Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 2 minor 1 cited by

On the maximum neutrino flux of blazars in the one-zone leptohadronic model

T0 review · 2 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-06-30 · grok-4.3

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

Pith's one-line read The one-zone leptohadronic model caps blazar neutrino fluxes below levels needed to explain IceCube associations.

desk verdict The paper gives a practical analytical upper bound on blazar neutrino flux from observed X-ray flux in the one-zone leptohadronic model, with numerical checks confirming it stays below IceCube levels. read the letter →

arxiv 2605.24107 v1 pith:RI6N7ZYZ submitted 2026-05-22 astro-ph.HE

Wei-Jian Li , Rui Xue , Ze-Rui Wang , Dingrong Xiong This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords blazarshigh-energyneutrinosleptohadronicmodelone-zoneemissionIceCubeX-rayconstraints
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 an analytical method to calculate the highest neutrino flux possible in the one-zone leptohadronic jet model, expressed directly as a function of the observed X-ray flux and the physical parameters that can be realized in that framework. When this upper bound is applied to neutrino-candidate blazars, the predicted fluxes stay comparable to or below those from earlier one-zone calculations and fall short of the fluxes inferred from IceCube events. Numerical modeling of the same objects reproduces the analytical limits, reinforcing that a single emission zone cannot supply enough neutrinos to account for the observed associations.

What carries the argument

Analytical expression for the maximum neutrino flux in terms of the observed X-ray flux under one-zone leptohadronic constraints.

What would settle it

A measured neutrino flux from a blazar that exceeds the analytical maximum while its X-ray flux and other parameters remain within the range assumed for that maximum.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

An analytical derivation yields the maximum neutrino flux as a function of observed X-ray flux within attainable one-zone leptohadronic parameters; application to candidate blazars and comparison with numerical models show that these fluxes do not significantly exceed prior one-zone results and remain below IceCube-inferred levels, indicating that the one-zone scenario alone is unlikely to explain high-energy neutrino-blazar associations.

Load-bearing premise

The physical parameters that maximize neutrino output while respecting X-ray limits can actually be attained inside a single emission zone.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • One-zone leptohadronic models reach their neutrino ceiling at values already explored in earlier studies.
  • X-ray constraints set a firm upper limit on neutrino output that single-zone jets cannot surpass.
  • Alternative sites such as the jet base or hot corona must be considered to reach higher neutrino fluxes.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If multi-zone models are required, the relative contribution of each zone to the total neutrino output becomes a testable quantity with future multi-messenger data.
  • The analytical bound offers a quick filter for ruling out one-zone explanations for new neutrino-blazar coincidences without full numerical fitting.
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 derives an analytical upper bound on the neutrino flux from blazars in the one-zone leptohadronic model, expressed as a function of the observed X-ray flux and attainable physical parameters (magnetic field, Doppler factor, particle densities). It applies the bound to a sample of neutrino-candidate blazars, performs numerical modeling on those sources, and reports agreement between the two approaches. Both indicate that predicted neutrino fluxes remain consistent with prior one-zone studies and below IceCube-inferred levels, leading to the conclusion that the one-zone scenario alone is unlikely to explain high-energy neutrino-blazar associations.

Significance. If the bound is correctly derived and the attainable-parameter premise holds, the work supplies a practical, observationally grounded constraint that quantifies the tension between X-ray limits and neutrino production in single-zone leptohadronic jets. The explicit agreement between the analytical expression and numerical results on real sources is a methodological strength that increases the result's utility for future modeling.

major comments (2)
  1. [Analytical derivation and parameter selection (likely §3)] The central claim that the derived maximum is attainable within a single emission zone without violating other multi-wavelength constraints rests on the choice of parameter values; the manuscript should explicitly demonstrate, for at least one source, that the optimizing values (B, δ, n_p, etc.) simultaneously satisfy the observed SED shape outside the X-ray band.
  2. [Comparison of analytical and numerical results (likely §4)] The abstract and main text state that analytical and numerical results agree, yet no quantitative metric (fractional difference, χ², or propagated uncertainty on the neutrino flux) is provided; without this, the robustness of the bound against parameter variations cannot be assessed.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Throughout] Notation for the maximum neutrino flux (e.g., Φ_ν^max) should be introduced once and used consistently; currently the abstract and body appear to switch between descriptive phrases and symbols.
  2. [Application to candidate sources] A short table listing the adopted parameter ranges for the analytical bound (B, δ, etc.) and the corresponding X-ray flux values for the sample sources would improve readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive comments and the recommendation for minor revision. We address the points below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Analytical derivation and parameter selection (likely §3)] The central claim that the derived maximum is attainable within a single emission zone without violating other multi-wavelength constraints rests on the choice of parameter values; the manuscript should explicitly demonstrate, for at least one source, that the optimizing values (B, δ, n_p, etc.) simultaneously satisfy the observed SED shape outside the X-ray band.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit demonstration is valuable to support the attainability of the maximum neutrino flux. In the revised version of the manuscript, we will add a subsection or appendix showing, for one representative source such as TXS 0506+056, that the parameter set (including B, δ, and particle densities) used to achieve the maximum neutrino flux also reproduces the observed multi-wavelength SED outside the X-ray band, thereby satisfying the one-zone model constraints. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Comparison of analytical and numerical results (likely §4)] The abstract and main text state that analytical and numerical results agree, yet no quantitative metric (fractional difference, χ², or propagated uncertainty on the neutrino flux) is provided; without this, the robustness of the bound against parameter variations cannot be assessed.

