Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 71 references

A third giant, supersoft X-ray outburst of IC 3599 rules out strictly periodic triggers and favors a radiation-pressure disk instability whose onset is set by local disk conditions.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · grok-4.5

2026-07-13 00:49 UTC pith:ZQ3UD6OV

load-bearing objection Solid third-outburst report with real-time multiwavelength data that cleanly kills constant-period models; the radiation-pressure story works only with an explicit free adjustment of onset times, and the QPO is correctly labeled candidate. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.09036 v1 pith:ZQ3UD6OV submitted 2026-07-10 astro-ph.GA astro-ph.HE

In the Eye of the Storm: The Third Giant X-ray Outburst of the Extreme Changing-look AGN IC 3599

D. Grupe , S. Komossa , W. Zheng , A.V. Filippenko , T.G. Brink , N. Schartel , J. Wang , V. Oknyansky
show 5 more authors
A.V. Dodin S. Wolsing E. Elien C. Tapper P. Lynam
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.GA astro-ph.HE
keywords changing-look AGNIC 3599X-ray outburstsradiation-pressure instabilitycoronal emission linesquasi-periodic oscillationsEddington accretion
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

IC 3599 is a nearby active galactic nucleus that has now produced three giant X-ray outbursts (1990, 2010, and 2025), each rising by more than a factor of 100 and becoming extremely soft. Dedicated monthly Swift monitoring caught the third event while it was rising, enabling the first rapid multiwavelength campaign: soft X-ray spectra, an XMM-Newton light curve that shows an hours-scale oscillatory pattern, and optical spectra filled with bright coronal iron lines that were weak or absent in quiescence. Because the intervals between outbursts are unequal (19.5 yr then 15.7 yr), models that demand a fixed clock—certain repeat tidal-stripping or binary-black-hole impact scenarios—are eliminated. The same data remain consistent with a radiation-pressure instability in the inner accretion disk once one allows local disk conditions to shift the start of each new cycle. The object therefore becomes a laboratory for near-Eddington accretion, coronal-line reverberation, and candidate quasi-periodic oscillations under extreme conditions.

Core claim

The third giant supersoft X-ray outburst of IC 3599, caught in real time, has unequal recurrence intervals and therefore eliminates strictly periodic outburst engines while remaining fully consistent with an accretion-disk radiation-pressure instability whose onset time is modulated by local disk conditions; the same high state also produces a dramatic coronal-line response and an hours-scale oscillatory X-ray light curve.

What carries the argument

Accretion-disk radiation-pressure instability (Lightman–Eardley type), evaluated with the analytic recurrence relation of the authors’ earlier work and now allowed a variable onset set by local disk state; the unequal observed intervals (19.5 yr, 15.7 yr) are the decisive observational filter that discards fixed-period alternatives.

Load-bearing premise

The radiation-pressure model only continues to fit after one freely allows local disk conditions to change the start time of each new instability cycle so the observed intervals need not be strictly equal.

