Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 2 minor 58 references

Detectability of Polarized Gamma-ray Emission from Blazar Flares with COSI

T0 review · 2 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-05-25 · grok-4.3

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

Pith's one-line read COSI is predicted to detect MeV polarization from up to six blazar flares over its two-year mission.

desk verdict The paper forecasts that COSI might catch polarized MeV emission from up to ~6 blazar flares in two years, but only if GeV flare rates and durations transfer directly to the MeV band. read the letter →

arxiv 2605.01139 v2 pith:PLEN5G2U submitted 2026-05-01 astro-ph.HE

Garrett A. Latiolais , Jorge Otero-Santos , Michela Negro , Lea Marcotulli , Mohammad Ali Boroumand , Savitri Gallego , Christopher M. Karwin , Israel Martinez-Castellanos
show 13 more authors
Daniel Kocevski Marco Ajello Sara Capecchiacci Ioannis Liodakis Srinadh R. Bhavanam Steven E. Boggs Dieter H. Hartmann Carolyn A. Kierans Tiffany R. Lewis Alberto Sciaccaluga John A. Tomsick Haocheng Zhang Andreas Zoglauer
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords blazarflaresgamma-raypolarizationCOSIMeVbandFermiLATminimumdetectableflat-spectrumradioquasarsjetgeometry
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 investigates whether the Compton Spectrometer and Imager (COSI) can detect polarized gamma-ray emission from blazar flares in the 0.2-5 MeV range. It extrapolates from 17 years of Fermi Large Area Telescope data on 1413 blazars, using Bayesian block analysis to identify flares and then calculating the minimum detectable polarization (MDP99) for each using COSI's response functions. A sympathetic reader would care because successful detections would provide the first direct measurements of polarization in the largely unexplored MeV band, constraining models of blazar jet geometry and emission processes. The analysis finds that under baseline conditions, up to about six flares could reach MDP99 below 50 percent, depending on assumptions about spectra and flare identification.

What carries the argument

The MDP99 calculation using COSI instrument response functions applied to flare light curves and spectra identified from Fermi LAT data via Bayesian blocks.

What would settle it

If COSI's two-year observations yield a number of polarized flare detections far from the predicted up to six, or if direct MeV flare rates differ markedly from the GeV-based extrapolation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Using 17 years of Fermi LAT observations of 1413 blazars, the authors identify a maximum of 787 sources with flaring episodes. They estimate the minimum detectable polarization MDP99 in the COSI energy band for each flare under a range of spectral assumptions and background conditions. Under baseline background levels and assuming MeV flare statistics match GeV observations, COSI can detect polarization in up to approximately 6 flares with MDP99 less than 50% over its two-year prime mission, with only a few reaching below 20%. Flat-spectrum radio quasars dominate the promising targets, and shorter intervals around bright peaks improve prospects.

Load-bearing premise

Blazar flare statistics and properties in the MeV band match those observed at GeV energies by Fermi LAT.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Flat-spectrum radio quasars make up most of the polarization-detectable flares.
  • Shorter time intervals around bright peaks within flares can yield better MDP99 values.
  • A small number of the most powerful flares may achieve MDP99 below 20%.
  • COSI's continuous monitoring will enable the first direct MeV polarization measurements from blazars.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Detections would allow testing whether the same jet regions produce the polarized emission across energy bands.
  • If fewer than expected flares are detected, it may indicate that MeV flares have different duty cycles or spectra than assumed.
  • This work could guide target selection for future MeV polarimeters or multi-wavelength campaigns.
  • Non-detections might point to depolarization effects specific to the MeV regime.
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

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript analyzes 17 years of Fermi LAT data for 1413 blazars, identifying a maximum of 787 flares via Bayesian block analysis. For each flare it computes the minimum detectable polarization (MDP99) in the COSI 0.2-5 MeV band using instrument response functions under varied spectral assumptions and background levels. Under the explicit assumption that MeV-band flare statistics match those observed at GeV energies, and for a baseline background of 1 count/s, the paper concludes that COSI could detect polarization in up to ~6 flares with MDP99 < 50% (a few reaching <20%) over its two-year prime mission, provides a ranked target list dominated by flat-spectrum radio quasars, and notes that shorter intervals around flare peaks improve prospects.

