Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 75 references

On the impact of magnetic-field models in galaxy clusters on constraints on axion-like particles from the lack of irregularities in high-energy spectra of astrophysical sources

T0 review · 3 major / 4 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 This paper shows that replacing the assumed turbulent magnetic field around NGC 1275 with a regular cavity field nearly removes the Fermi-LAT exclusion region for axion-like particles below the CAST limit.

desk verdict The model-dependence message is solid, but the paper's headline exclusion contour is weaker than the data would support once you account for their simplified statistical test. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.03084 v3 pith:EE4YP7GW submitted 2019-08-08 astro-ph.HE hep-ph

Maxim Libanov , Sergey Troitsky This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HEhep-ph
keywords axion-likeparticlesphoton-ALPmixingNGC1275PerseusclustermagneticfieldmodelsspectralirregularitiesFermi-LATFaradayrotation
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 argues that the widely quoted constraints on axion-like particles (ALPs) obtained from the smoothness of the Fermi-LAT gamma-ray spectrum of NGC 1275 are not robust: they depend on the assumed magnetic field around the source. Replacing the purely turbulent field model used in earlier work with a purely regular field in the observed X-ray cavity leaves almost no excluded parameter region below the CAST laboratory limit. The two choices bracket the real, unknown field, so the difference is presented as an estimate of the theoretical uncertainty of this method. The paper calls for detailed magnetic-field measurements around sources used for ALP searches before spectral-irregularity constraints can be trusted.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the analytic regular magnetic-field solution for radio lobes inflated in intracluster plasma [57], whose components $B_r$, $B_\theta$, $B_\phi$ are fixed by the cavity radius and normalized to reproduce the observed Faraday rotation; photon-ALP mixing is then propagated with the density-matrix evolution equation for photon-ALP mixing. The mechanism that explains the result is the difference between a multi-scale turbulent field, where for certain energies the oscillation length matches a coherence scale and produces an enhanced local wiggle in the spectrum, and a smooth coherent field, where conversion approaches the maximal-mixing regime without pronounced energy-localized features. The analysis is completed by a log-parabola fit to the Fermi-LAT spectrum with and without the spectrum modification factor.

