Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 2 cited by

A fast radio burst from the first 3 billion years of the Universe

T0 review · 4 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 FRB 20240304B is the most distant fast radio burst with a confirmed host galaxy, localized by JWST to a dwarf galaxy at $z = 2.148 \pm 0.001$, about 3 billion years after the Big Bang.

desk verdict First localized FRB at z>2, almost certainly real, but the host-association posterior is squishier than the headline 97.5% and the DM bookkeeping needs a cleanup. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.01648 v1 pith:2T7JAUYH submitted 2025-08-03 astro-ph.HE

Manisha Caleb , Themiya Nanayakkara , Benjamin Stappers , Inés Pastor-Marazuela , Ilya S. Khrykin , Karl Glazebrook , Nicolas Tejos , J. Xavier Prochaska
show 20 more authors
Kaustubh Rajwade Lluis Mas-Ribas Laura N. Driessen Wen-fai Fong Alexa C. Gordon Jordan Hoffmann Clancy W. James Fabian Jankowski Lordrick Kahinga Michael Kramer Sunil Simha Ewan D. Barr Mechiel Christiaan Bezuidenhout Xihan Deng Zeren Lin Lachlan Marnoch Christopher D. Martin Anya Nugent Kavya Shaji Jun Tian
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords fastradioburstsFRBhostgalaxiesMacquartrelationdispersionmeasureJWSTNIRSpecMeerKATcosmicnoonmagnetarprogenitors
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 FRB 20240304B, a fast radio burst detected by the MeerKAT telescope and traced with JWST imaging and spectroscopy to a faint, low-mass, star-forming dwarf galaxy at spectroscopic redshift $z = 2.148 \pm 0.001$, roughly 3 billion years after the Big Bang. That makes it the most distant FRB with a confirmed host galaxy, about doubling the redshift reach of the localized FRB population. The authors argue the discovery shows that at least some FRBs are produced with short delay times after star formation, and that FRBs can weigh ionized baryons and trace magnetic fields across roughly 80% of cosmic history. A sympathetic reader would care because this is the first direct evidence that FRB science reaches into the era when the universe was forming most of its stars.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by a measurement chain: the scattering-corrected dispersion measure (the integrated electron column along the line of sight, $\mathrm{DM} = 2458.20 \pm 0.01\,\mathrm{pc\,cm^{-3}}$), which the Macquart relation translates into a predicted redshift; the MeerKAT transient-buffer localization to sub-arcsecond precision; JWST NIRCam imaging that reveals the ultra-faint candidate host; and JWST NIRSpec integral-field spectroscopy that delivers the secure redshift from H$\alpha$ and [O\,III] $\lambda 5007$. The two load-bearing formalisms are the Macquart relation itself, which converts line-of-sight electron column into cosmic distance, and the PATH (Probabilistic Association of Transients to their Hosts) analysis, which quantifies the host association at 97.5% against a 2.4% unseen-host alternative. A z$-$DM survey model then argues that MeerKAT's sensitivity makes a $z>2$ burst like this one an expected outcome rather than a fluke.

What would settle it

A repetition of FRB 20240304B localized by very-long-baseline interferometry to sub-arcsecond precision would settle the association: if the repeating source lands on the candidate dwarf galaxy at $z = 2.148$, the record claim stands, and if it lands elsewhere, or a deeper JWST image reveals a second, fainter galaxy at the burst position, the host would be a foreground interloper.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper establishes that FRB 20240304B is a genuine, well-localized burst (dispersion measure $\mathrm{DM} = 2458.20 \pm 0.01\,\mathrm{pc\,cm^{-3}}$, localization uncertainty $0.28'' \times 0.48''$) whose host is a young galaxy at $z_{\mathrm{spec}} = 2.148 \pm 0.001$, identified from H$\alpha$ and [O\,III] $\lambda 5007$ emission lines in a JWST NIRSpec spectrum. The host is an ultra-faint clumpy dwarf ($m_{\mathrm{F200W}} = 27.82 \pm 0.06$), with stellar mass $\sim 10^7\,M_\odot$, star formation rate $\sim 0.2\,M_\odot\,\mathrm{yr^{-1}}$, and gas-phase metallicity near 10$-$20% solar; a probabilistic association (PATH) gives a 97.5% posterior that this galaxy is the true host, with 2.4% probability that the true host is unseen. This is the first FRB placed at cosmic noon, the epoch of peak cosmic star formation, and it extends the Macquart relation, the dispersion-measure-to-redshift link that lets FRBs census ionized baryons, beyond $z = 2$. The host's low mass, low metallicity, and active star formation are the paper's evidence that at least some FRB progenitors act promptly after star formation, consistent with young magnetars.

Load-bearing premise

The host identification rests on a single ultra-faint galaxy (magnitude 27.8 in the JWST image) sitting 0.23 arcseconds from the burst position, with a 97.5% statistical association; if that galaxy is a foreground interloper and the true host is too faint to have been seen, the redshift, and with it the whole record claim, would be wrong.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • At least some FRBs form within a short delay of star formation; the low-mass, star-forming, metal-poor host favors a prompt magnetar channel over long-delay channels such as neutron-star mergers.
  • The Macquart relation is now anchored at $z > 2$, strengthening future FRB-based measurements of the cosmic baryon content and of $H_0$ from burst statistics.
  • Survey modeling predicts that about 6.3% of MeerKAT/MeerTRAP bursts should lie at $z > 2$, while DSA is expected to find fewer than 3% beyond $z=2$, so high-redshift FRB science will grow with MeerKAT-class surveys.
  • Foreground structures along the sightline, the Virgo Cluster contributing about 235 pc cm$^{-3}$ and a foreground galaxy group at $z = 0.31131$ contributing about 33 pc cm$^{-3}$, can be subtracted to expose the intergalactic contribution, showing that FRB sightlines can be dissected tomographically over gigaparsec scales.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If more $z>2$ FRB hosts turn out to be low-mass dwarf galaxies, the local preference of FRBs for massive, star-forming galaxies may be partly a selection effect of the nearby universe rather than an intrinsic property of FRB progenitors.
  • The small observed rotation measure ($-55.6\,\mathrm{rad\,m^{-2}}$) paired with the large dispersion measure is evidence for tangled or reversing magnetic fields; a Faraday-tomography campaign along this sightline could separate the Virgo Cluster's contribution from intergalactic fields, a measurement the paper defers for future work.
  • The 2.4% unseen-host probability makes a testable prediction: roughly one in forty high-DM, high-redshift FRB localizations should show no host at JWST depth, a rate the next few dozen localizations can check.
  • Because the burst energy was not K-corrected, the rest-frame spectral index is unmeasured; a future wide-band detection of a repeating counterpart would tie down the energetics and the claimed magnetized circumburst environment.
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

