Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 3 cited by

Probing Memory-Burdened Primordial Black Holes with Galactic Sources observed by LHAASO

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper uses LHAASO spectra of four Galactic gamma-ray sources to set the tightest limits yet on memory-burdened primordial black holes as dark matter, excluding full dark-matter abundance below about $2\times10^5$ grams at $k=2.0$.

desk verdict A timely but flawed attempt to tighten memory-burdened PBH limits: the all-sky averaged D-factor does not belong in a localized, background-subtracted source analysis. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.19857 v1 pith:L3WXAN4N submitted 2025-05-26 astro-ph.CO astro-ph.HE

Xiu-hui Tan , Yu-feng Zhou This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.COastro-ph.HE
keywords primordialblackholesmemoryburdeneffectHawkingevaporationLHAASOultra-high-energygammaraysdarkmatterconstraintsGalacticgamma-raysourcesCrabNebula
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 argues that primordial black holes lighter than about $10^9$ grams, normally considered long evaporated, could still exist if the memory-burden effect slows their Hawking radiation once half the mass is gone. If such light black holes make up dark matter, their evaporation should add a high-energy gamma-ray component to the spectra of Galactic sources. The authors fit LHAASO observations of four ultra-high-energy gamma-ray sources with a log-parabolic inverse-Compton background plus a memory-burdened PBH component, and use the fit to bound the PBH dark-matter fraction. Their limits are stronger than previous diffuse gamma-ray and neutrino bounds for masses above about $10^5$ grams, with the combined Crab Nebula data excluding primordial black holes below about $2\times10^5$ grams from being all of the dark matter at $k=2.0$.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the memory-burden modification of Hawking evaporation: after the black hole loses half its mass, its decay rate is suppressed by a factor $S(M_{\rm PBH})^{-k}$, where $S$ is the black hole entropy and $k>0$ is an unknown index. The gamma-ray flux from a PBH distribution is computed from BlackHawk and HDMSpectra primary and secondary spectra, multiplied by a D-factor that averages the dark-matter column over the whole sky, attenuated by pair-production optical depth; a log-parabolic function models the inverse-Compton background of each source, and a $\chi^2$ fit with Wilks' theorem converts spectral agreement into 95% C.L. limits.

What would settle it

Recompute the bounds with the D-factor integrated only over the angular extent of each LHAASO source rather than over the entire sky; if the exclusion curves disappear or weaken drastically, the whole-sky averaging is the load-bearing assumption. Alternatively, search LHAASO maps for a residual isotropic ultra-high-energy gamma-ray component after subtracting known sources.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that point-like ultra-high-energy Galactic gamma-ray sources are sensitive probes of memory-burdened primordial black holes. For each chosen PBH mass and entropy index $k$, the paper finds the maximum $f_{\rm PBH}$ compatible with the measured spectra; the resulting 95% C.L. exclusion curves in the $M_{\rm PBH}$--$k$ plane (with $f_{\rm PBH}=1$) and in the $M_{\rm PBH}$--$f_{\rm PBH}$ plane (with $k=2.0$) show that the four LHAASO sources provide stronger constraints than previous diffuse gamma-ray, UHE gamma-ray, and high-energy neutrino bounds for $M_{\rm PBH}>10^5$ g, and the collected Crab data are the strongest of all. The paper thus establishes a new, tighter mass--abundance window for light PBHs as dark matter under the memory-burden scenario.

