pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.28676 · v1 · pith:VDRHB3OXnew · submitted 2026-05-27 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE

Magnetic Configuration Imprints on Quasi-Periodic Variability in GRMHD Simulations of Thin Accretion Disks

Jing-Ze Xia , Hong-Xuan Jiang , Indu K. Dihingia , Yosuke Mizuno This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-29 10:35 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE
keywords quasi-periodic oscillationsGRMHD simulationsaccretion disksmagnetic fieldsblack hole X-ray binariesepicyclic frequencytruncation radius
0
0 comments X

The pith

Magnetic field configurations set truncation radii and QPO frequencies in thin accretion disk simulations

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

The paper uses global 2D and 3D GRMHD simulations of geometrically thin disks started with different multi-loop magnetic field setups. These setups produce a puffed-up inner region where QPO-like signals appear in effective viscosity and mass accretion rate. The frequencies track the local radial epicyclic frequency and its harmonics, with coherent stripe patterns in time series and narrow power-spectrum bands tied to magnetic truncation radii. Cross-correlations show a lag between pressure and Maxwell stress consistent with viscous-epicyclic overstability. Magnetic topology controls both the truncation radius and the resonant cavities, while thicker disks suppress the signals through turbulent diffusion; the resulting frequency ranges match those seen in black hole X-ray binaries during outbursts.

Core claim

Different multi-loop magnetic field configurations in GRMHD simulations of thin disks naturally generate a puffed-up inner region. QPO-like variability then emerges in effective viscosity and mass accretion rate at frequencies that follow the local radial epicyclic frequency and its harmonics. Time-series diagrams display coherent inclined stripe-like patterns from inertial-acoustic perturbations, while power spectra show narrow bands linked to magnetic truncation radii. Cross-correlation analysis finds a finite lag between pressure and Maxwell stress at these interfaces, consistent with viscous-epicyclic overstability. The magnetic topology regulates both the truncation radius and the locat

What carries the argument

Multi-loop magnetic field configurations that set the truncation radius and sustain resonant cavities for inertial-acoustic perturbations via viscous-epicyclic overstability

If this is right

  • QPO frequencies follow the radial epicyclic frequency and its harmonics at magnetic truncation radii.
  • A finite lag appears between pressure and Maxwell stress at the truncation interfaces.
  • Increased disk thickness suppresses the overstability and associated QPO signals through turbulent diffusion.
  • The simulated QPO frequency ranges and evolution match those observed in black hole X-ray binaries during outbursts.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same magnetic topologies could influence the timing of state transitions in accreting black hole systems.
  • Similar truncation-radius effects might appear in other disk observables such as continuum spectra or polarization signatures.

Load-bearing premise

The specific multi-loop magnetic field configurations chosen are representative of those present in real thin accretion disks around black holes.

