Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

The FAST Galactic Plane Pulsar Snapshot survey: VIII. 116 binary pulsars

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The FAST GPPS survey reports 116 new binary pulsars: Keplerian orbits for all, timing solutions for 29, and relativistic masses for two double neutron stars.

desk verdict Solid catalog paper with one secure DNS mass and one candidate that is oversold. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.03062 v2 pith:Q3M6ITPM submitted 2024-12-04 astro-ph.HE

P.F. Wang , J.L. Han , Z.L.Yang , T. Wang , C. Wang , W.Q. Su , J. Xu , D.J. Zhou
show 7 more authors
Yi Yan W. C. Jing N. N. Cai J. P. Yuan R. X. Xu H. G. Wang X. P. You
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords binarypulsarsmilliseconddoubleneutronstarspost-KeplerianparametersperiastronadvancepulsartimingFASTGPPSsurveywhitedwarfcompanions
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 that the FAST Galactic Plane Pulsar Snapshot survey has turned up 116 pulsars in binary systems, a substantial enlargement of the known Galactic-field binary pulsar sample. For all 116 it provides Keplerian orbital parameters derived from FAST timing, and for 29 of them it presents phase-connected timing solutions spanning one to five years. The companions are classified as helium white dwarfs, CO/ONe white dwarfs, neutron stars, main-sequence stars, or ultra-light objects, and eight systems show eclipses. The quantitative centerpiece is the measurement of the post-Keplerian periastron advance in the double neutron star systems PSR J0528+3529 and PSR J1844-0128, which, under general relativity, gives total masses of 2.90(12) and 1.7(8) solar masses.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by two standard binary-pulsar relations. The Keplerian mass function, $f = (m_c \sin i)^3 / (m_p + m_c)^2 = 4\pi^2 x^3 / (T_\odot P_b^2)$, converts the fitted orbital period $P_b$ and projected semi-major axis $x$ into a companion-mass estimate, which is the basis for classifying companions when paired with spin period, orbital period, and eccentricity. The general-relativistic periastron-advance relation, $\dot{\omega} = 3 T_\odot^{2/3} (P_b / 2\pi)^{-5/3} (1-e^2)^{-1} (m_p + m_c)^{2/3}$, converts a measured $\dot{\omega}$ directly into the total binary mass, without needing the inclination angle. Timing fits use the ELL1 model for nearly circular orbits and the DD model for eccentric ones, with phase connection linking observations across gaps.

What would settle it

Continue timing PSR J1844-0128 over a longer baseline with proper motion and dispersion-measure variations included in the fit: if $\dot{\omega}$ is not recovered above five $\sigma$ or shifts by more than its current uncertainty, the claimed $1.7(8)\,M_\odot$ total mass fails. Alternatively, a Shapiro-delay measurement in PSR J0528+3529 that gives individual masses inconsistent with the total $2.90(12)\,M_\odot$ would falsify the general-relativistic interpretation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper establishes that the FAST GPPS survey has discovered 116 pulsars in binary orbits and measures their Keplerian parameters, with orbital periods ranging from 0.037 days to 826 days, projected semi-major axes, and eccentricities. For 29 of these, including the two double neutron star systems, it obtains phase-connected timing solutions with residuals as low as 1.053 microseconds. It classifies companion types from the mass function and orbital properties, identifies eight eclipsing systems, and locates the optical counterpart of the companion of PSR J1908+1036. The central quantitative result is the measurement of the relativistic periastron advance, $\dot{\omega} = 0.0072(3)$ deg/yr for PSR J0528+3529 and $\dot{\omega} = 0.0059(18)$ deg/yr for PSR J1844-0128, from which the general-relativistic formula (Eq. 2) yields total masses of $2.90(12)\,M_\odot$ and $1.7(8)\,M_\odot$.

