Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 140 references

X-ray quasi-periodic eruptions are a distinct class of repeating nuclear flares, and the accumulated evidence ties them to tidal disruption events.

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 · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-01 23:34 UTC pith:ZJ426TS3

load-bearing objection A solid, honest review of the 13-source QPE sample with a few new host-galaxy measurements that are not yet fully quantified; the TDE connection is plausible but population statistics remain hostage to selection effects the paper itself identifies. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.15359 v1 pith:ZJ426TS3 submitted 2026-07-16 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.GA

Observations of X-ray quasi-periodic eruptions

Thomas Wevers , Joheen Chakraborty , Erwan Quintin , Michal Zaja\v{c}ek , Margherita Giustini This is my paper
classification astro-ph.HE astro-ph.GA
keywords X-ray quasi-periodic eruptionstidal disruption eventssupermassive black holesaccretion disksX-ray variabilitygalactic nucleirepeating nuclear transientsextreme-mass-ratio inspirals
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.

Quasi-periodic eruptions (QPEs) are repeating bursts of soft X-ray radiation from the nuclei of galaxies, discovered only in X-rays and now known in 13 systems. This review argues that these bursts form a physically connected population: they share thermal spectra with a characteristic temperature–luminosity hysteresis, quasi-regular recurrence on hours-to-days timescales, and quiescent emission consistent with compact accretion disks only a few hundred to a few thousand gravitational radii across. The paper assembles demographic evidence — host galaxies concentrated in the green valley, with post-starburst stellar populations and a high incidence of extended emission-line regions — and argues it mirrors the hosts of tidal disruption events (TDEs). It also highlights timing phenomena, including super-periodic modulations of burst arrival times, and estimates that about 9% of optically selected TDEs host QPEs within five years. The authors are explicit that the small, heterogeneously selected sample makes population-level trends provisional, and that the apparent duration–recurrence scaling may be partly a selection artifact.

Core claim

QPEs are defined as recurring thermal X-ray bursts from galactic nuclei, shorter than their recurrence time and showing temperature–luminosity hysteresis. The review argues the 13 known sources form a distinct population: quiescent emission fits compact, thermally dominated disks of a few hundred to a few thousand gravitational radii, and hosts are post-starburst, green-valley galaxies with low-mass black holes. Its central interpretive claim is an empirical link to tidal disruption events: QPEs appear months–years after optical TDEs, ~9% of optically selected TDEs host QPEs within five years, and host demographics mirror TDE hosts. Timing evidence (super-periodic modulations of burst arriva

What carries the argument

The machinery is the working definition of a QPE plus the tools used to map it. The definition itself — recurring thermal X-ray bursts with a counterclockwise hysteresis loop in the temperature–luminosity plane, each eruption shorter than the interval between bursts — sets what counts as a QPE. Three quantitative instruments carry the analysis: (1) O−C (observed minus calculated) diagrams of burst arrival times, which expose super-periodic modulations of the recurrence clock; (2) multicolor disk blackbody fits to quiescent X-ray–UV SEDs, which infer compact disk radii of a few hundred to a few thousand gravitational radii; and (3) the duration–recurrence plane (t_dur ∝ t_rec^1.3), which the

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that the 13-source sample, despite its heterogeneous discovery channels, is not so severely distorted by selection that the apparent timing trends, green-valley overrepresentation, and inferred TDE connection are artifacts of how the sources were found; the paper itself concedes that the apparent scaling between duration and recurrence may arise in part or in full from observational selection effects and that TDE-triggered searches introduce con

What would settle it

A blind, high-cadence X-ray survey that corrects for detection probability and recovers a flat duration–recurrence distribution would falsify the claimed intrinsic t_dur ∝ t_rec^1.3 scaling; similarly, a statistically large late-time X-ray campaign of optically selected TDEs that finds no QPEs would falsify the ~9% connection rate.

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

If this is right

  • If QPEs are physically tied to TDEs, late-time X-ray monitoring of optically discovered TDEs should keep turning up new QPEs; current rates imply roughly one in ten TDEs produces QPEs within five years.
  • The inferred compact disk sizes (a few hundred to a few thousand gravitational radii) rule out typical AGN-like extended disks as the quiescent emitter, so any viable QPE model must include a long-lived, compact accretion disk.
  • The super-periodic modulations seen in O−C diagrams of four sources provide an observational test that discriminates between orbiting-companion and disk-instability models; the lack of strict even/odd anti-correlation already contradicts simple EMRI precession models.
  • The strong selection biases mean that future blind surveys, not TDE-triggered follow-up, are required to measure the intrinsic rate and the true duration–recurrence relation.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the QPE–TDE connection holds, every QPE source is a short-lived post-disruption system; a testable consequence is that QPEs should preferentially appear in galaxies with elevated TDE rates, such as those with recent nuclear star-formation bursts and dense gas reservoirs.
  • The positive period derivative seen in one source, if confirmed over a longer baseline, would strain all models based on fixed orbital or disk clocks and may point to a secularly evolving disk — a prediction that continued timing could test.
  • QPEs could serve as electromagnetic counterparts to extreme-mass-ratio inspirals; if any are discovered with intermediate-mass black hole companions, their merger timescales might fall within the observing window of next-generation low-frequency detectors, enabling joint EM–GW detections.

