English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

We investigate the discrepancy pointed out by Jenkins et al. in Ref. [1]between the predictions of anisotropies of the astrophysical gravitational wave(GW) background, derived using different methods in Cusin et al. [2] and inJenkins et al. [3]. We show that this discrepancy is not due to our treatmentof galaxy clustering, contrary to the claim made in Ref. [1] and we show thatour modeling of clustering gives results in very good agreement withobservations. Furthermore we show that the power law spectrum used in Refs. [1]and [3] to describe galaxy clustering is incorrect on large scales and leads toa different scaling of the multipoles $C_\ell$. Moreover, we also explain thatthe analytic derivation of the gravitational wave background correlationfunction in Refs. [1] and [3] is mathematically ill-defined and predicts anamplitude of the angular power spectrum which depends on the (arbitrary) choiceof a non-physical cut-off.

Comment on the article "Anisotropies in the astrophysical  gravitational-wave background: The impact of black hole distributions" by  A.C. Jenkins et al. [arXiv:1810.13435]