pith. sign in

arxiv: 2502.07940 · v2 · submitted 2025-02-11 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE · hep-ph

Temporary EHBL-like behavior of Markarian 501 during July 2014 VHE flaring

Sarira Sahu , A. U. Puga Oliveros , D. I. P\'aez-S\'anchez , G. S\'anchez-Col\'on , Subhash Rajpoot , M. E. Iglesias Mart\'inez , Jos\'e Guerra Carmenate , P. Fern\'andez de C\'ordoba
show 1 more author
Gaetano Lambiase
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-23 03:38 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE hep-ph
keywords Markarian 501VHE gamma-ray flaresphotohadronic modelBL Lac objectsextreme high-energy behaviorgamma-ray spectracutoff energy
0
0 comments X

The pith

The two-zone photohadronic model reproduces Markarian 501's 2014 VHE flare spectrum with a mild peak arising from a cutoff at 3.18 TeV.

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

The paper applies a two-zone photohadronic model to the day-by-day VHE gamma-ray spectra of Markarian 501 during its July 2014 flaring activity. It focuses on the narrow peak-like feature around 3 TeV recorded by MAGIC on MJD 56857.98 and shows this arises when the spectrum reaches a cutoff energy. Below the cutoff the spectrum rises slowly in a high-emission state; above it the spectrum drops faster, producing only a mild feature. The model therefore accounts for the observation through standard photohadronic processes without requiring additional mechanisms.

Core claim

Using the well-known two-zone photohadronic model, the analysis shows that on MJD 56857.98 the peak-like feature appears at a cutoff energy of E^c_γ=3.18 TeV. Below this energy the VHE spectrum increases slowly and remains in a high emission state. For E^c_γ > 3.18 TeV the spectrum falls faster, resulting in a mild peak-like feature that is less prominent than reported by the MAGIC collaboration.

What carries the argument

The two-zone photohadronic model, which separates the emission region into two zones to compute photohadronic gamma-ray production and the resulting spectral cutoff.

If this is right

  • The same model parameters can be applied to the spectra recorded on the other fourteen days of the flare to check consistency.
  • The temporary shift to extreme high-energy behavior is produced by the cutoff location rather than a permanent change in source properties.
  • The day-by-day spectral evolution can be tracked by varying only the cutoff energy within the fixed two-zone framework.
  • The observed feature does not require revisions to standard interpretations of VHE emission in BL Lac objects.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Similar narrow features reported in other blazar flares could be re-examined as cutoff signatures rather than distinct emission components.
  • High-resolution spectral measurements around 3 TeV during future flares would directly test the predicted transition from slow rise to rapid fall.
  • The model framework may extend to other sources exhibiting temporary EHBL-like states to predict cutoff locations from X-ray data.

Load-bearing premise

The two-zone photohadronic model parameters are assumed to capture the dominant emission process on that day without significant contributions from other mechanisms such as synchrotron self-Compton.

