Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 3 minor 34 references

Discrete Chi-Square Method discovers solar forcing in El Ni\~no time series: The Pacific Ocean as a bolometer measuring the solar dynamo light curve in real-time

T0 review · 4 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims its Discrete Chi-Square Method recovers periodic signals where the Discrete Fourier Transform fails, and that on El Niño records it reveals a solar-forced 'Big wave' rather than purely chaotic ocean-atmosphere dynamics.

desk verdict The body is a modest DCM-vs-DFT simulation study; the abstract's El Niño and solar-forcing claims have no support in the text, so the submission overreaches badly. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.01540 v9 pith:C5A32ZQT submitted 2025-09-01 stat.ME

Lauri Jetsu This is my paper
classification stat.ME MSC 62M10
keywords DiscreteChi-SquareMethodFourierTransformtimeseriesanalysisperiodicsignaldetectionElNiñosolarforcingsunspotcycleill-posedproblems
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

This paper aims to establish that a computationally heavy but conceptually simple strategy — fitting a huge catalogue of linear least-squares models, one per candidate frequency combination, and keeping the minimum — can pull periodic signals out of data windows where the Discrete Fourier Transform is known to fail: signals whose periods exceed the record length, signals riding on an unknown trend, close frequencies, and non-sinusoidal shapes. The method, the Discrete Chi-Square Method (DCM), claims a 'Window Dimension effect': detection is guaranteed once the sample is large or accurate enough, regardless of the time span, so it can 'see through time'. The abstract of this version goes further, asserting that on El Niño records DCM detects a multi-periodic 'Big wave' on the warming trend, produces deterministic forecasts that outperform official agencies, and that only solar forcing — the Pacific acting as a bolometer of the solar dynamo light curve — can explain the cooling at sunspot minima. The body supplied here develops the simulation-based case (seven synthetic data sets, all recovered by DCM and all missed by the comparison DFT); the El Niño application itself is announced rather than displayed. If true, the climatological part would push El Niño modeling toward incorporating astrophysical cycles and deterministic periodic prediction, not merely probabilistic chaos.

What carries the argument

The device that carries the argument is conditional linearization. The DCM model g(t) = h(t) + p(t) is nonlinear only because the frequencies f_i sit inside trigonometric arguments; once a tested frequency combination is fixed, every remaining parameter — harmonic amplitudes and trend coefficients — enters linearly, so ordinary least squares yields a unique, stable solution for that combination (the paper's well-posedness conditions C1–C3). A grid search over ordered frequency tuples (f1 > f2 > ... > fK1, exploiting permutation symmetry) produces a catalogue of linear fits; the minimum of z supplies starting values for a final nonlinear iteration. Model selection is then Fisher-test based, w

What would settle it

A decisive test: (1) inject into a simulated series a non-sinusoidal signal whose period exceeds the window and whose true frequency falls between two grid nodes of the DCM search, with a high-order trend and realistic noise; if the recovered minimum is not the injected signal at large n and low sigma, the window-dimension guarantee fails. (2) For the climate claim: run a coupled ocean-atmosphere El Niño model with no solar input and check whether it can generate the multi-periodic 'Big wave'; if it can, 'only solar forcing' is false. Either experiment is directly executable.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that the Discrete Chi-Square Method (DCM) — fitting g(t) = h(t) + p(t), the sum of K1 periodic signals (each with K2 Fourier harmonics) plus a polynomial trend — solves an ill-posed nonlinear fitting problem by brute force: hold the frequencies fixed, solve the now-linear least-squares problem uniquely for every tested frequency combination, keep the combination with the smallest z = sqrt(R/n) or sqrt(chi^2/n), then iterate. On seven simulated data sets designed to hit every known DFT failure mode, DCM recovers the injected periods, amplitudes, phases, and trend coefficients, while the Horne-Baliunas DFT fails in all seven. The claimed guarantee, the Window Dimension effect,

