Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 149 references

The SKA's first full configurations can provide the observations needed to settle how pulsars emit radio waves.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-02 08:50 UTC pith:RNZO4XHQ

load-bearing objection A comprehensive, well-grounded SKA pulsar magnetosphere review whose central 'solve the problem' claim outruns what the chapter itself shows. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.05432 v2 pith:RNZO4XHQ submitted 2026-07-03 astro-ph.HE

Understanding Pulsar Magnetospheres with the SKAO

L. S. Oswald , A. Basu , M. Chakraborty , B. C. Joshi , N. Lewandowska , K. Liu , M. E. Lower , A. Philippov
show 16 more authors
X. Song P. Tarafdar J. van Leeuwen A. L. Watts P. Weltevrede G. Wright J. Ben\'a\v{c}ek A. Beri S. Cao P. Esposito F. Jankowski J. C. Jiang A. Karastergiou K. J. Lee N. Rea D. Vohl
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords pulsar magnetospheresradio emission mechanismSKApulsar polarizationsubpulse driftingneutron star magnetic fieldpulsar population evolutionfast radio bursts
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This chapter argues that the Square Kilometre Array, at the AA* and AA4 deployment stages, will have the sensitivity, bandwidth, and sub-array flexibility to solve the long-standing problem of pulsar radio emission physics. The authors review a decade of advances, from magnetic-field geometry and polarization to subpulse drifting and magnetosphere simulations, and frame them around five open questions. Their central claim is that a combination of large-scale pulsar monitoring surveys, in-depth follow-up of unusual sources, and coordinated multi-wavelength observations will provide the population-wide data needed to discriminate between competing emission mechanisms. A sympathetic reader would take this as a concrete scientific program with a testable payoff: if the arrays perform as specified, the emission mechanism is no longer an open problem.

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper claims that the SKA telescopes will achieve the advances necessary to solve the problem of pulsar radio emission physics in the coming years. The mechanism is a two-pronged observing strategy: broad-band, full-Stokes monitoring of a large fraction of the pulsar population to extract statistical trends, and high time-resolution follow-up of individual sources and newly discovered objects. The key enablers are the high instantaneous sensitivity of SKA-Mid and SKA-Low (roughly three to four times higher than the current Southern-hemisphere array MeerKAT), the wide instantaneous bandwidths, the capacity to sub-array and observe many pulsars simultaneously, and SKA-Mid

What carries the argument

The load-bearing instrument is the SKA in its AA* and AA4 configurations: 307 of 512 SKA-Low stations and 80 of 133 SKA-Mid dishes combined with the 64 existing MeerKAT dishes, totaling 144 dishes. The argument rests on three capabilities: high sensitivity (about three to four times MeerKAT at similar frequencies), broad instantaneous bandwidth with full-Stokes polarization, and sub-arraying that allows simultaneous monitoring of many pulsars. These convert single-source case studies into population-scale tests, and they are what make the proposed survey-plus-follow-up program capable of separating intrinsic emission from propagation and geometry effects.

Load-bearing premise

The quantitative promises rest on the SKA AA* and AA4 arrays being delivered with the designed sensitivity, bandwidth, and sub-array capability; if actual performance falls short, the proposed observing programs would be less decisive than claimed.

