Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 108 references

A pulsar-helium star compact binary system formed by common envelope evolution

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper identifies PSR J1928+1815 as a 10.55 ms millisecond pulsar in a 3.60-hour orbit with a 1.0-1.6 solar-mass stripped helium star companion, arguing it is the first observed pulsar-helium star binary formed by common envelope…

desk verdict A well-observed eclipsing millisecond pulsar in a compact binary with a firmly non-main-sequence companion; the stripped-helium-star identification is the leading candidate but leans on a bow-shock model the authors themselves stretch. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.15896 v1 pith:GONCLISY submitted 2025-05-21 astro-ph.HE

Z.L.Yang , J.L.Han , D.J.Zhou , W.C.Jing , W.C.Chen , T. Wang , X. D. Li , S. Wang
show 28 more authors
B. Wang H. W. Ge Y. L. Guo L. H. Li Y. Shao J. F. Liu W. Q. Su L. G. Hou W. J. Huang J. C. Jiang P. Jiang J. H. Sun B. J. Wang C. Wang H. G. Wang J. B. Wang N. Wang P. F. Wang S. Q. Wang H. Xu J. Xu R. X. Xu W. M. Yan Y. Yan X. P. You D. J. Yu Z. S. Yuan C. F. Zhang
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords millisecondpulsarheliumstarcompanioncommonenvelopeevolutioneclipsingbinaryrecyclingstellarPSRJ1928+1815
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

Radio timing observations of PSR J1928+1815 reveal a millisecond pulsar with a spin period of 10.55 ms in a nearly circular, 3.60-hour orbit. The timing mass function demands a companion heavier than 1.0 solar mass, and the pulsar is eclipsed for about 17% of each orbit around superior conjunction. The paper argues that no white dwarf, neutron star, or main-sequence star can explain the eclipses, so the companion is a stripped helium star of 1.0 to 1.6 solar masses whose wind forms an absorbing bow shock against the pulsar wind. The system is interpreted as having just emerged from a common envelope phase, with the neutron star spun up by hypercritical accretion; if correct, it is the first observed pulsar-helium star binary and a direct view of the predicted link between spider pulsars and pulsar-white dwarf binaries.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by three linked pieces: the timing mass function, which fixes the companion's minimum mass; the Roche-lobe radius (computed with the Eggleton approximation), which rules out a main-sequence companion because such a star would overfill its lobe; and the intra-binary bow shock, a shock front where the pulsar wind and the companion's wind collide, whose shape and optical depth set the observed eclipse phase range through the wind-momentum ratio $\eta_{\rm w}\equiv \dot{M} v c / \dot{E}$. The evolutionary story rests on the common-envelope energy budget, equating the released orbital energy to the binding energy of the red-giant envelope, and on hypercritical neutrino-cooled accretion at rates $\gtrsim10^4$ times Eddington to explain the 10.55 ms spin.

What would settle it

A deep near-infrared spectrum at the pulsar position would settle the claim: a naked helium star of 1.0 to 1.6 $M_\odot$ must show strong He I and He II absorption lines whose radial velocity swings with the 3.60-hour orbital period and an amplitude of roughly 200 to 300 km s$^{-1}$ for a nearly edge-on orbit. A continuum without helium lines, or a radial-velocity amplitude incompatible with the mass function, would falsify the helium-star identification.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that PSR J1928+1815 is a recycled millisecond pulsar ($P=10.55$ ms) in a 3.60-hour, nearly circular orbit ($e<3\times10^{-5}$) with a companion of 1.0 to 1.6 $M_\odot$. From the timing solution, the mass function $f=(M_c\sin i)^3/(M_p+M_c)^2=0.2342\,M_\odot$ sets a firm lower limit of $M_c>1.0\,M_\odot$. The companion eclipses the pulsar during orbital phases 0.18 to 0.35, and the authors model these eclipses as an intra-binary bow shock produced where the pulsar wind overwhelms the helium star wind, with a wind-momentum ratio $\eta_{\rm w}\approx0.25$ reproducing the phase coverage. Optical and near-infrared non-detections, with the tightest limit from the $K$-band, push the companion mass below about 1.6 $M_\odot$. The paper concludes that the system recently left a common envelope phase in which a $5$ to $8\,M_\odot$ red-giant progenitor lost its envelope, leaving the helium core in a compact orbit, while the neutron star accreted at least $0.01\,M_\odot$ at a hypercritical rate and was recycled to 10.55 ms.

Load-bearing premise

The identification of the companion as a stripped helium star rests on the assumption that the regular 17% eclipses are caused by an optically thick intra-binary bow shock in which the pulsar wind overpowers the companion's wind; if the eclipses instead come from a bloated proto-white dwarf with a residual ionized envelope, or from any other opaque screen, the companion need not be a helium star and the common-envelope interpretation loses its cornerstone.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The companion is a stripped helium star of 1.0 to 1.6 solar masses; no main-sequence, white-dwarf, or neutron-star companion can simultaneously satisfy the mass function, Roche-lobe, eclipse, and infrared constraints.
  • The neutron star was recycled to 10.55 ms by hypercritical accretion during the common envelope phase, requiring accretion of at least 0.01 solar masses at rates about $10^4$ times the Eddington rate.
  • In about 10 million years the helium star will overflow its Roche lobe, and the system will become a detached pulsar plus carbon-oxygen white-dwarf binary with an orbital period near 6.2 hours.
  • Population synthesis predicts a formation rate of $1.3$ to $7.2\times10^{-6}$ per year and 16 to 84 such systems currently in the Milky Way, most not detectable because of beaming and distance.
  • This is the first observed pulsar-helium-star binary, filling a predicted evolutionary gap between spider pulsars and pulsar-white-dwarf binaries.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If correct, the discovery implies that some apparently isolated millisecond pulsars with high spin-down may actually be compact binaries with faint helium-star companions; orbital-acceleration searches in the Galactic plane could uncover more.
  • The spin-orbit misalignment invoked to explain the wide pulse profile suggests that recycled pulsars need not have spin axes aligned with their orbits, so wide or complex pulse profiles should not be taken as evidence against accretion recycling.
  • The paper's dismissal of the proto-white-dwarf companion rests on a statistical lifetime argument; a targeted search for a similar eclipsing pulsar with a slightly different companion mass could test whether the post-Case-BB channel contributes.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper reports 4.5 years of FAST timing observations of PSR J1928+1815, a 10.55 ms pulsar in a 3.60-hour circular binary, and derives a precise timing solution (152 TOAs, reduced chi-squared 1.296). The mass function of 0.2342 solar masses gives a firm lower limit on the companion mass of about 1.0 solar masses, and the K-band non-detection is used to place an upper limit near 1.6 solar masses. Three long tracks show regular eclipses over orbital phases 0.18 to 0.35, centered on superior conjunction. The authors interpret the companion as a stripped helium star whose wind, confined by the pulsar wind into an intra-binary bow shock, produces the eclipses, and they argue that the system recently emerged from a common envelope phase during which the neutron star was recycled by hypercritical accretion. The paper supports this scenario with MESA models, BSE population synthesis, and a predicted future evolution into a pulsar-white dwarf binary.