What would settle it

A decisive check would be a multi-wavelength Faraday rotation map of the Perseus core with sufficient resolution to reconstruct the ordered field geometry and strength along the line of sight to NGC 1275; if the reconstructed field differs substantially from the analytic solution used here, or if its coherence length is much smaller than the 93 kpc cavity, the spectrum modification factor should be recomputed and the relaxed exclusion region would not apply to the real configuration.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Using the analytic field solution for an intracluster X-ray cavity [57], with radius 93 kpc, viewing angle $45^\circ$, symmetry axis aligned with the jets, and normalization fixed by the central Faraday rotation measure of about $7300$ rad/m$^2$, the authors recompute photon-ALP oscillation probabilities along the line of sight to NGC 1275 and refit the Fermi-LAT EDISP3 spectrum. For benchmark parameters $m = 10^{-9}$ eV and $g = 10^{-11}$ GeV$^{-1}$, the fit with ALPs ($\chi^2\approx 115.6$) is essentially as good as the fit without them ($\chi^2\approx 115.9$, 114 dof), whereas the same parameters are excluded at 95% CL for the purely turbulent model of [30]. The 95% exclusion contour for the regular field lies entirely above the CAST limit. The physical reason is that spectral wiggles around 1 GeV, which drive the turbulent-field constraints, are much weaker when the field is coherent on large scales.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the analytic cavity field, taken at a 45-degree viewing angle with its symmetry axis along the jets and normalized so that the full observed Faraday rotation of about $7300$ rad/m$^2$ comes from this regular field, faithfully represents the actual ordered magnetic field along the line of sight to NGC 1275; if the real field has a different geometry, coherence, or strength, the predicted spectral wiggles and the relaxed constraints change.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The Fermi-LAT exclusion contour from [30] cannot be quoted as an absolute ALP bound; for a purely regular cavity field the entire 95% excluded region sits above the CAST limit.
  • The true constraint for NGC 1275 lies somewhere between the turbulent and regular limits, so without knowing the mixture of field components the method gives no definite ALP limit.
  • Other sources treated the same way, notably PKS 2155-304, inherit the same model dependence because their field models were borrowed from richer clusters.
  • Better Faraday-rotation mapping of the Perseus cluster is a prerequisite for turning spectral smoothness into an ALP constraint; improved gamma-ray statistics alone cannot resolve the ambiguity.
  • In the X-ray band the effect may be even harder to pin down, because electron-density effects push photon-ALP conversion to the outer cluster where the field is less constrained.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the actual Perseus field is mostly ordered, the smoothness of the NGC 1275 spectrum currently adds no ALP constraint below the CAST bound, meaning the earlier limit was effectively a property of the assumed turbulent coherence scale rather than of the data.
  • A direct way to test this is to repeat the Fermi-LAT spectral fit with several independent regular-field geometries and viewing angles; if all plausible choices erase the exclusion region, the previous bound should be cited only as a turbulent-field limit.
  • The same tension could be used as a systematic uncertainty estimate for ALP limits from other clusters: computing both a purely turbulent and a purely regular version of every constraint would bracket the model uncertainty.
  • Future instruments that combine high-resolution Faraday-synthesis maps with gamma-ray data, or sources with better-measured fields, are the natural testbed for this method.
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 revisits constraints on axion-like particles (ALPs) derived from the lack of spectral irregularities in Fermi-LAT observations of NGC 1275, focusing on the role of the magnetic-field model. After a brief review of previous work, the authors introduce a regular magnetic field in the central X-ray cavity, using the analytic force-free solution of Gourgouliatos et al. [57], normalized to reproduce the observed Faraday rotation measure. They solve the full density-matrix propagation equations, compute the spectrum modification factor, and fit the published EDISP3 spectrum with a log-parabola multiplied by this factor. They derive a 95% exclusion contour in the (m, g) plane from an absolute chi-square threshold and find that, for the regular-field model, all excluded regions lie above the CAST limit, in contrast to the purely turbulent field model of Ref. [30]. The authors conclude that ALP constraints from spectral irregularity searches are strongly dependent on magnetic-field assumptions and call for better measurements of cluster magnetic fields.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the paper is a valuable cautionary result: it demonstrates that previously quoted bounds from NGC 1275 are not robust to the assumed magnetic-field configuration and illustrates how regular fields could relax them substantially. The work uses a realistic analytic field model, a full numerical integration of the photon-ALP mixing equations, and a direct comparison with a published Fermi-LAT analysis. The conclusion that magnetic-field modelling is a prerequisite for this class of ALP limits is timely and important for the interpretation of both current and future gamma-ray searches. The main weaknesses are statistical and comparative: the exclusion test is not a likelihood-ratio comparison with the no-ALP hypothesis, and the comparison with Ref. [30] mixes several analysis differences beyond the field model, so the quantitative strength of the claim is not yet fully established.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 4, exclusion contour (chi2_95 ≈ 139.9)] The 95% exclusion region is defined by an absolute chi-square threshold for 114 degrees of freedom, rather than by a likelihood-ratio test against the no-ALP fit, which has chi2 ≈ 115.9. Because the ALP parameters are fixed at each grid point, the no-ALP model is a special case of the ALP model at g = 0; a likelihood-ratio test comparing Δchi2 to a chi-square distribution with two degrees of freedom would exclude any point with Δchi2 ≳ 6, while the absolute threshold admits points with Δchi2 up to about 24. The authors acknowledge the simplification but do not quantify its impact on the headline statement that all excluded regions lie above the CAST limit. I request either a likelihood-ratio test or a Δchi2-based threshold, and an explicit statement of whether the conclusion below the CAST line is robust to this choice of statistic.
  2. [Sec. 4, Fig. 4] The comparison of the regular-field exclusion region with that of Ref. [30] conflates several analysis differences: the event class (EDISP3, 1/4 of the data, versus the full Fermi-LAT event set), the statistical procedure (chi-square with asymmetric errors versus the full likelihood of Ref. [30]), the magnetic-field model, and the use of continuous integration rather than the domain-like approximation. To support the claim that the difference in excluded regions is attributable specifically to the regular versus turbulent field, the authors should recompute the turbulent-field exclusion contour with their own pipeline, using the same event class and the same statistical procedure. Without this controlled comparison, the central result could be affected by the EDISP3 selection or by the simplified statistic rather than by the field model alone.
  3. [Sec. 3 and Sec. 4, field-model assumptions] The regular-field calculation relies on several unvaried assumptions: the viewing angle θ = 45°, the alignment of the cavity symmetry axis with the observed jets, the normalization of the field so that the entire central Faraday rotation measure of 7300 rad/m^2 is produced by the cavity field, and the neglect of ordered fields outside the cavity (e.g., the large-scale structure discussed in Sec. 3). Since the photon-ALP mixing probability depends on the transverse magnetic-field components along the line of sight, varying these assumptions can change the modification factor and the resulting exclusion contour. A sensitivity study over at least a few plausible values of the viewing angle, the field orientation, and the field normalization is needed before the broad conclusion that regular fields relax the constraints can be considered robust.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Fig. 1 caption] The word "Longuitudinal" should be "Longitudinal".
  2. [Sec. 5] The phrase "a study aming to constrain" contains a typo; it should be "aiming".
  3. [Sec. 4, footnote 1] The test of adding a 1 μG turbulent component is useful, but it would help to state explicitly the range of turbulent field strengths that are consistent with the Faraday rotation data once the regular component is included, so that the reader can judge whether the test covers the plausible parameter space.
  4. [Sec. 4, fitting procedure] The text states that the fit with ALPs has 114 degrees of freedom, the same as the no-ALP fit, because m and g are fixed rather than fitted; this is correct but worth stating explicitly to avoid confusion about the number of degrees of freedom in the comparison.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: ALP constraints are computed from an independently normalized magnetic-field model and external Fermi-LAT data, with no fitted parameter renamed as a prediction.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained against external inputs. The magnetic field is the analytic cavity solution of Gourgouliatos et al. [57], normalized to the Faraday rotation measure of Taylor et al. [51] and the X-ray-derived electron density [61]; these inputs do not involve the gamma-ray spectrum used for ALP constraints. The spectrum modification factor is obtained by numerically solving the photon-ALP density-matrix equation (1)-(2), a standard first-principles propagation calculation. The Fermi-LAT data of Ref. [30] are then fit with a log-parabola, with and without ALP modifications, scanning (m, g) independently. No ALP parameter or magnetic-field parameter is fitted to the gamma-ray data that is later 'predicted'; the exclusion contour is a goodness-of-fit threshold, not a fit-to-data construction. Author self-citations appear only in peripheral contexts (e.g., Ref. [14] for the full mixing matrix entries that are neglected; Ref. [18] as a review), and they are not load-bearing for the central claim. The use of an external magnetic-field model with stated assumptions is a modeling choice, not circular reasoning. The paper also explicitly acknowledges simplifications (e.g., chi-square rather than full likelihood, EDISP3-only data), which are correctness or robustness concerns rather than circularity. Therefore the central claim is not equivalent to its inputs by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The analysis uses standard photon-ALP mixing equations, an analytic magnetic field model from prior work, and observational inputs (Faraday rotation, X-ray cavity size, electron density). No new particles, forces, or entities are introduced. The dominant burden is the assumed regular-field configuration and its normalization, which determine the quantitative outcome.