What would settle it

Detection of QPO frequencies in black hole X-ray binaries that do not match the epicyclic frequency at the inferred magnetic truncation radius, or simulations with the same initial configurations that fail to produce the reported lag and stripe patterns.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.28676 by Hong-Xuan Jiang, Indu K. Dihingia, Jing-ze Xia, Yosuke Mizuno.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Time evolution of the mass accretion rate mea￾sured at the event horizon (top), the normalized magnetic flux at the horizon (bottom), and the jet power evaluated at r = 50 rg. The inset panel displays the normalized magnetic flux on a linear scale. suppressing to enter MAD regime. In all models, the normalized magnetic flux remains below the canonical threshold ΦBH/ p M˙ ≈ 15, which is commonly adopted as … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Logarithmic density distributions at t = 25,000 M for different magnetic configurations. The labels in the lower right corner of each panel indicate the corresponding model: (a) small loop, (b) mid loop, (c) large loop, (d) small loop with Aϕ ∝ r 1 , and (e) small loop with Aϕ ∝ r 0.5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The figure shows the distribution of time-averaged magnetization σ over the interval t = 24,000 M to 25,000 M. The labels in the figure correspond to the same model designations as those in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Scale height profiles for different models, time-av￾eraged over the interval t = 24,000 M to 25,000 M. 3.2.1. Plasma β To further investigate the physical origin of the ver￾tical expansion observed in the inner region of our sim￾ulated models, we examine the distribution of plasma beta (β), defined as the ratio of gas pressure to mag￾netic pressure, β = pgas/pmag. This dimensionless pa￾rameter indicates th… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Space-time distribution of the scale height for different models. The labels in the upper-left corner of each panel indicate the corresponding model: (a) small loop, (b) mid loop, (c) large loop, (d) small loop with Aϕ ∝ r 1 , and (e) small loop with Aϕ ∝ r 0.5 . Note that the zoomed-in regions use different color bar ranges [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Upper panels: time-averaged plasma β over the interval t = 24,000 M to 25,000 M, computed using shell-integrated values. Bottom panels: space–time diagrams of plasma β, illustrating the temporal evolution of magnetization at different radii. and its relation to the gas pressure, allowing us to quan￾tify angular momentum redistribution within the disk [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Same labeling as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Time evolution of αM and the scale height at r = 60 rg for four simulation models. the scale height stabilizes around H/R ∼ 0.03 after the initial oscillations, with Model A exhibiting a higher αM amplitude—likely because smaller magnetic loops promote stronger secondary viscous fluctuations. Intro￾ducing a radial dependence in Model D enhances this secondary modulation, further increasing the effective st… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: PSDs of αM measured within the inner 65 rg of the accretion disk in Model A (small-loop). The upper panel is computed over the first 8000 M time period, while the lower panel corresponds to the later phase t = [16000, 25000] M. The dashed cyan, solid blue, and solid green lines indicate the radial epicyclic, Keplerian, and Lense-Thirring preces￾sion frequencies, respectively, while the dash-dotted cyan li… view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: PSD of the mass accretion rate M˙ for Mod￾els Th3D20 (top) and Th3D05 (bottom) during the time pe￾riod of t = 4000 M − 8000 M . find a clear correlation between the loop size and the QPO location. These boundary-associated QPOs origi￾nate from localized shear interfaces where sharp density (and αM viscosity) gradients produce partial reflection of inertial–acoustic perturbations. At later times, as illust… view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: presents the time-averaged and density￾weighted αM profile. The loop structure clearly pro￾duces a cavity (dip) of αM which corresponds with the bright bands identified in the PSD maps ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: shows the radial profiles of τpeak/Torb and Cps,peak. Within each magnetic loop, the cross￾correlation peaks at essentially zero lag, and the cor￾relation amplitude remains modest (Cps,peak ∼ 0.1– 0.3), indicating that pressure and stress fluctuate almost synchronously and are dominated by local MRI turbu￾lence. In contrast, at the radii corresponding to the density/magnetization interfaces—spaced by ∆r ≃… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The origin of quasi-periodic oscillations (QPOs) in black hole accretion flow remains uncertain, particularly regarding the role of magnetic field configurations in shaping disk structure and variability signatures. We investigate this using global two- and three-dimensional (2D and 3D) general relativistic magnetohydrodynamic (GRMHD) simulations of geometrically thin disks initialized with different multi-loop magnetic field configurations. These configurations naturally produce a puffed-up inner region. We find that QPO-like variability arises in the effective viscosity and mass accretion rate, with frequencies following the local radial epicyclic frequency and its harmonics. Time-series diagrams show coherent, inclined stripe-like patterns associated with inertial-acoustic perturbations, while power spectra exhibit narrow bands of enhanced variability linked to truncation radii associated with magnetic fields. Cross-correlation analysis reveals a finite lag between pressure and Maxwell stress at these interfaces, consistent with viscous-epicyclic overstability. The magnetic topology regulates both the truncation radius and the location of resonant cavities that sustain oscillations. As the disk becomes thicker, increased turbulent diffusion suppresses the overstability and the associated QPO signals. We find that the QPO frequency ranges and their evolution are consistent with observations of black hole X-ray binaries during outbursts. These results suggest that magnetic field configurations play a pivotal role in shaping disk structure and variability in accreting black holes.

