pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.11492 · v1 · pith:CPLUQWEInew · submitted 2026-06-09 · 🌌 astro-ph.SR

Summary of the First Year of the Space Weather Around Young Suns Program: 900 Hours of Low-frequency Radio and Optical Data Dedicated to Young, Solar-type Stars

Ivey Davis , Gregg Hallinan , Nikita Kosogorov , Marin M. Anderson , John Baker , Judd D. Bowman , Rick Burruss , Ruby Byrne
show 46 more authors
Morgan Catha Bin Chen Xingyao Chen Sherry Chhabra Curt Corcoran Larry D'Addario Jayce Dowell Katherine Elder Dale Gary Charlie Harnach Carolyn Heffner Greg Hellbourg Jack Hickish Rick Hobbs David Hodge Mark Hodges Yuping Huang Andrea Isella Daniel C. Jacobs Ghislain Kemby John T. Klinefelter Matthew Kolopanis James Lamb Casey Law Nivedita Mahesh Surajit Mondal Navtej Saini Brian O'Donnell Kathryn Plant Corey Posner Travis Powell Vinand Prayag Andres Rizo Andrew Romero-Wolf Jun Shi Greg Taylor Jordan Trim Mike Virgin Akshatha K. Vydula Sandy Weinreb Scott White David Woody Sijie Yu Thomas Zentmeyer Peijin Zhang Jeffry Zolkower
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-27 11:22 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.SR
keywords young solar-type starslow-frequency radiostellar flarestype II III burstsstellar coronaespace weatherEK Draconismulti-wavelength monitoring
0
0 comments X

The pith

Hot dense coronae around young active stars may prevent the radio bursts that mark space weather events.

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

The SWAYS program coordinated nearly 900 hours of low-frequency radio observations with optical photometry on six young solar-type stars to hunt for stellar versions of solar type II and III bursts. A detected superflare on EK Draconis produced no accompanying radio signal from particle motion in the corona or interplanetary medium. The authors conclude that the exceptionally hot and dense coronae of these stars suppress the plasma instabilities needed for such bursts or shift when any signal would appear relative to the flare. This offers a plasma-density explanation that complements known magnetospheric barriers to low-frequency detection. The result matters for setting realistic expectations about observable space weather around other stars.

Core claim

The exceptionally hot, dense coronae of incredibly active stars may not be conducive to the development of the instabilities required for type II and III bursts, or else inspire new expectations for when we should expect to observe a signal relative to the time of the flare. This may represent the plasma-density complement to the magnetospheric limitations to observing space-weather signatures at low frequencies.

What carries the argument

Simultaneous OVRO-LWA radio monitoring (13-87 MHz) and Flarescope optical photometry to tie detected flares directly to the presence or absence of low-frequency particle-flux signals.

Load-bearing premise

The non-detection of low-frequency radio emission is caused by the physical state of the stellar corona rather than by the timing of the observations relative to flare peak, instrumental sensitivity limits, or other unstated selection effects.

