Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 3 cited by

Galactic Super-Accreting X-ray Binaries as Super-PeVatron Accelerators

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Super-accreting X-ray binaries, whose jets and winds carry kinetic luminosity above $10^{39}\ \mathrm{erg\,s^{-1}}$, can accelerate protons past several PeV, and a handful of them could supply the galactic cosmic-ray flux above the knee.

desk verdict Useful, honest Hillas-criterion case for super-accreting XRBs as super-PeVatrons, but the central claim is a plausibility argument, not a demonstration. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.21048 v1 pith:5NWRPGA4 submitted 2025-07-28 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.GAastro-ph.SR

Jieshuang Wang , Brian Reville , Felix Aharonian This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HEastro-ph.GAastro-ph.SR
keywords cosmicraysPeVatronssuper-accretingX-raybinariesultraluminoussourcesHillascriterionultra-high-energygamma-rayhalosmicroquasarsgalacticcosmic-rayknee
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

The paper argues that super-accreting X-ray binaries — compact binary systems accreting near or above the Eddington limit, including ultraluminous X-ray sources — can accelerate protons to energies above several PeV, which would make them galactic 'super-PeVatrons.' The case rests on the kinetic power of their trans-relativistic jets and winds, which can exceed $10^{39}\ \mathrm{erg\,s^{-1}}$, and on a Hillas-type maximum-energy formula that converts that power into a maximum particle rigidity. If the argument is right, a few to a few tens of such systems (roughly 3–20, depending on escape index, conversion efficiency, and duty cycle) could maintain the observed cosmic-ray flux at and above the knee, an energy range that supernova remnants struggle to reach. The paper also predicts that these systems should appear as ultra-high-energy gamma-ray halos and large-scale nebulae, giving observers concrete signatures to look for.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the super-accreting X-ray binary outflow — a collimated jet ($\tilde\omega=1$) or quasi-spherical wind ($\tilde\omega=4$) — characterized by kinetic luminosity $L_K$, velocity $\beta c$, and magnetization $\sigma$. The load-bearing identity is the maximum-energy formula $E_{\max} = 35Z\sigma_{-1}^{1/2}(L_{K,39}\beta)^{1/2}\tilde\omega^{-1/2}\ \mathrm{PeV}$, obtained by relating the outflow's Poynting flux to the electric potential across the acceleration zone; it turns observable outflow power into a maximum proton rigidity. The second mechanism is the population conversion: the ULX luminosity function $\mathrm{d}N/\mathrm{d}L\propto L^{-1.6}$ with cutoff at $10^{41}\ \mathrm{erg\,s^{-1}}$, together with population synthesis giving $N\sim 10$ systems, yields the count $N\approx (2.5\text{–}21)\epsilon_{CR,-1}^{-1}\epsilon_{DC}^{-1}(\tau_{10}/100)^{-1}$ needed to supply the knee flux. Nebula and halo dynamics (jet-cocoon and wind-termination-shock scalings) convert these predictions into observable sizes and fluxes.

What would settle it

A concrete test is to measure the gamma-ray spectrum of a super-accreting X-ray binary halo, such as the V4641 Sgr bubble, above 1 PeV: a cutoff well below the predicted several-PeV maximum, combined with a confirmed kinetic luminosity around $10^{40}$ erg/s, would show the accelerators fall far short of the Hillas maximum and overturn the central claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that galactic super-accreting X-ray binaries, with outflow kinetic luminosity $L_K \gtrsim 10^{39}\ \mathrm{erg\,s^{-1}}$, are viable super-PeVatrons: protons can be accelerated above several PeV and, in flaring states, to rigidities of order $10^2$ PV. The authors derive this from the maximum-energy bound $E_{\max} = 35\,Z\,\sigma_{-1}^{1/2}(L_{K,39}\beta)^{1/2}\tilde\omega^{-1/2}\ \mathrm{PeV}$, where $\sigma$ is the outflow magnetization, $\beta c$ its bulk velocity, and $\tilde\omega$ a geometry factor ($1$ for a jet, $4$ for a wind). Inverting this relation yields a minimum kinetic luminosity $L_K \gtrsim 10^{38}(E_{\max}/10\ \mathrm{PeV})^2\tilde\omega\beta^{-1}\sigma_{-1}^{-1}\ \mathrm{erg\,s^{-1}}$, which super-Eddington outflows satisfy. Combining population synthesis ($N\sim 10$ ULX-type systems in a Milky Way-like galaxy) with a luminosity function $\mathrm{d}N/\mathrm{d}L\propto L^{-1.6}$, the paper estimates that about 3–20 sources, assuming $\sim 10\%$ conversion of outflow power into cosmic rays, can account for the galactic cosmic-ray flux above the knee. It further predicts PeV gamma-ray halos with fluxes near $10^{-13}\,\epsilon_{CR,-1}L_{K,39}(\theta/1^\circ)^2 n_t D_{30}^{-1}\ \mathrm{erg\,cm^{-2}\,s^{-1}}$ and comparable neutrino fluxes from the same halos.

