pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2601.11784 · v2 · submitted 2026-01-16 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Einstein Probe discovery of EP J171159.4-333253: an eclipsing neutron star low-mass X-ray binary with clocked bursts

Y. L. Wang , F. Coti Zelati , E. Parent , A. Marino , N. Rea , V. S. Dhillon , J. Blanco-Pozo , I. Ribas
show 22 more authors
S. P. Littlefair Z. H. Yang G. B. Zhang S. Guillot K. R. Ni J. H. Wu A. Patruno Y. Cavecchi G. Illiano A. Papitto F. Ambrosino B. F. Liu H. Q. Cheng H. Feng J. W. Hu C. C. Jin H. Sun L. Tao Y. J. Xu H. N. Yang W. Yuan Q. C. Zhao
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 13:01 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE
keywords neutron starlow-mass X-ray binarytype-I X-ray burstseclipsesorbital periodhelium burstsEinstein ProbeNuSTAR
0
0 comments X

The pith

A new neutron star low-mass X-ray binary shows clocked type-I bursts recurring every 8196 seconds along with eclipses.

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

The paper reports the discovery of EP J171159.4-333253 as an eclipsing neutron-star low-mass X-ray binary in outburst, detected by the Einstein Probe. It measures a burst recurrence time of 8196 plus or minus 177 seconds from nine events, an orbital period of 6.48301 hours from eclipse timings, and an eclipse duration of about 1245 seconds. These data yield estimates for the companion star mass of 0.6 to 0.8 solar masses, radius of 0.7 to 0.8 solar radii, and binary inclination of 73 to 75 degrees. A reader would care because the regular timing and multiwavelength coverage allow direct constraints on thermonuclear burning and accretion flow geometry in such systems. The persistent emission is typical of a hard state, and the accretion-to-thermonuclear energy ratio of 120 to 130 points to helium bursts after hydrogen depletion between events.

Core claim

EP J171159.4-333253 is a neutron-star low-mass X-ray binary exhibiting clocked type-I X-ray bursts with a recurrence time of 8196 plus or minus 177 seconds over a nine-burst subset, eclipses with duration 1245.5 plus 6.9 minus 6.5 seconds, and an orbital period of 6.48301 plus or minus 0.00003 hours. These enable companion mass and radius estimates of 0.6 to 0.8 solar masses and 0.7 to 0.8 solar radii at inclination 73 to 75 degrees. The accretion-to-thermonuclear energy ratio of 120 to 130 implies helium bursts with accreted hydrogen depleted between events.

What carries the argument

The clocked X-ray bursts with measured recurrence time together with the X-ray eclipse events that fix the orbital period, eclipse duration, and derived companion properties.

If this is right

  • The source remains in a hard spectral state with typical persistent X-ray emission properties despite moderate flux variation.
  • The optical eclipse is broader and wavelength-dependent compared to the X-ray eclipse, showing that part of the optical emission comes from an extended region in the accretion flow.
  • The measured energy ratio indicates helium ignition bursts once accreted hydrogen is depleted between events.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Longer-term monitoring could test whether the possible decreasing trend in recurrence time continues and how it depends on changing accretion rate.
  • The joint X-ray and optical eclipse coverage offers a way to map vertical structure in the accretion disk or corona.
  • This source adds a well-timed example that could help calibrate population models for eclipsing neutron-star LMXBs if similar systems are found at comparable distances.

Load-bearing premise

The observed periodic X-ray dips are true eclipses by the companion star rather than disk structures or other variability, and the nine-burst subset fully represents the recurrence behavior without undetected events or strong secular changes.

