Properties and use of CMB power spectrum likelihoods
arXiv:0902.0674 · doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.79.083012
Abstract
Fast robust methods for calculating likelihoods from CMB observations on small scales generally rely on approximations based on a set of power spectrum estimators and their covariances. We investigate the optimality of these approximation, how accurate the covariance needs to be, and how to estimate the covariance from simulations. For a simple case with azimuthal symmetry we compare optimality of hybrid pseudo-C_l CMB power spectrum estimators with the exact result, indicating that the loss of information is not negligible, but neither is it enough to have a large effect on standard parameter constraints. We then discuss the number of samples required to estimate the covariance from simulations, with and without a good analytic approximation, and assess the use of shrinkage estimators. Finally we discuss how to combine an approximate high-ell likelihood with a more exact low-ell harmonic-space likelihood as a practical method for accurate likelihood calculation on all scales.
15 pages, 11 figures; updated to match version accepted by PRD
References in corpus (7)
- Five-Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Likelihoods and Parameters from the WMAP data
- Why your model parameter confidences might be too optimistic -- unbiased estimation of the inverse covariance matrix
- High resolution CMB power spectrum from the complete ACBAR data set
- A general solution to the E-B mixing problem
- Shrinkage Estimation of the Power Spectrum Covariance Matrix
- Making Maps from Planck LFI 30GHz Data
- PReBeaM for Planck: A Polarized Regularized Beam Deconvolution Map-Making Method