    Authors: We concur that providing a quantitative metric would enhance the assessment of agreement. We will revise the manuscript to include the fractional differences between the analytical upper bounds and the numerical neutrino flux predictions for the sources in our sample, as well as any relevant uncertainties from parameter variations. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity

full rationale

The central derivation expresses the maximum neutrino flux as an analytical function of directly observed X-ray flux together with physical parameters attainable inside the one-zone leptohadronic framework. This supplies an external observational anchor rather than defining the neutrino quantity in terms of itself or fitting it to neutrino data. Numerical modeling on candidate sources is used only for confirmation and does not alter the bound. No self-citation chain is invoked to justify the uniqueness of the bound, and the conclusion that one-zone predictions remain below IceCube levels follows from the X-ray constraint without reduction to the target result.

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

The central claim rests on the validity of the one-zone leptohadronic framework and the attainability of parameters that maximize neutrino output while matching X-ray data; no explicit free parameters or invented entities are named in the abstract.

assumptions (1)
  • domain assumption The one-zone leptohadronic jet model provides a complete description of the relevant emission processes in blazars.
    The entire derivation and comparison to IceCube data assumes this modeling framework holds without additional zones or sites.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of On the maximum neutrino flux of blazars in the one-zone leptohadronic model." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RI6N7ZYZ

@misc{pith2026260524107,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: On the maximum neutrino flux of blazars in the one-zone leptohadronic model},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RI6N7ZYZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2605.24107}
}
read the original abstract

