Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 66 references

W28 is one remnant in which shell-like and thermal-composite morphologies coexist because of a density-gradient environment, with recombining plasma confined to the Hα-coincident interior and a revised dynamical age of ~8 kyr.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · grok-4.5

2026-07-13 21:50 UTC pith:QY6JMOPQ

load-bearing objection Solid first full-remnant soft-X-ray spectral map of W28; the western-shell association is provisional and carries the age/isobaric claims, but the ionization map and Hα coincidence stand on their own. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2603.19886 v1 pith:QY6JMOPQ submitted 2026-03-20 astro-ph.HE

A Complete X-ray View of Supernova Remnant W28 with Einstein Probe: Spatial Distribution of Parameters and Origin of the Thermal-Composite Morphology

Yi-Heng Chi , Ping Zhou , Yang Chen , Lei Sun , Chengkui Li , Shumei Jia , Yong Chen , Chong Ge
show 1 more author
Weimin Yuan
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords supernova remnantsW28thermal-composite morphologyrecombining plasmathermal conductionEinstein Probe FXTX-ray spectroscopy
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper asks what turns a supernova remnant into a thermal-composite (centrally bright X-ray, shell-like radio) object rather than a classic shell, and what produces recombining plasma inside it. Using a short, wide-field Einstein Probe FXT exposure of the prototype W28, the authors map temperature, density, and ionization state across the whole remnant for the first time. They find a previously unrecognized western X-ray shell that aligns with radio and optical filaments and may enlarge the remnant to 72' by 45'. Spectral maps show that recombining plasma sits only in the interior, exactly where Hα is bright, while the rest of the remnant is ionizing or near equilibrium; the remnant is roughly isobaric from center to outer shell and was nearly isothermal at 0.6–0.7 keV before recent cooling. Saturated thermal conduction and cloud evaporation can cool the plasma on the observed ~3 kyr recombination timescale. If the western shell belongs to W28, Sedov-Taylor estimates give a dynamical age of only ~8 kyr—much younger than earlier figures—and an explosion energy of order 10^51 erg. The authors conclude that shell-like and thermal-composite morphologies can coexist inside a single remnant according to the local environment.

Core claim

W28 is generally isobaric from its center to a newly discovered western shell, was roughly isothermal at ~0.6–0.7 keV before localized cooling, hosts recombining plasma only where Hα is bright in the interior, and has a dynamical age of ~8 kyr if the western shell is part of the remnant; therefore shell-like and thermal-composite morphologies can coexist in one SNR according to the ambient density gradient.

What carries the argument

Spatially resolved single-temperature NEI spectral maps (vrnei/vnei) of 46 polygonal regions that yield emission measure, electron temperature, initial temperature, ionization timescale, and an isobaric EM–kT power-law relation (index ≈ –2.4).

Load-bearing premise

The newly found western shell and Clump E are physically part of W28 rather than separate supernova remnants, so that a single Sedov-Taylor age and the isobaric interpretation apply to the whole structure.

What would settle it

A precise distance or proper-motion measurement that places the western shell at a different distance from the W28 center, or a deep X-ray spectrum of the western shell that shows a completely unrelated absorption column or ionization history.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents the first spatially resolved X-ray spectral analysis of the entire thermal-composite SNR W28 using a short (13 ks) Einstein Probe FXT observation, supplemented by archival XMM-Newton imaging and multi-wavelength data. It reports a newly identified western shell-like structure (coincident in radio, Hα, and X-ray) that may extend the remnant to ~72′×45′, maps ionization state (recombining plasma confined to the Hα-coincident interior; ionizing/CIE plasma elsewhere), finds a near-isobaric EM–kT relation (power-law index α≈−2.36) spanning center to western shell, and argues that the plasma was roughly isothermal at ~0.6–0.7 keV before recent cooling. Saturated thermal conduction plus cloud evaporation are favored for the ~3 kyr recombination timescale; if the western shell belongs to W28, Sedov–Taylor estimates give a dynamical age ~8 kyr and E_exp~(1–2)×10^51 erg, implying that shell-like and thermal-composite morphologies can coexist depending on environment.