Load-bearing premise

The total-mass values for the two double neutron star systems assume that the entire measured periastron advance is caused by general relativity; for PSR J1844-0128 this is fragile because the advance is only a marginal 3.3-$\sigma$ detection on a 154-microsecond timing residual, so an unmodeled contribution or fitting covariance could change the derived $1.7(8)\,M_\odot$ total mass.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The Galactic-field binary pulsar census grows by 116 systems, making the combined sample the largest available for studying binary evolution and companion-type statistics.
  • The two double neutron star total masses, $2.90(12)\,M_\odot$ and $1.7(8)\,M_\odot$, add new anchors for neutron-star mass measurements and for tests of gravitational theories in the strong-field regime.
  • The eight newly identified eclipsing binaries, including black widows and redbacks, provide targets for studying the outflowing material and geometry of the companion winds.
  • The confirmed gaps in the He-WD orbital-period distribution, with enhanced peaks, support the Case A versus Case B Roche-lobe overflow formation channels for these systems.
  • The 29 phase-connected timing solutions give precise ephemerides and polarization profiles that can be used for continued monitoring of post-Keplerian effects such as Shapiro delay.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the paper's claim for PSR J0528+3529 holds, a total mass near $2.9\,M_\odot$ would put the system on the high side for double neutron stars, so measuring Shapiro delay to split the individual masses would be a direct test of whether one component is an unusually massive neutron star.
  • The marginal periastron-advance detection for PSR J1844-0128 suggests that many of the 78 pulsars without timing solutions may hide additional relativistic binaries, so extending the timing campaign on those sources is a cheap way to grow the double neutron star census.
  • Because companion types are inferred from median masses assuming a $1.35\,M_\odot$ pulsar and an inclination of 60 degrees, the reported fractions of He-WD and CO/ONe-WD companions will likely shift once individual masses or inclinations are measured.
  • A selection-effect simulation of the snapshot survey would be needed to know whether the high WD-companion fraction reflects the true Galactic-plane population or the survey's sensitivity to recycled pulsars.
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.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper presents 116 binary pulsars discovered in the FAST Galactic Plane Pulsar Snapshot survey. For all 116 systems, preliminary Keplerian orbital parameters are derived from observed barycentric period variations; for 29 of them, phase-connected timing solutions are obtained, with residuals of 1-175 microseconds and reduced chi-squared near unity. Two systems, PSR J0528+3529 and PSR J1844-0128, are identified as double neutron star candidates, and the general-relativistic periastron advance dot-omega is used to derive total masses of 2.90(12) and 1.7(8) M_sun, respectively. The paper also reports companion classifications for the sample, eclipse detections for eight systems, polarization profiles for 29 pulsars, and an optical counterpart for the companion of PSR J1908+1036.

Significance. If the two DNS mass measurements were secure, this would be a valuable addition to the DNS mass sample and a strong demonstration of the survey's follow-up capability. The 29 phase-connected timing solutions are genuinely useful for future timing and evolution studies, and the full sample of 116 binaries substantially enlarges the Galactic binary pulsar census, especially the He-WD and CO/ONe-WD populations. The polarization profiles and eclipse detections are also useful. However, the significance of the paper as stated in the abstract rests on the two DNS mass measurements; one of them (J1844-0128) is marginal and internally inconsistent, so the paper's headline claim is stronger than the data support.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3.5, Table A1, and Table 3] The presentation of PSR J1844-0128 as a double neutron star system with a measured total mass of 1.7(8) M_sun is not supported by the quoted numbers. The mass function f = 0.0881 M_sun (Table 3) together with M_tot = 1.7 M_sun forces the companion mass to about 0.63-0.73 M_sun for pulsar masses of 0.97-1.07 M_sun and inclinations of 90-60 degrees, which is far below the observed neutron star mass range and actually outside the NS criterion (mc,med > 0.76 M_sun) used in Table 1. The 3.3-sigma dot-omega measurement is therefore insufficient to claim a DNS mass. Please present this as a candidate DNS with a candidate total mass, and revisit the 'NS' companion classification for this system in Table 3.
  2. [Section 3, Table 3, and Figure A3] The 'Keplerian parameters' listed for the 78 pulsars without timing solutions are obtained from fits that fix the eccentricity to zero (as shown by the 'e = 0.0' labels in every panel of Figure A3), but this assumption is not stated in Table 3, where the e column is simply left blank, and no uncertainties are quoted for Pb, x, or T0. Because the abstract claims Keplerian parameters for all 116 systems, the circular-orbit assumption should be explicitly marked (e.g., 'e = 0 (fixed)') and the preliminary nature of these parameters should be emphasized; otherwise the table and abstract overstate what is measured.
  3. [Section 3.5 and Table A1] The dot-omega measurement for PSR J1844-0128 rests on 59 TOAs with a 154-microsecond residual and is only a 3.3-sigma detection. The paper does not provide any check for covariance between dot-omega and the other DD model parameters (e, omega, Pb, x) or for systematic timing errors. Since this is the only basis for the claimed total mass, please add a robustness analysis (e.g., splitting the data, fitting subsets, or a residual inspection without dot-omega) or discuss the systematic uncertainty explicitly.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract and Section 1] The phrase 'the the Five-hundred-meter' contains a duplicated article.
  2. [Section 4] 'Kepelerian parameters' should be 'Keplerian parameters'.
  3. [Figure 11 caption] 'soliday single pulsars' should be 'solitary single pulsars'.
  4. [Section 1] 'constraints of EOS and and the understanding' contains a doubled 'and'.
  5. [Table 3] For the 78 preliminary systems, add a footnote stating that eccentricity and longitude of periastron are not fitted (fixed to e = 0) and that Pb, x, and T0 come from the fits shown in Figure A3.
  6. [Figure A3] The longitude of periastron is printed as '= 0.0 o' and would be clearer as 'omega = 0.0 deg'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: catalog and mass measurements are derived from independent timing data and standard GR relations.