The origin of extragalactic high-energy neutrinos remains a major mystery in astrophysics, with blazars as leading candidate sources. The widely adopted one-zone leptohadronic jet model, however, faces severe challenges from stringent X-ray observational constraints. In this work, we present an analytical approach that derives the maximum neutrino flux as a function of the observed X-ray flux and the corresponding physical parameters attainable within the one-zone leptohadronic framework. Applying this approach to a sample of neutrino candidate blazars, we further perform numerical modeling and find agreement between analytical and numerical results. Both approaches consistently show that the model-predicted neutrino fluxes do not significantly exceed those obtained in previous one-zone studies and remain below the flux levels inferred from IceCube observations, suggesting that the one-zone scenario alone is unlikely to fully account for high-energy neutrino-blazar associations. This highlights the importance of considering multi-zone models or alternative production sites (e.g., jet base, hot corona) to better explain high-energy neutrino origins in blazars.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.24107 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. TXS 0506+056 associated with IC-170922A. Upper panels: the parameter space (left panel) and the fitting result of the SED for different radii of blob (right panel) under the SSC-dominated case. In the upper left panel, the red line with arrows represents the parameter space under the severe KN effect corresponding to Eq. (4). The area within the black lines with arrows represents the peak frequency constraint, corre… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. TXS 0506+056 associated with GVD-210418CA. Upper panels: the parameter space (left panel) and the fitting result of the SED for different radii of blob (right panel) under the SSC-dominated case. The line styles in upper panels have the same meaning as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. TXS 0506+056 associated with IC-220918A. Upper panels: the parameter space (left panel) and the fitting result of the SED for different radii of blob (right panel) under the SSC-dominated case. The line styles in upper panels have the same meaning as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (18 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: PKS 0735+178 associated with IC-211208A. Upper panels: the parameter space (left panel) and the fitting result of the SED for different radii of blob (right panel) under the SSC-dominated case. The line styles in upper panels have the same meaning as in [PITH_FULL_IMA…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: GB6 J2113+1121 associated with IC-191001A. Upper panels: the parameter space (left panel) and the fitting result of the SED for different radii of blob (right panel) under the SSC-dominated case. The line styles in upper panels have the same meaning as in [PITH_FULL_I…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: 5BZB J0630-2406 associated with IC J0630-2353. Upper panels: the parameter space (left panel) and the fitting result of the SED for different radii of blob (right panel) under the SSC-dominated case. The line styles in upper panels have the same meaning as in [PITH_FU…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: PKS 1502+106 associated with IC-190730A. Upper panels: the parameter space (left panel) and the fitting result of the SED for different radii of blob (right panel) under the SSC-dominated case. The line styles in upper panels have the same meaning as in [PITH_FULL_IMA…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: PKS B1424-418 associated with Big Bird. Upper panels: the parameter space (left panel) and the fitting result of the SED for different radii of blob (right panel) under the SSC-dominated case. The line styles in upper panels have the same meaning as in [PITH_FULL_IMAG…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: GB6 J1040+0617 associated with IC-141209A. The parameter space (left panel) and the fitting result of the SED for different radii of blob (right panel) under the SSC-dominated case. The line styles have the same meaning as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: 3HSP J095507.1+355101 associated with IC-200107A. The parameter space (left panel) and the fitting result of the SED for different radii of blob (right panel) under the SSC-dominated case. In the left panel, the red line with arrows represents the parameter space unde…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: TXS 0506+056 associated with IC-170922A. The parameter space (left panel) and the fitting result of the SED for different radii of blob (right panel) under the SSC-dominated case. The line styles have the same meaning as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: TXS 0506+056 associated with IC-170922A. Upper panels: the fitting results of the SED for R = 1 × 1015 cm (left panel) and R = 1×1016 cm (right panel) under the SSC-dominated case. Middle panels: the parameter space for R = 2×1015 cm (left panel) and R = 2 × 1016 cm (…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: TXS 0506+056 associated with GVD-210418CA. Upper panels: the fitting results of the SED for R = 1 × 1016 cm (left panel) and R = 1 × 1017 cm (right panel) under the SSC-dominated case. Middle panels: the parameter space for R = 1 × 1016 cm (left panel) and R = 1 × 101…
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: TXS 0506+056 associated with IC-220918A. Upper panels: the fitting results of the SED for R = 1 × 1016 cm (left panel) and R = 1×1017 cm (right panel) under the SSC-dominated case. Middle panels: the parameter space for R = 1×1016 cm (left panel) and R = 1 × 1019 cm (…
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: PKS 0735+178 associated with IC-211208A. Upper panels: the fitting results of the SED for R = 1 × 1015 cm (left panel) and R = 1×1016 cm (right panel) under the SSC-dominated case. Middle panels: the parameter space for R = 1×1015 cm (left panel) and R = 1 × 1019 cm (…
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: GB6 J2113+1121 associated with IC-191001A. Upper panels: the fitting results of the SED for R = 1×1017 cm (left panel) and R = 1×1018 cm (right panel) under the SSC-dominated case. Middle panels: the parameter space for R = 4×1014 cm (left panel) and R = 1 × 1015 cm (…
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: 5BZB J0630-2406 associated with IC J0630-2353. Upper panels: the fitting results of the SED for R = 1 × 1016 cm (left panel) and R = 1 × 1017 cm (right panel) under the SSC-dominated case. Middle panels: the parameter space for R = 3 × 1015 cm (left panel) and R = 6 ×…
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: PKS 1502+106 associated with IC-190730A. Upper panels: the fitting results of the SED for R = 1 × 1018 cm (left panel) and R = 1×1019 cm (right panel) under the SSC-dominated case. Middle panels: the parameter space for R = 1×1015 cm (left panel) and R = 1 × 1018 cm (…
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: PKS B1424-418 associated with Big Bird. Upper panels: the fitting results of the SED for R = 1 × 1019 cm (left panel) and R = 1×1020 cm (right panel) under the SSC-dominated case. Middle panels: the parameter space for R = 2×1016 cm (left panel) and R = 1 × 1017 cm (r…
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: GB6 J1040+0617 associated with IC-141209A. The fitting results of the SED for R = 1 × 1016 cm (left panel) and R = 1 × 1017 cm (right panel) under the SSC-dominated case. The colored dashed and solid lines respectively represent the secondary pair cascade emission and…
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: 3HSP J095507.1+355101 associated with IC-200107A. The fitting results of the SED for R = 1×1015 cm (left panel) and R = 1 × 1016 cm (right panel) under the SSC-dominated case. The colored dashed and solid lines respectively represent the secondary pair cascade emissio…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Locating the Production Sites of High-Energy Neutrinos in Blazar Jets

    astro-ph.HE 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    Efficient neutrino production requires an external radiation field stronger than the magnetic field near the broad-line region, but this conflicts with single-zone broadband emission, implying the neutrino site must b...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

118 extracted references · 118 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    G., Ackermann, M., Adams, J., et al

    Aartsen, M. G., Ackermann, M., Adams, J., et al. 2017, ApJ, 849, 67, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa8dfb

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa8dfb 2017

  2. [2]

    , keywords =

    Aartsen, M. G., Ackermann, M., Adams, J., et al. 2020, PhRvL, 124, 051103, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.051103

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.124.051103 2020

  3. [3]

    , keywords =

    Abbasi, R., Ackermann, M., Adams, J., et al. 2023, ApJS, 269, 25, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/acfa95

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/acfa95 2023

  4. [4]

    A., Ackermann, M., Agudo, I., et al

    Abdo, A. A., Ackermann, M., Agudo, I., et al. 2010, ApJ, 716, 30, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/716/1/30

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/716/1/30 2010

  5. [5]

    K., Ag¨ ueros, M

    Adelman-McCarthy, J. K., Ag¨ ueros, M. A., Allam, S. S., et al. 2008, ApJS, 175, 297, doi: 10.1086/524984

    work page doi:10.1086/524984 2008

  6. [6]

