pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.27503 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-30 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE

Recognition: unknown

Detection of optical quasi-periodic oscillation in the blazar 3C 454.3

A. A. Vasilyev, A. K. Singh, A. Kurtenkov, Alok C. Gupta, A. Marchini, Amira A. Tawfeek, An-Li Tsai, A. P. Marscher, A. Scherbantin, A. Sota, A. Strigachev, A. Takey, A. V. Zhovtan, C. Lorey, C. Marinelli, C. M. Raiteri, D. A. Blinov, D. A. Morozova, D. Carosati, D. Elsaesser, D. Kuberek, D. Morcuende, D. Reinhart, E. G. Elhosseiny, Elena G. Larionova, E. N. Kopatskaya, E. Semkov, E. V. Shishkina, F. Hemrich, F. J. Aceituno, G. A. Borman, G. Andreuzzi, G. Bonnoli, G. Damljanovic, G. N. Kimeridze, G. V. Baida, H. C. Lin, H. Y. Hsiao, I. Agudo, I. S. Troitskiy, J. A. Acosta-Pulido, J. Escudero, J. H. Fan, J. Otero-Santos, Karan Dogra, K. Gazeas, K. Mannheim, K. Vrontaki, Lang Cui, L. A. Sigua, L. Barbieri, L. V. Larionova, M. Abdelkareem, Mauri J. Valtonen, M. D. Jovanovic, M. Feige, M. G. Nikolashvili, M. I. Carnerero, Minfeng Gu, M. Ismail, M. Stojanovic, M. Villata, N. Zottmann, O. M. Kurtanidze, O. Vince, Paul J. Wiita, P. U. Devanand, R. Bachev, R. Steineke, R. Z. Ivanidze, S. A. Ata, S. G. Jorstad, Shubham Kishore, S. O. Kurtanidze, S. S. Savchenko, S. V. Nazarov, T. M. Kamel, T. S. Grishina, Tushar Tripathi, V. A. Hagen-Thorn, V. Casanova, V. M. Larionov, Wenwen Zuo, W. P. Chen, Y. V. Troitskaya, Zhongli Zhang

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-07 08:10 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE
keywords blazar3C 454.3quasi-periodic oscillationoptical variabilityLomb-Scargle periodogramweighted wavelet Z-transformjet precessionseasonal gaps
0
0 comments X

The pith

Optical observations reveal a 433-day quasi-periodic oscillation persisting for 9.5 years in blazar 3C 454.3

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

The paper analyzed 19 years of R-band data for the blazar 3C 454.3 and detected a quasi-periodic oscillation with a period of approximately 433 days. This oscillation was identified through the Lomb-Scargle periodogram and confirmed as persistent from MJD 54980 to 58450 using the weighted wavelet Z-transform, with additional validation from phase dispersion minimization. The authors developed a new approach to separate real signals from artifacts caused by annual seasonal gaps in ground-based data. The detection reaches a global significance of 2.53 sigma and may point to physical processes in the accretion disk or jet around the central supermassive black hole.

Core claim

We detected a QPO of ∼ 433 days using Lomb-Scargle periodogram, which lasted from MJD 54980--58450 as detected by the weighted wavelet Z-transform technique, making it one of the most persistent QPOs ever detected in the optical regime. We detected this signal at a global significance of 2.53σ across all methodologies. To explain the observed QPO, we have considered both models focused on the accretion disk around the super-massive black hole (SMBH), and those based purely on jet emissions. Plausible jet-based models involve a shock moving down the jet in a helical magnetic field, whereas the SMBH models could involve Lense-Thirring effect-induced jet precession or dual jets in a binary SMBH

What carries the argument

Lomb-Scargle periodogram combined with weighted wavelet Z-transform and phase dispersion minimization, plus a novel technique to rule out spurious signals from annual seasonal observing gaps.

