Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 4 minor 4 cited by

In strongly magnetized electron–positron pair plasma, stimulated Raman scattering—forbidden when the plasma is unmagnetized—becomes possible in the charged mode, with a maximum energy growth rate a_e (ω0/ω_c)(ω0 ω_p)^{1/2} in the intermedia

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-04 09:50 UTC pith:3GAJ3TXC

load-bearing objection A genuinely useful analytic extension of the authors' induced-scattering framework, but the claimed SRS density cutoff (ωp/ω0 < 1/2) looks like an artifact of dropping O(ω²) terms, so the mode-competition map needs revision. the 1 major comments →

arxiv 2510.12869 v2 pith:3GAJ3TXC submitted 2025-10-14 astro-ph.HE physics.plasm-ph

Unified kinetic theory of induced scattering: Compton, Brillouin, and Raman processes in magnetized electron and positron pair plasma

Rei Nishiura , Shoma F. Kamijima , Kunihito Ioka This is my paper
classification astro-ph.HE physics.plasm-ph
keywords induced Compton scatteringstimulated Brillouin scatteringstimulated Raman scatteringelectron-positron pair plasmamagnetar magnetospherefast radio burstskinetic dispersion relationparametric instabilities
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper tries to establish a unified analytic theory of induced (stimulated) scattering in strongly magnetized electron–positron pair plasma, covering induced Compton scattering, stimulated Brillouin scattering, and stimulated Raman scattering from one kinetic dispersion relation. Its central result is a classification: for each of the three density-fluctuation modes (ordinary, neutral, charged), the dominant instability is determined by a weak-versus-strong coupling condition, and the maximum linear growth rates take simple closed forms with distinct powers of the small ratio ω0/ω_c. The headline finding is that stimulated Raman scattering, which cannot occur in unmagnetized pair plasma, is enabled in the charged mode by the magnetic field, with growth rate a_e(ω0/ω_c)(ω0 ω_p)^{1/2} in the intermediate-density window. A sympathetic reader cares because this supplies the analytic map of which scattering process damps radio waves as they cross a magnetar magnetosphere, directly relevant to fast radio burst emission and escape.

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that the three induced-scattering processes are not independent but are branches of a single dispersion relation whose structure is fixed by the ponderomotive beat between incident and scattered transverse waves and the longitudinal density response. Solving that relation with a Maxwellian plasma dispersion function, the authors obtain analytic maximum growth rates for the ordinary, neutral, and charged modes. They find that scattering of perpendicularly polarized waves is suppressed by powers of ω0/ω_c—(ω0/ω_c)^4 and (ω0/ω_c)^{4/3} for neutral-mode ICS and SBS, and (ω0/ω_c)^2, (ω0/ω_c)^{2/3}, and (ω0/ω_c) for charged-mode ICS, SBS, and SRS—and that

What carries the argument

The central object is the set of kinetic dispersion relations (Eqs. 20–22) for the scattered wave, derived from the Boltzmann equation with a ponderomotive force and a Maxwellian background. Each relation contains the plasma dispersion function Z(ζ) whose argument ζ = ω/(k_∥ v_th) controls the physics: the |ζ|≪1 expansion yields Landau-resonant induced Compton scattering, the |ζ|≫1 expansion yields fluid-like Brillouin/Raman scattering, and the charged mode additionally carries the longitudinal dielectric function ε_L, which introduces Debye screening in the collective limit. The polarization of the pump selects the mode: electric field parallel to B0 drives the ordinary mode; perpendicular

Load-bearing premise

The derivation treats both the incident and scattered waves as strictly transverse and the density fluctuation as strictly longitudinal (Eqs. 2–3); in a magnetized plasma an obliquely propagating transverse wave is not an exact eigenmode, and the paper itself notes the maximum-growth angle parameters computed under this assumption may differ by a factor from the true value.

