Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 141 references

Studying the multi-phase interstellar medium in the Large Magellanic Cloud with SRG/eROSITA -- I. Analysis of diffuse X-ray emission

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A full-galaxy spectral census of the Large Magellanic Cloud's hot interstellar gas, based on eROSITA all-sky survey data, yields a diffuse X-ray luminosity of $1.9\times10^{38}\,\mathrm{erg\,s^{-1}}$ and a thermal energy around…

desk verdict A solid first eROSITA census of the LMC's diffuse hot ISM; fix the abstract's thermal-energy inconsistency and publish. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.23698 v1 pith:RR4XEHOA submitted 2025-06-30 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.GA

Martin G. F. Mayer , Manami Sasaki , Frank Haberl , Kisetsu Tsuge , Yasuo Fukui , Chandreyee Maitra , Miroslav D. Filipovic , Zachary J. Smeaton
show 4 more authors
Lister Staveley-Smith Baerbel Koribalski Sean Points Patrick Kavanagh
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HEastro-ph.GA
keywords LargeMagellanicClouddiffuseX-rayemissionhotinterstellarmediummulti-phaseISMeROSITAall-skysurveyspatiallyresolvedspectroscopyalpha-elementabundancesspur
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

This paper establishes a full census of the hot, X-ray-emitting phase of the interstellar medium in the Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC) using the cumulative eROSITA all-sky survey. After masking point sources, the authors analyse 175 spatially resolved regions and fit each spectrum with an absorbed two-temperature plasma model, producing maps of temperature, density, pressure, and light-element abundances. They find a total diffuse X-ray luminosity of $1.9\times10^{38}\,\mathrm{erg\,s^{-1}}$ in the $0.2$-$5.0\,\mathrm{keV}$ band, a typical electron density of about $5\times10^{-3}\,\mathrm{cm^{-3}}$, a mean temperature near $0.25\,\mathrm{keV}$, and a thermal energy around $5\times10^{54}\,\mathrm{erg}$. If these numbers are right, they give the most complete view to date of how much hot gas the LMC holds, where it is heated, and how it relates to the galaxy's cold gas and recent star formation.

What carries the argument

The engine of the analysis is spatially resolved spectroscopy of 175 regions produced by adaptive Voronoi tessellation (splitting the field into equal-signal patches), each spectrum fitted in $0.2$-$8.5\,\mathrm{keV}$ with a model of absorbed two-temperature collisional-ionization-equilibrium plasma plus a power-law component and fixed instrumental and X-ray background templates. Emission measures from the two components are converted to electron densities, pressures, masses, and energies using Equations (3)-(7) of the paper, which assume pressure balance between the components and scale explicitly with the line-of-sight depth $D_{\rm LoS}$ and volume filling factor $f$, evaluated at $D_{\rm LoS}=3\,\mathrm{kpc}$, $f=1$. Alternative spectral models (a continuous log-normal temperature distribution, a non-equilibrium-ionization shock model, and a charge-exchange component) are used to test how far the conclusions depend on the two-temperature choice.

