Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 5 minor 3 cited by

Long-term Timing Results of Ecliptic Pulsars Observed with I-LOFAR

T0 review · 1 major / 5 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 This paper publishes a two-to-three-year low-frequency timing dataset for seven ecliptic pulsars observed with I-LOFAR, with dispersion-measure precision of order $10^{-4}$ pc cm$^{-3}$, and argues that the measured DM variations track…

desk verdict A solid I-LOFAR data release with genuinely useful DM time series, but the solar wind interpretation needs a quantitative fit or softer language. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.09549 v1 pith:CIZUSCCQ submitted 2025-05-14 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.IM

S. C. Susarla , O. A. Johnson , D. J. McKenna , E. F. Keane , P. J. McCauley , J. P. W. Verbiest , C. Tiburzi , A. Golden This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HEastro-ph.IM
keywords pulsartimingdispersionmeasuresolarwindlow-frequencyradioastronomyeclipticpulsarsinterstellarmediumionospherepulseprofileevolution
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 claims that a single low-frequency radio station, I-LOFAR, can produce publicly available, high-precision timing products for seven pulsars near the ecliptic plane, and that the dispersion-measure time series from these observations expose the solar wind's effect on radio pulses. It presents times of arrival, timing solutions, templates, and DM time series spanning two to three years, with typical per-epoch DM precision of a few $10^{-5}$ to $10^{-4}$ pc cm$^{-3}$. Such precision matters because DM variations are a major low-frequency noise source for pulsar timing arrays, so a well-characterised dataset of ecliptic pulsars can help separate solar-wind and ionospheric contributions from interstellar ones. The paper also finds pulse-width changes with frequency that deviate from a simple power law in some pulsars, quantifies pulse nulling in PSR J0826+2637, and reports tentative frequency-dependent (chromatic) dispersion in PSR J1645-0317. If the claims hold, a standalone LOFAR station becomes a viable instrument for low-frequency dispersion studies and for supporting gravitational-wave timing experiments.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing objects are the seven pulsars' dispersion-measure time series, built with the 'epoch-wise' method: for each observing epoch, times of arrival across ten frequency sub-bands are fit to the dispersive delay relation $\Delta t = \mathrm{DM}/(K_D \nu^2)$, yielding one DM measurement per observation. Coherent dedispersion with the DSPSR package and timing fits with tempo2 carry the analysis, and each pulsar's ecliptic latitude is the geometric handle that ties observed DM excursions to the solar wind.

What would settle it

Fit a quantitative solar-wind electron-density model to the published DM time series and check whether large residuals remain near conjunction; or compare the same pulsar's DM at low and high radio frequencies across a conjunction and check whether the excess is frequency-dependent in the way dispersion requires. If a high-ecliptic-latitude pulsar shows DM excursions of comparable size, the solar-wind attribution would not hold.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that seven ecliptic pulsars, observed with I-LOFAR between roughly 102 and 198 MHz for two to three years, show dispersion-measure variations that depend on their ecliptic latitudes, with the largest fluctuations occurring when the line of sight passes within 45 degrees of the Sun. These excursions are interpreted as the solar wind's effect on low-frequency pulse arrival times, while slower DM trends in some pulsars are attributed to the interstellar medium. The paper further reports that some pulse profiles narrow with increasing frequency, as expected from radius-to-frequency mapping, while others show absorption-like deviations or remain stable, and that PSR J2145-0750's DM precision (median uncertainty $8\times10^{-5}$ pc cm$^{-3}$) is high enough that the ionosphere's DM contribution should be resolvable.

