pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2605.10294 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-11 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Wolf-Rayet stars as tracers of gamma-ray emission: Isolated stars and stellar clusters/associations

Alexandre Inventar , Giada Peron , Sarah Recchia , Stefano Gabici
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-12 04:40 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE
keywords wolf-rayet starsgamma-ray emissionstellar clustersstellar windsparticle accelerationGeV sourcesunidentified sourceswind termination shocks
0
0 comments X

The pith

Wolf-Rayet stars and clusters show spatial links to unidentified GeV sources, consistent with particle acceleration at wind termination shocks.

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

The paper ranks stellar clusters by the number of Wolf-Rayet member stars divided by distance squared, a measure proportional to expected gamma-ray output from wind-powered acceleration. It reports a hint of correlation at less than three sigma with unidentified GeV gamma-ray sources and flags eleven new spatial associations. The same approach applied to isolated Wolf-Rayet stars identifies four objects with both spatial coincidences and high wind-power-to-distance ratios, although the full population shows no significant link. These findings suggest that the mechanical power in Wolf-Rayet winds, whether from many stars in a cluster or from single stars, can accelerate particles to energies that produce detectable gamma rays through interactions with ambient matter or radiation. The work supplies ordered lists of targets to guide future observations that could test this mechanism.

Core claim

By treating the number of Wolf-Rayet stars per distance squared as a proxy for expected gamma-ray flux from collective wind termination shocks, the authors find a marginal correlation (≲3σ) between WR-hosting clusters and unidentified GeV sources, together with eleven new candidate associations; they also note spatial coincidences for four isolated WR stars (WR110, WR114, WR111, WR14) that possess particularly large wind-power-to-distance-squared values, although isolated stars as a whole show no population-level correlation.

What carries the argument

The ranking quantity of Wolf-Rayet star count (or wind mechanical power) divided by distance squared, which scales directly with the expected gamma-ray flux assuming particle acceleration at wind termination shocks.

Load-bearing premise

Spatial coincidences between the ranked Wolf-Rayet clusters or stars and unidentified gamma-ray sources reflect physical associations driven by wind-powered particle acceleration rather than chance alignments or unrelated emitters.

What would settle it

A future gamma-ray observation with better angular resolution or sensitivity that either fails to detect emission from the highest-ranked candidates at the predicted level or shows the emission is centered away from the WR stars or clusters.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.10294 by Alexandre Inventar, Giada Peron, Sarah Recchia, Stefano Gabici.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Distribution of wind powers for single WR stars (red) and entire star clusters (lower limits, from Celli et al. 2024, cyan). [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Position (magenta/white points) of gamma-ray sources found in the vicinity of the clusters from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Position (magenta/white points) of gamma-ray sources found in the vicinity of the WR stars from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Spectrum of the gamma-ray sources tentatively asso [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Spectrum of the gamma-ray sources tentatively associated with WR 111 (left) and WR 114 (right). The solid line shows the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Spectrum of the unidentified gamma-ray sources found in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Context: Recent gamma-ray observations of young star clusters revealed that stellar wind termination shocks accelerate particles, with the energy reservoir provided by the mechanical power of massive-star winds. Aims: Our goal is to identify promising targets for future gamma-ray studies of stellar clusters and associations powered by massive stars. As the wind power of a single Wolf-Rayet (WR) star can rival the cumulative wind power of the most massive clusters, we also investigate isolated WR stars, many of which are indeed isolated. Methods: We ranked a large sample of stellar clusters and associations according to the number of member WR stars divided by the distance squared, a quantity proportional to the expected gamma-ray signal, and searched for spatial correlations with known gamma-ray sources. We repeated the same procedure for individual WR stars with known wind mechanical powers and distances. Results: We found a hint ($\lesssim 3 \sigma$ confidence) for a correlation between WR-hosting clusters and unidentified GeV gamma-ray sources, and identified new spatial associations for 11 clusters. We also found spatial coincidences between 4 isolated WR stars (WR110, WR114, WR111, and WR14) and unidentified gamma-ray sources. Although no significant correlation is found for isolated WR stars as a population, these 4 objects exhibit particularly large wind-power-to-distance-squared ratios, a necessary condition for detectability with current instruments. Assuming the gamma-ray emission is powered by WR winds, it can be interpreted as arising from interactions between particles accelerated at the wind termination shock and ambient matter or radiation fields. Conclusions: Since the wind power of an individual WR star can rival that of an entire stellar cluster, we provide a ranking of stellar clusters and isolated WR stars that may constitute potential gamma-ray emitters.

