Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

The FAST Globular Cluster Pulsar Survey (GC FANS)

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A 101-ms pulsar in M71 orbits a massive companion every 11 days; the authors argue it is the first globular-cluster double neutron star born from ordinary stellar evolution.

desk verdict A careful, well-executed survey paper with real new timing results; the M71D DNS claim is plausible but explicitly provisional, and the paper is honest about that. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.07970 v2 pith:ZGWTDXBD submitted 2025-06-09 astro-ph.HE

Yujie Lian , Zhichen Pan , Haiyan Zhang , Shuo Cao , P. C. C. Freire , Lei Qian , Ralph P. Eatough , Lijing Shao
show 19 more authors
Scott M. Ransom Duncan R. Lorimer Dejiang Yin Yinfeng Dai Kuo Liu Lin Wang Yujie Wang Zhongli Zhang Zhonghua Feng Baoda Li Minghui Li Tong Liu Yaowei Li Bo Peng Yu Pan Yuxiao Wu Liyun Zhang Xingnan Zhang Peng Jiang
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords globularclusterpulsarsdoubleneutronstarsbinarymillisecondpulsartimingFASTtelescopestellarencounters
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 FAST Globular Cluster Pulsar Survey has found 60 pulsars in 14 globular clusters, more than doubling the known pulsar census in FAST's sky. The paper's central claim is that one of these, M71D, is a double neutron star system: a 101-ms pulsar on an 11-day, highly eccentric orbit with a companion of about 1.4 solar masses and a total system mass of $2.63 \pm 0.08 \, M_\odot$. What sets this apart is the formation path: because M71 is among the least dense clusters known to host pulsars, the eccentricity cannot have been raised by stellar encounters, and the large characteristic age points to formation from the cluster's original massive binaries, the way double neutron stars form in the Galactic disk. If correct, M71D is the first globular-cluster double neutron star formed by ordinary binary evolution rather than dynamical interactions. The survey also finds that low-density clusters can harbor extreme binaries, including the widest known globular-cluster binaries, M71B and M71C.

What carries the argument

The argument rides on phase-connected timing solutions: a relativistic binary orbital model for M71D yields the periastron advance $\dot{\omega}$, which fixes the total mass through general relativity, while a Bayesian mass-inclination analysis yields the component-mass posteriors. An analytical cluster density profile bounds the line-of-sight acceleration, turning the observed $\dot{P}$ into limits on intrinsic spin-down and characteristic age. A standard encounter-timescale formula for eccentricity pumping, evaluated with M71's low density, shows that M71D's eccentricity is essentially primordial, while the same logic applied to M71B and C shows their mild eccentricities are consistent with a quiet cluster environment.

What would settle it

Measure the Shapiro delay or any second post-Keplerian parameter in M71D's timing: if the implied companion mass falls below the neutron-star range, or the component masses become inconsistent with two neutron stars, the DNS classification fails. A deep X-ray or optical search that identifies a bright white-dwarf or main-sequence companion to M71D would also disprove it.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that five pulsars in the low-density globular cluster M71 include three new timing solutions (M71B, C, D) that are unlike most globular-cluster binaries. M71D has spin period 100.679 ms, orbital period 10.938 d, eccentricity 0.628921, and a measured periastron advance $\dot{\omega} = 0.0116(2)$ deg yr$^{-1}$; assuming general relativity, this gives a total mass of $2.63 \pm 0.08\,M_\odot$ and component masses $M_p = 1.21^{+0.13}_{-0.46}\,M_\odot$ and $M_c = 1.41^{+0.46}_{-0.13}\,M_\odot$. The cluster is too sparse for encounters to have created the eccentricity (the estimated timescale is $\sim$228 Gyr), and the characteristic age, between 8.8 and 131 Gyr depending on the line-of-sight acceleration, is consistent with formation when the cluster still contained massive stars. The paper therefore concludes that M71D is a double neutron star formed from the cluster's original massive main-sequence binaries, like Galactic disk DNSs, and not by the dynamical exchanges that produced other candidate globular-cluster DNSs.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the measured periastron advance in M71D, $\dot{\omega} = 0.0116(2)$ deg yr$^{-1}$, is purely relativistic and that the unseen companion is a neutron star; the paper states that no other post-Keplerian parameters are measurable now or in the foreseeable future, so neither the individual masses nor the companion's nature can be directly confirmed.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If M71D is a DNS, at least one globular cluster has retained a neutron-star binary formed from its original massive stars, meaning some GC binaries do not require dynamical formation.
  • Low-density clusters can host the full range of binary evolution products, from the shortest known orbital period (M71E, 0.037 d) to the widest known GC binaries (M71B, 466 d; M71C, 378 d).
  • The wide, nearly circular M71B and M71C systems resemble Galactic disk MSP--He WD binaries and are promising targets for future strong-equivalence-principle and local-Lorentz-invariance tests.
  • Encounter-rate predictions alone undercount pulsars in low-$\Gamma$ clusters: 36 of the 60 GC FANS discoveries lie in clusters with $\Gamma_{M4} < 10$.
  • The survey's deeper sensitivity extends the known spin-period range of GC pulsars from 1.98 ms to 3.96 s and reveals slower pulsars in dense clusters such as M15.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper: if M71D is confirmed, it implies M71's present escape velocity ($\sim$10 km s$^{-1}$) is too low to retain a disk-like DNS formed with typical recoil, so either the cluster was more massive in the past or this system received an unusually small kick.
  • A direct next step is to search the GC FANS archive for other eccentric, high-companion-mass pulsars in low-density clusters; the survey's data already cover 41 clusters and the paper notes future jerk and template-bank searches.
  • The M71B and M71C systems could become long-baseline gravity laboratories: their figures of merit for a statistical SEP test exceed that of PSR J1713+0747, so a decade more of timing could place new constraints on gravity theories.
  • Should a future second post-Keplerian parameter (e.g., Shapiro delay) become measurable for M71D, it would either confirm the neutron-star companion or reveal a massive white-dwarf or black-hole companion; until then the DNS identification rests on the total mass alone.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper reports the status of the FAST Globular Cluster Pulsar Survey (GC FANS): the observing strategy, sensitivity calculations, 60 pulsar discoveries in 14 clusters, phase-connected timing solutions for M71B/C/D, updated solutions for M92A, NGC 6712A, M71A/E, and a statistical comparison of GC and disk MSP populations. The headline result is M71D, a 100.7 ms pulsar in an 11-day eccentric orbit with a measured periastron advance of omega_dot = 0.0116(2) deg/yr, a total mass of 2.63 +/- 0.08 Msun, and a companion mass posterior of 1.41 (+0.46, -0.13) Msun. The authors argue that this system is most likely a double neutron star (DNS) formed by massive-binary evolution early in M71's history, in contrast to other GC DNS candidates that form dynamically.

