Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 53 references

PSR J1631-4722: The Discovery of a Young and Energetic Pulsar in the Supernova Remnant G336.7+0.5

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · 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 the discovery of a young and energetic 118-ms pulsar inside the supernova remnant G336.7+0.5; its pulses are so heavily scattered that it was only detectable above 2 GHz.

desk verdict A real new pulsar with a plausible SNR association, but the abstract misquotes Pdot and the one-year timing baseline leaves the spin-down parameters hostage to timing noise. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.11345 v1 pith:5O5YD7ID submitted 2024-12-16 astro-ph.HE

A. Ahmad , S. Dai , S. Lazarević , M. D. Filipović , S. Johnston , M. Kerr , D. Li , C. Maitra
show 1 more author
R. N. Manchester
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords pulsars:individual(PSRJ1631-4722)supernovaremnants:(G336.7+0.5)pulsarwindnebulaeinterstellarscatteringradiocontinuumsurveystimingdispersionmeasuregamma-raysources
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

PSR J1631–4722 is a $118.7\,\mathrm{ms}$ pulsar the authors place inside the Galactic supernova remnant G336.7+0.5. Its high dispersion measure of $873\,\mathrm{pc\,cm}^{-3}$ produces enough pulse scattering that it is effectively invisible in the $1.4\,\mathrm{GHz}$ surveys that have scanned the Galactic plane, and the paper argues that targeted high-frequency observations are what made the discovery possible. The timing solution yields a characteristic age of about $33.9\,\mathrm{kyr}$, a spin-down luminosity of $1.3\times10^{36}\,\mathrm{erg\,s}^{-1}$, and a surface magnetic field of $2.6\times10^{12}\,\mathrm{G}$, putting it squarely among young, energetic pulsars. The authors identify a cometary radio emission tail near the pulsar position that they interpret as a candidate pulsar wind nebula, with its direction suggesting the pulsar is moving away from the remnant's center. If the association is correct, the system becomes a rare example of a radio pulsar tied to a known supernova remnant, and a promising target for studying high-energy emission from a pulsar wind.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the strong frequency dependence of interstellar scattering, $\tau_s \propto \nu^{-\alpha}$ with $\alpha \approx 4.4$, which the paper uses both to explain why the pulsar eluded previous surveys and to recover the intrinsic pulse shape from high-frequency data. By fitting a Gaussian intrinsic profile convolved with an exponential scattering tail in five subbands between 2 and 4 GHz, the authors measure a scattering timescale of $3.0 \pm 0.5\,\mathrm{ms}$ at $3\,\mathrm{GHz}$, and extrapolate this to a smearing of about $76\,\mathrm{ms}$ at $1.4\,\mathrm{GHz}$. The other key piece is the targeted observational strategy: a compact, tail-like radio continuum source inside the SNR, found in RACS images, selected as a pulsar candidate and then observed with the wideband UWL receiver on the Parkes telescope, with the search performed separately in subbands above and below $2\,\mathrm{GHz}$ to account for scattering.

What would settle it

A VLBI or timing-parallax measurement that places PSR J1631–4722 outside the 7–9 kpc distance range of SNR G336.7+0.5, or a proper-motion direction that does not point away from the remnant's geometric center, would disprove the claimed association.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

In its own terms, the paper reports the discovery of PSR J1631–4722, a $118.7\,\mathrm{ms}$ pulsar with a dispersion measure of $873.75\,\mathrm{pc\,cm}^{-3}$, a rotation measure of $-1004 \pm 7\,\mathrm{rad\,m}^{-2}$, a period derivative of $5.55963\times10^{-14}$ (in s/s), and a flux density of $0.089\,\mathrm{mJy}$ at $3300\,\mathrm{MHz}$. From these it derives a characteristic age of $33.9\,\mathrm{kyr}$, a spin-down luminosity of $1.3\times10^{36}\,\mathrm{erg\,s}^{-1}$, and a surface magnetic field of $2.6\times10^{12}\,\mathrm{G}$. The pulsar was found in a pointed observation of a compact radio source seen in RACS images inside SNR G336.7+0.5; it was detected only in the high-band ($1984$–$3008\,\mathrm{MHz}$) portion of the UWL observation, while nothing was seen below $2\,\mathrm{GHz}$. The authors attribute this to scatter broadening: the measured scattering timescale at $3\,\mathrm{GHz}$ is about $3\,\mathrm{ms}$, and with a spectral index of $\alpha = 4.4 \pm 0.1$ this extrapolates to about $76\,\mathrm{ms}$ at $1.4\,\mathrm{GHz}$, which is $64\%$ of the pulse period and would hide the pulsar from earlier surveys. Their timing and polarization analysis show a highly linearly polarized, weakly circularly polarized profile typical of young energetic pulsars. The claimed association with the SNR rests on the pulsar's position within the remnant, its young characteristic age, DM-based distances of $6.8$ and $9.1\,\mathrm{kpc}$ (YMW16 and NE2001) that bracket the remnant's literature distances, and a $\sim$73-arcsec cometary tail pointing away from the remnant center, which they interpret as a pulsar wind nebula.

