Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 94 references

A single correction matrix undoes antenna-to-antenna coupling in dense radio arrays, all the way down to the measured visibilities.

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

2026-08-02 06:53 UTC pith:EWKX6GLH

load-bearing objection Solid simulation study with an overstated central claim: the element-level C_F is never actually propagated to visibilities; the visibility validation uses a separately solved C_A. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.11438 v2 pith:EWKX6GLH submitted 2026-07-13 astro-ph.CO astro-ph.IM

Direct Primary Beam Correction: Untangling Mutual Coupling in 21-cm Cosmological Experiments with the SKA-Low Radio Telescope

Oscar S.D. O'Hara , Quentin Gueuning , Eloy de Lera Acedo , John Cumner , Dominic Anstey , Anthony Brown , Fred Dulwich , Andrew Faulkner
show 2 more authors
Ashish Mhaske Oskar Zetterstrom
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.CO astro-ph.IM
keywords direct primary beam correctionmutual coupling21-cm cosmologySKA-Lowembedded element patternJones matricesdelay power spectrumEoR window
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.

The paper introduces Direct Primary Beam Correction, a framework that removes mutual coupling between antennas in dense aperture arrays by solving one regularised, direction-weighted least-squares inversion at the antenna level. It shows that this correction operator can be applied unchanged to beamformed voltages and to visibilities through a simple congruence transformation, making the same correction available in real time or in post-processing. Using full-wave electromagnetic simulations of SKA-Low, the authors demonstrate reconstruction of the isolated-element response to numerical precision within a conditioned field of view, but also find that correcting only the main beam is not enough: uncorrected sidelobes inject resonant, frequency-incoherent contamination that can exceed the uncorrected coupling. A sympathetic reader cares because mutual coupling is currently the dominant direction-dependent systematic limiting 21-cm cosmology, and this work identifies both a practical way to suppress it and the boundary conditions under which that suppression fails.

Core claim

The central claim is that mutual coupling in a dense aperture array can be undone by a single linear operator, solved once from the embedded and isolated element patterns over a Nyquist-sampled, direction-weighted sky, and then propagated unchanged through beamforming into the visibility domain via the congruence transformation R_corr = C_A R C_A†. The paper proves this propagation by establishing the equivalence between beamforming and interferometric imaging, and validates it numerically: within a conditioned field of view, the corrected element pattern matches the isolated pattern to below -80 dB, and the same operator restores the array pattern and visibilities without recomputation. It

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the correction matrix C_F, computed as a regularised, direction-weighted least-squares solution C_F = F_iso D (F D)^+ with Tikhonov regularisation, mapping embedded element patterns (EEPs) onto a chosen reference pattern—here the isolated element pattern (IEP). The propagation of this operator to the beam and visibility domains is carried by the matrix identity A = W F for beamformed array patterns and the congruence transformation R_corr = C_A R C_A† for visibilities, which the paper derives from the formal equivalence between beamforming and interferometric imaging. Direction weighting via the diagonal matrix D selects a conditioned field of view and ensures the

Load-bearing premise

The full-wave electromagnetic simulation of the SKALA4 element in the Perturbed Vogel station is assumed to represent the true as-built instrument response, so all validation is closed-loop against that simulation; if real embedded element patterns differ, the correction matrix built from simulation will not remove the real mutual coupling.

What would settle it

Measure the true embedded element pattern of a real SKA-Low station holographically, construct the correction matrix from that measured pattern, and apply it to actual visibilities of a bright calibrator; then examine the delay power spectrum for residual sub-MHz structure. If residual coupling-induced contamination comparable to the uncorrected case persists, the assumption that simulated EEPs suffice would be falsified.

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

If this is right

  • Mutual-coupling correction can be performed exactly once at the element level, then applied for free to beamformed voltages or to stored visibilities, enabling real-time correction without downstream recomputation.
  • Main-beam-only correction is not a safe default for 21-cm power-spectrum experiments; robust recovery of the EoR window requires either full-sky correction or explicit separation of main-beam and sidelobe contributions before forming the power spectrum.
  • Mutual-coupling contamination is a fixed imprint of the array geometry, so longer integrations or more time samples will not average it away; only explicit correction or modelling can remove it.
  • The fidelity of the correction is directly tied to the accuracy of the embedded-element-pattern model: reconstruction degrades noticeably when the model falls below roughly three significant figures, establishing a quantitative accuracy target for beam models.
  • Because the framework is agnostic to both the distortion mechanism and the choice of reference pattern, the same operator construction applies to other direction-dependent effects, not only mutual coupling.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the correction operator is approximately stationary over the 10-minute recomputation cycle the paper uses, one could interpolate or smooth correction matrices across frequency and time to suppress the channel-to-channel incoherence that causes the resonant sidelobe artefacts; this is a natural testable extension the paper does not pursue.
  • The paper explicitly proposes holographic beam measurements as the anchor for the true as-built response; the practical implication is that the method's real-world value depends more on measurement fidelity than on the simulation fidelity demonstrated here.
  • Pairing the correction with a tapered gridded estimator or image-domain apodisation could separate main-beam from sidelobe visibility contributions before the delay transform, potentially recovering the EoR window even when full-sky correction is impractical.
  • The same theory could be applied to other temporally coherent, geometry-fixed direction-dependent effects, such as cable reflections or mutual coupling between stations, since the reference pattern in the inversion is arbitrary.

