Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 47 references

Detection of the orbital modulation of Fe K$\alpha$ fluorescence emission in Centaurus X-3 using the high-resolution spectrometer Resolve onboard XRISM

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read In Centaurus X-3, the Fe Kα line's orbital motion is 248 km/s, matching the O star, not the neutron star's 391 km/s.

desk verdict A solid first measurement of Fe Kα orbital RV modulation in Cen X-3; the production-site interpretation is suggestive but needs a two-component test. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.12978 v3 pith:RISPKFJM submitted 2024-11-20 astro-ph.HE

Yuto Mochizuki , Masahiro Tsujimoto , Richard L. Kelley , Bert Vander Meulen , Teruaki Enoto , Yutaro Nagai , Chris Done , Pragati Pradhan
show 4 more authors
Natalie Hell Katja Pottschmidt Ken Ebisawa Ehud Behar
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords FeKαfluorescenceX-raymicrocalorimeterCentaurusX-3high-massbinaryorbitalradialvelocityneutronstarradiativetransferaccretionstream
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

Using a 155 ks observation with a high-resolution X-ray microcalorimeter that covers a full 2.08-day orbit of the high-mass X-ray binary Centaurus X-3, this paper reports the first detection of orbital-phase modulation in the radial velocity of the Fe Kα fluorescence line. The velocity amplitude is 248 ± 13 km/s, significantly smaller than the 391 km/s expected if the emission came from the neutron star's surface and consistent with the orbital motion of the O-type companion star. The data also show a line width of 500–1000 km/s, a nearly constant fluorescence equivalent width outside eclipse, and a reduced pulse fraction in the Fe Kα band, all of which argue against a compact reprocessor near the neutron star. Simple radiative transfer models with spherical symmetry and isotropic illumination fail to reproduce the phase-resolved equivalent width and line width, so the paper's conclusion is that the site of the fluorescence is extended and likely asymmetric, with the accretion stream or stellar wind as candidates.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing element is the Fe Kα fluorescence line as a Doppler tracer: the centroid energy of the 6.4 keV line is measured in each out-of-eclipse orbital phase bin, and a sine fit converts the energy shift into a radial velocity curve. The expected amplitudes are fixed by the system's known masses and inclination: $2\pi a_{\rm NS}\sin i/P_{\rm orb} \simeq 391$ km/s for reprocessing at the neutron star, versus the O star's $\simeq 248$ km/s. Because the observed amplitude, $248\pm13$ km/s, sits at the O-star value, the line's place of origin is tied to the companion star's motion. Supporting machinery is the phase-resolved fluorescence equivalent width and the spin-phase analysis, which show that the reprocessor is spread enough to smear the pulsar signal.

What would settle it

A decisive test is to fit the Fe Kα profile in each orbital phase with two components, one allowed to move at 391 km/s and one at 248 km/s; if the two-component model is statistically preferred and the fast component carries non-negligible flux, the single-site interpretation is wrong. Alternatively, detecting a spin-phase modulation of the Fe Kα centroid would place the reprocessor near the neutron star and overturn the O-star conclusion.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is a measured sinusoidal modulation of the Fe Kα line centroid over the binary orbit, with amplitude 248 ± 13 km/s and a phase consistent with the binary ephemeris. Comparing this amplitude with the known stellar velocities — 391 km/s for the neutron star and about 248 km/s for the O star — the authors conclude that the bulk of the fluorescent material co-moves with the O star rather than with the neutron star. They also find that the line is intrinsically broad (10–20 eV, i.e. 500–1000 km/s FWHM) and that its equivalent width stays at 10–20 eV at all orbital phases, with the fluorescence equivalent width roughly flat outside eclipse. The pulse profile of the Fe Kα band shows a significantly reduced pulse fraction compared with the continuum and no measurable phase delay, implying the reprocessed photons have lost the neutron star's 4.8 s spin coherence. These results narrow the production site to matter distributed on the scale of the binary, and the paper argues that the phase-resolved line properties provide new constraints on the geometry of the accretion flow and stellar wind.

