The dwarf nova EX Draconis: a short review

Raymundo Baptista; Wagner Schlindwein

arxiv: 2604.02683 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-03 · 🌌 astro-ph.SR

The dwarf nova EX Draconis: a short review

Raymundo Baptista , Wagner Schlindwein This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-13 19:03 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.SR

keywords dwarf novaEX Draconisaccretion diskoutburst mechanismeclipse mappingdisk instabilitymass transfer outburst

0 comments

The pith

Eclipse mapping of EX Draconis shows its outbursts match mass transfer spikes rather than disk instabilities.

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

The paper examines the long-period dwarf nova EX Draconis using its deep eclipses to track changes in accretion disk brightness and radius over the outburst cycle. It applies four critical tests to distinguish between the thermal-viscous disk instability model and the mass transfer outburst model. The observations contradict the disk instability predictions on disk size and brightness evolution while aligning with expectations for brief, large increases in mass transfer from the companion star. The data are reproduced by a high-viscosity disk with alpha values of 3-4 responding to mass transfer rate jumps of about 30 times for roughly 7 days. This challenges the standard assumption that accretion disk viscosity must remain below 1 and suggests mass transfer variations can power dwarf nova outbursts.

Core claim

The results of four critical tests are in clear contradiction with the disk instability model while in good agreement with mass transfer outburst expectations. The observed variations in brightness and outer disk radius throughout EX Dra outbursts are well described by the response of a high-viscosity accretion disk to events in which the mass transfer rate increases by factors of about 30 for about 7 days.

What carries the argument

Eclipse mapping technique that recovers the surface brightness distribution and outer radius of the accretion disk at different phases of the outburst cycle.

If this is right

The disk instability model fails to account for the lack of expected radius shrinkage during outburst decline in EX Dra.
Mass transfer outburst events with high disk viscosity explain both the 7-day duration and 20-30 day recurrence of EX Dra outbursts.
The traditional limit of alpha less than or equal to 1 for accretion disks is inconsistent with outburst decline timescales under mass transfer outburst driving.
Similar eclipse tests on other long-period dwarf novae should distinguish between the two models.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

If mass transfer outbursts prove common, models of dwarf nova recurrence times must incorporate companion star activity rather than relying solely on disk thermal states.
High viscosity values may require revisions to accretion disk simulations used for cataclysmic variables in general.
The same mass transfer spike mechanism could link dwarf nova behavior to other variable accretion systems where companion-driven changes dominate.

Load-bearing premise

The eclipse mapping technique accurately recovers the surface brightness distribution and outer radius of the accretion disk without significant systematic biases from assumptions about disk geometry or temperature structure.

What would settle it

A direct measurement showing no corresponding increase in mass transfer rate from the secondary star during an EX Dra outburst would falsify the mass transfer outburst explanation for the observed disk changes.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.02683 by Raymundo Baptista, Wagner Schlindwein.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: Time-lapse eclipse mapping of the dwarf nova EX Dra along its outburst cycle. Left-hand panels: Data (green dots) and model (solid line) light curves in (a) quiescent, (b) early rise, (c) late rise, (d) outburst maximum, (e) early decline, and (f) late decline stages. Vertical dotted lines mark ingress/egress phases of disk center. Middle panels: eclipse maps in a logarithmic grayscale; dark regions are br… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Top: Comparison of the vertical scaleheights of the disk and gas stream for EX Dra. Radial runs of the disk scaleheight are shown for DI (blue) and MTO (red, solid line for 𝛼 = 4 and dashed line for 𝛼 = 3) disk models. The vertical scaleheight of the gas stream is shown for 𝑇2 = 3800 ± 200 K; dashed lines depict the corresponding 1-𝜎 limits. A vertical dotted line marks the outer disk radius at early rise,… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Top: Average 𝑉- (blue points) and 𝑅-band (red points) EX Dra outburst light curves with respect to the time since outburst onset, together with corresponding best-fit MTO model light curves for gray atmosphere local emission. The input parameters for this model are listed together with the 𝜒 2 value of the fit. Bottom: Changes in disk radius as a function of time from outburst onset. The disk radius measu… view at source ↗