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper reports the discovery and localization of FRB 20240304B with MeerKAT, and identifies a faint JWST NIRCam/NIRSpec host galaxy at z_spec = 2.148 ± 0.001 from H-alpha and [O III] emission lines. The authors argue that this is the most distant FRB with a confirmed host, doubling the redshift reach of localized FRBs, and use the host properties (low stellar mass, active star formation, low metallicity) to favor a short-delay magnetar progenitor. They also analyze the dispersion measure and rotation measure to infer contributions from the Virgo Cluster, a foreground galaxy group, and the intergalactic medium, concluding that the FRB probes ionized baryons and magnetic fields across roughly 80% of cosmic history. The central claim is an observational measurement, but it depends critically on the association of a very faint (F200W ~ 27.8-28.1) galaxy to the FRB position via the PATH algorithm.

Significance. If the host association holds, this is a landmark result: it approximately doubles the maximum redshift of localized FRBs and places the first FRB near the peak of cosmic star formation. The paper's strengths include a clear astrometric tie of the radio position to VLASS, a spectroscopic redshift measured from multiple emission lines in NIRSpec PRISM data, and detailed public follow-up observations with JWST and ground-based facilities. The inference that at least some FRBs can form with short delay times after star formation is a valuable step, as is the demonstration that DM-based redshift estimates can be tested at z > 2. The main weakness is that the entire interpretation rests on a single faint host candidate whose association probability is sensitive to the assumed prior for unseen hosts; the manuscript also contains internal inconsistencies in the reported magnitudes and dispersion-measure bookkeeping that need to be resolved.

major comments (4)
  1. [S1.7, Table S1] The host association probability P(O|x) = 97.5% is load-bearing for the central claim, but it depends directly on the unseen-host prior P(U) = 0.035, estimated from 23 previously known FRB hosts from reference (84). That calibrating sample is biased toward brighter hosts, and the candidate galaxy here is near the detection limit (F200W ~ 28.05 in Table S1 versus a limiting magnitude of 28.5). The posterior is sensitive to this prior: increasing P(U) to roughly 20% lowers P(O|x) to about 90%, and P(U)=50% lowers it to about 80%. The paper should provide a sensitivity analysis over P(U) or otherwise justify the prior with a sample that is complete at F200W ~ 28; as written, the quoted 97.5% is not a robust measure of association reliability.
  2. [Table 2 versus Table S1] There is a direct inconsistency in the photometry used for the host association: Table 2 lists F200W = 27.82 ± 0.06 mag, while Table S1 lists the top PATH candidate at F200W = 28.05016 mag. These are not within the quoted uncertainties and cannot both describe the same measurement. In addition, the PATH table lists P(x|O) = 1.00574 for the top candidate, which is impossible for a probability and indicates that the reported quantity is either an unnormalized likelihood or is mislabeled. These issues must be corrected because they affect the reproducibility and credibility of the host identification.
  3. [Main text, 'Discovery and observations' and 'Foreground contributions'] The dispersion-measure bookkeeping is internally inconsistent. The text states DMMW,ISM = 28 pc cm^-3 and DMMW,halo = 40 pc cm^-3, which subtracted from the scattering-corrected DM of 2458.20 pc cm^-3 gives DM_cosmic = 2390 pc cm^-3, not the quoted 2330 pc cm^-3. Later, the paper reports Virgo and foreground-group contributions of 235 and 33 pc cm^-3, totaling 268 pc cm^-3, and describes these as 'the majority of the observed DM excess' of approximately 550 pc cm^-3; 268 pc cm^-3 is about 49% of that excess. The authors should clarify how the 2330 pc cm^-3 value was obtained, whether foreground structures were already subtracted in that number, and how the 'excess' is defined.
  4. [S1.7] The PATH analysis uses a single-epoch F200W detection of a galaxy with half-light radius 0.10 arcsec at a separation of 0.23 arcsec from the FRB position, where the FRB positional uncertainty is 0.28 x 0.48 arcsec. Because the candidate is unresolved or barely resolved and sits close to the localization ellipse, the association would be strengthened by an independent check, for example a deep second-epoch image or a search for variability/offset between the FRB position and the galaxy centroid. As it stands, the 2.4% unseen-host probability is treated as small, but the fragility of the prior means this residual probability may be underestimated.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract refers to 'FRB 2024030' instead of 'FRB 20240304B'; this typo should be corrected.
  2. [Figure 2 caption] The caption describes a '0.28'' x 0.48'' localization uncertainty (dashed white circle)', but the uncertainty is an ellipse; the figure should show an ellipse or the caption should say ellipse.
  3. [Main text] There is a typo in 'interferometeric' in the final paragraph; it should be 'interferometric'.
  4. [Table S1] The column labeled P(x|O) should be renamed or reformatted, since the values include 1.00574 and are not probabilities in the current printing.
  5. [References] References 12 and 48 are the same paper (Sharma et al. 2024) and should be merged or renumbered to avoid duplication.
  6. [S1.3] The statement 'The center of the pointing was offset from the FRB position toward the North by 30 arcsec to avoid the chip gap' is clear, but the dither pattern list that follows would be easier to read as a table or a compact list.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found: the central claim is an observational measurement, and the only author-overlapping citations are auxiliary survey-yield predictions that do not feed back into the redshift or host association.

full rationale

FRB 20240304B's redshift is derived from NIRSpec spectroscopy of the candidate host (Halpha and [OIII] lines fit with slinefit), and the host association is made with the PATH formalism using an external code and an unseen-host prior estimated from 23 previously known FRB hosts (ref 84). These are not fitted to the target burst, and the posterior P(O|x)=97.5% is a statistical association statement, not a derived quantity that assumes the conclusion. The DM decomposition into Milky Way, Virgo Cluster, and foreground group contributions uses independent Galactic electron-density models, Planck X-ray data, and a group halo model; the Macquart-relation redshift estimate (z_Macquart=2.8+0.6-1.2) is a prediction that is later compared with, not calibrated to, zspec=2.148. The only citations with overlapping authorship are refs 25 and 54 (Hoffmann et al. 2025; James et al. 2022) used in the 'Smashing the z>=2 Window' section to compute expected survey yields (e.g., 6.3% of MeerTRAP FRBs at z>2). This is a forward population-model calculation using external best-fit parameters; it does not use FRB 20240304B as input and does not support the redshift or host identification. The fragility of the host association (faint F200W source and sensitivity of the posterior to the unseen-host prior) is a robustness concern, not circularity. No equation in the paper defines a quantity in terms of the target result, and no fitted parameter is relabeled as a prediction for the central claim.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are introduced. The derived quantities rest on standard astrophysical models and priors, itemized above. The central redshift is a direct measurement; the main model dependence is in the host association prior and the DM decomposition.

