Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 33 references

Optical characterization of WISE selected blazar candidates

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Optical spectroscopy of 1830 WISE-selected candidates shows that only about 30% of each catalog is made of confirmed blazars, with quasars and galaxies as the main contaminants.

desk verdict A solid spectroscopic characterization of two new blazar catalogs; the headline efficiency numbers need a caveat about the fainter unobserved sources. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.05229 v1 pith:XRAOWB2C submitted 2019-08-14 astro-ph.HE

Raniere de Menezes , Harold A. Peña-Herazo , Ezequiel J. Marchesini , Raffaele D'Abrusco , Nicola Masetti , Rodrigo Nemmen , Francesco Massaro , Federica Ricci
show 3 more authors
Marco Landoni Alessandro Paggi Howard A. Smith
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords WIBRaLS2KDEBLLACSblazarcandidatesWISEinfraredcolorsSDSSopticalspectraBLLacobjectsgamma-raysourcecounterpartsactivegalacticnuclei
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper asks how trustworthy two newly released catalogs of blazar candidates—objects chosen by their infrared colors in WISE data and by radio loudness—really are. By examining optical spectra from SDSS DR15 for 1830 catalog sources, the authors find that at least roughly 30% of each catalog consists of spectroscopically confirmed blazars. The main impostors differ: quasars dominate the contamination of WIBRaLS2 (~58%) while normal galaxies dominate KDEBLLACS (~38.2%). The same spectra let the authors pin down the nature of 11 previously uncertain Fermi-LAT blazar candidates and identify 25 new BL Lac objects. A sympathetic reader would care because these catalogs are used to find counterparts for the large share of Fermi gamma-ray sources that remain unassociated.

What carries the argument

The central machinery is the WISE Blazar Strip and its three-dimensional WISE color locus: WIBRaLS2 selects sources whose W1-W2 and W2-W3 colors match confirmed Fermi blazars and that are radio-loud, while KDEBLLACS applies a kernel density estimate to the two-dimensional WISE color diagram and keeps sources within the 90% isodensity contour of known BL Lacs, also requiring radio loudness. To test these selections, the authors classify SDSS DR15 optical spectra using established diagnostics: featureless blue continuum for BL Lacs, broad emission lines plus radio luminosity for quasars, the Ca II break depression parameter $C_B$ with threshold 0.25 to separate BL Lac-host galaxies from normal galaxies, and BPT line ratios to separate low-luminosity AGNs from star-forming galaxies. Kernel density estimates applied to contaminants and to 4FGL gamma-ray blazars in the WISE color space localize the contamination to the edges of the selection region.

What would settle it

Take a random or complete sample of the WIBRaLS2 and KDEBLLACS sources in the SDSS footprint that currently lack spectra, obtain deep optical spectra for them, and compare the confirmed-blazar fraction with the reported ~30% lower limit; if the faint missing sources are predominantly normal galaxies, the true blazar fraction will fall below ~30%.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper reports that WIBRaLS2 and KDEBLLACS, though built from WISE mid-infrared colors similar to known gamma-ray blazars, are not highly pure: for the SDSS-observed subsample, the confirmed-blazar fraction is about 31% for WIBRaLS2 (34.6% of candidate BZBs, 27.7% of candidate BZQs, 42.5% of mixed-color candidates) and about 30% for KDEBLLACS; the authors treat these as lower limits for the whole catalogs. Quasars are the main contaminant of WIBRaLS2 (~58%) and normal galaxies of KDEBLLACS (~38.2%), with contaminants concentrated toward the edges of the infrared color-color diagram. In addition, optical spectra yield classifications for 11 4FGL blazar candidates of uncertain type and reveal 25 new BL Lac objects not previously cataloged.

