Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 2 cited by

Catalog of very-high-energy emitting active galactic nuclei at high Galactic latitudes

T0 review · 3 major / 6 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 claims Fermi-LAT's 16-year exposure, searched for clusters of >100 GeV photons around 4FGL sources, yields a 90%-complete catalog of 275 very-high-energy AGN at high Galactic latitudes and an associated BL Lac luminosity…

desk verdict A substantial new VHE AGN catalog from 16 years of Fermi-LAT data, with an under-supported BL Lac luminosity function that needs more work before the population claims land. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.08497 v1 pith:44UDIUC6 submitted 2025-06-10 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.CO

A.Neronov , D.Semikoz This is my paper
classification astro-ph.HEastro-ph.CO
keywords very-high-energygammaraysactivegalacticnucleiBLLacobjectsFermi-LATgamma-raysurveyluminosityfunctionextragalacticbackgroundlightblazars
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 claims that Fermi-LAT's sixteen years of continuous sky scanning now acts as an unbiased survey for very-high-energy (VHE, >100 GeV) active galactic nuclei. By counting clusters of >100 GeV photons inside the point-spread function of sources from the 4FGL catalog, the authors identify 175 AGN at high significance and another 100 at the 3σ level in the high-latitude sky, 204 of which were not previously known as VHE emitters. They find the catalog is 90% complete at a flux of 1.3×$10^{-12}$ erg/$cm^{2}$ s and use the dominant BL Lac population to measure a luminosity function that is a broken power law with a break at L* ≈ $10^{44}$ erg/s and a source density of (6.5±0.5)×$10^{-7}$ $Mpc^{-3}$. If correct, this converts the VHE sky from a collection of pointed IACT discoveries into a statistically defined population, and provides a ready-made target list for the next generation of imaging atmospheric Cherenkov telescopes and for studies of the extragalactic background light.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the photon-cluster statistic: counting E>100 GeV photons within the 68% and 95% PSF containment circles around each 4FGL source, with an analytic chance-coincidence probability p1 ≈ 0.0122 per photon inside 0.1°, so that three photons already give a ~4σ detection. The catalog's population statement then rests on the broken power-law luminosity function dN/dL ∝ $L^{{-κ}}$ of BL Lacs, whose break at L* ≈ $10^{44}$ erg/s separates the flux-limited part of the sample from the intrinsically rare bright end.

What would settle it

Perform the same 16-year Fermi-LAT search without anchoring to 4FGL positions, i.e., look for any clusters of E>100 GeV photons at |b|>10° with no catalog counterpart. A population of such orphan clusters above the claimed 1.3×$10^{-12}$ erg/$cm^{2}$ s completeness limit would show the catalog is not the unbiased census it claims to be.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Using the public Fermi-LAT data from September 2008 to March 2025, the paper searches for spatial clustering of photons with E>100 GeV around the positions of the 5071 4FGL sources at |b|>10°. A source is retained with high confidence when it has three or more photons inside the 68% PSF containment circle (chance probability ~1.8×$10^{-6}$), or two photons inside 68% plus one inside the 95% circle; weaker criteria select the 3σ sample. This yields 175 sources above 4σ and 100 above 3σ, of which only 71 were previously reported by IACTs. The authors argue the sample is an unbiased sky survey, 90% complete at 1.3×$10^{-12}$ erg/$cm^{2}$ s, and derive from the 233 BL Lacs a luminosity function dN/dL ∝ $L^{{-κ}}$ with a break from κ<2 to κ>2 at L* ≈ $10^{44}$ erg/s, corresponding to a spatial density (6.5±0.5)×$10^{-7}$ $Mpc^{-3}$. They also report seven sources at z>1 whose EBL-corrected spectra harden above 100 GeV, which they attribute either to wrong redshifts or to a factor-of-two overestimate of the high-redshift EBL opacity.

