Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

A Diagnostic Kit for Optical Emission Lines Shaped by Accretion Disc Winds

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Excess-EW wind diagnostic hinges on how the line wing is defined

desk verdict A genuinely useful open grid and a real warning about mask sensitivity, but the strong reliability claim for the FWHM-based fix isn't backed by a non-wind control. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.02858 v1 pith:CAOTEGUK submitted 2025-09-02 astro-ph.IM astro-ph.HEastro-ph.SR

Austen G. W. Wallis , Christian Knigge , James H. Matthews , Knox S. Long , Stuart A. Sim This is my paper
classification astro-ph.IMastro-ph.HEastro-ph.SR
keywords accretiondiscwindscataclysmicvariablesH-alphaemissionlinesexcessequivalentwidthdiagnosticradiativetransferSIROCCOlineprofilediagnosticsscalingrelation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper asks whether the 'excess equivalent width' diagram—a fast way to spot accretion-disc winds from optical H-alpha lines—actually works. To answer it, the authors compute 3,645 synthetic H-alpha profiles from 729 biconical disc-wind models with the radiative-transfer code SIROCCO, and compare them to observed nova-like cataclysmic variables. Their central finding is that the diagram's verdict depends strongly on the user-chosen velocity window that defines the line wing: a small shift of the window can move a data point across the diagram and even switch its quadrant. They argue that a window set at 1.0x to 5.0x the line's full-width at half-maximum makes the diagnostic stable and interpretable, and they supply an approximate scaling relation that predicts H-alpha equivalent width from wind parameters. If right, this means previous outflow classifications based on fixed windows need revisiting, and future surveys should use the FWHM-relative mask.

What carries the argument

The central object is the 'excess equivalent width diagnostic diagram': a best-fit Gaussian is subtracted from a continuum-normalised H-alpha line, and the residual flux is integrated separately in a blue-wing and red-wing velocity mask to give the two coordinates. The paper's refinement replaces the fixed velocity mask with a dynamic one bounded at 1.0x and 5.0x the line's FWHM, so every line is measured over the same fraction of its wings. The supporting machinery is the SIROCCO radiative-transfer grid of 729 Knigge-Wood-Drew biconical wind models (six varied parameters, five inclinations), which supplies the 3,645 self-consistent H-alpha profiles used to test the diagram and calibrate the

What would settle it

Take the 61 observed H-alpha spectra of Cúneo et al. (2023) and recompute their excess EWs under both the fixed ±1000–2500 km/s mask and the proposed 1.0x–5.0x FWHM mask; then shift the FWHM estimate by ±30 per cent. If a substantial fraction of spectra change quadrants under the FWHM mask, or if known wind-driving systems do not move toward the blue-deficit/red-excess region, the paper's central reliability claim would be contradicted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the excess-EW diagnostic diagram, as originally implemented with fixed radial-velocity masking windows, is not a reliable outflow diagnostic for wind-formed H-alpha lines. Using a grid of 729 SIROCCO wind models viewed at five inclinations, the authors show that the position of a line in the diagram depends sensitively on the chosen wing boundaries; shifting the inner edge by approximately 200 km/s can move data points between quadrants. They propose defining the wing masking window as 1.0x to 5.0x the line's FWHM, which avoids core contamination and makes the diagram's regions correspond to actual profile shapes—P-Cygni-like lines land in the blue-deficit/r

Load-bearing premise

The analysis assumes that one smooth, steady, biconical wind model with fixed white-dwarf and disc parameters, treated as converged at 80–90 per cent of cells, adequately represents the geometry, ionization, and velocity structure of real CV disc winds.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Previous applications of the excess-EW diagram that used fixed velocity windows should be re-checked; their outflow classifications may be mask artefacts rather than wind detections.
  • Adopting the FWHM-relative mask (1.0x to 5.0x FWHM) makes the diagram stable enough for survey-scale use across thousands of spectra with very different line widths.
  • The scaling relation lets an observer decide quickly whether a measured H-alpha EW can plausibly be produced by a disc wind, and if so what combination of mass-loss, collimation, and acceleration parameters would do it.
  • The result that most synthetic wind lines sit near the y=x diagonal under the fixed mask means symmetric non-Gaussian wings—from discs, hot spots, or eccentric discs—can masquerade as outflow features unless the mask is chosen carefully.
  • The Gold sample's preference for the 'wind region' of the diagram is inclination-dependent, so viewing angle must be accounted for when classifying an observed source.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The mask-sensitivity problem likely extends beyond CVs: any application of the excess-EW method to LMXBs, YSOs, or AGN that uses fixed windows should be re-examined with FWHM-relative masks.
  • The scaling relation could be inverted into a cheap prior for spectral fitting or emulator-based inference, narrowing the wind-parameter space before expensive radiative-transfer runs.
  • The paper's finding that most wind models cluster near the diagonal suggests that an off-diagonal excess alone is weak evidence; combining the diagram with blue-shifted absorption or time-variable line shapes would give more robust wind identification.
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

