Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 67 references

Discovery of Main-sequence Radio Pulse emitters from widefield sky surveys

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Three new main-sequence radio pulse emitters were found using only total-intensity variability in ASKAP survey light curves, with confirmation from ATCA follow-up.

desk verdict Three new MRPs are solidly confirmed, but the variability-only selection method is not as cleanly demonstrated as the abstract claims. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.07195 v1 pith:B6CQU7V2 submitted 2025-05-12 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.HE

Barnali Das , Matt E. Shultz , Joshua Pritchard , Kovi Rose , Laura N. Driessen , Yuanming Wang , Andrew Zic , Tara Murphy
show 1 more author
Gregory Sivakoff
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.SRastro-ph.HE
keywords stars:early-typemagneticfieldradiocontinuum:starsvariableselectroncyclotronmaseremissionMain-sequencePulseemittersminimumflux-densitygradientASKAPsurveys
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

The paper reports the first use of the 'minimum flux-density gradient condition' as a survey-based way to find Main-sequence Radio Pulse emitters (MRPs): instead of requiring high circular polarisation, it selects stars whose radio flux rises over a narrow rotational-phase window, the signature of electron cyclotron maser emission (ECME). Applying the criterion to multi-epoch ASKAP total-intensity light curves of 37 radio-emitting magnetic hot stars yielded four candidates, and ATCA follow-up confirmed three of them, HD 83625, HD 105382, and HD 149764, as MRPs. This grows the known MRP sample from 19 to 22 and marks the first time the criterion has been used to mine an all-sky survey for candidates. The significance is that targeted MRP discoveries carry selection biases that obscure how ECME depends on stellar parameters, while a variability-only route promises a less biased census; the expanded sample is consistent with ECME luminosity depending on magnetic field strength and effective temperature, though a degeneracy in the cool-star regime remains.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the 'minimum flux-density gradient condition': a pulse counts as MRP-like only if the rotational-phase interval over which its flux density rises from basal to peak satisfies $\Delta\phi_{\rm rot} < 1/(2\pi) \approx 0.16$, a bound derived from comparing narrow ECME pulses with incoherent emission that modulates as $\sin^2(2\pi\phi_{\rm rot})$. In this paper the condition converts sparse multi-epoch ASKAP light curves, with integration times from 12 minutes to 10 hours at 887.5, 943.5, 1367.5, and 1655.5 MHz, into a candidate list, after the time axis is phased using rotation periods refined from space-based photometry. ATCA follow-up then provides the full-band dynamic spectra and pulse cut-off frequencies that turn candidates into confirmed MRPs.

What would settle it

Simulate light curves of purely incoherent radio emitters with $\sin^2(2\pi\phi_{\rm rot})$ rotational modulation, sampled with the same ASKAP epoch pattern, integration times, and noise, and count how often the minimum flux-density gradient condition is satisfied; if false-positive rates are substantial, the three confirmations would not demonstrate that the strategy reliably selects MRPs.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central claim is that coherent radio pulses from magnetic A and late-B stars can be found without polarisation information, solely from variability in total-intensity survey light curves. The authors define the minimum flux-density gradient condition, $\Delta\phi_{\rm rot} < 1/(2\pi) \approx 0.16$, as a necessary mark of MRP behaviour, apply it to ASKAP light curves at four frequencies between 887.5 and 1655.5 MHz, and confirm three of the four selected stars through ATCA observations at 1–3 GHz. The three newly confirmed MRPs all show a premature ECME upper cut-off, well below the electron gyrofrequency expected from their surface magnetic fields. In the expanded sample the ECME luminosity still increases with maximum surface magnetic field strength and follows a peaked dependence on effective temperature, while the relation for stars with $T_{\rm eff} \lesssim 16$ kK remains degenerate between temperature and field strength. The fourth candidate, HD 151965, was not confirmed but shows roughly 25% circular polarisation of the sign opposite to expectation from its longitudinal field, so it remains an MRP candidate.