Load-bearing premise

The paper interprets the DM excursions seen within 45 degrees of the Sun as the solar wind's effect, but it does not fit a quantitative solar-wind model that would rule out intrinsic interstellar variations or changing pulse-template shapes as the cause.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The public data release provides the pulsar-timing community with a low-frequency DM dataset for seven ecliptic pulsars, useful for mitigating dispersion-measure noise in gravitational-wave searches.
  • Four pulsars show DM variations that track solar conjunctions, making them good targets for daily-cadence monitoring around conjunction to probe solar-wind structure.
  • With median DM uncertainties as low as $8\times10^{-5}$ pc cm$^{-3}$, pulsar timing alone may resolve the ionospheric DM contribution, especially for telescopes located under higher ionospheric electron content.
  • The tentative DM chromaticity in PSR J1645-0317 implies that frequency-dependent dispersion can appear in low-frequency data, with implications for multi-band timing analyses.
  • Measured pulse-width evolution and absorption-like features in the 100-200 MHz band constrain pulsar emission geometry and radiation models at these wavelengths.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the solar-wind interpretation is right, simultaneous observations of the same ecliptic pulsars from multiple widely separated stations could map the heliosphere's electron-density structure in three dimensions rather than along individual lines of sight.
  • The per-epoch DM precision achieved by a single station suggests that a network of similar standalone stations could act as a distributed ionospheric monitor, converting pulsar DM time series into total-electron-content maps over continental scales.
  • The tentative chromaticity in PSR J1645-0317 could be tested directly by comparing simultaneous low-frequency and higher-frequency observations across a solar conjunction; if the DM offset between bands disappears when the solar wind is not along the line of sight, the effect is likely interstellar rather than solar.
  • A dedicated daily-cadence campaign on PSR J0034-0534 around conjunction would test the reported asymmetry in solar-wind-induced DM and help distinguish slow from fast solar-wind regions.
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

1 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper reports on a two-to-three year I-LOFAR observing campaign of seven pulsars with ecliptic latitude within 20 degrees of the Sun's path. The authors describe the telescope setup, data reduction, template construction, and timing analysis, and they release TOAs, timing solutions, templates, and DM time series on Zenodo. Using these data, they study DM variability and its relation to solar conjunctions, pulse-profile frequency evolution through W50 and W10 measurements, pulse nulling in PSR J0826+2637, and possible DM chromaticity in PSR J1645-0317. The central claim is that the DM time series reveal the impact of the solar wind through variations that correlate with ecliptic latitude and proximity to the Sun, and that the achieved DM precision (median uncertainties of order 1e-4 pc/cm3) opens the possibility of detecting ionospheric DM with pulsar timing.

Significance. If the data products are as described, this is a valuable public low-frequency dataset for seven ecliptic pulsars, with DM precision that complements higher-frequency PTA datasets and enables studies of the ionosphere, the interstellar medium, and the solar wind. The methodology is standard and transparent: coherent dedispersion, DSPSR and PSRCHIVE-based processing, tempo2 timing fits, and the epoch-wise DM method following Tiburzi et al. (2019) and Donner et al. (2020). The decision to exclude epochs within 45 degrees of the Sun from template construction is a sensible safeguard. The profile-evolution, nulling, and chromaticity analyses are descriptive and useful context. The main weakness is that the solar-wind attribution rests on visual coincidence rather than a quantitative model fit, so the dataset itself is more secure than the interpretive claim made in the abstract and conclusions.

major comments (1)
  1. [Section 4.1 and Section 5 (Conclusions)] The central result that the DM time series 'reveal the impact of the solar wind' is supported only by the visual alignment of red points (epochs within 45 degrees of the Sun) with DM excesses in Fig. 3. No solar-wind electron-density model is fitted to the DM data, and no quantitative comparison is made against the alternative that the variations are intrinsic IISM fluctuations (turbulence, scattering, or profile evolution) that happen to be modulated by the annual conjunction geometry. The Conclusions state that a spherically symmetric model 'is not able to completely model the variability' for pulsars like PSR J1022+1001, but that model, its parameters, and its residuals are not presented anywhere in the paper. I recommend adding a quantitative solar-wind model fit (for example, a simple spherically symmetric or two-component model fitted to each conjunction, with a goodness-of-fit statistic or comparison to an intrinsic-ISM model), or alternatively softening the abstract and conclusions to say that the DM variations are 'consistent with' solar-wind influence. As written, the attribution is an interpretation rather than a demonstrated result.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 5] The Conclusions refer to variability 'that can be seen in Fig 5' when discussing the failure of a spherical solar-wind model; Fig. 5 shows timing residuals, not the DM time series, so the cross-reference should be to Fig. 3.
  2. [Section 4.2 and Fig. 4] The power-law fits W50 = f^alpha shown in Fig. 4 are not accompanied by the fitted values of alpha or their uncertainties, and the identification of points as 'absorption features' below the fit has no stated significance threshold; reporting these parameters and a goodness-of-fit statistic would make the profile-evolution results reproducible.
  3. [Table 1 and Sections 4.3--4.9] The DM values in Table 1 are quoted to fewer decimal places and without uncertainties than the values reported in the per-pulsar sections (for example, J0034-0534 appears as 13.7650 in Table 1 and as 13.764996 +/- 0.000015 in Section 4.3); these should be unified.
  4. [Section 4.8 and Fig. 8] The DM chromaticity analysis for PSR J1645-0317 uses templates and sub-bands derived from the same observations, so frequency-dependent profile evolution could mimic a chromatic DM offset; the authors appropriately call the evidence tentative, but a brief discussion of how such systematics were checked would strengthen the claim.
  5. [Figure 1 caption] The caption contains a typo: 'Aito ff projection' should be 'Aitoff projection'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: DM time series are measured from ToAs via standard pulsar-timing fits and are not derived from the solar-wind interpretation they support.

