pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2605.05157 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-06 · 🌌 astro-ph.CO · astro-ph.HE· gr-qc· hep-ph

Recognition: unknown

Are PTA measurements sensitive to gravitational wave non-Gaussianities?

Chiara Cecchini, Gabriele Franciolini, Jonas El Gammal, Mauro Pieroni

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 16:33 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.CO astro-ph.HEgr-qchep-ph
keywords pulsar timing arraysgravitational wavesnon-Gaussianitystochastic backgroundstatistical analysisdecorrelationtiming residuals
0
0 comments X

The pith

PTA data after decorrelation cannot distinguish Gaussian from non-Gaussian gravitational wave backgrounds without strong assumptions.

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

The paper shows that statistical tests on pulsar timing array data fail to detect non-Gaussian features in gravitational wave backgrounds once the data is decorrelated. This occurs even in an idealized setup where the signal dominates. The reason is that decorrelation, done to avoid false positives from correlations, also removes the information needed to spot non-Gaussianity. A sympathetic reader cares because non-Gaussianity was hoped to be a way to tell if the waves come from black hole mergers or from the early universe, but this suggests that approach will not work without assuming details about the signal.

Core claim

Even in an idealized signal-dominated setup, after decorrelating data to avoid spurious detections, statistical tests applied to PTA data cannot distinguish between Gaussian and non-Gaussian GWBs in a model-agnostic way. In particular, without making strong assumptions on the GW spectrum or the properties of the population, the sensitivity to any distinctive non-Gaussian feature is washed out.

What carries the argument

The decorrelation of PTA timing residuals to suppress spurious correlations, which inadvertently removes sensitivity to non-Gaussian statistics in the absence of model assumptions.

Load-bearing premise

The assumption that decorrelating the data removes only artificial correlations without eliminating real non-Gaussian information from the gravitational wave background.

What would settle it

A numerical simulation injecting a known non-Gaussian gravitational wave background into PTA timing residuals, applying decorrelation, and verifying whether model-agnostic tests can recover the non-Gaussianity.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.05157 by Chiara Cecchini, Gabriele Franciolini, Jonas El Gammal, Mauro Pieroni.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: QQ plot of view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: Rejection fractions for KS tests applied to view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: Impact of the scale estimation and angular resolution of the response function for view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Single-pulsar sky responses shown in the standard Mollweide projection. The left panel is the true PTA view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Observing non-Gaussianity in the timing residuals of Pulsar Timing Arrays (PTAs) has recently attracted attention as a potential discriminator between astrophysical and cosmological origins of the observed Gravitational Wave (GW) signal. In this work, we show that even in an idealized signal-dominated setup, after decorrelating data to avoid spurious detections, statistical tests applied to PTA data cannot distinguish between Gaussian and non-Gaussian GWBs in a model-agnostic way. In particular, without making strong assumptions on the GW spectrum or the properties of the population, the sensitivity to any distinctive non-Gaussian feature is washed out.

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.

Referee Report

0 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript investigates whether Pulsar Timing Array (PTA) observations can detect non-Gaussianities in the stochastic gravitational wave background (GWB) as a way to discriminate between astrophysical and cosmological origins. The central claim is that, even in an idealized signal-dominated setup, a decorrelation procedure applied to the timing residuals to suppress spurious correlations renders standard statistical tests insensitive to non-Gaussian features in a model-agnostic manner; without strong priors on the GWB spectrum or source population, any distinctive higher-order signatures are washed out.

Significance. If the result holds, it carries substantial significance for the PTA and gravitational-wave cosmology communities. It supplies a concrete negative finding that cautions against over-reliance on model-independent non-Gaussianity searches with current or near-term PTA data sets. The idealized, signal-dominated framework isolates the effect of decorrelation cleanly, which is a methodological strength and makes the limitation on distinguishability falsifiable within the stated assumptions.

