The Decline and Fall of ROME. V. A Preliminary Search for Star-Disrupted Planet Interactions and Coronal Activity at 5 GHz Among White Dwarfs within 25 pc

Matthew Route (1) ((1) Purdue University)

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 86 references

The Decline and Fall of ROME. V. A Preliminary Search for Star-Disrupted Planet Interactions and Coronal Activity at 5 GHz Among White Dwarfs within 25 pc

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A 5 GHz survey of nine isolated white dwarfs within 25 pc detected no polarized radio bursts, setting first upper limits on white dwarf-planet magnetic interactions and coronae.

desk verdict A genuinely new null-result survey with useful upper limits, but the headline '~1 GHz bandpass' overstates what the data actually delivered—only a single 172 MHz subband was clean enough for the quoted limits. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.13718 v2 pith:FTVYFAO2 submitted 2024-11-20 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.EP

Matthew Route (1) ((1) Purdue University) This is my paper · ORCID

classification astro-ph.SRastro-ph.EP

keywords whitedwarfsstar-planetmagneticinteractionselectroncyclotronmaserunipolarinductionradioobservationsdwarfcoronaemagnetosphericemissionplanetaryremnants

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

This paper reports the first targeted radio survey for magnetic star-planet interactions around isolated white dwarfs. Nine white dwarfs within 25 pc, selected to have no known stellar companions, were observed at about 5 GHz with a 305 m single-dish radio telescope, reaching millijansky-level sensitivity in sub-second integrations. No circularly or linearly polarized radio bursts were seen from any target, with a best $3\sigma$ luminosity limit of $\nu L_\nu \ge 1.059\times10^{24}$ erg s$^{-1}$. The paper argues that these non-detections place the first observational upper limits on electron cyclotron maser emission from white dwarf-planet unipolar induction and on intrinsic coronal radio activity in apparently isolated white dwarfs, and that such emission, if found, would provide a new probe of white dwarf magnetic fields, magnetospheric plasma, and planetary remnants.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is unipolar induction: a conducting planet or stripped planetary core moving through a magnetized white dwarf's rotating field acts as a dynamo, driving currents along the flux tube that connects it to the white dwarf's atmosphere, in the same way Io drives Jupiter's radio emission. The electron cyclotron maser (ECM) converts that energy into highly circularly polarized radio bursts near the cyclotron frequency, $\nu_c[\mathrm{MHz}] = 2.8\,n\,B[\mathrm{G}]$, so the survey's 4.239$-$5.262 GHz band is sensitive to emission from magnetic fields of roughly 1.5$-$1.9 kG at the fundamental harmonic. The observational machinery is full-Stokes spectropolarimetry: seven FPGA-based spectrometers produced a ~1 GHz aggregate bandpass, and candidate flares were identified as >10% circular polarization in Stokes V (or linear polarization in Stokes Q/U) exceeding $3\sigma$, with morphology checked against a library of radio-frequency interference artifacts; the empirical G\"udel-Benz radio/X-ray relation is then used to translate the radio limits into coronal X-ray luminosity constraints.

What would settle it

Re-observe the nine surveyed white dwarfs, or a comparable sample of nearby isolated white dwarfs, for several full rotation and orbital periods at 4.2$-$5.3 GHz with millijansky full-Stokes sensitivity: a single burst with more than 10% circular polarization, duration of a few minutes or less, and brightness temperature above $10^{10}$ K would directly falsify the paper's central non-detection claim, while continued null results over full periods would strengthen it.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is an observational null result: none of the nine surveyed white dwarfs emitted a detectable circularly or linearly polarized radio burst at 4.239$-$5.262 GHz during the 2017 observing campaign. The per-target $3\sigma$ flux-density limits range from about 1.3 to 4.4 mJy in circular polarization and 4.8 to 13.9 mJy in linear polarization; converted to luminosities, the best circular-polarization limit is $\nu L_\nu < 1.059\times10^{24}$ erg s$^{-1}$. The survey was sensitive only to bursts lasting a few minutes or less with at least 10% circular polarization (electron cyclotron maser or gyrosynchrotron) or linear polarization (synchrotron), and would have detected flares matching the best-case unipolar-induction model of an Earth-sized exoplanet in a $\lesssim 10$ hr orbit around a $0.7\,M_\odot$ white dwarf with magnetic moment $10^{31}$ G cm$^3$, plasma density $10^8$ cm$^{-3}$, and temperature 1$-$10 eV. The paper therefore establishes, for the first time, observational upper bounds on white dwarf-planet magnetic interactions and on coronae of apparently isolated white dwarfs, while leaving open the possibility that the flares are weaker, beamed away, unpolarized, or occur outside the surveyed band.