If this is right

  • The QPO could be produced by a shock moving along the jet in a helical magnetic field.
  • Lense-Thirring precession of the jet or a binary supermassive black hole system could also generate the observed periodicity.
  • The long duration of the signal implies it is a stable feature that can be tracked in future data to test disk versus jet origin models.
  • The consistency across three independent analysis methods reduces the chance that the detection is due to random noise.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the period is confirmed, it could help estimate the mass or spin of the central black hole in this blazar.
  • The gap-handling method could be applied to other blazar light curves to search for additional long-lived QPOs.
  • Repeated detections in independent datasets would strengthen the case that such oscillations trace real physical processes rather than sampling artifacts.

Load-bearing premise

The novel method for distinguishing genuine QPOs from spurious signals due to annual seasonal gaps works as intended, and a global significance of 2.53 sigma is high enough to support a real detection despite the red noise typical of blazar variability.

What would settle it

Additional optical monitoring of 3C 454.3 over the next several years that shows the 433-day cycle does not continue or recur at the expected phases after MJD 58450 would indicate the reported signal was not a persistent physical QPO.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.27503 by A. A. Vasilyev, A. K. Singh, A. Kurtenkov, Alok C. Gupta, A. Marchini, Amira A. Tawfeek, An-Li Tsai, A. P. Marscher, A. Scherbantin, A. Sota, A. Strigachev, A. Takey, A. V. Zhovtan, C. Lorey, C. Marinelli, C. M. Raiteri, D. A. Blinov, D. A. Morozova, D. Carosati, D. Elsaesser, D. Kuberek, D. Morcuende, D. Reinhart, E. G. Elhosseiny, Elena G. Larionova, E. N. Kopatskaya, E. Semkov, E. V. Shishkina, F. Hemrich, F. J. Aceituno, G. A. Borman, G. Andreuzzi, G. Bonnoli, G. Damljanovic, G. N. Kimeridze, G. V. Baida, H. C. Lin, H. Y. Hsiao, I. Agudo, I. S. Troitskiy, J. A. Acosta-Pulido, J. Escudero, J. H. Fan, J. Otero-Santos, Karan Dogra, K. Gazeas, K. Mannheim, K. Vrontaki, Lang Cui, L. A. Sigua, L. Barbieri, L. V. Larionova, M. Abdelkareem, Mauri J. Valtonen, M. D. Jovanovic, M. Feige, M. G. Nikolashvili, M. I. Carnerero, Minfeng Gu, M. Ismail, M. Stojanovic, M. Villata, N. Zottmann, O. M. Kurtanidze, O. Vince, Paul J. Wiita, P. U. Devanand, R. Bachev, R. Steineke, R. Z. Ivanidze, S. A. Ata, S. G. Jorstad, Shubham Kishore, S. O. Kurtanidze, S. S. Savchenko, S. V. Nazarov, T. M. Kamel, T. S. Grishina, Tushar Tripathi, V. A. Hagen-Thorn, V. Casanova, V. M. Larionov, Wenwen Zuo, W. P. Chen, Y. V. Troitskaya, Zhongli Zhang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: R-band light curve plot of the object 3C 454.3. The plot shows the full light curve from 2004 to 2023. The part of the light curve where the signal is most apparent is highlighted. Jorstad et al. 2022; Kishore et al. 2023, and references therein) especially within the past two decades or so. Additionally, possible QPOs have also been discussed for a few non-blazar AGNs (e.g. Gierli´nski et al. 2008; Alston… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Plot showing the LSP of the original light curve in orange, the spectral window in blue, and the LSP of the gap￾interpolated original light curve in grey (see Appendix A). plot is shown in view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: On left: Result of the WWZ analysis with a dominant signal at 0.00231 day−1 from MJD 54980 to 58450. The white dashed line separates the region in the WWZ plot, where edge effects become dominant, with our QPO of ∼ 433 days in the safe region. On right: Time-averaged WWZ (WW Z) plot. (WT) of a function y(t) is given as: W T(ω, τ ; y(t)) = ω 1/2 Z y(t)f ∗ (ω(t − τ )) dt = ω −1/2 Z y(ω −1 z + τ )f ∗ (z) dz. … view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Probability distribution function for the R-band optical light curve. To estimate the function, KDE was per￾formed (shown in black), revealing a bimodal distribution, which was then fitted using a bimodal function (shown in red). package. For a non-sinusoidal or aperiodic variation, s 2 ≈ σ 2 , and θ is close to 1, whereas if a periodic com￾ponent is present in the light curve, θ is expected to be low, so … view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Corner plot showing a two-dimensional projection of the posterior probability distribution of the sinusoidal model parameters given in Equation 12. bution of the light curve is Gaussian at a significance level of 10−3 . To get an idea of the shape of the PDF we performed a kernel density estimation (KDE), which revealed a bimodal distribution as shown in view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We analyzed 19 years of $R$-band data of the blazar 3C 454.3 from the Whole Earth Blazar Telescope (WEBT) archive, along with new data from its members and from public archives such as those provided by the Small and Moderate Aperture Research Telescope System (SMARTS) and the Steward Observatory projects to search for quasi-periodic oscillations (QPOs). We detected a QPO of $\sim$ 433 days using Lomb-Scargle periodogram, which lasted from MJD 54980--58450 as detected by the weighted wavelet Z-transform technique, making it one of the most persistent QPOs ever detected in the optical regime. The phase dispersion minimization technique was also performed to further validate this QPO claim. We detected this signal at a global significance of $2.53\sigma$ across all methodologies. To explain the observed QPO, we have considered both models focused on the accretion disk around the super-massive black hole (SMBH), and those based purely on jet emissions. Plausible jet-based models involve a shock moving down the jet in a helical magnetic field, whereas the SMBH models could involve Lense-Thirring effect-induced jet precession or dual jets in a binary SMBH system. We introduce a novel approach to distinguish genuine QPOs from spurious signals arising from annual seasonal gaps, a common limitation of ground-based observations.