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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper introduces 'Direct Primary Beam Correction,' a regularized, direction-weighted linear inversion framework that reconstructs a distorted antenna/array response (EEP) toward a reference response (IEP) in order to mitigate mutual coupling. The formalism is developed at three levels: an element-level correction matrix C_F (Eq. 24), a station/array-level matrix C_A (Eq. 30), and a visibility-domain congruence transformation R_corr = C_A R C_A^† (Eq. 32). The method is validated with full-wave FAST simulations of a perturbed Vogel SKA-Low station, showing sub-−80 dB residuals within a conditioned field of view at element, beam, and visibility level. The paper then applies the framework to a simulated 4-hour EoR0 observation and reports two implications: (i) main-beam correction restores the EoR window, but full-sky correction leaves severe resonant contamination from unconstrained sidelobes; (ii) mutual-coupling contamination is temporally coherent and does not average down with integration time. The conclusion argues that robust EoR recovery requires either full-sky correction or explicit separation of main-beam and sidelobe contributions.

Significance. If the headline propagation claim is repaired, the framework is a useful addition to the DD-correction toolbox for dense aperture arrays. The numerical validation is detailed and the sub-−80 dB residuals are impressive. The temporal-coherence result for mutual coupling is an important, potentially general caution for 21-cm power-spectrum analyses. However, the validation is closed-loop against the same full-wave simulation that provides both the distorted and reference patterns, and the EoR conclusions rely on a partially masked sky and hand-tuned regularization parameters. The central claim that element-level correction propagates 'unchanged' to visibilities is not currently supported, which reduces the paper's impact as stated. The paper is well organized and the underlying station-level correction concept is sound, so the issues are fixable within the manuscript's scope.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3.3, Eq. (32); §5.3; Conclusion (i)] The central claim that 'a correction matrix solved once at the element level propagates unchanged through the beamformed-voltage domain and into the visibility domain' is not supported by the derivation. The element-level relation is F_iso ≈ C_F F, while the station-level relation used for visibility correction is A_iso ≈ C_A A. The numerical validation in §5.3 solves for C_A via Eq. (30) with a Tikhonov parameter scaled by N_a^2; C_F is never applied to beamformed voltages or visibilities. To obtain the visibility correction from C_F one would need R_corr = (W C_F) R (W C_F)^†, not Eq. (32), unless C_A = W C_F W^+. This missing derivation makes conclusion (i) and the 'no recomputation required downstream' statement internally inconsistent. The authors should either prove the relation between C_F and C_A or reframe the claim as station-level single-solve propagation.
  2. [§4.2, Fig. 8, Conclusion (ii)] The 'full-sky' scenario is not full-sky. The diffuse Galactic component is masked to a 5° radius around the tracked field, and the bottom row of Fig. 8 includes the full GLEAM point-source population but not diffuse emission at large angles. Because the resonant contamination in the corrected-EEP full-sky panel is attributed to unconstrained sidelobes, omitting diffuse sky power beyond 5°—where sidelobe response is significant—could substantially alter both the amplitude and structure of the contamination. The conclusion that robust EoR recovery requires full-sky correction or main-beam/sidelobe separation is therefore not quantitatively established for a realistic full-sky foreground. The authors should either include the full-sky diffuse emission or justify that the point-source population alone is sufficient for the claimed effect.
  3. [§6.1, Fig. 8; §5.1 FoV definition] The comparison in Fig. 8 does not cleanly separate corrected and uncorrected sky regions. The correction FoV in §5.1 is a 16.2° radius (D=1), yet the main-beam row retains GLEAM sources only within 5° of the phase centre, while the full-sky row includes all sources, including those between 5° and 16.2° that are inside the corrected FoV. Thus the bottom-right panel mixes correctly corrected near-sidelobe directions with uncorrected far-sidelobe directions. The stated conclusion that 'restricting the correction to the main lobe and near sidelobes is inadequate' confounds these two populations. A clean test would separate sources with D=1 from those outside the correction FoV.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§3.1] Typo: 'frquency' should be 'frequency'. Also, the statement that the method is 'previously noted' in Section 2 lacks a citation.
  2. [§5.3] The scaling of λ_reg by N_a^2 is asserted without derivation. A brief explanation of why this restores parity between element-level and station-level regularization would aid reproducibility.
  3. [§4.2] The diffuse component is masked to a 5° radius while the 21cmFAST signal is generated over a 10°×10° field; the statement that these are 'matching' is approximate. Clarify the geometry.
  4. [§6.1, Fig. 8] The terms 'horizon limit' and 'beam limit' are used in the caption and text but not explicitly defined. Please define them, as the 'supra-horizon' leakage discussion relies on this distinction.
  5. [Data Availability] The statement that data and software 'will be shared on reasonable request' is weaker than standard practice; consider archiving the simulation and analysis scripts to enable reproduction.

Circularity Check

3 steps flagged

Correction 'validation' is an in-sample least-squares fit: C_F and C_A are solved from the same EEP/IEP data on which the noise-floor residuals are measured, and the visibility test uses the separately fitted C_A rather than the element-level C_F claimed to propagate unchanged.

specific steps
  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 5.1, Eqs. (21)-(24), Figures 3-4]
    "Minimising this loss with respect to CF yields the closed-form weighted least-squares solution, CF=FisoD(FD)+ ... the Nyquist-sampled solution shown in the third panel down fully resolves the beam structure within the corrected field of view, enabling accurate reconstruction of the target response to numerical precision, with the residual saturating at −125dBV."

