Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 4 cited by

Polarized multiwavelength emission from pulsar wind - accretion disk interaction in a transitional millisecond pulsar

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 Multiwavelength polarimetry of the transitional millisecond pulsar PSR J1023+0038 shows high-mode X-ray and optical emission sharing one polarization angle and one polarized flux spectrum, pointing to synchrotron radiation at the…

desk verdict First multiwavelength polarimetric campaign on a tMSP, with a plausible but not yet bulletproof X-ray detection anchoring the boundary-region interpretation. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.13260 v2 pith:LFOS2SMG submitted 2024-12-17 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.SR

M. C. Baglio , F. Coti Zelati , A. Di Marco , F. La Monaca , A. Papitto , A. K. Hughes , S. Campana , D. M. Russell
show 12 more authors
D. F. Torres F. Carotenuto S. Covino D. de Martino S. Giarratana S. E. Motta K. Alabarta P. D'Avanzo G. Illiano M. M. Messa A. Miraval Zanon N. Rea
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HEastro-ph.SR
keywords transitionalmillisecondpulsarPSRJ1023+0038X-raypolarimetryopticalwindaccretiondisksynchrotronradiationsub-luminousstate
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

This paper tries to identify what powers the high-mode emission of the transitional millisecond pulsar PSR J1023+0038 during its active, subluminous X-ray state. It reports simultaneous X-ray, optical, and radio polarimetry: in the high mode, the 2–6 keV X-ray emission is polarized at $(12\pm3)\%$ with a position angle of $-2^\circ\pm9^\circ$, and the R-band optical emission is polarized at $(1.41\pm0.04)\%$ with an angle consistent with the X-rays. The polarized flux spectrum is the same single power law that fits the pulsed optical-to-X-ray flux, while no radio polarization is detected down to a $9\%$ upper limit. The authors conclude that both the polarized and pulsed emissions come from synchrotron radiation at the shock where the pulsar wind meets the inner accretion disk, ruling out standard accretion, isolated-pulsar magnetosphere, and compact-jet origins on the basis of the high degree and stable angle of polarization.

What carries the argument

The boundary region is a shocked interaction zone located at roughly $k R_{\rm LC}$ with $k\simeq1$–2, where $R_{\rm LC}$ is the light-cylinder radius at which corotation with the pulsar becomes impossible, corresponding to about 100 km for this pulsar. The paper uses the polarization degree, position angle, and their phase stability as diagnostics: synchrotron emission from a predominantly poloidal magnetic field in that region yields a stable position angle and a polarization degree consistent with the observed $12$–$17\%$ in X-rays and $1.4\%$ in the optical, while the same measurements exclude the compact jet and standard isolated-pulsar magnetosphere models.

What would settle it

A longer IXPE campaign reaching an unweighted minimum detectable polarization of a few percent in the high-mode 2–6 keV band would settle the X-ray detection: if the model-independent polarization degree is below about $8\%$ or its position angle is not within roughly $20^\circ$ of the optical angle, the wind-disk boundary interpretation would be falsified. Alternatively, phase-resolved polarimetry of the pulsed emission showing a $180^\circ$ position-angle swing across the pulse would contradict the predominantly poloidal field assumption.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

During the high mode of PSR J1023+0038, the 2–6 keV X-ray polarization degree is $(12\pm3)\%$ at position angle $-2^\circ\pm9^\circ$, and the R-band optical polarization is $(1.41\pm0.04)\%$ at $-3.9^\circ\pm0.7^\circ$, aligned with the X-ray angle. The polarized flux spectrum follows the same power law as the pulsed flux from optical to X-rays, and the X-ray position angle does not vary significantly across the pulsar spin cycle, contrary to expectations for isolated-pulsar emission geometries. The paper argues that these properties are direct evidence that both polarized and pulsed emission originate from synchrotron radiation at the boundary region where the pulsar electromagnetic wind collides with the inner accretion flow.

