Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 2 minor 89 references

The coronal temperature of NGC 4388 and NGC 2110 measured with INTEGRAL

T0 review · 3 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Two Seyfert coronae are measured at 75–80 keV, placing them in the pair-thermostat regime.

desk verdict Clean spectral measurement that gives NGC 2110 a credible coronal temperature and revises an inflated earlier value; the main caveat is an untested assumption that the high-energy cutoff is constant across 13 years of INTEGRAL and snapshot data. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.03112 v2 pith:MXSQSTAE submitted 2019-08-08 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.GA

F. Ursini , L. Bassani , A. Malizia , A. Bazzano , A. J. Bird , J. B. Stephen , P. Ubertini This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HEastro-ph.GA
keywords activegalacticnucleiSeyfertgalaxiesX-raycoronacoronaltemperatureComptonisationhigh-energycutoffINTEGRALpairproduction
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 13 years of INTEGRAL hard X-ray data (20–300 keV) joined with archival XMM-Newton and NuSTAR spectra to pin down the high-energy cutoff in two bright Seyfert galaxies, NGC 4388 and NGC 2110. Interpreting the cutoff with a thermal Comptonisation model, it derives coronal temperatures of about 80 keV and 75 keV for the two sources, with optical depth near 2. These values place both sources in the regime where electron–positron pair production is expected to act as a thermostat, capping the coronal temperature. The result matters because direct measurements of coronal temperatures above 100 keV are rare, and the pair-thermostat scenario is a key prediction of how AGN coronae regulate themselves.

What carries the argument

The analysis rests on the thermal Comptonisation model compps (Poutanen & Svensson 1996), which computes the spectrum produced when soft disc photons are upscattered by a hot electron plasma; fitting the electron temperature $k T_{\rm e}$ and the Compton parameter $y=4\tau\,k T_{\rm e}/m_{\rm e}c^{2}$ (used instead of $\tau$ to reduce the known temperature–optical-depth degeneracy) yields the coronal parameters under an assumed spherical geometry. The load-bearing data are the INTEGRAL/IBIS spectra accumulated from 2003 to 2015, whose coverage up to 300 keV makes the high-energy turnover visible; the turnover is modelled both as an exponential cutoff and as the intrinsically sharper Comptonisation rollover. The compactness–temperature diagram ($\ell$ vs $\Theta_{\rm e}=k T_{\rm e}/m_{\rm e}c^{2}$), with the pair runaway line of Fabian et al. (2015), is used to interpret the measured temperatures.

What would settle it

Split the INTEGRAL data into epochs matching the XMM–Newton and NuSTAR snapshots and fit the cutoff freely in each epoch; if the derived cutoffs move outside the reported 90% confidence ranges ($200^{+75}_{-40}$ keV for NGC 4388, $320^{+100}_{-60}$ keV for NGC 2110), the time-averaged temperature is an artefact of spectral variability and the pair-thermostat interpretation fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Joint fitting of the time-averaged INTEGRAL/IBIS spectrum (20–300 keV) with archival XMM–Newton and NuSTAR spectra shows that both sources are well described by an absorbed cutoff power law with no Compton reflection component. The high-energy cutoff is measured at $E_{\rm c}=200^{+75}_{-40}$ keV for NGC 4388 and $E_{\rm c}=320^{+100}_{-60}$ keV for NGC 2110. Replacing the phenomenological cutoff with the thermal Comptonisation model compps in spherical geometry gives coronal temperatures of $k T_{\rm e}=80^{+40}_{-20}$ keV (NGC 4388) and $k T_{\rm e}=75^{+20}_{-15}$ keV (NGC 2110), with optical depths $\tau \simeq 1.7$ and $\tau \simeq 2.1$. The derived temperatures and luminosities place both objects below the pair runaway line in the compactness–temperature plane, supporting the pair-thermostat scenario in which electron–positron pair production regulates the coronal temperature.

