pith. the verified trust layer for science. sign in

arxiv: 2006.00714 · v4 · pith:YDXVYBGPnew · submitted 2020-06-01 · 🌌 astro-ph.IM · gr-qc

Bayesian inference for compact binary coalescences with BILBY: Validation and application to the first LIGO--Virgo gravitational-wave transient catalogue

I. M. Romero-Shaw , C. Talbot , S. Biscoveanu , V. D'Emilio , G. Ashton , C. P. L. Berry , S. Coughlin , S. Galaudage
show 51 more authors
C. Hoy M. Huebner K. S. Phukon M. Pitkin M. Rizzo N. Sarin R. Smith S. Stevenson A. Vajpeyi M. Arene K. Athar S. Banagiri N. Bose M. Carney K. Chatziioannou J. A. Clark M. Colleoni R. Cotesta B. Edelman H. Estelles C. Garcia-Quiros Abhirup Ghosh R. Green C.-J. Haster S. Husa D. Keitel A. X. Kim F. Hernandez-Vivanco I. Magana Hernandez C. Karathanasis P. D. Lasky N. De Lillo M. E. Lower D. Macleod M. Mateu-Lucena A. Miller M. Millhouse S. Morisaki S. H. Oh S. Ossokine E. Payne J. Powell G. Pratten M. Puerrer A. Ramos-Buades V. Raymond E. Thrane J. Veitch D. Williams M. J. Williams L. Xiao
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-18 21:49 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.IM gr-qc
keywords gravitational wavesBayesian inferencecompact binary coalescencesLIGOVirgoparameter estimationGWTC-1BILBY
0
0 comments X p. Extension
Add this Pith Number to your LaTeX paper What is a Pith Number? 
\usepackage{pith}
\pithnumber{YDXVYBGP}

Prints a linked pith:YDXVYBGP badge after your title and writes the identifier into PDF metadata. Compiles on arXiv with no extra files. Learn more

The pith

BILBY accurately recovers parameters for simulated compact binary merger signals and matches published results for all eleven GWTC-1 events.

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

This paper validates the BILBY library for Bayesian inference on gravitational-wave data from merging black holes and neutron stars. Tests on simulated signals confirm that the code recovers known parameters within expected uncertainties. Application to the real signals in the first LIGO-Virgo catalogue shows results that agree with earlier published estimates. Configuration and output files are supplied so the analyses can be reproduced or extended by others. The work concludes that the library is now ready for the growing volume of detections expected from improving detectors.

Core claim

BILBY produces reliable results for simulated gravitational-wave signals from compact binary mergers, and accurately reproduces results reported for the eleven GWTC-1 signals.

What carries the argument

BILBY, the modular Bayesian inference library that performs parameter estimation for gravitational-wave signals from compact binary coalescences.

If this is right

  • BILBY can be applied with confidence to new gravitational-wave events from compact binary coalescences.
  • The released configuration files enable direct reproduction and modification of the eleven GWTC-1 analyses.
  • The library scales to the higher event rates expected as detector sensitivity improves.
  • Analysts can now focus on astrophysical interpretation rather than developing new inference software.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Validated open-source tools like BILBY may accelerate real-time follow-up observations that combine gravitational waves with electromagnetic signals.
  • Community-wide adoption could reduce discrepancies that sometimes arise when different codes analyse the same event.
  • Similar validation exercises on future catalogue releases would test whether accuracy holds as signal complexity and detector networks grow.

Load-bearing premise

Earlier published parameter estimates for the GWTC-1 signals can be treated as a reliable benchmark, and the simulated signals capture the essential statistical properties of real detector noise.

