pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.31798 · v1 · pith:OA2DRST7new · submitted 2026-06-30 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE

Evidence for Millihertz Oscillations in the bright atoll source GX 3+1

Malu Sudha , Renee M. Ludlam , Diego Altamirano , Edward M. Cackett , Mason Ng This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-07-01 04:06 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE
keywords millihertz QPOsGX 3+1neutron star LMXBNICER observationsquasi-periodic oscillationsatoll sourceX-ray timingrms-energy relation
0
0 comments X

The pith

Millihertz QPOs appear in GX 3+1 at luminosities higher than those seen in other neutron-star binaries.

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

The paper presents detections of millihertz quasi-periodic oscillations in the bright atoll source GX 3+1 from seven NICER observations. Eight candidate signals fall between 7 and 15 mHz with fractional rms amplitudes of 0.5 to 1.4 percent; one survives global significance testing after trials correction. The signals show no clear tie to hardness-intensity diagram position, an rms-energy trend that mostly rises with energy but can pivot near 3-5 keV, and occurrence at higher luminosity than reported for similar features elsewhere. These properties match the frequency and amplitude ranges known from other sources yet differ in luminosity and energy dependence, thereby challenging some prior ideas about how mHz QPOs are produced.

Core claim

Evidence exists for millihertz QPOs in GX 3+1 in the 7-15 mHz band with rms amplitudes 0.51-1.41 percent. The features were found across seven datasets, with one retaining >95 percent global significance after correction. Their rms-energy behavior is generally increasing but can pivot near 3-4 keV or ~5 keV, and they appear at higher luminosity than in other NS LMXBs. No relation is found between QPO properties and hardness-intensity diagram location. These traits align with literature values for frequency and amplitude yet differ in luminosity and rms-energy pivot, challenging existing considerations of mHz QPO origin.

What carries the argument

Millihertz quasi-periodic oscillations detected in NICER 0.5-10 keV power spectra, whose frequency, rms amplitude, energy dependence, and luminosity context carry the argument about their presence and implications.

If this is right

  • mHz QPOs can occur at higher luminosities than previously associated with other NS LMXBs.
  • The rms-energy relation can show a pivot near 5 keV in addition to the ~3 keV pivot reported elsewhere.
  • QPO properties show no systematic link to the source's location in the hardness-intensity diagram.
  • Existing models of mHz QPO production must accommodate both the higher-luminosity regime and the range of observed energy pivots.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the higher-luminosity detections hold, mHz QPOs may arise under a wider range of accretion conditions than current models assume.
  • Targeted NICER or future X-ray timing observations at intermediate luminosities could map whether a sharp luminosity threshold separates different QPO behaviors.
  • The occasional 5 keV pivot hints that the underlying emission region or scattering geometry may shift with source state in ways not captured by single-pivot models.

Load-bearing premise

The candidate signals are real astrophysical oscillations rather than statistical fluctuations or instrumental effects.

