Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Searching for radio pulses from radio-quiet gamma-ray pulsars with FAST

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper reports the first radio detection of the gamma-ray pulsar PSR J1813-1246 with FAST at 1250 MHz: a pulsed signal with a 48.08 ms spin period, a dispersion measure of 209.85 pc cm^-3, and a flux density near 9 microjansky.

desk verdict The J1813-1246 detection is probably real but the paper under-reports its statistical significance; the upper limits for the other 21 pulsars are the real product. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.10565 v1 pith:C6REECYW submitted 2025-06-12 astro-ph.HE

S.Q. Wang , S. Dai , N. Wang , A. Zic , G. Hobbs , D. Li , R.B. Ding , L. Peng
show 2 more authors
Z.C. Pan S.B. Zhang
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords radiopulsarsgamma-rayFASTtelescopedispersionmeasureperiodicitysearchsingle-pulsefluxdensityupperlimitsPSRJ1813-1246
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper searches 22 gamma-ray pulsars that have never been seen at radio wavelengths, using FAST at 1250 MHz, and reports a detection for one of them, PSR J1813-1246, with a spin period of $48.08$ ms and a dispersion measure of $209.85\ \mathrm{pc\,cm^{-3}}$, matching the gamma-ray period. The pulsed flux density is roughly $9\,\mu$Jy, far below the $30\,\mu$Jy threshold commonly used to label such pulsars radio-quiet. For the other 21 pulsars the search yields upper limits of a few microjansky, the most stringent available at this frequency. The authors take the detection to show that 'radio-quiet' often means 'too faint for earlier telescopes', and that deep radio observations can tie gamma-ray pulsars to distance estimates and multi-wavelength emission geometry.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is de-dispersion and folding of the radio time series at the known gamma-ray spin period, using trial dispersion measures from 0 to 1000 pc cm$^{-3}$. Signals are sought both as periodic trains (periodicity search) and as isolated bright pulses (single-pulse search). The detection criterion is not a single high signal-to-noise ratio but consistency across multiple epochs: four independent observations show the same period and similar dispersion measures near $210\ \mathrm{pc\,cm^{-3}}$. A pipeline-validation check on the known radio pulsar J0358+5413 demonstrates that the search would recover a normal pulsar with the same procedure. The final confirmation uses phase alignment of profiles across epochs to build an averaged pulse profile with a Monte Carlo uncertainty estimate.

What would settle it

A new deep observation of PSR J1813-1246 at comparable sensitivity that finds no pulsed signal at $48.08$ ms with DM near $209.85\ \mathrm{pc\,cm^{-3}}$, or a blind periodicity search that does not use the gamma-ray ephemeris and fails to recover the candidate, would falsify the claimed detection. The candidate must also survive standard RFI mitigation; if it is traced to a flagged frequency band or disappears when the excised channels are re-added, it is an artifact.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that PSR J1813-1246, previously classified as a radio-quiet gamma-ray pulsar, does emit pulsed radio waves. In four FAST observations spanning 2023 to 2025, the authors find a periodic signal at $48.08$ ms with dispersion measures of $209.33$, $211.40$, $209.85$, and $209.65\ \mathrm{pc\,cm^{-3}}$, adopting $209.85\ \mathrm{pc\,cm^{-3}}$ for the longest integration. The combined pulse profile shows a main pulse and an interpulse with width about $0.2$ of the period, and the estimated flux density is about $9\,\mu$Jy. Because the period agrees with the gamma-ray period, the authors regard this as the first radio detection of this pulsar. From the dispersion measure they estimate a distance near $4$ kpc, a gamma-ray luminosity of about $5\times10^{35}$ erg s$^{-1}$, and a gamma-ray efficiency near 8 percent, values consistent with radio-loud gamma-ray pulsars. No single pulses or periodic signals were found in the other 21 sources.