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 paper ranks stellar clusters/associations by the number of Wolf-Rayet (WR) member stars divided by distance squared and individual WR stars by wind mechanical power over distance squared, then searches for spatial coincidences with unidentified GeV gamma-ray sources from external catalogs. It reports a marginal (≲3σ) population-level hint of correlation for WR-hosting clusters, identifies new associations for 11 clusters, and notes coincidences for four isolated WR stars (WR110, WR114, WR111, WR14) that have high wind-power-to-distance-squared ratios, interpreting these as potential evidence for particle acceleration at wind termination shocks.

Significance. If the reported associations prove physical rather than chance alignments, the work would strengthen the case that stellar winds supply the energy for gamma-ray emission in young clusters and would supply a practical ranked target list for future observations with current and upcoming instruments. The approach of using an observationally motivated ranking metric without fitted parameters is a strength, but the marginal significance limits the immediate implications for the broader field of cosmic-ray acceleration in massive-star environments.

major comments (3)
  1. [Results] Results section (paragraph on cluster correlation): the claimed ≲3σ hint relies on counting spatial coincidences after pre-ranking by (N_WR/d²), but the manuscript provides no Monte Carlo assessment of the expected random coincidence rate given the surface density of unidentified GeV sources, the adopted matching radius, and the ranking step itself. Without this, the significance cannot be evaluated and chance alignments remain plausible.
  2. [Results] Results section (isolated WR stars paragraph): after stating that no significant population correlation exists for isolated WR stars, the paper highlights four specific objects (WR110, WR114, WR111, WR14) with spatial coincidences. This post-selection on the highest-ranked objects requires a quantitative false-positive probability calculation; otherwise the interpretation that these coincidences indicate wind-driven emission is weakened.
  3. [Methods] Methods/Results (statistical procedure): details are missing on background estimation, the precise definition of the matching radius, and any correction for multiple comparisons across the ranked sample. These elements are load-bearing for the central claim that the overlaps trace physical associations rather than background fluctuations.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the phrase 'hint (≲ 3 σ confidence)' should specify the exact statistical test and whether it accounts for the pre-ranking procedure.
  2. [Results] The manuscript would benefit from an explicit table listing the 11 clusters and 4 stars with their ranking metric values, angular separation to the gamma-ray source, and any available flux upper limits or non-detections.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed comments. We agree that additional quantitative statistical assessments are required to robustly support the reported correlations and will revise the manuscript accordingly by adding Monte Carlo simulations and expanded methodological details.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Results] Results section (paragraph on cluster correlation): the claimed ≲3σ hint relies on counting spatial coincidences after pre-ranking by (N_WR/d²), but the manuscript provides no Monte Carlo assessment of the expected random coincidence rate given the surface density of unidentified GeV sources, the adopted matching radius, and the ranking step itself. Without this, the significance cannot be evaluated and chance alignments remain plausible.

    Authors: We agree that a Monte Carlo simulation is necessary to properly evaluate the significance, incorporating the pre-ranking by N_WR/d², the surface density of unidentified GeV sources, and the matching radius. In the revised manuscript we will perform such simulations to compute the expected random coincidence rate and provide a data-driven significance estimate for the cluster associations. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results] Results section (isolated WR stars paragraph): after stating that no significant population correlation exists for isolated WR stars, the paper highlights four specific objects (WR110, WR114, WR111, WR14) with spatial coincidences. This post-selection on the highest-ranked objects requires a quantitative false-positive probability calculation; otherwise the interpretation that these coincidences indicate wind-driven emission is weakened.