Significance. If the identification is correct, this would be the first observed pulsar-helium star binary, filling a predicted but previously missing evolutionary stage between spider pulsars and pulsar-white dwarf systems. The observational core is strong: the timing solution is precise and self-consistent, the mass-function lower limit is model-independent, the eclipses are clearly present in three independent long tracks, and the multi-wavelength search is carefully reported with explicit limits. The population synthesis rates and evolutionary tracks provide useful theoretical context. However, the central claim that the companion is a helium star depends on two load-bearing inferences: the eclipse mechanism (an intra-binary bow shock with an ad hoc enlarged wind region) and the K-band upper mass limit (sensitive to assumed extinction). Both need to be substantially strengthened or their limitations explicitly acknowledged before the interpretation can be regarded as established.

major comments (4)
  1. [Supplementary text, 'Intrabinary bow shock and eclipses' (Fig. S5)] The quantitative link between the observed eclipse phases and the helium-star wind is not closed. The authors compute the wind momentum ratio eta_w = 0.018, 0.050, and 0.24 for inclinations of 90, 60, and 30 degrees, and then adopt eta_w = 0.25 with sin i = 1 as a working value. They then state that even with this choice the observed eclipse range (orbital phases 0.18 to 0.35) can only be reproduced 'by enlarging the companion wind region to more than the outermost optically thick shock lines from the connection line of two stars in Fig. S5.' This is a post-hoc adjustment rather than a predictive model, and no calculation is provided for the density, temperature, or free-free optical depth of the enlarged wind region at 1.0-1.5 GHz. Since the inferred eclipse radii (0.69 and 0.95 solar radii) exceed the Roche lobe radius (0.58 solar radii), while the helium-star radius from the authors' own mass-radius relation is only about 0.2 solar radii for a 1.2 solar mass star, the entire helium-star identification rests on this unquantified bow-shock/wind extension. The paper needs either a self-consistent calculation of the shock geometry and its radio opacity, or an explicit statement that the eclipse data alone do not uniquely require a helium-star wind.
  2. [Supplementary text, 'Other possibilities for PSR J1928+1815 companion'] The proto-white dwarf (or evolved helium star with a carbon-oxygen core) alternative is dismissed primarily by lifetime and population-count arguments (expected number < 0.035 in the Milky Way versus 16-84 for helium stars), not by a direct observational test. The observed eclipses do not by themselves distinguish a helium-star wind from a residual ionized envelope around a proto-white dwarf, and the single MESA example of a 2.0 solar mass helium star that shrinks to 0.02 R_L does not scan the allowed 1-2 solar mass range or the range of possible envelope masses. The section should either present an observational discriminant (e.g., frequency dependence of eclipse duration, ingress/egress asymmetry, or variability of eclipse boundaries) or explicitly concede that the helium-star identification is model-dependent. As written, the statement that the companion is 'most likely a stripped helium star' is stronger than the evidence presented.
  3. [Supplementary text, 'Magnitude upper limits of the companion star' (Table S2, Fig. 2)] The claimed upper limit of 1.6 solar masses on the companion mass depends sensitively on the assumed K-band extinction A_K = 1.5 mag from the Marshall et al. model at 8 kpc. The paper itself acknowledges a roughly 30% distance uncertainty and the possibility of additional circumstellar extinction from common envelope ejecta (references 74-75). Because the predicted K magnitudes for 1.0-1.6 solar mass helium stars (18.3 to 17.3 mag) lie within about a magnitude of the raw observed limit (18.8 mag), a modest increase in A_K (e.g., from 1.5 to 2.5 mag) would substantially raise the implied mass cap, potentially above 2 solar masses and into the ultra-stripped supernova range. The authors should provide a sensitivity analysis of the mass limit to extinction and distance, or state the upper limit as a range with explicit caveats, instead of quoting 1.6 solar masses as a firm constraint.
  4. [Main text, 'Binary stellar evolution model' and Supplementary text, 'Pulsar recycling'] The claim that the neutron star was recycled by hypercritical, neutrino-cooled accretion during the common envelope phase is an interpretive inference, not a direct measurement. The argument requires at least 0.01 solar masses of accretion (Eq. S4) and relies on ruling out other recycling channels; the timing data themselves do not constrain the accretion history. This scenario may well be correct, but the paper presents it as a conclusion ('indicates that the system has recently experienced hypercritical mass accretion process during a common envelope phase') rather than as a working hypothesis. The observational discovery (an eclipsing millisecond pulsar with a >1 solar mass companion) should be cleanly separated from the proposed evolutionary channel, especially in the title and abstract, which currently present the common envelope interpretation as established.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Materials and Methods, 'FAST observations of PSR J1928+1815'] The text says the three long tracking observations were carried out on '2012 March 13, 2021 April 5, and 2023 December 18'; the first date should be 2021 March 13, consistent with Table S1 and Fig. S1.
  2. [Main text, paragraph after Table 1] The sentence beginning 'hat the binary system has eccentricity' is missing the initial 'T' and should read 'That the binary system has eccentricity...'.
  3. [Main text, 'Binary stellar evolution model'] The phrase 'We ound that the formation rate' should read 'We found that the formation rate'.
  4. [Main text, 'Multiwavelength search for the companion'] The phrase 'too few high-energy photos reaching us' should be 'too few high-energy photons reaching us'.
  5. [Supplementary text, 'Pulsar recycling'] The phrase 'evening including the accretion before the common envelope evolution phase' should read 'even including the accretion...'.
  6. [Supplementary text, 'Magnitude upper limits of the companion star'] In Table S2 the word 'amg' appears in the header row; this should be 'mag'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation: companion mass from timing and independent photometry; helium-star identification from external stellar models; bow-shock eclipse model is an interpretation, not a fitted prediction.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. The mass function (Eq. 1) and the observed pulsar-mass range set the companion lower mass bound; the K-band non-detection, combined with the external helium-star mass-luminosity relation (Götberg et al.), sets the upper bound. The rejection of a main-sequence companion uses standard mass-radius relations and the Roche-lobe formula. The helium-star interpretation is checked against MESA mass-radius relations and observed stripped stars; these are independent inputs, not quantities fitted from the eclipses. The bow-shock eclipse model is an interpretation of the observed eclipse phases, and the paper candidly states that reproducing the eclipse requires enlarging the companion wind region beyond the optically thick shock lines. This is a modeling weakness that reduces confidence in the helium-star identification, but it is not circular: the eclipses are the input, not a prediction generated from fitted parameters. The proto-white-dwarf alternative is excluded by a lifetime/statistical argument, which is debatable but not circular. Population-synthesis rates are forward predictions with stated assumptions (alpha_CE, kicks, IMF) and are not used to re-derive the observed parameters. Self-citations appear for discovery, data reduction, and common-envelope methodology, but they are not load-bearing for the central claim and no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' prior work. Therefore the score is 0, with no specific circular step identified.