What would settle it

Re-analysis of the same GWTC-1 data yielding posterior distributions that differ markedly from the previously published values, or recovery of injected parameters in new simulations that fall outside credible intervals, would falsify the claim of reliability.

read the original abstract

Gravitational waves provide a unique tool for observational astronomy. While the first LIGO--Virgo catalogue of gravitational-wave transients (GWTC-1) contains eleven signals from black hole and neutron star binaries, the number of observations is increasing rapidly as detector sensitivity improves. To extract information from the observed signals, it is imperative to have fast, flexible, and scalable inference techniques. In a previous paper, we introduced BILBY: a modular and user-friendly Bayesian inference library adapted to address the needs of gravitational-wave inference. In this work, we demonstrate that BILBY produces reliable results for simulated gravitational-wave signals from compact binary mergers, and verify that it accurately reproduces results reported for the eleven GWTC-1 signals. Additionally, we provide configuration and output files for all analyses to allow for easy reproduction, modification, and future use. This work establishes that BILBY is primed and ready to analyse the rapidly growing population of compact binary coalescence gravitational-wave signals.

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 / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript validates the BILBY Bayesian inference library for gravitational-wave parameter estimation of compact binary coalescences. It claims that BILBY recovers injected parameters from simulated signals with reliable results and accurately reproduces the published parameter estimates for all eleven events in the GWTC-1 catalogue, while supplying configuration and output files to enable reproduction.

Significance. If the central claims are substantiated with quantitative comparisons, the work is significant for establishing a modular, user-friendly inference tool at a time when GW detection rates are rising. The provision of full analysis configurations is a clear strength that supports reproducibility and community use. The dual validation on simulations and real events, if shown to be independent, would strengthen confidence in BILBY for future catalogue analyses.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and validation sections] The abstract and validation sections state that results match simulations and prior GWTC-1 catalogue values, but the provided manuscript text contains no quantitative metrics, error budgets, or explicit comparison tables (e.g., no reported median offsets, credible-interval overlaps, or Kolmogorov-Smirnov statistics). This absence makes it difficult to evaluate whether the central claim of reliability is fully supported.
  2. [GWTC-1 reproduction (likely §4)] The validation against the eleven GWTC-1 signals rests on reproducing previously published results. The manuscript should explicitly state whether the BILBY runs use identical strain data segments, PSD estimates, and prior ranges as the original LALInference analyses. If these inputs are shared, agreement primarily confirms sampler and likelihood consistency rather than independent correctness against an external ground truth.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract could include one or two concrete examples of the quantitative agreement (e.g., typical fractional error on chirp mass or effective spin) to give readers an immediate sense of the achieved precision.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for the constructive comments that help clarify the validation approach. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript to incorporate additional quantitative details and explicit statements as requested.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and validation sections] The abstract and validation sections state that results match simulations and prior GWTC-1 catalogue values, but the provided manuscript text contains no quantitative metrics, error budgets, or explicit comparison tables (e.g., no reported median offsets, credible-interval overlaps, or Kolmogorov-Smirnov statistics). This absence makes it difficult to evaluate whether the central claim of reliability is fully supported.

    Authors: We agree that the original manuscript would benefit from explicit quantitative metrics in the main text to support the reliability claims. In the revised manuscript we have added new tables in the validation sections that report median offsets between injected and recovered parameters for the simulated signals, along with the fraction of injections recovered within the 90% credible intervals. For the GWTC-1 events we now include a direct comparison table of median values and credible-interval overlaps with the published LALInference results. These additions provide the quantitative support needed to evaluate the central claims while retaining the provided configuration and output files for full reproducibility. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [GWTC-1 reproduction (likely §4)] The validation against the eleven GWTC-1 signals rests on reproducing previously published results. The manuscript should explicitly state whether the BILBY runs use identical strain data segments, PSD estimates, and prior ranges as the original LALInference analyses. If these inputs are shared, agreement primarily confirms sampler and likelihood consistency rather than independent correctness against an external ground truth.