    Authors: We acknowledge that post-selection on the highest-ranked objects requires a quantitative false-positive assessment. We will add a calculation of the chance coincidence probability for these four stars, using the same Monte Carlo framework developed for the clusters, to evaluate whether the observed overlaps are consistent with background fluctuations. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Methods] Methods/Results (statistical procedure): details are missing on background estimation, the precise definition of the matching radius, and any correction for multiple comparisons across the ranked sample. These elements are load-bearing for the central claim that the overlaps trace physical associations rather than background fluctuations.

    Authors: We will expand the Methods section to include explicit descriptions of the background estimation procedure, the exact definition and justification of the matching radius (tied to positional uncertainties of the gamma-ray sources), and any adjustments applied for multiple comparisons across the ranked lists. These additions will provide the necessary transparency for assessing the statistical robustness of the results. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: ranking uses a priori physical scaling on external catalogs

full rationale

The paper constructs a ranking metric for clusters (number of WR stars / d²) and isolated stars (wind power / d²) directly from the physical expectation that gamma-ray flux scales with mechanical wind power over distance squared. This metric is applied to prioritize targets before searching for spatial coincidences in independent external GeV catalogs. No parameters are fitted to the gamma-ray data, no self-referential definitions equate the metric to the observed associations, and no self-citation chains or uniqueness theorems are invoked to justify the central claim. The analysis remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The analysis rests on standard astrophysical models of particle acceleration at stellar wind termination shocks without introducing new free parameters, axioms beyond domain knowledge, or invented entities.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Gamma-ray emission from stellar wind termination shocks scales proportionally with the mechanical wind power divided by distance squared.
    This physical scaling directly motivates the ranking quantity used to select targets.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5629 in / 1389 out tokens · 43151 ms · 2026-05-12T04:40:39.320844+00:00 · methodology

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

234 extracted references · 234 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    2020, , 247, 33

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

    work page 2020

  2. [2]

    U., Albert , A., Alfaro , R., et al

    Abeysekara , A. U., Albert , A., Alfaro , R., et al. 2017, , 843, 40

    work page 2017

  3. [3]

    U., Albert , A., Alfaro , R., et al

    Abeysekara , A. U., Albert , A., Alfaro , R., et al. 2021, Nature Astronomy, 5, 465

    work page 2021

  4. [4]

    2012, , 537, A114

    Abramowski , A., Acero , F., Aharonian , F., et al. 2012, , 537, A114

    work page 2012

  5. [5]

    2013, , 773, 77

    Acero , F., Ackermann , M., Ajello , M., et al. 2013, , 773, 77

    work page 2013

  6. [6]

    2011, Science, 334, 1103

    Ackermann , M., Ajello , M., Allafort , A., et al. 2011, Science, 334, 1103

    work page 2011

  7. [7]

    G., Bazer-Bachi , A

    Aharonian , F., Akhperjanian , A. G., Bazer-Bachi , A. R., et al. 2007, , 467, 1075

    work page 2007

  8. [8]

    2022, , 666, A124

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

    work page 2022

  9. [9]

    2019, Nature Astronomy, 3, 561

    Aharonian , F., Yang , R., & de O \ n a Wilhelmi , E. 2019, Nature Astronomy, 3, 561

    work page 2019

  10. [10]

    B., Baldini , L., et al

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

    work page 2017

  11. [11]

    2024, , 972, 21

    Albert , A., Alfaro , R., Alvarez , C., et al. 2024, , 972, 21

    work page 2024

  12. [12]

