Papers for
astrophysics data analysts
Papers whose findings have a practical use for this group, as judged from the abstract. Open a paper to read what it means in practice.
Six key factors needed to model cosmic microwave background spectra
OCCAMS: A Multi-Task Learning-Based Investigation of the CMB Power Spectra
Abstract: How many latent variables are needed to fit the cosmic microwave background (CMB) temperature and polarisation power spectra when a neural network is given no cosmological model, and to what extent do they map onto the standard cosmological parameters? We use multi-task learning with variational autoencoders trained on CLASS-generated spectra (TT, TE, EE) over $2\le\ell\le2500$. No cosmological model is built into the network, and the number of latent variables, $L$, is varied over $L=5$, $6$ and $7$. Their fits are compared to the Planck 2018 data using $\hatχ^2$, AIC, BIC and Bayesian evidence. Their correspondence with cosmological parameters is measured with normalised mutual information post-training. The loss weights are set within a single training run by uncertainty weighting, with the weight of the disentanglement term either fixed (semi-automated, SA) or learned (completely automated, CA). The reconstruction loss is split over multipole ranges in three configurations that separate the roles of temperature and polarisation and of the low- and high-$\ell$ ranges. In four of the six combinations of configuration and strategy, the fit improves from $L=5$ to $L=6$ and not beyond, and $L=6$ is the best, or close to the best, in five of the six cases. So, six latent variables are needed, as many as the free parameters of the standard, model-dependent approach. SA gives clearer disentanglement, while CA needs no a priori choice of the disentanglement weight and has the higher evidence at $L=5$ and $6$: the two strategies are points on a trade-off between interpretability and fit to the data. Notably, the latent variables for $τ$ and $A_s$ share almost no information in any model, consistent with large-scale polarisation separating the two, as in standard analyses. A deep-learning approach can thus give a compact, data-driven parametrisation of the CMB spectra.
Physical law ecology finds multiple governing laws in complex systems
Physical Law Ecology: mapping multi-mechanism ecologies as the zeroth step of data-driven scientific discovery
Abstract: Every data-driven equation discovery method assumes (implicitly and without verification) that the target system obeys a single governing law ($K{=}1$). Here we show that this assumption is the primary bottleneck limiting scientific discovery in multi-mechanism systems, and introduce Physical Law Ecology, a framework that makes $K^*$ (the number of coexisting independent mechanisms) itself the first quantity to be determined from data. The framework automatically mines a pool of topologically distinct candidate equations, constructs a continuous dominance weight field across parameter space, and discovers analytic evolution laws governing mechanism succession---with optional monotonicity constraints encoding irreversible physics. Across four unrelated systems (elastomer mechanics, pool boiling, galactic dynamics, and droplet evaporation), BIC consistently identifies $K^*{=}3$ independent governing topologies. Applied to 163 SPARC galaxies (3,269 spatially resolved measurements), the framework autonomously recovers three gravitational laws whose coexistence provides evidence against the single-universal-acceleration hypothesis of MOND ($p<10^{-34}$). In engineering applications, multi-law weighted prediction reduces error by 67-72\% over single-equation baselines while retaining full interpretability. By establishing the determination of $K^*$ as the zeroth step of scientific discovery-prior to and independent of equation search---this work opens a direction orthogonal to existing symbolic regression: not finding better equations, but mapping the ecology of mechanisms that govern complex systems.