Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 86 references

A LOFAR station detects pulsars with roughly 20% higher signal-to-noise as they rise than as they set, a bias standard beam models do not predict.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-01 12:19 UTC pith:4YOZBHU3

load-bearing objection A credible, well-resourced measurement of a rise/set sensitivity asymmetry at LOFAR stations, but the quantitative amplitude and the attribution to the beam rather than sky noise need more work before it becomes a calibration-grade result. the 4 major comments →

arxiv 2607.19585 v1 pith:4YOZBHU3 submitted 2026-07-21 astro-ph.IM

Characterising the response of an International LOFAR Station

Letizia Vincetti , Sai C. Susarla , Owen A. Johnson , Evan F. Keane , David J. McKenna , Tobia D. Carozzi , Gavin Ramsay , Oisin Creaner
show 2 more authors
Peter T. Gallagher Joe McCauley
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.IM
keywords LOFARinternational stationbeam modelazimuthal asymmetrypulsarssignal-to-noise ratioaperture array calibrationHamaker formalism
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This paper sets out to characterise the full-sky response of the high-band antennas of an international LOFAR station, using 170 hours of track observations of 11 bright, supposedly flux-stable pulsars. The central claim is that the station's sensitivity is not symmetric about the zenith: every measured pulsar shows a higher signal-to-noise ratio as it rises than when it sets, with the difference usually around 20% and reaching 45%. The standard Hamaker beam model, as implemented in the DreamBeam software, predicts an essentially symmetric response, so the observed asymmetry is not explained by current beam modelling. If the claim is right, calibration, flux-density measurement, and scheduling for LOFAR 2.0 and SKA-Low must account for a station-level, direction-dependent sensitivity bias of tens of percent. The authors suggest an imbalanced weighting of the two polarisation channels as a plausible cause.

Core claim

The discovery is an azimuthal asymmetry in the measured beam response of the station: the effective sensitivity, encoded in the signal-to-noise ratio (effectively Aeff/Tsys), is higher on the rising side of a source's trajectory than on the setting side at the same elevation. The effect is broadband, consistent across all 11 pulsars in the sample, and reproduced at the Swedish and Polish international stations, indicating a systematic, not local, property. The paper argues this cannot come from the Hamaker beam model alone, and that an unequal weighting of the X and Y polarisation contributions in the station beamforming can reproduce the hysteresis-like pattern in elevation.

What carries the argument

The carrier of the argument is the station beam model built on the Radio Interferometer Measurement Equation and the Hamaker formalism, implemented in the DreamBeam software as Jones matrices; the relevant quantity is the Mueller element m_II, which maps incident Stokes I to measured power. The paper models the measured S/N as (a·X + b·Y)/Tsys, where X and Y are the two polarisation channel responses and a and b are their relative weights; an equal-weight model (a=b) gives the symmetric response, while a≠b produces the observed rise/set asymmetry.

Load-bearing premise

The claim rests on the pulsars being flux-stable across each track and on Tsys being essentially constant with azimuth, so that the measured S/N differences trace the instrument rather than the source or the sky; the paper itself flags that PSR B0809+74 shows interstellar scintillation yet still includes it in the all-pulsars result, and the SE607 fixed-elevation test shows sky-noise variations of comparable size.

What would settle it

Track a bright continuum calibrator with known stable flux over a full rise/set pass at the same station on two consecutive days, repeating the same LST window, and compare S/N at identical elevations on the rising and setting sides: if the S/N difference flips sign or disappears when the source's azimuth is mirrored, the asymmetry is caused by sky noise, not by a fixed polarisation imbalance. Alternatively, re-beamform recorded data with digitally equalised X/Y weights; if the hysteresis persists, the weighting is not the cause.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Observations scheduled on the rising side gain tens of percent in sensitivity, translating into large time savings since S/N scales only with the square root of observing time.
  • Flux densities and spectral indices measured with international LOFAR stations will be biased by this asymmetric response unless calibration explicitly includes per-polarisation weighting.
  • The same pulsar-track test can serve as an early validation diagnostic for LOFAR 2.0 and SKA-Low, before those systems are fully complete.
  • Unmodelled asymmetries of this size can contaminate pulsar timing, polarimetry, and transient searches, not just imaging.
  • The effect, if confirmed at other stations, implies that aperture-array calibration software must treat the beam as a function of azimuth as well as elevation and frequency.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the asymmetry is a fixed X/Y weighting in station firmware, a testable fix is to equalise the two channels digitally and re-measure the S/N curve: the hysteresis should flatten, providing a cheap correction and confirming the explanation.
  • The paper does not jointly model the LST-dependent sky noise measured in the fixed-elevation SE607 test with the polarisation weighting; a joint fit of (aX+bY)/Tsys(LST) could separate an instrumental cause from a sky-noise cause.
  • Tracking a strong continuum source (e.g. Cassiopeia A) through the same rise/set geometry would test whether the effect is intrinsic to the beam or specific to pulsar processing such as folding and dedispersion.
  • Because the dipole orientation varies between international stations, comparing stations with very different array rotations could isolate the geometric mechanism behind the imbalanced weighting.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper presents a characterization of the high-band antenna (HBA) response of the Irish LOFAR station (IE613) using long-track observations of 11 bright pulsars, totaling ~170 hours. The authors measure the S/N of folded pulse profiles as a function of elevation and azimuth, and compare the resulting sensitivity pattern with the DreamBeam implementation of the Hamaker/Hamaker beam model. Their main empirical finding is a pronounced azimuthal asymmetry: for every pulsar observed, the S/N is higher on the rising side of the track than on the setting side, with the difference often reaching ~20% and up to 45%. The same trend is reported for the Swedish station (SE607) using PSR B0329+54 and is claimed to be consistent with earlier Polish station (PL612) results. The paper argues that the standard beam model predicts a near-symmetric response and proposes, as a candidate explanation, an imbalanced weighting of the X and Y polarization channels. The work concludes with operational recommendations for LOFAR 2.0 and SKA-Low.