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that brute-force grid search over candidate frequencies is guaranteed to find the true signals once data are dense or accurate enough; the least-squares optimality theorem the paper leans on covers each individual linear fit, but the paper gives no proof that it extends to the global search over a high-dimensional, nonconvex frequency grid.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If DCM detects signals with periods longer than the observing window, then no record need be 'long enough' in the classical resolution sense: dense, accurate sampling can reveal cycles before they complete a single repeat.
  • If the El Niño analysis holds, forecasting would shift from probabilistic to deterministic — a fixed multi-periodic model fitted once and extrapolated — and the paper claims such forecasts outperform official agency outlooks.
  • If only solar forcing can cause the Pacific cooling at sunspot minima, then future El Niño models must couple astrophysical solar and planetary cycles to ocean-atmosphere dynamics instead of treating the system as autonomously chaotic.
  • The four DFT limitations (period longer than window, trend, close frequencies, non-sinusoidal shape) are presented as the reason such signals were never detected before in records like the sunspot series; wherever DFT is standard, DCM is claimed to be a drop-in replacement.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The body of this version contains only the simulation study (Models 1–7); the El Niño forecast, the 'Big wave' detection, and the solar-forcing conclusion are asserted in the abstract without displayed data, fitted models, or forecast windows in the supplied text. A reader should treat the climatological claims as announced results pending the companion analysis.
  • The paper's 'cannot fail' conclusion leans on the Gauss-Markov theorem harder than the theorem reaches: it covers the least-squares fit for each fixed frequency combination, not the global minimum over a high-dimensional grid of frequency combinations, which is a nonconvex search. The gap sits in Section 4.4's sentence that the model with the lowest R or chi^2 is 'eventually always found'.
  • The paper itself concedes in Section 4.4 that the n and signal-to-noise values of Models 2, 5, and 7 are extreme and unrealistic for most real data, so the practical margin over DFT on real-length, real-noise records is not established by the simulations shown.
  • The bolometer metaphor yields a checkable prediction independent of the next forecast: if the Pacific really tracks the solar dynamo light curve, the phases of the detected multi-periodic components should lock to sunspot-cycle extrema across independent ocean indices (Niño 3.4, SOI, thermocline depth) with consistent lags. Testing that phase locking would distinguish the solar-forcing claim from
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript, as represented by the full text, is a methods paper. It proposes the Discrete Chi-Square Method (DCM): a two-stage grid search over frequency combinations, followed by linear least-squares fits at each grid point, bootstrap error estimates, Fisher-test model selection, and a Prediction-test on a held-out slice. The paper compares DCM with the Horne and Baliunas DFT on seven simulated datasets that combine pure-sine or double-wave signals, polynomial trends, close frequencies, and periods longer than the data window; it reports that DCM recovers the simulation parameters (with some exceptions) while DFT fails. The supplied arXiv abstract, however, makes much stronger claims: application to El Niño time series, detection of a 'Big wave', deterministic solar forcing, and forecasts outperforming official agencies. The full text contains no such real-data analysis.

Significance. Strengths first: the paper makes its synthetic data and control files available on Zenodo, gives explicit model equations, and demonstrates a plausible computational strategy for period searches with trends. If the simulation results were replicated, the method could be a useful addition to periodogram-based tools. The significance for a general statistical audience is, however, undermined by three problems. First, the headline discovery claim is unsupported by any real-data analysis in the submitted text. Second, the central 'cannot fail' argument misuses the Gauss-Markov theorem and is contradicted by the paper's own Table 5. Third, the model-selection protocol includes a post hoc rejection of 'unstable' models, which needs formalization before one can interpret the reported high success rates. As submitted, the manuscript cannot justify its advertised conclusions.

