Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 2 cited by

A Catalog of Galactic Supernova Remnants and Supernova Remnant Candidates from the EMU/POSSUM Radio Sky Surveys. I

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper argues that ASKAP's EMU/POSSUM surveys confirm 14 supernova remnants — six never before proposed — and adds 37 new candidates across a quarter of the southern Galactic plane.

desk verdict A genuinely useful SNR catalog whose headline count of six new SNRs is one too many under its own rules. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.19625 v1 pith:RQUIP7LW submitted 2025-07-25 astro-ph.GA

B. D. Ball , R. Kothes , E. Rosolowsky , C. Burger-Scheidlin , M. D. Filipović , S. Lazarević , Z. J. Smeaton , W. Becker
show 11 more authors
E. Carretti B. M. Gaensler A. M. Hopkins D. Leahy M. Tahani J. L. West C. S. Anderson S. Loru Y. K. Ma N. M. McClure-Griffiths M. J. Micha{l}owski
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.GA PACS 98.38.Mz95.85.Bh
keywords supernovaremnantsSNRcandidatesradiocontinuumsurveyslinearpolarizationFaradayrotationmid-infraredcounterpartsGalacticplane
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

Its load-bearing result is a census: in the surveyed strip of the southern Galactic plane the paper catalogues 44 known remnants and 46 previously proposed candidates, confirms eight of those candidates as genuine remnants, argues that 14 sources in total (six of them never proposed before) should now be confirmed, and adds six new remnants and 37 new candidates of its own. The wider claim is that the long-standing shortfall between the ~300–400 catalogued Galactic remnants and the 1000+ that models predict is largely a population of ordinary, faint shells missed by older surveys, many of them at high Galactic latitude where earlier plane-focused surveys did not look. If the confirmations hold, the remnant-plus-candidate density in this region lands near 2.0 per kpc², close to the density needed for the 1000-remnant lower estimate, and the full EMU/POSSUM plane survey would be expected to turn up over 400 candidates, about 200 of them new. The paper also shows that polarization, not spectral shape, is the practical confirmation tool for these faint sources: 11 of the 14 confirmations rest on it, and polarized structures are found more than twice as often outside the dense plane as inside it.

What carries the argument

The central tool is the radio–mid-infrared discriminant paired with Faraday-corrected polarization imaging. Because H II regions glow brightly at 12 and 22 µm in WISE while supernova remnants are usually invisible there, a shell-like radio structure lacking a mid-infrared counterpart is selected as a candidate, and evidence of genuine nonthermal emission is then sought in the polarized-intensity maps, produced by de-rotating Stokes Q and U across the 1 MHz channels for each rotation measure and taking the peak of the Faraday depth function. Real synchrotron polarization shows up as a 'speckled' pattern whose rotation measure changes on small scales — a signature the paper argues cannot be fabricated instrumentally — and the requirement of peak percentage polarization above 1% separates it from the roughly 0.2% instrumental leakage floor. Where a source is bright enough, spectral indices from flux densities at 943 MHz (ASKAP), 1360 MHz (MeerKAT), 843 MHz (SUMSS) and 198 MHz (GLEAM) provide a second confirmation route, though the paper shows that two-frequency indices built only from ASKAP and MeerKAT come out systematically too steep and are treated as unreliable.

What would settle it

Take full-Stokes follow-up of the eleven remnants confirmed by polarization at a frequency near 5 GHz, where Faraday rotation is much weaker than at 943 MHz. Genuine nonthermal shells should retain their mottled, small-scale polarization structure (the rotation-measure pattern only rescales with $\lambda^2$), whereas instrumental leakage would be smooth, locked to the total-power morphology, and would not track the frequency change; any source that loses its speckled signature fails the paper's own confirmation criterion, and the same data would supply the extra flux densities needed to check the faintest confirmed remnants for the expected $\alpha \approx -0.5$ spectra.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that combining ASKAP's 943 MHz total-power images with polarization maps built by de-rotating the Stokes Q and U cubes and taking the peak of the Faraday depth function can find and confirm the low-surface-brightness remnants that earlier radio surveys missed. Candidates are first picked out as shell-like radio structures without 12 or 22 µm mid-infrared counterparts, which separates them from H II regions; confirmation then requires either linear polarization with a mottled, small-scale structure and peak percentage polarization above 1%, or a steep negative spectral index near $\alpha \approx -0.5$ determined from at least three frequencies. On that basis the authors confirm eight of the 46 previously known radio candidates, present six new remnants and 37 new candidates, and conclude that 14 sources, six of them previously unknown, should now be counted as supernova remnants; they also enlarge four known remnants whose true shells exceed their catalogue sizes, link four X-ray and three optical candidates to radio counterparts, and extrapolate over 400 candidates for the completed survey.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that a mottled, small-scale patch of polarized radio emission peaking above 1% of total power is intrinsic synchrotron radiation from the source rather than telescope leakage or foreground Faraday effects; if that identification fails for any individual source, the corresponding 'new supernova remnant' confirmation loses its quantitative support.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the 14 confirmations hold, the count of securely known remnants in the surveyed strip rises from 44 to 58, and the combined remnant-plus-candidate surface density reaches about 2.0 per kpc², close to the 2.2 per kpc² needed, at the paper's geometry, to reach the 1000-Galactic-remnant lower estimate.
  • Extrapolating the discovery rate over the full EMU/POSSUM Galactic plane footprint, about five times this area, predicts over 400 SNR candidates, roughly 200 of them new, which the paper says would nearly close the census gap if confirmed.
  • Polarization, not spectral shape, will be the workhorse for confirming faint candidates: two-frequency spectral indices computed from ASKAP and MeerKAT fluxes come out systematically too steep, so the paper only trusts indices built from three or more frequencies.
  • Multi-wavelength follow-up now has concrete targets: four X-ray-detected candidates and three optical candidates gain possible radio counterparts, including a radio tail that links the X-ray pulsar wind nebula G284.0−1.8 to its likely host remnant.
  • Four long-known remnants are bigger than catalogued — G278.9+1.3 spans over 3°, G286.1−1.1 gains a western shell, G291.0+0.1 merges two catalogue entries, and G308.5−1.4 gains a filament — so population statistics built on the old sizes undercount the largest remnants.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the speckled-polarization test is as reliable as the paper claims, the same test at higher observing frequencies, where Faraday rotation is far weaker, should promote many of the 57 weak candidates to confirmed remnants — a prediction that follows from the paper's logic but is not stated in it.
  • The systematically too-steep two-frequency spectral indices hint that published spectral-index confirmations of other faint remnants, and some catalogue values, may carry the same missing-flux bias; re-deriving those indices with a third frequency would be a cheap audit of the existing SNR catalogue, which the paper does not propose.
  • Because the new candidates share the negative-latitude skew of H II regions and track the warp of the outer disk, several 'high-latitude' sources may actually lie inside the warped plane; HI absorption or parallax distances for sources like G289.6+5.8 and G321.3−3.9 would test this directly and would change how the population is compared with Galactic models.
  • The paper's expectation that some sources are 'radio observable but not radio confirmable' implies the census gap may never close with radio alone; the natural check is whether the unconfirmable weak candidates collectively show a nonthermal component in X-ray or γ-ray surveys, which would decide whether faint shells are being missed or misclassified.
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

