Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 65 references

Determining the Magnetic Field in the Atmosphere of a Solar Active Region Observed by the CLASP2.1 Sounding Rocket Experiment

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Applying the weak-field approximation to Mg ii h&k and Mn i circular polarization from the CLASP2.1 sounding rocket, this paper maps the longitudinal magnetic field at three chromospheric heights in a solar active region and reports a…

desk verdict First 2D UV spectropolarimetric maps of chromospheric B_L across an active region, with a plausible polarity-reversal detection; the main soft spot is an overclaimed transverse-field abstract. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.09878 v1 pith:EMQABFC6 submitted 2025-07-14 astro-ph.SR

Ryohko Ishikawa , Javier Trujillo Bueno , David E. McKenzie , Donguk Song , Tanausú del Pino Alemán , Ernest Alsina Ballester , Luca Belluzzi , Hao Li
show 12 more authors
Frédéric Auchère Christian Bethge Bart De Pontieu Ryouhei Kano Ken Kobayashi Adam R. Kobelski Takenori J. Okamoto Laurel A. Rachmeler Taro Sakao Jiří Štěpán Genevieve D. Vigil Amy Winebarger
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.SR
keywords solarmagneticfieldsplagesspectropolarimetryreconnectionchromosphereMgiihandklinesweak-fieldapproximationCLASP2.1
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper uses ultraviolet spectropolarimetry from the CLASP2.1 sounding rocket, combined with Hinode photospheric magnetograms, to map the longitudinal magnetic field of a solar active region at three chromospheric heights: lower, middle, and upper. Applying the weak-field approximation separately to the outer and inner lobes of the Mg ii h and k lines and to the Mn i lines, it obtains field maps that show the plage magnetic field expanding by roughly a factor of 2.5 in the lower chromosphere and 3.1 in the middle chromosphere, matching the moss seen above in the transition region and corona. The central new result is a localized polarity reversal at the upper chromosphere around the edge of a pore: the field measured from the inner lobes has the opposite sign to the field lower down, which the authors interpret as an overlying, oppositely directed magnetic field that can drive reconnection and recurrent jet-like brightenings. Around the penumbral edge, the maps detect large-scale fields associated with superpenumbral fibrils, and spatially averaged linear polarization implies nearly horizontal fields of roughly 1000 G in the upper chromosphere there.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the weak-field approximation (WFA) applied lobe by lobe: for each spectral line, Stokes $V(\lambda)$ is proportional to $B_L$ times the wavelength derivative of the intensity, $V(\lambda) = -\left(\frac{e\lambda^2}{4\pi m_e c}\right) g_{\rm eff} B_L \, \frac{\partial I}{\partial \lambda}$, with separate effective Landé factors for the Mg ii h and k lines and the two Mn i lines. The paper assigns the external lobes of the Mg ii h line to the middle chromosphere, the inner lobes of h and k to the upper chromosphere, and the Mn i lobes to the lower chromosphere, based on where the line-core optical depth reaches unity in forward models. Fitting these lobes separately is what converts one spectrum into a three-height magnetic map, and the same lobe decomposition is what makes the polarity reversal at the upper chromosphere a claim about a distinct layer rather than a whole-atmosphere average.

What would settle it

A concrete test: use a 3D radiative-MHD simulation of a pore embedded in opposite-polarity plage with a known upper-chromosphere canopy, synthesize the Mg ii h and k Stokes profiles, and apply the lobe-wise WFA; if the WFA maps do not reproduce the model's polarity structure at the upper-chromosphere heights, the observed polarity reversal is an artifact of the constant-field approximation, whereas a faithful reproduction would confirm the inferred discontinuity.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that the longitudinal magnetic field of an active region can be inferred at three separate chromospheric layers by applying the weak-field approximation to different parts of the Mg ii h&k and Mn i Stokes V profiles, and that this height-resolved view reveals a magnetic configuration not visible in photospheric maps alone. In a positive-polarity pore embedded in a negative-polarity plage, the positive area expands in the lower and middle chromosphere but shrinks in the upper chromosphere, where the edge turns negative with a field of roughly 200 G; the WFA fits to the inner lobes give opposite polarity to the middle-chromosphere fits at the same pixels. The authors take this as evidence of an overlying expanding plage field of opposite polarity, producing a magnetic discontinuity above the chromosphere, and they point to recurrent EUV brightenings and eruptions in the same region as reconnection signatures. In the superpenumbral fibrils, the upper chromosphere is dominated by large-scale sunspot-origin fields, while spatially averaged Zeeman-induced linear polarization in the Mg ii h core suggests transverse fields as strong as 1500 G above the penumbra and about 1000 G in a fibril, both explicitly upper limits because scattering polarization is not fully modeled.

