Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 77 references

Reconciling the Waiting Time Peaks Variations of Repeating FRBs with an Eccentric Neutron Star--White Dwarf Binary

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper argues that the shrinking long-duration waiting-time peaks of the repeating FRBs 20121102A and 20201124A are the orbital-period decay of an eccentric neutron star-white dwarf binary, with common-envelope ejection episodes…

desk verdict Stable mass-transfer analysis is fine, but Section 4's CE fitting contradicts the paper's own Eq. (25); the central claims for both FRBs do not survive contact with the equations. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.15591 v1 pith:P7DRQD42 submitted 2025-04-22 astro-ph.HE

Hao-Yan Chen This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords fastradioburstsrepeatingFRBswaitingtimedistributionneutronstar-whitedwarfbinaryeccentricorbitcommonenvelopeejectionFRB20121102A20201124A
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

Repeating fast radio bursts 20121102A and 20201124A both show a bimodal distribution of waiting times between bursts, and the tens-of-seconds component of that distribution has been shrinking over the years of observation. This paper claims that those long waiting-time peaks are the orbital periods of eccentric neutron star-white dwarf binaries: each periastron passage dumps material onto the neutron star, and each dumping produces a burst after a roughly uniform lag. Under that identification, the shrinking peaks record orbital decay. The paper shows that ordinary stable mass transfer plus gravitational-wave loss shrinks the orbit too slowly to match the data, but adding common-envelope ejection episodes, one for FRB 20121102A followed by stable Roche-lobe overflow and multiple for FRB 20201124A, reproduces the observed peak ratios. If correct, the two repeaters are binaries at different evolutionary moments, and the same mechanism should govern other active repeaters with double-peaked waiting-time distributions.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is an eccentric neutron star-white dwarf binary in which the white dwarf fills its Roche lobe, the region from which its matter is pulled away by the neutron star, only at periastron; the orbital period is identified with the tens-of-seconds waiting-time peak. Around that picture the paper builds a chain of standard binary-evolution machinery: Roche-lobe geometry, gravitational-wave angular-momentum loss, a stability criterion comparing the radius responses of the white dwarf and its Roche lobe (ζ_L2 ≲ ζ_WD), a mass-transfer rate controlled by how far the donor overfills its lobe, and, for the unstable channel, the gamma-mechanism common-envelope relation that converts ejected mass ΔM into an orbital-period ratio P_f/P_i. The gamma-mechanism is the step that turns a modest ejected mass into a large period change, and it is what makes the observed peak ratios reachable.

What would settle it

Because the paper itself notes that the observed activity epochs are discontinuous, the decisive test is a single continuous, high-cadence monitoring campaign resolving burst arrival times. If within one campaign the long-duration waiting-time peak is seen to lengthen, or bursts appear at half or twice the fitted gap, then the one-burst-per-orbit identification is broken and the orbital-decay explanation loses its basis; a continuous monotonic decline of the peak, by contrast, would support the model.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the secular decrease in the long-duration waiting-time peak of FRB 20121102A, from about 95 s to about 70 s, and of FRB 20201124A, from about 107 s to about 10 s, is the orbital decay of a neutron star-white dwarf binary on an eccentric orbit. The waiting time between adjacent bursts is taken to equal the orbital period, because Roche-lobe overflow happens once per periastron passage and the accreted material reaches the neutron star with a uniform delay. The evolutionary calculations show that stable mass transfer alone, with a 0.6 solar-mass white dwarf, shortens the orbital period over a century but by too little; the observed factors require the angular-momentum drain of common-envelope ejection. Applying the gamma-mechanism of common-envelope ejection to an initial 1.2 solar-mass white dwarf donor reproduces the observed peak ratios with gamma_CE between 3 and 4, and assigns the two repeaters distinct histories: FRB 20121102A lost roughly 0.5-0.7 solar masses in a common-envelope phase and then settled into stable mass transfer with a subcritical white dwarf, while FRB 20201124A lost more than 1 solar mass and probably went through two or more common-envelope ejections, leaving a naked O-Ne white dwarf in a circular orbit with a sharply lower mass-transfer rate.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the tens-of-seconds waiting-time peak equals the binary orbital period, with one burst per periastron passage after a uniform accretion lag; if bursts are not locked one-to-one to orbits, the mapping from waiting-time trends to orbital-period decay and to common-envelope histories is unsupported.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The long-duration waiting-time peak of an active repeater acts as an orbital clock, so monitoring it over years gives a direct readout of orbital decay in a compact binary.
  • FRB 20121102A and FRB 20201124A need not share an evolutionary state: one is a post-common-envelope system in stable mass transfer, while the other is a multiple-common-envelope system whose stripped white dwarf now transfers mass far more slowly, predicting a sharp drop in its burst rate.
  • The initial ~1.2 solar-mass white dwarf donors imply dynamically unstable mass transfer and common-envelope formation, and the observed waiting-time ratios constrain the common-envelope efficiency parameter gamma_CE to 3-4, tighter than typical calibrations.
  • If the same interpretation applies to other active repeaters with bimodal waiting-time distributions, their long-duration peaks should also decay with time, making the trend testable in FRBs 20220912A and 20240114A.
  • The closest such binaries should emit gravitational waves at frequency f = 2/P_orb, in the 10^-2 to 10^-1 Hz band, potentially detectable by the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A testable division follows from the one-burst-per-orbit lock: after accounting for detection thresholds, each long waiting-time gap should contain exactly one burst episode, and the burst phase within that gap should be stable rather than random; existing burst arrival-time data could be re-binned at the fitted peak to check this.
  • The model predicts diverging futures for the two repeaters: FRB 20121102A should show a smooth, gradual decline of its long-duration peak as stable mass transfer continues, whereas renewed high-rate activity from FRB 20201124A would argue against the proposed multiple-common-envelope history.
  • The required gamma_CE values of 3-4 lie well above the 1.4-1.7 range used for double helium white dwarfs, so if the identification is right, either common-envelope ejection in neutron star-white dwarf binaries removes angular momentum much more efficiently, or the gamma-mechanism parameterization is absorbing additional physics such as magnetically enhanced mass loss.
  • A cleaner test would compare the period decay inferred from waiting times with an independent orbital signature, such as a periodic modulation of dispersion measure, rotation measure, or the activity window itself, which the model does not currently provide.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes that the observed secular decrease of the long-duration waiting-time peaks of two repeating FRBs, 20121102A and 20201124A, is produced by the orbital period decay of an eccentric neutron star–white dwarf binary. After asserting that the tens-of-seconds waiting-time peak equals the binary orbital period, the author studies two mass-transfer regimes: stable Roche-lobe overflow (Section 3) and unstable mass transfer leading to common-envelope ejection (Section 4). Using standard angular-momentum equations, the paper argues that stable mass transfer alone cannot produce the observed peak shrinkage, but a common-envelope event with γ_CE = 3–4 can, yielding distinct pathways for the two sources: CE ejection followed by stable mass transfer for FRB 20121102A, and multiple CE ejections for FRB 20201124A.