Load-bearing premise

The argument relies on super-accreting X-ray binaries accelerating particles at or near their theoretical maximum energy, and on outflow kinetic power being comparable to X-ray luminosity; if real acceleration is orders of magnitude less efficient, the multi-PeV conclusion fails even with correct source parameters.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the claim holds, a population of roughly 3–20 super-accreting X-ray binaries can explain the galactic cosmic-ray flux at and above the knee, with the exact number set by the escape-time index, the cosmic-ray conversion efficiency, and the duty cycle.
  • The outflows should inflate nebulae tens to hundreds of parsecs across and produce PeV gamma-ray halos with angular sizes $\theta_h\approx 0.7^\circ D_{30}^{1/2}E^{\delta/2}_{p,\mathrm{PeV}}t_3^{1/2}(d/10\ \mathrm{kpc})^{-1}$, within reach of current and next-generation observatories.
  • PeV halos larger than the roughly 100 pc synchrotron and inverse-Compton cooling distance of PeV electrons would point to a hadronic, not leptonic, origin for the emission.
  • A comparable flux of neutrinos at $E_\nu\approx 0.05E_p$ should accompany the halos, offering an independent detection channel.
  • If the accelerated spectrum extends with index $s=2$ down to GeV energies, these systems could contribute to the whole galactic cosmic-ray population from GeV to tens of PeV, not just the above-knee component.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A corollary the paper leaves implicit: the flaring-state power of sources like V4641 Sgr ($L_K\sim 10^{40}$–$10^{41}\ \mathrm{erg\,s^{-1}}$) is so far above the $10^{39}$ erg/s threshold that even a factor-of-ten shortfall from the theoretical maximum would still permit multi-PeV protons, so the near-maximum assumption could be relaxed for the most luminous flares.
  • The duty-cycle factor $\epsilon_{DC}$ is likely the controlling unknown: if super-accreting phases are short and rare, the current X-ray census would undercount the relevant population, and nebular ages rather than flaring rates would be the better population measure.
  • The predicted MeV synchrotron cascade from pair production of absorbed PeV gamma rays offers a cheaper multi-wavelength test of hadronic halos than neutrinos alone, and could be searched for in hard X-ray data around known microquasars.
  • Sub-EeV cosmic-ray composition measurements could test the XRB origin directly: the super-solar $\alpha$-process abundances measured in SS 433 and V4641 Sgr jets imply a distinctive heavy-element signature that would be hard to reproduce with supernova-remnant sources.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The paper argues that Galactic super-accreting X-ray binaries (including ULXs and microquasars in extreme states) are viable super-PeVatron candidates. It derives a Hillas-type maximum energy from the kinetic luminosity, magnetization, and velocity of trans-relativistic jets/winds (Eq. 1), compares several candidate source classes, estimates that a few to a few tens of such sources could supply the Galactic cosmic-ray flux above the knee (Section 3), and presents a forward model for UHE gamma-ray halos and nebulae (Section 4 and Appendix A). The central claim is that systems with kinetic luminosity ≥10^39 erg/s can accelerate protons to several PeV and above.

