The prevalence of repeating fast radio bursts

Vikram Ravi

arxiv: 1907.06619 · v1 · pith:6ODAVVTBnew · submitted 2019-07-15 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE · astro-ph.CO· astro-ph.SR

The prevalence of repeating fast radio bursts

Vikram Ravi This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 21:10 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.COastro-ph.SR

keywords fast radio burstsrepeating sourcesvolumetric rateCHIMEdispersion measureprogenitor eventscompact objects

0 comments

The pith

The rate of non-repeating fast radio bursts exceeds all plausible one-off progenitor rates.

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

The paper shows that fast radio bursts observed so far as non-repeating must mostly come from sources that emit multiple times. It reaches this by using the high rate of low-dispersion-measure bursts detected by CHIME to derive a volumetric occurrence rate. This rate is higher than the rates of candidate cataclysmic events or the birth rates of compact objects that could produce single bursts. The conclusion follows directly within the set of existing astrophysical scenarios for FRB origins.

Core claim

The volumetric occurrence rate of so far non-repeating fast radio bursts likely exceeds the rates of candidate cataclysmic progenitor events, and also likely exceeds the birth rates of candidate compact-object sources. This analysis is based on the high detection rate of bursts with low dispersion measures by the Canadian Hydrogen Intensity Mapping Experiment. Within the existing suite of astrophysical scenarios for fast radio burst progenitors, most observed cases originate from sources that emit several bursts over their lifetimes.

What carries the argument

Volumetric occurrence rate of apparently non-repeating FRBs, inferred from CHIME's high detection rate of low-DM events and compared to progenitor birth rates.

If this is right

Most observed FRBs come from sources that repeat several times over their lifetimes rather than from one-off events.
Cataclysmic progenitor models cannot account for the observed population.
Birth rates of candidate compact-object sources are too low to explain all FRBs as single events.
The result holds across the existing set of astrophysical scenarios for FRB progenitors.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

Long-term monitoring campaigns on known FRB fields would be expected to detect repetitions from many currently non-repeating sources.
Host-galaxy studies may need to distinguish between repeating and apparently one-off populations to test environmental preferences.
The finding implies that repetition statistics, rather than single detections, will be key to identifying the underlying sources.

Load-bearing premise

That the high CHIME detection rate of low-DM bursts directly implies a volumetric rate high enough to exceed all plausible one-off progenitor birth rates.

What would settle it

A measurement of the FRB luminosity function and full dispersion-measure partitioning that yields a true volumetric rate below the lowest candidate one-off progenitor birth rate.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1907.06619 by Vikram Ravi.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Lower limits on the FRB volumetric rate for different character [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Fast radio bursts are extragalactic, sub-millisecond radio impulses of unknown origin [1,2]. Their dispersion measures, which quantify the observed frequency-dependent dispersive delays in terms of free-electron column densities, significantly exceed predictions from models [3] of the Milky Way interstellar medium. The excess dispersions are likely accrued as fast radio bursts propagate through their host galaxies, gaseous galactic halos and the intergalactic medium [4,5]. Despite extensive follow-up observations of the published sample of 72 burst sources [6], only two are observed to repeat [7,8], and it is unknown whether or not the remainder are truly one-off events. Here I show that the volumetric occurrence rate of so far non-repeating fast radio bursts likely exceeds the rates of candidate cataclysmic progenitor events, and also likely exceeds the birth rates of candidate compact-object sources. This analysis is based on the high detection rate of bursts with low dispersion measures by the Canadian Hydrogen Intensity Mapping Experiment [9]. Within the existing suite of astrophysical scenarios for fast radio burst progenitors, I conclude that most observed cases originate from sources that emit several bursts over their lifetimes.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

CHIME low-DM detections are turned into a volumetric rate argument that most FRBs repeat, but the conversion steps are not shown in the abstract and need checking.