Load-bearing premise

The assumption that the weak candidate near the gamma-ray period, with a maximum single-epoch signal-to-noise ratio of about 8 and consistent dispersion measures near 210 pc cm$^{-3}$ across four epochs, is genuine pulsar emission rather than a systematic false positive produced by folding noise at a previously known period.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the detection is real, PSR J1813-1246 becomes a radio-loud gamma-ray pulsar at $9\,\mu$Jy, and the 'radio-quiet' label becomes a sensitivity statement rather than an intrinsic property.
  • The dispersion measure gives a distance of roughly 4 kpc, letting the authors estimate gamma-ray luminosity and efficiency for direct comparison with the radio-loud population.
  • The main pulse plus interpulse profile, combined with the gamma-ray profile, constrains where in the magnetosphere the radio and gamma-ray emission originate for this pulsar.
  • The microjansky-level upper limits for the other 21 pulsars are sharper than earlier limits at other frequencies, providing better constraints on their radio spectra.
  • High spin-down energy-loss pulsars such as J1813-1246, J0359+5414, and J1907+0602 are exactly where faint radio emission has now been found, supporting the trend that radio quietness decreases with increasing energy loss rate.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If many radio-quiet gamma-ray pulsars emit at the few-microjansky level, the radio-quiet fraction measures telescope sensitivity more than pulsar physics; a systematic deep survey of the remaining unobserved candidates could convert a substantial subset into detections.
  • The cross-epoch consistency that carries this paper is a good first test, but an independent detection at a different telescope or an interferometric localization of the pulsed source to the pulsar position would settle the detection more firmly.
  • Because pulsar spectra generally rise toward lower frequencies, even deeper detections might be achievable at 300-800 MHz, where scattering is stronger but intrinsic flux is higher; a spectral-index measurement for J1813-1246 would test this directly.
  • The reported $9\,\mu$Jy flux at 1250 MHz means that J1813-1246 would be missed by time-domain surveys with short dwell times, so sustained integrations are needed to uncover the faintest radio pulsars.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper reports periodicity and single-pulse searches at 1250 MHz with FAST for 22 gamma-ray pulsars classified as radio-quiet. For PSR J1813-1246 it claims the first radio detection, with a spin period of 48.08 ms, a dispersion measure of 209.85 pc cm^-3, a maximum single-epoch S/N of about 8, and an estimated flux density of about 9 uJy, based on four observations with consistent periods and DMs. For the other 21 pulsars no radio emission is found, and flux-density upper limits of a few uJy are quoted. The pipeline is validated on the known pulsar J0358+5413, and the authors discuss implications for radio and gamma-ray emission geometries and for the radio-quiet population.

