Paper detail

Fast radio bursts: search sensitivities and completeness

In this paper we identify some sub-optimal performance in algorithms that search for Fast Radio Bursts (FRBs), which can reduce the cosmological volume probed by over 20%, and result in missed discoveries and incorrect flux density and sky rate determinations. Re-calculating parameters for all of the FRBs discovered with the Parkes telescope (i.e. all of the reported FRBs bar one), we find some inconsistencies with previously determined values, e.g. FRB 010125 was approximately twice as bright as previously reported. We describe some incompleteness factors not previously considered which are important in determining accurate population statistics, e.g. accounting for fluence incompleteness the Thornton et al. all-sky rate can be re-phrased as ~2500 FRBs per sky per day above a 1.4-GHz fluence of ~2 Jy ms. Finally we make data for the FRBs easily available, along with software to analyse these.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors3 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.