Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 2 minor 1 cited by

Unprecedent fast winking of solar flares triggered by bursty magnetic reconnection

T0 review · 3 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-06-29 · grok-4.3

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

Pith's one-line read High-cadence UV observations of 31 solar flares show flare ribbon kernels that wink on and off in 2-3 seconds and slip at up to 1800 km/s, indicating plasmoid-driven 3D bursty reconnection.

desk verdict New high-cadence kernel measurements are the solid part; the direct link to plasmoid-driven 3D reconnection is an interpretation that skips the needed checks against waves or LOS effects. read the letter →

arxiv 2606.27641 v1 pith:GXL6CRKK submitted 2026-06-26 astro-ph.SR

Ting Li , Xuchun Duan , Yijun Hou , Guillaume Aulanier , Ivan Zimovets , Jun Zhang , Juraj Lorincik , Larisa Kashapova
show 8 more authors
Zhentong Li Yining Zhang Yulei Wang Leping Li Suli Ma Jing Huang Shuhong Yang Guiping Zhou
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.SR
keywords solarflaresflareribbonsribbonkernelsmagneticreconnectionplasmoidsquasi-periodicpulsations3Dburst
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

The paper examines ultraviolet images of solar flares taken every 2.5 seconds or faster over twelve years. It identifies repeated quasi-periodic brightening and fading, called winking, in individual ribbon kernels whose sizes range from 480 to 1200 km and whose heating episodes last only a few seconds. Kernels are also seen to slide along the ribbons at speeds between 20 and 1800 km per second. The authors link these short, repeating, and moving features to the repeated formation and ejection of plasmoids inside a three-dimensional current sheet that lies above the flare. They conclude that the data supply direct evidence that reconnection in the corona proceeds in a bursty, three-dimensional manner rather than steadily or in two dimensions.

What carries the argument

Plasmoid formation inside a three-dimensional reconnecting coronal current sheet, which repeatedly modulates energy deposition and drives the observed kernel motions and brightness changes.

What would settle it

High-resolution coronal imaging that shows no plasmoids or no 3D reconnection geometry during flares that nevertheless exhibit the same 6-24 second kernel winking and slipping.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the observed quasi-periodic pulsations with periods of 6-24 seconds, the unprecedently fast winking of individual kernels on 2-3 second timescales, and the rapid slipping motions are produced by the coupled effects of plasmoid formation and three-dimensional magnetic reconnection inside the overlying coronal current sheet, thereby furnishing strong observational evidence for 3D bursty reconnection.

Load-bearing premise

The quasi-periodic winking and slipping cannot be produced by wave propagation, steady reconnection with periodic particle injection, or simple line-of-sight superposition of unrelated sources.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Energy is deposited only inside small localized patches of the ribbon that persist for just 2-3 seconds.
  • Individual kernels move along the ribbon at speeds from 20 km/s to 1800 km/s.
  • The 6-24 second periods reflect the characteristic timescale of plasmoid formation and ejection.
  • The bursty nature of the kernels is a direct consequence of three-dimensional reconnection geometry.
  • Ribbon fine structure therefore serves as a visible tracer of coronal current-sheet dynamics.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Similar short-timescale kernel winking may appear in other reconnection-driven events such as coronal mass ejections or magnetospheric substorms if observed at comparable cadence.
  • Numerical models of solar flares will need to resolve three-dimensional plasmoid dynamics to reproduce the observed 2-3 second heating episodes.
  • Future instruments with sub-second cadence could test whether even shorter winking periods exist and whether they scale with the size of the reconnecting current sheet.
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, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports the first statistical study of 31 solar flares observed with IRIS (cadence ≤2.5 s), identifying quasi-periodic pulsations in ribbon kernels with periods of 6-24 s, spatial scales of 480-1200 km, heating times as short as 2-3 s, and slipping motions at 20-1800 km s^{-1}. These features are interpreted as providing strong observational evidence for plasmoid formation coupled with 3D bursty magnetic reconnection in the overlying coronal current sheet.

