Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 8 minor 44 references

An X-ray and optical study of the outbursting behaviour of the SMC Be X-ray binary SXP 91.1

T0 review · 4 major / 8 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The neutron star in SXP 91.1 has been spinning up at a steady, unusually high rate for more than two decades, according to this study of its X-ray and optical behaviour.

desk verdict Solid single-source study that makes a plausible 20-year spin-up claim but under-quantifies the fit and leaves the short-term Pdot at the mercy of orbital Doppler. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.04638 v1 pith:YZDXHVY2 submitted 2019-08-13 astro-ph.HE

Itumeleng Monageng , Malcolm Coe , Jamie Kennea , Lee Townsend , David Buckley , Vanessa McBride , Andrzej Udalski , Phil Evans
show 1 more author
Paul Roche
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords BeX-raybinarySXP91.1SmallMagellanicCloudneutronstarspin-uppulseperiodcircumstellardisctypeIoutbursttiming
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

SXP 91.1 is a Be X-ray binary in the Small Magellanic Cloud whose neutron star appears to have been spinning up at an almost constant rate for more than two decades. The paper argues that during the November 2018 type I outburst the optical and X-ray light curves rose and fell together, that the circumstellar disc has been stable and nearly face-on over the whole historical record, and that this persistent, low-level accretion has produced one of the highest average spin-up rates known among SMC pulsars, about $1.39\times10^{-8}$ s/s. If right, the system offers a clean case study of how steady disc-fed accretion torques a neutron star without giant outbursts, and it sharpens the connection between pulse-period change and mass accretion rate.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing objects are the 20-year pulse-period history assembled from RXTE, NuSTAR, and Swift measurements (Fig. 6) and the folded optical and X-ray light curves at the 88.37-day orbital period (Fig. 7). The pulse-period history is used to extract a single long-term spin-up rate by a weighted linear fit, while the folded light curves place the spin-up in binary phase and show that the X-ray outburst is shorter than, and phase-offset from, the optical disc-distortion signal. The colour-magnitude diagrams and H-alpha equivalent-width series supply the supporting geometry: a low-inclination, always-present disc whose growth tracks the X-ray activity.

What would settle it

Re-measure the 2018 pulse periods with one instrument at high cadence and compare them with RXTE-era measurements reduced by the same pipeline; if the apparent 0.438 s/year decrease is an artifact of cross-instrument offsets, the two datasets will not connect smoothly. Alternatively, a Chandra or XMM-Newton observation taken today should find the period at or below the extrapolated line, while a period significantly above the line would falsify the steady spin-up.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the neutron star in SXP 91.1 shows an unusually steady spin-up over a 20-year pulse-period history, with a weighted linear fit giving a period decrease of 0.438 s/year, i.e. $\dot P = -1.39\times10^{-8}$ s/s, and an even higher value of $-3.67\times10^{-8}$ s/s from the three NuSTAR measurements taken during the 2018 outburst. The authors interpret this as evidence that the system accretes matter almost continuously from a stable, always-present circumstellar disc rather than only in isolated impulses: the disc lies at low inclination, as inferred from the colour-magnitude correlation; the optical outburst lasts over half of the 88.37-day binary cycle; the X-ray source never fades completely; and the spin-up is strongest at binary phases where the X-ray flux is highest. They conclude that SXP 91.1 is unusual in having a consistent spin-period derivative over many years, with a spin-up rate among the highest for known SMC pulsars and more than an order of magnitude above that of most SMC systems.

