Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 39 references

Optical Photometric Monitoring of the Blazar OT 355 and Local Standard Stars' Calibration

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper argues that additive Doppler-factor variability predicts a negative rms–flux relation that OT 355 and other blazars do not show, pointing instead to multiplicative processes.

desk verdict Useful monitoring dataset and standard-star calibration, but the rms-flux argument is less generic than claimed and the paper's own data are marginal. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.23677 v1 pith:KBXT2BHT submitted 2025-05-29 astro-ph.HE

R. Bachev , Tushar Tripathi , Alok C. Gupta , A. Kurtenkov , Y. Nikolov , A. Strigachev , S. Boeva , G. Latev
show 6 more authors
B. Spassov M. Minev E. Ovcharov W.-X. Yang Yi Liu J.-H. Fan
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords blazarvariabilityOT355flat-spectrumradioquasarrms–fluxrelationDopplerboostingintra-nightphotometriccalibrationrelativisticjets
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

OT 355, a rarely studied flat-spectrum radio quasar at redshift 0.975, was monitored in BVRI colors over 41 nights between 2017 and 2023, including about 100 hours of intra-night coverage, and secondary standard stars in its field were calibrated for future use. The object varied by up to four magnitudes over the campaign and by up to 0.3 mag within a night, with no statistically significant color–magnitude trend and a structure function that has not saturated after five years. The paper's central theoretical claim is that if short-term blazar variability comes from many independent emitting regions whose Doppler factors change as their directions wobble, the fractional variability should fall as the source brightens, producing a negative rms–flux relation. The measured relation for OT 355 is flat to slightly negative but not the predicted decline, and the same is true for other blazars; the authors take this as evidence against purely additive geometric variability and in favor of multiplicative processes such as avalanches. If right, this sharpens the constraint on what drives the fastest optical variations in relativistic jets.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing identity is Eq. (11), $\delta I/I \propto \sqrt{(I_0/I)^{1/(3+\alpha)} - 1}$, derived from the small-angle Doppler factor $D \simeq 2/(\Gamma \theta^2)$, the emission law $I \propto D^{3+\alpha}$, and the trajectory parametrization $\theta^2 = \phi^2 + \theta_0^2$. That parametrization makes the angular wobble $\delta\theta$ shrink to zero as the jet approaches the observer's direction, which is the step that turns Doppler boosting into a negative rms–flux prediction. The companion additive mechanism, $N$-region shot noise with $\delta I/I \propto 1/\sqrt{N}$, yields $\delta I/I \propto 1/\sqrt{I}$ and therefore the same sign. The argument works by showing both additive routes predict declining fractional variability in bright states, so a non-negative observed rms–flux relation selects multiplicative variability.

What would settle it

Measure binned fractional rms against mean flux over many nights spanning a factor of several in brightness for OT 355 and similar flat-spectrum radio quasars; a positive or flat slope, or any case where rms grows with brightness, would falsify the negative relation predicted by Eq. (11).

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is conditional: assuming a fixed small number of emitting regions moving along trajectories that pass the observer's line of sight at a minimum angle $\theta_0$, the Doppler factor $D \simeq 2/(\Gamma \theta^2)$ and the emitted intensity $I \propto D^{3+\alpha}$ imply that the fractional flux change during an angular wobble is $\delta I/I \propto \sqrt{(I_0/I)^{1/(3+\alpha)} - 1}$, a decreasing function of intensity that vanishes at the maximum brightness $I_0$. Adding a second additive channel, regions whose number $N$ fluctuates, gives $\delta I/I \propto 1/\sqrt{N} \propto 1/\sqrt{I}$, also decreasing. Since the observed intra-night rms–flux relation for OT 355 and for comparison blazars is not the predicted negative decline, the authors conclude that additive geometric Doppler scenarios are disfavored and that multiplicative, avalanche-type processes are more plausible drivers of the fastest optical variability.

