arxiv: v1 [astro-ph.co] 15 Jan 2019

Transcription

1 Poarisation as a tracer of CMB anomaies: Panck resuts and future forecasts M. Bii a,b, A.Gruppuso b,c,, N. Mandoesi d,b, L. Moscardini a,b,c, P. Natoi d,e arxiv: v1 [astro-ph.co] 15 Jan 219 a Dipartimento di Fisica e Astronomia, Ama Mater Studiorum Università di Boogna, Via Gobetti 93/2, I-4129 Boogna, Itay b INAF-OAS Boogna, Osservatorio di Astrofisica e Scienza deo Spazio di Boogna, Istituto Nazionae di Astrofisica, via Gobetti 11, I-4129 Boogna, Itay c INFN, Sezione di Boogna, Via Irnerio 46, I-4126 Boogna, Itay d Dipartimento di Fisica e Scienze dea Terra, Università degi Studi di Ferrara, Via Saragat 1, I-441 Ferrara, Itay e INFN, Sezione di Ferrara, Via Saragat 1, I-441 Ferrara, Itay Abstract The ack of power anomay is an intriguing feature at the argest anguar scaes of the CMB anisotropy temperature pattern, whose statistica significance is not strong enough to caim any new physics beyond the standard cosmoogica mode. We revisit the former statement by aso considering poarisation data. We propose a new one-dimensiona estimator which takes jointy into account the information contained in the TT, TE and EE CMB spectra. By empoying this estimator on Panck 215 ow- data, we find that a random ΛCDM reaisation is statisticay accepted at the eve of 3.68%. Even though Panck poarisation contributes a mere 4% to the tota information budget, its use pushes the ower-tai-probabiity down from the 7.22% obtained with ony temperature data. Forecasts of future CMB poarised measurements, as e.g. the LiteBIRD sateite, can increase the poarisation contribution up to 6 times with respect to Panck at ow-. We argue that the arge-scae E-mode poarisation may pay an important roe in anaysing CMB temperature anomaies with future mission. Corresponding author Emai addresses: matteo.bii3@unibo.it (M. Bii), aessandro.gruppuso@inaf.it (A.Gruppuso), mandoesi@iasfbo.inaf.it (N. Mandoesi), auro.moscardini@unibo.it (L. Moscardini), paoo.natoi@unife.it (P. Natoi) Preprint submitted to Physics of the Dark Universe January 16, 219

2 Keywords: Lack of Power, CMB anomaies, CMB poarisation, CMB 1. Introduction CMB observations show anomaies at arge anguar scae of the temperature map, see e.g. [1]. The statistica eve of these signatures is around 2-3σ from what expected in the concordance ΛCDM mode. Not a of these anomaies are independent and a certain degree of correation exists [2]. Here we focus on the ack of power anomay: the temperature CMB anisotropy pattern exhibits ess power with respect to what foreseen by ΛCDM. This effect has been studied with the variance estimator in WMAP data [3, 4, 5] and in Panck 213 [6] and Panck 215 [7] data, measuring a ower-tai-probabiity of the order of few per cent. Such a percentage can become even smaer, beow 1%, once ony regions at high Gaactic atitude are taken into account [5]. WMAP and Panck agree we on this feature, so it is very hard, abeit not impossibe, to attribute this anomay to systematic effects of instrumenta origin. Moreover it is aso difficut to beieve that a ack of power coud be generated by residuas of astrophysica emission, since the atter is not expected to be correated 1 with the CMB and therefore an astrophysica residua shoud increase the tota power rather than decreasing it. Hence, it appears natura to accept this as a rea feature present in the CMB pattern. An eary fast-ro phase of the infaton coud naturay expain such a ack of power, see e.g. [8, 9, 1, 11]: this anomay might then witness a new cosmoogica phase before the standard infationary era (see e.g. [12, 13, 14]). However, with ony the observations based on the temperature map, this anomay is not statisticay significant enough to be used to caim new physics beyond the standard cosmoogica mode. Therefore, it is egitimate to conservativey interpret it as a statistica fuke of the ΛCDM concordance mode. The main point of this paper is to argue that future CMB poarisation data 1 In particuar they shoud be anti-correated to produce a decrease of the tota power. 2

