Power of simultaneous X-ray and UV high-resolution spectroscopy for probing AGN outflows

Ehud Behar; Elisa Costantini; Jelle S. Kaastra; Jon M. Miller; Laura W. Brenneman; Luigi C. Gallo; Michael A. Nowak; Missagh Mehdipour; Sibasish Laha

REVIEW 3 major objections 8 minor 23 references

Power of simultaneous X-ray and UV high-resolution spectroscopy for probing AGN outflows

T0 review · 3 major / 8 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Simultaneous high-resolution X-ray and UV spectroscopy would measure the density, distance, and kinetic power of AGN outflows, and extend those measurements to redshift about 0.8.

desk verdict Good mission-concept paper for Arcus; the qualitative argument is solid, but the Fig. 4/5 error bars need a disclosed methodology before the few-percent and z~0.8 claims can be trusted. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.03493 v2 pith:W5W3WLE5 submitted 2024-12-04 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.IM

Missagh Mehdipour , Laura W. Brenneman , Jon M. Miller , Elisa Costantini , Ehud Behar , Luigi C. Gallo , Jelle S. Kaastra , Sibasish Laha

show 1 more author

Michael A. Nowak

This is my paper · ORCID

classification astro-ph.HEastro-ph.IM

keywords AGNoutflowswarmabsorbersX-rayspectroscopyUVrecombinationtimingkineticpowerArcusmissionhigh-resolution

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

AGN outflows imprint their physical state on absorption lines in both soft X-rays and the far UV, but current telescopes cannot observe those bands simultaneously at high resolution, so the density, distance, and kinetic power of the winds remain unmeasured. This paper argues that the proposed Arcus mission, with co-mounted X-ray and UV spectrometers observing the same target at the same time, would break that bottleneck. From simulated spectra of the Seyfert galaxy NGC 3783 and of a typical warm absorber at different redshifts, the authors show that Arcus would resolve individual outflow lines, track their hour-to-hour changes, and constrain column density, ionization, and velocity to a few percent uncertainty out to redshift about 0.8, whereas XMM/RGS and HST/COS cannot reach beyond the local universe. If the claim holds, outflow densities, locations, and energy output become measurable for a much larger AGN population.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is recombination timing on absorption lines: when the ionizing SED flickers, the ionic column densities respond on a timescale $t_{\rm rec}$ that is inversely proportional to the electron density, and photoionization codes such as the pion model convert a measured $t_{\rm rec}$ into a hydrogen density $n_H$. With the ionization parameter $\xi = L_{\rm ion}/(n_H r^2)$ from line ratios and $L_{\rm ion}$ from the simultaneous broadband SED, the radius $r$ follows, and then the kinetic power $P_{\rm kin} \propto N_H v_{\rm out}^3 r$ is determined. The second pillar is simultaneity itself: X-ray continuum absorption fixes $N_H$ while UV lines fix $\xi$, so a joint solution is unique where either band alone is degenerate, and simultaneous sampling is required because the wind varies on hour-to-day timescales.

What would settle it

Measure the as-built Arcus effective areas and spectral resolutions; if they fall below the assumed 450 $cm^{2}$ at 22 A, 445 $cm^{2}$ at 1032 A, 0.16 eV, and 0.042 eV, the predicted few-percent parameter constraints and the $z\approx0.8$ reach will not hold.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central claim is that a single platform with co-pointed, high-resolution X-ray and UV spectrometers, specifically the proposed Arcus mission, would make AGN outflows far more measurable than today's separate X-ray and UV telescopes. Using simulated spectra of NGC 3783 and a typical warm absorber at redshifts up to about 0.8, the authors show that Arcus would resolve individual absorption lines, track their variability on timescales of hours, and constrain the column density, ionization parameter, and outflow velocity to a few percent uncertainty, while XMM/RGS combined with HST/COS can do so only for the brightest local objects. The result is a route to the density, location, and kinetic power of outflows, and to testing how wind properties scale with redshift.

