arxiv: 2604.13580 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-15 · 🌀 gr-qc · astro-ph.HE

Recognition: unknown

Investigating the effect of sensitivity of KAGRA on sky localization of gravitational-wave sources from compact binary coalescences

Alvin K. Y. Li , Peony K. K. Lai , Elwin K. Y. Li , Otto A. Hannuksela

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 12:57 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌀 gr-qc astro-ph.HE

keywords gravitational wavessky localizationKAGRAbinary neutron starsLIGO-Virgo networkcompact binary coalescencesmultimessenger astronomy

0 comments

The pith

Adding KAGRA improves sky localization of binary neutron star mergers even at its current low sensitivity by adding new baselines and directional constraints.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper tests how KAGRA joins the LIGO-Virgo network to help locate the origins of gravitational waves from merging neutron stars. It runs many simulated signals through a timing-based mapping method and measures how much the added detector shrinks the uncertain sky regions. Even when KAGRA reaches only about 10 megaparsecs, the new baselines and viewing angles break some of the ambiguities that the other detectors share, raising the share of events pinned down to under 100 square degrees. Better sensitivity in KAGRA further tightens the positions and lets the network catch more faint events. The results matter because tighter locations let telescopes chase the same events in light and other messengers.

Core claim

The addition of KAGRA to the global gravitational-wave detector network introduces new baselines and complementary antenna response patterns that can enhance sky localization for compact binary coalescences. Sky maps are constructed with a radiometric, coherence-based framework, allowing isolation of geometric and timing contributions from individual detectors. Even at its current sensitivity of ∼10 Mpc, KAGRA provides measurable improvements by breaking degeneracies through additional baselines and directional constraints. As sensitivity increases, improvements in signal-to-noise ratio and timing precision lead to substantial reductions in localization area, with a binary neutron star range

What carries the argument

A systematic injection study of binary neutron star signals analyzed with a radiometric coherence-based sky localization framework that separates geometric and timing effects from each detector.

If this is right

The fraction of events localized within 100 square degrees rises when KAGRA joins the network.
Median 90-percent credible sky areas shrink as KAGRA sensitivity climbs from 10 to 30 megaparsecs.
KAGRA raises the total number of detectable binary neutron star events by recovering lower signal-to-noise signals.
A KAGRA range near 30 megaparsecs marks a practical threshold for producing sky maps useful for electromagnetic follow-up.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Geographic spread of detectors may matter more than raw sensitivity for initial multimessenger campaigns.
Similar gains could appear when other planned detectors in new locations join future networks.
The same baseline-breaking effect should be checked for black-hole mergers and other source classes.

Load-bearing premise

The radiometric method for turning signal arrival times and strengths into sky positions, together with the chosen models of neutron-star merger waveforms and detector noise, match how the real network and analysis will behave.

What would settle it

Real gravitational-wave events from the operating LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA network show no reduction in sky area uncertainty when KAGRA data are added to the same events processed without it.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.13580 by Alvin K. Y. Li, Elwin K. Y. Li, Otto A. Hannuksela, Peony K. K. Lai.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: PSDs of the detector network used in this study. H1, L1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Fraction of events localized within 100 deg2 as a function of KAGRA sensitivity. Top: HLV-detectable events. Bottom: HLVK-detectable events. This improvement arises primarily from geometric effects. The addition of KAGRA introduces a new detector baseline, providing independent constraints on arrival time differences. Even when KAGRA contributes little SNR, this geometric information helps break degenera… view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Number of detected events as a function of KAGRA [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: summarizes the typical localization performance through the median A90 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Example sky localization maps for a representative BNS event as a function of KAGRA sensitivity. The panels show increasing [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

