Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 44 references

Acceleration Potential and Density Profile of Secondary Plasma in the Magnetosphere of Orthogonal Pulsars

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper proposes a self-consistent vacuum-gap method that yields the first quantitative non-axisymmetric accelerating potential and secondary plasma density profiles for orthogonal pulsars.

desk verdict A well-executed new computational method for non-axisymmetric pulsar vacuum gaps, but the physical claim of quantitative accuracy is undermined by the unvalidated stationary gap assumption and missing solver validation; worth refereeing as a modeling contribution. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.11408 v1 pith:ANS5YRVE submitted 2025-05-16 astro-ph.HE

A. Yu. Istomin , F. A. Kniazev , V. S. Beskin This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords radiopulsarsacceleratingpotentialsecondaryplasmadensityvacuumgaporthogonalphysics-informedneuralnetworkspaircascadeinterpulse
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 argues that the accelerating potential above a pulsar's polar cap can be computed without the usual assumptions that the vacuum gap is thin and axisymmetric. The authors build a self-consistent scheme in which the height and shape of the vacuum gap and the electric potential inside it are solved together, and they use this scheme to obtain, for the first time, the non-axisymmetric accelerating potential of orthogonal pulsars (magnetic axis nearly perpendicular to the rotation axis). From that potential they compute the transverse profiles of the secondary electron-positron plasma flowing along open field lines. These density profiles are what a quantitative theory of observed radio profiles and interpulses needs, since propagation effects such as refraction and absorption depend on the actual plasma distribution. The paper also concludes that inverse Compton scattering is negligible relative to curvature radiation for the polar cap temperatures and parameters considered.

What carries the argument

The central object is the vacuum gap: the region above the polar cap in which the charge density is much smaller than the Goldreich-Julian value, so a longitudinal electric field accelerates primary particles. The argument is carried by a self-consistent iteration in which the potential $\psi$ is obtained from the Poisson equation in a domain whose upper boundary $H_{\rm gap}(r_m,\varphi_m)$ is itself unknown, and the boundary is recalculated from the condition that curvature-radiation photons produced by the accelerated primaries become able to convert into pairs. The Poisson equation is solved with a physics-informed neural network (a fully connected network trained to minimize the PDE residual) because the domain has a variable shape and the alternative series solution is numerically ill-conditioned. Once the potential is known, the secondary plasma density follows from a synchrotron cascade calculation of the number of pairs produced per primary particle, with the cascade spectrum obtained by solving an integral equation for the photon number distribution.