Significance. If the two load-bearing assumptions—near-Hillas acceleration efficiency and outflow kinetic power comparable to X-ray luminosity—are correct, the proposal is timely and physically interesting, and the paper provides a useful comparative survey of Galactic super-PeVatron candidates as well as a concrete, observationally testable halo-emission model. The halo flux formula (Eq. 4) and the nebular dynamics in Appendix A are constructive steps that can be matched against LHAASO, CTAO, SWGO, and future neutrino observations. However, the central claim is currently conditional on assumptions that are not demonstrated, and one internal example (V4641 Sgr) suggests an efficiency far below the adopted value.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 2.1, Eq. (1) and following paragraph] Eq. (1) is an upper limit from the Hillas criterion, but the abstract and Section 5 convert it into the claim that super-accreting XRBs 'can accelerate protons to energies above several PeV' by taking the position that the accelerators operate at or near their maximum capability. This assumption is not tested; for a generic accelerator with efficiency well below the Hillas voltage, the fiducial source with L_K=10^39 erg/s, β=0.1, σ=0.1 would not reach multi-PeV energies. The paper should either provide evidence for near-Hillas acceleration in these systems or explicitly restrict the claim to an upper limit on source requirements.
  2. [Section 3, paragraph beginning 'For super-accreting XRBs identified in X-rays'] The assumption that outflow kinetic power is comparable to X-ray luminosity is load-bearing for both the individual Emax values in Table 1 and the population estimate. The paper does not justify this comparability; radiative efficiencies, beaming, and the distinction between transient and persistent states can make the X-ray luminosity either larger or smaller than the mechanical power. A sensitivity analysis varying L_K/L_X over a decade or two would clarify how robust the claimed multi-PeV capability is.
  3. [Section 3, V4641 Sgr example] Using the numbers quoted in the paper, the hadronic energy W_p≈10^50 erg (Alfaro et al. 2024) and the active time t≈10 kyr estimated from Eqs. (A1)-(A2) with L_j=10^41 erg/s imply a CR production efficiency ϵ_CR=W_p/(L_K t)≈3×10^-3, two orders of magnitude below the ϵ_CR≈0.1 adopted later for the population estimate. This is an internal consistency problem for the claim that a handful of such sources can supply the CR flux above the knee.
  4. [Section 3, final paragraph] The estimate N≈(2.5−21) ϵ_CR,-1^-1 ϵ_DC^-1 (τ_10/100)^-1 assumes ϵ_CR≈0.1. With ϵ_CR≈10^-2, the required number becomes 250–2100, and with ϵ_CR≈3×10^-3 it becomes roughly 10^3–10^4, far exceeding the adopted ULX population of N∼10. Because no independent constraint on ϵ_CR is provided, the population claim is not robust, and the summary statement that around ten sources may be sufficient should be explicitly qualified by the efficiency assumption.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Title / running header] The running header and title contain 'Super-PeV atron' due to an apparent line-break artifact; this should be corrected to 'Super-PeVatron'.
  2. [Section 2.1, Eq. (2)] The coefficient in Eq. (2) is rounded from the exact inversion of Eq. (1) (which gives about 8.2×10^37 erg/s for Emax=10 PeV and the quoted fiducial parameters); the rounding is fine but a remark would avoid confusion.
  3. [Section 4, Eq. (4)] The flux expression omits CMB absorption, which is discussed later in the section; for sources at distances ≳8 kpc and photon energies above ≳PeV, the predicted halo flux should be attenuated before comparing with LHAASO or CTAO sensitivities.
  4. [Section 4, text after Eq. (4)] The paper states that the resulting photons have energies extending up to Eγ≈0.1Ep, but does not discuss the corresponding spectral shape or the influence of the diffusion index δ on the observable spectrum; a brief elaboration would make the predicted halo signal more directly testable.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the multi-PeV claim is a forward Hillas-capability estimate with explicit efficiency assumptions, not a fitted or self-referential derivation.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained in the relevant sense. Equation (1) is the standard Hillas/Poynting-flux upper limit, and the paper explicitly states in Section 2.1 that it 'take[s] the position that the accelerators operate at or near their maximum capability' before converting that bound into an achieved energy. This is a transparent assumption about efficiency, not a fit to the paper's own conclusion, and it is not defined in terms of the claimed result. The individual-source values in Table 1 come from externally published X-ray luminosities, jet velocities, and magnetization estimates, and the population requirement in Section 3 is a forward calculation from an adopted ULX luminosity function and an assumed CR-production efficiency epsilon_CR = 0.1. The halo flux estimate in Equation (4) is likewise a forward pp-emission model with independently chosen parameters, not a quantity fitted to the paper's central claim. The consistency checks against SS 433 and V4641 Sgr use external TeV/PeV observations (H.E.S.S., LHAASO, Alfaro et al. 2024) rather than the paper's own fitted values. The self-references that do appear (Aharonian et al. 2002 for the electrodynamic limit, and Vieu et al. 2022 or Vieu & Reville 2023 for background discussion of stellar clusters and supernova remnants) are not load-bearing: removing them would not alter the equation chain or the predicted source properties. The genuine weaknesses are the explicit but unsupported assumptions that acceleration saturates the Hillas limit and that outflow kinetic power tracks X-ray luminosity; these are correctness and robustness concerns, not circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper's conclusions rest on the Hillas upper limit plus several hand-chosen parameters (sigma, epsilon_CR, epsilon_DC, D30, n_t, s) and two key assumptions: near-maximum acceleration efficiency and kinetic power comparable to X-ray luminosity. The population and flux estimates are therefore conditional on these inputs, though all are within ranges suggested by observations and simulations.

free parameters (6)
  • Magnetization parameter sigma = 0.1 (Table 1); range 0.01-1 for populations
    Chosen by hand. Emax scales as sigma^(1/2); 0.1 is the optimistic end but within theoretical expectations for magnetized jets; not directly measured for most sources.
  • CR acceleration efficiency epsilon_CR = 0.1 (normalized; Eq. 4 and population estimate)
    Chosen by hand to make a few sources sufficient; also appears in the halo flux formula as epsilon_CR,-1.
  • Outflow duty cycle epsilon_DC = free parameter, order 1 in example
    Accounts for episodic activity; the paper leaves it explicit and multiplies the population estimate.
  • Diffusion coefficient normalization D30 at 1 PeV = 1e30 cm^2/s (example)
    Order-of-magnitude value consistent with Galaxy-wide escape time; local variations can change halo size and flux.
  • Target gas density n_t = not fixed; appears in Eq. (4)
    Needed to evaluate the pp-interaction rate and halo flux; the paper leaves it symbolic, so the numerical flux is conditional on an assumed ISM density.
  • Source spectral index s = 2 or 2.2
    Assumed flat spectrum citing H.E.S.S. observations of SS 433; controls the relative gamma-ray flux.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Hillas limit Emax = Ze beta B R
    Standard necessary condition for acceleration of charged particles; used to set the maximum energy in Eq. (1). Not sufficient by itself.
  • domain assumption Relation of kinetic to Poynting power LK = LB/sigma for a cold, magnetized outflow
    Defines the magnetization parameter and underpins Eq. (1); valid for ideal MHD outflows.
  • domain assumption CR escape time model tau_esc(E) = tau10 (E/10 GeV)^(-delta) in the leaky-box model
    Standard parametrization used to estimate the required CR power above the knee; the paper adopts delta = 1/3 - 1/2 from literature.
  • ad hoc to paper Outflow kinetic power comparable to X-ray luminosity
    Stated in Section 3: 'we further assume that the kinetic power of the outflows is comparable to the X-ray luminosity'; load-bearing for assigning LK to Table 1 sources.
  • ad hoc to paper Particle accelerators operate at or near the Hillas maximum
    Stated in Section 2.1: 'we take the position that the accelerators operate at or near their maximum capability'; this is the key assumption that turns the upper limit into an actual Emax estimate.
  • domain assumption ULX luminosity function dN/dL proportional to L^(-1.6) with cutoff at 1e41 erg/s
    Taken from Mineo et al. 2012 and King et al. 2023; used to estimate the average kinetic power of the population.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Galactic Super-Accreting X-ray Binaries as Super-PeVatron Accelerators." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5NWRPGA4