What would settle it

A fourth outburst whose recurrence time returns exactly to 19.5 yr (or any other fixed period), or a longer XMM-Newton light curve that fails to confirm the candidate 4.8–7.4 hr quasi-period, would undermine the variable-onset instability picture.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Strictly periodic engines (fixed-orbit tidal stripping or binary impacts) are ruled out for IC 3599 and become less plausible for other recurrent changing-look AGN with unequal intervals.
  • IC 3599 supplies a clean laboratory for near-Eddington accretion-disk physics and for coronal-line reverberation mapping on the light-travel time of the inner gas.
  • The candidate hours-scale oscillation, if confirmed, would place a dynamical clock at tens of gravitational radii around a few-million-solar-mass black hole.
  • Continued Swift monitoring can test whether future outbursts continue to show variable recurrence set by local disk state.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If local disk conditions truly control onset, other long-lived AGN with soft high states may show similar non-periodic giant flares once dense monitoring is applied.
  • The dramatic brightening of high-ionization iron lines offers a ready-made multi-line reverberation experiment that can map density and ionization structure without waiting for a new outburst.
  • A confirmed QPO-like signal would link the same disk region that produces the radiation-pressure instability to the short-term oscillatory variability.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports the discovery of a third giant (factor >100), supersoft X-ray outburst of the changing-look AGN IC 3599, caught in progress by dedicated Swift monitoring and followed up promptly with Swift, XMM-Newton, and optical spectroscopy. The Swift spectra are extremely soft (almost no photons above ~2.5 keV) and well described by a black-body with kT_BB ~0.1 keV; the peak luminosity implies L/L_Edd ~1 for the adopted host-scaling black-hole mass. The XMM-Newton light curve shows high-amplitude oscillatory variability with a candidate period of ~7.4 hr (Lomb-Scargle). Optical spectra reveal a dramatic brightening of high-ionization coronal lines ([Fe X]–[Fe XIV]) that were absent or weak in low-state spectra, together with a large change in the Heta/[O III] ratio. The unequal recurrence intervals (19.5 yr then 15.7 yr) eliminate strictly periodic models (certain repeat tidal-stripping or binary-impact scenarios) while remaining consistent with a radiation-pressure disk instability once local disk conditions are allowed to modulate the onset of each cycle.

Significance. If the interpretation holds, IC 3599 becomes a uniquely well-sampled laboratory for accretion physics near the Eddington limit: three giant supersoft outbursts spanning 3.5 decades, a strong multi-line coronal-line response that enables future reverberation mapping, and a candidate short-term QPO-like signal. The observational elimination of constant-period models is robust and model-independent. The radiation-pressure framework (with the explicit non-strict-periodicity premise) yields a truncation radius (~20 R_g for M_BH = 2e6 M_sun) that matches the observed near-Eddington peak, providing a concrete, falsifiable link between multi-decade light curves and inner-disk structure. The data set is of high quality and will be of lasting value regardless of the final theoretical preference.

major comments (2)
  1. Sec. 5.3 and abstract: the radiation-pressure model is retained only after introducing the additional premise that local disk conditions can shift the onset time of each cycle, so that the observed intervals (19.5 yr then 15.7 yr) need not be strictly periodic. This premise is stated explicitly and is not hidden, but it is load-bearing: without it the same analytic relation used previously (Eq. 1 of Grupe et al. 2015) would be disfavored by the unequal Delta-t. The manuscript should quantify how large a change in local parameters (alpha, surface density, magnetic field, outer-disk radius) is required to produce a ~20% shift in recurrence time, and should cite the more recent radiation-pressure calculations (e.g., Sniegowska et al. 2023) that already show flare morphology and timing are sensitive to these quantities. A short paragraph of this form would convert an ad-hoc adjustment into a
  2. Sec. 3 and Appendix D: the candidate QPO at 7.4 hr (and secondary peak at 4.8 hr) rests on only four cycles of a 120 ks light curve. The Lomb-Scargle powers (0.27 and 0.20) and formal significances are reported, but the manuscript correctly notes that longer coverage is required. Because the QPO-like pattern is highlighted in the abstract and used to place IC 3599 among rare AGN with short-term periodicities, the text should more clearly separate the robust high-amplitude variability (factor 2.5 in 1.75 hr) from the still-unconfirmed periodicity, and should avoid language that could be read as a firm detection.
minor comments (5)
  1. Fig. 1 caption and Sec. 2.3: the 1990 ROSAT outburst is mentioned but not plotted; a simple vertical marker or inset would help the reader visualize the full three-outburst baseline.
  2. Sec. 2.3 and Appendix B: the black-body fit to the peak WT spectrum is preferred over a power law, but a brief comparison with a diskbb or Comptonized model (even if the fit does not improve) would strengthen the claim that the spectrum is thermal.
  3. Table 1: the [Fe XIV] 5303 FWHM and flux are flagged as upper limits because of possible blending; a short note on which other Fe transitions could contribute would be useful for future photoionization modeling.
  4. Sec. 5.1: the bolometric correction is taken from Grupe et al. (2010); stating the numerical factor used (or the (0.2–2 keV) to bolometric conversion) would aid reproducibility.
  5. Throughout: a few minor typos and inconsistent hyphenation (e.g., “quasiperiodic” vs “quasi-periodic”, “windowed timing” vs “Windowed Timing”) should be standardized.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

