pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.15940 · v1 · pith:HHZDGVURnew · submitted 2026-05-15 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE

Bridging X-ray Polarization with Timing & Spectroscopic Parameters of a galactic black hole: Swift J1727.8-1613

Arka Chatterjee , Sujoy K. Nath , Kaushik Chatterjee , Samar Safi-Harb , Broja G. Dutta , Indranil Chattopadhyay , Sudip K. Garain , Hsiang-Kuang Chang This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-20 16:36 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE
keywords black hole binariesX-ray polarizationquasi-periodic oscillationstime lagshard stateSwift J1727.8-1613accretionIXPE
0
0 comments X

The pith

Correlated energy-dependent time lags and X-ray polarization in Swift J1727.8-1613 point to mechanisms beyond inverse Comptonization in black hole hard states.

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

The paper reports a significant correlation between energy-dependent time lags measured around type-C quasi-periodic oscillations and the degree of polarization in the black hole candidate Swift J1727.8-1613. Using IXPE observations for timing and polarimetry along with simultaneous HXMT spectral data, the authors find a Spearman coefficient of 0.8. They provide model-independent arguments showing that inverse Comptonization alone cannot account for both the observed lags and polarization. This discovery suggests additional physical processes connect the timing, spectral, and polarimetric behaviors in the hard state of black hole binaries.

Core claim

We report the discovery of a correlated energy-dependent time lag and degree of polarization for Swift J1727.8-1613 during its 2023 outburst. The energy-dependent time lag is measured around the type-C quasi-periodic oscillations observed by IXPE, while the degree of polarization is obtained from energy-resolved polarimetric measurements. The Spearman correlation coefficient was found to be 0.8, with a null hypothesis probability of 4.2%. The correlation value drops as the quality factor of the observed QPO frequencies decreases. Model-independent theoretical arguments show that processes other than inverse Comptonization also contribute to both the observed polarization and time lags. This

What carries the argument

The Spearman rank correlation between energy-resolved time lags at the QPO frequency and the polarization fraction, backed by arguments that exclude pure inverse Compton scattering as the sole contributor to both observables.

If this is right

  • The correlation implies shared physical origins for time lags and polarization in the accretion flow.
  • Additional mechanisms besides inverse Comptonization are required to explain the data in the hard state.
  • The strength of the correlation depends on the coherence of the QPO, as measured by its quality factor.
  • Similar connections may exist between spectral, timing, and polarimetric properties in other black hole systems.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the correlation holds in other sources, it could provide a new diagnostic for the geometry of the corona or jet base in black hole binaries.
  • High-cadence multi-wavelength campaigns during future outbursts could test whether this link persists across different accretion rates.
  • The result raises the possibility that time lags at QPO frequencies encode information about the polarized emission regions.

Load-bearing premise

The time lag and polarization measurements from IXPE around the QPO frequency are free from significant instrumental contamination or selection biases.

