arxiv: v1 [astro-ph.im] 19 Nov 2014

Transcription

1 submitted to APJ Preprint typeset using L A TEX style emulateapj v. 5//11 AN ACCURATE AND EFFICIENT ALGORITHM FOR DETECTION OF RADIO BURSTS WITH AN UNKNOWN DISPERSION MEASURE, FOR SINGLE DISH TELESCOPES AND INTERFEROMETERS Barak Zackay and Eran O. Oek Benoziyo Center or Astrophysics, Weizmann Institute o Science, Rehovot, Israel submitted to APJ arxiv: v1 [astro-ph.im] 19 Nov 014 ABSTRACT Astronomical radio bursts disperse while traveling through the interstellar medium. To optimally detect a short-duration signal within a requency band, we have to precisely compensate or the pulse dispersion, which is a computationally demanding task. We present the Fast Dispersion Measure Transorm (FDMT) algorithm or optimal detection o such signals. Our algorithm has a low theoretical complexity o N t + N t N d log ( ) where, N t and N d are the numbers o requency bins, time bins, and dispersion measure bins, respectively. Unlike previously suggested ast algorithms our algorithm conserves the sensitivity o brute orce dedispersion. Our tests indicate that this algorithm, running on a standard desktop computer, and implemented in a high-level programming language, is already aster than the state o the art dedispersion codes running on graphical processing units (GPUs). We also present a variant o the algorithm that can be eiciently implemented on GPUs. The latter algorithm s computation and data transport requirements are similar to those o two-dimensional FFT, indicating that incoherent dedispersion can now be considered a non-issue while planning uture surveys. We urther present a ast algorithm or sensitive dedispersion o pulses shorter than normally allowed by incoherent dedispersion. In typical cases this algorithm is orders o magnitude aster than coherent dedispersion by convolution. We analyze the computational complexity o pulsed signal searches by radio intererometers. We conclude that, using our suggested algorithms, maximally sensitive blind searches or such pulses is easible using existing acilities. We provide an implementation o these algorithms in Python and MATLAB. 1. INTRODUCTION When a radio pulse propagates through the interstellar and intergalactic plasma, dierent requencies travel at dierent speeds. This phenomenon, known as dispersion, hinders the detection o radio pulses. This is because integrating over many requencies during a given time rame dilutes the signal with noise, as only a single requency contributes signal at any given interval within the integration rame. The solution to this problem is to dedisperse the signal (i.e., to apply requency dependent time delays to the signal prior to integration). Since in most cases the dispersion is a prioriunknown, we need to test a large number o dispersions. The best dispesrion is the one that maximizes the signal-to-noise ratio o the pulse. A dierent way to look at this problem is that we need to integrate the lux along many dispersion curves in the requency-time domain. The dierence in pulse arrival time between two requencies is given by: t = t t 1 = 4.15DM( 1 )ms, (1) where DM is called the dispersion measure o the signal and it is traditionally measured in units o pccm 3. i arerequenciesmeasuredinghzandt i isthearrivaltime o the signal at requency i. For brevity, throughout the paper, we will use d to denote the dispersion measure in which all the dimensional constants are absorbed, i.e., the relation is given by t = t t 1 = d( 1 ). () The raw input rom a radio reciever is a time series o voltage measurments sampled typically at high requency (e.g., 100MHz). We denote the sampling interval by τ. In order to generate a spectrum (I[t,]) as a unction o time (t) and requency () the time series is divided to blocks o size samples, and each block is then Fourier transormed (a process known as Short Time Fourier Transorm, or STFT) and the absolute value squared at each rquency is saved 1. There are two distinct processes that we can apply to dedisperse a signal: incoherent dedispersion and coherent dedispersion. The term incoherent dedeispersion reers to applying requency-dependent time delays to the I(t, ) matrix, while coherent dedispersion involves applying a requency-dependent phase shit directly to the Fourier transorm o the raw signal. This subtle dierence is important incoherent dedispersion is only an approximation that is valid under certain conditions that we are going to review shortly ( ). A typical input matrix (I[t, ]) to incoherent dedispersion is presented in the top panel o Figure 1, while on the bottom we show a zoom in on the output o the transorm. The exact mathematical description o signal dispersion is the multiplication o the Fourier transorm o the raw signal with the phase-only ilter ( ) πid Ĥ() = exp (3) + (Lorimer & Kramer 01), where is the base-band requency. In order to exactly dedisperse the signal, we bzackay@gmail.com Eran.oek@weizmann.ac.il 1 Sometimes, an additional stage o binning is then applied to reduce the time resolution.