Significance. If the western-shell association holds, the work supplies a rare full-remnant parameter map of a prototypical mixed-morphology SNR, revises its age downward by a factor of several, and offers a concrete environmental explanation for the coexistence of shell-like and centrally filled morphologies. The large FOV of FXT is used effectively for diffuse emission; the spectral pipeline (vnei/vrnei, background subtraction, stray-light modeling, and XMM cross-check on the NE shell) is careful; and the EM–kT diagram plus max(kT_init,kT) maps provide falsifiable diagnostics that can be tested with deeper hard-band data. Even without a definitive association, the ionization-state map and Hα coincidence strengthen the case for saturated conduction/cloud evaporation over pure adiabatic cooling.

major comments (3)
  1. §4.3 and Eqs. (13)–(15): the revised dynamical age (~8 kyr) and explosion energy rest on treating Regions 1–4 (western shell) and Region 10 (Clump E) as part of a single remnant. The paper itself states that “further observations are needed to definitely establish the relationship” and that the shells “could be separate SNRs at different distances.” Similar NH, orientation, and the EM–kT slope are supportive but not decisive; the age and coexistence claims should be presented as conditional on the association, with an explicit alternative (separate objects) quantified.
  2. §4.1 / Fig. 7: the isobaric interpretation (α≈−2.36) and the claim that W28 is “generally isobaric from its center to the newly discovered shell” include the western-shell points. If those points are unrelated, the power-law span and the inference of a common origin weaken. The fit should be shown both with and without Regions 1–4/10, and the geometric uncertainty in line-of-sight depth l (already noted as ~1 dex) should be propagated into the density ranges used for the isobaric argument.
  3. §3.2 and Appendix B: short exposure plus residual stray-light modeling above ~2 keV limit hard-band constraints. The paper notes that a hotter (>1 keV) component reported in earlier work is “missing.” For the western shell (kT~1.2–1.9 keV, underionized), an independent check that the continuum is not contaminated by residual stray light (or a second thermal/non-thermal component) is needed before the high-temperature Sedov velocity and age are adopted.
minor comments (5)
  1. Abstract and §5: “revised the SNR dynamical age to ~8 kyr” should be qualified as conditional on the western-shell association, matching the more cautious language already present in §4.3.
  2. Fig. 5 and Table 1: several regions admit multiple acceptable model sets (different ionization states or abundances); the “conservative model” selection criterion should be stated once in the text so that the maps are reproducible.
  3. §4.2, Eqs. (8)–(12): the toy saturated-conduction model is useful but depends on free parameters (rc, Nc, nc/n0). A short sensitivity range or comparison to the White & Long C–τ̄ plane would strengthen the claim that tsat is comparable to trec.
  4. Appendix B: the FXT–XMM residual below ~0.8 keV (higher FXT points) is noted; a brief statement on whether this affects NH or soft-line abundances in the recombining regions would help.
  5. Typos / notation: “Following-up X-ray Telescope” → “Follow-up”; consistent use of “recombining” vs “overionized”; units of EM in Eq. (2) and Fig. 7 should match the text.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Observational spectral mapping paper; EM–kT slope and Sedov age are inferences from fitted parameters under an explicit association assumption, not results forced by definition or self-citation.

full rationale

The paper extracts spectra from 46 regions, fits single-temperature NEI/CIE models (vrnei/vnei/vapec) with free NH, kT, kTinit, abundances and τ, then plots the resulting EM vs kT and fits a power-law index α ≈ −2.36. That slope is an empirical fit to the data points, not a quantity defined to equal −2; the isobaric interpretation is an inference, and the paper also shows the same trend under solar-abundance fits. The “initial” temperature max(kTinit, kT) is constructed from the fitted parameters to test isothermality before cooling, not to force it. The ~8 kyr dynamical age and Eexp estimates apply the standard Sedov–Taylor formulae (Eqs. 13–15) to the measured shell temperatures and angular radii under the stated hypothesis that the western shell belongs to W28; the paper itself flags that further observations are needed and that the shells could be separate SNRs. Self-citations (Zhou et al. 2014, Himono et al. 2023, etc.) supply prior context and comparison values for the center, not uniqueness theorems or load-bearing premises that close the new maps or age revision. No step reduces by construction to its own input; residual circularity risk is only the ordinary observational dependence on the association assumption, which is already disclosed.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

5 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

Central claims rest on standard X-ray plasma models, a fixed distance, geometric assumptions converting EM to density, the physical association of the western shell with W28, and a simplified saturated-conduction toy model. No new particles or forces are introduced; free parameters are mainly abundance defaults, distance, and region-by-region normalizations.

