Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 106 references

Bayesian inference of neutron star crust properties using an ab initio-benchmarked meta-model

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Adding microscopic low-density constraints to neutron-star equation-of-state models reduces crust model dependence and shifts the symmetry-energy slope toward stiffer values.

desk verdict A useful and honest extension of the meta-model EoS framework; the low-density blending works and the posteriors shift as advertised, but the central claim of reduced model dependence needs a robustness check against the chosen transition function. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.05603 v2 pith:QVSW6AL3 submitted 2025-06-05 nucl-th astro-ph.HE

S. Burrello , F. Gulminelli , M. Antonelli , M. Colonna , A. Fantina This is my paper
classification nucl-thastro-ph.HE
keywords neutronstarcrustequationofstatemeta-modelYGLOfunctionalBayesianinferencesymmetryenergyslopecrust-coretransitionabinitiomatter
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 tries to establish that standard phenomenological neutron-star equations of state fail in the dilute regime below about 0.02 $fm^{-3}$, and that this failure propagates into uncertain crust predictions. The authors add a low-density correction, the YGLO functional anchored to ab initio neutron-matter calculations, blended smoothly into the meta-model framework to produce a unified Y-MM equation of state. Using Bayesian inference that combines nuclear masses, astrophysical constraints, and a chiral effective field theory filter, they show that the correction reduces model dependence in crustal composition, the crust-core transition density and pressure, and the crustal moment of inertia. A notable consequence is that the symmetry-energy slope Lsym shifts toward stiffer values, tying dilute neutron-matter physics to saturation properties. If right, the approach offers a cheap, model-agnostic way to enforce exact low-density behavior in any existing equation-of-state model.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the smooth blending function eta that connects the YGLO energy functional, exact below n_chi^B = 0.02 $fm^{-3}$, to the standard meta-model polynomial expansion, fully recovered beyond n_MM^B = 0.10 $fm^{-3}$. YGLO itself is defined by a resummed Lee-Yang expansion of the s-wave interaction, with parameters fitted to quantum Monte Carlo AV4 pseudodata and chiral effective field theory benchmarks, now refit with the new YGLO (MU) parameter set to BMBPT3 neutron-matter results. The blending function is infinitely smooth but must satisfy a mechanical-stability inequality, a non-negative derivative of the neutron chemical potential, which discards parameter sets that would generate spurious instabilities.

What would settle it

A high-precision ab initio calculation of the pure-neutron-matter energy per particle between 0.02 and 0.10 $fm^{-3}$ that lies outside the 5%-enlarged chiral band would falsify the low-density anchor; so would a model-independent crust-core transition measurement, for example from pulsar timing or future high-precision radius data, landing outside the Y-MM posterior range nCC = 0.074 +/- 0.014 $fm^{-3}$.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the ab initio-benchmarked Y-MM framework brings the equation of state into agreement with microscopic predictions below about 0.02 $fm^{-3}$, where the standard meta-model diverges, and that this low-density anchoring reshapes crustal inference. The paper demonstrates that the Y-MM informed prior already encodes most of the constraining power of the chiral filter, so that applying the filter changes little; that the posterior mean of the symmetry-energy slope Lsym increases from 48.4 to 51.4 MeV with reduced dispersion; and that the crust-core transition density and pressure move upward with narrower distributions. It also reports that the Y-MM posterior predicts a crustal moment-of-inertia fraction above the Vela glitch threshold for essentially all masses up to about 1.8 solar masses, supporting a crustal origin of Vela glitches under the assumption of negligible entrainment.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the resummed Lee-Yang form of the YGLO functional, with the YGLO (MU) parameters fitted to the chosen BMBPT3 benchmarks, correctly describes neutron matter at all densities below the blending endpoint, while the two blending densities, 0.02 and 0.10 $fm^{-3}$, are set by hand rather than derived from a physical principle.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The Y-MM posterior narrows the predicted equation-of-state band across the inner crust, reducing the spread inherited from different empirical energy-density functional parameter sets.
  • The crust-core transition density and pressure are predicted with tighter distributions and higher mean values than in the standard meta-model.
  • Crustal composition changes: the neutron gas becomes energetically more favored for some functionals, which reduces the spread in cluster mass and lowers cluster charge in the deep inner crust.
  • The symmetry-energy slope Lsym shifts toward stiffer values and is better determined, linking dilute neutron-matter physics to saturation properties.
  • The crustal moment-of-inertia fraction satisfies the Vela glitch inequality for essentially all plausible Vela masses up to about 1.8 solar masses, under negligible entrainment.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A direct extension would be to apply the same blending correction to finite-temperature equations of state used in supernova simulations, where low-density behavior also shapes the neutrino-driven mechanism.
  • If the Lsym shift survives future empirical determinations, it would suggest that low-density neutron-matter information can serve as an additional independent anchor for the symmetry energy at saturation.
  • The hand-set blending densities n_chi^B and n_MM^B are free parameters; a systematic scan or a physical criterion for choosing them could turn the current point estimates into a marginalized uncertainty.
  • With next-generation gravitational-wave detectors aiming for sub-percent radius precision, the crust uncertainties highlighted here may soon become observationally relevant, motivating the authors' emphasis on low-density physics.
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

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper extends the unified meta-modeling (MM) framework for the nuclear equation of state by blending the MM energy functional with the YGLO energy density functional at sub-saturation densities. The YGLO functional is benchmarked against ab initio neutron-matter calculations, and a new parameterization (YGLO(MU)) is fitted to BMBPT3 results. The resulting Y-MM functional is used together with a compressible liquid-drop model and Bayesian inference to study the inner-crust composition, the crust-core transition density and pressure, and the fractional crustal moment of inertia, with priors filtered by physical stability, a maximum-mass constraint, nuclear mass fits, and optionally a chiral EFT band. The central claims are that Y-MM reduces model dependence in the crust, shifts the symmetry-energy slope Lsym toward stiffer values, increases the crust-core transition density and pressure, and makes the crustal moment of inertia more compatible with the Vela glitch constraint.

