pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2605.12598 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-12 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Depth of Maximum of Air-Shower Profiles above 10¹7.7 eV Measured with the Fluorescence Detector of the Pierre Auger Observatory

The Pierre Auger Collaboration: A. Abdul Halim , P. Abreu , M. Aglietta , M. Ahmed , I. Allekotte , K. Almeida Cheminant , R. Aloisio , J. Alvarez-Mu\~niz
show 352 more authors
A. Ambrosone J. Ammerman Yebra L. Anchordoqui B. Andrada L. Andrade Dourado L. Apollonio C. Aramo E. Arnone J.C. Arteaga Vel\'azquez P. Assis G. Avila E. Avocone A. Bakalova Y. Balibrea A. Baluta F. Barbato J.A. Bellido A. Bartz Mocellin J.P. Behler C. Berat M.E. Bertaina M. Bianciotto P.L. Biermann V. Binet K. Bismark T. Bister J. Biteau J. Blazek J. Bl\"umer M. Boh\'a\v{c}ov\'a D. Boncioli C. Bonifazi N. Borodai J. Brack P.G. Brichetto Orquera A. Bueno S. Buitink A. Bwembya T.R. Caba Pineda K.S. Caballero-Mora S. Cabana-Freire L. Caccianiga J. Cara\c{c}a-Valente R. Caruso A. Castellina F. Catalani G. Cataldi L. Cazon M. Cerda B. \v{C}erm\'akov\'a A. Cermenati K. Cerny J.A. Chinellato J. Chudoba L. Chytka R.W. Clay A.C. Cobos Cerutti R. Colalillo R. Concei\c{c}\~ao G. Consolati M. Conte F. Convenga D. Correia dos Santos P.J. Costa C.E. Covault M. Cristinziani C.S. Cruz Sanchez S. Dasso K. Daumiller B.R. Dawson R.M. de Almeida E.-T. de Boone B. de Errico J. de Jes\'us S.J. De Jong J.R.T. de Mello Neto I. De Mitri D. de Oliveira Franco F. de Palma V. de Souza E. De Vito A. Del Popolo O. Deligny N. Denner K. Denner Syrokvas L. Deval A. Di Matteo C. Dobrigkeit J.C. D'Olivo L.M. Domingues Mendes T. Dominguez Y. Dominguez Ballesteros Q. Dorosti R.C. dos Anjos J. Ebr F. Ellwanger R. Engel I. Epicoco M. Erdmann A. Etchegoyen C. Evoli H. Falcke G. Farrar A.C. Fauth T. Fehler F. Feldbusch A. Fernandes M. Fern\'andez Alonso B. Fick J.M. Figueira P. Filip A. Filip\v{c}i\v{c} T. Fitoussi B. Flaggs A. Franco M. Freitas T. Fujii A. Fuster C. Galea B. Garc\'ia C. Gaudu P.L. Ghia U. Giaccari M. Giammarco C. Glaser F. Gobbi F. Gollan G. Golup P.F. G\'omez Vitale J.P. Gongora N. Gonz\'alez D. G\'ora A. Gorgi M. Gottowik F. Guarino G.P. Guedes Y.C. Guerra L. G\"ulzow S. Hahn P. Hamal M.R. Hampel P. Hansen V.M. Harvey A. Haungs M. Havelka T. Hebbeker C. Hojvat J.R. H\"orandel P. Horvath M. Hrabovsk\'y T. Huege A. Insolia P.G. Isar M. Ismaiel P. Janecek V. Jilek K.-H. Kampert B. Keilhauer V.V. Kizakke Covilakam H.O. Klages M. Kleifges A. Klingel J. K\"ohler F. Krieger M. Kubatova N. Kunka B.L. Lago N. Langner N. Leal M.A. Leigui de Oliveira Y. Lema-Capeans A. Letessier-Selvon I. Lhenry-Yvon L. Lopes J.P. Lundquist M. Mallamaci S. Mancuso D. Mandat P. Mantsch A.G. Mariazzi C. Marinelli I.C. Mari\c{s} G. Marsella D. Martello S. Martinelli O. Mart\'inez Bravo A. Mart\'inez-Mendez M.A. Martins H.-J. Mathes J. Matthews G. Matthiae E. Mayotte S. Mayotte P.O. Mazur G. Medina-Tanco J. Meinert D. Melo A. Menshikov C. Merx S. Michal M.I. Micheletti L. Miramonti M. Mogarkar S. Mollerach F. Montanet L. Morejon K. Mulrey R. Mussa W.M. Namasaka S. Negi L. Nellen K. Nguyen G. Nicora M. Niechciol D. Nitz D. Nosek A. Novikov V. Novotny L. No\v{z}ka A. Nucita L.A. N\'u\~nez S.E. Nuza J. Ochoa M. Olegario C. Oliveira L. \"Ostman M. Palatka J. Pallotta G. Parente T. Paulsen J. Pawlowsky M. Pech J. P\k{e}kala R. Pelayo V. Pelgrims C. P\'erez Bertolli L. Perrone S. Petrera T. Pierog M. Pimenta M. Platino B. Pont M. Pourmohammad Shahvar P. Privitera C. Priyadarshi M. Prouza K. Pytel S. Querchfeld J. Rautenberg D. Ravignani J.V. Reginatto Akim M.Z. Renn\'o A. Reuzki J. Ridky F. Riehn M. Risse V. Rizi B. Rocha Moldes E. Rodriguez G. Rodriguez Fernandez J. Rodriguez Rojo S. Rossoni M. Roth E. Roulet A.C. Rovero A. Saftoiu M. Saharan F. Salamida H. Salazar G. Salina P. Sampathkumar N. San Martin J.D. Sanabria Gomez F. S\'anchez F.M. S\'anchez Rodriguez E. Santos F. Sarazin R. Sarmento R. Sato P. Savina V. Scherini H. Schieler M. Schimp D. Schmidt O. Scholten H. Schoorlemmer P. Schov\'anek F.G. Schr\"oder J. Schulte T. Schulz S.J. Sciutto M. Scornavacche A. Sedoski S. Sehgal S.U. Shivashankara G. Sigl K. Simkova F. Simon R. \v{S}m\'ida S. Soares Sippert P. Sommers S. Stani\v{c} J. Stasielak P. Stassi S. Str\"ahnz M. Straub T. Suomij\"arvi A.D. Supanitsky Z. Svozilikova Z. Szadkowski F. Tairli A. Tapia C. Taricco C. Timmermans O. Tkachenko P. Tobiska C.J. Todero Peixoto B. Tom\'e A. Travaini P. Travnicek C. Trimarelli M. Tueros M. Unger R. Uzeiroska-Geyik L. Vaclavek M. Vacula I. Vaiman J.F. Vald\'es Galicia L. Valore P. van Dillen E. Varela V. Va\v{s}\'i\v{c}kov\'a A. V\'asquez-Ram\'irez D. Veberi\v{c} I.D. Vergara Quispe S. Verpoest V. Verzi J. Vicha S. Vorobiov J.B. Vuta C. Watanabe A.A. Watson A. Weindl M. Weitz L. Wiencke H. Wilczy\'nski B. Wundheiler B. Yue A. Yushkov E. Zas D. Zavrtanik M. Zavrtanik
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-14 20:33 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE
keywords ultra-high-energy cosmic raysair-shower maximum depthmass compositionfluorescence detectorPierre Auger ObservatoryXmaxhadronic interactions
0
0 comments X