What would settle it

Compare SKA-Mid's delivered sensitivity and Band 5b performance against the design figures assumed in the chapter; if the array does not reach roughly three to four times MeerKAT sensitivity, or if the sub-array scheduling cannot support simultaneous monitoring, the claim that these observations will settle the emission mechanism loses its basis. Equally, a monitoring survey that fails to sharpen the existing correlations with spin-down energy would count against the program's power.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • A large-scale SKA pulsar monitoring survey will map how profile shape, polarization fraction, and subpulse drifting depend on spin-down energy, giving a population-level test of emission models.
  • Broad-band full-Stokes observations will separate magnetospheric propagation effects, such as orthogonal polarization modes and birefringence, from the intrinsic emission mechanism.
  • SKA-Mid Band 5b observations above 10 GHz will, for the first time, probe the high-frequency emission of a large pulsar sample, testing radius-to-frequency mapping and high-altitude emission components.
  • High-sensitivity single-pulse studies will test whether quasi-periodic substructure scales with rotation period across pulsars, magnetars, and possibly fast radio bursts.
  • Eclipse monitoring of the double pulsar with SKA-Mid will constrain the pair multiplicity and magnetic-field structure of the eclipsing magnetosphere.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same sub-array flexibility could enable simultaneous multi-frequency monitoring of one pulsar, a mode the chapter mentions but does not fully develop as a standalone program.
  • If the scaling of quasi-periodic substructure holds across the newly discovered population, SKA single-pulse data would effectively turn the substructure period into a neutron-star rotation-period estimator for objects where timing is difficult.
  • Population-wide statistics may also feed back into pulsar timing arrays, since identifying and modeling variable profile components reduces a noise source in gravitational-wave background searches.
  • The proposed sensitivity would allow systematic searches for weak radio emission from radio-quiet magnetars, potentially connecting the magnetar and fast-radio-burst populations.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. This chapter, prepared for the SKA II volume, reviews the past decade of progress in pulsar magnetosphere physics and argues that the SKA telescopes—particularly the AA* and AA4 configurations—will provide the observations needed to resolve the five key open questions: magnetic-field geometry, intrinsic emission spectra, time variability, global magnetosphere physics, and population evolution. It synthesizes results from MeerKAT, Murriyang, LOFAR, FAST, and other facilities, and closes by recommending a large-scale monitoring survey, sub-arraying, broad-band full-Stokes observations, and follow-up of individual sources such as the double pulsar. The central forward-looking claim is that these observations 'will achieve the advances necessary to solve the problem of pulsar radio emission physics.'

Significance. The chapter is a comprehensive and generally well-calibrated review of the current observational and theoretical landscape. Its main strengths are the breadth of the synthesis, the concrete discussion of recent single-pulse and polarization measurements, and the explicit acknowledgement that simulations have not yet reproduced several observed phenomena (e.g., spark structures, time variability). If SKA performs as assumed, the proposed monitoring programs would clearly produce higher-quality data over a larger sample, and several individual investigations—such as the eclipse mapping of PSR J0737−3039A/B—are persuasive and well motivated. However, the chapter makes no quantitative predictions or model-comparison calculations; its significance rests on the sufficiency argument that the proposed observations will actually break the degeneracies between competing emission models. That sufficiency is asserted rather than demonstrated, and the body of the text itself lists multiple unresolved gaps.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract; §7 Conclusions] The claim that the AA*/AA4 observations 'will achieve the advances necessary to solve the problem of pulsar radio emission physics' is not supported by the body of the chapter. The text itself states that simulations have not generated spark structures (§3.1), that mechanisms driving time-variability have not been uncovered by simulations (§4.1), and that simulations cannot yet replicate the full complexity of observations (§4.5). Similarly, §1.1 and §2.2 show that RVM fitting and OPM decomposition remain ambiguous for most pulsars. Unless the authors can specify a concrete, falsifiable pathway by which the proposed observations discriminate between, for example, carousel and fan-beam models, the abstract and conclusions should be tempered to 'substantial progress' rather than 'solve.' This is a load-bearing issue because the chapter's stated purpose is built on this claim.
  2. [§4.2] The statement that SKA-Mid will be 'approximately three to four times more sensitive than MeerKAT at similar observing frequencies' is given without citation or derivation. This factor is then used to argue that one SKA observation equals four averaged MeerKAT observations, which in turn motivates the eclipse-measurement program. Since the actual sensitivity depends on the specific AA* and AA4 configurations and on observing band, the claim should either be referenced to an official SKA sensitivity table or explicitly labeled as an assumption. Without this, a key quantitative premise of the proposed program is unverified.
  3. [§6.2] The proposed observing program (items 1–5) lists broad categories—surveys, monitoring, follow-up—but does not state expected sample sizes, signal-to-noise thresholds, or observational signatures that would rule out or favor specific emission models. For a chapter whose central claim is that these observations will solve the emission problem, at least one concrete example is needed: e.g., 'a measurement of X in a sample of N pulsars would distinguish carousel from fan-beam geometries.' Without such a link, the recommendations are a reasonable extension of current surveys but do not establish sufficiency.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract; §6.2] The terms 'AA*' and 'AA4' are used without explicit definition at first occurrence. Since readers may not know these are SKA construction milestones, define them (e.g., array configuration names) and use consistent notation. Note also the 'AA★' symbol in §4.2.
  2. [§2.2] The phrase 'heteroscedasticity along this morphological sequence' is accurate but jargon-heavy; a brief explanation would help the non-specialist reader.
  3. [Fig. 5] The axes in the P–Pdot diagram are not labeled in the figure preview; ensure the published figure includes axis labels and units.
  4. [References] Several references are to in-press AASKAII companion chapters (e.g., Keane et al. 2026, Shannon et al. 2026, Tiburzi et al. 2026). These are appropriate for the volume but should be marked as forthcoming with arXiv IDs where available.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: the chapter is a review with no fitted parameters or predictions that reduce to inputs.

