Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 76 references

A blind millimeter survey of the Galactic Plane finds two day-long flares from accreting white dwarf binaries.

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

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-04 19:54 UTC pith:DLLK5KJ6

load-bearing objection First blind mm-wave time-domain survey of the Galactic Plane reports two dual-band flares plausibly from accreting white dwarfs; detections look solid, interpretation is speculative but honest, with minor inconsistencies to clean up. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2509.08962 v1 pith:DLLK5KJ6 submitted 2025-09-10 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.GA

Detection of Millimeter-Wavelength Flares from Two Accreting White Dwarf Systems in the SPT-3G Galactic Plane Survey

Y. Wan , J. D. Vieira , P. M. Chichura , T. J. Maccarone , A. J. Anderson , B. Ansarinejad , A. Anumarlapudi , M. Archipley
show 91 more authors
L. Balkenhol P. S. Barry K. Benabed A. N. Bender B. A. Benson F. Bianchini L. E. Bleem F. R. Bouchet L. Bryant E. Camphuis M. G. Campitiello J. E. Carlstrom C. L. Chang P. Chaubal A. Chokshi T.-L. Chou A. Coerver T. M. Crawford C. Daley T. de Haan K. R. Dibert M. A. Dobbs M. Doohan A. Doussot D. Dutcher W. Everett C. Feng K. R. Ferguson K. Fichman A. Foster S. Galli A. E. Gambrel R. W. Gardner F. Ge N. Goeckner-Wald R. Gualtieri F. Guidi S. Guns N. W. Halverson E. Hivon G. P. Holder W. L. Holzapfel J. C. Hood A. Hryciuk N. Huang D. L. Kaplan F. Keruzore A. R. Khalife L. Knox M. Korman K. Kornoelje C.-L. Kuo K. Levy A. E. Lowitz C. Lu G. P. Lynch A. Maniyar E. S. Martsen F. Menanteau M. Millea J. Montgomery Y. Nakato T. Natoli G. I. Noble Y. Omori A. Ouellette Z. Pan P. Paschos K. A. Phadke A. W. Pollak K. Prabhu W. Quan M. Rahimi A. Rahlin C. L. Reichardt M. Rouble J. E. Ruhl E. Schiappucci A. Simpson J. A. Sobrin A. A. Stark J. Stephen C. Tandoi B. Thorne C. Trendafilova C. Umilta A. Vitrier N. Whitehorn W. L. K. Wu M. R. Young J. A. Zebrowski
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.SR astro-ph.GA
keywords millimeter-wave transientsGalactic Plane surveyaccreting white dwarfscataclysmic variablessymbiotic starsSPT-3Gtime-domain astronomymagnetic reconnection
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper reports the first transient search in a dedicated wide-field millimeter survey of the Galactic Plane, using roughly 1,500 observations from the South Pole Telescope. It detects two events that appear at more than 5 times the local noise in both the 95 and 150 GHz bands, each lasting about a day, unpolarized, and peaking at tens of millijanskys. Both events are positionally coincident with previously identified accreting white dwarf binary systems, one a cataclysmic variable and one a symbiotic star. The paper argues these are millimeter flares from the accretion flow, likely self-absorbed synchrotron emission powered by magnetic reconnection in the accretion disk. A sympathetic reader would care because these are among the first blind millimeter detections of flaring from accreting white dwarfs, and they show that time-domain surveys of the crowded Galactic Plane can reveal a new class of transient.

Core claim

The central discovery is the detection of two transient events, SPT-SV J174417.2-293942 and SPT-SV J173508.3-292956, with durations of about one day, peak 150 GHz flux densities of at least 50 mJy, isotropic luminosities around 10^31 erg/s, and no detected linear polarization. Both events are found in difference maps constructed by subtracting a yearly average map from each 20-minute observation, and both exceed a 5-sigma threshold in the 95 and 150 GHz bands simultaneously. The events are positionally associated with X-ray sources in a Galactic bulge survey, with angular separations of about 1-2 arcseconds, well within the SPT pointing uncertainty of about 6 arcseconds. Those X-ray sources

What carries the argument

The mechanism that carries the argument is a difference-image transient search pipeline: each 20-minute SPT-3G observation is mapped, a yearly average map is subtracted to remove static Galactic and CMB emission, the residual maps are filtered to enhance point-source sensitivity, and pixels exceeding 5-sigma in both 95 and 150 GHz are fit with Gaussian flare lightcurves. The dual-band threshold is central because it suppresses single-band instrumental glitches and atmospheric contamination. A two-step pointing correction—first aligning observations relative to each other, then tying the absolute frame using bright compact radio reference sources—yields positional uncertainties of about 6 arc

Load-bearing premise

The identification of both flares as coming from accreting white dwarfs rests on positional coincidence with X-ray sources, and that identification would fail if the survey's absolute pointing error is larger than about 6 arcseconds or if the local X-ray source density near the flares is much higher than the assumed field average.