Load-bearing premise

The result depends on the weak-field approximation being valid for each lobe, meaning the longitudinal field must stay roughly constant along the line-formation path of that lobe; if the field varies along the path, or if the inner lobes form at a different height than assumed, the inferred three-layer stratification and the polarity reversal could be wrong.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Plage magnetic fields expand by factors of about 2.5 and 3.1 at the lower and middle chromosphere, so the same flux concentrations that look compact in photospheric magnetograms spread out high enough to outline the moss footpoints of hot coronal loops.
  • A polarity reversal confined to the upper chromosphere at the pore edge implies an overlying oppositely directed field, so this location is a candidate site for magnetic reconnection and the recurrent jet-like brightenings seen in EUV.
  • The superpenumbral fibrils seen in the Mg ii k core correspond to large-scale fields that exist at the upper chromosphere and do not return to the photosphere within the CLASP2.1 field of view, so their outer footpoints lie outside the scanned area or in overlying field.
  • Zeeman-induced linear polarization in the Mg ii h core places lower bounds on the transverse field in the upper chromosphere: about 1500 G above the penumbra and 1000 G in a superpenumbral fibril, with near-horizontal geometry.
  • The lobe-wise WFA maps are consistent with the independent inversion of the same data reported in the paper's companion study, supporting the use of this fast method for chromospheric magnetic-field stratification.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A testable extension the paper leaves implicit: the same lobe-wise WFA applied to archival CLASP2 data or to future Mg ii observations could search for polarity reversals at other pore and sunspot edges as a systematic feature of opposite-polarity plage environments.
  • If the polarity reversal is real, it strengthens the picture that the upper chromosphere is not a smooth continuation of photospheric field but a layer where overlying canopy fields can create discontinuities; such sites may be where transition-region moss heating is locally enhanced.
  • The near-horizontal 1000 G fields inferred in superpenumbral fibrils, if confirmed by full scattering-plus-Zeeman modeling, would make these fibrils significant reservoirs of magnetic energy and a promising target for wave-heating studies.
  • One could also test the height assignment directly by comparing the inner-lobe WFA fields against simultaneous Ca ii 8542 Å or He i 10830 Å inversions at the same location, since those lines sample overlapping chromospheric heights.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. Using CLASP2.1 spectropolarimetry of the Mg ii h/k and Mn i lines combined with Hinode/SOT, IRIS, and SDO imaging, the authors apply the weak-field approximation (WFA) to different lobes of the V/I profiles to infer longitudinal magnetic field maps at three chromospheric heights. They report a factor of roughly 2.5–3.1 expansion of the plage magnetized area with height, an upper-chromosphere polarity reversal at the edge of a pore that they interpret as evidence of a magnetic discontinuity, large-scale positive-polarity fields in superpenumbral fibrils, and Zeeman-induced linear polarization signals suggesting transverse fields as strong as about 1000–1500 G. The main results are the first two-dimensional chromospheric B_L maps from CLASP2.1 and the potentially new polarity-reversal signature around the pore edge.