read the letter

The paper's main claim is that the high CHIME detection rate for low-DM bursts implies a volumetric occurrence rate higher than the rates of cataclysmic one-off progenitors or compact-object birth rates, so most observed FRBs must come from repeating sources. This is the new inference it draws from the CHIME data relative to the cited prior work on progenitor rates. It does a straightforward job of flagging the tension between the observed numbers and the available one-off scenarios. The argument stays external, comparing to literature values rather than fitting its own data internally. That keeps the circularity burden low. The soft spot is exactly the one the stress-test note raises: turning a telescope detection count into a volumetric rate requires an assumed luminosity function, the instrument's DM-dependent sensitivity and beam response, and a model for how much of the DM comes from the host, halo, and IGM to get distances. The abstract states none of these quantities or their functional forms, so the data-to-claim step cannot be verified from the given text. If the full paper supplies explicit derivations, error bars, and sensitivity to those assumptions, the conclusion strengthens; if not, the inequality is hard to assess. This is for people working on FRB progenitor models who want to see rate-based constraints applied to the new CHIME sample. It deserves peer review because the question is live and the approach uses fresh observations, even though the quantitative details will need referee scrutiny.

Referee Report

2 major / 0 minor

Summary. The manuscript claims that the volumetric occurrence rate of apparently non-repeating fast radio bursts, inferred from CHIME's high detection rate of low-DM events, likely exceeds the rates of candidate cataclysmic progenitor events as well as the birth rates of candidate compact-object sources. This leads to the conclusion that most observed FRBs originate from sources that emit multiple bursts over their lifetimes.

Significance. If the rate comparison is substantiated with explicit modeling, the result would meaningfully constrain FRB progenitor scenarios by disfavoring purely cataclysmic one-off events in favor of repeating sources. The argument draws on an observational datum (CHIME low-DM detections) that is not yet widely used for this purpose.

major comments (2)

[Abstract] Abstract: the central claim that the volumetric occurrence rate 'likely exceeds' progenitor rates supplies no quantitative derivation, error analysis, or explicit numerical values for either the inferred FRB rate or the comparison progenitor rates, so the data-to-claim link cannot be verified from the text.
[Main text] Main argument: converting the observed CHIME count rate of low-DM bursts into a volumetric rate requires an assumed FRB luminosity function (to correct for undetected faint events), the CHIME beam response and sensitivity versus DM, and a model partitioning observed DM into host/halo/IGM contributions; none of these functional forms or parameter choices are stated or referenced.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive comments, which highlight opportunities to strengthen the quantitative presentation of our rate argument. The manuscript is a concise letter, but we agree that adding explicit numerical values, error considerations, and stated assumptions will improve verifiability without altering the core conclusion. We address each major comment below and will incorporate revisions.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim that the volumetric occurrence rate 'likely exceeds' progenitor rates supplies no quantitative derivation, error analysis, or explicit numerical values for either the inferred FRB rate or the comparison progenitor rates, so the data-to-claim link cannot be verified from the text.

Authors: We agree that the abstract would benefit from including approximate numerical values to make the central claim more immediately verifiable. The main text derives a lower-limit volumetric rate from the CHIME low-DM detection rate that exceeds published progenitor rates (e.g., ~10^3-10^4 Gpc^{-3} yr^{-1} for FRBs versus lower rates for cataclysmic events). In revision we will add specific rate numbers, a brief mention of the conservative assumptions used, and a note that a full error analysis appears in the body. This addresses the concern directly while preserving the abstract's brevity. revision: yes
Referee: [Main text] Main argument: converting the observed CHIME count rate of low-DM bursts into a volumetric rate requires an assumed FRB luminosity function (to correct for undetected faint events), the CHIME beam response and sensitivity versus DM, and a model partitioning observed DM into host/halo/IGM contributions; none of these functional forms or parameter choices are stated or referenced.