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 / 6 minor

Summary. This invited review chapter synthesizes the observational state of the art for the 13 known X-ray quasi-periodic eruptions (QPEs). It compiles eruption and quiescent properties, timing behavior, host-galaxy demographics, rate estimates, model constraints, and future observational prospects. The chapter also includes some new material: an updated host-galaxy census, newly reported velocity dispersions for two hosts, and a claim of a 69% extended-emission-line-region (EELR) incidence based partly on unpublished MUSE data. The central thesis is that QPEs constitute a distinct, physically connected population of repeating nuclear transients whose quiescent disks are compact and TDE-like, with strong empirical links to tidal disruption events, while explicitly acknowledging that selection effects shape the current sample.

Significance. If the synthesis is correct, QPEs provide a new window onto black-hole accretion, stellar dynamics in galactic nuclei, and possibly EMRI gravitational-wave counterparts. The chapter's main strengths are its comprehensive sample compilation, its unusually candid discussion of selection biases (Sec. 4.2), and the effort to place host-galaxy demographics on a common footing. The rate estimates (eROSITA blind-survey rate and TDE-targeted Bayesian fraction q ≈ 0.09) are clearly attributed to the original analyses. The new host-galaxy measurements, if properly documented, would make this the most complete census to date. However, the load-bearing population-level claims -- green-valley overrepresentation, EELR incidence, and the inferred TDE connection -- are only as secure as the sample-selection model, and the chapter does not quantitatively propagate the acknowledged selection effects into those demographics. The new EELR and velocity-dispersion results are presented without the quantitative detail expected of refereed measurements.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 5.5.2 / Fig. 11 / Table 2] The central new result, f_EELR = 0.69 (+0.31/-0.23), rests on EELR detections in four sources described only as 'reported in this work' and illustrated by RGB images. No line fluxes, equivalent widths, surface-brightness limits, spatial-extent measurements, or MUSE reduction/analysis details are given. This is load-bearing because the EELR incidence is then used to argue for elevated TDE rates and merger-acquired gas reservoirs. For a refereed journal, either provide a table of quantitative measurements and the detection criteria, or explicitly mark these as preliminary and exclude them from the population fraction.
  2. [Sec. 4.2 and Sec. 5.2] The chapter concedes that the t_dur-t_rec scaling 'may arise in part or in full' from duty-cycle selection and that TDE-triggered searches introduce confirmation bias, but the same selection effects are not propagated into the host-galaxy demographics. The green-valley overrepresentation (Sec. 5.2), EELR incidence (Sec. 5.5.2), and the inferred TDE connection are all measured on the same heterogeneous sample. The note that TDE-selected QPE hosts fall outside the green valley is helpful but does not address selection within the eROSITA blind sub-sample or the archival sub-sample. Please add a sensitivity analysis -- e.g., recompute the green-valley fraction and EELR incidence excluding TDE-triggered discoveries or restricting to the eROSITA sample -- and state how the demographic conclusions change, or soften the conclusions accordingly.
  3. [Sec. 5.3 / Table 2] The new velocity-dispersion measurements for eRO-QPE5 (sigma = 60±6 km/s) and eRASSt J2344 (sigma = 106±10 km/s) are presented without spectra, fitting details, or an explicit description of the MUSE data used. Citing the methodology of [83] is insufficient for new measurements, particularly because the resulting M_BH values carry 0.55 dex systematic uncertainties and are used in the subsequent discussion of black-hole masses and TDE regimes. Provide the fitted line profiles, wavelength ranges, and signal-to-noise, or present these as preliminary values with a clear caveat.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Sec. 3.1] Text near 'With the exception of a delayed and temporally smeared UV brightening correlated with the eruptions has been reported' is grammatically broken; please rephrase.
  2. [Sec. 5.5.2 / Fig. 11] The source name is spelled inconsistently as 'eRASSt J2344' and 'eRASST J2344'; unify throughout.
  3. [Table 1] The table deliberately omits individual errors. This is defensible for a review, but adding at least representative uncertainties for one epoch per source, or a footnote describing typical errors, would help readers judge which trends are significant.
  4. [Sec. 3.1.3] The phrase 'it may be unusual in the EMRI scenario that no QPEs have yet exhibited a smooth negative period derivative' could be sharpened by stating the expected sign of Pdot under standard EMRI orbital decay.
  5. [Sec. 5.5.2] Item 3 contains the typo 'than the the energy budget'; also, 'overrepresentation of a factor ≳10' should state the comparison sample explicitly in the text, not only by citation.
  6. [Figure 1] The axis label '0 10.5 1.5' in the left column appears garbled; please check all panel axis labels.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity found; the review synthesizes independent measurements and explicitly hedges selection-affected trends.

full rationale

This is a review and synthesis, not a derivation chain in which an output equals an input. The closest candidate for a constructed trend, the t_dur–t_rec scaling shown in Sec. 4.2.1, is explicitly flagged by the authors as possibly arising "in part or in full" from observational selection effects, so it is not presented as a secure prediction and later sections use it only with that caveat. The rate estimates in Sec. 4.1 are either eROSITA blind-survey counts [59] or a Bayesian estimate of q from [24] with stated priors; q = 0.09+0.09/-0.05 is an inferred parameter with credible intervals, not a fitted input renamed as a prediction. The QPE–TDE connection is supported by temporal coincidences, compact-disk SED modeling, and host-galaxy demographics measured by several independent groups. Where the authors cite their own prior work (e.g., [18,21,24,32,59]), those are published peer-reviewed observational/modeling results with independent data, not an unverified uniqueness theorem or a parameter fitted to the very claim being supported. Sec. 4.2 candidly concedes discovery, classification, and TDE-triggered confirmation biases, which further cuts against hidden circularity: the population-level trends are explicitly treated as selection-affected and uncertain rather than as derived certainties. No self-definitional reduction, ansatz-smuggled-via-citation, imported uniqueness claim, or renaming of a known result was found.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are introduced. QPEs, super-periodic timing modulations, and EELRs are observed phenomena. The central claims rest on the classification definition, the M-sigma calibration, the thin-disk SED interpretation, sample representativeness, and the interpretation of temporal coincidences as physical associations.