Significance. If the central extrapolation holds, the result supplies the first quantitative forecast for MeV polarization detections with COSI and supplies a practical ranked target list that could guide early observations. The work draws strength from its use of an extensive, publicly available Fermi LAT flare catalog and from direct application of COSI instrument response functions rather than purely theoretical estimates.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract and the paragraph containing the ~6-flare claim: the headline number is obtained by transferring the full set of 787 GeV-identified flares (occurrence rate, duration distribution, and peak fluxes) directly to the COSI band. No independent MeV flare catalog, SED-based simulation, or duty-cycle correction is performed to test this transfer; if the MeV flare rate is lower (as expected when the synchrotron or external-Compton peak lies outside 0.2-5 MeV for many sources), the effective sample size and therefore the predicted detection count would decrease substantially.
  2. [MDP calculation procedure] MDP calculation procedure (the section describing the conversion from Fermi LAT flare properties to COSI MDP99): the final count of ~6 events is shown to vary with the choice of spectral index, background rate, and flare-selection threshold, yet the manuscript presents only a limited set of discrete cases rather than a continuous sensitivity study or error envelope on the extrapolated flare population. This makes it difficult to assess how robust the central prediction remains under plausible variations in the untested MeV extrapolation.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Flare identification] The description of the Bayesian block parameters (prior, false-positive rate) used to identify the 787 flares should be stated explicitly so that readers can reproduce the flare sample from the public Fermi LAT light curves.
  2. [Target list figure] Figure captions for the ranked target list should indicate the exact MDP99 threshold and background level adopted for each source so that the ordering can be directly compared with the text.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their insightful comments, which help clarify the strengths and limitations of our analysis. We address the major comments point by point below, maintaining the data-driven nature of the study while improving clarity on assumptions.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and the paragraph containing the ~6-flare claim: the headline number is obtained by transferring the full set of 787 GeV-identified flares (occurrence rate, duration distribution, and peak fluxes) directly to the COSI band. No independent MeV flare catalog, SED-based simulation, or duty-cycle correction is performed to test this transfer; if the MeV flare rate is lower (as expected when the synchrotron or external-Compton peak lies outside 0.2-5 MeV for many sources), the effective sample size and therefore the predicted detection count would decrease substantially.

    Authors: We agree that the central prediction relies on the explicit assumption, stated in the abstract and throughout the manuscript, that MeV-band flare statistics match those at GeV energies. As no MeV flare catalog is available (COSI being a future mission and Fermi-LAT having limited sensitivity in the MeV range for this purpose), we cannot perform an independent verification or SED-based simulation without introducing further model dependencies. This is the strongest data-driven estimate possible with current observations. We will revise the abstract and discussion to more explicitly caution that if the MeV flare rate is lower, the number of detectable events would decrease, and we will reference this as a key uncertainty. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [MDP calculation procedure] MDP calculation procedure (the section describing the conversion from Fermi LAT flare properties to COSI MDP99): the final count of ~6 events is shown to vary with the choice of spectral index, background rate, and flare-selection threshold, yet the manuscript presents only a limited set of discrete cases rather than a continuous sensitivity study or error envelope on the extrapolated flare population. This makes it difficult to assess how robust the central prediction remains under plausible variations in the untested MeV extrapolation.

    Authors: The manuscript already demonstrates the dependence on spectral assumptions, background levels, and flare identification criteria through multiple discrete scenarios. To better address robustness, we will expand the analysis to include a more continuous exploration of parameter space, such as varying the spectral index over a range and showing the resulting distribution of detectable flares. This will provide a clearer sensitivity envelope without altering the core methodology or conclusions. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity; forward predictions from external Fermi-LAT catalog under explicit extrapolation assumption.

full rationale

The central result (~6 detectable polarized flares) is obtained by applying COSI instrument response functions to flare parameters taken directly from an external 17-year Fermi-LAT analysis of 1413 blazars. The paper states the key transfer assumption explicitly rather than deriving it from its own equations. No self-citation chain, fitted parameter renamed as prediction, or self-definitional step appears in the derivation. The calculation is therefore a standard forward projection whose validity rests on the plausibility of the stated assumption, not on any internal reduction to the paper's own inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 1 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on one primary domain assumption about flare statistics across energy bands plus several modeling choices for background and spectra.

