Hard TeV spectra of blazars and the constraints to the IR intergalactic background

2); (2) Torun Centre for Astronomy; Dept. of Physics; F. Tavecchio (1); G. Ghisellini (1); J. Gracia (3); K. Katarzynski (1; L. Maraschi (1) ((1)INAF - Osservatorio Astronomico di Brera; Nicolaus Copernicus Univ. (3) IASA; Univ. of Athens)

REVIEW

Hard TeV spectra of blazars and the constraints to the IR intergalactic background

K. Katarzynski (1, 2), G. Ghisellini (1), F. Tavecchio (1), J. Gracia (3), L. Maraschi (1) ((1)INAF - Osservatorio Astronomico di Brera, (2) Torun Centre for Astronomy, Nicolaus Copernicus Univ. (3) IASA

show 2 more authors

Dept. of Physics, Univ. of Athens)

Astrophysics · Submitted 1 Mar 2006 · 21 references

Pith's verdict: A clear, honest SSC-based argument that hard TeV spectra do not force a minimal EBL, under a sharp-cutoff assumption that is speculative but clearly flagged.

T0 · AI review

How this review was made: An AI referee (deepseek-v4-flash) read the paper on August 28, 2026 and answered a fixed list of questions about it. T0 is the starting level every paper gets. The levels describe how deeply Pith has checked the paper, never the authors.

T0 AI review An AI read the paper and answered a fixed list of questions.
T1 Audit Automatic checks that the references and files the paper relies on exist and match.
T2 Compute The paper's code or calculations re-run with the same results.
T3 Formal statement The claims written out in a formal math language a computer can read.
T4 Proof Those claims proved, and the proof checked by computer.

How Pith checks papers →

· 3 major objections · 5 minor · Ask about this paper · The compiled record · Read the full review →

Challenge this review Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗

Cite ▾

arXiv IDastro-ph/0603030 (version 1)

Pith ID2YBVAPC2, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review

Citation2), (2) Torun Centre for Astronomy, Dept. of Physics, F. Tavecchio (1), G. Ghisellini (1), J. Gracia (3), K. Katarzynski (1, L. Maraschi (1) ((1)INAF - Osservatorio Astronomico di Brera, Nicolaus Copernicus Univ. (3) IASA, Univ. of Athens). "Hard TeV spectra of blazars and the constraints to the IR intergalactic background." arXiv:astro-ph/0603030 (2006). https://pith.science/paper/2YBVAPC2

Cite this reviewBibTeX for Pith's review of this paper

Claim paper

Why Pith says this

Highlight any text to comment on it.

Editor's note

read the letter

Katarzynski et al. show that a one-zone SSC model with a truncated electron distribution (high gamma_min) can produce intrinsic TeV spectra as hard as alpha=-1/3, then apply that to 1ES 1101-232 and three other TeV blazars. The analytic limit is standard physics—the synchrotron spectrum of a monoenergetic electron population (Rybicki & Lightman)—but the application is new and cleanly executed. They are honest that this is a consistency argument, not a prediction: they adjust gamma_min to match the unabsorbed spectrum, and they state that the fit sits at the limiting case, so the Kneiske et al. EBL is close to the maximum absorbable. They also say the De Jager & Stecker level cannot be accommodated. That is a fair frame for the result.

The soft spots are real but not fatal. The alpha=-1/3 limit requires a sharp cutoff or a flat low-energy branch (n1 <= 1/3). The paper’s justification for such a cutoff—truncated injection, or stochastic acceleration balancing cooling—is speculative, and the gamma_min inferred for 1ES 1101-232 comes from non-simultaneous 1997 BeppoSAX and 2004-2005 H.E.S.S. data. The fits are qualitative—no error bars—and the unabsorbed spectra use the Kneiske et al. EBL, so the conclusion is conditional on that model. None of this is hidden; the paper states it in Sections 3 and 4. The stress-test concern that the relaxed EBL constraint rests on an unverified assumption is accurate, but I would not call it a load-bearing flaw: the paper never claims to prove the cutoff exists. It asks what follows if the cutoff is there, and shows the previously claimed “theoretical difficulty” of alpha < 0.5 is not a real difficulty. That is a useful and fair contribution to the debate.

