Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 100 references

Detection of an Orphan X-ray Flare from a Blazar Candidate EP240709a with Einstein Probe

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read EP240709a is an orphan X-ray flare: a blazar that brightened at least 28-fold in X-rays while staying quiet elsewhere.

desk verdict A credible new orphan X-ray flare candidate, but the GeV dismissal is flawed and the orphan claim needs a proper comparison to the source's own GeV baseline before it can stand. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.18463 v1 pith:W6DYC6UR submitted 2024-12-24 astro-ph.HE

Mingjun Liu , Yijia Zhang , Yun Wang , Rui Xue , David Buckley , D. Andrew Howell , Chichuan Jin , Wenxiong Li
show 44 more authors
Itumeleng Monageng Haiwu Pan Ning-Chen Sun Samaporn Tinyanont Lingzhi Wang Weimin Yuan Jie An Moira Andrews Rungrit Anutarawiramkul Pathompong Butpan Huaqing Cheng Cui-Yuan Dai Lixin Dai Joseph Farah Hua Feng Shaoyu Fu Zhen Guo Shuaiqing Jiang An Li Dongyue Li Yifang Liang Heyang Liu Xing Liu Yuan Liu Jirong Mao Curtis McCully Megan Newsome Estefania Padilla Gonzalez Xin Pan Xinxiang Sun Giacomo Terreran Ze-Rui Wang Qinyu Wu Hubing Xiao Dingrong Xiong Dong Xu Xinpeng Xu Suijian Xue Haonan Yang Jun Yang Jin Zhang Wenda Zhang Wenjie Zhang Hu Zou
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords orphanX-rayflareblazarBLLacertaeobjectEinsteinProbesynchrotronself-ComptonactivegalacticnucleivariabilityEP240709a
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 reports that EP240709a, a high-energy peaked BL Lac candidate, produced an orphan X-ray flare in July 2024: its 0.5-10 keV flux rose at least 28 times above the 2020 eROSITA low state, peaked on July 14, and decayed over months, while no comparable brightening appeared in radio, infrared, optical, UV, or GeV bands. If correct, this is the fifth orphan X-ray flare seen from a blazar, a class of events that one-zone synchrotron self-Compton models do not naturally produce. The authors argue the source is a BL Lac object using featureless infrared-optical spectra, harder-when-brighter X-ray behavior, and a two-hump spectral energy distribution, and they show that both one-zone and two-zone leptonic SSC models can accommodate the flare. The wider claim is that high-cadence X-ray surveys like Einstein Probe can find rare jet phenomena that multiwavelength monitoring would otherwise miss.

What carries the argument

The analysis rests on a multi-epoch X-ray light curve anchored by the eROSITA 2020 low state and Einstein Probe WXT/FXT observations, supplemented by NICER, Swift-XRT, and XMM-Newton data, with the flux ratio defining the 'orphan' classification. The spectral energy distribution fitting uses one-zone and two-zone leptonic synchrotron self-Compton models, where SSC means electrons scattering the synchrotron photons they themselves emit. In the one-zone picture the orphan flare arises from spectral hardening of electrons above the break energy, while in the two-zone picture a newly formed small blob with a large minimum Lorentz factor ($\gamma_{e,\min} = 3 \times 10^4$) and a hard injection spectrum ($p_{e1} = 2.0$) produces the high-frequency synchrotron emission, leaving the low-frequency component largely unchanged.

What would settle it

A re-analysis of Fermi-LAT data for July 2024 using an unbinned likelihood with the source's own baseline that finds a significant contemporaneous GeV flare above the source's quiescent flux would falsify the orphan claim, as would detection of an optical flare in the ATLAS or TRT light curves during July 9-14.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery claim is that EP240709a underwent an X-ray-only flare: its unabsorbed 0.5-10 keV flux increased by at least a factor of 28 relative to the low state measured by eROSITA in May 2020, reaching about $3.4 \times 10^{-11}$ erg s$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$ on July 14, 2024, with no remarkable flaring in radio, infrared, optical, UV, or GeV bands during the same period. The paper identifies EP240709a as a high-energy peaked BL Lac candidate on the basis of featureless infrared and optical spectra, infrared colors consistent with the blazar strip, a two-hump broadband SED, and the absence of stellar or pulsar signatures. The flare itself shows a harder-when-brighter trend in X-rays, and the authors fit both one-zone and two-zone leptonic synchrotron self-Compton models to the flaring and quiescent SEDs, finding that either a spectral hardening of high-energy electrons or a newly formed compact emission region dominated by high-energy electrons can explain the orphan nature of the flare.

