very soon , experiments at the large hadron collider ( lhc ) will begin direct exploration of physics at the tev scale .
strong theoretical arguments suggest that this physics will include new particles and forces not present in the standard model ( sm ) .
several theoretically motivated extensions of the standard model at the tev scale have been proposed .
after new physics discovery at the lhc , the main task of the experiments will be to determine which of the proposed models , if any , is correct .    unfortunately , there exists a broad and well - motivated class of sm extensions for which this task would be highly non - trivial . in these models ,
the new tev - scale particles carry a new conserved quantum number , not carried by the sm states .
the lightest of the new particles is therefore stable .
furthermore , the stable particle interacts weakly , providing a very attractive `` weakly interacting massive particle '' ( wimp ) candidate for dark matter with relic abundance naturally in the observed range .
models of this class include the minimal supersymmetric standard model ( mssm ) and a variety of other supersymmetric models with conserved r parity , little higgs models with t parity ( lht ) , and models with universal extra dimensions ( ued ) with kaluza - klein ( kk ) parity .
all these models have a common signature at a hadron collider : pair - production of new states is followed by their prompt decay into visible sm states and the lightest new particle , which escapes the detector without interactions leading to a `` missing transverse energy '' signature .
if this universal signature is observed at the lhc , how does one determine which of these models is realized ?
one crucial difference between the mssm and models such as lht or ued is the correlation between spins of the new particles and their gauge charges . in all these models ,
all ( or many of ) the new states at the tev scale can be paired up with the known sm particles , with particles in the same pair carrying identical gauge charges . however , while in the lht and ued models the two members of the pair have the same spin , in the mssm and other supersymmetric models their spins differ by 1/2 .
thus , measuring the spin of the observed new particles provides a way to discriminate among models .    experimental determination of the spin of a heavy unstable particle with one or more invisible daughter(s ) in hadron collider environment is a difficult task .
one possibile approach , which recently received considerable attention in the literature  @xcite , is to use angular correlations between the observable particles emitted in subsequent steps of a cascade decay , which are sensitive to intermediate particle spins .
this strategy is promising , but its success depends on the availability of long cascade decay chains , which may or may not occur depending on the details of the new physics spectrum .
it is worth thinking about other possible strategies for spin determination .    in this paper
, we explore the possibility of using 3-body decays of heavy new particles to determine their spin .
the most interesting example is the 3-body decay of the mssm gluino into a quark - antiquark pair and a weak gaugino , q+|q+ . in a large part of the mssm parameter space
, this decay has a large branching ratio : this occurs whenever all squarks are heavier than the gluino . , which first arises at one - loop level and generically has a partial width comparable to the tree - level decay  .
the gluino decay patterns in this parameter region have been analyzed in detail in ref .
] under the same condition , gluino pair - production dominates susy signal at the lhc .
we will argue that the invariant mass distribution of the jets produced in reaction   contains non - trivial information about the gluino spin , and can be used to distinguish this process from , for example , its ued counterpart , @xmath3 .
it is important to note that the jet invariant mass distribution we study depends not just on the spin of the decaying particle , but also on the helicity structure of the couplings which appear in the decay  , as well as on the masses of the decaying particle , the invisible daughter , and the off - shell particles mediating the decay .
if all these parameters were measured independently , the jet invariant mass distribution would unambiguously determine the spin .
however , independent determination of many of the relevant parameters will be very difficult or impossible at the lhc .
in this situation , proving the spin-1/2 nature of the decaying particle requires demonstrating that the experimentally observed curve can not be fitted with any of the curves predicted by models with other spin assignments , independently of the values of the unknown parameters .
this considerably complicates our task .
still , interesting information can be extraced .
for example , we will show that , even if complete ignorance of the decaying and intermediate particle masses is assumed , the jet invariant mass distribution allows one to distinguish between the decay   in the mssm and its ued counterpart ( assuming the couplings specified by each model ) at the lhc .
the paper is organized as follows . after setting up our notation and reviewing the basics of three - body kinematics in section 2
, we present a simple toy model showing how dijet invariant mass distributions from three - body decays can be used to probe the nature of the decaying particle and its couplings in section 3 .
section 4 discusses using this observable for mssm / ued discrimination , and contains the main results of the paper .
section 5 contains the conclusions .
appendix a contains the polarization analysis of the decay @xmath3 in ued , which sheds some light on the main features of the dijet invariant mass distribution in this case .
appendix b contains a brief review of the kullback - leibler distance , a statistical measure used in our analysis .
we are interested in three - body decays of the type a q + |q + b , where @xmath4 and @xmath5 are tev - scale particles
. the main focus of this paper will be on the case when @xmath4 is the gluino of the mssm or the kk gluon of the ued model , and @xmath5 is a neutalino or chargino of the mssm or a kk electroweak gauge boson of the ued ; however the discussion in this section applies more generally .
we assume that @xmath6 and @xmath7 are massless , and denote their four - momenta by @xmath8 and @xmath9 respectively . to describe the kinematics in lorentz - invariant terms , we introduce the `` mandelstam variables '' , s & = & ( p_1+p_2)^2 = ( p_a - p_b)^2 , u & = & ( p_1+p_b)^2 = ( p_a - p_2)^2 , t & = & ( p_2+p_b)^2 = ( p_a - p_1)^2 , of which only two are independent since s+t+u = m_a^2 + m_b^2 .
the allowed ranges for the mandelstam variables are determined by energy and momentum conservation ; in particular , 0s ( m_a - m_b)^2 .
we will assume that @xmath10 can not be reconstructed , either because @xmath5 is unobservable or is unstable with all decays containing unobservable daughters .
moreover , since the parton center - of - mass frame is unknown , no information is available about the motion of particle @xmath4 in the lab frame . due to these limitations ,
the analysis should use observables that can be reconstructed purely by measuring the jet four - momenta , and are independent of the velocity of @xmath4 in the lab frame .
the only such observable is @xmath11 , and the object of interest to us is the distribution @xmath12 .
this is given by = _ e_b - p_b^e_b+p_b ||m|^2 , where e_b & = & , p_b & = & , and @xmath13 is the invariant matrix element for the decay  , with the bar denoting the usual summation over the final state spins and other quantum numbers and averaging over the polarization and other quantum numbers of @xmath4 . if it is produced in a polarized state .
in the examples of this paper , production is dominated by strong interactions and @xmath4 will always be produced unpolarized . ]
the quantity @xmath14 can be expressed in terms of the variables  ; substitutions t m_a^2 - ,   u+m_b^2 should be made in @xmath14 before performing the integral in eq .  .
notice that eq .
is valid in the rest frame of the particle @xmath4 ; however , since @xmath11 is lorentz - invariant , its lorentz transformation is a trivial overall rescaling by time dilation , and the shape of the distribution is unaffected .
the strategy we will pursue is to use this shape to extract information about the decay matrix element @xmath13 , which is in turn determined by the spins and couplings of the particles @xmath4 and @xmath5 .    to separate the effects of non - trivial structure of the decay matrix element > from those due merely to kinematics
, it will be useful to compare the dijet invariant mass distributions predicted by various theories to the `` pure phase space '' distribution , obtained by setting the matrix element to a constant value . from eq .
, the phase space distribution is given by = .
this distribution . ] is shown by a solid black line in fig .
[ fig : toy ] .
notice that the phase space distribution has an endpoint at @xmath15 , with the asymptotic behavior given by ~(s-)^1/2 as the endpoint is approached .
and @xmath16.[fig : toy ] , title="fig:",width=226 ] ( 5,0)@xmath11 ( -185,100)@xmath17    to illustrate how the chiral structure of the couplings involved in the decay   can be determined from the dijet invariant mass distribution , consider a situation when the particles @xmath4 and @xmath5 are real scalars . introduce a massive dirac fermion @xmath18 of mass @xmath19 , and consider the following two models : model 1 defined by _ 1= y_a a | p_l q + y_b b | p_r q + h.c . and model 2 defined by _
2= y_a a | p_l q + y_b b | p_l q + h.c .
the matrix element for the decay   in model 1 is given by _
spin|m_1|^2= 2 y_a^2 y_b^2 ( m_*^2 s ) ( + ) , while in model 2 it is given by _
spin|m_2|^2= 2 y_a^2 y_b^2 ( ( m_a^2+m_b^2 ) t u -m_a^2 m_b^2 ) ( + ) ^2 .
the dijet invariant mass distributions in the two models are shown by the blue / dashed line ( model 1 ) and red / dot - dashed line ( model 2 ) in fig .
[ fig : toy ] .
their strikingly different shapes are due to the angular momentum conservation law and to the different helicity structure of the couplings . to understand this , consider this decay in the @xmath4 rest frame . in this frame , @xmath20
when @xmath21 , the quark and the antiquark travel in the same direction , as illustrated in fig .
[ fig : am ] .
since @xmath4 and @xmath5 have zero spin , the sum of the quark and antiquark helicities must vanish for this kinematics . in model 1 ,
the quark and the antiquark have the same helicity , and the decay is forbidden for @xmath21 ; in model 2 , it is allowed .
in contrast , when @xmath15 , the particle @xmath5 is at rest , and the quark and the antiquark travel in the opposite directions . by angular momentum conservation , their helicities must be equal . in model 1 , this is the case , and the distribution approaches that of pure phase space in the limit @xmath22 . in model 2
, this kinematics is forbidden , the matrix element vanishes at the endpoint , and the distribution behaves as @xmath23 .     rest frame for @xmath21 and @xmath15 in the two toy models of section 3 .
[ fig : am],title="fig:",width=566 ] ( -440,60)@xmath24 ( -440,10)@xmath25 ( -360,100)model 1 : same helicities ( -160,100)model 2 : opposite helicities
in this section , we will show that measuring the shape of the dijet invariant mass distribution arising from a three - body decay of a heavy colored particle may allow to determine whether the decaying particle is the gluino of the mssm or the kk gluon of the ued model .
we will begin by comparing the analytic predictions for the shapes of the two distributions at leading order .
we will then present a parton - level monte carlo study which demonstrates that the discriminating power of this analysis persists after the main experimental complications ( such as the combinatioric background , finite energy resolution of the detector , and cuts imposed to suppress sm backgrounds ) are taken into account .
