Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 minor 1 cited by

Radio and X-ray monitoring of the accreting millisecond X-ray pulsar IGR J17591-2342 in outburst

T0 review · 0 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read An accreting millisecond X-ray pulsar, IGR J17591-2342, is the radio-brightest neutron-star low-mass X-ray binary known and rivals black-hole binaries at similar X-ray luminosity, while showing fourfold radio variability at nearly…

desk verdict Solid extended dataset for an AMXP; the headline radio-brightest claim is distance-dependent, but the paper handles it honestly and the secondary results survive. read the letter →

arxiv 1909.02323 v2 pith:MH2D5BZG submitted 2019-09-05 astro-ph.HE

N.V. Gusinskaia , T.D. Russell , J.W.T. Hessels , S. Bogdanov , N. Degenaar , A.T. Deller , J. van den Eijnden , A.D. Jaodand
show 2 more authors
J.C.A. Miller-Jones R. Wijnands
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords accretingmillisecondX-raypulsarIGRJ17591-2342radio-X-raycorrelationneutronstarlow-massbinaryjetsoutburstmonitoringradiosearch
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

IGR J17591-2342, an accreting millisecond X-ray pulsar (AMXP) discovered in outburst in 2018, is the radio-brightest neutron-star low-mass X-ray binary seen so far, assuming its likely distance of more than 6 kiloparsecs. At X-ray luminosities around $10^{36}$ erg s$^{-1}$ it was as radio-luminous as black-hole X-ray binaries, a population previously thought to be roughly twenty times more radio-loud than neutron-star systems at the same X-ray output. The paper uses ten quasi-simultaneous VLA, ATCA and Swift-XRT observations to fit $L_{\rm R}\propto L_{\rm X}^{\beta}$, obtaining $\beta = 0.37^{+0.42}_{-0.40}$, but the main additional result is the scatter: the radio luminosity fell by up to a factor of four while the X-ray luminosity and hard spectral state stayed roughly constant. That scatter implies no tight universal radio-X-ray correlation for this source and raises the question of what controls jet brightness in neutron-star binaries besides accretion power. A high-time-resolution search for radio pulsations after the outburst found none, leaving the quiescent state unresolved.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is the quasi-simultaneous radio-X-ray luminosity comparison built from ten epochs. The paper turns VLA and ATCA radio detections, with two 3$\sigma$ upper limits, and Swift-XRT X-ray spectra taken within 0.6 days of each radio epoch into 5-GHz and 1-10 keV luminosities, assuming an 8 kpc distance and a flat radio spectrum, and fits the power law $L_{\rm R}\propto L_{\rm X}^{\beta}$ with a regression that also reports the intrinsic scatter around the fit. The named object class is the accreting millisecond X-ray pulsar (AMXP): a neutron star in a low-mass X-ray binary whose magnetic field channels the accretion flow, producing coherent millisecond X-ray pulsations. The comparison populations are black-hole and non-pulsing neutron-star LMXBs, whose population slopes and normalisations set the baseline for judging this source radio-bright.

