Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Fr\'echet Vectors as sensitive tools for blind tests of CMB anomalies

T0 review · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Fréchet Vectors, built from Multipole Vectors, are more sensitive to CMB anisotropies, and Planck 2018 temperature maps show small tensions with a Gaussian and statistically isotropic sky.

arxiv 2411.08087 v2 pith:6F37D6KT submitted 2024-11-12 astro-ph.CO gr-qc

Ricardo G. Rodrigues , Thiago S. Pereira , Miguel Quartin This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.COgr-qc
keywords datascalesvariancevectorsechetnullsigmasimulations
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

Cosmologists usually describe the cosmic microwave background (CMB), the oldest light in the universe, by breaking it into spherical harmonics labeled by the multipole number ell. The standard summary is the angular power spectrum C_ell, which assumes the sky is statistically the same in every direction. But there is another way to encode the information: Multipole Vectors (MVs), which replace the harmonic coefficients with ell unit vectors on a sphere. In a universe that is Gaussian and statistically isotropic (GSI), these vectors should point uniformly in all directions.

The authors compress the MVs at each multipole into a single Fréchet Vector (FV), the point on the sphere that minimizes the average squared distance to all MVs. Because it combines all vectors of a multipole, the FV is less affected by cosmic variance and more sensitive to tiny angular shifts in the MV directions. The paper first shows with simulations that FVs can point toward the location of an artificially injected cold spot on the sky. It then applies a chi-square uniformity test to Planck 2018 temperature maps and to thousands of GSI simulations.

The results are mixed. Using the raw Planck maps, the MV test finds no significant anisotropy when the galactic mask is applied. The FV test, however, rejects the GSI hypothesis at 5.3 to 8.2 sigma. When the authors add realistic anisotropic noise simulations to the GSI maps, the FV rejection drops to about 2 sigma at scales ell<=1500, but remains at 3.5 to 3.7 sigma above ell=1500. The authors conclude that the remaining tensions could come from noise or foreground modeling limitations rather than new physics.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that Fréchet Vectors are more sensitive than raw Multipole Vectors in blind tests of CMB statistical isotropy, and that Planck 2018 temperature maps show tensions with the Gaussian and statistically isotropic hypothesis when FVs are used. The abstract states: 'Planck's MVs appear consistent with these hypotheses at scales 2<=ell<=1500 when the common mask is applied, whereas the same test using the FVs rejects them with significances between 5.3 and 8.2 sigma.' The conclusions give the more conservative version: 'our results show small tensions with respect to the GSI hypotheses both at ell<=1500 (>=2.1 sigma) and ell>1500 (>=3.5 sigma)'.

Load-bearing premise

The residual tensions reported for Planck FVs depend on the assumption that Planck's dx12_v3 anisotropic noise simulations faithfully reproduce the real instrument noise in the component-separated maps. If those simulations under- or over-estimate the noise anisotropy, the 2.1-2.3 sigma tensions at ell<=1500 and the 3.5-3.7 sigma rejections above ell=1500 could change substantially. This premise enters at Section 5.2, where the authors add the noise simulations to GSI maps to build the null distribution, and is acknowledged in the conclusions: 'Limitations of the noise and/or foregrounds modeling may account for these deviations from the null hypothesis.'