Significance. If the J1813-1246 detection holds, this is the first radio detection of that pulsar and demonstrates FAST's ability to reach a few microjansky sensitivity for gamma-ray pulsars, a useful result for the radio-quiet pulsar population. The paper has clear strengths: the pipeline is validated on a known pulsar, the candidate is consistent with an externally measured gamma-ray period, the DM is consistent across four epochs, and the authors explicitly acknowledge that red noise can affect long-period upper limits. The main weakness is that the central detection claim lacks a trial-corrected false-alarm probability, and the flux density and DM are quoted without uncertainties. The non-detection upper limits also depend on sensitivity assumptions that are only partly quantified.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3.1.1] The confirmation of pulsed emission from PSR J1813-1246 is not supported by a quantitative false-alarm probability. The periodicity search produces approximately 500 candidates per observation after accel_sift (Section 2.2), and the maximum single-epoch S/N is about 8. Although the gamma-ray period reduces the search trials, the effective number of independent period-DM-harmonic trials is not reported, so a single-epoch S/N of 8 cannot be assumed significant without a trial-corrected significance estimate. Please provide a Monte Carlo false-alarm rate, an analytic trials factor, or an independent blind re-detection; this is load-bearing for the 'first radio detection' claim.
  2. [Section 3.1.1] The estimated flux density of approximately 9 uJy is quoted without an uncertainty or a complete list of assumed parameters beyond S/N about 8 and a duty cycle of 0.4. Please give an error budget that includes uncertainties in Tsys and gain, pulse-width measurement, off-pulse baseline or red-noise contamination, and the S/N estimate, and also report uncertainties on the four DM values (209.33, 211.40, 209.85, and 209.65 pc cm^-3). Without these, the detection cannot be compared quantitatively with the upper limits in Table 2.
  3. [Section 3.1, Eq. (1), and Table 2] The flux-density upper limits for the 21 non-detections are computed with a detection threshold of S/N=7, beta=1, and an assumed 10% duty cycle, while the text acknowledges that red noise can significantly degrade sensitivity for periods longer than 100 ms. Most of the sample has periods above 100 ms, so the quoted 'several uJy' limits may be optimistic. Please quantify the red-noise degradation (e.g., with injected pulse tests or off-pulse variance measurements) or explicitly state that Table 2 and Figure 4 represent sensitivity floors rather than measured upper limits; this affects the central non-detection result.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section 1] The section heading contains a typo: 'INDRUCTION' should be 'INTRODUCTION', and 'F AST' appears with an inconsistent space throughout the manuscript.
  2. [Table 1] The table caption and column headings are not fully self-explanatory: 'Radio-queit' is a typo for 'Radio-quiet', and the columns labeled 'JP' and '˙E' lack explicit units and definitions in the caption.
  3. [Section 3.2, Eq. (5)] Equation (5) is ambiguous: the displayed expression '(S/Npeak)2βTsys' could be misread as a squared signal-to-noise ratio, which would disagree with the standard single-pulse radiometer equation; please clarify whether the '2' is a typographical artifact or an intended factor.
  4. [Table 2] The caption states 'Column (2) to (13)' for the flux-density limits, but the table actually contains 13 flux-density columns before the reference column; please correct the column numbering or the caption text.
  5. [Section 3.1.1] The sentence describing the radio profile is unclear: it says the main pulse and interpulse have 'a similar W50 width of ~0.2 P, comparable to the gamma-ray profile, but with a narrower pulse width'; please rephrase to distinguish W50 from the overall pulse width.
  6. [Section 3.1.1] In the description of Figure 3, 'usingpaastool' and 'patto' are missing spaces; they should read 'using paas' and 'pat to' (or similar), and the software commands should be formatted consistently.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found: the PSR J1813-1246 detection is supported by an independent periodicity search and an externally measured gamma-ray period, with no derived quantity feeding back into its own derivation.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is a new radio detection of PSR J1813-1246. The pulse period and dispersion measure are measured from the FAST data themselves: the periodicity search (Section 2.2) runs PRESTO over DMs from 0 to 1000 pc cm^-3 and identifies a candidate near 48.08 ms, and the DM values 209.33, 211.40, 209.85, and 209.65 pc cm^-3 come from folding the four observations. The known gamma-ray period from Ray et al. (2011) is used only after the candidate is found, to refold and align profiles, not as an input that creates the detection. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no equation in the paper reduces to its own input by construction. The distance and gamma-ray luminosity estimates use standard electron-density models (YMW16, NE2001) and the standard beaming formula, not parameters fitted to the detection. The self-citations in the paper, such as Ding et al. (2024) for PSR J0359+5414 and the in-preparation FAST study of six other sources, are contextual comparisons and do not carry the load of the J1813-1246 detection. The skeptical concern that the single-epoch S/N of about 8 may not survive trial corrections in a large period-DM search space is a statistical validity issue, not a circularity issue: a weak but real candidate is not rendered circular by being weak. The paper also notes the candidate was initially too weak to confirm and was then reproduced across three additional epochs with consistent DMs, which is an external consistency check rather than a self-referential derivation. Therefore, under the hard rule that circularity requires a quoted reduction of a claim to its own inputs, no significant circularity is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities and fits no model parameters to data. The only hand-chosen number that materially affects the reported limits is the assumed 10% duty cycle. The remaining assumptions are standard tools in pulsar astronomy that the paper explicitly identifies.

free parameters (1)
  • Assumed pulse duty cycle = 0.1 (10%)
    Adopted in Eq. (1) to calculate flux density upper limits for the 21 non-detected pulsars. The paper states the choice is conservative, but the resulting limits scale directly with this assumed width.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The radiometer equation (Lorimer & Kramer 2004, Eq. 1) correctly describes the minimum detectable mean flux density for the periodicity search.
    Used in Section 3.1 to derive the upper limits; assumes accurate gain, system temperature, and no significant red-noise degradation.
  • domain assumption The scattering timescale follows the Cordes & McLaughlin (2003) relation (Eq. 3).
    Used in Section 3.1 to estimate pulse broadening for high-DM pulsars; larger scattering would worsen sensitivity.
  • domain assumption The gamma-ray ephemerides from PSRCAT are sufficiently accurate for folding and candidate confirmation.
    Used in Sections 2.2 and 3.1.1; an inaccurate ephemeris would reduce sensitivity and could affect the J1813-1246 confirmation.
  • domain assumption The YMW16 and NE2001 electron density models provide valid DM-to-distance conversions.
    Used in Section 3.1.1 to estimate distance and gamma-ray luminosity; these models have significant uncertainties in the Galactic plane.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Searching for radio pulses from radio-quiet gamma-ray pulsars with FAST." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/C6REECYW