The addition of KAGRA to the global gravitational-wave detector network introduces new baselines and complementary antenna response patterns that can enhance sky localization for compact binary coalescences. We investigate KAGRA's role in the LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA network using a systematic injection study of binary neutron star signals. Sky maps are constructed with a radiometric, coherence-based framework, allowing isolation of geometric and timing contributions from individual detectors. Localization performance is quantified using the fraction of events localized within $100~\mathrm{deg}^2$, cumulative area distributions, and the median $90%$ credible region. We also assess KAGRA's impact on detection rates by varying its sensitivity over a wide range. Even at its current sensitivity of $\sim10~\mathrm{Mpc}$, KAGRA provides measurable improvements by breaking degeneracies through additional baselines and directional constraints. As sensitivity increases, improvements in signal-to-noise ratio and timing precision lead to substantial reductions in localization area. We identify a binary neutron star range of $\sim30~\mathrm{Mpc}$ as a practical benchmark for reliable localization suitable for electromagnetic follow-up, noting this as a conservative estimate. In addition, KAGRA increases the number of detectable events by enabling lower signal-to-noise detections. These results demonstrate that even a modest-sensitivity detector can significantly enhance network performance through geometric complementarity, highlighting the importance of a geographically distributed network for multimessenger gravitational-wave astronomy.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

KAGRA at current sensitivity gives some localization gains through added baselines, but the size of those gains rests on a radiometric coherence method without reported cross-checks to standard Bayesian pipelines.

read the letter

The paper's main point is that KAGRA, even at its present ~10 Mpc range, already reduces median 90% credible areas and raises the fraction of binary neutron star events inside 100 deg² by supplying extra baselines and antenna-pattern constraints in the LIGO-Virgo network. Gains become larger as sensitivity climbs, and the authors flag ~30 Mpc as a practical threshold for follow-up work. They also show the detector increases the overall detection rate by pulling in lower-SNR events. The study is a straightforward injection campaign that varies only KAGRA sensitivity while holding the rest of the network fixed. The radiometric coherence framework is used to build sky maps and separate geometric from timing contributions, which gives a clean way to see where the improvement comes from. Metrics are reported directly: cumulative area distributions, median areas, and changes in detectable event counts. This supplies concrete numbers that network planners can use when thinking about upgrade priorities or multimessenger campaigns. The soft spot is the reliance on the radiometric method alone. No comparison is shown between the reported areas and what BAYESTAR or LALInference would produce on the same injections, so it is unclear whether the quoted improvements would survive in the pipelines actually used for real events. Standard assumptions about Gaussian noise and waveform models are in place, but the paper does not quantify how calibration errors or non-Gaussian features would change the observed gains. The central claim therefore rests on how faithfully the coherence approach captures the degeneracy-breaking effect of the new detector. This work is aimed at gravitational-wave astronomers and multimessenger follow-up teams who need quick estimates of network performance. The simulations are systematic and the question is timely, so the paper deserves a serious referee even if the quantitative results need extra validation on the localization side. I would bring it to a reading group to discuss the network-geometry angle, but I would not cite the specific numbers without seeing the Bayesian cross-check.

Referee Report

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents a systematic injection study of binary neutron star coalescences into simulated LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA networks. Using a radiometric coherence-based pipeline to generate sky maps, it quantifies localization performance via the fraction of events within 100 deg², cumulative area distributions, and median 90% credible regions. The central result is that KAGRA at its current ~10 Mpc range already yields measurable improvements by breaking degeneracies through new baselines and antenna patterns; further sensitivity gains produce larger reductions in localization area, with ~30 Mpc identified as a practical benchmark for electromagnetic follow-up utility. The study also notes increased detection rates from lower-SNR events.

