Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 31 references

AstroSat timing and spectral analysis of the accretion-powered millisecond X-ray pulsar IGR J17591--2342

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read AstroSat timing of IGR J17591–2342 confirms the 527.4256984 Hz spin and finds a flat 3–20 keV pulse amplitude, differing from the NICER low-energy rise.

desk verdict A competent AstroSat timing/spectral study of IGR J17591-2342 that adds independent coverage but overstates consistency with NICER and mishandles the spin derivative. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.11143 v1 pith:SMSLRAMS submitted 2024-12-15 astro-ph.HE

Akshay Singh (1 , 2) Andrea Sanna (3) , Sudip Bhattacharyya (4) , Sudiip Chakraborty (5) , Sarita Jangle (2) , Tlak Katoch (4) , H.M. Antia (6) , Nitinkumar Bijewar (2) ((1) BIU (2) MU (3) UniCa (4) TIFR
show 1 more author
Mumbai (5) CNRS (6) UM-DAE CEBS)
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords accretiondiscsmethods:dataanalysispulsars:individual(IGRJ17591-2342)stars:neutronX-ray:binariesAstroSatsoftlagspulsefractionalamplitude
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

IGR J17591–2342 is a transient accretion-powered millisecond X-ray pulsar whose 2018 outburst was caught by AstroSat. After removing a flaring interval attributed to contamination by the bright source GX 5-1, this paper derives an independent phase-coherent timing solution from LAXPC data, fixing the average spin frequency at $527.4256984(8)$ Hz and updating the orbital period and projected semi-major axis to values consistent with the NICER-based ephemeris. The pulse profile is described by four harmonically related sinusoids, and the fractional amplitude of the fundamental and first overtone appears constant across $3$–$20$ keV, in contrast to the low-energy increase reported from NICER data. The paper also finds soft X-ray phase lags of about $0.05$ and $0.13$ cycles and a spectral continuum of Comptonization plus a soft blackbody and a broad $\sim 6.4$ keV line, pointing to seed photons from the disc or neutron-star surface.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is a phase-coherent timing analysis built on epoch folding. LAXPC photon arrival times are barycentered and then corrected for the binary orbit using $z(t)/c = (a\sin i/c)\sin[2\pi(t-T_{\rm NOD})/P_{\rm orb}]$ with a recursive emission-time relation; the folded profiles are split into $\sim1000$ s segments, and the pulse-phase residuals are modelled as $\Delta\phi(t)=\phi_0+\Delta\nu_0(t-T_0)+\frac12 \dot\nu (t-T_0)^2+R_{\rm orb}(t)$ to recover the spin frequency, its derivative, and the orbital parameters. A second component is the harmonic decomposition of the average profile into four sinusoids with periods $P$, $P/2$, $P/3$, $P/4$, whose amplitudes and phases are tracked across 19 energy bins. A third step is the identification and removal of the flaring interval in ObsID 9000002320, based on a colour-colour diagram and an SXT image brightening, before any timing or spectral fitting is done.

What would settle it

Recover the actual attitude history for ObsID 9000002320 from star-tracker data and test whether the pointing drifted about one degree toward GX 5-1 during the flaring interval; if the pointing was stable, the excluded data contain genuine source emission and the reported spin frequency and orbital parameters are biased.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that AstroSat data from the 2018 outburst yield a complete, self-consistent timing and spectral picture of IGR J17591–2342. Phase-coherent epoch folding gives an average pulsar spin frequency of $527.4256984(8)$ Hz, an orbital period $P_{\rm orb}=31684.73(1)$ s, a projected semi-major axis $a\sin i/c=1.22772(1)$ lt-s, and a spin-up derivative of $(1.9\pm0.8)\times10^{-12}$ Hz s$^{-1}$, all consistent with the NICER solution. The $3$–$20$ keV pulse profile is well fitted by four sinusoids whose fractional amplitudes are about $13\%$, $6\%$, $0.9\%$, and $0.2\%$; a linear fit to the fundamental and first-overtone amplitudes as functions of energy gives no significant slope, so the authors conclude the fractional amplitude is constant over this band. Energy-dependent phase delays show that soft photons in the $2.8$–$3.3$ keV band lag photons above $15$ keV by about $0.05$ cycles (fundamental) and $0.13$ cycles (first overtone), a soft-lag pattern attributed to thermal Comptonization. The joint LAXPC/SXT spectrum is fit by an absorbed model with a Comptonizing corona (photon index $1.54\pm0.03$, electron temperature fixed at $40$ keV), a blackbody seed component at $0.95\pm0.03$ keV, and a broad $\sim 6.4$ keV Gaussian line, with an inferred blackbody radius of about $12$ km at the assumed distance of $7.6$ kpc.

