Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 52 references

Accelerating HI density predictions during the Epoch of Reionization using a GPR-based emulator on N-body simulations

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that a Gaussian-process emulator trained on conditional cumulative distributions of the collapse fraction can generate $f_{\rm coll}$ maps from low-resolution N-body density fields and recover the HI power spectrum at…

desk verdict Solid methods paper; new stochastic CDF emulator for f_coll, but the missing statement on whether LB and RB share initial conditions must be fixed before the headline accuracy is interpretable. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.03485 v2 pith:ZWLLXSLE submitted 2024-12-04 astro-ph.CO

Gaurav Pundir , Aseem Paranjape , Tirthankar Roy Choudhury This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.CO
keywords EpochofReionization21cmcosmologycollapsefractionfieldGaussianprocessregressionemulatorsemi-numericalsimulationsneutralhydrogenpowerspectrumN-body
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

During the Epoch of Reionization, the expensive part of semi-numerical modeling is the collapse fraction field $f_{\rm coll}(\mathbf{x})$: the fraction of dark matter mass contained in halos at each location. The paper claims that this field can be generated cheaply by learning the conditional distribution ${\rm CDF}(f_{\rm coll}|\delta)$ from several small, high-resolution N-body boxes with a Gaussian process regressor, then sampling from that distribution cell by cell using the density field of a large, low-resolution box. It reports that the resulting stochastic $f_{\rm coll}$ maps, fed through a photon-conserving semi-numerical reionization code, recover the large-scale HI power spectrum ($k \lesssim 1\ h\,{\rm Mpc}^{-1}$) at the $\lesssim10\%$ level and the HII power spectrum to better than 10% on all scales, while needing about 20 GB of RAM instead of 160 GB. If correct, this gives reionization studies a fast, accurate replacement for the standard semi-analytical conditional mass-function prescriptions and removes the need to run a high-dynamic-range N-body simulation for every parameter choice.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the conditional cumulative distribution function ${\rm CDF}(f_{\rm coll}|\delta)$, computed in overdensity bins from the small N-body boxes and interpolated with Gaussian process regression (GPR), a non-parametric method that models the target values as a Gaussian process over the inputs. The interpolator uses an anisotropic covariance kernel with smoothness parameter $\nu=2.5$, with hyperparameters chosen by simulated annealing. For each cell, inverse transform sampling draws a uniform random number and returns the $f_{\rm coll}$ at which the emulated CDF equals that number, conditioned on the cell's density from the large box; this is what reproduces the scatter that deterministic mean-only maps lack. Variable binning in $\log(1+\delta)$ keeps the rare high-density tail from becoming too noisy, and a photon-conserving semi-numerical reionization code converts the sampled maps into HI and HII density fields.

What would settle it

Run the benchmark with the large box and the reference box generated from identical initial phases, or repeat it with several independent large-box realizations, and compare the HI power error at $k\approx0.1\ h\,{\rm Mpc}^{-1}$; if the error becomes tens of percent, the reported ~10% accuracy was dominated by cosmic variance rather than emulator fidelity.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that stochasticity in the collapse fraction — the cell-to-cell scatter of $f_{\rm coll}$ at fixed overdensity — is both physically important and learnable. The paper trains a Gaussian process on the empirical cumulative distributions ${\rm CDF}(f_{\rm coll}|\delta)$ built from seven small boxes, then uses inverse transform sampling to draw one $f_{\rm coll}$ per cell of the large box. Compared with the deterministic alternative that assigns only the conditional mean $\langle f_{\rm coll}|\delta\rangle$, the stochastic maps recover small-scale HI power about twice as accurately (errors around 20–25% instead of 35–40% at $k\gtrsim2\ h\,{\rm Mpc}^{-1}$), and both simulation-based approaches beat the semi-analytical conditional mass functions at large scales. In the fiducial $z=7$, $Q^M_{\rm HII}=0.5$ setting, HI auto power is recovered to about 10% for $k\lesssim1\ h\,{\rm Mpc}^{-1}$, while HII auto power stays within a few percent over the whole $k$ range; the accuracy holds across redshifts 5–9, ionized fractions 0.25–0.75, different minimum halo masses, and grid sizes.