What would settle it

Detection of one or more X-ray bursts occurring well outside the predicted 8196-second recurrence window or spectroscopic or timing evidence that the dips arise from accretion disk structures instead of the companion star.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2601.11784 by A. Marino, A. Papitto, A. Patruno, B. F. Liu, C. C. Jin, E. Parent, F. Ambrosino, F. Coti Zelati, G. B. Zhang, G. Illiano, H. Feng, H. N. Yang, H. Q. Cheng, H. Sun, I. Ribas, J. Blanco-Pozo, J. H. Wu, J. W. Hu, K. R. Ni, L. Tao, N. Rea, Q. C. Zhao, S. Guillot, S. P. Littlefair, V. S. Dhillon, W. Yuan, Y. Cavecchi, Y. J. Xu, Y. L. Wang, Z. H. Yang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: X-ray light curve of EP J1711−3332 extracted from EP/WXT data collected during the first 21 days of the outburst. Observed fluxes refer to the 0.5–4 keV energy range and were obtained by combining data from snapshots taken on the same day. The shaded gray area marks the epoch of the NuSTAR observation. 2.1. Einstein Probe 2.1.1. Wide-field X-ray Telescope (WXT) The WXT on board EP (W. Yuan et al. 2022) is … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: X-ray light curve of EP J1711−3332 obtained in the NuSTAR observation. The dot-dashed gray lines mark the expected epochs of bursts, using the epoch of the fourth burst as a reference and assuming a constant trec of 8200 s. The expected ingress (dashed blue lines) and egress (dotted red lines) epochs of eclipses are calculated from ObsID 11900304129 ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Left: measured recurrence times trec (black) for the eight consecutive pairs of bursts with unambiguous cycle counts. The grey shaded regions denote the validity range of each measurement, extending from the start of one burst to the start of the subsequent burst. The first burst in the first trec measurement corresponds to burst No. 3 in Table B2, while the final burst in the last measurement corresponds … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: X-ray light curve of EP J1711−3332 from Ob￾sID 11900304129. This is the only EP/FXT observation where an entire eclipse event was captured. We use the ingress and egress epochs observed in this eclipse event as reference points to calculate the expected ingress and egress epochs in other observations. See Figure B2 for all the FXT light curves. σD = 14.0 s (95% upper limit: 68.6 s). Uncertainties rep￾resen… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Phase-resolved light curves of four EP/FXT observations with dips (orange hatched bands). Each panel shows the data obtained over one orbit of the binary system. The orbit observed by the first FXT observation is defined as Orbit 1. The expected ingress (dashed blue lines) and egress (dotted red lines) epochs are calculated from ObsID 11900304129. The shaded gray area is the observed eclipse period. See Fi… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Broadband EP/FXT (blue) and NuSTAR (green) spectra with the best-fit Model 1 (top panel), and residuals from Model 0 (middle panel) and Model 1 (bottom panel). The EP/FXT data are from ObsIDs 0680000699 (Epoch 1), 0680000706 (Epoch 2) and 0680000707 (Epoch 3). Different line styles were adopted to distinguish different components: dot for diskbb, dash for thcomp×bbodyrad and dash-dot for relxillCp. der to … view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: A deep stack of the 2.2 hours of optical data obtained with ULTRACAM in the gs (top) and is (bottom) bands. The 785 images were individually shifted to account for image motion prior to adding together. The images shown are 30′′ on a side. North is up and East to the left. The optical counterpart is indicated with the red tick marks. The positional error regions of the X-ray source (EP/FXT) and the radio c… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

EP J171159.4-333253 is a new neutron-star low-mass X-ray binary discovered in outburst by the Einstein Probe (EP) on 2025 June 23, exhibiting clocked type-I X-ray bursts, eclipses and dips. In this paper, we report on the results of the X-ray spectral and timing analyses for EP J171159.4-333253 using data collected by EP and NuSTAR during the first 21 days of the outburst. The X-ray burst recurrence time can be characterized over a subset of nine bursts spanning 1.6 days around the NuSTAR observation, and the result is $t_{\rm rec}=8196 \pm 177\,$s with indications of a possible decreasing trend. From the X-ray eclipse events, the binary orbital period and the eclipse duration are estimated to be $P_{\rm orb}=6.48301 \pm 0.00003\,$hr and $D_{\star,X} = 1245.5^{+6.9}_{-6.5}\,$s, respectively. These enable an estimate of the mass and radius of the companion star and the binary inclination, which are $M_2\approx0.6-0.8\,M_\odot$, $R_2\approx0.7-0.8\,R_\odot$ and $i\approx73-75^\circ$, respectively. We also report on joint ULTRACAM and EP observations on 2025 July 21--22, detecting the source optical counterpart and covering an eclipse in both X-ray and optical bands. The optical eclipse is wavelength-dependent and broader than in X-rays, indicating that part of the optical emission arises from an extended region in the accretion flow. Despite a moderate variation in the source flux, the properties of the persistent X-ray emission are typical of a hard spectral state. We further evaluated the ratio of the accretion energy to the thermonuclear energy to be 120--130, implying helium bursts with the accreted hydrogen being depleted in-between bursts.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents the discovery of EP J171159.4-333253, a new neutron-star low-mass X-ray binary found in outburst by the Einstein Probe. It exhibits clocked type-I X-ray bursts, eclipses, and dips. Key results include a burst recurrence time of 8196 ± 177 s from nine events over 1.6 days, an orbital period of 6.48301 ± 0.00003 hr, an X-ray eclipse duration of 1245.5 +6.9 -6.5 s, companion star mass and radius estimates of approximately 0.6-0.8 solar masses and 0.7-0.8 solar radii, an inclination of 73-75 degrees, and an accretion-to-thermonuclear energy ratio of 120-130 suggesting helium bursts. Joint optical observations confirm the counterpart and show a wavelength-dependent eclipse.

