pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.12705 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-14 · 🌌 astro-ph.SR · astro-ph.HE

Recognition: unknown

Self-Lensing Signals in Binary Systems Containing White Dwarfs with Neutron star or Stellar-mass Black hole Companions

Sedighe Sajadian , Man Ho Chan
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 14:28 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.HE
keywords self-lensingwhite dwarfsneutron starsblack holesbinary systemsTESSdetectabilitylight curves
0
0 comments X

The pith

White dwarf binaries with neutron star or black hole companions produce self-lensing signals with probabilities of 10^{-3} to 10^{-2} that TESS could detect under stated assumptions.

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

The paper calculates the probabilities of self-lensing signals in white dwarf plus neutron star and white dwarf plus black hole binaries as roughly 0.001 and 0.01 respectively, with the highest rates occurring for low-mass white dwarfs orbiting the most massive companions. It then models the resulting light curves, incorporates finite-source effects, and applies the actual observing windows, cadences, and noise properties of the TESS and Roman telescopes to determine detection efficiencies. A reader would care because these signals offer a purely photometric route to identifying otherwise elusive stellar-mass black holes and neutron stars paired with white dwarfs.

Core claim

Analytical calculations show the probabilities of self-lensing signals in WD+NS and WD+BH systems are ∼10^{-3} and ∼10^{-2}, maximized for low-mass white dwarfs revolving around massive neutron stars or black holes. Simulations of light curves under TESS and Roman observing protocols demonstrate that detectable events satisfy 1 ≤ orbital period ≤ observation window, SNR thresholds of 3 or 6, depth greater than twice the photometric error, and coverage by at least one datum. Such systems exhibit inclinations ≲0.2°, periods near 6–19 days, and event durations of 6–30 minutes, yielding detection efficiencies of ∼2–6×10^{-4} for TESS and ∼2–12×10^{-10} for Roman. TESS could therefore register at

What carries the argument

Finite-source self-lensing in edge-on WD+NS and WD+BH binaries, quantified via the normalized source radius ρ_star and used to generate occurrence probabilities together with synthetic light curves matched to telescope cadences.

If this is right

  • WD+NS systems with periods ≲25 days show large finite-source sizes with ρ_star ≳1.
  • WD+BH systems with periods ≳3 days exhibit small source sizes, reaching ρ_star ∼0.01 for black holes of several tens of solar masses.
  • Detectable signals require orbital inclinations ≲0.2° and last 6–30 minutes.
  • TESS detection efficiency lies between 2×10^{-4} and 6×10^{-4} while Roman efficiency is orders of magnitude lower.
  • At least one event is expected in TESS data if the companion fractions reach the stated 8% and 3% levels.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • A confirmed detection would provide an independent photometric confirmation of compact-object companions to white dwarfs that does not require X-ray emission or radial-velocity monitoring.
  • The observed rate of such events could be compared with binary population synthesis models to test the assumed fractions of white dwarfs paired with neutron stars or black holes.
  • Similar calculations applied to ground-based surveys with different cadences might identify longer-period systems missed by space-based continuous monitoring.

Load-bearing premise

The conclusion that TESS might detect at least one signal rests on the external premise that 8% of white dwarfs have neutron-star companions and 3% have black-hole companions.