, title="fig:",width=453 ] ( -250,55)@xmath6 ( -205,55)@xmath7 ( -320,0)@xmath26 ( -200,0)@xmath27 ( -260,20)@xmath28 ( -80,55)@xmath6 ( -35,55)@xmath7 ( -155,0)@xmath26 ( -30,0)@xmath27 ( -90,2)@xmath28    we consider the mssm in the region of the parameter space where all squarks are heavier than the gluino , forbidding the two - body decays @xmath29 .
in this situation , gluino decays through three - body channels .
we study the channel ( p_a ) q(p_1)+|q(p_2)+_1 ^
0(p_b ) , where @xmath6 and @xmath7 are light ( 1st and 2nd generation ) quarks , and @xmath30 is the lightest neutralino which we assume to be the lsp .
( note that many of our results would continue to hold if @xmath30 is replaced with a heavier neutralino or a chargino .
the only extra complication in these cases would be a possible additional contribution to the combinatoric background from the subsequent cascade decay of these particles . )
the leading - order feynman diagrams for the process   are shown in fig .
[ fig : mssm_fd ] ; the vertices entering these diagrams are well known ( see for example ref .
the spin - summed and averaged matrix element - squared has the form ( up to an overall normalization constant ) _
spin|m_mssm|^2= |c_l|^2 f(s , t , u;m_l * ) + |c_r|^2 f(s , t , u;m_r * ) , where f(s , t , u ; m ) = + + 2 .
here @xmath0 , @xmath1 , @xmath31 and @xmath32 are the masses of the gluino , the neutralino , the squarks @xmath33 and @xmath34 , respectively .
in order to keep the analysis general , we will not assume any relationships ( such as msugra contraints ) among these parameters , and will always work in terms of weak - scale masses .
we also define c_l & = & t^3_q n_12 - t_w ( t^3_q - q_q ) n_11 , c_r & = & t_w q_q n_11 , where @xmath35 , and @xmath36 is the neutralino mixing matrix is real .
it is always possible to redefine the neutralino fields to achieve this .
however one should keep in mind that the neutralino eigenmasses may be negative with this choice . ] in the basis @xmath37 .
we have neglected the mixing between the left - handed and right - handed squarks , which is expected to be small in the mssm . since
up and down type quarks are experimentally indistinguishable , the dijet invariant mass distribution @xmath12 should include both the contributions of up - type and down - type squarks .      , title="fig:",width=453 ] ( -250,55)@xmath6 ( -205,55)@xmath7 ( -320,0)@xmath38 ( -200,0)@xmath39 ( -260,2)@xmath40 ( -80,55)@xmath6 ( -35,55)@xmath7 ( -155,0)@xmath38 ( -30,0)@xmath39 ( -95,2)@xmath40    the counterpart of the decay   in the universal extra dimensions ( ued )
model is the decay g^1(p_a ) q(p_1)+|q(p_2)+b^1(p_b ) , where @xmath41 and @xmath39 are the first - level kaluza - klein ( kk ) excitations of the gluon and the hypercharge gauge boson , respectively .
we ignore the mixing between @xmath39 and the kk mode of the @xmath42 field , which is small provided that the radius of the extra dimension is small , @xmath43 , and assume that the @xmath39 is the ltp .
as in the mssm case , the decay   is expected to have a substantial branching fraction when all kk quarks @xmath44 and @xmath45 are heavier than the kk gluon . note that in the original ued model  @xcite , the kk modes of all sm states were predicted to be closely degenerate in mass around @xmath46 ; it was however later understood  @xcite that kinetic terms localized on the boundaries of the extra dimension can produce large mass splittings in the kk spectrum .
since such kinetic terms are consistent with all symmetries of the theory , we will assume that they are indeed present , and treat the masses of the @xmath41 , @xmath39 , @xmath44 and @xmath45 fields as free parameters .
the leading - order feynman diagrams for the decay   are shown in fig .
[ fig : ued_fd ] .
( we ignored the contribution of the diagrams mediated by @xmath47 with @xmath48 , which are suppressed by the larger masses of the higher kk modes . )
the relevant couplings have the form & & g_3 g^1_+ & & g_1 b^1 _ , where @xmath49 and @xmath50 are the hypercharges .
the spin - summed and averaged matrix element - squared has the form ( up to an overall normalization constant ) _ spin|m_ued|^2= y_l^2 g(s , t , u;m_l * ) + y_r^2 g(s , t , u;m_r * ) , where @xmath31 and @xmath32 are the masses of the left- and right - handed quark kk modes @xmath45 and @xmath44 , and g(s , t , u;m)= + + 2 , with h_1(s , t , u ) & = & 4(t u - m_a^2 m_b^2 ) + ( 2 s ( m_a^2+m_b^2 ) + t
u -m_a^2 m_b^2 ) , h_2(s , t , u ) & = & 4s(m_a^2+m_b^2 ) - ( 2 s ( m_a^2+m_b^2)+t u - m_a^2 m_b^2 ) .       and @xmath16.[fig : dgdsall],title="fig:",width=226 ] ( 5,0)@xmath11 ( -185,100)@xmath17    armed with the expressions   and  , it is straightforward to obtain the dijet invariant mass distributions for gluino and kk gluon decays and compare them .
for example , the two distributions for a particular choice of parameters , along with the pure phase space distribution , are shown in fig .
[ fig : dgdsall ] . while not as strikingly different as the two toy models of section  [ sec : toy ] , the curves predicted by the mssm and the ued are clearly distinct .
( the suppression of the ued distribution compared to phase space around @xmath21 and @xmath51 can be easily understood using angular momentum conservation , as explained in appendix  [ app : pol ] . ) in this section , we will perform a simplified analysis of the discriminating power of these distributions , ignoring experimental complications such as cuts , finite energy resolution , combinatoric and sm backgrounds , and systematic errors .
we will return to include some of these complications in the following section .
the distrubution in each model depends on a number of parameters , including the mass of the mother particle @xmath0 , the mass of the invisible daughter @xmath1 , and the masses of intermediate particles : @xmath52 in the mssm case and @xmath53 in the ued case .
we assume that the partners of the up - type quarks of the first two generations and the down - type quarks for all three generations are degenerate , and do not include the diagrams with intermediate stops ( or kk tops ) since they produce tops in the final state . furthermore , since the yukawa couplings for the first two generations are small , it is safe to assume that @xmath54 in the mssm and @xmath55 in ued .
since an overall rescaling of all masses does not affect the shape of the distribution , we need four dimensionless parameters to specify the mass spectrum in each model ; we use the particle masses in units of @xmath0 .
experimentally , these four parameters may be very difficult to obtain independently .
a direct measurement of the masses of squarks / kk quarks may well be impossible , since these particles may be too heavy to be produced on - shell .
also , while it is easy to measure @xmath56 ( one can use the endpoint of the dijet invariant mass distribution or other simple observables such as the effective mass  @xcite or its variations  @xcite ) , it is much more difficult to measure @xmath0 and @xmath1 individually  @xcite , which would be required in order to obtain @xmath57 . in this study
, we will conservatively assume no prior knowledge of any of these parameters .
( of course , if some independent information about them is available , for example the overall mass scale is constrained by production cross section considerations , this information can be folded into our analysis , increasing its discriminating power . ) in addition to the unknown masses , the matrix elements in the mssm depend on the neutralino mixing matrix elements , @xmath58 and @xmath59 , although only the ratio @xmath60 affects the shape of the distribution . again , this parameter is difficult to measure at the lhc , and we will assume that it is unknown ; fortunately , the effect of varying it is quite small .    to quantify the discriminating power of the proposed observable , we use the following procedure .
we assume that the experimental data is described by the mssm curve with a particular set of parameters .
we then ask , how many events ( assuming statistical errors only ) would be required to rule out the ued as an explanation of this distribution ? to answer this question , we scan over 50000 points in the ued parameter space : m_b / m_a & = & ( 0  0.5 ) ,  m(q_l^1)/m_a=(1.05  3.0),m(d_r^1)/m_a & = & ( 1.05  3.0 ) ,  m(u_r^1)/m_a=(1.05  3.0 ) . for each point in the scan ,
we compute the kullback - leibler ( kl ) distance ( see appendix  [ app : kl ] ) between the ued distribution with the parameters at that point , and the `` experimental '' distribution .
we then find the `` best - fit ued '' point , which is the point that gives the smallest kl distance among the scanned sample .
finally , we compute the number of events required to rule out the best - fit ued point at a desired confidence level .     decays .
[ fig : scan],title="fig:",width=37 ]    decays .
[ fig : scan],title="fig:",width=264 ]    the results of this analysis are shown in fig .
[ fig : scan ] .
the mssm parameters used to generate the `` data '' are : @xmath61 , @xmath62 , @xmath63 the parameters @xmath64 and @xmath65 were then scanned between @xmath66 and @xmath67 , and for each point in the scan the procedure described in the previous paragraph was performed .
[ fig : scan ] shows the number of events required to rule out the ued interpretation of the signal at the 99.9% c.l .
( in the language of appendix  [ app : kl ] , this corresponds to @xmath68 . ) in a typical point in the model parameter space , about 6000 events are required . for comparison ,
the pair - production cross section for a 1 tev gluino at the lhc is about 600 fb , corresponding to 12000 gluinos / year at the initial design luminosity of 10 fb@xmath69/year .
the number of events useful for the measurement studied here depends on the branching ratio of the decay  .
since this branching ratio is generically of order one , we expect @xmath70 useful events / year at the initial stages of the lhc running .
thus , at least under the highly idealized conditions of this simplified analysis , this method of model discrimination is quite promising in a wide range of reasonable model parameters .
the mssm and ued distributions look more alike when the squark - gluino mass splitting is small ; as a result , more events are required in that region . as the squarks become heavier , however , the distributions quickly converge to their asymptotic shapes , and the discriminating power is approximately independent of the squark masses in most of the scanned region .     of the `` true '' model.,title="fig:",width=264 ]
( -5,-10)@xmath71 ( -230,120)@xmath72    we checked that the conclusions of this analysis are approximately independent of the value of @xmath60 used to generate the `` data '' .
they do , however , depend sensitively on the ratio @xmath57 : as @xmath57 grows , the mssm and ued distributions become more and more alike .
this is illustrated in fig .
[ fig : mbma ] , which shows the number of events needed to rule out the `` wrong '' model ( assumed to be ued ) at the 99.9% c.l .
