pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.18048 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-20 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE

Recognition: unknown

X-Ray Polarization from the Atoll 4U 1735-44 Suggests a Low Inclination

A. Bobrikova, A. Gnarini, A. Salganik, A. Tarana, F. Capitanio, F. Ursini, G. Matt, J. J. E. Kajava, J. Poutanen, M. A. D\'iaz Teodori, M. Cocchi, M. Ng, P. Kaaret, P. Soffitta, R. Farinelli, S. Bianchi, S. Fabiani, S. Ravi, S. V. Forsblom, S. Zane

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 04:23 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE
keywords x-ray polarimetryneutron staratoll sourceaccretion diskdisk inclinationpolarization degreerelativistic reflectionIXPE
0
0 comments X

The pith

X-ray polarimetry of 4U 1735-44 shows marginal polarization consistent with a low disk inclination of about 40 degrees.

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

This paper presents the first coordinated X-ray spectropolarimetric observations of the atoll source 4U 1735-44 using IXPE, NICER, and NuSTAR. It reports a marginal polarization detection of 1.4 percent over 2-8 keV and uses spectral modeling that includes a thermal disk, Comptonized blackbody, and relativistic reflection to infer a disk inclination of roughly 40 degrees. The low polarization level matches patterns in other atoll sources observed by IXPE and is attributed to the low viewing angle. A sympathetic reader would care because polarimetry provides an independent probe of accretion geometry around weakly magnetized neutron stars, helping clarify how orientation affects observed emission.

Core claim

The spectroscopic and polarimetric properties of 4U 1735-44 are consistent with those observed in other atoll sources studied by IXPE, with its low polarization likely due to its low inclination. The best-fit model comprises a thermal component associated with the accretion disk, a Comptonized blackbody component, and a relativistic reflection component, from which a disk inclination of about 40 degrees is derived.

What carries the argument

Relativistic reflection modeling of the X-ray spectrum combined with direct polarization measurements, which together constrain the accretion disk inclination angle.

If this is right

  • The marginal polarization signal supports the low-inclination interpretation derived from the reflection component.
  • Atoll sources with similarly low inclinations are expected to exhibit comparably low polarization degrees.
  • Polarimetry can serve as a complementary tool to spectral reflection modeling for determining viewing angles in neutron star accretion systems.
  • The consistency with other IXPE-studied atoll sources suggests shared accretion geometries across this class.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If low inclination is the main suppressor of polarization, then higher-inclination atoll sources should display measurably stronger polarization signals in future IXPE data.
  • Correcting for inclination effects may enable polarimetry to isolate contributions from the Comptonizing region or disk atmosphere in these systems.
  • This approach could be extended to statistical samples of atoll sources to map their inclination distribution and accretion flow properties.

Load-bearing premise

The low observed polarization is caused primarily by the low disk inclination rather than by details of the Comptonization geometry, magnetic field structure, or other unmodeled effects in the accretion flow.

What would settle it

A future observation that measures a polarization degree well above the current 3.5 percent upper limit, or an independent determination of a disk inclination much larger than 40 degrees from orbital dynamics or burst oscillation analysis, would challenge the claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.18048 by A. Bobrikova, A. Gnarini, A. Salganik, A. Tarana, F. Capitanio, F. Ursini, G. Matt, J. J. E. Kajava, J. Poutanen, M. A. D\'iaz Teodori, M. Cocchi, M. Ng, P. Kaaret, P. Soffitta, R. Farinelli, S. Bianchi, S. Fabiani, S. Ravi, S. V. Forsblom, S. Zane.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Averaged polarization properties. Left: Normalized Stokes q and u parameters in the 2–8 keV band, for the three IXPE DUs and their combination. Errors are provided at 1σ CL. Right: Polarization contours in the 2–8 keV band at the 68%, 90% and 99% confidence levels obtained with the ixpe protractor task. We used the standard NICER-recommended calibration and filtering tool nicerl2 to produce the clean event… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Polarimetric properties as functions of energy. Errors are provided at 1σ CL. Upper panel: Normalized Stokes parameters q and u in six energy bands. Lower panel: PD as a function of energy. The 2σ upper limit in the 5–6 keV energy bin is shown [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Light curves obtained from IXPE, NuSTAR, and NICER. IXPE HR (5–8 keV/3–5 keV) and NuSTAR hard color (10–20 keV)/(6–10 keV) are also shown. IXPE obser￾vations are shown in orange, simultaneous NuSTAR observa￾tions are marked in green and non-simultaneous observations are marked in grey. 3.2. Spectroscopic analysis NICER observations happened one day before the IXPE or NuSTAR observations (see [PITH_FULL_IM… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Spectral energy distribution of 4U 1735−44. The IXPE and NuSTAR data are shown with green and or￾ange crosses, respectively. Left panel: fit with the tbabs*(diskbb+comptt+gauss) model. Right panel: fit with the tbabs*(diskbb+comptt+relxillNS) model. The lower panels show the fit residuals. “Model 1” column, and in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

