2015
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stv2520
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Investigations of the emission geometry of the four-component radio pulsar J0631+1036

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The near even spacing of its four features, the deep emission minimum in the profile center and the weakness of its outer pair with respect to the inner pair distinguish its unusual profile from the rest of the four-component population. Teixeira et al (2016) show that such a profile can be explained by the widely used core-double-cone beaming model but needs an unrealistic fine tuning when assuming circular beams.…”
Section: 1mentioning
confidence: 98%
“…The near even spacing of its four features, the deep emission minimum in the profile center and the weakness of its outer pair with respect to the inner pair distinguish its unusual profile from the rest of the four-component population. Teixeira et al (2016) show that such a profile can be explained by the widely used core-double-cone beaming model but needs an unrealistic fine tuning when assuming circular beams.…”
Section: 1mentioning
confidence: 98%
“…J0631+1036: This pulsar presents a rare example of a fourcomponent pulsar. Teixeira et al (2016) studied the pulsar and worked out the geometry that we use here to model its profiles. The authors outline issues with accommodating the inner cone, but the dimension do satisfy the double cone model.…”
Section: B0540+23mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The debate between the "corecone" beam models and other models (such as the "patchy" beam, fan-beam, microbeam pattern et al) as well as multi-frequency observed data have been persisted by many authors (e.g. Lyne & Manchester 1988;Kramer et al 1994;Manchester 1995;Gil & Krawczyk 1996;Melrose 1999;Mitra & Deshpande 1999;Gangadhara et al 2001;Han & Manchester 2001;Kijak & Gil 2002;Manchester et al 2005;Karastergiou & Johnston 2007;Maciesiak et al 2012;Beskin & Philippov 2012;Fonseca et al 2014;Wang et al 2014;Cerutti et al 2016;Dyks et al 2016;Pierbattista et al 2016;Teixeira et al 2016). Besides, some theoretical perspectives (such as: the radio radiation beam is a hollow beam without a core cone; the pulse profiles at lower frequency are wider than those at higher frequencies) have been challenged by a large number of observations.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%