Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 4 cited by

Africanus II. QuartiCal: calibrating radio interferometer data at scale using Numba and Dask

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read QuartiCal claims that radio-interferometer calibration can be reduced to per-element update rules for arbitrary Jones chains and scaled from a laptop to a cloud cluster via Dask.

desk verdict A solid engineering paper that delivers a working, scalable calibration package; the math is not new, the software is, and the main caveat is the unvalidated AllJones approximation in the multi-direction regime. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.10072 v2 pith:QFV3CM7J submitted 2024-12-13 astro-ph.IM

Jonathan S. Kenyon , Simon J. Perkins , Hertzog L. Bester , Oleg M. Smirnov , Cyndie Russeeawon , Benjamin V. Hugo This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.IM
keywords radiointerferometrycalibrationJoneschainsWirtingercalculusGauss-NewtonDaskNumbadistributedcomputing
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

QuartiCal aims to show that radio-interferometer calibration can be made both more flexible and more scalable than current tools allow. The paper derives per-element complex Gauss-Newton updates for an arbitrary chain of per-antenna gain terms (a Jones chain), including terms whose gains depend on real parameters such as delay or bandpass, and packages this into a Python code that runs from a laptop to a distributed Dask cluster. If the claim holds, one calibration tool can carry a reduction from first-generation (1GC) through third-generation (3GC) calibration, including direction-dependent peeling, at a fraction of the memory of its predecessor CubiCal. The central mathematical step is a diagonal approximation to the Gauss-Newton normal matrix that decouples every gain element, giving compact update rules that avoid forming large matrices.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the diagonal-approximated, per-element Gauss-Newton update for a term $n$ in a Jones chain, written as Eq. 34. Here the model visibility for baseline $pq$ in direction $d$ is factored as left-chain times the target term times right-chain (Eq. 11), so differentiating with respect to that term's gain produces a Kronecker product of the left chain and the conjugated or transposed right chain. Under AllJones, the full normal matrix $J^{\dagger}WJ$ is replaced by its diagonal blocks, which is equivalent to assuming no covariance between any two parameters, including a gain and its conjugate. This turns a large matrix inversion into a set of independent scalar or small-block updates, and it is what makes the problem embarrassingly parallel: each solution interval can be solved without communication. The implementation then compiles the hot loops in Numba and expresses the whole calibration as a Dask task graph, with scheduler plugins to keep data on the worker that owns it.

What would settle it

Take a simulated observation with two overlapping direction-dependent gain terms where the true gains are known, calibrate with QuartiCal under AllJones, and compare the recovered gains or residual dynamic range against the same problem solved with the full Gauss-Newton normal matrix. If the AllJones solution stops improving or differs systematically at fixed iteration count, the diagonal approximation is the cause; if the two match, the approximation is doing its job.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the full radio interferometer measurement equation can be calibrated with per-element update rules valid for a chain of any length, with any term parameterized by real parameters, under the AllJones approximation. Working from the Wirtinger complex-derivative formalism, the authors re-express the model visibility so the gain of interest sits in a 'vec trick' factorization, then derive closed forms for the diagonal of $J^{\dagger}WJ$ and the vector $J^{\dagger}W\breve{r}$ (Eqs. 30 and 32). These combine into Eq. 34, a Gauss-Newton step for each gain element that needs no full Jacobian, no matrix inverse, and no visibility-sized intermediates. The same framework gives three concrete parameterized scenarios: a scalar parameter per gain element, parameters at coarser time or frequency resolution than the gains, and direction-independent parameters that generate direction-dependent gains. The paper demonstrates the result on MeerKAT observations of PSR J2009-2026 through first-generation, second-generation, and a direction-dependent peel, and reports roughly an order-of-magnitude lower memory use than CubiCal with better wall-clock scaling.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that dropping every off-diagonal entry of the Gauss-Newton normal matrix, treating each gain and its conjugate as statistically independent, still yields updates that converge to the correct gains, especially when direction-dependent terms are coupled through the sky model.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A single code can carry 1GC, 2GC, and 3GC, because arbitrary Jones chains can mix direction-independent and direction-dependent terms.
  • Because each solution interval is an independent subproblem, the calibration task graph can scale nearly linearly with Dask workers across cloud nodes, as measured up to 64 workers on a distributed deployment.
  • Avoiding visibility-sized intermediates keeps memory use low: the paper reports approximately an order-of-magnitude reduction in footprint compared with CubiCal.
  • The Zarr/XArray gain format lets solutions be reused, interpolated across fields, and consumed by an imaging pipeline without writing corrected visibility columns.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The derivation implies that the AllJones approximation is the single point controlling accuracy on coupled direction-dependent gains; the paper demonstrates its adequacy only qualitatively, so a quantitative comparison against a full normal-matrix solve would be the natural test.
  • The same per-element update structure is a natural fit for GPU execution, since each element's update is small and independent; the authors list GPU solvers as a future direction rather than claiming them here.
  • The Zarr-backed Measurement Set path suggests a fully object-store-based reduction, where data is read from storage, gains are written back as Zarr, and an imaging suite applies them without ever materializing corrected-data columns; this workflow is sketched in the paper but not demonstrated.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper introduces QuartiCal, a Python package for radio interferometric calibration that generalizes the CubiCal framework to Jones chains of arbitrary length, including parameterized gain terms. Section 2 derives per-element complex Gauss-Newton update rules under the AllJones diagonal approximation, using Wirtinger calculus and the RIME. Section 4 describes the Dask/Numba implementation, including data ingestion, graph construction, solvers, and scheduler plugins. Section 5 presents qualitative MeerKAT results (1GC through a single-direction, diagonal 3GC term) and benchmarks comparing QuartiCal with CubiCal, CTDS-backed versus Zarr-backed Measurement Sets, and cloud-based distributed runs on AWS. The central claims are that QuartiCal correctly calibrates from 1GC through 3GC, outperforms CubiCal in memory and wall time, and scales from a laptop to distributed clusters.

