Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 6 cited by

Soft X-ray Imager of the Xtend system onboard XRISM

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The XRISM Soft X-ray Imager, a CCD camera built from the Hitomi design with three targeted fixes, passed every pre-flight test for Xtend.

desk verdict Solid instrument paper; the effective-area requirements are verified only through surrogate hardware and a mesh correction, so read the 'all requirements met' claim with that caveat. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.08030 v1 pith:IM5FKIZO submitted 2025-02-12 astro-ph.IM

Hirofumi Noda , Koji Mori , Hiroshi Tomida , Hiroshi Nakajima , Takaaki Tanaka , Hiroshi Murakami , Hiroyuki Uchida , Hiromasa Suzuki
show 52 more authors
Shogo Benjamin Kobayashi Tomokage Yoneyama Kouichi Hagino Kumiko Nobukawa Hideki Uchiyama Masayoshi Nobukawa Hironori Matsumoto Takeshi Go Tsuru Makoto Yamauchi Isamu Hatsukade Hirokazu Odaka Takayoshi Kohmura Kazutaka Yamaoka Tessei Yoshida Yoshiaki Kanemaru Junko Hiraga Tadayasu Dotani Masanobu Ozaki Hiroshi Tsunemi Jin Sato Toshiyuki Takaki Yuta Terada Keitaro Miyazaki Kohei Kusunoki Yoshinori Otsuka Haruhiko Yokosu Wakana Yonemaru Kazuhiro Ichikawa Hanako Nakano Reo Takemoto Tsukasa Matsushima Reika Urase Jun Kurashima Kotomi Fuchi Kaito Hayakawa Masahiro Fukuda Takamitsu Kamei Yoh Asahina Shun Inoue Amano Yuki Yuma Aoki Yamato Ito Tomoya Kamatani Kouta Takayama Takashi Sako Marina Yoshimoto Kohei Shima Mayu Higuchi Kaito Ninoyu Daiki Aoki Shun Tsunomachi Kiyoshi Hayashida
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.IM
keywords X-rayCCDcameraXRISMXtendPchNeXT4Apre-flightcalibrationopticalblockinglayerchargetransferefficiencyastronomyinstrumentation
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 reports the design and pre-flight verification of the Soft X-ray Imager (SXI), the CCD camera at the focus of the Xtend telescope on the XRISM observatory, which launched in September 2023. The authors claim that the flight-model SXI meets every requirement set for Xtend: a $38'\times38'$ field of view over $0.4$–$13$ keV, energy resolution of $173$–$188$ eV full width at half maximum at $5.9$ keV at beginning of life, optical-light blocking better than $10^{-7}$ through the camera, stable CCD temperature control with a single Stirling cooler, and a detection efficiency that supports $300~\mathrm{cm}^2$ at $1.5$ keV and $270~\mathrm{cm}^2$ at $6$ keV effective area when combined with the X-ray mirror. The camera is a $2\times2$ array of back-illuminated CCD chips with $200~\mu$m depletion layers, improved from the Hitomi/SXI by doubling the aluminum optical blocking layer, adding an aluminum edge shield, and implanting a notch in the charge-transfer channel. Because Xtend is the wide-field complement to XRISM's high-resolution spectrometer Resolve, a camera that works as designed gives the mission a way to separate point sources from diffuse emission, monitor contamination outside Resolve's small field of view, and reach an order of magnitude higher signal-to-noise on extended sources.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the PchNeXT4A CCD: a p-channel, back-illuminated, frame-transfer charge-coupled device with a 200-micron depletion layer, arranged four-up in a $2\times2$ mosaic to cover a $38'\times38'$ field of view. Three chip-level changes carry the argument: the optical blocking layer was doubled from a single 100 nm aluminum film to two 100 nm films, closing the pinholes that leaked optical light on the predecessor Hitomi camera; an additional aluminum layer was placed between the bonding sheet and the depletion layer to block light entering through the physical chip edges; and a narrow notch implant in the charge-transfer channel confines each charge packet to a fraction of the 24-micron pixel width, which slows the growth of charge-transfer inefficiency under cosmic-ray bombardment. Around the chip, the camera adds a contamination-blocking filter of 200 nm polyamide sandwiched between 80 nm and 40 nm aluminum layers, a single Stirling cooler with PID heater control that holds the focal plane at $-110$ or $-120\,^\circ$C, and onboard $^{55}$Fe calibration sources. The verification apparatus that carries the claim includes a mesh projection to measure chip gaps of $1.2$–$1.6$ mm, the multi-color X-ray generator for spectral response across $0.5$–$14.1$ keV, and separate beam measurements of filter transmission and chip quantum efficiency.

