Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 40 references

Distinct properties of the radio burst emission from the magnetar XTE J1810-197

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper reports that the radio bursts of the magnetar XTE J1810-197 contain spectral structures that cannot be caused by interstellar scintillation, implying the structures are intrinsic to the source and fade as the outburst evolves.

desk verdict Useful low-frequency single-pulse study of a magnetar outburst; the intrinsic spectral structure claim is plausible but rests on an indirect scintillation-bandwidth estimate. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.04304 v2 pith:4JUOZMBZ submitted 2019-08-12 astro-ph.HE

Yogesh Maan , Bhal Chandra Joshi , Mayuresh P. Surnis , Manjari Bagchi , P. K. Manoharan This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords magnetarsXTEJ1810-197radioburstsfrequencystructuresinterstellarscintillationgiantmicropulsesfasttransientemission
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 reports that the recently re-activated magnetar XTE J1810-197 emits narrow, bright radio bursts whose frequency structure cannot be explained by interstellar scintillation, implying the structure is intrinsic to the emission mechanism. Using low-frequency observations soon after the December 2018 outburst, the authors measure intrinsic burst widths of about 0.5–0.7 ms and show that the bursts become spectrally smoother in later epochs. If correct, this makes the magnetar only the third source, after repeating fast radio bursts and the Crab pulsar, to show such prominent frequency structures, a potential bridge between magnetar bursts and FRB emission.

What carries the argument

The argument runs through two standard radio-propagation tools. First, each burst is modeled as an intrinsic Gaussian convolved with a one-sided exponential, which separates the intrinsic width (0.5–0.7 ms) from the scattering tail ($\tau_{\rm sc}\,{\sim}\,1$ ms). Second, that scattering timescale is fed into the standard relation between scattering time and scintillation bandwidth, together with two Galactic electron-density models, to bound the scintillation bandwidth below 1 kHz. The spectral modulation index, $m_I^2 = \big(\langle I^2\rangle-\langle I\rangle^2\big)/\langle I\rangle^2$, computed for dedispersed burst spectra, quantifies how patchy each burst's spectrum is and documents the decline of structure in later epochs.

What would settle it

A direct measurement of the 650 MHz scintillation bandwidth from long-term monitoring of the burst spectra: if it turns out to be tens of MHz rather than below 1 kHz, the observed frequency structures would be a propagation artifact rather than intrinsic to the source.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

At 550–750 MHz, individual radio bursts from XTE J1810-197 show strong spectral variations over tens of MHz. Because the scattering timescale estimated from two bursts is $\tau_{\rm sc} = 1.30\pm0.06$ and $1.05\pm0.05$ ms, the interstellar scintillation bandwidth should be below 1 kHz, so these wide spectral structures cannot be propagation effects; they are intrinsic to the magnetar's emission. The structures are most prominent in the first days after the December 2018 outburst and become less frequent and less pronounced in later observations. The bursts also have an intrinsic width of 0.5–0.7 ms, with power-law tails in their peak-flux distributions, tying them phenomenologically to giant micropulses rather than classical giant pulses.

