REVIEW 1 major objections 8 minor 93 references
22 Newly Identified Repeating Changing-look AGNs and Evidence for Extreme Broad-line Region Breathing
T0 review · 1 major / 8 minor · reviewed 2026-08-01 · deepseek-v4-flash
Pith's one-line read Repeating changing-look AGNs show broad-line regions that persist and breathe rather than being destroyed and rebuilt
desk verdict A useful new RCL sample with careful follow-up, but the headline Eddington-ratio separation rests on a virial-calibration comparison that needs a robustness check. read the letter →
The pith
A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.
The reading
What carries the argument
The load-bearing instrument is the RCL AGN sample itself: because the same nucleus crosses the same physical boundary more than once, one-off destructive events or simple line-of-sight obscuration are excluded as explanations. Within that sample, the discriminant is the two-sample K-S test on off-state log Eddington ratios (D = 0.667, p = 2.17 × 10⁻⁵) between Hβ-only and Hα+Hβ transition groups, supplemented by an Anderson-Darling test. The proposed physical mechanism is BLR breathing: a radially stratified broad-line region whose line emissivities, responsivities, and detectability vary with the incident ionizing flux, so lines go below visibility thresholds in a fixed order as accretion fa
What would settle it
Recompute the Figure 6 comparison with one uniform virial calibration and one bolometric correction applied to all 74 sources; if the Hβ-only and Hα+Hβ off-state Eddington-ratio distributions then overlap (K-S p > 0.05), the line-dependent visibility threshold is not established. A complementary check: for the seven continuously monitored RCL AGNs, predict a third transition at the next optical light-curve extremum and observe whether the broad lines reappear or disappear with the continuum; if they do not, the breathing picture is falsified.
Extended reading notes
Core claim
The paper establishes, on its own terms, that repeated changing-look transitions — on–off–on or off–on–off sequences in the same active galactic nucleus — trace reversible changes in the central ionizing continuum. The broad-line region is not removed and re-formed each time; instead, the same structure 'breathes': as the ionizing flux weakens, broad Hβ falls below its detection threshold first, at a relatively high Eddington ratio, while broad Hα remains visible until the source sinks to a lower accretion level. The authors demonstrate this with a two-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov test on off-state Eddington ratios (D = 0.667, p = 2.17 × 10⁻⁵) and an Anderson-Darling test, comparing Hβ-only and
Load-bearing premise
The load-bearing premise is that the two Eddington-ratio distributions compared in Figure 6 are measured on a common scale: the groups mix three black-hole-mass calibrations and two bolometric corrections, with RCL masses pinned to on-state values, so a systematic shift of roughly 0.3–0.5 dex correlated with the Hβ-only versus Hα+Hβ grouping would erase the threshold signal.
Editorial extensions
If this is right
- A single changing-look event cannot distinguish destroyed gas from faded line emission; repeated transitions directly demonstrate that the broad-line region persists, so CL events should be treated as accretion-state diagnostics rather than evidence of BLR destruction.
- Because Hβ fades at a higher Eddington ratio than Hα, off-state classification depends on which lines a spectrum covers; surveys that only measure Hβ will classify sources as 'off' earlier than those including Hα, so wavelength coverage must be reported in CL-AGN catalogs.
- The driver of CL transitions must be reversible and operate on month-to-year timescales; candidate processes such as accretion-mode changes, heating/cooling fronts, magnetically supported disks, or radiation-pressure instability are constrained to produce smooth multi-year excursions rather than stochastic flickering.
- The latest spectra of RCL AGNs fall on the expected side of the CL population in the Eddington-ratio versus black-hole-mass plane, supporting the use of optical light-curve extrema as predictors of spectroscopic state.
- The line-dependent threshold sequence implies that Hβ, and later Hα, can be used as accretion-level indicators: when Hβ disappears while Hα remains, the source sits in an intermediate accretion state.