What would settle it

Measure the end-to-end on-axis effective area of the flight SXI together with the X-ray mirror at $1.5$ and $6$ keV using monochromatic X-rays—or, in orbit, compare the count rate of a standard celestial source with the predicted $300$ and $270~\mathrm{cm}^2$; a significant shortfall would falsify the detection-efficiency claim. In addition, if the in-orbit $5$–$10$ keV non-X-ray background from deep blank-sky observations exceeds $1\times10^{-6}$ counts keV$^{-1}$ s$^{-1}$ arcmin$^{-2}$ cm$^{-1}$, one of the stated Xtend requirements would fail despite the pre-flight results.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the XRISM/SXI, a $2\times2$ array of PchNeXT4A back-illuminated CCDs with a $200~\mu$m depletion layer, passed every pre-flight test that the ground program could run, in the full flight configuration or a setup equivalent to it. Spectroscopically, the measured energy resolution at the Mn-K$\alpha$ line is $173$–$188$ eV FWHM at $5.9$ keV, inside the $<200$ eV beginning-of-life requirement, and radiation-damage experiments with notch-implanted chips indicate the resolution should stay below the $<250$ eV end-of-life requirement after three years in orbit. The contamination-blocking filter (a 200 nm polyamide layer between 80 nm and 40 nm aluminum layers) and the CCD's doubled optical blocking layer (200 nm total aluminum) together give light leakage below $10^{-7}$, which meets the camera-level optical blocking requirement when combined with the satellite's $10^{-6}$ structural shielding. A one-month thermal-vacuum test showed the single Stirling cooler holding the four chips stable at $-110\,^\circ$C or $-120\,^\circ$C through environmental swings of about 22 degrees. For detection efficiency, beam measurements of the filter transmission (about 0.857 at 1.5 keV and 0.892 at 6 keV) and of CCD quantum efficiency (about 0.957 at 1.5 keV and 0.993 at 6 keV) are combined with the mirror's effective area to argue that the Xtend effective-area requirements of $300~\mathrm{cm}^2$ at 1.5 keV and $270~\mathrm{cm}^2$ at 6 keV are met.

Load-bearing premise

The effective-area requirement rests on assuming that the smaller surrogate CCD chips and the contamination-filter sample without its support mesh behave exactly like the flight hardware, since the $300$ and $270~\mathrm{cm}^2$ numbers come from combining those separate measurements with a mesh aperture correction rather than from a direct full-system X-ray measurement.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Xtend will give XRISM a $38'\times38'$ field of view across $0.4$–$13$ keV, wide enough to cover the full Moon and to complement the $3'\times3'$ field of the Resolve spectrometer.
  • The beginning-of-life energy resolution of $173$–$188$ eV FWHM at 5.9 keV meets the $<200$ eV requirement, and the notch implant is expected to keep the end-of-life resolution under 250 eV after three years.
  • Optical-light leakage through the camera is below $10^{-7}$, which, combined with the spacecraft's $10^{-6}$ shielding, meets the $<10^{-13}$ optical blocking requirement along the X-ray path.
  • The single Stirling cooler plus PID control keeps all four CCD chips stable at $-110$ or $-120\,^\circ$C through a roughly 22-degree swing in spacecraft temperature, as demonstrated in the one-month thermal vacuum test.
  • The measured filter transmission and CCD quantum efficiency, combined with the XMA mirror area, support the Xtend effective-area requirements of $300~\mathrm{cm}^2$ at 1.5 keV and $270~\mathrm{cm}^2$ at 6 keV.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Inference: the doubled 200 nm aluminum optical blocking layer, while solving the light-leakage problem, will also absorb more of the softest X-rays, so the $0.4$ keV edge of the band is where the effective-area requirement could turn out to be tighter than the $1.5$ and $6$ keV verification points suggest.
  • Inference: because the effective-area claim multiplies the measured filter transmission by a mesh aperture correction of $0.896$ and by quantum efficiencies measured on smaller surrogate CCDs, a dedicated measurement of the flight mesh's open fraction and a direct quantum-efficiency check on a flight-model chip would be a cheap way to confirm the $300/270~\mathrm{cm}^2$ numbers.
  • Inference: the paper explicitly defers in-orbit verification of the non-X-ray background and effective area to a later report, so if those in-orbit numbers disagree with the ground predictions, the 'all requirements met' conclusion should be read as a ground-test result rather than an end-to-end validation of flight performance.
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