Significance. The paper presents unique observational data and a straightforward, mostly transparent analysis, including WFA fits with photon-noise uncertainties and maps with excluded low-significance pixels. The spatial correspondence between the expanded middle-chromosphere magnetic field and the overlying moss is a valuable quantitative result for active-region connectivity. The reported upper-chromosphere polarity reversal, if confirmed, is an important observation for models of magnetic discontinuities and reconnection in the solar chromosphere. The authors are appropriately cautious in several places, but the quantitative validation of the central reversal claim is currently incomplete, which limits the strength of the conclusions that can be drawn from it.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4.2, Eq. (1)] The upper-chromosphere polarity reversal is the paper's central claim, but it is inferred by applying the WFA to the inner lobes of Mg ii h/k. The WFA validity condition, that B_L is approximately constant over the line-formation region, is precisely what is not guaranteed in a geometry with a sign change along the line of sight. The cited MHD tests of WFA on inner lobes (Centeno et al. 2022; Afonso Delgado et al. 2023) are performed in plage-like or general chromospheric models, not in a pore-edge configuration with an overlying opposite-polarity field. The manuscript also states that the map is "consistent" with HanleRT-TIC (Li et al. 2024b), but no quantitative comparison is shown. I request either a forward-model test with a sign-reversing field along the line of sight, or a per-pixel HanleRT-TIC comparison (for example, a scatter plot and correlation restricted to the blue region in Fig. 5j). Until then, the polarity-reversal claim should be explicitly presented as tentative.
  2. [§4.2, Fig. 5j] The identification of the reversal region is partly subjective: the negative-polarity area at the upper chromosphere is described as "pixels with relatively strong B_L [that] are visually chosen." The map in Fig. 5j should be accompanied by an objective detection criterion, such as contiguous pixels where the upper-chromosphere B_L is opposite in sign to the lower/middle chromosphere and exceeds 2–3 sigma, together with the number of independent pixels and the total area satisfying that criterion. This would rule out isolated noise excursions and make the detection reproducible.
  3. [§3.1.1, Fig. 3 (bottom row)] For pixels without clear k3/h3 self-reversal features, the paper treats the 4–5 wavelength points around line center as inner lobes for the WFA. This is a nonstandard definition that needs justification: these signals are not demonstrated to originate in the upper chromosphere, and with V/I amplitudes near the photon-noise level, the inferred B_L can be sensitive to the chosen wavelength range. The paper should quantify how many such pixels are included in Figs. 4j and 5j, and test whether the upper-chromosphere maps (in particular the reversal region) are robust to excluding them.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract] The phrase "as strong as 1000 G in the upper chromosphere" should be qualified as an upper limit, consistent with the caveat stated in Section 4.4 and the conclusions.
  2. [Fig. 3 caption] The caption does not identify the rows explicitly; please state which row corresponds to the plage, the polarity-reversal pixel, and the profile without k3/h3 self-reversal, as referenced in the text.
  3. [§4.2, Fig. 5] The text refers to "blue boxes" in panels h–j, but the figure shows blue contours; please use consistent terminology.
  4. [Fig. 6] The text refers to a "purple, dashed-line box" in the schematic, but this feature is not identifiable in the printed figure; please add a visible label or remove the reference.
  5. [§4.1, §5] The phrase "causal relationship" in the conclusions is stronger than the correlation analysis in Table 1 supports; suggest "association" or "spatial correspondence".
  6. [§3.1.1] When averaging the WFA B_L values from the inner lobes of the h and k lines, the paper does not state how the uncertainties are combined; please specify the averaging and error-propagation procedure.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the field maps and polarity reversal are direct WFA inferences from observed Stokes V/I, not outputs of a model fitted to those same data.

full rationale

The central derivations are self-contained against external data and standard physics. Eq. (1) is the textbook WFA relation V = -(e lambda^2 / 4 pi m_e c) g_eff B_L dI/dlambda, and B_L is obtained by least-squares scaling of the observed V/I to the observed I derivative (Section 3.1.1). The polarity reversal claim is read from observed profiles: 'The third row of Figure 3 shows the I and V/I profiles for one of the pixels ... that exhibits B_L with negative polarity only at the upper chromosphere. The WFA successfully fits the V/I profiles, giving B_L = -212 +/- 47 G at the upper chromosphere ... and B_L = 183 +/- 19 G at the middle chromosphere.' No parameter was fitted to produce this sign change. The height assignment for the lobes is supported by citations to prior radiative-transfer/simulation work (del Pino Alemán et al. 2020; Centeno et al. 2022; Afonso Delgado et al. 2023) rather than by an assumption built into the present derivation, and the consistency check with HanleRT-TIC (Li et al. 2024b) is a separate inversion method, not a restatement of the WFA result. Self-citations occur, but they are not load-bearing definitions or uniqueness claims; they are published external computations. Thus the paper is not circular, though the upper-chromosphere height assignment and WFA validity at the pore edge are legitimate correctness risks.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new particles, forces, or entities. It relies on standard physical assumptions about line formation and the weak-field approximation, plus a few analysis choices (thresholds, averaging boxes) that should be recognized as free parameters of the measurement.