Load-bearing premise

The selection assumes that a star's sparse ASKAP snapshots, sometimes only two or three epochs, can show its radio flux rising within a narrow rotational-phase window, and that the narrow rise is not a sampling artifact of slower rotational modulation.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Because the variability route needs no polarisation information, it can find MRPs whose pulses are only weakly circularly polarised, such as HD 83625 with roughly 40% polarisation averaged over 5 minutes and 64 MHz, which could be missed by polarisation-selected surveys.
  • The three confirmations bring the MRP census to 22 and add stars that targeted campaigns would have skipped: HD 83625 and HD 149764 have only sparse longitudinal-field measurements and unknown or barely constrained magnetic-null phases.
  • The expanded sample still supports an ECME luminosity that rises with $B_0^{\rm max}$ (Spearman rank correlation 0.80, $p = 0.0001$, for $T_{\rm eff} < 19$ kK, treating lower limits as true values) and follows a peaked temperature dependence, while the $T_{\rm eff} \lesssim 16$ kK branch stays degenerate with field strength.
  • All three new MRPs show an upper cut-off frequency well below the gyrofrequency of their surface fields, indicating that the pulse cut-off is governed by something other than the polar field strength.
  • HD 151965 remains a viable MRP candidate: its roughly 25% circular polarisation with the sign opposite to the expectation from its consistently negative $\langle B_z\rangle$ suggests a coherent contribution, so lower-frequency observations are the stated next step.

Reading between the lines

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

  • An extension the paper does not test is to automate the visual inspection: applying the same condition algorithmically to all 37 radio-emitting magnetic hot stars, including those with fewer than three epochs, could reveal additional candidates once more ASKAP epochs accumulate.
  • If the variability criterion proves as general as the paper suggests, the same total-intensity search could run on archival light curves of cooler magnetic stars and brown dwarfs, where coherent pulses are also expected; the data requirements are already met by existing surveys.
  • A testable consequence of the premature cut-offs is that measuring true polar field strengths for HD 83625 and HD 149764 could show whether the cut-offs cluster at a common fraction of the gyrofrequency; if they do, a plasma-density or geometry limit is at work rather than the surface field strength.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. Das et al. present a variability-based search for Main-sequence Radio Pulse emitters (MRPs) using multi-epoch ASKAP survey data. They cross-match a sample of 37 radio-emitting magnetic hot stars, construct total-intensity light curves at four frequencies, and visually select four candidates that they judge to satisfy the minimum flux-density gradient condition Δφ_rot < 0.16 (Eq. 1). Follow-up ATCA 1–3 GHz observations confirm HD 83625, HD 105382, and HD 149764 as MRPs on the basis of periodic, narrow-phase, highly circularly polarized pulses whose arrival phases match the ASKAP detections; HD 151965 remains unconfirmed. The authors then include the new MRPs in the existing L_ECME–T_eff and L_ECME–B0max scaling analyses and report consistency with earlier results. New TESS-based rotation periods and ephemerides for all four stars are derived in the appendix.