What would settle it

A new observation of the same or similar black hole binary during hard state showing no significant correlation between energy-dependent time lags and polarization degree, or the correlation vanishing after correcting for potential data biases.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.15940 by Arka Chatterjee, Broja G. Dutta, Hsiang-Kuang Chang, Indranil Chattopadhyay, Kaushik Chatterjee, Samar Safi-Harb, Sudip K. Garain, Sujoy K. Nath.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: MAXI/GSC count rate is plotted with the MJD. Colorbar represents the hardness ratio (4 − 20 keV/2 − 4 keV) of GSC. ⊙ symbols represent the IXPE observations with distinct QPO features over time. density spectra (PDSs), energy-dependent time lags, fractional r.m.s, and dynamic PDSs from the IXPE datasets. Later, we explored the spectral properties of the Swift J1727.8-1613 using Insight/HXMT. Finally, we di… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Left panel: Model fitted Power Density Spectra (PDS) in the 2−8 keV energy band for the three IXPE observations. The narrow Lorentzians corresponding to the QPO fundamental and harmonic peaks are shown in orange and green dotted lines, respectively. Middle panel: Confidence contours between PA and PD as obtained from the PCUBE algorithm in the 2−3, 3 − 4, 4 − 5, 5 − 6, 6 − 7, and 7 − 8 keV energy bands. Th… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Dynamic PDS of the three IXPE observations are presented [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Simultaneous spectral fit of IXPE Stokes I spectra in 2 − 8 keV (DU 1 in orange, DU 2 in purple, DU 3 in brown) and the three Insight/HXMT instruments (LE: 2–10 keV in red, ME: 10–35 keV in green, and HE: 35–150 keV in blue) with tbabs(diskbb+powerlaw+pexrav) model for the three epochs. model the spectra as the sum of a disk-blackbody and a power-law, modified by interstellar absorption. The photoelectric … view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Based on the equation 2, the parameter spaces of the thermodynamic variables contributing to the time lag are explored. The colorbar represents the positive lag magnitude. Panel (a) shows the time-lag map for optical depth τ and coronal radius (R) variation. Other parameters, such as Ehh = 100.0 keV, Ess = 1.0 keV, and Θ = 0.05 are considered. Panel (b) represents the lag parameter space of coronal radius … view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Polarization fraction is plotted as a function of time lag. The initially unpolarized photons are more likely to become depolarized with small time lags (fewer scatterings), whereas photons with structured polarization require many scatterings to become depolarized. The relationships could be useful to detect the de￾gree of X-ray polarization for previous and future non￾polarimetric X-ray missions. 5. CONC… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We report the discovery of a correlated energy-dependent time lag and degree of polarization for Swift J1727.8-1613 during its 2023 outburst. The energy-dependent time lag is measured around the type-C quasi-periodic oscillations (QPO) observed by IXPE on 2023-09-07, while the degree of polarization is obtained from energy-resolved polarimetric measurements. The Spearman correlation coefficient was found to be 0.8, with a null hypothesis probability of 4.2\%. Furthermore, the correlation value drops as the quality factor, or Q value, of the observed QPO frequencies decreases. The spectral properties of Swift J1727.8-1613 are analyzed using simultaneous Insight/HXMT data. Thereafter, we present model-independent theoretical arguments to show that processes other than inverse Comptonization also contributes to both the observed polarization and time lags. This correlation may therefore point to additional mechanisms contributing to the connection between the spectral, temporal, and polarimetric properties of black hole binaries in their hard state.

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 reports the discovery of a correlation between energy-dependent time lags measured around type-C QPOs and the degree of X-ray polarization in the galactic black hole Swift J1727.8-1613 during its 2023 outburst. Using IXPE data from the 2023-09-07 observation for timing and polarimetry, combined with simultaneous Insight/HXMT spectroscopy, the authors quantify a Spearman rank correlation coefficient of 0.8 (null probability 4.2%) that weakens as the QPO quality factor decreases. They present model-independent theoretical arguments suggesting that mechanisms beyond inverse Comptonization contribute to the observed polarization and lags, implying additional connections among spectral, temporal, and polarimetric properties in the hard state.

Significance. If the correlation is robust, the result would be significant for understanding accretion physics in black hole binaries, as it observationally links timing, spectroscopy, and polarimetry in a single source with multi-instrument data. The statistical approach and note on QPO quality factor dependence add value, and the model-independent framing avoids over-reliance on specific models. However, the overall impact hinges on validation against potential systematics in lag and polarization extraction.

major comments (2)
  1. [IXPE Data Analysis and Correlation Results] The central claim that the energy-dependent lag-polarization correlation indicates mechanisms beyond inverse Comptonization rests on the unbiased extraction of lags and polarization in each energy band. The manuscript does not report the number of energy bins, the exact frequency window around the QPO for lag computation, or explicit tests against alternative binning/event-selection choices (e.g., different QPO frequency ranges or polarization response corrections). This leaves open whether the Spearman coefficient of 0.8 could be driven by a small number of bins or instrumental trends.
  2. [Theoretical Interpretation] The model-independent theoretical arguments that processes other than inverse Comptonization contribute to both the polarization and time lags are presented qualitatively. A more detailed derivation showing how the observed energy dependence deviates from pure Comptonization predictions (e.g., via explicit comparison of expected lag and polarization signatures) is needed to make this interpretation load-bearing for the conclusion.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract would be clearer if it stated the number of energy bins and the precise QPO frequency range used for the lag measurements.
  2. [Figures] Figure captions for the lag and polarization spectra should explicitly note the energy bin boundaries and any applied corrections for instrumental effects.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive feedback. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript accordingly to enhance the transparency of our analysis and the rigor of our theoretical discussion.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [IXPE Data Analysis and Correlation Results] The central claim that the energy-dependent lag-polarization correlation indicates mechanisms beyond inverse Comptonization rests on the unbiased extraction of lags and polarization in each energy band. The manuscript does not report the number of energy bins, the exact frequency window around the QPO for lag computation, or explicit tests against alternative binning/event-selection choices (e.g., different QPO frequency ranges or polarization response corrections). This leaves open whether the Spearman coefficient of 0.8 could be driven by a small number of bins or instrumental trends.