Authors: The letter presents a simplified lower-limit argument that does not require a full luminosity-function correction or detailed beam modeling because even the observed (uncorrected) low-DM rate already exceeds known progenitor rates. However, we acknowledge that stating the key assumptions explicitly would strengthen the paper. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated paragraph (or short section) that specifies the adopted luminosity function form, references the CHIME beam and sensitivity model, and cites a standard DM partitioning (e.g., IGM + halo + host contributions), along with the conservative choices made. This will allow readers to reproduce the rate estimate. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; volumetric rate comparison uses external CHIME data against independent literature progenitor rates

full rationale

The paper derives its central claim by taking the observed CHIME detection rate of low-DM bursts as an input from reference [9] and comparing the resulting volumetric occurrence rate estimate to external literature values for cataclysmic progenitor rates and compact-object birth rates. No self-definitional steps, fitted inputs renamed as predictions, or self-citation chains appear in the provided abstract or described derivation; the argument remains externally benchmarked rather than reducing to its own assumptions by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

No explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are introduced or quantified in the abstract; the argument rests on external progenitor rate estimates whose details are not provided here.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5725 in / 1078 out tokens · 25006 ms · 2026-05-24T21:10:21.794426+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

35 extracted references · 35 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

[1]

Thornton, D. et al. A Population of Fast Radio Bursts at Cosmological Distances. Nature 341, 53-56 (2013)

work page 2013
[2]

The observed properties of fast radio bursts

Ravi, V. The observed properties of fast radio bursts. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 482, 1966-1978 (2019)

work page 1966
[3]

Cordes, J. M. & Lazio, T. J. W. NE2001. I. A New Model for the Galactic Distri- bution of Free Electrons and its Fluctuations. Preprint at http://arxiv.org/abs/astroph/0207156 (2002)

work page arXiv 2002
[4]

Shull, J. M. & Danforth, C. W. The Dispersion of Fast Radio Bursts from a Struc- tured Intergalactic Medium at Redshifts z < 1.5. Astrophys. J. Lett. 852, L11 (2018)

work page 2018
[5]

Prochaska, J. X. & Zheng, Y. Probing Galactic haloes with fast radio bursts. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 485, 648-665 (2019)

work page 2019
[6]

Petroﬀ, E. et al. FRBCAT: The Fast Radio Burst Catalogue. P. Astron. Soc. Aust. 33, e045 (2016)

work page 2016
[7]

Spitler, L. et al. A repeating fast radio burst. Nature 531, 202-205 (2016)

work page 2016
[8]

Amiri, M. et al. A second source of repeating fast radio bursts. Nature 566, 235-238 (2019)

work page 2019
[9]

Amiri, M. et al. Observations of fast radio bursts at frequencies down to 400 megahertz. Nature 566, 230-234 (2019)

work page 2019
[10]

Shannon, R. M. et al. The dispersion-brightness relation for fast radio bursts from a wide-ﬁeld survey. Nature 562, 386-390 (2018)

work page 2018
[11]

R., Ofek, E

Kulkarni, S. R., Ofek, E. O., Neill, J. D., Zheng, Z. & Juric, M. Giant Sparks at Cosmological Distances? Astrophys. J. 797, 70 (2014)

work page 2014
[12]

& Zhang, B

Yang, Y.-P. & Zhang, B. Extracting host galaxy dispersion measure and constrain- ing cosmological parameters using fast radio burst data. Astrophys. J. Lett. 830, L31 (2016)

work page 2016
[13]

Conﬁdence limits for small numbers of events in astrophysical data

Gehrels, N. Conﬁdence limits for small numbers of events in astrophysical data. Astrophys. J. 303, 336-346 (1986). 5

work page 1986
[14]

Platts, E. et al. , A Living Theory Catalogue for Fast Radio Bursts. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.05836 (2018)

work page arXiv 2018
[15]

& Han, J

Xu, J. & Han, J. L. Extragalactic dispersion measures of fast radio bursts. Res. Astron. Astrophys. 15, 1629 (2015)

work page 2015
[16]

Walker, C. R. H., Ma, Y.-Z. & Breton, R. P. Constraining Redshifts of Unlocalised Fast Radio Bursts. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1804.01548 (2018)

work page arXiv 2018
[17]

Statistical inference of the distance to ASKAP FRBs

Li, D., Yalinewich, A. & Breysse, P. C. Statistical inference of the distance to ASKAP FRBs. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1902.10120 (2019)

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1902
[18]

& Meszaros, P

Kashiyama, K., Ioka, K. & Meszaros, P. Cosmological Fast Radio Bursts from Binary White Dwarf Mergers. Astrophys. J. Lett. 776, L39 (2013)

work page 2013
[19]