Significance. If the quantitative claim holds, this is an important result for low-frequency aperture-array instruments: international LOFAR stations would carry a position-dependent sensitivity asymmetry at the tens-of-percent level that is not captured by the standard Hamaker beam model, with direct implications for flux calibration, polarimetry, scheduling, and the design of LOFAR 2.0 and SKA-Low. The paper has substantial strengths: a large, homogeneous dataset (170 h over 11 pulsars), an independent check at a second station (SE607), a qualitative comparison with previously published PL612 data, and a transparent acknowledgment of limitations (e.g., the scintillating pulsar B0809+74 and the unclear physical origin of the effect). The dataset in Appendix B is a useful community resource. However, the central quantitative claim is not yet error-budgeted, and the attribution of the asymmetry to Aeff rather than to time-variable sky noise is not closed. These issues are fixable and do not negate the qualitative finding, but they are load-bearing for the paper's main conclusion.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 5 (Discussion), Fig. 10] The attribution of the rise/set S/N asymmetry to the beam response (through an imbalanced X/Y weighting) rests on the statement that 'except near the horizon ... the Tsys factor is more or less constant for the majority of the trajectory of each source.' However, the SE607 fixed-elevation test in Fig. 10 shows that sky noise varies with LST at a scale that is comparable to the reported 20–45% asymmetry. For a circumpolar source, the rising and setting phases occur at LSTs separated by roughly 12 hours, so a time-varying Tsys(LST) can masquerade as an azimuth-dependent Aeff. The paper notes this variation qualitatively but never jointly models Tsys(LST) with the DreamBeam Aeff model. To establish that the standard beam model under-predicts the observed asymmetry, the authors must either subtract a data-derived Tsys(LST) model from the S/N or quantitatively demonstrate that the observed LS
  2. [Section 4 (Results), Table 3 / Appendix B] The main quantitative claims — 'responses often being ~20% better on the rising side' (Sect. 4) and 'a discrepancy that reaches 45%' (Sect. 6) — are not supported by error estimates. Table 3 lists S/N values to two decimal places but gives no uncertainties, no off-pulse noise estimates, and no measure of profile-fitting or scrunching errors. Moreover, the statement that the effect is seen 'for every pulsar' is presented without a statistical test. The authors should provide per-point S/N errors, propagate them into rise/set ratios, and report a significance for the sign of the asymmetry for each pulsar and for the sample as a whole (for example, a sign test). Without this, the magnitude and universality of the effect are not quantitatively established.
  3. [Section 4 (Results), Fig. 11 and Table 3 (B0809+74)] The paper explicitly flags PSR B0809+74 as showing interstellar scintillation and advises 'extra caution ... when interpreting the measured values' (Sect. 4 and the note to Fig. 11). Nevertheless, the same section states that 'every pulsar we observe is seen more significantly as it rises,' and this pulsar is included in the aggregate claim. The Table 3 S/N values for B0809+74 show large, non-monotonic scatter (e.g., 872, 1487, 1419, 1139 at adjacent elevations of 38.6, 40.3, 42.7, 45.7 degrees), which is consistent with scintillation rather than a smooth antenna response. This is an internal inconsistency: a source the authors themselves flag should not be included in an 'all pulsars' claim without a demonstration that the asymmetry survives its exclusion. Please re-run the aggregate statistics with and without B0809+74.
  4. [Section 5 (Discussion), Fig. 8 and Fig. 5] The assertion that the observed asymmetry 'is more than one can explain/model from' the Hamaker beam model (Sect. 6) is not quantitatively demonstrated. Fig. 8 provides a single-frequency (150 MHz) DreamBeam calculation for one pulsar (PSR B1508+55) and states qualitatively that the equal-weighting response is 'highly symmetric.' Fig. 5 compares the data to an ad hoc cos^2(ZA) fit, not to the DreamBeam model. Since the observed asymmetry is claimed to be present across the frequency band (Fig. 6), the model comparison should be made per frequency sub-band, and the residual (data minus model Aeff/Tsys) should be presented as a quantitative function of elevation, azimuth, and LST. As written, the 'exceeds the model' claim is a visual impression rather than a measured discrepancy.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Eq. (1)] The expression for gain, G = 4π^2 Aeff/λ^2, should be G = 4π Aeff/λ^2 (standard effective-aperture relation). The extra factor of π does not affect the rest of the analysis, but the formula should be corrected.
  2. [Fig. 8 caption] The caption says 'The dotted orange line shows the combined Stokes I response. A representative unequal weighting is shown in dotted orange.' The color/line-style designation appears duplicated; clarify which line corresponds to equal weighting and which to the illustrative unequal (a = 0.5) weighting.
  3. [Section 3] 'Manch-ester et al.' is a typo for 'Manchester et al.' (the ATNF pulsar catalogue reference).
  4. [Section 1] 'calbrating' should be 'calibrating' in the opening paragraph.
  5. [Section 4, summary paragraph] The phrase 'responses often being ~20% better on the rising side' would benefit from a precise definition of 'often' — for example, the fraction of pulsars or the fraction of elevation-matched track points for which the rising S/N exceeds the setting S/N.
  6. [Table 3] The column header says 'relative S/N' while the text (Sect. 3) says the reported values are the S/N from pdmp. Clarify whether the values are normalized in any way or are absolute S/N values.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the rise/set asymmetry is an empirical measurement that contradicts the in-house beam model, not a quantity derived from it.

