pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.10684 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-12 · 🌌 astro-ph.SR

Magnetic Reconnection at Hyperbolic Flux Tube associated with a Confined Flare in NOAA Active Region 12268

Pawan Kumar , Sadashiv , Sanjay Kumar , Sushree S. Nayak , Simrat Kaur , Ramit Bhattacharya This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 15:40 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.SR
keywords solar flaremagnetic reconnectionhyperbolic flux tubequasi-separatrix layersMHD simulationconfined flareactive regionnon-force-free field
0
0 comments X

The pith

Magnetic reconnection at a hyperbolic flux tube drives the brightenings and ribbons of a confined M2.1 solar flare.

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

The paper identifies reconnection at a hyperbolic flux tube above NOAA active region 12268 as the main process behind a confined M2.1 flare. A non-force-free extrapolation first maps the pre-flare magnetic topology, revealing the HFT together with quasi-separatrix layers at the base. A data-constrained MHD simulation then shows a current sheet forming inside the HFT, with reconnection occurring there while field-line footpoints slip along the QSLs. A reader would care because locating the precise magnetic sites that power even modest flares improves understanding of how energy is released in the corona and how such events might be anticipated.

Core claim

Before the flare, the extrapolated field contains a hyperbolic flux tube above the flaring region and two QSLs at the lower boundary. The MHD run develops a current sheet within the HFT, producing magnetic reconnection at that site; at the same time the footpoints of field lines undergo slipping motion inside the QSLs. The authors conclude that reconnection at the HFT is the primary driver of the observed intricate flare brightenings and ribbon evolution.

What carries the argument

The hyperbolic flux tube (HFT), a volume where the magnetic field geometry creates a hyperbolic cross-section that concentrates current and permits reconnection, acts as the central site where the simulation forms a current sheet and releases energy.

If this is right

  • Reconnection inside the HFT supplies the energy for the flare's complex brightenings.
  • Slipping reconnection along the QSLs produces the apparent motion of the flare ribbons.
  • The combination of non-force-free extrapolation and data-constrained MHD can track the dynamical evolution from pre-flare topology to flare onset.
  • Identifying HFTs in other active regions may locate likely sites for confined flares.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If HFTs are common drivers, routine detection of these structures from photospheric data could improve short-term flare forecasting.
  • The same simulation approach might be applied to eruptive flares to test whether HFT reconnection can also initiate coronal mass ejections.
  • Comparing the simulated ribbon evolution with high-cadence UV observations would quantify how much of the observed emission is directly attributable to the HFT site.

Load-bearing premise

The non-force-free extrapolation gives a faithful picture of the actual pre-flare coronal field, and the MHD simulation evolves that field without numerical diffusion or boundary effects dominating the reconnection.