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 / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript analyzes 19 years of R-band optical photometry of the blazar 3C 454.3 from WEBT, SMARTS, and Steward Observatory archives. It reports detection of a ~433-day QPO via Lomb-Scargle periodogram, with persistence over MJD 54980–58450 confirmed by weighted wavelet Z-transform (WWZ) and cross-validated by phase dispersion minimization (PDM). A global significance of 2.53σ is quoted across methods, a novel procedure is introduced to separate genuine signals from annual-gap aliases, and both jet-precession and binary-SMBH interpretations are discussed.

Significance. A robust detection of an optical QPO persisting for ~8 cycles would be a notable result for blazar variability studies, offering constraints on jet or disk precession models. The multi-technique approach and long temporal baseline are positive features. However, the marginal 2.53σ global significance combined with the absence of published validation tests for the novel gap-handling method substantially limits the strength of the claim.

major comments (3)
  1. [Results] The global significance of 2.53σ is marginal for a firm detection claim in red-noise-dominated blazar light curves. The manuscript must detail the Monte Carlo procedure used to derive this value, including the number of realizations, the exact PSD model fitted to the data, and whether the simulations preserve the observed sampling window and annual gaps (Results section on significance estimation).
  2. [Methods] The novel gap-correction technique is presented as essential to the detection, yet no signal-injection and recovery tests are shown to quantify its false-alarm rate or completeness. Without such tests, the quoted 2.53σ cannot be taken at face value (Methods section describing the novel approach).
  3. [Results] The WWZ analysis claims persistence from MJD 54980 to 58450 (~8 cycles), but no quantitative coherence metric (e.g., quality factor or time-frequency localization width) is provided to support the statement that this is “one of the most persistent QPOs ever detected” (WWZ results subsection).
minor comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states the signal was “detected at a global significance of 2.53σ across all methodologies” but does not specify how the three independent techniques (Lomb-Scargle, WWZ, PDM) are combined into a single significance figure.
  2. [Figures] Figure captions for the periodogram and WWZ map should explicitly state the significance contours used and whether the gap-correction procedure has been applied to the displayed data.
  3. [Discussion] A brief comparison of the derived 433-day period with previously reported optical or radio QPOs in 3C 454.3 or similar FSRQs would strengthen the discussion.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of our manuscript and the constructive comments. We address each major comment below and indicate the revisions that will be incorporated into the next version of the paper.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Results] The global significance of 2.53σ is marginal for a firm detection claim in red-noise-dominated blazar light curves. The manuscript must detail the Monte Carlo procedure used to derive this value, including the number of realizations, the exact PSD model fitted to the data, and whether the simulations preserve the observed sampling window and annual gaps (Results section on significance estimation).