Load-bearing premise

The analysis assumes the intrinsic photon index and high-energy cutoff stayed constant across the 2003–2015 INTEGRAL average and the XMM–Newton and NuSTAR snapshots, so the measured cutoff represents a single physical corona.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Assuming a coronal radius of about 10 gravitational radii, both sources lie below the pair runaway line in the $\ell$–$\Theta_{\rm e}$ plane, so pair production can cap the coronal temperature as the pair-thermostat model predicts.
  • The lack of a Compton reflection hump alongside strong Fe K$\alpha$ lines indicates the line arises in Compton-thin material rather than from a disc reflection continuum.
  • The measured cutoffs of 200 and 320 keV are high relative to the typical INTEGRAL cutoff (mean ~128 keV), and they place both sources in the small group of AGNs with coronal temperatures above 70 keV that are measured to better than about 50 per cent uncertainty.
  • Within the epochs used, the primary continuum slope is consistent with being constant across the 2003–2015 INTEGRAL average and the XMM–Newton/NuSTAR snapshots, with the 2011 XMM observation of NGC 4388 as a distinct flatter state.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the pair-thermostat picture is right, the coronal temperature of these two sources should remain near 75–80 keV while their luminosity varies by a factor of several; a direct test would be to split the INTEGRAL data into high- and low-flux epochs and measure $k T_{\rm e}$ in each.
  • The two galaxies have very different Eddington ratios (~0.23 and ~0.01) yet nearly identical coronal temperatures; this hints that $k T_{\rm e}$ is not driven by accretion rate in this regime, a correlation that a larger sample of sources with measured black hole masses could test.
  • Because Fedorova et al. (2011) suggested the cutoff in NGC 4388 varies between about 80–100 keV and above 320 keV, the time-averaged 200 keV cutoff may be a blend of states; if so, the single-temperature corona would need to be replaced by a distribution of temperatures, and the pair-thermostat interpretation would need to be revisited.
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 / 2 minor

Summary. This paper presents a spectral analysis of the hard X-ray (20-300 keV) INTEGRAL/IBIS time-averaged spectra of the Seyfert galaxies NGC 4388 and NGC 2110, combined with archival XMM-Newton and NuSTAR snapshots. The authors fit the broad-band spectra with xspec using an absorbed cutoff power law plus a Fe Kα line, obtaining well-constrained high-energy cutoffs Ec = 200+75-40 keV for NGC 4388 and Ec = 320+100-60 keV for NGC 2110, with no significant Compton reflection component (R < 0.12 and R < 0.02). Replacing the power law with the thermal Comptonisation model compps in spherical geometry yields coronal temperatures kTe = 80+40-20 keV (NGC 4388) and kTe = 75+20-15 keV (NGC 2110), with Compton parameters y ~ 1.1-1.2 corresponding to optical depths of roughly 1.7 and 2.1. The authors then estimate bolometric luminosities, compute the compactness parameter l = Lσ_T/(R m_e c^3) assuming R = 10 R_g, and argue that both objects fall below the pair runaway line in the l - Θ_e plane, consistent with the pair thermostat scenario.

Significance. If the measurements are correct, this work adds two well-constrained coronal temperature and optical depth measurements to the AGN sample, demonstrating the importance of high signal-to-noise data above 100 keV. The spectral analysis is statistically careful, the reduced spectra are made available, and the paper explicitly compares with and reconciles previous INTEGRAL, NuSTAR, Suzaku, and BeppoSAX results. The main quantitative conclusion (kTe ~ 75-80 keV) is, however, dependent on the assumption that a single cutoff energy describes both the 13-year INTEGRAL average and the short XMM/NuSTAR snapshots, and the pair-thermostat interpretation depends on an assumed coronal radius and bolometric correction. These dependencies are acknowledged in part but deserve further testing.

