FARSim: a fast RF-chain-aware trigger-screening surrogate for radio detection of ultra-high-energy cosmic rays

Chao Zhang; Fufu Yang; Pengfei Zhang; Pengxiong Ma; Ramesh Koirala; Xin Xu

arxiv: 2605.28373 · v3 · pith:5FWFZVJYnew · submitted 2026-05-27 · 🌌 astro-ph.IM

FARSim: a fast RF-chain-aware trigger-screening surrogate for radio detection of ultra-high-energy cosmic rays

Xin Xu , Pengfei Zhang , Fufu Yang , Pengxiong Ma , Ramesh Koirala , Chao Zhang This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-29 10:08 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.IM

keywords radio detectionultra-high-energy cosmic raysair-shower simulationsurrogate modeltrigger optimizationRF chain responsevector waveform reconstruction

0 comments

The pith

FARSim reconstructs radio emission from cosmic-ray air showers via a reduced reference library to accelerate trigger and layout studies.

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

The paper introduces a surrogate model that reuses a small set of full radio simulations to rebuild ground-plane electric-field footprints and time-domain waveforms for many different shower energies, directions, and core positions. It decomposes fields into geomagnetic and charge-excess components, applies scaling and projection steps, then attaches normalized pulse templates to produce voltage traces after an RF-chain response. The goal is to let designers evaluate many array layouts and trigger thresholds quickly without repeating expensive end-to-end simulations for each configuration. Validation on held-out cases shows the reconstructed vector waveforms match the original simulations closely enough for trigger screening purposes.

Core claim

FARSim reuses a reduced library of ZHAireS reference footprints together with vector decomposition, geomagnetic-angle and energy scaling, geometrical projection, contour-based core sampling, and geometry-dependent pulse templates to reconstruct radio emission and estimate trigger observables. The time-domain extension produces three-component electric-field traces whose median vector-waveform R^2 reaches 0.986 on 2112 held-out traces when evaluated at the true peak amplitude, enabling voltage-domain threshold and L1-trigger diagnostics after RF-chain propagation.

What carries the argument

Vector geomagnetic and charge-excess field decomposition combined with energy-angle scaling, geometrical projection, and geometry-dependent normalized pulse templates that synthesize time-domain traces from predicted peak-field vectors.

If this is right

Many candidate array geometries and trigger settings can be screened without running a full shower simulation for each one.
RF-chain effects on voltage thresholds become available during early layout optimization.
Event-rate integration over core positions can be performed by querying the surrogate instead of resimulating each point.
Absolute exposure calculations still require full simulations, but the surrogate narrows the space of layouts worth testing in detail.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

The same template-based synthesis could be tested on other radio-emission codes to check whether the high waveform fidelity is specific to ZHAireS or more general.
Expanding the reference library with a few extreme cases might reduce the risk that rare geometries fall outside the validated range.
If the scaling relations hold across experiments, the approach could shorten the design cycle for next-generation radio arrays by replacing repeated full simulations with library queries.

Load-bearing premise

The reduced library plus the decomposition, scaling, and template steps can accurately represent radio emission and trigger behavior for any energy, arrival direction, core position, or trigger setup.

What would settle it

A new set of ZHAireS simulations at previously unsampled energies or angles where the surrogate's median vector-waveform R^2 drops below 0.9 or its predicted trigger decisions disagree with the full simulation on more than a few percent of events.

read the original abstract

Radio arrays provide a scalable route to detecting extensive air showers from ultra-high-energy cosmic rays, but trigger studies for candidate layouts are expensive when every energy, arrival direction, core position and trigger configuration is evaluated with full radio simulations. We present FARSim, a fast surrogate framework that reuses a reduced library of ZHAireS reference footprints to reconstruct ground-plane radio emission and to estimate trigger-relevant observables. The method combines vector geomagnetic and charge-excess field decomposition, geomagnetic-angle and energy scaling, geometrical projection, contour-based core sampling and event-rate integration. We validate the reconstructed field footprints and trigger regions against dedicated ZHAireS simulations, and quantify the computational gain obtained by replacing repeated full shower simulations with fast footprint queries. We further extend the peak-field surrogate to time-domain electric-field synthesis by combining the predicted three-component peak-field vector with geometry-dependent normalized pulse templates. Propagating these traces through an RF-chain response enables voltage-domain threshold and L1-trigger diagnostics. For the validation samples considered here, the time-domain extension reaches a median vector-waveform R^2 of 0.986 over 2112 held-out ZHAireS traces when tested at the true peak amplitude. FARSim is therefore intended as a rapid, physics-informed screening layer for array-layout and trigger studies; absolute exposure predictions and detector commissioning remain the role of full end-to-end simulations.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

