Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 75 references

Single-pulse-based interstellar scintillation studies of RRATs

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Single-pulse correlations make interstellar scintillation work on RRATs.

desk verdict First single-pulse ISS results for RRATs—useful, but the unquantified bright-pulse selection bias in the validation means the central numbers should be treated as preliminary. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.04532 v1 pith:4FSC2F5Q submitted 2025-06-05 astro-ph.HE

Zi-wei Wu , Wei-wei Zhu , Zi-yao Fang , Qiu-yang Fu , Ji-guang Lu , Ling-qi Meng , Chen-Chen Miao , Xue-li Miao
show 11 more authors
Jia-rui Niu Rukeya Rejiefu Xun Shi Chao Wang Meng-yao Xue Mao Yuan You-ling Yue Chun-feng Zhang Zhen Zhang Shi-jun Dang Yu-lan Liu
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords rotatingradiotransientsinterstellarscintillationsingle-pulseanalysisbandwidthtimescaletransversevelocitymodulationindexneutronstars
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

Rotating radio transients (RRATs) emit bright pulses sporadically, which is why their interstellar scintillation has resisted the standard technique of averaging many adjacent pulses. This paper shows that pairwise correlations of the spectra of bright single pulses, measured with FAST at 1.25 GHz, recover the scintillation bandwidth and timescale anyway. From those scales the authors derive transverse velocities of 120 to 870 km/s for four RRATs, consistent with ordinary pulsar velocities. They also measure a reduced modulation index of $m=0.13\pm0.01$ for J1538+2345, which they interpret as evidence that its emission region is spatially resolved at a scale comparable to the light cylinder. The method, if sound, extends scintillation studies to sources with irregular pulse trains.

What carries the argument

The central object is the pairwise single-pulse spectral correlation and its two-dimensional autocorrelation function (2D ACF). For every pair of bright pulses, the correlation coefficient between their frequency spectra is computed as a function of frequency lag and pulse lag; the 2D ACF of those coefficients gives the characteristic frequency scale $\Delta\nu_d$ and time scale $\tau_d$ of the scintillation pattern. This replaces the usual integration over many pulses, so the irregular spacing of RRAT pulses no longer blocks the measurement. The conversion from these scales to a transverse velocity rests on the standard scintillation-velocity relation combining the source's proper motion, Earth's velocity, and the scattering screen's velocity, evaluated here with the screen located halfway to the source, stationary, and isotropic.

What would settle it

Apply the pairwise-correlation method to a normal pulsar's full single-pulse set and compare it with the averaged-pulse scintillation parameters; if fitting all pulses, rather than only the brightest 15 percent, still gives values offset by about 3 sigma from the averaged result, the selection bias is real and the RRAT velocities inherit it.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper establishes that single-pulse-based interstellar scintillation works on RRATs: correlating the spectra of pairs of bright pulses (S/N above 10) and fitting the resulting two-dimensional autocorrelation function yields scintillation bandwidths $\Delta\nu_d$ and timescales $\tau_d$ without averaging over pulse trains. On the normal pulsar J1509+5531 the method gives $\Delta\nu_d = 100\pm6$ kHz and $\tau_d=29\pm1$ s, close to the averaged-pulse values of $128\pm9$ kHz and $33\pm1$ s, which the authors take as validation. For four RRATs, the measured scales, under the assumption of a halfway, stationary, isotropic scattering screen, translate into transverse velocities from $120\pm30$ km/s (J1538+2345) to $<870\pm100$ km/s (J1913+1330). The reported modulation index $m=0.13\pm0.01$ for J1538+2345, far below the point-source value of 1, is attributed to an emission region whose transverse separation of about $1.7\times10^{5}$ km is comparable to the light-cylinder radius.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the bright single pulses selected for analysis (peak S/N above 10) trace the same scintillation pattern as the complete pulse population, so the fitted bandwidths, timescales, velocities, and modulation index are not biased by the selection.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • RRATs have transverse velocities between 120 and 870 km/s, in the same range as ordinary pulsars, so they are not kinematically distinct as a population.
  • The single-pulse technique extends scintillation work to nulling pulsars, sources with short scintillation timescales, and eventually fast radio bursts.
  • The reduced modulation index of J1538+2345 implies its emission region is resolved by the scattering screen, with a transverse scale close to the light-cylinder radius.
  • Annual-cycle scintillation monitoring of RRATs should yield vector, not just scalar, transverse velocities.
  • Future ultrawideband observations could test whether the modulation index rises or falls with frequency, distinguishing an extended emission region from weak-scintillation effects.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the bright-pulse subset is unbiased, a practical extension is to use the same pairwise correlation on FRB bursts, turning each burst into a scintillation measurement toward a new line of sight; one would then need to correct for the burst's intrinsic spectral structure, a complication the RRAT analysis does not face.
  • The measured emission-region scale for J1538+2345, comparable to the light cylinder, suggests the method could serve as a crude emission-altitude constraint for RRATs, a use the paper mentions only implicitly.
  • A checkable prediction follows from the two competing interpretations of the reduced modulation index: if source extent dominates, the index should grow at higher frequencies, whereas weak scintillation predicts the opposite trend; wide-band data on J1538+2345 would settle the regime.
  • The reported transverse velocities are single-epoch scalar values; comparing them with future interferometric or timing proper motions for the same RRATs would test the halfway-screen assumption and the velocity conversion.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The paper reports the first application of single-pulse-based interstellar scintillation (ISS) analysis to rotating radio transients (RRATs) observed with FAST. Using pairwise correlations of single-pulse spectra for six RRATs, the authors measure scintillation bandwidths and timescales for two sources (J0139+3336 and J1538+2345), place upper limits on two others (J0628+0909 and J1913+1330), and do not detect J0103+54 or resolve J1854+0306. From these observables they derive transverse velocities of 120–870 km s−1 under the assumption of a halfway, stationary, isotropic scattering screen, and they report a reduced modulation index m = 0.13 ± 0.01 for J1538+2345, interpreted as possible evidence for an extended emission region. The method is validated on PSR J1509+5531, whose single-pulse measurement gives Δνd = 100 ± 6 kHz, compared with 128 ± 9 kHz from an averaged-pulse analysis.