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

The paper's interpretation depends on standard binary evolution physics plus several modeling choices: assumed CE efficiencies and kick velocity distributions in population synthesis, an adopted distance and extinction, and a wind-driven eclipse mechanism. The 1.0 to 1.6 solar mass companion range is not a direct measurement; it is derived from the mass function, an assumed pulsar mass range, photometric non-detections, and a mass-luminosity relation for stripped helium stars. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (6)
  • Common envelope ejection efficiency alpha_CE (BSE) = 0.3, 1.0, 3.0
    Assumed values in population synthesis (Table S3). The formation rate estimate depends on this choice.
  • Common envelope binding-energy parameter beta_CE (MESA) = 1.0 and 0.5
    Assumed values in adiabatic mass-loss CE simulations (Fig. S6). Controls final orbital period and helium star mass.
  • NS kick velocity dispersions V_CC, V_EC = V_CC = 265, 320 km/s; V_EC = 40, 80 km/s
    Assumed Maxwellian dispersions in population synthesis (Table S3). Influences whether binaries survive the supernovae that form the neutron star.
  • Distance to PSR J1928+1815 = 8 kpc
    Adopted between 9.7 kpc (NE2001) and 7.2 kpc (YMW16). Affects companion brightness estimates and extinction, hence mass upper limit.
  • Helium star wind mass-loss rate and terminal velocity = Mdot = 1e-10 Msun/yr, v = 2e3 km/s
    Adopted from theoretical predictions (Vink 2017; Götberg et al. 2018) for the bow-shock eclipse model. Needed to reproduce eclipse duration.
  • Extinction in K band = 1.5 mag
    From Marshall et al. (2006) 3D dust model at 8 kpc. Directly sets the companion mass upper limit of 1.6 Msun via the K-band non-detection.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Measured pulsar masses lie in the range 1.1 to 2.2 solar masses (Tauris & van den Heuvel 2023).
    Combined with the measured mass function 0.2342 solar masses to derive a companion lower limit of about 1.0 solar masses (main text, 'Constraints on the companion').
  • domain assumption A main sequence star with more than 1.0 solar mass would overfill its Roche lobe.
    Used to exclude a main sequence companion, relying on standard mass-radius relations (Demircan & Kahraman 1991; Boyajian et al. 2012) (Fig. 2).
  • domain assumption Common envelope ejection follows alpha_CE Delta E_orb = E_bind.
    Standard but uncertain energy prescription used to model CE and infer the RGB progenitor mass (supplementary text, Eqs. S1-S3, Fig. S6).
  • ad hoc to paper The neutron star was spun up by hypercritical, neutrino-cooled accretion during the common envelope phase.
    Needed to explain the 10.55 ms spin period in the CE formation scenario; the text itself says this is 'possibly' the recycling channel, relying on Houck & Chevalier (1991).
  • domain assumption The eclipse screen is an optically thick bow shock.
    Standard for spider pulsars; here converts the observed eclipse phase range into a wind momentum ratio (supplementary text, 'Intrabinary bow shock and eclipses').

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A pulsar-helium star compact binary system formed by common envelope evolution." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GONCLISY

@misc{pith2026250515896,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A pulsar-helium star compact binary system formed by common envelope evolution},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GONCLISY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.15896}
}
read the original abstract

A stellar common envelope occurs in a binary system when the atmosphere of an evolving star expands to encompass an orbiting companion object. Such systems are predicted to evolve rapidly, ejecting the stellar envelope and leaving the companion in a tighter orbit around a stripped star. We used radio timing to identify a pulsar, PSR J1928+1815, with a spin period of 10.55 ms in a compact binary system with an orbital period of 3.60 hours. The companion star has 1.0 to 1.6 solar masses, eclipses the pulsar for about 17% of the orbit, and is undetected at other wavelengths, so it is most likely a stripped helium star. We interpret this system as having recently undergone a common envelope phase, producing a compact binary.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

