Metadata-Version: 2.1
Name: nifty-ls
Version: 2.0.0.dev1
Summary: A fast Lomb-Scargle periodogram. It's nifty, and uses a NUFFT.
Author: Lehman Garrison, Dan Foreman-Mackey, Yuwei (Peter) Sun
License:                                  Apache License
                                    Version 2.0, January 2004
                                 http://www.apache.org/licenses/
         
            TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR USE, REPRODUCTION, AND DISTRIBUTION
         
            1. Definitions.
         
               "License" shall mean the terms and conditions for use, reproduction,
               and distribution as defined by Sections 1 through 9 of this document.
         
               "Licensor" shall mean the copyright owner or entity authorized by
               the copyright owner that is granting the License.
         
               "Legal Entity" shall mean the union of the acting entity and all
               other entities that control, are controlled by, or are under common
               control with that entity. For the purposes of this definition,
               "control" means (i) the power, direct or indirect, to cause the
               direction or management of such entity, whether by contract or
               otherwise, or (ii) ownership of fifty percent (50%) or more of the
               outstanding shares, or (iii) beneficial ownership of such entity.
         
               "You" (or "Your") shall mean an individual or Legal Entity
               exercising permissions granted by this License.
         
               "Source" form shall mean the preferred form for making modifications,
               including but not limited to software source code, documentation
               source, and configuration files.
         
               "Object" form shall mean any form resulting from mechanical
               transformation or translation of a Source form, including but
               not limited to compiled object code, generated documentation,
               and conversions to other media types.
         
               "Work" shall mean the work of authorship, whether in Source or
               Object form, made available under the License, as indicated by a
               copyright notice that is included in or attached to the work
               (an example is provided in the Appendix below).
         
               "Derivative Works" shall mean any work, whether in Source or Object
               form, that is based on (or derived from) the Work and for which the
               editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications
               represent, as a whole, an original work of authorship. For the purposes
               of this License, Derivative Works shall not include works that remain
               separable from, or merely link (or bind by name) to the interfaces of,
               the Work and Derivative Works thereof.
         
               "Contribution" shall mean any work of authorship, including
               the original version of the Work and any modifications or additions
               to that Work or Derivative Works thereof, that is intentionally
               submitted to Licensor for inclusion in the Work by the copyright owner
               or by an individual or Legal Entity authorized to submit on behalf of
               the copyright owner. For the purposes of this definition, "submitted"
               means any form of electronic, verbal, or written communication sent
               to the Licensor or its representatives, including but not limited to
               communication on electronic mailing lists, source code control systems,
               and issue tracking systems that are managed by, or on behalf of, the
               Licensor for the purpose of discussing and improving the Work, but
               excluding communication that is conspicuously marked or otherwise
               designated in writing by the copyright owner as "Not a Contribution."
         
               "Contributor" shall mean Licensor and any individual or Legal Entity
               on behalf of whom a Contribution has been received by Licensor and
               subsequently incorporated within the Work.
         
            2. Grant of Copyright License. Subject to the terms and conditions of
               this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual,
               worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable
               copyright license to reproduce, prepare Derivative Works of,
               publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute the
               Work and such Derivative Works in Source or Object form.
         
            3. Grant of Patent License. Subject to the terms and conditions of
               this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual,
               worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable
               (except as stated in this section) patent license to make, have made,
               use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer the Work,
               where such license applies only to those patent claims licensable
               by such Contributor that are necessarily infringed by their
               Contribution(s) alone or by combination of their Contribution(s)
               with the Work to which such Contribution(s) was submitted. If You
               institute patent litigation against any entity (including a
               cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that the Work
               or a Contribution incorporated within the Work constitutes direct
               or contributory patent infringement, then any patent licenses
               granted to You under this License for that Work shall terminate
               as of the date such litigation is filed.
         
            4. Redistribution. You may reproduce and distribute copies of the
               Work or Derivative Works thereof in any medium, with or without
               modifications, and in Source or Object form, provided that You
               meet the following conditions:
         
               (a) You must give any other recipients of the Work or
                   Derivative Works a copy of this License; and
         
               (b) You must cause any modified files to carry prominent notices
                   stating that You changed the files; and
         
               (c) You must retain, in the Source form of any Derivative Works
                   that You distribute, all copyright, patent, trademark, and
                   attribution notices from the Source form of the Work,
                   excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of
                   the Derivative Works; and
         
               (d) If the Work includes a "NOTICE" text file as part of its
                   distribution, then any Derivative Works that You distribute must
                   include a readable copy of the attribution notices contained
                   within such NOTICE file, excluding those notices that do not
                   pertain to any part of the Derivative Works, in at least one
                   of the following places: within a NOTICE text file distributed
                   as part of the Derivative Works; within the Source form or
                   documentation, if provided along with the Derivative Works; or,
                   within a display generated by the Derivative Works, if and
                   wherever such third-party notices normally appear. The contents
                   of the NOTICE file are for informational purposes only and
                   do not modify the License. You may add Your own attribution
                   notices within Derivative Works that You distribute, alongside
                   or as an addendum to the NOTICE text from the Work, provided
                   that such additional attribution notices cannot be construed
                   as modifying the License.
         
