pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.07537 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-08 · 🌌 astro-ph.SR

Recognition: unknown

Solar Extreme Ultraviolet Spectrograph and High-energy Imager (SEUSHI): Design, Development, and Pre-Flight Calibration

Anant Telikicherla , Thomas N. Woods , Dave Crotser , Bennet D. Schwab , Robert H. Sewell , Wyatt ZagorecMarks , Alan Sims , Andrew R. Jones
show 2 more authors
James P. Mason Philip Chamberlin
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 17:14 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.SR
keywords solar flaresEUV spectroscopysoft X-ray imagingspace weathercoronal dimminginstrument calibrationsounding rocket
0
0 comments X

The pith

SEUSHI combines multi-pinhole SXR imaging and grazing-incidence EUV spectroscopy on a shared camera to deliver temperature and emission measure maps at 1 arcminute resolution every 5 seconds.

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

The paper presents the design, development, and pre-flight calibration of the SEUSHI instrument for solar observations. SEUSHI integrates multi-pinhole soft X-ray imaging with grazing-incidence extreme ultraviolet spectroscopy on a single camera to produce spatially resolved temperature and emission measure maps. These maps target 1 arcminute resolution at 5 second cadence specifically to detect Hot Onset Precursor Events that precede solar flares. The instrument further supports 100 Hz photon-counting spectroscopy in soft X-rays for elemental abundance studies and 0.2 nm resolution EUV spectra for coronal dimming analysis. Built with low mass and power needs, a technology demonstration version is prepared for a sounding rocket flight aboard the Solar Dynamics Observatory Extreme Ultraviolet Variability Experiment calibration payload.

Core claim

SEUSHI delivers spatially-resolved temperature and emission measure maps at 1 arcminute resolution and 5 second cadence by combining multi-pinhole soft X-ray imaging with grazing-incidence EUV spectroscopy on a shared camera, along with high-cadence readouts at 100 Hz for photon-counting spectroscopy over 1.1-6.8 keV at approximately 0.08 keV energy resolution and high-resolution EUV spectra across 16.1-33.8 nm at 5 second cadence.

What carries the argument

The shared camera that performs simultaneous multi-pinhole soft X-ray imaging and grazing-incidence EUV spectroscopy, enabling multiple diagnostic channels on a compact platform without separate detectors.

If this is right

  • Enables identification of Hot Onset Precursor Events (HOPEs) to provide early alerts of solar flares.
  • Supports photon-counting spectroscopy to track elemental abundance evolution in active regions as a diagnostic of coronal heating.
  • Delivers 0.2 nm resolution EUV spectra at 5 second cadence for coronal dimming studies and early CME alerts.
  • Fits low power, mass, and volume constraints suitable for small satellite platforms.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the rocket test succeeds, the compact design could be adapted for continuous monitoring on operational satellites to refine space weather forecast lead times.
  • The dual-mode readout might reveal rapid changes in X-ray emission that link thermal structure directly to abundance variations.
  • Data from the instrument could be cross-compared with existing EUV imagers to test whether HOPEs appear consistently across wavelengths.
  • Deployment on multiple small satellites would allow simultaneous viewing from different vantage points to improve three-dimensional reconstruction of flare onsets.

Load-bearing premise

The combined multi-pinhole SXR imaging and grazing-incidence EUV spectroscopy on a shared camera will achieve the stated resolutions, cadences, and energy resolution without significant interference or degradation in the space environment.