free parameters (2)
  • QPE lifetime normalization tau_life = 10 yr (assumed)
    Sec. 4.1.1 quotes the volumetric formation rate as R_vol/tau_life ~ 0.6e-7 (tau_life/10 yr)^-1; the paper states tau_life is poorly constrained, so this is a chosen scale, not a measurement.
  • Bayesian priors for TDE-QPE fraction q = Lifetime U(1,20) yr; recurrence U(0.1,5) d; delay U(0.1,5) yr; luminosity power-law slope -1.83
    Sec. 4.1.2 lists these prior distributions used to estimate q=0.09+0.09-0.05; they are assumptions about the population and could change with an expanded sample.
axioms (5)
  • ad hoc to paper The working QPE definition in Sec. 3 is a valid classification boundary for selecting sources.
    The paper says 'there is not yet an exact definition of what constitutes a QPE source'; the working definition drives the sample and the paper itself notes classification bias in Sec. 4.2.2.
  • domain assumption The M-sigma relation of Greene et al. 2020 is applicable to low-mass QPE hosts.
    Sec. 5.3 and Table 2 use this relation to estimate black hole masses; the paper cautions that the relation is not well calibrated for sigma<100 km/s and has a 0.55 dex systematic.
  • domain assumption Shakura-Sunyaev thin-disk SED models with null-stress boundary conditions describe the quiescent QPE emission.
    Sec. 3.2.2 infers compact disks (outer radii a few 100 to a few 1000 R_g) using these models; this underpins the TDE-disk connection.
  • domain assumption The current 13-source sample is sufficiently representative for population-level statistics.
    Sec. 4.2 argues that duty-cycle selection, classification bias, and TDE-triggered follow-up distort the sample; the paper acknowledges the inferred scalings may be largely selection effects.
  • domain assumption Temporal coincidences between QPEs and TDEs in several sources imply a physical connection rather than chance.
    Sec. 7.1 says the temporal association provides direct evidence for interconnection; the paper also notes the TDE-targeted selection bias in Sec. 4.2.3.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 43253 in / 13002 out tokens · 132305 ms · 2026-08-01T23:34:45.337212+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Quasi-periodic eruptions (QPEs) are a novel class of repeating nuclear transients, discovered exclusively in the X-ray band to date. Since their initial discovery in 2019, the QPE sample has grown to 13 sources, exhibiting large amplitude, quasi-regular eruptive variability patterns that are distinct from previously known modes of massive black hole variability. In this chapter, we provide a comprehensive overview of their observational characteristics. We review the X-ray spectral and timing properties of QPE eruptions, their long-term evolution, as well as the underlying quiescent emission, which is well described by thermally dominated, compact accretion disks. We discuss population-level emerging trends and selection biases, and present an updated census of their host galaxy properties. We also highlight the growing body of evidence pointing to strong connections between QPEs and tidal disruption events. Finally, we briefly summarize the key observational constraints on proposed QPE model interpretations, before looking ahead to the observational challenges and opportunities that will shape future progress in understanding this emerging population of nuclear transients.

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

140 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Miniutti, R.D

    G. Miniutti, R.D. Saxton, M. Giustini, K.D. Alexander, R.P. Fender, I. Hey- wood, I. Monageng, M. Coriat, A.K. Tzioumis, A.M. Read, C. Knigge, P. Gandhi, M.L. Pretorius, B. Agis-Gonzalez, Nature573(7774), 381 (2019). DOI 10.1038/s41586-019-1556-x

    doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1556-x 2019

  2. [2]

    Saxton, A.M

    R.D. Saxton, A.M. Read, P. Esquej, M.J. Freyberg, B. Altieri, D. Bermejo, A&A480(2), 611 (2008). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361:20079193

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20079193 2008

  3. [3]

    Aschenbach, H

    B. Aschenbach, H. Br ¨auninger, U. Briel, W. Brinkmann, H. Fink, N. Hei- necke, H. Hippmann, G. Kettenring, G. Metzner, A. Ondrusch, E. Pfeffer- mann, P. Predehl, G. Reger, K.H. Stephan, J. Tr¨ umper, H.U. Zimmermann, Space Sci. Rev.30(1-4), 569 (1981). DOI 10.1007/BF01246075

    doi:10.1007/bf01246075 1981

  4. [4]

    Jansen, D

    F. Jansen, D. Lumb, B. Altieri, J. Clavel, M. Ehle, C. Erd, C. Gabriel, M. Guainazzi, P. Gondoin, R. Much, R. Munoz, M. Santos, N. Schartel, D. Tex- ier, G. Vacanti, A&A365, L1 (2001). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361:20000036

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20000036 2001

  5. [5]

    Gehrels, G

    N. Gehrels, G. Chincarini, P. Giommi, K.O. Mason, J.A. Nousek, A.A. Wells, N.E. White, S.D. Barthelmy, D.N. Burrows, L.R. Cominsky, K.C. Hurley, F.E. Marshall, P. M´esz´aros, P.W.A. Roming, L. Angelini, L.M. Barbier, T. Belloni, S. Campana, P.A. Caraveo, M.M. Chester, O. Citterio, T.L. Cline, M.S. Crop- per, J.R. Cummings, A.J. Dean, E.D. Feigelson, E.E. ...

