Paper detail

Studies in Astronomical Time Series Analysis: VII. An Enquiry Concerning Non-Linearity, the RMS-Mean Flux Relation, and log-Normal Flux Distributions

A broad and widely used class of stationary, linear, additive time series models can have statistical properties which many authors have asserted imply that the underlying process must be non-linear, non-stationary, multiplicative, or inconsistent with shot noise. This result is demonstrated with exact and numerical evaluation of the model flux distribution function and dependence of flux standard deviation on mean flux (here and in the literature called the \emph{rms-flux relation}). These models can: (1) exhibit normal, log-normal or other flux distributions; (2) show linear or slightly non-linear rms-mean flux dependencies; as well as (3) match arbitrary second order statistics of the time series data. Accordingly the above assertions cannot be made on the basis of statistical time series analysis alone. Also discussed are ambiguities in the meaning of terms relevant to this study -- \emph{linear}, \emph{stationary} and \emph{multiplicative} -- and functions that can transform observed fluxes to a normal distribution as well or better than the logarithm.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.