Significance. If the blending procedure is robust, the paper offers a cheap, fully analytical way to impose low-density ab initio behavior on any phenomenological EoS, which is a useful methodological contribution. The thermodynamic derivations are explicit and the appendices are complete, and the authors are transparent about several limitations, including the ad hoc nature of the transition function and the fact that other resummation strategies exist. However, the central quantitative conclusions rest on a small number of arbitrarily chosen ingredients: the form of the transition function, the blending endpoint, and the 5% enlargement of the chiral band. Because the stability filter of Eq. (38) removes models whose spurious instabilities are generated by the specific blending shape, the reported stiffening of Lsym and the narrowing of n_CC, P_CC, and I_crust/I may be a selection effect rather than a robust physical prediction. The paper is therefore promising but currently overstates the robustness of its main claims.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. II.C and IV.C] The central claim that Y-MM reduces model dependence and stiffens Lsym is conditioned on the specific smooth-step transition function defined in Eqs. (30)-(33) and on the endpoint n_MM^B = 0.10 fm^-3, which is chosen after inspecting posterior widths and acceptance rates in Fig. 9 and Table III rather than from a physical principle. The paper itself states in Sec. II.C that exploring other functional forms is left to future work. Since Eq. (38) discards parameter sets whose only instability is an artifact of this particular eta, and since Table IV shows that the Lsym shift (51.07 to 59.25 MeV in the IP) occurs before the chiral filter is applied, the reported stiffening and uncertainty reduction may be partly a selection effect of the blending shape. I ask for a sensitivity study that varies the transition function (e.g., a Fermi-type or polynomial step) and the endpoint, reporting the impact on Lsym, n_CC, P_CC, and I_crust/I. Without this, the central claim is not yet supported.
  2. [Sec. IV.A, Eq. (50)] The 5% enlargement of the chiral EFT band is introduced without derivation or sensitivity testing. This factor directly controls which models pass the wEFT filter, and therefore controls the posterior acceptance rates in Table III and the posterior widths in Tables IV and V. A different enlargement (say 0% or 10%) would change the inferred Lsym and n_CC distributions. Please repeat the analysis with at least two alternative enlargement factors, or use the raw Huth et al. band, and report how the central values and uncertainties change. As written, the reported posterior widths are conditional on an arbitrary calibration constant.
  3. [Sec. II.B, Table I] The YGLO(MU) fit is described only qualitatively; the table gives the adjusted parameters without their uncertainties, and there is no discussion of the fit residuals or the density range used for the BMBPT3 benchmark. The paper then treats YGLO as exact below n_chi^B = 0.02 fm^-3 and uses it up to n_MM^B = 0.10 fm^-3. The alternative resummations mentioned in Sec. II.B (effective-range corrections, difermion approaches, Pade approximants) are known to differ, and the paper does not quantify how those differences would propagate into the crustal observables. Because the paper's main message is about reducing uncertainty, the quoted error bars in Tables IV and V likely underestimate the total uncertainty. Please provide the fit covariance or at least a residual analysis, and discuss the expected systematic shift from the choice of resummation.
  4. [Sec. IV.A, Eq. (50) and Table III] The high posterior acceptance rate of Y-MM models under the chiral filter (36-38% versus 2.8% for the standard MM) is to a large extent built in by construction: the Y-MM energy is forced to match YGLO, which is fitted to ab initio neutron-matter calculations, on the interval [0.02, 0.10] fm^-3, and the chiral band is derived from the same physics. The abstract and conclusions state that the improved model 'reduces uncertainties' and is more consistent with nuclear theory, which is true but should be framed as a consistency check rather than an independent validation. Please state explicitly which of the constraints used in the posterior are independent of the low-density input that defines YGLO.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract] The abbreviation MM is used in the abstract without being defined; please spell out 'meta-modeling' at first use.
  2. [Sec. II.B, Eq. (24) and Table I] The symbol Yi in Eq. (24) is used both as the function name and, in the following paragraph, as an index (i = s, n), which is confusing. In addition, the unit order in the Table I caption (fm2, MeV fm5, MeV fm3+3α) does not match the listed order (Ci, Di, Fi); please reorder.
  3. [Sec. II.A, Eq. (5)] The notation t*_FG is introduced in Eq. (5) but the appendix uses a different subscript convention; please unify the notation between the main text and Appendix A.
  4. [Fig. 6 caption] The four panels of Figure 6 show several EDF parameter sets with colored lines, but the caption does not identify which color corresponds to which force; please add a legend or a color key.
  5. [Sec. IV.A] The text states that 6×10^6 models are sampled from the prior, but it does not report how many models survive each filter for each configuration; please provide effective sample sizes for the IP and posterior in each case, especially for the standard MM case where the acceptance is low.
  6. [Figure 1] The figure labels the BMBPT3 result as 'Palaniappan, 2025' while the text cites it as [60]; please harmonize in-text citations and figure labels.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Low-density benchmarking partly reproduces its own fit targets, and the reported spread reduction is built into the blending definition; the central crustal and Lsym inferences retain substantial independent content.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Sec. II.B (YGLO(MU) fit) and Sec. III.A (Fig. 2 discussion)]
    "In this work, we introduce the new parameterization YGLO (MU), fitted to recent third-order PNM Bogoliubov many-body perturbation theory (BMBPT3) calculations ... [59, 60]. ... our blending procedure successfully captures the correct low-density trend: the curves obtained by applying Eq. (30) closely follow the AFDMC pseudodata of [58] and remain largely consistent with the MBPT3 calculations of [57,59,60]."

    Eq. (30) sets Y-MM equal to YGLO below n_chi^B = 0.02 fm^-3 and blends to n_MM^B; YGLO(MU) is itself fitted to the BMBPT3 results of Refs. [59,60]. Displaying those same BMBPT3 data as a benchmark and then concluding that Y-MM 'remains largely consistent with the MBPT3 calculations' is a reproduction of the fit target, not an independent prediction. Likewise, the wEFT posterior filter in Sec. IV.A is an ab initio neutron-matter band, so the improved posterior acceptance in Table III partly reflects that the same chiral-EFT-based physics was used both to construct YGLO(MU) and to filter the posterior.

