Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 33 references

PRIMA: PRIMAger, a far-infrared hyperspectral and polarimetric instrument

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read PRIMAger is designed to make the far-infrared sky 10–25 times more sensitive than the prior space camera, combining R≈8 spectroscopy at 24–84 µm with polarimetry at 80–264 µm in one cryogenic instrument.

desk verdict Solid Phase A design study for the PRIMAger FIR imager; sensitivity numbers are model-based and hinge on full-array KID performance, but the paper is honest about it and deserves a serious referee. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.01727 v1 pith:JABC6J2X submitted 2025-09-01 astro-ph.IM astro-ph.GA

Laure Ciesla , Charles Darren Dowell , Marc Sauvage , Denis Burgarella , Jochem Baselmans , Matthieu Béthermin , Jeffrey T. Booth , Charles M. Bradford
show 22 more authors
Florent Canourgues Ivan Charles Anne Costille Thomas Essinger-Hileman Lorenza Ferrari Johan Floriot Marc Foote Jason Glenn Renaud Goullioud Matt Griffin Oliver Krause Willem Jellema Elizabeth Luthman Laurent Martin Margaret Meixner Tony Pamplona Klaus M. Pontoppidan Alexandra Pope Thomas Prouvé Jennifer Rocca Johannes Staguhn Carole Tucker
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.IMastro-ph.GA PACS 95.55.Qf95.55.-n07.57.Kp
keywords far-infraredinstrumentationkineticinductancedetectorshyperspectralimagingpolarimetriclinearvariablefilterscryogenicspacetelescopePRIMAmission
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

This paper establishes the design and predicted performance of PRIMAger, the far-infrared imager on the PRIMA space observatory. PRIMAger pairs two kinetic-inductance-detector focal planes: one that images 24–84 µm with spectral resolution R≈8 using linear variable filters, and one that images 80–264 µm in four broad bands with three linear-polarization orientations per pixel. Every observation is a scan, with a steering mirror and spacecraft motion building maps instead of a staring mode. The headline quantitative claim is that PRIMAger reaches 5σ point-source sensitivities of 1.2–4.6 mJy in a 1 deg², 10-hour map, roughly 10–25 times deeper than the previous far-infrared space camera. This depth would open the far-infrared window to unbiased surveys of distant dusty galaxies, dust polarization, and PAH features.

What carries the argument

The carrying mechanism is the kinetic inductance detector (KID): a superconducting resonator whose resonant frequency shifts with absorbed photon energy. PRIMAger uses two KID variants — lens-antenna-coupled devices for polarimetry and lens-absorber-coupled devices for hyperspectral imaging — read out by frequency-multiplexed microwave tones. The linearly variable filter (LVF) provides the wavelength gradient that turns a two-dimensional array into an R≈8 spectrograph, while three antenna orientations per pixel provide the polarimetric capability.

What would settle it

Measure the noise equivalent power of a flight-representative, full-sized PRIMAger array under the expected 4.5 K telescope background. If the dark NEP exceeds roughly 3×10⁻²⁰ W Hz⁻⁰·⁵ or the 1/f knee rises above 0.1 Hz, the Table 2 point-source sensitivities are not reachable; an end-to-end scan map of a simulated sky with the flight electronics would reveal whether the reconstruction achieves the predicted depths.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

PRIMAger demonstrates that a single cryogenic camera can cover the full 24–264 µm far-infrared range with both moderate-resolution spectroscopy and polarimetry, provided the detectors are background-limited kinetic inductance detectors and the focal planes are scanned rather than stared. The hyperspectral imager uses an array whose passband central wavelength varies along one axis, so short scans build low-resolution spectra of every source; the polarimetric imager obtains the Stokes I, Q, and U parameters by combining pixels with three antenna orientations. The sensitivity model, anchored on measured prototype detectors, predicts background-limited performance at every band, with 1/f noise