full rationale

The paper's headline finding is an empirical measurement, not a derived quantity: S/N values come from folded pulsar profiles (Table 3), and the reference model is the Hamaker/DreamBeam response computed from Jones elements (Sect. 2.3, Fig. 8), which 'predicts a much more symmetric response' (Sect. 4). Because the model output is symmetric while the data are asymmetric, the model is not fitted to the data and the asymmetry is not built in by construction; the comparison is a genuine falsification of the equal-weighting model. The only hand-set quantity, the X/Y weighting a=0.5, is explicitly illustrative ('A representative unequal weighting is shown in dotted orange', Fig. 8 caption) and is presented as a hypothesis ('Possible improper weighting of the X and Y components could explain such a discrepancy', Conclusions), not fitted to or validated against the 20-45% excess, so there is no fitted-input-called-prediction step. The paper's own stated limitations are confounds for the A_eff-versus-Tsys attribution, not circular reductions: it flags PSR B0809+74 for interstellar scintillation ('extra caution is advised when interpreting the measured values for this pulsar', Sect. 4), and it assumes Tsys is 'more or less constant' (Sect. 5) while its own Fig. 10 shows LST-dependent sky noise of comparable scale; the two are never jointly modelled. These weaken the central attribution but do not make the prediction equivalent to its inputs. Self-citations (Carozzi 2016; Creaner and Carozzi 2019) supply the software and a qualitative Cas A agreement, but the load-bearing support is the new IE613 and SE607 observations plus external PL612 data (Błaszkiewicz et al. 2018); the self-citations are not load-bearing. Verdict: no significant circularity; score 2 reflects only the minor in-group corroboration.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim is empirical; the ledger is dominated by stated domain assumptions rather than fitted parameters. The only ad hoc numbers are the illustrative X/Y weighting (a=0.5, Fig. 8) and the descriptive cos^2(ZA) fit amplitude (Fig. 5); neither is fitted to test the asymmetry. The load-bearing assumptions are pulsar flux stability (explicitly flagged as violated by B0809+74), Tsys constancy (partially contradicted by the paper's own SE607 LST test), and the S/N proxy. No new entities (particles, forces, dimensions) are introduced.

free parameters (2)
  • X/Y channel weighting ratio a (with b=1) = a = 0.5 (illustrative only)
    Introduced in Sect. 5 / Fig. 8 as 'a representative unequal weighting' to demonstrate that imbalanced X/Y addition could produce the observed asymmetry; it is hand-chosen, not fitted to the S/N tracks.
  • cos^2(ZA) fit amplitude = not stated numerically
    Fig. 5 fits the S/N-vs-elevation trend of PSR B1508+55 (15-min slices) with a·cos^2(ZA); the amplitude is a descriptive fit, not a prediction, and does not enter the asymmetry claim.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption Pulsar flux densities and pulse profiles are stable across each 12–24 h track (no nulling, mode changes, or scintillation correlated with azimuth)
    Sect. 1/3: 'Most pulsars are seen to have stable flux densities... we use a sample at sufficient distance to be unaffected by propagation effects like interstellar scintillation'. Load-bearing because S/N tracks are read as instrument response; the paper itself flags B0809+74 as violating this (Sect. 4).
  • domain assumption Tsys is approximately constant over most of each track (except near the horizon)
    Sect. 5: 'except near the horizon where spillover and beam distortion can be important, the Tsys factor is more or less constant'. The SE607 fixed-elevation test (Fig. 10) shows LST-dependent sky noise, so constant-Tsys is only partially supported.
  • domain assumption pdmp-optimised S/N is a faithful proxy for Aeff/Tsys at fixed period and DM
    Sect. 4: 'This optimises the period and DM parameters to get the highest S/N value'. If the profile shape or DM changes with elevation, the S/N would be biased; no test of this is presented.
  • standard math Radiometer equation (Eq. 1), effective-area models (Eqs. 2–4) and Mueller-matrix beam response (Eq. 6)
    Standard instrument equations adopted from Dicke (1946), Lorimer & Kramer (2004), van Haarlem et al. (2013), Kondratiev et al. (2016); assumed, not derived here.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 24651 in / 20461 out tokens · 155091 ms · 2026-08-01T12:19:12.216165+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Phased-array radio interferometers with fixed antennas are a highly scalable design which can achieve a large gain. However they are complex systems and challenging to calibrate. Here we examine the response of an International LOFAR Station, the high-band antennas of the Irish LOFAR station. In modelling our measured responses, we account for projection effects, the frequency-dependence of the aperture efficiency and pulsar spectra, as well as sky and instrumental noise contributions. We perform long-track observations of 11 bright pulsars as they move across the sky, apply RFI mitigation and determine the signal-to-noise ratio response as a function of time, elevation and azimuth. We use the DreamBeam software to model the beam response of the station to compare with what is observed. The sensitivity map so obtained was validated using observations of PSR B0329+54 on the Swedish LOFAR station. As expected, the sensitivity is higher near the zenith. However, an asymmetry with respect to the zenith point is detected. Characterising the instrumental response in azimuth reveals a better performance as the targets rise, as compared to when they set. This trend is seen for all pulsars and is consistent with other International Stations. The magnitude of the effect can exceed 20%. We consider variations in the beam model and noise level, both frequency- and time- dependent, to try to account for this. A possible explanation for the hysteresis-like response in elevation could be an imbalanced signal weighting of the polarisation components. This work addresses the importance of accurate beam modelling and noise evaluation for the LOFAR 2.0 system upgrade as well as being relevant to the under-construction SKA-Low facility.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.19585 by David J. McKenna, Evan F. Keane, Gavin Ramsay, Joe McCauley, Letizia Vincetti, Oisin Creaner, Owen A. Johnson, Peter T. Gallagher, Sai C. Susarla, Tobia D. Carozzi.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: — From left to right: the layout of IE613, SE607, PL612 HBAs (the rotation of the array is 11.90◦ from local north (IE613), 4.26◦ (SE607) and 10.98◦(PL612). gain of a single antenna and consequently to maximize the effective collecting area of the station, up to 2400 m2 at 120 MHz. The dipoles are arranged close enough to suppress grating lobes, but spaced enough to allow for a sufficiently narrow beam for… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: — Example of antenna spectra generated as part of the diagnostics and monitoring procedures each time an observation is scheduled. The plot is generated with 1s integration of data and varies with date and time (06 : 01 UTC on 14 February 2025 the one shown here). The X and Y polarisation responses shown are the averaged ones over all antennas. 2.2. Single station sensitivity The sensitivity of a telescope… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: — The folded pulse profile as intensity over pulse phase is shown at the top, while the phase-frequency plot is shown at the bottom, with frequency channels displayed on the y-axis. The profile shown here is RFI-cleaned, hence some frequency channels appear removed. As an example, we used the integrated pulse pro￾file of PSR B1508+55 for the 59 min-observation taken at 06 : 01 UTC on 14 February 2025, whic… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: — Synoptic plot of pulsar observations tracking their path as they cross the I-LOFAR sky. The colour-coded S/N is normalized to the maximum S/N for each pulsar. Grey shadowed lines highlight the target path. PSR B0329+54 is shown with squared markers in order to differentiate it from PSR B1508+55, because of the overlapping of the relative tracks, at the resolution shown. Note: each pointing lasts 1 hour; … view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: — S/N versus elevation in semi-log scale for PSR B1508+55 and for the sliced observations of 15 minutes. The colour bar refers to the azimuth coordinate. The solid black line repre￾sents the fitting with cos2 (ZA) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: — S/N versus elevation in semi-log scale for PSR B1508+55. Each curve represents a slice of ∼ 10 MHz in band￾width. We next endeavoured to measure the variation of the station performance in time and frequency at finer res￾olution. The shorter integration time might reveal vari￾ations in S/N, hidden otherwise in the 1-hour averages. In this way, the elevation dependence of the antenna re￾sponse can be exam… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: — [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: — Modelled response through DreamBeam showing the variation in time. The response with respect to elevation is displayed in the inset panels. The simulation is based on observations at the IE613 station of a target with DEC = 10◦ (left panel) and DEC = 65◦ (right panel). The Jones factors shown here are generated at 150 MHz. A Jones factor equal to 0 indicates that the target is situated below the horizon.… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: — Test observations at 140 MHz from the SE607 station to evaluate the sky noise variation. Two 24-hours pointings were performed, each at EL = 60◦, and either 15◦ ahead or behind of the local Southern meridian in azimuth. The blue (orange) curve is shifted +1hour (-1hour) in LST. In this way, the observations lines up along the time axis, showing how the response varies on the sky but on opposite sides of… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: — S/N vs elevation in semi-log scale. Each pulsar is shown in a single subplot, with the S/N on the y-axis (log scale) and the elevation on the x-axis. For each subplot, the points represent the S/N of the RFI-cleaned integrated pulse profiles over 1-hour and for the full frequency range (reduced to 112 − 190 MHz) and colour-coded by azimuth [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_11.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