    Authors: We thank the referee for this important clarification. The BILBY runs for the GWTC-1 events were configured with identical strain data segments, PSD estimates, and prior ranges as the original LALInference analyses; this is now stated explicitly in the revised Section 4 and is documented in the released configuration files. The agreement therefore validates the correctness of BILBY's likelihood implementation and sampler against the established LALInference code. Independent validation against known ground truth is provided by the separate simulated-signal injection studies, where the true parameters are known a priori. We have revised the text to distinguish these complementary validation approaches more clearly. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Validation against external simulations and published GWTC-1 results shows no circularity

full rationale

The paper validates BILBY by running it on simulated compact binary signals and by reproducing parameter estimates for the eleven GWTC-1 events that were previously published by the LIGO-Virgo collaboration. These comparisons use external benchmarks (injected signals with known parameters and independently reported posteriors) rather than deriving the target quantities from the paper's own fitted parameters or equations. The single reference to a prior BILBY introduction paper is a standard software citation and does not carry the load-bearing justification for the reliability claim. No self-definitional loops, fitted-input predictions, or uniqueness theorems imported from the same authors appear in the validation chain.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

The validation relies on standard Bayesian inference assumptions and the correctness of prior GWTC-1 analyses; no new free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are introduced in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 6020 in / 1041 out tokens · 33594 ms · 2026-05-18T21:49:45.451629+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 19 Pith papers

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

  1. GW240925 and GW250207: Astrophysical Calibration of Gravitational-wave Detectors

    gr-qc 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 8.0

    The first informative astrophysical calibration of gravitational-wave detectors is reported using GW240925 and GW250207.

  2. Testing the Kerr hypothesis beyond the quadrupole with GW241011

    gr-qc 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 8.0

    GW241011 data shows consistency with Kerr black holes for both quadrupole and octupole moments and delivers the first observational bounds on spin-induced octupole deviations.

  3. GWTC-2: Compact Binary Coalescences Observed by LIGO and Virgo During the First Half of the Third Observing Run

    gr-qc 2020-10 accept novelty 7.0

    LIGO and Virgo detected 39 compact binary coalescence events in O3a, including 13 new ones, with black hole binaries up to 150 solar masses and the first significantly asymmetric mass ratios.

  4. Post-Newtonian inspiral waveform model for eccentric precessing binaries with higher-order modes and matter effects

    gr-qc 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    pyEFPEHM extends prior PN models to include higher-order quasi-circular phasing, generalized precession solutions, and eccentric corrections up to 1PN in selected multipoles for eccentric precessing binaries with matt...

  5. Plunge-Merger-Ringdown Tests of General Relativity with GW250114

    gr-qc 2026-01 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    GW250114 data constrains GR deviations in merger amplitude to 10% and frequency to 4% at 90% CL, with first bounds on the (4,4) mode frequency at 6%.

  6. Scalar fields around black hole binaries in LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA

    gr-qc 2025-10 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Semi-analytic waveform model for scalar environments around black hole binaries is validated against numerical relativity and applied to LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA data to obtain upper limits on scalar densities with tentative ...

  7. A Robust and Efficient F-statistic-based Framework for Consistent Bayesian Inference of Compact Binary Coalescences

    gr-qc 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0

    F-statistic framework analytically maximizes over distance and polarization to enable faster Bayesian inference of compact binary coalescences with a new evidence formulation that matches full frequency-domain results...

  8. Black Hole Spectroscopy and Tests of General Relativity with GW250114

    gr-qc 2025-09 accept novelty 6.0

    GW250114 data confirm the remnant is consistent with a Kerr black hole and bound the dominant quadrupolar mode frequency to within a few percent of the GR prediction, with constraints tighter than prior multi-event catalogs.

  9. The Impact of Spin Priors on Parameterized Tests of General Relativity

    gr-qc 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Spin prior choices propagate into tests of GR via the 1.5PN deviation parameter δφ̂3 in a non-trivial, event-dependent way, with stronger effects for short-inspiral events and partial degeneracy with χ_eff when the de...

  10. Inference of recoil kicks from binary black hole mergers up to GWTC--4 and their astrophysical implications

    astro-ph.HE 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Recoil kicks are inferred for GWTC-4 binary black hole events with values up to nearly 1000 km/s for some, yielding retention probabilities of 1-5% in globular clusters and 70-100% in elliptical galaxies.

  11. GW250114: testing Hawking's area law and the Kerr nature of black holes

    gr-qc 2025-09 accept novelty 5.0

    GW250114 data confirm the remnant black hole ringdown frequencies lie within 30% of Kerr predictions and that the final horizon area is larger than the sum of the progenitors' areas to high credibility.

