SST-1M Observations of Markarian 421

Anabella Araudo; Ana Laura M\"uller (for the SST-1M Collaboration); Jakub Jury\v{s}ek; Srija Reddy Muthyala

REVIEW 3 major objections 7 minor 12 references

SST-1M Observations of Markarian 421

T0 review · 3 major / 7 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 The SST-1M telescopes detected the blazar Markarian 421 in stereo mode at 10.95 sigma, measured a power-law spectrum with index 3.24, and fitted a synchrotron self-Compton model whose parameters agree with earlier TeV studies.

desk verdict Solid SST-1M first-light detection of Mrk 421, but the 'intrinsic' spectrum lacks a documented EBL correction, likely flattening the quoted index by 0.2–0.4. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.18445 v1 pith:BDEGQURI submitted 2025-07-24 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.IM

Srija Reddy Muthyala , Anabella Araudo , Jakub Juryšek , Ana Laura Müller (for the SST-1M Collaboration) This is my paper

classification astro-ph.HEastro-ph.IM

keywords Markarian421blazarveryhighenergygammaraysimagingatmosphericCherenkovtelescopestereoscopicobservationsynchrotronself-Comptonpower-lawspectrumSST-1M

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 reports the first stereoscopic observations of the blazar Markarian 421 with the SST-1M telescopes, taken between January and May 2024. The authors claim a clear very-high-energy detection: 178 excess gamma-ray events in 32.9 hours of selected stereo data, corresponding to a total significance of 10.95. After correcting for extragalactic background light absorption, the intrinsic spectrum is described by a power law with photon index $\alpha = 3.24 \pm 0.26$ and normalization $A = (1.06 \pm 0.12) \times 10^{-12}\,\mathrm{TeV}^{-1}\,\mathrm{cm}^{-2}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}$ at 3 TeV. A one-zone synchrotron self-Compton fit to the combined 2024 and 2009 broadband data yields a Doppler factor of about 24 and a magnetic field of about 25 mG, in line with earlier results. The result matters because it shows that a compact, single-mirror Cherenkov system can do meaningful stereoscopic blazar science and extend spectral coverage above 2 TeV.

What carries the argument

The central object is the stereoscopic Cherenkov detection system: two 4-m single-mirror telescopes separated by 155.2 m, each with a SiPM camera and a 9-degree field of view, whose nanosecond-synchronized waveforms are reconstructed into gamma-ray candidate lists. The detection significance comes from the ring-background method on sky maps, and the spectrum is obtained by forward folding a power-law model through the instrument response to match the observed energy distribution. For the broadband modeling, the load-bearing component is the one-zone synchrotron self-Compton (SSC) mechanism: a single region containing relativistic electrons in a broken power-law distribution, with a Doppler factor of $24.29$, a magnetic field of $24.58$ mG, and an electron energy break at $59$ GeV, simultaneously producing the low-energy synchrotron peak and the high-energy inverse-Compton peak.

What would settle it

A simultaneous multi-wavelength campaign on Markarian 421 during SST-1M observations, with X-ray and optical data taken on the same nights, would settle the claim: if a one-zone SSC fit to truly simultaneous data requires a Doppler factor or magnetic field outside the quoted ranges, or cannot reproduce the 2024 TeV spectrum, the single-state SSC interpretation is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the two SST-1M telescopes, working as a stereo pair, detect Markarian 421 with a total significance of $10.95$ and $178$ excess events in $32.9$ hours of observation, and that the intrinsic (EBL-corrected) spectrum is a power law $dN/dE = A\,(E/3\,\mathrm{TeV})^{-\alpha}$ with $\alpha = 3.24 \pm 0.26$ and $A = (1.06 \pm 0.12) \times 10^{-12}\,\mathrm{TeV}^{-1}\,\mathrm{cm}^{-2}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}$. The 2024 light curve shows no flare, with an average flux above 1 TeV of $(8.01 \pm 2.54) \times 10^{-14}\,\mathrm{TeV}^{-1}\,\mathrm{cm}^{-2}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}$. Combining these points with the 2009 multi-wavelength spectral energy distribution, the authors derive a one-zone SSC model with Doppler factor $\delta_D = 24.29 \pm 0.01$, magnetic field $B = 24.58 \pm 1.01$ mG, and a broken power-law electron distribution breaking at $E_b = 59.08 \pm 0.51$ GeV, giving an emission-region radius of $6.1 \times 10^{16}$ cm. These parameters agree with previous TeV-band modeling, which the paper takes as support for the SSC interpretation of Markarian 421's gamma-ray emission.