               You may add Your own copyright statement to Your modifications and
               may provide additional or different license terms and conditions
               for use, reproduction, or distribution of Your modifications, or
               for any such Derivative Works as a whole, provided Your use,
               reproduction, and distribution of the Work otherwise complies with
               the conditions stated in this License.
         
            5. Submission of Contributions. Unless You explicitly state otherwise,
               any Contribution intentionally submitted for inclusion in the Work
               by You to the Licensor shall be under the terms and conditions of
               this License, without any additional terms or conditions.
               Notwithstanding the above, nothing herein shall supersede or modify
               the terms of any separate license agreement you may have executed
               with Licensor regarding such Contributions.
         
            6. Trademarks. This License does not grant permission to use the trade
               names, trademarks, service marks, or product names of the Licensor,
               except as required for reasonable and customary use in describing the
               origin of the Work and reproducing the content of the NOTICE file.
         
            7. Disclaimer of Warranty. Unless required by applicable law or
               agreed to in writing, Licensor provides the Work (and each
               Contributor provides its Contributions) on an "AS IS" BASIS,
               WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or
               implied, including, without limitation, any warranties or conditions
               of TITLE, NON-INFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY, or FITNESS FOR A
               PARTICULAR PURPOSE. You are solely responsible for determining the
               appropriateness of using or redistributing the Work and assume any
               risks associated with Your exercise of permissions under this License.
         
            8. Limitation of Liability. In no event and under no legal theory,
               whether in tort (including negligence), contract, or otherwise,
               unless required by applicable law (such as deliberate and grossly
               negligent acts) or agreed to in writing, shall any Contributor be
               liable to You for damages, including any direct, indirect, special,
               incidental, or consequential damages of any character arising as a
               result of this License or out of the use or inability to use the
               Work (including but not limited to damages for loss of goodwill,
               work stoppage, computer failure or malfunction, or any and all
               other commercial damages or losses), even if such Contributor
               has been advised of the possibility of such damages.
         
            9. Accepting Warranty or Additional Liability. While redistributing
               the Work or Derivative Works thereof, You may choose to offer,
               and charge a fee for, acceptance of support, warranty, indemnity,
               or other liability obligations and/or rights consistent with this
               License. However, in accepting such obligations, You may act only
               on Your own behalf and on Your sole responsibility, not on behalf
               of any other Contributor, and only if You agree to indemnify,
               defend, and hold each Contributor harmless for any liability
               incurred by, or claims asserted against, such Contributor by reason
               of your accepting any such warranty or additional liability.
         
            END OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS
         
            APPENDIX: How to apply the Apache License to your work.
         
               To apply the Apache License to your work, attach the following
               boilerplate notice, with the fields enclosed by brackets "[]"
               replaced with your own identifying information. (Don't include
               the brackets!)  The text should be enclosed in the appropriate
               comment syntax for the file format. We also recommend that a
               file or class name and description of purpose be included on the
               same "printed page" as the copyright notice for easier
               identification within third-party archives.
         
            Copyright 2024 Flatiron Institute
         
            Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
            you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
            You may obtain a copy of the License at
         
                http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
         
            Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
            distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
            WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
            See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
            limitations under the License.
         
Project-URL: Homepage, https://github.com/flatironinstitute.org/nifty-ls
Requires-Python: >=3.9
Requires-Dist: numpy
Requires-Dist: finufft>=2.3
Provides-Extra: cuda11
Requires-Dist: cufinufft; extra == "cuda11"
Requires-Dist: cupy-cuda11x; extra == "cuda11"
Provides-Extra: cuda12
Requires-Dist: cufinufft; extra == "cuda12"
Requires-Dist: cupy-cuda12x; extra == "cuda12"
Provides-Extra: cuda
Requires-Dist: cufinufft; extra == "cuda"
Requires-Dist: cupy-cuda12x; extra == "cuda"
Description-Content-Type: text/markdown

# nifty-ls
A fast Lomb-Scargle periodogram. It's nifty, and uses a NUFFT!

[![PyPI](https://img.shields.io/pypi/v/nifty-ls)](https://pypi.org/project/nifty-ls/) [![Tests](https://github.com/flatironinstitute/nifty-ls/actions/workflows/tests.yml/badge.svg)](https://github.com/flatironinstitute/nifty-ls/actions/workflows/tests.yml) [![pre-commit.ci status](https://results.pre-commit.ci/badge/github/flatironinstitute/nifty-ls/main.svg)](https://results.pre-commit.ci/latest/github/flatironinstitute/nifty-ls/main) [![Jenkins Tests](https://jenkins.flatironinstitute.org/buildStatus/icon?job=nifty-ls%2Fmain&subject=Jenkins%20Tests)](https://jenkins.flatironinstitute.org/job/nifty-ls/job/main/) [![arXiv](https://img.shields.io/badge/arXiv-2409.08090-b31b1b.svg)](https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.08090)

## Overview
The Lomb-Scargle periodogram, used for identifying periodicity in irregularly-spaced
observations, is useful but computationally expensive. However, it can be
phrased mathematically as a pair of non-uniform FFTs (NUFFTs). This allows us to
leverage Flatiron Institute's [finufft](https://github.com/flatironinstitute/finufft/)
package, which is really fast! It also enables GPU (CUDA) support and is
several orders of magnitude more accurate than
[Astropy's Lomb Scargle](https://docs.astropy.org/en/stable/timeseries/lombscargle.html)
with default settings.

