pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.21182 · v1 · pith:T3ZCEUDHnew · submitted 2026-06-19 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE · astro-ph.CO

Probing dipole and quadrupole anisotropy in Gamma-ray bursts from Swift dataset

Vedant Mokal , Shantanu Desai This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 13:51 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.CO
keywords gamma-ray burstsisotropydipole anisotropyquadrupole anisotropySwift observatorycosmological principleexposure mapHEALPix
0
0 comments X

The pith

After correcting for Swift's exposure biases, GRB directions show no significant dipole or quadrupole anisotropy.

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

The paper tests whether gamma-ray burst positions observed by Swift are distributed isotropically across the sky, as required by the cosmological principle. Spherical harmonic decomposition applied to the raw catalog yields apparent dipole and quadrupole signals above random expectations. Once an exposure map constructed from the telescope's pointing history, roll angles, and partial coding fractions is incorporated into Monte Carlo simulations, those signals drop below 1 sigma. The result replicates earlier isotropy findings with this independent dataset and publicly releases the exposure map for further use.

Core claim

Using the HEALPix spherical harmonic decomposition, we estimate the dipole and quadrupole amplitudes and compare them against the null hypothesis obtained from 500 isotropic Monte Carlo realizations. Our results show 2.9 sigma dipole and 7.2 sigma quadrupole amplitude when applied to the raw data. To account for observational biases, we then create an exposure map using the pointing history, roll angle, and the partial coding fraction of the Swift Telescope. Reevaluating the null hypothesis using this map reduces the significance of these anisotropies to less than 1 sigma. Therefore, our findings confirm statistical isotropy of the GRB sky using the Swift data, consistent with previous studi

What carries the argument

HEALPix spherical harmonic decomposition of GRB directions, tested against 500 Monte Carlo realizations modulated by an exposure map built from Swift pointing history, roll angle, and partial coding fraction.

If this is right

  • The GRB sky is statistically isotropic once observational biases are modeled.
  • Raw catalogs can produce spurious anisotropy signals if exposure variations are ignored.
  • The released exposure map supports future isotropy tests on Swift data.
  • These findings align with and reinforce prior GRB isotropy results from other instruments.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Exposure-map techniques developed here could be adapted to test isotropy in other transient catalogs such as those from Fermi or future missions.
  • If GRBs trace the large-scale matter distribution, their confirmed isotropy places limits on the scale at which homogeneity holds.
  • Uniform all-sky coverage in next-generation surveys would reduce reliance on complex exposure corrections for similar tests.

Load-bearing premise

The exposure map derived from pointing history, roll angle, and partial coding fraction fully accounts for all directional selection effects in the observations.

What would settle it

Reanalysis of the same Swift GRB catalog with an independently derived exposure map that recovers dipole or quadrupole amplitudes above 1 sigma would falsify the isotropy conclusion.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.21182 by Shantanu Desai, Vedant Mokal.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: This figure shows the angular distribution of 1759 GRBs from the Swift GRB catalog (top panel) and a uniform random distribution of 1759 simulated points (middle panel), shown in Mollweide projection and Galactic coordinates. The bottom panel shows a HEALPix map of the fluctuation of GRBs from the Swift GRB catalog using Nside = 8. https://doi.org/10.3390/universe1010000 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Observed Dipole vs PDF obtained from Monte Carlo simulations 0f 500 skies for Swift GRB DATA [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Observed quadrupole vs Gaussian fit to Monte Carlo simulations for 500 skies for Swift GRB DATA https://doi.org/10.3390/universe1010000 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The Swift 2-D Partial Coding Fraction (PCF) map. Its asymmetric sensitivity profile demon￾strates why spacecraft roll angle must be accounted for to project exposure onto the sky [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: HEALPix probability map of the Swift sky exposure in equatorial coordinates, constructed by co-adding all pointings from the Swift pointing history weighted by the Partial Coding Fraction. The map reflects the accumulated PCF-weighted exposure across the mission lifetime and is used as the instrument response for the rejection-sampling procedure described in this section. 5.2. Exposure-Convolved Isotropic … view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: represents the PDF of exposure-convolved isotropic simulations and the real dipole amplitude of Swift. The observed dipole amplitude is now equal to 0.14 ± 0.04. The significance of the observed dipole now decreases to only 0.2σ and the p-value becomes 0.39, and is therefore consistent with a perfectly isotropic distribution [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Exposure corrected PDF of Quadrupole amplitude for Swift [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Testing the validity of the cosmological principle's assumption of large-scale isotropy remains crucial for modern cosmology. We investigate the angular distributions of gamma-ray bursts using the GRB catalog from Neil Gehrels Swift Observatory (Swift) for an independent probe of isotropy. Using the HEALPix spherical harmonic decomposition, we estimate the dipole and quadrupole amplitudes and compare them against the null hypothesis obtained from 500 isotropic Monte Carlo realizations. Our results show 2.9$\sigma$ dipole and 7.2$\sigma$ quadrupole amplitude when applied to the raw data. To account for observational biases, we then create an exposure map using the pointing history, roll angle, and the partial coding fraction of the Swift Telescope. Reevaluating the null hypothesis using this map reduces the significance of these anisotropies to less than $1\sigma$. Therefore, our findings confirm statistical isotropy of the GRB sky using the Swift data, consistent with previous studies. We have also made the Swift exposure map publicly available.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper analyzes the angular distribution of Swift GRBs using HEALPix spherical harmonic decomposition to extract dipole and quadrupole amplitudes. Raw data show 2.9σ dipole and 7.2σ quadrupole deviations from isotropy. An exposure map is constructed from pointing history, roll angle, and partial coding fraction; 500 isotropic Monte Carlo realizations re-weighted by this map reduce both amplitudes to <1σ, supporting statistical isotropy of the GRB sky. The exposure map is released publicly.