No significant circularity: unequal recurrence times are independent data that eliminate constant-period models; radiation-pressure agreement reuses prior parameters under an explicit extra assumption.

specific steps
  1. self citation load bearing [Sec. 5.3 (and abstract)]
    "That model (see Eq. (1) of Grupe et al. 2015) still explains the new outburst well, if we assume local changes in the long-lived accretion disk that impact the onset and timing of the next cycle such that recurrent outbursts are not strictly periodic. At Δt2 = 15.7 yr and all other parameters as before (M_Edd = 1, R0 = 3 Rg, α = 0.1; Grupe et al. 2015), we obtain a truncation radius of R_trunc = (6.2–38) Rg"

    The preferred model's quantitative viability (truncation radius and continued agreement) is obtained by importing the exact equation and fixed parameters from the authors' own prior paper and adding an extra free premise about variable onset; this is a mild self-citation dependency, but it is not load-bearing for the independent observational elimination of constant-Δt scenarios and is stated explicitly rather than hidden.

full rationale

The paper's load-bearing observational claims rest on new Swift monitoring (third outburst detection and light curve), XMM-Newton short-term variability, and optical spectroscopy showing brightened coronal lines. These directly yield unequal intervals (Δt1 = 19.5 yr, Δt2 = 15.7 yr) that rule out strictly periodic scenarios by construction of the data, not by model definition. The radiation-pressure instability interpretation re-applies the analytic formula and fixed parameters (α = 0.1, R0 = 3 Rg, M_Edd = 1) from the authors' earlier work (Grupe et al. 2015 Eq. 1) and adds the explicit premise that local disk conditions can shift onset times; this is an interpretive application of an existing model (itself rooted in Lightman & Eardley 1974 / Belloni et al. 1997), not a prediction forced by a fit to the new data or a self-definitional loop. Peak luminosity and L/L_Edd ~ 1 follow from a black-body spectral fit plus a previously published host-scaling mass; the candidate QPO is correctly flagged as needing longer coverage. No step reduces a claimed first-principles result or prediction to its own inputs by construction. Minor self-citation of prior parameters is normal and non-load-bearing for the elimination claim.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper is primarily observational. Load-bearing inputs are standard cosmological parameters, a host-scaling black-hole mass, Galactic absorption, and the analytic radiation-pressure instability formula taken from earlier work; the only ad-hoc addition is the allowance for variable onset times that rescues the model from the unequal recurrence intervals.