FARSim stitches together library reuse, field decomposition and template matching into a practical screening surrogate, but the 0.986 R^2 only checks shape once the peak amplitude is already known exactly.

read the letter

The main point is that this surrogate reuses a reduced ZHAireS library to reconstruct radio footprints and generate time-domain traces for trigger studies, yet the headline accuracy number conditions on the true peak amplitude from the reference simulation.

They decompose the field into geomagnetic and charge-excess vectors, scale by angle and energy, project geometrically, sample contours for core positions, and attach geometry-dependent normalized pulse templates. The traces then go through an RF-chain model to produce voltage-domain L1 diagnostics. Validation is reported against dedicated full simulations for both footprints and trigger regions, with a concrete speed gain from avoiding repeated shower runs. The integration of these steps into one framework for layout exploration is the actual new piece, and grounding everything in external ZHAireS references keeps it non-circular.

The soft spot is the one flagged in the stress-test note. Because the R^2 of 0.986 on the 2112 held-out traces is measured at the true peak, it only confirms how well the templates match shape; it says nothing about whether the surrogate's own predicted peak vector is accurate enough for the voltage thresholds that actually matter. Trigger observables depend on absolute amplitude after filtering, so an error there would propagate even with perfect normalized shapes. The reduced library plus all the scaling and projection steps also leaves open how well the method extrapolates to energies, directions or core positions outside the sampled set, though the authors correctly note that absolute exposure still requires full simulations.

This is for the instrumentation side of astro-ph.IM, specifically people running many array-layout and trigger-configuration scans. A reader who needs a fast screening layer before committing to end-to-end runs would find the method and the reported computational savings directly usable.

It deserves peer review. The computational motivation is clear, the approach is concrete and externally anchored, and referees can ask for the missing amplitude validation and extrapolation checks without the paper being incoherent on its own terms.

Referee Report

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents FARSim, a fast surrogate framework that reuses a reduced library of ZHAireS reference footprints to reconstruct ground-plane radio emission from ultra-high-energy cosmic rays via vector geomagnetic/charge-excess decomposition, geomagnetic-angle and energy scaling, geometrical projection, contour-based core sampling, and event-rate integration. It further extends the peak-field surrogate to time-domain electric-field synthesis using geometry-dependent normalized pulse templates, enabling RF-chain voltage-domain trigger diagnostics. Validation against dedicated ZHAireS simulations is reported, with the time-domain extension reaching a median vector-waveform R² of 0.986 over 2112 held-out traces when tested at the true peak amplitude. The framework is positioned as a screening layer for array-layout and trigger studies.

Significance. If the surrogate's peak-field predictions and trigger-region reconstructions prove accurate across the claimed range of energies, directions, and core positions, FARSim could meaningfully accelerate iterative design studies for radio arrays by replacing repeated full simulations. The grounding in external ZHAireS reference simulations, use of held-out validation traces, and explicit quantification of computational gain are strengths that support its intended role as a physics-informed screening tool.

major comments (1)

[Abstract] Abstract: The central quantitative claim states that the time-domain extension reaches a median vector-waveform R² of 0.986 'when tested at the true peak amplitude.' This conditions the metric on exact knowledge of the peak vector, so the reported fidelity only quantifies normalized pulse-template shape matching once amplitude and direction are already known. Because L1-trigger observables depend on absolute voltage after RF-chain filtering, this leaves the accuracy of the surrogate's own peak-vector prediction (via decomposition, scaling, projection, and contour sampling) untested for the combined pipeline.