Load-bearing premise

The whole interpretive power of the non-detections rests on the theoretical premise that white dwarf-planet unipolar induction produces electron cyclotron maser flares near 5 GHz that are at least 10% circularly polarized and are pointing at Earth during the roughly two-hour observations of each target.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

If the survey's central claim holds, any magnetic star-planet interaction around these nine white dwarfs must be rarer than the observed phase coverage, emit below the mJy-level limits, be beamed away from Earth, be less than 10% circularly polarized, or radiate outside 4.2$-$5.3 GHz.
The non-detections place the first observational constraints on white dwarf coronae: via the G\"udel-Benz relation, the radio limits correspond to an X-ray luminosity bound of $L_X < 1.2\times10^{29}$ erg s$^{-1}$ for gyrosynchrotron flaring, and an order-of-magnitude or more sensitivity gain would be needed to detect a Sun-like scaled-down corona.
Because the observed band corresponds to ECM emission from fields of only ~1.5$-$1.9 kG, the null result constrains weak-field regions and outer magnetospheric radii, while leaving higher-frequency ECM from the stronger fields typical of magnetic white dwarfs untested.
The survey demonstrates that radio observations of isolated white dwarfs can, in principle, measure DC and DQ white dwarf magnetic fields to ~100 G, probe magnetospheric plasma density via ECM helicity, and reveal conducting planetary cores before tidal disruption, if such emission is present in other systems.

Reading between the lines

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

Beyond the paper: if the roughly 25% incidence of white dwarf planetary systems is representative, the null result suggests that the best-case unipolar-induction model overpredicts the radio flux, or that ECM emission from these systems is systematically beamed away from Earth; a larger, longer-baseline survey would distinguish those possibilities.
Beyond the paper: because the survey was sensitive only to strongly polarized bursts, a future search with a telescope that can detect slowly varying or unpolarized emission could test whether white dwarf-planet interactions emit at all in the absence of the ECM condition $\nu_{pl}^2/\nu^2 \ll 1$.
Beyond the paper: a direct testable extension is to monitor recently polluted white dwarfs with known accretion episodes, where magnetospheric plasma is most likely to be present; a single 5 GHz ECM burst from such a system would validate unipolar induction as the power source and calibrate the plasma density.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

First thing you should know: this is the first radio survey specifically targeting magnetic star-planet interactions around white dwarfs, and the upper limits for nine nearby WDs are new and usable. The observations are real Arecibo data, the analysis is straightforward, and the null result is honestly reported. If you work on white dwarf magnetism or ECM emission from planet-star interactions, this is a reference you'll want.

The paper does a lot right. It is explicit about what it could and could not detect: only flares with ≳10% circular polarization or linear polarization, only on timescales of minutes or less. The comparison of survey sensitivity to known flare luminosities (Figure 2) is useful context. And the discussion of why a null result does not kill the unipolar induction model—beaming, plasma conditions, orbital phase coverage—is measured, not overreaching.

Where it gets soft: the bandpass claim. The abstract and conclusion say '~1 GHz bandpass' and the discussion maps 4.239–5.262 GHz to B~1.5–1.9 kG. But the RFI situation was much worse than that. Section 3 states that every data set was unusable above 5.090 GHz, and nearly all from 4.948–5.120 GHz. The actual detection limits in Table 3 come from one clean spectrometer subband, box 2, covering 4.522–4.694 GHz—172 MHz, not 1 GHz. That means the magnetic field range actually probed is about 1.61–1.68 kG for fundamental ECM, not 1.5–1.9 kG. This is a real overstatement in the headline claims, and it should be fixed. It does not invalidate the null detection within the clean subband, but it narrows the physical reach of the survey.