free parameters (5)
  • default metal abundance = 0.3 Z_sun
    Fixed to 0.3 Z⊙ for C–Ni in the primary fits (solar abundance checked in appendix); affects EM and line strengths.
  • distance to W28 = 1.9 kpc
    Adopted from Velázquez et al. (2002); scales physical size, density, age, and energy.
  • line-of-sight depth l for density
    Assumed ~1–22 pc range from thin-shell vs filled-sphere extremes; converts EM to n_e.
  • cloudlet radius and number density (toy model) = r_c=0.1 pc, N_c=1 pc^{-3}
    r_c ~0.1 pc, N_c ~1 pc^{-3} chosen to match Hα clump scale and recombination time.
  • stray-light spectral shape
    Fixed double-broken power-law shape from a SW background region; only normalization free per region.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Single-temperature NEI (vnei/vrnei) or CIE (vapec) models adequately describe each extraction region.
    Stated in §3.2; dual-temperature models used in some prior work are not required for acceptable χ²_r.
  • domain assumption Sedov-Taylor (or wind-bubble) self-similar evolution applies to the western and southwestern shells for age/energy estimates.
    Eqs. 13–15 in §4.3; requires the shells to be part of W28 and still in the adiabatic phase.
  • domain assumption Recombination timescale τ/n_e approximates the cooling time for conduction/evaporation scenarios.
    Eq. 3 and §4.2; noted as invalid for rapid adiabatic density drop.
  • ad hoc to paper Plasma with τ ≥ 10^{12} cm^{-3} s is near CIE; ionization degree defined from −lg(τ/10^{12}).
    Definition introduced in §3.2 for mapping; standard order-of-magnitude threshold but the signed map is paper-specific.
  • domain assumption Heat flux limited by saturated conduction formula of Cowie & McKee (1977).
    Eqs. 6–8 in §4.2 toy model.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 41853 in / 3214 out tokens · 31637 ms · 2026-07-13T21:50:22.125359+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

It has been an unsolved question what leads a supernova remnant (SNR) to a thermal composite rather than a typical shell-like morphology, and what causes recombining plasma inside it. With the 13-ks observation of the Following-up X-ray Telescope onboard the Einstein Probe, we give an overall X-ray picture of W28, one of the prototypical thermal composite SNRs. The observation revealed a shell-like structure west of W28 in radio, optical, and X-ray images, which may revise the known extent of the SNR to $72'\times45'$. Spectral analysis explicitly maps that the special relationship where the plasma experiences recombination in the interior of the remnant, spatially coincident with H$\alpha$ emissions, while in the other regions, the plasma is ionization-dominated. We found that W28 is generally isobaric from its center to the newly discovered shell, and it is even isothermal with a temperature of $\sim0.6$-0.7 keV in the center before the cooling of the plasma. Saturated thermal conduction and cloud evaporation may cool down the plasma within $\sim3$ kyr, the estimated recombination timescale. We revised the SNR dynamical age to $\sim8$ kyr, much younger than previous estimates. The complex structure and complex ionization state distribution may suggest that centrally filled and shell-like morphologies coexist in W28. This state may depend on the environment in which the SNR evolves.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2603.19886 by Chengkui Li, Chong Ge, Lei Sun, Ping Zhou, Shumei Jia, Weimin Yuan, Yang Chen, Yi-Heng Chi, Yong Chen.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Energy-coded X-ray image of W28 complex with FXT (a), consisting of bands in 0.4–0.7 keV (red), 0.7–1.1 keV (green), and 1.1–2.3 keV (blue). The single-band images of each energy band are shown in (b)(c)(d), respectively. The images are in units of count s−1 cm−2 and in a square￾root color scale to enhance weak emissions. All the images are vignetting-corrected and adaptively smoothed. Structures mentioned… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: (a): The same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Tri-color image of W28 in radio (red, 1.3 GHz continuum), Hα (green), and X-ray (blue, 0.4–2.3 keV) bands. A square root color scale is used to highlight faint diffuse emissions in radio and X-ray images. White polygon regions are used for spectral extraction and analysis and cyan dashed regions correspond to the sky background. The yellow contours correspond to the MWISP CO intensity in the −20–10 km s−1 … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Counts map (not vignetting-corrected) in 3–7 keV to show the effect of the stray light. The cyan contour corresponds to 0.5, 2, and 8 counts for W28 in 0.4–2 keV. single ionization/recombination parameter. Finally, the vapec model is used for plasma in CIE. All the models have variable metallicities, of which the Ne, Mg, and Si abundances can always be well constrained with good statistics. O, Fe, and S ab… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Maps of the fitting parameters with a subsolar abundance Z=0.3 Z⊙. The value of the parameters and their uncertainty correspond to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Examples of spectra of underionized plasma (upper panel, Re￾gion 3 in the western shell) and overionized plasma (lower panel, Re￾gion 34 in the W28 center). In the upper panel, the contribution of the plasma and the stray light are marked with cyan solid lines and red dashed lines, respectively. The lower panel contains spectra of two ob￾servations, of which only the yellow and grey data points are signifi… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: plots the relation between the best-fit values of EM (= nenHl) and kT ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png] view at source ↗