Load-bearing premise

The conclusion that the spectral structures are intrinsic rests on the assumption that the scattering timescales measured from two bursts (1.05 and 1.30 ms) are representative of the line of sight, so that the interstellar scintillation bandwidth is really below 1 kHz.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The magnetar becomes the third known object, after the repeating fast radio bursts and the Crab pulsar, whose bursts display prominent intrinsic frequency structures.
  • The spectral structures fade within weeks of the outburst, so they can serve as a tracer of how the magnetosphere's emission region reorganizes after an outburst.
  • The measured intrinsic widths place the bursts closer to giant micropulses than to giant pulses, supporting a common emission mechanism with certain pulsars.
  • The low-frequency spectral index is harder than previously reported, constraining the emission process at frequencies below 750 MHz.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the structures are intrinsic, their bandwidths could be used to estimate the size or plasma density of the radiating region inside the magnetosphere, assuming coherent emission or a local plasma lens.
  • A natural extension is high-time-resolution, high-frequency monitoring to hunt for frequency drift in the structures; detecting drift would tighten the phenomenological link to repeating FRBs.
  • The key propagation assumption rests on only two bursts; a future campaign that measures the scintillation bandwidth directly at 650 MHz would either confirm or overturn the intrinsic conclusion.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper reports GMRT observations of the magnetar XTE J1810-197 during its 2018-2019 radio outburst. It presents the 650 MHz flux-density evolution, a low-frequency spectrum, and a study of the narrow, bright bursts detected at 550-750 MHz and, in one session, at 1260-1460 MHz. The authors find that the bursts at 650 MHz have apparent widths of a few milliseconds, which they attribute largely to scatter broadening, and they fit two bursts to obtain intrinsic widths of about 0.5-0.7 ms. They also report frequency structures in the bursts and argue that these structures cannot be caused by interstellar scintillation because the measured scattering timescale and the NE2001 and YMW16 electron-density models imply a scintillation bandwidth below 1 kHz. The paper further notes that these spectral structures are more prominent in the early observations and become less prominent and less frequent in later sessions, and it discusses the burst properties in the context of giant pulses, giant micropulses, and repeating fast radio bursts.

Significance. If the intrinsic-spectral-structure claim is correct, this is a significant result: XTE J1810-197 would become one of only a few sources, after the Crab pulsar and the repeating FRBs, to show prominent sub-banded structure in its burst spectra. This would strengthen the phenomenological link between magnetar bursts and repeating FRBs and constrain models of the emission mechanism. The paper's strengths include the early low-frequency coverage, the use of two independent Galactic electron-density models, the explicit comparison with contemporaneous Parkes data, and the careful treatment of scatter broadening in the burst profiles. The central propagation argument, however, rests on an indirect estimate of the scintillation bandwidth rather than on a direct measurement, and the spectral structures themselves are characterized only by a modulation index rather than by a measured frequency scale.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 3.3] The conclusion that the frequency structures cannot be caused by interstellar scintillation hinges on the estimate that the scintillation bandwidth is less than 1 kHz, obtained from the measured scattering timescale and from the NE2001 and YMW16 models. The conversion from tau_sc to Delta nu_d assumes a specific scattering model, such as a single thin screen with a Kolmogorov wavenumber spectrum. Non-Kolmogorov spectra, scattering dominated by a small number of discrete images, or a circum-source screen can break the standard tau_sc-Delta nu_d relation and allow a much larger scintillation bandwidth for the same temporal broadening. Since no direct measurement of Delta nu_d from the dynamic spectra is presented, this load-bearing step needs either a direct measurement or an explicit robustness test that does not rely on the assumed scattering geometry.
  2. [Section 3.3, Figures 4 and 5] The paper does not quantify the frequency scale of the claimed spectral structures. The modulation index m_I measures the amount of spectral variation but not its bandwidth, and the statement that the structures have widths of 'several tens of MHz' is based on visual inspection of Figure 4. A two-dimensional autocorrelation of the dynamic spectra, or an equivalent measure of the spectral structure scale, is needed to support the claim that the structure bandwidth is orders of magnitude larger than the inferred interstellar scintillation bandwidth. As written, the central quantitative claim is not directly demonstrated.
  3. [Section 3.3, Figure 5] The m_I distributions are not corrected for the noise contribution to the variance of single-pulse spectra. The noise term in the modulation index depends on the per-sub-band signal-to-noise ratio, which may differ between sessions, so the comparison across sessions that underlies the claim that the spectral structures become less prominent in later phases is not secure. The authors should either subtract the expected noise bias or show that the result is insensitive to the noise contribution.
  4. [Section 3.3 and Abstract] The abstract and conclusions state that the bursts have a 'characteristic intrinsic width' of 0.5-0.7 ms, but this value is derived from fits to only two bursts from a single session. This is an overgeneralization unless the fitting is applied to a larger sample or the two bursts are explicitly shown to be representative. The text should state that this is an example-based estimate, not a measured characteristic of the burst population, or it should provide a population-level measurement.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 3.1, Figure 1 caption] The flux-density error bars are described as 'arbitrarily assumed to be 20%' of the measurements; the quoted spectral index alpha = +1.2 +/- 0.1 does not appear to include the systematic uncertainty from this assumption. The authors should justify the 20% value or propagate it into the spectral-index uncertainty.
  2. [Section 3.2, Table 1] The power-law fits to the burst flux-density distributions use a uniform lower cutoff of 500 mJy, but no goodness-of-fit statistics or sensitivity to the choice of cutoff are reported. This should be documented so that the fitted indices can be evaluated.
  3. [Section 3.3] The statement that both NE2001 and YMW16 'suggest similar estimates' would be more useful if the predicted scintillation bandwidths from the two models were quoted explicitly, since these predictions are central to the propagation argument.
  4. [Throughout] There are several typographical issues, including 'power-low' instead of 'power-law' in Section 3.2 and stray spacing in 'X TE J1810-197' in the title; a careful proofread is needed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the spectral-structure claim is tested against independent scattering measurements and external propagation models.