What would settle it

A clear detection of type II or III radio bursts from a young active star with comparable coronal temperature and density, timed to a documented optical flare.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.11492 by Akshatha K. Vydula, Andrea Isella, Andres Rizo, Andrew Romero-Wolf, Bin Chen, Brian O'Donnell, Carolyn Heffner, Casey Law, Charlie Harnach, Corey Posner, Curt Corcoran, Dale Gary, Daniel C. Jacobs, David Hodge, David Woody, Ghislain Kemby, Gregg Hallinan, Greg Hellbourg, Greg Taylor, Ivey Davis, Jack Hickish, James Lamb, Jayce Dowell, Jeffry Zolkower, John Baker, John T. Klinefelter, Jordan Trim, Judd D. Bowman, Jun Shi, Katherine Elder, Kathryn Plant, Larry D'Addario, Marin M. Anderson, Mark Hodges, Matthew Kolopanis, Mike Virgin, Morgan Catha, Navtej Saini, Nikita Kosogorov, Nivedita Mahesh, Peijin Zhang, Rick Burruss, Rick Hobbs, Ruby Byrne, Sandy Weinreb, Scott White, Sherry Chhabra, Sijie Yu, Surajit Mondal, Thomas Zentmeyer, Travis Powell, Vinand Prayag, Xingyao Chen, Yuping Huang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The FOV for EK Dra (left) and the flux-normalized light curves for EK Dra and the four other brightest stars in the FOV (right panels). The light curves’ colors correspond to the color of the dashed-line aperture in the field, small scatter points are the 5 s light curves, and large scatter points are the 90 s light curves. The distinctive steep rise and exponential decay of a flare is apparent in EK Dra’s… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The EK Dra light curve at the native 5 s integra￾tion time (dark blue) and the light curve at 90 s integration time (teal). The best-fit exponential profile is also shown in red. Ayres 2015)—the properties of associated bursts may be substantially different from solar bursts. To illus￾trate how this will influence our search for bursts from EK Dra, we consider two radial, isothermal wind mod￾els: one is a … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Example type III burst shapes for beam speeds, vb, at various factors of the thermal electron velocity ve = 0.041 c assuming the beam travels purely radially. We only demonstrate the contour of the burst edge and do not show the duration of the burst at a given frequency [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Example snapshot images integrated between 41–64 MHz (top panel) and 64–87 MHz (bottom panel), cropped around an 8◦ × 8 ◦ region centered on EK Dra. The position of 3C 305—the only consistently-detected source in this observation—is indicated by an ellipse and the expected position of EK Dra is indicated by a white crosshair. iterations and using an inner tukey taper of 30 wave￾lengths, a Briggs weighting … view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: 3C 305’s dynamic spectrum (top right), per-integration (black points) and time-averaged (colored points) spectra (top left), and frequency-averaged light curve (bottom plot) derived from the cross-correlated data. The periodically flagged data are due to the LADWP beacon pulses. The flux density has been corrected for the elevation of the source throughout the observation; the apparent increase in the flux… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The dynamic spectrum for EK Dra (middle panel) along with the light curve extracted from averaging over the entire dynamic spectrum (bottom-most panel). The Flarescope light curve is included in the top-most panel to illustrate when the flare occurred relative to the rest of the observation. 50 60 70 80 Frequency [MHZ] 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Time Since Start [hr] 5.0 2.5 0.0 2.5 5.0 Flux Density [Jy] 4 2 0 2 4 6 Fl… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: An extreme example of a “de-dispersed” EK Dra dynamic spectrum (top panel) and the resulting light curve from averaging over all frequencies (bottom panel) for a = −3.7 and α = 1.1. perature; this assumption is consistent with what is ob￾served for the Sun and that has been estimated for T Tauri stars (Johns-Krull & Herczeg 2007). It is thus likely that a beam reaching 10s of stellar radii would be capable… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Time-of-arrival (TOA) estimates for the CME to excite plasma frequencies in the OVRO-LWA band for the Parker wind (top panel) and CWS (bottom) models. The red line indicates the parameters that allow the CME to reach the band within 5.5 hr and the black line indicates the lower limit on the base coronal density from Guedel et al. (1995). nences for EK Dra (∼ 1017−19 g). Although strong over￾lying fields in… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The anticipated flux density of EK Dra, calcu￾lated from equation 3. An X-ray luminosity that is 10% of the bolometric flare luminosity is indicated by a black dashed line, as this is the typical partitioning of energy expected of flares. The red indicates flux densities above which a burst would have been a 5σ ≈ 10 Jy detection in any 4.6 MHz-wide subband. This suggests any reasonable partitioning of the… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Spiral predictions for the CWS model in blue and the Parker model in red. The central locations of the exciter indicate the distance conducive to exciting 87 MHz plasma emission in the respective models and are indicated by dots. Two different expansions rate for the exciter are demonstrated here: the dashed line indicates an expansion rate of 0.5 and the dotted line is an expansion rate of 1. The yellow … view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: The wind velocity profiles for EK Dra assuming a Parker model solution (solid lines) and a constant-velocity solution (dashed lines). The filled areas indicate the distances where the density is conducive to observing a type II in the OVRO-LWA band; the red area indicates the range for the Parker wind solution and the blue area indicates the range for CWS model. vshock is the minimum speed required to dri… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The Space Weather Around Young Suns (SWAYS) program was introduced in \citet{Davis2025} as a multi-wavelength monitoring program for studying the activity and particle environments of nearby, young, solar-type stars. The SWAYS program currently includes the Owens Valley Radio Observatory Long Wavelength Array (OVRO-LWA) operating between 13--87\,MHz to search for stellar equivalents of solar type~II and III bursts, which are associated with bulk plasma motion in the corona and interplanetary medium. These observations are accompanied by simultaneous photometric data from the high-precision, optical instrument Flarescope to identify associated flare events. These two instruments have collectively acquired nearly 900\,hr of data with $\approx70\%$ overlap between November 2023--June 2024, dedicated to six stars. Here, we present the results of this first season of the SWAYS observing campaign, which include a superflare from the star EK~Draconis with no accompanying low-frequency particle-flux signal. The novelty of the coordination at these specific parts of the spectrum allow us to uniquely evaluate the conditions that may have inhibited a radio detection. We find that the exceptionally hot, dense coronae of incredibly active stars may not be conducive to the development of the instabilities required for type~II and III bursts, or else inspire new expectations for when we should expect to observe a signal relative to the time of the flare. This may represent the plasma-density complement to the magnetospheric limitations to observing space-weather signatures at low frequencies.