major comments (3)
  1. [Secs. 3.1.2 and 3.2.2] The high-energy cutoff Ec (and the equivalent kTe in the compps model) is tied across the time-averaged IBIS spectrum and the individual XMM-Newton and NuSTAR snapshots, and the paper does not test whether Ec varies between epochs. The cross-normalization constants imply flux variations of factors ~3 for NGC 4388 and ~8 for NGC 2110, and Fedorova et al. (2011) reported possible cutoff variations in NGC 4388 between 80-100 keV and >320 keV. If the cutoff varies with flux or time, the reported Ec and kTe are flux-weighted effective values rather than a single physical coronal temperature. I recommend allowing Ec (or kTe) to vary among the spectra in the joint fit, or splitting the IBIS data into temporal subsets, to demonstrate that the cutoff is stable; otherwise the central claim of a measured coronal temperature is not fully supported.
  2. [Sec. 4] The pair-thermostat consistency check depends on the assumed corona radius through l = Lσ_T/(R m_e c^3), and the paper assumes R = 10 R_g with a bolometric correction from Marconi et al. (2004). The resulting compactness differs by a factor of about 26 between the two sources, and for NGC 2110 l ~ 0.5 at R = 10 R_g, which is far below the pair runaway line. This makes the statement of 'consistency with the pair thermostat' relatively weak; the authors should explicitly discuss the sensitivity of the compactness and of the conclusion to the assumed radius and luminosity, and present the result as an illustrative consistency check rather than a quantitative confirmation.
  3. [Sec. 3.1.2 and Appendix A] The 2011 XMM-Newton observation (XMM3) of NGC 4388 is excluded from the joint fit because it likely represents a different spectral state (flatter photon index and lower column density), yet this epoch is included in the IBIS time average used in the same joint fit. The authors should clarify whether this exclusion is consistent with their assumption of a single cutoff across the full 2003-2015 IBIS average, or whether the inclusion of the 2011 state could bias the time-averaged cutoff and hence the derived kTe.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Sec. 3.1.2] The cross-normalization constants in Tables 4 and 5 (e.g., K_IBIS-pn, K_IBIS-NusA) are not fully defined in the text; a sentence explaining that they are multiplicative factors between the IBIS and XMM/NuSTAR normalizations would improve readability.
  2. [Sec. 4] The unabsorbed 0.1-200 keV luminosity used in the compactness calculation is not reported; giving this value (with its uncertainty) would make the l - Θ_e placement reproducible.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: coronal temperatures are fit parameters from independent X-ray spectra, and the pair-thermostat comparison uses external theory with an assumed radius.

full rationale

The paper's central results, kTe = 80(+40,-20) keV for NGC 4388 and kTe = 75(+20,-15) keV for NGC 2110, are free parameters of thermal Comptonisation (compps) fits to a combination of INTEGRAL/IBIS, XMM-Newton, and NuSTAR data. The high-energy cutoff energies from the cutoff power-law fits are likewise directly constrained by the observed spectral turnover; they are not derived from, nor do they presuppose, the pair-thermostat conclusion. The compactness-temperature comparison is an independent interpretive step: compactness is computed from the fitted luminosity and an assumed coronal radius (R = 10 gravitational radii), and the pair-runaway/thermostat curve is taken from external theoretical work (Fabian et al. 2015, Svensson 1984, Zdziarski 1985). No equation in the paper reduces one claimed result to another by construction, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The only self-citation, Ursini et al. (2015), appears in the introduction as a general reference and is not load-bearing. The concern raised in the skeptic headline, that the joint fits tie the cutoff across a time-averaged INTEGRAL spectrum and shorter snapshots, is a statistical/modeling caveat about possible cutoff variability, not an instance of circularity; in fact the paper itself flags Fedorova et al. (2011) variability, showing the assumption is at least acknowledged rather than hidden. Because the measurements come directly from the data and the theoretical comparison is external and not tuned, the derivation is self-contained and no circular step is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the compps model assumptions, the seed photon temperature, the single-epoch spectral shape assumption, and the exclusion of the XMM3 observation. The coronal radius of 10 gravitational radii is an ad hoc assumption for the compactness estimate.