Load-bearing premise

The benchmark assumes the low-resolution box used for density input and the high-resolution reference box are equivalent for power-spectrum comparison, yet the paper does not state whether they share initial conditions; if they are independent realizations, sample variance in an 80 Mpc/h box at the largest scales is tens of percent, comparable to or larger than the claimed ~10% accuracy.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Semi-numerical reionization models can replace the standard semi-analytical conditional mass-function prescriptions with GPR-sampled collapse-fraction maps while keeping large-scale HI power accurate to about 10%.
  • Stochastic scatter in $f_{\rm coll}$ is necessary for small-scale HI structure: the deterministic mean-only version underproduces small-scale HI power by 35–40%, while the stochastic version reduces the error to about 20–25%.
  • The method's accuracy is stable across $z=5,7,9$, $Q^M_{\rm HII}=0.25$–$0.75$, minimum halo masses from $4.08\times10^8$ to $3.26\times10^9\ h^{-1}M_\odot$, and grid sizes $0.25$–$1\ h^{-1}\,{\rm Mpc}$.
  • Memory requirements drop from about 160 GB for the high-resolution reference box to about 20 GB for the small boxes plus the large input box, making parameter-space exploration feasible for RAM-limited users.
  • The GPR interpolator is designed to accept additional conditioning variables beyond $\delta$, so the same machinery can later incorporate environment information such as tidal tensor eigenvalues.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Because the stochastic sampling uses independent random draws per cell, the residual ~20% small-scale HI error in any single map will contain a sampling-noise component; averaging several draws from the same emulator would quantify how much of that residual is shot noise rather than missing environmental dependence.
  • The same conditional-CDF emulation strategy should transfer to other stochastic fields used in reionization modeling, such as halo occupation or stellar-mass fields, wherever N-body scatter at fixed density matters.
  • Extending the dynamic-range gap from 8x to 64x, as the paper suggests, would test whether the learned conditional distributions remain valid for much larger volumes and would set the practical ceiling of the hybrid approach.
  • If the large box and reference box share initial conditions, the reported ~10% large-scale HI error is a clean emulator error; if they do not, the comparison should be rerun with matched phases before the accuracy claim is taken at face value.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper develops a Gaussian-process-regression emulator for the conditional cumulative distribution function CDF(f_coll | δ), trained on (δ, f_coll) pairs from seven 40 h^-1 Mpc N-body boxes, and uses it to sample stochastic f_coll maps from the δ field of an 80 h^-1 Mpc low-resolution box. These maps are passed to the semi-numerical reionization code SCRIPT to produce HI and HII density fields, which are compared with the ground truth from an 80 h^-1 Mpc high-resolution reference box. The central claim is that the stochastic emulator recovers HI large-scale power (k ≲ 1 h Mpc^-1) at ≲10% and HII power within about 10% across all scales, outperforming the deterministic mean-only prescription and conditional Press-Schechter/Sheth-Tormen methods. The claimed computational benefit is a reduction in memory from ~160 GB to ~20 GB.

