Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 3 cited by

Strongly polarised radio pulses from a new white-dwarf-hosting long-period transient

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A radio transient has been found whose pulses alternate between 100% circular and 100% linear polarisation, tied to an 841-second rotation and a likely white-dwarf companion.

desk verdict Solid new LPT discovery with a tentative white-dwarf identification; the title overstates the photometric evidence, but the radio result deserves a serious referee. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.05078 v1 pith:A3HBN6MT submitted 2025-07-07 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.SR

Sanne Bloot , Harish K. Vedantham , Cees G. Bassa , Joseph R. Callingham , William M. J. Best , Michael C. Liu , Eugene A. Magnier , Timothy W. Shimwell
show 1 more author
Trent J. Dupuy
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.HEastro-ph.SR
keywords radiotransientslong-periodwhitedwarfscircularpolarisationlinearspin-orbitresonanceLOFARbursts
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

This paper reports the discovery of ILT J163430+445010, a long-period transient found in a blind search for circularly polarised pulses in LOFAR survey data. Over six observations the source emitted 19 pulses, each nearly 100% polarised, with some pulses purely circularly polarised and others purely linearly polarised, a switch in polarisation state from pulse to pulse not seen before in this class. The pulses repeat with a period of $841.24808 \pm 0.00015$ s, and their arrival times follow a pattern of two pulses every five periods, which the authors interpret as a white dwarf in a nearly perfect 5:2 or 5:3 spin-orbit resonance with a companion. A faint ultraviolet and optical counterpart suggests the emitter is a white dwarf with an effective temperature between 15000 K and 33000 K, making this the first LPT whose companion is likely an ultracool dwarf or another white dwarf.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is a spin-orbit resonance between the white dwarf's 841 s rotation and the companion's orbit (about 2103 s for a 5:2 resonance, 1402 s for a 5:3 resonance). Because the radio beam is narrow, at most 4.3 degrees wide, a pulse is only seen when the white dwarf's magnetic axis points at Earth and the companion lies in a particular orbital-phase window, so pulses appear after two or three rotations but never after one or four; a slight detuning of the resonance explains the phase shift between the 2015-2016 and 2019 observations. The energy budget is supplied by unipolar induction between the magnetised white dwarf and the companion, with relativistic electron-cyclotron maser emission or a pulsar-like mechanism as the coherent radiator that can switch between circular and linear polarisation.

What would settle it

Take a deep, space-based ultraviolet image or spectrum at the radio position: if the 5.2$\sigma$ GALEX FUV source and the three UNIONS detections do not persist, or turn out to be a background galaxy or artifact, the white-dwarf identification fails. Independently, monitor the source over several years: the resonance model predicts pulses will always arrive after two or three rotations, never one or four, and the active rotation number should drift as the resonance detunes; even one pulse arriving one period after the previous one would break the model.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that J1634+44 is a long-period transient of a kind not seen before: it produces 19 bright pulses at 120-167 MHz, each no longer than 10 s and each with a total polarisation fraction of roughly 100%, but with the polarisation state alternating between fully circular and fully linear depending on which of the two pulse slots in the five-period cycle it occupies. The pulses arrive at integer multiples of an $841.24808 \pm 0.00015$ s period, with two pulses every five periods and waiting times of two or three periods, never one or four. A 5.2$\sigma$ GALEX FUV detection and $u$-, $g$-, $r$-band UNIONS detections at 3.2-3.9$\sigma$, coincident within 2 arcseconds, point to a white dwarf with an effective temperature of 15000-33000 K and a mass of at least 0.78 $M_\odot$, while a deep UKIRT $J$-band limit of 24.7 AB mag rules out any main-sequence or brown-dwarf companion earlier than M7. The authors conclude that the white dwarf is in a binary with an ultracool dwarf or another white dwarf in a near 5:2 or 5:3 spin-orbit resonance, with the companion modulating when beamed radio emission is directed at us.

