Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 50 references

Detection of multiple X-ray quasi-periodic oscillations in IGR J19294+1816 with Insight-HXMT

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

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

Pith's one-line read IGR J19294+1816 shows two X-ray QPOs at the spin frequency minus and plus the 30 mHz oscillation, making it the second strongly magnetized pulsar with such sidebands.

desk verdict Solid confirmation of the 30 mHz QPO plus a plausible but under-supported sideband claim that needs a matched-noise significance test before it can carry the paper's headline. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.05771 v1 pith:ZLETEBAW submitted 2025-06-06 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.SRhep-ph

Wen Yang , Wei Wang This is my paper
classification astro-ph.HEastro-ph.SRhep-ph
keywords X-raypulsarsquasi-periodicoscillationsIGRJ19294+1816Be/X-raybinariessidebandspowerdensityspectrumwaveletanalysisaccretion-powered
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper analyzes Insight-HXMT timing observations of the Be/X-ray binary IGR J19294+1816 taken during the decline of its 2019 Type I outburst and argues that the source emits three quasi-periodic oscillations rather than one. Alongside the previously known ~30 mHz QPO, the 25–50 keV power spectrum shows new features at 51.1 ± 2.1 mHz and 113.6 ± 3.5 mHz, which sit symmetrically around the neutron star's 80.2 mHz spin frequency. The paper interprets the pair as sidebands produced when the ~30 mHz QPO modulates the amplitude of the coherent pulsations. If correct, this makes the source the second strongly magnetized accreting pulsar known to show this sideband fingerprint, and it ties a low-frequency QPO directly to the pulsar's emission mechanism.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the sideband relation $\nu_{\mathrm{NS}} \pm \nu_{\mathrm{QPO}}$: two oscillation features that bracket the spin frequency at equal offsets from it. The mechanism that produces them is the Fourier frequency-shifting theorem, which says that a periodic signal whose amplitude is modulated at some frequency develops extra spectral components at the carrier frequency plus and minus the modulating frequency. Here the carrier is the coherent pulsation at $\nu_{\mathrm{NS}} \simeq 80.2$ mHz and the modulator is the $\sim 30$ mHz QPO, giving predicted sidebands at $\sim 50$ and $\sim 110$ mHz. The paper supports the identification with wavelet analysis showing transient power at all three frequencies, and it proposes that a coherent 'blob' of material orbiting near the inner disk at the QPO frequency could be the physical modulator.

What would settle it

Run the same Monte Carlo significance test on the 51.1 mHz peak that the paper runs on the 113.7 mHz peak: simulate thousands of power spectra from the best-fit model without that Lorentzian and count how often a peak at that frequency appears by chance; if the false-positive rate is above a few percent, the sideband claim loses its statistical foundation. A second check is to divide the observation into segments with and without the ~30 mHz QPO and verify that the sidebands appear only in segments where the 30 mHz signal is present, as amplitude modulation requires.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is the detection of two quasi-periodic oscillations in the 25–50 keV band of IGR J19294+1816 at 51.1 ± 2.1 mHz and 113.6 ± 3.5 mHz, with rms amplitudes near 12%, in addition to the main ~30.2 mHz QPO. Since the neutron star spins at ν_NS ≈ 80.2 mHz, the two frequencies match ν_NS − ν_QPO and ν_NS + ν_QPO. The paper argues that this is not a harmonic relationship but the signature of amplitude modulation: the ~30 mHz QPO modulates the amplitude of the coherent pulsations, and by the Fourier frequency-shifting theorem this generates symmetric sidebands around the spin frequency. It therefore identifies IGR J19294+1816 as the second strongly magnetized X-ray pulsar, after 4U 1626–67, with significant sideband signals around its spin frequency.

