Description
As cosmological measurements become increasingly precise, tensions and discrepancies are emerging between different observables. One of the most prominent is the disagreement between measurements of the Hubble constant ($H_0$) from early Universe data, such as the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB), and late Universe measurements, particularly from the Local Distance Ladder (LDL). A wide range of explanations have been proposed for this tension, including systematic errors in measurements and new physics beyond the standard cosmological model. To distinguish between these possibilities in a statistically robust way, it is crucial to account for potential biases within specific datasets.
We present a systematic study of 16 different types of $H_0$ measurement, using a Bayesian jackknife code called $\texttt{CHIBORG}$ to define and compare between a range of plausible scenarios. Our results show that the hypothesis that LDL measurements are biased is the most strongly favored. Jackknife resampling confirms the robustness of this result, suggesting (up to the validity of our assumptions) that the observed $H_0$ discrepancy is more likely due to measurement biases rather than new physics.