What would settle it

A search of TESS light curves for thousands of white dwarfs that returns zero events matching the predicted short-duration, high-inclination self-lensing signatures would falsify the expected detection rate under the assumed companion fractions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.12705 by Man Ho Chan, Sedighe Sajadian.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Maps of RE (left panels), ρ⋆ (middle panels), and A the magnification factor for binary systems WD+NS (top row) and WD+BH (bottom row) over the 2D space made from MWD (vertical axes), and mass of NSs and BHs (horizontal axes). Here, we assume WDs are source stars, while NSs or BHs are the lens objects. Similar maps to these maps but for other values of orbital periods are also available in link1, link2, li… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Similar to the maps shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Left panel: the normalized distributions of WDs offered by Kilic et al. (2020) versus their absolute magnitudes in the TESS T-band (solid green histogram), and the Roman W149 filter (dashed blue histogram). Right panel: the corresponding distributions of detectable WDs with the apparent magnitude in the TESS T-band ≤ 17.5 mag and in the Roman W149 ∈ [14.8, 26] mag. orbital period, the semi-major axis is a … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Six examples of simulated light curves due to WD+NS binary systems. The solid black, dotted red, and dashed lime curves represent the overall normalized flux by considering both self-lensing and eclipsing effects, i.e., Atot which is given by Eq. 6, the contributions of occultation and self-lensing effects in the overall flux, respectively. The adopted physical parameters (top row) and resulting lensing pa… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Same as light curves shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: In each map, black dots represent simulated light curves due to WD+NS binary systems over the specified 2D space, and magenta stars display events with detectable sig￾nals in the TESS observations. In right and top sides of each panel, the marginal 1D normalized distributions related to the specified parameters over vertical and horizontal axes due to all simulated (and detectable) events are displayed wit… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Light curves from binary systems containing white dwarfs with neutron star or stellar-mass black hole companions (WD+NS and WD+BH) with edge-on orbital planes potentially show self-lensing/eclipsing signals. Here, we evaluate the properties and detectability of these signals in the NASA's Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS), and the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope (Roman) observations. WD+NS systems with orbital periods $T\lesssim25~$days mostly have considerable finite-source sizes with the normalized source radii $\rho_{\star}\gtrsim1$. WD+BH systems with $T\gtrsim3$ days have $\rho_{\star}\lesssim1$, and $\rho_{\star}\sim0.01$ for BHs with a few tens solar-mass. Our analytical calculations show the probabilities of occurring self-lensing signals in WD+NS and WD+BH systems are $\sim10^{-3},~10^{-2}$, and maximize for systems with low-mass WDs revolving massive NSs/BHs. We simulate their light curves and generate synthetic data for them by applying the observing protocols of these two satellites. We assume self-lensing signals are detectable if (i) $1\leq T\leq T_{\rm{obs}}$ (where $T_{\rm{obs}}=62~\rm{and}~27.4$ days are the Roman and TESS continuous observing windows), (ii) $\rm{SNR}\ge3,~6$, their signals are (iii) deeper than twice the photometric error, and (iv) covered by at least one datum. Systems with detectable self-lensing signals in the TESS and Roman observations on average have small inclination angles $i\lesssim0.2^{\circ}$, with the orbital periods $\sim6,~19~$days, and their signals last $\sim[6,~30]~\rm{minutes}$. The TESS and Roman efficiencies for detecting these signals are $\sim2-6\times10^{-4}$ and $\sim2-12\times10^{-10}$. Although detecting these self-lensing signals by Roman is impossible, the TESS telescope potentially manifests at least one self-lensing signal due to these binary systems, if $8\%,~\rm{and}~3\%$ of WDs have NS and BH companions.

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.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript analytically derives the occurrence probabilities of self-lensing signals in WD+NS (~10^{-3}) and WD+BH (~10^{-2}) binaries, showing maximization for low-mass WDs with massive companions, and computes normalized source radii indicating finite-source effects for short-period WD+NS systems. It simulates light curves under TESS (T_obs=27.4 days) and Roman (T_obs=62 days) protocols, applies detectability cuts (1 ≤ T ≤ T_obs, SNR ≥ 3 or 6, depth > 2×photometric error, coverage by ≥1 datum), and reports average detectable systems with i ≲ 0.2°, periods ~6-19 days, and durations 6-30 minutes. Detection efficiencies are ~2-6×10^{-4} (TESS) and ~2-12×10^{-10} (Roman), leading to the conclusion that Roman detection is impossible while TESS could detect at least one signal if 8% of WDs have NS companions and 3% have BH companions.

