Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 4 minor 34 references

Summary statistic for pulsar timing arrays

T0 review · 1 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read The information content of a pulsar timing array's gravitational-wave signal reduces to roughly ten spherical harmonic coefficients per frequency bin.

desk verdict A genuinely useful compression result for the stochastic background, with the point-source 'carry all the signal' wording running ahead of the amplitude-only Fisher evidence. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.05295 v1 pith:S7A5E3MQ submitted 2026-08-05 astro-ph.CO astro-ph.HEgr-qc

Gabriela Sato-Polito , Matias Zaldarriaga , Barak Zackay This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.COastro-ph.HEgr-qc
keywords pulsartimingarraysgravitational-wavebackgroundsphericalharmonicsHellings-DownscurvedatacompressionFisherinformationpoint-sourcesearchpulsar-termvariance
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

Gravitational-wave signals leave two imprints in pulsar timing residuals: a coherent Earth term and an incoherent pulsar term whose phases are unknown because pulsar distances are poorly measured. This paper argues that once pulsar distances are marginalized out, all the information a pulsar timing array can extract from those residuals is carried by the spherical harmonic coefficients of the Earth-term map and of the pulsar-term variance map. Because every signal produces the same steeply falling Hellings-Downs angular spectrum on average, the information is concentrated at low multipoles. Using the noise properties and sky positions of the 15-year dataset as a realistic case, the paper finds that keeping only the $\ell=2$ Earth-term modes plus the monopole of the pulsar-term variance retains about 95% of the information about an isotropic background, and that $\ell_{\max}=3$ with the pulsar-term dipole keeps at least 90% of the information about a point source anywhere on the sky. If correct, the full likelihood can be replaced by on the order of ten coefficients per frequency bin, making every downstream search cheap and consistent.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the modified PTA likelihood, Eq. 9, in which the Earth term is expanded as $z_e = \sigma_h \sum_{\ell m} a_{\ell m} Y_{\ell m}$ and the total per-pulsar variance is $\sigma_i^2 = \sigma_h^2 \sum_{\ell m} b_{\ell m} Y_{\ell m}(\hat{n}_i) + \sigma_{n,i}^2$. The pulsar term is absorbed as a Gaussian variance, Eq. 6, rather than a grid over unknown phases. The universal Hellings-Downs spectrum in harmonic space, $C_\ell \propto 1/[(\ell+2)(\ell+1)\ell(\ell-1)]$, is the reason the compression works: it guarantees that a handful of low-$\ell$ coefficients carries almost all signal-to-noise, and the pulsar-term variance map separately captures low-$\ell$ auto-correlation information, including a dipole that helps locate point sources.

What would settle it

Simulate timing residuals from the exact single-source likelihood of Eq. A2, sampling the pulsar-term phase uniformly rather than treating it as Gaussian, for a source at the sky location where the paper's retention is lowest, and recompute the Fisher retention ratio $R$ for $\ell_{\max}=3$ with a pulsar-term dipole; if $R$ drops below 0.9, the central compression claim fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central discovery is that the PTA likelihood can be rewritten, Eq. 9, so that the data enter only through the spherical harmonic coefficients $a_{\ell m}$ of the Earth-term map $z_e(\hat{n})$ and $b_{\ell m}$ of the pulsar-term variance map $\sigma_p^2(\hat{n})$, after marginalizing over unknown pulsar phases with a Gaussian prior on the pulsar term. The harmonic-space form of the Hellings-Downs correlation, $C_\ell \propto 1/[(\ell+2)(\ell+1)\ell(\ell-1)]$, is what makes the signal low-dimensional: the quadrupole dominates and higher multipoles are strongly suppressed. The paper quantifies information retention with the Fisher ratio between the compressed and full likelihoods, using realistic noise and sky coverage from the 15-year dataset. The result is that $\ell_{\max}=2$ plus the pulsar-term monopole preserves roughly 95% of the information about an isotropic stochastic background, while point sources need $\ell_{\max}=3$ plus the pulsar-term dipole to reach at least 90% retention for every sky location.

