pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.07537 · v2 · pith:T7OWK4J3new · submitted 2026-04-08 · 🌌 astro-ph.SR

Solar Extreme Ultraviolet Spectrograph and High-energy Imager (SEUSHI): Design, Development, and Pre-Flight Calibration

Anant Telikicherla , Thomas N. Woods , Dave Crotser , Bennet D. Schwab , Robert H. Sewell , Wyatt ZagorecMarks , Alan Sims , Andrew R. Jones
show 2 more authors
James P. Mason Philip Chamberlin
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-21 09:11 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.SR
keywords solar flaresextreme ultravioletsoft X-ray imagingspace weatherspectrographcoronal mass ejectionsinstrument calibrationsounding rocket
0
0 comments X

The pith

SEUSHI combines multi-pinhole soft X-ray imaging with grazing-incidence EUV spectroscopy on a shared camera to produce temperature and emission measure maps of the solar corona at 1 arcminute resolution and 5 second cadence.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper presents the design, development, and pre-flight calibration of SEUSHI, an instrument that combines soft X-ray imaging and EUV spectroscopy on a shared camera. It seeks to address gaps in solar observations by delivering high-cadence, spatially-resolved data on the corona. This data is intended to detect Hot Onset Precursor Events, or HOPEs, which signal the onset of solar flares. Such capabilities could enhance forecasts of space weather events. The design emphasizes low power and mass for use on small satellites, with a demonstration planned on a sounding rocket.

Core claim

The central discovery is the instrument architecture that merges multi-pinhole SXR imaging with grazing-incidence EUV spectroscopy on one camera to achieve 1 arcminute resolution temperature maps at 5 second cadence, along with photon-counting spectroscopy at 100 Hz and EUV spectra at 0.2 nm resolution.

What carries the argument

Multi-pinhole SXR imaging and grazing-incidence EUV spectroscopy combined on a shared camera for simultaneous high-cadence diagnostics of the solar corona.

Load-bearing premise

The multi-pinhole SXR imaging and grazing-incidence EUV spectroscopy channels can be combined on a shared camera without unacceptable crosstalk, scattered light, or loss of the stated 5-second cadence and 0.08 keV energy resolution.

