arxiv: v1 [astro-ph] 28 Jun 2007

Transcription

1 Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 000, (0000) Printed 13 March 2008 (MN LATEX stye fie v2.2) A ow CMB variance in the WMAP data arxiv: v1 [astro-ph] 28 Jun 2007 C. Monteserín 1,2, R.B. Barreiro 1, P. Vieva 1, E. Martínez-Gonzáez 1, M.P. Hobson 3 and A.N.Lasenby 3 1 Instituto de Física de Cantabria, CSIC-Univ. de Cantabria, Avda. de os Castros s/n, Santander, Spain 2 Dpto. de Física Moderna, Univ. de Cantabria, Avda. de os Castros s/n, Santander, Spain 3 Astrophysics Group, Cavendish Laboratory, J.J. Thomson Avenue, Cambridge CB3 0EH 13 March INTRODUCTION ABSTRACT The study of the anisotropies of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) constitutes one of the most powerfu toos of cosmoogy, providing us with very vauabe information about the origin and evoution of the universe. In particuar, the determination of the CMB power spectrum aows one to put tight constraints on the cosmoogica parameters. In addition, the study of the CMB temperature distribution provides us with a powerfu test of the standard infationary theory, since this predicts that the CMB fuctuations shoud foow a homogeneous and isotropic Gaussian distribution whereas aternative theories such as non-standard infation (Bartoo et a. 2004) or topoogica defects (Durrer 1999) give rise to non-gaussian fuctuations. Given the interest of the subject, a arge number of techniques have been proposed for studying the Gaussianity of the CMB incuding, among others, the Minkowski functionas (Coes 1988; Gott et a. 1990), the bispectrum (Ferreira, Magueijo & Górski 1998; Heavens 1998; Magueijo 2000), properties of hot and cod spots (Coes & Barrow 1987; Martínez-Gonzáez et a. 2000), geometrica estimators (Barreiro, Martínez-Gonzáez & Sanz 2001; Doré, Coombi & Bouchet 2003; Monteserín et a. 2005, 2006), extrema correation function (Nasesky & Novikov We have estimated the CMB variance from the three-year WMAP data, finding a vaue which is significanty ower than the one expected from Gaussian simuations using the WMAP best-fit cosmoogica mode, at a significance eve of 98.7 per cent. This resut is even more prominent if we consider ony the north eciptic hemisphere (99.8 per cent). Different anayses have been performed in order to identify a possibe origin for this anomay. In particuar we have studied the behaviour of singe radiometers and singe year data as we as the effect of residua foregrounds and 1/f noise, finding that none of these possibiities can expain the ow vaue of the variance. Finay, the effect of varying the cosmoogica parameters has aso been tested, finding that the spectra index n s, the ampitude A and the reionization optica depth τ are the most sensitive parameters. Interestingy, the estimated CMB variance tends to favour higher vaues of n s than the one of the WMAP best-fit mode. Key words: cosmic microwave background - methods: data anaysis - methods: statistica 1995; Barreiro et a. 1998; Heavens & Sheth 1999), waveet anaysis (Hobson, Jones & Lasenby 1999; Barreiro et a. 2000; Barreiro & Hobson 2001; Aghanim, Forni & Bouchet 2001), phase anaysis (Chiang, Nasesky & Coes 2004) and goodness of fit tests (Aiaga et a. 2005; Rubiño-Martín et a. 2006; Curto et a. 2007). Many non-gaussianity anayses have been performed using the best CMB data avaiabe up to date, which have been provided by the NASA Wikinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) sateite (Bennett et a. 2003a, Sperge et a. 2007). The WMAP team carried out a study of the CMB temperature distribution of the first year data (Komatsu et a. 2003) finding that the data were consistent with Gaussianity. However, in subsequent works, a number of unexpected resuts regarding the Gaussianity and/or isotropy of the CMB were reported, incuding anomaies reated to ow mutipoes (de Oiveira-Costa et a. 2004; Copi et a. 2004; Land & Magueijo 2005a; Schwarz et a. 2004), north/south asymmetries (Eriksen et a. 2004; Hansen, Banday & Górski 2004a; Hansen et a. 2004b; Land & Magueijo 2005b; Bernui et a. 2006), a cod spot in the southern hemisphere (Vieva et a. 2004; Mukherjee & Wang 2004; Cruz et a. 2005, 2006; McEwen et a. 2005; Cayón et a. 2005) structure

2 2 Monteserín et a. aignment (Wiaux et a. 2006), phase correations (Chiang, Nasesky & Verkhodanov 2003; Coes et a. 2004) and to the ampitude of hot and cod spots (Larson & Wandet 2004). After the reease of the three year WMAP data in March 2006, simiar anayses have been carried out confirming the presence of the anomaies in the data (Martínez-Gonzáez et a. 2006; McEwen et a. 2006; Vieva et a. 2007; Cruz et a. 2007; Copi et a. 2007; Bernui et a. 2007; Eriksen et a. 2007; Wiaux et a. 2007). In this work, we report a new anomay in the WMAP data: a significanty ow vaue of the CMB variance with respect to the one expected for the WMAP best-fit mode. The outine of the paper is as foows. In 2 severa quantities reated to the one-point density function (1-pdf) are studied for the WMAP data, incuding the dispersion, skewness, kurtosis and Komogorov-Smirnov distance. In 3 the CMB dispersion from the WMAP data is estimated, finding that its vaue is significanty ow. The effect on our resuts of possibe residua foregrounds or systematics are studied in 4. In 5 the effect of varying the cosmoogica parameters on the significance of the derived CMB variance is discussed. Finay, our concusions are presented in 6. 