Significance. If the radiometric results are confirmed to match standard Bayesian localization, the work supplies concrete sensitivity thresholds and geometric benchmarks that clarify when a modest-range detector like KAGRA meaningfully augments network performance for multimessenger astronomy. It reinforces the value of geographic distribution even before full design sensitivity is reached.

major comments (1)

[Abstract and methods] Abstract and methods (radiometric coherence framework): the headline claim that KAGRA at ~10 Mpc produces measurable sky-localization gains rests entirely on areas derived from the radiometric coherence pipeline. No cross-validation against standard Bayesian tools (BAYESTAR or LALInference) on the same injections is reported. Without this comparison, it is unclear whether the reported reductions in 90% credible area and increases in the fraction inside 100 deg² reflect genuine information gain from the additional baselines or method-specific biases in how the coherence approach handles timing and antenna-pattern constraints.

minor comments (1)

[Abstract] The abstract states that KAGRA 'increases the number of detectable events by enabling lower signal-to-noise detections,' but the quantitative impact on detection rates is not broken out separately from the localization metrics; a dedicated table or figure isolating this effect would improve clarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive review and positive assessment of the work's significance. We address the major comment on the radiometric coherence framework below.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract and methods] Abstract and methods (radiometric coherence framework): the headline claim that KAGRA at ~10 Mpc produces measurable sky-localization gains rests entirely on areas derived from the radiometric coherence pipeline. No cross-validation against standard Bayesian tools (BAYESTAR or LALInference) on the same injections is reported. Without this comparison, it is unclear whether the reported reductions in 90% credible area and increases in the fraction inside 100 deg² reflect genuine information gain from the additional baselines or method-specific biases in how the coherence approach handles timing and antenna-pattern constraints.

Authors: We appreciate the referee highlighting this point. Our analysis compares sky localization for identical injections using the exact same radiometric coherence pipeline, both with and without KAGRA (and across KAGRA sensitivity ranges). Any method-specific biases in timing or antenna-pattern handling would therefore apply equally to the LV and LVK cases, leaving the reported relative improvements attributable to KAGRA's additional baselines and directional constraints. These geometric effects are explicitly modeled in the coherence framework. While we agree that a direct comparison to BAYESTAR or LALInference on the same set would strengthen absolute-area claims, it is not necessary to demonstrate the differential gains from network expansion, which is the central focus. We will add a clarifying paragraph in the methods and discussion sections of the revised manuscript to make this distinction explicit. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: forward simulation study with fixed models

full rationale

The paper conducts an injection study of binary neutron star signals into a modeled LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA network, constructs sky maps via a radiometric coherence framework, and quantifies localization metrics (90% credible area, fraction within 100 deg²) as direct outputs of those simulations. Detector sensitivities are varied as inputs, not fitted to the localization results. The framework is applied uniformly without redefining its outputs as inputs or invoking self-citations as load-bearing uniqueness theorems. Results follow from geometric/timing properties of the network rather than any self-referential reduction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The study rests on standard gravitational-wave data analysis assumptions and simulation parameters rather than new theoretical constructs.

free parameters (1)

KAGRA sensitivity benchmarks
Values such as ~10 Mpc current range and ~30 Mpc benchmark are selected to explore performance scaling.

axioms (1)

domain assumption Binary neutron star waveforms and detector noise follow standard general-relativity and Gaussian-stationary models
Invoked for all signal injections and sky-map construction.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5585 in / 1108 out tokens · 42997 ms · 2026-05-10T12:57:19.302977+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references · 55 canonical work pages · 7 internal anchors

[1]

The sources are dis- tributed uniformly in comoving volume [29, 46, 47], such that the luminosity distance followsp(d)∝d 2, within the range d∈[40,200] Mpc

Injection population We generate a total of 10000 compact binary coalescence signals with component masses fixed at1.4M ⊙–1.4M ⊙, rep- resentative of typical BNS systems. The sources are dis- tributed uniformly in comoving volume [29, 46, 47], such that the luminosity distance followsp(d)∝d 2, within the range d∈[40,200] Mpc. This range is chosen to probe...
[2]