free parameters (5)
  • Milky Way halo DM (DM_MW,halo) = 40 pc cm^-3
    Adopted from refs 17 and 18 to subtract the Milky Way foreground; its few-tens pc cm^-3 systematic uncertainty is not propagated, shifting the inferred cosmic DM and Macquart redshift but not the spectroscopic redshift.
  • Virgo cluster DM contribution = ~235 pc cm^-3
    Estimated from an assumed electron density of n_e=7.6e-5 cm^-3 based on Planck X-ray data and integration out to 2.4 Mpc; model-dependent and used to interpret the DM excess.
  • Foreground galaxy group DM contribution = 33 +/- 13 pc cm^-3 (lower limit)
    Computed with a modified NFW profile and a lower-limit halo mass log10(M_halo/Msun)=12.8; the authors explicitly label it a lower limit.
  • PATH unseen-host prior = 0.05 (rounded from 0.035)
    Coarse prior from 23 known FRB hosts placed at redshifts 0 to 5; it directly sets the association posterior and the residual 2.4% chance that the true host is unseen.
  • SED-derived stellar population parameters = log(M*/Msun)=6.89, SFR~0.1-0.2 Msun/yr, Z~0.1-0.2 Zsun
    FAST++ and Prospector fits with assumed BC03/C3K models, Chabrier IMF, Calzetti dust law, and SFH priors; these values drive the young, low-mass, low-metallicity host and the short-delay magnetar interpretation.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The Macquart relation (ref 3) maps cosmic DM to redshift and is used to predict z_Macquart=2.8+0.6-1.2.
    Invoked in Discovery and observations and Figure 3; it is not needed for the spectroscopic redshift but is used for the DM-based redshift estimates and survey-yield predictions.
  • domain assumption NE2001 and Milky Way halo models give the foreground DM values (28 and 40 pc cm^-3).
    Used to subtract Milky Way contributions; errors of a few tens pc cm^-3 are not propagated into the excess-DM interpretation.
  • domain assumption PATH priors (inverse surface density, 50% half-light radius exponential offset, truncation at 6 half-light radii, unseen prior of 5%) are appropriate.
    Section S1.7; these priors produce the 97.5% host association probability, the load-bearing step that assigns the FRB to the z=2.148 galaxy.
  • domain assumption [NII] emission is negligible in the unresolved Halpha+[NII] blend due to the low metallicity.
    Section S1.8; if [NII] were strong, the fitted Halpha centroid would shift, though the resulting redshift error would likely remain small.
  • domain assumption Stellar population synthesis choices (BC03/C3K models, Chabrier IMF, Calzetti dust, chosen SFH priors) are valid for this galaxy.
    Section S1.9; these choices determine the stellar mass, age, SFR, and metallicity used in the progenitor discussion.
  • domain assumption Virgo X-ray electron density and the galaxy group NFW model describe the foreground gas along the sightline.
    Section S1.4; used to estimate 235 and 33 pc cm^-3 foreground DM contributions, supporting the DM excess interpretation.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A fast radio burst from the first 3 billion years of the Universe." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2T7JAUYH

@misc{pith2026250801648,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A fast radio burst from the first 3 billion years of the Universe},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2T7JAUYH}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.01648}
}
read the original abstract

Fast radio bursts (FRBs) are enigmatic millisecond-duration signals which encode otherwise unattainable information on the plasma which permeates our Universe, providing insights into magnetic fields and gas distributions. Here we report the discovery of FRB 20240304B originating at redshift 2.148 +/- 0.001 corresponding to just 3 billion years after the Big Bang. FRB 2024030 was detected with the MeerKAT radio telescope and localized to a low-mass, clumpy, star forming galaxy using the James Webb Space Telescope. This discovery doubles the redshift reach of localized FRBs and probes ionized baryons across ~80% of cosmic history. Its sightline, intersecting the Virgo Cluster and a foreground group, reveals magnetic field complexity over many gigaparsec scales. Our observations establish FRB activity during the peak of cosmic star formation and demonstrate that FRBs can probe galaxy formation during the most active era in cosmic time.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Measurement of angular cross-correlation between the cosmological dispersion measure and the thermal Sunyaev--Zeldovich effect

    astro-ph.CO 2025-11 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    First detection of an angular cross-correlation between FRB dispersion measure and the thermal SZ y-map: amplitude A≈2 relative to the fiducial halo-model prediction (4.0σ for Planck, 1.5σ for ACT).

  2. Probing Primordial Black Holes with upcoming Radio Telescopes: a case study for LOFAR2.0, FAST Core Array and BINGO

    astro-ph.CO 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 4.0 of 10

    LOFAR2.0, FAST Core Array and BINGO can constrain the PBH dark matter fraction f_PBH below 0.16-0.39 for masses above 10^{-2} to 10 solar masses via FRB lensing statistics.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

114 extracted references · 2 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    D. R. Lorimer, M. Bailes, M. A. McLaughlin, D. J. Narkevic, F. Crawford, A Bright Millisecond Radio Burst of Extragalactic Origin. Science 318 (5851), 777 (2007), doi: 10.1126/science.1147532

    doi:10.1126/science.1147532 2007

  2. [2]

    Thornton, et al., A Population of Fast Radio Bursts at Cosmological Distances

    D. Thornton, et al., A Population of Fast Radio Bursts at Cosmological Distances. Science 341 (6141), 53–56 (2013), doi:10.1126/science.1236789

    doi:10.1126/science.1236789 2013

  3. [3]

    J. P. Macquart, et al., A census of baryons in the Universe from localized fast radio bursts. Nature 581 (7809), 391–395 (2020), doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2300-2

    doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2300-2 2020

  4. [4]