What would settle it

Measure the product $D_{\rm LoS}f$ directly, for example by fitting the X-ray shadows of background active galactic nuclei behind the LMC or by matching the observed emission-measure map with simulations of a clumpy hot phase; if the true value differs from $3\,\mathrm{kpc}$, then the reported density $\sim5\times10^{-3}\,\mathrm{cm^{-3}}$, pressure range $10^4$-$10^5\,\mathrm{K\,cm^{-3}}$, hot-gas mass $\sim6\times10^6\,M_\odot$, and thermal energy $\sim5\times10^{54}\,\mathrm{erg}$ would all shift by the corresponding power of $D_{\rm LoS}f$.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the diffuse X-ray emission of the LMC is dominated by two thermal plasma components in collisional ionization equilibrium, present across most of the galaxy rather than only in 30 Doradus, and that this gas can be characterized globally and spatially. Removing compact sources and integrating over the galaxy gives an unabsorbed luminosity $L=1.9\times10^{38}\,\mathrm{erg\,s^{-1}}$ in the $0.2$-$5.0\,\mathrm{keV}$ band; the corresponding hot-gas mass is about $6.3\times10^{6}\,M_\odot$ and the thermal energy is about $8.8\times10^{54}\,\mathrm{erg}$, both scaling as $(D_{\rm LoS}f/3\,\mathrm{kpc})^{1/2}$. The maps show the hottest, densest, and most pressurized plasma in the southeast around 30 Dor and the X-ray spur, with $P/k$ reaching about $10^5\,\mathrm{K\,cm^{-3}}$, while the north and east show strong $\alpha$-enhancement in oxygen, neon, and magnesium and the spur shows a local $\alpha$ deficit. The analysis also argues that radiative cooling is at least a factor of twenty slower than supernova heating, requiring additional energy-loss channels, and it tentatively identifies nonthermal X-ray synchrotron emission in the supergiant shell LMC 2, though stray light from LMC X-1 cannot be excluded.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that the hot gas fills a line-of-sight depth of 3 kpc completely; if that gas is clumpy or thinner, every derived density, pressure, mass, and energy shifts, and the abundance maps also assume iron is uniformly half-solar.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Two hot plasma components are inferred over most of the LMC, so the hot phase is not confined to 30 Dor and likely has a large volume filling factor.
  • The diffuse luminosity is about an order of magnitude below predictions from the LMC's star-formation rate, meaning unresolved supernova remnants and point sources can dominate integrated X-ray fluxes of nearby galaxies.
  • The pressure peak in the X-ray spur, without a massive-star counterpart, supports tidally driven gas collisions as the energy source there.
  • The heating timescale from supernovae is about a few million years, while radiative cooling is slower by more than a factor of twenty, so adiabatic expansion and outflows are required to balance the hot-gas energy budget.
  • Nonthermal X-ray emission is securely detected only in 30 Dor and 30 Dor C; a tentative detection in SGS LMC 2 needs confirmation.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: because the paper fixes $D_{\rm LoS}f=3\,\mathrm{kpc}$, the quoted density and pressure values are really lower limits if the true emitting gas is clumpy, while the mass and thermal energy become upper limits; the global numbers sit on an unquantified systematic scale.
  • Editorial inference: the O vii centroid measurement, which suggests charge exchange could contribute about a quarter of the O vii flux, predicts a specific forbidden-to-resonance line ratio that a future microcalorimeter spectrum of the LMC could test directly.
  • Editorial inference: the fixed iron abundance at half solar converts the oxygen, neon, and magnesium maps into statements about relative $\alpha$/Fe ratios; an independent iron map would be needed to confirm that the southeast abundance gradient is chemical rather than a thermal artifact.
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. This paper presents a spatially resolved spectral analysis of diffuse X-ray emission from the Large Magellanic Cloud using the SRG/eROSITA all-sky survey (eRASS:5). The authors construct multi-band images, define 175 Voronoi regions, and fit each spectrum with a two-temperature thermal plasma model plus a power-law component, with careful treatment of instrumental and astrophysical backgrounds. They produce maps of temperature, density, pressure, absorption column, and elemental abundances, and report a total intrinsic luminosity of the hot ISM phase of 1.9e38 erg/s (0.2-5.0 keV), typical densities of about 5e-3 cm^-3, a hot gas mass of about 6e6 M_sun, and a thermal energy content of about 5-9e54 erg. The discussion interprets the X-ray spur, the alpha-element enrichment gradient, and tentative nonthermal emission in terms of tidal interactions, massive-star feedback, and particle acceleration.

Significance. If the quantitative results are correct, this work provides the most complete census of the hot ISM phase in the LMC, improving on ROSAT and XMM-Newton with full-disk coverage and consistent spectral modeling. The paper's strengths include the careful three-template background treatment, explicit tests of alternative thermal models (log-normal temperature distribution, non-equilibrium ionization, charge exchange), and the use of MCMC with documented priors. The qualitative findings—smooth soft X-ray distribution, hot/cold anticorrelation, the X-ray spur's high pressure and lower alpha-element abundances, and the tentative LMC 2 nonthermal signal—are valuable and likely robust to the quantitative issues raised below. However, internal inconsistencies in the reported luminosity and thermal energy, and the unpropagated (D_LoS f) scaling, currently prevent the headline numbers from being used as published.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 3.2.2] The quoted flux F = 6.4e-10 erg cm^-2 s^-1 and average surface brightness Sigma = 8.3e-15 erg cm^-2 s^-1 arcmin^-2 are mutually consistent, but at d = 50 kpc they imply L ~ 1.9e36 erg s^-1, not the reported L = 1.9e38 erg s^-1 (a factor 100 error). Since the total luminosity is a central result repeated in the abstract and summary, the values of F, Sigma, and L must be brought into mutual consistency.
  2. [Abstract vs. Eq. (7) and Summary] The abstract reports a thermal energy 'around 5e54 erg', while Eq. (7) in Sec. 4.1.1 gives E_hot = 8.8 (D_LoS f / 3 kpc)^(1/2) x 10^54 erg and the Summary states 9e54 erg. These three numbers are mutually inconsistent; the source of the 5e54 value should be identified and corrected, or all values should be quoted consistently.
  3. [Eqs. (4)-(7), Sec. 4.1.1] All derived gas properties (density, mass, pressure, energy) scale as (D_LoS f)^(+/-1/2) under the assumptions D_LoS = 3 kpc and f = 1, but the paper does not propagate any uncertainty on the D_LoS f product. This is not a minor caveat: the same section invokes clumping (f < 1) as a possible resolution of the cooling-time/heating-time discrepancy, which would change the headline energy by factors of several (e.g., f = 0.1 lowers E_hot to about 2.8e54 erg). The abstract and summary should either quote the scaling explicitly or provide a plausible range for D_LoS f.
  4. [Secs. 3.2.1 and 4.3.1] The fixed iron abundance Fe/H = 0.5 is a global assumption, and the reported O/H, Ne/H, and Mg/H maps are relative to it. Given that the alpha-element abundance gradient is one of the main science results, the paper should test the sensitivity of the abundance maps to Fe/H (e.g., by freeing Fe/H in a subset of regions or varying it over the plausible LMC range) and report the induced systematic error.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract contains misspellings ('compoistion' and 'disitribution') that should be corrected.
  2. [Table 1] The table notes refer to 'spetra' and the column header 'log Sigma_Gamma' is not introduced; please define all symbols in the caption.
  3. [Fig. 3] Several color-bar captions appear to run values together (e.g., '1.8e-2 1.4e-3 7.7e-3 3.3e-3'); these should be separated and the scaling definition made explicit.
  4. [Sec. 4.1.1] The heating timescale estimate of about 1.8 Myr uses an assumed supernova rate of 5e-3 yr^-1; the authors should state whether this rate is for all supernovae or core-collapse only, and how its uncertainty is obtained.
  5. [Sec. 4.5] The comparison of the photon index with Sasaki et al. (2022) and Cheng et al. (2021) would benefit from a statement of the energy band used in each case, since Gamma can depend on the fitted range.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: headline quantities are direct transformations of fitted spectral parameters under openly stated geometric assumptions; the abstract's thermal-energy value conflicts with Eq. 7 but that is an internal inconsistency, not a circular derivation.