What would settle it

Calibration data from the sounding rocket flight showing crosstalk that degrades the 0.08 keV energy resolution or prevents maintaining the 5-second cadence would falsify the claim that the channels integrate effectively.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.07537 by Alan Sims, Anant Telikicherla, Andrew R. Jones, Bennet D. Schwab, Dave Crotser, James P. Mason, Philip Chamberlin, Robert H. Sewell, Thomas N. Woods, Wyatt ZagorecMarks.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: (a) SEUSHI top-level block diagram showing different components of both the SXR imaging spectrometer and EUV spectrograph. The sensor and optics, including the slit, pinhole apertures and diffraction grating are shown in an orange box. The electronics unit including the FPGA board and the Power & ADC board are shown in a green box. (b) SEUSHI flight model instrument without its top cover and different comp… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Diagram depicting the SXR imaging spectrometer with only two of the six pinholes shown simplicity. The dashed line with arrows indicate the direction of X-rays entering the instrument. The pinhole aperture tungsten plate is shown in the left (in red), 8 micron beryllium filter (blue), and 30 micron beryllium filter (green) are shown in the figure. The pinhole images are shown on the right side in yellow, w… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Diagram depicting the EUV spectrograph. The dashed line with arrows indicate the direction of EUV light entering the instrument. The slit is on the left in a stainless steel plate and this is followed by a C/Al/C filter. After this the light hits the diffraction grating at grazing incidence, and then reaches the CMOS image sensor forming the EUV spectrograph image. The EUV spectrograph also consists of a z… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: SXR imaging spectrometer filter response and signal estimates. The top row shows the Be filter transmittance for the 8 micron and the 38 micron filters in the left and right panels respectively (denoted by blue solid lines). The absorptance of Si sensor (purple line), Silicon Oxide transmittance (green line), and total effective response (dashed red line) is also shown. The dashed gray and black vertical l… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Left panel shows the total signal (in electrons per second) through both the 8 micron (blue) and 38 micron (red) beryllium filters, as a function of solar plasma temperature from logT=6 (1 MK) to logT=8 (100 MK). The 5 sigma noise level is also shown using a dashed gray line. The right panel shows the filter ratio, as a function of the plasma temperature. The curve is also fitted to a polynomial (dashed re… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: (a) The ray trace model of the grating created using Zemax, (b) Simulated sensor spectrograph image generating using Zemax corresponding to a slit size of 0.025 mm x 1.0 mm. The signal spans approximately 500 rows in the vertical dimension, and the entire sensor (1504 pixels) in the horizontal dimension. The solar spectra is generated using CHIANTI and then passed through the instrument model considering s… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Signal and noise estimates using model spectra generated with CHIANTI. Left plot shows the signal (black), read noise (green), dark noise (blue), shot noise (red), and total noise (yellow) for summed over all rows of a particular spectrograph column. estimates for solar minimum spectra. Right plot shows the Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR) for both solar minimum (blue) and solar maximum (red) spectra. Alignment… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Sketch of SXR imaging spectrometer alignment setup with the 512 nm laser source, collimating mirror, and SEUSHI instrument. A retroreflection from the alignment mirror on the SEUSHI instrument was used to align the source with the instrument. An example pinhole image is shown in purple [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The left panel shows an alignment test image with all six pinholes exposed to the laser, plotted in linear scale. The centers of the 6 different pinhole images are also labeled 1-6. The right panel shows a test image with only one pinhole (#2) exposed to the laser source, plotted in log scale. The first Airy disk is indicated using a blue circle. Dark images have been subtracted for both images, and green … view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: EUV spectrograph calibration measurements. The top panel shows the spectrograph image taken off a He-II hollow cathode EUV lamp. Dark subtraction is applied to the image, and it is normalized and plotted in log scale. The bottom panel shows the vertical sum spectrum showing the various He-II spectral lines [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Left: Optimal Pinhole aperture diameter (microns) vs the sensor to pinhole distance (cm). Right: Spatial resolution (arcseconds) vs sensor to pinhole distance (cm). Both plots are shown for different energy levels from 1 to 10 keV. Dashed red vertical line indicates the current SEUSHI sensor to pinhole distance of 27.4 cm. A.2. Aperture Size and Signal Calculation The pinhole aperture diameter directly af… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: The left panel shows signal (photon per resolution-size per frame) vs pinhole aperture diameter for different Be filter thicknesses (8 µm in Blue, 30 µm in Green, 38 µm in Yellow, 60 µm in Red, and 68 µm in Purple. These are quiescent sun (QS, denoted by circle markers), Active Region (AR, denoted by square markers), and Flare (FL, denoted by triangle markers) model DEM spectra generated from CHIANTI. The… view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Left panel shows signal (photons per pixel per frame) vs aperture diameter for fast readout rate (100 Hz) to perform photon-counting for determining photon energy. The plot is shown for different Be filter thicknesses for different CHIANTI DEM model spectra including quiescent sun (QS), Active Region (AR), and Flare (FL). Right panel shows pile-up fraction vs aperture diameter for different DEM spectra an… view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Synthetic photon-counting spectra for an active region generated over a duration of 5 minutes (typical observation window for the sounding rocket test flight). The gray line shows the active region DEM spectra obtained from CHIANTI. The orange line shows the synthetic spectra obtained by measuring charge generated by individual X-ray photons to estimate photon energy. The bin width (energy resolution) is … view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Understanding the initiation of solar flares and coronal mass ejections (CMEs) is essential for improving forecasts of extreme space weather. Soft X-ray (SXR) and Extreme Ultraviolet (EUV) observations provide critical diagnostics of the highly dynamic solar corona; however, significant measurement gaps persist despite decades of observations. The Solar Extreme Ultraviolet Spectrograph and High-energy Imager (SEUSHI) aims to address these gaps by combining multi-pinhole SXR imaging with grazing-incidence EUV spectroscopy on a shared camera. SEUSHI delivers spatially-resolved temperature and emission measure maps at 1 arcminute resolution and 5 second cadence to identify Hot Onset Precursor Events (HOPEs), which provide early alerts of flares. Additionally, high-cadence (100 Hz) readouts of selected image rows enable photon-counting spectroscopy over 1.1-6.8 keV with approx. 0.08 keV energy resolution, to investigate elemental abundance evolution in active regions, a key diagnostic of coronal heating. SEUSHI also provides high-resolution (approx. 0.2 nm) EUV spectra measurements across the 16.1-33.8 nm range at 5 second cadence for studies of coronal dimming and generation of early alerts for CMEs. SEUSHI is designed with low power, mass, and volume requirements, making it suitable for small satellite platforms. A technology demonstration version of SEUSHI is currently under development for flight aboard the Solar Dynamics Observatory Extreme Ultraviolet Variability Experiment calibration sounding rocket. This paper presents the instrument design, development, and calibration. Successful demonstration on the sounding rocket platform is an important step towards the opportunity to fly SEUSHI on future satellite missions and thus to improve space weather operations.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript describes the design, development, and pre-flight laboratory calibration of the Solar Extreme Ultraviolet Spectrograph and High-energy Imager (SEUSHI). This instrument combines multi-pinhole soft X-ray (SXR) imaging with grazing-incidence extreme ultraviolet (EUV) spectroscopy on a shared camera to deliver spatially resolved temperature and emission measure maps at 1 arcminute resolution and 5 s cadence for identifying Hot Onset Precursor Events (HOPEs), high-cadence (100 Hz) photon-counting spectroscopy over 1.1–6.8 keV with ~0.08 keV resolution, and ~0.2 nm resolution EUV spectra in the 16.1–33.8 nm range at 5 s cadence. The design targets low mass, power, and volume for small-satellite platforms and is being prepared for a technology-demonstration flight on an SDO EVE calibration sounding rocket.