, as a function of @xmath57 of the `` true '' model ( assumed to be the mssm with @xmath73 and @xmath74 ) .
the ued scan parameters are the same as in eq .  , except that we vary @xmath75 in this case .
it is clear that the discriminating power of the dijet invariant mass distribution falls rapidly ( approximately exponentially ) with growing @xmath57 .
this can be understood as follows .
the main feature of the invariant mass distributions that allows for model discrimination is the presence of the sharp dip at @xmath21 in the ued case . according to the goldstone boson equivalence theorem ,
if the daughter particle @xmath5 in the ued case is highly boosted , the decays into its longitudinal component will dominate .
the particle @xmath5 is highly boosted in the vicintiy of @xmath21 , provided that the mass ratio @xmath57 is small ; as @xmath57 grows , the boost becomes less pronounced and the decays into the longitudinal component of @xmath5 are less dominant .
this is illustrated in fig .
[ fig : polratio ] , which compares the ratio of partial decay rates into the longitudinal and transverse modes of @xmath5 for @xmath16 and @xmath76 .
however , it is exactly the decays into the longitudinal mode of @xmath5 that are mainly responsible for the characteristic dip at @xmath21 ; this feature is far less pronounced for the decays into transverse modes .
this means that as @xmath57 is increased , the dip gradually disappears , and the discriminating power of our observable fades away .
( so that the @xmath5 particle is actually highly boosted ) . in figure
[ fig : polratio ] we can see the ratio of the decay distribution into the longitudinal modes to the decay modes into the transverse modes of @xmath5 for two different ratios @xmath77 . for @xmath78 we can clearly see that the longitudinal modes dominates for low @xmath11 , while for @xmath79 the decay into transverse modes is enhanced .
however , it is exactly the decays into the longitudinal mode that are responsible for the characteristic dip of the distribution around @xmath21 which lets us distinguish the ued case from the mssm case .
this means that the characteristic dip will disappear if we increase @xmath77 , and will our discriminating power too .     into the longitudinal component of @xmath5 to the decay distributions into the transverse components of @xmath5 for @xmath16(solid ) and
@xmath76(dashed ) . for low @xmath57 the daughter particle
is highly boosted at @xmath21 and will mainly be longitudinally polarized . as @xmath1 increases , the transeverse polarization becomes more important.,width=264 ]      given the large number of simplifying assumptions made in the analysis of the previous section , a skeptical reader may well wonder how meaningful the results presented above are . in this section , we will repeat the analysis in a more realistic setting : effects of experimental cuts and combinatoric background will be included .
we will also bin the distributions , to approximate the effects of finite jet energy resolution . since this analysis involves generating large samples of monte carlo ( mc ) events for each model
, we were not able to perform a scan over the model parameter space , as we did in the previous section .
instead , we will present a test case , comparing the mssm distribution for a single point in the mssm parameter space with the distribution generated by the `` best - fit '' ued model for that point .
the chosen mssm point has the following parameters : @xmath80 tev , @xmath81 gev , @xmath82 tev .
the corresponding `` best - fit '' ued point , found by the procedure described in the previous section , has the following parameters : @xmath83 tev , @xmath84 gev , @xmath85 tev .
( note that the value of @xmath56 , which can be determined independently , is the same for these two points . ) using madgraph / madevent v4.1  @xcite event generator , we have simulated a statistically significant sample ( about 20000 ) of parton - level monte carlo events for each model in @xmath86 collisions at @xmath87 tev .
the simulated processes are pp qq|q|q ^0_1 ^0_1 in the mssm , and its counterpart , pp qq|q|q b^1 b^1 , in ued . with the chosen model parameters , the dominant contribution to the processes   and   comes from pair - production of @xmath88 , followed by the three - body decay  , which is of primary interest to us . in the mc simulation , we did not demand that the @xmath88 be on - shell ; the full tree - level matrix elements for the @xmath89 reactions   and   were simulated , so that the subdominant contributions with off - shell @xmath88 are included .
we imposed the following set of cuts on the generated events : _
i4.0 ;  r(i , j)0.4 ;  p_t , i100  gev ;  100  gev , where @xmath90 , @xmath91 label the four ( anti)quarks in each event .
the first three cuts are standard for all lhc analyses , reflecting the finite detector coverage , separation required to define jets , and the need to suppress the large qcd background of soft jets .
the @xmath92 cut is common to all searches for models where new physics events are characterized by large missing transverse energy , such as the mssm and ued models under consideration .
detailed studies have shown that this cut is quite effective in suppressing the sm backgrounds , including both the physical background , @xmath93 , @xmath94 , and a variety of instrumental backgrounds ( see , for example , the cms study  @xcite ) .
while we have not performed an independent analysis of the sm backgrounds , based on previous work we expect that , with a sufficiently restrictive @xmath92 cut , one will be able to obtain a large sample of new physics events with no significant sm contamination .
( green / light - gray ) , and its ued counterpart  @xmath95 ( blue / dark - gray ) , including realistic experimental cuts and the combinatoric background ( monte carlo simulation ) .
right panel : theoretical dijet invariant mass distributions > from a single gluino / kk gluon decay with the same model parameters and no experimental cuts .
[ fig : mg],width=302 ]    ( -60,-105)@xmath11(gev@xmath96 ) ( -220,90)@xmath36     ( green / light - gray ) , and its ued counterpart  @xmath95 ( blue / dark - gray ) , including realistic experimental cuts and the combinatoric background ( monte carlo simulation ) .
right panel : theoretical dijet invariant mass distributions > from a single gluino / kk gluon decay with the same model parameters and no experimental cuts .
[ fig : mg],width=264,height=241 ]    ( -10,-105)@xmath11 ( -215,90)@xmath97    the dijet invariant mass distruibutions obtained from the mssm and ued mc samples are shown in fig .  [ fig : mg ] .
the distributions are normalized to have the same total number of events , since the overall normalization is subject to large systematic uncertainties and we do not use any normalization information in our study .
note that for each mc event , we include all @xmath98 possible jet pairings ; 4 out of these correspond to combining jets that do _ not _ come from the same decay , and thus do not follow the theoretical distributions computed above . in fig .
[ fig : mg ] , we selected can be measured independently . ]
the jet pairs with @xmath99 ; all pairs with larger values of @xmath11 arise > from the wrong jet pairings .
however , some of the wrong jet pairs do have @xmath11 in the selected range , forming a combinatoric background to the distribution we want to study .
nevertheless , it is clear from fig .
[ fig : mg ] that even after realistic cuts   and the combinatoric background are included , the distributions in the two models retain their essential shape difference expected from the simplified theoretical analysis of the previous section . assuming that the experimental data is described by the mssm histogram and ignoring systematic uncertainties , we find ( using the standard @xmath100 test ) that about 750 events would be required to rule out the ued curve at the 99.9% c.l .
note that this number is smaller than those obtained in the previous section , indicating that the performed cuts actually enhance the difference between the mssm and ued distributions .
on the other hand , the actual discriminating power of the analysis is likely to be somewhat lower than this estimate , since the systematic uncertainty in the cut efficiencies was not taken into account here .
our parton - level analysis does not explicitly take into account the smearing effect due to the finite jet energy and direction resolution of a real detector .
the hadronic calorimeter energy resolution for a jet of energy e can be approximated by 0.05 + ( ) ^0.5 , and is in the @xmath101% range for the jets that pass the cuts  .
we can crudely estimate @xmath102 to be of order @xmath103 , evaluated at @xmath104 .
the fractional uncertainty of the measurement of @xmath11 in our analysis is then roughly between 10% ( for points with @xmath105 ) and 30% ( for points with low @xmath11 ) .
the bin size used in fig .
[ fig : mg ] is of the order of this uncertainty for large @xmath11 , and larger for small @xmath11 , so we expect that the smearing introduced by binning in our analysis provides a reasonable , if crude , description of the expected smearing due to finite jet energy resolution . a more detailed investigation of this effect , and other potential detector effects , would be required to fully understand the applicability of the proposed method in a realistic experimental situation .
in this paper , we have investigated how the dijet invariant mass distributions > from three - body decays of a color - octed tev - scale new particle , such as the gluino of the mssm and the kk gluon of the ued model , can be used to determine the nature of this particle .
the production cross section for the color - octet state at the lhc is expected to be large , and the branching ratio for the three - body decays is significant whenever all squarks / kk quarks are heavier than the gluino / kk gluon . if this is the case , the dijet invariant mass distribution can be determined accurately at the lhc .
the main complication of the analysis is that the distributions in the two models we considered depend on a number of parameters in addition to the spin of the decaying particle .
however , even allowing for complete ignorance of these parameters , we found the dijet invariant mass to be a very promising tool for model discrimination .
the simplified analysis of this paper did not take into account a number of potentially important effects .
since the particles involved are colored , the qcd loop corrections to the decay amplitudes are expected to be significant , and may modify the tree - level distributions we studied .
also , our analysis is performed at the parton level and does not include detector effects . while we expect that many systematic effects would cancel out since the analysis relies only on the shapes of the distributions and is insensitive to the overall normalization , a better understanding of the systematics is required .
we believe that the promising conclusions of this preliminary analysis motivate a more detailed study of these issues .    1.0 cm
we are grateful to matt reece and itay yavin for useful discussions .
this research is supported by the nsf grant phy-0355005 .
is also supported in part by the doe oji grant de - fg02 - 01er41206 .
the main feature of the invariant mass distribution of the ued case , which makes it distingishable from susy , is the dip at @xmath21 .
this feature can be understood by analyzing the decay amplitudes of the individual polarization components of the mother and daughter particles and considering conservation of angular momentum . as shown with the two toy models in section  [ sec : toy ] , conservation of angular momentum can lead to suppression of the invariant mass distributions with respect to the pure phase space distribution   at @xmath21 , as well as at @xmath15 .
the couplings in the ued case have the same chiral structure as the second toy model of section  [ sec : toy ] , with the quark and antiquark having opposite helicities .
the added complication in the ued case is that the mother and daughter particles are massive spin one particles .
we use @xmath106 and @xmath107 to denote the projections of the @xmath4 and @xmath5 spins on the direction of the momentum @xmath8 of the quark @xmath6 .
these operators have eigenvalues @xmath108 ; the corresponding eigenstates have polarization vectors @xmath109 , @xmath110 , and @xmath111 .
the transitions among these eigestates are described by a @xmath112 matrix of decay amplitudes . using the ued lagrangian
, we have evaluated these amplitudes and obtained the dijet invariant mass distribution corresponding to each entry . in the intermediate state .
the diagrams with @xmath113 lead to distributions that are identical , up to a parity reflection , to the ones presented here . ]
these distributions , divided out by the pure phase space distribution  , are plotted in fig .