What would settle it

Reprocessing the same seven NICER datasets and finding that none of the eight candidates exceed the 95 percent global significance threshold after trial correction.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.31798 by Diego Altamirano, Edward M. Cackett, Malu Sudha, Mason Ng, Renee M. Ludlam.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Left: Hardness intensity diagram of GX 3+1 obtained using NICER Obs1-7. Hardness ratio is the ratio of X-ray photon countrate between the 3.8–6.8 keV and 2–3.8 keV energy bands and intensity is the total countrate in the 2–6.8 keV energy band. HID is obtained with data binned to 90 s. Right: Lightcurves in the 0.5–10 keV energy band binned to 90 s using the same styled markers as used in the HID. obtain 7 … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: HID of GX 3+1 (grey markers) obtained using NICER Obs1-7 overplotted with the location of the candi￾date mHz QPOs shown using the black ‘*’ marker. These folded lightcurves were then fitted using a model comprising a sinusoidal function and a constant. Fractional rms amplitudes of the candidate mHz QPOs, rms=A/√ 2 × (C − B). Here A is the amplitude of os￾cillation of the fundamental frequency, C is the con… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: * [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The lightcurve segments that have tentative mHz QPO detections (left) with the number of QPO cycles in each segment (N), identified candidate mHz QPOs (center panel) and their corresponding folded profiles at the fundamental frequen￾cies (2 cycles) with the solid black curve showing the sinusoidal fit to the profile (right panel) in the 0.5–10 keV energy band. Overplotted on the power spectra is the 95 % s… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Ratio of NICER data to continuum model indi￾cating the presence of a Fe K line emission. The QPO and non-QPO epochs are overplotted for each observation shown in different panels. 0.1 keV to 1000 keV with 1000 logarithmic bins as recommended for this model while fitting. We tried two different models, one with Thcomp convolved with bbody and the other with Thcomp convolved with the DiskBB. We attempted the… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Fractional rms of the candidate mHz QPOs in different energy bands with the respective QPO frequencies mentioned on each panel. we used the RELXILLNS reflection model (Dauser et al. 2014; García et al. 2014). For a detailed review of the reflection model along with specific details on the parameters, see Ludlam 2024. We fixed the reflection fraction to -1 to return only reflected emission and tied the blac… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Left panel shows the distribution in luminosities of tentative detections in Eddington units with respect to frequency. Right panel shows the spread in fractional rms amplitudes of candidate mHz QPOs with respect to frequency. Results for GX 3+1 (this work) is marked with a ‘*’ symbol. Values for other sources are taken from Altamirano et al. 2008a; Linares et al. 2012; Mancuso et al. 2019; Revnivtsev et a… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We report evidence for millihertz (mHz) QPOs in the bright atoll neutron star low-mass X-ray binary (NS LMXB) source GX 3+1 using NICER in the 0.5--10 keV energy band. Across 7 observational datasets obtained over 6 days, we made 8 candidate mHz QPO detections with local significance above 95%, one of which remains above 95% global significance after the trial correction. These mHz QPOs were detected in the 7--15 mHz frequency range and had fractional rms amplitudes ranging from 0.51--1.41%. Our studies indicate no association between the hardness intensity diagram location of the candidate QPOs and their rms amplitudes. There appears to be a monotonous increase in rms with energy, except in some observations where there is a pivot around 3--4 keV or at ~ 5 keV. Previous studies of mHz QPOs in other sources in literature indicate a pivot around 3 keV in the rms-energy relation, but in our study some tentative detections suggest a pivot at around ~ 5 keV, though the large uncertainties in most cases prevent a robust statistical claim. Although properties such as the frequency range of detection and fractional rms amplitudes of the mHz QPOs in our study are well in agreement with that in literature for other NS LMXBs, the luminosity at which these candidate QPOs occur are higher than that of other sources. The rms-energy relation of the candidate mHz QPOs and the luminosity at which they occur challenges some of the existing considerations of mHz QPO origin.

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

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper reports evidence for millihertz QPOs in the bright atoll NS LMXB GX 3+1 from seven NICER datasets spanning six days. It identifies eight candidate detections in the 7-15 mHz range with local significance >95%, one of which survives >95% global significance after trial correction. Fractional rms amplitudes range from 0.51-1.41%; the work examines rms-energy relations (noting possible pivots near 3-5 keV), lack of correlation with HID position, and occurrence at higher luminosities than prior mHz QPO reports, arguing this challenges existing origin models.

Significance. If the trial-corrected significance holds under full methodological disclosure, the result would be significant: it extends mHz QPO detections to a new source at higher luminosities while providing energy-resolved rms constraints from NICER. This could falsifiably test models linking mHz QPOs to nuclear burning or disk instabilities that were calibrated on lower-luminosity sources. The direct observational approach carries no circularity or free-parameter fitting burden.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim of one surviving >95% global detection after trial correction is load-bearing, yet the text supplies neither the total number of trials (frequency bins in 7-15 mHz, segments per dataset, energy bands, or additional searches) nor the correction method (analytic or Monte-Carlo), rendering the global significance unverifiable.
  2. [Abstract / Methods] The manuscript provides no description of power-spectrum computation (normalization convention, segment length, averaging, or red-noise modeling), which directly affects both local significance thresholds and the validity of the trial factor; this omission prevents independent assessment of the eight local >95% candidates.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The rms-energy pivot discussion cites literature values near 3 keV but reports tentative ~5 keV pivots without quantifying uncertainties or performing a statistical test for the difference.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed and constructive report. The two major comments correctly identify omissions in the description of the analysis methods and trial accounting. We will revise the manuscript to supply these details in full, allowing independent verification of both local and global significances.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim of one surviving >95% global detection after trial correction is load-bearing, yet the text supplies neither the total number of trials (frequency bins in 7-15 mHz, segments per dataset, energy bands, or additional searches) nor the correction method (analytic or Monte-Carlo), rendering the global significance unverifiable.