full rationale

The paper's central product is an observational data release. DM values at each epoch are obtained by fitting topocentric ToAs across frequency channels to the dispersion delay (Eq. 2) using tempo2; templates are built from the same data but explicitly exclude epochs within 45 degrees of the Sun, so the subsequent DM measurements at conjunction are not defined by the template. No parameter is fitted to the DM time series and then renamed a prediction; the W50 power-law fits are descriptive only. The claim that DM variations 'reveal the impact of the solar wind' is an interpretation supported by visual correlation with solar angle, not by a fitted solar-wind model. That is a quantitative-evidence weakness rather than circularity, since the measurements are independent of the interpretation. Self-citations to Tiburzi et al. (2019, 2021), Donner et al. (2020), and Susarla et al. (2024) are methodological precedents or comparisons; none carries a load-bearing derivation. The data products are publicly released, so the central measurements are externally checkable. No circular step can be exhibited from the paper's text.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central data products are standard pulsar timing outputs. The only fitted quantities used in the analysis are the W50 power-law slopes, which are descriptive. The physical interpretation of solar wind effects relies on standard assumptions about the dispersion measure and the stability of pulse profiles.

free parameters (1)
  • W50 power-law index alpha (per pulsar) = not tabulated
    Fitted to FWHM versus frequency data for each pulsar in Section 4.2. Used to identify deviations called absorption features, but not part of the core data release.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Dispersion delay relation Δt = DM / (KD ν^2) with KD fixed at 2.41e-4 MHz^-2 pc cm^-3 s^-1.
    Standard pulsar timing convention, invoked in Sections 2.3 and 3.3. Underpins all DM measurements.
  • domain assumption Pulse profiles are stable over the observing span, allowing cross-correlation with a single template.
    Needed for ToA and DM estimation in Sections 3.1 to 3.3. The paper partially addresses this by excluding modes and using a high-S/N template for one source.
  • domain assumption Within a single observing epoch, the DM is constant (epoch-wise method).
    Basis of DM time series extraction in Section 3.3, following Iraci et al. 2024.
  • domain assumption DM variations when the line of sight is within 45 degrees of the Sun are attributed to the solar wind.
    Used in Section 4.1 and Figure 3 to interpret DM fluctuations as solar wind effects, without a quantitative solar wind model fit.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Long-term Timing Results of Ecliptic Pulsars Observed with I-LOFAR." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CIZUSCCQ

@misc{pith2026250509549,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Long-term Timing Results of Ecliptic Pulsars Observed with I-LOFAR},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CIZUSCCQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.09549}
}
read the original abstract