free parameters (4)
  • SMBH mass = 2.2e6 Msun
    Adopted as 2.2e6 Msun from host-galaxy scaling relations (Grupe et al. 2015); used to compute L/L_Edd ~1 and the truncation radius. Not measured from the new Balmer lines.
  • viscosity parameter alpha = 0.1
    Fixed at 0.1 when evaluating the radiation-pressure recurrence-time formula (Sec. 5.3).
  • inner-disk radius R0 = 3 Rg
    Fixed at 3 Rg in the same formula.
  • black-body temperature kT_BB = 0.12 keV
    Fitted to the highest-state Swift WT spectrum (0.12 +/- 0.01 keV) and used for luminosity estimates.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption Lambda-CDM cosmology with Omega_M=0.3, Omega_Lambda=0.7, H0=70 km/s/Mpc yields D=91 Mpc at z=0.02078
    Stated in Sec. 1 and used for all luminosities.
  • domain assumption Radiation-pressure instability recurrence time formula of Lightman & Eardley / Belloni et al. (as written in Eq. 1 of Grupe et al. 2015) applies to this AGN
    Invoked in Sec. 5.3 to derive R_trunc ~20 Rg.
  • ad hoc to paper Local conditions in the long-lived accretion disk can shift the onset time of each instability cycle, allowing non-strict periodicity
    Explicitly introduced in the abstract and Sec. 5.3 to keep the radiation-pressure model viable given Delta-t1=19.5 yr and Delta-t2=15.7 yr.
  • domain assumption Galactic N_H = 1.35e20 cm^-2 and E(B-V)=0.015 mag with R_V=3.1
    Fixed absorption and extinction used for all spectral fits and line fluxes.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 22208 in / 3055 out tokens · 38237 ms · 2026-07-13T00:49:21.761948+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We report the discovery and multiwavelength follow-up observations of a giant (factor >100) X-ray outburst of the exceptional changing-look active galactic nucleus (AGN) IC 3599. This is the third such outburst after two previous ones serendipitously discovered in 1990 and 2010. Based on our dedicated long-term monitoring of IC 3599 with {\it Swift}, the third outburst was detected while it was happening, and we triggered multiple follow-up observations within days to weeks for the first time. The Swift outburst spectra are supersoft and almost no photons are detected beyond 2.5 keV. The XMM-Newton short-term light curve shows a remarkable apparent oscillatory pattern that is reminiscent of quasiperiodic oscillations (QPOs). The optical high-state spectra reveal a multitude of bright coronal emission lines that have dramatically brightened and were absent or much fainter in low-state spectra. The new results eliminate outburst scenarios that require a constant time interval of repetitions (like certain variants of repeat tidal stripping, or of an orbiting supermassive black hole impacting the inner accretion disk), but remain in excellent agreement with an accretion disk radiation-pressure instability when assuming that local conditions in the disk of this long-lived AGN affect the onset time of each new instability. The combination of recurrent, giant, supersoft outbursts on decadal timescales, the exceptional emission-line response, and the rapid, candidate quasiperiodic, short-term variability on an hours timescale makes IC 3599 unique among AGN, and establishes it as a key system for studying accretion physics under extreme conditions and at the Eddington limit.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.09036 by A.V. Dodin, A.V. Filippenko, C. Tapper, D. Grupe, E. Elien, J. Wang, N. Schartel, P. Lynam, S. Komossa, S. Wolsing, T.G. Brink, V. Oknyansky, W. Zheng.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Long-term Swift XRT count rate, hardness ratio, and UVW2 light curves from 2010 to 2025, including the two high-amplitude outbursts of IC 3599. The third one from 1990 is not shown. (WT) starting with the observation on 2025 December 09 in order to avoid pile-up. 2.2. UVOT Swift’s ultraviolet-optical telescope (UVOT; Roming et al. 2005) was operated in all 6 filters, and the extraction and reduction of the… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: XMM-Newton EPIC pn light curve of IC 3599, revealing a strong oscillation pattern. The top panel shows the count rate and the lower panel the hardness ratio. We obtained a 120 ks XMM-Newton observation of IC 3599 on 2025 December 09–10 (observation ID 0973390701). A key goal of that observation is to search for absorption lines signaling outflows that could arise during the near-Eddington accretion phase a… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Optical spectrum of IC 3599 taken at Lick Obser￾vatory on November 22. The CMO spectrum from December 16 is plotted in red. The brightest coronal emission lines are labeled in magenta. Other bright emission lines are labeled in black. 4. OPTICAL SPECTROSCOPY In order to search for an emission-line response to the giant-amplitude outburst, we have carried out op￾tical spectroscopy (Komossa et al. 2025) of I… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Left: High-state X-ray spectrum of IC 3599 of 2025 December 19 fit with a single black-body model and absorption fixed at the Galactic value (Sec. 2.3). The lower panel shows the fit residuals. The spectrum is exceptionally soft. Right: The same spectrum fit with a single power-law model (Sec. 2.3) that does not provide a successful description. APPENDIX A. DETAILS ON THE SWIFT OBSERVATIONS OF THE OUTBURST… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Lomb-Scargle periodogram of the XMM-Newton EPIC pn light curve shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Xinglong optical spectrum of IC 3599. The brightest emission lines are marked [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_7.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