The pith

Air-shower maximum depth shows a clear break at 10^18.4 eV where the average cosmic-ray mass begins to rise.

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

The paper reports 17 years of fluorescence detector data on the depth of maximum development Xmax for air showers above 10^17.7 eV. The mean Xmax versus energy displays a pronounced break near 10^18.4 eV that cannot be explained by a constant composition. At the same time the width of the Xmax distributions narrows, pointing to a heavier and more uniform primary mass. These patterns are obtained directly from the data before any simulation-based conversion to elemental fractions. The results therefore contradict the long-held expectation that ultra-high-energy cosmic rays remain proton-dominated at the highest energies.

Core claim

The energy evolution of the mean Xmax exhibits a pronounced break at around 10^18.4 eV, providing direct, model-independent evidence for a change in the evolution of the mass composition. Independently, the observed decrease of the Xmax fluctuations with energy indicates a transition toward a heavier and less diverse primary mass composition. No statistically significant declination dependence of the Xmax distributions is observed, indicating an isotropic mass composition.

What carries the argument

Depth of shower maximum Xmax, the atmospheric column depth at which the number of particles in the extensive air shower reaches its peak value.

If this is right

  • Above 10^18.4 eV the average logarithmic mass of arriving cosmic rays increases steadily.
  • The variance of the mass distribution decreases, implying fewer distinct nuclear species dominate the flux.
  • Fitting the Xmax distributions in each energy bin yields rising fractions of CNO and iron-group nuclei and falling proton and helium fractions.
  • The absence of declination dependence in Xmax implies the mass composition is the same in all directions within the Observatory's field of view.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A heavier composition at the highest energies would reduce the expected flux of cosmogenic neutrinos and gamma rays produced in interactions with the cosmic microwave background.
  • The observed break energy roughly coincides with the ankle feature in the all-particle spectrum, suggesting a possible link between composition change and the transition from galactic to extragalactic sources.
  • Future observatories with larger statistics could test whether the composition continues to evolve or stabilizes above 10^19.5 eV.

Load-bearing premise

Converting the measured Xmax distributions into statements about primary particle mass requires air-shower simulations whose hadronic interaction models remain uncertain.