    C. W. James, et al., A measurement of Hubble’s Constant using Fast Radio Bursts.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 516 (4), 4862–4881 (2022), doi:10.1093/mnras/stac2524

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stac2524 2022

  5. [5]

    Baptista, et al., Measuring the Variance of the Macquart Relation in Redshift–Extragalactic Dispersion Measure Modeling

    J. Baptista, et al., Measuring the Variance of the Macquart Relation in Redshift–Extragalactic Dispersion Measure Modeling. Astrophys. J. 965 (1), 57 (2024), doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ ad2705

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ 2024

  6. [6]

    Caleb, C

    M. Caleb, C. Flynn, B. W. Stappers, Constraining the era of helium reionization using fast radio bursts.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.485 (2), 2281–2286 (2019), doi:10.1093/mnras/stz571

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stz571 2019

  7. [7]

    Beniamini, P

    P. Beniamini, P. Kumar, X. Ma, E. Quataert, Exploring the epoch of hydrogen reionization using FRBs. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 502 (4), 5134–5146 (2021), doi:10.1093/mnras/ stab309

    doi:10.1093/mnras/ 2021

  8. [8]

    Zhang, A Possible Connection between Fast Radio Bursts and Gamma-Ray Bursts

    B. Zhang, A Possible Connection between Fast Radio Bursts and Gamma-Ray Bursts. Astro- phys. J. 780 (2), L21 (2014), doi:10.1088/2041-8205/780/2/L21

    doi:10.1088/2041-8205/780/2/l21 2014

Show all 114 references
  1. [9]

    J. M. Cordes, I. Wasserman, Supergiant pulses from extragalactic neutron stars. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 457 (1), 232–257 (2016), doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2948

    2016 doi

  2. [10]

    B. D. Metzger, E. Berger, B. Margalit, Millisecond Magnetar Birth Connects FRB 121102 to Superluminous Supernovae and Long-duration Gamma-Ray Bursts.Astrophys. J. 841 (1), 14 (2017), doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa633d. 15

    2017 doi

  3. [11]

    A. C. Gordon, et al., The Demographics, Stellar Populations, and Star Formation Histories of Fast Radio Burst Host Galaxies: Implications for the Progenitors.Astrophys. J. 954 (1), 80 (2023), doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ace5aa

    2023 doi

  4. [13]

    Madau, M

    P. Madau, M. Dickinson, Cosmic Star-Formation History. Annual Rev. in Astron. Astrophys 52, 415–486 (2014), doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125615

    2014 doi

  5. [14]

    K. M. Rajwade, et al., First discoveries and localizations of Fast Radio Bursts with MeerTRAP: real-time, commensal MeerKAT survey.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.514 (2), 1961–1974 (2022), doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1450

    2022 doi

  6. [15]

    Materials and methods are available as supplementary material

  7. [16]

    J. M. Cordes, T. J. W. Lazio, NE2001.I. A New Model for the Galactic Distribution of Free Electrons and its Fluctuations. arXiv e-prints astro-ph/0207156 (2002)

    2002 arXiv

  8. [17]

    J. X. Prochaska, Y. Zheng, Probing Galactic haloes with fast radio bursts.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 485 (1), 648–665 (2019), doi:10.1093/mnras/stz261

    2019 doi

  9. [18]

    A. M. Cook, et al., An FRB Sent Me a DM: Constraining the Electron Column of the Milky Way Halo with Fast Radio Burst Dispersion Measures from CHIME/FRB. Astrophys. J. 946 (2), 58 (2023), doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acbbd0

    2023 doi

  10. [19]

    Aggarwal, et al., Probabilistic Association of Transients to their Hosts (PATH)

    K. Aggarwal, et al., Probabilistic Association of Transients to their Hosts (PATH). Astro- phys. J. 911 (2), 95 (2021), doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abe8d2

    2021 doi

  11. [20]

    S. P. Tendulkar, et al., The Host Galaxy and Redshift of the Repeating Fast Radio Burst FRB 121102. Astrophys. J. 834 (2), L7 (2017), doi:10.3847/2041-8213/834/2/L7

    2017 doi

  12. [21]

    Main Sequence

    J. S. Speagle, C. L. Steinhardt, P. L. Capak, J. D. Silverman, A Highly Consistent Framework for the Evolution of the Star-Forming “Main Sequence” from z˜0-6. Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 214 (2), 15 (2014), doi:10.1088/0067-0049/214/2/15. 16

    2014 doi

  13. [22]

    M. W. Topping, et al., The MOSDEF survey: the mass-metallicity relationship and the ex- istence of the FMR at z 1.5. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 506 (1), 1237–1249 (2021), doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1793

    2021 doi

  14. [23]

    Popesso, et al., The main sequence of star-forming galaxies across cosmic times.Mon

    P. Popesso, et al., The main sequence of star-forming galaxies across cosmic times.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 519 (1), 1526–1544 (2023), doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3214

    2023 doi

  15. [24]

    Clarke, et al

    L. Clarke, et al. , The Star-forming Main Sequence in JADES and CEERS at 𝑧 > 1.4: Investigating the Burstiness of Star Formation. Astrophys. J. 977 (1), 133 (2024), doi:10. 3847/1538-4357/ad8ba4

    2024

  16. [25]

    J. L. Hoffmann, et al., Modelling DSA, FAST, and CRAFT surveys in a z-DM analysis and constraining a minimum FRB energy. Astron. Soc. Aust. 42, e017 (2025), doi:10.1017/pasa. 2024.127

    2025 doi

  17. [26]

    J. P. Macquart, et al., The Spectral Properties of the Bright Fast Radio Burst Population. Astrophys. J. 872 (2), L19 (2019), doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab03d6

    2019 doi

  18. [27]

    Kirsten, et al

    F. Kirsten, et al. , A link between repeating and non-repeating fast radio bursts through their energy distributions. Nature 8 (3), 337–346 (2024), doi:10.1038/s41550-023-02153-z, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41550-023-02153-z

    2024 doi

  19. [28]

    S. D. Ryder, et al., A luminous fast radio burst that probes the Universe at redshift 1.Science 382 (6668), 294–299 (2023), doi:10.1126/science.adf2678

    2023 doi

  20. [29]

    C. D. Bochenek, V. Ravi, D. Dong, Localized Fast Radio Bursts Are Consistent with Magnetar Progenitors Formed in Core-collapse Supernovae. Astrophys. J. 907 (2), L31 (2021), doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abd634