Significance. If correct, the method provides a practical, low-memory way to generate collapse-fraction fields with the stochastic scatter that matters for small-scale HI structure, which is directly relevant to 21-cm reionization modeling. The paper's strengths include a held-out comparison in the sense that the reference box is not used in GPR training, convergence tests over the number of training realizations, an explicit treatment of normalization errors, and a systematic comparison against conditional PS/ST. The main caveats are that binning hyperparameters are tuned per case against the same reference box used for validation, and that the phase relationship between the low-resolution and reference boxes is not stated; both must be addressed before the quantitative accuracy claim can be taken at face value.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 2, Section 3.3, Section 4] Section 2 introduces the Large Box and Reference Box without specifying whether they share initial conditions. Sections 3.3 and 4 then use the LB density field to predict f_coll and compare the resulting HI/HII power spectra with the RB ground truth. If LB and RB are independent realizations, the matter power spectra of the two boxes differ by sample variance: for an 80 h^-1 Mpc box at k ≈ 0.1 h Mpc^-1, a single realization has roughly 20–30% power-spectrum variance, comparable to or larger than the claimed ≤10% error. In that case the reported large-scale accuracy is not interpretable as emulator error. Please state explicitly whether the two boxes were run with matched initial phases; if not, either run a matched-initial-conditions LB or include a cosmic-variance error bar when quoting the ≲10% figures.
  2. [Appendix B; Section 4.2; Section 6] The binning hyperparameters (δ bin widths and number of f_coll bins) are optimized separately for each case by selecting the choice that minimizes the HI/HII power-spectrum error against the same RB ground truth used for the reported accuracy. Appendix B shows that this tuning matters: applying the fiducial binning to z=5 degrades the large-scale HI error from ~10% to >30%. Thus the headline claim is not an out-of-sample accuracy estimate. The conclusion should be qualified accordingly, and an independent high-resolution validation box not used in any hyperparameter choice would strengthen the central claim considerably.
  3. [Abstract; Section 4.1.2; Section 6] The abstract and Section 6 state that HII errors are 'well below 10%' or 'well within 10%' over the entire k range, but the fiducial stochastic case shows ~10% errors at k > 5 h Mpc^-1 (Figure 4b caption; Section 4.1.2; repeated in Section 4.2.1). Please revise the wording to 'within about 10%' or provide a bound that is actually satisfied, and make the abstract consistent with the figures.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 1] The first section contains the typo 'the outpt being the ionization fraction'; it should read 'the output being the ionization fraction'.
  2. [Section 3.3] The inverse-transform sampling description has an unmatched bracket in 'smallest f_coll at which [CDF(f_coll|δ0) equals the random number'; the intended sentence should refer to the emulated CDF.
  3. [Section 4] The acronym for the semi-numerical code is written as 'script' in the text but is defined as Semi-numerical Code for ReIonization with PhoTon-conservation; please standardize the capitalization (e.g., SCRIPT).
  4. [Figure 1b caption] The caption contains the garbled string '95 70 4010'; this should be '10, 40, 70 and 95 percentiles'.
  5. [Data availability] The statement that parameters and code 'can be made available upon reasonable request' is vague; for a machine-learning methods paper, a public repository would substantially aid reproducibility.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the emulator is validated against a held-out Reference Box, and the ionizing-efficiency calibration is a normalization, not a fit to the reported power spectra.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. The GPR emulator is trained exclusively on the seven Small Boxes (SB) to learn the conditional CDF(f_coll|δ); the headline accuracy claim is benchmarked against the Reference Box (RB), which is explicitly not used in training: 'This box is our ground truth – the goal of our emulator will be to recover the statistics of this high dynamic range box.' Predictions are generated from the Large Box (LB) density field, which provides out-of-sample inputs. The reionization efficiency ζ is calibrated per case to enforce a common global ionized fraction Q^M_HII = 0.5 ('We assume a constant ionizing efficiency ζ and calibrate it for all the three cases separately such that the global ionization fraction, Q^M_HII ≡ ⟨x^M_HII(x)⟩ is 0.5'); this is a mean-level normalization, not a fit to the HI/HII power spectra that are reported, and the power-spectrum errors are not forced by construction. The self-citations (script, reference [25]; the ASA and GPR-script emulators, references [48]-[50]) are methodological and are not load-bearing for the central accuracy claim, which rests on the independent RB comparison. The possible lack of shared initial conditions between LB and RB is a cosmic-variance/validity concern about interpreting the error budget, not a circularity of the derivation.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a modeling ansatz (f_coll determined by local δ plus random scatter), transferability of the conditional CDF from small boxes to a coarse large box, and the standard machinery of GPR and the script semi-numerical code. The main fitted elements are the δ-bin widths and f_coll bin count (tuned per case against the validation power spectra), the GPR hyperparameters, and the ionizing efficiency ζ calibrated to fix the global ionized fraction. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (5)
  • δ-bin widths for variable binning = reference 0.03 dex at δ=0; first bin ~0.06 dex; last bin ~0.12 to 0.2 dex
    Bin widths are optimized per case (z, Δx) by minimizing the error in the HI and HII power spectra against the ground truth (Appendix B). This is hyperparameter tuning on the validation target.
  • number of f_coll bins for empirical CDFs = 500 or 900
    Chosen per case by comparing HI/HII power spectrum accuracy; 900 used for z=9, varying by case (Appendix B).
  • cv_thresh for GPR convergence = 0.015
    User-set threshold controlling when GPR training is deemed converged (Section 3.2); chosen by hand and not varied.
  • GPR kernel hyperparameters (Matérn ν=2.5 length scales and noise) = not quoted
    Learned from the SB training data via anisotropic simulated annealing following Paranjape 2022; these are standard fitted model parameters.
  • ionizing efficiency ζ = ~10.8 for stochastic fiducial
    Calibrated separately for each case (stochastic, deterministic, true) so that the global ionized fraction Q_HII equals 0.5 (Section 4.1.2). This is a per-case normalization fit, not a prediction.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The collapse fraction in a cell is determined primarily by the local overdensity δ; all other environmental dependencies can be represented by random sampling from the conditional CDF(f_coll|δ).
    Section 3.1 states this assumption explicitly: 'the cumulative effect of other environmental factors is modeled by random sampling from the conditional CDFs.' This is the core modeling ansatz.
  • domain assumption The conditional CDF measured in the small high-resolution boxes (SB) is transferable to the large low-resolution box (LB) and to the reference box (RB).
    The emulator is trained on SB (δ, f_coll) pairs and applied to LB δ values; SB and RB share particle mass resolution, but LB has 8 times coarser particle mass, so the δ resolution differs. The paper does not test CDF transferability across resolutions (Section 3.3).
  • standard math Standard GPR with Matérn kernel is an adequate interpolator for the CDF surfaces.
    Section 3.2 assumes GPR as the regression model, following Rasmussen and Williams 2006; this is a standard statistical assumption, not specific to cosmology.
  • domain assumption The semi-numerical code script faithfully maps (f_coll, δ) to HI/HII fields and preserves photon number.
    Section 4.1.2 uses script as the forward model, relying on its photon conservation scheme as validated in Choudhury and Paranjape 2018; the authors cite this as prior work.
  • standard math The spherical collapse mapping (equations 4.5 and 4.6) converts non-linear δ to linear δ for the conditional PS/ST comparisons.
    Section 4.2.1 uses Mo and White 1996 spherical collapse relations; this is a standard analytic mapping, not part of the ML method.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Accelerating HI density predictions during the Epoch of Reionization using a GPR-based emulator on N-body simulations." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZWLLXSLE

@misc{pith2026241203485,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Accelerating HI density predictions during the Epoch of Reionization using a GPR-based emulator on N-body simulations},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZWLLXSLE}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.03485}
}
abstract

Building fast and accurate ways to model the distribution of neutral hydrogen during the Epoch of Reionization (EoR) is essential for interpreting upcoming 21 cm observations. A key component of semi-numerical models of reionization is the collapse fraction field $f_{\text{coll}}(\mathbf{x})$, which represents the fraction of mass within dark matter halos at each location. Using high-dynamic range N-body simulations to obtain this is computationally prohibitive and semi-analytical approaches, while being fast, end up compromising on accuracy. In this work, we bridge the gap by developing a machine learning model that can generate $f_{\text{coll}}$ maps by sampling from the full distribution of $f_{\text{coll}}$ conditioned on the dark matter density contrast $\delta$. The conditional distribution functions and the input density field to the model are taken from low-dynamic range N-body simulations that are more efficient to run. We evaluate the performance of our ML model by comparing its predictions to a high-dynamic range N-body simulation. Using these $f_{\text{coll}}$ maps, we compute the HI and HII maps through a semi-numerical code for reionization. We are able to recover the large-scale HI density field power spectra $(k \lesssim 1\ h\,{\rm Mpc}^{-1})$ at the $\lesssim10\%$ level, while the HII density field is reproduced with errors well below 10% across all scales. Compared to existing semi-analytical prescriptions, our approach offers significantly improved accuracy in generating the collapse fraction field, providing a robust and efficient alternative for modeling reionization.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

52 extracted references · 22 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Gnedin and P

    N.Y. Gnedin and P. Madau,Modeling cosmic reionization,Living Reviews in Computational Astrophysics8(2022) 3

    2022

  2. [2]

    Choudhury,A short introduction to reionization physics,General Relativity and Gravitation54(2022)

    T.R. Choudhury,A short introduction to reionization physics,General Relativity and Gravitation54(2022)

    2022

  3. [3]

    Furlanetto, S

    S.R. Furlanetto, S. Peng Oh and F.H. Briggs,Cosmology at low frequencies: The 21cm transition and the high-redshift universe,Physics Reports433(2006) 181

    2006

  4. [4]

    Pritchard and A

    J.R. Pritchard and A. Loeb,21 cm cosmology in the 21st century,Reports on Progress in Physics75(2012) 086901

    2012

  5. [5]

    Mesinger, ed.,The Cosmic 21-cm Revolution, 2514-3433, IOP Publishing (2019), 10.1088/2514-3433/ab4a73