What would settle it

A geometric distance measurement of IGR J17591-2342, such as a radio parallax from very long baseline interferometry, that places the source below about 6 kpc would overturn the radio-brightest-AMXP claim, since all luminosities scale as $D^2$; a strictly simultaneous radio-X-ray campaign resolving the factor-of-four radio changes at constant X-ray luminosity would determine whether the large scatter is a real property of the jet or an artefact of quasi-simultaneous sampling.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that IGR J17591-2342 was, during its 2018 outburst, the radio-brightest accreting millisecond X-ray pulsar detected to date: with a 5-GHz luminosity near $4\times10^{29}$ erg s$^{-1}$ at $L_X\sim10^{36}$ erg s$^{-1}$, it sat among black-hole LMXBs rather than the neutron-star population, which on average is about twenty times fainter in radio at the same X-ray luminosity. From ten quasi-simultaneous VLA, ATCA and Swift-XRT epochs the paper fits $L_R\propto L_X^{\beta}$ with $\beta = 0.37^{+0.42}_{-0.40}$, consistent with the hard-state neutron-star population slope but so loosely constrained that it cannot be read as a tight correlation. The radio light curve also decoupled from the X-ray light curve: later observations at nearly the same $L_X$ and hard spectral state were up to a factor of four fainter in radio, so the source shows large intrinsic scatter at fixed accretion power. GBT observations soon after the outburst ended found no radio pulsations, which the authors present as a non-detection that cannot rule out a rotation-powered millisecond pulsar in quiescence.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is the distance of about 8 kpc, with a lower bound near 6 kpc, inferred from X-ray absorption rather than measured geometrically, because every radio and X-ray luminosity used in the comparison scales as this distance squared and a much smaller distance would remove the source's claim to being the radio-brightest AMXP.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Neutron-star LMXBs can be as radio-luminous as black-hole LMXBs near $L_X\sim10^{36}$ erg s$^{-1}$, so radio brightness alone is not a reliable way to classify an X-ray transient as a black hole rather than a neutron star.
  • The fitted slope $\beta=0.37^{+0.42}_{-0.40}$ is consistent with the global hard-state neutron-star slope, but the loose constraint and large scatter mean a single power law does not capture this source's radio-X-ray behaviour.
  • Including IGR J17591-2342 widens the observed radio-luminosity spread of AMXPs to roughly 1.5 dex at fixed X-ray luminosity, broader than the spread seen so far in non-pulsing NS-LMXBs.
  • The absence of radio pulsations after outburst does not rule out a millisecond pulsar turn-on in quiescence, because distance, scattering, and orbital eclipses could hide it.
  • Catching a future outburst from its onset with high-cadence, strictly simultaneous radio and X-ray observations is the way to test whether the radio emission tracks, lags, or anticorrelates with the X-rays.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If a geometric distance later placed the source below about 6 kpc, the 'radio-brightest AMXP' claim would collapse, but the factor-of-four radio variability at roughly constant $L_X$ would survive; the scatter is the more distance-robust part of the result.
  • The combination of high radio luminosity and large variability resembles transitional millisecond pulsars at lower luminosities, where radio emission is thought to be driven by a propeller or pulsar wind rather than a steady jet; the same physics could be operating in this AMXP during outburst.
  • Because the campaign began about three weeks after the outburst start and missed a later X-ray re-brightening, the measured radio luminosities may not be the peak values; earlier triggering could strengthen the radio-brightest claim.
  • A testable extension would be very rapid, strictly simultaneous radio and X-ray monitoring during a future outburst: resolving the factor-of-four radio swings on minute timescales would show whether the variability is intrinsic jet flickering or a delayed response to X-ray changes.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

0 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper reports quasi-simultaneous radio (VLA and ATCA) and X-ray (Swift-XRT) monitoring of the accreting millisecond X-ray pulsar IGR J17591-2342 during its 2018 outburst, together with Green Bank Telescope searches for radio pulsations in quiescence. The authors tabulate radio flux densities and spectral indices for ten radio epochs, eight of which have Swift-XRT spectral measurements, and use the data to fit a power-law radio-X-ray luminosity relation with LINMIX_ERR, obtaining a slope beta = 0.37 (+0.42, -0.40). They report that, assuming the likely >6 kpc distance, IGR J17591-2342 is the radio-brightest AMXP detected so far, with radio luminosity comparable to black hole LMXBs in outburst, and that its radio luminosity at a given X-ray luminosity varied by up to a factor of four. The GBT observations do not detect radio pulsations, with a period-averaged flux density upper limit of about 26 microJy, and the authors discuss possible reasons for the non-detection.

Significance. If the conclusions hold, the paper materially extends the small sample of neutron star low-mass X-ray binaries with dense radio-X-ray coverage during outburst and provides the strongest case to date of an AMXP with radio luminosity approaching the black hole LMXB population. The paper's strengths include the use of standard calibration and fitting tools, tabulated measurements with uncertainties, a transparent treatment of the distance and quasi-simultaneity caveats, and a quantified radio pulsation search limit. The main observational results - high radio luminosity and large intra-source scatter - are qualitative and largely distance-independent, although the quantitative 'radio-brightest AMXP' ranking is conditional on the assumed distance, which the authors explicitly acknowledge.

minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 4.1] The reported intrinsic scatter for the IGR J17591-2342 fit, sigma0 = 0.05 (+0.1, -0.04) dex, appears inconsistent with the factor-of-four spread in L_R at comparable L_X seen in Table 1 and Figure 2, and with the same paragraph's statement that the fit uncertainty is large because of the significant scatter. Please verify the LINMIX_ERR output; if the intrinsic scatter is actually ~0.5 dex (or another larger value), correct the number and its error bars in the text and in the shaded region of Figure 3. This is likely a typographical slip, but as printed it contradicts the paper's own description of the data.
  2. [Abstract and Section 2.2.1] The abstract and Section 2.2.1 describe '10 quasi-simultaneous radio (VLA, ATCA) and X-ray (Swift-XRT) observations', but Table 1 lists Swift-XRT spectral measurements for only eight detections plus one upper limit, and the 20 October VLA upper limit appears to have no listed Swift-XRT counterpart. Please clarify whether all ten radio epochs have a Swift-XRT pointing, and if not, adjust the wording to avoid overstating the overlap.
  3. [Section 3.2] The statement that the radio luminosity 'decays after MJD 58355' is not strictly accurate because epoch 5 (28 September, MJD 58389.02) has a higher 5-GHz luminosity than epoch 4 (1 September). I suggest rewording to 'the highest radio luminosities are seen in the first three epochs, with generally lower luminosities afterwards' or similar.
  4. [Section 3.4] In the description of the direct pulse-phase folding search, please specify whether the known spin ephemeris from Sanna et al. (2018) was used and how trial spin frequencies were handled, in addition to the stated search over |Delta T_asc| < 5 s. This would make the non-detection claim easier to reproduce.
  5. [Abstract] The phrase 'and assuming its likely >6 kpc distance' is placed awkwardly after the claim that the radio emission is brighter than any other NS-LMXB; consider moving the distance assumption before the claim, e.g., 'assuming its likely >6 kpc distance, the source's radio emission is...', to make the conditional nature of the statement clear at first reading.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper fits observed data and uses externally derived distances; no prediction reduces to an input by construction.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is observational and self-contained. Radio flux densities and X-ray fluxes are measured from the data (Table 1), and luminosities are computed with L_R = 4 pi nu D^2 S_nu using a distance of 8 kpc taken from the external work of Nowak et al. (2019), not from the present paper's own claims. The radio--X-ray power-law slope beta = 0.37(+0.42,-0.40) is obtained by fitting a LINMIX_ERR regression to the observed LR-LX points and is explicitly presented as a fit, not as a prediction. The statement that IGR J17591-2342 is the radio-brightest AMXP detected so far is explicitly conditional on the external distance estimate (“Given its likely > 6 kpc distance”), and the comparison samples for BH-LMXBs, NS-LMXBs, and other AMXPs are taken from independent published catalogs. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, no uniqueness theorem from the authors' prior work is invoked to force a choice, and no equation in the paper is equivalent to its own input by construction. The distance assumption is a legitimate fragility, but it is an external input and a correctness risk, not a circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central analysis is a pure observational campaign. The paper fits a power law rather than deriving one, so the ledger contains the adopted distance, the fixed absorbing column, the flat-spectrum assumption, the quasi-simultaneity window, and the assumed power-law form. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (2)
  • Assumed distance D = 8 kpc (lower bound roughly 6 kpc)
    Adopted from Nowak et al. (2019); all luminosities scale as D squared, so the radio-brightness ranking and the absolute LX range depend on this choice.
  • Power-law slope beta = 0.37 (+0.42, -0.40)
    Fitted to 8 detected radio-X-ray epochs with LINMIX_ERR (Section 3.3); the large uncertainty makes the slope consistent with both the global NS slope and with no correlation.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The source is at distance D = 8 kpc, likely greater than 6 kpc, adopted from Nowak et al. (2019).
    Used to convert all fluxes to luminosities (Sections 3.1, 3.2). If the distance is wrong, the absolute radio and X-ray luminosities and the radio-brightest AMXP claim change.
  • domain assumption X-ray spectra are described by an absorbed power law with fixed NH = (4.4 +/- 0.2) times 10^22 cm^-2 from Nowak et al. (2019).
    Used to derive the unabsorbed 1-10 keV fluxes in Table 1; a different NH would shift LX values.
  • domain assumption Radio luminosities are computed at 5 GHz assuming a flat spectral index alpha = 0.
    Section 3.2; individual epochs show spectral indices from about -0.5 to 0.1, so this assumption could introduce small scatter in LR.
  • domain assumption Radio and X-ray observations within 0.6 days are treated as quasi-simultaneous.
    Section 2.2.1; the source can vary on shorter timescales, so the LR-LX correlation and measured scatter could be affected by non-simultaneity.
  • domain assumption The power-law model LR proportional to LX^beta is an appropriate representation of the relation.
    Equation 1 and Section 3.3; the authors themselves note it is unclear whether a single power law applies to NS-LMXBs.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Radio and X-ray monitoring of the accreting millisecond X-ray pulsar IGR J17591-2342 in outburst." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MH2D5BZG