full rationale

The paper's central inference, that the tens-of-MHz spectral structures in bursts are intrinsic rather than interstellar, is not circular. It rests on direct measurements of scattering timescales from two bursts (tau_sc = 1.30 +/- 0.06 ms and 1.05 +/- 0.05 ms) obtained by fitting a Gaussian convolved with a one-sided exponential, the standard pulsar-scintillation relation Delta_nu_d approximately 1/(2*pi*tau_sc), and independent NE2001 and YMW16 electron-density model estimates. The conclusion that the scintillation bandwidth is less than a kilohertz is derived from an external physical relation and external models, not from the observed spectral structures themselves. The quoted passage 'using the above measured tau_sc, the scintillation bandwidth is estimated to be less than a kHz... Hence, the observed spectral structures of several tens of MHz are intrinsic' connects measured and modeled quantities through independently established propagation theory. The observed spectral structures are the phenomenon to be explained, not inputs used to set the scintillation bandwidth. Methodological self-citations (e.g., Maan & Aswathappa 2014 for the radiometer equation and Krishnakumar et al. 2019 for a fitting module) are not load-bearing for the key claim. Even if one worries that the two-burst tau_sc may not be representative or that the scattering medium might be non-Kolmogorov, that is a robustness and correctness concern, not a circularity in which the conclusion is equivalent to its inputs by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are proposed. The free parameters are measurement choices and fitted values that the headline numbers depend on. The main fragility is the assumption that the two-burst scattering fit plus the standard ISM models correctly bounds the scintillation bandwidth, which is the foundation of the intrinsic-spectral-structure claim.

