Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 108 references

Location of a Sample of GeV and Optical Outbursts in the Jets of Blazars

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read All 47 blazar outbursts arise beyond the broad line region

desk verdict Useful sample extension of the flare-ratio method, but the "all cases beyond BLR" claim overreaches because the EC-only approach is applied to a BL Lac whose inferred 14–15 pc zone lies far beyond the torus, where SSC must dominate. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.03010 v2 pith:IBWGXL54 submitted 2025-05-05 astro-ph.HE

Maitreya Kundu (Washington U. St Louis , Presidency U. Kolkata) , Arit Bala (Presidency U. Kolkata) , Saugata Barat (U. Amsterdam , MIT) , Ritaban Chatterjee (Presidency U. Kolkata) This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords blazarsgamma-rayemissionregionbroadlinedustytorusexternalComptonscatteringFermi-LATmulti-wavelengthvariabilityactivegalacticnuclei
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

The paper asks a long-standing question in blazar physics: where in the jet are the bright GeV and optical flares produced? To answer it, the authors use the ratio of energy released in contemporaneous gamma-ray and optical outbursts, a method established in earlier work, and apply it to 47 flare pairs in ten low-synchrotron-peaked blazars, sources in which the GeV band is dominated by external Compton scattering of broad-line-region or dusty-torus photons. Each observed ratio is matched against light curves simulated with a cylindrical jet model in which the optical emission is synchrotron and the gamma-ray emission is external Compton scattering, with the emission zone placed at a series of distances from the black hole. The paper concludes that in all 47 cases the emission region lies beyond the broad line region, most often between it and the dusty torus and in a few cases outside the torus. A reader should care because the location of the gamma-ray zone determines which seed photons power the flares, what physical parameters the jet has at that distance, and how the jet interacts with its surroundings.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the gamma-to-optical energy dissipation ratio of a flare pair, $R_{\gamma/{\rm opt}}$. Observed light curves in the R band and in 0.1–100 GeV are decomposed into double-exponential flares; flares whose peaks fall within 20 days are paired, and the ratio of their integrated energies is computed. The same decomposition is applied to light curves produced by a cylindrical, multi-cell jet simulation in which the optical emission is synchrotron radiation and the GeV emission is external Compton scattering. The seed photon energy densities from the broad line region and dusty torus are described by Eqs. 13–14, which fall off with distance as $[1+(r/R)]^{-\beta}$; this makes $R_{\gamma/{\rm opt}}$ a monotonic, distance-dependent ruler. The BLR and torus distances themselves are set by the reverberation-mapping scaling relations $R_{\rm BLR}=0.1\,L_{D,46}^{0.5}\,\mathrm{pc}$ and $R_{\rm torus}=2.5\,L_{D,46}^{0.5}\,\mathrm{pc}$, so matching observed to simulated ratios yields a distance in parsecs and a position relative to the BLR and torus.

What would settle it

A single well-measured contemporaneous GeV/optical flare pair in an LSP blazar whose energy ratio matches the simulated ratio at or inside the BLR radius—of order $10^2$–$10^3$ for the fiducial parameters—would place that emission inside the BLR and contradict the claim that all such outbursts lie beyond it.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central discovery is that every one of the 47 contemporaneous GeV/optical flare pairs examined in ten low-synchrotron-peaked blazars originates outside the broad line region (BLR), with most emission zones between the BLR and the dusty torus and a minority beyond the torus. The distance is not measured directly but inferred from the gamma-to-optical energy ratio: the simulated ratio falls as the emission zone moves downstream, because the external-Compton seed photon field from the BLR and torus weakens with distance, so each observed ratio maps to a distance. Representative results include PKS 0208-512 at roughly 0.5–1 pc, 3C 454.3 at 0.8–2 pc, and PKS 1510-089 and PKS 2142-75 beyond the torus, the latter out to about 15 pc. For the well-studied 2013–2014 outburst of 3C 279, the method separates two flares in distance and reproduces the two-zone conclusion of earlier VLBI-based work, one flare between the BLR and torus and the other beyond the torus. The paper also reports that short-timescale flares follow the model expectation: in flat-spectrum radio quasars the GeV-to-optical ratio decreases when short flares are included, while in BL Lac objects it does not change, matching an EC-dominated gamma-ray mechanism in the former and an SSC-coupled mechanism in the latter.