    2023, Galaxies, 11, 117, doi: 10.3390/galaxies11060117

    Aguilar-Ruiz, E., Galv´ an-G´ amez, A., & Fraija, N. 2023, Galaxies, 11, 117, doi: 10.3390/galaxies11060117

    work page doi:10.3390/galaxies11060117 2023

  7. [7]

    Aharonian, F. A. 2000, NewA, 5, 377, doi: 10.1016/S1384-1076(00)00039-7

    work page doi:10.1016/s1384-1076(00)00039-7 2000

  8. [8]

    A., Atoian, A

    Aharonian, F. A., Atoian, A. M., & Nagapetian, A. M. 1983, Astrofizika, 19, 323

    work page 1983

Show all 118 references
  1. [9]

    P., Alexandroff, R., Allende Prieto, C., et al

    Ahn, C. P., Alexandroff, R., Allende Prieto, C., et al. 2012, ApJS, 203, 21, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/203/2/21

    2012 doi

  2. [10]

    2017, PhRvD, 96, 082001, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.96.082001

    Albert, A., Andr´ e, M., Anghinolfi, M., et al. 2017, PhRvD, 96, 082001, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.96.082001

    2017 doi

  3. [11]

    2020, ApJ, 892, 92, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab7afb

    Albert, A., Andr´ e, M., Anghinolfi, M., et al. 2020, ApJ, 892, 92, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab7afb

    2020 doi

  4. [12]

    A., Avrorin, A

    Allakhverdyan, V. A., Avrorin, A. D., Avrorin, A. V., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 8784, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3653

    2024 doi

  5. [13]

    Anchordoqui, L. A. 2019, PhR, 801, 1, doi: 10.1016/j.physrep.2019.01.002

    2019 doi

  6. [14]

    A., Arcaro, C., et al

    Ansoldi, S., Antonelli, L. A., Arcaro, C., et al. 2018, ApJL, 863, L10, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aad083 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ ocz, B...

    2018 doi

  7. [15]

    L., Larson, D., Weiland, J

    Bennett, C. L., Larson, D., Weiland, J. L., & Hinshaw, G. 2014, ApJ, 794, 135, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/794/2/135

    2014 doi

  8. [16]

    2023, JCAP, 2023, 039, doi: 10.1088/1475-7516/2023/07/039 B la˙ zejowski, M., Sikora, M., Moderski, R., & Madejski, G

    Bhowmick, S., Ghosh, D., & Sachdeva, D. 2023, JCAP, 2023, 039, doi: 10.1088/1475-7516/2023/07/039 B la˙ zejowski, M., Sikora, M., Moderski, R., & Madejski, G. M. 2000, ApJ, 545, 107, doi: 10.1086/317791

    2023 doi

  9. [17]

    2022, ApJL, 933, L43, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac7d5b

    Buson, S., Tramacere, A., Pfeiffer, L., et al. 2022, ApJL, 933, L43, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac7d5b

    2022 doi

  10. [18]

    D., & Serkowski, K

    Kinman, T. D., & Serkowski, K. 1974, ApJL, 190, L101, doi: 10.1086/181516

    1974 doi

  11. [19]

    2019, in International Cosmic Ray Conference, Vol

    Carver, T. 2019, in International Cosmic Ray Conference, Vol. 36, 36th International Cosmic Ray Conference (ICRC2019), 851, doi: 10.22323/1.358.0851

    2019 doi

  12. [20]

    2019, MNRAS, 483, L12, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/sly210

    Cerruti, M., Zech, A., Boisson, C., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 483, L12, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/sly210

    2019 doi

  13. [21]

    2015, MNRAS, 448, 910, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu2691

    Cerruti, M., Zech, A., Boisson, C., & Inoue, S. 2015, MNRAS, 448, 910, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu2691

    2015 doi

  14. [22]

    2026, ApJS, 282, 22, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ae1d5f

    Cerruti, M., Rudolph, A., Petropoulou, M., et al. 2026, ApJS, 282, 22, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ae1d5f

    2026 doi

  15. [23]

    2007, ApJ, 660, 117, doi: 10.1086/511969

    Meier, D. 2007, ApJ, 660, 117, doi: 10.1086/511969

    2007 doi

  16. [24]

    2021, ApJ, 910, 100, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abe4cd

    Das, S., Gupta, N., & Razzaque, S. 2021, ApJ, 910, 100, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abe4cd

    2021 doi

  17. [25]

    2022, A&A, 668, A146, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244653 de Gouveia Dal Pino, E

    Das, S., Gupta, N., & Razzaque, S. 2022, A&A, 668, A146, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244653 de Gouveia Dal Pino, E. M., Rodr´ ıguez-Ram´ ırez, J. C., & del Valle, M. V. 2025, MNRAS, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf251 De Marchi, A. G., Granelli, A., Nava, J., & Sala, F. 2025a, PhRvD, 112...