Load-bearing premise

The result assumes the phase-resolved Fe Kα line is a single emission component whose fitted centroid velocity is the true Doppler motion of the emitting gas; if the line is a blend of two components with different velocities and phase-dependent relative flux, the measured 248 km/s amplitude would not be the velocity of any one site.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The orbital Doppler amplitude of a fluorescence line becomes a direct, model-independent measure of where the reprocessing material sits in an X-ray binary, applicable to any system with a known ephemeris.
  • Because the measured amplitude matches the O star's velocity, the dominant Fe Kα reprocessor in Cen X-3 is located at or near the companion star, not in a compact region around the neutron star.
  • The reduced pulse fraction and absence of spin-phase delay in the Fe Kα band imply that the fluorescent region is spread over a light-travel scale of at least the neutron star spin period's light distance ($P_{\rm spin}c \simeq 0.11a$), smearing the coherent pulsation.
  • The failure of spherically symmetric, isotropically illuminated models to match the equivalent width and line width simultaneously means the next generation of models must include asymmetric density structures, non-isotropic X-ray emission, or both.
  • The same phase-resolved Fe Kα technique can now be applied to other high-mass X-ray binaries where the site of fluorescence has been debated for decades.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the line is actually a two-component blend, the measured 248 km/s amplitude would be a flux-weighted average rather than a physical velocity; a two-component spectral fit across orbital phase is the cleanest follow-up test, but it was not performed in this paper.
  • The clumpy-shell configuration that reproduces the fluorescence equivalent width could be distinguished from a smooth wind by measuring the Fe K edge depth and the line width jointly at higher signal-to-noise; a smooth wind predicts a tight edge-to-line correlation that clumping breaks.
  • Applying the same orbital-centroid tracking to the Fe XXV and Fe XXVI lines, whose P Cygni profiles trace the wind, would reveal whether the fluorescent iron shares the wind's velocity field or belongs to a separate accretion stream.
  • Combining the phase-resolved line data with X-ray polarimetry of the continuum could separate the directly pulsed neutron star emission from the scattered fluorescent component, giving an independent handle on the reprocessor's geometry.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents a 155 ks XRISM/Resolve observation of the high-mass X-ray binary Cen X-3 covering one full 2.08 d orbit. The Fe Kα fluorescence line is detected in all out-of-eclipse orbital phase bins, and its centroid radial velocity is found to follow a sinusoidal modulation with amplitude 248±13 km/s, a velocity offset of −140±4 km/s, and a phase offset consistent with zero. This amplitude is significantly smaller than the 391±8 km/s expected for reprocessing at the neutron-star surface. The paper also reports the orbital phase dependence of the line flux, width, equivalent width, and fluorescence equivalent width, and a spin-phase analysis that shows a reduced pulse fraction but no significant phase delay in the Fe Kα band. Several production sites (NS surface, O-star surface, O-star wind, accretion stream) are discussed, and SKIRT radiative-transfer calculations for the O-star surface and a spherically symmetric wind are compared with the data; neither model reproduces the joint behavior of the equivalent width and velocity dispersion, leading the authors to argue that more elaborate modeling is required.