Load-bearing premise

The conclusion stands on the assumption that the simulated gamma-to-optical energy ratio as a function of emission-region distance is a faithful mapping for every source, which requires each flare's GeV emission to be external-Compton-dominated and the adopted magnetic field, disk luminosity, jet Lorentz factor, and BLR/torus geometry to be correct.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the conclusion is right, the torus, not the broad line region, supplies the seed photons for most luminous GeV flares in these blazars, so SED models that require BLR seed photons to make strong gamma-ray flares are disfavored for this class.
  • Jet parameters inferred from GeV/optical variability, such as magnetic field strength and Doppler factor, describe the jet at distances of a few parsecs from the black hole rather than within 0.1 pc.
  • The GeV/optical ratio can serve as a relative distance indicator for multiple flares in one source: in 3C 279, two contemporaneous flares from the same epoch are placed at different distances, matching results from radio-jet monitoring.
  • Short-timescale variability in FSRQs and BL Lacs should behave differently: FSRQs should show a lower GeV-to-optical ratio when short flares are included, while BL Lacs should not, because their GeV emission tracks the magnetic field through the SSC process.
  • This method can be extended to larger samples using public Fermi-LAT and optical monitoring data, allowing systematic comparison with radio-jet and SED-based location estimates.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A testable extension would be to apply the same ratio method to high-synchrotron-peaked blazars, where the GeV emission is SSC-dominated; the predicted distance-ruler would be much flatter, so the method should fail there, providing a check on the model assumptions.
  • If the all-beyond-BLR result holds, one might expect GeV spectra of these flares to show little or no BLR-related absorption or cut-off features; searching Fermi spectra of the same flare epochs for such signatures would test the location independently.
  • The inference depends on each source's disk luminosity and jet parameters from the literature; a coordinated re-analysis that fits those parameters simultaneously with the same data could sharpen the distances and test whether the scatter among sources is real or a parameter artifact.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper applies the Barat et al. (2022) method to locate the GeV/optical emission region in 47 contemporaneous outburst pairs across 10 LSP blazars. Flares are decomposed from Fermi-LAT 0.1-100 GeV and SMARTS R-band light curves, and the ratio of the energy dissipated in each GeV and optical flare pair is compared with ratios extracted from simulated light curves generated by a cylindrical jet model that includes synchrotron, SSC, and EC scattering of BLR and torus seed photons. The authors infer that all 47 pairs originate beyond the BLR, generally between the BLR and the dusty torus, with a few beyond the torus. They also compare individual flaring epochs, most notably the 2013-14 flares of 3C 279, with results from the literature, and report consistency in most cases for which data are available.

Significance. If the inference is robust, the paper provides a uniform, relatively large-sample confirmation that GeV/optical flares in LSP blazars occur outside the BLR, in line with VLBI-based and Compton-dominance studies, and it strengthens the case for torus seed photons in GeV production. The paper's strengths are its use of public Fermi-LAT and SMARTS data, its uniform analysis of 47 flare pairs, and its attempt to validate the method against epoch-specific literature results. However, the central claim is only as strong as the model assumption of EC-dominated GeV emission and the parameter-dependent simulated calibration; at present the supporting evidence is incomplete.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 2, Section 4.3, Table 8, Eq. (14)] The assumption that each flare's 0.1-100 GeV emission is EC-dominated is not verified per flare, and the sample includes PKS 2142-75, which is classified as a BL Lac object in Table 8. For this source Table 5 gives inferred distances of about 14-15 pc, while the torus is at 4.26 pc; at r = 15 pc the torus seed photon density in Eq. (14) is suppressed by [1 + (15/4.26)]^-4 ≈ 2.4 × 10^-3 relative to its peak, and the BLR contribution is negligible. The GeV emission in this regime must therefore be substantially SSC, whose ratio to synchrotron does not depend on distance in the same way as EC, so the distance inference is no longer unique. The manuscript does not compute the SSC fraction per flare or exclude SSC-dominated events, so the statement that the location is beyond the BLR for all cases is not established for these events. The authors should either quantify the SSC/EC fraction for each flare, restrict the sample to events for which EC dominance can be demonstrated, or soften the 'all cases' claim.
  2. [Section 4.1, Eqs. (23)-(24), Fig. 6] The observed ratios R_flare-3 and R_flare-5 are given in units of ph cm^-2 s^-1 mJy^-1, while the simulated ratios in Fig. 6 are dimensionless energy ratios. Comparing these numbers directly is dimensionally inconsistent: the photon-flux-to-energy-flux conversion for the gamma-ray band and the mJy-to-energy-flux-density conversion for the optical band must be applied before the comparison. As written, the quantitative agreement with Rani et al. (2018) is not supported by the analysis.
  3. [Section 3.1, Table 5] The inferred distances are not accompanied by propagated uncertainties. The observed and simulated ratios carry error bars, but there is no formal mapping from the ratio uncertainties to the distance estimates. For PKS 1244-255, observed ratios such as 0.54 ± 1.88 and 0.35 ± 6.90 are consistent with a very broad range of distances, and the text acknowledges that one flare pair is difficult to constrain. The abstract's unqualified claim that the location is beyond the BLR for all 47 cases is stronger than the table entries support.
  4. [Section 5, Table 4] The sensitivity discussion states that varying L_D by a factor of 10 moves the inferred emission zone by about 2.5 pc and can change its location relative to the BLR and torus. Since the L_D and Γ values in Table 4 are taken from literature SED fits without quoted uncertainties, the robustness of the 'beyond BLR' conclusion across all 47 pairs is not demonstrated. A per-source parameter exploration, or at least a conservative uncertainty band on r that accounts for the literature parameters, is needed to support the universal claim.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Table 1, Abstract] Table 1 lists 11 objects while the text and abstract say 10 blazars; please clarify whether 3C 279 is one of the 10 or an additional source used only for the comparison in Section 4.1.
  2. [Section 3.2.1] The turbulence parameters L_corr, σ, Σ, and θ_max are said to be chosen by qualitative comparison with observed light curves, but no values are given anywhere in the paper. This prevents reproduction of the simulated light curves; the values should be reported even if a more detailed model description is deferred to a future paper.
  3. [Section 5 versus Section 4.3] Section 5 says the method applies only to LSP blazars for which the 0.1-100 GeV emission is dominated by the EC process, yet Section 4.3 and Table 8 classify PKS 2142-75 as a BL Lac object and include it in the main sample; please reconcile the classification or justify that this source is an LSP BL Lac with EC-dominated GeV emission.
  4. [General] There are numerous typographical and spelling errors, e.g., 'assumtion', 'emisison', 'dissiptaion', 'magentic', 'outbrusts', and the section title 'Shoter-Timescale Flares'; the manuscript needs a careful proofreading pass.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: observed flare ratios are independent, the forward simulation is specified in-paper, and external benchmarks support the method.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. The observed GeV-to-optical energy ratios are measured from independent Fermi-LAT and SMARTS light curves (Sections 2, 3.1), and the distance-to-ratio mapping is produced by a forward jet-emission simulation (Eqs. 1–22) with parameters taken from external SED studies (Paliya et al. 2017; Ghisellini et al. 2010), not fitted to the observed flare ratios. The BLR/torus seed-photon profiles (Eqs. 13–14) are standard literature forms (Hayashida et al. 2012), and the “beyond BLR” conclusion is an inverted prediction of that simulation, not an identity. The method's provenance is a self-citation (Barat et al. 2022), but the present paper re-specifies the model equations and validates against external epoch-specific results (3C 279 vs. Rani et al. 2018; 3C 454.3 vs. Acharyya et al. 2021; PKS 1510-089 vs. H.E.S.S.), so the citation is not load-bearing. The manuscript's own caveats concern model validity rather than circularity: Section 4.3 classifies some sample objects (PKS 2142-75, PKS 1244-255 in Table 8) as BL Lacs whose GeV emission is SSC, which conflicts with the EC-dominance assumption used for all LSP blazars in Section 3.2; and Eqs. 23–24 quote 3C 279 flare ratios in mixed units. These are correctness risks for individual inferences, but they do not make the observed ratio equal to the simulated ratio by construction, nor do they reduce the central claim to a fitted parameter.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The method relies on a forward jet model with parameters taken from the literature. The observed gamma-to-optical ratios are measured, not fitted to the location, so the central inference is not a pure fit. However, the analysis choices (smoothing, pairing window, turbulence parameters) and the fixed seed photon field parameters are inputs that affect the mapping from observed ratio to distance.