2 Zackay & Oek can apply the inverse o this shit. This process is reerred as coherent dedispersion. The computational requirements o incoherent dedispersion are more tractable than those o coherent dedispersion, and thereore whenever a blind search or astrophysical pulses is done, incoherent dedispersion is usually the method o choice (e.g. van Leeuwen & Stappers 010). The main practical motivation or improving dedispersion algorithms is to allow eicient analysis o modern radio intererometers data. When a blind search or new sources is conducted using a multi-component radio intererometer, coherent dedispersion o a large number o synthesized beams is the most sensitive detection method, but usually this is uneasible. The standard solution or this problem is to either combine the power romallantennasincoherently, ortouseonlyasmallcore o the intererometer or blind searches. Both approaches result in a signiicant loss o sensitivity and angular resolution that can amount to an order o magnitude sensitivity loss. It is important to improve upon these methods, especially when searching or non-repeating radio transients such as ast radio bursts(frbs; Lorimer et al. 007; Thornton et al. 013). Eicient detection o such objects requires both high sensitivity and a good spatial localization that is calculated in real time. This is crucial or the multi-wavelength ollowup o these illusive transients (e.g., Petro et al. 014). In this paper, we present the Fast discrete Dispersion Measure Transorm algorithm (henceorth FDMT) to solve the problem o incoherent dedispersion. FDMT is a transorm algorithm, having (generally) equal sizes or both input and output, and complexity that is only logarithmically larger than the input itsel. In addition, we present a hybrid algorithm that achieves both the sensitivity o coherent dedispersion, and the computational eiciency o incoherent dedispersion. Finally, we show that using this algorithm, it is easible to perorm blind searches with modern radio intererometers, and consequently to open new rontiers in the search or pulsars and radio transients. The structure o the paper is as ollows. In we analyze the sensitivity o incoherent dedispersion. In 3 we review the existing approaches or incoherent dedispersion. In 4 we describe the proposed algorithm, along with its complexity analysis. In 5 we present a variant o the algorithm that utilizes the ast Fourier transorm to make the algorithm much more parallel riendly. In 6 we compare the runtime o the implementation we provide with existing implementations o brute orce dedispersion. In 7 we propose a new hybrid algorithm or detection o pulses shorter than sensitively detectable by incoherent dedispersion. In 8 we discuss the application o the proposed algorithms or intererometers, and show that sensitive detection o short pulses, with maximal resolution, using all the elements o the intererometer, is easible with current acilities. We conclude in 9.. SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS OF INCOHERENT DEDISPERSION In this subsection, we develop the condition on the pulse length, the sampling interval and the dispersion delay that allows sensitive detection with incoherent dedispersion. This will be o importance in section 7. We denote by x the raw voltage signal, and by N s the Figure 1. A dispersed signal and its dispersion transorm (FDMT), based on simulated data. The top panel shows a 0.1ms wide dispersed pulse with D = 40pccm 3. The bottom panel shows a zoom in on the signiicant part o the dedispersion transorm. Notice that the Y axis has units o time because the dispersion measure is parametrized by the total time delay between the pulses entrance and exit. Note that because the pulse is so thin, any slight error on the dispersion path will immediately result in signiicant loss o the pulse power. total number o samples. We urther denote the pulse duty time (length) by t p = τ, where is the number o samples within the pulse. The optimal score or pulse detection is the sum o the squared voltage measurements within the pulse start time (t 0 ) and end time, S opt = x(t 0 +j). (4) j=0 We urther deine the dispersion time t d to be the total delay o the pulse within the band and we deine N d to be the dispersion time in units o samples, i.e. t d = N d τ. An important property o the dispersion kernel H() is that it is power preserving ( Ĥ() = 1). Another important property is that the majority o pulse power will lay within the dispersion curve in I(t,). By summing over the dispersion curve in I, we also sum the power o the noise outside the pulse, which its total variance is proportional to the number o added I bins i.e., to the length o the dispersion curve. The total length o the

3 Fast discrete Dispersion Measure Transorm 3 dispersion curve can be approximated by ( max 1, N ) p N + N d N N, (5) assuming the dispersion curve is close to linear. Thereore, the ratio o the noise power summed by incoherent dedispersion and the noise power within the pulse (assuming < ) is + N d. (6) Immediately, wegetthatthechoiceo thatmaximizes sensitivity is = N d, (7) regradless o pulse length. In order or the sensitivity loss to be less than a actor o, we need both and This implies that N d < (8) <. (9) N d < <. (10) This transorms to an important relation between the minimal pulse duration t p, the maximal dispersion time t d, and the sampling time τ. or, simpliied, t d τ < t p τ (11) t p > t d τ. (1) Using a standard order o magnitude value or τ and t d, τ = 10 8 s (100MHz sampling) and t d = 0.1s we get that t p > s. This means that incoherent dedispersionanalysisopulsesshorterthan about s usually loses sensitivity relative to coherent dedispersion. 3. EXISTING ALGORITHMS FOR INCOHERENT DEDISPERSION Algorithmically, there are two leading approaches or inchorerent dedispersion o single-dish data streams. These are the the tree dedispersion (Taylor 1974) and brute orce dedispersion (e.g., Magro et al. 011;Barsdell et al. 01; Clarke et al. 013). The tree dedispersion algorithm, eiciently calculates the integrals o all the straight line paths with slopes between 45 and 90 through the input time vs. requency matrix (this is similar to the discrete Radon transorm, Gotz & Druckmuller 1996; Brady 1998). The computational complexity o this algorithm is N t log, where we use the notation N t = N s / (note that N t and are the dimensions o I(t,)). However, since the dispersion curve is not linear, the use o this method results in a substantial loss o sensitivity. This can be somewhat mitigated by applying the algorithm to many small sub-bands o the data, and then combining the A sub-band o the data is a part o the data that is both limited and continuous in requency. results with a dedicated algorithm. This approach is not exact, and it increases the computational complexity o the algorithm. For more details on the sensitivity analysis and computational complexity o this algorithm we reer readers to Barsdell et al. (01). The brute orce dedispersion algorithm simply scans all the trial dispersion measures, one at a time, integrating its path on the input map and inding curves with excess power. This method is exact, but has the high complexity o N N t, where N is the number o trial dispersion measures scanned (note that N = N d / ). In order to expedite the search speed, the algorithm was implemented on graphical