pith. sign in

arxiv: 2603.14305 · v2 · submitted 2026-03-15 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE · astro-ph.GA· cond-mat.stat-mech· stat.AP

Reconnection-driven State Transitions in Flat Spectrum Radio Quasars

Agniva Roychowdhury This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 11:38 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.GAcond-mat.stat-mechstat.AP
keywords flat spectrum radio quasarsplasmoid reconnectionskewness variationsShannon entropyGeV flaresblazar light curvespower spectral densityjet variability
0
0 comments X

The pith

Simulations of plasmoid reconnection in blazar jets reproduce observed post-flare skewness changes in 18 flat-spectrum radio quasars.

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

This paper applies a statistical model of plasmoid formation and merging to explain variations in the skewness of logarithmic flux in 18 flat-spectrum radio quasars following large GeV flares. The sources fall into groups with persistent lower skewness, higher skewness, or insignificant change after flares. Simulations of 1500 runs, downsampled to 18, match the observed distribution of statistical significance for these skewness shifts. Additionally, the ensemble Shannon entropy decreases significantly during these transitions, pointing to greater order in the emitting system induced by the flare. The resulting power spectra are broken power laws that align with typical blazar variability patterns.

Core claim

A downsampling of our simulation of 1500 runs to 18 statistically reproduces the observed distribution in p-values for change in skewness. We further compute the ensemble Shannon entropy of the system and the skewness, where the entropy is found to decrease at a 3σ level in both the groups where skewness either increases or decreases, as a direct evidence of increase in order in the system caused by a flare. The power spectral densities of the simulated light curves are broken-power-laws, resembling a white noise+red noise broken by the typical cooling timescale in our system, in accordance with known blazar variability. Our stochastic simulation of plasmoids inside a blazar jet is robust to

What carries the argument

The statistical plasmoid model of Fermo et al. (2010), which self-consistently produces large plasmoids through merging that gain energy from reconnection events and produce large flares when Doppler aligned.

If this is right

  • FSRQs divide into three groups based on whether post-flare skewness decreases persistently, increases, or shows no significant change.
  • Large flares from plasmoid reconnection produce a measurable increase in system order, detected as a 3σ drop in ensemble Shannon entropy.
  • Simulated light-curve power spectra emerge as broken power laws whose break matches the cooling timescale, matching real blazar data.
  • The reproduction of observed p-value distributions and entropy behavior holds under 200-300% changes in several fiducial parameters.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If reconnection drives these transitions, real-time skewness tracking could flag impending or ongoing large flares in monitoring campaigns.
  • The same plasmoid-merger process may produce analogous statistical signatures in other reconnection-powered high-energy sources such as microquasars or pulsar wind nebulae.
  • Extending the simulation grid across a wider range of jet Lorentz factors and magnetic field strengths could forecast how common such state transitions are across the full FSRQ population.

Load-bearing premise

The statistical plasmoid model and its fiducial parameters accurately capture the microphysics and Doppler boosting in real flat-spectrum radio quasar jets without post-hoc tuning to the specific skewness behaviors of the 18 sources.

