pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.16698 · v1 · pith:6DLOQN5Qnew · submitted 2026-05-15 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE · astro-ph.GA

Multiwavelength Probes of Cosmic Ray Transport in Molecular Cloud Structures

Hayden P. H. Ng , Ellis R. Owen , Naomi Tsuji , Szu-Ting Chen This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-20 15:14 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.GA
keywords cosmic raysmolecular cloudsgamma-ray emissionX-ray synchrotronCR ionizationCR diffusionTaurus cloudhadronic interactions
0
0 comments X

The pith

Cosmic rays scatter more strongly in molecular cloud clumps than in the interstellar medium, suppressing diffusion at GeV energies and raising interaction rates.

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

The paper builds a framework for cosmic ray transport in molecular clouds and their clumps by considering three propagation limits: fully ballistic, fully diffusive, and a hybrid case with a diffusive outer layer around a quasi-ballistic core. Forward-modeling of pion-decay gamma rays, ionization profiles, and hard X-ray synchrotron from secondary electrons is then applied to the Taurus complex. The modeling indicates that diffusion coefficients on clump scales fall well below typical interstellar medium values, so cosmic rays spend more time in dense gas, encounter higher column densities, and produce more secondaries. This matters for readers because it supplies concrete, multi-wavelength observables that can test how cosmic rays actually cross the boundary between diffuse and dense interstellar phases.

Core claim

We show that CR scattering may be substantially enhanced on clump scales, with inferred CR diffusion coefficients suppressed relative to canonical interstellar medium values at GeV energies. In this interpretation, CRs are more closely coupled with dense gas in the ISM, and a diffusive envelope boosts the effective gas column density encountered by the CRs. This increases the hadronic interaction rate in the cloud. In turn, the secondary CR electron injection is also increased, and CR ionization rates are elevated at higher densities. We show that a hard X-ray synchrotron emission component is also generated, which may be detectable with near-future facilities.

What carries the argument

Three limiting propagation scenarios (ballistic transport, diffusion, and hybrid diffusive envelope with quasi-ballistic core) that are used to compute pion-decay gamma-ray emissivities, ionization-rate profiles, and electron synchrotron spectra in magnetized cloud substructures.

If this is right

  • CRs remain coupled to dense gas over longer path lengths than assumed in standard models.
  • Hadronic interaction rates and secondary production both rise inside the cloud.
  • CR ionization rates increase at the highest densities.
  • A hard X-ray synchrotron signal appears that can be searched for with upcoming instruments.
  • Gamma-ray, X-ray, and ionization data together can discriminate among the three propagation scenarios.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same clump-scale suppression could modify gamma-ray brightness maps of other nearby clouds and change estimates of their total cosmic-ray content.
  • If confirmed, the hybrid envelope model would imply that cosmic-ray-driven chemistry and heating are stronger in dense cores than current uniform-diffusion calculations predict.
  • Ionization-rate maps derived from molecular-line observations could serve as an independent cross-check on the X-ray and gamma-ray diagnostics.

Load-bearing premise

The three idealized propagation scenarios are sufficient to describe the essential behavior of cosmic rays inside molecular clouds even though the microphysics of self-generated turbulence and ion-neutral damping remains unsettled.