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper describes the design and pre-flight performance verification of the Soft X-ray Imager (SXI) for the Xtend telescope on XRISM, a CCD camera based on the Hitomi/SXI with improvements to optical blocking and radiation tolerance. The authors report measurements of imaging capability, spectroscopic performance (173–188 eV FWHM at 5.9 keV), optical blocking, cooling stability, and detection efficiency (CBF transmissivity and CCD quantum efficiency) using the full flight-model configuration or equivalent setups, and they conclude that all requirements for Xtend are met before launch.

Significance. If the verification chain is complete, the paper provides the definitive pre-launch reference for the XRISM/Xtend/SXI calibration and demonstrates that the camera meets the mission's quantitative requirements, including the under-200 eV BOL energy resolution. The strengths are the use of the full flight-model configuration for the key spectroscopic measurement, the month-long thermal-vacuum test, the external beam measurements at KEK, and the explicit reporting of measured quantities such as the CBF transmissivity of 0.857 and CCD QE of 0.957 at 1.5 keV. The main weakness is that the effective-area requirement, which involves the XMA, is not directly verified pre-flight and rests on surrogate components.

major comments (4)
  1. [§5.5 and §2] The effective-area requirement is for Xtend (SXI+XMA), but the paper only reports the SXI detection efficiency and does not give the XMA effective area or the resulting margin. At 1.5 keV, T=0.857 and QE=0.957 give a product of 0.820, so the XMA effective area must be at least 366 cm² to reach the 300 cm² requirement; the paper provides no evidence of this. As the in-orbit verification is deferred, the pre-flight claim that the effective-area requirement is met is not supported by the data presented.
  2. [§5.5] The CCD QE was measured on smaller surrogate chips, and the QE model fixes the SiO₂ and Al₂O₃ layer thicknesses at 20 nm and 0 nm, respectively, without a sensitivity study. The resulting QE at 1.5 keV (0.957) is therefore model-dependent; a modest change in the dead-layer thickness would reduce the low-energy QE and erode the margin against the 300 cm² requirement. The paper should justify the surrogate equivalence and provide a systematic error budget for the QE.
  3. [§5.5] The CBF transmissivity was measured on a filter that lacks the support mesh (aperture ratio 0.896), and the flight-model transmissivity is obtained by a model correction. The paper does not quantify the uncertainty in this correction or its dependence on incidence angle across the 38'×38' field of view. Without this, the quoted 0.857 value at 1.5 keV has an unquantified systematic error.
  4. [§6 and §2] The conclusion states that 'all of them met the requirements,' but the NXB requirement and the effective area including the XMA are explicitly deferred to a subsequent paper. The conclusion should be qualified to reflect that the pre-flight tests cover the SXI components but not the full Xtend system effective area or the in-orbit NXB.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§3.1.1] The word 'untill' in the contamination estimate sentence should be 'until'.
  2. [§5.2] The phrase 'full fight-model one' should read 'full flight-model one', and the Figure 9 caption contains 'acuisition' for 'acquisition'.
  3. [§4.1] The word 'donwlinked' should be 'downlinked'.
  4. [§2] The word 'Altough' should be 'Although'.
  5. [§5.3] The total leakage is reported as <10⁻⁷, which is exactly at the detector-level requirement after accounting for the satellite's 10⁻⁶ reduction; stating the explicit margin (or lack thereof) would aid the reader.
  6. [§5.5] The measured CBF layer thicknesses (Al 102.3±0.5 nm, polyamide 238.2±0.5 nm) differ from the design values of 120 nm and 200 nm given in §3.1.1; the discrepancy is not discussed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