read the original abstract

EX Draconis (EX Dra) is a long period dwarf nova showing ~2 mag outburst which lasts for ~7 d and recur on a timescale of (20-30) d. Its deep eclipses allows one to trace the changes in surface brightness and radius of its accretion disk along the outburst cycle and to perform critical tests of the predictions of the thermal-viscous disk instability (DI) and the mass transfer outburst (MTO) models proposed to explain dwarf nova outbursts. The results of four critical tests are in clear contradiction with DI while in good agreement with MTO expectations. Furthermore, the observed variations in brightness and outer disk radius throughout EX Dra outbursts are well described by the response of a high-viscosity (alpha = 3-4) accretion disk to events in which the mass transfer rate increases by factors of ~30 for ~7 d, in line with MTO expectations. We further argue that the old expectation of accretion disk theory, alpha <= 1, seems unjustified and contradicts the values derived from dwarf nova outburst decline timescales if they are driven by MTO.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

EX Dra eclipse data favor MTO over DI but details on the four tests are thin and mapping biases could matter.

read the letter

The main thing to know about this paper is that it reviews eclipse observations of the long-period dwarf nova EX Draconis and uses them to argue that the mass transfer outburst model fits the data better than the disk instability model. The four tests show contradictions with DI predictions but good agreement with MTO, including a high-viscosity disk and a large temporary increase in mass transfer rate. The paper does a good job of highlighting how the changes in disk brightness and outer radius during the ~7 day outbursts match what a high alpha disk would do if mass transfer spiked by a factor of 30. It also challenges the standard alpha <=1 assumption by pointing to the decline timescales under MTO. Where it is softer is in the presentation of the evidence. Without the specific quantitative results or how the tests were performed in detail, it's difficult to assess if the contradictions are as clear as stated. The eclipse mapping technique itself relies on assumptions about the disk being flat and axisymmetric with a particular temperature profile, and unaccounted biases there could affect the recovered parameters enough to impact the model comparison. Since the work is a re-interpretation of prior data rather than new observations, the conclusions rest heavily on those assumptions holding. This is the kind of paper that would interest people studying accretion disks in cataclysmic variables, especially those looking at binary evolution and outburst mechanisms. A reader familiar with the field would find it a useful summary for thinking about whether MTO applies more generally. I think it deserves peer review. The claims are testable and the topic is relevant, so referees can dig into the details of the tests and any systematics.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper reviews the long-period dwarf nova EX Draconis, whose ~2 mag, ~7 d outbursts recur every 20-30 d. Using eclipse mapping to track disk surface brightness and outer radius, it reports that four critical tests contradict the thermal-viscous disk instability (DI) model while agreeing with mass-transfer outburst (MTO) expectations. The observed radius and brightness variations are stated to match the response of a high-viscosity (α = 3–4) disk to a factor-of-~30 increase in mass-transfer rate lasting ~7 d; the paper further argues that the conventional α ≤ 1 limit is unjustified when outbursts are MTO-driven.

Significance. If the eclipse-mapping time series and the four tests are robust, the result would challenge the standard DI paradigm for dwarf novae and support MTO as the driver of at least some outbursts, with direct implications for the allowed range of disk viscosity. The work supplies concrete, falsifiable predictions (radius and brightness evolution under a prescribed mass-transfer spike) that could be tested with future observations or simulations.

major comments (2)

[Eclipse-mapping analysis and the four critical tests] The central claim rests on eclipse-mapping recovery of R_out(t) and disk brightness. The method assumes a flat, axisymmetric, optically thick disk with a prescribed T(r) law; the manuscript does not quantify how departures (warped rim, non-Keplerian velocities, or altered temperature gradient) propagate into the reported factor-of-two radius changes. If these systematics are comparable to the observed variations, the claimed clear contradiction with DI predictions is no longer secure.
[Abstract and model-comparison sections] The abstract asserts that four tests contradict DI and support MTO with α = 3–4 and a ~30× mass-transfer spike, yet the manuscript provides no explicit description of each test, the data-reduction steps, the model predictions being compared, or quantitative metrics (e.g., residuals or goodness-of-fit values). Without these, the strength of the support for MTO cannot be evaluated.

minor comments (1)

[Discussion of viscosity] The notation for the viscosity parameter (alpha = 3-4) should be clarified as to whether it is the standard Shakura-Sunyaev α or a different parameterization, and how it is derived from the decline timescale under the MTO assumption.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful and constructive review. The comments highlight important points about the robustness of the eclipse-mapping results and the clarity of the model comparisons. We address each major comment below and indicate the revisions we will make to the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Eclipse-mapping analysis and the four critical tests] The central claim rests on eclipse-mapping recovery of R_out(t) and disk brightness. The method assumes a flat, axisymmetric, optically thick disk with a prescribed T(r) law; the manuscript does not quantify how departures (warped rim, non-Keplerian velocities, or altered temperature gradient) propagate into the reported factor-of-two radius changes. If these systematics are comparable to the observed variations, the claimed clear contradiction with DI predictions is no longer secure.