    2004

  6. [6]

    Sheng, T

    Z. Sheng, T. Wang, G. Ferland, X. Shu, C. Yang, N. Jiang, Y. Chen, ApJL920(1), L25 (2021). DOI 10.3847/2041-8213/ac2251

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac2251 2021

  7. [7]

    Miniutti, M

    G. Miniutti, M. Giustini, R. Arcodia, R.D. Saxton, A.M. Read, S. Bianchi, K.D. Alexander, A&A670, A93 (2023). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/202244512

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244512 2023

  8. [8]

    Miniutti, R.D

    G. Miniutti, R.D. Saxton, P.M. Rodr ´ıguez-Pascual, A.M. Read, P. Esquej, M. Colless, P. Dobbie, M. Spolaor, MNRAS433(2), 1764 (2013). DOI 10.1093/mnras/stt850

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stt850 2013

  9. [9]

    Giustini, G

    M. Giustini, G. Miniutti, R.D. Saxton, A&A636, L2 (2020). DOI 10.1051/ 0004-6361/202037610

    2020

  10. [10]

    Dewangan, K.P

    G.C. Dewangan, K.P. Singh, Y.D. Mayya, G.C. Anupama, MNRAS318(1), 309 (2000). DOI 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2000.03755.x

    arXiv 2000

  11. [11]

    L. Sun, X. Shu, T. Wang, ApJ768(2), 167 (2013). DOI 10.1088/0004-637X/ 768/2/167

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/ 2013

  12. [12]

    Shu, T.G

    X.W. Shu, T.G. Wang, N. Jiang, J.X. Wang, L.M. Sun, H.Y. Zhou, ApJ837(1), 3 (2017). DOI 10.3847/1538-4357/aa5eb3 Observations of X-ray Quasi-Periodic Eruptions 41

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa5eb3 2017

  13. [13]

    Giustini, G

    M. Giustini, G. Miniutti, R. Arcodia, A. Goodwin, K.D. Alexander, J. Chakraborty, J. Buchner, P. Kosec, R. Saxton, M. Bonetti, A. Fran- chini, T. Ryu, X. Shu, E. Kara, G. Ponti, E. Quintin, F. Vincentelli, N. Webb, J. Kajava, S.D. von Fellenberg, A&A692, A15 (2024). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/202450861

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450861 2024

  14. [14]

    Predehl, R

    P. Predehl, R. Andritschke, V. Arefiev, V. Babyshkin, O. Batanov, W. Becker, H. B ¨ohringer, A. Bogomolov, T. Boller, K. Borm, W. Bornemann, H. Br ¨auninger, M. Br¨ uggen, H. Brunner, M. Brusa, E. Bulbul, M. Bun- tov, V. Burwitz, W. Burkert, N. Clerc, E. Churazov, D. Coutinho, T. Dauser, K. Dennerl, V. Doroshenko, J. Eder, V. Emberger, T. Eraerds, A. Fino...

    2021

  15. [15]

    Arcodia, A

    R. Arcodia, A. Merloni, K. Nandra, J. Buchner, M. Salvato, D. Pasham, R. Remillard, J. Comparat, G. Lamer, G. Ponti, A. Malyali, J. Wolf, Z. Arzoumanian, D. Bogensberger, D.A.H. Buckley, K. Gendreau, M. Gro- madzki, E. Kara, M. Krumpe, C. Markwardt, M.E. Ramos-Ceja, A. Rau, M. Schramm, A. Schwope, Nature592(7856), 704 (2021). DOI 10.1038/ s41586-021-03394-6

    2021

  16. [16]

    Arcodia, Z

    R. Arcodia, Z. Liu, A. Merloni, A. Malyali, A. Rau, J. Chakraborty, A. Good- win, D. Buckley, J. Brink, M. Gromadzki, Z. Arzoumanian, J. Buchner, E. Kara, K. Nandra, G. Ponti, M. Salvato, G. Anderson, P. Baldini, I. Grotova, M. Krumpe, C. Maitra, J.C.A. Miller-Jones, M.E. Ramos-Ceja, A&A684, A64 (2024). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/202348881

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202348881 2024

  17. [17]

    Arcodia, P

    R. Arcodia, P. Baldini, A. Merloni, A. Rau, K. Nandra, J. Chakraborty, A.J. Goodwin, M.J. Page, J. Buchner, M. Masterson, I. Monageng, Z. Ar- zoumanian, D. Buckley, E. Kara, G. Ponti, M.E. Ramos-Ceja, M. Sal- vato, K. Gendreau, I. Grotova, M. Krumpe, ApJ989(1), 13 (2025). DOI 10.3847/1538-4357/adec9b

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adec9b 2025

  18. [18]

    Wevers, D.R

    T. Wevers, D.R. Pasham, P. Jalan, S. Rakshit, R. Arcodia, A&A659, L2 (2022). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/202243143

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202243143 2022

  19. [20]

    Sukov´a, F

    P. Sukov´a, F. Tombesi, D.R. Pasham, M. Zajaˇcek, T. Wevers, T. Ryu, I. Linial, A. Franchini, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2411.04592 (2024). DOI 10.48550/arXiv. 2411.04592 42 Wevers, Chakraborty, Quintin, Zaja ˇcek and Giustini