free parameters (2)
  • Seed photon temperature = 100 eV (fixed)
    Model input in the compps fit; not measured, but shown to have minor impact when changed to 10 eV. Section 3.1.2 fixes it at 100 eV.
  • Coronal radius in gravitational radii = 10 (assumed)
    Ad hoc assumption in Section 4 to place the sources in the compactness-temperature diagram. The pair thermostat conclusion depends on this choice.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The compps model with spherical geometry (geom=0) describes the corona.
    Section 3.1.2 assumes spherical geometry to convert the fitted Compton parameter into an optical depth; other geometries would change tau and moderately affect the temperature.
  • domain assumption The seed photon temperature is fixed at 100 eV.
    Section 3.1.2 fixes the seed photon temperature at 100 eV and reports that 10 eV does not change results, but this is a model input rather than a measured value.
  • ad hoc to paper The 2011 XMM3 observation of NGC 4388 represents a different spectral state and is excluded from the joint fit.
    Section 3.1.2 and Appendix A exclude XMM3 because of a flatter spectrum and ionized iron absorption lines. The exclusion is post hoc and affects the data used for the central result.
  • domain assumption A single photon index and cutoff apply across all epochs, with only normalization varying.
    Section 3.1.2 states that parameters were tied among the different spectra. This is load-bearing for the time-averaged measurement.
  • standard math Standard abundances and photoelectric cross-sections apply.
    Section 3 states the use of Anders and Grevesse (1989) abundances and Verner et al. (1996) cross-sections.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The coronal temperature of NGC 4388 and NGC 2110 measured with INTEGRAL." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MXSQSTAE

@misc{pith2026190803112,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The coronal temperature of NGC 4388 and NGC 2110 measured with INTEGRAL},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MXSQSTAE}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.03112}
}
abstract

We aim to measure the physical properties of the hot X-ray corona of two active galactic nuclei, NGC 4388 and NGC 2110. We analysed the hard X-ray (20-300 keV) INTEGRAL spectrum in conjunction with archival XMM-Newton and NuSTAR data. The X-ray spectrum of both sources is phenomenologically well described by an absorbed cut-off power law. In agreement with previous results, we find no evidence of a Compton reflection component in these sources. We obtain a high-energy cut-off of $200^{+75}_{-40}$ keV for NGC 4388 and $320^{+100}_{-60}$ keV for NGC 2110. A fit with a thermal Comptonisation model yields a coronal temperature of $80^{+45}_{-20}$ keV and $75^{+20}_{-15}$ keV, respectively, and an optical depth of approximately two, assuming a spherical geometry. The coronal temperature and luminosity of both sources are consistent with pair production that acts as a thermostat for the thermal plasma. These results emphasise the importance of good signal-to-noise X-ray data above 100 keV to probe the high-energy emission of AGNs.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.03112 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Residuals of fits of IBIS spectrum with different models. Up￾per panel: simple power law. Second panel: power law plus reflection (pexrav). Third panel: exponentially cut-off power law. Lower panel: thermal Comptonisation model (compps). 10−6 10−5 10−4 10−3 IBIS NuSTAR/FPMA XMM1 XMM2 XMM3 5 20 50 200 10 100 0.5 1 1.5 2 Energy (keV) Counts s−1 keV−1 cm−2 Data/model NGC 4388 − Extrapolation of the IBIS cut−off power l… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Upper panel: XMM–Newton and NuSTAR spectra of NGC 4388 with the cut-off power law that best fits IBIS. Lower panel: data/model ratio. Only NuSTAR’s FPMA data are shown for clarity. The data were binned for plotting purposes. modelling of absorption. XMM3 instead shows a significant dif￾ference in spectral shape. 3.1.2. The broad-band fit As a second step, we performed a broad-band fit including the lower energy data… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Contour plots of cut-off energy vs. photon index for NGC 4388 (black) and NGC 2110 (red). Solid, dashed, and dotted lines correspond to 68, 90, and 99 per cent confidence level, respectively. 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 + Compton parameter kT e (keV) + NGC 4388 NGC 2110 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 τ=2.5 τ=2.0 τ=1.5 τ=1.0 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Contour plots of Compton parameter y vs. electron tempera￾ture kTe for NGC 4388 (black) and NGC 2110 (red). Solid, dashed, and dotted lines correspond to 68, 90, and 99 per cent confidence level, re￾spectively. Grey dotted lines correspond to constant values of optical…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Upper panel: spectra of NGC 4388 with best-fitting compps model. Second panel: residuals, plotted as ∆χ = (data-model)/error. Third panel: best-fitting model E 2 f(E). The data were binned for plot￾ting purposes. tral analysis to the data above 3 keV. We fitted the XMM…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Upper panel: spectra of NGC 2110 with best-fitting compps model. Second panel: residuals, plotted as ∆χ = (data-model)/error. Third panel: best-fitting model E 2 f(E). The data were binned for plot￾ting purposes. 4. Discussion and conclusions We presented the hard X-ra…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Residuals of fits of IBIS spectrum with different models. Up￾per panel: simple power law. Second panel: power law plus reflection (pexrav). Third panel: exponentially cut-off power law. Lower panel: thermal Comptonisation model (compps). 10−6 10−5 10−4 10−3 0.01 IBIS X…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Upper panel: XMM–Newton and NuSTAR spectra of NGC 2110 with the cut-off power law that best fits IBIS. Lower panel: data/model ratio. Only NuSTAR’s FPMA data are shown for clarity. The data were binned for plotting purposes. 100 eV. We obtained a good fit (χ 2 /dof = 9…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