Significance. If the exposure map is shown to be complete, the result supplies an independent high-redshift test of isotropy using GRBs, reinforcing the cosmological principle at scales probed by these events. The public map release is a concrete asset for the community and enables reproducibility or follow-up analyses.

major comments (2)
  1. [Methods (exposure map)] Exposure map construction (Methods section): The reduction of significances from 2.9σ/7.2σ to <1σ rests entirely on the Monte Carlo null distribution generated with the exposure map. The manuscript provides no explicit validation (e.g., comparison of the map against the observed GRB sky density or an external catalog) that all directional selection effects are captured; any unmodeled bias would invalidate the corrected null hypothesis.
  2. [Results] Monte Carlo procedure (Results section): With only 500 realizations, the precision of the tail probabilities used to assign <1σ significance is limited; the paper should report the exact percentile ranks or bootstrap uncertainties on the amplitude distributions to substantiate the isotropy conclusion.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states the raw-data significances but does not quote the numerical amplitude values (A_dipole, A_quadrupole); these should be added for quantitative comparison with prior work.
  2. [Methods] Notation for the HEALPix multipole amplitudes should be defined explicitly (e.g., relation to a_{1m} or a_{2m} coefficients) to avoid ambiguity when readers compare with other spherical-harmonic analyses.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful and constructive review. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript to incorporate the requested improvements.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Methods (exposure map)] Exposure map construction (Methods section): The reduction of significances from 2.9σ/7.2σ to <1σ rests entirely on the Monte Carlo null distribution generated with the exposure map. The manuscript provides no explicit validation (e.g., comparison of the map against the observed GRB sky density or an external catalog) that all directional selection effects are captured; any unmodeled bias would invalidate the corrected null hypothesis.

    Authors: We agree that explicit validation of the exposure map is necessary to confirm that all relevant directional selection effects have been captured. In the revised manuscript we will add a direct comparison of the exposure map against the observed GRB sky density (e.g., a sky map overlay and a quantitative correlation test) to demonstrate consistency with the data-driven selection function. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results] Monte Carlo procedure (Results section): With only 500 realizations, the precision of the tail probabilities used to assign <1σ significance is limited; the paper should report the exact percentile ranks or bootstrap uncertainties on the amplitude distributions to substantiate the isotropy conclusion.