The other caveat is the model. The interpretation leans on Willes & Wu's unipolar induction picture, with specific plasma densities, temperatures, and a 10^31 G cm^3 magnetic moment. The paper calls this 'best-case,' and acknowledges that factor-of-5 changes in ECM parameters make emission undetectable. That is honest, but it means the survey is a first step, not a constraining test of the model.

Nothing here is circular or fabricated. The data are archived at TACC, and the methodology follows the author's earlier ROME papers. The central result—no polarized bursts—is solid within the clean subband.

Who's it for? People working on white dwarf planetary systems, ECM theory, and radio observations of compact objects. It deserves a serious referee; the bandpass presentation needs a revision, but the science is worth a slot.

Recommendation: send it to review, with a referee who will push on the frequency-coverage claim and the model assumptions.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports a targeted Arecibo C-band (4.75 GHz) mini-survey of nine white dwarfs within 25 pc, searching for polarized radio bursts from magnetic star–planet interactions or intrinsic coronal activity. The observations used seven Mock spectrometers covering a nominal aggregate bandpass of 4.239–5.262 GHz, with full Stokes dynamic spectra and time series. No circularly or linearly polarized bursts were detected. Three-sigma detection limits are reported in Table 3 for each target, computed from the single cleanest 172 MHz subband (4.522–4.694 GHz, 'box 2'); the best circular-polarization luminosity limit is 1.059e24 erg/s for WD 1334+039. The paper claims this is the first survey for white-dwarf–planet magnetic interactions and the most extensive radio survey for isolated white dwarf coronae.

Significance. If the results stand, the paper provides the first observational upper limits on ECM and gyrosynchrotron emission from white dwarf–planetary-remnant interactions, a genuinely new constraint for a topic previously treated only theoretically. The survey is carefully executed in several respects: it uses full Stokes parameters, dynamic spectra, an explicit polarization threshold, and a library of RFI artifacts; the data are available through the Arecibo data archive. The central null result is simple and honestly presented. However, the paper's stated frequency coverage and physical interpretation outrun what the data actually support, because most of the nominal 1 GHz bandpass was corrupted by RFI and all quantitative limits come from a single 172 MHz subband. The revision should bring the abstract, Section 5, and Section 4.1 into line with this effective bandpass.

major comments (2)

[Sections 3 and 5, Table 3] The claim of a '~1 GHz bandpass' survey at ~5 GHz is not supported by the analysis. Section 3 states that all data were too corrupted by RFI from 5.090–5.262 GHz (box 6) and nearly all from 4.948–5.120 GHz (box 5), and Table 3 derives all detection limits from box 2 alone (4.522–4.694 GHz). Thus the quantitative non-detection constrains only a 172 MHz window, corresponding to fundamental ECM emission for B in a narrow range near 1.6–1.7 kG, not the B ≈ 1.5–1.9 kG range quoted in Section 4.1. The abstract and Section 5 should state the effective bandpass and magnetic-field coverage, or present per-subband limits for the other usable boxes if such limits exist.
[Section 4.1 and Section 5] The interpretive statement that the survey 'could detect ECM flares from Earth-sized exoplanets in ≲10 hr orbits' should be explicitly tied to the Willes & Wu (2004) best-case model and to the 4.522–4.694 GHz subband. The paper already acknowledges several model dependencies (beaming, plasma parameters, phase coverage), but the headline conclusion in Section 5 reads as a model-independent non-detection. A sentence clarifying that the constraints apply only to the assumed emission mechanism, polarization fraction, frequency, and beaming geometry would prevent over-interpretation.

minor comments (5)