What would settle it

A measured VHE spectrum on MJD 56857.98 that continues rising or falls at a different rate above 3.18 TeV would contradict the predicted cutoff shape.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.07940 by A. U. Puga Oliveros, D. I. P\'aez-S\'anchez, Gaetano Lambiase, G. S\'anchez-Col\'on, Jos\'e Guerra Carmenate, M. E. Iglesias Mart\'inez, P. Fern\'andez de C\'ordoba, Sarira Sahu, Subhash Rajpoot.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The observed VHE spectra of Mrk 501 for the first three days are fitted using the two-zone photohadronic model. In all the figures, the normalization constants F1 and F2 are expressed in units of 10−11 erg cm−2 s −1 . The best fit to zone-1 is shown as the red curve and its extension as dotted red curve shows the behavior of the model at the high-energy limit if only zone-1 exists. Similarly, the spectrum … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The VHE spectrum of Mrk 501 observed on MJD 56857.98. See [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The observed VHE spectra on MJD 56859.98, 56859.97, 56861.01 and 56862.02 are fitted with the two-zone photo￾hadronic model. See [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The VHE spectra observed on MJD 56863.00, 56864.02, 56865.00 and 56865.99 are fitted with the two-zone photo￾hadronic model. See [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The observed VHE spectra on MJD 56867.00, 56868.01, and 56869.93 are fitted with the two-zone photohadronic model. See [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The cutoff energy E c γ in the two-zone photohadronic model is shown for every flaring event. MJD 56857.98∗ corresponds to the day when a narrow peak-like feature at 3.18 TeV was observed and this is also shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The best fit values of the spectral indices δ1 and δ2 for every flaring event are shown. the intrinsic spectrum falls as Fγ,in ∝ E−1 γ for Eγ > Ec γ . In zone-1, Fγ,in ∝ E0.17 γ , a slowly increasing flux up to Ec γ . In the photohadronic model we predict a mild peak-like structure at Ec γ = 3.18 TeV in the observed spectrum. On this day, the maximum observed photon energy was Eγ = 6.8 TeV, corresponding t… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The best fit values of the normalization factors F1 and F2 in two-zone photohadronic model are shown for all the days. Acciari, V., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 490, 2284 —. 2020, A&A, 638, A14 Ahnen, M., et al. 2017, A&A, 603, A31 —. 2018, A&A, 620, A181 Ahnen, M. L., Ansoldi, S., Antonelli, L. A., et al. 2018, A&A, 620, A181, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833704 Albert, J., et al. 2007, ApJ, 669, 862 —. 2008, ApJ, 68… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Markarian 501, a BL Lac object well-known as a high energy gamma-ray source, has exhibited several epochs of very high energy (VHE) gamma-ray flaring events when its synchrotron peak frequency shifted above $10^{17}$ Hz, a signature of extreme behavior. From July 16 to July 31, 2014 such flaring events were observed for 15 days by various telescopes. On July 19 (MJD 56857.98), the X-ray outburst from the source was at its highest and on the same day an intriguing narrow peak-like feature around 3 TeV was observed by the MAGIC telescopes, a feature inconsistent with standard interpretations. Using the well-known two-zone photohadronic model, we study these VHE gamma-ray spectra on a day-by-day basis and offer explanation. Our two-zone photohadronic scenario shows that, on MJD 56857.98, the peak-like feature appears at a cutoff energy of $E^c_{\gamma}=3.18$ TeV. Below this energy the VHE spectrum increases slowly and is in high emission state. However, for $E^c_{\gamma}\, > 3.18$ TeV, the spectrum falls faster, resulting in a mild peak-like feature, not prominent enough as claimed by the MAGIC collaboration.

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

3 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper claims that the narrow peak-like feature around 3 TeV in the VHE spectrum of Markarian 501 on MJD 56857.98, observed during the July 2014 flare, can be explained using the two-zone photohadronic model with a cutoff energy E^c_γ = 3.18 TeV. Below this energy the spectrum rises slowly in a high state; above it the spectrum falls faster, producing a mild peak that is less prominent than reported by MAGIC. The analysis is performed day-by-day across the 15-day flaring period.

Significance. If the model application is shown to be appropriate and dominant, the result would offer a concrete photohadronic interpretation for an anomalous VHE spectral feature in an extreme blazar, potentially constraining the relative importance of hadronic versus leptonic processes during flares. The day-by-day modeling approach is a positive element that could be strengthened by quantitative comparisons.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The central claim that the two-zone photohadronic model produces the observed mild peak at E^c_γ=3.18 TeV rests on the premise that this mechanism dominates VHE emission on MJD 56857.98. No section demonstrates that leptonic contributions (SSC or EC) are sub-dominant, nor are alternative models compared to the data.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: The cutoff energy E^c_γ=3.18 TeV is presented as the value that produces the peak-like feature, yet the description indicates it is chosen to reproduce the MAGIC data point. This makes the explanation post-hoc rather than an independent prediction from the model.
  3. [Abstract] Abstract and main text: No error bars, fitting procedure, raw spectral points, or goodness-of-fit metrics are provided for the day-by-day spectra or the specific cutoff value, preventing assessment of whether the model actually reproduces the data within uncertainties.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: Minor grammatical correction needed: 'offer explanation' should read 'offer an explanation'.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments and the recommendation for major revision. We address each major comment point by point below, indicating planned changes to the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The central claim that the two-zone photohadronic model produces the observed mild peak at E^c_γ=3.18 TeV rests on the premise that this mechanism dominates VHE emission on MJD 56857.98. No section demonstrates that leptonic contributions (SSC or EC) are sub-dominant, nor are alternative models compared to the data.

    Authors: The manuscript applies the two-zone photohadronic model to provide an explanation for the anomalous spectral feature noted as inconsistent with standard interpretations. It does not claim that this mechanism dominates the VHE emission or that leptonic processes are sub-dominant. To clarify this scope, we will revise the abstract and add a brief statement in the introduction and conclusions noting that the work presents one possible physical interpretation and that assessing relative contributions would require dedicated multi-wavelength leptonic modeling outside the present focus. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The cutoff energy E^c_γ=3.18 TeV is presented as the value that produces the peak-like feature, yet the description indicates it is chosen to reproduce the MAGIC data point. This makes the explanation post-hoc rather than an independent prediction from the model.

