Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Where is the Supervirial Gas? III. Insights from X-ray Shadow Observations and a revised Model for the Soft Diffuse X-ray Background

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Using six pairs of shadow observations, the paper shows that the N VII excess and the hot thermal component of the soft X-ray background arise beyond the Galactic disk, in the Milky Way's circumgalactic medium.

desk verdict A careful shadow-experiment study that makes a plausible case for a distant origin of the excess soft X-ray components, but the foreground-constancy assumption is only tested for one of six pairs; the strongest evidence comes from the two contemporaneous pairs. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.13331 v1 pith:4Q65RPZN submitted 2025-07-17 astro-ph.GA astro-ph.HE

Anjali Gupta , Smita Mathur , Joshua Kingsbury , Esma Korkmaz , Sanskriti Das , Yair Krongold , Manami Roy , Armando Lara-DI This is my paper
classification astro-ph.GAastro-ph.HE
keywords softdiffuseX-raybackgroundcircumgalacticmediumshadowobservationsSuzakunitrogenabundancesuper-virialgassolarwindchargeexchangelocalbubble
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

Using six Suzaku shadow observations—each pairing a sightline through a dense molecular cloud with a nearby clear field—the paper separates foreground from background emission in the soft diffuse X-ray background. It shows that the excess emission near $\sim 0.5$ keV (identified with N VII) and the additional hot thermal component near $0.8$–$1.0$ keV are both stronger in the unobscured fields, ruling out the local bubble and solar wind charge exchange as their source. This places the emitting gas beyond the Galactic disk, in the Milky Way's circumgalactic medium, which appears nitrogen-rich with an average N/O of $2.6\pm0.5$ times solar and, in two sightlines, neon also above solar. The paper therefore revises the standard model of the soft X-ray background to include a hot absorbed component and variable nitrogen and neon abundances, which is essential for interpreting diffuse X-ray emission from external galaxies and clusters.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing tool is the shadow observation: for each of six molecular-cloud sightlines the paper jointly fits the on-cloud (high hydrogen column) and off-cloud (low column) spectra, linking the foreground components—local bubble emission and solar wind charge exchange—between the two fields. Any excess emission that appears only in the off-cloud spectrum must be absorbed by the cloud, hence comes from beyond the Galactic disk. The spectral fits use collisional-ionization plasma models with variable abundances, the ACX2 model for charge exchange, and a power law for the cosmic X-ray background, with the N VII line at $0.501$ keV, Ne IX at $0.91$ keV, and Gaussian features for residual lines.

What would settle it

A decisive test would be to re-observe a shadow pair with simultaneous in-situ solar-wind charge-exchange measurements and to subtract that measured foreground; if the off-cloud excess disappears, the distant-origin claim is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that two recently discovered excesses in the soft diffuse X-ray background—an N VII emission excess near $0.5$ keV and a hot thermal component near $0.8$–$1.0$ keV—are not produced locally but originate in the Milky Way's circumgalactic medium. Because the on-cloud spectra, which absorb background emission, show little or none of these excesses while the off-cloud spectra show them clearly, the emitting plasma must lie beyond the shadowing clouds. The warm-hot circumgalactic gas is nitrogen rich, with an average N/O of $2.6\pm0.5$ times solar, and neon rich in two sightlines, and a separate hotter component at roughly $0.45$–$0.75$ keV is present beyond the Galactic disk. This motivates a revised five-component model of the soft X-ray background in which the warm-hot CGM is fitted with variable nitrogen and neon abundances and a hot absorbed thermal component is added.