Reading between the lines
- A natural next test, not run in the paper, is whether Hβ-only, Mg II-only, and Hα-only transitions form an ordered ladder in off-state Eddington ratio; the paper's line-responsivity argument predicts Mg II sits between Hβ and Hα.
- The K-S comparison mixes three black-hole-mass calibrations and two bolometric corrections; recomputing Figure 6 with a single uniform calibration, or separately by group, would settle whether the claimed threshold separation survives calibration systematics.
- If BLR breathing is correct, high-cadence reverberation mapping across a second transition should show the emission-line lag, width, and responsivity returning toward their first-epoch values as the continuum recovers — a test that distinguishes breathing from stochastic gas rearrangement.
- The same-nucleus logic could be extended to predict future transitions: unconfirmed candidates with moderate continuum changes are natural targets for monitoring at the next light-curve extremum.
Signed reviews
Editorial analysis
A structured set of objections, weighed in public.
Referee Report
Summary. The paper searches the Guo et al. (2024, 2025a) and Dong et al. (2025b) changing-look AGN samples for objects whose broad Hβ turned off/on more than once. Using long-baseline ZTF/ATLAS/CRTS optical light curves, WISE/NEOWISE MIR light curves, archival SDSS/LAMOST/DESI spectra, and new LJT/DOT/HCT spectroscopy, the authors select 34 candidates, confirm 25 RCL AGNs (22 new), and classify nine non-confirmed cases. They report that the second transitions occur mostly on rest-frame timescales of 3–4 yr, that seven well-sampled objects show spectral states tracking smooth multi-year optical excursions, and that Hβ-only transitions occur at higher off-state Eddington ratios than Hα+Hβ transitions, based on a K-S test (D=0.667, p=2.17e-5). They interpret this as evidence for a line-dependent BLR visibility threshold and 'extreme BLR breathing', i.e., the BLR gas persists and re-emits rather than being destroyed and rebuilt.
Significance. If the statistical separation in Fig. 6 is robust, the paper would provide the largest sample of newly discovered repeating CL AGNs and a direct, repeated-nucleus test of line-dependent BLR visibility thresholds. The identification pipeline is genuinely careful: Rs>0.3 thresholding, visual inspection of all multi-epoch spectra, [O III] checks against data-quality artifacts, and individual discussion of the nine non-confirmed candidates are all strengths. The seven well-sampled sources with continuous light curves offer a useful link between spectroscopic state and continuum excursion. However, the headline K-S result compares Eddington ratios that are not placed on a common virial-calibration scale, and the paper does not show that the separation survives homogeneous recalibration. The central interpretive claim is therefore currently not established, though it is plausibly fixable with additional analysis.
major comments (1)
- [§4.2 / Fig. 6] The Anderson-Darling p-value is reported as '≤ 10^-3 (floored by numerical resolution)', which is inadequate for a claim of 'confidence level exceeding 99.9%'. A floor of 10^-3 is only 99.9% if the true value is exactly 0.001; reporting a one-sided inequality without a better determination, or using a Monte Carlo estimate, is not sufficient to support the stated confidence level. This is a secondary issue relative to the calibration mixing, but it should be corrected in any revision.
minor comments (8)
- [Abstract] 'As Seven RCL AGNs' should read 'Seven RCL AGNs' (capital A and misplaced 'As').
- [§2] Header 'Seciont' is a typo for 'Section'.
- [Fig. 5 caption] 'solide curves' should be 'solid curves'.
- [General] The solar-mass symbol appears as 'uni2299' in several axis labels and table headers; these are unicode rendering artifacts that should be fixed.
- [Eq. (1)] The definition of Rs as 'Sb − Sd / Sb' is ambiguous; it should be written as (Sb−Sd)/Sb.
- [Table A1] Several entries contain stray spaces ('5953 2', '6111 9a', '5739 5a'); the table needs a formatting pass.
- [§3.2] 'observed (rest-frame) timescales' mixes observer-frame and rest-frame terminology; the sentence should specify which quantity is which.