What would settle it

Sounding rocket flight data that fails to produce temperature maps at 1 arcminute resolution and 5 second cadence or shows crosstalk between the imaging and spectroscopy channels exceeding design thresholds.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.07537 by Alan Sims, Anant Telikicherla, Andrew R. Jones, Bennet D. Schwab, Dave Crotser, James P. Mason, Philip Chamberlin, Robert H. Sewell, Thomas N. Woods, Wyatt ZagorecMarks.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: (a) SEUSHI top-level block diagram showing different components of both the SXR imaging spectrometer and EUV spectrograph. The sensor and optics, including the slit, pinhole apertures and diffraction grating are shown in an orange box. The electronics unit including the FPGA board and the Power & ADC board are shown in a green box. (b) SEUSHI flight model instrument without its top cover and different comp… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Diagram depicting the SXR imaging spectrometer with only two of the six pinholes shown simplicity. The dashed line with arrows indicate the direction of X-rays entering the instrument. The pinhole aperture tungsten plate is shown in the left (in red), 8 micron beryllium filter (blue), and 30 micron beryllium filter (green) are shown in the figure. The pinhole images are shown on the right side in yellow, w… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Diagram depicting the EUV spectrograph. The dashed line with arrows indicate the direction of EUV light entering the instrument. The slit is on the left in a stainless steel plate and this is followed by a C/Al/C filter. After this the light hits the diffraction grating at grazing incidence, and then reaches the CMOS image sensor forming the EUV spectrograph image. The EUV spectrograph also consists of a z… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: SXR imaging spectrometer filter response and signal estimates. The top row shows the Be filter transmittance for the 8 micron and the 38 micron filters in the left and right panels respectively (denoted by blue solid lines). The absorptance of Si sensor (purple line), Silicon Oxide transmittance (green line), and total effective response (dashed red line) is also shown. The dashed gray and black vertical l… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Left panel shows the total signal (in electrons per second) through both the 8 micron (blue) and 38 micron (red) beryllium filters, as a function of solar plasma temperature from logT=6 (1 MK) to logT=8 (100 MK). The 5 sigma noise level is also shown using a dashed gray line. The right panel shows the filter ratio, as a function of the plasma temperature. The curve is also fitted to a polynomial (dashed re… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: (a) The ray trace model of the grating created using Zemax, (b) Simulated sensor spectrograph image generating using Zemax corresponding to a slit size of 0.025 mm x 1.0 mm. The signal spans approximately 500 rows in the vertical dimension, and the entire sensor (1504 pixels) in the horizontal dimension. The solar spectra is generated using CHIANTI and then passed through the instrument model considering s… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Signal and noise estimates using model spectra generated with CHIANTI. Left plot shows the signal (black), read noise (green), dark noise (blue), shot noise (red), and total noise (yellow) for summed over all rows of a particular spectrograph column. estimates for solar minimum spectra. Right plot shows the Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR) for both solar minimum (blue) and solar maximum (red) spectra. Alignment… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Sketch of SXR imaging spectrometer alignment setup with the 512 nm laser source, collimating mirror, and SEUSHI instrument. A retroreflection from the alignment mirror on the SEUSHI instrument was used to align the source with the instrument. An example pinhole image is shown in purple [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The left panel shows an alignment test image with all six pinholes exposed to the laser, plotted in linear scale. The centers of the 6 different pinhole images are also labeled 1-6. The right panel shows a test image with only one pinhole (#2) exposed to the laser source, plotted in log scale. The first Airy disk is indicated using a blue circle. Dark images have been subtracted for both images, and green … view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: EUV spectrograph calibration measurements. The top panel shows the spectrograph image taken off a He-II hollow cathode EUV lamp. Dark subtraction is applied to the image, and it is normalized and plotted in log scale. The bottom panel shows the vertical sum spectrum showing the various He-II spectral lines [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Left: Optimal Pinhole aperture diameter (microns) vs the sensor to pinhole distance (cm). Right: Spatial resolution (arcseconds) vs sensor to pinhole distance (cm). Both plots are shown for different energy levels from 1 to 10 keV. Dashed red vertical line indicates the current SEUSHI sensor to pinhole distance of 27.4 cm. A.2. Aperture Size and Signal Calculation The pinhole aperture diameter directly af… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: The left panel shows signal (photon per resolution-size per frame) vs pinhole aperture diameter for different Be filter thicknesses (8 µm in Blue, 30 µm in Green, 38 µm in Yellow, 60 µm in Red, and 68 µm in Purple. These are quiescent sun (QS, denoted by circle markers), Active Region (AR, denoted by square markers), and Flare (FL, denoted by triangle markers) model DEM spectra generated from CHIANTI. The… view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Left panel shows signal (photons per pixel per frame) vs aperture diameter for fast readout rate (100 Hz) to perform photon-counting for determining photon energy. The plot is shown for different Be filter thicknesses for different CHIANTI DEM model spectra including quiescent sun (QS), Active Region (AR), and Flare (FL). Right panel shows pile-up fraction vs aperture diameter for different DEM spectra an… view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Synthetic photon-counting spectra for an active region generated over a duration of 5 minutes (typical observation window for the sounding rocket test flight). The gray line shows the active region DEM spectra obtained from CHIANTI. The orange line shows the synthetic spectra obtained by measuring charge generated by individual X-ray photons to estimate photon energy. The bin width (energy resolution) is … view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Understanding the initiation of solar flares and coronal mass ejections (CMEs) is essential for improving forecasts of extreme space weather. Soft X-ray (SXR) and Extreme Ultraviolet (EUV) observations provide critical diagnostics of the highly dynamic solar corona; however, significant measurement gaps persist despite decades of observations. The Solar Extreme Ultraviolet Spectrograph and High-energy Imager (SEUSHI) aims to address these gaps by combining multi-pinhole SXR imaging with grazing-incidence EUV spectroscopy on a shared camera. SEUSHI delivers spatially-resolved temperature and emission measure maps at 1 arcminute resolution and 5 second cadence to identify Hot Onset Precursor Events (HOPEs), which provide early alerts of flares. Additionally, high-cadence (100 Hz) readouts of selected image rows enable photon-counting spectroscopy over 1.1-6.8 keV with approx. 0.08 keV energy resolution, to investigate elemental abundance evolution in active regions, a key diagnostic of coronal heating. SEUSHI also provides high-resolution (approx. 0.2 nm) EUV spectra measurements across the 16.1-33.8 nm range at 5 second cadence for studies of coronal dimming and generation of early alerts for CMEs. SEUSHI is designed with low power, mass, and volume requirements, making it suitable for small satellite platforms. A technology demonstration version of SEUSHI is currently under development for flight aboard the Solar Dynamics Observatory Extreme Ultraviolet Variability Experiment calibration sounding rocket. This paper presents the instrument design, development, and calibration. Successful demonstration on the sounding rocket platform is an important step towards the opportunity to fly SEUSHI on future satellite missions and thus to improve space weather operations.

