Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

The NuSTAR view of five changing-look active galactic nuclei

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Five changing-look AGNs show absorption falling as X-ray brightness rises, a sign that an accretion-driven disc wind clears the line of sight.

desk verdict Useful multi-epoch NuSTAR analysis of five CLAGNs, but the central NH–LX/LEdd anti-correlation is dominated by one source and the pooled significance is inflated. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.09602 v1 pith:RVXJZZYY submitted 2025-01-16 astro-ph.HE

Bing Lyu , Zhen Yan , Xue-bing Wu , Qingwen Wu , Wenfei Yu , Hao Liu This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords activegalacticnucleichanging-lookAGNchanging-obscurationX-rayabsorptioncolumndensityaccretiondiskwindsEddingtonratioNuSTAR
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 analyzes multi-epoch NuSTAR X-ray spectra of five changing-look active galactic nuclei (AGNs) that have switched optical type between type 1 and type 2 and also swung between Compton-thick and Compton-thin X-ray absorption. It tries to establish that these two apparently different kinds of changing-look behavior are driven by one thing: the accretion rate. The key evidence is a significant anti-correlation between the line-of-sight hydrogen column density $N_{\rm H,los}$ and the Eddington-scaled 2--10 keV luminosity $L_{\rm X}/L_{\rm Edd}$, with slope $-0.75\pm0.16$ after removing the outlier ESO 362-G18, together with a positive correlation between the photon index $\Gamma$ and $L_{\rm X}/L_{\rm Edd}$. The interpretation is that a disc wind whose strength grows with accretion rate pushes obscuring material out of the line of sight, which would unify changing-state and changing-obscuration AGNs under a single accretion-disc evolution picture. A sympathetic reader should care because it turns a classification curiosity into a physical mechanism with concrete predictions about which systems change and when.

What carries the argument

The carrying object is the Eddington-scaled X-ray luminosity $\log(L_{\rm X}/L_{\rm Edd})$, used as a proxy for the accretion rate, set against the line-of-sight column density $N_{\rm H,los}$ recovered from broadband X-ray spectral fitting. The argument works through the relation between these two quantities: a negative slope means the absorber thins as the disc brightens. The physical mechanism invoked is a radiation-pressure-driven disc wind whose strength increases with accretion rate; at the moderate disc inclinations of these five objects ($\sim40^\circ$--$70^\circ$), the wind pushes obscuring material away from the observer, lowering $N_{\rm H,los}$. A simulation study of parameter degeneracies supports that the measured anti-correlation is not an artifact of fitting degeneracy between $N_{\rm H,los}$ and the photon index $\Gamma$.

What would settle it

Compute the $N_{\rm H,los}$ versus $L_{\rm X}/L_{\rm Edd}$ slope separately for NGC 4151, NGC 5548, and NGC 7582 with enough epochs: if those slopes remain consistent with zero while NGC 1365 alone drives the pooled signal, the universal wind interpretation fails. A cleaner decisive observation would monitor one changing-look AGN continuously through a state transition; if the column density drops only after the luminosity rises by more than the light-crossing time of the obscuring region, the wind scenario is supported, and if they vary together with no lag, an ionization-driven change is the more likely explanation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is a correlation: for five changing-look AGNs observed with NuSTAR, the line-of-sight column density falls as the Eddington-scaled hard X-ray luminosity rises. Fitting the 3--60 keV spectra with a phenomenological reflection model (pexrav) and two clumpy torus models (XCLUMPY and UXCLUMPY), the authors find a negative $\log N_{\rm H,los}$--$\log(L_{\rm X}/L_{\rm Edd})$ correlation with slope $-0.75\pm0.16$, $R=-0.67\pm0.07$, and $p=6.7\times10^{-5}$, excluding ESO 362-G18; the X-ray photon index correlates positively with $L_{\rm X}/L_{\rm Edd}$. They interpret this as evidence that the obscuring gas is not merely a static clumpy torus but is regulated by the intrinsic accretion rate through a disc wind formed at moderate inclination angles: stronger accretion drives a stronger wind that clears the line of sight. ESO 362-G18, the one low-column source with a single NuSTAR pointing, violates the relation and is attributed to a clumpy-torus absorber. The paper concludes that changing-obscuration phenomena, like changing-state phenomena, are triggered by accretion-disc evolution.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the many epochs of the five galaxies can be pooled as independent points in one correlation; if the anti-correlation is mostly a difference between galaxies rather than a change within each galaxy, the accretion-regulated wind conclusion is not individually established.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Changing-obscuration and changing-state activity in these AGNs share a common trigger: evolution of the accretion disc.
  • The positive $\Gamma$--$L_{\rm X}/L_{\rm Edd}$ relation places the five objects in the standard thin-disc accretion state even while their optical and absorption types change.
  • The disc-wind scenario predicts that only moderate-inclination systems show both kinds of changing-look behavior; face-on and edge-on systems should show less coordinated variability.
  • The $N_{\rm H,los}$--$L_{\rm X}/L_{\rm Edd}$ anti-correlation can serve as a spectral diagnostic for whether an extreme absorber is smooth, wind-regulated material or a clumpy torus: ESO 362-G18 violates it and is attributed to a clumpy torus.