    Authors: We agree that the total number of trials and the correction procedure must be stated explicitly. In the revised manuscript we will report: (i) the frequency range and binning searched (7–15 mHz), (ii) the number of independent segments per dataset, (iii) the energy bands examined, (iv) any additional searches performed, and (v) the Monte-Carlo procedure used to derive the global significance threshold. These numbers will be placed in both the abstract and the methods section. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract / Methods] The manuscript provides no description of power-spectrum computation (normalization convention, segment length, averaging, or red-noise modeling), which directly affects both local significance thresholds and the validity of the trial factor; this omission prevents independent assessment of the eight local >95% candidates.

    Authors: We accept that a complete description of the power-spectrum analysis is required. The revised manuscript will contain a dedicated methods subsection specifying: the normalization convention (Leahy-normalized power spectra converted to fractional rms), the segment length and overlap used, the averaging procedure across segments, and the treatment of red-noise (including any modeling or simulation-based significance estimation). This information will enable readers to reproduce the local >95% thresholds applied to the eight candidates. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: direct observational timing analysis

full rationale

The paper performs standard power-spectrum analysis on NICER light curves from seven datasets, reports local significances above 95% for eight candidates in the 7-15 mHz band, and applies a trial correction yielding one global detection above 95%. No equations, fitted parameters, or first-principles derivations are present; the result is a statistical claim on raw timing data. No self-citations are load-bearing, no ansatzes are smuggled, and no predictions reduce to inputs by construction. The method is externally verifiable via independent re-analysis of the public NICER data.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

No free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are introduced; the work is a pure observational report of timing signals without theoretical modeling or new postulated quantities.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5851 in / 1146 out tokens · 51094 ms · 2026-07-01T04:06:29.273808+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

172 extracted references · 105 canonical work pages · 5 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    A., & Shaham, J., 1985, Nature, 316, 239

    Alpar, M. A., & Shaham, J., 1985, Nature, 316, 239

    1985

  2. [2]

    Alpar M. A. Hasinger G. Shaham J. Yancopoulos S., 1992, A&A, 257, 627

    1992

  3. [3]

    doi:10.1086/590897

    Altamirano, D., van der Klis, M., M \'e ndez, M., et al.\ 2008, , 685, 1, 436. doi:10.1086/590897

    work page doi:10.1086/590897 2008

  4. [4]

    doi:10.1086/527355

    Altamirano, D., van der Klis, M., Wijnands, R., et al.\ 2008, , 673, 1, L35. doi:10.1086/527355

    work page doi:10.1086/527355 2008

  5. [5]

    Altamirano, D., Homan, J., Linares, M., et al.\ 2010, The Astronomer's Telegram, 2952, 1

    2010

  6. [6]

    2006, MNRAS, 367, 801

    Arevalo, P., Uttley, P. 2006, MNRAS, 367, 801

    2006

  7. [7]

    A.\ 1996, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems V, 101, 17

    Arnaud, K. A.\ 1996, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems V, 101, 17

    1996

  8. [8]

    W., Weisskopf, M

    Bussard, R. W., Weisskopf, M. C., Elsner, R. F., et al.\ 1988, , 327, 284. doi:10.1086/166189

    work page doi:10.1086/166189 1988

  9. [9]

    doi:10.1093/pasj/45.6.801

    Asai, K., Dotani, T., Nagase, F., et al.\ 1993, , 45, 6, 801. doi:10.1093/pasj/45.6.801

    work page doi:10.1093/pasj/45.6.801 1993

  10. [10]

    doi:10.5281/zenodo.4881255

    Bachetti, M., Huppenkothen, D., Khan, U., et al.\ 2021, Zenodo, v0.3. doi:10.5281/zenodo.4881255

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.4881255 2021

  11. [11]

    Bachetti, M., Huppenkothen, D., Khan, U., et al.\ 2021, Zenodo

    2021

  12. [12]

    A., Cook, R., et al.\ 2015, , 800, 109

    Bachetti, M., Harrison, F. A., Cook, R., et al.\ 2015, , 800, 109. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/800/2/109

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/800/2/109 2015

  13. [13]

    & Huppenkothen, D.\ 2018, , 853, L21

    Bachetti, M. & Huppenkothen, D.\ 2018, , 853, L21. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aaa83b