Load-bearing premise

The 20-year spin-up trend assumes that pulse-period measurements from RXTE, NuSTAR, and Swift can be combined as a single homogeneous series, with no unknown instrument-to-instrument offset masquerading as a steady period decrease.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the spin-up is as steady as claimed, the accretion torque on SXP 91.1's neutron star has been nearly constant for two decades, implying the disc supply does not vary dramatically between outbursts.
  • The phase-folded behaviour implies the neutron star distorts the disc for over half the orbit and accretes at a low level throughout, so the orbit is likely of low eccentricity; this can be tested with a radial-velocity orbit.
  • The high spin-up rate places SXP 91.1 at the top of the SMC pulsar spin-up distribution, so models of SMC Be X-ray binary evolution must explain how a source that only produces type I outbursts spins up faster than most transient systems.
  • The observed maximum spin-up at maximum X-ray flux supports the direct link between mass accretion rate and $\dot P$, suggesting that $\dot P$ can serve as a phase-resolved tracer of accretion in similar systems.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because the long-term $\dot P$ rests on merging RXTE, NuSTAR, and Swift pulse periods, a natural test is to look for inter-instrument period offsets; if none exist, the strictly linear trend also constrains any longer-term torque variability, which would smooth out a randomly varying accretion rate over 20 years.
  • The same analysis could be applied to other SMC Be X-ray binaries with long RXTE histories; systems with low inclinations and always-on discs should show similarly steady $\dot P$, providing an observational handle on disc truncation and orbital eccentricity.
  • If a future type II giant outburst occurs in SXP 91.1, comparing the spin-up during that event with the present values would separate the contribution of the persistent disc-fed torque from the impulsive accretion torque.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 8 minor

Summary. This paper presents an X-ray and optical study of the SMC Be X-ray binary SXP 91.1 during its November 2018 type I outburst, using Swift/XRT, NuSTAR, SALT, and long-term OGLE/MACHO photometry. The authors report synchronous X-ray and optical variability, a stable circumstellar disc over two decades, a positive colour-magnitude correlation interpreted as a low-inclination disc, persistent phase offsets between the optical and X-ray folded light curves, and a spin-period derivative of 0.438 s/yr (1.39e-8 s/s) over 20 years, with a higher value of 3.67e-8 s/s during the outburst. They conclude that SXP 91.1 has an unusually consistent and high spin-up rate compared with other SMC pulsars.

Significance. If the central claim holds, SXP 91.1 would be a notable object: a persistently spinning-up Be X-ray binary that only exhibits type I outbursts, with a spin-up rate at the high end of the SMC distribution. The paper assembles valuable heterogeneous data sets, including new NuSTAR timing measurements and long-term OGLE/MACHO photometry, and the qualitative picture (spin-up, disc-accretion coupling) is coherent. However, the headline quantitative result - the 20-year spin-up rate and its consistency - lacks the statistical and systematic-error analysis needed to support the claim. The paper would benefit from a proper fit characterization and cross-instrument validation, which are within the scope of a revision.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 3.4, Fig. 6] The linear fit to the pulse-period history is reported as a period decrease of 0.438 s/yr, but no slope uncertainty, goodness-of-fit statistic (e.g., reduced chi-square), or residual analysis is provided. The claim of a 'consistent spin period derivative over many years' depends on demonstrating that the scatter about the line is consistent with the measurement errors; without this, the 20-year trend could be an average over a more complex period evolution. Please report the fit parameters, uncertainties, and a residual plot or scatter measurement.
  2. [Section 3.4, Fig. 6] All pre-MJD 56000 pulse periods come from RXTE while the 2018 points come from NuSTAR. No check is made for inter-instrument period offsets; such offsets can be significant at the 0.001 s level and could bias the slope or inflate the scatter. Please validate the consistency of the two instruments, for example by analyzing a contemporaneous source observation with both, or by fitting the RXTE data alone and examining the residuals at the NuSTAR epoch.
  3. [Section 3.4, Table 2] The NuSTAR-only spin-up rate of 3.67e-8 s/s is derived from three points spanning only 11.44 days, with a total period change of 0.038 s. Since the system has no precise binary solution (as noted in the text), the orbital Doppler modulation of the pulse period, which for typical Be X-ray binary radial velocities is of order 0.03-0.09 s, could contribute significantly to this short-term slope. The authors should either correct for orbital Doppler using the 88.37-day orbital period or quote the short-term P-dot as a provisional value with a systematic uncertainty term reflecting this.
  4. [Section 4.1, Fig. 7, and Section 3.2, Fig. 3] The phase offset between the optical and X-ray folded light curves and the positive colour-magnitude correlation are described qualitatively with no quantitative measures. For example, no peak-phase difference and its uncertainty are given for the phase offset, and no correlation coefficient or significance is quoted for the colour-magnitude relation. These claims would be strengthened by simple numerical estimates.
minor comments (8)
  1. [Section 2.1, Fig. 1] The Swift light curve is in counts/s; the text states a peak luminosity of 9e35 erg/s, but the conversion used is not given. Please state the count-rate-to-flux conversion or the assumed spectrum.
  2. [Section 3.3, Table 1] The description of the HRS EW scaling is terse. Please clarify how the RSS/HRS pairs were selected and the exact scaling procedure applied.
  3. [Section 3.4, Table 2] The Swift/XRT detection (MJD 58431.46, period 83.293 ± 1.41 s) is not shown in Fig. 6; indicate this in the caption or text to avoid confusion.
  4. [Section 4.2] The sentence 'As a result, its spin up rate is on the high end' is not a consequence of the preceding sentence; rephrase for clarity.
  5. [Section 5] The claim 'at least an order of magnitude larger compared to a majority (>60%)' is vague. Please specify the comparison with the Klus et al. (2014) sample, e.g., the median P-dot of SMC pulsars and the number of sources with comparable values.
  6. [Figure 2 caption] The caption contains 'MACHOR-band', which should be 'MACHO R-band'.
  7. [Section 3.3] The sentence 'The timescales for these changes, however, are much longer (≥ 1 year; ...) than the those seen in the spectra shown in this work' contains a typo: 'than the those' should be 'than those'.
  8. [Section 3.4] The sentence 'Fig. 7 confirms, perhaps unsurprisingly, that the NS spins up as a direct result of the mass accretion rate (seen as seen in the increase in X-ray flux)' contains a repetition ('seen as seen'); rephrase.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No circularity: spin-up rate and disc behaviour are directly measured; interpretive links are empirical, not fitted.