free parameters (4)
  • Turbulence parameters (L_corr, sigma, Sigma, theta_max) = not specified
    Chosen based on qualitative comparison with observed light curves (Section 3.2.1). They affect the scatter of simulated ratios and short-timescale variability, but not the mean ratio versus distance curve.
  • Gaussian smoothing width = 10 days
    Choice of smoothing width in flare decomposition (Section 3.1). Affects which flares are identified and their fitted parameters.
  • Flare-pair window = 20 days
    Maximum time separation between optical and GeV flare peaks to be considered contemporaneous (Section 3.1). Directly affects which pairs enter the ratio computation.
  • Flare decomposition stopping threshold = 10% of highest flare
    Stopping criterion for the iterative flare decomposition (Section 3.1). Determines how many small flares are included and thus the energy ratios.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The 0.1-100 GeV emission in LSP blazars is dominated by external Compton scattering of BLR and torus seed photons.
    Invoked in Section 2 to justify restricting the sample to LSP blazars. If a flare has significant SSC or hadronic contribution, the simulated ratio curve is not applicable.
  • domain assumption The R-band optical emission is synchrotron radiation from the same electron population that produces the GeV emission.
    Used throughout the simulation (Section 3.2) to relate the optical luminosity to the magnetic field and electron distribution.
  • domain assumption The BLR and torus seed photon energy densities follow Eqs. 13-14 with E_BLR = 0.1 and E_torus = 0.01.
    Taken from Hayashida et al. (2012) and fixed in Table 3. The functional form and normalization set the distance dependence of the gamma-to-optical ratio.
  • domain assumption The BLR and torus radii scale with disk luminosity as R_BLR = 0.1 L_D,46^0.5 pc and R_torus = 2.5 L_D,46^0.5 pc (Eqs. 21-22).
    From Bentz et al. (2013) reverberation mapping. The inferred relative location (beyond BLR or beyond torus) depends directly on these radii.
  • domain assumption Each flare can be modeled as a double exponential function (Eq. 1).
    Used in the decomposition of both observed and simulated light curves (Section 3.1). Systematic errors in the flare shape propagate to energy ratios.
  • domain assumption Optical and GeV flares with peaks within 20 days are produced by the same physical event.
    Assumed in Section 3.1 to define contemporaneous flare pairs. Incorrect pairing would mix unrelated flares and distort the energy ratio.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Location of a Sample of GeV and Optical Outbursts in the Jets of Blazars." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IBWGXL54

