Pith. sign in

REVIEW 6 major objections 6 minor 75 references

Multi-year Polarimetric Monitoring of Four CHIME-Discovered Repeating Fast Radio Bursts with FAST

T0 review · 6 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Multi-year FAST polarimetry of four repeating FRBs shows that a majority of such sources have rotation-measure swings above 50 rad/m² and some flip sign, implying dynamic magneto-ionic surroundings and a turbulence spectrum dominated by…

desk verdict New FAST data and transparent population statistics make this worth refereeing; the shallow-turbulence claim needs a stronger anchor than an un-derived 1 ms structure-function point. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.02355 v1 pith:3QITD7MF submitted 2025-07-03 astro-ph.HE

Yi Feng , Yong-Kun Zhang , Jintao Xie , Yuan-Pei Yang , Yuanhong Qu , Dengke Zhou , Di Li , Bing Zhang
show 45 more authors
Weiwei Zhu Wenbin Lu Jiaying Xu Chenchen Miao Shiyan Tian Pei Wang Ju-Mei Yao Chen-Hui Niu Jiarui Niu Heng Xu Jinchen Jiang Dejiang Zhou Zenan Liu Chao-Wei Tsai Zigao Dai Xuefeng Wu Fayin Wang Jinlin Han Kejia Lee Renxin Xu Yongfeng Huang Yuanchuan Zou Jinhuang Cao Xianglei Chen Jianhua Fang Dongzi Li Ye Li Wanjin Lu Jiawei Luo Jintao Luo Rui Luo Fen Lyu Bojun Wang Weiyang Wang Qin Wu Mengyao Xue Di Xiao Wenfei Yu Jianping Yuan Chunfeng Zhang Junshuo Zhang Lei Zhang Songbo Zhang Rushuang Zhao Yuhao Zhu
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.HE PACS 95.30.Gv95.85.Bh98.70.Dk
keywords fastradioburstsrepeatingFRBsrotationmeasurepolarizationFaradayturbulencemagneto-ionicenvironment
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

Fast radio bursts are millisecond flashes from cosmological distances; for the subset that repeats, polarization can reveal what sits immediately around the source. This paper uses multi-year FAST observations of four repeating FRBs — 66 bursts in total — to argue that many repeaters live in dynamic, magnetized, ionized environments close to the central engine. It reports that two of the four sources are highly linearly polarized while two show wavelength-dependent depolarization from multipath propagation, and that one source (FRB 20190417A) emits bursts with up to 35.7% circular polarization. Combining its measurements with published data, the paper claims that 64% of repeating FRBs with multiple RM measurements show rotation-measure changes larger than 50 rad m$^{-2}$ and 21% show RM reversals, and that the RM structure function has a power-law index $\gamma \sim 0$--$0.8$, corresponding to a shallow turbulence spectrum $\alpha = -(\gamma+2)$ between about $-2.0$ and $-2.8$. A sympathetic reader would care because, if right, this turns repeating FRBs into probes of the turbulent plasma surrounding their progenitors, and distinguishes them from non-repeating FRBs.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing tool is the rotation-measure structure function, $D_{\rm RM}(\Delta t) = \langle [{\rm RM}(t)-{\rm RM}(t+\Delta t)]^2 \rangle$. For a turbulent plasma screen sampled by a line of sight moving with transverse velocity $v_\perp$, time lags convert to spatial scales through $l = v_\perp \Delta t$, and the spatial structure function connects to the turbulence power spectrum $P(k)\propto k^\alpha$ via $D_{\rm RM}\propto l^{-(\alpha+2)}$ for a thick screen. The paper fits $\log D_{\rm RM}$ against $\log \Delta t$ to obtain $\gamma$, then converts with $\alpha = -(\gamma+2)$; the resulting $\alpha$ between $-2.0$ and $-2.8$ lies above the Kolmogorov value $-11/3$, defining a shallow spectrum dominated by small-scale fluctuations. To handle the depolarized sources, the paper also uses the multipath RM-scattering formula $f = 1 - \exp(-2\lambda^4 \sigma_{\rm RM}^2)$ to assign $\sigma_{\rm RM}$ values to FRBs 20190117A and 20190417A.