What would settle it

A direct measurement of the cosmic-ray diffusion coefficient inside Taurus clumps that matches standard interstellar-medium values, or the absence of the predicted hard X-ray synchrotron component with next-generation X-ray telescopes, would falsify the enhanced-scattering interpretation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.16698 by Ellis R. Owen, Hayden P. H. Ng, Naomi Tsuji, Szu-Ting Chen.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Schematic of our molecular cloud model and the generalized framework for model-agnostic, parameterized tests of CR transport. The color scale represents the cloud’s density structure. CR propagation regimes are shown as an outer diffusive envelope and an inner ballistic core, separated at a critical radius r = rcr where the density exceeds a pa￾rameterized threshold n c H = η n0. The central density at r =… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Pion-decay γ-ray emissivity per H atom produced by CR protons in the fiducial clump model. The thick gray line shows the emissivity inte￾grated over the full clump. Other lines show the contribution from the inner r < 0.25pc region, comparable to the smallest angular scale that could be resolved for a clump at d = 150 pc in this energy range with an instrument like Fermi–LAT. Colored curves indicate the CR… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Emergent synchrotron X-ray emissivity per H atom from primary and secondary electrons produced in hadronic interactions in the fiducial clump model. Colored curves show the contribution from the inner region (r < 0.25 pc) for different CR transport prescriptions: fully diffusive (blue), ballistic (red), and two-zone models (green) with transition parameter η (values as labeled). Photoelectric absorption wi… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: CR ionization rate profiles, ζ(r), for the fiducial molecular cloud (left) and a clump (right). In both cases, for comparative purposes, the LIS is set as the irradiating external CR flux. We compute ζ by integrating the local CR proton and electron fluxes over ion-producing cross-sections (direct and dissociative ionization of H2, and weighted double ionization), including secondary ionizations. Curves co… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: As [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Pion-decay γ-ray emissivity per H atom for the Taurus molecular cloud (red; with over-plotted data points from Neronov et al. 2017) and rep￾resentative embedded clumps (blue; data from Yang et al. 2023). Points show the binned Fermi-LAT emissivities and quoted uncertainties, while solid curves show the corresponding best-fit spectra from our CR-transport model adopted for each target ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:fi… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Predicted total absorbed X-ray surface-brightness spectra of syn￾chrotron emission from CR electrons for the Taurus molecular cloud (red) and representative embedded clumps (blue) under the model parameter fits shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Predicted CR ionization rate per H atom, ζ, as a function of (left) local gas number density, and (right) inward hydrogen column density the CRs propagate through, NH, for the Taurus molecular cloud (red) and the four embedded γ-ray–bright clumps (blue). The left abscissa is the local density of the gas, while the right abscissa is the radial column integrated from the cloud surface to depth r. This ensur… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Mass-size map of the predicted low-energy γ-ray deficit in molec￾ular structures for the fiducial two-zone CR-transport model with transi￾tion parameter η = 0.5 (labeled), and diffusion coefficient normalization of 3 × 1026 cm2 s −1 set as that adopted for our fiducial clump model. Colors show the degree of deficit at Eγ = 1 GeV, where a value of 1 (yellow) indi￾cates no suppression compared to a ballisti… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We investigate how cosmic ray (CR) transport in molecular clouds and their substructures can be probed using multi-wavelength observations. The detailed microphysics regulating the penetration and coupling of CRs in dense molecular structures is unsettled. Self-generated turbulence can produce scattering and diffusive transport, while ion-neutral damping in cold, dense gas promotes ballistic CR propagation. We construct a self-consistent framework for CR transport and interactions in magnetized molecular clouds, considering three limiting propagation scenarios: ballistic transport, diffusion, and a hybrid configuration with a diffusive envelope and quasi-ballistic core. By forward-modeling pion-decay $\gamma$-ray emissivities, CR-driven ionization-rate profiles, and electron synchrotron emission in the hard X-ray band, we connect GeV attenuation and propagation signatures to independent diagnostics of secondary production and CR penetration. As an illustrative example, we apply our framework to the Taurus molecular cloud complex and selected embedded clumps. We show that CR scattering may be substantially enhanced on clump scales, with inferred CR diffusion coefficients suppressed relative to canonical interstellar medium (ISM) values at GeV energies. In this interpretation, CRs are more closely coupled with dense gas in the ISM, and a diffusive envelope boosts the effective gas column density encountered by the CRs. This increases the hadronic interaction rate in the cloud. In turn, the secondary CR electron injection is also increased, and CR ionization rates are elevated at higher densities. We show that a hard X-ray synchrotron emission component is also generated, which may be detectable with near-future facilities. Finally, we discuss how future $\gamma$-ray, X-ray, and ionization constraints will provide firm tests of CR propagation theories in molecular cloud environments.

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

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript constructs a self-consistent framework for cosmic ray (CR) transport and interactions in magnetized molecular clouds, considering three limiting propagation scenarios (ballistic, diffusive, and hybrid with a diffusive envelope plus quasi-ballistic core). It forward-models pion-decay gamma-ray emissivities, CR ionization-rate profiles, and hard X-ray synchrotron emission, then applies the framework as an illustrative example to the Taurus molecular cloud complex and embedded clumps. The central result is that CR scattering may be substantially enhanced on clump scales, with inferred GeV diffusion coefficients suppressed relative to canonical ISM values; this is interpreted as increasing hadronic interaction rates, elevating ionization at higher densities, and generating a potentially detectable synchrotron component.