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

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript describes the design, development, and pre-flight calibration of the SEUSHI instrument, which combines multi-pinhole soft X-ray (SXR) imaging and grazing-incidence EUV spectroscopy on a shared camera. It claims to deliver 1 arcmin resolution temperature and emission measure maps at 5 s cadence for identifying Hot Onset Precursor Events (HOPEs), 100 Hz photon-counting SXR spectroscopy (1.1-6.8 keV, ~0.08 keV resolution) for abundance studies, and ~0.2 nm EUV spectra (16.1-33.8 nm) at 5 s cadence for coronal dimming and CME alerts. The instrument is optimized for low-resource small-satellite platforms, with a technology demonstration version under development for a sounding rocket flight.

Significance. If the performance specifications are achieved, SEUSHI would fill key observational gaps in high-cadence, spatially resolved SXR/EUV diagnostics for solar flare initiation and coronal heating, with direct relevance to space weather forecasting. The low mass/power/volume design is a notable strength for future missions. The paper provides a clear instrument concept and development path, though its impact depends on validation of the combined-channel performance.

major comments (2)
  1. [§5] §5 (Pre-Flight Calibration): The reported calibration results characterize the EUV spectroscopic and SXR imaging channels individually or in static configurations. No quantitative data are presented on simultaneous operation of the multi-pinhole SXR imaging and grazing-incidence EUV spectroscopy on the shared detector, including measurements of crosstalk, wavelength-dependent quantum efficiency overlap, effective spatial/energy resolution in mixed readout modes, or alignment stability. This directly affects the central claims of achieving the stated 1 arcmin / 5 s and 0.08 keV / 100 Hz performance without degradation.
  2. [§3] §3 (Instrument Design): The description of the shared camera, readout electronics, and multi-pinhole/grazing-incidence optics does not include an error budget, ray-trace simulations, or thermal/vibration analysis demonstrating that the 5 s full-frame cadence for imaging/spectroscopy and the 100 Hz row readouts for photon-counting spectroscopy can be maintained concurrently without interference or loss of the claimed resolutions.
minor comments (2)
  1. The abstract and main text repeatedly use approximate values (e.g., 'approx. 0.08 keV', 'approx. 0.2 nm') without accompanying error bars or measurement methods; specifying the exact definitions (FWHM, etc.) and how they were determined from calibration data would improve precision.
  2. Figure captions and the optical layout diagrams would benefit from explicit annotations showing the common optical path and detector region used by both the SXR imaging and EUV spectroscopic channels.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 1 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed review of our manuscript on the SEUSHI instrument. We address each major comment below, indicating where revisions will be made to strengthen the paper.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§5] §5 (Pre-Flight Calibration): The reported calibration results characterize the EUV spectroscopic and SXR imaging channels individually or in static configurations. No quantitative data are presented on simultaneous operation of the multi-pinhole SXR imaging and grazing-incidence EUV spectroscopy on the shared detector, including measurements of crosstalk, wavelength-dependent quantum efficiency overlap, effective spatial/energy resolution in mixed readout modes, or alignment stability. This directly affects the central claims of achieving the stated 1 arcmin / 5 s and 0.08 keV / 100 Hz performance without degradation.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the pre-flight calibration results presented focus on the individual channels, as these represent the completed tests at the time of submission. The optical paths are designed to be largely independent (multi-pinhole SXR versus grazing-incidence EUV), with the shared detector using distinct readout modes to limit interference. We will revise §5 to incorporate a quantitative discussion of expected combined-mode performance, drawing on the measured component quantum efficiencies, optical modeling of potential crosstalk, and estimates of resolution and alignment stability under concurrent operation. This will more directly support the instrument's claimed capabilities. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§3] §3 (Instrument Design): The description of the shared camera, readout electronics, and multi-pinhole/grazing-incidence optics does not include an error budget, ray-trace simulations, or thermal/vibration analysis demonstrating that the 5 s full-frame cadence for imaging/spectroscopy and the 100 Hz row readouts for photon-counting spectroscopy can be maintained concurrently without interference or loss of the claimed resolutions.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit error budget and supporting analyses would improve the clarity of the design section. Ray-trace simulations were used in the instrument design process to confirm the optical layout and timing requirements, and thermal/vibration considerations were evaluated for the sounding-rocket environment. We will revise §3 to include a dedicated subsection with the error budget (tabulated for key parameters such as spatial resolution, energy resolution, and cadence), summaries of the ray-trace results, and thermal/vibration analysis demonstrating that concurrent operation is feasible without degradation. revision: yes