Load-bearing premise

The association of PSR J1631–4722 with SNR G336.7+0.5 rests on the pulsar's position inside the remnant, its young characteristic age, and DM-based distance estimates; with only a one-year timing baseline the timing position may be affected by timing noise, and a direct distance or proper-motion measurement has not yet been made to confirm the association.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The pulsar becomes one of only about 40 radio pulsars known to be directly associated with a Galactic supernova remnant, and it is the most energetic pulsar in the G336.7+0.5 field.
  • The discovery validates a search strategy: compact radio continuum sources in widefield surveys such as RACS can be high-DM, heavily scattered pulsars, and targeting them at frequencies above 2 GHz can find objects that 1.4 GHz surveys miss.
  • A timing baseline of about five years should yield a sub-arcsecond position, which would test whether the apparent offset between the pulsar and the candidate PWN is real and would allow a meaningful transverse-velocity estimate.
  • Continued timing will also make it possible to search for pulsed GeV and TeV emission from the Fermi and H.E.S.S. sources in the region, since the current one-year timing ephemeris is too noisy to fold the high-energy data.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If scattering hides objects like this one, the Galactic pulsar census is incomplete at high dispersion measures; widefield high-frequency surveys could bring the true population of heavily scattered pulsars to light.
  • The same imaging-to-timing pipeline could be used to find pulsars with other selection biases – for example, highly accelerated binary pulsars or intermittent sources that would not appear in periodicity searches – by starting from compact sources in continuum images rather than from pulsed surveys.
  • The abstract's period derivative value (3.6 × 10^-15) appears to be a typo; it is inconsistent with the paper's tabulated value (5.6 × 10^-14), characteristic age, and spin-down luminosity, so the quoted energetic parameters should be taken from the body and table.
  • If the candidate PWN is confirmed through X-ray or deeper radio observations, a distance could be derived from its spectral energy distribution, independently checking the DM-based distance and thus the physical association with the SNR.
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 / 6 minor

Summary. The paper reports the discovery of PSR J1631-4722, a 118 ms pulsar with a high dispersion measure (873 pc cm^-3) and rotation measure (-1004 rad m^-2), found in a targeted high-frequency search with the Parkes UWL receiver toward the supernova remnant G336.7+0.5. The authors present a ~1-year timing solution yielding Pdot = 5.56e-14 s/s, from which they derive a characteristic age of 33.9 kyr, spin-down luminosity 1.3e36 erg/s, and surface magnetic field 2.6e12 G. They argue that the pulsar's high DM and strong scattering made it undetectable in earlier 1.4 GHz surveys, and they identify a candidate pulsar wind nebula in RACS images. They also discuss a possible association with gamma-ray sources in the region.