    Authors: We agree that the Monte Carlo procedure requires a more explicit description to allow readers to evaluate the global significance. The manuscript currently states that Monte Carlo simulations were used to assess significance across methods while preserving the sampling properties, but we will expand the relevant subsection in the revised Results section to specify the number of realizations performed, the precise red-noise PSD model fitted to the data, and explicit confirmation that each realization incorporates the actual observation times and annual gaps. This will clarify how the 2.53σ value was obtained without altering the reported significance. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Methods] The novel gap-correction technique is presented as essential to the detection, yet no signal-injection and recovery tests are shown to quantify its false-alarm rate or completeness. Without such tests, the quoted 2.53σ cannot be taken at face value (Methods section describing the novel approach).

    Authors: We acknowledge that quantitative validation of the novel gap-correction procedure would strengthen the result. The current manuscript introduces the method as a way to distinguish genuine periodic signals from annual-gap aliases and applies it to the data, but does not include injection-recovery tests. We will add a dedicated subsection in the revised Methods section describing signal-injection experiments performed on simulated light curves that match the observed sampling and gaps. These tests will report the recovered false-alarm rate and completeness as a function of signal strength, thereby providing direct support for the quoted global significance. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Results] The WWZ analysis claims persistence from MJD 54980 to 58450 (~8 cycles), but no quantitative coherence metric (e.g., quality factor or time-frequency localization width) is provided to support the statement that this is “one of the most persistent QPOs ever detected” (WWZ results subsection).

    Authors: We agree that a quantitative metric would better support the persistence claim. The manuscript identifies the interval MJD 54980–58450 from the WWZ map and notes the long duration relative to other reported optical QPOs, but does not supply a numerical coherence measure. In the revised WWZ results subsection we will add the quality factor Q = period / frequency width measured from the time-frequency localization in the WWZ map, together with a brief comparison to literature values, to substantiate the statement of persistence. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: pure observational periodogram analysis on archival data.

full rationale

The paper applies standard statistical tools (Lomb-Scargle periodogram, weighted wavelet Z-transform, phase dispersion minimization) directly to 19 years of R-band light-curve data to search for periodicity. The claimed ~433-day QPO and its 2.53σ global significance are outputs of these data-driven tests, not quantities fitted or defined in terms of themselves. The novel gap-handling procedure is introduced as an additional data-processing step to mitigate seasonal aliases; it does not enter any self-referential derivation or prediction loop. No accretion-disk or jet models are fitted to the data in a manner that would make a subsequent prediction equivalent to the input by construction. No load-bearing self-citations or uniqueness theorems are invoked. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks and contains no circular steps.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The claim relies on statistical detection in time-series data and existing physical models for blazar jets; no new parameters beyond the measured period or new entities are introduced.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The light curve variability can be analyzed with standard Fourier-based and wavelet methods assuming the noise properties allow detection of periodic signals above the significance threshold.
    Invoked in the application of Lomb-Scargle, WWZ, and PDM to the unevenly sampled data.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 9419 in / 1518 out tokens · 139837 ms · 2026-05-07T08:10:19.789108+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

89 extracted references · 80 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    2007, Encyclopedia of measurement and statistics, 3, 2007

    Abdi, H., et al. 2007, Encyclopedia of measurement and statistics, 3, 2007

    2007

  2. [2]

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

    Abdo, A. A., Ackermann, M., Ajello, M., et al. 2009, ApJ, 699, 817, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/699/1/817 —. 2010, ApJ, 722, 520, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/722/1/520

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/699/1/817 2009

  3. [3]

    2010, ApJ, 721, 1383, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/721/2/1383

    Ackermann, M., Ajello, M., Baldini, L., et al. 2010, ApJ, 721, 1383, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/721/2/1383

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/721/2/1383 2010

  4. [4]

    2015, ApJL, 813, L41, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/813/2/L41

    Ackermann, M., Ajello, M., Albert, A., et al. 2015, ApJL, 813, L41, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/813/2/L41