Load-bearing premise

The Gaussian approximation for the pulsar term, Eq. 6, is the load-bearing simplification; it is exact for many sources but only approximate for a single dominant source, where the true phase-marginalized distribution is a ring rather than a Gaussian.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A single analysis over the full timing residuals can extract on the order of ten coefficients per frequency bin, and isotropic, anisotropy, and continuous-wave searches can all be run afterward on that summary.
  • For an isotropic background, truncating the Earth term at $\ell=2$ and keeping only the pulsar-term monopole loses only about 5% of the Fisher information about the signal amplitude.
  • For point sources, the pulsar-term variance dipole carries significant information: including it together with $\ell_{\max}=3$ Earth-term modes keeps at least 90% of the source amplitude information for every sky location.
  • The degeneracy between the auto-correlation (CURN) and the Hellings-Downs angular pattern that appears under aggressive truncation is largely closed by measuring the pulsar-term monopole.
  • Because the retained low-$\ell$ harmonics alias and recapture the high-$\ell$ signal in a non-uniform array, the compression loses less information than a naive counting of modes would suggest.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The paper's Fisher-ratio test could be promoted to a posterior comparison: running the full and compressed likelihoods on the same real 15-year data and checking that parameter posteriors overlap would test the summary in the regime the Fisher calculation only approximates.
  • Because the summary lives in a fixed spherical-harmonic basis, different pulsar timing arrays could publish their compressed coefficients and combine them without sharing raw arrival-time chains, a possibility the paper leaves implicit.
  • As arrays add pulsars and the sky sampling becomes more uniform, the number of modes needed should fall rather than rise, which could be checked by repeating the Fisher-ratio calculation on future datasets.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

1 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a summary statistic for pulsar timing array (PTA) data based on the spherical-harmonic coefficients of the Earth-term map and the pulsar-term variance map. It derives a likelihood (Eq. 9) in which unknown pulsar phases are marginalized using a Gaussian pulsar-term approximation (Eq. 6), and it shows that the expected angular power spectrum of any GW signal is the steeply decaying Hellings–Downs spectrum (Eq. 17). Using Fisher information with the NANOGrav 15yr noise properties and sky locations, it computes the fraction of amplitude Fisher information retained when the maps are truncated at low multipoles (Eq. 58). The main quantitative results are that ell_max=2 for the Earth term plus the pulsar-term monopole retain about 95% of the information about an isotropic background, and that for point sources ell_max=3 plus the pulsar-term dipole achieve at least 90% retention across the sky. Appendix A checks the Gaussian pulsar-term approximation via Edgeworth and KL expansions, quoting an upper Hellinger-distance bound near 0.13 for NG15.

Significance. If the full claim were established, the paper would provide an interpretable and computationally cheap compression of PTA data to roughly ten coefficients per frequency bin, with downstream searches performed on the compressed summary. The use of the steep HD multipole decay to motivate low-dimensional summaries is a natural and valuable idea, and the quantitative Fisher forecasts grounded in public NG15 noise products are a useful contribution. The careful Appendix A examination of the Gaussian pulsar-term approximation is a strength, as is the public code release. However, the evidence presented supports retention of information about a single overall amplitude, not the broader statement that the compressed coefficients 'carry all of the signal' for any signal or hypothesis test. The point-source localization gap is the main obstacle to the paper's strongest conclusion.

major comments (1)
minor comments (4)
  1. [Fig. 1 caption] The caption contains a typo: 'correponds' should be 'corresponds'.
  2. [Eqs. (24)-(25)] The power spectrum notation C_0, C_1, C_2 for the pulsar-term variance map is used in Eqs. (24)-(25) without an explicit definition; stating the normalization relative to Eq. (17) would improve readability.
  3. [Fig. 3, right panel] The right panel uses both point size and color to indicate the Earth-term SNR per pulsar, but the figure as reproduced provides no quantitative color scale; a colorbar or explicit text values would help the reader interpret the map.
  4. [Abstract] The phrase 'fully characterize' overstates what is demonstrated; the quantitative results concern the Fisher information of an overall amplitude, so the abstract and conclusion should either use more limited wording or add the missing parameter-space information.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the compression-retention numbers are derived from the analytic C_l spectrum, the NG15 noise model, and explicit Fisher-matrix calculations, with no fitted parameter renamed as a prediction.