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.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The analysis has no fitted physical parameters; the free parameters listed are analysis choices for pixel resolution and reporting ranges. The main domain assumption is the fidelity of the Planck noise simulations, which directly affects the significance of the residual tensions. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (2)
  • HEALPix resolution for vector frequency counting = Nside=8 for ell in [2,160]; Nside=16 for ell in [161,2000]
    Chosen after tests as a compromise between hiding intra-pixel correlations and numerical cost (Section 4). It affects sensitivity but is not fitted to the measured anisotropy.
  • Scale ranges for reporting = Large: 2<=ell<=31; Planck: 2<=ell<=1500; All: 2<=ell<=2000
    Chosen to quote results at three well-motivated ranges and to mitigate selection biases (Section 5, Table 1). The Large range uses a round 30 multipoles, which is a hand choice.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption MVs of a Gaussian statistically isotropic CMB are uniformly distributed on the sphere
    Invoked in Section 4 to justify the 1-point chi-square uniformity test; relies on Ref. [57] and is checked by simulation in Figure 2.
  • domain assumption FVs of a Gaussian statistically isotropic CMB are uniformly distributed on the sphere
    Central to the null test; assumed from the uniform MV distribution and confirmed by simulations in Figure 2.
  • domain assumption Planck dx12_v3 anisotropic noise simulations faithfully reproduce the instrument noise
    Used in Section 5.2 to build the noise-inclusive null distribution; the interpretation of residual tensions depends on its validity.
  • domain assumption The Planck common mask removes foreground-contaminated regions
    Used in the masked-map analyses; residual foregrounds could remain, as acknowledged in the conclusions.
  • domain assumption The total chi-square Q follows a log-normal distribution for the control simulations
    Appendix C uses this to convert p-values to sigma values, including extrapolations beyond the 2000 control simulations.
  • standard math The covariance matrix is singular due to the constraint that pixel frequencies sum to the number of vectors, and a pseudo-inverse with the Hartlap correction is unbiased
    Section 4, Eqs. (4.1)-(4.2), following Ref. [60].
  • domain assumption FVs from different multipoles are statistically independent when the a_lm are independent
    Assumed in Section 2.2 and used by the FV chi-square test, which pools all FVs from ell=2 to ell_max.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Fr\'echet Vectors as sensitive tools for blind tests of CMB anomalies." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/6F37D6KT

@misc{pith2026241108087,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Fr\'echet Vectors as sensitive tools for blind tests of CMB anomalies},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/6F37D6KT}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.08087}
}
abstract

Cosmological data collected on a sphere, such as CMB anisotropies, are typically represented by the spherical harmonic coefficients, denoted as $a_{\ell m}$. The angular power spectrum, or $C_\ell$, serves as the fundamental estimator of the variance in this data. Alternatively, spherical data and their variance can also be characterized using Multipole Vectors (MVs) and the Fr\'echet variance. The vectors that minimize this variance, known as Fr\'echet Vectors (FVs), define the center of mass of points on a compact space, and are excellent indicators of statistical correlations between different multipoles. We demonstrate this using both simulations and real data. Through simulations, we show that FVs enable a blind detection and reconstruction of the location associated with a mock Cold Spot anomaly introduced in an otherwise isotropic sky. Applying these tools to the 2018 Planck maps, we implement several improvements on previous null tests of Gaussianity and statistical isotropy, down to arc-minute scales. Planck's MVs appear consistent with these hypotheses at scales $2 \leq\ell \leq 1500$ when the common mask is applied, whereas the same test using the FVs rejects them with significances between 5.3 and 8.2$\sigma$. The inclusion of anisotropic noise simulations render the FVs marginally consistent ($\geq 2\sigma$) with the null hypotheses at the same scales, but still rejects them at $3.5-3.7\sigma$ when we consider scales above $\ell=1500$, where the signal-to-noise is small. Limitations of the noise and/or foregrounds modeling may account for these deviations from the null hypothesis.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Multipolar structure of the local expansion rate from incomplete sky data

    astro-ph.CO 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    CF4 data yield a 3.3σ excess dipole in the local expansion-rate fluctuation field at (l,b)=(290°,-4°)±5°, sourced mainly by z∈[0.03,0.05], with quadrupole/octupole consistent with ΛCDM and no multipole-vector alignments.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

62 extracted references · 35 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Physics of the cosmic microwave background anisotropy

    M. Bucher,Physics of the cosmic microwave background anisotropy,Int. J. Mod. Phys. D24 (2015) 1530004 [1501.04288]. [2]WMAPcollaboration,First year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) observations: Determination of cosmological parameters,Astrophys. J. Suppl.148(2003) 175 [astro-ph/0302209]. [3]Planckcollaboration,Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmolog...

    work page Pith review arXiv 2015

  2. [5]