    A. Mesinger, ed.,The Cosmic 21-cm Revolution, 2514-3433, IOP Publishing (2019), 10.1088/2514-3433/ab4a73

    doi:10.1088/2514-3433/ab4a73 2019

  6. [6]

    Gnedin,Cosmological reionization by stellar sources,The Astrophysical Journal535 (2000) 530

    N.Y. Gnedin,Cosmological reionization by stellar sources,The Astrophysical Journal535 (2000) 530

    2000

  7. [7]

    Ciardi, A

    B. Ciardi, A. Ferrara and S.D.M. White,Early reionization by the first galaxies,Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society344(2003) L7 [https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article-pdf/344/1/L7/18652206/344-1-L7.pdf]. – 22 –

    work page 2003

  8. [8]

    Iliev, G

    I.T. Iliev, G. Mellema, U.-L. Pen, H. Merz, P.R. Shapiro and M.A. Alvarez,Simulating cosmic reionization at large scales – i. the geometry of reionization,Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society369(2006) 1625 [https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article-pdf/369/4/1625/3799304/mnras0369-1625.pdf]

    work page 2006

Show all 52 references
  1. [9]

    Trac and R

    H. Trac and R. Cen,Radiative transfer simulations of cosmic reionization. i. methodology and initial results,The Astrophysical Journal671(2007) 1

    2007

  2. [10]

    Petkova and V

    M. Petkova and V. Springel,An implementation of radiative transfer in the cosmological simulation code gadget,Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society396(2009) 1383 [https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article-pdf/396/3/1383/5796731/mnras0396-1383.pdf]

    2009

  3. [11]

    Gnedin,Cosmic reionization on computers

    N.Y. Gnedin,Cosmic reionization on computers. i. design and calibration of simulations,The Astrophysical Journal793(2014) 29

    2014

  4. [12]

    Pawlik, A

    A.H. Pawlik, A. Rahmati, J. Schaye, M. Jeon and C. Dalla Vecchia,The aurora radiation-hydrodynamical simulations of reionization: calibration and first results,Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society466(2016) 960 [https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article-pdf/466/1/960/...

    2016

  5. [13]

    Rosdahl, H

    J. Rosdahl, H. Katz, J. Blaizot, T. Kimm, L. Michel-Dansac, T. Garel et al.,The sphinx cosmological simulations of the first billion years: the impact of binary stars on reionization, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society479(2018) 994 [https://academic.oup.com/mnra...

    2018

  6. [14]

    Kannan, E

    R. Kannan, E. Garaldi, A. Smith, R. Pakmor, V. Springel, M. Vogelsberger et al.,Introducing the thesan project: radiation-magnetohydrodynamic simulations of the epoch of reionization, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society511(2021) 4005 [https://academic.oup.com/mnr...

    2021

  7. [15]

    Lewis, P

    J.S.W. Lewis, P. Ocvirk, J.G. Sorce, Y. Dubois, D. Aubert, L. Conaboy et al.,The short ionizing photon mean free path at z = 6 in cosmic dawn iii, a new fully coupled radiation-hydrodynamical simulation of the epoch of reionization,Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Soc...

    2022

  8. [16]

    Iliev, G

    I.T. Iliev, G. Mellema, K. Ahn, P.R. Shapiro, Y. Mao and U.-L. Pen,Simulating cosmic reionization: how large a volume is large enough?,Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society439(2014) 725 [https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article-pdf/439/1/725/5599101/stt2497.pdf]

    2014

  9. [17]

    H.D. Kaur, N. Gillet and A. Mesinger,Minimum size of 21-cm simulations,Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society495(2020) 2354 [https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article-pdf/495/2/2354/33323159/staa1323.pdf]

    2020

  10. [18]

    J.R. Bond, S. Cole, G. Efstathiou and N. Kaiser,Excursion Set Mass Functions for Hierarchical Gaussian Fluctuations, ApJ379(1991) 440

    1991

  11. [19]

    Furlanetto, M

    S.R. Furlanetto, M. Zaldarriaga and L. Hernquist,The growth of HII regions during reionization,The Astrophysical Journal613(2004) 1

    2004

  12. [20]

    Mesinger and S

    A. Mesinger and S. Furlanetto,Efficient simulations of early structure formation and reionization,The Astrophysical Journal669(2007) 663

    2007

  13. [21]

    O. Zahn, A. Lidz, M. McQuinn, S. Dutta, L. Hernquist, M. Zaldarriaga et al.,Simulations and analytic calculations of bubble growth during hydrogen reionization,The Astrophysical Journal 654(2007) 12

    2007

  14. [22]

    Choudhury, M.G

    T.R. Choudhury, M.G. Haehnelt and J. Regan,Inside-out or outside-in: the topology of reionization in the photon-starved regime suggested by lyαforest data,Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society394(2009) 960 [https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article-pdf/394/2/960/37105...