Significance. The survey is a major observational contribution: it roughly doubles the known GC pulsar population in the FAST sky, probes fainter flux densities than previous surveys, and has uncovered extremes such as the 53-minute binary M71E and the 466-day binary M71B. The timing solutions are of high quality (residual rms 10-204 us, reduced chi-squared near unity), and the total mass derived from omega_dot follows standard practice from an independently measured post-Keplerian parameter, so there is no circularity in the timing analysis. If the DNS interpretation of M71D is correct, this would be the first globular-cluster DNS formed through isolated massive-binary evolution rather than dynamical interactions, which is a scientifically important claim. However, that interpretation is provisional: it rests on a single post-Keplerian parameter, and the paper itself states that no other relativistic effects are measurable in the foreseeable future.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 3.5, Table 6, Section 3.8] The identification of M71D as a DNS is underdetermined by the data presented. The only post-Keplerian parameter is the periastron advance, omega_dot = 0.0116(2) deg/yr; the paper explicitly states in Section 3.8 that no other PK parameters are readily measurable and that no other relativistic effects will be measurable in the foreseeable future. With the mass function f = 0.296092, the total mass 2.63 +/- 0.08 Msun implies a companion mass posterior of M_c = 1.41 (+0.46, -0.13) Msun and a minimum companion mass of 1.2888 Msun. These values are fully consistent with a massive white dwarf near the Chandrasekhar limit, and a NS+massive-WD binary can have the same total mass as a DNS. The arguments in Section 3.8 - total mass within the Galactic DNS range, large eccentricity e ~ 0.63, and large characteristic age - do not discriminate against this alternative: eccentric NS+WD binaries exist (e.g., PSR J1141-6545), and a large characteristic age only indicates that the system is old. Because the companion nature and individual masses cannot be confirmed with current data, the claim that M71D is likely a DNS formed via massive binary evolution should be softened to a candidate status, with a quantitative discussion of the massive-WD and BH companion scenarios and their formation channels.
  2. [Section 3.5, Table 6, Section 3.8] The age argument for formation at the very early stages of M71's life is weaker than presented. Table 6 gives tau_c = 8.8-131 Gyr for M71D, a factor of about 15 range that depends on the unknown line-of-sight acceleration; the lower end is only comparable to the cluster age, and the upper end is not informative. A characteristic age of order 10 Gyr is a necessary but not sufficient condition for a DNS formed from the cluster's original massive-star population, and it does not exclude a massive-WD companion or a binary that acquired its companion at an earlier epoch. The text should either present this as a consistency check or quantify how the posterior on tau_c maps onto a formation-time statement.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract vs. Section 3.1/Table 3] The abstract says 34 binaries, while Section 3.1 and the Table 3 note state 25 isolated and 35 binary pulsars; please make the counts consistent.
  2. [Section 2.2] The sentence listing clusters with shorter exposures says 'Only four clusters (Pal 10, NGC 4147, NGC 5053, Pal 14, and Ko 1)' but names five targets; correct the enumeration.
  3. [Section 2.2] There is a typo in 'radio sourves' that should read 'radio sources'.
  4. [Table 6 caption] The phrase 'their real ages are unconstrained' is too strong for objects for which lower and upper limits are actually quoted; consider 'not tightly constrained'.
  5. [References] The reference list and text contain 'Ballet el al.' (twice) and a few other spacing/typo issues; a final proofreading pass is recommended.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the M71D total mass follows from the independently measured periastron advance via general relativity, and the DNS label is a stated provisional inference rather than a fitted parameter recycled as a prediction.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation is self-contained. The M71D total mass is obtained from the timing measurement of periastron advance: 'we have a robust measurement of the rate of advance of periastron, ˙ω = 0.0116(2) deg yr−1, which assuming the effect is relativistic results in a total system mass of 2.63 ± 0.08 M⊙' (Section 3.4). omega_dot is a free parameter fitted directly to the observed arrival times; general relativity is applied as an external theory, and the resulting total mass depends only on P_b, e, and omega_dot, not on any assumed pulsar or companion mass. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction: the Bayesian estimates M_p = 1.21(+0.13/−0.46) M⊙ and M_c = 1.41(+0.46/−0.13) M⊙ are presented as inferences with stated priors (Splaver et al. 2002; Freire et al. 2011b), and Table 3's companion masses explicitly assume a 1.35 M⊙ pulsar and i = 60 deg. The DNS classification is a provisional interpretation rather than a derived identity; the paper concedes 'no other PK parameters are readily measurable' and that 'no other relativistic effects will be measurable in the foreseeable future' (Sections 3.4 and 3.8). The skeptic's concern that a near-Chandrasekhar-mass white dwarf companion is not excluded is a real underdetermination and correctness issue, but it is not circularity, because the WD alternative is not built into the mass derivation. Self-citations (Pan et al. 2021b for initial discovery, Freire et al. 2005/2017 for the cluster acceleration model, Tauris et al. 2017 for Galactic DNS formation) are used as externally validated references or benchmarks; the phase-connected timing solutions presented here come from 21 new FAST observations fitted in this paper, and the acceleration model is validated against independent 47 Tucanae data (Freire et al. 2017). No equation in the paper reduces to its own input: the characteristic age range 8.8–131 Gyr follows from the measured P_dot combined with the cluster potential model, and the t_e ≈ 228 Gyr argument applies a standard encounter-rate formula (Rasio & Heggie 1995; Lynch et al. 2011). The analysis is therefore not circular, even though the DNS identity is weaker than the independently derived system mass.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central M71D claim rests on standard timing theory (Keplerian fits, general relativity) and on several nontrivial physical assumptions: the spin-down correction decomposition, the purely relativistic nature of omega_dot, and the identity of the companion. These are external physical assumptions, not fitted parameters. The companion mass table also uses assumed pulsar mass and inclination. No new particles or forces are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • Assumed pulsar mass for companion mass estimates = 1.35 M_sun
    Table 3 caption says companion masses assume a 1.35 M_sun pulsar and an inclination angle of 60 degrees; this converts mass functions into companion masses used in Table 3 and Figure 5.
  • Assumed inclination angle for companion mass estimates = 60 degrees
    Table 3 caption adopts i = 60 degrees for all companion mass estimates. The M71D total mass from omega_dot does not depend on this assumption.
  • Maximum DM spread in sensitivity calculation = 0.05 pc cm^-3
    Section 2.3 adopts a maximum DM spread of 0.05 pc cm^-3 to estimate dispersion smearing and survey sensitivity. This affects survey comparisons but not the timing results.
  • Assumed average stellar mass for encounter timescale = 1 M_sun
    Section 3.6 follows Lynch et al. (2011) and assumes an average stellar mass of 1 M_sun to convert M71 core density to number density, n approximately 680 pc^-3, used for the t>e estimates of M71B, C, and D.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The observed spin period derivative is the sum of intrinsic spin-down, the Shklovskii effect, cluster line-of-sight acceleration, and Galactic acceleration (Eq. 6).
    Section 3.5 uses this decomposition to estimate intrinsic P_dot; if an additional acceleration source exists, the derived magnetic fields and characteristic ages shift.
  • domain assumption The periastron advance of M71D is entirely relativistic and follows general relativity.
    Sections 3.4 and 3.8 derive total mass 2.63 ± 0.08 M_sun from omega_dot; a classical or third-body contribution would change the mass and weaken the DNS classification.
  • domain assumption M71D's companion is a neutron star rather than a massive white dwarf or a black hole.
    The DNS label rests on total mass, eccentricity, and characteristic age. The paper notes that no other post-Keplerian parameter confirms the companion nature.
  • domain assumption The King model cluster potential brackets the line-of-sight acceleration for each pulsar.
    Section 3.5 uses the Freire et al. (2005) model with Harris (2010) parameters to set a_l,max; inaccurate core parameters would change P_dot_int limits and characteristic ages.
  • domain assumption The Tauris and Savonije (1999) relation between orbital period and He WD mass applies to M71B and C.
    Section 3.7 compares measured minimum companion masses to that relation, supporting the interpretation of M71B and C as wide MSP-He WD systems.
  • domain assumption The Cordes et al. (2022) scattering relation describes the interstellar medium toward these clusters.
    Section 2.3 uses Equation 5 for scattering in sensitivity curves; it is an empirical fit rather than a derivation.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The FAST Globular Cluster Pulsar Survey (GC FANS)." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZGWTDXBD

@misc{pith2026250607970,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The FAST Globular Cluster Pulsar Survey (GC FANS)},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZGWTDXBD}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.07970}
}
abstract

By January 2025, 60 pulsars were discovered by the Five-hundred-meter Aperture Spherical radio Telescope globular cluster (GC) pulsar survey (GC FANS), with spin periods spanning 1.98 ms to 3960.72 ms. Of these, 55 are millisecond pulsars (MSPs; $P<30$ ms), while 34 are binaries with orbital periods spanning 0.12 days to 466.47 days. This paper describes GC FANS, a deep, thorough search for pulsars in 41 GCs in the FAST sky ($-14^\circ < \delta < 65^\circ$) and describes new discoveries in 14 of them. We present updated timing solutions for M92A, NGC 6712A, M71A, and M71E, all of which are ``spider'' pulsars with short orbital periods. We present new timing solutions for M71B, C, and D. With orbital periods of $\sim$466 and 378 days, M71B and M71C are the widest known GC binaries; these systems resemble the normal wide MSP-He WD systems in the Galactic disk. With a spin period of 101 ms, M71D is in an eccentric ($e\sim$0.63) orbit with an 11-day period and a massive companion; the system has a total mass of $2.63 \pm 0.08 \, M_{\odot}$. These features and its large characteristic age suggest it is a double neutron star system (DNS) formed via massive binary evolution early in the cluster's history, akin to Galactic disk DNSs--unlike other candidate GC DNSs, which typically form dynamically. A comparative analysis of GC pulsar populations within FAST's sky reveals that most clusters (10 of 14) resemble the Galactic disk MSP population, likely due to lower stellar densities.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.07970 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The distribution of all the 45 GCs with its ΓM4 (listed in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Summary of GC FANS observations for 45 clusters within −13.1 ◦ < DEC < +47.5 ◦ from May 2018 to September 2024, plotted as a function of Modified Julian Date (MJD) and calendar date (YYYY-MM-DD). Clusters are sorted by their declinations (north to south). Blue markers denote individual observations, with the observation counts (N obs) and total integration time (T) in hours shown on the right. Clusters with pulsar d… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The summary of the longest single observation durations for all 45 clusters within FAST’s sky. Red and purple horizontal lines denote the theoretical maximum observation times at zenith angles of 26.5◦ and 40◦ , respectively. Clusters are ordered by their declinations (north to south). Within a zenith angle of 26.5◦ , FAST maintains a stable gain (∼ 16 K Jy−1 ) with a 300-meter effective aperture, but beyond this an… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (9 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Survey sensitivity as a function of period and DM, assuming an intrinsic pulse width of 8%. Each set of curves shows (from left to right, see example denoted for the curves of Parkes) the sensitivity calculated using DMs of 30, 200, and 500 pc cm−3 . In each case, the …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Companion mass vs. orbital period for GC pul￾sars. Pulsars in GCs from the ANTF pulsar catalog are shown as unfilled grey diamonds, known black widows and redbacks are unfilled pentagons and triangles respectively, and FAST discoveries are filled stars. The dashed grey…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Timing residuals from the best-fit timing models presented in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Positions of M92A, NGC 6712A, and M71A-E (denoted as red stars), and detected X-ray sources (denoted as blue circles), respectively. The details of those marked X-ray sources in M92, NGC 6712, and M71 can be found in Lu et al. (2011), Geffert et al. (1994), and Elsner …
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Mass-inclination and mass-mass diagrams for M71D. The contours display the cos i–Mc and Mp–Mc planes, including 1σ, 2σ, and 3σ of a 2D pdf derived from the χ 2 of TEMPO fit and the Bayesian technique described by Splaver et al. (2002); Freire et al. (2011b). The red re…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The acceleration model for M92, NGC 6712, and M71. The black solid lines represent the upper and lower limits for the line-of-sight accelerations (aℓGC) caused by the cluster as a function of the total angular offset from the center of the cluster (θ⊥). The triangles p…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The central density as a function of the core radius for 44 clusters with known pulsars (excluding GLIMPSE-C01, which does not have available central den￾sity). The constant stellar interaction rate Γ and encounter rate per binary γ are shown as lines in the graph. Am…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Flux density vs. pulsar spin period P (left panel) and orbital period Pb (right panel) for pulsars in GCs discovered by different telescopes: Arecibo (lime), Effelsberg (deep pink), FAST (red), GBT (purple), MeerKAT (orange), and Parkes (cyan). The pulsars identified …
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Gamma-ray spectral energy distributions (SEDs) for M92, NGC 6712, and M71, which are typical of SEDs observed for MSPs. The log-parabola fit to the data comes from the 4FGL-DR4 catalog (Ballet el al. 2023). The grey zone shows the 1 σ uncertainty range. The Fermi LAT …