Load-bearing premise

The joint SED fit treats the 2024 SST-1M measurements and the 2009 archival multi-wavelength data as a single emission state of Markarian 421, even though the source is highly variable and the 2024 light curve shows night-to-night flux changes; if the two epochs represent different states, the fitted SSC parameters do not describe a real physical state.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

SST-1M's stereo mode can detect a known very-high-energy blazar at about 11 sigma in roughly 33 hours, demonstrating that a compact single-mirror Cherenkov system is scientifically productive.
The measured intrinsic spectrum, with photon index near 3.2 above a few TeV, is consistent with the soft TeV spectra reported for Markarian 421 by other instruments and extends coverage beyond 2 TeV.
The SSC parameters imply an emission-region radius of about $6 \times 10^{16}$ cm, matching a roughly one-day variability timescale for the source.
The absence of a flare in the 2024 light curve provides a quiescent-state baseline for comparing future flaring observations of Markarian 421.

Reading between the lines

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

If the same analysis chain proves reliable on more sources, a small stereo IACT array could serve as a flexible monitor for TeV blazar flares, catching activity that large-aperture instruments cannot observe continuously.
The agreement between the 2024 TeV spectrum and the 2009 broadband SED may reflect that Markarian 421's SSC parameters fluctuate around similar average values rather than staying constant; fitting each night of SST-1M data separately would test this.
Adding higher-energy points above 9 TeV to the SED, as the paper plans, should sharpen the high-energy tail and could distinguish one-zone SSC from scenarios with additional emission components.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Quick take: this is a solid first-light detection report for a new IACT system, and the main science claim—that SST-1M sees Mrk 421 at ~11 sigma in stereo—is believable. The problem is the paper never explains how the 'intrinsic' spectrum in Table 1 was produced. No EBL correction is mentioned for SST-1M data, only for the archival 2009 points. At z=0.031 that matters: going from observed to intrinsic flattens a PL index by roughly 0.2–0.4, which is larger than the quoted 0.26 statistical error. So either the table is mislabeled or there's a missing method statement. Either way, the SSC fit in Figure 5 mixes EBL-corrected archival points with possibly uncorrected SST-1M points, which could shift the derived B, delta_D, and electron index.

What's new and useful: first SST-1M stereo data on a standard calibration blazar, 32.9 hours, clean maps, Gaussian background, 10.95 sigma excess. The spectrum is consistent with previous TeV measurements, which is the point of an instrument validation. The forward-folding and reflected-background methods are standard, and the pipeline was already validated on the Crab. Credit for that.

Soft spots besides EBL: no systematic uncertainties anywhere, and the data selection (34.31 h for T1, 40.48 h for T2, 32.92 h stereo) isn't justified beyond 'bad weather, clouds, auroras.' The light curve in Fig. 3 shows night-to-night variability, yet the SED fit uses 2009 archival data and treats it all as one state. That's a real issue but secondary—if the EBL question is fixed, the spectral index and detection claim survive.

Net: the paper is an instrument paper, not a physics breakthrough. It deserves a serious referee because the detection is real and the SST-1M collaboration is doing the right kind of validation work. A referee should ask for a clear EBL statement, systematics, and a discussion of the non-simultaneous fit. I'd accept it for review but mark it as needing moderate revision.

Referee Report

3 major / 7 minor

Summary. This paper reports the first stereoscopic observations of Mrk 421 by the SST-1M Cherenkov telescopes at Ondrejov, taken between January and May 2024. After data quality cuts, 32.92 h of stereo data are used. The authors detect the source at 10.95 sigma with 178 excess events, reconstruct a nightly light curve with no strong flares, fit a power law to the 1D spectrum yielding an intrinsic (as labelled) spectral index alpha = 3.24 +/- 0.26 and normalization A = (1.06 +/- 0.12) x 10^-12 TeV^-1 cm^-2 s^-1 at 3 TeV, and fit a single-zone SSC model (via agnpy) to the combined SST-1M data and the 2009 time-averaged SED from Abdo et al. (2011), obtaining delta_D ~ 24.3, B ~ 24.6 mG, and broken electron spectrum parameters. The abstract and conclusions characterize the results as preliminary.