minor comments (1)

[Abstract] Abstract: No quantitative metrics, error sources, or extrapolation tests are provided for the claimed validation of reconstructed field footprints and trigger regions against ZHAireS, despite these being central to the surrogate's utility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive assessment of FARSim's potential utility and for the precise observation on the validation metric. We address the comment below and will revise the manuscript accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The central quantitative claim states that the time-domain extension reaches a median vector-waveform R² of 0.986 'when tested at the true peak amplitude.' This conditions the metric on exact knowledge of the peak vector, so the reported fidelity only quantifies normalized pulse-template shape matching once amplitude and direction are already known. Because L1-trigger observables depend on absolute voltage after RF-chain filtering, this leaves the accuracy of the surrogate's own peak-vector prediction (via decomposition, scaling, projection, and contour sampling) untested for the combined pipeline.

Authors: We agree that the quoted R² isolates the performance of the normalized pulse templates once the peak vector is taken from the reference simulation. The accuracy of the peak-vector reconstruction (decomposition, scaling, projection, and contour sampling) is quantified separately via direct footprint comparisons in the main text. To address the concern for the end-to-end pipeline, we will revise the abstract to remove the conditioning phrase, add a sentence clarifying the separate validation of peak amplitudes, and include explicit comparisons of surrogate-derived L1-trigger observables against full ZHAireS runs in the results section. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; derivation grounded in external ZHAireS references

full rationale

The FARSim framework reuses a reduced library of ZHAireS reference footprints, applies vector decomposition and scaling, and validates both field footprints and time-domain traces against independent dedicated ZHAireS simulations. The reported median vector-waveform R^2 of 0.986 is obtained on held-out traces at true peak amplitude, but this metric does not reduce any claimed prediction to its own inputs by construction. No self-definitional equations, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, load-bearing self-citations, or ansatzes smuggled via prior author work appear in the derivation chain. The method remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only access prevents exhaustive identification of free parameters, axioms, or invented entities; the method builds on existing ZHAireS simulations with mentioned scaling but no specifics on fitting or new postulates are given.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5796 in / 1262 out tokens · 58305 ms · 2026-06-29T10:08:55.815557+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

37 extracted references · 5 canonical work pages

[1]

Cosmic-ray proton and helium spectra from the first CREAM flight,

Y. S. Yoon, H. S. Ahn, P. S. Allisonet al., “Cosmic-ray proton and helium spectra from the first CREAM flight,”Astrophys. J., vol. 728, no. 2, p. 122, 2011

2011
[2]

First result from the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer on the International Space Station: precision measurement of the positron fraction in primary cosmic rays of 0.5–350 GeV,

M. Aguilar, G. Alberti, B. Alpatet al., “First result from the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer on the International Space Station: precision measurement of the positron fraction in primary cosmic rays of 0.5–350 GeV,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 110, no. 14, p. 141102, 2013

2013
[3]

Measurement of the cosmic ray proton spectrum from 40 GeV to 100 TeV with the DAMPE satellite,

Q. An, R. Asfandiyarov, P. Azzarelloet al., “Measurement of the cosmic ray proton spectrum from 40 GeV to 100 TeV with the DAMPE satellite,”Sci. Adv., vol. 5, no. 9, p. eaax3793, 2019

2019
[4]

Cosmic rays,

Particle Data Group, “Cosmic rays,” inReview of Particle Physics, 2025 update, available: https://pdg.lbl.gov/2025/reviews/rpp2025-rev-cosmic-rays.pdf

2025
[5]

T. K. Gaisser, R. Engel, and E. Resconi,Cosmic Rays and Particle Physics. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2016

2016
[6]

Performance of the MAGIC stereo system obtained with Crab Nebula data,

J. Aleksić, E. A. Alvarez, L. A. Antonelliet al., “Performance of the MAGIC stereo system obtained with Crab Nebula data,”Astropart. Phys., vol. 35, no. 7, pp. 435–448, 2012