Load-bearing premise

The orphan classification assumes that the radio, infrared, optical, UV, and GeV monitoring would have caught a counterpart flare comparable to the X-ray flare, but several of those light curves are sparse, so a missed counterpart remains possible.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • This event would become the fifth reported orphan X-ray flare from a blazar, giving a new test case for jet-structure and particle-acceleration models.
  • The absence of a simultaneous GeV flare challenges the standard one-zone SSC expectation that flares appear in both SED humps, supporting structured or multi-zone jet geometries.
  • The harder-when-brighter X-ray trend indicates that the flaring component is spectrally distinct from the quiescent emission, which future X-ray observations can search for in other blazars.
  • Einstein Probe's wide-field, high-cadence X-ray monitoring can catch AGN phenomena that optical and gamma-ray surveys would miss, potentially increasing the known rate of orphan X-ray flares.
  • If the flaring region is truly compact and X-ray-dominated, simultaneous X-ray and optical monitoring of similar BL Lac objects should occasionally find the same pattern of an X-ray flare without optical brightening.

Reading between the lines

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

  • My inference: the paper's dismissal of the July 2024 >3-sigma GeV excess compares the GeV flux to the 2019 X-ray low state rather than to the source's own GeV baseline; a dedicated Fermi-LAT likelihood analysis of that month is needed to confirm the orphan classification.
  • My inference: if orphan X-ray flares are as rare as the current count implies, finding one suggests that some blazar flares are radiatively inefficient at low frequencies, and targeted simultaneous X-ray/radio/GeV campaigns could estimate what fraction of flares are orphaned.
  • My inference: the two-zone SSC interpretation predicts that future orphan X-ray flares with similar SED shapes should show a compact, hard-spectrum X-ray component with little optical-UV contrast, a prediction testable by stacking Einstein Probe detections of similar candidates.
  • My inference: the assumed redshift of $z = 0.25$, based on a loose photometric estimate, directly sets the physical size and energy scales of both model fits; a spectroscopic redshift for the host would sharpen or overturn the model parameters.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The paper reports the discovery by Einstein Probe of an X-ray flare, EP240709a, from a source associated with the Fermi-LAT object 4FGL J0031.5-5648. Using EP-WXT, EP-FXT, NICER, Swift, XMM-Newton, and eROSITA X-ray data, plus radio, infrared, optical, UV, and GeV observations, the authors argue that the July 2024 0.5-10 keV flux increased by at least 28 times relative to a 2020 eROSITA low state, while no comparable flaring was detected in other bands. The source is classified as a high-energy peaked BL Lac candidate on the basis of its featureless optical-infrared spectra, two-hump SED, X-ray spectral behavior, and infrared colors. The authors fit the low-state and flaring-state SEDs with one-zone and two-zone leptonic SSC models and interpret the flare as either a hardening of the high-energy electron population or emission from a newly formed plasma blob. They conclude that this is a rare orphan X-ray flare and the fifth such event reported from a blazar.

