Search for: All records

ABSTRACT A pulsar’s pulse profile gets broadened at low frequencies due to dispersion along the line of sight or due to multipath propagation. The dynamic nature of the interstellar medium makes both of these effects time-dependent and introduces slowly varying time delays in the measured times-of-arrival similar to those introduced by passing gravitational waves. In this article, we present an improved method to correct for such delays by obtaining unbiased dispersion measure (DM) measurements by using low-frequency estimates of the scattering parameters. We evaluate this method by comparing the obtained DM estimates with those, where scatter-broadening is ignored using simulated data. A bias is seen in the estimated DMs for simulated data with pulse-broadening with a larger variability for a data set with a variable frequency scaling index, $$\alpha$$, as compared to that assuming a Kolmogorov turbulence. Application of the proposed method removes this bias robustly for data with band averaged signal-to-noise ratio larger than 100. We report the measurements of the scatter-broadening time and $$\alpha$$ from analysis of PSR J1643$$-$$1224, observed with upgraded Giant Metrewave Radio Telescope as part of the Indian Pulsar Timing Array experiment. These scattering parameters were found to vary with epoch and $$\alpha$$ was different from that expected for Kolmogorov turbulence. Finally, we present the DM time-series after application of this technique to PSR J1643$$-$$1224. 

Abstract The Australian, Chinese, European, Indian, and North American pulsar timing array (PTA) collaborations recently reported, at varying levels, evidence for the presence of a nanohertz gravitational-wave background (GWB). Given that each PTA made different choices in modeling their data, we perform a comparison of the GWB and individual pulsar noise parameters across the results reported from the PTAs that constitute the International Pulsar Timing Array (IPTA). We show that despite making different modeling choices, there is no significant difference in the GWB parameters that are measured by the different PTAs, agreeing within 1σ. The pulsar noise parameters are also consistent between different PTAs for the majority of the pulsars included in these analyses. We bridge the differences in modeling choices by adopting a standardized noise model for all pulsars and PTAs, finding that under this model there is a reduction in the tension in the pulsar noise parameters. As part of this reanalysis, we “extended” each PTA’s data set by adding extra pulsars that were not timed by that PTA. Under these extensions, we find better constraints on the GWB amplitude and a higher signal-to-noise ratio for the Hellings–Downs correlations. These extensions serve as a prelude to the benefits offered by a full combination of data across all pulsars in the IPTA, i.e., the IPTA’s Data Release 3, which will involve not just adding in additional pulsars but also including data from all three PTAs where any given pulsar is timed by more than a single PTA.