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper presents a systematic grid of 3645 synthetic H-alpha line profiles (729 KWD biconical wind models viewed at five inclinations) computed with SIROCCO, filters them into quality tiers, and defines a 'Gold' subsample whose EW and FWHM match observed high-state CVs. Using this grid, the authors test the excess-EW diagnostic diagram of Mata Sánchez et al. (2018)/Cúneo et al. (2023). They find that wind-formed models can occupy the previously suggested wind regions, but that the result is highly sensitive to the adopted velocity masking window. They therefore propose a FWHM-relative mask (1.0x–5.0x FWHM) and argue it improves diagnostic reliability. They also derive an approximate power-law scaling relation (Eq. 3) between EW and wind parameters, plus an emission-measure-based curve-of-growth model in Appendix A. All models and analysis scripts are open-source, with a web-based browsing tool.

Significance. If the central reliability claim is established, this would be a valuable methodological contribution: it would place the widely used excess-EW diagnostic on a quantitative footing, provide a standardized masking prescription, and give observers a fast way to connect H-alpha EWs to disc-wind parameters. The paper's concrete strengths are the large open-source grid, the explicit quantitative test of mask sensitivity in Fig. 8, and the physically motivated scaling analysis. However, the validation design currently limits the strength of the main conclusions: there is no wind-free control sample, the Gold sample is selected on the same observations used for comparison, and the scaling relations are fit and tested on the same data. These issues are addressable but require additional work before the reliability claims can be accepted.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sections 7.1–7.3 and Section 8 (third bullet)] The claim that the FWHM-based masking restores sensitivity and reliability is under-supported because every spectrum in the grid is wind-formed. Fig. 8 demonstrates that fixed-mask excess EWs depend on the window choice (11/155 points switch quadrants), but that does not show that the original method misclassifies non-wind lines, nor that the revised method correctly separates wind from non-wind lines. The paper itself notes in Section 7.1 that hot spots and eccentric discs can produce asymmetric wings, but no such non-wind profiles are modelled. Without a matched control sample of wind-free line profiles, the true-positive and false-positive rates of the proposed diagnostic are undefined, so the concluding sentence that the refined definition is 'more likely to provide a sensitive and reliable way to detect disc winds' does not follow. Please add a non-wind control set (e.g., rotating-d
  2. [Section 5.2.2 and Section 6] The Gold sample is selected by drawing a box 'roughly centred on the Cúneo et al. (2023) sample' in the EW–FWHM plane (Fig. 6), and the same Cúneo data are then used as the observational benchmark in the excess-EW diagram (Fig. 7). Selection in EW/FWHM and comparison in excess-EW are not identical observables, so this is not a full circularity, but it is also not an independent validation: the model–data overlap in Fig. 7 is conditioned on matching the same systems. Please validate on an independent sample (e.g., Zhao et al. 2025 or a withheld subset) and quantify how Gold membership and the resulting diagram change with the selection-box boundaries.
  3. [Section 7.4, Eq. (3), Fig. 10; Appendix A, Table A1] The scaling relation in Eq. (3) is fitted to the Gold sample and its predictive performance is displayed for the same Gold sample (Fig. 10); the Silver/Bronze inset shows degradation but those samples are not used in the fit. Similarly, Appendix A fits K1, K2, and the EM scaling coefficients to the full data set. As presented, the scatter of ~0.17 dex measures in-sample fit quality, not predictive power. To support the statement that the relation lets observers 'assess whether—and what kind of—accretion disc wind might produce the H-alpha line,' please provide out-of-sample validation, for example by cross-validation or by holding out a random subset of the grid. If the relation is intended only as an empirical description of the grid, that limitation should be stated explicitly.
  4. [Section 2 and Table 1] All diagnostic conclusions and the scaling relation are conditioned on the Knigge–Wood–Drew biconical wind parameterization with fixed white-dwarf parameters, a smooth wind, and 80–90% cell convergence treated as steady state. If real CV winds are clumpy, time-dependent, or differently collimated, the Gold-sample fractions and the fitted exponents in Eq. (3) could change. This is not a fatal objection—the grid is explicitly systematic—but the abstract and Section 8 state conclusions about 'disc winds' in general. Please add a limitations paragraph that spells out the model-validity domain and, ideally, a concrete test (e.g., a small comparison set with different wind geometry or with clumping) showing the robustness of the qualitative conclusions.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Fig. 8 caption and Section 7.2] The text says a subset of 40 spectra, but the caption and text also refer to 155 data points; clarify that each spectrum is shown at five inclinations and state the total number of plotted points.
  2. [Section 3.2] There is a tension between the original method's step (ii) (Gaussian fit constrained to the core) and the third modification (fitting the overall line profile). Please provide an explicit algorithmic summary of the actual fitting region after the modification.
  3. [Section 7.3] The choice of 1.0x and 5.0x FWHM is still a user-chosen window. Since the paper emphasizes mask sensitivity, please report the sensitivity of Fig. 9/B3 to reasonable changes in these multipliers, or state that this is left for future work.
  4. [Eq. (3)] The notation 'h 100.31(α−0.25) i' is confusing; consider writing these factors as 10^{0.31(α−0.25)} and 10^{0.1(β−1.5)}.
  5. [Section 5.2.2] Minor wording: 'the vice-versa view applies' should be 'the vice versa view applies' or 'the converse applies'.
  6. [Abstract and Section 8] The statement that 'about 20%' of lines are Gold would be more precise if the range across the five inclinations were given, since Gold membership is inclination-dependent.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Mask-sensitivity analysis is non-circular; the circularity is the in-sample EW scaling relation presented as a prediction, with a second instance in Appendix A.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 7.4, Eq. (3), Fig. 10]
    "For our Gold sample of model line profiles, a scaling relation based on a simple power-law Ansatz is sufficient to predict the Hα EWs to within 0.17 dex RMS (corresponding to ≃50%) across all inclinations simultaneously. The fitted scaling relation is illustrated in Fig. 10 and given by [Eq. 3]."