What would settle it

Measure RM across bursts of one repeater at separations from minutes to months. A flat structure function at short lags, or an RM scatter between bursts minutes apart equal to that between bursts months apart, would falsify the turbulent-screen mapping $l = v_\perp \Delta t$ on which the spectral-index conclusion rests.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper aims to establish that repeating FRBs as a class are surrounded by dynamic, magnetized plasma. Three of the four newly monitored repeaters show substantial rotation-measure variations between bursts, and adding the published record yields 64% of all repeaters with multiple RM measurements changing by more than 50 rad m$^{-2}$, with 21% showing RM reversals. The paper further claims that the RM structure function is a power law in time lag with index $\gamma \sim 0$--$0.8$, which it translates through the turbulent-screen formalism into a shallow spatial power spectrum $\alpha = -(\gamma+2)$ between $-2.0$ and $-2.8$; small-scale fluctuations, not the largest eddies, dominate the RM wander. On the polarization side, the paper finds that repeaters are highly linearly polarized as a group, that one burst of FRB 20190417A reaches 35.7% circular polarization, and that the linear polarization distributions of five repeaters are nearly identical while differing from those of non-repeaters.

Load-bearing premise

The structure-function argument assumes that the observed RM changes are produced by a turbulent plasma screen whose spatial fluctuations the line of sight samples through uniform transverse motion, so a time lag $\Delta t$ can be converted into a spatial scale $l = v_\perp \Delta t$; if the changes instead come from a changing path through a static medium, from source-intrinsic effects, or from a non-turbulent outflow, the inferred turbulence spectral index does not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the 64% figure holds, most repeating FRBs with repeated RM measurements occupy dynamic magneto-ionic environments, making burst-to-burst RM monitoring a direct probe of the local circumburst medium.
  • A 21% RM-reversal rate would make magnetic field reversals a common, not exceptional, feature of repeater environments.
  • A shallow turbulence spectrum with $\alpha$ between $-2.0$ and $-2.8$ means small-scale RM density fluctuations dominate the wandering, which the paper connects to supersonic turbulence in regions like star-forming clouds.
  • The near-identical linear polarization distributions of five repeaters, distinct from non-repeaters, would give observers a polarization-based class separator, subject to the small-sample caveats the paper states.
  • Because the paper treats 64% and 21% as lower limits, continued long-term monitoring should push both fractions upward rather than downward.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • An extension the paper does not pursue is to apply the same structure-function analysis to intra-epoch or sub-day RM differences; a short-lag slope that disagrees with the long-lag slope would test the uniform-transverse-motion screen assumption.
  • If the shallow-spectrum result holds for more sources, RM monitoring of repeaters could constrain the density spectrum of the circumburst medium and thereby weigh progenitor scenarios such as supernova remnants, magnetar winds, and companion outflows — a discrimination the paper does not claim to make.
  • The marginal RM dichotomy between repeaters and non-repeaters, which the paper itself flags as possibly selection-driven, could be settled by measuring RMs for a sample of non-repeaters with matched telescopes and cadence.
  • The two high-circular-polarization bursts from FRB 20190417A suggest that adding more bursts could bring this source into the small club of repeaters with detectable circular polarization, which would bear on the magnetospheric emission interpretation.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

6 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper reports multi-year FAST polarimetric monitoring of four CHIME-discovered repeating FRBs (20190117A, 20190208A, 20190303A, 20190417A), detecting 66 bursts in total. It measures rotation measures, linear and circular polarization fractions, identifies two high-significance circular-polarization bursts from FRB 20190417A, and derives intra-burst RM scatter for FRBs 20190117A and 20190417A. Combining their RM data with published results for 18 repeating FRBs, the authors report that 64% show RM variations above 50 rad/m^2 and 21% show RM reversals. They further compute RM structure functions, claiming a shallow turbulence power spectrum with index alpha ~ -(2.0-2.8), and perform K-S tests comparing RM distributions of repeating and non-repeating FRBs, finding a marginal dichotomy. The paper is transparent about several selection effects and explicitly conditions the turbulence interpretation on the RM variations being attributed to turbulence.

Significance. If the empirical claims stand, this is a useful addition to the small sample of repeaters with extended polarimetric monitoring. The 64% and 21% tallies consolidate earlier indications that many repeating FRBs reside in dynamic magneto-ionic environments, and the circular-polarization detections add to the census of such events. The paper's explicit discussion of selection biases in the K-S tests is a strength. However, the headline spectral-index conclusion is the most fragile part: it depends on an unverified mapping from time lags to spatial scales and on placing an intra-burst sigma_RM value at a 1 ms lag. These issues are fixable in revision by softening the claim and adding robustness tests, but they currently outrun the evidence.

major comments (6)
  1. [Section 4 and Figure 3] The structure function includes an intra-burst sigma_RM point at Delta t = 1 ms. As defined in Eq. (3), sigma_RM is a single-epoch variance over ray paths, not a two-epoch difference [RM(t) - RM(t+Delta t)]^2, and the path-diversity-to-time mapping is not derived. For sources with few epoch pairs this anchor can dominate the log-log fit. Please report fits with and without this anchor, per-source gamma values with uncertainties, and the number of pairs contributing to each binned point.
  2. [Section 4, D_RM proportional to l^{-(alpha+2)}] The conversion D_RM(t) = D_RM(v_perp t) assumes a static turbulent screen and a single uniform transverse velocity. The paper does not test this against alternatives such as a changing line of sight, binary/outflow motion, or source-intrinsic RM changes. The abstract's conditional wording does not carry into Conclusion item 5, which asserts that small-scale RM-density fluctuations dominate. Please either add a sensitivity test (for example, varying v_perp or excluding sources with dynamically known environments) or state the spectral-index inference as conditional throughout the conclusions.
  3. [Section 3, Figure 2, Eq. (3), Table 4] For FRB 20190117A, the FAST and CHIME data give inconsistent sigma_RM values (9.85 and 2.78 rad/m^2), and the fit discards the FAST point because of the inconsistency. The abstract and Table 4 quote 2.78 +/- 0.05 without stating that this value is CHIME-only. This matters because the structure-function anchor for this source changes substantially if the FAST value is used. State explicitly which measurement is used in the structure function and justify the exclusion with a physical model.
  4. [Table 4] The column labeled sigma_RM mixes two different quantities: intra-burst RM scatter from Eq. (3) and the standard deviation of RM over time. For FRB 20121102A, sigma_RM = 30.9 +/- 0.4 cannot be the standard deviation of the RMmin/RMmax entries listed in the same row. This conflation is directly related to the use of sigma_RM as a 1 ms structure-function point. Rename the column and separate the two quantities.
  5. [Section 4, 50 rad/m^2 threshold] The 64% and 21% tallies depend on a threshold that is justified only by an unquantified statement that RM variations of 10-30 rad/m^2 can be apparent rather than environmental. Show the counts for several thresholds (for example, 20, 30, 50, and 80 rad/m^2) and state whether the conclusions are stable under this choice.
  6. [Section 3, Figure 1] The pairwise t-tests treat individual bursts from the same FRB as independent samples, but bursts from a single repeating source are correlated. This can bias the p-values comparing the five repeaters with the non-repeating sample. Please supplement the burst-level test with source-averaged linear polarization fractions, or otherwise address the non-independence explicitly.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Table 4 footnote] The footnote says FRB 20220912A is excluded because its RM variations are smaller than 50 rad/m^2, but the source is listed in the table; clarify what it is excluded from.
  2. [Table 3] Several bursts (for example, FRB 20190303A burst 12 and multiple FRB 20190417A bursts) have no RM or polarization entries; state in the table notes why no measurement is reported for these bursts.
  3. [Section 3, Eq. (1)] Some linear polarization fractions exceed 100% (for example, 134 +/- 23.7% for FRB 20190417A burst 4). The debiasing in Eq. (1) does not cap L/I at unity, so these values should be discussed or handled explicitly in the fitting.
  4. [Section 4, Figure 3] The quoted range gamma ~ 0-0.8 is not accompanied by per-source fitted values or uncertainties; a small table with gamma, its error, and the fitted time range for each source would make the structure-function analysis reproducible.
  5. [Header and references] The manuscript header contains placeholder citation details such as 'V ol. xx' and 'xxx 2023' that need to be updated before publication.
  6. [Section 4, K-S tests] The 'fiducial+3' hypothesis reclassifies the three largest DSA RMs as repeating FRBs; this is an interesting sensitivity but should be described explicitly as a formal sensitivity test rather than as a data assumption.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper's empirical tallies and hedged turbulence interpretation rest on independent RM measurements and a conditional theoretical conversion.

full rationale

The paper's central empirical results—64% of repeaters with RM variations >50 rad/m^2 and 21% with RM reversals—are direct counts of independently measured RM values, and the text explicitly cautions that these may be lower limits due to sparse sampling and selection effects. The structure-function slope γ is fitted to pairwise temporal RM differences, and the conversion γ → α = −(γ+2) uses the published thick-screen turbulence relation from Ref. [15], whose stated assumptions do not include the measured RMs and whose derivation is external to the present measurements; the interpretation is explicitly conditional ('if the RM variations are attributed to turbulence'). Although Ref. [15] shares authors with the present paper, the cited relation is a general plasma-turbulence result and is not used to define the measured quantities. The green-star anchor (σ_RM^2 placed at 1 ms) and the single-transverse-velocity screen assumption are robustness/statistical concerns rather than circularity: they do not make the derived γ or α equal to the fitted σ_RM by construction. No step defines the target result in terms of an input parameter, so no self-definitional or fitted-input-as-prediction circularity is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities. It relies on standard RM scattering theory and a published turbulence model, along with a hand-chosen RM variation threshold.

free parameters (4)
  • sigma_RM for FRB 20190117A = 2.78 ± 0.05 rad/m^2 (CHIME); 9.85 rad/m^2 (FAST)
    Fitted from depolarization vs. wavelength assuming 100% intrinsic linear polarization (Eq. 3).
  • sigma_RM for FRB 20190417A = 5.19 ± 0.09 rad/m^2
    Weighted least-squares fit of Eq. (3) to FAST and CHIME linear polarization fractions.
  • RM variation threshold = 50 rad/m^2
    Chosen by authors to distinguish local-environment RM changes from measurement/systematics; directly sets the 64% fraction.
  • Structure function power-law index gamma = 0 to 0.8
    Linear fit to log D_RM vs log Delta t across 10 repeaters; used to derive turbulence power spectrum index alpha = -(gamma+2).
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Depolarization due to RM scattering follows 1 - exp(-2 lambda^4 sigma_RM^2) (Eq. 3).
    Assumed to interpret low linear polarization fractions as multipath propagation; from O'Sullivan et al. 2012.
  • domain assumption The RM structure function in time maps to a spatial structure function with D_RM ∝ l^{-(alpha+2)} for a thick screen.
    Theoretical relation from Yang, Xu & Zhang (2023) (Ref 15) used to convert fitted gamma to turbulence spectral index alpha.
  • domain assumption RM variations are caused by a turbulent plasma screen with uniform transverse motion relative to the source.
    Needed to interpret the observed time-domain RM variations as spatial turbulence; acknowledged with 'if the RM variations are attributed to turbulence.'

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Multi-year Polarimetric Monitoring of Four CHIME-Discovered Repeating Fast Radio Bursts with FAST." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/3QITD7MF

@misc{pith2026250702355,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Multi-year Polarimetric Monitoring of Four CHIME-Discovered Repeating Fast Radio Bursts with FAST},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/3QITD7MF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.02355}
}
abstract

In this study, we report multi-year polarization measurements of four repeating FRBs initially discovered by CHIME: FRBs~20190117A, 20190208A, 20190303A, and 20190417A. We observed the four repeating FRBs with FAST, detecting a total of 66 bursts. Two bursts from FRB~20190417A exhibit a circular polarization signal-to-noise ratio greater than 7, with the highest circular polarization fraction recorded at 35.7%. While the bursts from FRBs 20190208A and 20190303A are highly linearly polarized, those from FRBs~20190117A and 20190417A show depolarization due to multi-path propagation, with \sigma_{\mathrm{RM}} = 2.78 \pm 0.05 rad m$^{-2}$ and 5.19 \pm 0.09 rad m$^{-2}$, respectively. The linear polarization distributions among five repeating FRB--FRBs~20190208A, 20190303A, 20201124A, 20220912A, and 20240114A--are nearly identical but show distinct differences from those of non-repeating FRBs. FRBs~20190117A, 20190303A, and 20190417A exhibit substantial rotation measure (RM) variations between bursts, joining other repeating FRBs in this behavior. Combining these findings with published results, 64% of repeating FRBs show RM variations greater than 50 rad m$^{-2}$, and 21\% exhibit RM reversals. A significant proportion of repeating FRBs reside in a dynamic magneto-ionic environment. The structure function of RM variations shows a power-law index of $\gamma \sim (0-0.8)$, corresponding to a shallow power spectrum $\alpha = -(\gamma + 2) \sim -(2.0-2.8)$ of turbulence, if the RM variations are attributed to turbulence. This suggests that the variations are dominated by small-scale RM density fluctuations. We perform K-S tests comparing the RMs of repeating and non-repeating FRBs, which reveal a marginal dichotomy in the distribution of their RMs.We caution that the observed dichotomy may be due to the small sample size and selection biases.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

75 extracted references · 43 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    D. R. Lorimer , M. Bailes , M. A. McLaughlin , D. J. Narkevic , and F. Crawford , Science http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1147532 318, 777 (2007), arXiv: 0709.4301

    arXiv 2007

  2. [2]

    Zhang , Reviews of Modern Physics http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.95.035005 95, 035005 (2023), arXiv: 2212.03972

    B. Zhang , Reviews of Modern Physics http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.95.035005 95, 035005 (2023), arXiv: 2212.03972

    arXiv 2023

  3. [3]

    J. Xu , Y. Feng , D. Li , P. Wang , Y. Zhang , J. Xie , H. Chen , H. Wang , Z. Kang , J. Hu , et al., Universe http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/universe9070330 9, 330 (2023), arXiv: 2308.00336

    arXiv 2023

  4. [4]

    Michilli , A

    D. Michilli , A. Seymour , J. W. T. Hessels , L. G. Spitler , V. Gajjar , A. M. Archibald , G. C. Bower , S. Chatterjee , J. M. Cordes , K. Gourdji , et al., http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature25149 553, 182 (2018), arXiv: 1801.03965

    arXiv 2018

  5. [5]

    G. H. Hilmarsson , D. Michilli , L. G. Spitler , R. S. Wharton , P. Demorest , G. Desvignes , K. Gourdji , S. Hackstein , J. W. T. Hessels , K. Nimmo , et al., http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/abdec0 908, L10 (2021), arXiv: 2009.12135

    work page Pith review arXiv 2021

  6. [6]

    Feng , J

    Y. Feng , J. Jiang , D. Zhou , P. Wang , J. Zhang , D. Li , W. Zhu , B. Zhang , Y. Zhang , Y.-P. Yang , et al., The Astronomer's Telegram https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ATel15980....1F 15980, 1 (2023)

    work page 2023

  7. [7]

    Dispersion Measure Variation of Repeating Fast Radio Burst Sources

    Y.-P. Yang and B. Zhang , http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/aa8721 847, 22 (2017), arXiv: 1707.02923

    work page Pith review arXiv 2017

  8. [8]

    A. L. Piro and B. M. Gaensler , http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/aac9bc 861, 150 (2018), arXiv: 1804.01104

    arXiv 2018

Show all 75 references
  1. [9]

    Margalit and B

    B. Margalit and B. D. Metzger , http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/aaedad 868, L4 (2018), arXiv: 1808.09969

    2018 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Z. Y. Zhao and F. Y. Wang , http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/ac3f2f 923, L17 (2021), arXiv: 2112.00935

    2021 arXiv

  3. [11]

    F. Y. Wang , G. Q. Zhang , Z. G. Dai , and K. S. Cheng , Nature Communications http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-31923-y 13, 4382 (2022), arXiv: 2204.08124

    2022 arXiv

  4. [12]

    J. I. Katz , http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mnrasl/slab128 510, L42 (2022), arXiv: 2110.10847

    2022 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Yang , W

    Y.-P. Yang , W. Lu , Y. Feng , B. Zhang , and D. Li , http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/ac5f46 928, L16 (2022), arXiv: 2202.09602

    2022 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Z. Y. Zhao , G. Q. Zhang , F. Y. Wang , and Z. G. Dai , http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/aca66b 942, 102 (2023), arXiv: 2209.05242

    2023 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Yang , S

    Y.-P. Yang , S. Xu , and B. Zhang , http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stad168 520, 2039 (2023), arXiv: 2208.08712

    2023 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Anna-Thomas , L

    R. Anna-Thomas , L. Connor , S. Dai , Y. Feng , S. Burke-Spolaor , P. Beniamini , Y.-P. Yang , Y.-K. Zhang , K. Aggarwal , C. J. Law , et al., Science http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.abo6526 380, 599 (2023), arXiv: 2202.11112

    2023 arXiv

  9. [17]

    H. Xu , J. R. Niu , P. Chen , K. J. Lee , W. W. Zhu , S. Dong , B. Zhang , J. C. Jiang , B. J. Wang , J. W. Xu , et al., http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05071-8 609, 685 (2022), arXiv: 2111.11764

    2022 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Wang , Y.-P

    W.-Y. Wang , Y.-P. Yang , C.-H. Niu , R. Xu , and B. Zhang , http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/ac4097 927, 105 (2022), arXiv: 2111.11841

    2022 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Qu and B

    Y. Qu and B. Zhang , http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stad1072 522, 2448 (2023), arXiv: 2302.09697

    2023 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Liu , W.-Y

    Z.-N. Liu , W.-Y. Wang , Y.-P. Yang , and Z.-G. Dai , http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/acac23 943, 47 (2023), arXiv: 2212.13153

    2023 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Qu and B

    Y. Qu and B. Zhang , http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/ad5d5b 972, 124 (2024), arXiv: 2404.11948

    2024 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Plotnikov and L

    I. Plotnikov and L. Sironi , http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stz640 485, 3816 (2019), arXiv: 1901.01029

    2019 arXiv

  15. [23]

    a ttil \

    L. Sironi , I. Plotnikov , J. N \"a ttil \"a , and A. M. Beloborodov , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.035101 127, 035101 (2021), arXiv: 2107.01211

    2021 arXiv

  16. [24]

    J. C. Jiang , J. W. Xu , J. R. Niu , K. J. Lee , W. W. Zhu , B. Zhang , Y. Qu , H. Xu , D. J. Zhou , S. S. Cao , et al., National Science Review http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nsr/nwae293 12, nwae293 (2024)

    2024 doi

  17. [25]

    R. Luo , B. J. Wang , Y. P. Men , C. F. Zhang , J. C. Jiang , H. Xu , W. Y. Wang , K. J. Lee , J. L. Han , B. Zhang , et al., http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2827-2 586, 693 (2020), arXiv: 2011.00171

    2020 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Mckinven , M

    R. Mckinven , M. Bhardwaj , T. Eftekhari , C. D. Kilpatrick , A. Kirichenko , A. Pal , A. M. Cook , B. M. Gaensler , U. Giri , V. M. Kaspi , et al., arXiv e-prints http://dx.doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2402.09304 arXiv:2402.09304 (2024), arXiv: 2402.09304

    2024 doi arXiv

  19. [27]

    J. R. Niu, W. Y. Wang, J. C. Jiang, Y. Qu, D. J. Zhou, W. W. Zhu, K. J. Lee, J. L. Han, B. Zhang, D. Li, et al., The Astrophysical Journal Letters http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/ad7023 972, L20 (2024), ://dx.doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/ad7023

    2024 doi

  20. [28]

    Mckinven , B

    R. Mckinven , B. M. Gaensler , D. Michilli , K. Masui , V. M. Kaspi , J. Su , M. Bhardwaj , T. Cassanelli , P. Chawla , F. A. Dong , et al., http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/acd188 951, 82 (2023), arXiv: 2302.08386

    2023 arXiv

  21. [29]

    C. Ng , A. Pandhi , R. Mckinven , A. P. Curtin , K. Shin , E. Fonseca , B. M. Gaensler , D. L. Jow , V. Kaspi , D. Li , et al., arXiv e-prints http://dx.doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2411.09045 arXiv:2411.09045 (2024), arXiv: 2411.09045

    2024 doi arXiv

  22. [30]

    C. H. Niu , K. Aggarwal , D. Li , X. Zhang , S. Chatterjee , C. W. Tsai , W. Yu , C. J. Law , S. Burke-Spolaor , J. M. Cordes , et al., http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-04755-5 606, 873 (2022), arXiv: 2110.07418

    2022 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Kumar , R

    P. Kumar , R. Luo , D. C. Price , R. M. Shannon , A. T. Deller , S. Bhandari , Y. Feng , C. Flynn , J. C. Jiang , P. A. Uttarkar , et al., http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stad2969 526, 3652 (2023), arXiv: 2304.01763

    2023 arXiv

  24. [32]

    R. Nan , D. Li , C. Jin , Q. Wang , L. Zhu , W. Zhu , H. Zhang , Y. Yue , and L. Qian , International Journal of Modern Physics D http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/S0218271811019335 20, 989 (2011), arXiv: 1105.3794

    2011 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Li and Z

    D. Li and Z. Pan , Radio Science http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/2015RS005877 51, 1060 (2016), arXiv: 1612.09372

    2016 arXiv

  26. [34]

    D. Li , P. Wang , L. Qian , M. Krco , P. Jiang , Y. Yue , C. Jin , Y. Zhu , Z. Pan , R. Nan , et al., IEEE Microwave Magazine http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MMM.2018.2802178 19, 112 (2018), arXiv: 1802.03709

    2018

  27. [35]

    Jiang , Y

    P. Jiang , Y. Yue , H. Gan , R. Yao , H. Li , G. Pan , J. Sun , D. Yu , H. Liu , N. Tang , et al., Science China Physics, Mechanics, and Astronomy http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11433-018-9376-1 62, 959502 (2019), arXiv: 1903.06324

    2019 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Feng , D

    Y. Feng , D. Li , Y.-P. Yang , Y. Zhang , W. Zhu , B. Zhang , W. Lu , P. Wang , S. Dai , R. S. Lynch , et al., Science http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.abl7759 375, 1266 (2022), arXiv: 2202.09601

    2022 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Michilli , M

    D. Michilli , M. Bhardwaj , C. Brar , B. M. Gaensler , V. M. Kaspi , A. Kirichenko , K. W. Masui , R. Mckinven , C. Ng , C. Patel , et al., http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/accf89 950, 134 (2023), arXiv: 2212.11941

    2023 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Dunning, M

    A. Dunning, M. Bowen, S. Castillo, Y. S. Chung, P. Doherty, D. George, D. B. Hayman, K. Jeganathan, H. Kanoniuk, S. Mackay, et al., in 2017 XXXIInd General Assembly and Scientific Symposium of the International Union of Radio Science (URSI GASS), 1--4 (2017)

    2017

  31. [39]

    A. W. Hotan , W. van Straten , and R. N. Manchester , http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/AS04022 21, 302 (2004), arXiv: astro-ph/0404549

    2004 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Zhang , D

    Y.-K. Zhang , D. Li , Y. Feng , C.-W. Tsai , P. Wang , C.-H. Niu , H.-X. Chen , and Y.-H. Zhu , http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4365/ad8f31 276, 20 (2025), arXiv: 2410.03200

    2025 arXiv

  33. [41]

    S. P. O'Sullivan , S. Brown , T. Robishaw , D. H. F. M. Schnitzeler , N. M. McClure-Griffiths , I. J. Feain , A. R. Taylor , B. M. Gaensler , T. L. Landecker , L. Harvey-Smith , et al., http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20554.x 421, 3300 (2012), arXiv: 1201.3161

    2012

  34. [42]

    J. E. Everett and J. M. Weisberg , http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/320652 553, 341 (2001), arXiv: astro-ph/0009266

    2001 arXiv

  35. [43]

    C. K. Day , A. T. Deller , R. M. Shannon , H. Qiu , K. W. Bannister , S. Bhandari , R. Ekers , C. Flynn , C. W. James , J.-P. Macquart , et al., http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mnras/staa2138 497, 3335 (2020), arXiv: 2005.13162

    2020 arXiv

  36. [44]

    J.-T. Xie , Y. Feng , D. Li , Y.-K. Zhang , D. Zhou , Y. Qu , X. Cui , J. Fang , J. Xu , C. Miao , et al., arXiv e-prints http://dx.doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2410.10172 arXiv:2410.10172 (2024), arXiv: 2410.10172

    2024 doi arXiv

  37. [45]

    D. Li , P. Wang , W. W. Zhu , B. Zhang , X. X. Zhang , R. Duan , Y. K. Zhang , Y. Feng , N. Y. Tang , S. Chatterjee , et al., http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03878-5 598, 267 (2021), arXiv: 2107.08205

    2021 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Zhang , P

    Y.-K. Zhang , P. Wang , Y. Feng , B. Zhang , D. Li , C.-W. Tsai , C.-H. Niu , R. Luo , J.-M. Yao , W.-W. Zhu , et al., Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1674-4527/ac98f7 22, 124002 (2022), arXiv: 2210.03645

    2022 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Zhang , D

    Y.-K. Zhang , D. Li , B. Zhang , S. Cao , Y. Feng , W.-Y. Wang , Y. Qu , J.-R. Niu , W.-W. Zhu , J.-L. Han , et al., http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/aced0b 955, 142 (2023), arXiv: 2304.14665

    2023 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Zhang , Q

    J. Zhang , Q. Wu , S. Cao , Y. Zhu , Y. Zhang , J. Niu , J. Xie , D. Zhou , T. Wang , W. Zhu , et al., The Astronomer's Telegram https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ATel16505....1Z 16505, 1 (2024)

    2024

  41. [49]

    Feng , Y.-K

    Y. Feng , Y.-K. Zhang , D. Li , Y.-P. Yang , P. Wang , C.-H. Niu , S. Dai , and J.-M. Yao , Science Bulletin http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scib.2022.11.014 67, 2398 (2022), arXiv: 2212.05873

    2022 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Feng , D

    Y. Feng , D. Li , Y.-K. Zhang , C.-W. Tsai , Y. Qu , W.-Y. Wang , Y.-P. Yang , P. Wang , D. Zhou , J. Niu , et al., http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/ad7a64 974, 296 (2024), arXiv: 2304.14671

    2024 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Pandhi , Z

    A. Pandhi , Z. Pleunis , R. Mckinven , B. M. Gaensler , J. Su , C. Ng , M. Bhardwaj , C. Brar , T. Cassanelli , A. Cook , et al., http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/ad40aa 968, 50 (2024), arXiv: 2401.17378

    2024 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Jiang , W.-Y

    J.-C. Jiang , W.-Y. Wang , H. Xu , J.-W. Xu , C.-F. Zhang , B.-J. Wang , D.-J. Zhou , Y.-K. Zhang , J.-R. Niu , K.-J. Lee , et al., Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1674-4527/ac98f6 22, 124003 (2022), arXiv: 2210.03609

    2022 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Plavin , Z

    A. Plavin , Z. Paragi , B. Marcote , A. Keimpema , J. W. T. Hessels , K. Nimmo , H. K. Vedantham , and L. G. Spitler , http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stac500 511, 6033 (2022), arXiv: 2202.10519

    2022

  46. [54]

    Mckinven , B

    R. Mckinven , B. M. Gaensler , D. Michilli , K. Masui , V. M. Kaspi , M. Bhardwaj , T. Cassanelli , P. Chawla , F. A. Dong , E. Fonseca , et al., http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/acc65f 950, 12 (2023), arXiv: 2205.09221

    2023 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Pleunis , D

    Z. Pleunis , D. Michilli , C. G. Bassa , J. W. T. Hessels , A. Naidu , B. C. Andersen , P. Chawla , E. Fonseca , A. Gopinath , V. M. Kaspi , et al., http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/abec72 911, L3 (2021), arXiv: 2012.08372