    Hu,Weak lensing of the CMB: A harmonic approach,Phys

    W. Hu,Weak lensing of the CMB: A harmonic approach,Phys. Rev. D62(2000) 043007 [astro-ph/0001303]. [6]Planckcollaboration,Planck 2018 results. VIII. Gravitational lensing,Astron. Astrophys. 641(2020) A8 [1807.06210]

    arXiv 2000

  3. [7]

    Challinor and F

    A. Challinor and F. van Leeuwen,Peculiar velocity effects in high resolution microwave background experiments,Phys. Rev. D65(2002) 103001 [astro-ph/0112457]

    arXiv 2002

  4. [8]

    Measuring our Peculiar Velocity by "Pre-deboosting" the CMB

    A. Notari and M. Quartin,Measuring our Peculiar Velocity by ’Pre-deboosting’ the CMB, JCAP02(2012) 026 [1112.1400]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2012

  5. [9]

    Ferreira and M

    P.d.S. Ferreira and M. Quartin,First Constraints on the Intrinsic CMB Dipole and Our Velocity with Doppler and Aberration,Phys. Rev. Lett.127(2021) 101301 [2011.08385]

    arXiv 2021

  6. [10]

    Schwarz, C.J

    D.J. Schwarz, C.J. Copi, D. Huterer and G.D. Starkman,CMB Anomalies after Planck,Class. Quant. Grav.33(2016) 184001 [1510.07929]. [11]Planckcollaboration,Planck 2015 results. XVI. Isotropy and statistics of the CMB,Astron. Astrophys.594(2016) A16 [1506.07135]

    arXiv 2016

  7. [12]

    Wavelet analysis and the detection of non-Gaussianity in the CMB

    M. Hobson, A. Jones and A. Lasenby,Wavelet analysis and the detection of non-gaussianity in the cmb,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.309(1999) 125 [astro-ph/9810200]

    work page Pith review arXiv 1999

  8. [13]

    Applications of Wavelets to the Analysis of Cosmic Microwave Background Maps

    L. Tenorio, A.H. Jaffe, S. Hanany and C.H. Lineweaver,Applications of wavelets to the analysis of cosmic microwave background maps,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.310(1999) 823 [astro-ph/9903206]

    work page Pith review arXiv 1999

Show all 62 references
  1. [14]

    Cayon, J.L

    L. Cayon, J.L. Sanz, E. Martinez-Gonzalez, A.J. Banday, F. Argueso, J.E. Gallegos et al., Spherical mexican hat wavelet: an application to detect non-gaussianity in the cobe-dmr maps, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.326(2001) 1243 [astro-ph/0105111]

    2001 arXiv

  2. [15]

    Vielva, R.B

    P. Vielva, R.B. Barreiro, M.P. Hobson, E. Martinez-Gonzalez, A.N. Lasenby, J.L. Sanz et al., Combining maximum-entropy and the mexican hat wavelet to reconstruct the microwave sky, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.328(2001) 1 [astro-ph/0105387]

    2001 arXiv

  3. [16]

    Aghanim, M

    N. Aghanim, M. Kunz, P.G. Castro and O. Forni,Non-Gaussianity: Comparing wavelet and Fourier based methods,Astron. Astrophys.406(2003) 797 [astro-ph/0301220]

    2003 arXiv

  4. [17]

    Mukherjee and Y

    P. Mukherjee and Y. Wang,Wavelets and WMAP non-Gaussianity,Astrophys. J.613(2004) 51 [astro-ph/0402602]. – 24 –

    2004 arXiv

  5. [18]

    Schmalzing and K.M

    J. Schmalzing and K.M. Gorski,Minkowski functionals used in the morphological analysis of cosmic microwave background anisotropy maps,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.297(1998) 355 [astro-ph/9710185]

    1998 arXiv

  6. [19]

    Eriksen, D.I

    H.K. Eriksen, D.I. Novikov, P.B. Lilje, A.J. Banday and K.M. Gorski,Testing for non-Gaussianity in the WMAP data: Minkowski functionals and the length of the skeleton, Astrophys. J.612(2004) 64 [astro-ph/0401276]