    Equation (3) is a least-squares power-law fit of EW to the six grid parameters; the coefficients and the 'predictive performance' in Fig. 10 are evaluated on the same Gold sample that determined the fit. The 0.17 dex RMS is the in-sample scatter of the fit, not an out-of-sample prediction. The paper does label it 'fitted', but the abstract and Section 7.4 present the relation as a fast diagnostic that 'predicts' observed-line EW, so the predictive claim for the Gold sample reduces by construction to the fitted values. The Silver/Bronze degradation shown in the inset is an honest out-of-sample check, which keeps this from being fully circular.

  2. fitted input called prediction [Section 7.4 (final paragraph) and Appendix A, Eq. (A2), Table A1]
    "In Appendix A, we show that a (slightly) more physically motivated approach based on the volumetric emission measure of the outflow is capable of predicting EWs with reasonable accuracy across our entire set of models (Gold, Silver and also Bronze)."

    The 'prediction' in Appendix A uses Eq. (A2) with K1 and K2 obtained by least-squares fits to the same line luminosities/EWs (Table A1), and Eq. (A3) is a power-law fit to the same models' emission measures. The quoted accuracy is an in-sample residual of these fits, so the predicted EW is the fitted value on the calibration data. This is the same fitted-input-called-prediction pattern as Eq. (3), though confined to an appendix.