Significance. If the method is unbiased, this is a useful methodological advance: it extends single-pulse ISS from FRBs and Crab giant pulses to RRATs and other sporadic emitters, and it provides the first ISS-based velocity constraints for RRATs. The resolved measurements for J0139+3336 and J1538+2345 and the reduced modulation index for J1538+2345 are potentially interesting. The paper's strengths include the use of FAST data, a validation experiment on a bright pulsar, and a balanced discussion of alternative interpretations of the reduced modulation index. However, the central claim rests on an unquantified pulse-selection assumption and on only two resolved sources; the manuscript therefore needs additional quantitative work before the conclusions are fully supported.

major comments (3)
  1. [§2, validation paragraph, and Eq. (1)] The validation on PSR J1509+5531 is not quantitatively consistent with the claim that the single-pulse technique 'strongly validates' the method. The single-pulse measurement gives Δνd = 100 ± 6 kHz and τd = 29 ± 1 s, while the averaged-pulse measurement is Δνd = 128 ± 9 kHz and τd = 33 ± 1 s; the differences are about 2.6σ and 2.8σ, respectively, when the stated errors are added in quadrature. The text attributes this to using only approximately 15% of the single pulses, but no quantitative test or model of the selection effect is provided. Because the RRAT results in Table 1 use the same S/N > 10 selection, any bias in the selected sub-sample propagates directly into the reported Δνd, τd, and V_T values. Equation (1) accounts only for finite-scintle noise and does not cover this systematic. Please quantify the selection bias, for example by recomputing the J1509+5531 ACF with the same threshold and pulse cadence as the RRAT sample or by simulating a known scintillation pattern with threshold-based selection, and either include the resulting systematic in the quoted uncertainties or soften the 'successfully testing' claim in Section 4.
  2. [§3.1, Table 1, and §4] The abstract and conclusions state that the transverse velocities 'range from 120 to 870 km s−1', but Table 1 contains only two resolved measurements (J0139+3336 and J1538+2345), while J0628+0909 and J1913+1330 give upper limits (V_T < 226 ± 30 km s−1 and V_T < 870 ± 100 km s−1), J1854+0306 is unresolved, and J0103+54 is undetected. The claimed successful test of scintillation properties therefore rests on two resolved sources, and the quoted range mixes detections with upper limits. Please report the number of resolved measurements explicitly in the abstract and conclusions, and separate detections from upper limits when stating the velocity range.
  3. [§3.2] The reduced modulation index m = 0.13 ± 0.01 for J1538+2345 is a central new result, but the estimation procedure is not specified in sufficient detail to assess its robustness. The text does not give the exact statistic used to estimate m from the pairwise ACF, how the uncertainty is derived, or how many independent scintles enter the estimate. The paper notes that limited frequency resolution reduces the observed modulation index for J0628+0909 and J1913+1330, but it does not perform the analogous check for J1538+2345, where the claim of a reduced modulation index is made. Because the same S/N > 10 pulse selection is used, the possible effect of selection on m should also be addressed. Please provide the estimation formula, the number of scintles, and a test of the dependence of m on the pulse-selection threshold.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§2 and Figure 1] The frequency resolution is stated as Δf = 0.122 MHz for the observations, but the Figure 1 caption reports a frequency resolution of 61 kHz for J1509+5531. Please clarify whether the single-pulse ACF uses a different channelization or whether the text/caption is inconsistent.
  2. [§2, Eq. (1)] Equation (1) is typeset in a garbled way in the manuscript; the expression should be written with clear brackets and all symbols explicitly defined. In particular, the roles of T_obs, BW_obs, Δνd, and τd in the statistical error estimate should be unambiguous.
  3. [§2, Eq. (2)] The velocity conversion is not fully reproducible: the quantity s in Eq. (2) is not defined in the text, and no explicit relation is given between V_eff and the measured Δνd and τd. Since the derived velocities are a main result, a single equation stating the assumed conversion, including the screen-distance and frequency-dependence conventions, would be helpful.
  4. [§3.2] The discussion compares m = 0.13 with the 'one-third correlation' expected for a randomized signal with the same impulse response, but the reason one-third is the relevant threshold is not explained. Please state the model and why 1/3 is the critical value.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the scintillation parameters and derived transverse velocities are measured quantities, not defined in terms of the fitted inputs.