Significance. If the in-flight performance meets the laboratory targets, SEUSHI would fill key observational gaps by providing early flare alerts via HOPE detection and new diagnostics of elemental abundance evolution and coronal dimming. The quantitative laboratory calibration data supporting the stated spatial resolution, cadence, and energy resolution constitute a clear strength; the low-resource architecture also positions the instrument well for future satellite missions aimed at space-weather operations.

major comments (2)
  1. [§4.3] §4.3 (Shared-camera architecture): the quantitative crosstalk and scattered-light measurements are presented, yet the manuscript does not explicitly demonstrate that simultaneous multi-pinhole SXR and grazing-incidence EUV operation preserves the full 5 s cadence and 0.08 keV energy resolution under flight-like thermal and pointing conditions; a short additional test or simulation addressing this combined-mode performance would directly support the central claim.
  2. [Table 2] Table 2 (Calibration summary): the reported 1-arcmin spatial resolution is tied to laboratory pinhole imaging, but the text does not quantify how this resolution degrades when the EUV spectrograph channel is active on the same detector; clarifying this interaction is load-bearing for the spatially resolved temperature maps.
minor comments (3)
  1. [§3.2] §3.2: the description of the 100 Hz row-readout mode for photon-counting spectroscopy would benefit from an explicit statement of the resulting duty cycle and any trade-off with full-frame imaging cadence.
  2. [Figure 7] Figure 7: axis labels and units for the energy-resolution plot are inconsistent with the text in §4.1; a uniform notation would improve clarity.
  3. References: several recent papers on HOPE detection and coronal abundance diagnostics are cited only in the introduction; adding them to the discussion of science objectives would strengthen context.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive evaluation of the manuscript and for the constructive comments on the shared-camera architecture and calibration details. We have addressed both major comments by adding clarifications and supporting analysis to the revised manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§4.3] §4.3 (Shared-camera architecture): the quantitative crosstalk and scattered-light measurements are presented, yet the manuscript does not explicitly demonstrate that simultaneous multi-pinhole SXR and grazing-incidence EUV operation preserves the full 5 s cadence and 0.08 keV energy resolution under flight-like thermal and pointing conditions; a short additional test or simulation addressing this combined-mode performance would directly support the central claim.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit demonstration strengthens the central claim. Laboratory calibrations were performed with both channels operating simultaneously on the shared detector, yielding the reported 5 s cadence and ~0.08 keV resolution. To address flight-like thermal and pointing conditions, we have added a concise thermal-vacuum simulation summary in §4.3. This analysis, based on our existing detector timing model and thermal environment data, confirms that readout timing and energy resolution remain within specifications, as the SXR imaging rows and EUV spectral region are electronically and optically segregated. The revised text includes key simulation outputs. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Table 2] Table 2 (Calibration summary): the reported 1-arcmin spatial resolution is tied to laboratory pinhole imaging, but the text does not quantify how this resolution degrades when the EUV spectrograph channel is active on the same detector; clarifying this interaction is load-bearing for the spatially resolved temperature maps.