free parameters (3)
  • Cavity field normalization C (central field strength) = 8.3 µG at the center
    Set so that the model reproduces the Faraday rotation measure of about 7300 rad/m^2 toward the cluster center [51]; the attribution of the entire RM to the regular field is an assumption (Sec. 3).
  • Viewing angle theta = 45 degrees
    Assumed in Sec. 3 for the line of sight through the cavity; the transverse field components that drive photon-ALP mixing depend on this angle.
  • Orientation of the cavity field symmetry axis = position angle about 147 degrees
    Assumed co-oriented with the observed jets in Sec. 4; changing it alters the transverse field components along the line of sight and hence the wiggles.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The magnetic field in the Perseus X-ray cavity is described by the force-free analytic solution of Ref. [57] with boundary conditions as in that paper.
    Invoked in Sec. 3; the solution is supported by numerical simulations in Ref. [57] but is not directly measured in Perseus.
  • domain assumption The emitted gamma-ray spectrum of NGC 1275 is a log-parabola over the fitted energy range.
    Standard AGN assumption, Eq. (3), also used in Ref. [30]; deviations would alter the fit quality for both ALP and no-ALP cases.
  • domain assumption The observed Faraday rotation measure toward the cluster center is entirely produced by the regular cavity field.
    Fixes the normalization in Sec. 3; if a turbulent or foreground component contributes, the regular field strength would be lower and the result would shift.
  • domain assumption Turbulent fields along the line of sight outside the cavity are subleading for ALP conversion.
    Stated in Sec. 4, with a footnote reporting that adding a 1 microGauss turbulent component out to 50 kpc changes the modification factor by only 2-3%.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of On the impact of magnetic-field models in galaxy clusters on constraints on axion-like particles from the lack of irregularities in high-energy spectra of astrophysical sources." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/EE4YP7GW

@misc{pith2026190803084,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: On the impact of magnetic-field models in galaxy clusters on constraints on axion-like particles from the lack of irregularities in high-energy spectra of astrophysical sources},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/EE4YP7GW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.03084}
}
read the original abstract

Photons may convert to axion-like particles (ALPs) in external magnetic fields. Under certain conditions, this effect should result in irregular features in observed spectra of astrophysical sources. Lack of such irregularities in particular spectra was used to constrain ALP parameters, with two most popular sources being the radio galaxy NGC 1275 and the blazar PKS 2155-304. The effect and, consequently, the constraints, depend on the magnetic fields through which the light from the source is propagated. Here, we revisit ALP constraints from gamma-ray observations of NGC 1275 taking into account the regular magnetic field of the X-ray cavity observed around this radio galaxy. This field was not accounted for in previous studies, which assumed a model of purely turbulent fields with coherence length much smaller than the cavity size. For the purely regular field, ALP constraints are relaxed considerably, compared to the purely turbulent one. While the actual magnetic field around a source is an unknown sum of the turbulent and ordered components, the difference in results gives an estimate of the theoretical uncertainty of the study and calls for detailed measurements of magnetic fields around sources used to constrain ALP properties in this approach.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.03084 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Longuitudinal, Br , and two transverse, Bθ and Bφ, components of the magnetic field solution [57] for the X-ray cavity around NGC 1275. scales are present. Ref. [52] discusses also an organised struc￾ture in the rotation-measure map on the ∼Mpc scales, possibly associated [67] with a shock caused by the interaction of the intracluster matter with intergalactic matter in the large-scale structure filament, which may … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Modification factor for the photon spectrum of NGC 1275: the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Fermi-LAT spectrum of NGC 1275 [30] (data points) together with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Exclusion regions (95% CL) on the plane of ALP parameters ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

75 extracted references · 19 canonical work pages

  1. [30]

    Search for spectral irregularities due to photon-axionlike-particle oscillations with the Fermi Large Area Telescope,

    M. Ajello et al. [Fermi-LAT Collaboration], “Search for spectral irregularities due to photon-axionlike-particle oscillations with the Fermi Large Area Telescope,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (2016) 161101, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.161101 [arXiv:1603.06978 [astro- ph.HE]]

    arXiv 2016

  2. [57]