Reading between the lines

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

  • An extension the paper leaves implicit: if the wind clears material on a characteristic timescale, simultaneous optical, UV, and X-ray monitoring of a single object through a type transition should reveal a measurable lag between the luminosity rise and the column-density drop; a zero lag would favor ionization-driven transparency instead.
  • A statistical caution: the pooled correlation treats epochs from five galaxies as independent, and only NGC 1365 shows a significant individual slope; redoing the test with per-source slopes or a hierarchical model would tell whether the trend is a universal accretion-regulating mechanism or a between-source scaling.
  • A testable prediction follows from the inclination argument: in a large CLAGN sample, the fraction of objects showing both changing-state and changing-obscuration behavior should peak at intermediate disc inclinations near 40--70 degrees.
  • If the steepness of the anti-correlation tracks wind strength, NGC 1365 should show the strongest outflow signatures among the five, a direct observational check.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper analyzes multi-epoch NuSTAR spectra of five changing-look AGNs (ESO 362-G18, NGC 1365, NGC 4151, NGC 5548, NGC 7582) using a phenomenological reflection model (pexrav) and two clumpy torus models (XCLUMPY, UXCLUMPY). It reports a positive correlation between the X-ray photon index and the Eddington-scaled 2-10 keV luminosity, and a negative correlation between line-of-sight column density and the Eddington-scaled luminosity after excluding ESO 362-G18. The authors interpret these trends as evidence that the changing-obscuration phenomenon is driven by accretion-rate-dependent disc winds, unifying changing-state and changing-obscuration AGNs.

Significance. If the central anti-correlation were established as a within-source effect, the paper would provide an important observational link between changing-state and changing-obscuration AGNs and would support the disc-wind scenario. The spectral fitting is standard and the application of three different models is a strength, as is the parameter-degeneracy simulation in Section 4.2. However, the statistical support for the key claim is currently limited: only one of the four sources shows a significant individual correlation, and the pooled analysis treats repeated or sub-epoch observations as independent. The paper is therefore more a useful case study than a definitive sample-wide demonstration at this stage.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4.1, Table 3] The claim of a significant sample-wide anti-correlation between log NH,los and log LX/LEdd rests on pooling ~30 epochs from four sources as independent data points. Only NGC 1365 has a significant individual slope (p = 9.3e-4), while NGC 4151, NGC 5548, and NGC 7582 show p = 0.47, 0.75, and 0.64, respectively. Because the abscissa (log LX/LEdd) incorporates the 12-fold spread in adopted black-hole masses (log MBH = 6.65-7.74, Table 1), much of the pooled variance is between-source. The pooled correlation may therefore reflect a between-source scaling rather than the required within-source co-variation of NH,los with accretion rate. A hierarchical or mixed-effects regression, or a partial correlation controlling for source, is needed to establish the central claim.
  2. [§4.1, Table B4] The effective sample size is inflated by treating non-independent measurements as independent. NGC 7582 contributes ~10 time-resolved bins from the single 2016 NuSTAR observation (Lefkir et al. 2023), which are intra-observation slices rather than separate changing-look epochs, and the three 2012/2013 NGC 1365 epochs plus the 2021 campaign epochs (MJD 59320-59342) are separated by only days. Treating these as independent realizations overstates the significance of the pooled p-values (e.g., 6.7e-5 for the NH-log LX/LEdd correlation). The analysis should either aggregate such sub-epochs or use a method that accounts for temporal correlation within sources.
  3. [§4.1, §4.2] The exclusion of ESO 362-G18 from the NH-log LX/LEdd correlation is data-driven: the source has only one low-NH NuSTAR observation and is described as an 'obvious outlier'. Yet the paper reports only the 'ESO 362-G18 excluded' result and does not state the correlation when the source is included. The Section 4.2 fakeit simulation tests only the NH-Gamma fitting degeneracy and does not address the source-clustering or independence assumptions, so it does not validate the pooled sample-wide correlation. Please report the all-sample correlation, justify the exclusion a priori, and extend the robustness test to the hierarchical within-source question.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§4.1] The sentence 'For individual sources, the log NH,los is also roughly anti-correlated with log LX/LEdd' is not supported by Table 3, which shows non-significant slopes for NGC 4151, NGC 5548, and NGC 7582; please rephrase to state that only NGC 1365 shows a significant individual correlation.
  2. [Table 3] The paper quotes uncertainties on Pearson's R (e.g., ±0.07) but scipy.stats.linregress does not provide such uncertainties by default; please describe how these errors were estimated (e.g., bootstrap or Monte Carlo).
  3. [Figure 1] The caption states that the dashed line is the best fit 'for all sources', but the NH panel excludes ESO 362-G18; please clarify which sample each panel refers to.
  4. [Table B4] The NGC 7582 rows from Lefkir et al. (2023) are time-resolved sub-epochs of a single observation; please label them as such in the table to avoid ambiguity.
  5. [§3.2] Typo: 'clumpy tours model' should read 'clumpy torus model'.
  6. [Section 2] The criterion 'log∆(NH) > 1' would be clearer as 'log10(∆NH / cm^-2) > 1' to specify units and logarithm base.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the claimed NH–LX/LEdd anti-correlation is an empirical spectral-fit result, with a direct degeneracy test; the self-citations are data/method sources, not load-bearing arguments.

