Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 2 minor 56 references

CTFlow: Video-Inspired Latent Flow Matching for 3D CT Synthesis

T0 review · 3 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read CTFlow, a 0.5B latent flow matching transformer, generates whole 3D CT volumes from clinical reports and claims to outperform prior generative CT models on coherence, diversity, and text-image alignment.

desk verdict Only the abstract is present; the full text is an unrelated astronomy paper, so the SOTA claims are unverifiable and the submission is not reviewable as-is. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.12900 v1 pith:PIHWNX6C submitted 2025-08-18 cs.CV cs.AI

Jiayi Wang , Hadrien Reynaud , Franciskus Xaverius Erick , Bernhard Kainz This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CVcs.AI
keywords CTFlowtext-to-3DCTsynthesislatentflowmatchingautoregressivegenerationclinicalreportconditioningCT-RATEA-VAECT-CLIP
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 introduces CTFlow, a 0.5-billion-parameter latent flow matching transformer that generates three-dimensional CT volumes from clinical radiology reports. Flow matching here means the model learns a smooth path from random noise to a compressed volume representation. CTFlow maps volumes into a latent space with the A-VAE from FLUX, encodes the report text with CT-Clip, and synthesizes the volume autoregressively in slice blocks: the first block is generated from text alone, and every later block is generated from the text plus the slices already produced. The authors report that, on the CT-RATE dataset, this beats a state-of-the-art generative CT model on FID, FVD, IS, and CLIP scores, meaning better slice-to-slice coherence, more diversity, and stronger text alignment. The supplied full text is a different manuscript on planetary nebulae, so this summary rests on the abstract alone and the full evaluation is not available here.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is the combination of three components: the A-VAE from FLUX, an image-trained autoencoder whose latent space compresses each 3D CT volume; the CT-Clip text encoder, which turns clinical reports into conditioning embeddings; and the 0.5B latent flow matching transformer, which generates the volume autoregressively block by block. The autoregressive block scheme is the piece that reconciles whole-volume consistency with a finite memory budget, because no block attends to the whole volume at once.

What would settle it

Run a real CT volume through the A-VAE encoder and decoder and compare the reconstruction to the original; if small lesions or boundary anatomy disappear, the latent space is not faithful. Then generate volumes conditioned on CT-RATE reports and check the seams between autoregressive blocks for abrupt intensity or anatomy changes, and re-run the FID, FVD, IS, and CLIP evaluation; visible seams or unreproducible scores would undercut the central claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

CTFlow's central claim is that a text-conditioned latent flow matching transformer can synthesize complete, anatomically consistent CT volumes directly from clinical reports. The model uses the A-VAE from FLUX to compress 3D CT volumes into a compact latent representation, uses CT-Clip to embed the report text, and generates the volume autoregressively in blocks of slices, conditioning each block on the text and the previously generated slices. The authors assert that this design makes whole-volume generation tractable under memory constraints while preserving long-range coherence, and that on CT-RATE it exceeds the current best generative CT model on FID, FVD, IS, and CLIP scores.

Load-bearing premise

The method assumes that the A-VAE latent space, built for images, compresses 3D CT volumes without losing diagnostic or anatomical information, and that autoregressive block-by-block generation preserves whole-volume coherence.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If CTFlow works as reported, synthetic CT volumes can be generated from clinical text, enabling data augmentation and privacy-preserving sharing without releasing patient scans.
  • Rare or underrepresented pathologies could be synthesized on demand from written reports, giving downstream models more balanced training data.
  • The autoregressive block scheme offers a template for scaling flow matching to other memory-heavy 3D medical modalities.
  • The reported metric gains would make CTFlow the reference text-to-CT baseline for subsequent work in this line.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The supplied full text is a different paper on X-ray planetary nebulae, not the CTFlow manuscript; every CTFlow claim here is therefore read from the abstract alone and needs the original paper to be checked.
  • Because the A-VAE was trained on natural images, a testable open question is whether its latents preserve small diagnostic structures such as nodules; a slice-by-slice reconstruction study would settle it.
  • If autoregressive block boundaries are not handled well, generated volumes should show discontinuities where blocks meet; examining intensity profiles at block seams is a cheap, concrete test.
  • The same architecture could plausibly transfer to other 3D medical modalities with paired text reports, but that transfer is speculative beyond the paper's scope.
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. The manuscript abstract announces CTFlow, a 0.5-billion-parameter latent flow matching transformer for generating 3D CT volumes conditioned on clinical reports. The proposed method combines a FLUX A-VAE for the latent space, a CT-Clip text encoder, and a custom autoregressive block-wise slice generation scheme, and the authors claim state-of-the-art performance in temporal coherence, diversity, and text-image alignment measured by FID, FVD, IS, and CLIP scores. The supplied full text, however, is a different manuscript (arXiv:2508.12895v2) on planetary nebulae detected in the eROSITA eRASS1 catalog; it does not describe CTFlow, its architecture, training procedure, datasets, baselines, or any experimental results. Consequently, the paper as submitted contains no evidence to support its central claims.

