Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 104 references

X-ray Spectral and Timing Properties of the Black Hole Binary XTE J1859+226 and their Relation to Jets

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read During the 1999-2000 outburst of XTE J1859+226, the disk's inner radius pins near the ISCO in decay, and its rising-phase motion sets the QPO frequency and jet timing.

desk verdict A careful spectral-timing study of XTE J1859+226 that finds a tight fQPO-rin correlation, but the radius scale is model-dependent and the jet-precursor claim outruns the radio data. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.02977 v1 pith:IJT3PF5D submitted 2024-12-04 astro-ph.HE

Kazutaka Yamaoka , Toshihiro Kawaguchi , Michael L. McCollough , Ruben Farinelli , Sergei Trushkin This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords blackholeX-raybinariesXTEJ1859+226low-frequencyquasi-periodicoscillationsinnermoststablecircularorbitaccretiondisktruncationjetlaunchingComptonizationspectralfittingtimingvariability
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper reanalyzes the 1999–2000 outburst of the Galactic black hole binary XTE J1859+226 using RXTE, ASCA, BeppoSAX, and CGRO data, fitting each spectrum with a multi-color disk component convolved with a Comptonization model. The central claim is that the disk's innermost radius stays pinned near 60 km throughout the decaying phase, which the authors take as direct evidence for the innermost stable circular orbit (ISCO). In the rising phase the radius moves outward and inward repeatedly, and the frequency of Type-C quasi-periodic oscillations (QPOs) tracks it as $f_{\rm QPO} \propto r_{\rm in}^{-1.01\pm0.07}$, while Type-A and Type-B QPOs appear only when the radius is already close to the ISCO. The paper further argues that jet ejection events coincide with rapid shrinkage of $r_{\rm in}$ toward the ISCO, so tracking the radius and its time derivative could serve as a precursor for radio flares. If true, these results connect the spectral continuum, X-ray timing, and jet ejections through a single physical quantity: the position of the disk's inner edge.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing element is the innermost disk radius $r_{\rm in}$, obtained by fitting every spectrum with the multi-color disk blackbody (diskbb) convolved with simplcutx, a Comptonization model that up-scatters a fraction of the disk photons into a power-law with an exponential cutoff. The diskbb normalization is converted to a physical radius using the assumed distance (8 kpc) and inclination (66.6 degrees), and splitting the spectrum into direct-disk and Comptonized components lets the authors track $r_{\rm in}$ and $T_{\rm in}$ independently of the power-law flux. Comparing this spectral parameter with independently measured QPO frequencies, rms variability, and radio light curves yields the paper's central correlations: the constant-radius and variable-radius branches in the $r_{\rm in}$–$T_{\rm in}$ plane, the $f_{\rm QPO}$–$r_{\rm in}$ relation, the rms–$r_{\rm in}$ relation, and the coincidence of negative $dr_{\rm in}/dt$ with radio flares.

What would settle it

Fit the same RXTE, ASCA, and BeppoSAX spectra with a fully relativistic disk model and check whether the inferred inner radius stays constant through the decay phase or moves with the flux; a significantly flux-dependent radius would falsify the ISCO interpretation, and finding Type-C QPOs at an epoch where the radius is measured at the ISCO would falsify the truncation requirement.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central discovery is that the innermost disk radius, inferred from spectral fitting, behaves like a switch: during the decaying phase it holds constant at about 60 km (for a distance of 8 kpc and inclination of 66.6 degrees), indicating the disk sits at the ISCO, while during the rising phase it moves between this value and roughly 300 km. Type-C QPOs occur only on the variable-radius branch, with $f_{\rm QPO} \propto r_{\rm in}^{-1.01\pm0.07}$, and cease just before $r_{\rm in}$ reaches the ISCO; Type-A and Type-B QPOs occur on the constant-radius branch near the ISCO. The fractional rms variability tracks the same radius evolution, and five radio flares coincide with episodes where $r_{\rm in}$ rapidly shrinks toward the ISCO. The authors conclude that the inner disk edge is the common control parameter connecting the low-frequency QPOs, the variability amplitude, and jet launching.