Significance. If the derivations hold, the work supplies useful analytical expressions for self-lensing probabilities and ρ_★ in compact-object binaries, together with simulated light curves that quantify the stringent requirements (small inclinations, specific periods) for detection. The forward calculation from standard binary assumptions to efficiencies under realistic satellite protocols, without circularity in the central quantities, provides a concrete basis for assessing the rarity of these events and prioritizing follow-up strategies in white-dwarf population studies.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract and final results paragraph: the claim that TESS 'potentially manifests at least one' self-lensing signal is reached only after multiplying the derived p_selflens (~10^{-3}, 10^{-2}) and eff_detect (~2-6×10^{-4}) by externally assumed fractions f_NS=0.08 and f_BH=0.03. No population-synthesis derivation, citation, or sensitivity analysis for these fractions appears; the expected count N_WD × f_comp × p × eff therefore scales directly with them, and the headline statement is not robust if the true fractions differ by even a factor of a few.
  2. [Results on detectability] Simulation and detectability section: while the criteria (SNR thresholds, depth >2×error, coverage) are stated, the manuscript does not provide the exact mass-period distributions used to generate the synthetic population, the full error-propagation procedure, or the numerical values of photometric errors and sampling rates applied in the TESS/Roman mocks. This prevents independent verification of the reported efficiencies 2-6×10^{-4} and 2-12×10^{-10}.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Notation for orbital period is introduced as T but later appears as T_obs; a single consistent symbol or explicit definition would improve clarity.
  2. [Detectable systems paragraph] The range of signal durations [6,30] minutes is given without specifying whether it is the 16-84 percentile or full range of the detectable subsample; adding this detail would aid interpretation.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading and constructive comments, which have helped us improve the clarity and robustness of the manuscript. We address each major comment point by point below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and final results paragraph: the claim that TESS 'potentially manifests at least one' self-lensing signal is reached only after multiplying the derived p_selflens (~10^{-3}, 10^{-2}) and eff_detect (~2-6×10^{-4}) by externally assumed fractions f_NS=0.08 and f_BH=0.03. No population-synthesis derivation, citation, or sensitivity analysis for these fractions appears; the expected count N_WD × f_comp × p × eff therefore scales directly with them, and the headline statement is not robust if the true fractions differ by even a factor of a few.

    Authors: We agree that the detection statement in the abstract is conditional on the adopted companion fractions and that the manuscript would benefit from greater transparency on this point. These fractions are drawn from observational estimates in the white-dwarf binary population literature rather than derived via new population synthesis within the present work. In the revised version we have (i) rephrased the abstract to make the conditional nature explicit, (ii) added a short sensitivity discussion in the final section showing how the expected TESS yield scales when f_NS and f_BH are varied by factors of 2–3, and (iii) inserted the relevant citations that motivated the original 8 % and 3 % values. These changes preserve the original numerical results while rendering the headline claim more robust. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Results on detectability] Simulation and detectability section: while the criteria (SNR thresholds, depth >2×error, coverage) are stated, the manuscript does not provide the exact mass-period distributions used to generate the synthetic population, the full error-propagation procedure, or the numerical values of photometric errors and sampling rates applied in the TESS/Roman mocks. This prevents independent verification of the reported efficiencies 2-6×10^{-4} and 2-12×10^{-10}.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the simulation section lacked sufficient detail for full reproducibility. In the revised manuscript we have expanded the relevant section and added an appendix that now specifies: (1) the exact mass–period distributions adopted for the synthetic WD+NS and WD+BH populations (drawn from standard binary-evolution prescriptions with explicit parameter ranges), (2) the complete error-propagation formulae, including how photometric uncertainties are computed from the published TESS and Roman noise models, and (3) the numerical values of photometric errors and sampling cadences used in the mock light-curve generation. With these additions the quoted detection efficiencies can be independently verified. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; probabilities and efficiencies derived independently from external assumptions

full rationale

The paper performs analytical calculations for self-lensing occurrence probabilities (~10^{-3} for WD+NS, ~10^{-2} for WD+BH) based on orbital parameters, finite-source sizes, and inclination distributions. It then simulates light curves and applies external TESS/Roman observing protocols (SNR thresholds, photometric error criteria, coverage) to obtain detection efficiencies (~2-6e-4 for TESS). The final conditional statement multiplies by assumed companion fractions (8% NS, 3% BH) but does not derive or fit those fractions inside the work, nor does any central quantity reduce by the paper's equations to a self-defined input. No self-citations, ansatzes, or uniqueness theorems are invoked as load-bearing steps. The derivation chain is self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper relies on two explicit free parameters (companion fractions) and standard domain assumptions about orbital orientations and binary demographics; no new entities are postulated.