    Authors: We fully agree that these methodological details are crucial for assessing the robustness of the reported correlation. In the revised version of the manuscript, we now explicitly state that the energy-dependent analysis was conducted with 9 energy bins in the 2-8 keV range. The lag computation used a frequency window of 0.05-0.6 Hz around the QPO centroid. We have added a new subsection detailing robustness tests, including variations in binning (7 to 12 bins) and frequency windows, as well as checks for polarization response matrix effects. In all cases, the Spearman rank correlation remains significant (coefficients 0.72-0.85, null probabilities <10%). We also confirm that no obvious instrumental trends correlate with the energy bins in a way that could artificially produce the observed trend. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Theoretical Interpretation] The model-independent theoretical arguments that processes other than inverse Comptonization contribute to both the polarization and time lags are presented qualitatively. A more detailed derivation showing how the observed energy dependence deviates from pure Comptonization predictions (e.g., via explicit comparison of expected lag and polarization signatures) is needed to make this interpretation load-bearing for the conclusion.

    Authors: We thank the referee for highlighting the need for a more quantitative theoretical discussion. Although our original approach was to remain model-independent, we have expanded the relevant section in the revision to include a brief derivation. We compare the expected behavior under pure Compton up-scattering, where time lags typically increase with energy due to multiple scatterings while polarization degree decreases due to averaging over angles. Our observed positive correlation between lag and polarization degree deviates from this prediction. We provide an order-of-magnitude estimate showing that an additional polarized component with energy-dependent contribution (e.g., from disk reflection) is necessary to reconcile the data, with the mismatch quantified through a simple linear model fit. This addition makes our interpretation more concrete while preserving the model-independent spirit. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Observational correlation from IXPE/HXMT data is self-contained with no reduction to fitted inputs or self-citations

full rationale

The paper reports direct measurements of energy-dependent time lags around type-C QPOs and energy-resolved polarization from the 2023-09-07 IXPE observation of Swift J1727.8-1613, combined with simultaneous HXMT spectroscopy. The central result is a Spearman rank correlation (0.8, p=4.2%) between these quantities, which weakens with QPO quality factor. This is computed from the data using standard statistical methods. The subsequent model-independent theoretical arguments are presented after the data analysis and do not rely on equations or parameters fitted within the paper itself. No step reduces a claimed prediction or first-principles result to its own inputs by construction, and the derivation chain remains externally anchored in the raw observations rather than internal definitions or self-referential citations.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the validity of the polarimetric and timing measurements from IXPE and the interpretation of type-C QPOs as standard features in black hole binaries.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Type-C QPOs originate from the inner regions of the accretion disk or corona in black hole X-ray binaries
    This is a standard assumption in the field used to interpret the timing features observed.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5767 in / 1472 out tokens · 101639 ms · 2026-05-20T16:36:11.591911+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

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

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

86 extracted references · 86 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    E., & Wenzel, A

    Allison, F. E., & Wenzel, A. B. 1962, The Shock-Induced Polarization of Dielectrics, Memorandum Report BRL-MR-1449, Ballistic Research Laboratories, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland

    work page 1962

  2. [2]

    Arnaud, K. A. 1996, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 101, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems V, ed. G. H. Jacoby & J. Barnes, 17 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ ocz, B. M., et a...

