🏆 Finalist — NIH Data Sharing Index (“S-Index”) Challenge
Demo corpus. Scores are computed on a select set of biomedical paper/datasets and may be inaccurate for papers outside this corpus — DataRank relies on network effects that improve with scale. We aim to expand this into a fully open resource pending additional funding.

<i>Planck</i> 2018 results

Astronomy &amp; Astrophysics(2020)10.1051/0004-6361/201833910Source: DataRank Database

<i>Planck</i> 2018 results is a research paper published in Astronomy &amp; Astrophysics (2020). On theSindex it has a DataRank of 1.4. It has been cited 13,629 times.

N/A
1.4DataRank · unranked
1.4
Open Access13629 citations · base score 9.5
Cite:
datarank_citation_only_1hop_v6· scope data_onlyMethodology

Abstract

We present cosmological parameter results from the final full-mission Planck measurements of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) anisotropies, combining information from the temperature and polarization maps and the lensing reconstruction. Compared to the 2015 results, improved measurements of large-scale polarization allow the reionization optical depth to be measured with higher precision, leading to significant gains in the precision of other correlated parameters. Improved modelling of the small-scale polarization leads to more robust constraints on many parameters, with residual modelling uncertainties estimated to affect them only at the 0.5 σ level. We find good consistency with the standard spatially-flat 6-parameter ΛCDM cosmology having a power-law spectrum of adiabatic scalar perturbations (denoted “base ΛCDM” in this paper), from polarization, temperature, and lensing, separately and in combination. A combined analysis gives dark matter density Ω c h 2  = 0.120 ± 0.001, baryon density Ω b h 2  = 0.0224 ± 0.0001, scalar spectral index n s  = 0.965 ± 0.004, and optical depth τ  = 0.054 ± 0.007 (in this abstract we quote 68% confidence regions on measured parameters and 95% on upper limits). The angular acoustic scale is measured to 0.03% precision, with 100 θ *  = 1.0411 ± 0.0003. These results are only weakly dependent on the cosmological model and remain stable, with somewhat increased errors, in many commonly considered extensions. Assuming the base-ΛCDM cosmology, the inferred (model-dependent) late-Universe parameters are: Hubble constant H 0  = (67.4 ± 0.5)  km s −1  Mpc −1 ; matter density parameter Ω m  = 0.315 ± 0.007; and matter fluctuation amplitude σ 8  = 0.811 ± 0.006. We find no compelling evidence for extensions to the base-ΛCDM model. Combining with baryon acoustic oscillation (BAO) measurements (and considering single-parameter extensions) we constrain the effective extra relativistic degrees of freedom to be N eff  = 2.99 ± 0.17, in agreement with the Standard Model prediction N eff  = 3.046, and find that the neutrino mass is tightly constrained to ∑ m ν  &lt;  0.12  eV. The CMB spectra continue to prefer higher lensing amplitudes than predicted in base ΛCDM at over 2 σ , which pulls some parameters that affect the lensing amplitude away from the ΛCDM model; however, this is not supported by the lensing reconstruction or (in models that also change the background geometry) BAO data. The joint constraint with BAO measurements on spatial curvature is consistent with a flat universe, Ω K  = 0.001 ± 0.002. Also combining with Type Ia supernovae (SNe), the dark-energy equation of state parameter is measured to be w 0  = −1.03 ± 0.03, consistent with a cosmological constant. We find no evidence for deviations from a purely power-law primordial spectrum, and combining with data from BAO, BICEP2, and Keck Array data, we place a limit on the tensor-to-scalar ratio r 0.002  &lt;  0.06. Standard big-bang nucleosynthesis predictions for the helium and deuterium abundances for the base-ΛCDM cosmology are in excellent agreement with observations. The Planck base-ΛCDM results are in good agreement with BAO, SNe, and some galaxy lensing observations, but in slight tension with the Dark Energy Survey’s combined-probe results including galaxy clustering (which prefers lower fluctuation amplitudes or matter density parameters), and in significant, 3.6 σ , tension with local measurements of the Hubble constant (which prefer a higher value). Simple model extensions that can partially resolve these tensions are not favoured by the Planck data.

Data sources & pipeline
Pipeline:MetadataData-paper checkEnrichmentCitation networkScoring
Enrichment:Pending

FAIR Checklist

Context only (not used in score)
Findable (1/2)
  • Has DOI
Accessible (1/2)
  • Open Access
Interoperable (0/2)
    Reusable (0/3)

      FAIR checklist signals are shown for context only and do not affect DataRank scoring.

      DataRank Breakdown

      Base Score 100%Citation Network 0%

      Base Score Contribution

      1.4

      From this paper's citation signal

      Citation Network Contribution

      0

      Citation network not refreshed for this result

      This paper's DataRank is currently driven only by its base citation score. Citation network data was not refreshed for this result.

      Learn more about DataRank methodology →
      Why this DataRank?

      DataRank blends this paper's own citation count with the influence of the papers that cite it. Here, roughly 100% comes from its base citations and 0% from the citation network.

      Base score B(p)
      log1p(citation_count) — grows sub-linearly, so a paper with 1,000 citations is not 10× a paper with 100.
      Network N(p)
      Σ over citers of log1p(Cq) ÷ max(outdegreeq, 1). Being cited by a highly-cited paper with few references counts most.
      Damping factor d = 0.85
      DataRank = (1−d)·B(p) + d·N(p) — the two cards above are each already multiplied by their share.
      Self-citations excluded
      Citers sharing any OpenAlex author ID with this paper are filtered out before the network sum.

      Citers are pulled from OpenAlex sorted by cited_by_count:descand capped per paper, so when the cap binds we keep the highest-signal references and the score is reproducible across reruns.

      Read the full methodology →

      Authors (201)

      N. Aghanim,Y. AkramiORCID,M. Ashdown,J. AumontORCID,C. Baccigalupi

      Related Papers (10)

      The Astrophysical Journal(1999)
      co-cited
      10.1086/307221
      Physical Review Letters(1964)
      co-cited
      10.1103/physrevlett.13.508
      seaborn: statistical data visualization
      N/A
      1.3DataRank · unranked
      Journal of Open Source Software(2021)
      co-cited
      10.21105/joss.03021
      Array programming with NumPy
      N/A
      1.5DataRank · unranked
      Nature(2020)
      co-cited
      10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2
      Journal of Statistical Software(2017)
      co-cited
      10.18637/jss.v076.i01
      Nuclear Physics B(1972)
      co-cited
      10.1016/0550-3213(72)90279-9