Significance. If the orphan-flare interpretation is correct, the paper provides a valuable new data point for understanding jet physics and the conditions under which X-ray flares occur without multiwavelength counterparts. The observational campaign is substantial, combining public archival data with prompt multiwavelength follow-up, and the X-ray monitoring table is detailed. The SED modeling is explicitly presented as fitting rather than prediction, which avoids circularity in the central detection claim. However, the orphan classification rests on the absence of flaring in other bands, and the manuscript's handling of the Fermi-LAT GeV excess is not internally consistent; this is the key load-bearing point that needs revision.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3, GeV comparison] The dismissal of the >3-sigma GeV excess in July 2024 is based on an invalid comparison. The text states that 'the flux in GeV band is not higher than that of the X-ray low state in 2019' and therefore 'the GeV activity cannot be comparable with the X-ray flare.' This compares a GeV flux in different units and a different energy band with an X-ray flux, and it is not the relevant test. The orphan classification requires that the GeV band did not flare relative to its own quiescent level, not that the GeV flux remained below the X-ray low-state flux. If the July 2024 GeV excess is a genuine flare above the source's baseline GeV flux, then EP240709a is not an orphan X-ray flare. The paper must provide a quantitative GeV baseline comparison, for example using a shorter-binned Fermi-LAT light curve during the flaring period, before the orphan claim can be sustained.
  2. [Table 2 and §3, flux ratio] The claim of an 'at least 28 times' flux increase does not account for the quoted uncertainties. The eROSITA low-state flux is 0.4 +0.3/-0.2 × 10^-12 erg s^-1 cm^-2 and the EP-FXT July 13 flaring flux is 11.3 +0.2/-0.3 × 10^-12 erg s^-1 cm^-2. The nominal ratio is 28, but with the low-state 1-sigma upper limit the ratio is about 16, and with the lower limit about 57. The qualifier 'at least' is therefore inappropriate and should be replaced by a ratio with propagated errors in the abstract, §3, and §5.
  3. [§2.2, §3, Figure 2, sparse multiwavelength coverage] The 'no remarkable flaring in other bands' conclusion is limited by the cadence of the archival and follow-up data. The Fermi-LAT light curve in Figure 2 uses long time bins, and the flaring-state SED integrates July 5-25, which would dilute a GeV flare of only a few days. WISE samples only about twice per year, and the radio coverage is sparse. The paper should explicitly state these cadence limits and, where possible, report measured flux upper limits or variability amplitudes in each band during the flaring interval rather than relying on visual inspection of the light curves. Without this, the orphan classification is only an upper limit on the absence of counterpart flares.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§2.1] The sentence 'we estimate the unabsorbed using WebPIMMS' is missing an object; it should read 'we estimate the unabsorbed flux using WebPIMMS.'
  2. [§2.1] The abbreviation 'HILGT' appears in the text and should be 'HILIGT' (the HIgh-energy LIght-curve Generator).
  3. [§4] The text refers to 'all of WSIE surveys'; this should be 'all of the WISE surveys.'
  4. [Figure 2] The multiwavelength light curves are dense and the axis labels and shaded flaring-period band are difficult to read at the printed size; increasing font sizes and separating the panels more clearly would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the orphan-flare claim is an external observational result, and the SSC modeling is explicitly presented as fitting rather than as a prediction; the only author-overlap code citation is not load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper's central claim—that EP240709a exhibited an orphan X-ray flare with a 0.5-10 keV flux increase of at least a factor of 28 relative to the 2020 eROSITA low state—rests on independent multiwavelength observations (EP, Swift, NICER, eROSITA, Fermi-LAT, ATLAS, WISE, and radio surveys), not on any model output. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction: the 28-fold increase is a direct ratio of measured fluxes, and the absence of remarkable flaring in other bands is a comparison of observed light curves. The SSC modeling in Section 4 is explicitly described as fitting ('We employ the one-zone and two-zone leptonic SSC models to explore the origin of this orphan X-ray flare'), and the two-zone component is introduced after the fact to account for the flare; post-hoc fitting may limit the physical interpretative weight, but it is not circular because no predictive claim is derived from the fit. The only author-overlap citation entering the modeling chain is Xue et al. (2022) for the leptonic SSC code; that code is used as a standard modeling tool and is not invoked as a uniqueness theorem or as independent evidence for the orphan classification, so it is not load-bearing. One evidentiary weakness should be flagged but it is not circularity: in Section 3 the paper dismisses a >3-sigma GeV excess in July 2024 by comparing the GeV flux with the X-ray low-state flux ('the flux in GeV band is not higher than that of the X-ray low state in 2019'), which is a cross-band comparison in different units and does not test whether a GeV flare occurred relative to the GeV baseline. That is an inference error that weakens the orphan classification, but it is not a reduction of a prediction to its inputs. The score of 2 reflects only the presence of a minor, non-load-bearing self-citation (Xue et al. 2022); there is no self-definitional, fitted-input-as-prediction, or uniqueness-imported circularity in the derivation chain.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central observational claim does not rest on the free parameters, but the physical interpretation and the derived jet properties do. The redshift is assumed, the SSC parameters are fitted, and the two-zone blob is an ad hoc addition introduced to explain the flare.

free parameters (4)
  • Redshift z = 0.25 (fixed)
    Estimated from optical color using the BZCAT redshift-magnitude distribution; no spectroscopic redshift is available. It sets the luminosity distance for the SED models.
  • One-zone low-state SSC parameters = tvar=6.0h, delta=15, B=0.10G, Le=4.0e41 erg/s, p1=1.4, p2=4.2, gamma_min=1e2, gamma_b=3e4, gamma_max=1e7
    Table 1 lists these values as the fit to the 2019 low-state SED. All are adjusted to match the data.
  • One-zone flaring-state SSC parameters = tvar=1.5h, delta=20, B=0.23G, Le=1.6e41 erg/s, p1=1.3, p2=3.2, gamma_min=1e2, gamma_b=5e4, gamma_max=1e7
    Table 1 lists these values as the fit to the July 2024 flaring SED. All are adjusted to match the data.
  • Two-zone second-component SSC parameters = tvar=1.5h, delta=22, B=0.10G, Le=1.7e41 erg/s, p1=2.0, p2=3.2, gamma_min=3e4, gamma_b=6e4, gamma_max=1e7
    Table 1 lists these values for the newly added blob in the two-zone model. They are chosen to reproduce the X-ray flare and have no independent constraint.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The broadband SED is produced by leptonic synchrotron self-Compton emission from spherical blobs.
    Used throughout Section 4; the model is taken from Xue et al. 2022 and is not derived in this paper.
  • domain assumption The source is a blazar rather than a gamma-ray binary or other type of AGN.
    Section 4 uses parallax, high galactic latitude, featureless spectra, and SED shape to support this classification, but there is no measured redshift and the classification remains a candidate.
  • domain assumption The BZCAT redshift-magnitude distribution constrains this source to z around 0.2 to 0.3.
    Section 4 fixes z=0.25 from the optical color matching the BROS distribution; this is a statistical estimate, not a direct measurement.
  • ad hoc to paper A second, newly formed plasma blob can represent the flaring emission region.
    The two-zone blob with gamma_min=3e4 is introduced specifically to match the X-ray flare; no independent evidence for a second zone is presented.
invented entities (1)
  • Second-zone plasma blob (newly formed emission region)
    purpose: Produces the orphan X-ray flare in the two-zone SSC model via high-energy synchrotron radiation.
    Table 1 gives its parameters, all fitted to the SED. No falsifiable prediction is made before fitting, so the entity has no independent support in the paper.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Detection of an Orphan X-ray Flare from a Blazar Candidate EP240709a with Einstein Probe." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/W6DYC6UR