Significance. If the inferences are robust, the work supplies a useful multi-wavelength toolkit for constraining unsettled CR microphysics (self-generated turbulence versus ion-neutral damping) in dense gas. The logical construction from standard limits and the explicit connection between propagation signatures and secondary diagnostics are strengths; the framework could inform CR ionization models in star-forming regions and guide future gamma-ray, X-ray, and ionization observations.

major comments (2)
  1. [Taurus application section] Taurus application section: the reported suppression of the CR diffusion coefficient on clump scales is obtained by fitting one of the three limiting scenarios (particularly the hybrid case) to Taurus observations and then interpreting the improved match as evidence for enhanced scattering. This procedure is circular because the value of the fitted parameter is then used to support the physical conclusion; independent validation against separate data sets or explicit sensitivity tests to the transition radius are needed to break the degeneracy.
  2. [Hybrid scenario description] Hybrid scenario description: the transition radius between the diffusive envelope and quasi-ballistic core is introduced via a simple damping criterion rather than emerging from solved wave-transport equations that include self-generated turbulence and ion-neutral damping. Because this scale is load-bearing for the claim that the hybrid model yields a unique lower D(E) that fits the multi-wavelength data better than canonical ISM values, the central inference remains sensitive to alternative microphysical prescriptions.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: no error bars or uncertainty ranges are quoted for the inferred diffusion coefficients or ionization-rate enhancements, which weakens the quantitative claims.
  2. [Figure captions] Figure captions (e.g., those showing emissivity profiles or synchrotron spectra): axis labels and line styles for the three scenarios should be clarified to allow direct comparison with the text.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed comments, which have helped clarify several aspects of our presentation. We address each major comment point by point below, outlining the revisions we intend to implement.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Taurus application section] Taurus application section: the reported suppression of the CR diffusion coefficient on clump scales is obtained by fitting one of the three limiting scenarios (particularly the hybrid case) to Taurus observations and then interpreting the improved match as evidence for enhanced scattering. This procedure is circular because the value of the fitted parameter is then used to support the physical conclusion; independent validation against separate data sets or explicit sensitivity tests to the transition radius are needed to break the degeneracy.

    Authors: We acknowledge the referee's concern that the Taurus application risks appearing circular if the hybrid scenario is selected primarily because it improves the fit and then used to infer enhanced scattering. The three scenarios are presented as limiting cases to bracket possible behaviors, with the Taurus example serving to illustrate how multi-wavelength data can be used within the framework. To address the degeneracy, we will add explicit sensitivity tests varying the transition radius (and other hybrid parameters) and show how the inferred diffusion coefficients respond. We will also compare the results to independent literature constraints on CR diffusion in molecular clouds and clarify in the text that the hybrid case provides a suggestive but not definitive preference pending further observational validation. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Hybrid scenario description] Hybrid scenario description: the transition radius between the diffusive envelope and quasi-ballistic core is introduced via a simple damping criterion rather than emerging from solved wave-transport equations that include self-generated turbulence and ion-neutral damping. Because this scale is load-bearing for the claim that the hybrid model yields a unique lower D(E) that fits the multi-wavelength data better than canonical ISM values, the central inference remains sensitive to alternative microphysical prescriptions.

    Authors: We agree that the transition radius in the hybrid scenario is set by a simplified damping criterion rather than emerging from a full solution of the wave-transport equations that self-consistently include CR-driven turbulence and ion-neutral damping. This is a modeling choice made for tractability, as solving the coupled system represents a substantial extension beyond the current scope. In the revised manuscript we will explicitly state this limitation, expand the discussion of alternative microphysical prescriptions, and include sensitivity tests to different choices of the transition criterion. We will also moderate language claiming uniqueness of the lower D(E) to reflect the approximate nature of the hybrid construction. revision: yes

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

Inferred suppression of GeV diffusion coefficients reduces to parameter fit to Taurus multi-wavelength data

specific steps
  1. fitted input called prediction [Application to Taurus (abstract and results section)]
    "We show that CR scattering may be substantially enhanced on clump scales, with inferred CR diffusion coefficients suppressed relative to canonical interstellar medium (ISM) values at GeV energies. In this interpretation, CRs are more closely coupled with dense gas in the ISM, and a diffusive envelope boosts the effective gas column density encountered by the CRs."

