pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2602.12677 · v1 · submitted 2026-02-13 · 🌌 astro-ph.IM · astro-ph.CO

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Murriyang cryogenic phased array feed: spectral-line results and noise-reduction methods

L. Staveley-Smith , S. Barker , R. Berangi , A.B. Bolin , S. Broadhurst , J.D. Bunton , N. Carter , S. Castillo
show 20 more authors
W. Chandler A. Chippendale J.R. Dawson F. Di Dio A.R. Dunning S. Gordon J.A. Green A. Hafner D.B. Hayman D. Humphrey A. Jameson S. Johnston J.F. Kaczmarek J. Ma G. Perry M. Pilawa J. Rhee L. Toomey J. van Aardt N. Wang
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 22:34 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.IM astro-ph.CO
keywords cryogenic phased array feedspectral line observationsneutral hydrogensingular value decompositionRFI mitigationParkes telescopeHI intensity mappingnoise reduction
0
0 comments X

The pith

A cryogenic phased array feed on the Murriyang telescope delivers high-efficiency 21-cm observations and uses 3D singular value decomposition to separate neutral hydrogen signals from continuum and RFI more effectively than 2D methods.

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

The paper reports first spectral-line results from the cryoPAF receiver on the Murriyang telescope, which provides a wider field of view, higher aperture efficiency, and broader bandwidth than traditional horn feeds. Measurements of the Large Magellanic Cloud and NGC 6744 show that the system achieves a Tsys over efficiency ratio of 25 K within 0.3 degrees of the axis, and the data match prior HI maps while hinting at previously undetected low-column-density gas. The central technical advance is the application of higher-order singular value decomposition directly to the three-dimensional data cube, which the authors show extracts both compact and extended HI emission with less signal loss and better rejection of radio-frequency interference and sky continuum than conventional layered two-dimensional decompositions.

Core claim

The cryoPAF achieves system temperatures and efficiencies that support faster, wider surveys of neutral hydrogen, and robust higher-order SVD applied to the full data cube separates astronomical HI from foreground continuum and RFI while preserving faint extended emission better than traditional two-dimensional SVD techniques applied layer by layer.

What carries the argument

Higher-order singular value decomposition performed on the three-dimensional spectral-line data cube, which decomposes the volume into orthogonal components to isolate low-rank astronomical signals from higher-rank noise and interference.

If this is right

  • HI surveys with the cryoPAF can cover larger sky areas at higher sensitivity per unit time than previous multibeam receivers.
  • The same 3D SVD pipeline can be applied to intensity-mapping experiments that target faint cosmological HI signals.
  • Observations of the LMC already indicate that earlier multibeam maps may have missed an extended low-column-density component.
  • The method reduces signal loss in data sets with high RFI occupancy or strong sky continuum structure.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The technique could be tested on other phased-array-feed instruments to check whether the low-rank assumption holds across different telescope designs and frequency bands.
  • If the 3D decomposition preserves extended emission reliably, it may allow joint analysis of single-dish and interferometer data without separate foreground-cleaning steps.
  • Extending the method to time-domain or polarization dimensions could further suppress variable RFI while retaining transient astronomical signals.

Load-bearing premise

The data cube must possess a low-rank structure that lets higher-order SVD isolate the HI signal from continuum and RFI without removing a substantial fraction of faint extended emission.

What would settle it

A side-by-side comparison of the same field mapped with the cryoPAF using 3D SVD versus independent high-sensitivity single-dish or interferometer data that shows whether the low-column-density HI component at 8 times 10 to the 18 per square centimeter is retained or suppressed.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.12677 by A.B. Bolin, A. Chippendale, A. Hafner, A. Jameson, A.R. Dunning, D.B. Hayman, D. Humphrey, F. Di Dio, G. Perry, J.A. Green, J.D. Bunton, J.F. Kaczmarek, J. Ma, J.R. Dawson, J. Rhee, J. van Aardt, L. Staveley-Smith, L. Toomey, M. Pilawa, N. Carter, N. Wang, R. Berangi, S. Barker, S. Broadhurst, S. Castillo, S. Gordon, S. Johnston, W. Chandler.

Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The 7 × 7 pointing pattern used to observe the LMC. There was no parallactification of the cryoPAF during these observations, so the fields are rotated with respect to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: A comparison of HI spectra at a similar position within the LMC (RA = 05h07m10s , Dec = −69◦14′41′′, J2000), as marked with the red cross in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: System temperature measurements taken on 2024 November 18 for all 72 cryoPAF beams and both orthogonal polarisations at 1.4 GHz from calibrations using (top) the flux density calibrator PKS B1934-638 and (bottom) the Galactic HI source S9. The B1934-638 measurement includes a dish efficiency term (ηd ) which decreases away from the optical axis. The S9 measurement includes a main beam efficiency term (ηmb)… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: A spatially integrated cryoPAF HI spectrum of NGC 6744, compared with an integrated spectrum from the HIPASS Bright Galaxy Catalogue (Ko￾ribalski et al., 2004). The cryoPAF spectrum has been Hanning smoothed to a resolution of 75 kHz; the HIPASS resolution is 85 kHz. 2.2 Target observations CryoPAF commissioning data for this paper were taken using the Murriyang telescope on 2025 February 24 for the nearby… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: RGB images of the LMC from 165.9 to 394.3 km s−1 (barycentric) in chunks of width 38 km s−1 . Each colour channel has a width of 12.7 km s−1 , with the blue channel starting at the lowest velocity in each image. The individual images are scaled to peak brightness temperatures of 0.4, 4.8, 19.5, 27.8, 13.5 and 0.4 K, respectively, with a stretch of 0.5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: A cryoPAF RGB column density image of HI in the LMC, coloured by velocity over the barycentric frequency range 1418.5 to 1419.5 MHz (191 to 403 km s−1 ). The maximum column density is 5 × 1021 cm−2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: A pixel-pixel comparison of HI brightness temperature in the LMC as measured from RA-Dec-velocity data cubes from the multibeam (Staveley￾Smith et al., 2003) and the cryoPAF. The spatial coverage for the comparison is the same as shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Frequency-time waterfall plots of Stokes I spectral data taken with the central beam (beam 71) of the Murriyang cryoPAF. Left: single-pointing zoom band data taken on 2025 February 24 whilst observing the NGC 6744. An off-source reference spectrum was applied to remove bandpass ripple. The wide vertical stripe is redshifted HI emission from NGC 6744; the narrow positive and negative lines at 1420.4 MHz are… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Frequency–time waterfall plots of beam 36 in the NGC 6744 dataset after application of (left column) a clipped two-dimensional SVD (CSVD) and (right column) a censored three dimensional SVD (CPSVD). Prior to SVD, a 1 Jy compact source was injected at the central frequency and time. The best (in terms of S/N in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: The top row shows the recovered signal (i.e. the ratio of measured signal to the injected input signal) for a compact source in (left) the ‘clean’ NGC 6744 field and (right) the ‘challenging’ LMC field, as a function of the number of singular values removed. The middle row shows the corresponding rms without any signal injection. The bottom row shows the corresponding signal-to-noise ratio S/N. In the cas… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Waterfall plots of example 2D sections of the LMC dataset after addition of the G23 HI intensity map, scaled by a factor of 102 . From top to bottom, the three sections are: frequency-time; frequency-beam; and time-beam (the time dimension is also a spatial dimension due to the changing telescope position). The left column represents the data after step 5 of pre-conditioning in Section 3.5 – i.e. only bas… view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: The left panel shows the power spectrum (red points) of the G23 intensity map. It also shows the cross-power spectrum (blue points) of the intensity map with the