Significance. If the claims are fully supported, QuartiCal would be a valuable community resource, addressing a real need for scalable, distributed calibration software with flexible Jones-chain support and low memory overhead. The mathematical derivation in Section 2 is a clean formalization of per-element updates for parameterized chains, and the implementation choices (Numba kernels, Dask task graphs, Zarr-backed storage, scheduler plugins) are sensible and clearly described. The reported order-of-magnitude memory improvement over CubiCal is plausible and well aligned with the stated design goal of avoiding visibility-sized intermediates. The paper is honest about several limitations, including the lack of quantitative cross-package comparison and the qualitative nature of the imaging demonstration. However, the evidence for the 3GC and wall-time claims needs strengthening before the stated conclusions can be accepted as established.

major comments (3)
  1. [§2.3, §5.1] The AllJones approximation is load-bearing for the 3GC claim, but it is only demonstrated for a diagonal, single-direction dE term. The approximation explicitly discards all off-diagonal entries of J†WJ, which the text describes as assuming no covariance between any parameters, including gains and their conjugates. For a multi-direction solve, Eq. (12) sums over directions, so the per-element update in Eq. (34) ignores covariance between gains in different directions; whether those off-diagonal blocks are small is not tested. The paper should add a quantitative test of this regime, ideally a simulation with known direction-dependent gains, and report gain error or residual metrics as a function of SNR, or explicitly restrict the 3GC claim to the demonstrated case.
  2. [§5.2] The wall-time comparison with CubiCal is not controlled. The text states that CubiCal was run with fewer solution epochs and, in the K+dE experiment, with a second diagonal complex term instead of the K term. Since one of the paper's central performance claims is that QuartiCal outperforms CubiCal in wall time, these differences undermine that specific conclusion. The memory-footprint comparison is less affected by this asymmetry, but the wall-time curves and projected lines should either be produced under matched iteration counts and term types, or the claim should be downgraded to per-iteration or per-unit-work performance.
  3. [§5.1] The calibration demonstration is qualitative only. The paper states that no quantitative comparison with competitors is included, but a quantitative validation of gain correctness is needed even without a competitor comparison. The conclusion that QuartiCal is 'successful in performing calibration from 1GC through to 3GC' rests on visual inspection of images. Please report at least residual RMS or dynamic-range improvement before and after each calibration stage, and, for the direction-dependent case, gain error against a known model would be much more convincing.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§6] In the Conclusions, 'there are still many ways in which in could be improved' should read 'in which it could be improved'.
  2. [§5.2, §5.4] The 'projected' curves in Figures 4, 6, and 7 appear to be linear extrapolations from the four-core or single-worker point; the figure captions or text should state this more explicitly so readers do not mistake them for measurements or fits.
  3. [§5.4] The GKB cloud experiment is limited to eight workers because there are eight data partitions. The statement that QuartiCal 'scales nearly linearly' should be qualified as 'over the tested range of one to eight workers', since this is a weak-scaling demonstration with a very small number of points.
  4. [§2.3] When introducing AllJones as the 'most extreme' approximation from Smirnov and Tasse (2015), a brief reminder of the less extreme alternatives would help readers understand the design choice.
  5. [§4.7] The phrase 'on the fly' throughout the paper is generally used correctly, but in §4.7 it appears as 'on the fly degridding' without hyphens; 'on-the-fly degridding' would be more standard.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the Gauss-Newton update rules are derived from the stated model, and the performance claims rest on external benchmarks rather than on fitted inputs or self-citations.