@misc{pith2026250721048,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Galactic Super-Accreting X-ray Binaries as Super-PeVatron Accelerators},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5NWRPGA4}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.21048}
}
abstract

The extension of the cosmic-ray (CR) spectrum well beyond 1~PeV necessitates the existence of a population of accelerators in the Milky Way, which we refer to as Super PeVatrons. Identifying the nature of these sources remains a challenge to the paradigm of galactic CRs. Galactic super-accreting X-ray binaries, where the compact object accretes at a rate near or above the Eddington limit, can meet the energy requirement to supply the high-energy population of galactic CRs. We demonstrate that the trans-relativistic jets and/or winds of these powerful objects with kinetic energy luminosity exceeding $10^{39} \, \rm erg/s$, can accelerate protons to energies above several PeV. Detection of such super-accreting X-ray binaries through their ultra-high-energy $\gamma$-ray ``halos" and large-scale nebulae is also discussed.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.21048 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The maximum rigidity of Eq. (1) for young stellar clusters (YSCs), supernovae and their remnants (SNe/SNRs), pulsar wind nebulae (exemplified by Crab neb￾ula), the GC, and super-accreting XRBs. The corresponding kinetic power, magnetization, and velocity for this plot are summarized in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Illustration indicating the key features in the XRB nebula and halo (not to scale). The nebula is inflated by the jet/wind. The CR halo is produced by escaping CRs interacting with the ISM. The jet may be collimated by the ambient medium. Close to the binary, the jet profile can be parabolic or conical. Further away from the binary, it can be quasi-cylindrical. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS J.S.W. thanks Y. Shao for helpful discu… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Magnetic rigidity reveals the PeVatron acceleration region in SS433

    astro-ph.HE 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    The radio-measured magnetic field in SS 433's inner jet declines as H^-0.5, so the jet retains enough magnetic rigidity at ~100 AU to accelerate protons to PeV energies.

  2. PeV particle acceleration and non-thermal emission in the `minimalist' model of the extended jets in W50/SS433

    astro-ph.GA 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A model of SS433/W50's extended jets with diffusive shock acceleration reproduces X-ray spectra, gamma-ray emission, and >20% X-ray polarization, with >10% of jet power going into PeV protons.

  3. Superdiffusion of cosmic rays in the vicinity of their accelerators and the resulting $\gamma$-ray emission

    astro-ph.HE 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.5 of 10

    Superdiffusion produces constant or r^{α-3} CR radial profiles near sources; the associated γ-ray morphology can distinguish it from normal diffusion with IACTs.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

82 extracted references · 27 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    G., Ackermann, M., Adams, J., et al

    Aartsen, M. G., Ackermann, M., Adams, J., et al. 2019, Cosmic ray spectrum and composition from PeV to EeV using 3 years of data from IceTop and IceCube, PhRvD, 100, 082002, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.100.082002

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.100.082002 2019

  2. [2]

    G., Abbasi, R., Ackermann, M., et al

    Aartsen, M. G., Abbasi, R., Ackermann, M., et al. 2021, IceCube-Gen2: the window to the extreme Universe, Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics, 48, 060501

    2021

  3. [3]

    U., Abe, M., Abu-Zayyad, T., et al

    Abbasi, R. U., Abe, M., Abu-Zayyad, T., et al. 2021, The Cosmic-Ray Composition between 2 PeV and 2 EeV Observed with the TALE Detector in Monocular Mode, ApJ, 909, 178, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abdd30 Abdul Halim, A., Abreu, P., Aglietta, M., et al. 2024, Large-scale Cosmic-ray Anisotropies with 19 yr of Data from the Pierre Auger Observatory, ApJ, 976, 48...

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abdd30 2021

  4. [4]

    2019, Massive stars as major factories of Galactic cosmic rays, NatAs, 3, 561, doi: 10.1038/s41550-019-0724-0

    Aharonian, F., Yang, R., & de O˜ na Wilhelmi, E. 2019, Massive stars as major factories of Galactic cosmic rays, NatAs, 3, 561, doi: 10.1038/s41550-019-0724-0

    doi:10.1038/s41550-019-0724-0 2019

  5. [5]

    V., & Kocharovsky, V

    Kocharovsky, V. V., & Kocharovsky, V. V. 2002, Constraints on the extremely high-energy cosmic ray accelerators from classical electrodynamics, PhRvD, 66, 023005, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.66.023005

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.66.023005 2002

  6. [6]

    E., Ameli, F., et al

    Aiello, S., Akrame, S. E., Ameli, F., et al. 2019, Sensitivity of the KM3NeT/ARCA neutrino telescope to point-like neutrino sources, APh, 111, 100, doi: 10.1016/j.astropartphys.2019.04.002

    doi:10.1016/j.astropartphys.2019.04.002 2019

  7. [7]

    C., et al

    Alfaro, R., Alvarez, C., Arteaga-Vel´ azquez, J. C., et al. 2024, Ultra-high-energy gamma-ray bubble around microquasar V4641 Sgr, Nature, 634, 557, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07995-9 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Lim, P. L., et al. 2022, The Astropy Project: Sustaining and Growing a Community-oriented Open-source Project and the Latest Major R...

    doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07995-9 2024

  8. [8]

    M., Aharonian, F

    Atoyan, A. M., Aharonian, F. A., & V¨ olk, H. J. 1995, Electrons and positrons in the galactic cosmic rays, PhRvD, 52, 3265, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.52.3265

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.52.3265 1995

Show all 82 references
  1. [9]

    Axford, W. I. 1994, The Origins of High-Energy Cosmic

    1994

  2. [10]

    Rays, ApJS, 90, 937, doi: 10.1086/191928 10 W ang et al

    doi

  3. [11]

    2015, Magnetic fields in spiral galaxies, A&ARv, 24, 4, doi: 10.1007/s00159-015-0084-4

    Beck, R. 2015, Magnetic fields in spiral galaxies, A&ARv, 24, 4, doi: 10.1007/s00159-015-0084-4

    2015 doi

  4. [12]

    C., & Cioffi, D

    Begelman, M. C., & Cioffi, D. F. 1989, Overpressured Cocoons in Extragalactic Radio Sources, ApJL, 345, L21, doi: 10.1086/185542

    1989 doi

  5. [13]

    C., King, A

    Begelman, M. C., King, A. R., & Pringle, J. E. 2006, The nature of SS433 and the ultraluminous X-ray sources, MNRAS, 370, 399, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10469.x

    2006

  6. [14]

    R., Schure, K

    Bell, A. R., Schure, K. M., Reville, B., & Giacinti, G. 2013, Cosmic-ray acceleration and escape from supernova remnants, MNRAS, 431, 415, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt179

    2013 doi

  7. [15]

    S., Bulanov, S

    Berezinskii, V. S., Bulanov, S. V., Dogiel, V. A., & Ptuskin, V. S. 1990, Astrophysics of cosmic rays (North-Holland)

    1990

  8. [16]

    2005, XMM-Newton observations of SS 433 I

    Brinkmann, W., Kotani, T., & Kawai, N. 2005, XMM-Newton observations of SS 433 I. EPIC spectral analysis, A&A, 431, 575, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20041768

    2005 doi

  9. [17]

    2024, The First LHAASO Catalog of Gamma-Ray Sources, ApJS, 271, 25, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/acfd29 Cherenkov Telescope Array Consortium, Acero, F.,

    Cao, Z., Aharonian, F., & An, Q., e. 2024, The First LHAASO Catalog of Gamma-Ray Sources, ApJS, 271, 25, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/acfd29 Cherenkov Telescope Array Consortium, Acero, F.,

    2024 doi

  10. [18]

    2023, Sensitivity of the Cherenkov Telescope Array to spectral signatures of hadronic PeVatrons with application to Galactic Supernova

    Acharyya, A., et al. 2023, Sensitivity of the Cherenkov Telescope Array to spectral signatures of hadronic PeVatrons with application to Galactic Supernova

    2023

  11. [19]

    Remnants, Astroparticle Physics, 150, 102850, doi: 10.1016/j.astropartphys.2023.102850

    2023

  12. [20]

    M., Khabibullin, I

    Churazov, E. M., Khabibullin, I. I., & Bykov, A. M. 2024, Minimalist model of the W50/SS433 extended X-ray jet: Anisotropic wind with recollimation shocks, A&A, 688, A4, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202449343

    2024 doi

  13. [21]

    J., Gaggero, D., Markoff, S., & Zhang, S

    Cooper, A. J., Gaggero, D., Markoff, S., & Zhang, S. 2020, High-energy cosmic ray production in X-ray binary jets, MNRAS, 493, 3212, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa373

    2020 doi

  14. [22]

    P., Tasse, C., et al

    Coriat, M., Fender, R. P., Tasse, C., et al. 2019, The twisted jets of Circinus X-1, MNRAS, 484, 1672, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz099

    2019 doi

  15. [23]

    2020, The low rate of Galactic pevatrons, Astroparticle Physics, 123, 102492, doi: 10.1016/j.astropartphys.2020.102492

    Cristofari, P., Blasi, P., & Amato, E. 2020, The low rate of Galactic pevatrons, Astroparticle Physics, 123, 102492, doi: 10.1016/j.astropartphys.2020.102492

    2020

  16. [24]

    2004, The jets and supercritical accretion disk in SS433, ASPRv, 12, 1, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0603390

    Fabrika, S. 2004, The jets and supercritical accretion disk in SS433, ASPRv, 12, 1, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0603390

    2004 doi arXiv

  17. [25]

    2004, GRS 1915+105 and the Disc-Jet Coupling in Accreting Black Hole Systems, ARA&A, 42, 317, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.42.053102.134031

    Fender, R., & Belloni, T. 2004, GRS 1915+105 and the Disc-Jet Coupling in Accreting Black Hole Systems, ARA&A, 42, 317, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.42.053102.134031

    2004

  18. [26]

    Giacinti, G., Kachelrieß, M., & Semikoz, D. V. 2015, Escape model for Galactic cosmic rays and an early extragalactic transition, PhRvD, 91, 083009, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.91.083009

    2015 doi

  19. [27]

    L., & Syrovatskii, S

    Ginzburg, V. L., & Syrovatskii, S. I. 1964, The Origin of Cosmic Rays (PERGAMON PRESS)

    1964

  20. [28]