LMC dataset (which includes the co-added intensity map, scaled by 102 ). The right panel shows the same intensity map power spectrum, but shows the cross-power spectrum (blue points) after CPSVD with n = 10. The HI intensity field is much closer … view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: The colour represents the ratio of the amplitude of the cross-power spectrum to the amplitude of the G23 intensity map power spectrum scaled by 103 as a function of both wavenumber and the number of singular values subtracted from the data. High values of the ratio (white) indicate noise contamination. Values of the ratio near unity (orange/red) mean that the intensity field power spectrum is unbiased; va… view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_16.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Normalised intensity map signal as a function of the number of singular values removed from the LMC/G23 dataset for the six SVD methods. The signal is defined as the ratio of the cross-power spectrum to the original intensity map power spectrum, averaged over all k (i.e. 1.0 means there is no signal loss, and 0.0 means there is no remaining signal). at low S/N ratio are probably meaningless. It is therefo… view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Radar plots showing the performance of each of the six SVD methods with respect to extracting an extended source (red) and a compact source (blue). The top row are the tensor SVD methods, and the bottom row are the 2D SVD methods. The left half of each radar plot refers to performance in a ’low noise’ environment and the right hand half refers to a ’high noise’ environment. For each half, we have displaye… view at source ↗
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: A histogram of the flux densities in the LMC data cube used for the compact-source injection tests. The blue histogram is the data without any singular value removal (preconditioned, but rescaled back to flux density); the orange histogram is after n = 10 singular values removed (SVD method); and the green histogram is after clipping and n = 10 singular values removed (CSVD method). The dashed green line … view at source ↗
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: Nevertheless, the success of the L1SVD approach [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_18.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Spectral-line results from a new cryogenic phased array feed (cryoPAF) on the Murriyang telescope at Parkes are presented. This array offers a significant improvement in field of view, aperture efficiency, bandwidth, chromaticity and survey speed compared with conventional horn-fed receivers. We demonstrate this with measurements of sky calibrators and observations of 21-cm neutral hydrogen (HI) in the LMC and the nearby galaxy NGC 6744. Within 0.3 deg of the optical axis, the ratio of system temperature to dish aperture efficiency is 25 K and the ratio with beam efficiency is 21 K (at 1.4 GHz). For the previously measured $T_{sys} = 17$ K, respective efficiency values 0.7 and 0.8 are derived. Our HI observational results are in good agreement with previous results, although detailed comparison with multibeam observations of the LMC suggests that the earlier observations may have missed an extended component of low-column-density gas ($8\times 10^{18}$ cm$^{-2}$). We use the cryoPAF zoom-band and wideband data to make a preliminary investigation of whether the large number of simultaneous beams (72) permits the use of novel data reduction methods to reduce the effects of foreground/background continuum contamination and RFI. We also investigate if these methods can better protect against signal loss for the detection of faint, extended cosmological signals such as HI intensity maps. Using robust higher-order singular value decomposition (SVD) techniques, we find encouraging results for the detection of both compact and extended sources, including challenging conditions with high RFI occupancy and significant sky continuum structure. Examples are shown that demonstrate that 3D SVD techniques offer a significant improvement in noise reduction and signal capture compared with more traditional layered 2D techniques.