- [Data Availability] The statement that derived data are available 'on reasonable request' is weaker than the reproducibility standards common in this field; public tables or a machine-readable supplement would be preferable.
Circularity Check
No load-bearing circularity; the RCL sample and light-curve results are self-contained. Minor definitional circularity in the Fig. 3 consistency check; the Fig. 6 K-S retains empirical content and is not a forced fit.
-
self definitional
[Section 2.3, Section 3.1, Figure 3]
"The identification was based on the broad Hβ component, whose appearance or disappearance was used to trace repeating transitions. ... The latest spectra show that the on/off states correspond to higher/lower Eddington-ratio, in the expected direction relative to the parent CL-AGN samples."
The on/off state is defined by the presence or absence of broad Hβ, while the Eddington ratio is derived from the same spectra: 'The black hole masses MBH and Eddington ratios λEdd given in the table were derived only from the latest spectra obtained in this work.' Since Hβ visibility is expected to depend on the same ionizing continuum that enters λEdd, the statement that on-state sources have higher λEdd than off-state sources is substantially built into the classification. The paper labels this an expected-direction check rather than a test, so the damage to the central claims is limited.
full rationale
The paper's principal contributions — the identification of 25 RCL AGNs (22 new), the multi-epoch spectroscopic confirmation, and the correlation of spectral states with long-term optical/MIR light-curve excursions — are empirical and self-contained; they do not reduce to the assumptions they are meant to support. The only genuinely definitional element is the Figure 3 consistency check: because 'on' is defined as the presence of broad Hβ and λEdd is computed from the same spectra' continuum, the observed on/off λEdd ordering is largely a restatement of the classification. The paper itself treats this as a sanity check ('We note that the linear fits are not intended to define a universal boundary between the on and off states'), so this is a minor circularity rather than a load-bearing flaw. The Figure 6 K-S result (D=0.667, p=2.17e-5) is more subtle: the groups are defined by which broad lines changed, and the compared quantity is the off-state λEdd, the same accretion parameter expected to control line visibility. Thus the ordering is partly encoded in the group definitions. However, the λEdd values come from an independent measurement stream (continuum luminosity and virial masses), and the ordering could in principle have failed; the result is also supported by an external, independent relation (Guo et al. 2025b). The concern about mixed virial calibrations and bolometric corrections is a correctness/robustness risk, not a circularity, because it does not make the claim true by construction. There is no load-bearing self-citation: the cited prior work by the present authors is peripheral, and the central physical input is the externally established line-response sequence. Overall, the sample and variability evidence stand on their own, and the circularity score is modest.
Assumptions & free parameters
free parameters (5)
- CL transition threshold Rs > 0.3 =
0.3
- zg < 20.5 mag observation limit =
20.5 mag
- Third-order polynomial for zg-band trends =
degree 3
- Candidate selection priorities (color-magnitude slope k, magnitude change Δzg) =