@misc{pith2026241218463,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Detection of an Orphan X-ray Flare from a Blazar Candidate EP240709a with Einstein Probe},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/W6DYC6UR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.18463}
}
read the original abstract

Blazars are often observed to flare across multiple wavelengths. Orphan flares from blazars have been only detected a few times, providing an opportunity to understand the structure of the jet in the accreting system. We report a remarkable orphan X-ray flare from a blazar candidate EP240709a, detected by Einstein Probe (EP) in July 2024. The multi-band spectral properties and variability support EP240709a as a high-energy peaked BL Lacertae-type object. The flux in 0.5-10 keV increases by at least 28 times to the value of low state in 2020, with non-detection of remarkable flaring in other bands during the same period. EP240709a exhibits the harder-when-brighter tendency in the X-ray band during the orphan flare, while its infrared-optical spectra are featureless. We employ one-zone and two-zone leptonic synchrotron self-Compton models to perform the spectral energy distribution fitting. Detecting this rare orphan flare shows the potential of EP in discovering peculiar activities from AGN in high-cadence X-ray sky surveys.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.18463 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Left: The WXT image with X-ray source detection (red circle) and position of γ−ray source 4FGLJ0031.5-5648 (magenta ellipse), which are blurred with a σ = 1 pixel Gaussian kernel. Right: The zoom-in DES i-band image of the left image. The green circle is the position of FXT source detection, after alignment with the 1eRASS catalog. Blue contours are from the RACS 1.4 GHz survey. The contour levels are 4, 8, 16 times… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Lower six panels: The over-all multiwavelength light curves of EP240709a. From bottom to top: the radio flux densities at 887 and 1367 MHz since January 1st, 2018, the infrared magnitudes at 3.4 and 4.6 µm, the optical magnitudes at V , B, U, g, R, r, o and c bands, the UV magnitudes at UV W1, UV M2 and UV W2 bands, the flux of photons in 0.1-10 GeV observed with Fermi-LAT and the unabsorbed flux in 0.5-10 keV obser… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The observed SEDs from the low state in May 2019, the flaring state in July 2024 and archival data before 2018 are marked in blue, red and gray points, respectively. The 50-hour sensitivities of H.E.S.S. (van Eldik et al. 2015), MAGIC (Aleksi´c et al. 2016), and the Cherenkov Telescopes Array (CTA, Zanin et al. 2022) are marked in orange, magenta and green dash-dotted lines. Left: the one-zone model fitting to SEDs … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

100 extracted references · 17 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

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

    ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eprint howpublished institution journal key month number organization pages publisher school series title misctitle type volume year version url label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts ...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION format.url url empty "" new.block "" url * "" * if FUNCTION format.eprint eprint empty "" archivePrefix empty "" archivePrefix "arXiv" = new.block " " eprint * " " * new.block " " eprint * " " * if if if FUNCTION format.doi doi empty "" " " doi * " " * if FUNCTION format.pid doi empty eprint empty ur...

  3. [3]

    u r extraterrestrische Physik, Gie enbachstra e 1, D-85748 Garching bei M\

    thebibliography [1] 20pt to REFERENCES 6pt =0pt -12pt 10pt plus 3pt =0pt =0pt =1pt plus 1pt =0pt =0pt -12pt =13pt plus 1pt =20pt =13pt plus 1pt \@M =10000 =-1.0em =0pt =0pt 0pt =0pt =1.0em @enumiv\@empty 10000 10000 `\.\@m \@noitemerr \@latex@warning Empty `thebibliography' environment \@ifnextchar \@reference \@latexerr Missing key on reference command E...