Load-bearing premise

The negative rms–flux prediction depends on the jet's direction wobble shrinking to zero exactly when the jet points closest to the observer; if the wobble amplitude instead stays constant as the angle varies, the predicted sign reverses.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For OT 355, the flat or slightly negative rms–flux correlation, with Spearman coefficients around $-0.34$ to $-0.39$ at $p \approx 0.03$–$0.07$, does not match the steep decline predicted by Eq. (11), so simple additive Doppler geometry is not the dominant driver of its intra-night variability.
  • If additive geometric variability is generally disfavored, then models of blazar fast variability must include multiplicative or avalanche-style coupling between emitting regions, where a small initial disturbance triggers a much larger response.
  • The shortest observed variability timescale, about 2 hours, implies a magnetic field $B \lesssim 2$ G and an emitting-region size $R \lesssim 10^{15}$ cm for a Doppler factor $D \approx 10$, providing quantitative inputs for spectral energy distribution modeling.
  • The structure function slope of about $0.23$ with no saturation over five years indicates the long-term variability is driven by processes slower than a single characteristic timescale, such as accretion-rate changes or jet precession.
  • The calibrated secondary standards in the OT 355 field make future photometric monitoring of this object feasible with smaller telescopes, supporting multi-wavelength campaigns.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: The sign of the predicted rms–flux relation is tied to the trajectory parametrization $\theta^2 = \phi^2 + \theta_0^2$; a random-walk model with constant angular step size would give $\delta I/I \propto \delta\theta/\theta$, which increases with brightness, so the same data could be consistent with Doppler geometry under a different stochastic prescription.
  • Editorial inference: The paper notes that no correction for Doppler-factor-induced time dilation was applied when computing rms and structure functions; re-analyzing with such corrections could either strengthen or erase the discrepancy, and this is a straightforward test.
  • Editorial inference: The argument should apply to any band where synchrotron or inverse-Compton emission is Doppler-boosted, so the same rms–flux test can be run on X-ray and gamma-ray light curves of OT 355 and other flat-spectrum radio quasars.
  • Editorial inference: If multiplicative avalanche processes dominate, the rms–flux relation should become more strongly positive and possibly nonlinear in the highest flux states; existing and future monitoring can check whether the slope steepens with brightness.
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.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper reports broadband optical photometry of the FSRQ OT 355 over 2017–2023, including about 100 hours of intra-night monitoring with three telescopes, and calibrates secondary standards in the field. It analyzes long-term color behavior, intra-night variability with nested ANOVA and false-discovery-rate control, the intra-night rms-flux relation, and a structure function spanning five decades in timescale. The authors also present a simple analytic argument intended to show that additive Doppler-factor variability generically predicts a negative rms-flux relation, and they use the absence of such a relation to argue for multiplicative variability mechanisms.