Pre-flight verification is against external benchmarks; no circular derivation chain.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that XRISM/SXI met pre-flight requirements. Those requirements are fixed engineering targets stated in Section 2 (FOV, effective area, pixel size, energy range, energy resolution, optical blocking, NXB), and each performance item in Section 5 is measured against them using external sources: 55Fe and 241Am radioisotopes, a multi-color X-ray generator, and the KEK Photon Factory beam. No quantity that is being 'predicted' is used as an input to the measurement or to the requirement. The Section 5.5 effective-area verification uses surrogate CBF and CCD samples; this is a representativeness/validation risk, not circularity, because the surrogate measurements are compared with flight-model parameter corrections (mesh aperture ratio) and external beam data, and the flight requirement is not defined from those measurements. The radiation-hardness and optical-aging statements rely on prior team papers (Kanemaru et al. 2019; Uchida et al. 2020), but those are independent irradiation and aging experiments, not the present paper's fitted values or definitions; they are real supporting evidence. The conclusion defers in-orbit effective-area and NXB verification to a later paper, which is a stated limitation, not a circular step. No equation or fitted parameter is reused as the claimed result, so no circularity is found.

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

The central verification claims rest on several representativeness assumptions for surrogate hardware and on external prior results from the same collaboration. The fitted layer thicknesses in section 5.5 are used to compute the flight-model effective area. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • CBF Al layer thickness = 102.3 ± 0.5 nm
    Fitted to the CBF transmissivity measurements in section 5.5 and used to compute the flight-model effective area.
  • CBF polyamide layer thickness = 238.2 ± 0.5 nm
    Fitted in the same transmissivity model in section 5.5.
  • CBF Al2O3 layer thickness = 7.5 ± 0.5 nm
    Third fitted layer in the transmissivity model in section 5.5.
  • CCD Al layer thickness = 230 ± 8 nm
    Fitted to the CCD quantum efficiency curve in section 5.5, assuming SiO2 and Al2O3 thicknesses of 20 nm and 0 nm.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The smaller-model CCD chips used in the KEK quantum efficiency test have QE equivalent to the flight-model PchNeXT4A chips.
    Stated in section 5.5: 'The CCD chips used in this experiment were smaller models than the flight models but with structures equivalent to those of the flight models.' The effective-area requirement rests on this equivalence.
  • domain assumption The mesh-less CBF test article is representative of the flight CBF once scaled by the mesh aperture ratio 0.896.
    Section 5.5: CBFs identical to flight models 'except for the absence of a mesh structure with an aperture ratio of 0.896'.
  • domain assumption The notch implant provides roughly three times higher radiation hardness to CTI degradation in orbit.
    Section 3.1.2 relies on Kanemaru et al. 2019 tests of equivalent non-flight chips to predict EOL energy resolution below 250 eV.
  • domain assumption The molecular contamination of CCD surfaces stays below 4 micrograms per square cm after 3 years per the outgassing model.
    Section 3.1.1: the baking process and the contamination model are used to bound contamination, which affects QE and gain stability assumptions.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Soft X-ray Imager of the Xtend system onboard XRISM." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IM5FKIZO

@misc{pith2026250208030,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Soft X-ray Imager of the Xtend system onboard XRISM},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IM5FKIZO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.08030}
}
abstract