2 TESTS OF GAUSSIANITY BASED ON THE 1-PDF The NASA WMAP sateite was aunched in the summer of The first-year and three-years resuts were presented in February 2003 and March 2006 respectivey. WMAP observes at five frequency bands: K (22.8 GHz, one receiver), Ka (33.0 GHz, one receiver), Q (40.7 GHz, two receivers), V (60.8 GHz, two receivers) and W (93.5 GHz, four receivers). A the data and products generated by WMAP can be found at the Legacy Archive for Microwave Background Data Anaysis (LAMBDA) web site. 1 Foowing the WMAP team (Komatsu et a. 2003) we have performed our non-gaussianity anayses on a noise weighted average of the Q, V and W receivers, which provides a CMB map where the signa-to-noise ratio has been increased. The K and Ka receivers are not incuded in the combined map since they are argey contaminated by Gaactic foregrounds. In addition, the WMAP team has reduced the Gaactic contamination present in the Q, V and W map by performing a foreground tempate fit as described in Hinshaw et a. (2007). In particuar, the combined Q+V+W map is constructed using these cean data as (Bennett et a. 2003b): T c(x) 10 j3 T j(x) w j(x), (1) where x gives the position in the sky and the index j correspond to the different receivers of the Q, V and W bands (i.e., the indices 3 to 10 refer to the Q1, Q2, V1, V2, W1, W2, W3 and W4 radiometers respectivey). The noise weight 1 w j(x) is defined as: w j(x) Nj(x) w j(x) 10 wj(x) σ 2 wj(x), 0j (2) j3 where σ 0j is the noise dispersion per observation for each radiometer given by Jarosik et a and N j(x) is the number of observations made by the receiver j at the position in the sky x. Athough the data are provided at a HEALPix 2 (Górski et a. 2005) resoution of n side 512, we degrade the data down to n side 256 since the smaest scaes are dominated by noise. In addition, in order to avoid the strong contamination present at the Gaactic pane and the emission coming from extragaactic point sources, ony the data outside the WMAP Kp0 mask (Hinshaw et a. 2007), which corresponds approximatey to 76 per cent of the sky, has been used. Finay, the monopoe and dipoe outside the Kp0 mask have been removed. In order to appy our Gaussianity test, we construct the normaised temperature u (x), which is obtained by dividing the data at each pixe by its corresponding expected dispersion. Since the contribution from residua foregrounds in the cean WMAP combined map outside the Kp0 is expected to be very sma, the main contribution to the data dispersion comes from the CMB signa and the instrumenta noise. The WMAP noise is very we approximated by Gaussian white noise at each pixe characterised by a dispersion σ n(x). Therefore, the normaised temperature is given by u (x) T c (x) σ σ 2 n (x) where σ 0 is the CMB dispersion 3 and has been estimated as σ 0 max π Cc (4) 2 The C c s in the previous equation correspond to the power spectrum of the combined map assuming the best-fit mode 4 to the WMAP data and taking into account the different beams and noise weights used in the combination (see Appendix A). The maximum that we have considered is max 2.5n side. If the data foow a Gaussian distribution and our assumptions about the underying cosmoogica mode and the instrumenta noise are correct the normaised temperature Since the CMB is an homogeneous and isotropic fied, σ 0 is constant over the sky. However, stricty speaking, there is a sma dependence of σ 0 with the position in the WMAP combined map due to the different beams and noise weights used in the combination. Nonetheess, these differences are very sma and one can assume, to a very good approximation, that the signa dispersion is constant over the sky. 4 The CMB simuations have been performed using the best-fit mode given in the first version of the papers of the 3-yr WMAP data reaease (Sperge et a. 2007, see arxiv:astro-ph/ v1). Athough the vaues of the cosmoogica parameters have been sighty modified in the fina version of the WMAP papers, we have tested that these sma changes do not affect the resuts of this work. (3)

3 Low CMB variance in WMAP 3 Tabe 1. The dispersion, skewness, kurtosis and Komogorov- Smirnov distance d KS are given for the normaised WMAP data as we as for the northern and southern eciptic hemispheres (in a cases considering ony pixes outside the Kp0 mask). The significance of each quantity has been cacuated from 1000 Gaussian reaisations as the percentage of simuations with a vaue arger or equa to that obtained from the data. Estimator WMAP vaue Signif. (%) A pixes outside Kp0 mask dispersion skewness kurtosis d KS Northern eciptic hemisphere dispersion skewness kurtosis d KS Southern eciptic hemisphere dispersion skewness kurtosis d KS u(x) shoud foow a Gaussian distribution with zero mean and unit dispersion N(0,1). We have cacuated different estimators for the normaised data outside the Kp0 mask: dispersion, skewness and kurtosis. In addition, the data have been compared to a N(0,1) distribution through a Komogorov-Smirnov test. In order to assign a significance to these quantities, the same anaysis has been appied to 1000 Gaussian simuations of the WMAP combined data. Resuts are shown in Tabe 1. We find that the skewness and kurtosis are consistent with the resuts obtained from Gaussian simuations. However, the dispersion of the normaised data is significanty ower than expected, at the eve of 97.8 per cent (i.e., ony 22 out of the 1000 simuations have ower vaues than the one found for the data). Regarding the Komogorov-Smirnov distance (d KS), we find that ony 7 per cent of the simuations have a arger vaue of d KS than the data. This coud be reated to the fact that the data dispersion is ower than expected, what woud tend to produce a deviation of the normaised temperature from a N(0,1) distribution. These deviations can aso be seen in the top pane of Figure 1, which compares the histogram obtained from the normaised WMAP data with the one obtained averaging over 1000 Gaussian simuations. A deviation of the data histogram (dashed ine) from the one obtained with simuations (soid ine) is apparent due to the sma vaue of the dispersion of the normaised data. We woud ike to mention that the same anaysis has aso been performed on the first year WMAP data, finding again a ow vaue of the dispersion (at a significance eve of 99.5 per cent). In order to investigate further the origin of this deviation, we have repeated the same anaysis in the northern and southern eciptic hemispheres, considering ony those pixes Figure 1. The top pane shows the histogram of the normaised WMAP data outside the Kp0 mask (dashed red ine) compared to the averaged histogram obtained from 1000 simuations (soid back ine). The error bars indicate the dispersion obtained from simuations. The midde and bottom panes give the same histograms for the northern and southern eciptic hemispheres (ony considering pixes outside the Kp0) respectivey.