@misc{pith2026250503010,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Location of a Sample of GeV and Optical Outbursts in the Jets of Blazars},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IBWGXL54}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.03010}
}
abstract

The exact location of the $\gamma$-ray emitting region in blazar jets has long been a matter of debate. However, the location has important implications about the emission processes, geometric and physical parameters of the jet, as well as the nature of interaction of the jet with the interstellar and intergalactic medium. Diverse conclusions have been drawn by various authors based on a variety of methods applied to different data sets of many blazars, e.g., the location is less than 0.1 pc from the central engine within the broad line region (BLR) or a few or tens of pc downstream beyond the dusty torus or at some intermediate distance. Here we use a method, established in a previous work, in which the location of the GeV/optical emission is determined using the ratio of energy dissipated during contemporaneous outbursts at those wave bands. We apply it to a total of 47 multi-wavelength outbursts in 10 blazars. We find that the location of the GeV/optical emission is beyond the BLR for all cases. This result is consistent with other studies, in which the location has been determined for a large sample of blazars. We compare the location determined by our method for several GeV outbursts of multiple blazars to that obtained by other authors using different methods. We find that our results are consistent in such one-to-one comparison in most cases, for which the required data were available.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.03010 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. ‘Decomposed’ light curves, with individual flares shown as red lines, for the blazars in our sample. The name of the blazar is [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The time-evolution of the simulated SEDs. For each case, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Months-timescale Light Curves simulated with the Jet [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Variation of the simulated γ-to-optical ratio, as a function of the distance of the γ-ray emitting region from the central engine (r), is shown as the black dotted lines. The vertical green and red lines denote the position of the BLR and the DT, respectively. The hori…
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (continued) simulated flare pair energy ratios intersects the energy ratio value of flare-5 at a distance roughly mid-way between the BLR and the DT. Thus, flare-5 is generated beyond the BLR but within the torus. However, we see that the energy ratio for flare-3 is no…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The light curves of 3C 279, during the 2013–2014 epoch of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Variation of the γ-to-optical flare pair energy ratio with the distance of the emitting region from the SMBH. The dashed hori￾zontal lines show the ratios for flare-3 and flare-5. The vertical lines denote the position of the BLR and the DT. The simulation is run at th…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

108 extracted references · 22 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.state := if if FUNCTION not #0 #1 if FUNCTION and 'skip pop #0 if FUNCTION or pop #1...

  2. [2]

    A., et al., 2010, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/722/1/520 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...722..520A 722, 520

    Abdo A. A., et al., 2010, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/722/1/520 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...722..520A 722, 520

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/722/1/520 2010

  3. [3]

    Abdollahi S., et al., 2020, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series] 10.3847/1538-4365/ab6bcb , 247, 33

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab6bcb 2020

  4. [4]

    Abdollahi S., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/ac6751 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJS..260...53A 260, 53

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac6751 2022

  5. [5]

    A., et al., 2022, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stab3454 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.510.2344A 510, 2344

    Acciari V. A., et al., 2022, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stab3454 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.510.2344A 510, 2344

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab3454 2022

  6. [6]

    M., Brown A

    Acharyya A., Chadwick P. M., Brown A. M., 2021, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/staa3483 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.500.5297A 500, 5297

    doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3483 2021

  7. [7]

    Ackermann M., et al., 2016, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/2041-8205/824/2/L20 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...824L..20A 824, L20

    doi:10.3847/2041-8205/824/2/l20 2016

  8. [8]

    Agarwal S., Shukla A., Mannheim K., Vaidya B., Banerjee B., 2024, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/2041-8213/ad4994 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...968L...1A 968, L1

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad4994 2024

Show all 108 references
  1. [9]

    Agudo I., et al., 2011, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/2041-8205/726/1/L13 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...726L..13A 726, L13

    2011 doi

  2. [10]

    L., 2018, @doi [Astronomy and Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/201833005 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018A&A...616A..63A 616, A63

    Arsioli B., Chang Y. L., 2018, @doi [Astronomy and Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/201833005 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018A&A...616A..63A 616, A63

    2018 doi

  3. [11]

    B., et al., 2009, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/697/2/1071 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...697.1071A 697, 1071

    Atwood W. B., et al., 2009, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/697/2/1071 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...697.1071A 697, 1071

    2009 doi

  4. [12]

    Barat S., Chatterjee R., Mitra K., 2022, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stac1852 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.515.1655B 515, 1655

    2022 doi

  5. [13]

    C., et al., 2013, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/767/2/149 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...767..149B 767, 149

    Bentz M. C., et al., 2013, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/767/2/149 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...767..149B 767, 149

    2013 doi

  6. [14]