3 at ow- might increase the significance of this anomay. In other words, considering the counterpart in poarisation of the ack of power currenty observed in temperature might be key to confirm it as a simpe statistica fuke or to raise it up at the eve of manifestation of new physics 2. In this paper we propose a new one-dimensiona estimator which combines information from the CMB TT, EE and TE anguar power spectra at the argest anguar scaes, i.e. 2 3, with being the mutipoe moment. Considering Panck data in the whoe harmonic range mentioned above, noise dominated poarisation provides an information content at the eve of 4% to this estimator which, even though sma, has a non-negigibe impact on the anaysis, the ower-tai-probabiity shifting downward from 7.22% (obtained considering ony temperature data) to 3.68% C.L. (obtained considering jointy temperature and poarisation data). We show that for future CMB observations, poarisation at the argest anguar scaes can weight as much as 23% of the tota information entering our estimator. We argue that the incusion of arge-scae E-mode poarisation coud cruciay hep in changing the interpretation from a simpe statistica fuke into the detection of a new physica phenomenon. Therefore, future CMB arge-scae poarised observations, which are typicay aimed at primordia B-modes, might provide signas of new physics aso through the other poarised CMB mode, i.e. the E-mode. The paper is organised as foows: in Section 2 we introduce the agebra needed to buid the new estimator which condensates a the TT, EE and TE information into a 1-D object; in Section 3 we eaborate on an optimised (i.e. minimum variance) version of the proposed estimator; Section 4 is devoted to the description of the dataset used and of the simuations empoyed; in Section 5 we present the resuts on Panck data and provide estimates of the improvement expected with future CMB poarised observations, as the LiteBIRD sateite [15]; concusions are drawn in Section 6. 2 Of course this argument might be used for any CMB anomay. 3

4 2. A new one-dimensiona joint estimator: the dimensioness normaised mean power The idea of this joint estimator starts from the usua equations empoyed to simuate temperature and E-mode CMB maps, see e.g. [16]: where a T,E m a T m = a E m = C T T,th ξm 1, (1) C T E,th C T T,th ξm 1 + C EE,th ) 2 C T T,th (CT E,th ξ 2 m, (2) are the coefficients of the Spherica Harmonics (with, m being integers numbers so that {, 1, 2, 3...} and m ), C T T,th, C EE,th and C T E,th are the theoretica anguar power spectra (APS) for T T, EE and T E and with ξ 1,2 m mean and unit variance: being Gaussian random variabes, uncorreated, with zero ξ 1 m =, (3) ξ 2 m =, (4) ξmξ 1 2 m =, (5) ξ 1 mξ 1 m = ξ2 mξ 2 m = δ δ mm. (6) From equations (1),(2) one can compute the corresponding APS, defined as C T T,sim = C T E,sim = C EE,sim = m= m= m= a T m(a T m), (7) a T m(a E m), (8) a E m(a E m), (9) where the abe sim stands for simuated, i.e. reaised randomy from the theoretica spectra C T T,th, C EE,th C T T,sim and C T E,th, finding the foowing expressions, = C T T,th ξ (1) , (1) 4