Significance. If the timing parameters hold, PSR J1631-4722 is a genuinely young and energetic pulsar that adds to the small population of radio pulsars associated with Galactic SNRs. The discovery is particularly valuable as a demonstration that targeted high-frequency searches of radio continuum sources can uncover highly scattered pulsars missed by lower-frequency surveys. The scattering analysis is standard and the derived scattering index is consistent with Kolmogorov turbulence. The authors are appropriately cautious about the gamma-ray association and the PWN identification, and the data availability statement is clear. The main scientific claims, however, rest on a spin-down rate measured over only about one year, and the manuscript gives no timing-noise diagnostic, so the true uncertainty on Pdot is not quantified.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3.1, Table 1] The timing solution spans only MJD 60237.26-60589.13 (~352 days), and the quoted parameter uncertainties are explicitly stated not to account for timing noise. For a young pulsar with a characteristic age of ~34 kyr, red timing noise can bias Pdot by a substantial fraction over such a short baseline, so the formal error quoted on Pdot is not a reliable measure of the true uncertainty. Because tau_c, Edot, and the association argument all use this Pdot, the paper should report a timing-noise diagnostic (e.g., a second frequency derivative, sigma_z, or a red-noise fit) or should explicitly state that the derived spin-down parameters are provisional.
  2. [Abstract vs. Table 1] The abstract quotes Pdot = 3.6 x 10^-15 s/s, but Table 1 and Section 4 use Pdot = 5.55963(8) x 10^-14 s/s. With P = 118.719 ms, the abstract value would imply tau_c ~ 5.2 x 10^5 yr and Edot ~ 8 x 10^34 erg/s, not the quoted 33 kyr and 1.3 x 10^36 erg/s. The abstract must be corrected to match the table.
  3. [§4, association] The association between PSR J1631-4722 and SNR G336.7+0.5 is presented in the abstract and Section 4 as established, but the evidence is positional coincidence, a characteristic-age estimate, and DM-based distances, all of which are model-dependent. The authors themselves note that the pulsar is offset from the proposed PWN and that the timing position may be affected by timing noise. The association should be described as 'candidate' or 'probable' until a proper-motion, parallax, or independent distance measurement is available.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§2.2] The text 'Murryiyang's Ultra-Wideband Low receiver' contains a typo; it should read 'Murriyang's.'
  2. [Figure 2] The caption contains 'PSR J631–4722' and 'obseravtions'; both should be corrected to 'PSR J1631–4722' and 'observations,' respectively.
  3. [§4, last paragraph] The paragraph beginning 'PSR J1638–4713 is one of the known handful...' appears to refer to the newly discovered pulsar but uses the wrong name; it should be PSR J1631–4722.
  4. [§3.3] The assumption that the 3836 MHz profile represents the intrinsic pulse shape is reasonable but should be justified more explicitly, since the measured scattering timescale at 3 GHz scaled to 3.8 GHz is still about 1 ms, which could bias the fitted intrinsic width and hence the spectral index.
  5. [References] The reference for Cordes & Lazio (2002) is incomplete ('arXiv e-prints, astro'); the full arXiv identifier or a published version should be provided.
  6. [Author affiliations] There are minor typographical issues in the affiliations, including 'Tsinghua Univerisity' and non-standard characters in 'Beijing'; these should be corrected.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: spin parameters follow from measured P and Pdot via standard formulas, and the SNR/PWN association is argued from independent evidence.

full rationale

The paper's central derived quantities—characteristic age tau_c, spin-down luminosity Edot, and surface magnetic field B_s—are computed directly from the measured spin period and period derivative using the canonical dipole formulas stated in Section 3.1. No free parameter is fitted to the quantity being presented as a result, and the gamma-ray flux estimate in Section 4 explicitly assumes an efficiency (3%) and a distance (7 kpc), labeled as an estimate rather than a prediction. The pulsar–SNR association is supported by positional coincidence, the young characteristic age, and DM-based distance estimates that are consistent with literature distances to G336.7+0.5; each of these is independent evidence, and the paper does not reduce the association to a fitted input. Self-citations (e.g., Lazarević et al. 2024a; Johnston et al. 2021) are contextual and not load-bearing for the central claim. The paper explicitly acknowledges limitations: the one-year timing baseline is insufficient to accurately predict spin parameters for folding high-energy data, and timing noise may bias the position and parameter errors. The internal inconsistency between the abstract's Pdot value (3.6e-15) and the table's value (5.56e-14) is a typographical error, not a circular step, and the table value is the one used in the derived quantities. No enumerated circularity pattern is present.