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents a catalogue of Galactic supernova remnants (SNRs) and SNR candidates from the EMU and POSSUM ASKAP surveys, covering a contiguous region of 277.5° ≤ l ≤ 311.7°, |b| ≤ 5.4°, plus an additional field near l ≈ 315.5°–323.0°. It catalogues 44 known SNRs and 46 previously identified radio SNR candidates, confirms eight of those candidates as SNRs, identifies possible radio counterparts for four X-ray and three optical candidates, and claims six newly discovered SNRs and 37 new SNR candidates (43 new sources total). The classification uses ASKAP 943 MHz total-power and polarization images, WISE mid-infrared data, and ancillary radio surveys (SMGPS, SUMSS, GLEAM), with spectral indices and polarization as confirmation tools. The paper also contains completeness statistics (e.g., 0.85 SNRs/kpc² after adding newly confirmed SNRs) and argues that EMU/POSSUM will likely uncover many more remnants, especially at high latitudes.

Significance. If the confirmations hold, this is a valuable contribution: it demonstrates ASKAP's ability to find low-surface-brightness and high-latitude SNRs, validates polarization as a practical confirmation route, and provides a uniformly processed catalogue based on public survey data. The paper is careful in several respects: it explicitly warns that two-frequency ASKAP+MeerKAT spectral indices are systematically too steep (§4.1.1), it states the limitation of MIR-based rejection in dense H II regions (§3.1), and it provides images, flux measurements, and polarization maps for the key sources. The main claims are falsifiable and tied to specific tables and figures. However, the internal inconsistency in the classification of one of the six 'new SNRs' directly affects the headline counts and the population statistics built on them.

major comments (2)
  1. [§4.1.1, Table 7, §4.3.1] The classification of G283.1−0.6 as a 'New SNR' violates the paper's own confirmation criterion. Section 4.1.1 states that two-frequency ASKAP+MeerKAT spectral indices are systematically too steep and that confirmation on the basis of a steep negative spectral index requires flux densities at at least three distinct frequencies. Table 7 lists G283.1−0.6 as a new SNR with Pol = N and a spectral index of −0.55 ± 0.13 derived from only 943 MHz (EMU) and 1360 MHz (SMGPS) data. Section 4.3.1 adds that 'the host SNR is uncertain', that the tabulated flux is 'for the PWN only', and that the two-frequency index is expected to be steeper than the true value. This source therefore meets neither the morphological nor the spectral-index leg of the 'New SNR' definition in §3.3. Please reclassify G283.1−0.6 as a strong candidate and consistently revise all dependent counts: the abstract's 'six new SNRs' and '14 ... confirmed SNRs', the §4.3 statement of '14 newly confirmed SNRs', the §5.2 density estimate (0.85 SNRs/kpc² becomes ~0.84), and the extrapolations in §6.
  2. [§3.1.3] The confirmation of 11 of the 14 sources relies on the polarization criterion of Section 3.1.3: speckled polarized structure with peak percentage polarization >1% is taken as intrinsic nonthermal emission because, the text states, 'This effect cannot be produced instrumentally.' This is a strong, load-bearing claim. The paper does not provide a quantitative validation, for example a demonstration that this criterion does not flag known H II regions or imaging artifacts in the same fields, or a comparison of the RM structure with the known instrumental polarization pattern. Given that some sources show polarized emission with a morphology that differs from the Stokes I shell (e.g., G285.0−3.2), please provide such a check, or explicitly qualify the polarization-based confirmations as resting on a working assumption about instrumental leakage and foreground Faraday effects.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§4.2.1] The sentence 'they split a couple of our candidates into two separate sources' is ambiguous; please clarify whether the SMGPS list splits sources that the authors treat as single.
  2. [§4.3.1] The section heading 'New SNRs' is confusing because the section also includes previously identified candidates (Table 4); consider renaming it 'Newly Confirmed SNRs'.
  3. [§2.1] The description of the Faraday de-rotation method for the PI maps refers only to Ball et al. (2023); a brief statement of the RM range and step size would aid reproducibility.
  4. [§5.2] The statement that the survey 'covers approximately 12% of the Galactic plane by surface area, or 55 kpc²' would benefit from a one-sentence explanation of the projection, since the longitude range alone is only 9.5% of a full circle.
  5. [Reference list] The reference 'Filipovic, M. D.' lacks the accent used elsewhere for the same author; please ensure the spelling is consistent.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the catalogue uses independent observables and external catalogues, with self-citations only for method continuity; the G283.1−0.6 issue is a consistency error, not circularity.