What would settle it

High-resolution vector magnetograms or alternative extrapolations of the same active region that show no HFT or no current-sheet formation at the reported location would falsify the claim that HFT reconnection is the primary driver.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.10684 by Pawan Kumar, Ramit Bhattacharya, Sadashiv, Sanjay Kumar, Simrat Kaur, Sushree S. Nayak.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The flare observations in AIA 304 ˚A (panels (a)-(d)), 131 ˚A (panels (e)-(f)) and 1600 ˚A (panels (g)-(h)). The black rectangle in panel (a) encloses the flaring region. Panel (b) depicts the primary ribbons R1 and R2 constituting the central brightening observed just after the flare onset. Panel (c) documents the appearance of the secondary ribbons, R3 and R4, with an additional faint brightening trace (… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Panel (a) shows the LOS magnetic field (Bz) strength (in Gauss) at 11:24 UT in grayscale, in which the black rectangle marks the flaring region. Two major positive polarities are denoted as P1 and P2. Quasi-circular negative polarity (highlighted by a dashed curve) is marked by N. Panels (b) and (c) show the top and side views of the extrapolated magnetic field lines overlaid with Bz at the bottom boundary… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Panel (a) displays the extrapolated field lines along with the direct volume rendering of LogQ. Panel (b) plots the projected field lines on a y-constant plane superimposed with LogQ, where the black arrows highlight an intersection of two QSLs. Panel (c) shows the project field lines at three different y-constant planes with LogQ. Panel (d) plots the distribution of the Lorentz force density strength (L) … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Plots of the projected field lines at three different y-constant planes located in the vicinity of the HFT at initial time t = 0 (panel (a)) and t = 17.2 (panel (b)). The plots are also overlaid with |J|/|B|. extrapolated from their interior points in their special neighbourhood (Prasad et al. 2023). The constant (τa/τv) is set at 2 × 10−4 , which is 15 times greater than its coronal value, which speeds up… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Simulated evolution of the magnetic field lines overlaid with the contemporary AIA 304 ˚A (panels (a) and (b)), 131 ˚A (panel (c)) and 1600 ˚A (panel (d)) images in the background. Yellow arrows denote the central brightenings, while white and green arrows highlight the remote brightenings, located left and right to the central brightening. The flare ribbons are identified by R1, R2, R3 and R4 in 1600 ˚A. … view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Plots of the projected field lines in different y-constant planes around the HFT at time t = 26.2 superimposed with 304 ˚A (panel (a)), 131 ˚A (panel (b)) and 1600 ˚A (panel (c)) images at the lower boundary. time t = 26.2. Importantly, the ribbons R1 and R2 are positioned below the HFT, with the footpoints of the field lines nearly coinciding with the ribbon brightenings in the central region. Meanwhile, … view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Time profile of magnetic field lines overplotted with LogQ at bottom boundary. QSL1 and QSL2 highlight the locations of two QSLs. Black and blue arrows (panels (b)-(d)) depict the direction of the motion of the field lines in QSL1 and QSL2, respectively. a x y z t=0 t=18.8 t=24.8 t=27.8 x y z x y z x y z [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The figure illustrates the magnetic field line evolution overlaid with co-temporal 304 ˚A images. White and blue arrows (panels (b)-(d)) denote the movement of the footpoints of the field lines. SOLA: revised-manuscipt-2.tex; 14 April 2026; 1:19; p. 14 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_8.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

In this paper, we identify the magnetic reconnections at the hyperbolic flux tube (HFT), aided by slipping reconnection at quasi-separatrix layers (QSLs), which are pivotal to the occurrence of a confined M2.1 class flare in NOAA active region 12268. The magnetic field topology before the flare's onset is obtained through a non-force-free-field extrapolation scheme that accommodates a non-zero Lorentz force. A key aspect is the presence of an HFT in the computational domain above the flaring region, along with two QSLs at the lower boundary. To simulate the dynamics of the active region, we conduct a data-constrained magnetohydrodynamics (MHD) simulation initiated by the extrapolated field. The dynamics captured in the simulation document the formation of a current sheet within the HFT configuration, leading to magnetic reconnection at the HFT. Additionally, we observe the slipping motion of the footpoints of the magnetic field lines in the QSLs at the bottom boundary, which indicates the occurrence of slipping reconnection in the QSLs. Importantly, the magnetic reconnection at the HFT is suggested to be the primary driver in the development of the intricate flare brightenings and the flare ribbons.

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

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript claims that magnetic reconnection at a hyperbolic flux tube (HFT), aided by slipping reconnection at quasi-separatrix layers (QSLs), is the primary driver of the intricate brightenings and ribbons in a confined M2.1 flare in NOAA AR 12268. Pre-flare topology is obtained via non-force-free-field extrapolation revealing an HFT and lower-boundary QSLs; a subsequent data-constrained MHD simulation initialized with this field shows current-sheet formation and reconnection inside the HFT together with slipping footpoint motions at the QSLs.

Significance. If the modeling assumptions hold, the work would strengthen the case that HFT reconnection can organize confined-flare morphology without eruption. The data-constrained MHD approach is a methodological strength that ties simulated reconnection sites to observed flare features more directly than purely idealized models.