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. Detecting Intermediate-mass Black Holes Using Miniature Pulsar Timing Arrays in Globular Clusters

    astro-ph.HE 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A mini pulsar timing array inside a globular cluster could detect intermediate-mass black hole binaries with mass ratios above about 0.1 via microsecond gravitational-wave timing residuals.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

175 extracted references · 70 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    D., Buchner S., Burgay M., Champion D

    Abbate F., Ridolfi A., Barr E. D., Buchner S., Burgay M., Champion D. J., Chen W., et al., 2022, MNRAS, 513, 2292

    2022

  2. [2]

    Abdollahi, S., Acero, F., Baldini, L., et al., 2022, ApJS, 260, 53

    2022

  3. [3]

    A., Cheng A

    Alpar M. A., Cheng A. F., Ruderman M. A., Shaham J., 1982, Nature, 300, 728

    1982

  4. [4]

    B., Gorham, P

    Anderson, S. B., Gorham, P. W., Kulkarni, S. R., Prince, T. A., & Wolszczan, A. 1990, Nature, 346, 42

    1990

  5. [5]

    B., 1993, PhD thesis, California Institute of Technology

    Anderson, S. B., 1993, PhD thesis, California Institute of Technology

    1993

  6. [6]

    C., & Ransom, S

    Andersen, B. C., & Ransom, S. M. 2018, ApJL, 863, L13

    2018

  7. [7]

    M., et al., 2018, Nature, 559, 73

    Archibald, A. M., et al., 2018, Nature, 559, 73

    2018

  8. [8]

    C., Hama, S., Hook, S

    Backer, D. C., Hama, S., Hook, S. V., & Foster, R. S. 1993, ApJ, 404, 636

    1993

Show all 175 references
  1. [9]

    Bagchi, M., et al., 2011, MNRAS, 418, 477

    2011

  2. [10]

    O., Sivakoff, G

    Bahramian, A., Heinke, C. O., Sivakoff, G. R., & Gladstone, J. C., 2013, ApJ, 766, 136

    2013

  3. [11]

    Balakrishnan, V., Champion, D., Barr, E., et al., 2022, MNRAS, 511, 1265

    2022

  4. [13]

    D., Dutta, A., Freire, P

    Barr, E. D., Dutta, A., Freire, P. C. C., et al. 2024, Sci, 383, 275

    2024

  5. [14]

    & Hilker, M., 2018, MNRAS, 478, 1520

    Baumgardt, H. & Hilker, M., 2018, MNRAS, 478, 1520

    2018

  6. [15]

    G., De Vito, M

    Benvenuto, O. G., De Vito, M. A. & Horvath, J. E., 2014, ApJ, 786, l7

    2014

  7. [16]

    Bhat, N. D. R., Cordes, J. M., Camilo, F., Nice, D. J., & Lorimer, D. R., 2004, ApJ, 605, 759

    2004

  8. [17]

    Bhat, N. D. R., Rao, A. P., & Gupta, Y., 1999, ApJS, 121, 483

    1999

  9. [18]

    R., Turk, P

    Boyles, J., Lorimer, D. R., Turk, P. J., et al., 2011, ApJ, 742, 51

    2011

  10. [19]

    B., et al., 2022, Nature, 605, 41–45

    Burdge, K. B., et al., 2022, Nature, 605, 41–45

    2022

  11. [20]

    R., et al., 2015, ApJ, 807, 91

    Cadelano, M., Pallanca, C., Ferraro, F. R., et al., 2015, ApJ, 807, 91

    2015

  12. [21]

    M., Freire, P

    Cadelano, M., Ransom, S. M., Freire, P. C. C., et al., 2018, ApJ, 855, 125

    2018

  13. [22]

    R., Freire, P., Lyne, A

    Camilo, F., Lorimer, D. R., Freire, P., Lyne, A. G., & Manchester, R. N., 2000, ApJ, 535, 975

    2000

  14. [23]

    Camilo, F., & Rasio, F. A. 2005, in ASP Conf. Ser. 328, Binary Radio Pulsars, ed. F. A. Rasio & I. H. Stairs (San Francisco: ASP), 147

    2005

  15. [24]

    W., 1975, ApJ, 199, L143

    Clark, G. W., 1975, ApJ, 199, L143

    1975

  16. [25]

    Chen, H.-L., Chen, X., Tauris, T. M. & Han, Z., 2013, ApJ, 775, 27

    2013

  17. [26]

    C., Ridolfi A.,et al., 2023, MNRAS, 520, 3847

    Chen W., Freire P. C., Ridolfi A.,et al., 2023, MNRAS, 520, 3847

    2023

  18. [27]

    A., & Ruffini, R

    Cipolletta, F., Cherubini, C., Filippi, S., Rueda, J. A., & Ruffini, R. 2015, PRD, 92, 023007