Significance. If the three confirmations stand, this work is significant: it grows the known MRP sample from 19 to 22 and, more importantly, demonstrates in principle that survey variability can be used to find MRP candidates without circular-polarization information. The ATCA evidence for the three confirmations is strong: the dynamic spectra show narrowband, phase-consistent pulses, the Stokes V light curves show large fractional circular polarization (up to nearly 100% in HD 149764), and the upper cutoff frequencies are measured for each star. The paper also provides improved rotation periods from TESS and is transparent about the inconclusive case of HD 151965. However, the headline claim that the variability-only strategy is 'effective' is not yet quantitatively supported, because the selection step was performed by visual inspection and no false-negative test on previously known MRPs is reported. The discoveries are robust, but the methodological novelty requires further quantification.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3, Eq. (1)] The paper asserts that HD 83625, HD 105382, and HD 149764 'comfortably satisfy' the minimum flux-density gradient condition, but it does not report the measured Δφ_rot values or an error analysis for any of the four candidates. With ASKAP light curves containing as few as two or three epochs at different frequencies and integration times (Figure 1), the phase interval over which a flux rise occurs cannot in general be constrained to Δφ_rot < 0.16; the paper's own discussion of HD 151965 (§5.4) acknowledges that its variation timescale lies on the 'borderline' of the condition, showing how ambiguous such visual judgements are. Because the abstract and conclusion claim that the 3/4 confirmation rate 'demonstrates the effectiveness of our strategy,' a reproducible, quantitative evaluation of Eq. (1) on the ASKAP data is needed: for each candidate, give the epochs, the inferred phase range of the rise, and how integration times and phase gaps were propagated into the uncertainty on Δφ_rot.
  2. [§3, Figure 1] No false-negative test is reported. Of the 37 radio-emitting magnetic hot stars cross-matched from ASKAP, 20 had detections at more than two epochs, yet the paper does not state whether previously known MRPs in this sample would also have been selected by the variability criterion, nor how many of the non-candidate stars show variability that violates Eq. (1). Without such a test, the 'effectiveness' of the strategy is only supported by the positive confirmation rate (3/4), while its completeness and false-negative rate remain unknown. A quantitative, algorithmically defined application of the variability criterion to all 20 multi-epoch stars, or at least to the known MRPs among them, would directly test the method's usefulness.
  3. [§6.3, Table 2, Figures 13–14] The scaling-relation conclusions are based on assumptions that receive little sensitivity analysis: the lower limits on B0max for HD 83625 and HD 149764 are treated as true values in the Spearman correlations, and the new L_ECME values are measured at 1.5 GHz while most literature values are at 700 MHz, without a demonstrated spectral interpolation. In addition, the comparison with past results reuses the same fitted X-factor threshold of 16.5 kK from Das et al. (2022c), which is not an independent test. The paper already acknowledges the small sample and the T_eff-B0max degeneracy, but it should explicitly quantify how the correlation coefficients and the claimed consistency change when the lower limits are varied or when only the 700 MHz sample is used.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§5.4] There is a typo: 'and teh corresponding variation' should read 'and the corresponding variation'.
  2. [Figure 8 caption] The caption says 'the peak flux density spectra of both stars,' but Figure 10 shows the two pulses of HD 149764; 'stars' should be 'pulses'.
  3. [§3] The sentence 'Of the 37 radio emitting magnetic hot stars, and 20 had detections at more than two epochs' contains a stray 'and'; the sentence should read 'Of the 37 radio emitting magnetic hot stars, 20 had detections at more than two epochs.'
  4. [Figure 1] The figure would benefit from a legend distinguishing the four ASKAP frequencies and from explicit markers for upper limits or non-detections, which are relevant for judging how many epochs actually constrain the variability.
  5. [Abstract and §6.3] The abstract states that ECME is 'affected by temperature and the magnetic field strength,' but Figure 13 shows a non-monotonic (parabolic) dependence on T_eff and the paper itself notes a degeneracy between T_eff and B0max; the wording should reflect that the relation is not a simple monotonic one.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the three MRP discoveries rest on independent ATCA confirmations; reused author-derived criteria are disclosed and used only as selection/consistency checks.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is the discovery of three new MRPs, and the confirmation chain is observational: ASKAP total-intensity variability (informed by Eq. 1 from Das et al. 2022c) is used only to select candidates, and the actual confirmation comes from independent ATCA dynamic spectra showing phase-stable, narrowband, highly circularly polarized pulses. Eq. 1 is a necessary condition imported from prior work, but the paper explicitly states its sin^2(2πφ_rot) assumption and does not redefine the criterion in terms of the new targets. The scaling-relation section reuses the X-factor with the 16.5 kK threshold fitted in Das et al. (2022c), yet the text frames this as consistency with past results ('consistent with past results', 'as observed by Das et al. 2022c,b'), not as a newly predicted relation, and the three new stars add only three points, mostly with lower-limit field strengths. No equation in the paper reduces to its own input by construction, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The sparse, visually inspected ASKAP selection is a legitimate robustness concern, but it is a question of reproducibility and completeness, not circularity; the paper itself flags the small sample and lower limits ('the new MRPs do not help get rid of the correlation between B0max and Teff', 'we still do not have independent evidence for the role of stellar radii or the rotation periods'). Under the strict definition used here, the derivation chain is self-contained against the independent ATCA data, so no circular step is identified.