Load-bearing premise

The quantitative reach depends on the assumed Arcus instrument performance, effective areas of 450 $cm^{2}$ at 22 A and 445 $cm^{2}$ at 1032 A with resolutions of 0.16 eV and 0.042 eV, and on the assumed AGN spectral energy distribution and photoionization model; if the flight instrument delivers less or the target SED differs, the predicted uncertainty levels and the redshift-0.8 reach will change.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

A single 200 ks Arcus exposure would recover $N_H$, $\xi$, and $v_{\rm out}$ for a typical warm absorber to a few percent uncertainty at $z\lesssim0.8$, where current instruments cannot constrain them at all.
Simultaneous X-ray and UV spectra would remove the X-ray/UV degeneracy in BLR winds such as that in NGC 5548, giving a unique photoionization solution for the obscuring wind.
Hour-timescale recombination timing would measure the density and distance of warm-absorber outflows in objects like NGC 3783, enabling $P_{\rm kin}$ estimates for gas that today can only be probed with impractical exposure times.
A Broad sample would measure wind column, ionization, and velocity across a large AGN population, while a Deep sample would add time-dependent densities and locations, allowing wind duty cycles and accretion-rate scaling to be studied out to intermediate redshifts.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

An extension the paper leaves implicit: the same recombination-timing pipeline could be applied to archival X-ray and UV data with partial overlap to estimate how often non-simultaneous observing actually loses the unique photoionization solution, giving a quantitative cost of today's scheduling limits.
With density and location measured for a large sample, the kinetic power $P_{\rm kin}$ could be correlated with accretion rate and Eddington ratio across redshift, turning wind-energetics questions from case studies into a statistical test of launching models.
If the outflowing gas is clumpy or partially covering, part of the line variability may come from covering-factor changes rather than recombination, which would bias $t_{\rm rec}$; Arcus's timing data would be the direct check, and the bias would need modeling before density claims become routine.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Short version: this is a well-crafted mission-concept paper for Arcus, and the qualitative case for simultaneous X-ray/UV spectroscopy of AGN outflows is genuinely good. The quantitative claims in Figs. 4 and 5, however, are not backed by a disclosed methodology, so the few-percent uncertainties and the z~0.8 reach are not checkable as written. That is the main soft spot, and it is a real one.

What is new: the paper applies the standard Kaastra figures of merit to the Arcus design and produces simulated spectra for NGC 3783, comparing Arcus/XRS and UVS against XMM/RGS and HST/COS. More importantly, it shows how the recombination-timing technique, previously used on local AGN, would with Arcus probe densities and distances on hour timescales, and it extends the simulation to z~0.8 for a typical warm absorber. Those demonstrations are new and directly relevant for the Arcus Probe proposal. The FoM derivations are straightforward and correct, and the ratios in Table 1 are useful.

What it does well: the argument for simultaneity is well made, with the NGC 5548 example showing how X-ray and UV data jointly lift degeneracies that neither band alone can break. The paper is honest about the limitations of current instruments, and the simulated spectra look physical.

Where the soft spots are: the biggest one is exactly what the stress-test flags. The uncertainties in Figs. 4 and 5 are plotted without saying how they were computed. There is no description of the noise model, the fitting procedure (SPEX? what free parameters?), whether the NH–xi–covering fraction degeneracy was treated, or how the recombination-timing light curves were analyzed. At z~0.8 the lines are weak, and the few-percent reach is suspicious without knowing how the fit handles blending and degeneracies. This is a load-bearing gap for the paper's central quantitative claim. It may be fixable with an appendix, but as it stands the numbers are not independently reproducible. The instrument parameters are also assumed at fixed values; a sensitivity analysis would help, but the missing methodology is the bigger issue.

For whom: present it to a reading group focused on AGN outflows or future X-ray/UV missions. It would spark good discussion. I would not cite the quantitative results until the methodology is available.

Recommendation: I would send it to peer review. The qualitative argument is valuable, the FoMs are correct, and the quantitative claims deserve scrutiny rather than desk rejection. With a methodology appendix and a sensitivity study, it could be a solid paper.