Significance. The observational campaign is a genuine contribution: 41 nights of monitoring, a calibrated secondary sequence, a careful nested-ANOVA treatment with FDR correction, and a structure function over a wide time baseline are all useful for future studies of this poorly monitored blazar. If the theoretical claim were sound, the paper would offer a clean falsifiable distinction between additive geometric and multiplicative variability models. However, the central derivation contains an algebraic error in Eq. (9), and the empirical section actually reports a negative (though not always significant) rms-flux correlation, so the headline physical conclusion is not currently supported. With a corrected and suitably qualified theoretical discussion, the observational content would merit publication.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 4, Eq. (9)] Equation (9) states δm ∝ δD/D ∝ θδθ. From Eq. (8), D ≃ 2/(Γθ^2), the fractional Doppler change is δD/D = −2δθ/θ, not θδθ. Repeating the derivation with the correct expression gives δI/I ∝ sqrt(A(1−A)) with A=(I/I0)^{1/(3+α)}, which is not a monotonically decreasing function of intensity; it rises from zero at small I, peaks near A=1/2, and declines only as I approaches I0. Equation (11) and the conclusion that additive Doppler scenarios generically predict a negative rms-flux relation therefore do not follow from the stated assumptions. Please correct the algebra and re-derive the predicted relation, or explicitly restrict the claim to a model in which the relevant fractional change is indeed θδθ.
  2. [Section 4, Eqs. (10)–(11)] Even after correcting the algebra, the step from the instantaneous expression to a night-averaged rms is not justified. The text states that δφ affects δI/I only through the proportionality coefficient, but that coefficient is exactly what determines the rms; if δφ has a stationary distribution, the rms inherits the intensity dependence of the prefactor, and if δφ has a different distribution in fainter states, the predicted correlation can change sign. Moreover, the assumed trajectory θ^2=φ^2+θ0^2 is one specific parametrization. A random walk on the sky with constant angular step size δθ gives δD/D ∝ δθ/θ ∝ I^{1/[2(3+α)]}, i.e., a positive rms-flux relation. The paper therefore overclaims when it says additive mechanisms 'mostly predict the decrease in variability for high states.'
  3. [Sections 3.4 and 5] Section 3.4 reports Pearson CC ≈ −0.35 (p ≈ 0.07), Spearman CC ≈ −0.34 (p ≈ 0.07 ± 0.03), and time-normalized Spearman CC ≈ −0.39 (p ≈ 0.03 ± 0.01) between intra-night σrms and average flux. The text nonetheless says 'a slight tendency of increasing σrms with the average flux,' and the abstract/conclusions say the negative rms-flux relation 'is not observed.' A negative correlation is observed; it is simply not statistically secure, especially for the non-normalized quantities. This matters because the paper's own theoretical argument predicts a negative relation, so the OT 355 data, if anything, point in the predicted direction rather than against it. Please reconcile the wording with the reported signs of the correlation coefficients and clarify how the 'other cases' support the claim.
  4. [Section 2, Table 1] Table 1 lists R-band average magnitudes for observations taken with filter E (unfiltered/clear), and Figure 5 uses these <R> values to construct the rms-flux relation. The transformation from unfiltered instrumental magnitudes to the R band is not described in Section 2 or Section 3.1. Given that the source shows color changes up to 0.3 mag in V-I (Section 3.2), a color-dependent clear-to-R conversion could systematically shift <R> and bias the rms-flux correlation. Please provide the transformation coefficients or explicitly justify that the E-band magnitudes are directly comparable to R.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 3.4, Eq. (4)] For magnitude derivatives, tvar = F/|dF/dt| equals 0.921/|dm/dt|, not 1/|dm/dt|, because dm/dt = −2.5/ln(10) × (1/F)dF/dt. Please correct the numerical factor.
  2. [Section 4] The text refers to the optical spectrum as 'Figure 6,' but the spectrum is shown in Figure 7; Figure 6 is the structure function. Please fix the cross-reference.
  3. [Section 3.1, Table 2] The abstract states that observations were made in four colors (BVRI), but Table 2 lists only VRI secondary-standard magnitudes. If B-band standards were calibrated, please include them; otherwise, adjust the wording.
  4. [Table 1] Several rows (e.g., 27.06.2017 V and I, 29.06.2017 V) have missing <R> and rms values even though the table caption says all data are given. Please mark these entries as not applicable or provide the values.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the theoretical rms-flux derivation is self-contained and the data are used as a test, not an input.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that additive Doppler-factor variability predicts a negative rms-flux relation, which is then tested against optical monitoring of OT 355 and other blazars. The derivation in Eqs. (6)-(11) is analytic: it combines the Doppler-boosting formula I ∝ D^(3+α), a small-angle approximation, and a specific geometric parametrization (θ² = φ² + θ₀²) to obtain δI/I ∝ sqrt((I₀/I)^(1/(3+α)) − 1), a declining function of intensity. This is not fitted to the data; the OT 355 measurements and the previously published rms-flux behaviors of S4 0954+65, CTA 102, and BL Lacertae (refs. 25, 26, 33) are used as observational tests of the derived expectation. The author self-citations are to independent datasets and are not load-bearing in the derivation. The main potential weakness is scientific, not circular: the sign of the predicted rms-flux relation depends on the assumed angular trajectory (straight-line pass with vanishing wobble at closest approach), so a different stochastic model could reverse the prediction. That is a validity or generality concern, not a re-use of the conclusion as an input. No equation is self-referential, no fitted parameter is renamed a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem or prior claim is invoked to force the result. The paper is self-contained against external observational benchmarks, and the central theoretical statement reduces to the stated geometric assumptions rather than to the data it seeks to explain.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central derivation rests on four explicit assumptions: the standard Doppler-beaming form I ∝ D^{3+α}; the small-angle, β→1 approximation for D; the specific closest-approach geometry θ^2 = φ^2 + θ0^2; and an asserted statistical averaging step that makes the night-averaged rms follow Eq. (11). No invented entities are introduced. Two unconstrained quantities (I0 and the illustrative Doppler factor D≈10) appear, but they are not fitted to the data.