What would settle it

Recompute the absolute astrometry of the two flare positions against a dense, high-resolution radio reference frame and check whether the claimed 1-2 arcsecond offsets to the X-ray sources hold; if the true pointing error exceeds about 6 arcseconds, the white-dwarf associations become unremarkable. Alternatively, measure the X-ray source density in a small circle around each flare: if it is substantially higher than 0.04 sources per square arcminute, the 1% false-association estimate collapses.

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

If this is right

  • Accreting white dwarf binaries become a recognized class of millimeter-wave transient emitters, with flares bright enough to be found blindly in wide-field surveys.
  • Difference-map searches with dual-band thresholds can work in the crowded, high-foreground Galactic Plane, extending time-domain millimeter surveys to a region previously avoided.
  • The two flares are more luminous and more distant than the stellar flares found at high Galactic latitude, suggesting that plane surveys access a different or more luminous transient population.
  • Future data can test the magnetic-reconnection interpretation by looking for recurrence of these flares and by measuring circular polarization during a flare.
  • Lowering the detection threshold and allowing single-band detections in future analyses should reveal fainter and shorter-timescale events in the same field.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • I infer that if disk reconnection drives these flares, short-period cataclysmic variables should show fainter or absent millimeter flares because their disks are smaller; comparing flare rates across the CV orbital-period distribution would test this population-level prediction.
  • I infer that the absence of simultaneous optical flares may reflect the brightness of the giant donor stars rather than the absence of optical emission; a coordinated optical and millimeter campaign during a future flare could reveal buried optical counterparts.
  • I infer that the false-association probability could be checked locally by measuring the X-ray source density in a small annulus around each flare rather than using the field average; this is testable with existing catalogs.
  • I infer that if the flares recur on timescales related to the binary orbital periods (about 8.7 and 38 days), stacking many epochs of future SPT data might reveal fainter repeated flares and make the white-dwarf association far more secure.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. This paper presents the first time-domain millimeter-wave transient search of the SPT-3G Galactic Plane Survey. Using roughly 1,500 20-minute observations of three subfields covering about 100 deg^2 near the Galactic center in 2023 and 2024, the authors subtract yearly average maps and search for simultaneous >5-sigma outlier pixels at 95 and 150 GHz. They report two events, SPT-SV J174417.2-293942 and SPT-SV J173508.3-292956, with approximately one-day Gaussian timescales, peak 150 GHz fluxes of about 59 and 87 mJy, and isotropic luminosities around 10^31 erg/s. They measure spectral indices and polarization upper limits, identify X-ray/optical/IR counterparts, and associate the flares with a cataclysmic variable and a symbiotic star, respectively. They discuss possible emission mechanisms and tentatively favor magnetic reconnection in the accretion disk.

Significance. If the associations hold, this is a significant result: it demonstrates blind mm-wave time-domain discovery of accreting white dwarf systems in the Galactic Plane, a population inaccessible to previous CMB-survey transient searches, and it provides rare constraints on mm-wave flaring from CVs and symbiotic stars. The survey design, conservative two-band threshold, bright-source masking, visual contamination screening, and external multi-wavelength associations are strengths; the two events are individually secure at the stated signal-to-noise ratio. However, the astrophysical interpretation is only as robust as the positional association, which is why the local astrometric and source-density validation discussed below is important. The paper is also honest about the speculative nature of the emission-mechanism discussion, which is appropriate for a two-event sample.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 4.4, Eqs. (4)-(5)] The accreting-white-dwarf association rests on the 1.19''/2.09'' offsets between the SPT positions and 2CXO J174417.2-293944 / 2CXO J173508.2-292957. The absolute pointing term is derived from 17 AT20G calibrators and applied as a global offset; this validates the boresight solution at the calibrators but not possible local astrometric distortions at the transient positions in a crowded Galactic-Plane field. In addition, the "at most 1%" false-association probability uses the GBS average source density of 0.04 arcmin^-2 over 12 deg^2; Source 1 lies at b=-0.134 deg, where the local Chandra source density may be several times the field average. Please quantify local astrometric residuals using other Chandra/Gaia sources within the same subfield and epoch, and recompute the false-association probability with the local X-ray density within a radius comparable to the 3-sigma_pos search radius
  2. [Section 4.3 / Table 3 / Section 6] The average spectral indices are quoted inconsistently in three places: Section 4.3 gives alpha_95^150 = -0.31 +/- 0.08 for Source 1 and 0.96 +/- 0.08 for Source 2; Table 3 as typeset gives 0.31 +/- 0.08 and 0.96 +/- 0.08; Section 6 gives -0.29 +/- 0.04 and 0.92 +/- 0.03. This is not solely a sign typo because the uncertainties also differ. Please reconcile the numbers and state clearly whether the quoted values come from stacked-day maps or from a different averaging procedure. The falling-versus-rising spectral classification and the synchrotron self-absorption discussion depend on these values.
  3. [Section 5.2 and abstract] The statistical argument that there is only a ~10% chance per source, and ~1% combined, that these flares arise from donor stars rests on the assumption that accreting-WD donors and generic field rapid rotators have equal per-star mm-flare probability. That assumption is not calibrated by any measured mm flaring rate for the control populations, and the space densities of long-period CVs, RS CVn stars, and active red giants carry large uncertainties. As written, the "combined probability of about 1%" reads like a posterior probability, but it is a conditional statement for a specific model. I recommend either presenting a direct detection-rate comparison between the Galactic Plane survey and control populations, or softening the conclusion to an order-of-magnitude plausibility argument. This does not affect the detection claim, but it affects the physical interpretation advertised in the
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 3.1] The pixelization is described as using "0.25'' pixels"; this should presumably be 0.25 arcminutes. A 0.25 arcsecond pixel over 100 deg^2 would be computationally untenable and is inconsistent with the arcminute-scale SPT-3G beam.
  2. [Section 4.1] There is a typo: "between 2024 March 4 and 2024 March 2024" should be "between 2024 March 4 and 2024 March 20" (or similar).
  3. [Section 5.4] The comparison between the expected 0.3 events and the observed 2 events would benefit from a Poisson confidence interval around the observed count (2 events gives a 95% CL of roughly 0.24-7.2). This would help the reader judge how much weight to place on the claimed rate enhancement.
  4. [General] The paper would be easier to check if the data products (lightcurves, thumbnails, and the final filtered maps for the two events) were made available, or if a data availability statement pointed to where they will be hosted. This is not required for the scientific result but would aid reproducibility.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circular derivation: blind detections, external calibrations, and independent counterpart classifications carry the paper's claims.