2012
[7]

The status of the HESS project,

J. A. Hinton, “The status of the HESS project,”New Astron. Rev., vol. 48, pp. 331–337, 2004

2004
[8]

The Cherenkov Telescope Array: layout, design and performance,

O. Guetaet al., “The Cherenkov Telescope Array: layout, design and performance,”Proc. Sci.ICRC2021, 885, 2021, arXiv:2108.04512

work page arXiv 2021
[9]

TAIGA—the Tunka Advanced Instrument for cosmic ray physics and gamma astronomy: present status and perspectives,

N. M. Budnev, I. I. Astapov, A. G. Bogdanovet al., “TAIGA—the Tunka Advanced Instrument for cosmic ray physics and gamma astronomy: present status and perspectives,” J. Instrum., vol. 9, no. 9, p. C09021, 2014

2014
[10]

The KASCADE-Grande experiment,

W. D. Apel, J. C. Arteaga, A. F. Badeaet al., “The KASCADE-Grande experiment,”Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A, vol. 620, no. 2–3, pp. 202–216, 2010

2010
[11]

IceTop: The surface component of IceCube,

R. Abbasi, Y. Abdou, M. Ackermannet al., “IceTop: The surface component of IceCube,” Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A, vol. 700, pp. 188–220, 2013

2013
[12]

Highlights from the High Altitude Water Cherenkov Observatory,

J. Pretz, “Highlights from the High Altitude Water Cherenkov Observatory,”Proc. Sci., ICRC2015, p. 025, 2015

2015
[13]

Detection and imaging of atmospheric radio flashes from cosmic ray air showers,

H. Falckeet al., “Detection and imaging of atmospheric radio flashes from cosmic ray air showers,”Nature, vol. 435, no. 7040, pp. 313–316, 2005

2005
[14]

Geomagnetic origin of the radio emission from cosmic ray induced air showers observed by CODALEMA,

D. Ardouinet al., “Geomagnetic origin of the radio emission from cosmic ray induced air showers observed by CODALEMA,”Astropart. Phys., vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 192–200, 2009

2009
[15]

Measurement of cosmic-ray air showers with the Tunka Radio Extension (Tunka-Rex),

P. A. Bezyazeekovet al., “Measurement of cosmic-ray air showers with the Tunka Radio Extension (Tunka-Rex),”Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A, vol. 802, pp. 89–96, 2015

2015
[16]

Energy estimation of cosmic rays with the Engineering Radio Array of the Pierre Auger Observatory,

A. Aabet al., “Energy estimation of cosmic rays with the Engineering Radio Array of the Pierre Auger Observatory,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 93, no. 12, p. 122005, 2016

2016
[17]

A large light-mass component of cosmic rays at1017–1017.5 eV from radio observations,

S. Buitinket al., “A large light-mass component of cosmic rays at1017–1017.5 eV from radio observations,”Nature, vol. 531, pp. 70–73, 2016

2016
[18]

Autonomous radio detection of air showers with the TREND50 antenna array,

D. Charrieret al., “Autonomous radio detection of air showers with the TREND50 antenna array,”Astropart. Phys., vol. 110, pp. 15–29, 2019

2019
[19]

Radiation from cosmic ray air showers,

F. D. Kahn and I. Lerche, “Radiation from cosmic ray air showers,”Proc. Roy. Soc. London A, vol. 289, no. 1417, pp. 206–213, 1966. – 33 –

1966
[20]

Excess negative charge of an electron-photon shower and its coherent radio emission,

G. A. Askaryan, “Excess negative charge of an electron-photon shower and its coherent radio emission,”Sov. Phys. JETP, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 441–443, 1962

1962
[21]

Pruning: a tool to optimize the layout of large scale arrays for ultra-high-energy air-shower detection,

A. Benoit-Lévy, K. Kotera, and M. Tueros, “Pruning: a tool to optimize the layout of large scale arrays for ultra-high-energy air-shower detection,”J. Instrum., vol. 19, no. 04, p. P04006, 2024

2024
[22]