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aaa83b 2018

  14. [14]

    & Vaughan, S.\ 2012, , 746, 131

    Barret, D. & Vaughan, S.\ 2012, , 746, 131. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/746/2/131

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/746/2/131 2012

  15. [15]

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1922

    Bellavita, C., Garc \' a, F., M \'e ndez, M., et al.\ 2022, , 515, 2099. doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1922

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1922 2022

  16. [16]

    & Hasinger, G.\ 1990, , 227, L33

    Belloni, T. & Hasinger, G.\ 1990, , 227, L33

    1990

  17. [17]

    , keywords =

    Belloni, T. M., Sanna, A., & M \'e ndez, M.\ 2012, , 426, 1701. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21634.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21634.x 2012

  18. [18]

    Thermonuclear Burning on Rapidly Accreting Neutron Stars

    Bildsten, L.\ 1998, The Many Faces of Neutron Stars., 515, 419. doi:10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9709094

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/9709094 1998

  19. [19]

    M., 2016, ApJ, 826, 103

    Cackett E. M., 2016, ApJ, 826, 103

    2016

  20. [20]

    M., Miller, J

    Cackett, E. M., Miller, J. M., Bhattacharyya, S., et al. 2008, ApJ, 674, 415

    2008

  21. [21]

    M., Miller, J

    Cackett, E. M., Miller, J. M., Raymond, J., et al.\ 2008, , 677, 2, 1233. doi:10.1086/529483

    work page doi:10.1086/529483 2008

  22. [22]

    M., Miller, J

    Cackett, E. M., Miller, J. M., Ballantyne, D. R. et al. 2010, ApJ, 720, 205

    2010

  23. [23]

    Casella, P., Belloni, T., & Stella, L.\ 2006, , 446, 579

    2006

  24. [24]

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stae389

    Chattopadhyay, S., Bhulla, Y., Misra, R., et al.\ 2024, , 528, 4, 6167. doi:10.1093/mnras/stae389

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae389 2024

  25. [25]

    A Python Code for the Emmanoulopoulos et al. [arXiv:1305.0304] Light Curve Simulation Algorithm

    Connolly, S. D.\ 2015, , arXiv:1503.06676. doi:10.48550/arXiv.1503.06676

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1503.06676 2015

  26. [26]

    Cooper, R. L. & Narayan, R.\ 2007, , 657, 1, L29. doi:10.1086/513077

    work page doi:10.1086/513077 2007

  27. [27]

    L., et al.\ 2014, , 444, L100

    Dauser, T., Garcia, J., Parker, M. L., et al.\ 2014, , 444, L100. doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slu125

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slu125 2014

  28. [28]

    Dieters S. W. et al., 2000, ApJ, 538, 307

    2000

  29. [29]

    M., Wijnands, R., et al.\ 2013, , 767, L37

    Degenaar, N., Miller, J. M., Wijnands, R., et al.\ 2013, , 767, L37. doi:10.1088/2041-8205/767/2/L37

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/767/2/l37 2013

  30. [30]

    T., & Miller-Jones, J

    Ding, H., Deller, A. T., & Miller-Jones, J. C. A. 2021, PASA, 38, e048

    2021

  31. [31]

    doi:10.1007/s00159-007-0006-1

    Done, C., Gierli \'n ski, M., & Kubota, A.\ 2007, , 15, 1. doi:10.1007/s00159-007-0006-1

    work page doi:10.1007/s00159-007-0006-1 2007

  32. [32]

    & Papadakis, I

    Epitropakis, A. & Papadakis, I. E.\ 2017, , 468

    2017

  33. [33]

    C., Rees, M

    Fabian, A. C., Rees, M. J., Stella, L., et al.\ 1989, , 238, 729. doi:10.1093/mnras/238.3.729

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/238.3.729 1989

  34. [34]

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac2501

    Fei, Z., Lyu, M., M \'e ndez, M., et al.\ 2021, , 922, 2, 119. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac2501

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac2501 2021

  35. [35]

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stw3344

    Ferrigno, C., Bozzo, E., Sanna, A., et al.\ 2017, , 466, 3, 3450. doi:10.1093/mnras/stw3344

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw3344 2017

  36. [36]

    J.\ 2002, , 398

    Frank, J., King, A., & Raine, D. J.\ 2002, , 398

    2002

  37. [37]