  2. self definitional [Sec. III.B and Sec. V (conclusions)]
    "we enforce that the energy per baryon eB matches the YGLO prediction eY for nB <= n_chi^B = 0.02 fm^-3 ... adopting the Y-MM prescription significantly reduces the spread in neutron-gas density and cluster size associated with different empirical EDF parameter sets, across the full density range relevant to the inner crust."

    Because Y-MM is defined by Eq. (30) to coincide with the single fixed YGLO functional below n_chi^B and to interpolate toward MM only over [n_chi^B, n_MM^B], all empirical parameter sets share the same low-density EoS. The reduction in spread of crustal quantities over the inner-crust density range is therefore entailed by the definition of Y-MM rather than derived from data. The conclusion that 'The introduced correction reduces the model dependence' restates the construction input 'all models are forced to YGLO at low density,' so this part of the claimed reduction is by construction.

full rationale

The paper is not a classic circular derivation: the MM empirical parameters are sampled from flat priors, the surface parameters are fitted to AME masses, the maximum-mass filter is astrophysical, and the final Lsym, n_CC, P_CC, and I_crust/I posteriors are nontrivial outputs of the Bayesian pipeline. The main circularity is localized. The low-density correction is built by fitting YGLO(MU) to ab initio PNM data (BMBPT3), and the paper then uses overlapping ab initio and chiral neutron-matter information both to display agreement (Fig. 2) and to filter the posterior (wEFT), so the improved consistency of Y-MM with those constraints is partly inherited from the construction. Similarly, the reduction in model dependence across the inner crust is partly a direct consequence of Eq. (30) forcing all EoSs to the same YGLO behavior below n_chi^B. These issues do not erase the independent content: the stiffer Lsym shift is explained by the stability-matching condition rather than being read off from the fit, and the CC transition and moment-of-inertia results depend on crustal minimization and astrophysical filters. The paper itself flags that the choice of transition function is untested ('Exploring other functional forms ... will be pursued in a future work'), which is a robustness limitation rather than an additional circular step. Self-citations to the MM framework are methodological and are not load-bearing in a circular sense. Overall score 4: partial circularity in the benchmarking and spread-reduction claims, but the central crustal inferences retain substantial independent grounding.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The model rests on the MM truncation, the validity of the YGLO functional in the dilute regime, the choice of blending endpoints, the CLDM for the crust, and the assumption of negligible entrainment. No new particles or forces are introduced; the main free choices are the fitted YGLO(MU) parameters and hand-set densities.

free parameters (5)
  • YGLO(MU) PNM fit parameters (Cn, Dn, Fn) = Cn = 90.87 fm^2, Dn = -9427.83 MeV fm^5, Fn = 9706.90 MeV fm^(3+3α)
    Fitted to BMBPT3 neutron-matter energies from Palaniappan et al.; fit residuals are not reported.
  • Blending endpoint n_MM^B = 0.10 fm^-3 (baseline); 0.08 to nsat explored
    Chosen by hand after inspecting posterior retention rates and EoS bands; affects the width of the blending region.
  • Low-density matching point n_chi^B = 0.02 fm^-3
    Set to the lowest density of the χ-EFT benchmark; not derived from physics.
  • χ-EFT band enlargement factor = 5%
    Ad hoc widening of the ab initio band in wEFT; no sensitivity test is shown.
  • Surface parameters (σ0, σ0,c, bs, β) = Not reported for each EoS
    Optimized for each parameter set via AME mass fit following Refs. [50,52]; values not tabulated.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption MM polynomial expansion (Eq. 3) truncated at N=4 maps all density dependence of homogeneous matter onto a finite set of empirical parameters (Eqs. 11-20).
    Underlies the entire meta-modeling approach; higher-order terms are neglected.
  • domain assumption The YGLO functional (Eqs. 23-27), based on a resummed Lee-Yang expansion, describes the low-density EoS correctly up to the matching point.
    The correction enforces eB = eY for nB ≤ 0.02 fm^-3; if YGLO is biased, all crust predictions inherit the bias.
  • domain assumption The smooth transition function (Eqs. 30-33) with the stability constraint Eq. (38) is sufficient to avoid unphysical spinodal instabilities.
    Other transition functions are not explored; the constraint is only checked on a grid.
  • domain assumption The compressible liquid drop model with spherical Wigner-Seitz cells and excluded-volume approximation accurately describes the inner crust.
    Pasta phases are neglected, based on cited work; surface and curvature energies are parametrized.
  • domain assumption The star is cold, beta-equilibrated, and the crustal superfluid neutron fraction equals the crust moment of inertia fraction (entrainment negligible).
    Used to relate Icrust/I to Vela glitch activity; entrainment revision from [106] is adopted.
  • domain assumption The chiral EFT band from Huth et al. (2022), enlarged by 5%, is an accurate constraint on PNM between 0.02 and 0.2 fm^-3.
    Used as the optional wEFT filter; the enlargement is not justified quantitatively.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Bayesian inference of neutron star crust properties using an ab initio-benchmarked meta-model." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QVSW6AL3

@misc{pith2026250605603,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Bayesian inference of neutron star crust properties using an ab initio-benchmarked meta-model},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QVSW6AL3}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.05603}
}
read the original abstract