major comments (4)
  1. [Abstract; Sections 1-4] The abstract asserts that 'Only solar forcing, not chaotic ocean-atmosphere coupling, can cause the Big wave cooling the Pacific Ocean at sunspot minima' and that DCM forecasts outperform official agencies. The full text does not contain an El Niño index, sea-surface temperature series, sunspot series, fitted 'Big wave' model, or forecast comparison. Sections 3.1-3.7 analyze only simulated data; Section 3.10's Prediction-test illustration uses Model 3 synthetic data. The only links to real data are a footnote to a submitted manuscript and references to Jetsu (2025), neither of which is summarized or included. The causal claim is therefore not verifiable from this submission.
  2. [Section 4.4; Table 5] The statement 'The Gauß-Markov theorem ensures that the model having the lowest R or chi2 is eventually always found' and the later 'DCM can fail if, and only if, the Gauß-Markov theorem is not valid. That is impossible' are not supported. Gauss-Markov concerns best linear unbiased estimation for a fixed linear model; it does not guarantee global minimization over the nonconvex, finite grid of frequency combinations defined in Eq. (18). Moreover, Table 5, column 2 (n=10,000, SN=1000) shows DCM failing to recover P2=1.9 (estimated 5.24 +/- 0.83), with wildly wrong trend coefficients; Section 3.5 acknowledges that 'DCM can fail'. The 'cannot fail' claim needs to be removed or replaced with a concrete convergence guarantee.
  3. [Sections 3.8-3.9] The Fisher-test is used to select model orders from the same data that are then used for the Prediction-test; this can induce selection bias, and the paper does not report how often the selected model is the true model under repeated simulation. More importantly, the rejection of 'unstable models' (UM) relies on signatures (intersecting frequencies, dispersing amplitudes, leaking periods) that are not defined by numerical thresholds. Because UM models are identified after examining fits, the claim that all non-UM models are stable is circular unless the criteria are fixed in advance and validated on independent replicates.
  4. [Section 4.4; Sections 3.2, 3.5, 3.7] The WD-effect claim that performance depends only on n and SN, not on Delta T, is not established. For periods longer than the window, identifiability depends on the assumed trigonometric shape and on the trend order; a low-frequency component can often be absorbed by a polynomial trend. The simulations do not provide a general identifiability proof. They also use only one realization per (model, n, SN) cell, so detection probabilities and false-positive rates are not estimated; Tables 1-7 report bootstrap parameter errors for a single dataset, not sampling variation across datasets. The extreme n and SN of Models 2, 5 and 7 are acknowledged in Section 4.4, further limiting the generality of the 'time span is irrelevant' conclusion.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Title and author affiliation] The title contains a spacing typo: 'Transfo rm'. The affiliation contains 'Hels inki'. These should be corrected.
  2. [Sections 3.3 and 3.4] Cross-references to figures are wrong: Section 3.3 refers to 'Figures 1a-d' when it means Figures 3a-d, and Section 3.4 similarly refers to 'Figures 1a-d' when it means Figures 4a-d. Section 3.6 refers to 'Equation 37' for the Model 6 formula, but the displayed equation is Eq. (36).
  3. [Abstract and Section 3.5] The abstract says DCM 'can not fail', while Section 3.5 explicitly states 'DCM can fail, just like any other time series analysis method'. This internal inconsistency should be reconciled. Also, Table 8 has malformed notation such as 'g1,,1,-1', which needs cleaning.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Abstract's solar-forcing/ENSO claim rests on a self-citation; the method-comparison body is not circular.

  1. self citation load bearing [Abstract (v3); Section 3.10; footnote 1 in Section 2.1]
    "Only solar forcing, not chaotic ocean-atmosphere coupling, can cause the "Big wave" cooling the Pacific Ocean at sunspot minima. ... This "Prediction-test" technique revealed at least five real signals in the sunspot record (Jetsu 2025). ... Jetsu L. "Do planets cause the sunspot cycle?", submitted to Scientific Reports."

    The abstract's central discovery claim—solar forcing, not chaotic coupling, causes the Pacific 'Big wave'—is never derived in the body of this manuscript. The full text contains only simulated DCM-versus-DFT comparisons; no El Niño index, sea-surface temperature series, sunspot record, or forecast comparison is analyzed. The only support offered for the ENSO/solar result is a citation to the author's own submitted manuscript (Jetsu 2025) and the footnote to another submitted paper. Thus the advertised conclusion is imported from a self-citation rather than obtained from the present paper's equations or data, making the headline claim equivalent to the author's own prior assertion.