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

The central claim rests on standard pulsar astronomy modeling: measured P and Pdot are converted to age, luminosity, and field using canonical formulas, and the distance and scattering use standard ISM models. The only hand-set numbers are the assumed gamma-ray efficiency and the fitted scattering parameters. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • Scattering timescale at 3 GHz = 3.0 ± 0.5 ms
    Fitted by convolving a Gaussian intrinsic profile with an exponential tail to five subband profiles (Section 3.3, Figure 3).
  • Scattering spectral index alpha = 4.4 ± 0.1
    Power-law index fitted to the frequency dependence of the scattering timescale (Section 3.3).
  • Gamma-ray conversion efficiency = 3% (assumed)
    Assumed for the GeV flux estimate in Section 4; explicitly stated, not fitted.
  • Intrinsic profile Gaussian width = Not quoted separately
    The 3836 MHz profile is fit with a 1-D Gaussian and adopted as the intrinsic pulse shape (Section 3.3).
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Standard pulsar spin-down model: tau_c = P/(2 Pdot), Edot = 4 pi^2 I Pdot / P^3, B_s = 3.2e19 sqrt(P Pdot), with moment of inertia I = 1e45 g cm^2 and radius 10 km.
    Used in Section 3.1 and Table 1 to derive characteristic age, spin-down luminosity, and surface magnetic field.
  • domain assumption The highest-frequency (3.8 GHz) pulse profile is the unscattered intrinsic profile.
    Section 3.3: 'We fit the pulse profile in the highest frequency subband with a 1-D Gaussian model and assume that this is the intrinsic pulse shape.'
  • domain assumption Scattering timescale follows a power law tau_s proportional to nu^{-alpha}.
    Section 3.3, used to fit alpha and to extrapolate tau_s to 1.4 GHz to explain non-detection in lower-frequency surveys.
  • domain assumption Galactic electron density models YMW16 and NE2001 give reliable DM-based distances.
    Section 4, used to estimate distance range 6.8-9.1 kpc and transverse velocity.
  • domain assumption The radio-brightness-to-diameter distance relations for SNR G336.7+0.5 are reliable.
    Section 4 cites literature distances between 7.2 and 9.5 kpc for consistency checks.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of PSR J1631-4722: The Discovery of a Young and Energetic Pulsar in the Supernova Remnant G336.7+0.5." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5O5YD7ID

@misc{pith2026241211345,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: PSR J1631-4722: The Discovery of a Young and Energetic Pulsar in the Supernova Remnant G336.7+0.5},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5O5YD7ID}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.11345}
}
abstract

Detecting a pulsar associated with a supernova remnant (SNR) and/or pulsar wind nebula (PWN) is crucial for unraveling its formation history and pulsar wind dynamics, yet the association with a radio pulsar is observed only in a small fraction of known SNRs and PWNe. In this paper, we report the discovery of a young pulsar J1631$-$4722, associated with the Galactic SNR G336.7$+$0.5 using Murriyang, CSIRO's Parkes radio telescope. It is also potentially associated with a PWN revealed by the Rapid ASKAP (Australian Square Kilometre Array Pathfinder) Continuum Survey (RACS). This 118 ms pulsar has a high dispersion measure of 873 $\mathrm{pc\,cm^{-3}}$ and a rotation measure of $-$1004 $\mathrm{rad\,m^{-2}}$. Because of such a high DM, at frequencies below 2 GHz, the pulse profile is significantly scattered, making it effectively undetectable in previous pulsar surveys at $\sim$1.4 GHz. Follow-up observations yield a period derivative of $\dot{P} = 3.6 \times 10^{-15}$, implying a characteristic age, $\tau_{c} = 33\,$kyr, and spin-down luminosity, $\dot{E} = 1.3\times10^{36}\,$erg$\,s^{-1}$. PSR$\,$J1631$-$4722, with its high spin-down luminosity and potential link to a PWN, stands out as a promising source of the high-energy $\gamma$-ray emission observed in the region.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.11345 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The 888 MHz radio continuum RACS image (SB 13601) containing the SNR G336.7+0.5 with the putative PWN enclosed in the black rectangle. The beam size of the radio image is 14.3 arcsec × 11.4 arcsec and shown at the bottom left corner. Most SNRs and PWNe are situated in the Galactic plane, where electron density is high. Pulsar searches within these systems are sus￾ceptible to various effects, especially when the dist… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Timing residuals as a function of MJD for PSR J631–4722 from Murriyang obseravtions. tail-like extended emission within the SNR G336.7+0.5 (see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The multi-frequency pulse profiles of the PSR J1631–4722 above 2 GHz. We show the profiles at 2136, 2635, 2991, 3357, and 3836 MHz ver￾tically aligned from bottom to top (black), along with the assumed intrinsic pulse profile based on a fit to 3836 MHz data (red). The blue curves repre￾sent the best-fit exponential scattering model profiles. The timescales for the scattering fits to corresponding subbands are labell… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Scattering timescale at 1 GHz vs DM for pulsars (grey dots) in ATNF pulsar catalogue (Manchester et al. 2005) and for PSR J1631–4722 (red diamond). The blue and black dashed lines correspond to the relation between DM and scattering timescale fitted by Krishnakumar et …
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

