| 1. |
- Abdalla, E., et al.
(författare)
-
Cosmology intertwined : A review of the particle physics, astrophysics, and cosmology associated with the cosmological tensions and anomalies
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Journal of High Energy Astrophysics. - : Elsevier BV. - 2214-4048 .- 2214-4056. ; 34, s. 49-211
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The standard Λ Cold Dark Matter (ΛCDM) cosmological model provides a good description of a wide range of astrophysical and cosmological data. However, there are a few big open questions that make the standard model look like an approximation to a more realistic scenario yet to be found. In this paper, we list a few important goals that need to be addressed in the next decade, taking into account the current discordances between the different cosmological probes, such as the disagreement in the value of the Hubble constant H0, the σ8–S8 tension, and other less statistically significant anomalies. While these discordances can still be in part the result of systematic errors, their persistence after several years of accurate analysis strongly hints at cracks in the standard cosmological scenario and the necessity for new physics or generalisations beyond the standard model. In this paper, we focus on the 5.0σ tension between the Planck CMB estimate of the Hubble constant H0 and the SH0ES collaboration measurements. After showing the H0 evaluations made from different teams using different methods and geometric calibrations, we list a few interesting new physics models that could alleviate this tension and discuss how the next decade's experiments will be crucial. Moreover, we focus on the tension of the Planck CMB data with weak lensing measurements and redshift surveys, about the value of the matter energy density Ωm, and the amplitude or rate of the growth of structure (σ8,fσ8). We list a few interesting models proposed for alleviating this tension, and we discuss the importance of trying to fit a full array of data with a single model and not just one parameter at a time. Additionally, we present a wide range of other less discussed anomalies at a statistical significance level lower than the H0–S8 tensions which may also constitute hints towards new physics, and we discuss possible generic theoretical approaches that can collectively explain the non-standard nature of these signals. Finally, we give an overview of upgraded experiments and next-generation space missions and facilities on Earth that will be of crucial importance to address all these open questions.
|
|
| 2. |
- Wolever, Thomas M S, et al.
(författare)
-
Measuring the glycemic index of foods: interlaboratory study.
- 2008
-
Ingår i: The American journal of clinical nutrition. - 0002-9165 .- 1938-3207. ; 87:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Many laboratories offer glycemic index (GI) services. OBJECTIVE: We assessed the performance of the method used to measure GI. DESIGN: The GI of cheese-puffs and fruit-leather (centrally provided) was measured in 28 laboratories (n=311 subjects) by using the FAO/WHO method. The laboratories reported the results of their calculations and sent the raw data for recalculation centrally. RESULTS: Values for the incremental area under the curve (AUC) reported by 54% of the laboratories differed from central calculations. Because of this and other differences in data analysis, 19% of reported food GI values differed by >5 units from those calculated centrally. GI values in individual subjects were unrelated to age, sex, ethnicity, body mass index, or AUC but were negatively related to within-individual variation (P=0.033) expressed as the CV of the AUC for repeated reference food tests (refCV). The between-laboratory GI values (mean+/-SD) for cheese-puffs and fruit-leather were 74.3+/-10.5 and 33.2+/-7.2, respectively. The mean laboratory GI was related to refCV (P=0.003) and the type of restrictions on alcohol consumption before the test (P=0.006, r2=0.509 for model). The within-laboratory SD of GI was related to refCV (P<0.001), the glucose analysis method (P=0.010), whether glucose measures were duplicated (P=0.008), and restrictions on dinner the night before (P=0.013, r2=0.810 for model). CONCLUSIONS: The between-laboratory SD of the GI values is approximately 9. Standardized data analysis and low within-subject variation (refCV<30%) are required for accuracy. The results suggest that common misconceptions exist about which factors do and do not need to be controlled to improve precision. Controlled studies and cost-benefit analyses are needed to optimize GI methodology. The trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00260858.
|
|