    Authors: We acknowledge that 500 realizations limit the precision of tail probabilities. In the revised manuscript we will report the exact percentile ranks of the observed dipole and quadrupole amplitudes within the Monte Carlo distributions and, where appropriate, include bootstrap uncertainties on those ranks. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; isotropy test uses independent exposure map and MC null

full rationale

The derivation computes raw dipole/quadrupole amplitudes on the GRB catalog, then generates a null distribution from 500 isotropic Monte Carlo realizations modulated by an exposure map constructed from pointing history, roll angle, and partial coding fraction. This map is an external observational input, not fitted to the anisotropy statistics or defined in terms of the target amplitudes. The drop from 2.9σ/7.2σ to <1σ is a direct statistical comparison, not a reduction by construction. No self-citations, ansatzes, or uniqueness theorems are invoked as load-bearing steps. The test is self-contained against the MC benchmark.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

Based on abstract only: no free parameters are introduced; the analysis rests on the standard assumption that HEALPix spherical harmonics correctly decompose directional data and that Monte Carlo realizations drawn from the exposure map faithfully represent the null hypothesis of isotropy.

axioms (2)
  • standard math HEALPix decomposition accurately measures dipole and quadrupole amplitudes from directional data
    Invoked when estimating amplitudes from the Swift catalog
  • domain assumption Monte Carlo realizations generated with the exposure map represent the correct null distribution for isotropy
    Central to reducing the significance from 2.9/7.2 sigma to <1 sigma

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5703 in / 1298 out tokens · 16146 ms · 2026-06-26T13:51:46.174569+00:00 · methodology

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

41 extracted references · 37 canonical work pages · 18 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    The physics of gamma-ray bursts ; Cambridge University Press, 2018

    Zhang, B. The physics of gamma-ray bursts ; Cambridge University Press, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781139047241

    work page doi:10.1017/9781139047241 2018

  2. [2]

    Identifica- tion of two classes of gamma-ray bursts

    Kouveliotou, C.; Meegan, C.A.; Fishman, G.J.; Bhat, N.P .; Briggs, M.S.; Koshut, T.M.; Paciesas, W.S.; Pendleton, G.N. Identifica- tion of two classes of gamma-ray bursts. Astrophys. J. Lett. 1993, 413, L101–L104. https://doi.org/10.1086/186969

    work page doi:10.1086/186969 1993

  3. [3]

    The Supernova -- Gamma-Ray Burst Connection

    Woosley, S.E.; Bloom, J.S. The supernova–gamma-ray burst connection. Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 2006, 44, 507–556, [astro-ph/0609142]. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev .astro.43.072103.150558

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1146/annurev 2006

  4. [4]

    Short-Hard Gamma-Ray Bursts

    Nakar, E. Short-hard gamma-ray bursts. Phys. Rep. 2007, 442, 166–236, [astro-ph/0701748]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep. 2007.02.005

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.physrep 2007

  5. [5]

    A lanthanide-rich kilonova in the aftermath of a long gamma-ray burst

    Yang, Y .H.; Troja, E.; O’Connor, B.; Fryer, C.L.; Im, M.; Durbak, J.; Paek, G.S.H.; Ricci, R.; Bom, C.R.; Gillanders, J.H.; et al. A lanthanide-rich kilonova in the aftermath of a long gamma-ray burst. Nature 2024, 626, 742–745, [arXiv:astro-ph.HE/2308.00638]. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06979-5

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06979-5 2024

  6. [6]

    Cosmology; Oxford University Press, 2008

    Weinberg, S. Cosmology; Oxford University Press, 2008

    2008

  7. [7]

    A measurement of excess antenna temperature at 4080 Mc/s

    Penzias, A.A.; Wilson, R.W. A measurement of excess antenna temperature at 4080 Mc/s. Astrophys. J. 1965, 142, 419–421. https://doi.org/10.1086/148307

    work page doi:10.1086/148307 1965

  8. [8]

    Structure in the COBE differential microwave radiometer first-year maps

    Smoot, G.F.; Bennett, C.L.; Kogut, A.; et al. Structure in the COBE differential microwave radiometer first-year maps. Astrophys. J. Lett. 1992, 396, L1. https://doi.org/10.1086/186504

    work page doi:10.1086/186504 1992

  9. [9]

    Detection of the velocity dipole in the radio galaxies of the NRAO VLA Sky Survey

    Blake, C.; Wall, J. A velocity dipole in the distribution of radio galaxies. Nature 2002, 416, 150–152, [astro-ph/0203385]. https: //doi.org/10.1038/416150a

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1038/416150a 2002

  10. [10]