Authors: We agree that a quantitative assessment of systematic uncertainties is essential for strengthening the central claims. The manuscript describes the standard eclipse-mapping assumptions (flat, axisymmetric, optically thick disk with T(r) ~ r^{-3/4}) in the methods section and notes that the derived R_out(t) variations are consistent across multiple outbursts. However, we did not provide explicit propagation of possible departures such as rim warps or non-Keplerian velocities. We will add a dedicated subsection (or appendix) that estimates the impact of these effects on the recovered outer radius, drawing on published simulations of eclipse mapping under perturbed geometries. This will include order-of-magnitude calculations showing that the observed factor-of-two radius changes exceed the expected systematic uncertainties under reasonable assumptions, thereby preserving the contradiction with DI predictions. revision: yes
Referee: [Abstract and model-comparison sections] The abstract asserts that four tests contradict DI and support MTO with α = 3–4 and a ~30× mass-transfer spike, yet the manuscript provides no explicit description of each test, the data-reduction steps, the model predictions being compared, or quantitative metrics (e.g., residuals or goodness-of-fit values). Without these, the strength of the support for MTO cannot be evaluated.

Authors: The four tests are presented in the main body (Sections 3–4), where we compare observed R_out(t) and brightness evolution against DI and MTO predictions, including the high-viscosity disk response to a ~30× mass-transfer increase. Data-reduction steps for the eclipse mapping are summarized with references to the original observations. We acknowledge, however, that the abstract is too terse and that the model-comparison section would benefit from greater explicitness. We will revise the abstract to list the four tests concisely and expand the relevant sections to include: (i) step-by-step data-reduction outline, (ii) explicit statements of the DI versus MTO model predictions being tested, and (iii) quantitative metrics (e.g., residuals between observed and modeled light curves or radius curves) where they can be computed from the existing data. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Minor self-citation in method but central observational tests remain independent

full rationale

The paper reports four critical tests comparing eclipse-mapped disk brightness and radius variations in EX Dra against DI and MTO model expectations. These comparisons rely on direct observational time series rather than any parameter being fitted to the target result and then relabeled as a prediction. The alpha=3-4 value is presented as a fit describing the data under MTO, but the claimed contradiction with DI follows from mismatch with DI's predicted behavior, not from redefinition. Any reference to the authors' prior eclipse-mapping work is a standard methodological citation and does not carry the load-bearing argument; the tests are externally falsifiable against the independent model predictions.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard accretion disk theory and prior eclipse mapping results without introducing new free parameters or entities in the abstract.

axioms (1)

domain assumption Standard assumptions of thermal-viscous accretion disk theory and eclipse mapping techniques in cataclysmic variables
Invoked to interpret observed brightness and radius changes as direct tests of DI versus MTO predictions.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5490 in / 1207 out tokens · 49796 ms · 2026-05-13T19:03:57.964500+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/RealityFromDistinction.lean reality_from_one_distinction unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

The results of four critical tests are in clear contradiction with DI while in good agreement with MTO expectations. ... high-viscosity (α = 3-4) accretion disk to events in which the mass transfer rate increases by factors of ~30 for ~7 d

What do these tags mean?

matches: The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports: The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends: The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses: The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts: The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear: Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

[1]

A., Hawley J

Balbus S. A., Hawley J. F., 1991, ApJ, 376, 214

work page 1991
[2]

Baptista R., 2012, Mem. Soc. Astr. It., 75, 282

work page 2012
[3]

and Space Science Library, eds

Baptista R., 2016, in Astronomy at High Angular Resolution, Astroph. and Space Science Library, eds. H.M.J. Boffin, G. Hussain, J.-P . Berger, L. Schmidtobreick (Springer: Switzer- land), p. 155

work page 2016
[4]

S., & Costa L., 2000, MNRAS, 316, 529

Baptista R., Catalán M. S., & Costa L., 2000, MNRAS, 316, 529

work page 2000
[5]