full rationale

This is an observational discovery paper with no fitted theory parameters; the central claims are blind detections (5 sigma in 95 and 150 GHz), measured fluxes and lightcurves, and external-catalog associations. The detection pipeline (Guns et al. 2021) applies likelihood fits and local-noise thresholds before any association or theory is imposed, so the two events are not predicted from the model. Pointing (Eqs. 4-6) is calibrated against 17 AT20G external sources; the small Chandra offsets (1.19'', 2.09'') are measured, not fitted to the association. The accreting-white-dwarf classification comes from Shaw et al. (2020) and Munari et al. (2021), which are independent X-ray/radial-velocity/optical studies; Maccarone is a shared author on Shaw et al., but that classification is externally falsifiable and not derived from this paper's inputs. Luminosities (Eq. 7) are definitions applied to Gaia distances and measured fluxes. The event-rate comparison (Sec. 5.4) is a stated-assumption extrapolation with explicit small-number caveats ('too early to draw any definitive conclusions'), and the emission-mechanism discussion is explicitly speculative (Sec. 5.3: 'We emphasize that this discussion is speculative'). The skeptical concerns about spatial uniformity of the absolute pointing error and local Chandra source density are legitimate scientific risks to the association, but they are correctness risks, not circularity: no equation in the paper reduces to its own input, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. Score 1 reflects only the minor shared authorship in one counterpart-classification citation, which is not load-bearing.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 8 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities; the candidate emission locations (white dwarf, donor star, accretion disk) are standard components of the identified binary systems. The analysis relies on eight domain assumptions, mostly inherited pipeline behavior and external catalog statistics, plus four hand-chosen or fitted analysis parameters. The most fragile inputs are the absolute pointing calibration and the assumed Chandra background density, since the entire interpretation depends on the positional associations.