free parameters (2)
  • I0 (maximum intensity at closest approach θ0)
    Introduced in Eq. (11) as the normalization of the declining rms-flux relation; not fitted to data, which leaves the predicted slope and amplitude only qualitative.
  • Doppler factor D ≈ 10 for size/magnetic field estimates = 10
    Assumed in Section 4 for estimating the emitting region size (R ~ 10^15 cm) and magnetic field (B ~ 2 G); illustrative rather than fitted.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Blob emission scales as I ∝ D^{3+α} with D the Doppler factor and α ≈ 1 (Eq. 6).
    Standard synchrotron beaming relation for a moving blob in a relativistic jet, used throughout Section 4.
  • domain assumption Small-angle and β→1 approximations give D ≃ 2/(Γ θ^2) (Eq. 8).
    Assumes ultra-relativistic jet and viewing angles θ << 1, conditions likely but not guaranteed for all emitting cells.
  • ad hoc to paper The jet direction satisfies θ^2 = φ^2 + θ0^2 (Eq. 10), a straight-line closest-approach trajectory.
    This specific geometric parametrization makes δθ vanish at θ=θ0, producing the declining relation (Eq. 11). Other stochastic geometries would give different signs.
  • ad hoc to paper The night-averaged rms is proportional to the instantaneous expression in Eq. (11), with the random quantity δφ contributing only a constant proportionality factor.
    The paper does not derive this statistical averaging; it is asserted when moving from the instantaneous δI/I to the observed rms-flux relation.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Optical Photometric Monitoring of the Blazar OT 355 and Local Standard Stars' Calibration." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KBXT2BHT

@misc{pith2026250523677,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Optical Photometric Monitoring of the Blazar OT 355 and Local Standard Stars' Calibration},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KBXT2BHT}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.23677}
}
read the original abstract