    2015

  19. [28]

    M., Ocker, S

    Cordes, J. M., Ocker, S. K., Chatterjee, S., 2022, ApJ, 931, 88

    2022

  20. [29]

    A., Ransom S

    Corcoran K. A., Ransom S. M., Rosenthal A. C., DeCesar M. E., Freire P. C. C., Hessels J. W. T., Lynch R. S., et al., 2024, arXiv, arXiv:2412.08688

    2024

  21. [30]

    J., Li, D., et al

    Cruces, M., Champion, D. J., Li, D., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 508, 300

    2021

  22. [31]

    Dai, Y., Pan, Z., Qian, L., et al., 2025, arXiv, arXiv:2504.16872

    2025 arXiv

  23. [32]

    Damour, T., Deruelle, N., 1985, AIHPA, 43, 107

    1985

  24. [33]

    1992, PRD, 46, 4128

    Damour, T., & Esposito-Far\`ese, G. 1992, PRD, 46, 4128

    1992

  25. [34]

    1991, PRL, 66, 2549

    Damour, T., & Schaefer, G. 1991, PRL, 66, 2549

    1991

  26. [35]

    Damour, T., & Taylor, J. H. 1992, PRD, 45, 1840

    1992

  27. [36]

    Das J., Roy J., Freire P. C. C., Ransom S. M., Bhattacharyya B., Ad \'a mek K., Armour W., et al., 2025, arXiv, arXiv:2502.09154

    2025

  28. [37]

    B., 1997, MNRAS, 288, 117

    Davies, M. B., 1997, MNRAS, 288, 117

    1997

  29. [38]

    E., Ransom, S

    DeCesar, M. E., Ransom, S. M., Kaplan, D. L., Ray, P. S., & Geller, A. M., 2015, ApJL, 807, L23

    2015

  30. [39]

    E., Hall, P

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

    2009

  31. [40]

    A., Cohn, H

    Drukier, G. A., Cohn, H. N., Lugger, P. M., et al. 2007, AJ, 133, 1041

    2007

  32. [41]

    Dutta A., Freire P. C. C., Gautam T., Wex N., Ridolfi A., Champion D. J., Venkatraman Krishnan V., et al., 2025, A&A, accepted, arXiv, arXiv:2503.05466

    2025 arXiv

  33. [42]

    F., Heinke, C

    Elsner, R. F., Heinke, C. O., Cohn, H. N., et al., 2008, ApJ, 687, 1019

    2008

  34. [43]

    Faucher-Giguère, C.-A., & Loeb, A., 2011, MNRAS, 415, 3951

    2011

  35. [44]

    C., Gupta, Y., Ransom, S

    Freire, P. C., Gupta, Y., Ransom, S. M., & Ishwara-Chandra, C. H., 2004, ApJ, 606, 53

    2004

  36. [45]

    C., Hessels, J

    Freire, P. C., Hessels, J. W. T., Nice D. J., et al., 2005, ApJ, 621, 959

    2005

  37. [46]

    Freire P. C. C., Ransom S. M., B \'e gin S., Stairs I. H., Hessels J. W. T., Frey L. H., Camilo F., 2008, ApJ, 675, 670

    2008

  38. [47]

    Freire, P. C. C., Abdo, A. A., Ajello, M., et al., 2011, Sci, 334, 1107

    2011

  39. [48]

    Freire, P. C. C., Bassa, C. G., Wex, N., et al., 2011, MNRAS, 412, 2763

    2011

  40. [49]

    Freire, P. C. C., Kramer, M., Wex, N., 2012, CQGra, 29, 184007

    2012

  41. [50]

    Freire P. C. C., Ridolfi A., Kramer M., Jordan C., Manchester R. N., Torne P., Sarkissian J., et al., 2017, MNRAS, 471, 857

    2017

  42. [51]

    Freire, P. C. C. & Ridolfi, A.\ 2018, MNRAS, 476, 4794

    2018

  43. [52]

    S., Stinebring, D

    Fruchter, A. S., Stinebring, D. R., & Taylor, J. H. 1988, Nature, 333, 237

    1988

  44. [53]

    Gautam, T., Ridolfi, A., Freire, P. C. C., et al., 2022, A&A, 664, A54

    2022

  45. [54]

    Geffert, M., Auriere, M., Requieme, Y., Mazurier, J.-M., 1994, A&A, 282, 989

    1994

  46. [55]

    Guo, Y.-L., Wang, B., Li, X., 2024, MNRAS, 527, 7394

    2024

  47. [56]

    Ghosh, A., Bhattacharyya, B., Lyne, A., et al., 2024, ApJ, 965, 64

    2024

  48. [57]

    S., et al., 2017, Curr

    Gupta, Y., Ajithkumar, B., Kale, H. S., et al., 2017, Curr. Science, 113, 707

    2017

  49. [58]

    L., Wang, C., Wang, P

    Han, J. L., Wang, C., Wang, P. F., et al., 2021, RAA, 21, 107

    2021

  50. [59]

    L., Zhou D

    Han J. L., Zhou D. J., Wang C., Su W. Q., Yan Y., Jing W. C., Yang Z. L., et al., 2024, arXiv, arXiv:2411.15961

    2024 arXiv

  51. [60]

    E., 1996, AJ, 112, 1487

    Harris, W. E., 1996, AJ, 112, 1487

    1996

  52. [61]

    Harris, W. E. 2010, arXiv:1012.3224

    2010 arXiv

  53. [62]

    Hessels, J. W. T., Ransom, S. M., Stairs, I. H., et al., 2006, Science, l311, 1901

    2006

  54. [63]

    Hessels, J. W. T., Ransom, S. M., Stairs, I. H., Kaspi, V. M., & Freire, P. C. C., 2007, ApJ, 670, 363

    2007

  55. [64]

    Hessels, J., Possenti, A., Bailes, M., et al., 2015, Advancing Astrophysics with the Square Kilometre Array (AASKA14), 47

    2015

  56. [65]

    A., Naylor, T., et al., 1996, MNRAS, 282, L37

    Homer, L., Charles, P. A., Naylor, T., et al., 1996, MNRAS, 282, L37

    1996

  57. [66]