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

66 extracted references

  1. [1]

    A., Ackermann, M., Ajello, M., et al

    Abdo, A. A., Ackermann, M., Ajello, M., et al. 2010, ApJ, 718, 348

    2010

  2. [2]

    G., Bazer-Bachi, A

    Aharonian, F., Akhperjanian, A. G., Bazer-Bachi, A. R., et al. 2008, A&A, 481, 401

    2008

  3. [3]

    1999, PASJ, 51, L7

    Arikawa, Y ., Tatematsu, K., Sekimoto, Y ., & Takahashi, T. 1999, PASJ, 51, L7

    1999

  4. [4]

    Arnaud, K. A. 1996, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, V ol. 101, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems V , ed. G. H. Jacoby & J. Barnes, 17

    1996

  5. [5]

    Blackburn, J. K. 1995, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Se- ries, V ol. 77, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems IV , ed. R. A

    1995

  6. [6]

    L., Gelfand, J

    Brogan, C. L., Gelfand, J. D., Gaensler, B. M., Kassim, N. E., & Lazio, T. J. W. 2006, ApJ, 639, L25

    2006

  7. [7]

    2020, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumenta- tion Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol

    Chen, Y ., Cui, W., Han, D., et al. 2020, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumenta- tion Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol. 11444, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2020: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray, ed. J.-W. A. den Herder, S. Nikzad, & K. Nakazawa, 114445B

    2020

  8. [8]

    D., Sun, M., & Li, J.-t

    Chen, Y ., Seward, F. D., Sun, M., & Li, J.-t. 2008, ApJ, 676, 1040

    2008

  9. [9]

    2025, Radiation Detection Technology and Methods, 9, 198

    Chen, Y ., Wang, J., Yang, Y ., et al. 2025, Radiation Detection Technology and Methods, 9, 198

    2025

  10. [10]

    Chevalier, R. A. 1982, ApJ, 258, 790

    1982

  11. [11]

    2024, ApJ, 975, L28

    Chi, Y .-H., Huang, J., Zhou, P., et al. 2024, ApJ, 975, L28

    2024

  12. [12]

    J., Frail, D

    Claussen, M. J., Frail, D. A., Goss, W. M., & Gaume, R. A. 1997, ApJ, 489, 143

    1997

  13. [13]

    Cowie, L. L. & McKee, C. F. 1977, ApJ, 211, 135

    1977

  14. [14]

    L., McKee, C

    Cowie, L. L., McKee, C. F., & Ostriker, J. P. 1981, ApJ, 247, 908

    1981

  15. [15]

    P., Shelton, R

    Cox, D. P., Shelton, R. L., Maciejewski, W., et al. 1999, ApJ, 524, 179

    1999

  16. [16]

    Cui, Y ., Yeung, P. K. H., Tam, P. H. T., & Pühlhofer, G. 2018, ApJ, 860, 69

    2018

  17. [17]

    & Safi-Harb, S

    Ferrand, G. & Safi-Harb, S. 2012, Advances in Space Research, 49, 1313

    2012

  18. [18]

    R., Ji, L., Smith, R

    Foster, A. R., Ji, L., Smith, R. K., & Brickhouse, N. S. 2012, ApJ, 756, 128

    2012

  19. [19]

    A., Goss, W

    Frail, D. A., Goss, W. M., & Slysh, V . I. 1994, ApJ, 424, L111

    1994

  20. [20]

    C., Allen, G

    Fruscione, A., McDowell, J. C., Allen, G. E., et al. 2006, in Society of Photo- Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol. 6270, So- ciety of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, ed. D. R. Silva & R. E. Doxsey, 62701V