Load-bearing premise

Load-bearing premise: every VHE gamma-ray source in the field is bright enough in the 0.1–100 GeV band to be listed in the 4FGL catalog, since the cluster search is performed only around those positions; a VHE AGN population too faint in GeV would be absent from the survey and from the luminosity function.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The 275-source catalog gives current and next-generation IACT arrays a pre-vetted target list; a survey of all sources at about 50 hours each would cost roughly 1.4×10^4 hours, on the scale of a decade of allocated observation time.
  • The BL Lac luminosity function implies a total VHE power injection of (1.41±0.11)×10^37 erg/s/Mpc^3, which extrapolated over a Hubble time reproduces the measured extragalactic gamma-ray background at 100 GeV.
  • The 63 extreme blazars, 41 of them new, provide a much larger systematic sample for intergalactic magnetic field searches than the handful of sources previously studied in depth.
  • The seven z>1 detections show that Fermi-LAT can find VHE sources beyond the gamma-ray horizon probed by current IACTs, and their spectral hardening in EBL-corrected spectra can be removed by halving the EBL optical depth at z≈1.5–2, within the stated uncertainty of the model.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the catalog is as complete as claimed, the historical IACT source list was strongly biased toward bright, nearby, hard-spectrum blazars; population models built on that anecdotal list would need to be redone with this survey-defined sample.
  • The 4FGL-anchored search could miss a hypothetical class of 'orphan' VHE emitters, such as BL Lacs with steep GeV spectra or one-off flares; a blind cluster search would test this directly.
  • The luminosity-function break at ~10^44 erg/s coincides with the typical divide between FR I and FR II radio galaxies; if some of the 20 unclassified AGN and blazar candidates are radio galaxies, the total VHE power of the radio-galaxy population, which the paper estimates may rival BL Lacs, could be constrained precisely.
  • If the high-z hardening is genuine, VHE spectra of z>1 blazars could serve as a redshift-independent probe of EBL evolution, and the three sources with disputed redshifts (GB6 J0045+2127, Ton 0396, RBS 1432) are the ones to target with optical spectroscopy.
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

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper presents a catalog of very-high-energy (VHE, E>100 GeV) AGN at Galactic latitudes |b|>10 deg, constructed by searching for clusters of Fermi-LAT photons around positions of 4FGL sources. It reports 175 sources detected at >4 sigma and 100 additional sources at >3 sigma, with a claimed 90% completeness at a flux of 1.3e-12 erg/cm2/s. The catalog is used to derive a BL Lac luminosity function described as a broken power law with break at L* ~ 1e44 erg/s and normalization (6.5+/-0.5)e-7 Mpc^-3. The paper also discusses subsamples of radio galaxies, FSRQs, extreme blazars, high-redshift sources, and unidentified objects, and suggests applications for CTAO planning and EBL/IGMF studies.