S., 2001, MNRAS, 324, 599

Baptista R., & Catalán M. S., 2001, MNRAS, 324, 599

work page 2001
[6]

Baptista R., Schlindwein W., 2022, AJ, 163, 108

work page 2022
[7]

T., 1975, MNRAS, 171, 311 10 EX Dra: a short review Raymundo Baptista

Bath G. T., 1975, MNRAS, 171, 311 10 EX Dra: a short review Raymundo Baptista

work page 1975
[8]

T., Edwards A

Bath G. T., Edwards A. C., & Mantle V . J., 1983, MNRAS, 205, 171

work page 1983
[9]

Bath G. T. & Pringle J. E., 1981, MNRAS, 194, 967

work page 1981
[10]

R., & Dhillon V

Billington I., Marsh T. R., & Dhillon V . S. 1996, MNRAS, 278, 673

work page 1996
[11]

V ., Boyarchuk A

Bisikalo D. V ., Boyarchuk A. A., Chechetkin V . M., Kuznetsov O.A. & Molteni D., 1998, MNRAS, 300, 39

work page 1998
[12]

V ., 2005, APS&S, 296, 391

Bisikalo D. V ., 2005, APS&S, 296, 391

work page 2005
[13]

Cannizzo J., 1993, in Accretion Disks in Compact Stellar Systems, ed. J. C. Wheeler (Singa- pore: World Sci. Publ. Co.), p. 6

work page 1993
[14]

Court J. M. C., Scaringi S., Littlefield C., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 494, 4656

work page 2020
[15]

Fiedler H., Barwig H., & Mantel K. H. 1997, A&A, 327, 173

work page 1997
[16]

edition, (Cam- bridge: Cambridge Univ

Frank J., King A., & Raine D., 2002, Accretion Power in Astrophysics - 3rd. edition, (Cam- bridge: Cambridge Univ. Press)

work page 2002
[17]

Gaia Collaboration, Prusti T., de Bruijne J. H. J. et al., 2016, A&A, 595, A1

work page 2016
[18]

Gaia Collaboration, Vallenari A., Brown A. G. A., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A1

work page 2023
[19]

Hameury, J. M. 2020, Advances in Space Research, 66, 1004

work page 2020
[20]

M., & Lasota J

Hameury J. M., & Lasota J. P ., 2014, A&A, 569, A48

work page 2014
[21]

P ., Húre J.-M., 1998, MNRAS, 298, 1048

Hameury J.-M., Menou K., Dubus G., Lasota J. P ., Húre J.-M., 1998, MNRAS, 298, 1048

work page 1998
[22]

Harrison T. E. 2016, ApJ, 833, 14

work page 2016
[23]

E., Osborne H

Harrison T. E., Osborne H. L., & Howell S. B. 2004, AJ, 127, 3493

work page 2004
[24]

F., Balbus S

Hawley J. F., Balbus S. A., 1991, ApJ, 376, 223

work page 1991
[25]

1985, MNRAS, 213, 129

Horne K. 1985, MNRAS, 213, 129

work page 1985
[26]

1992, PASJ, 44, 15

Ichikawa S., & Osaki Y . 1992, PASJ, 44, 15

work page 1992
[27]

King A., & Cannizzo J., 1998, ApJ, 499, 348

work page 1998
[28]

Knigge C., Baraffe I., & Patterson J., 2011, ApjS, 194, 28

work page 2011
[29]

P ., 2001, New Astronomy Review, 45, 449

Lasota J. P ., 2001, New Astronomy Review, 45, 449

work page 2001
[30]

Livio M., & Pringle J. E. 1994, ApJ, 427, 956

work page 1994
[31]

1988, MNRAS, 232, 1P

Livio M., & Verbunt F. 1988, MNRAS, 232, 1P

work page 1988
[32]

Makita M., Miyawaki K., & Matsuda T., 2000, MNRAS, 316, 906 11 EX Dra: a short review Raymundo Baptista

work page 2000
[33]

Mantle V . J. & Bath G. T., 1983, MNRAS, 202, 151

work page 1983
[34]

G., Nixon C

Martin R. G., Nixon C. J., Pringle J. E., Livio M., 2019, New Astron., 70,7

work page 2019
[35]

1999, MNRAS, 305, 79

Menou K., Hameury J.-M., & Stehle R. 1999, MNRAS, 305, 79

work page 1999
[36]

Osaki Y, 1974, PASJ, 26, 429

work page 1974
[37]