@misc{pith2026250610565,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Searching for radio pulses from radio-quiet gamma-ray pulsars with FAST},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/C6REECYW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.10565}
}
abstract

We present periodicity and single-pulse searches at 1250 MHz for 22 radio-quiet gamma-ray pulsars, conducted using the Five-hundred-meter Aperture Spherical Radio Telescope (FAST). For PSR J1813$-$1246, we successfully detected pulsed signals with a spin period of 48.08 ms and a dispersion measure of 209.85 ${\rm pc cm^{-3}}$, consistent with the spin period measured at gamma-ray wavelengths. The estimated flux density is approximately 9 $\mu$Jy. For the remaining 21 sources, no radio emission was detected, with flux density upper limits of several $ \mu$Jy. The capability to detect pulsars with such low flux densities provides the opportunity to determine if and how these faint sources differ from much radio-brighter pulsars.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.10565 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Left panel: Periodicity search detection of PSR J0358+5413, showing a clear detection with a spin period of 156 ms and a DM of 57.712 pc cm−3 . Right panel: Single-pulse search detection of PSR J0358+5413. Several bright single pulses are detected at approximately 5.7 s and 7.8 s, with a consistent DM of about 57.7 pc cm−3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Periodicity search detections of PSR J1813−1246 for observations conducted on 11 September 2023, 25 March 2024, and 20 April 2024, and 19 April 2025, with durations of 1040 s, 3540 s, 4140 s, and 3240 s, respectively [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The dynamic spectrum (top panel) and the av￾eraged pulse profile obtained by combining all four observa￾tions (bottom panel) for PSR J1813−1246. The black solid line represents the final averaged profile, while the green lines show 100 averaged profiles generated through Monte Carlo simulations to estimate the uncertainty. 3.2. Single-pulse search sensitivity For single-pulse searches, the minimum detectable peak fl… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Flux density upper limits for 22 radio-quiet gamma-ray pulsars. The red circles/stars represent the flux density upper limits/detections from our observations at 1250 MHz, while the black triangles denote results from previous observations. More details are provided in…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. FAST Discovery of $\mu$Jy Radio Pulsations from PSR J2238+5903, Providing a DM Distance Anchor for the Candidate TeV Halo 1LHAASO J2238+5900

    astro-ph.HE 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.5 of 10

    First radio detection of PSR J2238+5903 yields DM = 247.5 ± 3.0 pc cm^{-3} and a model distance of 7.4 ± 3.9 kpc that anchors the physical scale and TeV efficiency of candidate halo 1LHAASO J2238+5900.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references · 24 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    A., Ackermann, M., Ajello, M., et al

    Abdo, A. A., Ackermann, M., Ajello, M., et al. 2010a, ApJS, 187, 460, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/187/2/460 —. 2010b, ApJ, 711, 64 74, doi: 10.1088/0004637X/711/1/64

    doi:10.1088/0067-0049/187/2/460

  2. [2]

    A., Ajello, M., Allafort, A., et al

    Abdo, A. A., Ajello, M., Allafort, A., et al. 2013, ApJS, 208, 17, doi: 10.1088/00670049/208/2/17

    work page doi:10.1088/00670049/208/2/17 2013

  3. [3]

    D., Guillemot, L., Champion, D

    Barr, E. D., Guillemot, L., Champion, D. J., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 429, 1633, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sts449

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sts449 2013

  4. [4]

