pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.21883 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-23 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE · gr-qc

Recognition: unknown

Testing solitonic boson star interpretations of Sagittarius A* with near-infrared flare astrometry

Xiangyu Wang , Zhenyu Zhang , Hai-Qing Zhang , Minyong Guo , Bin Chen
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-09 20:23 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE gr-qc
keywords solitonic boson starsSagittarius A*GRAVITY astrometrynear-infrared flaresblack hole alternativesmass estimationcompact object spacetimesflare modeling
0
0 comments X

The pith

Boson star models for Sagittarius A* require masses larger than the measured 4.3 million solar masses.

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

The paper tests whether Sagittarius A* could be a solitonic boson star by treating near-infrared flares seen by GRAVITY as hot spots on circular equatorial orbits. It models the flares' centroid motions and images in five boson-star spacetimes of varying sizes plus the Schwarzschild black hole, then fits parameters with both chi-squared and MCMC methods. All boson-star models return masses above the established 4.3 times 10 to the 6 solar masses, while models with larger effective radii produce imaging closer to black-hole behavior and mass values nearer the observed number. These outcomes impose tight limits on boson-star interpretations without excluding them entirely.

Core claim

Treating the flares as hot spots on circular equatorial orbits, analysis of their centroid motions and images shows that the inferred masses of all five solitonic boson-star models exceed the established value of 4.3 times 10 to the 6 solar masses. More diffusive boson stars yield imaging properties closer to those of a black hole and therefore mass estimates correspondingly closer to the known value, placing stringent constraints on such interpretations of Sagittarius A* while leaving them viable.

What carries the argument

Fitting the centroid motions and images of modeled hot-spot flares on circular equatorial orbits to GRAVITY astrometric data, performed separately in each solitonic boson-star spacetime and in Schwarzschild geometry.

If this is right

  • Boson-star models with smaller effective radii face stronger exclusion from the mass discrepancy.
  • More extended boson stars remain less constrained because their imaging and mass fits approach black-hole values.
  • Flare astrometry supplies an independent test of exotic compact-object models for Sagittarius A*.
  • The same fitting approach can be applied to future higher-precision astrometric datasets.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If circular-orbit modeling holds, comparable flare tests could constrain boson-star parameters for other galactic centers.
  • Relaxing the point-like or equatorial assumption might reduce the reported mass offsets if flares have extended or inclined structure.
  • Combining these astrometric constraints with Event Horizon Telescope shadow measurements could produce joint limits on boson-star radius and mass.

Load-bearing premise

The flares are treated as point-like hot spots on circular equatorial orbits whose centroid motions and images can be directly compared to the data.

What would settle it

A future GRAVITY or similar measurement of flare centroid paths that fits a boson-star model with mass exactly 4.3 times 10 to the 6 solar masses without systematic excess.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.21883 by Bin Chen, Hai-Qing Zhang, Minyong Guo, Xiangyu Wang, Zhenyu Zhang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The metric and scalar field solutions for the BS1 (purple), BS2 (blue), BS3 (green), [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: A snapshot of a hot spot orbiting a boson star. The hot spot radius [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The best fit of BS5 model for combined data. Left: the centroid motion. Right: the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Posterior probability distribution functions for BS5 parameters of the combined astro [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The constraint results from the joint analysis of the three events. The dashed lines in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Boson star mass versus effective radius. The green square points represent the medians [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: From left to right are the time-averaged imaging examples of BS1, BS3, BS5, and SBH. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_7.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We use GRAVITY near-infrared (NIR) flare astrometry to test whether Sagittarius A* could be a solitonic boson star. We consider five spherically symmetric solitonic boson-star models with different effective radii, together with the Schwarzschild black hole. Treating the flares as hot spots on circular equatorial orbits, we analyze their centroid motions and images in these spacetimes and use them for parameter fitting. We perform the fitting using both $\chi^2$ analysis and Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods, which yield consistent results: the inferred masses of boson-star models are systematically larger than the established value of $4.3\times10^6M_\odot$. Notably, more diffusive boson stars exhibit imaging properties closer to those of a black hole, leading to mass estimates that are correspondingly closer to the established value. Overall, our results place stringent constraints on solitonic boson star interpretations of Sagittarius A*, although do not completely rule them out.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript claims that modeling near-infrared flares from Sagittarius A* as hot spots on circular equatorial orbits in five solitonic boson star spacetimes (with varying effective radii) and the Schwarzschild metric, and fitting their centroid motions and images to GRAVITY data using both chi-squared and MCMC methods, yields systematically higher best-fit masses for the boson star models compared to the 4.3×10^6 M_⊙ value from stellar orbits. More diffusive boson stars produce mass estimates closer to the established value due to imaging similarities with black holes, leading to the conclusion that solitonic boson star interpretations are stringently constrained but not fully ruled out.