full rationale

This is a review/prospects chapter, not a derivation or modeling paper. It reports observational and simulation results from the literature and proposes future SKA observing programs. There is no quantity in the paper that is fitted from a subset of data and then presented as a prediction; the forward-looking statements (e.g., that AA* and AA4 observations 'will achieve the advances necessary to solve the problem of pulsar radio emission physics') are programmatic claims, not derived results. The authors do cite their own previous work extensively, but these citations are used as ordinary references to published observations (e.g., Oswald et al. 2023a, Song et al. 2023, Basu et al. 2024, Lower et al. 2024b) and not as load-bearing unverified premises. The manuscript itself is candid about the limitations of current simulations, noting that they 'have not generated spark structures' and 'cannot yet replicate the full complexity of observations.' Such statements weaken the persuasiveness of the future-science claims, but they are not instances of circular reasoning: no equation is defined in terms of another, no fitted value is relabeled a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported from the authors' prior work to force a conclusion. The central claims are therefore self-contained in the sense relevant to circularity analysis, and the appropriate finding is no significant circularity (score 0).

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 3 axioms · 0 invented entities

The chapter is a review, so it introduces no free parameters or new entities. Its central claim depends on the future performance of the SKA and on the adequacy of standard models in pulsar astrophysics.

axioms (3)
  • domain assumption The SKA AA* and AA4 configurations will be deployed as planned with the stated sensitivity, bandwidth, and sub-array capability.
    Quantitative promises in Section 6, e.g., 'approximately three to four times more sensitive than MeerKAT' (Section 4.2), depend on the design parameters being met.
  • domain assumption Existing pulsar emission and magnetosphere models (RVM, Goldreich-Julian/Ruderman-Sutherland, force-free and PIC simulations) are adequate starting points for interpreting observations.
    Sections 1.1 and 4.1 build the review's interpretive framework on these models, while acknowledging their limitations.
  • domain assumption The pulsar catalogue (ATNF psrcat) is complete and accurate for the statistical discussions.
    Section 5 uses psrcat data (4,343 pulsars) for the P-Pdot diagram and population trends.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 31385 in / 8190 out tokens · 80464 ms · 2026-08-02T08:50:43.779847+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