    C_F is defined as the (regularized) weighted least-squares minimizer of ||C_F F D - F_iso D||. The residual quoted as 'reconstruction to numerical precision' is evaluated on the same F, F_iso, and D-weighted directions used to solve Eq. (24). The 'reconstruction' therefore measures in-sample training error, not an independent prediction; the near-zero residual is forced by construction.

  2. fitted input called prediction [Section 5.3, Eqs. (28)-(30), Figure 6]
    "To compute the correction matrix given by Equation (30), we first constructed the array pattern using the Nyquist-sampled radiation patterns Fn and Fiso n, evaluated at Nl pointing directions distributed across the visible hemisphere using the Fibonacci lattice from Figure 2. ... Within the corrected field of view, the residual is suppressed to the noise floor"

    C_A is solved by the same regularized least-squares procedure against A_iso using the very array patterns A and A_iso that are then used for the residual check. The claim that 'the antenna-level correction operator propagates coherently to the beamformed-voltage domain' is supported only by the in-sample fit residual of the station-level matrix, not by any out-of-sample or independent test.

  3. self definitional [Section 3.3, Eq. (32); Section 5.3; Section 7 conclusion (i)]
    "By substituting the station-level correction relationship from Equation (27), the visibilities may be corrected given Rcorr mn = Aiso m I (Aiso n)^† ≃ CA Am I A†n C†A ≃ CA Rmn C†A. ... the same correction matrix applied to the station-level correction in Figure 6 is applied directly to the simulated visibilities Rl,mn"

    The visibility-domain result is defined through the station-level matrix C_A, which was separately fitted to satisfy A_iso ≈ C_A A. Substituting that fit into R = A I A† makes the 'corrected' visibility equal the A_iso-based visibility by algebra, not by any empirical test. Moreover, C_A is not the element-level C_F of Eq. (24), so conclusion (i)'s claim that 'a correction matrix solved once at the element level propagates unchanged' into the visibility domain is not derived from the paper's own equations.

full rationale

The paper contains substantial non-circular content: the EoR-window analysis, the demonstration that main-beam-only correction leaves chromatic grating-lobe contamination, the channel-incoherent resonant structures from per-frequency regularized inverses, and the temporal coherence of mutual-coupling contamination are genuine simulation-based findings that do not reduce to the correction fits. However, the central validation of the correction operator is technically circular in the patterns the review targets. Equations (21)-(24) define C_F as the weighted least-squares solution minimizing the same residual that is then reported as 'reconstruction to numerical precision'; this is a fitted quantity presented as a validated recovery, not an out-of-sample prediction. The same holds for C_A at station level. The visibility-domain test of Section 5.3 does not propagate C_F: Eq. (32) applies the separately fitted C_A, so the agreement is a congruence-transformed version of the fit relation A_iso ≈ C_A A, again forced by construction. The paper itself flags the closed-loop limitation in Section 7 by proposing holographic measurements as an anchor to the true as-built response, and it acknowledges the sidelobe-correction tension in Section 6.1. These admissions are important but do not remove the in-sample nature of the claimed noise-floor validation. Self-citations, such as the four-significant-digit requirement from O'Hara et al. (2025c), are not load-bearing because the paper independently probes model precision in Section 5.2. On balance, the score is 6: one or more 'predictions' (the noise-floor reconstruction and its propagation) reduce by construction, while the paper still contains independent scientific results on EoR-window contamination.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The method introduces no new physical entities. Its load-bearing assumptions are standard RIME, a linear coupling model, a Nyquist sampling criterion, and the fidelity of the full-wave simulation. Three free parameters (λ_reg, correction FoV, sky mask radius) are hand-chosen and shape the results.