Significance. If the causal interpretation holds, the work would supply useful observational constraints on the fine-scale, bursty dynamics of flare reconnection. The sample of 31 events and the reported timescales are strengths, but the absence of quantitative tests against alternatives limits the immediate significance.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract (final paragraph): The assertions that the observations 'strongly imply a joint picture' and 'provide strong observational evidences of 3D bursty reconnection' are not secured by the data, because no quantitative forward modeling, period-matching to simulations, or statistical test is presented to exclude alternative explanations such as wave propagation, periodic particle injection from a steady site, or line-of-sight superposition effects.
  2. [Results] Results (31-event sample): No uncertainties or error bars are reported on the measured periods (6-24 s), kernel sizes (480-1200 km), heating times (2-3 s), or slipping speeds (20-1800 km s^{-1}), and the text provides no description of how selection effects or projection effects were excluded; these omissions are load-bearing for the statistical claims.
  3. [Discussion] Discussion: The shortest heating time of 2-3 s is used to argue for localized energy deposition due to plasmoid-mediated reconnection, yet no comparison is made to expected timescales under competing models, leaving the uniqueness of the interpretation untested.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Title] Title contains a spelling error: 'Unprecedent' should read 'Unprecedented'.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: The phrase 'unprecedent fast ``winking" process' contains a spelling error and awkward construction.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive report. We address each major comment below and indicate where revisions will be made to the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract (final paragraph): The assertions that the observations 'strongly imply a joint picture' and 'provide strong observational evidences of 3D bursty reconnection' are not secured by the data, because no quantitative forward modeling, period-matching to simulations, or statistical test is presented to exclude alternative explanations such as wave propagation, periodic particle injection from a steady site, or line-of-sight superposition effects.

    Authors: We agree the original wording was too assertive. The paper is an observational study whose strength lies in the first statistical sample of 31 events showing consistent short periods, small spatial scales, brief heating times, and fast slipping. These match signatures reported in 3D reconnection simulations, but we performed no new forward modeling or formal hypothesis tests. In revision we will replace 'strongly imply' and 'strong observational evidences' with 'suggest' and 'provide observational support for', while retaining the description of the measured properties. We view this as an honest reflection of the work's scope. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Results] Results (31-event sample): No uncertainties or error bars are reported on the measured periods (6-24 s), kernel sizes (480-1200 km), heating times (2-3 s), or slipping speeds (20-1800 km s^{-1}), and the text provides no description of how selection effects or projection effects were excluded; these omissions are load-bearing for the statistical claims.

    Authors: This point is correct. The submitted text reports ranges without accompanying uncertainties or a methods subsection on biases. We will add (i) error bars derived from IRIS spatial resolution (~0.33 arcsec), temporal cadence, and kernel-fitting procedures, and (ii) a dedicated paragraph describing the event-selection criteria (clear kernel visibility in ≥3 frames, disk-center preference to reduce projection) together with checks against AIA context data. These additions will be placed in the Results section. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Discussion] Discussion: The shortest heating time of 2-3 s is used to argue for localized energy deposition due to plasmoid-mediated reconnection, yet no comparison is made to expected timescales under competing models, leaving the uniqueness of the interpretation untested.

    Authors: We will expand the Discussion to include explicit timescale comparisons. Typical coronal wave periods at the observed spatial scales exceed 24 s, and steady reconnection lacks a natural mechanism for the observed quasi-periodic on/off behavior. The combination of winking plus rapid slipping is also difficult to reconcile with line-of-sight superposition alone. We will cite relevant simulation papers that report plasmoid formation on ~few-second timescales. While this does not constitute a full statistical exclusion of every alternative, it strengthens the case for the proposed interpretation. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: direct measurements independent of interpretive claim

full rationale

The paper reports measured quantities (periods 6-24 s, kernel scales 480-1200 km, heating times 2-3 s, slipping speeds 20-1800 km s^{-1}) from IRIS UV observations of 31 flares. These are presented as empirical results. The suggestion that they imply plasmoid-mediated 3D reconnection is an interpretive statement in the abstract, not a derivation that reduces those measurements to fitted parameters or self-citations by construction. No equations, ansatzes, or load-bearing self-citations appear in the provided text that would force the observations from the model. The work is self-contained as an observational report.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 1 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper is purely observational and introduces no new free parameters, axioms beyond standard solar-atmosphere assumptions, or invented entities; the interpretation invokes plasmoid formation and 3D reconnection as existing theoretical concepts.