    G., Pleunis, Z., & Hessels, J

    Bassa, C. G., Pleunis, Z., & Hessels, J. W. T. 2017, Astronomy and Computing, 18, 40, doi: 10.1016/j.ascom.2017.01.004

    doi:10.1016/j.ascom.2017.01.004 2017

  5. [5]

    S., et al

    Bhattacharyya, B., Roy, J., Ray, P. S., et al. 2013, ApJL, 773, L12, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/773/1/L12

    doi:10.1088/2041-8205/773/1/l12 2013

  6. [6]

    F., Caraveo, P

    Bignami, G. F., Caraveo, P. A., & Lamb, R. C. 1983, ApJL, 272, L9 L13, doi: 10.1086/184107

    work page doi:10.1086/184107 1983

  7. [7]

    Browning, R., Ramsden, D., & Wright, P. J. 1971, Nature Physical Science, 232, 99, doi: 10.1038/physci232099a0

    work page doi:10.1038/physci232099a0 1971

  8. [8]

    2000, in American Institute of Physics Conference Series, Vol

    Burderi, L., & Fauci, F. 2000, in American Institute of Physics Conference Series, Vol. 513, Nuclear and Condensed Matter Physics: VI Regional Conference (AIP), 353–356, doi: 10.1063/1.1303396

    work page doi:10.1063/1.1303396 2000

Show all 63 references
  1. [9]

    2010, MNRAS, 402, 855, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15965.x

    Burke-Spolaor, S., & Bailes, M. 2010, MNRAS, 402, 855, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15965.x

    2010

  2. [10]

    2025, A&A, 695, A93, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451948

    Cerutti, B., Figueiredo, E., & Dubus, G. 2025, A&A, 695, A93, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451948

    2025 doi

  3. [11]

    A., & Dubus, G

    Cerutti, B., Philippov, A. A., & Dubus, G. 2020, A&A, 642, A204, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038618

    2020 doi

  4. [12]

    J., Pletsch, H

    Clark, C. J., Pletsch, H. J., Wu, J., et al. 2015, ApJL, 809, L2, doi: 10.1088/20418205/809/1/L2 10W ang et al

    2015 doi

  5. [13]

    J., Breton, R

    Clark, C. J., Breton, R. P., Barr, E. D., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 519, 5590, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3742

    2023 doi

  6. [14]

    J., et al

    Cognard, I., Guillemot, L., Johnson, T. J., et al. 2011, ApJ, 732, 47, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/732/1/47

    2011 doi

  7. [15]

    M., & Lazio, T

    Cordes, J. M., & Lazio, T. J. W. 2002, arXiv e prints, astro ph/0207156, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astroph/0207156

    2002 doi

  8. [16]

    M., & McLaughlin, M

    Cordes, J. M., & McLaughlin, M. A. 2003, ApJ, 596, 1142 1154, doi: 10.1086/378231

    2003 doi

  9. [17]

    T., Camilo, F., Kerr, M., et al

    Cromartie, H. T., Camilo, F., Kerr, M., et al. 2016, ApJ, 819, 34, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/819/1/34

    2016 doi

  10. [18]

    2019, Science, 365, 1013, doi: 10.1126/science.aav7272

    Desvignes, G., Kramer, M., Lee, K., et al. 2019, Science, 365, 1013, doi: 10.1126/science.aav7272

    2019 doi

  11. [19]

    2024, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 16875, 1 Grießmeier, J

    Ding, R., Cao, S., Wang, S., et al. 2024, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 16875, 1 Grießmeier, J. M., Smith, D. A., Theureau, G., et al. 2021, A&A, 654, A43, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202140841

    2024 doi

  12. [20]

    L., Wang, C., Wang, P

    Han, J. L., Wang, C., Wang, P. F., et al. 2021, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 21, 107, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/21/5/107

    2021 doi

  13. [21]

    Collins, R. A. 1968, Nature, 217, 709 713, doi: 10.1038/217709a0

    1968 doi

  14. [22]

    2004, MNRAS, 353, 1311, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.08157.x

    Jordan, C. 2004, MNRAS, 353, 1311, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.08157.x

    2004

  15. [23]

    B., Edwards, R

    Hobbs, G. B., Edwards, R. T., & Manchester, R. N. 2006, MNRAS, 369, 655, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10302.x

    2006

  16. [24]