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 / 0 minor

Summary. The manuscript summarizes the first year of the Space Weather Around Young Suns (SWAYS) program, which acquired nearly 900 hours of coordinated low-frequency radio observations (OVRO-LWA, 13-87 MHz) and optical photometry (Flarescope) on six young solar-type stars from November 2023 to June 2024, with ~70% overlap. The central result is the detection of a superflare on EK Draconis with no accompanying low-frequency radio signal, interpreted as evidence that the exceptionally hot, dense coronae of highly active stars may suppress the plasma instabilities required for type II and III bursts or require revised expectations for radio emission timing relative to the flare; this is presented as a plasma-density complement to magnetospheric limitations on low-frequency space-weather signatures.

Significance. If the non-detection is placed on a quantitative footing and alternative explanations are excluded, the result would provide a useful observational constraint on differences in coronal particle acceleration and radio burst production between the Sun and young active stars. The coordinated multi-wavelength dataset itself represents a valuable resource for the field.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The interpretation that hot, dense coronae inhibit type II/III instabilities rests on a single superflare non-detection but supplies no quantitative upper limits on radio flux, no scaling of expected solar-analog burst strength to EK Dra's distance (~100 pc) and flare energy, and no statistical assessment of the non-detection significance.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: No information is given on the temporal alignment between the radio window and the optical flare peak, nor on the expected delay for plasma-frequency emission, preventing separation of a physical coronal explanation from possible timing or scheduling limitations.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment below and will revise the manuscript accordingly to strengthen the presentation of our results.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The interpretation that hot, dense coronae inhibit type II/III instabilities rests on a single superflare non-detection but supplies no quantitative upper limits on radio flux, no scaling of expected solar-analog burst strength to EK Dra's distance (~100 pc) and flare energy, and no statistical assessment of the non-detection significance.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract would be improved by the inclusion of these quantitative elements to better support the interpretation. In the revised manuscript we will add an upper limit on the radio flux density from the non-detection, a scaling of typical solar type II/III burst strengths to the distance and energy of the EK Dra event, and a brief statistical assessment of the non-detection. These additions will also be expanded in the main text. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: No information is given on the temporal alignment between the radio window and the optical flare peak, nor on the expected delay for plasma-frequency emission, preventing separation of a physical coronal explanation from possible timing or scheduling limitations.

    Authors: We concur that explicit timing information is necessary to distinguish physical suppression from observational constraints. The revised version will report the precise temporal overlap between the radio observations and the optical flare peak, together with an estimate of the expected delay for plasma-frequency emission based on solar scaling relations. This will allow readers to evaluate the robustness of the coronal-density interpretation. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: purely observational non-detection with interpretive hypothesis

full rationale

The paper reports coordinated radio and optical observations of young solar-type stars, including a superflare on EK Dra with no detected low-frequency emission. The central claim is an interpretive suggestion that hot dense coronae may inhibit type II/III burst instabilities. No equations, parameter fits, derivations, or model predictions appear in the provided text. The non-detection is presented as data; the physical interpretation is offered as one possible explanation alongside alternatives (timing, sensitivity). No self-citation chains, ansatzes, or renamings reduce any result to its inputs by construction. This is a standard observational report whose conclusions rest on the data rather than on any internal definitional loop.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

This is an observational summary; the central claim rests on the interpretation of a single non-detection. No free parameters, domain axioms beyond standard radio astronomy, or invented entities appear in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 6047 in / 1172 out tokens · 26261 ms · 2026-06-27T11:22:39.730139+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

62 extracted references · 59 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    D., Drake , J

    Alvarado-G \'o mez , J. D., Drake , J. J., Cohen , O., Moschou , S. P., & Garraffo , C. 2018, , 862, 93, 10.3847/1538-4357/aacb7f

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aacb7f 2018

  2. [2]