    D., Rees M

    Blandford R. D., Rees M. J., 1978, @doi [Physica Scripta] 10.1088/0031-8949/17/3/020 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1978PhyS...17..265B 17, 265

    1978 doi

  7. [15]

    Blandford R., Meier D., Readhead A., 2019, @doi [Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics] 10.1146/annurev-astro-081817-051948 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ARA&A..57..467B 57, 467

    2019 doi

  8. [16]

    M., 2000, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/317791 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000ApJ...545..107B 545, 107

    B a \.z ejowski M., Sikora M., Moderski R., Madejski G. M., 2000, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/317791 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000ApJ...545..107B 545, 107

    2000 doi

  9. [17]

    Bonning E., et al., 2012, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/756/1/13 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...756...13B 756, 13

    2012 doi

  10. [18]

    Bottacini E., B \"o ttcher M., Pian E., Collmar W., 2016, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/0004-637X/832/1/17 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...832...17B 832, 17

    2016 doi

  11. [19]

    B \"o ttcher M., 2007, @doi [Astrophysics and Space Science] 10.1007/s10509-007-9404-0 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007Ap&SS.309...95B 309, 95

    2007 doi

  12. [20]

    D., 2010, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/711/1/445 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...711..445B 711, 445

    B \"o ttcher M., Dermer C. D., 2010, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/711/1/445 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...711..445B 711, 445

    2010 doi

  13. [21]

    B \"o ttcher M., Els P., 2016, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/0004-637X/821/2/102 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...821..102B 821, 102

    2016 doi

  14. [22]

    N., Lebofsky M

    Bregman J. N., Lebofsky M. J., Aller M. F., Rieke G. H., Aller H. D., Hodge P. E., Glassgold A. E., Huggins P. J., 1981, @doi [Nature] 10.1038/293714a0 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981Natur.293..714B 293, 714

    1981 doi

  15. [23]

    M., 2013, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stt218 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.431..824B 431, 824

    Brown A. M., 2013, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stt218 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.431..824B 431, 824

    2013 doi

  16. [24]

    M., Rosenberg F

    Burbidge E. M., Rosenberg F. D., 1965, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/148458 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1965ApJ...142.1673B 142, 1673

    1965 doi

  17. [25]

    N., et al., 2005, @doi [Space Science Reviews] 10.1007/s11214-005-5097-2 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005SSRv..120..165B 120, 165

    Burrows D. N., et al., 2005, @doi [Space Science Reviews] 10.1007/s11214-005-5097-2 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005SSRv..120..165B 120, 165

    2005 doi

  18. [26]

    Cao G., Wang J.-C., 2013, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stt1723 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.436.2170C 436, 2170

    2013 doi

  19. [27]

    Castignani G., et al., 2017, @doi [Astronomy and Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/201629775 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017A&A...601A..30C 601, A30

    2017 doi

  20. [28]

    B., 2023, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/acc575 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...948....2C 948, 2

    Chase O., McBride F., Gokus A., Lucchini M., Zhang H., Ojha R., Fox D. B., 2023, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/acc575 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...948....2C 948, 2

    2023 doi

  21. [29]

    Chatterjee R., et al., 2012, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/749/2/191 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...749..191C 749, 191

    2012 doi

  22. [30]

    Chiang J., B \"o ttcher M., 2002, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/324294 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002ApJ...564...92C 564, 92

    2002 doi

  23. [31]

    Chidiac C., et al., 2016, @doi [Astronomy and Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/201628347 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016A&A...590A..61C 590, A61

    2016 doi

  24. [32]

    T., Brown A

    Coogan R. T., Brown A. M., Chadwick P. M., 2016, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stw199 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.458..354C 458, 354

    2016 doi

  25. [33]

    Costamante L., Cutini S., Tosti G., Antolini E., Tramacere A., 2018, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/sty887 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.477.4749C 477, 4749

    2018 doi

  26. [34]

    K., Mondal S

    Das A. K., Mondal S. K., Prince R., 2023, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stad702 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.521.3451D 521, 3451

    2023 doi

  27. [35]

    D., Schlickeiser R., 1993, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/173251 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993ApJ...416..458D 416, 458

    Dermer C. D., Schlickeiser R., 1993, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/173251 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993ApJ...416..458D 416, 458

    1993 doi

  28. [36]

    J., 2003, @doi [Astroparticle Physics] 10.1016/S0927-6505(02)00155-X , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003APh....18..377D 18, 377

    Donea A.-C., Protheroe R. J., 2003, @doi [Astroparticle Physics] 10.1016/S0927-6505(02)00155-X , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003APh....18..377D 18, 377

    2003 doi

  29. [37]

    T., McCann K., 2015, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/809/2/164 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...809..164D 809, 164

    Dotson A., Georganopoulos M., Meyer E. T., McCann K., 2015, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/809/2/164 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...809..164D 809, 164

    2015 doi

  30. [38]

    S., et al., 2013, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/779/2/174 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...779..174D 779, 174

    Dutka M. S., et al., 2013, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/779/2/174 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...779..174D 779, 174

    2013 doi

  31. [39]