What would settle it

Launch a linearly polarized, monochromatic pulse with ω0 ≪ ω_c into a magnetized pair plasma with pair density such that √(8 k_B T_e/m_e c²)(1+ω_p²/ω_c²)^{1/2} ≪ ω_p/ω0 < 1/2, and look for an SRS backscattered sideband growing at rate a_e(ω0/ω_c)(ω0 ω_p)^{1/2}; alternatively, numerically solve the full dispersion relation without the two-transverse-one-longitudinal restriction and compare maximum growth and the SRS/ICS boundary. If the charged-mode SRS branch is absent or the growth-rate exponents in ω0/ω_c change, the central claim fails.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Stimulated Raman scattering becomes a real damping channel for radio pulses in magnetized pair plasma whenever ω_p/ω0 lies in the intermediate window, with growth rate a_e(ω0/ω_c)(ω0 ω_p)^{1/2}; in unmagnetized pair plasma this channel is closed.
  • In the weak-coupling regime, induced Compton scattering dominates in the ordinary and neutral modes and in the low-density charged mode, while in the intermediate-density charged mode SRS always outgrows ICS; the paper proves this ordering.
  • Perpendicularly polarized waves are suppressed by specific powers of ω0/ω_c, so the dominant process and its growth rate can be read off from plasma density, temperature, field strength, and wave amplitude without solving the full dispersion relation numerically.
  • For broadband incident waves (as in FRBs), ICS growth rates scale with (ω0/Δω)^2 and SBS/SRS rates lose a factor (t_coh Δω)^{-1} relative to monochromatic waves, changing the expected damage to a pulse.
  • The analytic map provides a direct tool for fast radio burst models: comparing induced-scattering timescales with burst durations in different magnetosphere regions tells where emission and attenuation can occur.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The paper's own caveat in Appendix B3—that maximum-growth angles computed for strictly transverse scattered waves 'may differ by a factor from the true value'—suggests that the quantitative boundaries in the density–temperature plane could shift once oblique eigenmodes are allowed; a PIC simulation scanning ω_p/ω0 around the intermediate window would test the SRS-versus-ICS ordering.
  • If the SRS channel really opens at the predicted rate, magnetar magnetosphere radio pulses may generate Langmuir waves at the plasma frequency, offering a potential secondary emission or heating signature at frequencies tied to the local pair density.
  • The same dispersion-relation machinery should extend to X-mode/Alfvén-wave pumps and four-wave interactions; those extensions would decide whether the SRS channel survives in the strongly nonlinear outer-magnetosphere regime where a_e ω0/ω_c > 1, which the present linear theory does not cover.
  • Because the theory is derived under the two-transverse-one-longitudinal wave assumption, its growth-rate formulas are most directly applicable to the inner magnetosphere; extrapolating them to the outer magnetosphere, where nonlinear effects dominate, is an editorial inference beyond the paper's claims.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

1 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper presents a unified kinetic-theory treatment of induced scattering (ICS, SBS, SRS) in strongly magnetized electron-positron pair plasma. Starting from dispersion relations previously derived by the authors, it derives analytic linear growth rates for the ordinary, neutral, and charged density-fluctuation modes, classifies the dominant instability by coupling strength and density, and gives scalings for the suppression by powers of omega0/omega_c. The central novel claim is that SRS, absent in unmagnetized pair plasma, can be excited in the charged mode, with a maximum growth rate (t_R^max)^{-1} = a_e (omega0/omega_c)(omega0 omega_p)^{1/2} in the intermediate-density regime. The paper also addresses broadband incident waves and discusses applications to FRB propagation in magnetar magnetospheres.

Significance. If correct, the paper provides a valuable analytic classification of parametric instabilities in a regime relevant to FRB emission and propagation. The detailed appendices make the derivations transparent, and the growth-rate formulas for ICS and SBS are checked against numerical solutions of the dispersion relations for representative parameters (Figs. 1, 2, 4-6). The scalings with omega0/omega_c are a useful organizing principle. However, the SRS density boundary and the associated high-density classification rest on a small-beat-frequency expansion that is not valid where SRS is claimed to operate; the numerical tests do not probe that boundary. This is a load-bearing issue that requires revision.

major comments (1)
  1. [Appendix B3 and D5; Appendix D3] The maximum-growth angular parameters are derived under the strict transverse-wave assumption (Eqs. 2-3), which the paper itself states may differ 'by a factor' from the true value because obliquely propagating transverse waves are not exact eigenmodes of the magnetized plasma. This factor enters the maximum growth rates (48), (62), (88), (93), (104) and the SRS-vs-ICS ratio (D17). Near regime boundaries the ratio is O(1), so the conclusion that SRS always dominates in the intermediate-density regime is not robust to this factor. Please either relax the transverse assumption or quantify the error and show that the classification is unchanged.
minor comments (4)
  1. [General] There are several citation errors for equations in figure captions: Fig. 4 caption refers to Eq. (70) for the transition point, but the correct equation is (120); Fig. 5 caption similarly refers to Eq. (70), which should be (121).
  2. [Eq. (108)] The second line of Eq. (108) contains an extra factor of 8 in the lower-bound term (8kBTe/mec^2) compared with the corresponding bound in Eq. (107); this appears to be a typo.
  3. [§III.C.1.b] The reference to 'collective limit (75)' should be to Eq. (74).
  4. [§III.A.2] Typo: 'Apendix B 3' should be 'Appendix B 3'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the new growth-rate formulas are analytic consequences of previously published, parameter-free dispersion relations, with no fitted parameters.