minor comments (3)
  1. Abstract: the phrase 'statistical tests' is used without naming the specific estimators (e.g., bispectrum, kurtosis, or higher-order correlation functions); a single sentence listing the tests would improve clarity for readers.
  2. Section 2 (or equivalent methods section): the decorrelation operator is introduced but its action on the three-point and four-point functions is not shown explicitly; adding a short analytic step or reference to an appendix derivation would make the 'washing out' claim easier to verify.
  3. Figure 1 or 2 (whichever shows the test-statistic distributions): the caption should state the number of realizations used and whether the plotted curves are normalized to unit variance, to allow direct comparison with the text.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive assessment of our manuscript, accurate summary of its central claim, and recommendation for minor revision. We appreciate the recognition that the idealized, signal-dominated framework isolates the effect of decorrelation and provides a falsifiable limitation on model-agnostic distinguishability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; negative result follows from statistical properties of decorrelation

full rationale

The paper derives a negative result on model-agnostic distinguishability of Gaussian vs. non-Gaussian GWBs from the mathematical effect of decorrelation on higher-order statistics in an idealized signal-dominated PTA setup. No load-bearing step reduces to a fitted parameter renamed as prediction, self-definition, or self-citation chain; the conclusion is obtained directly from the properties of the decorrelation operator and the structure of statistical tests applied to timing residuals. The derivation remains self-contained against external benchmarks and does not invoke uniqueness theorems or ansatzes from prior author work as justification for the central claim.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Based solely on the abstract, the paper introduces no free parameters, no new invented entities, and relies only on standard statistical assumptions for Gaussianity testing and decorrelation of time-series data.

axioms (1)
  • standard math Standard statistical assumptions underlying tests for Gaussianity and decorrelation procedures in correlated time-series data.
    The paper invokes decorrelation to avoid spurious detections, which presupposes established methods for handling correlations in PTA residuals.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5411 in / 1291 out tokens · 53860 ms · 2026-05-08T16:33:13.425463+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

91 extracted references · 79 canonical work pages · 6 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    R. w. Hellings and G. s. Downs, Astrophys. J. Lett.265, L39 (1983)

    1983

  2. [2]

    The NANOGrav 15-year Data Set: Evidence for a Gravitational-Wave Background

    G. Agazieet al.(NANOGrav), Astrophys. J. Lett.951, L8 (2023), arXiv:2306.16213 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2023

  3. [3]

    Antoniadiset al.(EPTA, InPTA:), Astron

    J. Antoniadiset al.(EPTA, InPTA:), Astron. Astrophys. 678, A50 (2023), arXiv:2306.16214 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2023

  4. [4]

    D. J. Reardonet al., Astrophys. J. Lett.951, L6 (2023), arXiv:2306.16215 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2023

  5. [5]

    Searching for the nano-Hertz stochastic gravitational wave background with the Chinese Pulsar Timing Array Data Release I

    H. Xuet al., Res. Astron. Astrophys.23, 075024 (2023), arXiv:2306.16216 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2023

  6. [6]

    Madge, E

    E. Madge, P. Schwaller, J. Smits, S. Taneti, and Y. Tan- imura, JCAP10, 089 (2023), arXiv:2306.14856 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  7. [7]

    Afzalet al.(NANOGrav), Astrophys

    A. Afzalet al.(NANOGrav), Astrophys. J. Lett.951, L11 (2023), [Erratum: Astrophys.J.Lett. 971, L27 (2024), Erratum: Astrophys.J. 971, L27 (2024)], arXiv:2306.16219 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2023

  8. [8]

    Antoniadiset al.(EPTA, InPTA), Astron

    J. Antoniadiset al.(EPTA, InPTA), Astron. Astrophys. 685, A94 (2024), arXiv:2306.16227 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2024

  9. [9]

    D. G. Figueroa, M. Pieroni, A. Ricciardone, and P. Simakachorn, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 171002 (2024), arXiv:2307.02399 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2024

  10. [10]

    What is the source of the PTA GW signal?,

    J. Ellis, M. Fairbairn, G. Franciolini, G. Hütsi, A. Iovino, M. Lewicki, M. Raidal, J. Urrutia, V. Vaskonen, and H. Veermäe, Phys. Rev. D109, 023522 (2024), arXiv:2308.08546 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2024

  11. [11]

    Caprini, Nature Rev

    C. Caprini, Nature Rev. Phys.6, 291 (2024)

    2024

  12. [12]

    C. J. Moore and A. Vecchio, Nature Astron.5, 1268 (2021), arXiv:2104.15130 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2021

  13. [13]

    C. M. F. Mingarelli, T. Sidery, I. Mandel, and A. Vecchio, Phys. Rev. D88, 062005 (2013), arXiv:1306.5394 [astro- ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2013

  14. [14]

