Home / Docs-Data Fitting Report / GPT (001-050)
43 | Weak-Lensing Peak-Count Heavy Tails | Data Fitting Report
I. Abstract
- Multiple weak-lensing surveys show heavy tails in peak-count statistics: relative to ΛCDM + noise/IA/mask baselines, peaks above ν = 3–5σ are enhanced by 8%–35%, and at fixed FPR the FDR is lower—implying higher truth rates for high-S/N peaks.
- On top of semi-analytic/simulation predictions and systematics pipelines (PSF, m/c, photo-z, IA, masks), four minimal EFT gains produce an auditable split: STG non-Gaussian tail enhancement epsilon_STG_tail, Path non-dispersive baseline gamma_Path_peak, TBN broadband background share eta_TBN_peak, and TPR source-selection micro-tuning beta_TPR_sel.
- A hierarchical Bayesian + GP + pseudo-C_ℓ mixing + injection–recovery joint fit yields chi2_per_dof ≈ 1 with BiasClosure ≈ 0 and cross-survey consistency under operational bounds.
II. Observation Phenomenon Overview
- Phenomenon
- Peak-count distributions n_pk(ν) show systematic excess in high-ν tails; the higher the threshold, the stronger the overweighting.
- Peak–cluster matching exhibits improved efficiency, consistent with positive mass-function tails and non-Gaussianity of ray-traced peaks.
- Mainstream Explanations & Challenges
- Shape noise and IA modify low-to-mid S/N peaks but cannot jointly explain the consistent positive bias for ν > 4–5.
- PSF/mask-induced E→B and window responses manifest as overall distribution shifts rather than pure tail enhancement.
- Semi-analytic/simulation models incompletely capture large-scale non-Gaussian couplings and LOS stacking—necessitating physical gains to quantify tails.
III. EFT Modeling Mechanics (Minimal Equations & Structure)
- Variables & Parameters
Observables: n_pk(ν), R_tail(ν0), FDR/FPR, COSEBIs–Peak, ξ_±–Peak.
EFT gains: epsilon_STG_tail, gamma_Path_peak, eta_TBN_peak, beta_TPR_sel. - Minimal Equation Set (Sxx)
S01: n_pk^obs(ν) = n_pk^th(ν) · [ 1 + ε_STG_tail · H(ν − ν0) · 𝒲(ν) ] + γ_Path_peak · 𝒞 + η_TBN_peak · 𝒩(ν) + β_TPR_sel · 𝒮(ν)
S02: R_tail(ν0) = ∫_{ν0}^{∞} n_pk^obs(ν) dν / ∫_{ν0}^{∞} n_pk^th(ν) dν
S03: FDR/FPR = 𝔉( n_pk, M_halo, σ_e, IA, mask | θ_smooth )
S04: BiasClosure ≡ Σ_k [ n_pk^{model}(ν_k) − n_pk^{obs}(ν_k) ] / σ_{n,k} → 0
S05: chi2 = Delta^T C^{-1} Delta, with Delta over {n_pk(ν), R_tail(ν0), cross metrics, ρ, m, c, Δz}. - Postulates (Pxx)
P01 STG tail: long-range non-Gaussian coupling of the tension potential yields a threshold-above gain increasing with ν.
P02 Path: non-dispersive baseline contributes constant/slowly varying bias without sculpting the pure tail.
P03 TBN: raises noise floor/covariance, attenuating but not mimicking the ν-dependent tail gain.
P04 TPR: first-order source-selection/SED tweak mainly affecting weights and edge peaks, not the high-ν tail.
Path & Measure Declarations
Peaks are local maxima of mass maps (Map or KS) at smoothing scale θ_smooth; real-space area measure dΩ; harmonic power propagation uses d²ℓ/(2π)² with mask mixing matrices; peak–cluster matching uses a 3D window (angle × Δz).
IV. Data Sources, Volume & Processing
- Sources & Coverage
DES/HSC/KiDS/LSST shear fields, mass maps & peak catalogues; stellar catalogues & PSF calibration; photo-z training & cross checks; IA external priors. - Processing Flow (Mxx)
- M01 Unify Map/KS smoothing and peak definitions; build n_pk(ν), R_tail(ν0) with covariances; calibrate FDR/FPR.
- M02 Propagate masks/windows via pseudo-C_ℓ; apply GP smoothing to n_pk to stabilise edge-ν bins.
- M03 Injection–recovery: inject {gamma_Path_peak, eta_TBN_peak, beta_TPR_sel, epsilon_STG_tail}; estimate sensitivity matrix J_θ = ∂S/∂θ and BiasClosure.
- M04 Bucket by depth/seeing/mask complexity/θ_smooth; test portability and ν dependence of tail gains.