free parameters (2)
  • Fraction of WDs with NS companions = 0.08
    Stated as 8% to conclude TESS might detect at least one signal
  • Fraction of WDs with BH companions = 0.03
    Stated as 3% to conclude TESS might detect at least one signal
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Orbital inclinations are isotropically distributed
    Required to compute the probability of sufficiently edge-on systems
  • domain assumption Standard mass and period distributions for WD+NS/BH binaries
    Used when averaging probabilities and detectability over the population

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5741 in / 1644 out tokens · 28797 ms · 2026-05-10T14:28:24.318554+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

72 extracted references · 70 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T

    Abbott, B. P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., et al. 2016, PhRvL, 116, 061102, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.061102

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.116.061102 2016

  2. [2]

    2017, PhRvL, 119, 161101, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.161101

    Abbott, B. P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., et al. 2017, Phys. Rev. Lett., 119, 161101, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.161101

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.119.161101 2017

  3. [3]

    2015, Classical and Quantum Gravity, 32, 024001, doi: 10.1088/0264-9381/32/2/024001

    Acernese, F., Agathos, M., Agatsuma, K., et al. 2015, Classical and Quantum Gravity, 32, 024001, doi: 10.1088/0264-9381/32/2/024001 Adamane Pallathadka, G., Chandra, V., Zakamska, N. L., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.02906, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2509.02906

    work page doi:10.1088/0264-9381/32/2/024001 2015

  4. [4]

    2002, ApJ, 579, 430, doi: 10.1086/342880

    Agol, E. 2002, ApJ, 579, 430, doi: 10.1086/342880

    work page doi:10.1086/342880 2002

  5. [5]

    , archivePrefix = "arXiv", eprint =

    Alam, S., Albareti, F. D., Allende Prieto, C., et al. 2015, ApJS, 219, 12, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/219/1/12

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/219/1/12 2015

  6. [6]

    E., & Lupton, R

    Badenes, C., Mullally, F., Thompson, S. E., & Lupton, R. H. 2009, ApJ, 707, 971, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/707/2/971 Self-lensing in WD+NS and WD+BH binary systems15

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/707/2/971 2009

  7. [7]

    E., & Podsiadlowski, P

    Beer, M. E., & Podsiadlowski, P. 2002, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 279, Exotic Stars as Challenges to Evolution, ed. C. A. Tout & W. van Hamme, 253

    2002

  8. [8]

    A Comprehensive study of binary compact objects as gravitational wave sources: Evolutionary channels, rates, and physical properties

    Belczynski, K., Kalogera, V., & Bulik, T. 2002, ApJ, 572, 407, doi: 10.1086/340304

    work page doi:10.1086/340304 2002

  9. [9]

    2006, ApJ, 648, 1110, doi: 10.1086/505169

    Belczynski, K., Perna, R., Bulik, T., et al. 2006, ApJ, 648, 1110, doi: 10.1086/505169

    work page doi:10.1086/505169 2006

  10. [10]

    M., & Tuntsov, A

    Beskin, G. M., & Tuntsov, A. V. 2002, A&A, 394, 489, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20021150

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20021150 2002

  11. [11]

    2010, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 408, 1181, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17197.x

    Bozza, V. 2010, MNRAS, 408, 2188, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17265.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17265.x 2010

  12. [12]

    R., Kilic, M., Kosakowski, A., et al

    Brown, W. R., Kilic, M., Kosakowski, A., et al. 2020, ApJ, 889, 49, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab63cd

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab63cd 2020

  13. [13]

    Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society , keywords =

    Caldwell, D. A., Tenenbaum, P., Twicken, J. D., et al. 2020, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 4, 201, doi: 10.3847/2515-5172/abc9b3

    work page doi:10.3847/2515-5172/abc9b3 2020

  14. [14]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.21805, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2508.21805

    Chawla, C., Chatterjee, S., & Breivik, K. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.21805, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2508.21805

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2508.21805 2025

  15. [15]

    2004, A&A, 422, 665, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20047056

    Claret, A. 2004, A&A, 422, 665, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20047056

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20047056 2004

  16. [16]

    2020, A&A, 634, A93, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201937326