processing units (GPUs), and this method is now capable o analyzing single beam data in real time (Barsdell et al. 01). The maximal sensitivity, along with the possibility o real time analysis using GPUs, makes this method likely to be the most popular algorithm or dedispersion. Here we present an algorithm that combines both maximal sensitivity and low computational complexity. A comparison o all these mentioned algorithms is summarized in Table THE FDMT ALGORITHM TheinputtotheFDMTalgorithmisatwodimensional array o intensities, denoted by I(t,). The FDMT algorithm calculates the integral over all curves deined by Equation. A dispersion curve can be uniquely deined by the arrival time o the signal at the lowest requency (t 0 ) and the time delay between the arrival times o the lowest and highest requencies ( t). Thereore, the FDMT result can be expressed as a two dimensional array that contains the integrals along dispersion curves as a unction o t 0 and t A max min (t 0, t) = max [ 1 I(t 0 d = min min 1 ],), (13) where min and max are the minimum and maximum requencies in the base-band. To compute the FDMT transorm o the input, the algorithmworksinlog ( )iterations. Theinputsothe i th iteration are the FDMT transorms o a partition o the original band into / (i 1) sub-bands o size (i 1) requencies. The outputs o i th iteration are the FDMT transorms o a partition o the original input into / i sub-bands o size i requencies. Every two successive sub-bands are combined using the addition rule described below. Ater log ( ) iterations, we have the FDMT over the whole band. The FDMT combining process o two successive subbands into A (t 0, t), is given by the ollowing addition rule: A (t 0, t) = A 1 (t 0,t 0 t 1 )+A 1 (t 1,t 1 t ). (14) Here, A 1 and A 1 are part o the output o the previous iteration and t 1 is the intersection time o the dispersion curve at the central requency 1 = 0. t 1 is uniquely determined by the ormula t 1 t 0 t t 0 C, t, (15)

4 4 Zackay & Oek Table 1 Algorithm comparison FDMT Brute orce Tree Computational complexity max{n tn log ( ), N t} N tn N tlog ( ) Inormation eicient Yes Yes No Memory access riendly Yes Yes Yes Parallelization riendly Yes Yes No Note. Comparison o the FDMT algorithm with two other approaches to incoherent dedispersion, brute orce (e.g.,barsdell et al. 01), and tree dedispersion (Taylor 1974). It is clear that the FDMT algorithm dominates in all parameters. Figure. Illustration o a single iteration o the FDMT algorithm: On the let side, the input requency vs. time input table is drawn. An example dispersion curve is highlighted on purple. The input table is divided methodically to two sub-bands. The right table shows the inal dedispersion transorm o the input (let), where the integral over the purple dispersion curve (let) is marked by the purple cell on the right. On the middle, the dispersion measure transorm o the two sub-bands (which are assumed to be calculated in the previous iteration) is drawn, where each o the two sub-bands contains in each cell the sum o the unique dispersion trail with exit point t 0 and total delay t through the corresponding sub-bands. The cells that contain the partial sums o the two halves o the purple dispersion curve on the let are highlighted in purple. Highlighted in red, is a row in the dispersion tables that contributes to the calculation o the red cells on the right. Notice that we can add the lines highlighted in red as vectors, in order to implement the algorithm in a vectorized orm. Highlighted in orange, are the cells that use the alternative addition rule, in the case when the dispersion trail exits the boundaries o the input table. where C, (16) By deinition, A 1 (t 0,t 0 t 1 ) is the calculated sum over the unique dispersion curve between the coordinates (t 0, ) and (t 1, 1 ), and A 1 (t 1,t 1 t 0 ) is the same or (t 1, 1 ) and (t, ). Ater an FDMT iteration, the only dispersion curve passing through (t 0, ),(t, ), will be given by A (t 0,t 0 t ). Forsuicientlyearlyt 0, thetime t 1 willbesmallerthan zero. In that case we just copy i.e, use the alternative addition rule A (t 0, t) = A 1 (t 0,t 0 t 1 ). (17) The operation o one iteration o the algorithm is graphically illustrated in Figure. The only thing let to deal with is the data initialization. This is done prior to the irst iteration, generating A 1 or every two consecutive requencies. I the maximum dispersion delay between two consecutive requencies is smaller than the width o a time bin, then we can use the simple initialization: where A +δ (t 0,0) = I(,t), (18) δ = max min. (19) Otherwise, the energy o the signal at some requencies is not located at a single bin. This can be compensated or by two ways: 1. By computing partial sums over the time axis. i.e A +δ (t, t) = t i=0 I(,t+i). (0). I or a certain d, the time delay within each single requency bin is larger than one time bin, we can simply reduce the time resolution (i.e., bin). Note

5 Fast discrete Dispersion Measure Transorm 5 that this implies N >>, which we show in to be suboptimal in terms o sensitivity. In the MATLAB and Python codes we provide, we use Option 1. The maximal time delay within each requency bin is uniquely determined by d max, the maximal d we want to scan, and is given by 0 ( +δ ) t max ( ) = d max. (1) min max Thereore, this decision can be made prior to the computation. A pseudo code o FDMT is given in Algorithm 1. In addition, we provide implementation or the algorithm in Python and MATLAB. 3 Note that so ar we did not treat rounding and binning issues, these are discussed in 4. and are implemented in the codes we provide. Algorithm 1 The FDMT Algorithm Input: I(, t) input matrix (possibly packed), t axis is continuous in memory. Output: Packed dispersion measure scores arranged in a two dimensional table A max (t, t) where t represents the dispersion min measure axis. Initiate the table by A +max min (t, t) = t i=0 I(,t+i) or iteration i = 1 to i = log do or in the range [ min, max] with steps i δ do = + i δ 1 = C, = t max(i, ) = N 0 (+ i δ ) min max or t in the range [0, t max(i, )] do or t 0 in range [C, t,n t] do t 1 = t 0 C, t A (t 0, t) = A 1 0 (t 0,t 0 t 1 )+A 0 (t 1,t 1 t ) 1 end or or t 0 in the range [0,C, t] do A (t 0, t) = A 1 0 (t 0,C, t) end or end or end or end or 4.1. Computational Complexity To calculate the computational complexity, we need to trace the number o operations done throughout the algorithm. The amount o additions in iteration i is bounded rom above by N b N t t max (i) where N b is the number o sub-bands processed at the current iteration, and t max (i) is the maximum time shit within a single sub-band at iteration i or the curve with highest dispersion measure: 0 ( + i δ ) t max (i, ) = N, () min max 3 The codes are available rom t max (i) = max { t max (i, )} = (3) min = N ( min + i δ ). min max As a irst approximation, one can assume that the dispersion curve is almost linear, meaning that the number o t s needed in iteration i is roughly twice the number needed in iterationi+1. In the last iteration, t = N, and thereore, in iteration i, t max (i) N i. (4) The number o bands (N b ) in each iteration is N b = i. Thereore, under the approximationo almost linear dispersion(or narrow band), the ollowing approximation is correct: N b t max (i) max{n,n b } (5) Summingthisoralliterations,andassumingN isdominant in all iterations, and taking into account the number o entries in each added row (N t ), we get the complexity C FDMT = N t N log ( ). (6) I we assume N b is dominant, we get C FDMT = N t + N t +... = N t. (7) Thereore, the total complexity o the algorithm is bounded rom above by: C FDMT N t +N t N log ( ). (8) Casting the complexity analysis o the FDMT algorithm with the more naturally deined N s,n d, using N s = N t and N = N d / we get C FDMT N s + N d N s log ( ) = (9) = N s + N sn d log ( ). Adding to the above the complexity o data preparation by STFT, N s log ( ), and the act that i we chose < we can eectively bin (or low pass, see 5.1) to size, we get C FDMT N s log + N s + N dn s log ( ). (30) Here we can see that the data preparation complexity dominates the operation count o the algorithm whenever incoherent dedispersion is maximally sensitive (i.e, N d < ). 