free parameters (3)
  • Magnetized-area threshold = 0.2 * max(|BL|)
    Pixels with |BL| above 20% of the maximum in the moss region are defined as magnetized. This is an arbitrary threshold that directly affects the reported area expansion factors (2.4 to 3.1).
  • Upper-chromosphere display threshold = 2 sigma of V/I photon noise
    Pixels in the upper chromosphere BL map are shown only when the maximum circular polarization amplitude exceeds 2 sigma. This selection could bias the morphology of the upper-chromosphere field toward strong-signal pixels.
  • Spatial averaging boxes for Q/I = Two boxes, sizes not explicitly quantified
    The linear polarization profiles are averaged over two manually chosen regions (areas i and ii in Figure 10) to improve signal-to-noise, which affects the derived upper limits on transverse field strength.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The weak-field approximation is valid for the selected spectral line lobes.
    The paper assumes the Zeeman splitting is much smaller than the line width and that the longitudinal field is constant over the formation region, as stated in Section 3.1.1.
  • domain assumption The inner V/I lobes of Mg ii h and k form in the upper chromosphere, and the external lobes form in the middle chromosphere.
    This lobe-height correspondence is taken from earlier studies (del Pino Aleman et al. 2020; Centeno et al. 2022), but it is a physical assumption that underpins the three-height maps.
  • domain assumption The magnetic structure is stable during the 5.5-minute CLASP2.1 scan.
    The 16 slit positions were observed sequentially from 17:42:13 to 17:47:38 UT; the maps are treated as a snapshot, while the Sun evolves on shorter timescales in the dynamic regions they study.
  • domain assumption The linear polarization at the center of the Mg ii h line is attributed to the Zeeman effect when deriving transverse-field upper limits.
    Section 4.4 explicitly says 'Assuming that the detected Q/I signals at the line center originate from the Zeeman effect'; scattering polarization could contribute, so the derived BT is an upper limit.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Determining the Magnetic Field in the Atmosphere of a Solar Active Region Observed by the CLASP2.1 Sounding Rocket Experiment." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/EMQABFC6

@misc{pith2026250709878,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Determining the Magnetic Field in the Atmosphere of a Solar Active Region Observed by the CLASP2.1 Sounding Rocket Experiment},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/EMQABFC6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.09878}
}
abstract