5 where ξ (1/2) C EE,sim ) 2 C T T,th = (CT E,th C T E,th +2a C T T,th = C T E,th ξ (1) 2 C T E,sim [ ξ (1) ξ (2) ξ (1) a ξ (2) ] + C EE,th ξ (2) , (11) ξ (1) ξ (2) are vectors with components, i.e. ( ξ (1/2) = ξ (1/2), ξ (1/2) +1,..., ξ(1/2),...ξ (1/2) , (12), ξ(1/2) ), (13) and a is defined as a C EE,th C T T,th (C T E,th ) 2. (14) It is easy to check that taking the ensembe average of equations (1),(11) and (12) yieds to C T T,sim = C T T,th, (15) C EE,sim = C EE,th, (16) C T E,sim = C T E,th, (17) since for each, as a consequence of equations (5),(6), ξ (1) = 1, (18) ξ (2) = 1, (19) ξ (1) ξ (2) =. (2) Equations (1),(11) and (12) can be inverted, giving the foowing set of equations ξ (1) ξ (2) = C T T C T T,th, (21) ( = CEE a 2 C T T,th CT T,th a 2 C T E,th C T T,th ) 2 C T T 5

6 ξ (1) ξ (2) [ E,th CT 2 a 2 C T E = 1 a [ C T E CT E,th C T T,th CT E,th C T T,th C T T ] C T T ], (22), (23) where we have dropped out the abe sim for sake of simpicity. Now, we can interpret C T T, C EE and C T E as the CMB APS recovered by a CMB experiment under reaistic circumstances, i.e. incuding noise residuas, incompete sky fraction and finite anguar resoution 3. Once the mode is chosen, i.e. once the spectra C T T,th, C EE,th and C T E,th are fixed, for exampe to ΛCDM, one can compute the foowing objects ξ (1) , (24) x (1) ξ (2) , (25) x (2) x (3) ξ (1) ξ (2) 2 + 1, (26) for the observations and/or for the corresponding reaistic simuations. In the foowing we wi ca the variabes x (1) and x (3) as APS of the norma random variabes or normaised APS (henceforth NAPS). The advantage of using NAPS, instead of the standard APS, is that they are dimensioness and simiar ampitude numbers and can be easiy combined to define a 1-D estimator in harmonic space, which depends on temperature, E-mode poarisation and their cross-correation. A natura definition of this 1-D estimator, caed P, is the foowing P = 1 ( max 1) max =2 ( ) x (1) + x (2). (27) The estimator P coud be interpreted as a dimensioness normaised mean power, which jointy combines the temperature and poarisation data. The expectation vaue of P is P = 2, (28) 3 In principe one can aso incude residuas of systematic effects. 6

7 regardess of the vaue of max. Note that a definition of the foowing type S = 1 max (x (1) + x (2) + x (3) ), (29) ( max 1) =2 is expected to have ess signa-to-noise ratio with respect to P because whie S and P have the same expectation vaue, the intrinsic variance of P is in genera smaer than the one of S. We wi see in the foowing that Eq. (27) is noise-imited for Panck data due to x (2) (its poarisation part) and in practice can be empoyed ony up to max = 6. An optimised version of this estimator, given in Section 3, does not suffer from this issue and can be empoyed up to the maximum mutipoe considered in this anaysis, i.e. max = Optimised estimator In equation (27) the NAPS x (1) and x (2) are combined with equa weights. However the signa-to-noise ratios of the two NAPS are different even in the cosmic variance imit case: therefore one might wonder which are the best weights that we can use in the definition of the joint estimator in order to make it optima, i.e. with minimum variance. It is possibe to compute, see Appendix A, that the optimised estimator P, defined as P has minimum variance when α = 2 β = 2 1 max (α x (1) + β x (2) ) (3) ( max 1) =2 var(x (2) ) cov(x (1) ) var(x (1) ) + var(x (2) ) 2cov(x (1) ), (31) var(x (1) ) cov(x (1) ) var(x (1) ) + var(x (2) ) 2cov(x (1) ), (32) where var and cov stand respectivey for the variance and the covariance of the variabes which appear in the brackets. Note that as done for P, P, which depends on max, has been normaised such that P = 2 for any vaue of max. Note aso, that P can be empoyed up to max = 3 both for Panck and 7