Load-bearing premise

The central assumption is that the simple spectral model (disk blackbody plus Comptonized tail) recovers the true inner disk radius without a bias that changes over time, so the constant radius in the decay phase and the radius motion in the rising phase are real; if the model mis-tracks the disk during bright phases, the correlations with QPOs and jets could be artifacts.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A constant inner radius across the decay phase means the continuum spectrum can anchor a black hole mass estimate; the paper derives $M_{\rm BH}\approx 8.6\pm0.1\,M_\odot$, consistent with the optical dynamical mass.
  • The relation $f_{\rm QPO} \propto r_{\rm in}^{-1.01\pm0.07}$ over a radius range of a factor of about five provides a sharper test of Type-C QPO models than earlier single-source measurements, and it disfavors Lense-Thirring precession, which expects a steeper dependence.
  • The empirical rms–$r_{\rm in}$ relation, ${\rm rms}[\%] = 33.0 - 25.3\,(r_{\rm in}/70\,{\rm km})^{-1.01}$, predicts that variability amplitude saturates near 33% as the disk truncates farther out, a constraint for any proposed QPO mechanism.
  • Radio flares coincide with rapid inward motion of $r_{\rm in}$, so a fast decrease of the inner radius (or the associated rms drop) can serve as a trigger for Target-of-Opportunity observations of jet ejections.
  • Because the disk flux rises and the hardness ratio softens during these shrinkages while the Comptonized flux stays roughly constant, the jet material is argued to come from the inner disk rather than from the corona or hot flow.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper: if the $f_{\rm QPO}$–$r_{\rm in}$ calibration holds for other sources, a measured Type-C QPO frequency could be converted into a live estimate of the truncation radius without any spectral fitting, enabling quick state diagnostics.
  • Beyond the paper: the claim that Type-C QPOs stop at the ISCO predicts that a black hole whose disk is already at the ISCO in the hard state (a lamp-post geometry) should not show Type-C QPOs; this is testable with existing hard-state observations.
  • Beyond the paper: the precursor scenario could be tested by dense simultaneous X-ray and radio monitoring of a bright outburst, searching for a negative $dr_{\rm in}/dt$ signature a reproducible time before each radio peak.
  • Beyond the paper: the paper's low-spin conclusion from the slimbh model could be cross-checked against reflection-based spin measurements; a large disagreement would point to systematic bias in one of the continuum fitting methods.
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

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper compiles RXTE, ASCA, BeppoSAX, and CGRO/OSSE observations of the black hole X-ray binary XTE J1859+226 during its 1999–2000 outburst and performs systematic spectral fitting with a model consisting of a multi-temperature disk blackbody convolved with a Comptonization component (simplcutx, with thcomp as a cross-check). The central claims are: (i) during the decay phase the apparent inner disk radius rin remains constant at about 60 km, interpreted as evidence for the ISCO; (ii) during the rising phase rin is variable, and Type-C QPOs appear only when rin is larger than the ISCO value, with fQPO ∝ rin^{-1.01±0.07}; (iii) the disk parameters correlate with independently measured timing properties (QPO frequency and rms variability); and (iv) radio flares are associated with rapid shrinkage of rin toward the ISCO, suggesting that drin/dt can serve as a jet precursor. The paper also uses the constant rin to estimate the black hole mass and applies slimbh to two BeppoSAX epochs to constrain a low spin parameter.

Significance. If the central results hold, the paper provides a valuable, well-documented case of a factor-of-five variation in the apparent inner disk radius during the rising phase, with a tight fQPO–rin relation that can discriminate among Type-C QPO models. The constant-rin branch in the decay phase and the consistency of the derived black hole mass with the optical dynamical mass are also strong points. The multi-instrument cross-checks, the alternative Comptonization model (model B), and the simultaneous ASCA/RXTE and BeppoSAX fits are genuine strengths that increase confidence in the qualitative behavior of the spectral parameters. The proposed jet-precursor indicator, if confirmed, would be practically useful for target-of-opportunity programs. However, the quantitative radius scale and its time variation depend on the diskbb color-correction assumption, so the strength of the conclusions is presently conditioned on an additional systematic check.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3.2–3.3, Eq. (1)] The central fQPO–rin relation and the 'Type-C only when rin > ISCO' threshold rest on the diskbb normalization Ndbb = rin^2 cos i / D10^2, with no spectral-hardening or inner-boundary correction in the time-varying branch; the f=1.7, eta=0.412 correction is introduced only in §4.2 for the black-hole mass estimate. Standard disk-atmosphere models predict the color-correction factor f_col to increase from about 1.7 toward 2.5 or more as the disk approaches and exceeds roughly 0.3 L_Edd, and the source reaches about 0.6 L_Edd in the rising phase. Because the apparent radius scales roughly as f_col^{-2}, an increase of f_col from 1.7 to 2.5 alone would shrink the apparent rin by a factor of about 2, which is a substantial fraction of the factor-of-5 variation from which fQPO ∝ rin^{-1.01±0.07} is derived. The model-B (thcomp) and BeppoSAX checks use the same diskbb normalization and therefore do not remove this ambiguity; slimbh is applied only to TOO4 and TOO5 in the decay phase (§4.2). I request a quantitative assessment of this effect, for example by re-fitting the light curve with a model that lets f_col vary with Tin or Eddington ratio and showing whether the rin evolution and the fQPO–rin slope survive.
  2. [§3.4, Table 3] The jet-precursor claim is built on a radio light curve described by one linear plus five FRED components in which the peak times of the second, third, and fourth flares are fixed to the values in Brocksopp et al. (2002) and a common rise rate and decay timescale are imposed for all components. The radio sampling is sparse for these flares, and the association between negative drin/dt and radio peaks is presented visually ('there is a hint') rather than with a quantitative significance. Because this association is one of the main new claims, the authors should provide a statistical measure of the coincidence (for example, a Monte Carlo test against randomized flare times) and show that the conclusion is not driven by the fixed peak times and the two-point derivative definition.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Figure 3 caption] The caption states 'September 26 (MJD 51474)', but MJD 51474 corresponds to 1999 October 23; please correct the date.
  2. [Eq. (1) and §3.1] The symbol f is used both for the spectral hardening factor in Eq. (1) and, earlier, as part of the Compton fraction notation fsc; please disambiguate the notation.
  3. [§4.3] The text says 'we showed a clear correction between rms and rin'; this should read 'correlation'.
  4. [References and spelling] There are inconsistent spellings, for example 'Zdziarskl' in §3.2 versus 'Zdziarski' in the reference list, 'Russel et al.' versus 'Russell et al.', and 'Schwartzchild' instead of 'Schwarzschild' in §4.2; please standardize.
  5. [Figure 13] The caption says 'Dotted lines indicate the components of fitting', but the text and figure description also refer to dotted vertical lines for peak times; please clarify which lines correspond to which elements.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the fQPO–rin, rms–rin, and jet-precursor claims rest on independent spectral/timing/radio data; only a minor diskbb flux–temperature identity is restated as a 'confirmation'.