Load-bearing premise

The limits assume the PBH gamma-ray signal is spread over the whole sky, so the D-factor averages the dark-matter column over $\Delta\Omega=4\pi$; if the observed source spectra come from subtracting a smooth background, an isotropic PBH contribution would largely cancel and the exclusion limits would collapse.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the limits are right, memory-burdened PBHs with masses below about 1e5 grams cannot be all of the dark matter for k=2.0, narrowing the mass window reopened by the memory-burden effect.
  • Ultra-high-energy Galactic source spectra, not just diffuse backgrounds, become a standard tool for probing PBH dark matter in the 1e4 to 1e9 gram range.
  • The per-source differences in limits are small, but the Crab Nebula's multi-experiment energy coverage gives the most leverage, encouraging combined multi-instrument spectral fits for the other sources.
  • Future multi-messenger data, as the paper states, can push the bounds further into the currently allowed region.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The paper's D-factor averages the dark-matter column over the whole sky ($\Delta\Omega=4\pi$) while comparing with localized source spectra; if LHAASO spectra are produced by subtracting a smooth isotropic background, an isotropic PBH component could partially cancel, so the robustness of the limits to the background-subtraction procedure is worth testing.
  • The constraints scale strongly with the unknown entropy index $k$; independent determinations of $k$ from early-Universe observables would turn the exclusion lines into a direct test of the memory-burden mechanism.
  • The same analysis could be applied to the other LHAASO sources as their spectra are published, and to future ultra-high-energy observatories, potentially covering masses below 1e4 grams.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies memory-burdened primordial black holes (PBHs) as dark matter. Using the entropy-suppressed evaporation prescription of Refs. [13-17], the authors compute the gamma-ray flux from light PBHs and add it to a log-parabolic inverse-Compton (IC) template for four LHAASO Galactic sources (Crab Nebula, J2226+6057, J1908+0621, J1825-1326), plus a combined multi-experiment Crab dataset. From a chi-square fit they derive 95% C.L. exclusion limits in the (M_PBH, k) plane for f_PBH=1 and in the (M_PBH, f_PBH) plane for k=2, and they claim these Galactic-source limits are stronger than previous diffuse gamma-ray and neutrino constraints for M_PBH > 10^5 g.