Significance. If the proposed explanation were quantitatively sound, it would connect waiting-time evolution of repeating FRBs to binary orbital dynamics and would make testable predictions, including LISA-band gravitational-wave sources. The analytic framework in Equations (13), (17), and (21) follows standard literature and is integrated in a straightforward way. However, the central identification of the waiting-time peak with the orbital period is asserted rather than derived, and the quantitative common-envelope calculation for FRB 20201124A is internally inconsistent with the model's own equations. The paper is therefore best read as an exploratory scenario, not as an established quantitative reconciliation.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 2, paragraph 'For the tens-of-seconds peaks'] The identification of the long-duration waiting-time peak with the orbital period P_orb is asserted rather than demonstrated. The argument that T_mt ≲ P_orb and a 'uniform temporal lag' imply equality of the burst interval with P_orb requires a specific model of burst production, and the paper itself allows fragmented material to produce multiple bursts with short intervals, so the one-burst-per-orbit mapping is not unique. If this mapping fails, the subsequent interpretation of the decreasing waiting-time peaks as decreasing orbital periods is unsupported.
  2. [Section 4.2, Equations (24)–(25), Figure 4] The claimed CE parameters for FRB 20201124A are unphysical. With M_NS = 1.4 M_sun and M_WD = 1.2 M_sun, M_tot = 2.6 M_sun. Equation (24) gives (J_i − J_f)/J_i = γ_CE ΔM/M_tot, so J_f/J_i < 0 for ΔM > 0.867 M_sun when γ_CE = 3 and for ΔM > 0.65 M_sun when γ_CE = 4. The text states that ΔM exceeds 1 M_sun for γ_CE = 3–4, which makes the third factor in Equation (25) negative and yields no positive final period ratio. In the allowed range, a ratio P_f/P_i ≈ 10.05/106.7 ≈ 0.094 requires ΔM ≈ 0.6–0.7 M_sun and leaves M_WD ≈ 0.5–0.6 M_sun, not the M_WD < 0.2 M_sun stripped O-Ne WD described in Section 4.2. The multiple-CE pathway for FRB 20201124A is therefore not reproduced by the model's own equations.
  3. [Section 4, Figure 4 and Section 4.2] The quantitative agreement in Figure 4 is obtained by choosing γ_CE, the initial WD mass, and ΔM after the fact. No independent constraint on γ_CE = 3–4, on the initial M_WD = 1.2 M_sun, or on the number of CE episodes is provided. The agreement with the observed peak ratios is therefore a parameter adjustment rather than a prediction, and in the case of FRB 20201124A the adjusted parameters are inconsistent with Equation (25), as noted above.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 2, final paragraph] The phrase 'some of the fragmented materials cannot not fall to the surface of the NS' contains a double negative; it should read 'cannot fall'.
  2. [Figure 3] The four panels of Figure 3 appear twice in the displayed text, once after 'Figure 3. Cont.'; the duplicated panel set should be removed.
  3. [Section 4.2] The term 'naked O-Ne WD' is used to describe the remnant after CE ejection, but the quantitative result in the allowed parameter range leaves M_WD ≈ 0.5–0.6 M_sun; the text should state explicitly what final mass is actually obtained from Equation (25).
  4. [Introduction and Section 5] The references to the FAST burst samples are cited through [32]–[34] and [37], but the paper would benefit from stating the exact observation epochs and fitted waiting-time values in a table, since the ratios of these values are central to the argument.

Circularity Check

3 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

CE 'reconstructions' are parameter fits to the observed WT-peak ratios, and the FRB 20201124A fit is unphysical under the paper's own Eq. (24).

  1. ansatz smuggled in via citation [Section 2, paragraph beginning 'For the tens-of-seconds peaks']
    "In our hypothesis, these peak waiting times may correspond to the orbital periods Porb of the NS-WD binary. ... Moreover, the supply of the accreted materials to the NS is expected to exhibit a uniform temporal lag. Therefore, the time interval between two adjacent bursts should be equivalent to Porb."

    The mapping 'WT peak = Porb' is the load-bearing input of the whole paper. It is not derived from the FAST data or tested here; it is adopted from the cited NS-WD model, including Lin et al. (2022) [26] (co-authored by the present author) for the estimate Tmt ≲ Porb. Under this mapping, any computed Porb evolution is automatically a predicted WT-peak evolution, so the comparisons in Figures 1 and 4 test the model only up to this imported ansatz. The paper gives no independent check that adjacent detected bursts are locked one-to-one to orbits or that the accreted-material lag is uniform, so the claimed reconciliation rests on a self-citation-supplied assumption rather than on a derived result.