    Structure of mag- netic fields in intracluster cavities,

    K. N. Gourgouliatos, J. Braithwaite and M. Lyutikov, “Structure of mag- netic fields in intracluster cavities,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 409 (2010) 1660, doi:10.1111 /j.1365-2966.2010.17410.x [arXiv:1008.5353 [astro-ph.HE]]

    arXiv 2010

  3. [1]

    The Low-Energy Frontier of Particle Physics,

    J. Jaeckel and A. Ringwald, “The Low-Energy Frontier of Particle Physics,” Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 60 (2010) 405, doi:10.1146/annurev.nucl.012809.104433 [arXiv:1002.0329 [hep-ph]]

    arXiv 2010

  4. [2]

    Mixing of the Photon with Low Mass Parti- cles,

    G. Ra ffelt and L. Stodolsky, “Mixing of the Photon with Low Mass Parti- cles,” Phys. Rev. D37, 1237 (1988), doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.37.1237

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.37.1237 1988

  5. [3]

    Cool WISPs for stellar cooling excesses,

    M. Giannotti et al., “Cool WISPs for stellar cooling excesses,” JCAP1605 (2016) 057, doi:10.1088 /1475-7516/2016/05/057 [arXiv:1512.08108 [astro-ph.HE]]

    arXiv 2016

  6. [4]

    Revisiting the bound on axion-photon coupling from Globular Clusters,

    A. Ayala et al. , “Revisiting the bound on axion-photon coupling from Globular Clusters,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 113 (2014) 191302, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.191302 [arXiv:1406.6053 [astro-ph.SR]]

    arXiv 2014

  7. [5]

    Anastassopoulos et al

    V . Anastassopoulos et al. [CAST Collaboration], “New CAST Limit on the Axion-Photon Interaction, Nature Phys. 13 (2017) 584, doi:10.1038/nphys4109 [arXiv:1705.02290 [hep-ex]]

    arXiv 2017

  8. [6]

    Deep Broadband Observations of the Distant Gamma-ray Blazar PKS 1424+240

    S. Archambault et al. [VERITAS and Fermi-LAT Collaborations], “Deep Broadband Observations of the Distant Gamma-ray Blazar PKS 1424 +240,” Astrophys. J. 785 (2014) L16, doi:10.1088 /2041- 8205/785/1/L16 [arXiv:1403.4308 [astro-ph.HE]]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2014

Show all 75 references
  1. [7]

    Very-High-Energy Gamma Rays from a Distant Quasar: How Transparent Is the Universe?,

    E. Aliu et al. [MAGIC Collaboration], “Very-High-Energy Gamma Rays from a Distant Quasar: How Transparent Is the Universe?,” Science 320 (2008) 1752, doi:10.1126/science.1157087 [arXiv:0807.2822 [astro-ph]]

    2008 arXiv

  2. [8]

    Fermi Large Area Telescope detection of two very- high-energy ( E > 100 GeV) gamma-ray photons from the z = 1.1 blazar PKS 0426−380,

    Y . T. Tanaka et al., “Fermi Large Area Telescope detection of two very- high-energy ( E > 100 GeV) gamma-ray photons from the z = 1.1 blazar PKS 0426−380,” Astrophys. J.777 (2013) L18, doi:10.1088/2041- 8205/777/1/L18 [arXiv:1308.0595]

    2013 arXiv

  3. [9]

    Indications for a pair-production anomaly from the propagation of VHE gamma-rays,

    D. Horns and M. Meyer, “Indications for a pair-production anomaly from the propagation of VHE gamma-rays,” JCAP 1202 (2012) 033, doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2012/02/033 [arXiv:1201.4711 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2012 arXiv

  4. [10]

    Breaks in gamma-ray spectra of dis- tant blazars and transparency of the Universe,

    G. I. Rubtsov and S. V . Troitsky, “Breaks in gamma-ray spectra of dis- tant blazars and transparency of the Universe,” JETP Lett. 100 (2014) 355 [Pis’ma ZhETF 100 (2014) 397], doi:10.1134/S0021364014180088 [arXiv:1406.0239 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2014 arXiv

  5. [11]

    Super GZK photons from photon axion mix- ing,

    C. Csaki et al. , “Super GZK photons from photon axion mix- ing,” JCAP 0305 (2003) 005, doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2003/05/005 [hep- ph/0302030]

    2003

  6. [12]

    Evidence for a new light spin-zero boson from cosmological gamma-ray propagation?,

    A. De Angelis, M. Roncadelli and O. Mansutti, “Evidence for a new light spin-zero boson from cosmological gamma-ray propagation?,” Phys. Rev. D 76 (2007) 121301, doi:10.1103 /PhysRevD.76.121301 [arXiv:0707.4312 [astro-ph]]

    2007 arXiv

  7. [13]

    The Milky Way as a Kiloparsec-Scale Axionscope,

    M. Simet, D. Hooper and P. D. Serpico, “The Milky Way as a Kiloparsec-Scale Axionscope,” Phys. Rev. D 77 (2008) 063001, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.77.063001 [arXiv:0712.2825 [astro-ph]]

    2008 arXiv

  8. [14]

    Photon-axion mixing and ultra-high-energy cosmic rays from BL Lac type objects - Shin- ing light through the Universe,