Simulating radio emission from air showers with CoREAS,

T. Huege, M. Ludwig, and C. W. James, “Simulating radio emission from air showers with CoREAS,”AIP Conf. Proc., vol. 1535, pp. 128–132, 2013

2013
[23]

Monte Carlo simulations of radio pulses in atmospheric showers using ZHAireS,

J. Alvarez-Muñiz, W. R. Carvalho Jr., and E. Zas, “Monte Carlo simulations of radio pulses in atmospheric showers using ZHAireS,”Astropart. Phys., vol. 35, no. 6, pp. 325–341, 2012

2012
[24]

Radio morphing: towards a fast computation of the radio signal from air showers,

A. Zilleset al., “Radio morphing: towards a fast computation of the radio signal from air showers,”Astropart. Phys., vol. 114, pp. 10–21, 2020

2020
[25]

A macroscopic description of coherent geo-magnetic radiation from cosmic-ray air showers,

O. Scholten, K. Werner, and F. Rusydi, “A macroscopic description of coherent geo-magnetic radiation from cosmic-ray air showers,”Astropart. Phys., vol. 29, pp. 94–103, 2008

2008
[26]

Simulation of radio emission from cosmic ray air shower with SELFAS2,

V. Marin and B. Revenu, “Simulation of radio emission from cosmic ray air shower with SELFAS2,”Astropart. Phys., vol. 35, no. 11, pp. 733–741, 2012

2012
[27]

NuRadioMC: Simulating the radio emission of neutrinos from interaction to detector,

C. Glaseret al., “NuRadioMC: Simulating the radio emission of neutrinos from interaction to detector,”Eur. Phys. J. C, vol. 80, no. 2, p. 77, 2020

2020
[28]

GRANDlib: A simulation pipeline for the Giant Radio Array for Neutrino Detection (GRAND),

The GRAND Collaboration, R. Alves Batistaet al., “GRANDlib: A simulation pipeline for the Giant Radio Array for Neutrino Detection (GRAND),”Comput. Phys. Commun., vol. 308, p. 109461, 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.cpc.2024.109461

work page doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2024.109461 2025
[29]

Noise suppression and radio frequency interference rejection for self-triggered radio detectors of extensive air showers,

P. Zhanget al., “Noise suppression and radio frequency interference rejection for self-triggered radio detectors of extensive air showers,”IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas., vol. 75, pp. 1–19, 2026, doi: 10.1109/TIM.2026.3677983

work page doi:10.1109/tim.2026.3677983 2026
[30]

Data acquisition, triggering, and filtering at the Auger Engineering Radio Array,

J. L. Kelley for the Pierre Auger Collaboration, “Data acquisition, triggering, and filtering at the Auger Engineering Radio Array,”Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A, vol. 725, pp. 133–136, 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.nima.2012.11.153

work page doi:10.1016/j.nima.2012.11.153 2013
[31]

SMIET: Fast and accurate synthesis of radio pulses from extensive air shower using simulated templates,

M. Desmet, S. Buitink, T. Huege, and K. Watanabe, “SMIET: Fast and accurate synthesis of radio pulses from extensive air shower using simulated templates,”Astropart. Phys., vol. 175, p. 103182, 2026, doi: 10.1016/j.astropartphys.2025.103182

work page doi:10.1016/j.astropartphys.2025.103182 2026
[32]

The cosmic ray energy spectrum between 2 PeV and 2 EeV observed with the TALE detector in monocular mode,

R. U. Abbasiet al., “The cosmic ray energy spectrum between 2 PeV and 2 EeV observed with the TALE detector in monocular mode,”Astrophys. J., vol. 865, no. 1, p. 74, 2018

2018
[33]

The cosmic-ray energy spectrum observed with the surface detector of the Telescope Array experiment,

T. Abu-Zayyadet al., “The cosmic-ray energy spectrum observed with the surface detector of the Telescope Array experiment,”Astrophys. J. Lett., vol. 768, no. 1, p. L1, 2013

2013
[34]

Features of the energy spectrum of cosmic rays above2.5×1018 eV using the Pierre Auger Observatory,