[Section 3, first paragraph] The sentence 'No circularly or linearly polarized radio bursts were detected' should specify 'above the 3-sigma threshold in the clean subbands' to match the detection procedure described later in the section.
[Section 5, last paragraph before references] The phrase 'with a 3σ sensitivity of ν Lν ≥ 1.059×10^24 erg s−1' is inconsistent with Table 3, which lists an upper limit (ν Lν < 1.059×10^24). Please rephrase as 'a 3σ upper limit of ν Lν < 1.059×10^24 erg s−1' or 'a sensitivity to flares with ν Lν ≥ 1.059×10^24 erg s−1.'
[Abstract] The phrase 'search for white dwarf coronae' is clear, but 'measure DC and DQ magnetic fields' should be 'measure the magnetic fields of DC and DQ white dwarfs' to avoid implying that the fields themselves are the direct observables.
[Section 1, cyclotron formula] The formula νc[MHz] = 2.8nB[Gauss] would benefit from stating explicitly that n is the harmonic number and that the paper's B-field mapping uses n = 1 (fundamental emission).
[Section 4.1, beaming discussion] The sentence 'ECM opening angles range from 90° to 10° with respect to the local magnetic field' reads as if the opening angle can be 90°, which is unusual for ECM; please rephrase to describe the emission cone angle and beamwidth more precisely.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No numbers are fitted to the data; the survey reports upper limits. The model parameters used to assess detectability (magnetic moment 10^31 G cm3, plasma density 10^8 cm-3, temperature 1 to 10 eV, Earth-sized exoplanet) are adopted from Willes and Wu (2004) and are not adjusted to the observations. No new physical entities are introduced.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption Unipolar induction between a white dwarf and an orbiting conducting body produces ECM radio emission at frequencies near the cyclotron frequency with high circular polarization.
Invoked in Section 1 and used to define the 4.2 to 5.3 GHz search band and the greater than 10% Stokes V criterion. If real systems lack plasma, have superluminal Alfven speeds, or do not accelerate particles (Walters et al. 2021), the non-detection carries no weight for star-planet interactions.
domain assumption The Guedel-Benz relation between radio luminosity and X-ray luminosity, calibrated on solar and stellar flares, applies to white dwarf coronal flares.
Used in Section 4.2 to convert radio limits into LX < 1.2 x 10^29 erg/s. This is an extrapolation from main-sequence stellar coronae to white dwarfs, where coronal heating is unproven.
domain assumption The targets are genuinely isolated from stellar companions and debris disks, as far as prior catalogs can determine.
Section 2 and Table 1 use SIMBAD, Spitzer/IRAC, WISE, and CHEOPS follow-ups to exclude companions and disks. A hidden companion or recent debris could provide plasma or alter the magnetic interaction.
domain assumption Typical white dwarf rotation and remnant orbital periods allow the one to three hour observations to sample the relevant phases.
Section 3 computes about 6% rotation phase coverage and up to 45% orbital phase coverage using assumed period distributions and a Fe/Ni core density. If the sample stars rotate slowly or host wide orbits, coverage is negligible.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The Decline and Fall of ROME. V. A Preliminary Search for Star-Disrupted Planet Interactions and Coronal Activity at 5 GHz Among White Dwarfs within 25 pc." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FTVYFAO2

@misc{pith2026241113718,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The Decline and Fall of ROME. V. A Preliminary Search for Star-Disrupted Planet Interactions and Coronal Activity at 5 GHz Among White Dwarfs within 25 pc},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FTVYFAO2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.13718}
}