89 extracted references · 48 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    & Grevesse , N

    Anders , E. & Grevesse , N. 1989, , 53, 197

    1989

  2. [2]

    Arnaud , K. A. 1996, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 101, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems V, ed. G. H. Jacoby & J. Barnes , 17

    1996

  3. [3]

    A., et al

    Balokovi \'c , M., Brightman , M., Harrison , F. A., et al. 2018, , 854, 42

    2018

  4. [4]

    H., Tueller , J., Markwardt , C

    Baumgartner , W. H., Tueller , J., Markwardt , C. B., et al. 2013, , 207, 19

    2013

  5. [5]

    & Do Cao , O

    Beckmann , V. & Do Cao , O. 2010, in Eighth Integral Workshop. The Restless Gamma-ray Universe (INTEGRAL 2010), 81

    2010

  6. [6]

    2004, , 614, 641

    Beckmann , V., Gehrels , N., Favre , P., et al. 2004, , 614, 641

    2004

  7. [7]

    & Shrader , C

    Beckmann , V. & Shrader , C. R. 2012, Active Galactic Nuclei (Weinheim, Germany: Wiley-VCH)

    2012

  8. [8]

    D., Laor , A., et al

    Behar , E., Baldi , R. D., Laor , A., et al. 2015, , 451, 517

    2015

Show all 89 references
  1. [9]

    D., Smith , K

    Behar , E., Vogel , S., Baldi , R. D., Smith , K. L., & Mushotzky , R. F. 2018, , 478, 399

    2018

  2. [10]

    2006, , 448, 499

    Bianchi , S., Guainazzi , M., & Chiaberge , M. 2006, , 448, 499

    2006

  3. [11]

    2005, , 357, 599

    Bianchi , S., Matt , G., Nicastro , F., Porquet , D., & Dubau , J. 2005, , 357, 599

    2005

  4. [12]

    J., Bazzano , A., Bassani , L., et al

    Bird , A. J., Bazzano , A., Bassani , L., et al. 2010, , 186, 1

    2010

  5. [13]

    J., Malizia , A., Bazzano , A., et al

    Bird , A. J., Malizia , A., Bazzano , A., et al. 2007, , 170, 175

    2007

  6. [14]

    Broderick , J. W. & Fender , R. P. 2011, , 417, 184

    2011

  7. [15]