OT 355 (4FGL J1734.3 + 3858) is a relatively rarely studied but highly variable, moderate-redshift (z = 0.975) flat-spectrum radio quasar (blazar). With this work, we aim to study its optical variability on different timescales, which can help us to better understand the physical processes in relativistic jets operating in blazar-type active galactic nuclei. OT 355 was observed in four colors (BVRI) during 41 nights between 2017 and 2023 using three 1 and 2 m class telescopes. The object was also monitored on intra-night timescales, for about 100 h in total. In addition, secondary standard stars in the field of OT 355 were calibrated in order to facilitate future photometric studies. We detected significant intra-night and night-to-night variations of up to 0.5 mag. Variability characteristics, color changes, and a possible ``rms-flux'' relation were studied and discussed. Using simple arguments, we show that a negative ``rms-flux'' relation should be expected if many independent processes/regions drive the short-term variability via Doppler factor changes, which is not observed in this and other cases. This finding raises arguments for the idea that more complex multiplicative processes are responsible for blazar variability. Studying blazar variability, especially on the shortest possible timescales, can help to estimate the strength and geometry of their magnetic fields, the linear sizes of the emitting regions, and other aspects, which may be of importance for constraining and modeling blazars' emitting mechanisms.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.23677 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Secondary standards in the field of OT 355, denoted as A, C, and D. Here the object is marked with a cross and B is an additional check star. The field is 10 arcmin wide; north is up, and east is to the left [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Long-term variability in VRI colors of the blazar OT 355. The light curve covers a period of more than 3 years. The lower panel shows the most intensive part of the monitoring in more detail, starting after the 2017 outburst. Lines are to guide the eye. 17.5 17.0 16.5 16.0 15.5 15.0 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.8 (V-I) color R-magnitude [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Color–magnitude (V-I vs. R) relation for the blazar OT 355. The seemingly apparent “bluer-when-brighter” trend is of very low statistical significance (see the text). 3.3. Intra-Day Flux Variability The most dramatic examples of rapid intra-night variations are presented in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Examples of rapid intra-night variations in OT 355 near the outburst. Data were obtained with the 60 cm Belogradchik telescope. No filter (clear) was used to improve the signal-to-noise ratio of the light curves. We also found the percentage variability amplitude. The …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Fractional variability–flux (“rms–<R>”) relation for the nights for which intra-night moni￾toring was performed. Both rms and time-length-normalized rms are shown (see the text), as rms is normally expected to increase with the length of observation. 3.5. Structure Fun…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: R-band structure function of OT 355 between 2017 and 2023 (∼50 data points). A linear fit with a slope of ∼0.23 is consistent with the data. The slope of the square root of the SF is shown as in [30]. The 90% confidence intervals are also shown. The SF is useful for re…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Optical spectrum of OT 355 taken with the 2 m Rozhen telescope during the night of 29 June 2017. The location of the Mg IIλ2798 broad line is marked by a red dashed line [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Illustration of a random or a constant-speed change in the direction of motion of an emitting blob, passing by the direction of the observer at a closest distance of θ0 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

39 extracted references · 39 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A unifying view of the spectral energy distributions of blazars

    Fossati, G.; Maraschi, L.; Celotti, A.; Comastri, A.; Ghisellini, G. A unifying view of the spectral energy distributions of blazars. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 1998, 299, 433. [CrossRef]

    work page 1998

  2. [2]

    The blazar sequence and its physical understanding

    Prandini, E.; Ghisellini, G. The blazar sequence and its physical understanding. Galaxies 2022, 10, 35. [CrossRef]

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    Abdo, A.A.; Ackermann, M.; Agudo, I.; Ajello, M.; Aller, H.D.; Aller, M.F.; Angelakis, E.; Arkharov, A.A.; Axelsson, M.; Bach, U. et al. The spectral energy distribution of Fermi bright blazars. Astrophys. J. 2010, 716, 30. [CrossRef]

    work page 2010

  4. [4]

    Mid-infrared variability of γ-ray emitting blazars

    Anjum, A.; Stalin, C.S.; Rakshit, S.; Gudennavar, S.B.; Durgapal, A. Mid-infrared variability of γ-ray emitting blazars. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2020, 494, 764. [CrossRef]

    work page 2020

  5. [5]

    The connection between the giant optical outbursts of the flat spectrum radio quasars and the black hole precession

    Bachev, R. The connection between the giant optical outbursts of the flat spectrum radio quasars and the black hole precession. Bulg. Astron. J. 2018, 28, 22

    work page 2018

  6. [6]

    Connection between optical andγ-ray variability in blazars

    Hovatta, T.; Pavlidou, V .; King, O.G. Connection between optical andγ-ray variability in blazars. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2014, 439, 690–702. [CrossRef]

    work page 2014

  7. [7]

    Long-term optical-infrared color variability of blazars

    Zhang, B.-K.; Zhou, X.-S.; Zhao, X.-Y.; Dai, B.-Z. Long-term optical-infrared color variability of blazars. Res. Astron. Astrophys. 2015, 15, 1784. [CrossRef]

    work page 2015

  8. [8]