108 extracted references · 4 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    M. A. Alpar, A. F. Cheng, M. A. Ruderman, J. Shaham, A new class of radio pulsars.Nature 300(5894), 728–730 (1982), doi:10.1038/300728a0

    doi:10.1038/300728a0 1982

  2. [2]

    Han, H.-W

    Z.-W. Han, H.-W. Ge, X.-F. Chen, H.-L. Chen, Binary Population Synthesis.Res. Astron. Astrophys.20(10), 161 (2020), doi:10.1088/1674-4527/20/10/161

    doi:10.1088/1674-4527/20/10/161 2020

  3. [3]

    T. M. Tauris, E. P. J. van den Heuvel,Physics of Binary Star Evolution: From Stars to X- ray Binaries and Gravitational Wave Sources, vol. 68 ofPrinceton Series in Astrophysics (Princeton University Press) (2023),http://www.jstor.org/stable/jj.8595663

    2023

  4. [4]

    Paczynski, Common Envelope Binaries, inStructure and Evolution of Close Binary Sys- tems, P

    B. Paczynski, Common Envelope Binaries, inStructure and Evolution of Close Binary Sys- tems, P. Eggleton, S. Mitton, J. Whelan, Eds., vol. 73 ofIAU Symposium(1976), p. 75

    1976

  5. [5]

    Iben, Icko, M

    J. Iben, Icko, M. Livio, Common Envelopes in Binary Star Evolution.Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. 105, 1373 (1993), doi:10.1086/133321

    doi:10.1086/133321 1993

  6. [6]

    Ivanova,et al., Common envelope evolution: where we stand and how we can move forward.Astron

    N. Ivanova,et al., Common envelope evolution: where we stand and how we can move forward.Astron. Astrophys. Rev.21, 59 (2013), doi:10.1007/s00159-013-0059-2

    doi:10.1007/s00159-013-0059-2 2013

  7. [7]

    M. R. Drout,et al., An observed population of intermediate-mass helium stars that have been stripped in binaries.Sci382(6676), 1287–1291 (2023), doi:10.1126/science.ade4970

    doi:10.1126/science.ade4970 2023

  8. [8]

    H.-L. Chen, X. Chen, T. M. Tauris, Z. Han, Formation of Black Widows and Redbacks—Two Distinct Populations of Eclipsing Binary Millisecond Pulsars.Astrophys. J.775(1), 27 (2013), doi:10.1088/0004-637X/775/1/27

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/775/1/27 2013

Show all 108 references
  1. [9]

    Pan,et al., FAST Globular Cluster Pulsar Survey: Twenty-four Pulsars Discovered in 15 Globular Clusters.Astrophys

    Z. Pan,et al., FAST Globular Cluster Pulsar Survey: Twenty-four Pulsars Discovered in 15 Globular Clusters.Astrophys. J. Lett.915(2), L28 (2021), doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac0bbd

    2021 doi

  2. [10]

    M. S. E. Roberts, Surrounded by spiders! New black widows and redbacks in the Galactic field, inNeutron Stars and Pulsars: Challenges and Opportunities after 80 years, J. van Leeuwen, Ed., vol. 291 ofIAU Symposium(2013), pp. 127–132, doi:10.1017/S174392131202337X

    2013 doi

  3. [11]

    D. A. Smith,et al., The Third Fermi Large Area Telescope Catalog of Gamma-Ray Pulsars. Astrophys. J.958(2), 191 (2023), doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acee67

    2023 doi

  4. [12]

    Nan, Five hundred meter aperture spherical radio telescope (FAST).Science in China: Physics, Mechanics and Astronomy49(2), 129–148 (2006), doi:10.1007/s11433-006-0129-9

    R. Nan, Five hundred meter aperture spherical radio telescope (FAST).Science in China: Physics, Mechanics and Astronomy49(2), 129–148 (2006), doi:10.1007/s11433-006-0129-9. 15

    2006 doi

  5. [13]

    J. L. Han,et al., The FAST Galactic Plane Pulsar Snapshot survey: I. Project design and pulsar discoveries.Res. Astron. Astrophys.21(5), 107 (2021), doi:10.1088/1674-4527/21/5/107

    2021 doi

  6. [14]

    Materials and methods are available as supplementary materials

  7. [15]

    Jiang,et al., The fundamental performance of FAST with 19-beam receiver at L band.Res

    P. Jiang,et al., The fundamental performance of FAST with 19-beam receiver at L band.Res. Astron. Astrophys.20(5), 064 (2020), doi:10.1088/1674-4527/20/5/64

    2020 doi

  8. [16]

    P. P. Eggleton, Aproximations to the radii of Roche lobes.Astrophys. J.268, 368–369 (1983), doi:10.1086/160960

    1983 doi

  9. [17]

    Demircan, G

    O. Demircan, G. Kahraman, Stellar Mass / Luminosity and Mass / Radius Relations.Astro- phys. Space Sci.181(2), 313–322 (1991), doi:10.1007/BF00639097

    1991 doi

  10. [18]

    T. S. Boyajian,et al., Stellar Diameters and Temperatures. II. Main-sequence K- and M-stars. Astrophys. J.757(2), 112 (2012), doi:10.1088/0004-637X/757/2/112

    2012 doi

  11. [19]

    Thompson, R

    C. Thompson, R. D. Blandford, C. R. Evans, E. S. Phinney, Physical Processes in Eclipsing Pulsars: Eclipse Mechanisms and Diagnostics.Astrophys. J.422, 304 (1994), doi:10.1086/ 173728

    1994

  12. [20]

    Wadiasingh, A

    Z. Wadiasingh, A. K. Harding, C. Venter, M. B¨ottcher, M. G. Baring, Constraining Relativistic Bow Shock Properties in Rotation-powered Millisecond Pulsar Binaries.Astrophys. J.839(2), 80 (2017), doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa69bf

    2017 doi

  13. [21]

    Du,et al., Constraining the Orbital Inclination and Companion Properties of Three Black Widow Pulsars Detected by FAST.Res

    Z.-X. Du,et al., Constraining the Orbital Inclination and Companion Properties of Three Black Widow Pulsars Detected by FAST.Res. Astron. Astrophys.23(12), 125024 (2023), doi:10.1088/1674-4527/ad034b