The Soft X-ray Imager (SXI) is the X-ray charge-coupled device (CCD) camera for the soft X-ray imaging telescope Xtend installed on the X-ray Imaging and Spectroscopy Mission (XRISM), which was adopted as a recovery mission for the Hitomi X-ray satellite and was successfully launched on 2023 September 7 (JST). In order to maximize the science output of XRISM, we set the requirements for Xtend and find that the CCD set employed in the Hitomi/SXI or similar, i.e., a $2 \times 2$ array of back-illuminated CCDs with a $200~\mu$m-thick depletion layer, would be practically best among available choices, when used in combination with the X-ray mirror assembly. We design the XRISM/SXI, based on the Hitomi/SXI, to have a wide field of view of $38' \times 38'$ in the $0.4-13$ keV energy range. We incorporated several significant improvements from the Hitomi/SXI into the CCD chip design to enhance the optical-light blocking capability and to increase the cosmic-ray tolerance, reducing the degradation of charge-transfer efficiency in orbit. By the time of the launch of XRISM, the imaging and spectroscopic capabilities of the SXI has been extensively studied in on-ground experiments with the full flight-model configuration or equivalent setups and confirmed to meet the requirements. The optical blocking capability, the cooling and temperature control performance, and the transmissivity and quantum efficiency to incident X-rays of the CCDs are also all confirmed to meet the requirements. Thus, we successfully complete the pre-flight development of the SXI for XRISM.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.08030 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Block diagram of the XRISM/SXI system, modified from the diagram of the Hitomi/SXI system in Tanaka et al. (2018). Red, blue, purple, and black lines show the power supply, analog, SpaceWire, and notable digital signal flows, respectively. Alt text: One block diagram. superior, considering the overall balance, notably its high toler￾ance to micrometeoroids and orbital debris. • The FOV must be larger than 22′ ×22′ f… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Photographs of the (left panel) front and (right) back sides of SXI-S (credit: JAXA). Alt text: Two photographs. 3.1 Sensors and front-end components: SXI-S [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Photograph of the flight-model CCD chips mounted on the cold plate. The four CCD chips are mounted on the cold plate supported by jigs. The frame-store regions of the CCD sensors are shielded by the frame-store cover, and a Flexible Printed Circuit (FPC) extends from each of the four CCD sensors. Alt text: One photograph. surface of SXI-S-BNT above the CCD chips to measure the imag￾ing and spectroscopic performance … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Schematic illustrations of (left) PchNeXT4 and (right) PchNeXT4a. PchNeXT4A is improved from PchNeXT4 with a doubled OBL and an additional aluminum area between the depletion layer and the bounding sheet (see §3 and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Frame image obtained from one segment of a CCD chip of the XRISM/SXI, with the color scale representing pulse heights (ch). Charge injection (CI) lines saturated at 4095 ch are located every 80 rows. Alt text: One frame image cessing. We adopted the spare MND02 chips f…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: (Left) Photograph of the mesh mounted on the CCD chips during the SXI stand-alone cooling test. (Right) X-ray image where the entire imaging area is irradiated with Mn-Kα photons through the mesh and the orientation between the four CCD chips are adjusted. The distinct…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Spectra obtained in the pre-flight calibration with a multi-color X-ray generator. The horizontal axis is in PHA (ch), where 1000 ch corresponds to ∼ 6 keV. Alt text: Five line graphs. 5.2 Spectroscopic performance To measure the spectroscopic performance of the flight…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Pulse heights of Mn-Kα and Kβ as a function of row number in the horizontal direction in a segment of a CCD chip. Left and right panels show the pulse heights before and after the charge trail and CTI corrections (§4.2.2) were applied, respectively. Alt text: Two scatt…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: A spectrum with a Mn-Kα and Kβ lines obtained by a segment of a CCD chip of the SXI in the full flight-model configuration. The CCD temperature was kept at −110 ◦C during the data acuisition. The charge￾trail and CTI corrections (§4.2.2) have been applied. Alt text: On…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The long-term history of the temperatures of the (top panel) four CCD chips and (bottom panel) camera body, as a function of days from 9:00 am on 2022 August 5. The camera body temperature reflects the temperature of the surrounding environment of SXI-S. The CCD tempe…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Model and measured values for the (Left panel) Transmissivity of SXI-S-CBF and (Right panel) quantum efficiency of the CCD chips, as a function of incident energy. Alt text: Two line graphs. these results, the SXI of XRISM can be considered one of the best X-ray CCD c…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 6 Pith papers

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

  1. Kinematic Evidence for Bipolar Ejecta Flows in the Galactic SNR W49B

    astro-ph.HE 2025-06 conditional novelty 8.0 of 10

    XRISM/Resolve finds a systematic east-west line-of-sight velocity gradient in W49B's ejecta, indicating bipolar flows rather than an expanding disk.