full rationale

The derivation chain in this paper is not circular. The base dispersion relations for the ordinary, neutral, and charged modes (Eqs. (20)-(22)) are taken from the authors' prior paper [51], but that reference is a published, parameter-free derivation with stated assumptions (transverse incident/scattered waves, longitudinal density fluctuations, strong magnetic field, Maxwellian background), and the present paper's new content—the analytic SBS and SRS growth rates, the mode competition, and the density-temperature classification—follows by algebraic expansion and asymptotic analysis of those relations, not by fitting or by assuming the target growth rates. The numerical comparisons (Figs. 1, 2, 4-6) solve the same dispersion relations and therefore serve as algebraic consistency checks rather than external benchmarks, which is a methodological limitation but not circularity. The only self-citation of note is the reuse of [51] for Eqs. (20)-(22), and because that prior work is external, published evidence rather than an unverified assertion, it does not make the derivation circular. The paper's own caveat that the transverse-wave angle parameters 'may differ by a factor from the true value' is a validity/accuracy concern, not a circular-reasoning concern.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 9 axioms · 0 invented entities

No new particles, forces, or conserved quantities are introduced. The ordinary/neutral/charged modes are classifications of density fluctuations in the existing kinetic model, not new dynamical entities. No free parameters are fitted: all quantities are physical inputs or derived coefficients. The principal load-bearing input is the set of dispersion relations from the authors' own prior paper [51], which is why the circularity burden is low but nonzero.

axioms (9)
  • domain assumption Unperturbed pair plasma is uniform, Maxwellian, with equal electron and positron densities (Eqs. 5, 23).
    The kinetic dispersion relations in Eqs. (20)-(22) use this distribution; real magnetar magnetospheres may have non-thermal or non-uniform distributions.
  • domain assumption Incident and scattered waves are monochromatic, linearly polarized, strictly transverse; density fluctuations are longitudinal (Eqs. 1-3).
    This excludes decays involving fast magnetosonic or two-plasmon processes, as the paper notes in Sec. II A. It also makes the scattered wave an approximate eigenmode, with admitted factor-of-few angular errors.
  • domain assumption Nonrelativistic amplitude limits: a_e << 1 for ordinary mode and a_e omega0/omega_c << 1 for neutral/charged modes (Eqs. 36-37).
    The kinetic description and ponderomotive potential assume nonrelativistic particle motion; FRB pulses in the inner magnetosphere may violate this.
  • domain assumption Strong-field ordering omega0, omega1 << omega_c and k_perp v_th/omega_c << 1 (Eqs. 18-19).
    The entire magnetized-mode classification and the cyclotron-frequency suppression scalings are derived in this regime.
  • domain assumption Ponderomotive potential formula in a uniform magnetic field, Eq. (16), taken from Refs. [94-99].
    This is the coupling mechanism between beat waves and density fluctuations. The formula is cited from prior literature, not re-derived here.
  • domain assumption Base dispersion relations for ordinary, neutral, and charged modes, Eqs. (20)-(22), taken from the authors' prior paper Nishiura et al. [51].
    All new results in this paper are derived from these relations. If any of them contains an error, the new growth rates inherit it.
  • standard math Asymptotic expansions of the plasma dispersion function Z(zeta) in Eq. (41).
    Standard expansions used for weak-coupling (|zeta|<<1) and strong-coupling (|zeta|>>1) regimes.
  • domain assumption For SRS, the Langmuir wave resonance omega = -omega_p |cos theta_kB| and the Landau-damping bound k << (1/4) lambda_De^-1 |cos theta_kB| (Eqs. 100-101), including the 'conventional factor of 4'.
    The small-angle SRS calculation and the intermediate/high-density boundaries depend on this condition, which is imported from prior literature.
  • domain assumption Broadband suppression rule t_inc^-1 ~ t_coh^-2 / Delta_omega (Eq. 123) applied also to strong-coupling SBS/SRS.
    The paper explicitly states the precise behavior in the strong-coupling broadband case is future work, so the Sec. V formulas are heuristic.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 43979 in / 13501 out tokens · 113755 ms · 2026-08-04T09:50:45.319651+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We extend a unified theoretical framework for induced (stimulated) scattering-parametric instabilities of electromagnetic waves, including induced Compton, stimulated Brillouin, and stimulated Raman scattering (SRS) in strongly magnetized electron-positron pair plasma. By solving the dispersion relations derived from kinetic theory, taking into account the ponderomotive force due to the beat of incident and scattered waves, we obtain analytical expressions for the linear growth rates of the ordinary, neutral, and charged modes of density fluctuations. Our results clarify which type of scattering dominates under different thermal coupling, resonance, and density conditions. In strong magnetic fields, scattering of perpendicularly polarized waves is generally suppressed, but by different powers of the cyclotron frequency. Moreover, SRS, which is forbidden in unmagnetized electron and positron pair plasma, becomes possible in the charged mode. This framework enables a comprehensive evaluation of induced scattering in extreme astrophysical and laboratory plasma, such as fast radio burst (FRB) emission and propagation in magnetar magnetospheres.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2510.12869 by Kunihito Ioka, Rei Nishiura, Shoma F. Kamijima.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: The maximum linear growth rate of induced scattering excited by the ordinary mode as a function of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: The dependence of the maximum linear growth rate of induced scattering for the neutral mode on the incident [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: The further subdivision of the charged mode instability classification, as summarized in Tab. I, according to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Dependence of the maximum linear growth rate of induced scattering excited by the charged mode on the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: The dependence of the maximum linear growth rate of induced scattering in the charged mode on the incident [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: The dependence of the maximum linear growth rate of induced scattering in the charged mode on the strength [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_6.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. Scattering of Strong Radio Waves by Particles in Strongly Magnetized Plasmas and Implications for Fast Radio Bursts