What would settle it

An independent data set that shows the mean Xmax continuing its previous slope past 10^18.4 eV with no flattening or that finds proton fractions remaining above 50 percent at 10^19 eV would falsify the claimed break and mass increase.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.12598 by A. Ambrosone, A.A. Watson, A. Bakalova, A. Baluta, A. Bartz Mocellin, A. Bueno, A. Bwembya, A. Castellina, A.C. Cobos Cerutti, A. Cermenati, A.C. Fauth, A.C. Rovero, A. Del Popolo, A. Di Matteo, A.D. Supanitsky, A. Etchegoyen, A. Fernandes, A. Filip\v{c}i\v{c}, A. Franco, A. Fuster, A.G. Mariazzi, A. Gorgi, A. Haungs, A. Insolia, A. Klingel, A. Letessier-Selvon, A. Mart\'inez-Mendez, A. Menshikov, A. Novikov, A. Nucita, A. Reuzki, A. Saftoiu, A. Sedoski, A. Tapia, A. Travaini, A. V\'asquez-Ram\'irez, A. Weindl, A. Yushkov, B. Andrada, B. de Errico, B. Fick, B. Flaggs, B. Garc\'ia, B. Keilhauer, B.L. Lago, B. Pont, B.R. Dawson, B. Rocha Moldes, B. Tom\'e, B. \v{C}erm\'akov\'a, B. Wundheiler, B. Yue, C. Aramo, C. Berat, C. Bonifazi, C. Dobrigkeit, C.E. Covault, C. Evoli, C. Galea, C. Gaudu, C. Glaser, C. Hojvat, C.J. Todero Peixoto, C. Marinelli, C. Merx, C. Oliveira, C. P\'erez Bertolli, C. Priyadarshi, C.S. Cruz Sanchez, C. Taricco, C. Timmermans, C. Trimarelli, C. Watanabe, D. Boncioli, D. Correia dos Santos, D. de Oliveira Franco, D. G\'ora, D. Mandat, D. Martello, D. Melo, D. Nitz, D. Nosek, D. Ravignani, D. Schmidt, D. Veberi\v{c}, D. Zavrtanik, E. Arnone, E. Avocone, E. De Vito, E. Mayotte, E. Rodriguez, E. Roulet, E. Santos, E.-T. de Boone, E. Varela, E. Zas, F. Barbato, F. Catalani, F. Convenga, F. de Palma, F. Ellwanger, F. Feldbusch, F. Gobbi, F. Gollan, F.G. Schr\"oder, F. Guarino, F. Krieger, F. Montanet, F.M. S\'anchez Rodriguez, F. Riehn, F. Salamida, F. S\'anchez, F. Sarazin, F. Simon, F. Tairli, G. Avila, G. Cataldi, G. Consolati, G. Farrar, G. Golup, G. Marsella, G. Matthiae, G. Medina-Tanco, G. Nicora, G. Parente, G.P. Guedes, G. Rodriguez Fernandez, G. Salina, G. Sigl, H. Falcke, H.-J. Mathes, H.O. Klages, H. Salazar, H. Schieler, H. Schoorlemmer, H. Wilczy\'nski, I. Allekotte, I.C. Mari\c{s}, I. De Mitri, I.D. Vergara Quispe, I. Epicoco, I. Lhenry-Yvon, I. Vaiman, J.A. Bellido, J.A. Chinellato, J. Alvarez-Mu\~niz, J. Ammerman Yebra, J. Biteau, J. Blazek, J. Bl\"umer, J. Brack, J.B. Vuta, J. Cara\c{c}a-Valente, J.C. Arteaga Vel\'azquez, J.C. D'Olivo, J. Chudoba, J. de Jes\'us, J.D. Sanabria Gomez, J. Ebr, J.F. Vald\'es Galicia, J. K\"ohler, J. Matthews, J. Meinert, J.M. Figueira, J. Ochoa, J. Pallotta, J. Pawlowsky, J.P. Behler, J.P. Gongora, J. P\k{e}kala, J.P. Lundquist, J. Rautenberg, J.R. H\"orandel, J. Ridky, J. Rodriguez Rojo, J.R.T. de Mello Neto, J. Schulte, J. Stasielak, J. Vicha, J.V. Reginatto Akim, K. Almeida Cheminant, K. Bismark, K. Cerny, K. Daumiller, K. Denner Syrokvas, K.-H. Kampert, K. Mulrey, K. Nguyen, K. Pytel, K.S. Caballero-Mora, K. Simkova, L. Anchordoqui, L. Andrade Dourado, L.A. N\'u\~nez, L. Apollonio, L. Caccianiga, L. Cazon, L. Chytka, L. Deval, L. G\"ulzow, L. Lopes, L.M. Domingues Mendes, L. Miramonti, L. Morejon, L. Nellen, L. No\v{z}ka, L. \"Ostman, L. Perrone, L. Vaclavek, L. Valore, L. Wiencke, M. Aglietta, M. Ahmed, M.A. Leigui de Oliveira, M.A. Martins, M. Bianciotto, M. Boh\'a\v{c}ov\'a, M. Cerda, M. Conte, M. Cristinziani, M.E. Bertaina, M. Erdmann, M. Fern\'andez Alonso, M. Freitas, M. Giammarco, M. Gottowik, M. Havelka, M. Hrabovsk\'y, M.I. Micheletti, M. Ismaiel, M. Kleifges, M. Kubatova, M. Mallamaci, M. Mogarkar, M. Niechciol, M. Olegario, M. Palatka, M. Pech, M. Pimenta, M. Platino, M. Pourmohammad Shahvar, M. Prouza, M.R. Hampel, M. Risse, M. Roth, M. Saharan, M. Schimp, M. Scornavacche, M. Straub, M. Tueros, M. Unger, M. Vacula, M. Weitz, M. Zavrtanik, M.Z. Renn\'o, N. Borodai, N. Denner, N. Gonz\'alez, N. Kunka, N. Langner, N. Leal, N. San Martin, O. Deligny, O. Mart\'inez Bravo, O. Scholten, O. Tkachenko, P. Abreu, P. Assis, P.F. G\'omez Vitale, P. Filip, P.G. Brichetto Orquera, P.G. Isar, P. Hamal, P. Hansen, P. Horvath, P. Janecek, P.J. Costa, P.L. Biermann, P.L. Ghia, P. Mantsch, P.O. Mazur, P. Privitera, P. Sampathkumar, P. Savina, P. Schov\'anek, P. Sommers, P. Stassi, P. Tobiska, P. Travnicek, P. van Dillen, Q. Dorosti, R. Aloisio, R. Caruso, R.C. dos Anjos, R. Colalillo, R. Concei\c{c}\~ao, R. Engel, R.M. de Almeida, R. Mussa, R. Pelayo, R. Sarmento, R. Sato, R. Uzeiroska-Geyik, R. \v{S}m\'ida, R.W. Clay, S. Buitink, S. Cabana-Freire, S. Dasso, S.E. Nuza, S. Hahn, S.J. De Jong, S.J. Sciutto, S. Mancuso, S. Martinelli, S. Mayotte, S. Michal, S. Mollerach, S. Negi, S. Petrera, S. Querchfeld, S. Rossoni, S. Sehgal, S. Soares Sippert, S. Stani\v{c}, S. Str\"ahnz, S.U. Shivashankara, S. Verpoest, S. Vorobiov, T. Bister, T. Dominguez, T. Fehler, T. Fitoussi, T. Fujii, T. Hebbeker, The Pierre Auger Collaboration: A. Abdul Halim, T. Huege, T. Paulsen, T. Pierog, T.R. Caba Pineda, T. Schulz, T. Suomij\"arvi, U. Giaccari, V. Binet, V. de Souza, V. Jilek, V.M. Harvey, V. Novotny, V. Pelgrims, V. Rizi, V. Scherini, V. Va\v{s}\'i\v{c}kov\'a, V. Verzi, V.V. Kizakke Covilakam, W.M. Namasaka, Y. Balibrea, Y.C. Guerra, Y. Dominguez Ballesteros, Y. Lema-Capeans, Z. Svozilikova, Z. Szadkowski.