    Optical Variability of Blazars in the Tomo-e Gozen Northern Sky Transient Survey.Astrophys

    Zhang, T.; Doi, M.; Kokubo, M.; Sako, S.; Ohsawa, R.; Tominaga, N.; Tanaka, M.; Fukazawa, Y.; Takahashi, H.; Arima, N.; et al. Optical Variability of Blazars in the Tomo-e Gozen Northern Sky Transient Survey.Astrophys. J. 2024, 968, 71. [CrossRef]

    work page 2024

Show all 39 references
  1. [9]

    Leptonic and Hadronic Modeling of Fermi-detected Blazars.Astrophys

    Bottcher, M.; Reimer, A.; Sweeney, K.; Prakash, A. Leptonic and Hadronic Modeling of Fermi-detected Blazars.Astrophys. J. 2013, 768, 54. [CrossRef]

    2013

  2. [10]

    Turbulent, Extreme Multi-zone Model for Simulating Flux and Polarization Variability in Blazars.Astrophys

    Marscher, A. Turbulent, Extreme Multi-zone Model for Simulating Flux and Polarization Variability in Blazars.Astrophys. J. 2014, 780, 87. [CrossRef]

    2014

  3. [11]

    Extragalactic Jets Every Angle

    Marscher, A.P . Extragalactic Jets Every Angle. Proc. Int. Astron. Union 2015, 313, 122

    2015

  4. [12]

    Synchrotron Polarization in Blazars

    Zhang, H.; Chen, X.; Bottcher, M. Synchrotron Polarization in Blazars. Astrophys. J. 2014, 789, 66. [CrossRef]

    2014

  5. [13]

    The optical behaviour of BL Lacertae at its maximum brightness levels: A blend of geometry and energetics

    Raiteri, C.M.; Villata, M.; Jorstad, S.G.; Marscher, A.P .; Acosta Pulido, J.A.; Carosati, D.; Chen, W.P .; Joner, M.D.; Kurtanidze, S.O.; et al. The optical behaviour of BL Lacertae at its maximum brightness levels: A blend of geometry and energetics. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. S...

    2023

  6. [14]

    Spectroscopy of Broad-line Blazars from 1LAC

    Shaw, M.S.; Romani, R.W.; Cotter, G.; Healey, S.E.; Michelson, P .F.; Readhead, A.C.S.; Richards, J.L.; Max-Moerbeck, W.; King, O.G.; Potter, W.J. Spectroscopy of Broad-line Blazars from 1LAC. Astrophys. J. 2012, 748, 49. [CrossRef]

    2012

  7. [15]

    MunozAT el

    Bachev, R.; Kurtenkov, A.; Nikolov, Y.; Spassov, B.; Boeva, S.; Latev, G.; Dimitrova, R.V . MunozAT el. 2017; No 10540. Available online: https://www.astronomerstelegram.org/?read=10540 (accessed on 30 March 2025). Universe 2025, 11, 171 17 of 17

    2017

  8. [16]

    A new CCD camera at the 60-cm telescope of the Belogradchik Astronomical Observatory

    Strigachev, A.; Bachev, R. A new CCD camera at the 60-cm telescope of the Belogradchik Astronomical Observatory. Bulg. Astron. J. 2011, 16, 144–152

    2011

  9. [17]

    O.; Sillanpaa, A.; Valtaoja, E.; Terasranta, H.; Tornikoski, M.; et al

    Raiteri, C.M.; Villata, M.; Tosti, G.; Fiorucci, M.; Ghisellini, G.; Takalo, L. O.; Sillanpaa, A.; Valtaoja, E.; Terasranta, H.; Tornikoski, M.; et al. Optical and radio behaviour of the blazar S4 0954+65. Astron. Astrophys. 1999, 352, 19

    1999

  10. [18]