  1. self definitional [Section 3.3, discussion of Figure 8 (total disk bolometric flux vs. Tin)]
    "We confirmed that the disk flux is proportional to T 4 in, except for the epochs showing Type-C QPOs, as already suggested by observations (Kubota et al. 2001; Kubota & Makishima 2004a; Gierli´nski & Done 2004) and as expected from theoretically for the standard accretion disk with a fixedrin."

    In the diskbb model used throughout, the bolometric disk flux is F = C (r_in^2 cos i / D^2) T_in^4 = C Ndbb T_in^4, with Ndbb = r_in^2 cos i / D^2 (Section 3.1). Therefore, whenever rin is constant, F ∝ T_in^4 holds identically by the model's algebraic definition, not as an independently fitted or empirical confirmation. The statement is thus a restatement of the model identity rather than a derived result; it is a minor consistency note and not load-bearing for the main QPO or jet conclusions.

full rationale

The paper's central correlations are not circular. Innermost radii come from spectral fitting of the diskbb normalization (Section 3.1), while QPO frequencies and rms come from independent timing analysis of the same PCA light curves; the paper explicitly notes that the spectral and timing analyses are independent. The fQPO–rin relation (Section 3.3, fQPO ∝ rin^{−1.01±0.07}) is a fit to these two independent quantities, not a prediction of one from the other. The 'constant rin = ISCO' interpretation is an external physical attribution, and the mass/spin checks in Section 4.2 are compared with the optically measured mass and with external models (slimbh, LMC X-3 comparison). The jet-precursor suggestion (Section 4.3) is an explicitly tentative post hoc correlation with independent radio data, hedged by 'Albeit small number statistics' and 'seems to be associated.' The paper also flags its own model dependence ('this estimation strongly depends on assumption of D=8 kpc and i=66.6', Section 4.2). The one self-citation (Yamaoka et al. 2012) is merely supporting prior evidence and is not load-bearing. The sole self-definitional element is the F ∝ T_in^4 confirmation, which is a built-in diskbb identity; it does not affect the QPO, ISCO, or jet claims, so the overall circularity score is low.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 9 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims (constant rin interpreted as ISCO, correlation between rin and QPOs, and the jet precursor suggestion) rest on standard spectral model assumptions (diskbb, simpl/comptonization), on external measurements of distance, inclination, and BH mass, and on a simplified empirical model for radio flares. The fQPO-rin relation itself is an empirical fit that does not require additional physical constants.

free parameters (5)
  • Spin parameter a_* (slimbh fit) = 0.165 ± 0.007 for f=1.6; <0.002 for f=1.7
    Fitted to BeppoSAX TOO4/TOO5 spectra in Table 4; used for the low-spin claim. The value depends on assumed distance, mass, and hardening.
  • Distance D (slimbh Case-II) = 7.19-8.26 kpc for different f
    Fitted in Case-II with M and a_* fixed; used to argue D=8 kpc is consistent.
  • FRED rising rate = 393.2 ± 24.5 mJy/day
    Common rising rate for radio flare model, used to time jet ejections.
  • FRED decay timescale = 0.412 ± 0.010 day
    Common decay timescale for radio flares, used to time jet ejections.
  • Power-law index of fQPO-rin = -1.01 ± 0.07
    Empirical fit relating Type-C QPO frequency to rin; a measured slope, not an ad hoc constant, but fitted to data.
assumptions (9)
  • domain assumption Distance to XTE J1859+226 is D=8±3 kpc (Hynes 2005)
    Used to convert diskbb normalization to rin in km throughout; different distances (4.2-14 kpc) from the literature would change absolute rin values.
  • domain assumption Inclination i=66.6±4.3 deg (Yanes-Rizo et al. 2022)
    Used in the rin conversion (cos i factor); affects the absolute radius and the spectral hardness.
  • domain assumption BH mass M=7.8±1.9 Msun (Yanes-Rizo et al. 2022)
    Used for Eddington luminosity and spin/ISCO estimates.
  • domain assumption diskbb model with zero-torque inner boundary and local multicolor blackbody emission describes the disk continuum
    The spectral model's normalization is interpreted as the physical inner radius; any deviation (hardening, non-blackbody, torque) affects rin.
  • domain assumption smedge reflection-like smeared edge approximates soft excess/reflection above 7 keV
    Used to fit the continuum; a simplified treatment of reflection.
  • standard math The ISCO radius is given by general relativity as 6GM/c^2 for a Schwarzschild BH or the appropriate Kerr value
    Used to interpret constant rin and compute spin.
  • standard math Eddington luminosity L_Edd = 1.25e38 (M/Msun) erg/s
    Used for luminosity ratios.
  • ad hoc to paper The radio flares are described by a FRED shape with a common rise and decay timescale
    Assumed for timing the jet ejections; sparse radio data require this parameterization.
  • domain assumption Spectral hardening factor f≈1.7 and inner boundary condition factor η=0.412 (from Kubota et al. 1998)
    Used to correct rin for color temperature and torque in the BH mass estimate.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of X-ray Spectral and Timing Properties of the Black Hole Binary XTE J1859+226 and their Relation to Jets." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IJT3PF5D