What would settle it

A particle-in-cell simulation of an orthogonal pulsar with $B_{12}=1.5$, $P=0.3$ s, and $\chi=88^\circ$ that resolves the time-averaged secondary plasma density above the polar cap would settle the point: if the gap height and density profile oscillate substantially, the stationary self-consistent solution cannot describe the real magnetosphere. Alternatively, a statistical study of orthogonal interpulse pulsars with independently estimated surface fields could test the predicted drop in pair multiplicity for $89^\circ\lesssim\chi\lesssim91^\circ$.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that a stationary vacuum-gap model, with the gap height $H_{\rm gap}(r_m,\varphi_m)$ treated as a free function determined together with the potential $\psi(r_m,\varphi_m,z)$, quantitatively reproduces the non-axisymmetric structure of the accelerating potential for orthogonal pulsars. Solving the Poisson equation with zero potential on the stellar surface and the separatrix and zero parallel electric field at the upper boundary, the authors find that for inclination angles near $90^\circ$ the Goldreich-Julian charge density can change sign inside the polar cap, and with it the sign of the accelerating potential, over a narrow range roughly $88.5^\circ\lesssim\chi\lesssim91.5^\circ$. From these potentials they compute the multiplicity and transverse density profile of secondary plasma, and find that for $\chi\simeq89^\circ$–$91^\circ$ and moderate fields $B_{12}\sim2$ the pair multiplicity is orders of magnitude lower than for ordinary pulsars, while for orthogonal interpulse pulsars with $B_{12}=7$ plasma generation is stronger. Inverse Compton scattering, both resonant and non-resonant, is shown to be unimportant for the gap height and multiplicity in the parameter ranges studied.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that a stationary vacuum gap is a reasonable starting point for computing pair creation and gap height, even though the paper itself cites particle-in-cell simulations showing pair production is strongly time-dependent and that plasma periodically leaves the magnetosphere.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For non-orthogonal pulsars ($\chi\lesssim85^\circ$) the problem reduces to an axisymmetric one, and the computed potential reproduces the expected slot-gap geometry: the gap height diverges near the magnetic axis and near the polar cap edge.
  • For orthogonal pulsars the accelerating potential is genuinely non-axisymmetric, and within the narrow band $88.5^\circ\lesssim\chi\lesssim91.5^\circ$ the Goldreich-Julian density changes sign in the polar cap, so the accelerating electric field reverses direction across the cap.
  • The pair multiplicity for orthogonal pulsars with $B_{12}\sim2$ is several orders of magnitude lower than for ordinary pulsars, which is hard to reconcile with the observed abundance of orthogonal interpulse pulsars unless their magnetic fields are higher or the inclination estimates are biased.
  • The transverse density profile of secondary plasma near the magnetic axis behaves as $g(r_m)\propto\exp(-a^2/r_m^2)$ for $r_m<0.03$, while on the larger scale $0.03<r_m<0.2$ the approximation $g\propto r_m^3$ remains adequate for practical modelling.
  • The resulting density profiles provide the input needed to compute propagation effects such as refraction, cyclotron absorption, and limiting polarization in the neutron star magnetosphere, which is necessary to compare emission models with the high-quality profiles from modern radio telescopes.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The authors note the stationary-gap assumption as a limitation; I infer that the most direct test of the method is a time-resolved particle-in-cell simulation of the same orthogonal-pulsar parameters ($B_{12}=1.5$, $P=0.3$ s, $\chi=88^\circ$ and $89.3^\circ$) that time-averages the pair density profile and compares it with the stationary prediction.
  • The predicted suppression of multiplicity near $\chi=90^\circ$ could be tested statistically: if the method is right, the fraction of interpulse pulsars should decline toward periods and period-derivatives where the inferred surface field drops below a few $10^{12}$ G, unless an evolution model that predicts enhanced fields applies.
  • Nothing in the method itself requires a dipolar field; the authors assume dipole geometry, but the same self-consistent scheme could be applied to non-dipolar or multipolar near-surface fields. I infer that including such fields could resolve the orthogonal-pulsar contradiction the authors identify, since local curvature and field strength would change pair-production rates.
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

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper presents a method for computing the accelerating electric potential above the polar caps of radio pulsars with arbitrary inclination angle, using a stationary vacuum-gap model in which the gap height is coordinate-dependent and determined self-consistently with the potential. The Poisson equation is solved with physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) inside an iterative scheme, and the approach is applied to non-orthogonal and orthogonal pulsars, yielding non-axisymmetric potential structures and gap heights for the latter. From these potentials, the authors compute transverse secondary plasma density profiles using a synchrotron-cascade model, argue that inverse Compton scattering is negligible in the regimes considered, and discuss implications for the statistics of orthogonal interpulse pulsars.

