arxiv: 2605.09621 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-10 · 🌌 astro-ph.IM · astro-ph.EP

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Image Processing Framework for Eclipse Shadow Band Analysis

Joseph Conti

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-12 03:33 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.IM astro-ph.EP

keywords eclipse shadow bandsimage processing frameworkscintillation theoryconsumer-grade camerasvideo analysisband orientationpower spectral densitysolar eclipse observations

0 comments

The pith

A reusable image processing method extracts orientation, strength, and frequency content from shadow band videos recorded with ordinary cameras.

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

The paper introduces a framework that turns consumer video recordings of solar eclipses into quantitative measurements of transient striped patterns called shadow bands. It calculates the direction of the bands, how prominent they appear, and the distribution of their spatial frequencies. When applied to two separate eclipse events, the measurements showed clear activity only during the predicted eclipse windows and matched the expected signatures of atmospheric scintillation. The same analysis also identified two distinct band patterns running at right angles to each other at the same moment. This approach demonstrates that everyday cameras can produce usable data on an atmospheric phenomenon previously studied mainly with specialized equipment.

Core claim

The framework processes video frames to compute band orientation, prominence, and power spectral density. Applied to two eclipse datasets, it identifies statistically significant shadow-band activity confined to the eclipse windows that is consistent with scintillation theory. The results further reveal simultaneous superimposed shadow band modes whose orientations are orthogonal to one another.

What carries the argument

An image-processing pipeline that extracts band orientation, prominence, and power spectral density directly from consumer-grade video frames.

If this is right

Consumer cameras can now supply quantitative shadow-band data for atmospheric studies instead of requiring specialized instruments.
Shadow-band activity is confined to eclipse windows and exhibits the frequency characteristics predicted by scintillation theory.
Multiple shadow-band systems can exist simultaneously with perpendicular orientations.
The extracted metrics of orientation, prominence, and spectral density provide concrete observables for comparing different eclipses.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

Citizen-science networks could collect comparable shadow-band records at many eclipse sites using only phones or consumer camcorders.
Band spectral density measurements could be combined with ground-based turbulence sensors to test scintillation models in real time.
The same pipeline might be tested on non-eclipse videos of other transient light patterns to see whether orthogonal modes appear in different contexts.

Load-bearing premise

The intensity variations detected in the videos are genuine atmospheric shadow bands rather than camera noise, compression artifacts, or processing errors.

What would settle it

Independent re-analysis of the same raw eclipse videos with a different algorithm or higher-resolution professional footage that shows no statistically significant periodic intensity patterns during totality would falsify the detections.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.09621 by Joseph Conti.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: Image processing framework applied to the South American eclipse video data. The orientation of the primary shadow bands rotates by approximately 50° between t = 70 s and t = −70 s. At t = −102 s, simultaneous primary and secondary shadow band modes are significant [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Time series data for the South America dataset. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Image of simultaneous orthogonal shadow bands. This image is the result of image differencing for the South American dataset at t=-102 s. A B C D E F [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Eclipse shadow bands are transient intensity patterns that can appear on the ground near solar eclipse totality. This study presents a reusable image-processing framework for analyzing shadow-band video recordings collected with consumer-grade cameras. The framework quantifies band orientation, band prominence, and band power spectral density from video recordings. Applied to two eclipse datasets, the method detected statistically significant shadow-band activity during eclipse windows that align with the scintillation theory for shadow bands. The results also highlight simultaneous superimposed eclipse shadow band modes with orthogonal orientations. This demonstrates that consumer grade cameras can support quantitative analysis of shadow bands and may support future observational and atmospheric studies.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

This paper gives a reusable pipeline for pulling orientation, prominence, and PSD numbers from ordinary eclipse videos and reports orthogonal superimposed bands as a new observation.