  2. fitted input called prediction [Section 4.1, FRB 20121102A]
    "To make the change in the orbital period of the NS-WD binary comparable to the variation in the wait time peaks of FRB 20121102A, the mass of the ejected material ΔMWD should range from ∼0.5 M⊙ to ∼0.7 M⊙ when γCE varies between 3 and 4 (see the red dashed line in Figure 4)."

    The red dashed line in Figure 4 is set by the observed waiting-time peak ratio of FRB 20121102A. Equation (25) is then inverted to read off ΔMWD for assumed values of γCE; there are no independent constraints on ΔMWD, γCE, or the initial 1.2 M⊙ WD mass. The resulting CE + RLOF evolutionary history is therefore the input of the fitting procedure repackaged as a reconstructed pathway: the target peak ratio is used to choose the parameters, and those parameters are then said to reproduce the peak ratio.

1 more flagged steps
  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 4.2, FRB 20201124A]
    "For FRB 20201124A, as shown in Figure 4, the mass of the ejected material exceeds 1 M⊙ when γCE = 3–4, which can account for the changes in the waiting time peaks."

    The 'accounting' is a fit: the observed 106.7 s→10.05 s peak ratio fixes Pf/Pi, and ΔM is chosen so that Eq. (25) returns that ratio. Worse, the chosen parameter region violates the model's own validity: with Mtot = 2.6 M⊙, γCE = 3–4, and ΔM > 1 M⊙, Eq. (24) gives Jf/Ji = 1 − γCE ΔM/Mtot < 0, so Eq. (25) cannot yield a positive Pf/Pi. The claimed reconciliation for FRB 20201124A therefore reduces to an unphysical reading of the graph rather than to a derived prediction of the model.

full rationale

The paper contains one genuinely independent negative result: Section 3 integrates the stable mass-transfer equations and shows that Roche-lobe overflow alone cannot reproduce the observed peak decay (the curves in Figure 3 remain near 88–98 s while the observed long-duration peaks drop toward tens of seconds). That part is not circular and is a legitimate use of the model. Circularity enters in Section 4, where the two repeater histories are obtained by selecting ΔMWD and γCE so that Eq. (25) reproduces the observed Pf/Pi ratios; the parameters are not independently constrained, so calling the outcome a 'reconciliation' is inverting the fit. The FRB 20201124A solution additionally requires ΔM > 1 M⊙ at γCE = 3–4, which makes Jf/Ji negative by Eq. (24) and Pf/Pi undefined by Eq. (25). The foundational mapping 'WT peak = Porb' is imported from the author's own prior model (Lin et al. 2022, Eq. 9) without independent validation, making the self-citation load-bearing for the whole comparison. Score 6: some predictions reduce to the fitting procedure, but the stable-transfer evolution and the multi-source comparison retain independent content.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central scenario rests on free parameters chosen to match the target observations, including gamma_CE, initial WD mass, initial eccentricity, and accretion efficiencies. The identification of the long-duration waiting time peak with the orbital period is an ad hoc assumption. No new physical entity class is introduced beyond the specific massive WD donor assumed for each source. The rest of the machinery is standard binary evolution: Kepler's law, Peters' gravitational radiation formula, mass-radius relations, and common-envelope formalism.

free parameters (4)
  • gamma_CE = 3 to 4 (chosen per source)
    Selected in Figure 4 so that Pf/Pi matches the observed long-duration peak ratios for FRBs 20121102A and 20201124A.
  • Initial WD mass MWD = 0.6 or 1.2 solar masses depending on scenario
    0.6 solar masses is used for the stable mass transfer integration to start near a 94 s period; 1.2 solar masses is required for the unstable/CE scenario so that the Porb-e curves overlap the observed peaks.
  • Initial eccentricity e = 0.3
    Chosen so that the initial orbital period is about 94 s, comparable to the observed long-duration peaks; no observational constraint is given.
  • Accretion efficiency epsilon and specific angular momentum gamma = epsilon = 0.1, 0.5, 1; gamma = q in mass-loss cases
    These values are explored to vary the angular momentum loss; the central CE scenario depends on the choices but they are not measured from data.
assumptions (5)
  • ad hoc to paper Long-duration waiting time peaks correspond to orbital periods, with adjacent bursts separated by one Porb due to uniform temporal lag
    Invoked in Section 2; no derivation is given beyond Tmt less than or similar to Porb from Lin et al. 2022.
  • domain assumption The WD fills its Roche lobe exactly at periastron, RWD = RL2
    Used in Section 3.1 to derive the Porb-e relation; mass transfer is assumed to occur only at periastron.
  • domain assumption Gravitational radiation dominates angular momentum loss and spin-orbit coupling is negligible in eccentric binaries
    Stated in Section 3.2 following standard binary evolution treatments; this determines the orbital decay rate.
  • domain assumption Unstable mass transfer with a massive WD leads to common envelope ejection described by the gamma-mechanism
    Section 4 adopts the Nelemans et al. gamma_CE formalism for NS-WD systems; the applicability and efficiency are not independently established.
  • standard math Kepler's third law, Peters' gravitational radiation formula, and the Nauenberg white dwarf mass-radius relation
    Standard background relations used throughout Sections 2 and 3 without proof.
invented entities (1)
  • Massive white dwarf donor with MWD around 1.2 solar masses in FRBs 20121102A and 20201124A
    purpose: Enables unstable mass transfer and common-envelope ejection to explain the observed decreases in long-duration waiting time peaks
    No observational evidence is presented for such a massive WD in these sources; initial masses and CE parameters are chosen to match the observed peak ratios.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Reconciling the Waiting Time Peaks Variations of Repeating FRBs with an Eccentric Neutron Star--White Dwarf Binary." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/P7DRQD42

@misc{pith2026250415591,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Reconciling the Waiting Time Peaks Variations of Repeating FRBs with an Eccentric Neutron Star--White Dwarf Binary},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/P7DRQD42}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.15591}
}
read the original abstract