    2023 doi

  14. [22]

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

    2002

  15. [23]

    J. M. Yao, R. N. Manchester, N. Wang, A New Electron-density Model for Estimation of Pulsar and FRB Distances.Astrophys. J.835(1), 29 (2017), doi:10.3847/1538-4357/835/1/29

    2017 doi

  16. [25]

    K. I. I. Koljonen, M. Linares, A Gaia view of the optical and X-ray luminosities of compact binary millisecond pulsars.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.525(3), 3963–3985 (2023), doi:10. 1093/mnras/stad2485. 16

    2023

  17. [26]

    Boller,et al., Second ROSAT all-sky survey (2RXS) source catalogue.Astron

    T. Boller,et al., Second ROSAT all-sky survey (2RXS) source catalogue.Astron. Astrophys. 588, A103 (2016), doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201525648

    2016 doi

  18. [27]

    P. A. Evans,et al., 2SXPS: An Improved and Expanded Swift X-Ray Telescope Point-source Catalog.Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser.247(2), 54 (2020), doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab7db9

    2020 doi

  19. [28]

    Abdollahi,et al., Incremental Fermi Large Area Telescope Fourth Source Catalog.Astro- phys

    S. Abdollahi,et al., Incremental Fermi Large Area Telescope Fourth Source Catalog.Astro- phys. J. Suppl. Ser.260(2), 53 (2022), doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac6751

    2022 doi

  20. [29]

    Lazarus,et al., Timing of a young mildly recycled pulsar with a massive white dwarf companion.Mon

    P. Lazarus,et al., Timing of a young mildly recycled pulsar with a massive white dwarf companion.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.437(2), 1485–1494 (2014), doi:10.1093/mnras/stt1996

    2014 doi

  21. [30]

    T. M. Tauris, D. Sanyal, S. C. Yoon, N. Langer, Evolution towards and beyond accretion- induced collapse of massive white dwarfs and formation of millisecond pulsars.Astron. Astrophys.558, A39 (2013), doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201321662

    2013 doi

  22. [31]

    Radhakrishnan, G

    V. Radhakrishnan, G. Srinivasan, On the origin of the recently discovered ultra-rapid pulsar. Curr. Sci.51, 1096–1099 (1982)

    1982

  23. [32]

    H. Ge, R. F. Webbink, X. Chen, Z. Han, Adiabatic Mass Loss in Binary Stars. II. From Zero-age Main Sequence to the Base of the Giant Branch.Astrophys. J.812(1), 40 (2015), doi:10.1088/0004-637X/812/1/40

    2015 doi

  24. [33]

    H. Ge, R. F. Webbink, X. Chen, Z. Han, Adiabatic Mass Loss in Binary Stars. III. From the Base of the Red Giant Branch to the Tip of the Asymptotic Giant Branch.Astrophys. J. 899(2), 132 (2020), doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aba7b7

    2020 doi

  25. [34]

    T. M. Tauris, N. Langer, M. Kramer, Formation of millisecond pulsars with CO white dwarf companions - I. PSR J1614-2230: evidence for a neutron star born massive.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.416(3), 2130–2142 (2011), doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19189.x

    2011

  26. [35]

    J. D. M. Dewi, O. R. Pols, G. J. Savonije, E. P. J. van den Heuvel, The evolution of naked helium stars with a neutron star companion in close binary systems.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 331(4), 1027–1040 (2002), doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05257.x

    2002

  27. [36]

    J. C. Houck, R. A. Chevalier, Steady Spherical Hypercritical Accretion onto Neutron Stars. Astrophys. J.376, 234 (1991), doi:10.1086/170272

    1991 doi

  28. [37]

    Bhattacharya, E

    D. Bhattacharya, E. P. J. van den Heuvel, Formation and evolution of binary and millisecond radio pulsars.Phys. Rep.203(1-2), 1–124 (1991), doi:10.1016/0370-1573(91)90064-S. 17

    1991 doi

  29. [38]

    J. H. Krolik, Multipolar Magnetic Fields in Neutron Stars.Astrophys. J. Lett.373, L69 (1991), doi:10.1086/186053

    1991 doi

  30. [39]

    Radhakrishnan, D

    V. Radhakrishnan, D. J. Cooke, Magnetic Poles and the Polarization Structure of Pulsar Radiation.Astrophys. Lett.3, 225 (1969)

    1969

  31. [40]

    Biryukov, P

    A. Biryukov, P. Abolmasov, Magnetic angle evolution in accreting neutron stars.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.505(2), 1775–1786 (2021), doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1378

    2021 doi

  32. [41]

    A. Lyne, F. Graham-Smith, B. Stappers,Pulsar Astronomy, Cambridge Astrophysics (Cam- bridge University Press), 5 ed. (2022)

    2022

  33. [42]

    G ¨otberg,et al., Stellar Properties of Observed Stars Stripped in Binaries in the Magellanic Clouds.Astrophys

    Y. G ¨otberg,et al., Stellar Properties of Observed Stars Stripped in Binaries in the Magellanic Clouds.Astrophys. J.959(2), 125 (2023), doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ace5a3

    2023 doi

  34. [43]

    K. S. Thorne, A. N. Zytkow, Red giants and supergiants with degenerate neutron cores. Astrophys. J. Lett.199, L19–L24 (1975), doi:10.1086/181839

    1975 doi

  35. [44]

    K. S. Thorne, A. N. Zytkow, Stars with degenerate neutron cores. I. Structure of equilibrium models.Astrophys. J.212, 832–858 (1977), doi:10.1086/155109

    1977 doi

  36. [45]

    G. B. Hobbs, R. T. Edwards, R. N. Manchester, TEMPO2, a new pulsar-timing package - I. An overview.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.369(2), 655–672 (2006), doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966. 2006.10302.x

    2006 arXiv

  37. [46]

    S. M. Ransom,New search techniques for binary pulsars, Ph.D. thesis, Harvard University, Massachusetts (2001)

    2001

  38. [48]