Significance. If the detection and spectral parameters are robust, this is a valuable verification of the SST-1M stereo system and a useful TeV measurement of Mrk 421. Strengths: the analysis uses widely used open-source tools (gammapy), a standard wobble/reflected-background approach, and the pipeline has been previously validated on the Crab Nebula (reference [2]); the significance and excess map with Gaussian background check are standard. However, the physical-modeling part is explicitly preliminary and the two main quantitative claims (Table 1 intrinsic spectrum and Table 2 SSC parameters) depend on an undocumented EBL treatment and on combining non-simultaneous data. The paper therefore does not yet establish robust new physics, but it establishes a credible first stereo detection.

major comments (3)

[Section 2, Table 1] The label 'intrinsic spectrum' is not supported by an explicit EBL correction for the SST-1M data. The text in Section 2 says only that the 'observed and intrinsic' spectra are produced using a PL model; no EBL model or redshift-dependent absorption is described for the SST-1M data. At z=0.031, the Franceschini and Rodighiero (2017) model gives tau(3 TeV) ~ 0.1 and a spectral slope change d(tau)/d(ln E) ~ 0.2-0.4 over 1-10 TeV, which would flatten the intrinsic index to roughly 2.8-3.0 and raise the 3 TeV amplitude by about 10%. If the green curve in Fig. 4 is actually the forward-folded (instrument-deconvolved, but EBL-absorbed) spectrum, then Table 1 should be relabelled 'observed' and the true intrinsic values recomputed; if it is EBL-corrected, the model and parameters must be stated. Without this, the central value alpha = 3.24 +/- 0.26 is ambiguous.
[Section 3, Figure 5] The SSC fit combines 2024 SST-1M data with the 2009 time-averaged Abdo et al. (2011) SED without accounting for the source's known variability. The paper's own light curve (Fig. 3) shows night-to-night fluctuations, and Mrk 421 is explicitly described as 'highly variable.' Fitting a single-zone equilibrium model to data separated by 15 years (with different flux states) can produce parameters that do not represent any physical state; the quoted 1-sigma errors on delta_D, B, etc. in Table 2 are formal and almost certainly understate the true uncertainty. Please either use contemporaneous multi-wavelength data, or model the two epochs separately, or clarify that the parameters are a time-averaged approximation and quantify the state difference (e.g., from Fermi-LAT or HAWC light curves).
[Section 2] The data-selection and systematic uncertainties are not quantified. The raw stereo exposure (51.10 h) is reduced to 32.92 h after cuts for 'bad atmospheric conditions, such as highly variable night sky background (NSB), clouds, auroras, and technical issues,' but no thresholds or failure rates are given, and no systematic terms are propagated into the spectral-index and amplitude errors. Since the quoted statistical error on alpha is 0.26 and the SSC parameters are fit to data points whose systematic errors (energy scale, NSB, selection) are not included, the absence of a systematic treatment is a substantive gap. At minimum, the paper should state the dominant systematics and an estimated scale.

minor comments (7)

[Section 2] Units typo: the average flux is written as '[8.01 +/- 2.54] x 10^-14 (Tev^-1 cm^-2 s^-1)'; since this is an integral flux above 1 TeV, the units should be cm^-2 s^-1, or the expression should be differential with an explicit energy.
[Table 1 and Section 2] The unit 'Tev' should be 'TeV' in Table 1 and in the sentence defining the average flux F.
[Section 3] The sentence 'a chi^2 fit is then performed by the Python package gammapy' should specify which data points are included in the chi^2 (SST-1M plus archival, or all wavelengths?) and what the resulting chi^2/dof is; without this, the quality of the SSC fit cannot be assessed.
[Section 2] The sentence 'The forward folding method is used to remove the experimental systematics' is imprecise; forward folding folds the model through the instrument response to compare with counts, rather than removing systematics. Please rephrase.
[Footnote 2] The definition of 'flare' (peak flux more than three times the standard deviation of the average flux in a band) is stated without a reference; consider citing a standard criterion or clarifying that it is an ad hoc choice.
[Abstract and Section 1] The abstract says the telescopes operate in the 1-300 TeV energy range, while Section 1 says 3-300 TeV; these should be unified.
[Figure 4 caption] The caption says 'observed (blue) and intrinsic (green)' but does not explain whether the data points are flux points, the model curves, or the uncertainty bands; please define explicitly what is plotted in each color.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found: the detection, spectrum, and SSC fit are independent measurements and model fits, not outputs smuggled back into inputs.