Load-bearing premise

The central argument assumes that the foreground emission (local bubble plus solar wind charge exchange) was identical between the on-cloud and off-cloud observations, which were typically taken two days apart; if the solar wind changed in that interval, the off-cloud excess could appear without any distant gas.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the N VII excess is distant, the Milky Way's circumgalactic medium contains nitrogen-rich plasma with N/O about $2.6\pm0.5$ times solar, so chemical enrichment models must explain a widespread nitrogen enhancement.
  • If the hot thermal component is distant, it supports an extraplanar origin for the super-virial gas, consistent with feedback-driven or accretion-shock-heated halo models.
  • The revised five-component SDXB model means that any study of extended X-ray sources—supernova remnants, galaxies, clusters, or the intergalactic medium—must include the hot absorbed component and variable N/Ne abundances or risk biasing results.
  • Because the hot component is detected only in brighter sightlines, deeper observations of faint high-latitude fields should reveal it if it is as widespread as the nitrogen enrichment.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The paper's average N/O of $2.6\pm0.5$ includes marginal detections; with longer exposures or better resolution, the nitrogen-rich phase could turn out to be even more prevalent than the two secure detections reported here.
  • Shadow observations localize the excess only beyond the Galactic disk; pairing these data with absorption-line measurements or future microcalorimeter spectra could determine whether the hot component fills a large volume or resides in a clumpy extraplanar layer.
  • Because foreground constancy is tested for only one of the six pairs, a dedicated campaign with simultaneous solar-wind monitoring would eliminate the main alternative explanation and make the distant-origin claim robust.
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

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper analyzes six Suzaku X-ray shadow observations (on-cloud vs off-cloud pairs) to determine whether the previously reported soft diffuse X-ray background excesses near 0.5 keV (identified as N VII) and near 0.8-1.0 keV (identified as a super-virial hot thermal component) originate locally or beyond the absorbing Galactic disk. The authors fit the paired spectra with a standard foreground (LHB+SWCX) plus absorbed background (warm-hot CGM + CXB) model and find that the excesses are stronger in the off-cloud spectra, leading them to conclude that both components lie beyond the shadowing clouds, that the CGM is nitrogen-rich with an average N/O of 2.6 +/- 0.5, and that a revised multi-component SDXB model is required. The paper also reports super-solar Ne/O in two sightlines and a possible N VI feature in the MBM36 off-cloud spectrum.

Significance. If the conclusions hold, the paper is significant: it would observationally locate the N VII excess and the super-virial hot component beyond the absorbing Galactic disk, support a chemically enriched (N and Ne) Milky Way CGM, and provide a practical updated model for extragalactic X-ray background analyses. The paper has concrete strengths: the shadow technique is well motivated, the O I contamination screening is careful, the MBM36 analysis includes tests of several alternative models, and the comparison between on- and off-cloud spectra provides a direct empirical contrast that could in principle have failed. The central location claim, however, rests on the untested assumption that the LHB+SWCX foreground is constant between the paired observations, which is not established for most pairs; the quoted average N/O also mixes measurements of very different significance. These issues need to be addressed before the headline conclusions can be taken as secure.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3.2, Table 1] The central location conclusion is built on simultaneous fits in which the LHB and SWCX foreground parameters are tied between the on-cloud and off-cloud spectra. Table 1 shows that the paired observations are not contemporaneous: the MBM20 on/off pair is separated by about six months (2008 Feb 11 vs. 2007 Jul 30) and the MBM12 pair by about one year (2006 Feb 03 vs. 2007 Feb 06), while even the closest pairs are two to six days apart. Since SWCX is known to vary on timescales of hours to days (Kuntz 2019), an off-cloud spectrum taken at a time of enhanced SWCX can produce excess O VII/N VII/Ne IX emission without any distant component. The paper tests variable SWCX only for the SGH filament (§3.2.2); no equivalent test is reported for the other five pairs. Because the off-cloud excesses are the observable that anchors both the "beyond the shadowing clouds" conclusions (N VII and hot component), the foreground-constancy assumption must be checked for each pair, for example by allowing foreground normalizations to float independently or by using contemporaneous solar-wind/geocoronal data, before the local-origin interpretation can be ruled out.
  2. [§4.2, Table 2] The abstract and §4.2 quote a super-solar average N/O of 2.6±0.5. Table 2 shows that this average is taken over five sightlines with heterogeneous significance: only MBM36 (1.7±0.6, F-test >99.1%) and MBM20 (3.7±1.2, F-test >99%) are individually significant; the filament (1.6±0.3, 95.69%) and MBM12 (3.1±1.3, 93.6%) are marginal, and G236+38 (2.7±1.7, >76%) is not significant. A simple unweighted average of these values does not account for the large uncertainties and marginal detections; an inverse-variance weighted combination would move the value substantially lower. Please report the error-weighted average or restrict the claim to the high-significance subsample; as written, the "widespread nitrogen enrichment" claim is stronger than the data support.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Introduction] The text contains typos such as "absortpion" in the first paragraph of §1 and "sighlines" in the abstract; these should be corrected.
  2. [Author list] The author line contains "Armando Lara-DI5", which is likely a formatting error for "Lara-Dí" or "Lara-DI" with a superscript; please correct the name and affiliation marker.
  3. [Figures 2 and 3] Figures 2 and 3 are referenced in the text but have no descriptive captions; the reader is left to infer the meaning of the grey and black spectra and of the residual panels.
  4. [§3.2.3] The "mystery feature" at ~0.86 keV in MBM12 is modeled with a Gaussian, but there is no discussion of possible instrumental or continuum artifacts that could mimic the line, nor of how its presence affects the quoted N/O constraint; a short comment would improve the presentation.
  5. [§4.5] The revised SDXB model is presented as a numbered list, but the text does not specify how the new components (especially the hot component and the variable-abundance warm-hot component) should be implemented in extragalactic background subtraction; a practical prescription would strengthen this section.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the shadow experiment independently tests prior hypotheses, and the revised SDXB model is an empirical fit rather than a prediction derived from its inputs.