    The diffusion coefficient is varied within the hybrid scenario until the modeled gamma-ray emissivity, ionization profiles, and X-ray synchrotron match Taurus observations; the resulting lower D value is then reported as a physical inference of enhanced scattering. The 'prediction' of suppression is therefore the input parameter that was adjusted to fit the data.

full rationale

The paper builds three limiting transport scenarios (ballistic, diffusive, hybrid) and forward-models pion-decay, ionization, and synchrotron signatures. The central physical claim—that CR scattering is enhanced on clump scales with D(E) suppressed relative to ISM values—is obtained by applying the hybrid model to Taurus observations and selecting D(E) values that reproduce the data. This selected D is then presented as evidence for the physical conclusion. The transition radius in the hybrid case is set by a damping criterion rather than solved from wave equations, but the load-bearing inference is the post-fit interpretation. No self-citation chain or external uniqueness theorem is invoked; the circularity is internal to the fitting step.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard domain assumptions about CR propagation modes and introduce the diffusion coefficient as a key adjustable quantity when matching Taurus data; no new particles or forces are postulated.

free parameters (1)
  • CR diffusion coefficient on clump scales
    Value is inferred to be suppressed relative to ISM canonical values to reproduce the observed signatures under the hybrid scenario.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Self-generated turbulence produces scattering and diffusive transport while ion-neutral damping in cold dense gas promotes ballistic propagation.
    Invoked to define the three limiting scenarios that structure the entire framework.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5845 in / 1418 out tokens · 51526 ms · 2026-05-20T15:14:26.030106+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

151 extracted references · 151 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    D., Teachey, A., & Paglione, T

    Abrahams, R. D., Teachey, A., & Paglione, T. A. D. 2017, ApJ, 834, 91

    work page 2017

  2. [2]

    2020, Phys

    Aharonian, F., Peron, G., Yang, R., Casanova, S., & Zanin, R. 2020, Phys. Rev. D, 101, 083018

    work page 2020

  3. [3]

    Aharonian, F. A. 2013, Astroparticle Physics, 43, 71

    work page 2013

  4. [4]

    A., Kelner, S

    Aharonian, F. A., Kelner, S. R., & Prosekin, A. Y . 2010, Phys. Rev. D, 82, 043002

    work page 2010

  5. [5]

    Albertsson, T., Kauffmann, J., & Menten, K. M. 2018, ApJ, 868, 40

    work page 2018

  6. [6]

    M., et al

    Ao, Y ., Henkel, C., Menten, K. M., et al. 2013, A&A, 550, A135

    work page 2013

  7. [7]

    C., & Jiang, Y .-F

    Armillotta, L., Ostriker, E. C., & Jiang, Y .-F. 2021, ApJ, 922, 11

    work page 2021

  8. [8]

    2011, A&A, 529, L6

    Arzoumanian, D., André, P., Didelon, P., et al. 2011, A&A, 529, L6

    work page 2011

  9. [9]

    L., Linnartz, H., Cox, N

    Bacalla, X. L., Linnartz, H., Cox, N. L. J., et al. 2019, A&A, 622, A31

    work page 2019

  10. [10]

    N., Offner, S

    Beaumont, C. N., Offner, S. S. R., Shetty, R., Glover, S. C. O., & Goodman, A. A. 2013, ApJ, 777, 173

    work page 2013

  11. [11]

    S., Bulanov, S

    Berezinskii, V . S., Bulanov, S. V ., Dogiel, V . A., & Ptuskin, V . S. 1990, Astrophysics of cosmic rays (Amsterdam: North-Holland)

    work page 1990

  12. [12]

    Bergin, E. A. & Tafalla, M. 2007, ARA&A, 45, 339

    work page 2007

  13. [13]

    D., et al

    Beuther, H., Gieser, C., Soler, J. D., et al. 2024, A&A, 682, A81

    work page 2024

  14. [14]

    M., et al

    Beuther, H., Schilke, P., Menten, K. M., et al. 2002, ApJ, 566, 945

    work page 2002

  15. [15]