abstract

The recent discovery of planetesimals orbiting white dwarfs has renewed interest in the final chapters of the evolution of planetary systems. Although observational and theoretical studies have examined the dynamical evolution of these systems, studies of their magnetic star-planet interactions, as powered by unipolar induction, have thus far only been assessed theoretically. This fifth paper of the ROME (Radio Observations of Magnetized Exoplanets) series presents the results of a targeted mini-survey of nine white dwarfs within 25 pc without known stellar mass companions in search of radio emissions generated by magnetic interactions between white dwarfs and their planetary remnants. This $\sim$5 GHz Arecibo radio telescope survey achieved mJy-level sensitivity over $<$1 s integration times. Although no exoplanet-induced stellar radio flares were detected, this is the first survey to search for magnetic star-planet interactions between white dwarfs and planetary companions, cores, or disrupted planetesimals. It is also the most extensive and sensitive radio survey for intrinsic coronal emissions from apparently isolated white dwarfs. The study of radio emissions from white dwarf systems may present a new means to detect and measure DC and DQ magnetic fields, search for white dwarf coronae, characterize the density and spatial distribution of white dwarf magnetospheric plasma, characterize the dynamical and electrical properties of planetary cores, and offer new constraints on the modeling of double degenerate merger events.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.13718 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** Sample Stokes V dynamic spectra and bandpass-integrated time series from this survey (left) and our previous survey of UCDs (right) at AO. The left panels exemplify the null-detection of circularly polarized radio emission from WD 1344+106. This data set is the least corrupted by RFI and instrumental artifacts obtained during our survey. For comparison, the right panels depict a highly circularly polarized ECM radio… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** White dwarf survey νLν radio luminosity detection limits compared to known stellar flare luminosities. The spectral type(s) of each system are given in parentheses. The flare radio luminosity of the interacting binary BY Dra AB is calculated from its X-ray flare luminosity ranges via the G¨udel-Benz relationship, which relates the X-ray luminosity to radio luminosity of incoherent gyrosynchrotron stellar flares (Ben… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

86 extracted references · 77 canonical work pages

[1]

, " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eprint howpublished institution journal key month number organization pages publisher school series title misctitle type volume year version url label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts ...
[2]

write newline

" write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION format.url url empty "" new.block "" url * "" * if FUNCTION format.eprint eprint empty "" archivePrefix empty "" archivePrefix "arXiv" = new.block " " eprint * " " * new.block " " eprint * " " * if if if FUNCTION format.doi doi empty "" " " doi * " " * if FUNCTION format.pid doi empty eprint empty ur...
[3]

:V:?:pz UkA4;h+m1mĭܑ 6s;W Yeek24? # endstream endobj 14 0 obj <</Filter/FlateDecode/Length 959>>stream HWKr0 0 ?FGYt e7'6l xxx c |2S7 P+/XzT;e 8BqS \<Bx8) Pљ) R-] H x

thebibliography [1] 20pt to REFERENCES 6pt =0pt -12pt 10pt plus 3pt =0pt =0pt =1pt plus 1pt =0pt =0pt -12pt =13pt plus 1pt =20pt =13pt plus 1pt \@M =10000 =-1.0em =0pt =0pt 0pt =0pt =1.0em @enumiv\@empty 10000 10000 `\.\@m \@noitemerr \@latex@warning Empty `thebibliography' environment \@ifnextchar \@reference \@latexerr Missing key on reference command E...

work page arXiv 2021
[4]

Angel, J. R. P., Borra, E. F., & Landstreet, J. D. 1981, , 45, 457

1981
[5]

D., & Folsom, C

Bagnulo, S., Farihi, J., Landstreet, J. D., & Folsom, C. P. 2024, , 963, L22

2024
[6]

D., Farihi, J., et al

Bagnulo, S., Landstreet, J. D., Farihi, J., et al. 2024, , 688, L14

2024
[7]

& Landstreet, J

Bagnulo, S. & Landstreet, J. D. 2018, , 618, A113

2018
[8]

& Landstreet, J

Bagnulo, S. & Landstreet, J. D. 2019, , 660, A65

work page 2019

Show all 86 references

[9]

& Landstreet, J

Bagnulo, S. & Landstreet, J. D. 2021, , 507, 5902

2021
[10]

D., Belardi, C., Kilic, M., & Giannianas, A

Barber, S. D., Belardi, C., Kilic, M., & Giannianas, A. 2016, , 459, 1415

2016
[11]

J., Mason, P

Barrett, P., Dieck, C., Beasley, A. J., Mason, P. A., & Singh, K. P. 2020, Adv Spac Res, 66, 1226

2020
[12]

S., Dulk, G

Bastian, T. S., Dulk, G. A., & Leblanc, Y. 2000, , 545, 1058

2000
[13]

O., & G\" u del, M

Benz, A. O., & G\" u del, M. 2010, , 48, 241

2010
[14]

V., Piirola, V., Bagnulo, S., Landstreet, J

Berdyugin, A. V., Piirola, V., Bagnulo, S., Landstreet, J. D., & Berdyugina, S. V. 2022, , 657, A105