Load-bearing premise

The case that J1634+44 contains a white dwarf rests on a handful of faint ultraviolet and optical detections that are individually near the noise floor; if those sources are spurious or unrelated to the radio source, the white-dwarf interpretation and everything built on it falls away.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If correct, J1634+44 is the first LPT observed to switch between 100% circular and 100% linear polarisation from pulse to pulse, so the polarisation state is not a fixed property of an LPT.
  • The 5:2 or 5:3 spin-orbit resonance implies some LPTs are binaries with short, roughly 35-minute orbits, and the pulse pattern directly tracks the orbital phase of the companion.
  • The detection of a hot white dwarf with an age below 1.5 Gyr in an LPT supports the white-dwarf origin hypothesis for at least some members of the class, rather than a magnetar origin.
  • The emission mechanism must be coherent and able to produce both polarisation states, which rules out classical electron-cyclotron maser emission and favours relativistic ECMI or a pulsar-like process.
  • Extrapolating from one detection, the authors expect about 4 more objects like J1634+44 once the full LOFAR Two-Metre Sky Survey is searched.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Extension: if the polarisation state is tied to the waiting time (circular after three periods, linear after two), then the polarisation mode is set by orbital phase rather than by intrinsic rotation phase; this can be tested directly once more pulses are collected.
  • Not in the paper: the claimed line-of-sight magnetic field of about 0.4 $\mu$G could be checked independently by measuring Faraday rotation of polarised background sources along the same sight line, providing a test of the distance and interstellar interpretation.
  • Not in the paper: if many more LPTs show a 5:2 or 5:3 pulse pattern, spin-orbit resonance could become a standard clock for measuring white-dwarf braking and binary orbital decay on timescales of years.
  • Not in the paper: the quoted occurrence rate implies a handful of similar sources should appear in the remaining LoTSS data, so a targeted search in the unsurveyed sky is an immediate, concrete test of the rate estimate.
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

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper reports the discovery of ILT J163430+445010, a long-period transient (LPT) found in a blind Stokes V search of LoTSS DR2. It presents 19 pulses with an 841.24808 +/- 0.00015 s period, a dispersion measure of 22.5 +/- 5.5 pc cm^-3, a rotation measure of 6.27 +/- 0.04 rad m^-2, and pulse-to-pulse switching between ~100% circular and ~100% linear polarization. A marginal UV/optical counterpart (GALEX FUV, UNIONS u/g/r) is interpreted as a white dwarf with effective temperature between 15000 K and 33000 K and mass > 0.78 M_sun, and a companion in a 5:2 or 5:3 spin-orbit resonance is suggested. The text itself repeatedly qualifies the counterpart as marginal and states that deeper observations are required.

