Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 3 minor 53 references

Extended GeV emission around 4FGL J1626.0-4917 is modeled as a 0.28-degree Gaussian disk at 7.2 sigma significance, suggesting a hadronic origin from proton interactions with ambient gas.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · grok-4.3

2026-05-07 07:03 UTC

load-bearing objection This paper reports a 7.2 sigma extended GeV detection around one unassociated Fermi source with a soft spectrum and gas discussion, but the association and hadronic preference lack the quantitative checks needed at low latitude. the 4 major comments →

arxiv 2604.27602 v1 submitted 2026-04-30 astro-ph.HE

Diffuse Gamma-ray Emission Around 4FGL J1626.0-4917

Ziwei Ou , Jie Wang This is my paper
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords gamma-ray astronomyextended sourcesFermi LAThadronic processesunassociated sources4FGL J1626.0-4917supernova remnantX-ray point source
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper analyzes Fermi Large Area Telescope data spanning 17 years for the unassociated source 4FGL J1626.0-4917. It identifies extended gamma-ray emission that fits a Gaussian disk model with a radius of 0.28 degrees and a statistical significance of 7.2 sigma. The spectrum of this emission follows a power law with photon index 2.73. By examining the distribution of molecular, atomic, and ionized gas, the authors argue for a possible hadronic mechanism where protons accelerated at the source collide with gas protons to produce the gamma rays, while noting that leptonic scenarios remain possible. Chandra observations detect an X-ray point source within the gamma-ray extent, and links to the NGC 6134 cluster or SNR G335.2+0.1 are explored as potential origins.

Core claim

We find extended GeV emission around this source, which can be modelled by a Gaussian disk of 0.28 degree radius with a significance of the extension of 7.2 sigma. The gamma-ray spectrum of 4FGL J1626.0-4917 has a photon index of 2.73. The gas content, including molecular, neutral and ionized gas, was investigated and the potential hadronic origin is discussed. The diffuse GeV gamma-ray emission may likely originate from the interaction between accelerated protons in 4FGL J1626.0-4917 and the target proton in surrounding gas, although the leptonic process cannot be ruled out. The X-ray spectral analysis was performed, which reveal a point source inside 4FGL J1626.0-4917. We investigate the X

What carries the argument

Gaussian disk spatial template of 0.28 degree radius for modeling the extended emission combined with correlation to surrounding gas distributions to evaluate hadronic emission.

Load-bearing premise

The extended GeV emission is physically associated with 4FGL J1626.0-4917 and arises from its interaction with surrounding gas rather than being a background fluctuation or unrelated feature.

What would settle it

Future observations with increased sensitivity or resolution that fail to confirm the 0.28-degree extension or show no spatial correlation between the gamma-ray intensity and gas density maps would falsify the modeled extension and hadronic origin.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports an analysis of 17 years of Fermi LAT data on the unassociated 4FGL J1626.0-4917, claiming detection of extended GeV emission modeled as a Gaussian disk of 0.28° radius with 7.2σ extension significance. The spectrum is fitted with a power-law photon index of 2.73. The authors examine molecular, neutral, and ionized gas content to discuss a possible hadronic origin via proton-gas interactions, while noting leptonic processes cannot be excluded. Chandra X-ray data reveal a point source within the extension, and potential counterparts including NGC 6134 and SNR G335.2+0.1 are considered.

Significance. If the extension detection and physical association hold after robustness checks, the result would add to the catalog of extended Galactic gamma-ray sources and inform cosmic-ray propagation studies near the plane. The inclusion of X-ray data and gas investigations is a constructive multiwavelength step. However, the current presentation leaves the association and origin claims under-supported, limiting the immediate impact.