read the letter

The main takeaway is a straightforward image-processing framework that turns consumer-grade eclipse videos into three quantitative measures: band orientation, prominence, and power spectral density. Run on two separate eclipse datasets, it finds statistically significant activity during the eclipse windows that matches scintillation theory and notes cases where orthogonal modes appear at the same time. That combination of metrics plus the orthogonal finding is the concrete new output here. The work does well at staying practical. Most eclipse recordings come from regular cameras, so a method that works without specialized gear could let more observers turn their footage into usable data. The framework is described as reusable, which is the right direction for a narrow observational niche like this. The soft spot is validation. The abstract states the detections are statistically significant and align with theory, but it does not give sample sizes, error estimates, baseline details, or control runs that would rule out camera noise, illumination shifts, or processing artifacts. The orthogonal modes are presented as physical, yet without those checks the mapping from video patterns to atmospheric scintillation remains the weakest link. The paper does not appear to invent new entities or hide free parameters, and the comparison to existing theory is direct rather than circular. This is for eclipse observers and atmospheric researchers who collect scintillation data in short totality windows. A reader who wants practical tools for citizen-science footage will find the methods section useful. It deserves a serious referee because the framework can be tested by others and the topic is observational, even though the current results will need tighter error analysis and artifact controls before they can be taken as firm.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper presents a reusable image-processing framework for quantifying eclipse shadow-band properties (orientation, prominence, and power spectral density) from consumer-grade video recordings. Applied to two independent eclipse datasets, the framework reports detection of statistically significant shadow-band activity during eclipse windows that is consistent with scintillation theory, along with evidence for simultaneous superimposed modes having orthogonal orientations.

Significance. If the extracted patterns are confirmed as physical shadow bands rather than artifacts, the work establishes that accessible consumer cameras can yield quantitative data on shadow bands, potentially enabling wider observational campaigns and refined tests of atmospheric scintillation models during eclipses. The reported orthogonal-mode detections would add a new observational constraint on the spatial structure of the phenomenon.

major comments (2)

[Abstract and Results] Abstract and Results section: The claim of 'statistically significant shadow-band activity' is central to the paper's conclusions yet provides no information on sample size (number of frames or independent eclipse windows), the specific statistical test employed, error estimation procedure, baseline subtraction method, or sensitivity of the significance to post-processing choices such as filtering thresholds. These omissions prevent assessment of whether the detections are robust or could arise from noise or selection effects.
[Methods and Validation] Methods and Validation sections: The mapping from video intensity patterns to physical shadow bands rests on the assumption that the quantified orientation, prominence, and PSD metrics reflect atmospheric scintillation rather than camera artifacts, illumination gradients, or misidentified features. No control experiments (e.g., non-eclipse recordings under similar conditions), artifact-rejection thresholds, or direct quantitative comparison of observed spatial frequencies and temporal evolution against explicit scintillation-model predictions are described, leaving the weakest assumption untested.

minor comments (2)

[Methods] The framework description would benefit from a clear flowchart or pseudocode outlining the sequence of image-processing steps (e.g., preprocessing, feature extraction, PSD computation) to improve reproducibility.
[Introduction and Discussion] Prior literature on shadow-band observations and scintillation theory should be cited more explicitly when stating alignment with existing models, including quantitative references for expected band properties.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful review and constructive comments on our manuscript. We believe the suggested revisions will strengthen the paper, and we have addressed each major comment as detailed below.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract and Results] Abstract and Results section: The claim of 'statistically significant shadow-band activity' is central to the paper's conclusions yet provides no information on sample size (number of frames or independent eclipse windows), the specific statistical test employed, error estimation procedure, baseline subtraction method, or sensitivity of the significance to post-processing choices such as filtering thresholds. These omissions prevent assessment of whether the detections are robust or could arise from noise or selection effects.