    Authors: The cutoff energy is obtained by adjusting model parameters to match the position of the observed feature in the MAGIC spectrum, which is the standard procedure for constraining source models with data. The model then supplies the physical mechanism (transition from slow rise to faster fall across the cutoff) that accounts for the mild peak. We will revise the abstract and relevant text to explicitly describe this as a fit to the data rather than an a priori prediction. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and main text: No error bars, fitting procedure, raw spectral points, or goodness-of-fit metrics are provided for the day-by-day spectra or the specific cutoff value, preventing assessment of whether the model actually reproduces the data within uncertainties.

    Authors: We acknowledge the absence of quantitative fitting details in the current version. The presentation emphasizes the qualitative reproduction of the spectral shape. In the revised manuscript we will add the fitting procedure for the day-by-day spectra, report uncertainties on E^c_γ, include goodness-of-fit metrics, and discuss how well the model matches the data points within reported errors. revision: yes

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

Fitted cutoff energy presented as model-derived explanation of observed peak feature

specific steps
  1. fitted input called prediction [Abstract]
    "Our two-zone photohadronic scenario shows that, on MJD 56857.98, the peak-like feature appears at a cutoff energy of E^c_γ=3.18 TeV. Below this energy the VHE spectrum increases slowly and is in high emission state. However, for E^c_γ > 3.18 TeV, the spectrum falls faster, resulting in a mild peak-like feature, not prominent enough as claimed by the MAGIC collaboration."

    The cutoff energy E^c_γ=3.18 TeV is a tunable model parameter whose value is chosen to reproduce the observed MAGIC spectrum on that date. The subsequent description of slow increase below and faster fall above this energy follows directly from the cutoff placement in the model, so the claimed 'explanation' of the peak-like feature is the input fit restated as an output of the scenario.

full rationale

The paper's central claim attributes the mild peak-like feature on MJD 56857.98 to the two-zone photohadronic model's cutoff at E^c_γ=3.18 TeV, with the spectral behavior below and above this energy described as a direct consequence. This reduces to fitting the model's free parameter to match the MAGIC data point and then presenting the fit result as the model's 'showing' of the feature. The assumption that this mechanism dominates (without SSC/EC contributions) is invoked via the abstract's reference to the 'well-known' model but is not independently verified in the provided text. No self-citation chain or self-definitional loop is exhibited beyond the standard fitting procedure, so the circularity is partial and limited to the 'prediction' language around the fitted value.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the applicability of the two-zone photohadronic model to this source and on the choice of a cutoff energy fitted to match the observed spectral feature. No new entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • cutoff energy E^c_γ = 3.18 TeV
    Value 3.18 TeV is selected to locate the transition from slow rise to faster fall in the VHE spectrum on MJD 56857.98
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The two-zone photohadronic model accurately describes the dominant VHE emission process in this flare
    Invoked directly in the abstract as the framework used to study the spectra

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5839 in / 1428 out tokens · 32884 ms · 2026-05-23T03:38:07.183514+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

52 extracted references · 52 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    2019, , 870, 93, 10.3847/1538-4357/aaf1c4

    Abdalla , H., Aharonian , F., Ait Benkhali , F., et al. 2019, , 870, 93, 10.3847/1538-4357/aaf1c4

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaf1c4 2019

  2. [2]

    A., et al

    Abdo, A. A., et al. 2009, ApJ, 700, 597

    work page 2009

  3. [3]

    A., Ackermann , M., Agudo , I., et al

    Abdo , A. A., Ackermann , M., Agudo , I., et al. 2010, , 716, 30, 10.1088/0004-637X/716/1/30

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/716/1/30 2010

  4. [4]

    2019, MNRAS, 490, 2284

    Acciari, V., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 490, 2284

    work page 2019

  5. [5]

    2020, , 638, A14

    ---. 2020, , 638, A14

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    2017, , 603, A31

    Ahnen, M., et al. 2017, , 603, A31

    work page 2017

  7. [7]

    2018, , 620, A181

    ---. 2018, , 620, A181

    work page 2018

  8. [8]

    L., Ansoldi , S., Antonelli , L

    Ahnen , M. L., Ansoldi , S., Antonelli , L. A., et al. 2018, , 620, A181, 10.1051/0004-6361/201833704

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833704 2018

  9. [9]

    2007, ApJ, 669, 862

    Albert, J., et al. 2007, ApJ, 669, 862

    work page 2007

  10. [10]