full rationale

The paper's central claims—116 binary pulsar Keplerian parameters, 29 phase-connected timing solutions, and two periastron-advance mass estimates—are derived from FAST timing data through standard pulsar timing models. Equation (2) is the GR periastron-advance formula cited to Blandford & Teukolsky (1976) and Damour & Deruelle (1985); it contains no fitted parameters, and the input Pb, e, and dot-omega are measured quantities, not outputs of the mass calculation. Companion classifications use external criteria (Table 1, based on the ATNF catalogue and Tauris et al. 2012) applied to mass-function estimates under stated assumptions (mp=1.35 M_sun, sin i=60 deg); this is a classification scheme, not a circular derivation. The self-citations (Su et al. 2024; Yang et al. 2025a,b; Pan et al. 2023) report previously published GPPS pulsars and are contextual, not load-bearing for the new 116-pulsar sample. The marginal dot-omega for J1844-0128 is a statistical reliability concern but not a circularity: the 1.7(8) M_sun total mass is a direct GR inversion of a measured PK parameter, not a fit to the sample or to the NS-classification assumption. No claim here reduces to its input by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central scientific content is observational. The quantitative claims rest on standard assumptions: the mass function conversion uses a canonical pulsar mass of 1.35 M_sun and inclinations of 60 (median) or 90 (minimum) degrees; the companion-type classification applies literature criteria (Table 1) that the authors acknowledge have exceptions; and the PK masses assume GR. The 78 systems without timing solutions have e fixed to 0 in the displayed fits. No new entities are postulated.

free parameters (3)
  • Assumed pulsar mass mp = 1.35 M_sun
    Used in Section 3 (mass function conversion) to estimate minimum and median companion masses from the mass function. Not fitted; a canonical assumption.
  • Assumed inclination sin i = i = 90 degrees for minimum, 60 degrees for median
    Chosen to convert mass function to companion masses; inclination is unknown for most systems.
  • Eccentricity e (preliminary systems) = 0 (fixed for most of 78 pulsars)
    In Figure A3 fits, e is set to 0 for nearly all 78 pulsars without timing solutions; this is a modeling choice that can bias companion classification and orbital parameters.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption General Relativity describes the periastron advance (Eq. 2)
    Used to convert dot-omega to total mass for PSR J0528+3529 and J1844-0128. Standard for DNS, but an assumption about gravity theory.
  • domain assumption Keplerian binary models (ELL1/DD) adequately describe the orbits
    Used throughout timing analysis; ignores possible third bodies, orbital period derivatives, or timing noise beyond white noise.
  • domain assumption Companion classification criteria in Table 1 are valid
    Borrowed from Tauris et al. (2012) and the known population; the paper itself notes exceptions, so the boundaries are rough.
  • domain assumption Mass function conversion assumes sin i and mp
    Companion masses are not directly measured; the median/minimum masses depend on assumed inclination distribution and pulsar mass.
  • ad hoc to paper For the 78 preliminary systems, circular orbits (e=0) are assumed in the displayed fits
    Figure A3 fits set e=0 for nearly all 78 pulsars without timing solutions; this is a simplification chosen for this paper.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The FAST Galactic Plane Pulsar Snapshot survey: VIII. 116 binary pulsars." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/Q3M6ITPM