full rationale

The paper's headline diagnostic-reliability claim (Sections 7.1-7.3) is not circular: it is an internal comparison of how EW excess values shift under different masking windows for the same model grid, and the FWHM-based recommendation is not derived from the quantity it predicts. No uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' prior work; the KWD/SIROCCO framework is cited as standard modeling machinery and the excess-diagram method is due to Mata Sánchez et al. The Gold-sample selection is a source of bias (models are chosen to match the EW/FWHM of the Cúneo et al. systems before being compared with those systems in the excess diagram), but because the excess diagram is a different projection, this is not a definitional equality. The absence of a non-wind control sample means the 'reliability improves' statement is under-supported, but that is a validation-design issue, not circularity. The concrete circularity that survives scrutiny is the EW scaling relation (and its EM variant): a fit to the data presented as a prediction. Score 4 reflects one secondary main result reducing to a fit while the central mask-sensitivity finding stands independently.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central results rest on the SIROCCO/KWD wind geometry and on hand-tuned sample filters. The scaling relations are calibrations with fitted coefficients, not independent derivations. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (7)
  • EW scaling relation coefficients (Eq. 3) = norm 5 A; exponents -0.12, 0.31, 0.11, 0.16, 0.31(alpha-0.25), 0.1(beta-1.5), -0.56 cos i
    Least-squares calibrated on the Gold sample; the 0.17 dex RMS scatter is a fit residual, not an independent validation.
  • Gold sample selection box bounds = EW 3-70 A; FWHM 3-30 A
    Hand-drawn box around Cuneo et al. (2023) loci; decides which synthetic lines enter all downstream diagnostics and the scaling fit.
  • Fixed excess EW masking windows = +-1000-2500 km/s; +-500-4000 km/s; +-200 km/s perturbations
    User-defined radial velocity bounds; the central result is that excess values and quadrant assignments change drastically with this choice.
  • FWHM-based mask multipliers = 1x and 5x FWHM
    Chosen by hand as inner and outer wing boundaries; the claimed improvement depends on this choice.
  • Curve-of-growth K1 and K2 (Appendix A) = K1 ~ (0.59-2.02)e33; K2 ~ -55 to -56 per inclination
    Free parameters fit per inclination in Eq. A2 by least squares.
  • Emission measure scaling coefficients (Eq. A3) = 10^54.5 cm^-3; exponents 0.00, 1.96, 0.21, 1.14, 0.7, 0.6
    Power-law fit to SIROCCO emission measures; used to estimate EM from wind parameters.
  • Silver sample filtering thresholds = peak>1%, peaks<=2, RMS<=0.5, excess error<=0.5 A
    Hand-set numerical thresholds remove about 50 percent of profiles before Gold selection and influence sample composition.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption SIROCCO's steady-state, radiative-equilibrium assumption for the outflow
    Section 2: the code assumes steady state and radiative equilibrium; 80-90 percent cell convergence is treated as sufficient. All 3,645 profiles inherit this.
  • domain assumption Knigge-Wood-Drew biconical wind parameterization and velocity law represent real CV disc winds
    Section 2, Table 1: the KWD model defines geometry and kinematics for every simulation; the diagnostics and scaling relation are only as good as this parameterization.
  • domain assumption Gaussian profile is an appropriate symmetric reference for the excess EW method
    Section 3.1: the method fits a Gaussian to the line and attributes deviations to outflow features. The paper adopts this framework while later cautioning that symmetric non-Gaussian wings also place points on the diagonal.
  • domain assumption H-alpha line forms entirely in the outflow, not in the disc
    Section 7.4 footnote: 'the entire line is formed in the outflow'. This is required for the EW-wind-parameter scaling relation to be interpretable.
  • domain assumption Curve-of-growth slab model for line luminosity
    Appendix A, Eq. A2: assumes a Gaussian line profile, a uniform cylindrical slab, tau proportional to EM/R^2 with fixed disc radius, and standard curve-of-growth behavior. K1 and K2 are fitted, not derived from microphysics.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A Diagnostic Kit for Optical Emission Lines Shaped by Accretion Disc Winds." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CAOTEGUK

@misc{pith2026250902858,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A Diagnostic Kit for Optical Emission Lines Shaped by Accretion Disc Winds},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CAOTEGUK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.02858}
}
read the original abstract