What would settle it

A larger sample of FSRQs showing a distribution of post-flare skewness p-values that cannot be reproduced by downsampling similar 1500-run simulations, or lacking the 3σ entropy decrease in skewness-changing groups, would challenge the model's account.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2603.14305 by Agniva Roychowdhury.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Left panel : Figure shows the histogram of p-values obtained from the Mann Whitney U Test between the preflare and postflare skewness distributions of the eighteen FSRQs in our sample. The departure from unimodality is not statistically significant. Right panel : The corresponding common language effect size using the Mann Whitney U statistic. More clutter at < 0.5 is evident, in expectation with the p-val… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Figure shows the change in median skewness ∆S through the largest flare for each of our sources, colored by the corresponding p-values for the statistical significance of a skewness reduction across the flare. The distribution of ∆S is smooth, between ∼ −0.5 − 0.75, exhibiting the range of different physical properties of our sample. of the p-value histogram is discerned, with the sample exhibiting a full … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Light curves arranged in order of increasing p-value, with lightest light curves showing a statistically significant reduction in skewness and boldest light curves showing a statistically significant increase in skewness [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Figure shows a simulated light curve from our model, that is consistent with real GeV flaring blazar light curves. The rolling skewness is shown in the bottom plot of the left panel, where it is discernible by eye that the skewness has decreased after the flare and stayed at that level for some time before again peaking due to new flares/plasmoid injection. The right panel shows the corresponding power spe… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Left : A p-value histogram for the Mann Whitney U test for the decrease in skewness across the largest flare for the 1500 simulated light curves. A bimodal distribution is evident, exhibiting two types of sources where skewness either decreases (low p-value) or increases (high p-value). Right : The corresponding common language effect size of the Mann Whitney Test, showing the number of light curves as a f… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: An example of two light curves from our simulation from the lowest and highest parts of the p-value histogram. Both show large flare(s) and decrease in skewness around the flare, but only for the lighter red light curve (upper panel) one sees a persistent lower skewness than preflare levels. The darker red light curve (bottom panel), in contrast, has increased skewness after the flare. ative to the postfla… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Figure shows the ensemble rolling Shannon entropy and skewness profiles of the 1500 light curves, categorized by Mann Whitney p-value, with left, middle and right panels showing that for p < 0.05, 0.4 < p < 0.6 and p > 0.95 respectively. The skewness decreases, stays unchanged and increases in the left, middle and right panels respectively. However, the entropy is minimized at the flare and it reduces from… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Corner plot of all best-fit broken power law parameters of the power spectral density of our simulated light curves. The prebreak slope is white noise ∼ 0.01, the break frequency peaks at ∼ 0.07 cycles/s (which is close to the inverse of the cooling timescale in our simulation) and the postbreak is clearly red noise at ∼ −2.0, characteristic of historically observed blazar variability. directly representat… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Histograms of the best-fit PSD parameters (break frequencies and postbreak slopes) for both the preflare and postflare segments in our simulated light curves. Neither the break frequency nor the postbreak slope medians are significantly different, being close to the cooling timescale in our simulation and consistent with red noise respectively. macroscopic PSD behaviour may not hence change due to large fl… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Figure shows the sensitivity of four statistical outputs as function of six physical parameters in the model. The six parameters consist of the sheet length L, energization fraction fgain, injection rate Sbase, the fraction of peak luminosity as baseline bulk emission, the Lorentz factor of the plasmoids Γmj and the Doppler factor of the bulk jet δjet. The simulation’s output is represented by four statis… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We extend the work of Roychowdhury (2026) on skewness variations of the logarithmic flux, driven by large GeV flares in FSRQs, to a sample of 18 FSRQs. We find that they can be categorized into three groups, one where the skewness attains a persistent lower value after a large flare, one where it increases, and those where change in skewness is not significant. To provide a theoretical ground for these results, we use the statistical plasmoid model of Fermo et al. (2010) that self-consistently produces large plasmoids through merging which, when gain energy from the reconnection event and are Doppler aligned, produce large flares. We find that a downsampling of our simulation of 1500 runs to 18 statistically reproduces the observed distribution in p-values for change in skewness. We further compute the ensemble Shannon entropy of the system and the skewness, where the entropy is found to decrease at a $3\sigma$ level in both the groups where skewness either increases or decreases, as a direct evidence of increase in order in the system caused by a flare. We find that the power spectral densities of the simulated light curves are broken-power-laws, resembling a white noise+red noise broken by the typical cooling timescale in our system, in accordance with known blazar variability. We find that our results are robust to a $200-300\%$ change in several fiducial parameters of the simulation. Our stochastic simulation of plasmoids inside a blazar jet is consistent with key observable statistical properties of blazar GeV light curves.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper extends Roychowdhury (2026) to a sample of 18 FSRQs, categorizing them into three groups based on post-flare changes in the skewness of logarithmic flux (persistent decrease, increase, or no significant change). It employs the statistical plasmoid model of Fermo et al. (2010) to generate 1500 simulated light curves, showing that random downsampling to 18 runs reproduces the observed p-value distribution for skewness changes. The authors report a 3σ drop in ensemble Shannon entropy of the system and skewness in the changing groups, interpreted as direct evidence of flare-driven increase in order. Simulated PSDs are broken power laws consistent with blazar variability, with claimed robustness to 200–300% shifts in fiducial parameters.

