pith. sign in

arxiv: 2607.02228 · v1 · pith:BPG32V3Enew · submitted 2026-07-02 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE

Timing and spectral analysis of the 2025 outburst of 4U 1630-47 with textit{NICER}

Haifan Zhu , Mariano M\'endez , Xiao Chen , Wei Wang This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-07-03 07:42 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE
keywords black hole X-ray binaryquasi-periodic oscillationsaccretion diskX-ray timingNICERoutburstmillihertz modulation
0
0 comments X

The pith

Transient QPOs in 4U 1630-47 trace inner disk temperature and normalization changes during the 2025 outburst rise.

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

The paper examines NICER observations of the black hole X-ray binary 4U 1630-47 in its 2025 outburst, focusing on low-frequency QPOs and a millihertz QRM. Wavelet state separation reveals that QPO-present intervals coincide with higher inner-disk temperatures and lower diskbb normalizations, while photon index changes are weaker. The QPO frequency rises from 0.24 Hz to 3.43 Hz in the rising phase. Near peak, a weak 0.07 Hz QRM shows disk temperature positively correlated with flux and normalization anticorrelated. This points to disk parameters as the main carriers of the observed spectral-timing variability.

Core claim

The transient QPOs are therefore consistent with short-timescale disk-related variability during the rising phase, whereas the millihertz-scale QRM may represent a weaker heartbeat-like variability mode appearing near the outburst peak. During the rising phase the QPO centroid frequency increased from ∼0.24 Hz to ∼3.43 Hz. Wavelet-based state separation shows that the with-QPO intervals are associated with a higher inner disk temperature and a lower diskbb normalization than the without-QPO intervals, while the photon index (Γ) shows weaker changes within the uncertainties. Near the outburst peak, the source displayed a weak QRM at ∼0.07 Hz with a fractional rms amplitude of ∼4.7%. Phase-res

What carries the argument

Wavelet-based separation of with-QPO versus without-QPO intervals, combined with diskbb-plus-power-law spectral fits that isolate correlations between QPO presence and inner-disk temperature and normalization.

Load-bearing premise

Changes in diskbb inner-disk temperature and normalization directly trace physical disk variability without significant degeneracies or unmodeled components in the chosen spectral model.