86 extracted references · 5 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [6]

    Astronomy and Computing , keywords =

    Cobalt: A GPU-based correlator and beamformer for LOFAR. Astronomy and Computing , keywords =. doi:10.1016/j.ascom.2018.04.006 , archivePrefix =. 1801.04834 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  2. [7]

    , keywords =

    A LOFAR census of non-recycled pulsars: average profiles, dispersion measures, flux densities, and spectra. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201527702 , archivePrefix =. 1511.01767 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  3. [10]

    Carozzi, T. D. , title =. GitHub repository , howpublished =. 2014 , publisher =

    2014

  4. [13]

    Essential Radio Astronomy

  5. [20]

    Understanding radio polarimetry. I. Mathematical foundations. , keywords =

  6. [23]

    A 408-MHZ All-Sky Continuum Survey. II. The Atlas of Contour Maps. , keywords =

  7. [24]

    , year = 1969, month = nov, volume =

    Observation of a Rapidly Pulsating Radio Source (Reprinted from Nature, February 24, 1968). , year = 1969, month = nov, volume =. doi:10.1038/224472b0 , adsurl =

    doi:10.1038/224472b0 1968

  8. [25]

    2017 , publisher =

    Optics-5th Edition , author =. 2017 , publisher =

    2017

  9. [29]

    Handbook of Pulsar Astronomy

  10. [36]

    2023 , url =

    ASTRON , title =. 2023 , url =

    2023

  11. [37]

    SIGPROC: Pulsar Signal Processing Programs

  12. [43]

    R. J. Nijboer and J. E. Noordam , title =. Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XVI , series =. 2007 , editor =

    2007

  13. [50]

    Understanding radio polarimetry. II. Instrumental calibration of an interferometer array. , keywords =

  14. [56]

    , keywords =

    Exploring the time variability of the solar wind using LOFAR pulsar data. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450680 , archivePrefix =. 2409.09838 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  15. [59]

    Station Data Cookbook

  16. [61]

    and van Zwieten , Joris E

    Cyril Tasse and van Diepen , Ger and van der Tol , Sebastiaan and van Weeren , Reinout J. and van Zwieten , Joris E. and Fabien Batejat and Sanjay Bhatnagar and van Bemmel , Ilse and Laura Birzan and Annalisa Bonafede and John Conway and Chiara Ferrari and De Gasperin , Francesco and Kumar Golap and George Heald and Neal Jackson and Giulia Macario and Joh...