Significance. If the results were validated, the method would be a useful extension of the classical Ruderman–Sutherland vacuum-gap analysis to non-axisymmetric geometries, potentially providing input for radio emission profile and interpulse visibility models. The iterative self-consistent treatment of a coordinate-dependent gap height is a sensible formulation, and the analysis of inverse Compton scattering is a useful addition. The paper is also honest about the model's limitations. However, the central claim of having 'quantitatively determined' the non-axisymmetric accelerating potential for orthogonal pulsars rests on two unverified pillars: the representativeness of the stationary vacuum-gap model for a physically non-stationary pair discharge, and the numerical accuracy of the PINN solutions. The manuscript currently lacks the independent checks needed to support this claim.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section II] The central quantitative claim is undermined by the acknowledged non-stationarity of the physical process. In Section II the authors state that 'the particle generation is essentially a time-dependent process [13,16]' yet they choose the stationary vacuum gap model 'as a starting point', and in the Conclusion they repeat that 'many numerical [10,13,16] and analytical [44] studies indicate a significant non-stationarity of secondary plasma generation.' No argument or test is provided that the stationary gap height H_gap(r_m, phi_m) and potential psi(r_m, phi_m, z) correspond to the time-averaged quantities of the real, episodic discharges seen in PIC simulations (e.g., Timokhin & Harding 2015; Philippov et al. 2015; Tolman et al. 2022). The paper should include a quantitative comparison of the computed gap height and potential with time-averaged PIC results for similar parameters, or at least a timescale argument showing that non-stationarity is a small correction. Without such evidence, the word 'quantitative' in the claim 'quantitatively determine the non-axisymmetric structure of the accelerating potential for orthogonal pulsars for the first time' is not justified.
  2. [Section IIIC] The PINN solution is not independently verified. The authors state that an analytical series solution exists but is not used due to a large condition number, and that grid-based methods are poorly suited to the variable-shaped domain. However, no comparison of the PINN result against a known solution is presented. The reported 'relative errors' in Fig. 3(b) and Fig. 4 are norms of the Poisson-equation residuals, which do not guarantee the accuracy of the potential itself; a small PDE residual can coexist with a poorly satisfied boundary condition (8) or with a spurious solution. The manuscript should provide a comparison of the PINN potential with the analytical series [22] (or a conventional finite-difference solver) for at least one axisymmetric case, and should report the residual of the Neumann condition (8) on the converged gap surface. This is necessary to support the claimed 1–2% accuracy.
  3. [Section III] The convergence of the iterative scheme (10) is not established. The scheme introduces a weighting factor w with no analysis of its value or sensitivity, and the stopping criterion is a 1% relative change in the gap height between iterations. No proof or numerical demonstration is given that the fixed-point iteration converges to a unique self-consistent solution, nor that the converged solution is independent of w and of the initial guess. This is load-bearing because the gap height H_gap(r_m, phi_m) is one of the principal outputs and is used in the density calculations. The authors should show results for several values of w and confirm that the converged H_gap and psi are insensitive to these choices, or provide a contraction argument for the mapping H_gap[psi].
minor comments (6)
  1. [Global] The phrase 'border conditions' is used repeatedly; it should be replaced with 'boundary conditions' throughout.
  2. [Fig. 3 caption] The caption refers to the 'monoenergetic approximation of the synchrotron spectrum (14)', but Eq. (14) defines the characteristic energy of curvature radiation; 'curvature' should replace 'synchrotron'.
  3. [Eq. (12) and Eq. (13)] The quantity Λ is used in Eq. (12) before it is defined in Eq. (13); consider reordering the definitions or adding a parenthetical note.
  4. [Fig. 4] The label 'vacuum gap height normalized to polar gap radius' likely should read 'polar cap radius' for consistency with the text.
  5. [References] References [12] and [40] are the same paper (Tchekhovskoy et al. 2016); one duplicate entry should be removed.
  6. [Section IV, Eq. (35)] In Eq. (35), the quantity cosθ_b is used without restating its definition from Eq. (5); a brief reminder would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found: the potential-gap-height fixed point and the potential-to-density cascade are self-contained; the stationary-gap limitation is a model-validity concern, not a circular-reasoning defect.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-consistent rather than circular. For a fixed gap height H_gap, the potential psi is obtained by solving the Poisson equation (4) with boundary conditions (6)-(8). The gap height is then recomputed from the pair-production front via equations (11)-(14), where the primary photon energy depends on the Lorentz factor gamma_e = e psi/m c^2 obtained from the previously computed potential. The iteration (10) is a genuine fixed-point scheme: each quantity is recalculated from the other, and the loop is continued until convergence, so no output quantity is inserted as an input. The secondary plasma density profiles are derived downstream from the converged potential using the curvature-radiation cascade (24)-(35); they are never fed back into the Poisson equation or the gap-height calculation, so they are predictions of the model rather than fitted inputs. The inverse-Compton contribution is explicitly estimated and shown to be negligible in Figures 1 and 7, and the monoenergetic approximation is tested by varying the characteristic photon energy, giving only a 15-20% change in potential, so neither step assumes its own conclusion. Citations to prior work, including the authors' own papers [20] and [36], provide standard formulas, benchmarks, and evolutionary context, but the load-bearing mathematical content of this paper does not reduce to those citations. The acknowledged non-stationarity of pair plasma generation, stated in Section II and the Conclusion, is a genuine model-validity limitation that affects whether the stationary vacuum-gap solution describes real pulsars; however, the hard circularity rules require exhibiting a reduction by construction or a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction, and no such reduction appears here. The paper is self-contained with respect to its stated inputs, so the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central calculation relies on the stationary vacuum gap framework, a dipolar field geometry with a cylindrical computational domain, and a curvature-radiation-driven local pair cascade. These are physically motivated but not independently verified assumptions, and the paper explicitly acknowledges the stationarity issue. No new entities are postulated.