8 LiteBIRD-ike simuated data: what changes between the two cases is the set of the coefficients α and β, or, in other words, the reative contribution of the temperature and poarisation data. 4. Dataset and simuations We use the atest pubic Panck sateite CMB temperature data 4 i.e. the Panck 215 Commander map with its standard mask (f T sky = 93.6) entering the temperature sector of the ow- Panck ikeihood 5 [17]. In poarisation we consider a noise-weighted combination of WMAP9 and Panck data as done in [18]. This aows to gain some signa-to-noise ratio and to dea with a arger sky fraction in poarisation (fsky P = 73.9). Temperature and poarisation maps are samped at HEALPix 6 [19] resoution N side = 16. For sake of simpicity we wi refer to this data set as the Panck-WMAP ow- data set. In order to buid the estimators P and P, as defined in equations (27) and (3), we estimate the six CMB APS from 1 CMB-pus-noise maps where the signa is extracted from the Panck fiducia ΛCDM and the noise is simuated through Choesky decomposition of the tota noise covariance matrix in pixe space. Such estimates are obtained over the observed sky fraction, with the optima anguar power spectrum estimator BoPo [21]. Montecaro simuations for the Panck-WMAP ow- data set are vaidated in Figure 1, where the average of the NAPS (x (1) and x (3) ) are shown respectivey in the upper, midde and ower panes aong with their uncertainties of the means (σ µ ). Each pane dispays aso a ower box where for each it is shown the distance of mean in units of standard deviation of the mean itsef. Figure 2 shows the ow- estimates of x (1) and x (3) of the Panck- WMAP ow- data set (red dots), with the contours at one, two and three σ as At the moment of writing the corresponding Panck 218 ikeihood code and corresponding data set is not pubicy avaiabe

9 estimated from simuations (bue regions). Simuations for a LiteBIRD-ike noise eve [2] are obtained foowing the same procedure as described above but dividing the poarisation part of the noise covariance matrix by a factor of 1. The choice of the max parameter, which enters the definition of P, see eq.(27), is dictated by the signa-to-noise ratio of x (2) since x (1) is aways signa dominated in the whoe range considered. In Figure 3 we dispay the signato-noise ratio (S/N), see Appendix B, of the NAPS for the Panck-WMAP ow- data set. Lower pane of Figure 3 shows that whie for x (1) such a ratio grows monotonicay, for x (2) it saturates around max 6. Consequenty we wi empoy the estimator P with max = 6 for the Panck-WMAP ow- data set. The signa-to-noise ratio of x (2) is shown in Figure 4 for the LiteBIRD-ike noise eve. Since such a ratio grows monotonicay in this case we can choose the maximum max avaiabe in our simuations, i.e. max = 3. Note that this imitation in the choice of max does not appy to P. In this case the coefficients α and β adjust themseves automaticay (depending on the signa-to-noise ratio) such that noise-dominated mutipoes do not contribute to the estimator, see aso Section 3 and Resuts of the anayses 5.1. Resuts for P In Figure 5 we pot the empirica distribution expected in ΛCDM for P with max = 6 considering the Panck-WMAP ow- characteristics. The red vertica ine stands for the observed vaue of the Panck-WMAP ow- data set. The ower-tai probabiity (LTP) of the observed vaue of P is 3.63%. Such a vaue is smaer than the corresponding LTP of P when, sti with max = 6, we negect the contribution of x (2) is 17.63%. contribution of x (1) in eq. (27). In that case the LTP we obtain Simiary for the same maximum mutipoe, when we negect the in P, we get a LTP of 6.71%. In short, the combination of temperature and poarisation data provides a LTP smaer than what obtained 9