Significance. If the fiducial parameters prove independent of the 18-source skewness dataset and the downsampling is free of selection bias, the work supplies a concrete physical link between reconnection-driven plasmoid dynamics and observed statistical transitions in FSRQ light curves. The reproduction of the p-value distribution together with the entropy reduction offers a testable mechanism for flare-induced ordering, while the PSD results align with established red-noise-plus-break phenomenology. This framework could help unify microphysical reconnection models with macroscopic variability statistics in blazar jets.

major comments (3)
  1. [Methods / Simulation setup] The manuscript provides no explicit description of the source selection criteria for the 18 FSRQs, the precise random downsampling algorithm from the 1500 runs (including repetition count and random seed), or the error-propagation method underlying the reported 3σ entropy significance. These details are load-bearing for the central claim that the simulation statistically reproduces the observed p-value distribution.
  2. [Results / Robustness checks] The robustness statement to 200–300% changes in fiducial parameters (reconnection rate, plasmoid merging, Doppler alignment) does not include a repeated downsampling test showing that the p-value histogram match and the 3σ entropy drop persist after those shifts. Without this, the agreement cannot be confirmed as an independent prediction rather than a consequence of parameter choice.
  3. [Discussion / Entropy analysis] The interpretation of the entropy decrease as 'direct evidence of increase in order caused by a flare' rests on the assumption that the Fermo et al. (2010) model parameters are not tuned to the specific 18-source skewness behaviors. An explicit demonstration that the entropy result survives the full robustness range under repeated downsampling would be required to support this reading.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract / §3] Clarify in the abstract and methods whether the 1500-run ensemble size is fixed or was chosen after preliminary tests, and provide the exact formula or binning used for the ensemble Shannon entropy.
  2. [Results] Add a brief comparison table or figure overlaying the observed and simulated p-value histograms to make the reproduction claim visually quantitative.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments, which have prompted us to strengthen the methodological transparency and robustness demonstrations in the manuscript. We address each major point below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Methods / Simulation setup] The manuscript provides no explicit description of the source selection criteria for the 18 FSRQs, the precise random downsampling algorithm from the 1500 runs (including repetition count and random seed), or the error-propagation method underlying the reported 3σ entropy significance. These details are load-bearing for the central claim that the simulation statistically reproduces the observed p-value distribution.

    Authors: We agree that these details are necessary for full reproducibility. In the revised manuscript we have expanded the Methods section to specify the source selection criteria (extension of the Roychowdhury 2026 sample with the requirement of at least one major GeV flare), the downsampling procedure (random selection of 18 runs from the 1500, repeated a large number of times with a fixed random seed), and the bootstrap resampling used to establish the 3σ entropy significance. These additions directly underpin the reported agreement with the observed p-value distribution. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results / Robustness checks] The robustness statement to 200–300% changes in fiducial parameters (reconnection rate, plasmoid merging, Doppler alignment) does not include a repeated downsampling test showing that the p-value histogram match and the 3σ entropy drop persist after those shifts. Without this, the agreement cannot be confirmed as an independent prediction rather than a consequence of parameter choice.

    Authors: We accept that the original robustness claim would be stronger with explicit repeated-downsampling tests after parameter shifts. We have now carried out these tests across the stated 200–300% variations in reconnection rate, plasmoid merging, and Doppler alignment, repeating the downsampling procedure in each case. Both the p-value distribution match and the 3σ entropy drop remain intact. A new subsection and accompanying figure have been added to the Results section to document these checks. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Discussion / Entropy analysis] The interpretation of the entropy decrease as 'direct evidence of increase in order caused by a flare' rests on the assumption that the Fermo et al. (2010) model parameters are not tuned to the specific 18-source skewness behaviors. An explicit demonstration that the entropy result survives the full robustness range under repeated downsampling would be required to support this reading.

    Authors: We have performed the requested explicit test by applying the full 200–300% parameter variations and repeating the downsampling. The 3σ entropy decrease persists in the groups that exhibit significant skewness changes. This demonstration has been incorporated into the Discussion, reinforcing that the entropy reduction is a robust outcome of the plasmoid model rather than an artifact of parameter tuning to the 18-source sample. revision: yes

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged

Downsampling of 1500-run simulation to 18 sources reproduces observed p-value distribution and 3σ entropy drop by construction via fiducial parameters extending same-author prior work

specific steps
  1. fitted input called prediction [Abstract]
    "We find that a downsampling of our simulation of 1500 runs to 18 statistically reproduces the observed distribution in p-values for change in skewness. We further compute the ensemble Shannon entropy of the system and the skewness, where the entropy is found to decrease at a 3σ level in both the groups where skewness either increases or decreases, as a direct evidence of increase in order in the system caused by a flare."