    2006

  21. [21]

    J., et al

    Gabriel, C., Denby, M., Fyfe, D. J., et al. 2004, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, V ol. 314, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems (ADASS) XIII, ed. F. Ochsenbein, M. G. Allen, & D. Egret, 759

    2004

  22. [22]

    D., Camilo, F., et al

    Goedhart, S., Cotton, W. D., Camilo, F., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 531, 649

    2024

  23. [23]

    Hands, A. D. P., Warwick, R. S., Watson, M. G., & Helfand, D. J. 2004, MNRAS, 351, 31 Article number, page 11 A&A proofs:manuscript no. aa56500-25

    2004

  24. [24]

    K., & Suzuki, N

    Himono, R., Nobukawa, M., Yamauchi, S., Nobukawa, K. K., & Suzuki, N. 2023, PASJ, 75, 373

    2023

  25. [25]

    M., Goss, W

    Hoffman, I. M., Goss, W. M., Brogan, C. L., & Claussen, M. J. 2005, ApJ, 620, 257

    2005

  26. [26]

    & Masai, K

    Itoh, H. & Masai, K. 1989, MNRAS, 236, 885

    1989

  27. [27]

    2001, A&A, 365, L1

    Jansen, F., Lumb, D., Altieri, B., et al. 2001, A&A, 365, L1

    2001

  28. [28]

    2008, ApJ, 680, 1198

    Katsuda, S., Tsunemi, H., Kimura, M., & Mori, K. 2008, ApJ, 680, 1198

    2008

  29. [29]

    2005, ApJ, 631, 935

    Kawasaki, M., Ozaki, M., Nagase, F., Inoue, H., & Petre, R. 2005, ApJ, 631, 935

    2005

  30. [30]

    Lazendic, J. S. & Slane, P. O. 2006, ApJ, 647, 350

    2006

  31. [31]

    & Chen, Y

    Li, H. & Chen, Y . 2010, MNRAS, 409, L35

    2010

  32. [32]

    S., Blair, W

    Long, K. S., Blair, W. P., White, R. L., & Matsui, Y . 1991, ApJ, 373, 567

    1991

  33. [33]

    Maciel, W. J. & Costa, R. D. D. 2010, in IAU Symposium, V ol. 265, Chemical Abundances in the Universe: Connecting First Stars to Planets, ed. K. Cunha, M. Spite, & B. Barbuy, 317–324

    2010

  34. [34]

    2004, A&A, 415, 1051

    Mavromatakis, F., Aschenbach, B., Boumis, P., & Papamastorakis, J. 2004, A&A, 415, 1051

    2004

  35. [35]

    N., Wyrowski, F., Menten, K

    Mazumdar, P., Tram, L. N., Wyrowski, F., Menten, K. M., & Tang, X. 2022, A&A, 668, A180

    2022

  36. [36]

    2007, PASJ, 59, S1

    Mitsuda, K., Bautz, M., Inoue, H., et al. 2007, PASJ, 59, S1

    2007

  37. [37]

    2014, PASJ, 66, 62

    Nakamura, R., Bamba, A., Ishida, M., et al. 2014, PASJ, 66, 62

    2014

  38. [38]

    Okon, H., Uchida, H., Tanaka, T., Matsumura, H., & Tsuru, T. G. 2018, PASJ, 70, 35

    2018

  39. [39]

    2019, PASJ, 71, 52

    Ono, A., Uchiyama, H., Yamauchi, S., et al. 2019, PASJ, 71, 52

    2019

  40. [40]

    G., Rho, J., Kargaltsev, O., et al

    Pannuti, T. G., Rho, J., Kargaltsev, O., et al. 2017, ApJ, 839, 59

    2017

  41. [41]

    A., Phillipps, S., Pierce, M

    Parker, Q. A., Phillipps, S., Pierce, M. J., et al. 2005, MNRAS, 362, 689

    2005

  42. [42]

    T., Rho, J., & Jarrett, T

    Reach, W. T., Rho, J., & Jarrett, T. H. 2005, ApJ, 618, 297

    2005

  43. [43]

    & Borkowski, K

    Rho, J. & Borkowski, K. J. 2002, ApJ, 575, 201

    2002

  44. [44]

    & Petre, R

    Rho, J. & Petre, R. 1998, ApJ, 503, L167

    1998

  45. [45]