71 extracted references · 9 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    M., Fosbury , R

    Alloin , D., Pelat , D., Phillips , M. M., Fosbury , R. A. E., & Freeman , K. 1986, ApJ, 308, 23, 10.1086/164475

    doi:10.1086/164475 1986

  2. [2]

    1968, Astrophysical Letters, 1, 111

    Andrillat , Y., & Souffrin , S. 1968, Astrophysical Letters, 1, 111

    1968

  3. [3]

    Arnaud , K. A. 1996, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 101, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems V, ed. G. H. Jacoby & J. Barnes , 17

    1996

  4. [4]

    R., van der Klis , M., & van Paradijs , J

    Belloni , T., M \'e ndez , M., King , A. R., van der Klis , M., & van Paradijs , J. 1997, , 479, L145, 10.1086/310595

    doi:10.1086/310595 1997

  5. [5]

    N., Pounds , K

    Brandt , W. N., Pounds , K. A., & Fink , H. 1995, MNRAS, 273, L47, 10.1093/mnras/273.1.L47

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/273.1.l47 1995

  6. [6]

    N., Hill , J

    Burrows , D. N., Hill , J. E., Nousek , J. A., et al. 2005, Space Science Reviews, 120, 165, 10.1007/s11214-005-5097-2

    doi:10.1007/s11214-005-5097-2 2005

  7. [7]

    2025, , 539, 231, 10.1093/mnras/staf496

    Callow , J., Graur , O., Clark , P., et al. 2025, , 539, 231, 10.1093/mnras/staf496

    doi:10.1093/mnras/staf496 2025

  8. [8]

    2015, , 581, A17, 10.1051/0004-6361/201525965

    Campana , S., Mainetti , D., Colpi , M., et al. 2015, , 581, A17, 10.1051/0004-6361/201525965

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201525965 2015

  9. [9]

    A., Clayton , G

    Cardelli , J. A., Clayton , G. C., & Mathis , J. S. 1989, ApJ, 345, 245, 10.1086/167900

    doi:10.1086/167900 1989

  10. [10]

    Crawley, M. J. 2012, The R Book, 2nd edn. (Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons)

    2012

  11. [11]

    Dexter , J., & Begelman , M. C. 2019, MNRAS, 483, L17, 10.1093/mnrasl/sly213

    doi:10.1093/mnrasl/sly213 2019

  12. [12]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.18445, 10.48550/arXiv.2510.18445

    Dong , Q., Zhang , Z.-X., Gu , W.-M., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.18445, 10.48550/arXiv.2510.18445

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.18445 2025

  13. [13]

    A., Beardmore , A

    Evans , P. A., Beardmore , A. P., Page , K. L., et al. 2007, , 469, 379, 10.1051/0004-6361:20077530

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20077530 2007

  14. [14]

    2016, PASP, 128, 115005, 10.1088/1538-3873/128/969/115005

    Fan, Z., Wang, H., Jiang, X., et al. 2016, PASP, 128, 115005, 10.1088/1538-3873/128/969/115005

    doi:10.1088/1538-3873/128/969/115005 2016

  15. [15]

    Filippenko , A. V. 1982, , 94, 715, 10.1086/131052

    doi:10.1086/131052 1982

  16. [16]

    2008, , 455, 369, 10.1038/nature07277

    Gierli \'n ski , M., Middleton , M., Ward , M., & Done , C. 2008, , 455, 369, 10.1038/nature07277

    doi:10.1038/nature07277 2008

  17. [17]

    Giustini , M., Miniutti , G., & Saxton , R. D. 2020, , 636, L2, 10.1051/0004-6361/202037610

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202037610 2020

  18. [18]

    X-RAY OUTBURST OF THE PECULIAR SEYFERT GALAXY IC 3599

    Grupe , D., Beuermann , K., Mannheim , K., et al. 1995, , 299, L5, 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9505085