@misc{pith2026241202977,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: X-ray Spectral and Timing Properties of the Black Hole Binary XTE J1859+226 and their Relation to Jets},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IJT3PF5D}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.02977}
}
abstract

We compiled the X-ray and soft gamma-ray observations of the Galactic black hole binary XTE J1859+226 in the 1999--2000 outburst from RXTE, ASCA, BeppoSAX and CGRO. Throughout systematic spectral analysis using a two-component model consisting of a multi-temperature accretion disk plus a fraction of its flux convolved with an empirical Comptonized powerlaw component, we found that the innermost radius ($r_{\rm in}$) and temperature (Tin) of the disk are very variable with time in the rising phase of soft X-ray flux where Type-A/B/C low-frequency quasi-periodic oscillations (QPOs) were found. After this phase, $r_{\rm in}$ remains constant at around 60 km assuming a distance of 8 kpc and an inclination angle of 67$^{\circ}$, and Tin smoothly decays with time. The constant $r_{\rm in}$ suggests a presence of the innermost stable circular orbit (ISCO), with $r_{\rm in}$ repeatedly moving closer and farther away from the ISCO in the rising phase. Both disk parameters are remarkably correlated with independently analyzed timing properties such as QPO frequency and rms variability. Type-A/B QPOs are seen only when $r_{\rm in}$ is close to the ISCO, while Type-C are seen when $r_{\rm in}$ is truncated and the frequency changes with a relation of $r^{-1.0}_{\rm in}$, supporting that Type-C QPOs occur at the inner edge of the truncated disk. Accurate determinations of the frequency--$r_{\rm in}$ relation for various objects should be a powerful tool to discriminate plausible Type-C QPO models. Furthermore, we suggest that jet ejection events may occur when $r_{\rm in}$ rapidly approaches to the ISCO, along with rapid changes of the disk flux, the rms variability and the hardness ratio. A rapid shrinkage of $r_{\rm in}$ down to the ISCO can be a useful index as a precursor of radio flares for triggering Target-of-Opportunity observations and would provide constraints on jet launching mechanisms.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.02977 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. X-ray and soft gamma-ray light curves of XTE J1859+226 in the 1999-2000 outburst taken from several instruments: RXTE/ASM 1.5–12 keV, RXTE/PCA 2–7 keV and 7–20 keV, RXTE/HEXTE 20–100 keV, CGRO/BATSE 20–100 keV, CGRO/OSSE 50–500 keV, and PCA hardness ratio between 2–7 and 7–20 keV from top to bottom. Six arrows in the bottom panel indicate radio flare peaks shown in §3.4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. RXTE/PCA hardness-intensity diagram of XTE J1859+226 in the 1999-2000 outburst. The left figure is produced by the RXTE/PCA count rate, and the right is based on the spectral fitting results for several satellite data (RXTE shown by filled and open circles with the same meaning as figures shown in §3, ASCA+RXTE by open triangles, and BeppoSAX by open stars: see §3.1 for definitions of hardness ratio and Comptonized/… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. ASCA/GIS, RXTE/PCA, and HEXTE light curves of XTE J1859+226 on September 26 (MJD 51474). 0.7–10 keV from ASCA/GIS(GIS2+3), 2–20 keV from RXTE/PCA(PCU2), 20–100 keV from RXTE/HEXTE(Cluster A), and the GIS hardness ratio between 0.7–2 keV and 2–10 keV, and PCA hardness ratio between 2–7 keV and 7–20 keV from top to lower. Dashed lines indicate two epochs we performed spectral analysis simultaneously with ASCA and RXTE… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (13 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Spectral fitting of simultaneous ASCA and RXTE data during Epoch-I and II, and BeppoSAX data during TOO1 to TOO6. Each upper panel shows the νFν spectra with the best-fit model A. The normalization factor among instruments is corrected. Models of direct-disk and Compto…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Time evolution of spectral parameters. Top panel: Innermost temperature (Tin) and innermost radius (rin) in diskbb, photon index (Γ) and Compton scattering fraction (fsc), and e-folding energy (Ef ) in simplcutx, total flux, disk direct flux and Comptonized flux, and s…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Model fitting of the CGRO/OSSE 50–500 keV spectrum taken on MJD 51466–51477 (see figure 1). Upper panel: νFν spectrum together with the best-fit cut-off power-law (CPL) model shown by solid line. Two lower panels: residuals from the best-fit power-law (PL) and CPL [PI…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Example of power spectral densities (PSDs) where Type-A (upper left), B (upper right), C (lower left), and unknown (lower right) QPOs ap￾peared. The data are taken from RXTE/PCA observations with ObsIDs: 40124-01-12-00, 40122-01-01-03, 40124-01-11-00, and 40124-01-39-0…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Upper left panel: Relation between innermost radius (rin) and temperature (Tin). Two arrows show the time evolution; the right arrow for the rapid rising phase just before the peak flux, and the left arrow for the gradual decaying phase after the peak flux. Dashed curv…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Relation between Comptonized flux and direct disk flux, together with the dashed line where Comptonized flux equals to direct disk flux (upper panel). Relation of direct disk flux (lower left) and Comptonized flux (lower right) as a function of photon index (Γ). The me…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Top panel: Relation between innermost radius (rin) and photon index (Γ). Arrows indicate time evolution. Middle panel: Relation between QPO frequency (fQPO) and Γ. Bottom panel: Relation between Compton fraction fsc in the simplcutx model and fQPO. The same symbols as…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Time evolution of spectral and timing properties. Innermost temperature (Tin), innermost radius (rin), QPO frequency (fQPO), and fractional rms variability in 0.03–64 Hz are shown from top to bottom. Right panel: Zoom-up of Days 2–32 (indicated by dashed lines in left…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Top left panel: Relation between rms and QPO frequency (fQPO), which is the same as figure 3 in Casella et al. (2004). Top right panel: Relation between rms and spectral hardness ratio (SHR) of the Comptonized flux relative to the direct disk flux. Lower-left panel: R…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Time variation of radio flux densities with spectral and timing properties. The innermost radius (rin), time derivative of rin, rms variability, total flux, time derivatives of direct disk flux and Comptonized flux, hardness ratio of Comptonized flux relative to direc…
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Illustration for a possible configuration (see text in section 4.1 for details). A geometrically-thin (with a small aspect ratio) disk is surround￾ing the inner hot accretion flow (ADAF) in the Type-C QPO phase. In the Type-B phase, the corona above the disk is suppos…
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Comparison of Tin and the total disk luminosity relative to the Eddignton luminosity between XTE J1859+226 [for two assumed dis￾tances: 8 kpc (shown by open circles) and 7.2 kpc (by open triangles)] and LMC X-3 (by red filled circles). For the latter, Tin is corrected…
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Relation between time derivatives of rin(left) and fluxes (right) with radio fluence estimated from the fitting. Direct disk flux and Comptonized flux are indicated by filled and open circles, respectively. National Science Foundation operated by the NRAO in support o…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