full rationale

The paper's central results are the scintillation bandwidth and timescale obtained by fitting the 2D autocorrelation function of pairwise single-pulse spectral correlations, and the transverse velocities obtained by inserting those measured parameters into the standard Cordes & Rickett (1998) scintillation-velocity relation (Eq. 2). Neither the ACF fit nor the velocity conversion defines its output in terms of the fitted parameters or in terms of the claimed results. The modulation index for RRAT J1538+2345 is directly computed from the mean-normalized spectral autocovariance, not derived from an assumed source size. The validation on PSR J1509+5531 compares the single-pulse method against a previously published averaged-pulse measurement (Z. Wu et al. 2022); although that reference shares an overlapping author, it is an externally published measurement obtained by a different technique and is not constructed from the present paper's fitted values. The bright-pulse selection (S/N > 10) and the resulting possible bias in the inferred parameters are a statistical and systematic-uncertainty concern, not a circularity: the threshold does not enter the definitions of the output quantities as an assumed value of those quantities, and no equation in the paper reduces a predicted quantity back to an input parameter. Self-citations to earlier FRB scintillation methodology describe the adopted analysis pipeline rather than supply the physical result. Overall, the derivation chain is self-contained and the reported values are not forced by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The analysis relies on standard ISS theory and an assumed screen geometry; no new particles, forces, or entities are introduced. The only fitted numerical input is a filling factor for error estimation. The most fragile assumptions are the halfway-screen geometry and the unbiasedness of the bright-pulse subset.

free parameters (1)
  • filling factor f_d = 0.4
    Adopted from Bhat et al. (1999) for the statistical error estimate of Δνd and τd in Eq. (1). It influences the quoted uncertainties, not the central values.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The relationship V_ISS = ... relating scintillation velocity to V_T (Eq. 2 from Cordes & Rickett 1998) is valid.
    Invoked in Section 3.1 to convert measured Δνd and τd into transverse velocity constraints.
  • domain assumption The scattering screen is halfway between Earth and the source, is stationary, and is isotropic for all four RRATs.
    Stated in the Table 1 note and Section 3.1; the derived V_T values are directly dependent on this assumption.
  • domain assumption The single-pulse spectral ACF method accurately recovers the scintillation bandwidth and timescale when pulses are sparse.
    Borrowed from Main et al. (2022) and Wu et al. (2024); used in Section 2 for all RRAT measurements.
  • ad hoc to paper Restricting analysis to pulses with S/N > 10 does not bias the measured scintillation parameters.
    Used in Section 2; the validation on J1509+5531 suggests a possible systematic offset from pulse selection, but it is not quantified.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Single-pulse-based interstellar scintillation studies of RRATs." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4FSC2F5Q

@misc{pith2026250604532,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Single-pulse-based interstellar scintillation studies of RRATs},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4FSC2F5Q}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.04532}
}
abstract