free parameters (2)
  • baseline background level
    Set to 1 counts/s for MDP99 calculations; directly affects the minimum detectable polarization threshold.
  • spectral assumptions
    Range of spectral shapes assumed for blazar flares in the MeV band; changes the expected count rates and thus MDP99.
assumptions (1)
  • domain assumption blazar flare statistics in the MeV band are comparable to those observed at GeV energies
    Invoked to scale Fermi LAT flare rates and durations to the COSI band for detectability estimates.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Detectability of Polarized Gamma-ray Emission from Blazar Flares with COSI." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/PLEN5G2U

@misc{pith2026260501139,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Detectability of Polarized Gamma-ray Emission from Blazar Flares with COSI},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/PLEN5G2U}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2605.01139}
}
read the original abstract

We investigate the detectability of polarized gamma-ray emission from blazar flares with the Compton Spectrometer and Imager (COSI). Using 17 years of Fermi Large Area Telescope observations, we analyze light curves for 1413 blazars and identify a maximum of 787 sources with flaring episodes through Bayesian block analysis. For each flare, we estimate the minimum detectable polarization MDP99 in the COSI energy band (0.2-5 MeV) using instrument response functions under a range of spectral assumptions and background conditions. Under baseline background levels (1 counts/s), and assuming that blazar flare statistics in the MeV band are comparable to those observed at GeV energies, we find that COSI can realistically detect polarization in up to ~6 flares with MDP99<50% over its two-year prime mission depending on different spectral and flare identification assumptions, with only a few most powerful ones reaching MDP99<20%. These expectations are shown to improve when shorter intervals around bright peaks within long flares are considered. We provide a ranked list of the most promising targets, finding that flat-spectrum radio quasars dominate the population of polarization-detectable events. Through its continuous all-sky monitoring in the largely unexplored MeV band, COSI will open a new observational window on blazar variability and deliver the first direct measurements of MeV polarization, offering unique insights into jet geometry and high-energy emission processes.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.01139 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The photon flux light curve of LCR source 4FGL J2253.9+1609, within Fermi’s energy band with η = 0.3. Alternating orange and blue blocks represent distinct identified flaring periods. The solid blue line is the BB analysis of the source. The dashed horizontal green line is the calculated quiescent threshold of the source, Qth. Below the light curve, yellow blocks mark the periods of time where Fermi-LAT was operatin… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Example of a BAT-LAT extrapolated spectrum to the COSI 0.2-5 MeV γ-ray band according to Eqs. (3) and (4) for a BL Lac object (dashed black line) and an FSRQ (dotted black line). The energy ranges of BAT, COSI and Fermi-LAT are highlighted with the blue, yellow and purple shaded regions and solid lines, respectively. where K is the normalization constant in units of photons/cm2/s/MeV, Eb is the break energy and γ1 a… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Left: MDP99% as a function of the photon fluence for every flare showing MDP99% values below 100%. The color scale and sizes of the markers represent the duration of the flare, with bigger markers representing longer flares and vice versa. Right: MDP99% map for a grid of photon flux (0.2-5 MeV), assuming a background rate of 1 ct/s, η = 0.3 and softer X-ray spectrum. In both plots: circles mark flares detected by th… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Left: Blazars’ flares fluence cumulative distributions for BL Lacs and FSRQs in the sample of flares with a duration <8 weeks obtained by setting η = 0.3, Rbkg = 1 ct/s and considering the case of a softer X-ray spectrum. The horizontal dashed line corresponds to 1 fla…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Top: Effective area as a function of Energy and off-axis angle for Fermi-LAT (left) and COSI (right). Bottom: Effective area as a function of energy averaged over the off-axis angles considered in the analysis and multiplied by the effective exposure factor (in red), f…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Left: Dependence of the MDP99% (blue) and SNR (orange) on the maximum accepted off-axis angle. Both quantities reach their optimal values at ∼ 60◦ , where the SNR reaches a maximum value of 43 and the MDP reaches its minimum of 33%. Right: Comparison of the MDP99% impr…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Simulation of a polarized source at 250 keV as seen by COSI SMEX. Top left: Reconstructed sky map with the source location marked in red and the celestial north direction indicated and used as reference to define the azimuthal angle (increasing anti-clock-wise and rang…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Photon flux light curve of 4FGL J2253+1609 using η = 0.3. The red dashed line is the initial value of Fth, and the green dashed line is the value of Qth. The colored blocks are time periods that rise above and subsequently fall below the quiescent threshold level, Qth.…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Cumulative distribution function of the duty cycles (thick lines) and flux-weighted duty cycle (thin lines) for BL Lacs (blue), FSRQs (red), and the combined population of BL Lacs and FSRQs (black) for the case with η = 0.3, Rbkg = 1 ct/s. The medians of the distributi…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Example of the light curve of blazar 4FGL J0116.0-1136 with fake flare identifications. The first hop corresponds to a real flare, while the second and third are clearly consistent with constant flux, but identified as flares by the BB algorithm due to the two flux po…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Example of a Long-flare (gray shaded region) identified in the Fermi-LAT light curve of source 4FGL J2253.9+1609. Manually-selected time windows with bright peaks are highlighted in orange and blue shades. Dotted red lines represent the average flux for those shorter …