    W., van Straten, W., & Manchester, R

    Hotan, A. W., van Straten, W., & Manchester, R. N. 2004, PASA, 21, 302, doi: 10.1071/AS04022

    2004 doi

  17. [25]

    F., et al

    Jankowski, F., van Straten, W., Keane, E. F., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 473, 4436, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2476

    2018 doi

  18. [26]

    2019, MNRAS, 484, 3691, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty3390

    Jankowski, F., Bailes, M., van Straten, W., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 484, 3691, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty3390

    2019 doi

  19. [27]

    2020, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 20, 064, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/20/5/64

    Jiang, P., Tang, N.-Y., Hou, L.-G., et al. 2020, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 20, 064, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/20/5/64

    2020 doi

  20. [28]

    2019, MNRAS, 490, 4565, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2865

    Johnston, S., & Kramer, M. 2019, MNRAS, 490, 4565, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2865

    2019 doi

  21. [29]

    A., Hartman, R

    Kniffen, D. A., Hartman, R. C., Thompson, D. J., Bignami, G. F., & Fichtel, C. E. 1974, Nature, 251, 397 399, doi: 10.1038/251397a0

    1974 doi

  22. [30]

    Lazarus, P., Brazier, A., Hessels, J. W. T., et al. 2015, ApJ, 812, 81, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/812/1/81

    2015 doi

  23. [31]

    2018, IEEE Microwave Magazine, 19, 112, doi: 10.1109/MMM.2018.2802178

    Li, D., Wang, P., Qian, L., et al. 2018, IEEE Microwave Magazine, 19, 112, doi: 10.1109/MMM.2018.2802178

    2018

  24. [32]

    R., & Kramer, M

    Lorimer, D. R., & Kramer, M. 2004, Handbook of Pulsar

    2004

  25. [33]

    R., Yates, J

    Lorimer, D. R., Yates, J. A., Lyne, A. G., & Gould, D. M. 1995, MNRAS, 273, 411, doi: 10.1093/mnras/273.2.411

    1995 doi

  26. [34]

    G., & Manchester, R

    Lyne, A. G., & Manchester, R. N. 1988, MNRAS, 234, 477, doi: 10.1093/mnras/234.3.477

    1988 doi

  27. [35]

    Maan, Y., & Aswathappa, H. A. 2014, MNRAS, 445, 3221 3228, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu1902

    2014 doi

  28. [36]

    N., Hobbs, G

    Manchester, R. N., Hobbs, G. B., Teoh, A., & Hobbs, M. 2005, AJ, 129, 1993, doi: 10.1086/428488

    2005 doi

  29. [37]

    A., Lyne, A

    McLaughlin, M. A., Lyne, A. G., Lorimer, D. R., et al. 2006, Nature, 439, 817, doi: 10.1038/nature04440

    2006 doi

  30. [38]

    2011, International Journal of Modern Physics D, 20, 989, doi: 10.1142/S0218271811019335

    Nan, R., Li, D., Jin, C., et al. 2011, International Journal of Modern Physics D, 20, 989, doi: 10.1142/S0218271811019335

    2011 doi

  31. [39]

    2022, ARA&A, 60, 495, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-052920-112338

    Philippov, A., & Kramer, M. 2022, ARA&A, 60, 495, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-052920-112338

    2022 doi

  32. [40]

    A., & Spitkovsky, A

    Philippov, A. A., & Spitkovsky, A. 2014, ApJL, 785, L33, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/785/2/L33 —. 2018, ApJ, 855, 94, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaabbc

    2014 doi

  33. [41]

    J., Guillemot, L., Allen, B., et al

    Pletsch, H. J., Guillemot, L., Allen, B., et al. 2012a, ApJ, 744, 105, doi: 10.1088/0004637X/744/2/105 —. 2012b, ApJL, 755, L20, doi: 10.1088/20418205/755/1/L20 —. 2013, ApJL, 779, L11, doi: 10.1088/20418205/779/1/L11

    2013 doi

  34. [42]

    Radhakrishnan, V., & Cooke, D. J. 1969, Astrophys. Lett., 3, 225

    1969

  35. [43]

    Rankin, J. M. 1983, ApJ, 274, 333, doi: 10.1086/161450

    1983 doi

  36. [44]