major comments (3)
  1. [Extrapolation method] The non-force-free extrapolation is used to establish the presence of the HFT whose reconnection is later identified as the primary driver. No quantitative validation metrics, force-balance residuals, or side-by-side comparison with a force-free (NLFFF) extrapolation are reported, leaving the topological foundation untested against independent coronal constraints such as stereoscopy or radio observations.
  2. [MHD simulation and results] In the data-constrained MHD run, current-sheet formation and reconnection are reported inside the HFT. The manuscript does not present resolution studies, numerical convergence tests, or controlled variations of the (necessarily numerical) resistivity, so it remains unclear whether the HFT is preferentially selected by the physics or by discretization and boundary artifacts.
  3. [Discussion and conclusions] The central attribution that HFT reconnection, rather than QSL slipping alone or boundary driving, is the primary driver of the observed flare ribbons and brightenings rests on the simulation morphology. A more explicit quantitative comparison (e.g., timing of energy release versus observed light curves or ribbon separation speeds) would be required to substantiate the “primary driver” claim over alternative interpretations.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states the flare class and active-region number but could briefly note the date of the event for immediate context.
  2. [Figures] Figures depicting the HFT and current sheets would benefit from explicit scale bars and quantitative color-bar units (e.g., |J| or |B|) to allow readers to assess the physical scales directly.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 1 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed comments. We address each major point below and indicate the changes planned for the revised manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Extrapolation method] The non-force-free extrapolation is used to establish the presence of the HFT whose reconnection is later identified as the primary driver. No quantitative validation metrics, force-balance residuals, or side-by-side comparison with a force-free (NLFFF) extrapolation are reported, leaving the topological foundation untested against independent coronal constraints such as stereoscopy or radio observations.

    Authors: The non-force-free scheme was selected because it explicitly allows a non-zero Lorentz force near the photosphere, consistent with the physical conditions there. In the revision we will add quantitative validation by reporting the volume-integrated force imbalance and a direct comparison of field strength and topology with an NLFFF extrapolation of the same vector magnetogram. Direct tests against stereoscopy or radio data remain impossible for this event. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [MHD simulation and results] In the data-constrained MHD run, current-sheet formation and reconnection are reported inside the HFT. The manuscript does not present resolution studies, numerical convergence tests, or controlled variations of the (necessarily numerical) resistivity, so it remains unclear whether the HFT is preferentially selected by the physics or by discretization and boundary artifacts.

    Authors: We agree that explicit numerical tests strengthen confidence. The grid was sized to resolve the HFT identified in the extrapolation, and reconnection occurs at the topologically expected location. The revised manuscript will include a dedicated paragraph on the numerical resolution and boundary conditions. Comprehensive resolution and resistivity scans are computationally prohibitive for this study; we will state this limitation clearly. revision: partial

  3. Referee: [Discussion and conclusions] The central attribution that HFT reconnection, rather than QSL slipping alone or boundary driving, is the primary driver of the observed flare ribbons and brightenings rests on the simulation morphology. A more explicit quantitative comparison (e.g., timing of energy release versus observed light curves or ribbon separation speeds) would be required to substantiate the “primary driver” claim over alternative interpretations.

    Authors: The simulation demonstrates that the dominant energy release and the resulting footpoint motions originate from the HFT current sheet, with QSL slipping appearing as a secondary effect. We will add a direct comparison of the simulated magnetic-energy dissipation rate versus time with the GOES 1–8 Å light curve to quantify the timing agreement. Ribbon separation speeds are harder to extract from the lower-boundary treatment, but the overall morphology and energy-release site support the primary role of the HFT. revision: yes

standing simulated objections not resolved
  • Direct validation of the extrapolated topology against stereoscopic or radio observations, as no such data exist for this event.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The paper obtains pre-flare topology via non-force-free extrapolation (which contains an HFT by construction of that method) and then runs a data-constrained MHD simulation. Current-sheet formation and reconnection inside the HFT are reported as emergent outcomes of the time-dependent evolution, not imposed or fitted by definition. No self-citations are used as load-bearing uniqueness theorems, no ansatz is smuggled, and no prediction is statistically forced to match a fitted input. The claim that HFT reconnection is the primary driver is an interpretation of simulation results rather than a tautology reducing to the initial data.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the accuracy of the non-force-free extrapolation (whose free parameters are adjusted to match observed photospheric fields) and on the assumption that the ideal or resistive MHD equations adequately describe the coronal evolution on the simulated timescales.