    W., Lang, D., et al.\ 2013, , 125, 306

    Foreman-Mackey, D., Hogg, D. W., Lang, D., et al.\ 2013, , 125, 306. doi:10.1086/670067

    work page doi:10.1086/670067 2013

  38. [38]

    K., Miller G

    Fortner B., Lamb F. K., Miller G. S., 1989, Nature, 342, 775

    1989

  39. [39]

    F., Iaria, R., Di Salvo, T., et al.\ 2016, , 589, A34

    Gambino, A. F., Iaria, R., Di Salvo, T., et al.\ 2016, , 589, A34. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201527512

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201527512 2016

  40. [40]

    K., Muno, M

    Galloway, D. K., Muno, M. P., Hartman, J. M., et al.\ 2008, , Thermonuclear (Type-I) X-Ray Bursts Observed by the Rossi X-Ray Timing Explorer, 179, 2, 360. doi:10.1086/592044

    work page doi:10.1086/592044 2008

  41. [41]

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202452642

    Gnarini, A., Farinelli, R., Ursini, F., et al.\ 2024, , 692, A123. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202452642

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202452642 2024

  42. [42]

    doi:10.1088/0004-637X/782/2/76

    Garc \' a, J., Dauser, T., Lohfink, A., et al.\ 2014, , 782, 2, 76. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/782/2/76

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/782/2/76 2014

  43. [43]

    A., Steiner, J

    Garc \' a, J. A., Steiner, J. F., Grinberg, V., et al.\ 2018, , 864, 1, 25. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aad231

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aad231 2018

  44. [44]

    Gilfanov M., Revnivtsev M., Molkov S., 2003, A&A, 410, 217

    2003

  45. [45]

    Hasinger G., 1987, A&A, 186, 153

    1987

  46. [46]

    1989, A&A, 225, 79

    Hasinger G., & van der Klis, M. 1989, A&A, 225, 79

    1989

  47. [47]

    E.\ 2007, , 665, 2, 1311

    Heger, A., Cumming, A., & Woosley, S. E.\ 2007, , 665, 2, 1311. doi:10.1086/517491

    work page doi:10.1086/517491 2007

  48. [48]

    L., et al.\ 2019, , 881, 39

    Huppenkothen, D., Bachetti, M., Stevens, A. L., et al.\ 2019, , 881, 39. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab258d

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab258d 2019

  49. [49]

    doi:10.21105/joss.01393

    Huppenkothen, D., Bachetti, M., Stevens, A., et al.\ 2019, The Journal of Open Source Software, 4, 1393. doi:10.21105/joss.01393

    work page doi:10.21105/joss.01393 2019

  50. [50]

    K., & Remillard, R

    Homan, J., Fridriksson, J. K., & Remillard, R. A.\ 2015, , 812, 1, 80. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/812/1/80

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/812/1/80 2015

  51. [51]

    Homan, J., van der Klis, M., Jonker, P. G. et al. 2002, ApJ, 568, 878

    2002

  52. [52]

    Homan, J., van der, Klis M., Fridriksson, J. K. et al. 2010, ApJ, 719, 201

    2010

  53. [53]

    R., et al.\ 2005, , 439, 2, 575

    Iaria, R., di Salvo, T., Robba, N. R., et al.\ 2005, , 439, 2, 575. doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20042231

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20042231 2005

  54. [54]

    & van der Klis, M.\ 2013, , 434, 1476

    Ingram, A. & van der Klis, M.\ 2013, , 434, 1476. doi:10.1093/mnras/stt1107

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt1107 2013

  55. [55]

    J., Jing, Y

    Ingram, A. & Done, C.\ 2011, , 415, 2323. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18860.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18860.x 2011

  56. [57]

    G., van der Klis, M., Wijnands, R., et al.\ 2000, , 537, 374

    Jonker, P. G., van der Klis, M., Wijnands, R., et al.\ 2000, , 537, 374. doi:10.1086/309029

    work page doi:10.1086/309029 2000

  57. [58]

    C., Santangelo A., 1999, ApJ,

    Kaaret P., Piraino S., Ford E. C., Santangelo A., 1999, ApJ,

    1999

  58. [59]

    R., Vrtilek, S

    Kallman, T. R., Vrtilek, S. D., & Kahn, S. M.\ 1989, , 345, 498. doi:10.1086/167924

    work page doi:10.1086/167924 1989

  59. [60]