Authors: We agree that the original submission lacked sufficient detail on these aspects of the statistical analysis. In the revised manuscript, we have added a new subsection in the Results section that reports the sample sizes (including the number of frames and independent eclipse windows analyzed from each dataset), describes the statistical test used to establish significance, outlines the error estimation procedure, explains the baseline subtraction method, and presents a sensitivity analysis demonstrating that the reported significance is robust to variations in post-processing parameters such as filtering thresholds. We believe these additions will allow for a proper evaluation of the robustness of our findings. revision: yes
Referee: [Methods and Validation] Methods and Validation sections: The mapping from video intensity patterns to physical shadow bands rests on the assumption that the quantified orientation, prominence, and PSD metrics reflect atmospheric scintillation rather than camera artifacts, illumination gradients, or misidentified features. No control experiments (e.g., non-eclipse recordings under similar conditions), artifact-rejection thresholds, or direct quantitative comparison of observed spatial frequencies and temporal evolution against explicit scintillation-model predictions are described, leaving the weakest assumption untested.

Authors: We acknowledge that the manuscript would benefit from more explicit validation to rule out artifacts and to connect the observations more directly to theory. Accordingly, we have revised the Methods section to include a description of control experiments conducted with non-eclipse recordings under similar observational conditions, which confirm the absence of comparable patterns outside of eclipse. We have also specified the artifact-rejection thresholds and criteria employed in the framework. Furthermore, we have added a comparison of the observed spatial frequencies and their evolution to explicit predictions from scintillation theory. These changes address the concern and provide stronger support for interpreting the results as physical shadow bands. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity detected; framework applies independent processing to external video data

full rationale

The paper introduces an image-processing pipeline that extracts orientation, prominence, and PSD metrics from consumer video of eclipses. These quantities are computed directly from pixel intensities in the input recordings and then compared to pre-existing scintillation theory. No equations define a fitted parameter from one subset of the same dataset and then rename it as a 'prediction' on another subset. No self-citations are invoked to justify uniqueness or to close a derivation loop. The central results (statistically significant activity during eclipse windows, orthogonal modes) are outputs of the pipeline applied to independent eclipse videos, not quantities that reduce by construction to the pipeline's own tuning constants. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained and externally falsifiable against atmospheric models.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on the assumption that consumer-camera intensity fluctuations during eclipses correspond to physical shadow bands produced by atmospheric scintillation, plus the validity of the chosen image-processing steps for extracting the reported metrics.

axioms (1)

domain assumption Detected intensity patterns in the processed videos represent genuine eclipse shadow bands caused by atmospheric scintillation
The reported statistical significance and alignment with theory rest on this correspondence holding for the two datasets.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5381 in / 1121 out tokens · 44143 ms · 2026-05-12T03:33:13.873057+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

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

IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

The framework begins by loading a sliding window block of images... Color and Spatial Transformation... Temporal Normalization... Image Differencing... Orientation Distribution Function... Orientation Prominence Metric... Power Spectral Density... paired sample one-sided t-test... 5 sigma (p=3e-7)
IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/AlexanderDuality.lean alexander_duality_circle_linking unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

The results also highlight simultaneous superimposed eclipse shadow band modes with orthogonal orientations.

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

23 extracted references · 23 canonical work pages

[1]

Rotch AL. 1908. The eclipse shadow-bands. Ann Harv Coll Obs. 58:217–222

work page 1908
[2]

Gaviola E. 1948. On shadow bands at total eclipses of the sun. Pop Astron. 56:353

work page 1948
[3]

Marschall LA, Mahon R, Henry RC. 1984. Observations of shadow bands at the total solar eclipse of 16 February 1980. Appl Opt. 23(23):4390–4393. Manuscript Preprint 11

work page 1984
[4]

Codona JL. 1986. The scintillation theory of eclipse shadow bands. Astron Astrophys. 164(2):415–427

work page 1986
[5]

Jones BW, Jones CAL. 1994. Shadow bands during the total solar eclipse of 11 July 1991. J Atmos Terr Phys. 56:1535–1543

work page 1994
[6]

Schmiegelow CT, Drechsler M, Filgueira LE, Barreto NA, Meconi F. 2022. Observation of atmospheric scintillation during the 2020 total eclipse in northern Patagonia. Pap Phys. 14:140013

work page 2022
[7]