full rationale

The paper's central claims rest on a shadow-observation experiment: simultaneous fits of on-cloud and off-cloud Suzaku spectra in which foreground parameters are tied and the on-cloud column absorbs distant emission. The excess components are found preferentially in off-cloud spectra, and a direct alternative test (allowing N abundance in the foreground SWCX model) fails to improve the fit. This is an independent empirical test, not a re-statement of the paper's inputs. The prior work invoked (Gupta et al. 2023, Das et al. 2019) supplies the hypotheses being tested, not the test itself. The revised SDXB model in Section 4.5 is a summary of the fitted spectral model, not a first-principles prediction derived from itself. The only genuinely load-bearing auxiliary assumption, that foreground SWCX/LHB is constant between paired observations, is a validity threat rather than a circularity: if violated, the off-cloud residuals could be misattributed, but the claim does not reduce to its own input by construction. No equation is defined in terms of the quantity it is used to derive, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. Under the stated rules, this is a non-finding.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 3 invented entities

The central claims rest mainly on fitted spectral parameters rather than on new entities. The N/O average is a simple mean of five per-sightline fits, not a global fit, and includes marginal and non-significant detections. The hot component is required in only two of six sightlines. The shadow technique itself supplies the external handle, but it depends on the foreground-constancy axiom. Overall, the paper adds one new model component class (hot gas) and an abundance pattern to the standard SDXB model; these are grounded in prior literature but not formally verified.