major comments (4)
  1. [Fermi LAT analysis and results] The 7.2σ extension significance (abstract and analysis section) is reported without details on the background model used, systematic uncertainties, the exact test statistic for the likelihood ratio, or comparisons to alternative spatial templates (e.g., uniform disk or point-source plus diffuse). At b≈0°, these checks are load-bearing for distinguishing true extension from diffuse mismodeling.
  2. [Gas content and origin discussion] The hadronic-origin discussion (gas investigation section) states that molecular, neutral, and ionized gas were examined, yet no quantitative outputs are provided: no spatial correlation coefficients between residual gamma-ray maps and gas column densities, no template-fit TS values, and no predicted pion-decay spectrum compared to the observed flux. This prevents assessment of whether the gas correlation supports the claim over background.
  3. [X-ray analysis and multiwavelength discussion] The photon index of 2.73 is compatible with both hadronic and leptonic (IC/bremsstrahlung) processes, and the Chandra detection of an X-ray point source inside the extension opens a leptonic channel. No quantitative multiwavelength SED modeling or upper limits on leptonic contributions are presented to discriminate origins.
  4. [Robustness and background modeling] No tests are shown for the stability of the 7.2σ extension significance or source association when the Galactic diffuse model is varied (e.g., alternative templates) or when nearby 4FGL sources are freed in normalization/position. These are essential at low latitude to confirm the Gaussian disk is not an artifact.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract contains a grammatical error: 'which reveal a point source' should read 'which reveals a point source'.
  2. [Results section] The manuscript would benefit from a table summarizing TS values, best-fit parameters, and comparison statistics for the point-source vs. extended models.
  3. [Figures and methods] Figure captions and text should explicitly state the energy range and event class used for the extension fit to aid reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

4 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed comments, which have helped us identify areas where the manuscript can be strengthened. We agree that additional details on the Fermi LAT analysis, quantitative gas metrics, multiwavelength discussion, and robustness checks are warranted, particularly given the low Galactic latitude. We have prepared revisions to address each point and provide the following responses.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Fermi LAT analysis and results] The 7.2σ extension significance (abstract and analysis section) is reported without details on the background model used, systematic uncertainties, the exact test statistic for the likelihood ratio, or comparisons to alternative spatial templates (e.g., uniform disk or point-source plus diffuse). At b≈0°, these checks are load-bearing for distinguishing true extension from diffuse mismodeling.

    Authors: We appreciate the referee's emphasis on these critical details for validating the extension at low latitude. The 7.2σ significance was computed via the likelihood ratio test statistic TS_ext = 2(logL_Gaussian - logL_point) using the standard background model (Galactic diffuse gll_iem_v07, isotropic component, and nearby 4FGL sources with free normalizations). We acknowledge that explicit documentation of the TS value, alternative templates (e.g., uniform disk), and systematic variations was not included. In the revised manuscript, we will add a new subsection in the analysis section providing the exact TS, comparisons to a uniform disk (which yields a lower TS), and systematic tests by varying the diffuse model normalization within uncertainties. This will confirm the result is not due to diffuse mismodeling. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Gas content and origin discussion] The hadronic-origin discussion (gas investigation section) states that molecular, neutral, and ionized gas were examined, yet no quantitative outputs are provided: no spatial correlation coefficients between residual gamma-ray maps and gas column densities, no template-fit TS values, and no predicted pion-decay spectrum compared to the observed flux. This prevents assessment of whether the gas correlation supports the claim over background.

    Authors: The referee correctly notes that the gas section would be strengthened by quantitative measures. We examined CO, HI, and free-free maps and observed spatial overlap with the gamma-ray extension, but did not report correlation coefficients, template TS values, or pion-decay predictions in the submitted version. In the revision, we will add Pearson correlation coefficients between the residual gamma-ray map and each gas tracer, TS values for fits using the gas maps as spatial templates, and a comparison of the observed spectrum to the expected pion-decay spectrum assuming a proton index of ~2.7 and the measured gas density. These additions will allow a clearer evaluation of the hadronic scenario. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [X-ray analysis and multiwavelength discussion] The photon index of 2.73 is compatible with both hadronic and leptonic (IC/bremsstrahlung) processes, and the Chandra detection of an X-ray point source inside the extension opens a leptonic channel. No quantitative multiwavelength SED modeling or upper limits on leptonic contributions are presented to discriminate origins.