Significance. If the catalog is reliable, it is a valuable resource: it provides a homogeneous, well-defined VHE AGN sample from 16 years of Fermi-LAT data, with explicit false-positive estimates, per-source spectra, and detailed discussion of high-redshift sources. It would be the first systematic VHE AGN catalog from a space-based instrument and could guide CTAO observations and EBL/IGMF studies. The luminosity-function claim, if substantiated, would be an important population measurement. However, the LF analysis is currently underdocumented and the 'unbiased survey' claim is not fully supported, so the quantitative population results should be treated with caution until the analysis is described in detail.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 3.2, Figs. 3 and 4] The broken-power-law BL Lac luminosity function quoted in the abstract and in Sec. 3.2 is not substantiated. The paper gives no LF estimator, no completeness correction, and no treatment of the many sources with z=-1 in Tables 1-4. If missing-redshift sources are omitted from the luminosity-volume bins, the derived normalization (6.5+/-0.5)e-7 Mpc^-3 and the break at L*~1e44 erg/s are biased, because the omitted sources are preferentially fainter or more distant. The argument in the text that the low-luminosity deficit is not a sensitivity effect (based on Fig. 3) applies only to the redshift-known subset. Please provide a quantitative LF derivation, including the redshift-completeness correction, the EBL correction, and the assumed density evolution (or justify the no-evolution assumption).
  2. [Sec. 2 and Sec. 3.1] The claim in Sec. 3.1 that the catalog provides a sky survey 'not biased by selection effects' is contradicted by the search procedure described in Sec. 2, which uses positions of sources from the 4FGL catalog as priors. The parent sample is GeV-selected, so VHE AGN too faint in the 0.1-100 GeV band to enter 4FGL are missed. This selection effect should be quantified (e.g., by an estimate of the fraction of VHE sources missing from 4FGL, or a comparison with a blind search) and propagated into the completeness and LF claims.
  3. [Sec. 3.1] The 90% completeness limit at F=1.3e-12 erg/cm2/s is derived from a single average photon count assuming E=100 GeV and simplified Monte Carlo. This does not account for the distribution of spectral indices or the energy dependence of the PSF and effective area. Because the detection thresholds use fixed 0.1 and 0.4 degree apertures, hard-spectrum sources (more photons at high energy, better PSF) are favored over soft-spectrum sources at equal flux. Please quantify the spectral-index dependence of the completeness and the resulting selection function.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Sec. 2 and Sec. 3.1] Typo: 'probability to fine one photon' should read 'probability to find one photon'; also 'simulaitons' in Sec. 3.1 should be 'simulations'.
  2. [Sec. 3.3 and Discussion] The number of extreme blazars is given as 63 in the abstract and Sec. 3.3 (22 previously known + 41 new), but the Discussion states 49. Please reconcile.
  3. [Tables 1-4] The tables use z=-1 for missing redshifts, but this is not explained in the table captions or text. Add a footnote describing the convention and stating the number of sources without redshifts.
  4. [Sec. 3.2] Fig. 4 does not show error bars or the broken-power-law fit; please show the data with uncertainties and the fit curve, and report the fit parameters (kappa1, kappa2, L*, Phi*) with uncertainties.
  5. [Sec. 3.5] Typo: 'PSK 0454-234' should be 'PKS 0454-234'.
  6. [Sec. 3.6] In the paragraph on 4FGL J1955.3-5032, the source name is written 'FGL J1955.3-5032'; the prefix should be '4FGL'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the VHE AGN catalog is an empirical event-clustering sample and the BL Lac luminosity function is a fit to the resulting measured fluxes, not an input to the derivation.

full rationale

The central derivation is empirical. Section 2 constructs the catalog by clustering Fermi-LAT events above 100 GeV around 4FGL source positions using fixed angular radii (0.1 and 0.4 degrees) and Poisson chance probabilities; fluxes are then measured with the Fermi Science Tools using aperture photometry. The completeness estimate is derived from the mean exposure and a Monte Carlo simulation, not from the luminosity function. In Section 3.2, the BL Lac luminosity function is presented as a broken power-law fit to luminosities computed from the measured fluxes, redshifts, Planck 2018 cosmology, and the external EBL model of Saldana-Lopez et al. (2021). No fitted parameter is fed back into the source selection or flux measurement, and no conclusion is forced by a definition. The paper does omit a description of the LF estimator and redshift-incompleteness corrections, which is a methodological or correctness gap rather than circularity: the LF is a descriptive fit to data, not a prediction generated from the same inputs. The sample is GeV-selected because the search is restricted to 4FGL sources, so a population of VHE AGN too faint at lower energies would be missed; this is a selection bias, not a self-referential reduction. Self-citations (e.g., Neronov et al. 2011, 2015; Neronov & Vovk 2010; Neronov & Semikoz 2009) appear as background context for IGMF and neutrino studies and are not load-bearing for the catalog construction or the luminosity function. Therefore no circular step can be exhibited, and the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper's physical results rest on external inputs: the 4FGL catalog, the EBL absorption model, and Planck cosmology. The only quantities fitted to data are the parameters of the BL Lac luminosity function. No new entities are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • L* (characteristic luminosity of BL Lac luminosity function) = ~10^44 erg/s
    Break luminosity of the broken power law fitted to the VHE BL Lac luminosity function in Section 3.2, Fig. 4; no uncertainty quoted.
  • kappa1 (LF slope below break) = not quoted (stated as <2)
    Slope of the broken power law below L*, fitted to the LF; value and error not given.
  • kappa2 (LF slope above break) = not quoted (stated as >2)
    Slope of the broken power law above L*, fitted to the LF; value and error not given.
  • Phi* (normalization / spatial density) = 6.5e-7 Mpc^-3, statistical error 0.5e-7
    Normalization of the LF; statistical uncertainty quoted, systematic uncertainties not.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The 4FGL source catalog provides the complete parent population of VHE AGN in the survey region.
    Search for VHE events is performed only around 4FGL positions; if some VHE AGN are absent from 4FGL, the catalog is incomplete.
  • domain assumption The PSF containment radii R68 and R95 of Fermi-LAT P8R3_SOURCEVETO_V3 are correct and energy-independent in the analysis bins.
    Used for photon association and flux extraction; incorrect radii would bias fluxes and significances.
  • domain assumption The EBL model of Saldana-Lopez et al. (2021) describes the gamma-ray attenuation for luminosity and spectral correction.
    Used for EBL correction; paper acknowledges factor-of-two uncertainty at z>1, which affects high-z results.
  • standard math Planck 2018 cosmological parameters are used for luminosity distance.
    Standard cosmology assumption.
  • domain assumption Source classifications (BLL, FSRQ, RDG) from 4FGL and SIMBAD are correct.
    Classification affects the per-class luminosity functions; the paper reclassifies a few sources based on literature.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Catalog of very-high-energy emitting active galactic nuclei at high Galactic latitudes." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/44UDIUC6

