Repository navigation
Document + maybe add some flexibility for powerspectrum convention #17
Description
Our BLS implementation returns only one type of bls "power" = the square of the "signal residue" from https://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0206099.
The astropy BLS implementations give additional conventions for the "power": https://docs.astropy.org/en/stable/timeseries/bls.html. We should (1) be very clear about what exactly we are calculating and returning so that we avoid confusion, and (2) if possible, allow user to specify which convention they want to have returned.
I believe the same is also true for Lomb Scargle -- we're only returning a single convention. In LS we are clear in the documentation about what convention we are using but it might be good to allow alternatives.
Activity
A5: selectable BLS power conventions (#17)
johnh2o2 commentedon Sep 28, 2026
Release triage for PR #69 (cuvarbase 1.0.1, source
6b6c48945160).This issue is implemented in PR #69 and will close automatically when that PR merges into master. Keeping it open until the merge.
BLS supports chi2ratio, snr and loglik and provides convert_bls_power. The guide explains the reference-model difference from Astropy likelihood power. LS retains its documented standard normalization. The issue’s optional flexibility is delivered for BLS; no additional LS normalization modes are claimed.
Evidence: BLS conventions and Astropy relationship · Lomb–Scargle standard normalization · power-convention tests