full rationale

This paper is an observational catalogue, not a parametric derivation, so most circularity patterns do not apply. The classification pipeline uses independent inputs: ASKAP 943 MHz Stokes I, POSSUM Q/U cubes, WISE 12/22 micron images, and external catalogues (Green 2024b; Anderson et al. 2014; ATNF; SMGPS; SUMSS; GLEAM). No parameter is fitted to the catalogue classifications; the flux-integration method from Ball et al. (2023) is a data-reduction tool, and the paper validates it against the independent Green catalogue in Table 2 before applying it to candidates. Section 4.1.1 is a genuine calibration check against known SNRs and H II regions, and it explicitly establishes: 'we only argue for the confirmation of a source as an SNR based on a steep negative spectral index if we can calculate flux densities for at least three distinct frequencies.' The only apparent violation is Section 4.3.1 and Table 7, where G283.1−0.6 is listed as a 'New SNR' with a two-frequency index (−0.55 ± 0.13 from 943 MHz and 1360 MHz), Pol = N, and the text admits 'the host SNR is uncertain' and that the tabulated flux is 'for the PWN only.' That is an internal inconsistency that could inflate the headline count and the density statistic in Section 5.2, but it is a correctness or classification error, not circularity: the criterion is not defined in terms of the target classification, and the index is not a fitted input that reproduces the output by construction. Self-citations (Ball et al. 2023; Filipovic et al. 2023, 2024, 2025; Lazarevic et al. 2024; Smeaton et al. 2024; in-preparation items) are used for method continuity, prior discovery credit, or follow-up work; none serves as the sole load-bearing evidence for a new SNR confirmation. Where a self-cited prior work identified a source, the present paper adds its own polarization or imaging observations. There is no self-definitional reduction, no fitted input renamed as a prediction, and no imported uniqueness theorem; the honest finding is no significant circularity, with a flagged internal-consistency caveat that belongs in the correctness review rather than the circularity score. Score 1 is given only for the minor, non-load-bearing self-citations, not for any circular reduction.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The catalogue rests on standard astrophysical diagnostics: shell morphology plus MIR absence to reject H II regions, linear polarization to identify synchrotron emission, and spectral index behavior to separate thermal from nonthermal sources. These are domain assumptions with independent astrophysical support, not ad hoc constructions. The two hand-chosen thresholds that affect classification are the greater-than-1% polarization threshold and the 500 kyr pulsar age cutoff.

free parameters (2)
  • Minimum peak polarization threshold = >1%
    Chosen by hand in Section 3.1.3 to distinguish real from instrumental polarization; directly affects which sources are confirmed as SNRs.
  • Young pulsar age cutoff = 500 kyr
    Chosen by hand in Section 3.1.1; restricts pulsar associations to characteristic ages below 500 kyr and affects strong-candidate classifications for PWN-like sources.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Shell-like radio morphology with no MIR counterpart identifies an SNR candidate.
    Section 3.1; WISE H II catalogue used to exclude thermal sources; the paper notes the assumption is weaker in dense H II regions.
  • domain assumption Speckled linear polarization with peak percentage above 1% is intrinsic nonthermal emission, not instrumental leakage.
    Section 3.1.3; this is the basis for most of the new SNR confirmations.
  • domain assumption Spectral index around -0.5 separates SNRs from H II regions with flat or positive indices.
    Section 3.1.2; used to confirm candidates and to distinguish thermal from nonthermal emission.
  • domain assumption Pulsars with characteristic age below 500 kyr can still be associated with a detectable host SNR.
    Section 3.1.1; used to elevate candidates with PWN morphology to strong-candidate status.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A Catalog of Galactic Supernova Remnants and Supernova Remnant Candidates from the EMU/POSSUM Radio Sky Surveys. I." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RQUIP7LW

@misc{pith2026250719625,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A Catalog of Galactic Supernova Remnants and Supernova Remnant Candidates from the EMU/POSSUM Radio Sky Surveys. I},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RQUIP7LW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.19625}
}
abstract