    VRI photometry of stars in the fields of 12 BL Lacertae objects

    Fiorucci, M.; Tosti, G. VRI photometry of stars in the fields of 12 BL Lacertae objects. Astron. Astrophys. Suppl. Ser. 1996, 116, 403. [CrossRef]

    1996

  11. [19]

    Optical flux and spectral variability of blazars Mon

    Gaur, H.; Gupta, A.C.; Strigachev, A.; Bachev, R.; Semkov, E.; Wiita, P .J.; Peneva, S.; Boeva, S.; Slavcheva-Mihova, L.; Mihov, B.; et al. Optical flux and spectral variability of blazars Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2012, 425, 3002. [CrossRef]

    2012

  12. [20]

    Multi-colour optical monitoring of eight red blazars

    Gu, M.F.; Lee, C.-U.; Pak, S.; Yim, H.S.; Fletcher, A.B. Multi-colour optical monitoring of eight red blazars. Astron. Astrophys. 2006, 450, 39

    2006

  13. [21]

    Optical intraday variability of the blazar S5 0716+714

    Tripathi, T.; Gupta, A.C.; Takey, A.; Bachev, R.; Vince, O.; Strigachev, A.; Kushwaha, P .; Elhosseiny, E.G.; Wiita, P .J.; Damljanovic, G.; et al. Optical intraday variability of the blazar S5 0716+714. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2024, 450, 39-51

    2024

  14. [22]

    Testing microvariability in quasar differential light curves using several field stars

    de Diego, J.A.; Polednikova, J.; Bongiovanni, A.; Pérez García, A.M.; De Leo, M.A.; Verdugo, T.; Cepa, J. Testing microvariability in quasar differential light curves using several field stars. Astron. J. 2015, 150, 44. [CrossRef]

    2015

  15. [23]

    Controlling the false-discovery rate in astrophysical data analysis

    Miller, C.J.; Genovese, C.; Nichol, R.C.; Wasserman, L.; Connolly, A.; Reichart, D.; Hopkins, A.; Schneider, J.; Moore, A. Controlling the false-discovery rate in astrophysical data analysis. Astron. J. 2001, 122, 3492

    2001

  16. [24]

    Statistics of optical intraday variability in a complete sample of radio-selected BL Lacertae objects

    Heidt, J.; Wagner, S.J. Statistics of optical intraday variability in a complete sample of radio-selected BL Lacertae objects. Astron. Astrophys. 1996, 305, 42

    1996

  17. [25]

    Intra-night variability of the blazar CTA 102 during its 2012 and 2016 giant outbursts

    Bachev, R.; Popov, V .; Strigachev, A.; Semkov, E.; Ibryamov, S.; Spassov, B.; Latev, G.; Munoz Dimitrova, R.V .; Boeva, S. Intra-night variability of the blazar CTA 102 during its 2012 and 2016 giant outbursts. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2017, 471, 2216. [CrossRef]

    2012

  18. [26]

    Bachev, R.; Tripathi, T.; Gupta, A.C.; Kushwaha, P .; Strigachev, A.; Kurtenkov, A.; Nikolov, Y.; Boeva, S.; Damljanovic, G.; Vince, O. et al. Intra-night optical flux and polarization variability of BL Lacertae during its 2020–2021 high state. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2023...

    2020

  19. [27]

    Flicker of extragalactic radio sources at two frequencies

    Simonetti, J.H.; Cordes, J.M.; Heeschen, D.S. Flicker of extragalactic radio sources at two frequencies. Astrophys. J. 1985, 296, 46. [CrossRef]

    1985

  20. [28]

    On the use of structure functions to study blazar variability: Caveats and problems

    Emmanoulopoulos, D.; McHardy, I.M.; Uttley, P . On the use of structure functions to study blazar variability: Caveats and problems. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2010, 404, 931. [CrossRef]

    2010

  21. [29]

    The dual nature of blazar fast variability

    Raiteri, C.M.; Villata, M.; Carosati, D.; Benítez, E.; Kurtanidze, S.O.; Gupta, A.C.; Mirzaqulov, D.O.; D’Amm, F.; Larionov, V .M.; Pursimo, T.; et al. The dual nature of blazar fast variability. Space and ground observations of S5 0716+714. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2021, 5...