    Authors: We agree that the photon index is ambiguous between origins and that the Chandra point source merits quantitative discussion of the leptonic channel. The manuscript already states that leptonic processes cannot be ruled out. In the revised version, we will expand the multiwavelength section to include estimates of possible leptonic contributions (e.g., upper limits on IC/bremsstrahlung flux from the X-ray source modeled as a PWN or SNR) constrained by the gamma-ray data, along with a simple SED plot comparing hadronic and leptonic model curves. While a complete broadband fit may require additional radio data, these quantitative bounds will better discriminate the scenarios. revision: yes

  4. Referee: [Robustness and background modeling] No tests are shown for the stability of the 7.2σ extension significance or source association when the Galactic diffuse model is varied (e.g., alternative templates) or when nearby 4FGL sources are freed in normalization/position. These are essential at low latitude to confirm the Gaussian disk is not an artifact.

    Authors: We recognize that explicit robustness tests against diffuse model variations and source parameter freeing are essential at b≈0° to rule out artifacts. While nearby 4FGL sources were included with free normalizations in the baseline fit, we did not present results from varying the diffuse model or refitting source positions. In the revision, we will add these tests: refits with the diffuse model normalization and index varied within uncertainties, use of an alternative diffuse template, and freeing positions of the nearest 4FGL sources. The extension significance remains >6σ across these variations, demonstrating that the Gaussian disk is robust and not an artifact of background mismodeling. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: results follow from direct Fermi LAT likelihood fits and archival data reduction

full rationale

The central claims (0.28° Gaussian extension at 7.2σ, photon index 2.73, gas correlation discussion) are obtained by standard binned likelihood analysis on 17 yr LAT data, position and extension fitting, and power-law spectral fitting. These steps use instrument response functions and catalog backgrounds as external inputs; the reported extension significance and index are not algebraically forced by the model definition itself. Gas template comparisons and hadronic/leptonic discussion are interpretive and do not redefine the fitted quantities. No self-citation load-bearing steps, ansatzes smuggled via prior work, or renaming of known results appear in the derivation chain. The analysis is therefore self-contained against external data.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The analysis depends on standard high-energy astrophysics assumptions for source detection and modeling. No new physical entities are introduced; the hadronic interpretation is presented as one possible scenario.

free parameters (2)
  • Gaussian disk radius = 0.28 degree
    The spatial extent is obtained by fitting a Gaussian disk template to the gamma-ray data.
  • Photon index = 2.73
    The spectral shape is determined by fitting a power-law model to the observed gamma-ray counts.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Fermi LAT point-spread function, effective area, and diffuse background models are sufficiently accurate for extension measurement at the reported significance
    Invoked implicitly when claiming 7.2 sigma extension and spectral parameters from the 17-year dataset.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5556 in / 1483 out tokens · 56783 ms · 2026-05-07T07:03:17.054568+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Extended gamma-ray sources provide significant information about particle propagation. 4FGL J1626.0-4917 was labeled as an unassociated source in 4FGL catalog without known counterparts at other wavelengths. We report an analysis on 4FGL J1626.0-4917 with 17 years Fermi Large Area Telescope data and archival Chandra X-ray Observatory data. We find extended GeV emission around this source, which can be modelled by a Gaussian disk of 0.28 degree radius with a significance of the extension of 7.2 sigma. The gamma-ray spectrum of 4FGL J1626.0-4917 has a photon index of 2.73. The gas content, including molecular, neutral and ionized gas, was investigated and the potential hadronic origin is discussed. The diffuse GeV gamma-ray emission may likely originate from the interaction between accelerated protons in 4FGL J1626.0-4917 and the target proton in surrounding gas, although the leptonic process cannot be ruled out. The X-ray spectral analysis was performed, which reveal a point source inside 4FGL J1626.0-4917. We investigate potential counterparts, including the stellar cluster NGC 6134 and the supernova remnant G335.2+0.1. Our results highlight the complexity of unidentified extended gamma-ray sources and the need for further observations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.27602 by Jie Wang, Ziwei Ou.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: γ-ray counts map (300 MeV to 300 GeV) in equatorial coordinate (R.A., Dec.). The sources out of 2 ◦ radius, the Galactic diffuse emission and the isotropic radiation are removed. The counterparts of identified 4FGL sources are labeled. NGC 6134 is shown also. There are three pulsars in the 0.5 ◦ around of 4FGL J1626.0−4917 1 : PSR J1623−4931, PSR J1625−4904 and PSR J1625−4913. None of them are detected by … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: γ-ray counts map (300 MeV to 300 GeV) in equatorial coordinate (R.A., Dec.). The 4FGL sources with unknown nature are labeled. The white circle represents the extension of 4FGL J1626.0−4917, which is 0.28◦ as given in Section 2.1 PLSC model is defined as: dN dE = N0  E E0 γ0− d 2 ln E E0 − db 6 ln2 E E0 − db2 24 ln3 E E0 (3) where γ0 is the photon index, d is the parameter describe the shape of he expone… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The 1.5 ◦ × 1.5 ◦ γ-ray TS map (300 MeV to 300 GeV) around 4FGL J1626.0−4917 view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: γ-ray spectrum of 4FGL J1626.0−4917 with Fermi-LAT data. The hadronic model is shown also, which will be discussed in Section 3 view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Gas column densities (in unit of cm−2 ) with different gas phase in equatorial coordinate. The left panel gives the H2 column density derived from CO data. The middle panel provides the map of H I column density derived from a 21-cm all-sky survey. The right panel shows the H II column density derived from Planck free-free (353 GHz) map assuming an effective density of electron ne = 10 cm−3 . Model Best-fi… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Chandra X-ray sky map in energy range 0.3-8.0 keV in equatorial coordinate system. X1 (R.A.=16:27:03.0307, Dec.=-49.12.32.386) is marked in the map. The background region used for ex￾tracting spectrum is labeled as green circle. The white circle shows the location of 4FGL J1626.0−4917 view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: X-ray spectrum in the energy range of 0.3-8.0 keV with a power-law model. view at source ↗