Load-bearing premise

All sensitivity predictions rest on the assumption that prototype kinetic-inductance detectors keep their measured dark noise (about 3×10⁻²⁰ W Hz⁻⁰·⁵) and white-noise spectrum with a 0.1 Hz 1/f knee when built into full flight arrays, operated in space, and subjected to real optical loading.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • PRIMAger can generate large, unbiased far-infrared-selected galaxy samples over degree-scale fields, directly probing the dust-obscured phases of star formation and black-hole growth at cosmic noon.
  • Its R≈8 spectra over 24–84 µm will detect polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon features at redshifts where they have been inaccessible, tracing how small dust grains evolve with cosmic time.
  • Four-band polarimetry of 80–264 µm dust emission will map magnetic field structure in molecular clouds and nearby galaxies, testing models of grain alignment and magnetized star formation.
  • With 10–25 times better depth per unit time than the prior far-infrared camera, PRIMAger makes degree-scale surveys practical that would have required hundreds of hours on earlier missions.
  • The scanned, no-staring operating mode, combining a beam steering mirror with spacecraft motion, generalizes Herschel-style map-making to instruments whose instantaneous focal planes are not Nyquist sampled.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same dual-focal-plane architecture — hyperspectral LVF plus three-angle polarimetric pixels — could be reused by future far-infrared missions, since the KID and LVF technologies are not specific to this platform.
  • Because the stated sensitivities are instrumental, not confusion-limited, the practical depth of wide surveys will be set by confusion, which the paper delegates to companion studies; the realized galaxy-sample depths may differ from Table 2.
  • An end-to-end demonstration with flight-representative arrays and the actual readout electronics, mapping a realistic simulated sky, would sharpen the predicted polarized and total-intensity depths before launch.
  • The design assumes that the 125 mK and 1 K cooling stages deliver their modeled power and stability; performance of the adiabatic demagnetization refrigerator in continuous operation is a load-bearing external element the instrument team does not itself build.
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. This paper describes the design and expected performance of PRIMAger, the far-infrared imager proposed for the NASA PRIMA probe mission. PRIMAger consists of two KID-based focal planes: PHI, a hyperspectral imager covering 24–84 µm with R≈8 via linear variable filters, and PPI, a polarimetric imager covering 80–264 µm in four bands (R≈4) with three polarization orientations per pixel. The paper presents the opto-mechanical, thermal, optical, detector, and readout designs, as well as the observing modes using spacecraft and beam-steering-mirror scanning. It reports 5σ point-source flux-density limits and surface-brightness limits in Table 2, and claims that these correspond to a 10–25× sensitivity improvement over Herschel/PACS for fixed integration time.