Significance. If the modeling assumptions hold, this work offers a novel test of exotic compact object models for the Galactic center using flare astrometry data, complementing stellar-orbit and EHT constraints. The consistency between chi-squared and MCMC results is a strength that bolsters the reported mass offsets. The analysis usefully illustrates how boson-star diffusivity affects flare observables, providing a basis for future observational tests.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract (modeling and fitting description)] The central claim of systematically larger inferred masses for boson-star models (and the resulting constraints) rests on the assumption, stated in the abstract, of treating flares as hot spots on circular equatorial orbits. No justification or robustness checks against non-circular, non-equatorial, or non-point-like flare dynamics are described. If this assumption is violated, the chi-squared/MCMC mass discrepancies and constraints on solitonic boson star interpretations do not follow.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract provides no details on data selection, error modeling, or the precise parameterization of the five boson-star metrics (including how effective radius enters the spacetime). These omissions hinder verification of the fitting procedure.
  2. Consider including a table of best-fit masses, uncertainties, and chi-squared values for each model (boson stars and Schwarzschild) to allow direct comparison with the 4.3×10^6 M_⊙ reference value.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of our manuscript and for highlighting this important point about modeling assumptions. We address the comment below and have revised the paper to strengthen the presentation of our assumptions and their implications.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central claim of systematically larger inferred masses for boson-star models (and the resulting constraints) rests on the assumption, stated in the abstract, of treating flares as hot spots on circular equatorial orbits. No justification or robustness checks against non-circular, non-equatorial, or non-point-like flare dynamics are described. If this assumption is violated, the chi-squared/MCMC mass discrepancies and constraints on solitonic boson star interpretations do not follow.

    Authors: We agree that the assumption of hot spots on circular equatorial orbits is foundational to the reported mass offsets and constraints, as stated in the abstract and detailed in Section 2. This framework is the standard approach in the GRAVITY flare astrometry literature for enabling direct comparison of spacetime geometries. We did not include explicit robustness tests against non-circular, non-equatorial, or extended (non-point-like) flare models in the original submission. To address the referee's concern, we have added a dedicated paragraph in the revised Discussion section (new Section 5.2) that (i) justifies the circular equatorial choice by reference to existing observational indications from GRAVITY data and prior modeling papers, and (ii) qualitatively discusses how deviations from these assumptions could modify the inferred masses. Full quantitative robustness checks would require a substantially expanded analysis and are noted as future work. The constraints are therefore presented as conditional on the stated assumptions, which are now more explicitly caveated in the abstract and conclusions. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; mass inference uses external GRAVITY data against independent stellar-orbit benchmark

full rationale

The paper fits boson-star model parameters (including mass) directly to GRAVITY NIR flare astrometry by modeling flares as point-like hot spots on circular equatorial orbits, then compares the resulting best-fit masses to the independently established 4.3×10^6 M_⊙ value from stellar-orbit dynamics. No derivation step reduces a claimed prediction to a quantity defined by the fit itself, invokes self-citations for uniqueness or ansatz, or renames a known result. The central claim is a direct empirical comparison against external data, with the orbit assumption serving as a modeling choice rather than a circular reduction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 1 invented entities