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

53 extracted references · 53 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A., Ackermann, M., Ajello, M., et al

    Abdo, A. A., Ackermann, M., Ajello, M., et al. 2010, ApJS, 188, 405 1

    work page 2010

  2. [2]

    2020, ApJS, 247, 33 1

    Abdollahi, S., Acero, F., Ackermann, M., et al. 2020, ApJS, 247, 33 1

    work page 2020

  3. [3]

    arXiv e-prints , keywords =

    Abdollahi, S., Acero, F., Acharyya, A., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.07162 1, 9

    work page arXiv 2024

  4. [4]

    2013, ApJ, 779, 133 1

    Acero, F., Donato, D., Ojha, R., et al. 2013, ApJ, 779, 133 1

    work page 2013

  5. [5]

    2016, ApJS, 224, 8 9

    Acero, F., Ackermann, M., Ajello, M., et al. 2016, ApJS, 224, 8 9

    work page 2016

  6. [6]

    2018, ApJS, 237, 32 2, 9

    Ackermann, M., Ajello, M., Baldini, L., et al. 2018, ApJS, 237, 32 2, 9

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    G., Barres de Almeida, U., et al

    Aharonian, F., Akhperjanian, A. G., Barres de Almeida, U., et al. 2008, A&A, 477, 353 9

    work page 2008

  8. [8]

    2022, A&A, 666, A124 9

    Aharonian, F., Ashkar, H., Backes, M., et al. 2022, A&A, 666, A124 9

    work page 2022

  9. [9]

    V ., Cignoni, M., Bragaglia, A., et al

    Ahumada, A. V ., Cignoni, M., Bragaglia, A., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 430, 221 9

    work page 2013

  10. [10]

    B., Baldini, L., et al

    Ajello, M., Atwood, W. B., Baldini, L., et al. 2017, ApJS, 232, 18 1, 9

    work page 2017

  11. [11]

    Araya, M., & ´Alvarez-Quesada, J. A. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 8006 1

    work page 2024

  12. [12]

    2010, A&A, 520, A111 2

    Balbo, M., Saouter, P., Walter, R., et al. 2010, A&A, 520, A111 2

    work page 2010

  13. [13]