free parameters (4)
  • Lower cutoff for power-law tail fits (Sp_cut) = 500 mJy
    Chosen uniformly across all sessions in Section 3.2 to fit only the tails of the peak flux density distributions. Different cutoffs would change the fitted alpha indices.
  • Assumed 20% flux density uncertainty = 20%
    Figure 1 caption: 'The error bars are arbitrarily assumed to be 20% of the measurements.' This assumption propagates into the combined spectral index alpha equals +1.2 plus or minus 0.1 and the flux decay interpretation.
  • Fitted scatter-broadening parameters for two bursts = intrinsic widths 0.69 plus or minus 0.05 and 0.53 plus or minus 0.04 ms; tau_sc 1.30 plus or minus 0.06 and 1.05 plus…
    Section 3.3: these two fits are the quantitative basis for the 'intrinsic width 0.5-0.7 ms' claim and for the scintillation bandwidth estimate used to argue the spectral structures are intrinsic.
  • Spectral modulation index selection thresholds = width < 3 ms; S/N > 10; 128 sub-bands across 200 MHz
    Section 3.3: the bursts included in the modulation-index distributions are selected by these thresholds, and the frequency resolution is set by the number of sub-bands. This affects the comparison of structure prominence across sessions.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The dispersion measure of 178.5 pc cm^-3 is accurate, so coherent dedispersion removes the interstellar frequency delays.
    Section 2 uses DM 178.5 for all time series. If wrong, measured burst widths and spectral structure would be distorted.
  • domain assumption The observed exponential tails of bursts arise from interstellar scattering, modeled as a Gaussian convolved with a one-sided exponential.
    Section 3.3: this shape model is assumed when fitting the two bursts; it separates 'intrinsic' width from scattering time.
  • domain assumption The standard tau_sc-to-decorrelation-bandwidth relation, together with the NE2001 and YMW16 electron density models, bounds the interstellar scintillation bandwidth below about 1 kHz.
    Section 3.3: the inference that tens-of-MHz structures are intrinsic depends on this bound.
  • domain assumption Scattering along the line of sight is dominated by the interstellar medium; no local circum-source scattering screen is included.
    Section 3.3: the estimate uses only ISM models; a local screen could have a different decorrelation bandwidth and change the conclusion.
  • domain assumption The selected bursts (width < 3 ms, S/N > 10) are representative of the burst population in each session for the purpose of tracking spectral-structure evolution.
    Section 3.3: the temporal comparison of modulation-index distributions assumes the selection does not bias the trend.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Distinct properties of the radio burst emission from the magnetar XTE J1810-197." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4JUOZMBZ

@misc{pith2026190804304,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Distinct properties of the radio burst emission from the magnetar XTE J1810-197},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4JUOZMBZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.04304}
}
read the original abstract

XTE J1810-197 (PSR J1809-1943) was the first ever magnetar which was found to emit transient radio emission. It has recently undergone another radio and high-energy outburst. This is only the second radio outburst that has been observed from this source. We observed J1810-197 soon after its recent radio outburst at low radio frequencies using the Giant Metrewave Radio Telescope. We present the 650 MHz flux density evolution of the source in the early phases of the outburst, and its radio spectrum down to frequencies as low as 300 MHz. The magnetar also exhibits radio emission in the form of strong, narrow bursts. We show that the bursts have a characteristic intrinsic width of the order of 0.5-0.7 ms, and discuss their properties in the context of giant pulses and giant micropulses from other pulsars. We also show that the bursts exhibit spectral structures which cannot be explained by interstellar propagation effects. These structures might indicate a phenomenological link with the repeating fast radio bursts which also show interesting, more detailed frequency structures. While the spectral structures are particularly noticeable in the early phases of the outburst, these seem to be less prominent as well as less frequent in the later phases, suggesting an evolution of the underlying cause of these spectral structures.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.04304 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Top panel: The temporal evolution of the period￾averaged flux density of the magnetar in the frequency range 550−750 MHz. The error bars are arbitrarily assumed to be 20% of the measurements. Bottom panel: The flux density spectrum including our measurements at frequencies below 750 MHz and those from Dai et al. (2019) at higher frequen￾cies. For each of the epochs, we used the pulsar search and analysis software PR… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Left: The black curve shows the histogram of bright pulses as a function of the spin phase, while the dashed, blue curve shows the average profile shape from session S1. The vertical light blue colored dotted lines mark the assumed extents of the individual components (used in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The continuous black color histograms show the peak flux density distributions of the bursty emission at the epochs and bands marked in the respective panels. The red, dotted-line and the blue, dashed-line histograms show the distributions for the bursts detected under the components M1 and M2, respectively. Note that, for ease of comparison, the same flux density range has been displayed for all the 650 MHz (B4) ob… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Spectro-temporal properties of a sample of bursts at 650 MHz are shown. The bursts in the first, second, and third rows are from the sessions S1, S2, and S3, respectively. in Maan & Aswathappa (2014). The Sp distributions of the bursts under the two components, combine…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The individual panels show the distribution of the spectral modulation indices obtained for the peak-spectra of the bursts from the 550−750 MHz sessions marked in the respective panels. nakumar et al. 2019). Our model fits suggest the in￾trinsic widths of the two burst…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    1997, ApJ, 475, L33