X-ray polarimetry is a new tool capable of probing the geometry of accretion onto weakly magnetized neutron stars. Here we present the first X-ray spectropolarimetric results from coordinated observations of the atoll source 4U 1735-44, conducted with the Imaging X-ray Polarimetry Explorer (IXPE), NICER, and NuSTAR. Over the 2-8 keV energy range, we obtained a marginal detection of polarization with the polarization degree of $1.4\%\pm0.7\%$ and polarization angle of $-29^\circ\pm14^\circ$, corresponding to a $3\sigma$ upper limit on the polarization degree of 3.5\%. The best-fit model to describe the spectrum comprises a thermal component associated with the accretion disk, a Comptonized blackbody component, and a relativistic reflection component. From the reflection model, we infer a disk inclination of $\sim 40^\circ$. The spectroscopic and polarimetric properties of 4U 1735-44 are consistent with those observed in other atoll sources studied by IXPE, with its low polarization likely due to its low inclination.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper reports the first spectropolarimetric observations of the atoll source 4U 1735-44 using coordinated IXPE, NICER, and NuSTAR data. It finds a marginal polarization detection in the 2-8 keV band with PD = 1.4% ± 0.7% and PA = -29° ± 14°, yielding a 3σ upper limit of 3.5%. Spectral modeling with a disk blackbody, Comptonized blackbody, and relativistic reflection component infers a disk inclination of ~40°. The authors conclude that the low polarization is likely due to this low inclination and that the source's properties are consistent with other IXPE-observed atoll sources.

Significance. If the interpretation holds, this work adds a new source to the limited IXPE sample of polarized atoll sources, supporting a possible correlation between low polarization degree and low system inclination in weakly magnetized neutron star accretors. The multi-instrument spectral decomposition provides an independent inclination constraint via reflection modeling, which is a methodological strength. The result is incremental but useful for building statistical understanding of accretion geometries; the marginal detection, however, restricts its impact to suggestive rather than definitive.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The central claim that the observed low polarization 'is likely due to its low inclination' lacks quantitative support. The manuscript does not compute the polarization degree and angle predicted by the best-fit multi-component model (disk blackbody + Comptonized blackbody + relativistic reflection) at i ≈ 40°. Comptonization and reflection each contribute energy-dependent polarization whose net value depends on optical depth, geometry, and 2-8 keV flux weighting; without this forward modeling, it is unclear whether the low inclination alone accounts for the marginal PD = 1.4% ± 0.7% or whether other unmodeled effects dominate.
minor comments (2)
  1. The polarization angle reference frame and any assumptions about energy dependence or constant polarization across the band should be stated explicitly in the polarization analysis section.
  2. Provide the full best-fit spectral parameters (including uncertainties on inclination and component normalizations) in a table to allow readers to evaluate the robustness of the ~40° inclination.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed review of our manuscript. We address the major comment below and are prepared to revise the paper to strengthen the interpretation of our results.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The central claim that the observed low polarization 'is likely due to its low inclination' lacks quantitative support. The manuscript does not compute the polarization degree and angle predicted by the best-fit multi-component model (disk blackbody + Comptonized blackbody + relativistic reflection) at i ≈ 40°. Comptonization and reflection each contribute energy-dependent polarization whose net value depends on optical depth, geometry, and 2-8 keV flux weighting; without this forward modeling, it is unclear whether the low inclination alone accounts for the marginal PD = 1.4% ± 0.7% or whether other unmodeled effects dominate.