@misc{pith2026190902323,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Radio and X-ray monitoring of the accreting millisecond X-ray pulsar IGR J17591-2342 in outburst},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MH2D5BZG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1909.02323}
}
abstract

IGR J17591$-$2342 is a new accreting millisecond X-ray pulsar (AMXP) that was recently discovered in outburst in 2018. Early observations revealed that the source's radio emission is brighter than that of any other known neutron star low-mass X-ray binary (NS-LMXB) at comparable X-ray luminosity, and assuming its likely $\gtrsim 6$ kpc distance. It is comparably radio bright to black hole LMXBs at similar X-ray luminosities. In this work, we present the results of our extensive radio and X-ray monitoring campaign of the 2018 outburst of IGR J17591$-$2342. In total we collected 10 quasi-simultaneous radio (VLA, ATCA) and X-ray (Swift-XRT) observations, which make IGR J17591$-$2342 one of the best-sampled NS-LMXBs. We use these to fit a power-law correlation index $\beta = 0.37^{+0.42}_{-0.40}$ between observed radio and X-ray luminosities ( $L_\mathrm{R}\propto L_\mathrm{X}^{\beta}$). However, our monitoring revealed a large scatter in IGR J17591$-$2342's radio luminosity (at a similar X-ray luminosity, $L_\mathrm{X} \sim 10^{36}$ erg s$^{-1}$, and spectral state), with $L_\mathrm{R} \sim 4 \times 10^{29}$ erg s$^{-1}$ during the first three reported observations, and up to a factor of 4 lower $L_\mathrm{R}$ during later radio observations. Nonetheless, the average radio luminosity of IGR J17591$-$2342 is still one of the highest among NS-LMXBs, and we discuss possible reasons for the wide range of radio luminosities observed in such systems during outburst. We found no evidence for radio pulsations from IGR J17591$-$2342 in our Green Bank Telescope observations performed shortly after the source returned to quiescence. Nonetheless, we cannot rule out that IGR J17591$-$2342 becomes a radio millisecond pulsar during quiescence.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1909.02323 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. X-ray and radio light-curves during the 2018 outburst of IGR J17591−2342. Downward pointing arrows indicate 3σ upper limits in all cases. Panel (a): Swift-BAT (15 − 50 keV) daily X-ray light curve. Panel (b): Blue squares represent the Swift-XRT (1 − 10 keV) X-ray light-curve (using the left-hand axis). Grey circles represent the NICER (0.2 − 12 keV) X-ray light-curve (using the right-hand axis). Panel (c): Radio li… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. X-ray (1 − 10 keV) luminosity versus radio (5 GHz) luminosity for BH- and NS-LMXBs. Black circles represent BH-LMXBs; grey squares represent non-pulsing NS-LMXBs; a variety of symbol types and colours are used to represent individual AMXP and confirmed tMSP systems. Radio—X-ray measurements of IGR J17591−2342 are shown using yellow-green squares (where the assumed distance is 8 kpc; see Russell et al. 2018a [PITH_F… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Top: Inferred parameters of the LINMIX_ERR fit (Equation 1) to X-ray and radio luminosities of different classes of NS- and BH-LMXBs, as well as individual sources (using an X-ray luminosity range 4 × 1035 erg s−1 < LX < 1037 erg s−1 ). The solid and dashed lines represent values of the radio luminosity intercept ξ+LR,c and its uncertainties, respectively. The shaded areas represent the intrinsic scatter σ0 of radio… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Quasi-simultaneous radio and X-ray observations of Aql X-1: probing low luminosities

    astro-ph.HE 2019-08 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    Three new VLA radio upper limits on Aql X-1 at X-ray luminosities below 3e35 erg/s, combined with archival detections, steepen the inferred radio-X-ray correlation slope to beta = 1.17 (+0.30/-0.21), or imply a radio ...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