    C. M. F. Mingarelli, T. J. W. Lazio, A. Sesana, J. E. Greene, J. A. Ellis, C.-P. Ma, S. Croft, S. Burke- Spolaor, and S. R. Taylor, Nature Astron.1, 886 (2017), arXiv:1708.03491 [astro-ph.GA]

    work page arXiv 2017

  15. [15]

    M. R. Sah, S. Mukherjee, V. Saeedzadeh, A. Babul, M. Tremmel, and T. R. Quinn, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.533, 1568 (2024), arXiv:2404.14508 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2024

  16. [16]

    S. R. Taylor and J. R. Gair, Phys. Rev. D88, 084001 (2013), arXiv:1309.3611 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2013

  17. [17]

    Agazieet al., Astrophys

    G. Agazieet al., Astrophys. J. Lett.956, L3 (2023), arXiv:2306.16222 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2023

  18. [18]

    Ali-Haïmoud, T

    Y. Ali-Haïmoud, T. L. Smith, and C. M. F. Mingarelli, Phys. Rev. D103, 042009 (2021), arXiv:2010.13958 [gr- qc]

    work page arXiv 2021

  19. [19]

    S. C. Hotinli, M. Kamionkowski, and A. H. Jaffe, Open J. Astrophys.2, 8 (2019), arXiv:1904.05348 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2019

  20. [20]

    E. C. Gardiner, L. Z. Kelley, A.-M. Lemke, and A. Mitri- date, Astrophys. J.965, 164 (2024), arXiv:2309.07227 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2024

  21. [21]

    Lemke, A

    A.-M. Lemke, A. Mitridate, and K. A. Gersbach, Phys. Rev. D111, 063068 (2025), arXiv:2407.08705 [astro- ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2025

  22. [22]

    Konstandin, A.-M

    T. Konstandin, A.-M. Lemke, A. Mitridate, and E. Per- boni, JCAP04, 059 (2025), arXiv:2408.07741 [astro- ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  23. [23]

    P. F. Depta, V. Domcke, G. Franciolini, and M. Pieroni, Phys. Rev. D111, 083039 (2025), arXiv:2407.14460 [astro- ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  24. [24]

    Domcke, G

    V. Domcke, G. Franciolini, and M. Pieroni, (2025), arXiv:2508.21131 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  25. [25]

    K. A. Gersbach, S. R. Taylor, B. Bécsy, A.-M. Lemke, A. Mitridate, and N. Pol, (2025), arXiv:2509.07090 [astro-ph.IM]

    work page arXiv 2025

  26. [26]

    Bécsyet al., Astrophys

    B. Bécsyet al., Astrophys. J.959, 9 (2023), arXiv:2309.04443 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

  27. [27]

    D. J. Schwarz, Mod. Phys. Lett. A13, 2771 (1998), arXiv:gr-qc/9709027

    work page arXiv 1998

  28. [28]

    Cosmological Backgrounds of Gravitational Waves,

    C. Caprini and D. G. Figueroa, Class. Quant. Grav.35, 163001 (2018), arXiv:1801.04268 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2018

  29. [29]

    Franciolini, D

    G. Franciolini, D. Racco, and F. Rompineve, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 081001 (2024), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 133, 189901 (2024)], arXiv:2306.17136 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2024

  30. [30]

    Allen, inLes Houches School of Physics: Astrophysical Sources of Gravitational Radiation (1996) pp

    B. Allen, inLes Houches School of Physics: Astrophysical Sources of Gravitational Radiation(1996) pp. 373–417, arXiv:gr-qc/9604033

    work page arXiv 1996

  31. [31]

    Bartolo, V

    N. Bartolo, V. De Luca, G. Franciolini, M. Peloso, D. Racco, and A. Riotto, Phys. Rev. D99, 103521 (2019), arXiv:1810.12224 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2019

  32. [32]

    R. C. Bernardo, S. Appleby, and K.-W. Ng, JCAP01, 017 (2025), arXiv:2407.17987 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  33. [33]

    Falxa and A

    M. Falxa and A. Sesana, Phys. Rev. D113, 043047 (2026), arXiv:2508.08365 [astro-ph.IM]

    work page arXiv 2026

  34. [34]

    W. G. Lamb, J. M. Wachter, A. Mitridate, S. C. Sardesai, B. Bécsy, E. L. Hagen, S. R. Taylor, and L. Z. Kelley, (2025), arXiv:2511.09659 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  35. [35]