Significance. If the interpretation is robust, this is the first orbital radial-velocity curve of the Fe Kα fluorescence line in Cen X-3 and one of the first demonstrations of the microcalorimeter's ability to measure small energy shifts in a weak line. The calibration check using Mn Kα lines (accurate to about 3 km/s) and the consistency of the fitted phase offset with zero are strong points. However, the central interpretive step—equating the fitted single-Lorentzian centroid with the Doppler velocity of a single emission region—requires additional scrutiny before the production-site conclusions can be accepted. The paper is honest about the limitations of its simple radiative-transfer models, and the data will be valuable for future, more realistic modeling.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3.1 / Fig. 3a] The measured 248±13 km/s amplitude is interpreted as the Doppler velocity of a single emission region. The paper does not test whether the Fe Kα line is an unresolved blend of two components with different velocities, for example a NS-surface component at ~391 km/s and a slower O-star or wind component. Because the observed FWHM of 500–1000 km/s (Fig. 3c) is comparable to or larger than the separation between such components, a two-component fit could return an intermediate centroid amplitude whose value changes with orbital phase as the relative fluxes vary. The sentence in Section 3.1 that broader Fe Kα lines 'may additionally exist, but it is not required' does not rule this out. Please fit a two-component model with one component fixed at the NS orbital velocity, or otherwise demonstrate that the line profile and its phase dependence are inconsistent with such a blend; without this, the paper's claim that the amplitude identifies a single production site is not fully supported.
  2. [Section 4 / Fig. 5] The claim that the O-star surface is consistent with the RV amplitude is not quantified. The green curve in Fig. 3a is not defined in the text, and the SKIRT setup for the O-star surface has 'no velocity.' For a Roche-lobe-filling star in synchronous rotation, the projected rotational velocity of the illuminated surface varies substantially across the stellar disk, so the expected line centroid is not simply the O-star orbital velocity. Please specify how the green curve was computed, including the rotational velocity contribution, and ideally include the predicted RV curve from the SKIRT model in the comparison. Without this, the consistency claim is not testable.
  3. [Section 3.1] The best-fit RV offset of −140±4 km/s leaves approximately −116 km/s unexplained after the stated +15 km/s barycentric correction and −39 km/s proper motion. This residual is large compared with the measurement precision and is comparable to a substantial fraction of the fitted amplitude. It could indicate an outflowing wind component, an additional blended line, or a residual gain-scale issue. The paper should discuss this residual quantitatively rather than attributing it to 'other factors,' because it bears on the absolute velocity scale of the line and on the interpretation of the line formation site.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 4] The list of required conditions for the cold matter skips from 'Third' to 'Fifth'; the missing 'Fourth' should be restored or the numbering should be made consistent.
  2. [Throughout] There are several typographical errors: 'elipticity' should be 'ellipticity', 'superliquid helium' should be 'superfluid helium', and 'thermister' should be 'thermistor'.
  3. [References] The DOI for Torrejón et al. (2015) is malformed ('2017012522081000'); please update it to a resolvable DOI.
  4. [Figure 3] The green curve in Fig. 3a should be defined in the caption or text; currently the reader cannot tell whether it represents the O-star orbital velocity alone or includes the synchronous rotational velocity.
  5. [Section 3.1] When comparing the RV offset to the arithmetic sum of the gain uncertainty and the barycentric motion, the numerical value of the gain uncertainty should be stated so that the reader can assess the significance of the residual.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity found; the RV amplitude is an independent observable compared with an externally derived benchmark.

full rationale

The central claim chain is observation -> empirical spectral fits of the Fe Kalpha line -> sine fit to the measured centroid -> comparison with an expected amplitude. The expected 391 km/s is computed from published binary parameters (a, MNS, MO, Porb, inclination) via aNS = a MO/(MNS + MO), not from the same line fits, so the comparison is an external benchmark rather than a definitional equivalence. The radiative-transfer models with SKIRT are used only for secondary predictions of fEW and velocity dispersion as functions of orbital phase, and the paper explicitly reports that none of the tested configurations reproduces the observations; the clumping fraction f = 0.15 is fitted to the fEW-tauFe relation in Figure 6 and affects only that secondary model comparison, not the RV detection itself. The self-citations present (Mochizuki et al. 2024 for event screening and background; Rahin & Behar 2023 for the Vela X-1 companion-reprocessing argument) are either technical calibration references or corroborative external examples, and neither carries the derivation of the reported RV amplitude. The unresolved-blend concern raised in the skeptic's note is a model-ambiguity or correctness issue, not a circularity issue: even if a blend of two components existed, it would alter the physical interpretation of the measured centroid shift, but it would not show that the measurement is contained in the paper's assumptions. No step reduces by construction to its own inputs, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a predicted quantity. Therefore the paper is self-contained against external benchmarks and receives a circularity score of 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim is a direct measurement that does not require new free parameters beyond the usual line-fit parameters. The system parameters used to compute the expected neutron-star velocity come from prior literature. The model comparison introduces several assumed parameters (wind mass loss, terminal velocity, clumping fraction), of which only the clumping fraction is adjusted to match the observed fEW-τFe relation. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (5)
  • Wind mass-loss rate = 0.2e-6 M_sun/yr
    Assumed in the SKIRT stellar wind model in Section 4; not derived from data.
  • Wind terminal velocity = 1000 km/s
    Assumed velocity-law parameter in the SKIRT wind model.
  • Wind beta exponent = 1.0
    Assumed β-law exponent for the wind velocity profile.
  • Clumping fraction f of spherical shell = 0.15
    Chosen to match the observed fEW versus τFe relation in Figure 6.
  • O star surface density = 1e18 cm^-3
    Assumed reflection-layer density in the SKIRT O-star surface model.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The binary system parameters (P_orb, M_NS=1.21±0.21 M_sun, M_O=20.5±0.7 M_sun, a=42.1 lt-s, i=70.2±2.7 deg, e=0) from prior literature are correct.
    Used to compute the expected NS radial-velocity amplitude of 391 km/s in Section 4.
  • domain assumption The O star fills its Roche lobe and has radius R_O=0.62a, with the surface rotating synchronously with the orbit.
    Used to estimate the O star surface velocity and to set up the SKIRT model in Section 4 and Figure 5.
  • domain assumption The Mn Kα calibration lines and the instrument response validate the absolute energy scale to a few km/s.
    Used in Section 3.1 to justify that the measured RV shifts are not calibration artifacts.
  • domain assumption The Fe Kα fluorescence is produced by neutral or low-ionized iron, with standard fluorescence yields and cross sections.
    Standard atomic physics used in the SKIRT calculations in Section 4.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Detection of the orbital modulation of Fe K$\alpha$ fluorescence emission in Centaurus X-3 using the high-resolution spectrometer Resolve onboard XRISM." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RISPKFJM