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 1996

  3. [3]

    2024a, StingraySoftware/stingray: Release 2.1, 2.1 Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.11383212

    Bachetti, M., Huppenkothen, D., Khan, U., et al. 2024a, StingraySoftware/stingray: Release 2.1, 2.1 Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.11383212

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.11383212

  4. [4]

    2024b, Journal of Open Source Software, 9, 7389, doi: 10.21105/joss.07389

    Bachetti, M., Huppenkothen, D., Stevens, A., et al. 2024b, Journal of Open Source Software, 9, 7389, doi: 10.21105/joss.07389

    work page doi:10.21105/joss.07389

  5. [5]

    2021, Astroparticle Physics, 133, 102628, doi: 10.1016/j.astropartphys.2021.102628

    Baldini, L., Barbanera, M., Bellazzini, R., et al. 2021, Astroparticle Physics, 133, 102628, doi: 10.1016/j.astropartphys.2021.102628

    work page doi:10.1016/j.astropartphys.2021.102628 2021

  6. [6]

    D., et al

    Baldini, L., Bucciantini, N., Lalla, N. D., et al. 2022, SoftwareX, 19, 101194, doi: 10.1016/j.softx.2022.101194

    work page doi:10.1016/j.softx.2022.101194 2022

  7. [7]

    C., & Sikora, M

    Begelman, M. C., & Sikora, M. 1987, ApJ, 322, 650, doi: 10.1086/165760

    work page doi:10.1086/165760 1987

  8. [8]

    2017, ApJ, 850, 14, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa906a

    Beheshtipour, B., Krawczynski, H., & Malzac, J. 2017, ApJ, 850, 14, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa906a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa906a 2017

  9. [9]

    1990, A&A, 230, 103

    Belloni, T., & Hasinger, G. 1990, A&A, 230, 103

    work page 1990

  10. [10]

    2005, A&A, 440, 207, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20042457

    Belloni, T., Homan, J., Casella, P., et al. 2005, A&A, 440, 207, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20042457

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20042457 2005

  11. [11]

    2002, ApJ, 572, 392, doi: 10.1086/340290

    Belloni, T., Psaltis, D., & van der Klis, M. 2002, ApJ, 572, 392, doi: 10.1086/340290

    work page doi:10.1086/340290 2002

  12. [12]

    Belloni, T., van der Klis, M., Lewin, W. H. G., et al. 1997, A&A, 322, 857

    work page 1997

  13. [13]

    2025, MNRAS, 540, 1394, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf750

    Bollemeijer, N., Uttley, P., & You, B. 2025, MNRAS, 540, 1394, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf750

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staf750 2025

  14. [14]

    V., Rothschild, R

    Bradt, H. V., Rothschild, R. E., & Swank, J. H. 1993, A&AS, 97, 355

    work page 1993

  15. [15]

    2020, Science China

    Cao, X., Jiang, W., Meng, B., et al. 2020, Science China

    work page 2020

  16. [16]

    Physics, Mechanics, and Astronomy, 63, 249504, doi: 10.1007/s11433-019-1506-1

    work page doi:10.1007/s11433-019-1506-1

  17. [17]

    2005, ApJ, 629, 403, doi: 10.1086/431174

    Casella, P., Belloni, T., & Stella, L. 2005, ApJ, 629, 403, doi: 10.1086/431174

    work page doi:10.1086/431174 2005

  18. [18]

    Chakrabarti, S., & Titarchuk, L. G. 1995, ApJ, 455, 623, doi: 10.1086/176610 11

    work page doi:10.1086/176610 1995

  19. [19]

    K., Nandi, A., Manickam, S

    Chakrabarti, S. K., Nandi, A., Manickam, S. G., Mandal, S., & Rao, A. R. 2002, ApJL, 579, L21, doi: 10.1086/344783

    work page doi:10.1086/344783 2002

  20. [20]

    1950, Radiative Transfer (Oxford University Press)

    Chandrasekhar, S. 1950, Radiative Transfer (Oxford University Press)

    work page 1950

  21. [21]

    K., & Ghosh, H

    Chatterjee, A., Chakrabarti, S. K., & Ghosh, H. 2017, MNRAS, 465, 3902, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2975

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2975 2017

  22. [22]

    B., & Sugizaki, M

    Chatterjee, K., Mondal, S., Singh, C. B., & Sugizaki, M. 2024, ApJ, 977, 148, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad8dc4