Significance. If the CTFlow claims are accurate, the work would be of practical significance for medical-imaging data augmentation and privacy-preserving synthesis, as the use of clinical reports as conditioning and the autoregressive block-wise generation for whole-volume coherence are appealing directions for text-to-3D-CT generation. The use of established components (FLUX A-VAE and CT-Clip) is reasonable and not circular. However, because the submission provides no derivations, no equations, no evaluation tables, and no reproducibility artifacts such as code, model, or data, the significance cannot currently be assessed; the paper would need its full experimental content to be evaluated.

major comments (3)
  1. [Full Text] The full text supplied for review is an unrelated astronomy paper (arXiv:2508.12895v2) about planetary nebulae in the eROSITA eRASS1 catalog; none of the abstract's claims about CTFlow are backed by any content in this manuscript. This is a missing-support condition that prevents verification of the architecture, the autoregressive generation scheme, the dataset splits, the baselines, or the reported FID, FVD, IS, and CLIP scores.
  2. [Abstract] The statement 'we demonstrate the superiority of our approach in terms of temporal coherence, image diversity and text-image alignment, with FID, FVD, IS scores and CLIP score' is asserted without reporting any numerical values or statistical comparisons; even if the full text had been supplied, the abstract alone leaves the superiority claim unsupported, and as submitted there is no evaluation anywhere in the manuscript.
  3. [Full Text] The manuscript does not provide any information on how the FLUX A-VAE, designed for images, is adapted to compress 3D CT volumes while preserving diagnostic anatomical information, nor how the custom autoregressive approach prevents error accumulation across the generated volume; these load-bearing architectural assumptions require experimental validation that is entirely absent from the submission.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Header/Title] The abstract names 'CTFlow' while the full text's title, author list, and references all correspond to the eROSITA planetary-nebula paper, and the arXiv identifiers differ (2508.12900 vs. 2508.12895).
  2. [Abstract] Should the actual CTFlow manuscript be submitted, the abstract would benefit from reporting the actual FID, FVD, IS, and CLIP values and the number of volumes in the evaluation set, rather than only naming the metrics.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity is exhibited in the available CTFlow material; the supplied body is a different paper, so the CTFlow derivation cannot be checked, but missing body text is not circularity.

full rationale

The only CTFlow content available is the abstract. It describes a latent flow matching transformer using the A-VAE from FLUX and the CT-Clip text encoder, with an autoregressive slice-sequence generator, and claims better FID, FVD, IS, and CLIP scores than a state-of-the-art generative CT model. Using external pretrained components is not circular: these are building blocks, not the target result. No equation, no fitted parameter renamed as a prediction, and no self-citation chain is present in the abstract. The full text supplied under the submission is a different manuscript, 'Planetary Nebulae in the eROSITA eRASS1 catalog', so the CTFlow architecture, training procedure, dataset handling, baselines, metric definitions, and result tables are entirely absent. That is a missing-support and correctness-risk condition, not a circularity condition: I cannot exhibit a specific reduction of any CTFlow claim to its own inputs because the CTFlow derivation is not available to analyze. Per the hard rules, circularity must be demonstrated by quote and explicit reduction; no such demonstration is possible from the submitted material. Therefore the honest finding is no significant circularity, scored 0.

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

The central claim rests on the transferability of the FLUX A-VAE to 3D CT data and on the coherence of autoregressive volume generation. These are domain assumptions that cannot be checked without the full text.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption The FLUX A-VAE provides a valid and information-preserving latent space for 3D CT volumes.
    The abstract states the method leverages the A-VAE from FLUX, but does not justify transferring an image latent space to volumetric CT data; this is load-bearing but unverifiable from the abstract.
  • domain assumption Autoregressive generation of slice blocks yields globally coherent CT volumes.
    The abstract asserts this approach generates consistent whole CT volumes while keeping memory constraints tractable, but no evidence is provided.
  • standard math Flow matching provides a valid generative training objective.
    Background result assumed by the method.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of CTFlow: Video-Inspired Latent Flow Matching for 3D CT Synthesis." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/PIHWNX6C