free parameters (3)
  • Tikhonov regularisation parameter λ_reg = 1e-4 (element level); 6.55 (station level, scaled by N_a^2)
    Chosen by hand to balance main-lobe reconstruction fidelity versus sidelobe conditioning (Section 5.1, Figure 3). Controls the bias-variance trade-off and is central to the correction's behaviour outside the corrected FoV.
  • Correction field-of-view cutoff angle = 16.2° at 122 MHz
    Defined as the angle enclosing N_a direction samples (Section 5.1, Figure 2). Determines which sky directions are weighted into the least-squares solution and therefore which directions are corrected.
  • Diffuse sky mask radius = 5°
    GSM diffuse emission is masked to a 5° radius around the tracked field (Section 4.2) to make the simulation computationally feasible. This choice affects the full-sky contamination assessment because diffuse emission beyond 5° is excluded from the foreground model.
axioms (5)
  • standard math Voltage-to-incident-field linearity (RIME, Eq. 3)
    The Jones-matrix formalism is assumed valid for describing the instrument response and is used throughout Section 2.
  • domain assumption Linear mutual-coupling model F_iso ≈ C_F F (Eq. 19)
    Assumes that the relationship between embedded element patterns and isolated element patterns is a single linear transformation, following Huang et al. (2013). The correction framework rests on this.
  • domain assumption Nyquist spatial-sampling criterion (Section 5.1)
    Sampling the sky at the Nyquist rate set by the maximum baseline is assumed sufficient to capture all accessible spatial modes and to reconstruct the beam manifold without aliasing.
  • domain assumption Full-wave simulation as ground truth (Section 4.1)
    FAST wire-mesh MoM simulations of the SKALA4 element in a Perturbed Vogel station are assumed to accurately represent the as-built instrument. All validation is closed-loop against this model.
  • domain assumption Discrete-source sky representation (Section 4.2)
    The sky is represented as point sources for RIME evaluation; the continuous GSM is pixelised and masked. This is required for OSKAR but omits diffuse emission beyond the mask.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 24322 in / 10318 out tokens · 97445 ms · 2026-08-02T06:53:17.848488+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Mutual coupling between antennas has emerged as the dominant direction-dependent corruption in dense aperture arrays, imprinting pronounced sub-MHz spatial and spectral structure that compromises the time-gating and foreground-separation strategies used to isolate the faint 21-cm signal. In this work, we introduce \textit{Direct Primary Beam Correction}, a domain-agnostic framework for reconstructing the far-field radiation pattern relative to an arbitrary reference via a regularised, direction-weighted linear inversion of stacked Jones matrices, thereby enabling the removal of direction-dependent distortions such as mutual coupling. Using full-wave electromagnetic simulations of SKA-Low, we demonstrate that this framework reconstructs the radiation pattern down to the numerical noise floor within a suitably conditioned field of view, with the reconstruction accuracy governed by the regularised inversion and the fidelity of the underlying beam model. Applying the framework to a simulated 4-hour observation of the EoR0 field in the $122$--$134$~MHz band, we identify two principal implications for 21-cm power-spectrum analysis. First, restricting the correction to the main lobe and near sidelobes is inadequate: chromatic grating lobe contributions, whether left insufficiently or entirely uncorrected, continue to contaminate the EoR window. Second, mutual-coupling-induced contamination is temporally coherent and, being anchored to the fixed array geometry, does not average down across snapshots as the EoR field is tracked. Direct primary beam correction, therefore, provides a computationally efficient means of mitigating mutual coupling; however, robust recovery of the EoR window necessitates either full-sky correction or explicit separation of main-beam and sidelobe contributions prior to power-spectrum estimation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.11438 by Andrew Faulkner, Anthony Brown, Ashish Mhaske, Dominic Anstey, Eloy de Lera Acedo, Fred Dulwich, John Cumner, Oscar S.D. O'Hara, Oskar Zetterstrom, Quentin Gueuning.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: A block diagram of a two-station phased-array interferometer. The channelised antenna voltages v𝑛 ( 𝑓 , 𝑡) are weighted and coherently summed within each station to form multiple simultaneous beams across the (𝑙𝑥 , 𝑚𝑦 ) sky grid, producing beamformed station voltages 𝑏𝑝,𝑙 ( 𝑓 , 𝑡) for each point￾ing. These beamformed voltages are then cross-correlated to yield the visibil￾ities. The dashed boxes indicate t… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The 𝑀 directional samples ( 𝜃𝑚, 𝜙𝑚) at 122 MHz, sampled at Nyquist using a Fibonacci lattice and coloured according to the binary weights given by the matrix D. The dashed black circle denotes the correction FoV, defined by the cutoff angle that encloses 𝑁𝑎 samples, which ensures a well￾conditioned least-squares system. The red points (𝐷( 𝜃𝑚,𝜙𝑚) = 1) fall within this FoV and are included in the least-squar… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: presents a y-polarised co-azimuthal cut at 𝜙 = 0 ◦ and 122 MHz of the element-pattern power response, |f𝑛 ( 𝑓 ,sˆ)|2 , here￾after referred to as the beam transfer function. The curves are shown for the IEP (dashed black), the EEPs (solid grey), and the average element pattern (AEP) (solid black). The AEP facilitates computation of the residual electric-field patterns (red) relative to the IEP, thereby quan… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Illustration of antenna-level mutual coupling correction for a perturbed Vogel SKA-Low station composed of SKALA4 elements at 122 MHz. The top row shows the response of the central element, while the bottom row shows the resulting array pattern. For each, the panels (left to right) leverage the following element patterns: the isolated element pattern |F iso |, the embedded element pattern |F| exhibiting mu… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Beamformed voltage-domain mutual-coupling compensation for the Perturbed Vogel SKA-Low station at 122 MHz, for a zenith-pointed beam. The left panel shows the corrected array pattern |A corr |, while the right panel shows the residual |A iso − A corr | between the isolated-element and corrected array patterns. Both panels are shown as beam transfer functions in dBV across directional-cosine coordinates. Th… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Beam transfer function illustrating the sensitivity of antenna-level mutual coupling compensation to embedded element pattern (EEP) model accuracy, shown for the perturbed Vogel SKA-Low station at 122 MHz. Panels correspond to EEP models degraded to four, three, two, and one significant figures of precision, respectively. Each panel shows a co-azimuthal cut at 𝜙 = 0 ◦ of the Y-polarisation of all embedded … view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Visibility-domain mutual-coupling compensation for a two-station baseline of 310.8 m oriented 143.7◦ east of north at 122 MHz. Each panel displays the normalised residual of the diagonal entries of the Stokes-𝐼 com￾ponent of the correlation matrix, where computed over all 𝑁𝑙 beam pointings given by each marker. The left panel shows the uncorrected visibility re￾sponse, while the right panel shows the corre… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Two-dimensional delay power spectra for a 10 s snapshot at LST 00:02:26 on 22 September 2021, tracking the EoR0 field at (RA, Dec.) = (0 h, −30◦ ) over 122–134 MHz with 121 channels of 100 kHz. The sky model consists of GLEAM point sources filtered into two subsets: the top row retains only sources within 5 ◦ of the phase centre, isolating the main-beam contribution, while the bottom row includes the full-… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Illustrates the signal-to-foreground ratio P˜ EoR/P˜ FG as a function of delay, (left to right) for a single 10 s integration, alongside a 10-minute (60 time steps), and 4-hour (1440 time steps) observation. Each panel shows cuts of baseline length b = 40 m (grey) and 747 m (black), for the IEP (dashed), EEP (solid), and corrected EEP (shaded) antenna models. The mutual-coupling-induced contamination seen … view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Two-dimensional delay power spectra for a 4-hour tracked observation of the EoR0 field (RA, Dec.) = (0 h, −30◦ ) commencing at LST 22:02:26 on 21 September 2021, over 122–134 MHz, comprising 1440 time samples with a 10 s integration time. Rows correspond to the three antenna response models: the IEP (top), EEP (middle), and corrected EEP (bottom). Columns show the foreground component (GLEAM and GSM; left… view at source ↗