This paper deserves a serious referee. It is not a paradigm shift, and the central claim is conditional by design, but it is clearly argued, the physics is standard and correctly applied, and the authors are transparent about the supporting assumptions. I would bring it to a reading group and cite it when discussing EBL constraints or SSC model flexibility.

Referee report

Significance

The central analytic result—that a one-zone SSC model with a sharply truncated electron distribution has a hard-spectrum ceiling of α=-1/3—is a clean and useful physical statement. It is derived from standard synchrotron theory and is independent of the high-energy electron index n2, and the numerical models use the full Klein-Nishina cross section rather than a Thomson approximation. If the application to 1ES 1101-232 holds, the paper removes a widely cited theoretical objection to non-minimal IR backgrounds: hard intrinsic TeV spectra do not automatically require exotic physics, because standard SSC physics can produce them under plausible (though strong) assumptions about the low-energy electron population. The paper is also transparent about its main limitations: the best fit uses the limiting case n1=-∞, the TeV data are unabsorbed with a specific EBL model, and the X-ray and TeV data for 1ES 1101-232 are not simultaneous. The result is therefore best read as a proof-of-possibility that relaxes, rather than overturns, the minimal-EBL conclusion.

Major objections (3)

[Section 2.1 and Fig. 1] The hard limit α=-1/3 is achieved only in the limit of a perfectly sharp low-energy cutoff (n1=-∞). For any finite low-energy branch with n1>1/3, the synchrotron seed index is (n1-1)/2>-1/3 and the SSC index below the peak is correspondingly softer; the authors' own Fig. 1 shows that n1=1.5 produces a curved spectrum with α≈0.25 at GeV energies rising to α≈1 near the peak. Because the best fit for 1ES 1101-232 is the limiting n1=-∞ case, the claimed consistency with the Kneiske et al. (2004) EBL has zero headroom in the shape of the low-energy electron distribution. The paper should state this explicitly and quantify the maximum n1 (or the maximum normalization of a low-energy tail) compatible with the unabsorbed H.E.S.S. spectrum; without such a quantification, the 'reconciliation with relatively high IR background' is a statement about a measure-zero subset of models.
[Section 3] The value of γ_min used for 1ES 1101-232 is inferred from a fit that combines BeppoSAX X-ray data from January 1997 with H.E.S.S. TeV data from 2004-2005. Since blazars are strongly variable, the joint fit does not strongly constrain γ_min, and the conclusion that the SSC model can accommodate the Kneiske et al. (2004) EBL therefore rests on a parameter that is not pinned by simultaneous observations. The authors should explicitly label the 1ES 1101-232 fit as a proof-of-possibility rather than a constraint on γ_min, or should discuss how source variability affects the inferred γ_min and the resulting EBL conclusions.
[Section 2.1] The analytic argument equating the inverse-Compton index below the peak to the seed index is made in the Thomson limit, while the numerical models use the full Klein-Nishina cross section. The paper does not state over which observed energy band the hard ν^{1/3} IC segment actually persists in the models shown in Fig. 1. Please specify the frequency interval where α=-1/3 is realized in the model spectra and show explicitly that this interval covers the 0.1-1 TeV band used for 1ES 1101-232; otherwise the statement 'the limit on how hard an SSC spectrum can be is α=-1/3' could be overinterpreted outside the range where the Thomson mapping applies.

Minor objections (5)

[Section 3 and Fig. 2 caption] The text says the Mrk 501 fit is for observations made on April 7, 1997, while the Fig. 2 caption and the surrounding text say April 16, 1997; please make the date consistent.
[References] The reference 'De Jager O.C., & Stecker F.W. 2002, 566, 738' is missing the journal name, and the 'Stecker et al. 2005, ApJ, submitted' entry should be updated to the published version.
[Section 2.2 and Fig. 3] The Fig. 3 caption states that the input parameter values are given, but the text does not list the numerical parameters (B, δ, R, γ_min, γ_max, n) used for the four sources; a table of the adopted parameters would make the fits reproducible.
[Section 2.1] The relation α=(n-1)/2 for the Thomson-limit SSC index is stated without derivation; a one-line derivation or a specific reference to Rybicki & Lightman (1979) or Tavecchio et al. (1998) would help the reader verify the subsequent formulas.
[Section 4] The second proposed physical mechanism for γ_min (stochastic turbulent acceleration balancing cooling) is only sketched; a sentence indicating the expected equilibrium energy scale or a reference to a quantitative model would strengthen the case that γ_min≫1 is not purely ad hoc.

