pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.18050 · v1 · pith:VXI42TXTnew · submitted 2026-05-18 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE

Search for the Highest-energy Quasiperiodic Oscillation in the Black Hole X-Ray Binary Candidate Swift J1727.8-1613

Xiang Ma , Qing-Cang Shui , Ming-Yu Ge , Liang Zhang , Jin-Lu Qu , Shuang-Nan Zhang , Lian Tao , Li-Ming Song
show 3 more authors
Shu Zhang Hua Feng Yue Huang
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-20 09:11 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE
keywords quasiperiodic oscillationblack hole X-ray binarySwift J1727.8-1613high-energy X-raysjet precessionphase lagInsight-HXMT
0
0 comments X

The pith

A low-frequency QPO extends above 250 keV in the black hole X-ray binary Swift J1727.8-1613

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

The paper reports the first detection of a low-frequency quasiperiodic oscillation reaching above 250 keV during the 2023 outburst of Swift J1727.8-1613. Observations with the Insight-HXMT telescope show strong signals in the NaI and CsI detectors, reaching significances of roughly 8.9 and 5.7 sigma. The fractional rms of the QPO falls above 100 keV while the soft phase lag rises with energy. These trends lead the authors to attribute the oscillation to the precession of a small-scale jet. A confirmed geometric origin at such high energies would tie QPO behavior directly to jet dynamics near the black hole.

Core claim

We report the first detection of a low-frequency quasiperiodic oscillation (QPO) extending above 250 keV in the black hole X-ray binary candidate Swift J1727.8-1613 using Insight-HXMT observations during its 2023 outburst. Owing to the large effective area of Insight-HXMT in hard X-ray, our observations indicate a remarkably strong QPO signal in the power spectrum above 100 keV. We utilize advanced Hilbert-Huang transform techniques to analyze phase-folded light curves across a wide range of energy bands, observing significant QPOs from 100 to 300 keV in the NaI and CsI detectors, respectively. The detection of QPO profiles above 250 keV can achieve significance levels of ∼8.9σ for the NaI

What carries the argument

Hilbert-Huang transform applied to energy-resolved phase-folded light curves to extract QPO profiles, measure fractional rms, and quantify soft phase lags at high energies

If this is right

  • QPOs in black hole X-ray binaries can be produced at energies up to at least 300 keV.
  • The drop in fractional rms above 100 keV indicates that geometric effects become dominant at higher energies.
  • The rise in soft phase lag with energy is consistent with precession of a compact jet structure.
  • High-energy QPO detections can constrain the location and motion of the jet base relative to the accretion flow.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same analysis approach could be applied to other bright outbursts to test whether jet-linked QPOs appear routinely above 200 keV.
  • Coordinated radio monitoring during future outbursts might reveal correlated timing signals if the precession model is correct.
  • Quantifying the false-alarm probability of the post-processing steps would directly address concerns about low-count statistics.

Load-bearing premise

The power-spectrum peaks above 250 keV represent genuine quasiperiodic oscillations rather than noise or analysis artifacts in the low-photon-count regime.

What would settle it

A re-analysis of the same Insight-HXMT dataset with an independent method or a new observation with another hard X-ray instrument that fails to recover a significant QPO above 250 keV at comparable significance.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.18050 by Hua Feng, Jin-Lu Qu, Liang Zhang, Lian Tao, Li-Ming Song, Ming-Yu Ge, Qing-Cang Shui, Shuang-Nan Zhang, Shu Zhang, Xiang Ma, Yue Huang.

Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The combined power spectra of Swift J1727.8−1613 in the 115–150 keV (blue line) and 150–200 keV (red line) bands observed by Insight-HXMT/HE. Traditionally, QPOs in X-ray light curves are detected using Fourier techniques, in which QPOs appear as a series of harmonic peaks in the PDS. However, in high￾energy bands, limited photon statistics significantly re￾duce the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), making QPO … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Constructed QPO waveforms of Swift J1727.8−1613 by phase folding the light curve from HE/NaI detector in the energy range of 26–40 keV (a), 40–50 keV (b), 50–70 keV (c), 70–100 keV (d), 100–150 keV (e), 150–200 keV (f), 200–250 keV (g), 250–290 keV (h) and 290–376 keV (i). The red line is the fitting result using a serious of periodic function of sine. Data are from ObsIDs P061433800201– P061433801507. 00 … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Constructed QPO waveforms by phase folding the light curve from HE/CsI detector in energy range of 100– 150 keV (a), 150–200 keV (b), 200–250 keV (c), 250–300 keV (d), 300-350 keV (e) and 350–400 keV (f). Data are from ObsIDs P061433800201–P061433801507. 3.3. Energy Dependence of LFQPO Properties Following the method described by Ingram & van der Klis (2015) (Equation 6), we model the QPO waveform using a … view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: QPO fractional rms (a) and phase lag (b) in different energy bands. The blue triangles in upper panel (a) represent the computed QPO fractional rms by fitting the constructed QPO profile in each energy band as shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We report the first detection of a low-frequency quasiperiodic oscillation (QPO) extending above 250 keV in the black hole X-ray binary candidate Swift J1727.8-1613 using Insight-HXMT observations during its 2023 outburst. Swift J1727.8-1613 is one of the brightest X-ray transients discovered and presents a valuable opportunity for studying high-energy properties of QPOs. Owing to the large effective area of Insight-HXMT in hard X-ray, our observations indicate a remarkably strong QPO signal in the power spectrum above 100 keV. We utilize advanced Hilbert-Huang transform techniques to analyze phase-folded light curves across a wide range of energy bands, observing significant QPOs from 100 to 300 keV in the NaI and CsI detectors, respectively. The detection of QPO profiles above 250 keV can achieve significance levels of ${\sim} 8.9{\sigma}$ for the NaI detector and ${\sim} 5.7{\sigma}$ for the CsI detector. Our results indicate a decrease in QPO fractional rms above 100 keV and an increased soft phase lag with energy, suggesting a geometric origin for the QPOs, likely linked to the precession of a small-scale jet.

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 first detection of a low-frequency quasiperiodic oscillation (QPO) extending above 250 keV in the black hole X-ray binary candidate Swift J1727.8-1613, based on Insight-HXMT observations during the 2023 outburst. It applies Hilbert-Huang transform techniques to phase-folded light curves across energy bands, claiming QPO signals with significances of ∼8.9σ (NaI) and ∼5.7σ (CsI) above 250 keV, a decrease in fractional rms above 100 keV, and increasing soft phase lags with energy, interpreted as evidence for a geometric origin linked to small-scale jet precession.

Significance. If the high-energy QPO detections hold after statistical validation, the result would be notable for extending QPO observations into a previously unexplored regime above 250 keV in a bright transient, providing new constraints on QPO models in black hole systems. The use of established timing tools on Insight-HXMT's large hard X-ray effective area is a clear strength and supports the potential for geometric interpretations.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the quoted significances of ∼8.9σ (NaI) and ∼5.7σ (CsI) for the >250 keV QPO are presented without an explicit false-alarm probability derivation or correction for the number of independent trials (energy bands, frequency windows, detector combinations) in the HHT pipeline.
  2. [Analysis of the >250 keV band] Analysis of the >250 keV band: in the low-count regime the manuscript does not report end-to-end Monte Carlo simulations that inject only Poisson noise plus the measured background spectrum and then execute the identical HHT phase-folding pipeline; without this calibration the quoted σ values cannot be reliably converted to a false-alarm probability.
minor comments (2)
  1. A short description of the specific HHT implementation parameters (e.g., number of intrinsic mode functions, stopping criteria) would improve reproducibility.
  2. Consider adding a table that tabulates QPO frequency, fractional rms, and phase lag as a function of energy band for direct comparison across detectors.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful and constructive review of our manuscript. The comments highlight important aspects of statistical validation for the high-energy QPO detections, and we have revised the paper to address them directly. Our point-by-point responses follow.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the quoted significances of ∼8.9σ (NaI) and ∼5.7σ (CsI) for the >250 keV QPO are presented without an explicit false-alarm probability derivation or correction for the number of independent trials (energy bands, frequency windows, detector combinations) in the HHT pipeline.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract and main text would benefit from an explicit statement of the false-alarm probability derivation and a clear accounting for the number of trials. In the revised manuscript we have added a dedicated paragraph in the Methods section that derives the significance from the HHT phase-folding procedure, specifies the frequency search window, the number of energy bands examined, and the two detector combinations, and applies a conservative Bonferroni correction. The trial-corrected significances remain above 5σ for both NaI and CsI in the >250 keV band; the abstract has been updated to reference this calculation. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Analysis of the >250 keV band] Analysis of the >250 keV band: in the low-count regime the manuscript does not report end-to-end Monte Carlo simulations that inject only Poisson noise plus the measured background spectrum and then execute the identical HHT phase-folding pipeline; without this calibration the quoted σ values cannot be reliably converted to a false-alarm probability.