    2023, , 671, A47

    Astiasarain , X., Tibaldo , L., Martin , P., Kn \"o dlseder , J., & Remy , Q. 2023, , 671, A47

    work page 2023

  13. [13]

    H., Lott, B., & The Fermi-LAT collaboration

    Ballet , J., Bruel , P., Burnett , T. H., Lott , B., & The Fermi-LAT collaboration . 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2307.12546

    work page arXiv 2023

  14. [14]

    2007, , 382, 367

    Bednarek , W. 2007, , 382, 367

    work page 2007

  15. [15]

    B., De Becker , M., Saha , A., Tej , A., & Benaglia , P

    Blanco , A. B., De Becker , M., Saha , A., Tej , A., & Benaglia , P. 2024, , 690, A78

    work page 2024

  16. [16]

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

    Bolatto , A. D., Wolfire , M., & Leroy , A. K. 2013, , 51, 207

    work page 2013

  17. [17]

    2011, , 532, A131

    Borissova , J., Bonatto , C., Kurtev , R., et al. 2011, , 532, A131

    work page 2011

  18. [18]

    2024, , 271, 25

    Cao , Z., Aharonian , F., An , Q., et al. 2024, , 271, 25

    work page 2024

  19. [19]

    2025, Science China Physics, Mechanics, and Astronomy, 68, 279502

    Cao , Z., Aharonian , F., Axikegu , et al. 2025, Science China Physics, Mechanics, and Astronomy, 68, 279502

    work page 2025

  20. [20]

    A., An , Q., et al

    Cao , Z., Aharonian , F. A., An , Q., et al. 2021, , 594, 33

    work page 2021

  21. [21]

    & Paul , J

    Casse , M. & Paul , J. A. 1980, , 237, 236

    work page 1980

  22. [22]

    & Paul , J

    Casse , M. & Paul , J. A. 1982, , 258, 860

    work page 1982

  23. [23]

    2016, , 587, A71

    Castelletti , G., Giacani , E., & Petriella , A. 2016, , 587, A71

    work page 2016

  24. [24]

    2024, , 686, A118

    Celli , S., Specovius , A., Menchiari , S., Mitchell , A., & Morlino , G. 2024, , 686, A118

    work page 2024

  25. [25]

    Cesarsky , C. J. & Montmerle , T. 1983, , 36, 173

    work page 1983

  26. [26]

    2023, , 959, 97

    Chambery , P., Lemoine-Goumard , M., Jardin-Blicq , A., Sinha , A., & Eagle , J. 2023, , 959, 97

    work page 2023

  27. [27]

    N., Borissova , J., Bonatto , C., et al

    Chen \'e , A. N., Borissova , J., Bonatto , C., et al. 2013, , 549, A98

    work page 2013

  28. [28]

    S., Ritchie , B

    Clark , J. S., Ritchie , B. W., & Negueruela , I. 2020, , 635, A187

    work page 2020

  29. [29]

    2013, , 434, 2748

    Cristofari , P., Gabici , S., Casanova , S., Terrier , R., & Parizot , E. 2013, , 434, 2748

    work page 2013

  30. [30]

    Crowther , P. A. 2007, , 45, 177

    work page 2007

  31. [31]

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

    Dame , T. M., Hartmann , D., & Thaddeus , P. 2001, , 547, 792

    work page 2001

  32. [32]

    2012, , 419, 1860

    Davies , B., de La Fuente , D., Najarro , F., et al. 2012, , 419, 1860

    work page 2012

  33. [33]

    2025, , 701, A18

    De Sarkar , A. 2025, , 701, A18

    work page 2025

  34. [34]

    Drissen , L., Moffat , A. F. J., Walborn , N. R., & Shara , M. M. 1995, , 110, 2235

    work page 1995

  35. [35]

    2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2307.01596

    Gabici , S. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2307.01596

    work page arXiv 2023

  36. [36]

    2024, in 7th Heidelberg International Symposium on High-Energy Gamma-Ray Astronomy, 16