Blueshifted absorption is the classic spectroscopic signature of an accretion disc wind in X-ray binaries and cataclysmic variables (CVs). However, outflows can also create pure emission lines, especially at optical wavelengths. Therefore, developing other outflow diagnostics for these types of lines is worthwhile. With this in mind, we construct a systematic grid of 3645 synthetic wind-formed H-alpha line profiles for CVs with the radiative transfer code SIROCCO. Our grid yields a variety of line shapes: symmetric, asymmetric, single- to quadruple-peaked, and even P-Cygni profiles. About 20% of these lines -- our `Gold' sample -- have strengths and widths consistent with observations. We use this grid to test a recently proposed method for identifying wind-formed emission lines based on deviations in the wing profile shape: the `excess equivalent width diagnostic diagram'. We find that our `Gold' sample can preferentially populate the suggested `wind regions' of this diagram. However, the method is highly sensitive to the adopted definition of the line profile `wing'. Hence, we propose a refined definition based on the full-width at half maximum to improve the interpretability of the diagnostic diagram. Furthermore, we define an approximate scaling relation for the strengths of wind-formed CV emission lines in terms of the outflow parameters. This relation provides a fast way to assess whether -- and what kind of -- outflow can produce an observed emission line. All our wind-based models are open-source and we provide an easy-to-use web-based tool to browse our full set of H-alpha spectral profiles.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.02858 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. A qualitative, idealised sketch of various possible single-peaked line profiles numbered with their respective ‘expected’ data point positions on an EW excess diagnostic diagram. The hand-drawn line profiles (solid black) are a small subset of many shape variations physically possible. However, when compared against the fixed Gaussian (dashed red) across all plots, these profiles highlight the excess EW value impact… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. provides a visual aid for steps 1 to 3: (i) A polynomial is fitted to each spectrum’s continuum. Depend￾ing on the wavelength range of the spectrum, a mask may be applied over spectral lines. This mask helps to ensure that the fit only ap￾plies to regions of the spectrum that are continuum-dominated. The spectrum is then normalised, in other words, divided by the fitted polynomial, fixing the continuum level to a va… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Trailed spectra of the H 𝛼 spectral line of four non-magnetic nova-like cataclysmic variable sources – BZ Cam, V751 Cyg, MV Lyr and V425 Cas – observed at different epochs. Redder colours indicate higher emission above the continuum, while bluer colours represent lower emission. The dashed black line highlights the rest wavelength of H 𝛼. Within each source’s panel is an overlaid spaghetti plot of all the spectral H… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Four different sirocco simulations of H 𝛼 line profiles at ≈ 6560 A˚ across inclinations from 20° to 85°. Plot (a) is typical of a weak H 𝛼 line profile. Plot (b) displays a P-Cygni H 𝛼 line profile with hints of an additional He I − 𝜆6678 line. Plot (c) shows a high f…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Frequency of sirocco model parameter values in the Gold (Green), Silver (Blue), and Bronze (Grey) samples. Each panel highlights one of the six input parameters. Within each panel, the three x-axis categories (Low, Medium and High) correspond to the parameter’s three n…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: A Full-Width at Half Maximum – Equivalent Width plot comparing the strength and breadth of sirocco H 𝛼 line profiles to observed line profiles from Cúneo et al. (2023) and Zhao et al. (2025). Filled circular data points describe line profiles obtained from observing ca…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Excess diagnostic diagrams for Gold sirocco CV systems viewed at a 20°, 45°, 60°, 72.5° and 85° inclination. Red data points indicate sirocco spectra that exhibit only one prominent peak within the H 𝛼 emission line. Black data points indicate sirocco spectra with two …
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: For a representative random subset selection of line profiles, a diagnostic diagram showing the change in excess EWs for a 200 km s−1 change in the radial velocity’s inner masking window edge. The black data points are calculated from a ± 1000 − 2500 km s−1 , matching …
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FWHM masking windowed excess diagnostic diagrams for Gold sirocco CV systems viewed at a 20° and 45° inclination. Red data points indicate sirocco spectra that exhibit only one prominent peak within the H 𝛼 emission line. Black data points indicate sirocco spectra with…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Predictive performance of an approximate calibrated scaling power-law relation for H 𝛼 line’s EW given a particular combination of sirocco parameters. The relation is solely fitted to our Gold sample at all inclinations, which is shown in hues of green. The black dash…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. How massive and clumpy must a quasar wind be to create emission line blueshifts?