Load-bearing premise

The sideband interpretation stands or falls on the 51 and 114 mHz features being real oscillations rather than red-noise fluctuations or Lorentzian-fitting artifacts; this is fragile because the 114 mHz wavelet detections have R-factors of 0.55–0.85, below the paper's stated threshold of 1, and the 51 mHz feature has no simulation-based significance test.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • IGR J19294+1816 becomes the second strongly magnetized pulsar, after 4U 1626–67, with significant sideband signals around its spin frequency.
  • The 25–50 keV power spectrum requires an additional Lorentzian near 113.6 mHz; the improvement is supported by a simulation-based p-value of $2\times10^{-4}$.
  • The ~30 mHz QPO's rms amplitude increases with energy, from ~8% at 10–20 keV to ~14% at 25–50 keV.
  • The ~30 mHz QPO centroid frequency stays nearly constant across luminosity changes, a property that disfavors the beat-frequency model.
  • Wavelet analysis shows the QPOs are transient, with the 30 mHz signal lasting longer than the 50 and 110 mHz features.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the sideband interpretation holds, the sideband-to-pulsation power ratio should track the rms amplitude of the 30 mHz QPO in the same energy band, giving an independent way to measure the QPO strength.
  • The proposed orbiting-blob picture predicts that the sidebands should vanish when the 30 mHz QPO disappears; searching for both in a longer or repeated observation would test that link.
  • A systematic search for similar $\nu_{\mathrm{spin}} \pm \nu_{\mathrm{QPO}}$ pairs in other strongly magnetized pulsars with mHz QPOs could reveal whether this is a general emission-geometry effect rather than a curiosity of one source.
  • One could phase-resolve the pulse profile to look for a quasi-periodic absorption feature that appears once per blob orbit, a direct signature of the proposed reprocessing structure.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper analyzes Insight-HXMT observations of the Be/X-ray binary IGR J19294+1816 during the decline of its 2019 Type I outburst. The authors detect the neutron star spin at ~80 mHz, confirm the previously reported ~30 mHz QPO, and measure its rms to increase from ~8% at 10-20 keV to ~14-15% at 25-50 keV. They report two additional QPO-like features in the 25-50 keV PDS of one ObsID, at ~51.1 mHz and ~113.6 mHz, and interpret them as sidebands of the spin frequency produced by amplitude modulation by the ~30 mHz QPO under the Fourier frequency-shifting theorem. Continuous wavelet analysis is used to characterize the transient behavior of the QPOs. The paper concludes that IGR J19294+1816 is the second strongly magnetized X-ray pulsar with significant sideband signals around its spin frequency, and discusses several physical origins, including a 'blob' of material orbiting the neutron star.

Significance. The strength of the paper is the re-detection and energy-dependent characterization of the ~30 mHz QPO, which matches the earlier AstroSat/XMM-Newton detection and extends it to hard X-rays with Insight-HXMT. If the two sideband features are genuine, the source would indeed be a rare second example after 4U 1626-67, and the wavelet analysis adds useful time-frequency information about the QPO transient behavior. However, the central new claim is not yet statistically secured: the 51.1 mHz feature lacks any null-hypothesis test, the 113.6 mHz PDS feature relies on a single ObsID with the width fixed and no trials correction, and the supporting wavelet detections at ~110 mHz fall below the paper's own R>1 threshold. The manuscript is clearly organized and the fitting procedure is described in enough detail that the required simulations are straightforward to perform. No code or data products are provided, but this is not essential for an observational timing paper.