full rationale

No circular step could be exhibited. Section 2 derives the per-element update rules (Eqs. 30, 32, 34) from the RIME model (Eq. 12), the definition of the residual (Eq. 13), and standard Wirtinger calculus with the vec trick; the derivation is self-contained and does not take its conclusion as an input. The AllJones approximation (Section 2.3) is explicitly introduced as an assumption—'we can discard all off-diagonal entries from J†WJ. This is equivalent to assuming that there is no covariance between any of the parameters'—rather than being presented as a derived prediction, so any concern about its accuracy is a correctness/validation risk, not a circularity. The performance results in Sections 5.2-5.4 are measured wall times and memory footprints comparing QuartiCal with CubiCal and across cloud configurations; they are not quantities manufactured by fitting the model. The projected scaling curves are labeled as projections from the measured 4-core point, not as validated predictions, and this labeling is explicit. Self-citations to Paper I, Paper IV, Smirnov & Tasse 2015, and Kenyon et al. 2018 are used for background, implementation dependencies, and acknowledgement of prior mathematical results; where prior mathematics is invoked, the paper re-derives the needed expressions in Section 2 rather than relying on the citation as the sole source of the result. The paper's own stated limitations—absence of a quantitative comparison with competitors, the qualitative nature of the 3GC demonstration, the single diagonal direction-dependent term used, and the acknowledged lack of I/O/compute interleaving—are honest validation gaps and do not reduce any central claim to its own inputs. Therefore no circularity is found.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper's central claim rests on standard radio astronomy models and a computational approximation. No free parameters or invented entities are introduced. The key assumptions are the RIME, the diagonal AllJones approximation to the Hessian, and the independence of solution intervals. These are stated in the text but the accuracy of the AllJones approximation is not quantified.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The radio interferometer measurement equation (RIME) correctly models observed visibilities as a sum over directions of Jones chains.
    Used to construct the model v in Eq. (12). This is standard in radio astronomy (Hamaker et al. 1996; Smirnov 2011).
  • domain assumption The AllJones approximation, discarding all off-diagonal entries of J†WJ, yields sufficiently accurate updates.
    Introduced in Section 2.3 to make the update rules computationally tractable. Not proven here; validated only by qualitative images.
  • domain assumption Weights W are diagonal.
    Assumed in Eq. (1) and throughout; per-correlation weights are handled, but off-diagonal noise covariance is ignored.
  • domain assumption Gains are constant over each solution interval and independent between intervals.
    Enables embarrassingly parallel decomposition in Section 4.1. This assumption may fail for rapidly varying gains.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Africanus II. QuartiCal: calibrating radio interferometer data at scale using Numba and Dask." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QFV3CM7J

@misc{pith2026241210072,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Africanus II. QuartiCal: calibrating radio interferometer data at scale using Numba and Dask},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QFV3CM7J}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.10072}
}
read the original abstract