Review history (2 revisions) →

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

94 extracted references · 1 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    2017 , publisher=

    Interferometry and synthesis in radio astronomy , author=. 2017 , publisher=

    2017

  2. [2]

    Astronomy & astrophysics , volume=

    LOFAR: The low-frequency array , author=. Astronomy & astrophysics , volume=. 2013 , publisher=

    2013

  3. [3]

    Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia , volume=

    The Murchison widefield array: the square kilometre array precursor at low radio frequencies , author=. Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia , volume=. 2013 , publisher=

    2013

  4. [4]

    The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series , volume=

    An overview of chime, the canadian hydrogen intensity mapping experiment , author=. The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series , volume=. 2022 , publisher=

    2022

  5. [5]

    2015 International Conference on Electromagnetics in Advanced Applications (ICEAA) , pages=

    Evolution of SKALA (SKALA-2), the log-periodic array antenna for the SKA-low instrument , author=. 2015 International Conference on Electromagnetics in Advanced Applications (ICEAA) , pages=. 2015 , organization=

    2015

  6. [6]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume=

    Spectral performance of SKA Log-periodic Antennas I: mitigating spectral artefacts in SKA1-LOW 21 cm cosmology experiments , author=. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume=. 2017 , publisher=

    2017

  7. [7]

    and de Lera Acedo, Eloy and Wayth, Randall B

    Trott, Cathryn M. and de Lera Acedo, Eloy and Wayth, Randall B. and Fagnoni, Nicolas and Sutinjo, Adrian T. and Wakley, Brett and Punzalan, Chris Ivan B. , year=. Spectral performance of Square Kilometre Array Antennas – II. Calibration performance , volume=. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , publisher=. doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1224 , number=

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1224

  8. [8]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:1912.12699 , year=

    Anticipated Performance of the Square Kilometre Array--Phase 1 (SKA1) , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:1912.12699 , year=

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1912

  9. [9]

    Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific , volume=

    Hydrogen epoch of reionization array (HERA) , author=. Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific , volume=. 2017 , publisher=

    2017

  10. [10]

    Annual review of astronomy and astrophysics , volume=

    Reionization and Cosmology with 21-cm Fluctuations , author=. Annual review of astronomy and astrophysics , volume=. 2010 , publisher=

    2010

  11. [11]

    and Hall, Peter J

    Dewdney, Peter E. and Hall, Peter J. and Schilizzi, Richard T. and Lazio, T. Joseph L. W. , journal=. The Square Kilometre Array , year=

  12. [12]

    Radio Science , volume=

    A review on array mutual coupling analysis , author=. Radio Science , volume=. 2011 , publisher=

    2011

  13. [13]

    IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation , volume=

    Direct deterministic nulling techniques for large random arrays including mutual coupling , author=. IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation , volume=. 2018 , publisher=

    2018

  14. [14]

    2021 , publisher=

    Mutual Coupling Between Antennas , author=. 2021 , publisher=

    2021

  15. [15]

    IEEE Antennas and Wireless Propagation Letters , volume=

    Mutual coupling calibration for microstrip antenna arrays via element pattern reconstruction method , author=. IEEE Antennas and Wireless Propagation Letters , volume=. 2013 , publisher=

    2013

  16. [16]

    2020 XXXIIIrd General Assembly and Scientific Symposium of the International Union of Radio Science , pages=

    Embedded element patterns in hierarchical calibration of large distributed arrays , author=. 2020 XXXIIIrd General Assembly and Scientific Symposium of the International Union of Radio Science , pages=. 2020 , organization=

    2020

  17. [17]

    2019 international conference on electromagnetics in advanced applications (ICEAA) , pages=

    Using embedded element patterns to improve aperture array calibration , author=. 2019 international conference on electromagnetics in advanced applications (ICEAA) , pages=. 2019 , organization=

    2019

  18. [18]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume=

    Uncovering the effects of array mutual coupling in 21-cm experiments with the SKA-Low radio telescope , author=. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume=. 2025 , publisher=

    2025

  19. [19]

    2025 , eprint=

    First Results from HERA Phase II , author=. 2025 , eprint=

    2025

  20. [20]

    A full-sky Jones formalism , author=

    Revisiting the radio interferometer measurement equation-I. A full-sky Jones formalism , author=. Astronomy & Astrophysics , volume=. 2011 , publisher=

    2011

  21. [21]

    Calibration and direction-dependent effects , author=

    Revisiting the radio interferometer measurement equation-II. Calibration and direction-dependent effects , author=. Astronomy & Astrophysics , volume=. 2011 , publisher=

    2011

  22. [22]

    Addressing direction-dependent effects in 21 cm WSRT observations of 3C 147 , author=