    Ransom, S. M. 2001, PhD thesis, Harvard University, Massachusetts

    2001

  37. [45]

    M., Eikenberry, S

    Ransom, S. M., Eikenberry, S. S., & Middleditch, J. 2002, AJ, 124, 1788 1809, doi: 10.1086/342285

    2002 doi

  38. [46]

    M., Ray, P

    Ransom, S. M., Ray, P. S., Camilo, F., et al. 2011, ApJL, 727, L16, doi: 10.1088/20418205/727/1/L16

    2011 doi

  39. [47]

    N., & Hobbs, G

    Ravi, V., Manchester, R. N., & Hobbs, G. 2010, ApJL, 716, L85 L89, doi: 10.1088/20418205/716/1/L85

    2010 doi

  40. [48]

    S., Kerr, M., Parent, D., et al

    Ray, P. S., Kerr, M., Parent, D., et al. 2011, ApJS, 194, 17, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/194/2/17

    2011 doi

  41. [49]

    S., Abdo, A

    Ray, P. S., Abdo, A. A., Parent, D., et al. 2012, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1205.3089, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1205.3089

    2012 doi arXiv

  42. [50]

    W., & Watters, K

    Romani, R. W., & Watters, K. P. 2010, ApJ, 714, 810, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/714/1/810

    2010 doi

  43. [51]

    A., & Sutherland, P

    Ruderman, M. A., & Sutherland, P. G. 1975, ApJ, 196, 51, doi: 10.1086/153393 Saz Parkinson, P. M., Dormody, M., Ziegler, M., et al. 2010, ApJ, 725, 571 584, doi: 10.1088/0004637X/725/1/571

    1975 doi

  44. [52]

    A., Guillemot, L., Camilo, F., et al

    Smith, D. A., Guillemot, L., Camilo, F., et al. 2008, A&A, 492, 923, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200810285

    2008 doi

  45. [53]

    A., Abdollahi, S., Ajello, M., et al

    Smith, D. A., Abdollahi, S., Ajello, M., et al. 2023, ApJ, 958, 191, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acee67

    2023 doi

  46. [54]

    N., Wang, N., Yan, W

    Sun, S. N., Wang, N., Yan, W. M., & Wang, S. Q. 2025, ApJ, 983, 179, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adc254 Radio-quiet gamma-ray pulsar11 van Straten, W., & Bailes, M. 2011, PASA, 28, 1, doi: 10.1071/AS10021

    2025 doi

  47. [55]

    J., et al

    Wang, P., Li, D., Clark, C. J., et al. 2021, Science China

    2021

  48. [56]

    Physics, Mechanics, and Astronomy, 64, 129562, doi: 10.1007/s11433-021-1757-5

    doi

  49. [57]

    F., Han, J

    Wang, P. F., Han, J. L., Xu, J., et al. 2023, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 23, 104002, doi: 10.1088/16744527/acea1f

    2023 doi

  50. [58]

    Q., Hobbs, G., Wang, J

    Wang, S. Q., Hobbs, G., Wang, J. B., et al. 2020, ApJL, 902, L13, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abbb89

    2020 doi

  51. [59]

    Q., Wang, N., Wang, J

    Wang, S. Q., Wang, N., Wang, J. B., et al. 2024, ApJ, 964, 6, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad217b

    2024 doi

  52. [60]

    P., & Romani, R

    Watters, K. P., & Romani, R. W. 2011, ApJ, 727, 123, doi: 10.1088/0004637X/727/2/123

    2011 doi

  53. [61]

    N., et al

    Weltevrede, P., Johnston, S., Manchester, R. N., et al. 2010, PASA, 27, 64, doi: 10.1071/AS09054

    2010 doi

  54. [62]

    J., Pletsch, H

    Wu, J., Clark, C. J., Pletsch, H. J., et al. 2018, ApJ, 854, 99, doi: 10.3847/15384357/aaa411

    2018 doi

  55. [63]

    M., Manchester, R

    Yao, J. M., Manchester, R. N., & Wang, N. 2017, ApJ, 835, 29, doi: 10.3847/15384357/835/1/29

    2017 doi

Pith tools

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