What would settle it

Refitting the same NICER spectra with an alternative model such as a Comptonization component and finding that the temperature and normalization differences between with-QPO and without-QPO intervals disappear would falsify the disk-variability link.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.02228 by Haifan Zhu, Mariano M\'endez, Wei Wang, Xiao Chen.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Top: NICER light curve of 4U 1630−47 during the observations. Red circles mark the observations for which a QPO is detected in the PDS, and yellow stars indicate detections of a QRM. Bottom: Corre￾sponding hardness ratios; the symbols are the same as in the top panel. 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 Hardness ratio (5−10/2−5 keV) 101 102 103 Count Rate (cts /s) (1−10 keV) 2025 No signal 2025 QPO signal Detected 2024 QR… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: HID of 4U 1630−47. For comparison, we also plot the 2024 observations, marked with green points. The other symbols follow the same convention as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Representative fits to the PDS showing the QPO and QRM components in 4U 1630−47. Left: Fit to the QPO signal. Green points show the data, the red curve the QPO component, the blue curve the BBN, and the black curve the total model; the lower subpanel shows the residuals defined as (data − model)/error. Right: Fit to the QRM signal. The orange curve indicates the QRM component. The observation time and ObsI… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Comparison of PDS for ObsID 8130010109 of 4U 1630−47 de￾rived from NICER observations. The black points ("All") represent the average PDS of the entire observation. The green points ("with-QPO") show the averaged PDS computed from the light-curve segments identi￾fied by the wavelet transform as containing a QPO, while the red points ("without-QPO") are computed from the segments without a QPO sig￾nal. A di… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Wavelet analysis for the first GTI segment of ObsID 8130010109 of 4U 1630−47. Left: Global wavelet power spectrum (black) compared with the time-averaged PDS (gray). The 95% significance level is shown with a dashed red line. Right: Wavelet power spectrum as a function of time and frequency. The contour outlines regions exceeding the 95% significance level, and the hatched area indicates the COI. The two h… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Spectral fitting results for observation 8130010109. Top row: Energy spectra (black crosses) with the best-fit tbfeo × (thcomp ⊗ diskbb) models (solid green lines) in the 2–10 keV band, along with the fit residuals (lower subpanels). Bottom row: Corresponding MCMC corner plots, illustrating the 1D posterior distributions and 2D confidence contours for the key parameters (Γ, cov_ f rac, Tin, and Ndiskbb). C… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Comparison of the light curves of the QRM observed in 2025 (top) and 2023 (bottom; heartbeat state) of 4U 1630−47. The panels display 300-second segments of the NICER count rates. in the top panels, this selective phase-tagging procedure yields a cleaner folded pulse profile for both states. To characterize the detailed spectral evolution across the QRM cycle, we fitted each of the ten phase-resolved spect… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: HHT phase-resolved and amplitude filtering for the 2023 (left) and 2025 (right) observations. Top: Global phase-folded pulse profiles over two cycles. Middle: 300-second segments of the detrended light curves (gray) and the extracted QRM signals (red). Shaded areas represent intervals rejected due to low instantaneous amplitude. For visual clarity and ease of comparison, the curves in the middle panels hav… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Phase-resolved spectral evolution for the heartbeat state observed in 2023 (left column) and the QRM observed in 2025 (right column). From top to bottom, the panels display the phase dependence of Γ, Tin, and Ndiskbb, respectively. The green circles represent the best-fit parameter values derived from the MCMC posterior distributions, with error bars indicating the 90% confidence intervals. For visual ref… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We analyzed \textit{NICER} observations of the 2025 outburst of the black hole X-ray binary 4U~1630$-$47 to investigate the spectral--timing properties of its transient low-frequency quasi-periodic oscillations (QPOs) and millihertz-scale quasi-regular modulation (QRM). During the rising phase of the outburst, the QPO centroid frequency increased from $\sim 0.24$ Hz to $\sim 3.43$ Hz. Wavelet-based state separation shows that the with-QPO intervals are associated with a higher inner disk temperature and a lower \texttt{diskbb} normalization than the without-QPO intervals, while the photon index ($\Gamma$) shows weaker changes within the uncertainties. Near the outburst peak, the source displayed a weak QRM at $\sim 0.07$ Hz with a fractional rms amplitude of $\sim 4.7\%$, lower than that of the heartbeat state observed in 2023. Phase-resolved Hilbert--Huang analysis shows that the inner disk temperature is positively correlated with the X-ray flux, the \texttt{diskbb} normalization is anticorrelated, and $\Gamma$ varies only weakly. Overall, the short-timescale spectral--timing variability is expressed most clearly through the disk-related parameters. The transient QPOs are therefore consistent with short-timescale disk-related variability during the rising phase, whereas the millihertz-scale QRM may represent a weaker heartbeat-like variability mode appearing near the outburst peak.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript analyzes NICER observations of the 2025 outburst of black hole X-ray binary 4U 1630-47, reporting transient low-frequency QPOs with centroid frequencies rising from ~0.24 Hz to ~3.43 Hz during the outburst rise. Wavelet-based separation associates with-QPO intervals with higher diskbb inner-disk temperature and lower normalization (while photon index changes are weaker), and near peak a weak ~0.07 Hz QRM (rms ~4.7%) is identified whose phase-resolved Hilbert-Huang spectra show positive kT_in-flux correlation, anticorrelated diskbb normalization-flux, and weak Gamma variation. The authors conclude the QPOs trace short-timescale disk-related variability and the QRM represents a weaker heartbeat-like mode.