Load-bearing premise

The high-mode X-ray polarization claim rests on the weighted spectro-polarimetric analysis; the same data analyzed without weights give $(7\pm4)\%$ with a minimum detectable polarization of $12\%$, so if the weighting or calibration is biased, the X-ray anchor of the multiwavelength story disappears.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the claim holds, the high-mode emission of PSR J1023+0038 is powered mainly by the pulsar wind colliding with the inner accretion disk, not by steady accretion onto the neutron star.
  • The optical and X-ray pulsations share a single synchrotron mechanism, so future polarization measurements of the pulsed signal should recover the same position angle and roughly constant phase behavior in both bands.
  • The absence of sharp position-angle swings across the pulse disfavors outer-gap, two-pole-caustic, and current-sheet geometries, favoring a magnetically ordered boundary region.
  • The compact jet contributes little to the polarized high-mode flux, and the radio polarization upper limits are consistent with partially self-absorbed synchrotron emission from the jet.
  • Multiwavelength polarimetry becomes a discriminating tool for identifying the emission mechanism in other transitional millisecond pulsars.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural extension of the paper's logic is that future phase-resolved polarimetry of the pulsed emission should recover a roughly constant position angle; a $180^\circ$ swing across the pulse would reveal a toroidally dominated field and break the current picture.
  • The same boundary-region mechanism should be searched for in other transitional millisecond pulsars, where the expected signature is a few-percent optical polarization aligned with a higher X-ray polarization and a pulsed flux spectrum matching the polarized flux spectrum.
  • A further consequence, if the near-coincidence of polarized and pulsed fluxes is exact, is that the unpulsed component of the high-mode emission must be nearly unpolarized, a prediction that could be tested by subtracting the pulsed profile from phase-averaged polarization estimates.
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 manuscript reports the first multiwavelength polarimetric campaign of the transitional millisecond pulsar PSR J1023+0038, combining IXPE (2–6 keV), VLT/FORS2 (R band), VLA (C band), and supporting NICER and Swift observations over 2024 May–June. The main results are: (i) a high-mode X-ray polarization of P = (12±3)% at PA = −2°±9° (2–6 keV) from the weighted spectro-polarimetric analysis of Appendix C.2, whereas the model-independent high-mode analysis yields P = (7±4)% with an MDP of 12%; (ii) a very significant optical polarization P = (1.41±0.04)% with a position angle aligned with the X-ray value to within ≲2°; (iii) first radio linear-polarization upper limits in both modes (P_radio,H < 9% stacked); and (iv) an apparent match between the polarized-flux SED and the pulsed-flux power law across optical and X-ray energies. The authors use these properties to argue against standard accretion, isolated-pulsar magnetospheric emission, and compact-jet origins, and to conclude that the polarized and pulsed emissions both originate from synchrotron radiation at the boundary region where the pulsar wind interacts with the inner accretion disk.

Significance. If the central claim survives scrutiny, this is a high-impact result: it would settle the long-debated powering mechanism of the subluminous X-ray state in tMSPs, extend the pulsar-wind interaction paradigm to disk-accreting binaries, and establish multiwavelength polarimetry as a decisive probe of such systems. Strengths worth emphasizing: the optical polarization is measured with exceptional precision (P/σ ≈ 35); the radio polarization upper limits are first-of-a-kind for both modes; both the model-independent and weighted spectro-polarimetric analyses are reported, including the less favorable high-mode independent result; mode selection is cross-checked against simultaneous NICER data; and data products and analysis scripts are archived on Zenodo with public observatory data. The fragility is concentrated in one place: the high-mode X-ray detection above 99.7% c.l. is obtained only through the weighted analysis, and the agreement with the 12–17% prediction of Baglio et al. (2023) is a same-group validation. Neither issue is fatal; both are addressable in revision.

major comments (3)
  1. [Appendix C.2 / §3.2] The high-mode X-ray polarization measurement that anchors the optical–X-ray alignment and the polarized-flux SED rests entirely on the weighted spectro-polarimetric analysis. The model-independent analysis of the same high-mode data yields P_X,H = (7±4)% with an MDP of 12% (2–6 keV) and P_X,H = (13±5)% with an MDP of 16% (3–6 keV; Appendix C.1), so neither passes the 99% MDP threshold, and the combined-significance test quoted for the full dataset is 96.1% at best. Because the weighted result is the only path to the claimed 99.7% c.l., the paper should validate it explicitly: split-sample and per-DU consistency checks, a comparison of weighted versus unweighted Stokes spectra, and a systematic error term arising from the ellipticity-weight calibration and from the fixed N_H and Γ_X values used in the fit. The present wording also oscillates between “probable detection” (abstract) and “we detected” (Conclusions) for the same measurement; a single, uniform significance statement should be adopted once the systematic budget is quantified.
  2. [§3.5 / Fig. 4] The claim that the polarized-flux SED matches the pulsed-emission power law is supported only by visual inspection; no goodness-of-fit statistic is reported for the polarized points against F_ν = a ν^b from Papitto et al. (2019). The polarized X-ray fluxes are constructed as the product of the model-dependent weighted PDs (Table 2) and the absorbed-power-law model fluxes, and the 2–3 keV point has a PD consistent with zero, so the effective evidence is two X-ray bands plus one optical band. Please quantify the match (a χ² or equivalent with the 2–3 keV point included), propagate the uncertainties of the weighted PDs and of the fixed N_H and Γ_X into the polarized fluxes, and state the dereddening prescription used for the R-band point in the figure caption. As written, the “strong evidence” sentence in §3.5 overstates what is currently quantified.
  3. [§4.1.2 / Fig. 11] The dismissal of rotation-powered magnetospheric scenarios and the inference of a predominantly poloidal field geometry rely on the constancy of PA across pulse phase, but several phase bins have PD upper limits with formally unconstrained PA, and the unweighted high-mode PA uncertainties are of order ±18° (Appendix C.3, Fig. 11). The data therefore exclude only the most extreme magnetospheric geometries, as the text partially concedes, and the further inference that the measured time-averaged polarization belongs to the pulsed component (rather than to an unpulsed polarized component) is an assumption, not a measurement. In light of this, the abstract’s phrase “direct evidence” and the parallel wording in §5 exceed what the observationally demonstrated chain supports; demoting this to “strong evidence” — or adding simulated IXPE model-comparison tests of the OG/TPC/current-sheet PA curves — would make the claim proportionate to the data.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Conclusions / §3.2 / Table 2] The high-mode polarization angle is quoted as −2°±6° in the Conclusions bullet but as −2°±9° in Table 2 and §3.2; the two values should be reconciled.
  2. [Abstract] The abstract calls the X-ray detection “probable” while the Conclusions state “we detected polarized X-ray emission”; since the detection significance is set by the model-dependent analysis, the same hedge should appear at both places.
  3. [§2.4] There is a typographical error in the sentence “This is linked to the the polarization degree P_opt and angle θ”; it should read “to the polarization degree”.
  4. [Appendix A] A brief sensitivity test of the X-ray and optical polarization results to the adopted mode-selection thresholds (0.05 counts s^-1 low-mode and ≈0.2 counts s^-1 flaring-mode boundaries) would make the robustness argument more complete than the current 0.2% low-mode contamination estimate alone.
  5. [§4.1.3] Because the predicted 12–17% X-ray polarization range cited from Baglio et al. (2023) shares authors with the present work, a sentence that distinguishes the a priori published prediction from the new measurement would help readers judge the confirmatory power of the agreement.
  6. [Fig. 4] Please clarify in the caption which model and extinction law produced the dereddened R-band flux and how the gray dashed pulse power law was extrapolated beyond the fitted band, since the apparent coincidence of the polarized and pulsed fluxes is a central visual claim.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