4.. Implementation details In this subsection we consider implementation issues, such as rounding and binning, pulse proile convolution and using an arbitrary number o requencies. In addition, it is important to implement the tricks o the trade,

6 6 Zackay & Oek in order to transorm the theoretical complexity reduction to a real speedup. Rounding and binning: The exact ormulas written above need to take into account discreteness o both requency and time axes. To keep the ormulas readable, we did not include these considerations in the algorithm description and pseudo-code. However, we include them in the implementation we provide, and we advise readers who want to implement the FDMT to pay attention to the discretization process. That is because an incorrect choice might lead to a signiicant reduction in accuracy. An example o the most important discretization issue, is that when combining two sub-bands, the point t 1, where the dispersion curve travels rom one sub-band to the next might not be well deined. This can happen, because the dispersion curve might travel one bin between the end requency o the irst band + ( i 1)δ and the start requency o the second band + i δ. The implemented solution or this problem is to calculate two versionsoc 0,, onewiththeendrequencyothelower sub-band, and the other with the start requency o the upper sub-band. Using the dierent versions o C 0, in the two dierent uses o t 1, we can account or a time shit between the added bands, approximating the dispersion curve better. Machine word utilization: One can utilize the machine word width (or the width o the SSE registers) to pack ew instances o the dedispersion procedure into one computation (since modern computers operate on machine words o 64 bits, this will result in a speedup actor o 4 8 depending on the number o bits per requency and the pulse maximum allowed strength). Memory access: An important issue in run-time reduction, is the continuity o memory access. The FDMT algorithm never perorms any re-ordering action along the time axis. Thereore, it is recommended to store the time axis continuously in order to speed up the memory access operations. Dierent range o dispersions: Sometimes, we have a prior knowledge o the range o dispersion measures needed to scan. In that case, one can still employ the FDMT algorithm ater an additional preparation o applying either a requency dependent shit to the input (according to some d min ), or a coherent dedispersion o the signal (using d min ). Pulse proile: Sometimes we have prior knowledge on the pulse width or proile (might be a dierent proile or each requency, like in pulse scattering). By applying a matched ilter approach, one can convolve each requency time series with the predicted proile or that requency andemploythefdmtattheend. Forwideenoughpulse shapes, one might consider binning the time resolution. We note that convolution o the time axis with a uniorm pulse proile (or all requencies) commutes with the entire FDMT operation. Thereore, we can test a ew pulse proiles per FDMT without repeating the dedispersion process. Dealing with the case o k : The algorithm presented above assumes that the number o requencies is strictly a power o two. This assumption can be abandoned by slightly adjusting the addition rule to allow a merge o non-equal size sub-bands. The only change needed is to switch 1 in Equation 16 rom being the middle requency between and to be the border requency between the sub-bands. Applying FDMT or other unctional orms: Thedispersionequation(Eq. )isusedonlyinthepreparation o C,. One can easily extend the FDMT algorithm to search or other unctional orms, or example, t = γ 1 γ. (31) The only required modiication is to change the power o the requency in Equation 16 rom to γ. Furthermore, it could be extended to any amily o curves that satisies the condition that there is only one curve passing between any two points in the input data. Using this, one can calculate the required C,, by inding the only curve passing through both (t 0, ) and (t, ), and deining t 1 to be the intersection time o the curve with the requency 1. While the complexity o the algorithm, may change with the unctional orm, or a suiciently regular unctional orm, the complexity will close to N d N t log. 5. ELIMINATING SHIFTS BY FFT ING THE TIME AXIS In modern computers and GPU s, memory access is requently the bottleneck o many algorithms, especially when programming transorms, where the computational complexity is only slightly larger than the data size. Eicient implementation o transorm algorithms is nontrivial and requires architecture dependent changes in order to avoid cache misses 4 (in a general CPU setup) or to avoid communication when using distributed computing. While it is probably possible to control the algorithms behavior as presented above, it is non-trivial to distribute the data between dierent processing units while avoiding duplication and communication issues. In this subsection, we present a variant o the algorithm which is easily parallelized on all architectures and where the memory access pattern is as parallelization riendly as possible. The algorithm, as it is described in 4, has only one core operation: adding a complete shited time row. It is the shit operation which makes the data transer and memory management o the algorithm challenging, and thereore we wish to eliminate shits rom the algorithm. In order to do that, we can Fourier transorm the time axis. This makes the shit operation become a multiplication with a shit vector which is the Fourier transorm o a shited delta unction. In this version, all additions are o numbers rom the same (Fourier transormed) time coordinate. Thereore, we can assign dierent parts o the (Fourier transormed) time axis to dierent processing units, and consequently reduce the need or shared memory or data transport. At the end, we need to Fourier transorm back the time axis. We call this algorithm FFT FDMT and it is summarized in Algorithm. Tracking the data in this algorithm, we can see that there are only two global steps and that they are both transpose operations o the data. To perorm all other steps o the algorithm we need only to access memory that is not larger than one row or one column o the 4 In modern computers, the astest memory buer is the L1 cache. An access to a value that is not stored in the L1 cache causes a memory read rom slower storage media such as L cache or the RAM memory, and is sometimes called a cache miss.