standing simulated objections not resolved
  • Quantitative experimental measurements of simultaneous multi-pinhole SXR imaging and grazing-incidence EUV spectroscopy on the integrated detector (including direct crosstalk and mixed-mode resolution data), as the full instrument has not yet completed integrated testing ahead of the sounding-rocket flight.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: instrument description paper with no derivations or predictions

full rationale

The paper is a straightforward engineering description of SEUSHI hardware design, optical layout, readout electronics, and pre-flight calibration measurements. It contains no mathematical derivations, no fitted parameters renamed as predictions, no self-citation chains supporting uniqueness theorems, and no ansatzes smuggled via prior work. All performance claims (1 arcmin resolution, 5 s cadence, 0.08 keV energy resolution, etc.) are presented as design specifications and measured calibration outcomes rather than results derived from equations that could reduce to the inputs by construction. The absence of any load-bearing derivation chain makes the circularity score 0.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Only the abstract is available; the ledger reflects stated design assumptions rather than derived quantities. No free parameters are fitted to data in the provided text.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The instrument optics and detector will deliver the quoted spatial resolution, temporal cadence, and energy resolution under flight conditions.
    Performance numbers are presented as design deliverables without accompanying error analysis or environmental testing results in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5676 in / 1276 out tokens · 37595 ms · 2026-05-10T17:14:32.113182+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

41 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    2020, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 642, A14, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935574

    Anderson, M., Appourchaux, T., Auch` ere, F., et al. 2020, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 642, A14, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935574

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201935574 2020

  2. [2]

    M., McClintock, W

    Bailey, S. M., McClintock, W. E., Carstens, J. N., et al. 2022, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 127, e2021JA030257, doi: 10.1029/2021JA030257 22

    work page doi:10.1029/2021ja030257 2022

  3. [3]

    F., Hudson, H., Warmuth, A., et al

    Battaglia, A. F., Hudson, H., Warmuth, A., et al. 2023, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 679, A139, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347706

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347706 2023

  4. [4]

    J., Warren, H

    Cargill, P. J., Warren, H. P., & Bradshaw, S. J. 2015, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A:

    2015

  5. [5]

    Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 373, 20140260, doi: 10.1098/rsta.2014.0260

    work page doi:10.1098/rsta.2014.0260 2014

  6. [6]

    Y., Warren, H

    Caspi, A., Shih, A. Y., Warren, H. P., et al. 2016, in CubeSats and NanoSats for Remote Sensing, Vol. 9978 (SPIE), 49–49, doi: 10.1117/12.2238478

    work page doi:10.1117/12.2238478 2016

  7. [7]

    C., Scott, G

    Chancellor, J. C., Scott, G. B. I., & Sutton, J. P. 2014, Life : Open Access Journal, 4, 491, doi: 10.3390/life4030491

    work page doi:10.3390/life4030491 2014

  8. [8]