A. Aabet al., “Features of the energy spectrum of cosmic rays above2.5×1018 eV using the Pierre Auger Observatory,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 125, no. 12, p. 121106, 2020

2020
[35]

A Rotationally Symmetric Lateral Distribution Function for Radio Emission from Inclined Air Showers,

T. Huege, L. Brenk, and F. Schlüter, “A Rotationally Symmetric Lateral Distribution Function for Radio Emission from Inclined Air Showers,”EPJ Web Conf., vol. 216, p. 03009, 2019

2019
[36]

Simulation of radiation energy release in air showers,

C. Glaser, M. Erdmann, J. R. Hörandel, T. Huege, and J. Schulz, “Simulation of radiation energy release in air showers,”J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys., vol. 2016, no. 09, p. 024, 2016

2016
[37]

Radio emission from extensive air showers,

H. R. Allan, “Radio emission from extensive air showers,”Prog. Elem. Part. Cosmic Ray Phys., vol. 10, pp. 171–302, 1971. – 34 –

1971

[1] [1]

Cosmic-ray proton and helium spectra from the first CREAM flight,

Y. S. Yoon, H. S. Ahn, P. S. Allisonet al., “Cosmic-ray proton and helium spectra from the first CREAM flight,”Astrophys. J., vol. 728, no. 2, p. 122, 2011

2011

[2] [2]

First result from the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer on the International Space Station: precision measurement of the positron fraction in primary cosmic rays of 0.5–350 GeV,

M. Aguilar, G. Alberti, B. Alpatet al., “First result from the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer on the International Space Station: precision measurement of the positron fraction in primary cosmic rays of 0.5–350 GeV,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 110, no. 14, p. 141102, 2013

2013

[3] [3]

Measurement of the cosmic ray proton spectrum from 40 GeV to 100 TeV with the DAMPE satellite,

Q. An, R. Asfandiyarov, P. Azzarelloet al., “Measurement of the cosmic ray proton spectrum from 40 GeV to 100 TeV with the DAMPE satellite,”Sci. Adv., vol. 5, no. 9, p. eaax3793, 2019

2019

[4] [4]

Cosmic rays,

Particle Data Group, “Cosmic rays,” inReview of Particle Physics, 2025 update, available: https://pdg.lbl.gov/2025/reviews/rpp2025-rev-cosmic-rays.pdf

2025

[5] [5]

T. K. Gaisser, R. Engel, and E. Resconi,Cosmic Rays and Particle Physics. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2016

2016

[6] [6]

Performance of the MAGIC stereo system obtained with Crab Nebula data,

J. Aleksić, E. A. Alvarez, L. A. Antonelliet al., “Performance of the MAGIC stereo system obtained with Crab Nebula data,”Astropart. Phys., vol. 35, no. 7, pp. 435–448, 2012

2012

[7] [7]

The status of the HESS project,

J. A. Hinton, “The status of the HESS project,”New Astron. Rev., vol. 48, pp. 331–337, 2004

2004

[8] [8]

The Cherenkov Telescope Array: layout, design and performance,

O. Guetaet al., “The Cherenkov Telescope Array: layout, design and performance,”Proc. Sci.ICRC2021, 885, 2021, arXiv:2108.04512

work page arXiv 2021

[9] [9]

TAIGA—the Tunka Advanced Instrument for cosmic ray physics and gamma astronomy: present status and perspectives,

N. M. Budnev, I. I. Astapov, A. G. Bogdanovet al., “TAIGA—the Tunka Advanced Instrument for cosmic ray physics and gamma astronomy: present status and perspectives,” J. Instrum., vol. 9, no. 9, p. C09021, 2014

2014

[10] [10]

The KASCADE-Grande experiment,

W. D. Apel, J. C. Arteaga, A. F. Badeaet al., “The KASCADE-Grande experiment,”Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A, vol. 620, no. 2–3, pp. 202–216, 2010

2010

[11] [11]

IceTop: The surface component of IceCube,

R. Abbasi, Y. Abdou, M. Ackermannet al., “IceTop: The surface component of IceCube,” Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A, vol. 700, pp. 188–220, 2013

