Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 2 minor 35 references

TEQUILA: Mechanism-free polarimetry for astronomy

T0 review · 1 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-07-03 · grok-4.3

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

Pith's one-line read TEQUILA measures absolute polarization of point sources at 0.15 percent RMS uncertainty with a fixed on-chip micro-polarizer array and no moving parts.

desk verdict TEQUILA shows a working commercial-sensor polarimeter on a 1.3 m telescope with 0.15% RMS in pupil tracking, but the flat-field correction needs verification. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.01325 v1 pith:AKL35VHD submitted 2026-07-01 astro-ph.IM astro-ph.HE

Alan M. Watson , Noémie Globus This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.IMastro-ph.HE
keywords polarimetryastronomicalinstrumentationgamma-rayburstafterglowsCMOSsensorsmicro-polarizerarraytransientsourcesStokesparameters
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper presents TEQUILA, a polarimeter built from commercial parts that captures I, Q, and U in one exposure using a CMOS sensor with an integrated wire-grid micro-polarizer array. It reports that this mechanism-free design reaches 0.15 percent RMS uncertainty for point sources in pupil-tracking mode on a 1.3-meter telescope, fully accounted for by measurement noise and standard-star calibration, and 0.20 percent in field-tracking mode after adding a 0.10 percent term. The instrument targets early follow-up of transients such as gamma-ray burst afterglows. The work also notes a flat-field polarimetric structure and low quantum efficiency around 17 percent. Calibration for extended sources is still under development.

What carries the argument

On-chip wire-grid micro-polarizer array on a CMOS sensor that extracts simultaneous single-exposure Stokes I, Q, and U parameters without any moving optical components.

What would settle it

Repeated observations of a polarized standard star in pupil-tracking mode that yield RMS scatter exceeding the combined measurement noise and standard-star uncertainty by more than the reported 0.15 percent would show an unaccounted systematic.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

TEQUILA achieves absolute polarimetry with RMS uncertainties of 0.15 percent in pupil-tracking observations and 0.20 percent in field-tracking observations for point sources, with the pupil-tracking result fully explained by measurement and standard-star uncertainties and no additional calibration term required.

Load-bearing premise

The on-chip wire-grid micro-polarizer array and associated data reduction produce Stokes parameters whose only significant uncertainties are the reported measurement noise plus the 0.10 percent additional term for field-tracking; no unmodeled systematics from the observed flat-field polarimetric structure remain.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Pupil-tracking observations require no extra calibration term beyond measurement noise and standard-star values.
  • Field-tracking observations need an added 0.10 percent uncertainty term to match observed scatter.
  • The design supports seeing-limited imaging in a fixed band for transient sources on an alt-az telescope.
  • Sensor characterization shows a polarimetric flat-field structure that must be handled in data reduction.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The reported performance applies only to point sources; resolved-source polarimetry calibration is still pending.
  • The mechanism-free approach may reduce operational complexity for rapid-response observations compared with instruments that require rotating components.
  • Low quantum efficiency around 17 percent sets a practical brightness limit for useful observations despite the polarimetric precision.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents TEQUILA, a mechanism-free imaging polarimeter for the 1.3-m COLIBRI telescope that employs a CMOS sensor with an on-chip wire-grid micro-polarizer array to obtain simultaneous single-exposure measurements of Stokes I, Q, and U. The paper covers the scientific motivation, instrument design and implementation using commercial components, calibration procedures, sensor characterization (including revelation of polarimetric structure in the flat field and an estimated QE of ~17%), and initial on-sky results. It reports absolute polarimetry performance for point sources of 0.15% RMS in pupil-tracking mode and 0.20% RMS in field-tracking mode, with the pupil-tracking RMS fully accounted for by measurement and standard-star uncertainties and an additional ~0.10% calibration term required for field-tracking; calibration for resolved sources is stated to remain in progress.