free parameters (5)
  • N/O abundance ratio in warm-hot CGM (per sightline) = average 2.6±0.5; per sightline 1.7-3.7
    Fitted to the ~0.5 keV excess in each sightline; the average is the paper's headline metallicity result.
  • Ne/O abundance ratio in warm-hot CGM = MBM36 3.1±0.6; Filament 2.8±0.5
    Fitted to residual ~0.9 keV emission; required in only two sightlines.
  • Hot component temperature and emission measure = kT 0.45-0.52 keV; EM 0.30-3.04 x 1e-3 cm-6 pc
    Added absorbed thermal component to model the 0.8-1.0 keV excess; not detected in four sightlines.
  • On-cloud hydrogen column density NH = on-cloud 4.6-46.2 x 1e20 cm-2 (free)
    NH treated as free for on-cloud fields because IRAS-derived values are uncertain in dense regions; controls the on/off contrast.
  • CXB power-law photon index and normalization = Gamma 1.32-1.69; norm 7.4-10.4
    Fitted in 1.5-5.0 keV and used as background; consistent with external CXB but not fixed.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Collisional ionization equilibrium (APEC/vAPEC) describes the warm-hot and hot plasma.
    Used throughout §3. If the plasma is out of equilibrium, the derived N/O and temperatures could be biased; the paper tests one NEI model only for MBM36 (§4.1).
  • domain assumption The foreground (LHB+SWCX) is identical and unabsorbed in each paired on/off observation while distant emission is absorbed by the cloud.
    Core premise of the shadow method (§1.3). Only partially tested for SWCX variability (§3.2.2).
  • ad hoc to paper The ~0.5 keV excess is predominantly N VII emission from thermal plasma, not O I fluorescence or an unidentified line.
    Suzaku's energy resolution (about 50 eV) cannot cleanly separate N VII at 0.501 keV from O I at 0.525 keV and O VII at 0.574 keV; screening reduces but does not eliminate O I contamination (§2.1, §3.2).
  • ad hoc to paper A single-temperature absorbed hot component is the correct description of the 0.8-1.0 keV excess.
    Best fit for two sightlines; alternative models are compared only on MBM36 (§4.1), so the physical nature is not uniquely established.
  • domain assumption The IRAS 100 micron to NH conversion and the Anders-Grevesse abundance scale are adequate baselines.
    NH is derived from IRAS 100 micron maps (§3); abundance scale changes were tested and reported as not affecting conclusions, but the adopted scale enters all N/O values.
invented entities (3)
  • Super-virial hot component of the Milky Way CGM independent evidence
    purpose: Additional absorbed thermal component to model 0.8-1.0 keV excess
    Supported by prior absorption and emission detections by the same and other groups, and by two shadow sightlines here; exact location and covering fraction remain uncertain.
  • Nitrogen-enriched plasma in the warm-hot CGM independent evidence
    purpose: Explains excess N VII emission near 0.5 keV
    Super-solar N/O seen in several sightlines in this work and previous papers; physical origin (AGB feedback) is inferred, not directly observed.
  • 0.86 keV mystery line in MBM12
    purpose: Gaussian component to fit residual emission in the MBM12 off-cloud spectrum
    The paper states 'no known atomic lines match this energy' and calls it a mystery feature (§3.2.3); no independent detection yet.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Where is the Supervirial Gas? III. Insights from X-ray Shadow Observations and a revised Model for the Soft Diffuse X-ray Background." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4Q65RPZN

@misc{pith2026250713331,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Where is the Supervirial Gas? III. Insights from X-ray Shadow Observations and a revised Model for the Soft Diffuse X-ray Background},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4Q65RPZN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.13331}
}
read the original abstract

Shadow observations provide a powerful tool to separate foreground components of the soft diffuse X-ray background (SDXB) from the background components. Such observations have now established that the ``local'' foreground is made of the solar wind charge exchange and the local bubble, and the background emission is from the extended circumgalactic medium (CGM) of the Milky Way and from the unresolved extragalactic sources. New data and careful analyses of the SDXB led to two new discoveries in recent years: (1) excess emission near 0.5 keV that is identified as the NVII emission line, and (2) excess emission near 0.8-1.0 keV that is identified with an additional, super-virial temperature hot thermal component of the CGM. The goal of this paper is to use Suzaku shadow observations along six sightlines to determine whether either of these components is from the ``local'' sources. We eliminate the ambiguity regarding the origin of NVII emission, ruling out the local origin. We confirm that the Milky Way CGM contains nitrogen-rich plasma, with a super-solar average (N/O) of 2.6+-0.5, and suggest that nitrogen-enhanced plasma is widespread throughout the CGM. We find super-solar Ne abundance in two sighlines, also from the CGM. Similarly, we rule out the local origin of the hot thermal component and confirm that it is present beyond the shadowing clouds. Furthermore, we provide a revised model of the soft diffuse X-ray background, which is crucial for extragalactic astronomy.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.13331 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. All-sky map centered on the Galactic Center, showing the locations of the shadows analyzed in this paper. 0.0 0.1 0.2 n orm co u nts s 1 k e V 1 0.0 0.1 residuals 0.5 1 Energy (keV) 0.0 0.1 residuals [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Suzaku XIS1 spectra towards MBM36 on-cloud (grey) and off-cloud (black) were fitted simultaneously with the SDXB standard model. Excess emissions at the lower energy and higher energy bands can be clearly seen in the residual plot of the off-cloud spectrum (middle panel). In contrast, excess emissions are not as prominent in the on-cloud spectrum (bottom panel). https://www.overleaf.com/project/60099b830ab3d9d0f04e2… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Suzaku XIS1 spectra towards MBM36, on-cloud (grey) and off-cloud (black), fitted with the revised model of the SDXB as discussed in §3.2.1. The middle (off-cloud) and bottom (on-cloud) panels show the residual plots [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Detection of 'super-virial' gas in the Circumgalactic medium of the Milky Way towards PKS 2155-304