major comments (4)
  1. [§3.2, Table 1] The 51.1 mHz QPO (QPO2) is reported as a detection with rms 12.6(29)% and Q = 7.5(4), but no null-hypothesis test is presented for this feature. Unlike the 113.6 mHz feature, there is no F-test or simulation, and the feature appears in only one 25-50 keV PDS (ObsID P021405600201). The wavelet detections labeled QPO2 in Table 2 have centroid frequencies between 44.8 and 60.1 mHz across ObsIDs, so they do not independently confirm a stable 51.1 mHz line. Because the 'symmetric sidebands' claim requires both sidebands to be genuine, a matched simulation of the PDS without the 51.1 mHz Lorentzian (following the same fakeit procedure used for QPO3) should be reported.
  2. [§3.3, Eq. (2), Table 2] The paper states in §3.3 that only QPOs with R-factors exceeding 1.0 and GTIs longer than 500 s are selected for further analysis. However, Table 2 lists QPO3 detections at 109.0, 104.2, and 111.4 mHz with R = 0.55, 0.85, and 0.67, respectively, all below the stated threshold. These sub-threshold wavelet features are then used in §3.3 and §4 as supporting evidence for the ~110 mHz sideband. The inconsistency should be resolved: either apply the stated threshold and remove these entries, or rephrase the selection criterion and provide an alternative significance estimate for these features.
  3. [§3.2] The 113.6 mHz feature is tested only after fixing the width of the additional Lorentzian at 0.03 Hz. The reported simulated p-value of 2e-4 is conditional on that choice, and the reported Q = 3.8 is a direct consequence of the fixed width rather than an independently measured coherence. The robustness of the detection to the width should be demonstrated, for example by repeating the simulation with the width free or with values spanning the fitted range. The manuscript should also state how many trial frequencies, energy bands, and individual ObsIDs were searched when reporting this p-value, since a single number without a trials correction overstates significance if the search space was large.
  4. [§4] The sideband interpretation identifies 51.1 and 113.6 mHz with ν_spin ± ν_QPO. With the measured spin frequency 80.09 mHz (from P = 12.486 s) and QPO1 frequency 30.2(1) mHz, the predicted sidebands are 49.9 and 110.3 mHz; the measured offsets are 29.0±2.1 and 33.5±3.5 mHz. These are consistent at the ~1σ level, but the consistency is asserted rather than quantified. Given that the central conclusion labels the source as the second strongly magnetized pulsar with significant sidebands, a quantitative statistical test of the frequency relation (e.g., fitting ν_spin ± ν_QPO with the three frequencies jointly and reporting the goodness of fit) should be added.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§3.2] The phrase 'there would be the presence of an additional QPO above 0.05 Hz' is ungrammatical; consider 'there is evidence for an additional QPO near 0.11 Hz.'
  2. [§3.3, Eq. (1)] The symbols x̂_k and Ψ̂*(sω_k) are not defined in the text; please define the Fourier transform conventions and the wavelet normalization, or point explicitly to Torrence & Compo (1998).
  3. [Table 2] In the ObsID 0602, 10-20 keV row, the QPO2 R-factor is listed as '1.05' without an uncertainty, unlike all other entries; add the uncertainty or state that the value was fixed.
  4. [§4, Eq. (3)] The quantity is labeled t_prec, but the subsequent text quotes a frequency of ~10 mHz; clarify whether t_prec is the precession period and show the conversion to frequency.
  5. [Acknowledgements] The phrase 'the the NSFC' contains a duplicated article; please correct it.
  6. [Abstract and Figure 5] The claim that the ~30 mHz centroid is 'nearly constant' for different luminosities is stronger than the data; the measured range is 29-35 mHz and the Pearson coefficients are 0.49 and 0.26, so 'weakly correlated' would be more precise.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

An observational detection paper with an interpretive sideband model; no load-bearing step reduces to its own inputs and no self-citation chain forces the central claim.

full rationale

The paper is an observational timing analysis of IGR J19294+1816. The spin peak at ~80 mHz, the ~30 mHz QPO, and the ~51 and ~113 mHz features are each obtained from independent fits to power density spectra, with the 113 mHz feature additionally tested by simulated F-statistics. The identification of the 51 and 113 mHz features as sidebands of the form nu_spin +/- nu_qpo is an interpretation applied after detection, via the standard Fourier frequency-shifting theorem; it is not used to define or fit those features, nor are the feature frequencies forced by the spin and QPO frequencies. The theoretical estimates in Section 4 adopt literature values for the magnetic field, distance, luminosity, and viscosity parameter and do not feed back into the claimed detections. Self-citations to Yang & Wang (2025) are methodological or contextual and are not load-bearing for the central detection claim. The statistical weaknesses noted by the skeptic, such as wavelet R-factors below 1 for some ~110 mHz detections and the absence of a reported simulation for the 51 mHz feature, are correctness or robustness concerns, not circularity. Therefore no circular step is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central result is an observational timing measurement, so the main fitted quantities are Lorentzian parameters characterizing the PDS. The only hand-chosen parameter in the detection model is the fixed width of the 113.7 mHz Lorentzian. The theoretical estimates in Section 4 adopt prior literature values, and the blob is a speculative entity without independent evidence.