Fast radio bursts (FRBs) are luminous radio transients with millisecond duration. For some active repeaters, such as FRBs 20121102A and 20201124A, more than a thousand bursts have been detected by the Five-hundred-meter Aperture Spherical radio Telescope (FAST). The waiting time (WT) distributions of both repeaters, defined as the time intervals between adjacent (detected) bursts, exhibit a bimodal structure well-fitted by two log-normal functions. Notably, the time scales of the long-duration WT peaks for both repeaters show a decreasing trend over time. These similar burst features suggest that there may be a common physical mechanism for FRBs~20121102A and 20201124A. In this paper, we {revisit} the neutron star (NS)--white dwarf (WD) binary model with an eccentric orbit to account for the observed changes in the long-duration WT peaks. According to our model, the shortening of the WT peaks corresponds to the orbital period decay of the NS-WD binary. We consider two mass transfer modes, namely, stable and unstable mass transfer, to examine how the orbital period evolves. Our findings reveal distinct evolutionary pathways for the two repeaters: for FRB~20121102A, the NS-WD binary likely undergoes a combination of common envelope (CE) ejection and Roche lobe overflow, whereas for FRB~20201124A the system may experience multiple CE ejections. These findings warrant further validation through follow-up observations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.15591 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Relationship between the orbital period Porb and eccentricity e for the different WD masses MWD (where MNS = 1.4 M⊙) when the WD fills its Roche lobe at periastron. The black lines represent difference WD masses, i.e., 0.1 M⊙ (solid line), 0.6 M⊙ (dashed line), and 1.2 M⊙ (dotted line). The blue lines correspond to the peak waiting times of FRB 20121102A reported by Hewitt et al. [37] (solid line) and Li et al. [32]… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. shows the logarithmic change in the radii of the WD and its Roche lobe due to mass transfer. In the NS-WD binary, we set the WD mass in the range of 0.01 − 1 M⊙ and MNS = 1.4 M⊙. The black and colored lines describe the logarithmic change in the WD radius and Roche lobe radius, respectively, while the solid and dashed lines represent the NS-WD binary with circular and eccentric orbits (e.g., e = 0.5), respectively. … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Cont [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Evolution of the physical parameters of the NS-WD binary, including contributions from gravitational wave radiation, mass transfer, and mass ejection. The system with an eccentricity of e = 0.3 consists of a 1.4 M⊙ NS and a 0.6 M⊙ WD. The panels show (a) the orbital ec…
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Relationship between the orbital period ratio, defined as Pf/Pi , and the envelope mass lost from the binary ∆M. Different colored lines represent different γCE, i.e., γCE = 1 (black), 2 (blue), 3 (green), and 4 (orange). The initial physical parameters of the NS-WD bi…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

77 extracted references · 75 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Fast Radio Bursts: An Extragalactic Enigma

    Cordes, J.M.; Chatterjee, S. Fast Radio Bursts: An Extragalactic Enigma. ARAA 2019, 57, 417–465

    work page 2019

  2. [2]

    Fast radio bursts

    Petroff, E.; Hessels, J.W.T.; Lorimer, D.R. Fast radio bursts. AARv 2019, 27, 4

    work page 2019

  3. [3]

    Fast radio bursts at the dawn of the 2020s

    Petroff, E.; Hessels, J.W.T.; Lorimer, D.R. Fast radio bursts at the dawn of the 2020s. AARv 2022, 30, 2

    work page 2022

  4. [4]

    A repeating fast radio burst source localized to a nearby spiral galaxy.Nature 2020, 577, 190–194

    Marcote, B.; Nimmo, K.; Hessels, J.W.T.; Tendulkar, S.P; Bassa, C.G; Paragi, Z; Keimpema, A.; Bhardwaj, M.; Karuppusamy, R.; Kaspi, V .M.; et al. A repeating fast radio burst source localized to a nearby spiral galaxy.Nature 2020, 577, 190–194

    work page 2020

  5. [5]

    A luminous fast radio burst that probes the Universe at redshift 1

    Ryder, S.D.; Bannister, K.W.; Bhandari, S., Deller, A.T.; Ekers, R.D.; Glowacki, M.; Gordon, A.C; Gourdji, K.; James, C.W.; Kilpatrick, C.D.; et al. A luminous fast radio burst that probes the Universe at redshift 1. Science 2023, 382, 294–299

    work page 2023

  6. [6]

    A fast radio burst associated with a Galactic magnetar

    Bochenek, C.D.; Ravi, V .; Belov, K.V .; Hallinan, G.; Kocz, J.; Kulkarni, S.R.; McKenna, D.L. A fast radio burst associated with a Galactic magnetar. Nature 2020, 587, 59–62

    work page 2020

  7. [7]

    [The CHIME/FRB Collaboration]

    Andersen, B.C.; Bandura, K.M.; Bhardwaj, M.; Bij, A.; Boyce, M.M.; Boyle, P .J.; Brar, C.; Cassanelli, T.; Chawla, P .; Chen, T.; et al. [The CHIME/FRB Collaboration]. A bright millisecond-duration radio burst from a Galactic magnetar. Nature 2020, 587, 54–58

    work page 2020

  8. [8]

    [The CHIME/FRB Collaboration]

    Amiri, M.; Andersen, B.C.; Bandura, K.; Berger, S.; Bhardwaj, M.; Boyce, M.M.; Boyle, P .J.; Brar, C.; Breitman, D.; Cassanelli, T.; et al. [The CHIME/FRB Collaboration]. The First CHIME/FRB Fast Radio Burst Catalog. Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 2021, 257, 59

    work page 2021

Show all 77 references
  1. [9]

    Can a Single Population Account for the Discriminant Properties in Fast Radio Bursts? Astrophys

    Zhong, S.Q.; Xie, W.J.; Deng, C.M.; Li, L.; Dai, Z.G.; Zhang, H.M. Can a Single Population Account for the Discriminant Properties in Fast Radio Bursts? Astrophys. J. 2022, 926, 206