free parameters (2)
  • Weighting factor w in the iterative scheme = not specified
    Introduced in Eq. (10) to stabilize convergence of the gap-height iteration; its value is not reported and it is a numerical hyperparameter rather than a physical fit.
  • Coefficient in the monoenergetic curvature photon energy = 3/2 in Eq. (14)
    Used to replace the curvature-radiation spectrum by a single photon energy. The authors test that a factor-of-2 change alters the potential by 15-20%, so it is an ad hoc approximation with quantified sensitivity.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The stationary vacuum gap model is a valid starting point for computing pair creation and gap height.
    PIC simulations and analytical studies cited in the paper indicate time-dependent plasma generation; the authors acknowledge this in Section II and the Conclusion.
  • domain assumption The magnetic field is dipolar and field-line curvature is neglected in the computational domain.
    Stated in Section II; this approximation breaks down when the gap height becomes comparable to or larger than the polar cap radius, as allowed in the paper.
  • domain assumption Primary particle energy is set by gamma = e*psi/mc^2, neglecting curvature and Compton losses.
    Used in Section IIIA and based on estimates that losses are small except near gamma ~ 10^8; central to the gap-height calculation.
  • domain assumption The pair cascade is local in space and driven by curvature radiation alone.
    Used in Section IVA; the paper argues inverse Compton scattering is negligible for the parameter range of interest, but this relies on approximate rate expressions.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Acceleration Potential and Density Profile of Secondary Plasma in the Magnetosphere of Orthogonal Pulsars." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ANS5YRVE

@misc{pith2026250511408,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Acceleration Potential and Density Profile of Secondary Plasma in the Magnetosphere of Orthogonal Pulsars},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ANS5YRVE}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.11408}
}
read the original abstract