@misc{pith2026250812900,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: CTFlow: Video-Inspired Latent Flow Matching for 3D CT Synthesis},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/PIHWNX6C}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.12900}
}
read the original abstract

Generative modelling of entire CT volumes conditioned on clinical reports has the potential to accelerate research through data augmentation, privacy-preserving synthesis and reducing regulator-constraints on patient data while preserving diagnostic signals. With the recent release of CT-RATE, a large-scale collection of 3D CT volumes paired with their respective clinical reports, training large text-conditioned CT volume generation models has become achievable. In this work, we introduce CTFlow, a 0.5B latent flow matching transformer model, conditioned on clinical reports. We leverage the A-VAE from FLUX to define our latent space, and rely on the CT-Clip text encoder to encode the clinical reports. To generate consistent whole CT volumes while keeping the memory constraints tractable, we rely on a custom autoregressive approach, where the model predicts the first sequence of slices of the volume from text-only, and then relies on the previously generated sequence of slices and the text, to predict the following sequence. We evaluate our results against state-of-the-art generative CT model, and demonstrate the superiority of our approach in terms of temporal coherence, image diversity and text-image alignment, with FID, FVD, IS scores and CLIP score.

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 23 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    1985, A&A, 151, L13

    Acker, A., Jasniewicz, G., & Gleizes, F. 1985, A&A, 151, L13

    work page 1985

  2. [2]

    2003, A&A, 403, 659, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20030391

    Acker, A., & Neiner, C. 2003, A&A, 403, 659, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20030391

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20030391 2003

  3. [3]

    2018, MNRAS, 476, 1140, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty174

    Aller, A., Lillo-Box, J., Vuˇ ckovi´ c, M., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 476, 1140, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty174

    doi:10.1093/mnras/sty174 2018

  4. [4]

    H., Keyes, C

    Aller, L. H., Keyes, C. D., & Feibelman, W. A. 1986, ApJ, 311, 930, doi: 10.1086/164830

    work page doi:10.1086/164830 1986

  5. [5]

    H., Keyes, C

    Aller, L. H., Keyes, C. D., Ross, J. E., & Omara, B. J. 1981, MNRAS, 197, 647, doi: 10.1093/mnras/197.3.647

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/197.3.647 1981

  6. [6]

    1985, ApJ, 294, 193, doi: 10.1086/163286

    Barker, T. 1985, ApJ, 294, 193, doi: 10.1086/163286

    work page doi:10.1086/163286 1985

  7. [7]

    J., Tr¨ umper, J., et al

    Boller, T., Freyberg, M. J., Tr¨ umper, J., et al. 2016, A&A, 588, A103, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201525648

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201525648 2016

  8. [8]

    J., Moles, M., Crist´ obal-Hornillos, D., et al

    Cenarro, A. J., Moles, M., Crist´ obal-Hornillos, D., et al. 2019, A&A, 622, A176, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833036

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833036 2019

Show all 56 references
  1. [9]

    H., & Conway, G

    Chu, Y., Chang, T. H., & Conway, G. M. 1997, The Astrophysical Journal, 482, 891–896, doi: 10.1086/304196

    1997 doi

  2. [10]

    1995, The Astrophysical Journal, 448, doi: 10.1086/309612

    Chu, Y.-H., & Ho, C.-H. 1995, The Astrophysical Journal, 448, doi: 10.1086/309612

    1995 doi

  3. [11]

    A., Price-Whelan, A

    Collaboration, T. A., Price-Whelan, A. M., Lim, P. L., et al. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 935, 167, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c74 de Korte, P. A. J., Claas, J. J., Jansen, F. A., &

    2022 doi

  4. [12]

    McKechnie, S. P. 1985, Advances in Space Research, 5, 57, doi: 10.1016/0273-1177(85)90450-8

    1985 doi

  5. [13]

    H., et al

    Freeman, M., Montez, Jr., R., Kastner, J. H., et al. 2014, ApJ, 794, 99, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/794/2/99 Garc´ ıa-D´ ıaz, M. T., L´ opez, J. A., Steffen, W., & Richer, M. G. 2012, ApJ, 761, 172, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/761/2/172

    2014 doi

  6. [14]

    1985, ApJL, 295, L17, doi: 10.1086/184529

    Gieseking, F., Becker, I., & Solf, J. 1985, ApJL, 295, L17, doi: 10.1086/184529

    1985 doi

  7. [15]

