Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 70 references

The Spectral Behaviour and Variability of Narrow-line Seyfert 1 Galaxies with Australia Telescope Compact Array Observations

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Narrow-line Seyfert 1 galaxies vary widely in the radio, with gamma-ray-loud ones the most active.

desk verdict New ATCA data make this a useful contribution to NLS1 radio studies, but the gamma-ray quiet variability fraction is softer than the abstract implies because of cross-survey systematics. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.05933 v1 pith:LXJ322OS submitted 2024-12-08 astro-ph.GA astro-ph.HE

Xi Shao , Philip G. Edwards , Jamie Stevens , Minfeng Gu , Timothy J. Galvin , Minh T. Huynh This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GAastro-ph.HE
keywords narrow-lineSeyfert1galaxiesradiovariabilitygamma-rayloudAGNATCAobservationsspectralindexrelativisticjetsFermi-LATactivegalacticnuclei
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 investigates whether narrow-line Seyfert 1 galaxies (NLS1s) vary strongly at radio wavelengths, focusing on gamma-ray loud versus gamma-ray quiet subclasses. Using long-term ATCA monitoring for five gamma-ray loud NLS1s, the authors find they are highly variable radio emitters, with contemporaneous radio-gamma flares in three sources and significant radio flares without gamma-ray counterparts in two others. Extending to 21 gamma-ray quiet candidates, new ATCA snapshot observations plus ASKAP survey data show that over half of the 14 detected sources vary at >3 sigma between epochs, and these sources generally have steep spectra at low frequencies but flatter spectra at higher frequencies. A sympathetic reader cares because this suggests relativistic jets are present and active in many NLS1s, not only in the rare gamma-ray loud ones, and that radio variability is a useful and inexpensive probe of jet activity.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the multi-frequency radio light curve combined with the spectral index, computed as alpha = log(S_nu1/S_nu2) / log(nu1/nu2), and the radio variability index (rms about the mean divided by mean flux density) following Tingay et al. (2003). For the gamma-ray loud sources, long-term ATCA monitoring from projects C007 and C1730 at 2.1-33 GHz is compared with weekly-binned Fermi-LAT light curves from the Light Curve Repository, allowing visual identification of contemporaneous and orphan flares. For the gamma-ray quiet sample, new ATCA 5.5/9.0 GHz snapshot fluxes are compared with previous VLA (Chen et al. 2020) and ATCA (Chen et al. 2022) measurements, and with ASKAP RACS-Low (887.5 MHz) and RACS-Mid (1367.5 MHz) survey fluxes to derive up to three spectral indices per source. These tools together distinguish variability (a temporal property) from spectral shape (a frequency-dependent property), and the contrast between gamma-ray loud flat-spectrum variables and gamma-ray quiet steep-spectrum emitters is the paper's main interpretive axis for jet vs. star-formation origin of the radio emission.

What would settle it

A matched-resolution, same-day VLA and ATCA cross-check at 5.5 GHz on J0122-2646, J0452-2953, and J1057-4039 would test whether the reported >3 sigma flux changes between epochs are intrinsic or artifacts of the different instruments.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that gamma-ray emitting narrow-line Seyfert 1 galaxies are highly variable radio emitters, and that the radio and gamma-ray bands are not strictly coupled: contemporaneous flaring is seen in PKS 0440-00, PMN J0948+0022 and PKS 1244-255, yet significant radio outbursts without gamma-ray counterparts occur in PMN J0948+0022 and PKS 2004-447. For the gamma-ray quiet sample, comparison of ATCA 5.5 GHz measurements with earlier VLA/ATCA data indicates apparent variability in over half of the 14 sources detected at two epochs, including flux-density changes of factors of several in J0122-2646, J0452-2953 and J1057-4039. Spectrally, the gamma-ray loud sources favor flat or inverted radio spectra (though individual spectral indices vary substantially between epochs), while gamma-ray quiet sources tend to be steep between 887.5 MHz and 1367.5 MHz (median alpha_1 = -1.0 +/- 0.5) and flatter at higher frequencies (median alpha_3 = 0.0 +/- 0.3), with the more variable sources preferentially showing flat high-frequency spectra. The paper also reports first-time 5.5 GHz detections of two previously unobserved candidates, J2229-1401 and J2250-1152.