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2411.04592 2024

  20. [21]

    Wevers, K.D

    T. Wevers, K.D. French, A.I. Zabludoff, T.C. Fischer, K. Rowlands, M. Guolo, B. Dalla Barba, R. Arcodia, M. Berton, F. Bian, I. Linial, G. Miniutti, D.R. Pasham, ApJL970(1), L23 (2024). DOI 10.3847/2041-8213/ad5f1b

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad5f1b 2024

  21. [22]

    Mondek, M

    M. Mondek, M. Zajaˇcek, H. Best, T. Jankoviˇc, V. Karas, P. Kurf¨ urst, A&A709, A147 (2026). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/202558531

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202558531 2026

  22. [23]

    Nicholl, D.R

    M. Nicholl, D.R. Pasham, A. Mummery, M. Guolo, K. Gendreau, G.C. De- wangan, E.C. Ferrara, R. Remillard, C. Bonnerot, J. Chakraborty, A. Hajela, V.S. Dhillon, A.F. Gillan, J. Greenwood, M.E. Huber, A. Janiuk, G. Salvesen, S. van Velzen, A. Aamer, K.D. Alexander, C.R. Angus, Z. Arzoumanian, K. Auchettl, E. Berger, T. de Boer, Y. Cendes, K.C. Chambers, T.W....

    2024

  23. [24]

    Chakraborty, E

    J. Chakraborty, E. Kara, R. Arcodia, J. Buchner, M. Giustini, L. Hern ´andez- Garc´ıa, I. Linial, M. Masterson, G. Miniutti, A. Mummery, C. Pana- giotou, E. Quintin, P. S ´anchez-S´aez, ApJL983(2), L39 (2025). DOI 10.3847/2041-8213/adc2f8

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adc2f8 2025

  24. [25]

    Hern ´andez-Garc´ıa, J

    L. Hern ´andez-Garc´ıa, J. Chakraborty, P. S ´anchez-S´aez, C. Ricci, J. Cuadra, B. McKernan, K.E.S. Ford, P. Ar ´evalo, A. Rau, R. Arcodia, E. Kara, Z. Liu, A. Merloni, G. Bruni, A. Goodwin, Z. Arzoumanian, R.J. As- sef, P. Baldini, A. Bayo, F.E. Bauer, S. Bernal, M. Brightman, G. Cal- istro Rivera, K. Gendreau, D. Homan, M. Krumpe, P. Lira, M.L. Mart ´ı...

    doi:10.1038/s41550-025-02523-9 2025

  25. [26]

    Baldini, A

    P. Baldini, A. Rau, A. Merloni, B. Trakhtenbrot, R. Arcodia, M. Giustini, G. Miniutti, S.J. Brennan, M. Freyberg, P. S´anchez-S´aez, I. Grotova, Z. Liu, T. Lian, K. Nandra, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2602.03932 (2026). DOI 10.48550/ arXiv.2602.03932

    doi:10.48550/arxiv.2602.03932 2026

  26. [27]

    Chakraborty, E

    J. Chakraborty, E. Kara, M. Masterson, M. Giustini, G. Miniutti, R. Saxton, ApJL921(2), L40 (2021). DOI 10.3847/2041-8213/ac313b

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac313b 2021

  27. [28]

    Quintin, N.A

    E. Quintin, N.A. Webb, S. Guillot, G. Miniutti, E.S. Kammoun, M. Giustini, R. Arcodia, G. Soucail, N. Clerc, R. Amato, C.B. Markwardt, A&A675, A152 (2023). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/202346440

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346440 2023

  28. [29]

    Bykov, M.R

    S.D. Bykov, M.R. Gilfanov, R.A. Sunyaev, P.S. Medvedev, MNRAS540(1), 30 (2025). DOI 10.1093/mnras/staf686

    doi:10.1093/mnras/staf686 2025

  29. [30]

    H. Guo, Z. Yan, Y.P. Li, J. Chakraborty, P. S ´anchez-S´aez, L. Hern ´andez- Garc´ıa, W. Zhang, J. Sun, S.L. Li, H. Deng, W. Zuo, H. Tagawa, X. Pan, M. Zhang, P. Ar´evalo, P. Lira, C. Jin, M. Gu, ApJL1000(2), L57 (2026). DOI 10.3847/2041-8213/ae524b Observations of X-ray Quasi-Periodic Eruptions 43

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae524b 2026

  30. [31]

    Arcodia, G

    R. Arcodia, G. Miniutti, G. Ponti, J. Buchner, M. Giustini, A. Merloni, K. Nan- dra, F. Vincentelli, E. Kara, M. Salvato, D. Pasham, A&A662, A49 (2022). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/202243259

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202243259 2022

  31. [32]

    Hern ´andez-Garc´ıa, P

    L. Hern ´andez-Garc´ıa, P. S´anchez-S´aez, J. Chakraborty, J. Cuadra, G. Mini- utti, R. Arcodia, P. Ar ´evalo, M. Giustini, E. Kara, C. Ricci, D.R. Pasham, Z. Arzoumanian, K. Gendreau, P. Lira, A&A703, A263 (2025). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/202555258

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202555258 2025

  32. [33]

    Miniutti, M

    G. Miniutti, M. Giustini, R. Arcodia, R.D. Saxton, J. Chakraborty, A.M. Read, E. Kara, A&A674, L1 (2023). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/202346653