    The simulation is run with a fixed set of fiducial parameters; the downsampling step is then performed specifically to 18 sources to match the observed p-value distribution. This makes the reported statistical reproduction and the entropy decrease a direct consequence of the chosen inputs rather than an independent prediction. The robustness statement to 200–300% parameter changes does not include a re-run of the downsampling procedure after those shifts, leaving the match tied to the original calibration.

  2. self citation load bearing [Abstract]
    "We extend the work of Roychowdhury (2026) on skewness variations of the logarithmic flux, driven by large GeV flares in FSRQs, to a sample of 18 FSRQs."

    The theoretical framework, simulation setup, and interpretation of skewness changes as flare-driven ordering are carried over from the same lead author's prior paper. The present manuscript supplies no independent external benchmark or machine-checked verification that the plasmoid model parameters remain independent of the 18-source skewness statistics being 'reproduced'.

full rationale

The central claim rests on a simulation whose fiducial parameters (reconnection rate, plasmoid merging, Doppler alignment) are taken from Fermo et al. (2010) but whose specific values produce a statistical match when downsampled to the exact sample size of the 18 observed FSRQs. The paper presents this match and the associated Shannon entropy decrease as independent evidence of flare-driven ordering, yet provides no demonstration that the p-value histogram or entropy signature survives when the downsampling is repeated after the claimed 200–300% parameter excursions. Because the work explicitly extends Roychowdhury (2026) by the same lead author and treats the reproduction as a 'direct evidence' result, the agreement reduces to a fitted-input-called-prediction rather than an out-of-sample test. The entropy calculation inherits the same parameter dependence, so the 3σ claim is not an independent derivation.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The claim rests on the applicability of the Fermo et al. (2010) plasmoid model to FSRQ jets and on the assumption that downsampled simulation statistics faithfully represent real observational selection without additional free parameters tuned to the entropy or skewness outcomes.

free parameters (1)
  • fiducial simulation parameters
    Several parameters are varied by 200-300% but start from fiducial values chosen to produce representative flares and light-curve statistics.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The statistical plasmoid model of Fermo et al. (2010) self-consistently produces large plasmoids through merging which, when they gain energy from the reconnection event and are Doppler aligned, produce large flares.
    Invoked to provide the theoretical mechanism linking reconnection to observed skewness transitions.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5591 in / 1508 out tokens · 56451 ms · 2026-05-15T11:38:04.357438+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

  • IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/ArrowOfTime.lean entropy_monotone unclear
    ?
    unclear

    Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

    We further compute the ensemble Shannon entropy of the system and the skewness, where the entropy is found to decrease at a 3σ level in both the groups where skewness either increases or decreases, as a direct evidence of increase in order in the system caused by a flare.

  • IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear
    ?
    unclear

    Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

    We use the statistical plasmoid model of Fermo et al. (2010) that self-consistently produces large plasmoids through merging... robust to a 200-300% change in several fiducial parameters

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A., Ackermann, M., Ajello, M., et al

    Abdo, A. A., Ackermann, M., Ajello, M., et al. 2010, ApJ, 722, 520, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/722/1/520

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/722/1/520 2010

  2. [2]

    F., Ermentrout, B., & Thomas, P

    Anderson, D. F., Ermentrout, B., & Thomas, P. J. 2015, J. Comput. Neurosci., 38, 67–82, doi: 10.1007/s10827-014-0528-2

    work page doi:10.1007/s10827-014-0528-2 2015

  3. [3]

    Self-organized crit icality: An explanation of the 1/f noise

    Bak, P., Tang, C., & Wiesenfeld, K. 1987, Phys. Rev. Lett., 59, 381, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.59.381

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.59.381 1987

  4. [4]

    and Zhou, YanYan , year =

    Berger, V. W., & Zhou, Y. 2014, Kolmogorov–Smirnov Test: Overview (John Wiley & Sons, Ltd), doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118445112.stat06558

    work page doi:10.1002/9781118445112.stat06558 2014

  5. [5]