  2. XRISM reveals a variable, multi-phase outflow-inflow structure during the X-ray obscured 2024 outburst of the black hole transient V4641 Sgr

    astro-ph.HE 2025-08 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    During the 2024 outburst of V4641 Sgr, XRISM resolved narrow X-ray lines indicating an obscured, intrinsically bright inner disk with a variable, multi-phase outflow-inflow structure.

  3. Delving into the depths of NGC 3783 with XRISM. I. Kinematic and ionization structure of the highly ionized outflows

    astro-ph.HE 2025-06 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    XRISM spectroscopy of NGC 3783 reveals six outflow components; one broad Fe XXVI absorber moves at 0.05 c with kinetic luminosity 0.8-3% of bolometric.

  4. Thermal and Kinematic Properties of Ejecta in SN1987A revealed by XRISM

    astro-ph.HE 2025-05 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    XRISM's high-resolution spectra of SN 1987A show 1500-1700 km/s Doppler-broadened Si, S, and Fe lines, indicating that the observed X-rays come from kinematic, non-metal-rich shocked ejecta.

  5. The unusual spectrum of the X-ray transient source XRISM J174610.8-290021 near the Galactic center

    astro-ph.HE 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A newly discovered X-ray transient near the Galactic center shows hydrogen-like iron emission four times stronger than helium-like iron, inconsistent with magnetic CV models and consistent with a high-inclination neut...

  6. Unraveling the structure of the stratified ultra-fast outflows in PDS 456 with XRISM

    astro-ph.HE 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Spectra from XRISM suggest the five fast X-ray outflows in PDS 456 are stratified by ionization, with a weak and not statistically significant trend v_out proportional to the ionization parameter to the power 0.14, pl...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

38 extracted references · 24 canonical work pages · cited by 6 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Aoki Y., Ito Y., Nobukawa M., Kanemaru Y., Miyazaki K., Kusunoki K., Mori K., et al., 2023, sdpi.conf, 36

    work page 2023

  2. [2]

    doi:10.1117/12.461500

    Hayashida K., Shiroshoji T., Fukuda K., Katayama H., 2003, SPIE, 4851, 933. doi:10.1117/12.461500

    work page doi:10.1117/12.461500 2003

  3. [3]

    G., et al., 2018, SPIE, 10699, 1069923

    Hayashida K., Tomida H., Mori K., Nakajima H., Tanaka T., Uchida H., Tsuru T. G., et al., 2018, SPIE, 10699, 1069923. doi:10.1117/12.2311446

    doi:10.1117/12.2311446 2018

  4. [4]

    W., Anabuki N., Angelini L., et al., 2016, Natur, 535, 117

    Hitomi Collaboration, Aharonian F., Akamatsu H., Akimoto F., Allen S. W., Anabuki N., Angelini L., et al., 2016, Natur, 535, 117. doi:10.1038/nature18627

    doi:10.1038/nature18627 2016

  5. [5]

    W., Angelini L., Audard M., et al., 2017, Natur, 551, 478

    Hitomi Collaboration, Aharonian F., Akamatsu H., Akimoto F., Allen S. W., Angelini L., Audard M., et al., 2017, Natur, 551, 478. doi:10.1038/nature24301

    doi:10.1038/nature24301 2017

  6. [6]

    W., Angelini L., Audard M., et al., 2018, PASJ, 70, 9

    Hitomi Collaboration, Aharonian F., Akamatsu H., Akimoto F., Allen S. W., Angelini L., Audard M., et al., 2018, PASJ, 70, 9. doi:10.1093/pasj/psx138

    doi:10.1093/pasj/psx138 2018

  7. [7]

    W., Angelini L., Audard M., et al., 2018, PASJ, 70, 11

    Hitomi Collaboration, Aharonian F., Akamatsu H., Akimoto F., Allen S. W., Angelini L., Audard M., et al., 2018, PASJ, 70, 11. doi:10.1093/pasj/psy004

    doi:10.1093/pasj/psy004 2018

  8. [8]

    W., Angelini L., Audard M., et al., 2018, PASJ, 70, 13

    Hitomi Collaboration, Aharonian F., Akamatsu H., Akimoto F., Allen S. W., Angelini L., Audard M., et al., 2018, PASJ, 70, 13. doi:10.1093/pasj/psx147

    doi:10.1093/pasj/psx147 2018

Show all 38 references
  1. [9]

    doi:10.1016/j.nima.2016.03.071

    Inoue S., Hayashida K., Katada S., Nakajima H., Nagino R., Anabuki N., Tsunemi H., et al., 2016, NIMPA, 831, 415. doi:10.1016/j.nima.2016.03.071