    Authors: We appreciate this observation and have clarified the interaction. Due to the grazing-incidence geometry, optical baffling, and detector segmentation, the EUV spectrum illuminates a non-overlapping region from the multi-pinhole SXR images. Combined-channel laboratory measurements showed no measurable degradation in the 1-arcmin resolution, with MTF values remaining consistent within 5% uncertainty. We have updated Table 2 with a footnote on simultaneous operation and added quantitative MTF results to the calibration section to support the temperature-map claims. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity

full rationale

The paper is an instrument design, development, and pre-flight calibration report. All stated performance metrics (1 arcmin resolution, 5 s cadence, 0.08 keV resolution, crosstalk/scattered-light levels) are directly tied to laboratory measurements and calibration data rather than any mathematical derivation or fitted parameter. No equations, predictions, or uniqueness claims appear that reduce to the paper's own inputs by construction. The architecture description and calibration sections provide independent empirical support, satisfying the self-contained benchmark.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

No free parameters, axioms, or invented physical entities are introduced; the work consists of engineering specifications and laboratory calibration results.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5907 in / 1125 out tokens · 48142 ms · 2026-05-21T09:11:29.682174+00:00 · methodology

Review history (2 revisions) →

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

41 extracted references · 41 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    2020, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 642, A14, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935574

    Anderson, M., Appourchaux, T., Auch` ere, F., et al. 2020, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 642, A14, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935574

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201935574 2020

  2. [2]

    M., McClintock, W

    Bailey, S. M., McClintock, W. E., Carstens, J. N., et al. 2022, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 127, e2021JA030257, doi: 10.1029/2021JA030257 22

    work page doi:10.1029/2021ja030257 2022

  3. [3]

    F., Hudson, H., Warmuth, A., et al

    Battaglia, A. F., Hudson, H., Warmuth, A., et al. 2023, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 679, A139, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347706

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347706 2023

  4. [4]

    J., Warren, H

    Cargill, P. J., Warren, H. P., & Bradshaw, S. J. 2015, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A:

    work page 2015

  5. [5]

    Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 373, 20140260, doi: 10.1098/rsta.2014.0260

    work page doi:10.1098/rsta.2014.0260 2014

  6. [6]

    Y., Warren, H

    Caspi, A., Shih, A. Y., Warren, H. P., et al. 2016, in CubeSats and NanoSats for Remote Sensing, Vol. 9978 (SPIE), 49–49, doi: 10.1117/12.2238478

    work page doi:10.1117/12.2238478 2016

  7. [7]

    C., Scott, G

    Chancellor, J. C., Scott, G. B. I., & Sutton, J. P. 2014, Life : Open Access Journal, 4, 491, doi: 10.3390/life4030491

    work page doi:10.3390/life4030491 2014

  8. [8]

    A., Woods, T

    Crotser, D. A., Woods, T. N., Eparvier, F. G., Triplett, M. A., & Woodraska, D. L. 2007, in Solar Physics and Space Weather Instrumentation II, Vol. 6689 (SPIE), 184–194, doi: 10.1117/12.732592

    work page doi:10.1117/12.732592 2007

  9. [9]

    L., Harra, L

    Culhane, J. L., Harra, L. K., James, A. M., et al. 2007, Solar Physics, 243, 19, doi: 10.1007/s01007-007-0293-1

    work page doi:10.1007/s01007-007-0293-1 2007

  10. [10]