4 4 Monteserín et a. outside the Kp0 mask (which correspond to a sky fraction of 38.8 and 37.0 per cent for the northern and southern hemispheres, respectivey). Resuts are shown in Tabe 1. The vaues of skewness, kurtosis and d KS remain compatibe with Gaussian simuations. However, we find an asymmetry in the behaviour of the dispersion: whie the data dispersion in the southern eciptic hemisphere is compatibe with Gaussianity (at the 71.8 per cent eve), a cear deviation is found in the north, at the 99.4 per cent significance eve (i.e., ony 6 out of 1000 simuations had ower dispersion vaues). The midde (bottom) pane of Figure 1 shows the histogram of the data in the northern (southern) eciptic hemisphere compared to the averaged histogram obtained from Gaussian simuations in the same sky region. The histogram obtained from the northern data shows again a systematic deviation from the average one, which is even arger than in the case of the whoe sky, due to the ower vaue of the dispersion found for the data of the northern eciptic hemisphere. Conversey, the histogram obtained from the southern data is coser to the average vaue of the Gaussian simuations. estimated σ true σ 0 Figure 2. Estimated versus true dispersion obtained from 1000 simuations of the WMAP combined map outside the Kp0 mask. For iustration, the best fit to a straight ine is aso shown (soid red ine), which corresponds to ˆσ σ STUDY OF THE CMB DISPERSION σ 0 Given the deviation found in the dispersion of the normaised temperature, we have performed a more detaied study of the CMB dispersion σ 0. Let us reca that the dispersion of the data σ(x) has contributions from both the CMB signa and the instrumenta noise: σ(x) σ σ2 n(x) (5) We have estimated the vaue of σ 0 by aowing this quantity to vary in equation (3) and compare the different obtained normaised temperatures to a Gaussian of zero mean and unit dispersion with the Komogorov-Smirnov test. Our estimation of the CMB dispersion is given by the vaue of σ 0 that produces the minimum d KS. We have tested with simuations that this estimator performs we, as it wi be shown beow for the different considered cases. Using this method, we have estimated a vaue of σ mk for the WMAP combined map. The bias and error of this estimation has been tested using 1000 CMB simuations. Figure 2 shows the true CMB dispersion of each simuation outside the Kp0 mask versus the one estimated with our method from the simuated data in the same region of the sky. For iustration, the best fit to a straight ine is aso potted, showing a very good correation between the true and estimated dispersions. The bias (obtained as the average difference of the true minus the estimated dispersion) and error (obtained as the dispersion of the same difference) of the estimator are b mk and e mk respectivey, i.e. the error of our estimator is at the eve of 0.5 per cent. In addition, the bias is aso significanty smaer than the typica vaue expected for the CMB dispersion and therefore our estimator can be considered unbiased to a very good approximation. In order to assign a significance to the estimated vaue of σ 0, we have obtained the distribution of variances from noiseess CMB Gaussian simuations of the WMAP combined data (see Figure 3). We find that 98.7 per cent of the simuations have a arger vaue of the variance (or, equivaenty, of the Tabe 2. The second coumn gives the CMB dispersion (in mk) estimated for the WMAP combined data obtained using pixes of three different regions of the sky: outside the Kp0, the northern eciptic hemisphere outside the Kp0 and the southern eciptic hemisphere outside the Kp0. Significances, that have been cacuated as the percentage of simuations with vaues arger than the one found for the data using Gaussian CMB simuations, are given in the third coumn. Finay, in the ast two coumns, the bias (obtained as the average differences of the true minus the estimated dispersion) and error of the estimator, both in mk, are given, which have been obtained from 1000 Gaussian simuations. Region ˆσ 0 Signif. Bias Error Kp north south dispersion) than the one found for the WMAP data. These resuts are summarised in Tabe 2. It is interesting to point out that, for a Gaussian CMB, the distribution of the correation function C(θ) for a given power spectrum can be anayticay cacuated (Cayón et a. 1991). In particuar, we are interested in obtaining the theoretica distribution of the variance, i.e., the correation function at θ 0. Foowing Cayón et a. (1991), the cumuative function of the variance can be cacuated as max F(σ0) π 0 0 sin [ ] B (t) + tσ0 2 dt t B (t) max [ (1 + 4t 2 σ 2 ) 2+1 ] 4 arctan ( 2tσ ), (6) where σ C contains the power spectrum dependence. 4π Cacuating the derivative of the cumuative function with

5 Low CMB variance in WMAP 5 Figure 3. Left pane: theoretica cumuative function of the CMB variance (soid back ine), compared to the same functions obtained from Gaussian simuations over the whoe sky (bue dotted-dashed ine) and using ony the pixes outside the Kp0 mask (red dashed ine). Right pane: the probabiity distribution of the variance is given for the three same cases. For iustration, the soid vertica ine in both panes indicates the vaue obtained from the WMAP data. respect to σ 2 0, we can aso obtain the probabiity distribution of the variance: p(σ 2 0) 1 π 0 max 0 [ (1 + 4t 2 σ 2 ) ] cos [ B (t) + tσ 2 0] dt(7) The previous distributions are vaid when considering the variance of the whoe sky. However, the presence of the Kp0 mask restricts the fraction of the sky ( 76 per cent) used in the anaysis. Since obtaining the significance of a given estimated CMB variance from simuations is significanty sower than cacuating it from the cumuative function (6), we have tested whether the theoretica distributions are a good approximation in our case. The eft pane of Figure 3 shows the cumuative function of σ 2 0 (back soid ine) obtained using the theoretica power spectrum of the WMAP combined map cacuated in Appendix A. The dotted-dashed bue ine corresponds to the distribution of the variance obtained from Gaussian simuations over the whoe sky. As expected, the agreement in this case is very good. Finay, the red dashed ine gives the distribution of the variance obtained from the same simuations considering ony those pixes outside the Kp0 mask. We can appreciate some sma differences between this curve and the one obtained from equation (6), due to the fact that we are appying a mask, but the genera agreement is very good. The maximum difference between both cumuative functions is found in the centra part of the pot and is ess than 0.04, whereas the differences in the tais of the distributions are even smaer. Therefore, the theoretica cumuative function provides a simpe and good approximation to obtain the significance of the estimated CMB variance in the considered case. In particuar, using the theoretica distribution we obtain a significance of per cent for the estimated σ 0, that shoud be compared with the vaue of obtained from simuations. Simiar concusions can be derived from the right pane of Figure 3, that shows the probabiity distribution of the variance for the same cases as before: theoretica (soid back ine), from simuations using the whoe sky (bue dotted-dashed ine) and from simuations considering pixes outside Kp0 (red dashed-ine). Taking into account the resuts found in the previous section, we have aso estimated the CMB dispersion in the northern and southern eciptic hemispheres (considering ony those pixes outside the Kp0 mask), obtaining vaues of and mk, respectivey. The corresponding biases, errors and significances