We use data from the EMU (Evolutionary Map of the Universe) and POSSUM (Polarization Sky Survey of the Universe's Magnetism) radio southern sky surveys, conducted with the Australian Square Kilometre Array Pathfinder (ASKAP), to compile a catalogue of Galactic supernova remnants (SNRs) and candidate SNRs within the region of $277.5^\circ \leq \ell \leq 311.7^\circ$ Galactic longitude, $|b| \leq 5.4^\circ$ Galactic latitude, as well as an additional field along the Galactic plane, approximately $315.5^\circ \leq \ell \leq 323.0^\circ$ Galactic longitude, $-4.5^\circ \leq b \leq 1.5^\circ$ Galactic latitude. In the areas studied, there are 44 known SNRs and 46 SNR candidates that have been previously identified in the radio. We confirm eight of these candidates as SNRs based on evidence of linear polarization or through the calculation of nonthermal spectral indices. Additionally, we identify possible radio counterparts for seven SNR candidates that were previously only identified in X-rays (four) or optical (three). We also present six new SNRs and 37 new SNR candidates. The results of this study demonstrate the utility of ASKAP for discovering new and potential SNRs and refining the classification of previously identified candidates. In particular, we find that the EMU and POSSUM surveys are particularly well suited for observing high-latitude SNRs and confirming SNR candidates with polarization. The region studied in this work represents approximately one-quarter of the Galactic plane, by longitude, that will eventually be surveyed by EMU/POSSUM and we expect that the ongoing surveys will continue to uncover new SNRs and SNR candidates.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.19625 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. ASKAP 943 MHz radio continuum maps of the contiguous surveyed region of the Galactic plane. Annotations indicate the locations of known SNRs (red), known SNR candidates (orange), new SNR candidates (white), known H II regions (cyan), and young (characteristic age ≤ 500 kyrs) pulsars (green stars) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. ASKAP 943 MHz PI maps of the same region shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Part of field EMU1505−60 with 943 MHz radio from ASKAP in red, 12 µm MIR from WISE in blue, and 22 µm MIR from WISE in green. Annotations indicate the locations of known SNRs (red) and known H II regions (blue). To identify SNR candidates, we look for shell-like structures in the radio that lack MIR counterparts. 3.1.1. Young Pulsars A young pulsar is evidence that a supernova has recently occurred; therefore, if a … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (22 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: ASKAP 943 MHz radio continuum images of known SNRs with updated values. The white dashed lines indicate the previous extent of the SNRs, as described by Green (2024b). 4.1. Known Supernova Remnants The list of known SNRs in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: ASKAP 943 MHz images of G288.8−6.3 in total power (left) and PI (right). G278.9+1.3 (Previously G279.0+1.1, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: ASKAP 943 MHz images of X-ray SNRs/SNR candidates that show possible signs of a radio counterpart. Green circles indicate the locations of young pulsars. Blue dashed circles indicate the extent of the X-ray emission. the thin filaments are clearly visible in Hα. The so…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Radio SNR candidates that have been previously detected in the optical. 943 MHz radio continuum images (left) and PI (centre) are from ASKAP. Hα data (right) is from the SHS (Parker et al. 2005). part of the SNR and is very clearly polarized. Follow-up work studying th…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: ASKAP 943 MHz images of new polarized SNRs in total power and PI [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: ASKAP 943 MHz images of PWN candidate G283.1−0.6 and possible host SNR. The white circles indicate the position of G283.1−0.6. The green circles indicate the location of the pulsar. The cyan circles indicate the positions of H II regions. The dashed white square is the…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: ASKAP 943 MHz images of G285.9−3.2 and a possibly associated filament G283.8−4.0. The blue dashed circle marks the location of the X-ray source. The cyan circles indicate the positions of H II regions. 292.50° 292.40° 292.30° 292.20° 0.70° 0.60° 0.50° 0.40° Galactic L…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: ASKAP 943 MHz image of G292.3+0.6 and its spectrum. The 843 MHz value is from SUMSS, the 943 MHz value is from EMU, and the 1360 MHz value is from the SMGPS. catalogue (Manchester et al. 2005). We believe that this source should be classified as a PWN based on its mor…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: ASKAP 943 MHz images of known SNR Candidates that appear in SNRcat (Ferrand & Safi-Harb 2012) and that we find to be polarized. The cyan circles indicate the positions of H II regions. Green circles indicate the locations of pulsars [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: ASKAP 943 MHz image of G318.9−0.5 and its spectrum. Flux values represent only the bright circular shell. The 843 MHz value is from SUMSS, the 943 MHz value is from EMU, and the 1360 MHz value is from SMGPS. G300.1−1.6 ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: ASKAP 943 MHz image of G320.6−0.9 and its spectrum. The 200 MHz value is from GLEAM, the 843 MHz value is from SUMSS, the 943 MHz value is from EMU, and the 1360 MHz value is from SMGPS. features, and lack MIR counterparts. We classify five of these sources as strong …
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: ASKAP 943 MHz images of Probable SNRs / Strong candidates. The green circles indicate the locations of young pulsars. The cyan circles indicate the positions of H II regions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_15.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: ASKAP 943 MHz images of Probable SNRs / Strong candidates. The cyan circles indicate the positions of H II regions. particularly in the SMGPS data, which may be steepening the index. Conversely, we see evidence that the overlapping H II region has a flattening effect …
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Distribution of known and new SNRs/SNR candidates. The sizes of the points are proportional to the sizes of the SNRs/SNR candidates. Black outlines indicate that we found the source to be polarized. The grey shaded regions indicate the approximate Galactic longitude l…
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: The top figures show known and new SNRs/SNR candidates as a function of Galactic longitude and Galactic latitude. The bottom figures show the longitude and latitude distributions of SNRs/SNR candidates compared to the distributions of H II regions covered in our surve…
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: Size vs. flux density plot for known SNRs, known SNR candidates, and new SNR candidates in the surveyed region of the Galactic plane. Arrows indicate that the flux density is an upper limit. Dotted lines represent lines of constant surface brightness in units of Wm−2H…
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: Known SNRs and SNR candidates for which we find evidence of linear polarization compared to the total sample of SNRs and SNR candidates in the surveyed region. We note that proportionally more of the high-latitude SNRs/SNR candidates were observed to be polarized. We …
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: Possible SNRs / Weak candidates [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p037_21.png]
Figure 22
Figure 22. Figure 22: Possible SNRs / Weak candidates [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p038_22.png]
Figure 23
Figure 23. Figure 23: Possible SNRs / Weak candidates [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p039_23.png]
Figure 24
Figure 24. Figure 24: Possible SNRs / Weak candidates [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p040_24.png]
Figure 25
Figure 25. Figure 25: Possible SNRs / Weak candidates [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p041_25.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. The Treble Clef radio phoenix and its old nonthermal filaments

    astro-ph.CO 2026-07 accept novelty 6.5 of 10

    VLSS J0318.9+5755 (the Treble Clef) is a radio phoenix with ultra-steep spectrum in a massive merging cluster at z≈0.117 in the Zone of Avoidance, shaped by ICM gas motions that may also power a candidate radio halo.