    G., Bell, T

    Bisbas, T. G., Bell, T. A., Viti, S., Yates, J., & Barlow, M. J. 2012, MNRAS, 427, 2100

    work page 2012

  16. [16]

    A., Keane, E., & Wagg, J

    Braun, R., Bourke, T., Green, J. A., Keane, E., & Wagg, J. 2015, in Advancing Astrophysics with the Square Kilometre Array (AASKA14), 174

    work page 2015

  17. [17]

    2025, MNRAS, 537, 482

    Brugaletta, V ., Walch, S., Naab, T., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 537, 482

    work page 2025

  18. [18]

    & Zweibel, E

    Bustard, C. & Zweibel, E. G. 2021, ApJ, 913, 106

    work page 2021

  19. [19]

    2024, ApJ, 961, 153

    Cahlon, S., Zucker, C., Goodman, A., Lada, C., & Alves, J. 2024, ApJ, 961, 153

    work page 2024

  20. [20]

    A., Fukui, Y ., et al

    Casanova, S., Aharonian, F. A., Fukui, Y ., et al. 2010, PASJ, 62, 769

    work page 2010

  21. [21]

    M., Terzieva, R., & Herbst, E

    Caselli, P., Walmsley, C. M., Terzieva, R., & Herbst, E. 1998, ApJ, 499, 234

    work page 1998

  22. [22]

    2014, ApJL, 790, L1 Cécere, M., Velázquez, P

    Ceccarelli, C., Dominik, C., López-Sepulcre, A., et al. 2014, ApJL, 790, L1 Cécere, M., Velázquez, P. F., Araudo, A. T., et al. 2016, ApJ, 816, 64

    work page 2014

  23. [23]

    Cesarsky, C. J. & V olk, H. J. 1978, A&A, 70, 367

    work page 1978

  24. [24]

    2020, MNRAS, 493, 351

    Chen, B.-Q., Li, G.-X., Yuan, H.-B., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 493, 351

    work page 2020

  25. [25]

    O., Ivlev, A

    Chernyshov, D. O., Ivlev, A. V ., & Dogiel, V . A. 2025, Phys. Rev. D, 112, 083045

    work page 2025

  26. [26]

    O., Ivlev, A

    Chernyshov, D. O., Ivlev, A. V ., & Kiselev, A. M. 2024, Phys. Rev. D, 110, 043012

    work page 2024

  27. [27]

    Cravens, T. E. & Dalgarno, A. 1978, ApJ, 219, 750

    work page 1978

  28. [28]

    2025, Nature Astronomy, 9, 36

    Cruise, M., Guainazzi, M., Aird, J., et al. 2025, Nature Astronomy, 9, 36

    work page 2025

  29. [29]

    Crutcher, R. M. 2012, ARA&A, 50, 29

    work page 2012

  30. [30]

    M., Wandelt, B., Heiles, C., Falgarone, E., & Troland, T

    Crutcher, R. M., Wandelt, B., Heiles, C., Falgarone, E., & Troland, T. H. 2010, ApJ, 725, 466

    work page 2010

  31. [31]

    C., Stone, E

    Cummings, A. C., Stone, E. C., Heikkila, B. C., et al. 2016, ApJ, 831, 18

    work page 2016

  32. [32]

    2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 103, 12269

    Dalgarno, A. 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 103, 12269

    work page 2006

  33. [33]

    J., Connolly, Jr., H

    Desch, S. J., Connolly, Jr., H. C., & Srinivasan, G. 2004, ApJ, 602, 528

    work page 2004

  34. [34]

    2015, in Advancing Astrophysics with the Square Kilometre Array (AASKA14), 102

    Dickinson, C., Beck, R., Crocker, R., et al. 2015, in Advancing Astrophysics with the Square Kilometre Array (AASKA14), 102

    work page 2015

  35. [35]

    A., Chernyshov, D

    Dogiel, V . A., Chernyshov, D. O., Ivlev, A. V ., et al. 2018, ApJ, 868, 114

    work page 2018

  36. [36]

    2021, ApJ, 914, 122

    Doi, Y ., Hasegawa, T., Bastien, P., et al. 2021, ApJ, 914, 122

    work page 2021

  37. [37]

