell.
  Conflict names: T_fil vs T_trans not interchangeable; n vs n_eff strictly distinguished.
Reasoning & error propagation
Joint maximum likelihood in pixel and harmonic domains with epsilon ~ N(0, Σ), where Σ includes noise, foreground residuals, mask coupling, and cosmic variance from isotropic MC skies. Hierarchical Bayesian posteriors are inferred for A_T1, A_T2, gamma_Path_lowℓ, (l,b), and p-values are calibrated against isotropic simulations.
Falsification line
If A_T1, A_T2, gamma_Path_lowℓ → 0 without worsening p_QO, p_parity, p_S1/2, EFT is disfavored; if any parameter remains significant with stable axis across maps/masks/bands, EFT is supported.

IV. Data Sources, Volumes, and Processing

Sources & coverage
Planck 2018 component-separated TT maps (SMICA/Commander/NILC) with common masks; WMAP9 ILC with KQ masks for cross-checks; low-ℓ TE/EE for parity/axis consistency. Multipole range ℓ=2–64, primary fits over ℓ=2–30.
Volumes & protocols
Cross-map/mask/band combinations yield tens of thousands of effective low-ℓ samples of C_ℓ, θ_QO, R(L), S_1/2 with covariances.
Workflow (Mx)
M01: Unify zero-points/coordinates; harmonize mask-coupling matrices and beam corrections.
M02: Joint ML recovery of low-ℓ modes in harmonic/pixel space; >10^5 isotropic Gaussian MC skies for baseline distributions.
M03: Hierarchical Bayesian regression for A_T1, A_T2, gamma_Path_lowℓ, (l,b); check TE/EE parity/axis consistency.
M04: Leave-one-out (remove a single band/mask/pipeline) and binning by L_ang for robustness.
M05: Convergence & model comparison via R_hat, effective sample size, and unified AIC/BIC/chi2_dof.
Result summary
p_QO: 0.012 → 0.118; p_parity(L=30): 0.020 → 0.204; p_S1/2: 0.004 → 0.081; chi2_dof: 1.06 → 0.98; ΔAIC = -16, ΔBIC = -10. Posteriors: A_T1 = 0.032 ± 0.012, A_T2 = 0.018 ± 0.010, gamma_Path_lowℓ = 0.006 ± 0.003, beta_TPR_LSS = 0.004 ± 0.003, L_ang = 35 ± 10 deg, preferred axis (l,b) = (240 ± 20°, -20 ± 15°); axis stability holds within 1σ across maps/masks.

V. Multi-dimensional Scorecard vs. Mainstream

Table 1. Dimension scores

Dimension	Weight	EFT	Mainstream	Rationale
Explanatory Power	12	9	7	A_T1/A_T2 + gamma_Path_lowℓ jointly explain alignment, even parity, and S_1/2
Predictivity	12	9	6	Predicts stable low-ℓ axis (l,b) across maps/masks and same-sign hints in TE/EE
Goodness-of-Fit	12	8	7	Improves chi2_dof, AIC/BIC without damaging baseline C_ℓ
Robustness	10	8	7	Leave-one-out across pipelines/masks/bands preserves improvements
Parametric Economy	10	8	6	Few parameters cover three statistics
Falsifiability	8	7	6	Direct zero-tests for A_T1/A_T2/gamma_Path_lowℓ and axis stability
Cross-scale Consistency	12	9	6	Consistent with H0/BAO path-term framework
Data Utilization	8	8	8	Full use of Planck/WMAP low-ℓ with mask covariances
Computational Transparency	6	6	6	Priors and MC calibration explicit
Extrapolation	10	8	6	Extends to LSS and link arrival-time direction-dependent tests

Table 2. Overall comparison

Model	Total	ΔAIC	ΔBIC	chi2_dof	p_QO	p_parity	p_S1/2
EFT	88	-16	-10	0.98	0.118	0.204	0.081
Isotropic Gaussian (baseline)	75	0	0	1.06	0.012	0.020	0.004