Load-bearing premise

The variability claims assume that flux densities measured at different epochs with different telescopes and surveys can be directly compared, with only small systematic differences in angular resolution, uv coverage, and calibration.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Gamma-ray loud NLS1s are confirmed as highly variable radio emitters, with variability indices generally well above the median radio-loud AGN values.
  • Radio and gamma-ray flaring can coincide, but radio outbursts can also occur with no change in gamma-ray state, as seen in PMN J0948+0022 and PKS 2004-447.
  • Over half of the gamma-ray quiet NLS1s detected at two epochs show apparent >3 sigma variability, implying radio variability is not restricted to gamma-ray loud sources.
  • Gamma-ray quiet NLS1s typically have steep spectra between 887.5 and 1367.5 MHz (median alpha_1 = -1.0) and flatter spectra at higher frequencies, with variable sources preferentially flat at 5.5-9.0 GHz.
  • The spectral and variability properties together point to compact relativistic jet emission dominating in at least the variable NLS1s, while star formation alone cannot explain the observed variability.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the cross-epoch systematics are as minor as the paper argues, the high variability fraction implies that many NLS1s harbor weak jets, and two-epoch radio snapshot surveys could be an efficient jet-finder for larger samples.
  • The orphan radio flares imply that radio and gamma-ray emission can arise in different jet regions or particle populations, a constraint that single-zone emission models would need to accommodate.
  • Combining the four frequency bands into physical spectral fits (e.g., synchrotron self-absorption or free-free absorption) would clarify whether the flat high-frequency components are compact synchrotron cores or thermal emission.
  • A full ATCA campaign across the Chen et al. (2018) sample would test whether the observed variability fraction holds statistically and allow correlation with black hole mass, accretion rate, and host galaxy type.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents multi-frequency radio observations of narrow-line Seyfert 1 galaxies. For a sample of five gamma-ray loud NLS1s, it combines long-term ATCA monitoring with Fermi-LAT weekly light curves, computes variability indices and spectral indices at selected epochs, and concludes that these sources are highly variable radio emitters, with some radio flares contemporaneous with gamma-ray activity and some pronounced radio flares lacking gamma-ray counterparts. For gamma-ray quiet sources, new ATCA snapshot observations of 21 targets are combined with RACS-Low and RACS-Mid survey fluxes and compared with earlier VLA/ATCA measurements; the paper reports that over half of the 14 detected sources show apparent variability and that the gamma-ray quiet sample generally has steep spectra at lower radio frequencies but flatter spectra at higher frequencies.

Significance. If the quantitative claims are robust, the paper strengthens the observational case that gamma-ray loud NLS1s are strong radio variables with decoupled radio and gamma-ray flares, and it provides a first indication that a substantial fraction of gamma-ray quiet NLS1s are radio variable. The use of long-term, same-telescope ATCA monitoring for the gamma-ray loud sources is a real strength, as is the public availability of the ATCA data and the explicit comparison with Fermi-LAT light-curve data. However, the gamma-ray quiet sample's variability fraction and spectral-index medians rest on cross-survey, cross-epoch comparisons that are demonstrated within the paper to be susceptible to resolution and calibration systematics; those quantitative conclusions need re-analysis before the abstract claims can be fully accepted.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3.1, §4.1, Table 4] The claim that over half of the 14 gamma-ray quiet sources are variable compares VLA 5.5 GHz, ATCA 5.5/9.0 GHz, and RACS-Low/RACS-Mid flux densities from different epochs, different arrays, and different primary calibrators, using only statistical errors. The paper itself provides a concrete counterexample: J0447−0508 has a reported RACS-Low flux of 89.0 mJy and a RACS-Mid flux of 8.2 mJy, with resolution into two components in RACS-Mid yielding a spurious α1 = −5.5. The same mismatch can mimic variability, as when VLA C-configuration flux is resolved out by the 6-km ATCA arrays; the apparent decreases in J0447−0508 (4.0→2.4 mJy) and J0400−2500 (1.2→0.7 mJy) may be affected. Because the 'over half' count is a 3σ threshold on statistical errors alone, adding the stated 5% absolute calibration uncertainty or excluding resolution-affected sources could change the count. Please re-analyse the variability fraction with an explicit treatment of systematic errors and/or a matched-resolution comparison.
  2. [§4.2, Table 4, Eq. (1)] The spectral indices α1 (887.5–1367.5 MHz) and α2 (1367.5 MHz–5.5 GHz) are computed from RACS-Low, RACS-Mid, and ATCA observations taken at different epochs, and for variable sources this mixes variability with spectral shape. For example, J0122−2646 increased from 0.9 to 7.1 mJy between the VLA and ATCA epochs; its reported α2 = 0.9 ± 0.1 may be dominated by the flux change rather than by the true spectral slope. The median α1 = −1.0 ± 0.5 and the conclusion that gamma-ray quiet sources have steep low-band spectra therefore need a robustness check, for instance by restricting to sources with near-simultaneous data or by explicitly propagating epoch-difference uncertainties into the spectral-index errors.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§4.1] The text refers to 'the 2021 flare in PMN J0048+0022', but the source in this paper is PMN J0948+0022; this appears to be a typo.
  2. [§3.1.2 and Table 4] The source is called 'J1057−4089' in the text but 'J1057−4039' in Table 4; the names should be made consistent.
  3. [§3.1] The reported median spectral index '−0.9 ± −0.0' for α2 appears to be a typographical error; it should presumably read '−0.9 ± 0.0'.
  4. [§3.1] The sentence 'We observed tens sources selected from Chen et al. (2020)' should read 'ten sources', and 'particularly' is misspelled as 'particular' in one place.
  5. [Table 4 note] The note contains 'coodinate', which should be 'coordinate'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper presents direct observational measurements and comparisons, with no fitted parameters renamed as predictions and no load-bearing self-citation chain.