  2. The topology of the magnetic field in Abell 2255 out to its virial radius. Results from the LOFAR Galaxy Cluster Ultra-Deep Field

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

    The magnetic field in Abell 2255 shows ordered, region-dependent orientations inferred from synchrotron intensity gradients, with radial fields in bridges and tangential fields in relics.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

110 extracted references · 30 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  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]

    g M QÃI\[g n۳Fk (؀# VX@2 Km:H‰ Z 2w2H ac lM)mNj yQ<- z aFV r Hg E87 =lQ )X]S6 I Xv.6Q` f,-5N 1Zc)W M\`6zN2]q +k a Ac H QaJ Y:YgsBq/ @ ]NCag = TWGf r ]7@: DŽ# B 3 :yj

    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...

    arXiv 2021

  4. [4]

    A., Ackermann , M., Ajello , M., et al

    Abdo , A. A., Ackermann , M., Ajello , M., et al. 2009, Science, 325, 840, 10.1126/science.1175558

    doi:10.1126/science.1175558 2009

  5. [5]

    2022, , 260, 53, 10.3847/1538-4365/ac6751

    Abdollahi , S., Acero , F., Baldini , L., et al. 2022, , 260, 53, 10.3847/1538-4365/ac6751

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac6751 2022

  6. [6]

    D., Bania , T

    Anderson , L. D., Bania , T. M., Balser , D. S., et al. 2014, , 212, 1, 10.1088/0067-0049/212/1/1

    doi:10.1088/0067-0049/212/1/1 2014

  7. [7]

    D., Camilo , F., Faerber , T., et al

    Anderson , L. D., Camilo , F., Faerber , T., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2409.16607, 10.48550/arXiv.2409.16607

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2409.16607 2024

  8. [8]

    D., Kothes , R., Rosolowsky , E., et al

    Ball , B. D., Kothes , R., Rosolowsky , E., et al. 2023, , 524, 1396, 10.1093/mnras/stad1953

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stad1953 2023

Show all 110 references
  1. [9]

    2020, , 365, 178, 10.1007/s10509-020-03891-6

    Bamba , A., Watanabe , E., Mori , K., et al. 2020, , 365, 178, 10.1007/s10509-020-03891-6

    2020 doi

  2. [10]

    Becker et al. in prep

  3. [11]

    2023, , 520, 1832, 10.1093/mnras/stad094

    Binney , J., & Vasiliev , E. 2023, , 520, 1832, 10.1093/mnras/stad094

    2023 doi

  4. [12]

    2016, , 54, 529, 10.1146/annurev-astro-081915-023441

    Bland-Hawthorn , J., & Gerhard , O. 2016, , 54, 529, 10.1146/annurev-astro-081915-023441

    2016 doi

  5. [13]

    Bock , D. C. J., Large , M. I., & Sadler , E. M. 1999, , 117, 1578, 10.1086/300786

    1999 doi

  6. [14]

    M., Filipovi \'c , M

    Bozzetto , L. M., Filipovi \'c , M. D., Sano , H., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 518, 2574, 10.1093/mnras/stac2922

    2023 doi

  7. [15]

    L., Gelfand , J

    Brogan , C. L., Gelfand , J. D., Gaensler , B. M., Kassim , N. E., & Lazio , T. J. W. 2006, , 639, L25, 10.1086/501500

    2006 doi

  8. [16]

    Burger-Scheidlin et al. in prep

  9. [17]

    Burn , B. J. 1966, , 133, 67, 10.1093/mnras/133.1.67

    1966 doi

  10. [18]

    M., Gotthelf , E

    Camilo , F., Gaensler , B. M., Gotthelf , E. V., Halpern , J. P., & Manchester , R. N. 2004 a , , 616, 1118, 10.1086/424924

    2004 doi

  11. [19]

    F., Manchester , R

    Camilo , F., Bell , J. F., Manchester , R. N., et al. 2001, , 557, L51, 10.1086/323171

    2001 doi

  12. [20]

    N., Lyne , A

    Camilo , F., Manchester , R. N., Lyne , A. G., et al. 2004 b , , 611, L25, 10.1086/423620

    2004 doi

  13. [21]

    G., Kargaltsev , O., & Shibanov , Y

    Chang , C., Pavlov , G. G., Kargaltsev , O., & Shibanov , Y. A. 2012, , 744, 81, 10.1088/0004-637X/744/2/81

    2012 doi

  14. [22]

    L., Matsuura , M., et al

    Chawner , H., Gomez , H. L., Matsuura , M., et al. 2020, , 493, 2706, 10.1093/mnras/staa221

    2020 doi

  15. [23]

    2020, , 637, A96, 10.1051/0004-6361/201937289

    Chrob \'a kov \'a , Z ., Nagy , R., & L \'o pez-Corredoira , M. 2020, , 637, A96, 10.1051/0004-6361/201937289

    2020 doi

  16. [24]

    J., Pletsch , H

    Clark , C. J., Pletsch , H. J., Wu , J., et al. 2016, , 832, L15, 10.3847/2041-8205/832/1/L15

    2016 doi

  17. [25]

    J., Wu , J., Pletsch , H

    Clark , C. J., Wu , J., Pletsch , H. J., et al. 2017, , 834, 106, 10.3847/1538-4357/834/2/106

    2017 doi

  18. [26]

    A., Rahoui , F., & Tomsick , J

    Coleiro , A., Chaty , S., Zurita Heras , J. A., Rahoui , F., & Tomsick , J. A. 2013, , 560, A108, 10.1051/0004-6361/201322382

    2013 doi

  19. [27]

    D., Filipovi \'c , M

    Cotton , W. D., Filipovi \'c , M. D., Camilo , F., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 529, 2443, 10.1093/mnras/stae277