7 Fast discrete Dispersion Measure Transorm 7 input. Since present L1 cache architectures can contain more than a typical rowor column o data, the algorithm can be computing-power limited. The run-time o this algorithm on any machine is comparable to the run-time o two dimensional convolution, because o the similar number o operations and data access patterns. We note that in the basic preparation o radio data, one oten applies Fourier transorms (or example, when applying ilters or screening or radio requency intererences). Thereore, i we have the computational ability to prepare the input table rom the raw data, FFT FDMT is also easible. Algorithm The FFT FDMT Algorithm Input: I(, t) input matrix (possibly packed), t axis is continuous in memory. Output: Packed dispersion measure scores arranged in a two dimensional table A max (t, t) where t represents the dispersion min measure axis. 1: Initiate the table by t (t, t) = I(,t+i) i=0 + max min N A : Initiate the shit vector V( t 0, T) = F(δ( T))( t 0 ) where δ(x) is a vector containing one at position x and zeros everywhere else, F is the FFT operator, and t 0 is the index o the Fourier transormed time axis. 3: Fourier transorm the time axis B +δ ( t, t) = F(A +δ (:, t)) 4: Transpose the data. ater this action, the requency and t axes should be continuous in memory, time axis should be distributed across all computing units. 5: or t 0 in the range [0,N t] do 6: or i in the range [1,log ] do 7: or in the range [ min, max] with steps i δ do 8: = + i δ 9: 1 = 10: C, = : t max(i, ) = N 0 (+ i δ ) min max 1: or t in the range [0, t max(i, )] do 13: t 1 = C, t 14: B ( t 0, t) = B 1 ( t 0, t 1 )+B 1 ( t 0, t t 1 )V( t 0, t 1 ) 15: end or 16: end or 17: end or 18: end or 19: Transpose the data back. Now, time is again continous in memory. 0: Perorm inverse Fourier transorm on the time axis. A max min ( t, t) = F 1 (B max min (:, t)) 5.1. Comments on the Implementation o the FFT-FDMT algorithm The FFT-FDMT algorithm is designed to increase the amount o computation per cache replacement. To completely optimize the algorithm or this property, we have to consider special implementation details like cache size and processing units communication geometry. Though important to an eicient implementation o the algorithm, these details are considered out o scope or this paper as they are architecture dependent. We note that allthedetailsdiscussedin 4.arevalidalsoortheFFT- FDMT version, except or the changes listed below. Machine word utilization: The long integer data type is the optimal choice or the regular FDMT algorithm in order to ully utilize the machine word capability. In the Fourier transormed version o the algorithm, we have to use the complex loating point data type. Using the loating point data type, we have to leave unused the bits o the exponent ield, and leave some more bits unused to retain the loating point precision needed to perorm the Fourier transorm operations. Furthermore, some architectures such as GPUs, have a clear optimization preerence or the 3 bit loating point data type. However, it is possible to pack another algorithm instance in the complex ield o the input vector. Since the result o the FDMT algorithm is real (as a sum o real numbers), packing another input to the imaginary part o the input is possible. The imaginary part o the result will be the second algorithm instance. Pulse proile: In addition to the ability to test several pulse proiles per FDMT operation, as explained in 4., we can urther exploit the use o the Fourier transormed timedomain. Ithepulsewidthisslightlylargerthanone bin, reducing the computational load by binning loses inormation. Instead, we can eectively apply a lowpass ilter on the time axis by either keeping less (timedomain) requencies or multiplying with a ilter. This can be both more sensitive than binning the time axis and more eicient than having a high sampling rate. Handling Large dispersion measures: I the maximum dispersion broadens the pulse to more than one time bin per requency bin, the initialization phase o the algorithm inlates the data rom size N t to size N (note that the use o N >> is losing sensitivity, and thereore this part is not considered a crucial part o the algorithm). The partial sum operation o the initialization phase is equivalent to an application o a low-pass ilter on the time axis. This allows natural reduction o computation and memory by saving a dierential amount o Fouriered time bins or dierent t s. This can be used in the case o large dispersion measures to reduce the algorithm s complexity rom N N t log ( ) to N t log ( N ). Zero padding: Since convolution is a cyclical operation, all the shits done in this algorithm are cyclical shits. Thereore, we have to pad the time axis with N zeros prior to the Fourier transorm. This operation can increase by a actor o two the complexity o the algorithm i N = N t. To avoid this we can choose N t >> N. This is usually possible i the size o the input table is not too close to the maximum memory (or cache) capacity o the machine used. 6. RUN TIME AND BENCHMARKING Accurate benchmarking o algorithms should use a mature code, and contain architecture dependent adaptations. However, it is important to demonstrate that the code we present, running on a single standard CPU, is competitive with the brute orce dedispersion implementations on GPU s. Thereore, we provide a simple bench-