assumptions (1)
  • domain assumption Standard assumptions of solar atmospheric physics (optically thin UV emission, reconnection in coronal current sheets) are invoked to link observed kernel behavior to reconnection.
    Abstract paragraph linking ribbon kernels to energy deposition and coronal reconnection.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Unprecedent fast winking of solar flares triggered by bursty magnetic reconnection." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GXL6CRKK

@misc{pith2026260627641,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Unprecedent fast winking of solar flares triggered by bursty magnetic reconnection},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GXL6CRKK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2606.27641}
}
abstract

Flare ribbons form as a result of energy deposition associated with particles accelerated in low layers of the solar atmosphere. The fine-scale structures of flare ribbons, also called ribbon kernels, offer a potentially powerful diagnostic of the flare reconnection process, however to date the dynamic evolution of ribbon kernels has not been fully characterized in statistical studies. Here, we checked the state-of-the-art observations (cadence $\leq$ 2.5 seconds) of solar flares in the ultraviolet from space by Interface Region Imaging Spectrograph (IRIS) over the past 12 years. Our results showed the first statistical study of multiple spatially-resolved flare kernel quasi-periodic pulsation events for 31 flares, with the period of 6-24 seconds. The ribbon kernels have a spatial scale of 480$-$1200 km and some kernels exhibit unprecedent fast ``winking" process, i.e., quasi-periodic pulsation-like flashing of individual kernels. The shortest heating time reaches about 2$-$3 s, implying that the energy is deposited only in a small localized region within flare ribbons, persisting for only a few seconds. Meanwhile, some ribbon kernels were observed to slip along the ribbon at speeds of 20-1800 km s$^{-1}$. These observations strongly imply a joint picture for the dynamics and the bursty nature of ribbon kernels as being due to coupled effects of plasmoid formation and three-dimensional (3D) magnetic reconnection in the overlaying coronal current sheet. We suggest that the observed flare behaviors provide strong observational evidences of 3D bursty reconnection.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.27641 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. — Context observations of Event 1 on 2024 August 25. (a) Time profiles of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. — “Winking” ribbon kernels of Event 1. (a1)-(a6) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. — Fast slippage of ribbon kernels for Event 1. (a) IRIS SJI 1330 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: — Overview of Event 2 on 2024 September 23. (a) Normalized HXR count fluxes of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: — Slipping motions of ribbon kernels of Event 2. (a-b) IRIS SJI 1330 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: — “Winking” process of the kernels in Event 2. (a)-(f) IRIS SJI 1330 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: — Histogram of identified QPP periods from the statistical 31 events including 28 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: — Cartoon depicting the combination of slipping/slip-running and plasmoid-mediated [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: — QPPs and slipping motion of Event 3 on 2025 February 05. (a)-(b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: — QPPs and slipping motion of Event 4 on 2025 April 05. (a)-(b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: — QPPs and slipping motion of Event 5 on 2024 November 23. (a)-(b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_11.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Electron Acceleration and Plasma Heating in an Impulsive Confined C-class Solar Flare

    astro-ph.SR 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    In the early impulsive phase of confined C2.8 flare SOL2023-03-19, nonthermal electron flux scales with emission measure and low-energy cutoff with temperature under nearly collisionless conditions, with QPPs likely s...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

62 extracted references · 3 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    2020, Solar-Terrestrial Physics, 6, 2,

    Altyntsev, A., Lesovoi, S., Globa, M., et al. 2020, Solar-Terrestrial Physics, 6, 2,

    2020

  2. [2]

    & Zimovets, I

    Artemyev, A. & Zimovets, I. 2012, Sol. Phys., 277, 2,

    2012

  3. [3]

    2026, Nature Astronomy, 10,

    Ashfield, W., Polito, V., L¨ orinˇ c ´ ık, J., et al. 2026, Nature Astronomy, 10,

    2026

  4. [4]