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/9505085 1995

  19. [19]

    Grupe , D., Beuermann , K., Thomas , H.-C., Mannheim , K., & Fink , H. H. 1998, , 330, 25, 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9710298

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/9710298 1998

  20. [20]

    M., & Page , K

    Grupe , D., Komossa , S., Leighly , K. M., & Page , K. L. 2010, ApJS, 187, 64, 10.1088/0067-0049/187/1/64

    doi:10.1088/0067-0049/187/1/64 2010

  21. [21]

    2015, , 803, L28, 10.1088/2041-8205/803/2/L28

    Grupe , D., Komossa , S., & Saxton , R. 2015, , 803, L28, 10.1088/2041-8205/803/2/L28

    doi:10.1088/2041-8205/803/2/l28 2015

  22. [22]

    2024, , 969, 98, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad4530

    Grupe , D., Komossa , S., & Wolsing , S. 2024, , 969, 98, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad4530

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad4530 2024

  23. [23]

    2025, The Astronomer's Telegram, 17479, 1

    Grupe , D., Komossa , S., Wolsing , S., & Schartel , N. 2025, The Astronomer's Telegram, 17479, 1

    2025

  24. [24]

    2001, , 367, 470, 10.1051/0004-6361:20000429

    Grupe , D., Thomas , H.-C., & Beuermann , K. 2001, , 367, 470, 10.1051/0004-6361:20000429

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20000429 2001

  25. [25]

    2016, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 594, 10.1051/0004-6361/201628642

    HI4PI Collaboration , Ben Bekhti , N., Fl \"o er , L., et al. 2016, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 594, 10.1051/0004-6361/201628642

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201628642 2016

  26. [26]

    E., Angelini , L., Morris , D

    Hill , J. E., Angelini , L., Morris , D. C., et al. 2005, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 5898, UV, X-Ray, and Gamma-Ray Space Instrumentation for Astronomy XIV, ed. O. H. W. Siegmund , 325--340, 10.1117/12.618026

    doi:10.1117/12.618026 2005

  27. [27]

    Kollatschny, W., & Fricke, K. J. 1985, , 146, L11

    1985

  28. [28]

    1999, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 343, 775

    Komossa , S., & Bade , N. 1999, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 343, 775. astro-ph/9901141

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  29. [29]

    2024, Serbian Astronomical Journal, 209, 1, 10.2298/SAJ2409001K

    Komossa , S., & Grupe , D. 2024, Serbian Astronomical Journal, 209, 1, 10.2298/SAJ2409001K

    doi:10.2298/saj2409001k 2024

  30. [30]

    2014, in Proceedings of Swift: 10 Years of Discovery (SWIFT 10), 143, 10.22323/1.233.0143

    Komossa , S., Grupe , D., Saxton , R., & Gallo , L. 2014, in Proceedings of Swift: 10 Years of Discovery (SWIFT 10), 143, 10.22323/1.233.0143

    work page doi:10.22323/1.233.0143 2014

  31. [31]

    2008, ApJL, 678, L13, 10.1086/588281

    Komossa , S., Zhou , H., Wang , T., et al. 2008, ApJL, 678, L13, 10.1086/588281

    doi:10.1086/588281 2008

  32. [32]

    2025, The Astronomer's Telegram, 17507, 1

    Komossa , S., Grupe , D., Zheng , W., et al. 2025, The Astronomer's Telegram, 17507, 1

    2025

  33. [33]

    2026, Advances in Space Research, 77, 4041, 10.1016/j.asr.2025.04.058

    Komossa , S., Grupe , D., Marziani , P., et al. 2026, Advances in Space Research, 77, 4041, 10.1016/j.asr.2025.04.058

    doi:10.1016/j.asr.2025.04.058 2026

  34. [34]

    2022, ApJ, 931, 5, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac63aa

    Laha , S., Meyer , E., Roychowdhury , A., et al. 2022, ApJ, 931, 5, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac63aa

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac63aa 2022

  35. [35]