full rationale

This is an observational measurement paper, not a first-principles derivation, and no claimed result reduces to its own input by construction. The luminosity is computed as 4πd^2F from the integrated observed flux and the adopted LMC distance. Density, mass, pressure, and thermal energy are algebraic re-expressions of fitted emission measures, temperatures, and the assumed line-of-sight depth D_LoS and filling factor f, with the scaling stated explicitly in Eqs. 3-7 (e.g., E_hot = 8.8 (D_LoS f / 3 kpc)^(1/2) × 10^54 erg). The D_LoS = 3 kpc and f = 1 assumptions are stated and the results are transparently parametrized by that product, so no fitted parameter is silently renamed as a prediction. The paper also actively tests alternative spectral models (log-normal temperature distribution, NEI, charge exchange) rather than smuggling in an ansatz by citation. Self-citations to Sasaki et al. (2022) and Mayer et al. (2022, 2023) support the adopted modeling approach and the D_LoS value, but the same assumptions are independently motivated by external geometric references (van der Marel et al. 2002; Subramanian & Subramaniam 2009) and, more importantly, the derived quantities are not claimed to be predicted by those citations. The abstract's 'thermal energy to around 5×10^54 erg' is inconsistent with Eq. 7's 8.8×10^54 erg and the Summary's 9×10^54 erg, which is a genuine internal-consistency/correctness problem worth correcting, but it is not circularity. Similarly, the lack of a propagated systematic uncertainty on D_LoS f is a robustness limitation, not a circular step. No load-bearing circular step was found.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The analysis depends on standard astrophysical assumptions (absorption models, background composition, distance) and on a few domain-specific modeling choices (two-temperature CIE plasma, pressure equilibrium, fixed Fe/H, assumed line-of-sight depth and filling factor). No new physical entities are postulated. The main systematic risk lies in the geometric assumptions (D_LoS, f) and the fixed iron abundance, which scale the derived density, pressure, mass, and energy.

free parameters (2)
  • D_LoS f
    Line-of-sight depth times volume filling factor of the hot gas, assumed to be 3 kpc (D_LoS = 3 kpc, f = 1) to convert emission measures to densities, pressures, and energies (Eqs. 3-7). This is a scaling assumption, not fitted to the data, but it directly affects all global energetics.
  • Fe/H = 0.5 (solar)
    Iron abundance fixed to 0.5 solar relative to Wilms et al. (2000) ISM abundances, to break degeneracy between metallicity and normalization. If incorrect, derived alpha-element abundances and temperatures could be biased. This is a stated modeling choice, not a fitted parameter.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The diffuse X-ray emission of the LMC is predominantly thermal and described by two plasma components in collisional ionization equilibrium.
    Used in the main spectral fits (Sect. 3.2.1). Tested against a log-normal temperature distribution (Sect. 4.1.2) and NEI (Sect. 4.1.3), which yield similar fits but different quantitative results.
  • domain assumption The two plasma components are in pressure equilibrium (n2 = kT1/kT2 * n1, Eq. 1).
    Used to derive total density from the two emission measures. If the phases are not in equilibrium, derived densities and pressures are biased.
  • domain assumption Plasma density is constant along the line of sight within each Voronoi region.
    Used to convert emission measure to density (Eq. 2). Clumping would change the derived density for a given emission measure.
  • standard math The foreground and intrinsic absorption models (TBabs, TBvarabs) use Wilms et al. (2000) abundances with LMC metallicity of half solar.
    Standard X-ray absorption models, widely used in spectral fitting of extragalactic sources.
  • domain assumption The X-ray background is represented by a linear combination of templates from three off-source regions, with normalization constrained within a factor of two.
    Approximation to a spatially varying background. If the background is misrepresented, source parameters will shift, though the authors propagate some of this uncertainty in the normalization.
  • domain assumption Distance to the LMC is 50 kpc.
    Used to convert flux to luminosity and for physical scales. The distance is well measured from eclipsing binaries (Pietrzynski et al. 2019).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Studying the multi-phase interstellar medium in the Large Magellanic Cloud with SRG/eROSITA -- I. Analysis of diffuse X-ray emission." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RR4XEHOA