    2022

  2. [10]

    One-off and Repeating Fast Radio Bursts: A Statistical Analysis.Astrophys

    Chen, H.Y.; Gu, W.M.; Sun, M.Y.; Yi, T. One-off and Repeating Fast Radio Bursts: A Statistical Analysis.Astrophys. J. 2022, 939, 27

    2022

  3. [11]

    Luminosity distribution of fast radio bursts from CHIME/FRB Catalog 1 by means of the updated Macquart relation

    Cui, X.H.; Zhang, C.M.; Li, D.; Zhang, J.W.; Peng, B.; Zhu, W.W.; Strom, R.; Wang, S.Q.; Wang, N.; Wu, Q.D.; et al. Luminosity distribution of fast radio bursts from CHIME/FRB Catalog 1 by means of the updated Macquart relation. ApSS 2022, 367, 66

    2022

  4. [12]

    FRB 121102 Bursts Show Complex Time-Frequency Structure

    Hessels, J.W.T.; Spitler, L.G.; Seymour, A.D.; Cordes, J.M.; Michilli, D.; Lynch, R.S.; Gourdji, K.; Archibald, A.M.; Bassa, C.G.; Bower, G.C.; et al. FRB 121102 Bursts Show Complex Time-Frequency Structure. Astrophys. J. Lett. 2019, 876, L23. Universe 2025, 1, 0 16 of 18

    2019

  5. [13]

    The physical mechanisms of fast radio bursts

    Zhang, B. The physical mechanisms of fast radio bursts. Nature 2020, 587, 45–53

    2020

  6. [14]

    The physics of fast radio bursts

    Zhang, B. The physics of fast radio bursts. RvMP 2023, 95, 035005

    2023

  7. [15]

    Propagation effects at low frequencies seen in the LOFAR long-term monitoring of the periodically active FRB 20180916B

    Gopinath, A.; Bassa, C.G.; Pleunis, Z.; Hessels, J.W.T.; Chawla, P .; Keane, E.F.; Kondratiev, V .; Michilli, D.; Nimmo, K. Propagation effects at low frequencies seen in the LOFAR long-term monitoring of the periodically active FRB 20180916B. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 2024, 5...

    2024

  8. [16]

    Amiri, M.; Andersen, B.C.; Bandura, K.M.; Bhardwaj, M.; Boyle, P .J.; Brar, C. et al. [The CHIME/FRB Collaboration]. Periodic activity from a fast radio burst source. Nature 2020, 582, 351–355

    2020

  9. [17]

    A direct localization of a fast radio burst and its host.Nature 2017, 541, 58–61

    Chatterjee, S.; Law, C.J.; Wharton, R.S.; Burke-Spolaor, S.; Hessels, J.W.T.; Bower, G.C.; Cordes, J.M.; Tendulkar, S.P .; Bassa, C.G.; Demorest, P .; et al. A direct localization of a fast radio burst and its host.Nature 2017, 541, 58–61

    2017

  10. [18]

    The Repeating Fast Radio Burst FRB 121102 as Seen on Milliarcsecond Angular Scales

    Marcote, B.; Paragi, Z.; Hessels, J.W.T.; Keimpema, A.; van Langevelde, H.J.; Huang, Y.; Bassa, C.G.; Bogdanov, S.; Bower, G.C.; Burke-Spolaor, S.; et al. The Repeating Fast Radio Burst FRB 121102 as Seen on Milliarcsecond Angular Scales. Astrophys. J. Lett. 2017, 834, L8

    2017

  11. [19]

    Possible periodic activity in the repeating FRB 121102

    Rajwade, K.M.; Mickaliger, M.B.; Stappers, B.W.; Morello, V .; Agarwal, D.; Bassa, C.G.; Breton, R.P .; Caleb, M.; Karastergiou, A.; Keane, E.F.; et al. Possible periodic activity in the repeating FRB 121102. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 2020, 495, 3551–3558

    2020

  12. [20]

    Repeating behaviour of FRB 121102: Periodicity, waiting times, and energy distribution

    Cruces, M.; Spitler, L.G.; Scholz, P .; Lynch, R.; Seymour, A.; Hessels, J.W.T.; Gouiffés, C.; Hilmarsson, G.H.; Kramer, M.; Munjal, S. Repeating behaviour of FRB 121102: Periodicity, waiting times, and energy distribution. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 2020, 500, 448–463

    2020

  13. [21]

    Periodic Fast Radio Bursts as a Probe of Extragalactic Asteroid Belts

    Dai, Z.G.; Zhong, S.Q. Periodic Fast Radio Bursts as a Probe of Extragalactic Asteroid Belts. Astrophys. J. Lett. 2020, 895, L1

    2020

  14. [22]

    A neutron star-white dwarf binary model for periodically active fast radio burst sources.Mon

    Gu, W.M.; Yi, T.; Liu, T. A neutron star-white dwarf binary model for periodically active fast radio burst sources.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 2020, 497,1543–1546

    2020

  15. [23]

    FRB Periodicity: Mild Pulsars in Tight O/B-star Binaries.Astrophys

    Lyutikov, M.; Barkov, M.V .; Giannios, D. FRB Periodicity: Mild Pulsars in Tight O/B-star Binaries.Astrophys. J. Lett. 2020, 893, L39

    2020

  16. [24]

    An Accreting Stellar Binary Model for Active Periodic Fast Radio Bursts

    Deng, C.M.; Zhong, S.Q.; Dai, Z.G. An Accreting Stellar Binary Model for Active Periodic Fast Radio Bursts. Astrophys. J. 2021, 922, 98

    2021

  17. [25]

    Repeating Ultraluminous X-Ray Bursts and Repeating Fast Radio Bursts: A Possible Association? Astrophys