full rationale

Circularity score 1. This is an observational timing and photometry paper; its central claims are measurements, not model derivations. The spin-up rate (0.438 s/yr, 1.39e-8 s/s in Section 3.4) is a weighted linear fit to independently measured pulse periods from RXTE (Townsend et al. 2013), NuSTAR (Monageng et al. 2019) and Swift; no parameter is fitted and then renamed a prediction. The claim that P-dot is largest when the accretion rate is largest (Fig. 7) is an empirical superposition of two independently measured quantities (pulse periods and XRT count rates) folded at an explicitly arbitrary phase: the paper states "Note that since we do not have a precise binary solution for this system we cannot say exactly where periastron occurs. Thus the binary phase shown in this figure is arbitrary," so the alignment is not manufactured by tuning a phase. The H-alpha EW calibration (scaling HRS EWs to RSS via closest-in-time pairs) is a zero-point correction and does not force the reported synchronous optical/X-ray evolution. The self-citations (Townsend et al. 2013; Kennea et al. 2018; Monageng et al. 2019; Klus et al. 2014) are data and catalog references with published uncertainties, externally checkable; they are context, not load-bearing theoretical premises, and no uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported from them. The reviewer-level concern that the 20-year 'consistent' trend lacks reported slope uncertainty, reduced chi-square, residual tests, and cross-instrument calibration, and that the 2018 short-term P-dot may be contaminated by an unmodelled orbital Doppler term, is a statistical robustness/correctness matter, not a circular reduction; the claims are falsifiable by the same data they cite.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are invented. The analysis rests on standard BeXB phenomenology, one fitted spin-up slope, a few calibration choices from prior literature, and the assumption that archived pulse-period measurements from different instruments are commensurable.

free parameters (1)
  • Spin-up rate dP/dt (linear fit slope) = -0.438 s/year (1.39e-8 s/s)
    Derived from a weighted linear fit to the pulse period history in Fig. 6; the central claim of a consistent spin-up depends on this fitted slope.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption A Be X-ray binary consists of a Be star with a Keplerian decretion disc and a neutron star that accretes from it, producing X-ray outbursts.
    Standard model invoked throughout; used to interpret optical variability as disc growth and X-rays as accretion.
  • domain assumption The H-alpha equivalent width traces the size and density of the Be disc.
    Used in Sections 3.1 and 3.3 to infer that the disc grows during the outburst.
  • domain assumption A positive colour-magnitude correlation indicates a low disc inclination angle (near face-on).
    Invoked in Section 3.2, following Harmanec 1983 and Rajoelimanana et al. 2011.
  • domain assumption The orbital period of 88.37 d is taken from Bird et al. (2012) and assumed stable over the full data span.
    Used for phase folding in Section 4.1 and Fig. 7.
  • domain assumption The source is at the SMC distance of 62 kpc (Scowcroft et al. 2016).
    Used to convert count rate to luminosity in Section 2.1.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of An X-ray and optical study of the outbursting behaviour of the SMC Be X-ray binary SXP 91.1." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YZDXHVY2