    2005, A&A, 444, 3,

    Aulanier, G., Pariat, E., & D´ emoulin, P. 2005, A&A, 444, 3,

    2005

  5. [5]

    2006, Sol

    Aulanier, G., Pariat, E., D´ emoulin, P., et al. 2006, Sol. Phys., 238, 2,

    2006

  6. [6]

    1983, Physics of Fluids, 26, 11,

    Bhattacharjee, A., Brunel, F., & Tajima, T. 1983, Physics of Fluids, 26, 11,

    1983

  7. [7]

    R., Longcope, D

    Brannon, S. R., Longcope, D. W., & Qiu, J. 2015, ApJ, 810, 1,

    2015

  8. [8]

    2019, ApJ, 878, 2,

    Chen, X., Yan, Y., Tan, B., et al. 2019, ApJ, 878, 2,

    2019

Show all 62 references
  1. [9]

    A., Yu, S., et al

    Collier, H., Hayes, L. A., Yu, S., et al. 2024, A&A, 684, A215. – 12 – Collier, H., Krucker, S., Hayes, L. A., et al. 2026, arXiv:2603.12178. Corchado Albelo, M. F., Kazachenko, M. D., & Lynch, B. J. 2024, ApJ, 965, 1,

    2024 arXiv

  2. [10]

    T., Antiochos, S

    Dahlin, J. T., Antiochos, S. K., Wyper, P. F., et al. 2025, ApJ, 993, 1,

    2025

  3. [11]

    C., Priest, E

    Demoulin, P., Henoux, J. C., Priest, E. R., et al. 1996, A&A, 308,

    1996

  4. [12]

    M., Lemen, J

    De Pontieu, B., Title, A. M., Lemen, J. R., et al. 2014, Sol. Phys., 289, 7,

    2014

  5. [13]

    2014, ApJ, 784, 2,

    Dud ´ ık, J., Janvier, M., Aulanier, G., et al. 2014, ApJ, 784, 2,

    2014

  6. [14]

    2025, Sol

    Dud ´ ık, J., Aulanier, G., L¨ orinˇ c ´ ık, J., et al. 2025, Sol. Phys., 300, 10,

    2025

  7. [15]

    J., Matthews, S

    French, R. J., Matthews, S. A., Jonathan Rae, I., et al. 2021, ApJ, 922, 2,

    2021

  8. [16]

    2023, Sol

    Gan, W., Zhu, C., Deng, Y., et al. 2023, Sol. Phys., 298, 5,

    2023

  9. [17]

    A., Inglis, A

    Hayes, L. A., Inglis, A. R., Christe, S., et al. 2020, ApJ, 895, 1,

    2020

  10. [18]

    S., et al

    Hou, Z., Tian, H., Madjarska, M. S., et al. 2024, A&A, 687, A190. Huang, J., Kontar, E. P., Nakariakov, V. M., et al. 2016, ApJ, 831, 2,

    2024

  11. [19]

    2013, A&A, 555, A77

    Janvier, M., Aulanier, G., Pariat, E., et al. 2013, A&A, 555, A77. Jel ´ ınek, P., Karlick´ y, M., Van Doorsselaere, T., et al. 2017, ApJ, 847, 2,

    2013

  12. [20]

    2021, Frontiers in Physics, 9,

    Jiang, C., Chen, J., Duan, A., et al. 2021, Frontiers in Physics, 9,

    2021

  13. [21]

    Kliem, B., Karlick´ y, M., & Benz, A. O. 2000, A&A, 360,

    2000

  14. [22]

    2022, Nature Communications, 13,

    Kou, Y., Cheng, X., Wang, Y., et al. 2022, Nature Communications, 13,

    2022

  15. [23]

    T., & Dahlin, J

    Kumar, P., Karpen, J. T., & Dahlin, J. T. 2025, ApJ, 980, 2,

    2025

  16. [24]

    S., Prasad, A., et al

    Kumar, S., Nayak, S. S., Prasad, A., et al. 2021, Sol. Phys., 296, 1,

    2021

  17. [25]

    R., Title, A

    Lemen, J. R., Title, A. M., Akin, D. J., et al. 2012, Sol. Phys., 275, 1-2,

    2012

  18. [26]