    2003, Observations of Giant Outbursts from Cygnus X-1, ApJ, 596, 1113, doi: 10.1086/378190

    Golenetskii, S., Aptekar, R., Frederiks, D., et al. 2003, Observations of Giant Outbursts from Cygnus X-1, ApJ, 596, 1113, doi: 10.1086/378190

    2003 doi

  21. [29]

    J., & Schr´ eder, G

    Gould, R. J., & Schr´ eder, G. 1966, Opacity of the Universe to High-Energy Photons, PhRvL, 16, 252, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.16.252

    1966 doi

  22. [30]

    R., Millman, K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Array programming with NumPy, Nature, 585, 357, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2

    2020 doi

  23. [31]

    2018, Design of the LHAASO detectors, Radiation Detection Technology and Methods, 2, 7, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41605-018-0037-3

    He, H., & LHAASO Collaboration. 2018, Design of the LHAASO detectors, Radiation Detection Technology and Methods, 2, 7, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41605-018-0037-3

    2018 doi

  24. [32]

    2002, Cosmic rays from microquasars: A narrow component to the CR spectrum?, A&A, 390, 751, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20020615 H.E.S.S

    Heinz, S., & Sunyaev, R. 2002, Cosmic rays from microquasars: A narrow component to the CR spectrum?, A&A, 390, 751, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20020615 H.E.S.S. Collaboration, Abramowski, A., Aharonian, F., et al. 2016, Acceleration of petaelectronvolt protons in the Galactic Cen...

    2002 doi

  25. [33]

    Hillas, A. M. 1984, The Origin of Ultra-High-Energy Cosmic Rays, ARA&A, 22, 425, doi: 10.1146/annurev.aa.22.090184.002233

    1984

  26. [34]

    2022, in 37th International Cosmic Ray Conference, 23, doi: 10.22323/1.395.0023

    Hinton, J., & SWGO Collaboration. 2022, in 37th International Cosmic Ray Conference, 23, doi: 10.22323/1.395.0023

    2022 doi

  27. [35]

    M., & Rupen, M

    Hjellming, R. M., & Rupen, M. P. 1995, Episodic ejection of relativistic jets by the X-ray transient GRO J1655 - 40, Natur, 375, 464, doi: 10.1038/375464a0

    1995 doi

  28. [36]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Matplotlib: A 2D graphics environment, Computing in Science & Engineering, 9, 90, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55

    2007 doi

  29. [37]

    Iaria, R., Di Salvo, T., Burderi, L., & Robba, N. R. 2001, Spectral Evolution of Circinus X-1 along Its Orbit, ApJ, 561, 321, doi: 10.1086/323226

    2001 doi

  30. [38]

    M., & Davis, S

    Jiang, Y.-F., Stone, J. M., & Davis, S. W. 2014, A Global Three-dimensional Radiation Magneto-hydrodynamic Simulation of Super-Eddington Accretion Disks, ApJ, 796, 106, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/796/2/106 Super Accretor as Super-PeV atrons 11

    2014 doi

  31. [39]

    R., Gunn, K

    Kaiser, C. R., Gunn, K. F., Brocksopp, C., & Sokoloski, J. L. 2004, Revision of the Properties of the GRS 1915+105 Jets: Clues from the Large-Scale Structure, ApJ, 612, 332, doi: 10.1086/422466

    2004 doi

  32. [40]

    2023, Ultraluminous X-ray sources, NewAR, 96, 101672, doi: 10.1016/j.newar.2022.101672

    King, A., Lasota, J.-P., & Middleton, M. 2023, Ultraluminous X-ray sources, NewAR, 96, 101672, doi: 10.1016/j.newar.2022.101672

    2023

  33. [41]

    S., & Falle, S

    Komissarov, S. S., & Falle, S. A. E. G. 1998, The large-scale structure of FR-II radio sources, MNRAS, 297, 1087, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.1998.01547.x

    1998

  34. [42]

    Koo, B.-C., & McKee, C. F. 1992, Dynamics of Wind Bubbles and Superbubbles. I. Slow Winds and Fast

    1992

  35. [43]

    Winds, ApJ, 388, 93, doi: 10.1086/171132

    doi

  36. [44]

    O., & Cesarsky, C

    Lagage, P. O., & Cesarsky, C. J. 1983, The maximum energy of cosmic rays accelerated by supernova shocks., A&A, 125, 249 LHAASO Collaboration. 2024a, An ultrahigh-energy γ -ray bubble powered by a super PeVatron, Science Bulletin, 69, 449, doi: 10.1016/j.scib.2023.12.040 LHAAS...

    1983

  37. [45]

    A., & Aharonian, F

    Malkov, M. A., & Aharonian, F. A. 2019, Cosmic-ray Spectrum Steepening in Supernova Remnants. I. Loss-free Self-similar Solution, ApJ, 881, 2, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab2c01

    2019 doi

  38. [46]

    N., Hobbs, G

    Manchester, R. N., Hobbs, G. B., Teoh, A., & Hobbs, M. 2005, The Australia Telescope National Facility Pulsar

    2005

  39. [47]

    M., & Peracaula, M

    Catalogue, AJ, 129, 1993, doi: 10.1086/428488 Mart ´ ı, J., Paredes, J. M., & Peracaula, M. 2001, Development of a two-sided relativistic jet in Cygnus X-3, A&A, 375, 476, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20010907 Mart ´ ı, J.-M. 2019, Numerical Simulations of Jets from Active Galactic ...