  12. Constraints on the extreme mass-ratio inspiral population from LISA data

    gr-qc 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    A neural-network-accelerated hierarchical Bayesian pipeline is developed and validated on a phenomenological model to constrain EMRI population parameters from LISA data.

  13. Disentangling spinning and nonspinning binary black hole populations with spin sorting

    gr-qc 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0

    Spin sorting with the default spin model distinguishes spinning and nonspinning binary black hole populations in simulations and shows real data rule out a fully nonspinning population but allow mixed ones with up to ...

  14. Tests of General Relativity with Binary Black Holes from the second LIGO-Virgo Gravitational-Wave Transient Catalog

    gr-qc 2020-10 accept novelty 5.0

    No evidence for deviations from general relativity is found in LIGO-Virgo binary black hole events, with improved constraints on waveform parameters, graviton mass, and ringdown properties.

  15. Basilic: An end-to-end pipeline for Bayesian burst inference and model classification in gravitational-wave data

    gr-qc 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Basilic is an end-to-end Bayesian pipeline for gravitational-wave burst inference and model classification, with a case study showing signal degeneracies between binary black hole mergers and cosmic strings.

  16. The impact of waveform systematics and Gaussian noise on the interpretation of GW231123

    gr-qc 2026-01 accept novelty 4.0

    The high mass and high spin magnitudes inferred for GW231123 using NRSur7dq4 are robust to waveform systematics and Gaussian noise.

  17. GWTC-2.1: Deep Extended Catalog of Compact Binary Coalescences Observed by LIGO and Virgo During the First Half of the Third Observing Run

    gr-qc 2021-08 accept novelty 4.0

    GWTC-2.1 adds eight new high-significance compact binary coalescence events to the prior catalog, extending the observed black hole mass range and including candidates inside the pair-instability mass gap.

  18. Improved Constraints on Non-Kerr Deviations from Binary Black Hole Inspirals Using GWTC-4 Data

    gr-qc 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 3.0

    Bayesian constraints from GWTC-4 binary black hole inspirals show Johannsen metric deformation parameters α13 and ε3 consistent with zero, supporting the Kerr hypothesis.

  19. Tests of General Relativity with GWTC-3

    gr-qc 2021-12 accept novelty 3.0

    No evidence for physics beyond general relativity is found in the analysis of 15 GW events from GWTC-3, with consistency in residuals, PN parameters, and remnant properties.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

241 extracted references · 241 canonical work pages · cited by 19 Pith papers · 35 internal anchors

  1. [2]

    Aasi J., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0264-9381/32/7/074001 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015CQGra..32g4001T 32, 074001

    work page doi:10.1088/0264-9381/32/7/074001 2015

  2. [15]

    P., Abbott R., Abbott T

    Abbott B. P., Abbott R., Abbott T. D., et al., 2018a, https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-P1800370/public

    work page

  3. [18]

    P., Abbott R., Abbott T

    Abbott B. P., Abbott R., Abbott T. D., et al., 2019b, https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-P1900011/public

    work page

  4. [19]

    P., Abbott R., Abbott T

    Abbott B. P., Abbott R., Abbott T. D., et al., 2019c, https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-P1900040/public

    work page

  5. [20]

    (LIGO Scientific and Virgo Collaboration) 2020 Class

    Abbott B. P., Abbott R., Abbott T. D., et al., 2019a, arXiv preprint arXiv:1908.11170

    work page arXiv 1908

  6. [21]

    P., Abbott R., Abbott T

    Abbott B. P., Abbott R., Abbott T. D., et al., 2019d, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019arXiv190806060T p. arXiv:1908.06060

    work page arXiv 1908

  7. [22]

    Open data from the first and second observing runs of Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo

    Abbott R., Abbott T. D., Abraham S., et al., 2019e, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019arXiv191211716T p. arXiv:1912.11716

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1912

  8. [27]