    Authors: We agree that the central claim would be strengthened by explicit forward modeling of the expected polarization from the best-fit spectral model. Our interpretation relies on the general theoretical expectation that both disk blackbody and relativistic reflection produce low polarization degrees at inclinations around 40°, with the Comptonized component likely diluting the net signal further, and on the consistency with other IXPE-observed atoll sources. However, we acknowledge that without a quantitative calculation incorporating the specific flux contributions, optical depths, and geometries from our multi-component fit, the link remains qualitative. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated subsection (or appendix) that estimates the predicted polarization degree and angle in the 2-8 keV band. This will be done by weighting the polarization properties of each component according to their best-fit fluxes: using known analytic or numerical expectations for Comptonized emission (depending on scattering geometry) and the inclination-dependent polarization from the relxill reflection model. The resulting net PD and PA will be compared directly to the observed marginal detection to assess consistency or identify possible additional effects. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: inclination from independent reflection fit, polarization direct measurement, comparison to other sources is external

full rationale

The paper measures polarization degree and angle directly from IXPE data (PD = 1.4% ± 0.7%, 3σ upper limit 3.5%). Disk inclination (~40°) is obtained separately from relativistic reflection modeling of the NICER+NuSTAR spectrum. The statement that low polarization is 'likely due to its low inclination' is a qualitative inference based on consistency with other IXPE atoll sources; no equation redefines one quantity in terms of the other, no parameter is fitted to polarization data and then called a prediction, and no self-citation chain supplies a load-bearing uniqueness theorem. The derivation chain remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard X-ray spectral modeling assumptions and the interpretation that polarization degree scales with inclination in Comptonized disk geometries.

free parameters (2)
  • disk inclination
    Fitted from the relativistic reflection component in the spectral model; reported as approximately 40 degrees.
  • polarization degree
    Directly measured from IXPE data as 1.4% with uncertainty; used to set the 3-sigma upper limit.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Standard assumptions of relativistic reflection modeling (disk geometry, emissivity profile, ionization state) accurately recover the true inclination.
    Invoked when inferring inclination from the reflection component.
  • domain assumption Polarization in atoll sources is dominated by scattering in the accretion disk and corona geometry rather than other effects.
    Underlies the claim that low polarization indicates low inclination.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5612 in / 1402 out tokens · 28943 ms · 2026-05-10T04:23:57.091793+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 53 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Arnaud, K. A. 1996, in ASP Conf. Ser., Vol. 101, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems V, ed. G. H. Jacoby & J. Barnes (San Francisco: ASP), 17–20

    1996

  2. [2]

    InHandbook of X-ray and Gamma- ray Astrophysics; Bambi, C.; Santangelo, A., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2024; pp

    Bahramian, A., & Degenaar, N. 2024, in Handbook of X-ray and Gamma-ray Astrophysics, ed. C. Bambi & A. Santangelo (Singapore: Springer), 3657–3718, doi: 10.1007/978-981-19-6960-7 94

    work page doi:10.1007/978-981-19-6960-7 2024

  3. [3]

    2018, AJ, 156, 58, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aacb21

    Mantelet, G., & Andrae, R. 2018, AJ, 156, 58, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aacb21

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aacb21 2018

  4. [4]

    SoftwareX , keywords =

    Baldini, L., Bucciantini, N., Di Lalla, N., et al. 2022, SoftwareX, 19, 101194, doi: 10.1016/j.softx.2022.101194

    work page doi:10.1016/j.softx.2022.101194 2022

  5. [5]

    Astroparticle Physics , keywords =

    Baldini, L., Barbanera, M., Bellazzini, R., et al. 2021, Astroparticle Physics, 133, 102628, doi: 10.1016/j.astropartphys.2021.102628

    work page doi:10.1016/j.astropartphys.2021.102628 2021

  6. [6]