10 with ony temperature or ony poarisation, athough our findings cannot be considered as anomaous. In Figure 6 we pot the empirica distribution of P expected in ΛCDM with max = 3 for the Panck-WMAP ow- data set and for the LiteBIRD-ike noise eve. In order to evauate the improvement of the atter with respect to the former, we buid the ratios between the widths of the empirica distributions of P, corresponding to the eve of 68.3%, for the LiteBIRD-ike noise eve (σ LB ) and for the Panck-WMAP ow- noise eve (σ P anck ). In Figure 7 we pot σ P anck /σ LB for each max from 2 to 3. We find that the width of the estimator P in the LiteBIRD case can be even 3 times smaer with respect to what obtained in the Panck-WMAP ow- case, if max Resuts for P In the upper pane of Figure 8 we pot α and β (see equations (31) and (32)) as a function of for the Panck-WMAP ow- data set. Note how β for > 7 go to zero (and consequenty α 2 for same mutipoes) because of the noise eve in poarisation. For max = 6, even though the distribution of P is 32% narrower with respect to P shown in Figure 5, Panck-WMAP ow- data shift a itte so that the LTP is increased to 8.33%. However P, as aready mentioned, is not imited in the choice of max and sti for the Panck-WMAP ow- data at max = 3 we obtain a LTP at the eve of 3.68%. In Figure 9 we give the LTP for P at each max, dispayed in back, compared to a naive estimator defined ony with temperature data as 1 max P T = x (1), ( max 1) shown in bue. It is interesting to note how the incusion of the subdominant poarisation part impacts on the anaysis making the LTP of P smaer then P T for the whoe range considered. In particuar for P T at max = 3 we compute that the LTP is 7.22%. In the ower pane of Figure 8 we pot α and β as a function of for the LiteBIRD-ike noise eve. Note that for this case none of the β go to zero and =2 1

11 therefore poarisation data provide a contribution for each of the mutipoes considered at arge scae. Correspondenty temperature data wi not saturate the information entering P for any considered mutipoes. In order to evauate the impact of poarisation and temperature data on P we define the foowing weights 1 max w x (1)( max ) = α, (33) 2( max 1) =2 1 max w x (2)( max ) = β, (34) 2( max 1) such that w x (1)( max ) + w x (2)( max ) = 1 for every max. For max = 6 we find that poarised Panck-WMAP ow- data contribute at the eve of 21.4% to the buiding of P. This vaue increases to 47.9% for future LiteBIRD-ike poarised data at the same maximum mutipoe. At max = 3 we forecast that future LiteBIRD-ike poarised data wi weight as the 23.1% with respect to the 3.8% obtained with Panck-WMAP ow- data, therefore providing an increasing factor 6. The behaviour of w x (1) and w x (2) for each max is given in Figure 1. We end this Section showing in the upper pane of Figure 11 how the standard deviation σ of P shrinks for each max from current Panck data (soid bue) to future LiteBIRD-ike data (dashed bue). In the ower pane of Figure 11 we provide the ratio of the two σ s as a function of max. We see that at ow- future data wi aow to buid P with a statistica uncertainty around 23 17% smaer with respect to current Panck data depending on max. =2 6. Concusions In this paper we have proposed a new one-dimensiona estimator, i.e. P and its optimised version P, see equations (27) and (3), which is abe to jointy test the ack of power in TT, TE and EE. The main outcomes of this anaysis are isted beow. 11

12 1. Considering Panck-WMAP ow- data it is interesting to note that the incusion of poarisation information through our new one-dimensiona estimator, either P or P, provides estimates which are ess ikey accepted in a ΛCDM mode than the corresponding ony-temperature version of the same estimator. In other words, poarisation though subdominant in terms of signa-to-noise ratio with respect to temperature, pays a nonnegigibe roe in the evauation of compatibiity between data and the standard mode. However the LTP obtained are at the eve of few per cent and therefore sti compatibe with a statistica fuke. See for instance Figure 9: even though the weight of poarisation data is ony around 4% of the tota information budget, the LTP probabiity of P is aways smaer than its corresponding temperature-ony version P T. 2. E-modes at arge anguar scae sti contain information which might be capabe to probe new physics beyond the standard cosmoogica mode. We forecast that future CMB poarised measurements à a LiteBIRD can tight the empirica distribution of P up to a factor of 3. Considering the optimised version of the proposed estimator, i.e. P, we evauate that future LiteBIRD-ike measurements can shrink the statistica uncertainty by around 23 17% and at the same time increasing the contribution of the poarisation part by a factor ranging from 2 to 6. Future a-sky CMB experiments aimed at detecting primordia B-modes (which in turn are reated to the energy scae of infation) are designed to observe CMB poarisation with exquisite accuracy and precision. In order to make this possibe, residua systematic effects both of instrumenta and astrophysica origin have to be carefuy measured or, at east, kept under contro. In this paper we suppose that this is the case and that the statistica noise is the dominant source of uncertainty. Under these circumstances, E-modes wi be in practice known at the cosmic variance imit at arge anguar scaes. This is a great opportunity, since E-mode poarisation might contain important information 12