    astro-ph.GA 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    First MgXII K-alpha absorption detection in the Milky Way CGM, with four inferred temperature phases including a 5.4e7 K super-virial component toward PKS 2155-304.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 37 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    1989, Geochim

    Anders, E., & Grevesse, N. 1989, Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta, 53, 197

    1989

  2. [2]

    J., & Scott, P

    Asplund, M., Grevesse, N., Sauval, A. J., & Scott, P. 2009, ARA&A, 47, 481

    2009

  3. [3]

    2023, ApJ, 952, 41

    Krongold, Y. 2023, ApJ, 952, 41

    work page 2023

  4. [4]

    S., Nath, B

    Bisht, M. S., Nath, B. B., & Mathur, S. 2024, ApJ, 975, 49

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    M., & Zajczyk, A

    LaRocca, D. M., & Zajczyk, A. 2022, ApJ, 936, 72

    work page 2022

  6. [6]

    & Perault, M

    Boulanger, F. & Perault, M. 1988, ApJ, 330, 964

    work page 1988

  7. [7]

    N., & Yang, G

    Brandt, W. N., & Yang, G. 2021, Handbook of X-ray and Gamma-ray Astrophysics. Edited by Cosimo Bambi and Andrea Santangelo, Springer Living Reference Work

    work page 2021

  8. [8]

    Cappelluti, N., Li, Y., Ricarte, A. et al. 2017, ApJ, 837, 19

    work page 2017

Show all 48 references
  1. [9]

    S., Mullen, P

    Cumbee, R. S., Mullen, P. D., Lyons, D. et al. 2018, ApJ, 852, 7

    2018

  2. [10]

    2021, ApJ, 918, 83

    Das, S., Mathur, S., Gupta, A., & Krongold, Y. 2021, ApJ, 918, 83

    2021

  3. [11]

    M., & Lockman, F

    Dickey, J. M., & Lockman, F. J. 1990, ARA&A, 28, 215

    1990

  4. [12]

    Foster, A., Cui, X., Dupont, M. et al. 2020, AAS Meeting Abstracts, 235, 180.01

    2020

  5. [13]

    2007, ApJ, 658, 1081

    Galeazzi, M., Gupta, A., & Ursino, E. 2007, ApJ, 658, 1081

    2007

  6. [14]

    2009, ApJ, 695, 1127

    Galeazzi, M., Gupta, A., & Ursino, E. 2009, ApJ, 695, 1127

    2009

  7. [15]

    Gatuzz, E., Garcia, J., & Kallaman, T. R. et al. 2015, ApJ, 800, 29

    2015

  8. [16]

    2016, ˚ a, 594, A78

    Gu, L., Mao, J., Costantini, E., & Kaastra, J. 2016, ˚ a, 594, A78

    2016

  9. [17]

    2009, ApJ, 707, 644

    Lallement, R. 2009, ApJ, 707, 644

    2009

  10. [18]

    & Galeazzi, M

    Gupta, A. & Galeazzi, M. 2009, ApJ, 702, 270

    2009

  11. [19]

    2012, ApJL, 756, L8

    Galeazzi, M. 2012, ApJL, 756, L8

    2012

  12. [20]

    2021, ApJ, 909, 164

    Krongold, Y., & Galeazzi, M. 2021, ApJ, 909, 164

    2021

  13. [21]

    2023, NewA, 7, 799

    Gupta, A., Mathur, S., Kingsbury, J., Das, S., & Krongold, Y. 2023, NewA, 7, 799

    2023

  14. [22]

    B., Shelton, R

    Henley, D. B., Shelton, R. L., & Kuntz, K. D. 2007, ApJ, 661, 1

    2007

  15. [23]