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad8dc4 2024

  23. [23]

    2020, Science China

    Chen, Y., Cui, W., Li, W., et al. 2020, Science China

    work page 2020

  24. [24]

    Physics, Mechanics, and Astronomy, 63, 249505, doi: 10.1007/s11433-019-1469-5

    work page doi:10.1007/s11433-019-1469-5

  25. [25]

    2024, ApJ, 975, 194, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad7a76

    Chang, H.-K. 2024, ApJ, 975, 194, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad7a76

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad7a76 2024

  26. [26]

    Deng, W., Zhang, B., Li, H., & Stone, J. M. 2017, ApJL, 845, L3, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa7d49 Di Marco, A., Soffitta, P., Costa, E., et al. 2023, AJ, 165, 143, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/acba0f

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa7d49 2017

  27. [27]

    Dolan, J. F. 1967, SSRv, 6, 579, doi: 10.1007/BF00168792

    work page doi:10.1007/bf00168792 1967

  28. [28]

    A., & Suzuki, S

    Dulk, G. A., & Suzuki, S. 1980, A&A, 88, 203

    work page 1980

  29. [29]

    P., et al

    Errando, M., Liodakis, I., Marscher, A. P., et al. 2024, ApJ, 963, 5, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1ce4

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad1ce4 2024

  30. [30]

    2011, A&A, 535, A12, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201117748

    Fabas, N., L` ebre, A., & Gillet, D. 2011, A&A, 535, A12, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201117748

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201117748 2011

  31. [31]

    1957, Reviews of Modern Physics, 29, 74, doi: 10.1103/RevModPhys.29.74

    Fano, U. 1957, Reviews of Modern Physics, 29, 74, doi: 10.1103/RevModPhys.29.74

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.29.74 1957

  32. [32]

    2020, Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems, 6, 048002, doi: 10.1117/1.JATIS.6.4.048002

    Ferrazzoli, R., Muleri, F., Lefevre, C., et al. 2020, Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems, 6, 048002, doi: 10.1117/1.JATIS.6.4.048002

    work page doi:10.1117/1.jatis.6.4.048002 2020

  33. [33]

    E., Bianchi, S., Kammoun, E., et al

    Gianolli, V. E., Bianchi, S., Kammoun, E., et al. 2024, A&A, 691, A29, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451645

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451645 2024

  34. [34]

    1995, ApJ, 449, 188, doi: 10.1086/176045

    Hua, X.-M., & Titarchuk, L. 1995, ApJ, 449, 188, doi: 10.1086/176045

    work page doi:10.1086/176045 1995

  35. [35]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science & Engineering, 9, 90

    work page 2007

  36. [36]

    L., et al

    Huppenkothen, D., Bachetti, M., Stevens, A. L., et al. 2019, apj, 881, 39, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab258d

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab258d 2019

  37. [37]

    2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2311.05497, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2311.05497

    Ingram, A., Bollemeijer, N., Veledina, A., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2311.05497, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2311.05497

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2311.05497 2023

  38. [38]

    2025, A&A, 699, A9, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202554353

    Jin, P., M´ endez, M., Garc´ ıa, F., et al. 2025, A&A, 699, A9, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202554353

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202554353 2025

  39. [39]

    2015, Astroparticle Physics, 68, 45, doi: 10.1016/j.astropartphys.2015.02.007

    Kislat, F., Clark, B., Beilicke, M., & Krawczynski, H. 2015, Astroparticle Physics, 68, 45, doi: 10.1016/j.astropartphys.2015.02.007

    work page doi:10.1016/j.astropartphys.2015.02.007 2015

  40. [40]

    M., Liodakis, I., Middei, R., et al

    Kouch, P. M., Liodakis, I., Middei, R., et al. 2024, A&A, 689, A119, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202449166

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202449166 2024

  41. [41]

    M., Liodakis, I., Fenu, F., et al

    Kouch, P. M., Liodakis, I., Fenu, F., et al. 2025, A&A, 695, A99, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202453127

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202453127 2025

  42. [42]

    A., Darbro, W., Elsner, R

    Leahy, D. A., Darbro, W., Elsner, R. F., et al. 1983, ApJ, 266, 160, doi: 10.1086/160766

    work page doi:10.1086/160766 1983

  43. [43]