Pulsar timing at low frequencies offers a powerful tool for studying the interstellar medium. Additionally, pulsar observations in the ecliptic enables us to study the effects of the solar wind which becomes much more prominent at low radio frequencies. The Irish station of the LOw Frequency ARray (I-LOFAR) is a sensitive low-frequency radio telescope, capable of delivering high-precision data for pulsar studies. We present a comprehensive dataset of times-of-arrival, timing solutions and dispersion measure (DM) time series for seven ecliptic pulsars observed over two-to-three years with I-LOFAR. The primary objectives are to investigate time-dependent dispersion effects and provide high-precision timing data for pulsar timing experiments. We measure DM variations through pulsar timing and analysed these across different ecliptic latitudes to assess the impact of the solar wind on each pulsar. We model the intrinsic pulse-profile variability as a function of frequency. The high-precision DM time series for all seven pulsars exhibit clear variations dependent on their ecliptic latitudes, revealing the impact of the solar wind. Some pulsars show significant changes in their pulse widths across the frequency band, while others remain stable. We examine and quantify the pulse-nulling present in PSR J0826+2637, we report evidence for DM chromaticity in PSR J1645-0317, and we describe how PSR J2145-0750's DM precision is such that it could resolve the ionospheric DM contribution. This makes it a target of interest for telescopes in areas of the globe where the ionospheric electron density is higher, e.g. the Murchison Radio Observatory in Australia. This data release underscores the potential of I-LOFAR, or any standalone international LOFAR station, for advancing low-frequency pulsar studies, particularly in analyses of dispersion in the interstellar medium, the solar wind and the ionosphere.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.09549 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. An Aitoff projection of the locations of the pulsars listed in Tab. 1. The pulsars are shown in star symbols as well as the ecliptic plane, which is indicated by a yellow dashed line. Pulsar Name Time span, tspan Average Integration Period Ecl. Lat. DM Median (J2000) (MJD) (yr) time (min) (ms) (deg) (pc/cm3 ) S/N J0034´0534 59892´60431 (2.0 yr) 50 1.8 ´8.53 13.7650 72.2 J0826+2637 59695´60411 (2.5 yr) 15 530.6 7.24 … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Frequency evolution of normalized pulse profiles. The colour intensity is scaled according to the observing frequency. Darker [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. DM time series of each of the pulsars. The red points [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Full-width-half-maximum (FWHM) pulse widths for pulsars in our dataset. The black stars represent the pulse width at each [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Residuals after timing using tempo2. The different colours are representative of different frequencies. Article number, page 7 of 11 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Full width at 10% of the peak flux density ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The observation of PSR J0826+2637 from the observation on April 18th, 2023. The left column shows the emission as a function of time in 10-s sub-integrations; the transition in emission modes is evident. The middle column shows the pulse profile during the B (Q) mode i…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: DM chromaticity in PSR J1645´0317. In the top panel, the black points with errorbars show the DM timeseries at 170.6 MHz whereas the orange points show the DM timeseries at 131.5 MHz. The bottom panel shows the difference in the ab￾solute values of their DMs at the sam…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Characterising the response of an International LOFAR Station

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

    International LOFAR stations are 20–45% more sensitive to sources on the rising side of the sky than the setting side, an asymmetry observed in all 11 tracked pulsars and across three stations.

  2. The Southern-sky MWA Rapid Two-metre (SMART) pulsar survey--IV. Survey update and an atlas of 205 non-recycled southern pulsars

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

    Atlas of 205 non-recycled southern pulsars at 140–170 MHz from MWA SMART data, with profiles, DMs, RMs, fluxes and public data products for SKA-Low.

  3. RRAT-like behaviour of PSR B0656+14 observed with I-LOFAR

    astro-ph.HE 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    PSR B0656+14 shows random, memory-less bright pulses at 110-190 MHz, requiring over 47,500 pulses to build a stable profile, resembling rotating radio transients.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

57 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Agazie, G., et al., Anumarlapudi, A., Archibald, A. M. 2024, ApJ, 966, 105

    work page 2024

  2. [2]

    M., Arzoumanian, Z

    Agazie, G., et al., Archibald, A. M., Arzoumanian, Z. 2023, ApJ, 951, L8

    work page 2023

  3. [3]

    C., et al., Heiles, C., Davis, M

    Backer, D. C., et al., Heiles, C., Davis, M. M. 1982, Nature, 300, 615

    work page 1982

  4. [4]

    R., Johnston, S

    Bailes, M., et al., Lorimer, D. R., Johnston, S. 1994, ApJ, 425, L41

    work page 1994

  5. [5]

    2019, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1912.12699

    Braun, R., et al., Bourke, T., Keane, E. 2019, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1912.12699

    arXiv 2019

  6. [6]

    2015, Astroparticle Physics, 65, 22

    Bray, J., et al., Roberts, P., Reynolds, J. 2015, Astroparticle Physics, 65, 22

    work page 2015

  7. [7]