We determine magnetic fields from the photosphere to the upper chromosphere combining data from the Hinode satellite and the CLASP2.1 sounding rocket experiment. CLASP2.1 provided polarization profiles of the Mg~{|sc ii} $h$ and $k$ lines, as well as of the Mn~{|sc i} lines around 2800~{|AA}, across various magnetic structures in an active region, containing a plage, a pore, and the edges of a sunspot penumbra. By applying the Weak-Field Approximation (WFA) to the circular polarization profiles of these spectral lines, we obtain a longitudinal magnetic field map at three different heights in the chromosphere (lower, middle, and upper). This is complemented by data from Hinode (photospheric magnetic field), IRIS, and SDO (high-spatial-resolution observations of the chromosphere and corona). We quantify the height expansion of the plage magnetic fields and find that the magnetic fields expand significantly in the middle chromosphere, shaping the moss observed above in the transition region and corona. We identified an area with polarity reversal at the upper chromosphere around the edge of the pore, suggesting the presence of a magnetic discontinuity in the upper chromosphere. Transient and recurrent jet-like events are observed in this region, likely driven by magnetic reconnection. Around the penumbral edge, we find large-scale magnetic fields corresponding to the superpenumbral fibrils seen in the upper chromosphere. In the superpenumbral fibrils, we find Zeeman-induced linear polarization signals, suggesting the presence of a significantly inclined magnetic field, as strong as 1000~G in the upper chromosphere.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.09878 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Overview of the observed area. Panels a, b−1, and b−2: The AIA 304 ˚A (panels a and b−1) and 94 ˚A (panel b−2) images temporally averaged between 17:41.29 and 17:47.41 UT, and between 17:41.35 and 17:47.47 UT, respectively, on 2021 October 8. The green box in panel a indicates the areas displayed in panels b−1 and b−2. The 16 locations of the CLASP2.1 spectrograph’s slit are highlighted in green in panels b−1 and b−… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Normalized Stokes I (gray curves) and V /I (black dots) profiles of the Mg ii k at 2796.4 ˚A (panel a), Mg ii h at 2803.5 ˚A (b), Mn i at 2799.1 ˚A (c), and Mn i at 2801.9 ˚A (d) at the location in the penumbra in the photosphere, indicated by the light blue cross marks in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Examples of normalized I (light gray) and V /I (dark gray with ±1σ error bars based on the photon noise) profiles at the locations marked by the orange triangle, pink diamond, purple circle, and green square in Figures 1 and 4 for the Mg ii k at 2796.4 ˚A (a), Mg ii h at 2803.5 ˚A (b), Mn i at 2799.1 ˚A (c), and Mn i at 2801.9 ˚A (d). The red, black, and blue curves show the fits resulting from the application of th… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Panels a−f and g−j show intensity images from the photosphere to the corona, and longitudinal magnetograms from the photosphere to the upper chromosphere, respectively, within the CLASP2.1 scan area (indicated by white rectangles in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: ROI A. a: The photospheric intensity image taken by Hinode/SOT. b: Longitudinal component of the photospheric magnetic field observed by Hinode/SOT. The colorbar is capped at ±1.5 kG. c: Intensity image in SDO/AIA channels of 1600 ˚A. d: Intensity image at the line cen…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Schematic of ROI A. 4.3. Superpenumbral fibril region [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Temporal evolution of ROI A. From left to right, photospheric longitudinal magnetic field BL obtained by SDO/HMI, and the intensity in 1600 ˚A, 304 ˚A, 171 ˚A, and 335 ˚A by SDO/AIA around ROI A. The time denoted on the left at each panel shows the time with respect to…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: ROI B. a: The photospheric intensity image taken by Hinode/SOT. b: Longitudinal component of the photospheric magnetic field observed by Hinode/SOT. The colorbar is capped at ±1.5 kG. c, e−g: Intensity images in SDO/AIA channels of 1600 ˚A, 304 ˚A, 171 ˚A, and 335 ˚A, …
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Schematic of ROI B. The CLASP2.1 FOV includes both, the edge and the outer area of the penumbra (ROI B, lower box in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Panels (a) and (b) are the images of the k core intensity and BL at the upper chromosphere of ROI B, respectively. The black boxes show the areas (i) and (ii) over which the Stokes profiles are averaged. Panels (c)−(f) are the spatially averaged Q/I profiles in the un…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: BL map focusing on the moss region (Y > 0 ′′ in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_11.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

65 extracted references · 39 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    2023, , 954, 218, 10.3847/1538-4357/ace4c8

    Afonso Delgado , D., del Pino Alem \'a n , T., & Trujillo Bueno , J. 2023, , 954, 218, 10.3847/1538-4357/ace4c8

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ace4c8 2023

  2. [2]

    2016, , 831, L15, 10.3847/2041-8205/831/2/L15

    Alsina Ballester , E., Belluzzi , L., & Trujillo Bueno , J. 2016, , 831, L15, 10.3847/2041-8205/831/2/L15

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8205/831/2/l15 2016

  3. [3]

    B., Grant , S

    Bate , W., Jess , D. B., Grant , S. D. T., et al. 2024, , 970, 66, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad4d97

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad4d97 2024

  4. [4]

    Beck , C., & Choudhary , D. P. 2020, , 891, 119, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab75bd

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab75bd 2020

  5. [5]

    2012, , 750, L11, 10.1088/2041-8205/750/1/L11

    Belluzzi , L., & Trujillo Bueno , J. 2012, , 750, L11, 10.1088/2041-8205/750/1/L11

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/750/1/l11 2012

  6. [6]

    E., De Pontieu , B., Fletcher , L., et al

    Berger , T. E., De Pontieu , B., Fletcher , L., et al. 1999, , 190, 409, 10.1023/A:1005286503963

    work page doi:10.1023/a:1005286503963 1999

  7. [7]