free parameters (4)
  • 5 sigma detection threshold (95 and 150 GHz simultaneously) = 5 sigma
    Chosen by hand in Section 3.2 to suppress false positives from anisotropic Galactic noise; it sets survey sensitivity, not the validity of the two detected events.
  • Local-noise annulus inner/outer radii = 2 arcmin / 3 arcmin
    Hand-chosen in Section 3.2 to estimate local rms while excluding the central source signal.
  • Transient mask radius around bright sources = 5 arcmin around 10 sources
    Hand-chosen in Section 3.2 to contain leakage from Sgr A (about 20 Jy at 95 GHz) and other bright sources.
  • Gaussian flare width (timescale) = 1.00 +/- 0.05 d (Source 1), 0.80 +/- 0.08 d (Source 2)
    Fitted to multi-band single-observation lightcurves in Section 4.1; this is a measurement result rather than a theory input, but the quoted precision comes from daily sampling with multi-day gaps (Figures 5 and 6).
axioms (8)
  • domain assumption The SPT-3G mapmaking pipeline (Dutcher et al. 2021) produces unbiased per-observation maps after filtering, common-mode subtraction, and polynomial filtering.
    Section 3.1; inherited from the cosmology pipeline and validated in prior transient searches.
  • domain assumption The Gaussian flare-model detection pipeline of Guns et al. (2021) provides a valid TS statistic for point-source transients in filtered difference maps.
    Section 3.2; validated on the SPT-3G main field with 111 stellar flares (Tandoi et al. 2024).
  • domain assumption Subtracting the yearly average map removes static backgrounds (CMB, dust, static sources) without biasing transient flux densities.
    Section 3.1; residual leakage around bright sources is mitigated by the 5 arcmin transient mask.
  • domain assumption The chance association of an SPT transient with a Chandra source is at most 1%, based on a uniform X-ray source density of 0.04 sources per square arcminute in the GBS footprint.
    Section 4.4; if the local source density near the two matches is higher than the field average, the association probability increases.
  • domain assumption Gaia DR3 parallaxes give reliable distances (966 +/- 18 pc and 1497 +/- 44 pc) for the two systems.
    Section 4.5; the isotropic luminosities scale as distance squared.
  • domain assumption External population estimates for long-period CVs, RS CVn stars, symbiotic stars, and rapidly rotating red giants (Pala et al. 2020; Hall 1976; Gaulme et al. 2020; Laversveiler et al. 2025) support the 10%-per-system and 1%-combined statistical argument.
    Section 5.2; the statistical case for a disk origin is only as good as these estimates, which the authors acknowledge are uncertain.
  • domain assumption Brightness-temperature estimates assume emitting-region sizes of order the orbital separation (disk scenario) or 1 day times 3000 km/s (micronova ejecta scenario).
    Section 5.3; the inference that the emission is synchrotron depends on these assumed source sizes.
  • domain assumption Visual inspection reliably distinguishes astrophysical transients from weather balloons, asteroids, and bright-source leakage.
    Section 3.2; the two events were accepted after visual checks, and no automated false-positive discriminator is used.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 27731 in / 20120 out tokens · 200581 ms · 2026-08-04T19:54:47.452656+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Blind discoveries of millimeter-wave (mm-wave) transient events in non-targeted surveys, as opposed to follow-up or pointed observations, have only become possible in the past decade using cosmic microwave background surveys. Here we present the first results from the SPT-3G Galactic Plane Survey -- the first dedicated high-sensitivity, wide-field, time-domain, mm-wave survey of the Galactic Plane, conducted with the South Pole Telescope (SPT) using the SPT-3G camera. The survey field covers approximately 100 $\text{deg}^2$ near the Galactic center. In 2023 and 2024, this survey consists of roughly 1,500 individual 20-minute observations in three bands centered at 95, 150, and 220 GHz, with plans for more observations in the coming years. We report the detection of two transient events exceeding a 5$\sigma$ threshold in both the 95 and 150 GHz bands in the first two years of SPT-3G Galactic Plane Survey data. Both events are unpolarized and exhibit durations of approximately one day, with peak flux densities at 150 GHz of at least 50 mJy. The peak isotropic luminosities at 150 GHz are on the order of $10^{31}~\text{erg}~\text{s}^{-1}$. Both events are associated with previously identified accreting white dwarfs. Magnetic reconnection in the accretion disk is a likely explanation for the observed millimeter flares. In the future, we plan to expand the transient search in the Galactic Plane by lowering the detection threshold, enabling single-band detections, analyzing lightcurves on a range of timescales, and including additional data from future observations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.08962 by A. Anumarlapudi, A. A. Stark, A. Chokshi, A. Coerver, A. Doussot, A. E. Gambrel, A. E. Lowitz, A. Foster, A. Hryciuk, A. J. Anderson, A. Maniyar, A. N. Bender, A. Ouellette, A. Rahlin, A. R. Khalife, A. Simpson, A. Vitrier, A. W. Pollak, B. A. Benson, B. Ansarinejad, B. Thorne, C. Daley, C. Feng, C. L. Chang, C.-L. Kuo, C. L. Reichardt, C. Lu, C. Tandoi, C. Trendafilova, C. Umilta, D. Dutcher, D. L. Kaplan, E. Camphuis, E. Hivon, E. Schiappucci, E. S. Martsen, F. Bianchini, F. Ge, F. Guidi, F. Keruzore, F. Menanteau, F. R. Bouchet, G. I. Noble, G. P. Holder, G. P. Lynch, J. A. Sobrin, J. A. Zebrowski, J. C. Hood, J. D. Vieira, J. E. Carlstrom, J. E. Ruhl, J. Montgomery, J. Stephen, K. A. Phadke, K. Benabed, K. Fichman, K. Kornoelje, K. Levy, K. Prabhu, K. R. Dibert, K. R. Ferguson, L. Balkenhol, L. Bryant, L. E. Bleem, L. Knox, M. A. Dobbs, M. Archipley, M. Doohan, M. G. Campitiello, M. Korman, M. Millea, M. Rahimi, M. Rouble, M. R. Young, N. Goeckner-Wald, N. Huang, N. W. Halverson, N. Whitehorn, P. Chaubal, P. M. Chichura, P. Paschos, P. S. Barry, R. Gualtieri, R. W. Gardner, S. Galli, S. Guns, T. de Haan, T. J. Maccarone, T.-L. Chou, T. M. Crawford, T. Natoli, W. Everett, W. L. Holzapfel, W. L. K. Wu, W. Quan, Y. Nakato, Y. Omori, Y. Wan, Z. Pan.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The observing schedule of the SPT-3G Galactic Plane Survey in 2023 and 2024. The black rectangles represent periods during which the SPT observed the given subfields, with the widths of the rectangles indicating the lengths of time spent on each. The few-day gaps between observations were dedicated to focused Sgr A* observations. The extended coverage of the subfield ra17h27dec-35 and the gap around MJD 60… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The SPT-3G two-year average map at 150 GHz in Galactic coordinates constructed from combining observations in 2023 and 2024. The color map employs a symmetrical logarithmic scale with a linear scale applied in the range of ±100 µK. This scale allows the visualization of both the bright Galactic Plane and CMB temperature fluctuations. The locations of some bright objects, including Sgr B2, Sgr A, NGC 6357 (… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Histogram of the noise values for all filtered differ￾ence maps in 2023 and 2024 at 95, 150, and 220 GHz. The noise level of each individual map is estimated as the rms of a noise-dominated region located away from the Galactic Plane (signal leakage is present in the Galactic Plane). The x-axis is shown on a logarithmic scale. Dashed lines indicate the median noise levels of 4.6, 6.6, and 24.6 mJy at 95, 1… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Lightcurve and thumbnails for SPT-SV J174417.2-293942 (Source 1). The top main panel shows the daily-averaged lightcurve for all three bands, with red triangles representing the 95 GHz band, blue circles representing the 150 GHz band, and yellow diamonds representing the 220 GHz band. The dotted gray line indicates the 0 mJy level for clarity. The inset panel zooms in on the period ranging from one day bef… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Lightcurve and thumbnails for SPT-SV J173508.3-292956 (Source 2). The plotting scheme is the same as that used in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Spitzer/IRAC(top) and DECaPS2(bottom) images centered on the SPT positions of the two detected transient sources. Top panels: grayscale images from IRAC channel 1 (3.6 µm) of the Spitzer/IRAC Survey of the Galactic Center (Ram´ırez et al. 2008) display surface brightness with the color scale linearly spanning from 0 to 500 MJy/sr. Red contours show the SPT-3G TS maps at 500, 1000, 1500 and 2000 levels when… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Peak flare luminosity versus distance at 150 GHz for the two flares reported in this paper (squares) and flares in the main SPT-3G survey (crosses). Point color indicates the Galactic height, which is the vertical distance from the Galactic Plane. Gray lines connect flares originating from the same source. The orange line represents the expected 5σ detection threshold of the Galactic survey estimated from… view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