    1999, ApJ, 511, 351

    Contopoulos, I., Kazanas, D., & Fendt, C. 1999, ApJ, 511, 351

    1999

  8. [8]

    Cordes, J. M. 2013, ApJ, 775, 47

    work page 2013

Show all 57 references
  1. [9]

    M., Shannon, R

    Cordes, J. M., Shannon, R. M., & Stinebring, D. R. 2016, The Astrophysical Journal, 817, 16

    2016

  2. [10]

    D., Lovelace, R

    Craft, H. D., Lovelace, R. V . E., & Sutton, J. M. 1968, IAU Circ., 2100, 1 Donner, et al., Tiburzi, C., Osłowski, S. 2020, A&A, 644, A153

    1968

  3. [11]

    Y ., et al., Tiburzi, C., Osłowski, S

    Donner, J. Y ., et al., Tiburzi, C., Osłowski, S. 2019, A&A, 624, A22

    2019

  4. [12]

    T., Hobbs, G

    Edwards, R. T., Hobbs, G. B., & Manchester, R. N. 2006, MNRAS, 372, 1549

    2006

  5. [13]

    1968, Nature, 218, 731

    Gold, T. 1968, Nature, 218, 731

    1968

  6. [14]

    P., Bregman, J

    Hamaker, J. P., Bregman, J. D., & Sault, R. J. 1996, A&AS, 117, 137

    1996

  7. [15]

    Hankins, T. H. & Rankin, J. M. 2010, AJ, 139, 168

    2010

  8. [16]

    Hankins, T. H. & Rickett, B. J. 1975, Methods in Computational Physics, 14, 55

    1975

  9. [17]

    E., et al., Weltevrede, P., Hessels, J

    Hassall, T. E., et al., Weltevrede, P., Hessels, J. W. T. 2013, A&A, 552, A61

    2013

  10. [18]

    J., Manchester, R

    Helfand, D. J., Manchester, R. N., & Taylor, J. H. 1975, ApJ, 198, 661

    1975

  11. [19]

    Hellings, R. W. & Downs, G. S. 1983, ApJ, 265, L39

    1983

  12. [20]

    B., Edwards, R

    Hobbs, G. B., Edwards, R. T., & Manchester, R. N. 2006, MNRAS, 369, 655

    2006

  13. [21]

    W., van Straten, W., & Manchester, R

    Hotan, A. W., van Straten, W., & Manchester, R. N. 2004, PASA, 21, 302

    2004

  14. [22]

    Iraci, F., et al., Tiburzi, C., Verbiest, J. P. W. 2024, arXiv e-prints, Accepted in A&A, arXiv:2410.22170

    2024 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Jones, R. C. 1941, Journal of the Optical Society of America (1917-1983), 31, 488

    1941

  16. [24]

    Kazantsev, N. A. & Potapov, V . A. 2015, Astronomicheskij Tsirkulyar, 1628, 1

    2015

  17. [25]

    Keane, E. F. 2013, in IAU Symposium, V ol. 291, Neutron Stars and Pulsars: Challenges and Opportunities after 80 years, ed. J. van Leeuwen, 295–300

    2013

  18. [26]

    & Berdermann, J

    Kriegel, M. & Berdermann, J. 2020, in 2020 European Navigation Conference (ENC), 1–10

    2020

  19. [27]

    Lazarus, P., et al., Graikou, E., Caballero, R. N. 2016, MNRAS, 458, 868

    2016

  20. [28]

    J., Kramer, M

    Liu, K., et al., Lee, K. J., Kramer, M. 2012, MNRAS, 420, 361 LOFAR Collaboration. 2023, LOFAR2.0 White Paper v2023.1, accessed: 2024- 12-02

    2012

  21. [29]

    Lorimer, D. R. 2011, SIGPROC: Pulsar Signal Processing Programs, Astro- physics Source Code Library, record ascl:1107.016

    2011

  22. [30]

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

    2004

  23. [31]

    2010, Science, 329, 408

    Lyne, A., et al., Kramer, M., Stairs, I. 2010, Science, 329, 408

    2010

  24. [32]

    Lyne, A. G. & Manchester, R. N. 1988, MNRAS, 234, 477

    1988

  25. [33]