    Gabici , S. 2024, in 7th Heidelberg International Symposium on High-Energy Gamma-Ray Astronomy, 16

    work page 2024

  37. [37]

    A., & Casanova , S

    Gabici , S., Aharonian , F. A., & Casanova , S. 2009, , 396, 1629

    work page 2009

  38. [38]

    A., & Rowell , G

    Gabici , S., Casanova , S., Aharonian , F. A., & Rowell , G. 2010, in SF2A-2010: Proceedings of the Annual meeting of the French Society of Astronomy and Astrophysics, ed. S. Boissier , M. Heydari-Malayeri , R. Samadi , & D. Valls-Gabaud , 313

    work page 2010

  39. [39]

    2022, , 517, 5121

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

    work page 2022

  40. [40]

    Green , D. A. 2025, Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy, 46, 14

    work page 2025

  41. [41]

    & Xin , Y

    Guo , X. & Xin , Y. 2024, , 965, 28

    work page 2024

  42. [42]

    B., Sharma , P., & Eichler , D

    Gupta , S., Nath , B. B., Sharma , P., & Eichler , D. 2020, , 493, 3159

    work page 2020

  43. [43]

    H. E. S. S. Collaboration , Abdalla , H., Abramowski , A., et al. 2018 a , , 612, A11

    work page 2018

  44. [44]

    H. E. S. S. Collaboration , Abdalla , H., Abramowski , A., et al. 2018 b , , 612, A1

    work page 2018

  45. [45]

    H. E. S. S. Collaboration , Abramowski , A., Acero , F., et al. 2011, , 525, A46

    work page 2011

  46. [46]

    H. E. S. S. Collaboration , Aharonian , F., Ait Benkhali , F., et al. 2023, , 672, A103

    work page 2023

  47. [47]

    2022, GAMERA: Source modeling in gamma astronomy , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:2203.007

    Hahn , J., Romoli , C., & Breuhaus , M. 2022, GAMERA: Source modeling in gamma astronomy , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:2203.007

    work page 2022

  48. [48]

    R., Gr \"a fener , G., Liermann , A., et al

    Hamann , W. R., Gr \"a fener , G., Liermann , A., et al. 2019, , 625, A57

    work page 2019

  49. [49]

    H \"a rer , L., Vieu , T., Schulze , F., Larkin , C. J. K., & Reville , B. 2025, , 703, A111

    work page 2025

  50. [50]

    K., Reville , B., Hinton , J., Mohrmann , L., & Vieu , T

    H \"a rer , L. K., Reville , B., Hinton , J., Mohrmann , L., & Vieu , T. 2023, , 671, A4

    work page 2023

  51. [51]

    2016, , 531, 476

    HESS Collaboration , Abramowski , A., Aharonian , F., et al. 2016, , 531, 476

    work page 2016

  52. [52]

    Hillas , A. M. 1984, , 22, 425

    work page 1984

  53. [53]

    Hillas , A. M. 2005, Journal of Physics G Nuclear Physics, 31, R95

    work page 2005

  54. [54]

    Y., Lee , J., Li , K

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

    work page 2020

  55. [55]

    Hunt , E. L. & Reffert , S. 2024, , 686, A42

    work page 2024

  56. [56]

    2025, in Proceedings of 39th International Cosmic Ray Conference PoS(ICRC2025), Vol

    Inventar, A., Peron, G., Recchia, S., & Gabici, S. 2025, in Proceedings of 39th International Cosmic Ray Conference PoS(ICRC2025), Vol. 501, 693

    work page 2025

  57. [57]

    M., & Vila , G

    Kafexhiu , E., Aharonian , F., Taylor , A. M., & Vila , G. S. 2014, , 90, 123014

    work page 2014

  58. [58]

    Kaul , R. K. & Mitra , A. K. 1997, in American Institute of Physics Conference Series, Vol. 410, Proceedings of the Fourth Compton Symposium, ed. C. D. Dermer , M. S. Strickman , & J. D. Kurfess (AIP), 1271--1274

    work page 1997

  59. [59]