    Authors: We concur that end-to-end Monte Carlo simulations are the most direct way to calibrate the false-alarm probability in the low-count regime. We have now performed 10,000 realizations in which synthetic light curves containing only Poisson noise plus the measured background spectrum were passed through the identical HHT phase-folding and significance pipeline. The resulting null distribution places the observed signals at >5.5σ for NaI and >5.0σ for CsI above 250 keV. A new subsection (now Section 3.3) describes the simulation setup, the background model, and the resulting confidence levels; the quoted significances in the abstract and results have been cross-referenced to these simulations. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: direct observational detection from independent data processing

full rationale

The manuscript presents an observational result from Insight-HXMT satellite data on Swift J1727.8-1613. The claimed QPO detections and significances are obtained by applying the Hilbert-Huang transform to phase-folded light curves in separate energy bands. No equations, fitted parameters, or self-citations are used to derive the reported frequencies or rms values from the same dataset in a self-referential manner. The analysis does not invoke uniqueness theorems, rename known results, or smuggle ansatzes via prior self-citations. The central claim remains a direct measurement whose validity rests on the data and pipeline rather than reducing to its own inputs by construction. This is the expected outcome for a pure observational report without theoretical derivation chains.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

This observational detection paper relies on standard domain assumptions in X-ray timing rather than new free parameters or invented entities. No explicit fitting of new constants or postulation of new particles occurs.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Standard statistical thresholds and background-subtraction methods in X-ray power-spectrum analysis are valid at energies above 100 keV.
    Invoked implicitly when claiming 5.7–8.9 sigma detections in NaI and CsI detectors.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5808 in / 1441 out tokens · 54495 ms · 2026-05-20T09:11:49.825119+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

70 extracted references · 70 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    C., Casella, P., Testa, V., et al

    Baglio, M. C., Casella, P., Testa, V., et al. 2023, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 16225, 1

    work page 2023

  2. [2]

    Belloni, T. M. 2018, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1803.03641, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1803.03641

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1803.03641 2018

  3. [3]

    Black hole transients

    Belloni, T. M., Motta, S. E., & Muñoz-Darias, T. 2011, Bulletin of the Astronomical Society of India, 39, 409, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1109.3388

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1109.3388 2011

  4. [4]

    2020, MNRAS, 496, 4366, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1843

    Altamirano, D. 2020, MNRAS, 496, 4366, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1843

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1843 2020

  5. [5]

    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

  6. [6]

    C., Zhang, S

    Bu, Q. C., Zhang, S. N., Santangelo, A., et al. 2021, ApJ, 919, 92, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac11f5

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac11f5 2021

  7. [7]

    , keywords =

    Cabanac, C., Henri, G., Petrucci, P. O., et al. 2010, MNRAS, 404, 738, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16340.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16340.x 2010

  8. [8]

    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

  9. [9]

    D., et al

    Caballero-Garcia, M. D., et al. 2023, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 16208, 1

    work page 2023

  10. [10]

    A., Miller, J

    Draghis, P. A., Miller, J. M., Homan, J., et al. 2023, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 16219, 1

    work page 2023

  11. [11]

    2014, IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 62, 531, doi: 10.1109/TSP.2013.2288675 Gierliński, M., & Done, C

    Dragomiretskiy, K., & Zosso, D. 2014, IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 62, 531, doi: 10.1109/TSP.2013.2288675 Gierliński, M., & Done, C. 2003, MNRAS, 342, 1083, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06591.x Gierliński, M., & Zdziarski, A. A. 2005, MNRAS, 363, 1349, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09527.x Gierliński, M., Zdziarski, A. A., Poutanen, J., et al....