Significance. If the radio discovery holds, this is a significant addition to the LPT population: the complete polarization-state switching within a few periods would be new among LPTs, and a high-latitude LPT with a candidate white-dwarf host would provide an important data point for progenitor models. The paper's strengths include the blind-search provenance, the machine-readable TOA table, the use of public archival data, and the explicit caveats about the photometric counterpart. The main risk is that the white-dwarf identification rests on detections at 5.2 sigma (FUV) and 3.2-3.9 sigma (UNIONS), which is below the usual threshold for a secure host identification. The spin-orbit resonance model is clearly presented as illustrative rather than independently tested, which is appropriate.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sections 3.1.2, 3.1.3, Table 4, Abstract/Title] The physical association of the radio source with the GALEX FUV source (5.2 sigma, below the MIS catalogue threshold) and the UNIONS detections (3.5 sigma, 3.2 sigma, 3.9 sigma in u, g, r) is the sole evidence for the white-dwarf interpretation. The paper does not provide a trials-corrected probability of finding a blue background source within the 2 arcsec radio uncertainty circle, and individual detections are at the 3 sigma level. Given that 'white-dwarf-hosting' appears in the title and abstract and that Section 4 derives the white-dwarf properties from these detections, this is a load-bearing point. Please add a quantitative chance-coincidence analysis (including the number of independent counterpart positions examined and the FUV/u/g/r source densities) or explicitly re-label the object as a 'candidate white dwarf' in the title, abstract, and conclusions.
  2. [Section 2.2, Table 3, Section 4.2.1] The short-period model with Pdot = -9 +/- 3 x 10^-12 is degenerate with the long-period model with an interpulse and a 0.614 phase jump between 2015-2016 and 2019; Table 3 shows comparable reduced chi-squared values. The period derivative is therefore not an independent measurement: it is one way to absorb the two-epoch phase offset. Since Section 4.2.1 uses the negative Pdot to argue for accretion spin-up from an ultracool dwarf companion, the paper should report a formal model comparison (e.g., AIC/BIC or a phase-connected timing residual search) and state explicitly that Pdot is tentative until more epochs are obtained.
  3. [Section 4.2, orbital period ranges] The companion orbital periods quoted in Section 4.2 (2103.1061-2103.1141 s and 1402.0814-1402.0853 s) are derived from the same 841.24808 s period and the same 2015-2016 to 2019 phase shift that the resonance model is intended to explain; the active-phase-window width and beaming geometry are free parameters. This is therefore a consistency interpretation rather than an independent prediction. The wording 'We show that such a pattern can be explained' overstates the evidential value; it should be rephrased as 'is consistent with' and the absence of an independent orbital-period measurement (e.g., from periodic Doppler shifts) should be stated.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section 2.3] The waiting-time simulation says '20 pulses' but the text elsewhere reports 19 detected pulses; please reconcile.
  2. [Section 3.1.2] Please report the GALEX image pixel scale and whether the 5.2 sigma FUV detection is measured in the same way as the UNIONS source (aperture versus PSF fitting).
  3. [Section 4.2] The sentence describing how a slightly shorter 5/2 period shifts the pulse from rotations (1,4) to (2,5) to (3,1) is confusing; a small table of the sequence would help.
  4. [Table 2] The Time column is described in the notes as 'seconds of modified Julian date' but the column header says UTC; please clarify the column format.
  5. [Figure 5] The color scale used to identify observing epochs is difficult to read in grayscale or print; add a legend that identifies the epochs directly.
  6. [Appendix A] Figures A.1-A.4 would be more informative with the residual RMS or reduced chi-squared value included in each caption.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

Radio discovery is self-contained; the spin-orbit resonance companion-period 'result' is a consistency interpretation that reduces by construction to the assumed resonance times the measured 841 s spin period.

  1. other [Section 4.2, 'Binary system' (companion orbital period range; also Table 1 'Modulating period')]
    "We assume the white dwarf rotation period is the period we measure in the short-period timing solution, 841.24808±0.00015 s. In our observations, we see pulses arrive at rotation one and four in 2015–2016, and one and three in 2019. Assuming only one change in pulse phase has happened in that time period, and assuming the active phase window covers 0.3 of the orbital phase, we find that the orbit of the companion must be between 2103.1061±0.0004 s and 2103.1141±0.0004 s for a 5:2 resonance, and between 1402.0814±0.0003 and 1402.0853±0.0003 for a 5:3 resonance."

    Once the 5:2 (or 5:3) resonance is assumed, the companion orbital period is fixed as 5/2 (or 5/3) times the measured 841.24808 s spin period; the observed 2015-2016 vs 2019 phase shift only selects a narrow interval around these arithmetic values. Thus the 'derived' 2103.110 s / 1402.08 s periods are a restatement of the assumed resonance plus the input spin period, not an independent measurement or prediction. The paper does present the model as a possibility ('could be a result', 'can be explained'), so this is a consistency interpretation rather than a test, and it is not load-bearing for the central radio discovery.