The claim rests on domain assumptions about flare dynamics and on fitting masses within pre-existing boson-star spacetimes; the boson star itself is an entity imported from prior theory rather than newly invented here.

free parameters (2)
  • boson star effective radius
    Five discrete values chosen to span different degrees of diffuseness; each affects the spacetime and thus the fitted mass.
  • inferred mass
    Fitted via chi-squared and MCMC to reproduce observed flare centroid motions and images.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Flares are hot spots on circular equatorial orbits
    Invoked to compute centroid motions and lensed images in each spacetime.
  • standard math Spherically symmetric, static metrics for the boson star models
    Standard assumption for the five solitonic solutions considered.
invented entities (1)
  • solitonic boson star no independent evidence
    purpose: Alternative compact object model for Sgr A* lacking an event horizon
    Imported from prior boson-field theory and tested here; no new independent evidence supplied in the paper.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5480 in / 1704 out tokens · 66192 ms · 2026-05-09T20:23:40.042135+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Boson star-black hole binaries: initial data and head-on collisions

    gr-qc 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    A one-body conformal-factor correction stabilizes boson star-black hole initial data, enabling gravitational-wave analysis that shows higher multipoles can discriminate mixed mergers from pure black-hole binaries.

  2. Bayesian Analysis of Massive Boson Star Models for Sagittarius A* Using Near-Infrared Astrometry Data

    astro-ph.HE 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Bayesian analysis shows current near-IR astrometry data cannot distinguish massive boson stars from Schwarzschild black holes for Sgr A*.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

61 extracted references · 60 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    ECO-spotting: looking for extremely compact objects with bosonic fields,

    V. Cardoso, C. F. B. Macedo, K.-i. Maeda, and H. Okawa, “ECO-spotting: looking for extremely compact objects with bosonic fields,” Class. Quant. Grav.39no. 3, (2022) 034001, arXiv:2112.05750 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2022

  2. [2]

    Dynamical Boson Stars,

    S. L. Liebling and C. Palenzuela, “Dynamical boson stars,” Living Rev. Rel.26no. 1, (2023) 1,arXiv:1202.5809 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

  3. [3]

    Dynamical bar-mode instability in spinning bosonic stars,

    F. Di Giovanni, N. Sanchis-Gual, P. Cerd´ a-Dur´ an, M. Zilh˜ ao, C. Herdeiro, J. A. Font, and E. Radu, “Dynamical bar-mode instability in spinning bosonic stars,” Phys. Rev. D102 no. 12, (2020) 124009,arXiv:2010.05845 [gr-qc]. 19

    work page arXiv 2020

  4. [4]

    Accretion disc onto a static non-baryonic compact object

    D. F. Torres, “Accretion disc onto a static nonbaryonic compact object,” Nucl. Phys. B626 (2002) 377–394,arXiv:hep-ph/0201154

    work page Pith review arXiv 2002

  5. [5]

    Accretion disc onto boson stars: A Way to supplant black holes candidates,

    F. S. Guzman, “Accretion disc onto boson stars: A Way to supplant black holes candidates,” Phys. Rev. D73(2006) 021501,arXiv:gr-qc/0512081

    work page arXiv 2006

  6. [6]

    Spherical boson stars as black hole mimickers,

    F. S. Guzman and J. M. Rueda-Becerril, “Spherical boson stars as black hole mimickers,” Phys. Rev. D80(2009) 084023,arXiv:1009.1250 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2009

  7. [7]

    Astrophysical signatures of boson stars: quasinormal modes and inspiral resonances,

    C. F. B. Macedo, P. Pani, V. Cardoso, and L. C. B. Crispino, “Astrophysical signatures of boson stars: quasinormal modes and inspiral resonances,” Phys. Rev. D88no. 6, (2013) 064046,arXiv:1307.4812 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2013

  8. [8]