    D., Cohen , O., Drake , J

    Alvarado-G \'o mez , J. D., Cohen , O., Drake , J. J., et al. 2022, , 928, 147, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac54b8

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac54b8 2022

  3. [3]

    Alvarez , H., & Haddock , F. T. 1973, , 29, 197, 10.1007/BF00153449

    work page doi:10.1007/bf00153449 1973

  4. [4]

    J., Nightingale , R

    Aschwanden , M. J., Nightingale , R. W., & Alexander , D. 2000, , 541, 1059, 10.1086/309486

    work page doi:10.1086/309486 2000

  5. [5]

    Ayres , T. R. 2015, , 150, 7, 10.1088/0004-6256/150/1/7

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/150/1/7 2015

  6. [6]

    L., Hinkle , J

    Berger , V. L., Hinkle , J. T., Tucker , M. A., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2312.12511, 10.48550/arXiv.2312.12511

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2312.12511 2023

  7. [7]

    R., Tasse , C., Keers , R., et al

    Callingham , J. R., Tasse , C., Keers , R., et al. 2025, , 647, 603, 10.1038/s41586-025-09715-3

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-025-09715-3 2025

  8. [8]

    CASA, the Common Astronomy Software Applications for Radio Astronomy

    CASA Team , Bean , B., Bhatnagar , S., et al. 2022, , 134, 114501, 10.1088/1538-3873/ac9642

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1088/1538-3873/ac9642 2022

  9. [9]

    Cranmer , S. R. 2017, , 840, 114, 10.3847/1538-4357/aa6f0e

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa6f0e 2017

  10. [10]

    2025, , 993, 82, 10.3847/1538-4357/adfbe9

    Davis , I., Hallinan , G., Saini , N., et al. 2025, , 993, 82, 10.3847/1538-4357/adfbe9

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adfbe9 2025

  11. [11]

    D., & Guinan, E

    Dorren, J. D., & Guinan, E. F. 1994, International Astronomical Union Colloquium, 143, 206–216, 10.1017/S0252921100024702

    work page doi:10.1017/s0252921100024702 1994

  12. [12]

    Dulk , G. A. 1985, , 23, 169, 10.1146/annurev.aa.23.090185.001125

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.aa.23.090185.001125 1985

  13. [13]

    Eastwood, M. W. 2017, TTCal, 0.3.0, Zenodo, 10.5281/zenodo.1049160

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.1049160 2017

  14. [14]

    L., et al

    Fichtinger , B., G \"u del , M., Mutel , R. L., et al. 2017, , 599, A127, 10.1051/0004-6361/201629886

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629886 2017

  15. [15]

    2022, VizieR Online Data Catalog, I/357

    Gaia Collaboration . 2022, VizieR Online Data Catalog, I/357

    2022

  16. [16]

    Gaia Collaboration , Brown , A. G. A., Vallenari , A., et al. 2018, , 616, A1, 10.1051/0004-6361/201833051

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833051 2018

  17. [17]

    2000, Geophysical Monograph Series, 119, 123, 10.1029/GM119p0123

    Gopalswamy , N. 2000, Geophysical Monograph Series, 119, 123, 10.1029/GM119p0123

    work page doi:10.1029/gm119p0123 2000

  18. [18]

    2004, , 12, 71, 10.1007/s00159-004-0023-2

    G \"u del , M. 2004, , 12, 71, 10.1007/s00159-004-0023-2

    work page doi:10.1007/s00159-004-0023-2 2004

  19. [19]

    2007, Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 4, 3, 10.12942/lrsp-2007-3

    ---. 2007, Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 4, 3, 10.12942/lrsp-2007-3

    work page doi:10.12942/lrsp-2007-3 2007

  20. [20]

    F., & Skinner , S

    G \"u del , M., Guinan , E. F., & Skinner , S. L. 1997, , 483, 947, 10.1086/304264

    work page doi:10.1086/304264 1997

  21. [21]

    Guedel , M., Schmitt , J. H. M. M., Benz , A. O., & Elias , II, N. M. 1995, , 301, 201

    1995

  22. [22]

    P., Korhonen , H., Berdyugina , S

    J \"a rvinen , S. P., Korhonen , H., Berdyugina , S. V., et al. 2008, , 488, 1047, 10.1051/0004-6361:200809837

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:200809837 2008

  23. [23]

    M., & Herczeg , G

    Johns-Krull , C. M., & Herczeg , G. J. 2007, , 655, 345, 10.1086/508770

    work page doi:10.1086/508770 2007

  24. [24]