    Chen, H.Y.; Gu, W.M.; Fu, J.B.; Weng, S.S.; Wang, J.F.; Sun, M.Y. Repeating Ultraluminous X-Ray Bursts and Repeating Fast Radio Bursts: A Possible Association? Astrophys. J. 2022, 937, 9

    2022

  18. [26]

    Effects of Gravitational-wave Radiation of Eccentric Neutron Star-White Dwarf Binaries on the Periodic Activity of Fast Radio Burst Sources

    Lin, Y.Q.; Chen, H.Y.; Gu, W.M.; Yi, T. Effects of Gravitational-wave Radiation of Eccentric Neutron Star-White Dwarf Binaries on the Periodic Activity of Fast Radio Burst Sources. Astrophys. J. 2022, 929, 114

    2022

  19. [27]

    Periodicity in recurrent fast radio bursts and the origin of ultralong period magnetars

    Beniamini, P .;Wadiasingh, Z.; Metzger, B.D. Periodicity in recurrent fast radio bursts and the origin of ultralong period magnetars. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 2020, 496,3390–3401

    2020

  20. [28]

    Precessing Flaring Magnetar as a Source of Repeating FRB 180916.J0158+65

    Levin, Y.; Beloborodov, A.M.; Bransgrove, A. Precessing Flaring Magnetar as a Source of Repeating FRB 180916.J0158+65. Astrophys. J. Lett. 2020, 895, L30

    2020

  21. [29]

    Orbit-induced Spin Precession as a Possible Origin for Periodicity in Periodically Repeating Fast Radio Bursts

    Yang, H.; Zou, Y.C. Orbit-induced Spin Precession as a Possible Origin for Periodicity in Periodically Repeating Fast Radio Bursts. Astrophys. J. Lett. 2020, 893, L31

    2020

  22. [30]

    Reconciling the 16.35-day Period of FRB 20180916B with Jet Precession.Astrophys

    Chen, H.Y.; Gu, W.M.; Sun, M.; Liu, T.; Yi, T. Reconciling the 16.35-day Period of FRB 20180916B with Jet Precession.Astrophys. J. 2021, 921, 147

    2021

  23. [31]

    Periodic Fast Radio Bursts from Luminous X-ray Binaries

    Sridhar, N.; Metzger, B.D.; Beniamini, P .; Margalit, B.; Renzo, M.; Sironi, L.; Kovlakas, K. Periodic Fast Radio Bursts from Luminous X-ray Binaries. Astrophys. J. 2021, 917, 13

    2021

  24. [32]

    A bimodal burst energy distribution of a repeating fast radio burst source

    Li, D.; Wang, P .; Zhu, W.W.; Zhang, B.; Zhang, X.X.; Duan, R.; Zhang, Y.K.; Feng, Y.; Tang, N.Y.; Chatterjee, S.; et al. A bimodal burst energy distribution of a repeating fast radio burst source. Nature 2021, 598, 267–271

    2021

  25. [33]

    A fast radio burst source at a complex magnetized site in a barred galaxy

    Xu, H.; Niu, J.R.; Chen, P .; Lee, K.J.; Zhu, W.W.; Dong, S.; Zhang, B.; Jiang, J.C.; Wang, B.J.; Xu, J.W.; et al. A fast radio burst source at a complex magnetized site in a barred galaxy. Nature 2022, 609, 685–688

    2022

  26. [34]

    FAST Observations of an Extremely Active Episode of FRB 20201124A

    Zhang, Y.K.; Wang, P .; Feng, Y.; Zhang, B.; Li, D.; Tsai, C.W.; Niu, C.H.; Luo, R.; Yao, J.M.; Zhu, W.W.; et al. FAST Observations of an Extremely Active Episode of FRB 20201124A. II. Energy Distribution. RAA 2022, 22, 124002

    2022

  27. [35]

    A Sudden Period of High Activity from Repeating Fast Radio Burst 20201124A

    Lanman, A.E.; Andersen, B.C.; Chawla, P .; Josephy, A.; Noble, G.; Kaspi, V .M.; Bandura, M.; Boyle, P .J.; Brar, C.; Breitman, D.; et al. A Sudden Period of High Activity from Repeating Fast Radio Burst 20201124A. Astrophys. J. 2022, 927, 59

    2022

  28. [36]

    FAST Observations of an Extremely Active Episode of FRB 20201124A

    Niu, J.R.; Zhu, W.W.; Zhang, B.; Yuan, M.; Zhou, D.J.; Zhang, Y.K.; Jiang, J.C.; Han, J.L.; Li, D.; Lee, K.J.; et al. FAST Observations of an Extremely Active Episode of FRB 20201124A. IV . Spin Period Search.RAA 2022, 22, 124004

    2022

  29. [37]

    Hewitt, D.M.; Snelders, M.P .; Hessels, J.W.T.; Nimmo, K.; Jahns, J.N.; Spitler, L.G.; Gourdji, K.; Hilmarsson, G.H.; Michilli, D.; Ould-Boukattine, O.S.; et al. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 2022, 515, 3577–3596

    2022

  30. [38]

    FAST Observations of an Extremely Active Episode of FRB 20201124A

    Jiang, J.C.; Wang, W.Y.; Xu, H.; Xu, J.W.; Zhang, C.F.; Wang, B.J.; Zhou, D.J.; Zhang, Y.K.; Niu, J.R.; Lee, K.J.; et al. FAST Observations of an Extremely Active Episode of FRB 20201124A. III. Polarimetry. RAA 2022, 22, 124003

    2022

  31. [39]

    FAST Observations of an Extremely Active Episode of FRB 20201124A: I

    Zhou, D.J.; Han, J.L.; Zhang, B.; Lee, K.J.; Zhu, W.W.; Li, D.; Jing, W.C.; Wang, W.Y.; Zhang, Y.K.; Jiang, J.C.; et al. FAST Observations of an Extremely Active Episode of FRB 20201124A: I. Burst Morphology. RAA 2022, 22, 124001