    Probing cosmological isotropy with Planck Sunyaev-Zeldovich galaxy clusters

    Bengaly, C.A.P .; Bernui, A.; Ferreira, I.S.; Alcaniz, J.S. Probing cosmological isotropy with Planck Sunyaev-Zeldovich galaxy clusters. MNRAS 2017, 466, 2799–2804, [arXiv:astro-ph.CO/1511.09414]. https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stw3233

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/stw3233 2017

  11. [11]

    New Evidence for the Dynamical Decay of a Multiple System in the Orion Kleinmann-Low Nebula

    Pandey, B. Testing isotropy in the two micron all-sky redshift survey with information entropy. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 2017, 468, 1953–1961, [1703.05159]. https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stx692

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/stx692 2017

  12. [12]

    Testing isotropy in the universe using photometric and spectroscopic data from the SDSS

    Sarkar, S.; Pandey, B.; Khatri, R. Testing isotropy in the universe using photometric and spectroscopic data from the SDSS. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 2019, 483, 2453–2464, [1810.03315]. https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/sty3282

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty3282 2019

  13. [13]

    Probing cosmic isotropy in the local universe

    Franco, C.; Avila, F.; Bernui, A. Probing cosmic isotropy in the local universe. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 2024, 527, 7400–7413, [2311.12798]. https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stad3496

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3496 2024

  14. [14]

    A test of the cosmological principle with quasars

    Secrest, N.J.; von Hausegger, S.; Rameez, M.; Mohayaee, R.; Sarkar, S.; Colin, J. A test of the cosmological principle with quasars. Astrophys. J. Lett. 2021, 908, L51, [2009.14826]. https://doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/abdd40

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/abdd40 2021

  15. [15]

    A challenge to the standard cosmological model

    Secrest, N.; von Hausegger, S.; Rameez, M.; Mohayaee, R.; Sarkar, S. A challenge to the standard cosmological model. arXiv e-prints 2022, [2206.05624]

    arXiv 2022

  16. [16]

    A study of dipolar signal in distant quasars with various observables

    Kothari, R.; Panwar, M.; Singh, G.; Tiwari, P .; Jain, P . A study of dipolar signal in distant quasars with various observables. Eur. Phys. J. C 2024, 84, 75, [2310.13329]. https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-12401-y

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-12401-y 2024

  17. [17]

    Evidence for a ~300 Mpc Scale Under-density in the Local Galaxy Distribution

    Keenan, R.C.; Barger, A.J.; Cowie, L.L. Evidence for a ∼300 megaparsec scale under-density in the local galaxy distribution. Astrophys. J. 2013, 775, 62, [1304.2884]. https://doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/775/1/62

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/0004-637x/775/1/62 2013

  18. [18]

    The KBC void and Hubble tension contradict ΛCDM on a Gpc scalemilgromian dynamics as a possible solution

    Haslbauer, M.; Banik, I.; Kroupa, P . The KBC void and Hubble tension contradict ΛCDM on a Gpc scalemilgromian dynamics as a possible solution. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 2020, 499, 2845–2883, [2009.11292]. https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/staa2348

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa2348 2020

  19. [20]

    Gamma-ray bursts as cosmological probes

    Ghirlanda, G.; Ghisellini, G.; Firmani, C. Gamma-ray bursts as cosmological probes. New J. Phys. 2006, 8, 123, [astro- ph/0607573]. https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/8/7/123

    work page doi:10.1088/1367-2630/8/7/123 2006

  20. [21]

    Spatial distribution of gamma-ray bursts

    Meegan, C.A.; Fishman, G.J.; Wilson, R.B.; Paciesas, W.S.; Pendleton, G.N.; Horack, J.M.; Brock, M.N.; Kouveliotou, C. Spatial distribution of gamma-ray bursts. Nature 1992, 355, 143–145. https://doi.org/10.1038/355143a0

    work page doi:10.1038/355143a0 1992

  21. [22]

    BATSE observations of the large-scale isotropy of gamma-ray bursts

    Briggs, M.S.; Paciesas, W.S.; Pendleton, G.N.; Meegan, C.A.; Fishman, G.J.; Horack, J.M.; Brock, M.N.; Kouveliotou, C.; Hart- mann, D.H.; Hakkila, J. BATSE observations of the large-scale isotropy of gamma-ray bursts. Astrophys. J. 1996, 459, 40. https://doi.org/10.1086/176865

    work page doi:10.1086/176865 1996

  22. [23]