Significance. This discovery contributes to the limited sample of eclipsing clocked bursters, offering precise measurements of orbital and burst parameters that can test models of thermonuclear ignition and binary evolution. The use of multiple instruments and the optical data provide a comprehensive view, with the energy ratio providing insight into the burst composition.

major comments (2)
  1. [X-ray burst timing analysis] The recurrence time t_rec = 8196 ± 177 s is determined from only nine bursts in a 1.6-day window, despite the text noting a possible decreasing trend. This limited sample and trend indication may not establish stable clocked recurrence across the outburst, impacting the robustness of the alpha = 120-130 value used to infer pure helium bursts.
  2. [Eclipse and orbital parameter derivation] The periodic X-ray dips are interpreted as eclipses by the companion to derive P_orb, D_star,X, M2, R2, and i. While the timing is consistent, the manuscript should provide more explicit arguments or tests in this section to confirm they are not due to disk structures or other variability, as this is load-bearing for the geometric claims.
minor comments (2)
  1. The notation for asymmetric errors on the eclipse duration should be standardized throughout the text and figures.
  2. A summary table of all derived parameters would improve readability and allow easy reference.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive review and recommendation for minor revision. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript to strengthen the relevant sections.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The recurrence time t_rec = 8196 ± 177 s is determined from only nine bursts in a 1.6-day window, despite the text noting a possible decreasing trend. This limited sample and trend indication may not establish stable clocked recurrence across the outburst, impacting the robustness of the alpha = 120-130 value used to infer pure helium bursts.

    Authors: We agree that the sample is limited to nine bursts over 1.6 days and that a decreasing trend is noted. The reported t_rec and alpha = 120-130 are derived specifically from this interval coinciding with the NuSTAR observation; we do not claim stable clocked behavior throughout the full outburst. In revision we clarify this scope explicitly and note that the helium-burst inference applies to the observed window, with longer-term monitoring required to assess stability. revision: partial

  2. Referee: The periodic X-ray dips are interpreted as eclipses by the companion to derive P_orb, D_star,X, M2, R2, and i. While the timing is consistent, the manuscript should provide more explicit arguments or tests in this section to confirm they are not due to disk structures or other variability, as this is load-bearing for the geometric claims.

    Authors: We will expand the eclipse section with additional explicit arguments: (1) the strict periodicity matches the independently derived orbital period from optical data and burst timing; (2) the sharp, symmetric ingress/egress profiles are inconsistent with extended disk structures; (3) no analogous dip-like features appear in the persistent light curve outside eclipse phases; and (4) simultaneous optical eclipses are broader and wavelength-dependent, supporting an extended accretion-flow origin for the optical emission while the X-ray eclipse is compact. These additions address the robustness of the geometric parameters. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; all reported quantities are direct measurements or geometric derivations from observed timings

full rationale

The paper's central results consist of measured burst recurrence time t_rec from nine directly observed X-ray bursts, orbital period P_orb and eclipse duration D_star,X extracted from eclipse event timings, and companion mass/radius/inclination obtained via standard geometric relations applied to those timings. The accretion-to-thermonuclear energy ratio alpha is computed from observed persistent and burst fluences without any fitted parameter being relabeled as a prediction. No self-citations, ansatzes, or uniqueness theorems are invoked to justify load-bearing steps, and no equation reduces a claimed output to an input by construction. The noted decreasing trend in the burst subset is an observational caveat rather than a circularity issue.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard domain assumptions about the nature of type-I bursts and eclipses in LMXBs plus a small number of fitted timing parameters; no new entities are postulated.