full rationale

The methodological core of the paper—Sections 2–4—is a self-contained simulation study. Data are generated from explicit DCM models (Equations 31–37), analyzed in Sections 3.1–3.7, and the recovered parameters in Tables 1–7 match the simulated inputs. The Prediction-test in Section 3.10 uses a genuine split: the first 40 observations are used to fit the model and the last 10 are predicted, so the prediction statistic is not fitted on the target slice. These parts do not exhibit circularity. However, the paper's abstract advertises a real-world El Niño/solar-forcing discovery, and that claim is absent from the body. No ENSO data, sunspot data, 'Big wave' fit, or causal analysis appears in the results; the only support is a self-citation to Jetsu (2025) and a submitted-manuscript footnote. That is a load-bearing self-citation for the headline claim. Separately, the WD-effect is essentially the standard consistency of least-squares estimation within the assumed parametric model family; presenting it as a new 'Window Dimension Effect' is a renaming/novelty issue rather than a circular prediction, so I do not count it as a separate circular step. The Gauss-Markov/grid-search argument in Section 4.4 is a logical gap—the theorem does not guarantee that a finite nonconvex frequency-grid search finds the global minimum—but that is an unsupported inference, not a circularity. Overall, the independent simulation methodology keeps the paper from a high circularity score, but the abstract's central causal claim reduces to the author's own unpublished work, giving a score of 4.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The central advertised results are absent, but the listed parameters, assumptions, and entities are what the text relies on.

free parameters (5)
  • gamma_F = 0.001
    Pre-assigned significance level for rejecting the null hypothesis in the Fisher-test (Eq. 40). This is a user choice, not derived.
  • c = 0.05
    Fraction of the frequency interval defining the short-search window around the best long-search frequency (Eq. 17).
  • nL, nS, nB = not specified in text
    Number of long-search frequencies, short-search frequencies, and bootstrap samples. These determine the search size but are not documented in the body (presumably in downloadable control files).
  • DCM model orders (K1, K2, K3) for real data = unknown
    For the abstract's El Niño claim, the model orders and periods would be fitted to data, but no such results are present.
  • SN and n values in simulations = varied per table
    The simulated sample sizes and signal-to-noise ratios are chosen to make DCM succeed; Table 5 shows failure when they are too low.
assumptions (4)
  • standard math Gauss-Markov theorem is valid after fixing frequencies, so LS is BLUE and 'cannot fail'.
    Invoked as the backbone (Section 1, Section 4.4), but BLUE is a property of fixed linear models, not a guarantee of global optimization over nonlinear frequency grid.
  • domain assumption The true data generation process is exactly a sum of sinusoids plus a low-order polynomial trend.
    DCM model (Eqs. 1-5); simulations use this model. Real El Niño data would need to satisfy this, which is not shown.
  • ad hoc to paper The global minimum of the DCM periodogram over the finite tested frequency grid equals the continuous global minimum.
    Assumed in Sections 2.1 and 4.4 without proof; the objective is nonconvex, and no coverage argument for the grid is given.
  • domain assumption Data errors are independent with known (or equal) variance and zero mean.
    Required for the chi-square and Gauss-Markov arguments (Eqs. 13-16); validity for El Niño series is not discussed.
invented entities (2)
  • The 'Big wave'
    purpose: A multi-periodic signal in El Niño claimed to represent solar forcing (abstract).
    Mentioned only in the abstract; no definition, estimates, or data appear in the body.
  • Deterministic solar dynamo light curve
    purpose: Claimed to be measurable by the Pacific Ocean as a bolometer (abstract).
    Only in abstract; no physical model or observational test is provided.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Discrete Chi-Square Method discovers solar forcing in El Ni\~no time series: The Pacific Ocean as a bolometer measuring the solar dynamo light curve in real-time." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/C5A32ZQT

@misc{pith2026250901540,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Discrete Chi-Square Method discovers solar forcing in El Ni\~no time series: The Pacific Ocean as a bolometer measuring the solar dynamo light curve in real-time},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/C5A32ZQT}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.01540}
}
abstract