@misc{pith2026190804638,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: An X-ray and optical study of the outbursting behaviour of the SMC Be X-ray binary SXP 91.1},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YZDXHVY2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.04638}
}
read the original abstract

In this paper we report on the optical and X-ray behaviour of the Be X-ray binary, SXP 91.1, during a recent type I outburst. We monitored the outburst using the Neil Gehrels Swift Observatory. These data were supported by optical data from the Southern African Large Telescope (SALT) and the Optical Gravitational Lensing Experiment (OGLE) to show the circumstellar disc activity. Matter from this disc accretes onto the neutron star, giving rise to the X-ray outburst as seen in the synchronous evolution of the optical and X-ray lightcurves. Using data taken with OGLE we show that the circumstellar disc has exhibited stable behaviour over two decades. A positive correlation is seen between the colour and magnitude from the OGLE and MACHO observations, which indicates that the disc is orientated at relatively low inclination angles. From the OGLE and Swift data, we demonstrate that the system has shown relative phase offsets that have persisted for many years. The spin period derivative is seen to be at maximum spin-up at phases when the mass accretion rate is at maximum. We show that the neutron star in SXP 91.1 is an unusual member of its class in that it has had a consistent spin period derivative over many years, with the average spin-up rate being one of the highest for known SMC pulsars. The most recent measurements of the spin-up rate reveal higher values than the global trend, which is attributed to the recent mass accretion event leading to the current outburst.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.04638 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The Swift X-ray (top panel), Hα EW (middle panel; blue squares are RSS observations and red circles are from HRS) and OGLE I-band measurements (bottom panel, black triangles) during the current outburst. as it sets a limit to the extent to which the disc can grow. The correlation between the increase in X-ray activity and optical flux, as seen in the current outburst, appears to be a consistent historic feature of t… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. shows the extent of the Hα emission in the region surrounding SXP 91.1. For the HRS spectra the background fibre was positioned 1 arcmin to the east of the target (the leftmost edge of the green circle in the figure). There is ev￾idence of low level Hα emission at this position, so the Hα equivalent width (EW) measurements from HRS may be a slight underestimate due to over-subtraction of the back￾ground. To account … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. OGLE (V − I) vs I (top) and MACHO (V − R) vs R (bottom) colour magnitude diagrams. A disc-less B0.5III−V star in the SMC has an apparent I-band magnitude of ∼15.5 and colour index of (V − I) ∼ −0.3. The arrows indicate the direction of the evolution of the variability with time. of the RSS spectra where we see the central depression persist from the background over-subtraction. Examples of the Hα emission line are s… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The pulse period history of SXP 91.1. All data points before MJD 56000 come from RXTE. There are 3 data points after this date and they are from NuSTAR. The straight line shows the weighted best linear fit to the data. See text for further details. 4 DISCUSSION 4.1 Lon…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Hα line profiles obtained using SALT during the cur￾rent outburst. The top three were obtained using HRS and the rest are from RSS observations. The bottom spectrum is from the earliest observation, taken approximately three months before the current outburst, demonstr…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: All OGLE (upper panel) and Swift (middle panel) data folded at the binary period. Binary phase is arbitrary but the same for both datasets. The folded PÛ measurements weighted in phase bins of 0.2 (lower panel). The dashed horizontal line shows the mean long-term PÛ of…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 22 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    T., ed., Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series Vol

    Alcock C., et al., 1993, in Soifer B. T., ed., Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series Vol. 43, Sky Surveys. Protostars to Protogalaxies. p. 291

    work page 1993

  2. [2]

    J., de Ruijsscher R

    Ballester P., 1992, in Grosb l P. J., de Ruijsscher R. C. E., eds, European Southern Observatory Conference and Workshop Proceedings Vol. 41, European Southern Observatory Conference and Workshop Proceedings. p. 177

    work page 1992

  3. [3]

    J., Coe M

    Bird A. J., Coe M. J., McBride V. A., Udalski A., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21163.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012MNRAS.423.3663B 423, 3663

    arXiv 2012

  4. [4]

    G., et al., 2010, in Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy III

    Bramall D. G., et al., 2010, in Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy III. p. 77354F, @doi 10.1117/12.856382

    doi:10.1117/12.856382 2010

  5. [5]