full rationale

The paper's central claims are derived directly from the LOFAR observations: the 19 detected pulses, the 841.24808 s periodicity and period derivative, the DM/RM, and the pulse-to-pulse switching between ~100% circular and ~100% linear polarisation are all measured quantities (Secs. 2.1-2.4), not fits disguised as predictions. The white-dwarf identification rests on marginal GALEX/UNIONS photometry (the paper itself calls it marginal and asks for deeper observations), but that is a data-quality limitation, not a circular argument. The only step that reduces by construction is the spin-orbit resonance companion period in Sec. 4.2, where P_orb is essentially (5/2) or (5/3) times the measured spin period under the assumed resonance. Because the paper frames this as a possible explanation and the discovery stands without it, the overall circularity is low.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central discovery uses few hidden constants: pulse period, DM, RM, and polarization fractions are measured quantities with quoted uncertainties. The interpretive spin-orbit resonance model carries hand-set parameters (phase window, magnetic field strengths, companion mass and radius assumptions) and relies on domain assumptions about the white dwarf atmosphere and distance models. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (5)
  • Active orbital phase window = ±0.15 (width 0.3)
    Chosen by hand in Section 4.2 ('taking a phase range of -0.15 to 0.15 as an example') to make the 5:2 resonance produce pulses at rotations 1 and 4 in 2015-2016 and 1 and 3 in 2019.
  • White dwarf magnetic field strengths for induction estimates = 1 kG and 1 MG test values
    Test values in Sections 4.2.1 and 4.2.2; there is no measurement of the white dwarf's magnetic field, and the stability conclusion (field must be ≲ 10^4 G) depends on which value is used.
  • Ultracool dwarf companion mass and radius = 0.1 Msun, 0.1-0.12 Rsun
    Assumed in Sections 4.2.1 and 5 for Roche, accretion, gravitational-wave, and induction calculations; the companion is undetected and only constrained to be spectral type M7 or later.
  • Electron temperature in white dwarf atmosphere = 10^4 K
    Assumed for the atmospheric resistance in the unipolar induction formula (Eq. 2) in Section 4.2.1, following Wu et al. (2002); no observational constraint is given.
  • Orbital period range for 5:2 and 5:3 resonances = 2103.1061-2103.1141 s (5:2); 1402.0814-1402.0853 s (5:3)
    Derived from the assumed resonance integers and the observed phase drift between 2015-2016 and 2019 in Section 4.2; these are consistency bounds, not independent measurements.
assumptions (7)
  • standard math Cold plasma dispersion relation governs the pulse frequency sweep
    Used in Section 2.1 to convert the time-frequency sweep into a dispersion measure of 22.5 ± 5.5 pc cm^-3.
  • domain assumption Galactic electron density models (Cordes & Lazio 2002; Yao et al. 2017) give distances of 1.0-4.3 kpc
    Section 2.1 converts DM to distance using these models; the luminosity and companion constraints depend on this distance range.
  • domain assumption The faint UV/optical sources at the radio position are physically associated with J1634+44
    Sections 3.1.2 and 3.1.3 treat the 5.2 sigma GALEX FUV and 3.2-3.9 sigma UNIONS detections as the counterpart; load-bearing for the white dwarf identification.
  • domain assumption The white dwarf has a pure-hydrogen, homogeneous-temperature atmosphere for SED fitting
    Section 4 states 'We assume a pure-hydrogen composition' and 'Assuming the temperature of the white dwarf is homogeneous across its surface'; the derived Teff and mass range depend on these choices.
  • domain assumption The 841 s period is the rotation period of the white dwarf
    Section 4.2 explicitly states 'We note that we assume that the period measured in the radio data is the rotation period of the white dwarf. It could also be the orbital period'; the resonance model depends on this choice.
  • ad hoc to paper Spin-orbit resonance 5:2 or 5:3 with an active orbital phase window explains the pulse pattern
    Section 4.2 introduces the resonance and the active phase window as an illustrative model; this is not needed for the core detection but underpins the binary interpretation.
  • domain assumption High brightness temperature and high polarization imply a coherent emission process
    Section 1 states the pulses must be produced through a coherent plasma process; this motivates the discussion of ECMI and pulsar-like mechanisms.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Strongly polarised radio pulses from a new white-dwarf-hosting long-period transient." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/A3HBN6MT