    2012

  17. [62]

    doi:10.1007/978-3-319-44431-4 , adsurl =

    Interferometry and Synthesis in Radio Astronomy, 3rd Edition. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-44431-4 , adsurl =

    doi:10.1007/978-3-319-44431-4

  18. [63]

    GitHub repository , howpublished =

    Tammo Jan Dijkema , title =. GitHub repository , howpublished =. 2024 , publisher =

    2024

  19. [67]

    , keywords =

    LOFAR Facet Calibration. , keywords =. doi:10.3847/0067-0049/223/1/2 , archivePrefix =. 1601.05422 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  20. [68]

    and van Cappellen, Wim A

    Wijnholds, Stefan J. and van Cappellen, Wim A. , journal=. In Situ Antenna Performance Evaluation of the LOFAR Phased Array Radio Telescope , year=

  21. [75]

    o randel , author L. V. E. \ Koopmans , author G. Mann , author G. Miley , author H. R \

    author author M. P. \ van Haarlem , author M. W. \ Wise , author A. W. \ Gunst , author G. Heald , author J. P. \ McKean , author J. W. T. \ Hessels , author A. G. \ de Bruyn , author R. Nijboer , author J. Swinbank , author R. Fallows , author M. Brentjens , author A. Nelles , author R. Beck , author H. Falcke , author R. Fender , author J. H \"o randel ...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  22. [76]

    author author V. I. \ Kondratiev , author J. P. W. \ Verbiest , author J. W. T. \ Hessels , author A. V. \ Bilous , author B. W. \ Stappers , author M. Kramer , author E. F. \ Keane , author A. Noutsos , author S. Os owski , author R. P. \ Breton , author T. E. \ Hassall , author A. Alexov , author S. Cooper , author H. Falcke , author J. M. \ Grie meier ...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  23. [77]

    author author T. D. \ Carozzi \ and\ author G. Woan ,\ 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14642.x journal journal \ volume 395 ,\ pages 1558 ( year 2009 ) ,\ http://arxiv.org/abs/0812.0141 arXiv:0812.0141 [astro-ph] NoStop

    arXiv 2009

  24. [78]

    author author T. W. \ Shimwell , author C. Tasse , author M. J. \ Hardcastle , author A. P. \ Mechev , author W. L. \ Williams , author P. N. \ Best , author H. J. A. \ R \"o ttgering , author J. R. \ Callingham , author T. J. \ Dijkema , author F. de Gasperin , author D. N. \ Hoang , author B. Hugo , author M. Mirmont , author J. B. R. \ Oonk , author I....

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  25. [79]

    author author S. A. \ Brackenhoff , author A. R. \ Offringa , author M. Mevius , author L. V. E. \ Koopmans , author J. K. \ Chege , author E. Ceccotti , author C. H \"o fer , author L. Gao , author S. Ghosh , author F. G. \ Mertens , \ and\ author S. Munshi ,\ 10.1093/mnras/staf1206 journal journal \ volume 541 ,\ pages 3993 ( year 2025 ) ,\ http://arxiv...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  26. [80]

    de Gasperin , author T

    author author F. de Gasperin , author T. J. \ Dijkema , author A. Drabent , author M. Mevius , author D. Rafferty , author R. van Weeren , author M. Br \"u ggen , author J. R. \ Callingham , author K. L. \ Emig , author G. Heald , author H. T. \ Intema , author L. K. \ Morabito , author A. R. \ Offringa , author R. Oonk , author E. Orr \`u , author H. R \...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  27. [81]

    Corstanje , author S

    author author A. Corstanje , author S. Buitink , author J. E. \ Enriquez , author H. Falcke , author J. R. \ H \"o randel , author M. Krause , author A. Nelles , author J. P. \ Rachen , author P. Schellart , author O. Scholten , author S. ter Veen , author S. Thoudam , \ and\ author T. N. G. \ Trinh ,\ 10.1051/0004-6361/201527809 journal journal \ volume ...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  28. [82]

    author author K. M. B. \ Asad , author L. V. E. \ Koopmans , author V. Jeli \'c , author V. N. \ Pandey , author A. Ghosh , author F. B. \ Abdalla , author G. Bernardi , author M. A. \ Brentjens , author A. G. \ de Bruyn , author S. Bus , author B. Ciardi , author E. Chapman , author S. Daiboo , author E. R. \ Fernandez , author G. Harker , author I. T. \...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  29. [83]

    author author O. M. \ Smirnov ,\ 10.1051/0004-6361/201016082 journal journal \ volume 527 ,\ eid A106 ( year 2011 a ) ,\ http://arxiv.org/abs/1101.1764 arXiv:1101.1764 [astro-ph.IM] NoStop

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  30. [84]

    author author T. D. \ Carozzi ,\ 10.5281/ZENODO.18433630 title dreamBeam : Software to implement radio astronomy measurement equations , \ howpublished https://github.com/2baOrNot2ba/dreamBeam.git ( year 2016 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.18433630 2016

  31. [85]

    Gold ,\ 10.1038/218731a0 journal journal \ volume 218 ,\ pages 731 ( year 1968 ) NoStop

    author author T. Gold ,\ 10.1038/218731a0 journal journal \ volume 218 ,\ pages 731 ( year 1968 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1038/218731a0 1968

  32. [86]

    Kramer ,\ in\ 10.1051/eas:2005155 booktitle EAS Publications Series ,\ series EAS Publications Series , Vol

    author author M. Kramer ,\ in\ 10.1051/eas:2005155 booktitle EAS Publications Series ,\ series EAS Publications Series , Vol. volume 15 ,\ editor edited by\ editor L. I. \ Gurvits , editor S. Frey , \ and\ editor S. Rawlings \ ( year 2005 )\ pp.\ pages 219--241 NoStop

    work page doi:10.1051/eas:2005155 2005

  33. [87]

    Jankowski , author W

    author author F. Jankowski , author W. van Straten , author E. F. \ Keane , author M. Bailes , author E. D. \ Barr , author S. Johnston , \ and\ author M. Kerr ,\ 10.1093/mnras/stx2476 journal journal \ volume 473 ,\ pages 4436 ( year 2018 ) ,\ http://arxiv.org/abs/1709.08864 arXiv:1709.08864 [astro-ph.HE] NoStop