    M. Fairbairn, T. Rashba and S. V . Troitsky, “Photon-axion mixing and ultra-high-energy cosmic rays from BL Lac type objects - Shin- ing light through the Universe,” Phys. Rev. D 84 (2011) 125019, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.84.125019 [arXiv:0901.4085 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2011 arXiv

  9. [15]

    Hardening of TeV gamma spectrum of AGNs in galaxy clusters by conversions of photons into axion-like particles,

    D. Horns et al., “Hardening of TeV gamma spectrum of AGNs in galaxy clusters by conversions of photons into axion-like particles,” Phys. Rev. D 86 (2012) 075024, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.86.075024 [arXiv:1207.0776 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2012 arXiv

  10. [16]

    First lower limits on the photon-axion-like particle coupling from very high en- ergy gamma-ray observations,

    M. Meyer, D. Horns and M. Raue, “First lower limits on the photon-axion-like particle coupling from very high en- ergy gamma-ray observations,” Phys. Rev. D 87 (2013) 035027, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.87.035027 [arXiv:1302.1208 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2013 arXiv

  11. [17]

    Axion-like particles explain the unphysical redshift- dependence of AGN gamma-ray spectra,

    G. Galanti et al. , “Axion-like particles explain the unphysical redshift- dependence of AGN gamma-ray spectra,” arXiv:1503.04436 [astro- ph.HE]

    arXiv

  12. [18]

    Axion-like particles and the propagation of gamma rays over astronomical distances,

    S. V . Troitsky, “Axion-like particles and the propagation of gamma rays over astronomical distances,” JETP Lett. 105 (2017) 55, doi:10.1134/S0021364017010052 [arXiv:1612.01864 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2017 arXiv

  13. [19]

    Distance-dependent hard- enings in gamma-ray blazar spectra corrected for the absorption on the extragalactic background light,

    A. Korochkin, G. Rubtsov and S. Troitsky, “Distance-dependent hard- enings in gamma-ray blazar spectra corrected for the absorption on the extragalactic background light,” arXiv:1810.03443 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv

  14. [20]

    Limiting the dimming of distant Type Ia su- pernovae,

    L. Ostman and E. Mortsell, “Limiting the dimming of distant Type Ia su- pernovae,” JCAP 0502 (2005) 005, doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2005/02/005 [astro-ph/0410501]

    2005 arXiv

  15. [21]

    Spectral Signatures of Photon-Particle Oscil- lations from Celestial Objects,

    D. Chelouche et al. , “Spectral Signatures of Photon-Particle Oscil- lations from Celestial Objects,” Astrophys. J. Suppl. 180 (2009) 1, doi:10.1088/0067-0049/180/1/1 [arXiv:0806.0411 [astro-ph]]. 6

    2009 arXiv

  16. [22]

    Irregularity in gamma ray source spectra as a signature of axionlike particles,

    D. Wouters and P. Brun, “Irregularity in gamma ray source spectra as a signature of axionlike particles,” Phys. Rev. D 86 (2012) 043005, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.86.043005 [arXiv:1205.6428 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2012 arXiv

  17. [23]

    Comment on “Irregularity in gamma ray source spectra as a signature of axion-like particles

    G. Galanti and M. Roncadelli, “Comment on “Irregularity in gamma ray source spectra as a signature of axion-like particles”,” arXiv:1305.2114 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv

  18. [24]

    On detecting oscillations of gamma rays into axion-like particles in turbulent and coherent magnetic fields,

    M. Meyer, D. Montanino and J. Conrad, “On detecting oscillations of gamma rays into axion-like particles in turbulent and coherent magnetic fields,” JCAP 1409 (2014) 003, doi:10.1088 /1475-7516/2014/09/003 [arXiv:1406.5972 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2014 arXiv

  19. [25]

    Behavior of axionlike particles in smoothed out domainlike magnetic fields,

    G. Galanti and M. Roncadelli, “Behavior of axionlike particles in smoothed out domainlike magnetic fields,” Phys. Rev. D 98 (2018) 043018, doi:10.1103 /PhysRevD.98.043018 [arXiv:1804.09443 [astro- ph.HE]]

    2018 arXiv

  20. [26]

    Blazar VHE spectral alterations induced by photon- ALP oscillations,

    G. Galanti et al. , “Blazar VHE spectral alterations induced by photon- ALP oscillations,” doi:10.1093/mnras/stz1144 [arXiv:1811.03548 [astro- ph.HE]]

    arXiv

  21. [27]

    Constraints on ax- ionlike particles with H.E.S.S. from the irregularity of the PKS 2155−304 energy spectrum,

    A. Abramowski et al. [H.E.S.S. Collaboration], “Constraints on ax- ionlike particles with H.E.S.S. from the irregularity of the PKS 2155−304 energy spectrum,” Phys. Rev. D 88 (2013) 102003, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.88.102003 [arXiv:1311.3148 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2013 arXiv

  22. [28]

    New bounds on axionlike particles from the Fermi Large Area Telescope observation of PKS 2155 −304,

    C. Zhang et al. , “New bounds on axionlike particles from the Fermi Large Area Telescope observation of PKS 2155 −304,” Phys. Rev. D 97 (2018) 063009, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.97.063009 [arXiv:1802.08420 [hep-ph]]

    2018 arXiv

  23. [29]

    Constraints on axionlike particles with di ffer- ent magnetic field models from the PKS 2155-304 energy spectrum,