[ fig : pol ] . at @xmath21
the spin projections of the quark - antiquark pair sums up to zero , and the final state has no angular momentum ( see the right panel of fig .  [
fig : am ] ) .
therefore the polarizations of @xmath4 and @xmath5 must be the same .
this will result in a suppression of all non - diagonal components in the transition matrix at @xmath21 , resulting in a dip there . at @xmath15 , however , the spin projections of the quark - antiquark pair add up to @xmath114 ( see fig .  [
fig : am ] ) .
thus the only allowed decays at @xmath115 are the longitudinal component of @xmath4 to @xmath116 and @xmath117 to the longitudinal component of @xmath5 . both features at the ends of the distribution
can be nicely observed in fig .
[ fig : pol ] .     and @xmath118 in arbitrary units
. the polarization vectors are along the momentum @xmath8 of the outgoing quark @xmath6 .
notice that at @xmath21 only the diagonal elements are unsuppressed due to angular momentum conservation , resulting in a dip of the distribution .
[ fig : pol],title="fig:",width=529 ] ( -420,290)@xmath119 ( -420,205)@xmath120 ( -420,120)@xmath121 ( -340,330)@xmath122 ( -200,330)@xmath123 ( -70,330)@xmath124    the main feature of the invariant mass distribution of the ued case ( the dip at @xmath21 ) can be understood by looking at the decay of the individual polarization components of the mother and daughter particles and considering conservation of angular momentum . as shown with our toy models in section  [ sec : toy ]
, conservation of angular momentum can in some kinematic cases lead to the suppression of the invariant mass distributions compared to the pure phase space distribution ( by pure phase space we mean the invariant mass distribution with the matrix element set one , thus considering only pure kinematic effects and the propagator of the intermediate particle ) .
figure  [ fig : pol ] shows the invariant mass distributions of these individual decay modes divided by the phase space distribution .
the ued case has the same chirality assignments as our second toy model in fig .
[ fig : am ] , with the obvious added complication that the mother and daughter particles are massive spin one particles .
apply now the argument of fig .
[ fig : am ] along the direction of the quark @xmath125 . at @xmath21 the spin projection of the quark - antiquark pair sums up to zero
, therefore the polarization of @xmath5 must be the same as the one of @xmath4 .
this will result in a suppression ( compared to pure phase space ) of all other components at @xmath21 . at @xmath126
however , the quark - antiquark pair has spin projection @xmath127 . thus the only allowed decays at @xmath115 are the longitudinal component of @xmath4 to @xmath128 and @xmath129 to the longitudinal polarization of @xmath5 .
both features at the ends of the distribution can be nicely observed in  [ fig : pol ] .
a convenient measure to quantify how much two continuous probability distributions differ from each other is the _ kullback - leibler distance_. ( for a recent application in the collider phenomenology context , see ref .
@xcite . ) in this appendix , we will briefly review this measure .
suppose that the data sample consists of @xmath36 events distributed according to the theoretical prediction of model @xmath130 .
consider a second model , @xmath131 , which predicts a distribution different from @xmath130 .
we can quantify the discriminating power of our data sample by the ratio of conditional probabilities for @xmath131 and @xmath130 to be true , given the data : = .
this equation can be rewritten using bayes theorem : @xmath132 where @xmath133 and @xmath134 are the priors  probabilities for @xmath131 and @xmath130 to be true before the experiment at hand is conducted .
( in this paper , we assumed that the mssm and ued are _ a  priori _ equally likely , so we set @xmath135 . )
suppose that each event @xmath136 ( @xmath137 ) is characterized by a single variable @xmath138 ( in our case , the dijet invariant mass ) .
since the @xmath36 events are independent , we have @xmath139 for large @xmath36 we can approximate @xmath140 and use the normalization condition @xmath141 to obtain @xmath142 where the _ kullback - leibler distance _ ( also called _ relative entropy _ ) is defined as @xmath143 it follows that the number of events needed to constrain the probability of model @xmath131 being true , relative to the probability of @xmath130 being true , to be less than @xmath144 , is given by @xmath145 this number provides a convenient and physically meaningful measure of how different the @xmath131 and @xmath130 distributions are .
two properties of the kullback - leibler distance are worth mentioning in our context .
first , while this is not manifest from its definition , the kl distance is non - negative , and zero if and only if @xmath146 .
second , it is invariant under transformations @xmath147 : for example , it does not matter whether we consider the jet invariant mass distribution in terms of @xmath11 or @xmath148 .
a.  j.  barr , phys .
b * 596 * , 205 ( 2004 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0405052 ] .
j.  m.  smillie and b.  r.  webber , jhep * 0510 * , 069 ( 2005 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0507170 ] .
a.  datta , k.  kong and k.  t.  matchev , phys .  rev .
d * 72 * , 096006 ( 2005 ) [ erratum - ibid .
d * 72 * , 119901 ( 2005 ) ] [ arxiv : hep - ph/0509246 ] . c.  athanasiou , c.  g.  lester , j.  m.  smillie and b.  r.  webber , jhep * 0608 * , 055 ( 2006 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0605286 ] .
l.  t.  wang and i.  yavin , jhep * 0704 * , 032 ( 2007 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0605296 ] .
c.  kilic , l.  t.  wang and i.  yavin , arxiv : hep - ph/0703085 .
a.  alves , o.  eboli and t.  plehn , phys .
d * 74 * , 095010 ( 2006 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0605067 ] . m.  toharia and j.  d.  wells , jhep * 0602 * , 015 ( 2006 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0503175 ] .
h.  e.  haber and g.  l.  kane , phys .
rept .   * 117 * , 75 ( 1985 ) .
m.  perelstein and c.  spethmann , jhep * 0704 * , 070 ( 2007 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0702038 ] .
t.  appelquist , h.  c.  cheng and b.  a.  dobrescu , phys .  rev .
d * 64 * , 035002 ( 2001 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0012100 ] .
m.  carena , t.  m.  p.  tait and c.  e.  m.  wagner , acta phys .
b * 33 * , 2355 ( 2002 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0207056 ] .
i.  hinchliffe , f.  e.  paige , m.  d.  shapiro , j.  soderqvist and w.  yao , phys .
d * 55 * , 5520 ( 1997 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9610544 ] . c.  g.  lester and d.  j.  summers , phys .
b * 463 * , 99 ( 1999 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9906349 ] ; a.  barr , c.  lester and p.  stephens , j.  phys .
g * 29 * , 2343 ( 2003 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0304226 ] .
p.  meade and m.  reece , phys .
d * 74 * , 015010 ( 2006 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0601124 ] .
can be downloaded from http://madgraph.phys.ucl.ac.be/ + for a discussion of the madgraph project , see f.  maltoni and t.  stelzer , jhep * 0302 * , 027 ( 2003 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0208156 ] .
, cern - lhcc-2006 - 021 , pp .


non - gaussianity of the cosmic microwave background ( cmb ) is progressively becoming a crucial probe of the inflationary dynamics , since models beyond single field slow - roll inflation predict large distinct non - gaussianities above the current limit of measurement ( lyth et al .
2003 , 2006 ; bartolo et al . 2004
; dvali et al . 2004 ; chen 2005 ; seery & lidsey 2005 ; chen & szapudi 2006 ; seery & hidalgo 2006 ; ling & wu 2008 ; senatore et al .
2008 , 2009 ; chen et al .
moreover , up - to - date a number of plausible alternative early universe models also predict skewed primordial fluctuations , and are in principle distinguishable from other scenarios through the shape dependence of high - order correlation functions ( alishahiha et al .
2004 ; arkani - hamed et al . 2004
; creminelli & senatore 2007 ; brandenberger 2008 ; buchbinder , khoury & ovrut 2008 ; lehners & steinhardt 2008 ; mcallister & silverstein 2008 ) .    an even small degree of primordial non - gaussianity would indicate a quite different structure formation scenario from the concordance cosmological model in which density perturbations are assumed to be a gaussian random field , and alter significantly the statistics of voids ( kamionkowski et al .
2008 ; song & lee 2008 , for example ) . imprints of primordial non - gaussianity can manifest in the statistical properties of the lyman-@xmath0 forest qso spectra at intermediate redshift ( viel et al .
2008 ) , in the large - scale distribution of neutral hydrogen ( pillepich et al . 2007 ) , in the reionization history of the universe ( crociani et al .
2008 ) , and in the abundance , clustering and biasing of dark matter halos ( kang et al . 2007 ; carbone et al .
2008 ; dalal et al . 2008 ; desjacques et al .
2008 ; grossi et al . 2008 ; loverde et al . 2008
; matarrese & verde 2008 ; mcdonald & seljak 2008 ; pillepich et al .
2008 ; seljak 2008 ; slosar et al . 2008 ; jeong & komatsu 2009 ) .
topology of the large scale structure is also very sensitive to the initial conditions of the matter density field , and potentially represents a strong and independent test of deviations from the gaussian hypothesis ( park et al .
1998 , 2001 , 2005 ; gott et al .
2008a , b ; hikage et al .
2008b ) .
hence , there is significant interest in quantifying the gaussianity of the cosmic background radiation , and a multitude of non - gaussian estimators have been applied so far . in particular , data from the _ _ w__ilkinson _ _ m__icrowave _ _ a__nisotropy _ _ p__robe ( wmap ) mission has been used to constrain primordial non - gaussianity .
recent measurements of the one- and three - point probability functions , the bispectrum and trispectrum , the genus statistic and the other minkowski functionals ( cabella et al . 2005 ; hinshaw et al .
2007 , 2008 ; creminelli et al . 2007 ; gott et al . 2007 ; spergel et al . 2007 ; curto et al . 2008 ; hikage et al .
2008a ; komatsu et al . 2008
; vielva & sanz 2008 ; pietrobon et al .
2009a ) from the first three or five years of wmap data are all consistent with gaussianity .
however , a considerable number of anomalies like asymmetries , intrinsic alignments in the data or the presence of unusual cold spots have also been reported ( cruz et al .
2006 ; tojeiro et al .
2006 ; chiang et al . 2007 ;
naselsky et al .
2007 ; rth et al . 2007 , 2009 ; vielva et al . 2007 ; hansen et al . 2008
; dickinson et al . 2009 ; diego et al . 2009 ; li et al .
2009 ; pietrobon et al . 2009b ; rossmanith et al . 2009 ) , as well as some claims of non - gaussianity ( jeong & smoot 2007 ; yadav & wandelt 2008 ) , which , if confirmed , would rule out a large class of inflationary models .    in this paper
we investigate the gaussian hypothesis using the clustering statistics of pixels that lie above or below a threshold . for a gaussian field ,
the scale dependence of this statistic , and its dependence on threshold , have been predicted ( jensen & szalay 1986 ) .
it turns out that a careful accounting for the effects of noise is crucial to performing this test .
kashlinsky et al .