The SKA telescopes will bring unparalleled sensitivity across a broad radio band, a wide field of view across the Southern sky, and the capacity for sub-arraying, all of which make them the ideal instruments for studying the pulsar magnetosphere. This chapter describes the advances that have been made in pulsar magnetosphere physics over the last decade, and details how these have been made possible through the advances of modern radio telescopes, particularly SKA precursors and pathfinders. It explains how the SKA telescopes would transform the field of pulsar magnetosphere physics through a combination of large-scale monitoring surveys and in-depth follow-up observations of unique sources and new discoveries. Finally, it describes how the specific observing opportunities available with the AA* and AA4 configurations will achieve the advances necessary to solve the problem of pulsar radio emission physics in the coming years.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.05432 by A. Basu, A. Beri, A. Karastergiou, A. L. Watts, A. Philippov, B. C. Joshi, D. Vohl, F. Jankowski, G. Wright, J. Ben\'a\v{c}ek, J. C. Jiang, J. van Leeuwen, K. J. Lee, K. Liu, L. S. Oswald, M. Chakraborty, M. E. Lower, N. Lewandowska, N. Rea, P. Esposito, P. Tarafdar, P. Weltevrede, S. Cao, X. Song.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Average of four MeerKAT UHF polarization light curves of PSR J0737−3039A being eclipsed by the truncated dipolar magnetosphere of PSR J0737−3039B. Top panel shows the linear polarization position angle (Ψ), middle is the ellipticity angle (𝜒) and the lower panel depicts the changes in total intensity (𝐼; black solid line), total linear polarization (𝐿; dashed orange line) and circular polarization (𝑉; dash… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Two examples of integrated pulse profiles of pulsars observed with the Murriyang radio telescope using its Ultra-Wideband receiver. The full frequency resolution of the receiver (704–4032 MHz) is split into 8 subbands, and the pulse profiles displayed here are taken from the subband centred at 1400 MHz. In each case the top subplot shows the position angle (PA) of the linear polarization, and the bottom su… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: An example of a pulsar with profile variability as identified in the Thousand-Pulsar-Array project with MeerKAT. The figure is similar to that in Basu et al. (2024), but includes more recent data. The top panel shows the average pulse profile of PSR J1141−3322. The colour map in the lower left panel shows the phase resolved temporal evolution of profile shape of the pulsar (for details see Basu et al. 2024… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Illustration of the dipolar magnetic field of a pulsar where key regions of interest are highlighted. The inner and outer magnetosphere are defined by the regions within and beyond the light-cylinder radius, indicated by the orange cylinder, where the co-rotation velocity exceeds the vacuum speed of light. Elec￾tromagnetic radiation is generated in the shaded regions, with radio emission originating from t… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: This figure shows all of the pulsars discovered to date which have both a measured period 𝑃 and period derivative 𝑃¤, as a function of those two variables. The pulsars are shown with small black dots, and a Gaussian kernel density estimation of the whole distribution is shown in green. A total of 4,343 pulsars have been discovered, of which 2,816 have a measurement of 𝑃¤. Data taken from the pulsar catalog… view at source ↗

Review history (2 revisions) →

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

149 extracted references

  1. [4]

    doi: 10.1086/163979

    ISSN 0004-637X. doi: 10.1086/163979. A. Basu et al.MNRAS, 528(4):7458–7476, Mar

    doi:10.1086/163979

  2. [9]

    doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450949

    ISSN 0004-6361. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450949. J. Benáček et al.A&A, 707:A316, Mar

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450949

  3. [11]

    doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab53e7. A. V. Bilous et al.A&A, 658:A143, Feb

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab53e7 2041

  4. [12]

    doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142242. S. Bogdanov et al.ApJL, 887(1):L25, Dec. 2019a. doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab53eb. S. Bogdanov et al.ApJL, 887(1):L26, Dec. 2019b. doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab5968. S. Bogdanov et al.ApJL, 914(1):L15, June

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202142242 2041

  5. [17]

    doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012. 20998.x. M. Caleb et al.Nature Astronomy, 6(7):828–836, jul

    arXiv 2012

  6. [19]

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw124. B. Cerutti, A. A. Philippov, and G. Dubus.A&A, 642:A204, Oct

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stw124

  7. [21]

    doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451948

    ISSN 14320746. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451948. D. Champion et al.MNRAS, 498(4):6044–6056, Nov

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451948

  8. [22]

    A.Y.Chen,Y.Yuan,andG.Vasilopoulos.ApJL,893(2):L38,Apr.2020

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa2764. A.Y.Chen,Y.Yuan,andG.Vasilopoulos.ApJL,893(2):L38,Apr.2020. doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ 28 Pulsar Magnetospheres Oswald et al. ab85c5. A. Chernoglazov, A. Philippov, and A. Timokhin.ApJL, 974(2):L32, Oct

    doi:10.1093/mnras/staa2764 2020

  9. [23]

    CHIME/FRB Collaboration et al.Nature, 587(7832):54–58, Nov

    doi: 10.3847/ 2041-8213/ad7e24. CHIME/FRB Collaboration et al.Nature, 587(7832):54–58, Nov

    2041

  10. [24]

    doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-04841-8. D. Choudhury et al.ApJL, 971(1):L20, Aug

    doi:10.1038/s41586-022-04841-8

  11. [25]

    doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad5a6f. I. Contopoulos, D. Kazanas, and C. Fendt.ApJ, 511(1):351–358, mar

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad5a6f 2041

  12. [27]

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1813

    ISSN 13652966. doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1813. J. M. Cordes.ApJ, 222:1006–1011,