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

    Blueshifted C IV emission in quasars requires wind mass-loading ϵ_w/f_V ∼ 50, disfavouring smooth disc winds in favour of clumpy or ambient-swept outflows.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

62 extracted references · 32 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Beristain G., Edwards S., Kwan J., 2001, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/320233 , 551, 1037

    doi:10.1086/320233 2001

  2. [2]

    A., Green R

    Boroson T. A., Green R. F., 1992, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series] 10.1086/191661 , 80, 109

    doi:10.1086/191661 1992

  3. [3]

    A., Mason K

    Cordova F. A., Mason K. O., 1982, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/160291 , 260, 716

    work page doi:10.1086/160291 1982

  4. [4]

    M., Mandel K

    Czekala I., Andrews S. M., Mandel K. S., Hogg D. W., Green G. M., 2015, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/812/2/128 , 812, 128

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/812/2/128 2015

  5. [5]

    A., et al., 2020, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/staa2241 , 498, 25

    Cúneo V. A., et al., 2020, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/staa2241 , 498, 25

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa2241 2020

  6. [6]

    A., et al., 2023, @doi [Astronomy & Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/202347265 , 679, A85

    Cúneo V. A., et al., 2023, @doi [Astronomy & Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/202347265 , 679, A85

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347265 2023

  7. [7]

    Emission Measures Demystified

    Dennis B. R., Phillips K. J. H., 2024, Emission Measures Demystified , @doi 10.48550/arXiv.2403.14845 , http://arxiv.org/abs/2403.14845

    work page Pith review arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2403.14845 2024

  8. [8]

    E., 1987, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/224.3.595 , 224, 595

    Drew J. E., 1987, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/224.3.595 , 224, 595

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/224.3.595 1987

Show all 62 references
  1. [9]

    Edwards S., Fischer W., Hillenbrand L., Kwan J., 2006, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/504832 , 646, 319

    2006 doi

  2. [10]

    Filiz Ak N., et al., 2014, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/791/2/88 , 791, 88

    2014 doi

  3. [11]

    J., 2002, Accretion Power in Astrophysics, p

    Frank J., King A., Raine D. J., 2002, Accretion Power in Astrophysics, p. 398

    2002

  4. [12]

    S., 2004, Observations of Outflows in Cataclysmic Variables , @doi 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0410200 , http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0410200

    Froning C. S., 2004, Observations of Outflows in Cataclysmic Variables , @doi 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0410200 , http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0410200

    2004 doi arXiv

  5. [13]

    D., O'brien T

    Gill C. D., O'brien T. J., 1999, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.1999.02681.x , 307, 677

    1999

  6. [14]

    H., Di Stefano R., Prestwich A., González-Riestra R., Szentasko L., Chavarría C., 1999, @doi [Astronomy and Astrophysics] 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9812054 , 343, 183

    Greiner J., Tovmassian G. H., Di Stefano R., Prestwich A., González-Riestra R., Szentasko L., Chavarría C., 1999, @doi [Astronomy and Astrophysics] 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9812054 , 343, 183

    1999 doi arXiv

  7. [15]

    J., Rutten R

    Groot P. J., Rutten R. G. M., van Paradijs J., 2004, @doi [Astronomy and Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361:20031771 , 417, 283

    2004 doi

  8. [16]

    B., et al., 2002, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series] 10.1086/340546 , 141, 267

    Hall P. B., et al., 2002, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series] 10.1086/340546 , 141, 267

    2002 doi

  9. [17]

    R., et al., 2020, @doi [Nature] 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 , 585, 357

    Harris C. R., et al., 2020, @doi [Nature] 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 , 585, 357

    2020 doi

  10. [18]

    E., Drew J

    Hartley L. E., Drew J. E., Long K. S., Knigge C., Proga D., 2002, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05277.x , 332, 127

    2002

  11. [19]

    R., et al., 1978, @doi [Nature] 10.1038/275385a0 , 275, 385

    Heap S. R., et al., 1978, @doi [Nature] 10.1038/275385a0 , 275, 385

    1978 doi

  12. [20]

    V., Panek R

    Holm A. V., Panek R. J., Schiffer Iii F. H., 1982, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/183714 , 252, L35

    1982 doi

  13. [21]