A new method for determining the accelerating potential above the polar caps of radio pulsars with an arbitrary inclination angle of the magnetic axis to the rotation axis has been proposed. The approach has been based on the concept of a vacuum gap, the height and shape of the upper boundary of which are found self-consistently together with the solution of the corresponding Poisson equation. In turn, information about the accelerating potential has made it possible to determine the transverse profiles of the secondary plasma density. It has also been shown that the effect of inverse Compton scattering on the considered processes is insignificant.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.11408 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Dependence of the mean free path of a pri [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Example of loss function behavior. The jumps [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Example of accelerating potential calculation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Examples of accelerating potential calculation for orthogonal pulsars with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Accelerating potential profiles at the gap [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Comparison of the efficiency of secondary [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Secondary plasma concentration profile [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Linearization of the behavior of the concentration profile in the limit of rm → 0. The dashed line shows the asymptotics of g(rm) ∝ e −(a/rm) 2 . tion angles χ for period P = 0.3 s, typical for orthogo￾nal interpulse pulsars. As can be seen in this figure, for moderate…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Plasma density distribution function λg(rm, ϕm) for orthogonal pulsars for various magnetic fields and inclination angles. a significantly lower accelerating potential, which could affect the possibility of plasma generation. This question is particularly interesting …

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [22]

    V. S. Beskin and P. E. Litvinov. Pulsar death line revis- ited - I. Almost vacuum gap.MNRAS, 510(2):2572–2582, February 2022

    work page 2022

  2. [44]

    S. A. Petrova and Y. E. Lyubarskii. Propagation effects in pulsar magnetospheres.A&A, 355:1168–1180, March 2000

    work page 2000

  3. [1]

    Johnston, M

    S. Johnston, M. Kramer, A. Karastergiou, M. J. Keith, L. S. Oswald, A. Parthasarathy, and P. Weltevrede. The Thousand-Pulsar-Array programme on MeerKAT - XI. Application of the rotating vector model.MNRAS, 520(4):4801–4814, April 2023

    work page 2023

  4. [2]

    Posselt, A

    B. Posselt, A. Karastergiou, S. Johnston, A. Parthasarathy, M. J. Keith, L. S. Oswald, X. Song, P. Weltevrede, E. D. Barr, S. Buchner, M. Geyer, M. Kramer, D. J. Reardon, M. Serylak, R. M. Shannon, R. Spiewak, and V. Venkatraman Krishnan. The Thousand-Pulsar-Array programme on MeerKAT - VI. Pulse widths of a large and diverse sample of radio pulsars.MNRAS...

    work page 2021

  5. [3]

    P. F. Wang, J. L. Han, J. Xu, C. Wang, Y. Yan, W. C. Jing, W. Q. Su, D. J. Zhou, and T. Wang. FAST Pulsar Database. I. Polarization Profiles of 682 Pulsars.Re- search in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 23(10):104002, October 2023

    work page 2023

  6. [4]

    Radhakrishnan and D

    V. Radhakrishnan and D. J. Cooke. Magnetic Poles and the Polarization Structure of Pulsar Radiation.Astro- phys. Lett., 3:225, 1969

    work page 1969

  7. [5]

    Oster and W

    L. Oster and W. Sieber. Pulsar geometries. III - The hollow-cone model.Astrophys. J., 210:220–229, Novem- ber 1976

    work page 1976

  8. [6]

    V. S. Beskin and A. A. Philippov. On the mean profiles of radio pulsars - I. Theory of propagation effects.MNRAS, 425:814–840, September 2012

    work page 2012

Show all 44 references
  1. [7]

    M. A. Ruderman and P. G. Sutherland. Theory of pulsars - Polar caps, sparks, and coherent microwave radiation. Astrophys. J., 196:51–72, February 1975

    1975

  2. [8]

    V. S. Beskin. Radio pulsars: already fifty years!Physics Uspekhi, 61(4):353–380, April 2018

    2018

  3. [9]

    A. N. Timokhin. A model for nulling and mode changing in pulsars.MNRAS, 408:L41–L45, October 2010

    2010

  4. [10]

    A. N. Timokhin and J. Arons. Current flow and pair cre- ation at low altitude in rotation- powered pulsars’ force- free magnetospheres: space charge limited flow.MNRAS, 12 429:20–54, February 2013

    2013

  5. [11]

    A. A. Philippov and A. Spitkovsky. Ab Initio Pulsar Magnetosphere: Three-dimensional Particle-in-cell Sim- ulations of Axisymmetric Pulsars.ApJ, 785:L33, April 2014