@misc{pith2026250608497,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Catalog of very-high-energy emitting active galactic nuclei at high Galactic latitudes},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/44UDIUC6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.08497}
}
read the original abstract

Large number of Active Galactic Nuclei (AGN) producing Very-High-Energy (VHE) gamma-rays (energies above 100~GeV) has been revealed using observations with Imaging Atmospheric Cherenkov Telescopes (IACTs). However, our knowledge of the VHE emitting AGN population is limited in the absence of an unbiased sky survey. We use long exposure of Fermi Large Area Telescope (LAT) to perform a survey of VHE emitting AGN at Galactic latitudes |b|>10 degrees. We consider clustering of gamma-ray events with energies E>100 GeV around positions of AGN from the 4-th LAT source catalog to select sources detected in the VHE range. The VHE AGN catalog produced in this way contains overall 175 sources detected with high confidence and additional 100 sources detected at more than 3-sigma level. It is 90% complete at the flux limit 1.3e-12 erg/cm2s. Less than half of the source sample (71) are previously reported VHE emitters, other sources are new detections in the VHE band. The majority of VHE AGN detectable at the survey flux limit are BL Lac type objects. We find their luminosity function to derive their spatial density (6.5+/-0.5)e-7/ Mpc3 and the characteristic luminosity scale ~1e44 erg/s. Ten sources in the VHE AGN catalog are nearby radio galaxies and seven are flat spectrum radio quasars, while 20 sources are unclassified AGN. We also include in our catalog four unidentified sources that may or may not be VHE AGN. 63 source in the catalog are "extreme" blazars, with 41 of them being new VHE band detections. In spite of the fact that the VHE flux is heavily attenuated by the pair production in interactions with Extragalactic Background Light (EBL), the catalog includes 7 sources at redshift larger than 1. Some of these sources show peculiar hardening of the VHE band spectra that point either to errors in redshift determination, or to limitations of modeling of cosmological evolution of EBL.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.08497 by the authors.