full rationale

The paper's central results are the stereo detection of Mrk 421 (10.95 sigma, 178 excess counts), a forward-folded power-law spectral fit, and a chi-square SSC model fit. The detection significance and excess are derived from ring-background count statistics, not from any model that presupposes the source flux. The spectral parameters in Table 1 are obtained by maximizing the agreement between experimental data and Monte-Carlo expectations, i.e., a standard forward-folding fit, so the quoted index and amplitude are outputs of the data, not inputs. The SSC parameters in Table 2 are likewise fitted with agnpy and gammapy against the combined SST-1M and archival Abdo et al. (2011) data; they are not advertised as predictions and no quantity that is later 'predicted' was used to set the fit. The self-citations (sst1mpipe code, prior SST-1M instrument papers, and an ATel) are implementation and instrument references; none is used as a load-bearing uniqueness theorem or to forbid alternative models. The labeling of the observed and intrinsic spectra and the undocumented EBL treatment for the SST-1M points are potential correctness/documentation concerns, but they do not constitute a circular derivation: the quoted values are still fit outputs, not identical to inputs by construction. No step reduces to its own input, so the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 8 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities. The free parameters are the spectral and SSC model parameters fitted to data. The axioms are standard techniques and modeling choices, plus the unstated assumption of a single emission state across epochs.

free parameters (8)

Power law spectral index = 3.24 +/- 0.26
Free parameter in the PL fit to the intrinsic spectrum (Table 1).
Power law normalization = [1.06 +/- 0.12] x 10^-12 TeV^-1 cm^-2 s^-1
Free parameter in the PL fit (Table 1).
Doppler factor = 24.29 +/- 0.01
Fitted in the SSC model (Table 2).
Magnetic field = 24.58 +/- 1.01 mG
Fitted in the SSC model (Table 2).
Spectral index before break = 2.11 +/- 0.01
Fitted in the SSC model (Table 2).
Spectral index after break = 3.38 +/- 0.10
Fitted in the SSC model (Table 2).
Energy break = 59.08 +/- 0.51 GeV
Fitted in the SSC model (Table 2).
Maximum electron energy = 557.47 +/- 0.58 GeV
Fitted in the SSC model (Table 2).

assumptions (6)

domain assumption The atmospheric Cherenkov technique and the Monte Carlo simulations used to train the Random Forests accurately model the detector response.
The analysis pipeline relies on MC simulations; no independent calibration is shown in this paper.
domain assumption The background is accurately estimated by the ring background method with a 0.7 degree ring.
Used to compute significance and spectrum; if background is misestimated, the results change.
domain assumption The source emission is well described by a single-zone synchrotron self-Compton model with a broken power-law electron distribution.
This is the model chosen in Section 3 for the SED fit.
domain assumption The EBL absorption correction from Franceschini and Rodighiero (2017) is correct.
Used to compute the intrinsic spectrum and to correct the archival TeV data.
domain assumption The non-simultaneous data from 2009 and 2024 can be combined to represent a single emission state of Mrk 421.
Required for the joint SED fit; not justified in the paper.
domain assumption The variability time scale of 1 day used to derive the emission radius is valid.
No variability time scale measurement is presented in this paper.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of SST-1M Observations of Markarian 421." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/BDEGQURI

@misc{pith2026250718445,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: SST-1M Observations of Markarian 421},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/BDEGQURI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.18445}
}