2022
[15]

V., Piirola, V., Bagnulo, S., Landstreet, J

Berdyugin, A. V., Piirola, V., Bagnulo, S., Landstreet, J. D., & Berdyugina, S. V. 2023, , 670, A2

2023
[16]

S., Burleigh, M

Brinkworth, C. S., Burleigh, M. R., Lawrie, K., Marsh, T. R., & Knigge, C. 2013, , 773, 47

2013
[17]

C., & Kenyon, S

Bromley, B. C., & Kenyon, S. J. 2019, , 876, 17

2019
[18]

Buckley, D. A. H., Meintjes, P. J., Potter, S. B., Marsh, T. R., & G\" a nsicke B. T. 2017, NatAs 1, 29

2017
[19]

D., Bychova, L

Bychkov, V. D., Bychova, L. V., & Madej, J. 2009, , 394, 1338

2009
[20]

2015, RSPTA, 373, 20140269

De Moortel, I., & Browning, P. 2015, RSPTA, 373, 20140269

2015
[21]

de Pater, I, & Lissauer, J. J. 2015, Planetary Sciences (Updated 2nd ed.; Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press)

2015
[22]

Dulk, G. A. 1987, in: Cool Stars, Stellar Systems, and the Sun, eds. J. L. Linsky & R. E. Stencel, Springer Berlin Heidelberg (Berlin, Heidelberg), 72

1987
[23]

K., Thejil, P

Dupuis, J., Vennes, S., Bowyer, S., Pradhan, A. K., Thejil, P. 1994, BAAS, 26, 901

1994
[24]

E., & Zuckerman, B

Farihi, J., Becklin, E. E., & Zuckerman, B. 2005, , 161, 394

2005
[25]

2009, , 694, 805

Farihi, J., Jura, M., & Zuckerman, B. 2009, , 694, 805

2009
[26]

J., et al

Farihi, J., Fossati, L., Wheatley, P. J., et al. 2017a, , 474, 947
[27]

Farihi, J., von Hippel, T., & Pringle, J. E. 2017b, , 471, L145
[28]

T., Liebert J., Schmidt G

Ferrario L., Wickramasinghe D. T., Liebert J., Schmidt G. D., Bieging J. H. 1997, , 289, 105

1997
[29]

T., & Kawka, A

Ferrario L., Wickramasinghe D. T., & Kawka, A. 2020, AdvSpaRes, 66, 1025

2020
[30]

Gaia Collaboration, 2021, , 649, A1

2021
[31]

Gianninas, A., Bergeron, P., & Ruiz, M. T. 2011, , 743, 138

2011
[32]

1969, ApJ, 156, 59

Goldreich, P., & Lynden-Bell, D. 1969, ApJ, 156, 59

1969
[33]

J., G\" a nsicke, B

Hermes, J. J., G\" a nsicke, B. T., Kawaler, S. D., et al. 2017, ApJS, 232, 23

2017
[34]

2017, , 836, L28

Isern, J., Garc\' i a-Berro, E., K\" u lebi, B., & Lore\' e n-Aguilar, P. 2017, , 836, L28

2017
[35]

Kawaler, S. D. 2015, in ASP Conf. Ser. 493, 19th European Workshop on White Dwarfs, ed. P. Dufour, P. Bergeron, & G. Fontaine (San Francisco, CA: ASP), 65

2015
[36]

2019, , 482, 5201

Kawka, A., Vennes, S., Ferrario, L., & Paunzen, E. 2019, , 482, 5201

2019
[37]

2014, MNRASL, 439, L90

Kawka, A., & Vennes, S. 2014, MNRASL, 439, L90

2014
[38]

2016, , 458, 325

Kawka, A., & Vennes, S. 2016, , 458, 325

2016
[39]

2021, , 502, 4972

Kilic, M., Bedard, A., & Bergeron, P. 2021, , 502, 4972

2021
[40]

G., Bergeron, P., & Conly, A

Kilic, M., Kosakowski, A., Moss, A. G., Bergeron, P., & Conly, A. A. 2021, , 923, L6

2021
[41]

Klimchuk, J. A. 2015, RSPTA, 373, 20140256

2015
[42]