    P., Abbott R., Abbott T

    Abbott B. P., Abbott R., Abbott T. D., et al., 2020a, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020arXiv200408342T p. arXiv:2004.08342

    work page arXiv 2004

  9. [31]

    Acernese F., et al., 2015, @doi [Classical Quantum Gravity] 10.1088/0264-9381/32/2/024001 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015CQGra..32b4001A 32, 024001

    work page doi:10.1088/0264-9381/32/2/024001 2015

  10. [32]

    A., et al., 2016, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 594, A13

    Ade P. A., et al., 2016, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 594, A13

    work page 2016

  11. [33]

    Ajith P., et al., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.241101 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011PhRvL.106x1101A 106, 241101

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.106.241101 2011

  12. [36]

    Ashton G., et al., 2019, , 241, 27

    work page 2019

  13. [39]

    W., Gaebel S

    Barrett J. W., Gaebel S. M., Neijssel C. J., Vigna-G \' o mez A., Stevenson S., Berry C. P. L., Farr W. M., Mandel I., 2018, @doi [Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.] 10.1093/mnras/sty908 , 477, 4685

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty908 2018

  14. [41]

    Bayes T., 1763, @doi [Philosophical Transactions of The Royal Society] 10.1098/rstl.1763.0053

    work page doi:10.1098/rstl.1763.0053

  15. [42]

    Baylor A., Smith R., Chase E., 2019, IMRPhenomPv2\_NRTidal\_GW190425\_narrow\_Mc, @doi 10.5281/zenodo.3478659 , https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3478659

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.3478659 2019

  16. [43]

    Binary neutron star formation and the origin of GW170817

    Belczynski K., et al., 2018, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018arXiv181210065B p. arXiv:1812.10065

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  17. [50]

    R., Will C

    Blanchet L., Damour T., Iyer B. R., Will C. M., Wiseman A. G., 1995, @doi [ ] 10.1103/PhysRevLett.74.3515 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995PhRvL..74.3515B 74, 3515

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.74.3515 1995

  18. [51]

    LIGO Project, https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-T1500602

    Boh \'e A., Hannam M., Husa S., Ohme F., Puerrer M., Schmidt P., 2016, Technical Report LIGO -T1500602, PhenomPv2 - Technical Notes for LAL Implementation, https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-T1500602 . LIGO Project, https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-T1500602

    work page 2016

  19. [52]

    Boh\'e A., et al., 2017, @doi [Phys. Rev. D] 10.1103/PhysRevD.95.044028 , 95, 044028

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.95.044028 2017

  20. [53]

    Buchner J., 2016, @doi [Statistics and Computing] 10.1007/s11222-014-9512-y , 26, 383–392

    work page doi:10.1007/s11222-014-9512-y 2016

  21. [54]

    Buchner J., 2019, @doi [Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific] 10.1088/1538-3873/aae7fc , 131, 108005

    work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/aae7fc 2019

  22. [55]

    Buchner J., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201322971 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014A

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322971 2014

  23. [64]

    Fast Fisher Matrices and Lazy Likelihoods

    Cornish N. J., 2010, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010arXiv1007.4820C p. arXiv:1007.4820

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  24. [66]

    J., Shuman K., 2020, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020arXiv200503610C p

    Cornish N. J., Shuman K., 2020, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020arXiv200503610C p. arXiv:2005.03610

    work page arXiv 2020

  25. [71]

    Ellis J., van Haasteren R., 2017, jellis18/PTMCMCSampler: Official Release, @doi 10.5281/zenodo.1037579 , https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1037579

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.1037579 2017

  26. [74]

    M., 2014, Technical Report LIGO-T1400460, Marginalisation of the time and phase parameters in CBC parameter estimation, https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-T1400460/public

    Farr W. M., 2014, Technical Report LIGO-T1400460, Marginalisation of the time and phase parameters in CBC parameter estimation, https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-T1400460/public . https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-T1400460/public

    work page 2014

  27. [75]

    M., 2015, kombine: a kernel-density-based, embarrassingly parallel ensemble sampler

    Farr B., Farr W. M., 2015, kombine: a kernel-density-based, embarrassingly parallel ensemble sampler

    work page 2015

  28. [76]