    2022 doi

  18. [26]

    2024, PASA, 41, e062, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2024.54

    Deng, C.-B., Shi, Y.-Y., Song, Y.-J., et al. 2024, PASA, 41, e062, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2024.54

    2024 doi

  19. [27]

    Drury, L. O. 1983, Reports on Progress in Physics, 46, 973, doi: 10.1088/0034-4885/46/8/002

    1983 doi

  20. [28]

    A., Suvorova, O., & Baikal-GVD Collaboration

    Dzhilkibaev, Z. A., Suvorova, O., & Baikal-GVD Collaboration. 2021, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 15112, 1

    2021

  21. [29]

    2021, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 15132, 1

    Falomo, R., Treves, A., & Paiano, S. 2021, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 15132, 1

    2021

  22. [30]

    S., & Halzen, F

    Fang, K., Gallagher, J. S., & Halzen, F. 2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 241, doi: 10.1038/s41550-023-02128-0

    2024 doi

  23. [31]

    2023, JCAP, 2023, 057, doi: 10.1088/1475-7516/2023/05/057 Fichet de Clairfontaine, G., Buson, S., Pfeiffer, L., et al

    Ferrer, F., Herrera, G., & Ibarra, A. 2023, JCAP, 2023, 057, doi: 10.1088/1475-7516/2023/05/057 Fichet de Clairfontaine, G., Buson, S., Pfeiffer, L., et al. 2023, ApJL, 958, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad0644

    2023 doi

  24. [32]

    2025, ApJ, 986, 104, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/add267

    Winter, W. 2025, ApJ, 986, 104, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/add267

    2025 doi

  25. [33]

    2020, ApJ, 893, 162, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab8307

    Franckowiak, A., Garrappa, S., Paliya, V., et al. 2020, ApJ, 893, 162, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab8307

    2020 doi

  26. [34]

    2019, Nature Astronomy, 3, 88, doi: 10.1038/s41550-018-0610-1

    Gao, S., Fedynitch, A., Winter, W., & Pohl, M. 2019, Nature Astronomy, 3, 88, doi: 10.1038/s41550-018-0610-1

    2019 doi

  27. [35]

    2017, ApJ, 843, 109, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa7754

    Gao, S., Pohl, M., & Winter, W. 2017, ApJ, 843, 109, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa7754

    2017 doi

  28. [36]

    2019, ApJ, 880, 103, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab2ada 35

    Garrappa, S., Buson, S., Franckowiak, A., et al. 2019, ApJ, 880, 103, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab2ada 35

    2019 doi

  29. [37]

    2008, MNRAS, 387, 1669, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13360.x

    Ghisellini, G., & Tavecchio, F. 2008, MNRAS, 387, 1669, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13360.x

    2008 doi

  30. [38]

    2010, MNRAS, 402, 497, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15898.x

    Ghisellini, G., Tavecchio, F., Foschini, L., et al. 2010, MNRAS, 402, 497, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15898.x

    2010 doi

  31. [39]

    2012, MNRAS, 425, 1371, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21554.x

    Ghisellini, G., Tavecchio, F., Foschini, L., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 425, 1371, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21554.x

    2012 doi

  32. [40]

    2020, A&A, 640, L4, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038423

    Giommi, P., Padovani, P., Oikonomou, F., et al. 2020, A&A, 640, L4, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038423

    2020 doi

  33. [41]

    2013, MNRAS, 431, 1914, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt305

    Giommi, P., Padovani, P., & Polenta, G. 2013, MNRAS, 431, 1914, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt305

    2013 doi

  34. [42]

    2023, in The Encyclopedia of Cosmology

    Halzen, F., & Kheirandish, A. 2023, in The Encyclopedia of Cosmology. Set 2: Frontiers in Cosmology. Volume 2: Neutrino Physics and Astrophysics, ed. F. W. Stecker, 107–235, doi: 10.1142/9789811282645 0005

    2023 doi

  35. [43]

    R., Millman, K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2

    2020 doi

  36. [44]

    M., Nalewajko, K., et al

    Hayashida, M., Madejski, G. M., Nalewajko, K., et al. 2012, ApJ, 754, 114, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/754/2/114

    2012 doi

  37. [45]

    2024, MNRAS, 528, 7587, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae522 IceCube Collaboration

    Hu, H.-B., Wang, H.-Q., Xue, R., Peng, F.-K., & Wang, Z.-R. 2024, MNRAS, 528, 7587, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae522 IceCube Collaboration. 2013, Science, 342, 1242856, doi: 10.1126/science.1242856 IceCube Collaboration. 2019, GRB Coordinates Network, 25913, 1 IceCube Collaboration....