full rationale

The paper's central claim—that a few spherical-harmonic coefficients of the Earth-term map and the monopole/dipole of the pulsar-term variance retain ~95% of the information about the signal—is quantified through the Fisher-information ratio R^2 = tilde-F_AA / F_AA (Eq. 58). The ingredients are the analytic Hellings-and-Downs harmonic spectrum C_l ∝ 1/[(l+2)(l+1)l(l-1)] (Eq. 17), the NG15 noise and sky-location model (Sec. IV C), and the compressed-statistic moments derived in Eqs. 59-72. No parameter is fitted to the retention numbers, and the retention numbers are not re-used as inputs elsewhere in the derivation. The Gaussian approximation for the pulsar term (Eq. 6) is the main assumption, but it is explicitly tested against the exact phase-marginalized likelihood in Appendix A using Edgeworth/KL expansions, so it is not circularly justified. The only self-citation is the companion code/data availability reference [36], which is not load-bearing for any scientific claim. Concerns about whether the point-source Fisher ratio captures localization information are scope limitations rather than circular steps. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained and non-circular.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard mathematics and on domain assumptions common in PTA analyses: unknown pulsar distances making the pulsar-term phase uniform, Gaussian noise, and the Gaussian approximation for the pulsar term. No new entities or fitted constants are introduced by this paper.

assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Pulsar distances are unknown to GW-wavelength precision, so the pulsar-term phase psi is uniformly distributed.
    Introduced in Sec. II, Eq. 4 and the sentence preceding Eq. 6. Underlies the marginalization leading to Eq. 8.
  • domain assumption The pulsar term z_p is a Gaussian random variable with variance sigma_p^2 (Eq. 6).
    Used to derive Eq. 9 and all Fisher forecasts. For a single dominant source the exact phase-marginalized distribution is non-Gaussian (Eq. A2); Appendix A bounds the deviation.
  • domain assumption Noise is independent, zero-mean Gaussian with known variance sigma_{i,n}^2.
    Assumed in Eq. 2 and standard for PTA likelihood analyses.
  • domain assumption The GW frequency does not evolve between Earth and pulsar in the current PTA band.
    Discussed after Eq. 27; the frequency shift is approximately 3 nHz at typical parameters, justifying the equal-frequency approximation.
  • domain assumption The stochastic background and CURN templates have fixed spectral shape, and the pulsar noise parameters are fixed to NG15 best-fit values.
    Sec. IV B-C: all pulsar-specific noise parameters and the spectral index are fixed in the Fisher forecasts.
  • standard math Spherical harmonic orthogonality, Wigner rotation matrices, and the Fisher information formalism are valid and applicable.
    Used throughout Secs. II-V, for example in Eqs. 28-37 and 73-74.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Summary statistic for pulsar timing arrays." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/S7A5E3MQ

@misc{pith2026260805295,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Summary statistic for pulsar timing arrays},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/S7A5E3MQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.05295}
}
abstract

The timing residuals produced by gravitational-wave signals can be described as an incoherent (pulsar term) contribution and a coherent (Earth term) map on the sky, which PTAs measure at the locations of the timed pulsars. The observed Earth term map and the variance induced by the pulsar term contain all of the information about any GW signal available to a PTA (assuming pulsar distances are unknown). Furthermore, any type of signal produces on average the same angular correlation function, the Hellings and Downs curve, which decays steeply with multipole as $C_\ell \propto 1/[(\ell+2)(\ell+1)\ell(\ell-1)]$. This suggests that the signal is inherently low-dimensional and therefore only a small number of parameters are needed to fully characterize it. We present an expression for the PTA likelihood that makes the dependence on the Earth term map and pulsar term variance explicit, and show that only a few spherical harmonic coefficients are needed to capture most of the information about the signal. To quantify this in a realistic setting, we compute the Fisher matrix of the amplitude of a stochastic background or a deterministic point source assuming the noise properties and sky locations of the pulsars in the NANOGrav 15yr dataset. We find that $\ell_{\rm max}=2$ of the Earth term map and the monopole of the pulsar term variance retain $\sim 95\%$ of the information about the signal. For a point source, including the dipole of the pulsar term variance is important to achieve a similar fraction.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.05295 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Angular power spectra of the Earth-term map [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Contribution per pulsar to the signal-to-noise ratio of the Earth term map for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Sensitivity and sky locations for pulsars in the NANOGrav 15yr data set. The left panel shows the ratio between [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Eigenvalue spectrum of the whitened Earth-term [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Fraction of the SNR of a stochastic GWB amplitude [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Fraction of the SNR that is retained when the Earth term map is only measured up to a maximum multipole [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Distributions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Excess kurtosis computed from Eq. A16 for a single [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Leading-order KL divergence between the Gaussian approximation and the full distribution in the single-source scenario. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_9.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