13 about the ack of power anomay currenty observed ony in the temperature map, which coud be tracing new physica phenomena beyond the standard cosmoogica mode in the eary universe. Appendix A. Computation of the weights for P We use the method of the Lagrange mutipiers to minimise the variance of P, i.e. var( P ), keeping fixed the expected vaue of P. This can be achieved requiring that α + β = const = 2, (A.1) for each mutipoe. Repacing the definition of P, see equation (3), in the expression of var( P ), one obtains var( P ) ( P P ) 2 = ( P ) 2 P 2 = = var( P ) (A.2) where the cross-terms among different mutipoes goes exacty to zero in the fu sky case, and with var( P ) defined as var( P ) = ᾱ 2 var(x (1) ) + β 2 var(x (2) ) + 2ᾱ β cov(x (1) ), (A.3) where the barred quantities are defined as ȳ = y/( max 1) and where var(x (1) ) and var(x (2) ) are the variance of x (1) and x (2) respectivey, and cov(x (1) ) is their covariance cov(x (1) ) = (x (1) x (1) )(x (2) x (2) ). (A.4) Because of Eq. (A.2), the minimisation of var( P ) is equivaent to the minimisation of each var( P ). As it is customary in the Lagrange mutipier method, for each mutipoe we introduce a new variabe λ, known as the Lagrange mutipier, and minimise the function F (ᾱ, β, λ ) which is defined as ) F (ᾱ, β, λ ) = var( P ) + λ (ᾱ + β 2. (A.5) ( max 1) 13

14 This is equivaent to minimise the variance of P on the constrain given by equation (A.1) (mutipied by 1/( max 1)). Therefore we compute the partia derivatives with respect to the coefficients ᾱ, β and λ and set them to be zero: F (ᾱ, β, λ ) = 2ᾱ var(x (1) ) + 2 ᾱ cov(x (1) ) + λ =, (A.6) F (ᾱ, β, λ ) β = 2 β var(x (2) ) + 2ᾱ cov(x (1) ) + λ =, (A.7) F (ᾱ, β, λ ) = ᾱ + λ β 2 ( max 1) =. (A.8) This set of equations is soved by equations (31), (32) together with 2 λ = cov(x (1) )+ ( max 1) var(x (1) )var(x (2) ) cov(x (1) ) + ( var(x (1) ) + var(x (2) ) var(x (1) ) + var(x (2) ) 2cov(x (1) ) ). (A.9) Appendix B. Signa-to-noise ratio The tota signa-to-noise ratio (S/N) 2 max contained in x (1) or x (2) up to a maximum harmonic scae max, is defined summing up (S/N) 2 over the mutipoes from 2 to max as: where ( ) 2 S = N ( ) 2 S = N max x (i) 2 max =2 ( ) 2 = x (i) x (i) ( ) 2 S N 1 ( x (i) 1 (B.1) ) 2, (B.2) since x (i) = 1, for i = 1, 2. Acknowedgments. We acknowedge the use of computing faciities at NERSC (USA), of the HEALPix package [19], and of the Panck Legacy Archive (PLA). This research was supported by ASI through the Grant H. (COSMOS) and through the ASI/INAF Agreement I/72/9/ for the Panck 14