( 2001 ) and hernndez - monteagudo et al .
( 2004 ) presented an analysis of the problem when the noise is spatially homogeneous . in the case of wmap ,
the noise is spatially inhomogeneous ; the present work shows how to incorporate this complexity into the analysis .
the layout of the paper is as follows . in section [ noise_model ]
we outline the theoretical framework for the two - point statistics above a temperature threshold , and show how to incorporate the complexity of inhomogeneous noise into the two - point formalism .
some details on errorbar calculations are left in appendix a. in section [ wmap5 analysis ] we test our theory against wmap five - year data .
we study and quantify the inhomogeneous noise properties and show that the abundance and clustering of pixels ( both scale and dependence on threshold temperature ) appears to be inconsistent with the gaussian prediction if one ignores the fact that the noise is spatially inhomogeneous .
we compare the number density of pixels above threshold and the one- and two - point statistics measurements with the theory , allowing for inhomogeneous noise . while this improves the agreement between measurements and predictions , discrepancies remain .
although this may be an indication of primordial non - gaussianity , we discuss a variety of other possibilities , among which the effect of smoothing the map .
we inspect all the wmap five - year channels , but we present in the main text results only for the w1 differencing assembly ( da ) , and leave in appendix b results for other da s .
a final section summarizes our findings , and highlights ongoing and future studies .
denote the observed value in a pixel by @xmath1 , which is the sum of the true signal @xmath2 plus noise @xmath3 , both of which have mean zero .
we consider a model in which the signal is homogeneous and may have spatial correlations whereas the noise , which is independent of the signal , may be inhomogeneous and have spatial correlations . by this
we mean that the rms value of the noise @xmath4 may fluctuate from pixel to pixel and these fluctuations may be correlated , and that the actual value of the noise in one pixel could depend of that in another .
let @xmath5 denote the observed one - point distribution of @xmath6 , @xmath7 the distribution of @xmath2 , @xmath8 the distribution of the rms value of the noise in a pixel , and @xmath9 the distribution of the noise when the rms value of the noise is @xmath4 .
note that @xmath10 .
our convention is to use capital letters for average quantities , and lower case letters for actual ( varying ) quantities .
later on in the paper we will also drop the ( understood ) subscript @xmath3 of the rms of the noise , for clarity of notation .      since the distribution of the noise @xmath11 is independent of the signal @xmath2 , @xmath12 where @xmath13 is the dirac delta and @xmath14 the variance of @xmath6 is : @xmath15 where we have used @xmath16 to denote the rms value of the signal , and @xmath17 to denote the variance of the noise upon averaging over all pixels .
it is also straightforward to show that @xmath18 , as expected .
the fraction of pixels above some threshold @xmath19 is @xmath20 if @xmath21 denotes the mean value of @xmath6 in such pixels , then @xmath22      two point statistics may be computed similarly . for two pixels separated by the angular distance @xmath23 , @xmath24 where @xmath25 notice that if we integrate over all pixels then @xmath26 where @xmath27 and @xmath28 this is because the signal and noise are uncorrelated , and so @xmath29 for all @xmath30 .
clearly , if the noise is not spatially correlated , then @xmath31 and @xmath32 .
if the rms values of the noise are perfectly correlated , meaning @xmath33 , then it is convenient to write @xmath34 and replace @xmath35 with a delta function centered on @xmath36 .
one then averages over the distribution of @xmath4 , namely : @xmath37 if , in addition , one replaces @xmath8 with a delta function centered on @xmath38 , then @xmath39 , and the homogeneous case is recovered .
the noise distributions @xmath8 and @xmath40 are measured directly from the wmap five - year data .      the two - point unweighted correlation function @xmath41 estimates the excess of probability of finding a pair at a distance @xmath23 , compared to a random catalog ( e.g. jensen & szalay , 1986 ) .
similarly , one can define the two - point weighted correlation function @xmath42 , which differs from @xmath41 only because each member of the pair is now weighted by some ( average ) mark . in this study ,
the mark is given by @xmath43 .
two - point correlation functions of regions above some threshold are readily obtained by integration above the threshold level .    within the formalism previously outlined , the two point correlation function of pixels above some threshold @xmath19 is @xmath44 and the associated weighted function is @xmath45 where
@xmath46 , @xmath47 and @xmath48 have been previously defined .    to gain intuition , it is helpful to define @xmath49 and @xmath50 in terms of which @xmath51 \label{xiintuit}\end{aligned}\ ] ] and @xmath52 . \label{wiintuit}\end{aligned}\ ] ] this shows that @xmath53 and @xmath54 can be thought of as weighted averages over the values at fixed @xmath55 and @xmath56 .
this re - writing shows clearly that the key quantity of interest are @xmath57 , which is the convolution of the signal and noise distributions , and @xmath58 .
this rewriting also allows one to study two limiting cases .
if the rms values of the noise are perfectly correlated , meaning @xmath59 , then : @xmath60 and @xmath61 if , in addition , one replaces @xmath8 with a delta function centered on @xmath38 , then @xmath62 and @xmath63    we are particularly interested in the case where the signal @xmath64 is bivariate gaussian with @xmath65 , and @xmath66 and the noise @xmath9 is gaussian with rms @xmath4 . then @xmath67 with @xmath68 , @xmath69 , and @xmath70 @xmath71 @xmath72 where @xmath73 is the covariance matrix of the temperature field , @xmath74 the power spectrum of the noise map , @xmath75 the _ wmap _ window function and @xmath76 the additional smoothing due to finite pixel size , mask influence and an optional additional gaussian beam smoothing .    if the noise is spatially uncorrelated , then clearly @xmath77 and therefore @xmath78 .    in the approximation
where @xmath33 , rms noise varies spatially on scales much larger than those of interest , then @xmath79 .
the `` standard '' approximation , rms noise independent of position , has @xmath80 and we recover the hernndez - monteagudo et al .
( 2004 ) formula .
uncertainties in the correlation functions above threshold are estimated from the optimal variance limit , containing cosmic variance , instrumental noise ( knox 1995 ; hernndez - monteagudo et al . 2004 ) , and finite binsize effects .
see appendix a for more details .
the data from the five years of the wmap mission are available online at _ _
_ a__rchive for _ _ m__icrowave _ _ b__ackground _ _ da__ta ( lambda ) website ( http://lambda.gsfc.nasa.gov/ ) , nasa s cmb thematic data center .
for the purposes of this study , we use the wmap five - year full resolution `` foreground - reduced '' coadded sky maps ( produced by performing a weighted pixel - by - pixel mean of the five single year maps , see hinshaw et al .
2008 ) for the w ( the 94 ghz channel ) , v ( the 61 ghz channel ) and q ( the 41 ghz channel ) differencing assemblies .
we show results for the w1 channel in the main text , and leave in appendix b major results for all the other individual da s .
the data consist of four fields for each pixel :    1 .   the thermodynamic temperature in mk , 2 .   the q polarization temperature in mk , 3 .   the u polarization temperature in mk , and 4 .
the effective number of observations , @xmath81 .
the maps are provided in the healpix scheme ( grski et al .
1999 ) at a resolution of @xmath82 , giving a total of 3145728 pixels separated on average by @xmath83 .
the maps have been cleaned of galactic foreground emission using external templates , as explained in gold et al .
it is indeed necessary to mask out regions of strong foreground emission . of the different masks provided from the lambda legacy archive , which allow for the selective exclusion of portions of the sky at different flux levels
, we chose the most conservative , kq75  essentially an extension and improvement of the standard kp0 cut in the 3-yr data release .
this choice removes about 28% of the pixels .
point sources are masked based on a combination of external catalog data and wmap - detected sources ( wright et al .
note that point sources are the largest astrophysical contaminant to the temperature power spectrum .
our theory predictions ( section [ noise_model ] ) depend on the tt power spectrum , on the shape of the wmap beam , and on the noise properties .
we used the beam and window transfer functions from the five - year wmap data , which have been significantly improved with the 5yr data release ; models of the instrument gain and beam response are now accurate to better than @xmath84 , and errors in the five - year beam transfer functions are reduced by a factor of @xmath85 as compared to the three - year analysis ( hill et al .
the wmap5 tt power spectrum we use comes from a weighted combination of 153 individual cross - power spectra , and has been improved by using a gibbs - based maximum likelihood estimate for @xmath86 ( dunkley et al .
2008 ) and a pseudo @xmath87 estimate for higher @xmath88 ( nolta et al .
the pixel - pixel covariance matrix is essentially diagonal ( hinshaw et al .
2003 , 2008 ) , so the rms noise in pixel @xmath89 is @xmath90 , where the noise per observation , @xmath91 , is provided for each coadded channel .
this value for @xmath91 is obtained by averaging the values of the five possible year - by - year difference combinations ( jarosik et al .
2007 ; hinshaw et al . 2008 ) .
the data reduction process should be free of contamination induced by foregrounds , and should be insensitive to monopole and dipole moments . at @xmath82 ,
the generic data pipeline involves the following main steps :    1 .
dipole and monopole removal outside kq75 ; 2 .
selection of pixels above a temperature threshold ; 3 .
healpix coordinate and pixel - noise assignment .
for the five - year coadded wmap data ( w1 channel ) , after application of the kq75 mask , in mollweide projection .
the scale is logarithmic , in mk units
i.e. @xmath92 is shown.,scaledwidth=45.0% ]     for the wmap5 w1 coadded channel , after application of the kq75 mask.,scaledwidth=45.0% ]    the distribution of the rms noise values in a pixel at @xmath82 is shown in mollweide projection in figure [ psigma_map ] , and as histogram in figure [ psigma_hist ] , for the wmap5 w1 channel .
the distribution is reasonably broad , indicating that the noise is inhomogeneous .
this is a direct consequence of the fact that not all pixels were observed the same number of times .
the evident symmetrical pattern present in figure [ psigma_map ] is due to the scanning strategy of the wmap satellite .     at @xmath82 resolution for four different choices of @xmath23 as indicated in the panels , from the wmap5 w1 coadded channel .