@misc{pith2026241203062,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The FAST Galactic Plane Pulsar Snapshot survey: VIII. 116 binary pulsars},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/Q3M6ITPM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.03062}
}
abstract

Finding pulsars in binaries are important for measurements of the masses of neutron stars, for tests of gravity theories, and for studies of star evolution. We are carrying out the Galactic Plane Pulsar Snapshot survey (GPPS) by using the the Five-hundred-meter Aperture Spherical radio Telescope (FAST). Here we present the Keplerian parameters for 116 newly discovered pulsars in the FAST GPPS survey, and obtain timing solutions for 29 pulsars. Companions of these pulsars are He white dwarfs, CO/ONe white dwarfs, neutron stars, main sequence stars and ultra light objects or even planets. Our observations uncover eclipses of 8 binary systems. The optical counterpart for the companion of PSR J1908+1036 is identified. The Post-Keplerian parameter $\dot{\omega}$ for the double neutron star systems PSR J0528+3529 and J1844-0128 have been measured, with which the total masses of the binary systems are determined.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.03062 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Variation of the barycentric periods for PSR J1842+0407g across the orbit phase. The observed barycentric pe￾riods are marked by “x” after the spin period P0 is subtracted. The error-bars are marked but too small to see for most data. Dashed line is the best-fit by using the preliminary Keplerian model with orbital parameters (Pb, x, T0, e and ω) listed inside the panel. The orbital phase is referred to the periastr… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Integrated pulse profile of PSR J1952+2837. The total intensity, linear and circular polarization are represented by solid, dashed and doted lines in the bottom sub-panel. The left-hand cir￾cular polarization is defined to be positive. The bin size and 3σ are marked inside the sub-panel, here σ is the standard deviation of off￾pulse bins. In the top panel, dots with error-bar are measurements of polarization positio… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Timing residuals of two example pulsars PSR J1903+0839 and J1947+2011. Left panels: Residuals versus observation epochs. The weighted root-mean-square residual of each pulsar is indicated in the top left corner of the panel. Right panels: Residuals versus orbital phase. The orbital phases are referred to ascending node or periastron depending on the binary model of each pulsar. Timing residuals of the 29 binary puls… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Fractions of binary pulsars with different types of com￾panions in the Galactic field. The top panel is for 315 known bina￾ries and the bottom panel for the 115 GPPS discovered ones. Their numbers are listed in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Binary parameters are clustered for various companion types. Binary parameters of previously known pulsars are taken from the ATNF puslar catalogue (https://www.atnf.csiro.au/people/pulsar/psrcat/ Manchester et al. 2005), plus the newly discovered binary pulsars by the…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The distribution of pulsar periods and orbit periods for binary pulsars with He-WD companions. In the main panel, green dots represent the 129 known binary pulsars with He-WD compan￾ions in the Galactic field, the stars stand for the 58 GPPS pulsars with He-WD companio…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Distribution of pulsar spin periods and orbit periods of binaries with CO/ONe WD companions. There are 39 known sys￾tems, plus 25 GPPS binary pulsars with a CO/ONe WD companion. A pulsar CO/ONe WD binary system can be formed from an IMXB via the Case A RLO in small orb…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Mass-mass diagram of the double neutron star system PSR J0528+3529. The gray area represents the excluded parameter spaces from its mass function, with the boundary defined by an in￾clination angle of i = 90◦ . The area between two dash-doted blue lines is the possibl…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Eclipses of four binary pulsars. PSRs J1932+2121 and J1849+0304g are observed for 2.1 and 3.1 hours, PSRs J1931+1428g and J1814+0045g are observed for 15 minutes each. 0.064 and 0.013 M⊙. Eclipse around the egress of PSR J1814+0045g is detected in a short observation, …
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Binary pulsars in the period versus period derivative dia￾gram. Gray dots represent soliday single pulsars listed in the ATNF pulsar catalogue (Manchester et al. 2005). Binary pulsars are in￾dicated by circles. The newly discovered 38 binary pulsars by the GPPS survey…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. The FAST Globular Cluster Pulsar Survey (GC FANS)

    astro-ph.HE 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    The FAST globular cluster pulsar survey reports 60 new pulsars and identifies M71D as a likely double neutron star system formed through standard massive binary evolution.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