    A., Woods, T

    Crotser, D. A., Woods, T. N., Eparvier, F. G., Triplett, M. A., & Woodraska, D. L. 2007, in Solar Physics and Space Weather Instrumentation II, Vol. 6689 (SPIE), 184–194, doi: 10.1117/12.732592

    work page doi:10.1117/12.732592 2007

  9. [9]

    , keywords =

    Culhane, J. L., Harra, L. K., James, A. M., et al. 2007, Solar Physics, 243, 19, doi: 10.1007/s01007-007-0293-1

    work page doi:10.1007/s01007-007-0293-1 2007

  10. [10]

    Curto, J. J. 2020, Journal of Space Weather and Space Climate, 10, 27, doi: 10.1051/swsc/2020027

    work page doi:10.1051/swsc/2020027 2020

  11. [11]

    M., Seaton, D

    Darnel, J. M., Seaton, D. B., Bethge, C., et al. 2022, Space Weather, 20, e2022SW003044, doi: 10.1029/2022SW003044 da Silva, D. F., Hui, L., Sim˜ oes, P. J. A., et al. 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 525, 4143, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad2244 Del Zanna, G., Dere, K. P., Young, P. R., & Landi, E. 2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 909, 3...

    work page doi:10.1029/2022sw003044 2022

  12. [12]

    Thiemann, E. M. B. 2015, Space Science Reviews, 195, 293, doi: 10.1007/s11214-015-0195-2

    work page doi:10.1007/s11214-015-0195-2 2015

  13. [13]

    2008, in The Hinode Mission, ed

    Golub, L., DeLuca, E., Austin, G., et al. 2008, in The Hinode Mission, ed. T. Sakurai (New York, NY: Springer), 27–50, doi: 10.1007/978-0-387-88739-5 5 Heliophysics Decadal Survey. 2025, The Next Decade of Discovery in Solar and Space Physics: Exploring and Safeguarding Humanity's Home in Space (Washington, DC: The National Academies Press), doi: 10....

    work page doi:10.1007/978-0-387-88739-5 2008

  14. [14]

    2020, in X-Ray, Optical, and Infrared Detectors for Astronomy IX, Vol

    Heymes, J., Stefanov, K., Soman, M., et al. 2020, in X-Ray, Optical, and Infrared Detectors for Astronomy IX, Vol. 11454 (SPIE), 99–110, doi: 10.1117/12.2560162

    work page doi:10.1117/12.2560162 2020

  15. [15]

    F., Schmutz, W., Stockman, Y., et al

    Hochedez, J. F., Schmutz, W., Stockman, Y., et al. 2006, Advances in Space Research, 37, 303, doi: 10.1016/j.asr.2005.10.041

    work page doi:10.1016/j.asr.2005.10.041 2006

  16. [16]

    2025, Solar Physics, 300, 2, doi: 10.1007/s11207-024-02418-4

    Hudson, H. 2025, Solar Physics, 300, 2, doi: 10.1007/s11207-024-02418-4

    work page doi:10.1007/s11207-024-02418-4 2025

  17. [17]

    S., Sim˜ oes, P

    Hudson, H. S., Sim˜ oes, P. J. A., Fletcher, L., Hayes, L. A., & Hannah, I. G. 2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 501, 1273, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3664

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3664 2021

  18. [18]

    Janesick, J. R. 2007, Photon Transfer DN→λ(SPIE). https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/ebooks/PM/Photon- Transfer/eISBN-9780819478382/10.1117/3.725073

    work page doi:10.1117/3.725073 2007

  19. [19]

    L., McMullin, D

    Judge, D. L., McMullin, D. R., Ogawa, H. S., et al. 1998, Solar Physics, 177, 161, doi: 10.1023/A:1004929011427

    work page doi:10.1023/a:1004929011427 1998

  20. [20]

    2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 869, 99, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaebfc

    Kawabata, Y., Iida, Y., Doi, T., et al. 2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 869, 99, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaebfc

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaebfc 2018

  21. [21]

    J., Grimm, O., et al

    Krucker, S., Hurford, G. J., Grimm, O., et al. 2020, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 642, A15, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201937362

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201937362 2020

  22. [22]

    Laming, J. M. 2015, Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 12, 2, doi: 10.1007/lrsp-2015-2

    work page doi:10.1007/lrsp-2015-2 2015

  23. [23]

    R., Title, A

    Lemen, J. R., Title, A. M., Akin, D. J., et al. 2012, Solar Physics, 275, 17, doi: 10.1007/s11207-011-9776-8

    work page doi:10.1007/s11207-011-9776-8 2012

  24. [24]