    astro-ph.HE 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Relativistic single-particle scattering cross sections for strong electromagnetic waves in strongly magnetized plasma are computed for arbitrary polarization and angle, showing strong suppression and sub-unity optical...

  2. Interaction of Strong Electromagnetic Waves with Unmagnetized Pair Plasmas

    physics.plasm-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Strong EM waves in pair plasmas are governed by nonlinearity parameter ε_p, producing attenuation over ε_p^{-2/3} wavelengths when small and shock formation when large.

  3. Interaction of Strong Electromagnetic Waves with Unmagnetized Pair Plasmas

    physics.plasm-ph 2026-04 conditional novelty 7.0

    The propagation length of strong electromagnetic waves through unmagnetized pair plasmas scales as ε_p^{-2/3}, where ε_p combines wave strength and frequency, verified by kinetic simulations.

  4. Induced Scattering of Strong Waves in Pair Plasmas

    astro-ph.HE 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Induced scattering of strong waves in pair plasmas saturates at a level set by the wave-to-plasma energy ratio, so waves with a0 ω0/ωpe ≫ 1 propagate with little scattering even when the amplitude a0 exceeds 1.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

137 extracted references · 64 linked inside Pith · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Large-Angle (Backward) Scattering The lower bound on the plasma frequency for backward scattering (86) originates from Eq. (74). This criterion corresponds to the condition that the phase velocity of the Langmuir wave is much greater than the thermal ve- locity of electrons and positrons. If this requirement is not satisfied, the Langmuir wave undergoes s...

  2. [2]

    (106), SRS is excited only for small-angle scattering

    Small-Angle Scattering In the low density regime described by Eq. (106), SRS is excited only for small-angle scattering. In this re- gion, the phase velocity of the Langmuir wave is typi- cally smaller than the thermal velocity of electrons and positrons, involving strong Landau damping. However, for small scattering angles, the parameterνapproaches unity...

  3. [3]

    Stimulated Raman Scattering (Charged mode) In the strong coupling regime, SRS is degenerate with SBS as discussed in Sec. IV C. Therefore, this subsection focuses on the weak coupling regime. The effect of the incident EM wave bandwidth on the SRS growth rate depends on the plasma density regime. a. Intermediate density regimeFor the intermediate density ...

  4. [4]

    Summary of Charged Mode Instabilities in the charged mode are initially classified according to coupling and resonance conditions, as sum- marized in Tab. I. For the charged mode, a more detailed classification is provided in the density–temperature plane, as illustrated in Fig. 3. This map delineates the nature of scattering processes in the low, interme...

  5. [5]

    Numerical Evaluation The linear growth rate of induced scattering in the charged mode can be evaluated by numerically solving the dispersion relation expressed as Eq. (72). In this study, following the approach used for the neutral mode, we systematically vary the dimensionless amplitude of the incident EM wave, as defined by Eq. (69), and ex- amine how t...