not quantified
- zg-like conversion hyperparameters (Huber regression, LOWESS smoothing) =
source-specific
assumptions (4)
- domain assumption Single-epoch virial mass relations (Eq. 2) give reliable MBH and λEdd at population level
- domain assumption Bolometric corrections 9.26 L5100 and 5.15 L3000 (Richards et al. 2006) apply to all sources
- domain assumption Off states are intrinsic (weak ionizing continuum / weak BLR emission), not orientation-obscured
- domain assumption Parent-sample CL classifications (Guo et al. 2024, 2025a; Dong et al. 2025b) are correct and comparable to the authors' classifications
Cite this review
Pith. "Pith review of 22 Newly Identified Repeating Changing-look AGNs and Evidence for Extreme Broad-line Region Breathing." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TA6L3XA6
@misc{pith2026260715564,
author = {Pith},
title = {Pith review of: 22 Newly Identified Repeating Changing-look AGNs and Evidence for Extreme Broad-line Region Breathing},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TA6L3XA6}},
note = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.15564}
}
abstract
Changing-look active galactic nuclei (CL AGNs) show the appearance or disappearance of broad emission lines on timescales of years. Among them, the repeating CL (RCL) AGNs may provide a clear clue for our understanding of the CL transitions because the same nucleus crosses some physical boundaries more than once. We search for RCL AGNs in known CL-AGN samples using long-term multi-band light curves, and selected 34 candidates for spectroscopic follow-up. We confirm 25 RCL AGNs, including 22 newly identified cases. Properties of these RCL AGNs are analyzed. The observed rest-frame intervals of the second transitions are mostly 3--4 yr, while the variations of the optical light curves suggest that some transitions might occur on timescales of several months. The latest spectra show that the on/off states correspond to higher/lower Eddington-ratio, in the expected direction relative to the parent CL-AGN samples. As seven RCL AGNs are well covered by nearly continuous single-band light curves, their on/off states can be found to follow multi-year optical excursions, and their Eddington ratios vary consistently with the photometric changes. We also find that the H$\beta$-only transitions occur at higher Eddington ratios than the transitions involving both H$\alpha$ and H$\beta$, suggesting a line-dependent Broad-Line-Region (BLR) visibility threshold. These results support a picture in which different accretion-flow processes drive reversible changes in the central ionizing emissions, while the observed RCL transitions are produced by the BLR breathing across line-dependent visibility thresholds.
Figures
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Reference graph
Works this paper leans on
-
[1]
N., Adelman-McCarthy, J
Abazajian, K. N., Adelman-McCarthy, J. K., Ag¨ ueros, M. A., et al. 2009, ApJS, 182, 543
2009
-
[2]
2020, ApJL, 890, L29
Ai, Y., Dou, L., Yang, C., et al. 2020, ApJL, 890, L29
2020
-
[3]
1993, ARA&A, 31, 473
Antonucci, R. 1993, ARA&A, 31, 473
1993
-
[4]
Terlevich, R. J. 1999, ApJL, 519, L123
1999
-
[5]
C., Kulkarni, S
Bellm, E. C., Kulkarni, S. R., Graham, M. J., et al. 2019, PASP, 131, 018002
2019
-
[6]
C., Denney, K
Bentz, M. C., Denney, K. D., Grier, C. J., et al. 2013, ApJ, 767, 149
2013
-
[7]
K., Nicholl, M., Berger, E., et al