    Claret, A., Cukanovaite, E., Burdge, K., et al. 2020, A&A, 634, A93, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201937326

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201937326 2020

  17. [17]

    Davey, S., & Smith, R. C. 1992, MNRAS, 257, 476, doi: 10.1093/mnras/257.3.476

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/257.3.476 1992

  18. [18]

    1998, A&A, 329, 361, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9702039

    Dominik, M. 1998, A&A, 329, 361, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9702039

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/9702039 1998

  19. [19]

    1916, Sitzungsberichte der K¨ oniglich Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 688 —

    Einstein, A. 1916, Sitzungsberichte der K¨ oniglich Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 688 —. 1918, Sitzungsberichte der K¨ oniglich Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 154

    1916

  20. [20]

    J., Cˆ ot´ e, P., & McConnachie, A

    Fantin, N. J., Cˆ ot´ e, P., & McConnachie, A. W. 2020, ApJ, 900, 139, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aba270

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aba270 2020

  21. [21]

    2023, AJ, 166, 140, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aced8b

    Fatheddin, H., & Sajadian, S. 2023, AJ, 166, 140, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aced8b

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aced8b 2023

  22. [22]

    D., Quataert, E., et al

    Gottlieb, O., Metzger, B. D., Quataert, E., et al. 2023, ApJL, 958, L33, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad096e

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad096e 2023

  23. [23]

    1994, ApJL, 421, L71, doi: 10.1086/187190 —

    Gould, A. 1994, ApJL, 421, L71, doi: 10.1086/187190 —. 1995, ApJ, 446, 541, doi: 10.1086/175812

    work page doi:10.1086/187190 1994

  24. [24]

    2016, ApJ, 820, 53, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/820/1/53

    Han, C. 2016, ApJ, 820, 53, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/820/1/53

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/820/1/53 2016

  25. [25]

    M., et al., 2016, in Chiozzi G., Guzman J

    Jenkins, J. M., Twicken, J. D., McCauliff, S., et al. 2016, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 9913, Software and Cyberinfrastructure for Astronomy IV, ed. G. Chiozzi & J. C. Guzman, 99133E, doi: 10.1117/12.2233418

    work page doi:10.1117/12.2233418 2016

  26. [26]

    A., Penny, M., Gaudi, B

    Johnson, S. A., Penny, M., Gaudi, B. S., et al. 2020, AJ, 160, 123, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aba75b

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aba75b 2020

  27. [27]

    2018, AJ, 155, 144, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aaaaaf

    Kawahara, H., Masuda, K., MacLeod, M., et al. 2018, AJ, 155, 144, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aaaaaf

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aaaaaf 2018

  28. [28]

    2020, ApJ, 898, 84, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab9b8d

    Kilic, M., Bergeron, P., Kosakowski, A., et al. 2020, ApJ, 898, 84, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab9b8d

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab9b8d 2020

  29. [29]

    P., Toonen, S., et al

    Korol, V., Igoshev, A. P., Toonen, S., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 530, 844, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae889

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae889 2024

  30. [30]

    M., Groot, P

    Korol, V., Rossi, E. M., Groot, P. J., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 470, 1894, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1285

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1285 2017

  31. [31]

    2014, Science, 344, 275, doi: 10.1126/science.1251999

    Kruse, E., & Agol, E. 2014, Science, 344, 275, doi: 10.1126/science.1251999

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1251999 2014

  32. [32]

    M., Rowe, J

    Kunimoto, M., Matthews, J. M., Rowe, J. F., & Hoffman, K. 2018, AJ, 155, 43, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aaa005

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aaa005 2018

  33. [33]

    M., Lattanzi, M

    Lasker, B. M., Lattanzi, M. G., McLean, B. J., et al. 2008, AJ, 136, 735, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/136/2/735

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/136/2/735 2008

  34. [34]

    Lattimer, J. M. 2019, Universe, 5, 159, doi: 10.3390/universe5070159 LIGO Scientific Collaboration, Aasi, J., Abbott, B. P., et al. 2015, Classical and Quantum Gravity, 32, 074001, doi: 10.1088/0264-9381/32/7/074001

    work page doi:10.3390/universe5070159 2019

  35. [35]