    2024 doi

  38. [46]

    2020, ApJL, 891, L33, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab7661

    Inoue, Y., Khangulyan, D., & Doi, A. 2020, ApJL, 891, L33, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab7661

    2020 doi

  39. [47]

    2019, ApJ, 880, 40, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab2715

    Inoue, Y., Khangulyan, D., Inoue, S., & Doi, A. 2019, ApJ, 880, 40, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab2715

    2019 doi

  40. [48]

    2025, ApJ, 979, 1, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad9f40

    Ji, S., Wang, Z., & Zheng, D. 2025, ApJ, 979, 1, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad9f40

    2025 doi

  41. [49]

    2024, ApJL, 965, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad36b9

    Jiang, X., Liao, N.-H., Wang, Y.-B., et al. 2024, ApJL, 965, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad36b9

    2024 doi

  42. [50]

    2025, ApJ, 986, 110, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/add1b5

    Jiang, X., Liao, N.-H., Xue, R., Fan, Y.-Z., & Wei, D.-M. 2025, ApJ, 986, 110, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/add1b5

    2025 doi

  43. [51]

    2016, Nature Physics, 12, 807, doi: 10.1038/nphys3715

    Kadler, M., Krauß, F., Mannheim, K., et al. 2016, Nature Physics, 12, 807, doi: 10.1038/nphys3715

    2016 doi

  44. [52]

    2024, JCAP, 2024, 006, doi: 10.1088/1475-7516/2024/07/006 Katarzy´ nski, K., Sol, H., & Kus, A

    Karavola, D., & Petropoulou, M. 2024, JCAP, 2024, 006, doi: 10.1088/1475-7516/2024/07/006 Katarzy´ nski, K., Sol, H., & Kus, A. 2001, A&A, 367, 809, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20000538

    2024 doi

  45. [53]

    2018, ApJ, 864, 84, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aad59a

    Keivani, A., Murase, K., Petropoulou, M., et al. 2018, ApJ, 864, 84, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aad59a

    2018 doi

  46. [54]

    R., & Aharonian, F

    Kelner, S. R., & Aharonian, F. A. 2008, PhRvD, 78, 034013, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.78.034013

    2008 doi

  47. [55]

    Kiehlmann, S., Hovatta, T., Kadler, M., Max-Moerbeck, W., & Readhead, A. C. S. 2019, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 12996, 1

    2019

  48. [56]

    2025, ApJ, 995, 38, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae1cc2

    Lian, J.-S., Wang, Z.-R., & Zhang, J. 2025, ApJ, 995, 38, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae1cc2

    2025 doi

  49. [57]

    2022, ApJL, 932, L25, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac756f

    Liao, N.-H., Sheng, Z.-F., Jiang, N., et al. 2022, ApJL, 932, L25, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac756f

    2022 doi

  50. [58]

    2019, PhRvD, 99, 063008, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.99.063008

    Liu, R.-Y., Wang, K., Xue, R., et al. 2019, PhRvD, 99, 063008, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.99.063008

    2019 doi

  51. [59]

    2020, PhRvD, 102, 083028, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.102.083028

    Liu, R.-Y., Xi, S.-Q., & Wang, X.-Y. 2020, PhRvD, 102, 083028, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.102.083028

    2020 doi

  52. [60]

    P., & Gear, W

    Marscher, A. P., & Gear, W. K. 1985, ApJ, 298, 114, doi: 10.1086/163592

    1985 doi

  53. [61]

    2015, Ap&SS, 357, 141, doi: 10.1007/s10509-015-2372-x

    Maselli, A., Massaro, F., D’Abrusco, R., et al. 2015, Ap&SS, 357, 141, doi: 10.1007/s10509-015-2372-x

    2015 doi

  54. [62]

    2013, MNRAS, 434, 2684, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt1210

    Mastichiadis, A., Petropoulou, M., & Dimitrakoudis, S. 2013, MNRAS, 434, 2684, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt1210

    2013 doi

  55. [63]

    K., Das, S., & Gupta, N

    Mondal, S. K., Das, S., & Gupta, N. 2023, ApJ, 948, 75, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acc46b

    2023 doi

  56. [64]

    2022, ApJL, 941, L17, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aca53c

    Murase, K. 2022, ApJL, 941, L17, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aca53c

    2022 doi

  57. [65]

    2012, A&A, 547, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201219848

    Nilsson, K., Pursimo, T., Villforth, C., et al. 2012, A&A, 547, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201219848

    2012 doi

  58. [66]

    2021, JCAP, 2021, 082, doi: 10.1088/1475-7516/2021/10/082

    Oikonomou, F., Petropoulou, M., Murase, K., et al. 2021, JCAP, 2021, 082, doi: 10.1088/1475-7516/2021/10/082

    2021 doi

  59. [67]

    2025, A&A, 695, A266, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452143

    Omeliukh, A., Garrappa, S., Fallah Ramazani, V., et al. 2025, A&A, 695, A266, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452143

    2025 doi

  60. [68]

    2025, ApJ, 980, 19, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ada3bc

    Ouyang, Z., Xiao, H., Manganaro, M., et al. 2025, ApJ, 980, 19, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ada3bc

    2025 doi

  61. [69]

    2019, MNRAS, 484, L104, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slz011

    Padovani, P., Oikonomou, F., Petropoulou, M., Giommi, P., & Resconi, E. 2019, MNRAS, 484, L104, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slz011

    2019 doi

  62. [70]

    2022, MNRAS, 510, 2671, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab3630

    Padovani, P., Giommi, P., Falomo, R., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 510, 2671, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab3630

    2022 doi

  63. [71]

    2020, MNRAS, 495, L108, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slaa056