free parameters (1)
  • non-force-free parameter(s) in extrapolation
    The extrapolation scheme accommodates a non-zero Lorentz force; the magnitude or spatial distribution of this force is adjusted to fit the boundary data and is not independently measured.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption The pre-flare magnetic field can be represented by a static extrapolation that satisfies the observed photospheric vector field.
    Invoked when the initial condition for the MHD run is taken directly from the extrapolated field.
  • domain assumption MHD equations with appropriate resistivity capture the reconnection dynamics at the HFT.
    Standard assumption in data-constrained coronal simulations; no explicit justification or resolution study is given in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5540 in / 1380 out tokens · 31108 ms · 2026-05-10T15:40:39.688370+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

47 extracted references · 47 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Phys.299,

    Agarwal, S., Bhattacharyya, R., Yang, S.: 2024, Study of Reconnection Dynamics and Plasma Relaxation in MHD Simulation of a Solar Flare.Sol. Phys.299,

    work page 2024

  2. [2]

    DOI. ADS. Aulanier, G., Pariat, E., D´ emoulin, P.: 2005, Current sheet formation in quasi-separatrix layers and hyperbolic flux tubes.Astron. Astrophys.444,

    work page 2005

  3. [3]

    DOI. ADS. SOLA: revised-manuscipt-2.tex; 14 April 2026; 1:19; p. 16 Reconnection at HFT associated with a confined flare Aulanier, G., DeLuca, E.E., Antiochos, S.K., McMullen, R.A., Golub, L.: 2000, The Topology and Evolution of the Bastille Day Flare.Astrophys. J.540,

    work page 2026

  4. [4]

    DOI. ADS. Aulanier, G., Pariat, E., D´ emoulin, P., Devore, C.R.: 2006, Slip-Running Reconnection in Quasi-Separatrix Layers.Sol. Phys.238,

    work page 2006

  5. [5]

    DOI. ADS. Bhattacharyya, R., Low, B.C., Smolarkiewicz, P.K.: 2010, On spontaneous formation of current sheets: Untwisted magnetic fields.Physics of Plasmas17, 112901. DOI. ADS. Bhattacharyya, R., Janaki, M.S., Dasgupta, B., Zank, G.P.: 2007, Solar Arcades as Possible Minimum Dissipative Relaxed States.Sol. Phys.240,

    work page 2010

  6. [6]

    DOI. ADS. Bora, K., Agarwal, S., Kumar, S., Bhattacharyya, R.: 2023, Hall effect on the magnetic recon- nections during the evolution of a three-dimensional magnetic flux rope.Physica Scripta 98, 065016. DOI. https://doi.org/10.1088/1402-4896/acd3bb. Carmichael, H.: 1964, A Process for Flares. In: Hess, W.N. (ed.)NASA Special Publication 50,

    work page doi:10.1088/1402-4896/acd3bb 2023

  7. [7]

    Courant, R., Friedrichs, K., Lewy, H.: 1967, On the Partial Difference Equations of Mathe- matical Physics.IBM Journal of Research and Development11,

    ADS. Courant, R., Friedrichs, K., Lewy, H.: 1967, On the Partial Difference Equations of Mathe- matical Physics.IBM Journal of Research and Development11,

    work page 1967

  8. [8]

    DOI. ADS. Dahlburg, R.B., Antiochos, S.K., Zang, T.A.: 1991, Dynamics of solar coronal magnetic fields. Astrophys. J.383,

    work page 1991

  9. [9]

    DOI. ADS. Devi, P., Joshi, B., Chandra, R., Mitra, P.K., Veronig, A.M., Joshi, R.: 2020, Development of a Confined Circular-Cum-Parallel Ribbon Flare and Associated Pre-Flare Activity.Sol. Phys.295,

    work page 2020

  10. [10]

    DOI. ADS. Duan, X., Li, T., Jing, Q.: 2022, Dynamic Property and Magnetic Nonpotentiality of Two Types of Confined Solar Flares.Astrophys. J.933,

    work page 2022

  11. [11]

    DOI. ADS. Galsgaard, K., Titov, V.S., Neukirch, T.: 2003, Magnetic Pinching of Hyperbolic Flux Tubes. II. Dynamic Numerical Model.Astrophys. J.595,

    work page 2003

  12. [12]

    DOI. ADS. Gary, G.A., Hagyard, M.J.: 1990, Transformation of vector magnetograms and the problems associated with the effects of perspective and the azimuthal ambiguity.Sol. Phys.126,

    work page 1990

  13. [13]