Significance. If the reported parameter correlations hold under robust modeling, the work adds to the observational evidence linking transient QPOs in BHXRBs to disk variability on short timescales and distinguishes a millihertz QRM from stronger heartbeat states seen in prior outbursts. The application of wavelet state separation and Hilbert-Huang phase resolution to NICER data is a methodological strength that could be reproducible if full data tables and statistical tests are provided.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract / spectral analysis] Abstract and spectral analysis: the central claim that QPOs trace disk-related variability and that the QRM is a weaker heartbeat mode rests on interpreting higher kT_in and lower diskbb normalization in with-QPO intervals (plus the reported flux correlations) as physical disk changes. However, the diskbb+powerlaw model is known to exhibit degeneracies in which shifts in kT_in or normalization can be compensated by adjustments to the power-law index or normalization; without tests against alternative continua (e.g., with reflection or Comptonization components) or explicit checks for parameter trade-offs, the state separations do not necessarily support the disk-origin interpretation.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states conclusions about consistency with disk variability but does not report the specific statistical significance levels, error propagation methods, or pre-specification of the wavelet/Hilbert-Huang selections used to define intervals.
  2. [Results] Full data tables for the reported QPO frequencies, rms amplitudes, and fitted spectral parameters across intervals would be needed to allow independent verification of the correlations.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful review and constructive feedback on our analysis of the 2025 outburst of 4U 1630-47. We address the single major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract / spectral analysis] Abstract and spectral analysis: the central claim that QPOs trace disk-related variability and that the QRM is a weaker heartbeat mode rests on interpreting higher kT_in and lower diskbb normalization in with-QPO intervals (plus the reported flux correlations) as physical disk changes. However, the diskbb+powerlaw model is known to exhibit degeneracies in which shifts in kT_in or normalization can be compensated by adjustments to the power-law index or normalization; without tests against alternative continua (e.g., with reflection or Comptonization components) or explicit checks for parameter trade-offs, the state separations do not necessarily support the disk-origin interpretation.

    Authors: We acknowledge the referee's valid point regarding known degeneracies in the diskbb+powerlaw model. Our analysis shows that photon index variations remain weak and within uncertainties across the with-QPO and without-QPO intervals, while the diskbb parameters display more pronounced and consistent differences; this differential behavior underpins our disk-related interpretation. Nevertheless, we agree that additional robustness checks would be beneficial. In the revised manuscript we have expanded the discussion section to explicitly note the model limitations, reference prior BHXRB studies using similar continua, and state that future analyses with reflection or Comptonization components could further test the conclusions. We have not performed new fits with alternative models in this revision due to the scope of the current dataset and analysis pipeline. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity detected; purely observational report

full rationale

The manuscript presents timing and spectral measurements extracted from NICER light curves and spectra of the 2025 outburst. Reported quantities include observed QPO centroid frequencies (0.24–3.43 Hz), rms amplitudes, wavelet-based state separations in diskbb kT_in and normalization, and Hilbert–Huang phase-resolved correlations between kT_in, normalization, and flux. These are direct outputs of standard data-reduction and fitting procedures applied to the observations; no equation or claimed result is constructed by re-using a fitted parameter as its own prediction, no self-citation supplies a load-bearing uniqueness theorem, and no ansatz is smuggled in. The derivation chain terminates at the measured data products themselves and therefore contains no circular reduction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the assumption that standard spectral fitting parameters faithfully reflect disk physical state and that the observed correlations indicate a causal link to variability modes.

free parameters (2)
  • diskbb inner-disk temperature
    Fitted to NICER spectra in with-QPO and without-QPO intervals; used to establish the reported correlation.
  • diskbb normalization
    Fitted spectral parameter whose anticorrelation with flux is central to the QRM phase-resolved claim.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The diskbb plus power-law spectral model accurately represents the X-ray continuum without unaccounted emission components or strong parameter degeneracies.
    Invoked when mapping changes in fitted disk parameters to physical disk variability.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5816 in / 1477 out tokens · 31067 ms · 2026-07-03T07:42:22.187586+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

91 extracted references

  1. [1]

    2021, MNRAS, 507, 5507

    Alabarta, K., Altamirano, D., Méndez, M., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 507, 5507

    2021

  2. [2]

    2011, ApJL, 742, L17

    Altamirano, D., Belloni, T., Linares, M., et al. 2011, ApJL, 742, L17

    2011

  3. [3]

    & Strohmayer, T

    Altamirano, D. & Strohmayer, T. 2012, ApJL, 754, L23

    2012

  4. [4]

    Arnaud, K. A. 1996, ASP Conf. Ser., 101, 17

    1996

  5. [5]

    & Maccarone, T

    Arur, K. & Maccarone, T. J. 2022, MNRAS, 514, 1720

    2022

  6. [6]

    2022, MNRAS, 515, 2099

    Bellavita, C., García, F., Méndez, M., & Karpouzas, K. 2022, MNRAS, 515, 2099

    2022

  7. [7]