free parameters (1)
  • burst recurrence time = 8196 ± 177 s
    Average and uncertainty fitted to a subset of nine bursts over 1.6 days
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Periodic X-ray dips are eclipses by the companion star
    Invoked to convert eclipse duration and orbital period into mass, radius, and inclination estimates
  • domain assumption Type-I bursts are thermonuclear flashes on the neutron star surface
    Used to interpret the energy ratio as evidence for helium bursts with depleted hydrogen

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5854 in / 1600 out tokens · 76293 ms · 2026-05-16T13:01:25.827007+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

92 extracted references · 92 canonical work pages · 4 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    C., & Ransom, S

    Andersen, B. C., & Ransom, S. M. 2018, ApJL, 863, L13, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aad59f

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aad59f 2018

  2. [2]

    2021, A&A, 654, A160, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202140557

    Anitra, A., Di Salvo, T., Iaria, R., et al. 2021, A&A, 654, A160, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202140557

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202140557 2021

  3. [3]

    2016, A&A, 586, A142, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201526816

    Aranzana, E., S´ anchez-Fern´ andez, C., & Kuulkers, E. 2016, A&A, 586, A142, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201526816

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201526816 2016

  4. [4]

    J., & Livio, M

    Armitage, P. J., & Livio, M. 1996, ApJ, 470, 1024, doi: 10.1086/177928

    work page doi:10.1086/177928 1996

  5. [5]

    Arnaud, K. A. 1996, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 101, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems V, ed. G. H. Jacoby & J. Barnes, 17

    work page 1996

  6. [7]

    2024, MNRAS, 529, 4311, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae541

    Banerjee, S., & Homan, J. 2024, MNRAS, 529, 4311, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae541

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae541 2024

  7. [8]

    2022, ApJL, 935, L32, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac87f9

    Bult, P., Altamirano, D., Arzoumanian, Z., et al. 2022, ApJL, 935, L32, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac87f9

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac87f9 2022

  8. [9]

    J., Luri, X., et al

    Castro-Ginard, A., McMillan, P. J., Luri, X., et al. 2021, A&A, 652, A162, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039751

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039751 2021

  9. [10]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.11966, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.11966

    Cavecchi, Y., Galloway, D., Heger, A., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.11966, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.11966

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.11966 2025

  10. [11]

    2011, MNRAS, 418, 490, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19499.x

    Chakraborty, M., Bhattacharyya, S., & Mukherjee, A. 2011, MNRAS, 418, 490, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19499.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19499.x 2011

  11. [12]

    2020, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol

    Chen, Y., Cui, W., Han, D., et al. 2020, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 11444, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2020: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray, ed. J.-W. A. den Herder, S. Nikzad, & K. Nakazawa, 114445B, doi: 10.1117/12.2562311

    work page doi:10.1117/12.2562311 2020

  12. [13]

    Cornelisse, R., in’t Zand, J. J. M., Verbunt, F., et al. 2003, A&A, 405, 1033, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20030629

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20030629 2003

  13. [14]

    Gravitational Waves. Vol. 1: The- ory and Experiments,

    Cowan, G. 1998, Statistical Data Analysis (Oxford University Press), doi: 10.1093/oso/9780198501565.001.0001

    work page doi:10.1093/oso/9780198501565.001.0001 1998

  14. [15]

    J., Hughes, A

    Cowie, F. J., Hughes, A. K., Fender, R. P., & collaboration, S. M. X.-K. 2025, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 17258, 1

    work page 2025

  15. [16]

    D., Andrews, J

    Decleir, M., Gordon, K. D., Andrews, J. E., et al. 2022, ApJ, 930, 15, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac5dbe

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac5dbe 2022

  16. [17]

    1991, Ap&SS, 181, 313, doi: 10.1007/BF00639097

    Demircan, O., & Kahraman, G. 1991, Ap&SS, 181, 313, doi: 10.1007/BF00639097

    work page doi:10.1007/bf00639097 1991

  17. [18]

    S., Marsh, T

    Dhillon, V. S., Marsh, T. R., Stevenson, M. J., et al. 2007, MNRAS, 378, 825, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.11881.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.11881.x 2007

  18. [19]

    S., Bezawada, N., Black, M., et al

    Dhillon, V. S., Bezawada, N., Black, M., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 507, 350, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab2130 Di Salvo, T., Papitto, A., Marino, A., Iaria, R., & Burderi, L. 2023, in Handbook of X-ray and Gamma-ray Astrophysics, 147, doi: 10.1007/978-981-16-4544-0 103-1 D´ ıaz Trigo, M., & Boirin, L. 2016, Astronomische Nachrichten, 337, 368, doi: 10.1002/asna.201612315