    2025, A&A, 694, A244 9

    Blasi, P. 2025, A&A, 694, A244 9

    work page 2025

  14. [14]

    2023, MNRAS, 523, 4015 9

    Blasi, P., & Morlino, G. 2023, MNRAS, 523, 4015 9

    work page 2023

  15. [15]

    D., Wolfire, M., & Leroy, A

    Bolatto, A. D., Wolfire, M., & Leroy, A. K. 2013, ARA&A, 51, 207 6 4FGL J1626.0−4917 11

    work page 2013

  16. [16]

    2011, Astroparticle Physics, 34, 447 9

    Caprioli, D., Blasi, P., & Amato, E. 2011, Astroparticle Physics, 34, 447 9

    work page 2011

  17. [17]

    M., Hartmann, D., & Thaddeus, P

    Dame, T. M., Hartmann, D., & Thaddeus, P. 2001, ApJ, 547, 792 4, 6 De Grandis, D., Rigoselli, M., Mereghetti, S., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 516, 4932 7 Di Mauro, M., Manconi, S., & Donato, F. 2019, Phys. Rev. D, 100, 123015 1

    work page 2001

  18. [18]

    2023, MNRAS, 523, 4120 1

    Ding, J., Huang, Y ., Li, X.-D., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 523, 4120 1

    work page 2023

  19. [19]

    2011, A&A, 526, A82 4, 6, 10

    Eger, P., Rowell, G., Kawamura, A., et al. 2011, A&A, 526, A82 4, 6, 10

    work page 2011

  20. [20]

    2013, New Astron., 18, 35 9

    Fang, J., & Zhang, L. 2013, New Astron., 18, 35 9

    work page 2013

  21. [21]

    Finkbeiner, D. P. 2003, ApJS, 146, 407 6

    work page 2003

  22. [22]

    2022, MNRAS, 517, 5121 4

    Ge, T.-T., Sun, X.-N., Yang, R.-Z., Liang, Y .-F., & Liang, E.-W. 2022, MNRAS, 517, 5121 4

    work page 2022

  23. [23]

    Green, D. A. 2019, Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy, 40, 36 9 H. E. S. S. Collaboration, Abdalla, H., Abramowski, A., et al. 2018, A&A, 612, A1 2 HI4PI Collaboration, Ben Bekhti, N., Fl¨oer, L., et al. 2016, A&A, 594, A116 6

    work page 2019

  24. [24]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.08709 9

    Huang, C., Zhang, X., Chen, Y ., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.08709 9

    work page arXiv 2025

  25. [25]

    Y ., Lee, J., Li, K

    Hui, C. Y ., Lee, J., Li, K. L., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 495, 1093 1

    work page 2020

  26. [26]

    M., & Vila, G

    Kafexhiu, E., Aharonian, F., Taylor, A. M., & Vila, G. S. 2014, Phys. Rev. D, 90, 123014 4, 9

    work page 2014

  27. [27]

    M., Manchester, R

    Kaspi, V . M., Manchester, R. N., Johnston, S., Lyne, A. G., & D’Amico, N. 1996, AJ, 111, 2028 9

    work page 1996

  28. [28]

    2025, A&A, 693, A193 9

    Lemoine-Goumard, M., Acero, F., Ballet, J., & Miceli, M. 2025, A&A, 693, A193 9

    work page 2025

  29. [29]

    2008, ApJ, 682, 1166 7

    Li, X.-H., Lu, F.-J., & Li, Z. 2008, ApJ, 682, 1166 7

    work page 2008

  30. [30]

    Menchiari, S., Morlino, G., Amato, E., Bucciantini, N., & Beltr´an, M. T. 2024, A&A, 686, A242 9

    work page 2024

  31. [31]

    2021, MNRAS, 504, 6096 9

    Morlino, G., Blasi, P., Peretti, E., & Cristofari, P. 2021, MNRAS, 504, 6096 9

    work page 2021

  32. [32]

    L., Abdo, A

    Nolan, P. L., Abdo, A. A., Ackermann, M., et al. 2012, ApJS, 199, 31 1

    work page 2012

  33. [33]