full rationale

The paper's central claims are observational: long-term radio variability of gamma-ray loud NLS1s is assessed by computing a variability index from measured ATCA flux densities, and gamma-ray quiet source variability is inferred by comparing new ATCA measurements with earlier VLA and ATCA flux densities. There is no step where a quantity defined in terms of another is later presented as an independent prediction. The variability index follows the definition of Tingay et al. (2003) and is compared against external median values, so it is a measurement with an external benchmark, not a fit. The spectral indices are computed directly from measured flux densities via Eq. (1), and the quoted median indices are summaries of those direct measurements. The 'over half of 14 sources variable' statement is a count of sources whose two-epoch flux density differences exceed 3 sigma in statistical errors; this is a direct comparison, and the paper explicitly acknowledges that differing angular resolutions, incomplete u-v coverage, and different calibrators may contribute to apparent variability, especially for faint sources. The J0447-0508 example is discussed as a resolution-related caveat rather than hidden. Self-citations (e.g., Shao et al. 2023) appear only as supporting context for jet morphology and do not carry the variability or spectral conclusions. No equation is shown to reduce to its own input, no fitted parameter is relabelled as a prediction, and no uniqueness or ansatz is imported from prior work by the same authors. The fragility of the cross-survey variability fraction is a systematic-error concern, not circularity, and is explicitly acknowledged in the paper.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper fits no free parameters and introduces no new entities. Its claims depend on the reliability of multi-epoch flux density measurements, on cross-epoch comparability of different telescopes and surveys, and on literature classifications of the sources. The heaviest burden is the assumption that differences between VLA, ATCA, and RACS measurements reflect intrinsic variability rather than calibration or resolution systematics.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Flux densities from ATCA, VLA, and RACS surveys are accurate to the quoted statistical errors, and systematic differences between telescopes and epochs are small enough not to dominate the inferred variability and spectral indices.
    Used throughout Sections 2 and 3 when comparing flux densities across epochs, telescopes, and surveys to infer variability and spectral indices.
  • domain assumption The variability index, rms about the mean divided by the mean flux density, is a meaningful measure for comparing variability across sources and against the Tingay et al. (2003) benchmarks.
    Section 2.1 compares the computed indices with median values from Tingay et al. (2003) to conclude that gamma-ray loud NLS1s are highly variable.
  • domain assumption Source classifications as NLS1, FSRQ, misaligned AGN, or Seyfert from Foschini et al. (2022), Chen et al. (2018), and Berton et al. (2021) are correct.
    Sample definition and interpretation of the gamma-ray loud and gamma-ray quiet populations depend on optical classifications taken from the literature.
  • domain assumption RACS-Low and RACS-Mid flux densities can be combined with ATCA flux densities taken at different epochs to define spectral indices.
    Section 3.1 computes alpha_1 and alpha_2 from non-contemporaneous measurements; source variability could bias these indices.
  • standard math The convention S_nu proportional to nu^alpha with steep defined as alpha <= -0.5 is an appropriate framework for interpreting the spectra.
    Stated in Section 1 and used throughout the spectral classification.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The Spectral Behaviour and Variability of Narrow-line Seyfert 1 Galaxies with Australia Telescope Compact Array Observations." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LXJ322OS