    M., Farr B., Littenberg T., 2014, Technical Report LIGO-T1400682, Modelling calibration errors in CBC waveforms, https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-T1400682/public

    Farr W. M., Farr B., Littenberg T., 2014, Technical Report LIGO-T1400682, Modelling calibration errors in CBC waveforms, https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-T1400682/public . https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-T1400682/public

    work page 2014

  29. [77]

    Favata M., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.101101 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014PhRvL.112j1101F 112, 101101

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.112.101101 2014

  30. [78]

    2008, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 383, 1079, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12589.x

    Feroz F., Hobson M. P., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12353.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008MNRAS.384..449F 384, 449

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12353.x 2008

  31. [79]

    W., et al

    Feroz F., Hobson M. P., Bridges M., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14548.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009MNRAS.398.1601F 398, 1601

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14548.x 2009

  32. [80]

    Importance Nested Sampling and the MultiNest Algorithm

    Feroz F., Hobson M. P., Cameron E., Pettitt A. N., 2019, @doi [The Open Journal of Astrophysics] 10.21105/astro.1306.2144 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019OJAp....2E..10F 2, 10

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.21105/astro.1306.2144 2019

  33. [82]

    S., Chernoff D

    Finn L. S., Chernoff D. F., 1993, @doi [ ] 10.1103/PhysRevD.47.2198 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993PhRvD..47.2198F 47, 2198

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.47.2198 1993

  34. [86]

    S., Tonolini F., Murray-Smith R., 2019, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019arXiv190906296G p

    Gabbard H., Messenger C., Heng I. S., Tonolini F., Murray-Smith R., 2019, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019arXiv190906296G p. arXiv:1909.06296

    work page arXiv 2019

  35. [87]

    arXiv:1912.09708

    Galaudage S., Talbot C., Thrane E., 2019, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019arXiv191209708G p. arXiv:1912.09708

    work page arXiv 2019

  36. [89]

    arXiv:1910.05961

    Goncharov B., Zhu X.-J., Thrane E., 2019, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019arXiv191005961G p. arXiv:1910.05961

    work page arXiv 2019

  37. [90]

    Analysis Issues for Large CMB Data Sets

    G \'o rski K. M., et al. 1999, in Banday A. J., Sheth R. K., da Costa L. N., eds, Evolution of Large Scale Structure : From Recombination to Garching. p. 37 ( @eprint arXiv astro-ph/9812350 )

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  38. [91]

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

    G \'o rski K. M., Hivon E., Banday A. J., Wandelt B. D., Hansen F. K., Reinecke M., Bartelmann M., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1086/427976 , 622, 759

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

  39. [92]

    J., Hobson M

    Handley W. J., Hobson M. P., Lasenby A. N., 2015a, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters] 10.1093/mnrasl/slv047 , 450, L61

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slv047

  40. [93]

    J., Hobson M

    Handley W. J., Hobson M. P., Lasenby A. N., 2015b, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stv1911 , 453, 4384

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1911

  41. [94]

    Hannam M., Schmidt P., Boh \'e A., Haegel L., Husa S., Ohme F., Pratten G., P \"u rrer M., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.151101 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014PhRvL.113o1101H 113, 151101

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.113.151101 2014

  42. [95]

    K., 1970, Biometrika, 57, 97

    Hastings W. K., 1970, Biometrika, 57, 97

    work page 1970

  43. [96]

    D., 2019a, @doi [ ] 10.1103/PhysRevD.100.043023 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019PhRvD.100d3023H 100, 043023

    Hernandez Vivanco F., Smith R., Thrane E., Lasky P. D., 2019a, @doi [ ] 10.1103/PhysRevD.100.043023 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019PhRvD.100d3023H 100, 043023

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.100.043023

  44. [97]

    D., Talbot C., Raymond V., 2019b, @doi [ ] 10.1103/PhysRevD.100.103009 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019PhRvD.100j3009H 100, 103009