@misc{pith2026241112978,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Detection of the orbital modulation of Fe K$\alpha$ fluorescence emission in Centaurus X-3 using the high-resolution spectrometer Resolve onboard XRISM},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RISPKFJM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.12978}
}
abstract

The Fe K$\alpha$ fluorescence line emission in X-ray spectra is a powerful diagnostic tool for various astrophysical objects to reveal the distribution of cold matter around photo-ionizing sources. The advent of the X-ray microcalorimeter onboard the \textit{XRISM} satellite will bring new constraints on the emission line. We present one of the first such results for the high-mass X-ray binary Centaurus X-3, which is composed of an O-type star and a neutron star (NS). We conducted a 155 ks observation covering an entire binary orbit. A weak Fe K$\alpha$ line was detected in all orbital phases at an equivalent width (EW) of 10--20 eV. We found for the first time that its radial velocity (RV) is sinusoidally modulated by the orbital phase. The RV amplitude is 248 $\pm$ 13 km s$^{-1}$, which is significantly smaller than the value (391 km s$^{-1}$) expected if the emission is from the NS surface, but is consistent if the emission takes place at the O star surface. We discuss several possibilities of the line production site, including the NS surface, O star surface, O star wind, and accretion stream from the O star to the NS. We ran radiative transfer calculation for some of them assuming spherically-symmetric density and velocity profiles and an isotropic distribution of X-ray emission from the NS. None of them explains the observed EW and velocity dispersion dependence on the orbital phase, suggesting that more elaborated modeling is needed. In other words, the present observational results have capability to constrain deviations from these assumptions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.12978 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (a) FW positions, (b) 2–12 keV count rate binned at 100 s, (c) the fraction of Hp events, and (d) orbital phase (Falanga et al. 2015). The observation was interrupted by South Atlantic Anomaly passages (blue) and ADR recycles (red). The FW 55Fe was illuminated several times as shown in (a) during on-source integration time, leading to an additional count rate of 20 s−1 . the background rate to only one event per spe… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (a) Resolve spectra out of the eclipse in the 2-12 keV band. A close-up view of the Fe K band is given in the inset. (b) Fe Kα spectra and their best-fit models and (c) residuals to the fit at ϕorb =0.25 (blue) and 0.75 (orange). Compare to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Best-fit values of (a) Fe Kα line center, (b) flux, and (c) width as well as (d) fluorescence EW as a function of ϕorb. Shaded areas indicate eclipses. In (a), the data are compared to the RV curve of the NS (red), O star (green), and the best fit to the data outside the eclipse (blue). Positive RVs are in the approaching direction. Results of the radiative transfer calculation are compared in (c) and (d) for the O … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (a) Pulse shape folded by Pspin, (b) phase delay relative to the lowest energy band as a function of energy, and (c) pulse fraction as a function of energy. The Fe Kα count rate is from 6.35–6.45 keV. 40 20 0 20 40 Size (lt-s) 40 20 0 20 40 Size (lt-s) ( aO, 0) (aNS, 0…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Schematic view and the radiative transfer calcu￾lation setup at ϕorb = 0.75. The CoM is placed at the origin and the orbit is projected on its plane. The line of sight is toward +y-axis direction. The locations of the NS (red), O star (black), and an O star surface clo…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Relation between τFe and fEW. The observed results at different ϕorb are shown with pluses, while the simulated results are shown with dotted lines of different colors for different f ∈ {0, 0.15, 0.9}. n ≳ 1012(r/a) −2 cm−3 , where r is the distance from the NS to the …