@misc{pith2026250623698,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Studying the multi-phase interstellar medium in the Large Magellanic Cloud with SRG/eROSITA -- I. Analysis of diffuse X-ray emission},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RR4XEHOA}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.23698}
}
abstract

The Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC), being a nearby and actively star-forming satellite galaxy of the Milky Way, is an ideal site to observe the multi-phase interstellar medium (ISM) of a galaxy across the electromagnetic spectrum. We aim to exploit the available SRG/eROSITA all-sky survey data to study the distribution, composition and properties of the diffuse X-ray emitting hot gas in the LMC. We construct multi-band X-ray images of the LMC, reflecting the morphology and temperatures of the diffuse hot gas. By performing spatially resolved X-ray spectroscopy of 175 regions, we constrain the distribution, physical state, and composition of the hot ISM phase throughout the LMC. We combine our constraints with multiwavelength data to obtain a comprehensive view of the different ISM phases. We measure a total X-ray luminosity of the hot ISM phase of $1.9\times10^{38}\,\mathrm{erg\,s^{-1}}$ ($0.2-5.0\,\mathrm{keV}$ band), and constrain its thermal energy to around $5\times10^{54}\,\mathrm{erg}$. The typical density and temperature of the X-ray emitting plasma are around $5\times10^{-3}\,\mathrm{cm^{-3}}$ and $0.25\,\mathrm{keV}$, respectively, with both exhibiting broad peaks in the southeast of the LMC. The observed degree of X-ray absorption correlates strongly with the distribution of foreground HI gas, whereas a spatial anticorrelation between the hot and cold ISM phases is visible on sub-kpc scales within the disk. The abundances of light metals show a strong gradient throughout the LMC, with the north and east exhibiting a strong $\alpha$-enhancement, as expected from observed massive stellar populations there. In contrast, the enigmatic ``X-ray spur'' exhibits a local deficit in $\alpha$-elements, and a peak in hot-gas pressure at $P/k\sim10^5\,\mathrm{K\,cm^{-3}}$, consistent with a dominant energy input through tidally driven gas collisions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.23698 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Exposure-corrected three-band false-color images of the LMC displayed in a square-root brightness scale. The left panel displays the exposure-corrected image without any masking of compact sources, smoothed with a Gaussian kernel of 15′′ size. The right panel displays the adaptively smoothed image with point-like and compact sources removed, and the resulting holes filled. tunity to study the diffuse X-ray emitting … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Map of important features and regions. We show the X-ray im￾age of the LMC, overlaid with smoothed intensity contours (dark blue) and cyan markers indicating bright compact features: LMC X-1 (plus), SNRs N63A (star), N49 (cross), N132D (triangle), and H ii region N11 (diamond). The white lines mark important extended regions, which are used for spectral extraction in Sect. 3.2: X-ray spur (A), SGS LMC 2 (B), 30 Dor … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Maps of physical parameters derived from spectral fits to diffuse emission in the LMC. In each panel, the color map reflects the median parameter value as mapped in the respective color bar on top, while the typical (i.e., median) error is given in the upper left corner. The displayed parameters are absorption column density NH, mean temperature kTmean, electron density ¯n tot e , emission measure per unit area EM/Ω… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (11 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Example spectra from selected regions throughout the LMC. The two panels display the spectra of the different regions in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Multiwavelength view of the LMC. Each panel displays the emission in the region of the LMC in a different energy range. This includes the GLEAM low-frequency radio continuum (top left), ATCA and Parkes H i line emission (top center), far- to mid-infrared (top right), n…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Distribution of thermal pressure P/k, energy density ϵ, and cooling timescale tcool across the LMC, derived from the physical parameters displayed in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Parameter maps from spectral fitting, assuming a log-normal temperature distribution. The temperature kT corresponds to an emission￾weighted mean temperature, whereas σkT describes the characteristic width of the temperature distribution in natural logarithmic scale. A…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Constraints on NEI in the hot plasma component. The top panel shows the joint 1σ-contours of the density ne and ionization timescale τNEI inferred for the hot plasma component in each region. The dashed gray lines correspond to constant shock age ts , and are logarithm…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Centroid determination of O vii (top) and O viii (bottom) lines. In both panels, we display the probability distribution functions for the centroid energy of all regions where both lines were detected with at least 10σ significance. The vertical black lines mark the me…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Multiwavelength view of the region of SGS 17 (Kim et al. 1999). This figure is as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Multiwavelength view of the X-ray spur. This figure is as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Filaments in a 30′ -diameter box south of LMC X-1 in the in￾termediate X-ray band 0.7 − 1.1 keV. We show an exposure-corrected image, smoothed with a 15′′ Gaussian kernel. The blue ellipses high￾light the approximate size and orientation of the identified structures. …
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Composite false-color view of the eastern part of SGS LMC 2, showing Hα line emission (red), ASKAP 888 MHz radio continuum emission (green), and 1.1 − 2.3 keV diffuse X-ray emission (blue). centered on LMC X-1. We fitted this spectrum, fixing the col￾umn density to th…
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Comparison of measured nonthermal surface brightness in the 1.0−5.0 keV band (as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_14.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