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

The paper

The paper claims

This paper argues that hard TeV blazar spectra can come from a standard one-zone synchrotron self-Compton model with a high minimum electron energy, so they do not force a minimal infrared background.

The reading

The paper is trying to establish that the very hard TeV spectrum measured for the blazar 1ES 1101-232, once corrected for absorption by the intergalactic infrared background, does not force the background to be at its absolute lower limit. It shows that a simple one-zone synchrotron self-Compton model can produce an intrinsic spectrum as hard as $F(\nu)\propto\nu^{1/3}$ when the emitting electrons follow a power-law distribution with a relatively high minimum energy. Under that assumption, the observations can be reconciled with a substantially stronger infrared background, and the model fitted to the data sits close to the strongest absorption the scenario can accommodate. The same model, with a somewhat larger minimum energy, also accounts for the other TeV blazars Mrk 421, Mrk 501, and PKS 2155-304.

What carries the argument

The central object is the broken power-law electron energy distribution $N(\gamma)=K\gamma^{-n_1}$ below the break and $K\gamma_{\rm brk}^{n_2-n_1}\gamma^{-n_2}$ above it, with $\gamma_{\rm min}$ possibly much larger than one. The argument is carried by the saturation of the low-frequency synchrotron spectral index at $\alpha_1=-1/3$: once the low-energy slope is flatter than $n_1=1/3$, the photons below the peak are produced mainly by electrons at the break, so the emission behaves like that of a monoenergetic distribution, $F_{\rm syn}\sim\nu^{1/3}$. In the Thomson limit the inverse-Compton spectrum copies the target photon index, giving $\alpha_{\rm IC}=-1/3$ below the peak regardless of $n_2$, while the X-ray spectrum can remain soft because it comes from the high-energy tail. This hardness bound, combined with the adopted infrared background, sets the maximum absorption the TeV photons can have suffered.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that there is a physical limit, $\alpha=-1/3$, to how hard a synchrotron self-Compton spectrum can be below its peak, so an intrinsic TeV spectrum cannot rise faster than $F(\nu)\propto\nu^{1/3}$ in this standard scenario. This limit appears when the low-energy electron distribution is made flatter than $n_1=1/3$: the low-frequency synchrotron emission is then dominated by electrons near the break energy, reducing to the spectrum of a monoenergetic population, which falls as $\nu^{1/3}$. In the Thomson regime the inverse-Compton spectrum inherits the index of the target photons, so the Compton emission below its peak is also bounded by $-1/3$, independent of the high-energy electron slope $n_2$. The paper therefore concludes that a single power-law electron distribution with a high low-energy cutoff $\gamma_{\rm min}\gg1$ can explain the hard deabsorbed TeV spectrum of 1ES 1101-232 without invoking exotic physics, and that the infrared background can be as high as the adopted level.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the intrinsic TeV emission of 1ES 1101-232 comes from a single homogeneous zone with a sharply truncated power-law electron distribution and no softer low-energy tail contributing, and that the adopted infrared background is the true absorber; if the source is inhomogeneous, the electrons have a low-energy tail, or the background is wrong, the fitted minimum energy and the relaxed background constraints no longer follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For 1ES 1101-232, the intrinsic TeV index can be as hard as $\alpha=-1/3$ rather than limited to $\alpha\simeq0.5$, so the infrared background can be higher than the minimal galaxy-count level.
Every one-zone SSC spectrum below its Compton peak obeys $\alpha\ge -1/3$; a deabsorbed TeV spectrum harder than this would signal non-standard physics or an incorrect absorption correction.
With a high minimum electron energy, the X-ray band can stay soft while the TeV band hardens, matching the observed contrast in 1ES 1101-232.
The same scenario, with a larger minimum energy, fits Mrk 421, Mrk 501, and PKS 2155-304, so the electron cutoff is not unique to the distant source.
The strongest absorption models considered in the paper are excluded, because they would demand intrinsic spectra harder than $-1/3$.