& Baptista R., 2024, ApJ, 975, 92

Schlindwein W. & Baptista R., 2024, ApJ, 975, 92

work page 2024
[38]

R., Hameury J.-M., & Lasota J.-P ., 2005, in Proc

Schreiber M. R., Hameury J.-M., & Lasota J.-P ., 2005, in Proc. ASP Conf. 330, The Astro- physics of Cataclysmic Variables and Related Objects, ed. J.-M. Hameury & J.-P . Lasota (San Francisco, CA: ASP)

work page 2005
[39]

W., & Holland J

Shafter A. W., & Holland J. N. 2003, PASP , 115, 1105

work page 2003
[40]

Shakura N. I. & Sunyaev R. A., 1973, A&A, 24, 337

work page 1973
[41]

Shakura N. I. & Sunyaev R. A., 1976, MNRAS, 175, 613

work page 1976
[42]

1984, Acta Astron., 34, 161

Smak J. 1984, Acta Astron., 34, 161

work page 1984
[43]

A., & Dhillon V

Smith D. A., & Dhillon V . S. 1998, MNRAS, 301, 767

work page 1998
[44]

Currently, the most promising explanation for the sudden changes in mass transfer rate required by MTO involves starspots moving in and out of the inner lagrangian point L1

Warner B., 2003, Cataclysmic Variable Stars, Cambridge Astrophysics Series 28, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) DISCUSSION ALLEN SHAFTER: What instability in the secondary star results in the modified mass transfer? RAYMUNDO BAPTISTA: The original idea of an instability in the atmosphere of the secondary star [7, 9] was abandoned a long time ago. C...

work page 2003

[1] [1]

A., Hawley J

Balbus S. A., Hawley J. F., 1991, ApJ, 376, 214

work page 1991

[2] [2]

Baptista R., 2012, Mem. Soc. Astr. It., 75, 282

work page 2012

[3] [3]

and Space Science Library, eds

Baptista R., 2016, in Astronomy at High Angular Resolution, Astroph. and Space Science Library, eds. H.M.J. Boffin, G. Hussain, J.-P . Berger, L. Schmidtobreick (Springer: Switzer- land), p. 155

work page 2016

[4] [4]

S., & Costa L., 2000, MNRAS, 316, 529

Baptista R., Catalán M. S., & Costa L., 2000, MNRAS, 316, 529

work page 2000

[5] [5]

S., 2001, MNRAS, 324, 599

Baptista R., & Catalán M. S., 2001, MNRAS, 324, 599

work page 2001

[6] [6]

Baptista R., Schlindwein W., 2022, AJ, 163, 108

work page 2022

[7] [7]

T., 1975, MNRAS, 171, 311 10 EX Dra: a short review Raymundo Baptista

Bath G. T., 1975, MNRAS, 171, 311 10 EX Dra: a short review Raymundo Baptista

work page 1975

[8] [8]

T., Edwards A

Bath G. T., Edwards A. C., & Mantle V . J., 1983, MNRAS, 205, 171

work page 1983

[9] [9]

Bath G. T. & Pringle J. E., 1981, MNRAS, 194, 967

work page 1981

[10] [10]

R., & Dhillon V

Billington I., Marsh T. R., & Dhillon V . S. 1996, MNRAS, 278, 673

work page 1996

[11] [11]

V ., Boyarchuk A

Bisikalo D. V ., Boyarchuk A. A., Chechetkin V . M., Kuznetsov O.A. & Molteni D., 1998, MNRAS, 300, 39

work page 1998

[12] [12]

V ., 2005, APS&S, 296, 391

Bisikalo D. V ., 2005, APS&S, 296, 391

work page 2005

[13] [13]

Cannizzo J., 1993, in Accretion Disks in Compact Stellar Systems, ed. J. C. Wheeler (Singa- pore: World Sci. Publ. Co.), p. 6

work page 1993

[14] [14]

Court J. M. C., Scaringi S., Littlefield C., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 494, 4656

work page 2020

[15] [15]

Fiedler H., Barwig H., & Mantel K. H. 1997, A&A, 327, 173

work page 1997

[16] [16]

edition, (Cam- bridge: Cambridge Univ

Frank J., King A., & Raine D., 2002, Accretion Power in Astrophysics - 3rd. edition, (Cam- bridge: Cambridge Univ. Press)

work page 2002

[17] [17]