Significance. If the reported performance holds, the instrument provides a low-complexity, mechanism-free option for rapid polarimetric follow-up of transients such as GRB afterglows using only commercial parts, which is a practical contribution to astro-ph.IM. Strengths include the direct reporting of concrete numbers from both lab characterization and on-sky tests, plus the empirical observation that pupil-tracking RMS matches expected uncertainties with no evidence for extra terms.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the central performance claims of 0.15% RMS (pupil-tracking) and 0.20% RMS (field-tracking) for point-source absolute polarimetry rest on the assumption that the reported polarimetric flat-field structure has been removed by the data-reduction pipeline to a level below the quoted uncertainties (plus the 0.10% field-tracking term); without explicit description of the correction method, residual maps after flat-fielding, or tests isolating any position- or wavelength-dependent residuals in the extracted Stokes parameters for point sources, it is not possible to confirm that unmodeled systematics do not contribute.
minor comments (2)
  1. The quantum-efficiency estimate of approximately 17% (including micro-polarizer losses) is stated without the supporting calculation or measurement details that would allow independent verification.
  2. The manuscript refers to 'initial science results' but the provided abstract does not include any example light curves or polarimetric time series from transients; if such data exist in the full text they should be cross-referenced to the performance claims.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful and constructive review of our manuscript on TEQUILA. We address the single major comment below and agree that additional details are needed to fully support the performance claims.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the central performance claims of 0.15% RMS (pupil-tracking) and 0.20% RMS (field-tracking) for point-source absolute polarimetry rest on the assumption that the reported polarimetric flat-field structure has been removed by the data-reduction pipeline to a level below the quoted uncertainties (plus the 0.10% field-tracking term); without explicit description of the correction method, residual maps after flat-fielding, or tests isolating any position- or wavelength-dependent residuals in the extracted Stokes parameters for point sources, it is not possible to confirm that unmodeled systematics do not contribute.

    Authors: We agree with the referee that the abstract and main text would be strengthened by an explicit description of how the polarimetric flat-field structure is corrected in the data-reduction pipeline, along with supporting residual maps and tests for residuals in the extracted Stokes parameters. The current manuscript reports the existence of this structure from sensor characterization but does not provide the level of detail requested. In the revised version we will: (1) add a concise statement in the abstract noting that a polarimetric flat-field correction is applied in the pipeline; (2) expand the data-reduction section with the precise correction method; (3) include residual maps after flat-fielding; and (4) present tests isolating any position- or wavelength-dependent residuals in point-source Stokes parameters. These additions will directly demonstrate that unmodeled systematics remain below the quoted uncertainties. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; empirical instrument report

full rationale

The paper is an instrument description, calibration report, and measurement summary with no mathematical derivations, model predictions, or fitted parameters presented as outputs. All quoted performance numbers (0.15% RMS pupil-tracking, 0.20% RMS field-tracking) are stated as direct results of on-sky observations and standard-star characterization rather than quantities obtained by solving equations whose inputs already embed the target result. No self-citation chains, ansatzes, or uniqueness theorems are invoked to justify the central claims. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 1 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central performance claims rest on standard polarimetry assumptions plus one explicit fitted calibration term; no new physical entities are postulated.

free parameters (1)
  • additional calibration uncertainty for field-tracking = 0.10%
    Introduced to account for the difference between observed RMS and expected measurement noise in field-tracking mode
assumptions (1)
  • domain assumption The on-chip wire-grid micro-polarizer array enables accurate single-exposure extraction of Stokes I, Q, and U parameters
    Invoked as the basis for the mechanism-free design and all reported polarimetric uncertainties

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of TEQUILA: Mechanism-free polarimetry for astronomy." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/AKL35VHD

@misc{pith2026260701325,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: TEQUILA: Mechanism-free polarimetry for astronomy},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/AKL35VHD}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.01325}
}
abstract