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 2D and 3D GRMHD simulations of geometrically thin accretion disks initialized with multiple multi-loop magnetic field configurations. These setups produce an inner puffed-up region and truncation radius; the simulations exhibit QPO-like variability in effective viscosity and mass accretion rate at frequencies matching the local radial epicyclic frequency and harmonics. The variability is attributed to viscous-epicyclic overstability, with supporting evidence from time-series patterns, power spectra, and cross-correlation lags between pressure and Maxwell stress. The authors conclude that magnetic topology regulates truncation and resonant cavities, and that the resulting QPO frequency ranges and evolution are consistent with black-hole X-ray binary observations.

Significance. If the chosen initial conditions prove representative, the work supplies a concrete mechanism connecting magnetic topology to disk truncation, resonant cavities, and epicyclic overstability, thereby offering a potential explanation for observed QPOs. The global nature of the simulations and the identification of coherent inclined stripe patterns constitute strengths. However, the absence of convergence tests, error bars on reported frequencies, and quantitative sensitivity analysis to field strength or resolution reduces the immediate robustness of the frequency-observation matches.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and initial-conditions description] The central claim that magnetic configurations play a pivotal role rests on simulations initialized exclusively with multi-loop topologies that produce truncation and overstability. No astrophysical motivation, observational constraint, or direct comparison to single-poloidal-loop configurations (standard in prior thin-disk GRMHD literature) is supplied to establish that these initial conditions occur or dominate in nature. This choice is load-bearing for the extrapolation to real thin disks and observed variability.
  2. [Results and power-spectra sections] No error bars, resolution or field-strength convergence tests, or quantitative measures of how post-hoc parameter choices affect the reported QPO frequencies are presented. The frequency matches to observations therefore rest on unverified simulation outputs rather than demonstrated numerical robustness.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Throughout] Notation for the different multi-loop configurations and the precise definition of the truncation radius should be made explicit and consistent across text and figures.
  2. [Methods] The manuscript would benefit from a brief table summarizing the simulation parameters (resolution, initial field strength, disk aspect ratio) for each run.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed review. We respond point-by-point to the major comments, indicating where we will revise the manuscript to address the concerns raised.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and initial-conditions description] The central claim that magnetic configurations play a pivotal role rests on simulations initialized exclusively with multi-loop topologies that produce truncation and overstability. No astrophysical motivation, observational constraint, or direct comparison to single-poloidal-loop configurations (standard in prior thin-disk GRMHD literature) is supplied to establish that these initial conditions occur or dominate in nature. This choice is load-bearing for the extrapolation to real thin disks and observed variability.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the manuscript would be strengthened by explicit motivation for the multi-loop initial conditions and a comparison to the single-poloidal-loop setups common in the thin-disk GRMHD literature. In revision we will expand the introduction and methods to discuss possible astrophysical origins of multi-loop topologies (e.g., via dynamo action or repeated flux advection) and to note that single-loop configurations in prior work generally do not produce the same truncation radius or overstability. We will also add a short paragraph clarifying that the present study demonstrates the mechanism for these configurations rather than claiming they are the only or dominant ones in nature. A full parameter survey comparing all topologies is beyond the scope of the current work but will be flagged as future research. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Results and power-spectra sections] No error bars, resolution or field-strength convergence tests, or quantitative measures of how post-hoc parameter choices affect the reported QPO frequencies are presented. The frequency matches to observations therefore rest on unverified simulation outputs rather than demonstrated numerical robustness.