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

47 extracted references · 19 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    2019, ApJS, 243, 29, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab2a77

    Aftab, N., Paul, B., & Kretschmar, P. 2019, ApJS, 243, 29, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab2a77

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab2a77 2019

  2. [2]

    1989, Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 53, 197, doi: 10.1016/0016-7037(89)90286-x

    Anders, E., & Grevesse, N. 1989, Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 53, 197, doi: 10.1016/0016-7037(89)90286-x

    doi:10.1016/0016-7037(89)90286-x 1989

  3. [3]

    M., Papei, H., Barmby, P., Bahramian, A., & D

    Arnason, R. M., Papei, H., Barmby, P., Bahramian, A., & D. Gorski, M. 2021, MNRAS, 502, 5455, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab345

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stab345 2021

  4. [4]

    Arnaud, K. A. 1996, in Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems V, ed. G. Jacoby & J. Barnes, Vol. 101, 17, doi: 1996ASPC..101...17A

    work page 1996

  5. [5]

    D., Reynolds, A

    Ash, T. D., Reynolds, A. P., Roche, P., et al. 1999, MNRAS, 307, 357, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.1999.02605.x

    arXiv 1999

  6. [6]

    1997, ApJS, 113, 367, doi: 10.1086/313060

    Bildsten, L., Chakrabarty, D., Chiu, J., et al. 1997, ApJS, 113, 367, doi: 10.1086/313060

    doi:10.1086/313060 1997

  7. [7]

    R., Davis, J

    Canizares, C. R., Davis, J. E., Dewey, D., et al. 2005, PASP, 117, 1144, doi: 10.1086/432898

    doi:10.1086/432898 2005

  8. [8]

    1967, PRL, 19, 681, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.19.681 de Vries, C

    Chodil, G., Mark, H., Rodrigues, R., et al. 1967, PRL, 19, 681, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.19.681 de Vries, C. P., Haas, D., Yamasaki, N. Y., et al. 2017, JATIS, 4, 1, doi: 10.1117/1.jatis.4.1.011204

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.19.681 1967

Show all 47 references
  1. [9]

    S., Kallman, T

    Ebisawa, K., Day, C. S., Kallman, T. R., et al. 1996, PASJ, 48, 425, doi: 10.1093/pasj/48.3.425

    1996 doi

  2. [10]

    Eggleton, P. P. 1983, ApJ, 268, 368, doi: 10.1086/160960 El Mellah, I., Sundqvist, J. O., & Keppens, R. 2018, MNRAS, 475, 3240, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx3211

    1983 doi

  3. [11]

    2020, Cryogenics, 108, 103016, doi: 10.1016/j.cryogenics.2019.103016

    Ezoe, Y., Ishisaki, Y., Fujimoto, R., et al. 2020, Cryogenics, 108, 103016, doi: 10.1016/j.cryogenics.2019.103016

    2020

  4. [12]

    2015, A&A, 577, A130, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201425191

    Falanga, M., Bozzo, E., Lutovinov, A., et al. 2015, A&A, 577, A130, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201425191

    2015 doi

  5. [13]

    2023, A&A, 677, A103, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347062

    Ferrigno, C., D’A ` ı, A., & Ambrosi, E. 2023, A&A, 677, A103, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347062

    2023 doi

  6. [14]

    1971, ApJ, 167, L67, doi: 10.1086/180762 H¨ olzer, G., Fritsch, M., Deutsch, M., H¨ artwig, J., & F¨ orster, E

    Tananbaum, H. 1971, ApJ, 167, L67, doi: 10.1086/180762 H¨ olzer, G., Fritsch, M., Deutsch, M., H¨ artwig, J., & F¨ orster, E. 1997, PRA, 56, 4554, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.56.4554