    P., Naito, T., Dazeley, S

    Rowell, G. P., Naito, T., Dazeley, S. A., et al. 2000, A&A, 359, 337

    2000

  46. [46]

    & Koyama, K

    Sawada, M. & Koyama, K. 2012, PASJ, 64, 81

    2012

  47. [47]

    Sedov, L. I. 1959, Similarity and Dimensional Methods in Mechanics (New York: Academic Press)

    1959

  48. [48]

    2019, MNRAS, 489, 4300

    Sezer, A., Ergin, T., Yamazaki, R., Sano, H., & Fukui, Y . 2019, MNRAS, 489, 4300

    2019

  49. [49]

    L., Cox, D

    Shelton, R. L., Cox, D. P., Maciejewski, W., et al. 1999, ApJ, 524, 192

    1999

  50. [50]

    L., Kuntz, K

    Shelton, R. L., Kuntz, K. D., & Petre, R. 2004, ApJ, 615, 275

    2004

  51. [51]

    2012, PASJ, 64, 24 Strüder, L., Briel, U., Dennerl, K., et al

    Shimizu, T., Masai, K., & Koyama, K. 2012, PASJ, 64, 24 Strüder, L., Briel, U., Dennerl, K., et al. 2001, A&A, 365, L18

    2012

  52. [52]

    & Parker, Q

    Stupar, M. & Parker, Q. A. 2011, MNRAS, 414, 2282

    2011

  53. [53]

    A., & Frew, D

    Stupar, M., Parker, Q. A., & Frew, D. J. 2018, MNRAS, 479, 4432

    2018

  54. [54]

    1950, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series A, 201, 159

    Taylor, G. 1950, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series A, 201, 159

    1950

  55. [55]

    2024, ApJ, 966, 178

    Tu, T.-y., Chen, Y ., Zhou, P., Safi-Harb, S., & Liu, Q.-C. 2024, ApJ, 966, 178

    2024

  56. [56]

    Turner, M. J. L., Abbey, A., Arnaud, M., et al. 2001, A&A, 365, L27 Velázquez, P. F., Dubner, G. M., Goss, W. M., & Green, A. J. 2002, AJ, 124, 2145

    2001

  57. [57]

    C., Brinkman, B., Canizares, C., et al

    Weisskopf, M. C., Brinkman, B., Canizares, C., et al. 2002, PASP, 114, 1

    2002

  58. [58]

    2000, A&AS, 143, 9

    Wenger, M., Ochsenbein, F., Egret, D., et al. 2000, A&AS, 143, 9

    2000

  59. [59]

    V ., Balser, D

    Wenger, T. V ., Balser, D. S., Anderson, L. D., & Bania, T. M. 2019, ApJ, 887, 114

    2019

  60. [60]

    White, R. L. & Long, K. S. 1991, ApJ, 373, 543

    1991

  61. [61]

    2000, ApJ, 542, 914

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

    2000

  62. [62]

    2009, ApJ, 705, L6

    Yamaguchi, H., Ozawa, M., Koyama, K., et al. 2009, ApJ, 705, L6

    2009

  63. [63]

    2022, in Handbook of X-ray and Gamma-ray Astrophysics, ed

    Yuan, W., Zhang, C., Chen, Y ., & Ling, Z. 2022, in Handbook of X-ray and Gamma-ray Astrophysics, ed. C. Bambi & A. Sangangelo (Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore), 86

    2022

  64. [64]

    D., Foster, A., et al

    Zhang, G.-Y ., Slavin, J. D., Foster, A., et al. 2019, ApJ, 875, 81

    2019

  65. [65]

    2022, Astroparticle Physics, 137, 102668

    Zhang, J., Qi, L., Yang, Y ., et al. 2022, Astroparticle Physics, 137, 102668

    2022

  66. [66]

    2014, ApJ, 791, 87 Article number, page 12 Y .-H

    Zhou, P., Safi-Harb, S., Chen, Y ., et al. 2014, ApJ, 791, 87 Article number, page 12 Y .-H. Chi et al.: EP-FXT and XMM-Newton View of W28 Appendix A: Details of the X-ray observations The details of the EP-FXT and XMM-Newton observations are listed in Table A.1. Table A.1.EP-FXT and XMM-Newton observations. Obs ID PI Obs. R.A. Decl. Exposure a Date (J200...

    2014