Accurate modeling of the neutron star crust is essential for interpreting multimessenger observations and constraining the nuclear equation of state (EoS). However, standard phenomenological EoS models often rely on heuristic extrapolations in the low-density regime, which are inconsistent with microscopic predictions. In this work, we refine a unified meta-modeling framework for the EoS by incorporating low-density corrections based on energy density functionals constrained by ab initio neutron-matter calculations. Using Bayesian inference to combine information from astrophysical observations, nuclear theory, and experiments, we assess the impact of these corrections on key crustal properties, including the crust-core transition density and pressure, crustal composition, and moment of inertia. The improved model reduces uncertainties in the inner crust and emphasizes the importance of low-density physics in EoS modeling, highlighting the value of integrating both theoretical and observational constraints across densities to robustly describe the EoS. Moreover, the adopted approach can be readily applied to any existing EoS model to provide a solid framework for interpreting upcoming high-precision multimessenger data.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.05603 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Energy per nucleon in PNM, normalized to the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Energy per nucleon in PNM, normalized to the free Fermi gas energy [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Energy per nucleon eB, defined in Eq. (30), as a function of the baryon number density nB in PNM, computed within the standard MM (red lines), using the YGLO parameterization (blue lines), or with the blended functional Y-MM (black lines) for different values of n MM B . Left and right panels correspond to the BSk24 and TM1 empirical parameter sets, respectively. 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 n B [fm-3] 0 10 20 30 40 µ n [MeV… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Energy per nucleon eB as a function of the total baryon number density nB for different values of the isospin asymmetry δ, as obtained by the standard MM (red lines) or with the functional Y-MM, with n MM B = 0.10 fm−3 (black lines). Results are shown for the BSk24 emp…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Free neutron-gas density ng (top left panel), ion density (bottom left panel), cluster mass A (top right panel), and proton number Z (bottom right panel) numbers, in the inner crust as a function of nB for different set of empirical parameters of EDFs available in lite…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Correlation matrices as obtained in the IP (top [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Probability density functions (PDFs) of the zeroth (left panel) and first (right panel) order empirical parameters in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Left panel: Pressure as a function of the total baryon mass density [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Joint probability density of the CC transition den [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Percentage of the crustal fraction of the moment [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_11.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

106 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Haensel, A

    P. Haensel, A. Y. Potekhin, and D. G. Yakovlev, eds., Neutron star cores: Nucleons and hyperons, inNeutron Stars 1 (Springer New York, New York, NY, 2007) pp. 207–280

    2007

  2. [2]

    J. M. Lattimer, Neutron stars and the nuclear matter equation of state, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.71, 433 (2021)

    2021

  3. [3]

    M. C. Miller et al., Psr j0030+0451 mass and radius from nicer data and implications for the properties of neutron star matter, Astrophys. J. Lett. 887, L24 (2019), arXiv:1912.05705 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2019

  4. [4]

    M. C. Milleret al., The radius of psr j0740+6620 from nicer and xmm-newton data, Astrophys. J. Lett.918, L28 (2021), arXiv:2105.06979 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2021

  5. [5]

    T. E. Riley et al., A nicer view of psr j0030+0451: Millisecond pulsar parameter estimation, Astrophys. J. Lett. 887, L21 (2019), arXiv:1912.05702 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2019

  6. [6]

    T. E. Rileyet al., A nicer view of the massive pulsar psr j0740+6620 informed by radio timing and xmm- newton spectroscopy, Astrophys. J. Lett. 918, L27 (2021), arXiv:2105.06980 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2021

  7. [7]

    Salmiet al., The radius of psr j0740+6620 from nicer withnicerbackgroundestimates,Astrophys.J

    T. Salmiet al., The radius of psr j0740+6620 from nicer withnicerbackgroundestimates,Astrophys.J. 941,150 (2022), arXiv:2209.12840 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2022

  8. [8]

    Vinciguerra et al

    S. Vinciguerra et al. , An Updated Mass–Radius Analysis of the 2017–2018 NICER Data Set of PSR J0030+0451, Astrophys. J. 961, 62 (2024), arXiv:2308.09469 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2024

Show all 106 references
  1. [9]

    Rutherford et al., Constraining the Dense Mat- ter Equation of State with New NICER Mass–Radius Measurements and New Chiral Effective Field The- ory Inputs, Astrophys

    N. Rutherford et al., Constraining the Dense Mat- ter Equation of State with New NICER Mass–Radius Measurements and New Chiral Effective Field The- ory Inputs, Astrophys. J. Lett. 971, L19 (2024), arXiv:2407.06790 [astro-ph.HE]

    2024 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Choudhuryet al., A NICER View of the Nearest and 20 Brightest Millisecond Pulsar: PSR J0437–4715, Astro- phys

    D. Choudhuryet al., A NICER View of the Nearest and 20 Brightest Millisecond Pulsar: PSR J0437–4715, Astro- phys. J. Lett.971, L20 (2024), arXiv:2407.06789 [astro- ph.HE]

    2024 arXiv

  3. [11]

    B. P. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Gw170817: Observation of gravitational waves from a binary neu- tron star inspiral, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 161101 (2017), arXiv:1710.05832 [gr-qc]

    2017 arXiv

  4. [12]

    B. P. Abbott, R. Abbott, T. D. Abbott, F. Acernese, K. Ackley, C. Adams, T. Adams, P. Addesso, R. X. Ad- hikari, V. B. Adya, and et al., Properties of the binary neutron star merger gw170817, Phys. Rev. X9, 011001 (2019), arXiv:1805.11579 [gr-qc]

    2019 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Abbott et al

    R. Abbott et al. (KAGRA, VIRGO, LIGO Scientific), Gwtc-3: Compact binary coalescences observed by ligo and virgo during the second part of the third observing run, Phys. Rev. X13, 041039 (2023), arXiv:2111.03606 [gr-qc]

    2023 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Maggiore, C

    M. Maggiore, C. V. D. Broeck, N. Bartolo, E. Belgacem, D. Bertacca, M. A. Bizouard, M. Branchesi, S. Clesse, S. Foffa, J. García-Bellido, S. Grimm, J. Harms, T. Hin- derer, S. Matarrese, C. Palomba,et al., Science case for the einstein telescope, Journal of Cosmology and As- t...