76 extracted references · 16 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    E., Ginsburg, A

    Aguirre, J. E., Ginsburg, A. G., Dunham, M. K., et al. 2011, ApJS, 192, 4, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/192/1/4

    doi:10.1088/0067-0049/192/1/4 2011

  2. [2]

    B., Abdo, A

    Atwood, W. B., Abdo, A. A., Ackermann, M., et al. 2009, ApJ, 697, 1071, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/697/2/1071

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/697/2/1071 2009

  3. [3]

    O., & G¨ udel, M

    Benz, A. O., & G¨ udel, M. 2010, ARA&A, 48, 241, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-082708-101757

    doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-082708-101757 2010

  4. [4]

    2002, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

    Bertin, E., Mellier, Y., Radovich, M., et al. 2002, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 281, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XI, ed. D. A. Bohlender, D. Durand, & T. H. Handley, 228

    2002

  5. [5]

    The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: Systematic Transient Search of Single Observation Maps

    Biermann, E. K., Li, Y., Naess, S., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2409.08429, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2409.08429

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2409.08429 2024

  6. [6]

    Biermann, P., & Hall, D. S. 1976, in IAU Symposium, Vol. 73, Structure and Evolution of Close Binary Systems, ed. P. Eggleton, S. Mitton, & J. Whelan, 381

    1976

  7. [7]

    R., & Greisen, E

    Calabretta, M. R., & Greisen, E. W. 2002, A&A, 395, 1077, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20021327

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20021327 2002

  8. [8]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.20707, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.20707

    Camphuis, E., Quan, W., Balkenhol, L., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.20707, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.20707

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.20707 2025

  9. [9]

    E., Ade, P

    Carlstrom, J. E., Ade, P. A. R., Aird, K. A., et al. 2011, PASP, 123, 568, doi: 10.1086/659879

    doi:10.1086/659879 2011

  10. [10]