    work page doi:10.1109/tsp.2013.2288675 2014

  12. [12]

    Y., Ji, L., et al

    Hou, X., Ge, M. Y., Ji, L., et al. 2022, ApJ, 938, 149, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac8c93

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac8c93 2022

  13. [13]

    2020, ApJ, 900, 116, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abacbd

    Hsieh, H.-E., & Chou, Y. 2020, ApJ, 900, 116, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abacbd

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

  14. [14]

    2014, ApJ, 788, 31, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/788/1/31

    Hu, C.-P., Chou, Y., Yang, T.-C., & Su, Y.-H. 2014, ApJ, 788, 31, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/788/1/31

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/788/1/31 2014

  15. [15]

    E., Shen, Z., Long, S

    Huang, N. E., Shen, Z., Long, S. R., et al. 1998, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series A, 454, 903, doi: 10.1098/rspa.1998.0193

    work page doi:10.1098/rspa.1998.0193 1998

  16. [16]

    L., Zhang, S

    Huang, Y., Qu, J. L., Zhang, S. N., et al. 2018, ApJ, 866, 122, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aade4c

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aade4c 2018

  17. [17]

    Ingram, A., Done, C., & Fragile, P. C. 2009, MNRAS, 397, L101, doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2009.00693.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1745-3933.2009.00693.x 2009

  18. [18]

    2015, MNRAS, 446, 3516, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu2373

    Ingram, A., & van der Klis, M. 2015, MNRAS, 446, 3516, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu2373

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu2373 2015

  19. [19]

    2017, MNRAS, 464, 2979, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2581

    Ingram, A., van der Klis, M., Middleton, M., Altamirano, D., & Uttley, P. 2017, MNRAS, 464, 2979, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2581

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2581 2017

  20. [20]

    2016, MNRAS, 461, 1967, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw1245

    Ingram, A., van der Klis, M., Middleton, M., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 461, 1967, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw1245

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw1245 2016

  21. [21]

    2024, ApJ, 968, 76, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad3faf

    Ingram, A., Bollemeijer, N., Veledina, A., et al. 2024, ApJ, 968, 76, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad3faf

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad3faf 2024

  22. [22]

    R., & Motta, S

    Ingram, A. R., & Motta, S. E. 2019, NewAR, 85, 101524, doi: 10.1016/j.newar.2020.101524

    work page doi:10.1016/j.newar.2020.101524 2019

  23. [23]

    Vincentelli, F. M. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.10353, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2510.10353

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.10353 2025

  24. [24]

    , keywords =

    Jonker, P. G., Méndez, M., & van der Klis, M. 2002, MNRAS, 336, L1, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05781.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05781.x 2002

  25. [25]

    2022, ApJL, 933, L3, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac7711

    Kong, L.-D., Zhang, S., Zhang, S.-N., et al. 2022, ApJL, 933, L3, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac7711

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac7711 2022

  26. [26]

    2011, Science, 332, 438, doi: 10.1126/science.1200848

    Laurent, P., Rodriguez, J., Wilms, J., et al. 2011, Science, 332, 438, doi: 10.1126/science.1200848

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1200848 2011

  27. [27]

    2020, Journal of High Energy Astrophysics, 27, 14, doi: 10.1016/j.jheap.2020.04.002

    Liao, J.-Y., Zhang, S., Lu, X.-F., et al. 2020, Journal of High Energy Astrophysics, 27, 14, doi: 10.1016/j.jheap.2020.04.002

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jheap.2020.04.002 2020

  28. [28]

    2018, MNRAS, 474, L81, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slx174

    Liska, M., Hesp, C., Tchekhovskoy, A., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 474, L81, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slx174

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slx174 2018

  29. [29]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2406.03834, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2406.03834

    Liu, H.-X., Xu, Y.-J., Zhang, S.-N., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2406.03834, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2406.03834

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2406.03834 2024

  30. [30]

    2020, Journal of High Energy Astrophysics, 27, 1, doi: 10.1016/j.jheap.2020.04.004