8 8 Zackay & Oek mark or the provided code. The benchmark we use is the run-time o perorming FDMT on data with the ollowing properties: = 10, N t = 5 16 and N = 10. This volume o input is similar to the one used in the toy observation deined in (Barsdell et al. 01; Magro et al. 011), = 8, N t = 19 and N = 500. Although, we modiied the partition between,n t, and increased N d by a actor o two 5. The run-time we achieve on this data is 3.5 seconds, on a standard Intel Core i processor. For example, these numbers can represent a real time dedispersion o 8 seconds o input data with 40MHz bandwidth and 104 dispersions. To get this benchmark, we packive instances othe algorithmto the 64 bit machine word, allocating 1 bits to each instance. The resulting packed data has dimensions N t = 16, = 10, and serves as input to the FDMT implementation. Using this scheme, we ind that our run-time is already shorter than that o the state o the art brute orce implementations on GPU s reported in (Barsdell et al. 01; Magro et al. 011). A comparison between the run-times is shown in Table. 7. BRIDGING THE GAP BETWEEN COHERENT AND INCOHERENT DEDISPERSION Since some interesting transient sources such as pulsar giant pulses are in the regime 1 << < N d, it is o importance to ind a easible and sensitive algorithm or their exact dedispersion. Coherent dedispersion was, until now, the only sensitive alternative. The noise power summed when searching or a pulse that is dispersed with a dispersion measure d is +N d. (3) The noise power summed when searching or a nondispersedpulseisn p, andthereorethelargestdispersion tolerable or sensitive pulse detection satisies N d =. (33) Thereore, or sensitive detection, the number o dispersion measure trials we need to process is N d. (34) The convolution operation perormed or coherent dedispersion can be eiciently calculated with Fourier transormsosizen d,andthereorethecomplexityocoherent dedispersion is: C coherent = N d N s log (N d ). (35) Noting that the computational complexity o coherent dedispersion scales with N d / and that o incoherent dedispersion scales with N d /Np, we see that using coherent dedispersion is not computationally eicient or resolved pulses (i.e > 1). 5 This is a more realistic choice, since using large N > usually looses sensitivity (see ), and the number o requencies is usually larger than Hybrid algorithm or dedispersion In order to have both the detection sensitivity o coherent dedispersion and the computational complexity o FDMT, we propose the ollowing solution: Coherently dedisperse the raw signal with coarse trial dispersion values (with steps δd), and then apply STFT and absolute value squared, ollowed by FDMT with the maximal dispersion being the next coarse-trial coherent dedispersion. This process ensures that the FDMT will not lose sensitivity, relative to coherent dedispersion. We denote by N δd the number o bins o length τ that a delta unction pulse will spread upon when dispersed by δd: N δd = 4.15δd( min max)ms (36) τ As shown in, in order to retain sensitivity the maximal dispersion residual to be processed by the ollowing FDMT must be bounded rom above by N δd = N p (37) Thereore, the number o trial dispersions we need to coherently dedisperse is N coherent = N d Np. (38) This process is approaching maximum sensitivity, and its complexity is: C hybrid = N d Np N s (log (N d )+log ( ))+ (39) + N dn s + N dn s log (). Simpliying, we get the computational complexity or detection o a pulse o length : C hybrid = N dn s (+log (N d)+log ( )). (40) This complexity is near optimal, because the number o uncorrelated scores is N dn s N p, which is only a logarithmic actor smaller than the computational complexity. Thereore, there is not much room or urther reduction o computational complexity. The algorithm is summarized in Algorithm 3. Algorithm 3 Coherent hybrid FDMT dedispersion algorithm Input: Antenna voltage series x(t). Output: Score table or all dispersions d < N d with steps and all exit times t 0 < N s with steps. 1: or dispersion d 0 in the range [0,d max] in steps o Np d N max d do : Create the ) signal y(t) by applying the ilter Ĥ d0 () = exp( πid0 to x(t). + 3: Apply STFT with block size on y(t), to obtain I(t,). 4: Apply FDMT to I, with maximal t max =, and output the partial result A max (d 0 + d,t 0 ) or d < N p with steps min, and t 0 in the range [0,N s] with steps. 5: end or

9 Fast discrete Dispersion Measure Transorm 9 Table Runtime comparison This work Magro et al. (011) Barsdell et al. (01) Machine used Intel Core i Tesla C1060 GPU Tesla C1060 GPU Programming language Python (anaconda + accelerate) C C Number o instances packed Runtime 3.5s 4.8s.1s,N t(total),n d 10,5 16, 10 8, 19,500 8, 19,500 N tn d Algorithm used FDMT (non-fft version) Brute orce Brute orce Algorithm theoretical complexity N t +N tn d log ( ) N tn d N tn d Note. The FDMT algorithm has a dierent computational complexity scaling than the brute-orce dedispersion it is compared to. Even with standard CPU s and with a high-level programming language, the FDMT implementation we present here is aster than existing GPU implementations o brute orce dedispersion. 7.. Implications Using this algorithm, it is possible to perorm blind searchesorpulseswithdurationinthe1µs 1msregime (whichimplies = orstandardsearches). Together with the low computational complexity o FDMT, this can be eiciently employed in blind searches or FRBs and giant pulses, both reducing the computational load, and increasing sensitivity. 8. FDMT FOR RADIO INTERFEROMETERS In this section, we analyze the complexity o blind searches o short astrophysical signals with radio intererometers using the FDMT. We irst calculate the computational and communication complexity o applying the FDMT algorithm ater the imaging operation. Aterwards, we oer a way to reduce the communication complexity by applying the FDMT algorithm ater the correlator operation and beore the imaging operation. We show that in principle, using our scheme, it is possible to use modern radio intererometers to detect and locate short astrophysical pulses in real-time without the knowledge o the dispersion measure. We start by introducing some additional notation. In the scenario o a blind dispersed pulse search with a radio intererometer, we have signals o several telescopes. We denote the raw voltage signal rom the j th telescope by x j. We urther denote by N a the number o antennas, and by N l the number o distinct locations in the sky, or pixels, in the optimal image resolution o the intererometer. The desired statistic that we need to calculate or eicient detection is given by: S(t 0,p x,p y ) = t=t+n p t=t 0 N (x i H)(t+u i (p x,p y )), (41) i=0 whereu i (p x,p y ) representsthe time delayothe signalat antenna i, H is the dedispersion ilter needed to be convolved with to correct or dispersion, and represents convolution. We wish to calculate this score or all combinations o sky positions (which we denote their number by N l ), dispersions N