    2004 arXiv

  7. [20]

    Hikage, E

    C. Hikage, E. Komatsu and T. Matsubara,Primordial Non-Gaussianity and Analytical Formula for Minkowski Functionals of the Cosmic Microwave Background and Large-scale Structure,Astrophys. J.653(2006) 11 [astro-ph/0607284]

    2006 arXiv

  8. [21]

    Novaes, A

    C.P. Novaes, A. Bernui, G.A. Marques and I.S. Ferreira,Local analyses of Planck maps with Minkowski Functionals,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.461(2016) 1363 [1606.04075]

    2016 arXiv

  9. [22]

    C.J. Copi, D. Huterer and G.D. Starkman,Multipole vectors - A New representation of the CMB sky and evidence for statistical anisotropy or non-Gaussianity at 2<= l<= 8,Phys. Rev. D70(2004) 043515 [astro-ph/0310511]

    2004 arXiv

  10. [23]

    Helling, P

    R.C. Helling, P. Schupp and T. Tesileanu,CMB statistical anisotropy, multipole vectors and the influence of the dipole,Phys. Rev. D74(2006) 063004 [astro-ph/0603594]

    2006 arXiv

  11. [24]

    Bielewicz and A

    P. Bielewicz and A. Riazuelo,The study of topology of the universe using multipole vectors, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.396(2009) 609 [0804.2437]

    2009 arXiv

  12. [25]

    Pinkwart and D.J

    M. Pinkwart and D.J. Schwarz,Multipole vectors of completely random microwave skies for l≤50,Phys. Rev. D98(2018) 083536 [1803.07473]

    2018 arXiv

  13. [26]

    Oliveira, T.S

    R.A. Oliveira, T.S. Pereira and M. Quartin,CMB statistical isotropy confirmation at all scales using multipole vectors,Phys. Dark Univ.30(2020) 100608 [1812.02654]. [27]Planckcollaboration,Planck 2018 results. IV. Diffuse component separation,Astron. Astrophys.641(2020) A4 [18...

    2020 arXiv

  14. [28]

    Aurich, S

    R. Aurich, S. Lustig, F. Steiner and H. Then,CMB Alignment in Multi-Connected Universes, Class. Quant. Grav.24(2007) 1879 [astro-ph/0612308]

    2007 arXiv

  15. [29]

    Hajian, T

    A. Hajian, T. Souradeep and N.J. Cornish,Statistical isotropy of the WMAP data: A Bipolar power spectrum analysis,Astrophys. J. Lett.618(2004) L63 [astro-ph/0406354]

    2004 arXiv

  16. [30]

    Hajian and T

    A. Hajian and T. Souradeep,The Cosmic microwave background bipolar power spectrum: Basic formalism and applications,astro-ph/0501001

    arXiv

  17. [31]

    Pullen and M

    A.R. Pullen and M. Kamionkowski,Cosmic Microwave Background Statistics for a Direction-Dependent Primordial Power Spectrum,Phys. Rev. D76(2007) 103529 [0709.1144]

    2007 arXiv

  18. [32]

    Pereira and L.R

    T.S. Pereira and L.R. Abramo,Angular-planar CMB power spectrum,Phys. Rev. D80(2009) 063525 [0907.2340]

    2009 arXiv

  19. [33]

    Abramo, A

    L.R. Abramo, A. Bernui and T.S. Pereira,Searching for planar signatures in WMAP,JCAP 12(2009) 013 [0909.5395]

    2009 arXiv

  20. [34]

    Froes, T.S

    A.L. Froes, T.S. Pereira, A. Bernui and G.D. Starkman,New geometric representations of the CMB two-point correlation function,Phys. Rev. D92(2015) 043508 [1506.00705]

    2015 arXiv

  21. [35]

    Abramo, A

    L.R. Abramo, A. Bernui, I.S. Ferreira, T. Villela and C.A. Wuensche,Alignment Tests for low CMB multipoles,Phys. Rev. D74(2006) 063506 [astro-ph/0604346]