    2018, Nature Astronomy, 2, 102, 10.1038/s41550-017-0372-1

    Lawrence , A. 2018, Nature Astronomy, 2, 102, 10.1038/s41550-017-0372-1

    doi:10.1038/s41550-017-0372-1 2018

  36. [36]

    2025, , 988, 207, 10.3847/1538-4357/adec76

    Li , S.-L., & Cao , X. 2025, , 988, 207, 10.3847/1538-4357/adec76

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adec76 2025

  37. [37]

    P., & Eardley , D

    Lightman , A. P., & Eardley , D. M. 1974, ApJL, 187, L1, 10.1086/181377

    doi:10.1086/181377 1974

  38. [38]

    K., Li , S., & Chen , X

    Liu , F. K., Li , S., & Chen , X. 2009, , 706, L133, 10.1088/0004-637X/706/1/L133

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/706/1/l133 2009

  39. [39]

    Lomb, N. R. 1976, Astrophysics and Space Science, 39, 447

    1976

  40. [40]

    O., Hassall , B

    Mason , K. O., Hassall , B. J. M., Bromage , G. E., et al. 1995, , 274, 1194, 10.1093/mnras/274.4.1194

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/274.4.1194 1995

  41. [41]

    2025, , 638, 370, 10.1038/s41586-024-08385-x

    Masterson , M., Kara , E., Panagiotou , C., et al. 2025, , 638, 370, 10.1038/s41586-024-08385-x

    doi:10.1038/s41586-024-08385-x 2025

  42. [42]

    2011, , 417, 250, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19185.x

    Middleton , M., Uttley , P., & Done , C. 2011, , 417, 250, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19185.x

    doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19185.x 2011

  43. [43]

    S., & Stone, R

    Miller, J. S., & Stone, R. P. S. 1994, Lick Obs. Tech. Rep. 66 (Santa Cruz: Lick Obs.)

    1994

  44. [44]

    2023, , 674, L1, 10.1051/0004-6361/202346653

    Miniutti , G., Giustini , M., Arcodia , R., et al. 2023, , 674, L1, 10.1051/0004-6361/202346653

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346653 2023

  45. [45]

    2018, MNRAS, 480, 3898, 10.1093/mnras/sty2032

    Noda , H., & Done , C. 2018, MNRAS, 480, 3898, 10.1093/mnras/sty2032

    doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2032 2018

  46. [46]

    W., Kollatschny , W., Probst , M

    Ochmann , M. W., Kollatschny , W., Probst , M. A., et al. 2024, , 686, A17, 10.1051/0004-6361/202348559

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202348559 2024

  47. [47]

    L., Winkler , H., Tsygankov , S

    Oknyansky , V. L., Winkler , H., Tsygankov , S. S., et al. 2020, , 498, 718, 10.1093/mnras/staa1552

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1552 2020

  48. [48]

    L., Siemiginowska , A., et al

    Park , T., Kashyap , V. L., Siemiginowska , A., et al. 2006, , 652, 610, 10.1086/507406

    doi:10.1086/507406 2006

  49. [49]

    L., Schartel , N., Grupe , D., et al

    Parker , M. L., Schartel , N., Grupe , D., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 483, L88, 10.1093/mnrasl/sly224

    doi:10.1093/mnrasl/sly224 2019

  50. [50]

    A., Belinski , A

    Potanin , S. A., Belinski , A. A., Dodin , A. V., et al. 2020, Astronomy Letters, 46, 836, 10.1134/S1063773720120038

    doi:10.1134/s1063773720120038 2020

  51. [51]

    2021, , 650, A33, 10.1051/0004-6361/202140597

    Potts , B., & Villforth , C. 2021, , 650, A33, 10.1051/0004-6361/202140597

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202140597 2021

  52. [52]

    2026, R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing)

    R Core Team . 2026, R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing). https://www.R-project.org/

    2026

  53. [53]