Load-bearing premise

The entire timing and spectral solution assumes that the flaring interval in the first AstroSat observation is wholly contamination from GX 5-1, an attribution inferred from colour–colour behaviour and a brightened image edge even though the orbit files do not record the pointing drift directly.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If this solution is right, future X-ray observations of IGR J17591–2342 can fold on the AstroSat ephemeris, making pulse-phase comparisons across telescopes straightforward.
  • The constant pulse fraction from 3 to 20 keV implies that the bright spot's emission geometry stays similar over this band, a property that models of the accretion column must reproduce.
  • The soft lags of about 0.05 and 0.13 cycles support the two-component Comptonization picture in which blackbody seed photons are up-scattered in a hot corona, linking spectral and timing behaviour.
  • The spectral fit with a blackbody radius near 12 km suggests the whole neutron-star surface contributes seed photons, not just a polar cap; this weighting has consequences for estimates of the accretion geometry.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Our inference: because the paper's flat pulse-fraction result comes from a single energy band and a single epoch, it would be worth checking whether the same constancy holds in the 0.5–3 keV band covered by NICER; a combined high-cadence observation during a future outburst would directly test the discrepancy.
  • Our inference: the measured spin-up derivative, $(1.9\pm0.8)\times10^{-12}$ Hz s$^{-1}$, is only marginally significant; if the flaring-interval excision is correct, this value could be an accretion torque signal, but if not, it could be an artifact of unmodeled orbital motion.
  • Our inference: the broad Gaussian width above 1 keV suggests the 6.4 keV feature may be a blend rather than a single reflection line; resolving it with higher spectral resolution would probe whether the emission arises in a disc reflector or an outflow.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper presents an AstroSat LAXPC and SXT timing and spectral analysis of the accreting millisecond X-ray pulsar IGR J17591--2342 during its 2018 outburst. Using phase-coherent timing of the ~527 Hz pulsations, the authors derive updated orbital parameters and a spin frequency of 527.4256984(8) Hz, reporting consistency with the NICER-based solution of Sanna et al. (2020). The pulse profile is decomposed into four harmonics, and the energy dependence of the fractional amplitudes and phase delays is studied over 3--20 keV. The spectrum is fitted with an absorbed thermal Comptonization model plus a blackbody and a Gaussian iron line. The paper's central claims are the independent AstroSat ephemeris, the energy-independent pulse amplitudes in 3--20 keV, and the spectral parameters, including a blackbody temperature of about 0.95 keV and a neutron-star radius estimate of about 12 km.