    2016 doi

  2. [10]

    doi:10.1088/1748-0221/14/04/C04003

    Kanemaru, Y., Sato, J., Mori, K., et al.\ 2019, Journal of Instrumentation, 14, C04003. doi:10.1088/1748-0221/14/04/C04003

    2019 doi

  3. [11]

    K., et al., 2020, NIMPA, 984, 164646

    Kanemaru Y., Sato J., Takaki T., Terada Y., Mori K., Saito M., Nobukawa K. K., et al., 2020, NIMPA, 984, 164646. doi:10.1016/j.nima.2020.164646

    2020

  4. [12]

    doi:10.1093/pasj/59.sp1.S23

    Koyama, K., Tsunemi, H., Dotani, T., et al.\ 2007, , 59, 23. doi:10.1093/pasj/59.sp1.S23

    2007 doi

  5. [13]

    doi:10.1143/JJAP.45.8904

    Matsuura D., Ozawa H., Tohiguchi M., Uchino M., Miyata E., Tsunemi H., Inui T., et al., 2006, JaJAP, 45, 8904. doi:10.1143/JJAP.45.8904

    2006 doi

  6. [14]

    doi:10.1117/12.2626894

    Mori K., Tomida H., Nakajima H., Okajima T., Noda H., Tanaka T., Uchida H., et al., 2022, SPIE, 12181, 121811T. doi:10.1117/12.2626894

    2022 doi

  7. [15]

    doi:10.48550/arXiv.2406.19911

    Mori K., Tomida H., Nakajima H., Okajima T., Noda H., Uchida H., Suzuki H., et al., 2024, arXiv, arXiv:2406.19911. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2406.19911

    2024 doi

  8. [16]

    doi:10.1093/pasj/60.sp1.S1

    Nakajima, H., Yamaguchi, H., Matsumoto, H., et al.\ 2008, , 60, S1. doi:10.1093/pasj/60.sp1.S1

    2008 doi

  9. [17]

    doi:10.1016/j.nima.2010.12.174

    Nakajima, H., Matsuura, D., Idehara, T., et al.\ 2011, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A, 632, 128. doi:10.1016/j.nima.2010.12.174

    2011 doi

  10. [18]

    doi:10.1016/j.nima.2013.05.146

    Nakajima, H., Fujikawa, M., Mori, H., et al.\ 2013, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A, 731, 166. doi:10.1016/j.nima.2013.05.146

    2013 doi

  11. [19]

    doi:10.1093/pasj/psx116

    Nakajima, H., Maeda, Y., Uchida, H., et al.\ 2018, , 70, 21. doi:10.1093/pasj/psx116

    2018 doi

  12. [20]

    doi:10.1117/12.2560348

    Nakajima H., Hayashida K., Tomida H., Mori K., Noda H., Matsumoto H., Yoneyama T., et al., 2020, SPIE, 11444, 1144423. doi:10.1117/12.2560348

    2020 doi

  13. [21]

    K., Tsuru T

    Nobukawa K. K., Tsuru T. G., Nobukawa M., Tanaka T., Uchida H., Tsunemi H., Hayashida K., et al., 2014, NIMPA, 765, 269. doi:10.1016/j.nima.2014.05.091

    2014 doi

  14. [22]

    doi:10.1117/12.3017877

    Noda H., Aoyagi M., Mori K., Tomida H., Nakajima H., Tanaka T., Suzuki H., et al., 2024, SPIE, 13093, 130935X. doi:10.1117/12.3017877

    2024 doi

  15. [23]

    doi:10.1117/12.671216

    Ozawa H., Tohiguchi M., Matsuura D., Miyata E., Tsunemi H., Takagi S., Inui T., et al., 2006, SPIE, 6266, 62662N. doi:10.1117/12.671216