2009, , 498, 517

Koester, D. 2009, , 498, 517

2009
[43]

P., Zarka, P., & Lecacheux, A

Ladreiter, H. P., Zarka, P., & Lecacheux, A. 1994, P&SS, 42, 919

1994
[44]

Li, J., Ferrario, L., & Wickramasinghe, D., 1998, , 503, L151

1998
[45]

M., & Shara, M

L\' e pine, S., Rich, R. M., & Shara, M. M. 2003, , 125, 1598

2003
[46]

2020, (arXiv:2004.11474v1)

Lyutikov, M., Barkov, M., Route, M., et al. 2020, (arXiv:2004.11474v1)

2020 arXiv
[47]

J., G\" a nsicke, B

Manser, C. J., G\" a nsicke, B. T., Eggl, S., et al., 2019, Science, 364, 66

2019
[48]

a nsicke, B. T., H\

Marsh, T. R., G\" a nsicke, B. T., H\" u mmerich, S., et al. 2016, , 537, 374

2016
[49]

Maxted, P. F. L., Ferrario, L., Marsh, T. R., & Wickramasinghe, D. T., 2000, , 315, L41

2000
[50]

D., Rafikov R

Metzger B. D., Rafikov R. R., & Bochkarev K. V., 2012, , 423, 505

2012
[51]

M., Heng, K., Brandeker, A., Swan, S., & Lendl, M

Morris, B. M., Heng, K., Brandeker, A., Swan, S., & Lendl, M. 2021, , 651, L12

2021
[52]

Musielak, Z. E. 1987, , 322, 234

1987
[53]

E., Winget, D

Musielak, Z. E., Winget, D. E., & Montgomery, M. H. 2005, , 630, 506

2005
[54]

A., & Milkey, R

Pilachowski, C. A., & Milkey, R. W. 1984, , 96, 821

1984
[55]

1997, , 112, 527

Putney, A. 1997, , 112, 527

1997
[56]

1969, ApL, 3, 225

Radhakrishnan, V., & Cooke, D.J. 1969, ApL, 3, 225

1969
[57]

2013, PhD Dissertation, Pennsylvania State University

Route, M. 2013, PhD Dissertation, Pennsylvania State University

2013
[58]

2019, , 872, 79

Route, M. 2019, , 872, 79

2019
[59]

& Wolszczan, A

Route, M. & Wolszczan, A. 2013, , 773, 18

2013
[60]

& Wolszczan, A

Route, M. & Wolszczan, A. 2016a, , 821, L21
[61]

& Wolszczan, A

Route, M. & Wolszczan, A. 2016b, , 830, 85
[62]

& Wolszczan, A

Route, M. & Wolszczan, A. 2023, , 952, 118

2023
[63]

2024, , 966, 55

Route, M. 2024, , 966, 55

2024
[64]

2022, Physics Reports, 988,1

Saumon, D., Blouin, S., & Tremblay, P.-E. 2022, Physics Reports, 988,1

2022
[65]

R., Belloni, D., G\" a nsicke, B

Schreiber, M. R., Belloni, D., G\" a nsicke, B. T., Parsons, S. G., & Zorotovic, M. 2021, NatAs, 5, 648

2021
[66]

M., Kenyon, S

Sion, E. M., Kenyon, S. J., & Aannestad, P. A. 1990, , 72, 707

1990
[67]

M., Holberg, J

Sion, E. M., Holberg, J. B., Oswalt, T. D., et al. 2009, , 138, 1681

2009
[68]

R., Marsh

Stanway, E. R., Marsh. T. R., Chote, P., et al. 2018, , 611, 66

2018
[69]

V., Kliem, B., Zaitsev, V

Stepanov, A. V., Kliem, B., Zaitsev, V. V., et al. 2001, , 374, 1072

2001
[70]

T., & Boekholt, T

Toonen, S., Hollands, M., G\" a nsicke, B. T., & Boekholt, T. 2017, , 602, A16

2017
[71]

Treumann, R. A. 2006, , 13, 229

2006
[72]