Load-bearing premise

The results treat the SDSS-observed subsample as giving a lower limit for the whole catalog, which requires that the unobserved sources (about half of WIBRaLS2 and three-quarters of KDEBLLACS in the SDSS footprint, mostly fainter) are not more galaxy-dominated than the observed ones.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • WIBRaLS2 and KDEBLLACS can be used to propose counterparts for unassociated Fermi-LAT sources, but with a known purity floor around 30%; candidates lying in the more contaminated regions of the WISE color-color diagram should be treated with lower confidence.
  • Contaminants are not random: quasars cluster in the WBZQ region of WIBRaLS2 and galaxies and quasars sit at the edges of the KDEBLLACS selection, so targeted cuts could improve the purity of future catalog releases.
  • The 25 newly identified BL Lac objects expand the spectroscopic census of this class and can serve as training samples for future infrared- or radio-based selection techniques.
  • The 11 classified 4FGL blazar candidates of uncertain type reduce the uncertain fraction of the gamma-ray catalog, sharpening population studies of the gamma-ray sky.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the fainter unobserved KDEBLLACS sources are mostly galaxies, the catalog's true blazar fraction could fall below 30%; testing this requires spectroscopy of a magnitude-limited sample beyond SDSS's current depth.
  • Some of the WIBRaLS2 QSO contaminants may actually be flat-spectrum radio quasars, which are a subclass of blazars; if so, the effective blazar content could be higher than 30%, and radio spectral indices of those contaminants would discriminate.
  • The $u-r<1.4$ criterion used to vet the new BL Lacs is stated to fail at redshifts above 0.5, so a few of the 25 new objects at higher redshift could be misclassified; redshift-resolved spectroscopy would settle their nature.
  • The edge-concentration pattern of contaminants suggests a reusable test: applying the same kernel-density contamination mapping to future color-selected AGN catalogs could reveal where their purity drops before committing to large follow-up campaigns.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The paper characterizes two WISE-selected blazar candidate catalogs, WIBRaLS2 and KDEBLLACS, using optical spectra from SDSS DR15. The authors cross-match catalog sources to SDSS spectra, visually classify the spectra into blazars, QSOs, galaxies, stars, and other classes, and report the fraction of confirmed blazars in each catalog. They find that the spectroscopically observed subsamples contain roughly 30% confirmed blazars, with QSOs being the main contaminants in WIBRaLS2 and normal galaxies in KDEBLLACS. They also classify 11 Fermi 4FGL BCUs and report 25 new BL Lac objects. The paper's headline claim is that 'at least ~30%' of each full catalog consists of confirmed blazars, presented as a lower limit on selection efficiency.

