A Cepheid systematics-reduced test of <i>H</i>0 to ≲2.5% accuracy using SH0ES photometry

ABSTRACT The recent SH0ES determination of the Hubble constant, $H_0=73.04\pm 1.04$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$, deviates significantly by ${\approx }5\sigma$ from the Planck value, stimulating discussions on cosmological model extensions. To minimize statistical uncertainty and mitigate sensitivity to systematic errors in any single anchor distance determination, SH0ES combines Cepheids from various observations, including those from Type Ia supernova host galaxies, NGC 4258, and closer galaxies (MW, LMC, SMC, and M31), although this mixed sample may introduce unknown or subtle systematic errors due to comparing distant and closer Cepheids. To address this, we propose a subset excluding Cepheids from the closer galaxies, retaining only the NGC 4258 water megamasers as a single anchor, circumventing potential systematic errors associated with observational methods and reduction techniques. Focusing solely on these Cepheids yields $H_0=72.68\pm 1.67$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$, where the competitive statistical uncertainty of approximately $2.5{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$ is sufficient to identify a ${\approx }3\sigma$ discrepancy with the Planck $H_0$ value, while significantly mitigating Cepheid-related systematics associated with photometry determination, metallicity treatment, and dust–colour corrections. A period-bin analysis demonstrates that a global period–luminosity relation is unnecessary, challenging previous assumptions. We also validate the host Cepheid extinction estimates, showing their low reddening supports the use of optical photometry with systematic uncertainty smaller than the statistical uncertainty, potentially achieving higher precision than near-infrared photometry, given the lower optical background. We investigate potential explanations for the significant deviation from the Planck value observed in our analysis that do not involve Cepheids.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
Published
2025-03-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/staf431
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Body Composition Measurement Techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.33
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A Cepheid systematics-reduced test of H0 to ≲2.5% accuracy using SH0ES photometry

Amir Sharon, Doron Kushnir
2 citations
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
Body Composition Measurement Techniques
2.33
article

A Cepheid systematics-reduced test of H0 to ≲2.5% accuracy using SH0ES photometry

Amir Sharon, Doron Kushnir
article en
2 citations

Abstract

ABSTRACT The recent SH0ES determination of the Hubble constant, $H_0=73.04\pm 1.04$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$, deviates significantly by ${\approx }5\sigma$ from the Planck value, stimulating discussions on cosmological model extensions. To minimize statistical uncertainty and mitigate sensitivity to systematic errors in any single anchor distance determination, SH0ES combines Cepheids from various observations, including those from Type Ia supernova host galaxies, NGC 4258, and closer galaxies (MW, LMC, SMC, and M31), although this mixed sample may introduce unknown or subtle systematic errors due to comparing distant and closer Cepheids. To address this, we propose a subset excluding Cepheids from the closer galaxies, retaining only the NGC 4258 water megamasers as a single anchor, circumventing potential systematic errors associated with observational methods and reduction techniques. Focusing solely on these Cepheids yields $H_0=72.68\pm 1.67$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$, where the competitive statistical uncertainty of approximately $2.5{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$ is sufficient to identify a ${\approx }3\sigma$ discrepancy with the Planck $H_0$ value, while significantly mitigating Cepheid-related systematics associated with photometry determination, metallicity treatment, and dust–colour corrections. A period-bin analysis demonstrates that a global period–luminosity relation is unnecessary, challenging previous assumptions. We also validate the host Cepheid extinction estimates, showing their low reddening supports the use of optical photometry with systematic uncertainty smaller than the statistical uncertainty, potentially achieving higher precision than near-infrared photometry, given the lower optical background. We investigate potential explanations for the significant deviation from the Planck value observed in our analysis that do not involve Cepheids.

Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietyVol. 538(4)
Weizmann Institute of Science (IL)
Openalex Percentile: Top 14%
Body Composition Measurement Techniques
2.33
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

A Cepheid systematics-reduced test of <i>H</i>0 to ≲2.5% accuracy using SH0ES photometry — Amir Sharon, Doron Kushnir · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS