Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 3 cited by

X-ray Dips and Polarization Angle Swings in GX 13+1

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read X-ray dips swing the polarization angle of the neutron-star binary GX 13+1 by about 70 degrees, with polarization degree rising to about 4 percent in the dip state.

desk verdict The April 2024 dip/off-dip PD contrast is real, but the headline ~70 deg PA swing across states leans on a three-epoch combined analysis whose epoch-stability assumption is not tested. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.05511 v2 pith:4IA22WEN submitted 2025-01-09 astro-ph.HE

Alessandro Di Marco , Fabio La Monaca , Anna Bobrikova , Luigi Stella , Alessandro Papitto , Juri Poutanen , Maria Cristina Baglio , Matteo Bachetti
show 3 more authors
Vladislav Loktev Maura Pilia Daniele Rogantini
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords X-raypolarimetryGX13+1low-massbinaryneutronstaraccretiondiskcoronawinddipspolarizationangleswing
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

The paper tries to establish that the X-ray polarization of the neutron-star low-mass X-ray binary GX 13+1 is not a fixed property but varies systematically with accretion state: when the source enters an X-ray dip, the harder Comptonized component dominates and the polarization degree rises to about 4%, while the polarization angle swings by roughly 70 degrees relative to the soft off-dip state. The evidence comes from a third IXPE observation that caught two dips, combined with the two earlier IXPE observations of the same source. If this is right, X-ray polarimetry becomes a direct probe of the geometry of the accreting regions and of the scattering medium, an extended accretion disk corona or disk wind, that surrounds the neutron star. It also provides a coherent explanation for a previously puzzling result: the continuous ~70 degree polarization angle rotation seen during the first IXPE observation with little spectral change.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by a joint hardness-intensity diagram analysis of the three IXPE observations, in which the data are pooled and binned first by spectral hardness ratio and then by intensity, following the binning approach used for Cir X-1. This makes the correlation visible: the high-hardness, low-intensity bin sits at PD ~4.3% and PA ~ -47 deg, the low-hardness bin at PD ~2.4% and PA ~ +22 deg, and the swing between extremes is ~70 deg. On the spectral side, the load-bearing decomposition is a two-component continuum, a soft multicolor disk blackbody plus a hard optically thick Comptonized blackbody from the boundary/spreading layer, whose relative normalization shifts during dips and thereby moves the summed polarization vector. The interpretive machinery proposed for the high PD and the PA swing is scattering in an oblate, optically thin accretion disk corona (or a similarly placed disk wind): such a corona produces PD ~20% times its Thomson optical depth, and when a clump covers the central source while leaving the corona visible, the changed mixing of direct and scattered polarization vectors rotates the angle.

What would settle it

A single IXPE observation that resolves a complete dip ingress and egress would settle it: if the polarization angle at a given hardness and intensity differs between the two dips, or between ingress and egress of the same dip, then the polarization is not a single-valued function of hardness and intensity and the joint-binning result averages over time-dependent behavior.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that the X-ray polarization of the neutron-star low-mass X-ray binary GX 13+1 varies in a systematic way with accretion state, and that the variation repeats across three IXPE observing epochs (October 2023, February 2024, April 2024). During the April 2024 observation, two off-phase dips occurred in which the count rate dropped by 20-30% and the spectral hardness increased; in those intervals the hard Comptonized component (modeled as a blackbody from the boundary/spreading layer) supplied about 80% of the flux, compared with about half in the soft off-dip state, and the polarization degree rose to 4-5%. Combining all three observations and binning by hardness ratio gives polarization degree (PD) ~4.3% at polarization angle (PA) ~ -47 degrees in the high-hardness dip state and ~2.4% at ~ +22 degrees in the low-hardness state, a ~70-degree swing that matches the continuous rotation seen in the first IXPE observation. The paper interprets the high polarization and the angle swing as evidence that scattering in an extended accretion disk corona or disk wind, together with obscuration of the central source by the clumps that cause the dips, changes the mixture of direct and scattered polarized photons.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that GX 13+1's polarization is a single-valued function of its brightness and of how hard its X-ray spectrum is across all three observing epochs, so that pooling the data into common bins reveals one true relation instead of averaging over different behaviors.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The ~70 degree polarization-angle swing is a reproducible source property: it appears in the first IXPE observation as a continuous rotation and in the third observation as the dip/off-dip contrast, so it is tied to the same accretion-state changes that produce dips.
  • During dips the hard Comptonized component dominates and the polarization degree reaches 4-5%, above the 3-4% maximum expected from an aligned disk plus boundary/spreading layer at the inferred 60-80 degree inclination, so an additional scattering component is required.
  • The intermediate hardness bin shows a lower polarization degree (~1.3%) and a polarization angle compatible with the low-hardness bin, meaning the large angle swing occurs between the off-dip and dip extremes rather than progressively across hardness.
  • If scattering in an accretion disk corona or disk wind is responsible, the same mechanism should produce dip-associated changes in polarization in other high-inclination dipping low-mass X-ray binaries.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A testable extension of the ADC/wind scenario is that the size of the polarization-angle swing should depend on how much of the corona the obscuring clump covers: a clump that hides the central source but leaves the corona visible should give the largest swing, while a clump large enough to cover a substantial fraction of the corona should suppress or reverse it.
  • The single-valued-response interpretation could be checked by comparing polarization angles measured at the same hardness and intensity in different orbital phases; if they disagree, part of the apparent swing is temporal evolution rather than a pure function of source state.
  • Because the dip-induced PA swing is about 70 degrees and the PD reaches ~4%, the same joint-binning method could be applied to existing IXPE data of other dipping LMXBs to test whether the swing amplitude scales with inferred coronal optical depth or inclination.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper reports on the third IXPE observation of the neutron-star low-mass X-ray binary GX 13+1, obtained in April 2024 together with coordinated NICER and Swift–XRT pointings. Two X-ray dips were observed. The authors find that during the dips the spectrum is harder, the Comptonized component contributes a larger fraction of the flux, and the polarization degree is higher than in the off-dip intervals, with a polarization angle swing of roughly 70 degrees across the dip and off-dip states. They then combine the three IXPE observations of GX 13+1 (October 2023, February 2024, and April 2024) into common hardness-ratio and intensity bins and claim that the polarization properties varied in response to the intensity and spectral hardness changes associated with the dips. The paper interprets the high polarization degree and the angle swing as possibly arising from scattering in an extended accretion disk corona or a disk wind, while noting the difficulties of explaining the results with standard disk plus boundary/spreading layer models alone.

Significance. If the main claim is substantiated, this is one of the first demonstrations in a dipping neutron-star LMXB that the X-ray polarization state changes coherently with spectral hardness and intensity during dips, providing a new probe of the geometry of the accretion disk, boundary/spreading layer, and any extended corona or wind. The analysis has notable strengths: the polarization is measured directly from Stokes parameters with the model-independent pcube algorithm; the model-dependent spectropolarimetric analysis is broadly consistent with the model-independent results; the paper is candid about the soft-component degeneracy and about the need for detailed modeling of the ADC/wind scenario; and the use of the external Brown & McLean scattering formula avoids a circular internal calibration. The main weakness is that the joint three-epoch analysis, which carries much of the statistical weight for the central claim, assumes without a quantitative test that the polarization vector is a single-valued function of hardness and intensity across all three epochs.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4.1, Figs. 9–10] The combined three-epoch analysis assumes that the polarization vector is a single-valued function of hardness and intensity across the October 2023, February 2024, and April 2024 observations. This assumption is load-bearing for the central claim that the polarization 'varies in response to' dip-related hardness and intensity changes, but it is not tested quantitatively. The first IXPE observation showed a continuous ~70° PA rotation with little spectral change (Sect. 1; Bobrikova et al. 2024b), and Fig. 5 of the present paper shows PA variability on ~5.2 hr timescales that is not strictly tied to the dips. If such a time- or epoch-dependent component is present, the high-HR bin preferentially selects dip intervals from specific orbital phases while the low-HR bin selects off-dip intervals from other phases, so HR may partly act as a proxy for time/orbital phase. I ask the authors to test the epoch-stability assumption, for example by deriving the HR-binned PD/PA separately for each epoch and checking that the common-bin values are consistent, or by adding a time/phase coordinate to the model. Without such a test, the causal language in the abstract and conclusions overstates what the correlation alone demonstrates.
  2. [§3.3, Table 4] The single-epoch Dip/Off-dip polarization contrast is moderate and should be reported with its significance. In the common-polarization model, PD_Dip = 2.5% ± 0.7% versus PD_Off-dip = 1.2% ± 0.3%, a difference of about 1.7σ; in the two-component model, the hard component gives PD = 5% ± 2% (Dip) versus 3.1% ± 1.1% (Off-dip), which are formally compatible, and the PA change is only about 2σ. Since the abstract states that during the dips the polarization degree was 'higher', the paper should state the statistical significance of this specific contrast and either soften the wording or explicitly place the weight of the claim on the joint three-epoch analysis, subject to the epoch-stability caveat raised in the first major comment.
  3. [§4.1, Fig. 9] The joint HR-binned result is not monotonic in hardness: the intermediate-HR bin gives PD ~ 1.3%, which is lower than the low-HR bin's PD ~ 2.4%, while the high-HR bin gives PD ~ 4.3%. The text states that 'low and low-intermediate intensity and high hardness were associated to a higher polarization degree', but this does not address the intermediate-HR bin. If that bin's PD is significantly different from both extremes, the relation between PD and hardness is more complex than a simple increase with hardness; if it is not significant, the paper should say so explicitly. This is relevant to the interpretation of the polarization as a direct response to hardness changes.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§3.2, Table 3] In Table 3, the inner disk radius for Observation 7701010103 in the Off-dip state is printed as '15.8+63.8−0.2'; this appears to be a malformed error bar and should be corrected.
  2. [§3.1, p. 10] The sentence 'PA increased at higher count rates' is ambiguous about the sign convention and the time intervals involved; specifying whether the angle rotates eastward or northward would make the statement clearer.
  3. [§3.3] In the second spectropolarimetric model, tbabs*(polconst*diskbb+polconst*bbodyrad+gauss), the two polconst components are likely independent; the text should state this explicitly and, ideally, report the correlation between the two sets of polarization parameters.
  4. [§4.3, Eq. (1)] For reproducibility of the clump-size estimates, please specify the dip durations T_dip used for each of the two dips; the text gives only the resulting ranges of R_clump.
  5. [General] There are a few typographical and stylistic issues: the reference 'Diaz Trigo et al. 2010' should be accented consistently as 'Díaz Trigo'; 'The higher χ2 values at higher flux is probably related' should be 'are probably related'; and '~70◦' appears with inconsistent spacing and degree symbols in a few places.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper's polarization results are direct measurements of IXPE Stokes parameters, and the cited prior observations are independent empirical epochs rather than fitted inputs or self-referential theoretical constraints.

full rationale

The central claim of the paper is that GX 13+1's polarization degree and angle vary with the intensity and spectral hardness changes associated with dipping. This is established by measuring PD and PA directly from IXPE Stokes Q and U parameters in time intervals, hardness bins, and intensity bins (Sects. 3.1, 3.3, 4.1). No parameter is fitted to the polarization data and then renamed as a prediction: the hardness and intensity binning is defined purely by count rates and hardness ratios, independent of the polarization measurements. The spectropolarimetric decomposition into diskbb and bbodyrad components uses temperatures frozen from NICER spectral fits, but the polarization parameters of each component are free fit parameters; the resulting PD/PA values are not forced by construction. The comparison with the earlier IXPE observations (Bobrikova et al. 2024a,b) uses those papers as additional empirical data from separate epochs, not as theoretical premises or uniqueness theorems. Even if those authors overlap with the present paper, the earlier observations are independent measurements and are not the sole support for the new results: the April 2024 data alone show PA variability and elevated PD during dips (Fig. 5). The Brown & McLean (1977) ADC estimate is an external analytical formula applied with assumed geometry and optical depth, not a self-referential input. The reader-identified concern about the combined analysis assuming a single-valued PD/PA-hardness relation across three epochs is a statistical or interpretive limitation, not circularity: the paper does not define the polarization vector in terms of hardness, nor does it fit hardness from polarization. No step in the derivation chain reduces to its own inputs by definition or by self-citation.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central measurement is model-independent: PD and PA are estimated directly from Stokes parameters. The free parameters listed are hand-set thresholds, frozen spectral values, and a fixed column ratio that affect how the data are binned and interpreted. The proposed ADC/disk wind is a known class of model applied to this source, not a new physical entity; no new particle, force, or dimension is introduced.

free parameters (6)
  • IXPE Dip/Off-dip intensity threshold = 28 counts/s in 2-8 keV
    Hand-set threshold used to split the April 2024 observation into Dip and Off-dip states (Sect. 3.3, Fig. 1). The reported PD/PA values depend on this choice; the authors checked other selections but did not quantify the dependence.
  • NICER Dip/Off-dip hardness threshold = 0.44 in 4-12 keV / 2-4 keV
    Hand-set cut used to classify NICER snapshots into Dip and Off-dip states for spectral fitting (Sect. 3.2, Fig. 1).
  • HR and intensity bin edges in combined analysis = not stated numerically
    The three HR intervals and four intensity intervals in Figs. 9-10 are described as 'almost equally spaced' and chosen by eye. The headline ~70 degree PA swing is computed between selected bins, so the bin boundaries influence the headline result.
  • cabs-to-warmabs column ratio = 1.21
    Fixed ratio forcing the scattering column to be 1.21 times the warm absorber column (Sect. 3.2). This converts the fitted warm absorber column into the optical depth (tau~0.3-0.4) later used to argue ADC/wind polarization is plausible.
  • Nickel abundance in warmabs = 5 (solar units)
    Frozen to fit a ~7 keV absorption feature (Table 3 note b). This modeling choice affects the derived warm absorber column and therefore the inferred scattering optical depth.
  • Frozen spectral parameters for IXPE spectropolarimetry = kTin=0.5/1.0 keV, kTbb=1.1/1.2 keV, gauss E/sigma from NICER
    In the polconst decomposition (Sect. 3.3, Table 4), diskbb temperature, bbodyrad temperature, and iron line parameters are frozen at NICER values. The resulting component polarizations (PD 10% for diskbb in dip, 5% for bbodyrad) are sensitive to this assumption, and the authors flag a degeneracy between the two nearly orthogonal polarization vectors.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption System inclination is ~60-80 degrees, with 70 degrees assumed for radius estimates
    Inherited from prior XMM-Newton and NuSTAR analyses (Diaz Trigo et al. 2012; Saavedra et al. 2023), used to estimate inner disk radii and to evaluate whether observed PD exceeds geometric maxima. A different inclination would change the interpretation of the high PD.
  • domain assumption Distance is 7±1 kpc
    From Bandyopadhyay et al. 1999, used to convert fluxes to luminosities and normalizations to radii (Table 4). Not measured in this paper.
  • domain assumption Spectral continuum is diskbb (soft) plus bbodyrad (Comptonized hard component), with warm absorber, scattering (cabs), and a Gaussian iron line
    Adopted from Diaz Trigo et al. 2012 and applied to NICER and IXPE data (Sects. 3.2-3.3). The component separation underlies the claim that the hard Comptonized component dominates during dips and that the two components carry different polarizations.
  • domain assumption Dips are caused by absorbing clumps in the outer disk that partially obscure the central source
    Standard interpretation used in Sect. 4.3 to estimate clump sizes from dip durations via R_clump = T_dip/P_orb * R_out and to motivate the ADC obscuration scenario.
  • domain assumption The extended disk corona / disk wind is optically thin, non-spherical, and large enough to scatter a few percent of the flux
    Invoked in Sect. 4.3 to explain PD ~4-5% and PA swings. Prior evidence for a warm absorber and wind exists, but the specific geometry, column, and scattering fraction for GX 13+1 are assumed, not derived from a fitted model.
  • domain assumption In the baseline model the BL/SL and disk symmetry axes are aligned, so the two component polarization vectors should be parallel or orthogonal
    Used in Sect. 4.2 to argue that the observed ~70 degree rotation cannot come from simple aligned geometry and that a coronal scatterer or misalignment is required. This is a theoretical expectation from Loktev et al. 2022 and Sunyaev and Titarchuk 1985.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of X-ray Dips and Polarization Angle Swings in GX 13+1." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4IA22WEN

@misc{pith2026250105511,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: X-ray Dips and Polarization Angle Swings in GX 13+1},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4IA22WEN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.05511}
}
read the original abstract

We present the result from the April 2024 observation of the low-mass X-ray binary GX 13+1 with the Imaging X-ray Polarimetry Explorer (IXPE), together with NICER and Swift-XRT coordinated observations. Two light curve dips were observed; during them, the harder Comptonized spectral component was dominant and the polarization degree higher than in the softer, off-dip intervals. Through a joint analysis of the three IXPE observations, which also included the dip from the first observation, we demonstrate that the polarization properties varied in response to the intensity and spectral hardness changes associated with the dips. The polarization degree attained values up to ~4%. The polarization angle showed a swing of ~70{\deg} across the dip and off-dip states, comparable to the continuous rotation seen during the first IXPE observation. We discuss these results in the context of models for polarized emission from the accretion disk and the boundary/spreading layer on the neutron star surface. We also draw attention to the role that an extended accretion disk corona or disk wind can play in generating high polarization degrees and, possibly, swings of the polarization angle.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.05511 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Hardness-intensity diagram obtained from IXPE data, using the same energy bands (4–8 keV and 2–4 keV) and the same binning (200 s) as in Bobrikova et al. (2024b,a). The colors follow the same time behavior as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. MAXI folded light curve and hardness ratio of GX 13+1 using the ephemeris of Iaria et al. (2014). The periodic dip defines zero phase. The orbital phase intervals covered in the three IXPE observations (IXPE 1, 2, 3) are marked with vertical orange strips. It is apparent that the spectral hardness increases when the source count rate de￾creases. ing detailed spectral modeling possible. No Swift–XRT data were taken d… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Normalized Stokes parameters q = Q/I and u = U/I in different energy bins as obtained by pcube in ixpeobssim. The error bars are at 68% CL. No significant trend of the polarization with energy is observed. report almost the same results, except when the selec￾tion star…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Polarization properties of GX 13+1 as a function of time during the third IXPE observation. The panels from top to bottom show PD, PA, q = Q/I, u = U/I and the hardness ratio along the observation. The gray points in the top four panels show the 2–8 keV count rate (rig…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Best-fit spectral fits from NICER during Dip and Off-dip states in Observation IDs 77010102 and 77010103. peratures of both the diskbb and bbodyrad compo￾nents, the energy and width of the Gaussian describing the iron line, were frozen at the values obtained from the N…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Comparison between the polarization in the first two IXPE observations of GX 13+1 (left), and this new one (right) to compare the polarization of the dips and of the source in Off-dip states. Contours are at 90% CL. to dips, which are associated with HR variations, can…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: GX 13+1 HID from the three different IXPE ob￾servations where the different colors correspond to different HR and flux bins (top). The bottom panel reports the 90% CL polarization contours corresponding to the four different HR bins. 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Intensity (cou…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: IXPE HID obtained for GX 13+1 from the dif￾ferent observations (panels a–c) and when the three obser￾vations are combined (d). corona: therefore, we assume RADC∼1010 − 1011 cm for it. Such a radius is about ∼103 times larger than the regions where the bulk of the X-ray…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: GX 13+1 HID from the three different IXPE observations where the different colors correspond to differ￾ent bins in intensity (top). The bottom panel reports the polarization contours at 90% CL, corresponding to each in￾tensity bin [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p0…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Sketch of the proposed geometry of GX 13+1 (not to scale). The gray region represents the outer disk rim, the yellow region the ADC, and the blue circle the central X￾ray source. The black segments show the polarization angle of the radiation scattered by the ADC. The…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Peering through the dip: IXPE unveils the extended scattering environment of GX 13+1

    astro-ph.HE 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    During the periodic dip of GX 13+1, X-ray polarization rises to 9.1%±1.1% and rotates by ~60° relative to the off-dip state, consistent with scattering in an oblate corona or disk wind.

  2. Unchanged X-Ray Polarization During Accretion Dips in the Low Hard State of Cygnus X-1

    astro-ph.HE 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    During Cygnus X-1 accretion dips the 2–8 keV polarization is unchanged within errors, indicating the absorbed disk does not contribute and supporting an extended oblate corona.

  3. The hitchhiker's guide to the IXPE data analysis

    astro-ph.HE 2026-04 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

    A user-oriented guide that collects best practices, data formats, and analysis strategies for extracting polarimetric information from IXPE observations.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

76 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [1]

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

    ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eprint howpublished institution journal key month number organization pages publisher school series title misctitle type volume year version url label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts ...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION format.url url empty "" new.block "" url * "" * if FUNCTION format.eprint eprint empty "" archivePrefix empty "" archivePrefix "arXiv" = new.block " " eprint * " " * new.block " " eprint * " " * if if if FUNCTION format.doi doi empty "" " " doi * " " * if FUNCTION format.pid doi empty eprint empty ur...

  3. [3]

    The Disk Wind in the Neutron Star Low-mass X-Ray Binary GX 13+1

    thebibliography [1] 20pt to REFERENCES 6pt =0pt -12pt 10pt plus 3pt =0pt =0pt =1pt plus 1pt =0pt =0pt -12pt =13pt plus 1pt =20pt =13pt plus 1pt \@M =10000 =-1.0em =0pt =0pt 0pt =0pt =1.0em @enumiv\@empty 10000 10000 `\.\@m \@noitemerr \@latex@warning Empty `thebibliography' environment \@ifnextchar \@reference \@latexerr Missing key on reference command E...

    work page Pith review arXiv 2021

  4. [4]

    L., Schulz , N

    Allen , J. L., Schulz , N. S., Homan , J., et al. 2018, , 861, 26, 10.3847/1538-4357/aac2d1

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aac2d1 2018

  5. [5]

    Arnaud , K. A. 1996, in ASP Conf. Ser., Vol. 101, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems V, ed. G. H. Jacoby & J. Barnes (San Francisco: Astron. Soc. Pac.), 17--20

    1996

  6. [6]

    P., Tollerud , E

    Astropy Collaboration , Robitaille , T. P., Tollerud , E. J., et al. 2013, , 558, A33, 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 2013

  7. [7]

    M., Sip o cz , B

    Astropy Collaboration , Price-Whelan , A. M., Sip o cz , B. M., et al. 2018, , 156, 123, 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f 2018

  8. [8]

    2024, StingraySoftware/stingray: Release 2.1 , v2.1, Zenodo, 10.5281/zenodo.11383212

    Bachetti , M., Huppenkothen , D., Khan , U., et al. 2024, StingraySoftware/stingray: Release 2.1 , v2.1, Zenodo, 10.5281/zenodo.11383212

    doi:10.5281/zenodo.11383212 2024

Show all 76 references
  1. [9]

    C., D’Avanzo, P., Campana, S., & Russell, D

    Baglio, M. C., D’Avanzo, P., Campana, S., & Russell, D. M. 2017, Galaxies, 5, 10.3390/galaxies5040062

    2017 doi

  2. [10]

    2022, SoftwareX, 19, 101194, 10.1016/j.softx.2022.101194

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

    2022

  3. [11]

    M., Shahbaz , T., Charles , P

    Bandyopadhyay , R. M., Shahbaz , T., Charles , P. A., & Naylor , T. 1999, , 306, 417, 10.1046/j.1365-8711.1999.02547.x

    1999

  4. [12]

    2024 a , , 688, A217, 10.1051/0004-6361/202450207

    Bobrikova , A., Di Marco , A., La Monaca , F., et al. 2024 a , , 688, A217, 10.1051/0004-6361/202450207

    2024 doi

  5. [13]

    V., Di Marco , A., et al

    Bobrikova , A., Forsblom , S. V., Di Marco , A., et al. 2024 b , , 688, A170, 10.1051/0004-6361/202449318

    2024 doi

  6. [14]

    N., & Kaastra , J

    Boirin , L., M \'e ndez , M., D \' az Trigo , M., Parmar , A. N., & Kaastra , J. S. 2005, , 436, 195, 10.1051/0004-6361:20041940

    2005 doi

  7. [15]

    C., & McLean , I

    Brown , J. C., & McLean , I. S. 1977, , 57, 141

    1977

  8. [16]

    2002, , 330, 817, 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05113.x

    Churazov, E., Sunyaev, R., & Sazonov, S. 2002, , 330, 817, 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05113.x

    2002

  9. [17]

    2023, , 674, L10, 10.1051/0004-6361/202346275

    Cocchi , M., Gnarini , A., Fabiani , S., et al. 2023, , 674, L10, 10.1051/0004-6361/202346275

    2023 doi

  10. [18]

    Corbet , R. H. D., Pearlman , A. B., Buxton , M., & Levine , A. M. 2010, , 719, 979, 10.1088/0004-637X/719/1/979

    2010 doi

  11. [19]

    M., Paerels , F., & Liedahl , D

    Cottam , J., Sako , M., Kahn , S. M., Paerels , F., & Liedahl , D. A. 2001, , 557, L101, 10.1086/323343

    2001 doi

  12. [20]

    2014, , 564, A62, 10.1051/0004-6361/201322044

    D'A \` , A., Iaria , R., Di Salvo , T., et al. 2014, , 564, A62, 10.1051/0004-6361/201322044

    2014 doi

  13. [21]

    2024, Astronomische Nachrichten, e20240126, https://doi.org/10.1002/asna.20240126

    Di Marco , A., & IXPE Science Team . 2024, Astronomische Nachrichten, e20240126, https://doi.org/10.1002/asna.20240126

    2024 doi

  14. [22]

    2022, , 163, 170, 10.3847/1538-3881/ac51c9

    Di Marco , A., Costa, E., Muleri, F., et al. 2022, , 163, 170, 10.3847/1538-3881/ac51c9

    2022 doi

  15. [23]

    2023 a , , 953, L22, 10.3847/2041-8213/acec6e

    Di Marco , A., La Monaca , F., Poutanen , J., et al. 2023 a , , 953, L22, 10.3847/2041-8213/acec6e

    2023 doi

  16. [24]

    2023 b , , 165, 143, 10.3847/1538-3881/acba0f

    Di Marco , A., Soffitta , P., Costa , E., et al. 2023 b , , 165, 143, 10.3847/1538-3881/acba0f

    2023 doi

  17. [25]

    N., Boirin , L., M \'e ndez , M., & Kaastra , J

    D \' az Trigo , M., Parmar , A. N., Boirin , L., M \'e ndez , M., & Kaastra , J. S. 2006, , 445, 179, 10.1051/0004-6361:20053586

    2006 doi

  18. [26]

    D \' az Trigo , M., Sidoli , L., Boirin , L., & Parmar , A. N. 2012, , 543, A50, 10.1051/0004-6361/201219049

    2012 doi

  19. [27]

    2010, in AIP Conf

    Diaz Trigo , M., Sidoli , L., Parmar , A., & Boirin , L. 2010, in AIP Conf. Ser., Vol. 1248, X-ray Astronomy 2009; Present Status, Multi-Wavelength Approach and Future Perspectives, ed. A. Comastri , L. Angelini , & M. Cappi (AIP), 153--154, 10.1063/1.3475177

    2010 doi

  20. [28]

    C., Rees , M

    Fabian , A. C., Rees , M. J., Stella , L., & White , N. E. 1989, , 238, 729, 10.1093/mnras/238.3.729

    1989 doi

  21. [29]

    2024, , 684, A137, 10.1051/0004-6361/202347374

    Fabiani , S., Capitanio , F., Iaria , R., et al. 2024, , 684, A137, 10.1051/0004-6361/202347374

    2024 doi

  22. [30]

    2023, , 519, 3681, 10.1093/mnras/stac3726

    Farinelli , R., Fabiani , S., Poutanen , J., et al. 2023, , 519, 3681, 10.1093/mnras/stac3726