are given in Tabe 2. As expected, the bias and error of the estimator has increased sighty with respect to the ones obtained using a pixes outside the Kp0 mask, due to the smaer fraction of sky considered, but they are sti sma (ess than 1 per cent with respect to ˆσ 0). In addition, it shoud be noted that this bias is negative, impying that, if anything, the CMB dispersion woud tend to be overestimated and, therefore, the true σ 0 woud be even ower. We remark that the variance of the northern hemisphere is significanty ow (ony 0.2 per cent of the Gaussian simuations have ower vaues) whereas the southern hemisphere is compatibe with Gaussianity. This is consistent with the resuts found in 2, which seem to indicate that the anomay found in the WMAP variance comes from the northern eciptic hemisphere. This resut is aso in agreement with the ack of power found in the northern eciptic hemisphere of the WMAP data by previous works (Eriksen et a. 2004; Hansen et a. 2004a). Finay, we have aso studied the ratio of σ 2 0 in the northern eciptic hemisphere over σ 2 0 in the southern one for the WMAP data, finding that this quantity is consistent with what is expected from Gaussian simuations (with a significance of 88.7 per cent obtained from simuations). This can be expained because, athough the vaue of σ 0 in the southern hemisphere is consistent with Gaussianity, this quantity is ower than the average dispersion expected from

6 6 Monteserín et a. simuations, and this fact makes the north-south ratio compatibe with the Gaussian mode. 4 DISCUSSION We may wonder if the anomaous vaue found for the CMB dispersion in the WMAP data may have an extrinsic origin, i.e., to be due to the presence of some systematics or foreground residuas. In order to carify this point, we have performed some further tests incuding an anaysis of each individua radiometer ( 4.1) as we as the study of the effect of 1/f noise ( 4.2) and foreground residuas ( 4.3). 4.1 Singe radiometer anaysis In order to check if the ow vaue of σ 0 found in the WMAP data coud be expained by the presence of an anomaous radiometer, we have estimated the CMB dispersion from the maps of each singe radiometer foowing the method expained in 3. The resuts are summarised in Tabe 3. The significances have been obtained anayticay (see 3) using the power spectrum of the WMAP best-fit mode (Sperge et a. 2007) and taking into account the different beam window functions of each radiometer as we as the window pixe function of the considered resoution (N side 256). The biases and errors of the estimator have been obtained from 100 Gaussian simuations and are at a eve ess than 1 per cent in a cases. As seen in Tabe 3, a different vaue of σ 0 has been obtained for each radiometer, which is expected due to the different beam window functions of each radiometer as we as to the statistica error of our estimator. In order to check if the dispersion of each radiometer is consistent with each other, and that no singe radiometer has an anomaous dispersion that coud be responsibe for the ow vaue of σ 0 found in the combined map, we have performed the foowing test. First, we have obtained the mean, d, and dispersion, error(d), of the difference between the dispersion of the combined map minus that of each singe radiometer from 100 simuations, where the map dispersions were obtained using our estimator. We have then added the corresponding mean difference d to the ˆσ 0 of each radiometer, which provides an estimation of σ 0 for the combined map (given in the sixth coumn of Tabe 3). If a the radiometer maps are consistent with each other, a these quantities shoud be compatibe among them within the range aowed by the dispersion of the cacuated differences (given in the seventh coumn of Tabe 3) as we as with the ˆσ 0 derived for the WMAP combined data. From Tabe 3, we see that consistency is found and that no singe radiometer has an anomaous ow dispersion. 5. Moreover, the significances obtained for the es- 5 Athough consistency is found, it is observed that the dispersions derived from the radiometers are in genera higher than that derived directy from the WMAP combined map. This sma bias coud be due to the presence of residua foregrounds and 1/f noise in the singe radiometer maps, whose effect, as wi be shown in sections 4.2 and 4.3, is to produce an overestimation of the dispersion in these maps. This is consistent with the fact that the radiometers that have a dispersion that deviates more from the one of the combined map (athough aways within the timated dispersion for a the radiometers are significanty high, confirming that the anomay can not be attributed to a singe radiometer. In addition, we have repeated the same anaysis for a the radiometers for each individua year of data. We find that the estimated CMB dispersion is reasonaby stabe aong the three years of data for a the radiometers as we as for the combined map. This shows that the ow σ 0 can not be expained as the resut of some anomay in a singe year of data /f noise In our anaysis, it has been assumed that the WMAP instrumenta noise is a Gaussian white noise characterised by a dispersion σ n(x) which varies with the position of the sky. Athough this seems to be a very good approximation, the WMAP data aso contain a sma eve of 1/f noise (Jarosik et a. 2003, 2007) and therefore we may wonder if this coud be affecting our estimation of σ 0. In order to test the effect of 1/f noise we need reaistic noise simuations that reproduce the WMAP data pipeine. As far as we know, this type of simuations are not avaiabe for the three year data but, however, the WMAP team did provide 110 of these simuations for each radiometer for the first year of data that incude 1/f noise as we as a known radiometric effects (for detais see the information in the LAMBDA web site). Therefore, we have carried out the foowing test. First of a, we have combined the simuations of the different radiometers in the appropriate way in order to obtain 110 reaistic noise simuations of the first-year WMAP combined map. We have then obtained the reaistic noise dispersion map from these simuations. Since the number of simuations is reativey sma, if we try to obtain the dispersion at each pixe, this map wi be very noisy. Therefore, we have assumed that this quantity varies smoothy over the map and that neighbouring pixes woud have the same eve of noise. In particuar, we have obtained the dispersion from 16 neighbouring pixes aong the 110 simuations. The mean vaue of the ratio of this dispersion map over the one constructed assuming that ony white noise is present is 1.02, which is an indication of the sma eve of 1/f noise present in the data. The next step is to construct a new set of 110 reaistic simuations by adding the combined reaistic noise simuations to Gaussian CMB reaizations of the WMAP combined first-year data. We have then appied our dispersion estimator to this new set of simuations and study its bias and error in 2 different cases: 1) incuding in equation (5) the vaue of σ n(x) obtained from the reaistic noise simuations and 2) assuming that we have ony white noise. Interestingy, the errors in both cases are very simiar ( mk), but 2σ error) are Q1 and Q2, which are expected to be the channes more affected by residuas foregrounds, and W4, which presents the argest 1/f noise of a the radiometers (Jarosik et a. 2003). These possibe residuas are expected to be reduced, reativey to the CMB signa, in the combined map and, therefore, the direct estimation of the σ 0 from the combined data woud tend to give a ower (ess biased) vaue than that obtained from each of the radiometers.