@misc{pith2026250705078,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Strongly polarised radio pulses from a new white-dwarf-hosting long-period transient},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/A3HBN6MT}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.05078}
}
abstract

Long-period transients (LPTs) are a new and enigmatic class of objects that produce bright pulsations in the radio, with periods far exceeding those seen in rotationally powered pulsars. The proposed progenitors for LPTs are contested, with white dwarfs or magnetars being likely candidates. Here, we present the discovery of ILT\,J163430+445010, a new LPT detected in a blind search for Stokes\,V transients in the LOFAR Two-Metre Sky Survey. Unusual for LPTs, J1634+44 shows pulses that are 100\% circularly polarised, as well as pulses that are 100\% linearly polarised, with the polarisation state changing from pulse to pulse. We detect 19 pulses in total, each with a total polarisation fraction of $\sim100\%$ and a pulse duration of at most 10\,s. The pulses show a periodicity at $841.24808\pm0.00015$\,s, implying a low duty cycle of $0.012$. J1634+44 has a marginally detected counterpart in the ultraviolet GALEX MIS survey and the ultraviolet/optical UNIONS survey, suggesting that it contains a white dwarf with an effective temperature between 15000\,K and 33000\,K. We do not detect J1634+44 with a deep $J$-band exposure with UKIRT at a $3\sigma$ AB magnitude limit of 24.7, ruling out a main-sequence star or ultracool dwarf with a spectral type earlier than M7. The pulses from J1634+44 follow a particular pattern, with two pulses being produced every five periods after a waiting time of two or three periods. This pattern could be a result of spin-orbit coupling in a binary system with a 5:2 or 5:3 resonance, where a companion induces beamed radio emission on the white dwarf. The companion is most likely an ultracool dwarf or another white dwarf, making J1634+44 unique among the currently known sample of LPTs.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.05078 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Light curve with 8 s time resolution of the LOFAR obser [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Bow-tie plot of the brightest pulse detected from J1634+44 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Distribution of waiting times between pulses for trials as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Light curve of all observations, binned to 8 seconds, phase-wrapped using a timing solution with a period of 841 s and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Cut-out images of the location of J1634+44 at the various wavelengths where it has been observed. The first row contains, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Allowed parameter space for a white dwarf in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: UV to IR spectrum of J1634+44. The horizontal lines represent the limits and detections in the GALEX FUV (purple) and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Limit on spectral type of a potential main-sequence star [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_9.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Evolution of the rotation number when the pulses arrive [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_11.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Unraveling the emission mechanism powering long period radio transients from interacting white dwarf binaries via kinetic plasma simulations

    astro-ph.HE 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Kinetic plasma simulations show the electron cyclotron maser instability can produce efficient, narrowband, partially linearly polarized radio emission under conditions inferred for white dwarf-M dwarf binaries.

  2. A new long period radio transient: Discovery of pulses repeating every 1.16 hours from ASKAP J175534.9-252749.1

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

    ASKAP J175534.9-252749.1 is confirmed as a long period radio transient with a period of 4186.3285 seconds (about 1.16 hours), based on new multi-telescope detections and a timing solution.

  3. The Lunar Farside Transients and Technology Telescope (LFT3) Mission

    astro-ph.IM 2026-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Proposes a $150M-class lunar farside radio telescope (LFT3) to survey 0.1–2700 MHz in the RFI-pristine shielded zone before lunar-orbital interference closes the window.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

68 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    P., Tollerud, E

    Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33 Barrett,P.,Dieck,C.,Beasley,A.J.,Mason,P.A.,&Singh,K.P.2020,Advances in Space Research, 66, 1226 Bédard, A., Bergeron, P., Brassard, P., & Fontaine, G. 2020, ApJ, 901, 93

    work page 2013

  2. [2]

    1995, PASP, 107, 1047

    Bergeron, P., Wesemael, F., & Beauchamp, A. 1995, PASP, 107, 1047

    work page 1995

  3. [3]

    2011, ApJ, 737, 28

    Bergeron, P., Wesemael, F., Dufour, P., et al. 2011, ApJ, 737, 28

    2011

  4. [4]

    2011, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

    Bertin, E. 2011, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 442, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XX, ed. I. N. Evans, A. Accomazzi, D. J. Mink, & A. H. Rots, 435

    2011

  5. [5]

    Best, W. M. J., Magnier, E. A., Liu, M. C., et al. 2018, ApJS, 234, 1

    work page 2018

  6. [6]

    R., Vedantham, H

    Bloot, S., Callingham, J. R., Vedantham, H. K., et al. 2024, A&A, 682, A170

    2024

  7. [7]

    Blouin, S., Dufour, P., & Allard, N. F. 2018, ApJ, 863, 184

    work page 2018

  8. [8]

    Buckley, D. A. H., Meintjes, P. J., Potter, S. B., Marsh, T. R., & Gänsicke, B. T. 2017, Nature Astronomy, 1, 0029

    work page 2017

Show all 68 references
  1. [9]

    L., et al

    Caleb, M., Lenc, E., Kaplan, D. L., et al. 2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 1159

    2024

  2. [10]

    R., Shimwell, T

    Callingham, J. R., Shimwell, T. W., Vedantham, H. K., et al. 2023, A&A, 670, A124

    2023

  3. [11]

    2007, A&A, 467, 777

    Casali, M., Adamson, A., Alves de Oliveira, C., et al. 2007, A&A, 467, 777

    2007

  4. [12]

    C., Magnier, E

    Chambers, K. C., Magnier, E. A., Metcalfe, N., et al. 2016, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1612.05560

    2016 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Cooper, A. J. & Wadiasingh, Z. 2024, MNRAS, 533, 2133

    2024

  6. [14]

    Cordes, J. M. & Lazio, T. J. W. 2002, arXiv e-prints, astro de Gasperin, F., Dijkema, T. J., Drabent, A., et al. 2019, A&A, 622, A5 de Ruiter, I., Rajwade, K. M., Bassa, C. G., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2408.11536 Dong,F.A.,Clarke,T.,Curtin,A.P.,etal.2024,arXive-prints...

    2002

  7. [15]

    A., Shin, K., Law, C., et al

    Dong, F. A., Shin, K., Law, C., et al. 2025, ApJ, under review

    2025

  8. [16]

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

    1985

  9. [17]

    A., Magnier, E

    Flewelling, H. A., Magnier, E. A., Chambers, K. C., et al. 2020, ApJS, 251, 7

    2020

  10. [18]

    1986, ApJ, 303, 336

    Gehrels, N. 1986, ApJ, 303, 336

    1986

  11. [19]

    Gould, D. M. & Lyne, A. G. 1998, MNRAS, 301, 235

    1998

  12. [20]

    2016, ApJ, 823, L28

    Gu, W.-M., Dong, Y.-Z., Liu, T., Ma, R., & Wang, J. 2016, ApJ, 823, L28

    2016

  13. [21]

    W., Cuillandre, J.-C., et al

    Gwyn, S., McConnachie, A. W., Cuillandre, J.-C., et al. 2025, UNIONS: The Ultraviolet Near-Infrared Optical Northern Survey

    2025

  14. [22]

    G., Lau, R

    Han, Y., Tuthill, P. G., Lau, R. M., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 498, 5604

    2020

  15. [23]

    Holberg, J. B. & Bergeron, P. 2006, AJ, 132, 1221

    2006

  16. [24]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing In Science & Engineering, 9, 90