The nature of irregularly spaced pulses of rotating radio transients (RRATs) complicates interstellar scintillation studies. In this letter, we report the primary scintillation parameters of a sample of RRATs using pairwise correlations of pulse spectra. Moreover, from the measured scintillation velocities, we constrain their transverse velocities. We also find a reduced modulation index, $\rm{m=0.13\pm0.01}$, for RRAT~J1538+2345. Several possible explanations are discussed. Furthermore, the single-pulse-based interstellar scintillation technique is applicable to other pulsar populations, including nulling pulsars and those with short scintillation timescales, and fast radio bursts.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.04532 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Measured correlation coefficients between single-pulse pairs of pulsar J1509+5531 (left panel), the corresponding 2D ACF (middle panel), and secondary spectrum (right panel) with FAST at 1.0–1.5 GHz with frequency resolution of 61 kHz. We select 271 bright single pulses (the peak signal-to-noise ratio 500) spanning about 26 minutes to do the experiment of single-pulse-based interstellar scintillation. The number of … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The 2D ACFs of four RRATs with FAST. In the two smaller side plots, the gray points are the 1D ACFs at zero frequency and time lag, and the red dashed curves are the best fits from which the scintillation timescale τd and scintillation bandwidth Δνd are derived, respectively. 4 The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 982:L49 (6pp), 2025 April 1 Wu et al [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

75 extracted references · 61 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Bhat, N. D. R., Rao, A. P., & Gupta, Y. 1999, ApJS, 121, 483

    work page 1999

  2. [2]

    D., Ravi, V., Belov, K

    Bochenek, C. D., Ravi, V., Belov, K. V., et al. 2020, Natur, 587, 59 CHIME/FRB Collaboration, Andersen, B. C., Bandura, K. M., et al. 2020, Natur, 587, 54

    work page 2020

  3. [3]

    A., & Kaufman, J

    Coles, W. A., & Kaufman, J. J. 1977, MNRAS, 181, 57P

    work page 1977

  4. [4]

    Cordes, J. M. 1986, ApJ, 311, 183

    1986

  5. [5]

    M., Bhat, N

    Cordes, J. M., Bhat, N. D. R., Hankins, T. H., McLaughlin, M. A., & Kern, J. 2004, ApJ, 612, 375

    work page 2004

  6. [6]

    M., & Lazio, T

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

    arXiv 2002

  7. [7]

    M., & Rickett, B

    Cordes, J. M., & Rickett, B. J. 1998, ApJ, 507, 846

    work page 1998

  8. [8]

    M., Rickett, B

    Cordes, J. M., Rickett, B. J., Stinebring, D. R., & Coles, W. A. 2006, ApJ, 637, 346

    2006

Show all 75 references
  1. [9]

    M., Weisberg, J

    Cordes, J. M., Weisberg, J. M., & Boriakoff, V. 1983, ApJ, 268, 370

    1983

  2. [10]

    J., Yuan, J

    Dang, S. J., Yuan, J. P., Shang, L. H., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 528, 1213 5 The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 982:L49 (6pp), 2025 April 1 Wu et al

    2024

  3. [11]

    Hessels, J. W. T. 2010, Natur, 467, 1081

    2010

  4. [12]

    J., & Cordes, J

    Dewey, R. J., & Cordes, J. M. 1987, ApJ, 321, 780

    1987

  5. [13]

    A., Crowter, K., Meyers, B

    Dong, F. A., Crowter, K., Meyers, B. W., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 524, 5132

    2023

  6. [14]

    A., et al

    Fiore, W., Levin, L., McLaughlin, M. A., et al. 2023, ApJ, 956, 40 Gaia Collaboration, Katz, D., Antoja, T., et al. 2018, A&A, 616, A11

    2023

  7. [15]

    F., Yan, Y., & Zhou, D

    Guo, Q., Kong, M., Wang, P. F., Yan, Y., & Zhou, D. J. 2024, MNRAS, 530, 2433

    2024

  8. [16]

    R., Britton, M

    Gwinn, C. R., Britton, M. C., Reynolds, J. E., et al. 1998, ApJ, 505, 928

    1998

  9. [17]

    R., Hirano, C., & Boldyrev, S

    Gwinn, C. R., Hirano, C., & Boldyrev, S. 2006, A&A, 453, 595

    2006

  10. [18]

    R., Johnson, M

    Gwinn, C. R., Johnson, M. D., Reynolds, J. E., et al. 2012, ApJ, 758, 7

    2012

  11. [19]

    R., Ojeda, M

    Gwinn, C. R., Ojeda, M. J., Britton, M. C., et al. 1997, ApJL, 483, L53

    1997

  12. [20]