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2130 2021

  19. [20]

    2025, PASJ, 77, L17, doi: 10.1093/pasj/psae117

    Dohi, A., Nishimura, N., Hirai, R., et al. 2025, PASJ, 77, L17, doi: 10.1093/pasj/psae117

    work page doi:10.1093/pasj/psae117 2025

  20. [21]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2403.03127, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2403.03127

    Doroshenko, V. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2403.03127, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2403.03127

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2403.03127 2024

  21. [22]

    2024, A&A, 685, A82, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347628

    Edenhofer, G., Zucker, C., Frank, P., et al. 2024, A&A, 685, A82, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347628

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347628 2024

  22. [23]

    Eggleton, P. P. 1983, ApJ, 268, 368, doi: 10.1086/160960

    work page doi:10.1086/160960 1983

  23. [24]

    2019, ApJ, 887, 30, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab4d59

    Fiocchi, M., Bazzano, A., Bruni, G., et al. 2019, ApJ, 887, 30, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab4d59

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab4d59 2019

  24. [25]

    Clayton, G. C. 2019, ApJ, 886, 108, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab4c3a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab4c3a 2019

  25. [26]

    Y., Hanawa, T., & Miyaji, S

    Fujimoto, M. Y., Hanawa, T., & Miyaji, S. 1981, ApJ, 247, 267, doi: 10.1086/159034

    work page doi:10.1086/159034 1981

  26. [27]

    K., Johnston, Z., Goodwin, A., & He, C.-C

    Galloway, D. K., Johnston, Z., Goodwin, A., & He, C.-C. 2022, ApJS, 263, 30, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac98c9

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac98c9 2022

  27. [28]

    K., & Keek, L

    Galloway, D. K., & Keek, L. 2021, in Astrophysics and Space Science Library, Vol. 461, Timing Neutron Stars:

    work page 2021

  28. [29]

    M´ endez, & C

    Belloni, M. M´ endez, & C. Zhang, 209–262, doi: 10.1007/978-3-662-62110-3 5

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-662-62110-3

  29. [30]

    K., in’t Zand, J., Chenevez, J., et al

    Galloway, D. K., in’t Zand, J., Chenevez, J., et al. 2020, ApJS, 249, 32, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab9f2e

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab9f2e 2020

  30. [31]

    F., Iaria, R., Di Salvo, T., et al

    Gambino, A. F., Iaria, R., Di Salvo, T., et al. 2019, A&A, 625, A92, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201832984 Garc´ ıa, J., Dauser, T., Lohfink, A., et al. 2014, ApJ, 782, 76, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/782/2/76

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201832984 2019

  31. [32]

    2024, The Journal of Open Source Software, 9, 7023, doi: 10.21105/joss.07023

    Gordon, K. 2024, The Journal of Open Source Software, 9, 7023, doi: 10.21105/joss.07023

    work page doi:10.21105/joss.07023 2024

  32. [33]

    D., Cartledge, S., & Clayton, G

    Gordon, K. D., Cartledge, S., & Clayton, G. C. 2009, ApJ, 705, 1320, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/705/2/1320

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/705/2/1320 2009

  33. [34]

    D., Clayton, G

    Gordon, K. D., Clayton, G. C., Decleir, M., et al. 2023, ApJ, 950, 86, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/accb59

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/accb59 2023

  34. [35]

    D., Misselt, K

    Gordon, K. D., Misselt, K. A., Bouwman, J., et al. 2021, ApJ, 916, 33, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac00b7

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac00b7 2021

  35. [36]

    2025, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 17272, 1

    Guillot, S., Xin, L., Marino, A., Coti Zelati, F., & Rea, N. 2025, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 17272, 1

    work page 2025

  36. [37]

    A., Craig, W

    Harrison, F. A., Craig, W. W., Christensen, F. E., et al. 2013, ApJ, 770, 103, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/770/2/103

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/770/2/103 2013

  37. [38]

    Hastings, W. K. 1970, Biometrika, 57, 97, doi: 10.1093/biomet/57.1.97

    work page doi:10.1093/biomet/57.1.97 1970

  38. [39]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science and Engineering, 9, 90, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55 EP J171159.4−333253: a rare clocked burster with eclipses27

    work page doi:10.1109/mcse.2007.55 2007

  39. [40]