    Paiano, S., Falomo, R., Padovani, P., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 495, L108, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slaa056

    2020 doi

  64. [72]

    2018, ApJL, 854, L32, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aaad5e

    Paiano, S., Falomo, R., Treves, A., & Scarpa, R. 2018, ApJL, 854, L32, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aaad5e

    2018 doi

  65. [73]

    S., B¨ ottcher, M., Olmo-Garc´ ıa, A., et al

    Paliya, V. S., B¨ ottcher, M., Olmo-Garc´ ıa, A., et al. 2020, ApJ, 902, 29, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abb46e

    2020 doi

  66. [74]

    B., Novoseltsev, Y

    Petkov, V. B., Novoseltsev, Y. F., Novoseltseva, R. V., & Baksan Underground Scintillation Telescope Group. 2021, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 15143, 1 36

    2021

  67. [75]

    2024, A&A, 685, A110, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347809

    Petropoulou, M., Mastichiadis, A., Vasilopoulos, G., et al. 2024, A&A, 685, A110, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347809

    2024 doi

  68. [76]

    2020a, ApJ, 899, 113, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aba8a0

    Petropoulou, M., Oikonomou, F., Mastichiadis, A., et al. 2020a, ApJ, 899, 113, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aba8a0

    doi

  69. [77]

    2017, MNRAS, 464, 2213, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2453

    Petropoulou, M., Vasilopoulos, G., & Giannios, D. 2017, MNRAS, 464, 2213, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2453

    2017 doi

  70. [78]

    2020b, ApJ, 891, 115, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab76d0

    Petropoulou, M., Murase, K., Santander, M., et al. 2020b, ApJ, 891, 115, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab76d0

    doi

  71. [79]

    2024, MNRAS, 527, 8746, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3804

    Prince, R., Das, S., Gupta, N., Majumdar, P., & Czerny, B. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 8746, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3804

    2024 doi

  72. [80]

    L., et al

    Pursimo, T., Ojha, R., Jauncey, D. L., et al. 2013, ApJ, 767, 14, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/767/1/14

    2013 doi

  73. [81]

    2022, PhRvL, 128, 221101, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.128.221101

    Reusch, S., Stein, R., Kowalski, M., et al. 2022, PhRvL, 128, 221101, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.128.221101

    2022 doi

  74. [82]

    2019, ApJL, 874, L29, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab1267

    Winter, W. 2019, ApJL, 874, L29, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab1267

    2019 doi

  75. [83]

    2021a, ApJ, 912, 54, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abe87b

    Rodrigues, X., Garrappa, S., Gao, S., et al. 2021a, ApJ, 912, 54, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abe87b

    doi

  76. [84]

    2021b, PhRvL, 126, 191101, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.191101

    Winter, W. 2021b, PhRvL, 126, 191101, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.191101

    doi

  77. [85]

    2024a, A&A, 689, A147, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450592

    Rodrigues, X., Karl, M., Padovani, P., et al. 2024a, A&A, 689, A147, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450592

    doi

  78. [86]

    S., Garrappa, S., et al

    Rodrigues, X., Paliya, V. S., Garrappa, S., et al. 2024b, A&A, 681, A119, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347540

    doi

  79. [87]

    2023, MNRAS, 519, 1396, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3607

    Sahakyan, N., Giommi, P., Padovani, P., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 519, 1396, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3607

    2023 doi

  80. [88]

    G., et al

    Saldana-Lopez, A., Dom´ ınguez, A., P´ erez-Gonz´ alez, P. G., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 507, 5144, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab2393

    2021 doi

  81. [89]

    S., Romani, R

    Shaw, M. S., Romani, R. W., Cotter, G., et al. 2013, ApJ, 764, 135, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/764/2/135

    2013 doi

  82. [90]

    T., Strauss, M

    Shen, Y., Richards, G. T., Strauss, M. A., et al. 2011, ApJS, 194, 45, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/194/2/45

    2011 doi

  83. [91]

    C., & Rees, M

    Sikora, M., Begelman, M. C., & Rees, M. J. 1994, ApJ, 421, 153, doi: 10.1086/173633

    1994 doi

  84. [92]

    2021, Nature Astronomy, 5, 510, doi: 10.1038/s41550-020-01295-8

    Stein, R., van Velzen, S., Kowalski, M., et al. 2021, Nature Astronomy, 5, 510, doi: 10.1038/s41550-020-01295-8

    2021 doi

  85. [93]

    L., Kowalski, M., & Franckowiak, A

    Strotjohann, N. L., Kowalski, M., & Franckowiak, A. 2019, A&A, 622, L9, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201834750

    2019 doi

  86. [94]

    2008, MNRAS, 386, 945, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13072.x

    Tavecchio, F., & Ghisellini, G. 2008, MNRAS, 386, 945, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13072.x

    2008 doi

  87. [95]

    1998, ApJ, 509, 608, doi: 10.1086/306526

    Tavecchio, F., Maraschi, L., & Ghisellini, G. 1998, ApJ, 509, 608, doi: 10.1086/306526