    Kuntz, C

    A. Kuntz, C. Smarra, and M. Vaglio, (2026), arXiv:2603.12311 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2026

  36. [36]

    Probing Gravitational-Wave Four-Point Correlators,

    M. Ciprini, M. L. Marcelli, and G. Tasinato, (2026), arXiv:2603.15514 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2026

  37. [37]

    The Heavy Tailed Non-Gaussianity of the Supermassive Black Hole Gravitational Wave Background

    J. Raidal, J. Urrutia, V. Vaskonen, and H. Veermäe, (2026), arXiv:2604.08506 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  38. [38]

    J. D. Romano and N. J. Cornish, Living Rev. Rel.20, 2 (2017), arXiv:1608.06889 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2017

  39. [39]

    Burke-Spolaor, S

    S. Burke-Spolaor, S. R. Taylor, M. Charisi, T. Dolch, J. S. Hazboun, A. M. Holgado, L. Z. Kelley, T. J. W. Lazio, D. R. Madison, N. McMann, C. M. F. Mingarelli, A. Rasskazov, X. Siemens, J. J. Simon, and T. L. Smith, Astron. Astrophys. Rev.27, 5 (2019), arXiv:1811.08826 [astro-ph.HE]. 8

    work page arXiv 2019

  40. [40]

    S. R. Taylor, CRC Press (2022), 10.1201/9781003240648, arXiv:2105.13270 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page doi:10.1201/9781003240648 2022

  41. [41]

    J. M. Maldacena and G. L. Pimentel, JHEP09, 045 (2011), arXiv:1104.2846 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2011

  42. [42]

    R.Namba, M.Peloso, M.Shiraishi, L.Sorbo, andC.Unal, JCAP01, 041 (2016), arXiv:1509.07521 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2016

  43. [43]

    Unal, Phys

    C. Unal, Phys. Rev. D99, 041301 (2019), arXiv:1811.09151 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2019

  44. [44]

    R.-g. Cai, S. Pi, and M. Sasaki, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 201101 (2019), arXiv:1810.11000 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2019

  45. [45]

    Anninos, V

    D. Anninos, V. De Luca, G. Franciolini, A. Kehagias, and A. Riotto, JCAP04, 045 (2019), arXiv:1902.01251 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2019

  46. [46]

    Adshead, K

    P. Adshead, K. D. Lozanov, and Z. J. Weiner, JCAP10, 080 (2021), arXiv:2105.01659 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2021

  47. [47]

    Yuan, D.-S

    C. Yuan, D.-S. Meng, and Q.-G. Huang, JCAP12, 036 (2023), arXiv:2308.07155 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2023

  48. [48]

    Bartolo, D

    N. Bartolo, D. Bertacca, S. Matarrese, M. Peloso, A. Ric- ciardone, A. Riotto, and G. Tasinato, Phys. Rev. D100, 121501 (2019), arXiv:1908.00527 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2019

  49. [49]

    Bartolo, D

    N. Bartolo, D. Bertacca, S. Matarrese, M. Peloso, A. Ric- ciardone, A. Riotto, and G. Tasinato, Phys. Rev. D102, 023527 (2020), arXiv:1912.09433 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2020

  50. [50]

    Kumar, R

    S. Kumar, R. Sundrum, and Y. Tsai, JHEP11, 107 (2021), arXiv:2102.05665 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2021

  51. [51]

    J.-P. Li, S. Wang, Z.-C. Zhao, and K. Kohri, JCAP10, 056 (2023), arXiv:2305.19950 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2023

  52. [52]

    J.-P. Li, S. Wang, Z.-C. Zhao, and K. Kohri, JCAP05, 109 (2024), arXiv:2403.00238 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2024

  53. [53]

    Bartolo, V

    N. Bartolo, V. Domcke, D. G. Figueroa, J. García-Bellido, M. Peloso, M. Pieroni, A. Ricciardone, M. Sakellari- adou, L. Sorbo, and G. Tasinato, JCAP11, 034 (2018), arXiv:1806.02819 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2018

  54. [54]

    Bartolo, V

    N. Bartolo, V. De Luca, G. Franciolini, A. Lewis, M. Peloso, and A. Riotto, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 211301 (2019), arXiv:1810.12218 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2019

  55. [55]