    2022

  32. [40]

    A new type of long gamma-ray burst

    King, A.; Olsson, E.; Davies, M.B. A new type of long gamma-ray burst. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 2007, 374, L34–L36. Universe 2025, 1, 0 17 of 18

    2007

  33. [41]

    Sub-second periodicity in a fast radio burst

    Andersen, B.C.; Bandura, K.; Bhardwaj, M.; Boyle, P .J.; Breitman, D.; Cassanelli, T.; Chatterjee, S.; Chawla, P .; Cliche, J.F.; Cubranic, D.; et al. Sub-second periodicity in a fast radio burst. Nature 2022, 607, 256–259

    2022

  34. [42]

    A Neutron Star-White Dwarf Binary Model for Repeating Fast Radio Burst 121102

    Gu, W.M.; Dong, Y.Z.; Liu, T.; Ma, R.Y.; Wang, J.F. A Neutron Star-White Dwarf Binary Model for Repeating Fast Radio Burst 121102. Astrophys. J. Lett. 2016, 823, L28

    2016

  35. [43]

    Evolutionary Processes in Close Binary Systems

    Paczy ´ nski, B. Evolutionary Processes in Close Binary Systems. ARAA 1971, 9, 183

    1971

  36. [44]

    Mass Transfer Instabilities Due to Angular Momentum Flows in Close Binaries

    Verbunt, F; Rappaport, S. Mass Transfer Instabilities Due to Angular Momentum Flows in Close Binaries. Astrophys. J. 1988, 332, 193

    1988

  37. [45]

    Mass transfer between double white dwarfs

    Marsh, T.R.; Nelemans, G.; Steeghs, D. Mass transfer between double white dwarfs. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 2004, 350, 113–128

    2004

  38. [46]

    Gravitational Radiation and the Motion of Two Point Masses

    Peters, P .C. Gravitational Radiation and the Motion of Two Point Masses. Phys. Rev. 1964, 136, 1224

    1964

  39. [47]

    Interacting Binaries with Eccentric Orbits

    Sepinsky, J.F.; Willems, B.; Kalogera, V .; Rasio, F.A. Interacting Binaries with Eccentric Orbits. II. Secular Orbital Evolution due to Non-conservative Mass Transfer. Astrophys. J. 2009, 702, 1387

    2009

  40. [48]

    The evolution of ultracompact X-ray binaries

    van Haaften, L.M.; Nelemans, G.; Voss, R.; Wood, M.A.; Kuijpers, J. The evolution of ultracompact X-ray binaries. Astron. Astrophys. 2012, 537, A104

    2012

  41. [49]

    Gas dynamics of semidetached binaries

    Lubow, S.H.; Shu, F.H. Gas dynamics of semidetached binaries. Astrophys. J. 1975, 198, 383

    1975

  42. [50]

    Stellar evolution and binaries

    Webbink, R.F. Stellar evolution and binaries. Interact. Bin. Stars 1985, 39

    1985

  43. [51]

    Golden Galactic Binaries for LISA: Mass-transferring White Dwarf Black Hole Binaries

    Sberna, L.; Toubiana, A.; Miller, M.C. Golden Galactic Binaries for LISA: Mass-transferring White Dwarf Black Hole Binaries. Astrophys. J. 2021, 908, 1

    2021

  44. [52]

    Interacting Binaries with Eccentric Orbits: Secular Orbital Evolution Due to Conservative Mass Transfer

    Sepinsky, J.F.; Willems, B.; Kalogera, V .; Rasio, F.A. Interacting Binaries with Eccentric Orbits: Secular Orbital Evolution Due to Conservative Mass Transfer. Astrophys. J. 2007, 667, 1170

    2007

  45. [53]

    Orbital Evolution of Mass-transferring Eccentric Binary Systems

    Dosopoulou, F.; Kalogera, V . Orbital Evolution of Mass-transferring Eccentric Binary Systems. II. Secular Evolution.Astrophys. J. 2016, 825, 71

    2016

  46. [54]

    Fast, Ultraluminous X-Ray Bursts from Tidal Stripping of White Dwarfs by Intermediate-mass Black Holes

    Shen, R.F. Fast, Ultraluminous X-Ray Bursts from Tidal Stripping of White Dwarfs by Intermediate-mass Black Holes. Astrophys. J. Lett. 2019, 871, L17

    2019

  47. [55]

    Mass transfer in white dwarf-neutron star binaries.Mon

    Bobrick, A.; Davies, M.B.; Church, R.P . Mass transfer in white dwarf-neutron star binaries.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 2017, 467, 3556–3575

    2017

  48. [56]

    Binary Population Synthesis

    Han, Z.W.; Ge, H.W.; Chen, X.F.; Chen, H.L. Binary Population Synthesis. RAA 2020, 20, 161

    2020

  49. [57]

    Binary stars in the new millennium

    Chen, X.F.; Liu, Z.W.; Han, Z.W. Binary stars in the new millennium. PrPNP 2024, 134, 104083

    2024

  50. [58]

    The Common Envelope Phase in the Evolution of Binary Stars

    Livio, M.; Soker, N. The Common Envelope Phase in the Evolution of Binary Stars. Astrophys. J. 1988, 329, 764

    1988

  51. [59]

    Double white dwarfs as progenitors of R Coronae Borealis stars and type I supernovae.Astrophys

    Webbink, R.F. Double white dwarfs as progenitors of R Coronae Borealis stars and type I supernovae.Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 1984, 277, 355

    1984

  52. [60]

    The evolution of cataclysmic and low-mass X-ray binaries

    Patterson, J. The evolution of cataclysmic and low-mass X-ray binaries. Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 1984, 54, 443

    1984

  53. [61]

    Reconstructing the evolution of double helium white dwarfs: Envelope loss without spiral-in

    Nelemans, G.; Verbunt, F.; Yungelson, L.R.; Portegies Zwart, S. Reconstructing the evolution of double helium white dwarfs: Envelope loss without spiral-in. Astron. Astrophys. 2000, 360, 1011–1018