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

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents spectral-line results from a new cryogenic phased array feed (cryoPAF) on the Murriyang telescope, including system performance metrics (Tsys/efficiency ratios of 25 K and 21 K at 1.4 GHz, with derived efficiencies of 0.7 and 0.8), HI observations of the LMC and NGC 6744 that agree with prior work while suggesting missed low-column-density gas, and a preliminary investigation of 3D higher-order SVD techniques for reducing continuum and RFI contamination, claiming significant improvements over layered 2D SVD in noise reduction and signal capture for both compact and extended sources.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the cryoPAF enables substantially higher survey speed and field of view for 21-cm observations, while the 3D SVD methods could provide a valuable tool for mitigating foregrounds without attenuating faint extended HI emission, with direct relevance to intensity mapping surveys.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract and results discussion: The claim that 3D SVD offers significant improvement in noise reduction and signal capture over 2D methods rests on qualitative 'examples' without quantitative validation such as recovered integrated HI fluxes, spatial power spectra, or column-density histograms for the LMC and NGC 6744 cubes; this leaves open whether truncation attenuates low-column-density extended emission as noted in the skeptic analysis.
  2. [Performance metrics] Performance metrics section: The reported Tsys/efficiency ratios (25 K within 0.3 deg and 21 K) and derived efficiencies lack error bars, full data exclusion criteria, or details on the calibration and sky calibrator observations used to obtain them, undermining the quantitative comparison to prior Tsys=17 K measurements.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Methods] The manuscript should include explicit statements on the rank truncation thresholds chosen for the SVD decompositions and any tests for signal loss in simulated data cubes.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thorough review and positive evaluation of the significance of our work on the cryogenic phased array feed and 3D SVD methods. We address each major comment below and will revise the manuscript accordingly to strengthen the presentation.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and results discussion: The claim that 3D SVD offers significant improvement in noise reduction and signal capture over 2D methods rests on qualitative 'examples' without quantitative validation such as recovered integrated HI fluxes, spatial power spectra, or column-density histograms for the LMC and NGC 6744 cubes; this leaves open whether truncation attenuates low-column-density extended emission as noted in the skeptic analysis.

    Authors: We agree that the current demonstration relies primarily on qualitative examples, as noted in the preliminary nature of the investigation. In the revised manuscript we will add quantitative validations, including recovered integrated HI fluxes, spatial power spectra, and column-density histograms comparing the 2D and 3D SVD results for both the LMC and NGC 6744 cubes. These metrics will directly address potential attenuation of low-column-density extended emission and provide a more rigorous basis for the claimed improvements in noise reduction and signal capture. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Performance metrics] Performance metrics section: The reported Tsys/efficiency ratios (25 K within 0.3 deg and 21 K) and derived efficiencies lack error bars, full data exclusion criteria, or details on the calibration and sky calibrator observations used to obtain them, undermining the quantitative comparison to prior Tsys=17 K measurements.

    Authors: We will expand the performance metrics section in the revised manuscript to include error bars on the Tsys/efficiency ratios, explicit data exclusion criteria, and additional details on the calibration procedures and sky calibrator observations. These changes will improve transparency and support a clearer quantitative comparison to the prior Tsys = 17 K measurements. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: empirical telescope data and SVD examples stand on direct measurements

full rationale

The paper reports direct measurements of cryoPAF performance (T_sys/efficiency ratios at 1.4 GHz) and HI spectral-line data from LMC and NGC 6744 observations. These are compared to independent prior observations, with the claim that earlier multibeam data may have missed low-column-density gas. The 3D SVD noise-reduction results are shown via examples on the acquired cubes, without any equations that define improvements via parameters fitted to the same data or that reduce the claimed signal capture to a self-referential low-rank decomposition. The low-rank assumption is stated as a premise for the method but is not used to force the outcome by construction; results are presented as empirical demonstrations. No self-citation chains or renamed known results appear in the load-bearing steps.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard radio-astronomy assumptions about array calibration and the applicability of SVD to separate signal subspaces; no new free parameters or invented entities are introduced.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The observed data cube can be decomposed into low-rank signal, continuum, and noise components separable by higher-order SVD.
    Invoked when applying 3D SVD to separate astronomical signals from RFI and sky structure.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5767 in / 1207 out tokens · 62748 ms · 2026-05-15T22:34:15.280051+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

92 extracted references · 92 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    E., Alexander, P., et al

    Abdurashidova, Z., Aguirre, J. E., Alexander, P., et al. 2022, ApJ, 924, 51

    work page 2022

  2. [2]

    Adams, E. A. K., Adebahr, B., de Blok, W. J. G., et al. 2022, A&A, 667, A38

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    H., Cichocki, A., et al

    Ahmadi-Asl, S., Phan, A. H., Cichocki, A., et al. 2024, Linear Algebra and its Applications, 695, 168