    J., & Wehrhahn , A

    Kochukhov , O., Hackman , T., Lehtinen , J. J., & Wehrhahn , A. 2020, , 635, A142, 10.1051/0004-6361/201937185

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201937185 2020

  25. [25]

    C., Vedantham , H

    Konijn , D. C., Vedantham , H. K., Tasse , C., et al. 2025, , 703, A198, 10.1051/0004-6361/202554317

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202554317 2025

  26. [26]

    J., Farrell , W

    Lazio , W., T. J., Farrell , W. M., Dietrick , J., et al. 2004, , 612, 511, 10.1086/422449

    work page doi:10.1086/422449 2004

  27. [27]

    2020, , 493, 4570, 10.1093/mnras/staa504

    Leitzinger , M., Odert , P., Greimel , R., et al. 2020, , 493, 4570, 10.1093/mnras/staa504

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa504 2020

  28. [28]

    Loyd , R. O. P., Mason , J. P., Jin , M., et al. 2022, , 936, 170, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac80c1

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac80c1 2022

  29. [29]

    , keywords =

    Marsden , S. C., Donati , J. F., Semel , M., Petit , P., & Carter , B. D. 2006, , 370, 468, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10503.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10503.x 2006

  30. [30]

    J., et al

    Mawet , D., Hirsch , L., Lee , E. J., et al. 2019, , 157, 33, 10.3847/1538-3881/aaef8a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aaef8a 2019

  31. [31]

    1958, , 181, 36, 10.1038/181036a0

    Maxwell , A., & Swarup , G. 1958, , 181, 36, 10.1038/181036a0

    work page doi:10.1038/181036a0 1958

  32. [32]

    Melrose , D. B. 1989, , 120, 369, 10.1007/BF00159885

    work page doi:10.1007/bf00159885 1989

  33. [33]

    2024, , 691, L8, 10.1051/0004-6361/202451072

    Mohan , A., Gopalswamy , N., Raju , H., & Akiyama , S. 2024, , 691, L8, 10.1051/0004-6361/202451072

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451072 2024

  34. [34]

    J., Cohen , O., et al

    Moschou , S.-P., Drake , J. J., Cohen , O., et al. 2019, , 877, 105, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab1b37

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab1b37 2019

  35. [35]

    2025 a , , 993, 80, 10.3847/1538-4357/adfe70

    Namekata , K., Maehara , H., Notsu , Y., et al. 2025 a , , 993, 80, 10.3847/1538-4357/adfe70

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adfe70 2025

  36. [36]

    2021, Nature Astronomy, 6, 241, 10.1038/s41550-021-01532-8

    Namekata , K., Maehara , H., Honda , S., et al. 2021, Nature Astronomy, 6, 241, 10.1038/s41550-021-01532-8

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-021-01532-8 2021

  37. [38]

    2022 b , , 926, L5, 10.3847/2041-8213/ac4df0

    ---. 2022 b , , 926, L5, 10.3847/2041-8213/ac4df0

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac4df0 2022

  38. [39]

    S., Petit , P., et al

    Namekata , K., Airapetian , V. S., Petit , P., et al. 2024 a , , 961, 23, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad0b7c

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad0b7c 2024

  39. [40]

    2024 b , , 976, 255, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad85df

    Namekata , K., Ikuta , K., Petit , P., et al. 2024 b , , 976, 255, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad85df

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad85df 2024

  40. [41]

    2025 b , arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.22110, 10.48550/arXiv.2510.22110

    Namekata , K., France , K., Chae , J., et al. 2025 b , arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.22110, 10.48550/arXiv.2510.22110

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.22110 2025

  41. [42]

    J., & Melrose , D

    Nelson , G. J., & Melrose , D. B. 1985, in Solar Radiophysics: Studies of Emission from the Sun at Metre Wavelengths, ed. D. J. McLean & N. R. Labrum , 333--359

    1985

  42. [43]

    R., McKinley, B., Hurley-Walker, et al

    Offringa, A. R., McKinley, B., Hurley-Walker, et al. 2014, MNRAS, 444, 606, 10.1093/mnras/stu1368

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1368 2014

  43. [44]

    R., van de Gronde , J

    Offringa , A. R., van de Gronde , J. J., & Roerdink , J. B. T. M. 2012, , 539, A95, 10.1051/0004-6361/201118497