TEQUILA (Transient Event $Q$, $U$, and $I$ Light Analyzer) is an optical imaging polarimeter developed for the second Nasmyth port of the 1.3-m COLIBR\'I altitude-azimuth telescope at Observatorio Astron\'omico Nacional in San Pedro M\'artir, M\'exico (OAN-SPM). TEQUILA uses a CMOS sensor with an on-chip wire-grid micro-polarizer array to obtain simultaneous, single-exposure measurements of the Stokes parameters $I$, $Q$, and $U$ without moving optical components. This mechanism-free instrument, built entirely from commercial components, delivers seeing-limited imaging in a fixed optical band and is optimized for early-time follow-up of transient sources, including gamma-ray burst afterglows, blazars, and variable young stellar objects. In this paper, we describe the scientific motivation, the instrument design and implementation, the calibration, and initial science results. Sensor characterization reveals a polarimetric structure in the flat field and a low quantum efficiency, which we estimate to be approximately 17%, including losses introduced by the micro-polarizer array. For point sources, TEQUILA achieves absolute polarimetry with RMS uncertainties of 0.15% in pupil-tracking observations and 0.20% in field-tracking observations. In pupil-tracking mode, the observed RMS is fully explained by the measurement and standard-star uncertainties, with no evidence for an additional calibration term. In contrast, field-tracking observations require an additional calibration uncertainty of approximately 0.10%. Calibration for resolved-source polarimetry remains in progress.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.01325 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Illustration of the sensor architecture and sensor design. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. TEQUILA mounted on one of the Nasmyth foci of the COLIBR´I telescope. TEQUILA is the small black-and-blue cylinder at the right seen mounted on the larger felt-covered OGSE test-camera support structure that extends from the derotator. The purpose of this structure is simply to support an instrument close to the telescope focal plane. Note the absence of a proper cable chain and the cables simply looped from the ins… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The temperature difference ∆T, between the sensor and the ambient air as a function of time at full cooling power. The sensor initially cools to 35 C below ambient, but then rises to about 30 C below ambient. 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (15 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Left: The mean dark rate in electron/m/px at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Left: A representative region of a dark image at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: A typical mean twilight flat field image. The pixel-to-pixel variation is about 1% RMS and the large scale [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Lab calibration set-up. The path of the collimated beam is shown in transparency when inside the optical [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The laboratory data and corresponding model fits for pixels in a representative super-pixel. The fits have [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The sensor parameters sxy, mxy, and ∆αxy derived in the laboratory calibration in a representative region close to the center of the sensor. Our model for the signal from a sensor illuminated by this source assumes the light is perfectly polarized but accounts for non-…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The current estimated polarimetric uncertainty [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Calibration with pupil tracking. Upper left: The raw polarizations [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Calibration with field tracking. Upper left: The raw polarizations [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: The centers of the observations of each group of standards for the pupil-tracking calibration (left) and field [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Instrumental polarization derived from the laboratory flat-field image obtained with collimated light using [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Instrumental polarization derived from the twilight-sky flat-field image obtained on the telescope and with the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_15.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Comparison of the low-order Zernike coefficients describing the instrumental polarization measured from flat [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_16.png]
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Differential instrumental polarization derived from the ratio of twilight flats on the telescope at 0 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_17.png]
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: Left panel: Stokes parameters q and u are plotted with observational uncertainties and color-coded by Modified Julian Date (MJD) to represent temporal evolution. Successive observations are connected to illustrate the polarization vector motion through the q–u plane. …

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

35 extracted references · 35 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Les com` etes

    Arago, F., [Astronomie populaire], vol. 2, Gide et J. Baudry, Paris (1858). Livre XVII: “Les com` etes”

    work page

  2. [2]

    Th´ eorie de la double r´ efraction de la lumi` ere dans les substances cristallis´ ees,

    ´Etienne Louis Malus, “Th´ eorie de la double r´ efraction de la lumi` ere dans les substances cristallis´ ees,” M´ emoires de l’Institut Imp´ erial de France2, 143–158 (1810)

    work page

  3. [3]

    FORS2 at the VLT,

    Appenzeller, I. e. a., “FORS2 at the VLT,” in [The Messenger], (1998)

    work page 1998

  4. [4]

    HOWPol: Hiroshima optical and near-infrared camera,

    Kawabata, K. S. e. a., “HOWPol: Hiroshima optical and near-infrared camera,” in [SPIE],7014(2008)

    work page 2008

  5. [5]

    The RoboPol instrument,

    Ramaprakash, A. N. e. a., “The RoboPol instrument,”MNRAS485, 2355–2366 (2019)

    work page 2019

  6. [6]

    YFPOL: A linear polarimeter of Lijiang 2.4 m telescope,

    Xu, D. e. a., “YFPOL: A linear polarimeter of Lijiang 2.4 m telescope,”RAA22(2022)

    work page 2022

  7. [7]

    RINGO3: A multi-colour fast response polarimeter,

    Arnold, D. M. e. a., “RINGO3: A multi-colour fast response polarimeter,” in [SPIE],8446(2012)

    work page 2012

  8. [8]

    MOPTOP: a new polarimeter for the Liverpool Telescope,

    Jermak, H. e. a., “MOPTOP: a new polarimeter for the Liverpool Telescope,”MNRAS473, 1269–1284 (2018)

    work page 2018

Show all 35 references
  1. [9]

    DIPOL-1: A double-image high-precision polarimeter,

    Piirola, V. e. a., “DIPOL-1: A double-image high-precision polarimeter,”AJ167, 137 (2024)

    2024

  2. [10]

    COLIBRI, a wide-field 1.3 m robotic telescope dedicated to the transient sky,

    Basa, S., Lee, W. H., Dolon, F., Watson, A. M., Floriot, J., Atteia, J. L., et al., “COLIBRI, a wide-field 1.3 m robotic telescope dedicated to the transient sky,” in [Ground-Based and Airborne Telescopes IX], Marshall, H. K., Spyromilio, J., and Usuda, T., eds.,Proceedings of...