2003, in Lectures on Solar Physics, eds

Ulmschneider, P. 2003, in Lectures on Solar Physics, eds. H. M. Antia, A. Bhatnagar, & P. Ulmschneider (New York: Springer), 232

2003
[73]

P., Rappaport, S., Guidry, J

Vanderbosch, Z. P., Rappaport, S., Guidry, J. A., et al. 2021, , 917, 41

2021
[74]

A., Rappaport, S., et al

Vanderburg, A., Johnson, J. A., Rappaport, S., et al. 2015, , 526, 546

2015
[75]

2019, , 488, 153

Veras, D., & Wolszczan, A. 2019, , 488, 153

2019
[76]

R., et al

Walters, N., Farihi, J., Marsh, T. R., et al. 2021, , 503, 3743

2021
[77]

C., Wu, K., Trimble, V., et al

Weisskopf, M. C., Wu, K., Trimble, V., et al. 2007, , 657, 1026

2007
[78]

J., Wu, K., & Kuncic, Z

Willes, A. J., Wu, K., & Kuncic, Z. 2004, PASA, 21, 248

2004
[79]

J., & Wu, K

Willes, A. J., & Wu, K. 2004, , 348, 285

2004
[80]

J., & Wu, K

Willes, A. J., & Wu, K. 2005, , 432, 1091

2005
[81]

E., Nather, R

Winget, D. E., Nather, R. E., Clemens, J. C., et al. 1994, , 430, 839

1994
[82]

Wolszczan, A., & Frail, D. A. 1992, , 355, 145

1992
[83]

2020, , 902, 127

Xu, S., Lai, S., & Dennihy, E. 2020, , 902, 127

2020
[84]

2013, , 433, 162

Yan, Z., Shen, Z.-Q., Yuan, J.-P., et al. 2013, , 433, 162

2013
[85]

2024, NatAs, 8, 50

Yu S., Chen B., Sharma R., et al. 2024, NatAs, 8, 50

2024
[86]

1991, SvAL, 17, 179

Zheleznyakov, V.V., & Serber, A.V. 1991, SvAL, 17, 179

1991

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

, " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eprint howpublished institution journal key month number organization pages publisher school series title misctitle type volume year version url label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts ...

[2] [2]

write newline

" write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION format.url url empty "" new.block "" url * "" * if FUNCTION format.eprint eprint empty "" archivePrefix empty "" archivePrefix "arXiv" = new.block " " eprint * " " * new.block " " eprint * " " * if if if FUNCTION format.doi doi empty "" " " doi * " " * if FUNCTION format.pid doi empty eprint empty ur...

[3] [3]

:V:?:pz UkA4;h+m1mĭܑ 6s;W Yeek24? # endstream endobj 14 0 obj <</Filter/FlateDecode/Length 959>>stream HWKr0 0 ?FGYt e7'6l xxx c |2S7 P+/XzT;e 8BqS \<Bx8) Pљ) R-] H x

thebibliography [1] 20pt to REFERENCES 6pt =0pt -12pt 10pt plus 3pt =0pt =0pt =1pt plus 1pt =0pt =0pt -12pt =13pt plus 1pt =20pt =13pt plus 1pt \@M =10000 =-1.0em =0pt =0pt 0pt =0pt =1.0em @enumiv\@empty 10000 10000 `\.\@m \@noitemerr \@latex@warning Empty `thebibliography' environment \@ifnextchar \@reference \@latexerr Missing key on reference command E...

work page arXiv 2021

[4] [4]

Angel, J. R. P., Borra, E. F., & Landstreet, J. D. 1981, , 45, 457

1981

[5] [5]

D., & Folsom, C

Bagnulo, S., Farihi, J., Landstreet, J. D., & Folsom, C. P. 2024, , 963, L22

2024

[6] [6]

D., Farihi, J., et al

Bagnulo, S., Landstreet, J. D., Farihi, J., et al. 2024, , 688, L14

2024

[7] [7]

& Landstreet, J

Bagnulo, S. & Landstreet, J. D. 2018, , 618, A113

2018

[8] [8]

& Landstreet, J

Bagnulo, S. & Landstreet, J. D. 2019, , 660, A65

work page 2019