Significance. If the timing solution is robust, the paper provides a valuable independent, multi-epoch AstroSat measurement of the orbital parameters and spin frequency of a well-studied AMXP, useful for cross-checking NICER and NuSTAR results. The pulse-amplitude behavior reported here (constant fractional amplitude over 3--20 keV) differs from the low-energy rise reported from NICER data, so the energy-dependent pulse-profile results are potentially interesting. The spectral analysis adds an independent broad-band view of the source. The paper uses public data and standard software, and the presentation is generally clear, but the reliability of the main timing claim is weakened by an internal inconsistency in the reported spin-frequency derivative and by the reliance on the exclusion of a large flaring interval.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3.3, Table 2] The reported spin-frequency derivative is internally inconsistent. Table 2 lists nu_dot = (1.9 +/- 0.8) x 10^-12 Hz/s, while the NICER value quoted in the same table is nu_dot = (-7.4 +/- 0.4) x 10^-14 Hz/s. These differ by roughly 2.5 sigma and have opposite signs, so the statement that 'our derived parameters are consistent within uncertainties' is not supported by the quoted numbers. The Discussion then calls this same value 'no significant spin frequency derivative,' which contradicts its presentation as a measured parameter in Table 2. Because Eq. (3) fits the quadratic phase term jointly with the orbital parameters, an unmodeled or poorly constrained derivative can bias the fitted spin frequency and orbital elements. The authors should test whether the quadratic term is statistically required by the AstroSat data, report the result of a fit with nu_dot fixed to the NICER value, and discuss the discrepancy explicitly rather than asserting consistency.
  2. [Section 3.1, 3.2 and Table 1] The exclusion of the flaring interval from all timing and spectral analysis is load-bearing but rests on indirect evidence. The paper states that 'the AstroSat orbit files do not give the correct information about the pointing direction' and attributes the flaring to a ~1 degree drift toward GX 5-1 based on a color-color diagram and an SXT image brightening. If any portion of the excluded ~28 ks contains genuine source emission, the combined timing solution and the orbital parameters in Table 2 are biased. The authors should either obtain direct pointing verification, or demonstrate robustness by fitting the timing solution with and without the flaring interval and showing that the parameters do not change beyond uncertainties. As written, the main ephemeris claim rests on only ~6.7 ks of usable exposure from the first observation, making this check particularly important.
  3. [Section 3.4, Table 3] The spectral analysis fixes the hydrogen column density at 2.09 x 10^22 cm^-2 and the electron temperature at 40 keV, citing earlier work. The reported spectral parameters, including the blackbody temperature and the inferred blackbody radius, are therefore conditional on these assumptions, and the quoted uncertainties do not include the systematic error from fixing N_H and kT_e. The paper should at least justify these fixed values for the AstroSat datasets, and ideally show how the blackbody temperature and radius change when N_H and kT_e are allowed to vary within their literature ranges. This is not a fatal flaw, but it limits the strength of the spectral conclusions as currently presented.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract and Table 2] The abstract reports 'an average pulsar spin frequency of 527.4256984(8) Hz', but Table 2 labels the quantity as nu_0 at the reference epoch; the paper should clarify whether the quoted value is the epoch-averaged frequency or the frequency at T0.
  2. [Figure 2 caption] The caption refers to 'ObsID 900000232' in the color-code description, which appears to be a typo for ObsID 9000002332.
  3. [Section 3.3.1] The text states that an F-test revealed that the trend in fractional amplitude remains constant with energy, but no F-test statistic or p-value is reported; adding that value would make the claim quantitatively checkable.
  4. [Eq. (1) and Eq. (2)] The notation for the orbital correction is slightly confusing: Eq. (1) defines z(t)/c using t, while Eq. (2) uses the recursive substitution t_em ~ t_arr - z(t_arr)/c; a sentence clarifying which time argument is used would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: timing updates and spectral parameters are free fits to AstroSat data, with the published NICER ephemeris used only as an initial guess.

full rationale

The timing analysis starts from the Sanna et al. (2020) frequency and orbital solution, but only as initial parameters for epoch folding; Eq. (3) fits Δν0, ν̇, and orbital residuals to the AstroSat phases, and Table 2 reports values that differ from the initial NICER values (e.g., 527.4256984(8) Hz vs 527.4257000578 Hz, P_orb 31684.73(1) s vs 31684.7503(5) s), so the result is not equal to the input by construction. The spectral analysis adopts the Tbabs*(nthcomp+bbodyrad+gauss) model and NH=2.09e22 cm^-2 from prior work, but kT_bb, photon index, and other parameters are free and fit to AstroSat spectra; the comparison to NICER/NuSTAR results is external. The paper's exclusion of the flaring interval because of a suspected GX 5-1 contamination is a data-quality limitation (the orbit files do not record the pointing), not a circular derivation. The only self-citations (Sanna et al. 2016, 2020) are method references and an initial-guess ephemeris; they are not load-bearing because the final fit is allowed to move and is checked against independent datasets. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported from the authors' prior work.