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1813

  13. [28]

    doi: 10.1038/s41550-019-0880-2. A. R. Crusius-Wätzel, T. Kunzl, and H. Lesch.ApJ, 546(1):401–405, Jan

    doi:10.1038/s41550-019-0880-2

  14. [29]

    doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac2157

    ISSN 2041-8205. doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac2157. S. Dai et al.ApJL, 874(2):L14, Apr

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac2157 2041

  15. [30]

    doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab0e7a. S. J. Dang et al.MNRAS, 528(2):1213–1222, Feb

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab0e7a 2041

  16. [31]

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae046. I. de Ruiter et al.Nature Astronomy, 5:1–13, mar

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stae046

  17. [32]

    doi: 10.1126/science.aav7272. G. Desvignes et al.Nature Astronomy, 8:617–627, May

    doi:10.1126/science.aav7272

  18. [33]

    doi: 10.1038/s41550-024-02226-7. A. J. Dittmann et al.ApJ, 974(2):295, Oct

    doi:10.1038/s41550-024-02226-7

  19. [34]

    doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad5f1e. R. C. Duncan and C. Thompson.ApJL, 392:L9, June

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad5f1e

  20. [36]

    doi: 10.1109/ISAP53582.2022.9998708. J. Dyks.MNRAS, 488(2):2018–2040,

    arXiv 2022

  21. [37]

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1690

    ISSN 13652966. doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1690. J. Dyks, P. Weltevrede, and C. Ilie.MNRAS, 501(2):2156–2173, feb

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stz1690

  22. [38]

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3762

    ISSN 13652966. doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3762. R. P. Eatough et al.Nature, 501(7467):391–394, Sept

    doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3762

  23. [41]

    doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac03b8. V. Gajjar et al.ApJ, 797(1):18, Dec

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac03b8 2041

  24. [43]

    doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450758. J. D. Gelfand et al. InAdvancing Astrophysics with the SKA – II (AASKAII)

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450758

  25. [44]

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1501

    ISSN 13652966. doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1501. P. Goldreich and W. H. Julian.ApJ, 157:869, Aug

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1501

  26. [50]

    doi: 10.1086/527293. T. H. Hankins, J. S. Kern, J. C. Weatherall, and J. A. Eilek.Nature, 422:141–143, Mar

    doi:10.1086/527293

  27. [51]

    doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/833/ 1/47. A. K. Harding and A. G. Muslimov.ApJ, 556(2):987–1001, Aug

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/833/

  28. [54]

    H.E.S.S.Collaborationetal.NatureAstronomy,7(11):1341–1350,nov2023

    doi: 10.1126/science.1230960. H.E.S.S.Collaborationetal.NatureAstronomy,7(11):1341–1350,nov2023. ISSN23973366. doi: 10.1038/s41550-023-02052-3. G. Hobbs et al.PASA, 37:e012, Apr

    doi:10.1126/science.1230960

  29. [55]

    doi: 10.1017/pasa.2020.2. M. Hoogkamer et al.Phys. Rev. D, 112(2):023008, July

    doi:10.1017/pasa.2020.2 2020

  30. [57]

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf323

    ISSN 0035-8711. doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf323. N. Hurley-Walker et al.Nature, Volume 601, Issue 7894, p.526-530, 601(7894):526, jan

    doi:10.1093/mnras/staf323

  31. [58]

    doi: 10.1038/S41586-021-04272-X

    ISSN 0028-0836. doi: 10.1038/S41586-021-04272-X. D. Íñiguez-Pascual, D. Viganò, and D. F. Torres.MNRAS, 516(2):2475–2485, Oct

    doi:10.1038/s41586-021-04272-x

  32. [59]

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2275. C. D. Ilie, P. Weltevrede, S. Johnston, and T. Chen.MNRAS, 491(3):3385–3394, Jan

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stac2275

  33. [60]

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz3167. P. Janagal et al.MNRAS, 523(4):5934–5946, Aug. 2023a. doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1797. P. Janagal, S. J. McSweeney, M. Chakraborty, and N. D. R. Bhat.MNRAS, 524(2):2684–2697, Sept. 2023b. doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad2056. F. Jankowski et al.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 473(4):4436–4458,

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stz3167

  34. [62]

    doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad2930

    ISSN 0004-637X. doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad2930. S. Johnston and M. Kramer.MNRAS, 490(4):4565–4574,