    Curto, J. J. 2020, Journal of Space Weather and Space Climate, 10, 27, doi: 10.1051/swsc/2020027

    work page doi:10.1051/swsc/2020027 2020

  11. [11]

    M., Seaton, D

    Darnel, J. M., Seaton, D. B., Bethge, C., et al. 2022, Space Weather, 20, e2022SW003044, doi: 10.1029/2022SW003044 da Silva, D. F., Hui, L., Sim˜ oes, P. J. A., et al. 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 525, 4143, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad2244 Del Zanna, G., Dere, K. P., Young, P. R., & Landi, E. 2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 909, 3...

    work page doi:10.1029/2022sw003044 2022

  12. [12]

    Thiemann, E. M. B. 2015, Space Science Reviews, 195, 293, doi: 10.1007/s11214-015-0195-2

    work page doi:10.1007/s11214-015-0195-2 2015

  13. [13]

    2008, in The Hinode Mission, ed

    Golub, L., DeLuca, E., Austin, G., et al. 2008, in The Hinode Mission, ed. T. Sakurai (New York, NY: Springer), 27–50, doi: 10.1007/978-0-387-88739-5 5 Heliophysics Decadal Survey. 2025, The Next Decade of Discovery in Solar and Space Physics: Exploring and Safeguarding Humanity's Home in Space (Washington, DC: The National Academies Press), doi: 10....

    work page doi:10.1007/978-0-387-88739-5 2008

  14. [14]

    2020, in X-Ray, Optical, and Infrared Detectors for Astronomy IX, Vol

    Heymes, J., Stefanov, K., Soman, M., et al. 2020, in X-Ray, Optical, and Infrared Detectors for Astronomy IX, Vol. 11454 (SPIE), 99–110, doi: 10.1117/12.2560162

    work page doi:10.1117/12.2560162 2020

  15. [15]

    F., Schmutz, W., Stockman, Y., et al

    Hochedez, J. F., Schmutz, W., Stockman, Y., et al. 2006, Advances in Space Research, 37, 303, doi: 10.1016/j.asr.2005.10.041

    work page doi:10.1016/j.asr.2005.10.041 2006

  16. [16]

    2025, Solar Physics, 300, 2, doi: 10.1007/s11207-024-02418-4

    Hudson, H. 2025, Solar Physics, 300, 2, doi: 10.1007/s11207-024-02418-4

    work page doi:10.1007/s11207-024-02418-4 2025

  17. [17]

    S., Sim˜ oes, P

    Hudson, H. S., Sim˜ oes, P. J. A., Fletcher, L., Hayes, L. A., & Hannah, I. G. 2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 501, 1273, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3664

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3664 2021

  18. [18]

    Janesick, J. R. 2007, Photon Transfer DN→λ(SPIE). https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/ebooks/PM/Photon- Transfer/eISBN-9780819478382/10.1117/3.725073

    work page doi:10.1117/3.725073 2007

  19. [19]

    L., McMullin, D

    Judge, D. L., McMullin, D. R., Ogawa, H. S., et al. 1998, Solar Physics, 177, 161, doi: 10.1023/A:1004929011427

    work page doi:10.1023/a:1004929011427 1998

  20. [20]

    2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 869, 99, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaebfc

    Kawabata, Y., Iida, Y., Doi, T., et al. 2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 869, 99, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaebfc

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaebfc 2018

  21. [21]

    J., Grimm, O., et al

    Krucker, S., Hurford, G. J., Grimm, O., et al. 2020, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 642, A15, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201937362

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201937362 2020

  22. [22]

    Laming, J. M. 2015, Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 12, 2, doi: 10.1007/lrsp-2015-2

    work page doi:10.1007/lrsp-2015-2 2015

  23. [23]

    , Title , A.M

    Lemen, J. R., Title, A. M., Akin, D. J., et al. 2012, Solar Physics, 275, 17, doi: 10.1007/s11207-011-9776-8

    work page doi:10.1007/s11207-011-9776-8 2012

  24. [24]

    2016, Solar physics, 291, doi: 10.1007/s11207-015-0842-5

    Lw, A. 2016, Solar physics, 291, doi: 10.1007/s11207-015-0842-5

    work page doi:10.1007/s11207-015-0842-5 2016

  25. [25]