    1971 doi

  7. [15]

    Paradijs, J., & White, N. E. 1979, ApJ, 229, 1079, doi: 10.1086/157042

    1979 doi

  8. [16]

    2018, JATIS, 4, 011217, doi: 10.1117/1.JATIS.4.1.011217

    Ishisaki, Y., Yamada, S., Seta, H., et al. 2018, JATIS, 4, 011217, doi: 10.1117/1.JATIS.4.1.011217

    2018 doi

  9. [17]

    L., Awaki, H., et al

    Ishisaki, Y., Kelley, R. L., Awaki, H., et al. 2022, Proc. of SPIE, 12181, 409, doi: 10.1117/12.2630654

    2022 doi

  10. [18]

    R., Palmeri, P., Bautista, M

    Kallman, T. R., Palmeri, P., Bautista, M. A., Mendoza, C., & Krolik, J. H. 2004, ApJS, 155, 675, doi: 10.1086/424039

    2004 doi

  11. [19]

    L., Rappaport, S., Clark, G

    Kelley, R. L., Rappaport, S., Clark, G. W., & Petro, L. D. 1983, ApJ, 268, 790, doi: 10.1086/161001

    1983 doi

  12. [20]

    A., Adams, J

    Kilbourne, C. A., Adams, J. S., Brekosky, R. P., et al. 2016, JATIS, 4, 99053L, doi: 10.1117/12.2231415

    2016 doi

  13. [21]

    A., Sawada, M., Tsujimoto, M., et al

    Kilbourne, C. A., Sawada, M., Tsujimoto, M., et al. 2018, PASJ, 70, doi: 10.1093/pasj/psx139

    2018 doi

  14. [22]

    2023, A&A, 675, A135, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202245181

    Klawin, M., Doroshenko, V., Santangelo, A., et al. 2023, A&A, 675, A135, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202245181

    2023 doi

  15. [23]

    2001, ApJ, 562, 943, doi: 10.1086/323848

    Kohmura, T., Kitamoto, S., & Torii, K. 2001, ApJ, 562, 943, doi: 10.1086/323848

    2001 doi

  16. [24]

    1974, ApJ, 192, L135, doi: 10.1086/181609 10

    Krzeminski, W. 1974, ApJ, 192, L135, doi: 10.1086/181609 10

    1974 doi

  17. [25]

    2015, A&A, 575, A58, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201321414

    Manousakis, A., & Walter, R. 2015, A&A, 575, A58, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201321414

    2015 doi

  18. [26]

    2021, JATIS, 7, 028005, doi: 10.1117/1.jatis.7.2.028005

    Midooka, T., Tsujimoto, M., Kitamoto, S., et al. 2021, JATIS, 7, 028005, doi: 10.1117/1.jatis.7.2.028005

    2021 doi

  19. [27]

    2022, Proc

    Mizumoto, M., Tsujimoto, M., Cumbee, R., et al. 2022, Proc. of SPIE, 12181, 1479, doi: 10.1117/12.2628784

    2022 doi

  20. [28]

    A., et al

    Mochizuki, Y., Tsujimoto, M., Kilbourne, C. A., et al. 2024, Proc. of SPIE, 13093, 1686, doi: 10.1117/12.3019453

    2024 doi

  21. [29]

    A., & Chevalier, C

    Mouchet, M., Ilovaisky, S. A., & Chevalier, C. 1980, A&A, 90, 113

    1980

  22. [30]

    Nagase, F., Corbet, R. H. D., Day, C. S. R., et al. 1992, ApJ, 396, 147, doi: 10.1086/171705

    1992 doi

  23. [31]

    2011, ApJ, 737, 79, doi: 10.1088/0004-637x/737/2/79

    Naik, S., Paul, B., & Ali, Z. 2011, ApJ, 737, 79, doi: 10.1088/0004-637x/737/2/79

    2011 doi

  24. [32]

    2022, Proc

    Omama, T., Tsujimoto, M., Sawada, M., et al. 2022, Proc. of SPIE, 12181, 1514, doi: 10.1117/12.2629753

    2022 doi

  25. [33]

