4.4 Article

Most Frequent Value Statistics and the Hubble Constant

Journal

Publisher

IOP Publishing Ltd
DOI: 10.1088/1538-3873/aac767

Keywords

methods: data analysis; methods: statistical

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [11547041, 11403007, 11701135, 11673007]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Hebei Province [A2012403006, A2017403025]
  3. Open Project Program of Hebei Key Laboratory of Data Science and Application [HBSJQ0701]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The measurement of Hubble constant (H-0) is clearly a very important task in astrophysics and cosmology. Based on the principle of minimization of the information loss, we propose a robust most frequent value (MFV) procedure to determine H-0, regardless of the Gaussian or non-Gaussian distributions. The updated data set of H-0 contains the 591 measurements including the extensive compilations of Huchra and other researchers. The calculated result of the MFV is H-0 = 67.498 km s(-1) Mpc(-1), which is very close to the average value of recent Planck H-0 value (67.81 +/- 0.92 km s(-1) Mpc(-1) and 66.93 +/- 0.62 km s(-1) Mpc(-1)) and Dark Energy Survey Year 1 Results. Furthermore, we apply the bootstrap method to estimate the uncertainty of the MFV of H-0 under different conditions, and find that the 95% confidence interval for the MFV of H-0 measurements is [66.319, 68.690] associated with statistical bootstrap errors, while a systematically larger estimate is H-0 = 67.498(-3.278)(+7.970) (systematic uncertainty). Especially, the non-Normality of error distribution is again verified via the empirical distribution function test including Shapiro-Wilk test and Anderson-Darling test. These results illustrate that the MFV algorithm has many advantages in the analysis of such statistical problems, no matter what the distributions of the original measurements are.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available