    2014

  6. [13]

    A. N. Timokhin and A. K. Harding. On the Polar Cap Cascade Pair Multiplicity of Young Pulsars.Astrophys. J., 810:144, Sep 2015

    2015

  7. [14]

    Chen, Anatoly Spitkovsky, and Luis O

    F´ abio Cruz, Thomas Grismayer, Alexander Y. Chen, Anatoly Spitkovsky, and Luis O. Silva. Coherent Emis- sion from QED Cascades in Pulsar Polar Caps.ApJ, 919(1):L4, September 2021

    2021

  8. [15]

    Arzamasskiy, V.S

    L.I. Arzamasskiy, V.S. Beskin, and Pirov K.K. Statis- tics of interpulse radio pulsars: the key to solving the alignment/counter-alignment probleme.MNRAS, 466:2325–2336, April 2017

    2017

  9. [16]

    A. A. Philippov, A. Spitkovsky, and B. Cerutti. Ab Ini- tio Pulsar Magnetosphere: Three-dimensional Particle- in-cell Simulations of Oblique Pulsars.Astrophys. J., 801:L19, March 2015

    2015

  10. [17]

    V. S. Beskin, A. V. Gurevich, and I. N. Istomin. The electrodynamics of a pulsar magnetosphere.Sov. Phys. JETP, 58:235–253, August 1983

    1983

  11. [18]

    S. E. Gralla, A. Lupsasca, and A. Philippov. Inclined PulsarMagnetospheresinGeneralRelativity: PolarCaps for the Dipole, Quadrudipole, and Beyond.Astrophys. J., 851:137–146, December 2017

    2017

  12. [19]

    Goldreich and W

    P. Goldreich and W. H. Julian. Pulsar Electrodynamics. Astrophys. J., 157:869, August 1969

    1969

  13. [20]

    E. M. Novoselov, V. S. Beskin, A. K. Galishnikova, M. M. Rashkovetskyi, and A. V. Biryukov. Orthogonal pulsars as a key test for pulsar evolution.MNRAS, 494(3):3899– 3911, April 2020

    2020

  14. [21]

    Sturrock

    P. Sturrock. A Model of Pulsar.Astrophys. J., 164:529– 556, March 1971

    1971

  15. [23]

    Hibschman and Jonathan Arons

    Johann A. Hibschman and Jonathan Arons. Pair Mul- tiplicities and Pulsar Death.Astrophys. J., 554(1):624– 635, June 2001

    2001

  16. [24]

    Zhang, G

    B. Zhang, G. J. Qiao, W. P. Lin, and J. L. Han. Three Modes of Pulsar Inner Gap.Astrophys. J., 478(1):313– 321, March 1997

    1997

  17. [25]

    Blumenthal and Robert J

    George R. Blumenthal and Robert J. Gould. Bremsstrahlung, Synchrotron Radiation, and Compton Scattering of High-Energy Electrons Traversing Dilute Gases.Reviews of Modern Physics, 42(2):237–271, January 1970

    1970

  18. [26]

    L. D. Berestetsky, E. M. Lifshits, and L. P. Pitaevsky. Quantum Electrodynamics. Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1971

    1971

  19. [27]

    H. Herold. Compton and Thomson scattering in strong magnetic fields.Phys. Rev. D, 19(10):2868–2875, May 1979

    1979

  20. [28]

    Charles D. Dermer. Compton Scattering in Strong Mag- netic Fields and the Continuum Spectra of Gamma-Ray Bursts: Basic Theory.Astrophys. J., 360:197, September 1990

    1990

  21. [29]

    Chantada, Susana J

    Augusto T. Chantada, Susana J. Landau, Pavlos Pro- topapas, Claudia G. Sc´ occola, and Cecilia Garraffo. Cosmology-informed neural networks to solve the back- ground dynamics of the Universe.Phys. Rev. D, 107(6):063523, March 2023