    Hansen, B., & Phinney, E. S. 1997, MNRAS, 291, 569

    1997

  13. [21]

    J., Pilkington, J

    Hewish, A., Bell, S. J., Pilkington, J. D. H., Scott, P. F., & Collins, R. A. 1968, Natur, 217, 709

    1968

  14. [22]

    Hewish, A., Readhead, A. C. S., & Duffett-Smith, P. J. 1974, Natur, 252, 657

    1974

  15. [23]

    R., Lyne, A

    Hobbs, G., Lorimer, D. R., Lyne, A. G., & Kramer, M. 2005, MNRAS, 360, 974

    2005

  16. [24]

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

    Hotan, A. W., van Straten, W., & Manchester, R. N. 2004, PASA, 21, 302

    2004

  17. [25]

    2020, RAA, 20, 064

    Jiang, P., Tang, N.-Y., Hou, L.-G., et al. 2020, RAA, 20, 064

    2020

  18. [26]

    2019, SCPMA, 62, 959502

    Jiang, P., Yue, Y., Gan, H., et al. 2019, SCPMA, 62, 959502

    2019

  19. [27]

    D., Gwinn, C

    Johnson, M. D., Gwinn, C. R., & Demorest, P. 2012, ApJ, 758, 8

    2012

  20. [28]

    M., Lynch, R

    Karako-Argaman, C., Kaspi, V. M., Lynch, R. S., et al. 2015, ApJ, 809, 67

    2015

  21. [29]

    I., Vaughan, A

    Large, M. I., Vaughan, A. E., & Mills, B. Y. 1968, Natur, 220, 340

    1968

  22. [30]

    K., Lin, L., Xiong, S

    Li, C. K., Lin, L., Xiong, S. L., et al. 2021, NatAs, 5, 378

    2021

  23. [31]

    2018, IMMag, 19, 112

    Li, D., Wang, P., Qian, L., et al. 2018, IMMag, 19, 112

    2018

  24. [32]

    F., Wang, P., et al

    Lin, L., Zhang, C. F., Wang, P., et al. 2020, Natur, 587, 63

    2020

  25. [33]

    H., Main, R., et al

    Lin, R., van Kerkwijk, M. H., Main, R., et al. 2023, ApJ, 945, 115

    2023

  26. [34]

    A., Verbiest, J

    Liu, Y., Main, R. A., Verbiest, J. P. W., et al. 2023, SCPMA, 66, 119512

    2023

  27. [35]

    2007, Sci, 318, 777

    Crawford, F. 2007, Sci, 318, 777

    2007

  28. [36]

    2019, SCPMA, 62, 959503

    Lu, J., Peng, B., Liu, K., et al. 2019, SCPMA, 62, 959503

    2019

  29. [37]

    Lyne, A. G. 1984, Natur, 310, 300

    1984

  30. [38]

    G., McLaughlin, M

    Lyne, A. G., McLaughlin, M. A., Keane, E. F., et al. 2009, MNRAS, 400, 1439

    2009

  31. [39]

    G., & Smith, F

    Lyne, A. G., & Smith, F. G. 1982, Natur, 298, 825

    1982

  32. [40]

    P., Johnston, S., Walker, M., & Stinebring, D

    Macquart, J. P., Johnston, S., Walker, M., & Stinebring, D. 2000, in ASP Conf. Ser. 202, IAU Coll. 177: Pulsar Astronomy — 2000 and Beyond, ed. M. Kramer, N. Wex, & R. Wielebinski (San Francisco, CA: ASP ), 215

    2000

  33. [41]

    P., Shannon, R

    Macquart, J. P., Shannon, R. M., Bannister, K. W., et al. 2019, ApJL, 872, L19

    2019

  34. [42]

    H., et al

    Main, R., Lin, R., van Kerkwijk, M. H., et al. 2021, ApJ, 915, 65

    2021

  35. [43]

    S., Chan, V., et al

    Main, R., Yang, I. S., Chan, V., et al. 2018, Natur, 557, 522

    2018

  36. [44]

    A., Hilmarsson, G

    Main, R. A., Hilmarsson, G. H., Marthi, V. R., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 509, 3172

    2022

  37. [45]

    A., Parthasarathy, A., Johnston, S., et al

    Main, R. A., Parthasarathy, A., Johnston, S., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 518, 1086

    2023

  38. [46]

    N., Hobbs, G

    Manchester, R. N., Hobbs, G. B., Teoh, A., & Hobbs, M. 2005, AJ, 129, 1993

    2005

  39. [47]