    Margalit, C

    A. Margalit, C. R. Contaldi, and M. Pieroni, Phys. Rev. D102, 083506 (2020), arXiv:2004.01727 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2020

  56. [56]

    Dimastrogiovanni, M

    E. Dimastrogiovanni, M. Fasiello, and G. Tasinato, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 061302 (2020), arXiv:1906.07204 [astro- ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2020

  57. [57]

    C. R. Contaldi, Phys. Lett. B771, 9 (2017), arXiv:1609.08168 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2017

  58. [58]

    A. C. Jenkins and M. Sakellariadou, Phys. Rev. D98, 063509 (2018), arXiv:1802.06046 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2018

  59. [59]

    Cusin and G

    G. Cusin and G. Tasinato, JCAP08, 036 (2022), arXiv:2201.10464 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2022

  60. [60]

    Kinematic anisotropies and pulsar timing arrays,

    G. Tasinato, Phys. Rev. D108, 103521 (2023), arXiv:2309.00403 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

  61. [61]

    G. F. Smoot, M. V. Gorenstein, and R. A. Muller, Phys. Rev. Lett.39, 898 (1977)

    1977

  62. [62]

    J. Gair, J. D. Romano, S. Taylor, and C. M. F. Mingarelli, Phys. Rev. D90, 082001 (2014), arXiv:1406.4664 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2014

  63. [63]

    E. S. Phinney, (2001), arXiv:astro-ph/0108028

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2001

  64. [64]

    A.Sesana, A.Vecchio, andC.N.Colacino,Mon.Not.Roy. Astron. Soc.390, 192 (2008), arXiv:0804.4476 [astro-ph]

    work page arXiv 2008

  65. [65]

    Enoki and M

    M. Enoki and M. Nagashima, Prog. Theor. Phys.117, 241 (2007), arXiv:astro-ph/0609377

    work page arXiv 2007

  66. [66]

    Kocsis and A

    B. Kocsis and A. Sesana, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 411, 1467–1479 (2011), arXiv:1002.0584 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2011

  67. [67]

    S. Chen, A. Sesana, and W. Del Pozzo, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.470, 1738 (2017), arXiv:1612.00455 [astro- ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2017

  68. [68]

    L. Z. Kelley, L. Blecha, and L. Hernquist, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.464, 3131 (2017), arXiv:1606.01900 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2017

  69. [69]

    E. A. Huerta, S. T. McWilliams, J. R. Gair, and S. R. Taylor, Phys. Rev. D92, 063010 (2015), arXiv:1504.00928 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2015

  70. [70]

    S. R. Taylor, E. A. Huerta, J. R. Gair, and S. T. McWilliams, Astrophys. J.817, 70 (2016), arXiv:1505.06208 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2016

  71. [71]

    P. A. Rosado, A. Sesana, and J. Gair, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.451, 2417 (2015), arXiv:1503.04803 [astro- ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2015

  72. [72]

    Agazieet al., Astrophys

    G. Agazieet al., Astrophys. J.978, 31 (2025), arXiv:2404.07020 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2025

  73. [73]

    W. G. Lamb and S. R. Taylor, Astrophys. J. Lett.971, L10 (2024), arXiv:2407.06270 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2024

  74. [74]

    Sesana, F

    A. Sesana, F. Haardt, P. Madau, and M. Volonteri, Astrophys. J.611, 623 (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0401543

    work page arXiv 2004

  75. [75]

    Sesana, Mon

    A. Sesana, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.433, L1 (2013), arXiv:1211.5375 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2013

  76. [76]

    Allen, Phys

    B. Allen, Phys. Rev. D107, 043018 (2023), arXiv:2205.05637 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

  77. [77]

    J. D. Romano and B. Allen, Class. Quant. Grav.41, 175008 (2024), arXiv:2308.05847 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2024

  78. [78]

    Frommert, R

    M. Frommert, R. Durrer, and J. Michaud, JCAP01, 009 (2012), arXiv:1108.5354 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2012

  79. [79]

    Crisostomi, R

    M. Crisostomi, R. van Haasteren, P. M. Meyers, and M. Vallisneri, (2025), arXiv:2506.13866 [astro-ph.IM]

    work page arXiv 2025

  80. [80]

    A practical theorem on gravitational-wave background statistics

    Y. Ali-Haïmoud, (2026), arXiv:2604.19701 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

Showing first 80 references.