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

No new physical entities or parameters are introduced. The listed free parameters are inputs fixed from prior measurements or standard practice; the listed axioms are standard data-analysis assumptions. The central measured quantities (spin frequency, orbital period, amplitudes) are direct fits to the data and do not depend on an unstated theory beyond the standard AMXP emission model.

free parameters (4)
  • Hydrogen column density N_H = 2.09e22 cm-2 (fixed).
    Fixed to a literature value in all spectral fits, so the fitted continuum parameters absorb any error in this choice.
  • Electron temperature kT_e = 40 keV (fixed).
    Fixed to a standard value for nthcomp; affects the spectral shape and the derived seed temperature.
  • Source distance d = 7.6 ± 0.7 kpc.
    Adopted from Kuiper et al. (2020); used to convert the bbodyrad normalization into a blackbody radius (12.1 km) and to compute fluxes.
  • Neutron star mass M_NS = 1.4 M_sun.
    Assumed to compute the expected spin-up rate; not measured by this paper.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Circular orbit model for the binary (e=0) in the timing equation.
    Equation (1) uses only a sinusoidal radial-velocity term; the eccentricity is only constrained to be <7e-5, so a circular model is standard but an unmodeled small eccentricity could absorb timing residuals.
  • domain assumption Seed photon temperature of nthcomp is tied to the blackbody temperature.
    The model assumes the Comptonized seed photons are the same blackbody component; this coupling affects both the spectral fit and the derived kT_bb.
  • ad hoc to paper The flaring interval is contamination from GX 5-1, not source variability.
    This premise justifies removing the flaring orbits; evidence is a pointing-drift inference and a color-color offset, not a direct measurement.
  • domain assumption The spectral model Tbabs*(nthcomp+bbodyrad+gauss) is the correct continuum description.
    Chosen after compPS failed to fit; no systematic model comparison is presented, and the very broad Gaussian residual suggests the continuum may be misspecified.
  • domain assumption bbodyrad normalization converts to a neutron-star surface radius.
    The paper itself cautions this holds only if all blackbody photons come from the NS surface, which may not be true.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of AstroSat timing and spectral analysis of the accretion-powered millisecond X-ray pulsar IGR J17591--2342." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SMSLRAMS

@misc{pith2026241211143,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: AstroSat timing and spectral analysis of the accretion-powered millisecond X-ray pulsar IGR J17591--2342},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SMSLRAMS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.11143}
}
abstract

IGR J17591--2342, a transient accretion-powered millisecond X-ray pulsar, was discovered during its 2018 outburst. Here, we present a timing and spectral analysis of the source using {\it AstroSat} data of the same outburst. From the timing analysis, we obtain updated values of binary orbital parameters, which reveal an average pulsar spin frequency of 527.4256984(8) Hz. The pulse profiles can be fit well with four harmonically related sinusoidal components with fractional amplitudes of fundamental and second, third, and fourth harmonics as $\sim13$\%, $\sim$6\%, $\sim$0.9\%, $\sim$0.2\%, respectively. The energy-dependent study of pulse profiles in the range of $3-20$ keV shows that the fractional amplitude of both the fundamental and first overtone is consistent with being constant across the considered energy band. Besides, a decaying trend has been observed for both the fundamental and first overtone in the phase-delay versus energy relation resulting in soft X-ray (2.8-3.3 keV) phase lags of $\sim$0.05 and $\sim$0.13 with respect to $\leq 15$ keV photons, for the fundamental and first overtone, respectively. The combined spectra from the Large Area X-ray Proportional Counters and the Soft X-ray Telescope aboard {\it AstroSat} in the $1-18$ keV range can be fit well with an absorbed model consisting of a Comptonization, a blackbody and a Gaussian emission line component yielding as best-fit parameters a blackbody seed photon temperature $kT_{\rm bb}$ $\sim 0.95 \pm 0.03$ keV, and an electron temperature $kT_{\rm e}$ $\sim 1.54 \pm0.03$ keV. The spectral aspects suggest the scattering of photons from the accretion disc or the neutron star's surface.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.11143 by the authors.