    2021

  22. [30]

    Optical Variability in Active Galactic Nuclei: Starbursts or Disk Instabilities? Astrophys

    Kawaguchi, T.; Mineshige, S.; Umemura, M.; Turner, E.L. Optical Variability in Active Galactic Nuclei: Starbursts or Disk Instabilities? Astrophys. J. 1998, 504, 671. [CrossRef]

    1998

  23. [31]

    An Extensive Study of Blazar Broad Emission Line: Changing-look Blazars and the Baldwin Effect

    Xiao, H.; Fan, J.; Ouyang, Z.; Hu, L.; Chen, G.; Fu, L.; Zhang, S. An Extensive Study of Blazar Broad Emission Line: Changing-look Blazars and the Baldwin Effect. Astrophys. J. 2022, 936, 146 [CrossRef]

    2022

  24. [32]

    Optical flux and colour variability of blazars in the ZTF survey

    Negi, V .; Joshi, R.; Chand, K.; Chand, H.; Wiita, P .; Ho, L.C.; Singh, R.S. Optical flux and colour variability of blazars in the ZTF survey. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2022, 510, 1791. [CrossRef]

    2022

  25. [33]

    The Extremes in Intra-Night Blazar Variability: The S4 0954+65 Case

    Bachev, R.; Strigachev, A.; Semkov, E.; Dimitrova, R.V .M.; Latev, G.; Spassov, B.; Petrov, B. The Extremes in Intra-Night Blazar Variability: The S4 0954+65 Case. Galaxies 2016, 4, 13. [CrossRef]

    2016

  26. [34]

    A Macroscopic Description of a Generalized Self-organized Criticality System: Astrophysical Applications

    Aschwanden, M. A Macroscopic Description of a Generalized Self-organized Criticality System: Astrophysical Applications. Astrophys. J. 2014, 782, 54. [CrossRef]

    2014

  27. [35]

    Optical periodicity analysis for radio selected BL Lacertae objects (RBLs)

    Fan, J.H.; Su, C.Y.; Lin, R.H. Optical periodicity analysis for radio selected BL Lacertae objects (RBLs). Publ. Astron. Soc. Jpn. 2002, 54, 175–178. [CrossRef]

    2002

  28. [36]

    rms–flux relation and disc–jet connection in blazars in the context of the internal shocks model

    Kundu, A.; Chatterjee, R.; Mitra, K.; Mondal, S. rms–flux relation and disc–jet connection in blazars in the context of the internal shocks model. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2022, 510, 3688. [CrossRef]

    2022

  29. [37]

    Fan, J.H.; Kurtanidze, S.O.; Liu, Y.; Kurtanidze, O.M.; Nikolashvili, M.G.; Liu, X.; Zhang, L.X.; Cai, J.T.; Zhu, J.T.; He, S.L. et al. Optical Photometry of the Quasar 3C 454.3 during the Period 2006–2018 and the Long-term Periodicity Analysis. Astron. Astrophys. Suppl. Ser. ...

    2006

  30. [38]

    Intraday optical variability of the BL Lacertae object S5 0716+714

    Zhang, B.K.; Dai, B.Z.; Wang, L.P .; Zhao, M.; Zhang, L.; Cao, Z. Intraday optical variability of the BL Lacertae object S5 0716+714. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2012, 421, 3111. [CrossRef]

    2012

  31. [39]

    Long-term optical and infrared variability of the BL Lac object PKS 0537–441

    Zhang, B.K.; Wang, S.; Zhao, X.Y.; Dai, B.Z.; Zha, M. Long-term optical and infrared variability of the BL Lac object PKS 0537–441. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2013, 428, 3630. [CrossRef] Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publicati...

    2013

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.