Calibration of radio interferometer data ought to be a solved problem; it has been an integral part of data reduction for some time. However, as larger, more sensitive radio interferometers are conceived and built, the calibration problem grows in both size and difficulty. The increasing size can be attributed to the fact that the data volume scales quadratically with the number of antennas in an array. Additionally, new instruments may have up to two orders of magnitude more channels than their predecessors. Simultaneously, increasing sensitivity is making calibration more challenging: low-level RFI and calibration artefacts (in the resulting images) which would previously have been subsumed by the noise may now limit dynamic range and, ultimately, the derived science. It is against this backdrop that we introduce QuartiCal: a new Python package implementing radio interferometric calibration routines. QuartiCal improves upon its predecessor, CubiCal, in terms of both flexibility and performance. Whilst the same mathematical framework - complex optimization using Wirtinger derivatives - is in use, the approach has been refined to support arbitrary length chains of parameterized gain terms. QuartiCal utilizes Dask, a library for parallel computing in Python, to express calibration as an embarrassingly parallel task graph. These task graphs can (with some constraints) be mapped onto a number of different hardware configurations, allowing QuartiCal to scale from running locally on consumer hardware to a distributed, cloud-based cluster. QuartiCal's qualitative behaviour is demonstrated using MeerKAT observations of PSR J2009-2026. These qualitative results are followed by an analysis of QuartiCal's performance in terms of wall time and memory footprint for a number of calibration scenarios and hardware configurations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.10072 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. A simple compute graph. Circles represent nodes or tasks and the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The XArray representation of QuartiCal’s gain format. Note that the above has been slightly simplified for clarity. 4.5. Graph Execution Dask supports several schedulers for the purpose of graph execution. These schedulers are responsible for mapping graph nodes or tasks to specific hardware and determining the order in which tasks are processed. They are an integral part of the Dask ecosystem and the performance of… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Images of the field surrounding PSR J2009-2026. The zoomed regions are colour-coded and correspond to interesting sources. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Benchmarking results comparing QuartiCal and CubiCal when solving for K (left) and KdE (right). Top row: Wall time in minutes as a function of allocated CPU cores. The projected curve is generated by presuming linear scaling and extrapolating from the measured value fo…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Benchmarking results comparing QuartiCal run on a Measurement Set backed by the CTDS (left) and QuartiCal run on a Measurement Set backed by Zarr (right). Top row: Wall time in minutes as a function of allocated threads. Middle row: Memory footprint in gigabytes as a f…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Wall time in minutes as a function of the number of D [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Wall time in minutes as a function of the number of D [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_7.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. The Peculiar Mini-Halo in the Shapley Supercluster Member Abell 3558

    astro-ph.GA 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    The diffuse radio emission in A3558 is a peculiar mini-halo with a new northern extension, a steep spectrum of 1.18, and a sublinear radio-X-ray correlation that steepens with frequency, consistent with sloshing-induc...

  2. Africanus I. Scalable, distributed and efficient radio data processing with Dask-MS and Codex Africanus

    astro-ph.IM 2024-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Dask-MS and Codex Africanus let radio astronomers run interferometry data reduction on Dask clusters, with demonstrated strong and weak scaling for a DFT model predict on AWS.

  3. Africanus IV. The Stimela2 framework: scalable and reproducible workflows, from local to cloud compute

    astro-ph.IM 2024-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Stimela2 introduces a YAML-based workflow framework that combines readable linear recipes with containerization and Kubernetes or Slurm backends for reproducible, scalable radio astronomy data reduction.

  4. Africanus III. pfb-imaging -- a flexible radio interferometric imaging suite

    astro-ph.IM 2024-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A flexible imaging library, pfb-imaging, implements a sparsity-based SARA algorithm with interpretable parameters and demonstrates it on terabyte-scale MeerKAT data.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

31 extracted references · 7 canonical work pages · cited by 4 Pith papers

  1. [5]

    doi: 10.5334/jors.148. J´ozsa, G.I.G., White, S.V ., Thorat, K., Smirnov, O.M., Serra, P., Ramatsoku, M., Ramaila, A.J.T., Perkins, S.J., Maccagni, F.M., Makhathini, S., Moln´ar, D.C., Kamphuis, P., Kleiner, D., Hugo, B.V ., de Blok, W.J.G., Andati, L.A.L.,

    doi:10.5334/jors.148

  2. [10]

    MeerKAT observations of starburst galaxies and AGNs within the core of XMMXCS J2215.9-1738 at $z$ = 1.46

    MeerKAT observations of starburst galaxies and AGNs within the core of XMMXCS J2215.9-1738 at z = 1.46. MNRAS 532, 2842–2859. doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1640, arXiv:2407.03667. Kreutz-Delgado, K.,

    work page Pith review arXiv

  3. [11]

    ArXiv e-prints arXiv:0906.4835

    The Complex Gradient Operator and the CR- Calculus. ArXiv e-prints arXiv:0906.4835. Lam, S.K., Pitrou, A., Seibert, S.,

    arXiv

  4. [16]

    Robust distributed calibration of radio interferometers with direction dependent distortions

    Robust distributed calibration of radio interferometers with direction dependent dis- tortions. Signal Processing 153, 348–354. doi:10.1016/j.sigpro.2018. 07.024, arXiv:1807.11738. Parekh, V ., Kincaid, R., Hugo, B., Ramaila, A., Oozeer, N.,

    work page Pith review arXiv 2018

  5. [18]