    2020

  7. [15]

    Evans et al., A horizon study for cosmic ex- plorer: Science, observatories, and community, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2109.09882 (2021), arXiv:2109.09882 [astro-ph.IM]

    M. Evans et al., A horizon study for cosmic ex- plorer: Science, observatories, and community, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2109.09882 (2021), arXiv:2109.09882 [astro-ph.IM]

    2021 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Branchesi, M

    M. Branchesi, M. Maggiore, D. Alonso, C. Badger, B. Banerjee, F. Beirnaert, E. Belgacem, S. Bhagwat, G. Boileau, S. Borhanian, D. D. Brown, M. Leong Chan, G. Cusin, S. L. Danilishin, J. Degallaix,et al., Science withtheeinsteintelescope: acomparisonofdifferentde- signs, Journa...

    2023

  9. [17]

    Abac et al., The science of the einstein tele- scope, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2503.12263 (2025), arXiv:2503.12263 [gr-qc]

    A. Abac et al., The science of the einstein tele- scope, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2503.12263 (2025), arXiv:2503.12263 [gr-qc]

    2025 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Oertel, M

    M. Oertel, M. Hempel, T. Klähn, and S. Typel, Equa- tions of state for supernovae and compact stars, Rev. Mod. Phys. 89, 015007 (2017)

    2017

  11. [19]

    G. F. Burgio and A. F. Fantina, Nuclear equation of state for compact stars and supernovae, inThe Physics and Astrophysics of Neutron Stars, Astrophysics and Space Science Library, Vol. 457, edited by L. Rez- zolla, P. Pizzochero, D. I. Jones, N. Rea, and I. Vi- daña (Springer...

    2018

  12. [20]

    Burgio, H.-J

    G. Burgio, H.-J. Schulze, I. Vidaña, and J.-B. Wei, Neu- tron stars and the nuclear equation of state, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 120, 103879 (2021)

    2021

  13. [21]

    Huth et al., Constraining neutron-star matter with microscopic and macroscopic collisions, Nature606, 276 (2022)

    S. Huth et al., Constraining neutron-star matter with microscopic and macroscopic collisions, Nature606, 276 (2022)

    2022

  14. [22]

    C. Y. Tsang, M. B. Tsang, W. G. Lynch, R. Kumar, and C. J. Horowitz, Determination of the equation of state fromnuclearexperimentsandneutronstarobservations, Nat. Astron. 8, 328 (2024), arXiv:2310.11588 [nucl-th]

    2024 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Klausner, G

    P. Klausner, G. Colò, X. Roca-Maza, and E. Vigezzi, Impact of ground-state properties and collective exci- tations on the skyrme ansatz: A bayesian study, Phys. Rev. C 111, 014311 (2025), arXiv:2410.18598 [nucl-th]

    2025

  16. [24]

    Essick, P

    R. Essick, P. Landry, and D. E. Holz, Nonparametric inference of neutron star composition, equation of state, and maximum mass with gw170817, Phys. Rev. D101, 063007 (2020), arXiv:1910.09740 [astro-ph.HE]

    2020 arXiv

  17. [25]

    S. K. Greif, G. Raaijmakers, K. Hebeler, A. Schwenk, and A. L. Watts, Equation of state sensitivities when inferring neutron star and dense matter properties, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 485, 5363 (2019), arXiv:https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article- pdf/...

    2019

  18. [26]

    Landry and R

    P. Landry and R. Essick, Nonparametric inference of the neutron star equation of state from gravitational wave observations, Phys. Rev. D 99, 084049 (2019), arXiv:1811.12529 [gr-qc]

    2019 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Annala, T

    E. Annala, T. Gorda, A. Kurkela, and A. Vuori- nen, Gravitational-wave constraints on the neutron- star-matter equation of state, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 172703 (2018), arXiv:1711.02644 [astro-ph.HE]

    2018 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Fortin, C

    M. Fortin, C. Providência, A. R. Raduta, F. Gulminelli, J. L. Zdunik, P. Haensel, and M. Bejger, Neutron star radii and crusts: Uncertainties and unified equations of state,Phys.Rev.C 94,035804(2016),arXiv:1604.01944 [astro-ph.SR]

    2016 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Ferreira and C

    M. Ferreira and C. Providência, Neutron star proper- ties: Quantifying the effect of the crust-core matching procedure, Universe 6, 220 (2020)

    2020

  22. [30]

    Suleiman, M

    L. Suleiman, M. Fortin, J. L. Zdunik, and P. Haensel, Influence of the crust on the neutron star macrophysical quantities and universal relations, Phys. Rev. C 104, 015801 (2021), arXiv:2106.12845 [astro-ph.HE]

    2021 arXiv

  23. [31]

    J., Dinh Thi, H., Fantina, A

    Davis, P. J., Dinh Thi, H., Fantina, A. F., Gulminelli, F., Oertel, M., and Suleiman, L., Inference of neutron- star properties with unified crust-core equations of state for parameter estimation, A&a687, A44 (2024), arXiv:2406.14906 [astro-ph.HE]

    2024 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Chamel and P

    N. Chamel and P. Haensel, Physics of neutron star crusts, Living Reviews in Relativity 11, 10 (2008), arXiv:0812.3955 [astro-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Huxford, R

    R. Huxford, R. Kashyap, S. Borhanian, A. Dhani, I. Gupta, and B. S. Sathyaprakash, Accuracy of neutron starradiusmeasurementwiththenextgenerationofter- restrial gravitational-wave observatories, Phys. Rev. D 109, 103035 (2024)

    2024

  26. [34]

    Page and S

    D. Page and S. Reddy, Forecasting neutron star temper- atures: Predictability and variability, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 241102 (2013), arXiv:1307.4455 [astro-ph.HE]

    2013 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Burrello, F

    S. Burrello, F. Gulminelli, F. Aymard, M. Colonna, and A. R. Raduta, Heat capacity of the neutron star inner crust within an extended nuclear statistical equilibrium model, Phys. Rev. C92, 055804 (2015)

    2015

  28. [36]

    Antonelli, A

    M. Antonelli, A. Montoli, and P. Pizzochero, In- sights into the physics of neutron star interiors from pulsar glitches (World Scientific, 2022) pp. 219–281, arXiv:2301.12769 [astro-ph.HE]