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  34. [88]

    u nsem \

    author author Z. Wu , author J. P. W. \ Verbiest , author R. A. \ Main , author J.-M. \ Grie meier , author Y. Liu , author S. Os owski , author K. Moochickal Ambalappat , author A.-S. B. \ Nielsen , author J. K \"u nsem \"o ller , author J. Y. \ Donner , author C. Tiburzi , author N. Porayko , author M. Serylak , author L. K \"u nkel , author M. Br \"u g...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  35. [89]

    author author D. R. \ Lorimer \ and\ author M. Kramer ,\ @noop title Handbook of Pulsar Astronomy ,\ Vol. volume 4 \ ( year 2004 ) NoStop

    2004

  36. [90]

    author author L. P. \ B aszkiewicz , author W. Lewandowski , author A. Krankowski , author J. Kijak , author A. Fro \'n , author T. Sidorowicz , author B. D a browski , author K. Kotulak , \ and\ author M. Hajduk ,\ 10.1016/j.asr.2018.06.047 journal journal Advances in Space Research \ volume 62 ,\ pages 1904 ( year 2018 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1016/j.asr.2018.06.047 2018

  37. [91]

    Braun , author T

    author author R. Braun , author T. Bourke , author J. A. \ Green , author E. Keane , \ and\ author J. Wagg ,\ 10.22323/1.215.0174 journal journal PoS \ volume AASKA14 ,\ pages 174 ( year 2015 ) NoStop

    doi:10.22323/1.215.0174 2015

  38. [92]

    a hren , author M. E. \ Bell , author J. Broderick , author E. J. \ Daw , author V. S. \ Dhillon , author J. Eisl \

    author author B. W. \ Stappers , author J. W. T. \ Hessels , author A. Alexov , author K. Anderson , author T. Coenen , author T. Hassall , author A. Karastergiou , author V. I. \ Kondratiev , author M. Kramer , author J. van Leeuwen , author J. D. \ Mol , author A. Noutsos , author J. W. \ Romein , author P. Weltevrede , author R. Fender , author R. A. M...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  39. [93]

    author author A. R. \ Offringa , author A. G. \ de Bruyn , author S. Zaroubi , author G. van Diepen , author O. Martinez-Ruby , author P. Labropoulos , author M. A. \ Brentjens , author B. Ciardi , author S. Daiboo , author G. Harker , author V. Jeli \'c , author S. Kazemi , author L. V. E. \ Koopmans , author G. Mellema , author V. N. \ Pandey , author R...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  40. [94]

    author author R. H. \ Dicke ,\ 10.1063/1.1770483 journal journal Review of Scientific Instruments \ volume 17 ,\ pages 268 ( year 1946 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1063/1.1770483 1946

  41. [95]

    Vivekanand , author R

    author author M. Vivekanand , author R. Narayan , \ and\ author V. Radhakrishnan ,\ 10.1007/BF02714864 journal journal Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy \ volume 3 ,\ pages 237 ( year 1982 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1007/bf02714864 1982

  42. [96]

    author author O. M. \ Smirnov ,\ 10.1051/0004-6361/201116434 journal journal \ volume 527 ,\ eid A107 ( year 2011 b ) ,\ http://arxiv.org/abs/1101.1765 arXiv:1101.1765 [astro-ph.IM] NoStop

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  43. [97]

    author author J. J. \ Condon \ and\ author S. M. \ Ransom ,\ @noop title Essential Radio Astronomy \ ( publisher Princeton University Press ,\ year 2015 ) NoStop

    2015

  44. [98]

    author author K. D. \ Lawson , author C. J. \ Mayer , author J. L. \ Osborne , \ and\ author M. L. \ Parkinson ,\ 10.1093/mnras/225.2.307 journal journal \ volume 225 ,\ pages 307 ( year 1987 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1093/mnras/225.2.307 1987

  45. [99]

    author author D. C. \ Price ,\ 10.3847/2515-5172/ac332c journal journal Research Notes of the AAS \ volume 5 ,\ pages 246 ( year 2021 ) ,\ note publisher: The American Astronomical Society NoStop

    doi:10.3847/2515-5172/ac332c 2021

  46. [100]

    author author C. G. T. \ Haslam , author C. J. \ Salter , author H. Stoffel , \ and\ author W. E. \ Wilson ,\ @noop journal journal \ volume 47 ,\ pages 1 ( year 1982 ) NoStop

    1982

  47. [101]

    de Oliveira-Costa , author M

    author author A. de Oliveira-Costa , author M. Tegmark , author B. M. \ Gaensler , author J. Jonas , author T. L. \ Landecker , \ and\ author P. Reich ,\ 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13376.x journal journal \ volume 388 ,\ pages 247 ( year 2008 ) ,\ http://arxiv.org/abs/0802.1525 arXiv:0802.1525 [astro-ph] NoStop

    arXiv 2008

  48. [102]

    Zheng , author M

    author author H. Zheng , author M. Tegmark , author J. S. \ Dillon , author D. A. \ Kim , author A. Liu , author A. R. \ Neben , author J. Jonas , author P. Reich , \ and\ author W. Reich ,\ 10.1093/mnras/stw2525 journal journal \ volume 464 ,\ pages 3486 ( year 2017 ) ,\ http://arxiv.org/abs/1605.04920 arXiv:1605.04920 [astro-ph.CO] NoStop

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  49. [103]

    Dowell , author G

    author author J. Dowell , author G. B. \ Taylor , author F. K. \ Schinzel , author N. E. \ Kassim , \ and\ author K. Stovall ,\ 10.1093/mnras/stx1136 journal journal \ volume 469 ,\ pages 4537 ( year 2017 ) ,\ http://arxiv.org/abs/1705.05819 arXiv:1705.05819 [astro-ph.IM] NoStop

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  50. [104]