84 extracted references · 12 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  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]

    , in which the pulsar winds are evaporating the companion. Many of them show the eclipses of pulsar signals. They are further divided into ``black-widows

    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]

    F., Arzoumanian , Z., Baker , P

    Alam , M. F., Arzoumanian , Z., Baker , P. T., et al. 2021, , 252, 5, 10.3847/1538-4365/abc6a1

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/abc6a1 2021

  5. [5]

    A., Cheng , A

    Alpar , M. A., Cheng , A. F., Ruderman , M. A., & Shaham , J. 1982, , 300, 728, 10.1038/300728a0

    doi:10.1038/300728a0 1982

  6. [6]

    2014, , 797, L24, 10.1088/2041-8205/797/2/L24

    Antoniadis , J. 2014, , 797, L24, 10.1088/2041-8205/797/2/L24

    doi:10.1088/2041-8205/797/2/l24 2014

  7. [7]

    M., Ozel , F., et al

    Antoniadis , J., Tauris , T. M., Ozel , F., et al. 2016, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1605.01665, 10.48550/arXiv.1605.01665

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1605.01665 2016

  8. [8]

    Antoniadis , J., Freire , P. C. C., Wex , N., et al. 2013, Science, 340, 448, 10.1126/science.1233232

    doi:10.1126/science.1233232 2013

Show all 84 references
  1. [9]

    C., & Hellings , R

    Backer , D. C., & Hellings , R. W. 1986, , 24, 537, 10.1146/annurev.aa.24.090186.002541

    1986

  2. [10]

    Bhattacharya , D., & van den Heuvel , E. P. J. 1991, , 203, 1, 10.1016/0370-1573(91)90064-S

    1991 doi

  3. [11]

    Blandford , R., & Teukolsky , S. A. 1976, , 205, 580, 10.1086/154315

    1976 doi

  4. [12]

    D., Champion , D

    Cameron , A. D., Champion , D. J., Kramer , M., et al. 2018, , 475, L57, 10.1093/mnrasl/sly003

    2018 doi

  5. [13]

    C., Magnier , E

    Chambers , K. C., Magnier , E. A., Metcalfe , N., et al. 2016, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1612.05560, 10.48550/arXiv.1612.05560

    2016 doi arXiv

  6. [14]

    M., & Han , Z

    Chen , H.-L., Chen , X., Tauris , T. M., & Han , Z. 2013, , 775, 27, 10.1088/0004-637X/775/1/27

    2013 doi

  7. [15]

    M., Han , Z., & Chen , X

    Chen , H.-L., Tauris , T. M., Han , Z., & Chen , X. 2021, , 503, 3540, 10.1093/mnras/stab670

    2021 doi

  8. [16]

    Corbet , R. H. D. 1984, , 141, 91

    1984

  9. [17]

    M., & Lazio , T

    Cordes , J. M., & Lazio , T. J. W. 2002, arXiv e-prints, astro, 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0207156

    2002 doi arXiv

  10. [18]

    1985, Annales de L'Institut Henri Poincare Section (A) Physique Theorique, 43, 107

    Damour , T., & Deruelle , N. 1985, Annales de L'Institut Henri Poincare Section (A) Physique Theorique, 43, 107

    1985

  11. [19]

    B., Pennucci , T., Ransom , S

    Demorest , P. B., Pennucci , T., Ransom , S. M., Roberts , M. S. E., & Hessels , J. W. T. 2010, , 467, 1081, 10.1038/nature09466

    2010 doi

  12. [20]

    S., Ray , P

    Deneva , J. S., Ray , P. S., Camilo , F., et al. 2021, , 909, 6, 10.3847/1538-4357/abd7a1

    2021 doi

  13. [21]