    2023 doi

  23. [31]

    Fleischman , J. R. 1985, , 153, 106

    1985

  24. [32]

    2004, , 611, 1005, 10.1086/422091

    Gehrels , N., Chincarini , G., Giommi , P., et al. 2004, , 611, 1005, 10.1086/422091

    2004 doi

  25. [33]

    C., Arzoumanian , Z., Adkins , P

    Gendreau , K. C., Arzoumanian , Z., Adkins , P. W., et al. 2016, in , Vol. 9905, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2016: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray, ed. J.-W. A. den Herder , T. Takahashi , & M. Bautz , 99051H, 10.1117/12.2231304

    2016 doi

  26. [34]

    M., & Fabian , A

    George , I. M., & Fabian , A. C. 1991, , 249, 352, 10.1093/mnras/249.2.352

    1991 doi

  27. [35]

    T., Gudennavar, S

    Giridharan, L., Thomas, N. T., Gudennavar, S. B., & Bubbly, S. G. 2023, , 527, 11855, 10.1093/mnras/stad3941

    2023 doi

  28. [36]

    1989, , 225, 79

    Hasinger , G., & van der Klis , M. 1989, , 225, 79

    1989

  29. [37]

    1998, , 499, L41, 10.1086/311341

    Homan , J., van der Klis , M., Wijnands , R., Vaughan , B., & Kuulkers , E. 1998, , 499, L41, 10.1086/311341

    1998 doi

  30. [38]

    L., et al

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

    2019 doi

  31. [39]

    2019 b , The Journal of Open Source Software, 4, 1393, 10.21105/joss.01393

    Huppenkothen , D., Bachetti , M., Stevens , A., et al. 2019 b , The Journal of Open Source Software, 4, 1393, 10.21105/joss.01393

    2019 doi

  32. [40]

    2014, , 561, A99, 10.1051/0004-6361/201322328

    Iaria , R., Di Salvo , T., Burderi , L., et al. 2014, , 561, A99, 10.1051/0004-6361/201322328

    2014 doi

  33. [41]

    A., & Sunyaev , R

    Inogamov , N. A., & Sunyaev , R. A. 1999, Astronomy Letters, 25, 269. astro-ph/9904333

    1999 arXiv

  34. [42]

    A., Schulz , N

    Jimenez-Garate , M. A., Schulz , N. S., & Marshall , H. L. 2003, , 590, 432, 10.1086/374864

    2003 doi

  35. [43]

    R., Angelini , L., Boroson , B., & Cottam , J

    Kallman , T. R., Angelini , L., Boroson , B., & Cottam , J. 2003, , 583, 861, 10.1086/345475

    2003 doi

  36. [44]

    2024, , 960, L11, 10.3847/2041-8213/ad132d

    La Monaca , F., Di Marco , A., Poutanen , J., et al. 2024, , 960, L11, 10.3847/2041-8213/ad132d

    2024 doi

  37. [45]

    La Monaca, Fabio , Di Marco, Alessandro , Ludlam, Renee M. , et al. 2024, A&A, 691, A253, 10.1051/0004-6361/202451966

    2024 doi

  38. [46]

    2022, , 660, A25, 10.1051/0004-6361/202142360

    Loktev , V., Veledina , A., & Poutanen , J. 2022, , 660, A25, 10.1051/0004-6361/202142360

    2022 doi

  39. [47]

    Ludlam , R. M. 2024, , 369, 16, 10.1007/s10509-024-04281-y

    2024 doi

  40. [48]

    2019, , 625, A8, 10.1051/0004-6361/201833163

    Maiolino , T., Laurent , P., Titarchuk , L., Orlandini , M., & Frontera , F. 2019, , 625, A8, 10.1051/0004-6361/201833163

    2019 doi

  41. [49]

    E., London , R

    McClintock , J. E., London , R. A., Bond , H. E., & Grauer , A. D. 1982, , 258, 245, 10.1086/160074

    1982 doi

  42. [50]

    A., & Stone , J

    Miller , K. A., & Stone , J. M. 2000, , 534, 398, 10.1086/308736

    2000 doi

  43. [51]

    1984, , 36, 741

    Mitsuda , K., Inoue , H., Koyama , K., et al. 1984, , 36, 741

    1984

  44. [52]

    2014, HEAsoft: Unified Release of FTOOLS and XANADU , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1408.004

    Nasa High Energy Astrophysics Science Archive Research Center (Heasarc) . 2014, HEAsoft: Unified Release of FTOOLS and XANADU , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1408.004

    2014

  45. [53]

    P., Veledina , A., & Poutanen , J

    Nitindala , A. P., Veledina , A., & Poutanen , J. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.18299, 10.48550/arXiv.2411.18299