    Scalable, distributed and e fficient radio data pro- cessing with Dask-MS and Codex Africanus

    Africanus I. Scalable, distributed and e fficient radio data pro- cessing with Dask-MS and Codex Africanus. Astronomy and Computing submitted. arXiv:2412.12052. Roberts, D.A., Crutcher, R., Young, W., Kemball, A.J.,

    arXiv

  6. [19]

    The LOFAR Two-metre Sky Survey. II. First data release. A&A 622, A1. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833559, arXiv:1811.07926. Smirnov, O.M.,

    arXiv

  7. [21]

    The Stimela2 framework: scalable and reproducible workflows, from local to cloud compute

    Africanus IV . The Stimela2 framework: scalable and reproducible workflows, from local to cloud compute. Astron- omy and Computing submitted. arXiv:2412.10080. Smirnov, O.M., Stappers, B.W., Tasse, C., Bester, H.L., Bignall, H., Walker, M.A., Caleb, M., Rajwade, K.M., Buchner, S., Woudt, P., Ivchenko, M., Roth, L., Noordam, J.E., Camilo, F.,

    arXiv

  8. [22]

    MNRAS 449, 2668–2684

    Radio interferometric gain calibration as a complex optimization problem. MNRAS 449, 2668–2684. doi: 10.1093/ mnras/stv418, arXiv:1502.06974. Sob, U.M., Bester, H.L., Smirnov, O.M., Kenyon, J.S., Grobler, T.L.,

    arXiv

Show all 31 references
  1. [25]

    A&A 611, A87

    Faceting for direction-dependent spectral deconvolution. A&A 611, A87. doi:10.1051/ 0004-6361/201731474, arXiv:1712.02078. THE CASA TEAM, Bean, B., Bhatnagar, S., Castro, S., Donovan Meyer, J., Emonts, B., Garcia, E., Garwood, R., Golap, K., Gonzalez Villalba, J., Har- ris, P....

    arXiv

  2. [27]

    Astronomy and Computing 12, 174–180

    Casacore Table Data System and its use in the Mea- surementSet. Astronomy and Computing 12, 174–180. doi: 10.1016/j. ascom.2015.06.002. van Haarlem, M.P., et al.,

    2015 doi

  3. [30]

    MNRAS 449, 4506–4514

    Distributed radio interferometric calibration. MNRAS 449, 4506–4514. doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv596, arXiv:1502.00858. Yatawatta, S.,

    arXiv

  4. [31]

    MNRAS 493, 6071–6078

    Stochastic calibration of radio interferometers. MNRAS 493, 6071–6078. doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa648, arXiv:2003.00986. 22

    2003 arXiv

  5. [90]

    3390/galaxies9040090, arXiv:2111.01858

    doi:10. 3390/galaxies9040090, arXiv:2111.01858. Perkins, S.J., Kenyon, J.S., Andati, L.A.L., Bester, H.L., Smirnov, O.M., Hugo, B.V .,

    arXiv

  6. [167]

    doi: 10.1145/2806777. 2809955. Castro, S., Gonzalez, J., Taylor, J., Bhatnagar, S., Caillat, M., Ford, P., Go- lap, K., Jakobs, J., Kawasaki, W., Kern, J., Kuniyoshi, M., Loveland, S., Mehringer, D., Miel, R., Moellenbrock, G., Nakazato, T., Petry, D., Poko- rny, M., Rao, U., ...

    doi

  7. [255]

    Hamaker, J.P., Bregman, J.D., Sault, R.J.,

    arXiv:1907.07648. Hamaker, J.P., Bregman, J.D., Sault, R.J.,

    1907 arXiv

  8. [635]

    14https://archive.sarao.ac.za Kenyon, J.S., Perkins, S., Smirnov, O.,

    doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2006.02955, arXiv:2006.02955. 14https://archive.sarao.ac.za Kenyon, J.S., Perkins, S., Smirnov, O.,

    2006 doi arXiv

  9. [2009]

    IEEE Proceedings 97, 1482–1496

    The Square Kilometre Array. IEEE Proceedings 97, 1482–1496. doi:10.1109/JPROC. 2009.2021005. Frostig, R., Johnson, M.J., Leary, C.,

    2009

  10. [2010]