    Draine, B. T. 2011, Physics of the Interstellar and Intergalactic Medium ESA: XMM-Newton SOC. 2025, XMM-Newton Users Handbook

    work page 2011

  38. [38]

    S., et al

    Eswaraiah, C., Li, D., Furuya, R. S., et al. 2021, ApJL, 912, L27

    work page 2021

  39. [39]

    Everett, J. E. & Zweibel, E. G. 2011, ApJ, 739, 60

    work page 2011

  40. [40]

    J., Reichherzer, P., Ren, S., et al

    Ewart, R. J., Reichherzer, P., Ren, S., et al. 2026, MNRAS, 545, staf2108

    work page 2026

  41. [41]

    K., & Zweibel, E

    Farber, R., Ruszkowski, M., Yang, H.-Y . K., & Zweibel, E. G. 2018, ApJ, 856, 112

    work page 2018

  42. [42]

    Felice, G. M. & Kulsrud, R. M. 2001, ApJ, 553, 198 Fitz Axen, M., Offner, S., Hopkins, P. F., Krumholz, M. R., & Grudi´c, M. Y . 2024, ApJ, 973, 16

    work page 2001

  43. [43]

    Gaches, B. A. L., Offner, S. S. R., & Bisbas, T. G. 2019, ApJ, 878, 105

    work page 2019

  44. [44]

    E., Galli, D., & Padovani, M

    Glassgold, A. E., Galli, D., & Padovani, M. 2012, ApJ, 756, 157

    work page 2012

  45. [45]

    Glassgold, A. E. & Langer, W. D. 1973, ApJ, 186, 859

    work page 1973

  46. [46]

    Gleeson, L. J. & Axford, W. I. 1968, ApJ, 154, 1011

    work page 1968

  47. [47]

    R., Pety, J., Gerin, M., Hily-Blant, P., & Le Bourlot, J

    Goicoechea, J. R., Pety, J., Gerin, M., Hily-Blant, P., & Le Bourlot, J. 2009, A&A, 498, 771

    work page 2009

  48. [48]

    A., Black, J

    Grenier, I. A., Black, J. H., & Strong, A. W. 2015, ARA&A, 53, 199 20Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan(2026), Vol. 00, No. 0

    work page 2015

  49. [49]

    R., Güdel, M., et al

    Grosso, N., Briggs, K. R., Güdel, M., et al. 2007, A&A, 468, 391 Güdel, M., Briggs, K. R., Arzner, K., et al. 2007, A&A, 468, 353

    work page 2007

  50. [50]

    M., Ungerechts, H., & Churchwell, E

    Guesten, R., Walmsley, C. M., Ungerechts, H., & Churchwell, E. 1985, A&A, 142, 381

    work page 1985

  51. [51]

    W., Yuen, K

    Habegger, R., Ho, K. W., Yuen, K. H., & Zweibel, E. G. 2024, ApJ, 974, 17

    work page 2024

  52. [52]

    Habegger, R., Ruszkowski, M., & Zweibel, E. G. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.24622

    work page arXiv 2025

  53. [53]

    & Wanner, G

    Hairer, E. & Wanner, G. 2010, Solving Ordinary Differential Equations II: Stiff and Differential-Algebraic Problems, Springer Series in Computational Mathematics (Springer Berlin Heidelberg)

    work page 2010

  54. [54]

    1961, PASJ, 13, 184

    Hayakawa, S., Nishimura, S., & Takayanagi, K. 1961, PASJ, 13, 184

    work page 1961

  55. [55]

    2020, ApJ, 899, 102

    Higurashi, R., Tsuji, N., & Uchiyama, Y . 2020, ApJ, 899, 102

    work page 2020

  56. [56]

    D., Lee, M.-Y ., Wyrowski, F., et al

    Hoang, T. D., Lee, M.-Y ., Wyrowski, F., et al. 2025, A&A, 695, A24

    work page 2025

  57. [57]

    2017, AJ, 154, 38

    Holdship, J., Viti, S., Jiménez-Serra, I., Makrymallis, A., & Priestley, F. 2017, AJ, 154, 38

    work page 2017

  58. [58]

    J., Neufeld, D., Wolfire, M., & Goicoechea, J

    Hollenbach, D., Kaufman, M. J., Neufeld, D., Wolfire, M., & Goicoechea, J. R. 2012, ApJ, 754, 105

    work page 2012

  59. [59]