    Gravitational Wave Signatures of Highly Compact Boson Star Binaries,

    C. Palenzuela, P. Pani, M. Bezares, V. Cardoso, L. Lehner, and S. Liebling, “Gravitational Wave Signatures of Highly Compact Boson Star Binaries,” Phys. Rev. D96no. 10, (2017) 104058,arXiv:1710.09432 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2017

  9. [9]

    M., et al

    H. Olivares, Z. Younsi, C. M. Fromm, M. De Laurentis, O. Porth, Y. Mizuno, H. Falcke, M. Kramer, and L. Rezzolla, “How to tell an accreting boson star from a black hole,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.497no. 1, (2020) 521–535,arXiv:1809.08682 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2020

  10. [10]

    H. R. Olivares-S´ anchez, P. Kocherlakota, and C. A. R. Herdeiro, GRMHD Simulations of Accretion Onto Exotic Compact Objects. 2025.arXiv:2408.09893 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2025

  11. [11]

    The imitation game: Proca stars that can mimic the Schwarzschild shadow,

    C. A. R. Herdeiro, A. M. Pombo, E. Radu, P. V. P. Cunha, and N. Sanchis-Gual, “The imitation game: Proca stars that can mimic the Schwarzschild shadow,” JCAP04(2021) 051,arXiv:2102.01703 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2021

  12. [12]

    Shadows of boson and Proca stars with thin accretion disks,

    J. L. Rosa and D. Rubiera-Garcia, “Shadows of boson and Proca stars with thin accretion disks,” Phys. Rev. D106no. 8, (2022) 084004,arXiv:2204.12949 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2022

  13. [13]

    Observational signatures of hot spots orbiting horizonless objects,

    J. L. Rosa, P. Garcia, F. H. Vincent, and V. Cardoso, “Observational signatures of hot spots orbiting horizonless objects,” Phys. Rev. D106no. 4, (2022) 044031,arXiv:2205.11541 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2022

  14. [14]

    Imaging compact boson stars with hot spots and thin accretion disks,

    J. L. Rosa, C. F. B. Macedo, and D. Rubiera-Garcia, “Imaging compact boson stars with hot spots and thin accretion disks,” Phys. Rev. D108no. 4, (2023) 044021,arXiv:2303.17296 [gr-qc]. 20

    work page arXiv 2023

  15. [15]

    Emerging black hole shadow from collapsing boson star,

    Y.-P. Zhang, S.-W. Wei, and Y.-X. Liu, “Emerging black hole shadow from collapsing boson star,”arXiv:2503.14159 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv

  16. [16]

    Theoretical Physics Implications of the Binary Black-Hole Mergers GW150914 and GW151226

    N. Yunes, K. Yagi, and F. Pretorius, “Theoretical Physics Implications of the Binary Black-Hole Mergers GW150914 and GW151226,” Phys. Rev. D94no. 8, (2016) 084002, arXiv:1603.08955 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2016

  17. [17]

    Echoes of ECOs: gravitational-wave signatures of exotic compact objects and of quantum corrections at the horizon scale

    V. Cardoso, S. Hopper, C. F. B. Macedo, C. Palenzuela, and P. Pani, “Gravitational-wave signatures of exotic compact objects and of quantum corrections at the horizon scale,” Phys. Rev. D94no. 8, (2016) 084031,arXiv:1608.08637 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2016

  18. [18]

    Distinguishing Boson Stars from Black Holes and Neutron Stars from Tidal Interactions in Inspiraling Binary Systems

    N. Sennett, T. Hinderer, J. Steinhoff, A. Buonanno, and S. Ossokine, “Distinguishing Boson Stars from Black Holes and Neutron Stars from Tidal Interactions in Inspiraling Binary Systems,” Phys. Rev. D96no. 2, (2017) 024002,arXiv:1704.08651 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2017

  19. [19]

    GW190521 as a Merger of Proca Stars: A Potential New Vector Boson of 8.7×10 −13 eV,