@misc{pith2026241205933,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The Spectral Behaviour and Variability of Narrow-line Seyfert 1 Galaxies with Australia Telescope Compact Array Observations},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LXJ322OS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.05933}
}
abstract

We present multi-frequency radio data for a sample of narrow-line Seyfert 1 galaxies. We first focus on the sub-class of gamma-ray emitting narrow-line Seyfert 1 galaxies, studying the long-term radio variability of five sources and comparing it to their gamma-ray state. We then extend the observations of the southern narrow-line Seyfert 1 galaxy sample of Chen et al. by observing several candidate narrow-line Seyfert 1 sources for the first time, and re-observing several other gamma-ray quiet sources to obtain a first indication of their radio variability. We find that the gamma-ray emitting narrow-line Seyfert 1 galaxies are highly variable radio emitters and that there are instances of contemporaneous flaring activity between the radio and gamma-ray band (PKS 0440$-$00, PMN J0948+0022 and PKS 1244$-$255). However, there are also cases of significant radio outbursts without gamma-ray counterparts (PMN J0948+0022 and PKS 2004$-$447). The five gamma-ray NLS1s favour flat or inverted radio spectra, although the spectral indices vary significantly over time. For the gamma-ray quiet sample, the difference between the previous observations at 5.5 GHz and new ATCA observations indicates that over half of the 14 sources exhibit apparent variability. In contrast to gamma-ray loud sources, gamma-ray quiet objects tend to have steep spectra especially in the lower radio band (887.5$-$1367.5 MHz), with a number of the variable sources having flatter spectra at higher radio frequencies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.05933 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The radio and gamma-ray light curves of PKS 0440−00. The dashed lines indicate the epochs for which radio spectra are shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The radio and gamma-ray light curves of PMN J0948+0022. The dashed lines indicate the epochs for which radio spectra are shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The radio and gamma-ray light curves of PKS 1244−255. The dashed lines indicate the epochs for which radio spectra are shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The radio and gamma-ray light curves of PKS 1502+036. The dashed lines indicate the epochs for which radio spectra are shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The radio and gamma-ray light curves of PKS 2004−447. The dashed lines indicate the epochs for which radio spectra are shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Panel [a] to [e] are the spectra for the two epochs indicated in Figures 1 to 5 for PKS 0440−00, PMN J0948+0022, PKS 1244−255, PKS 1502+036, and PKS 2004−447, respectively. Panel [f] is the single epoch spectrum for TXS 0943+105. Sambruna R. M., Chou L. L., Urry C. M.,…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The histogram of the spectral indices for gamma-ray quiet sources in the Chen et al. (2020, 2022) sample. The left panel (𝛼1) is the spectral index between RACS-Low (887.5 MHz) and RACS-Mid (1367.5 MHz). The central panel (𝛼2) is the spectral index between RACS-Mid and…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

70 extracted references · 12 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A., et al., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/699/2/976 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...699..976A 699, 976

    Abdo A. A., et al., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/699/2/976 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...699..976A 699, 976

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/699/2/976 2009

  2. [2]

    Abdollahi S., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/ab6bcb , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJS..247...33A 247, 33

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab6bcb 2020

  3. [3]

    Abdollahi S., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/acbb6a , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJS..265...31A 265, 31

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/acbb6a 2023

  4. [4]

    An F., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab2290 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.507.2643A 507, 2643

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2290 2021

  5. [5]

    Angelakis E., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201425081 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015A&A...575A..55A 575, A55

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201425081 2015

  6. [6]

    H., Digel S

    Ballet J., Burnett T. H., Digel S. W., Lott B., 2020, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2005.11208 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020arXiv200511208B p. arXiv:2005.11208