  6. [6]

    For a broadband incident wave, the growth rate for ICS has already been derived in Nishiuraet al.[51]

    Induced Compton Scattering (Charged mode) The behavior of the ICS growth rate differs between the noncollective limit (73) and the collective limit (74). For a broadband incident wave, the growth rate for ICS has already been derived in Nishiuraet al.[51]. a. Noncollective limit (low density regime)The ICS growth rate is expressed as (see Eq. (117) in [51...

  7. [7]

    The resulting expression is given by tinc B,charged −1 ∼ 3 2 2 3 ae ωp ω0 4 3 ω0 ωc 4 3 ω0 ∆ω ω0.(134)

    Stimulated Brillouin Scattering (Charged mode) For the strong coupling regime, the growth rate of SBS (degenerate with strong-coupling SRS) can be estimated by applying the broadband suppression formula (123) to the maximum growth rate (88). The resulting expression is given by tinc B,charged −1 ∼ 3 2 2 3 ae ωp ω0 4 3 ω0 ωc 4 3 ω0 ∆ω ω0.(134)

  8. [8]

    Summary of Charged Mode The instability of the charged mode under broadband incident EM waves can be classified according to the coupling and resonance conditions, as in the monochro- matic case, following the roadmap in Tab. I. The char- acter of the instability further depends on the density regime—low, intermediate, or high density (see Fig. 3). a. Low...

  9. [9]

    In this case, the amplitude becomes |Aw0|= √ 2A0

    (0,1,±i), where the + sign corresponds to left-handed and the−sign to right-handed circu- lar polarization. In this case, the amplitude becomes |Aw0|= √ 2A0. Thus, the strength parameter for cir- cular polarization is given by (c.f. Eq. (26) for linear polarization) ae ≡ e|A w0|max mec2 circ. pol. − − − − − → √ 2eA0 mec2 .(A2) Accordingly, the incident wa...

  10. [10]

    Derivation of dispersion relation for Strong Coupling SBS (Ordinary mode) This section presents the detailed derivation of the approximate dispersion relation (47) and the maximum linear growth rate (48) for SBS in the strong coupling regime (40). The dispersion relation (20) can be approx- imated by expanding the plasma dispersion function (41) for large...

  11. [11]

    a2 e ω2 p ω0 2 µ2(1−ν) cos 2 θkB 2 # 1 3 ,(B7) so that Imω(µ, ν,cosθkB ) = √ 3 2

    Derivation of the linear growth rate for the Strong Coupling SBS (Ordinary mode) Starting from the approximate dispersion relation for strong-coupling SBS, Eq. (B3), we expand it to obtain ω3 − c2 k2 + 2k 0 ·k 2ω0 ω2 − a2 e ω2 p c2 k2 ∥ µ2 8ω 0 = 0.(B4) Under the strong coupling condition, Eq. (40), theω 3 term dominates theω 2 term18. Becausek 2 + 2k 0 ·...

  12. [12]

    Maximum Growth Angle Parameters for SBS (Ordinary mode) The maximum value of the angular dependenceµ 2(1− ν) cos2 θkB , which appears in the linear growth rate of SBS (B8), can be derived analytically. In this study, the following simplified set of assumptions is adopted for the polarization and propagation direction of the inci- dent and scattered waves ...

  13. [13]

    First, in the dispersion relation (72), the plasma dispersion function (29) in the large argument limit is approximated by Eq

    Derivation of Strong-Coupling SBS (Charged mode) The dispersion relation and the linear growth rate for strong-coupling SBS (which is degenerate with SRS in this regime) in the charged mode can be derived analyti- cally as follows. First, in the dispersion relation (72), the plasma dispersion function (29) in the large argument limit is approximated by Eq...

  14. [14]

    Derivation of SRS in the Intermediate and High Density Regimes (Charged mode) In the intermediate and high density regimes, SRS be- comes the dominant instability when the resonance con- dition and the condition for negligible Landau damping of the Langmuir wave (92) are satisfied in the dispersion relation for SBS (87) and (D2). The applicability of the ...

  15. [15]

    (98), both ICS and SRS can be excited

    Competition between SRS and ICS in the Intermediate Density Regime (Charged mode) In the intermediate density regime, as defined by Eq. (98), both ICS and SRS can be excited. However, SRS consistently exhibits a higher growth rate than ICS. The ratio of the maximum linear growth rates for Debye- screened ICS (82) and SRS (93) is tmax C,charged −1 (tmax R ...