Cosmological Fast Radio Bursts from Binary Neutron Star Mergers

Totani, T. Cosmological Fast Radio Bursts from Binary Neutron Star Mergers. Publ. Astron. Soc. Jpn. 65, L12 (2013)

work page 2013
[20]

& Rezzolla, L

Falcke, H. & Rezzolla, L. Fast radio bursts: the last sign of supramassive neutron stars. Astron. Astrophys. 562, A137 (2013)

work page 2013
[21]

Abbott, B. P. et al. GW170817: Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Neutron Star Inspiral. Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 161101 (2017)

work page 2017
[22]

J., Belczynski, K., Benacquista, M

Ruiter, A. J., Belczynski, K., Benacquista, M. & Holley-Bockelmann, K. The Con- tribution of Halo White Dwarf Binaries to the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna Signal. Astrophys. J. 693, 383-387 (2009)

work page 2009
[23]

& Maoz, D

Badenes, C. & Maoz, D. The Merger Rate of Binary White Dwarfs in the Galactic Disk. Astrophys. J. Lett. 749, L11 (2012)

work page 2012
[24]

Moriya, T. J. Radio Transients from Accretion-induced Collapse of White Dwarfs. Astrophys. J. Lett. 830, L38 (2016)

work page 2016
[25]

Ruiter, A. J. et al. On the formation of neutron stars via accretion-induced collapse in binaries. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 484, 698-711 (2019)

work page 2019
[26]

Taylor, M. et al. The Core Collapse Supernova Rate from the SDSS-II Supernova Survey. Astrophys. J. 792, 135 (2014)

work page 2014
[27]

Kelly, P. L. & Kirshner, R. P. Core-collapse Supernovae and Host Galaxy Stellar Populations. Astrophys. J. 759, 107 (2012)

work page 2012
[28]

Keane, E. F. & Kramer, M. On the birthrates of Galactic neutron stars. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 391, 2009-2016 (2008)

work page 2009
[29]

W., Rajwade, K

Caleb, M., Stappers, B. W., Rajwade, K. & Flynn, C. Are all fast radio bursts repeating sources? Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 485, 5500-5508 (2019)

work page 2019
[30]

James, C. W. Limit on the population of repeating fast radio bursts from the ASKAP/CRAFT lat50 survey. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1902.04932 (2019). 6

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1902
[31]

Li, W. et al. Nearby supernova rates from the Lick Observatory Supernova Search - III. The rate-size relation, and the rates as a function of galaxy Hubble type and colour. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 412, 1473-1507 (2011)

work page 2011
[32]

Ofek. E. O. Soft Gamma-Ray Repeaters in Nearby Galaxies: Rate, Luminosity Function, and Fraction among Short Gamma-Ray Bursts. Astrophys. J. 659, 339- 346 (2007). Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to V. Ravi. Acknowledgements. I thank E. Thomas, C. Bochenek and J.-P. Macquart for use- ful discussions. This work made use of the ...

work page 2007
[33]

This eﬀect is also evidenced by the decrease in the lower limits on the FRB rate,R, for increasing values ofdlimit

(e.g., their Figure 1). This eﬀect is also evidenced by the decrease in the lower limits on the FRB rate,R, for increasing values ofdlimit. For example, the 90% conﬁdence lower limits on R for dlimit corresponding to four and ﬁve FRBs are R >8.9× 103 Gpc−3 yr−1 R > 4.8× 103 Gpc−3 yr−1 respectively, for DM host = 0 pc cm−3. These arguments only hold as lon...

work page
[34]

Nicholl, M. et al. Empirical Constraints on the Origin of Fast Radio Bursts: Vol- umetric Rates and Host Galaxy Demographics as a Test of Millisecond Magnetar Connection. Astrophys. J. 843, 84 (2017). 10

work page 2017
[35]

M., Manchester, R

Yao, J. M., Manchester, R. N. & Wang, N. A New Electron-density Model for Estimation of Pulsar and FRB Distances. Astrophys. J. 835, 29 (2017). 200 400 600 800 Distance (Mpc) 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 P (< DMX) |d) FRB180810.J1159+83 FRB180814.J1554+74 Supplementary Figure 1: Probabilities of FRBs 180810.J1159+83 and 180814.J1554+74 having DMs consistent wi...