    Hou, X., Zhang, W., Freire, P. C. C. et al., 2024, ApJ, 964, 118

    2024

  58. [67]

    A., Cameron, P

    Jacoby, B. A., Cameron, P. B., Jenet, F. A., et al., 2006, ApJL, 644, L113

    2006

  59. [68]

    2015, ApJ, 814, 74

    Jia, K., & Li, X.-D. 2015, ApJ, 814, 74

    2015

  60. [69]

    2019, SCPMA, 62, 959502

    Jiang, P., Yue, Y., Gan, H., et al. 2019, SCPMA, 62, 959502

    2019

  61. [70]

    2020, RAA, 20, 064

    Jiang, P., Tang, N.-Y., Hou, L.-G., et al. 2020, RAA, 20, 064

    2020

  62. [71]

    M., & Kulkarni, S

    Johnston, H. M., & Kulkarni, S. R., 1991, ApJ, 368, 504

    1991

  63. [72]

    J., Guillemot, L., Kerr, M., et al., 2013, ApJ, 778, 106

    Johnson, T. J., Guillemot, L., Kerr, M., et al., 2013, ApJ, 778, 106

    2013

  64. [73]

    I., 1975, Nature, 253, 698

    Katz, J. I., 1975, Nature, 253, 698

    1975

  65. [74]

    King, I., 1962, AJ, 67, 471

    1962

  66. [75]

    R., Davies, M

    King, A. R., Davies, M. B., & Beer, M. E. 2003, MNRAS, 345, 678

    2003

  67. [76]

    R., Beer, M

    King, A. R., Beer, M. E., Rolfe, D. J., Schenker, K., & Skipp, J. M. 2005, MNRAS, 358, 1501

    2005

  68. [77]

    S., Kıroğlu, F., et al., 2022, ApJL, 934, L1

    Kremer, K., Ye, C. S., Kıroğlu, F., et al., 2022, ApJL, 934, L1

    2022

  69. [78]

    L., & Ransom, S

    Kremer, K., Fuller, J., Piro, A. L., & Ransom, S. M., 2023, MNRAS, 525, L22

    2023

  70. [79]

    S., Heinke C

    Kremer K., Ye C. S., Heinke C. O., Piro A. L., Ransom S. M., Rasio F. A., 2024, arXiv, arXiv:2409.07527

    2024 arXiv

  71. [80]

    R., Anderson, S

    Kulkarni, S. R., Anderson, S. B., Prince, T. A., & Wolszczan, A. 1991, Nature, 349, 47

    1991

  72. [81]

    Lange, C., Camilo, F., Wex, N., et al., 2001, MNRAS, 326, 274

    2001

  73. [82]

    M., Champion, D

    Lazarus, P., Kaspi, V. M., Champion, D. J., Hessels, J. W. T., & Dib, R. 2012, ApJ, 744, 97

    2012

  74. [83]

    Li, D., Wang, P., Qian, L., et al., 2018, IEEE Microwave Magazine, 19, 112

    2018

  75. [84]

    Li, B., Zhang, L.-Y., Yao, J., et al., 2024, ApJ, 972, 1

    2024

  76. [85]

    Li, Y., Wang, L., Qian, L., et al., 2025, arXiv, arXiv:2505.05021

    2025 arXiv

  77. [86]

    Lian, Y., Pan, Z., Zhang, H., Freire, P. C. C., Cao, S., Qian, L., 2023, ApJL, 951, L37

    2023

  78. [87]

    Lian, Y., Freire, P. C. C., Cao, S., et al., 2025, ApJL, 981, L3

    2025

  79. [88]

    G., et al., 2020, MNRAS, 499, 2276

    Liu, K., Guillemot, L., Istrate, A. G., et al., 2020, MNRAS, 499, 2276

    2020

  80. [89]

    Liu, Z., Dong, S., 2023, arXiv:2306.14949

    2023 arXiv

  81. [90]

    R., & Kramer, M

    Lorimer, D. R., & Kramer, M. 2004, Handbook of Pulsar Astronomy, Vol. 4 (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press)

    2004

  82. [91]

    R., 2008, LRR, 11, 8

    Lorimer, D. R., 2008, LRR, 11, 8

    2008

  83. [92]

    Lu, T.-N., Kong, A. K. H., Verbunt, F., et al., 2011, ApJ, 736, 158

    2011

  84. [93]

    S., Ransom, S

    Lynch, R. S., Ransom, S. M., Freire, P. C. C., & Stairs, I. H., 2011, ApJ, 734, 89L

    2011

  85. [94]

    S., Freire, P

    Lynch, R. S., Freire, P. C. C., Ransom, S. M., & Jacoby, B. A., 2012, ApJ, 745, 109

    2012

  86. [95]

    G., Biggs, J

    Lyne, A. G., Biggs, J. D., Brinklow, A., Ashworth, M., & McKenna, J., 1988, Nature, 332, 45

    1988

  87. [96]

    G., Biggs, J

    Lyne, A. G., Biggs, J. D., Harrison, P. A., & Bailes, M., 1993, Nature, 361, 47

    1993

  88. [97]

    G., Manchester, R

    Lyne, A. G., Manchester, R. N., & D'Amico, N. 1996, ApJL, 460, L41

    1996

  89. [98]

    S., Chan, V., et al., 2018, Natur, 557, 522

    Main, R., Yang, I. S., Chan, V., et al., 2018, Natur, 557, 522

    2018

  90. [99]

    N., Hobbs, G

    Manchester, R. N., Hobbs, G. B., Teoh, A., & Hobbs, M., 2005, AJ, 129, 1993

    2005

  91. [100]

    R., Ransom, S

    Martsen, A. R., Ransom, S. M., DeCesar, M. E., et al., 2022, ApJ, 941, 22

    2022

  92. [101]

    V., Maccarone T

    McCarver A. V., Maccarone T. J., Ransom S. M., Clarke T. E., Giacintucci S., Peters W. M., Polisensky E., et al., 2024, ApJ, 969, 30

    2024

  93. [102]

    A., Connors, T., & Ables, J

    McConnell, D., Deshpande, A. A., Connors, T., & Ables, J. G. 2004, MNRAS, 348, 1409

    2004

  94. [103]