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad2930

  35. [65]

    doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aab550. C. Kalapotharakos, Z. Wadiasingh, A. K. Harding, and D. Kazanas.ApJ, 907(2):63, Feb

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aab550

  36. [66]

    doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abcec0. A. Karastergiou et al.MNRAS, 532(3):3558–3566, aug

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abcec0

  37. [67]

    doi: 10.1017/pasa.2024.30. H. S. Knight.Chinese Journal of Astronomy and Astrophysics Supplement, 6(S2):41–47, Dec

    doi:10.1017/pasa.2024.30 2024

  38. [68]

    doi: 10.1086/305790. M. Kramer et al.Science, 312(5773):549–551, Apr

    doi:10.1086/305790

  39. [69]

    doi: 10.1126/science.1124060. M. Kramer et al.MNRAS, 377(1):107–119, May

    doi:10.1126/science.1124060

  40. [71]

    doi: 10.1038/s41550-023-02125-3. J. Krtička et al.Space Sci. Rev., 220(2):24, Mar

    doi:10.1038/s41550-023-02125-3

  41. [72]

    doi: 10.1007/s11214-024-01058-1. Y. W. J. Lee et al.Nature Astronomy, pages 1–13, jan

    doi:10.1007/s11214-024-01058-1

  42. [74]

    L.Levinetal

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2074. L.Levinetal. InAdvancingAstrophysicswiththeSKA–II(AASKAII).2026. arXivsearch: Report number AASKAII/Levin01. R. Lin et al.ApJ, 945(2):115, Mar

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2074 2026

  43. [75]

    doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acba95. K. Liu et al.MNRAS, 420(1):361–368, Feb

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acba95

  44. [77]

    doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab4da8. K. Liu et al.MNRAS, 513(3):4037–4044, July

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab4da8 2041

  45. [78]

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1082. W. Lockhart, S. E. Gralla, F. Özel, and D. Psaltis.MNRAS, 490(2):1774–1783, Dec

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1082

  46. [79]

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2524. D. R. Lorimer and M. Kramer.Handbook of Pulsar Astronomy

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2524

  47. [81]

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3789. M. E. Lower et al.MNRAS, 524(4):5904–5917, oct

    doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3789

  48. [83]

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf427. S. C. Lundgren et al.ApJ, 453:433, Nov

    doi:10.1093/mnras/staf427

  49. [85]

    doi: 10.1126/science.1186683. A. G. Lyne et al.Science, 303(5661):1153–1157, Feb

    doi:10.1126/science.1186683

  50. [86]

    doi: 10.1126/science.1094645. Y. Lyubarsky.MNRAS, 483(2):1731–1736, Feb

    doi:10.1126/science.1094645

  51. [87]

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty3233. M. Lyutikov.ApJL, 580(1):L65–L68, Nov

    doi:10.1093/mnras/sty3233

  52. [89]

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt351. M. Lyutikov and C. Thompson.ApJ, 634(2):1223–1241, Dec

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stt351

  53. [91]

    doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab3a47. Y. Maan, M. P. Surnis, B. Chandra Joshi, and M. Bagchi.ApJ, 931(1):67, May

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab3a47 2041

  54. [92]

    doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac68f1. R. N. Manchester, G. B. Hobbs, A. Teoh, and M. Hobbs.ApJ, 129:1993–2006,

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac68f1 1993

  55. [93]

    doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae145d. M. A. McLaughlin et al.ApJL, 616(2):L131–L134, Dec

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae145d

  56. [94]

    doi: 10.1086/426813. S. J. McSweeney et al.ApJ, 933(2):210, July

    doi:10.1086/426813

  57. [95]

    doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac75bc. Y. Men et al.SciA, 11(3):eadp6351, jan

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac75bc

  58. [96]

    doi: 10.1126/sciadv.adp6351

    ISSN 23752548. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.adp6351. F. C. Michel.ApJ, 180:207–226, Feb. 1973a. doi: 10.1086/151956. F. C. Michel.ApJL, 180:L133, Mar. 1973b. doi: 10.1086/181169. M. T. Miles et al.MNRAS, 536(2):1467–1488, Jan

    doi:10.1126/sciadv.adp6351

  59. [97]

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae2572. M. C. Miller et al.ApJL, 887(1):L24, Dec