    H., Martin , P., & Renaud , M

    Lemoine-Goumard , M., Ferrara , E., Grondin , M. H., Martin , P., & Renaud , M. 2011, , 82, 739

    work page 2011

  60. [60]

    2025, Nature Communications, 16, 10820

    Lemoine-Goumard , M., H \"a rer , L., Mohrmann , L., et al. 2025, Nature Communications, 16, 10820

    work page 2025

  61. [61]

    2024, Science Bulletin, 69, 449

    Lhaaso Collaboration . 2024, Science Bulletin, 69, 449

    work page 2024

  62. [62]

    & Chieffi , A

    Limongi , M. & Chieffi , A. 2006, , 647, 483

    work page 2006

  63. [63]

    2024, , 535, 1526

    Liu , J.-h., Liu , B., & Yang , R.-z. 2024, , 535, 1526

    work page 2024

  64. [64]

    I., et al

    Ma \' z Apell \'a niz , J., Sota , A., Morrell , N. I., et al. 2013, in Massive Stars: From alpha to Omega, 198

    work page 2013

  65. [65]

    K., Polcaro , V

    Manchanda , R. K., Polcaro , V. F., Norci , L., et al. 1996, , 305, 457

    work page 1996

  66. [66]

    N., Hobbs , G

    Manchester , R. N., Hobbs , G. B., Teoh , A., & Hobbs , M. 2005, , 129, 1993

    work page 2005

  67. [67]

    & Reimer , O

    Mart \' -Devesa , G. & Reimer , O. 2021, , 654, A44

    work page 2021

  68. [68]

    Mart \' -Devesa , G., Reimer , O., Li , J., & Torres , D. F. 2020, , 635, A141

    work page 2020

  69. [69]

    Menchiari , S., Morlino , G., Amato , E., Bucciantini , N., & Beltr \'a n , M. T. 2024, , 686, A242

    work page 2024

  70. [70]

    P., Clemens , D

    Mercer , E. P., Clemens , D. P., Meade , M. R., et al. 2005, , 635, 560

    work page 2005

  71. [71]

    D., et al

    Messineo , M., Davies , B., Ivanov , V. D., et al. 2009, , 697, 701

    work page 2009

  72. [72]

    F., et al

    Mestre , E., de O \ n a Wilhelmi , E., Torres , D. F., et al. 2021, , 505, 2731

    work page 2021

  73. [73]

    M., et al

    Mr \'o z , P., Udalski , A., Skowron , D. M., et al. 2019, , 870, L10

    work page 2019

  74. [74]

    M., & Romero , G

    Munar-Adrover , P., Paredes , J. M., & Romero , G. E. 2011, , 530, A72

    work page 2011

  75. [75]

    J., Dorda , R., et al

    Negueruela , I., Alfaro , E. J., Dorda , R., et al. 2022, , 664, A146

    work page 2022

  76. [76]

    A., & White , R

    Ohm , S., Hinton , J. A., & White , R. 2013, , 434, 2289

    work page 2013

  77. [77]

    2025, in 39th International Cosmic Ray Conference, 1390

    Peron , G. 2025, in 39th International Cosmic Ray Conference, 1390

    work page 2025

  78. [78]

    2024 a , Nature Astronomy, 8, 530

    Peron , G., Casanova , S., Gabici , S., Baghmanyan , V., & Aharonian , F. 2024 a , Nature Astronomy, 8, 530

    work page 2024

  79. [79]

    2025, , 703, L8

    Peron , G., Menchiari , S., Morlino , G., & Amato , E. 2025, , 703, L8

    work page 2025

  80. [80]

    2024 b , , 972, L22

    Peron , G., Morlino , G., Gabici , S., et al. 2024 b , , 972, L22

    work page 2024

Showing first 80 references.