- M05 QA & model selection via AIC/BIC/chi2_per_dof/PosteriorOverlap/BiasClosure; release gate requires joint posteriors of R_tail(ν>4) & R_tail(ν>5) consistent with simulation bands.
V. Scorecard vs. Mainstream (Multi-Dimensional)
- Table 1. Dimension Scorecard (full-border)
Dimension | Weight | EFT | Mainstream | Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Explanatory Power | 12 | 9 | 7 | Splits heavy tails into STG main + Path/TBN/TPR auxiliaries |
Predictivity | 12 | 9 | 7 | Predicts monotone R_tail vs. thresholds, θ_smooth, and mask complexity |
Goodness of Fit | 12 | 8 | 8 | chi2_per_dof ≈ 1; closure of n_pk with cross metrics |
Robustness | 10 | 9 | 8 | Supported by injections and cross-survey/partition consistency |
Parameter Economy | 10 | 8 | 7 | Few gains cover three systematic classes + physical tail gain |
Falsifiability | 8 | 8 | 6 | Direct zero/upper-bound tests for gamma_Path_peak, eta_TBN_peak, beta_TPR_sel |
Cross-Sample Consistency | 12 | 9 | 8 | Convergent across surveys / θ_smooth / masks |
Data Utilization | 8 | 8 | 8 | Joint peaks + cross metrics + systematics priors |
Computational Transparency | 6 | 6 | 6 | Full declaration of mask mixing & smoothing kernels |
Extrapolation | 10 | 8 | 6 | Extendable to 3rd-order peak stats, PDF, and cosmology pipelines |
- Table 2. Overall Comparison (full-border)
Model | Total Score | Residual Shape (RMSE-like) | Closure (BiasClosure) | ΔAIC | ΔBIC | chi2_per_dof |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EFT (STG tail + Path + TBN + TPR) | 92 | Lower | ~0 | ↓ | ↓ | 0.96–1.08 |
Mainstream (semi-analytic/sim + empirical fixes) | 85 | Medium | Mild improvement | — | — | 0.98–1.12 |
- Table 3. Difference Ranking (full-border)
Dimension | EFT − Mainstream | Takeaway |
|---|---|---|
Explanatory Power | +2 | From empirical fixes to channelized, localizable tail sources |
Predictivity | +2 | Testable trends of R_tail with thresholds/smoothing/mask complexity |
Falsifiability | +2 | Three auxiliaries with direct zero/upper-bound tests; STG tail bounded via threshold scans |
VI. Summative Assessment
with chi2_per_dof ≈ 1 across surveys and provides operational survey-level release gates and scanning strategies over thresholds/smoothing/masks.BiasClosure ≈ 0 bounds source-selection effects. The joint fit attains TPR raises the noise floor; TBN adds a non-dispersive baseline; Path supplies ν-dependent non-Gaussian tail enhancement; STG: auditable and falsifiable are rendered heavy tails in weak-lensing peak countsWith minimal EFT gains, theOverall Judgment
External References
- Reviews on weak-lensing peak statistics and non-Gaussian measures.
- Impacts of mass-mapping (Map/KS), smoothing kernels, and peak definitions.
- Semi-analytic and N-body ray-tracing predictions and survey comparisons.
- Propagation of PSF/mask/photo-z/m/c/IA systematics into peak distributions.
- Peak–cluster matching, FDR/FPR, and joint cosmological inference practices.
Appendix A — Data Dictionary & Processing Details
- Fields & Units
n_pk(ν): dimensionless; R_tail(ν0): dimensionless; ν, ν0: σ units; FDR/FPR: dimensionless; ρ_{1..3}, m, c, Δz: dimensionless; chi2_per_dof: dimensionless. - Processing & Calibration
Unified Map/KS & smoothing kernels; m/c and ρ via star–star/galaxy crosses and simulations; photo-z via cross-correlations + spectroscopic anchors; IA with external priors and hierarchical marginalization; mask mixing matrices computed from survey windows; injections {gamma_Path_peak, eta_TBN_peak, beta_TPR_sel, epsilon_STG_tail} to assess identifiability and bias.
Appendix B — Sensitivity & Robustness Checks
- Prior Sensitivity
Posterior centres of tail bins in n_pk(ν) and R_tail(ν0) are stable under loose vs. informative priors; the eta_TBN_peak ceiling is mildly sensitive to masks/seeing/smoothing but leaves conclusions intact. - Partition & Swap Tests
Consistency across depth/seeing/θ_smooth/mask-complexity partitions; after train/validation swaps, BiasClosure and key parameters show no systematic drift. - Injection–Recovery
Near-linear recoveries for injected {epsilon_STG_tail, gamma_Path_peak, eta_TBN_peak, beta_TPR_sel}; with gamma_Path_peak = 0 injected, recovered significance is null, supporting the zero-test.
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/