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/813/2/l41 2015

  5. [5]

    2014, MNRAS, 445, L16, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slu127

    Middleton, M. 2014, MNRAS, 445, L16, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slu127

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slu127 2014

  6. [6]

    N., Parker, M

    Alston, W. N., Parker, M. L., Markeviˇ ci¯ ut˙ e, J., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 449, 467, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv351 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Lim, P. L., et al. 2022, ApJ, 935, 167, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c74

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv351 2015

  7. [7]

    2017, ApJ, 847, 7, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa86ed —

    Bhatta, G. 2017, ApJ, 847, 7, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa86ed —. 2019, MNRAS, 487, 3990, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1482

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa86ed 2017

  8. [8]

    , keywords =

    Bhatta, G., & Dhital, N. 2020, ApJ, 891, 120, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab7455

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab7455 2020

  9. [9]

    W., Bailyn, C., Urry, C

    Bonning, E. W., Bailyn, C., Urry, C. M., et al. 2009, ApJL, 697, L81, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/697/2/L81

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/697/2/l81 2009

  10. [10]

    V., Melchior, A.-L., & Zolotukhin, I

    Ghirlanda, G. 2011, MNRAS, 410, 368, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17450.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17450.x 2011

  11. [11]

    2013, MNRAS, 428, 280, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sts014

    Caproni, A., Abraham, Z., & Monteiro, H. 2013, MNRAS, 428, 280, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sts014

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sts014 2013

  12. [12]

    Helical jets and the misalignment distribution for core-dominated radio sources

    Conway, J. E., & Murphy, D. W. 1993, ApJ, 411, 89, doi: 10.1086/172809

    work page doi:10.1086/172809 1993

  13. [13]

    P., et al

    Czesla, S., Schr¨ oter, S., Schneider, C. P., et al. 2019, PyA: Python astronomy-related packages. http://ascl.net/1906.010

    2019

  14. [14]

    J., Gopakumar, A., et al

    Dey, L., Valtonen, M. J., Gopakumar, A., et al. 2018, ApJ, 866, 11, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aadd95

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aadd95 2018

  15. [15]

    C., Raiteri, C

    Dogra, K., Gupta, A. C., Raiteri, C. M., et al. 2025, ApJS, 276, 1, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad8e3d

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ad8e3d 2025

  16. [16]

    2013 , journal =

    Emmanoulopoulos, D., McHardy, I. M., & Papadakis, I. E. 2013, MNRAS, 433, 907, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt764

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt764 2013

  17. [17]

    H., Kurtanidze, S

    Fan, J. H., Kurtanidze, S. O., Liu, Y., et al. 2021, ApJS, 253, 10, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/abd32d

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/abd32d 2021

  18. [18]

    W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J

    Foreman-Mackey, D., Hogg, D. W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J. 2013, PASP, 125, 306, doi: 10.1086/670067

    work page doi:10.1086/670067 2013

  19. [19]

    1996, AJ, 112, 1709, doi: 10.1086/118137

    Foster, G. 1996, AJ, 112, 1709, doi: 10.1086/118137

    work page doi:10.1086/118137 1996

  20. [20]

    2006, A&A, 445, L1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200500213

    Fuhrmann, L., Cucchiara, A., Marchili, N., et al. 2006, A&A, 445, L1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200500213

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:200500213 2006

  21. [21]

    2016, in Revista Mexicana de Astronomia y Astrofisica Conference Series, Vol

    Gazeas, K. 2016, in Revista Mexicana de Astronomia y Astrofisica Conference Series, Vol. 48, Revista Mexicana de Astronomia y Astrofisica Conference Series, 22–23

    2016

  22. [22]

    2019, Galaxies, 7, 58, doi: 10.3390/galaxies7020058 Gierli´ nski, M., Middleton, M., Ward, M., & Done, C

    Gazeas, K. 2019, Galaxies, 7, 58, doi: 10.3390/galaxies7020058 Gierli´ nski, M., Middleton, M., Ward, M., & Done, C. 2008, Nature, 455, 369, doi: 10.1038/nature07277

    work page doi:10.3390/galaxies7020058 2019

  23. [23]