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

The central claim rests on standard stellar radio emission physics and on the authors' previously published selection criterion and scaling relation. No new physical entities are introduced, and the 16.5 kK threshold and the Δφ gradient threshold are imported fitted or hand-set parameters from earlier work by the same group.

free parameters (2)
  • T_eff threshold in X-factor = 16.5 kK
    The 'X-factor' defined in §6.3 as B0max/(Teff-16.5)^2 uses 16.5 kK fitted to 14 MRPs in Das et al. (2022c); this value is imported into the present comparison and is not independently derived here.
  • Minimum flux-density gradient threshold Δφ_rot = < 1/(2π) ≈ 0.16
    Eq. (1) sets the maximum rotational phase range for a pulse rise, derived by Das et al. (2022c) assuming incoherent flux modulates as sin^2(2π φ_rot); it is a hand-set criterion carried into the candidate selection.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption ECME produces narrow-band, highly directed, periodically pulsed emission at frequencies proportional to the local gyrofrequency.
    Used throughout §1 and §5 to identify MRPs and interpret cut-offs; from Melrose & Dulk (1982) and Trigilio et al. (2000).
  • domain assumption Incoherent gyrosynchrotron flux from magnetic hot stars modulates approximately as sin^2(2π φ_rot).
    Basis for Eq. (1) and the minimum flux-density gradient condition; introduced in Das et al. (2022c).
  • domain assumption The tangent-plane beaming model predicts ECME pulses around magnetic nulls.
    Used in §2 to motivate phase windows and in §6.2 to interpret the lack of Stokes V reversal.
  • domain assumption The centrifugal breakout luminosity proxy is L_CBO ∝ B0max R^2 / Prot.
    Invoked in §6.3 to compare L_ECME with the incoherent-luminosity driver; from Leto et al. (2021), Shultz et al. (2022), Owocki et al. (2022).
  • domain assumption Gaia parallaxes and literature stellar parameters (Teff, R, B0max) are accurate as cited.
    Used to compute L_ECME in Table 2 and the scaling relations; values from Bagnulo et al. (2015), Shultz et al. (2019b), and other cited sources.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Discovery of Main-sequence Radio Pulse emitters from widefield sky surveys." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/B6CQU7V2

@misc{pith2026250507195,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Discovery of Main-sequence Radio Pulse emitters from widefield sky surveys},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/B6CQU7V2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.07195}
}
abstract