    G., et al., 2012, in Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy IV

    Bramall D. G., et al., 2012, in Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy IV. p. 84460A, @doi 10.1117/12.925935

    doi:10.1117/12.925935 2012

  6. [6]

    Buckley D. A. H., Swart G. P., Meiring J. G., 2006, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series. p. 62670Z, @doi 10.1117/12.673750

    doi:10.1117/12.673750 2006

  7. [7]

    B., Nordsieck K

    Burgh E. B., Nordsieck K. H., Kobulnicky H. A., Williams T. B., O'Donoghue D., Smith M. P., Percival J. W., 2003, in Iye M., Moorwood A. F. M., eds, Vol. 4841, Instrument Design and Performance for Optical/Infrared Ground-based Telescopes. pp 1463--1471, @doi 10.1117/12.460312

    doi:10.1117/12.460312 2003

  8. [8]

    A., Gruber D

    Coburn W., Heindl W. A., Gruber D. E., Rothschild R. E., Staubert R., Wilms J., Kreykenbohm I., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1086/320565 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001ApJ...552..738C 552, 738

    doi:10.1086/320565 2001

Show all 44 references
  1. [9]

    J., Kirk J., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv1283 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.452..969C 452, 969

    Coe M. J., Kirk J., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv1283 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.452..969C 452, 969

    2015 doi

  2. [10]

    E., Lochner J

    Corbet R., Marshall F. E., Lochner J. C., Ozaki M., Ueda Y., 1998, , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998IAUC.6803....1C 6803

    1998

  3. [11]

    A., et al., 2014, in Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy V

    Crause L. A., et al., 2014, in Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy V. p. 91476T, @doi 10.1117/12.2055635

    2014 doi

  4. [12]

    M., 2015, pyhrs: Spectroscopic data reduction package for SALT , Astrophysics Source Code Library ( @eprint ascl 1511.005 )

    Crawford S. M., 2015, pyhrs: Spectroscopic data reduction package for SALT , Astrophysics Source Code Library ( @eprint ascl 1511.005 )

    2015

  5. [13]

    M., et al., 2012, PySALT: SALT science pipeline , Astrophysics Source Code Library ( @eprint ascl 1207.010 )

    Crawford S. M., et al., 2012, PySALT: SALT science pipeline , Astrophysics Source Code Library ( @eprint ascl 1207.010 )

    2012

  6. [14]

    M., Pfahl E., Rappaport S

    Delgado-Mart \' H., Levine A. M., Pfahl E., Rappaport S. A., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1086/318236 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001ApJ...546..455D 546, 455

    2001 doi

  7. [16]

    Gehrels N., et al., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1086/422091 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004ApJ...611.1005G 611, 1005

    2004 doi

  8. [17]

    Harmanec P., 1983, Hvar Observatory Bulletin, http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1983HvaOB...7...55H 7, 55

    1983

  9. [18]

    A., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/770/2/103 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...770..103H 770, 103

    Harrison F. A., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/770/2/103 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...770..103H 770, 103

    2013 doi

  10. [19]

    A., Coe M

    Kennea J. A., Coe M. J., Evans P. A., Waters J., Jasko R. E., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aae839 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...868...47K 868, 47

    2018 doi

  11. [20]

    Klus H., Ho W. C. G., Coe M. J., Corbet R. H. D., Townsend L. J., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt2192 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.437.3863K 437, 3863

    2014 doi

  12. [21]

    Y., Gvaramadze V

    Kniazev A. Y., Gvaramadze V. V., Berdnikov L. N., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw889 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.459.3068K 459, 3068

    2016 doi

  13. [22]

    A., Nordsieck K

    Kobulnicky H. A., Nordsieck K. H., Burgh E. B., Smith M. P., Percival J. W., Williams T. B., O'Donoghue D., 2003, in Iye M., Moorwood A. F. M., eds, Vol. 4841, Instrument Design and Performance for Optical/Infrared Ground-based Telescopes. pp 1634--1644, @doi 10.1117/12.460315

    2003 doi

  14. [23]

    E., Lochner J

    Marshall F. E., Lochner J. C., Takeshima T., 1997, , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997IAUC.6777....2M 6777

    1997

  15. [24]