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Determination of the fiducial field-of-view limits ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Fiducial field-of-view boundaries from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Top panel: Measured [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Acceptance as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Reconstruction bias (points) and systematic uncertainties [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Distribution of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. Differences in the mean and standard deviation of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. Time evolution of the mean and standard deviation of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13. Comparison of events arriving from northern ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14. Energy evolution of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: FIG. 15. Energy evolution of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: FIG. 16. Energy evolution of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_16.png] view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: FIG. 17. Example of the fit of composition fractions of the mass [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_17.png] view at source ↗
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: FIG. 18. Corner plot of the posterior mass-fraction parameters for H, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_18.png] view at source ↗
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: FIG. 19. Top four panels: best-fit fractions of protons, helium, nitrogen, and iron nuclei using air-shower simulations with the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_19.png] view at source ↗
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: FIG. 20. Reconstruction of the deep shower event #53725865. Top [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_20.png] view at source ↗
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: FIG. 21 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_21.png] view at source ↗
Figure 22
Figure 22. Figure 22: FIG. 22. Fits of composition fractions of the mass groups (H, He, N, Fe) with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_22.png] view at source ↗
Figure 23
Figure 23. Figure 23: FIG. 23. Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_23.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present measurements of the depth of shower maximum, Xmax, for cosmic-ray-induced extensive air showers recorded by the fluorescence detector of the Pierre Auger Observatory over 17 years. The data set covers primary energies from 10^17.7 eV to beyond 10^19.6 eV. With improved event reconstruction and an exposure 2.4 times larger than in our previous analysis, this work confirms and refines our conclusions on the mass composition at ultra-high energies. The energy evolution of the mean Xmax exhibits a pronounced break at around 10^18.4 eV, providing direct, model-independent evidence for a change in the evolution of the mass composition. Independently, the observed decrease of the Xmax fluctuations with energy indicates a transition toward a heavier and less diverse primary mass composition. No statistically significant declination dependence of the Xmax distributions is observed within the exposure of the Observatory, indicating an isotropic mass composition. The mean and standard deviation of the Xmax distributions, interpreted with air-shower simulations, yield the energy dependence of the average and variance of the logarithmic mass of cosmic rays arriving at Earth. Furthermore, energy-dependent fractional abundances of four representative primary-mass groups (p, He, CNO, Fe) are obtained by fitting the observed Xmax distributions in each energy bin with a weighted sum of elemental templates. These results provide strong evidence against a long-standing assumption that ultra-high-energy cosmic rays are predominantly protons: above ~10^18.4 eV, the average cosmic-ray mass increases, accompanied by a steadily decreasing diversity in the elemental composition.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