Figure 3
Figure 3. Intrinsic source luminosity as a function of distance. Dotted line shows the luminosity corresponding to the flux F = 10−12 erg/cm2 s. information on statistics of source detections by source type. We use source classification from the Fermi catalog (Ballet et al. 2023). Most of the sources (233) are BL Lacs (BLL), which is the dominant VHE AGN type at the survey sensitivity limit. The second-largest sample is that … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Number of sources as a function of redshift [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Luminosity functions of VHE AGN sub-classes. classified" AGN, "blazar candidates" and "unidentified" 4FGL sources have redshift estimates and luminosities in the range typical for BL Lacs and it is thus probable that those sources are from BL Lac class or, otherwise, they can belong to the population of radio galaxies. Dotted line in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Spectral characteristics for the subset of "extreme" sources. Blue data points show sources with synchrotron spec￾trum peak at frequencies νs > 1017 Hz. Red data points show sources with νs > 1018 Hz. of absorption on EBL, as expected from the extremely high energy of …
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Spectra of the most extreme blazars (synchrotron spectrum cut-off in the νs > 1018 Hz frequency range). The last panel shows the spectrum of 1ES 0502+675 that does not belong to the most extreme source sample, but is the second brightest source in the extreme VHE blaza…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Spectra of high redshift sources. Black and gray data points show spectra corrected for EBL absorption based on two different models of EBL, specified in the figure legends. Article number, page 8 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: SDSS image of the field (downloaded from SkyView service (https://skyview.gsfc.nasa.gov/) around 4FGL J0737.4+6535 showing the VHE source position (red marker) within the nearby galaxy NGC 2403. ref.Shaw et al. (2013). Similar to Ton 116, the source spec￾trum, shown in…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Spectra of unidentified 4FGL sources visible in the VHE band. Specifically useful for the EBL and IGMF studies are "extreme" sources that are expected to have their γ-ray spectra peaking well in the multi-TeV range, because their synchrotron spectra are found to peak …

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Fermi-Large Area Telescope Detection of Very High Energy (>100 GeV) Emission from Compton-Dominated Blazars

    astro-ph.HE 2026-07 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    Systematic Fermi-LAT search detects VHE emission from 14 Compton-dominated blazars (4 new at >5σ) and constrains the emitting region to >1.1–1.4 BLR radii.

  2. Revision of conservative lower bound on the intergalactic magnetic field from Fermi and Cherenkov telescope observations of extreme blazars

    astro-ph.HE 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Non-observation of delayed gamma-ray cascades from seven extreme blazars sets a conservative lower bound B > 2.1 x 10^-17 G on the intergalactic magnetic field, with 1ES 0502+675 giving the tightest constraint.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archiveprefix author booktitle chapter edition editor howpublished institution eprint journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type volume year label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts #0 'before.all := #1 ...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 global.max substring 't := if while FUNCTION word.in bbl.in " " * FUNCTION format....

  3. [3]

    Aartsen, M. G. et al. 2017, Astrophys. J., 835, 45

    work page 2017

  4. [4]

    Aartsen, M. G. et al. 2018, Science, 361, 147

    work page 2018

  5. [5]

    Abazajian, K. N. et al. 2009, Astrophys. J. Suppl., 182, 543

    2009

  6. [6]

    A., Agudo , I., Aniello , T., et al

    Acciari , V. A., Agudo , I., Aniello , T., et al. 2023, , 670, A145

    work page 2023

  7. [7]

    A., Aliu , E., Arlen , T., et al

    Acciari , V. A., Aliu , E., Arlen , T., et al. 2010, , 715, L49

    2010

  8. [8]

    A., Ansoldi , S., Antonelli , L

    Acciari , V. A., Ansoldi , S., Antonelli , L. A., et al. 2020, , 247, 16

    2020

Show all 63 references
  1. [9]

    B., Archer , A., et al

    Acharyya , A., Adams , C. B., Archer , A., et al. 2023, , 954, 70

    2023

  2. [10]

    2015, , 799, 86

    Ackermann , M., Ajello , M., Albert , A., et al. 2015, , 799, 86

    2015

  3. [11]

    2002, , 384, L23

    Aharonian , F., Akhperjanian , A., Barrio , J., et al. 2002, , 384, L23

    2002

  4. [12]

    G., Anton , G., et al

    Aharonian , F., Akhperjanian , A. G., Anton , G., et al. 2010, , 521, A69

    2010

  5. [13]

    G., Bazer-Bachi , A

    Aharonian , F., Akhperjanian , A. G., Bazer-Bachi , A. R., et al. 2006, , 440, 1018

    2006

  6. [14]

    2023, , 950, L16

    Aharonian , F., Aschersleben , J., Backes , M., et al. 2023, , 950, L16

    2023

  7. [15]