Discrete Chi-square Method (DCM) can detect multiple signals superimposed on an arbitrary trend. DCM's backbone is Gauss-Markov theorem that Least Squares (LS) is the best unbiased estimator for linear regression models. DCM is robust because it computes numerous linear model LS fits. Discrete Fourier Transform and other frequency-domain methods have many application limitations. None of those limitations constrains DCM. Fisher-test provides signal significances and identifies the best DCM model, which is validated by Forecast-test. Simulations verify the Window Dimension Effect (WD-effect): "For any sample window $\Delta T$, DCM inevitably detects the correct $p(t)$ trend and $h(t)$ signal(-s) when sample size $n$ and/or data accuracy $\sigma$ increase". WD-effect "sees through time". DCM's model analytical solution is ill-posed. We present a computational well-posed solution. Mainstream considers El Ni\~no phenomenon chaotic. Usual forecasts are probabilistic, not deterministic. We use El Ni\~no time series to stress-test DCM. It detects the multi-periodic "Big wave" superimposed on global warming trend. This gives accurate El Ni\~no forecasts. Our real-time forecast outperforms those of official agencies. Only solar forcing, not chaotic ocean-atmosphere coupling, can cause the "Big wave" cooling the Pacific Ocean at sunspot minima. The ocean acts like a giant bolometer measuring the deterministic "Solar dynamo light curve". DCM detects multi-periodicity in the ocean and sunspot record. The mainstream stochastic dynamo cannot cause this. Planetary tidal forces may drive solar dynamo. Future El Ni\~no models must integrate astrophysical cycles with chaotic climatological fluid dynamics. Validating our analysis now can save trillions (USD) in El Ni\~no damages.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

34 extracted references · 23 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A Bayesian method for the analysis of deterministic and stochastic time series

    barticle Bailer-Jones , C.A.L. : A Bayesian method for the analysis of deterministic and stochastic time series . 546 , 89 ( 2012 ) 10.1051/0004-6361/201220109 https://arxiv.org/abs/1209.3730 arXiv:1209.3730 [astro-ph.IM] barticle

    work page Pith review arXiv 2012

  2. [3]

    , Ticona , A

    barticle Chianca , C.V. , Ticona , A. , Penna , T.J.P. : Fourier-detrended fluctuation analysis . Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications 357 ( 3 ), 447 -- 454 ( 2005 ) 10.1016/j.physa.2005.03.047 barticle

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physa.2005.03.047 2005

  3. [4]

    , Smith , H

    bbook Draper , N.R. , Smith , H. : Applied Regression Analysis . John Wiley & Sons, Inc. , Hoboken, New Jersey ( 1998 ). 10.1002/9781118625590 bbook

    doi:10.1002/9781118625590 1998

  4. [5]

    , Tibshirani , R

    barticle Efron , B. , Tibshirani , R. : Bootstrap Methods for Standard Errors, Confidence Intervals, and Other Measures of Statistical Accuracy . Statistical Science 1 , 54 ( 1986 ) barticle

    work page 1986

  5. [6]

    : Th \'e orie Analytique de la Chaleur , ( 1822 ) bbook

    bbook Fourier , J.B.J. : Th \'e orie Analytique de la Chaleur , ( 1822 ) bbook

    work page

  6. [7]

    : Theoria Motvs Corporvm Coelestivm in Sectionibvs Conicis Solem Ambientivm

    bbook Gauss , K.F. : Theoria Motvs Corporvm Coelestivm in Sectionibvs Conicis Solem Ambientivm. , ( 1809 ) bbook

    work page

  7. [8]

    : Theoria Combinationis Observationum Erroribus Minimis Obnoxiae

    barticle Gauss , C.F. : Theoria Combinationis Observationum Erroribus Minimis Obnoxiae . Commentationes Societatis Regiae Scientiarum Gottingensis Recentiores 1 , 1 -- 94 ( 1821 ) barticle

    work page

  8. [9]

    : Sur les problèmes aux dérivées partielles et leur signification physique

    barticle Hadamard , J. : Sur les problèmes aux dérivées partielles et leur signification physique . Princeton University Bulletin 13 , 49 -- 52 ( 1902 ) barticle

    work page 1902

Show all 34 references
  1. [10]