## Background
The [Press & Rybicki (1989) method](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1989ApJ...338..277P/abstract) for Lomb-Scargle poses the computation as four weighted trigonometric sums that are solved with a pair of FFTs by "extirpolation" to an equi-spaced grid. Specifically, the sums are of the form:

```math
\begin{align}
S_k &= \sum_{j=1}^M h_j \sin(2 \pi f_k t_j), \\
C_k &= \sum_{j=1}^M h_j \cos(2 \pi f_k t_j),
\end{align}
```


where the $k$ subscript runs from 0 to $N$, the number of frequency bins, $f_k$ is the cyclic frequency of bin $k$, $t_j$ are the observation times (of which there are $M$), and $h_j$ are the weights.

The key observation for our purposes is that this is exactly what a non-uniform FFT computes! Specifically, a "type-1" (non-uniform to uniform) complex NUFFT in the [finufft convention](https://finufft.readthedocs.io/en/latest/math.html) computes:

```math
g_k = \sum_{j=1}^M h_j e^{i k t_j}.
```

The complex and real parts of this transform are Press & Rybicki's $S_k$ and $C_k$, with some adjustment for cyclic/angular frequencies, domain of $k$, real vs. complex transform, etc. finufft has a particularly fast and accurate spreading kernel ("exponential of semicircle") that it uses instead of Press & Rybicki's extirpolation.

There is some pre- and post-processing of $S_k$ and $C_k$ to compute the periodogram, which can become the bottleneck because finufft is so fast. This package also optimizes and parallelizes those computations.

### Fast $\chi^2$ Method (`nterms > 1`)
[Palmer (2009)](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...695..496P/abstract) extends the Lomb-Scargle model with a specified number of harmonics (called `nterms` in [Astropy](https://docs.astropy.org/en/v7.1.0/timeseries/lombscargle.html#additional-arguments)). This is implemented as a $\chi^2$ minimization at each frequency, requiring solving $N$ small matrix systems. This method is also amenable to FINUFFT acceleration, as the terms in these matrices can be computed with a NUFFT.

Because FINUFFT is so fast, the matrix assembly and linear‐algebra solve can be the primary bottlenecks of the fast $\chi^2$ method. These routines and other computational steps have been optimized and parallelized in nifty-ls.

## Installation
### From PyPI
For CPU support:

```console
$ pip install nifty-ls
```

For GPU (CUDA) support:

```console
$ pip install nifty-ls[cuda]
```

The default is to install with CUDA 12 support; one can use `nifty-ls[cuda11]` instead for CUDA 11 support (installs `cupy-cuda11x`).

### From source
The main requirement for a source build is a C++17 compiler.

First, clone the repo and `cd` to the repo root:
```console
$ git clone https://www.github.com/flatironinstitute/nifty-ls
$ cd nifty-ls
```

Then, to install with CPU support:

```console
$ pip install .
```

To install with GPU (CUDA) support:

```console
$ pip install .[cuda]
```

or `.[cuda11]` for CUDA 11. CUDA support is provided by cupy and cufinufft; nifty-ls does not have
its own CUDA requirements.

For development (with automatic rebuilds enabled by default in `pyproject.toml`):
```console
$ pip install nanobind scikit-build-core setuptools_scm ninja
$ pip install -e . --group dev --no-build-isolation
```

Developers may also be interested in setting these keys in `pyproject.toml`:

```toml
[tool.scikit-build]
cmake.build-type = "Debug"
cmake.verbose = true
install.strip = false
```

### For best performance
You may wish to compile and install finufft and cufinufft yourself so they will be
built with optimizations for your hardware. To do so, first install nifty-ls, then
follow the Python installation instructions for
[finufft](https://finufft.readthedocs.io/en/latest/install.html#building-a-python-interface-to-a-locally-compiled-library)
and
[cufinufft](https://finufft.readthedocs.io/en/latest/install_gpu.html#python-interface),
configuring the libraries as desired. Note that (cu)finufft is not bundled with nifty-ls, but is instead used through its Python interface.

nifty-ls can likewise be built from source following the instructions above for
best performance, but most of the heavy computations are offloaded to (cu)finufft,
so the performance benefit is minimal.