0 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper presents updated measurements of the depth of shower maximum (Xmax) for cosmic-ray air showers recorded by the fluorescence detector of the Pierre Auger Observatory over 17 years, covering energies from 10^17.7 eV to beyond 10^19.6 eV. With 2.4 times larger exposure and improved reconstruction, it reports a pronounced break in the energy evolution of mean Xmax at ~10^18.4 eV as model-independent evidence for a change in mass composition, a decrease in Xmax fluctuations indicating a transition to heavier and less diverse primaries, no significant declination dependence, and derived energy-dependent mass fractions (p, He, CNO, Fe) from fits to Xmax distributions using air-shower simulations.

Significance. If the results hold, the work delivers high-statistics, direct observational confirmation of a break in mean Xmax at ~10^18.4 eV, strengthening constraints on ultra-high-energy cosmic-ray mass composition evolution without relying on hadronic models for the primary claim. The separation of the model-independent Xmax trend from the simulation-dependent mass interpretation, combined with the large exposure increase, provides robust, falsifiable input for source and propagation models.

minor comments (2)
  1. [§3.2] §3.2: The description of the improved event reconstruction could include a brief quantitative comparison of the resolution improvement relative to the previous analysis to aid readers in assessing the impact on the reported break position.
  2. [Figure 5] Figure 5: The legend for the four mass-group templates should explicitly note the hadronic interaction model used for each template to avoid ambiguity in the fitting procedure.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive review, accurate summary of our results, and recommendation to accept the manuscript. No major comments were raised requiring specific responses or revisions.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The paper reports direct observational measurements of Xmax from fluorescence detector data over 17 years, with the pronounced break in mean Xmax at ~10^18.4 eV presented as a model-independent feature of the data itself. Subsequent mapping to mass composition uses external air-shower simulations and template fitting, which do not reduce by the paper's equations to quantities fitted from the same dataset. References to prior Auger publications are confirmatory updates with larger exposure rather than load-bearing justifications for the new result. No self-definitional loops, fitted inputs renamed as predictions, or ansatz smuggling via self-citation appear in the derivation chain.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Xmax measurements are direct; translation to mass composition rests on domain assumptions about hadronic shower physics.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Air-shower development is accurately modeled by current hadronic interaction simulations
    Invoked when converting observed Xmax distributions to primary mass fractions and average log mass.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 7729 in / 1215 out tokens · 51145 ms · 2026-05-14T20:33:29.321192+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

83 extracted references · 83 canonical work pages · 5 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Globus and R

    N. Globus and R. D. Blandford, Ultrahigh-Energy Cosmic Rays, ARAA63, 339 (2025)

  2. [2]

    Greisen, Cosmic Ray Showers, Ann

    K. Greisen, Cosmic Ray Showers, Ann. Rev. of Nucl. Part. Sci. 10, 63 (1960)

  3. [3]

    Linsley and A

    J. Linsley and A. A. Watson, Validity of scaling to 10 20 eV and high-energy cosmic-ray composition, Phys. Rev. Lett.46, 459 (1981)

  4. [4]

    Engelet al., Nucleus-nucleus collisions and interpretation of cosmic-ray cascades, Phys

    J. Engelet al., Nucleus-nucleus collisions and interpretation of cosmic-ray cascades, Phys. Rev. D46, 5013 (1992)

  5. [5]

    Matthews, A Heitler model of extensive air showers, Astropart

    J. Matthews, A Heitler model of extensive air showers, Astropart. Phys.22, 387 (2005)

  6. [6]

    Kampert and M

    K.-H. Kampert and M. Unger, Measurements of the cosmic ray composition with air shower experiments, Astropart. Phys.35, 660 (2012)

  7. [7]

    Abreuet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Interpretation of the Depths of Maximum of Extensive Air Showers Measured by the Pierre Auger Observatory, JCAP02, 026 (2013)

    P. Abreuet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Interpretation of the Depths of Maximum of Extensive Air Showers Measured by the Pierre Auger Observatory, JCAP02, 026 (2013)

  8. [8]

    Ostapchenko, Total and diffractive cross sections in enhanced Pomeron scheme, Phys

    S. Ostapchenko, Total and diffractive cross sections in enhanced Pomeron scheme, Phys. Rev. D81, 114028 (2010)

  9. [9]

    Pieroget al., EPOS LHC: Test of collective hadronization with data measured at the CERN Large Hadron Collider, Phys

    T. Pieroget al., EPOS LHC: Test of collective hadronization with data measured at the CERN Large Hadron Collider, Phys. Rev. C92, 034906 (2015)

  10. [10]

    Riehnet al., Hadronic interaction model Sibyll 2.3d and ex- tensive air showers, Phys

    F. Riehnet al., Hadronic interaction model Sibyll 2.3d and ex- tensive air showers, Phys. Rev. D102, 063002 (2020)

  11. [11]

    Ostapchenko, QGSJET-III model of high energy hadronic interactions

    S. Ostapchenko, QGSJET-III model of high energy hadronic interactions. II. Particle production and extensive air shower characteristics, Phys. Rev. D109, 094019 (2024)

  12. [12]

    Pierog and K

    T. Pierog and K. Werner, EPOS LHC-R : up-to-date hadronic model for EAS simulations, PoSICRC2023, 230 (2023)

  13. [13]

    Albrechtet al., Global tuning of hadronic interaction models with accelerator-based and astroparticle data, Nature Rev

    J. Albrechtet al., Global tuning of hadronic interaction models with accelerator-based and astroparticle data, Nature Rev. Phys. 8, 98 (2026), arXiv:2508.21796 [astro-ph.HE]

  14. [14]

    The Pierre Auger Cosmic Ray Observatory

    A. Aabet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), The Pierre Auger Cosmic Ray Observatory, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A798, 172 (2015), arXiv:1502.01323 [astro-ph.IM]

  15. [15]

    Abrahamet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Measurement of the Depth of Maximum of Extensive Air Showers above 1018 eV, Phys

    J. Abrahamet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Measurement of the Depth of Maximum of Extensive Air Showers above 1018 eV, Phys. Rev. Lett.104, 091101 (2010)

  16. [16]

    Aabet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Depth of maximum of air-shower profiles at the Pierre Auger Observatory

    A. Aabet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Depth of maximum of air-shower profiles at the Pierre Auger Observatory. I. Mea- surements at energies above 1017.8 eV, Phys. Rev. D90, 122005 (2014)

  17. [17]

    Aabet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Depth of maximum of air-shower profiles at the Pierre Auger Observatory

    A. Aabet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Depth of maximum of air-shower profiles at the Pierre Auger Observatory. II. Com- position implications, Phys. Rev. D90, 122006 (2014)