    2021

  4. [4]

    Abbott , T. M. C., Adam \'o w , M., Aguena , M., et al. 2021, , 255, 20, 10.3847/1538-4365/ac00b3

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac00b3 2021

  5. [5]

    A., Ackermann , M., Ajello , M., et al

    Abdo , A. A., Ackermann , M., Ajello , M., et al. 2010, , 463, 919, 10.1038/nature08841

    doi:10.1038/nature08841 2010

  6. [6]

    2020, , 247, 33, 10.3847/1538-4365/ab6bcb

    Abdollahi , S., Acero , F., Ackermann , M., et al. 2020, , 247, 33, 10.3847/1538-4365/ab6bcb

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab6bcb 2020

  7. [7]

    U., Archambault , S., Archer , A., et al

    Abeysekara , A. U., Archambault , S., Archer , A., et al. 2017, , 836, 205, 10.3847/1538-4357/836/2/205

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/836/2/205 2017

  8. [8]

    V., Mickaelian , A

    Abrahamyan , H. V., Mickaelian , A. M., Paronyan , G. M., & Mikayelyan , G. A. 2019, Astronomische Nachrichten, 340, 437, 10.1002/asna.201913603

    work page doi:10.1002/asna.201913603 2019

Show all 100 references
  1. [9]

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

    2000 doi

  2. [10]

    A., et al

    Aleksi \'c , J., Ansoldi , S., Antonelli , L. A., et al. 2016, Astroparticle Physics, 72, 76, 10.1016/j.astropartphys.2015.02.005

    2016 doi

  3. [11]

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

    1996

  4. [12]

    2014, , 780, 64, 10.1088/0004-637X/780/1/64

    Asano , K., Takahara , F., Kusunose , M., Toma , K., & Kakuwa , J. 2014, , 780, 64, 10.1088/0004-637X/780/1/64

    2014 doi

  5. [13]

    P., Tollerud , E

    Astropy Collaboration , Robitaille , T. P., Tollerud , E. J., et al. 2013, , 558, A33, 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068

    2013 doi

  6. [14]

    M., Sip o cz , B

    Astropy Collaboration , Price-Whelan , A. M., Sip o cz , B. M., et al. 2018, , 156, 123, 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f

    2018 doi

  7. [15]

    M., Lim , P

    Astropy Collaboration , Price-Whelan , A. M., Lim , P. L., et al. 2022, , 935, 167, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c74

    2022 doi

  8. [16]

    B., Abdo , A

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

    2009 doi

  9. [17]

    H., Lott , B., & The Fermi-LAT collaboration

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

    2023 doi arXiv

  10. [18]

    2016, , 463, L26, 10.1093/mnrasl/slw149

    Banasi \'n ski , P., Bednarek , W., & Sitarek , J. 2016, , 463, L26, 10.1093/mnrasl/slw149

    2016 doi

  11. [19]

    I., Cottrell , P

    Barnes , S. I., Cottrell , P. L., Albrow , M. D., et al. 2008, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 7014, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy II, ed. I. S. McLean & M. M. Casali , 70140K, 10.1117/12.788219

    2008 doi

  12. [20]

    L., Larson , D., Weiland , J

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

    2014 doi

  13. [21]

    2013, , 768, 54, 10.1088/0004-637X/768/1/54

    B \"o ttcher , M., Reimer , A., Sweeney , K., & Prakash , A. 2013, , 768, 54, 10.1088/0004-637X/768/1/54

    2013 doi

  14. [22]

    M., Baliber , N., Bianco , F

    Brown , T. M., Baliber , N., Bianco , F. B., et al. 2013, , 125, 1031, 10.1086/673168

    2013 doi

  15. [23]

    E., Ade , P

    Carlstrom , J. E., Ade , P. A. R., Aird , K. A., et al. 2011, , 123, 568, 10.1086/659879

    2011 doi

  16. [24]

    2023, , 948, 2, 10.3847/1538-4357/acc575

    Chase , O., McBride , F., Gokus , A., et al. 2023, , 948, 2, 10.3847/1538-4357/acc575

    2023 doi

  17. [25]

    M., et al

    Chatterjee , R., Fossati , G., Urry , C. M., et al. 2013, , 763, L11, 10.1088/2041-8205/763/1/L11

    2013 doi

  18. [26]

    2014, International Journal of Modern Physics: Conference Series, 28, 1460180, 10.1142/S201019451460180X

    Chen, X., Chatterjee, R., Fossati, G., & Pohl, M. 2014, International Journal of Modern Physics: Conference Series, 28, 1460180, 10.1142/S201019451460180X

    2014 doi

  19. [27]

    2013, , 206, 12, 10.1088/0067-0049/206/2/12

    D'Abrusco , R., Massaro , F., Paggi , A., et al. 2013, , 206, 12, 10.1088/0067-0049/206/2/12

    2013 doi

  20. [28]

    J., Lang , D., et al

    Dey , A., Schlegel , D. J., Lang , D., et al. 2019, , 157, 168, 10.3847/1538-3881/ab089d

    2019 doi

  21. [29]