Minor self-referential loop: the boundary-region 'prediction' comes from a same-group 2023 model, but all measured polarization values are new external data and no step reduces by construction.

  1. other [Section 4.1.3, 'Pulsar Wind – Accretion Flow Interaction?']
    "In this scenario, we estimate an intrinsic polarization degree of 12–17% in the X-ray band and expect close alignment between the average optical and X-ray polarization angles (M. C. Baglio et al. 2023). Our measurements are fully consistent with these predictions, providing striking evidence that the polarized emission in J1023 is driven by emission at the boundary region."

    The 'prediction' used as the benchmark is not an external theorem or an independent dataset; it is an estimate from M. C. Baglio et al. (2023), a paper with large author overlap with the present work. The same prior paper supplies the flux-decomposition percentages (boundary region ≃3% of the optical flux, ≃83% of the 0.3–10 keV flux) that define the scenario. Thus the statement that the measurements are fully consistent with these predictions is a consistency check between new data and a same-group model, and the conclusion that the polarized emission is driven by emission at the boundary region leans on that self-citation.

full rationale

The paper's measured polarization values are new external data: IXPE, VLT/FORS2, and VLA observations from 2024, reduced with standard tools. The high-mode X-ray polarization degree and angle, the optical polarization degree and angle, the radio upper limits, and the phase-resolved Stokes parameters are all measurements, not outputs of the model being tested. The central comparison—polarized flux SED versus pulsed SED—is an overlay of independent measurements (the pulsed points from Papitto et al. 2019 versus this paper's polarized points), and no parameter is fitted to force agreement. The only genuinely self-referential element is the interpretive step in Section 4.1.3, where the 'prediction' of 12–17% X-ray polarization degree is imported from M. C. Baglio et al. (2023), a paper with substantial author overlap that also supplies the boundary/jet flux decomposition used to frame the scenario. This makes the 'striking evidence' language a consistency check with a same-group model rather than an independent external verification. However, the 2023 estimate predates the IXPE data and could have been contradicted, so the loop is not definitional and does not reduce by construction. No equation in the paper defines X in terms of Y, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The robustness concern about the weighted spectro-polarimetric detection (the model-independent high-mode polarization degree is 7±4% with an MDP of 12%) is a statistical and calibration risk, not a circularity. Overall the derivation is mostly self-contained; the score of 2 reflects the minor self-referential interpretive loop.

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

No new physical constants or entities are introduced. The central claim rests on the validity of the IXPE weighted spectro-polarimetric calibration, on spectral and interstellar-polarization corrections inherited from prior work, and on the assumption that the 2019 pulsed SED is representative of the 2024 epoch. The mode-selection thresholds are data-derived and enter the analysis.

free parameters (2)
  • low-mode count-rate threshold in IXPE data = 0.05 cts/s (100-s bins)
    Chosen from NICER overlap to classify emission modes in IXPE; affects the high-mode sample and thus the measured polarization. The authors estimate residual low-mode contamination changes the polarization degree by about 0.2%.
  • flare-mode count-rate threshold in IXPE data = 0.2 cts/s (4 sigma above high-mode Gaussian)
    Set from a Gaussian mixture fit to the IXPE count-rate distribution; excludes flaring episodes from the high-mode analysis.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The high-mode X-ray spectrum is an absorbed power law with NH=2.8e20 cm^-2 and photon index Gamma=1.69, as measured by earlier observations.
    Used as the spectral model in the spectro-polarimetric fit (Sec. 3.2, App. C.2); changes in spectral shape could bias the polarization measurement.
  • domain assumption The 2019 pulsed SED from Papitto et al. (2019) is representative of the 2024 epoch of the polarized flux measurements.
    Used to claim that the polarized and pulsed SEDs match (Sec. 3.5, Fig. 4); non-simultaneous data require spectral stability.
  • domain assumption Interstellar polarization toward J1023 is correctly removed using four field stars and has an upper limit Popt,int<0.52%.
    If the interstellar correction is wrong, the optical polarization degree and angle could be altered, weakening the optical-X-ray alignment (Sec. 3.3, App. D).
  • domain assumption The boundary-region synchrotron model of Papitto et al. (2019) and Veledina et al. (2019) accurately predicts polarization degree and angle for the wind-disk shock.
    The interpretation and the expected jet and disk polarizations rely on these model calculations (Sec. 4.1.3), so the conclusion inherits their validity.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Polarized multiwavelength emission from pulsar wind - accretion disk interaction in a transitional millisecond pulsar." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LFOS2SMG