    2022 arXiv

  29. [37]

    A. W. Steiner, S. Gandolfi, F. J. Fattoyev, and W. G. Newton, Using neutron star observations to determine crust thicknesses, moments of inertia, and tidal de- formabilities, Phys. Rev. C91, 015804 (2015)

    2015

  30. [38]

    Vidaña, C

    I. Vidaña, C. m. c. Providência, A. Polls, and A. Rios, Density dependence of the nuclear symmetry energy: A microscopic perspective, Phys. Rev. C 80, 045806 (2009)

    2009

  31. [39]

    Xu, L.-W

    J. Xu, L.-W. Chen, B.-A. Li, and H.-R. Ma, Nuclear constraints on properties of neutron star crusts, The Astrophysical Journal 697, 1549 (2009)

    2009

  32. [40]

    C. C. Moustakidis, T. Nikšić, G. A. Lalazissis, D. Vrete- 21 nar, and P. Ring, Constraints on the inner edge of neu- tron star crusts from relativistic nuclear energy density functionals, Phys. Rev. C81, 065803 (2010)

    2010

  33. [41]

    Burrello, M

    S. Burrello, M. Colonna, and F. Matera, Pairing ef- fects on neutrinotransport in low-density stellar matter, Phys. Rev. C94, 012801 (2016)

    2016

  34. [42]

    Gonzalez-Boquera, M

    C. Gonzalez-Boquera, M. Centelles, X. Viñas, and A. Rios, Higher-order symmetry energy and neutron star core-crust transition with gogny forces, Phys. Rev. C 96, 065806 (2017)

    2017

  35. [43]

    Y.LimandJ.W.Holt,Bayesianmodelingofthenuclear equation of state for neutron star tidal deformabilities and gw170817, The European Physical Journal A55, 209 (2019), arXiv:1902.05502 [nucl-th]

    2019 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Grams, J

    G. Grams, J. Margueron, R. Somasundaram, and S. Reddy, Confronting a set of skyrme andχ eft pre- dictions for the crust of neutron stars: On the origin of uncertainties in model predictions, Eur. Phys. J. A58, 56 (2022)

    2022

  37. [45]

    Carreau, F

    T. Carreau, F. Gulminelli, and J. Margueron, General predictions for the neutron star crustal moment of iner- tia, Phys. Rev. C100, 055803 (2019)

    2019

  38. [46]

    Dinh Thi, C

    H. Dinh Thi, C. Mondal, and F. Gulminelli, The nuclear matter density functional under the nucleonic hypoth- esis, Universe 7, 373 (2021), arXiv:2109.09675 [astro- ph.HE]

    2021 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Klausner, M

    P. Klausner, M. Antonelli, and F. Gulminelli, Neutron star crust informed by nuclear structure data, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2505.16929 (2025), arXiv:2505.16929 [nucl-th]

    2025 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Margueron, R

    J. Margueron, R. Hoffmann Casali, and F. Gulminelli, Equation of state for dense nucleonic matter from meta- modeling. i. foundational aspects, Phys. Rev. C 97, 025805 (2018), arXiv:1708.06894 [nucl-th]

    2018 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Margueron, R

    J. Margueron, R. Hoffmann Casali, and F. Gulminelli, Equation of state for dense nucleonic matter from meta- modeling. ii. predictions for neutron star properties, Phys. Rev. C97, 025806 (2018)

    2018

  42. [50]

    Montefusco, Gabriele, Antonelli, Marco, and Gul- minelli, Francesca, Frozen and beta-equilibrated f and p modes of cold neutron stars: Nuclear metamodel predic- tions, A&A 694, A150 (2025), arXiv:2410.08008 [nucl- th]

    2025 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Antić, D

    S. Antić, D. Chatterjee, T. Carreau, and F. Gulminelli, Quantifying the uncertainties on spinodal instability for stellar matter through meta-modeling, Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics 46, 065109 (2019), arXiv:1901.03959 [nucl-th]

    2019 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Carreau, F

    T. Carreau, F. Gulminelli, and J. Margueron, Bayesian analysis of the crust-core transition with a compressible liquid-drop model, The European Physical Journal A 55, 188 (2019), arXiv:1902.07032 [nucl-th]

    2019 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Y. Lim, J. W. Holt, and R. J. Stahulak, Predicting the moment of inertia of pulsar j0737-3039a from bayesian modeling of the nuclear equation of state, Phys. Rev. C 100, 035802 (2019)

    2019

  46. [54]

    I. Tews, J. Margueron, and S. Reddy, Confronting gravitational-wave observations with modern nuclear physics constraints, Eur. Phys. J. A55, 97 (2019)

    2019

  47. [55]

    Essick, I

    R. Essick, I. Tews, P. Landry, S. Reddy, and D. E. Holz, Direct astrophysical tests of chiral effective field the- ory at supranuclear densities, Phys. Rev. C102, 055803 (2020)

    2020

  48. [56]

    Gezerlis and J

    A. Gezerlis and J. Carlson, Low-density neutron matter, Phys. Rev. C81, 025803 (2010)

    2010

  49. [57]

    Coraggio, J

    L. Coraggio, J. W. Holt, N. Itaco, R. Machleidt, and F. Sammarruca, Reduced regulator dependence of neutron-matter predictions with perturbative chiral in- teractions, Phys. Rev. C87, 014322 (2013)

    2013

  50. [58]

    S.Gandolfi, G.Palkanoglou, J.Carlson, A.Gezerlis,and K. E. Schmidt, The 1s0 pairing gap in neutron matter, Condensed Matter 7, 10.3390/condmat7010019 (2022)

    2022 doi

  51. [59]

    Palaniappan, S

    V. Palaniappan, S. Ramanan, and M. Urban, Equa- tion of state of superfluid neutron matter with low- momentum interactions, Phys. Rev. C 107, 025804 (2023)

    2023

  52. [60]

    Palaniappan, S

    V. Palaniappan, S. Ramanan, and M. Urban, Induced three-neutron interactions with low cutoffs for dilute neutron matter, Phys. Rev. C111, 035803 (2025)