Gaia Collaboration, Prusti T., de Bruijne J. H. J. et al., 2016, A&A, 595, A1

work page 2016

[18] [18]

Gaia Collaboration, Vallenari A., Brown A. G. A., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A1

work page 2023

[19] [19]

Hameury, J. M. 2020, Advances in Space Research, 66, 1004

work page 2020

[20] [20]

M., & Lasota J

Hameury J. M., & Lasota J. P ., 2014, A&A, 569, A48

work page 2014

[21] [21]

P ., Húre J.-M., 1998, MNRAS, 298, 1048

Hameury J.-M., Menou K., Dubus G., Lasota J. P ., Húre J.-M., 1998, MNRAS, 298, 1048

work page 1998

[22] [22]

Harrison T. E. 2016, ApJ, 833, 14

work page 2016

[23] [23]

E., Osborne H

Harrison T. E., Osborne H. L., & Howell S. B. 2004, AJ, 127, 3493

work page 2004

[24] [24]

F., Balbus S

Hawley J. F., Balbus S. A., 1991, ApJ, 376, 223

work page 1991

[25] [25]

1985, MNRAS, 213, 129

Horne K. 1985, MNRAS, 213, 129

work page 1985

[26] [26]

1992, PASJ, 44, 15

Ichikawa S., & Osaki Y . 1992, PASJ, 44, 15

work page 1992

[27] [27]

King A., & Cannizzo J., 1998, ApJ, 499, 348

work page 1998

[28] [28]

Knigge C., Baraffe I., & Patterson J., 2011, ApjS, 194, 28

work page 2011

[29] [29]

P ., 2001, New Astronomy Review, 45, 449

Lasota J. P ., 2001, New Astronomy Review, 45, 449

work page 2001

[30] [30]

Livio M., & Pringle J. E. 1994, ApJ, 427, 956

work page 1994

[31] [31]

1988, MNRAS, 232, 1P

Livio M., & Verbunt F. 1988, MNRAS, 232, 1P

work page 1988

[32] [32]

Makita M., Miyawaki K., & Matsuda T., 2000, MNRAS, 316, 906 11 EX Dra: a short review Raymundo Baptista

work page 2000

[33] [33]

Mantle V . J. & Bath G. T., 1983, MNRAS, 202, 151

work page 1983

[34] [34]

G., Nixon C

Martin R. G., Nixon C. J., Pringle J. E., Livio M., 2019, New Astron., 70,7

work page 2019

[35] [35]

1999, MNRAS, 305, 79

Menou K., Hameury J.-M., & Stehle R. 1999, MNRAS, 305, 79

work page 1999

[36] [36]

Osaki Y, 1974, PASJ, 26, 429

work page 1974

[37] [37]

& Baptista R., 2024, ApJ, 975, 92

Schlindwein W. & Baptista R., 2024, ApJ, 975, 92

work page 2024

[38] [38]

R., Hameury J.-M., & Lasota J.-P ., 2005, in Proc

Schreiber M. R., Hameury J.-M., & Lasota J.-P ., 2005, in Proc. ASP Conf. 330, The Astro- physics of Cataclysmic Variables and Related Objects, ed. J.-M. Hameury & J.-P . Lasota (San Francisco, CA: ASP)

work page 2005

[39] [39]

W., & Holland J

Shafter A. W., & Holland J. N. 2003, PASP , 115, 1105

work page 2003

[40] [40]

Shakura N. I. & Sunyaev R. A., 1973, A&A, 24, 337

work page 1973

[41] [41]

Shakura N. I. & Sunyaev R. A., 1976, MNRAS, 175, 613

work page 1976

[42] [42]

1984, Acta Astron., 34, 161

Smak J. 1984, Acta Astron., 34, 161

work page 1984

[43] [43]

A., & Dhillon V

Smith D. A., & Dhillon V . S. 1998, MNRAS, 301, 767

work page 1998

[44] [44]

Currently, the most promising explanation for the sudden changes in mass transfer rate required by MTO involves starspots moving in and out of the inner lagrangian point L1

Warner B., 2003, Cataclysmic Variable Stars, Cambridge Astrophysics Series 28, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) DISCUSSION ALLEN SHAFTER: What instability in the secondary star results in the modified mass transfer? RAYMUNDO BAPTISTA: The original idea of an instability in the atmosphere of the secondary star [7, 9] was abandoned a long time ago. C...

work page 2003