    R.\ 1995, , 455, 603

    Kallman, T. R.\ 1995, , 455, 603. doi:10.1086/176608

    work page doi:10.1086/176608 1995

  60. [61]

    M., et al.\ 2020, , 492, 1399

    Karpouzas, K., M \'e ndez, M., Ribeiro, E. M., et al.\ 2020, , 492, 1399. doi:10.1093/mnras/stz3502

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz3502 2020

  61. [62]

    M., Qu, J

    Jia, S. M., Qu, J. L., Lu, F. J., et al.\ 2023, , 521, 3, 4792. doi:10.1093/mnras/stad876

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad876 2023

  62. [63]

    Keek, L., Langer, N., & in't Zand, J. J. M.\ 2009, , 502, 3, 871. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200911619

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200911619 2009

  63. [64]

    Low-energy line emission from Cygnus X-2 observed with the BeppoSAX LECS

    Kuulkers, E., Parmar, A. N., Owens, A., et al.\ 1997, , 323, L29. doi:10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9706009

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/9706009 1997

  64. [65]

    The first radius-expansion X-ray burst from GX 3+1

    Kuulkers, E. & van der Klis, M.\ 2000, , 356, L45. doi:10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0003180

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/0003180 2000

  65. [66]

    R., in't Zand, J

    Kuulkers, E., den Hartog, P. R., in't Zand, J. J. M., et al.\ 2003, , 399, 663. doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20021781

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20021781 2003

  66. [67]

    N., Owens, A., Oosterbroek, T., & Lammers, U

    Kuulkers, E., Parmar, A. N., Owens, A., Oosterbroek, T., & Lammers, U. 1997, A&A, 323, L29

    1997

  67. [68]

    Kuulkers, E., van der Klis, M., & Vaughan, B. A. 1996, A&A, 311, 197

    1996

  68. [69]

    K., 1989, in Hunt J

    Lamb F. K., 1989, in Hunt J. Battrick B., 23rd ESLAB Symp., Two Topics in X-ray Astronomy, ESA SP-296. ESA, Noordwijk, p. 215

    1989

  69. [70]

    A., Pike, S

    Lazar, H., Tomsick, J. A., Pike, S. N., et al.\ 2021, , 921, 155. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac1bab

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac1bab 2021

  70. [71]

    Lewin, W. H. G., van Paradijs, J., & Taam, R. E.\ 1993, , 62, 3-4, 223. doi:10.1007/BF00196124

    work page doi:10.1007/bf00196124 1993

  71. [72]

    S., Kuiper, L., Pan, Y

    Li, Z. S., Kuiper, L., Pan, Y. Y., et al.\ 2024, , 691, A92. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451260

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451260 2024

  72. [73]

    A., Kahn, S

    Liedahl, D. A., Kahn, S. M., Osterheld, A. L., et al.\ 1990, , 350, L37. doi:10.1086/185662

    work page doi:10.1086/185662 1990

  73. [74]

    A., Osterheld, A

    Liedahl, D. A., Osterheld, A. L., & Goldstein, W. H. 1995, ApJ, 438, 115

    1995

  74. [75]

    C., Remillard R

    Lin D. C., Remillard R. A. and Homan J. 2009 ApJ 696 1277

    2009

  75. [76]

    J., Qu, J

    Lei, Y. J., Qu, J. L., Song, L. M. et al. 2008, ApJ, 677, 461

    2008

  76. [77]

    Lewin, W. H. G., van Paradijs, J., Hasinger, G., et al.\ 1987, , 226, 383. doi:10.1093/mnras/226.2.383

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/226.2.383 1987

  77. [78]

    A., Homan, J

    Lin, D., Remillard, R. A., Homan, J. 2007, ApJ, 667, 1073

    2007

  78. [79]

    Linares, M., Altamirano, D., Watts, A., et al.\ 2010, The Astronomer's Telegram, 2958, 1

    2010

  79. [80]

    doi:10.1088/0004-637X/748/2/82

    Linares, M., Altamirano, D., Chakrabarty, D., et al.\ 2012, , 748, 2, 82. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/748/2/82

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/748/2/82 2012

  80. [81]

    , keywords =

    Lomb, N. R.\ 1976, , 39, 2, 447. doi:10.1007/BF00648343

    work page doi:10.1007/bf00648343 1976

Showing first 80 references.