    Luo, Q., Liao, J.-Y., Li, X.-F., et al. 2020, Journal of High Energy Astrophysics, 27, 1, doi: 10.1016/j.jheap.2020.04.004

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jheap.2020.04.004 2020

  31. [31]

    2025, MNRAS, 543, 1748, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf1524

    Ma, R., Done, C., & Kubota, A. 2025, MNRAS, 543, 1748, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf1524

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staf1524 2025

  32. [32]

    2021, Nature Astronomy, 5, 94, doi: 10.1038/s41550-020-1192-2

    Ma, X., Tao, L., Zhang, S.-N., et al. 2021, Nature Astronomy, 5, 94, doi: 10.1038/s41550-020-1192-2

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-020-1192-2 2021

  33. [33]

    2023, ApJ, 948, 116, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acc4c3

    Ma, X., Zhang, L., Tao, L., et al. 2023, ApJ, 948, 116, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acc4c3

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acc4c3 2023

  34. [34]

    V., & Aharonian, F

    Malzac, J., & Belmont, R. 2009, MNRAS, 392, 570, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14142.x Mata Sánchez, D., Muñoz-Darias, T., Armas Padilla, M.,

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14142.x 2009

  35. [35]

    Casares, J., & Torres, M. A. P. 2024, A&A, 682, L1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348754 Méndez, M., Karpouzas, K., García, F., et al. 2022, Nature Astronomy, 6, 577, doi: 10.1038/s41550-022-01617-y Méndez, M., van der Klis, M., van Paradijs, J., et al. 1998, ApJL, 494, L65, doi: 10.1086/311162

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202348754 2024

  36. [36]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.13249, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2510.13249 10

    Meng, W., You, Y., Zhang, S.-N., & Cao, J.-Y. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.13249, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2510.13249 10

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.13249 2025

  37. [37]

    2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2310.06697, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2310.06697 —

    Mereminskiy, I., Lutovinov, A., Molkov, S., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2310.06697, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2310.06697 —. 2024, MNRAS, 531, 4893, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1393

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2310.06697 2023

  38. [38]

    1991, ApJ, 383, 784, doi: 10.1086/170837

    Ebisawa, K. 1991, ApJ, 383, 784, doi: 10.1086/170837

    work page doi:10.1086/170837 1991

  39. [39]

    , author Padovani, P

    Homan, J. 2011, MNRAS, 418, 2292, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19566.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19566.x 2011

  40. [40]

    E., Casella, P., Henze, M., et al

    Motta, S. E., Casella, P., Henze, M., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 447, 2059, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu2579

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu2579 2015

  41. [41]

    2024, MNRAS, 531, 1149, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1208

    Nandi, A., Das, S., Majumder, S., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 531, 1149, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1208

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1208 2024

  42. [42]

    2023, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 16205, 1 O’Connor, B., Hare, J., Younes, G., et al

    Negoro, H., Serino, M., Nakajima, M., et al. 2023, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 16205, 1 O’Connor, B., Hare, J., Younes, G., et al. 2023, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 16207, 1

    work page 2023

  43. [43]

    L., Dichiara, S., Gropp, J

    Page, K. L., Dichiara, S., Gropp, J. D., et al. 2023, GRB Coordinates Network, 34537, 1

    work page 2023

  44. [44]

    M., & Parsotan, T

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

    work page 2023

  45. [45]

    2024, ApJL, 960, L17, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad17ca

    Peng, J.-Q., Zhang, S., Shui, Q.-C., et al. 2024, ApJL, 960, L17, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad17ca

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad17ca 2024

  46. [46]

    2009, ApJL, 690, L97, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/690/2/L97

    Poutanen, J., & Vurm, I. 2009, ApJL, 690, L97, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/690/2/L97

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/690/2/l97 2009

  47. [47]

    L., Lu, F

    Qu, J. L., Lu, F. J., Lu, Y., et al. 2010, ApJ, 710, 836, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/710/1/836

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/710/1/836 2010

  48. [48]

    2004, ApJ, 612, 1018, doi: 10.1086/422672

    Tagger, M. 2004, ApJ, 612, 1018, doi: 10.1086/422672

    work page doi:10.1086/422672 2004

  49. [49]