    M., Foster, A., Patel, C., et al

    Chichura, P. M., Foster, A., Patel, C., et al. 2022, ApJ, 936, 173, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac89ec

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac89ec 2022

  11. [11]

    D., Aydi, E., et al

    Chomiuk, L., Linford, J. D., Aydi, E., et al. 2021, ApJS, 257, 49, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac24ab

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac24ab 2021

  12. [12]

    Dutcher, D., Balkenhol, L., Ade, P. A. R., et al. 2021, PhRvD, 104, 022003, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.104.022003

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.104.022003 2021

  13. [13]

    D., et al

    Eftekhari, T., Berger, E., Metzger, B. D., et al. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 935, 16, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7ce8

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac7ce8 2022

  14. [14]

    N., Primini, F

    Evans, I. N., Primini, F. A., Glotfelty, K. J., et al. 2010, ApJS, 189, 37, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/189/1/37

    doi:10.1088/0067-0049/189/1/37 2010

  15. [15]

    N., Evans, J

    Evans, I. N., Evans, J. D., Mart ´ ınez-Galarza, J. R., et al. 2024, ApJS, 274, 22, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad6319

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ad6319 2024

  16. [16]

    A., Page, K

    Evans, P. A., Page, K. L., Osborne, J. P., et al. 2020, ApJS, 247, 54, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab7db9

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab7db9 2020

  17. [17]

    J., et al

    Foster, A., Chokshi, A., Anderson, A. J., et al. 2025, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 8, 51, doi: 10.33232/001c.137526 Gaia Collaboration, Prusti, T., de Bruijne, J. H. J., et al. 2016, A&A, 595, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629272 Gaia Collaboration, Vallenari, A., Brown, A. G. A., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243940

    work page doi:10.33232/001c.137526 2025

  18. [18]

    2020, A&A, 639, A63, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202037781

    Gaulme, P., Jackiewicz, J., Spada, F., et al. 2020, A&A, 639, A63, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202037781

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202037781 2020

  19. [19]

    E., Hensley, B

    Guan, Y., Clark, S. E., Hensley, B. S., et al. 2021, ApJ, 920, 6, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac133f

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac133f 2021

  20. [20]

    2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 916, 98, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac06a3

    Guns, S., Foster, A., Daley, C., et al. 2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 916, 98, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac06a3

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac06a3 2021

  21. [21]

    Hall, D. S. 1976, in Astrophysics and Space Science Library, Vol. 60, IAU Colloq. 29: Multiple Periodic Variable Stars, ed. W. S. Fitch, 287, doi: 10.1007/978-94-010-1175-4 15

    work page doi:10.1007/978-94-010-1175-4 1976

  22. [22]

    R., Shibata, K., & Matsumoto, R

    Hayashi, M. R., Shibata, K., & Matsumoto, R. 1996, ApJL, 468, L37, doi: 10.1086/310222

    doi:10.1086/310222 1996

  23. [23]

    2019, BAAS, 51, 331

    Holder, G., Berger, E., Bleem, L., et al. 2019, BAAS, 51, 331

    2019

  24. [24]

    C., Simpson, A., McDaniel, A., et al

    Hood, II, J. C., Simpson, A., McDaniel, A., et al. 2023, ApJL, 945, L23, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acbf45

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acbf45 2023

  25. [25]

    W., Bunton, J

    Hotan, A. W., Bunton, J. D., Chippendale, A. P., et al. 2021, PASA, 38, e009, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2021.1

    doi:10.1017/pasa.2021.1 2021

  26. [26]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science and Engineering, 9, 90, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55

    doi:10.1109/mcse.2007.55 2007

  27. [27]

    G., Bassa, C

    Jonker, P. G., Bassa, C. G., Nelemans, G., et al. 2011, ApJS, 194, 18, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/194/2/18

    doi:10.1088/0067-0049/194/2/18 2011

  28. [28]

    G., Torres, M

    Jonker, P. G., Torres, M. A. P., Hynes, R. I., et al. 2014, ApJS, 210, 18, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/210/2/18

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/210/2/18 2014

  29. [29]

    Katz, J. I. 2017, ApJ, 835, 150, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/835/2/150

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/835/2/150 2017

  30. [30]

    S., Shappee, B

    Kochanek, C. S., Shappee, B. J., Stanek, K. Z., et al. 2017, PASP, 129, 104502, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aa80d9

    doi:10.1088/1538-3873/aa80d9 2017

  31. [31]

    Kowalski, A. F. 2024, Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 21, 1, doi: 10.1007/s41116-024-00039-4

    doi:10.1007/s41116-024-00039-4 2024

  32. [32]

    The Local Group Symbiotic Star Population and its Tenuous Link with Type Ia Supernovae

    Merc, J. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2504.02090, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2504.02090

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2504.02090 2025

  33. [33]