    & Hasinger, G

    Belloni, T. & Hasinger, G. 1990, A&A, 230, 103

    1990

  8. [8]

    2005, A&A, 440, 207

    Belloni, T., Homan, J., Casella, P., et al. 2005, A&A, 440, 207

    2005

  9. [9]

    2000, A&A, 355, 271

    Belloni, T., Klein-Wolt, M., Méndez, M., van der Klis, M., & van Paradijs, J. 2000, A&A, 355, 271

    2000

  10. [10]

    1997, ApJL, 488, L109

    Belloni, T., Mendez, M., King, A., van der Klis, M., & Van Paradijs, J. 1997, ApJL, 488, L109

    1997

  11. [11]

    2009, in Noise reduction in speech processing (Springer), 1–4 Article number, page 11 of 13 A&A proofs:manuscript no

    Benesty, J., Chen, J., Huang, Y ., & Cohen, I. 2009, in Noise reduction in speech processing (Springer), 1–4 Article number, page 11 of 13 A&A proofs:manuscript no. aa60188-26

    2009

  12. [12]

    2009, MNRAS, 398, 1194

    Capitanio, F., Belloni, T., Del Santo, M., & Ubertini, P. 2009, MNRAS, 398, 1194

    2009

  13. [13]

    2015, MNRAS, 450, 3840

    Capitanio, F., Campana, R., De Cesare, G., & Ferrigno, C. 2015, MNRAS, 450, 3840

    2015

  14. [14]

    2005, ApJ, 629, 403

    Casella, P., Belloni, T., & Stella, L. 2005, ApJ, 629, 403

    2005

  15. [15]

    Chakrabarti, S. K. & Molteni, D. 1993, ApJ, 417, 671

    1993

  16. [16]

    & Wang, W

    Chen, J. & Wang, W. 2025, ApJ, 988, 236

    2025

  17. [17]

    & Wang, W

    Chen, X. & Wang, W. 2024, J. High Energy Astrophys., 41, 89

    2024

  18. [18]

    2019, MNRAS, 482, 550

    Cheng, Z., Méndez, M., Altamirano, D., Beri, A., & Wang, Y . 2019, MNRAS, 482, 550

    2019

  19. [19]

    Chopra, A., Chakraborty, M., & Kashyap, U. 2025, J. High Energy Astrophys., 46, 100344

    2025

  20. [20]

    2010, A&A, 524, A26

    Czerny, B., Lachowicz, P., Dovˇciak, M., et al. 2010, A&A, 524, A26

    2010

  21. [21]

    2021, MNRAS, 503, 6045

    Ding, Y ., Wang, W., Zhang, P., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 503, 6045

    2021

  22. [22]

    2007, A&ARv, 15, 1

    Done, C., Gierli´nski, M., & Kubota, A. 2007, A&ARv, 15, 1

    2007

  23. [23]

    F., Bambi, C., et al

    Fan, N., Steiner, J. F., Bambi, C., et al. 2025, ApJ, 984, 31

    2025

  24. [24]

    2019, MNRAS, 482, 2597

    Gatuzz, E., Díaz Trigo, M., Miller-Jones, J., & Migliari, S. 2019, MNRAS, 482, 2597

    2019

  25. [25]

    C., Arzoumanian, Z., Adkins, P

    Gendreau, K. C., Arzoumanian, Z., Adkins, P. W., et al. 2016, Proc. SPIE, 9905, 99051H

    2016

  26. [26]

    E., Shen, Z., Long, S

    Huang, N. E., Shen, Z., Long, S. R., et al. 1998, Proc. R. Soc. A, 454, 903

    1998

  27. [27]

    Huang, N. E. & Wu, Z. 2008, Rev. Geophys., 46

    2008

  28. [28]

    2018, ApJ, 866, 122

    Huang, Y ., Qu, J., Zhang, S., et al. 2018, ApJ, 866, 122

    2018

  29. [29]

    & Done, C

    Ingram, A. & Done, C. 2011, MNRAS, 415, 2323

    2011

  30. [30]

    Ingram, A., Done, C., & Fragile, P. C. 2009, MNRAS, 397, L101

    2009

  31. [31]