    2008, ApJ, 681, 944

    ---. 2008, ApJ, 681, 944

    work page 2008

  11. [11]

    2015, , 573, A50

    Aleksi\'c, J., et al. 2015, , 573, A50

    work page 2015

  12. [12]

    2016, , 594, A76

    Aliu, E., et al. 2016, , 594, A76

    work page 2016

  13. [13]

    2013, Journal of Instrumentation, 8, P06008, 10.1088/1748-0221/8/06/P06008

    Anderhub , H., Backes , M., Biland , A., et al. 2013, Journal of Instrumentation, 8, P06008, 10.1088/1748-0221/8/06/P06008

    work page doi:10.1088/1748-0221/8/06/p06008 2013

  14. [14]

    2014, Journal of Instrumentation, 9, P10012, 10.1088/1748-0221/9/10/P10012

    Biland , A., Bretz , T., Bu , J., et al. 2014, Journal of Instrumentation, 9, P10012, 10.1088/1748-0221/9/10/P10012

    work page doi:10.1088/1748-0221/9/10/p10012 2014

  15. [15]

    2013, ApJ, 768, 54, 10.1088/0004-637X/768/1/54

    Boettcher, M., Reimer, A., Sweeney, K., & Prakash, A. 2013, ApJ, 768, 54, 10.1088/0004-637X/768/1/54

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/768/1/54 2013

  16. [16]

    D., & Finke, J

    B \"o ttcher, M., Dermer, C. D., & Finke, J. D. 2008, , 679, L9

    work page 2008

  17. [17]

    2017, , 54, 42

    Chandra, P., et al. 2017, , 54, 42

    work page 2017

  18. [18]

    2018, , 477, 4257

    Costamante, L., Bonnoli, G., Tavecchio, F., et al. 2018, , 477, 4257

    work page 2018

  19. [19]

    2001, , 371, 512

    Costamante, L., et al. 2001, , 371, 512

    work page 2001

  20. [20]

    D., & Schlickeiser , R

    Dermer , C. D., & Schlickeiser , R. 1993, , 416, 458, 10.1086/173251

    work page doi:10.1086/173251 1993

  21. [21]

    D., & Schlickeiser, R

    Dermer, C. D., & Schlickeiser, R. 1993, ApJ, 416, 458

    work page 1993

  22. [22]

    2011, , 410, 2556

    Dominguez, A., et al. 2011, , 410, 2556

    work page 2011

  23. [23]

    FACT - Monitoring Blazars at Very High Energies

    Dorner , D., Ahnen , M. L., Bergmann , M., et al. 2015, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1502.02582, 10.48550/arXiv.1502.02582

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1502.02582 2015

  24. [24]

    2019, , 486, 1741, 10.1093/mnras/stz812

    Foffano , L., Prandini , E., Franceschini , A., & Paiano , S. 2019, , 486, 1741, 10.1093/mnras/stz812

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz812 2019

  25. [25]

    2008, , 487, 837

    Franceschini, A., Rodighiero, G., & Vaccari, M. 2008, , 487, 837

    work page 2008

  26. [26]

    2004, , 611, 1005, 10.1086/422091

    Gehrels , N., Chincarini , G., Giommi , P., et al. 2004, , 611, 1005, 10.1086/422091

    work page doi:10.1086/422091 2004

  27. [27]

    2021, , 508, 4038, 10.1093/mnras/stab2442

    Hu , W., & Yan , D. 2021, , 508, 4038, 10.1093/mnras/stab2442

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2442 2021

  28. [28]

    1999, ApJ, 514, 138

    Kataoka, J., et al. 1999, ApJ, 514, 138

    work page 1999

  29. [29]

    2009, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:0912.3830, 10.48550/arXiv.0912.3830

    Kranich , D. 2009, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:0912.3830, 10.48550/arXiv.0912.3830

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.0912.3830 2009

  30. [30]

    A., Ansoldi , S., et al

    MAGIC Collaboration , Acciari , V. A., Ansoldi , S., et al. 2020, , 637, A86, 10.1051/0004-6361/201834603

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201834603 2020

  31. [31]

    1995, , 444, 567, 10.1086/175631

    Padovani , P., & Giommi , P. 1995, , 444, 567, 10.1086/175631

    work page doi:10.1086/175631 1995

  32. [32]

    2009, , 504, 821, 10.1051/0004-6361/200912237

    Paggi , A., Massaro , F., Vittorini , V., et al. 2009, , 504, 821, 10.1051/0004-6361/200912237

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200912237 2009

  33. [33]