    S., Chiao, M

    Porter, F. S., Chiao, M. P., Eckart, M. E., et al. 2016, JLTP, 184, 498, doi: 10.1007/s10909-016-1503-2

    2016 doi

  26. [34]

    2023, ApJ, 950, 170, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acc386 Sanjurjo-Ferr ´ ın, G., Torrej´ on, J

    Rahin, R., & Behar, E. 2023, ApJ, 950, 170, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acc386 Sanjurjo-Ferr ´ ın, G., Torrej´ on, J. M., Postnov, K., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 501, 5892, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3953

    2023 doi

  27. [35]

    2023, in High-Resolution X-ray Spectroscopy: Instrumentation, Data Analysis, and Science, ed

    Sato, K., Uchida, Y., & Ishikawa, K. 2023, in High-Resolution X-ray Spectroscopy: Instrumentation, Data Analysis, and Science, ed. C. Bambi & J. Jiang, Springer Series in Astrophysics and Cosmology (Singapore: Springer Nature), 93–123, doi: 10.1007/978-981-99-4409-5 5

    2023 doi

  28. [36]

    1972, ApJL, 172, L79, doi: 10.1086/180896

    Schreier, E., Levinson, R., Gursky, H., et al. 1972, ApJL, 172, L79, doi: 10.1086/180896

    1972 doi

  29. [37]

    S., Ishisaki, Y., et al

    Seta, H., Tashiro, M. S., Ishisaki, Y., et al. 2012, IEEE, 59, 366, doi: 10.1109/tns.2011.2179671

    2012

  30. [38]

    J., Kimball, M

    Shirron, P. J., Kimball, M. O., James, B. L., et al. 2016, Proc. of SPIE, 9905, 99053O, doi: 10.1117/12.2231301

    2016 doi

  31. [39]

    2008, ApJ, 675, 1487, doi: 10.1086/527042

    Suchy, S., Pottschmidt, K., Wilms, J., et al. 2008, ApJ, 675, 1487, doi: 10.1086/527042

    2008 doi

  32. [40]

    2023, ApJ, 944, 9, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acadde

    Tamba, T., Odaka, H., Tanimoto, A., et al. 2023, ApJ, 944, 9, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acadde

    2023 doi

  33. [41]

    B., Tucker, W

    Tarter, C. B., Tucker, W. H., & Salpeter, E. E. 1969, ApJ, 156, 943, doi: 10.1086/150026

    1969 doi

  34. [42]

    S., Maejima, H., Toda, K., et al

    Tashiro, M. S., Maejima, H., Toda, K., et al. 2020, Proc. of SPIE, 11444, 176, doi: 10.1117/12.2565812 Torrej´ on, J. M., Schulz, N. S., Nowak, M. A., & Kallman, T. R. 2010, ApJ, 715, 947, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/715/2/947 Torrej´ on, J. M., Schulz, N. S., Nowak, M. A., et al. ...

    2020 doi

  35. [43]

    S., Doroshenko, V., Poutanen, J., et al

    Tsygankov, S. S., Doroshenko, V., Poutanen, J., et al. 2022, ApJL, 941, L14, doi: 10/grmq28

    2022

  36. [44]

    2018, ApJ, 855, 25, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaaab6 Van Der Meer, A., Kaper, L., Van Kerkwijk, M

    Tzanavaris, P., & Yaqoob, T. 2018, ApJ, 855, 25, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaaab6 Van Der Meer, A., Kaper, L., Van Kerkwijk, M. H.,

    2018 doi

  37. [45]

    H., & Van Den Heuvel, E

    Heemskerk, M. H., & Van Den Heuvel, E. P. 2007, A&A, 473, 523, doi: 10/dk2h4v Vander Meulen, B., Camps, P., Stalevski, M., & Baes, M. 2023, A&A, 674, A123, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202245783

    2007 doi

  38. [46]

    C., Soffitta, P., Baldini, L., et al

    Weisskopf, M. C., Soffitta, P., Baldini, L., et al. 2022, JATIS, 8, 026002, doi: 10.1117/1.JATIS.8.2.026002

    2022 doi

  39. [47]

    2003, ApJ, 582, 959, doi: 10.1086/344821

    Paerels, F. 2003, ApJ, 582, 959, doi: 10.1086/344821

    2003 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.