Referee Report

3 major / 8 minor

Summary. The paper argues that the proposed Arcus Probe mission, with its simultaneous high-resolution X-ray (XRS) and UV (UVS) spectrometers, is required to measure the ionization structure, density, location, and kinetic power of AGN outflows, and to extend such measurements to redshifts z ≲ 0.8. The authors derive figures of merit for line detection, centroid measurement, velocity broadening, and resolution in Section 3, compare Arcus with XMM/RGS and HST/COS in Table 1, and present simulations of NGC 3783 (Figures 1, 3, 4) and of a representative warm-absorber outflow at different redshifts (Figure 5). The qualitative case for simultaneity rests on the complementary information carried by X-ray and UV absorption lines and on the variability of the obscuring disk wind, illustrated by the NGC 5548 degeneracy example in Figure 2.

Significance. If the quantitative simulations are substantiated, the paper makes a strong and falsifiable case for a mission concept: it predicts few-percent constraints on the warm-absorber parameters NH, log ξ, and vout out to z ≈ 0.8, and it identifies a concrete scientific gap—the measurement of outflow density, location, and kinetic power—that current instruments cannot fill. The FoM derivations in Section 3 are transparent and correct in their scaling, the use of published multi-wavelength models for NGC 3783 and NGC 5548 provides an external benchmark rather than a circular test, and the comparison with existing missions is explicit. The main weakness is that the simulations underlying Figures 4 and 5 are not described in sufficient detail to be reproduced, so the headline quantitative claims currently read as a plausibility argument rather than a demonstrated capability.

major comments (3)

[Section 5, Figure 5] The central quantitative result—that Arcus will constrain NH, log ξ, and vout to a few percent out to z ≈ 0.8—is not reproducible because the simulation and fitting procedure is not described. The text specifies the input warm-absorber parameters (NH = 1e21 cm^-2, log ξ = 2, vout = 500 km/s, NGC 5548 SED) and the exposure time, and the Code and Data Availability section states that SPEX was used, but it does not state how the spectra were generated (line optical depths, partial covering, foreground absorption), the noise model, the number of realizations, the fitting method, whether the X-ray and UV spectra were fitted jointly, how the NH–ξ–covering-fraction degeneracy shown in Figure 2 was treated, or how the plotted uncertainties were computed. If the error bars are analytic scalings from the Section 3 FoMs rather than full spectral fits, they will miss exactly the degeneracy that the paper argues makes joint X-ray/UV spectroscopy necessary; this must be clarified before the z ≈ 0.8 reach can be assessed.
[Section 4, Figure 4] The recombination-timing simulation is missing its assumptions. The text defines trec and states that the exposure time must be at least trec, but the figure requires additional inputs that are not given: the amplitude and timescale of the ionizing continuum variability, the resulting fractional change in the O VII absorption-line equivalent width, the time binning and S/N per bin, the detection threshold for a significant line change, and the luminosity/SED used to convert trec to nH and r. Without these, the claim that Arcus can probe higher-density gas on hour timescales while XMM/RGS cannot (and the specific placement of the vertical dotted lines in Figure 4) is an assertion, and the comparison cannot be checked.
[Section 5 and Table 1] The quantitative predictions, including the z ≈ 0.8 reach, inherit the assumed Arcus performance figures—XRS effective area 450 cm^2 at 22 Å and resolution 0.16 eV, UVS effective area 445 cm^2 at 1032 Å and resolution 0.042 eV—and the assumed NGC 5548 SED/photoionization model, but no sensitivity analysis is provided. A moderate change in effective area or resolution, or a different SED shape, will directly change the few-percent uncertainty claims; the paper should state how the results scale with these inputs or provide an error budget, otherwise the headline numbers are tied to a single point in instrument/model parameter space.

minor comments (8)

[Section 2] There is a typo: 'HTS' should be 'HST' in the discussion of target-of-opportunity observations.
[Section 6] The phrase 'other other key questions' contains a duplicated word and should be corrected.
[Table 1 and figure axes] The effective area column in Table 1 and the axis labels in Figure 2 list units as 'cm^-2' or 'cm 2'; the correct unit for area is cm^2, and the column-density unit should be cm^-2.
[Section 4] The phrase 'inversely proportional on the electron density' should be 'inversely proportional to the electron density'.
[References] Reference 19 is cited as an unpublished PDF; a stable citation or archive link is needed for reproducibility.
[Section 5] The sample name 'SUBW AYS' appears with an irregular space; it should be written consistently as 'SUBWAYS'.
[Figure 5] The comparison exposure for HST/COS is given as '5 orbits' but the useful on-source time per orbit is not specified; the total exposure time should be stated for a fair comparison with the 200 ks Arcus exposure.
[Equation (2)] The definition Ml ≡ S√(Fl t) is dimensionally unusual; consider defining the FoM directly in terms of counts or stating the units explicitly.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