15 LFI Activity of Phase E2, and by INFN (I.S. FaG, InDark). L.M. acknowedges the PRIN MIUR 215 Cosmoogy and fundamenta physics: iuminating the dark universe with Eucid. References References [1] D. J. Schwarz, C. J. Copi, D. Huterer and G. D. Starkman, Cass. Quant. Grav. 33 (216) no.18, 1841 [arxiv: [astro-ph.co]]. [2] J. Muir, S. Adhikari and D. Huterer, arxiv: [astro-ph.co]. [3] C. Monteserin, R. B. B. Barreiro, P. Vieva, E. Martinez-Gonzaez, M. P. Hobson and A. N. Lasenby, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 387 (28) 29 [arxiv: [astro-ph]]. [4] M. Cruz, P. Vieva, E. Martinez-Gonzaez and R. B. Barreiro, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 412 (211) 2383 [arxiv: [astro-ph.co]]. [5] A. Gruppuso, P. Natoi, F. Paci, F. Finei, D. Moinari, A. De Rosa and N. Mandoesi, JCAP 137 (213) 47 [arxiv: [astro-ph.co]]. [6] P. A. R. Ade et a. [Panck Coaboration], Astron. Astrophys. 571 (214) A23 doi:1.151/4-6361/ [arxiv: [astro-ph.co]]. [7] P. A. R. Ade et a. [Panck Coaboration], Astron. Astrophys. 594 (216) A16 [arxiv: [astro-ph.co]]. [8] C. R. Contadi, M. Peoso, L. Kofman and A. D. Linde, JCAP 37 (23) 2 doi:1.188/ /23/7/2 [astro-ph/33636]. [9] C. Destri, H. J. de Vega and N. G. Sanchez, Phys. Rev. D 81 (21) 6352 doi:1.113/physrevd [arxiv: [astro-ph.co]]. [1] M. Cicoi, S. Downes and B. Dutta, JCAP 1312 (213) 7 doi:1.188/ /213/12/7 [arxiv: [hep-th]]. 15

16 [11] E. Dudas, N. Kitazawa, S. P. Pati and A. Sagnotti, JCAP 125 (212) 12 [arxiv: [hep-th]]; N. Kitazawa and A. Sagnotti, JCAP 144 (214) 17 [arxiv: [hep-th]], EPJ Web Conf. 95 (215) 331 [arxiv: [hep-th]], Mod. Phys. Lett. A 3 (215) no.28, [arxiv: [hep-th]]. [12] A. Gruppuso and A. Sagnotti, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 24 (215) no.12, [arxiv: [astro-ph.co]]. [13] A. Gruppuso, N. Kitazawa, N. Mandoesi, P. Natoi and A. Sagnotti, Phys. Dark Univ. 11 (216) 68 [arxiv: [astro-ph.co]]. [14] A. Gruppuso, N. Kitazawa, M. Lattanzi, N. Mandoesi, P. Natoi and A. Sagnotti, Phys. Dark Univ. 2 (218) 49 doi:1.116/j.dark [arxiv: [astro-ph.co]]. [15] A. Suzuki et a., arxiv: [astro-ph.im]. [16] C. J. Copi, D. Huterer, D. J. Schwarz and G. D. Starkman, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 434 (213) 359 doi:1.193/mnras/stt1287 [arxiv: [astro-ph.co]]. [17] N. Aghanim et a. [Panck Coaboration], Astron. Astrophys. 594 (216) A11 doi:1.151/4-6361/ [arxiv: [astro-ph.co]]. [18] M. Lattanzi et a., JCAP 172 (217) no.2, 41 doi:1.188/ /217/2/41, 1.188/1475- [arxiv: [astro-ph.co]]. [19] K. M. Gorski, E. Hivon, A. J. Banday, B. D. Wandet, F. K. Hansen, M. Reinecke and M. Barteman, Astrophys. J. 622 (25) 759 doi:1.186/ [astro-ph/49513]. [2] T. Matsumura et a., J. Low. Temp. Phys. 176 (214) 733 doi:1.17/s [arxiv: [astro-ph.im]]. 16