    M., et al

    Du , Z.-X., Yu , Y.-W., Chen , A. M., et al. 2023, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 23, 125024, 10.1088/1674-4527/ad034b

    2023 doi

  14. [23]

    Freire , P. C. C., & Ridolfi , A. 2018, , 476, 4794, 10.1093/mnras/sty524

    2018 doi

  15. [24]

    Freire , P. C. C., Bassa , C. G., Wex , N., et al. 2011, , 412, 2763, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.18109.x

    2011

  16. [26]

    2024, , 527, 7394, 10.1093/mnras/stad3613

    Guo , Y., Wang , B., & Li , X. 2024, , 527, 7394, 10.1093/mnras/stad3613

    2024 doi

  17. [27]

    L., Wang , C., Wang , P

    Han , J. L., Wang , C., Wang , P. F., et al. 2021, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 21, 107, 10.1088/1674-4527/21/5/107

    2021 doi

  18. [28]

    L., Zhou , D

    Han , J. L., Zhou , D. J., Wang , C., et al. 2025, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 25, 014001, 10.1088/1674-4527/ada3b7

    2025 doi

  19. [29]

    N., et al

    Hobbs , G., Guo , L., Caballero , R. N., et al. 2020, , 491, 5951, 10.1093/mnras/stz3071

    2020 doi

  20. [30]

    B., Edwards , R

    Hobbs , G. B., Edwards , R. T., & Manchester , R. N. 2006, , 369, 655, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10302.x

    2006

  21. [31]

    W., van Straten , W., & Manchester , R

    Hotan , A. W., van Straten , W., & Manchester , R. N. 2004, , 21, 302, 10.1071/AS04022

    2004 doi

  22. [32]

    J., & Kehl , M

    Hu , H., Kramer , M., Wex , N., Champion , D. J., & Kehl , M. S. 2020, , 497, 3118, 10.1093/mnras/staa2107

    2020 doi

  23. [33]

    Y., Wu , K., Han , Q., Kong , A

    Hui , C. Y., Wu , K., Han , Q., Kong , A. K. H., & Tam , P. H. T. 2018, , 864, 30, 10.3847/1538-4357/aad5ec

    2018 doi

  24. [34]

    G., Tauris , T

    Istrate , A. G., Tauris , T. M., & Langer , N. 2014, , 571, A45, 10.1051/0004-6361/201424680

    2014 doi

  25. [35]

    2013, , 21, 59, 10.1007/s00159-013-0059-2

    Ivanova , N., Justham , S., Chen , X., et al. 2013, , 21, 59, 10.1007/s00159-013-0059-2

    2013 doi

  26. [36]

    2020, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 20, 064, 10.1088/1674-4527/20/5/64

    Jiang , P., Tang , N.-Y., Hou , L.-G., et al. 2020, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 20, 064, 10.1088/1674-4527/20/5/64

    2020 doi

  27. [37]

    M., Lyne , A

    Kaspi , V. M., Lyne , A. G., Manchester , R. N., et al. 2000, , 543, 321, 10.1086/317103

    2000 doi

  28. [38]

    2000, , 364, L66

    Koester , D., & Reimers , D. 2000, , 364, L66

    2000

  29. [39]

    H., Manchester , R

    Kramer , M., Stairs , I. H., Manchester , R. N., et al. 2006, Science, 314, 97, 10.1126/science.1132305

    2006 doi

  30. [40]

    H., Venkatraman Krishnan , V., et al

    Kramer , M., Stairs , I. H., Venkatraman Krishnan , V., et al. 2021, , 504, 2094, 10.1093/mnras/stab375

    2021 doi

  31. [41]

    2001, , 326, 274, 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04606.x

    Lange , C., Camilo , F., Wex , N., et al. 2001, , 326, 274, 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04606.x

    2001

  32. [42]

    R., Mingarelli , C

    Lentati , L., Taylor , S. R., Mingarelli , C. M. F., et al. 2015, , 453, 2576, 10.1093/mnras/stv1538

    2015 doi

  33. [43]

    X., Main , R., et al

    Li , D., Lin , F. X., Main , R., et al. 2019, , 484, 5723, 10.1093/mnras/stz374

    2019 doi

  34. [44]