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2005.11208 2020

  7. [7]

    Berton M., et al., 2017, @doi [Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences] 10.3389/fspas.2017.00008 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017FrASS...4....8B 4, 8

    arXiv 2017

  8. [8]

    Berton M., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201832612 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018A&A...614A..87B 614, A87

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201832612 2018

Show all 70 references
  1. [9]

    Berton M., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202037793 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020A&A...636A..64B 636, A64

    2020 doi

  2. [10]

    Berton M., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202141409 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021A&A...654A.125B 654, A125

    2021 doi

  3. [11]

    N., Fink H., 1996, @doi [ ] 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9504093 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996A&A...305...53B 305, 53

    Boller T., Brandt W. N., Fink H., 1996, @doi [ ] 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9504093 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996A&A...305...53B 305, 53

    1996 doi arXiv

  4. [12]

    A., Green R

    Boroson T. A., Green R. F., 1992, @doi [ ] 10.1086/191661 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1992ApJS...80..109B 80, 109

    1992 doi

  5. [13]

    Calderone G., Foschini L., Ghisellini G., Colpi M., Maraschi L., Tavecchio F., Decarli R., Tagliaferri G., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18308.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.413.2365C 413, 2365

    2011

  6. [14]

    C., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.11289.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007MNRAS.375..417C 375, 417

    Celotti A., Ghisellini G., Fabian A. C., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.11289.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007MNRAS.375..417C 375, 417

    2007

  7. [15]

    Chen S., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201832678 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018A&A...615A.167C 615, A167

    2018 doi

  8. [16]

    Chen S., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa2373 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.498.1278C 498, 1278

    2020 doi

  9. [17]

    Chen S., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac530 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.512..471C 512, 471

    2022 doi

  10. [18]

    Cracco V., Ciroi S., Berton M., Di Mille F., Foschini L., La Mura G., Rafanelli P., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw1689 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.462.1256C 462, 1256

    2016 doi

  11. [19]

    C., Gallo L., Ross R

    Crummy J., Fabian A. C., Gallo L., Ross R. R., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09844.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006MNRAS.365.1067C 365, 1067

    2006

  12. [20]

    D'Ammando F., 2019, @doi [Galaxies] 10.3390/galaxies7040087 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019Galax...7...87D 7, 87

    2019 doi

  13. [21]

    D'Ammando F., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt2464 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.438.3521D 438, 3521

    2014 doi

  14. [22]

    A., Capetti A., Raiteri C

    D'Ammando F., Acosta-Pulido J. A., Capetti A., Raiteri C. M., Baldi R. D., Orienti M., Ramos Almeida C., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnrasl/slx042 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.469L..11D 469, L11

    2017 doi

  15. [23]

    A., Capetti A., Baldi R

    D'Ammando F., Acosta-Pulido J. A., Capetti A., Baldi R. D., Orienti M., Raiteri C. M., Ramos Almeida C., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnrasl/sly072 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.478L..66D 478, L66

    2018 doi

  16. [24]

    W., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1017/pasa.2023.31 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023PASA...40...34D 40, e034

    Duchesne S. W., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1017/pasa.2023.31 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023PASA...40...34D 40, e034

    2023 doi

  17. [25]

    Foschini L., 2011a, in Foschini L., Colpi M., Gallo L., Grupe D., Komossa S., Leighly K., Mathur S., eds, Narrow-Line Seyfert 1 Galaxies and their Place in the Universe. p. 24 ( @eprint arXiv 1105.0772 ), @doi 10.22323/1.126.0024

    arXiv

  18. [26]

    Foschini L., 2011b, @doi [Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics] 10.1088/1674-4527/11/11/003 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011RAA....11.1266F 11, 1266

    doi

  19. [27]

    Foschini L., et al., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201220225 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012A&A...548A.106F 548, A106

    2012 doi

  20. [28]

    Foschini L., et al., 2022, @doi [Universe] 10.3390/universe8110587 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022Univ....8..587F 8, 587

    2022 doi

  21. [29]

    B., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab1011 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...875...80G 875, 80

    Gim H. B., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab1011 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...875...80G 875, 80