    J. Calder´ on Bustillo, N. Sanchis-Gual, A. Torres-Forn´ e, J. A. Font, A. Vajpeyi, R. Smith, C. Herdeiro, E. Radu, and S. H. W. Leong, “GW190521 as a Merger of Proca Stars: A Potential New Vector Boson of 8.7×10 −13 eV,” Phys. Rev. Lett.126no. 8, (2021) 081101, arXiv:2009.05376 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2021

  20. [20]

    Monitoring stellar orbits around the Massive Black Hole in the Galactic Center

    S. Gillessen, F. Eisenhauer, S. Trippe, T. Alexander, R. Genzel, F. Martins, and T. Ott, “Monitoring stellar orbits around the Massive Black Hole in the Galactic Center,” Astrophys. J.692(2009) 1075–1109,arXiv:0810.4674 [astro-ph]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2009

  21. [21]

    The Galactic Center Massive Black Hole and Nuclear Star Cluster,

    R. Genzel, F. Eisenhauer, and S. Gillessen, “The Galactic Center Massive Black Hole and Nuclear Star Cluster,” Rev. Mod. Phys.82(2010) 3121–3195,arXiv:1006.0064 [astro-ph.GA]. [22]GRAVITYCollaboration, R. Abuter et al., “Detection of the gravitational redshift in the orbit of the star S2 near the Galactic centre massive black hole,” Astron. Astrophys.615 ...

    work page arXiv 2010

  22. [22]

    Relativistic redshift of the star S0-2 orbit- ing the Galactic center supermassive black hole,

    T. Do et al., “Relativistic redshift of the star S0-2 orbiting the Galactic center supermassive black hole,” Science365no. 6454, (2019) 664–668,arXiv:1907.10731 [astro-ph.GA]. 21 [25]Event Horizon TelescopeCollaboration, K. Akiyama et al., “First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results. I. The Shadow of the Supermassive Black Hole in the Center of ...

    work page arXiv 2019

  23. [23]

    Constraints on self-dual black hole in loop quantum gravity with S0-2 star in the galactic center,

    J.-M. Yan, Q. Wu, C. Liu, T. Zhu, and A. Wang, “Constraints on self-dual black hole in loop quantum gravity with S0-2 star in the galactic center,” JCAP09(2022) 008, arXiv:2203.03203 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2022

  24. [24]

    Constraining a disformal Schwarzschild black hole in DHOST theories with the orbit of the S2 star,

    Z. Zhang, S. Chen, and J. Jing, “Constraining a disformal Schwarzschild black hole in DHOST theories with the orbit of the S2 star,” Eur. Phys. J. C84no. 8, (2024) 827, arXiv:2404.05957 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2024

  25. [25]

    A Supermassive scalar star at the galactic center?,

    D. F. Torres, S. Capozziello, and G. Lambiase, “A Supermassive scalar star at the galactic center?,” Phys. Rev. D62(2000) 104012,arXiv:astro-ph/0004064

    work page arXiv 2000

  26. [26]

    The Event Horizon of Sagittarius A*,

    A. E. Broderick, A. Loeb, and R. Narayan, “The Event Horizon of Sagittarius A*,” Astrophys. J.701(2009) 1357–1366,arXiv:0903.1105 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2009

  27. [27]

    Imaging a boson star at the Galactic center,

    F. H. Vincent, Z. Meliani, P. Grandclement, E. Gourgoulhon, and O. Straub, “Imaging a boson star at the Galactic center,” Class. Quant. Grav.33no. 10, (2016) 105015, arXiv:1510.04170 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2016

  28. [28]

    The observational evidence for horizons: from echoes to precision gravitational-wave physics

    V. Cardoso and P. Pani, “The observational evidence for horizons: from echoes to precision gravitational-wave physics,”arXiv:1707.03021 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv

  29. [29]

    Tests for the existence of black holes through gravitational wave echoes,

    V. Cardoso and P. Pani, “Tests for the existence of black holes through gravitational wave echoes,” Nature Astron.1no. 9, (2017) 586–591,arXiv:1709.01525 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2017