17 [21] A. Gruppuso, A. De Rosa, P. Cabea, F. Paci, F. Finei, P. Natoi, G. de Gasperis and N. Mandoesi, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 4 (29) 463 doi:1.1111/j x [arxiv: [astro-ph.co]]. 17

18 x CDM mode Average MC sim x x Figure 1: Averages of x (1) (upper pane) (midde pane) and x (3) (ower pane) as a function of obtained from MonteCaro simuations corresponding to the Panck- WMAP ow- data. Error bars represent the uncertainties associated to the averages. Each pane dispays aso a ower box where for each it is shown the distance of mean in units of standard deviation of the mean itsef. Dashed horizonta ines represent what theoreticay expected for the averages of x (1) and x (3), see equations (18),(19) and (2). 18

19 x CDM mode Panck data 68.3% 95.5% 99.7% x x Figure 2: Red dots represent x (1) (upper pane) (midde pane) and x (3) (ower pane) as a function of obtained from the Panck-WMAP ow- data set. Error bars (bue regions) represent the uncertainties associated to the estimates. Dashed horizonta ines represent what theoreticay expected for the averages of x (1) and x (3), see equations (18),(19) and (2). Each pane dispays aso a ower box where for each it is shown the distance of the estimates in units of standard deviation of the estimate itsef. 19

20 4 x (1) 3 ( S N ) max 6 x (2) 5 4 ( S N ) max Figure 3: Signa-to-noise ratio of x (1) (upper pane) and x (2) (ower pane) as a function of max for the Panck-WMAP ow- data set. Whie the signa contained in x (1) grows monotonicay saturates at max 6. 2

21 14 x (2) 12 1 ( S N ) max Figure 4: Signa-to-noise ratio of x (2) simuations. The signa contained in x (2) as a function of max for the LiteBIRD-ike noise grows monotonicay. counts % 95.5% 99.7% Panck Data CDM MODEL P Figure 5: Empirica distribution of the P estimator, see eq. (27), for max = 6. The red and the back vertica ines represent the vaues of the Panck data and of the ΛCDM mode respectivey. The back, red and green dashed ines indicate the boundaries of the 68.3%, 95.5% and 99.7% confidence regions respectivey. 21

22 % 95.5% 99.7% CDM MODEL counts P % 95.5% 99.7% CDM MODEL counts P Figure 6: Empirica distribution of the P estimator, see eq. (27), for max = 3. The upper pane refers to the Panck-WMAP ow- data set, whie the ower pane considers the case of the LiteBIRD-ike noise eve. 22

23 3 25 Panck LB max Figure 7: The ratio, σ P anck /σ LB, between the widths of the empirica distributions of P, for the LiteBIRD-ike noise eve (σ LB) and for the Panck-WMAP ow- noise eve (σ P anck ), as a function of max. See aso the text. 23

24 2. Coefficients Coefficients Figure 8: The behaviour of the coefficients α (bue ine) and β (red ine), see eqs. (3),(31) and (32) for their definitions, as a function of for the Panck-WMAP ow- data set (upper pane) and for the LiteBIRD-ike noise eve (ower pane). 24

25 3 25 LTP for P LTP for P T LTP(%) max Figure 9: LTP of P (in back) and of P T (in bue) as a function of max for the Panck- WMAP ow- data Weights.6.4 w x (1) Panck w x (1) LiteBIRD-ike w x (2) Panck w x (2) LiteBIRD-ike max Figure 1: w x (1) (in bue) and w x (2) (in red) as a function of max for the Panck- WMAP ow- data set (soid) and the LiteBIRD-ike case (dashed). 25

26 1..8 P for Panck P for LiteBIRD-ike max Panck LB max Figure 11: Upper pane: Standard deviation σ of P versus max for Panck-WMAP ow- data set (soid) and the LiteBIRD-ike case (dashed). Lower pane: ratio of the σs shown in the upper pane (σ P anck /σ LB) versus max. 26