    L., Jafari, A., et al

    Lazarian, A., Eyink, G. L., Jafari, A., et al. 2020, Physics of Plasmas, 27, 012305, doi: 10.1063/1.5110603

    doi:10.1063/1.5110603 2020

  34. [34]

    H., Adachi, S., et al

    Lee, A., Abitbol, M. H., Adachi, S., et al. 2019, in Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, Vol. 51, 147, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1907.08284

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1907.08284 2019

  35. [35]

    2023, ApJ, 956, 36, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ace599

    Li, Y., Biermann, E., Naess, S., et al. 2023, ApJ, 956, 36, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ace599

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ace599 2023

  36. [36]

    C., & Newman, J

    Licquia, T. C., & Newman, J. A. 2015, ApJ, 806, 96, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/806/1/96

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/806/1/96 2015

  37. [37]

    Lomb, N. R. 1976, Ap&SS, 39, 447, doi: 10.1007/BF00648343

    doi:10.1007/bf00648343 1976

  38. [38]

    2020, ApJ, 905, 107, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abc686

    Charbonneau, D. 2020, ApJ, 905, 107, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abc686

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abc686 2020

  39. [39]

    2009, PASP, 121, 1180, doi: 10.1086/648480

    Mellinger, A. 2009, PASP, 121, 1180, doi: 10.1086/648480

    work page doi:10.1086/648480 2009

  40. [40]

    D., Williams, P

    Metzger, B. D., Williams, P. K. G., & Berger, E. 2015, ApJ, 806, 224, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/806/2/224 22

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/806/2/224 2015

  41. [41]

    2016, A&A, 591, A149, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201526380

    Molinari, S., Schisano, E., Elia, D., et al. 2016, A&A, 591, A149, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201526380

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201526380 2016

  42. [42]

    2025, A&A, 694, A70, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450369

    Moreira, S., Moitinho, A., Silva, A., & Almeida, D. 2025, A&A, 694, A70, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450369

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450369 2025

  43. [43]

    2019, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1909.01389, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1909.01389

    Munari, U. 2019, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1909.01389, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1909.01389

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1909.01389 2019

  44. [44]

    2021, Contributions of the Astronomical Observatory Skalnate Pleso, 51, 103, doi: 10.31577/caosp.2021.51.2.103

    Munari, U., Valisa, P., Vagnozzi, A., et al. 2021, Contributions of the Astronomical Observatory Skalnate Pleso, 51, 103, doi: 10.31577/caosp.2021.51.2.103

    work page doi:10.31577/caosp.2021.51.2.103 2021

  45. [45]

    M., Ekers, R

    Murphy, T., Sadler, E. M., Ekers, R. D., et al. 2010, MNRAS, 402, 2403, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15961.x

    arXiv 2010

  46. [46]

    L., Stewart, A

    Murphy, T., Kaplan, D. L., Stewart, A. J., et al. 2021, PASA, 38, e054, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2021.44

    doi:10.1017/pasa.2021.44 2021

  47. [47]

    2021a, ApJ, 915, 14, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abfe6d

    Naess, S., Battaglia, N., Richard Bond, J., et al. 2021a, ApJ, 915, 14, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abfe6d

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abfe6d

  48. [48]

    2021b, ApJ, 923, 224, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac2307

    Naess, S., Aiola, S., Battaglia, N., et al. 2021b, ApJ, 923, 224, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac2307

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac2307

  49. [49]

    2000, A&AS, 143, 23, doi: 10.1051/aas:2000169 Ol´ ah, K., K˝ ov´ ari, Z., G¨ unther, M

    Ochsenbein, F., Bauer, P., & Marcout, J. 2000, A&AS, 143, 23, doi: 10.1051/aas:2000169 Ol´ ah, K., K˝ ov´ ari, Z., G¨ unther, M. N., et al. 2021, A&A, 647, A62, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039674

    doi:10.1051/aas:2000169 2000

  50. [50]

    F., G¨ ansicke, B

    Pala, A. F., G¨ ansicke, B. T., Breedt, E., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 494, 3799, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa764

    doi:10.1093/mnras/staa764 2020

  51. [51]

    2007, in Journal of Physics Conference Series, Vol

    Pordes, R., OSG Consortium, Petravick, D., et al. 2007, in Journal of Physics Conference Series, Vol. 78, Journal of Physics Conference Series (IOP), 012057, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/78/1/012057

    doi:10.1088/1742-6596/78/1/012057 2007

  52. [52]

    2024, ApJ, 973, 4, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad5ff1 Ram ´ ırez, S

    Prabhu, K., Raghunathan, S., Millea, M., et al. 2024, ApJ, 973, 4, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad5ff1 Ram ´ ırez, S. V., Arendt, R. G., Sellgren, K., et al. 2008, ApJS, 175, 147, doi: 10.1086/524015

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad5ff1 2024

  53. [53]