    M., & Ichimoto , K

    Borrero , J. M., & Ichimoto , K. 2011, Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 8, 4, 10.12942/lrsp-2011-4

    doi:10.12942/lrsp-2011-4 2011

  8. [8]

    2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 697, 10.1038/s41550-024-02241-8

    Bose , S., De Pontieu , B., Hansteen , V., et al. 2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 697, 10.1038/s41550-024-02241-8

    doi:10.1038/s41550-024-02241-8 2024

Show all 65 references
  1. [9]

    I., Vargas Dom \' nguez , S., Utz , D., Veronig , A

    Campos Rozo , J. I., Vargas Dom \' nguez , S., Utz , D., Veronig , A. M., & Hanslmeier , A. 2023, , 674, A91, 10.1051/0004-6361/202346389

    2023 doi

  2. [10]

    2015, , 809, L30, 10.1088/2041-8205/809/2/L30

    Carlsson , M., Leenaarts , J., & De Pontieu , B. 2015, , 809, L30, 10.1088/2041-8205/809/2/L30

    2015 doi

  3. [11]

    2022, , 936, 115, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac886f

    Centeno , R., Rempel , M., Casini , R., & del Pino Alem \'a n , T. 2022, , 936, 115, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac886f

    2022 doi

  4. [12]

    2014, The Astrophysical Journal, 789, 108, 10.1088/0004-637X/789/2/108

    Chae, J., Yang, H., Park, H., et al. 2014, The Astrophysical Journal, 789, 108, 10.1088/0004-637X/789/2/108

    2014 doi

  5. [13]

    2011, , 527, L8, 10.1051/0004-6361/201016018

    de la Cruz Rodr \' guez , J., & Socas-Navarro , H. 2011, , 527, L8, 10.1051/0004-6361/201016018

    2011 doi

  6. [14]

    E., Schrijver , C

    De Pontieu , B., Berger , T. E., Schrijver , C. J., & Title , A. M. 1999, , 190, 419, 10.1023/A:1005220606223

    1999 doi

  7. [15]

    M., Lemen , J

    De Pontieu , B., Title , A. M., Lemen , J. R., et al. 2014, , 289, 2733, 10.1007/s11207-014-0485-y

    2014 doi

  8. [16]

    2022, , 940, 78, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac922c

    del Pino Alem \'a n , T., Alsina Ballester , E., & Trujillo Bueno , J. 2022, , 940, 78, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac922c

    2022 doi

  9. [17]

    2016, , 830, L24, 10.3847/2041-8205/830/2/L24

    del Pino Alem \'a n , T., Casini , R., & Manso Sainz , R. 2016, , 830, L24, 10.3847/2041-8205/830/2/L24

    2016 doi

  10. [18]

    2020, , 891, 91, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab6bc9

    del Pino Alem \'a n , T., Trujillo Bueno , J., Casini , R., & Manso Sainz , R. 2020, , 891, 91, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab6bc9

    2020 doi

  11. [19]

    1971, , 20, 298, 10.1007/BF00159759

    Foukal , P. 1971, , 20, 298, 10.1007/BF00159759

    1971 doi

  12. [20]

    V., Noyes , R

    Foukal , P. V., Noyes , R. W., Reeves , E. M., et al. 1974, , 193, L143, 10.1086/181651

    1974 doi

  13. [21]

    L., & Handy , B

    Freeland , S. L., & Handy , B. N. 1998, , 182, 497, 10.1023/A:1005038224881

    1998 doi

  14. [22]

    C., et al

    Gordino , M., Auch \`e re , F., Vial , J. C., et al. 2022, , 657, A86, 10.1051/0004-6361/202141960

    2022 doi

  15. [23]

    Hale , G. E. 1908, , 28, 315, 10.1086/141602

    1908 doi

  16. [24]

    2008, Solar Physics, 249, 233

    Ichimoto, K., Lites, B., Elmore, D., et al. 2008, Solar Physics, 249, 233

    2008

  17. [25]

    2013, , 52, 8205, 10.1364/AO.52.008205

    Ishikawa , R., Kano , R., Bando , T., et al. 2013, , 52, 8205, 10.1364/AO.52.008205

    2013 doi

  18. [26]

    T., del Pino Alem \'a n , T., et al

    Ishikawa , R., Bueno , J. T., del Pino Alem \'a n , T., et al. 2021, Science Advances, 7, eabe8406, 10.1126/sciadv.abe8406