    : Time Series Analysis

    bbook Hamilton , J.D. : Time Series Analysis . Princeton University Press , Princeton ( 1994 ). 10.1515/9780691218632 bbook

    1994 doi

  2. [11]

    , Baliunas , S.L

    barticle Horne , J.H. , Baliunas , S.L. : A Prescription for Period Analysis of Unevenly Sampled Time Series . 302 , 757 ( 1986 ) 10.1086/164037 barticle

    1986 doi

  3. [12]

    , Tibshirani , R

    bbook Hastie , T. , Tibshirani , R. , Friedman , J. : The Elements of Statistical Learning . Springer Series in Statistics . Springer , New York, NY, USA ( 2001 ) bbook

    2001

  4. [13]

    : Discrete Chi-square Method for Detecting Many Signals

    barticle Jetsu , L. : Discrete Chi-square Method for Detecting Many Signals . The Open Journal of Astrophysics 3 ( 1 ), 4 ( 2020 ) 10.21105/astro.2002.03890 https://arxiv.org/abs/2002.03890 arXiv:2002.03890 barticle

    2020 arXiv

  5. [14]

    : Say Hello to Algol's New Companion Candidates

    barticle Jetsu , L. : Say Hello to Algol's New Companion Candidates . 920 ( 2 ), 137 ( 2021 ) 10.3847/1538-4357/ac1351 https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.13360 arXiv:2005.13360 barticle

    2021 arXiv

  6. [15]

    , Pelt , J

    barticle Jetsu , L. , Pelt , J. : Three stage period analysis and complementary methods . 139 , 629 -- 643 ( 1999 ) 10.1051/aas:1999411 barticle

    1999 doi

  7. [16]

    : Astronomical Time Series Analysis in South Africa

    barticle Koen , C. : Astronomical Time Series Analysis in South Africa . 230 ( 1-2 ), 307 -- 314 ( 1995 ) 10.1007/BF00658188 barticle

    1995 doi

  8. [17]

    , Protopapas , P

    barticle Kim , D.-W. , Protopapas , P. , Alcock , C. , Byun , Y.-I. , Bianco , F.B. : Detrending time series for astronomical variability surveys . Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 397 ( 1 ), 558 -- 568 ( 2009 ) 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14967.x https://arxiv.o...

    2009

  9. [18]

    , Deeming , T.J

    barticle Loumos , G.L. , Deeming , T.J. : Spurious Results from Fourier Analysis of Data with Closely Spaced Frequencies . 56 ( 2 ), 285 -- 291 ( 1978 ) 10.1007/BF01879560 barticle

    1978 doi

  10. [19]

    : Nouvelles m \'e thodes pour la d \'e termination des orbites des com \`e tes

    botherref Legendre , A.-M. : Nouvelles m \'e thodes pour la d \'e termination des orbites des com \`e tes. Journal de l' \'E cole Polytechnique (1805) botherref

  11. [20]

    , Jetsu , L

    barticle Lehtinen , J. , Jetsu , L. , Hackman , T. , Kajatkari , P. , Henry , G.W. : The continuous period search method and its application to the young solar analogue HD 116956 . 527 , 136 ( 2011 ) 10.1051/0004-6361/201015454 https://arxiv.org/abs/1007.4090 arXiv:1007.4090 barticle

    2011 arXiv

  12. [21]

    : Least-Squares Frequency Analysis of Unequally Spaced Data

    barticle Lomb , N.R. : Least-Squares Frequency Analysis of Unequally Spaced Data . 39 ( 2 ), 447 -- 462 ( 1976 ) 10.1007/BF00648343 barticle

    1976 doi

  13. [22]

    , Romanov , V.G

    bbook Lavrentiev , M.M. , Romanov , V.G. , Shishatskii , S.P. : Ill-posed Problems of Mathematical Physics and Analysis . Translations of Mathematical Monographs , vol. 64 . American Mathematical Society , Providence, R.I. ( 1986 ) bbook

    1986

  14. [23]