Magnetic AB stars are known to produce periodic radio pulses by the electron cyclotron maser emission (ECME) mechanism. Only 19 such stars, known as 'Main-sequence Radio Pulse emitters' (MRPs) are currently known. The majority of MRPs have been discovered through targeted observation campaigns that involve carefully selecting a sample of stars that are likely to produce ECME, and which can be detected by a given telescope within reasonable amount of time. These selection criteria inadvertently introduce bias in the resulting sample of MRPs, which affects subsequent investigation of the relation between ECME properties and stellar magnetospheric parameters. The alternative is to use all-sky surveys. Until now, MRP candidates obtained from surveys were identified based on their high circular polarisation ($\gtrsim 30\%$). In this paper, we introduce a complementary strategy, which does not require polarisation information. Using multi-epoch data from the Australian SKA Pathfinder (ASKAP) telescope, we identify four MRP candidates based on the variability in the total intensity light curves. Follow-up observations with the Australia Telescope Compact Array (ATCA) confirm three of them to be MRPs, thereby demonstrating the effectiveness of our strategy. With the expanded sample, we find that ECME is affected by temperature and the magnetic field strength, consistent with past results. There is, however, a degeneracy regarding how the two parameters govern the ECME luminosity for magnetic A and late-B stars (effective temperature $\lesssim 16$ kK). The current sample is also inadequate to investigate the role of stellar rotation, which has been shown to play a key role in driving incoherent radio emission.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.07195 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The light curves of the four targets that were identified as MRP candidates based on the variation of their flux densities (total intensity). The errorbars associated with the rotational phases indicate the integration times corresponding to the flux density measurements. All data were acquired with the ASKAP. The data are phased using the ephemerides given in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The Stokes I (black) and V (red) light curves of HD 83625 extracted from the visibility domain in three frequency subbands. The integration time for each measurement is 5 minutes. The shaded regions indicate the 3σ vari￾ation about the median flux density away from the phases of enhancement [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The dynamic spectra of HD 83625 in Stokes I and V up to a frequency of 2500 MHz, averaged with 5 minute time resolution and 32 MHz frequency resolution. The horizontal gaps mark the flagged channels. HD 83625 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (10 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The peak flux density spectrum for the pulse observed from HD 83625. The shaded regions indicate 3σ variations about the basal flux density spectrum [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The light curves of HD 105382 over 1–3 GHz in Stokes I (black) and Stokes V (red). The integration time for each data point is 5 minutes. The shaded regions indicate the 3σ variation about the median flux density away from the phases of enhancement [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:fi…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The dynamic spectra of HD 105382 in Stokes I and V over 1–3 GHz, averaged with 5 minute time resolution and 32 MHz frequency resolution. The Stokes V dynamic spectrum also suggests that the primary enhancement observed over the phase range 0.1 − 0.2 is actually compose…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The light curves of HD 149764 over 1–3 GHz in Stokes I (black) and Stokes V (blue). The integration time for each point is 5 minutes. The shaded regions indicate the 3σ variation about the median flux density away from the phases of enhancement [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figure…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The peak flux density spectrum for the pulse observed from HD 149764. The shaded regions indicate the basal flux densities ±3σ. left circularly polarised (Figures 8 and 9). This confirms that the star is an MRP. The pulses sweep in opposite directions on the frequency…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: The dynamic spectra for the ATCA data obtained for HD 151965 in Stokes I (top) and Stokes V (bottom) obtained by averaging the data to a resolution of 10 minutes and 64 MHz, respectively in time and frequency. The times on the horizontal axis are relative times since …
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Top: The Stokes I light curve of HD 151965 obtained from image domain by averaging over the entire available bandwidth. The horizontal error bars represent the averaging time intervals for the respective flux den￾sity measurements (1.5 hours or ≈ 0.04 stellar rotation…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Variation of spectral ECME luminosity with stellar effective temperature (left) and maximum surface magnetic field strength (right). The flux density measurements of all the existing MRPs are obtained at 700 MHz except for those enclosed in squares, for which sub-GHz …
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: The spectral ECME luminosity against the quantity (B 0 maxR2 )/Prot, which is the quantity that drives the incoherent radio emission (Leto et al., 2021; Shultz et al., 2022; Owocki et al., 2022). The new MRPs are highlighted as ‘stars’. HD 151965, which remains an MRP…
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Period determination from TESS photometry. Left: full periodogram (top) and (bottom) periodogram after prewhitening with the rotational frequency and its first harmonic (pink) and after prewhitening all significant harmonics of the rotational frequency (black). The da…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

67 extracted references · 30 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eprint howpublished institution journal key month number organization pages publisher school series title misctitle type volume year version url label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts ...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION format.url url empty "" new.block "" url * "" * if FUNCTION format.eprint eprint empty "" archivePrefix empty "" archivePrefix "arXiv" = new.block " " eprint * " " * new.block " " eprint * " " * if if if FUNCTION format.doi doi empty "" " " doi * " " * if FUNCTION format.pid doi empty eprint empty ur...

  3. [3]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eprint howpublished institution journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type volume year label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts #0 'before.all :=...

  4. [4]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION format.doi doi empty "" "doi:" doi * if FUNCTION format.eprint eprint empty "" archivePrefix empty "" archivePrefix ":" * if eprint field.or.null * if FUNCTION format.pid eprint empty format.doi format.eprint if FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = ...

  5. [5]

    2011, , 536, L6

    Alecian , E., Kochukhov , O., Neiner , C., et al. 2011, , 536, L6

    work page 2011

  6. [6]

    D., & Izzo , C

    Bagnulo , S., Fossati , L., Landstreet , J. D., & Izzo , C. 2015, , 583, A115

    work page 2015

  7. [7]

    A Non-Stop Aurora? The Intriguing Radio Emission from the Rapidly Rotating Magnetic Massive Star HR 5907

    Biswas , A., Das , B., Barron , J. A., Wade , G. A., & Holgado , G. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.10813

    work page Pith review arXiv 2025

  8. [8]

    A., Landstreet , J

    Bohlender , D. A., Landstreet , J. D., & Thompson , I. B. 1993, , 269, 355

    work page 1993

Show all 67 references
  1. [9]

    2001, , 366, 121

    Briquet , M., Aerts , C., & De Cat , P. 2001, , 366, 121

    2001

  2. [10]