    J., Keane, E

    McKenna, D. J., Keane, E. F., Gallagher, P. T., & McCauley, J. 2023, arXiv e- prints, arXiv:2309.03228

    2023 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Michel, F. C. & Li, H. 1999, Phys. Rep., 318, 227

    1999

  27. [35]

    & Deshpande, A

    Mitra, D. & Deshpande, A. A. 1999, A&A, 346, 906

    1999

  28. [36]

    C., et al., McCauley, J., McKenna, D

    Murphy, P. C., et al., McCauley, J., McKenna, D. J. 2021, A&A, 655, A16

    2021

  29. [37]

    2019, MNRAS, 489, 310

    Oswald, L., Karastergiou, A., & Johnston, S. 2019, MNRAS, 489, 310

    2019

  30. [38]

    Perera, B. B. P., et al., Demorest, P. B., Kerr, M. 2019, MNRAS, 490, 4666

    2019

  31. [39]

    A., Spitkovsky, A., & Cerutti, B

    Philippov, A. A., Spitkovsky, A., & Cerutti, B. 2015, ApJ, 801, L19

    2015

  32. [40]

    M., Olszanski, T

    Rankin, J. M., Olszanski, T. E. E., & Wright, G. A. E. 2020, ApJ, 890, 151

    2020

  33. [41]

    J., et al., Shannon, R

    Reardon, D. J., et al., Shannon, R. M., Hobbs, G. B. 2023, ApJ, 951, L6

    2023

  34. [42]

    Ruderman, M. A. & Sutherland, P. G. 1975, ApJ, 196, 51

    1975

  35. [43]

    Sobey, C., et al., Hessels, J. W. T., Weltevrede, P. 2015, MNRAS, 451, 2493

    2015

  36. [44]

    Stairs, I. H. 2003, Living Reviews in Relativity, 6, 5

    2003

  37. [45]

    Susarla, S. C. 2025, Irish-Low Frequency Array (IE613) observatory ecliptic pulsar data release

    2025

  38. [46]

    C., et al., Tiburzi, C., Keane, E

    Susarla, S. C., et al., Tiburzi, C., Keane, E. F. 2024, A&A, 692, A18

    2024

  39. [47]

    Taylor, J. H. 1992, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A, 341, 117

    1992

  40. [48]

    G., Zucca, P

    Tiburzi, C., et al., Bassa, C. G., Zucca, P. 2021, A&A, 647, A84

    2021

  41. [49]

    M., Janssen, G

    Tiburzi, C., et al., Shaifullah, G. M., Janssen, G. H. 2019, MNRAS, 487, 394

    2019

  42. [50]

    Timokhin, A. N. 2010, MNRAS, 408, L41 van Haarlem, M. P., et al., Gunst, A. W., Heald, G. 2013, A&A, 556, A2 van Straten, W. & Bailes, M. 2011, PASA, 28, 1 van Straten, W., Demorest, P., & Oslowski, S. 2012, Astronomical Research and Technology, 9, 237

    2010

  43. [51]

    Verbiest, J. P. W., et al., Coles, W. A., Hobbs, G. B. 2009, MNRAS, 400, 951

    2009

  44. [52]

    Verbiest, J. P. W., et al., Hobbs, G., van Haasteren, R. 2016, MNRAS, 458, 1267

    2016

  45. [53]

    Verbiest, J. P. W. & Shaifullah, G. M. 2018, Classical and Quantum Gravity, 35, 133001

    2018

  46. [54]

    Verbiest, J. P. W., et al., Porayko, N. K., Chen, S. 2024, Results in Physics, 61, 107719

    2024

  47. [55]

    & Frail, D

    Wolszczan, A. & Frail, D. 1992, Nature, 355, 145

    1992

  48. [56]

    2023, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 23, 075024

    Xu, H., et al., Guo, Y ., Jiang, J. 2023, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 23, 075024

    2023

  49. [57]

    J., Qiao, G

    Xu, X., et al., Zhi, Q. J., Qiao, G. J. 2021, ApJ, 917, 108 1 Physics, School of Natural Sciences & Center for Astronomy, Col- lege of Science and Engineering, University of Galway, University

    2021

Pith tools

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