    Buisson , D. J. K., Fabian , A. C., & Lohfink , A. M. 2018, , 481, 4419

    2018

  8. [16]

    D., Papadakis , I

    Caballero-Garcia , M. D., Papadakis , I. E., Nicastro , F., & Ajello , M. 2012, , 537, A87

    2012

  9. [17]

    2012, , 420, 2087

    de Rosa , A., Panessa , F., Bassani , L., et al. 2012, , 420, 2087

    2012

  10. [18]

    R., Riffel , R

    Diniz , M. R., Riffel , R. A., Storchi-Bergmann , T., & Winge , C. 2015, , 453, 1727

    2015

  11. [19]

    2004, , 615, L25

    Elvis , M., Risaliti , G., Nicastro , F., et al. 2004, , 615, L25

    2004

  12. [20]

    A., Lee , J

    Evans , D. A., Lee , J. C., Kamenetska , M., et al. 2006, , 653, 1121

    2006

  13. [21]

    A., Lee , J

    Evans , D. A., Lee , J. C., Turner , T. J., Weaver , K. A., & Marshall , H. L. 2007, , 671, 1345

    2007

  14. [22]

    C., Lohfink , A., Belmont , R., Malzac , J., & Coppi , P

    Fabian , A. C., Lohfink , A., Belmont , R., Malzac , J., & Coppi , P. 2017, , 467, 2566

    2017

  15. [23]

    C., Lohfink , A., Kara , E., et al

    Fabian , A. C., Lohfink , A., Kara , E., et al. 2015, , 451, 4375

    2015

  16. [24]

    S., & Simpson , C

    Falcke , H., Wilson , A. S., & Simpson , C. 1998, , 502, 199

    1998

  17. [25]

    Fanaroff , B. L. & Riley , J. M. 1974, , 167, 31P

    1974

  18. [26]

    V., Beckmann , V., Neronov , A., & Soldi , S

    Fedorova , E. V., Beckmann , V., Neronov , A., & Soldi , S. 2011, , 417, 1140

    2011

  19. [27]

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

    Fuschino , F., Campana , R., Caroli , E., et al. 2018, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 10699, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2018: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray, 106995Z

    2018

  20. [28]

    F., Baum , S

    Gallimore , J. F., Baum , S. A., O'Dea , C. P., Pedlar , A., & Brinks , E. 1999, , 524, 684

    1999

  21. [29]

    & Panessa , F

    Giroletti , M. & Panessa , F. 2009, , 706, L260

    2009

  22. [30]

    2003, , 411, L223

    Goldwurm , A., David , P., Foschini , L., et al. 2003, , 411, L223

    2003

  23. [31]

    1997, , 476, 620

    Haardt , F., Maraschi , L., & Ghisellini , G. 1997, , 476, 620

    1997

  24. [32]

    Ho , L. C. 2002, , 564, 120

    2002

  25. [33]

    & Doi , A

    Inoue , Y. & Doi , A. 2018, , 869, 114

    2018

  26. [34]

    S., Fabian , A

    Iwasawa , K., Wilson , A. S., Fabian , A. C., & Young , A. J. 2003, , 345, 369

    2003

  27. [35]

    A., Balokovi \'c , M., Lohfink , A., & Brightman , M

    Kamraj , N., Harrison , F. A., Balokovi \'c , M., Lohfink , A., & Brightman , M. 2018, , 866, 124

    2018

  28. [36]

    A., Brightman , M., & Balokovi \'c , M

    Kamraj , N., Rivers , E., Harrison , F. A., Brightman , M., & Balokovi \'c , M. 2017, , 843, 89

    2017

  29. [37]

    A., Lohfink , A., et al

    Kara , E., Garc \' a , J. A., Lohfink , A., et al. 2017, , 468, 3489

    2017

  30. [38]

    Y., Braatz , J

    Kuo , C. Y., Braatz , J. A., Condon , J. J., et al. 2011, , 727, 20

    2011

  31. [39]