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    G., & Santos, M

    Alonso, D., Bull, P., Ferreira, P. G., & Santos, M. G. 2015, MNRAS, 447, 400

    work page 2015

  5. [5]

    1976, IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, 24, 585 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T

    Applebaum, S. 1976, IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, 24, 585 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sipőcz, B. M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Lim, P. L., et al. 2022, ApJ, 935, 167

    work page 1976

  6. [6]

    2024, A&A, 681, A1

    Auclair, C., Allys, E., Boulanger, F., et al. 2024, A&A, 681, A1

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    G., Staveley-Smith, L., de Blok, W

    Barnes, D. G., Staveley-Smith, L., de Blok, W. J. G., et al. 2001, MNRAS, 322, 486

    work page 2001

  8. [8]

    A., Browne, I

    Battye, R. A., Browne, I. W. A., Dickinson, C., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 434, 1239

    work page 2013

  9. [9]

    2025, MNRAS, 543, 1092 Brüns, C., Kerp, J., Staveley-Smith, L., et al

    Bonaldi, A., Hartley, P., Braun, R., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 543, 1092 Brüns, C., Kerp, J., Staveley-Smith, L., et al. 2005, A&A, 432, 45

    work page 2025

  10. [10]

    C., Kunzler, J., Nygaard, E., et al

    Burnett, M. C., Kunzler, J., Nygaard, E., et al. 2020, in 2020 XXXIIIrd General Assembly and Scientific Symposium of the International Union of Radio Science, 1–4

    work page 2020

  11. [11]

    2024, SIAM Journal on Imaging Sciences, 17, 225

    Cai, H., Chao, Z., Huang, L., & Needell, D. 2024, SIAM Journal on Imaging Sciences, 17, 225

    work page 2024

  12. [12]

    R., Staveley-Smith, L., & Barnes, D

    Calabretta, M. R., Staveley-Smith, L., & Barnes, D. G. 2014, PASA, 31, e007

    work page 2014

  13. [13]

    P., Irfan, M

    Carucci, I. P., Irfan, M. O., & Bobin, J. 2020, MNRAS, 499, 304

    work page 2020

  14. [14]

    B., Harker, G., et al

    Chapman, E., Abdalla, F. B., Harker, G., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 423, 2518

    work page 2012

  15. [15]

    2015, in Advancing Astrophysics with the Square Kilometre Array (AASKA14), 5

    Chapman, E., Bonaldi, A., Harker, G., et al. 2015, in Advancing Astrophysics with the Square Kilometre Array (AASKA14), 5

    work page 2015

  16. [16]

    2024, MNRAS, 532, 2615

    Chen, T., Bianco, M., Tolley, E., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 532, 2615

    work page 2024

  17. [17]

    2017, in 2017 International Conference on Electromagnetics in Advanced Applications (ICEAA), 948–951

    Chippendale, A., & Hellbourg, G. 2017, in 2017 International Conference on Electromagnetics in Advanced Applications (ICEAA), 948–951

    work page 2017

  18. [18]

    J., Broderick, J

    Condon, J. J., Broderick, J. J., & Seielstad, G. A. 1989, AJ, 97, 1064

    work page 1989

  19. [19]

    Cortes-Medellin, G., Vishwas, A., Parshley, S., & Campbell, D. B. 2014, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Confer- ence Series, V ol. 9147, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy V, ed. S. K. Ramsay, I. S. McLean, & H. Takami, 91479Q

    work page 2014

  20. [20]

    G., et al

    Cunnington, S., Li, Y., Santos, M. G., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 518, 6262

    work page 2023

  21. [21]

    M., Allys, E., Gauvrit, E., & Boulanger, F

    Delouis, J. M., Allys, E., Gauvrit, E., & Boulanger, F. 2022, A&A, 668, A122

    work page 2022

  22. [22]