    Revisiting the radio interferometer measurement equation-III. Addressing direction-dependent effects in 21 cm WSRT observations of 3C 147 , author=. Astronomy & Astrophysics , volume=. 2011 , publisher=

    2011

  23. [23]

    Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XIV , volume=

    W projection: A new algorithm for wide field imaging with radio synthesis arrays , author=. Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XIV , volume=

  24. [24]

    Astronomy & Astrophysics , volume=

    Correcting direction-dependent gains in the deconvolution of radio interferometric images , author=. Astronomy & Astrophysics , volume=. 2008 , doi =

    2008

  25. [25]

    Astronomy & Astrophysics , volume=

    Applying full polarization A-Projection to very wide field of view instruments: An imager for LOFAR , author=. Astronomy & Astrophysics , volume=. 2013 , publisher=

    2013

  26. [26]

    Astronomy & Astrophysics , volume=

    Faceting for direction-dependent spectral deconvolution , author=. Astronomy & Astrophysics , volume=. 2018 , publisher=

    2018

  27. [27]

    and Yatawatta, S

    Kazemi, S. and Yatawatta, S. and Zaroubi, S. and Lampropoulos, P. and de Bruyn, A. G. and Koopmans, L. V. E. and Noordam, J. , title =. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume =. 2011 , month =. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18506.x , url =

    arXiv 2011

  28. [28]

    and Greenhill, Lincoln J

    Mitchell, Daniel A. and Greenhill, Lincoln J. and Wayth, Randall B. and Sault, Robert J. and Lonsdale, Colin J. and Cappallo, Roger J. and Morales, Miguel F. and Ord, Stephen M. , journal=. Real-Time Calibration of the Murchison Widefield Array , year=

  29. [29]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume=

    Calibration requirements for detecting the 21 cm epoch of reionization power spectrum and implications for the SKA , author=. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume=. 2016 , publisher=

    2016

  30. [30]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume=

    Robust direction-dependent gain-calibration of beam-modelling errors far from the target field , author=. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume=. 2025 , publisher=

    2025

  31. [31]

    Astronomy & Astrophysics , volume=

    Redundancy calibration of phased-array stations , author=. Astronomy & Astrophysics , volume=. 2012 , publisher=

    2012

  32. [32]

    Physical Review D—Particles, Fields, Gravitation, and Cosmology , volume=

    Fast Fourier transform telescope , author=. Physical Review D—Particles, Fields, Gravitation, and Cosmology , volume=. 2009 , publisher=

    2009

  33. [33]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume=

    An efficient feedback calibration algorithm for direct imaging radio telescopes , author=. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume=. 2017 , doi =

    2017

  34. [34]

    Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific , volume=

    Enabling next-generation dark energy and epoch of reionization radio observatories with the moff correlator , author=. Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific , volume=. 2011 , publisher=

    2011

  35. [35]

    Radio Science , volume=

    Holographic calibration of phased array telescopes , author=. Radio Science , volume=. 2021 , publisher=

    2021

  36. [36]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume=

    A generic and efficient E-field Parallel Imaging Correlator for next-generation radio telescopes , author=. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume=. 2017 , publisher=

    2017

  37. [37]

    Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia , volume=

    Comparison of fast, hybrid imaging architectures for multi-scale, hierarchical aperture arrays , author=. Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia , volume=. 2025 , publisher=

    2025

  38. [38]

    Offringa, A. R. and McKinley, B. and Hurley-Walker, N. and Briggs, F. H. and Wayth, R. B. and Kaplan, D. L. and Bell, M. E. and Feng, L. and Neben, A. R. and Hughes, J. D. and Rhee, J. and Murphy, T. and Bhat, N. D. R. and Bernardi, G. and Bowman, J. D. and Cappallo, R. J. and Corey, B. E. and Deshpande, A. A. and Emrich, D. and Ewall-Wice, A. and Gaensle...

    2014

  39. [39]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume=

    Systematic biases in low-frequency radio interferometric data due to calibration: the LOFAR-EoR case , author=. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume=. 2016 , publisher=

    2016

  40. [40]

    Cornwell, T. J. and Wilkinson, P. N. , title =. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume =. 1981 , month =. doi:10.1093/mnras/196.4.1067 , url =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/196.4.1067 1981

  41. [41]

    Ground-based telescopes , volume=

    LOFAR calibration challenges , author=. Ground-based telescopes , volume=. 2004 , organization=

    2004

  42. [42]

    Astronomy & Astrophysics , volume=

    Assessing the impact of two independent direction-dependent calibration algorithms on the LOFAR 21 cm signal power spectrum-And applications to an observation of a field flanking the north celestial pole , author=. Astronomy & Astrophysics , volume=. 2023 , publisher=

    2023

  43. [43]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume =

    Yatawatta, Sarod , title =. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume =. 2015 , month =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stv596 , url =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stv596 2015

  44. [44]

    and van der Veen, Alle-Jan , journal=

    van der Tol, Sebastiaan and Jeffs, Brian D. and van der Veen, Alle-Jan , journal=. Self-Calibration for the LOFAR Radio Astronomical Array , year=

  45. [45]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume=

    Testing for calibration systematics in the EDGES low-band data using Bayesian model selection , author=. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume=. 2020 , publisher=

    2020

  46. [46]

    Nature , volume=

    An absorption profile centred at 78 megahertz in the sky-averaged spectrum , author=. Nature , volume=. 2018 , publisher=

    2018

  47. [47]

    and Baartman, Rushelle and Barkana, Rennan and Berkhout, Lindsay M

    Abdurashidova, Zuhra and Adams, Tyrone and Aguirre, James E. and Baartman, Rushelle and Barkana, Rennan and Berkhout, Lindsay M. and Bernardi, Gianni and Billings, Tashalee S. and Bizarria, Bruno B. and Bowman, Judd D. and Breitman, Daniela and Bull, Philip and Burba, Jacob and Byrne, Ruby and Carey, Steven and Chandra, Rajorshi Sushovan and Chen, Kai-Fen...