    Noise induced phenomena in point Josephson junctions

    Vavrek, R.; Balázs, L.G.; Mészáros, A.; Horváth, I.; Bagoly, Z. Testing the randomness in the sky-distribution of gamma-ray bursts. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 2008, 391, 1741–1748, [0810.1654]. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14022.x

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14022.x 2008

  23. [24]

    Extension of the Bjorken energy density formula of the initial state for relativistic heavy ion collisions

    Tarnopolski, M. Testing the anisotropy in the angular distribution of Fermi/GBM gamma-ray bursts. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 2017, 472, 4819–4831, [1704.08418]. https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stx2356

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2356 2017

  24. [25]

    Some statistical remarks on the Giant GRB Ring

    Balázs, L.G.; Rejt˝ o, L.; Tusnády, G. Some statistical remarks on the giant GRB ring.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 2018, 473, 3169–3179, [1710.01621]. https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stx2550

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2550 2018

  25. [26]

    Mapping the Universe with gamma-ray bursts

    Horváth, I.; Bagoly, Z.; Balázs, L.G.; Hakkila, J.; Horváth, Z.; Joó, A.P .; Pintér, S.; Tóth, L.V .; V eres, P .; Rácz, I.I. Mapping the Universe with gamma-ray bursts. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 2024, 527, 7191–7202, [2312.10050]. https://doi.org/10.1093/ mnras/stad3669. https://doi.org/10.3390/universe1010000 Universe 2026, 1, 0 18 of 18

    work page doi:10.3390/universe1010000 2024

  26. [27]

    Revisiting the statistical isotropy of GRB sky distribution

    Andrade, U.; Bengaly, C.A.P .; Alcaniz, J.S.; Capozziello, S. Revisiting the statistical isotropy of GRB sky distribution. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 2019, 490, 4481–4488, [1905.08864]. https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stz2828

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2828 2019

  27. [28]

    Testing Isotropic Universe Using the Gamma-Ray Burst Data of Fermi / GBM

    ˇRípa, J.; Shafieloo, A. Testing the Isotropic Universe Using the Gamma-Ray Burst Data of Fermi/GBM. ApJ 2017, 851, 15, [arXiv:astro-ph.HE/1706.03556]. https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/aa9708

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa9708 2017

  28. [29]

    Update on Testing the Isotropy of the Properties of Gamma-Ray Bursts

    ˇRípa, J.; Shafieloo, A. Update on testing the isotropy of the properties of gamma-ray bursts. MNRAS 2019, 486, 3027–3040, [arXiv:astro-ph.HE/1809.03973]. https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stz921

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/stz921 2019

  29. [30]

    Reanalysing large-scale structure using an updated gamma-ray burst spatial density approach

    Horvath, I.; Bagoly, Z.; Hakkila, J.; Balazs, L.G.; Horvath, J.; Pinter, S.; Racz, I.I.; V eres, P .; Toth, L.V . Reanalysing large-scale structure using an updated gamma-ray burst spatial density approach. arXiv e-prints 2026, p. arXiv:2604.13712, [arXiv:astro- ph.CO/2604.13712]. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv .2604.13712

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv 2026

  30. [31]

    Probing cosmic isotropy with Gamma-ray bursts: A dipole and quadrupole analysis of BATSE and Fermi GBM data

    Mondal, D.; Pandey, B.; Mondal, A. Probing cosmic isotropy with Gamma-ray bursts: A dipole and quadrupole analysis of BATSE and Fermi GBM data. J. High Energy Astrophys. 2026, 51, 100549, [arXiv:astro-ph.HE/2510.27644]. https://doi.org/10.1 016/j.jheap.2026.100549

    arXiv 2026

  31. [32]

    The Third Swift Burst Alert Telescope Gamma-Ray Burst Catalog

    Lien, A.; Sakamoto, T.; Barthelmy, S.D.; Baumgartner, W.H.; Cannizzo, J.K.; Chen, K.; Collins, R.S.; Cummings, J.R.; Gehrels, N.; Krimm, H.A.; et al. The third Swift Burst Alert Telescope gamma-ray burst catalog. Astrophys. J. 2016, 829, 7, [1606.01956]. https://doi.org/10.3847/0004-637X/829/1/7