    2007, Astronomische Nachrichten, 328, 41

    Briquet , M., Hubrig , S., Sch \"o ller , M., & De Cat , P. 2007, Astronomische Nachrichten, 328, 41

    2007

  3. [11]

    A., Sundqvist , J

    Chandra , P., Wade , G. A., Sundqvist , J. O., et al. 2015, , 452, 1245

    2015

  4. [12]

    2021, , 921, 9

    Das , B., & Chandra , P. 2021, , 921, 9

    2021

  5. [13]

    2023, , 957, 53

    ---. 2023, , 957, 53

    2023

  6. [14]

    2022 a , , 515, 2008

    Das , B., Chandra , P., & Petit , V. 2022 a , , 515, 2008

    2022

  7. [15]

    E., et al

    Das , B., Chandra , P., Shultz , M. E., et al. 2022 b , , 517, 5756

    2022

  8. [16]

    E., & Wade , G

    Das , B., Chandra , P., Shultz , M. E., & Wade , G. A. 2019 a , , 877, 123

    2019

  9. [17]

    2019 b , , 489, L102

    ---. 2019 b , , 489, L102

    2019

  10. [18]

    Das , B., Chandra , P., & Wade , G. A. 2018, , 474, L61

    2018

  11. [19]

    2020 a , arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2004.08542

    Das , B., Kudale , S., Chandra , P., et al. 2020 a , arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2004.08542

    2020 arXiv

  12. [20]

    2020 b , , 900, 156

    Das , B., Mondal , S., & Chandra , P. 2020 b , , 900, 156

    2020

  13. [21]

    E., et al

    Das , B., Chandra , P., Shultz , M. E., et al. 2022 c , , 925, 125

    2022

  14. [22]

    E., Hall , P

    Dewdney , P. E., Hall , P. J., Schilizzi , R. T., & Lazio , T. J. L. W. 2009, IEEE Proceedings, 97, 1482

    2009

  15. [23]

    A., Abbott , D

    Drake , S. A., Abbott , D. C., Bastian , T. S., et al. 1987, , 322, 902

    1987

  16. [24]

    N., Pritchard , J., Murphy , T., et al

    Driessen , L. N., Pritchard , J., Murphy , T., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2404.07418

    2024 arXiv

  17. [25]

    W., Thomson , A

    Duchesne , S. W., Thomson , A. J. M., Pritchard , J., et al. 2023, , 40, e034

    2023

  18. [26]

    W., Grundy , J

    Duchesne , S. W., Grundy , J. A., Heald , G. H., et al. 2024, , 41, e003

    2024

  19. [27]

    W., Ross , K., Thomson , A

    Duchesne , S. W., Ross , K., Thomson , A. J. M., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.04978

    2025 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Dulk , G. A. 1985, , 23, 169

    1985

  21. [29]

    Gaia Collaboration , Prusti , T., de Bruijne , J. H. J., et al. 2016, , 595, A1

    2016

  22. [30]

    L., McConnell , D., Thomson , A

    Hale , C. L., McConnell , D., Thomson , A. J. M., et al. 2021, , 38, e058

    2021

  23. [31]

    2024, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, Vol

    Hallinan , G., Ravi , V., Bouman , K., et al. 2024, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, Vol. 243, American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, 237.05

    2024

  24. [32]

    1987, , 70, 33

    Heck , A., Mathys , G., & Manfroid , J. 1987, , 70, 33

    1987

  25. [33]

    1991, , 90, 365

    Lanz , T., & Mathys , G. 1991, , 90, 365

    1991

  26. [34]

    R., Kaplan , D

    Lenc , E., Murphy , T., Lynch , C. R., Kaplan , D. L., & Zhang , S. N. 2018, , 478, 2835

    2018

  27. [35]

    2005, Communications in Asteroseismology, 146, 53

    Lenz , P., & Breger , M. 2005, Communications in Asteroseismology, 146, 53

    2005

  28. [36]

    S., et al

    Leto , P., Trigilio , C., Buemi , C. S., et al. 2016, , 459, 1159

    2016

  29. [37]

    2017, , 467, 2820

    Leto , P., Trigilio , C., Oskinova , L., et al. 2017, , 467, 2820

    2017

  30. [38]