Significance. If the calculation were correct, the paper would present a genuinely new and interesting probe of the memory-burden scenario, using the highest-energy Galactic gamma-ray data available. The manuscript has some methodological strengths: it makes use of the public codes BlackHawk and HDMSpectra for the photon spectra, it combines LHAASO data with several other experiments for the Crab, and it clearly states its model assumptions (NFW profile, memory-burden index k, PBH mass fraction f_PBH). However, the central comparison between a sky-averaged PBH flux and localized, background-subtracted source spectra is not physically valid as presented, so the derived limits are not supported by the data they are claimed to constrain.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. II, Eqs. (8)-(9); Sec. III, Eq. (11)] The PBH flux in Eq. (8) is evaluated with D(E_gamma, Delta-Omega) defined in Eq. (9) using Delta-Omega = 4 pi, i.e., the full-sky average of the line-of-sight dark-matter column. For a comparison with LHAASO spectra of localized sources, the correct quantity is the integral over the source ROI, integral_ROI dOmega ds rho_DM e^{-tau}, with no division by 4 pi and without replacing the ROI by the entire sky. Since the solid angle of a typical source ROI is of order 10^-3 sr or smaller, the all-sky averaged flux overestimates the PBH contribution to the measured source spectra by orders of magnitude. The limits in Figs. 2 and 3 are therefore not a supported consequence of the data as analyzed.
  2. [Sec. III, Eq. (11); Sec. II, Eq. (9)] The LHAASO source spectra used here are derived from background-subtracted measurements, as in the source data of Ref. [26]. The Delta-Omega = 4 pi averaged PBH flux is a nearly isotropic Galactic diffuse component, so it would largely cancel in the standard ON/OFF or template background subtraction used to extract source spectra. The paper does not specify the source ROIs, the background model, or any argument that the PBH component survives the subtraction; without this, the predicted spectra used in the chi-square fit do not correspond to the observable measured for these sources.
  3. [Sec. III, statistical test] The text states that limits are derived using Wilks' theorem 'under four degree of freedom.' For fixed M_PBH and k, the alternative hypothesis adds f_PBH to the three background parameters F0, a, b, so the relevant Delta-chi^2 for an upper limit on f_PBH has one degree of freedom, not four. If instead all four parameters are treated as of interest, that should be stated explicitly with a justification. The use of chi^2 with four degrees of freedom changes the reported 95% C.L. and makes the statistical meaning of the limits ambiguous.
  4. [Sec. II, Eq. (9); Sec. III, Eq. (10)] The treatment of gamma-ray attenuation is internally inconsistent. The PBH flux in Eq. (8) includes the factor e^{-tau} from Eq. (9), while the log-parabolic IC template in Eq. (10) is not attenuated. If the LHAASO data from Ref. [26] are observed fluxes, the IC component should also be attenuated; if the data have been corrected for absorption, the PBH component should not include e^{-tau}. This inconsistency is most severe at the highest energies, where the claimed limits are strongest.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. I, second paragraph] The source name 'LHAASO J226+6057' should be 'LHAASO J2226+6057' as used later in the paper.
  2. [Sec. II, Eqs. (5)-(6)] It is not specified whether M_PBH in S(M_PBH) and in the flux normalization is the initial PBH mass at the start of the memory-burden stage or the current mass; for PBHs that have not yet lost half their mass, the memory-burden suppression should not be applied, and this affects the low-mass boundary of the excluded region.
  3. [Fig. 3 and caption] There are typos in the caption: 'LHASSO spectrum' should be 'LHAASO spectrum', and 'settle down' should be 'set to'.
  4. [Sec. III, Eq. (12)] The energy-scale nuisance factors f_j for the Crab multi-experiment fit are listed, but the corresponding uncertainties are not given for all experiments (e.g., HESS), and it is unclear whether a single f_j is used for every dataset from each experiment; a more complete reference to the treatment in Ref. [38] would be helpful.
  5. [Sec. III, Eq. (11)] The chi-square expression treats all energy bins as independent and does not include systematic uncertainties for the LHAASO datasets; this should be stated, as it affects the numerical values of the limits.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the PBH constraints derive from external data and public evaporation codes, with no fitted parameter defined in terms of the target result.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. The PBH gamma-ray flux is computed from the memory-burden modified Hawking spectrum (Eqs. 5-7) using public codes BlackHawk and HDMSpectra, combined with an NFW-halo D-factor (Eqs. 8-9) and the LHAASO source spectra as external inputs. The log-parabolic IC background (Eq. 10) is fitted to the same data, but the PBH parameters f_PBH, M_PBH, and k are not defined in terms of that fit; they are scanned and constrained via the chi-square statistic in Eq. (11), with limits obtained from Wilks' theorem. No equation makes the final constraint equal to an input by construction, and no load-bearing premise rests solely on a self-citation. The choice of Delta-Omega = 4 pi in Eq. (9) is a questionable astrophysical modeling assumption for localized source regions, but it is a physics/correctness concern, not circularity. Self-citations in the reference list are background context and do not support the central constraint. Therefore no circular step is identified.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The analysis rests on the memory burden model and its parameterization, which are taken from prior literature, plus a specific halo profile and optical depth. The paper introduces no new particles or forces. The free parameters are the model index k, the abundance f_PBH, and background nuisance parameters. The most fragile modeling choice is the all-sky D-factor, which is not justified for comparison with localized source spectra.

free parameters (4)
  • k (memory burden entropy index) = scanned from 1 to 2.5
    Controls the suppression of evaporation after half mass is lost (Eq. 5). Not derived from first principles in this paper.
  • f_PBH (PBH dark matter fraction) = upper limit (e.g., <~1e-6 to 1)
    The parameter constrained by the fit; the target of the analysis.
  • log-parabolic background parameters F0, a, b = best-fit values per source
    Nuisance parameters describing the IC source spectra (Eq. 10).
  • energy scale nuisance f_j (Crab multi-experiment) = adopted 0.86 to 1.15
    From ref. [38] to account for inter-experiment energy-scale uncertainties.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Memory burden effect: after losing half its mass, a PBH's evaporation is suppressed by a power of its entropy
    Invoked in Section II, based on refs. [13-17]. This is the core premise that allows light PBHs to survive to the present.
  • ad hoc to paper Entropy suppression formula: dM/dt = (1/S^k) dM/dt_semiclassical
    Eq. (5). A phenomenological parameterization; k is free and not derived.
  • domain assumption NFW dark matter halo profile with given parameters
    Used for the D-factor integral (Eq. 9). Standard but not tested.
  • domain assumption Galactic source spectra are background-subtracted and the PBH signal is not removed
    Implied by the comparison in Section III. This is the load-bearing assumption that is likely false if LHAASO subtraction removes smooth diffuse emission.
  • domain assumption Optical depth values from LHAASO collaboration [26] apply to the source directions
    Adopted without independent calculation.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Probing Memory-Burdened Primordial Black Holes with Galactic Sources observed by LHAASO." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/L3WXAN4N