    A&A 524, A61

    The MeqTrees software system and its use for third-generation calibration of radio interferometers. A&A 524, A61. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201015013, arXiv:1101.1745. Offringa, A.R., McKinley, B., Hurley-Walker, N., Briggs, F.H., Wayth, R.B., Kaplan, D.L., Bell, M.E., Feng, L., N...

    arXiv

  11. [2011]

    Revisiting the radio interferometer measurement equa- tion. I. A full-sky Jones formalism. A&A 527, A106. doi: 10.1051/ 0004-6361/201016082, arXiv:1101.1764. Smirnov, O.M., Makhathini, S., Kenyon, J.S., Bester, H.L., Perkins, S.J., Ra- maila, A.J.T., Hugo, B.V .,

    arXiv

  12. [2012]

    Uncon- strained optimization of real functions in complex variables. SIAM J. Optim. 22, 879–898. doi: 10.1137/110832124, arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1137/110832124. Tasse, C., Hugo, B., Mirmont, M., Smirnov, O., Atemkeng, M., Bester, L., Hardcastle, M.J., Lakhoo, R., Perkins, S.,...

    doi

  13. [2013]

    A&A 556, A2

    LOFAR: The LOw-Frequency ARray. A&A 556, A2. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201220873, arXiv:1305.3550. Villars, R.L., Olofson, C.W., Eastwood, M.,

    arXiv

  14. [2014]

    MNRAS 444, 606–619

    WSCLEAN: an implementation of a fast, generic wide-field imager for radio astronomy. MNRAS 444, 606–619. doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1368, arXiv:1407.1943. Ollier, V ., El Korso, M.N., Ferrari, A., Boyer, R., Larzabal, P.,

    1943 arXiv

  15. [2015]

    (Ed.), LLVM ’15: Proceedings of the Second Workshop on the LLVM Compiler Infrastructure in HPC, Association for Computing Machinery, New York

    Numba: A llvm-based python jit com- piler, in: Finkel, H. (Ed.), LLVM ’15: Proceedings of the Second Workshop on the LLVM Compiler Infrastructure in HPC, Association for Computing Machinery, New York. doi:10.1145/2833157.2833162. Madsen, K., Nielsen, H.B., Tingleff, O.,

  16. [2017]

    arXiv e-prints , arXiv:1712.05889arXiv:1712.05889

    Ray: A Distributed Framework for Emerging AI Applications. arXiv e-prints , arXiv:1712.05889arXiv:1712.05889. Noordam, J.E., Smirnov, O.M.,

    arXiv

  17. [2018]

    MNRAS 478, 2399–2415

    CUBI- CAL - fast radio interferometric calibration suite exploiting complex op- timization. MNRAS 478, 2399–2415. doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1221, arXiv:1805.03410. Klutse, D.Y ., Hilton, M., Heywood, I., Smail, I., Swinbank, A.M., Knowles, K., Sikhosana, S.P.,

    arXiv

  18. [2019]

    The DSA-2000 — A Radio Survey Camera, in: Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, p

    2000

  19. [2020]

    MNRAS 491, 1026–1042

    Radio interferometric calibration using a complex Student’s t-distribution and Wirtinger derivatives. MNRAS 491, 1026–1042. doi:10.1093/mnras/ stz3037. Sorber, L., van Barel, M., de Lathauwer, L.,

    doi

  20. [2021]

    Computing in Science and Engineering 23, 47–54

    mpi4py: Status Update After 12 Years of Devel- opment. Computing in Science and Engineering 23, 47–54. doi: 10.1109/ MCSE.2021.3083216. Dewdney, P.E., Hall, P.J., Schilizzi, R.T., Lazio, T.J.L.W.,

    2021

  21. [2022]

    arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2210.02276arXiv:2210.02276

    CASA, the Common Astronomy Software Applications for Radio Astronomy. arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2210.02276arXiv:2210.02276. Thompson, A.R., Moran, J.M., Swenson, George W., J.,

    arXiv

  22. [2023]

    AAP 673, A113

    The MeerKAT Absorption Line Survey: Homogeneous continuum catalogues towards a measurement of the cosmic radio dipole. AAP 673, A113. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202245477, arXiv:2302.10696. Wirtinger, W.,

    arXiv

  23. [2024]

    pfb-imaging – a flexible radio interferometric imaging suite

    Africanus III. pfb-imaging – a flexible radio interferometric imaging suite. Astronomy and Computing submitted. arXiv:2412.10073. Brewer, E.A.,

    arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.