    2024 doi

  20. [28]

    Y., Collier , J

    De Horta , A. Y., Collier , J. D., Filipovi \'c , M. D., et al. 2013, , 428, 1980, 10.1093/mnras/sts168

    2013 doi

  21. [29]

    1989, , 341, L13, 10.1086/185446

    Djorgovski , S., & Sosin , C. 1989, , 341, L13, 10.1086/185446

    1989 doi

  22. [30]

    2018, , 866, 61, 10.3847/1538-4357/aadc0c

    Dokara , R., Roy , N., Beuther , H., et al. 2018, , 866, 61, 10.3847/1538-4357/aadc0c

    2018 doi

  23. [31]

    M., et al

    Dokara , R., Brunthaler , A., Menten , K. M., et al. 2021, , 651, A86, 10.1051/0004-6361/202039873

    2021 doi

  24. [32]

    2017, in Handbook of Supernovae, ed

    Dubner , G. 2017, in Handbook of Supernovae, ed. A. W. Alsabti & P. Murdin , 2041, 10.1007/978-3-319-21846-5_91

    2017 doi

  25. [33]

    R., Stewart , R

    Duncan , A. R., Stewart , R. T., Haynes , R. F., & Jones , K. L. 1995, , 277, 36, 10.1093/mnras/277.1.36

    1995 doi

  26. [34]

    1997, , 287, 722, 10.1093/mnras/287.4.722

    ---. 1997, , 287, 722, 10.1093/mnras/287.4.722

    1997 doi

  27. [35]

    2012, Advances in Space Research, 49, 1313, 10.1016/j.asr.2012.02.004

    Ferrand , G., & Safi-Harb , S. 2012, Advances in Space Research, 49, 1313, 10.1016/j.asr.2012.02.004

    2012 doi

  28. [36]

    A., Drechsler , M., Strottner , X., et al

    Fesen , R. A., Drechsler , M., Strottner , X., et al. 2024, , 272, 36, 10.3847/1538-4365/ad410a

    2024 doi

  29. [37]

    M., Burkert , A., Ntormousi , E., et al

    Fierlinger , K. M., Burkert , A., Ntormousi , E., et al. 2016, , 456, 710, 10.1093/mnras/stv2699

    2016 doi

  30. [38]

    D., & Tothill, N

    Filipovi \'c , M. D., & Tothill, N. F. H. 2021 a , Principles of Multimessenger Astronomy, 2514-3433 (IOP Publishing), 10.1088/2514-3433/ac087e

    2021 doi

  31. [39]

    D., & Tothill, N

    Filipovi \'c , M. D., & Tothill, N. F. H., eds. 2021 b , Multimessenger Astronomy in Practice, 2514-3433 (IOP Publishing), 10.1088/2514-3433/ac2256

    2021 doi

  32. [40]

    D., Dai , S., Arbutina , B., et al

    Filipovi \'c , M. D., Dai , S., Arbutina , B., et al. 2023, , 166, 149, 10.3847/1538-3881/acf19c

    2023 doi

  33. [41]

    D., Lazarevi \'c , S., Araya , M., et al

    Filipovi \'c , M. D., Lazarevi \'c , S., Araya , M., et al. 2024, , 41, e112, 10.1017/pasa.2024.93

    2024 doi

  34. [42]

    D., Smeaton , Z

    Filipovic , M. D., Smeaton , Z. J., Kothes , R., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2505.04041, 10.48550/arXiv.2505.04041

    2025 doi arXiv

  35. [43]

    A., Goss , W

    Frail , D. A., Goss , W. M., & Whiteoak , J. B. Z. 1994, , 437, 781, 10.1086/175038

    1994 doi

  36. [44]

    M., Landecker , T

    Gaensler , B. M., Landecker , T. L., Taylor , A. R., & POSSUM Collaboration . 2010, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, Vol. 215, American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts \#215, 470.13

    2010

  37. [45]

    M., Stappers , B

    Gaensler , B. M., Stappers , B. W., Frail , D. A., et al. 2000, , 318, 58, 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2000.03626.x

    2000

  38. [46]

    M., Heald , G

    Gaensler , B. M., Heald , G. H., McClure-Griffiths , N. M., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2505.08272, 10.48550/arXiv.2505.08272

    2025 doi arXiv

  39. [47]

    D., Camilo , F., et al

    Goedhart , S., Cotton , W. D., Camilo , F., et al. 2024, , 531, 649, 10.1093/mnras/stae1166

    2024 doi

  40. [48]

    J., Reeves , S

    Green , A. J., Reeves , S. N., & Murphy , T. 2014, , 31, e042, 10.1017/pasa.2014.37

    2014 doi

  41. [49]

    Green , D. A. 2015, , 454, 1517, 10.1093/mnras/stv1885

    2015 doi

  42. [50]

    2024 a , arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.03367, 10.48550/arXiv.2411.03367

    ---. 2024 a , arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.03367, 10.48550/arXiv.2411.03367

    2024 doi arXiv

  43. [51]

    2024 b , ‘A Catalogue of Galactic Supernova Remnants (2024 October version)’

    ---. 2024 b , ‘A Catalogue of Galactic Supernova Remnants (2024 October version)’. https://www.mrao.cam.ac.uk/surveys/snrs/

    2024

  44. [52]

    2019, ASKAPsoft: ASKAP science data processor software , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1912.003

    Guzman , J., Whiting , M., Voronkov , M., et al. 2019, ASKAPsoft: ASKAP science data processor software , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1912.003

    2019

  45. [53]

    H. E. S. S. Collaboration , Abramowski , A., Acero , F., et al. 2011, , 533, A103, 10.1051/0004-6361/201117445

    2011 doi

  46. [54]