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

58 extracted references · 58 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Science , archivePrefix = "arXiv", eprint =

    Aartsen, M., Ackermann, M., Adams, J., et al. 2018, Science, 361, eaat1378, doi: 10.1126/science.aat1378

    work page doi:10.1126/science.aat1378 2018

  2. [2]

    Abdollahi, S., Acero, F., Ackermann, M., et al. 2020, ApJS, 247, 33, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab6bcb 18 T able 4.List of BB-selected flares identified below 50% MDP 99% for COSI for our baseline background case (η= 0.3, Rbkg = 1 ct/s) and a softer X-ray spectrum within Fig. 3, with their associated MDP 99%, average and peak flare flux, and flare duration wi...

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab6bcb 2020

  3. [3]

    2023, ApJS, 265, 31, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/acbb6a

    Abdollahi, S., Ajello, M., Baldini, L., et al. 2023, ApJS, 265, 31, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/acbb6a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/acbb6a 2023

  4. [4]

    2025, ApJL, 985, L15, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adc572

    Agudo, I., Liodakis, I., Otero-Santos, J., et al. 2025, ApJL, 985, L15, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adc572

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adc572 2025

  5. [5]

    W., & Darling, D

    Anderson, T. W., & Darling, D. A. 1954, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 49, 765

    work page 1954

  6. [6]

    2016, MNRAS, 463, 3365, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2217

    Angelakis, E., Hovatta, T., Blinov, D., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 463, 3365, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2217

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2217 2016

  7. [7]

    , archivePrefix = "arXiv", eprint =

    Atwood, W. B., Abdo, A. A., Ackermann, M., et al. 2009, ApJ, 697, 1071, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/697/2/1071

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/697/2/1071 2009

  8. [8]

    Fermi Large Area Telescope Fourth Source Catalog Data Release 4 (4FGL-DR4)

    Ballet, J., Bruel, P., Burnett, T. H., Lott, B., & The Fermi-LAT collaboration. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2307.12546, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2307.12546

    work page Pith review arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2307.12546 2023

Show all 58 references
  1. [9]

    H., Digel, S

    Ballet, J., Burnett, T. H., Digel, S. W., & Lott, B. 2020, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2005.11208, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2005.11208

    2020 doi

  2. [10]

    D., & K¨ onigl, A

    Blandford, R. D., & K¨ onigl, A. 1979, ApJ, 232, 34, doi: 10.1086/157262

    1979 doi

  3. [11]

    2018, MNRAS, 474, 1296, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2786 19 Figure 11.Example of a Long-flare (gray shaded region) identified in the Fermi-LAT light curve of source 4FGL J2253.9+1609

    Blinov, D., Pavlidou, V., Papadakis, I., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 474, 1296, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2786 19 Figure 11.Example of a Long-flare (gray shaded region) identified in the Fermi-LAT light curve of source 4FGL J2253.9+1609. Manually-selected time windows with bright peaks ar...

    2018 doi

  4. [12]

    2013, ApJ, 769, 70, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/769/1/70

    Chang, Z., Jiang, Y., & Lin, H.-N. 2013, ApJ, 769, 70, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/769/1/70

    2013 doi

  5. [13]

    Connolly, S. D. 2015, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1503.06676, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1503.06676

    2015 doi arXiv

  6. [14]

    D., & Schlickeiser, R

    Dermer, C. D., & Schlickeiser, R. 1993, ApJ, 416, 458, doi: 10.1086/173251

    1993 doi

  7. [15]

    M., & Papadakis, I

    Emmanoulopoulos, D., McHardy, I. M., & Papadakis, I. E. 2013, MNRAS, 433, 907, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt764

    2013 doi

  8. [16]

    D., & Becker, P

    Finke, J. D., & Becker, P. A. 2014, ApJ, 791, 21, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/791/1/21