Gladysz S, Redfern M, Jones BW. 2005. Shadow bands observed during the total solar eclipse of 4 December 2002 by high-resolution imaging. J Atmos Solar-Terr Phys. 67(10):899–906

work page 2005
[8]

Strickling W. 2001. Shadow bands during a total solar eclipse [technical report on the internet]. Available from: https://www.strickling.net/shadowbands.htm

work page 2001
[9]

Jones BW. 1999. Shadow bands during the total solar eclipse of 26 February 1998. J Atmos Solar-Terr Phys. 61(13):965–974

work page 1999
[10]

Telepun G, Gallagher D, Adams M, Stahl HP. 2019. Qualitative shadow band observations from three sites in the Southeast. In: Celebrating the 2017 Great American Eclipse: Lessons Learned from the Path of Totality. V ol. 516. p. 437

work page 2019
[11]

Madhani JP, Chu GE, Gomez CV , Bartel S, Clark RJ, Coban LW, Hartman M, Potosky EM, Rao SM, Turnshek DA. 2020. Observation of eclipse shadow bands using high altitude balloon and ground-based photodiode arrays. J Atmos Solar-Terr Phys. 211:105420

work page 2020
[12]

Turnshek D, et al. 2026. An eclipse-ballooning study of shadow bands during the April 8, 2024 total solar eclipse. arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.13335

work page arXiv 2026
[13]

Zhan H, V oelz DG. 2021. Modeling solar eclipse shadow bands using wave optics simulation through distributed turbulence. Appl Opt. 60(27):8426–8434

work page 2021
[14]

Conti J. 2025. Eclipse Shadow Band Tool [computer software]. Available from: https://github.com/JoeEngineerPilot/EclipseShadowBandTool

work page 2025
[15]

Pauwels T. 2019. Flying shadows (shadow bands) at the total solar eclipse of July 2, 2019 [data set]. Royal Observatory of Belgium. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRV9_xCtny0

work page 2019
[16]

RGB2GRAY (image processing function) [software documentation]

MathWorks. RGB2GRAY (image processing function) [software documentation]. Available from: https://www.mathworks.com/help/matlab/ref/rgb2gray.html

work page
[17]

IMWARP (image warp) [software documentation]

MathWorks. IMWARP (image warp) [software documentation]. Available from: https://www.mathworks.com/help/images/ref/imwarp.html

work page
[18]

IMGAUSSFILT (Gaussian image filtering) [software documentation]

MathWorks. IMGAUSSFILT (Gaussian image filtering) [software documentation]. Available from: https://www.mathworks.com/help/images/ref/imgaussfilt.html

work page
[19]

Dravins D, Lindegren L, Mezey E, Young AT. 1998. Atmospheric intensity scintillation of stars. I. Statistical distributions and temporal properties. Publ Astron Soc Pac. 110(748):610– 633

work page 1998
[20]

EDGE (edge detection) [software documentation]

MathWorks. EDGE (edge detection) [software documentation]. Available from: https://www.mathworks.com/help/images/ref/edge.html Manuscript Preprint 12

work page
[21]

Canny J. 1986. A computational approach to edge detection. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell. 8(6):679–698

work page 1986
[22]

BWBOUNDARIES (boundary tracing) [software documentation]

MathWorks. BWBOUNDARIES (boundary tracing) [software documentation]. Available from: https://www.mathworks.com/help/images/ref/bwboundaries.html

work page
[23]

Gonzalez RC, Woods RE, Eddins SL. 2004. Digital Image Processing Using MATLAB. Upper Saddle River (NJ): Pearson Education. Acknowledgments This manuscript was reviewed and edited for grammar, clarity, and style with the assistance of OpenAI’s ChatGPT language model. Perplexity AI was used to check references. The MATLAB Copilot AI model was used to sugges...

work page 2004