    2021 doi

  21. [30]

    Gourdji, A

    K. Gourdji, A. Rowlinson, R. A. M. J. Wijers, A. Goldstein, Constraining a neutron star merger origin for localized fast radio bursts. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 497 (3), 3131–3141 (2020), doi:10.1093/mnras/staa2128

    2020 doi

  22. [31]

    A. E. Nugent, et al., Short GRB Host Galaxies. II. A Legacy Sample of Redshifts, Stellar Population Properties, and Implications for Their Neutron Star Merger Origins.Astrophys. J. 940 (1), 57 (2022), doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac91d1. 17

    2022 doi

  23. [32]

    Horowicz, B

    A. Horowicz, B. Margalit, The Host Galaxies of Fast Radio Bursts Track a Combination of Stel- lar Mass and Star Formation, Similar to Type Ia Supernovae.arXiv e-prints arXiv:2504.08038 (2025), doi:10.48550/arXiv.2504.08038

    2025 doi

  24. [33]

    Hu, Y.-Q

    R.-Y. Hu, Y.-Q. Lou, Magnetized massive stars as magnetar progenitors.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 396 (2), 878–886 (2009), doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14648.x

    2009

  25. [34]

    Kroupa, On the variation of the initial mass function

    P. Kroupa, On the variation of the initial mass function. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 322 (2), 231–246 (2001), doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04022.x

    2001

  26. [35]

    Marks, P

    M. Marks, P. Kroupa, J. Dabringhausen, M. S. Pawlowski, Evidence for top-heavy stellar initial mass functions with increasing density and decreasing metallicity. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 422 (3), 2246–2254 (2012), doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20767.x

    2012

  27. [36]

    C. D. Bochenek, et al. , A fast radio burst associated with a Galactic magnetar. Nature 587 (7832), 59–62 (2020), doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2872-x

    2020 doi

  28. [37]

    Nature 587 (7832), 54–58 (2020), doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2863-y

    CHIME/FRB Collaboration, et al., A bright millisecond-duration radio burst from a Galactic magnetar. Nature 587 (7832), 54–58 (2020), doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2863-y

    2020 doi

  29. [38]

    M. J. Keith, et al., The Thousand-Pulsar-Array programme on MeerKAT - XIII. Timing, flux density, rotation measure, and dispersion measure time seri es of 597 pulsars. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 530 (2), 1581–1591 (2024), doi:10.1093/mnras/stae937

    2024 doi

  30. [39]

    A. R. Taylor, J. M. Stil, C. Sunstrum, A Rotation Measure Image of the Sky. Astrophys. J. 702 (2), 1230–1236 (2009), doi:10.1088/0004-637X/702/2/1230

    2009 doi

  31. [40]

    Hutschenreuter, et al., The Galactic Faraday rotation sky 2020.Astron

    S. Hutschenreuter, et al., The Galactic Faraday rotation sky 2020.Astron. Astrophys657, A43 (2022), doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202140486

    2022 doi

  32. [41]

    A. G. Mannings, et al., Fast Radio Bursts as Probes of Magnetic Fields in Galaxies at z ¡ 0.5. Astrophys. J. 954 (2), 179 (2023), doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ace7bb

    2023 doi

  33. [42]

    M. B. Sherman, et al. , Deep Synoptic Array Science: Implications of Faraday Rotation Measures of Fast Radio Bursts Localized to Host Galaxies. Astrophys. J. 957 (1), L8 (2023), doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad0380. 18

    2023 doi

  34. [43]

    Mckinven, et al., Revealing the Dynamic Magnetoionic Environments of Repeating Fast Radio Burst Sources through Multiyear Polarimetric Monitoring with CHIME/FRB

    R. Mckinven, et al., Revealing the Dynamic Magnetoionic Environments of Repeating Fast Radio Burst Sources through Multiyear Polarimetric Monitoring with CHIME/FRB. Astro- phys. J. 951 (1), 82 (2023), doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acd188

    2023 doi

  35. [44]

    P. P. Kronberg, et al., A Global Probe of Cosmic Magnetic Fields to High Redshifts. Astro- phys. J. 676 (1), 70–79 (2008), doi:10.1086/527281

    2008 doi

  36. [45]

    Simha, et al., Disentangling the Cosmic Web toward FRB 190608

    S. Simha, et al., Disentangling the Cosmic Web toward FRB 190608. Astrophys. J. 901 (2), 134 (2020), doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abafc3

    2020 doi

  37. [46]

    I. S. Khrykin, et al., FLIMFLAM DR1: The First Constraints on the Cosmic Baryon Dis- tribution from Eight Fast Radio Burst Sight Lines. Astrophys. J. 973 (2), 151 (2024), doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad6567

    2024 doi

  38. [47]

    Chatterjee, et al., A direct localization of a fast radio burst and its host.Nature 541 (7635), 58–61 (2017), doi:10.1038/nature20797

    S. Chatterjee, et al., A direct localization of a fast radio burst and its host.Nature 541 (7635), 58–61 (2017), doi:10.1038/nature20797

    2017 doi

  39. [48]

    Sharma, et al., Preferential occurrence of fast radio bursts in massive star-forming galaxies

    K. Sharma, et al., Preferential occurrence of fast radio bursts in massive star-forming galaxies. Nature 635 (8037), 61–66 (2024), doi:10.1038/s41586-024-08074-9

    2024 doi

  40. [49]

    Zhang, Fast Radio Burst Energetics and Detectability from High Redshifts

    B. Zhang, Fast Radio Burst Energetics and Detectability from High Redshifts. Astrophys. J. 867 (2), L21 (2018), doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aae8e3

    2018 doi

  41. [50]

    K. W. Bannister, et al., A single fast radio burst localized to a massive galaxy at cosmological distance. Science 365 (6453), 565–570 (2019), doi:10.1126/science.aaw5903

    2019 doi

  42. [51]

    Ravi, et al., A fast radio burst localized to a massive galaxy

    V. Ravi, et al., A fast radio burst localized to a massive galaxy. Nature 572 (7769), 352–354 (2019), doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1389-7

    2019 doi

  43. [52]

    Michilli, et al., Subarcminute Localization of 13 Repeating Fast Radio Bursts Detected by CHIME/FRB

    D. Michilli, et al., Subarcminute Localization of 13 Repeating Fast Radio Bursts Detected by CHIME/FRB. Astrophys. J. 950 (2), 134 (2023), doi:10.3847/1538-4357/accf89