    Hecht ,\ @noop title Optics-5th Edition \ ( publisher Pearson ,\ year 2017 ) NoStop

    author author E. Hecht ,\ @noop title Optics-5th Edition \ ( publisher Pearson ,\ year 2017 ) NoStop

    2017

  51. [105]

    a hren , author M. Bell , author J. Broderick , author D. Carbone , author Y. Cendes , author T. Coenen , author S. Corbel , author J. Eisl \

    author author A. Noutsos , author C. Sobey , author V. I. \ Kondratiev , author P. Weltevrede , author J. P. W. \ Verbiest , author A. Karastergiou , author M. Kramer , author M. Kuniyoshi , author A. Alexov , author R. P. \ Breton , author A. V. \ Bilous , author S. Cooper , author H. Falcke , author J. M. \ Grie meier , author T. E. \ Hassall , author J...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  52. [106]

    author author J. D. \ Mol \ and\ author J. W. \ Romein ,\ 10.48550/arXiv.1105.0661 journal journal arXiv e-prints \ ,\ eid arXiv:1105.0661 ( year 2011 ) ,\ http://arxiv.org/abs/1105.0661 arXiv:1105.0661 [cs.DC] NoStop

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1105.0661 2011

  53. [107]

    author author S. Yatawatta ,\ 10.1007/s10686-012-9300-7 journal journal Experimental Astronomy \ volume 34 ,\ pages 89 ( year 2012 ) ,\ http://arxiv.org/abs/1205.6654 arXiv:1205.6654 [astro-ph.IM] NoStop

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  54. [108]

    author author R. J. \ Sault , author J. P. \ Hamaker , \ and\ author J. D. \ Bregman ,\ @noop journal journal \ volume 117 ,\ pages 149 ( year 1996 ) NoStop

    1996

  55. [109]

    author author R. J. \ Nijboer \ and\ author J. E. \ Noordam ,\ in\ @noop booktitle Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XVI ,\ series ASP Conference Series , Vol.\ volume 376 ,\ editor edited by\ editor R. A. \ Shaw , editor F. Hill , \ and\ editor D. J. \ Bell \ ( publisher Astronomical Society of the Pacific ,\ year 2007 )\ pp.\ pages 237--+ NoStop

    2007

  56. [110]

    author author O. M. \ Smirnov ,\ 10.1051/0004-6361/201116435 journal journal \ volume 527 ,\ eid A108 ( year 2011 c ) ,\ http://arxiv.org/abs/1101.1768 arXiv:1101.1768 [astro-ph.IM] NoStop

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  57. [111]

    author author O. M. \ Smirnov ,\ 10.1051/0004-6361/201116764 journal journal \ volume 531 ,\ eid A159 ( year 2011 d ) ,\ http://arxiv.org/abs/1106.0579 arXiv:1106.0579 [astro-ph.IM] NoStop

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  58. [112]

    Tasse , author G

    author author C. Tasse , author G. van Diepen , author S. van der Tol , author R. van Weeren , author J. van Zwieten , author F. Batejat , author S. Bhatnagar , author I. van Bemmel , author L. Birzan , author A. Bonafede , author J. Conway , author C. Ferrari , author F. De Gasperin , author K. Golap , author G. Heald , author N. Jackson , author G. Maca...

    2011

  59. [113]

    author author D. C. \ Price \ and\ author O. M. \ Smirnov ,\ 10.1093/mnras/stv137 journal journal \ volume 449 ,\ pages 107 ( year 2015 ) ,\ http://arxiv.org/abs/1501.06447 arXiv:1501.06447 [astro-ph.IM] NoStop

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  60. [114]

    Mulrey , author A

    author author K. Mulrey , author A. Bonardi , author S. Buitink , author A. Corstanje , author H. Falcke , author B. M. \ Hare , author J. R. \ H \"o randel , author T. Huege , author P. Mitra , author A. Nelles , author J. P. \ Rachen , author L. Rossetto , author P. Schellart , author O. Scholten , author S. ter Veen , author S. Thoudam , author T. N. G...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  61. [115]

    Creaner \ and\ author T

    author author O. Creaner \ and\ author T. D. \ Carozzi ,\ 10.1016/j.ascom.2019.100311 journal journal Astronomy and Computing \ volume 28 ,\ eid 100311 ( year 2019 ) ,\ http://arxiv.org/abs/1908.02141 arXiv:1908.02141 [astro-ph.IM] NoStop

    arXiv 2019

  62. [116]

    A Formalism for Calibrating the Instrumental Polarization of Radio Interferometric Arrays at Meter Wavelengths using Unpolarized Sky: A Demonstration using the MWA Observations

    author author D. Kansabanik , author A. Vourlidas , author S. Dey , author S. Mondal , \ and\ author D. Oberoi ,\ 10.48550/arXiv.2503.16675 journal journal arXiv e-prints \ ,\ eid arXiv:2503.16675 ( year 2025 ) ,\ http://arxiv.org/abs/2503.16675 arXiv:2503.16675 [astro-ph.IM] NoStop

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2503.16675 2025

  63. [117]

    author author R. C. \ Jones ,\ 10.1364/JOSA.31.000488 journal journal Journal of the Optical Society of America (1917-1983) \ volume 31 ,\ pages 488 ( year 1941 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1364/josa.31.000488 1917

  64. [118]

    author author J. P. \ Hamaker , author J. D. \ Bregman , \ and\ author R. J. \ Sault ,\ @noop journal journal \ volume 117 ,\ pages 137 ( year 1996 ) NoStop

    1996

  65. [119]

    author author J. P. \ Hamaker ,\ 10.1051/aas:2000337 journal journal \ volume 143 ,\ pages 515 ( year 2000 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1051/aas:2000337 2000

  66. [120]

    author author J. P. \ Hamaker ,\ 10.1051/0004-6361:20065145 journal journal \ volume 456 ,\ pages 395 ( year 2006 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20065145 2006