## Usage
### From Astropy
Importing `nifty_ls` makes nifty-ls available via `method="fastnifty"` in
Astropy's LombScargle module. The name is prefixed with "fast" as it's part
of the fast family of methods that assume a regularly-spaced frequency grid.

```python
import nifty_ls
from astropy.timeseries import LombScargle
frequency, power = LombScargle(t, y).autopower(method="fastnifty")
```

For `nterms > 1`, pass the `"fastnifty_chi2"` method:

```python
frequency_chi2, power_chi2 = LombScargle(t, y, nterms=2).autopower(method="fastnifty_chi2")
```

<details>
<summary>Full example</summary>

```python
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
import nifty_ls
import numpy as np
from astropy.timeseries import LombScargle

rng = np.random.default_rng(seed=123)
N = 1000
t = rng.uniform(0, 100, size=N)
y = np.sin(50 * t) + 1 + rng.poisson(size=N)

frequency, power = LombScargle(t, y).autopower(method='fastnifty')

nterms = 4
frequency_chi2, power_chi2 = LombScargle(t, y, nterms=nterms).autopower(method='fastnifty_chi2')

plt.figure(figsize=(12, 5))

# Plot 1: Single component signal
plt.subplot(1, 2, 1)
plt.plot(frequency, power, label='nifty-ls (single component)')
plt.xlabel('Frequency (cycles per unit time)')
plt.ylabel('Power')
plt.title('Single Component Signal')
plt.legend()

# Plot 2: Two component signal with chi2
plt.subplot(1, 2, 2)
plt.plot(frequency_chi2, power_chi2, label='nifty-ls Chi2 (multi-component)', color='red')
plt.xlabel('Frequency (cycles per unit time)')
plt.ylabel('Power')
plt.title('Multi-Component Signal (nterms=4)')
plt.legend()

plt.tight_layout()
plt.show()
```  
</details>

To use the CUDA (cufinufft) backend, pass the appropriate argument via `method_kws`:

```python
frequency, power = LombScargle(t, y).autopower(method="fastnifty", method_kws=dict(backend="cufinufft"))
```

Likewise, for `nterms > 1`:

```python
frequency_chi2, power_chi2 = LombScargle(t, y, nterms=2).autopower(method="fastnifty_chi2", method_kws=dict(backend="cufinufft_chi2"))
```

In many cases, accelerating your periodogram is as simple as setting the `method`
in your Astropy Lomb Scargle code! More advanced usage, such as computing multiple
periodograms in parallel, should go directly through the nifty-ls interface.


### From nifty-ls (native interface)

nifty-ls has its own interface that offers more flexibility than the Astropy
interface for batched periodograms.

#### Single periodograms

A single periodogram can be computed through nifty-ls as:

```python
import nifty_ls
# with automatic frequency grid:
nifty_res = nifty_ls.lombscargle(t, y, dy)

# with automatic backend method selection:
nifty_res_chi2 = nifty_ls.lombscargle(t, y, dy, nterms=4)

# with user-specified frequency grid:
nifty_res = nifty_ls.lombscargle(t, y, dy, fmin=0.1, fmax=10, Nf=10**6)

# with user-specified backend method:
nifty_res_chi2 = nifty_ls.lombscargle(t, y, dy, Nf=10**6, nterms=4, backend='finufft_chi2')
```

<details>
<summary>Full example</summary>

```python
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
import nifty_ls
import numpy as np

rng = np.random.default_rng(seed=123)
N = 1000
t = np.sort(rng.uniform(0, 100, size=N))
y = np.sin(50 * t) + 1 + rng.poisson(size=N)

# with automatic frequency grid:
nifty_res = nifty_ls.lombscargle(t, y)

# Automatically selects the backend method based on the available options and the specified nterms:
nifty_res_chi2 = nifty_ls.lombscargle(t, y, dy=None, nterms=4)

# with user-specified frequency grid:
nifty_res = nifty_ls.lombscargle(t, y, fmin=0.1, fmax=10, Nf=10**6)

# with user-specified backend method:
nifty_res_chi2 = nifty_ls.lombscargle(t, y, dy=None, Nf=10**6, nterms=4, backend='finufft_chi2')

plt.figure(figsize=(12, 5))

# Plot 1: Finufft Grid
plt.subplot(1, 2, 1)
plt.plot(nifty_res.freq(), nifty_res.power, label='Default Grid')
plt.xlabel('Frequency (cycles per unit time)')
plt.ylabel('Power')
plt.title('Default Grid')
plt.legend()

# Plot 2: Finufft_chi2 Backend
plt.subplot(1, 2, 2)
plt.plot(nifty_res_chi2.freq(), nifty_res_chi2.power, label='Chi2 Backend', color='red')
plt.xlabel('Frequency (cycles per unit time)')
plt.ylabel('Power')
plt.title('Chi2 Backend (nterms=4)')
plt.legend()

plt.tight_layout()
plt.show()
```
</details>

#### Batched Periodograms

Batched periodograms (multiple objects with the same observation times) can be
computed as:

```python
import nifty_ls
import numpy as np

N_t = 100
N_obj = 10
Nf = 200

rng = np.random.default_rng()
t = np.sort(rng.random(N_t))
obj_freqs = rng.random(N_obj).reshape(-1,1)
y_batch = np.sin(obj_freqs * t)
dy_batch = rng.random(y_batch.shape)

batched = nifty_ls.lombscargle(t, y_batch, dy_batch, Nf=Nf)

# Similarly for Chi2 method
batched_chi2 = nifty_ls.lombscargle(t, y_batch, dy_batch, Nf=Nf, nterms=4)

print(batched.power.shape)  # (10, 200)
print(batched_chi2.power.shape)  # same: (10, 200)
```

Note that this computes multiple periodograms simultaneously on a set of time
series with the same observation times.  This approach is particularly efficient
for short time series, and/or when using the GPU.