@misc{pith2026241213260,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Polarized multiwavelength emission from pulsar wind - accretion disk interaction in a transitional millisecond pulsar},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LFOS2SMG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.13260}
}
read the original abstract

Transitional millisecond pulsars (tMSPs) bridge the evolutionary gap between accreting neutron stars in low-mass X-ray binaries and millisecond radio pulsars. These systems exhibit a unique subluminous X-ray state characterized by the presence of an accretion disk and rapid switches between high and low X-ray emission modes. The high mode features coherent millisecond pulsations spanning from the X-ray to the optical band. We present multiwavelength polarimetric observations of the tMSP PSR J1023+0038 aimed at conclusively identifying the physical mechanism powering its emission in the subluminous X-ray state. During the high mode, we detect polarized emission in the 2-6 keV energy range, with a polarization degree of 12% +/- 3% and a polarization angle of -2deg +/- 9deg (1sigma) measured counterclockwise from the North celestial pole towards East. At optical wavelengths, we find a polarization degree of 1.41% +/- 0.04% and a polarization angle aligned with that in the soft X-rays, suggesting a common physical mechanism operating across these bands. Remarkably, the polarized flux spectrum matches the pulsed emission spectrum from optical to X-rays. The polarization properties differ markedly from those observed in other accreting neutron stars and isolated rotation-powered pulsars and are also inconsistent with an origin in a compact jet. Our results provide direct evidence that the polarized and pulsed emissions both originate from synchrotron radiation at the shock formed where the pulsar wind interacts with the inner regions of the accretion disk.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.13260 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. shows the multiwavelength time series extracted from our dataset, along with the evolution of the optical and radio polarization properties. During the observations, we detected a single episode of low mode at X-ray and UV wave￾lengths lasting ≈5 min, matching an enhanced flux at both optical and radio wavelengths. In the following sections, we 4 https://casaguides.nrao.edu/index.php/CASA Guides:Polarization Calibra… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Protractor plot of X-ray polarization degree and angle for the high mode, derived from a weighted spectro-polarimetric anal￾ysis, compared with the optical polarization angle. The polarization degree and angle are measured over the energy ranges 2–6, 2–3, and 3–6 keV, and are displayed along the radial and azimuthal di￾rections, respectively. Contours represent 90% confidence regions. The black dashed line and gray … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Evolution of the radio properties. The panels, from top to bottom, illustrate the temporal evolution of the radio flux den￾sity at the central frequency of 6 GHz in the VLA’s C-band; the spectral index, calculated by dividing the 4–8 GHz band into two sub-bands (4–6 GHz and 6–8 GHz); and the 3σ upper limits on the linear polarization fraction. Each time bin represents a 2-min in￾terval. Spectral indices are only sho… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (9 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: SEDs for the high mode of J1023 derived from IXPE and VLT high-mode fluxes (green and red diamonds), with polarized fluxes depicted as squares. High-mode fluxes and pulsed fluxes in the X-ray and optical bands derived by A. Papitto et al. (2019) are shown as light-gray…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Geometry of polarized emission in the high mode of J1023. Pulsed emission originates from synchrotron emission at the boundary region where the pulsar electromagnetic wind – mod￾ulated at the NS rotational period – collides with the inner accretion flow at a distance o…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Top: IXPE time series extracted from the source region and binned at a 100-s resolution (black) and from the background region and binned at 1 ks (orange). Both time series were extracted by combining data from the three detector units, with the background time series …
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Probability density function of IXPE count rates and its modeling. The gray filled bins represent the distribution of count rates extracted from time series binned at 100 s. The gaps between some of the bins in the distribution result from the limited number of photon …
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Variance distribution for the coherent pulsations of J1023 detected by IXPE. The distribution is derived from an epoch fold￾ing search of IXPE data filtered for the high mode in the 2–6 keV energy range. The folding variance is plotted against the fre￾quency deviation …
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Normalized, background-subtracted Stokes parameters q and u for the average X-ray emission. The results are derived from the analysis of the combined data from all three DUs with no selection of the modes. The Stokes parameters were grouped into four bins with sizes of…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Normalized, background-subtracted Stokes parameters in the high mode in the 2-6 keV energy in distinct pulsar rotational phase bins. The results are derived from an unbinned analysis of the combined data from all three DUs. Each diamond represents the mean value for a…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Rotational (left) and orbital (right) phase dependence of the 2–6 keV normalized flux and polarization properties of J1023 in the high mode. From top to bottom, the left panel shows the pulse profile normalized to the average background-subtracted count rate as well a…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_12.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. Fast optical spectroscopic observations of PSR J1023+0038 over one orbital period

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

    Full-orbit minute-cadence optical spectroscopy of PSR J1023+0038 reveals short-timescale line variability and asymmetric Doppler maps consistent with outflows.

  2. Probing multi-band variability and mode switching in the candidate transitional millisecond pulsar 3FGL J1544.6-1125

    astro-ph.HE 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    New multi-band observations of candidate transitional millisecond pulsar J1544 show optical reddening during X-ray-like low modes, supporting a common optical/X-ray origin at the pulsar-wind/disk boundary.