    M., McClure-Griffiths, N., Gibson, S

    Dickey, J. M., McClure-Griffiths, N., Gibson, S. J., et al. 2013, PASA, 30, e003 chttp://www.astropy.org 20 L. Staveley-Smith et al

    work page 2013

  23. [23]

    P., Bellstedt, S., Robotham, A

    Driver, S. P., Bellstedt, S., Robotham, A. S. G., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 513, 439

    work page 2022

  24. [24]

    2023, in 2023 IEEE International Symposium on Antennas and Propagation and USNC-URSI Radio Science Meeting (USNC-URSI), 757–758

    Dunning, A., Barker, S., Carter, N., et al. 2023, in 2023 IEEE International Symposium on Antennas and Propagation and USNC-URSI Radio Science Meeting (USNC-URSI), 757–758

    work page 2023

  25. [25]

    D., Warnick, K

    Elmer, M., Jeffs, B. D., Warnick, K. F., Fisher, J. R., & Norrod, R. D. 2012, IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, 60, 903

    work page 2012

  26. [26]

    R., & Bradley, R

    Fisher, J. R., & Bradley, R. F. 2000, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumenta- tion Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol. 4015, Radio Telescopes, ed. H. R. Butcher, 308–318

    work page 2000

  27. [27]

    2022, in 38ème Conférence sur la Gestion de Données (BDA), Aubière, France

    Gillet, A., Leclercq, E., & Sautot, L. 2022, in 38ème Conférence sur la Gestion de Données (BDA), Aubière, France

    work page 2022

  28. [28]

    P., Kent, B

    Giovanelli, R., Haynes, M. P., Kent, B. R., et al. 2005, AJ, 130, 2598

    work page 2005

  29. [29]

    H., & Van Loan, C

    Golub, G. H., & Van Loan, C. F. 2013, Matrix Computations, forth edition

    work page 2013

  30. [30]

    A., Owers, M

    Gordon, Y. A., Owers, M. S., Pimbblet, K. A., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 465, 2671

    work page 2017

  31. [31]

    Gunawardhana, M. L. P., Norberg, P., Zehavi, I., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 479, 1433

    work page 2018

  32. [32]

    2024, in Proceedings of Machine Learning

    Han, S., Jung, S., & Kim, K. 2024, in Proceedings of Machine Learning

    work page 2024

  33. [33]

    R., Millman, K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357

    work page 2020

  34. [34]

    P., Giovanelli, R., Kent, B

    Haynes, M. P., Giovanelli, R., Kent, B. R., et al. 2018, ApJ, 861, 49

    work page 2018

  35. [35]

    2025, PASA, 42, e071

    Hopkins, A., Kapinska, A., Marvil, J., et al. 2025, PASA, 42, e071

    work page 2025

  36. [36]

    W., Bunton, J

    Hotan, A. W., Bunton, J. D., Chippendale, A. P., et al. 2021, PASA, 38, e009

    work page 2021

  37. [37]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science and Engineering, 9, 90 Hyvärinen, A. 1999, IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, 10, 626

    work page 2007

  38. [38]

    O., & Bull, P

    Irfan, M. O., & Bull, P. 2021, MNRAS, 508, 3551

    work page 2021

  39. [39]

    V., Simons, J., & Vaate, J

    Ivashina, M. V., Simons, J., & Vaate, J. G. B. 2004, Experimental Astronomy, 17, 149

    work page 2004

  40. [40]

    D., Warnick, K

    Jeffs, B. D., Warnick, K. F., Landon, J., et al. 2008, IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing, 2, 635 Jishnu Nambissan, T., Subrahmanyan, R., Somashekar, R., et al. 2021, Exper- imental Astronomy, 51, 193

    work page 2008

  41. [41]

    2016, in MeerKA T Science: On the Pathway to the SKA, 1

    Jonas, J., & MeerKA T Team. 2016, in MeerKA T Science: On the Pathway to the SKA, 1

    work page 2016

  42. [42]