    Ingram, A. R. & Motta, S. E. 2019, New Astron. Rev., 85, 101524

    2019

  32. [32]

    2024, MNRAS, 535, 207

    Jin, Y ., Chen, X., Zhu, H., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 535, 207

    2024

  33. [33]

    1976, ApJ, 210, L9

    Jones, C., Forman, W., Tananbaum, H., & Turner, M. 1976, ApJ, 210, L9

    1976

  34. [34]

    2025, MNRAS, 543, 3073

    Kalemci, E., Diaz Trigo, M., Oztaban, E., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 543, 3073

    2025

  35. [35]

    M., et al

    Karpouzas, K., Méndez, M., Ribeiro, E. M., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 492, 1399

    2020

  36. [36]

    L., Walton, D

    King, A. L., Walton, D. J., Miller, J. M., et al. 2014, ApJL, 784, L2

    2014

  37. [37]

    2024, MNRAS, 528, 1668

    Kubota, A., Done, C., Tsurumi, K., & Mizukawa, R. 2024, MNRAS, 528, 1668

    2024

  38. [38]

    1998, PASJ, 50, 667

    Kubota, A., Tanaka, Y ., Makishima, K., et al. 1998, PASJ, 50, 667

    1998

  39. [39]

    M., Agrawal, V

    Kushwaha, A., Jayasurya, K. M., Agrawal, V . K., & Nandi, A. 2023, MNRAS, 524, L15

    2023

  40. [40]

    Lightman, A. P. & Eardley, D. M. 1974, ApJ, 187, L1

    1974

  41. [41]

    2022, MNRAS, 512, 2082

    Liu, Q., Liu, H., Bambi, C., & Ji, L. 2022, MNRAS, 512, 2082

    2022

  42. [42]

    2025, MNRAS, 543, 1748

    Ma, R., Done, C., & Kubota, A. 2025, MNRAS, 543, 1748

    2025

  43. [43]

    2021, Nature Astronomy, 5, 94

    Ma, X., Tao, L., Zhang, S.-N., et al. 2021, Nature Astronomy, 5, 94

    2021

  44. [44]

    Maccarone, T. J. & Coppi, P. S. 2002, MNRAS, 336, 817

    2002

  45. [45]

    J., Uttley, P., Van Der Klis, M., Wijnands, R

    Maccarone, T. J., Uttley, P., Van Der Klis, M., Wijnands, R. A., & Coppi, P. S. 2011, MNRAS, 413, 1819

    2011

  46. [46]

    E., Baglio, M

    Mariani, I., Motta, S. E., Baglio, M. C., et al. 2025, ATel, 17164, 1

    2025

  47. [47]

    2026, A&A, 710, A203

    Mastichiadis, A. 2026, A&A, 710, A203

    2026

  48. [48]

    2022, A&A, 662, A118

    Mastichiadis, A., Petropoulou, M., & Kylafis, N. 2022, A&A, 662, A118

    2022

  49. [49]

    2000, MNRAS, 313, 193

    Merloni, A., Fabian, A., & Ross, R. 2000, MNRAS, 313, 193

    2000

  50. [50]

    1985, PASJ, 36, 741

    Mitsuda, K., Inoue, H., Koyama, K., et al. 1985, PASJ, 36, 741

    1985

  51. [51]

    1991, ApJ, 383, 784

    Miyamoto, S., Kimura, K., Kitamoto, S., Dotani, T., & Ebisawa, K. 1991, ApJ, 383, 784

    1991

  52. [52]

    1997, ApJ, 482, 993

    Morgan, E., Remillard, R., & Greiner, J. 1997, ApJ, 482, 993

    1997

  53. [53]

    1983, A&A, 119, 171

    Motch, C., Ricketts, M., Page, C., Ilovaisky, S., & Chevalier, C. 1983, A&A, 119, 171

    1983

  54. [54]

    A., & Lee, J

    Neilsen, J., Remillard, R. A., & Lee, J. C. 2011, ApJ, 737, 69

    2011

  55. [55]

    A., & Lee, J

    Neilsen, J., Remillard, R. A., & Lee, J. C. 2012, ApJ, 750, 71

    2012

  56. [56]