    2025

  53. [61]

    König, H

    S. König, H. W. Grießhammer, H.-W. Hammer, and U. van Kolck, Nuclear physics around the unitarity limit, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 202501 (2017)

    2017

  54. [62]

    R. J. Furnstahl, Turning the nuclear energy density functional method into a proper effective field theory: reflections, The European Physical Journal A 56, 85 (2020)

    2020

  55. [63]

    S.Burrello, M.Grasso,andC.-J.Yang,Towardsapower counting in nuclear energy–density–functional theories through a perturbative analysis, Phys. Lett. B 811, 135938 (2020)

    2020

  56. [64]

    C. J. Yang, W. G. Jiang, S. Burrello, and M. Grasso, Calculations for nuclear matter and finite nuclei within and beyond energy-density-functional theories through interactions guided by effective field theory, Phys. Rev. C 106, L011305 (2022)

    2022

  57. [65]

    C. J. Yang, M. Grasso, and D. Lacroix, From dilute matter to the equilibrium point in the energy-density- functional theory, Phys. Rev. C94, 031301 (2016)

    2016

  58. [66]

    Grasso, Effective density functionals beyond mean field, Prog

    M. Grasso, Effective density functionals beyond mean field, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.106, 256 (2019)

    2019

  59. [67]

    Burrello, J

    S. Burrello, J. Bonnard, and M. Grasso, Application of an ab-initio-inspired energy density functional to nuclei: Impact of the effective mass and the slope of the sym- metry energy on bulk and surface properties, Phys. Rev. C 103, 064317 (2021)

    2021

  60. [68]

    Burrello and M

    S. Burrello and M. Grasso, Finite-temperature infi- nite matter with effective-field-theory-inspired energy- density functionals, Eur. Phys. J. A58, 1 (2022)

    2022

  61. [69]

    G. A. Baker, Singularity structure of the perturbation series for the ground-state energy of a many-fermion system, Rev. Mod. Phys.43, 479 (1971)

    1971

  62. [70]

    T. D. Lee and C. N. Yang, Many-body problem in quantum mechanics and quantum statistical mechanics, Phys. Rev. 105, 1119 (1957)

    1957

  63. [71]

    Wellenhofer, C

    C. Wellenhofer, C. Drischler, and A. Schwenk, Dilute fermi gas at fourth order in effective field theory, Physics Letters B 802, 135247 (2020)

    2020

  64. [72]

    Schäfer, C.-W

    T. Schäfer, C.-W. Kao, and S. Cotanch, Many body methods and effective field theory, Nuclear Physics A 762, 82 (2005)

    2005

  65. [73]

    Kaiser, Resummation of fermionic in-medium lad- der diagrams to all orders, Nuclear Physics A860, 41 (2011)

    N. Kaiser, Resummation of fermionic in-medium lad- der diagrams to all orders, Nuclear Physics A860, 41 (2011)

    2011

  66. [74]

    Kaiser, Resummation of in-medium ladder diagrams: s-wave effective range and p-wave interaction, Eur

    N. Kaiser, Resummation of in-medium ladder diagrams: s-wave effective range and p-wave interaction, Eur. Phys. J. A48, 148 (2012)

    2012

  67. [75]

    Schwenk and C

    A. Schwenk and C. J. Pethick, Resonant fermi gases with a large effective range, Phys. Rev. Lett.95, 160401 22 (2005)

    2005

  68. [76]

    Wellenhofer, D

    C. Wellenhofer, D. R. Phillips, and A. Schwenk, From weak to strong: Constrained extrapolation of pertur- bation series with applications to dilute fermi systems, Phys. Rev. Res.2, 043372 (2020)

    2020

  69. [77]

    Akmal, V

    A. Akmal, V. R. Pandharipande, and D. G. Ravenhall, Equation of state of nucleon matter and neutron star structure, Phys. Rev. C 58, 1804 (1998), arXiv:nucl- th/9804027

    1998

  70. [78]

    Friedman and V

    B. Friedman and V. Pandharipande, Hot and cold, nu- clear and neutron matter, Nuclear Physics A361, 502 (1981)

    1981

  71. [79]

    Vidaña, Low-density neutron matter and the unitary limit, Front

    I. Vidaña, Low-density neutron matter and the unitary limit, Front. Phys.9, 660622 (2021)

    2021

  72. [80]

    Hebeler, Three-nucleon forces: Implementation and applications to atomic nuclei and dense matter, Physics Reports 890, 1 (2021)

    K. Hebeler, Three-nucleon forces: Implementation and applications to atomic nuclei and dense matter, Physics Reports 890, 1 (2021)

    2021

  73. [81]

    Somasundaram, C

    R. Somasundaram, C. Drischler, I. Tews, and J. Mar- gueron, Constraints on the nuclear symmetry energy from asymmetric-matter calculations with chiral n n and 3 n interactions, Phys. Rev. C103, 045803 (2021), arXiv:2009.04737 [nucl-th]

    2021 arXiv

  74. [82]

    G. Baym, H. A. Bethe, and C. J. Pethick, Neutron star matter, Nuclear Physics A175, 225 (1971)

    1971

  75. [83]

    Astro- phys

    F.DouchinandP.Haensel,Aunifiedequationofstateof dense matter and neutron star structure, Astron. Astro- phys. 380, 151 (2001), arXiv:astro-ph/0111092 [astro- ph]

    2001 arXiv

  76. [84]

    Carreau, F

    T. Carreau, F. Gulminelli, N. Chamel, A. F. Fantina, and J. M. Pearson, Crystallization of the inner crust of a neutron star and the influence of shell effects, Astron. Astrophys. 635, A84 (2020), arXiv:1912.01265 [astro- ph.HE]

    2020 arXiv

  77. [85]

    Grams, J

    G. Grams, J. Margueron, R. Somasundaram, N. Chamel, and S. Goriely, Neutron star crust properties: comparison between the compressible liquid-drop model and the extended thomas-fermi approach, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2340, 012030 (2022), arXiv:2205.15091 [nucl-th]