    Loeb, A., & Gaudi, B. S. 2003, ApJL, 588, L117, doi: 10.1086/375551

    work page doi:10.1086/375551 2003

  36. [36]

    Marsh, T. R. 2001, MNRAS, 324, 547, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04293.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04293.x 2001

  37. [37]

    The Astrophysical Journal Letters , author =

    Masuda, K., Kawahara, H., Latham, D. W., et al. 2019, ApJL, 881, L3, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab321b

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab321b 2019

  38. [38]

    2008, in EAS Publications Series, Vol

    Mazeh, T. 2008, in EAS Publications Series, Vol. 29, EAS Publications Series, ed. M. J. Goupil & J. P. Zahn, 1–65, doi: 10.1051/eas:0829001

    work page doi:10.1051/eas:0829001 2008

  39. [39]

    L., & Naftilan, S

    Morris, S. L., & Naftilan, S. A. 1993, ApJ, 419, 344, doi: 10.1086/173488 ¨Opik, E. 1924, Publications of the Tartu Astrofizica Observatory, 25, 1 ¨Ozel, F., Psaltis, D., Narayan, R., & Santos Villarreal, A. 2012, ApJ, 757, 55, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/757/1/55

    work page doi:10.1086/173488 1993

  40. [40]

    , archivePrefix = "arXiv", eprint =

    Pakmor, R., Kromer, M., R¨ opke, F. K., et al. 2010, Nature, 463, 61, doi: 10.1038/nature08642

    work page doi:10.1038/nature08642 2010

  41. [41]

    G., G¨ ansicke, B

    Parsons, S. G., G¨ ansicke, B. T., Marsh, T. R., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 470, 4473, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1522

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1522 2017

  42. [42]

    T., Gaudi, B

    Penny, M. T., Gaudi, B. S., Kerins, E., et al. 2019, ApJS, 241, 3, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aafb69

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/aafb69 2019

  43. [43]

    2004, Reviews of Modern Physics, 76, 1143, doi: 10.1103/RevModPhys.76.1143

    Piran, T. 2004, Reviews of Modern Physics, 76, 1143, doi: 10.1103/RevModPhys.76.1143

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.76.1143 2004

  44. [44]

    R., Winn, J

    Ricker, G. R., Winn, J. N., Vanderspek, R., et al. 2014, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 9143, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2014: Optical, Infrared, and Millimeter Wave, ed. J. M. Oschmann, Jr., M. Clampin, G. G. Fazio, & H. A. MacEwen, 914320, doi: 10.1117/12.2063489 16Sajadian, et. al

    work page doi:10.1117/12.2063489 2014

  45. [45]

    R., Winn, J

    Ricker, G. R., Winn, J. N., Vanderspek, R., et al. 2015, Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems, 1, 014003, doi: 10.1117/1.JATIS.1.1.014003

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1117/1.jatis.1.1.014003 2015

  46. [46]

    C., Marshall, D

    Robin, A. C., Marshall, D. J., Schultheis, M., & Reyl´ e, C. 2012, A&A, 538, A106, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201116512

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201116512 2012

  47. [47]

    Astronomy & Astrophysics , author =

    Robin, A. C., Reyl´ e, C., Derri` ere, S., & Picaud, S. 2004, A&A, 416, 157, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20040968

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20040968 2004

  48. [48]

    , keywords =

    Romani, R. W., Kandel, D., Filippenko, A. V., Brink, T. G., & Zheng, W. 2022, ApJL, 934, L17, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac8007

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac8007 2022

  49. [49]

    2021, MNRAS, 506, 3615, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1907 —

    Sajadian, S. 2021, MNRAS, 506, 3615, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1907 —. 2025a, AJ, 169, 164, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/adab74 —. 2025b, MNRAS, 544, 1981, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf1858

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1907 2021

  50. [50]

    Sajadian, S. 2026, Software developed for the manuscript ”Self- Lensing Signals in Binary Systems Containing White Dwarfs with Neutron star or Stellar-mass Black hole Companions””, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.19508510

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.19508510 2026

  51. [51]

    2024, AJ, 168, 298, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad7fdd

    Sajadian, S., & Afshordi, N. 2024, AJ, 168, 298, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad7fdd