104 extracted references · 66 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A., 1996, ASP Conf

    Arnaud, K. A., 1996, ASP Conf. Ser., 101, 17

    1996

  2. [2]

    Begelman, M. C. 1978, MNRAS, 184, 53

    1978

  3. [3]

    M., Sanna, A., & Méndez, M

    Belloni, T. M., Sanna, A., & Méndez, M. 2012, MNRAS, 426, 1701

    2012

  4. [4]

    C., Perora, G

    Boella, G., Butler, R. C., Perora, G. C., Piro, L., Scarsi, L., & Bleeker, J. 1997, A&AS, 122, 297

    1997

  5. [5]

    A., Fragile, P

    Bollimpalli, D. A., Fragile, P. C., Dewberry, J. W., & Klu´ zniak, W. 2024, MNRAS, 528, 1142

    2024

  6. [6]

    1999, ApJ, 517, 367

    Borozdin, K., Revnivtsev, M., Trudolyubov, S., Shrader, C., & Titarchuk, L. 1999, ApJ, 517, 367

    1999

  7. [7]

    V ., Rothschild, R

    Bradt, H. V ., Rothschild, R. E. & Swank, J. H. 1993, A&AS, 97, 355 Brenneman L. W., Reynolds C. S. 2006, ApJ, 652, 1028

    1993

  8. [8]

    2002, MNRAS, 331, 765

    Brocksopp, C., et al. 2002, MNRAS, 331, 765

    2002

Show all 104 references
  1. [9]

    E., Mountain, R

    Burke, B. E., Mountain, R. W., Daniels, P. J., Cooper, M. J., & Dolat, V . S. 1994, IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., 41, 375

    1994

  2. [10]

    2004, A&A, 426, 587

    Casella, P., Belloni, T., Homan, J., & Stella, L. 2004, A&A, 426, 587

    2004

  3. [11]

    2005, ApJ, 629, 403

    Casella, P., Belloni, T., & Stella, L. 2005, ApJ, 629, 403

    2005

  4. [12]

    M., Wijnands, R., & Kaaret, P

    Miller, J. M., Wijnands, R., & Kaaret, P. 2003, New Astron. Rev., 47, 477

    2003

  5. [13]

    Orosz, J. A. 2005, ApJ, 632, 504

    2005

  6. [14]