  18. [18]

    The Pierre Auger Observatory Upgrade - Preliminary Design Report

    A. Aabet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), The Pierre Auger Observatory Upgrade - Preliminary Design Report, arXiv:1604.03637 [astro-ph] (2016)

  19. [19]

    Allekotteet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), The Surface Detector System of the Pierre Auger Observatory, Nucl

    I. Allekotteet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), The Surface Detector System of the Pierre Auger Observatory, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A586, 409 (2008)

  20. [20]

    Abrahamet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), The fluores- cence detector of the Pierre Auger Observatory, Nucl

    J. Abrahamet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), The fluores- cence detector of the Pierre Auger Observatory, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A620, 227 (2010)

  21. [21]

    Abrahamet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Properties and performance of the prototype instrument for the Pierre Auger Observatory, Nucl

    J. Abrahamet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Properties and performance of the prototype instrument for the Pierre Auger Observatory, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A523, 50 (2004)

  22. [22]

    Sanchezet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), The AMIGA detector of the Pierre Auger Observatory, Proc

    F. Sanchezet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), The AMIGA detector of the Pierre Auger Observatory, Proc. 32nd ICRC3, 149 (2011)

  23. [23]

    Matheset al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), The HEAT Telescopes of the Pierre Auger Observatory - Status and First 19 Data, Proc

    H.-J. Matheset al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), The HEAT Telescopes of the Pierre Auger Observatory - Status and First 19 Data, Proc. 32nd ICRC3, 153 (2011)

  24. [24]

    J. T. Bracket al., Absolute photometric calibration of large aperture optical systems, Astropart. Phys.20, 653 (2004)

  25. [25]

    A. C. Roveroet al., Multi-wavelength calibration procedure for the Pierre Auger Observatory Fluorescence Detectors, As- tropart. Phys.31, 305 (2009)

  26. [26]

    J. T. Bracket al., Absolute calibration of a large-diameter light source, JINST8, 05014 (2013)

  27. [27]

    Abreuet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Description of atmospheric conditions at the Pierre Auger Observatory using the Global Data Assimilation System (GDAS), Astropart

    P. Abreuet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Description of atmospheric conditions at the Pierre Auger Observatory using the Global Data Assimilation System (GDAS), Astropart. Phys. 35, 591 (2012)

  28. [28]

    Ficket al., The Central Laser Facility at the Pierre Auger Observatory, JINST1, P11003 (2006)

    B. Ficket al., The Central Laser Facility at the Pierre Auger Observatory, JINST1, P11003 (2006)

  29. [29]

    J. Abrahamet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), A Study of the Effect of Molecular and Aerosol Conditions in the Atmosphere on Air Fluorescence Measurements at the Pierre Auger Obser- vatory, Astropart. Phys.33, 108 (2010)

  30. [30]

    V. M. Harveyet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), A new cross- check and review of aerosol attenuation measurements at the Pierre Auger Observatory, EPJ Web Conf.444, 300 (2023)

  31. [31]

    Chirinoset al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Cloud Monitor- ing at the Pierre Auger Observatory, Proc

    J. Chirinoset al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Cloud Monitor- ing at the Pierre Auger Observatory, Proc. 33rd ICRC33, 2244 (2013)

  32. [32]

    Abreuet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Identifying clouds over the Pierre Auger Observatory using infrared satellite data, Astropart

    P. Abreuet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Identifying clouds over the Pierre Auger Observatory using infrared satellite data, Astropart. Phys.50-52, 92 (2013)

  33. [33]

    Sommers, Capabilities of a giant hybrid air shower detector, Astropart

    P. Sommers, Capabilities of a giant hybrid air shower detector, Astropart. Phys.3, 349 (1995)

  34. [34]

    B. R. Dawson, H. Y. Dai, P. Sommers, and S. Yoshida, Simu- lations of a giant hybrid air shower detector, Astropart. Phys.5, 239 (1996)

  35. [35]

    A. N. Bunner, K. Greisen, and P. B. Landecker, An imaging system for EAS optical emission, Canadian Journal of Physics Supplement46, 266 (1968)

  36. [36]

    Risse and D

    M. Risse and D. Heck, Energy release in air showers, Astropart. Phys.20, 661 (2004)

  37. [37]

    Unger, B

    M. Unger, B. R. Dawson, R. Engel, F. Schussler, and R. Ulrich, Reconstruction of Longitudinal Profiles of Ultra-High Energy Cosmic Ray Showers from Fluorescence and Cherenkov Light Measurements, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A588, 433 (2008)

  38. [38]

    T. K. Gaisser and A. M. Hillas, Reliability of the Method of Constant Intensity Cuts for Reconstructing the Average Devel- opment of Vertical Showers, Proc. 15th ICRC8, 353 (1977)

  39. [39]

    Andringa, R

    S. Andringa, R. Conceicao, and M. Pimenta, Mass composition and cross-section from the shape of cosmic ray shower longitu- dinal profiles, Astropart. Phys.34, 360 (2011)

  40. [40]

    J. Bellidoet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), The Fitting Pro- cedure for Longitudinal Shower Profiles Observed with the Fluorescence Detector of the Pierre Auger Observatory, PoS ICRC2023, 211 (2023)

  41. [41]

    Aabet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Data-driven esti- mation of the invisible energy of cosmic ray showers with the Pierre Auger Observatory, Phys