    Hernandez Vivanco F., Smith R., Thrane E., Lasky P. D., Talbot C., Raymond V., 2019b, @doi [ ] 10.1103/PhysRevD.100.103009 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019PhRvD.100j3009H 100, 103009

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.100.103009

  45. [100]

    arXiv:2006.06639

    Hoy C., Raymond V., 2020, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020arXiv200606639H p. arXiv:2006.06639

    work page arXiv 2020

  46. [102]

    M., Scheel M

    Isi M., Giesler M., Farr W. M., Scheel M. A., Teukolsky S. A., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.111102 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019PhRvL.123k1102I 123, 111102

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.123.111102 2019

  47. [103]

    M., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnrasl/slz007 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.tmpL..14K p

    Kasliwal M. M., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnrasl/slz007 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.tmpL..14K p. L14

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slz007 2019

  48. [104]

    Keitel D., 2019, @doi [Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society] 10.3847/2515-5172/ab0c0b , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019RNAAS...3...46K 3, 46

    work page doi:10.3847/2515-5172/ab0c0b 2019

  49. [105]

    J., Boh \'e A., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1103/PhysRevD.93.044007 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016PhRvD..93d4007K 93, 044007

    Khan S., Husa S., Hannam M., Ohme F., P \"u rrer M., Forteza X. J., Boh \'e A., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1103/PhysRevD.93.044007 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016PhRvD..93d4007K 93, 044007

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.93.044007 2016

  50. [106]

    Kimball C., Talbot C., Berry C. P. L., Carney M., Zevin M., Thrane E., Kalogera V., 2020, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020arXiv200500023K p. arXiv:2005.00023

    work page arXiv 2020

  51. [107]

    N., 1933, G

    Kolmogorov A. N., 1933, G. Ist. Ital. Attuari., 4, 83–91

    work page 1933

  52. [108]

    F., 1987, @doi [General Relativity and Gravitation] 10.1007/BF00759095 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1987GReGr..19.1163K 19, 1163

    Krolak A., Schutz B. F., 1987, @doi [General Relativity and Gravitation] 10.1007/BF00759095 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1987GReGr..19.1163K 19, 1163

    work page doi:10.1007/bf00759095 1987

  53. [109]

    Kullback and R

    Kullback S., Leibler R. A., 1951, @doi [Ann. Math. Statist.] 10.1214/aoms/1177729694 , 22, 79

    work page doi:10.1214/aoms/1177729694 1951

  54. [110]

    LIGO Scientific Collaboration 2018, LIGO A lgorithm L ibrary - LALS uite, free software (GPL), @doi 10.7935/GT1W-FZ16

    work page doi:10.7935/gt1w-fz16 2018

  55. [111]

    D., P \"u rrer M., Taracchini A., Marsat S., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1103/PhysRevD.100.024002 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019PhRvD.100b4002L 100, 024002

    Lackey B. D., P \"u rrer M., Taracchini A., Marsat S., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1103/PhysRevD.100.024002 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019PhRvD.100b4002L 100, 024002

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.100.024002 2019

  56. [112]

    Lange J., O'Shaughnessy R., Rizzo M., 2018, arXiv:1805.10457

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  57. [113]

    P., Feroz F., van Haasteren R., Lee K

    Lentati L., Alexander P., Hobson M. P., Feroz F., van Haasteren R., Lee K. J., Shannon R. M., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt2122 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.437.3004L 437, 3004

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt2122 2014

  58. [114]

    Lin J., 1991, @doi [IEEE Transactions on Information Theory] 10.1109/18.61115 , 37, 145

    work page doi:10.1109/18.61115 1991

  59. [115]

    B., Cornish N

    Littenberg T. B., Cornish N. J., 2015, @doi [Phys. Rev. D] 10.1103/PhysRevD.91.084034 , 91, 084034

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.91.084034 2015

  60. [116]

    E., Thrane E., Lasky P

    Lower M. E., Thrane E., Lasky P. D., Smith R., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1103/PhysRevD.98.083028 , 98, 083028

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.98.083028 2018

  61. [117]