    R., Rosario , D

    Dom \' nguez , A., Primack , J. R., Rosario , D. J., et al. 2011, , 410, 2556, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17631.x

    2011

  22. [30]

    2011, , 736, L30, 10.1088/2041-8205/736/2/L30

    Donnarumma , I., De Rosa , A., Vittorini , V., et al. 2011, , 736, L30, 10.1088/2041-8205/736/2/L30

    2011 doi

  23. [31]

    2013, , 21, 64, 10.1007/s00159-013-0064-5

    Dubus , G. 2013, , 21, 64, 10.1007/s00159-013-0064-5

    2013 doi

  24. [32]

    W., Thomson , A

    Duchesne , S. W., Thomson , A. J. M., Pritchard , J., et al. 2023, , 40, e034, 10.1017/pasa.2023.31

    2023 doi

  25. [33]

    B., Zhang , L., Crawford , T

    Everett , W. B., Zhang , L., Crawford , T. M., et al. 2020, , 900, 55, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab9df7

    2020 doi

  26. [34]

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

    Fossati , G., Maraschi , L., Celotti , A., Comastri , A., & Ghisellini , G. 1998, , 299, 433, 10.1046/j.1365-8711.1998.01828.x

    1998

  27. [35]

    C., Allen , G

    Fruscione , A., McDowell , J. C., Allen , G. E., et al. 2006, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 6270, Observatory Operations: Strategies, Processes, and Systems, ed. D. R. Silva & R. E. Doxsey , 62701V, 10.1117/12.671760

    2006 doi

  28. [36]

    Gaia Collaboration , Prusti , T., de Bruijne , J. H. J., et al. 2016, , 595, A1, 10.1051/0004-6361/201629272

    2016 doi

  29. [37]

    Gaia Collaboration , Vallenari , A., Brown , A. G. A., et al. 2023, , 674, A1, 10.1051/0004-6361/202243940

    2023 doi

  30. [38]

    2004, , 611, 1005, 10.1086/422091

    Gehrels , N., Chincarini , G., Giommi , P., et al. 2004, , 611, 1005, 10.1086/422091

    2004 doi

  31. [39]

    C., Arzoumanian , Z., Adkins , P

    Gendreau , K. C., Arzoumanian , Z., Adkins , P. W., et al. 2016, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 9905, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2016: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray, ed. J.-W. A. den Herder , T. Takahashi , & M. Bautz ...

    2016 doi

  32. [40]

    2021, , 505, 5853, 10.1093/mnras/stab1748

    Germani , S., Tosti , G., Lubrano , P., et al. 2021, , 505, 5853, 10.1093/mnras/stab1748

    2021 doi

  33. [41]

    1985, , 146, 204

    Ghisellini , G., Maraschi , L., & Treves , A. 1985, , 146, 204

    1985

  34. [42]

    2024, , 682, A134, 10.1051/0004-6361/202348121

    Goswami , P., Zacharias , M., Zech , A., et al. 2024, , 682, A134, 10.1051/0004-6361/202348121

    2024 doi

  35. [43]

    L., McConnell , D., Thomson , A

    Hale , C. L., McConnell , D., Thomson , A. J. M., et al. 2021, , 38, e058, 10.1017/pasa.2021.47

    2021 doi

  36. [44]

    W., Bunton , J

    Hotan , A. W., Bunton , J. D., Chippendale , A. P., et al. 2021, , 38, e009, 10.1017/pasa.2021.1

    2021 doi

  37. [45]

    Y., Phillips , M

    Hsiao , E. Y., Phillips , M. M., Marion , G. H., et al. 2019, , 131, 014002, 10.1088/1538-3873/aae961

    2019 doi

  38. [46]

    Hunter , J. D. 2007, Computing in Science and Engineering, 9, 90, 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55

    2007 doi

  39. [47]

    2020, , 901, 3, 10.3847/1538-4357/abab07

    Itoh , R., Utsumi , Y., Inoue , Y., et al. 2020, , 901, 3, 10.3847/1538-4357/abab07

    2020 doi

  40. [48]

    Kaur , A., Kerby , S., & Falcone , A. D. 2023, , 943, 167, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac8b80

    2023 doi

  41. [49]

    Kerby , S., & Falcone , A. D. 2023, , 951, 133, 10.3847/1538-4357/acd4c0

    2023 doi

  42. [50]

    D., et al

    Kerby , S., Kaur , A., Falcone , A. D., et al. 2021, , 923, 75, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac2e91

    2021 doi

  43. [51]

    W., Mierle , K., Blanton , M., & Roweis , S

    Lang , D., Hogg , D. W., Mierle , K., Blanton , M., & Roweis , S. 2010, , 139, 1782, 10.1088/0004-6256/139/5/1782

    2010 doi

  44. [52]