[ psigma12],scaledwidth=49.0% ]    in particular , equations  ( [ xiintuit ] ) and ( [ wiintuit ] ) show that the clustering of pixels separated by @xmath23 depends on the joint distribution of @xmath93 given @xmath23 .
figure  [ psigma12 ] shows an example of how the joint distribution @xmath40 varies as a function of separation @xmath23 for the resolution @xmath82 .
the four panels were constructed by randomly selecting @xmath94 pixels , and for each selected value of @xmath95 , looking at the corresponding @xmath56 distributions at four different angular distances .
note that the scatter around the one - to - one line increases with increasing @xmath23 .
this is not surprising ; nearby pixels have similar @xmath81 whereas more widely separated ones do not ( figure [ psigma_map ] ) .
figure  [ sigma12fits ] shows some examples of the corresponding conditional distributions @xmath96 . when inserted into equations  ( [ xiintuit ] ) and  ( [ wiintuit ] ) , such fits
allow a prediction of how the clustering of pixels above a certain threshold temperature should depend on threshold if the signal is gaussian and the noise is inhomogeneous .
the histogram in figure  [ pdobs ] shows the distribution of temperature in the data , for the w1 coadded channel . for homogeneous noise , the predicted distribution
would be given by convolving the expected signal ( in this case gaussian with variance determined by smoothing the best - fit power spectrum on the scale of a pixel ) with that of the noise ( gaussian with average rms @xmath38 ) .
for inhomogeneous noise , the predicted distribution ( i.e. equation  [ pd ] ) is given by convolving the expected gaussian signal with the noise of rms @xmath97 , and then weighting by the distribution of @xmath97 shown in figure  [ psigma_hist ] .
the dotted line in figure [ pdobs ] shows a gaussian with the same rms as the data .
this fit has shorter tails than the data .
while this may be indicating that the signal is non - gaussian ( in fact , the sample skewness of the temperature distribution is @xmath98 mk@xmath99 , and the sample excess kurtosis 0.12698 mk@xmath100 ) , the solid curve in figure [ pdobs ] shows the predicted distribution when inhomogeneous noise effects are included : it provides substantially better agreement with the measurements .
nevertheless , the one - point distribution itself can not rule out a priori the presence of a non - gaussian signal , for reasons made explicit in fang & pando ( 1997 ) ; hence it is not a suitable statistics to investigate departures from gaussianity .
this is also relevant for the detection of non - gaussianity claimed by jeong & smoot ( 2007 ) , where the one - point distribution was used .
we also note that their equation ( 9 ) is missing one integration over the distribution of the noise ( see again our equation [ pd ] for comparison ) .
for the wmap5 w1 channel ( histogram ) .
solid line shows the expected distribution ( equation  [ pd ] ) given the distribution of the noise .
dotted line is a gaussian with the same rms as the data .
[ pdobs],scaledwidth=45.0% ]    , for the wmap5 w1 channel .
points are measurements from the data .
dotted line is the theoretical prediction for homogeneous noise , and solid line includes inhomogeneity .
different temperature thresholds are considered , as explained in the main text.,scaledwidth=49.0% ]                  the number density of pixels above ( below ) a given temperature threshold is simply obtained by multiplying the fraction of pixels above ( below ) the threshold @xmath101 ( eq . [ fdt ] ) by the total number density after masking ( i.e. the total number of pixels after masking over the `` available '' or `` unmasked '' area ) . if the noise were homogeneous , then this prediction is rather straightforward : equation ( [ fdt ] ) simply reduces to @xmath102 , where @xmath103 . in practice , due to the inhomogeneity of the noise , one needs to integrate ( [ fdt ] ) numerically , using the distributions @xmath104 measured from the data ( figure [ psigma_hist ] ) .
the solid lines in figure [ number_density_512 ] are the results of this integration , when accounting for inhomogeneous noise .
dotted lines are the theoretical predictions which assume homogeneous noise .
points in figure [ number_density_512 ] show measurements from the wmap5 w1 channel , for pixels above or below a threshold , where @xmath105 , respectively .
errorbars are from a poisson analysis .
while the solid lines slightly improve the fits , significant departures still remain , especially at higher thresholds .
we have measured the correlation function of pixels above and below a threshold temperature from the wmap five - year coadded maps , for a range of thresholds . in each case , we measured the signal in two ways : one in which all pixels are treated equally , and another in which the pixels are weighted by their temperature .
we adopt here the standard estimator @xmath106 for the correlation function ( jensen & szalay 1986 ) , where @xmath107 and @xmath108 are the number of data and random pairs , respectively .
in particular , the number of random pairs is computed by distributing random points on a unit sphere , and then by applying the same procedures ( i.e. kq75 masking and healpix coordinate assignment ) as for the data pipeline . for the weighted correlation estimates , the number of data pairs , @xmath107 ,
is simply replaced by its temperature weighted counterpart , @xmath109 .
we also tested the landy & szalay ( 1993 ) and the hamilton ( 1993 ) estimators , and found no significant differences in the calculations .
figures  [ xihi ] and  [ wihi ] show an example of the results for pixels with @xmath110 , @xmath111 , @xmath112 , @xmath113 , @xmath114 and @xmath115 , respectively . in all panels ,
symbols show the measurements of hot and cold pixels at the fixed threshold ; errors are from a poisson analysis .
dotted curves in all the left panels show the results based on homogeneous noise , solid curves in all the right panels account for the fact that the noise is inhomogeneous ( equations  [ xitheta ] and  [ wtheta ] ) .
shaded areas are derived as explained in appendix a ( see also hernndez - monteagudo et al .
2004 ) , and represent the @xmath116 optimal variance errors .
accounting for inhomogeneity significantly improves the fit to the data .
however , discrepancies between the observed correlation functions and the theoretical predictions still remain , especially for pixels at higher thresholds , or at small angular scales . in particular , we note the interesting fact that hot and cold pixels cluster differently within the same temperature thresholds .
this feature is also present in all the other wmap5 channels ( see appendix b ) , but we find that our theory is always in good agreement with the clustering of cold pixels in the q and v frequency bands , and only in slight disagreement with the hot patch clustering , especially for pixels at higher thresholds
. moreover , the fact that the wmap5 data appear to be systematically stronger ( weaker ) at small ( large ) angular scales than the theoretical predictions , even at lower temperature thresholds ( figures [ xihi ] and [ wihi ] ) , is particularly true in the w channel ( see figure [ cf_512_nu_0.25_0.75_app ] for comparison ) .
we suggest some possible interpretations in the discussion section and in appendix b , and present a more detailed investigation of this effect using realistic non - gaussian mock simulations in a forthcoming paper .
while the detected trend may be a unique signature of primordial non - gaussianity ( i.e. a primordial non - gaussianity would in fact enhance the clustering of the cold pixels and reduce that of the hot ones ) , we study the effect of smoothing the map next , and provide some other plausible explanations for these anomalies in the final section .
we have investigated the effect of smoothing the wmap five - year maps with a gaussian beam . in particular , we have tried different smoothing scales , corresponding to a fwhm of @xmath117 , @xmath118 , @xmath119 and @xmath120 , respectively . we have repeated the same analysis as for the unsmoothed maps , and characterized the number density and the clustering statistics of pixels above threshold .
figure [ number_density_512_smooth ] summarizes the results for the number density ( w1 channel ) , after smoothing with different gaussian beams .
the number of pixels above or below the considered temperature threshold is reduced ( a function of the smoothing scale ) , and measurements from the data and theoretical predictions appear now in agreement within about @xmath116 at the threshold levels considered .        finally , we have characterized the clustering statistics and showed in figure [ clustering_smooth_512 ] the case of inhomogeneous noise , for an arbitrary choice of the threshold ( @xmath121 ) .
the gaussian smoothing is included in our theory via equations ( [ ctheta_eq ] ) and ( [ ctheta_noise ] ) , in addition to the change of the noise variance distribution . after smoothing the map with a gaussian beam
, the pixel noise may be no longer independent among different pixels ( i.e. @xmath122 ) .
however , accounting for this contribution ( equation [ n1n2_cov ] ) resulted in no significant difference , even at small angular scales .
in fact , the average variance of the noise in the w1 channel is 0.0213 mk@xmath123 , which is about 0.32@xmath124 of the typical variance of the corresponding cosmological signal .
since the zero - level amplitude of the noise is already very low with respect to that of the signal , the mean amplitude of the correlated noise will be also very low .
in addition to that , note that the wmap mission has been designed to have uncorrelated pixel noise , and if such correlations arise when smoothing the maps , their amplitude is expected to drop quickly with the smoothing scale .    when the smoothing scale is @xmath120 , we find that the tension between data and theory is alleviated .
the observed distribution of temperatures in wmap5 pixels is slightly non - gaussian ( figure  [ pdobs ] ) .
this departure from gaussianity is not unexpected if the intrinsic signal is gaussian but the noise distribution is inhomogeneous white noise ( figures  [ psigma_map ] and [ psigma_hist ] ) . in fact , when accounting for inhomogeneous noise ( section [ noise_model ] ) , we find that the one - point statistics is substantially in better agreement with the measurements . however , the predicted dependence of clustering on pixel height is not in good agreement with the data , even after accounting for the inhomogeneity of the noise ( figures [ xihi ] , [ wihi ] ) .
although we found that an appropriate smoothing scale would be able to alleviate the discrepancy between data and measurements ( figures [ number_density_512_smooth ] and [ clustering_smooth_512 ] ) , other possible reasons for these discrepancies are : + _ masking procedure_. in our analysis we adopted the kq75 mask , which allows for selective exclusions of bright portions of the sky ( @xmath125 pixel cut ) .
although this is rather a drastic cut and the mask was significantly improved with the wmap five - year data release ( hill et al .
2008 ) , it may not completely account for all the galactic foreground effects . however , cutting out all the galactic plane ( @xmath126 strip ) and repeating our analysis resulted in no significant change .
edge effects due to pixels which lie very close to the mask could also affect our analysis .
+ _ cold spot contamination_. inoue & silk ( 2007 ) suggest that the presence of low density regions in the southern galactic cap could account for our anomalies , but restricting our analysis to @xmath127 , the northern galactic cap , resulted in no significant change . + _
contamination by point sources_. lopez - caniego et al .
( 2007 ) detected 98 new sources ( i.e. @xmath128 ) not present in the wmap three - year catalog . at higher frequencies
wmap estimates neglect the deviations of the point spread function from a gaussian shape , and carry out a blind search for sources . with the wmap five - year data release , the mask for point sources has been significantly improved ( wright et al .
2008 ) , and other studies ( gonzalez - nuevo et al .