Reading between the lines

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

If the central claim holds, variability offers a discriminating test: the model predicts that changes in the minimum electron energy alter the TeV flux with little change in the X-rays, naturally producing orphan TeV flares of the kind seen in other blazars.
A redshift trend may exist: if the minimum energy is set by a cooling and re-acceleration balance, the required $\gamma_{\rm min}$ should correlate with jet power or luminosity across the TeV blazar population.
Future hard-TeV detections should be fitted with SSC models before being used to set upper limits on the infrared background; without such a fit, a hard deabsorbed slope is ambiguous between a high background and a high minimum electron energy.

Original abstract

Recent gamma-ray observations of the blazar 1ES 1101-232 (redshift z=0.186) reveal that the unabsorbed TeV spectrum is hard, with spectral index $\alpha \lesssim 0.5$ [$F(\nu) \propto \nu^{-\alpha}$]. We show that simple one-zone synchrotron self-Compton model can explain such hard spectra if we assume a power law energy distribution of the emitting electrons with a relatively high minimum energy. In this case the intrinsic TeV spectrum can be as hard as $F(\nu)\propto \nu^{1/3}$, while the predicted X-ray spectrum can still be much softer. The observations of 1ES 1101-232 can therefore be reconciled with relatively high intensities of the infrared background, even if some extreme background levels can indeed be excluded. We show that the other TeV sources (Mrk 421, Mrk 501 and PKS 2155-304) can be interpreted in the same framework, with a somewhat larger minimum energy.

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged, kept beside the review and separate from it. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Compiled by classifier-1.13.0 via TypeSafe API, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 4,534 input tokens.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.03 · states limitation 0.72 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.03 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.97 · compares with prior results 0.43 · mentions code or data availability 0.01.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v1. Results and the main claim are underlined; show every role.

Recent gamma-ray observations of the blazar 1ES 1101-232 (redshift z=0.186) reveal that the unabsorbed TeV spectrum is hard, with spectral index $\alpha \lesssim 0.5$ [$F(\nu) \propto \nu^{-\alpha}$]. We show that simple one-zone synchrotron self-Compton model can explain such hard spectra if we assume a power law energy distribution of the emitting electrons with a relatively high minimum energy. In this case the intrinsic TeV spectrum can be as hard as $F(\nu)\propto \nu^{1/3}$, while the predicted X-ray spectrum can still be much softer. The observations of 1ES 1101-232 can therefore be reconciled with relatively high intensities of the infrared background, even if some extreme background levels can indeed be excluded. We show that the other TeV sources (Mrk 421, Mrk 501 and PKS 2155-304) can be interpreted in the same framework, with a somewhat larger minimum energy.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#	sentence	role	the authors' own work	states the main conclusion	strength
s0	Recent gamma-ray observations of the blazar 1ES 1101-232 (redshift z=0.186) reveal that the unabsorbed TeV spectrum is hard, with spectral index $\alpha \lesssim 0.5$ [$F(\nu) \propto \nu^{-\alpha}$].	result 0.52	0.20	0.09	asserted 1.00
s1	We show that simple one-zone synchrotron self-Compton model can explain such hard spectra if we assume a power law energy distribution of the emitting electrons with a relatively high minimum energy.	method 0.49	0.88	0.14	asserted 0.90
s2	In this case the intrinsic TeV spectrum can be as hard as $F(\nu)\propto \nu^{1/3}$, while the predicted X-ray spectrum can still be much softer.	result 0.90	0.82	0.12	asserted 0.66
s3	The observations of 1ES 1101-232 can therefore be reconciled with relatively high intensities of the infrared background, even if some extreme background levels can indeed be excluded.	interpretation 0.98	0.74	0.73	hedged possibility 0.86
s4	We show that the other TeV sources (Mrk 421, Mrk 501 and PKS 2155-304) can be interpreted in the same framework, with a somewhat larger minimum energy.	result 0.58	0.88	0.10	asserted 0.96

