Determining $H_0$ with Bayesian hyper-parameters

Abstract

We re-analyse recent Cepheid data to estimate the Hubble parameter $H_0$ by using Bayesian hyper-parameters (HPs). We consider the two data sets from Riess et al 2011 and 2016 (labelled R11 and R16, with R11 containing less than half the data of R16) and include the available anchor distances (megamaser system NGC4258, detached eclipsing binary distances to LMC and M31, and MW Cepheids with parallaxes), use a weak metallicity prior and no period cut for Cepheids. We find that part of the R11 data is down-weighted by the HPs but that R16 is mostly consistent with expectations for a Gaussian distribution, meaning that there is no need to down-weight the R16 data set. For R16, we find a value of $H_0=73.75\pm 2.11\mathrm{km}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}{\mathrm{Mpc}}^{-1}$ if we use HPs for all data points (including Cepheid stars, supernovae type Ia, and the available anchor distances), which is about 2.6 $\sigma$ larger than the Planck 2015 value of $H_0=67.81\pm 0.92\mathrm{km}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}{\mathrm{Mpc}}^{-1}$ and about 3.1 $\sigma$ larger than the updated Planck 2016 value $66.93\pm 0.62\mathrm{km}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}{\mathrm{Mpc}}^{-1}$. We test the effect of different assumptions, and find that the choice of anchor distances affects the final value significantly. If we exclude the Milky Way from the anchors, then the value of $H_0$ decreases. We find however no evident reason to exclude the MW data. The HP method used here avoids subjective rejection criteria for outliers and offers a way to test datasets for unknown systematics.

44 pages, 18 figures, 11 tables. Matches version accepted for publication in JCAP

References in corpus (7)

• New Hubble Space Telescope Discoveries of Type Ia Supernovae at z > 1: Narrowing Constraints on the Early Behavior of Dark Energy
• The trouble with $H_0$
• An eclipsing binary distance to the Large Magellanic Cloud accurate to 2 per cent
• H0LiCOW V. New COSMOGRAIL time delays of HE0435-1223: $H_0$ to 3.8% precision from strong lensing in a flat $\Lambda$CDM model
• Cepheid Parallaxes and the Hubble Constant
• A test of Gaia Data Release 1 parallaxes: implications for the local distance scale
• What is the distance to the CMB?

Cited by in corpus (16)

• Large Magellanic Cloud Cepheid Standards Provide a 1% Foundation for the Determination of the Hubble Constant and Stronger Evidence for Physics Beyond LambdaCDM
• Galileon Gravity in Light of ISW, CMB, BAO and $H_0$ data
• Measuring the Hubble constant with Type Ia supernovae as near-infrared standard candles
• A measurement of the Hubble constant from Type II supernovae
• Searching for dark matter - dark energy interactions: going beyond the conformal case
• Cosmology Intertwined: A Review of the Particle Physics, Astrophysics, and Cosmology Associated with the Cosmological Tensions and Anomalies
• A new coupled three-form dark energy model and implications for the $H_0$ tension
• Diffusion in unimodular gravity: Analytical solutions, late-time acceleration, and cosmological constraints
• The variance of the locally measured Hubble parameter explained with different estimators
• Observational Constraints in Nonlocal Gravity: the Deser-Woodard Case
• Vacuum dynamics in the Universe versus a rigid $\Lambda =$const
• Backreaction and FRW consistency conditions
• Alleviating the Hubble-constant tension and the growth tension via a transition of absolute magnitude favored by the Pantheon+ sample
• A critical discussion on the $H_0$ tension
• Prospects of strongly lensed fast radio bursts: Simultaneous measurement of post-Newtonian parameter and Hubble constant
• Evaluating backreaction with the ellipsoidal collapse model