    2014 doi

  9. [17]

    1998, MNRAS, 299, 433, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.1998.01828.x

    Ghisellini, G. 1998, MNRAS, 299, 433, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.1998.01828.x

    1998 doi

  10. [18]

    2026, ApJ, 997, 284, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae32f4

    Gallego, S., Oberlack, U., Lommler, J., et al. 2026, ApJ, 997, 284, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae32f4

    2026 doi

  11. [19]

    2017, MNRAS, 469, 255, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx806

    Ghisellini, G., Righi, C., Costamante, L., & Tavecchio, F. 2017, MNRAS, 469, 255, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx806

    2017 doi

  12. [20]

    2021, MNRAS, 507, 5690, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab2425

    Giommi, P., Perri, M., Capalbi, M., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 507, 5690, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab2425

    2021 doi

  13. [21]

    G., et al

    Hovatta, T., Pavlidou, V., King, O. G., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 439, 690, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt2494

    2014 doi

  14. [22]

    1981, ApJ, 243, 700, doi: 10.1086/158638

    Konigl, A. 1981, ApJ, 243, 700, doi: 10.1086/158638

    1981 doi

  15. [23]

    L., Aller, M

    Lister, M. L., Aller, M. F., Aller, H. D., et al. 2015, ApJL, 810, L9, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/810/1/L9

    2015 doi

  16. [24]

    B., & Whitney, D

    Mann, H. B., & Whitney, D. R. 1947, The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 18, 50

    1947

  17. [25]

    1993, A&A, 269, 67, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9302006

    Mannheim, K. 1993, A&A, 269, 67, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9302006

    1993 doi arXiv

  18. [26]

    1992, ApJL, 397, L5, doi: 10.1086/186531

    Maraschi, L., Ghisellini, G., & Celotti, A. 1992, ApJL, 397, L5, doi: 10.1086/186531

    1992 doi

  19. [27]

    M., et al

    Marcotulli, L., Ajello, M., Urry, C. M., et al. 2022, ApJ, 940, 77, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac937f

    2022 doi

  20. [28]

    2023, in Proceedings of 38th International Cosmic Ray Conference — PoS(ICRC2023), ICRC2023 (Sissa Medialab), 858, doi: 10.22323/1.444.0858

    Martinez, I. 2023, in Proceedings of 38th International Cosmic Ray Conference — PoS(ICRC2023), ICRC2023 (Sissa Medialab), 858, doi: 10.22323/1.444.0858

    2023 doi

  21. [29]

    2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2308.11436, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2308.11436

    Martinez-Castellanos, I., Gallego, S., Huang, C.-Y., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2308.11436, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2308.11436

    2023 doi

  22. [30]

    D., & Blandford, R

    Meyer, M., Scargle, J. D., & Blandford, R. D. 2019, ApJ, 877, 39, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab1651

    2019 doi

  23. [31]

    2023, ApJL, 942, L10, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aca281

    Middei, R., Liodakis, I., Perri, M., et al. 2023, ApJL, 942, L10, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aca281

    2023 doi

  24. [32]

    2013, MNRAS, 430, 1324, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sts711

    Nalewajko, K. 2013, MNRAS, 430, 1324, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sts711

    2013 doi

  25. [33]

    B., et al

    Oh, K., Koss, M., Markwardt, C. B., et al. 2018, ApJS, 235, 4, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aaa7fd

    2018 doi

  26. [34]

    A., Becerra Gonz´ alez, J., et al

    Otero-Santos, J., Acosta-Pulido, J. A., Becerra Gonz´ alez, J., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 523, 4504, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1722

    2023 doi

  27. [35]

    M., Acosta-Pulido, J

    Otero-Santos, J., Raiteri, C. M., Acosta-Pulido, J. A., et al. 2024, A&A, 686, A228, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202449647

    2024 doi

  28. [36]

    L., Negro, M., Liodakis, I., et al

    Peirson, A. L., Negro, M., Liodakis, I., et al. 2023, ApJL, 948, L25, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acd242

    2023 doi

  29. [37]

    M., Villata, M., Jorstad, S

    Raiteri, C. M., Villata, M., Jorstad, S. G., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 522, 102, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad942

    2023 doi

  30. [38]

    S., & Rakshit, S

    Rajput, B., Stalin, C. S., & Rakshit, S. 2020, A&A, 634, A80, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936769

    2020 doi

  31. [39]