    2006 arXiv

  22. [36]

    Tegmark, A

    M. Tegmark, A. de Oliveira-Costa and A. Hamilton,A high resolution foreground cleaned CMB map from WMAP,Phys. Rev. D68(2003) 123523 [astro-ph/0302496]

    2003 arXiv

  23. [37]

    Schwarz, G.D

    D.J. Schwarz, G.D. Starkman, D. Huterer and C.J. Copi,Is the low-l microwave background cosmic?,Phys. Rev. Lett.93(2004) 221301 [astro-ph/0403353]. – 25 –

    2004 arXiv

  24. [38]

    Notari and M

    A. Notari and M. Quartin,On the proper kinetic quadrupole CMB removal and the quadrupole anomalies,JCAP06(2015) 047 [1504.02076]

    2015 arXiv

  25. [39]

    Vielva, E

    P. Vielva, E. Martinez-Gonzalez, R.B. Barreiro, J.L. Sanz and L. Cayon,Detection of non-Gaussianity in the WMAP 1 - year data using spherical wavelets,Astrophys. J.609(2004) 22 [astro-ph/0310273]

    2004 arXiv

  26. [40]

    Owusu, P.d.S

    S. Owusu, P.d.S. Ferreira, A. Notari and M. Quartin,The CMB cold spot under the lens: ruling out a supervoid interpretation,JCAP06(2023) 040 [2211.16139]

    2023 arXiv

  27. [41]

    Hobson,The theory of spherical and ellipsoidal harmonics, No

    E. Hobson,The theory of spherical and ellipsoidal harmonics, No. v. 1-2 in Raymond F. Boyer Library Collection, p. 129, The University Press (1931)

    1931

  28. [42]

    Maxwell,A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, no

    J. Maxwell,A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, no. v. 1 in A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, Dover Publications (1954)

    1954

  29. [43]

    Katz and J

    G. Katz and J. Weeks,Polynomial interpretation of multipole vectors,Phys. Rev. D70(2004) 063527 [astro-ph/0405631]

    2004 arXiv

  30. [44]

    Weeks,Maxwell’s multipole vectors and the CMB,astro-ph/0412231

    J.R. Weeks,Maxwell’s multipole vectors and the CMB,astro-ph/0412231

    arXiv

  31. [45]

    Sachs,Gravitational waves in general relativity

    R. Sachs,Gravitational waves in general relativity. vi. the outgoing radiation condition, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences264 (1961) 309

    1961

  32. [46]

    Pirani,Introduction to gravitational radiation theory,Lectures on general relativity1 (1964) 249

    F.A. Pirani,Introduction to gravitational radiation theory,Lectures on general relativity1 (1964) 249

    1964

  33. [47]

    Thorne,Multipole Expansions of Gravitational Radiation,Rev

    K.S. Thorne,Multipole Expansions of Gravitational Radiation,Rev. Mod. Phys.52(1980) 299

    1980

  34. [48]

    Blanchet and T

    L. Blanchet and T. Damour,Radiative gravitational fields in general relativity I. general structure of the field outside the source,Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. A320(1986) 379

    1986

  35. [49]

    Fréchet,Les éléments aléatoires de nature quelconque dans un espace distancié, inAnnales de l’institut Henri Poincaré, vol

    M. Fréchet,Les éléments aléatoires de nature quelconque dans un espace distancié, inAnnales de l’institut Henri Poincaré, vol. 10, pp. 215–310, 1948

    1948

  36. [50]

    M.R. Dennis,Canonical representation of spherical functions: Sylvester’s theorem, maxwell’s multipoles and majorana’s sphere,Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General37(2004) 9487–9500

    2004

  37. [51]

    Dennis,Correlations between maxwell’s multipoles for gaussian random functions on the sphere,Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General38(2005) 1653–1658

    M.R. Dennis,Correlations between maxwell’s multipoles for gaussian random functions on the sphere,Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General38(2005) 1653–1658