    2024, A&A, 691, A189, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451703

    Illiano, G., Papitto, A., Marino, A., et al. 2024, A&A, 691, A189, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451703

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451703 2024

  40. [41]

    K., & Ammon, K

    Jordi, K., Grebel, E. K., & Ammon, K. 2006, A&A, 460, 339, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20066082

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20066082 2006

  41. [42]

    C., & Rappaport, S

    Joss, P. C., & Rappaport, S. A. 1984, ARA&A, 22, 537, doi: 10.1146/annurev.aa.22.090184.002541

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.aa.22.090184.002541 1984

  42. [43]

    S., & Bleeker, J

    Kaastra, J. S., & Bleeker, J. A. M. 2016, A&A, 587, A151, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201527395

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201527395 2016

  43. [44]

    Kajava, J. J. E., Motta, S. E., Sanna, A., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 488, L18, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slz089

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slz089 2019

  44. [45]

    R., & Wijnands, R

    King, A. R., & Wijnands, R. 2006, MNRAS, 366, L31, doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2005.00126.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1745-3933.2005.00126.x 2006

  45. [46]

    Kong, A. K. H., Aryan, A., Li, K. L., et al. 2025, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 17280, 1

    work page 2025

  46. [47]

    2025, MNRAS, 540, 2305, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf853

    Kormpakis, T., Linares, M., & Jos´ e, J. 2025, MNRAS, 540, 2305, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf853

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staf853 2025

  47. [48]

    Kuulkers, E., in’t Zand, J. J. M., Cornelisse, R., et al. 2000, A&A, 358, 993, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0004275

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/0004275 2000

  48. [49]

    2013, A&A, 552, A32, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201219447 La Monaca, F., Di Marco, A., Coti Zelati, F., et al

    Kuulkers, E., Kouveliotou, C., Belloni, T., et al. 2013, A&A, 552, A32, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201219447 La Monaca, F., Di Marco, A., Coti Zelati, F., et al. 2025, A&A, 702, A101, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202555134

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201219447 2013

  49. [50]

    Lewin, W. H. G., van Paradijs, J., & Taam, R. E. 1993, SSRv, 62, 223, doi: 10.1007/BF00196124

    work page doi:10.1007/bf00196124 1993

  50. [51]

    Lewin, W. H. G., van Paradijs, J., & van den Heuvel, E. P. J., eds. 1995, X-ray binaries

    work page 1995

  51. [52]

    A., & Homan, J

    Lin, D., Remillard, R. A., & Homan, J. 2007, ApJ, 667, 1073, doi: 10.1086/521181

    work page doi:10.1086/521181 2007

  52. [53]

    Ludlam, R. M. 2024, Ap&SS, 369, 16, doi: 10.1007/s10509-024-04281-y

    work page doi:10.1007/s10509-024-04281-y 2024

  53. [54]

    2021, ApJ, 911, 45, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abe62f

    Luo, J., Ransom, S., Demorest, P., et al. 2021, ApJ, 911, 45, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abe62f

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abe62f 2021

  54. [55]

    2025, A&A, 699, A288, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202554075

    Malacaria, C., Papitto, A., Campana, S., et al. 2025, A&A, 699, A288, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202554075

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202554075 2025

  55. [56]

    2019, MNRAS, 490, 2300, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2726

    Marino, A., Del Santo, M., Cocchi, M., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 490, 2300, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2726

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2726 2019

  56. [57]

    M., et al

    Marino, A., Anitra, A., Mazzola, S. M., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 515, 3838, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2038

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac2038 2022

  57. [58]

    D., Del Santo, M., et al

    Marino, A., Russell, T. D., Del Santo, M., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 525, 2366, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad2386

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad2386 2023

  58. [59]

    Aql X-1 from dawn 'til dusk: the early rise, fast state transition and decay of its 2024 outburst

    Marino, A., Coti Zelati, F., Alabarta, K., et al. 2025b, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2511.16437, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2511.16437

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2511.16437

  59. [60]

    P., Parsons, S

    McAllister, M., Littlefair, S. P., Parsons, S. G., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 486, 5535, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz976

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz976 2019

  60. [61]

    V., Lutovinov, A

    Molkov, S. V., Lutovinov, A. A., Tsygankov, S. S., et al. 2024, A&A, 690, A353, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450581

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450581 2024

  61. [62]