    M., et al

    Leto , P., Trigilio , C., Oskinova , L. M., et al. 2018, , 476, 562

    2018

  31. [39]

    2019, , 482, L4

    ---. 2019, , 482, L4

    2019

  32. [40]

    2020 a , , 493, 4657

    Leto , P., Trigilio , C., Leone , F., et al. 2020 a , , 493, 4657

    2020

  33. [41]

    S., et al

    Leto , P., Trigilio , C., Buemi , C. S., et al. 2020 b , , 499, L72

    2020

  34. [42]

    2021, , 507, 1979

    Leto , P., Trigilio , C., Krti c ka , J., et al. 2021, , 507, 1979

    2021

  35. [43]

    L., Drake , S

    Linsky , J. L., Drake , S. A., & Bastian , T. S. 1992, , 393, 341

    1992

  36. [44]

    L., Lenc , E., et al

    McConnell , D., Hale , C. L., Lenc , E., et al. 2020, , 37, e048

    2020

  37. [45]

    P., Waters , B., Schiebel , D., Young , W., & Golap , K

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

    2007

  38. [46]

    B., & Dulk , G

    Melrose , D. B., & Dulk , G. A. 1982, , 259, 844

    1982

  39. [47]

    W., et al

    Mikul \'a s ek , Z., Krti c ka , J., Henry , G. W., et al. 2011, , 534, L5

    2011

  40. [48]

    L., et al

    Murphy , T., Chatterjee , S., Kaplan , D. L., et al. 2013, , 30, e006

    2013

  41. [49]

    2017, , 468, 2745

    Netopil , M., Paunzen , E., H \"u mmerich , S., & Bernhard , K. 2017, , 468, 2745

    2017

  42. [50]

    Norris , R. P. 2011, Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy, 32, 599

    2011

  43. [51]

    R., McKinley , B., Hurley-Walker , N., et al

    Offringa , A. R., McKinley , B., Hurley-Walker , N., et al. 2014, , 444, 606

    2014

  44. [52]

    P., Shultz , M

    Owocki , S. P., Shultz , M. E., ud-Doula , A., et al. 2022, , arXiv:2202.05449

    2022 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Preston , G. W. 1967, , 150, 547

    1967

  46. [54]

    2021, , 502, 5438

    Pritchard , J., Murphy , T., Zic , A., et al. 2021, , 502, 5438

    2021

  47. [55]

    Renson , P., & Catalano , F. A. 2001, , 378, 113

    2001

  48. [56]

    R., Winn , J

    Ricker , G. R., Winn , J. N., Vanderspek , R., et al. 2015, Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems, 1, 014003

    2015

  49. [57]

    2023, , 951, L43

    Rose , K., Pritchard , J., Murphy , T., et al. 2023, , 951, L43

    2023

  50. [58]

    A., & Chand ra , P

    Shultz , M., Rivinius , T., Das , B., Wade , G. A., & Chand ra , P. 2019 a , , 486, 5558

    2019

  51. [59]

    E., Wade , G

    Shultz , M. E., Wade , G. A., Rivinius , T., et al. 2018, , 475, 5144

    2018

  52. [60]

    2019 b , , 490, 274

    ---. 2019 b , , 490, 274

    2019

  53. [61]

    2019 c , , 485, 1508

    ---. 2019 c , , 485, 1508

    2019

  54. [62]

    E., Owocki , S., Rivinius , T., et al

    Shultz , M. E., Owocki , S., Rivinius , T., et al. 2020, , 499, 5379

    2020

  55. [63]

    E., Owocki , S

    Shultz , M. E., Owocki , S. P., ud-Doula , A., et al. 2022, , arXiv:2201.05512

    2022 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Townsend , R. H. D., & Owocki , S. P. 2005, , 357, 251

    2005

  57. [65]

    2000, , 362, 281

    Trigilio , C., Leto , P., Leone , F., Umana , G., & Buemi , C. 2000, , 362, 281

    2000

  58. [66]

    S., & Leone , F

    Trigilio , C., Leto , P., Umana , G., Buemi , C. S., & Leone , F. 2011, , 739, L10

    2011

  59. [67]

    K., Callingham , J

    Vedantham , H. K., Callingham , J. R., Shimwell , T. W., et al. 2022, , 926, L30

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.