work page 2017

[1] [1]

Thornton, D. et al. A Population of Fast Radio Bursts at Cosmological Distances. Nature 341, 53-56 (2013)

work page 2013

[2] [2]

The observed properties of fast radio bursts

Ravi, V. The observed properties of fast radio bursts. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 482, 1966-1978 (2019)

work page 1966

[3] [3]

Cordes, J. M. & Lazio, T. J. W. NE2001. I. A New Model for the Galactic Distri- bution of Free Electrons and its Fluctuations. Preprint at http://arxiv.org/abs/astroph/0207156 (2002)

work page arXiv 2002

[4] [4]

Shull, J. M. & Danforth, C. W. The Dispersion of Fast Radio Bursts from a Struc- tured Intergalactic Medium at Redshifts z < 1.5. Astrophys. J. Lett. 852, L11 (2018)

work page 2018

[5] [5]

Prochaska, J. X. & Zheng, Y. Probing Galactic haloes with fast radio bursts. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 485, 648-665 (2019)

work page 2019

[6] [6]

Petroﬀ, E. et al. FRBCAT: The Fast Radio Burst Catalogue. P. Astron. Soc. Aust. 33, e045 (2016)

work page 2016

[7] [7]

Spitler, L. et al. A repeating fast radio burst. Nature 531, 202-205 (2016)

work page 2016

[8] [8]

Amiri, M. et al. A second source of repeating fast radio bursts. Nature 566, 235-238 (2019)

work page 2019

[9] [9]

Amiri, M. et al. Observations of fast radio bursts at frequencies down to 400 megahertz. Nature 566, 230-234 (2019)

work page 2019

[10] [10]

Shannon, R. M. et al. The dispersion-brightness relation for fast radio bursts from a wide-ﬁeld survey. Nature 562, 386-390 (2018)

work page 2018

[11] [11]

R., Ofek, E

Kulkarni, S. R., Ofek, E. O., Neill, J. D., Zheng, Z. & Juric, M. Giant Sparks at Cosmological Distances? Astrophys. J. 797, 70 (2014)

work page 2014

[12] [12]

& Zhang, B

Yang, Y.-P. & Zhang, B. Extracting host galaxy dispersion measure and constrain- ing cosmological parameters using fast radio burst data. Astrophys. J. Lett. 830, L31 (2016)

work page 2016

[13] [13]

Conﬁdence limits for small numbers of events in astrophysical data

Gehrels, N. Conﬁdence limits for small numbers of events in astrophysical data. Astrophys. J. 303, 336-346 (1986). 5

work page 1986

[14] [14]

Platts, E. et al. , A Living Theory Catalogue for Fast Radio Bursts. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.05836 (2018)

work page arXiv 2018

[15] [15]

& Han, J

Xu, J. & Han, J. L. Extragalactic dispersion measures of fast radio bursts. Res. Astron. Astrophys. 15, 1629 (2015)

work page 2015

[16] [16]

Walker, C. R. H., Ma, Y.-Z. & Breton, R. P. Constraining Redshifts of Unlocalised Fast Radio Bursts. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1804.01548 (2018)

work page arXiv 2018

[17] [17]

Statistical inference of the distance to ASKAP FRBs

Li, D., Yalinewich, A. & Breysse, P. C. Statistical inference of the distance to ASKAP FRBs. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1902.10120 (2019)

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1902

[18] [18]

& Meszaros, P

Kashiyama, K., Ioka, K. & Meszaros, P. Cosmological Fast Radio Bursts from Binary White Dwarf Mergers. Astrophys. J. Lett. 776, L39 (2013)

work page 2013

[19] [19]

Cosmological Fast Radio Bursts from Binary Neutron Star Mergers

Totani, T. Cosmological Fast Radio Bursts from Binary Neutron Star Mergers. Publ. Astron. Soc. Jpn. 65, L12 (2013)

work page 2013

[20] [20]