@misc{pith2026250519857,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Probing Memory-Burdened Primordial Black Holes with Galactic Sources observed by LHAASO},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/L3WXAN4N}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.19857}
}
abstract

The recently identified \textit{memory burden} effect has the potential to significantly decelerate the evaporation of black holes. Specifically, when approximately half of a black hole's initial mass has been radiated away, the evaporation process is halted. This mechanism allows very light primordial black holes (PBHs) with masses $m_{\rm PBH}<10^{15}$ g to persist until the present day and may contribute to the dark matter (DM) content of the universe. In this work, we focus on PBHs with masses $\lesssim 10^{9}$ g. Due to the memory burden effect, these PBHs emit high-energy gamma-rays, which in turn alter the corresponding observed energy spectra. To investigate the constraints on the masses and DM abundance of PBHs, we analyze data from four Galactic sources measured by the Large High Altitude Air Shower Observatory (LHAASO), including the Crab Nebula, LHAASO J2226+6057, LHAASO J1908+0621, and LHAASO J1825-1326. Our findings indicate that the ultra-high-energy gamma-ray spectra from these Galactic sources provide crucial probes for light PBHs, thereby significantly constraining their potential contribution to DM.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.19857 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. The best-fit spectra for the Crab Nebula, LHAASO J1825-1326, LHAASO J1908+0621, and LHAASO J2226+6057. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. The bounds at the 95% C.L. in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Black Hole Memory Burden and its Signatures in Gravitational Waves from Mergers

    gr-qc 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Swift memory burden shifts black-hole quasinormal-mode frequencies by an amount set by the memory-load parameter μ and critical exponent p, with μ able to exceed the progenitor's information content.

  2. Relativistic accretion and burdened primordial black holes

    astro-ph.CO 2025-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Combining relativistic accretion with memory-burdened evaporation widens the parameter space for primordial black holes as dark matter and changes dark matter and dark radiation emission predictions.

  3. New bounds on Memory Burdened Primordial Black Holes from Big Bang Nucleosynthesis

    astro-ph.CO 2025-06 reject novelty 4.0 of 10

    Memory-burdened primordial black holes lighter than 10^9 grams are newly constrained by Big Bang nucleosynthesis, with a residual unconstrained window around 1-100 grams for suppression index k=2.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

36 extracted references · 7 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    S. W. Hawking,Particle creation by black holes,Communications in Mathematical Physics43(Aug., 1975) 199–220

    work page 1975

  2. [2]

    Hawking,Gravitationally Collapsed Objects of Very Low Mass,Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society152 (04, 1971) 75–78

    S. Hawking,Gravitationally Collapsed Objects of Very Low Mass,Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society152 (04, 1971) 75–78

    work page 1971

  3. [3]

    Bambi, A

    C. Bambi, A. D. Dolgov and A. A. Petrov,Primordial black holes and the observed Galactic 511-keV line,Phys. Lett. B 670(2008) 174–178, [0801.2786]. [Erratum: Phys.Lett.B 681, 504–504 (2009)]

    arXiv 2008

  4. [4]

    DeRocco and P

    W. DeRocco and P. W. Graham,Constraining Primordial Black Hole Abundance with the Galactic 511 keV Line,Phys. Rev. Lett.123(2019) 251102, [1906.07740]

    arXiv 2019

  5. [5]

    Laha,Primordial Black Holes as a Dark Matter Candidate Are Severely Constrained by the Galactic Center 511 keVγ -Ray Line,Phys

    R. Laha,Primordial Black Holes as a Dark Matter Candidate Are Severely Constrained by the Galactic Center 511 keVγ -Ray Line,Phys. Rev. Lett.123(2019) 251101, [1906.09994]

    arXiv 2019

  6. [6]

