SIMBAD references

A number of pulsar timing arrays have recently reported preliminary evidence for the existence of a nanohertz frequency gravitational wave background. These analyses rely on noise analyses, which are inherently complex due to the many astrophysical and instrumental factors. We investigate whether realistic systematic errors, stemming from misspecified noise models that fail to capture salient features of the pulsar timing noise, could bias the evidence for gravitational waves. We consider two plausible forms of misspecification: small instrumental pulse arrival time offsets and radio-frequency-dependent time-correlated noise. Using simulated data, we calculate the distribution of the commonly used optimal statistic with no signal present and using plausibly misspecified noise models. By comparing the optimal statistic distribution with the distribution created using “quasi-resampling” techniques (such as sky scrambles and phase shifts), we endeavour to determine the extent to which plausible misspecification might lead to a false positive. The results are reassuring: we find that quasi-resampling techniques tend to underestimate the significance of pure-noise data sets. We conclude that recent reported evidence for a nanohertz gravitational wave background is likely robust to the most obvious sources of systematic errors; if anything, the significance of the signal is potentially underestimated.