    S., et al., 2017, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/835/2/182 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...835..182D 835, 182

    Dutka M. S., et al., 2017, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/835/2/182 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...835..182D 835, 182

    2017 doi

  32. [40]

    Ghisellini G., Celotti A., Fossati G., Maraschi L., Comastri A., 1998, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.1998.02032.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998MNRAS.301..451G 301, 451

    1998

  33. [41]

    Ghisellini G., Tavecchio F., Chiaberge M., 2005, @doi [Astronomy and Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361:20041404 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005A&A...432..401G 432, 401

    2005 doi

  34. [42]

    Ghisellini G., Tavecchio F., Foschini L., Ghirlanda G., Maraschi L., Celotti A., 2010, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15898.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010MNRAS.402..497G 402, 497

    2010

  35. [43]

    Giroletti M., et al., 2004, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/379663 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004ApJ...600..127G 600, 127

    2004 doi

  36. [44]

    A., Peck A

    Gurwell M. A., Peck A. B., Hostler S. R., Darrah M. R., Katz C. A., 2007, in Baker A. J., Glenn J., Harris A. I., Mangum J. G., Yun M. S., eds, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series Vol. 375, From Z-Machines to ALMA: (Sub)Millimeter Spectroscopy of Galaxies. p. 234

    2007

  37. [45]

    H. E. S. S. Collaboration et al., 2013, @doi [Astronomy and Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/201321135 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013A&A...554A.107H 554, A107

    2013 doi

  38. [46]

    H. E. S. S. Collaboration et al., 2019, @doi [Astronomy and Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/201935704 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019A&A...627A.159H 627, A159

    2019 doi

  39. [47]

    Hada K., et al., 2012, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/760/1/52 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...760...52H 760, 52

    2012 doi

  40. [48]

    Harvey A. L. W., Georganopoulos M., Meyer E. T., 2020, @doi [Nature Communications] 10.1038/s41467-020-19296-6 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020NatCo..11.5475H 11, 5475

    2020 doi

  41. [49]

    Hayashida M., et al., 2012, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/754/2/114 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...754..114H 754, 114

    2012 doi

  42. [50]

    Hayashida M., et al., 2015, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/807/1/79 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...807...79H 807, 79

    2015 doi

  43. [51]

    Hovatta T., Lindfors E., 2019, @doi [New Astronomy Reviews] 10.1016/j.newar.2020.101541 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019NewAR..8701541H 87, 101541

    2019

  44. [52]

    a hteenm \

    Hovatta T., Valtaoja E., Tornikoski M., L \"a hteenm \"a ki A., 2009, @doi [Astronomy and Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361:200811150 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A&A...494..527H 494, 527

    2009 doi

  45. [53]

    D., Neugebauer G., 1988, @doi [The Astronomical Journal] 10.1086/114638 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1988AJ.....95..307I 95, 307

    Impey C. D., Neugebauer G., 1988, @doi [The Astronomical Journal] 10.1086/114638 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1988AJ.....95..307I 95, 307

    1988 doi

  46. [54]

    C., et al., 2015, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/804/1/7 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...804....7I 804, 7

    Isler J. C., et al., 2015, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/804/1/7 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...804....7I 804, 7

    2015 doi

  47. [55]

    G., et al., 2013, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/773/2/147 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...773..147J 773, 147

    Jorstad S. G., et al., 2013, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/773/2/147 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...773..147J 773, 147

    2013 doi

  48. [56]

    G., et al., 2017, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/aa8407 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...846...98J 846, 98

    Jorstad S. G., et al., 2017, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/aa8407 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...846...98J 846, 98

    2017 doi

  49. [57]

    P., B \"o ttcher M., 2014, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/785/2/132 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...785..132J 785, 132

    Joshi M., Marscher A. P., B \"o ttcher M., 2014, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/785/2/132 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...785..132J 785, 132

    2014 doi

  50. [58]

    Kang S.-J., Zheng Y.-G., Wu Q., Chen L., Yin Y., 2021, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stab489 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.502.5875K 502, 5875

    2021 doi

  51. [59]

    Khatoon R., Prince R., Shah Z., Sahayanathan S., Gogoi R., 2022, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stac892 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.513..611K 513, 611

    2022 doi

  52. [60]

    G., Pushkarev A

    Kramarenko I. G., Pushkarev A. B., Kovalev Y. Y., Lister M. L., Hovatta T., Savolainen T., 2022, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stab3358 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.510..469K 510, 469

    2022 doi

  53. [61]

    Kundu A., Chatterjee R., Mitra K., Mondal S., 2022, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stab3750 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.510.3688K 510, 3688

    2022 doi

  54. [62]

    W., Filippenko A

    Liodakis I., Romani R. W., Filippenko A. V., Kocevski D., Zheng W., 2019, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab26b7 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...880...32L 880, 32

    2019 doi

  55. [63]

    M., Kovalev Y

    Lisakov M. M., Kovalev Y. Y., Savolainen T., Hovatta T., Kutkin A. M., 2017, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stx710 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.468.4478L 468, 4478