  3. Multi-band study of the flaring mode emission in the transitional millisecond pulsar PSR J1023+0038

    astro-ph.HE 2025-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Strictly simultaneous X-ray, UV, optical, and radio observations show that the flaring mode of PSR J1023+0038 includes a bright jet-like radio flare and optical depolarization.

  4. The hitchhiker's guide to the IXPE data analysis

    astro-ph.HE 2026-04 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

    A user-oriented guide that collects best practices, data formats, and analysis strategies for extracting polarimetric information from IXPE observations.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

96 extracted references · 21 canonical work pages · cited by 4 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    A., Cheng, A

    Alpar, M. A., Cheng, A. F., Ruderman, M. A., & Shaham, J. 1982, Nature, 300, 728, doi: 10.1038/300728a0

    doi:10.1038/300728a0 1982

  2. [2]

    M., Kaspi, V

    Archibald, A. M., Kaspi, V . M., Hessels, J. W. T., et al. 2013, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1311.5161. https://arxiv.org/abs/1311.5161

    arXiv 2013

  3. [3]

    M., Stairs, I

    Archibald, A. M., Stairs, I. H., Ransom, S. M., et al. 2009, Science, 324, 1411, doi: 10.1126/science.1172740

    doi:10.1126/science.1172740 2009

  4. [4]

    M., Bogdanov, S., Patruno, A., et al

    Archibald, A. M., Bogdanov, S., Patruno, A., et al. 2015, ApJ, 807, 62, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/807/1/62

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/807/1/62 2015

  5. [5]

    Arnaud, K. A. 1996, in Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems V , V ol. 101, XSPEC: The First Ten Years, ed. G. H. Jacoby & J. Barnes (ASP, San Francisco), 17–20 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ocz, B. M., et al....

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 1996

  6. [6]

    C., D’Avanzo, P., Campana, S., et al

    Baglio, M. C., D’Avanzo, P., Campana, S., et al. 2016, A&A, 591, A101, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201628383

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201628383 2016

  7. [7]

    C., Russell, D

    Baglio, M. C., Russell, D. M., Crespi, S., et al. 2020, ApJ, 905, 87, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abc685

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abc685 2020

  8. [8]

    C., Coti Zelati, F., Campana, S., et al

    Baglio, M. C., Coti Zelati, F., Campana, S., et al. 2023, A&A, 677, A30, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346418

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346418 2023

Show all 96 references
  1. [9]

    C., Coti Zelati, F., Hughes, A

    Baglio, M. C., Coti Zelati, F., Hughes, A. K., et al. 2025, A&A, 694, L19, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202453468

    2025 doi

  2. [10]

    2022, SoftwareX, 19, 101194, doi: 10.1016/j.softx.2022.101194

    Baldini, L., Bucciantini, N., Di Lalla, N., et al. 2022, SoftwareX, 19, 101194, doi: 10.1016/j.softx.2022.101194

    2022

  3. [11]

    2024, A&A, 688, A217, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450207

    Bobrikova, A., Di Marco, A., La Monaca, F., et al. 2024, A&A, 688, A217, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450207

    2024 doi

  4. [12]

    2023, A&A, 678, A99, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346833

    Bobrikova, A., Loktev, V ., Salmi, T., & Poutanen, J. 2023, A&A, 678, A99, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346833

    2023 doi

  5. [13]

    M., Bassa, C., et al

    Bogdanov, S., Archibald, A. M., Bassa, C., et al. 2015, ApJ, 806, 148, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/806/2/148

    2015 doi

  6. [14]

    T., Miller-Jones, J

    Bogdanov, S., Deller, A. T., Miller-Jones, J. C. A., et al. 2018, ApJ, 856, 54, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaaeb9

    2018 doi

  7. [15]

    2023, Nature Astronomy, 7, 602, doi: 10.1038/s41550-023-01936-8

    Bucciantini, N., Ferrazzoli, R., Bachetti, M., et al. 2023, Nature Astronomy, 7, 602, doi: 10.1038/s41550-023-01936-8

    2023 doi

  8. [16]

    W., et al

    Bucciantini, N., Wong, J., Romani, R. W., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2504.20534. https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.20534

    2025 arXiv

  9. [17]

    2020, MNRAS, 498, L98, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slaa133

    Burtovoi, A., Zampieri, L., Fiori, M., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 498, L98, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slaa133

    2020 doi

  10. [18]

    2018, in Astrophysics and Space Science Library, V ol

    Campana, S., & Di Salvo, T. 2018, in Astrophysics and Space Science Library, V ol. 457, Astrophysics and Space Science Library, ed. L. Rezzolla, P. Pizzochero, D. I. Jones, N. Rea, & I. Vida˜na, 149, doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-97616-7 4

    2018 doi

  11. [19]

    2019, A&A, 629, L8, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936312 CASA Team, Bean, B., Bhatnagar, S., et al

    Campana, S., Miraval Zanon, A., Coti Zelati, F., et al. 2019, A&A, 629, L8, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936312 CASA Team, Bean, B., Bhatnagar, S., et al. 2022a, PASP, 134, 114501, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ac9642 CASA Team, Bean, B., Bhatnagar, S., et al. 2022b, PASP, 134, 114501, ...