2008 ; chen & wright 2008 ) updated the point source catalog .
however , massardi et al . (
2008 ) recently provided a new version of the catalog based on wmap5 data and found new point sources ( 484 sources detected ) , carrying a complementary blind and non - blind approach .
this may be important to our analysis , since even a very low level contamination in the maps can produce spurious non - gaussianities .
in fact , we find some discrepancies at small angular scales ( around 20 ) especially in the w band , and their origin may be associated with extragalactic dust emission ( one type of point - source contamination ) , which peaks at high frequencies . in a forthcoming study
, we will be addressing the effect of contamination induced by point sources in more depth , using an updated version of the source catalog and mock simulations .
+ _ foreground subtraction contamination_. uncertainties in the external foreground template model used for the foreground subtractions ( gold et al .
2008 ) may introduce anomalies at the percentage level .
the template itself has noise , which may be correlated at small separations .
this is a delicate issue , since galactic foregrounds are non - gaussian and anisotropic , and even low level contamination in the maps can produce detectable non - gaussianities ( park et al . 2002 ; naselsky et al .
2005 ; kim , naselsky & christensen 2008 ) . on the other side ,
it is also worth noticing that recently vio & andreani ( 2008 ) showed that the benefits of using more sophisticated methods for foreground cleaning , such as the harmonic internal linear combination , are overestimated .
we are also addressing the foreground subtraction systematics in a forthcoming study .
+ _ wmap beam , window function , absolute calibration and pixel - noise uncertainties_. window functions were computed from the symmetrized beam profiles following the hermite method in page et al .
a typical wmap window function has an uncertainty of @xmath129 ( hill et al .
2008 ) , and these uncertainties add in quadrature in the cosmological analysis .
absolute calibration uncertainties in the five - year wmap data are estimated to be @xmath130 ( hinshaw et al .
recent studies ( groeneboom et al . 2009 ; kathrine wehus et al .
2009 ) have also pointed out that the noise levels of these maps are underestimated , and that there are some problems with the standard wmap transfer functions as well .
it may be that these facts play an important rule in our study ( see also colombo et al .
+ _ secondary anisotropies and phase transitions in the early universe_. spurious non - gaussianities could arise from secondary anisotropies , such as gravitational lensing , sunyaev - zeldovich effect or sachs - wolfe effects ( babich & pierpaoli 2008 ; carbone et al .
phase transitions in the early universe may also introduce a new source of non - gaussianity ( silvestri & trodden 2008 ) .
all these effects may be difficult to disentangle from a pure primordial non - gaussian signal , even after a clear detection of primordial non - gaussianity . _ real non - gaussian signatures at small scales_. a better understanding of all the previous points
is necessary before we can claim that the signal we see is due to primordial non - gaussianity .
however , we found an interesting difference in the clustering of hot and cold pixels within the same temperature threshold level ; this fact may be a unique signature of primordial non - gaussianity .
we present a detailed investigation of this feature in a forthcoming study .
we finally note that , as this work was being refereed , hou et al .
( 2009 ) presented a frequentist analysis of the correlation functions of the local extrema , and also found inconsistency with gaussian simulations plus differences in the clustering of hot and cold peaks  although comparison with their work is not direct since they considered bigger angular scales .
while seeking for primordial non - gaussianity is at the moment a new frontier in cosmology , ongoing efforts are currently devoted to the characterization of non - gaussian confusion effects , to reliable theoretical predictions of non - gaussianity from models ( see for example boyle & steinhardt 2008 ; fergusson & shellard 2008 ; munshi & heavens 2009 ) , till the extraction of information from data ( i.e. raeth et al . 2008 ; gong et al .
2009 ) or the search for observational signatures of primordial non - gaussianity imprinted in the large - scale structure of the universe .
even a small degree of primordial non - gaussianity can be a crucial probe of the inflationary dynamics or alternative universe models , hence studies of non - gaussianity may eventually become a powerful and solid probe of ultra - high energy physics and inflation .
we note that our model for the effects of inhomogeneous noise may be useful in other studies ( see for instance yu & lu 2008 ) . extending our formalism for inhomogeneous noise to peak rather than pixel statistics ( for example heavens & sheth 1999 ; heavens & gupta 2001 ) is more complicated ; this will complement numerical monte - carlo analyses of this problem ( larson & wandelt 2004 ; tojeiro et al . 2006 ; ayaita et al .
2009 ; hou et al .
2009 ) , and is the subject of work in progress .
we thank an anonymous referee for helpful comments and suggestions .
gr thanks fernando atrio - barandela , pravabati chingangbam , jacek guzik , mike jarvis and licia verde for many useful discussions .
gr is grateful to the organizers of the 24th texas symposium on relativistic astrophysics for their kind hospitality in vancouver , during which time he had interesting conversations with eiichiro komatsu and the final stage of this work was completed .
gr would also like to thank kitpc and in particular robert brandenberger for hospitality in beijing during the 2009 workshop `` connecting fundamental physics with observations '' .
cbp acknowledges the support of the korea science and engineering foundation ( kosef ) through the astrophysical research center for the structure and evolution of the cosmos ( arcsec ) .
we acknowledge the use of the _
_ l__egacy _ _ a__rchive for _ _ m__icrowave _ _ b__ackground _ _ d__ata _ _ a__nalysis ( _ lambda _ ) , support for which is provided by the national aeronautics and space administration ( nasa ) office of space science .
some of the results in this paper have been derived using the _ healpix _ package ( grski et al .
this work was partly supported by nasa grant nng05gk81 g , and partly by the project of knowledge innovation program ( pkip ) of chinese academy of sciences , grant no .
kjcx2.yw.w10 .    99    alishahiha , m. , silverstein , e. , & tong , d.  2004 , phys .
d , 70 , 123505 arkani - hamed , n. , creminelli , p. , mukohyama , s. , & zaldarriaga , m.  2004 , journal of cosmology and astro - particle physics , 4 , 1 ayaita , y. , weber , m. , & wetterich , c.  2009 , arxiv:0905.3324 babich , d. , & pierpaoli , e.  2008 , phys .  rev .
d , 77 , 123011 bartolo , n. , komatsu , e. , matarrese , s. , & riotto , a.  2004 , phys .  rep .
, 402 , 103 bond , j.  r. , & efstathiou , g.  1987 , mnras , 226 , 655 boyle , l. , & steinhardt , p.  j.  2008 , arxiv:0810.2787 brandenberger , r.  h.  2008 , arxiv:0808.0746 buchbinder , e.  i. , khoury , j. , & ovrut , b.  a.  2008 , physical review letters , 100 , 171302 cabella , p. , liguori , m. , hansen , f.  k. , marinucci , d. , matarrese , s. , moscardini , l. , & vittorio , n.  2005 , mnras , 358 , 684 carbone , c. , verde , l. , & matarrese , s.  2008 , apj , 684 , l1 chen , g. , & szapudi , i.  2006 , apj , 647 , l87 chen , x.  2005 , phys .  rev .
d , 72 , 123518 chen , x. , & wright , e.  l.  2008 , arxiv:0809.4025 chen , x. , hu , b. , huang , m .- x .
, shiu , g. , & wang , y.  2009 , arxiv:0905.3494 chiang , l .- y . , naselsky , p.  d. , & coles , p.  2007 , apj , 664 , 8 colombo , l.  p.  l. , pierpaoli , e. , & pritchard , j.  r.  2008 , arxiv:0811.2622 creminelli , p. , senatore , l. , zaldarriaga , m. , & tegmark , m.  2007 , journal of cosmology and astro - particle physics , 3 , 5 creminelli , p. , & senatore , l.  2007 , journal of cosmology and astro - particle physics , 11 , 10 crociani , d. , moscardini , l. , viel , m. , & matarrese , s.  2008 , arxiv:0809.3909 cruz , m. , tucci , m.,martnez - gonzlez , e. , & vielva , p.  2006 , mnras , 369 , 57 curto , a. , martinez - gonzalez , e. , mukherjee , p. , barreiro , r.  b. , hansen , f.  k. , liguori , m. , & matarrese , s.  2008 , arxiv:0807.0231 dalal , n. , dor , o. , huterer , d. , & shirokov , a.  2008 , phys .  rev .
d , 77 , 123514 desjacques , v. , seljak , u. , & iliev , i.  t.  2008 , arxiv:0811.2748 dickinson , c. , et al .
2009 , arxiv:0903.4311 diego , j.  m , cruz , m. , gonzalez - nuevo , j. , maris , m. , ascasibar , y. , & burigana , c.  2009 , arxiv:0901.4344 dunkley , j. , et al .  2008 , arxiv:0803.0586 dvali , g. , gruzinov , a. , & zaldarriaga , m.  2004 , phys .
d , 69 , 083505 fang , l .- z .
, & pando , j.  1997 , arxiv : astro - ph/9701228 fergusson , j.  r. , & shellard , e.  p.  s.  2008 , arxiv:0812.3413 grski , k.  m. et al . , 1999 , in proc .
mpa / eso conf .
`` evolution of large - scale structure : from recombination to garching '' gold , b. , et al .
2008 , arxiv:0803.0715 gong , y. , wang , x. , zheng , z. , & chen , x.  2009 , arxiv:0904.4257 gonzlez - nuevo , j. , massardi , m. , argeso , f. , herranz , d. , toffolatti , l. , sanz , j.  l. , lpez - caniego , m. , & de zotti , g.  2008 , mnras , 384 , 711 gott , j.  r. , colley , w.  n. , park , c .- g . , park , c. , & mugnolo , c.  2007 , mnras , 377 , 1668 gott , j.  r.  i. , et al .
2008 , apj , 675 , 16 gott , j.  r.  i. , choi , y .- y . , park , c. , kim , j. , & for the sdss collaboration 2008 , arxiv:0812.1406 groeneboom , n.  e. , eriksen , h.  k. , gorski , k. , huey , g. , jewell , j. , & wandelt , b.  2009 , arxiv:0904.2554 grossi , m. , branchini , e. , dolag , k. , matarrese , s. , & moscardini , l.  2008 , mnras , 390 , 438 hamilton , a.  j.  s.  1993 , evolution of galaxies and their environment , 15 hansen , f.  k. , banday , a.  j. , gorski , k.  m. , eriksen , h.  k. , & lilje , p.  b.  2008 , arxiv:0812.3795 heavens , a.  f. , & gupta , s.  2001 , mnras , 324 , 960 heavens , a.  f. , & sheth , r.  k.  1999 , mnras , 310 , 1062 hernndez - monteagudo , c. , kashlinsky , a. , & atrio - barandela , f .
2004 , a@xmath131a , 413 , 833 hikage , c. , coles , p. , grossi , m. , moscardini , l. , dolag , k. , branchini , e. , & matarrese , s.  2008 , mnras , 385 , 1613 hikage , c. , matsubara , t. , coles , p. , liguori , m. , hansen , f.  k. , & matarrese , s.  2008 , mnras , 389 , 1439 hill , r.  s. , et al .