    McMillan, P. J. 2017, MNRAS, 465, 76

    2017

  95. [104]

    D., Stappers, B

    Morello, V., Barr, E. D., Stappers, B. W., Keane, E. F., & Lyne, A. G., 2020, MNRAS, 497, 4654

    2020

  96. [105]

    J., Hobbs, G., Lyne, A

    Morris, D. J., Hobbs, G., Lyne, A. G., et al., 2002, MNRAS, 335, 275

    2002

  97. [106]

    2011, IJMPD, 20, 989N

    Nan, R., Li, D., Jin, C., et al. 2011, IJMPD, 20, 989N

    2011

  98. [107]

    Pan, Z., Hobbs, G., Li, D., et al., 2016, MNRAS, 459, L26

    2016

  99. [108]

    M., Lorimer, D

    Pan, Z., Ransom, S. M., Lorimer, D. R., et al. 2020, ApJ, 892L, 6P

    2020

  100. [109]

    Pan, Z., Ma, X.-Y., Qian, L., et al., 2021a, Res. Astron. Astrophys., 21, 143

  101. [110]

    Pan, Z., Qian, L., Ma, X., et al., 2021b, ApJ, 915, L28

  102. [111]

    Pan, Z., Lu, J.G., Jiang, P., et al., 2023, Nature, 620, 961–964

    2023

  103. [112]

    M., Ransom, S

    Parent, E., Kaspi, V. M., Ransom, S. M., et al. 2018, ApJ, 861, 44

    2018

  104. [113]

    Paust, N. E. Q., Chaboyer, B., & Sarajedini, A., 2007, AJ, 133, 2787

    2007

  105. [114]

    T., Possenti, A., Esposito, P., et al., 2015, ApJ, 808, 81

    Pennucci, T. T., Possenti, A., Esposito, P., et al., 2015, ApJ, 808, 81

    2015

  106. [115]

    S., 1992, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A, 341, 39

    Phinney E. S., 1992, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A, 341, 39

    1992

  107. [116]

    S., Kulkarni, S

    Phinney, E. S., Kulkarni, S. R., 1994, ARA&A, 32, 591

    1994

  108. [117]

    Pooley D., Lewin W. H. G., Anderson S. F., Baumgardt H., Filippenko A. V., Gaensler B. M., Homer L., et al., 2003, ApJL, 591, L131

    2003

  109. [118]

    J., Ransom, S

    Prager, B. J., Ransom, S. M., Freire, P. C. C., et al. 2017, ApJ, 845, 148

    2017

  110. [119]

    A., Anderson, S

    Prince, T. A., Anderson, S. B., Kulkarni, S. R., & Wolszczan, A., 1991, ApJL, 374, L41

    1991

  111. [120]

    Ransom, S. M. 2001, PhD thesis, Harvard Univ., http://www.cv.nrao.edu/ sransom/ransom\_thesis\_2001.pdf

    2001

  112. [121]

    M., Eikenberry, S

    Ransom, S. M., Eikenberry, S. S., & Middleditch, J. 2002, AJ, 124, 1788

    2002

  113. [122]

    M., Cordes, J

    Ransom, S. M., Cordes, J. M., & Eikenberry, S. S. 2003, ApJ, 589, 911

    2003

  114. [123]

    M., Hessels, J

    Ransom, S. M., Hessels, J. W. T., Stairs, I. H., et al. 2005, Sci, 307, 892

    2005

  115. [124]

    M., 2008, in IAU Symp

    Ransom, S. M., 2008, in IAU Symp. 246, Dynamical Evolution of Dense Stellar Systems, ed. E. Vesperini, M. Giersz, & A. Sills (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press), 291

    2008

  116. [125]

    A., & Heggie, D

    Rasio, F. A., & Heggie, D. C., 1995, ApJ, 445, L133

    1995

  117. [126]

    Ridolfi A., Freire P. C. C., Torne P., Heinke C. O., van den Berg M., Jordan C., Kramer M., et al., 2016, MNRAS, 462, 2918

    2016

  118. [127]

    Ridolfi, A., Freire, P. C. C., Gupta, Y., & Ransom, S. M., 2019, MNRAS, 490, 3860

    2019

  119. [128]

    Ridolfi, A., Gautam, T., Freire, P. C. C., et al., 2021, MNRAS, 504, 1407

    2021

  120. [129]

    Ridolfi, A., Freire, P. C. C., Gautam, T., et al., 2022, A&A, 664, A27

    2022

  121. [130]

    Roberts, M. S. E., 2013, IAUS, 291, 127

    2013

  122. [131]

    C., Ransom S

    Rosenthal A. C., Ransom S. M., Corcoran K. A., DeCesar M. E., Freire P. C. C., Hessels J. W. T., Keith M. J., et al., 2024, arXiv, arXiv:2410.21648. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2410.21648

    2024 doi arXiv

  123. [132]

    B., Hansen B

    Sigurdsson S., Richer H. B., Hansen B. M., Stairs I. H., Thorsett S. E., 2003, Science, 301, 193

    2003

  124. [133]

    Shaifullah G., Verbiest J. P. W., Freire P. C. C., Tauris T. M., Wex N., Os owski S., Stappers B. W., et al., 2016, MNRAS, 462, 1029

    2016

  125. [134]

    2012, CQGra, 29, 215018

    Shao, L., Wex, N. 2012, CQGra, 29, 215018

    2012

  126. [135]

    2018, PhRvL, 120, 241104

    Shao, L., Wex, N., Kramer, M. 2018, PhRvL, 120, 241104

    2018

  127. [136]

    Shaifullah, G., Verbiest, J. P. W., Freire, P. C. C., et al., 2016, MNRAS, 462, 1029

    2016

  128. [137]

    S., 1970, Soviet Ast., 13, 562

    Shklovskii, I. S., 1970, Soviet Ast., 13, 562

    1970

  129. [138]

    & Phinney, E

    Sigurdsson, S. & Phinney, E. S., 1993, ApJ, 415, 631

    1993

  130. [139]

    2022, ApJ, 934, 138

    Singh, S., Roy, J., Panda, U., et al. 2022, ApJ, 934, 138

    2022

  131. [140]