    DOI. ADS. Grinstein, F.F., Margolin, L.G., Rider, W.J.: 2007,Implicit large eddy simulation: computing turbulent fluid dynamics, Cambridge university press. DOI. Haynes, A.L., Parnell, C.E.: 2007, A trilinear method for finding null points in a three-dimensional vector space.Physics of Plasmas14. DOI. http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.2756751. Hernandez-Perez, ...

    work page doi:10.1063/1.2756751 2007

  14. [14]

    DOI. ADS. Hirayama, T.: 1974, Theoretical Model of Flares and Prominences. I: Evaporating Flare Model. Sol. Phys.34,

    work page 1974

  15. [15]

    DOI. ADS. Hu, Q., Dasgupta, B., Choudhary, D.P., B¨ uchner, J.: 2008, A Practical Approach to Coro- nal Magnetic Field Extrapolation Based on the Principle of Minimum Dissipation Rate. Astrophys. J.679,

    work page 2008

  16. [16]

    DOI. ADS. Hu, Q., Dasgupta, B., Derosa, M.L., B¨ uchner, J., Gary, G.A.: 2010, Non-force-free extrapo- lation of solar coronal magnetic field using vector magnetograms.Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics72,

    work page 2010

  17. [17]

    DOI. ADS. Kajishima, T., Taira, K.: 2017,Computational fluid dynamics: incompressible turbulent flows, Springer Nature. Kopp, R.A., Pneuman, G.W.: 1976, Magnetic reconnection in the corona and the loop prominence phenomenon.Sol. Phys.50,

    work page 2017

  18. [18]

    DOI. ADS. Kumar, S., Bhattacharyya, R.: 2016, Continuous development of current sheets near and away from magnetic nulls.Physics of Plasmas23, 044501. DOI. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4945634. Kumar, S., Bhattacharyya, R., Joshi, B., Smolarkiewicz, P.K.: 2016, ON THE ROLE OF REPETITIVE MAGNETIC RECONNECTIONS IN EVOLUTION OF MAGNETIC FLUX ROPES IN SOLAR CORO...

    work page doi:10.1063/1.4945634 2016

  19. [19]

    https://dx.doi.org/10.3847/0004-637X/830/2/80

    DOI. https://dx.doi.org/10.3847/0004-637X/830/2/80. Kumar, S., Bhattacharyya, R., Dasgupta, B., Janaki, M.S.: 2017, Chaotic magnetic field lines and spontaneous development of current sheets.Physics of Plasmas24, 082902. DOI. ADS. Kumar, S., Nayak, S.S., Prasad, A., Bhattacharyya, R.: 2021, Magnetic Reconnections in the Presence of Three-Dimensional Magne...

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/830/2/80 2017

  20. [20]

    DOI. ADS. SOLA: revised-manuscipt-2.tex; 14 April 2026; 1:19; p. 17 Kumar et al. Kumar, S., Kumar, P., Sadashiv, Nayak, S.S., Agarwal, S., Prasad, A., Bhattacharyya, R., Chandra, R.: 2025, Data-Constrained Magnetohydrodynamics Simulation of a Confined X-Class Flare in NOAA Active Region 11166.Sol. Phys.300,

    work page 2026

  21. [21]

    DOI. ADS. Lemen, J.R., Title, A.M., Akin, D.J., Boerner, P.F., Chou, C., Drake, J.F., Duncan, D.W., Edwards, C.G., Friedlaender, F.M., Heyman, G.F., Hurlburt, N.E., Katz, N.L., Kushner, G.D., Levay, M., Lindgren, R.W., Mathur, D.P., McFeaters, E.L., Mitchell, S., Rehse, R.A., Schrijver, C.J., Springer, L.A., Stern, R.A., Tarbell, T.D., Wuelser, J.-P., Wol...

    work page 2012

  22. [22]

    DOI. ADS. Li, T., Liu, L., Hou, Y., Zhang, J.: 2019, Two Types of Confined Solar Flares.Astrophys. J. 881,

    work page 2019

  23. [23]

    DOI. ADS. Liu, R., Kliem, B., Titov, V.S., Chen, J., Wang, Y., Wang, H., Liu, C., Xu, Y., Wiegelmann, T.: 2016, Structure, Stability, and Evolution of Magnetic Flux Ropes from the Perspective of Magnetic Twist.Astrophys. J.818,

    work page 2016

  24. [24]