    J., Capalbi, M., et al

    Giommi, P., Blustin, A. J., Capalbi, M., et al. 2006, A&A, 456, 911, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20064874

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20064874 2006

  24. [24]

    C., Srivastava, A

    Gupta, A. C., Srivastava, A. K., & Wiita, P. J. 2009, ApJ, 690, 216, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/690/1/216

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/690/1/216 2009

  25. [25]

    C., Tripathi, A., Wiita, P

    Gupta, A. C., Tripathi, A., Wiita, P. J., et al. 2018, A&A, 616, L6, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833629 —. 2019, MNRAS, 484, 5785, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz395

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833629 2018

  26. [26]

    C., Mangalam, A., Wiita, P

    Gupta, A. C., Mangalam, A., Wiita, P. J., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 472, 788, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2072

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2072 2017

  27. [27]

    C., Kushwaha, P., Valtonen, M

    Gupta, A. C., Kushwaha, P., Valtonen, M. J., et al. 2023, ApJL, 957, L11, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acfd2e

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acfd2e 2023

  28. [28]

    1989, ApJS, 69, 1, doi: 10.1086/191307

    Hewitt, A., & Burbidge, G. 1989, ApJS, 69, 1, doi: 10.1086/191307

    work page doi:10.1086/191307 1989

  29. [29]

    M., Sesana, A., Sandrinelli, A., et al

    Holgado, A. M., Sesana, A., Sandrinelli, A., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 481, L74, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/sly158

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/sly158 2018

  30. [30]

    A., Aller, H

    Hughes, P. A., Aller, H. D., & Aller, M. F. 1985, ApJ, 298, 301, doi: 10.1086/163611

    work page doi:10.1086/163611 1985

  31. [31]

    G., Marscher, A

    Jorstad, S. G., Marscher, A. P., Larionov, V. M., et al. 2010, ApJ, 715, 362, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/715/1/362

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/715/1/362 2010

  32. [32]

    , year = 2022, month = sep, volume =

    Jorstad, S. G., Marscher, A. P., Raiteri, C. M., et al. 2022, Nature, 609, 265, doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-05038-9

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-022-05038-9 2022

  33. [33]

    2023, lcsim: Light curve simulation code, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:2310.002

    Kiehlmann, S. 2023, lcsim: Light curve simulation code, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:2310.002. http://ascl.net/2310.002

    2023

  34. [34]

    2023, wwz: Weighted wavelet z-transform code, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:2310.003

    Kiehlmann, S., Max-Moerbeck, W., & King, O. 2023, wwz: Weighted wavelet z-transform code, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:2310.003. http://ascl.net/2310.003

    2023

  35. [35]

    V., Sullivan, A

    Kiehlmann, S., de la Parra, P. V., Sullivan, A. G., et al. 2025, ApJ, 985, 59, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adc567

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adc567 2025

  36. [36]

    A quasi-periodic oscillation in the blazar J1359+4011

    King, O. G., Hovatta, T., Max-Moerbeck, W., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 436, L114, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slt125

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slt125 2013

  37. [37]

    C., & Wiita, P

    Kishore, S., Gupta, A. C., & Wiita, P. J. 2023, ApJ, 943, 53, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aca809

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aca809 2023

  38. [38]

    C., Gaur, H., & Wiita, P

    Lachowicz, P., Gupta, A. C., Gaur, H., & Wiita, P. J. 2009, A&A, 506, L17, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200913161

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200913161 2009

  39. [39]

    , keywords =

    Lehto, H. J., & Valtonen, M. J. 1996, ApJ, 460, 207, doi: 10.1086/176962

    work page doi:10.1086/176962 1996

  40. [40]

    Formation of precessing jets by tilted black hole discs in 3D general relativistic MHD simulations

    Liska, M., Hesp, C., Tchekhovskoy, A., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 474, L81, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slx174

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slx174 2018

  41. [41]

    R., & Gu, M

    Liu, Y., Jiang, D. R., & Gu, M. F. 2006, ApJ, 637, 669, doi: 10.1086/498639

    work page doi:10.1086/498639 2006

  42. [42]