    2022

  3. [11]

    COLIBRI (SVOM/FM-GFT): Instrumentation and Performances on the SVOM Alerts,

    Basa, S., Lee, W. H., Watson, A. M., Dolon, F., Floriot, J., Atteia, J.-L., Dornic, D., Lugo-Ibarra, E. E., Figueroa, L., Langarica, R., Valentin, H., Ageron, M., Agneray, F., Alvarez Nunez, L. C., Angulo-Valdez, C., Antier, S., Auphan, T., Baumann, M., Bautista, L., Becerra, ...

    2026 arXiv

  4. [12]

    The DDRAGO wide-field imager for the COLIBR ´I telescope,

    Langarica, R., Watson, A. M., ´Alvarez N´ u˜ nez, L. C., Angeles, F., Atteia, J.-L., Basa, S., Cuevas, S., Dolon, F., Farah, A., Dornic, D., Floriot, J., Fuentes-Fern´ andez, J., Langlois, A., Lee, W. H., Lombardo, S., Pereyra, M., Ru´ ız D´ ıaz-Soto, J., Ronayette, S., Tinoco...

    2024

  5. [13]

    Four-directional pixel-wise polarization CMOS image sensor using air-gap wire grid on 2.5-µm back-illuminated pixels,

    Yamazaki, T., Maruyama, Y., Uesaka, Y., et al., “Four-directional pixel-wise polarization CMOS image sensor using air-gap wire grid on 2.5-µm back-illuminated pixels,” in [2016 IEEE International Electron Devices Meeting (IEDM)], 8.7.1–8.7.4, IEEE (2016)

    2016

  6. [14]

    Micropolarizer array for infrared imaging polarimetry,

    Nordin, G. P., Meier, J. T., Deguzman, P. C., and Jones, M. W., “Micropolarizer array for infrared imaging polarimetry,”Journal of the Optical Society of America A16(5), 1168–1174 (1999)

    1999

  7. [15]

    QHY1253P data sheet,

    QHYCCD, “QHY1253P data sheet,” (2025)

    2025

  8. [16]

    Automation of the OAN/SPM 1.5-meter Johnson telescope for operations with RATIR,

    Watson, A. M., Richer, M. G., Bloom, J. S., Butler, N. R., Cese˜ na, U., Clark, D., Colorado, E., C´ ordova, A., Farah, A., Fox-Machado, L., Fox, O. D., Garc´ ıa, B., Georgiev, L. N., Gonz´ alez, J. J., Guisa, G., Guti´ errez, L., Herrera, J., Klein, C. R., Kutyrev, A. S., Laz...

    2012

  9. [17]

    Optical Design of COLIBR ´I: A Fast Follow-up Telescope for Transient Events,

    Fuentes-Fern´ andez, J., Watson, A. M., Cuevas, S., Basa, S., Floriot, J., Dolon, F., Valentin, H., Challita, Z., and Vola, P., “Optical Design of COLIBR ´I: A Fast Follow-up Telescope for Transient Events,”Journal of Astronomical Instrumentation9, 2050001–280 (Jan. 2020)

    2020

  10. [18]

    Sony polarization image sensor: IMX250MZR/MYR, IMX264MZR/MYR, IMX253MZR/MYR,

    Sony Semiconductor Solutions, “Sony polarization image sensor: IMX250MZR/MYR, IMX264MZR/MYR, IMX253MZR/MYR,” (2021)

    2021

  11. [19]

    Thirteen Years of Weather Statistics at San Pedro Martir Observatory,

    Plauchu-Frayn, I., Colorado, E., Richer, M. G., and Herrera-V´ azquez, C., “Thirteen Years of Weather Statistics at San Pedro Martir Observatory,”Revista Mexicana de Astronom´ ıa y Astrof´ ısica56, 295–319 (Oct. 2020)

    2020

  12. [20]

    Calibration method for division of focal plane polarimeters in the optical and near- infrared regime,

    York, T. and Gruev, V., “Calibration method for division of focal plane polarimeters in the optical and near- infrared regime,” in [Infrared Technology and Applications XXXVII], Andresen, B. F., Fulop, G. F., and Norton, P. R., eds.,Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Eng...