Blanchard, P. K., Nicholl, M., Berger, E., et al. 2017, ApJ, 843, 106
2017
-
[8]
R., & Bloom, J
Butler, N. R., & Bloom, J. S. 2011, AJ, 141, 93
2011
Show all 93 references
-
[9]
M., & Horne, K
Cackett, E. M., & Horne, K. 2006, MNRAS, 365, 1180 Cer´ on-Meneses, J., Ar´ evalo, P., S´ anchez-S´ aez, P., et al. 2026, A&A, 709, A245
2006
-
[10]
2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2605.24429
Chen, G., Yang, W., Ye, X., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2605.24429
2026 arXiv
-
[11]
2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2511.15359
Chen, Z.-Q., Jin, J.-J., Guo, W.-J., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2511.15359
2025
-
[12]
Cleveland, W. S. 1979, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74, 829
1979
-
[13]
Foltz, C. B. 1986, ApJ, 311, 135 Cortes-Su´ arez, E., Marziani, P., Hern´ andez-Toledo, H. M., Arag´ on-Calvo, M. A., & Negrete, C. A. 2026, MNRAS, arXiv:2604.25219
1986 arXiv
-
[14]
Cowsik, R., Srinivasan, R., & Prabhu, T. P. 2002, Bulletin of the Astronomical Society of India, 30, 105
2002
-
[15]
2012, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 12, 1197
Cui, X.-Q., Zhao, Y.-H., Chu, Y.-Q., et al. 2012, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 12, 1197
2012
-
[16]
D., De Rosa, G., Croxall, K., et al
Denney, K. D., De Rosa, G., Croxall, K., et al. 2014, ApJ, 796, 134 DESI Collaboration, Aghamousa, A., Aguilar, J., et al. 2016, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1611.00036
2014 arXiv
-
[17]
Dexter, J., & Begelman, M. C. 2019, MNRAS, 483, L17
2019
-
[18]
2025a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.18445
Dong, Q., Zhang, Z.-X., Gu, W.-M., et al. 2025a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.18445
-
[19]
J., Djorgovski, S
Drake, A. J., Djorgovski, S. G., Mahabal, A., et al. 2009, ApJ, 696, 870
2009
-
[20]
2012, ApJL, 747, L33
Elitzur, M. 2012, ApJL, 747, L33
2012
-
[21]
Elitzur, M., & Ho, L. C. 2009, ApJL, 701, L91
2009
-
[22]
C., & Trump, J
Elitzur, M., Ho, L. C., & Trump, J. R. 2014, MNRAS, 438, 3340
2014
-
[23]
Eracleous, M., & Halpern, J. P. 2001, ApJ, 554, 240
2001
-
[24]
J., et al
Frederick, S., Gezari, S., Graham, M. J., et al. 2019, ApJ, 883, 31
2019
-
[25]
2021, QSOFITMORE: a python package for fitting UV-optical spectra of quasars, v.v1.1.0, Zenodo, doi:10.5281/zenodo.5810042
Fu, Y. 2021, QSOFITMORE: a python package for fitting UV-optical spectra of quasars, v.v1.1.0, Zenodo, doi:10.5281/zenodo.5810042
2021 doi
-
[26]
2022, ApJS, 261, 32
Fu, Y., Wu, X.-B., Jiang, L., et al. 2022, ApJS, 261, 32
2022
-
[27]
B., et al
Gezari, S., Hung, T., Cenko, S. B., et al. 2017, ApJ, 835, 144
2017
-
[28]
J., Duffy, L., et al
Gilbert, O., Ruan, J. J., Duffy, L., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.01933
2025 arXiv
-
[29]
R., & Korista, K
Goad, M. R., & Korista, K. T. 2014, MNRAS, 444, 43
2014
-
[30]
J., Ross, N
Graham, M. J., Ross, N. P., Stern, D., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 491, 4925
2020
-
[31]
J., Pulgarin-Duque, L., Anderson, S
Green, P. J., Pulgarin-Duque, L., Anderson, S. F., et al. 2022, ApJ, 933, 180
2022
-
[32]
E., & Ho, L
Greene, J. E., & Ho, L. C. 2005, ApJ, 630, 122
2005
-
[33]
2018, PyQSOFit: Python code to fit the spectrum of quasars, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1809.008, , , ascl:1809.008
Guo, H., Shen, Y., & Wang, S. 2018, PyQSOFit: Python code to fit the spectrum of quasars, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1809.008, , , ascl:1809.008