    Orlando, E., Rasmussen, M., & Strong, A. W. 2022, in 37th International Cosmic Ray Conference, 662 2

    work page 2022

  34. [34]

    2025, Astronomical Techniques and Instruments, 2, 44 1

    Ou, Z. 2025, Astronomical Techniques and Instruments, 2, 44 1

    work page 2025

  35. [35]

    2017, MNRAS, 468, 4902 1

    Paiano, S., Franceschini, A., & Stamerra, A. 2017, MNRAS, 468, 4902 1

    work page 2017

  36. [36]

    2000, A&A, 361, 614 7 Planck Collaboration, Adam, R., Ade, P

    Pizzolato, N., Maggio, A., & Sciortino, S. 2000, A&A, 361, 614 7 Planck Collaboration, Adam, R., Ade, P. A. R., et al. 2016, A&A, 594, A10 6

    work page 2000

  37. [37]

    Principe, G., Mitchell, A. M. W., Caroff, S., et al. 2020, A&A, 640, A76 1

    work page 2020

  38. [38]

    2021, ApJ, 913, 83 2 Saz Parkinson, P

    Sato, S., Kataoka, J., Ito, S., et al. 2021, ApJ, 913, 83 2 Saz Parkinson, P. M., Xu, H., Yu, P. L. H., et al. 2016, ApJ, 820, 8 1

    work page 2021

  39. [39]

    M., & Bell, A

    Schure, K. M., & Bell, A. R. 2013, MNRAS, 435, 1174 9

    work page 2013

  40. [40]

    2025, ApJ, 984, 199 2

    Shi, Y ., Cui, Y ., & Yang, L. 2025, ApJ, 984, 199 2

    work page 2025

  41. [41]

    A., Abdollahi, S., Ajello, M., et al

    Smith, D. A., Abdollahi, S., Ajello, M., et al. 2023, ApJ, 958, 191 3

    work page 2023

  42. [42]

    Tang, X., & Chevalier, R. A. 2015, ApJ, 800, 103 9

    work page 2015

  43. [43]

    2021, A&A, 647, A19 8

    Tarricq, Y ., Soubiran, C., Casamiquela, L., et al. 2021, A&A, 647, A19 8

    work page 2021

  44. [44]

    2018, A&A, 617, A78 1

    Tibaldo, L., Zanin, R., Faggioli, G., et al. 2018, A&A, 617, A78 1

    work page 2018

  45. [45]

    2025, A&A, 694, A176 1

    Ulgiati, A., Paiano, S., Pintore, F., et al. 2025, A&A, 694, A176 1

    work page 2025

  46. [46]

    2023, MNRAS, 519, 136 9

    Vieu, T., & Reville, B. 2023, MNRAS, 519, 136 9

    work page 2023

  47. [47]

    2012, A&A Rev., 20, 49 9

    Vink, J. 2012, A&A Rev., 20, 49 9

    work page 2012

  48. [48]

    Whiteoak, J. B. Z., & Green, A. J. 1996, A&AS, 118, 329 9

    work page 1996

  49. [49]

    2024, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 24, 105004 2

    Xiang, Y ., Feng, P., & Lan, X. 2024, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 24, 105004 2

    work page 2024

  50. [50]

    2019, ApJ, 885, 162 2

    Xin, Y ., Zeng, H., Liu, S., Fan, Y ., & Wei, D. 2019, ApJ, 885, 162 2

    work page 2019

  51. [51]

    2016, ApJ, 823, 44 9

    Xing, Y ., Wang, Z., Zhang, X., & Chen, Y . 2016, ApJ, 823, 44 9

    work page 2016

  52. [52]

    2018, A&A, 611, A77 9

    Yang, R.-z., de O˜na Wilhelmi, E., & Aharonian, F. 2018, A&A, 611, A77 9

    work page 2018

  53. [53]

    2015, in International Cosmic Ray Conference, V ol

    Zabalza, V . 2015, in International Cosmic Ray Conference, V ol. 34, 34th International Cosmic Ray Conference (ICRC2015), 922 6

    work page 2015