Significance. If the result holds, this is a useful benchmark for the community, because WIBRaLS2 and KDEBLLACS are widely used for Fermi counterpart identification and blazar population studies. The analysis is independent of the catalogs' construction: it relies on external SDSS DR15 spectra and the Roma-BZCAT catalog as benchmarks, so the core classification test is not circular. The identification of 11 BCU counterparts and 25 new BZBs is a concrete contribution. The main weakness is that the lower-limit interpretation of the blazar fraction is not rigorously supported by the data, which means the headline quantitative claim needs revision or additional analysis. The observed-subample fractions are still valuable, but they should be reported as such unless the selection-effect issue is addressed.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 5 (first two bullets) and Section 4.3, Figure 9] The abstract and summary claim that 'at least ~30%' of each catalog is composed of confirmed blazars, but this lower-limit interpretation is not supported by the analysis. Only 1424 of 9541 WIBRaLS2 sources (~15%) and 406 of 5580 KDEBLLACS sources (~7%) have SDSS spectra, and the paper's own Figure 9 shows that KDEBLLACS sources lacking spectra are systematically fainter than those with spectra. Section 4.3 also notes that KDEBLLACS candidates are intrinsically fainter in WISE bands. Fainter sources are more likely to be host-galaxy-dominated or normal galaxies, and the spectroscopically classified KDEBLLACS sample already contains 155 normal galaxies versus only 75 BZBs. The statement that contamination estimates are 'upper limits' does not imply that the blazar efficiency is a lower limit; a lower bound would require an explicit argument that the unobserved sources are not more blazar-rich than the observed ones, which is absent. The reported fractions (34.6%, 27.7%, and 42.5% for WBZB, WBZQ, and WMIXED in WIBRaLS2, and ~30% for KDEBLLACS) should be presented as observed-subample fractions, or the lower-limit claim needs a quantitative treatment of the magnitude-dependent incompleteness.
  2. [Sections 4.1 and 4.2] The classification fractions are reported without statistical uncertainties. For example, '17.6% of WBZBs show a featureless optical spectrum' and '26.1% of WBZQs are confirmed BZQs' are point estimates based on subsamples of 471 and 833 objects, respectively; without binomial or Poisson confidence intervals, the reader cannot assess the significance of differences such as the 30.8% versus 26.1% BZQ fractions between WMIXED and WBZQ sources. Adding uncertainties would strengthen the quantitative claims about the dominant contaminant classes and the relative purity of the color-selected subregions.
  3. [Section 4.3, Figure 8] The color-based selection-effect test concludes that 'we can rule out the existence of significant selection effects due to the colors of the optical counterparts,' but the analysis only compares isodensity contours in optical color-color space; it does not directly probe the joint color-magnitude selection function that determines SDSS spectroscopic targeting. Given that Figure 9 demonstrates a magnitude-dependent incompleteness, a test that does not incorporate magnitude cannot fully rule out selection effects that correlate with color and magnitude simultaneously. At minimum, the conclusion should be restricted to 'no strong color-only selection effect' rather than the current broader statement.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Figure 1 caption] The caption lists 'W1, W1, W3 and W4' but should read 'W1, W2, W3 and W4'.
  2. [Section 4, first paragraph] The word 'splitted' should be 'split'.
  3. [Abstract and Section 5] The abstract reports 'at least ~30%' while the summary gives a weighted lower limit of ~31% for WIBRaLS2 and ~30% for KDEBLLACS; these numbers should be made consistent and, if the lower-limit language is removed as suggested above, the abstract and summary should be reworded to describe the observed-subample fractions.
  4. [Section 2.2] The text says 'This sample corresponds to 7% of the whole KDEBLLACS' after stating the final sample is 406 sources; 406/5580 is approximately 7.3%, so the rounding is acceptable but could be clarified.
  5. [Appendix A caption] The captions for Figures A.1 and A.2 state that 'all sources present featureless spectra with color index u− r < 1.4,' but Table 2 lists one source with u− r = 1.38 and another with 1.32; the criterion should be described as 'u− r ≲ 1.4' or the threshold should be clarified to avoid an apparent inconsistency.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the test of WIBRaLS2 and KDEBLLACS uses external SDSS DR15 spectra and Roma-BZCAT as benchmarks, so the characterization is independent of the catalogs' own selection criteria.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is an efficiency test of two blazar-candidate catalogs against independent optical spectroscopy. The classifications rely on SDSS DR15 spectra and Roma-BZCAT classifications, both external to the WIBRaLS2 and KDEBLLACS construction. The fact that several authors of the present paper also built the catalogs being tested is not circular; the benchmark data are not derived from those catalogs. The 'at least ~30%' phrasing is an extrapolation from the spectroscopically observed subsamples (about 15% of WIBRaLS2 and 7% of KDEBLLACS), and the paper explicitly states that the contamination estimates are upper limits because of selection effects. That is a statistical limitation rather than a self-definitional or fitted-input circularity: the observed fractions are computed by direct spectral classification, not by construction from the catalog selection rules. No equation or fitted parameter is reused as a prediction, and no load-bearing argument reduces to a self-citation. Therefore no circular step can be exhibited under the required standard.

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

No free parameters were fitted in this paper; all thresholds come from prior literature. The key burden is the assumption that the SDSS-observed subsample gives a lower limit on efficiency, which is not clearly justified and may be contradicted by the magnitude selection effects the authors themselves report.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption SDSS DR15 spectra with SNR > 5 are sufficient for reliable optical classification of the selected sources.
    The paper uses SNR > 5 as the quality cut for the full sample (Section 2.1) and trusts spectral classification; no independent check is provided for borderline spectra.
  • domain assumption The 'featureless blue continuum' criterion identifies BL Lacs, and the CB < 0.25 threshold separates BZGs from normal galaxies.
    These criteria are taken from the literature (Stocke et al. 1991; Massaro et al. 2012a) and applied without recalibration in Section 3.
  • ad hoc to paper The spectroscopically observed subsample yields a lower limit on the blazar fraction of the full catalogs; unobserved sources cannot have a lower blazar fraction.
    Section 5 calls the contamination estimates upper limits and efficiencies lower limits, but Section 4.3 shows the unobserved KDEBLLACS sources are fainter, which could mean more galaxies and a lower true blazar fraction.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Optical characterization of WISE selected blazar candidates." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XRAOWB2C