87 extracted references · 19 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    A., Cheng A

    Alpar M. A., Cheng A. F., Ruderman M. A., Shaham J., 1982, @doi [ ] 10.1038/300728a0 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1982Natur.300..728A 300, 728

    doi:10.1038/300728a0 1982

  2. [2]

    Altamirano D., Casella P., Patruno A., Wijnands R., van der Klis M., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1086/528983 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJ...674L..45A 674, L45

    doi:10.1086/528983 2008

  3. [3]

    M., et al., 2009, @doi [Science] 10.1126/science.1172740 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009Sci...324.1411A 324, 1411

    Archibald A. M., et al., 2009, @doi [Science] 10.1126/science.1172740 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009Sci...324.1411A 324, 1411

    doi:10.1126/science.1172740 2009

  4. [4]

    M., Kaspi V

    Archibald A. M., Kaspi V. M., Hessels J. W. T., Stappers B., Janssen G., Lyne A., 2013, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013arXiv1311.5161A p. arXiv:1311.5161

    arXiv 2013

  5. [5]

    A., 1996, in Jacoby G

    Arnaud K. A., 1996, in Jacoby G. H., Barnes J., eds, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series Vol. 101, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems V. p. 17

    1996

  6. [6]

    Bahramian A., et al., 2018, Radio/X-ray correlation database for X-ray binaries , @doi 10.5281/zenodo.1252036 , https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1252036

    doi:10.5281/zenodo.1252036 2018

  7. [7]

    G., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu708 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.441.1825B 441, 1825

    Bassa C. G., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu708 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.441.1825B 441, 1825

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stu708 2014

  8. [8]

    D., Payne D

    Blandford R. D., Payne D. G., 1982, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/199.4.883 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1982MNRAS.199..883B 199, 883

    doi:10.1093/mnras/199.4.883 1982

Show all 87 references
  1. [9]

    D., Znajek R

    Blandford R. D., Znajek R. L., 1977, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/179.3.433 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1977MNRAS.179..433B 179, 433

    1977 doi

  2. [10]

    Bogdanov S., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aaaeb9 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...856...54B 856, 54

    2018 doi

  3. [11]

    Bozzo E., Ducci L., Ferrigno C., Savchenko V., Kuulkers E., Grinberg V., Paizis A., Sidoli L., 2018, The Astronomer's Telegram, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ATel11942....1B 11942, 1

    2018

  4. [12]

    R., Testa V., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20030669 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003A&A...404L..43B 404, L43

    Burderi L., Di Salvo T., D'Antona F., Robba N. R., Testa V., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20030669 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003A&A...404L..43B 404, L43

    2003 doi

  5. [13]

    I., Rea N., Vida \ n a I., eds, Astrophysics and Space Science Library Vol

    Campana S., Di Salvo T., 2018, in Rezzolla L., Pizzochero P., Jones D. I., Rea N., Vida \ n a I., eds, Astrophysics and Space Science Library Vol. 457, Astrophysics and Space Science Library. p. 149 ( @eprint arXiv 1804.03422 ), @doi 10.1007/978-3-319-97616-7_4

    2018 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Casella P., Altamirano D., Patruno A., Wijnands R., van der Klis M., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1086/528982 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJ...674L..41C 674, L41

    2008 doi

  7. [15]

    K., Fender R

    Corbel S., Coriat M., Brocksopp C., Tzioumis A. K., Fender R. P., Tomsick J. A., Buxton M. M., Bailyn C. D., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sts215 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.428.2500C 428, 2500

    2013 doi

  8. [16]

    M., Lazio T

    Cordes J. M., Lazio T. J. W., 2002, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002astro.ph..7156C pp astro--ph/0207156

    2002

  9. [17]

    Coti Zelati F., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201834835 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019A&A...622A.211C 622, A211

    2019 doi

  10. [18]

    T., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/809/1/13 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...809...13D 809, 13

    Deller A. T., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/809/1/13 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...809...13D 809, 13

    2015 doi

  11. [19]

    J., Taylor J

    Dewey R. J., Taylor J. H., Weisberg J. M., Stokes G. H., 1985, @doi [ ] 10.1086/184502 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1985ApJ...294L..25D 294, L25

    1985 doi

  12. [20]