    2009

  15. [23]

    Mesinger, S

    A. Mesinger, S. Furlanetto and R. Cen,21cmfast: a fast, seminumerical simulation of the high-redshift 21-cm signal,Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society411(2011) 955 [https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article-pdf/411/2/955/4099991/mnras0411-0955.pdf]

    2011

  16. [24]

    Lin, S.P

    Y. Lin, S.P. Oh, S.R. Furlanetto and P.M. Sutter,The distribution of bubble sizes during reionization,Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society461(2016) 3361 [https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article-pdf/461/3/3361/8112292/stw1542.pdf]

    2016

  17. [25]

    Choudhury and A

    T.R. Choudhury and A. Paranjape,Photon number conservation and the large-scale 21 cm power spectrum in seminumerical models of reionization,Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society481(2018) 3821 [https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article-pdf/481/3/3821/25844366/sty2551.pdf]

    2018

  18. [26]

    Majumdar, G

    S. Majumdar, G. Mellema, K.K. Datta, H. Jensen, T.R. Choudhury, S. Bharadwaj et al.,On the use of seminumerical simulations in predicting the 21-cm signal from the epoch of reionization,Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society443(2014) 2843 [https://academic.oup.com/m...

    2014

  19. [27]

    O. Zahn, A. Mesinger, M. McQuinn, H. Trac, R. Cen and L.E. Hernquist,Comparison of reionization models: radiative transfer simulations and approximate, seminumeric models, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society414(2011) 727 [https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article-pd...

    2011

  20. [28]

    Mutch, P.M

    S.J. Mutch, P.M. Geil, G.B. Poole, P.W. Angel, A.R. Duffy, A. Mesinger et al.,Dark-ages reionization and galaxy formation simulation – iii. modelling galaxy formation and the epoch of reionization,Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society462(2016) 250 [https://academic...

    2016

  21. [29]

    Kim, J.S.B

    H.-S. Kim, J.S.B. Wyithe, S. Raskutti, C.G. Lacey and J.C. Helly,The structure of reionization in hierarchical galaxy formation models,Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 428(2012) 2467 [https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article-pdf/428/3/2467/3698435/sts206.pdf]

    2012

  22. [30]

    Santos, L

    M.G. Santos, L. Ferramacho, M.B. Silva, A. Amblard and A. Cooray,Fast large volume simulations of the 21-cm signal from the reionization and pre-reionization epochs,Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society406(2010) 2421 [https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article-pdf/406/...

    2010

  23. [31]

    Press and P

    W.H. Press and P. Schechter,Formation of Galaxies and Clusters of Galaxies by Self-Similar Gravitational Condensation, ApJ187(1974) 425

    1974

  24. [32]

    Sheth and G

    R.K. Sheth and G. Tormen,Large-scale bias and the peak background split, MNRAS308(1999) 119 [astro-ph/9901122]

    1999 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Sheth and G

    R.K. Sheth and G. Tormen,An excursion set model of hierarchical clustering: ellipsoidal collapse and the moving barrier,Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society329(2002) 61 [https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article-pdf/329/1/61/3882215/329-1-61.pdf]

    2002

  26. [34]

    D.S. Reed, R. Bower, C.S. Frenk, A. Jenkins and T. Theuns,The halo mass function from the dark ages through the present day,Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society374 (2006) 2 [https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article-pdf/374/1/2/2835466/mnras0374-0002.pdf]

    2006

  27. [35]

    Tinker, A.V

    J. Tinker, A.V. Kravtsov, A. Klypin, K. Abazajian, M. Warren, G. Yepes et al.,Toward a halo mass function for precision cosmology: The limits of universality,The Astrophysical Journal 688(2008) 709

    2008

  28. [36]

    Courtin, Y

    J. Courtin, Y. Rasera, J.-M. Alimi, P.-S. Corasaniti, V. Boucher and A. Füzfa,Imprints of dark energy on cosmic structure formation – ii. non-universality of the halo mass function, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society410(2011) 1911 [https://academic.oup.com/mnras...