    2023 doi

  44. [53]

    Lee, et al., The FRB 20190520B Sight Line Intersects Foreground Galaxy Clusters

    K.-G. Lee, et al., The FRB 20190520B Sight Line Intersects Foreground Galaxy Clusters. Astrophys. J. 954 (1), L7 (2023), doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acefb5

    2023 doi

  45. [54]

    C. W. James, et al., The z-DM distribution of fast radio bursts. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 509 (4), 4775–4802 (2022), doi:10.1093/mnras/stab3051. 19

    2022 doi

  46. [55]

    R. M. Shannon, et al., The Commensal Real-time ASKAP Fast Transient incoherent-sum survey. arXiv e-prints arXiv:2408.02083 (2024), doi:10.48550/arXiv.2408.02083

    2024 doi arXiv

  47. [56]

    Amiri, et al., A Catalog of Local Universe Fast Radio Bursts from CHIME/FRB and the KKO Outrigger

    M. Amiri, et al., A Catalog of Local Universe Fast Radio Bursts from CHIME/FRB and the KKO Outrigger. arXiv e-prints arXiv:2502.11217 (2025), doi:10.48550/arXiv.2502.11217

    2025 doi arXiv

  48. [57]

    E. D. Barr, An S-band Receiver and Backend System for MeerKAT, in Pulsar Astrophysics the Next Fifty Years, P. Weltevrede, B. B. P. Perera, L. L. Preston, S. Sanidas, Eds., vol. 337 of Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union Symposium (2018), pp. 175–178, doi:10.10...

    2018 doi

  49. [58]

    W. Chen, E. Barr, R. Karuppusamy, M. Kramer, B. Stappers, Wide field beamformed obser- vation with MeerKAT. arXiv e-prints arXiv:2110.01667 (2021)

    2021 arXiv

  50. [59]

    Rajwade, et al., MeerTRAP in the era of multi-messenger astrophysics

    K. Rajwade, et al., MeerTRAP in the era of multi-messenger astrophysics. arXiv e-prints arXiv:2103.08410 (2021)

    2021 arXiv

  51. [60]

    de Gasperin, et al., The ViCTORIA project: Description of a multi-frequency radio survey of the Virgo galaxy cluster

    F. de Gasperin, et al., The ViCTORIA project: Description of a multi-frequency radio survey of the Virgo galaxy cluster. Astronomy and Astrophysics 693, A189 (2025), publisher: EDP ADS Bibcode: 2025A&A...693A.189D, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202452060, https://ui. adsabs.harvard.ed...

    2025 doi

  52. [61]

    K. M. Rajwade, et al., A study of two FRBs with low polarization fractions localized with the MeerTRAP transient buffer system. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 532 (4), 3881–3892 (2024), doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1652

    2024 doi

  53. [62]

    M. A. Clark, P. C. La Plante, L. J. Greenhill, Accelerating Radio Astronomy Cross- Correlation with Graphics Processing Units (2011), doi:10.48550/arXiv.1107.4264, https: //ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011arXiv1107.4264C, publication Title: arXiv e- prints ADS Bibcode: 2011arXiv...

    2011 doi arXiv

  54. [63]

    A. T. Deller, S. J. Tingay, M. Bailes, C. West, DiFX: A Software Correlator for Very Long Base- line Interferometry Using Multiprocessor Computing Environments. Publications of the As- tronomical Society of the Pacific119, 318–336 (2007), aDS Bibcode: 2007PASP..119..318D, doi:...

    2007 doi

  55. [64]

    A. T. Deller, et al. , DiFX-2: A More Flexible, Efficient, Robust, and Powerful Software Correlator. Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific123, 275 (2011), aDS Bib- code: 2011PASP..123..275D, doi:10.1086/658907, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/ abs/2011PASP..123..275D

    2011 doi

  56. [65]

    J. P. McMullin, B. Waters, D. Schiebel, W. Young, K. Golap, CASA Architecture and Ap- plications 376, 127 (2007), conference Name: Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XVI ADS Bibcode: 2007ASPC..376..127M,https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/ abs/2007ASPC..376..127M

    2007

  57. [66]

    A. R. Offringa, et al., WSCLEAN: an implementation of a fast, generic wide-field imager for radio astronomy. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 444, 606–619 (2014), aDS Bibcode: 2014MNRAS.444..606O, doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1368,https://ui.adsabs. harvard.edu/abs/20...

    2014 doi

  58. [67]

    Mohan, D

    N. Mohan, D. Rafferty, PyBDSF: Python Blob Detection and Source Finder. Astrophysics Source Code Library p. ascl:1502.007 (2015), aDS Bibcode: 2015ascl.soft02007M, https: //ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ascl.soft02007M

    2015

  59. [68]

    Lacy, et al

    M. Lacy, et al. , The Karl G. Jansky Very Large Array Sky Survey (VLASS). Sci- ence Case and Survey Design. Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific 132, 035001 (2020), publisher: IOP ADS Bibcode: 2020PASP..132c5001L, doi:10.1088/ 1538-3873/ab63eb, https://ui.ad...

    2020

  60. [69]

    M. S. de Villiers, MeerKAT Holography Measurements in the UHF, L, and S Bands. The Astronomical Journal 165 (3), 78 (2023), publisher: The American Astronomical Society, doi:10.3847/1538-3881/acabc3, https://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-3881/acabc3

    2023 doi

  61. [70]

    Agarwal, et al., A fast radio burst in the direction of the Virgo Cluster.Mon

    D. Agarwal, et al., A fast radio burst in the direction of the Virgo Cluster.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 490 (1), 1–8 (2019), doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2574

    2019 doi

  62. [71]

    Planck Collaboration, et al., Planck intermediate results. XL. The Sunyaev-Zeldovich sig- nal from the Virgo cluster. Astron. Astrophys 596, A101 (2016), doi:10.1051/0004-6361/ 201527743. 21

    2016 doi

  63. [72]

    Simionescu, N

    A. Simionescu, N. Werner, A. Mantz, S. W. Allen, O. Urban, Witnessing the growth of the nearest galaxy cluster: thermodynamics of the Virgo Cluster outskirts. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 469 (2), 1476–1495 (2017), doi:10.1093/mnras/stx919

    2017 doi

  64. [73]