    2024a, A&A, 688, A217, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450207

    Bobrikova, A., Di Marco, A., La Monaca, F., et al. 2024a, A&A, 688, A217, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450207

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450207

  7. [7]

    2025, A&A, 696, A181, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452358

    Bobrikova, A., Poutanen, J., & Loktev, V. 2025, A&A, 696, A181, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452358

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202452358 2025

  8. [8]

    V., Di Marco, A., et al

    Bobrikova, A., Forsblom, S. V., Di Marco, A., et al. 2024b, A&A, 688, A170, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202449318

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202449318

  9. [9]

    2023, ApJ, 943, 129, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acae88

    Capitanio, F., Fabiani, S., Gnarini, A., et al. 2023, ApJ, 943, 129, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acae88

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acae88 2023

  10. [10]

    J., Jonsson, P., Primack, J

    Casares, J., Cornelisse, R., Steeghs, D., et al. 2006, MNRAS, 373, 1235, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.11106.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.11106.x 2006

  11. [11]

    2023, A&A, 674, L10, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346275

    Cocchi, M., Gnarini, A., Fabiani, S., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, L10, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346275

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346275 2023

  12. [12]

    Corbet, R. H. D., Smale, A. P., Charles, P. A., et al. 1989, MNRAS, 239, 533, doi: 10.1093/mnras/239.2.533 Di Marco, A., Costa, E., Muleri, F., et al. 2022, AJ, 163, 170, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac51c9 Di Marco, A., La Monaca, F., Poutanen, J., et al. 2023a, ApJL, 953, L22, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acec6e Di Marco, A., Soffitta, P., Costa, E., et al. 2023b, ...

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/239.2.533 1989

  13. [13]

    J., Schawinski, K., Slosar, A., et al

    Matt, G. 2008, MNRAS, 391, 32, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13872.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13872.x 2008

  14. [14]

    2024, A&A, 684, A137, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347374

    Fabiani, S., Capitanio, F., Iaria, R., et al. 2024, A&A, 684, A137, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347374

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347374 2024

  15. [15]

    2024, A&A, 684, A62, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348915

    Farinelli, R., Waghmare, A., Ducci, L., & Santangelo, A. 2024, A&A, 684, A62, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348915

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202348915 2024

  16. [16]

    2023, MNRAS, 519, 3681, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3726

    Farinelli, R., Fabiani, S., Poutanen, J., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 519, 3681, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3726

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3726 2023

  17. [17]

    K., Homan, J., & Remillard, R

    Fridriksson, J. K., Homan, J., & Remillard, R. A. 2015, ApJ, 809, 52, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/809/1/52

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/809/1/52 2015

  18. [18]

    , keywords =

    Galloway, D. K., Muno, M. P., Hartman, J. M., Psaltis, D., & Chakrabarty, D. 2008, ApJS, 179, 360, doi: 10.1086/592044 Garc´ ıa, J. A., Dauser, T., Ludlam, R., et al. 2022, ApJ, 926, 13, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac3cb7

    work page doi:10.1086/592044 2008

  19. [19]

    Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2016: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray , year = 2016, editor =

    Gendreau, K. C., Arzoumanian, Z., Adkins, P. W., et al. 2016, in Proc. SPIE, Vol. 9905, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2016: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray, ed. J.-W. A. den Herder, T. Takahashi, & M. Bautz, 99051H, doi: 10.1117/12.2231304

    work page doi:10.1117/12.2231304 2016

  20. [20]

    2022, MNRAS, 514, 2561, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1523 Polarized Emission from 4U 1735−449

    Gnarini, A., Ursini, F., Matt, G., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 514, 2561, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1523 Polarized Emission from 4U 1735−449

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1523 2022

  21. [21]

    2024, A&A, 692, A123, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452642

    Gnarini, A., Farinelli, R., Ursini, F., et al. 2024, A&A, 692, A123, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452642

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202452642 2024

  22. [22]