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: theoretical result 0.97 · evidence from analysis of existing data 0.64.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read

arXiv listing abstract v1

not examined

full text
figures and tables
references and citing sentences
relations to other papers

levels run

P abstract

not run

S sections
T body sentences
C citations
R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

Figures

**Figure 1.** Synchrotron emission (upper panel) and self–Compton radiation (lower panel) for different values of n1. The green spectra, generated by the truncated single power law particle energy spectrum (n1 = −∞), provide the best fit for observations of 1ES 1101–232 made by BeppoSAX (Wolter et al. 2002) and H.E.S.S. (Aharonian et al. 2006). Note that the spectra on the lower panel have been normalized to the peak level and the H.E.S.S. observations has been unabsorbed according to the model proposed by Kneiske et al. (2004). 2.1 Flat electron distributions A flat slope of the electron…

**Figure 2.** Synchrotron emission (upper panel) and the self– Compton radiation (lower panel) for different values of the γmin parameter. The best fit for the BeppoSAX (Pian et al. 1998) and CAT (Djannati-Atai et al. 1999) observations of Mrk 501 is indicated by the green lines. Note that the inverse–Compton spectra have been normalized and the TeV observations have been unabsorbed according to the model proposed by Kneiske et al. (2004). 2.2 Changing γmin As we have shown in the previous subsection a particle distribution with a low energy cut-off provides the best explanation for the…

**Figure 3.** X–ray and TeV emission of four TeV blazars located at different redshifts. For all the sources we have applied the same SSC scenario, assuming that the emitting electrons are distributed in energy as a single power law with a low energy cut-off at γmin. All the TeV spectra have been unabsorbed according to the model of Kneiske et al. (2004). Solid lines are the best fits for the expected intrinsic emission whereas dashed lines indicate the observed spectra. For an easier comparison of the different sources, we transformed the observed flux in luminosity. the minimal possible value…

Figures reproduced from arXiv:astro-ph/0603030 by the authors.

References

Works cited (21)

[1]

Aharonian F., Akhperjanian A.G., Bazer--Bachi A.R., et al. 2005, A&A, 442, 895

View on Pith 2005
[2]

Aharonian F., Akhperjanian A.G., Bazer--Bachi A.R., et al. 2006, Nat, in press (astro-ph/0508073)

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2006
[3]

Costamante L., Aharonian F., Ghisellini G. & Horns D. 2003, New Astron. Rev., 47, 677

View on Pith 2003
[4]

De Jager O.C., & Stecker F.W. 2002, 566, 738

View on Pith 2002
[5]

Djannati--Atai A., Piron F., Barrau A., et al., 1999, A & A, 350, 17

View on Pith 1999
[6]

Dwek E. & Krennrich F., 2005, ApJ, 618, 657

View on Pith 2005
[7]

Gould R. J., Schreder G. P., 1966, Phys. Rev. Lett. 16, 252

View on Pith 1966
[8]

Hauser M. G., Dwek E., 2001, ARA&A, 39, 249

View on Pith 2001
[9]

Katarzynski K., Ghisellini G., Tavecchio F., Maraschi L., Fossati G. & Mastichiadis A. 2005a, A&A, 433, 479

View on Pith
[10]

Katarzynski K., Ghisellini G., Mastichiadis A., Tavecchio F. & Maraschi L. 2005b, A&A, in press

View on Pith
[11]

Kneiske T.M., Bretz T., Mannheim K., & Hartmann D. H., 2004, A&A, 413, 807

View on Pith 2004
[12]

Krawczynski H., Sambruna R., Kohnle A., et al., 2001, ApJ, 559, 187

View on Pith 2001
[13]

Krawczynski H., Hughes S.B., Horan D., et al. 2004, ApJ, 601, 151

View on Pith 2004
[14]

Madau P. & Pozzetti L., 2000, MNRAS, 312, L9

View on Pith 2000
[15]

Nishikov A. I., 1962, Sov. Phys. JETP, 14, 393

View on Pith 1962
[16]

Pian E., Vacanti G., Tagliaferri G., et al., 1998, ApJ , 492, L17

View on Pith 1998
[17]