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stae2572

  60. [98]

    doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab50c5. M. C. Miller et al.ApJL, 918(2):L28, Sept

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab50c5 2041

  61. [99]

    doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac089b. D. Mitra, M. Arjunwadkar, and J. M. Rankin.ApJ, 806:236, June

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac089b 2041

  62. [101]

    doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629937. A. Naidu, B. C. Joshi, P. K. Manoharan, and M. A. Krishnakumar.MNRAS, 475(2):2375–2382, Apr

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629937

  63. [102]

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx3284. R. Nan et al.IJMPD, 20(6):989–1024, jun

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stx3284

  64. [103]

    S.Osłowskietal.MNRAS,418(2):1258–1271,Dec.2011.doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19578.x

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1660. S.Osłowskietal.MNRAS,418(2):1258–1271,Dec.2011.doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19578.x. L. Oswald, A. Karastergiou, and S. Johnston.MNRAS, 496(2):1418–1429, Aug

    arXiv 2011

  65. [104]

    L.S.Oswaldetal.MNRAS,520(4):4961–4980,feb2023a

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1597. L.S.Oswaldetal.MNRAS,520(4):4961–4980,feb2023a. ISSN0035-8711. doi: 10.1093/mnras/ stad070. L. S. Oswald, A. Karastergiou, and S. Johnston.MNRAS, 525(1):840–853, oct 2023b. ISSN 13652966. doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad2271. J. Palfreyman et al.Nature, 556(7700):219–222,

    doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1597

  66. [105]

    doi: 10.1038/ s41586-018-0001-x

    ISSN 14764687. doi: 10.1038/ s41586-018-0001-x. A. Parthasarathy et al.MNRAS, 494(2):2012–2026, mar

    2012

  67. [106]

    32 Pulsar Magnetospheres Oswald et al

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab037. 32 Pulsar Magnetospheres Oswald et al. I. Pastor-Marazuela et al.A&A, 678:A149, Oct

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stab037

  68. [107]

    doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243339. I. Pastor-Marazuela et al.A&A, 693:A279, Jan

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202243339

  69. [108]

    doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450953. A. B. Pearlman et al.ApJ, 866(2):160, Oct

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450953

  70. [109]

    doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aade4d. U. L. Pen, J. P. Macquart, A. T. Deller, and W. Brisken.MNRAS, 440:L36–L40, May

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aade4d

  71. [110]

    doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slu010. J. Pétri and D. Mitra.A&A, 654:A106, oct

    doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slu010

  72. [112]

    ISSN00664146

    A.PhilippovandM.Kramer.Ann.Rev.Astron.Astrophys.,60:495–558,aug2022. ISSN00664146. doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-052920-112338. A. Philippov, D. A. Uzdensky, A. Spitkovsky, and B. Cerutti.ApJL, 876(1):L6, May

    doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-052920-112338

  73. [113]

    A.Philippov,A.Timokhin,andA.Spitkovsky.PhysicalReviewLetters,124(24):245101,jun2020

    doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab1590. A.Philippov,A.Timokhin,andA.Spitkovsky.PhysicalReviewLetters,124(24):245101,jun2020. ISSN 10797114. doi: 10.1103/PHYSREVLETT.124.245101/FIGURES/1/SMALL. A. A. Philippov and A. Spitkovsky.ApJ, 855(2):94, Mar

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab1590 2041

  74. [114]

    doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaabbc. B. Posselt et al.MNRAS, 508(3):4249–4268, dec

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaabbc

  75. [117]

    doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202140811. L. Qi et al.ApJ, 981(2):99, Mar

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202140811

  76. [118]

    doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adb42f. G. J. Qiao et al.ApJL, 616(2):L127–L130, Dec

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adb42f

  77. [119]

    doi: 10.1086/426862. V. Radhakrishnan and D. J. Cooke.ApJ Lett., 3:225,

    doi:10.1086/426862

  78. [120]

    doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20011525. J. M. Rankin and R. Ramachandran.ApJ, 590(1):411–423, June

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20011525

  79. [122]

    doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20054417. N. Rea et al.ApJ, 961(2):214, feb

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20054417

  80. [123]

    doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad165d

    ISSN 0004-637X. doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad165d. D. J. Reardon et al.ApJL, 971(1):L18, Aug

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad165d

Showing first 80 references.