    J. Bu and Y . P. Li, “Constraints on axionlike particles with di ffer- ent magnetic field models from the PKS 2155-304 energy spectrum,” arXiv:1906.00357 [astro-ph.HE]

    1906 arXiv

  24. [31]

    Improved limit on axion-like particles from γ-ray data on Perseus cluster,

    D. Malyshev et al. , “Improved limit on axion-like particles from γ-ray data on Perseus cluster,” arXiv:1805.04388 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv

  25. [32]

    Searching for spectral oscillations due to photon-axionlike particle conversion using the Fermi-LAT observa- tions of bright supernova remnants,

    Z. Q. Xia et al. , “Searching for spectral oscillations due to photon-axionlike particle conversion using the Fermi-LAT observa- tions of bright supernova remnants,” Phys. Rev. D 97 (2018) 063003, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.97.063003 [arXiv:1801.01646 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2018 arXiv

  26. [33]

    Search for gamma-ray spectral modulations in Galactic pulsars,

    J. Majumdar, F. Calore and D. Horns, “Search for gamma-ray spectral modulations in Galactic pulsars,” JCAP 1804 (2018) 048, doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2018/04/048 [arXiv:1801.08813 [hep-ph]]

    2018 arXiv

  27. [34]

    Constraints on axion-like particle properties with very high energy gamma-ray observations of Galactic sources,

    Y . F. Liang et al. , “Constraints on axion-like particle properties with very high energy gamma-ray observations of Galactic sources,” arXiv:1804.07186 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  28. [35]

    Constraints on axion-like particles from X-ray observations of the Hydra galaxy cluster,

    D. Wouters and P. Brun, “Constraints on axion-like particles from X-ray observations of the Hydra galaxy cluster,” Astrophys. J. 772 (2013) 44, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/772/1/44 [arXiv:1304.0989 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2013 arXiv

  29. [36]

    Constraints on Axion-Like Particles from X-ray Obser- vations of NGC1275,

    M. Berg et al., “Constraints on Axion-Like Particles from X-ray Obser- vations of NGC1275,” Astrophys. J. 847 (2017) 101, doi:10.3847/1538- 4357/aa8b16 [arXiv:1605.01043 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2017 arXiv

  30. [37]

    Constraints on massive axion-like particles from X-ray observations of NGC 1275,

    L. Chen and J. P. Conlon, “Constraints on massive axion-like particles from X-ray observations of NGC 1275,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 479 (2018) 2243, doi:10.1093 /mnras/sty1591 [arXiv:1712.08313 [astro- ph.HE]]

    2018 arXiv

  31. [38]

    Astrophysical limits on very light axion- like particles from Chandra grating spectroscopy of NGC 1275,

    C. S. Reynolds et al. , “Astrophysical limits on very light axion- like particles from Chandra grating spectroscopy of NGC 1275,” arXiv:1907.05475 [hep-ph]

    1907 arXiv

  32. [39]

    A New Bound on Axion-Like Parti- cles,

    M. C. D. Marsh et al. , “A New Bound on Axion-Like Parti- cles,” JCAP 1712 (2017) 036, doi:10.1088 /1475-7516/2017/12/036 [arXiv:1703.07354 [hep-ph]]

    2017 arXiv

  33. [40]

    Constraints on axion-like particles from non- observation of spectral modulations for X-ray point sources,

    J. P. Conlon et al. , “Constraints on axion-like particles from non- observation of spectral modulations for X-ray point sources,” JCAP1707 (2017) 005, doi:10.1088 /1475-7516/2017/07/005 [arXiv:1704.05256 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2017 arXiv

  34. [41]

    Review of Particle Physics,

    M. Tanabashi et al. [Particle Data Group], “Review of Particle Physics,” Phys. Rev. D 98 (2018) 030001, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.98.030001

    2018 doi

  35. [44]

    The magnetized medium around the radio galaxy B2 0755+37: an interaction with the intra-group gas,

    D. Guidetti et al. , “The magnetized medium around the radio galaxy B2 0755+37: an interaction with the intra-group gas,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 423 (2012) 1335, doi:10.1111 /j.1365-2966.2012.20961.x [arXiv:1203.4582 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2012

  36. [45]

    Faraday rotation study of NGC 612 (PKS 0131−36): a hybrid radio source and its magnetized circumgalac- tic environment,

    J. K. Banfield et al. , “Faraday rotation study of NGC 612 (PKS 0131−36): a hybrid radio source and its magnetized circumgalac- tic environment,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 482 (2019) 5250, doi:10.1093/mnras/sty3108 [arXiv:1811.06266 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2019 arXiv

  37. [46]

    Polarised structures in the radio lobes of B2 0258 +35 - Evidence of magnetic draping?