    Lomb, N. R. 1976, Ap&SS, 39, 447, doi: 10.1007/BF00648343 16

    work page doi:10.1007/bf00648343 1976

  43. [43]

    P., Gear, W

    Marscher, A. P., Gear, W. K., & Travis, J. P. 1992, in Variability of Blazars, ed. E. Valtaoja & M. Valtonen, 85

    1992

  44. [44]

    , year = 2008, month = apr, volume =

    Marscher, A. P., Jorstad, S. G., D’Arcangelo, F. D., et al. 2008, Nature, 452, 966, doi: 10.1038/nature06895

    work page doi:10.1038/nature06895 2008

  45. [45]

    W., & Theiss, D

    Mashhoon, B., Hehl, F. W., & Theiss, D. S. 1984, General Relativity and Gravitation, 16, 711, doi: 10.1007/BF00762913

    work page doi:10.1007/bf00762913 1984

  46. [46]

    Mason, K. O. 2004, MNRAS, 348, 783, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07376.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07376.x 2004

  47. [47]

    2015, MNRAS, 452, 2004, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv1412

    Mohan, P., Agarwal, A., Mangalam, A., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 452, 2004, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv1412

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1412 2015

  48. [48]

    C., Liao, M., et al

    Nalewajko, K., Gupta, A. C., Liao, M., et al. 2019, A&A, 631, A4, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935904 O’Neill, S., Kiehlmann, S., Readhead, A. C. S., et al. 2022, ApJL, 926, L35, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac504b

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201935904 2019

  49. [49]

    , keywords =

    Otero-Santos, J., Raiteri, C. M., Acosta-Pulido, J. A., et al. 2024, A&A, 686, A228, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202449647

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202449647 2024

  50. [50]

    2016, ApJL, 819, L19, doi: 10.3847/2041-8205/819/2/L19 Pe˜ nil, P., Torres-Alb` a, N., Rico, A., et al

    Pan, H.-W., Yuan, W., Yao, S., et al. 2016, ApJL, 819, L19, doi: 10.3847/2041-8205/819/2/L19 Pe˜ nil, P., Torres-Alb` a, N., Rico, A., et al. 2025, MNRAS, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf1842 Pe˜ nil, P., Dom´ ınguez, A., Buson, S., et al. 2020, ApJ, 896, 134, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab910d

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8205/819/2/l19 2016

  51. [51]

    Peters, P. C. 1964, PhD thesis, California Institute of Technology

    1964

  52. [52]

    M., Villata, M., Larionov, V

    Raiteri, C. M., Villata, M., Larionov, V. M., et al. 2007, A&A, 473, 819, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20078289 —. 2008, A&A, 491, 755, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200810869

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20078289 2007

  53. [53]

    The WEBT campaign on the BL Lac object PG 1553+113 in 2013. An analysis of the enigmatic synchrotron emission

    Raiteri, C. M., Stamerra, A., Villata, M., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 454, 353, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv1884

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1884 2015

  54. [54]

    Richards, J.L., et al., 2011

    Remillard, R. A., & McClintock, J. E. 2006, ARA&A, 44, 49, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.44.051905.092532

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.44.051905.092532 2006

  55. [55]

    Rieger, F. M. 2004, ApJL, 615, L5, doi: 10.1086/426018

    work page doi:10.1086/426018 2004

  56. [56]

    E., Chajet, L., Abraham, Z., & Fan, J

    Romero, G. E., Chajet, L., Abraham, Z., & Fan, J. H. 2000, A&A, 360, 57

    2000

  57. [57]

    Transient quasi-periodic oscillations at γ-rays in the TeV blazar PKS 1510-089

    Roy, A., Sarkar, A., Chatterjee, A., et al. 2022a, MNRAS, 510, 3641, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab3701

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab3701

  58. [58]

    R., Gupta, A

    Roy, A., Chitnis, V. R., Gupta, A. C., et al. 2022b, MNRAS, 513, 5238, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1287

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1287

  59. [59]