    Vivekanand, M. 1997, ApJ, 475, L33

    work page 1997

  2. [2]

    M., Halpern, J

    Camilo, F., Ransom, S. M., Halpern, J. P., et al. 2006, Nature, 442, 892, doi: 10.1038/nature04986

    doi:10.1038/nature04986 2006

  3. [3]

    M., Pe˜ nalver, J., et al

    Camilo, F., Ransom, S. M., Pe˜ nalver, J., et al. 2007, ApJ, 669, 561, doi: 10.1086/521548

    doi:10.1086/521548 2007

  4. [4]

    M., Halpern, J

    Camilo, F., Ransom, S. M., Halpern, J. P., et al. 2016, ApJ, 820, 110, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/820/2/110 CHIME/FRB Collaboration, Amiri, M., Bandura, K., et al. 2019, Nature, 566, 235, doi: 10.1038/s41586-018-0864-x

    doi:10.3847/0004-637x/820/2/110 2016

  5. [5]

    M., & Lazio, T

    Cordes, J. M., & Lazio, T. J. W. 2002, ArXiv Astrophysics e-prints

    work page 2002

  6. [6]

    M., & McLaughlin, M

    Cordes, J. M., & McLaughlin, M. A. 2003, ApJ, 596, 1142

    work page 2003

  7. [7]

    E., Bailes, M., et al

    Dai, S., Lower, M. E., Bailes, M., et al. 2019, ApJ, 874, L14, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab0e7a

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab0e7a 2019

  8. [8]

    V., Halpern, J

    Gotthelf, E. V., Halpern, J. P., Markwardt, C., et al. 2003, IAU Circ., 8190

    work page 2003

Show all 40 references
  1. [9]

    S., et al., 2017, Current Science, 113, 707-714

    Gupta, Y., Ajithkumar, B., Kale, H. S., et al., 2017, Current Science, 113, 707-714

    2017

  2. [10]

    H., Eilek, J

    Hankins, T. H., Eilek, J. A., & Jones, G. 2016, ApJ, 833, 47, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/833/1/47

    2016 doi

  3. [11]

    Haslam, C. G. T., Salter, C. J., Stoffel, H., & Wilson, W. E. 1982, A&AS, 47, 1

    1982

  4. [12]

    Hessels, J. W. T., Spitler, L. G., Seymour, A. D., et al. 2019, ApJ, 876, L23

    2019

  5. [13]

    I., Markwardt, C

    Ibrahim, A. I., Markwardt, C. B., Swank, J. H., et al. 2004, ApJL, 609, L21, doi: 10.1086/422636

    2004 doi

  6. [14]

    2001, ApJ, 549, L101, doi: 10.1086/319154

    Johnston, S., van Straten, W., Kramer, M., & Bailes, M. 2001, ApJ, 549, L101, doi: 10.1086/319154

    2001 doi

  7. [15]

    C., Kramer, M., Lyne, A

    Joshi, B. C., Kramer, M., Lyne, A. G., McLaughlin, M. A., & Stairs, I. H. 2004, in IAU Symposium, Vol. 218, Young Neutron Stars and Their Environments, ed. F. Camilo & B. M. Gaensler, 319

    2004

  8. [16]

    Manoharan, P. K. 2018, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 12312

    2018

  9. [17]

    W., & van Straten, W

    Karuppusamy, R., Stappers, B. W., & van Straten, W. 2010, A&A, 515, A36, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200913729

    2010 doi

  10. [18]

    2002, MNRAS, 334, 523, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05478.x

    Kramer, M., Johnston, S., & van Straten, W. 2002, MNRAS, 334, 523, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05478.x

    2002

  11. [19]