    2026

  48. [48]

    2025 , journal =

    Kern, Nicholas , number =. 2025 , journal =. doi:10.1093/MNRAS/STAF1007 , issn =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/staf1007 2025

  49. [49]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume=

    The effects of the antenna power pattern uncertainty within a global 21 cm experiment , author=. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume=. 2024 , publisher=

    2024

  50. [50]

    The Astrophysical Journal , volume=

    Ionospheric power-spectrum tomography in radio interferometry , author=. The Astrophysical Journal , volume=. 2010 , publisher=

    2010

  51. [51]

    Proceedings of the Cray User Group , pages=

    Isambard-ai: a leadership-class supercomputer optimised specifically for artificial intelligence , author=. Proceedings of the Cray User Group , pages=

  52. [52]

    Mitigating Zenith Blindness from Mutual Coupling in a Sunflower Phased Array , year=

    Anstey, Dominic and Cumner, John and Gueuning, Quentin and O'Hara, Oscar and de Lera Acedo, Eloy and Brown, Anthony and Faulkner, Andrew and Dulwich, Fred and Scott, Paul , booktitle=. Mitigating Zenith Blindness from Mutual Coupling in a Sunflower Phased Array , year=

  53. [53]

    Optimising Array Layouts with Aperiodic Tiling to Reduce Beam Spectral Variations Caused by Mutual Coupling , year=

    Mhaske, Ashish and Gueuning, Quentin and de Lera Acedo, Eloy and O'Hara, Oscar Sage David and Anstey, Dominic and Cumner, John and Brown, Anthony and Faulkner, Andrew and Dulwich, Fred , booktitle=. Optimising Array Layouts with Aperiodic Tiling to Reduce Beam Spectral Variations Caused by Mutual Coupling , year=

  54. [54]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume =

    Bonaldi, A and Hartley, P and Braun, R and Purser, S and Acharya, A and Ahn, K and Aparicio Resco, M and Bait, O and Bianco, M and Chakraborty, A and Chapman, E and Chatterjee, S and Chege, K and Chen, H and Chen, X and Chen, Z and Conaboy, L and Cruz, M and Darriba, L and De Santis, M and Denzel, P and Diao, K and Feron, J and Finlay, C and Gehlot, B and...

    2025

  55. [55]

    A Broadband Multipole Method for Accelerated Mutual Coupling Analysis of Large Irregular Arrays Including Rotated Antennas , year=

    Gueuning, Quentin and de Lera Acedo, Eloy and Keith Brown, Anthony and Craeye, Christophe and O’Hara, Oscar , journal=. A Broadband Multipole Method for Accelerated Mutual Coupling Analysis of Large Irregular Arrays Including Rotated Antennas , year=

  56. [56]

    UAV-Based Measurement of Sharp Spectral Resonances in Mutually Coupled SKA-Low Elements , year=

    Paonessa, Fabio and Ciorba, Lorenzo and Kyriakou, Georgios and Bolli, Pietro and Virone, Giuseppe , journal=. UAV-Based Measurement of Sharp Spectral Resonances in Mutually Coupled SKA-Low Elements , year=

  57. [57]

    Davidson, David B. and Bolli, Pietro and Bercigli, Mirko and Ninni, Paola Di and Monari, Jader and Perini, Federico and Sokolowski, Marcin and Tingay, Steven and Ung, Daniel and Virone, Giuseppe and Waterson, Mark and Wayth, Randall and Zerbi, Filippo M. , booktitle=. Electromagnetic modelling of the SKA-LOW AAVS2 prototype , year=

  58. [58]

    Davidson and Mirko Bercigli and Paola Di Ninni and Maria Grazia Labate and Daniel Ung and Giuseppe Virone , title =

    Pietro Bolli and David B. Davidson and Mirko Bercigli and Paola Di Ninni and Maria Grazia Labate and Daniel Ung and Giuseppe Virone , title =. Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems , number =. 2022 , doi =

    2022

  59. [59]

    The Astrophysical Journal , volume=

    Holographic beam measurements of the Canadian hydrogen intensity mapping experiment (CHIME) , author=. The Astrophysical Journal , volume=. 2024 , doi =

    2024

  60. [60]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume =

    Chokshi, A and Line, J L B and Barry, N and Ung, D and Kenney, D and McPhail, A and Williams, A and Webster, R L , title =. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume =. 2021 , month =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stab156 , url =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stab156 2021

  61. [61]

    Beam Prediction Method for Antenna Arrays in Radio Astronomy via Artificial Neural Networks , year=

    Kovaleva, Maria and Chen, Chuyan and Davidson, David , booktitle=. Beam Prediction Method for Antenna Arrays in Radio Astronomy via Artificial Neural Networks , year=

  62. [62]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume =

    O’Hara, Oscar S D and Dulwich, Fred and de Lera Acedo, Eloy and Dhandha, Jiten and Gessey-Jones, Thomas and Anstey, Dominic and Fialkov, Anastasia , title =. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume =. 2024 , month =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1952 , url =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1952 2024