    1998 doi

  88. [96]

    2013, MNRAS, 435, L24, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slt087

    Tavecchio, F., Pacciani, L., Donnarumma, I., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 435, L24, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slt087

    2013 doi

  89. [97]

    M., & Padovani, P

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

    1995 doi

  90. [98]

    2022, PhRvL, 128, 221104, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.128.221104

    Wang, J.-W., Granelli, A., & Ullio, P. 2022, PhRvL, 128, 221104, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.128.221104

    2022 doi

  91. [99]

    2025, PhRvD, 112, 083016, doi: 10.1103/w7mw-gghk

    Wang, Z.-J., Liu, R.-Y., & Wang, X.-Y. 2025, PhRvD, 112, 083016, doi: 10.1103/w7mw-gghk

    2025 doi

  92. [100]

    2024, ApJ, 962, 142, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1bca

    Wang, Z.-J., Liu, R.-Y., Wang, Z.-R., & Wang, J. 2024, ApJ, 962, 142, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1bca

    2024 doi

  93. [101]

    2021, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 21, 305, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/21/12/305

    Wang, Z.-R., & Xue, R. 2021, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 21, 305, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/21/12/305

    2021 doi

  94. [102]

    2024, ApJS, 271, 10, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad168c

    Wang, Z.-R., Xue, R., Xiong, D., et al. 2024, ApJS, 271, 10, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad168c

    2024 doi

  95. [103]

    1997, PhRvL, 78, 2292, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.78.2292

    Waxman, E., & Bahcall, J. 1997, PhRvL, 78, 2292, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.78.2292

    1997 doi

  96. [104]

    L., Jauncey, D

    White, G. L., Jauncey, D. L., Savage, A., et al. 1988, ApJ, 327, 561, doi: 10.1086/166216

    1988 doi

  97. [105]

    2022, ApJ, 925, 40, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac36da

    Xiao, H., Ouyang, Z., Zhang, L., et al. 2022, ApJ, 925, 40, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac36da

    2022 doi

  98. [106]

    2025, PhRvD, 112, 063047, doi: 10.1103/37zk-q59r

    Xiao, Z.-Z., Guo, G., & Tuniyazi, T. 2025, PhRvD, 112, 063047, doi: 10.1103/37zk-q59r

    2025 doi

  99. [107]

    2025a, ApJ, 990, 170, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adf72c

    Xue, R., He, J.-C., Xiong, D., & Wang, Z.-R. 2025a, ApJ, 990, 170, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adf72c

    doi

  100. [108]

    2023, PhRvD, 107, 103019, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.107.103019

    Xue, R., Huang, S.-T., Xiao, H.-B., & Wang, Z.-R. 2023, PhRvD, 107, 103019, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.107.103019

    2023 doi

  101. [109]

    2019a, ApJ, 886, 23, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab4b44

    Xue, R., Liu, R.-Y., Petropoulou, M., et al. 2019a, ApJ, 886, 23, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab4b44

    doi

  102. [110]

    2019b, ApJ, 871, 81, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaf720

    Xue, R., Liu, R.-Y., Wang, X.-Y., Yan, H., & B¨ ottcher, M. 2019b, ApJ, 871, 81, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaf720

    doi

  103. [111]

    2021, ApJ, 906, 51, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abc886

    Xue, R., Liu, R.-Y., Wang, Z.-R., Ding, N., & Wang, X.-Y. 2021, ApJ, 906, 51, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abc886

    2021 doi

  104. [112]

    2025b, European Physical Journal C, 85, 779, doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-025-14468-4

    Xue, R., Wang, Z.-R., & Hu, H.-B. 2025b, European Physical Journal C, 85, 779, doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-025-14468-4

    doi

  105. [113]

    C., & Li, W.-J

    Xue, R., Wang, Z.-R., Joshi, J. C., & Li, W.-J. 2024, ApJ, 971, 146, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad5fe9

    2024 doi

  106. [114]

    2022, PhRvD, 106, 103021, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.106.103021

    Xue, R., Wang, Z.-R., & Li, W.-J. 2022, PhRvD, 106, 103021, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.106.103021

    2022 doi

  107. [115]

    2025a, ApJ, 995, 166, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae1ba6

    Lemoine, M. 2025a, ApJ, 995, 166, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae1ba6

    doi

  108. [116]

    2025b, ApJ, 980, 255, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adaea4

    Yang, Q.-R., Liu, R.-Y., & Wang, X.-Y. 2025b, ApJ, 980, 255, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adaea4

    doi

  109. [117]

    D., Jones-P´ erez, J., & Gago, A

    Zapata, G. D., Jones-P´ erez, J., & Gago, A. M. 2025, JCAP, 2025, 042, doi: 10.1088/1475-7516/2025/07/042

    2025 doi

  110. [118]

    2024, ApJS, 275, 11, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad7730

    Zhu, J., Cao, H., Xiao, H., et al. 2024, ApJS, 275, 11, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad7730

    2024 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed June 30, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.