    2005, in 2005 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR’05), V ol

    Ke, Q., & Kanade, T. 2005, in 2005 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR’05), V ol. 1, 739–746 vol. 1

    work page 2005

  43. [43]

    E., Braman, K., Hao, N., & Hoover, R

    Kilmer, M. E., Braman, K., Hao, N., & Hoover, R. C. 2013, SIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applications, 34, 148

    work page 2013

  44. [44]

    G., & Bader, B

    Kolda, T. G., & Bader, B. W. 2009, SIAM Review, 51, 455

    work page 2009

  45. [45]

    2011, Handbook of Open Source Tools, doi:10.1007/ 978-1-4419-7719-9

    Koranne, S. 2011, Handbook of Open Source Tools, doi:10.1007/ 978-1-4419-7719-9

    work page 2011

  46. [46]

    S., Staveley-Smith, L., Kilborn, V

    Koribalski, B. S., Staveley-Smith, L., Kilborn, V. A., et al. 2004, AJ, 128, 16

    work page 2004

  47. [47]

    S., Staveley-Smith, L., Westmeier, T., et al

    Koribalski, B. S., Staveley-Smith, L., Westmeier, T., et al. 2020, Ap&SS, 365, 118

    work page 2020

  48. [48]

    2019, Journal of Machine Learning Research, 20, 1

    Kossaifi, J., Panagakis, Y., Anandkumar, A., & Pantic, M. 2019, Journal of Machine Learning Research, 20, 1

    work page 2019

  49. [49]

    M., Oosterloo, T

    Kutkin, A. M., Oosterloo, T. A., Morganti, R., et al. 2022, A&A, 667, A39

    work page 2022

  50. [50]

    H., & Markopoulos, P

    Le, D. H., & Markopoulos, P. P. 2022, in 2022 IEEE W orkshop on Signal Processing Systems (SiPS), 1–6

    work page 2022

  51. [51]

    2018, IEEE Microwave Magazine, 19, 112

    Li, D., Wang, P., Qian, L., et al. 2018, IEEE Microwave Magazine, 19, 112

    work page 2018

  52. [52]

    2021, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 21, 030

    Li, L.-C., Staveley-Smith, L., & Rhee, J. 2021, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 21, 030

    work page 2021

  53. [53]

    1966, Proceedings of the IEEE, 54, 1033

    Lo, Y., Lee, S., & Lee, Q. 1966, Proceedings of the IEEE, 54, 1033

    work page 1966

  54. [54]

    R., Bailes, M., McLaughlin, M

    Lorimer, D. R., Bailes, M., McLaughlin, M. A., Narkevic, D. J., & Crawford, F. 2007, Science, 318, 777

    work page 2007

  55. [55]

    P., Prochaska, J

    Macquart, J. P., Prochaska, J. X., McQuinn, M., et al. 2020, Nature, 581, 391

    work page 2020

  56. [56]

    C., Cormier, D., Hony, S., et al

    Madden, S. C., Cormier, D., Hony, S., et al. 2020, A&A, 643, A141

    work page 2020

  57. [57]

    L., Lancaster, L., Villaescusa-Navarro, F., et al

    Makinen, T. L., Lancaster, L., Villaescusa-Navarro, F., et al. 2021, J. Cosmol- ogy Astropart. Phys., 2021, 081

    work page 2021

  58. [58]

    N., Lyne, A

    Manchester, R. N., Lyne, A. G., Camilo, F., et al. 2001, MNRAS, 328, 17

    work page 2001

  59. [59]

    P., Chachlakis, D

    Markopoulos, P. P., Chachlakis, D. G., & Prater-Bennette, A. 2018, in 2018 IEEE Global Conference on Signal and Information Processing (GlobalSIP), 1353–1357

    work page 2018

  60. [60]

    L., Lenc, E., et al

    McConnell, D., Hale, C. L., Lenc, E., et al. 2020, PASA, 37, e048

    work page 2020

  61. [61]