    F., Meaburn, J., L´ opez, J

    Graham, M. F., Meaburn, J., L´ opez, J. A., Harman, D. J., & Holloway, A. J. 2004, MNRAS, 347, 1370, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07342.x

    2004

  8. [17]

    A., Chu, Y.-H., & Gruendl, R

    Guerrero, M. A., Chu, Y.-H., & Gruendl, R. A. 2000, ApJS, 129, 295, doi: 10.1086/313415

    2000 doi

  9. [19]

    A., Chu, Y.-H., Gruendl, R

    Guerrero, M. A., Chu, Y.-H., Gruendl, R. A., & Meixner, M. 2005, A&A, 430, L69–L72, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200400131

    2005 doi

  10. [20]

    A., Toal´ a, J

    Guerrero, M. A., Toal´ a, J. A., & Chu, Y.-H. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 884, 134, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab4256

    2019 doi

  11. [21]

    A., Ruiz, N., Hamann, W.-R., et al

    Guerrero, M. A., Ruiz, N., Hamann, W.-R., et al. 2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 755, 129, doi: 10.1088/0004-637x/755/2/129

    2012 doi

  12. [22]

    H., & Ford, H

    Jacoby, G. H., & Ford, H. C. 1983, ApJ, 266, 298, doi: 10.1086/160779

    1983 doi

  13. [23]

    H., Hillwig, T

    Jacoby, G. H., Hillwig, T. C., & Jones, D. 2020, MNRAS, 498, L114, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slaa138

    2020 doi

  14. [24]

    1987, A&A, 180, 145

    Jasniewicz, G., Duquennoy, A., & Acker, A. 1987, A&A, 180, 145

    1987

  15. [25]

    2017, A&A, 600, L9, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201730700

    Marco, O. 2017, A&A, 600, L9, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201730700

    2017 doi

  16. [26]

    H., Montez, Jr, R., Balick, B., & De Marco, O

    Kastner, J. H., Montez, Jr, R., Balick, B., & De Marco, O. 2008, The Astrophysical Journal, 672, 957, doi: 10.1086/523890

    2008 doi

  17. [27]

    H., Soker, N., Vrtilek, S

    Kastner, J. H., Soker, N., Vrtilek, S. D., & Dgani, R. 2000, ApJL, 545, L57, doi: 10.1086/317335

    2000 doi

  18. [28]

    H., Montez, R., Balick, B., et al

    Kastner, J. H., Montez, R., Balick, B., et al. 2012, The Astronomical Journal, 144, 58, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/144/2/58

    2012 doi

  19. [29]

    R., Bianchi, L., & Maciel, W

    Keller, G. R., Bianchi, L., & Maciel, W. J. 2014, MNRAS, 442, 1379, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu878

    2014 doi

  20. [30]

    G., Ponman, T

    Khosroshahi, H. G., Ponman, T. J., & Jones, L. R. 2007, MNRAS, 377, 595, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.11591.x

    2007

  21. [31]

    2025, A&A, 697, A227, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202453635

    Konstantinou, L., Akras, S., Garcia-Rojas, J., et al. 2025, A&A, 697, A227, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202453635

    2025 doi

  22. [32]

    C., Diesch, C., Zweigle, J., et al

    Kreysing, H. C., Diesch, C., Zweigle, J., et al. 1992, A&A, 264, 623

    1992

  23. [33]

    R., & Fitzgerald, P

    Kwok, S., Purton, C. R., & Fitzgerald, P. M. 1978, ApJL, 219, L125, doi: 10.1086/182621 Le Dˆ u, P., Mulato, L., Parker, Q. A., et al. 2022, A&A, 666, A152, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243393 15

    1978 doi

  24. [34]

    B., & White, R

    Lucy, L. B., & White, R. L. 1980, ApJ, 241, 300, doi: 10.1086/158342

    1980 doi

  25. [35]

    2024, A&A, 682, A34, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347165

    Merloni, A., Lamer, G., Liu, T., et al. 2024, A&A, 682, A34, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347165

    2024 doi

  26. [36]

    2019, doi: 10.48550/ARXIV.1903.07264

    Miszalski, B., Manick, R., Van Winckel, H., & Escorza, A. 2019, doi: 10.48550/ARXIV.1903.07264

    2019 doi arXiv

  27. [37]

    2019, PASA, 36, e018, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2019.11

    Miszalski, B., Manick, R., Van Winckel, H., & Escorza, A. 2019, PASA, 36, e018, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2019.11

    2019 doi

  28. [38]