  30. [30]

    Does the black hole shadow probe the event horizon geometry?,

    P. V. P. Cunha, C. A. R. Herdeiro, and M. J. Rodriguez, “Does the black hole shadow probe the event horizon geometry?,” Phys. Rev. D97no. 8, (2018) 084020,arXiv:1802.02675 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2018

  31. [31]

    Motion of test particle in rotating boson star,

    Y.-P. Zhang, Y.-B. Zeng, Y.-Q. Wang, S.-W. Wei, and Y.-X. Liu, “Motion of test particle in rotating boson star,” Phys. Rev. D105no. 4, (2022) 044021,arXiv:2107.04848 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2022

  32. [32]

    Using space-VLBI to probe gravity around Sgr A*,

    C. M. Fromm, Y. Mizuno, Z. Younsi, H. Olivares, O. Porth, M. De Laurentis, H. Falcke, M. Kramer, and L. Rezzolla, “Using space-VLBI to probe gravity around Sgr A*,” Astron. Astrophys.649(2021) A116,arXiv:2101.08618 [astro-ph.HE]. 22 [36]Event Horizon TelescopeCollaboration, K. Akiyama et al., “First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results. VI. Test...

    work page arXiv 2021

  33. [33]

    Testing the nature of dark compact objects: a status report

    V. Cardoso and P. Pani, “Testing the nature of dark compact objects: a status report,” Living Rev. Rel.22no. 1, (2019) 4,arXiv:1904.05363 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2019

  34. [34]

    Detection of orbital motions near the last stable circular orbit of the massive black hole SgrA*

    R. Abuter et al., “Detection of orbital motions near the last stable circular orbit of the massive black hole SgrA*,” Astron. Astrophys.618(2018) ,arXiv:1810.12641 [astro-ph.GA]. [39]GRAVITYCollaboration, R. Abuter et al., “Polarimetry and astrometry of NIR flares as event horizon scale, dynamical probes for the mass of Sgr A*,” Astron. Astrophys.677 (202...

    work page Pith review arXiv 2018

  35. [35]

    Polarimetry imprints of exotic compact objects: Solitonic boson stars,

    J. L. Rosa, N. Aimar, and H. L. Tamm, “Polarimetry imprints of exotic compact objects: Solitonic boson stars,” Phys. Rev. D111no. 12, (2025) 124036,arXiv:2504.02472 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  36. [36]

    Sagittarius A* near-infrared flares polarization as a probe of space-time I: Non-rotating exotic compact objects

    N. Aimar, J. L. Rosa, H. L. Tamm, and P. Garcia, “Sagittarius A* near-infrared flares polarization as a probe of space-time I: Non-rotating exotic compact objects,” arXiv:2506.23931 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  37. [37]

    Imaging optically-thin hot spots near the black hole horizon of sgr a* at radio and near-infrared wavelengths,

    A. E. Broderick and A. Loeb, “Imaging optically-thin hot spots near the black hole horizon of sgr a* at radio and near-infrared wavelengths,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.367(2006) 905–916,arXiv:astro-ph/0509237

    work page arXiv 2006

  38. [38]

    Polarized signatures of orbiting hot spots: Special relativity impact and probe of spacetime curvature,

    F. H. Vincent, M. Wielgus, N. Aimar, T. Paumard, and G. Perrin, “Polarized signatures of orbiting hot spots: Special relativity impact and probe of spacetime curvature,” Astron. Astrophys.684(2024) A194,arXiv:2309.10053 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2024

  39. [39]

    Images and flares of geodesic hot spots around a Kerr black hole,

    J. Huang, Z. Zhang, M. Guo, and B. Chen, “Images and flares of geodesic hot spots around a Kerr black hole,” Phys. Rev. D109no. 12, (2024) 124062,arXiv:2402.16293 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2024

  40. [40]

    Observations of orbiting hot spots around scalarized Reissner–Nordstr¨ om black holes,