34 extracted references · 7 canonical work pages

  1. [2]

    We therefore find that, at fixedε, the KL divergence decays as 1/N 2 p , while in the limitε→ ∞, it saturates to theN p-dependent constant DKL → 1 8N 2p

    Evaluating this integral, leads to DKL[q||p] = γ2 2 18 = 1 8 ε4 (1 +ε) 4 · 1 N 2p (A13) where we substituted the value ofγ 2 for the mean esti- mator in the second equality. We therefore find that, at fixedε, the KL divergence decays as 1/N 2 p , while in the limitε→ ∞, it saturates to theN p-dependent constant DKL → 1 8N 2p . Since the correction to the ...

    work page

  2. [3]

    Search for an Isotropic Gravitational-wave Background with the Parkes Pulsar Timing Array,

    D. J. Reardon et al., “Search for an Isotropic Gravitational-wave Background with the Parkes Pulsar Timing Array,” Astrophys. J. Lett.951no. 1, (2023) L6,arXiv:2306.16215 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2023

  3. [4]

    Searching for the Nano-Hertz Stochastic Gravitational Wave Background with the Chinese Pulsar Timing Array Data Release I,

    H. Xu et al., “Searching for the Nano-Hertz Stochastic Gravitational Wave Background with the Chinese Pulsar Timing Array Data Release I,” Res. Astron. Astrophys.23no. 7, (2023) 075024,arXiv:2306.16216 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2023

  4. [5]

    The MeerKAT Pulsar Timing Array: the 4.5-yr data release and the noise and stochastic signals of the millisecond pulsar population,

    M. T. Miles et al., “The MeerKAT Pulsar Timing Array: the 4.5-yr data release and the noise and stochastic signals of the millisecond pulsar population,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.536no. 2, (2024) 1467–1488,arXiv:2412.01148 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2024

  5. [6]

    Upper limits on the isotropic gravitational radiation background from pulsar timing analysis.,

    R. W. Hellings and G. S. Downs, “Upper limits on the isotropic gravitational radiation background from pulsar timing analysis.,” Astrophys. J. Lett.265(Feb., 1983) L39–L42

    work page 1983

  6. [7]

    Gravitational waves from resolvable massive black hole binary systems and observations with Pulsar Timing Arrays,

    A. Sesana, A. Vecchio, and M. Volonteri, “Gravitational waves from resolvable massive black hole binary systems and observations with Pulsar Timing Arrays,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.394(2009) 2255, arXiv:0809.3412 [astro-ph]

    arXiv 2009

  7. [8]

    Expected properties of the first gravitational wave signal detected with pulsar timing arrays,

    P. A. Rosado, A. Sesana, and J. Gair, “Expected properties of the first gravitational wave signal detected with pulsar timing arrays,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 451no. 3, (2015) 2417–2433,arXiv:1503.04803 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2015

  8. [9]

    Single Sources in the Low-Frequency Gravitational Wave Sky: properties and time to detection by pulsar timing arrays,

    L. Z. Kelley, L. Blecha, L. Hernquist, A. Sesana, and S. R. Taylor, “Single Sources in the Low-Frequency Gravitational Wave Sky: properties and time to detection by pulsar timing arrays,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.477no. 1, (2018) 964–976, arXiv:1711.00075 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2018

Show all 34 references
  1. [10]

    Measuring the parameters of massive black hole binary systems with Pulsar Timing Array observations of gravitational waves,

    A. Sesana and A. Vecchio, “Measuring the parameters of massive black hole binary systems with Pulsar Timing Array observations of gravitational waves,” 14 Phys. Rev. D81(2010) 104008,arXiv:1003.0677 [astro-ph.CO]

    2010 arXiv

  2. [11]

    Pulsar Timing Array Observations of Massive Black Hole Binaries,

    V. Corbin and N. J. Cornish, “Pulsar Timing Array Observations of Massive Black Hole Binaries,” arXiv:1008.1782 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv

  3. [12]

    Optimal Strategies for Continuous Gravitational Wave Detection in Pulsar Timing Arrays,

    J. A. Ellis, X. Siemens, and J. D. E. Creighton, “Optimal Strategies for Continuous Gravitational Wave Detection in Pulsar Timing Arrays,” Astrophys. J.756 no. 2, (Sept., 2012) 175,arXiv:1204.4218 [astro-ph.IM]

    2012 arXiv

  4. [13]

    Resolving multiple supermassive black hole binaries with pulsar timing arrays,

    S. Babak and A. Sesana, “Resolving multiple supermassive black hole binaries with pulsar timing arrays,” Phys. Rev. D85no. 4, (Feb., 2012) 044034, arXiv:1112.1075 [astro-ph.CO]

    2012 arXiv

  5. [14]

    Fast Bayesian analysis of individual binaries in pulsar timing array data,

    B. B´ ecsy, N. J. Cornish, and M. C. Digman, “Fast Bayesian analysis of individual binaries in pulsar timing array data,” Phys. Rev. D105no. 12, (2022) 122003, arXiv:2204.07160 [gr-qc]. [15]NANOGravCollaboration, G. Agazie et al., “The NANOGrav 15 yr Data Set: Bayesian Limits ...

    2022 arXiv

  6. [17]

    Mapping the nano-Hertz gravitational wave sky,

    N. J. Cornish and R. van Haasteren, “Mapping the nano-Hertz gravitational wave sky,”arXiv:1406.4511 [gr-qc]

    arXiv

  7. [18]

    Towards a unified treatment of gravitational-wave data analysis,

    N. J. Cornish and J. D. Romano, “Towards a unified treatment of gravitational-wave data analysis,” Phys. Rev. D87no. 12, (2013) 122003,arXiv:1305.2934 [gr-qc]

    2013 arXiv

  8. [19]

    Characterizing gravitational wave stochastic background anisotropy with pulsar timing arrays,

    C. M. F. Mingarelli, T. Sidery, I. Mandel, and A. Vecchio, “Characterizing gravitational wave stochastic background anisotropy with pulsar timing arrays,” Phys. Rev. D88no. 6, (2013) 062005, arXiv:1306.5394 [astro-ph.HE]

    2013 arXiv

  9. [20]

    Searching For Anisotropic Gravitational-wave Backgrounds Using Pulsar Timing Arrays,

    S. R. Taylor and J. R. Gair, “Searching For Anisotropic Gravitational-wave Backgrounds Using Pulsar Timing Arrays,” Phys. Rev. D88(2013) 084001, arXiv:1306.5395 [gr-qc]

    2013 arXiv

  10. [21]

    dirty”) and deconvolved (“clean

    The Earth-term spectrum (the harmonic-space counter- part of the HD correlation) is identical for a single source and for an isotropic stochastic background, while the pulsar-term variance map is not. The case shown in yellow correponds to a single edge-on source. The dashed l...

    2023 arXiv

  11. [22]

    Mapping gravitational-wave backgrounds using methods from CMB analysis: Application to pulsar timing arrays,

    J. Gair, J. D. Romano, S. Taylor, and C. M. F. Mingarelli, “Mapping gravitational-wave backgrounds using methods from CMB analysis: Application to pulsar timing arrays,” Phys. Rev. D90no. 8, (2014) 082001,arXiv:1406.4664 [gr-qc]

    2014 arXiv

  12. [23]

    The search for anisotropy in the gravitational-wave background with pulsar-timing arrays,

    S. C. Hotinli, M. Kamionkowski, and A. H. Jaffe, “The search for anisotropy in the gravitational-wave background with pulsar-timing arrays,” Open J. Astrophys.2no. 1, (2019) 8,arXiv:1904.05348 [astro-ph.CO]

    2019 arXiv

  13. [24]

    Insights into searches for anisotropies in the nanohertz gravitational-wave background,

    Y. Ali-Ha ¨ ımoud, T. L. Smith, and C. M. F. Mingarelli, “Insights into searches for anisotropies in the nanohertz gravitational-wave background,” Phys. Rev. D103 no. 4, (2021) 042009,arXiv:2010.13958 [gr-qc]

    2021 arXiv

  14. [25]

    Fisher formalism for anisotropic gravitational-wave background searches with pulsar timing arrays,