    2022 arXiv

  78. [86]

    Grams, N

    G. Grams, N. N. Shchechilin, T. Diverrès, A. F. Fantina, N. Chamel, and F. Gulminelli, Neutron Star Inner Crust at Finite Temperatures: A Comparison Between Com- pressible Liquid Drop and Extended Thomas-Fermi Ap- proaches, Universe 11, 172 (2025), arXiv:2505.19984 [nucl-th]

    2025 arXiv

  79. [87]

    Dinh Thi, A

    H. Dinh Thi, A. F. Fantina, and F. Gulminelli, The effect of the energy functional on the pasta-phase prop- erties of catalysed neutron stars, Eur. Phys. J. A57, 296 (2021)

    2021

  80. [88]

    Dinh Thi, T

    H. Dinh Thi, T. Carreau, A. F. Fantina, and F. Gul- minelli, Uncertainties in the pasta-phase properties of catalysed neutron stars, Astron. Astrophys.654, A114 (2021), arXiv:2109.13638 [nucl-th]

    2021 arXiv

  81. [89]

    D. G. Ravenhall, C. J. Pethick, and J. R. Wilson, Struc- ture of matter below nuclear saturation density, Phys. Rev. Lett. 50, 2066 (1983)

    1983

  82. [90]

    Nikolov, N

    N. Nikolov, N. Schunck, W. Nazarewicz, M. Bender, and J. Pei, Surface symmetry energy of nuclear energy density functionals, Phys. Rev. C83, 034305 (2011)

    2011

  83. [91]

    Chiba, Nuclear “pasta” structures and the charge screening effect, Phys

    T.Maruyama, T.Tatsumi, D.N.Voskresensky, T.Tani- gawa, and S. Chiba, Nuclear “pasta” structures and the charge screening effect, Phys. Rev. C72, 015802 (2005)

    2005

  84. [92]

    W. G. Newton, M. Gearheart, and B.-A. Li, A survey of the parameter space of the compressible liquid drop model as applied to the neutron star inner crust, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series204, 9 (2012)

    2012

  85. [93]

    Ravenhall, C

    D. Ravenhall, C. Pethick, and J. Lattimer, Nuclear in- terface energy at finite temperatures, Nuclear Physics A 407, 571 (1983)

    1983

  86. [94]

    J. M. Pearson, N. Chamel, A. Y. Potekhin, A. F. Fantina, C. Ducoin, A. K. Dutta, and S. Goriely, Uni- fied equations of state for cold non-accreting neutron stars with Brussels–Montreal functionals – I. Role of symmetry energy, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 481, 2994 (2018), [Er...

    2018 arXiv

  87. [95]

    Mondal, X

    C. Mondal, X. Viñas, M. Centelles, and J. N. De, Struc- ture and composition of the inner crust of neutron stars from gogny interactions, Phys. Rev. C 102, 015802 (2020)

    2020

  88. [96]

    S. K. Gupta and M. Urban, Effect of the equation of statefordiluteneutronmatteronthecompositionofthe inner crust of neutron stars, Phys. Rev. C109, 045806 (2024)

    2024

  89. [97]

    Antoniadiset al., A massive pulsar in a compact rela- tivisticbinary,Science 340,448(2013),arXiv:1304.6875 [astro-ph.HE]

    J. Antoniadiset al., A massive pulsar in a compact rela- tivisticbinary,Science 340,448(2013),arXiv:1304.6875 [astro-ph.HE]

    2013 arXiv

  90. [98]

    M. Wang, A. Wapstra, F. Kondev, M. MacCormick, X. Xu, and B. Pfeiffer, The ame2012 atomic mass eval- uation (i). evaluation of input data, adjustment proce- dures, Chinese Physics C36, 1287 (2012)

    2012

  91. [99]

    J. E. Lynn, I. Tews, J. Carlson, S. Gandolfi, A. Gezerlis, K. E. Schmidt, and A. Schwenk, Chiral three-nucleon interactions in light nuclei, neutron-α scattering, and neutron matter, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 062501 (2016)

    2016

  92. [100]

    Delsate, N

    T. Delsate, N. Chamel, N. Gürlebeck, A. F. Fantina, J. M. Pearson, and C. Ducoin, Giant pulsar glitches and the inertia of neutron star crusts, Phys. Rev. D 94, 023008 (2016), arXiv:1606.00016 [astro-ph.HE]

    2016 arXiv

  93. [101]

    Antonelli, A

    M. Antonelli, A. Montoli, and P. M. Pizzochero, Ef- fects of general relativity on glitch amplitudes and pul- sar mass upper bounds, MNRAS 475, 5403 (2018), arXiv:1710.05879 [astro-ph.HE]

    2018 arXiv

  94. [102]

    B. Link, R. I. Epstein, and J. M. Lattimer, Pulsar constraints on neutron star structure and equation of state, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 3362 (1999), arXiv:astro- ph/9909146 [astro-ph]

    1999

  95. [103]

    Chamel, Crustal entrainment and pulsar glitches, Phys

    N. Chamel, Crustal entrainment and pulsar glitches, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 011101 (2013), arXiv:1210.8177 [astro-ph.HE]

    2013 arXiv

  96. [104]

    Andersson, K

    N. Andersson, K. Glampedakis, W. C. G. Ho, and C. M. Espinoza, Pulsar glitches: The crust is not enough, Phys. Rev. Lett.109, 241103 (2012)

    2012

  97. [105]

    Montoli, M

    A. Montoli, M. Antonelli, B. Haskell, and P. Pizzochero, Statistical estimates of the pulsar glitch activity, Uni- verse 7, 8 (2021), arXiv:2012.01539 [astro-ph.HE]

    2021 arXiv

  98. [106]

    Almirante and M

    G. Almirante and M. Urban, Superfluid density in linear response theory : pulsar glitches from the inner crust of neutron stars, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2503.21635 (2025), arXiv:2503.21635 [nucl-th]

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.