    Y. Chen, P. Wang, and H. Yang, “Observations of orbiting hot spots around scalarized Reissner–Nordstr¨ om black holes,”Eur. Phys. J. C84no. 3, (2024) 270,arXiv:2401.10905 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2024

  41. [41]

    The galactic center massive black hole and nuclear star cluster,

    R. Genzel, F. Eisenhauer, and S. Gillessen, “The galactic center massive black hole and nuclear star cluster,” Reviews of modern physics82no. 4, (2010) 3121–3195. 23

    2010

  42. [42]

    Magnetic Reconnection and Hot Spot Formation in Black Hole Accretion Disks,

    B. Ripperda, F. Bacchini, and A. Philippov, “Magnetic Reconnection and Hot Spot Formation in Black Hole Accretion Disks,” Astrophys. J.900no. 2, (2020) 100, arXiv:2003.04330 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2020

  43. [43]

    Black Hole Flares: Ejection of Accreted Magnetic Flux through 3D Plasmoid-mediated Reconnection,

    B. Ripperda, M. Liska, K. Chatterjee, G. Musoke, A. A. Philippov, S. B. Markoff, A. Tchekhovskoy, and Z. Younsi, “Black Hole Flares: Ejection of Accreted Magnetic Flux through 3D Plasmoid-mediated Reconnection,” Astrophys. J. Lett.924no. 2, (2022) L32, arXiv:2109.15115 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2022

  44. [44]

    Magnetic reconnection plasmoid model for Sagittarius A* flares,

    N. Aimar, A. Dmytriiev, F. H. Vincent, I. E. Mellah, T. Paumard, G. Perrin, and A. Zech, “Magnetic reconnection plasmoid model for Sagittarius A* flares,” Astron. Astrophys.672 (2023) A62,arXiv:2301.11874 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2023

  45. [45]

    Flares in the Galactic Centre – I. Orbiting flux tubes in magnetically arrested black hole accretion discs,

    O. Porth, Y. Mizuno, Z. Younsi, and C. M. Fromm, “Flares in the Galactic Centre – I. Orbiting flux tubes in magnetically arrested black hole accretion discs,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.502no. 2, (2021) 2023–2032,arXiv:2006.03658 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2021

  46. [46]

    Flares in the Galactic centre – II. Polarization signatures of flares at mm-wavelengths,

    M. Najafi-Ziyazi, J. Davelaar, Y. Mizuno, and O. Porth, “Flares in the Galactic centre – II. Polarization signatures of flares at mm-wavelengths,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.531no. 4, (2024) 3961–3972,arXiv:2308.16740 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2024

  47. [47]

    Energy extraction from a Kerr black hole via magnetic reconnection within the plunging region,

    B. Chen, Y. Hou, J. Li, and Y. Shen, “Energy extraction from a Kerr black hole via magnetic reconnection within the plunging region,” Phys. Rev. D110no. 6, (2024) 063003, arXiv:2405.11488 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2024

  48. [48]

    Probing the Penrose Process: Images of Split Hotspots and Their Observational Signatures,

    Z. Zhao, Z.-Y. Fan, X. Wang, M. Guo, and B. Chen, “Probing the Penrose Process: Images of Split Hotspots and Their Observational Signatures,”arXiv:2510.27409 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv

  49. [49]

    Sgr A* near-infrared flares from reconnection events in a magnetically arrested disc,

    J. Dexter et al., “Sgr A* near-infrared flares from reconnection events in a magnetically arrested disc,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.497no. 4, (2020) 4999–5007,arXiv:2006.03657 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2020

  50. [50]

    Dynamics and emission properties of flux ropes from two-temperature GRMHD simulations with multiple magnetic loops,