    R. Laha, J. B. Mu˜ noz and T. R. Slatyer,INTEGRAL constraints on primordial black holes and particle dark matter, Physical Review D101(June, 2020) 123514, [2004.00627]

    arXiv 2020

  7. [7]

    Iguaz, P

    J. Iguaz, P. D. Serpico and T. Siegert,Isotropic X-ray bound on Primordial Black Hole Dark Matter,Physical Review D 103(May, 2021) 103025, [2104.03145]

    arXiv 2021

  8. [8]

    Chen, H.-H

    S. Chen, H.-H. Zhang and G. Long,Revisiting the constraints on primordial black hole abundance with the isotropic gamma ray background,Physical Review D105(Mar., 2022) 063008, [2112.15463]

    arXiv 2022

Show all 36 references
  1. [9]

    Tan, Y.-J

    X.-H. Tan, Y.-J. Yan, T. Qiu and J.-Q. Xia,Searching for the Signal of a Primordial Black Hole from CMB Lensing and γ-Ray Emissions,Astrophys. J. Lett.939(2022) L15, [2209.15222]

    2022 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Korwar and S

    M. Korwar and S. Profumo,Updated constraints on primordial black hole evaporation,Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2023(may, 2023) 054. 7

    2023

  3. [11]

    Tan and J.-q

    X.-h. Tan and J.-q. Xia,Revisiting bounds on primordial black hole as dark matter with X-ray background,JCAP09 (2024) 022, [2404.17119]

    2024 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Huang and Y.-F

    J.-Z. Huang and Y.-F. Zhou,Constraints on evaporating primordial black holes from the AMS-02 positron data,Phys. Rev. D111(2025) 083525, [2403.04987]

    2025 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Dvali,A Microscopic Model of Holography: Survival by the Burden of Memory,1810.02336

    G. Dvali,A Microscopic Model of Holography: Survival by the Burden of Memory,1810.02336

    arXiv

  6. [14]

    Dvali, L

    G. Dvali, L. Eisemann, M. Michel and S. Zell,Black hole metamorphosis and stabilization by memory burden,Phys. Rev. D102(2020) 103523, [2006.00011]

    2020 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Dvali, J

    G. Dvali, J. S. Valbuena-Berm´ udez and M. Zantedeschi,Memory burden effect in black holes and solitons: Implications for PBH,Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 056029, [2405.13117]

    2024 arXiv

  8. [16]

    M. R. Haque, S. Maity, D. Maity and Y. Mambrini,Quantum effects on the evaporation of PBHs: contributions to dark matter,JCAP07(2024) 002, [2404.16815]

    2024 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Dvali, O

    G. Dvali, O. Kaikov and J. S. V. Berm´ udez,How special are black holes? Correspondence with objects saturating unitarity bounds in generic theories,Phys. Rev. D105(2022) 056013, [2112.00551]

    2022 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Alexandre, G

    A. Alexandre, G. Dvali and E. Koutsangelas,New mass window for primordial black holes as dark matter from the memory burden effect,Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 036004, [2402.14069]

    2024 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Thoss, A

    V. Thoss, A. Burkert and K. Kohri,Breakdown of hawking evaporation opens new mass window for primordial black holes as dark matter candidate,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.532(2024) 451–459, [2402.17823]

    2024 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Chianese, A

    M. Chianese, A. Boccia, F. Iocco, G. Miele and N. Saviano,Light burden of memory: Constraining primordial black holes with high-energy neutrinos,Phys. Rev. D111(2025) 063036, [2410.07604]

    2025 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Dvali, M

    G. Dvali, M. Zantedeschi and S. Zell,Transitioning to Memory Burden: Detectable Small Primordial Black Holes as Dark Matter,2503.21740

    arXiv

  14. [22]

    Montefalcone, D

    G. Montefalcone, D. Hooper, K. Freese, C. Kelso, F. Kuhnel and P. Sandick,Does Memory Burden Open a New Mass Window for Primordial Black Holes as Dark Matter?,2503.21005

  15. [23]