    B., & Shelton, R

    Henley, D. B., & Shelton, R. L. 2008, ApJ, 676, 335

    2008

  16. [24]

    B., & Shelton, R

    Henley, D. B., & Shelton, R. L. 2015, ApJ, 808, 22

    2015

  17. [25]

    Henry, R. B. C., Edmunds, M. G., & Koppen, J. 2000, ApJ, 541, 660

    2000

  18. [26]

    Kataoka, J., Yamamoto, M., Nakamura, Y. et al. 2021, ApJ, 908, 1

    2021

  19. [27]

    Kuntz, K. D. 2019, Astronomy & Astrophysics Review, 27, 1

    2019

  20. [28]

    2023, ApJ, 946, 55L

    Lara-DI, A., Mathur, S., Krongold, Y., Das, S., & Gupta, A. 2023, ApJ, 946, 55L

    2023

  21. [29]

    R., et al

    Liu, W., Chiao, M., Collier, M. R., et al. 2017, ApJ, 834, 33

    2017

  22. [30]

    2003, ApJ, 591, 1220 L

    Lodders, K. 2003, ApJ, 591, 1220 L

    2003

  23. [31]

    Lodders, K., Palme, H., & Gail, H. -P. 2009, Solar System, Landolt-B¨ ornstein - Group VI Astronomy and

    2009

  24. [32]

    2022, Probing the Circumgalactic Medium with X-Ray Absorption Lines

    Mathur, S. 2022, Probing the Circumgalactic Medium with X-Ray Absorption Lines. Springer Nature Singapore, Singapore, pp 1-36

    2022

  25. [33]

    D., Tsunemi, H., Bautz, M

    Miller, E. D., Tsunemi, H., Bautz, M. W., et al. 2008, PASJ, 60, S95

    2008

  26. [34]

    Y., et al

    Mitsuishi, I., Gupta, A., Yamasaki, N. Y., et al. 2012, PASJ, 64, 12

    2012

  27. [35]

    D., Cumbee, R

    Mullen, P. D., Cumbee, R. S., Lyons, D. & Stancil, P.C. 2016, ApJS, 224, 31

    2016

  28. [36]

    D., Cumbee, R

    Mullen, P. D., Cumbee, R. S., Lyons, D., et al. 2017, ApJ, 844, 7

    2017

  29. [37]

    2023, ˚ a, 674, 195

    Ponti, G., Zheng, X., Locatelli, N. 2023, ˚ a, 674, 195

    2023

  30. [38]

    A., Becker, W., et al

    Predehl, P., Sunyaev, R. A., Becker, W., et al. 2020, Nature, 588, 227

    2020

  31. [39]

    2024, arXiv240917252

    Roy, M., Kung-Yi, S., Mathur, S., & Jonathan, S. 2024, arXiv240917252

    2024

  32. [40]

    2024, arXiv2411.15394

    Gupta, A. 2024, arXiv2411.15394

    2024 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Salinas, A., & Schlegel, E. M. 2004, AJ, 128, 1331

    2004

  34. [42]

    Y., Mitsuda, K., & Takei, Y

    Sekiya, N., Yamasaki, N. Y., Mitsuda, K., & Takei, Y. 2014, PASJ, 66, L3

    2014

  35. [43]

    2001, ApJ, 556, L9

    Raymond, J, C. 2001, ApJ, 556, L9

    2001

  36. [44]

    K., Bautz, M

    Smith, R. K., Bautz, M. W., Edgar, R.J., et al. 2007, PASJ, 59, S141

    2007

  37. [45]

    K., Foster, A

    Smith, R. K., Foster, A. R., Edgar, R. J., & Brickhouse, N. S. 2014, ApJ, 787, 77

    2014

  38. [46]

    & Liu, W

    Ursino, E., Galeazzi, M. & Liu, W. 2016, ApJ, 816, 33

    2016

  39. [47]

    2000, ApJ, 542, 2, 914

    Wilms, J., Allen, A., & McCray, R. 2000, ApJ, 542, 2, 914

    2000

  40. [48]

    & Sofue, Y

    Yamamoto, M., Kataoka, J. & Sofue, Y. 2022, MNRAS, 512, 2

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.