full rationale

The paper does not present a derivation in which an output is equivalent to an input by construction. The central claim is an empirical correlation between two quantities obtained from X-ray spectral fitting: the line-of-sight column density NH,los and the Eddington-scaled 2-10 keV luminosity LX/LEdd. These are not defined in terms of each other; they are separate fitted parameters linked only through the spectral model. The one construction-level risk would be fitting degeneracy between NH and the continuum normalization that enters LX, and the authors address this directly in Section 4.2 with fakeit simulations in which the input NH is drawn independently of the input normalization. The observed negative slope deviates strongly from the simulated null distribution (null probability 1.4e-5), so the correlation is not shown to be forced by the fitting procedure. The use of prior results (Liu et al. 2021 for NGC 1365, Lefkir et al. 2023 for NGC 7582, Pal et al. 2022, Zhong & Wang 2022) is a normal use of published measurements as data points; although Liu et al. shares an author with the present paper, the cited analysis is a separate published spectral fit with a different model and is not used as a uniqueness theorem or as the justification for the correlation. The pooled Pearson/OLS analysis may mix within-source and between-source variance, and only NGC 1365 shows a significant individual slope, but that is a statistical validity concern, not a circularity of the kind defined here. No step in the paper reduces to a self-citation chain or to a renamed input, so the appropriate finding is no significant circularity.

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

The central result is a set of empirical correlations built from spectral fits; it does not introduce a derivation with hidden free parameters. The fitted values of NH,los, Gamma, and the 2-10 keV luminosity are the quantities whose mutual correlations constitute the result. The main external inputs are literature BH masses, distances, and the physical assumption that the absorbing gas is well described by the adopted models.

free parameters (4)
  • Line-of-sight column density NH,los per epoch = 0.0 to 87 x 10^22 cm^-2 (Tables B1-B3)
    Fitted in pexrav, XCLUMPY, and UXCLUMPY; the anti-correlation claim depends directly on these fitted values.
  • X-ray photon index Gamma per epoch = 1.32 to 2.09 (Tables B1-B4)
    Fitted in all three models; the positive Gamma-LX/LEdd correlation depends on these values.
  • Intrinsic 2-10 keV luminosity LX per epoch = log LX roughly 41.5 to 43.6 erg/s (Tables B1-B4)
    Derived from fitted normalization, distance, and model; divided by LEdd to form the x-axis of the main correlations.
  • Bolometric correction factors for Lbol comparison = Adopted from Netzer (2019)
    Used only for the Lbol/LEdd comparison in Figure 3 and the reported Eddington-ratio range, not for the primary LX/LEdd correlations.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption X-ray absorption along the line of sight is modeled by neutral gas with solar iron abundance, and the spectral models separate absorption from the intrinsic continuum.
    Sections 3.1 and 3.2; if the absorbers are significantly ionized or the geometry differs, the fitted NH,los values would be biased.
  • domain assumption The adopted black hole masses, distances, and inclination angles from Table 1 are correct.
    Table 1 and Section 4; LX/LEdd and model-dependent NH values depend on these inputs.
  • domain assumption Repeated NuSTAR observations of each source are treated as independent measurements in the linear regressions.
    Section 4.1; this assumption is not tested and is questionable because the five sources contribute multiple epochs.
  • domain assumption The disc-wind scenario, in which wind strength tracks accretion rate and pushes obscuring material away from moderate-inclination sight lines, explains the observed anti-correlation.
    Section 5; the data are consistent with this scenario, but the winds are not directly detected.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The NuSTAR view of five changing-look active galactic nuclei." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RVXJZZYY

@misc{pith2026250109602,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The NuSTAR view of five changing-look active galactic nuclei},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RVXJZZYY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.09602}
}
abstract