    S., Chan , V., et al

    Main , R., Yang , I. S., Chan , V., et al. 2018, , 557, 522, 10.1038/s41586-018-0133-z

    2018 doi

  35. [45]

    N., Hobbs , G

    Manchester , R. N., Hobbs , G. B., Teoh , A., & Hobbs , M. 2005, , 129, 1993, 10.1086/428488

    2005 doi

  36. [46]

    C., Zhu , W

    Miao , C. C., Zhu , W. W., Li , D., et al. 2023, , 518, 1672, 10.1093/mnras/stac1305

    2023 doi

  37. [47]

    2006, Science in China: Physics, Mechanics and Astronomy, 49, 129, 10.1007/s11433-006-0129-9

    Nan , R. 2006, Science in China: Physics, Mechanics and Astronomy, 49, 129, 10.1007/s11433-006-0129-9

    2006 doi

  38. [48]

    2011, International Journal of Modern Physics D, 20, 989, 10.1142/S0218271811019335

    Nan , R., Li , D., Jin , C., et al. 2011, International Journal of Modern Physics D, 20, 989, 10.1142/S0218271811019335

    2011 doi

  39. [49]

    J., & Taylor , J

    Nice , D. J., & Taylor , J. H. 1995, , 441, 429, 10.1086/175367

    1995 doi

  40. [50]

    2016, , 54, 401, 10.1146/annurev-astro-081915-023322

    \"O zel , F., & Freire , P. 2016, , 54, 401, 10.1146/annurev-astro-081915-023322

    2016 doi

  41. [51]

    G., Jiang , P., et al

    Pan , Z., Lu , J. G., Jiang , P., et al. 2023, , 620, 961, 10.1038/s41586-023-06308-w

    2023 doi

  42. [52]

    S., Folkner , W

    Park , R. S., Folkner , W. M., Williams , J. G., & Boggs , D. H. 2021, , 161, 105, 10.3847/1538-3881/abd414

    2021 doi

  43. [53]

    Phinney , E. S. 1992, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A, 341, 39, 10.1098/rsta.1992.0084

    1992

  44. [54]

    S., & Kulkarni , S

    Phinney , E. S., & Kulkarni , S. R. 1994, , 32, 591, 10.1146/annurev.aa.32.090194.003111

    1994

  45. [55]

    1991, , 350, 136, 10.1038/350136a0

    Podsiadlowski , P. 1991, , 350, 136, 10.1038/350136a0

    1991 doi

  46. [56]

    Podsiadlowski , P., Rappaport , S., & Pfahl , E. D. 2002, , 565, 1107, 10.1086/324686

    2002 doi

  47. [57]

    Pylyser , E., & Savonije , G. J. 1988, , 191, 57

    1988

  48. [58]

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

    1969

  49. [59]

    J., Shannon , R

    Reardon , D. J., Shannon , R. M., Cameron , A. D., et al. 2021, , 507, 2137, 10.1093/mnras/stab1990

    2021 doi

  50. [60]

    1971, , 13, 367

    Refsdal , S., & Weigert , A. 1971, , 13, 367

    1971

  51. [61]

    Roberts , M. S. E. 2013, in Neutron Stars and Pulsars: Challenges and Opportunities after 80 years, ed. J. van Leeuwen , Vol. 291, 127--132, 10.1017/S174392131202337X

    2013 doi

  52. [62]

    C., et al

    Strader , J., Chomiuk , L., Cheung , C. C., et al. 2015, , 804, L12, 10.1088/2041-8205/804/1/L12

    2015 doi

  53. [63]

    2019, , 872, 42, 10.3847/1538-4357/aafbaa

    Strader , J., Swihart , S., Chomiuk , L., et al. 2019, , 872, 42, 10.3847/1538-4357/aafbaa

    2019 doi

  54. [64]

    Q., Han , J

    Su , W. Q., Han , J. L., Yang , Z. L., et al. 2024, , 530, 1506, 10.1093/mnras/stae888

    2024 doi

  55. [65]

    E., King , A

    Taam , R. E., King , A. R., & Ritter , H. 2000, , 541, 329, 10.1086/309392

    2000 doi

  56. [66]