read the original abstract

Markarian 421 (Mrk 421) is the closest and one of the brightest high-frequency peaked blazars, located at a redshift of z = 0.031. It is a strong source of gamma rays, and its broadband emission has been extensively studied over the years through multi-wavelength observations from various telescopes. Mrk 421 has been a target of observational campaigns conducted by the SST-1M telescopes - two single-mirror small-size Cherenkov telescopes at Ondrejov Observatory, Prague, Czech Republic. These telescopes operate in mono and stereoscopic modes, utilizing the Imaging Atmospheric Cherenkov Technique (IACT) to detect Very High Energy (VHE) gamma rays in the 1-300 TeV energy range. We present recent SST-1M observations, data analysis, and the results of preliminary physical modeling of Mrk 421's emission mechanisms.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.18445 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** LEFT: SST-1M telescope 1 in Ondrejov Observatory near Prague. RIGHT: An aerial view of the Ondřejov site shows the two SST-1Ms located 155.2 m apart (C. Alispach et al., 2025). SST-1M is a single-mirror small-size Cherenkov telescope as shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Significance (LEFT) and excess (MIDDLE) maps of Mrk 421 in stereo mode. RIGHT: 1D distribution of significance in stereo mode. Best fit parameters Power law index Amplitude (Tev−1 cm−2 s −1 ) Reference Energy (TeV) Intrinsic Spectrum 3.24 ± 0.26 [1.06 ± 0.12] × 10−12 3.00 ± 0.00 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Light Curve of Mrk 421 in stereo mode for the year 2024 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (2 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Energy spectrum of Mrk 421 in stereo mode, showing both observed (blue) and intrinsic (green) spectra fitted with a PL model. 3. Data Modeling Previous studies [e.g. 5] show a good fit for the low and high-energy components, but a poor fit for the high-energy tail, usu…

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: LEFT: SED of Mrk 421 with best fit SSC model using agnpy package. RIGHT: zoomed figure showing SST-1M data points on the SED. electrons with a minimum energy of 500𝑚𝑒𝑐 2 . The data consists of observed data from SST-1M combined with the time-averaged SED of Mrk 421 fro…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

12 extracted references · 10 canonical work pages

[2]

Observation of the Crab Nebula with the Single-Mirror Small-Size Telescope stereoscopic system at low altitude

C. Alispach, A. Araudo, M. Balbo, V. Beshley, J. Blažek, J. Borkowski et al.,Observationof thecrab nebula with thesingle-mirror small-sizetelescopestereoscopicsystematlow altitude,2506.01733

work page Pith review arXiv
[1]

The SST-1M imaging atmospheric Cherenkov telescope for gamma-ray astrophysics

C. Alispach, A. Araudo, M. Balbo, V. Beshley, A. Biland, J. Blažek et al., The SST-1M imaging atmospheric Cherenkov telescope for gamma-ray astrophysics,JCAP 2025(2025) 047 [2409.11310]

work page Pith review arXiv 2025
[3]

Serrano et al.,The White Rabbit Project, inICALEPCS,Kobe,Japan, 12th International Conference on Accelerator and Large Experimental Physics Control Systems, 2009

J. Serrano et al.,The White Rabbit Project, inICALEPCS,Kobe,Japan, 12th International Conference on Accelerator and Large Experimental Physics Control Systems, 2009

work page 2009
[4]

Jurysek et al.,Sst-1m-collaboration/sst1mpipe: v0.7.3, Feb., 2025

J. Jurysek et al.,Sst-1m-collaboration/sst1mpipe: v0.7.3, Feb., 2025. 10.5281/zenodo.14808846. 7 SST-1M Observations of Markarian 421S. R. Muthyala

work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.14808846 2025
[5]

Long-term spectra of the blazars Mrk 421 and Mrk 501 at TeV energies seen by HAWC

A. Albert, R. Alfaro, C. Alvarez, J.R. Angeles Camacho, J.C. Arteaga-Velázquez, K.P. Arunbabu et al., Long-term Spectra of the Blazars Mrk 421 and Mrk 501 at TeV Energies Seen by HAWC, AstrophyicalJournal929(2022) 125 [2106.03946]

work page Pith review arXiv 2022
[6]

Punch, C.W

M. Punch, C.W. Akerlof, M.F. Cawley, M. Chantell, D.J. Fegan, S. Fennell et al., Detection of TeV photons from the active galaxy Markarian 421,Nature358(1992) 477

work page 1992
[7]

Fomin, A.A

V.P. Fomin, A.A. Stepanian, R.C. Lamb, D.A. Lewis, M. Punch and T.C. Weekes, New methods of atmospheric Cherenkov imaging for gamma-ray astronomy. I. The false source method, Astroparticle Physics2(1994) 137

work page 1994
[8]

Donath et al.,gammapy/gammapy:v.0.19, Nov., 2021

A. Donath et al.,gammapy/gammapy:v.0.19, Nov., 2021. 10.5281/zenodo.5721467

work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.5721467 2021

Show all 12 references

[9]