    H., & Chu, Y.-H

    Montez, Jr., R., De Marco, O., Kastner, J. H., & Chu, Y.-H. 2010, ApJ, 721, 1820, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/721/2/1820

    2010 doi

  29. [39]

    H., Balick, B., & Frank, A

    Montez, Jr., R., Kastner, J. H., Balick, B., & Frank, A. 2009, ApJ, 694, 1481, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/694/2/1481

    2009 doi

  30. [40]

    H., Balick, B., et al

    Montez, Jr., R., Kastner, J. H., Balick, B., et al. 2015, ApJ, 800, 8, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/800/1/8

    2015 doi

  31. [41]

    Parker, Q. A. 2022, Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences, 9, 895287, doi: 10.3389/fspas.2022.895287

    2022

  32. [43]

    A., Bojiˇ ci´ c, I

    Parker, Q. A., Bojiˇ ci´ c, I. S., & Frew, D. J. 2016b, in Journal of Physics Conference Series, Vol. 728, Journal of Physics Conference Series (IOP), 032008, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/728/3/032008

    doi

  33. [45]

    A., Acker, A., Frew, D

    Parker, Q. A., Acker, A., Frew, D. J., et al. 2006, MNRAS, 373, 79, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10950.x

    2006

  34. [46]

    T., & Esteban, C

    Peimbert, M., Peimbert, A., Ruiz, M. T., & Esteban, C. 2004, ApJS, 150, 431, doi: 10.1086/381090

    2004 doi

  35. [48]

    Koornneef, J., & Feibelman, W. A. 2002, A&A, 393, 285–294, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20020986

    2002 doi

  36. [49]

    R., & Bernard-Salas, J

    Pottasch, S. R., & Bernard-Salas, J. 2008, A&A, 490, 715–724, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200810721

    2008 doi

  37. [50]

    2021, A&A, 647, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039313

    Predehl, P., Andritschke, R., Arefiev, V., et al. 2021, A&A, 647, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039313

    2021 doi

  38. [51]

    A., et al

    Ruiz, N., Chu, Y.-H., Gruendl, R. A., et al. 2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 767, 35, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/767/1/35

    2013 doi

  39. [52]

    A., Chu, Y.-H., & Gruendl, R

    Ruiz, N., Guerrero, M. A., Chu, Y.-H., & Gruendl, R. A. 2011, The Astronomical Journal, 142, 91, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/142/3/91

    2011 doi

  40. [53]

    1997, A&A, 320, 913 Toal´ a, J

    Thevenin, F., & Jasniewicz, G. 1997, A&A, 320, 913 Toal´ a, J. A., & Arthur, S. J. 2016, MNRAS, 463, 4438, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2307 Toal´ a, J. A., Montez, Jr., R., & Karovska, M. 2019, ApJ, 886, 30, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab498e

    1997 doi

  41. [54]

    1977, ApJ, 218, 377, doi: 10.1086/155692

    Weaver, R., McCray, R., Castor, J., Shapiro, P., & Moore, R. 1977, ApJ, 218, 377, doi: 10.1086/155692

    1977 doi

  42. [55]

    Corradi, R. L. M. 2018, MNRAS, 480, 4589, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1871

    2018 doi

  43. [56]

    W., & Barlow, M

    Wesson, R., Liu, X. W., & Barlow, M. J. 2005, MNRAS, 362, 424, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09325.x

    2005

  44. [57]

    2022, Handbook of X-ray and Gamma-ray Astrophysics, 86, doi: 10.1007/978-981-16-4544-0 151-1

    Yuan, W., Zhang, C., Chen, Y., & Ling, Z. 2022, Handbook of X-ray and Gamma-ray Astrophysics, 86, doi: 10.1007/978-981-16-4544-0 151-1

    2022 doi

  45. [58]

    2015, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1506.07735, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1506.07735

    Yuan, W., Zhang, C., Feng, H., et al. 2015, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1506.07735, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1506.07735

    2015 doi arXiv

  46. [59]

    2018, Scientia Sinica

    Yuan, W., Zhang, C., Chen, Y., et al. 2018, Scientia Sinica

    2018

  47. [60]

    Physica, Mechanica & Astronomica, 48, 039502, doi: 10.1360/SSPMA2017-00297

    doi

  48. [61]

    2022, Astroparticle Physics, 137, 102668, doi: 10.1016/j.astropartphys.2021.102668

    Zhang, J., Qi, L., Yang, Y., et al. 2022, Astroparticle Physics, 137, 102668, doi: 10.1016/j.astropartphys.2021.102668

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.