    Bhattacharyya, R

    B. Bhattacharyya, R. Nityananda, Determination of the orbital parameters of binary pulsars. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.387(1), 273–278 (2008), doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13213.x

    2008

  39. [49]

    van Straten, M

    W. van Straten, M. Bailes, DSPSR: Digital Signal Processing Software for Pulsar Astronomy. Publ. Astron. Soc. Aust.28(1), 1–14 (2011), doi:10.1071/AS10021

    2011 doi

  40. [50]

    A. W. Hotan, W. van Straten, R. N. Manchester, PSRCHIVE and PSRFITS: An Open Approach to Radio Pulsar Data Storage and Analysis.Publ. Astron. Soc. Aust.21(3), 302–309 (2004), doi:10.1071/AS04022. 18

    2004 doi

  41. [51]

    X. Chen, J. L. Han, W. Q. Su, Z. L. Yang, D. J. Zhou, Cleaning Radio Frequency Interference in Pulsar-Folded Data Based on the Conditional Random Fields with an Adaptive Prior.Res. Astron. Astrophys.23(10), 104004 (2023), doi:10.1088/1674-4527/acd52b

    2023 doi

  42. [52]

    R. S. Park, W. M. Folkner, J. G. Williams, D. H. Boggs, The JPL Planetary and Lunar Ephemerides DE440 and DE441.Astron. J.161(3), 105 (2021), doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ abd414

    2021 doi

  43. [53]

    Lange,et al., Precision timing measurements of PSR J1012+5307.Mon

    C. Lange,et al., Precision timing measurements of PSR J1012+5307.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.326(1), 274–282 (2001), doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04606.x

    2001

  44. [54]

    Gautam,et al., Relativistic effects in a mildly recycled pulsar binary: PSR J1952+2630

    T. Gautam,et al., Relativistic effects in a mildly recycled pulsar binary: PSR J1952+2630. Astron. Astrophys.668, A187 (2022), doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244699

    2022 doi

  45. [55]

    Ochsenbein, P

    F. Ochsenbein, P. Bauer, J. Marcout, The VizieR database of astronomical catalogues.Astron. Astrophys. Suppl.143, 23–32 (2000), doi:10.1051/aas:2000169

    2000 doi

  46. [56]

    M. F. Skrutskie,et al., The Two Micron All Sky Survey (2MASS).Astron. J.131(2), 1163– 1183 (2006), doi:10.1086/498708

    2006 doi

  47. [57]

    R. A. Benjamin,et al., GLIMPSE. I. An SIRTF Legacy Project to Map the Inner Galaxy. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac.115(810), 953–964 (2003), doi:10.1086/376696

    2003 doi

  48. [58]

    Summary of the contents and survey properties.Astron

    Gaia Collaboration,et al., Gaia Early Data Release 3. Summary of the contents and survey properties.Astron. Astrophys.649, A1 (2021), doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039657

    2021 doi

  49. [59]

    E. L. Wright,et al., The Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE): Mission Description and Initial On-orbit Performance.Astron. J.140(6), 1868–1881 (2010), doi:10.1088/0004-6256/ 140/6/1868

    2010 doi

  50. [60]

    Mainzer,et al., Preliminary Results from NEOWISE: An Enhancement to the Wide- field Infrared Survey Explorer for Solar System Science.Astrophys

    A. Mainzer,et al., Preliminary Results from NEOWISE: An Enhancement to the Wide- field Infrared Survey Explorer for Solar System Science.Astrophys. J.731(1), 53 (2011), doi:10.1088/0004-637X/731/1/53

    2011 doi

  51. [61]

    K. C. Chambers,et al., The Pan-STARRS1 Surveys.arXiv e-printsarXiv:1612.05560 (2016), doi:10.48550/arXiv.1612.05560

    2016 doi arXiv

  52. [62]

    Casali,et al., The UKIRT wide-field camera.Astron

    M. Casali,et al., The UKIRT wide-field camera.Astron. Astrophys.467(2), 777–784 (2007), doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20066514. 19

    2007 doi

  53. [64]

    N. C. Hambly,et al., The WFCAM Science Archive.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.384(2), 637–662 (2008), doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12700.x

    2008

  54. [65]

    A. S. Fruchter, D. R. Stinebring, J. H. Taylor, A millisecond pulsar in an eclipsing binary. Nature333(6170), 237–239 (1988), doi:10.1038/333237a0

    1988 doi

  55. [66]

    J. S. Vink, Winds from stripped low-mass helium stars and Wolf-Rayet stars.Astron. Astro- phys.607, L8 (2017), doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201731902

    2017 doi

  56. [67]

    G ¨otberg,et al., Spectral models for binary products: Unifying subdwarfs and Wolf-Rayet stars as a sequence of stripped-envelope stars.Astron

    Y. G ¨otberg,et al., Spectral models for binary products: Unifying subdwarfs and Wolf-Rayet stars as a sequence of stripped-envelope stars.Astron. Astrophys.615, A78 (2018), doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201732274

    2018 doi

  57. [68]

    Cant ´o, A

    J. Cant ´o, A. C. Raga, F. P. Wilkin, Exact, Algebraic Solutions of the Thin-Shell Two-Wind Interaction Problem.Astrophys. J.469, 729 (1996), doi:10.1086/177820

    1996 doi

  58. [69]

    Paxton,et al., Modules for Experiments in Stellar Astrophysics (MESA).Astrophys

    B. Paxton,et al., Modules for Experiments in Stellar Astrophysics (MESA).Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser.192(1), 3 (2011), doi:10.1088/0067-0049/192/1/3

    2011 doi

  59. [70]

    Paxton,et al., Modules for Experiments in Stellar Astrophysics (MESA): Pulsating Variable Stars, Rotation, Convective Boundaries, and Energy Conservation.Astrophys

    B. Paxton,et al., Modules for Experiments in Stellar Astrophysics (MESA): Pulsating Variable Stars, Rotation, Convective Boundaries, and Energy Conservation.Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 243(1), 10 (2019), doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab2241

