We present a phase-resolved, optical, spectroscopic study of the eclipsing low-mass X-ray binary, EXO 0748-676 = UY Vol. The sensitivity of Gemini combined with our complete phase coverage makes for the most detailed blue spectroscopic study of this
source obtained during its extended twenty-four year period of activity. We identify 12 optical emission lines and present trailed spectra, tomograms, and the first modulation maps of this source in outburst. The strongest line emission originates downstream of the stream-impact point, and this component is quite variable from night-to-night. Underlying this is weaker, more stable axisymmetric emission from the accretion disk. We identify weak, sharp emission components moving in phase with the donor star, from which we measure Kem = 329+/-26 km/s. Combining all the available dynamical constraints on the motion of the donor star with our observed accretion disk velocities we favor a neutron star mass close to canonical (M1~1.5Msun) and a very low mass donor (M2~0.1$Msun). We note that there is no evidence for CNO processing that is often associated with undermassive donor stars, however. A main sequence donor would require both a neutron star more massive than 2Msun and substantially sub-Keplerian disk emission.
We present X-ray and infrared observations of the X-ray source CXOGC J174536.1-285638. Previous observations suggest that this source may be an accreting binary with a high-mass donor (HMXB) or a colliding wind binary (CWB). Based on the Chandra and
XMM-Newton light curve, we have found an apparent 189+/-6 day periodicity with better than 99.997% confidence. We discuss several possible causes of this periodicity, including both orbital and superorbital interpretations. We explore in detail the possibility that the X-ray modulation is related to an orbital period and discuss the implications for two scenarios; one in which the variability is caused by obscuration of the X-ray source by a stellar wind, and the other in which it is caused by an eclipse of the X-ray source. We find that in the first case, CXOGC J174536.1-285638 is consistent with both CWB and HMXB interpretations, but in the second, CXOGC J174536.1-285638 is more likely a HMXB.