Detector configuration and sensitivity modeling We consider a reference detector network consisting of H1, L1, and V1, and a test network that includes K1 in addition. The detector sensitivities are modeled using PSD representa- tive of the O4a configuration for LIGO [49, 50], the O3 con- figuration for Virgo [51, 52], and O4 simulation estimate for KAGRA...
[3]

non-contributing

Analysis For each realization and ASD scaling, matched filtering is performed to compute the SNR in each detector. Events are required to satisfy a network SNR threshold ofρnet ≥8in the reference network. Each signal is embedded in stationary Gaussian noise con- sistent with the detector PSDs. Matched filtering is then used to identify candidate triggers ...
[4]

B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 061102 (2016), 1602.03837

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2016
[6]

A. G. Abac et al. (LIGO Scientific, KAGRA, VIRGO), Astro- phys. J. Lett.995, L18 (2025), 2508.18080

work page arXiv 2025
[7]

A. G. Abac et al. (LIGO Scientific, VIRGO, KAGRA) (2025), 2508.18081

work page arXiv 2025
[8]

A. G. Abac et al. (LIGO Scientific, VIRGO, KAGRA) (2025), 2508.18083

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[9]

A. G. Abac et al. (LIGO Scientific, VIRGO, KAGRA) (2025), 2509.04348

work page arXiv 2025
[10]

Advanced LIGO

J. Aasi et al. (LIGO Scientific), Class. Quant. Grav.32, 074001 (2015), 1411.4547

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2015
[11]

Acernese et al

F. Acernese et al. (Virgo) (2026), 2603.20342

work page arXiv 2026
[12]

Akutsu et al

T. Akutsu et al. (KAGRA), PTEP2021, 05A101 (2021), 2005.05574

work page arXiv 2021
[13]

Y . Aso, Y . Michimura, K. Somiya, M. Ando, O. Miyakawa, T. Sekiguchi, D. Tatsumi, and H. Yamamoto (KAGRA), Phys. Rev. D88, 043007 (2013), 1306.6747

work page arXiv 2013
[14]

Triangulation of gravitational wave sources with a network of detectors,

S. Fairhurst, New J. Phys.11, 123006 (2009), [Erratum: New J.Phys. 13, 069602 (2011)], 0908.2356

work page arXiv 2009
[15]

Fairhurst, Source localization with an advanced gravita- tional wave detector network, Classical Quantum Gravity28, 105021 (2011), arXiv:1010.6192 [gr-qc]

S. Fairhurst, Class. Quant. Grav.28, 105021 (2011), 1010.6192

work page arXiv 2011
[16]

Raffai, L

P. Raffai, L. Gond ´an, I. S. Heng, N. Kelecs ´enyi, J. Logue, Z. M ´arka, and S. M ´arka, Classical and Quantum Gravity30, 155004 (2013), 1301.3939

work page arXiv 2013
[17]

B. F. Schutz, Class. Quant. Grav.28, 125023 (2011), 1102.5421

work page arXiv 2011
[18]

L. P. Singer and L. R. Price, Phys. Rev. D93, 024013 (2016), 1508.03634

work page arXiv 2016
[19]

Wen and Y

L. Wen and Y . Chen, Phys. Rev. D81, 082001 (2010), 1003.2504

work page arXiv 2010
[20]

Determining the Hubble constant from gravitational wave observations of merging compact binaries

S. Nissanke, D. E. Holz, N. Dalal, S. A. Hughes, J. L. Sievers, and C. M. Hirata (2013), 1307.2638

work page Pith review arXiv 2013
[21]

B. D. Metzger, Living Rev. Rel.23, 1 (2020), 1910.01617

work page arXiv 2020
[22]

Magee and S

R. Magee and S. Borhanian, Astrophys. J.935, 139 (2022), 2201.11841

work page arXiv 2022
[23]

Sachdev et al., Astrophys

S. Sachdev et al., Astrophys. J. Lett.905, L25 (2020), 2008.04288

work page arXiv 2020
[24]