free parameters (2)
  • QPO3 Lorentzian width = 0.03 Hz (fixed)
    In Section 3.2, the 0.113 Hz Lorentzian in the 25-50 keV PDS for ObsID 0201 had its width fixed at 0.03 Hz before the F-test simulation; the chosen width affects the significance and rms of the 113.7 mHz sideband candidate.
  • Disk viscosity alpha = 0.023 (adopted from Roy et al. 2019)
    Used in Eq. (3) for the magnetic disk precession frequency estimate in Section 4; it is taken from fits to 4U 0115+63, not measured for IGR J19294+1816.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The wavelet significance test assumes the light curves follow a red noise random process with the 95% confidence levels computed from that model.
    Section 3.3 compares global wavelet power to red noise spectra; if the red noise model is misspecified, the reported significances shift.
  • standard math The Fourier frequency-shifting theorem: amplitude modulation of a periodic signal at frequency nu_m produces sidebands at nu_s plus or minus nu_m.
    Used in Section 4 to interpret 51.1 and 113.7 mHz as sidebands of the 80.2 mHz pulsation, citing Kommers et al. 1998.
  • domain assumption The PDS can be decomposed into broad-band noise, the spin peak at about 0.08 Hz, its harmonic at about 0.16 Hz, and Lorentzian QPO components.
    Section 3.2 relies on this Lorentzian decomposition; if the continuum model is wrong, the QPO parameters and significances shift.
  • domain assumption The source distance of 11 kpc and magnetic field of 4.6e12 G from the cyclotron line are adopted from prior work for luminosity and Alfven radius estimates.
    These values enter the theoretical discussion in Section 4 but do not affect the detection itself.
invented entities (1)
  • Blob (coherent orbiting reprocessing structure)
    purpose: Explains the simultaneous 30 mHz QPO and symmetric sidebands around the spin frequency via quasi-periodic absorption or scattering of the pulsar beam.
    Introduced in Section 4; the authors note it is unclear how such a structure persists despite differential rotation. No independent predicted signature is given.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Detection of multiple X-ray quasi-periodic oscillations in IGR J19294+1816 with Insight-HXMT." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZLETEBAW

@misc{pith2026250605771,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Detection of multiple X-ray quasi-periodic oscillations in IGR J19294+1816 with Insight-HXMT},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZLETEBAW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.05771}
}
abstract