53 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    G., Bazer-Bachi, A

    Aharonian, F., Akhperjanian, A. G., Bazer-Bachi, A. R., et al. 2006, ApJ, 636, 777

    work page 2006

  2. [2]

    A., Antoranz, P., et al

    Ansoldi, S., Antonelli, L. A., Antoranz, P., et al. 2016, A&A, 585, A133

    work page 2016

  3. [3]

    T., Dai, S., Zhi, Q

    Bai, J. T., Dai, S., Zhi, Q. J., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 513, 1794

    work page 2022

  4. [4]

    2010, A&A, 520, A111

    Balbo, M., Saouter, P., Walter, R., et al. 2010, A&A, 520, A111

    work page 2010

  5. [5]

    D., Kothes, R., Rosolowsky, E., et al

    Ball, B. D., Kothes, R., Rosolowsky, E., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 524, 1396 Ballet,J.,Bruel,P.,Burnett,T.H.,Lott,B.,&TheFermi-LATcollaboration. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2307.12546

    arXiv 2023

  6. [6]

    & Williams, B

    Bamba, A. & Williams, B. J. 2022, in Handbook of X-ray and Gamma-ray Astrophysics, ed. C. Bambi & A. Sangangelo, 77

    work page 2022

  7. [7]

    2022, MNRAS, 510, 4049 Bhat,N.D.R.,Cordes,J.M.,Camilo,F.,Nice,D.J.,&Lorimer,D.R.2004, ApJ, 605, 759 Bhat,N.D.R.,Swainston,N.A.,McSweeney,S.J.,etal.2023,Publ.Astron

    Basu, A., Shaw, B., Antonopoulou, D., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 510, 4049 Bhat,N.D.R.,Cordes,J.M.,Camilo,F.,Nice,D.J.,&Lorimer,D.R.2004, ApJ, 605, 759 Bhat,N.D.R.,Swainston,N.A.,McSweeney,S.J.,etal.2023,Publ.Astron. Soc. Australia, 40, e021

    work page 2022

  8. [8]

    M., Gaensler, B

    Camilo, F., Ransom, S. M., Gaensler, B. M., & Lorimer, D. R. 2009, ApJ, 700, L34 Camilo,F.,Ransom,S.M.,Halpern,J.P.,&Roshi,D.A.2021,ApJ,917,67

    work page 2009

Show all 53 references
  1. [9]

    A., An, Q., et al

    Cao, Z., Aharonian, F. A., An, Q., et al. 2021, Nature, 594, 33

    2021

  2. [10]

    Case, G. L. & Bhattacharya, D. 1998, ApJ, 504, 761

    1998

  3. [11]

    Cordes, J. M. & Lazio, T. J. W. 2002, arXiv e-prints, astro

    2002

  4. [12]

    D., Filipović, M

    Cotton, W. D., Filipović, M. D., Camilo, F., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 529, 2443

    2024

  5. [13]

    N., et al

    Dai, S., Hobbs, G., Manchester, R. N., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 449, 3223 Espinoza,C.M.,Lyne,A.G.,Stappers,B.W.,&Kramer,M.2011,MNRAS, 414, 1679

    2015

  6. [14]

    Everett, J. E. & Weisberg, J. M. 2001, ApJ, 553, 341

    2001

  7. [15]

    & Safi-Harb, S

    Ferrand, G. & Safi-Harb, S. 2012, Advances in Space Research, 49, 1313 Filipović, M. D., Dai, S., Arbutina, B., et al. 2023, AJ, 166, 149