    A., Bruel, P., Cognard, I., et al., 2019, ApJ, 871, 78

    Smith, D. A., Bruel, P., Cognard, I., et al., 2019, ApJ, 871, 78

    2019

  132. [141]

    A., Abdollahi, S., Ajello, M., et al., 2023, ApJ, 958, 191

    Smith, D. A., Abdollahi, S., Ajello, M., et al., 2023, ApJ, 958, 191

    2023

  133. [142]

    M., Nice, D

    Splaver, E. M., Nice, D. J., Arzoumanian, Z., Camilo, F., Lyne, A. G., Stairs, I. H., 2002, ApJ, 581, 509

    2002

  134. [143]

    H.\ 1969, IEEE Proceedings, 57, 724

    Staelin, D. H.\ 1969, IEEE Proceedings, 57, 724

    1969

  135. [144]

    S., Ransom, S

    Stovall, K., Lynch, R. S., Ransom, S. M., et al., 2014, ApJ, 791, 67

    2014

  136. [145]

    Swarup, G., 1991, in ASP Conf. Ser. 19, IAU Coll. 131: Radio Interferometry. Theory, Techniques, and Applications, ed. T. J. Cornwell & R. A. Perley (San Francisco, CA: ASP), 376

    1991

  137. [146]

    M., & Savonije, G

    Tauris, T. M., & Savonije, G. J., 1999, A&A, 350, 928

    1999

  138. [147]

    M., Sanyal, D., Yoon, S.-C., et al., 2013, A&A, 558, A39

    Tauris, T. M., Sanyal, D., Yoon, S.-C., et al., 2013, A&A, 558, A39

    2013

  139. [148]

    M., Kramer, M., Freire, P

    Tauris, T. M., Kramer, M., Freire, P. C. C., et al., 2017, ApJ, 846, 170

    2017

  140. [149]

    M., van den Heuvel E

    Tauris T. M., van den Heuvel E. P. J., 2023, arXiv:2305.09388

    2023 arXiv

  141. [150]

    D., Evans, C

    Thompson, C., Blandford, R. D., Evans, C. R., & Phinney, E. S., 1994, ApJ, 422, 304

    1994

  142. [151]

    J., & Lorimer, D

    Turk, P. J., & Lorimer, D. R., 2013, MNRAS, 436, 3720

    2013

  143. [152]

    van den Heuvel, E. P. J., & van Paradijs, J. 1988, Nature, 334, 227

    1988

  144. [153]

    Vasiliev, E., & Baumgardt, H., 2021, MNRAS, 505, 5978

    2021

  145. [154]

    Verbunt F., Hut P., 1987, IAUS, 125, 187

    1987

  146. [155]

    Verbunt, F., 2003, in New horizons in globular cluster astronomy, eds. G. Piotto et al., ASP Conf. Ser., 296, 245

    2003

  147. [156]

    Verbunt, F., Freire, P. C. C., 2014, A&A, 561, A11

    2014

  148. [157]

    Voisin, G., et al., 2020, A&A, 638, A24

    2020

  149. [158]

    W., Bailes, M., et al., 2022, MNRAS, 513, 1386

    Vleeschower, L., Stappers, B. W., Bailes, M., et al., 2022, MNRAS, 513, 1386

    2022

  150. [159]

    et al., 2020, ApJ, 892, 43

    Wang, L. et al., 2020, ApJ, 892, 43

    2020

  151. [160]

    F., Han J

    Wang P. F., Han J. L., Yang Z. L., Wang T., Wang C., Su W. Q., Xu J., et al., 2024, arXiv, arXiv:2412.03062

    2024 arXiv

  152. [161]

    2000, in Pulsar Astronomy---2000 and Beyond, ASP Conference Series, 202, 113

    Wex, N. 2000, in Pulsar Astronomy---2000 and Beyond, ASP Conference Series, 202, 113

    2000

  153. [162]

    Will, C. M. 2018, Theory and Experiment in Gravitational Physics, Cambridge University Press

    2018

  154. [163]

    Wu Y., Pan Z., Qian L., et al., 2024, ApJL, 974, L23

    2024

  155. [164]

    M., et al., 2021, ApJ, 921, 120

    Yan, Z., Pan, Z.-C., Ransom, S. M., et al., 2021, ApJ, 921, 120

    2021

  156. [165]

    M., Manchester, R

    Yao, J. M., Manchester, R. N., Wang, N., 2017, ApJ, 835, 29

    2017

  157. [166]

    S., Kremer, K., Ransom, S

    Ye, C. S., Kremer, K., Ransom, S. M., Rasio, F. A., 2024, ApJ, 961, 98

    2024

  158. [167]

    Yin, D., Zhang, L., Li, B.-D., et al., 2023, RAA, 23, 055012

    2023

  159. [168]

    Yin, D., Zhang, L., Qian, L., et al., 2024, ApJL, 969, L7

    2024

  160. [169]

    P., Hobbs, G., Coles, W

    You, X. P., Hobbs, G., Coles, W. A., et al. 2007, MNRAS, 378, 493

    2007

  161. [170]

    Zhang, P., Xing, Y., & Wang, Z., 2022, ApJL, 935, L36

    2022

  162. [171]

    Zhang, L., Freire, P. C. C., Ridolfi, A., et al. 2023a, ApJS, 269, 56

  163. [172]

    2023b, ApJ, 945, 70

    Zhang, P., Xing, Y., Wang, Z., Wu, W., & Chen, Z. 2023b, ApJ, 945, 70

  164. [173]

    O., 2022, MNRAS, 511, 5964

    Zhao, J., Heinke, C. O., 2022, MNRAS, 511, 5964

    2022

  165. [174]

    2024, SCPMA, 67, 269512

    Zhou, D., Wang, P., Li, D., et al. 2024, SCPMA, 67, 269512

    2024

  166. [175]

    W., Desvignes, G., Wex, N., et al

    Zhu, W. W., Desvignes, G., Wex, N., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 482, 3249

    2019

  167. [176]

    H., Lott, B., & The Fermi-LAT collaboration, 2023, arXiv:2307.12546

    Ballet, J., Bruel, P., Burnett, T. H., Lott, B., & The Fermi-LAT collaboration, 2023, arXiv:2307.12546

    2023 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.