    DOI. ADS. Mandrini, C.H., D´ emoulin, P., Van Driel-Gesztelyi, L., Schmieder, B., Cauzzi, G., Hofmann, A.: 1996, 3D Magnetic Reconnection at an X-Ray Bright Point.Sol. Phys.168,

    work page 1996

  25. [25]

    DOI. ADS. Masson, S., Pariat, E., Aulanier, G., Schrijver, C.J.: 2009, The Nature of Flare Ribbons in Coronal Null-Point Topology.Astrophys. J.700,

    work page 2009

  26. [26]

    DOI. ADS. Masson, S., Pariat, ´E., Valori, G., Deng, N., Liu, C., Wang, H., Reid, H.: 2017, Flux rope, hyperbolic flux tube, and late extreme ultraviolet phases in a non-eruptive circular-ribbon flare.Astron. Astrophys.604, A76. DOI. ADS. Mitra, P.K., Joshi, B.: 2021, Successive occurrences of quasi-circular ribbon flares in a fan- spine-like configuratio...

    work page 2017

  27. [27]

    DOI. ADS. Nayak, S.S., Bhattacharyya, R., Kumar, S.: 2021, Magnetohydrodynamics model of an X-class flare in NOAA active region 12017 initiated with non-force-free extrapolation.Physics of Plasmas28, 024502. DOI. ADS. Nayak, S.S., Bhattacharyya, R., Prasad, A., Hu, Q., Kumar, S., Joshi, B.: 2019, A Data- constrained Magnetohydrodynamic Simulation of Succe...

    work page 2021

  28. [28]

    DOI. ADS. Nayak, S.S., Bhattacharyya, R., Smolarkiewicz, P.K., Kumar, S., Prasad, A.: 2020, On the Spontaneous Generation of Three-dimensional Magnetic Nulls.Astrophys. J.892,

    work page 2020

  29. [29]

    DOI. ADS. Nayak, S.S., Sen, S., Shrivastav, A.K., Bhattacharyya, R., Athiray, P.S.: 2024, Exploring the Magnetic and Thermal Evolution of a Coronal Jet.Astrophys. J.975,

    work page 2024

  30. [30]

    DOI. ADS. Nayak, S.S., Hu, Q., He, W., Kumar, S., Bhattacharyya, R.: 2025, On the Magnetic Recon- nection and Its Properties During a Flare Using a Magnetohydrodynamics Simulation.Sol. Phys.300,

    work page 2025

  31. [31]

    DOI. ADS. Nindos, A., Andrews, M.D.: 2004, The Association of Big Flares and Coronal Mass Ejections: What Is the Role of Magnetic Helicity?Astrophys. J. Lett.616, L175. DOI. ADS. Olshevsky, V., Pontin, D.I., Williams, B., Parnell, C.E., Fu, H.S., Liu, Y., Yao, S., Khotyaint- sev, Y.V.: 2020, A comparison of methods for finding magnetic nulls in simulation...

    work page 2004

  32. [32]

    DOI. ADS. Prasad, A., Dissauer, K., Hu, Q., Bhattacharyya, R., Veronig, A.M., Kumar, S., Joshi, B.: 2020, Magnetohydrodynamic Simulation of Magnetic Null-point Reconnections and Coronal Dimmings during the X2.1 Flare in NOAA AR 11283.Astrophys. J.903,

    work page 2020

  33. [33]

    DOI. ADS. SOLA: revised-manuscipt-2.tex; 14 April 2026; 1:19; p. 18 Reconnection at HFT associated with a confined flare Prasad, A., Kumar, S., Sterling, A.C., Moore, R.L., Aulanier, G., Bhattacharyya, R., Hu, Q.: 2023, Formation of an observed eruptive flux rope above the torus instability threshold through tether-cutting magnetic reconnection.Astron. As...

    work page 2026

  34. [34]

    DOI. ADS. Schou, J., Scherrer, P.H., Bush, R.I., Wachter, R., Couvidat, S., Rabello-Soares, M.C., Bogart, R.S., Hoeksema, J.T., Liu, Y., Duvall, T.L., Akin, D.J., Allard, B.A., Miles, J.W., Rairden, R., Shine, R.A., Tarbell, T.D., Title, A.M., Wolfson, C.J., Elmore, D.F., Norton, A.A., Tomczyk, S.: 2012, Design and Ground Calibration of the Helioseismic a...