    2015, , 800, L27

    Ajello , M., Gasparrini , D., S \'a nchez-Conde , M., et al. 2015, , 800, L27

    2015

  8. [16]

    D., Allende Prieto , C., Almeida , A., et al

    Albareti , F. D., Allende Prieto , C., Almeida , A., et al. 2017, , 233, 25

    2017

  9. [17]

    R., et al

    Albert , A., Alvarez , C., Angeles Camacho , J. R., et al. 2021, , 907, 67

    2021

  10. [18]

    B., Abdo , A

    Atwood , W. B., Abdo , A. A., Ackermann , M., et al. 2009, , 697, 1071

    2009

  11. [19]

    H., & Lott, B

    Ballet, J., Bruel, P., Burnett, T. H., & Lott, B. 2023 [ [arXiv] 2307.12546 ]

    2023 arXiv

  12. [20]

    2011, in International Cosmic Ray Conference, Vol

    Benbow , W. 2011, in International Cosmic Ray Conference, Vol. 8, International Cosmic Ray Conference, 51

    2011

  13. [21]

    2024, , 271, 25

    Cao , Z., Aharonian , F., An , Q., et al. 2024, , 271, 25

    2024

  14. [22]

    L., Arsioli , B., Giommi , P., Padovani , P., & Brandt , C

    Chang , Y. L., Arsioli , B., Giommi , P., Padovani , P., & Brandt , C. H. 2019, , 632, A77

    2019

  15. [23]

    S., Agudo , I., et al

    Cherenkov Telescope Array Consortium , Acharya , B. S., Agudo , I., et al. 2019, Science with the Cherenkov Telescope Array

    2019

  16. [24]

    & CTAO LST Collaboration

    Cortina , J. & CTAO LST Collaboration . 2023, The Astronomer's Telegram, 16381, 1

    2023

  17. [25]

    Dom\' nguez, A. et al. 2023, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 527, 4632

    2023

  18. [26]

    1998, , 299, 433

    Fossati , G., Maraschi , L., Celotti , A., Comastri , A., & Ghisellini , G. 1998, , 299, 433

    1998

  19. [27]

    & Rodighiero , G

    Franceschini , A. & Rodighiero , G. 2017, , 603, A34

    2017

  20. [28]

    2019, , 157, 41

    Furniss , A., Worseck , G., Fumagalli , M., et al. 2019, , 157, 41

    2019

  21. [29]

    H. E. S. S. Collaboration , Aharonian , F., Ait Benkhali , F., et al. 2025, , 695, A261

    2025

  22. [30]

    2019, in Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, Vol

    Huentemeyer , P., BenZvi , S., Dingus , B., et al. 2019, in Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, Vol. 51, 109

    2019

  23. [31]

    G., Ackermann , M., et al

    IceCube Collaboration , Aartsen , M. G., Ackermann , M., et al. 2018, Science, 361, eaat1378

    2018

  24. [32]

    D., et al

    Kerby , S., Kaur , A., Falcone , A. D., et al. 2021, , 923, 75

    2021

  25. [33]

    & Pita , S

    Lefaucheur , J. & Pita , S. 2017, , 602, A86

    2017

  26. [34]

    W., Higley , A

    Lyke , B. W., Higley , A. N., McLane , J. N., et al. 2020, , 250, 8

    2020

  27. [35]

    Mao , L. S. 2011, , 16, 503

    2011

  28. [36]

    2019, in International Cosmic Ray Conference, Vol

    Mart \' nez-Huerta , H., Biteau , J., Lefaucheur , J., et al. 2019, in International Cosmic Ray Conference, Vol. 36, 36th International Cosmic Ray Conference (ICRC2019), 739

    2019

  29. [37]

    2014, The Astronomer's Telegram, 6062, 1

    Mirzoyan , R. 2014, The Astronomer's Telegram, 6062, 1

    2014

  30. [38]

    M., & Vovk , I

    Neronov , A., Semikoz , D., Taylor , A. M., & Vovk , I. 2015, , 575, A21

    2015

  31. [39]