#### Heterogeneous Batched Periodograms
Parallel processing of periodograms with different observation times ("heterogeneous batches") is supported through a separate interface called `heterobatch`. This interface dynamically dispatches individual periodograms to finufft at the C++ level with an OpenMP thread pool. Thus, it is very efficient for short or unevenly-sized periodograms.

Use `nifty_ls.lombscargle_heterobatch()` to access this functionality. For example:
```python
import nifty_ls
import numpy as np

N_t_mean = 100
N_obj = 10

rng = np.random.default_rng()

# Each t has a different length!
t_list = [np.sort(rng.random(N_t)) for N_t in rng.poisson(N_t_mean, size=N_obj)]

obj_freqs = rng.random(N_obj)
y_list = [np.sin(f * t) for (f, t) in zip(obj_freqs, t_list)]
dy_list = [rng.random(t.shape) for t in t_list]

batched = nifty_ls.lombscargle_heterobatch(t_list, y_list, dy_list)

# list of length 10 of different-length power arrays
print(batched.power_list)
```

Individual periodograms in the heterobatch interface can have uniform batching; just pass a 2D `y` and `dy` array as a list element. Heterobatch also supports chi2, but not CUDA (yet).

A similar dynamic dispatch effect can be achieved with [free-threaded Python](#free-threaded-parallelism), but as the dispatch is still done in Python, it will likely not be as performant as heterobatch.

### Free-Threaded Parallelism
nifty-ls supports [free-threaded Python](https://docs.python.org/3/howto/free-threading-python.html)
since version 1.1.0. With a free-threaded build of Python, efficient parallelism over many time
series with distinct observation times can be achieved with Python threads. For example:

```python
from concurrent.futures import ThreadPoolExecutor

with ThreadPoolExecutor(max_workers=nthreads) as executor:
    futures = [
        executor.submit(nifty_ls.lombscargle, t, y, nthreads=1) for (t,y) in zip(t_values, y_values)
    ]
results = [future.result() for future in futures]
```

<details>
<summary>Full example</summary>

```python
import concurrent.futures

import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
import nifty_ls
import numpy as np

N_periodograms = 200
N_points_poisson = 10000
python_threads = 32  # "None" will use all CPUs
rng = np.random.default_rng(42)

t_values = []
y_values = []
frequencies = rng.uniform(0.1, 100.0, size=N_periodograms)

for i in range(N_periodograms):
    n_points = rng.poisson(N_points_poisson)
    t = np.sort(rng.uniform(0, 100, size=n_points))
    y = np.sin(2 * np.pi * frequencies[i] * t) + 0.1 * rng.normal(size=n_points)
    t_values.append(t)
    y_values.append(y)

with concurrent.futures.ThreadPoolExecutor(max_workers=python_threads) as executor:
    futures = [
        executor.submit(nifty_ls.lombscargle, t, y, nthreads=1) for (t,y) in zip(t_values, y_values)
    ]

results = [future.result() for future in futures]

fig, axes = plt.subplots(N_periodograms, 1, figsize=(6, 2 * N_periodograms), constrained_layout=True)
for i in range(N_periodograms):
    axes[i].plot(results[i].freq(), results[i].power)
    axes[i].set_title(f"Periodogram {i + 1}")
    axes[i].set_xlabel("Frequency")
    axes[i].set_ylabel("Power")

plt.show()
```
</details>

This approach allows you to compute multiple heterogeneous periodograms in parallel. A similar effect can be achieved with multiple processes, but this is less efficient due to the overhead of inter-process communication.

Astropy (as of version 7.1.0) does not support free-threaded Python, however. Be alert for messages printed to the interpreter that free threading is disabled due to Astropy, and remove Astropy from your environment if necessary.

Note that each nifty-ls computation may use multiple OpenMP threads internally. To avoid spawning too many threads, we recommend setting `nthreads=1` in the call to nifty-ls.


### Limitations
The code only supports frequency grids with fixed spacing; however, finufft does
support type 3 NUFFTs (non-uniform to non-uniform), which would enable arbitrary
frequency grids. It's not clear how useful this is, so it hasn't been implemented,
but please open a GitHub issue if this is of interest to you.

## Performance

Using 16 cores of an Intel Icelake CPU and a NVIDIA A100 GPU, we obtain the following performance. First, we'll look at results from a single periodogram (i.e. unbatched):

![benchmarks](doc/bench.png)

In this case, finufft is 5× faster (11× with threads) than Astropy for large transforms, and 2× faster for (very) small transforms.  Small transforms improve futher relative to Astropy with more frequency bins. (Dynamic multi-threaded dispatch of transforms is planned as a future feature which will especially benefit small $N$.)

cufinufft is 200× faster than Astropy for large $N$! The performance plateaus towards small $N$, mostly due to the overhead of sending data to the GPU and fetching the result. (Concurrent job execution on the GPU is another planned feature, which will especially help small $N$.)

Similar performance trends are observed for the $\chi^2$ method. The following results use `nterms=4` as an example:

![benchmarks](doc/bench_chi2.png)

In this case, finufft is 100× faster than Astropy's `fastchi2` method, and 300× faster with multi-threading enabled. cufinufft achieves an impressive 5600× speedup over Astropy for large $N$! However, it suffers from similar overhead for small $N$ due to data transfer costs between CPU and GPU. The performance gain being larger for the $\chi^2$ method than the standard method is partially due to the greater number of NUFFTs in this method, and partially due to the large number of small matrix operations, which nifty-ls accelerates.