Forward simulations and standard diagnostic relations; no circular step.

full rationale

The paper's quantitative claims are forward end-to-end simulations: it chooses input warm-absorber parameters (Sect. 5: NH=1e21 cm^-2, log xi=2, v=500 km/s) and an SED anchored to published observations of NGC 5548, then evaluates whether Arcus would recover those inputs from simulated spectra. This is a sensitivity study, not a fit disguised as prediction. The FoM formulas in Sect. 3 are derived from Poisson statistics and the instrument's effective area and resolution; those are external mission parameters, not outputs of the paper. The spectral-timing chain from recombination variability to nH, then from xi = Lion/(nH r^2) to r, and then Pkin ∝ NH v_out^3 r, is a standard sequence of independent physical relations; no step defines a target quantity in terms of the quantity it is supposed to predict. The authors' prior models of NGC 3783 and NGC 5548 supply the boundary conditions, but those models are anchored to published X-ray and UV observations and are externally falsifiable; no self-citation is invoked as a uniqueness theorem or as a substitute for calculation. No equation reduces to its own input by construction, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The lack of detail on how the Fig. 5 uncertainties were computed is a reproducibility concern, not evidence of circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The quantitative demonstrations depend on (1) assumed Arcus instrument performance from the Arcus proposal (area and resolution values in Table 1), (2) SEDs and outflow parameters inherited from the authors' previous papers on NGC 3783 and NGC 5548, and (3) the SPEX/pion photoionization code. None of these are checked here against new data, so the paper is a mission-capability projection rather than an empirical measurement.

free parameters (7)

Arcus XRS effective area = 450 cm^-2 at 22 Å
Design value from Arcus proposal (ref 4); drives all X-ray FoMs in Table 1 and the simulations.
Arcus XRS resolution = 0.16 eV
Design value from ref 4; used in FoM calculations.
Arcus UVS effective area = 445 cm^-2 at 1032 Å
Design value from ref 4; drives UV FoMs.
Arcus UVS resolution = 0.042 eV
Design value from ref 4; used in FoM calculations.
Warm absorber column density NH = 1e21 cm^-2
Assumed typical value for the redshift simulation in Sect. 5; directly sets the recovered values in Fig. 5.
Ionization parameter log xi = 2
Assumed input in Sect. 5 simulation.
Outflow velocity v_out = 500 km/s
Assumed input in Sect. 5 simulation.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption The SPEX/pion photoionization model correctly computes ionization balance and line absorption for AGN outflows.
All simulations use SPEX v3.07.01 pion (Sect. 2).
standard math Recombination timescale trec is inversely proportional to electron density ne, as computed by SPEX.
Formula in Sect. 4.
domain assumption The SED models used for NGC 3783 and NGC 5548 represent real AGN SEDs from prior papers.
Simulations based on previous studies, refs 6-9, 20.
domain assumption The instrument characteristics for Arcus (A, Delta E) used as inputs are correct.
From ref 4, Smith et al. 2024, the Arcus Probe mission proposal.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Power of simultaneous X-ray and UV high-resolution spectroscopy for probing AGN outflows." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/W5W3WLE5

@misc{pith2026241203493,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Power of simultaneous X-ray and UV high-resolution spectroscopy for probing AGN outflows},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/W5W3WLE5}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.03493}
}

read the original abstract

Black hole accretion in active galactic nuclei (AGN) is coupled to the evolution of their host galaxies. Outflowing winds in AGN can play an important role in this evolution through the resulting feedback mechanism. Multi-wavelength spectroscopy is key for probing the intertwined physics of inflows and outflows in AGN. However, with the current spectrometers, crucial properties of the ionized outflows are poorly understood, such as their coupling to the accretion rate, their launching mechanism, and their kinetic power. In this paper we discuss the need for simultaneous X-ray and UV high-resolution spectroscopy for tackling outstanding questions on these outflows in AGN. The instrumental requirements for achieving the scientific objectives are addressed. We demonstrate that these requirements would be facilitated by the proposed Arcus Probe mission concept. The multi-wavelength spectroscopy and timing by Arcus would enable us to establish the kinematics and ionization structure of the entire ionized outflow, extending from the vicinity of the accretion disk to the outskirts of the host galaxy. Arcus would provide key diagnostics on the origin, driving mechanism, and the energetics of the outflows, which are useful benchmarks for testing various theoretical models of outflows and understanding their impact in AGN.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