    1993 doi

  40. [48]

    1997, Morphology and Dynamics of Relativistic Jets, ApJ, 479, 151, doi: 10.1086/303842

    Marquina, A. 1997, Morphology and Dynamics of Relativistic Jets, ApJ, 479, 151, doi: 10.1086/303842

    1997 doi

  41. [49]

    M., & Tsygankov, S

    Churazov, E. M., & Tsygankov, S. S. 2018, An Upper Limit on Nickel Overabundance in the Supercritical Accretion Disk Wind of SS 433 from X-ray Spectroscopy, AstL, 44, 390, doi: 10.1134/S1063773718060038

    2018 doi

  42. [50]

    2002, Iron Emission Lines from Extended X-ray Jets in SS 433: Reheating of Atomic Nuclei, Sci, 297, 1673, doi: 10.1126/science.1073660

    Migliari, S., Fender, R., & M´ endez, M. 2002, Iron Emission Lines from Extended X-ray Jets in SS 433: Reheating of Atomic Nuclei, Sci, 297, 1673, doi: 10.1126/science.1073660

    2002 doi

  43. [51]

    Miller-Jones, J. C. A., Blundell, K. M., Rupen, M. P., et al. 2004, Time-sequenced Multi-Radio Frequency Observations of Cygnus X-3 in Flare, ApJ, 600, 368, doi: 10.1086/379706

    2004 doi

  44. [52]

    2012, X-ray emission from star-forming galaxies - I

    Mineo, S., Gilfanov, M., & Sunyaev, R. 2012, X-ray emission from star-forming galaxies - I. High-mass X-ray binaries, MNRAS, 419, 2095, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19862.x

    2012

  45. [53]

    2021, Particle acceleration in winds of star clusters, MNRAS, 504, 6096, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab690

    Morlino, G., Blasi, P., Peretti, E., & Cristofari, P. 2021, Particle acceleration in winds of star clusters, MNRAS, 504, 6096, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab690

    2021 doi

  46. [54]

    2023, Reacceleration of Galactic Cosmic Rays beyond the Knee at the Termination Shock of a Cosmic-Ray-driven Galactic Wind, ApJ, 953, 49, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acdc9b

    Blandford, R. 2023, Reacceleration of Galactic Cosmic Rays beyond the Knee at the Termination Shock of a Cosmic-Ray-driven Galactic Wind, ApJ, 953, 49, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acdc9b

    2023 doi

  47. [55]

    Neilsen, J., Rahoui, F., Homan, J., & Buxton, M. 2016, A

    2016

  48. [56]

    Super-Eddington, Compton-thick Wind in GRO J1655-40?, ApJ, 822, 20, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/822/1/20

    doi

  49. [57]

    2024, Very-high-energy gamma rays from cosmic rays escaping from Galactic black hole binaries, arXiv, arXiv:2410.22976, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2410.22976

    Ohira, Y. 2024, Very-high-energy gamma rays from cosmic rays escaping from Galactic black hole binaries, arXiv, arXiv:2410.22976, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2410.22976

    2024 doi arXiv

  50. [58]

    2005, Supercritical Accretion Flows around Black Holes:

    Ohsuga, K., Mori, M., Nakamoto, T., & Mineshige, S. 2005, Supercritical Accretion Flows around Black Holes:

    2005

  51. [59]

    Two-dimensional, Radiation Pressure-dominated Disks with Photon Trapping, ApJ, 628, 368, doi: 10.1086/430728

    doi

  52. [60]

    A., Kuulkers, E., van der Klis, M., et al

    Orosz, J. A., Kuulkers, E., van der Klis, M., et al. 2001, A Black Hole in the Superluminal Source SAX J1819.3-2525 (V4641 Sgr), ApJ, 555, 489, doi: 10.1086/321442

    2001 doi

  53. [61]

    2025, Particle acceleration and multi-messenger radiation from ultra-luminous X-ray sources: A new class of Galactic PeVatrons, A&A, 698, A188, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452987

    Peretti, E., Petropoulou, M., Vasilopoulos, G., & Gabici, S. 2025, Particle acceleration and multi-messenger radiation from ultra-luminous X-ray sources: A new class of Galactic PeVatrons, A&A, 698, A188, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452987

    2025 doi

  54. [62]

    Perucho, M., & Mart ´ ı, J. M. 2007, A numerical simulation of the evolution and fate of a Fanaroff-Riley type I jet. The case of 3C 31, MNRAS, 382, 526, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12454.x

    2007

  55. [63]

    A., Becker, W., et al

    Predehl, P., Sunyaev, R. A., Becker, W., et al. 2020, Detection of large-scale X-ray bubbles in the Milky Way halo, Natur, 588, 227, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2979-0

    2020 doi

  56. [64]

    M., & Kallman, T

    Proga, D., Stone, J. M., & Kallman, T. R. 2000, Dynamics of Line-driven Disk Winds in Active Galactic Nuclei, ApJ, 543, 686, doi: 10.1086/317154 12 W ang et al

    2000 doi

  57. [65]

    2002, V4641Sgr - A super-Eddington source enshrouded by an extended envelope, A&A, 385, 904, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20020189

    Revnivtsev, M., Sunyaev, R., Gilfanov, M., & Churazov, E. 2002, V4641Sgr - A super-Eddington source enshrouded by an extended envelope, A&A, 385, 904, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20020189