    Tauris , T. M. 1996, , 315, 453

    1996

  57. [67]

    Tauris , T. M. 2011, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 447, Evolution of Compact Binaries, ed. L. Schmidtobreick , M. R. Schreiber , & C. Tappert , 285, 10.48550/arXiv.1106.0897

    2011 doi arXiv

  58. [68]

    M., Langer , N., & Kramer , M

    Tauris , T. M., Langer , N., & Kramer , M. 2011, , 416, 2130, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19189.x

    2011

  59. [69]

    2012, , 425, 1601, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21446.x

    ---. 2012, , 425, 1601, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21446.x

    2012

  60. [70]

    M., & Savonije , G

    Tauris , T. M., & Savonije , G. J. 1999, , 350, 928. astro-ph/9909147

    1999 arXiv

  61. [71]

    M., & van den Heuvel , E

    Tauris , T. M., & van den Heuvel , E. P. J. 2006, in Compact stellar X-ray sources, Vol. 39 (Cambridge University Press), 623--665, 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0303456

    2006 doi arXiv

  62. [72]

    M., & van den Heuvel , E

    Tauris , T. M., & van den Heuvel , E. P. J. 2023, Physics of Binary Star Evolution. From Stars to X-ray Binaries and Gravitational Wave Sources (Princeton University Press), 10.48550/arXiv.2305.09388

    2023 doi arXiv

  63. [73]

    M., Kramer , M., Freire , P

    Tauris , T. M., Kramer , M., Freire , P. C. C., et al. 2017, , 846, 170, 10.3847/1538-4357/aa7e89

    2017 doi

  64. [74]

    M., Nelemans , G., Voss , R., Wood , M

    van Haaften , L. M., Nelemans , G., Voss , R., Wood , M. A., & Kuijpers , J. 2012, , 537, A104, 10.1051/0004-6361/201117880

    2012 doi

  65. [75]

    2011, , 28, 1, 10.1071/AS10021

    van Straten , W., & Bailes , M. 2011, , 28, 1, 10.1071/AS10021

    2011 doi

  66. [76]

    2020, Science, 367, 577, 10.1126/science.aax7007

    Venkatraman Krishnan , V., Bailes , M., van Straten , W., et al. 2020, Science, 367, 577, 10.1126/science.aax7007

    2020 doi

  67. [77]

    Voisin , G., Cognard , I., Freire , P. C. C., et al. 2020, , 638, A24, 10.1051/0004-6361/202038104

    2020 doi

  68. [78]

    F., Han , J

    Wang , P. F., Han , J. L., Xu , J., et al. 2023, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 23, 104002, 10.1088/1674-4527/acea1f

    2023 doi

  69. [79]

    F., Rappaport , S., & Savonije , G

    Webbink , R. F., Rappaport , S., & Savonije , G. J. 1983, , 270, 678, 10.1086/161159

    1983 doi

  70. [80]

    M., & Huang , Y

    Weisberg , J. M., & Huang , Y. 2016, , 829, 55, 10.3847/0004-637X/829/1/55

    2016 doi

  71. [81]

    M., & Taylor , J

    Weisberg , J. M., & Taylor , J. H. 1984, , 52, 1348, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.52.1348

    1984 doi

  72. [82]

    2023, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 23, 075024, 10.1088/1674-4527/acdfa5

    Xu , H., Chen , S., Guo , Y., et al. 2023, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 23, 075024, 10.1088/1674-4527/acdfa5

    2023 doi

  73. [83]

    L., Han , J

    Yang , Z. L., Han , J. L., Jing , W. C., & Su , W. Q. 2023, , 956, L39, 10.3847/2041-8213/acfe6e

    2023 doi

  74. [84]

    L., Han , J

    Yang , Z. L., Han , J. L., Wang , T., et al. 2025 a , Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 25, 014002, 10.1088/1674-4527/ada3b5

    2025 doi

  75. [85]

    L., Han , J

    Yang , Z. L., Han , J. L., Zhou , D. J., et al. 2025 b , Science, in press

    2025

  76. [86]

    M., Manchester , R

    Yao , J. M., Manchester , R. N., & Wang , N. 2017, , 835, 29, 10.3847/1538-4357/835/1/29

    2017 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.