    A., Craig, W

    Harrison, F. A., Craig, W. W., Christensen, F. E., et al. 2013, ApJ, 770, 103, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/770/2/103

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/770/2/103 2013

  23. [23]

    , keywords =

    Hasinger, G., & van der Klis, M. 1989, A&A, 225, 79 HI4PI Collaboration, Ben Bekhti, N., Fl¨ oer, L., et al. 2016, A&A, 594, A116, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629178

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629178 1989

  24. [24]

    Astronomy Letters , keywords =

    Inogamov, N. A., & Sunyaev, R. A. 1999, Astronomy Letters, 25, 269, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9904333

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/9904333 1999

  25. [25]

    doi:10.1016/j.astropartphys.2015.02.007 , eprint =

    Kislat, F., Clark, B., Beilicke, M., & Krawczynski, H. 2015, Astroparticle Physics, 68, 45, doi: 10.1016/j.astropartphys.2015.02.007

    work page doi:10.1016/j.astropartphys.2015.02.007 2015

  26. [26]

    1998, PASJ, 50, 667, doi: 10.1093/pasj/50.6.667 La Monaca, F., Di Marco, A., Poutanen, J., et al

    Kubota, A., Tanaka, Y., Makishima, K., et al. 1998, PASJ, 50, 667, doi: 10.1093/pasj/50.6.667 La Monaca, F., Di Marco, A., Poutanen, J., et al. 2024, ApJL, 960, L11, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad132d

    work page doi:10.1093/pasj/50.6.667 1998

  27. [27]

    I., & Sunyaev, R

    Lapidus, I. I., & Sunyaev, R. A. 1985, MNRAS, 217, 291, doi: 10.1093/mnras/217.2.291

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/217.2.291 1985

  28. [28]

    T., Gudennavar, S

    Lavanya, S., Thomas, N. T., Gudennavar, S. B., & Bubbly, S. G. 2024, MNRAS, 534, 2783, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae2269

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae2269 2024

  29. [29]

    2013, AJ, 146, 60, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/146/3/60

    Lei, Y.-J., Zhang, H.-T., Zhang, C.-M., et al. 2013, AJ, 146, 60, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/146/3/60

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/146/3/60 2013

  30. [30]

    Lewin, W. H. G., van Paradijs, J., & Taam, R. E. 1993, SSRv, 62, 223, doi: 10.1007/BF00196124

    work page doi:10.1007/bf00196124 1993

  31. [31]

    2022, A&A, 660, A25, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142360

    Loktev, V., Veledina, A., & Poutanen, J. 2022, A&A, 660, A25, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142360

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202142360 2022

  32. [32]

    M., Cackett, E

    Ludlam, R. M., Cackett, E. M., Garc´ ıa, J. A., et al. 2020, ApJ, 895, 45, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab89a6

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab89a6 2020

  33. [33]

    Marshall, H. L. 2021a, ApJ, 907, 82, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abcfc3

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abcfc3

  34. [34]

    Marshall, H. L. 2021b, AJ, 162, 134, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac173d

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac173d

  35. [35]

    Marshall, H. L. 2024, ApJ, 964, 88, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad0897

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad0897 2024

  36. [36]

    1993, MNRAS, 260, 663, doi: 10.1093/mnras/260.3.663

    Matt, G. 1993, MNRAS, 260, 663, doi: 10.1093/mnras/260.3.663

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/260.3.663 1993

  37. [37]

    M., Maitra, D., Cackett, E

    Miller, J. M., Maitra, D., Cackett, E. M., Bhattacharyya, S., & Strohmayer, T. E. 2011, ApJL, 731, L7, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/731/1/L7 M¨ uck, B., Piraino, S., & Santangelo, A. 2013, A&A, 555, A17, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201321645 Nasa Heasarc. 2014, HEAsoft: Unified Release of FTOOLS and XANADU,, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1408.004 htt...