    2011

  13. [21]

    Characterization of a visible spectrum division-of-focal-plane polarimeter,

    York, T. and Gruev, V., “Characterization of a visible spectrum division-of-focal-plane polarimeter,”Applied Optics51, 5392 (Aug. 2012)

    2012

  14. [22]

    Calibration methods for division-of-focal-plane polarimeters,

    Powell, S. B. and Gruev, V., “Calibration methods for division-of-focal-plane polarimeters,”Optics Ex- press21, 21039 (Sept. 2013)

    2013

  15. [23]

    Calibration method for division of focal plane polarimeters,

    Fei, H., Li, F.-M., Chen, W.-C., Zhang, R., and Chen, C.-S., “Calibration method for division of focal plane polarimeters,”Applied Optics57, 4992 (June 2018)

    2018

  16. [24]

    Polarization properties at the Nasmyth focus of the alt-azimuth TNG telescope,

    Giro, E., Bonoli, C., Leone, F., Molinari, E., Pernechele, C., and Zacchei, A., “Polarization properties at the Nasmyth focus of the alt-azimuth TNG telescope,” in [Polarimetry in Astronomy], Fineschi, S., ed., Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conferen...

    2003

  17. [25]

    Calibration of EFOSC2 Broadband Linear Imaging Polarimetry,

    Wiersema, K., Higgins, A. B., Covino, S., and Starling, R. L. C., “Calibration of EFOSC2 Broadband Linear Imaging Polarimetry,”Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia35, e012 (Mar. 2018)

    2018

  18. [26]

    SPLOT: a snapshot survey for polarized light in optical transients,

    Higgins, A. B., Wiersema, K., Covino, S., Starling, R. L. C., Stevance, H. F., Wyrzykowski, L., Hodgkin, S. T., Maund, J. R., O’Brien, P. T., and Tanvir, N. R., “SPLOT: a snapshot survey for polarized light in optical transients,”Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Socie...

    2019

  19. [27]

    The RoboPol sample of optical polarimetric standards,

    Blinov, D., Maharana, S., Bouzelou, F., Casadio, C., Gjerløw, E., Jormanainen, J., Kiehlmann, S., Kyprio- takis, J. A., Liodakis, I., Mandarakas, N., Markopoulioti, L., Panopoulou, G. V., Pelgrims, V., Pouliasi, A., Romanopoulos, S., Skalidis, R., Anche, R. M., Angelakis, E., ...

    2023

  20. [28]

    Photutils,

    Bradley, L., Sip˝ ocz, B. M., Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., Vin´ ıcius, Z., Deil, C., Barbary, K., Wilson, T. J., Busko, I., Donath, A., G¨ unther, H. M., Cara, M., Lim, P. L., Meßlinger, S., Conseil, S., Droettboom, M., Bostroem, K. A., Bray, E. M., Bratholm, L. A., Bur...

    2026

  21. [29]

    Accurate Optical Polarimetry on the Nasmyth Platform,

    Tinbergen, J., “Accurate Optical Polarimetry on the Nasmyth Platform,”Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific119, 1371–1384 (Dec. 2007)

    2007

  22. [30]

    Optical Polarimetry: Methods, Instruments and Calibration Techniques,

    Berdyugin, A., Piirola, V., and Poutanen, J., “Optical Polarimetry: Methods, Instruments and Calibration Techniques,” in [Astronomical Polarisation from the Infrared to Gamma Rays], Mignani, R., Shearer, A., S lowikowska, A., and Zane, S., eds.,Astrophysics and Space Science L...

    2019

  23. [31]

    Zernike polynomials and atmospheric turbulence.,

    Noll, R. J., “Zernike polynomials and atmospheric turbulence.,”Journal of the Optical Society of America (1917-1983)66, 207–211 (Mar. 1976)

    1917

  24. [32]

    Prospects for detecting X-ray polarization in blazar jets,

    Liodakis, I., Peirson, A. L., and Romani, R. W., “Prospects for detecting X-ray polarization in blazar jets,” The Astrophysical Journal880(1), 7 (2019)

    2019

  25. [33]

    Simultaneous X-ray and optical polarization observations of the blazar Mrk 421,

    Bharathan, A. M., Stalin, C. S., Sahayanathan, S., Wani, K., Mandal, A. K., Chatterjee, R., Joshi, S., Pandey, J. C., Mathew, B., and Agrawal, V. K., “Simultaneous X-ray and optical polarization observations of the blazar Mrk 421,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.16745(2024)

    2024

  26. [34]

    Sub-percent characterization and polarimetric performance analysis of commercial micro-polarizer array detectors,

    Stockmans, T., Scheinowitz, N., van der Linden, E., Malysheva, I., Strelow, K., Smit, M., and Snik, F., “Sub-percent characterization and polarimetric performance analysis of commercial micro-polarizer array detectors,” in [Polarization: Measurement, Analysis, and Remote Sensi...

    2024

  27. [35]

    STDPipe: Simple Transient Detection Pipeline

    Karpov, S., “STDPipe: Simple Transient Detection Pipeline.” Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:2112.006 (Dec. 2021)

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed July 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.