    M., Casares, J., Shahbaz, T., Zurita, C., Martínez-Pais, I

    Corral-Santana, J. M., Casares, J., Shahbaz, T., Zurita, C., Martínez-Pais, I. G., & Rodríguez-Gil, P. 2011, MNRAS, 413, L15

    2011

  7. [15]

    G., & Russell, D

    Pais, I. G., & Russell, D. M. 2016, A&A, 587, A61

    2016

  8. [16]

    Coppi, P. S. 1999, ASP Conf. Ser., 161, 375

    1999

  9. [17]

    R., Haswell, C

    Cui, W., Shrader, C. R., Haswell, C. A., & Hynes, R. I. 2000, ApJL, 535, L123 dal Fiume, D., et al. 1999, IAU Circ., 7291, #2

    2000

  10. [18]

    Dunn, R. J. H., Fender, R. P., Körding, E. G., Belloni, T., & Cabanac, C. 2010, MNRAS, 403, 61

    2010

  11. [19]

    P., Schmidtke, P

    Ebisawa, K., Makino, F., Mitsuda, K., Belloni, T., Cowley, A. P., Schmidtke, P. C., & Trevis, A. 1993, ApJ, 463, 684

    1993

  12. [20]

    1994, PASJ, 46, 375

    Ebisawa, K., et al. 1994, PASJ, 46, 375

    1994

  13. [21]

    A., McClintock, J

    Esin, A. A., McClintock, J. F., & Narayan, R. 1997

    1997

  14. [22]

    2013, MNRAS, 428, 3295

    Farinelli, R., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 428, 3295

    2013

  15. [23]

    P., Belloni, T

    Fender, R. P., Belloni, T. M., & Gallo, E. 2004, MNRAS, 355, 1105

    2004

  16. [24]

    P., Homan, J., & Belloni, T

    Fender, R. P., Homan, J., & Belloni, T. 2009, MNRAS, 396, 1370 Filippenko A. V ., & Chornock R. 2001, IAU Circular, 7644, 2

    2009

  17. [25]

    C., Straub, O., & Blaes, O

    Fragile, P. C., Straub, O., & Blaes, O. 2016, MNRAS, 461, 1356

    2016

  18. [26]

    Q., et al

    Gao, H. Q., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 466, 564 Gierli´nski, M., Zdziarski, A., Done, C., Johnson, W. N., Ebisawa, K., Ueda, Y ., Haardt, F., & Phlips, B. F. 1997, MNRAS, 288, 958 Gierli´nski, M., & Done, C. 2004, MNRAS, 347, 885

    2017

  19. [27]

    & Maraschi, L

    Haardt, F. & Maraschi, L. 1991, ApJL, 380, L51

    1991

  20. [28]

    2005, Ap&SS, 300, 107

    Homan, J., & Belloni, T. 2005, Ap&SS, 300, 107

    2005

  21. [29]

    2020, ApJL, 891, L29

    Homan, J., et al. 2020, ApJL, 891, L29

    2020

  22. [30]

    I., Haswell, C

    Hynes, R. I., Haswell, C. A., Chaty, S., Shrador, R., & Cui, W. 2002, MNRAS, 331, 169

    2002

  23. [31]

    Hynes, R. I. 2005, ApJ, 623, 1026

    2005

  24. [32]

    Ichimaru, S., 1977, ApJ, 214, 840

    1977

  25. [33]

    Ingram, A., Done, C., & Fragile, P. C. 2009, MNRAS, 397, L101

    2009

  26. [34]

    R., & Motta, S

    Ingram, A. R., & Motta, S. E. 2019, New Astron. Rev., 85, 101524

    2019

  27. [35]

    B., Radeva, Y ., Rotz, A

    Jahoda, K., Markwardt, C. B., Radeva, Y ., Rotz, A. H., Stark, M. J., Swank, J. H., Strohmayer, T. E., & Zhang, W. 2006, ApJS, 163, 401

    2006

  28. [36]

    N., et al

    Johnson, W. N., et al. 1993, ApJS, 86, 693

    1993

  29. [37]

    2019, Nature, 565, 198

    Kara, E., et al. 2019, Nature, 565, 198

    2019

  30. [38]

    & Manmoto, T

    Kato, S. & Manmoto, T. 2000, ApJ, 541, 889

    2000

  31. [39]

    2008, Black-Hole Accretion Disks: Towards a New Paragram (Kyoto: Kyoto University Press)

    Kato, S., Fukue, J., & Mineshige, S. 2008, Black-Hole Accretion Disks: Towards a New Paragram (Kyoto: Kyoto University Press)

    2008

  32. [40]

    2001, ApJ, 546, 966

    Kawaguchi, T., Shimura, T., & Mineshige, S. 2001, ApJ, 546, 966

    2001

  33. [41]

    2003, ApJ, 593, 69

    Kawaguchi, T. 2003, ApJ, 593, 69

    2003

  34. [42]

    2004, A&A, 415, 47

    Kawaguchi, T., Pierens, A., & Huré, J.-M. 2004, A&A, 415, 47

    2004

  35. [43]