2013

[12] [12]

Highlights from the High Altitude Water Cherenkov Observatory,

J. Pretz, “Highlights from the High Altitude Water Cherenkov Observatory,”Proc. Sci., ICRC2015, p. 025, 2015

2015

[13] [13]

Detection and imaging of atmospheric radio flashes from cosmic ray air showers,

H. Falckeet al., “Detection and imaging of atmospheric radio flashes from cosmic ray air showers,”Nature, vol. 435, no. 7040, pp. 313–316, 2005

2005

[14] [14]

Geomagnetic origin of the radio emission from cosmic ray induced air showers observed by CODALEMA,

D. Ardouinet al., “Geomagnetic origin of the radio emission from cosmic ray induced air showers observed by CODALEMA,”Astropart. Phys., vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 192–200, 2009

2009

[15] [15]

Measurement of cosmic-ray air showers with the Tunka Radio Extension (Tunka-Rex),

P. A. Bezyazeekovet al., “Measurement of cosmic-ray air showers with the Tunka Radio Extension (Tunka-Rex),”Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A, vol. 802, pp. 89–96, 2015

2015

[16] [16]

Energy estimation of cosmic rays with the Engineering Radio Array of the Pierre Auger Observatory,

A. Aabet al., “Energy estimation of cosmic rays with the Engineering Radio Array of the Pierre Auger Observatory,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 93, no. 12, p. 122005, 2016

2016

[17] [17]

A large light-mass component of cosmic rays at1017–1017.5 eV from radio observations,

S. Buitinket al., “A large light-mass component of cosmic rays at1017–1017.5 eV from radio observations,”Nature, vol. 531, pp. 70–73, 2016

2016

[18] [18]

Autonomous radio detection of air showers with the TREND50 antenna array,

D. Charrieret al., “Autonomous radio detection of air showers with the TREND50 antenna array,”Astropart. Phys., vol. 110, pp. 15–29, 2019

2019

[19] [19]

Radiation from cosmic ray air showers,

F. D. Kahn and I. Lerche, “Radiation from cosmic ray air showers,”Proc. Roy. Soc. London A, vol. 289, no. 1417, pp. 206–213, 1966. – 33 –

1966

[20] [20]

Excess negative charge of an electron-photon shower and its coherent radio emission,

G. A. Askaryan, “Excess negative charge of an electron-photon shower and its coherent radio emission,”Sov. Phys. JETP, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 441–443, 1962

1962

[21] [21]

Pruning: a tool to optimize the layout of large scale arrays for ultra-high-energy air-shower detection,

A. Benoit-Lévy, K. Kotera, and M. Tueros, “Pruning: a tool to optimize the layout of large scale arrays for ultra-high-energy air-shower detection,”J. Instrum., vol. 19, no. 04, p. P04006, 2024

2024

[22] [22]

Simulating radio emission from air showers with CoREAS,

T. Huege, M. Ludwig, and C. W. James, “Simulating radio emission from air showers with CoREAS,”AIP Conf. Proc., vol. 1535, pp. 128–132, 2013

2013

[23] [23]

Monte Carlo simulations of radio pulses in atmospheric showers using ZHAireS,

J. Alvarez-Muñiz, W. R. Carvalho Jr., and E. Zas, “Monte Carlo simulations of radio pulses in atmospheric showers using ZHAireS,”Astropart. Phys., vol. 35, no. 6, pp. 325–341, 2012

2012

[24] [24]

Radio morphing: towards a fast computation of the radio signal from air showers,

A. Zilleset al., “Radio morphing: towards a fast computation of the radio signal from air showers,”Astropart. Phys., vol. 114, pp. 10–21, 2020

2020

[25] [25]

A macroscopic description of coherent geo-magnetic radiation from cosmic-ray air showers,

O. Scholten, K. Werner, and F. Rusydi, “A macroscopic description of coherent geo-magnetic radiation from cosmic-ray air showers,”Astropart. Phys., vol. 29, pp. 94–103, 2008

2008

[26] [26]