2008 , arxiv:0803.0570 hinshaw , g. , et al .
2003 , apjs , 148 , 135 hinshaw , g. , et al .
2007 , apjs , 170 , 288 hinshaw , g. , et al .  2008 ,
arxiv:0803.0732 hou , z. , banday , a.  j. , & gorski , k.  m.  2009 , arxiv:0903.4446 inoue , k.  t. , & silk , j.  2007 , apj , 664 , 650 jarosik , n. , et al .
2007 , apjs , 170 , 263 jensen , l.  g. , & szalay , a.  s.  1986 , apj , 305 , l5 jeong , d. , & komatsu , e.  2009 , arxiv:0904.0497 jeong , e. , & smoot , g.  f.  2007 , arxiv:0710.2371 kamionkowski , m. , verde , l. , & jimenez , r.  2008 , arxiv:0809.0506 kang , x. , norberg , p. , & silk , j.  2007 , mnras , 376 , 343 kashlinsky , a. , hernndez - monteagudo , c. , & atrio - barandela , f.  2001 , apj , 557 , l1 kathrine wehus , i. , ackerman , l. , eriksen , h.  k. , & groeneboom , n.  e.  2009 , arxiv:0904.3998 kim , j. , naselsky , p. , & christensen , p.  r.  2008 , arxiv:0810.4008 knox , l.  1995 , phys .
d , 52 , 4307 komatsu , e. , et al .
2008 , arxiv:0803.0547 landy , s.  d. , & szalay , a.  s.  1993 , apj , 412 , 64 larson , d.  l. , & wandelt , b.  d.  2004 , apj , 613 , l85 lehners , j .- l . , & steinhardt , p.  j.  2008 , phys .
d , 77 , 063533 li , t .-
, liu , h. , song , l .- m . , xiong , s .- l .
, & nie , j .- y .
2009 , arxiv:0905.0075 ling , y. , & wu , j .- p .
2008 , arxiv:0809.3398 lpez - caniego , m. , gonzlez - nuevo , j. , herranz , d. , massardi , m. , sanz , j.  l. , de zotti , g. , toffolatti , l. , & argeso , f.  2007 , apjs , 170 , 108 lo verde , m. , miller , a. , shandera , s. , & verde , l.  2008 , journal of cosmology and astro - particle physics , 4 , 14 lyth , d.  h. , ungarelli , c. , & wands , d.  2003 , phys .
d , 67 , 023503 lyth , d.  h. , & riotto , a.  2006 , physical review letters , 97 , 121301 massardi , m. , lpez - caniego , m. , gonzlez - nuevo , j. , herranz , d. , de zotti , g. , & sanz , j.  l.  2008 , arxiv:0810.2338 matarrese , s. , & verde , l.  2008 , apj , 677 , l77 mcallister , l. , & silverstein , e.  2008 , general relativity and gravitation , 40 , 565 mcdonald , p. , & seljak , u.  2008 , arxiv:0810.0323 munshi , d. , & heavens , a.  2009 , arxiv:0904.4478 naselsky , p. , chiang , l .- y . , olesen , p. , & novikov , i.  2005 , phys .
d , 72 , 063512 naselsky , p.  d. , christensen , p.  r. , coles , p. , verkhodanov , o. , novikov , d. , & kim , j.  2007 , arxiv:0712.1118 nolta , m.  r. , et al .
2008 , arxiv:0803.0593 page , l. , et al .
2003 , apjs , 148 , 39 park , c. , colley , w.  n. , gott , j.  r.  i. , ratra , b. , spergel , d.  n. , & sugiyama , n.  1998 , apj , 506 , 473 park , c. , gott , j.  r.  i. , & choi , y.  j.  2001 , apj , 553 , 33 park , c .- g . , park , c. , & ratra , b.  2002 , apj , 568 , 9 park , c. , et al .
2005 , apj , 633 , 11 pietrobon , d. , cabella , p. , balbi , a. , de gasperis , g. , & vittorio , n.  2009 , mnras , 682 pietrobon , d. , cabella , p. , balbi , a. , crittenden , r. , de gasperis , g. , & vittorio , n.  2009 , arxiv:0905.3702 pillepich , a. , porciani , c. , & matarrese , s.  2007 , apj , 662 , 1 pillepich , a. , porciani , c. , & hahn , o.  2008 , arxiv:0811.4176 rth , c. , schuecker , p. , & banday , a.  j.  2007 , mnras , 380 , 466 rth , c. , morfill , g.  e. , rossmanith , g. , banday , a.  j. , & grski , k.  m.  2009 , physical review letters , 102 , 131301 raeth , c. , morfill , g. , rossmanith , g. , banday , a.  j. , & gorski , k.  m.  2008 , arxiv:0810.3805 rossmanith , g. , raeth , c. , banday , a.  j. , & morfill , g.  2009 , arxiv:0905.2854 seery , d. , & lidsey , j.  e.  2005 , journal of cosmology and astro - particle physics , 9 , 11 seery , d. , & hidalgo , j.  c.  2006 , journal of cosmology and astro - particle physics , 7 , 8 seljak , u.  2008 , arxiv:0807.1770 senatore , l. , tassev , s. , & zaldarriaga , m.  2008 , arxiv:0812.3658 senatore , l. , smith , k.  m. , & zaldarriaga , m.  2009 , arxiv:0905.3746 slosar , a. , hirata , c. , seljak , u. , ho , s. , & padmanabhan , n.  2008 , journal of cosmology and astro - particle physics , 8 , 31 silvestri , a. , & trodden , m.  2008 , arxiv:0811.2176 song , h. , & lee , j.  2008 , arxiv:0811.1339 spergel , d.  n. , et al .
2007 , apjs , 170 , 377 tojeiro , r. , castro , p.  g. , heavens , a.  f. , & gupta , s.  2006 , mnras , 365 , 265 viel , m. , branchini , e. , dolag , k. , grossi , m. , matarrese , s. , & moscardini , l.  2008 , arxiv:0811.2223 vielva , p. , wiaux , y. , martnez - gonzlez , e. , & vandergheynst , p.  2007 ,
mnras , 381 , 932 vielva , p. , & sanz , j.  l.  2008 , arxiv:0812.1756 vio , r. , & andreani , p.  2008
, arxiv:0811.4277 yadav , a.  p.  s. , & wandelt , b.  d.  2008 , physical review letters , 100 , 181301 yu , b. , & lu , t.  2008 , phys .  rev .
d , 78 , 063008 wright , e.  l. , et al .
2008 , arxiv:0803.0577
we estimate the uncertainties in the correlation functions above threshold from the optimal variance limit , containing cosmic variance , instrumental noise , and finite binsize effects .    in more detail , the ultimate accuracy with which the cmb power spectrum can be determined at each @xmath88 is given by ( knox 1995 ) : @xmath132 \equiv \delta      c_{\rm l}\ , \label{opt_var}\ ] ] where @xmath133 is the number of pixels , @xmath38 the average pixel noise , @xmath134 the wmap window function , and @xmath135 the fraction of the sky covered by the experiment .
the uncertainty in the angular correlation function for narrow bins in @xmath23 is then ( hernndez - monteagudo et al .
2004 ) : @xmath136 ^ 2\big\}^{1/2 } \label{delta_c_theta}\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath137 and @xmath76 is the additional smoothing due to finite pixel size , mask influence and an optional gaussian beam .    however , in practice @xmath138 is not measured at a point , but smeared out over a region of size @xmath139 . in the limit of large @xmath88 and small @xmath23 ,
@xmath140 $ ] ( bond & efstathiou 1987 ) .
if the bin size is not infinitesimal , one must replace : @xmath141 & \rightarrow &   { 2 \over ( t_{\rm max}^2 -t_{\rm min}^2 ) } \int_{t_{\rm min}}^{t_{\rm      max } } j_0 [ ( l+1/2)t]~t~{\rm d}t \nonumber \\ & = &    { 2[t_{\rm max } j_{1}(k t_{\rm max } ) - t_{\rm min } j_1    ( k t_{\rm min } ) ] \over k ( t_{\rm max}^2 -t_{\rm      min}^2 ) }    \label{j0}\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath142 and @xmath143 .
this expression should then substitute @xmath144 $ ] in ( [ delta_c_theta ] ) , to give @xmath145 .
the uncertainties in the correlation function above threshold are finally derived from : @xmath146
we have inspected all the wmap five - year channels ( w band at 94 ghz ; v band at 61 ghz ; q band at 41 ghz ) , and performed the same analysis described in the main text for each single differencing assembly ( da ) . for this study , it is ideal to consider individual da s rather than their combinations , as wmap beams and noise properties are well - defined within each single da .
figure [ psigma_map_app ] shows the distributions of the rms noise values for all the da s considered ; note the characteristic bi - modality of these histograms , present in all the channels .
figure [ pdobs_app ] shows the distributions of temperatures in the data at different frequencies .
dotted lines in the figure are gaussians with the same rms as data , solid curves show the predicted distributions when inhomogeneous noise effects are included .
departures from the gaussian fits are more significant in the w frequency range .
figure [ number_density_512_app ] shows the number density of pixels above ( below ) different temperature thresholds .
dotted lines are theoretical predictions with homogeneous noise , solid lines include inhomogeneity .
points are measurements from all the wmap5 da s .
finally , figure [ cf_512_nu_0.25_0.75_app ] highlights some examples of the unweighted correlation functions from the wmap5 pixel - pixel temperature fields , at @xmath82 .
two pixel - thresholds are considered ( @xmath110 and @xmath147 ) , as indicated in the panels .
solid curves show the predictions associated with gaussian signal plus inhomogeneous noise .
points are measurements of the clustering of hot and cold pixels at corresponding temperature thresholds , and shaded areas are the @xmath148 optimal variance errors . essentially , we find that the difference in clustering between hot and cold pixels is still present in all the other da s . however , our theory is always in good agreement with the clustering of cold pixels , and in slight disagreement with that of the hot ones , both in the q and in the v channels
. therefore the 94 ghz frequency ( w band ) seems to be the most discrepant one , with respect to our theoretical predictions .
in particular , we checked our small - scale theory expectations against wmap mock measurements from simulations with identical beam and noise properties , and found full consistency .
hence , we suggest that those small - scale discrepancies may be due to extragalactic dust emission ( one type of point - source contamination ) , which has a peak at high frequencies and is not accounted in our analysis .