The following demonstrates "batch mode", in which 10 periodograms are computed from 10 different time series with the same observation times:

![batched benchmarks](doc/bench_batch.png)

Here, the finufft single-threaded advantage is consistently 6× across problem sizes, while the multi-threaded advantage is up to 30× for large transforms.

The 200× advantage of the GPU extends to even smaller $N$ in this case, since we're sending and receiving more data at once.

We see that both multi-threaded finufft and cufinufft particularly benefit from batched transforms, as this exposes more parallelism and amortizes fixed latencies.

<!-- FUTURE: move to a readthedocs page and include the following performance plot

In contrast, the following shows "batch mode" performance for the chi-squared method under the same setting and `nterms=4`:

![batched benchmarks](doc/bench_chi2_batch.png)

Compared to the standard finufft method, the chi-squared method shows less single-thread performance gain when scaling from a single batch to multiple batches. This is because its primary bottlenecks lie in data processing tasks like matrix construction and solving linear systems, rather than the NUFFT transform itself. 

Nevertheless, multi-threaded execution achieves up to a 430× speedup, owing to the fact that computations at each frequency are independent and can be efficiently parallelized across threads.

However, due to GPU memory limitations, running cufinufft with a large batch size and number of data points (batch_size>=10 and N>=1000_000) will results in a CUDA out-of-memory error. -->

We use `FFTW_MEASURE` for finufft in these benchmarks, which improves performance a few tens of percents.

Multi-threading hurts the performance of small problem sizes; the default behavior of nifty-ls is to use fewer threads in such cases. The "multi-threaded" line uses between 1 and 16 threads.

On the CPU, nifty-ls gets its performance not only through its use of finufft, but also
by offloading the pre- and post-processing steps to compiled extensions. The extensions
enable us to do much more processing element-wise, rather than array-wise. In other words,
they enable "kernel fusion" (to borrow a term from GPU computing), increasing the compute
density.

<!-- FUTURE: the overall effect of the FFT backend is mild. In a future readthedocs site, make a section for this. Might need to revisit some of the timings, as MEASURE being slower than ESTIMATE is odd.

### FFT Backend
We use `FFTW_MEASURE` for finufft in all benchmarks described. Compared to `FFTW_ESTIMATE`, `FFTW_MEASURE` improves performance a few tens of percents.

The choice of FFT implementation also affects both plan and transform time. nifty-ls supports both FFTW3 and DUCC0 via FINUFFT:
- FFTW3 with `FFTW_MEASURE` provides the best transform performance for large or repeated workloads.
- DUCC0 avoids plan creation altogether and generally performs better than FFTW3 with `FFTW_ESTIMATE` for small to moderate problem sizes.
- However, DUCC0 may scale less efficiently for larger N, as it only supports radix passes for a limited set of factors (2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 11, 13), whereas FFTW3 supports a wider range, reducing the number of required passes.

The following benchmark results compare the performance of two FFT libraries, FFTW3 and DUCC0, in a multi-threaded setting. The benchmarks were conducted on a 64-cores Intel Icelake CPU, using a multithreading strategy based on nifty-ls’s internal multithreaded heuristic. You may wish to switch out the default FFT library (FFTW) for DUCC0. To do so, follow the Python installation instructions with the [DUCC0 config flag](https://finufft.readthedocs.io/en/latest/python.html#:~:text=pip%20install%20%2D%2Dno%2Dbinary%20finufft%20finufft%20%2D%2Dconfig%2Dsettings%3Dcmake.define.FINUFFT_USE_DUCC0%3DON%20finufft)
![FFT benchmarks](doc/FFT_bench.png) -->


## Accuracy
While we compared performance with Astropy's `fast` and `fastchi2` methods, this isn't quite fair. nifty-ls is much more accurate than Astropy `fast` and `fastchi2`!  These Astropy methods use Press & Rybicki's extirpolation approximation, trading accuracy for speed, but thanks to finufft, nifty-ls can have both.

In the figure below, we plot the median periodogram error in circles and the 99th percentile error in triangles for astropy, finufft, and cufinufft for a range of $N$ (and default $N_F \approx 12N$).

The astropy result is presented for two cases: a nominal case and a "worst case". Internally, astropy uses an FFT grid whose size is the next power of 2 above the target oversampling rate. Each jump to a new power of 2 typically yields an increase in accuracy. The "worst case", therefore, is the highest frequency that does not yield such a jump.

![](doc/accuracy.png)

Errors of $\mathcal{O}(10\%)$ or greater are common with worst-case evaluations. Errors of $\mathcal{O}(1\%)$ or greater are common in typical evaluations. nifty-ls is conservatively 6 orders of magnitude more accurate.

The reference result in the above figure comes from the "phase winding" method, which uses trigonometric identities to avoid expensive sin and cos evaluations. One can also use astropy's `fast` method or `fastchi2` method as a reference with exact evaluation enabled via `use_fft=False`, and one finds the same result. The phase winding is used because it is a few orders of magnitude faster (but still not competitive with finufft).