    Liu, B.-Y

    T.-C. Liu, B.-Y. Zhu, Y.-F. Liang, X.-S. Hu and E.-W. Liang,Constraining the parameters of heavy dark matter and memory-burdened primordial black holes with DAMPE electron measurements,JHEAp47(2025) 100375, [2503.13192]

    2025 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Zantedeschi and L

    M. Zantedeschi and L. Visinelli,Ultralight Black Holes as Sources of High-Energy Particles,2410.07037

    arXiv

  17. [25]

    Ma et al.,Chapter 1 LHAASO Instruments and Detector technology *,Chin

    X.-H. Ma et al.,Chapter 1 LHAASO Instruments and Detector technology *,Chin. Phys. C46(2022) 030001. [26]LHAASOcollaboration, Z. Cao et al.,Ultrahigh-energy photons up to 1.4 petaelectronvolts from 12γ-ray Galactic sources,Nature594(2021) 33–36

    2022

  18. [27]

    Li, X.-J

    J. Li, X.-J. Bi, L.-Q. Gao, X. Huang, R.-M. Yao and P.-F. Yin,Constraints on axion-like particles from the observation of Galactic sources by the LHAASO*,Chin. Phys. C48(2024) 065107, [2401.01829]

    2024 arXiv

  19. [28]

    Arbey and J

    A. Arbey and J. Auffinger,BlackHawk: A public code for calculating the Hawking evaporation spectra of any black hole distribution,Eur. Phys. J. C79(2019) 693, [1905.04268]

    2019 arXiv

  20. [29]

    Arbey and J

    A. Arbey and J. Auffinger,Physics Beyond the Standard Model with BlackHawk v2.0,Eur. Phys. J. C81(2021) 910, [2108.02737]

    2021 arXiv

  21. [30]

    C. W. Bauer, N. L. Rodd and B. R. Webber,Dark matter spectra from the electroweak to the Planck scale,JHEP06 (2021) 121, [2007.15001]

    2021 arXiv

  22. [31]

    J. F. Navarro, C. S. Frenk and S. D. M. White,A universal density profile from hierarchical clustering,The Astrophysical Journal490(dec, 1997) 493

    1997

  23. [32]

    A. U. Abeysekara, A. Albert, R. Alfaro, C. Alvarez, J. D. ´Alvarez, J. R. A. Camacho et al.,Measurement of the crab nebula spectrum past 100 tev with hawc,The Astrophysical Journal881(aug, 2019) 134

    2019

  24. [33]

    Liu and X.-Y

    R.-Y. Liu and X.-Y. Wang,Origin of Galactic Sub-PeV Diffuse Gamma-Ray Emission: Constraints from High-energy Neutrino Observations,Astrophys. J. Lett.914(2021) L7, [2104.05609]

    2021 arXiv

  25. [34]

    Aharonian, A

    F. Aharonian, A. Akhperjanian, M. Beilicke, K. Bernl¨ ohr, H.-G. B¨ orst, H. Bojahr et al.,The crab nebula and pulsar between 500 gev and 80 tev: Observations with the hegra stereoscopic air cerenkov telescopes,The Astrophysical Journal 614(oct, 2004) 897. [35]MAGICcollaborati...

    2008 arXiv

  26. [36]

    Amenomori, X

    M. Amenomori, X. J. Bi, D. Chen, S. W. Cui, Danzengluobu, L. K. Ding et al.,Multi-tev gamma-ray observation from the crab nebula using the tibet-iii air shower array finely tuned by the cosmic ray moon ’s shadow,The Astrophysical Journal692(feb, 2009) 61. [37]H.E.S.S.collabora...

    2006 arXiv

  27. [38]

    X.-J. Bi, Y. Gao, J. Guo, N. Houston, T. Li, F. Xu et al.,Axion and dark photon limits from Crab Nebula high energy gamma-rays,Phys. Rev. D103(2021) 043018, [2002.01796]

    2021 arXiv

  28. [39]

    Chianese,High-energy gamma-ray emission from memory-burdened primordial black holes,2504.03838

    M. Chianese,High-energy gamma-ray emission from memory-burdened primordial black holes,2504.03838

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.