    2021 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Chawla , B

    P. Chawla , B. C. Andersen , M. Bhardwaj , E. Fonseca , A. Josephy , V. M. Kaspi , D. Michilli , Z. Pleunis , K. M. Bandura , C. G. Bassa , et al., http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/ab96bf 896, L41 (2020), arXiv: 2004.02862

    2020 arXiv

  49. [57]

    K. R. Sand , J. T. Faber , V. Gajjar , D. Michilli , B. C. Andersen , B. C. Joshi , S. Kudale , M. Pilia , B. Brzycki , T. Cassanelli , et al., http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/ac6cee 932, 98 (2022), arXiv: 2111.02382

    2022 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Nimmo , J

    K. Nimmo , J. W. T. Hessels , F. Kirsten , A. Keimpema , J. M. Cordes , M. P. Snelders , D. M. Hewitt , R. Karuppusamy , A. M. Archibald , V. Bezrukovs , et al., Nature Astronomy http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41550-021-01569-9 6, 393 (2022), arXiv: 2105.11446

    2022 arXiv

  51. [59]

    G. H. Hilmarsson , L. G. Spitler , R. A. Main , and D. Z. Li , http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stab2936 508, 5354 (2021), arXiv: 2107.12892

    2021 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Kumar , R

    P. Kumar , R. M. Shannon , M. E. Lower , S. Bhandari , A. T. Deller , C. Flynn , and E. F. Keane , http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stac683 512, 3400 (2022), arXiv: 2109.11535

    2022 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Li , Z.-Y

    R.-N. Li , Z.-Y. Zhao , Q. Wu , S.-X. Yi , and F.-Y. Wang , arXiv e-prints http://dx.doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2411.15546 arXiv:2411.15546 (2024), arXiv: 2411.15546

    2024 doi arXiv

  54. [62]

    Goldreich and S

    P. Goldreich and S. Sridhar , http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/175121 438, 763 (1995)

    1995 doi

  55. [63]

    Lazarian and E

    A. Lazarian and E. T. Vishniac , http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/307233 517, 700 (1999), arXiv: astro-ph/9811037

    1999 arXiv

  56. [64]

    T. A. Bowen , S. D. Bale , B. D. G. Chandran , A. Chasapis , C. H. K. Chen , T. Dudok de Wit , A. Mallet , R. Meyrand , and J. Squire , Nature Astronomy http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41550-023-02186-4 8, 482 (2024), arXiv: 2306.04881

    2024 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Hennebelle and E

    P. Hennebelle and E. Falgarone , http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00159-012-0055-y 20, 55 (2012), arXiv: 1211.0637

    2012 arXiv

  58. [66]

    Xu and B

    S. Xu and B. Zhang , http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/835/1/2 835, 2 (2017), arXiv: 1610.03011

    2017 arXiv

  59. [67]

    M. B. Sherman , L. Connor , V. Ravi , C. Law , G. Chen , M. Catha , J. T. Faber , G. Hallinan , C. Harnach , G. Hellbourg , et al., http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/ad275e 964, 131 (2024), arXiv: 2308.06813

    2024 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Kumar , Y

    P. Kumar , Y. Qu , and B. Zhang , http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/ad6cda 974, 160 (2024), arXiv: 2406.01266

    2024 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Yang , http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/acebc6 956, 67 (2023), arXiv: 2305.08649

    Y.-P. Yang , http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/acebc6 956, 67 (2023), arXiv: 2305.08649

    2023 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Wang , Y.-P

    W.-Y. Wang , Y.-P. Yang , H.-B. Li , J. Liu , and R. Xu , http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/202348670 685, A87 (2024), arXiv: 2311.13114

    2024 arXiv

  63. [71]

    Zhang , http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/ac3979 925, 53 (2022), arXiv: 2111.06571

    B. Zhang , http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/ac3979 925, 53 (2022), arXiv: 2111.06571

    2022 arXiv

  64. [72]

    Liu , J.-J

    Z.-N. Liu , J.-J. Geng , Y.-P. Yang , W.-Y. Wang , and Z.-G. Dai , http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/acf9a3 958, 35 (2023), arXiv: 2309.06050

    2023 arXiv

  65. [73]

    A repeating fast radio burst associated with a persistent radio source

    A. Dunning, M. Bowen, S. Castillo, Y. S. Chung, P. Doherty, D. George, D. B. Hayman, K. Jeganathan, H. Kanoniuk, S. Mackay, L. Reilly, P. Roush, S. K. W. Smart, R. D. Shaw, S. L. Smith, T. Tzioumis, V.-C. J. Venables, Design and Laboratory Testing of the Five Hundred Meter Ape...

    2017

  66. [74]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address adsurl archive author booktitle chapter collaboration doi edition editor eid eprint howpublished institution journal key month note number numpages organization pages publisher school series title type url volume year label INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.se...

  67. [75]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 gl...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.