The following shows a similar accuracy comparison for the $\chi^2$ variants, finding similar results:

![](doc/accuracy_chi2.png)

In summary, nifty-ls is highly accurate while also giving high performance.

### Numerics

#### float32 vs float64
While 32-bit floats provide a substantial speedup for finufft and cufinufft, we generally don't recommend their use for Lomb-Scargle. The reason is the challenging [condition number](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condition_number) of the problem.  The condition number is the response in the output to a small perturbation in the input—in other words, the derivative. [It can easily be shown](https://finufft.readthedocs.io/en/latest/trouble.html) that the derivative of a NUFFT with respect to the non-uniform points is proportional to $N$, the transform length (i.e. the number of modes). In other words, errors in the observation times are amplified by $\mathcal{O}(N)$.  Since float32 has a relative error of $\mathcal{O}(10^{-7})$, transforms of length $10^5$ already suffer $\mathcal{O}(1\%)$ error. Therefore, we focus on float64 in nifty-ls, but float32 is also natively supported by all backends for adventurous users.

The condition number is also a likely contributor to the mild upward trend in error versus $N$ in the above figure, at least for finufft/cufinufft. With a relative error of $\mathcal{O}(10^{-16})$ for float64 and a transform length of $\mathcal{O}(10^{6})$, the minimum error is $\mathcal{O}(10^{-10})$.

#### Fast $\chi^2$ matrix condition number
In the $\chi^2$ backends with `nterms > 1`, users should be aware that the first few modes tend to have ill-conditioned matrices, especially when using the default frequency grid. Each matrix represents a Fourier mode and its `nterms` harmonics, and the loss of conditioning appears to represent a loss of linear independence between the harmonics because the default minimum frequency (inherited from Astropy) is so low. In other words, the harmonics are not picking up appreciably different power across the signal. Solving for the harmonic amplitudes is thus under-constrained, which can amplify differences between nifty-ls and Astropy. Most users will not notice this unless directly comparing Astropy and nifty-ls periodograms, but if you encounter this, consider using fewer `nterms` or a higher minimum frequency.

In extreme cases, the $\chi^2$ backends raise a `numpy.linalg.LinAlgError` if the matrix solve is singular or nearly singular.

## Testing
First, install from source (`pip install . --group test`). Then, from the repo root, run:

```console
$ pytest
```

Or, with uv, the previous steps can be combined as:

```console
$ uv run pytest
```