Simulation of radio emission from cosmic ray air shower with SELFAS2,

V. Marin and B. Revenu, “Simulation of radio emission from cosmic ray air shower with SELFAS2,”Astropart. Phys., vol. 35, no. 11, pp. 733–741, 2012

2012

[27] [27]

NuRadioMC: Simulating the radio emission of neutrinos from interaction to detector,

C. Glaseret al., “NuRadioMC: Simulating the radio emission of neutrinos from interaction to detector,”Eur. Phys. J. C, vol. 80, no. 2, p. 77, 2020

2020

[28] [28]

GRANDlib: A simulation pipeline for the Giant Radio Array for Neutrino Detection (GRAND),

The GRAND Collaboration, R. Alves Batistaet al., “GRANDlib: A simulation pipeline for the Giant Radio Array for Neutrino Detection (GRAND),”Comput. Phys. Commun., vol. 308, p. 109461, 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.cpc.2024.109461

work page doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2024.109461 2025

[29] [29]

Noise suppression and radio frequency interference rejection for self-triggered radio detectors of extensive air showers,

P. Zhanget al., “Noise suppression and radio frequency interference rejection for self-triggered radio detectors of extensive air showers,”IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas., vol. 75, pp. 1–19, 2026, doi: 10.1109/TIM.2026.3677983

work page doi:10.1109/tim.2026.3677983 2026

[30] [30]

Data acquisition, triggering, and filtering at the Auger Engineering Radio Array,

J. L. Kelley for the Pierre Auger Collaboration, “Data acquisition, triggering, and filtering at the Auger Engineering Radio Array,”Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A, vol. 725, pp. 133–136, 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.nima.2012.11.153

work page doi:10.1016/j.nima.2012.11.153 2013

[31] [31]

SMIET: Fast and accurate synthesis of radio pulses from extensive air shower using simulated templates,

M. Desmet, S. Buitink, T. Huege, and K. Watanabe, “SMIET: Fast and accurate synthesis of radio pulses from extensive air shower using simulated templates,”Astropart. Phys., vol. 175, p. 103182, 2026, doi: 10.1016/j.astropartphys.2025.103182

work page doi:10.1016/j.astropartphys.2025.103182 2026

[32] [32]

The cosmic ray energy spectrum between 2 PeV and 2 EeV observed with the TALE detector in monocular mode,

R. U. Abbasiet al., “The cosmic ray energy spectrum between 2 PeV and 2 EeV observed with the TALE detector in monocular mode,”Astrophys. J., vol. 865, no. 1, p. 74, 2018

2018

[33] [33]

The cosmic-ray energy spectrum observed with the surface detector of the Telescope Array experiment,

T. Abu-Zayyadet al., “The cosmic-ray energy spectrum observed with the surface detector of the Telescope Array experiment,”Astrophys. J. Lett., vol. 768, no. 1, p. L1, 2013

2013

[34] [34]

Features of the energy spectrum of cosmic rays above2.5×1018 eV using the Pierre Auger Observatory,

A. Aabet al., “Features of the energy spectrum of cosmic rays above2.5×1018 eV using the Pierre Auger Observatory,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 125, no. 12, p. 121106, 2020

2020

[35] [35]

A Rotationally Symmetric Lateral Distribution Function for Radio Emission from Inclined Air Showers,

T. Huege, L. Brenk, and F. Schlüter, “A Rotationally Symmetric Lateral Distribution Function for Radio Emission from Inclined Air Showers,”EPJ Web Conf., vol. 216, p. 03009, 2019

2019

[36] [36]

Simulation of radiation energy release in air showers,

C. Glaser, M. Erdmann, J. R. Hörandel, T. Huege, and J. Schulz, “Simulation of radiation energy release in air showers,”J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys., vol. 2016, no. 09, p. 024, 2016

2016

[37] [37]

Radio emission from extensive air showers,

H. R. Allan, “Radio emission from extensive air showers,”Prog. Elem. Part. Cosmic Ray Phys., vol. 10, pp. 171–302, 1971. – 34 –

1971