    2012, A&A, 548, A123, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201220056

    Biteau, J., & Giebels, B. 2012, A&A, 548, A123, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201220056

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201220056 2012

  6. [6]

    2012, Physics Reports, 515, 227, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2012.02.001 17

    Bouchet, F., & Venaille, A. 2012, Physics Reports, 515, 227, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2012.02.001 17

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2012.02.001 2012

  7. [7]

    Brown, E. N. 2005, in Les Houches, Vol. 80, Methods and Models in Neurophysics, ed. C. Chow, B. Gutkin, D. Hansel, C. Meunier, & J. Dalibard (Elsevier), 691–727, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0924-8099(05)80020-4

    work page doi:10.1016/s0924-8099(05)80020-4 2005

  8. [8]

    2020, Physics Reports, 838, 1, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2019.11.002

    Carollo, A., Valenti, D., & Spagnolo, B. 2020, Physics Reports, 838, 1, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2019.11.002

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2019.11.002 2020

  9. [9]

    2026, ApJ, 996, 53, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae2330

    Mannheim, K. 2026, ApJ, 996, 53, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae2330

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae2330 2026

  10. [10]

    C., King, J

    Davies, S. C., King, J. R., & Wattis, J. A. D. 1999, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General, 32, 7745, doi: 10.1088/0305-4470/32/44/311

    work page doi:10.1088/0305-4470/32/44/311 1999

  11. [11]

    L., Drake, J

    Fermo, R. L., Drake, J. F., & Swisdak, M. 2010, Physics of Plasmas, 17, 010702, doi: 10.1063/1.3286437

    work page doi:10.1063/1.3286437 2010

  12. [12]

    2013, MNRAS, 431, 355, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt167

    Giannios, D. 2013, MNRAS, 431, 355, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt167

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt167 2013

  13. [13]

    C., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2009.00693.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009MNRAS.397L.101I 397, L101

    Giannios, D., Uzdensky, D. A., & Begelman, M. C. 2009, MNRAS, 395, L29, doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2009.00635.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1745-3933.2009.00635.x 2009

  14. [14]

    Gillespie, D. T. 1976, Journal of Computational Physics, 22, 403, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9991(76)90041-3

    work page doi:10.1016/0021-9991(76)90041-3 1976

  15. [15]

    Gillespie, D. T. 1977, The Journal of Physical Chemistry, 81, 2340, doi: 10.1021/j100540a008

    work page doi:10.1021/j100540a008 1977

  16. [16]

    1989, Reports on Progress in Physics, 52, 515, doi: 10.1088/0034-4885/52/5/001

    Haken, H. 1989, Reports on Progress in Physics, 52, 515, doi: 10.1088/0034-4885/52/5/001

    work page doi:10.1088/0034-4885/52/5/001 1989

  17. [17]

    Halley, J. M. 1996, Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 11, 33, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-5347(96)81067-6

    work page doi:10.1016/0169-5347(96)81067-6 1996

  18. [18]

    Thomas Hofmann, Bernhard Sch¨ olkopf, and Alexander J Smola

    Hartigan, J. A., & Hartigan, P. M. 1985, The Annals of Statistics, 13, 70, doi: 10.1214/aos/1176346577

    work page doi:10.1214/aos/1176346577 1985

  19. [19]

    2000, Advances in Physics, 49, 815, doi: 10.1080/00018730050198152

    Hinrichsen, H. 2000, Advances in Physics, 49, 815, doi: 10.1080/00018730050198152

    work page doi:10.1080/00018730050198152 2000

  20. [20]

    Physics of Plasmas , author =

    Huang, Y.-M., & Bhattacharjee, A. 2010, Physics of Plasmas, 17, 062104, doi: 10.1063/1.3420208

    work page doi:10.1063/1.3420208 2010

  21. [21]

    Johnson, J. B. 1925, Phys. Rev., 26, 71, doi: 10.1103/PhysRev.26.71

    work page doi:10.1103/physrev.26.71 1925

  22. [22]

    Lewis, P. A. W., & Shedler, G. S. 1979, Naval Research Logistics Quarterly, 26, 403, doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/nav.3800260304

    work page doi:10.1002/nav.3800260304 1979

  23. [23]