    2005

  38. [52]

    Helling, P

    R.C. Helling, P. Schupp and T. Tesileanu,Cmb statistical anisotropy, multipole vectors, and the influence of the dipole,Physical Review D74(2006)

    2006

  39. [53]

    Fréchet,Les éléments aléatoires de nature quelconque dans un espace distancié,Annales de l’institut Henri Poincaré10(1948) 215

    M. Fréchet,Les éléments aléatoires de nature quelconque dans un espace distancié,Annales de l’institut Henri Poincaré10(1948) 215

    1948

  40. [54]

    Dubey and H.-G

    P. Dubey and H.-G. Müller,Fréchet analysis of variance for random objects, 2019

    2019

  41. [55]

    Buss and J.P

    S.R. Buss and J.P. Fillmore,Spherical averages and applications to spherical splines and interpolation,ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG)20(2001) 95

    2001

  42. [56]

    Eichfelder, T

    G. Eichfelder, T. Hotz and J. Wieditz,An algorithm for computing fréchet means on the sphere,Optimization Letters13(2019) 1523

    2019

  43. [57]

    Bogomolny, O

    E. Bogomolny, O. Bohigas and P. Leboeuf,Distribution of roots of random polynomials, Physical Review Letters68(1992) 2726

    1992

  44. [58]

    Dennis and K

    M.R. Dennis and K. Land,Probability Density of the Multipole Vectors for a Gaussian Cosmic Microwave Background,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.383(2008) 424 [0704.3657]. [59]Planckcollaboration,Planck 2015 results. IX. Diffuse component separation: CMB maps, Astron. Astrophys.594(...

    2008 arXiv

  45. [60]

    Hartlap, P

    J. Hartlap, P. Simon and P. Schneider,Why your model parameter confidences might be too optimistic. unbiased estimation of the inverse covariance matrix,Astronomy & Astrophysics 464(2007) 399

    2007

  46. [61]

    J. Muir, S. Adhikari and D. Huterer,Covariance of CMB anomalies,Phys. Rev. D98(2018) 023521 [1806.02354]

    2018 arXiv

  47. [62]

    Jones, C.J

    J. Jones, C.J. Copi, G.D. Starkman and Y. Akrami,The Universe is not statistically isotropic, 2310.12859

  48. [63]

    Luparello, E.F

    H.E. Luparello, E.F. Boero, M. Lares, A.G. Sánchez and D.G. Lambas,The cosmic shallows – I. Interaction of CMB photons in extended galaxy haloes,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.518 (2022) 5643 [2206.14217]

    2022

  49. [64]

    Lewis,GetDist: a Python package for analysing Monte Carlo samples,1910.13970

    A. Lewis,GetDist: a Python package for analysing Monte Carlo samples,1910.13970

    1910 arXiv

  50. [65]

    Gorski, E

    K.M. Gorski, E. Hivon, A.J. Banday, B.D. Wandelt, F.K. Hansen, M. Reinecke et al.,Healpix: A framework for high-resolution discretization and fast analysis of data distributed on the sphere,The Astrophysical Journal622(2005) 759–771

    2005

  51. [66]

    Zonca, L

    A. Zonca, L. Singer, D. Lenz, M. Reinecke, C. Rosset, E. Hivon et al.,healpy: equal area pixelization and spherical harmonics transforms for data on the sphere in python,Journal of Open Source Software4(2019) 1298

    2019

  52. [67]

    Hunter,Matplotlib: A 2d graphics environment,Computing in Science & Engineering9 (2007) 90

    J.D. Hunter,Matplotlib: A 2d graphics environment,Computing in Science & Engineering9 (2007) 90

    2007

  53. [68]

    Courant and D

    R. Courant and D. Hilbert,Methods of Mathematical Physics, Volume 1, vol. 1, John Wiley & Sons (2008)

    2008

  54. [69]

    Lewis,Getdist: a python package for analysing monte carlo samples, 2019

    A. Lewis,Getdist: a python package for analysing monte carlo samples, 2019. – 27 –

    2019

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.