Significance. If realized, PRIMAger would provide a unique combination of FIR hyperspectral imaging and polarimetric mapping capability, with a large mapping-speed advantage over previous FIR missions. The design leverages substantial heritage: the PACS-derived beam steering mirror, Cardiff metal-mesh filters, NASA/GSFC SpaceCube readout, and prototype KID arrays demonstrated at 1.5 THz and 12 THz. The paper explicitly identifies the current TRL and the remaining development steps, which is appropriate for a Phase A instrument paper. However, the central quantitative claims in Table 2 and the comparison to Herschel/PACS are based on an instrument model whose equations and input parameters are not provided, and the table entries are labeled as science requirements rather than current best estimates. This makes the headline performance claims difficult to verify and should be corrected before publication.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4 and Table 2] Table 2 is titled 'Baseline Survey Sensitivity Requirements', and §4 states that these are science requirements derived from the instrument model, with the expected performance 'significantly better' than these requirements. Yet the abstract, summary, and reader-facing statements treat the Table 2 values as achieved sensitivities. No CBE values, model equations, input parameters, margin allocations, or reference to a public model description are provided. Since the 10–25× improvement over Herschel/PACS is drawn directly from Table 2, the paper should include an appendix (or a public model citation) with the sensitivity calculation: NEP vs background loading, filter transmission and bandpass shapes, scan efficiency, integration time per sky pixel, detector yield, and the polarimetric factor sqrt(2.6). A table separating requirements, current best estimate, and margin should be added.
  2. [§5.1] The detector sensitivity inputs are a dark NEP ≈ 3×10^-20 W/Hz^0.5, a 1/f knee at 0.1 Hz, and background-limited operation across 24–264 µm. These values come from small prototype devices (Refs. 17, 18), with no full PHI array demonstrated, no yield statistics, no cosmic-ray or resonator-collision measurements for large arrays, and no array-level readout noise analysis. A factor-of-few degradation in NEP, a higher 1/f knee, or a yield well below 100% would directly increase the integration times required to reach the Table 2 depths and shrink the claimed Herschel advantage. Please quantify these risks with array-level projections, or state explicitly that Table 2 is a requirements set rather than a flight-array prediction.
  3. [Table 2 note and §2.1] There is an internal inconsistency in the spectral resolution used for PHI. Section 2.1 and Table 1 specify R≈8, but the Table 2 note says the sensitivity is 'estimated for each of 6×2 sub-bands ... under the assumption of R = 10.' This must be reconciled: either the sensitivity numbers are for a narrower bandwidth than the design, or the design specification should be updated. The table caption also calls the entries '5σ background-subtracted flux density limit' while §4 calls them 'baseline survey requirements'; these are different statements and the labeling should be consistent throughout.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§4] The notation '5νσ(Fν)' is not defined. Since it is used to derive the Table 2 entries, a brief definition would improve clarity.
  2. [§4] The factor sqrt(2.6) for polarized flux density is asserted without derivation or reference. A one-sentence explanation or a citation to the PPI simulation paper (Ref. 6) would make this reproducible.
  3. [§7] The summary says PRIMAger's performance 'eclipses that of previous FIR missions like Herschel/SPIRE', but the quantitative comparison in §4 is to Herschel/PACS at 100 µm. The instrument should be named correctly.
  4. [Code and data] The statement 'This paper does not rest on code or data that would be appropriate to share' is in tension with §4, which relies on an instrument model. Either describe the model sufficiently or cite a public model description.
  5. [§3.2 and affiliations] Typos: 'lacks symetry' should be 'lacks symmetry'; 'Reseach' should be 'Research' in the Netherlands institute affiliation; Fig. 1 caption has 'PP1' instead of 'PPI1'.
  6. [§6.2.2] The text says the flight prototype covers 25–45 µm, while the design band is 24–45 µm. Please clarify whether the prototype was intentionally sized with a margin or if this is a typo.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No material circularity: Table 2 is explicitly a set of survey requirements derived from science goals and a documented instrument model, not a fitted result or a self-justifying prediction.

full rationale

The paper's central quantitative claims are not circular. Section 4 derives Table 2 from a stated science requirement: 'the science-required point-source statistical uncertainty 5νσ(Fν) has been set at 1.2 × 10−17 W/m2 ... to be accomplished in 1500 hours' and then divides by band center frequency and scales by 1/√time. This is arithmetic, not fitting. The instrument-model inputs (dark NEP ≈ 3×10−20 W/Hz^0.5, 1/f knee at 0.1 Hz, background-limited operation) are attributed to prototype measurements cited as Refs. 17 and 18; although those references include co-authors, they report measured device performance and are externally checkable, so the dependence is evidence, not circularity. The √2.6 factor for polarized flux is an explicitly stated design-efficiency multiplier rather than a fitted parameter. The comparison with Herschel/PACS uses a published PACS sensitivity (Ref. 15) and straightforward scaling. The paper also openly flags the main vulnerability: 'The detector system is currently at TRL5' and future environmental testing is needed, which is an engineering risk about extrapolation from prototypes, not a logical circularity. The only mild concern is that the instrument model 'has influenced the scope of the PRIMA PI science objectives' (Sec. 4), but this is a normal design feedback loop, and the sensitivity requirements are not chosen to match a predetermined sensitivity output. Overall, the derivation chain is self-contained in the sense that each number's provenance is stated; no prediction reduces to its own input by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The instrument design rests on assumptions about the space environment, detector performance, and optics. These are domain assumptions rather than fitted parameters. The sensitivity numbers are model outputs, not measured values, and the model itself is not fully specified.