@misc{pith2026190805229,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Optical characterization of WISE selected blazar candidates},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XRAOWB2C}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.05229}
}
read the original abstract

Over the last decade more than five thousand gamma-ray sources were detected by the Large Area Telescope (LAT) on board Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope. Given the positional uncertainty of the telescope, nearly 30% of these sources remain without an obvious counterpart in lower energies. This motivated the release of new catalogs of gamma-ray counterpart candidates and several follow up campaigns in the last decade. Recently, two new catalogs of blazar candidates were released, they are the improved and expanded version of the WISE Blazar-Like Radio-Loud Sources (WIBRaLS2) catalog and the Kernel Density Estimation selected candidate BL Lacs (KDEBLLACS) catalog, both selecting blazar-like sources based on their infrared colors from the Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE). In this work we characterized these two catalogs, clarifying the true nature of their sources based on their optical spectra from SDSS data release 15, thus testing how efficient they are in selecting true blazars. We first selected all WIBRaLS2 and KDEBLLACS sources with available optical spectra in the footprint of Sloan Digital Sky Survey data release 15. Then we analyzed these spectra to verify the nature of each selected candidate and see which fraction of the catalogs is composed by spectroscopically confirmed blazars. Finally, we evaluated the impact of selection effects, specially those related to optical colors of WIBRaLS2/KDEBLLACS sources and their optical magnitude distributions. We found that at least ~ 30% of each catalog is composed by confirmed blazars, with quasars being the major contaminants in the case of WIBRaLS2 (~ 58%) and normal galaxies in the case of KDEBLLACS (~ 38.2%). The spectral analysis also allowed us to identify the nature of 11 blazar candidates of uncertain type (BCUs) from the Fermi-LAT 4th Point Source Catalog (4FGL) and to find 25 new BL Lac objects.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.05229 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The whole WIBRaLS2 sample divided into three categories ac￾cordingly to the sources’ IR colors: BZB candidates (WBZBs, in blue), BZQ candidates (WBZQs, in red) and blazars with intermediate colors (WMIXEDs, in purple). 2. Sample selection For this analysis we used observations available in the AllWISE catalog (Cutri et al. 2013, 2014), which contains astrometry and photometry in the IR for ∼3×107 sources in W1, W2, … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Flow chart with all steps adopted in the sample selection and spectral classification. The numbers in blue refer to sources in WIBRaLS2 while numbers in red refer to sources in KDEBLLACS af￾ter each step. Roma-BZCAT. This led us to a final sample of 1424 WIBRaLS2 sources, which corresponds to ∼ 15% of the whole WIBRaLS2. A flowchart describing the effects of our selection of the number of candidates in the WIBRaLS2 … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Typical smoothed spectra in observed wavelengths for each one of the spectral categories found in WIBRaLS2 and KDEBLLACS. 4.1. WIBRALS2 We analyzed a total of 1424 spectra (1396 with SNR > 5 and 28 with SNR < 5 but with a counterpart in Roma-BZCAT) among the 9541 sources available in WIBRaLS2 – but only 3407 in the SDSS footprint. According to their WIBRaLS2 classification, these sources were divided into 471 WBZBs,… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Nested pie charts for the 3 classes of sources described in WIBRaLS2 (WBZB, WBZQ and WMIXED). The major contaminant in all categories are AGNs. A significant fraction of these AGNs, however, may be blazars (BZQ). The subclass LLAGN is represented by Seyferts and LINERs…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Contaminants in WIBRaLS2. Left: Contamination of WIBRaLS2 obtained based on a KDE and using the SDSS DR15 spectra of 953 sources (833 QSOs, 100 Seyferts and 20 LINERs) as training sample. The contaminants are mainly QSOs concentrated in the WBZQ region of the color-col…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Contaminants for KDEBLLACS divided by classes. The major contaminant for this catalog are normal galaxies. Some fraction of the QSOs can have a flat radio spectrum and be BZQs. 4.3. Selection effects Since ∼52% of WIBRaLS2 and ∼75% of KDEBLLACS sources in the footprint…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Contamination of KDEBLLACS. Left: The main contaminants of KDEBLLACS are normal galaxies and QSOs, both located in the edges of the sample. Right: PDF of the γ-ray BZBs available in 4FGL obtained with a KDE. We can see that the majority of BZBs are indeed located outsi…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Optical color-color diagrams for WIBRaLS2 (upper panel) and KDEBLLACS (bottom panel) sources in the footprint of SDSS. The total number of sources is 3407 for WIBRaLS2 and 2807 for KDE￾BLLACS, and are divided in WBZBs/KBZBs (blue stars), WBZQs (or￾ange circles) and WMI…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