    Y., Nakariakov, V

    Li, D., Kolotkov, D. Y., Nakariakov, V. M., et al. 2020, ApJ, 888, 2,

    2020

  19. [27]

    2025, Journal of Geophysical Research (Space Physics), 130, 4, e2025JA033772

    – 13 – Li, D., Yuan, D., Yan, J., et al. 2025, Journal of Geophysical Research (Space Physics), 130, 4, e2025JA033772. Li, T., Hou, Y., Yang, S., et al. 2018, ApJ, 869, 2,

    2025

  20. [28]

    2021, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series A, 477, 2249, 20200949

    Li, T., Priest, E., & Guo, R. 2021, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series A, 477, 2249, 20200949. Li, T. & Zhang, J. 2015, ApJ, 804, 1, L8. Lin, J. & Forbes, T. G. 2000, J. Geophys. Res., 105, A2, 2375 Litvinenko, Y. E. 1996, ApJ, 462,

    2021

  21. [29]

    2019, ApJ, 881, 1,

    L¨ orinˇ c ´ ık, J., Aulanier, G., Dud ´ ık, J., et al. 2019, ApJ, 881, 1,

    2019

  22. [30]

    2025, Nature Astronomy, 9,

    L¨ orinˇ c ´ ık, J., Dud ´ ık, J., Sainz Dalda, A., et al. 2025, Nature Astronomy, 9,

    2025

  23. [31]

    2026, arXiv:2604.17330

    L¨ orinˇ c ´ ık, J., Collier, H., Polito, V., et al. 2026, arXiv:2604.17330. Lu, L., Li, D., Ning, Z., et al. 2021, Sol. Phys., 296, 8,

    2026 arXiv

  24. [32]

    2022, ApJ, 940, 2,

    Luo, Y., Chen, B., Yu, S., et al. 2022, ApJ, 940, 2,

    2022

  25. [33]

    McAteer, R. T. J., Young, C. A., Ireland, J., et al. 2007, ApJ, 662, 1,

    2007

  26. [34]

    K., Pontin, D

    Mondal, S., Srivastava, A. K., Pontin, D. I., et al. 2024, ApJ, 977, 2,

    2024

  27. [35]

    K., Pontin, D

    Mondal, S., Srivastava, A. K., Pontin, D. I., et al. 2025, ApJ, 989, 2,

    2025

  28. [36]

    Nakariakov, V. M. & Melnikov, V. F. 2009, Space Sci. Rev., 149, 1-4,

    2009

  29. [37]

    2015, ApJ, 799, 1,

    Ni, L., Kliem, B., Lin, J., et al. 2015, ApJ, 799, 1,

    2015

  30. [38]

    2022, Sol

    Ning, Z., Wang, Y., Hong, Z., et al. 2022, Sol. Phys., 297, 1,

    2022

  31. [39]

    & Longcope, D

    Parker, J. & Longcope, D. 2017, ApJ, 847, 1,

    2017

  32. [40]

    D., Thompson, B

    Pesnell, W. D., Thompson, B. J., & Chamberlin, P. C. 2012, Sol. Phys., 275, 1-2,

    2012

  33. [41]

    Pietrow, A. G. M., Druett, M. K., & Singh, V. 2024, A&A, 685, A137. Pontin, D. I. 2011, Advances in Space Research, 47, 9,

    2024

  34. [42]

    Pontin, D. I. & Priest, E. R. 2022, Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 19, 1,

    2022

  35. [43]

    Priest, E. R. 1985, Reports on Progress in Physics, 48, 7,

    1985

  36. [44]

    2015, ApJ, 810, 2,

    – 14 – Savcheva, A., Pariat, E., McKillop, S., et al. 2015, ApJ, 810, 2,

    2015

  37. [45]

    Schindler, K., Hesse, M., & Birn, J. 1988, J. Geophys. Res., 93, A6,

    1988

  38. [46]

    & Magara, T

    Shibata, K. & Magara, T. 2011, Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 8, 1,

    2011

  39. [47]