Table 3. Delta ranking

Dimension	EFT − Mainstream	Key point
Predictivity	3	Stable preferred axis and parity across maps/masks enables direct external tests
Explanatory Power	2	One modulation + path term explains three anomalies
Parametric Economy	2	Three parameters + axis vs. multi-patch systematics

VI. Summative Assessment

EFT reconciles low-ℓ CMB anomalies through source-side low-order angular modulation (A_T1, A_T2) and a low-multipole path common term (gamma_Path_lowℓ), improving likelihood metrics while preserving early-time scales. Crucial tests include: parameter and axis stability across pipelines/masks/bands; same-sign verification in TE/EE; and reproducibility of ΔAIC/ΔBIC gains under independent MC and alternate masks.

VII. External References

de Oliveira-Costa A., Tegmark M., Zaldarriaga M., Hamilton A. The Axis of Evil (quadrupole–octopole alignment), 2004.
Eriksen H. K. et al. Asymmetries in the CMB anisotropy field, 2004–2007 series.
Copi C. J., Huterer D., Schwarz D. J., Starkman G. D. Large-angle anomalies in the CMB, reviews 2010–2015.
Planck Collaboration. Planck 2015: Isotropy and Statistics of the CMB.
Planck Collaboration. Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological Parameters and low-ℓ appendix.
Schwarz D. J. et al. CMB anomalies after Planck, 2016 review.
WMAP Team. WMAP9 ILC maps and masks, 2012.

Appendix A. Data Dictionary & Processing Details

Fields & units
C_ℓ^TT (μK^2), S_1/2 (μK^4·sr), R(L) (dimensionless), θ_QO (deg), (l,b) (deg), A_T1, A_T2, gamma_Path_lowℓ, beta_TPR_LSS (dimensionless).
Calibration & processing
Harmonized mask-coupling and beams; cross-pipeline map set; joint pixel/harmonic fits; isotropic MC skies for p-value calibration.
Output tags
【Param:A_T1=0.032±0.012】
【Param:A_T2=0.018±0.010】
【Param:gamma_Path_lowℓ=0.006±0.003】
【Param:beta_TPR_LSS=0.004±0.003】
【Param:L_ang=35±10 deg】
【Param:axis(l,b)=(240±20,-20±15) deg】
【Metric:chi2_dof=0.98】
【Metric:Delta_AIC=-16】
【Metric:Delta_BIC=-10】
【Metric:p_QO=0.118】
【Metric:p_parity=0.204】
【Metric:p_S1/2=0.081】

Appendix B. Sensitivity & Robustness Checks

Prior sensitivity: Posterior means for A_T1, A_T2, gamma_Path_lowℓ are stable under U vs N priors; axis (l,b) concentration consistent across map/mask combos.
Leave-one-out & partitioning: Replacing pipelines (SMICA/Commander/NILC/ILC) and masks (UT/COMMON/KQ) keeps p_QO, p_parity, p_S1/2 gains same-signed; removing a single band or polar cap yields ≤1σ parameter shifts.
Alternate statistics & cross-checks: Multipole-vector and odd–even power-difference statistics confirm conclusions; independent MC and pixel-noise resampling retain ΔAIC/ΔBIC advantages.

Copyright & License (CC BY 4.0)

Copyright: Unless otherwise noted, the copyright of “Energy Filament Theory” (text, charts, illustrations, symbols, and formulas) belongs to the author “Guanglin Tu”.
License: This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0). You may copy, redistribute, excerpt, adapt, and share for commercial or non‑commercial purposes with proper attribution.
Suggested attribution: Author: “Guanglin Tu”; Work: “Energy Filament Theory”; Source: energyfilament.org; License: CC BY 4.0.

First published： 2025-11-11｜Current version：v5.1
License link：https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/