    H.-X. Jiang, Y. Mizuno, I. K. Dihingia, A. Nathanail, Z. Younsi, and C. M. Fromm, “Dynamics and emission properties of flux ropes from two-temperature GRMHD simulations with multiple magnetic loops,” Astron. Astrophys.688(2024) A82,arXiv:2404.03237 [astro-ph.HE]. [56]GRAVITYCollaboration, M. Baub¨ ock et al., “Modeling the orbital motion of Sgr A*’s near-...

    work page arXiv 2024

  51. [51]

    A Plasmoid model for the Sgr A* Flares Observed With Gravity and CHANDRA,

    D. Ball, F. ¨Ozel, P. Christian, C.-K. Chan, and D. Psaltis, “A Plasmoid model for the Sgr A* Flares Observed With Gravity and CHANDRA,” Astrophys. J.917no. 1, (2021) 8, arXiv:2005.14251 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2021

  52. [52]

    Investigating non-Keplerian motion in flare events with astrometric data,

    F. Xie, Q.-H. Zhu, and X. Li, “Investigating non-Keplerian motion in flare events with astrometric data,”arXiv:2507.07411 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv

  53. [53]

    The origin of hotspots around Sgr A*: Orbital or pattern motion?,

    T. Matsumoto, C.-H. Chan, and T. Piran, “The origin of hotspots around Sgr A*: Orbital or pattern motion?,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.497no. 2, (2020) 2385–2392, arXiv:2004.13029 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2020

  54. [54]

    Parameter study for hot spot trajectories around SgrA*,

    E. Antonopoulou and A. Nathanail, “Parameter study for hot spot trajectories around SgrA*,” Astron. Astrophys.690(2024) A240,arXiv:2405.10115 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2024

  55. [55]

    Hot spots around Sagittarius A* - Joint fits to astrometry and polarimetry,

    A. I. Yfantis, M. Wielgus, and M. A. Mo´ scibrodzka, “Hot spots around Sagittarius A* - Joint fits to astrometry and polarimetry,” Astron. Astrophys.691(2024) A327, arXiv:2408.07120 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2024

  56. [56]

    Radial kinks in the boson stars,

    T.-C. Ma, X.-Y. Wang, and H.-Q. Zhang, “Radial kinks in the boson stars,” arXiv:2510.13923 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv

  57. [57]

    Imaging thick accretion disks and jets surrounding black holes,

    Z. Zhang, Y. Hou, M. Guo, and B. Chen, “Imaging thick accretion disks and jets surrounding black holes,” JCAP05(2024) 032,arXiv:2401.14794 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2024

  58. [58]

    Coport: a new public code for polarized radiative transfer in a covariant framework,

    J. Huang, L. Zheng, M. Guo, and B. Chen, “Coport: a new public code for polarized radiative transfer in a covariant framework,” JCAP11(2024) 054,arXiv:2407.10431 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2024

  59. [59]

    Autocorrelation signatures in time-resolved black hole flare images: Secondary peaks and convergence structure,

    Z. Zhang, Y. Hou, M. Guo, Y. Mizuno, and B. Chen, “Autocorrelation signatures in time-resolved black hole flare images: Secondary peaks and convergence structure,” Phys. Rev. D112no. 8, (2025) 083024,arXiv:2503.17200 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2025

  60. [60]

    ArviZ a unified library for ex- ploratory analysis of Bayesian models in Python.Journal of Open Source Software, 4(33):1143, 2019

    R. Kumar, C. Carroll, A. Hartikainen, and O. Martin, “Arviz a unified library for exploratory analysis of bayesian models in python,” Journal of Open Source Software4 no. 33, (2019) 1143.https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01143

    work page doi:10.21105/joss.01143 2019

  61. [61]

    emcee: the mcmc hammer,

    D. Foreman-Mackey, D. W. Hogg, D. Lang, and J. Goodman, “emcee: the mcmc hammer,” Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific125no. 925, (2013) 306. 25 [68]GRAVITYCollaboration, R. Abuter et al., “Mass distribution in the Galactic Center based on interferometric astrometry of multiple stellar orbits,” Astron. Astrophys.657(2022) L12, arXiv:211...

    work page arXiv 2013