23 extracted references · 21 canonical work pages

[1]

Laha , C

S. Laha , C. S. Reynolds , J. Reeves , et al. , `` Ionized outflows from active galactic nuclei as the essential elements of feedback ,'' Nature Astronomy 5 , 13--24 (2021)

work page 2021
[2]

L. C. Gallo , J. M. Miller , and E. Costantini , `` Active galactic nuclei with high-resolution X-ray spectroscopy ,'' arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2302.10930 (2023)

arXiv 2023
[3]

Fukumura , M

K. Fukumura , M. Mehdipour , E. Behar , et al. , `` Dual Role of Accretion Disk Winds as X-Ray Obscurers and UV Line Absorbers in AGN ,'' 968 , 70 (2024)

work page 2024
[4]

Smith , J

R. Smith , J. Arenberg , M. Bautz , et al. , `` The Arcus Probe Mission ,'' in Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2024: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray , J.-W. A. den Herder , S. Nikzad , and K. Nakazawa , Eds., Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series 13093 , 1309326 (2024)

work page 2024
[5]

C. B. Tarter , W. H. Tucker , and E. E. Salpeter , `` The Interaction of X-Ray Sources with Optically Thin Environments ,'' 156 , 943--951 (1969)

work page 1969
[6]

Mehdipour , J

M. Mehdipour , J. S. Kaastra , G. A. Kriss , et al. , `` Chasing obscuration in type-I AGN: discovery of an eclipsing clumpy wind at the outer broad-line region of NGC 3783 ,'' 607 , A28 (2017)

work page 2017
[7]

Costanzo , M

D. Costanzo , M. Dadina , C. Vignali , et al. , `` Short-timescale X-ray spectral variability in the Seyfert 1 galaxy NGC 3783 ,'' 659 , A161 (2022)

work page 2022
[8]

G. A. Kriss , M. Mehdipour , J. S. Kaastra , et al. , `` HST/COS observations of the newly discovered obscuring outflow in NGC 3783 ,'' 621 , A12 (2019)

work page 2019

Show all 23 references

[9]

J. R. Gabel , D. M. Crenshaw , S. B. Kraemer , et al. , `` The Ionized Gas and Nuclear Environment in NGC 3783. II. Averaged Hubble Space Telescope/STIS and Far Ultraviolet Spectroscopic Explorer Spectra ,'' 583 , 178--191 (2003)

2003
[10]

J. S. Kaastra , R. Mewe , and H. Nieuwenhuijzen , `` SPEX: a new code for spectral analysis of X & UV spectra. ,'' in UV and X-ray Spectroscopy of Astrophysical and Laboratory Plasmas , 411--414 (1996)

1996
[11]

J. S. Kaastra, A. J. J. Raassen, J. de Plaa, et al. , ``Spex x-ray spectral fitting package,'' (2020)

2020
[12]

Mehdipour , J

M. Mehdipour , J. S. Kaastra , and T. Kallman , `` Systematic comparison of photoionised plasma codes with application to spectroscopic studies of AGN in X-rays ,'' 596 , A65 (2016)

2016
[13]

J. M. Miller , J. S. Kaastra , M. C. Miller , et al. , `` Flows of X-ray gas reveal the disruption of a star by a massive black hole ,'' 526 , 542--545 (2015)

2015
[14]

J. S. Kaastra, G. A. Kriss, M. Cappi, et al. , ``A fast and long-lived outflow from the supermassive black hole in ngc 5548,'' Science 345 (6192), 64--68 (2014)

2014
[15]