Figure 2
Figure 2. The colour-colour diagram from IGR J17591-2342 count rates in 4 different independent energy bands (see section 3.2 for definition) using data from AstroSat/LAXPC observations ObsID9000002320 (blue coloured), including data points from the flaring orbits (green coloured) and ObsID900000232 (light coral coloured). 3 RESULTS 3.1 Light curve The background-corrected light curve of IGR J17591–2342 observed with LAXPC on… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. IGR J17591–2342 pulse profile using 32 bins (black points) in the energy range of 3-20 keV from epoch-folding the AstroSat observations after correcting for the orbital parameters reported in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Pulse profiles (16 bins) as a function of energy for IGR J17591-2342 using data from AstroSat/LAXPC ObsID9000002320 (left panel) and ObsID9000002332 (right panel) across the 3-20 keV energy range. Data points are aqua-coloured, while fits are in orange. The intensity axis is rescaled for each energy bin, but for comparison purposes, it remains the same for a given energy band for both observations. The pulse profile… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Phase lags plotted as a function of energy, obtained from the fundamental component (black points) and the first harmonic (red points) with respect to the first energy band (2.8-3.3 keV) for LAXPC ObsID9000002332. A constant shift of 0.05 is applied to the fundamental …
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Top Panel - Best fitted time-averaged spectra of LAXPC and SXT modelled with Tbabs*(constant*nthcomp+bbodyrad+gauss). The LAXPC/9000002320 spectrum is shown in black colour, and LAXPC/9000002332 and SXT/9000002332 are shown in red and green colours, respectively. The n…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

31 extracted references · 11 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.state := if if FUNCTION not #0 #1 if FUNCTION and 'skip pop #0 if FUNCTION or pop #1...

  2. [2]

    C., 2006, @doi [Advances in Space Research] 10.1016/j.asr.2006.03.038 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006AdSpR..38.2989A 38, 2989

    Agrawal P. C., 2006, @doi [Advances in Space Research] 10.1016/j.asr.2006.03.038 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006AdSpR..38.2989A 38, 2989

    doi:10.1016/j.asr.2006.03.038 2006

  3. [3]

    M., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/aa7a0e , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJS..231...10A 231, 10

    Antia H. M., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/aa7a0e , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJS..231...10A 231, 10

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/aa7a0e 2017

  4. [4]

    A., 1996, in Jacoby G

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

    1996

  5. [5]

    Bhattacharya D., van den Heuvel E. P. J., 1991, @doi [ ] 10.1016/0370-1573(91)90064-S , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1991PhR...203....1B 203, 1

    doi:10.1016/0370-1573(91)90064-s 1991

  6. [6]

    E., Boynton P

    Deeter J. E., Boynton P. E., Pravdo S. H., 1981, @doi [ ] 10.1086/159110 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981ApJ...247.1003D 247, 1003

    doi:10.1086/159110 1981

  7. [7]

    465, Astrophysics and Space Science Library

    Di Salvo T., Sanna A., 2022, in Bhattacharyya S., Papitto A., Bhattacharya D., eds, Astrophysics and Space Science Library Vol. 465, Astrophysics and Space Science Library. pp 87--124, @doi 10.1007/978-3-030-85198-9_4

    doi:10.1007/978-3-030-85198-9_4 2022

  8. [8]

    Ducci L., Kuulkers E., Grinberg V., Paizis A., Sidoli L., Bozzo E., Ferrigno C., Savchenko V., 2018, The Astronomer's Telegram, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ATel11941....1D 11941, 1

    work page 2018

Show all 31 references
  1. [9]

    Falanga M., Titarchuk L., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/514805 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...661.1084F 661, 1084

    2007 doi

  2. [10]

    V., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz3460 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.492.1091G 492, 1091

    Gusinskaia N. V., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz3460 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.492.1091G 492, 1091

    2020 doi

  3. [11]

    A., et al., 2018, The Astronomer's Telegram, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ATel11981....1K 11981, 1

    Krimm H. A., et al., 2018, The Astronomer's Telegram, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ATel11981....1K 11981, 1

    2018

  4. [12]

    S., Falanga M., Mereminskiy I

    Kuiper L., Tsygankov S. S., Falanga M., Mereminskiy I. A., Galloway D. K., Poutanen J., Li Z., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202037812 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020A&A...641A..37K 641, A37