    1998, PASJ, 50, 667

    Yamaoka, K. 1998, PASJ, 50, 667

    1998

  36. [44]

    2001, ApJL, 560, L147

    Kubota, A., Makishima, K., & Ebisawa, K. 2001, ApJL, 560, L147

    2001

  37. [45]

    2004, ApJ, 601, 428

    Kubota, A., & Makishima, K. 2004, ApJ, 601, 428

    2004

  38. [46]

    2004, MNRAS, 353, 980

    Kubota, A., & Done, C. 2004, MNRAS, 353, 980

    2004

  39. [47]

    1918, Phys

    Lense, J., & Thirring, H. 1918, Phys. Z., 19, 156 Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan (2024), Vol. 00, No. 0 21

    2024

  40. [48]

    G., Morgan, E

    Levine, A., Bradt, H., Cui, W., Jernigan, K. G., Morgan, E. H., Remillard, R., Shirey, R. E., & Smith, D. A. 1996, ApJ, 469, L33

    1996

  41. [49]

    F., Mineshige, S., Meyer, F., Meyer-Hofmeister, E., & Kawaguchi, T

    Liu, B. F., Mineshige, S., Meyer, F., Meyer-Hofmeister, E., & Kawaguchi, T. 2002, ApJ, 575, 117

    2002

  42. [50]

    et al., 1986, PASJ, 36, 741

    Makishima, K. et al., 1986, PASJ, 36, 741

    1986

  43. [51]

    F., & García, J

    Mall, G., Liu, H., Bambi, C., Steiner, J. F., & García, J. A. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 12053

    2024

  44. [52]

    B., Marshall, F

    Markwardt, C. B., Marshall, F. E., & Swank, J. H. 1999, IAU Circ., No. 7274, #2

    1999

  45. [53]

    E., & Remillard, R

    McClintock, J. E., & Remillard, R. E. 2006, in Lewin, W. & van der Klis, M., eds. Compact Stellar X-ray Sources, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, ch. 4

    2006

  46. [54]

    L., & Wilson, C

    McCollough, M. L., & Wilson, C. A., 1999, IAU Circ., No. 7282, #3

    1999

  47. [55]

    & Meyer-Hofmeister, E

    Meyer, F. & Meyer-Hofmeister, E. 1994, A&A, 288, 175

    1994

  48. [56]

    Miller-Jones, J. C. A., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 421, 468

    2012

  49. [57]

    Miniutti, G., & Fabian, A. C. 2004, MNRAS, 349, 1435

    2004

  50. [58]

    S., & Jain, P

    Misra, R., Rawat, D., Yadav, J. S., & Jain, P. 2020, ApJL, 889, L36

    2020

  51. [59]

    1984, PASJ, 36, 741

    Mitsuda, K., et al. 1984, PASJ, 36, 741

    1984

  52. [60]

    2012, MNRAS, 427, 595 Motta S

    Hiemstra, B., & Méndez, M. 2012, MNRAS, 427, 595 Motta S. E., Belloni T. M., Stella L., Muñoz-Darias T., & Fender R. 2014, MNRAS, 437, 2554

    2012

  53. [61]

    E., Casella, P., Henze, M., Muñoz-Darias, T., Anna, A., Fender, R., & Belloni, T

    Motta, S. E., Casella, P., Henze, M., Muñoz-Darias, T., Anna, A., Fender, R., & Belloni, T. 2015, MNRAS, 447, 2059

    2015

  54. [62]

    E., Belloni, T., Stella, L., Pappas, G., Casares, J., Muñoz-Darias, A

    Motta, S. E., Belloni, T., Stella, L., Pappas, G., Casares, J., Muñoz-Darias, A. T., Torres, M. A. P., & Yanes-Rizo, I. V . 2022, MNRAS, 517, 1469

    2022

  55. [63]

    2018, Astro

    Nandi, A., et al. 2018, Astro. Space Sci., 363, 90

    2018

  56. [64]

    1996, PASJ, 48, 157

    Ohashi, T., et al. 1996, PASJ, 48, 157

    1996

  57. [65]

    Steeghs, D., Guberman, A., & Torres, M. A. P. 2014, ApJ, 794, 154

    2014

  58. [66]

    2017, Astro

    Pei, S., Ding, G., Li, Z., Lei, Y ., Yuen, R., & Qu, J. 2017, Astro. Space Sci., 362, 118 Pietrzy´nski, G., et al. 2019, Nature, 567, 201

    2017

  59. [67]

    2009, API Conference Proceedings, 1126, 177

    Prat, L., & Rodriguez, J. 2009, API Conference Proceedings, 1126, 177

    2009

  60. [68]

    A., Sobczak, G

    Remillard, R. A., Sobczak, G. J., Muno, M. P., & McClintock, J. E. 2002, ApJ, 564, 962

    2002

  61. [69]

    Remillard, R. E. & McClintock, J. E. 2006, ARA&A, 44, 49 Reynolds C. S. 2014, Space Sci. Rev., 183, 277

    2006

  62. [70]

    2008, 675, 1449

    Rodriguez, J., et al. 2008, 675, 1449

    2008

  63. [71]

