Consistency tests for comparing astrophysical models and observations

Author:

Stoppa Fiorenzo12ORCID,Cator Eric2ORCID,Nelemans Gijs134ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Astrophysics/IMAPP, Radboud University , P.O. Box 9010, NL-6500 GL, Nijmegen, the Netherlands

2. Department of Mathematics/IMAPP, Radboud University , P.O. Box 9010, Nijmegen, NL-6500 GNijmegen,L, the Netherlands

3. Institute of Astronomy , KU Leuven , Celestijnenlaan 200D, B-3001 Leuven, Belgium

4. SRON, Netherlands Institute for Space Research , Sorbonnelaan 2 , Utrecht, NL-3584 CA, the Netherlands

Abstract

ABSTRACT In astronomy, there is an opportunity to enhance the practice of validating models through statistical techniques, specifically to account for measurement error uncertainties. While models are commonly used to describe observations, there are instances where there is a lack of agreement between the two. This can occur when models are derived from incomplete theories, when a better-fitting model is not available or when measurement uncertainties are not correctly considered. However, with the application of specific tests that assess the consistency between observations and astrophysical models in a model-independent way, it is possible to address this issue. The consistency tests (ConTESTs) developed in this paper use a combination of non-parametric methods and distance measures to obtain a test statistic that evaluates the closeness of the astrophysical model to the observations. To draw conclusions on the consistency hypothesis, a simulation-based methodology is performed. In particular, we built two tests for density models and two for regression models to be used depending on the case at hand and the power of the test needed. We used ConTEST to examine synthetic examples in order to determine the effectiveness of the tests and provide guidance on using them while building a model. We also applied ConTEST to various astronomy cases, identifying which models were consistent and, if not, identifying the probable causes of rejection.

Funder

NWO

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Space and Planetary Science,Astronomy and Astrophysics

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3