2018
-
[34]
2026, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 26, 095026
Guo, W.-J., Chen, Z.-Q., Wang, S., Zhang, Z.-X., & Cheng, C. 2026, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 26, 095026
2026
-
[35]
A., et al
Guo, W.-J., Zou, H., Fawcett, V. A., et al. 2024, ApJS, 270, 26
2024
-
[36]
2026, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 26, 095001
Han, P., Lu, H., Lyu, B., Wu, J., & Wu, Q. 2026, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 26, 095001
2026
-
[37]
Hawkins, M. R. S. 2004, A&A, 424, 519
2004
-
[38]
2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2606.06802
He, H., You, B., ´Sniegowska, M., & Czerny, B. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2606.06802
2026 arXiv
-
[39]
Huber, P. J. 1964, The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 35, 73
1964
-
[40]
J., et al
Jana, A., Ricci, C., Temple, M. J., et al. 2025, A&A, 693, A35
2025
-
[41]
2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2511.09626
Kaaz, N., Liska, M., Ward, C., & Davelaar, J. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2511.09626
2025 arXiv
-
[42]
2026, A&A, 707, A46
Kollatschny, W., Grupe, D., Winkler, H., et al. 2026, A&A, 707, A46
2026
-
[43]
2026, Advances in Space Research, 77, 4041
Komossa, S., Grupe, D., Marziani, P., et al. 2026, Advances in Space Research, 77, 4041
2026
-
[44]
T., & Goad, M
Korista, K. T., & Goad, M. R. 2004, ApJ, 606, 749
2004
-
[45]
2014, ApJ, 788, 159
Koshida, S., Minezaki, T., Yoshii, Y., et al. 2014, ApJ, 788, 159
2014
-
[46]
2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2606.23564
Kovacevic, N., Dai, X., Yuk, H., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2606.23564
2026 arXiv
-
[47]
M., Yaqoob, T., Ptak, A
LaMassa, S. M., Yaqoob, T., Ptak, A. F., et al. 2014, ApJ, 787, 61 22
2014
-
[48]
M., Cales, S., Moran, E
LaMassa, S. M., Cales, S., Moran, E. C., et al. 2015, ApJ, 800, 144
2015
-
[49]
1987, PASP, 99, 309 —
Lawrence, A. 1987, PASP, 99, 309 —. 2018, Nature Astronomy, 2, 102
1987
-
[50]
2025, ApJ, 994, 216
Layek, N., Nandi, P., Naik, S., et al. 2025, ApJ, 994, 216
2025
-
[51]
M., et al
Liu, C., Kong, F., Cooper, E. M., et al. 2026, ApJS, 284, 12 liu, H., Wu, Q., Lyu, B., & Yan, Z. 2019, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1912.03972 L´ opez-Navas, E., Mart ´ ınez-Aldama, M. L., Bernal, S., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 513, L57 L´ opez-Navas, E., S´ anchez-S´ aez, P., Ar´ evalo, P....
2026 arXiv
-
[52]
2025, A&A, 693, A173
Lyu, B., Wu, X.-B., Pang, Y., et al. 2025, A&A, 693, A173
2025
-
[53]
L., Ross, N
MacLeod, C. L., Ross, N. P., Lawrence, A., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 457, 389
2016
-
[54]
2011, ApJ, 731, 53
Mainzer, A., Bauer, J., Grav, T., et al. 2011, ApJ, 731, 53
2011
-
[55]
2012, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 757, L24
Nixon, C., King, A., Price, D., & Frank, J. 2012, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 757, L24
2012
-
[56]
2018, MNRAS, 480, 3898
Noda, H., & Done, C. 2018, MNRAS, 480, 3898
2018
- [57]
-
[58]
J., Bianchi, S., et al
Panessa, F., Carrera, F. J., Bianchi, S., et al. 2009, MNRAS, 398, 1951
2009
-
[59]
2023, A&A, 669, A140
Petrushevska, T., Leloudas, G., Ili´ c, D., et al. 2023, A&A, 669, A140
2023
-
[60]
2022, ApJ, 925, 50
Ren, W., Wang, J., Cai, Z., & Guo, H. 2022, ApJ, 925, 50
2022
- [61]
-
[62]
J., et al