Changing-look active galactic nuclei (CLAGNs) are known to change their spectral type between 1 and 2 (changing-state) or change their absorption between Compton-thick and Compton-thin (changing-obscuration) on timescales of years or less. The physical mechanism and possible connection between the two types of CLAGNs are still unclear. We explore the evolution of the broadband X-ray spectra from Nuclear Spectroscopic Telescope Array (\nustar\,) and column density in five CLAGNs with moderate inclination viewing angles, which have shown significant variations of both optical types and X-ray absorption. Based on a phenomenological and two clumpy torus models, we find that the X-ray photon index ($\Gamma$) and the Eddington-scaled X-ray $2-10$ keV luminosity ($L_{\rm X}/L_{\rm Edd}$) are positively correlated for the five sources, which are similar to other bright AGNs and optical CLAGNs at type 1 phase. We find a significant negative correlation between log$N_\mathrm{H,los}$ and log$L_{\rm X}/L_{\rm Edd}$ except for ESO 362-G18. Similar to changing-state AGNs, changing-obscuration AGNs may be also triggered by the evolution of the accretion disc. Our results support the disc wind scenario, where the disc wind proportional to the accretion rate and formed at moderate inclination angles would push the obscuration material further away and decrease the column density from the line of sight observed in the changing-look AGNs.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.09602 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Relations between Γ, logNH,los, and logLX/LEdd based on pexrav model. The circle, pentagon, up-triangle, and down-triangle represent ESO 362-G18, NGC 1365, NGC4151, and NGC 7582. The dashed line repre￾sents the best-fit line with a 3 σ confidence interval within the shaded region for all sources. Here, ESO 362-G18 is an obvious outlier in the logNH,los￾logLXLEdd correlation. The grey data points are from the literat… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Relations between Γ, logNH,los, and logLX/LEdd for two clumpy torus models. 3 2 1 1.4 1.6 1.8 XCLUMPY 3 2 1 log(Lbol/LEdd) 10 0 10 1 10 2 N H, lo s(1 0 22c m 2 ) 3 2 1 1.4 1.6 1.8 UXCLUMPY 3 2 1 log(Lbol/LEdd) 10 0 10 1 10 2 N H, lo s(1 0 22c m 2 ) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Relations between Γ, logNH,los, and logLbol/LEdd for two clumpy torus models. Bolometric correction factors are adopted from Netzer (2019). MNRAS 000, 1–11 (2024) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Upper panel: the slope distribution of the correlation between logNH,los and logLX/LEdd. Lower panel: the probability of the null hypoth￾esis. 4.2 Parameter degeneracy test To test the variability of logNH dependent on logLX/LEdd from the pexrav model is real rather th…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: A unified scenario for two kinds of changing-look phenomena. The dusty torus could consist of smooth or clumpy clouds. The optical CLAGNs are face-viewed with low-to-intermediate inclination angles and experience the transition between SSD and ADAF state. The variabili…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. X-ray Absorption Variability in NGC 1142: Another Constraint on the Nature of the Torus/Broad-Line Region in Active Galactic Nuclei

    astro-ph.GA 2026-07 conditional novelty 4.5 of 10

    NGC 1142’s NH varies across nine epochs; detection probability scales with observation count, and simple cloud simulations favor many simultaneous eclipsing clouds.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

112 extracted references · 21 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.state := if if FUNCTION not #0 #1 if FUNCTION and 'skip pop #0 if FUNCTION or pop #1...

  2. [2]

    Ag \' s-Gonz \'a lez B., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu1358 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.443.2862A 443, 2862

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1358 2014

  3. [3]

    Ag \' s-Gonz \'a lez B., Hutsem \'e kers D., Miniutti G., 2018, @doi [Galaxies] 10.3390/galaxies6020052 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018Galax...6...52A 6, 52

    work page doi:10.3390/galaxies6020052 2018

  4. [4]

    Andonie C., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202142473 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022A&A...664A..46A 664, A46

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202142473 2022

  5. [5]

    Antonucci R., 1993, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.aa.31.090193.002353 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993ARA&A..31..473A 31, 473

    arXiv 1993

  6. [6]

    A., 1996, in Jacoby G

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

    1996

  7. [7]

    Balokovi \'c M., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa7eb , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...854...42B 854, 42

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaa7eb 2018

  8. [8]

    C., Katz S., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1086/679601 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015PASP..127...67B 127, 67

    Bentz M. C., Katz S., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1086/679601 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015PASP..127...67B 127, 67

    doi:10.1086/679601 2015

Show all 112 references
  1. [9]

    C., Williams P

    Bentz M. C., Williams P. R., Treu T., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c0a , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...934..168B 934, 168

    2022 doi

  2. [10]

    Beuchert T., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201630293 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017A&A...603A..50B 603, A50

    2017 doi

  3. [11]

    J., Matt G., Fiore F., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/695/1/781 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...695..781B 695, 781