  16. [16]

    Derivation of Small-Angle SRS in the Low Density Regime (Charged mode) This section derives the linear growth rate for small- angle SRS of the charged mode in the low density regime, as defined by Eq. (106). We assume a Langmuir wave propagating at an angleθ kB with respect to the back- ground magnetic field, ω=−ω p|cosθ kB |.(D18) To neglect Landau dampi...

  17. [17]

    (D25) appearing in the linear growth rate for small- angle SRS can be derived analytically

    Maximum Growth Angular Parameter for Small-Angle SRS (Charged mode) The maximum value of the angular dependencefin Eq. (D25) appearing in the linear growth rate for small- angle SRS can be derived analytically. In this study, the following simplified set of assumptions is adopted for the polarization and propagation direction of the inci- dent and scatter...

  18. [18]

    J. F. Drake, P. K. Kaw, Y. C. Lee, G. Schmid, C. S. Liu, and M. N. Rosenbluth, Physics of Fluids17, 778 (1974)

    1974

  19. [19]

    B. I. Cohen and C. E. Max, Physics of Fluids22, 1115 (1979)

    1979

  20. [20]

    A. A. Galeev and V. N. Oraevskii, Soviet Physics Dok- lady7, 988 (1963)

    1963

  21. [21]

    Barnes, Physics of Fluids9, 1483 (1966)

    A. Barnes, Physics of Fluids9, 1483 (1966)

    1966

  22. [22]

    Barnes and R

    A. Barnes and R. J. Hung, Journal of Plasma Physics 8, 197 (1972)

    1972

  23. [23]

    Derby, N

    J. Derby, N. F., ApJ224, 1013 (1978)

    1978

  24. [24]

    Inhester, J

    B. Inhester, J. Geophys. Res.95, 10525 (1990)

    1990

  25. [25]

    Jayanti and J

    V. Jayanti and J. V. Hollweg, J. Geophys. Res.98, 13247 (1993)

    1993

  26. [26]

    J. V. Hollweg, J. Geophys. Res.99, 23431 (1994)

    1994

  27. [27]

    Del Zanna, M

    L. Del Zanna, M. Velli, and P. Londrillo, A&A367, 705 (2001)

    2001

  28. [28]

    Nariyuki and T

    Y. Nariyuki and T. Hada, Physics of Plasmas13, 124501 (2006), arXiv:physics/0608306 [physics.plasm-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  29. [29]

    Del Zanna, L

    L. Del Zanna, L. Matteini, S. Landi, A. Verdini, and M. Velli, Journal of Plasma Physics81, 325810102 (2015), arXiv:1407.5851 [astro-ph.SR]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  30. [30]

    M. Shi, H. Li, C. Xiao, and X. Wang, ApJ842, 63 (2017), arXiv:1705.03829 [physics.space-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  31. [31]

    Nariyuki, Reviews of Modern Plasma Physics6, 22 (2022)

    Y. Nariyuki, Reviews of Modern Plasma Physics6, 22 (2022)

    2022

  32. [32]

    C. E. Max, Physics of Fluids16, 1480 (1973)

    1973

  33. [33]

    R. D. Blandford and E. T. Scharlemann, MNRAS174, 59 (1976)

    1976

  34. [34]

    D. B. Wilson and M. J. Rees, MNRAS185, 297 (1978)

    1978

  35. [35]

    D. B. Wilson, MNRAS200, 881 (1982)

    1982

  36. [36]

    Y. E. Lyubarskii and S. A. Petrova, Astronomy Letters 22, 399 (1996)

    1996

  37. [37]

    Lyubarsky, ApJ682, 1443 (2008), arXiv:0804.2069 [astro-ph]

    Y. Lyubarsky, ApJ682, 1443 (2008), arXiv:0804.2069 [astro-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  38. [38]

    Iwamoto, E

    M. Iwamoto, E. Sobacchi, and L. Sironi, MNRAS522, 2133 (2023), arXiv:2304.03577 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  39. [39]

    Ishizaki and K

    W. Ishizaki and K. Ioka, Phys. Rev. E110, 015205 (2024), arXiv:2404.15689 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  40. [40]

    P. Kaw, G. Schmidt, and T. Wilcox, Physics of Fluids 16, 1522 (1973)

    1973

  41. [41]

    C. E. Max, J. Arons, and A. B. Langdon, Phys. Rev. Lett.33, 209 (1974)

    1974

  42. [42]