141 extracted references · 58 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    & Kravtsov, A

    Agertz, O. & Kravtsov, A. V . 2015, ApJ, 804, 18

    2015

  2. [2]

    Arnaud, K. A. 1996, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, V ol. 101, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems V , ed. G. H. Jacoby & J. Barnes, 17 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., SipHocz, B. M., et al. 2018, aj, 156, 123 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33

    1996

  3. [3]

    2018, ApJ, 864, 12

    Babazaki, Y ., Mitsuishi, I., Matsumoto, H., et al. 2018, ApJ, 864, 12

    2018

  4. [4]

    2004, ApJ, 602, 257

    Bamba, A., Ueno, M., Nakajima, H., & Koyama, K. 2004, ApJ, 602, 257

    2004

  5. [5]

    T., Watkins, E

    Barnes, A. T., Watkins, E. J., Meidt, S. E., et al. 2023, ApJ, 944, L22

    2023

  6. [6]

    P., Griffiths, R

    Behar, E., Rasmussen, A. P., Griffiths, R. G., et al. 2001, A&A, 365, L242

    2001

  7. [7]

    & Chiba, M

    Bekki, K. & Chiba, M. 2007, MNRAS, 381, L16

    2007

  8. [8]

    M., Motch, C., Beuermann, K., et al

    Bonnet-Bidaud, J. M., Motch, C., Beuermann, K., et al. 1989, A&A, 213, 97

    1989

Show all 141 references
  1. [9]

    G., Chu, Y .-H., & Gruendl, R

    Book, L. G., Chu, Y .-H., & Gruendl, R. A. 2008, ApJS, 175, 165

    2008

  2. [10]

    J., Lyerly, W

    Borkowski, K. J., Lyerly, W. J., & Reynolds, S. P. 2001, ApJ, 548, 820

    2001

  3. [11]

    M., Filipovi´c, M

    Bozzetto, L. M., Filipovi´c, M. D., Vukoti´c, B., et al. 2017, ApJS, 230, 2 10 http://www.astropy.org

    2017

  4. [12]

    2022, A&A, 661, A1

    Brunner, H., Liu, T., Lamer, G., et al. 2022, A&A, 661, A1

    2022

  5. [13]

    2023, A&A, 673, A45

    Camilloni, F., Becker, W., Predehl, P., et al. 2023, A&A, 673, A45

    2023

  6. [14]

    & Copin, Y

    Cappellari, M. & Copin, Y . 2003, MNRAS, 342, 345

    2003

  7. [15]

    D., & Lim, S

    Cheng, Y ., Wang, Q. D., & Lim, S. 2021, MNRAS, 504, 1627

    2021

  8. [16]

    M., Lyskova, N., & Sunyaev, R

    Churazov, E., Khabibullin, I., Bykov, A. M., Lyskova, N., & Sunyaev, R. 2023, A&A, 670, A156

    2023

  9. [17]

    M., Khabibullin, I

    Churazov, E. M., Khabibullin, I. I., Bykov, A. M., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 507, 971

    2021

  10. [18]

    Cioni, M. R. L., Clementini, G., Girardi, L., et al. 2011, A&A, 527, A116

    2011

  11. [19]

    Cox, D. P. 2005, ARA&A, 43, 337

    2005

  12. [20]

    Cox, D. P. & Smith, B. W. 1974, ApJ, 189, L105

    1974

  13. [21]

    A., Caballero-Nieves, S

    Crowther, P. A., Caballero-Nieves, S. M., Bostroem, K. A., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 458, 624

    2016

  14. [22]

    A., Schnurr, O., Hirschi, R., et al

    Crowther, P. A., Schnurr, O., Hirschi, R., et al. 2010, MNRAS, 408, 731 de Avillez, M. A. & Breitschwerdt, D. 2012, ApJ, 756, L3 de Luca, A. 2008, in American Institute of Physics Conference Series, V ol. 983, 40 Years of Pulsars: Millisecond Pulsars, Magnetars and More, ed. C...