    G., Bobin, J., & Carucci, I

    Mertens, F. G., Bobin, J., & Carucci, I. P. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 3517

    work page 2024

  62. [62]

    G., Ghosh, A., & Koopmans, L

    Mertens, F. G., Ghosh, A., & Koopmans, L. V. E. 2018, MNRAS, 478, 3640

    work page 2018

  63. [63]

    L., et al

    Murphy, T., Chatterjee, S., Kaplan, D. L., et al. 2013, PASA, 30, e006

    work page 2013

  64. [64]

    R., Adebahr, B., Kutkin, A., et al

    Offringa, A. R., Adebahr, B., Kutkin, A., et al. 2023, A&A, 670, A166

    work page 2023

  65. [65]

    2024, in 2024 IEEE 40th International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE), 995–1008

    Ouyang, Y., Xie, K., Wen, J., Xie, G., & Li, K. 2024, in 2024 IEEE 40th International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE), 995–1008

    work page 2024

  66. [66]

    M., Pisano, D

    Pingel, N. M., Pisano, D. J., Ruzindana, M., et al. 2021, AJ, 161, 163 Planck Collaboration, Aghanim, N., Akrami, Y., et al. 2020, A&A, 641, A6

    work page 2021

  67. [67]

    N., Staveley-Smith, L., Rhee, J., et al

    Reynolds, T. N., Staveley-Smith, L., Rhee, J., et al. 2017, PASA, 34, e051

    work page 2017

  68. [68]

    2023, MNRAS, 518, 4646

    Rhee, J., Meyer, M., Popping, A., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 518, 4646

    work page 2023

  69. [69]

    A., Shillue, W., Simon, B., et al

    Roshi, D. A., Shillue, W., Simon, B., et al. 2018, AJ, 155, 202

    work page 2018

  70. [70]

    Schneider, S. E. 1989, ApJ, 343, 94

    work page 1989

  71. [71]

    P., Cunnington, S., et al

    Spinelli, M., Carucci, I. P., Cunnington, S., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 509, 2048

    work page 2022

  72. [72]

    2022, PASA, 39, e026

    Staveley-Smith, L., Bond, E., Bekki, K., & Westmeier, T. 2022, PASA, 39, e026

    work page 2022

  73. [73]

    R., Haynes, R

    Staveley-Smith, L., Kim, S., Calabretta, M. R., Haynes, R. F., & Kesteven, M. J. 2003, MNRAS, 339, 87

    work page 2003

  74. [74]

    C., Schröder, A

    Staveley-Smith, L., Kraan-Korteweg, R. C., Schröder, A. C., et al. 2016, AJ, 151, 52

    work page 2016

  75. [75]

    E., Bird, T

    Staveley-Smith, L., Wilson, W. E., Bird, T. S., et al. 1996, PASA, 13, 243

    work page 1996

  76. [76]

    J., Hobbs, G., Price, D

    Toomey, L. J., Hobbs, G., Price, D. C., et al. 2024, Astronomy and Computing, 47, 100804

    work page 2024

  77. [77]

    M., Mondal, R., Mellema, G., et al

    Trott, C. M., Mondal, R., Mellema, G., et al. 2022, A&A, 666, A106

    work page 2022

  78. [78]

    Tucker, L. R. 1966, Psychometrika, 31, 279–311 van Cappellen, W. A., Oosterloo, T. A., Verheijen, M. A. W., et al. 2022, A&A, 658, A146 van Haarlem, M. P., Wise, M. W., Gunst, A. W., et al. 2013, A&A, 556, A2 van Leeuwen, J., Kooistra, E., Oostrum, L., et al. 2023, A&A, 672, A117

    work page 1966

  79. [79]

    2012, ApJ, 745, 176

    Vedantham, H., Udaya Shankar, N., & Subrahmanyan, R. 2012, ApJ, 745, 176

    work page 2012

  80. [80]

    E., et al

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261

    work page 2020

Showing first 80 references.