    2007

  17. [25]

    J., Bahramian, A., et al

    Hurley-Walker, N., McSweeney, S. J., Bahramian, A., et al. 2024, ApJ, 976, L21

    2024

  18. [26]

    J., et al

    Hurley-Walker, N., Rea, N., McSweeney, S. J., et al. 2023, Nature, 619, 487

    2023

  19. [27]

    2022, Nature, 601, 526

    Hurley-Walker, N., Zhang, X., Bahramian, A., et al. 2022, Nature, 601, 526

    2022

  20. [28]

    D., Lazio, T

    Hyman, S. D., Lazio, T. J. W., Kassim, N. E., et al. 2005, Nature, 434, 50

    2005

  21. [29]

    A., McConnachie, A., Cuillandre, J.-C., et al

    Ibata, R. A., McConnachie, A., Cuillandre, J.-C., et al. 2017, ApJ, 848, 128

    2017

  22. [30]

    J., Lewis, J., Hodgkin, S., et al

    Irwin, M. J., Lewis, J., Hodgkin, S., et al. 2004, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 5493, Optimizing Scientific Return for Astronomy through Information Technologies, ed. P. J. Quinn & A. Bridger, 411–422 Jones,E.,Oliphant,T....

    2004

  23. [31]

    Kaspi, V. M. & Beloborodov, A. M. 2017, ARA&A, 55, 261

    2017

  24. [32]

    Katz, J. I. 2017, MNRAS, 471, L92

    2017

  25. [33]

    Katz, J. I. 2022, Ap&SS, 367, 108

    2022

  26. [34]

    & Melrose, D

    Kennett, M. & Melrose, D. 1998, PASA, 15, 211

    1998

  27. [35]

    2010, Mem

    Koester, D. 2010, Mem. Soc. Astron. Italiana, 81, 921

    2010

  28. [36]

    Kowalski, P. M. & Saumon, D. 2006, ApJ, 651, L137

    2006

  29. [37]

    J., Almaini, O., et al

    Lawrence, A., Warren, S. J., Almaini, O., et al. 2007, MNRAS, 379, 1599

    2007

  30. [38]

    Lee, Y. W. J., Caleb, M., Murphy, T., et al. 2025, Nature Astronomy, 9, 393

    2025

  31. [39]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.15739

    Li, D., Yuan, M., Wu, L., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.15739

    2024

  32. [40]

    1998, ApJ, 503, L151

    Li, J., Ferrario, L., & Wickramasinghe, D. 1998, ApJ, 503, L151

    1998

  33. [41]

    J., Tovmassian, G., Rodrigues, C

    Lima, I. J., Tovmassian, G., Rodrigues, C. V., et al. 2025, ApJ, 984, 152

    2025

  34. [42]

    2021, ApJ, 911, 45

    Luo, J., Ransom, S., Demorest, P., et al. 2021, ApJ, 911, 45

    2021

  35. [43]

    2020, ApJ, 897, 1

    Lyubarsky, Y. 2020, ApJ, 897, 1

    2020

  36. [44]

    R., Gänsicke, B

    Marsh, T. R., Gänsicke, B. T., Hümmerich, S., et al. 2016, Nature, 537, 374

    2016

  37. [45]

    C., Fanson, J., Schiminovich, D., et al

    Martin, D. C., Fanson, J., Schiminovich, D., et al. 2005, ApJ, 619, L1

    2005

  38. [46]

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

    1982

  39. [47]

    Most, E. R. & Philippov, A. A. 2023, Phys. Rev. Lett., 130, 245201

    2023

  40. [48]

    2018, ApJ, 866, 88 Offringa,A.R.,McKinley,B.,Hurley-Walker,N.,etal.2014,MNRAS,444,606

    Nelson, L., Schwab, J., Ristic, M., & Rappaport, S. 2018, ApJ, 866, 88 Offringa,A.R.,McKinley,B.,Hurley-Walker,N.,etal.2014,MNRAS,444,606