    Y. Ali-Ha ¨ ımoud, T. L. Smith, and C. M. F. Mingarelli, “Fisher formalism for anisotropic gravitational-wave background searches with pulsar timing arrays,” Phys. Rev. D102no. 12, (2020) 122005,arXiv:2006.14570 [gr-qc]

    2020 arXiv

  15. [26]

    Harmonic space analysis of pulsar timing array redshift maps,

    E. Roebber and G. Holder, “Harmonic space analysis of pulsar timing array redshift maps,” Astrophys. J.835 no. 1, (2017) 21,arXiv:1609.06758 [astro-ph.CO]

    2017 arXiv

  16. [27]

    Pulsar timing array harmonic analysis and source angular correlations,

    B. Allen, “Pulsar timing array harmonic analysis and source angular correlations,” Phys. Rev. D110(Aug,

  17. [28]

    Harmonic analysis for pulsar timing arrays,

    J. Nay, K. K. Boddy, T. L. Smith, and C. M. F. Mingarelli, “Harmonic analysis for pulsar timing arrays,” Phys. Rev. D110no. 4, (2024) 044062, arXiv:2306.06168 [gr-qc]. [29]NANOGravCollaboration, G. Agazie et al., “The NANOGrav 15 yr Data Set: Harmonic Analysis of the Pulsar An...

    2024 arXiv

  18. [30]

    The NANOGrav 15-Year Data Set,

    T. N. Collaboration, “The NANOGrav 15-Year Data Set,” July, 2025. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16051178

    2025 doi

  19. [31]

    Efficient Large-Scale, Targeted Gravitational-Wave Probes of Supermassive Black-Hole Binaries,

    M. Charisi, S. R. Taylor, C. A. Witt, and J. Runnoe, “Efficient Large-Scale, Targeted Gravitational-Wave Probes of Supermassive Black-Hole Binaries,” Phys. Rev. Lett.132no. 6, (2024) 061401,arXiv:2304.03786 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  20. [32]

    Myths and truths concerning estimation of power spectra,

    G. Efstathiou, “Myths and truths concerning estimation of power spectra,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.349 (2004) 603,arXiv:astro-ph/0307515. [33]NANOGravCollaboration, G. Agazie et al., “The NANOGrav 15 yr Data Set: Detector Characterization and Noise Budget,” Astrophys. J. Let...

    2004 arXiv

  21. [35]

    Realistic sensitivity curves for pulsar timing arrays,

    J. S. Hazboun, J. D. Romano, and T. L. Smith, “Realistic sensitivity curves for pulsar timing arrays,” Phys. Rev. D100no. 10, (2019) 104028, arXiv:1907.04341 [gr-qc]

    2019 arXiv

  22. [36]

    Summary statistic for pulsar timing arrays — companion code

    G. Sato-Polito, M. Zaldarriaga, and B. Zackay, “Summary statistic for pulsar timing arrays — companion code.” https://github.com/gsatopolito/summary-stats,

  23. [37]

    Rapid refitting techniques for Bayesian spectral characterization of the gravitational wave background using pulsar timing arrays,

    W. G. Lamb, S. R. Taylor, and R. van Haasteren, “Rapid refitting techniques for Bayesian spectral characterization of the gravitational wave background using pulsar timing arrays,” Phys. Rev. D108no. 10, (2023) 103019,arXiv:2303.15442 [astro-ph.HE]

    2023 arXiv

  24. [38]

    Deep Neural Emulation of the Supermassive Black Hole Binary Population,

    N. Laal et al., “Deep Neural Emulation of the Supermassive Black Hole Binary Population,” Astrophys. J.982no. 1, (2025) 55,arXiv:2411.10519 [astro-ph.IM]

    2025 arXiv

  25. [39]

    Approximate Distributions of Order Statistics, with Applications to Nonparametric Statistics - R. D. Reiss.,

    L. Weiss, “Approximate Distributions of Order Statistics, with Applications to Nonparametric Statistics - R. D. Reiss.,” Metrika38no. 6, (1991) 316–317.http://eudml.org/doc/176364. 15 Appendix A: Gaussian approximation for the pulsar term In this appendix, we quantify the erro...

    1991

  26. [2024]

    043043.https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevD.110.043043

    doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.