We report the timing results with Insight-HXMT observations of X-ray binary IGR J19294+1816 during its 2019 Type I outburst at the decline phase shortly following its peak. We analyze the light curves and power density spectrum (PDS) of the 2019 observations and reveal a peak at approximately $\nu_{NS} \sim 80.2$ mHz, corresponding to X-ray pulsations from the neutron star. In addition, a significant quasi-periodic oscillation (QPO) feature is observed at around $\nu_{QPO} \sim 30.2$ mHz from 10-50 keV, with the rms amplitude increasing with energy. Furthermore, we detect two QPOs at the frequency of $\sim 51.1$ mHz and $113.7$ mHz (corresponding to sidebands near $\nu_{NS} \pm \nu_{QPO}$) in 25-50 keV, exhibiting an rms amplitude of around 12$\%$. Wavelet analysis also shows multiple QPOs at the frequency of $\sim 30$ mHz, $50$ mHz and $ 110$ mHz and these QPO features show transient behaviors, the centroid frequencies of $\sim 30$ mHz remain nearly constant for different luminosities. Our research identifies IGR J19294+1816 as the second strong magnetic-field pulsar with significant sideband signals around the spin frequency. We explore various physical origins that could explain the presence of multiple QPOs.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.05771 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Average photon counts per second with a time resolution of 20000s during the Insight-HXMT observations from 2019 Octo￾ber 23 to October 30 for 1-10 keV, 10-20 keV, 20-30 keV, 30-50 keV. previous publications, e.g., Wang et al. 2021; Chen et al. 2021). To take advantage of the best-screened event file to generate the high-level products including the energy spectra, response file, light curves and background files, w… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Pulse profiles of IGR J19294+1816 obtained from Insight￾HXMT data in different energy bands for ObsID P021405600201. Zero-phase was chosen arbitrarily to match the minimum in the profile. by using the 𝑒 𝑓 𝑠𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑐ℎ method. The uncertainties of the spin period are estimated by folding the light curve with a large number of periods around the approximate period by maximizing 𝜒 2 and determined using the Gaussian function… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Power density spectrum of IGR J19294+1816 for the Insight-HXMT observations (ObsID P021405600201) of 10-20 keV (left panel) and 25-50 keV (right panel). The solid black lines correspond to the best-fit model with multi–Lorentzian function. The sharp peaks corresponding to the neutron star’s spin period of 12.48 s and its harmonics are indicated by the blue dotted line. The QPO signals, 𝜈𝑄𝑃𝑂1 ∼ 30𝑚𝐻𝑧, 𝜈𝑄𝑃𝑂2 ∼ 50𝑚𝐻𝑧, … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Sub-figures: wavelet power (left) and its global wavelet power spectrum (right), count rates (bottom) with 10 s bins for ObsID P021405600201 in MJD 58781.15 of 1-10 keV (a), 10-20 keV (b), 25-50 keV (c) and 50-100 keV (d). Gray lines in wavelet power refer to the 95% c…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Centroid frequency of 𝑄𝑃𝑂1 versus the average count rate corresponding to the GTI data. Here, ∧ 𝑥𝑘 is a discrete Fourier transform of our signal (1- 10 keV for LE data, 10-20 keV for ME data, 25-50 keV for HE data with time resolution of 128−1 𝑠), ∧ 𝛹 (𝑠𝜔𝑘) is Morle wa…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 41 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eprint howpublished institution journal key month number organization pages publisher school series title misctitle type volume year version url label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts ...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION format.url url empty "" new.block "" url * "" * if FUNCTION format.eprint eprint empty "" archivePrefix empty "" archivePrefix "arXiv" = new.block " " eprint * " " * new.block " " eprint * " " * if if if FUNCTION format.doi doi empty "" " " doi * " " * if FUNCTION format.pid doi empty eprint empty ur...

  3. [3]

    ئ . ( ` 2 @_ߡ*pԩsNytaw?^ Q @ @ y3m @ _ Ǎ ׵C @w ] c ^r- ?uz` Ѕ zzzU N !T n! t/ P B, @ & nv

    thebibliography [1] 20pt to REFERENCES 6pt =0pt -12pt 10pt plus 3pt =0pt =0pt =1pt plus 1pt =0pt =0pt -12pt =13pt plus 1pt =20pt =13pt plus 1pt \@M =10000 =-1.0em =0pt =0pt 0pt =0pt =1.0em @enumiv\@empty 10000 10000 `\.\@m \@noitemerr \@latex@warning Empty `thebibliography' environment \@ifnextchar \@reference \@latexerr Missing key on reference command E...