    2019 doi

  12. [20]

    Cerutti, B., Mortier, J., & Philippov, A. A. 2016, MNRAS, 463, L89, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slw162

    2016 doi

  13. [21]

    S., Ho, C., & Ruderman, M

    Cheng, K. S., Ho, C., & Ruderman, M. 1986, ApJ, 300, 500, doi: 10.1086/163829

    1986 doi

  14. [22]

    S., Ruderman, M., & Zhang, L

    Cheng, K. S., Ruderman, M., & Zhang, L. 2000, ApJ, 537, 964, doi: 10.1086/309051 Coti Zelati, F., Campana, S., Braito, V ., et al. 2018, A&A, 611, A14, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201732244

    2000 doi

  15. [23]

    1999, A&A, 348, L1

    Covino, S., Lazzati, D., Ghisellini, G., et al. 1999, A&A, 348, L1

    1999

  16. [24]

    D., Andrews, J

    Decleir, M., Gordon, K. D., Andrews, J. E., et al. 2022, ApJ, 930, 15, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac5dbe

    2022 doi

  17. [25]

    T., Archibald, A

    Deller, A. T., Archibald, A. M., Brisken, W. F., et al. 2012, ApJL, 756, L25, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/756/2/L25

    2012 doi

  18. [26]

    T., Moldon, J., Miller-Jones, J

    Deller, A. T., Moldon, J., Miller-Jones, J. C. A., et al. 2015, ApJ, 809, 13, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/809/1/13 Di Marco, A., Costa, E., Muleri, F., et al. 2022, AJ, 163, 170, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac51c9 Di Marco, A., Soffitta, P., Costa, E., et al. 2023, AJ, 165, 143, doi: 10...

    2015 doi

  19. [27]

    K., & Rudak, B

    Dyks, J., Harding, A. K., & Rudak, B. 2004, ApJ, 606, 1125, doi: 10.1086/383121

    2004 doi

  20. [28]

    2003, ApJ, 598, 1201, doi: 10.1086/379052

    Dyks, J., & Rudak, B. 2003, ApJ, 598, 1201, doi: 10.1086/379052

    2003 doi

  21. [29]

    F., O’Dell, S

    Elsner, R. F., O’Dell, S. L., & Weisskopf, M. C. 2012, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference

    2012

  22. [30]

    8443, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2012: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray, ed

    Series, V ol. 8443, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2012: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray, ed. T. Takahashi, S. S. Murray, & J.-W. A. den Herder, 84434N, doi: 10.1117/12.924889

    2012 doi

  23. [31]

    2024, A&A, 684, A62, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348915

    Farinelli, R., Waghmare, A., Ducci, L., & Santangelo, A. 2024, A&A, 684, A62, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348915

    2024 doi

  24. [32]

    Clayton, G. C. 2019, ApJ, 886, 108, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab4c3a

    2019 doi

  25. [33]

    R., G¨uver, T., ¨Ozel, F., & Slane, P

    Foight, D. R., G¨uver, T., ¨Ozel, F., & Slane, P. O. 2016, ApJ, 826, 66, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/826/1/66

    2016 doi

  26. [34]

    2021,, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:2101.014

    Gordon, C., & Arnaud, K. 2021,, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:2101.014

    2021

  27. [35]

    2024, The Journal of Open Source Software, 9, 7023, doi: 10.21105/joss.07023

    Gordon, K. 2024, The Journal of Open Source Software, 9, 7023, doi: 10.21105/joss.07023

    2024 doi

  28. [36]

    D., Cartledge, S., & Clayton, G

    Gordon, K. D., Cartledge, S., & Clayton, G. C. 2009, ApJ, 705, 1320, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/705/2/1320

    2009 doi

  29. [37]

    D., Clayton, G

    Gordon, K. D., Clayton, G. C., Decleir, M., et al. 2023, ApJ, 950, 86, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/accb59

    2023 doi

  30. [38]

    Hakala, P., & Kajava, J. J. E. 2018, MNRAS, 474, 3297, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2922 Multiband polarimetry ofPSR J1023+0038 19

    2018 doi

  31. [39]

    Harding, A. K. 2019, in Astrophysics and Space Science Library, V ol. 460, Astronomical Polarisation from the Infrared to Gamma Rays, ed. R. Mignani, A. Shearer, A. Słowikowska, & S. Zane, 277, doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-19715-5 11

    2019 doi

  32. [40]

    K., & Muslimov, A

    Harding, A. K., & Muslimov, A. G. 2001, ApJ, 556, 987, doi: 10.1086/321589

    2001 doi

  33. [41]

    R., Millman, K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 Hernandez Santisteban, J. V . 2016, PhD thesis, University of

    2020 doi

  34. [42]

    J., Mori, K., Burrows, D., et al

    Hester, J. J., Mori, K., Burrows, D., et al. 2002, ApJL, 577, L49, doi: 10.1086/344132 H¨ogbom, J. A. 1974, A&AS, 15, 417

    2002 doi

  35. [43]

    W., & Foreman-Mackey, D

    Hogg, D. W., & Foreman-Mackey, D. 2018, ApJS, 236, 11, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aab76e

    2018 doi

  36. [44]