33 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    2010, The Astrophysical Journal, 716, 30

    Abdo, A., Ackermann, M., Agudo, I., et al. 2010, The Astrophysical Journal, 716, 30

    2010

  2. [2]

    2015, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 218, 23

    Acero, F., Ackermann, M., Ajello, M., et al. 2015, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 218, 23

    2015

  3. [3]

    2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 810, 14

    Ackermann, M., Ajello, M., Atwood, W., et al. 2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 810, 14

    work page 2015

  4. [4]

    2019, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 240, 23

    Aguado, D., Ahumada, R., Almeida, A., et al. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 240, 23

    work page 2019

  5. [5]

    A., Phillips, M

    Baldwin, J. A., Phillips, M. M., & Terlevich, R. 1981, Publications of the Astro- nomical Society of the Pacific, 93, 5

    work page 1981

  6. [6]

    1978, AM Wolfe, Ed, 328 Böttcher, M

    Blandford, R., Rees, M., & Wolfe, A. 1978, AM Wolfe, Ed, 328 Böttcher, M. 2007, in The Multi-Messenger Approach to High-Energy Gamma- Ray Sources (Springer), 95–104

    work page 1978

  7. [7]

    J., Cotton, W., Greisen, E., et al

    Condon, J. J., Cotton, W., Greisen, E., et al. 1998, The Astronomical Journal, 115, 1693

    work page 1998

  8. [8]

    2013, Explanatory Supplement to the AllWISE Data Release Products, by RM Cutri et al

    Cutri, R., Wright, E., Conrow, T., et al. 2013, Explanatory Supplement to the AllWISE Data Release Products, by RM Cutri et al

    work page 2013

Show all 33 references
  1. [9]

    Cutri, R. e. et al. 2014, VizieR Online Data Catalog, 2328 D’Abrusco, R., Crespo, N. Á., Massaro, F., et al. 2019, The Astrophysical Jour- nal Supplement Series, 242, 4 Article number, page 8 of 11 R. de Menezes et al.: Characterization of WISE blazar candidates D’Abrusco, R.,...

    2014

  2. [10]

    & Shectman, S

    Dressler, A. & Shectman, S. A. 1987, The Astronomical Journal, 94, 899 Fermi-LAT Collaboration, T. et al. 2019, arXiv preprint arXiv:1902.10045

    1987 arXiv

  3. [11]

    J., White, R

    Helfand, D. J., White, R. L., & Becker, R. H. 2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 801, 26

    2015

  4. [12]

    J., Groves, B., Kauffmann, G., & Heckman, T

    Kewley, L. J., Groves, B., Kauffmann, G., & Heckman, T. 2006, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 372, 961

    2006

  5. [13]

    2014, Astronomy & As- trophysics, 570, A126

    Landoni, M., Falomo, R., Treves, A., & Sbarufatti, B. 2014, Astronomy & As- trophysics, 570, A126

    2014

  6. [14]