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad7fdd 2024

  52. [52]

    2025, AJ, 170, 163, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/adf0f6

    Sajadian, S., & Asadi, A. 2025, AJ, 170, 163, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/adf0f6

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/adf0f6 2025

  53. [53]

    2025, AJ, 169, 3, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad81d1

    Sajadian, S., & Fatheddin, H. 2025, AJ, 169, 3, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad81d1

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad81d1 2025

  54. [54]

    2017, ApJ, 838, 157, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa67e1

    Sajadian, S., & Hundertmark, M. 2017, ApJ, 838, 157, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa67e1

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa67e1 2017

  55. [55]

    2025, AJ, 169, 34, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad88fb

    Sajadian, S., Kalantari, A., Fatheddin, H., & Khakpash, S. 2025, AJ, 169, 34, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad88fb

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad88fb 2025

  56. [56]

    2019, ApJ, 871, 205, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aafa1d

    Sajadian, S., & Poleski, R. 2019, ApJ, 871, 205, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aafa1d

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aafa1d 2019

  57. [57]

    Sajadian, S., & Sahu, K. C. 2023, AJ, 165, 96, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/acb20f

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/acb20f 2023

  58. [58]

    2023, MNRAS, 520, 5613, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad484

    Sajadian, S., & Sangtarash, P. 2023, MNRAS, 520, 5613, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad484

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad484 2023

  59. [59]

    Schneider, P., Ehlers, J., & Falco, E. E. 1992, Gravitational Lenses, doi: 10.1007/978-3-662-03758-4

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-662-03758-4 1992

  60. [60]

    M., Laycock, S

    Sorabella, N. M., Laycock, S. G. T., Christodoulou, D. M., & Bhattacharya, S. 2024, ApJL, 961, L45, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad19dc

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad19dc 2024

  61. [61]

    2013, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1305.5425, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1305.5425

    Spergel, D., Gehrels, N., Breckinridge, J., et al. 2013, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1305.5425, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1305.5425

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.1305.5425 2013

  62. [62]

    , keywords =

    Stassun, K. G., Oelkers, R. J., Pepper, J., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 102, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aad050

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aad050 2018

  63. [63]

    2018, MNRAS, 481, 3305, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2460

    Takahashi, K. 2018, MNRAS, 481, 3305, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2460

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2460 2018

  64. [64]

    E., Rubbo, L

    Timpano, S. E., Rubbo, L. J., & Cornish, N. J. 2006, PhRvD, 73, 122001, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.73.122001

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.73.122001 2006

  65. [65]

    T., & Boekholt, T

    Toonen, S., Hollands, M., G¨ ansicke, B. T., & Boekholt, T. 2017, A&A, 602, A16, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629978

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629978 2017

  66. [66]

    2012, A&A, 546, A70, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201218966

    Toonen, S., Nelemans, G., & Portegies Zwart, S. 2012, A&A, 546, A70, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201218966

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201218966 2012

  67. [67]

    , keywords =

    Troja, E., Fryer, C. L., O’Connor, B., et al. 2022, Nature, 612, 228, doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-05327-3

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-022-05327-3 2022

  68. [68]

    2025, ApJ, 979, 73, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad98ec

    Wang, C.-W., Tan, W.-J., Xiong, S.-L., et al. 2025, ApJ, 979, 73, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad98ec

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad98ec 2025

  69. [69]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.02751, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2510.02751

    Wiktorowicz, G., Middleton, M., Giersz, M., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.02751, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2510.02751

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.02751 2025

  70. [70]

    2021, MNRAS, 507, 374, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab2135

    Wiktorowicz, G., Middleton, M., Khan, N., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 507, 374, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab2135

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2135 2021

  71. [71]

    , keywords =

    Witt, H. J., & Mao, S. 1994, ApJ, 430, 505, doi: 10.1086/174426

    work page doi:10.1086/174426 1994

  72. [72]

    doi:10.1017/9781139226530

    Zhang, B. 2018, The Physics of Gamma-Ray Bursts, doi: 10.1017/9781139226530

    work page doi:10.1017/9781139226530 2018