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201118497 2012

  44. [45]

    A., & Wolk , S

    Osten , R. A., & Wolk , S. J. 2015, , 809, 79, 10.1088/0004-637X/809/1/79

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/809/1/79 2015

  45. [46]

    D., & Silva , D

    Pal , T., Khan , I., Worthey , G., Gregg , M. D., & Silva , D. R. 2023, , 266, 41, 10.3847/1538-4365/accea7

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/accea7 2023

  46. [47]

    Parker , E. N. 1965, , 4, 666, 10.1007/BF00216273

    work page doi:10.1007/bf00216273 1965

  47. [48]

    Reid , H. A. S., & Ratcliffe , H. 2014, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 14, 773, 10.1088/1674-4527/14/7/003

    work page doi:10.1088/1674-4527/14/7/003 2014

  48. [49]

    R., Winn , J

    Ricker , G. R., Winn , J. N., Vanderspek , R., et al. 2014, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 9143, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2014: Optical, Infrared, and Millimeter Wave, ed. J. Oschmann , Jacobus M., M. Clampin , G. G. Fazio , & H. A. MacEwen , 914320, 10.1117/12.2063489

    work page doi:10.1117/12.2063489 2014

  49. [50]

    2013, , 762, 60, 10.1088/0004-637X/762/1/60

    Saint-Hilaire , P., Vilmer , N., & Kerdraon , A. 2013, , 762, 60, 10.1088/0004-637X/762/1/60

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/762/1/60 2013

  50. [51]

    P., et al

    Sasikumar Raja , K., Maksimovic , M., Kontar , E. P., et al. 2022, , 924, 58, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac34ed

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac34ed 2022

  51. [52]

    G., Pichler , T., Weber , M., & Granzer , T

    Strassmeier , K. G., Pichler , T., Weber , M., & Granzer , T. 2003, , 411, 595, 10.1051/0004-6361:20031538

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20031538 2003

  52. [53]

    2005, , 622, 653, 10.1086/428109

    Telleschi , A., G \"u del , M., Briggs , K., et al. 2005, , 622, 653, 10.1086/428109

    work page doi:10.1086/428109 2005

  53. [54]

    2021, Journal of Geophysical Research (Space Physics), 126, e28380, 10.1029/2020JA028380

    Temmer , M., Holzknecht , L., Dumbovi \'c , M., et al. 2021, Journal of Geophysical Research (Space Physics), 126, e28380, 10.1029/2020JA028380

    work page doi:10.1029/2020ja028380 2021

  54. [55]

    Vedantham , H. K. 2020, , 639, L7, 10.1051/0004-6361/202038576

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202038576 2020

  55. [56]

    M., Odert , P., Leitzinger , M., et al

    Veronig , A. M., Odert , P., Leitzinger , M., et al. 2021, Nature Astronomy, 5, 697, 10.1038/s41550-021-01345-9

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-021-01345-9 2021

  56. [57]

    2019, , 871, 214, 10.3847/1538-4357/aaf88e

    Villadsen , J., & Hallinan , G. 2019, , 871, 214, 10.3847/1538-4357/aaf88e

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaf88e 2019

  57. [58]

    E., et al

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261, 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2

    work page doi:10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2 2020

  58. [59]

    J., Korpi-Lagg , M., & Kochukhov , O

    Williamo , T., Hackman , T., Lehtinen , J. J., Korpi-Lagg , M., & Kochukhov , O. 2022, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 5, 10, 10.21105/astro.2203.13398

    work page doi:10.21105/astro.2203.13398 2022

  59. [60]

    Wilson , O. C. 1963, , 138, 832, 10.1086/147689

    work page doi:10.1086/147689 1963

  60. [61]

    E., M \"u ller , H

    Wood , B. E., M \"u ller , H. R., Zank , G. P., Linsky , J. L., & Redfield , S. 2005, , 628, L143, 10.1086/432716

    work page doi:10.1086/432716 2005

  61. [62]

    Yashiro , S., Akiyama , S., Gopalswamy , N., & Howard , R. A. 2006, , 650, L143, 10.1086/508876

    work page doi:10.1086/508876 2006

  62. [63]

    2009, in Universal Heliophysical Processes, ed

    Yashiro , S., & Gopalswamy , N. 2009, in Universal Heliophysical Processes, ed. N. Gopalswamy & D. F. Webb , Vol. 257, 233--243, 10.1017/S1743921309029342

    work page doi:10.1017/s1743921309029342 2009