    A., Maan, Y., Joshi, B

    Krishnakumar, M. A., Maan, Y., Joshi, B. C., et al. 2019, ApJ, 878, 130 Burst emission properties of J1810 − 197 9

    2019

  12. [21]

    G., Desvignes, G., et al

    Levin, L., Lyne, A. G., Desvignes, G., et al. 2019, ArXiv e-prints. https://arxiv.org/abs/1903.02660

    2019 arXiv

  13. [22]

    R., Bailes, M., McLaughlin, M

    Lorimer, D. R., Bailes, M., McLaughlin, M. A., Narkevic, D. J., & Crawford, F. 2007, Science, 318, 777

    2007

  14. [23]

    R., & Kramer, M

    Lorimer, D. R., & Kramer, M. 2004, Handbook of Pulsar Astronomy, ed. R. Ellis, J. Huchra, S. Kahn, G. Rieke, & P. B. Stetson

    2004

  15. [24]

    2018, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 12284

    Lyne, A., Levin, L., Stappers, B., et al. 2018, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 12284

    2018

  16. [25]

    A., & Deshpande, A

    Maan, Y., Aswathappa, H. A., & Deshpande, A. A. 2012, MNRAS, 425, 2

    2012

  17. [26]

    Maan, Y., & Aswathappa, H. A. 2014, MNRAS, 445, 3221

    2014

  18. [27]

    Margalit, B., & Metzger, B. D. 2018, ApJ, 868, L4, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aaedad

    2018 doi

  19. [28]

    A., Lyne, A

    McLaughlin, M. A., Lyne, A. G., Lorimer, D. R., et al. 2006, Nature, 439, 817

    2006

  20. [29]

    B., Majid, W

    Pearlman, A. B., Majid, W. A., Prince, T. A., et al. 2018, ApJ, 866, 160

    2018

  21. [30]

    Ransom, S. M. 2001, PhD thesis, Harvard University

    2001

  22. [31]

    W., Weltevrede, P., et al

    Serylak, M., Stappers, B. W., Weltevrede, P., et al. 2009, MNRAS, 394, 295, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14260.x

    2009

  23. [32]

    G., Cordes, J

    Spitler, L. G., Cordes, J. M., Chatterjee, S., et al. 2012, ApJ, 748, 73

    2012

  24. [33]

    G., Scholz, P., Hessels, J

    Spitler, L. G., Scholz, P., Hessels, J. W. T., et al. 2016, Nature, 531, 202, doi: 10.1038/nature17168

    2016 doi

  25. [34]

    H., & Reifenstein, III, E

    Staelin, D. H., & Reifenstein, III, E. C. 1968, Science, 162, 1481

    1968

  26. [35]

    P., Joshi, B

    Surnis, M. P., Joshi, B. C., Maan, Y., et al. 2016, ApJ, 826, 184, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/826/2/184

    2016 doi

  27. [36]

    2013, Science , 341, 53

    Thornton, D., Stappers, B., Bailes, M., et al. 2013, Science , 341, 53

    2013

  28. [37]

    A., Bursov, N

    Trushkin, S. A., Bursov, N. N., Tsybulev, P. G., Nizhelskij, N. A., & Erkenov, A. 2019, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 12372

    2019

  29. [38]

    2000, ApJ, 543, 979, doi: 10.1086/317141

    Vivekanand, M. 2000, ApJ, 543, 979, doi: 10.1086/317141

    2000 doi

  30. [39]

    Rankin, J. M. 2006, A&A, 458, 269, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20065572

    2006 doi

  31. [40]

    1984, in Birth and Evolution of Neutron Stars: Issues Raised by Millisecond Pulsars, ed

    Wolszczan, A., Cordes, J., & Stinebring, D. 1984, in Birth and Evolution of Neutron Stars: Issues Raised by Millisecond Pulsars, ed. S. P. Reynolds & D. R. Stinebring, 63

    1984

  32. [41]

    M., Manchester, R

    Yao, J. M., Manchester, R. N., & Wang, N. 2017, ApJ, 835, 29

    2017

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.