    QUASI-PERIODICITIES AT YEAR-LIKE TIMESCALES IN BLAZARS

    Sandrinelli, A., Covino, S., Dotti, M., & Treves, A. 2016, AJ, 151, 54, doi: 10.3847/0004-6256/151/3/54

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-6256/151/3/54 2016

  60. [60]

    2018, A&A, 615, A118, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201732550

    Sandrinelli, A., Covino, S., Treves, A., et al. 2018, A&A, 615, A118, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201732550

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201732550 2018

  61. [61]

    C., Chitnis, V

    Sarkar, A., Gupta, A. C., Chitnis, V. R., & Wiita, P. J. 2021, MNRAS, 501, 50, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3211

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3211 2021

  62. [62]

    Wiita, P. J. 2020, A&A, 642, A129, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038052

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202038052 2020

  63. [63]

    R., Gupta, A

    Sarkar, A., Chitnis, V. R., Gupta, A. C., et al. 2019, ApJ, 887, 185, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5281

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab5281 2019

  64. [64]

    2014, ApJ, 784, 141, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/784/2/141

    Sasada, M., Uemura, M., Fukazawa, Y., et al. 2014, ApJ, 784, 141, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/784/2/141

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/784/2/141 2014

  65. [65]

    2012, MNRAS, 423, 600, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20901.x

    Sbarrato, T., Ghisellini, G., Maraschi, L., & Colpi, M. 2012, MNRAS, 421, 1764, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20442.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20442.x 2012

  66. [66]

    Scargle, J. D. 1982, ApJ, 263, 835, doi: 10.1086/160554

    work page doi:10.1086/160554 1982

  67. [67]

    Balonek, T. J. 1988, ApJL, 326, L39, doi: 10.1086/185119

    work page doi:10.1086/185119 1988

  68. [68]

    ApJL , keywords =

    Stella, L., & Vietri, M. 1998, ApJL, 492, L59, doi: 10.1086/311075

    work page doi:10.1086/311075 1998

  69. [69]

    Stellingwerf, R. F. 1978, ApJ, 224, 953, doi: 10.1086/156444

    work page doi:10.1086/156444 1978

  70. [70]

    1995, A&A, 300, 707

    Timmer, J., & K¨ onig, M. 1995, A&A, 300, 707

    1995

  71. [71]

    C., Aller, M

    Tripathi, A., Gupta, A. C., Aller, M. F., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 501, 5997, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab058

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab058 2021

  72. [72]

    L., Wiita, P

    Tripathi, A., Smith, K. L., Wiita, P. J., & Wagoner, R. V. 2024a, MNRAS, 527, 9132, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3744

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3744

  73. [73]

    C., Smith, K

    Tripathi, A., Gupta, A. C., Smith, K. L., et al. 2024b, ApJ, 977, 166, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad90e3

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad90e3

  74. [74]

    M., & Padovani, P

    Urry, C. M., & Padovani, P. 1995, PASP, 107, 803, doi: 10.1086/133630

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1086/133630 1995

  75. [75]

    2008, A&A, 477, 407, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20066399

    Valtonen, M., Kidger, M., Lehto, H., & Poyner, G. 2008, A&A, 477, 407, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20066399

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20066399 2008

  76. [76]

    Valtonen, M. J. 2024, RNAAS, 8, 11, doi: 10.3847/2515-5172/ad8d5e

    work page doi:10.3847/2515-5172/ad8d5e 2024

  77. [77]

    J., Zola, S., Gupta, A

    Valtonen, M. J., Zola, S., Gupta, A. C., et al. 2024, ApJL, 968, 8, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad4d9b,(PaperIV)

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad4d9b 2024

  78. [78]

    VanderPlas, J. T. 2018, ApJS, 236, 16, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aab766

    work page Pith review doi:10.3847/1538-4365/aab766 2018

  79. [79]

    G., et al

    Vaughan, S., Uttley, P., Markowitz, A. G., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 461, 3145, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw1412

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw1412 2016

  80. [80]

    2010, ApJ, 712, 405, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/712/1/405

    Vercellone, S., D’Ammando, F., Vittorini, V., et al. 2010, ApJ, 712, 405, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/712/1/405

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/712/1/405 2010

Showing first 80 references.