    2023

  22. [30]

    Physics in- formed neural networks for simulating radiative transfer

    Siddhartha Mishra and Roberto Molinaro. Physics in- formed neural networks for simulating radiative transfer. J. Quant. Spectrosc. Radiative Transfer, 270:107705, Au- gust 2021

    2021

  23. [31]

    Urb´ an, and Jos´ e A

    Petros Stefanou, Jorge F. Urb´ an, and Jos´ e A. Pons. Solv- ing the pulsar equation using physics-informed neural networks.MNRAS, 526(1):1504–1511, November 2023

    2023

  24. [32]

    Dimitropoulos, I

    I. Dimitropoulos, I. Contopoulos, V. Mpisketzis, and E. Chaniadakis. The pulsar magnetosphere with ma- chine learning: methodology.MNRAS, 528(2):3141– 3152, February 2024

    2024

  25. [33]

    The old and the new: Can physics-informed deep-learningreplacetraditionallinearsolvers?Frontiers in big data, 4:669097, 2021

    Markidis S. The old and the new: Can physics-informed deep-learningreplacetraditionallinearsolvers?Frontiers in big data, 4:669097, 2021

    2021

  26. [34]

    Adam: A method for stochastic optimization.International Conference on Learning Representations, 12 2014

    Diederik Kingma and Jimmy Ba. Adam: A method for stochastic optimization.International Conference on Learning Representations, 12 2014

    2014

  27. [35]

    J. Arons. Pair creation above pulsar polar caps : geo- metrical structure and energetics of slot gaps.Astrophys. J., 266:215–241, March 1983

    1983

  28. [36]

    based on qualitative considerations, it was argued that with a good accuracy, it can be setg(rm)∝r 3 m at rm≪1, in this study, the result ofg(rm)∝exp[−a 2/r2 m], a≪1was obtained (see Fig. 8-9). This asymptotic be- havior follows from the expansion of the curvature radi- ation ...

  29. [37]

    V. S. Beskin, A. Yu Istomin, and A. G. Mikhaylenko. On the triple pulsar profiles generated by ordinary mode. MNRAS, 526(2):1633–1645, December 2023

    2023

  30. [38]

    Hibschman and Jonathan Arons

    Johann A. Hibschman and Jonathan Arons. Pair Pro- duction Multiplicities in Rotation-powered Pulsars.As- trophys. J., 560(2):871–884, October 2001

    2001

  31. [39]

    Spitkovsky

    A. Spitkovsky. Time-dependent Force-free Pulsar Mag- netospheres: Axisymmetric and Oblique Rotators.ApJ, 648:L51–L54, September 2006

    2006

  32. [40]

    Kalapotharakos, I

    C. Kalapotharakos, I. Contopoulos, and D. Kazanas. The extended pulsar magnetosphere.MNRAS, 420:2793– 2798, March 2012

    2012

  33. [41]

    Tchekhovskoy, A

    A. Tchekhovskoy, A. Philippov, and A. Spitkovsky. Three-dimensional analytical description of magnetized winds from oblique pulsars.MNRAS, 457:3384–3395, April 2016

    2016

  34. [42]

    V. S. Beskin, A. V. Gurevich, and Ya. N. Istomin. Physics of the Pulsar Magnetosphere. Cambridge Uni- versity Press, Cambridge, August 1993

    1993

  35. [43]

    Ya. N. Istomin and D. N. Sobyanin. Electron-positron plasma generation in a magnetar magnetosphere.Astron. Lett., 33:660–672, October 2007

    2007

  36. [45]

    Tolman, A

    Elizabeth A. Tolman, A. A. Philippov, and A. N. Tim- okhin. Electric Field Screening in Pair Discharges and Generation of Pulsar Radio Emission.ApJ, 933(2):L37, July 2022

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.