    K., Kafka S., Robertson J

    Honeycutt R. K., Kafka S., Robertson J. W., 2013, @doi [The Astronomical Journal] 10.1088/0004-6256/145/2/45 , 145, 45

    2013 doi

  14. [22]

    R., 1986, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/218.4.761 , 218, 761

    Horne K., Marsh T. R., 1986, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/218.4.761 , 218, 761

    1986 doi

  15. [23]

    D., 2007, @doi [Computing in Science & Engineering] 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55 , 9, 90

    Hunter J. D., 2007, @doi [Computing in Science & Engineering] 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55 , 9, 90

    2007 doi

  16. [24]

    E., 1997, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/304519 , 486, 445

    Knigge C., Drew J. E., 1997, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/304519 , 486, 445

    1997 doi

  17. [25]

    A., Drew J

    Knigge C., Woods J. A., Drew J. E., 1995, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/273.2.225 , 273, 225

    1995 doi

  18. [26]

    S., Blair W

    Knigge C., Long K. S., Blair W. P., Wade R. A., 1997, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/303607 , 476, 291

    1997 doi

  19. [27]

    La Dous C., 1990, @doi [Space Science Reviews] 10.1007/BF00167124 , 52, 203

    1990 doi

  20. [28]

    M., Moore J

    Leighly K. M., Moore J. R., 2004, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/422088 , 611, 107

    2004 doi

  21. [29]

    P., Szkody P., Gänsicke B., Long K

    Linnell A. P., Szkody P., Gänsicke B., Long K. S., Sion E. M., Hoard D. W., Hubeny I., 2005, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/429143 , 624, 923

    2005 doi

  22. [30]

    Mata Sánchez D., et al., 2018, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/sty2402 , 481, 2646

    2018 doi

  23. [31]

    Mata Sánchez D., et al., 2022, Hard-state optical wind during the discovery outburst of the black-hole X -ray dipper MAXI J1803 -298, @doi 10.48550/arXiv.2201.09896 , http://arxiv.org/abs/2201.09896

    2022 doi

  24. [32]

    Mata Sánchez D., Muñoz-Darias T., Casares J., Huertas-Company M., Panizo-Espinar G., 2023, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stad1895 , 524, 338

    2023 doi

  25. [33]

    Matthews J., 2016, phd, University of Southampton, https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/400903/

    2016

  26. [34]

    H., Knigge C., Long K

    Matthews J. H., Knigge C., Long K. S., Sim S. A., Higginbottom N., 2015, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stv867 , 450, 3331

    2015 doi

  27. [35]

    H., Knigge C., Long K

    Matthews J. H., Knigge C., Long K. S., Sim S. A., Higginbottom N., Mangham S. W., 2016, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stw323 , 458, 293

    2016 doi

  28. [36]

    H., Knigge C., Higginbottom N., Long K

    Matthews J. H., Knigge C., Higginbottom N., Long K. S., Sim S. A., Mangham S. W., Parkinson E. J., Hewitt H. A., 2020, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/staa136 , 492, 5540

    2020 doi

  29. [37]

    H., et al., 2023, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stad2895 , 526, 3967

    Matthews J. H., et al., 2023, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stad2895 , 526, 3967

    2023 doi

  30. [38]

    H., et al., 2024, SIROCCO : A Publicly Available Monte Carlo Ionization and Radiative Transfer Code for Astrophysical Outflows , http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.19908

    Matthews J. H., et al., 2024, SIROCCO : A Publicly Available Monte Carlo Ionization and Radiative Transfer Code for Astrophysical Outflows , http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.19908

    2024 arXiv

  31. [39]

    M., Shields J

    McGraw S. M., Shields J. C., Hamann F. W., Capellupo D. M., Herbst H., 2018, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stx3219 , 475, 585

    2018 doi

  32. [40]

    M., Raymond J., Reynolds C

    Miller J. M., Raymond J., Reynolds C. S., Fabian A. C., Kallman T. R., Homan J., 2008, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/588521 , 680, 1359

    2008 doi

  33. [41]

    Muñoz-Darias T., et al., 2019, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal Letters] 10.3847/2041-8213/ab2768 , 879, L4

    2019 doi

  34. [42]