G. A. Kriss , G. De Rosa , J. Ely , et al. , `` Space Telescope and Optical Reverberation Mapping Project. VIII. Time Variability of Emission and Absorption in NGC 5548 Based on Modeling the Ultraviolet Spectrum ,'' 881 , 153 (2019)

2019
[16]

Mehdipour , G

M. Mehdipour , G. A. Kriss , E. Costantini , et al. , `` 10 Yr Transformation of the Obscuring Wind in NGC 5548 ,'' 934 , L24 (M22) (2022)

2022
[17]

Proga , T

D. Proga , T. Waters , S. Dyda , et al. , `` Thermal Instability in Radiation Hydrodynamics: Instability Mechanisms, Position-dependent S-curves, and Attenuation Curves ,'' 935 , L37 (2022)

2022
[18]

Waters , D

T. Waters , D. Proga , R. Dannen , et al. , `` Dynamical Thermal Instability in Highly Supersonic Outflows ,'' 931 , 134 (2022)

2022
[19]

J. S. Kaastra , ``Spectral diagnostics for ixo,\\ https://space.mit.edu/home/nss/ J elle\_ K aastra\_ixo\_spextroscopy.pdf,'' (2008)

2008
[20]

Mehdipour , J

M. Mehdipour , J. S. Kaastra , G. A. Kriss , et al. , `` Anatomy of the AGN in NGC 5548. I. A global model for the broadband spectral energy distribution ,'' 575 , A22 (2015)

2015
[21]

G. A. Matzeu , M. Brusa , G. Lanzuisi , et al. , `` Supermassive Black Hole Winds in X-rays: SUBWAYS. I. Ultra-fast outflows in quasars beyond the local Universe ,'' 670 , A182 (2023)

2023
[22]

Mehdipour , G

M. Mehdipour , G. A. Kriss , M. Brusa , et al. , `` Supermassive Black Hole Winds in X-rays: SUBWAYS. II. HST UV spectroscopy of winds at intermediate redshifts ,'' 670 , A183 (2023)

2023
[23]

write newline

" write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION blank.sep after.quote 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry output.state after.quoted.block = 'skip 'add.period if write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip output.state after.quote = after.quoted.blo...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Laha , C

S. Laha , C. S. Reynolds , J. Reeves , et al. , `` Ionized outflows from active galactic nuclei as the essential elements of feedback ,'' Nature Astronomy 5 , 13--24 (2021)

work page 2021

[2] [2]

L. C. Gallo , J. M. Miller , and E. Costantini , `` Active galactic nuclei with high-resolution X-ray spectroscopy ,'' arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2302.10930 (2023)

arXiv 2023

[3] [3]

Fukumura , M

K. Fukumura , M. Mehdipour , E. Behar , et al. , `` Dual Role of Accretion Disk Winds as X-Ray Obscurers and UV Line Absorbers in AGN ,'' 968 , 70 (2024)

work page 2024

[4] [4]

Smith , J

R. Smith , J. Arenberg , M. Bautz , et al. , `` The Arcus Probe Mission ,'' in Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2024: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray , J.-W. A. den Herder , S. Nikzad , and K. Nakazawa , Eds., Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series 13093 , 1309326 (2024)

work page 2024

[5] [5]

C. B. Tarter , W. H. Tucker , and E. E. Salpeter , `` The Interaction of X-Ray Sources with Optically Thin Environments ,'' 156 , 943--951 (1969)

work page 1969

[6] [6]

Mehdipour , J

M. Mehdipour , J. S. Kaastra , G. A. Kriss , et al. , `` Chasing obscuration in type-I AGN: discovery of an eclipsing clumpy wind at the outer broad-line region of NGC 3783 ,'' 607 , A28 (2017)

work page 2017

[7] [7]

Costanzo , M

D. Costanzo , M. Dadina , C. Vignali , et al. , `` Short-timescale X-ray spectral variability in the Seyfert 1 galaxy NGC 3783 ,'' 659 , A161 (2022)

work page 2022

[8] [8]

G. A. Kriss , M. Mehdipour , J. S. Kaastra , et al. , `` HST/COS observations of the newly discovered obscuring outflow in NGC 3783 ,'' 621 , A12 (2019)

work page 2019