    E., Hughes, A

    Ridder, M. E., Hughes, A. K., Heinke, C. O., Sivakoff, G. R., & Sydora, R. D. 2025, A&A, 695, A96, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452711

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202452711 2025

  54. [54]

    2003, A&A, 404, 301, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20030330

    Ritter, H., & Kolb, U. 2003, A&A, 404, 301, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20030330

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20030330 2003

  55. [55]

    R., Webb, N

    Rosen, S. R., Webb, N. A., Watson, M. G., et al. 2016, A&A, 590, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201526416

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201526416 2016

  56. [56]

    M., K´ osp´ al,´A., Getman, K

    Salter, D. M., K´ osp´ al,´A., Getman, K. V., et al. 2010, A&A, 521, A32, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201015197

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201015197 2010

  57. [57]

    K., Schlafly, E

    Saydjari, A. K., Schlafly, E. F., Lang, D., et al. 2023, ApJS, 264, 28, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aca594

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/aca594 2023

  58. [58]

    Scargle, J. D. 1982, ApJ, 263, 835, doi: 10.1086/160554

    doi:10.1086/160554 1982

  59. [59]

    J., Knigge, C., et al

    Scaringi, S., Groot, P. J., Knigge, C., et al. 2022, Nature, 604, 447, doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-04495-6

    doi:10.1038/s41586-022-04495-6 2022

  60. [60]

    Schaefer, B. E. 2024, ApJ, 969, 34, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad4705

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad4705 2024

  61. [61]

    E., Pagnotta, A., & Zoppelt, S

    Schaefer, B. E., Pagnotta, A., & Zoppelt, S. 2022, MNRAS, 512, 1924, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac443

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac443 2022

  62. [62]

    M., Contreras, Y., et al

    Schuller, F., Menten, K. M., Contreras, Y., et al. 2009, A&A, 504, 415, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200811568

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200811568 2009

  63. [63]

    C., Holzman, B., et al

    Sfiligoi, I., Bradley, D. C., Holzman, B., et al. 2009, in 2009 WRI World Congress on Computer Science and Information Engineering, Vol. 2, 428–432, doi: 10.1109/CSIE.2009.950

    doi:10.1109/csie.2009.950 2009

  64. [64]

    Z., et al

    Shappee, B., Prieto, J., Stanek, K. Z., et al. 2014, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, Vol. 223, American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts #223, 236.03

    2014

  65. [65]

    W., Heinke, C

    Shaw, A. W., Heinke, C. O., Maccarone, T. J., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 492, 4344, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa105

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa105 2020

  66. [66]

    F., Cutri, R

    Skrutskie, M. F., Cutri, R. M., Stiening, R., et al. 2006, AJ, 131, 1163, doi: 10.1086/498708

    doi:10.1086/498708 2006

  67. [67]

    A., Anderson, A

    Sobrin, J. A., Anderson, A. J., Bender, A. N., et al. 2022, ApJS, 258, 42, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac374f

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac374f 2022

  68. [68]

    S., Ade, P

    Swetz, D. S., Ade, P. A. R., Amiri, M., et al. 2011, ApJS, 194, 41, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/194/2/41

    doi:10.1088/0067-0049/194/2/41 2011

  69. [69]

    Flaring Stars in a Non-targeted mm-wave Survey with SPT-3G

    Tandoi, C., Guns, S., Foster, A., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2401.13525, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2401.13525

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2401.13525 2024

  70. [70]

    J., Casella, P., Miller-Jones, J

    Tetarenko, A. J., Casella, P., Miller-Jones, J. C. A., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 504, 3862, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab820

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stab820 2021

  71. [71]

    2020, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 14001, 1 Van Der Walt, S., Colbert, S

    Torne, P., Liu, K., Cognard, I., et al. 2020, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 14001, 1 Van Der Walt, S., Colbert, S. C., & Varoquaux, G. 2011, Computing in Science and Engineering, 13, 22, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2011.37

    doi:10.1109/mcse.2011.37 2020

  72. [72]

    E., et al

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261, doi: 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2

    doi:10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2 2020

  73. [73]

    L., et al

    Wang, Z., Murphy, T., Kaplan, D. L., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 516, 5972, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2542

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stac2542 2022

  74. [74]

    2003, Cataclysmic Variable Stars, doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511586491

    Warner, B. 2003, Cataclysmic Variable Stars, doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511586491

    doi:10.1017/cbo9780511586491 2003

  75. [75]

    Whitehorn, N., Natoli, T., Ade, P. A. R., et al. 2016, ApJ, 830, 143, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/830/2/143

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/830/2/143 2016

  76. [76]

    L., Eisenhardt, P

    Wright, E. L., Eisenhardt, P. R. M., Mainzer, A. K., et al. 2010, AJ, 140, 1868, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/140/6/1868

    doi:10.1088/0004-6256/140/6/1868 2010