    2021 doi

  19. [27]

    2023, , 945, 125, 10.3847/1538-4357/acb64e

    Ishikawa , R., Trujillo Bueno , J., Alsina Ballester , E., et al. 2023, , 945, 125, 10.3847/1538-4357/acb64e

    2023 doi

  20. [28]

    2015, , 290, 3081, 10.1007/s11207-015-0774-0

    Ishikawa , S., Shimizu , T., Kano , R., et al. 2015, , 290, 3081, 10.1007/s11207-015-0774-0

    2015 doi

  21. [29]

    L., Fang , C., & Chen , P

    Jiang , R. L., Fang , C., & Chen , P. F. 2012, , 751, 152, 10.1088/0004-637X/751/2/152

    2012 doi

  22. [30]

    K., et al

    Joshi , J., Lagg , A., Solanki , S. K., et al. 2016, , 596, A8, 10.1051/0004-6361/201629214

    2016 doi

  23. [31]

    G., Kleint , L., Leenaarts , J., Sukhorukov , A

    Judge , P. G., Kleint , L., Leenaarts , J., Sukhorukov , A. V., & Vial , J.-C. 2020, , 901, 32, 10.3847/1538-4357/abadf4

    2020 doi

  24. [32]

    2017, , 839, L10, 10.3847/2041-8213/aa697f

    Kano , R., Trujillo Bueno , J., Winebarger , A., et al. 2017, , 839, L10, 10.3847/2041-8213/aa697f

    2017 doi

  25. [33]

    2005, , 621, 498, 10.1086/427488

    Katsukawa , Y., & Tsuneta , S. 2005, , 621, 498, 10.1086/427488

    2005 doi

  26. [34]

    2007, , 243, 3

    Kosugi, T., Matsuzaki, K., Sakao, T., et al. 2007, , 243, 3

    2007

  27. [35]

    2016, , 832, 141, 10.3847/0004-637X/832/2/141

    Kubo , M., Katsukawa , Y., Suematsu , Y., et al. 2016, , 832, 141, 10.3847/0004-637X/832/2/141

    2016 doi

  28. [36]

    2004, Polarization in Spectral Lines , Vol

    Landi Degl'Innocenti , E., & Landolfi , M. 2004, Polarization in Spectral Lines , Vol. 307, 10.1007/978-1-4020-2415-3

    2004 doi

  29. [37]

    R., Title , A

    Lemen , J. R., Title , A. M., Akin , D. J., et al. 2012, , 275, 17, 10.1007/s11207-011-9776-8

    2012 doi

  30. [38]

    2024 a , , 975, 110, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad7954

    Li , H., del Pino Alem \'a n , T., & Trujillo Bueno , J. 2024 a , , 975, 110, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad7954

    2024 doi

  31. [39]

    2022, , 933, 145, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac745c

    Li , H., del Pino Alem \'a n , T., Trujillo Bueno , J., & Casini , R. 2022, , 933, 145, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac745c

    2022 doi

  32. [40]

    2023, , 945, 144, 10.3847/1538-4357/acb76e

    Li , H., del Pino Alem \'a n , T., Trujillo Bueno , J., et al. 2023, , 945, 144, 10.3847/1538-4357/acb76e

    2023 doi

  33. [41]

    2024 b , , 974, 154, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad6dfb

    ---. 2024 b , , 974, 154, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad6dfb

    2024 doi

  34. [42]

    W., Akin, D

    Lites, B. W., Akin, D. L., Card, G., et al. 2013, , 283, 579

    2013

  35. [43]

    Loughhead , R. E. 1968, , 5, 489, 10.1007/BF00147015

    1968 doi

  36. [44]

    Madjarska , M. S. 2019, Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 16, 2, 10.1007/s41116-019-0018-8

    2019 doi

  37. [45]

    W., & Skumanich , A

    Mart \' nez Pillet , V., Lites , B. W., & Skumanich , A. 1997, , 474, 810, 10.1086/303478

    1997 doi

  38. [46]

    J., Mooroogen , K., & Henriques , V

    Morton , R. J., Mooroogen , K., & Henriques , V. M. J. 2021, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A, 379, 20200183, 10.1098/rsta.2020.0183