7 Low CMB variance in WMAP 7 Tabe 3. CMB dispersion (in mk) estimated from maps of individua radiometers outside the Kp0 mask. Significances have been obtained anayticay. The corresponding bias and error (in mk) have been obtained from 100 Gaussian simuations. For comparison, the same resuts obtained for the WMAP combined map are aso shown. An estimation of the σ 0 of the combined map from each of the radiometers and its corresponding error are aso given in the ast two coumns (see text for detais). Radiometer ˆσ 0 Signif. (%) Bias Error ˆσ 0 + d Error (d) Q Q V V W W W W Combined the biases are significanty different. In the first case, when the noise is correcty characterised, the bias is very sma ( mk), however, when ony white noise is erroneousy assumed, the bias increases to a vaue of mk. This means that, if 1/f noise were present in the data and we did not propery take it into account, our estimation of the CMB dispersion woud tend to shift towards higher vaues and, therefore, this effect coud not expain an anomaous ow vaue of σ 0. This can be understood, since, by not incuding the 1/f noise, we are underestimating the eve of instrumenta noise and this extra power woud tend to be compensated by increasing the signa dispersion. As a further test, we have estimated the CMB dispersion from the WMAP first-year data using the reaistic noise dispersion map, finding a vaue of mk to be compared with the arger dispersion obtained assuming white noise ( mk). Since there are not reaistic noise simuations avaiabe for the WMAP three-year data, we can not repeat this test for the compete set of data. However, we can quaitativey check that the same argument is vaid for the three-year data using the reduced resoution inverse noise covariance matrices provided in the LAMBDA web site for the one and three year data. The diagona eements of the (direct) noise covariance matrices are dominated by white noise, whereas the off-diagona eements come from 1/f noise. We have obtained the ratio of the diagona and off-diagona terms of the first-year data over the corresponding eements of the three-year data finding that, in both cases, this ratio peaks around 3. This means that the reative importance of the 1/f noise with respect to the white noise is approximatey the same in both sets of data and, therefore, the effect that the 1/f noise has in the three-year data shoud be very simiar to the one found for the first-year data. Thus, residua 1/f noise can not expain the ow CMB variance found for the three-year WMAP data, since its unaccounted presence, if anything, woud ead to higher vaues of ˆσ Foreground residuas Athough we are using the foreground ceaned maps provided by the WMAP team and appying a Gaactic pus point source mask, some foreground residuas may sti be present in the data. Therefore, it is interesting to test if this possibe contamination can affect our estimation of the CMB dispersion. An indication of a significant effect from foregrounds woud be that the anomay found in σ 0 was frequency dependent. However, from Tabe 3, we can see that this is not the case, since σ 0 is consistenty ow in the whoe range of frequencies probed by Q, V and W (from 41 to 94 GHz). In order to study further the effect of foreground contamination, we have estimated the vaue of σ 0 in the combined and individua radiometer maps without the foreground correction. The most reevant change is found for the Q1 and Q2 maps (owering the significances of σ 0 down to 90.7 and 86.2 per cent respectivey), whereas for the radiometers of the V and W bands, the changes are smaer. This is consistent with the fact that foreground emission is higher in the Q band and therefore the ceaning of the Q1 and Q2 maps is important to improve the estimation of the CMB dispersion. The presence of residuas aso transates into a arger vaue for the ˆσ 0 of the combined map ( mk). As one woud expect, these resuts indicate that if foreground residuas were present in the data, this woud tend to bias σ 0 towards higher vaues. Therefore, the presence of foreground contamination can not expain the anomay found for the CMB dispersion. 5 EFFECT OF COSMOLOGICAL PARAMETERS During this work, we have used for the CMB power spectrum the best-fit mode to the WMAP data assuming a fat ΛCDM mode (Sperge et a. 2007). However, we may wonder if by varying the vaues of the cosmoogica parameters within the current uncertainties the estimated CMB variance coud be more consistent with the theoretica expectations. In order to test this possibiity, we have considered the effect of varying the foowing cosmoogica parameters: the physica baryon density Ω b h 2, the physica cod dark matter density Ω ch 2, the reduced Hubbe constant h, the reionization optica depth τ, the spectra index n s and the ampitude of the density fuctuations A (with the

8 8 Monteserín et a. Tabe 4. Ratio between the maximum vaue of the ikeihood, when varying each parameter within a range given by 2 times the errors of the WMAP best fit mode, over the ikeihood of the best fit mode (coumn 2) and significance of the variance for the mode correspoding to this maximum ikeihood vaue (coumn 3). Parameters Ratio Signif.