    2012

  8. [16]

    W., Ray, P

    Gorham, P. W., Ray, P. S., Anderson, S. B., Kulkarni, S. R., & Prince, T. A. 1996, ApJ, 458, 257

    1996

  9. [17]

    http://www.mrao.cam.ac.uk/surveys/snrs/

    Green, D. A. 2022, Cavendish Laboratory, Cambridge, United Kingdom (available at "http://www.mrao.cam.ac.uk/surveys/snrs/") Guzman,J.,Whiting,M.,Voronkov,M.,etal.2019,ASKAPsoft:ASKAPsci- ence data processor software, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1912.003 H. E....

    2022

  10. [18]

    N., Dunning, A., et al

    Hobbs, G., Manchester, R. N., Dunning, A., et al. 2020, Publ. Astron. Soc. Australia, 37, e012 Hobbs,G.B.,Edwards,R.T.,&Manchester,R.N.2006,MNRAS,369,655

    2020

  11. [19]

    W., Bunton, J

    Hotan, A. W., Bunton, J. D., Chippendale, A. P., et al. 2021, Publ. Astron. Soc. Australia, 38, e009 Hotan,A.W.,vanStraten,W.,&Manchester,R.N.2004,Publ.Astron.Soc. Australia, 21, 302 Huynh,M.,Dempsey,J.,Whiting,M.T.,&Ophel,M.2020,inAstronomical Society of the Pacific Conferenc...

    2021

  12. [20]

    Igoshev, A. P. 2020, MNRAS, 494, 3663

    2020

  13. [21]

    2021, MNRAS, 502, 1253

    Johnston, S., Sobey, C., Dai, S., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 502, 1253

    2021

  14. [22]

    & Weisberg, J

    Johnston, S. & Weisberg, J. M. 2006, MNRAS, 368, 1856

    2006

  15. [23]

    M., Manchester, R

    Kaspi, V. M., Manchester, R. N., Johnston, S., Lyne, A. G., & D’Amico, N. 1996, AJ, 111, 2028

    1996

  16. [24]

    J., Jameson, A., van Straten, W., et al

    Keith, M. J., Jameson, A., van Straten, W., et al. 2010, MNRAS, 409, 619 Krishnakumar,M.A.,Mitra,D.,Naidu,A.,Joshi,B.C.,&Manoharan,P.K. 2015, ApJ, 804, 23

    2010

  17. [25]

    I., Vaughan, A

    Large, M. I., Vaughan, A. E., & Mills, B. Y. 1968, Nature, 220, 340 Lazarević, S., Filipović, M. D., Dai, S., et al. 2024a, Publ. Astron. Soc. Australia, 41, e032 MNRAS000, 1–8 (2023) 8 Ahmad et al. Lazarević,S.,Filipović,M.D.,Koribalski,B.S.,etal.2024b,ResearchNotes of the Am...

    2023

  18. [26]

    2015, MNRAS, 449, 1570

    Lewandowski, W., Kowalińska, M., & Kijak, J. 2015, MNRAS, 449, 1570

    2015

  19. [27]

    Lorimer, D. R. & Kramer, M. 2004, Handbook of Pulsar Astronomy, Vol. 4 (Cambridge University Press)

    2004

  20. [28]

    R., Lyne, A

    Lorimer, D. R., Lyne, A. G., & Camilo, F. 1998, A&A, 331, 1002

    1998

  21. [29]

    E., Dai, S., Johnston, S., & Barr, E

    Lower, M. E., Dai, S., Johnston, S., & Barr, E. D. 2024, ApJ, 967, L16

    2024

  22. [30]

    E., Johnston, S., Dunn, L., et al

    Lower, M. E., Johnston, S., Dunn, L., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 508, 3251 Manchester,R.N.,Hobbs,G.B.,Teoh,A.,&Hobbs,M.2005,AJ,129,1993

    2021

  23. [31]

    N., Lyne, A

    Manchester, R. N., Lyne, A. G., Camilo, F., et al. 2001, MNRAS, 328, 17 McConnell,D.,Hale,C.L.,Lenc,E.,etal.2020,Publ.Astron.Soc.Australia, 37, e048

    2001

  24. [32]

