Insensitivity of The Distance Ladder Hubble Constant Determination to Cepheid Calibration Modeling Choices
Brent Follin, Lloyd Knox

TL;DR
This study shows that the determination of the Hubble constant using Cepheid variables is robust against various modeling choices, and systematic biases in Cepheid calibration are unlikely to explain the tension with CMB-based measurements.
Contribution
The paper demonstrates that different modeling assumptions in Cepheid calibration do not significantly affect the Hubble constant estimate, supporting its robustness.
Findings
H_0 = 73.3 ± 1.7 km/s/Mpc consistent with previous results
Cepheid calibration systematics cannot explain the Hubble tension
Model-independent approaches yield similar H_0 values
Abstract
Recent determination of the Hubble constant via Cepheid-calibrated supernovae by \citet{riess_2.4_2016} (R16) find tension with inferences based on cosmic microwave background temperature and polarization measurements from . This tension could be an indication of inadequacies in the concordance CDM model. Here we investigate the possibility that the discrepancy could instead be due to systematic bias or uncertainty in the Cepheid calibration step of the distance ladder measurement by R16. We consider variations in total-to-selective extinction of Cepheid flux as a function of line-of-sight, hidden structure in the period-luminosity relationship, and potentially different intrinsic color distributions of Cepheids as a function of host galaxy. Considering all potential sources of error, our final determination of (not…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