    2018

  41. [49]

    1976, in IAU Symposium, Vol

    Paczynski, B. 1976, in IAU Symposium, Vol. 73, Structure and Evolution of Close Binary Systems, ed. P. Eggleton, S. Mitton, & J. Whelan, 75

    1976

  42. [50]

    & Raymond, J

    Patterson, J. & Raymond, J. C. 1985, ApJ, 292, 535

    1985

  43. [51]

    R., Buckley, D

    Pelisoli, I., Marsh, T. R., Buckley, D. A. H., et al. 2023, Nature Astronomy, 7, 931 Pérez, F. & Granger, B. E. 2007, Computing in Science and Engineering, 9, 21 Popov,S.B.,Mereghetti,S.,Blinnikov,S.I.,Kuranov,A.G.,&Yungelson,L.R. 2018, MNRAS, 474, 2750 Purcell,C.R.,VanEck,C.L...

    2023

  44. [52]

    & Zhang, B

    Qu, Y. & Zhang, B. 2025, ApJ, 981, 34

    2025

  45. [53]

    C., Dehman, C., et al

    Rea, N., Zelati, F. C., Dehman, C., et al. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 940, 72

    2022

  46. [54]

    S., Pellegrini, E

    Reissl, S., Klessen, R. S., Pellegrini, E. W., et al. 2023, Nature Astronomy, 7, 1295

    2023

  47. [55]

    Rodriguez, A. C. 2025, A&A, 695, L8

    2025

  48. [56]

    Sazonov, V. N. 1969, Soviet Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics, 29, 578

    1969

  49. [57]

    W., Hardcastle, M

    Shimwell, T. W., Hardcastle, M. J., Tasse, C., et al. 2022, A&A, 659, A1

    2022

  50. [58]

    W., Tasse, C., Hardcastle, M

    Shimwell, T. W., Tasse, C., Hardcastle, M. J., et al. 2019, A&A, 622, A1

    2019

  51. [59]

    Taylor, J. H. & Weisberg, J. M. 1989, ApJ, 345, 434

    1989

  52. [60]

    E., Bergeron, P., & Gianninas, A

    Tremblay, P. E., Bergeron, P., & Gianninas, A. 2011, ApJ, 730, 128 Van Der Walt, S., Colbert, S. C., & Varoquaux, G. 2011, Computing in Science & Engineering, 13, 22 van Weeren, R. J., Shimwell, T. W., Botteon, A., et al. 2021, A&A, 651, A115

    2011

  53. [61]

    1999, A&A, 349, 389

    Voges, W., Aschenbach, B., Boller, T., et al. 1999, A&A, 349, 389

    1999

  54. [62]

    F., Wang, C., & Han, J

    Wang, P. F., Wang, C., & Han, J. L. 2012, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astro- nomical Society, 423, 2464

    2012

  55. [63]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.16606

    Wang, Z., Rea, N., Bao, T., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.16606

    2024 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Z., Magnier, E

    Waters, C. Z., Magnier, E. A., Price, P. A., et al. 2020, ApJS, 251, 4

    2020

  57. [65]

    Wilson, E. C. & Nordhaus, J. 2020, MNRAS, 497, 1895

    2020

  58. [66]

    2002, MNRAS, 331, 221

    Wu, K., Cropper, M., Ramsay, G., & Sekiguchi, K. 2002, MNRAS, 331, 221

    2002

  59. [67]

    M., Manchester, R

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

    2017

  60. [68]

    & Gil, J

    Zhang, B. & Gil, J. 2005, ApJ, 631, L143 Article number, page 13 of 14 A&A proofs: manuscript no. aa55131-25 Appendix A: Timing residuals Thisappendixcontainstheresidualsforthefourdifferenttiming solutions presented in Tab.3. Fig.A.1 shows the residuals for a timing model with...

    2005

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.