    2012, , 548, A46, 10.1051/0004-6361/201219814

    ---. 2012, , 548, A46, 10.1051/0004-6361/201219814

    2012 doi

  47. [55]

    L., Manchester , R

    Han , J. L., Manchester , R. N., Lyne , A. G., Qiao , G. J., & van Straten , W. 2006, , 642, 868, 10.1086/501444

    2006 doi

  48. [56]

    2019, , 875, 107, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab10da

    Hare , J., Volkov , I., Kargaltsev , O., Younes , G., & Rangelov , B. 2019, , 875, 107, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab10da

    2019 doi

  49. [57]

    J., Becker , R

    Helfand , D. J., Becker , R. H., White , R. L., Fallon , A., & Tuttle , S. 2006, , 131, 2525, 10.1086/503253

    2006 doi

  50. [58]

    2025, , 42, e071, 10.1017/pasa.2025.10042

    Hopkins , A., Kapinska , A., Marvil , J., et al. 2025, , 42, e071, 10.1017/pasa.2025.10042

    2025

  51. [59]

    W., Bunton , J

    Hotan , A. W., Bunton , J. D., Chippendale , A. P., et al. 2021, , 38, e009, 10.1017/pasa.2021.1

    2021 doi

  52. [60]

    Y., & Becker , W

    Hui , C. Y., & Becker , W. 2007, , 470, 965, 10.1051/0004-6361:20077628

    2007 doi

  53. [61]

    D., Gaensler , B

    Hurley-Walker , N., Filipovi \'c , M. D., Gaensler , B. M., et al. 2019 a , , 36, e045, 10.1017/pasa.2019.34

    2019 doi

  54. [62]

    J., Franzen , T

    Hurley-Walker , N., Hancock , P. J., Franzen , T. M. O., et al. 2019 b , , 36, e047, 10.1017/pasa.2019.37

    2019 doi

  55. [63]

    M., Leahy , D

    Hurley-Walker , N., Gaensler , B. M., Leahy , D. A., et al. 2019 c , , 36, e048, 10.1017/pasa.2019.33

    2019 doi

  56. [64]

    G., Manchester , R

    Johnston , S., Lyne , A. G., Manchester , R. N., et al. 1992, , 255, 401, 10.1093/mnras/255.3.401

    1992 doi

  57. [65]

    2013, in The Universe Evolution: Astrophysical and Nuclear Aspects

    Kargaltsev , O., Rangelov , B., & Pavlov , G. 2013, in The Universe Evolution: Astrophysical and Nuclear Aspects. Edited by I. Strakovsky and L. Blokhintsev. Nova Science Publishers, 359--406, 10.48550/arXiv.1305.2552

    2013 doi arXiv

  58. [67]

    M., Ables , J

    Komesaroff , M. M., Ables , J. G., Cooke , D. J., Hamilton , P. A., & McCulloch , P. M. 1973, , 15, 169

    1973

  59. [68]

    S., Staveley-Smith , L., Westmeier , T., et al

    Koribalski , B. S., Staveley-Smith , L., Westmeier , T., et al. 2020, , 365, 118, 10.1007/s10509-020-03831-4

    2020 doi

  60. [69]

    2017, in Astrophysics and Space Science Library, Vol

    Kothes , R. 2017, in Astrophysics and Space Science Library, Vol. 446, Modelling Pulsar Wind Nebulae, ed. D. F. Torres , 1, 10.1007/978-3-319-63031-1_1

    2017 doi

  61. [70]

    J., & Uyan ker , B

    Kothes , R., Fedotov , K., Foster , T. J., & Uyan ker , B. 2006, , 457, 1081, 10.1051/0004-6361:20065062

    2006 doi

  62. [71]

    F., Manchester , R

    Kramer , M., Bell , J. F., Manchester , R. N., et al. 2003, , 342, 1299, 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06637.x

    2003

  63. [72]

    D., Koribalski , B

    Lazarevi \'c , S., Filipovi \'c , M. D., Koribalski , B. S., et al. 2024, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 8, 107, 10.3847/2515-5172/ad40a9

    2024 doi

  64. [73]

    A., Ranasinghe , S., & Gelowitz , M

    Leahy , D. A., Ranasinghe , S., & Gelowitz , M. 2020, , 248, 16, 10.3847/1538-4365/ab8bd9

    2020 doi

  65. [74]

    2011, , 412, 1473, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18162.x

    Li , W., Chornock , R., Leaman , J., et al. 2011, , 412, 1473, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18162.x

    2011

  66. [75]

    Longair , M. S. 2011, High Energy Astrophysics

    2011

  67. [76]

    2024, , 692, A193, 10.1051/0004-6361/202450404

    Loru , S., Ingallinera , A., Umana , G., et al. 2024, , 692, A193, 10.1051/0004-6361/202450404

    2024 doi

  68. [77]

    N., Hobbs , G

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

    2005 doi

  69. [78]

    N., Lyne , A

    Manchester , R. N., Lyne , A. G., Taylor , J. H., et al. 1978, , 185, 409, 10.1093/mnras/185.2.409

    1978 doi

  70. [79]

    N., Lyne , A

    Manchester , R. N., Lyne , A. G., Camilo , F., et al. 2001, , 328, 17, 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04751.x

    2001

  71. [80]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2401.17294, 10.48550/arXiv.2401.17294

    Mantovanini , S., Becker , W., Khokhriakova , A., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2401.17294, 10.48550/arXiv.2401.17294

    2024 doi arXiv

  72. [81]

    2025, , 42, e021, 10.1017/pasa.2025.1

    Mantovanini , S., Hurley-Walker , N., & Anderson , G. 2025, , 42, e021, 10.1017/pasa.2025.1

    2025 doi

  73. [82]