    2016, Solar physics, 291, doi: 10.1007/s11207-015-0842-5

    Lw, A. 2016, Solar physics, 291, doi: 10.1007/s11207-015-0842-5

    work page doi:10.1007/s11207-015-0842-5 2016

  25. [25]

    L., Eparvier, F

    Machol, J. L., Eparvier, F. G., Viereck, R. A., et al. 2020, in The GOES-R Series (Elsevier), 233–242, doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-814327-8.00019-6

    work page doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-814327-8.00019-6 2020

  26. [26]

    Woods, T. N. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 244, 13, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab380e

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab380e 2019

  27. [27]

    P., Woods, T

    Mason, J. P., Woods, T. N., Webb, D. F., et al. 2016, The Astrophysical Journal, 830, 20, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/830/1/20

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/830/1/20 2016

  28. [28]

    P., Woods, T

    Mason, J. P., Woods, T. N., Chamberlin, P. C., et al. 2020, Advances in Space Research, 66, 3, doi: 10.1016/j.asr.2019.02.011

    work page doi:10.1016/j.asr.2019.02.011 2020

  29. [29]

    Mithun, N. P. S., Vadawale, S. V., Sarkar, A., et al. 2020, Solar Physics, 295, 139, doi: 10.1007/s11207-020-01712-1 OpticStudio. 2024, OpticStudio User Guide, Ansys,

    work page doi:10.1007/s11207-020-01712-1 2020

  30. [30]

    M., et al

    Palumbo, P., Roatsch, T., Lara, L. M., et al. 2025, Space Science Reviews, 221, 32, doi: 10.1007/s11214-025-01158-6

    work page doi:10.1007/s11214-025-01158-6 2025

  31. [31]

    2014, Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 11, 4, doi: 10.12942/lrsp-2014-4

    Reale, F. 2014, Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 11, 4, doi: 10.12942/lrsp-2014-4

    work page doi:10.12942/lrsp-2014-4 2014

  32. [32]

    2020, A&A, 642, A8, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936663

    Rochus, P., Auch` ere, F., Berghmans, D., et al. 2020, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 642, A8, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936663 23

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936663 2020

  33. [33]

    2025, Solar Physics, 300, 87, doi: 10.1007/s11207-025-02494-0

    Sankarasubramanian, K., Bug, M., Sarwade, A., et al. 2025, Solar Physics, 300, 87, doi: 10.1007/s11207-025-02494-0

    work page doi:10.1007/s11207-025-02494-0 2025

  34. [34]

    L., Winebarger, A

    Savage, S. L., Winebarger, A. R., Kobayashi, K., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 945, 105, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acbb58

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acbb58 2023

  35. [35]

    N., & Schwab, B

    Telikicherla, A., Woods, T. N., & Schwab, B. D. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 966, 198, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad37f6

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad37f6 2024

  36. [36]

    N., & Schwab, B

    Telikicherla, A., Woods, T. N., & Schwab, B. D. 2025, The Astrophysical Journal, 993, 95, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae0705

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae0705 2025

  37. [37]

    2023, Solar Physics, 298, 17, doi: 10.1007/s11207-023-02107-8

    Thiemann, E., Harder, J., Woods, T., et al. 2023, Solar Physics, 298, 17, doi: 10.1007/s11207-023-02107-8

    work page doi:10.1007/s11207-023-02107-8 2023

  38. [38]

    M., Thomas, R

    White, S. M., Thomas, R. J., & Schwartz, R. A. 2005, Solar Physics, 227, 231, doi: 10.1007/s11207-005-2445-z

    work page doi:10.1007/s11207-005-2445-z 2005

  39. [39]

    N., Eden, T., Eparvier, F

    Woods, T. N., Eden, T., Eparvier, F. G., et al. 2024, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 129, e2024JA032925, doi: 10.1029/2024JA032925

    work page doi:10.1029/2024ja032925 2024

  40. [40]

    N., Eparvier, F

    Woods, T. N., Eparvier, F. G., Hock, R., et al. 2012, Solar Physics, 275, 115, doi: 10.1007/s11207-009-9487-6

    work page doi:10.1007/s11207-009-9487-6 2012

  41. [41]

    N., Schwab, B., Sewell, R., et al

    Woods, T. N., Schwab, B., Sewell, R., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 956, 94, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acef13

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acef13 2023