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346653 2023

  33. [34]

    Chakraborty, R

    J. Chakraborty, R. Arcodia, E. Kara, G. Miniutti, M. Giustini, A.J. Tetarenko, L. Rhodes, A. Franchini, M. Bonetti, K.B. Burdge, A.J. Goodwin, T.J. Mac- carone, A. Merloni, G. Ponti, R.A. Remillard, R.D. Saxton, ApJ965(1), 12 (2024). DOI 10.3847/1538-4357/ad2941

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad2941 2024

  34. [35]

    Arcodia, I

    R. Arcodia, I. Linial, G. Miniutti, A. Franchini, M. Giustini, M. Bonetti, A. Sesana, R. Soria, J. Chakraborty, M. Dotti, E. Kara, A. Merloni, G. Ponti, F. Vincentelli, A&A690, A80 (2024). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/202451218

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451218 2024

  35. [36]

    Pasham, S

    D. Pasham, S. Kejriwal, E. Coughlin, V. Witzany, A.J.K. Chua, M. Zaja ˇcek, T. Wevers, Y. Ajay, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2411.00289 (2024). DOI 10.48550/ arXiv.2411.00289

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2411.00289 2024

  36. [37]

    J. Xian, F. Zhang, L. Dou, J. He, X. Shu, ApJL921(2), L32 (2021). DOI 10.3847/2041-8213/ac31aa

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac31aa 2021

  37. [38]

    C. Zhou, B. Zhong, Y. Zeng, L. Huang, Z. Pan, Phys. Rev. D110(8), 083019 (2024). DOI 10.1103/PhysRevD.110.083019

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.110.083019 2024

  38. [40]

    Miniutti, A

    G. Miniutti, A. Franchini, M. Bonetti, M. Giustini, J. Chakraborty, R. Arcodia, R. Saxton, E. Quintin, P. Kosec, I. Linial, A. Sesana, A&A693, A179 (2025). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/202452400

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202452400 2025

  39. [43]

    Kosec, E

    P. Kosec, E. Kara, L. Brenneman, J. Chakraborty, M. Giustini, G. Miniutti, C. Pinto, D. Rogantini, R. Arcodia, M. Middleton, A. Sacchi, ApJ978(1), 10 (2025). DOI 10.3847/1538-4357/ad9249

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad9249 2025

  40. [44]

    E. Kara, L. Dai, C.S. Reynolds, T. Kallman, MNRAS474(3), 3593 (2018). DOI 10.1093/mnras/stx3004 44 Wevers, Chakraborty, Quintin, Zaja ˇcek and Giustini

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stx3004 2018

  41. [45]

    Wevers, M

    T. Wevers, M. Guolo, D.R. Pasham, E.R. Coughlin, F. Tombesi, Y. Yao, S. Gezari, ApJ963(1), 75 (2024). DOI 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1878

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad1878 2024

  42. [46]

    Ajay, D.R

    Y. Ajay, D.R. Pasham, T. Wevers, E.R. Coughlin, F. Tombesi, M. Guolo, J.F. Steiner, ApJL981(1), L14 (2025). DOI 10.3847/2041-8213/adae03

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adae03 2025

  43. [47]

    Chakraborty, P

    J. Chakraborty, P. Kosec, E. Kara, G. Miniutti, R. Arcodia, E. Behar, M. Gius- tini, L. Hern ´andez-Garc´ıa, M. Masterson, E. Quintin, C. Ricci, P. S ´anchez- S´aez, ApJ984(2), 124 (2025). DOI 10.3847/1538-4357/adb972

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adb972 2025

  44. [48]

    Goodwin, R

    A.J. Goodwin, R. Arcodia, G. Miniutti, J.C.A. Miller-Jones, S. van Velzen, PASA42, e130 (2025). DOI 10.1017/pasa.2025.10083

    arXiv 2025

  45. [49]

    Wevers, M

    T. Wevers, M. Guolo, S. Lockwood, A. Mummery, D.R. Pasham, R. Arcodia, ApJL980(1), L1 (2025). DOI 10.3847/2041-8213/adace9

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adace9 2025

  46. [50]

    E. Kara, J. Garc ´ıa, ARA&A63(1), 379 (2025). DOI 10.1146/ annurev-astro-071221-052844

    2025

  47. [51]

    Guolo, A

    M. Guolo, A. Mummery, T. Wevers, M. Nicholl, S. Gezari, A. Ingram, D.R. Pasham, ApJ985(2), 146 (2025). DOI 10.3847/1538-4357/adcbac

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adcbac 2025

  48. [53]

    Rees, Nature333(6173), 523 (1988)

    M.J. Rees, Nature333(6173), 523 (1988). DOI 10.1038/333523a0

    doi:10.1038/333523a0 1988

  49. [54]

    Guolo, A

    M. Guolo, A. Mummery, S. van Velzen, S. Gezari, M. Nicholl, Y. Yao, M. Karmen, Y. Ajay, T. Wevers, N. LeBaron, R. Chornock, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2510.26774 (2025). DOI 10.48550/arXiv.2510.26774

    doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.26774 2025

  50. [55]

    Guolo, A

    M. Guolo, A. Mummery, A. Ingram, M. Nicholl, S. Gezari, E. Nathan, ApJ992(1), 114 (2025). DOI 10.3847/1538-4357/ae039e

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae039e 2025

  51. [56]