d, and start times Ns. Thereore, the number o calculated scores is N ln sn d N p. We estimate the number o computations required by using general modern radio intererometer parameters such as: ν = 100MHz, t d = 0.1s, t p = 0.1ms. Using N a = 300 antennas o diameter 10m, spread out to a maximal baseline o 10km. N l = 10 6, N s = 10 8, = 10 4, N d = 10 7 we get scores per second, which requires a computing power o 10TFlop/s to process. The computational requirement o the solution we propose in the next section is only logarithmically larger than this computation rate. Thereore, it is easible with current acilities to perorm a blind search using modern radio intererometers. For example, the computing acility o the Australian Commonwealth Scientiic and Industrial Research Organisation 6 (known as CSIRO) has computing power equivalent to 60 TFlop/s The standard approaches to pulse blind search with intererometers There are two existing approaches to blind search intererometry. The irst is to add antennas incoherently and then dedisperse. This process loses the angular resolution and reduces the sensitivity by a actor o N. However, this is considered to be computationally easible, and it is sensitive to the intererometer s entire ield o view. The second approach is to beam-orm and dedisperse, i.e or every searched location (p x,p y ), shit all the signals rom all antennas with the correct shit or position (p x,p y ), add them up, and perorm dedispersion. To mitigate the computational load o this process, it is custom to use only a small subset o all N l sky locations at a time, considerably reducing the overall survey speed o the instrument. Another possibility is to use a combination o both approaches by dividing the intererometers to closely packed stations, beam-orming all stations to a subset o all possible directions, and then incoherently adding the stations. All methods trade the computational un-easibility with a signiicant sensitivity reduction. A consideration o those approaches can be ound in (van Leeuwen & Stappers 010). 8.. The proposed solution First, we quickly review the standard imaging process o intererometry, using the approximations o lat sky and short observation. Assuming there is no dispersion, Taken rom the Top500 website,

10 10 Zackay & Oek the desired score is t=t 0+ N S(t 0,p x,p y ) = x j (t+u j (p x,p y )) t=t 0 j=0 max N = ˆx j (t 0,)exp( πiu j (p x,p y )) = min j=0 = max N = min j,k=0 ˆx j (t 0,)ˆx k (t 0,) exp( πi(u j (p x,p y ) u k (p x,p y ))), (4) denoting by ˆx the Fourier transorm o x. To eiciently calculate this score or every pixel p x,p y, it is useul to use the relation u j (p x,p y ) u k (p x,p y ) (L j L k ) (p x,p y ), (43) denoting by L j the two dimensional location o antenna j on the plane (under the approximation o having all antennas on the same plane). Now, we can calculate the score at all positions (p x,p y ) at the same time, by a two dimensional ourier transorm o the array: Ŝ(t 0,p u,p v ) = j,k, ˆx j (t 0,)ˆx k (t 0,)1((L j L k ),(p u,p v )) (44) S(t 0,p x,p y ) = F 1 (Ŝ(t 0,p u,p v )), (45) where 1((a,b),(c,d)) is equal to one i (a,b) = (c,d) (to the desired approximation), and zero otherwise. The summation in Equation 44 is a sum o squares. This means that coherent dedispersion operations must be perormed beore correlating 8, because the imaging process calculates the sum o square absolute values o requencies. Incorporating dedispersion into this, we can see that the block size we used earlier is transormed in this ramework to the size o the Fourier transorm done by the correlator. As a result, the imaging process cannot be done simultaneously in all requencies, as dierent requency sets should be used or dierent dispersion measures. Naively, this means that we need to image separately at each requency, perorming many two dimensional Fourier transorm imaging operations, ollowed by an FDMT or every pixel. Denoting the complexity o the i th step o the algorithm by C i, the complexity o the coherent dedispersion + STFT o all individual antennas is ( C 1 = max 1, N ) d N a N s (log (N d )+log ( )). (46) The complexity correlating all pairs o antennas is ( C = max 1, N ) d Na (N a 1) N s. (47) 8 The process o calculating ˆx i (t 0,)ˆx j (t 0,) is reerred to as correlating in the literature, and is calculated by a computing inrastructure usually called the correlator. The complexity o the imaging process is C 3 = N l log (N l ) N sn d. (48) The complexity o the FDMT algorithm (without the STFT part which was already done in this context) is C 4 = N l N s N d log (). (49) So, the total complexity o this process is C = C 1 +C +C 3 +C 4. (50) While the complexity o this process is indeed optimal, in the sense that it is only a logarithmic actor larger than the number o independant results, implementing this will result in a reduced computational eiciency. This is due to data transport between the imaging stage and the dedispersion stage. Between these stages, N ln sn d complex numbers are being transported. This could be mitigated by the act that dedispersion can be done beore the imaging operation, i the condition ( max min )(u i (p u,p v ) u j (p u,p v )) < 1 (51) holds 9. I the band is wide, this condition will not hold orpairsoarawayantennas. Inthiscase, it isnecessary to split the requencies into sub-bands that are narrow enough to maintain Condition 51. Since the FDMT s input and output dimensions have the same size, the communication complexity o the proposed solution is N a(n a 1)N sn d, which should (i Na << N l ) make the algorithm s run-time be computation limited, and thus easible. Another interesting point, is that i we are in the regimeon <, thenthefdmt isvolumeshrinking, and perorming it only ater the imaging process will result in excessive computation in the imaging stage. This scenario is sometimes plausible, or example, when looking or pulsars in a globular cluster, where we sometimes have a relatively good guess o the dispersion measure, or i we are using the choice o > N d (with some sacriice o sensitivity, i > ), This process is summarized in Algorithm 4. 9 sometimes, i the Condition 51 doesn t hold, the resulting image is said to suer rom a chromatic aberration.