    2021

  4. [4]

    A., & Shaham, J

    Alpar, M. A., & Shaham, J. 1985, Nature, 316, 239

    work page 1985

  5. [5]

    1989, Astrophysical Journal, Part 1 (ISSN 0004-637X), vol

    Angelini, L., Stella, L., & Parmar, A. 1989, Astrophysical Journal, Part 1 (ISSN 0004-637X), vol. 346, Nov. 15, 1989, p. 906-911., 346, 906

    work page 1989

  6. [6]

    1996, in ASP Conf., Vol

    Arnaud, K. 1996, in ASP Conf., Vol. 17

    1996

  7. [7]

    Atapin, K., Fabrika, S., & Caballero-Garc \' a, M. D. 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 486, 2766

    work page 2019

  8. [8]

    2012, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 544, A123

    Becker, P., Klochkov, D., Sch \"o nherr, G., et al. 2012, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 544, A123

    work page 2012

Show all 50 references
  1. [9]

    2020, SCIENCE CHINA Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy, 63, 1

    Cao, X., Jiang, W., Meng, B., et al. 2020, SCIENCE CHINA Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy, 63, 1

    2020

  2. [10]

    2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 919, 33

    Chen, X., Wang, W., Tang, Y., et al. 2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 919, 33

    2021

  3. [11]

    2020, Science China Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy, 63, 1

    Chen, Y., Cui, W., Li, W., et al. 2020, Science China Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy, 63, 1

    2020

  4. [12]

    Corbet , R. H. D., & Krimm , H. A. 2009, The Astronomer's Telegram, 2008, 1

    2009

  5. [13]

    2011, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 414, 1023

    Devasia, J., James, M., Paul, B., & Indulekha, K. 2011, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 414, 1023

    2011

  6. [14]

    2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 503, 6045

    Ding, Y., Wang, W., Zhang, P., et al. 2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 503, 6045

    2021

  7. [15]

    2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 524, 1478

    Ghosh, A., Gallo, L., & Gonzalez, A. 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 524, 1478

    2023

  8. [16]

    1979, Astrophysical Journal, Part 1, vol

    Ghosh, P., & Lamb, F. 1979, Astrophysical Journal, Part 1, vol. 234, Nov. 15, 1979, p. 296-316., 234, 296

    1979

  9. [17]

    2004, The Astrophysical Journal, 616, 463

    Inam, S., Baykal, A., Swank, J., & Stark, M. 2004, The Astrophysical Journal, 616, 463

    2004

  10. [18]

    K., Naik, S., & Paul, B

    Jaisawal, G. K., Naik, S., & Paul, B. 2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 779, 54

    2013

  11. [19]

    2010, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 407, 285

    James, M., Paul, B., Devasia, J., & Indulekha, K. 2010, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 407, 285

    2010

  12. [20]

    2011, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 410, 1489

    ---. 2011, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 410, 1489

    2011

  13. [21]

    M., Chakrabarty, D., & Lewin, W

    Kommers, J. M., Chakrabarty, D., & Lewin, W. H. 1998, The Astrophysical Journal, 497, L33

    1998

  14. [22]

    2024, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 529, 1187

    Li, P., Tao, L., Ma, R., et al. 2024, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 529, 1187

    2024

  15. [23]

    2020, SCIENCE CHINA Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy, 63, 1

    Liu, C., Zhang, Y., Li, X., et al. 2020, SCIENCE CHINA Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy, 63, 1

    2020

  16. [24]

    2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 516, 5579

    Liu, Q., Wang, W., Chen, X., et al. 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 516, 5579

    2022

  17. [25]

    2009, Astronomy Letters, 35, 433

    Lutovinov, A., & Tsygankov, S. 2009, Astronomy Letters, 35, 433

    2009

  18. [26]

    J., et al

    Malacaria, C., Huppenkothen, D., Roberts, O. J., et al. 2024, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 681, A25

    2024

  19. [27]

    2020, The Astrophysical Journal, 896, 90

    Malacaria, C., Jenke, P., Roberts, O., et al. 2020, The Astrophysical Journal, 896, 90

    2020

  20. [28]

    2024, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 531, 530

    Manikantan, H., Paul, B., Sharma, R., Pradhan, P., & Rana, V. 2024, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 531, 530

    2024

  21. [29]

    1976, Nature, 259, 292

    Maraschi, L., Treves, A., & Van den Heuvel, E. 1976, Nature, 259, 292

    1976

  22. [30]