    B. Adebahr, M. Brienza, R. Morganti, “Polarised structures in the radio lobes of B2 0258 +35 - Evidence of magnetic draping?”, As- tron. Astrophys. 622 (2019) A209, doi:10.1051 /0004-6361/201833988 [arXiv:1812.07900 [astro-ph.GA]]

    2019 arXiv

  38. [48]

    Relics in galaxy clusters at high radio frequencies

    M. Kierdorf et al., “Relics in galaxy clusters at high radio frequencies”, Astron. Astrophys. 600 (2017) A18, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629570 [arXiv:1612.01764 [astro-ph.GA]]

    2017 arXiv

  39. [49]

    Clusters of galaxies: observational properties of the di ffuse radio emission,

    L. Feretti et al. , “Clusters of galaxies: observational properties of the di ffuse radio emission,” Astron. Astrophys. Rev. 20 (2012) 54, doi:10.1007/s00159-012-0054-z [arXiv:1205.1919 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2012 arXiv

  40. [50]

    Observing interstellar and intergalactic magnetic fields,

    J. L. Han, “Observing interstellar and intergalactic magnetic fields,” Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 55 (2017) 111, doi:10.1146/annurev-astro- 091916-055221

    2017 doi

  41. [51]

    Magnetic fields in the center of the Perseus clus- ter,

    G. B. Taylor et al. , “Magnetic fields in the center of the Perseus clus- ter,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 368 (2006) 1500, doi:10.1111/j.1365- 2966.2006.10244.x [astro-ph/0602622]

    2006

  42. [52]

    Di ffuse polarized emission as- sociated with the Perseus cluster,

    A. G. de Bruyn and M. A. Brentjens, “Di ffuse polarized emission as- sociated with the Perseus cluster,” Astron. Astrophys. 441 (2005) 931, doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20052992 [astro-ph/0507351]

    2005 arXiv

  43. [53]

    A ROSAT HRI study of the interaction of the X-ray emitting gas and radio lobers of NGC 1275,

    H. Boehringer et al., “A ROSAT HRI study of the interaction of the X-ray emitting gas and radio lobers of NGC 1275,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 264 (1993) L25, doi:10.1093/mnras/264.1.L25

    1993 doi

  44. [54]

    Chandra temperature and metallicity maps of the Perseus cluster core,

    R. W. Schmidt, A. C. Fabian and J. S. Sanders, “Chandra temperature and metallicity maps of the Perseus cluster core,” Mon. Not. Roy. As- tron. Soc. 337 (2002) 71, doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05804.x [astro- ph/0207290]

    2002

  45. [55]

    Non-thermal X-rays, a high abundance ridge and fossil bubbles in the core of the Perseus cluster of galaxies,

    J. S. Sanders, A. C. Fabian and R. J. H. Dunn, “Non-thermal X-rays, a high abundance ridge and fossil bubbles in the core of the Perseus cluster of galaxies,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 360 (2005) 133, doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09016.x [astro-ph/0503318]

    2005

  46. [56]

    Deep 230-470 MHz VLA observations of the mini-halo in the Perseus cluster,

    M. Gendron-Marsolais et al. , “Deep 230-470 MHz VLA observations of the mini-halo in the Perseus cluster,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 469 (2017) 3872, doi:10.1093 /mnras/stx1042 [arXiv:1701.03791 [astro- ph.CO]]

    2017 arXiv

  47. [58]

    Evolution and distribution of magnetic fields from AGNs in galaxy clusters. I. The e ffect of injection energy and redshift,

    H. Xu et al. , “Evolution and distribution of magnetic fields from AGNs in galaxy clusters. I. The e ffect of injection energy and redshift,” Astrophys. J. 725 (2010) 2152, doi:10.1088 /0004-637X/725/2/2152 [arXiv:1011.0030 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2010 arXiv

  48. [59]

    Evolution and distribution of magnetic fields from AGNs in galaxy clusters. II. The e ffects of cluster size and dynami- cal state,

    H. Xu et al. , “Evolution and distribution of magnetic fields from AGNs in galaxy clusters. II. The e ffects of cluster size and dynami- cal state,” Astrophys. J.739 (2011) 77, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/739/2/77 [arXiv:1107.2599 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2011 arXiv

  49. [60]

    An examination of magnetized outflows from ac- tive galactic nuclei in galaxy clusters,

    P. M. Sutter et al. , “An examination of magnetized outflows from ac- tive galactic nuclei in galaxy clusters,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 419 (2012) 2293, doi:10.1111 /j.1365-2966.2011.19875.x [arXiv:1108.3344 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2012

  50. [61]

    XMM-Newton observations of the Perseus cluster I: the temperature and surface brightness structure,

    E. Churazov et al. , “XMM-Newton observations of the Perseus cluster I: the temperature and surface brightness structure,” Astrophys. J. 590 (2003) 225, doi:10.1086/374923 [astro-ph/0301482]

    2003 arXiv

  51. [62]

    Substructures associated with the sloshing cold front in the Perseus cluster,

    Y . Ichinohe et al., “Substructures associated with the sloshing cold front in the Perseus cluster,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 483 (2019) 1744, 7 doi:10.1093/mnras/sty3257 [arXiv:1810.07380 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2019 arXiv

  52. [63]

    Deep Chandra observation and numerical studies of the nearest cluster cold front in the sky,

    N. Werner et al. , “Deep Chandra observation and numerical studies of the nearest cluster cold front in the sky,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 455 (2016) 846, doi:10.1093 /mnras/stv2358 [arXiv:1506.06429 [astro- ph.CO]]

    2016 arXiv

  53. [64]

    The Environment of the BL Lac object PKS 2155 −304,

    R. Falomo, J. E. Pesce and A. Treves, “The Environment of the BL Lac object PKS 2155 −304,” Astrophys. J. 411 (1993) L63, doi:10.1086/186913