    McCall, et al., The SRG/eROSITA All-Sky Survey: View of the Virgo Cluster.Astron

    H. McCall, et al., The SRG/eROSITA All-Sky Survey: View of the Virgo Cluster.Astron. As- trophys 689, A113 (2024), doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202449391

    2024 doi

  65. [74]

    S. K. Ocker, J. M. Cordes, S. Chatterjee, Constraining Galaxy Halos from the Dispersion and Scattering of Fast Radio Bursts and Pulsars. Astrophys. J. 911 (2), 102 (2021), doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abeb6e

    2021 doi

  66. [75]

    J. M. Cordes, S. K. Ocker, S. Chatterjee, Redshift Estimation and Constraints on Intergalactic and Interstellar Media from Dispersion and Scattering of Fast Radio Bursts. Astrophys. J. 931 (2), 88 (2022), doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac6873

    2022 doi

  67. [76]

    Macquart, J

    J.-P. Macquart, J. Y. Koay, Temporal Smearing of Transient Radio Sources by the Intergalactic Medium. Astrophys. J. 776 (2), 125 (2013), doi:10.1088/0004-637X/776/2/125

    2013 doi

  68. [77]

    Jankowski, Scatfit: Scattering fits of time domain radio signals (Fast Radio Bursts or pulsars), Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:2208.003 (2022)

    F. Jankowski, Scatfit: Scattering fits of time domain radio signals (Fast Radio Bursts or pulsars), Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:2208.003 (2022)

    2022

  69. [78]

    Newville, et al

    M. Newville, et al. , Lmfit: Non-Linear Least-Square Minimization and Curve-Fitting for Python, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1606.014 (2016)

    2016

  70. [79]

    Foreman-Mackey, et al., emcee: The MCMC Hammer, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1303.002 (2013)

    D. Foreman-Mackey, et al., emcee: The MCMC Hammer, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1303.002 (2013)

    2013

  71. [80]

    Jankowski, et al., A sample of fast radio bursts discovered and localized with MeerTRAP at the MeerKAT telescope

    F. Jankowski, et al., A sample of fast radio bursts discovered and localized with MeerTRAP at the MeerKAT telescope. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 524 (3), 4275–4295 (2023), doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad2041

    2023 doi

  72. [81]

    Nanayakkara, et al., A population of faint, old, and massive quiescent galaxies at 3 < 𝑧 < 4 revealed by JWST NIRSpec Spectroscopy

    T. Nanayakkara, et al., A population of faint, old, and massive quiescent galaxies at 3 < 𝑧 < 4 revealed by JWST NIRSpec Spectroscopy. Scientific Reports 14, 3724 (2024), doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-52585-4. 22

    2024 doi

  73. [82]

    Horne, An optimal extraction algorithm for CCD spectroscopy.PASP 98, 609–617 (1986), doi:10.1086/131801

    K. Horne, An optimal extraction algorithm for CCD spectroscopy.PASP 98, 609–617 (1986), doi:10.1086/131801

    1986 doi

  74. [83]

    Bertin, S

    E. Bertin, S. Arnouts, SExtractor: Software for source extraction. Astron. Astro- phys. Suppl. Ser. 117, 393–404 (1996), doi:10.1051/aas:1996164

    1996 doi

  75. [84]

    Marnoch, et al., The unseen host galaxy and high dispersion measure of a precisely localized fast radio burst suggests a high-redshift origin

    L. Marnoch, et al., The unseen host galaxy and high dispersion measure of a precisely localized fast radio burst suggests a high-redshift origin. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 525 (1), 994–1007 (2023), doi:10.1093/mnras/stad2353

    2023 doi

  76. [85]

    R. A. Windhorst, et al., JWST PEARLS. Prime Extragalactic Areas for Reionization and Lensing Science: Project Overview and First Results. Astron. J. 165 (1), 13 (2023), doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aca163

    2023 doi

  77. [86]

    Schreiber, et al., Near infrared spectroscopy and star-formation histories of 3 ≤ z≤ 4 quiescent galaxies

    C. Schreiber, et al., Near infrared spectroscopy and star-formation histories of 3 ≤ z≤ 4 quiescent galaxies. Astron. Astrophys 618, A85 (2018), doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833070

    2018 doi

  78. [87]

    Pettini, B

    M. Pettini, B. E. J. Pagel, [OIII]/[NII] as an abundance indicator at high redshift. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 348, L59–L63 (2004), doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07591.x

    2004

  79. [88]

    Kriek, et al., An Ultra-Deep Near-Infrared Spectrum of a Compact Quiescent Galaxy at z = 2.2

    M. Kriek, et al., An Ultra-Deep Near-Infrared Spectrum of a Compact Quiescent Galaxy at z = 2.2. Astrophys. J. 700, 221–231 (2009), doi:10.1088/0004-637X/700/1/221

    2009 doi

  80. [89]

    B. D. Johnson, J. Leja, C. Conroy, J. S. Speagle, Stellar Population Inference with Prospector. Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser.254 (2), 22 (2021), doi:10.3847/1538-4365/abef67

    2021 doi

  81. [90]

    Bruzual, S

    G. Bruzual, S. Charlot, Stellar population synthesis at the resolution of 2003. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 344, 1000–1028 (2003), doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06897.x

    2003

  82. [91]

    Calzetti, et al., The Dust Content and Opacity of Actively Star-forming Galaxies

    D. Calzetti, et al., The Dust Content and Opacity of Actively Star-forming Galaxies. Astro- phys. J. 533, 682–695 (2000), doi:10.1086/308692

    2000 doi

  83. [92]

    Chabrier, Galactic Stellar and Substellar Initial Mass Function

    G. Chabrier, Galactic Stellar and Substellar Initial Mass Function. PASP 115 (809), 763–795 (2003), doi:10.1086/376392. 23

    2003 doi

  84. [93]

    J. Leja, A. C. Carnall, B. D. Johnson, C. Conroy, J. S. Speagle, How to Measure Galaxy Star Formation Histories. II. Nonparametric Models. Astrophys. J. 876 (1), 3 (2019), doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab133c

    2019 doi

  85. [94]

    Conroy, J

    C. Conroy, J. E. Gunn, M. White, The Propagation of Uncertainties in Stellar Population Synthesis Modeling. I. The Relevance of Uncertain Aspects of Stellar Evolution and the Initial Mass Function to the Derived Physical Properties of Galaxies. Astrophys. J. 699 (1), 486–506 (...