    P., & Zdziarski, A

    Lightman, A. P., & Zdziarski, A. A. 1987, ApJ, 319, 643, doi: 10.1086/165485

    work page doi:10.1086/165485 1987

  44. [44]

    2020, Science China

    Liu, C., Zhang, Y., Li, X., et al. 2020, Science China

    work page 2020

  45. [45]

    Physics, Mechanics, and Astronomy, 63, 249503, doi: 10.1007/s11433-019-1486-x

    work page doi:10.1007/s11433-019-1486-x

  46. [46]

    P., Liodakis, I., Saade, M

    Maksym, W. P., Liodakis, I., Saade, M. L., et al. 2025, ApJ, 986, 230, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adce6b

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adce6b 2025

  47. [47]

    2024, A&A, 684, A95, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348277

    Marra, L., Brigitte, M., Rodriguez Cavero, N., et al. 2024, A&A, 684, A95, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348277

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202348277 2024

  48. [48]

    2004, A&A, 423, 495, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20035649

    Matt, G. 2004, A&A, 423, 495, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20035649

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20035649 2004

  49. [49]

    E., & Remillard, R

    McClintock, J. E., & Remillard, R. A. 2006, in Compact Stellar X-ray Sources, ed. W. H. G. Lewin & M. van der Klis (Cambridge University Press), 157–213

    work page 2006

  50. [50]

    McMaster, W. H. 1961, Reviews of Modern Physics, 33, 8, doi: 10.1103/RevModPhys.33.8

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.33.8 1961

  51. [51]

    , keywords =

    McNamara, A. L., Kuncic, Z., & Wu, K. 2009, MNRAS, 395, 1507, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14608.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14608.x 2009

  52. [52]

    K., & Nandi, A

    Mondal, S., Chatterjee, R., Agrawal, V. K., & Nandi, A. 2024, PASA, 41, e072, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2024.58

    work page doi:10.1017/pasa.2024.58 2024

  53. [53]

    K., & Dutta, B

    Nandi, P., Chatterjee, A., Chakrabarti, S. K., & Dutta, B. G. 2021, MNRAS, 506, 3111, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1699

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1699 2021

  54. [54]

    K., Debnath, D., & Chang, H.-K

    Nath, S. K., Debnath, D., & Chang, H.-K. 2026, MNRAS, 547, stag436, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stag436

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stag436 2026

  55. [55]

    K., Debnath, D., Chatterjee, K., et al

    Nath, S. K., Debnath, D., Chatterjee, K., et al. 2024, ApJ, 960, 5, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad0735

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad0735 2024

  56. [56]

    2025, ApJ, 985, 69, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adcabd

    Ninoyu, K., Yamada, S., Uchida, Y., et al. 2025, ApJ, 985, 69, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adcabd

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

  57. [57]

    Nowak, M. A. 2000, MNRAS, 318, 361, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2000.03668.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2000.03668.x 2000

  58. [58]

    S., Chatterjee, R., & Agrawal, V

    Pal, I., Stalin, C. S., Chatterjee, R., & Agrawal, V. K. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2305.09365, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2305.09365

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2305.09365 2023

  59. [59]

    2025, A&A, 697, A182, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202453641

    Pal, I., Marchesi, S., Torres-Alb` a, N., et al. 2025, A&A, 697, A182, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202453641

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202453641 2025

  60. [60]

    M., & Parsotan, T

    Palmer, D. M., & Parsotan, T. M. 2023, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 16215, 1

    work page 2023

  61. [61]

    R., & Puthiya Veetil, R

    Paul, B., Gopala Krishna, M. R., & Puthiya Veetil, R. 2016, in 41st COSPAR Scientific Assembly, Vol. 41, E1.15–8–16

    work page 2016

  62. [62]

    Payne, D. G. 1980, ApJ, 237, 951, doi: 10.1086/157941

    work page doi:10.1086/157941 1980

  63. [63]

    2001, Advances in Space Research, 28, 267, doi: 10.1016/S0273-1177(01)00406-9 12

    Poutanen, J. 2001, Advances in Space Research, 28, 267, doi: 10.1016/S0273-1177(01)00406-9 12

    work page doi:10.1016/s0273-1177(01)00406-9 2001

  64. [64]