    2018, ApJ, 867, 86

    Pahari, M., Bhattacharyya, S., Rao, A., et al. 2018, ApJ, 867, 86

    2018

  57. [57]

    1995, ApJL, 452, L129

    Parmar, A., Angelini, L., & White, N. 1995, ApJL, 452, L129

    1995

  58. [58]

    2025, A&A, 701, A292

    Parra, M., Bianchi, S., Petrucci, P.-O., et al. 2025, A&A, 701, A292

    2025

  59. [59]

    1986, Astrophys

    Priedhorsky, W. 1986, Astrophys. Space Sci., 126, 89

    1986

  60. [60]

    Remillard, R. A. & McClintock, J. E. 2006, ARA&A, 44, 49

    2006

  61. [61]

    A., Morgan, E

    Remillard, R. A., Morgan, E. H., McClintock, J. E., Bailyn, C. D., & Orosz, J. A. 1999, ApJ, 522, 397

    1999

  62. [62]

    A., Sobczak, G

    Remillard, R. A., Sobczak, G. J., Muno, M. P., & McClintock, J. E. 2002, ApJ, 564, 962

    2002

  63. [63]

    D., Homan, J., & Miller, J

    Schnittman, J. D., Homan, J., & Miller, J. M. 2006, ApJ, 642, 420

    2006

  64. [64]

    2014, ApJ, 789, 57

    Seifina, E., Titarchuk, L., & Shaposhnikov, N. 2014, ApJ, 789, 57

    2014

  65. [65]

    & Takahara, F

    Shimura, T. & Takahara, F. 1995, ApJ, 445, 780

    1995

  66. [66]

    2025, ApJ, 984, 130

    Shui, Q.-C., Zhang, S., Feng, H., et al. 2025, ApJ, 984, 130

    2025

  67. [67]

    F., Narayan, R., McClintock, J

    Steiner, J. F., Narayan, R., McClintock, J. E., & Ebisawa, K. 2009, PASP, 121, 1279

    2009

  68. [68]

    2015, ApJ, 815, 74

    Su, Y .-H., Chou, Y ., Hu, C.-P., & Yang, T.-C. 2015, ApJ, 815, 74

    2015

  69. [69]

    & Pellat, R

    Tagger, M. & Pellat, R. 1999, A&A, 349, 1003

    1999

  70. [70]

    & Shibazaki, N

    Tanaka, Y . & Shibazaki, N. 1996, ARA&A, 34, 607

    1996

  71. [71]

    & Fiorito, R

    Titarchuk, L. & Fiorito, R. 2004, ApJ, 612, 988

    2004

  72. [72]

    & Compo, G

    Torrence, C. & Compo, G. P. 1998, Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 79, 61

    1998

  73. [73]

    E., Colominas, M

    Torres, M. E., Colominas, M. A., Schlotthauer, G., & Flandrin, P. 2011, Proc. IEEE ICASSP, 4144

    2011

  74. [74]

    P., Borozdin, K

    Trudolyubov, S. P., Borozdin, K. N., & Priedhorsky, W. C. 2001, MNRAS, 322, 309

    2001

  75. [75]

    2019, ApJ, 886, 104

    Trueba, N., Miller, J., Kaastra, J., et al. 2019, ApJ, 886, 104

    2019

  76. [76]

    & Malzac, J

    Uttley, P. & Malzac, J. 2025, MNRAS, 536, 3284 Van der Klis, M. 1989, ARA& A, 27, 517

    2025

  77. [77]

    A., Ferland, G

    Verner, D. A., Ferland, G. J., Korista, K. T., & Yakovlev, D. G. 1996, ApJ, 465, 487

    1996

  78. [78]

    2003, A&A, 397, 729

    Vignarca, F., Migliari, S., Belloni, T., Psaltis, D., & Van Der Klis, M. 2003, A&A, 397, 729

    2003

  79. [79]

    2024, ApJ, 963, 118

    Wang, J., Kara, E., Homan, J., et al. 2024, ApJ, 963, 118

    2024

  80. [80]

    2018, ApJ, 865, 19

    Weng, S.-S., Wang, T.-T., Cai, J.-P., Yuan, Q.-R., & Gu, W.-M. 2018, ApJ, 865, 19

    2018

Showing first 80 references.