    2011

  29. [37]

    Crocce, P

    M. Crocce, P. Fosalba, F.J. Castander and E. Gaztañaga,Simulating the universe with mice: the abundance of massive clusters,Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society403 (2010) 1353 [https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article-pdf/403/3/1353/6170753/mnras0403-1353.pdf]

    2010

  30. [38]

    Bhattacharya, K

    S. Bhattacharya, K. Heitmann, M. White, Z. Lukić, C. Wagner and S. Habib,Mass function predictions beyondλcdm,The Astrophysical Journal732(2011) 122

    2011

  31. [39]

    Ahn, I.T

    K. Ahn, I.T. Iliev, P.R. Shapiro, G. Mellema, J. Koda and Y. Mao,Detecting the rise and fall of the first stars by their impact on cosmic reionization,The Astrophysical Journal Letters756 (2012) L16

    2012

  32. [40]

    McQuinn, A

    M. McQuinn, A. Lidz, O. Zahn, S. Dutta, L. Hernquist and M. Zaldarriaga,The morphology of h ii regions during reionization,Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society377(2007) 1043 [https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article-pdf/377/3/1043/5678910/mnras0377-1043.pdf]

    2007

  33. [41]

    Doussot, Aristide and Semelin, Benoît,A bubble size distribution model for the epoch of reionization, A&A667(2022) A118

    2022

  34. [42]

    Sheth and G

    R.K. Sheth and G. Lemson,Biasing and the distribution of dark matter haloes,Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society304(1999) 767 [https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article-pdf/304/4/767/3558836/304-4-767.pdf]

    1999

  35. [43]

    Sheth and G

    R.K. Sheth and G. Lemson,The forest of merger history trees associated with the formation of dark matter haloes,Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society305(1999) 946 [https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article-pdf/305/4/946/18635251/305-4-946.pdf]

    1999

  36. [44]

    Barsode and T.R

    A. Barsode and T.R. Choudhury,Efficient hybrid technique for generating sub-grid haloes in reionization simulations,2407.10585

    arXiv

  37. [45]

    V. Springel,The cosmological simulation code gadget-2,Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society364(2005) 1105 [https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article-pdf/364/4/1105/18657201/364-4-1105.pdf]

    2005

  38. [46]

    Davis, G

    M. Davis, G. Efstathiou, C.S. Frenk and S.D.M. White,The evolution of large-scale structure in a universe dominated by cold dark matter, ApJ292(1985) 371

    1985

  39. [47]

    Rasmussen and C.K.I

    C.E. Rasmussen and C.K.I. Williams,Gaussian Processes for Machine Learning, The MIT Press (2006)

    2006

  40. [48]

    Paranjape,A simulated annealing approach to parameter inference with expensive likelihoods,arXiv e-prints(2022) arXiv:2205.07906 [2205.07906]

    A. Paranjape,A simulated annealing approach to parameter inference with expensive likelihoods,arXiv e-prints(2022) arXiv:2205.07906 [2205.07906]

    2022 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Maity, A

    B. Maity, A. Paranjape and T.R. Choudhury,A fast method of reionization parameter space exploration using gpr trained script,Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society526 (2023) 3920 [https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article-pdf/526/3/3920/52108319/stad2984.pdf]

    2023

  42. [50]

    Choudhury, A

    T.R. Choudhury, A. Paranjape and B. Maity,A gpr-based emulator for semi-numerical reionization code script: parameter inference from 21 cm data,Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2024(2024) 027

    2024

  43. [51]

    Mo and S.D.M

    H.J. Mo and S.D.M. White,An analytic model for the spatial clustering of dark matter haloes, MNRAS282(1996) 347 [astro-ph/9512127]. A Convergence of Results We chose to combine 7 different realizations of SB boxes to get the(δ, fcoll)pairs, from which the training CDFs were co...

    1996 arXiv

  44. [52]

    These results have been obtained for the fiducialz= 7setting

    In the lower panels, we show the error between the power spectra of each case with the truth obtained from RB, but the true power spectra itself is not shown in the upper panels. These results have been obtained for the fiducialz= 7setting. While the variation is small at larg...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.