    , Kurtz , D.W

    barticle Martinez , P. , Kurtz , D.W. : New observations and a frequency analysis of the extremely peculiar rapidly oscillating AP star HD 101065. 242 , 636 -- 652 ( 1990 ) 10.1093/mnras/242.4.636 barticle

    1990 doi

  15. [24]

    , Tuominen , I

    barticle Piskunov , N.E. , Tuominen , I. , Vilhu , O. : Surface imaging of late-type stars. 230 , 363 -- 370 ( 1990 ) barticle

    1990

  16. [25]

    , Teukolsky , S.A

    botherref Press , W.H. , Teukolsky , S.A. , Vetterling , W.T. , Flannery , B.P. : Numerical recipes in fortran: The art of scientific computing. Cambridge University Press (1992). This book contains a comprehensive discussion on DFT and its applications in various fields, incl...

    1992

  17. [26]

    , Reiners , A

    barticle Reinhold , T. , Reiners , A. , Basri , G. : Rotation and differential rotation of active Kepler stars . 560 , 4 ( 2013 ) 10.1051/0004-6361/201321970 https://arxiv.org/abs/1308.1508 arXiv:1308.1508 [astro-ph.SR] barticle

    2013 arXiv

  18. [27]

    : Studies in astronomical time series analysis

    barticle Scargle , J.D. : Studies in astronomical time series analysis. II. Statistical aspects of spectral analysis of unevenly spaced data. 263 , 835 -- 853 ( 1982 ) 10.1086/160554 barticle

    1982 doi

  19. [28]

    : Studies in Astronomical Time Series Analysis

    barticle Scargle , J.D. : Studies in Astronomical Time Series Analysis. III. Fourier Transforms, Autocorrelation Functions, and Cross-Correlation Functions of Unevenly Spaced Data . 343 , 874 ( 1989 ) 10.1086/167757 barticle

    1989 doi

  20. [29]

    : On the solution of ill-posed problems and the method of regularization

    barticle Tikhonov , A.N. : On the solution of ill-posed problems and the method of regularization . Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 151 , 501 -- 504 ( 1963 ) barticle

    1963

  21. [30]

    , K \"o nig , M

    barticle Timmer , J. , K \"o nig , M. : On generating power law noise. 300 , 707 ( 1995 ) barticle

    1995

  22. [31]

    , Solanki , S.K

    barticle Usoskin , I.G. , Solanki , S.K. , Kovaltsov , G.A. : Grand minima and maxima of solar activity: new observational constraints . 471 ( 1 ), 301 -- 309 ( 2007 ) 10.1051/0004-6361:20077704 https://arxiv.org/abs/0706.0385 arXiv:0706.0385 barticle

    2007 arXiv

  23. [32]

    : Understanding the Lomb-Scargle Periodogram

    barticle VanderPlas , J.T. : Understanding the Lomb-Scargle Periodogram . 236 ( 1 ), 16 ( 2018 ) 10.3847/1538-4365/aab766 https://arxiv.org/abs/1703.09824 arXiv:1703.09824 [astro-ph.IM] barticle

    2018 arXiv

  24. [33]

    : Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data , 2nd edn

    bbook Wooldridge , J.M. : Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data , 2nd edn. The MIT Press , Cambridge, MA, USA ( 2010 ) bbook

    2010

  25. [34]

    , Jia , H.Y

    barticle Zhu , F.R. , Jia , H.Y. : Lomb-Scargle periodogram analysis of the periods around 5.5 year and 11 year in the international sunspot numbers . 363 ( 7 ), 138 ( 2018 ) 10.1007/s10509-018-3332-z barticle

    2018 doi

  26. [35]

    , K \"u rster , M

    barticle Zechmeister , M. , K \"u rster , M. : The generalised Lomb-Scargle periodogram. A new formalism for the floating-mean and Keplerian periodograms . 496 ( 2 ), 577 -- 584 ( 2009 ) 10.1051/0004-6361:200811296 https://arxiv.org/abs/0901.2573 arXiv:0901.2573 [astro-ph.IM] barticle

    2009 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.