    2019 doi

  22. [30]

    Gokus A., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202039378 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021A&A...649A..77G 649, A77

    2021 doi

  23. [31]

    W., 1989, @doi [ ] 10.1086/167586 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1989ApJ...342..224G 342, 224

    Goodrich R. W., 1989, @doi [ ] 10.1086/167586 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1989ApJ...342..224G 342, 224

    1989 doi

  24. [32]

    C., Mannheim K., Fink H

    Grupe D., Beuermann K., Thomas H. C., Mannheim K., Fink H. H., 1998, @doi [ ] 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9710298 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998A&A...330...25G 330, 25

    1998 doi arXiv

  25. [33]

    A., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/221/1/3 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJS..221....3G 221, 3

    Gu M., Chen Y., Komossa S., Yuan W., Shen Z., Wajima K., Zhou H., Zensus J. A., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/221/1/3 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJS..221....3G 221, 3

    2015 doi

  26. [34]

    L., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1017/pasa.2021.47 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021PASA...38...58H 38, e058

    Hale C. L., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1017/pasa.2021.47 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021PASA...38...58H 38, e058

    2021 doi

  27. [35]

    a rvel \

    J \"a rvel \"a E., L \"a hteenm \"a ki A., Le \'o n-Tavares J., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201424694 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015A&A...573A..76J 573, A76

    2015 doi

  28. [36]

    a rvel \

    J \"a rvel \"a E., L \"a hteenm \"a ki A., Lietzen H., Poudel A., Hein \"a m \"a ki P., Einasto M., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201731318 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017A&A...606A...9J 606, A9

    2017 doi

  29. [37]

    a rvel \

    J \"a rvel \"a E., L \"a hteenm \"a ki A., Berton M., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201832876 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018A&A...619A..69J 619, A69

    2018 doi

  30. [38]

    I., Sramek R., Schmidt M., Shaffer D

    Kellermann K. I., Sramek R., Schmidt M., Shaffer D. B., Green R., 1989, @doi [ ] 10.1086/115207 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1989AJ.....98.1195K 98, 1195

    1989 doi

  31. [39]

    J., Grupe D., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/505043 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006AJ....132..531K 132, 531

    Komossa S., Voges W., Xu D., Mathur S., Adorf H.-M., Lemson G., Duschl W. J., Grupe D., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/505043 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006AJ....132..531K 132, 531

    2006 doi

  32. [40]

    a hteenm \

    L \"a hteenm \"a ki A., Valtaoja E., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1086/374883 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ApJ...590...95L 590, 95

    2003 doi

  33. [41]

    a hteenm \

    L \"a hteenm \"a ki A., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201630257 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017A&A...603A.100L 603, A100

    2017 doi

  34. [42]

    a hteenm \

    L \"a hteenm \"a ki A., J \"a rvel \"a E., Ramakrishnan V., Tornikoski M., Tammi J., Vera R. J. C., Chamani W., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201833378 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018A&A...614L...1L 614, L1

    2018 doi

  35. [43]

    M., 1999, @doi [ ] 10.1086/313287 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999ApJS..125..317L 125, 317

    Leighly K. M., 1999, @doi [ ] 10.1086/313287 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999ApJS..125..317L 125, 317

    1999 doi

  36. [44]

    Lister M., 2018, in Revisiting Narrow-Line Seyfert 1 Galaxies and their Place in the Universe. p. 22 ( @eprint arXiv 1805.05258 ), @doi 10.22323/1.328.0022

    2018 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Marziani P., et al., 2018, @doi [Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences] 10.3389/fspas.2018.00006 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018FrASS...5....6M 5, 6

    2018

  38. [46]

    Olgu \' n-Iglesias A., Kotilainen J., Chavushyan V., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz3549 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.492.1450O 492, 1450

    2020 doi

  39. [47]

    Oshlack A. Y. K. N., Webster R. L., Whiting M. T., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1086/322299 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001ApJ...558..578O 558, 578

    2001 doi

  40. [48]

    E., Pogge R

    Osterbrock D. E., Pogge R. W., 1985, @doi [ ] 10.1086/163513 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1985ApJ...297..166O 297, 166

    1985 doi

  41. [49]