    2019 doi

  60. [71]

    Fukugita,et al., The Sloan Digital Sky Survey Photometric System.Astron

    M. Fukugita,et al., The Sloan Digital Sky Survey Photometric System.Astron. J.111, 1748 (1996), doi:10.1086/117915

    1996 doi

  61. [72]

    M. S. Bessell, F. Castelli, B. Plez, Model atmospheres broad-band colors, bolometric correc- tions and temperature calibrations for O - M stars.Astron. Astrophys.333, 231–250 (1998)

    1998

  62. [73]

    D. J. Marshall, A. C. Robin, C. Reyl ´e, M. Schultheis, S. Picaud, Modelling the Galactic interstellar extinction distribution in three dimensions.Astron. Astrophys.453(2), 635–651 (2006), doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20053842

    2006 doi

  63. [74]

    G. L¨ u, C. Zhu, P. Podsiadlowski, Dust Formation in the Ejecta of Common Envelope Systems. Astrophys. J.768(2), 193 (2013), doi:10.1088/0004-637X/768/2/193. 20

    2013 doi

  64. [75]

    Iaconi, K

    R. Iaconi, K. Maeda, T. Nozawa, O. De Marco, T. Reichardt, Properties of the post in-spiral common envelope ejecta II: dust formation.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.497(3), 3166–3179 (2020), doi:10.1093/mnras/staa2169

    2020 doi

  65. [76]

    H. Ge, M. S. Hjellming, R. F. Webbink, X. Chen, Z. Han, Adiabatic Mass Loss in Binary Stars. I. Computational Method.Astrophys. J.717(2), 724–738 (2010), doi:10.1088/0004-637X/ 717/2/724

    2010 doi

  66. [77]

    H. Ge, R. F. Webbink, Z. Han, The Thermal Equilibrium Mass-loss Model and Its Applications in Binary Evolution.Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser.249(1), 9 (2020), doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ ab98f6

    2020 doi

  67. [78]

    Ge,et al., Criteria for Dynamical Timescale Mass Transfer of Metal-poor Intermediate- mass Stars.Astrophys

    H. Ge,et al., Criteria for Dynamical Timescale Mass Transfer of Metal-poor Intermediate- mass Stars.Astrophys. J.945(1), 7 (2023), doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acb7e9

    2023 doi

  68. [79]

    J. R. Hurley, C. A. Tout, O. R. Pols, Evolution of binary stars and the effect of tides on binary populations.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.329(4), 897–928 (2002), doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711. 2002.05038.x

    2002 arXiv

  69. [80]

    Shao, X.-D

    Y. Shao, X.-D. Li, On the Formation of Be Stars through Binary Interaction.Astrophys. J. 796(1), 37 (2014), doi:10.1088/0004-637X/796/1/37

    2014 doi

  70. [81]

    Shao, X.-D

    Y. Shao, X.-D. Li, Z.-G. Dai, A Population of Neutron Star Ultraluminous X-Ray Sources with a Helium Star Companion.Astrophys. J.886(2), 118 (2019), doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab4d50

    2019 doi

  71. [82]

    Kroupa, C

    P. Kroupa, C. A. Tout, G. Gilmore, The Distribution of Low-Mass Stars in the Galactic Disc. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.262, 545–587 (1993), doi:10.1093/mnras/262.3.545

    1993 doi

  72. [83]

    H. A. Kobulnicky, C. L. Fryer, A New Look at the Binary Characteristics of Massive Stars. Astrophys. J.670(1), 747–765 (2007), doi:10.1086/522073

    2007 doi

  73. [84]

    H. A. Abt, Normal and abnormal binary frequencies.Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys.21, 343–372 (1983), doi:10.1146/annurev.aa.21.090183.002015

    1983

  74. [85]

    Hobbs, D

    G. Hobbs, D. R. Lorimer, A. G. Lyne, M. Kramer, A statistical study of 233 pulsar proper motions.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.360(3), 974–992 (2005), doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005. 09087.x

    2005

  75. [86]

    A. P. Igoshev, The observed velocity distribution of young pulsars - II. Analysis of complete PSR𝜋.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.494(3), 3663–3674 (2020), doi:10.1093/mnras/staa958. 21

    2020 doi

  76. [87]

    Verbunt, A

    F. Verbunt, A. Igoshev, E. Cator, The observed velocity distribution of young pulsars.Astron. Astrophys.608, A57 (2017), doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201731518

    2017 doi

  77. [88]

    R. F. Webbink, Double white dwarfs as progenitors of R Coronae Borealis stars and type I supernovae.Astrophys. J.277, 355–360 (1984), doi:10.1086/161701

    1984 doi

  78. [89]

    de Kool, Common Envelope Evolution and Double Cores of Planetary Nebulae.Astrophys

    M. de Kool, Common Envelope Evolution and Double Cores of Planetary Nebulae.Astrophys. J.358, 189 (1990), doi:10.1086/168974

    1990 doi

  79. [90]

    Ge,et al., The Common Envelope Evolution Outcome-A Case Study on Hot Subdwarf B Stars.Astrophys

    H. Ge,et al., The Common Envelope Evolution Outcome-A Case Study on Hot Subdwarf B Stars.Astrophys. J.933(2), 137 (2022), doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac75d3

    2022 doi

  80. [91]

    Ge,et al., The Common Envelope Evolution Outcome

    H. Ge,et al., The Common Envelope Evolution Outcome. II. Short-orbital-period Hot Subdwarf B Binaries Reveal a Clear Picture.Astrophys. J.961(2), 202 (2024), doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad158e

    2024 doi

  81. [92]

    P. M. Ricker, R. E. Taam, An AMR Study of the Common-envelope Phase of Binary Evolution. Astrophys. J.746(1), 74 (2012), doi:10.1088/0004-637X/746/1/74

    2012 doi

  82. [93]

    J. J. Andrews, W. M. Farr, V. Kalogera, B. Willems, Evolutionary Channels for the Formation of Double Neutron Stars.Astrophys. J.801(1), 32 (2015), doi:10.1088/0004-637X/801/1/32