Tavernier and SST-1M Consortium, Detection of enhanced very-high-energy gamma-ray emission from Markarian 421,The Astronomer’sTelegram16533(2024) 1

T. Tavernier and SST-1M Consortium, Detection of enhanced very-high-energy gamma-ray emission from Markarian 421,The Astronomer’sTelegram16533(2024) 1

2024
[10]

Nigro, J

C. Nigro, J. Sitarek, P. Gliwny, D. Sanchez, A. Tramacere and M. Craig, agnpy: An open-source python package modelling the radiative processes of jetted active galactic nuclei, AstronomyandAstropysics660(2022) A18 [2112.14573]

2022 arXiv
[11]

A.A. Abdo, M. Ackermann, M. Ajello, L. Baldini, J. Ballet, G. Barbiellini et al.,Fermilarge area telescopeobservationsof markarian 421: The missingpiece ofitsspectral energy distribution, The AstrophysicalJournal736(2011) 131

2011
[12]

Franceschini and G

A. Franceschini and G. Rodighiero, The extragalactic background light revisited and the cosmic photon-photon opacity, AstronomyandAstropysics603(2017) A34 [1705.10256]. 8 SST-1M Observations of Markarian 421S. R. Muthyala Full Authors List: SST-1M Collaboration C. Alispach1, A...

2017 arXiv

Pith tools

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

[1] [2]

Observation of the Crab Nebula with the Single-Mirror Small-Size Telescope stereoscopic system at low altitude

C. Alispach, A. Araudo, M. Balbo, V. Beshley, J. Blažek, J. Borkowski et al.,Observationof thecrab nebula with thesingle-mirror small-sizetelescopestereoscopicsystematlow altitude,2506.01733

work page Pith review arXiv

[2] [1]

The SST-1M imaging atmospheric Cherenkov telescope for gamma-ray astrophysics

C. Alispach, A. Araudo, M. Balbo, V. Beshley, A. Biland, J. Blažek et al., The SST-1M imaging atmospheric Cherenkov telescope for gamma-ray astrophysics,JCAP 2025(2025) 047 [2409.11310]

work page Pith review arXiv 2025

[3] [3]

Serrano et al.,The White Rabbit Project, inICALEPCS,Kobe,Japan, 12th International Conference on Accelerator and Large Experimental Physics Control Systems, 2009

J. Serrano et al.,The White Rabbit Project, inICALEPCS,Kobe,Japan, 12th International Conference on Accelerator and Large Experimental Physics Control Systems, 2009

work page 2009

[4] [4]

Jurysek et al.,Sst-1m-collaboration/sst1mpipe: v0.7.3, Feb., 2025

J. Jurysek et al.,Sst-1m-collaboration/sst1mpipe: v0.7.3, Feb., 2025. 10.5281/zenodo.14808846. 7 SST-1M Observations of Markarian 421S. R. Muthyala

work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.14808846 2025

[5] [5]

Long-term spectra of the blazars Mrk 421 and Mrk 501 at TeV energies seen by HAWC

A. Albert, R. Alfaro, C. Alvarez, J.R. Angeles Camacho, J.C. Arteaga-Velázquez, K.P. Arunbabu et al., Long-term Spectra of the Blazars Mrk 421 and Mrk 501 at TeV Energies Seen by HAWC, AstrophyicalJournal929(2022) 125 [2106.03946]

work page Pith review arXiv 2022

[6] [6]

Punch, C.W

M. Punch, C.W. Akerlof, M.F. Cawley, M. Chantell, D.J. Fegan, S. Fennell et al., Detection of TeV photons from the active galaxy Markarian 421,Nature358(1992) 477

work page 1992

[7] [7]

Fomin, A.A

V.P. Fomin, A.A. Stepanian, R.C. Lamb, D.A. Lewis, M. Punch and T.C. Weekes, New methods of atmospheric Cherenkov imaging for gamma-ray astronomy. I. The false source method, Astroparticle Physics2(1994) 137

work page 1994

[8] [8]

Donath et al.,gammapy/gammapy:v.0.19, Nov., 2021

A. Donath et al.,gammapy/gammapy:v.0.19, Nov., 2021. 10.5281/zenodo.5721467

work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.5721467 2021