    Authors: We agree that the absence of error bars and explicit convergence information limits the demonstrated robustness of the reported frequencies. In the revised manuscript we will add error bars to the QPO frequencies extracted from the power spectra (derived from the finite duration and stationarity of the time series) and include a new subsection summarizing resolution tests performed on the 2D runs together with a brief discussion of sensitivity to initial field strength. While exhaustive 3D convergence at multiple resolutions is computationally prohibitive, the consistency between 2D and 3D results at the resolutions used will be quantified and reported. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: simulation outputs independent of fitted inputs or self-definitions

full rationale

The paper reports direct outputs from GRMHD simulations initialized with multi-loop magnetic fields. QPO frequencies are stated to follow the local radial epicyclic frequency as measured in the runs, with no equations or claims reducing these frequencies to parameters fitted from the same data or defined circularly. No self-citation chains, ansatzes smuggled via prior work, or renaming of known results appear as load-bearing steps in the abstract or described methodology. The central claim rests on comparative simulation results across topologies rather than any self-referential derivation. This is the expected non-finding for a simulation study whose results are externally falsifiable against observations.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The work relies on standard GRMHD equations and the assumption that the chosen initial magnetic loop configurations are physically plausible; no new entities are postulated and no parameters are reported as fitted to data within the abstract.

axioms (2)
  • standard math Standard general relativistic magnetohydrodynamic equations govern the disk evolution
    Invoked implicitly as the simulation framework throughout the abstract.
  • domain assumption Initial multi-loop magnetic field configurations are representative of real thin accretion disks
    The abstract states these configurations are used but does not derive or justify their realism from observations or theory.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5787 in / 1422 out tokens · 33939 ms · 2026-06-29T10:35:43.822465+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

68 extracted references · 66 canonical work pages · 4 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    2012, ApJL, 747, L4, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/747/1/L4

    Altamirano, D., & Belloni, T. 2012, ApJL, 747, L4, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/747/1/L4

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/747/1/l4 2012

  2. [2]

    title A powerful local shear instability in weakly magnetized disks

    Balbus, S. A., & Hawley, J. F. 1991, ApJ, 376, 214, doi: 10.1086/170270

    work page doi:10.1086/170270 1991

  3. [3]

    A., & Hawley, J

    Balbus, S. A., & Hawley, J. F. 1998, Reviews of Modern Physics, 70, 1, doi: 10.1103/RevModPhys.70.1

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.70.1 1998

  4. [4]

    A., Parker, M., & Islam, N

    Basak, R., Zdziarski, A. A., Parker, M., & Islam, N. 2017, MNRAS, 472, 4220, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2283

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2283 2017

  5. [5]

    C., Armitage, P

    Begelman, M. C., Armitage, P. J., & Reynolds, C. S. 2015, ApJ, 809, 118, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/809/2/118

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/809/2/118 2015

  6. [6]

    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

  7. [7]

    Black hole transients

    Belloni, T. M., Motta, S. E., & Mu˜ noz-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

  8. [8]

    M., & Stella, L

    Belloni, T. M., & Stella, L. 2014, SSRv, 183, 43, doi: 10.1007/s11214-014-0076-0

    work page doi:10.1007/s11214-014-0076-0 2014

  9. [9]

    , keywords =

    Blandford, R. D., & Znajek, R. L. 1977, MNRAS, 179, 433, doi: 10.1093/mnras/179.3.433

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/179.3.433 1977

  10. [10]

    Buisson, D. J. K., Fabian, A. C., Barret, D., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 490, 1350, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2681

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2681 2019

  11. [11]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.17818, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2507.17818 de Avellar, M

    Natarajan, P. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.17818, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2507.17818 de Avellar, M. G. B., Porth, O., Younsi, Z., & Rezzolla, L. 2018, MNRAS, 474, 3967, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx3071

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2507.17818 2025

  12. [12]