    Bianchi S., Piconcelli E., Chiaberge M., Bail \'o n E. J., Matt G., Fiore F., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/695/1/781 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...695..781B 695, 781

    2009 doi

  4. [12]

    N., Gofford J., Nardini E., Porquet D., Risaliti G., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/795/1/87 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...795...87B 795, 87

    Braito V., Reeves J. N., Gofford J., Nardini E., Porquet D., Risaliti G., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/795/1/87 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...795...87B 795, 87

    2014 doi

  5. [13]

    W., Risaliti G., Elvis M., Nardini E., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sts555 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.429.2662B 429, 2662

    Brenneman L. W., Risaliti G., Elvis M., Nardini E., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sts555 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.429.2662B 429, 2662

    2013 doi

  6. [14]

    E., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201834771 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019A&A...629A..16B 629, A16

    Buchner J., Brightman M., Nandra K., Nikutta R., Bauer F. E., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201834771 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019A&A...629A..16B 629, A16

    2019 doi

  7. [15]

    Chen Y.-J., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad051 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.520.1807C 520, 1807

    2023 doi

  8. [16]

    Dehghanian M., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ab3d41 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...882L..30D 882, L30

    2019 doi

  9. [17]

    D., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/796/2/134 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...796..134D 796, 134

    Denney K. D., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/796/2/134 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...796..134D 796, 134

    2014 doi

  10. [18]

    Di Gesu L., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201525934 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015A&A...579A..42D 579, A42

    2015 doi

  11. [19]

    C., Trump J

    Elitzur M., Ho L. C., Trump J. R., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt2445 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.438.3340E 438, 3340

    2014 doi

  12. [20]

    A., Storchi-Bergmann T., Binette L., 2000, @doi [ ] 10.1086/308621 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000ApJ...532..867F 532, 867

    Fraquelli H. A., Storchi-Bergmann T., Binette L., 2000, @doi [ ] 10.1086/308621 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000ApJ...532..867F 532, 867

    2000 doi

  13. [21]

    F., Kishimoto M., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/812/2/113 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...812..113G 812, 113

    Gandhi P., H \"o nig S. F., Kishimoto M., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/812/2/113 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...812..113G 812, 113

    2015 doi

  14. [22]

    J., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/773/2/90 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...773...90G 773, 90

    Grier C. J., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/773/2/90 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...773...90G 773, 90

    2013 doi

  15. [23]

    M., Storchi-Bergmann T., Schimoia J., Nemmen R., Robinson A., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab2550 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.508..144G 508, 144

    Guolo M., Ruschel-Dutra D., Grupe D., Peterson B. M., Storchi-Bergmann T., Schimoia J., Nemmen R., Robinson A., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab2550 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.508..144G 508, 144

    2021 doi

  16. [24]

    K., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab839 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.504..428G 504, 428

    Gupta K. K., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab839 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.504..428G 504, 428

    2021 doi

  17. [25]

    A., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/770/2/103 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...770..103H 770, 103

    Harrison F. A., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/770/2/103 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...770..103H 770, 103

    2013 doi

  18. [26]

    C., Alexander D

    Hickox R. C., Alexander D. M., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev-astro-081817-051803 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ARA&A..56..625H 56, 625

    2018 doi

  19. [27]

    C., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.astro.45.051806.110546 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ARA&A..46..475H 46, 475

    Ho L. C., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.astro.45.051806.110546 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ARA&A..46..475H 46, 475

    2008 arXiv

  20. [28]

    K., Hayasaki K., Ricci C., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab2155 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.507..687J 507, 687

    Jana A., Kumari N., Nandi P., Naik S., Chatterjee A., Jaisawal G. K., Hayasaki K., Ricci C., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab2155 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.507..687J 507, 687

    2021 doi

  21. [29]

    Jana A., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac799 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.512.5942J 512, 5942

    2022 doi

  22. [30]

    arXiv:2411.08676

    Jana A., et al., 2024, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2411.08676 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv241108676J p. arXiv:2411.08676

    2024 doi arXiv

  23. [31]

    Jin J.-J., Wu X.-B., Feng X.-T., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac410c , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...926..184J 926, 184

    2022 doi

  24. [32]

    S., et al., 2014, @doi [Science] 10.1126/science.1253787 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014Sci...345...64K 345, 64

    Kaastra J. S., et al., 2014, @doi [Science] 10.1126/science.1253787 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014Sci...345...64K 345, 64

    2014 doi

  25. [33]

    Kalberla P. M. W., Burton W. B., Hartmann D., Arnal E. M., Bajaja E., Morras R., P \"o ppel W. G. L., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20041864 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005A&A...440..775K 440, 775