(%) Ω b h Ω ch h τ n s A constraint of having a fat ΛCDM mode). Given that we have ony one observabe, the CMB variance σ 2 0, modifying a the cosmoogica parameters simutaneousy woud ead to strong degeneracies between them. Therefore, as a first approach, we have studied the effect of varying one singe parameter (within a range given by 2 times the errors of the WMAP best-fit mode) whie eaving the others unchanged. In particuar, we have constructed the corresponding one-dimensiona ikeihoods in the foowing way: for each set of parameters, the CMB spectrum was cacuated using CAMB (Lewis, Chainor & Lasenby 2000); this power spectrum was then inserted in equation (A8) in order to get the C s of the WMAP combined map; finay, the probabiity of having the observed vaue of σ 2 0 for that power spectrum was obtained using equation (7). We find that the estimated CMB variance favours ower vaues of Ω b h 2, h and A than the ones of the best-fit mode whereas higher vaues of Ω ch 2, n s and τ are preferred. However, not a parameters are equay sensitive to the variance as can be seen in Tabe 4. This tabe gives the ratio between the maximum vaue of the ikeihood, when varying one parameter in the considered range, over the ikeihood of the WMAP best-fit mode. The higher this ratio, the more sensitive the parameter to the CMB variance. We aso show in Tabe 4 the significance of the variance for the mode correspoding to this maximum ikeihood vaue. We see that the compatibiity of σ 0 with the mode is ony moderatey improved when varying Ω b h 2, h and Ω ch 2 within the aowed range and the ikeihood ratio aso confirms that these parameters are not very sensitive to the vaue of the CMB variance. However, this ratio reaches higher vaues when considering the variation of A, τ and n s and aso the σ 0 becomes perfecty compatibe with the mode, showing that these three parameters are more reevant regarding this observabe. Taking into account the previous resuts, we have further investigated the effect of cosmoogica parameters by constructing the ikeihood varying simutaneousy the three more sensitive parameters, i.e. τ, n s and A, whie fixing the others to the vaues of the best-fit mode. We find that there is a strong degeneracy between τ and A, and, therefore, we can not extract any further information with the observed CMB variance regarding these two parameters. However, the situation is different for the spectra index. We have constructed the marginaized ikeihood of n s, finding that vaues of the spectra index higher than the ones given by the WMAP best-fit mode are favoured. In particuar, we find n s 0.98, athough one shoud point out that, as expected since we are using ony one observabe, the ikeihood constructed in this way is significanty wider than the one obtained with the fu power spectrum of the WMAP data. The simpest infationary modes predict a neary-scae invariant power spectrum for the matter perturbations. However, the WMAP team has found that the Harrison- Zedovich (HZ) spectrum (Harrison 1970; Zedovich 1972) no onger provides a good fit to the WMAP data (Sperge et a. 2007). Moreover, the incusion of other astrophysica data sets in the anaysis favours, even more, ower vaues of n s. Interestingy, our resuts indicate that the observed CMB variance may favour vaues of the spectra index coser to the HZ spectrum. To further quantify this resut, we have performed a Bayesian anaysis in order to determine which mode best describes the data. According to Bayes theorem, the posterior probabiity of the parameters Θ given the data D and the mode M, P (Θ D,M), is given by P (Θ D,M) P (D Θ,M) P (Θ M) P (D M) where P (D Θ,M) is the ikeihood of the data, P (Θ M) is the prior and P (D M) is the Bayesian evidence. The evidence can be used for mode seection (e.g. Jeffreys 1961; Bridges, Lasenby & Hobson 2006; Parkinson, Mukherjee & Lidde 2006) and is given by E i (8) P (D Θ,M i) P (Θ M i)dθ (9) For a given data set, a mode M i with a higher evidence E i woud provide a better description of the anaysed data. In order to perform a comparison between two modes M 0 and M 1 the difference of the og evidence n E n(e 0/E 1) is usuay cacuated. In particuar, Jeffreys (1961) has provided a usefu guide to determine how significant is the difference of the og evidence: n E < 1 is inconcusive, 1 < n E < 2.5 is significant, 2.5 < n E < 5 is strong and n E > 5 is decisive. By comparing the evidence of modes with different vaues of n s, we can determine which spectra index is favoured by the data. In our case, D is the variance of the WMAP combined map, the considered parameters are Θ {A, τ}, the mode M is given by a fixed vaue of n s and P (D Θ,M) corresponds to the ikeihood of σ0 2 given those two cosmoogica parameters and the mode. We wi consider as our reference mode M 0 the HZ spectrum (n s 1), and test it against aternative modes M 1 with vaues of n s in the range (0.9,1.1). In order to cacuate the evidence, we wi use as the prior the (normaised) 2-dimensiona ikeihood function on A and τ given by the WMAP data and that has been cacuated using CosmoMC (Lewis & Bride 2002). Note that the considered prior is independent of the mode and thus we can drop the dependence on M i. Therefore, in our case, the evidence for the mode M i is given by E i P ( D A, τ, n s n i s) P(A,τ)dAdτ (10) where n i s corresponds to the spectra index of the considered

9 Low CMB variance in WMAP 9 Ln(E 0 /E 1 ) n s Figure 4. The difference of the og evidence between n s 1 and a mode with spectra index n s versus n s mode. In Figure 4 we pot the difference of the og evidence n E between our reference mode (n s 1) and modes with vaues of n s in the range (0.9,1.1). As a reference, the estimate of n s from the WMAP data is n s ± which owers to n s ± when additiona cosmoogica data sets are incuded (see Tabe 2 of Sperge et a. (2007)). The quoted errors are 68 per cent confidence intervas. Interestingy, the minimum in the difference of the og evidence and, therefore, the most favoured mode, is found very cose to n s 1. According to Jeffreys criterion, we find that the difference between the HZ spectrum and modes with different vaues of the spectra index is significant (i.e. L(E) > 1) for n s < and for n s > This means, that, according to the CMB variance, the HZ mode is significanty favoured versus the vaue obtained from the combination of WMAP with other data sets (n(e(n s 1)/E(n s 0.947)) 1.5) whereas the og evidence difference between n s 1 and n s is sighty beow 1 ( n(e) 0.97). Therefore, the ow vaue of the CMB dispersion found in the WMAP data coud be made compatibe with the mode by varying some of the cosmoogica parameters, within the current uncertainties aowed by the data, and, in particuar, by increasing the vaue of the spectra index. 