    D. W. Forslund, J. M. Kindel, and E. L. Lindman, Physics of Fluids18, 1002 (1975)

    1975

  43. [43]

    Tabak, J

    M. Tabak, J. Hammer, M. E. Glinsky, W. L. Kruer, S. C. Wilks, J. Woodworth, E. M. Campbell, M. D. Perry, and R. J. Mason, Physics of Plasmas1, 1626 (1994)

    1994

  44. [44]

    Deutsch, H

    C. Deutsch, H. Furukawa, K. Mima, M. Murakami, and K. Nishihara, Phys. Rev. Lett.77, 2483 (1996)

    1996

  45. [45]

    Kwan and J

    T. Kwan and J. M. Dawson, Physics of Fluids22, 1089 (1979)

    1979

  46. [46]

    Friedland, Physics of Fluids23, 2376 (1980)

    L. Friedland, Physics of Fluids23, 2376 (1980)

    1980

  47. [47]

    D. R. Lorimer, M. Bailes, M. A. McLaughlin, D. J. Narkevic, and F. Crawford, Science318, 777 (2007), arXiv:0709.4301 [astro-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  48. [48]

    Thornton, B

    D. Thornton, B. Stappers, M. Bailes, B. Barsdell, S. Bates, N. D. R. Bhat, M. Burgay, S. Burke-Spolaor, D. J. Champion, P. Coster, N. D’Amico, A. Jameson, S. Johnston, M. Keith, M. Kramer, L. Levin, S. Milia, C. Ng, A. Possenti, and W. van Straten, Science341, 53 (2013), arXiv:1307.1628 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  49. [49]

    Petroff, J

    E. Petroff, J. W. T. Hessels, and D. R. Lorimer, A&A Rev.27, 4 (2019), arXiv:1904.07947 [astro- ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  50. [50]

    CHIME/FRB Collaboration, B. C. Andersen, K. M. Bandura, M. Bhardwaj, A. Bij, M. M. Boyce, P. J. Boyle, C. Brar, T. Cassanelli, P. Chawla, T. Chen, J. F. Cliche, A. Cook, D. Cubranic, A. P. Curtin, N. T. Den- man, M. Dobbs, F. Q. Dong, M. Fandino, E. Fonseca, B. M. Gaensler, U. Giri, D. C. Good, M. Halpern, A. S. Hill, G. F. Hinshaw, C. H¨ ofer, A. Josephy...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  51. [51]

    C. D. Bochenek, V. Ravi, K. V. Belov, G. Hallinan, J. Kocz, S. R. Kulkarni, and D. L. McKenna, Nature 587, 59 (2020), arXiv:2005.10828 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  52. [52]

    S. N. Zhang, Y. L. Tuo, S. L. Xiong, C. K. Li, S. Xiao, S. M. Jia, X. B. Li, M. Y. Ge, Q. Luo, B. Li, C. Cai, Y. Tan, W. C. Xue, F. J. Lu, L. M. Song, C. Z. Liu, Y. Chen, X. L. Cao, Y. P. Xu, T. P. Li, L. Lin, and B. Zhang, The Astronomer’s Telegram13687, 1 (2020)

    2020

  53. [53]

    Mereghetti, V

    S. Mereghetti, V. Savchenko, C. Ferrigno, D. G¨ otz, M. Rigoselli, A. Tiengo, A. Bazzano, E. Bozzo, A. Coleiro, T. J. L. Courvoisier, M. Doyle, A. Gold- wurm, L. Hanlon, E. Jourdain, A. von Kienlin, A. Lu- tovinov, A. Martin-Carrillo, S. Molkov, L. Natalucci, F. Onori, F. Panessa, J. Rodi, J. Rodriguez, C. S´ anchez- Fern´ andez, R. Sunyaev, and P. Uberti...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  54. [54]

    Tavani, A

    M. Tavani, A. Ursi, F. Verrecchia, C. Casentini, C. Pittori, M. Pilia, M. Cardillo, G. Piano, A. Bul- garelli, V. Fioretti, N. Parmiggiani, F. Lucarelli, I. Donnarumma, S. Vercellone, F. Gianotti, M. Tri- foglio, A. Giuliani, S. Mereghetti, P. Caraveo, F. Per- otti, A. Chen, A. Argan, E. Costa, E. Del Monte, Y. Evangelista, M. Feroci, F. Lazzarotto, I. La...