    Paiano S., Falomo R., Treves A., Franceschini A., Scarpa R., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aaf6e4 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...871..162P 871, 162

    2019 doi

  42. [50]

    S., Ajello M., Rakshit S., Mandal A

    Paliya V. S., Ajello M., Rakshit S., Mandal A. K., Stalin C. S., Kaur A., Hartmann D., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aaa5ab , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...853L...2P 853, L2

    2018 doi

  43. [51]

    S., Stalin C

    Paliya V. S., Stalin C. S., Dom \' nguez A., Saikia D. J., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad3650 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.527.7055P 527, 7055

    2024 doi

  44. [52]

    M., 2011, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.1109.4181 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011arXiv1109.4181P p

    Peterson B. M., 2011, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.1109.4181 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011arXiv1109.4181P p. arXiv:1109.4181

    2011 doi arXiv

  45. [53]

    M., Wandel A., 1999, @doi [ ] 10.1086/312190 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999ApJ...521L..95P 521, L95

    Peterson B. M., Wandel A., 1999, @doi [ ] 10.1086/312190 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999ApJ...521L..95P 521, L95

    1999 doi

  46. [54]

    M., Chou L

    Sambruna R. M., Chou L. L., Urry C. M., 2000, @doi [ ] 10.1086/308706 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000ApJ...533..650S 533, 650

    2000 doi

  47. [55]

    J., Teuben P

    Sault R. J., Teuben P. J., Wright M. C. H., 1995, in Shaw R. A., Payne H. E., Hayes J. J. E., eds, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series Vol. 77, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems IV. p. 433 ( @eprint arXiv astro-ph/0612759 ), @doi 10.48550/arXiv....

    1995 doi arXiv

  48. [56]

    Shao X., Gu M., Chen Y., Yang H., Yao S., Yuan W., Shen Z., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aca762 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...943..136S 943, 136

    2023 doi

  49. [57]

    J., Jauncey D

    Tingay S. J., Jauncey D. L., King E. A., Tzioumis A. K., Lovell J. E. J., Edwards P. G., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1093/pasj/55.2.351 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003PASJ...55..351T 55, 351

    2003 doi

  50. [58]

    Tortosa A., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab3152 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.509.3599T 509, 3599

    2022 doi

  51. [59]

    J., Pounds K

    Turner T. J., Pounds K. A., 1989, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/240.4.833 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1989MNRAS.240..833T 240, 833

    1989 doi

  52. [60]

    J., George I

    Turner T. J., George I. M., Netzer H., 1999, @doi [ ] 10.1086/307995 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999ApJ...526...52T 526, 52

    1999 doi

  53. [61]

    a rvel \

    Varglund I., J \"a rvel \"a E., L \"a hteenm \"a ki A., Berton M., Ciroi S., Congiu E., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202244465 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022A&A...668A..91V 668, A91

    2022 doi

  54. [62]

    a rvel \

    Varglund I., J \"a rvel \"a E., Ciroi S., Berton M., Congiu E., L \"a hteenm \"a ki A., Di Mille F., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202346131 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023A&A...679A..32V 679, A32

    2023 doi

  55. [63]

    S., Rakshit S., Kurian K

    Viswanath G., Stalin C. S., Rakshit S., Kurian K. S., Ujjwal K., Gudennavar S. B., Kartha S. S., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ab365e , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...881L..24V 881, L24

    2019 doi

  56. [64]

    Yao S., Komossa S., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad1415 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.523..441Y 523, 441

    2023 doi

  57. [65]

    Yao S., Yuan W., Zhou H., Komossa S., Zhang J., Qiao E., Liu B., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnrasl/slv119 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.454L..16Y 454, L16

    2015 doi

  58. [66]

    Yao S., Komossa S., Liu W.-J., Yi W., Yuan W., Zhou H., Wu X.-B., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnrasl/slz071 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.487L..40Y 487, L40

    2019 doi

  59. [67]

    Yao S., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab2651 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.508.1305Y 508, 1305

    2021 doi

  60. [68]

    Zhou H., Wang T., Yuan W., Lu H., Dong X., Wang J., Lu Y., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/504869 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006ApJS..166..128Z 166, 128

    2006 doi

  61. [69]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.stat...

  62. [70]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.stat...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.