    A., Sobol, I

    Pozdnyakov, L. A., Sobol, I. M., & Syunyaev, R. A. 1983, Astrophys. Space Phys. Res., 2, 189

    work page 1983

  65. [65]

    2014, Advances in Space Research, 54, 1678, doi: 10.1016/j.asr.2014.06.039

    Radhika, D., & Nandi, A. 2014, Advances in Space Research, 54, 1678, doi: 10.1016/j.asr.2014.06.039

    work page doi:10.1016/j.asr.2014.06.039 2014

  66. [66]

    D., Bongiorno, S

    Ramsey, B. D., Bongiorno, S. D., Kolodziejczak, J. J., et al. 2022, Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems, 8, 024003, doi: 10.1117/1.JATIS.8.2.024003

    work page doi:10.1117/1.jatis.8.2.024003 2022

  67. [67]

    2025, A&A, 697, A229, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202453538

    Rawat, D., M´ endez, M., Garc´ ıa, F., & Maggi, P. 2025, A&A, 697, A229, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202453538

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202453538 2025

  68. [68]

    2000, ApJ, 541, 883, doi: 10.1086/309469

    Reig, P., Belloni, T., van der Klis, M., et al. 2000, ApJ, 541, 883, doi: 10.1086/309469

    work page doi:10.1086/309469 2000

  69. [69]

    E., Lewin, W

    Rutledge, R. E., Lewin, W. H. G., van der Klis, M., et al. 1999, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 124, 265, doi: 10.1086/313251

    work page doi:10.1086/313251 1999

  70. [70]

    D., & Krolik, J

    Schnittman, J. D., & Krolik, J. H. 2010, ApJ, 712, 908, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/712/2/908

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/712/2/908 2010

  71. [71]

    I., & Sunyaev, R

    Shakura, N. I., & Sunyaev, R. A. 1973, A&A, 500, 33

    work page 1973

  72. [72]

    2009, ApJ, 699, 453, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/699/1/453

    Shaposhnikov, N., & Titarchuk, L. 2009, ApJ, 699, 453, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/699/1/453

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/699/1/453 2009

  73. [73]

    2021, AJ, 162, 208, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac19b0

    Soffitta, P., Baldini, L., Bellazzini, R., et al. 2021, AJ, 162, 208, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac19b0

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac19b0 2021

  74. [74]

    F., Nathan, E., Hu, K., et al

    Steiner, J. F., Nathan, E., Hu, K., et al. 2024, ApJL, 969, L30, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad58e4

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad58e4 2024

  75. [75]

    A., & Titarchuk, L

    Sunyaev, R. A., & Titarchuk, L. G. 1980, A&A, 86, 121

    work page 1980

  76. [76]

    2004, ApJ, 612, 988, doi: 10.1086/422573 van der Klis, M., Hasinger, G., Stella, L., et al

    Titarchuk, L., & Fiorito, R. 2004, ApJ, 612, 988, doi: 10.1086/422573 van der Klis, M., Hasinger, G., Stella, L., et al. 1987, ApJL, 319, L13, doi: 10.1086/184946

    work page doi:10.1086/422573 2004

  77. [78]

    A., & Nowak, M

    Vaughan, B. A., & Nowak, M. A. 1997b, ApJL, 474, L43, doi: 10.1086/310430

    work page doi:10.1086/310430

  78. [79]

    2023, ApJL, 958, L16, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad0781

    Veledina, A., Muleri, F., Dovˇ ciak, M., et al. 2023, ApJL, 958, L16, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad0781

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad0781 2023

  79. [80]

    2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 1031, doi: 10.1038/s41550-024-02294-9

    Veledina, A., Muleri, F., Poutanen, J., et al. 2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 1031, doi: 10.1038/s41550-024-02294-9

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-024-02294-9 2024

  80. [81]

    A., Ferland, G

    Verner, D. A., Ferland, G. J., Korista, K. T., & Yakovlev, D. G. 1996, ApJ, 465, 487, doi: 10.1086/177435

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1086/177435 1996

Showing first 80 references.