    L., Stewart, A

    Murphy, T., Kaplan, D. L., Stewart, A. J., et al. 2021, Publ. Astron. Soc. Australia, 38, e054

    2021

  25. [33]

    P., Hopkins, A

    Norris, R. P., Hopkins, A. M., Afonso, J., et al. 2011, Publ. Astron. Soc. Australia, 28, 215 Norris,R.P.,Marvil,J.,Collier,J.D.,etal.2021,Publ.Astron.Soc.Australia, 38, e046

    2011

  26. [34]

    S., Karastergiou, A., Posselt, B., et al

    Oswald, L. S., Karastergiou, A., Posselt, B., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 504, 1115 Padmanabh,P.V.,Barr,E.D.,Sridhar,S.S.,etal.2023,MNRAS,524,1291

    2021

  27. [35]

    M., et al

    Parthasarathy, A., Johnston, S., Shannon, R. M., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 494, 2012

    2020

  28. [36]

    M., Johnston, S., et al

    Parthasarathy, A., Shannon, R. M., Johnston, S., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 489, 3810 Pavlović, M. Z., Urošević, D., Vukotić, B., Arbutina, B., & Göker, Ü. D. 2013, ApJS, 204, 4

    2019

  29. [37]

    Ransom, S. M. 2001, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, Vol. 199, American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, 119.03

    2001

  30. [38]

    P., Pavlov, G

    Reynolds, S. P., Pavlov, G. G., Kargaltsev, O., et al. 2017, Space Sci. Rev., 207, 175

    2017

  31. [39]

    G., et al

    Sanidas, S., Cooper, S., Bassa, C. G., et al. 2019, A&A, 626, A104

    2019

  32. [40]

    P., Clark, C

    Sett, S., Breton, R. P., Clark, C. J., van Kerkwijk, M. H., & Kaplan, D. L. 2021, A&A, 647, A183 Shaver,P.A.&Goss,W.M.1970,AustralianJournalofPhysicsAstrophysical Supplement, 14, 133 Smeaton,Z.J.,Filipović,M.D.,Koribalski,B.S.,etal.2024,ResearchNotes of the American Astronomica...

    2021

  33. [41]

    A., Abdollahi, S., Ajello, M., et al

    Smith, D. A., Abdollahi, S., Ajello, M., et al. 2023, ApJ, 958, 191

    2023

  34. [42]

    A., Bruel, P., Cognard, I., et al

    Smith, D. A., Bruel, P., Cognard, I., et al. 2019, ApJ, 871, 78

    2019

  35. [43]

    2021, MNRAS, 504, 228

    Sobey, C., Johnston, S., Dai, S., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 504, 228

    2021

  36. [44]

    Straal, S. M. & van Leeuwen, J. 2019, A&A, 623, A90

    2019

  37. [45]

    D., Parker, Q

    Stupar, M., Filipović, M. D., Parker, Q. A., et al. 2007, Ap&SS, 307, 423

    2007

  38. [46]

    Q., Han, J

    Su, W. Q., Han, J. L., Wang, P. F., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 526, 2645

    2023

  39. [47]

    D., Stappers, B

    Turner, J. D., Stappers, B. W., Carli, E., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 531, 3579

    2024

  40. [48]

    L., Sengar, R., et al

    Wang, Z., Kaplan, D. L., Sengar, R., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2311.14880

    2023 arXiv

  41. [49]

    & Johnston, S

    Weltevrede, P. & Johnston, S. 2008, MNRAS, 391, 1210

    2008

  42. [50]

    Whiteoak, J. B. Z. & Green, A. J. 1996, A&AS, 118, 329 Yang,M.,Dai,S.,Li,D.,etal.2021,ResearchinAstronomyandAstrophysics, 21, 141

    1996

  43. [51]

    M., Manchester, R

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

    2017

  44. [52]

    N., Hobbs, G., et al

    Yu, M., Manchester, R. N., Hobbs, G., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 429, 688

    2013

  45. [53]

    B., Dai, S., Hobbs, G., et al

    Zhang, S. B., Dai, S., Hobbs, G., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 479, 1836 This paper has been typeset from a TEX/LATEX file prepared by the author. MNRAS000, 1–8 (2023)

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.