    Singh, V., Scullion, E., Botha, G. J. J., et al. 2025, arXiv:2507.01169. Sobotka, M., Dud ´ ık, J., Denker, C., et al. 2016, A&A, 596, A1. Su, Y., Zhang, Z., Chen, W., et al. 2024, Sol. Phys., 299, 10,

    2025

  40. [48]

    1987, ApJ, 321,

    Tajima, T., Sakai, J., Nakajima, H., et al. 1987, ApJ, 321,

    1987

  41. [49]

    2025, A&A, 693, A8

    Thoen Faber, J., Joshi, R., Rouppe van der Voort, L., et al. 2025, A&A, 693, A8. Tian, H., Young, P. R., Reeves, K. K., et al. 2016, ApJ, 823, 1, L16. Titov, V. S., Hornig, G., & D´ emoulin, P. 2002, Journal of Geophysical Research (Space Physics), 107, A8,

    2025

  42. [50]

    2021, ApJ, 923, 2,

    Wang, Y., Cheng, X., Ding, M., et al. 2021, ApJ, 923, 2,

    2021

  43. [51]

    Wyper, P. F. & Pontin, D. I. 2021, ApJ, 920, 2,

    2021

  44. [52]

    D., Cauzzi, G., et al

    Yadav, R., Kazachenko, M. D., Cauzzi, G., et al. 2025, ApJ, 989, 2,

    2025

  45. [53]

    2022, Nature Communications, 13,

    Yan, X., Xue, Z., Jiang, C., et al. 2022, Nature Communications, 13,

    2022

  46. [54]

    2015, ApJ, 800, 2,

    Yang, L., Zhang, L., He, J., et al. 2015, ApJ, 800, 2,

    2015

  47. [55]

    2020, ApJ, 897, 1,

    Ye, J., Cai, Q., Shen, C., et al. 2020, ApJ, 897, 1,

    2020

  48. [56]

    2019, ApJ, 886, 2, L25

    Yuan, D., Feng, S., Li, D., et al. 2019, ApJ, 886, 2, L25. Zhang, Y., Li, T., Hou, Y., et al. 2025, ApJ, 982, 1, L9. Zhao, J., Gilchrist, S. A., Aulanier, G., et al. 2016, ApJ, 823, 1,

    2019

  49. [57]

    V., McLaughlin, J

    Zimovets, I. V., McLaughlin, J. A., Srivastava, A. K., et al. 2021, Space Sci. Rev., 217, 5,

    2021

  50. [58]

    – 15 – Fig

    This preprint was prepared with the AAS L ATEX macros v5.2. – 15 – Fig. 1.— Context observations of Event 1 on 2024 August

    2024

  51. [59]

    K3” to “K5

    (a) IRIS SJI 1330 ˚A images showing one episode of the apparent slipping motion from kernel “K3” to “K5”. The solid colored arrows mark the approximate location of the kernel along the direction of its motion (white arrow), while the dashed colored ones indicate its approximat...

    2024

  52. [60]

    winking” and slipping processes of the western ribbon. The FOV is shown by the white square in Figure 5(a). Panels (a), (c) and (e) show the “bright

    (a)-(f) IRIS SJI 1330 ˚A images simultaneously showing the “winking” and slipping processes of the western ribbon. The FOV is shown by the white square in Figure 5(a). Panels (a), (c) and (e) show the “bright” times at white squares. Orange arrows denote the apparent slipping ...

    2025

  53. [61]

    Orange arrow denotes the slipping direction of ribbon kernels

    (a)-(b) IRIS SJI 1330 ˚A images showing two flare ribbons. Orange arrow denotes the slipping direction of ribbon kernels. (c) Stack plot along cut 4 in panel (b) showing multiple-stripe pattern. (d) The integrated intensity profiles within black and red rectangles in panel (a). ...

    2025

  54. [62]

    (c) Stack plot along cut 5 in panel (b) showing multiple-stripe pattern

    (a)-(b) IRIS SJI 1330 ˚A images showing the circular flare ribbon. (c) Stack plot along cut 5 in panel (b) showing multiple-stripe pattern. (d) The integrated intensity profiles within the black and red rect- angles in panel (b). The period of the pulsations is about 19 s. An an...

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed June 29, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.