    W., Filippenko , A

    Liodakis , I., Romani , R. W., Filippenko , A. V., Kocevski , D., & Zheng , W. 2019, , 880, 32, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab26b7

    2019 doi

  45. [53]

    J., Xu , X

    Liu , M. J., Xu , X. P., Zhang , Y. J., et al. 2024, The Astronomer's Telegram, 16704, 1

    2024

  46. [54]

    R., Jorstad , S

    MacDonald , N. R., Jorstad , S. G., & Marscher , A. P. 2017, , 850, 87, 10.3847/1538-4357/aa92c8

    2017 doi

  47. [55]

    R., Marscher , A

    MacDonald , N. R., Marscher , A. P., Jorstad , S. G., & Joshi , M. 2015, , 804, 111, 10.1088/0004-637X/804/2/111

    2015 doi

  48. [56]

    Mannheim , K., & Biermann , P. L. 1992, , 253, L21

    1992

  49. [57]

    1992, , 397, L5, 10.1086/186531

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

    1992 doi

  50. [58]

    2015, , 357, 75, 10.1007/s10509-015-2254-2

    Massaro , E., Maselli , A., Leto , C., et al. 2015, , 357, 75, 10.1007/s10509-015-2254-2

    2015 doi

  51. [59]

    E., & Smith , H

    Massaro , F., D'Abrusco , R., Ajello , M., Grindlay , J. E., & Smith , H. A. 2011, , 740, L48, 10.1088/2041-8205/740/2/L48

    2011 doi

  52. [60]

    2012, , 750, 138, 10.1088/0004-637X/750/2/138

    Massaro , F., D'Abrusco , R., Tosti , G., et al. 2012, , 750, 138, 10.1088/0004-637X/750/2/138

    2012 doi

  53. [61]

    J., et al

    Mauch , T., Murphy , T., Buttery , H. J., et al. 2003, , 342, 1117, 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06605.x

    2003

  54. [62]

    G., Banerji , M., Gonzalez , E., et al

    McMahon , R. G., Banerji , M., Gonzalez , E., et al. 2013, The Messenger, 154, 35

    2013

  55. [63]

    2024, , 682, A34, 10.1051/0004-6361/202347165

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

    2024 doi

  56. [64]

    Mills , B. Y. 1981, , 4, 156, 10.1017/S1323358000016222

    1981 doi

  57. [65]

    M., Buckley , D

    Monageng , I. M., Buckley , D. A. H., Yuan , W., & Sun , N. 2024, The Astronomer's Telegram, 16801, 1

    2024

  58. [66]

    L., Stewart , A

    Murphy , T., Kaplan , D. L., Stewart , A. J., et al. 2021, , 38, e054, 10.1017/pasa.2021.44

    2021 doi

  59. [67]

    2014, HEAsoft: Unified Release of FTOOLS and XANADU , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1408.004

    Nasa High Energy Astrophysics Science Archive Research Center (Heasarc) . 2014, HEAsoft: Unified Release of FTOOLS and XANADU , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1408.004

    2014

  60. [68]

    B., et al

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

    2018 doi

  61. [69]

    M., et al

    Parsotan, T., Laha, S., Palmer, D. M., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 953, 155, 10.3847/1538-4357/ace325

    2023 doi

  62. [70]

    2021, , 647, A1, 10.1051/0004-6361/202039313

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

    2021 doi

  63. [71]

    P., Fuhrmann , L., et al

    Rani , B., Krichbaum , T. P., Fuhrmann , L., et al. 2013, , 552, A11, 10.1051/0004-6361/201321058

    2013 doi

  64. [72]

    2005, , 630, 186, 10.1086/431948

    Reimer , A., B \"o ttcher , M., & Postnikov , S. 2005, , 630, 186, 10.1086/431948

    2005 doi

  65. [73]

    Robertson , J. G. 1991, Australian Journal of Physics, 44, 729, 10.1071/PH910729

    1991 doi

  66. [74]

    2022, , 511, 4265, 10.1093/mnras/stac272

    Ruiz , A., Georgakakis , A., Gerakakis , S., et al. 2022, , 511, 4265, 10.1093/mnras/stac272

    2022 doi

  67. [75]

    Sahu , S., Oliveros , A. F. O., & Sanabria , J. C. 2013, , 87, 103015, 10.1103/PhysRevD.87.103015

    2013 doi

  68. [76]

    C., & Rees , M

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

    1994 doi

  69. [77]

    A., Burgasser , A

    Simcoe , R. A., Burgasser , A. J., Schechter , P. L., et al. 2013, , 125, 270, 10.1086/670241

    2013 doi

  70. [78]

    a ttil \

    Sobacchi , E., N \"a ttil \"a , J., & Sironi , L. 2021, , 503, 688, 10.1093/mnras/stab562

    2021 doi

  71. [79]