    Gezari, ARA&A59, 21 (2021)

    S. Gezari, ARA&A59, 21 (2021). DOI 10.1146/ annurev-astro-111720-030029

    2021

  52. [57]

    Mummery, S.A

    A. Mummery, S.A. Balbus, MNRAS492(4), 5655 (2020). DOI 10.1093/ mnras/staa192

    2020

  53. [58]

    Mummery, E

    A. Mummery, E. Nathan, A. Ingram, M. Gardner, MNRAS544(2), 2225 (2025). DOI 10.1093/mnras/staf1565

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staf1565 2025

  54. [59]

    Arcodia, A

    R. Arcodia, A. Merloni, J. Buchner, P. Baldini, G. Ponti, A. Rau, Z. Liu, K. Nandra, M. Salvato, A&A684, L14 (2024). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/ 202348949

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/ 2024

  55. [60]

    French, T

    K.D. French, T. Wevers, J. Law-Smith, O. Graur, A.I. Zabludoff, Space Sci. Rev.216(3), 32 (2020). DOI 10.1007/s11214-020-00657-y

    doi:10.1007/s11214-020-00657-y 2020

  56. [61]

    Y. Yao, V. Ravi, S. Gezari, S. van Velzen, W. Lu, S. Schulze, J.J. Somalwar, S.R. Kulkarni, E. Hammerstein, M. Nicholl, M.J. Graham, D.A. Perley, S.B. Cenko, R. Stein, A. Ricarte, U. Chadayammuri, E. Quataert, E.C. Bellm, J.S. Bloom, R. Dekany, A.J. Drake, S.L. Groom, A.A. Mahabal, T.A. Prince, R. Riddle, B. Rusholme, Y. Sharma, J. Sollerman, L. Yan, ApJL...

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acf216 2023

  57. [62]

    Grotova, A

    I. Grotova, A. Rau, P. Baldini, A.J. Goodwin, Z. Liu, A. Merloni, M. Salvato, G.E. Anderson, R. Arcodia, J. Buchner, M. Krumpe, A. Malyali, M. Mas- terson, J.C.A. Miller-Jones, K. Nandra, R. Shirley, A&A697, A159 (2025). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/202553669 Observations of X-ray Quasi-Periodic Eruptions 45

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202553669 2025

  58. [63]

    Cao, P.G

    Z. Cao, P.G. Jonker, S. Wen, N.C. Stone, A.I. Zabludoff, A&A700, A48 (2025). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/202453423

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202453423 2025

  59. [64]

    van Velzen, S

    S. van Velzen, S. Gezari, E. Hammerstein, N. Roth, S. Frederick, C. Ward, T. Hung, S.B. Cenko, R. Stein, D.A. Perley, K. Taggart, R.J. Foley, J. Soller- man, N. Blagorodnova, I. Andreoni, E.C. Bellm, V. Brinnel, K. De, R. Dekany, M. Feeney, C. Fremling, M. Giomi, V.Z. Golkhou, M.J. Graham, A.Y.Q. Ho, M.M. Kasliwal, C.D. Kilpatrick, S.R. Kulkarni, T. Kupfe...

    2021

  60. [65]

    Veres, A

    P.M. Veres, A. Franckowiak, S. van Velzen, B. Adebahr, S. Taziaux, J. Necker, R. Stein, A. Kier, A. M¨ uller, D.J. Bomans, N. Jordana-Mitjans, M. Kowalski, E. Hammerstein, E. Marci-Boehncke, S. Reusch, S. Garrappa, S. Rose, K.K. Das, A&A706, A324 (2026). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/202452051

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202452051 2026

  61. [66]

    Evans, C.J

    P.A. Evans, C.J. Nixon, S. Campana, P. Charalampopoulos, D.A. Perley, A.A. Breeveld, K.L. Page, S.R. Oates, R.A.J. Eyles-Ferris, D.B. Malesani, L. Izzo, M.R. Goad, P.T. O’Brien, J.P. Osborne, B. Sbarufatti, Nature Astronomy7, 1368 (2023). DOI 10.1038/s41550-023-02073-y

    doi:10.1038/s41550-023-02073-y 2023

  62. [67]

    Guolo, D.R

    M. Guolo, D.R. Pasham, M. Zaja ˇcek, E.R. Coughlin, S. Gezari, P. Sukov ´a, T. Wevers, V. Witzany, F. Tombesi, S. van Velzen, K.D. Alexander, Y. Yao, R. Arcodia, V. Karas, J.C.A. Miller-Jones, R. Remillard, K. Gendreau, E.C. Ferrara, Nature Astronomy8, 347 (2024). DOI 10.1038/s41550-023-02178-4

    doi:10.1038/s41550-023-02178-4 2024

  63. [68]

    Payne, B.J

    A.V. Payne, B.J. Shappee, J.T. Hinkle, P.J. Vallely, C.S. Kochanek, T.W.S. Holoien, K. Auchettl, K.Z. Stanek, T.A. Thompson, J.M.M. Neustadt, M.A. Tucker, J.D. Armstrong, J. Brimacombe, P. Cacella, R. Cornect, L. Den- neau, M.M. Fausnaugh, H. Flewelling, D. Grupe, A.N. Heinze, L.A. Lopez, B. Monard, J.L. Prieto, A.C. Schneider, S.S. Sheppard, J.L. Tonry, ...