    Y., Gaensler , B

    Ng , C. Y., Gaensler , B. M., Chatterjee , S., & Johnston , S. 2010, , 712, 596, 10.1088/0004-637X/712/1/596

    2010 doi

  74. [83]

    P., Hopkins , A

    Norris , R. P., Hopkins , A. M., Afonso , J., et al. 2011, , 28, 215, 10.1071/AS11021

    2011 doi

  75. [84]

    P., Marvil , J., Collier , J

    Norris , R. P., Marvil , J., Collier , J. D., et al. 2021, , 38, e046, 10.1017/pasa.2021.42

    2021 doi

  76. [85]

    A., Phillipps , S., Pierce , M

    Parker , Q. A., Phillipps , S., Pierce , M. J., et al. 2005, , 362, 689, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09350.x

    2005

  77. [86]

    G., & Carey , S

    Pinheiro Gon c alves , D., Noriega-Crespo , A., Paladini , R., Martin , P. G., & Carey , S. J. 2011, , 142, 47, 10.1088/0004-6256/142/2/47

    2011 doi

  78. [87]

    D., Chawner , H., Barlow , M

    Priestley , F. D., Chawner , H., Barlow , M. J., et al. 2022, , 516, 2314, 10.1093/mnras/stac2408

    2022 doi

  79. [88]

    2012, , 544, A7, 10.1051/0004-6361/201219086

    Prinz , T., & Becker , W. 2012, , 544, A7, 10.1051/0004-6361/201219086

    2012 doi

  80. [89]

    2022, , 940, 63, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac940a

    Ranasinghe , S., & Leahy , D. 2022, , 940, 63, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac940a

    2022 doi

  81. [90]

    2023, , 265, 53, 10.3847/1538-4365/acc1de

    ---. 2023, , 265, 53, 10.3847/1538-4365/acc1de

    2023 doi

  82. [91]

    2021, Universe, 7, 338, 10.3390/universe7090338

    Ranasinghe , S., Leahy , D., & Stil , J. 2021, Universe, 7, 338, 10.3390/universe7090338

    2021 doi

  83. [92]

    T., Rho , J., Tappe , A., et al

    Reach , W. T., Rho , J., Tappe , A., et al. 2006, , 131, 1479, 10.1086/499306

    2006 doi

  84. [93]

    T., Miller , J

    Reynolds , M. T., Miller , J. M., Maitra , D., et al. 2012, The Astronomer's Telegram, 3963, 1

    2012

  85. [94]

    S., Milne , D

    Roger , R. S., Milne , D. K., Caswell , J. L., & Little , A. G. 1986, , 219, 815, 10.1093/mnras/219.4.815

    1986 doi

  86. [95]

    B., & Lightman , A

    Rybicki , G. B., & Lightman , A. P. 1986, Radiative Processes in Astrophysics

    1986

  87. [96]

    M., Fesen , R

    Saken , J. M., Fesen , R. A., & Shull , J. M. 1992, , 81, 715, 10.1086/191703

    1992 doi

  88. [97]

    K., Badenes , C., Chomiuk , L., Caprioli , D., & Huizenga , D

    Sarbadhicary , S. K., Badenes , C., Chomiuk , L., Caprioli , D., & Huizenga , D. 2017, , 464, 2326, 10.1093/mnras/stw2566

    2017 doi

  89. [98]

    M., Dormody , M., Ziegler , M., et al

    Saz Parkinson , P. M., Dormody , M., Ziegler , M., et al. 2010, , 725, 571, 10.1088/0004-637X/725/1/571

    2010 doi

  90. [99]

    J., Filipovi \'c , M

    Smeaton , Z. J., Filipovi \'c , M. D., Koribalski , B. S., et al. 2024, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 8, 158, 10.3847/2515-5172/ad5309

    2024 doi

  91. [100]

    A., & Filipovi \'c , M

    Stupar , M., Parker , Q. A., & Filipovi \'c , M. D. 2008, , 390, 1037, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13761.x

    2008

  92. [101]

    2010, , 401, 1760, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15814.x

    ---. 2010, , 401, 1760, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15814.x

    2010

  93. [102]

    2011, , 332, 241, 10.1007/s10509-010-0544-2

    ---. 2011, , 332, 241, 10.1007/s10509-010-0544-2

    2011 doi

  94. [103]

    Sushch , I., Oya , I., Schwanke , U., Johnston , S., & Dalton , M. L. 2017, , 605, A115, 10.1051/0004-6361/201527871

    2017 doi

  95. [104]

    A., Loeffler , W., & Schroeder , A

    Tammann , G. A., Loeffler , W., & Schroeder , A. 1994, , 92, 487, 10.1086/192002

    1994 doi

  96. [105]

    van de Steene , G. C. M., & Pottasch , S. R. 1993, , 274, 895

    1993

  97. [106]

    van der Hucht , K. A. 2001, , 45, 135, 10.1016/S1387-6473(00)00112-3

    2001 doi

  98. [107]

    1962, , 124, 179, 10.1093/mnras/124.2.179

    van der Laan , H. 1962, , 124, 179, 10.1093/mnras/124.2.179

    1962 doi

  99. [108]

    Whiteoak , J. B. Z., & Green , A. J. 1996, , 118, 329

    1996

  100. [109]

    E., & Large , M

    Wielebinski , R., Vaughan , A. E., & Large , M. I. 1969, , 221, 47, 10.1038/221047a0

    1969 doi

  101. [110]

    Woermann , B., & Jonas , J. L. 1988, , 234, 971, 10.1093/mnras/234.4.971

    1988 doi

  102. [111]

    L., Eisenhardt , P

    Wright , E. L., Eisenhardt , P. R. M., Mainzer , A. K., et al. 2010, , 140, 1868, 10.1088/0004-6256/140/6/1868

    2010 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.