    2010

  15. [23]

    2001, A&A, 365, L202

    Dennerl, K., Haberl, F., Aschenbach, B., et al. 2001, A&A, 365, L202

    2001

  16. [24]

    Dickey, J. M. & Lockman, F. J. 1990, ARA&A, 28, 215

    1990

  17. [25]

    & Statler, T

    Diehl, S. & Statler, T. S. 2006, MNRAS, 368, 497

    2006

  18. [26]

    Falle, S. A. E. G. 1981, MNRAS, 195, 1011 Ferrière, K. M. 2001, Reviews of Modern Physics, 73, 1031

    1981

  19. [27]

    Q., Staveley-Smith, L., Hurley-Walker, N., et al

    For, B. Q., Staveley-Smith, L., Hurley-Walker, N., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 480, 2743

    2018

  20. [28]

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

    Foreman-Mackey, D., Hogg, D. W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J. 2013, PASP, 125, 306

    2013

  21. [29]

    R., Ji, L., Smith, R

    Foster, A. R., Ji, L., Smith, R. K., & Brickhouse, N. S. 2012, ApJ, 756, 128

    2012

  22. [30]

    & Noguchi, M

    Fujimoto, M. & Noguchi, M. 1990, PASJ, 42, 505

    1990

  23. [31]

    2021, PASJ, 73, S1

    Fukui, Y ., Habe, A., Inoue, T., Enokiya, R., & Tachihara, K. 2021, PASJ, 73, S1

    2021

  24. [32]

    2017, PASJ, 69, L5 Gaia Collaboration, Helmi, A., van Leeuwen, F., et al

    Fukui, Y ., Tsuge, K., Sano, H., et al. 2017, PASJ, 69, L5 Gaia Collaboration, Helmi, A., van Leeuwen, F., et al. 2018, A&A, 616, A12

    2017

  25. [33]

    Gardiner, L. T. & Noguchi, M. 1996, MNRAS, 278, 191

    1996

  26. [34]

    2017, MNRAS, 466, 1903

    Gatto, A., Walch, S., Naab, T., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 466, 1903

    2017

  27. [35]

    2016, MNRAS, 456, 3432

    Girichidis, P., Walch, S., Naab, T., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 456, 3432

    2016

  28. [36]

    Green, D. A. 2011, Bulletin of the Astronomical Society of India, 39, 289

    2011

  29. [37]

    2021, AJ, 161, 57 H

    Gulick, H., Kaaret, P., Zajczyk, A., et al. 2021, AJ, 161, 57 H. E. S. S. Collaboration, Abramowski, A., Aharonian, F., et al. 2015, Science, 347, 406

    2021

  30. [38]

    2022, A&A, 661, A25

    Haberl, F., Maitra, C., Carpano, S., et al. 2022, A&A, 661, A25

    2022

  31. [39]

    R., Millman, K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357–362

    2020

  32. [40]

    & Zaritsky, D

    Harris, J. & Zaritsky, D. 2009, AJ, 138, 1243

    2009

  33. [41]

    2022, MNRAS, 510, 11

    Hassani, H., Tabatabaei, F., Hughes, A., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 510, 11

    2022

  34. [42]

    F., Quataert, E., & Murray, N

    Hopkins, P. F., Quataert, E., & Murray, N. 2012, MNRAS, 421, 3522

    2012

  35. [43]

    W., Bunton, J

    Hotan, A. W., Bunton, J. D., Chippendale, A. P., et al. 2021, PASA, 38, e009

    2021

  36. [44]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science & Engineering, 9, 90

    2007

  37. [45]

    R., Hancock, P

    Hurley-Walker, N., Callingham, J. R., Hancock, P. J., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 464, 1146

    2017

  38. [46]

    1999, ApJS, 125, 439

    Iwamoto, K., Brachwitz, F., Nomoto, K., et al. 1999, ApJS, 125, 439

    1999

  39. [47]

    R., Mac Low, M.-M., & Bryan, G

    Joung, M. R., Mac Low, M.-M., & Bryan, G. L. 2009, ApJ, 704, 137

    2009

  40. [48]

    P., Besla, G., Anderson, J., & Alcock, C

    Kallivayalil, N., van der Marel, R. P., Besla, G., Anderson, J., & Alcock, C. 2013, ApJ, 764, 161

    2013

  41. [49]

    J., Vink, J., Sasaki, M., et al

    Kavanagh, P. J., Vink, J., Sasaki, M., et al. 2019, A&A, 621, A138

    2019

  42. [50]

    & Chu, Y .-H

    Kennicutt, Robert C., J. & Chu, Y .-H. 1988, AJ, 95, 720

    1988

  43. [51]

    A., Staveley-Smith, L., & Bessell, M

    Kim, S., Dopita, M. A., Staveley-Smith, L., & Bessell, M. S. 1999, AJ, 118, 2797

    1999

  44. [52]

    A., et al

    Kim, S., Staveley-Smith, L., Dopita, M. A., et al. 2003, ApJS, 148, 473

    2003

  45. [53]