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.3847/0004-637x/829/1/7 2016

  32. [33]

    The Swift Gamma-Ray Burst Mission

    Gehrels, N.; Chincarini, G.; Giommi, P .; Mason, K.O.; Nousek, J.A.; Wells, A.A.; White, N.E.; Barthelmy, S.D.; Burrows, D.N.; Cominsky, L.R.; et al. The Swift gamma-ray burst mission. Astrophys. J. 2004, 611, 1005–1020, [astro-ph/0405233]. https: //doi.org/10.1086/422091

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1086/422091 2004

  33. [34]

    HEALPix -- a Framework for High Resolution Discretization, and Fast Analysis of Data Distributed on the Sphere

    Górski, K.M.; Hivon, E.; Banday, A.J.; Wandelt, B.D.; Hansen, F.K.; Reinecke, M.; Bartelmann, M. HEALPix: A Framework for High-Resolution Discretization and Fast Analysis of Data Distributed on the Sphere. ApJ 2005, 622, 759–771, [arXiv:astro- ph/astro-ph/0409513]. https://doi.org/10.1086/427976

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1086/427976 2005

  34. [35]

    healpy: equal area pixelization and spherical harmonics transforms for data on the sphere in Python

    Zonca, A.; Singer, L.; Lenz, D.; Reinecke, M.; Rosset, C.; Hivon, E.; Górski, K.M. healpy: equal area pixelization and spherical harmonics transforms for data on the sphere in Python. J. Open Source Softw. 2019, 4, 1298. https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01298

    work page doi:10.21105/joss.01298 2019

  35. [36]

    Density estimation for statistics and data analysis ; V ol

    Silverman, B.W. Density estimation for statistics and data analysis ; V ol. 26, CRC press, 1986

    1986

  36. [37]

    Asymptotic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics

    Cowan, G.; Cranmer, K.; Gross, E.; Vitells, O. Asymptotic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics. European Physical Journal C 2011, 71, 1554, [arXiv:physics.data-an/1007.1727]. https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1554-0

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1554-0 2011

  37. [38]

    The 157 Month Swift/BAT All-sky Hard X-Ray Survey

    Lien, A.Y .; Krimm, H.A.; Markwardt, C.B.; Oh, K.; Marcotulli, L.; Mushotzky, R.; Collins, N.R.; Barthelmy, S.D.; Baumgart- ner, W.H.; Cenko, S.B.; et al. The 157 Month Swift/BAT All-sky Hard X-Ray Survey . ApJ 2025, 989, 161, [arXiv:astro- ph.HE/2506.04109]. https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/ade676

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ade676 2025

  38. [39]

    Representations of world coordinates in FITS

    Greisen, E.W.; Calabretta, M.R. Representations of world coordinates in FITS. Astronomy & Astrophysics 2002, 395, 1061–1075, [arXiv:astro-ph/astro-ph/0207407]. https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361:20021326

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20021326 2002

  39. [40]

    Recovering Gamma-Ray Burst Redshift Completeness Maps via Spherical Generalized Additive Models

    Bagoly, Z.; Rácz, I.I. Recovering Gamma-Ray Burst Redshift Completeness Maps via Spherical Generalized Additive Models. Universe 2026, 12, 31. https://doi.org/10.3390/universe12020031

    work page doi:10.3390/universe12020031 2026

  40. [41]

    Instrumental Tip-of-the-iceberg Effects on the Prompt Emission of Swift/BAT Gamma-ray Bursts

    Moss, M.; Lien, A.; Guiriec, S.; Cenko, S.B.; Sakamoto, T. Instrumental Tip-of-the-iceberg Effects on the Prompt Emission of Swift/BAT Gamma-ray Bursts. ApJ 2022, 927, 157, [arXiv:astro-ph.HE/2111.13392]. https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/ac497 3

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac497 2022

  41. [42]

    Evidence for anisotropy in the distribution of short-lived gamma-ray bursts

    Magliocchetti, M.; Ghirlanda, G.; Celotti, A. Evidence for anisotropy in the distribution of short-lived gamma-ray bursts. MN- RAS 2003, 343, 255–258, [arXiv:astro-ph/astro-ph/0302009]. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06657.x. https://doi.org/10.3390/universe1010000

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06657.x 2003