    2021

  39. [47]

    2012, , 761, 87, 10.1088/0004-637X/761/2/87

    Nakamura , N., Shibata , K., & Isobe , H. 2012, , 761, 87, 10.1088/0004-637X/761/2/87

    2012 doi

  40. [48]

    D., Thompson , B

    Pesnell , W. D., Thompson , B. J., & Chamberlin , P. C. 2012, , 275, 3, 10.1007/s11207-011-9841-3

    2012 doi

  41. [49]

    A., Trujillo Bueno , J., McKenzie , D

    Rachmeler , L. A., Trujillo Bueno , J., McKenzie , D. E., et al. 2022, , 936, 67, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac83b8

    2022 doi

  42. [50]

    A., Penn , M

    Schad , T. A., Penn , M. J., & Lin , H. 2013, , 768, 111, 10.1088/0004-637X/768/2/111

    2013 doi

  43. [51]

    H., Schou , J., Bush , R

    Scherrer , P. H., Schou , J., Bush , R. I., et al. 2012, , 275, 207, 10.1007/s11207-011-9834-2

    2012 doi

  44. [52]

    J., Title , A

    Schrijver , C. J., Title , A. M., Berger , T. E., et al. 1999, , 187, 261, 10.1023/A:1005194519642

    1999 doi

  45. [53]

    2008, , 249, 221

    Shimizu, T., Nagata, S., Tsuneta, S., et al. 2008, , 249, 221

    2008

  46. [54]

    A., & Linsky , J

    Shine , R. A., & Linsky , J. L. 1974, , 39, 49, 10.1007/BF00154970

    1974 doi

  47. [55]

    2013, , 560, A84, 10.1051/0004-6361/201322148

    Sobotka , M., S vanda , M., Jur c \'a k , J., et al. 2013, , 560, A84, 10.1051/0004-6361/201322148

    2013 doi

  48. [56]

    2018, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol

    Song , D., Ishikawa , R., Kano , R., et al. 2018, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 10699, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2018: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray, ed. J.-W. A. den Herder , S. Nikzad , & K. Nakazawa , 106992W, 10....

    2018 doi

  49. [57]

    2022, , 297, 135, 10.1007/s11207-022-02064-8

    Song , D., Ishikawa , R., Kano , R., et al. 2022, , 297, 135, 10.1007/s11207-022-02064-8

    2022 doi

  50. [58]

    2025, , 978, 140, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad94f6

    ---. 2025, , 978, 140, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad94f6

    2025 doi

  51. [59]

    2008, , 249, 197

    Suematsu, Y., Tsuneta, S., Ichimoto, K., et al. 2008, , 249, 197

    2008

  52. [60]

    2013, , 770, L1, 10.1088/2041-8205/770/1/L1

    Testa , P., De Pontieu , B., Mart \' nez-Sykora , J., et al. 2013, , 770, L1, 10.1088/2041-8205/770/1/L1

    2013 doi

  53. [61]

    2018, Geoscience Letters, 5, 4, 10.1186/s40562-018-0103-1

    Tian , H., Samanta , T., & Zhang , J. 2018, Geoscience Letters, 5, 4, 10.1186/s40562-018-0103-1

    2018 doi

  54. [62]

    2008, , 249, 167

    Tsuneta, S., Ichimoto, K., Katsukawa, Y., et al. 2008, , 249, 167

    2008

  55. [63]

    2020, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol

    Tsuzuki , T., Ishikawa , R., Kano , R., et al. 2020, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 11444, Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, 114446W, 10.1117/12.2562273

    2020 doi

  56. [64]

    J., de la Cruz Rodr \' guez , J., Calvo , F., & Morosin , R

    Yadav , R., D \' az Baso , C. J., de la Cruz Rodr \' guez , J., Calvo , F., & Morosin , R. 2021, , 649, A106, 10.1051/0004-6361/202039857

    2021 doi

  57. [65]

    2018, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol

    Yoshida , M., Song , D., Ishikawa , R., et al. 2018, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 10699, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2018: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray, ed. J.-W. A. den Herder , S. Nikzad , & K. Nakazawa , 1069930, ...

    2018 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.