    A. Aabet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Data-driven esti- mation of the invisible energy of cosmic ray showers with the Pierre Auger Observatory, Phys. Rev. D100, 082003 (2019)

  42. [42]

    Aabet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Measurement of the cosmic-ray energy spectrum above 2.5×1018 eV using the Pierre Auger Observatory, Phys

    A. Aabet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Measurement of the cosmic-ray energy spectrum above 2.5×1018 eV using the Pierre Auger Observatory, Phys. Rev. D102, 062005 (2020)

  43. [43]

    Abreuet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), The Lateral Trig- ger Probability function for the Ultra-High Energy Cosmic Ray showers detected by the Pierre Auger Observatory, Astropart

    P. Abreuet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), The Lateral Trig- ger Probability function for the Ultra-High Energy Cosmic Ray showers detected by the Pierre Auger Observatory, Astropart. Phys.35, 266 (2011)

  44. [44]

    V. M. Harveyet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Real-Time Measurements with Atmospheric Instruments at the Pierre Auger Observatory, PoSICRC2019, 283 (2021)

  45. [45]

    Pierre Auger Collaboration, Supplementary Data and Tables on Zenodo (2026), https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18024023

  46. [46]

    Abreuet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), The exposure of the hybrid detector of the Pierre Auger Observatory, Astropart

    P. Abreuet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), The exposure of the hybrid detector of the Pierre Auger Observatory, Astropart. Phys.34, 368 (2011)

  47. [47]

    E. Santoset al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Update on the Offline Framework for AugerPrime and production of reference simulation libraries using the VO Auger grid resources, PoS ICRC2023, 248 (2023)

  48. [48]

    One-dimensional Hybrid Approach to Extensive Air Shower Simulation

    T. Bergmannet al., One-dimensional Hybrid Approach to Ex- tensive Air Shower Simulation, Astropart. Phys.26, 420 (2007), arXiv:astro-ph/0606564

  49. [49]

    Argiroet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), The offline soft- ware framework of the Pierre Auger Observatory, Nucl

    S. Argiroet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), The offline soft- ware framework of the Pierre Auger Observatory, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res.580, 1485 (2007)

  50. [50]

    Aabet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Measurement of the average shape of longitudinal profiles of cosmic-ray air showers at the Pierre Auger Observatory, JCAP03, 018 (2019)

    A. Aabet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Measurement of the average shape of longitudinal profiles of cosmic-ray air showers at the Pierre Auger Observatory, JCAP03, 018 (2019)

  51. [51]

    O. Tkachenkoet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Measurement of the Inelastic Proton-Proton Cross-Section at √𝑠≥40 TeV Using the Hybrid Data of the Pierre Auger Observatory, PoS ICRC2025, 416 (2025)

  52. [52]

    Abreuet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Techniques for measuring aerosol attenuation using the Central Laser Facility at the Pierre Auger Observatory, JINST8, P04009 (2013)

    P. Abreuet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Techniques for measuring aerosol attenuation using the Central Laser Facility at the Pierre Auger Observatory, JINST8, P04009 (2013)

  53. [53]

    Aveet al.(AIRFLY Collaboration), Precise Measurement of the Absolute Fluorescence Yield of the 337 nm Band in Atmospheric Gases, Astropart

    M. Aveet al.(AIRFLY Collaboration), Precise Measurement of the Absolute Fluorescence Yield of the 337 nm Band in Atmospheric Gases, Astropart. Phys.42, 90 (2013)

  54. [54]

    Louedec and J

    K. Louedec and J. Colombi, Atmospheric multiple scattering of fluorescence light from extensive air showers and effect of the aerosol size on the reconstruction of energy and depth of maximum, Astropart. Phys.57-58, 6 (2014)

  55. [55]

    Baker and R

    S. Baker and R. D. Cousins, Clarification of the Use of Chi Square and Likelihood Functions in Fits to Histograms, Nucl. Instrum. Meth.221, 437 (1984)

  56. [56]

    Dawsonet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), The Energy Scale of the Pierre Auger Observatory, PoSICRC2019, 231 (2020)

    B. Dawsonet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), The Energy Scale of the Pierre Auger Observatory, PoSICRC2019, 231 (2020)

  57. [57]

    A. Abdul Halimet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Testing hadronic-model predictions of depth of maximum of air-shower profiles and ground-particle signals using hybrid data of the Pierre Auger Observatory, Phys. Rev. D109, 102001 (2024)

  58. [58]

    C. M. Sch ¨aferet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), A Novel Tool for the Absolute End-to-End Calibration of Fluorescence Tele- scopes – The XY-Scanner, EPJ Web Conf.444, 305 (2023)

  59. [59]

    R. U. Abbasiet al.(Telescope Array Collaboration), Depth of Ultra High Energy Cosmic Ray Induced Air Shower Maxima Measured by the Telescope Array Black Rock and Long Ridge FADC Fluorescence Detectors and Surface Array in Hybrid Mode, Astrophys. J.858, 76 (2018)

  60. [60]

    F. J. Massey, The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test for goodness of fit, JASA46, 68 (1951)

  61. [61]

    F. W. Scholz and M. A. Stephens, K-Sample Anderson–Darling tests, JASA82, 918 (1987)

  62. [62]

    A. Yushkovet al.(Pierre Auger and Telescope Array Collabo- rations), Depth of maximum of air-shower profiles: testing the compatibility of the measurements at the Pierre Auger Obser- vatory and the Telescope Array, PoSICRC2023, 249 (2023)