free parameters (2)
  • Filter chain total transmission = 45%
    Assumed throughput of the filter stack (excluding LVF) used in the sensitivity model to convert astrophysical background to detector loading and to scale signal levels.
  • Polarization efficiency factor = sqrt(2.6)
    Multiplier applied to total-flux sensitivity to derive polarized-flux sensitivity (Section 4). It encodes the polarimeter efficiency and is a design-level estimate, not an empirical measurement.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The 1.8 m telescope at 4.5 K delivers a 37'x27' field of view to PRIMAger with the assumed optical quality.
    Invoked in Section 2 as the telescope field available to the instrument; the design does not verify the telescope interface.
  • domain assumption The PACS-heritage beam steering mirror will meet the required positional accuracy (0.33" RMS), speed (30'/s), and cryogenic dissipation (<3 mW) in the PRIMA environment.
    Section 3.1 extends Herschel PACS heritage; no end-to-end test on this exact mechanism is presented.
  • domain assumption Prototype KID detector performance (dark NEP ≈ 3×10^-20 W/Hz^0.5, white noise, background-limited operation, 1/f knee at 0.1 Hz) will hold for full flight arrays after environmental qualification.
    Section 5.1 reports prototype tests; the central sensitivity predictions in Table 2 scale directly from these values.
  • domain assumption The thermal architecture can maintain the 125 mK detector stage with 2.2 µW of cooling power from the ADR, and the 1 K stage with 114 µW.
    Section 6.3 presents thermal modeling but no measured end-to-end cryogenic demonstration for this instrument.
  • domain assumption The linear variable filter spectral response and transmission meet the R≈8 specification, as demonstrated only on small prototypes and scale models.
    Section 6.2.2 describes prototype LVFs; the flight-configuration filters are not yet manufactured.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of PRIMA: PRIMAger, a far-infrared hyperspectral and polarimetric instrument." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JABC6J2X

@misc{pith2026250901727,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: PRIMA: PRIMAger, a far-infrared hyperspectral and polarimetric instrument},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JABC6J2X}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.01727}
}
read the original abstract

The PRobe far-Infrared Mission for Astrophysics (PRIMA) is an infrared observatory for the next decade, currently in Phase A, with a 1.8m telescope actively cooled to 4.5K. On board, an infrared camera, PRIMAger, equipped with ultra-sensitive kinetic inductance detector (KID) arrays, will provide observers with coverage of mid-infrared to far-infrared wavelengths from 24 to 264 microns. PRIMAger will offer two imaging modes: the Hyperspectral mode will cover the 24-84 microns wavelength range with a spectral resolution R=8, while the Polarimetric mode will provide polarimetric imaging in 4 broad bands, from 80 to 264 microns. These observational capabilities have been tailored to answer fundamental astrophysical questions such as black hole and star-formation co-evolution in galaxies, the evolution of small dust grains over a wide range of redshifts, and the effects of interstellar magnetic fields in various environments, as well as to open a vast discovery space with versatile photometric and polarimetric capabilities. PRIMAger is being developed by an international collaboration bringing together French institutes (Laboratoire d'Astrophysique de Marseille and CEA) through the center National d'Etudes Spatiales (CNES, France), the Netherlands Institute for Space Research (SRON, Netherlands), and the Cardiff University (UK) in Europe, as well as the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) and Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) in the USA.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

33 extracted references · 30 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine , Pathways to Discovery in Astronomy and Astrophysics for the 2020s , The National Academies Press, Washington, DC (2023)

    work page 2023

  2. [2]

    NASA , ``Apex call.'' https://explorers.larc.nasa.gov/2023APPROBE/pdf_files/NNH23ZDA021OSummary.pdf

    work page

  3. [3]

    Glenn , M

    J. Glenn , M. Meixner , C. M. Bradford , et al. , `` The PRIMA mission concept ,'' Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems 11 , 031628 (2025)

    work page 2025

  4. [4]

    C. M. Bradford , A. J. Kogut , D. Fixsen , et al. , `` The Far-Infrared Enhanced Survey Spectrometer (FIRESS) for PRIMA: Approach and Estimated Performance ,'' Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems 11 , 031627 (2025)

    work page 2025

  5. [5]