B. P. Abbott et al. (KAGRA, LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Living Rev. Rel.19, 1 (2016), 1304.0670

work page arXiv 2016
[25]

Nissanke, M

S. Nissanke, M. Kasliwal, and A. Georgieva, Astrophys. J.767, 124 (2013), 1210.6362

work page arXiv 2013
[26]

S. S. Chaudhary et al., Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci.121, e2316474121 (2024), 2308.04545

work page arXiv 2024
[27]

Ouzriat, V

A. Ouzriat, V . Sordini, and F. Di Renzo (2025), 2510.21930

work page arXiv 2025
[28]

Fotopoulos, M

K. Cannon et al., Astrophys. J.748, 136 (2012), 1107.2665

work page arXiv 2012
[29]

L. P. Singer et al., Astrophys. J.795, 105 (2014), 1404.5623

work page arXiv 2014
[30]

Tsutsui, K

T. Tsutsui, K. Cannon, and L. Tsukada, Phys. Rev. D103, 043011 (2021), 2005.08163

work page arXiv 2021
[31]

Grover, S

K. Grover, S. Fairhurst, B. F. Farr, I. Mandel, C. Rodriguez, T. Sidery, and A. Vecchio, Phys. Rev. D89, 042004 (2014), 1310.7454

work page arXiv 2014
[32]

B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 161101 (2017), 1710.05832

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2017
[33]

B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo, Fermi GBM, IN- TEGRAL, IceCube, AstroSat Cadmium Zinc Telluride Im- ager Team, IPN, Insight-Hxmt, ANTARES, Swift, AGILE Team, 1M2H Team, Dark Energy Camera GW-EM, DES, DLT40, GRAWITA, Fermi-LAT, ATCA, ASKAP, Las Cum- bres Observatory Group, OzGrav, DWF (Deeper Wider Faster Program), AST3, CAASTRO, VINROUGE, MAS...

work page Pith review arXiv 2017
[34]

M. Emma, T. F. de Nobrega, and G. Ashton, Phys. Rev. D110, 064068 (2024), 2404.16949

work page arXiv 2024
[35]

Pankow, M

C. Pankow, M. Rizzo, K. Rao, C. P. L. Berry, and V . Kalogera, Astrophys. J.902, 71 (2020), 1909.12961

work page arXiv 2020
[36]

Coherent method for detection of gravitational wave bursts

S. Klimenko, I. Yakushin, A. Mercer, and G. Mitselmakher, Class. Quant. Grav.25, 114029 (2008), 0802.3232

work page Pith review arXiv 2008
[37]

Allen, W

B. Allen, W. G. Anderson, P. R. Brady, D. A. Brown, and J. D. E. Creighton, Phys. Rev. D85, 122006 (2012), gr- qc/0509116

work page arXiv 2012
[38]

Jaranowski, A

P. Jaranowski, A. Krolak, and B. F. Schutz, Phys. Rev. D58, 063001 (1998), gr-qc/9804014

work page arXiv 1998
[39]

Comparison of post-Newtonian templates for compact binary inspiral signals in gravitational-wave detectors

A. Buonanno, B. Iyer, E. Ochsner, Y . Pan, and B. S. Sathyaprakash, Phys. Rev. D80, 084043 (2009), 0907.0700

work page Pith review arXiv 2009
[40]

Gravitational Waves from Mergin Compact Binaries: How Accurately Can One Extract the Binary's Parameters from the Inspiral Waveform?