    R., Sasaki, M., Fukui, Y ., et al

    Knies, J. R., Sasaki, M., Fukui, Y ., et al. 2021, A&A, 648, A90

    2021

  46. [54]

    J., Brandenburg, A., Shukurov, A., Tuominen, I., & Nordlund, Å

    Korpi, M. J., Brandenburg, A., Shukurov, A., Tuominen, I., & Nordlund, Å. 1999, ApJ, 514, L99

    1999

  47. [55]

    & Ostriker, E

    Koyama, H. & Ostriker, E. C. 2009, ApJ, 693, 1346

    2009

  48. [56]

    2013, A&A, 550, A49

    Krause, M., Fierlinger, K., Diehl, R., et al. 2013, A&A, 550, A49

    2013

  49. [57]

    Kuntz, K. D. & Snowden, S. L. 2001, ApJ, 554, 684

    2001

  50. [58]

    2004, A&A, 422, 391

    Lallement, R. 2004, A&A, 422, 391

    2004

  51. [59]

    C., Sandstrom, K

    Lee, J. C., Sandstrom, K. M., Leroy, A. K., et al. 2023, ApJ, 944, L17

    2023

  52. [60]

    2024, A&A, 688, A85

    Locatelli, N., Ponti, G., Merloni, A., et al. 2024, A&A, 688, A85

    2024

  53. [61]

    A., Grefenstette, B

    Lopez, L. A., Grefenstette, B. W., Auchettl, K., Madsen, K. K., & Castro, D. 2020, ApJ, 893, 144

    2020

  54. [62]

    A., Krumholz, M

    Lopez, L. A., Krumholz, M. R., Bolatto, A. D., et al. 2014, ApJ, 795, 121

    2014

  55. [63]

    & Rohlfs, K

    Luks, T. & Rohlfs, K. 1992, A&A, 263, 41

    1992

  56. [64]

    J., et al

    Maggi, P., Haberl, F., Kavanagh, P. J., et al. 2016, A&A, 585, A162

    2016

  57. [65]

    2023, A&A, 669, A30

    Maitra, C., Kaltenbrunner, D., Haberl, F., et al. 2023, A&A, 669, A30

    2023

  58. [66]

    J., Hollenbach, D., et al

    Malhotra, S., Kaufman, M. J., Hollenbach, D., et al. 2001, ApJ, 561, 766

    2001

  59. [67]

    A., McClure-Griffiths, N

    Mao, S. A., McClure-Griffiths, N. M., Gaensler, B. M., et al. 2012, ApJ, 759, 25

    2012

  60. [68]

    & Badenes, C

    Maoz, D. & Badenes, C. 2010, MNRAS, 407, 1314

    2010

  61. [69]

    D., & Swift, C

    Mark, H., Price, R., Rodrigues, R., Seward, F. D., & Swift, C. D. 1969, ApJ, 155, L143

    1969

  62. [70]

    S., Cleary, M

    Mathewson, D. S., Cleary, M. N., & Murray, J. D. 1974, ApJ, 190, 291 Article number, page 21 of 22 A&A proofs: manuscript no. main

    1974

  63. [71]

    Mayer, M. G. F., Becker, W., Predehl, P., & Sasaki, M. 2023, A&A, 676, A68

    2023

  64. [72]

    Mayer, M. G. F., Becker, W., Predehl, P., Sasaki, M., & Freyberg, M. 2022, A&A, 661, A31

    2022

  65. [73]

    McKee, C. F. & Ostriker, J. P. 1977, ApJ, 218, 148

    1977

  66. [74]

    1980, MNRAS, 192, 365

    Meaburn, J. 1980, MNRAS, 192, 365

    1980

  67. [75]

    2010, A&A, 518, L71

    Meixner, M., Galliano, F., Hony, S., et al. 2010, A&A, 518, L71

    2010

  68. [76]

    D., Indebetouw, R., et al

    Meixner, M., Gordon, K. D., Indebetouw, R., et al. 2006, AJ, 132, 2268

    2006

  69. [77]

    2013, AJ, 146, 62

    Meixner, M., Panuzzo, P., Roman-Duval, J., et al. 2013, AJ, 146, 62

    2013

  70. [78]

    2024, A&A, 682, A34

    Merloni, A., Lamer, G., Liu, T., et al. 2024, A&A, 682, A34

    2024

  71. [79]

    2012, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1209.3114

    Merloni, A., Predehl, P., Becker, W., et al. 2012, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1209.3114

    2012 arXiv

  72. [80]

    & Schrijver, J

    Mewe, R. & Schrijver, J. 1978, A&A, 65, 99

    1978

  73. [81]

    2012, MNRAS, 426, 1870

    Mineo, S., Gilfanov, M., & Sunyaev, R. 2012, MNRAS, 426, 1870

    2012

  74. [82]

    Murray, N., Ménard, B., & Thompson, T. A. 2011, ApJ, 735, 66

    2011

  75. [83]