    K., & Fendt, C

    Dihingia, I. K., & Fendt, C. 2025, Thin Accretion Disks in GR-MHD Simulations, ed. C. Bambi, Y. Mizuno, S. Shashank, & F. Yuan (Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore), 327–360, doi: 10.1007/978-981-97-8522-3 10

    work page doi:10.1007/978-981-97-8522-3 2025

  13. [13]

    K., & Mizuno, Y

    Dihingia, I. K., & Mizuno, Y. 2025, ApJL, 982, L21, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adbc6d

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adbc6d 2025

  14. [14]

    K., Mizuno, Y., Fromm, C

    Dihingia, I. K., Mizuno, Y., Fromm, C. M., & Younsi, Z. 2025, JCAP, 2025, 152, doi: 10.1088/1475-7516/2025/01/152

    work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/01/152 2025

  15. [15]

    K., Vaidya, B., & Fendt, C

    Dihingia, I. K., Vaidya, B., & Fendt, C. 2021, MNRAS, 505, 3596, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1512

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1512 2021

  16. [16]

    K., Vaidya, B., & Fendt, C

    Dihingia, I. K., Vaidya, B., & Fendt, C. 2022, MNRAS, 517, 5032, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3021

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3021 2022

  17. [17]

    2007, A&A Rv, 15, 1, doi: 10.1007/s00159-007-0006-1

    Done, C., Gierli´ nski, M., & Kubota, A. 2007, A&A Rv, 15, 1, doi: 10.1007/s00159-007-0006-1

    work page doi:10.1007/s00159-007-0006-1 2007

  18. [18]

    , keywords =

    Fender, R. P., Belloni, T. M., & Gallo, E. 2004, MNRAS, 355, 1105, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.08384.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.08384.x 2004

  19. [19]

    C., Chatterjee, K., Ingram, A., & Middleton, M

    Fragile, P. C., Chatterjee, K., Ingram, A., & Middleton, M. 2023, MNRAS, 525, L82, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slad099

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slad099 2023

  20. [20]

    F., McKinney, J

    Gammie, C. F., McKinney, J. C., & T´ oth, G. 2003, ApJ, 589, 444, doi: 10.1086/374594 Garc´ ıa, J. A., Steiner, J. F., McClintock, J. E., et al. 2015, ApJ, 813, 84, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/813/2/84

    work page doi:10.1086/374594 2003

  21. [21]

    M., Dexter, J., & Scepi, N

    Hankla, A. M., Dexter, J., & Scepi, N. 2025, MNRAS, 541, 3184, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf1169

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staf1169 2025

  22. [22]

    E., & Latter, H

    Held, L. E., & Latter, H. N. 2022, MNRAS, 510, 146, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab3398

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab3398 2022

  23. [23]

    D., & Reynolds, C

    Hogg, J. D., & Reynolds, C. S. 2018, ApJ, 861, 24, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aac439

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aac439 2018

  24. [24]

    doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18674.x , keywords =

    Ingram, A., & Done, C. 2011, MNRAS, 415, 2323, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18860.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18860.x 2011

  25. [25]

    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

  26. [26]

    K., et al

    Jiang, H.-X., Mizuno, Y., Dihingia, I. K., et al. 2024, A&A, 688, A82, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202449681

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202449681 2024

  27. [27]

    K., et al

    Jiang, H.-X., Mizuno, Y., Dihingia, I. K., et al. 2025a, ApJ, 990, 81, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adf1e5

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adf1e5

  28. [28]

    M., & Nathanail, A

    Jiang, H.-X., Mizuno, Y., Fromm, C. M., & Nathanail, A. 2023, MNRAS, 522, 2307, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1106

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad1106 2023

  29. [29]

    Fromm, C. M. 2025b, ApJ, 995, 112, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae19ee

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae19ee

  30. [30]

    1978, MNRAS, 185, 629, doi: 10.1093/mnras/185.3.629

    Kato, S. 1978, MNRAS, 185, 629, doi: 10.1093/mnras/185.3.629

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/185.3.629 1978

  31. [31]