    2024 doi arXiv

  46. [54]

    F., Rea , N., & Tauris , T

    Papitto , A., Torres , D. F., Rea , N., & Tauris , T. M. 2014, , 566, A64, 10.1051/0004-6361/201321724

    2014 doi

  47. [55]

    N., & White , N

    Parmar , A. N., & White , N. E. 1988, , 59, 147

    1988

  48. [56]

    2001, , 547, 355, 10.1086/318336

    Popham , R., & Sunyaev , R. 2001, , 547, 355, 10.1086/318336

    2001 doi

  49. [57]

    2018, , 620, A129, 10.1051/0004-6361/201834000

    Psaradaki , I., Costantini , E., Mehdipour , M., & D \' az Trigo , M. 2018, , 620, A129, 10.1051/0004-6361/201834000

    2018 doi

  50. [58]

    2024, , 961, L8, 10.3847/2041-8213/ad1832

    Rankin , J., La Monaca , F., Di Marco , A., et al. 2024, , 961, L8, 10.3847/2041-8213/ad1832

    2024 doi

  51. [59]

    2006, , 456, 917, 10.1051/0004-6361:20065071

    Romano , P., Campana , S., Chincarini , G., et al. 2006, , 456, 917, 10.1051/0004-6361:20065071

    2006 doi

  52. [60]

    L., Kaaret , P., Gnarini , A., et al

    Saade , M. L., Kaaret , P., Gnarini , A., et al. 2024, , 963, 133, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad235a

    2024 doi

  53. [61]

    A., Garc \' a , F., Fogantini , F

    Saavedra , E. A., Garc \' a , F., Fogantini , F. A., et al. 2023, , 522, 3367, 10.1093/mnras/stad1157

    2023 doi

  54. [62]

    S., Reerink , T., van der Klis , M., et al

    Schnerr , R. S., Reerink , T., van der Klis , M., et al. 2003, , 406, 221, 10.1051/0004-6361:20030682

    2003 doi

  55. [63]

    I., & Sunyaev , R

    Shakura , N. I., & Sunyaev , R. A. 1988, Advances in Space Research, 8, 135, 10.1016/0273-1177(88)90396-1

    1988 doi

  56. [64]

    P., Mason , K

    Smale , A. P., Mason , K. O., White , N. E., & Gottwald , M. 1988, , 232, 647, 10.1093/mnras/232.3.647

    1988 doi

  57. [65]

    2021, , 162, 208, 10.3847/1538-3881/ac19b0

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

    2021 doi

  58. [66]

    E., & Taylor , B

    Stella , L., White , N. E., & Taylor , B. G. 1985, in Recent Results on Cataclysmic Variables. The Importance of IUE and Exosat Results on Cataclysmic Variables and Low-Mass X-Ray Binaries, ed. W. R. Burke , 125

    1985

  59. [67]

    1999, , 342, 736, 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9812128

    Stelzer , B., Wilms , J., Staubert , R., Gruber , D., & Rothschild , R. 1999, , 342, 736, 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9812128

    1999 doi arXiv

  60. [68]

    2006, , 369, 2036, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10454.x

    Suleimanov , V., & Poutanen , J. 2006, , 369, 2036, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10454.x

    2006

  61. [69]

    A., & Titarchuk , L

    Sunyaev , R. A., & Titarchuk , L. G. 1985, , 143, 374

    1985

  62. [70]

    2024, , 527, 7047, 10.1093/mnras/stad3649

    Tomaru , R., Done , C., & Odaka , H. 2024, , 527, 7047, 10.1093/mnras/stad3649

    2024 doi

  63. [71]

    2023, , 676, A20, 10.1051/0004-6361/202346541

    Ursini , F., Farinelli , R., Gnarini , A., et al. 2023, , 676, A20, 10.1051/0004-6361/202346541

    2023 doi

  64. [72]

    1989, , 27, 517, 10.1146/annurev.aa.27.090189.002505

    van der Klis , M. 1989, , 27, 517, 10.1146/annurev.aa.27.090189.002505

    1989

  65. [73]

    C., Soffitta , P., Baldini , L., et al

    Weisskopf , M. C., Soffitta , P., Baldini , L., et al. 2022, JATIS, 8, 026002, 10.1117/1.JATIS.8.2.026002

    2022 doi

  66. [74]

    E., & Holt , S

    White , N. E., & Holt , S. S. 1982, , 257, 318, 10.1086/159991

    1982 doi

  67. [75]

    R., Lightman , A

    White , T. R., Lightman , A. P., & Zdziarski , A. A. 1988, , 331, 939, 10.1086/166611

    1988 doi

  68. [76]

    2000, , 542, 914, 10.1086/317016

    Wilms , J., Allen , A., & McCray , R. 2000, , 542, 914, 10.1086/317016

    2000 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.