    L., Eparvier, F

    Machol, J. L., Eparvier, F. G., Viereck, R. A., et al. 2020, in The GOES-R Series (Elsevier), 233–242, doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-814327-8.00019-6

    work page doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-814327-8.00019-6 2020

  26. [26]

    Woods, T. N. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 244, 13, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab380e

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab380e 2019

  27. [27]

    P., Woods, T

    Mason, J. P., Woods, T. N., Webb, D. F., et al. 2016, The Astrophysical Journal, 830, 20, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/830/1/20

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/830/1/20 2016

  28. [28]

    P., Woods, T

    Mason, J. P., Woods, T. N., Chamberlin, P. C., et al. 2020, Advances in Space Research, 66, 3, doi: 10.1016/j.asr.2019.02.011

    work page doi:10.1016/j.asr.2019.02.011 2020

  29. [29]

    Mithun, N. P. S., Vadawale, S. V., Sarkar, A., et al. 2020, Solar Physics, 295, 139, doi: 10.1007/s11207-020-01712-1 OpticStudio. 2024, OpticStudio User Guide, Ansys,

    work page doi:10.1007/s11207-020-01712-1 2020

  30. [30]

    M., et al

    Palumbo, P., Roatsch, T., Lara, L. M., et al. 2025, Space Science Reviews, 221, 32, doi: 10.1007/s11214-025-01158-6

    work page doi:10.1007/s11214-025-01158-6 2025

  31. [31]

    2014, Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 11, 4, doi: 10.12942/lrsp-2014-4

    Reale, F. 2014, Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 11, 4, doi: 10.12942/lrsp-2014-4

    work page doi:10.12942/lrsp-2014-4 2014

  32. [32]

    2020, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 642, A8, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936663 23

    Rochus, P., Auch` ere, F., Berghmans, D., et al. 2020, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 642, A8, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936663 23

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936663 2020

  33. [33]

    2025, Solar Physics, 300, 87, doi: 10.1007/s11207-025-02494-0

    Sankarasubramanian, K., Bug, M., Sarwade, A., et al. 2025, Solar Physics, 300, 87, doi: 10.1007/s11207-025-02494-0

    work page doi:10.1007/s11207-025-02494-0 2025

  34. [34]

    L., Winebarger, A

    Savage, S. L., Winebarger, A. R., Kobayashi, K., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 945, 105, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acbb58

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acbb58 2023

  35. [35]

    N., & Schwab, B

    Telikicherla, A., Woods, T. N., & Schwab, B. D. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 966, 198, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad37f6

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad37f6 2024

  36. [36]

    N., & Schwab, B

    Telikicherla, A., Woods, T. N., & Schwab, B. D. 2025, The Astrophysical Journal, 993, 95, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae0705

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae0705 2025

  37. [37]

    2023, Solar Physics, 298, 17, doi: 10.1007/s11207-023-02107-8

    Thiemann, E., Harder, J., Woods, T., et al. 2023, Solar Physics, 298, 17, doi: 10.1007/s11207-023-02107-8

    work page doi:10.1007/s11207-023-02107-8 2023

  38. [38]

    M., Thomas, R

    White, S. M., Thomas, R. J., & Schwartz, R. A. 2005, Solar Physics, 227, 231, doi: 10.1007/s11207-005-2445-z

    work page doi:10.1007/s11207-005-2445-z 2005

  39. [39]

    N., Eden, T., Eparvier, F

    Woods, T. N., Eden, T., Eparvier, F. G., et al. 2024, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 129, e2024JA032925, doi: 10.1029/2024JA032925

    work page doi:10.1029/2024ja032925 2024

  40. [40]

    N., Eparvier, F

    Woods, T. N., Eparvier, F. G., Hock, R., et al. 2012, Solar Physics, 275, 115, doi: 10.1007/s11207-009-9487-6

    work page doi:10.1007/s11207-009-9487-6 2012

  41. [41]

    N., Schwab, B., Sewell, R., et al

    Woods, T. N., Schwab, B., Sewell, R., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 956, 94, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acef13

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acef13 2023