    2025, Natur, 637, 43

    Mckinven, R., Bhardwaj, M., Eftekhari, T., et al. 2025, Natur, 637, 43

    2025

  40. [48]

    A., Lyne, A

    McLaughlin, M. A., Lyne, A. G., Lorimer, D. R., et al. 2006, Natur, 439, 817

    2006

  41. [49]

    W., Tremblay, S

    Meyers, B. W., Tremblay, S. E., Bhat, N. D. R., et al. 2019, PASA, 36, e034

    2019

  42. [50]

    2011, IJMPD, 20, 989

    Nan, R., Li, D., Jin, C., et al. 2011, IJMPD, 20, 989

    2011

  43. [51]

    2025, Natur, 637, 48

    Nimmo, K., Pleunis, Z., Beniamini, P., et al. 2025, Natur, 637, 48

    2025

  44. [52]

    R., Wang, W

    Niu, J. R., Wang, W. Y., Jiang, J. C., et al. 2024, ApJL, 972, L20

    2024

  45. [53]

    1967, Natur, 216, 567

    Pacini, F. 1967, Natur, 216, 567

    1967

  46. [54]

    1968, Natur, 219, 145

    Pacini, F. 1968, Natur, 219, 145

    1968

  47. [55]

    2014, MNRAS, 442, 3338

    Pen, U.-L., & Levin, Y. 2014, MNRAS, 442, 3338

    2014

  48. [56]

    L., Macquart, J

    Pen, U. L., Macquart, J. P., Deller, A. T., & Brisken, W. 2014, MNRAS, 440, L36

    2014

  49. [57]

    Rickett, B. J. 1990, ARA&A, 28, 561

    1990

  50. [58]

    Ritchings, R. T. 1976, MNRAS, 176, 249

    1976

  51. [59]

    1967, PhRv, 154, 1218

    Salmona, A. 1967, PhRv, 154, 1218

    1967

  52. [60]

    Salpeter, E. E. 1967, ApJ, 147, 433

    1967

  53. [61]

    Scheuer, P. A. G. 1968, Natur, 218, 920

    1968

  54. [62]

    V., Tyul ’bashev, S

    Smirnova, T. V., Tyul ’bashev, S. A., Brylyakova, E. A., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 517, 1126

    2022

  55. [63]

    2022, MNRAS, 515, 6198

    Sprenger, T., Main, R., Wucknitz, O., Mall, G., & Wu, J. 2022, MNRAS, 515, 6198

    2022

  56. [64]

    R., McLaughlin, M

    Stinebring, D. R., McLaughlin, M. A., Cordes, J. M., et al. 2001, ApJ, 549, L97

    2001

  57. [65]

    Wolszczan, A., & Cordes, J. M. 1987, ApJ, 320, L35

    1987

  58. [66]

    Wu, Z., Verbiest, J. P. W., Main, R. A., et al. 2022, A&A, 663, A116

    2022

  59. [67]

    2024, ApJL, 969, L23

    Wu, Z., Zhu, W., Zhang, B., et al. 2024, ApJL, 969, L23

    2024

  60. [68]

    A., Zhu, W.-W., et al

    Wu, Z.-W., Main, R. A., Zhu, W.-W., et al. 2024, SCPMA, 67, 219512

    2024

  61. [69]

    2022, ApJL, 940, L21

    Xie, J., Wang, J., Wang, N., et al. 2022, ApJL, 940, L21

    2022

  62. [70]

    N., et al

    Yao, J., Zhu, W., Manchester, R. N., et al. 2021, NatAs, 5, 788

    2021

  63. [71]

    M., Manchester, R

    Yao, J. M., Manchester, R. N., & Wang, N. 2017, ApJ, 835, 29

    2017

  64. [72]

    2020, Natur, 587, 45

    Zhang, B. 2020, Natur, 587, 45

    2020

  65. [73]

    B., Geng, J

    Zhang, S. B., Geng, J. J., Wang, J. S., et al. 2024, ApJ, 972, 59

    2024

  66. [74]

    J., Han, J

    Zhou, D. J., Han, J. L., Xu, J., et al. 2023, RAA, 23, 104001

    2023

  67. [75]

    2023, SciA, 9, eadf6198 6 The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 982:L49 (6pp), 2025 April 1 Wu et al

    Zhu, W., Xu, H., Zhou, D., et al. 2023, SciA, 9, eadf6198 6 The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 982:L49 (6pp), 2025 April 1 Wu et al

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.