    2011, ApJ, 735, 79

    Rodriguez, J., & Varniere, P. 2011, ApJ, 735, 79

    2011

  64. [72]

    E., et al

    Rothschild, R. E., et al. 1998, ApJ, 496, 538

    1998

  65. [73]

    D., et al

    Russel, T. D., et al. 2019, ApJ, 883, 198

    2019

  66. [74]

    Sadowski, A., 2011, PhD thesis, arXiv:1108.0396

    2011 arXiv

  67. [75]

    J., et al

    Serlemitsos, P. J., et al. 1995, PASJ, 47, 105

    1995

  68. [76]

    2010, MNRAS, 406, 2627

    Shadmehri, M., & Rammos, P. 2010, MNRAS, 406, 2627

    2010

  69. [77]

    I., & Sunyaev, R

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

    1973

  70. [78]

    2009, ApJ, 699, 453

    Shaposhnikov, N., & Titarchuk, L. 2009, ApJ, 699, 453

    2009

  71. [79]

    1995, ApJ, 445, 780

    Shimura, T., & Takahara, F. 1995, ApJ, 445, 780

    1995

  72. [80]

    Sobolewska, M. A. & ˙Zycki, P. T. 2006, MNRAS, 370, 405

    2006

  73. [81]

    2008, MNRAS, 383, 1089

    Soleri, P., Belloni, T., & Casella, P. 2008, MNRAS, 383, 1089

    2008

  74. [82]

    R., & Choi, C

    Sriram, K., Rao, A. R., & Choi, C. S. 2013, ApJ, 775, 28

    2013

  75. [83]

    2010, ApJL, 718, L117

    Narayan, R. 2010, ApJL, 718, L117

    2010

  76. [84]

    2014, ApJL, 793, L29 Stella L., & Vietri M

    Kolehmainen, M., Straub, O. 2014, ApJL, 793, L29 Stella L., & Vietri M. 1998, ApJL, 492, L59

    2014

  77. [85]

    M., Kalemci, E., & Motta, E

    Stiele, H., Belloni, T. M., Kalemci, E., & Motta, E. 2013, MNRAS, 429, 2655

    2013

  78. [86]

    2011, A&A, 533, 67

    Straub, O., et al. 2011, A&A, 533, 67

    2011

  79. [87]

    1999, A&A, 349, 1003

    Tagger, M., & Pellat, H. 1999, A&A, 349, 1003

    1999

  80. [88]

    Tanaka, Y ., Inoue, H., & Holt, S. S. 1994, PASJ, 46, L37

    1994

  81. [89]

    E., Sivakoff, G

    Tetarenko, B. E., Sivakoff, G. R., Heinke, C. O., & Gladstone, J. C. 2016, ApJS, 222, article id 15

    2016

  82. [90]

    Toor, A., & Seward, F. D. 1974, AJ, 79, 995

    1974

  83. [91]

    2013, ApJ, 778, 165

    Veledina, A., Poutanen, J., & Ingram, A. 2013, ApJ, 778, 165

    2013

  84. [92]

    A., Ferland, G

    Verner, D. A., Ferland, G. J., Korista, K. T., & Yakovlev, D. G. 1996, ApJ, 465, 487

    1996

  85. [93]

    2022, ApJ, 930, 18

    Wang, J., et al. 2022, ApJ, 930, 18

    2022

  86. [94]

    L., Beardmore, A

    Willingale, R., Starling, L. L., Beardmore, A. P., Tanvir, N. R., & O’Brien, P. T. 2013, MNRAS, 431, 394

    2013

  87. [95]

    2000, ApJ, 542, 914

    Wilms, J., Allen, A., & McCray, R. 2000, ApJ, 542, 914

    2000

  88. [96]

    A., Marshall, F

    Woods, A., Smith, D. A., Marshall, F. E., & Swank, J. 1999, IAU Circ., 7274

    1999

  89. [97]

    2001, PASJ, 53, 179

    Yamaoka, K., et al. 2001, PASJ, 53, 179

    2001

  90. [98]

    2012, PASJ, 61, 230

    Yamaoka, K., et al. 2012, PASJ, 61, 230

    2012

  91. [99]

    V ., et al

    Yanes-Rizo, I. V ., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 517, 1476

    2022

  92. [100]

    A., Johnson, W

    Zdziarski, A. A., Johnson, W. N., & Magdziarz, P. 1996, MNRAS, 283, 193

    1996

  93. [101]

    A., Szanecki, M., Poutanen, J., Gierli ´nski, M., & Biernacki, P

    Zdziarski, A. A., Szanecki, M., Poutanen, J., Gierli ´nski, M., & Biernacki, P. 2020, MNRAS, 492, 5234

    2020

  94. [102]

    N., Cui, W., & Chen, W

    Zhang, S. N., Cui, W., & Chen, W. 1997, ApJL, 482, L155

    1997

  95. [103]

    2024, ApJ, 971, 148

    Zhang, Z., et al. 2024, ApJ, 971, 148

    2024

  96. [104]

    2002, MNRAS, 334, 999

    Zurita, C., et al. 2002, MNRAS, 334, 999

    2002

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.