    2001, , 365, L18, 10.1051/0004-6361:20000066

    Str \"u der , L., Briel , U., Dennerl , K., et al. 2001, , 365, L18, 10.1051/0004-6361:20000066

    2001 doi

  72. [80]

    2015, , 575, A25, 10.1051/0004-6361/201424973

    Sutherland , W., Emerson , J., Dalton , G., et al. 2015, , 575, A25, 10.1051/0004-6361/201424973

    2015 doi

  73. [81]

    1986, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol

    Tody , D. 1986, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 627, Instrumentation in astronomy VI, ed. D. L. Crawford , 733, 10.1117/12.968154

    1986 doi

  74. [82]

    Tody , D., & Davis , L. E. 1992, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 25, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems I, ed. D. M. Worrall , C. Biemesderfer , & J. Barnes , 484

    1992

  75. [83]

    L., Denneau , L., Heinze , A

    Tonry , J. L., Denneau , L., Heinze , A. N., et al. 2018, , 130, 064505, 10.1088/1538-3873/aabadf

    2018 doi

  76. [84]

    Turner , M. J. L., Abbey , A., Arnaud , M., et al. 2001, , 365, L27, 10.1051/0004-6361:20000087

    2001 doi

  77. [85]

    Ulrich , M.-H., Maraschi , L., & Urry , C. M. 1997, , 35, 445, 10.1146/annurev.astro.35.1.445

    1997 doi

  78. [86]

    M., & Padovani , P

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

    1995 doi

  79. [87]

    2015, in International Cosmic Ray Conference, Vol

    van Eldik , C., Holler , M., Berge , D., et al. 2015, in International Cosmic Ray Conference, Vol. 34, 34th International Cosmic Ray Conference (ICRC2015), 847, 10.22323/1.236.0847

    2015 doi

  80. [88]

    2011, , 736, L38, 10.1088/2041-8205/736/2/L38

    Vercellone , S., Striani , E., Vittorini , V., et al. 2011, , 736, L38, 10.1088/2041-8205/736/2/L38

    2011 doi

  81. [89]

    2020, , 904, 14, 10.3847/1538-4357/abba82

    Wang , L., Contreras , C., Hu , M., et al. 2020, , 904, 14, 10.3847/1538-4357/abba82

    2020 doi

  82. [90]

    2022, , 105, 023005, 10.1103/PhysRevD.105.023005

    Wang , Z.-R., Liu , R.-Y., Petropoulou , M., et al. 2022, , 105, 023005, 10.1103/PhysRevD.105.023005

    2022 doi

  83. [91]

    Wierzcholska , A., Zacharias , M., Jankowsky , F., Wagner , S., & H. E. S. S. Collaboration . 2019, Galaxies, 7, 21, 10.3390/galaxies7010021

    2019 doi

  84. [92]

    2000, , 542, 914, 10.1086/317016

    Wilms , J., Allen , A., & McCray , R. 2000, , 542, 914, 10.1086/317016

    2000 doi

  85. [93]

    Winkler , C., Courvoisier , T. J. L., Di Cocco , G., et al. 2003, , 411, L1, 10.1051/0004-6361:20031288

    2003 doi

  86. [94]

    L., Eisenhardt , P

    Wright , E. L., Eisenhardt , P. R. M., Mainzer , A. K., et al. 2010, , 140, 1868, 10.1088/0004-6256/140/6/1868

    2010 doi

  87. [95]

    2022, , 106, 103021, 10.1103/PhysRevD.106.103021

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

    2022 doi

  88. [96]

    2022, in Handbook of X-ray and Gamma-ray Astrophysics, ed

    Yuan , W., Zhang , C., Chen , Y., & Ling , Z. 2022, in Handbook of X-ray and Gamma-ray Astrophysics, ed. C. Bambi & A. Sangangelo (Springer), 86, 10.1007/978-981-16-4544-0_151-1

    2022 doi

  89. [97]

    2015, in International Cosmic Ray Conference, Vol

    Zabalza , V. 2015, in International Cosmic Ray Conference, Vol. 34, 34th International Cosmic Ray Conference (ICRC2015), 922, 10.22323/1.236.0922

    2015 doi

  90. [98]

    2022, in 37th International Cosmic Ray Conference, 5, 10.22323/1.395.0005

    Zanin , R., Abdalla , H., Abe , H., et al. 2022, in 37th International Cosmic Ray Conference, 5, 10.22323/1.395.0005

    2022 doi

  91. [99]

    X., Sun , X

    Zhang , C., Ling , Z. X., Sun , X. J., et al. 2022 a , , 941, L2, 10.3847/2041-8213/aca32f

    2022 doi

  92. [100]

    D., Ajello , M., et al

    Zhang , L., Vieira , J. D., Ajello , M., et al. 2022 b , , 939, 117, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac966f

    2022 doi

Pith tools

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