    Ducci L., Kuulkers E., Grinberg V., Paizis A., Sidoli L., Bozzo E., Ferrigno C., Savchenko V., 2018, The Astronomer's Telegram, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ATel11941....1D 11941, 1

    2018

  13. [21]

    A., et al., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20077530 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007A

    Evans P. A., et al., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20077530 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007A

    2007 doi

  14. [23]

    Ferrigno C., et al., 2018, The Astronomer's Telegram, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ATel11957....1F 11957, 1

    2018

  15. [24]

    P., Fender R., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20899.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012MNRAS.423..590G 423, 590

    Gallo E., Miller B. P., Fender R., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20899.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012MNRAS.423..590G 423, 590

    2012

  16. [25]

    Gallo E., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu1599 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.445..290G 445, 290

    2014 doi

  17. [26]

    Gallo E., Degenaar N., van den Eijnden J., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnrasl/sly083 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.478L.132G 478, L132

    2018 doi

  18. [27]

    V., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx1235 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.470.1871G 470, 1871

    Gusinskaia N. V., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx1235 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.470.1871G 470, 1871

    2017 doi

  19. [28]

    V., et al., 2019, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019arXiv190804778G p

    Gusinskaia N. V., et al., 2019, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019arXiv190804778G p. arXiv:1908.04778

    2019 arXiv

  20. [29]

    Y., Kaspi V

    He C., Ng C. Y., Kaspi V. M., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/768/1/64 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...768...64H 768, 64

    2013 doi

  21. [30]

    S., Matthews J

    Higginbottom N., Knigge C., Long K. S., Matthews J. H., Parkinson E. J., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz310 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.484.4635H 484, 4635

    2019 doi

  22. [32]

    L., Chakrabarty D., Fender R., Fridriksson J

    Homan J., Neilsen J., Allen J. L., Chakrabarty D., Fender R., Fridriksson J. K., Remillard R. A., Schulz N., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8205/830/1/L5 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...830L...5H 830, L5

    2016 doi

  23. [33]

    N., Burgay M., Burderi L., Possenti A., di Salvo T., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201014025 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010A

    Iacolina M. N., Burgay M., Burderi L., Possenti A., di Salvo T., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201014025 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010A

    2010 doi

  24. [34]

    Keane E., et al., 2015, Advancing Astrophysics with the Square Kilometre Array (AASKA14), https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015aska.confE..40K p. 40

    2015

  25. [35]

    C., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/519947 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...665.1489K 665, 1489

    Kelly B. C., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/519947 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...665.1489K 665, 1489

    2007 doi

  26. [36]

    A., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/209/1/14 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJS..209...14K 209, 14

    Krimm H. A., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/209/1/14 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJS..209...14K 209, 14

    2013 doi

  27. [37]

    A., et al., 2018, The Astronomer's Telegram, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ATel11981....1K 11981, 1

    Krimm H. A., et al., 2018, The Astronomer's Telegram, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ATel11981....1K 11981, 1

    2018

  28. [38]

    Kuiper L., Tsygankov S., Falanga M., Galloway D., Poutanen J., Mereminskiy I., 2018, The Astronomer's Telegram, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ATel12004....1K 12004, 1

    2018

  29. [39]

    Lewin W. H. G., van Paradijs J., van den Heuvel E. P. J., 1997, X-ray Binaries

    1997

  30. [40]

    R., Kramer M., 2004, Handbook of Pulsar Astronomy

    Lorimer D. R., Kramer M., 2004, Handbook of Pulsar Astronomy . Vol. 4

    2004

  31. [41]

    J., 2002, @doi [ ] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05876.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002MNRAS.336.1371M 336, 1371

    Maccarone T. J., 2002, @doi [ ] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05876.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002MNRAS.336.1371M 336, 1371

    2002

  32. [42]

    Marino A., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201834460 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019A&A...627A.125M 627, A125

    2019 doi

  33. [43]

    P., Waters B., Schiebel D., Young W., Golap K., 2007, in Shaw R

    McMullin J. P., Waters B., Schiebel D., Young W., Golap K., 2007, in Shaw R. A., Hill F., Bell D. J., eds, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series Vol. 376, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XVI. p. 127

    2007

  34. [44]

    Messenger C., Patruno A., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/806/2/261 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...806..261M 806, 261