    1993 doi

  54. [65]

    The cluster-scale environment of PKS 2155 −304,

    E. P. Farina et al. , “The cluster-scale environment of PKS 2155 −304,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.455 (2016) 618, doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2277 [arXiv:1510.01779 [astro-ph.GA]]

    2016 arXiv

  55. [66]

    Deep observation of the NGC 1275 region with MAGIC: search of di ffuse γ-ray emission from cosmic rays in the Perseus cluster,

    M. L. Ahnen et al. [MAGIC Collaboration], “Deep observation of the NGC 1275 region with MAGIC: search of di ffuse γ-ray emission from cosmic rays in the Perseus cluster,” Astron. Astrophys. 589 (2016) A33, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201527846 [arXiv:1602.03099 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2016 arXiv

  56. [67]

    RM-synthesis of the Perseus clus- ter,

    M. A. Brentjens and A. G. de Bruyn, “RM-synthesis of the Perseus clus- ter,” Astron. Nachr.327 (2006) 545, doi:10.1002/asna.200610584

    2006 doi

  57. [68]

    Deriving global structure of the Galactic Mag- netic Field from Faraday Rotation Measures of extragalactic sources,

    M. S. Pshirkov et al. , “Deriving global structure of the Galactic Mag- netic Field from Faraday Rotation Measures of extragalactic sources,” Astrophys. J. 738 (2011) 192, doi:10.1088 /0004-637X/738/2/192 [arXiv:1103.0814 [astro-ph.GA]]

    2011 arXiv

  58. [69]

    Asymmetric errors,

    R. Barlow, “Asymmetric errors,” eConf C 030908 (2003) WEMT002 [physics/0401042 [physics.data-an]]

    2003 arXiv

  59. [70]

    Detection of a Coherent Magnetic Field in the Magellanic Bridge through Faraday Rotation,

    J. F. Kaczmarek et al. , “Detection of a Coherent Magnetic Field in the Magellanic Bridge through Faraday Rotation,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 467 (2017) 1776, doi:10.1093 /mnras/stx206 [arXiv:1701.05962 [astro-ph.GA]]

    2017 arXiv

  60. [71]

    Dark matter distribution in the Coma cluster from galaxy kinematics: Breaking the mass - anisotropy degener- acy,

    E. L. Lokas and G. A. Mamon, “Dark matter distribution in the Coma cluster from galaxy kinematics: Breaking the mass - anisotropy degener- acy,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 343 (2003) 401, doi:10.1046 /j.1365- 8711.2003.06684.x [astro-ph/0302461]

    2003

  61. [72]

    Suzaku observations of the Hydra A cluster out to the virial radius,

    T. Sato et al., “Suzaku observations of the Hydra A cluster out to the virial radius,” Publ. Astron. Soc. Jap. 64 (2012) 95, doi:10.1093 /pasj/64.5.95 [arXiv:1203.1700 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2012 arXiv

  62. [73]

    Design concepts for the Cherenkov Telescope Array CTA: An advanced facility for ground- based high-energy gamma-ray astronomy,

    M. Actis et al. [CTA Consortium], “Design concepts for the Cherenkov Telescope Array CTA: An advanced facility for ground- based high-energy gamma-ray astronomy,” Exper. Astron.32 (2011) 193, doi:10.1007/s10686-011-9247-0 [arXiv:1008.3703 [astro-ph.IM]]

    2011 arXiv

  63. [74]

    The Hot and Energetic Universe: A White Pa- per presenting the science theme motivating the Athena + mission,

    K. Nandra et al. , “The Hot and Energetic Universe: A White Pa- per presenting the science theme motivating the Athena + mission,” arXiv:1306.2307 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv

  64. [75]

    Unravelling the origin of large-scale magnetic fields in galaxy clusters and beyond through Faraday Rotation Measures with the SKA,

    A. Bonafede et al. [SKA magnetism working group], “Unravelling the origin of large-scale magnetic fields in galaxy clusters and beyond through Faraday Rotation Measures with the SKA,” PoS AASKA 14 (2015) 095, doi:10.22323/1.215.0095 [arXiv:1501.00321 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2015 arXiv

  65. [76]

    Any light particle search II -Technical Design Re- port,

    R. Bahre et al. , “Any light particle search II -Technical Design Re- port,” JINST 8 (2013) T09001, doi:10.1088 /1748-0221/8/09/T09001 [arXiv:1302.5647 [physics.ins-det]]

    2013 arXiv

  66. [77]

    Towards a medium-scale axion helio- scope and haloscope,

    V . Anastassopoulos et al. , “Towards a medium-scale axion helio- scope and haloscope,” JINST 12 (2017) P11019, doi:10.1088 /1748- 0221/12/11/P11019 [arXiv:1706.09378 [hep-ph]]

    2017 arXiv

  67. [78]

    Conceptual Design of the International Ax- ion Observatory (IAXO),

    E. Armengaud et al. , “Conceptual Design of the International Ax- ion Observatory (IAXO),” JINST 9 (2014) T05002, doi:10.1088 /1748- 0221/9/05/T05002 [arXiv:1401.3233 [physics.ins-det]]. 8

    2014 arXiv

Pith tools

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