    L., Massinger T., et al., 2018, gwpy/gwpy: 0.12.0, @doi 10.5281/zenodo.1346349

    Macleod D., Coughlin S., Urban A. L., Massinger T., et al., 2018, gwpy/gwpy: 0.12.0, @doi 10.5281/zenodo.1346349

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.1346349 2018

  62. [118]

    Margutti R., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aab2ad , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...856L..18M 856, L18

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aab2ad 2018

  63. [119]

    G., Dal Canton T., 2020, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020arXiv200300357M p

    Marsat S., Baker J. G., Dal Canton T., 2020, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020arXiv200300357M p. arXiv:2003.00357

    work page arXiv 2020

  64. [120]

    W., Rosenbluth M

    Metropolis N., Rosenbluth A. W., Rosenbluth M. N., Teller A. H., Teller E., 1953, The journal of chemical physics, 21, 1087

    work page 1953

  65. [121]

    P., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1038/s41586-018-0486-3 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018Natur.561..355M 561, 355

    Mooley K. P., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1038/s41586-018-0486-3 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018Natur.561..355M 561, 355

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-018-0486-3 2018

  66. [122]

    R., Weih L

    Most E. R., Weih L. R., Rezzolla L., Schaffner-Bielich J., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.261103 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018PhRvL.120z1103M 120, 261103

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.120.261103 2018

  67. [123]

    Nagar A., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1103/PhysRevD.98.104052 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018PhRvD..98j4052N 98, 104052

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.98.104052 2018

  68. [124]

    arXiv:2004.09442

    Ossokine S., et al., 2020, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020arXiv200409442O p. arXiv:2004.09442

    work page arXiv 2020

  69. [125]

    Pankow C., Brady P., Ochsner E., O'Shaughnessy R., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1103/PhysRevD.92.023002 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015PhRvD..92b3002P 92, 023002

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.92.023002 2015

  70. [126]

    Pankow C., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1103/PhysRevD.98.084016 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018PhRvD..98h4016P 98, 084016

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.98.084016 2018

  71. [127]

    Payne E., Talbot C., Thrane E., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1103/PhysRevD.100.123017 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019PhRvD.100l3017P 100, 123017

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.100.123017 2019

  72. [128]

    M., 1995, @doi [ ] 10.1103/PhysRevD.52.848 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995PhRvD..52..848P 52, 848

    Poisson E., Will C. M., 1995, @doi [ ] 10.1103/PhysRevD.52.848 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995PhRvD..52..848P 52, 848

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.52.848 1995

  73. [129]

    Powell J., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1088/1361-6382/aacf18 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018CQGra..35o5017P 35, 155017

    work page doi:10.1088/1361-6382/aacf18 2018

  74. [130]

    Powell J., M \"u ller B., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz1304 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.487.1178P 487, 1178

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz1304 2019

  75. [131]

    M., Sip o cz, B

    Price-Whelan A. M., et al., 2018, @doi [Astron. J.] 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2018AJ....156..123T 156, 123

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f 2018

  76. [132]

    Ramos-Buades A., Husa S., Pratten G., Estell \'e s H., Garc \' a-Quir \'o s C., Mateu-Lucena M., Colleoni M., Jaume R., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1103/PhysRevD.101.083015 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020PhRvD.101h3015R 101, 083015

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.101.083015 2020

  77. [133]

    Astropy: A community Python package for astronomy

    Robitaille T. P., et al., 2013, @doi [Astron. Astrophys.] 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013A

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 2013

  78. [134]

    D., Cornish N

    Romano J. D., Cornish N. J., 2017, @doi [Living Reviews in Relativity] 10.1007/s41114-017-0004-1 , 20, 2

    work page doi:10.1007/s41114-017-0004-1 2017

  79. [135]

    M., Lasky P

    Romero-Shaw I. M., Lasky P. D., Thrane E., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz2996 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.tmp.2600R p. 2600

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2996 2019

  80. [136]

    Romero-Shaw I., et al., 2020b, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4017046, @doi 10.5281/zenodo.4017046

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.4017046

Showing first 80 references.