    2002 doi

  58. [66]

    2008, Formation of dynamical structures in relativistic jets: the FRI case, A&A, 488, 795, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200809687

    Rossi, P., Mignone, A., Bodo, G., Massaglia, S., & Ferrari, A. 2008, Formation of dynamical structures in relativistic jets: the FRI case, A&A, 488, 795, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200809687

    2008 doi

  59. [67]

    A., Mart ´ ı, J

    Scheck, L., Aloy, M. A., Mart ´ ı, J. M., G´ omez, J. L., & M¨ uller, E. 2002, Does the plasma composition affect the long-term evolution of relativistic jets?, MNRAS, 331, 615, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05210.x

    2002

  60. [68]

    2020, Population Synthesis of Black Hole X-Ray Binaries, ApJ, 898, 143, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aba118

    Shao, Y., & Li, X.-D. 2020, Population Synthesis of Black Hole X-Ray Binaries, ApJ, 898, 143, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aba118

    2020 doi

  61. [69]

    A., Abdollahi, S., Ajello, M., et al

    Smith, D. A., Abdollahi, S., Ajello, M., et al. 2023, The Third Fermi Large Area Telescope Catalog of Gamma-Ray Pulsars, ApJ, 958, 191, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acee67

    2023 doi

  62. [70]

    M., Spencer, R

    Stirling, A. M., Spencer, R. E., de la Force, C. J., et al. 2001, A relativistic jet from Cygnus X-1 in the low/hard X-ray state, MNRAS, 327, 1273, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04821.x

    2001

  63. [71]

    W., Moskalenko, I

    Strong, A. W., Moskalenko, I. V., & Ptuskin, V. S. 2007, Cosmic-Ray Propagation and Interactions in the Galaxy, ARNPS, 57, 285, doi: 10.1146/annurev.nucl.57.090506.123011

    2007

  64. [72]

    R., & Finkbeiner, D

    Su, M., Slatyer, T. R., & Finkbeiner, D. P. 2010, Giant Gamma-ray Bubbles from Fermi-LAT: Active Galactic Nucleus Activity or Bipolar Galactic Wind?, ApJ, 724, 1044, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/724/2/1044

    2010 doi

  65. [73]

    J., Sivakoff, G

    Tetarenko, A. J., Sivakoff, G. R., Miller-Jones, J. C. A., et al. 2017, Extreme jet ejections from the black hole X-ray binary V404 Cygni, MNRAS, 469, 3141, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1048 The LHAASO Collaboration, Cao, Z., Aharonian, F., et al. 2025, First Identification and Preci...

    2017 doi

  66. [74]

    P., van Vliet, A., et al

    Thoudam, S., Rachen, J. P., van Vliet, A., et al. 2016, Cosmic-ray energy spectrum and composition up to the ankle: the case for a second Galactic component, A&A, 595, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201628894 van den Eijnden, J., Degenaar, N., Russell, T. D., et al. 2018, An evol...

    2016 doi

  67. [75]

    2024, Cygnus X-3 revealed as a Galactic ultraluminous X-ray source by

    Veledina, A., Muleri, F., Poutanen, J., et al. 2024, Cygnus X-3 revealed as a Galactic ultraluminous X-ray source by

    2024

  68. [76]

    IXPE, NatAs.tmp, doi: 10.1038/s41550-024-02294-9

    doi

  69. [77]

    2023, Massive star cluster origin for the galactic cosmic ray population at very-high energies, MNRAS, 519, 136, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3469

    Vieu, T., & Reville, B. 2023, Massive star cluster origin for the galactic cosmic ray population at very-high energies, MNRAS, 519, 136, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3469

    2023 doi

  70. [78]

    2022, Can superbubbles accelerate ultrahigh energy protons?, MNRAS, 515, 2256, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1901 V¨ olk, H

    Vieu, T., Reville, B., & Aharonian, F. 2022, Can superbubbles accelerate ultrahigh energy protons?, MNRAS, 515, 2256, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1901 V¨ olk, H. J., & Zirakashvili, V. N. 2004, Cosmic ray acceleration by spiral shocks in the galactic wind, A&A, 417, 807, doi: 10.10...

    2022 doi

  71. [79]

    2017, The Origin of the Ultraluminous X-Ray Sources, ApJ, 846, 17, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa821d

    Belczynski, K. 2017, The Origin of the Ultraluminous X-Ray Sources, ApJ, 846, 17, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa821d

    2017 doi

  72. [80]

    2023, A multi-cubic-kilometre neutrino telescope in the western Pacific Ocean, Nature Astronomy, 7, 1497

    Ye, Z., Hu, F., Tian, W., et al. 2023, A multi-cubic-kilometre neutrino telescope in the western Pacific Ocean, Nature Astronomy, 7, 1497

    2023

  73. [81]

    N., & Ptuskin, V

    Zirakashvili, V. N., & Ptuskin, V. S. 2008, Diffusive Shock Acceleration with Magnetic Amplification by Nonresonant Streaming Instability in Supernova

    2008

  74. [82]

    T., Done, C., & Smith, D

    Remnants, ApJ, 678, 939, doi: 10.1086/529580 ˙Zycki, P. T., Done, C., & Smith, D. A. 1999, The 1989 May outburst of the soft X-ray transient GS 2023+338 (V404 Cyg), MNRAS, 309, 561, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.1999.02885.x

    1999

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.