    A., & Melatos, A

    Mereghetti, S., Pons, J. A., & Melatos, A. 2015, Space Science Reviews, 191, 315

    2015

  23. [31]

    2024, in Handbook of X-ray and Gamma-ray Astrophysics (Springer), 4105--4176

    Mushtukov, A., & Tsygankov, S. 2024, in Handbook of X-ray and Gamma-ray Astrophysics (Springer), 4105--4176

    2024

  24. [32]

    A., Connors, A., Kashyap, V

    Protassov, R., Van Dyk, D. A., Connors, A., Kashyap, V. L., & Siemiginowska, A. 2002, The Astrophysical Journal, 571, 545

    2002

  25. [33]

    L., Zhang, S., Song, L

    Qu, J. L., Zhang, S., Song, L. M., & Falanga, M. 2005, The Astrophysical Journal, 629, L33

    2005

  26. [34]

    2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 508, 5578

    Raman, G., Paul, B., & Bhattacharya, D. 2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 508, 5578

    2021

  27. [35]

    2011, Astrophysics and Space Science, 332, 1

    Reig, P. 2011, Astrophysics and Space Science, 332, 1

    2011

  28. [36]

    J., Bernabeu, G., Magazz \`u , A., Torrejon, J

    Rodes-Roca, J. J., Bernabeu, G., Magazz \`u , A., Torrejon, J. M., & Solano, E. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 476, 2110

    2018

  29. [37]

    2009, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 508, 889

    Rodriguez, J., Tomsick, J., Bodaghee, A., et al. 2009, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 508, 889

    2009

  30. [38]

    2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 872, 33

    Roy, J., Agrawal, P., Iyer, N., et al. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 872, 33

    2019

  31. [39]

    2025, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, staf379

    Sharma, R., Jain, C., Paul, B., & Beri, A. 2025, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, staf379

    2025

  32. [40]

    2002, The Astrophysical Journal, 564, 361

    Shirakawa, A., & Lai, D. 2002, The Astrophysical Journal, 564, 361

    2002

  33. [41]

    1971, Soviet Astronomy, Vol

    Shvartsman, V. 1971, Soviet Astronomy, Vol. 15, p. 342, 15, 342

    1971

  34. [42]

    2019, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 622, A61

    Staubert, R., Tr \"u mper, J., Kendziorra, E., et al. 2019, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 622, A61

    2019

  35. [43]

    Torrence, C., & Compo, G. P. 1998, Bulletin of the American Meteorological society, 79, 61

    1998

  36. [44]

    2007, Astronomy Letters, 33, 368

    Tsygankov, S., Lutovinov, A., Churazov, E., & Sunyaev, R. 2007, Astronomy Letters, 33, 368

    2007

  37. [45]

    S., Doroshenko, V., Mushtukov, A

    Tsygankov, S. S., Doroshenko, V., Mushtukov, A. A., Lutovinov, A. A., & Poutanen, J. 2019, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 621, A134

    2019

  38. [46]

    2009, The Astronomer's Telegram, 1997, 1

    Turler, M., Rodriguez, J., & Ferrigno, C. 2009, The Astronomer's Telegram, 1997, 1

    2009

  39. [47]

    1987, Astrophysical Journal, Part 1 (ISSN 0004-637X), vol

    Van der Klis, M., Stella, L., White, N., Jansen, F., & Parmar, A. 1987, Astrophysical Journal, Part 1 (ISSN 0004-637X), vol. 316, May 1, 1987, p. 411-426., 316, 411

    1987

  40. [48]

    2021, Journal of High Energy Astrophysics, 30, 1

    Wang, W., Tang, Y., Tuo, Y., et al. 2021, Journal of High Energy Astrophysics, 30, 1

    2021

  41. [49]

    2025, The Astrophysical Journal, 980, 194

    Yang, W., & Wang, W. 2025, The Astrophysical Journal, 980, 194

    2025

  42. [50]

    Yang, W., Wang, W., & Epili, P. R. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 969, 107

    2024

Pith tools

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