    2020 doi

  5. [13]

    Manca A., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac3707 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.519.2309M 519, 2309

    2023 doi

  6. [14]

    Misra R., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/835/2/195 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...835..195M 835, 195

    2017 doi

  7. [15]

    Mukherjee D., Bult P., van der Klis M., Bhattacharya D., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv1542 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.452.3994M 452, 3994

    2015 doi

  8. [16]

    L., 2021, in Belloni T

    Patruno A., Watts A. L., 2021, in Belloni T. M., M \'e ndez M., Zhang C., eds, Astrophysics and Space Science Library Vol. 461, Timing Neutron Stars: Pulsations, Oscillations and Explosions. pp 143--208 ( @eprint arXiv 1206.2727 ), @doi 10.1007/978-3-662-62110-3_4

    2021 arXiv

  9. [17]

    M., Wijnands R., Chakrabarty D., van der Klis M., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/717/2/1253 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...717.1253P 717, 1253

    Patruno A., Hartman J. M., Wijnands R., Chakrabarty D., van der Klis M., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/717/2/1253 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...717.1253P 717, 1253

    2010 doi

  10. [18]

    Poutanen J., Gierli \'n ski M., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06773.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003MNRAS.343.1301P 343, 1301

    2003

  11. [19]

    S., et al., 2018, The Astronomer's Telegram, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ATel12050....1R 12050, 1

    Ray P. S., et al., 2018, The Astronomer's Telegram, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ATel12050....1R 12050, 1

    2018

  12. [20]

    D., Degenaar N., Wijnands R., van den Eijnden J., Gusinskaia N

    Russell T. D., Degenaar N., Wijnands R., van den Eijnden J., Gusinskaia N. V., Hessels J. W. T., Miller-Jones J. C. A., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aaf4f9 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...869L..16R 869, L16

    2018 doi

  13. [21]

    Sanna A., et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw740 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.459.1340S 459, 1340

    2016 doi

  14. [22]

    Sanna A., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201834160 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018A&A...617L...8S 617, L8

    2018 doi

  15. [23]

    Sanna A., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa1253 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.495.1641S 495, 1641

    2020 doi

  16. [24]

    P., et al., 2014, in Takahashi T., den Herder J.-W

    Singh K. P., et al., 2014, in Takahashi T., den Herder J.-W. A., Bautz M., eds, Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series Vol. 9144, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2014: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray. p. 91441S, @doi 10.1117/12.2062667

    2014 doi

  17. [25]

    P., et al., 2016, in den Herder J.-W

    Singh K. P., et al., 2016, in den Herder J.-W. A., Takahashi T., Bautz M., eds, Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series Vol. 9905, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2016: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray. p. 99051E, @doi 10.1117/12.2235309

    2016 doi

  18. [26]

    P., et al., 2017, @doi [Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy] 10.1007/s12036-017-9448-7 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017JApA...38...29S 38, 29

    Singh K. P., et al., 2017, @doi [Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy] 10.1007/s12036-017-9448-7 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017JApA...38...29S 38, 29

    2017 doi

  19. [27]

    Tse K., Chou Y., Hsieh H.-E., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aba18f , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...899..120T 899, 120

    2020 doi

  20. [28]

    A., Ferland G

    Verner D. A., Ferland G. J., Korista K. T., Yakovlev D. G., 1996, @doi [ ] 10.1086/177435 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996ApJ...465..487V 465, 487

    1996 doi

  21. [29]

    Wijnands R., van der Klis M., 1998, @doi [ ] 10.1038/28557 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998Natur.394..344W 394, 344

    1998 doi

  22. [30]

    Wilms J., Allen A., McCray R., 2000, @doi [ ] 10.1086/317016 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000ApJ...542..914W 542, 914

    2000 doi

  23. [31]

    S., et al., 2016, in den Herder J.-W

    Yadav J. S., et al., 2016, in den Herder J.-W. A., Takahashi T., Bautz M., eds, Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series Vol. 9905, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2016: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray. p. 99051D, @doi 10.1117/12.2231857

    2016 doi

Pith tools

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