An Investigation of Systematic Effects from Background Priors on PSR J0740$+$6620 Radius Estimates using Synthetic NICER and XMM-Newton Data

TL;DR

This study examines how background modeling errors affect neutron star radius estimates from synthetic NICER and XMM-Newton data, finding that even significant background underestimation causes minimal bias in radius inference.

Contribution

It demonstrates that background misparameterization has limited impact on radius estimates, supporting the robustness of NICER-like data analyses for neutron star measurements.

Findings

Background underestimation by a factor of five shifts radius estimates by about 1σ.

Bayesian evidence favors correct background models over incorrect ones.

Radius estimates remain accurate despite significant background modeling errors.

Abstract

Accurate and precise measurements of neutron star radii provide invaluable information about the cold, dense matter in neutron star cores. Analyses of synthetic X-ray pulse waveform data similar to the data obtained from non-accreting neutron stars using the Neutron star Interior Composition Explorer (NICER) have indicated that mass and radius estimates made using such data are robust against some systematic errors that may be made when modeling these data, such as errors in the assumed pattern of the thermal X-ray emission from the surface of these stars. A potentially important but so far unexplored source of systematic error is misparameterization of unmodulated background components, which can bias the inferred radius, particularly when data from different telescopes are used in the analysis. In this study, we investigate the effects of the background model on radius estimates by jointly analyzing synthetic NICER and XMM-Newton data, using the $\sim 2.1~M_\odot$ pulsar PSR~J0740$+$6620 as a prototypical example. Our analysis shows that even if the background assumed in the model underestimates the actual background by a factor of more than five, the resulting shift of the radius posterior from the true value of the radius corresponds to only $\sim1\sigma$. In all the cases we examined, the Bayesian evidence for the correct background model is greater than for the incorrect background model. These results add to the evidence that analyses of NICER-like data provide accurate measurements of neutron star radii when the statistical sampling is thorough and the model fits the data well.