    Moullet , T

    A. Moullet , T. Kataria , D. Lis , et al. , `` PRIMA General Observer Science Book ,'' arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2310.20572 (2023)

    arXiv 2023

  6. [6]

    C. D. Dowell , B. S. Hensley , and M. Sauvage , `` Simulation of the Far-Infrared Polarimetry Approach Envisioned for the PRIMA Mission ,'' arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2404.17050 (2024)

    arXiv 2024

  7. [7]

    T. J. Waskett , B. Sibthorpe , M. J. Griffin , et al. , `` Determining the optimum scan map strategy for Herschel-SPIRE using the SPIRE photometer simulator ,'' 381 , 1583--1590 (2007)

    work page 2007

  8. [8]

    C. D. Dowell , M. Pohlen , C. Pearson , et al. , `` Status of the SPIRE photometer data processing pipelines during the early phases of the Herschel Mission ,'' in Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2010: Optical, Infrared, and Millimeter Wave , J. M. Oschmann , Jr., M. C. Clampin , and H. A. MacEwen , Eds., Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engi...

    work page 2010

Show all 33 references
  1. [9]

    Roussel , `` Scanamorphos: A Map-making Software for Herschel and Similar Scanning Bolometer Arrays ,'' 125 , 1126 (2013)

    H. Roussel , `` Scanamorphos: A Map-making Software for Herschel and Similar Scanning Bolometer Arrays ,'' 125 , 1126 (2013)

    2013

  2. [10]

    Krause , D

    O. Krause , D. Lemke , R. Hofferbert , et al. , `` The cold focal plane chopper of HERSCHEL's PACS instrument ,'' in Optomechanical Technologies for Astronomy , E. Atad-Ettedgui , J. Antebi , and D. Lemke , Eds., Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Confer...

    2006

  3. [11]

    M. J. Griffin , A. Abergel , A. Abreu , et al. , `` The Herschel-SPIRE instrument and its in-flight performance ,'' 518 , L3 (2010)

    2010

  4. [12]

    Burgarella , M

    D. Burgarella , M. B\'ethermin , A. Boselli , et al. , `` PRIMAger General Observer programs: a pi-sr Infrared Survey and other wide-field programs ,'' Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems 11 , 031639 (2025)

    2025

  5. [13]

    B\'ethermin , A

    M. B\'ethermin , A. D. Bolatto , F. Boulanger , et al. , `` Confusion of extragalactic sources in the far infrared: a baseline assessment of the performance of PRIMAger in intensity and polarization ,'' (2024)

    2024

  6. [14]

    J. M. S. Donnellan , S. J. Oliver , M. B \'e thermin , et al. , `` Overcoming confusion noise with hyperspectral imaging from PRIMAger ,'' 532 , 1966--1979 (2024)

    1966

  7. [15]

    Poglitsch , C

    A. Poglitsch , C. Waelkens , N. Geis , et al. , `` The Photodetector Array Camera and Spectrometer (PACS) on the Herschel Space Observatory ,'' 518 , L2 (2010)

    2010

  8. [16]

    P. Day, H. LeDuc, B. Mazin, et al. , ``A broadband superconducting detector suitable for use in large arrays,'' Nature 425 , 817--821 (2003)

    2003

  9. [17]

    J. J. A. Baselmans , F. Facchin , A. Pascual Laguna , et al. , `` Ultra-sensitive THz microwave kinetic inductance detectors for future space telescopes ,'' 665 , A17 (2022)

    2022

  10. [18]

    P. K. Day , N. F. Cothard , C. Albert , et al. , `` A 25-micron single photon sensitive kinetic inductance detector ,'' arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2404.10246 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Gordon, B

    S. Gordon, B. Dober, A. Sinclair, et al. , ``An open source, fpga-based lekid readout for blast-tng: Pre-flight results,'' Journal of Astronomical Instrumentation 05 (2016)

    2016

  12. [20]

    A. K. Sinclair, R. C. Stephenson, C. A. Roberson, et al. , `` CCAT-prime: RFSoC based readout for frequency multiplexed kinetic inductance detectors ,'' in Millimeter, Submillimeter, and Far-Infrared Detectors and Instrumentation for Astronomy XI , J. Zmuidzinas and J.-R. Gao,...