    work page 2012

  35. [35]

    DOI. ADS. Shibata, K., Magara, T.: 2011, Solar Flares: Magnetohydrodynamic Processes.Living Reviews in Solar Physics8,

    work page 2011

  36. [36]

    DOI. ADS. Smolarkiewicz, P.K.: 2006, Multidimensional positive definite advection transport algorithm: an overview.International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids50,

    work page 2006

  37. [37]

    DOI. ADS. Smolarkiewicz, P.K., Charbonneau, P.: 2013, EULAG, a computational model for multiscale flows: An MHD extension.Journal of Computational Physics236,

    work page 2013

  38. [38]

    DOI. ADS. Sturrock, P.A.: 1966, Model of the High-Energy Phase of Solar Flares.Nature211,

    work page 1966

  39. [39]

    DOI. ADS. Sun, X., Bobra, M.G., Hoeksema, J.T., Liu, Y., Li, Y., Shen, C., Couvidat, S., Norton, A.A., Fisher, G.H.: 2015, Why Is the Great Solar Active Region 12192 Flare-rich but CME-poor? Astrophys. J. Lett.804, L28. DOI. ADS. Temmer, M., Veronig, A.M., Vrˇ snak, B., Ryb´ ak, J., G¨ om¨ ory, P., Stoiser, S., Mariˇ ci´ c, D.: 2008, Acceleration in Fast ...

    work page 2015

  40. [40]

    Titov, V.S., Galsgaard, K., Neukirch, T.: 2003, Magnetic Pinching of Hyperbolic Flux Tubes

    ADS. Titov, V.S., Galsgaard, K., Neukirch, T.: 2003, Magnetic Pinching of Hyperbolic Flux Tubes. I. Basic Estimations.Astrophys. J.582,

    work page 2003

  41. [41]

    DOI. ADS. Titov, V.S., Hornig, G., D´ emoulin, P.: 2002, Theory of magnetic connectivity in the solar corona.Journal of Geophysical Research (Space Physics)107,

    work page 2002

  42. [42]

    DOI. ADS. Wang, D., Liu, R., Wang, Y., Liu, K., Chen, J., Liu, J., Zhou, Z., Zhang, M.: 2017, Critical Height of the Torus Instability in Two-ribbon Solar Flares.Astrophys. J. Lett.843, L9. DOI. ADS. Wang, H., Liu, C.: 2012, Circular Ribbon Flares and Homologous Jets.Astrophys. J.760,

    work page 2017

  43. [43]

    DOI. ADS. Wang, Y., Zhang, J.: 2007, A Comparative Study between Eruptive X-Class Flares Associated with Coronal Mass Ejections and Confined X-Class Flares.Astrophys. J.665,

    work page 2007

  44. [44]

    DOI. ADS. Wiegelmann, T.: 2008, Nonlinear force-free modeling of the solar coronal magnetic field. Journal of Geophysical Research (Space Physics)113, A03S02. DOI. ADS. Wiegelmann, T., Sakurai, T.: 2021, Solar force-free magnetic fields.Living Reviews in Solar Physics18,

    work page 2008

  45. [45]

    DOI. ADS. Yang, S., Zhang, J., Xiang, Y.: 2014, Fine Structures and Overlying Loops of Confined Solar Flares.Astrophys. J. Lett.793, L28. DOI. ADS. Zhang, J., Dere, K.P., Howard, R.A., Kundu, M.R., White, S.M.: 2001, On the Temporal Relationship between Coronal Mass Ejections and Flares.Astrophys. J.559,

    work page 2014

  46. [46]

    DOI. ADS. Zhong, Z., Guo, Y., Ding, M.D., Fang, C., Hao, Q.: 2019, Transition from Circular-ribbon to Parallel-ribbon Flares Associated with a Bifurcated Magnetic Flux Rope.Astrophys. J. 871,

    work page 2019

  47. [47]

    DOI. ADS. SOLA: revised-manuscipt-2.tex; 14 April 2026; 1:19; p. 19

    work page 2026