  63. [63]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume =

    Bevins, Harry T J and Heimersheim, Stefan and Abril-Cabezas, Irene and Fialkov, Anastasia and de Lera Acedo, Eloy and Handley, William and Singh, Saurabh and Barkana, Rennan , title =. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume =. 2024 , month =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3194 , url =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3194 2024

  64. [64]

    Antenna design for the SKA1-LOW and HERA super radio telescopes , year=

    de Lera Acedo, Eloy and Pienaar, Hardie and Fagnoni, Nicolas , booktitle=. Antenna design for the SKA1-LOW and HERA super radio telescopes , year=

  65. [65]

    The detection & study of low-level electromagnetic emission in the presence of strong noise signals , url=

    O'Hara, Oscar , year=. The detection & study of low-level electromagnetic emission in the presence of strong noise signals , url=. doi:10.17863/CAM.128101 , school=

    doi:10.17863/cam.128101

  66. [66]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume =

    Liu, Yuchen and de Lera Acedo, Eloy and Sims, Peter H , title =. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume =. 2026 , month =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stag878 , url =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stag878 2026

  67. [67]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume =

    Mertens, F G and Mevius, M and Koopmans, L V E and Offringa, A R and Mellema, G and Zaroubi, S and Brentjens, M A and Gan, H and Gehlot, B K and Pandey, V N and Sardarabadi, A M and Vedantham, H K and Yatawatta, S and Asad, K M B and Ciardi, B and Chapman, E and Gazagnes, S and Ghara, R and Ghosh, A and Giri, S K and Iliev, I T and Jelić, V and Kooistra, ...

    2020

  68. [68]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume =

    Morales, Miguel F and Beardsley, Adam and Pober, Jonathan and Barry, Nichole and Hazelton, Bryna and Jacobs, Daniel and Sullivan, Ian , title =. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume =. 2019 , month =. doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2844 , url =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2844 2019

  69. [69]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume =

    Sarkar, Shouvik and Elahi, Khandakar Md Asif and Choudhuri, Samir and Bharadwaj, Somnath and Chatterjee, Suman and Bhattacharyya, Baijayanta and Sethi, Shiv and Patwa, Akash Kumar , title =. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume =. 2026 , month =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stag801 , url =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stag801 2026

  70. [70]

    Dulwich, Fred , title =

  71. [71]

    Fast and Accurate Simulation Technique for Large Irregular Arrays , year=

    Bui-Van, Ha and Abraham, Jens and Arts, Michel and Gueuning, Quentin and Raucy, Christopher and González-Ovejero, David and de Lera Acedo, Eloy and Craeye, Christophe , journal=. Fast and Accurate Simulation Technique for Large Irregular Arrays , year=

  72. [72]

    The Astrophysical Journal , volume=

    New limits on 21 cm epoch of reionization from paper-32 consistent with an x-ray heated intergalactic medium at z= 7.7 , author=. The Astrophysical Journal , volume=. 2014 , publisher=

    2014

  73. [73]

    Antenna gain pattern blindness due to mutual coupling in broadband arrays , year=

    Cumner, John and Cumner, John and Anstey, Dominic and Gueuning, Quentin and O’Hara, Oscar and Acedo, Eloy de Lera and Brown, Anthony and Faulkner, Andrew and Dulwich, Fred and Scott, Paul , booktitle=. Antenna gain pattern blindness due to mutual coupling in broadband arrays , year=

  74. [75]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume =

    Hurley-Walker, N and Callingham, J R and Hancock, P J and Franzen, T M O and Hindson, L and Kapińska, A D and Morgan, J and Offringa, A R and Wayth, R B and Wu, C and Zheng, Q and Murphy, T and Bell, M E and Dwarakanath, K S and For, B and Gaensler, B M and Johnston-Hollitt, M and Lenc, E and Procopio, P and Staveley-Smith, L and Ekers, R and Bowman, J D ...

    2017

  75. [76]

    and Tegmark, M

    Zheng, H. and Tegmark, M. and Dillon, J. S. and Kim, D. A. and Liu, A. and Neben, A. R. and Jonas, J. and Reich, P. and Reich, W. , title =. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume =. 2017 , month =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2525 , url =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2525 2017

  76. [77]

    The Astrophysical Journal , volume=

    Toward epoch of reionization measurements with wide-field radio observations , author=. The Astrophysical Journal , volume=

  77. [78]

    Astronomy & Astrophysics , volume=

    Fast gain calibration in radio astronomy using alternating direction implicit methods: Analysis and applications , author=. Astronomy & Astrophysics , volume=. 2014 , publisher=

    2014

  78. [79]

    2026 , eprint=

    Observations of the Cosmic Dawn and Epoch of Reionization with the SKAO: Observational Lessons Learned from Precursors and Pathfinder Instruments , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  79. [80]

    O’Hara, Oscar S.D. and Gueuning, Quentin and De Lera Acedo, Eloy and Dulwich, Fred and Cumner, John and Anstey, Dominic and Brown, Anthony and Faulkner, Andrew and Horton, Maya and Mhaske, Ashish , booktitle=. Impact of Array Mutual Coupling on 21-cm Cosmology Experiments with the SKA-Low Telescope , year=

  80. [81]

    2026 , note =

    Gueuning, Quentin , title =. 2026 , note =

    2026

Showing first 80 references.