    2005 doi

  26. [34]

    Katebi R., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz1552 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.487.4057K 487, 4057

    2019 doi

  27. [35]

    A., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab3049 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...881..153K 881, 153

    Kriss G. A., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab3049 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...881..153K 881, 153

    2019 doi

  28. [36]

    M., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/800/2/144 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...800..144L 800, 144

    LaMassa S. M., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/800/2/144 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...800..144L 800, 144

    2015 doi

  29. [37]

    M., Nardini E., Zoghbi A., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad995 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.522.1169L 522, 1169

    Lefkir M., Kammoun E., Barret D., Boorman P., Matzeu G., Miller J. M., Nardini E., Zoghbi A., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad995 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.522.1169L 522, 1169

    2023 doi

  30. [38]

    Li S.-S., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac8745 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...936...75L 936, 75

    2022 doi

  31. [39]

    F., Qiao E., 2022, @doi [iScience] 10.1016/j.isci.2021.103544 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022iSci...25j3544L 25, 103544

    Liu B. F., Qiao E., 2022, @doi [iScience] 10.1016/j.isci.2021.103544 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022iSci...25j3544L 25, 103544

    2022

  32. [40]

    Liu H., Wu Q.-W., Xue Y.-Q., Wang T.-G., Yang J., Guo H.-X., He Z.-C., 2021, @doi [Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics] 10.1088/1674-4527/21/8/199 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021RAA....21..199L 21, 199

    2021 doi

  33. [41]

    Liu H., Wu Q., Lyu B., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac5fa5 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...930...46L 930, 46

    2022 doi

  34. [42]

    H., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/abee14 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...912..126L 912, 126

    Lyu J., Rieke G. H., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/abee14 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...912..126L 912, 126

    2021 doi

  35. [43]

    Lyu B., Yan Z., Yu W., Wu Q., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab1581 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.506.4188L 506, 4188

    2021 doi

  36. [44]

    Lyu B., Wu Q., Yan Z., Yu W., Liu H., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac5256 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...927..227L 927, 227

    2022 doi

  37. [45]

    L., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab05e2 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...874....8M 874, 8

    MacLeod C. L., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab05e2 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...874....8M 874, 8

    2019 doi

  38. [46]

    A., 1995, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/273.3.837 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995MNRAS.273..837M 273, 837

    Magdziarz P., Zdziarski A. A., 1995, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/273.3.837 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995MNRAS.273..837M 273, 837

    1995 doi

  39. [47]

    Marchesi S., Ajello M., Marcotulli L., Comastri A., Lanzuisi G., Vignali C., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa410 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...854...49M 854, 49

    2018 doi

  40. [48]

    Marchesi S., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac80be , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...935..114M 935, 114

    2022 doi

  41. [49]

    W., Dov c iak M., Muleri F., Grosso N., Karas V., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt1677 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.436.1615M 436, 1615

    Marin F., Porquet D., Goosmann R. W., Dov c iak M., Muleri F., Grosso N., Karas V., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt1677 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.436.1615M 436, 1615

    2013 doi

  42. [50]

    B., N'Diaye M., Venot O., eds, SF2A-2019: Proceedings of the Annual meeting of the French Society of Astronomy and Astrophysics

    Marin F., Hutsem \'e kers D., Ag \' s Gonz \'a lez B., 2019, in Di Matteo P., Creevey O., Crida A., Kordopatis G., Malzac J., Marquette J. B., N'Diaye M., Venot O., eds, SF2A-2019: Proceedings of the Annual meeting of the French Society of Astronomy and Astrophysics. p. Di ( @...

    2019 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Matt G., 2002, @doi [Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A] 10.1098/rsta.2002.1052 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002RSPTA.360.2045M 360, 2045

    2002

  44. [52]

    Matt G., Guainazzi M., Maiolino R., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06539.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003MNRAS.342..422M 342, 422

    2003

  45. [53]

    H., Knigge C., Higginbottom N., Long K

    Matthews J. H., Knigge C., Higginbottom N., Long K. S., Sim S. A., Mangham S. W., Parkinson E. J., Hewitt H. A., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa136 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.492.5540M 492, 5540

    2020 doi

  46. [54]

    A., Kaastra J

    Mehdipour M., Kriss G. A., Kaastra J. S., Costantini E., Gu L., Landt H., Mao J., Rogantini D., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1bcb , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...962..155M 962, 155

    2024 doi

  47. [55]

    P., Hryniewicz K., Stalin C

    Mondal S., Adhikari T. P., Hryniewicz K., Stalin C. S., Pandey A., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202243084 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022A&A...662A..77M 662, A77

    2022 doi

  48. [56]

    Netzer H., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev-astro-082214-122302 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ARA&A..53..365N 53, 365

