Influence of Planck foreground masks in the large angular scale quadrant CMB asymmetry

L. Santos,P. Cabella,T. Villela,W. Zhao
DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1510.01009
2015-10-05
Cosmology and Nongalactic Astrophysics
Abstract:The measured CMB angular distribution shows a great consistency with the LCDM model. However, isotropy violations were reported in CMB temperature maps of both WMAP and Planck data. We investigate the influence of different masks employed in the analysis of CMB angular distribution, in particular in the excess of power in the Southeastern quadrant (SEQ) and the lack of power in the Northeastern quadrant (NEQ). We compare the two-point correlation function (TPCF) computed for each quadrant of the CMB foreground-cleaned temperature maps to 1000 simulations generated assuming the LCDM best-fit power spectrum using four different masks. In addition to the quadrants, we computed the TPCF for circular regions in the map where the excess and lack of power are present. We also compare the effect of Galactic cuts in the TPCF calculations as compared to the simulations. We found consistent results for three masks, namely mask-rulerminimal, U73 and U66. The results indicate that the excess of power in the SEQ tends to vanish as the portion of the sky covered by the mask increases and the lack of power in the NEQ remains virtually unchanged. When UT78 mask is applied, the NEQ becomes no longer anomalous and the excess of power in the SEQ becomes the most significant one among the masks. Nevertheless, the asymmetry between the SEQ and NEQ is independent of the mask and it is in disagreement with the isotropic model with at least 95% C.L. We find that UT78 is in disagreement with the other analysed masks, specially considering the SEQ and the NEQ individual analysis. Most importantly, the use of UT78 washes out the anomaly in the NEQ. Furthermore, we found excess of kurtosis, compared with simulations, in the NEQ for the regions not masked by UT78 but masked by the other masks, indicating that the previous result could be due to non-removed residual foregrounds by UT78.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?