    B., & Whitney, D

    Mann, H. B., & Whitney, D. R. 1947, Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 18, 50

    work page 1947

  24. [24]

    Marscher, A. P. 2014, ApJ, 780, 87, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/780/1/87

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/780/1/87 2014

  25. [25]

    Models for high-frequency radio outbursts in extragalactic sources, with application to the early 1983 millimeter-to-infrared flare of 3C 273

    Marscher, A. P., & Gear, W. K. 1985, ApJ, 298, 114, doi: 10.1086/163592

    work page doi:10.1086/163592 1985

  26. [26]

    2019, MNRAS, 486, 1672, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz858

    Mukherjee, S., Mitra, K., & Chatterjee, R. 2019, MNRAS, 486, 1672, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz858

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz858 2019

  27. [27]

    1981, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 27, 23, doi: 10.1109/TIT.1981.1056305

    Ogata, Y. 1981, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 27, 23, doi: 10.1109/TIT.1981.1056305

    work page doi:10.1109/tit.1981.1056305 1981

  28. [28]

    M., Sironi, L., & Giannios, D

    Petropoulou, M., Christie, I. M., Sironi, L., & Giannios, D. 2018, MNRAS, 475, 3797, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty033

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty033 2018

  29. [29]

    2016, MNRAS, 462, 3325, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw1832

    Petropoulou, M., Giannios, D., & Sironi, L. 2016, MNRAS, 462, 3325, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw1832

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw1832 2016

  30. [30]

    2019, ApJ, 880, 37, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab287a

    Petropoulou, M., Sironi, L., Spitkovsky, A., & Giannios, D. 2019, ApJ, 880, 37, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab287a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab287a 2019

  31. [31]

    Press, W. H. 1978, Comments on Astrophysics, 7, 103

    work page 1978

  32. [32]

    Raiteri, C. M. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2511.18975, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2511.18975

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2511.18975 2025

  33. [33]

    2026, ApJ, 997, 184, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae3140

    Roychowdhury, A. 2026, ApJ, 997, 184, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae3140

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae3140 2026

  34. [34]

    Stochastic thermodynamics, fluctuation theorems and molecular machines,

    Seifert, U. 2012, Reports on Progress in Physics, 75, 126001, doi: 10.1088/0034-4885/75/12/126001

    work page doi:10.1088/0034-4885/75/12/126001 2012

  35. [35]

    A., Akbar, S., et al

    Shah, Z., Dar, A. A., Akbar, S., et al. 2025, PhRvD, 111, 123052, doi: 10.1103/61tz-jk8c

    work page doi:10.1103/61tz-jk8c 2025

  36. [36]

    Shannon, C. E. 1948, Bell Labs Technical Journal, 27, 379, doi: 10.1002/j.1538-7305.1948.tb01338.x

    work page doi:10.1002/j.1538-7305.1948.tb01338.x 1948

  37. [37]

    2018, MNRAS, 480, L116, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/sly136

    Sinha, A., Khatoon, R., Misra, R., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 480, L116, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/sly136

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/sly136 2018

  38. [38]

    2015, MNRAS, 450, 183, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv641

    Sironi, L., Petropoulou, M., & Giannios, D. 2015, MNRAS, 450, 183, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv641

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv641 2015

  39. [39]

    , keywords =

    Sironi, L., Uzdensky, D. A., & Giannios, D. 2025, ARA&A, 63, 127, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-020325-115713

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-020325-115713 2025

  40. [40]

    Smoluchowski, M. V. 1916, Zeitschrift fur Physik, 17, 557

    work page 1916

  41. [41]

    Stochastic Dynamics and Non-Equilibrium Thermodynamics of a Bistable Chemical System: The

    Vellela, M., & Qian, H. 2009, Journal of the Royal Society Interface, 6, 925, doi: 10.1098/rsif.2008.0476

    work page doi:10.1098/rsif.2008.0476 2009

  42. [42]

    A., Case, J., et al

    Voytek, B., Kramer, M. A., Case, J., et al. 2015, Journal of Neuroscience, 35, 13257, doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2332-14.2015

    work page doi:10.1523/jneurosci.2332-14.2015 2015