    2017 doi

  56. [64]

    T., Bai J

    Liu H. T., Bai J. M., 2006, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/509097 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006ApJ...653.1089L 653, 1089

    2006 doi

  57. [65]

    T., Bai J

    Liu H. T., Bai J. M., Feng H. C., Li S. K., 2015, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stv601 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.450..494L 450, 494

    2015 doi

  58. [66]

    MAGIC Collaboration et al., 2018, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/sty1753 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.480..879M 480, 879

    2018 doi

  59. [67]

    R., Jorstad S

    MacDonald N. R., Jorstad S. G., Marscher A. P., 2017, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/aa92c8 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...850...87M 850, 87

    2017 doi

  60. [68]

    M., Bailyn C

    Majumder A., Mitra K., Chatterjee R., Urry C. M., Bailyn C. D., Nandi P., 2019, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stz2557 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.490..124M 490, 124

    2019 doi

  61. [69]

    Malzac J., 2012, in 39th COSPAR Scientific Assembly. p. 1168

    2012

  62. [70]

    Mannheim K., 1993, @doi [Astronomy and Astrophysics] 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9302006 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993A&A...269...67M 269, 67

    1993 doi arXiv

  63. [71]

    Maraschi L., Ghisellini G., Celotti A., 1992, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/186531 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1992ApJ...397L...5M 397, L5

    1992 doi

  64. [72]

    P., 1998, in Zensus J

    Marscher A. P., 1998, in Zensus J. A., Taylor G. B., Wrobel J. M., eds, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series Vol. 144, IAU Colloq. 164: Radio Emission from Galactic and Extragalactic Compact Sources. p. 25

    1998

  65. [73]

    P., 2014, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/780/1/87 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...780...87M 780, 87

    Marscher A. P., 2014, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/780/1/87 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...780...87M 780, 87

    2014 doi

  66. [74]

    Marscher A., 2016, @doi [Galaxies] 10.3390/galaxies4040037 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016Galax...4...37M 4, 37

    2016 doi

  67. [75]

    P., et al., 2008, @doi [Nature] 10.1038/nature06895 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008Natur.452..966M 452, 966

    Marscher A. P., et al., 2008, @doi [Nature] 10.1038/nature06895 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008Natur.452..966M 452, 966

    2008 doi

  68. [76]

    P., et al., 2010, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/2041-8205/710/2/L126 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...710L.126M 710, L126

    Marscher A. P., et al., 2010, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/2041-8205/710/2/L126 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...710L.126M 710, L126

    2010 doi

  69. [77]

    a hteenm \

    Marscher A., Jorstad S. G., Larionov V. M., Aller M. F., L \"a hteenm \"a ki A., 2011, @doi [Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy] 10.1007/s12036-011-9013-8 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011JApA...32..233M 32, 233

    2011 doi

  70. [78]

    R., et al., 1996, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/177068 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996ApJ...461..396M 461, 396

    Mattox J. R., et al., 1996, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/177068 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996ApJ...461..396M 461, 396

    1996 doi

  71. [79]

    D., Blandford R

    Meyer M., Scargle J. D., Blandford R. D., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab1651 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...877...39M 877, 39

    2019 doi

  72. [80]

    J., 2001, @doi [Astroparticle Physics] 10.1016/S0927-6505(00)00141-9 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001APh....15..121M 15, 121

    M \"u cke A., Protheroe R. J., 2001, @doi [Astroparticle Physics] 10.1016/S0927-6505(00)00141-9 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001APh....15..121M 15, 121

    2001 doi

  73. [81]

    J., Engel R., Rachen J

    M \"u cke A., Protheroe R. J., Engel R., Rachen J. P., Stanev T., 2003, @doi [Astroparticle Physics] 10.1016/S0927-6505(02)00185-8 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003APh....18..593M 18, 593

    2003 doi

  74. [82]

    V., Wagner A

    Mukherjee D., Bicknell G. V., Wagner A. Y., 2021, @doi [Astronomische Nachrichten] 10.1002/asna.20210061 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021AN....342.1140M 342, 1140

    2021 doi

  75. [83]

    C., Sikora M., 2014, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/789/2/161 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...789..161N 789, 161

    Nalewajko K., Begelman M. C., Sikora M., 2014, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/789/2/161 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...789..161N 789, 161

    2014 doi

  76. [84]

    Pacciani L., et al., 2010, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/2041-8205/716/2/L170 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...716L.170P 716, L170

    2010 doi

  77. [85]

    Pacciani L., Tavecchio F., Donnarumma I., Stamerra A., Carrasco L., Recillas E., Porras A., Uemura M., 2014, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/790/1/45 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...790...45P 790, 45

    2014 doi

  78. [86]

    Padovani P., Giommi P., 1995, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/277.4.1477 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995MNRAS.277.1477P 277, 1477

    1995 doi

  79. [87]

    S., Sahayanathan S., Stalin C

    Paliya V. S., Sahayanathan S., Stalin C. S., 2015, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/803/1/15 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...803...15P 803, 15