    2009 doi

  86. [95]

    G. J. Ferland, et al., The 2017 Release Cloudy.Revista Mexicana de Astronom´ıa y Astrof´ısica 53, 385–438 (2017)

    2017

  87. [96]

    J. M. Cordes, R. S. Wharton, L. G. Spitler, S. Chatterjee, I. Wasserman, Radio Wave Prop- agation and the Provenance of Fast Radio Bursts. arXiv e-prints arXiv:1605.05890 (2016), doi:10.48550/arXiv.1605.05890

    2016 doi arXiv

  88. [97]

    Mas-Ribas, M

    L. Mas-Ribas, M. McQuinn, J. X. Prochaska, CGM cloud sizes from refractive FRB scattering. arXiv e-prints arXiv:2504.19562 (2025)

    2025

  89. [98]

    McCourt, S

    M. McCourt, S. P. Oh, R. O’Leary, A.-M. Madigan, A characteristic scale for cold gas. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 473 (4), 5407–5431 (2018), doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2687

    2018 doi

  90. [99]

    Weltevrede, Investigation of the bi-drifting subpulses of radio pulsar B1839-04 utilising the open-source data-analysis project PSRSALSA.Astron

    P. Weltevrede, Investigation of the bi-drifting subpulses of radio pulsar B1839-04 utilising the open-source data-analysis project PSRSALSA.Astron. Astrophys 590, A109 (2016), doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201527950

    2016 doi

  91. [100]

    Caleb, et al., The SUrvey for Pulsars and Extragalactic Radio Bursts - III

    M. Caleb, et al., The SUrvey for Pulsars and Extragalactic Radio Bursts - III. Polarization properties of FRBs 160102 and 151230.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.478 (2), 2046–2055 (2018), doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1137

    2018 doi

  92. [101]

    I. Pastor-Marazuela, et al., Comprehensive analysis of the Apertif fast radio burst sample - Similarities with young energetic neutron stars.Astronomy & Astrophysics693, A279 (2025), publisher: EDP Sciences, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450953, https://www.aanda.org/ articles/aa/a...

    2025 doi

  93. [102]

    X. H. Li, J. L. Han, The effect of scattering on pulsar polarization angle. Astron. Astrophys 410, 253–256 (2003), doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20031190

    2003 doi

  94. [103]

    Kramer, S

    M. Kramer, S. Johnston, High-precision geometry of a double-pole pulsar. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 390 (1), 87–92 (2008), doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13780.x

    2008

  95. [104]

    Karastergiou, The complex polarization angles of radio pulsars: orthogonal jumps and interstellar scattering

    A. Karastergiou, The complex polarization angles of radio pulsars: orthogonal jumps and interstellar scattering. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 392 (1), L60–L64 (2009), doi:10.1111/j. 1745-3933.2008.00585.x

    2009

  96. [105]

    J. P. Vallee, Magnetism in the local Virgo-centered supercluster of galaxies (radius 24Mpc). Astron. Astrophys 251, 411 (1991)

    1991

  97. [106]

    Jankowski, M

    F. Jankowski, M. C. Bezuidenhout, et al., A sample of Fast Radio Bursts discovered and localised with MeerTRAP at the MeerKAT telescope. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 1, 1–2 (2023)

    2023

  98. [107]

    R. J. Dewey, J. H. Taylor, J. M. Weisberg, G. H. Stokes, A search for low-luminosity pul- sars. The Astrophysical Journal 294, L25 (1985), doi:10.1086/184502, http://adsabs. harvard.edu/doi/10.1086/184502

    1985 doi

  99. [108]

    Bailes, et al., The MeerKAT telescope as a pulsar facility: System verification and early science results from MeerTime

    M. Bailes, et al., The MeerKAT telescope as a pulsar facility: System verification and early science results from MeerTime. Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia 37, e028 (2020), aDS Bibcode: 2020PASA...37...28B, doi:10.1017/pasa.2020.19, https://ui. adsabs.har...

    2020 doi

  100. [109]

    Remazeilles, C

    M. Remazeilles, C. Dickinson, A. J. Banday, M. A. Bigot-Sazy, T. Ghosh, An improved source- subtracted and destriped 408-MHz all-sky map. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 451, 4311–4327 (2015), publisher: OUP ADS Bibcode: 2015MNRAS.451.4311R, doi:10.1093/mnras...

    2015 doi

  101. [110]

    D. C. Price, PyGDSM: Python interface to Global Diffuse Sky Models. Astrophysics Source Code Library p. ascl:1603.013 (2016), aDS Bibcode: 2016ascl.soft03013P, https://ui. adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ascl.soft03013P. 25

    2016

  102. [111]

    J. M. Cordes, S. Chatterjee, Fast Radio Bursts: An Extragalactic Enigma. Annual Rev. in Astron. Astrophys 57, 417–465 (2019), doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-091918-104501

    2019 doi

  103. [112]

    R. M. Shannon, et al., The dispersion-brightness relation for fast radio bursts from a wide-field survey. Nature 562 (7727), 386–390 (2018), doi:10.1038/s41586-018-0588-y

    2018 doi

  104. [113]

    J. L. Han, R. N. Manchester, W. van Straten, P. Demorest, Pulsar Rotation Measures and Large-scale Magnetic Field Reversals in the Galactic Disk. Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 234 (1), 11 (2018), doi:10.3847/1538-4365/aa9c45

    2018 doi

  105. [114]

    Pandhi, et al., Polarization Properties of 128 Nonrepeating Fast Radio Bursts from the First CHIME/FRB Baseband Catalog

    A. Pandhi, et al., Polarization Properties of 128 Nonrepeating Fast Radio Bursts from the First CHIME/FRB Baseband Catalog. The Astrophysical Journal 968, 50 (2024), publisher: IOP ADS Bibcode: 2024ApJ...968...50P, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad40aa,https://ui.adsabs. harvard.edu/ab...

    2024 doi

  106. [115]

    ON” image with improved cleaning parameters. Despite strict RFI flagging of the frequency subbands, the FRB remains clearly visible in the “ON

    M. B. Sherman, et al., Deep Synoptic Array Science: Polarimetry of 25 New Fast Radio Bursts Provides Insights into Their Origins. The Astrophysical Journal 964, 131 (2024), publisher: IOP ADS Bibcode: 2024ApJ...964..131S, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad275e,https: //ui.adsabs.harvard...

    2024 doi

Pith tools

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