    2019, ApJ, 885, 12, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab426a 20

    Grindlay, J. 2019, ApJ, 885, 12, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab426a 20

    2019 doi

  32. [40]

    R., Penacchioni, A

    Sacahui, J. R., Penacchioni, A. V., Marinelli, A., et al. 2021, RMxAA, 57, 251, doi: 10.22201/ia.01851101p.2021.57.02.01

    2021 doi

  33. [41]

    D., Norris, J

    Scargle, J. D., Norris, J. P., Jackson, B., & Chiang, J. 2013, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1304.2818, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1304.2818

    2013 doi arXiv

  34. [42]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2511.09420

    Sciaccaluga, A., Tavecchio, F., Sbarrato, T., & Bonnoli, G. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2511.09420. https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.09420

    2025

  35. [43]

    Smith, P. S. 1996, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 110, Blazar Continuum Variability, ed. H. R. Miller, J. R. Webb, & J. C. Noble, 135

    1996

  36. [44]

    2020, ApJS, 250, 1, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aba2c7 The Compton Spectrometer and Imager (COSI) Collaboration

    Pascual-Granado, J. 2020, ApJS, 250, 1, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aba2c7 The Compton Spectrometer and Imager (COSI) Collaboration. 2025, 3.1 Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.15126188

    2020 doi

  37. [45]

    2024, in 38th International Cosmic Ray Conference, 745, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2308.12362

    Tomsick, J., Boggs, S., Zoglauer, A., et al. 2024, in 38th International Cosmic Ray Conference, 745, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2308.12362

    2024 doi

  38. [46]

    2021, ApJ, 916, 28, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac0341

    Tsuji, N., Yoneda, H., Inoue, Y., et al. 2021, ApJ, 916, 28, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac0341

    2021 doi

  39. [47]

    M., & Padovani, P

    Urry, C. M., & Padovani, P. 1995, PASP, 107, 803, doi: 10.1086/133630

    1995 doi

  40. [48]

    M., Burd, P., Dorner, D., et al

    Wagner, S. M., Burd, P., Dorner, D., et al. 2022, in 37th International Cosmic Ray Conference, 868, doi: 10.22323/1.395.0868

    2022 doi

  41. [49]

    C., Elsner, R

    Weisskopf, M. C., Elsner, R. F., & O’Dell, S. L. 2010, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 7732, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2010: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray, ed. M. Arnaud, S. S. Murray, & T. Takahashi, 77320E, doi: 10.1...

    2010 doi

  42. [50]

    C., Soffitta, P., Baldini, L., et al

    Weisskopf, M. C., Soffitta, P., Baldini, L., et al. 2022, Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems, 8, 026002, doi: 10.1117/1.JATIS.8.2.026002

    2022 doi

  43. [51]

    2023, ApJ, 954, 194, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acea74

    Yoshida, K., Petropoulou, M., Murase, K., & Oikonomou, F. 2023, ApJ, 954, 194, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acea74

    2023 doi

  44. [52]

    2013, ApJ, 774, 18, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/774/1/18

    Zhang, H., & B¨ ottcher, M. 2013, ApJ, 774, 18, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/774/1/18

    2013 doi

  45. [53]

    2024, ApJ, 967, 93, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad4112

    Zhang, H., B¨ ottcher, M., & Liodakis, I. 2024, ApJ, 967, 93, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad4112

    2024 doi

  46. [54]

    2016, ApJ, 829, 69, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/829/2/69

    Zhang, H., Diltz, C., & B¨ ottcher, M. 2016, ApJ, 829, 69, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/829/2/69

    2016 doi

  47. [55]

    2019, ApJ, 876, 109, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab158d

    Zhang, H., Fang, K., Li, H., et al. 2019, ApJ, 876, 109, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab158d

    2019 doi

  48. [56]

    E., et al

    Zoglauer, A., Andritschke, R., Boggs, S. E., et al. 2008, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 7011, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2008: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray, ed. M. J. L. Turner & K. A. Flanagan, 70113F, doi: 10.1117/...

    2008 doi

  49. [57]

    2021, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2102.13158, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2102.13158

    Zoglauer, A., Siegert, T., Lowell, A., et al. 2021, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2102.13158, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2102.13158

    2021 doi

  50. [58]

    Zoglauer, A. C. 2006, PhD thesis, -

    2006

Pith tools

Reviewed May 25, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.