6 CONCLUSIONS We have studied the normaised temperature distribution of the CMB using the WMAP data, finding that the skewness, kurtosis and the Komogorov-Smirnov test are consistent with Gaussianity. However, the dispersion was significanty ower (at the eve of 97.8 per cent) than expected from CMB simuations using the WMAP best-fit power spectrum. This resut was even more significant when ony the northern eciptic sky was considered (at 99.4 per cent). In oder to carify this point, a more detaied anaysis of the CMB dispersion of the WMAP data has been performed. In particuar, we have estimated this dispersion to be mk, which is again anomaousy ow (98.7 per cent of the Gaussian CMB simuations have a arger vaue of the dispersion). If ony the northern eciptic hemisphere is considered, the significance increases to 99.8 per cent, whereas the southern eciptic hemisphere is compatibe with the simuations. We have repeated our anaysis using singe radiometer and singe year maps, finding that the significance of the ow variance is practicay frequency independent and that it cannot be expained by an anomaous radiometer or by an artifact in a singe year data. In addition, the presence of residua foregrounds or 1/f noise can not expain the ow vaue of the CMB dispersion, since they woud tend to shift ˆσ 0 towards higher vaues. We have aso investigated the effect of varying the cosmoogica parameters in the significance of the estimated variance. We find that the most sensitive parameters are A, τ and n s and a variation of one of these parameters (within a range given by 2 times the errors of the WMAP best-fit mode) makes ˆσ 0 perfecty compatibe with the mode. We have aso performed a Bayesian anaysis using the evidence for mode seection. Interestingy, we find that the difference of the og evidence between the HZ spectrum (n s 1) and modes with other vaues of the spectra index is significant for n s < and for n s > Therefore, the CMB variance tends to favour higher vaues of the spectra index than the fu-power spectrum anaysis of the WMAP data. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors thanks P. Mukherjee for hep regarding cosmoogica parameter estimation, M. Cruz, A. Curto, D. Herranz, M. López-Caniego, and J.L. Sanz for usefu discussions and R. Marco for the computationa support. CM thanks the Spanish Ministerio de Ciencia y Tecnoogía (MCyT) for a predoctora FPI feowship and for two grants to visit The Cavendish Laboratory of the University of Cambridge (UK). CM, RBB, PV and EMG thank the Cavendish Laboratory for their hospitaity during severa research stays and aso acknowedge partia financia support from the Spanish MCyT project ESP C Some of the resuts in this paper have been derived using the HEALPix (Górski et a., 2005) package. We acknowedge the use of the Legacy Archive for Microwave Background Data Anaysis (LAMBDA). Support for LAMBDA is provided by the NASA Office of Space Science. We acknowedge the use of the software CAMB ( deveoped by A. Lewis and A. Chainor and of CosmoMC deveoped by A. Lewis and S. Bride. REFERENCES Aghanim N., Forni O., Bouchet F.R., 2001, A&A, 365, 341 Aiaga A.M, Rubiño-Martín J.A., Martínez-Gonzáez E., Barreiro R.B., Sanz J.L., 2005, MNRAS, 356, 1559 Barreiro R.B., Sanz J.L., Martínez-Gonzáez E., Sik J., 1998, MNRAS, 296, 693 Barreiro R.B., Hobson M.P., Lasenby A.N., Banday A.J., Górski K.M., Hinshaw G., 2000, MNRAS, 318, 475 Barreiro R.B., Martínez-Gonzáez E., Sanz J.L., 2001, MN- RAS, 322, 411 Barreiro R.B., Hobson M.P., 2001, MNRAS, 327, 813

10 10 Monteserín et a. Bartoo N., Komatsu E., Matarrese S., Riotto A., 2004, Phys. Rep., 402, 103 Bennett, C.L. et a, 2003a, ApJS, 148, 1 Bennett, C.L. et a, 2003b, ApJS, 148, 97 Bernui A., Viea T., Wuensche C.A., Leonardi R., Ferreira, 2006, A&A, 454, 409 Bernui A., Mota B., Reboucas M.J., Tavako R., 2007, A&A, 464, 479 Bridges M., Lasenby A.N., Hobson M.P., 2006, MNRAS, 369, 1123 Cayón L., Martínez-Gonzáez E., Sanz J.L., 1991, MNRAS, 253, 599 Cayón L., Jin J., Treaster A., 2005, MNRAS, 362, 826 Chiang L., Nasesky P.D., Verkhodanov O.V., 2003, ApJ, 590, L65 Chiang L.-Y., Nasesky P., Coes P., 2004, ApJ, 602, L1 Coes P., 1988, MNRAS, 234, 509 Coes P., Barrow J.D., 1987, MNRAS, 228, 407 Coes P., Dineen P., Ear J., Wright D., 2004, MNRAS, 350, 989 Copi C.J., Huterer D., Starkman G.D., 2004, Phys. Rev. D., 70, Copi C.J., Huterer D., Schwarz D.J., Starkman G.D., 2007, Phys. Rev. D., 75, Cruz M., Martínez-Gonzáez E., Vieva P., Cayón L., 2005, MNRAS, 356, 29 Cruz M., Tucci M., Martínez-Gonzáez E., Vieva P., 2006, MNRAS, 369, 57 Cruz M., Cayón L., Martínez-Gonzáez E., Vieva P., Jin J., 2007, ApJ, 655, 11 Curto A., Aumont J., Macías-Pérez J.M., Martínez- Gonzáez E., Barreiro R.B., Santos D., Désert F.X., M. Tristram, 2007, A&A, submitted (astro-ph/ ) de Oiveira-Costa A., Tegmark M., Zadarriaga M., Hamiton A., 2004, Phys. Rev. D, 69, Doré O., Coombi S., Bouchet F.R., 2003, MNRAS, 344, 905 Durrer R., 1999, New Astron. Rev., 43, 111 Eriksen H.K., Hansen F.K., Banday A.J., Górski K.M., Lije P.B., 2004, ApJ, 605, 14 Eriksen H.K., Banday A.J., Górski K.M., Hansen F.K., Lije P.B., 2007, ApJ, 660, L81 Ferreira P.G., Magueijo J., Górski K.M., 1998, ApJ, 