    2022

  13. [21]

    Petrick , N

    D. Petrick , N. Gill , M. Hassouneh , et al. , ``Adapting the SpaceCube v2.0 data processing system for mission-unique application requirements,'' in IEEE Aerospace Conference , (2015)

    2015

  14. [22]

    Wilson , J

    C. Wilson , J. Stewart , P. Gauvin , et al. , `` CSP hybrid space computing for STP-H5/ISEM on ISS ,'' in 19th Annu. AIAA/USU Conf. on Small Satellites , SSC15-III-10 (2015)

    2015

  15. [23]

    Brewer , N

    C. Brewer , N. Franconi , R. Ripley , et al. , `` NASA SpaceCube intelligent multi-purpose system for enabling remote sensing, communication, and navigation in mission architectures,'' in 34th Annu. AIAA/USU Conf. on Small Satellites , SSC20-VI-07 (2020)

    2020

  16. [24]

    Sabogal , P

    S. Sabogal , P. Gauvin , B. Shea , et al. , ``Spacecraft supercomputing experiment for STP-H6 ,'' in 31st Annu. AIAA/USU Conf. on Small Satellites , SSC17-XIII-02 (2017)

    2017

  17. [25]

    Perryman , T

    N. Perryman , T. Schwarz , T. Cooke , et al. , `` STP-H7-CASPR : A transition from mission concept to launch,'' in 35th Annu. AIAA/USU Conf. on Small Satellites , SSC21-WKII-08 (2021)

    2021

  18. [26]

    S. G. Kanekal, L. Blum, E. R. Christian, et al. , ``The merit onboard the ceres: A novel instrument to study energetic particles in the earth's radiation belts,'' Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics 124 (7), 5734--5760 (2019)

    2019

  19. [27]

    Geist , G

    A. Geist , G. Crum , C. Brewer , et al. , `` NASA SpaceCube next-generation artificial-intelligence computing for STP-H9-SCENIC on ISS ,'' in 37th Annu. AIAA/USU Conf. on Small Satellites , SSC23-P1-32 (2023)

    2023

  20. [28]

    Dubayah, J

    R. Dubayah, J. B. Blair, S. Goetz, et al. , ``The global ecosystem dynamics investigation: High-resolution laser ranging of the earth’s forests and topography,'' Science of Remote Sensing 1 , 100002 (2020)

    2020

  21. [29]

    X. Sun, J. B. Blair, J. L. Bufton, et al. , `` Advanced silicon avalanche photodiodes on NASA's Global Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation (GEDI) mission ,'' in Photonic Instrumentation Engineering VII , Y. Soskind and L. E. Busse, Eds., 11287 , 1128713, International Society for...

    2020

  22. [30]

    P. A. R. Ade , G. Pisano , C. Tucker , et al. , `` A review of metal mesh filters ,'' in Millimeter and Submillimeter Detectors and Instrumentation for Astronomy III , J. Zmuidzinas , W. S. Holland , S. Withington , et al. , Eds., Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engin...

    2006

  23. [31]

    D. A. Paige , M. C. Foote , B. T. Greenhagen , et al. , `` The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Diviner Lunar Radiometer Experiment ,'' 150 , 125--160 (2010)

    2010

  24. [32]

    DiPirro , P

    M. DiPirro , P. Shirron , A. Jahromi , et al. , `` The continuous adiabatic demagnetization refrigerator for the probe far-infrared mission for astrophyiscs (PRIMA) ,'' in Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2024: Optical, Infrared, and Millimeter Wave , L. E. Coyle , S. Mats...

    2024

  25. [33]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION blank.sep after.quote 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry output.state after.quoted.block = 'skip 'add.period if write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip output.state after.quote = after.quoted.blo...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.