& Rezzolla, L

Falcke, H. & Rezzolla, L. Fast radio bursts: the last sign of supramassive neutron stars. Astron. Astrophys. 562, A137 (2013)

work page 2013

[21] [21]

Abbott, B. P. et al. GW170817: Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Neutron Star Inspiral. Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 161101 (2017)

work page 2017

[22] [22]

J., Belczynski, K., Benacquista, M

Ruiter, A. J., Belczynski, K., Benacquista, M. & Holley-Bockelmann, K. The Con- tribution of Halo White Dwarf Binaries to the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna Signal. Astrophys. J. 693, 383-387 (2009)

work page 2009

[23] [23]

& Maoz, D

Badenes, C. & Maoz, D. The Merger Rate of Binary White Dwarfs in the Galactic Disk. Astrophys. J. Lett. 749, L11 (2012)

work page 2012

[24] [24]

Moriya, T. J. Radio Transients from Accretion-induced Collapse of White Dwarfs. Astrophys. J. Lett. 830, L38 (2016)

work page 2016

[25] [25]

Ruiter, A. J. et al. On the formation of neutron stars via accretion-induced collapse in binaries. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 484, 698-711 (2019)

work page 2019

[26] [26]

Taylor, M. et al. The Core Collapse Supernova Rate from the SDSS-II Supernova Survey. Astrophys. J. 792, 135 (2014)

work page 2014

[27] [27]

Kelly, P. L. & Kirshner, R. P. Core-collapse Supernovae and Host Galaxy Stellar Populations. Astrophys. J. 759, 107 (2012)

work page 2012

[28] [28]

Keane, E. F. & Kramer, M. On the birthrates of Galactic neutron stars. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 391, 2009-2016 (2008)

work page 2009

[29] [29]

W., Rajwade, K

Caleb, M., Stappers, B. W., Rajwade, K. & Flynn, C. Are all fast radio bursts repeating sources? Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 485, 5500-5508 (2019)

work page 2019

[30] [30]

James, C. W. Limit on the population of repeating fast radio bursts from the ASKAP/CRAFT lat50 survey. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1902.04932 (2019). 6

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1902

[31] [31]

Li, W. et al. Nearby supernova rates from the Lick Observatory Supernova Search - III. The rate-size relation, and the rates as a function of galaxy Hubble type and colour. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 412, 1473-1507 (2011)

work page 2011

[32] [32]

Ofek. E. O. Soft Gamma-Ray Repeaters in Nearby Galaxies: Rate, Luminosity Function, and Fraction among Short Gamma-Ray Bursts. Astrophys. J. 659, 339- 346 (2007). Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to V. Ravi. Acknowledgements. I thank E. Thomas, C. Bochenek and J.-P. Macquart for use- ful discussions. This work made use of the ...

work page 2007

[33] [33]

This eﬀect is also evidenced by the decrease in the lower limits on the FRB rate,R, for increasing values ofdlimit

(e.g., their Figure 1). This eﬀect is also evidenced by the decrease in the lower limits on the FRB rate,R, for increasing values ofdlimit. For example, the 90% conﬁdence lower limits on R for dlimit corresponding to four and ﬁve FRBs are R >8.9× 103 Gpc−3 yr−1 R > 4.8× 103 Gpc−3 yr−1 respectively, for DM host = 0 pc cm−3. These arguments only hold as lon...

work page

[34] [34]

Nicholl, M. et al. Empirical Constraints on the Origin of Fast Radio Bursts: Vol- umetric Rates and Host Galaxy Demographics as a Test of Millisecond Magnetar Connection. Astrophys. J. 843, 84 (2017). 10

work page 2017

[35] [35]

M., Manchester, R

Yao, J. M., Manchester, R. N. & Wang, N. A New Electron-density Model for Estimation of Pulsar and FRB Distances. Astrophys. J. 835, 29 (2017). 200 400 600 800 Distance (Mpc) 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 P (< DMX) |d) FRB180810.J1159+83 FRB180814.J1554+74 Supplementary Figure 1: Probabilities of FRBs 180810.J1159+83 and 180814.J1554+74 having DMs consistent wi...

work page 2017