The tests are defined in the `tests/` directory, and include a mini-benchmark of
nifty-ls and Astropy, shown below:

```
❯ pytest
================================= test session starts ==================================
platform linux -- Python 3.11.11, pytest-8.4.1, pluggy-1.6.0
benchmark: 5.1.0 (defaults: timer=time.perf_counter disable_gc=True min_rounds=3 min_time=0.000005 max_time=1.0 calibration_precision=10 warmup=False warmup_iterations=100000)
rootdir: /mnt/home/lgarrison/nifty-ls/nifty-ls
configfile: pyproject.toml
plugins: benchmark-5.1.0
collected 112 items                                                                    

tests/test_freethreaded.py s                                                     [  0%]
tests/test_heterobatch.py ........................                               [ 22%]
tests/test_ls.py ............................................................... [ 78%]
..                                                                               [ 80%]
tests/test_perf.py ......................                                        [100%]


----------------------------------------- benchmark 'batched_chi2 Nf=1000': 4 tests -----------------------------------------
Name (time in ms)                                 Min                  Mean              StdDev            Rounds  Iterations
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
test_batched_chi2[cufinufft_chi2-1000]        20.8600 (1.0)         21.6833 (1.0)        1.3422 (1.0)          37           1
test_batched_chi2[finufft_chi2-1000]         164.4364 (7.88)       197.7773 (9.12)      20.1932 (15.05)         5           1
test_unbatched_chi2[finufft_chi2-1000]       387.9961 (18.60)      389.4745 (17.96)      1.4730 (1.10)          3           1
test_unbatched_chi2[cufinufft_chi2-1000]     895.2992 (42.92)    1,024.3081 (47.24)    222.7861 (165.99)        3           1
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------ benchmark 'batched_standard Nf=1000': 6 tests -------------------------------------------
Name (time in ms)                                            Min                Mean            StdDev            Rounds  Iterations
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
test_batched_standard[cufinufft-1000]                     5.6997 (1.0)        6.1075 (1.0)      0.4922 (10.87)        94           1
test_heterobatch_standard[finufft_heterobatch-1000]       9.1420 (1.60)       9.6008 (1.57)     0.2600 (5.74)         91           1
test_batched_standard[finufft-1000]                      15.9838 (2.80)      24.1990 (3.96)     4.7521 (105.00)       44           1
test_unbatched_standard[finufft-1000]                   131.9397 (23.15)    132.2553 (21.65)    0.1672 (3.69)          8           1
test_unbatched_standard[astropy-1000]                   153.7311 (26.97)    153.8238 (25.19)    0.0453 (1.0)           7           1
test_unbatched_standard[cufinufft-1000]                 265.6694 (46.61)    269.3043 (44.09)    2.4806 (54.81)         4           1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------ benchmark 'chi2_nterms4 Nf=10000': 3 tests -----------------------------------------
Name (time in ms)                                    Min                  Mean             StdDev            Rounds  Iterations
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
test_chi2_nterms4[cufinufft_chi2-10000]           8.6712 (1.0)         11.5653 (1.0)      16.2343 (82.95)        99           1
test_chi2_nterms4[finufft_chi2-10000]            11.5150 (1.33)        11.8576 (1.03)      0.1957 (1.0)          82           1
test_chi2_nterms4[astropy_fastchi2-10000]     9,186.0875 (>1000.0)  9,191.7857 (794.77)    5.7893 (29.58)         3           1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------- benchmark 'standard Nf=10000': 3 tests ---------------------------------
Name (time in ms)                     Min              Mean            StdDev            Rounds  Iterations
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
test_standard[finufft-10000]       1.9857 (1.0)      2.0048 (1.0)      0.0087 (1.0)         396           1
test_standard[cufinufft-10000]     2.5375 (1.28)     2.5875 (1.29)     0.1306 (15.02)       262           1
test_standard[astropy-10000]       5.5920 (2.82)     5.6105 (2.80)     0.0149 (1.72)        152           1
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------- benchmark 'standard Nf=100000': 3 tests -----------------------------------
Name (time in ms)                       Min               Mean            StdDev            Rounds  Iterations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
test_standard[cufinufft-100000]      3.2089 (1.0)       3.2486 (1.0)      0.0401 (1.0)         283           1
test_standard[finufft-100000]        7.6493 (2.38)      8.9735 (2.76)     1.9182 (47.82)        61           1
test_standard[astropy-100000]       49.5084 (15.43)    49.6754 (15.29)    0.0869 (2.17)         18           1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------- benchmark 'standard Nf=1000000': 3 tests -------------------------------------
Name (time in ms)                           Min                  Mean            StdDev            Rounds  Iterations
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
test_standard[cufinufft-1000000]         5.7563 (1.0)          5.8461 (1.0)      0.1300 (1.0)         118           1
test_standard[finufft-1000000]          82.1395 (14.27)       86.9484 (14.87)    3.0073 (23.12)         9           1
test_standard[astropy-1000000]       1,205.6845 (209.46)   1,206.2008 (206.33)   0.4522 (3.48)          3           1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Legend:
  Outliers: 1 Standard Deviation from Mean; 1.5 IQR (InterQuartile Range) from 1st Quartile and 3rd Quartile.
  OPS: Operations Per Second, computed as 1 / Mean
====================== 111 passed, 1 skipped in 145.63s (0:02:25) ======================

```

The results were obtained using 16 cores of an Intel Icelake CPU and 1 NVIDIA A100 GPU.
The ratio of the runtime relative to the fastest are shown in parentheses. You may obtain
very different performance on your platform! The slowest Astropy results in particular may
depend on the Numpy distribution you have installed and its trig function performance.

## Authors
nifty-ls was originally implemented by [Lehman Garrison](https://github.com/lgarrison)
based on work done by [Dan Foreman-Mackey](https://github.com/dfm) in the
[dfm/nufft-ls](https://github.com/dfm/nufft-ls) repo, with consulting from
[Alex Barnett](https://github.com/ahbarnett). [Yuwei (Peter) Sun](https://github.com/YuWei-CH)
added the chi2 functionality.


## Citation
If you use nifty-ls in an academic work, please cite our RNAAS research note:

```bibtex
@article{Garrison_2024,
  doi = {10.3847/2515-5172/ad82cd},
  url = {https://dx.doi.org/10.3847/2515-5172/ad82cd},
  year = {2024},
  month = {oct},
  publisher = {The American Astronomical Society},
  volume = {8},
  number = {10},
  pages = {250},
  author = {Lehman H. Garrison and Dan Foreman-Mackey and Yu-hsuan Shih and Alex Barnett},
  title = {nifty-ls: Fast and Accurate Lomb–Scargle Periodograms Using a Non-uniform FFT},
  journal = {Research Notes of the AAS},
  abstract = {We present nifty-ls, a software package for fast and accurate evaluation of the Lomb–Scargle periodogram. nifty-ls leverages the fact that Lomb–Scargle can be computed using a non-uniform fast Fourier transform (NUFFT), which we evaluate with the Flatiron Institute NUFFT package (finufft). This approach achieves a many-fold speedup over the Press &amp; Rybicki method as implemented in Astropy and is simultaneously many orders of magnitude more accurate. nifty-ls also supports fast evaluation on GPUs via CUDA and integrates with the Astropy Lomb–Scargle interface. nifty-ls is publicly available at https://github.com/flatironinstitute/nifty-ls/.}
}
```

A pre-print of the article is available on arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.08090

## Acknowledgements
nifty-ls builds directly on top of the excellent finufft package by Alex Barnett
and others (see the [finufft Acknowledgements](https://finufft.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ackn.html)).

Many parts of this package are an adaptation of [Astropy LombScargle](https://docs.astropy.org/en/stable/timeseries/lombscargle.html), in particular the Press & Rybicki (1989) method.