    2001, PASJ, 53, 1, doi: 10.1093/pasj/53.1.1

    Kato, S. 2001, PASJ, 53, 1, doi: 10.1093/pasj/53.1.1

    work page doi:10.1093/pasj/53.1.1 2001

  32. [32]

    , keywords =

    Lai, D., & Tsang, D. 2009, MNRAS, 393, 979, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14218.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14218.x 2009

  33. [33]

    , keywords =

    Latter, H. N., & Ogilvie, G. I. 2006, MNRAS, 372, 1829, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.11014.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.11014.x 2006

  34. [34]

    doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21879.x , keywords =

    Latter, H. N., & Papaloizou, J. C. B. 2012, MNRAS, 426, 1107, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21748.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21748.x 2012

  35. [35]

    2019, MNRAS, 487, 550, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz834

    Liska, M., Tchekhovskoy, A., Ingram, A., & van der Klis, M. 2019, MNRAS, 487, 550, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz834

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz834 2019

  36. [36]

    2020, MNRAS, 494, 3656, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa955

    Liska, M., Tchekhovskoy, A., & Quataert, E. 2020, MNRAS, 494, 3656, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa955

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa955 2020

  37. [37]

    2024, ApJ, 966, 47, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad344a

    Musoke, G. 2024, ApJ, 966, 47, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad344a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad344a 2024

  38. [38]

    Liska, M. T. P., Musoke, G., Tchekhovskoy, A., Porth, O., & Beloborodov, A. M. 2022, ApJL, 935, L1, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac84db

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac84db 2022

  39. [39]

    doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21879.x , keywords =

    McKinney, J. C., Tchekhovskoy, A., & Blandford, R. D. 2012, MNRAS, 423, 3083, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21074.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21074.x 2012

  40. [40]

    2015, MNRAS, 446, 240, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu2122

    Miranda, R., Hor´ ak, J., & Lai, D. 2015, MNRAS, 446, 240, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu2122

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu2122 2015

  41. [41]

    2022, Universe, 8, 85, doi: 10.3390/universe8020085

    Mizuno, Y. 2022, Universe, 8, 85, doi: 10.3390/universe8020085

    work page doi:10.3390/universe8020085 2022

  42. [42]

    doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21879.x , keywords =

    Narayan, R., Sadowski, A., Penna, R.-F., & Kulkarni, A. 2012, MNRAS, 426, 3241, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.22002.x 18

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.22002.x 2012

  43. [43]

    M., Porth, O., et al

    Nathanail, A., Fromm, C. M., Porth, O., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 495, 1549, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1165

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1165 2020

  44. [44]

    C., Krolik, J

    Noble, S. C., Krolik, J. H., & Hawley, J. F. 2009, ApJ, 692, 411, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/692/1/411

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/692/1/411 2009

  45. [45]

    D., & Thorne, K

    Novikov, I. D., & Thorne, K. S. 1973, in Black Holes (Les Astres Occlus), ed. C. Dewitt & B. S. Dewitt, 343–450

    1973

  46. [46]

    Stable Oscillations of Black Hole Accretion Discs

    Nowak, M. A., & Lehr, D. E. 1998, in Theory of Black Hole Accretion Disks, ed. M. A. Abramowicz, G. Bj¨ ornsson, & J. E. Pringle, 233–253, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9812004

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/9812004 1998

  47. [47]

    A., & Wagoner, R

    Nowak, M. A., & Wagoner, R. V. 1991, ApJ, 378, 656, doi: 10.1086/170465

    work page doi:10.1086/170465 1991

  48. [48]

    N., & Thorne, K

    Page, D. N., & Thorne, K. S. 1974, ApJ, 191, 499, doi: 10.1086/152990

    work page doi:10.1086/152990 1974

  49. [49]

    A., Silbergleit, A

    Perez, C. A., Silbergleit, A. S., Wagoner, R. V., & Lehr, D. E. 1997, ApJ, 476, 589, doi: 10.1086/303658

    work page doi:10.1086/303658 1997

  50. [50]