    P., Donzelli, C

    Madrid, J. P., Donzelli, C. J., Rodríguez-Ardila, A., et al. 2018, The Astrophysi- cal Journal Supplement Series, 238, 31

    2018

  7. [15]

    2011, The Astrophysical Journal, 743, 156

    Mainzer, A., Grav, T., Bauer, J., et al. 2011, The Astrophysical Journal, 743, 156

    2011

  8. [16]

    Á., et al

    Marchesini, E., Peña-Herazo, H., Crespo, N. Á., et al. 2019, Astrophysics and Space Science, 364, 5

    2019

  9. [17]

    Massaro, F., D’Abrusco, R., Ajello, M., Grindlay, J., & Smith, H. A. 2011, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 740, L48

    2011

  10. [18]

    2009, The Astrophysical Journal, 696, 980

    Massaro, F., Harris, D., Chiaberge, M., et al. 2009, The Astrophysical Journal, 696, 980

    2009

  11. [19]

    2010, The Astrophysical Journal, 714, 589

    Massaro, F., Harris, D., Tremblay, G., et al. 2010, The Astrophysical Journal, 714, 589

    2010

  12. [20]

    2014, The Astro- nomical Journal, 148, 66

    Massaro, F., Masetti, N., D’Abrusco, R., Paggi, A., & Funk, S. 2014, The Astro- nomical Journal, 148, 66

    2014

  13. [21]

    2003, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 342, 1117

    Mauch, T., Murphy, T., Buttery, H., et al. 2003, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 342, 1117

    2003

  14. [22]

    1993, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 263, 1023

    Morganti, R., Killeen, N., & Tadhunter, C. 1993, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 263, 1023

    1993

  15. [23]

    2014, The Astronomical Journal, 147, 112 Peña-Herazo, H., Massaro, F., Chavushyan, V ., et al

    Paggi, A., Milisavljevic, D., Masetti, N., et al. 2014, The Astronomical Journal, 147, 112 Peña-Herazo, H., Massaro, F., Chavushyan, V ., et al. 2019, Astrophysics and Space Science, 364, 85 Peña-Herazo, H. A., Marchesini, E. J., Crespo, N. Á., et al. 2017, Astrophysics and Sp...

    2014

  16. [24]

    2015, The Astronomical Journal, 149, 160

    Ricci, F., Massaro, F., Landoni, M., et al. 2015, The Astronomical Journal, 149, 160

    2015

  17. [25]

    1965, The Astrophysical Journal, 141, 1

    Schmidt, M. 1965, The Astrophysical Journal, 141, 1

    1965

  18. [26]

    1991, The Astrophysical Journal, 374, 431

    Stickel, M., Padovani, P., Urry, C., Fried, J., & Kühr, H. 1991, The Astrophysical Journal, 374, 431

    1991

  19. [27]

    T., Morris, S

    Stocke, J. T., Morris, S. L., Gioia, I., et al. 1991, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 76, 813

    1991

  20. [28]

    Taylor, M. B. 2005, in Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XIV , V ol. 347, 29

    2005

  21. [29]

    A., Blanton, M

    Tegmark, M., Strauss, M. A., Blanton, M. R., et al. 2004, Physical Review D, 69, 103501

    2004

  22. [30]

    Urry, C. M. & Padovani, P. 1995, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 107, 803

    1995

  23. [31]

    L., Becker, R

    White, R. L., Becker, R. H., Helfand, D. J., & Gregg, M. D. 1997, The Astro- physical Journal, 475, 479

    1997

  24. [32]

    L., Eisenhardt, P

    Wright, E. L., Eisenhardt, P. R., Mainzer, A. K., et al. 2010, The Astronomical Journal, 140, 1868

    2010

  25. [33]

    G., Adelman, J., Anderson Jr, J

    York, D. G., Adelman, J., Anderson Jr, J. E., et al. 2000, The Astronomical Jour- nal, 120, 1579 Appendix A: New BZB candidates During the spectral classification process described in Section 3, we found 25 new BZBs not available in Roma-BZCAT or during our follow up spectrosco...

    2000

Pith tools

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