    2024, , 685, A110, 10.1051/0004-6361/202347809

    Petropoulou , M., Mastichiadis , A., Vasilopoulos , G., et al. 2024, , 685, A110, 10.1051/0004-6361/202347809

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347809 2024

  34. [34]

    2000, ApJ, 536, 742

    Petry, D., et al. 2000, ApJ, 536, 742

    work page 2000

  35. [35]

    1998, , 492, L17, 10.1086/311083

    Pian , E., Vacanti , G., Tagliaferri , G., et al. 1998, , 492, L17, 10.1086/311083

    work page doi:10.1086/311083 1998

  36. [36]

    A., & Sikora , M

    Pjanka , P., Zdziarski , A. A., & Sikora , M. 2017, , 465, 3506, 10.1093/mnras/stw2960

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2960 2017

  37. [37]

    2017, , 207, 5, 10.1007/s11214-016-0328-2

    Romero, G., Boettcher, M., Markoff, S., & Tavecchio, F. 2017, , 207, 5, 10.1007/s11214-016-0328-2

    work page doi:10.1007/s11214-016-0328-2 2017

  38. [38]

    2019, Rev

    Sahu, S. 2019, Rev. Mex. Fis., 65, 307

    work page 2019

  39. [39]

    R., & Nagataki , S

    Sahu , S., de Le \'o n , A. R., & Nagataki , S. 2018, EPJC, 78, 484, 10.1140/epjc/s10052-018-5954-2

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-018-5954-2 2018

  40. [40]

    R., Nagataki, S., & Gupta, V

    Sahu, S., de León, A. R., Nagataki, S., & Gupta, V. 2018, EPJC, 78, 557

    work page 2018

  41. [41]

    E., Casta\ neda Hern\'andez, L

    Sahu, S., L\'opez Fort\' n, C. E., Casta\ neda Hern\'andez, L. H., Nagataki, S., & Rajpoot, S. 2020, ApJ, 901, 132, 10.3847/1538-4357/abb089

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abb089 2020

  42. [42]

    E., Casta \ n eda Hern \'a ndez , L

    Sahu , S., L \'o pez Fort \' n , C. E., Casta \ n eda Hern \'a ndez , L. H., & Rajpoot , S. 2021 a , , 906, 91, 10.3847/1538-4357/abc9c6

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abc9c6 2021

  43. [43]

    E., Iglesias Mart \' nez , M

    Sahu , S., L \'o pez Fort \' n , C. E., Iglesias Mart \' nez , M. E., Nagataki , S., & Fern \'a ndez de C \'o rdoba , P. 2020, , 492, 2261, 10.1093/mnras/staa023

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa023 2020

  44. [44]

    E., Valadez Polanco , I

    Sahu , S., L \'o pez Fort \' n , C. E., Valadez Polanco , I. A., & Rajpoot , S. 2021 b , , 914, 120, 10.3847/1538-4357/abfd9a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abfd9a 2021

  45. [45]

    E., & Nagataki, S

    Sahu, S., López Fortín, C. E., & Nagataki, S. 2019, ApJL, 884, L17

    work page 2019

  46. [46]

    S., & Rajpoot , S

    Sahu , S., Miranda , L. S., & Rajpoot , S. 2016, EPJC, 76, 127, 10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-3975-2

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-3975-2 2016

  47. [47]

    F., & Sanabria, J

    Sahu, S., Osorio Oliveros, A. F., & Sanabria, J. C. 2013, Phys. Rev. D, 87, 103015, 10.1103/PhysRevD.87.103015

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.87.103015 2013

  48. [48]

    Sahu, S., Yáñez, M. V. L., Miranda, L. S., de León, A. R., & Gupta, V. 2017, EPJC, 77, 18

    work page 2017

  49. [49]

    2014, , 438, 3255

    Tavecchio, F. 2014, , 438, 3255

    work page 2014

  50. [50]

    Extreme BL Lacs: probes for cosmology and UHECR candidates

    Tavecchio , F., & Bonnoli , G. 2015, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1512.05080, 10.48550/arXiv.1512.05080

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1512.05080 2015

  51. [51]

    2001, , 554, 725, 10.1086/321394

    Tavecchio , F., Maraschi , L., Pian , E., et al. 2001, , 554, 725, 10.1086/321394

    work page doi:10.1086/321394 2001

  52. [52]

    H., Kinman , T

    Ulrich , M. H., Kinman , T. D., Lynds , C. R., Rieke , G. H., & Ekers , R. D. 1975, , 198, 261, 10.1086/153603

    work page doi:10.1086/153603 1975