    2020, MNRAS, 492, 4246

    Huang, Y ., Li, Z., Wang, W., & Zhao, X. 2020, MNRAS, 492, 4246

    work page 2020

  60. [60]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science & Engineering, 9, 90 IceCube Collaboration, Abbasi, R., Ackermann, M., et al. 2023, Science, 380, 1338

    work page 2007

  61. [61]

    2023, ApJ, 950, 64

    Indriolo, N. 2023, ApJ, 950, 64

    work page 2023

  62. [62]

    A., Falgarone, E., et al

    Indriolo, N., Bergin, E. A., Falgarone, E., et al. 2018, ApJ, 865, 127

    work page 2018

  63. [63]

    V ., Pellegrin, T., et al

    Indriolo, N., Ivlev, A. V ., Pellegrin, T., et al. 2026, ApJ, 997, 123

    work page 2026

  64. [64]

    & McCall, B

    Indriolo, N. & McCall, B. J. 2012, ApJ, 745, 91

    work page 2012

  65. [65]

    V ., Dogiel, V

    Ivlev, A. V ., Dogiel, V . A., Chernyshov, D. O., et al. 2018, ApJ, 855, 23

    work page 2018

  66. [66]

    2025, MNRAS, 541, 1254 Kachelrieß, M., Moskalenko, I

    Jiang, M., Sun, X.-N., Wu, Q.-H., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 541, 1254 Kachelrieß, M., Moskalenko, I. V ., & Ostapchenko, S. 2019, Computer Physics Communications, 245, 106846 Kachelrieß, M., Moskalenko, I. V ., & Ostapchenko, S. S. 2015, ApJ, 803, 54

    work page 2025

  67. [67]

    M., & Vila, G

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

    work page 2014

  68. [68]

    2006, ApJ, 647, 692 Kamal Youssef, F

    Kamae, T., Karlsson, N., Mizuno, T., Abe, T., & Koi, T. 2006, ApJ, 647, 692 Kamal Youssef, F. R. & Grenier, I. A. 2024, A&A, 685, A102

    work page 2006

  69. [69]

    J., Gómez, M., & Whitney, B

    Kenyon, S. J., Gómez, M., & Whitney, B. A. 2008, in Handbook of Star Forming Regions, V olume I, ed. B. Reipurth, V ol. 4, 405

    work page 2008

  70. [70]

    S., Tomida, K., Kobayashi, M

    Kimura, S. S., Tomida, K., Kobayashi, M. I. N., Kin, K., & Zhang, B. 2025, ApJL, 981, L36

    work page 2025

  71. [71]

    Klessen, R. S. & Glover, S. C. O. 2016, Saas-Fee Advanced Course, 43, 85

    work page 2016

  72. [72]

    2021, Phys

    Koldobskiy, S., Kachelrieß, M., Lskavyan, A., et al. 2021, Phys. Rev. D, 104, 123027

    work page 2021

  73. [73]

    Lagage, P. O. & Cesarsky, C. J. 1983, A&A, 118, 223

    work page 1983

  74. [74]

    Lai, P. C. W., Crudele, B., Agostini, M., et al. 2026, Phys. Rev. D, 113, L061306

    work page 2026

  75. [75]

    2025, A&A, 699, A126

    Latrille, G., Lupi, A., Bovino, S., et al. 2025, A&A, 699, A126

    work page 2025

  76. [76]

    2021, Galaxies, 9, 41

    Li, H.-B. 2021, Galaxies, 9, 41

    work page 2021

  77. [77]

    Liang, N. & Oh, S. P. 2025, MNRAS, 543, 1911

    work page 2025

  78. [78]

    B., et al

    Lin, Y ., Wyrowski, F., Liu, H. B., et al. 2022, A&A, 658, A128

    work page 2022

  79. [79]

    G., Padovani, M., & Gaches, B

    Luo, G., Bisbas, T. G., Padovani, M., & Gaches, B. A. L. 2024, A&A, 690, A293

    work page 2024

  80. [80]

    & Bergin, E

    Maret, S. & Bergin, E. A. 2015, Astrochem: Abundances of chemical species in the interstellar medium, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1507.010

    work page 2015

Showing first 80 references.