    2019, arXiv e-prints [ [arXiv] 1904.04784 ]

    Lanzuisi , G., Gilli , R., Cappi , M., et al. 2019, arXiv e-prints [ [arXiv] 1904.04784 ]

    2019 arXiv

  32. [40]

    & Behar , E

    Laor , A. & Behar , E. 2008, , 390, 847

    2008

  33. [41]

    P., Lavocat , P., et al

    Lebrun , F., Leray , J. P., Lavocat , P., et al. 2003, , 411, L141

    2003

  34. [42]

    Y., Hoffman , G

    Lu , N. Y., Hoffman , G. L., Groff , T., Roos , T., & Lamphier , C. 1993, , 88, 383

    1993

  35. [43]

    2016, , 458, 2454

    Lubi \'n ski , P., Beckmann , V., Gibaud , L., et al. 2016, , 458, 2454

    2016

  36. [44]

    K., Harrison , F., Broadway , D., et al

    Madsen , K. K., Harrison , F., Broadway , D., et al. 2018, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 10699, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2018: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray, 106996M

    2018

  37. [45]

    & Zdziarski , A

    Magdziarz , P. & Zdziarski , A. A. 1995, , 273, 837

    1995

  38. [46]

    1999, , 342, L41

    Malaguti , G., Bassani , L., Cappi , M., et al. 1999, , 342, L41

    1999

  39. [47]

    2014, , 782, L25

    Malizia, A., Molina, M., Bassani, L., et al. 2014, , 782, L25

    2014

  40. [48]

    M., & Poutanen , J

    Malzac , J., Beloborodov , A. M., & Poutanen , J. 2001, , 326, 417

    2001

  41. [49]

    2004, , 351, 169

    Marconi , A., Risaliti , G., Gilli , R., et al. 2004, , 351, 169

    2004

  42. [50]

    2015, , 447, 160

    Marinucci , A., Matt , G., Bianchi , S., et al. 2015, , 447, 160

    2015

  43. [51]

    2015, , 447, 3029

    Matt , G., Balokovi \'c , M., Marinucci , A., et al. 2015, , 447, 3029

    2015

  44. [52]

    2014, , 439, 3016

    Matt , G., Marinucci , A., Guainazzi , M., et al. 2014, , 439, 3016

    2014

  45. [53]

    A., et al

    Matt , G., Piro , L., Antonelli , L. A., et al. 1994, , 292, L13

    1994

  46. [54]

    O., et al

    Middei , R., Bianchi , S., Petrucci , P. O., et al. 2019, , 483, 4695

    2019

  47. [55]

    2013, , 433, 1687

    Molina , M., Bassani , L., Malizia , A., et al. 2013, , 433, 1687

    2013

  48. [56]

    2009, , 399, 1293

    Molina , M., Bassani , L., Malizia , A., et al. 2009, , 399, 1293

    2009

  49. [57]

    G., Wilson , A

    Mundell , C. G., Wilson , A. S., Ulvestad , J. S., & Roy , A. L. 2000, , 529, 816

    2000

  50. [58]

    Nied \'z wiecki , A., Szanecki , M., & Zdziarski , A. A. 2019, , 485, 2942

    2019

  51. [59]

    D., Laor , A., et al

    Panessa , F., Baldi , R. D., Laor , A., et al. 2019, Nature Astronomy, 3, 387

    2019

  52. [60]

    2007, , 467, 519

    Panessa , F., Barcons , X., Bassani , L., et al. 2007, , 467, 519

    2007

  53. [61]

    2008, , 483, 151

    Panessa , F., Bassani , L., de Rosa , A., et al. 2008, , 483, 151

    2008

  54. [62]

    C., Matt , G., Cappi , M., et al

    Perola , G. C., Matt , G., Cappi , M., et al. 2002, , 389, 802

    2002

  55. [63]