    2023, Nature Astronomy, 7, 1282, 10.1038/s41550-023-02108-4

    Ricci , C., & Trakhtenbrot , B. 2023, Nature Astronomy, 7, 1282, 10.1038/s41550-023-02108-4

    doi:10.1038/s41550-023-02108-4 2023

  54. [54]

    J., Geller , M

    Rines , K. J., Geller , M. J., Diaferio , A., & Hwang , H. S. 2016, , 819, 63, 10.3847/0004-637X/819/1/63

    doi:10.3847/0004-637x/819/1/63 2016

  55. [55]

    Roming , P. W. A., Kennedy , T. E., Mason , K. O., et al. 2005, Space Science Reviews, 120, 95, 10.1007/s11214-005-5095-4

    doi:10.1007/s11214-005-5095-4 2005

  56. [56]

    D., Motta , S

    Saxton , R. D., Motta , S. E., Komossa , S., & Read , A. M. 2015, , 454, 2798, 10.1093/mnras/stv2160

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2160 2015

  57. [57]

    Scargle, J. D. 1982, ApJ, 263, 835, 10.1086/160554

    doi:10.1086/160554 1982

  58. [58]

    2025, , 994, 203, 10.3847/1538-4357/ae1299

    Shen , Y.-H., Lu , K.-X., Guo , W.-J., et al. 2025, , 994, 203, 10.3847/1538-4357/ae1299

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae1299 2025

  59. [59]

    M., Foley , R

    Silverman , J. M., Foley , R. J., Filippenko , A. V., et al. 2012, , 425, 1789, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21270.x

    doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21270.x 2012

  60. [60]

    B., Fries , L

    Smith , T. B., Fries , L. B., Trump , J. R., et al. 2025, , 995, 185, 10.3847/1538-4357/ae1f18

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae1f18 2025

  61. [61]

    2020, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 641, A167, 10.1051/0004-6361/202038575

    Sniegowska , M., Czerny , B., Bon , E., & Bon , N. 2020, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 641, A167, 10.1051/0004-6361/202038575

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202038575 2020

  62. [62]

    2023, , 672, A19, 10.1051/0004-6361/202243828

    \'S niegowska , M., Grz e dzielski , M., Czerny , B., & Janiuk , A. 2023, , 672, A19, 10.1051/0004-6361/202243828

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202243828 2023

  63. [63]

    J., et al

    Stern , D., McKernan , B., Graham , M. J., et al. 2018, ApJ, 864, 27, 10.3847/1538-4357/aac726

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aac726 2018

  64. [64]

    1986, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol

    Tody , D. 1986, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 627, Instrumentation in astronomy VI, ed. D. L. Crawford , 733, 10.1117/12.968154

    doi:10.1117/12.968154 1986

  65. [65]

    E., & Osterbrock , D

    Tohline , J. E., & Osterbrock , D. E. 1976, , 210, L117, 10.1086/182317

    doi:10.1086/182317 1976

  66. [66]

    2005, , 362, 235, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09296.x

    Vaughan , S., & Uttley , P. 2005, , 362, 235, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09296.x

    doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09296.x 2005

  67. [67]

    1999, , 349, 389, 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9909315

    Voges , W., Aschenbach , B., Boller , T., et al. 1999, , 349, 389, 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9909315

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/9909315 1999

  68. [68]

    W., Cao , X., et al

    Wang , J., Xu , D. W., Cao , X., et al. 2024, , 970, 85, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad4d89

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad4d89 2024

  69. [69]

    2012, ApJ, 749, 115, 10.1088/0004-637X/749/2/115

    Wang , T.-G., Zhou , H.-Y., Komossa , S., et al. 2012, ApJ, 749, 115, 10.1088/0004-637X/749/2/115

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/749/2/115 2012

  70. [70]

    Webbe , R., & Young , A. J. 2023, , 518, 3428, 10.1093/mnras/stac3318

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3318 2023

  71. [71]

    Wright , E. L. 2006, PASP, 118, 1711, 10.1086/510102

    doi:10.1086/510102 2006