    2011, , 529, A59

    Neronov , A., Semikoz , D., & Vovk , I. 2011, , 529, A59

    2011

  32. [40]

    & Semikoz , D

    Neronov , A. & Semikoz , D. V. 2009, , 80, 123012

    2009

  33. [41]

    & Semikoz, D

    Neronov, A. & Semikoz, D. V. 2012, Astrophys. J., 757, 61

    2012

  34. [42]

    V., & Ptitsyna, K

    Neronov, A., Semikoz, D. V., & Ptitsyna, K. 2017, Astron. Astrophys., 603, A135

    2017

  35. [43]

    & Vovk , I

    Neronov , A. & Vovk , I. 2010, Science, 328, 73

    2010

  36. [44]

    Neronov, A. Y. & Semikoz, D. V. 2002, Phys. Rev. D, 66, 123003

    2002

  37. [45]

    2024, , 691, A154

    Nilsson , K., Fallah Ramazani , V., Lindfors , E., et al. 2024, , 691, A154

    2024

  38. [46]

    2019, Mon

    Oikonomou, F., Murase, K., Padovani, P., Resconi, E., & M\'esz\'aros, P. 2019, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 489, 4347

    2019

  39. [47]

    S., \'A lvarez Crespo , N., et al

    Olmo-Garc \' a , A., Paliya , V. S., \'A lvarez Crespo , N., et al. 2022, , 516, 5702

    2022

  40. [48]

    2022, Mon

    Padovani, P., Boccardi, B., Falomo, R., & Giommi, P. 2022, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 511, 4697

    2022

  41. [49]

    2019, Mon

    Padovani, P., Oikonomou, F., Petropoulou, M., Giommi, P., & Resconi, E. 2019, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 484, L104

    2019

  42. [50]

    2020, , 497, 94

    Paiano , S., Falomo , R., Treves , A., & Scarpa , R. 2020, , 497, 94

    2020

  43. [51]

    2017, , 837, 144

    Paiano , S., Landoni , M., Falomo , R., et al. 2017, , 837, 144

    2017

  44. [52]

    2017, Astrophys

    Paiano, S., Landoni, M., Falomo, R., et al. 2017, Astrophys. J., 837, 144

    2017

  45. [53]

    S., Dom\' nguez, A., Ajello, M., Olmo-Garc\' a, A., & Hartmann, D

    Paliya, V. S., Dom\' nguez, A., Ajello, M., Olmo-Garc\' a, A., & Hartmann, D. 2021, Astrophys. J. Suppl., 253, 46

    2021

  46. [54]

    2020, , 641, A6

    Planck Collaboration , Aghanim , N., Akrami , Y., et al. 2020, , 641, A6

    2020

  47. [55]

    & Ghisellini , G

    Prandini , E. & Ghisellini , G. 2022, Galaxies, 10, 35

    2022

  48. [56]

    2022, Mon

    Sahakyan, N., Giommi, P., Padovani, P., et al. 2022, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 519, 1396

    2022

  49. [57]

    G., et al

    Saldana-Lopez , A., Dom \' nguez , A., P \'e rez-Gonz \'a lez , P. G., et al. 2021, , 507, 5144

    2021

  50. [58]

    S., Romani, R

    Shaw, M. S., Romani, R. W., Cotter, G., et al. 2013, Astrophys. J., 764, 135

    2013

  51. [59]

    Sol, H. et al. 2013, Astropart. Phys., 43, 215

    2013

  52. [60]

    2024, , 530, 4626

    Ulgiati , A., Paiano , S., Treves , A., et al. 2024, , 530, 4626

    2024

  53. [61]

    V \'e ron-Cetty , M. P. & V \'e ron , P. 2010, , 518, A10

    2010

  54. [62]

    2022, , 936, 146

    Xiao , H., Fan , J., Ouyang , Z., et al. 2022, , 936, 146

    2022

  55. [63]

    2025, Chinese Physics C, 49, 035001

    Zhang , Z., Yang , R., Zhang , S., et al. 2025, Chinese Physics C, 49, 035001

    2025

Pith tools

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