    O., Haardt , F., Maraschi , L., et al

    Petrucci , P. O., Haardt , F., Maraschi , L., et al. 2001, , 556, 716

    2001

  56. [64]

    O., Haardt , F., Maraschi , L., et al

    Petrucci , P. O., Haardt , F., Maraschi , L., et al. 2000, , 540, 131

    2000

  57. [65]

    2013, , 549, A73

    Petrucci , P.-O., Paltani , S., Malzac , J., et al. 2013, , 549, A73

    2013

  58. [66]

    2004, , 351, 161

    Piconcelli , E., Jimenez-Bail \'o n , E., Guainazzi , M., et al. 2004, , 351, 161

    2004

  59. [67]

    & Svensson , R

    Poutanen , J. & Svensson , R. 1996, , 470, 249

    1996

  60. [68]

    & Laor , A

    Raginski , I. & Laor , A. 2016, , 459, 2082

    2016

  61. [69]

    N., Nandra , K., George , I

    Reeves , J. N., Nandra , K., George , I. M., et al. 2004, , 602, 648

    2004

  62. [70]

    J., et al

    Ricci , C., Trakhtenbrot , B., Koss , M. J., et al. 2017, , 233, 17

    2017

  63. [71]

    2002, , 386, 379

    Risaliti , G. 2002, , 386, 379

    2002

  64. [72]

    2014, , 786, 126

    Rivers , E., Markowitz , A., Rothschild , R., et al. 2014, , 786, 126

    2014

  65. [73]

    2007, , 658, 815

    Sikora , M., Stawarz , ., & Lasota , J.-P. 2007, , 658, 815

    2007

  66. [74]

    H., et al

    Soldi , S., Beckmann , V., Baumgartner , W. H., et al. 2014, , 563, A57

    2014

  67. [75]

    E., Poutanen , J., Svensson , R., Sikora , M., & Begelman , M

    Stern , B. E., Poutanen , J., Svensson , R., Sikora , M., & Begelman , M. C. 1995, , 449, L13

    1995

  68. [76]

    1984, , 209, 175

    Svensson , R. 1984, , 209, 175

    1984

  69. [77]

    N., et al

    Tombesi , F., Cappi , M., Reeves , J. N., et al. 2010, , 521, A57

    2010

  70. [78]

    Tortosa , A., Bianchi , S., Marinucci , A., Matt , G., & Petrucci , P. O. 2018, , 614, A37

    2018

  71. [79]

    2017, , 466, 4193

    Tortosa , A., Marinucci , A., Matt , G., et al. 2017, , 466, 4193

    2017

  72. [80]

    J., Reeves , J

    Turner , T. J., Reeves , J. N., Braito , V., & Costa , M. 2018, , 476, 1258

    2018

  73. [81]

    2003, , 411, L131

    Ubertini , P., Lebrun , F., Di Cocco , G., et al. 2003, , 411, L131

    2003

  74. [82]

    Ulvestad , J. S. & Wilson , A. S. 1983, , 264, L7

    1983

  75. [83]

    2015, , 452, 3266

    Ursini , F., Marinucci , A., Matt , G., et al. 2015, , 452, 3266

    2015

  76. [84]

    A., Ferland , G

    Verner , D. A., Ferland , G. J., Korista , K. T., & Yakovlev , D. G. 1996, , 465, 487

    1996

  77. [85]

    Zdziarski , A. A. 1985, , 289, 514

    1985

  78. [86]

    A., Lubi \'n ski , P., Gilfanov , M., & Revnivtsev , M

    Zdziarski , A. A., Lubi \'n ski , P., Gilfanov , M., & Revnivtsev , M. 2003, , 342, 355

    2003

  79. [87]

    A., Poutanen , J., & Johnson , W

    Zdziarski , A. A., Poutanen , J., & Johnson , W. N. 2000, , 542, 703

    2000

  80. [88]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archiveprefix author booktitle chapter edition editor howpublished institution eprint journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type volume year label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sent...

  81. [89]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 gl...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.