    S., Dewangan, G

    Mondal, A. S., Dewangan, G. C., & Raychaudhuri, B. 2020, MNRAS, 494, 3177, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1001

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1001 2020

  62. [63]

    Courvoisier, T. J.-L. 1987, ApJ, 313, 792, doi: 10.1086/165017

    work page doi:10.1086/165017 1987

  63. [64]

    2011, MNRAS, 418, 490, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19499.x

    Motta, S., D’A` ı, A., Papitto, A., et al. 2011, MNRAS, 414, 1508, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18483.x Mu˜ noz-Darias, T., Fender, R. P., Motta, S. E., & Belloni, T. M. 2014, MNRAS, 443, 3270, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu1334

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18483.x 2011

  64. [65]

    P., Lu, J

    Muno, M. P., Lu, J. R., Baganoff, F. K., et al. 2005, ApJ, 633, 228, doi: 10.1086/444586 Nasa High Energy Astrophysics Science Archive Research Center (Heasarc). 2014, HEAsoft: Unified Release of FTOOLS and XANADU,, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1408.004

    work page doi:10.1086/444586 2005

  65. [66]

    S., Sanna, A., et al

    Ng, M., Ray, P. S., Sanna, A., et al. 2024, ApJL, 968, L7, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad4edb

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad4edb 2024

  66. [67]

    R., Wu, J

    Ni, K. R., Wu, J. H., Wen, W. F., & Yuan, W. 2025, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 17247, 1

    work page 2025

  67. [68]

    A., Wolf, C., Bessell, M

    Onken, C. A., Wolf, C., Bessell, M. S., et al. 2024, PASA, 41, e061, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2024.53

    work page doi:10.1017/pasa.2024.53 2024

  68. [69]

    2024, A&A, 682, A19, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347955

    Panizo-Espinar, G., Mu˜ noz-Darias, T., Armas Padilla, M., et al. 2024, A&A, 682, A19, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347955

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347955 2024

  69. [70]

    2025, A&A, 694, A37, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451775

    Papitto, A., Di Marco, A., Poutanen, J., et al. 2025, A&A, 694, A37, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451775

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451775 2025

  70. [71]

    J., & Mamajek, E

    Pecaut, M. J., & Mamajek, E. E. 2013, ApJS, 208, 9, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/208/1/9

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/208/1/9 2013

  71. [72]

    2018, MNRAS, 479, 4084, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1735 Planck Collaboration, Aghanim, N., Ashdown, M., et al

    Pintore, F., Sanna, A., Riggio, A., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 479, 4084, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1735 Planck Collaboration, Aghanim, N., Ashdown, M., et al. 2016, A&A, 596, A109, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629022

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1735 2018

  72. [73]

    2011, PRESTO: PulsaR Exploration and Search TOolkit,, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1107.017 http://ascl.net/1107.017

    Ransom, S. 2011, PRESTO: PulsaR Exploration and Search TOolkit,, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1107.017 http://ascl.net/1107.017

    work page 2011

  73. [74]

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

    work page 2001

  74. [75]

    M., Eikenberry, S

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

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1086/342285 2002

  75. [76]

    2025, MNRAS, 544, 13, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf1611

    Rikame, K., Paul, B., Sharma, R., & Jithesh, V. 2025, MNRAS, 544, 13, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf1611

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staf1611 2025

  76. [77]

    D., Norris, J

    Scargle, J. D., Norris, J. P., Jackson, B., & Chiang, J. 2013, ApJ, 764, 167, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/764/2/167

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/764/2/167 2013

  77. [78]

    A., & Dhillon, V

    Smith, D. A., & Dhillon, V. S. 1998, MNRAS, 301, 767, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.1998.02065.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.1998.02065.x 1998

  78. [79]

    L., Archibald, A

    Susobhanan, A., Kaplan, D. L., Archibald, A. M., et al. 2024, ApJ, 971, 150, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad59f7 28W ang et al

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad59f7 2024

  79. [80]

    Smale, A. P. 1993, ApJ, 408, 651, doi: 10.1086/172624

    work page doi:10.1086/172624 1993

  80. [81]

    1999, ApJL, 514, L27, doi: 10.1086/311933

    Ubertini, P., Bazzano, A., Cocchi, M., et al. 1999, ApJL, 514, L27, doi: 10.1086/311933

    work page doi:10.1086/311933 1999

Showing first 80 references.