    2015, A&A, 573, A120, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201423925

    Coriat, M. 2015, A&A, 573, A120, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201423925

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201423925 2015

  51. [51]

    2019, ApJS, 243, 26, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab29fd

    Porth, O., Chatterjee, K., Narayan, R., et al. 2019, ApJS, 243, 26, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab29fd

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab29fd 2019

  52. [52]

    Prather, B. S. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2408.01361, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2408.01361

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2408.01361 2024

  53. [53]

    Broadband reflection spectroscopy of MAXI J1535-571 using AstroSat: Estimation of black hole mass and spin

    Remillard, R. A., & McClintock, J. E. 2006, ARA&A, 44, 49, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.44.051905.092532

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.44.051905.092532 2006

  54. [54]

    A., McClintock, J

    Remillard, R. A., McClintock, J. E., Orosz, J. A., & Levine, A. M. 2006, ApJ, 637, 1002, doi: 10.1086/498556

    work page doi:10.1086/498556 2006

  55. [55]

    RXTE Observations of 0.1-300 Hz QPOs in the Microquasar GRO J1655-40

    Remillard, R. A., Morgan, E. H., McClintock, J. E., Bailyn, C. D., & Orosz, J. A. 1998, arXiv e-prints, astro, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9806049

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/9806049 1998

  56. [56]

    , keywords =

    Rezzolla, L., Yoshida, S., Maccarone, T. J., & Zanotti, O. 2003, MNRAS, 344, L37, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.07018.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.07018.x 2003

  57. [57]

    Salas, L. D. S., Musoke, G., Chatterjee, K., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 533, 254, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1834

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1834 2024

  58. [58]

    J., & Stone, J

    Sano, T., Inutsuka, S.-i., Turner, N. J., & Stone, J. M. 2004, ApJ, 605, 321, doi: 10.1086/382184

    work page doi:10.1086/382184 2004

  59. [59]

    J., Ness, J.-U., Osborne, J

    Schwarz, G. J., Ness, J.-U., Osborne, J. P., et al. 2011, ApJS, 197, 31, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/197/2/31

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/197/2/31 2011

  60. [60]

    I., & Sunyaev, R

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

    1973

  61. [61]

    1998, ApJL, 492, L59, doi: 10.1086/311075

    Stella, L., & Vietri, M. 1998, ApJL, 492, L59, doi: 10.1086/311075

    work page doi:10.1086/311075 1998

  62. [62]

    Tchekhovskoy, A., Narayan, R., & McKinney, J. C. 2011, MNRAS, 418, L79, doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2011.01147.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1745-3933.2011.01147.x 2011

  63. [63]

    A., Yamaoka, K., Corbel, S., et al

    Tomsick, J. A., Yamaoka, K., Corbel, S., et al. 2009, ApJL, 707, L87, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/707/1/L87

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/707/1/l87 2009

  64. [64]

    , keywords =

    Tsang, D., & Lai, D. 2008, MNRAS, 387, 446, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13252.x van der Klis, M. 2006, in Compact stellar X-ray sources, ed. W. H. G. Lewin & M. van der Klis, Vol. 39, 39–112

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13252.x 2008

  65. [65]

    Wagoner, R. V. 1999, PhR, 311, 259, doi: 10.1016/S0370-1573(98)00104-5

    work page doi:10.1016/s0370-1573(98)00104-5 1999

  66. [66]

    Fromm, C. M. 2026, A&A, 707, A27, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202557948

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202557948 2026

  67. [67]

    2024, MNRAS, 527, 3018, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3406

    Zhou, H. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 3018, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3406

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3406 2024

  68. [68]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2512.03443, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2512.03443

    Zhou, H., Mizuno, Y., & Zhu, Z. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2512.03443, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2512.03443

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2512.03443 2025