  63. [63]

    Abdul Halimet al.(Pierre Auger), Energy Spectrum of Ultrahigh-Energy Cosmic Rays across Declinations -90°to +44.8°as Measured at the Pierre Auger Observatory, Phys

    A. Abdul Halimet al.(Pierre Auger), Energy Spectrum of Ultrahigh-Energy Cosmic Rays across Declinations -90°to +44.8°as Measured at the Pierre Auger Observatory, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 241002 (2025), arXiv:2506.11688 [astro-ph.HE]

  64. [64]

    A. Abdul Halimet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Inference of the Mass Composition of Cosmic Rays with Energies from 1018.5 to 1020 eV Using the Pierre Auger Observatory and Deep 20 Learning, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 021001 (2025)

  65. [65]

    A. A. Watson, The mass of cosmic rays of ultra-high energy, Astropart. Phys.176, 103200 (2026)

  66. [66]

    Linsley, Spectra, anisotropies and composition of cosmic rays above 1000 GeV, Proc

    J. Linsley, Spectra, anisotropies and composition of cosmic rays above 1000 GeV, Proc. 18th ICRC12, 135 (1983)

  67. [67]

    Evoli, I

    C. Evoli, I. Vaiman, S. Petrera, and F. Salamida, Updated air- shower Xmax moment parametrizations for UHECR composi- tion with latest hadronic interaction models, Astropart. Phys. 179, 103239 (2026), arXiv:2602.18118 [astro-ph.HE]

  68. [68]

    Foreman-Mackey, D

    D. Foreman-Mackey, D. W. Hogg, D. Lang, and J. Goodman, emcee: The MCMC Hammer, Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac.125, 306 (2013)

  69. [69]

    G. R. Farrar, Particle Physics at Ultrahigh Energies, in18th International Symposium on Very High Energy Cosmic Ray Interactions(2019) arXiv:1902.11271 [hep-ph]

  70. [70]

    What do the highest-energy cosmic-ray data suggest about possible new physics around 50 TeV?

    V. Pavlidou and T. Tomaras, What do the highest-energy cosmic- ray data suggest about possible new physics around 50 TeV?, Phys. Rev. D99, 123016 (2019), arXiv:1802.04806 [astro- ph.HE]

  71. [71]

    Aabet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Evidence for a mixed mass composition at the ‘ankle’ in the cosmic-ray spectrum, Phys

    A. Aabet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Evidence for a mixed mass composition at the ‘ankle’ in the cosmic-ray spectrum, Phys. Lett.B762, 288 (2016)

  72. [72]

    J. Vichaet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Update on test- ing of air-shower modelling using combined data of the Pierre Auger Observatory and phenomenological consequences, PoS ICRC2025, 431 (2025), arXiv:2507.09802 [astro-ph.HE]

  73. [73]

    A. Yushkovet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Constraints on the spread of nuclear masses in ultra-high-energy cosmic rays based on the Phase I hybrid data from the Pierre Auger Obser- vatory, PoSICRC2025, 442 (2025), arXiv:2507.08997 [astro- ph.HE]

  74. [74]

    A. Aabet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Inferences on mass composition and tests of hadronic interactions from 0.3 to 100 EeV using the water-Cherenkov detectors of the Pierre Auger Observatory, Phys. Rev.D 96, 122003 (2017)

  75. [75]

    A. Abdul Halimet al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Measure- ment of the Depth of Maximum of Air-Shower Profiles with energies between 1018.5 and 1020 eV using the Surface Detector of the Pierre Auger Observatory and Deep Learning, Phys. Rev. D111, 022003 (2025)

  76. [76]

    Stadelmaieret al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Reconstruct- ing Air-Shower Observables using a Universality-Based Model, PoSUHECR2024, 117 (2025)

    M. Stadelmaieret al.(Pierre Auger Collaboration), Reconstruct- ing Air-Shower Observables using a Universality-Based Model, PoSUHECR2024, 117 (2025)

  77. [77]

    R. U. Abbasiet al.(Telescope Array Collaboration), The Cosmic-Ray Composition between 2 PeV and 2 EeV Observed with the TALE Detector in Monocular Mode, Astrophys. J.909, 178 (2021), arXiv:2012.10372 [astro-ph.HE]

  78. [78]

    R. U. Abbasiet al.(Telescope Array Collaboration), Cosmic ray mass composition measurement in the energy range from 1016.5 eV to 1018.5 eV observed with the TALE hybrid detector, Phys. Rev. D113, 062003 (2026), arXiv:2603.14804 [astro- ph.HE]. Appendix A: Extreme shower events

  79. [79]

    Its image in one of the cameras of the Los Morados site and the corresponding longitudinal profile are shown in Fig

    Deepest event in the data sample Event #53725865 is the deepest event observed in this data set. Its image in one of the cameras of the Los Morados site and the corresponding longitudinal profile are shown in Fig. 20. The fit of the longitudinal profile yields𝑋 max,LM = deg / azimuth0 5 10 15 20 25 30 deg / elevation 30 354045505560 Event 53725865 Los Mor...

  80. [80]

    g cm± = (1206 maxX FIG. 20. Reconstruction of the deep shower event #53725865. Top panel: Camera view of the event. Colors denote the arrival time of photons in the hexagonal photomultipliers, with blue to red corre- sponding to early to late arrival times. The red line indicates the fitted shower–detector plane. Bottom panel: Longitudinal energy-deposit ...

Showing first 80 references.