    K., Sivakoff, G

    Hughes, A. K., Sivakoff, G. R., Macpherson, C. E., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 521, 185, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad396

    2023 doi

  37. [45]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science & Engineering, 9, 90, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55

    2007 doi

  38. [46]

    2023, A&A, 669, A26, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244637

    Illiano, G., Papitto, A., Ambrosino, F., et al. 2023, A&A, 669, A26, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244637

    2023 doi

  39. [47]

    M., Hessels, J

    Jaodand, A., Archibald, A. M., Hessels, J. W. T., et al. 2016, ApJ, 830, 122, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/830/2/122

    2016 doi

  40. [48]

    A., & Mandel, E

    Joye, W. A., & Mandel, E. 2003, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, V ol. 295, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XII, ed. H. E. Payne, R. I. Jedrzejewski, & R. N. Hook, 489

    2003

  41. [49]

    J., Ehlert, S

    Kaaret, P., Roberts, O. J., Ehlert, S. R., et al. 2024, ApJL, 974, L1, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad7ba6

    2024 doi

  42. [50]

    R., Clark, C

    Kennedy, M. R., Clark, C. J., V oisin, G., & Breton, R. P. 2018, MNRAS, 477, 1120, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty731

    2018 doi

  43. [51]

    S., Perkins, S., & Smirnov, O

    Kenyon, J. S., Perkins, S., & Smirnov, O. 2022, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, V ol. 532, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XXX, ed. J. E. Ruiz, F. Pierfedereci, & P. Teuben, 349

    2022

  44. [52]

    2015, Astroparticle Physics, 68, 45, doi: 10.1016/j.astropartphys.2015.02.007

    Kislat, F., Clark, B., Beilicke, M., & Krawczynski, H. 2015, Astroparticle Physics, 68, 45, doi: 10.1016/j.astropartphys.2015.02.007

    2015 doi

  45. [53]

    2022, Science, 378, 650, doi: 10.1126/science.add5399

    Krawczynski, H., Muleri, F., Dovˇciak, M., et al. 2022, Science, 378, 650, doi: 10.1126/science.add5399

    2022 doi

  46. [54]

    Leahy, D. A. 1987, A&A, 180, 275

    1987

  47. [55]

    2014, ApJ, 795, 72, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/795/1/72

    Linares, M. 2014, ApJ, 795, 72, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/795/1/72

    2014 doi

  48. [56]

    2022, MNRAS, 512, 5269, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac720

    Linares, M., De Marco, B., Wijnands, R., & van der Klis, M. 2022, MNRAS, 512, 5269, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac720

    2022 doi

  49. [57]

    2023, ApJL, 959, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad0bfc

    Liu, K., Xie, F., Liu, Y .-h., et al. 2023, ApJL, 959, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad0bfc

    2023 doi

  50. [58]

    Longair, M. S. 2011, High Energy Astrophysics (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press)

    2011

  51. [59]

    2021, ApJ, 911, 45, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abe62f

    Luo, J., Ransom, S., Demorest, P., et al. 2021, ApJ, 911, 45, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abe62f

    2021 doi

  52. [60]

    I., & Gabuzda, D

    Lyutikov, M., Pariev, V . I., & Gabuzda, D. C. 2005, MNRAS, 360, 869, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.08954.x

    2005

  53. [61]

    2024, A&A, 690, A344, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202449466 Miraval Zanon, A., Ambrosino, F., Coti Zelati, F., et al

    Campana, S. 2024, A&A, 690, A344, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202449466 Miraval Zanon, A., Ambrosino, F., Coti Zelati, F., et al. 2022, A&A, 660, A63, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243180

    2024 doi

  54. [62]

    G., Levine, S

    Monet, D. G., Levine, S. E., Canzian, B., et al. 2003, AJ, 125, 984 Nasa High Energy Astrophysics Science Archive Research Center (Heasarc). 2014, http://ascl.net/1408.004

    2003

  55. [63]

    P., Veledina, A., & Poutanen, J

    Nitindala, A. P., Veledina, A., & Poutanen, J. 2025, A&A, 694, A230, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202453188

    2025 doi

  56. [64]

    R., McKiconley, B., Hurley-Walker, N., et al

    Offringa, A. R., McKiconley, B., Hurley-Walker, N., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 444, 606, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu1368

    2014 doi

  57. [65]

    2022, in Astrophysics and Space Science Library, V ol

    Papitto, A., & de Martino, D. 2022, in Astrophysics and Space Science Library, V ol. 465, Astrophysics and Space Science Library, ed. S. Bhattacharyya, A. Papitto, & D. Bhattacharya, 157–200, doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-85198-9 6

    2022 doi

  58. [66]

    2013, Nature, 501, 517, doi: 10.1038/nature12470

    Papitto, A., Ferrigno, C., Bozzo, E., et al. 2013, Nature, 501, 517, doi: 10.1038/nature12470

    2013 doi

  59. [67]

    2018, ApJL, 858, L12, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aabee9

    Papitto, A., Rea, N., Coti Zelati, F., et al. 2018, ApJL, 858, L12, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aabee9

    2018 doi

  60. [68]

    2019, ApJ, 882, 104, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab2fdf

    Papitto, A., Ambrosino, F., Stella, L., et al. 2019, ApJ, 882, 104, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab2fdf

    2019 doi

  61. [69]