11 Fast discrete Dispersion Measure Transorm 11 Algorithm 4 Finding short pulses with intererometers Input: Antenna voltage series Output: S(d,t 0,p x,p y) or every time, dispersion, and sky location. Standard choice o is. N d 1: or dispersion d 0 in the range [0,N d N d ] in steps o do : or antenna index i. do 3: Create the signal x i by convolving the i th antenna signal with the dedispersion ilter with index d 0. 4: Apply STFT with block size o on the signal x i, to obtain ˆx i 5: end or 6: or every pair o antennas i,j calculate ˆx d i ˆxd j do 7: or each populated point on the Ŝ(t 0,,p u,p v) matrix do 8: Generate the time vs. requency map o all the requencies 10 that enter into the same cell (p u,p v). 9: Apply FDMT with maximal N d = N 10: end or 11: Data transpose operation, each processing unit now holds all the p u,p v Ŝ(t 0,d,p u,p v) cells, or the same d,t 0. 1: or each dispersion d < N and each time t 0 do 13: Perorm two dimensional inverse Fourier transorm to calculate S(t 0,d,p x,p y) = F 1 (Ŝ(t 0,d,p u,p v)) 14: I or some point, the power is statistically signiicant. 15: end or 16: end or 17: end or 9. CONCLUSION We present the FDMT algorithm, that perorms exact incoherent dedispersion transorm with the complexity o N t log ( ). We show that regular implementation tricks o the trade can be combined with the FDMT algorithm to achieve signiicant computation speedup. We also present a variant o the FDMT algorithm that is slightly more computationally intensive, but concentrates all memory access operations to two global transpose operations, and might present urther speedup on massively parallel architectures such as GPUs. We show that the FDMT algorithm dominates all other known algorithms or incoherent dedispersion and has comparable complexity to the signal processing operations required to generate its input data. Thereore, we conclude that incoherent dedispersion can now be considered a nonissue or uture surveys. We provide implementations o the FDMT algorithm in high level programming languages, with a aster runtime than the state o the art implementations o brute-orce dedispersion on GPUs. We urther present an algorithm that bridges the gap between coherent and incoherent dedispersion, and show that the computational complexity o this algorithm is orders o magnitude lower than that o coherent dedispersion or pulses o resolvable duration. Using this algorithm, it will be possible to perorm blind searches or FRBs and giant pulse emitting pulsars with the sensitivity o coherent dedispersion searches. Last, we compute the operation count or a blind search o short astrophysical searches with modern radio intererometers and arrive to the conclusion that it is computationally easible using existing acilities. BZ would like to express his deep thank to Gregg Halinnan or introducing him the problem o dedispersion. The authors would like to express their thanks to Avishay Gal-Yam, Shrinivas Kulkarni, Matthew Bailes, David Kaplan, Ora Zackay and Gil Cohen or their useul comments and advice regrading the paper. E.O.O. is incumbent o the Arye Dissentshik career development chair and is grateul to support by grants rom the Willner Family Leadership Institute Ilan Gluzman (Secaucus NJ), Israeli Ministry o Science, Israel Science Foundation, Minerva and the I-CORE Program o the Planning and Budgeting Committee and The Israel Science Foundation. REFERENCES Barsdell, B. R., Bailes, M., Barnes, D. G., & Fluke, C. J. 01, MNRAS, 4, 379 Brady, Martin L. A ast discrete approximation algorithm or the Radon transorm. SIAM Journal on Computing 7, no. 1 (1998): Clarke, N., Macquart, J.-P., & Trott, C. 013, ApJS, 05, 4 Clarke, N., D Addario, L., Navarro, R., & Trinh, J. 014, Journal o Astronomical Instrumentation, 3, Gotz, W. A., and H. J. Druckmuller. A ast digital Radon transorm. An eicient means or evaluating the Hough transorm. Pattern Recognition 9, no. 4 (1996): Manchester, R. N., Lyne, A. G., D Amico, N., et al. 1996, MNRAS, 79, 135 Magro, A., Karastergiou, A., Salvini, S., et al. 011, MNRAS, 417, 64 McLaughlin, M. A., & Cordes, J. M. 003, ApJ, 596, 98 Lorimer, D. R., Bailes, M., McLaughlin, M. A., Narkevic, D. J., & Craword, F. 007, Science, 318, 777 Lorimer, D. R., & Kramer, M. 01, Handbook o Pulsar Astronomy, by D. R. Lorimer, M. Kramer, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 01, Petro, E., van Straten, W., Johnston, S., et al. 014, ApJ, 789, L6 Taylor, J. H. 1974, A&AS, 15, 367 Thompson, D. R., Wagsta, K. L., Brisken, W. F., et al. 011, ApJ, 735, 98 Thornton, D., Stappers, B., Bailes, M., et al. 013, Science, 341, 53 van Leeuwen, J., & Stappers, B. W. 010, A&A, 509, A7 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS several antennas will contribute to the same cell in the U,V plane 10 Also, it is possible or certain geometric conigurations that