  67. [121]

    author author R. N. \ Manchester , author G. B. \ Hobbs , author A. Teoh , \ and\ author M. Hobbs ,\ 10.1086/428488 journal journal The Astronomical Journal \ volume 129 ,\ pages 1993 ( year 2005 ) ,\ note publisher: IOP ADS Bibcode: 2005AJ....129.1993M NoStop

    doi:10.1086/428488 1993

  68. [122]

    author author P. C. \ Murphy , author P. Callanan , author J. McCauley , author D. J. \ McKenna , author D. \'O . \ Fionnag \'a in , author C. K. \ Louis , author M. P. \ Redman , author L. A. \ Ca \ n izares , author E. P. \ Carley , author S. A. \ Maloney , author B. Coghlan , author M. Daly , author J. Scully , author J. Dooley , author V. Gajjar , aut...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  69. [123]

    author author D. R. \ Lorimer ,\ @noop title SIGPROC: Pulsar Signal Processing Programs , \ howpublished Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1107.016 ( year 2011 ),\ http://arxiv.org/abs/1107.016 ascl:1107.016 NoStop

    2011

  70. [124]

    McKenna , author E

    author author D. McKenna , author E. Keane , author P. Gallagher , \ and\ author J. McCauley ,\ 10.21105/joss.05517 journal journal The Journal of Open Source Software \ volume 9 ,\ eid 5517 ( year 2024 ) ,\ http://arxiv.org/abs/2309.03228 arXiv:2309.03228 [astro-ph.IM] NoStop

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  71. [125]

    author author C. G. \ Bassa , author Z. Pleunis , \ and\ author J. W. T. \ Hessels ,\ 10.1016/j.ascom.2017.01.004 journal journal Astronomy and Computing \ volume 18 ,\ pages 40 ( year 2017 ) ,\ http://arxiv.org/abs/1607.00909 arXiv:1607.00909 [astro-ph.IM] NoStop

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  72. [126]

    van Straten \ and\ author M

    author author W. van Straten \ and\ author M. Bailes ,\ 10.1071/AS10021 journal journal \ volume 28 ,\ pages 1 ( year 2011 ) ,\ http://arxiv.org/abs/1008.3973 arXiv:1008.3973 [astro-ph.IM] NoStop

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  73. [127]

    Lazarus , author R

    author author P. Lazarus , author R. Karuppusamy , author E. Graikou , author R. N. \ Caballero , author D. J. \ Champion , author K. J. \ Lee , author J. P. W. \ Verbiest , \ and\ author M. Kramer ,\ 10.1093/mnras/stw189 journal journal \ volume 458 ,\ pages 868 ( year 2016 ) ,\ http://arxiv.org/abs/1601.06194 arXiv:1601.06194 [astro-ph.IM] NoStop

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  74. [128]

    author author S. C. \ Susarla , author O. A. \ Johnson , author D. J. \ McKenna , author E. F. \ Keane , author P. J. \ McCauley , author J. P. W. \ Verbiest , author C. Tiburzi , \ and\ author A. Golden ,\ 10.1051/0004-6361/202554226 journal journal \ volume 698 ,\ eid A248 ( year 2025 ) ,\ http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.09549 arXiv:2505.09549 [astro-ph.HE] NoStop

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  75. [129]

    author author A. W. \ Hotan , author W. van Straten , \ and\ author R. N. \ Manchester ,\ 10.1071/AS04022 journal journal \ volume 21 ,\ pages 302 ( year 2004 ) ,\ http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0404549 arXiv:astro-ph/0404549 [astro-ph] NoStop

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  76. [130]

    Amiri , author B

    author author CHIME/FRB Collaboration , author M. Amiri , author B. C. \ Andersen , author S. Andrew , author K. Bandura , author M. Bhardwaj , author P. J. \ Boyle , author C. Brar , author D. Breitman , author T. Cassanelli , author P. Chawla , author A. M. \ Cook , author A. P. \ Curtin , author M. Dobbs , author F. A. \ Dong , author G. Eadie , author...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  77. [131]

    Chawla , author A

    author author P. Chawla , author A. Gopinath , author N. Manaswini , author C. Bassa , author J. Hessels , author V. Kondratiev , author D. Michilli , \ and\ author Z. Pleunis ,\ 10.1093/mnras/staf1943 journal journal \ volume 544 ,\ pages 4079 ( year 2025 ) ,\ http://arxiv.org/abs/2509.01688 arXiv:2509.01688 [astro-ph.HE] NoStop

    arXiv 2025

  78. [132]

    Basu , author W

    author author R. Basu , author W. Lewandowski , author J. Kijak , author B. \'S mierciak , author M. Soida , author L. B aszkiewicz , \ and\ author A. Krankowski ,\ 10.1093/mnras/stad2737 journal journal \ volume 526 ,\ pages 691 ( year 2023 ) ,\ http://arxiv.org/abs/2309.03820 arXiv:2309.03820 [astro-ph.HE] NoStop

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  79. [133]

    a hren , author M. E. \ Bell , author J. W. \ Broderick , author S. Corbel , author E. J. \ Daw , author V. S. \ Dhillon , author J. Eisl \

    author author T. E. \ Hassall , author B. W. \ Stappers , author J. W. T. \ Hessels , author M. Kramer , author A. Alexov , author K. Anderson , author T. Coenen , author A. Karastergiou , author E. F. \ Keane , author V. I. \ Kondratiev , author K. Lazaridis , author J. van Leeuwen , author A. Noutsos , author M. Serylak , author C. Sobey , author J. P. ...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  80. [134]

    author author B. J. \ Rickett , author W. A. \ Coles , \ and\ author J. Markkanen ,\ 10.1086/308637 journal journal \ volume 533 ,\ pages 304 ( year 2000 ) ,\ http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/9911368 arXiv:astro-ph/9911368 [astro-ph] NoStop

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

Showing first 80 references.