503, L1 Górski K.M., Hivon E., Banday A.J., Wandet B.D., Hansen F.K., Reinecke M., Bartemann M., 2005, ApJ, 622, 759 Gott III J.R., Park C., Juszkiewicz R., Bies W.E., Bennett D.P., Bouchet F.R., Stebbins A., 1990, ApJ, 352, 1 Hansen F.K., Banday A.J., Górski K.M., 2004a, MNRAS, 354, 641 Hansen F.K., Cabea P., Marinucci D., Vittorio N., 2004b, ApJ, 607, L67 Harrison E.R., 1970, Phys. Rev. D, 1, 2726 Heavens A.F., 1998, MNRAS, 299, 805 Heavens A.F., Sheth R.K., 1999, MNRAS, 310, 1062 Hinshaw G. et a., 2007, ApJS, 170, 288 Hivon E., Górski K.M., Netterfied C.B., Cri B.P., Prunet S., Hansen F., 2002, ApJ, 567, 2 Hobson M.P., Jones A.W., Lasenby A.N., 1999, MNRAS, 309, 125 Jarosik N., 2003, ApJS, 148, 29 Jarosik N. et a., 2007, ApJS, 170, 263 Jeffreys H., 1961, Theory of probabiity, Oxford University press Komatsu E. et a., 2003, ApJS, 148, 119 Land K., Magueijo J., 2005a, Phys. Rev. Lett., 95, Land K., Magueijo J., 2005b, MNRAS, 357, 994 Larson D.L., Wandet B.D., 2004, ApJ, 613, L85 Lasenby A., Doran C., 2005, APS, 71, 6 Lewis A., Chainor A., Lasenby A., 2000, ApJ, 538, 473 Lewis A., Bride S., 2002, Phys.Rev. D, 66, Magueijo J., 2000, ApJ, 528, L57 Martínez-Gonzáez E., Barreiro R.B., Diego J.M., Sanz J.L., Cayón L., Sik J., Moerach S., Martínez V.J., 2000, ApL&C, 37, 335 Martínez-Gonzáez E., Cruz M., Cayón L., Vieva P., 2006, New Astronomy Review, 50, 875 McEwen J.D., Hobson M.P., Lasenby A.N., Mortock D.J., 2005, MNRAS, 359, 1583 McEwen J.D., Hobson M.P., Lasenby A.N., Mortock D.J., 2006, MNRAS, 371, L50 Monteserín C., Barreiro R.B., Sanz J.L., Martínez- Gonzáez E., 2005, MNRAS, 360, 9 Monteserín C., Barreiro R.B., Martínez-Gonzáez E., Sanz J.L., 2006, MNRAS, 371, 312 Mukherjee P., Wang Y., 2004, ApJ, 613, 51 Nasesky P., Novikov D., 1995, ApJ, 444, L1 Parkinson D., Mukherjee P., Lidde A.R., 2006, Phys. Rev. D, 73, Rubiño-Martín, J.A. et a., 2006, MNRAS, 369, 909 Schwarz D.J., Starkman G.D., Huterer D., Copi C.J., 2004, Phys. Rev. Lett., 93, Sperge D.N. et a., 2007, ApJS, 170, 377 Vieva P., Martínez-Gonzáez E., Barreiro R.B., Sanz J.L., Cayón L., 2004, ApJ, 609, 22 Vieva P., Wiaux Y., Martínez-Gonzáez E., Vandergheynst P., 2007, MNRAS, submitted (astro-ph/ ) Wiaux Y., Vieva P., Martínez-Gonzáez E., Vandergheynst P., 2006, Phys. Rev. Lett., 96, Wiaux Y., Vieva P., Barreiro R.B., Martínez-Gonzáez E., Vandergheynst P., 2007, MNRAS, submitted (astroph/ ) Zedovich Y. B., 1972, MNRAS, 160, 1 APPENDIX A: THEORETICAL POWER SPECTRUM OF A COMBINED MAP The derivation of the anguar power specturm of the CMB signa present in the combined Q-V-W map C c is given in this appendix. This combined map, T c( x), is the inear combination (see Eq. 1) of the eight ceaned maps (T i( x) with i running from 3 to 10) at different WMAP frequencies (Q1 and Q2 at 41 GHz, V1 and V2 at 61 GHz, and W1, W2, W3 and W4 at 94 GHz). Let us reca here the expicit formua: 10 T c( x) w i( x)t i( x), i3 (A1) where T i( x) is the CMB observation made by the i radiometer and the coefficients w i( x) represent, at a given postion x, the reative weight given to the noise dispersion for each radiometer, and are normaized to unity (see Eq. 2).

11 Each CMB observation made by the i radiometer can be expressed in terms of the spherica harmonic coefficients of the pure CMB signa a m, the beam (b i ) and pixe (p ) window functions: T i( x) a m b i p Y m ( x) (A2),m Let us define T i( x) w i( x)t i( x) as the noise-weighted CMB signa observed by the radiometer i. It is straightforward to show that the anguar power spectrum of the combined CMB signa is given by: C c i,j C ij C ij i,j m ã i mã j m (A3) where is the cross-anguar power spectrum of the CMB signa between the i and the j radiometers and ã i m are the spherica harmonic coeeficients of the noise-weighted CMB signa observed by the radiometer i: ã i m dω T i( x)y m( x) m b i p m a dω w i( x)t i( x)y m( x) dω w i( x)y m( x)y m ( x) a m b i p Ki m m. (A4) m K i m is a matrix introducing couping among mutipoes m due to the noise-weithing. Incuding Eq. A4 in Eq. A3, the the anguar power spectrum of the combined CMB signa reads: C c i,j i,j ,m a m ã i mã j m m i,j,m a,m b j p K j m m C K i m m K j. m m m,m b i bj p 2,m b i p Ki m m (A5) where C is the anguar power spectrum of the pure CMB signa and we have appied,m,m a,m a,m,m C δ δ m. m The couping K i m can be expressed in terms of the m Wigner 3j-symbos and the spherica harmonic coefficients (w m ) of the noise-weights, as foows: K i m m dω w i( x)y m( x)y m ( x) w i m,m,m { dω Y m( x)y m ( x)y m ( x) w i m ( 1)m [ (2 + 1)(2 + 1)(2 + 1) 4π ] 1 2 Low CMB variance in WMAP 11 ( )( )} m m m (A6) One of the orthogonaity properties of the Wigner-3j symbos reads (see e.g. Hivon et a. 2002): ( )( ) m 1 m 2 m 3 m 1 m 2 m 4 m 1,m δ 3 4 δ m3 m 4 δ( 1, 2, 3) (A7) where δ( 1, 2, 3) 1 when the trianguar reation is satisfied. Repacing Eq. A6 in Eq. A5 and taking into account Eq. A7, it is strightforward to derive the fina expression for the anguar power spectrum of the combined CMB signa: C c i,j C (2 + 1)w ij b i bj p π ( ) 2, (A8) where w ij is the cross-anguar power spectrum of the noiseweights between the radiometers i and j. In order to test the performance of this approach, the theoretica anguar power spectrum of the combined Q-V- W WMAP three-year map (at n side 256 resoution) given by the above equation has been compared with the anguar power spectrum obtained from the average of 1000 Gaussian simuations of the combined map. In Figure A1, the reative error between both spectra is given (soid back ine) up to 2.5n side. The red dashed ines give the reative 1σ error (obtained from the simuations). The agreement between both anguar power spectra in the considered range is very good.