Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

A comparison of Galactic electron density models using PyGEDM

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2106.15816 v1 pith:DWD3OITQ submitted 2021-06-30 astro-ph.GA astro-ph.HE

classification astro-ph.GAastro-ph.HE
keywords galacticmodelsymw16ne2001densityelectronfuturehigher
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Galactic electron density distribution models are crucial tools for estimating the impact of the ionised interstellar medium on the impulsive signals from radio pulsars and fast radio bursts. The two prevailing Galactic electron density models are YMW16 (Yao et al., 2017) and NE2001 (Cordes & Lazio, 2002). Here, we introduce a software package PyGEDM which provides a unified application programming interface (API) for these models and the YT20 (Yamasaki & Totani, 2020) model of the Galactic halo. We use PyGEDM to compute all-sky maps of Galactic dispersion measure (DM) for YMW16 and NE2001, and compare the large-scale differences between the two. In general, YMW16 predicts higher DM values toward the Galactic anticentre. YMW16 predicts higher DMs at low Galactic latitudes, but NE2001 predicts higher DMs in most other directions. We identify lines of sight for which the models are most discrepant, using pulsars with independent distance measurements. YMW16 performs better on average than NE2001, but both models show significant outliers. We suggest that future campaigns to determine pulsar distances should focus on targets where the models show large discrepancies, so future models can use those measurements to better estimate distances along those line of sight. We also suggest that the Galactic halo should be considered as a component in future GEDMs, to avoid overestimating the Galactic DM contribution for extragalactic sources such as FRBs.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Accurate Extragalactic Magnetic Fields from Faraday Rotation with Optimal Dispersion Measure Estimators

    astro-ph.GA 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Calibrated on MHD galaxy simulations, an EM-based power-law estimator converts Faraday rotation measures to magnetic field strengths with ~0.1 dex error.

  2. Exploring the Galactic plasma with pulsars in the SKA Era

    astro-ph.HE 2026-07 accept novelty 2.5 of 10

    Pulsars map Galactic, solar-wind, and ionospheric plasma via DM, RM, scintillation, and scattering; SKA-Low/Mid AA4 will push DM precision to ~10^{-8} pc cm^{-3} and transform IISM models.

Pith tools