    2020

  55. [55]

    Ridnaia, S

    A. Ridnaia, S. Golenetskii, R. Aptekar, D. Frederiks, M. Ulanov, D. Svinkin, A. Tsvetkova, A. Lysenko, and T. Cline, The Astronomer’s Telegram13688, 1 (2020)

    2020

  56. [56]

    Ioka, ApJ598, L79 (2003), arXiv:astro-ph/0309200 [astro-ph]

    K. Ioka, ApJ598, L79 (2003), arXiv:astro-ph/0309200 [astro-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  57. [57]

    Inoue, MNRAS348, 999 (2004), arXiv:astro- 33 ph/0309364 [astro-ph]

    S. Inoue, MNRAS348, 999 (2004), arXiv:astro- 33 ph/0309364 [astro-ph]

    arXiv 2004

  58. [58]

    J. P. Macquart, J. X. Prochaska, M. McQuinn, K. W. Bannister, S. Bhandari, C. K. Day, A. T. Deller, R. D. Ekers, C. W. James, L. Marnoch, S. Os lowski, C. Phillips, S. D. Ryder, D. R. Scott, R. M. Shannon, and N. Tejos, Nature581, 391 (2020), arXiv:2005.13161 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  59. [59]

    A. M. Beloborodov, ApJ922, L7 (2021), arXiv:2108.07881 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  60. [60]

    A. M. Beloborodov, Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 255003 (2022), arXiv:2108.05464 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  61. [61]

    Y. Qu, P. Kumar, and B. Zhang, MNRAS515, 2020 (2022), arXiv:2204.10953 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  62. [62]

    A. Y. Chen, Y. Yuan, X. Li, and J. F. Mahlmann, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2210.13506 (2022), arXiv:2210.13506 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  63. [63]

    A. M. Beloborodov, ApJ959, 34 (2023), arXiv:2210.13509 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  64. [64]

    A. M. Beloborodov, ApJ975, 223 (2024), arXiv:2307.12182 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  65. [65]

    Huang and Z.-G

    Y.-C. Huang and Z.-G. Dai, ApJ975, 226 (2024), arXiv:2410.04065 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  66. [66]

    Nishiura and K

    R. Nishiura and K. Ioka, Phys. Rev. D109, 043048 (2024), arXiv:2310.02306 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  67. [67]

    Sobacchi, M

    E. Sobacchi, M. Iwamoto, L. Sironi, and T. Piran, A&A 690, A332 (2024), arXiv:2409.10732 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  68. [68]

    Nishiura, S

    R. Nishiura, S. F. Kamijima, M. Iwamoto, and K. Ioka, Phys. Rev. D111, 063055 (2025), arXiv:2411.00936 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  69. [69]

    J. I. Katz, Phys. Rev. D89, 103009 (2014), arXiv:1309.3538 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  70. [70]

    J. M. Cordes and I. Wasserman, MNRAS457, 232 (2016), arXiv:1501.00753 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  71. [71]

    Lyutikov, L

    M. Lyutikov, L. Burzawa, and S. B. Popov, MNRAS 462, 941 (2016), arXiv:1603.02891 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  72. [72]

    Kumar, W

    P. Kumar, W. Lu, and M. Bhattacharya, MNRAS468, 2726 (2017), arXiv:1703.06139 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  73. [73]

    Zhang, ApJ836, L32 (2017), arXiv:1701.04094 [astro-ph.HE]

    B. Zhang, ApJ836, L32 (2017), arXiv:1701.04094 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  74. [74]

    Lu and P

    W. Lu and P. Kumar, MNRAS477, 2470 (2018), arXiv:1710.10270 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  75. [75]

    Ghisellini and N

    G. Ghisellini and N. Locatelli, A&A613, A61 (2018), arXiv:1708.07507 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  76. [76]

    Yang and B

    Y.-P. Yang and B. Zhang, ApJ868, 31 (2018), arXiv:1712.02702 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  77. [77]

    Ioka and B

    K. Ioka and B. Zhang, ApJ893, L26 (2020), arXiv:2002.08297 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  78. [78]

    Kumar and ˇZ

    P. Kumar and ˇZ. Boˇ snjak, MNRAS494, 2385 (2020), arXiv:2004.00644 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  79. [79]

    A. J. Cooper and R. A. M. J. Wijers, MNRAS508, L32 (2021), arXiv:2108.07818 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  80. [80]

    Lyutikov, ApJ922, 166 (2021), arXiv:2102.07010 [astro-ph.HE]

    M. Lyutikov, ApJ922, 166 (2021), arXiv:2102.07010 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

Showing first 80 references.