    C., Zhang, S., Chen, Y

    Shui, Q. C., Zhang, S., Chen, Y. P., et al. 2023a, ApJ, 943, 165, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aca7b8

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aca7b8

  50. [50]

    C., Zhang, S., Zhang, S

    Shui, Q. C., Zhang, S., Zhang, S. N., et al. 2023b, ApJ, 957, 84, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acfc42 —. 2024a, ApJL, 965, L7, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad374d

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acfc42 2041

  51. [51]

    2024b, ApJ, 973, 59, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad676a

    Shui, Q.-C., Zhang, S., Peng, J.-Q., et al. 2024b, ApJ, 973, 59, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad676a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad676a

  52. [52]

    L., & Uttley, P

    Stevens, A. L., & Uttley, P. 2016, MNRAS, 460, 2796, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw1093

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw1093 2016

  53. [53]

    Stiele, H., & Kong, A. K. H. 2024, A&A, 691, A268, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450657

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450657 2024

  54. [54]

    2015, ApJ, 815, 74, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/815/1/74

    Su, Y.-H., Chou, Y., Hu, C.-P., & Yang, T.-C. 2015, ApJ, 815, 74, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/815/1/74

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/815/1/74 2015

  55. [55]

    An Accretion-Ejection Instability in magnetized disks

    Tagger, M., & Pellat, R. 1999, A&A, 349, 1003, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9907267 van den Eijnden, J., Ingram, A., Uttley, P., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 464, 2643, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2634

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/9907267 1999

  56. [56]

    2013, MNRAS, 430, 3196, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt124

    Veledina, A., Poutanen, J., & Vurm, I. 2013, MNRAS, 430, 3196, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt124

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt124 2013

  57. [57]

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

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

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

  58. [58]

    M., Shahbaz, T., Casella, P., et al

    Vincentelli, F. M., Shahbaz, T., Casella, P., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.20862, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2503.20862

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2503.20862 2025

  59. [59]

    M., Miller-Jones, J

    Wood, C. M., Miller-Jones, J. C. A., Bahramian, A., et al. 2024, ApJL, 971, L9, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad6572

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad6572 2024

  60. [60]

    2025, ApJ, 993, 40, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae058a

    Xu, S.-E., You, B., Long, Y., & He, H. 2025, ApJ, 993, 40, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae058a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae058a 2025

  61. [61]

    2024, ApJL, 970, L33, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad60bd

    Yang, Z.-X., Zhang, L., Zhang, S.-N., et al. 2024, ApJL, 970, L33, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad60bd

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad60bd 2024

  62. [62]

    You, B., Bursa, M., & Życki, P. T. 2018, ApJ, 858, 82, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aabd33

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aabd33 2018

  63. [63]

    2023, ApJ, 951, 130, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acd756

    Yu, W., Bu, Q.-C., Yang, Z.-X., et al. 2023, ApJ, 951, 130, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acd756

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acd756 2023

  64. [64]

    2024, MNRAS, 529, 4624, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae835

    Yu, W., Bu, Q.-C., Zhang, S.-N., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 529, 4624, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae835

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae835 2024

  65. [65]

    Vadawale, S. V. 2001, ApJL, 554, L45, doi: 10.1086/320932

    work page doi:10.1086/320932 2001

  66. [66]

    2017, ApJ, 845, 143, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa8138

    Zhang, L., Wang, Y., Méndez, M., et al. 2017, ApJ, 845, 143, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa8138

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa8138 2017

  67. [67]

    2020, Science China

    Zhang, S.-N., Li, T., Lu, F., et al. 2020, Science China

    work page 2020

  68. [68]

    Physics, Mechanics, and Astronomy, 63, 249502, doi: 10.1007/s11433-019-1432-6

    work page doi:10.1007/s11433-019-1432-6

  69. [69]

    Giles, A. B. 1995, ApJ, 449, 930, doi: 10.1086/176111

    work page doi:10.1086/176111 1995

  70. [70]

    2024, ApJL, 961, L42, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad1e6c

    Zhao, Q.-C., Tao, L., Li, H.-C., et al. 2024, ApJL, 961, L42, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad1e6c

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad1e6c 2024