    Muñoz-Darias T., et al., 2020, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/2041-8213/ab8381 , 893, L19

    2020 doi

  35. [43]

    Panizo-Espinar G., Muñoz-Darias T., Armas Padilla M., Jiménez-Ibarra F., Casares J., Mata Sánchez D., 2021, @doi [Astronomy & Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/202140323 , 650, A135

    2021 doi

  36. [44]

    J., Knigge C., Dai L., Thomsen L

    Parkinson E. J., Knigge C., Dai L., Thomsen L. L., Matthews J. H., Long K. S., 2024, A multi-dimensional view of a unified model for TDEs , @doi 10.48550/arXiv.2408.16371 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240816371P

    2024 doi arXiv

  37. [45]

    R., Fried R., Skillman D

    Patterson J., Thorstensen J. R., Fried R., Skillman D. R., Cook L. M., Jensen L., 2001, @doi [Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific] 10.1086/317973 , 113, 72

    2001 doi

  38. [46]

    Pedregosa F., et al., 2011, Journal of Machine Learning Research, 12, 2825

    2011

  39. [47]

    K., Rosen R., 1995, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/273.2.461 , 273, 461

    Prinja R. K., Rosen R., 1995, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/273.2.461 , 273, 461

    1995 doi

  40. [48]

    K., Long K

    Prinja R. K., Long K. S., Froning C. S., Knigge C., Witherick D. K., Clark J. S., Ringwald F. A., 2003, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06307.x , 340, 551

    2003

  41. [49]

    T., Vanden Berk D

    Richards G. T., Vanden Berk D. E., Reichard T. A., Hall P. B., Schneider D. P., SubbaRao M., Thakar A. R., York D. G., 2002, @doi [The Astronomical Journal] 10.1086/341167 , 124, 1

    2002 doi

  42. [50]

    A., Naylor T., 1998, @doi [The Astronomical Journal] 10.1086/300192 , 115, 286

    Ringwald F. A., Naylor T., 1998, @doi [The Astronomical Journal] 10.1086/300192 , 115, 286

    1998 doi

  43. [51]

    Ritter H., Kolb U., 2003, @doi [Astronomy & Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361:20030330 , 404, 301

    2003 doi

  44. [52]

    Scepi N., Lesur G., Dubus G., Flock M., 2018, @doi [Astronomy and Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/201833921 , 620, A49

    2018 doi

  45. [53]

    C., et al., 2022, @doi [Nature] 10.1038/s41586-021-04324-2 , 603, 52

    Segura N. C., et al., 2022, @doi [Nature] 10.1038/s41586-021-04324-2 , 603, 52

    2022 doi

  46. [54]

    R., Patterson J., Thorstensen J

    Skillman D. R., Patterson J., Thorstensen J. R., 1995, @doi [Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific] 10.1086/133590 , 107, 545

    1995 doi

  47. [55]

    Smak J., 1981, Acta Astronomica, 31, 395

    1981

  48. [56]

    S., Matthews J

    Tampo Y., Knigge C., Long K. S., Matthews J. H., Segura N. C., 2024, A disc wind origin for the optical spectra of dwarf novae in outburst, @doi 10.48550/arXiv.2406.14396 , http://arxiv.org/abs/2406.14396

    2024 doi arXiv

  49. [57]

    M., Kaastra J., Zoghbi A., Kallman A

    Trueba N., Miller J. M., Kaastra J., Zoghbi A., Kallman A. C. F. T., Proga D., Raymond J., 2019, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab4f70 , 886, 104

    2019 doi

  50. [58]

    Virtanen P., et al., 2020, @doi [Nature Methods] 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2 , 17, 261

    2020 doi

  51. [59]

    Vitello P., Shlosman I., 1993, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/172799 , 410, 815

    1993 doi

  52. [60]

    J., Morris S

    Weymann R. J., Morris S. L., Foltz C. B., Hewett P. C., 1991, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/170020 , 373, 23

    1991 doi

  53. [61]

    Zhao X., Wang S., Liu J., 2025, Searching for accreting compact binary systems from spectroscopy and photometry: Application to LAMOST spectra, @doi 10.48550/arXiv.2503.12410 , http://arxiv.org/abs/2503.12410

    2025 doi arXiv

  54. [62]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.stat...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.