    2015 doi

  83. [94]

    Iben, I., A

    J. Iben, I., A. V. Tutukov, Supernovae of type I as end products of the evolution of binaries with components of moderate initial mass.Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser.54, 335–372 (1984), doi:10.1086/190932

    1984 doi

  84. [95]

    Livio, N

    M. Livio, N. Soker, The Common Envelope Phase in the Evolution of Binary Stars.Astrophys. J.329, 764 (1988), doi:10.1086/166419

    1988 doi

  85. [97]

    Fragos,et al., The Complete Evolution of a Neutron-star Binary through a Common Envelope Phase Using 1D Hydrodynamic Simulations.Astrophys

    T. Fragos,et al., The Complete Evolution of a Neutron-star Binary through a Common Envelope Phase Using 1D Hydrodynamic Simulations.Astrophys. J. Lett.883(2), L45 (2019), doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab40d1

    2019 doi

  86. [98]

    Jiang, T

    L. Jiang, T. M. Tauris, W.-C. Chen, J. Fuller, Novel Model of an Ultra-stripped Su- pernova Progenitor of a Double Neutron Star.Astrophys. J.920(2), L36 (2021), doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac2cc9. 22

    2021 doi

  87. [99]

    Guo,et al., Electron-capture supernovae in NS + He star systems and the double neutron star systems.Mon

    Y.-L. Guo,et al., Electron-capture supernovae in NS + He star systems and the double neutron star systems.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.530(4), 4461–4473 (2024), doi:10.1093/ mnras/stae1112

    2024

  88. [100]

    D. L. Kaplan,et al., A Metal-rich Low-gravity Companion to a Massive Millisecond Pulsar. Astrophys. J.765(2), 158 (2013), doi:10.1088/0004-637X/765/2/158

    2013 doi

  89. [101]

    A. G. Istrate, T. M. Tauris, N. Langer, J. Antoniadis, The timescale of low-mass proto- helium white dwarf evolution.Astron. Astrophys.571, L3 (2014), doi:10.1051/0004-6361/ 201424681

    2014 doi

  90. [102]

    T. M. Tauris, N. Langer, M. Kramer, Formation of millisecond pulsars with CO white dwarf companions - II. Accretion, spin-up, true ages and comparison to MSPs with He white dwarf companions.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.425(3), 1601–1627 (2012), doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966. 2012.21446.x

    2012

  91. [103]

    Wang,et al., Ultracompact X-ray binaries with He star companions.Mon

    B. Wang,et al., Ultracompact X-ray binaries with He star companions.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.506(3), 4654–4666 (2021), doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2032

    2021 doi

  92. [104]

    Chaty,Accreting Binaries, 2514-3433 (IOP Publishing) (2022), doi:10.1088/2514-3433/ ac595f,https://dx.doi.org/10.1088/2514-3433/ac595f

    S. Chaty,Accreting Binaries, 2514-3433 (IOP Publishing) (2022), doi:10.1088/2514-3433/ ac595f,https://dx.doi.org/10.1088/2514-3433/ac595f

    2022 doi

  93. [105]

    Ivanova, Common Envelope: On the Mass and the Fate of the Remnant.Astrophys

    N. Ivanova, Common Envelope: On the Mass and the Fate of the Remnant.Astrophys. J. 730(2), 76 (2011), doi:10.1088/0004-637X/730/2/76

    2011 doi

  94. [106]

    B. Wang, X. Meng, X. Chen, Z. Han, The helium star donor channel for the progenitors of Type Ia supernovae.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.395(2), 847–854 (2009), doi:10.1111/j. 1365-2966.2009.14545.x

    2009

  95. [107]

    Guo,et al., Type Ia supernovae in NS+He star systems and the isolated mildly recycled pulsars.Mon

    Y.-L. Guo,et al., Type Ia supernovae in NS+He star systems and the isolated mildly recycled pulsars.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.526(1), 932–941 (2023), doi:10.1093/mnras/stad2578

    2023 doi

  96. [108]

    Podsiadlowski, Common-Envelope Evolution and Stellar Mergers, inEvolution of Binary and Multiple Star Systems, P

    P. Podsiadlowski, Common-Envelope Evolution and Stellar Mergers, inEvolution of Binary and Multiple Star Systems, P. Podsiadlowski, S. Rappaport, A. R. King, F. D’ Antona, L. Bur- deri, Eds., vol. 229 ofAstronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series(2001), p. 239

    2001

  97. [109]

    Passy,et al., Simulating the Common Envelope Phase of a Red Giant Using Smoothed- particle Hydrodynamics and Uniform-grid Codes.Astrophys

    J.-C. Passy,et al., Simulating the Common Envelope Phase of a Red Giant Using Smoothed- particle Hydrodynamics and Uniform-grid Codes.Astrophys. J.744(1), 52 (2012), doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/744/1/52. 23

    2012 doi

  98. [110]

    MacLeod, E

    M. MacLeod, E. Ramirez-Ruiz, On the Accretion-fed Growth of Neutron Stars during Com- mon Envelope.Astrophys. J.798(1), L19 (2015), doi:10.1088/2041-8205/798/1/L19

    2015 doi

  99. [111]

    R. N. Manchester, G. B. Hobbs, A. Teoh, M. Hobbs, The Australia Telescope National Facility Pulsar Catalogue.Astron. J.129(4), 1993–2006 (2005), doi:10.1086/428488. 24 Acknowledgments We thank S. Ransom and two other anonymous referees for their careful reading and thoughtful ...

    2005 doi

  100. [2020]

    S16 Figure S3:Optical and infrared images around PSR J1928+1815

    Following (47) we fitted an ellipse to the data and found the preliminary orbital period 𝑃orb=0.150 days=3.6 hr and the projected semi-major axis𝑥=1.69 lt-s. S16 Figure S3:Optical and infrared images around PSR J1928+1815. (A) a false-color Pan- STARRS1 optical image composite...

Pith tools

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