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/731/1/l7 2011

  38. [38]

    K., Homan, J., et al

    Ng, M., Hughes, A. K., Homan, J., et al. 2024, ApJ, 966, 232, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad35bd

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad35bd 2024

  39. [39]

    Paradijs, J., & Lewin, W. H. G. 1995, A&A, 297, 141

    1995

  40. [40]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , author =

    Piconcelli, E., Jimenez-Bail´ on, E., Guainazzi, M., et al. 2004, MNRAS, 351, 161, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07764.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07764.x 2004

  41. [41]

    2001, The Astrophysical Journal, 547, 355, doi: 10.1086/318336

    Popham, R., & Sunyaev, R. 2001, ApJ, 547, 355, doi: 10.1086/318336

    work page doi:10.1086/318336 2001

  42. [42]

    N., & Svensson, R

    Poutanen, J., Nagendra, K. N., & Svensson, R. 1996, MNRAS, 283, 892, doi: 10.1093/mnras/283.3.892

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/283.3.892 1996

  43. [43]

    , keywords =

    Rankin, J., La Monaca, F., Di Marco, A., et al. 2024, ApJL, 961, L8, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad1832

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad1832 2024

  44. [44]

    L., & Gnarini, A

    Ravi, S., Ng, M., Marshall, H. L., & Gnarini, A. 2026, ApJ, 997, 60, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae21bd

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae21bd 2026

  45. [45]

    L., Kaaret, P., Gnarini, A., et al

    Saade, M. L., Kaaret, P., Gnarini, A., et al. 2024, ApJ, 963, 133, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad235a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad235a 2024

  46. [46]

    S., Reerink, T., van der Klis, M., et al

    Schnerr, R. S., Reerink, T., van der Klis, M., et al. 2003, A&A, 406, 221, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20030682

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20030682 2003

  47. [47]

    I., & Sunyaev, R

    Shakura, N. I., & Sunyaev, R. A. 1973, A&A, 24, 337

    1973

  48. [48]

    I., & Sunyaev, R

    Shakura, N. I., & Sunyaev, R. A. 1988, Advances in Space Research, 8, 135, doi: 10.1016/0273-1177(88)90396-1

    work page doi:10.1016/0273-1177(88)90396-1 1988

  49. [49]

    E., Bradt, H

    Shirey, R. E., Bradt, H. V., Levine, A. M., & Morgan, E. H. 1998, ApJ, 506, 374, doi: 10.1086/306247

    work page doi:10.1086/306247 1998

  50. [50]

    2021, AJ, 162, 208, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac19b0

    Soffitta, P., Baldini, L., Bellazzini, R., et al. 2021, AJ, 162, 208, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac19b0

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac19b0 2021

  51. [51]

    J., Jonsson, P., Primack, J

    Suleimanov, V., & Poutanen, J. 2006, MNRAS, 369, 2036, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10454.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10454.x 2006

  52. [52]

    2025, A&A, 698, A245, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202554083

    Tarana, A., Capitanio, F., Gnarini, A., et al. 2025, A&A, 698, A245, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202554083

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202554083 2025

  53. [53]

    2023, A&A, 676, A20, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346541

    Ursini, F., Farinelli, R., Gnarini, A., et al. 2023, A&A, 676, A20, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346541

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346541 2023

  54. [54]

    2024, A&A, 690, A200, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451584 van Paradijs, J., Penninx, W., Lewin, W

    Ursini, F., Gnarini, A., Bianchi, S., et al. 2024, A&A, 690, A200, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451584 van Paradijs, J., Penninx, W., Lewin, W. H. G., Sztajno, M., & Truemper, J. 1988, A&A, 192, 147

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451584 2024

  55. [55]

    Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems , keywords =

    Weisskopf, M. C., Soffitta, P., Baldini, L., et al. 2022, JATIS, 8, 026002, doi: 10.1117/1.JATIS.8.2.026002

    work page doi:10.1117/1.jatis.8.2.026002 2022

  56. [56]

    2000, The Astrophysical Journal, 542, 914, doi: 10.1086/317016

    Wilms, J., Allen, A., & McCray, R. 2000, ApJ, 542, 914, doi: 10.1086/317016

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1086/317016 2000