    2015 doi

  49. [57]

    Netzer H., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz2016 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.488.5185N 488, 5185

    2019 doi

  50. [58]

    Neustadt J. M. M., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad725 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.tmp..710N

    2023 doi

  51. [59]

    Noda H., Done C., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty2032 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.480.3898N 480, 3898

    2018 doi

  52. [60]

    arXiv:2212.02731

    Noda H., et al., 2022, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022arXiv221202731N p. arXiv:2212.02731

    2022 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Oh K., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/ac5b68 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJS..261....4O 261, 4

    2022 doi

  54. [62]

    L., Metlova N

    Oknyanskij V. L., Metlova N. V., Huseynov N. A., Guo D.-F., Lyuty V. M., 2016, @doi [Odessa Astronomical Publications] 10.18524/1810-4215.2016.29.85058 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016OAP....29...95O 29, 95

    2016

  55. [63]

    Oknyansky V., 2022, @doi [Astronomische Nachrichten] 10.1002/asna.20210080 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022AN....34310080O 343, e210080

    2022 doi

  56. [64]

    L., Gaskell C

    Oknyansky V. L., Gaskell C. M., Shimanovskaya E. V., 2015, @doi [Odessa Astronomical Publications] 10.48550/arXiv.1511.02170 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015OAP....28..175O 28, 175

    2015 doi arXiv

  57. [65]

    L., Winkler H., Tsygankov S

    Oknyansky V. L., Winkler H., Tsygankov S. S., Lipunov V. M., Gorbovskoy E. S., van Wyk F., Buckley D. A. H., Tyurina N. V., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty3133 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.483..558O 483, 558

    2019 doi

  58. [66]

    Onori F., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnrasl/slx032 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.468L..97O 468, L97

    2017 doi

  59. [67]

    E., 1981, @doi [ ] 10.1086/159306 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981ApJ...249..462O 249, 462

    Osterbrock D. E., 1981, @doi [ ] 10.1086/159306 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981ApJ...249..462O 249, 462

    1981 doi

  60. [68]

    E., Koski A

    Osterbrock D. E., Koski A. T., 1976, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/176.1.61P , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1976MNRAS.176P..61O 176, 61P

    1976 doi

  61. [69]

    S., Mallick L., Rani P., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202142386 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022A&A...662A..78P 662, A78

    Pal I., Stalin C. S., Mallick L., Rani P., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202142386 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022A&A...662A..78P 662, A78

    2022 doi

  62. [70]

    J., Treu T., Park D., Barth A

    Pancoast A., Brewer B. J., Treu T., Park D., Barth A. J., Bentz M. C., Woo J.-H., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu1419 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.445.3073P 445, 3073

    2014 doi

  63. [71]

    Panda S., \'S niegowska M., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/ad344f , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJS..272...13P 272, 13

    2024 doi

  64. [72]

    Paturel G., Petit C., Prugniel P., Theureau G., Rousseau J., Brouty M., Dubois P., Cambr \'e sy L., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20031411 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003A&A...412...45P 412, 45

    2003 doi

  65. [73]

    Piconcelli E., Bianchi S., Guainazzi M., Fiore F., Chiaberge M., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20066439 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007A&A...466..855P 466, 855

    2007 doi

  66. [74]

    Potts B., Villforth C., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202140597 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021A&A...650A..33P 650, A33

    2021 doi

  67. [75]

    Puccetti S., Fiore F., Risaliti G., Capalbi M., Elvis M., Nicastro F., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.11634.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007MNRAS.377..607P 377, 607

    2007

  68. [76]

    F., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/764/1/2 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...764....2Q 764, 2

    Qiao E., Liu B. F., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/764/1/2 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...764....2Q 764, 2

    2013 doi

  69. [77]

    I., Vestergaard M., Koay J

    Raimundo S. I., Vestergaard M., Koay J. Y., Lawther D., Casasola V., Peterson B. M., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz852 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.486..123R 486, 123

    2019 doi

  70. [78]

    Ricci C., Trakhtenbrot B., 2023, @doi [Nature Astronomy] 10.1038/s41550-023-02108-4 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023NatAs...7.1282R 7, 1282

    2023 doi

  71. [79]

    Ricci C., et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-637X/820/1/5 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...820....5R 820, 5

    2016 doi

  72. [80]

    Ricci C., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1038/nature23906 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017Natur.549..488R 549, 488

    2017 doi

  73. [81]

    V., Steiner J

    Ricci T. V., Steiner J. E., May D., Garcia-Rissmann A., Menezes R. B., 2018a, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx2746 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.473.5334R 473, 5334

    doi

  74. [82]

    Ricci C., et al., 2018b, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty1879 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.480.1819R 480, 1819

    doi

  75. [83]