    2015 doi

  35. [45]

    P., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09777.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006MNRAS.366...79M 366, 79

    Migliari S., Fender R. P., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09777.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006MNRAS.366...79M 366, 79

    2006

  36. [46]

    P., Rupen M., Jonker P

    Migliari S., Fender R. P., Rupen M., Jonker P. G., Klein-Wolt M., Hjellming R. M., van der Klis M., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06795.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003MNRAS.342L..67M 342, L67

    2003

  37. [47]

    Migliari S., Miller-Jones J. C. A., Russell D. M., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18868.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.415.2407M 415, 2407

    2011

  38. [48]

    Miller-Jones J. C. A., Heinke C. O., Sivakoff G. R., Pooley D., Homan J., Altamirano D., 2010, The Astronomer's Telegram, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ATel.2377....1M 2377, 1

    2010

  39. [49]

    Miller-Jones J. C. A., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1038/s41586-019-1152-0 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019Natur.569..374M 569, 374

    2019 doi

  40. [50]

    M., et al., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/504673 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006ApJ...646..394M 646, 394

    Miller J. M., et al., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/504673 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006ApJ...646..394M 646, 394

    2006 doi

  41. [51]

    C., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1038/nature07680 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009Natur.458..481N 458, 481

    Neilsen J., Lee J. C., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1038/nature07680 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009Natur.458..481N 458, 481

    2009 doi

  42. [52]

    Nowak M., Paizis A., Chenevez J., Chaty S., Wilms J., Rodriguez J., 2018, The Astronomer's Telegram, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ATel11988....1N 11988, 1

    2018

  43. [53]

    A., Paizis A., Jaisawal G

    Nowak M. A., Paizis A., Jaisawal G. K., Chenevez J., Chaty S., Fortin F., Rodriguez J., Wilms J., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab0a71 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...874...69N 874, 69

    2019 doi

  44. [54]

    Papitto A., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1038/nature12470 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013Natur.501..517P 501, 517

    2013 doi

  45. [55]

    arXiv:1904.10433

    Papitto A., et al., 2019, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019arXiv190410433P p. arXiv:1904.10433

    2019 arXiv

  46. [56]

    Parfrey K., Tchekhovskoy A., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aa9c85 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...851L..34P 851, L34

    2017 doi

  47. [57]

    M., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-637X/822/1/33 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...822...33P 822, 33

    Parfrey K., Spitkovsky A., Beloborodov A. M., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-637X/822/1/33 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...822...33P 822, 33

    2016 doi

  48. [58]

    M., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx950 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.469.3656P 469, 3656

    Parfrey K., Spitkovsky A., Beloborodov A. M., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx950 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.469.3656P 469, 3656

    2017 doi

  49. [59]

    L., 2012, preprint, http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012arXiv1206.2727P ( @eprint arXiv 1206.2727 )

    Patruno A., Watts A. L., 2012, preprint, http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012arXiv1206.2727P ( @eprint arXiv 1206.2727 )

    2012 arXiv

  50. [60]

    Patruno A., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aa6f5b , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...841...98P 841, 98

    2017 doi

  51. [61]

    Perera B. B. P., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz1180 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.487.1025P 487, 1025

    2019 doi

  52. [62]

    C., Kaastra J

    Pinto C., Costantini E., Fabian A. C., Kaastra J. S., in't Zand J. J. M., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201323283 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014A&A...563A.115P 563, A115

    2014 doi

  53. [63]

    P., Begelman M

    Ponti G., Fender R. P., Begelman M. C., Dunn R. J. H., Neilsen J., Coriat M., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2012.01224.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012MNRAS.422L..11P 422, L11

    2012

  54. [64]

    Radhakrishnan V., Srinivasan G., 1982, Current Science, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1982CSci...51.1096R 51, 1096

    1982

  55. [65]

    M., 2001, PhD thesis, Harvard University

    Ransom S. M., 2001, PhD thesis, Harvard University

    2001

  56. [66]

    M., Eikenberry S

    Ransom S. M., Eikenberry S. S., Middleditch J., 2002, @doi [ ] 10.1086/342285 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002AJ....124.1788R 124, 1788

    2002 doi

  57. [67]