    2006 doi

  16. [24]

    doi:10.1093/pasj/61.sp1.S1

    Ozawa, M., Uchiyama, H., Matsumoto, H., et al.\ 2009, , 61, S1. doi:10.1093/pasj/61.sp1.S1

    2009 doi

  17. [25]

    doi:10.1109/TED.2008.926732

    Prigozhin G., Burke B., Bautz M., Kissel S., Lamarr B., 2008, ITED, 55, 2111. doi:10.1109/TED.2008.926732

    2008

  18. [26]

    G., Inui T., Ozawa M., Matsumoto H., Koyama K., Tsunemi H., et al., 2006, SPIE, 6266, 62663V

    Takagi S., Tsuru T. G., Inui T., Ozawa M., Matsumoto H., Koyama K., Tsunemi H., et al., 2006, SPIE, 6266, 62663V. doi:10.1117/12.672657

    2006 doi

  19. [27]

    doi:10.1117/1.JATIS.4.2.021402

    Takahashi, T., Kokubun, M., Mitsuda, K., et al.\ 2018, Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems, 4, 021402. doi:10.1117/1.JATIS.4.2.021402

    2018 doi

  20. [28]

    doi:10.1117/12.2629534

    Tamura K., Hayashi T., Boissay-Malaquin R., Okajima T., Sato T., Olsen L., Koenecke R., et al., 2022, SPIE, 12181, 121811V. doi:10.1117/12.2629534

    2022 doi

  21. [29]

    doi:10.1117/1.JATIS.4.1.011211

    Tanaka, T., Uchida, H., Nakajima, H., et al.\ 2018, Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems, 4, 011211. doi:10.1117/1.JATIS.4.1.011211

    2018 doi

  22. [30]

    doi:10.1117/12.2309455

    Tashiro M., Maejima H., Toda K., Kelley R., Reichenthal L., Lobell J., Petre R., et al., 2018, SPIE, 10699, 1069922. doi:10.1117/12.2309455

    2018 doi

  23. [31]

    doi:10.1117/12.2565812

    Tashiro M., Maejima H., Toda K., Kelley R., Reichenthal L., Hartz L., Petre R., et al., 2020, SPIE, 11444, 1144422. doi:10.1117/12.2565812

    2020 doi

  24. [32]

    doi:10.1117/12.3019325

    Tashiro M., Watanabe S., Maejima H., Toda K., Matsushita K., Yamaguchi H., Kelley R., et al., 2024, SPIE, 13093, 130931G. doi:10.1117/12.3019325

    2024 doi

  25. [33]

    doi:10.1016/j.nima.2020.164374

    Uchida, H., Tanaka, T., Amano, Y., et al.\ 2020, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A, 978, 164374. doi:10.1016/j.nima.2020.164374

    2020

  26. [34]

    doi:10.1093/pasj/61.sp1.S9

    Uchiyama, H., Ozawa, M., Matsumoto, H., et al.\ 2009, , 61, S9. doi:10.1093/pasj/61.sp1.S9

    2009 doi

  27. [35]

    doi:10.1117/12.893348

    Ueda S., Hayashida K., Nakajima H., Anabuki N., Uchida H., Tsunemi H., Fujikawa M., et al., 2011, SPIE, 8145, 814504. doi:10.1117/12.893348

    2011 doi

  28. [36]

    doi:10.1016/j.nima.2012.11.187

    Ueda S., Hayashida K., Nakajima H., Anabuki N., Tsunemi H., Kan H., Kohmura T., et al., 2013, NIMPA, 704, 140. doi:10.1016/j.nima.2012.11.187

    2013 doi

  29. [37]

    doi:10.1016/j.nima.2020.164676

    Yoneyama T., Noda H., Hanaoka M., Okazaki K., Asakura K., Hayashida K., Ishikura A., et al., 2021, NIMPA, 985, 164676. doi:10.1016/j.nima.2020.164676

    2021

  30. [38]

    \@bibitem \@bib@author\@prev@author \@set@biblabel \@lbibitem[#1] \@bib@parse#1()\@nil \@set@biblabel \@bib@parse#1(#2)#3\@nil \@bib@author #1 @edef\@bib@year @space#2 \@empty \@set@biblabel#1 \@bib@author\@empty \@latex@warning Author name should be given for reference entry ...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.