    2025, A&A, 694, A37, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451775

    Papitto, A., Di Marco, A., Poutanen, J., et al. 2025, A&A, 694, A37, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451775

    2025 doi

  62. [70]

    S., Folkner, W

    Park, R. S., Folkner, W. M., Williams, J. G., & Boggs, D. H. 2021, AJ, 161, 105, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/abd414

    2021 doi

  63. [71]

    M., Hessels, J

    Patruno, A., Archibald, A. M., Hessels, J. W. T., et al. 2014, ApJL, 781, L3, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/781/1/L3

    2014 doi

  64. [72]

    Perez, F., & Granger, B. E. 2007, Computing in Science and Engg., 9, 21–29, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2007.53

    2007 doi

  65. [73]

    S., Safi-Harb, S., & Williams, R

    Petre, R., Hwang, U., Holt, S. S., Safi-Harb, S., & Williams, R. M. 2007, ApJ, 662, 988, doi: 10.1086/518019 P´etri, J., & Kirk, J. G. 2005, ApJL, 627, L37, doi: 10.1086/431973

    2007 doi

  66. [74]

    P., Gaensler, B

    Reynolds, S. P., Gaensler, B. M., & Bocchino, F. 2012, SSRv, 166, 231, doi: 10.1007/s11214-011-9775-y

    2012 doi

  67. [75]

    B., & Lightman, A

    Rybicki, G. B., & Lightman, A. P. 1979, Radiative processes in astrophysics

    1979

  68. [76]

    2018, MNRAS, 477, 566, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty562

    Shahbaz, T., Dallilar, Y ., Garner, A., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 477, 566, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty562

    2018 doi

  69. [77]

    2019, MNRAS, 488, 198, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1652

    Shahbaz, T., Linares, M., Rodr´ıguez-Gil, P., & Casares, J. 2019, MNRAS, 488, 198, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1652

    2019 doi

  70. [78]

    W., Archibald, A

    Stappers, B. W., Archibald, A. M., Hessels, J. W. T., et al. 2014, ApJ, 790, 39, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/790/1/39

    2014 doi

  71. [79]

    1992, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, V ol

    Stella, L., & Angelini, L. 1992, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, V ol. 25, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems I, ed. D. M. Worrall, C. Biemesderfer, & J. Barnes, 103

    1992

  72. [80]

    Stetson, P. B. 1987, PASP, 99, 191, doi: 10.1086/131977 20 Baglio, CotiZelati et al

    1987 doi

  73. [81]

    G., Breton, R

    Stringer, J. G., Breton, R. P., Clark, C. J., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 507, 2174, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab2167

    2021 doi

  74. [82]

    Strohmayer, T. E. 2017, ApJ, 838, 72, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa643d

    2017 doi

  75. [83]

    K., & Shibata, S

    Takata, J., Chang, H. K., & Shibata, S. 2008, MNRAS, 386, 748, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.12877.x

    2008

  76. [84]

    2024, Galaxies, 12, 43

    Ursini, F., Gnarini, A., Capitanio, F., et al. 2024, Galaxies, 12, 43

    2024

  77. [85]

    Vaillancourt, J. E. 2006, PASP, 118, 1340, doi: 10.1086/507472

    2006 doi

  78. [86]

    S., & Uttley, P

    Vaughan, S., Edelson, R., Warwick, R. S., & Uttley, P. 2003, MNRAS, 345, 1271, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2966.2003.07042.x

    2003

  79. [87]

    Veledina, A., N¨attil¨a, J., & Beloborodov, A. M. 2019, ApJ, 884, 144, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab44c6

    2019 doi

  80. [88]

    2025, A&A, 693, A273, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452557

    Veledina, A., & P´elissier, M. 2025, A&A, 693, A273, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452557

    2025 doi

  81. [89]

    A., Ferland, G

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

    1996

  82. [90]

    E., et al

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020, Nat. Methods, 17, 261, doi: 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2

    2020 doi

  83. [91]

    C., Elsner, R

    Weisskopf, M. C., Elsner, R. F., & O’Dell, S. L. 2010, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference

    2010

  84. [92]

    7732, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2010: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray, ed

    Series, V ol. 7732, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2010: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray, ed. M. Arnaud, S. S. Murray, & T. Takahashi, 77320E, doi: 10.1117/12.857357 Wes McKinney. 2010, in Proceedings of the 9th Python in Science Conference, ed. St´efan van der Walt & Jarrod Mi...

    2010 doi

  85. [93]

    2000, ApJ, 542, 914

    Wilms, J., Allen, A., & McCray, R. 2000, ApJ, 542, 914

    2000

  86. [94]

    2022, Nature, 612, 658, doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-05476-5

    Xie, F., Di Marco, A., La Monaca, F., et al. 2022, Nature, 612, 658, doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-05476-5

    2022 doi

  87. [95]

    2024, ApJ, 962, 92, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad17ba

    Xie, F., Wong, J., La Monaca, F., et al. 2024, ApJ, 962, 92, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad17ba

    2024 doi

  88. [96]

    2025, The Astrophysical Journal, 983, 1, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adbca0

    Zuo, C., Xie, F., Ge, M., et al. 2025, The Astrophysical Journal, 983, 1, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adbca0

    2025 doi

Pith tools

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