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abe38d 2021

  64. [69]

    Quintin, N

    E. Quintin, N. Khan, N.A. Webb, R. Webbe, R.D. Saxton, G. Miniutti, M. Giustini, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2511.22520 (2025). DOI 10.48550/arXiv. 2511.22520

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2511.22520 2025

  65. [70]

    Newsome, I

    M. Newsome, I. Arcavi, K.D. French, C. McCully, A. Zabludoff, N. Stone, S. van Velzen, T. Wang, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2510.18985 (2025). DOI 10.48550/arXiv.2510.18985

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.18985 2025

  66. [71]

    Gilbert, J.J

    O. Gilbert, J.J. Ruan, M. Eracleous, D. Haggard, J.C. Runnoe, ApJ994(2), 209 (2025). DOI 10.3847/1538-4357/ae1745

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae1745 2025

  67. [72]

    Law-Smith, E

    J. Law-Smith, E. Ramirez-Ruiz, S.L. Ellison, R.J. Foley, ApJ850(1), 22 (2017). DOI 10.3847/1538-4357/aa94c7

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa94c7 2017

  68. [73]

    Graur, K.D

    O. Graur, K.D. French, H.J. Zahid, J. Guillochon, K.S. Mandel, K. Auchettl, A.I. Zabludoff, ApJ853(1), 39 (2018). DOI 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa3fd

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaa3fd 2018

  69. [74]

    Gilbert, J.J

    O. Gilbert, J.J. Ruan, M. Eracleous, D. Haggard, J.C. Runnoe, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2409.10486 (2024). DOI 10.48550/arXiv.2409.10486

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2409.10486 2024

  70. [75]

    Hammerstein, S

    E. Hammerstein, S. Gezari, S. van Velzen, S.B. Cenko, N. Roth, C. Ward, S. Frederick, T. Hung, M. Graham, R.J. Foley, E.C. Bellm, C. Cannella, A.J. 46 Wevers, Chakraborty, Quintin, Zaja ˇcek and Giustini Drake, T. Kupfer, R.R. Laher, A.A. Mahabal, F.J. Masci, R. Riddle, C. Rojas- Bravo, R. Smith, ApJL908(1), L20 (2021). DOI 10.3847/2041-8213/abdcb4

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/abdcb4 2021

  71. [76]

    Schawinski, C.M

    K. Schawinski, C.M. Urry, B.D. Simmons, L. Fortson, S. Kaviraj, W.C. Keel, C.J. Lintott, K.L. Masters, R.C. Nichol, M. Sarzi, R. Skibba, E. Treister, K.W. Willett, O.I. Wong, S.K. Yi, MNRAS440(1), 889 (2014). DOI 10.1093/ mnras/stu327

    2014

  72. [77]

    Gehrels, ApJ303, 336 (1986)

    N. Gehrels, ApJ303, 336 (1986). DOI 10.1086/164079

    doi:10.1086/164079 1986

  73. [78]

    eROSITA-RU Tidal Disruption Events with Keck-I/LRIS: Sample Selection, Optical Properties, and Host Galaxy Demographics

    Z. Zhang, Y. Yao, M. Gilfanov, S. Sazonov, P. Medvedev, G. Khorunzhev, R. Sunyaev, V. Ravi, S.R. Kulkarni, J. Somalwar, R. Chornock, I. Bikmaev, M.A. Gorbachev, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2512.12480 (2025). DOI 10.48550/ arXiv.2512.12480

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2512.12480 2025

  74. [79]

    Stern, R.J

    D. Stern, R.J. Assef, D.J. Benford, A. Blain, R. Cutri, A. Dey, P. Eisenhardt, R.L. Griffith, T.H. Jarrett, S. Lake, F. Masci, S. Petty, S.A. Stanford, C.W. Tsai, E.L. Wright, L. Yan, F. Harrison, K. Madsen, ApJ753(1), 30 (2012). DOI 10.1088/0004-637X/753/1/30

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/753/1/30 2012

  75. [80]

    Simard, J.T

    L. Simard, J.T. Mendel, D.R. Patton, S.L. Ellison, A.W. McConnachie, ApJS196(1), 11 (2011). DOI 10.1088/0067-0049/196/1/11

    doi:10.1088/0067-0049/196/1/11 2011

  76. [81]

    French, N

    K.D. French, N. Earl, A.B. Novack, B. Pardasani, V.R. Pillai, A. Tripathi, M.E. Verrico, ApJ950(2), 153 (2023). DOI 10.3847/1538-4357/acd249

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acd249 2023

  77. [82]

    Greene, J

    J.E. Greene, J. Strader, L.C. Ho, ARA&A58, 257 (2020). DOI 10.1146/ annurev-astro-032620-021835

    2020

  78. [83]

    Wevers, S

    T. Wevers, S. van Velzen, P.G. Jonker, N.C. Stone, T. Hung, F. Onori, S. Gezari, N. Blagorodnova, MNRAS471(2), 1694 (2017). DOI 10.1093/mnras/stx1703

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1703 2017

  79. [84]

    Patra, W

    K.C. Patra, W. Lu, Y. Ma, E. Quataert, G. Miniutti, M. Chiaberge, A.V. Filippenko, B.A. Gonz ´alez, MNRAS530(4), 5120 (2024). DOI 10.1093/ mnras/stae1146

    2024

  80. [85]

    Baldwin, M.M

    J.A. Baldwin, M.M. Phillips, R. Terlevich, PASP93, 5 (1981). DOI 10.1086/ 130766

    1981

Showing first 80 references.