    G., Nixon C., Armitage P

    Martin R. G., Nixon C., Armitage P. J., Lubow S. H., Price D. J., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/790/2/L34 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...790L..34M 790, L34

    2014 doi

  16. [25]

    A., Coe M

    McBride V. A., Coe M. J., Negueruela I., Schurch M. P. E., McGowan K. E., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13410.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008MNRAS.388.1198M 388, 1198

    2008

  17. [26]

    M., McBride V

    Monageng I. M., McBride V. A., Coe M. J., Steele I. A., Reig P., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw2354 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.464..572M 464, 572

    2017 doi

  18. [27]

    M., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz723 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.485.4617M 485, 4617

    Monageng I. M., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz723 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.485.4617M 485, 4617

    2019 doi

  19. [28]

    Moritani Y., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/pasj/65.4.83 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013PASJ...65...83M 65, 83

    2013 doi

  20. [29]

    Nespoli E., Reig P., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201015303 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011A&A...526A...7N 526, A7

    2011 doi

  21. [30]

    A., Phillipps S., 1998, @doi [ ] 10.1071/AS98028 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998PASA...15...28P 15, 28

    Parker Q. A., Phillipps S., 1998, @doi [ ] 10.1071/AS98028 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998PASA...15...28P 15, 28

    1998 doi

  22. [31]

    F., Charles P

    Rajoelimanana A. F., Charles P. A., Udalski A., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18243.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.413.1600R 413, 1600

    2011

  23. [32]

    Reig P., Fabregat J., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201425008 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015A

    2015 doi

  24. [33]

    A., Kudryavtseva N

    Reig P., Larionov V., Negueruela I., Arkharov A. A., Kudryavtseva N. A., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20066217 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007A

    2007 doi

  25. [34]

    C., Cowley A

    Schmidtke P. C., Cowley A. P., Levenson L., Sweet K., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1086/420990 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004AJ....127.3388S 127, 3388

    2004 doi

  26. [35]

    L., Madore B

    Scowcroft V., Freedman W. L., Madore B. F., Monson A., Persson S. E., Rich J., Seibert M., Rigby J. R., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-637X/816/2/49 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...816...49S 816, 49

    2016 doi

  27. [36]

    188, Optical and Infrared Spectroscopy of Circumstellar Matter

    Stahl O., Kaufer A., Tubbesing S., 1999, in Guenther E., Stecklum B., Klose S., eds, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series Vol. 188, Optical and Infrared Spectroscopy of Circumstellar Matter. p. 331

    1999

  28. [37]

    E., Rosner R., 1986, @doi [ ] 10.1086/164538 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1986ApJ...308..669S 308, 669

    Stella L., White N. E., Rosner R., 1986, @doi [ ] 10.1086/164538 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1986ApJ...308..669S 308, 669

    1986 doi

  29. [38]

    B., Coe M

    Stevens J. B., Coe M. J., Buckley D. A. H., 1999, @doi [ ] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.1999.02847.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999MNRAS.309..421S 309, 421

    1999

  30. [39]

    Straizys V., Kuriliene G., 1981, Astrophysics and Space Science, 80, 353

    1981

  31. [40]

    J., Drave S

    Townsend L. J., Drave S. P., Hill A. B., Coe M. J., Corbet R. H. D., Bird A. J., Schurch M. P. E., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt646 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.433...23T 433, 23

    2013 doi

  32. [41]

    Udalski A., 2003, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003AcA....53..291U 53, 291

    2003

  33. [42]

    Udalski A., Kubiak M., Szymanski M., 1997, , http://ukads.nottingham.ac.uk/abs/1997AcA....47..319U 47, 319

    1997

  34. [43]

    K., Szyma \'n ski G., 2015, , http://ukads.nottingham.ac.uk/abs/2015AcA....65....1U 65, 1

    Udalski A., Szyma \'n ski M. K., Szyma \'n ski G., 2015, , http://ukads.nottingham.ac.uk/abs/2015AcA....65....1U 65, 1

    2015

  35. [44]

    Wegner W., 1993, , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993AcA....43..209W 43, 209

    1993

  36. [45]

    J., Lamers H

    de Wit W. J., Lamers H. J. G. L. M., Marquette J. B., Beaulieu J. P., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20065137 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006A&A...456.1027D 456, 1027

    2006 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.