Rybicki G. & Lightman A.P., 1979, Radiative Processes in Astrophysics, Wiley Interscience, New York

View on Pith 1979
[18]

Stecker F. W., de Jager O.C. & Salamon M. H., 1992, ApJ, 390, L49

View on Pith 1992
[19]

Stecker F. W., Malkan, M. A. & Scully, S. T., 2005, ApJ, submitted, (astro-ph/0510449)

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2005
[20]

Tavecchio F., Maraschi L. & Ghisellini G., 1998, ApJ , 509, 608

View on Pith 1998
[21]

Wolter A., Tavecchio F., Caccianiga A. & Tagliaferri G., 2000, A&A, 357, 429

View on Pith 2000

How the literature uses it

3 arXiv papers cite this in 3 sentences

Each citing sentence is taken from the citing paper's LaTeX source and typed by Pith's classifier. A label appears at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), a contest at 0.7 or more; the quoted words are the citing authors'. How each label was checked · JSON

Discussion

Disagree with the review, or know something it missed? Leave a comment, highlight any passage above to comment on it, or challenge this review formally.

[1] [1]

Aharonian F., Akhperjanian A.G., Bazer--Bachi A.R., et al. 2005, A&A, 442, 895

View on Pith 2005

[2] [2]

Aharonian F., Akhperjanian A.G., Bazer--Bachi A.R., et al. 2006, Nat, in press (astro-ph/0508073)

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2006

[3] [3]

Costamante L., Aharonian F., Ghisellini G. & Horns D. 2003, New Astron. Rev., 47, 677

View on Pith 2003

[4] [4]

De Jager O.C., & Stecker F.W. 2002, 566, 738

View on Pith 2002

[5] [5]

Djannati--Atai A., Piron F., Barrau A., et al., 1999, A & A, 350, 17

View on Pith 1999

[6] [6]

Dwek E. & Krennrich F., 2005, ApJ, 618, 657

View on Pith 2005

[7] [7]

Gould R. J., Schreder G. P., 1966, Phys. Rev. Lett. 16, 252

View on Pith 1966

[8] [8]

Hauser M. G., Dwek E., 2001, ARA&A, 39, 249

View on Pith 2001

[9] [9]

Katarzynski K., Ghisellini G., Tavecchio F., Maraschi L., Fossati G. & Mastichiadis A. 2005a, A&A, 433, 479

View on Pith

[10] [10]

Katarzynski K., Ghisellini G., Mastichiadis A., Tavecchio F. & Maraschi L. 2005b, A&A, in press

View on Pith

[11] [11]

Kneiske T.M., Bretz T., Mannheim K., & Hartmann D. H., 2004, A&A, 413, 807

View on Pith 2004

[12] [12]

Krawczynski H., Sambruna R., Kohnle A., et al., 2001, ApJ, 559, 187

View on Pith 2001

[13] [13]

Krawczynski H., Hughes S.B., Horan D., et al. 2004, ApJ, 601, 151

View on Pith 2004

[14] [14]

Madau P. & Pozzetti L., 2000, MNRAS, 312, L9

View on Pith 2000

[15] [15]

Nishikov A. I., 1962, Sov. Phys. JETP, 14, 393

View on Pith 1962

[16] [16]

Pian E., Vacanti G., Tagliaferri G., et al., 1998, ApJ , 492, L17

View on Pith 1998

[17] [17]

Rybicki G. & Lightman A.P., 1979, Radiative Processes in Astrophysics, Wiley Interscience, New York

View on Pith 1979

[18] [18]

Stecker F. W., de Jager O.C. & Salamon M. H., 1992, ApJ, 390, L49

View on Pith 1992

[19] [19]

Stecker F. W., Malkan, M. A. & Scully, S. T., 2005, ApJ, submitted, (astro-ph/0510449)

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2005

[20] [20]

Tavecchio F., Maraschi L. & Ghisellini G., 1998, ApJ , 509, 608

View on Pith 1998

[21] [21]

Wolter A., Tavecchio F., Caccianiga A. & Tagliaferri G., 2000, A&A, 357, 429

View on Pith 2000