    M., Cordes J

    Ransom S. M., Cordes J. M., Eikenberry S. S., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1086/374806 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ApJ...589..911R 589, 911

    2003 doi

  58. [68]

    S., et al., 2018, The Astronomer's Telegram, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ATel12050....1R 12050, 1

    Ray P. S., et al., 2018, The Astronomer's Telegram, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ATel12050....1R 12050, 1

    2018

  59. [69]

    Roberts M. S. E., 2013, in van Leeuwen J., ed., IAU Symposium Vol. 291, Neutron Stars and Pulsars: Challenges and Opportunities after 80 years. pp 127--132 ( @eprint arXiv 1210.6903 ), @doi 10.1017/S174392131202337X

    2013 arXiv

  60. [70]

    Romano P., et al., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20065071 , http://ukads.nottingham.ac.uk/abs/2006A

    2006 doi

  61. [71]

    M., Lewis F., 2018, The Astronomer's Telegram, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ATel11946....1R 11946, 1

    Russell D. M., Lewis F., 2018, The Astronomer's Telegram, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ATel11946....1R 11946, 1

    2018

  62. [72]

    D., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv723 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.450.1745R 450, 1745

    Russell T. D., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv723 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.450.1745R 450, 1745

    2015 doi

  63. [73]

    D., Degenaar N., Wijnands R., van den Eijnden J., Gusinskaia N

    Russell T. D., Degenaar N., Wijnands R., van den Eijnden J., Gusinskaia N. V., Hessels J. W. T., Miller-Jones J. C. A., 2018a, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aaf4f9 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...869L..16R 869, L16

    doi

  64. [74]

    Russell T., Degenaar N., Wijnands R., van den Eijnden J., 2018b, The Astronomer's Telegram, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ATel11954....1R 11954, 1

  65. [75]

    Sanchez-Fernandez C., Ferrigno C., Chenevez J., Kuulkers E., Wijnands R., Bazzano A., Jonker P., Del Santo M., 2018, The Astronomer's Telegram, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ATel12000....1S 12000, 1

    2018

  66. [76]

    Sanna A., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201834160 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018A&A...617L...8S 617, L8

    2018 doi

  67. [77]

    W., Degenaar N., Heinke C

    Shaw A. W., Degenaar N., Heinke C. O., 2018, The Astronomer's Telegram, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ATel11970....1S 11970, 1

    2018

  68. [78]

    W., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/790/1/39 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...790...39S 790, 39

    Stappers B. W., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/790/1/39 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...790...39S 790, 39

    2014 doi

  69. [79]

    J., et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw1013 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.460..345T 460, 345

    Tetarenko A. J., et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw1013 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.460..345T 460, 345

    2016 doi

  70. [80]

    J., et al., 2017, The Astronomer's Telegram, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ATel10843....1T 10843, 1

    Tetarenko A. J., et al., 2017, The Astronomer's Telegram, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ATel10843....1T 10843, 1

    2017

  71. [81]

    J., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa95a , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...854..125T 854, 125

    Tetarenko A. J., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa95a , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...854..125T 854, 125

    2018 doi

  72. [82]

    Tudor V., et al., 2016, The Astronomer's Telegram, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ATel.8914....1T 8914, 1

    2016

  73. [83]

    Tudor V., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx1168 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.470..324T 470, 324

    2017 doi

  74. [84]

    P., Linares M., Maitra D., van der Klis M., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15604.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009MNRAS.400.2111T 400, 2111

    Tudose V., Fender R. P., Linares M., Maitra D., van der Klis M., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15604.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009MNRAS.400.2111T 400, 2111

    2009

  75. [85]

    Wijnands R., van der Klis M., 1998, @doi [ ] 10.1038/28557 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998Natur.394..344W 394, 344

    1998 doi

  76. [86]

    D., Wijnands R., Miller-Jones J

    van den Eijnden J., Degenaar N., Russell T. D., Wijnands R., Miller-Jones J. C. A., Sivakoff G. R., Hern \'a ndez Santisteban J. V., 2018a, @doi [ ] 10.1038/s41586-018-0524-1 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018Natur.562..233V 562, 233

    doi

  77. [87]

    van den Eijnden J., et al., 2018b, The Astronomer's Telegram, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ATel11487....1V 11487

  78. [88]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.stat...

  79. [89]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.stat...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.