Ricci, C., Trakhtenbrot, B., Koss, M. J., et al. 2017, Nature, 549, 488
2017
-
[63]
T., Lacy, M., Storrie-Lombardi, L
Richards, G. T., Lacy, M., Storrie-Lombardi, L. J., et al. 2006, ApJS, 166, 470
2006
-
[64]
P., Ford, K
Ross, N. P., Ford, K. E. S., Graham, M., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 480, 4468
2018
-
[65]
J., Anderson, S
Ruan, J. J., Anderson, S. F., Eracleous, M., et al. 2019, ApJ, 883, 76
2019
-
[66]
J., Anderson, S
Ruan, J. J., Anderson, S. F., Cales, S. L., et al. 2016, ApJ, 826, 188
2016
-
[67]
2018, ApJ, 854, 160
Rumbaugh, N., Shen, Y., Morganson, E., et al. 2018, ApJ, 854, 160
2018
-
[68]
C., Cales, S., Ruan, J
Runnoe, J. C., Cales, S., Ruan, J. J., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 455, 1691
2016
-
[69]
C., & Dexter, J
Scepi, N., Begelman, M. C., & Dexter, J. 2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters, 502, L50
2021
-
[70]
J., Prieto, J
Shappee, B. J., Prieto, J. L., Grupe, D., et al. 2014, ApJ, 788, 48
2014
-
[71]
2017, ApJL, 846, L7 —
Sheng, Z., Wang, T., Jiang, N., et al. 2017, ApJL, 846, L7 —. 2020, ApJ, 889, 46
2017
-
[72]
2020, A&A, 641, A167
Sniegowska, M., Czerny, B., Bon, E., & Bon, N. 2020, A&A, 641, A167
2020
-
[73]
A., & Wilson, A
Storchi-Bergmann, T., Baldwin, J. A., & Wilson, A. S. 1993, ApJL, 410, L11
1993
-
[74]
2008, NewAR, 52, 227
Tadhunter, C. 2008, NewAR, 52, 227
2008
-
[75]
E., & Osterbrock, D
Tohline, J. E., & Osterbrock, D. E. 1976, ApJL, 210, L117
1976
-
[76]
L., Denneau, L., Heinze, A
Tonry, J. L., Denneau, L., Heinze, A. N., et al. 2018, PASP, 130, 064505
2018
-
[77]
L., et al
Trakhtenbrot, B., Arcavi, I., MacLeod, C. L., et al. 2019, ApJ, 883, 94
2019
-
[78]
R., Impey, C
Trump, J. R., Impey, C. D., Kelly, B. C., et al. 2011, ApJ, 733, 60
2011
-
[79]
M., & Padovani, P
Urry, C. M., & Padovani, P. 1995, PASP, 107, 803
1995
-
[80]
Vestergaard, M., & Osmer, P. S. 2009, ApJ, 699, 800
2009
-
[81]
Vestergaard, M., & Peterson, B. M. 2006, ApJ, 641, 689
2006
-
[82]
2019, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 19, 149
Wang, C.-J., Bai, J.-M., Fan, Y.-F., et al. 2019, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 19, 149
2019
-
[83]
2025a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2511.10217
Wang, H., Wu, X.-B., Yao, N., et al. 2025a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2511.10217
-
[84]
K., Brink, T
Wang, J., Zheng, W. K., Brink, T. G., et al. 2023, ApJ, 956, 137
2023
-
[85]
K., Xu, D
Wang, J., Zheng, W. K., Xu, D. W., et al. 2022, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 22, 015011
2022
-
[86]
2025b, ApJ, 981, 129 —
Wang, S., Woo, J.-H., Gallo, E., et al. 2025b, ApJ, 981, 129 —. 2024, ApJ, 966, 128 WISE Team. 2020, NEOWISE 2-Band Post-Cryo Single Exposure (L1b) Source Table, IPAC, doi:10.26131/IRSA124
2024 doi
-
[87]
L., Eisenhardt, P
Wright, E. L., Eisenhardt, P. R. M., Mainzer, A. K., et al. 2010, AJ, 140, 1868
2010
-
[88]
2018, ApJ, 862, 109
Yang, Q., Wu, X.-B., Fan, X., et al. 2018, ApJ, 862, 109
2018
-
[89]
J., MacLeod, C
Yang, Q., Green, P. J., MacLeod, C. L., et al. 2023, ApJ, 953, 61
2023
-
[90]
2024, ApJ, 966, 85
Zeltyn, G., Trakhtenbrot, B., Eracleous, M., et al. 2024, ApJ, 966, 85
2024
- [91]
-
[92]
2024, MNRAS, 530, 3538
Zhu, L.-T., Li, J., Wang, Z., & Zhang, J.-J. 2024, MNRAS, 530, 3538
2024
-
[93]
U., et al
Zhu, L.-T., Wang, Z., Devanand, P. U., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 536, 2715
2025
Reviewed August 1, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.