C. Cutler and E. E. Flanagan, Phys. Rev. D49, 2658 (1994), gr-qc/9402014

work page Pith review arXiv 1994
[41]

Robust parameter estimation for compact binaries with ground-based gravitational-wave observations using the LALInference software library

J. Veitch et al., Phys. Rev. D91, 042003 (2015), 1409.7215

work page Pith review arXiv 2015
[42]

Bilby: A user-friendly Bayesian inference library for gravitational-wave astronomy

G. Ashton et al., Astrophys. J. Suppl.241, 27 (2019), 1811.02042

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2019
[43]

Poisson and C

E. Poisson and C. M. Will, Phys. Rev. D52, 848 (1995), gr- qc/9502040

work page arXiv 1995
[44]

S. W. Ballmer, Class. Quant. Grav.23, S179 (2006), gr- qc/0510096

work page arXiv 2006
[45]

K. C. Cannon, Phys. Rev. D75, 123003 (2007), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevD. 75.123003

work page doi:10.1103/physrevd 2007
[46]

Sensitivity curves for searches for gravitational-wave backgrounds

E. Thrane and J. D. Romano, Phys. Rev. D88, 124032 (2013), 1310.5300

work page Pith review arXiv 2013
[47]

Prob- ing nontensorial polarizations of stochastic gravitational-wave ba ckgrounds with ground- based laser interferometers

A. Nishizawa, A. Taruya, K. Hayama, S. Kawamura, and M.-a. Sakagami, Phys. Rev. D79, 082002 (2009), 0903.0528

work page arXiv 2009
[48]

K. M. G ´orski, E. Hivon, A. J. Banday, B. D. Wandelt, F. K. Hansen, M. Reinecke, and M. Bartelman, Astrophys. J.622, 759 (2005), astro-ph/0409513

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2005
[49]

Abbott, T

R. Abbott et al. (KAGRA, VIRGO, LIGO Scientific), Phys. Rev. X13, 011048 (2023), 2111.03634

work page arXiv 2023
[50]

Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific and Virgo Collaboration), Astrophys

R. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Astrophys. J. Lett. 913, L7 (2021), 2010.14533

work page arXiv 2021
[51]

B. S. Sathyaprakash and B. F. Schutz, Living Rev. Rel.12, 2 (2009), 0903.0338

work page arXiv 2009
[52]

LIGO Scientific Collaboration, Virgo Collaboration, and KA- GRA Collaboration,GWTC-4.0 Cumulative Search Sensitiv- ity Estimates(2025), URLhttps://doi.org/10.5281/ zenodo.16740128

2025
[53]

A. G. Abac et al. (LIGO Scientific, VIRGO, KAGRA) (2025), 2508.18079

work page arXiv 2025
[54]

LIGO Scientific Collaboration, Virgo Collaboration, and KA- GRA Collaboration, Tech. Rep. LIGO-T2200043-v3, LIGO Scientific Collaboration (2022), URLhttps://dcc.ligo. org/LIGO-T2200043/public

2022
[55]

Acernese et al

F. Acernese et al. (Virgo), Class. Quant. Grav.40, 185006 (2023), 2210.15633

work page arXiv 2023
[56]

Akutsu et al

T. Akutsu et al. (KAGRA) (2025), 2508.03392

work page arXiv 2025
[57]

L. S. Finn, Phys. Rev. D46, 5236 (1992), gr-qc/9209010

work page arXiv 1992
[58]

Use and Abuse of the Fisher Information Matrix in the Assessment of Gravitational-Wave Parameter-Estimation Prospects

M. Vallisneri, Phys. Rev. D77, 042001 (2008), gr-qc/0703086

work page Pith review arXiv 2008
[59]

A. G. Abac et al. (LIGO Scientific, VIRGO, KAGRA) (2025), 2508.18082

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2025
[60]

Abbottet al.(KAGRA, VIRGO, LIGO Scientific), Astrophys

R. Abbott et al. (KAGRA, VIRGO, LIGO Scientific), Astro- phys. J. Suppl.267, 29 (2023), 2302.03676

work page arXiv 2023
[61]

Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific and Virgo Collaboration), Open data from the first and second observing runs of Ad- vanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo (2019), arXiv:1912.11716 [gr-qc]

R. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), SoftwareX13, 100658 (2021), 1912.11716

work page arXiv 2021