    2015 doi

  80. [88]

    S., Marcotulli L., Ajello M., Joshi M., Sahayanathan S., Rao A

    Paliya V. S., Marcotulli L., Ajello M., Joshi M., Sahayanathan S., Rao A. R., Hartmann D., 2017, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/aa98e1 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...851...33P 851, 33

    2017 doi

  81. [89]

    S., Marcotulli L., Ajello M., Joshi M., Sahayanathan S., Rao A

    Paliya V. S., Marcotulli L., Ajello M., Joshi M., Sahayanathan S., Rao A. R., Hartmann D., 2018, VizieR Online Data Catalog: Multi-wavelength analysis of CGRaBS blazars (Paliya+, 2017) , VizieR On-line Data Catalog: J/ApJ/851/33. Originally published in: 2017ApJ...851...33P, @...

    2018 doi

  82. [90]

    M., et al., 2018, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/sty1497 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.479.2037P 479, 2037

    Pati \ n o- \'A lvarez V. M., et al., 2018, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/sty1497 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.479.2037P 479, 2037

    2018 doi

  83. [91]

    Poutanen J., Stern B., 2010, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/2041-8205/717/2/L118 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...717L.118P 717, L118

    2010 doi

  84. [92]

    Prince R., Gupta N., Nalewajko K., 2019, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab3afa , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...883..137P 883, 137

    2019 doi

  85. [93]

    P., Fuhrmann L., Zensus J

    Rani B., Lott B., Krichbaum T. P., Fuhrmann L., Zensus J. A., 2013, @doi [Astronomy and Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/201321440 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013A&A...557A..71R 557, A71

    2013 doi

  86. [94]

    P., Marscher A

    Rani B., Krichbaum T. P., Marscher A. P., Jorstad S. G., Hodgson J. A., Fuhrmann L., Zensus J. A., 2014, @doi [Astronomy and Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/201424796 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014A&A...571L...2R 571, L2

    2014 doi

  87. [95]

    Rani B., et al., 2018, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/aab785 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...858...80R 858, 80

    2018 doi

  88. [96]

    Roming P. W. A., et al., 2005, @doi [Space Science Reviews] 10.1007/s11214-005-5095-4 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005SSRv..120...95R 120, 95

    2005 doi

  89. [97]

    R., Sarkar A., Chatterjee A., Chitnis V

    Roy A., Patel S. R., Sarkar A., Chatterjee A., Chitnis V. R., 2021, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stab975 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.504.1103R 504, 1103

    2021 doi

  90. [98]

    T., Takahashi T., Madejski G., D'Ammando F., 2013, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/2041-8205/766/1/L11 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...766L..11S 766, L11

    Saito S., Stawarz ., Tanaka Y. T., Takahashi T., Madejski G., D'Ammando F., 2013, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/2041-8205/766/1/L11 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...766L..11S 766, L11

    2013 doi

  91. [99]

    C., Rees M

    Sikora M., Begelman M. C., Rees M. J., 1994, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/173633 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1994ApJ...421..153S 421, 153

    1994 doi

  92. [100]

    G., Vestrand W

    Stacy J. G., Vestrand W. T., Sreekumar P., 2003, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/377632 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ApJ...598..216S 598, 216

    2003 doi

  93. [101]

    Tavecchio F., Mazin D., 2009, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2008.00584.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009MNRAS.392L..40T 392, L40

    2009

  94. [102]

    Troitskiy I., et al., 2016, @doi [Galaxies] 10.3390/galaxies4040072 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016Galax...4...72T 4, 72

    2016 doi

  95. [103]

    M., Mushotzky R

    Urry C. M., Mushotzky R. F., 1982, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/159607 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1982ApJ...253...38U 253, 38

    1982 doi

  96. [104]

    M., Padovani P., 1995, @doi [Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific] 10.1086/133630 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995PASP..107..803U 107, 803

    Urry C. M., Padovani P., 1995, @doi [Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific] 10.1086/133630 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995PASP..107..803U 107, 803

    1995 doi

  97. [105]

    a hteenm \

    Valtaoja E., L \"a hteenm \"a ki A., Ter \"a sranta H., Lainela M., 1999, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series] 10.1086/313170 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999ApJS..120...95V 120, 95

    1999 doi

  98. [106]

    Wendel C., Shukla A., Mannheim K., 2021, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac0a6e , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...917...32W 917, 32

    2021 doi

  99. [107]

    pp 54--63 ( @eprint arXiv 1204.5552 ), @doi 10.1142/S2010194513011070

    Zhang J., Zhang S.-N., Liang E.-W., 2013, in International Journal of Modern Physics Conference Series. pp 54--63 ( @eprint arXiv 1204.5552 ), @doi 10.1142/S2010194513011070

    2013 arXiv

  100. [108]

    Zhang B.-K., Jin M., Zhao X.-Y., Zhang L., Dai B.-Z., 2021, @doi [Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics] 10.1088/1674-4527/21/8/186 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021RAA....21..186Z 21, 186

    2021 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.