    2000

  54. [62]

    Population synthesis for double white dwarfs

    Nelemans, G.; Yungelson, L.R.; Portegies Zwart, S.F.; Verbunt, F. Population synthesis for double white dwarfs . I. Close detached systems. Astron. Astrophys. 2001, 365, 491–507

    2001

  55. [63]

    X-ray binaries in globular clusters

    Clark, G.W. X-ray binaries in globular clusters. Astrophys. J. Lett. 1975, 199, L143–L145

    1975

  56. [64]

    Tidal enhancement by a binary companion of stellar winds from cool giants.Mon

    Tout, C.A; Eggleton, P .P . Tidal enhancement by a binary companion of stellar winds from cool giants.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 1988, 231, 823–831

    1988

  57. [65]

    Cosmic Comb

    Zhang, B. A “Cosmic Comb” Model of Fast Radio Bursts. Astrophys. J. Lett. 2017, 836, L32

    2017

  58. [66]

    A link between repeating and non-repeating fast radio bursts through their energy distributions

    Kirsten, F.; Ould-Boukattine, O.S.; Herrmann, W.; Gawro ´ nski, M.P .; Hessels, J.W.T.; Lu,W.; Snelders, M.P .; Chawla, P .; Yang, J.; Blaauw, R.; et al. A link between repeating and non-repeating fast radio bursts through their energy distributions. Nat. Astron. 2024, 8, 337–346

    2024

  59. [67]

    Magnetars from Neutron Star-White Dwarf Mergers: Application to Fast Radio Bursts

    Zhong, S.Q; Dai, Z.G. Magnetars from Neutron Star-White Dwarf Mergers: Application to Fast Radio Bursts. Astrophys. J. 2020, 893, 9

    2020

  60. [68]

    An extreme magneto-ionic environment associated with the fast radio burst source FRB 121102

    Michilli, D.; Seymour, A.; Hessels, J.W.T.; Spitler, L.G.; Gajjar, V .; Archibald, A.M.; Bower, G.C.; Chatterjee, S.; Cordes, J.M.; Gourdji, K.; et al. An extreme magneto-ionic environment associated with the fast radio burst source FRB 121102. Nature 2018, 553, 182–185

    2018

  61. [69]

    Repeating fast radio burst 20201124A originates from a magnetar/Be star binary

    Wang, F.Y.; Zhang, G.Q.; Dai, Z.G.; Cheng, K.S. Repeating fast radio burst 20201124A originates from a magnetar/Be star binary. Nat. Comm. 2022, 13, 4382

    2022

  62. [70]

    Radio Nebulae from Hyperaccreting X-Ray Binaries as Common-envelope Precursors and Persistent Counterparts of Fast Radio Bursts

    Sridhar, N.; Metzger, B.D. Radio Nebulae from Hyperaccreting X-Ray Binaries as Common-envelope Precursors and Persistent Counterparts of Fast Radio Bursts. Astrophys. J. 2022, 937, 5

    2022

  63. [71]

    A long-duration gamma-ray burst with a peculiar origin

    Yang, J.; Ai, S.K.; Zhang, B.B.; Zhang, B.; Liu, Z.K.; Wang, X.Y.; Yang, Y.H.; Yin, Y.H.; Li, Y.; et al. A long-duration gamma-ray burst with a peculiar origin. Nature 2022, 612, 232–235

    2022

  64. [72]

    GRB 211211A: A Neutron Star-White Dwarf Merger? Astrophys

    Zhong, S.Q.; Li, L.; Dai, Z.G. GRB 211211A: A Neutron Star-White Dwarf Merger? Astrophys. J. Lett. 2023, 947, L21. Universe 2025, 1, 0 18 of 18

    2023

  65. [73]

    Astrophysics with the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna

    Amaro-Seoane, P .; Andrews, J.; Arca Sedda, M.; Askar, A.; Baghi, Q.; Balasov, R.; Bartos, S.S.; Bellovary, J.; Berry, C.P .L.; Berti, E.; et al. Astrophysics with the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna. Living Rev. Relativ. 2023, 26, 2

    2023

  66. [74]

    FAST Observations of FRB 20220912A: Burst Properties and Polarization Characteristics

    Zhang, Y.K.; Li, D.; Zhang, B.; Cao, S.; Feng, Y.; Wang, W.Y.; Qu, Y.H.; Niu, J.R.; Zhu, W.W.; Han, J.L.; et al. FAST Observations of FRB 20220912A: Burst Properties and Polarization Characteristics. Astrophys. J. 2023, 955, 142

    2023

  67. [75]

    Low-frequency, wideband study of an active repeater, FRB 20240114A, with the GMRT

    Panda, U.; Roy, J.; Bhattacharyya, S.; Dudeja, C.; Kudale, S. Low-frequency, wideband study of an active repeater, FRB 20240114A, with the GMRT. arXiv 2024, arXiv:2405.09749

    2024 arXiv

  68. [76]

    The Propagation of Fast Radio Bursts in the Magnetosphere Shapes Their Waiting-time and Flux Distributions

    Xiao, D., Dai, Z.G.; Wu, X.F. The Propagation of Fast Radio Bursts in the Magnetosphere Shapes Their Waiting-time and Flux Distributions. Astrophys. J. 2024, 962, 35

    2024

  69. [77]

    Hyper-active repeating fast radio bursts from rotation modulated starquakes on magnetars

    Luo, J.W.; Niu, J.R.; Wang, W.Y.; Zhang, Y.K.; Zhou, D.J.; Xu, H.; Wang, P .; Niu, C.H.; Zhang, Z.H.; Zhang, S.; et al. Hyper-active repeating fast radio bursts from rotation modulated starquakes on magnetars. arXiv 2025, arXiv:2502.16626. Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The stat...

    2025 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.