    Risaliti G., Elvis M., Fabbiano G., Baldi A., Zezas A., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1086/430252 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005ApJ...623L..93R 623, L93

    2005 doi

  76. [84]

    Risaliti G., et al., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2008.00580.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009MNRAS.393L...1R 393, L1

    2009

  77. [85]

    Rivers E., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/815/1/55 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...815...55R 815, 55

    2015 doi

  78. [86]

    R., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab393 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.503.2583S 503, 2583

    Senarath M. R., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab393 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.503.2583S 503, 2583

    2021 doi

  79. [87]

    I., Sunyaev R

    Shakura N. I., Sunyaev R. A., 1973, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1973A&A....24..337S 24, 337

    1973

  80. [88]

    J., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/788/1/48 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...788...48S 788, 48

    Shappee B. J., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/788/1/48 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...788...48S 788, 48

    2014 doi

  81. [89]

    Sheng Z., Wang T., Jiang N., Yang C., Yan L., Dou L., Peng B., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aa85de , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...846L...7S 846, L7

    2017 doi

  82. [90]

    Sheng Z., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5af9 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...889...46S 889, 46

    2020 doi

  83. [91]

    Sniegowska M., Czerny B., Bon E., Bon N., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202038575 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020A&A...641A.167S 641, A167

    2020 doi

  84. [92]

    Tanimoto A., Ueda Y., Odaka H., Kawaguchi T., Fukazawa Y., Kawamuro T., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab1b20 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...877...95T 877, 95

    2019 doi

  85. [93]

    Tanimoto A., Ueda Y., Odaka H., Yamada S., Ricci C., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/ac5f59 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJS..260...30T 260, 30

    2022 doi

  86. [94]

    J., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac3279 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.518.2938T 518, 2938

    Temple M. J., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac3279 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.518.2938T 518, 2938

    2023 doi

  87. [95]

    Trakhtenbrot B., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx1117 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.470..800T 470, 800

    2017 doi

  88. [96]

    Trakhtenbrot B., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab39e4 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...883...94T 883, 94

    2019 doi

  89. [97]

    J., Reeves J

    Turner T. J., Reeves J. N., Braito V., Lobban A., Kraemer S., Miller L., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty2447 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.481.2470T 481, 2470

    2018 doi

  90. [98]

    J., Reis R

    Walton D. J., Reis R. C., Fabian A. C., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17148.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010MNRAS.408..601W 408, 601

    2010

  91. [99]

    W., Wang Y., Zhang J

    Wang J., Xu D. W., Wang Y., Zhang J. B., Zheng J., Wei J. Y., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab4d90 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...887...15W 887, 15

    2019 doi

  92. [100]

    W., Wei J

    Wang J., Xu D. W., Wei J. Y., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/abaa48 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...901....1W 901, 1

    2020 doi

  93. [101]

    K., Xu D

    Wang J., Zheng W. K., Xu D. W., Brink T. G., Filippenko A. V., Gao C., Sun S. S., Wei J. Y., 2022, @doi [Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics] 10.1088/1674-4527/ac3477 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022RAA....22a5011W 22, 015011

    2022 doi

  94. [102]

    U., Siebenmorgen R., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20053385 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006A&A...460..449W 460, 449

    Wold M., Lacy M., K \"a ufl H. U., Siebenmorgen R., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20053385 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006A&A...460..449W 460, 449

    2006 doi

  95. [103]

    Yang Q., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aaca3a , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...862..109Y 862, 109

    2018 doi

  96. [104]

    Yang Q., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/acdedd , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...953...61Y 953, 61

    2023 doi

  97. [105]

    S., Pounds K

    Yaqoob T., Warwick R. S., Pounds K. A., 1989, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/236.2.153 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1989MNRAS.236..153Y 236, 153

    1989 doi

  98. [106]

    Yuan F., Narayan R., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev-astro-082812-141003 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ARA&A..52..529Y 52, 529

    2014 doi

  99. [107]

    Zeltyn G., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ac9a47 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...939L..16Z 939, L16

    2022 doi

  100. [108]

    Zeltyn G., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad2f30 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...966...85Z 966, 85

    2024 doi

  101. [109]

    Zhong X.-G., Wang J.-C., 2022, @doi [Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics] 10.1088/1674-4527/ac42c0 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022RAA....22c5002Z 22, 035002

    2022 doi

  102. [110]

    N., 2013, Journal of Improbable Astronomy, 1, 1

    Author A. N., 2013, Journal of Improbable Astronomy, 1, 1

    2013

  103. [111]

    Others S., 2012, Journal of Interesting Stuff, 17, 198

    2012

  104. [112]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.stat...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.