    & Ostriker, J

    Naab, T. & Ostriker, J. P. 2017, ARA&A, 55, 59

    2017

  76. [84]

    2019, MNRAS, 490, 3234

    Nelson, D., Pillepich, A., Springel, V ., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 490, 3234

    2019

  77. [85]

    A., Wilms, J., Heindl, W

    Nowak, M. A., Wilms, J., Heindl, W. A., et al. 2001, MNRAS, 320, 316

    2001

  78. [86]

    2022, ApJ, 928, 177

    Oh, S.-H., Kim, S., For, B.-Q., & Staveley-Smith, L. 2022, ApJ, 928, 177

    2022

  79. [87]

    Olsen, K. A. G., Zaritsky, D., Blum, R. D., Boyer, M. L., & Gordon, K. D. 2011, ApJ, 737, 29

    2011

  80. [88]

    M., & Tatische ff, V

    Parizot, E., Marcowith, A., van der Swaluw, E., Bykov, A. M., & Tatische ff, V . 2004, A&A, 424, 747

    2004

  81. [89]

    M., van Loon, J

    Pennock, C. M., van Loon, J. T., Filipovi ´c, M. D., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 506, 3540 Pietrzy´nski, G., Graczyk, D., Gallenne, A., et al. 2019, Nature, 567, 200

    2021

  82. [90]

    D., Chu, Y

    Points, S. D., Chu, Y . H., Kim, S., et al. 1999, ApJ, 518, 298

    1999

  83. [91]

    D., Chu, Y

    Points, S. D., Chu, Y . H., Snowden, S. L., & Staveley-Smith, L. 2000, ApJ, 545, 827

    2000

  84. [92]

    2022, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2210.03133

    Ponti, G., Zheng, X., Locatelli, N., et al. 2022, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2210.03133

    2022 arXiv

  85. [93]

    2010, Space Sci

    Porquet, D., Dubau, J., & Grosso, N. 2010, Space Sci. Rev., 157, 103

    2010

  86. [94]

    Porquet, D., Mewe, R., Dubau, J., Raassen, A. J. J., & Kaastra, J. S. 2001, A&A, 376, 1113

    2001

  87. [95]

    2021, A&A, 647, A1

    Predehl, P., Andritschke, R., Arefiev, V ., et al. 2021, A&A, 647, A1

    2021

  88. [96]

    & Schmitt, J

    Predehl, P. & Schmitt, J. H. M. M. 1995, A&A, 293, 889

    1995

  89. [97]

    L., Lopez, L

    Rosen, A. L., Lopez, L. A., Krumholz, M. R., & Ramirez-Ruiz, E. 2014, MN- RAS, 442, 2701

    2014

  90. [98]

    Russell, S. C. & Dopita, M. A. 1992, ApJ, 384, 508

    1992

  91. [99]

    M., Koch, E

    Sandstrom, K. M., Koch, E. W., Leroy, A. K., et al. 2023, ApJ, 944, L8

    2023

  92. [100]

    2002, A&A, 392, 103

    Sasaki, M., Haberl, F., & Pietsch, W. 2002, A&A, 392, 103

    2002

  93. [101]

    2022, A&A, 661, A37

    Sasaki, M., Knies, J., Haberl, F., et al. 2022, A&A, 661, A37

    2022

  94. [102]

    Schneider, F. R. N., Sana, H., Evans, C. J., et al. 2018, Science, 359, 69

    2018

  95. [103]

    M., Kosenko, D., Kaastra, J

    Schure, K. M., Kosenko, D., Kaastra, J. S., Keppens, R., & Vink, J. 2009, A&A, 508, 751

    2009

  96. [104]

    Shapiro, P. R. & Field, G. B. 1976, ApJ, 205, 762

    1976

  97. [105]

    Slavin, J. D. & Cox, D. P. 1992, ApJ, 392, 131

    1992

  98. [106]

    Slavin, J. D. & Cox, D. P. 1993, ApJ, 417, 187

    1993

  99. [107]

    Smith, D. A. & Wang, Q. D. 2004, ApJ, 611, 881

    2004

  100. [108]

    Smith, R. C. & MCELS Team. 1999, in IAU Symposium, V ol. 190, New Views of the Magellanic Clouds, ed. Y . H. Chu, N. Suntzeff, J. Hesser, & D. Bohlen- der, 28

    1999

  101. [109]

    K., Brickhouse, N

    Smith, R. K., Brickhouse, N. S., Liedahl, D. A., & Raymond, J. C. 2001, ApJ, 556, L91

    2001

  102. [110]

    K., Foster, A

    Smith, R. K., Foster, A. R., & Brickhouse, N. S. 2012, Astronomische Nachrichten, 333, 301

    2012

  103. [111]

    K., Foster, A

    Smith, R. K., Foster, A. R., Edgar, R. J., & Brickhouse, N. S. 2014, ApJ, 787, 77

    2014

  104. [112]

    Smith, R. K. & Hughes, J. P. 2010, ApJ, 718, 583

    2010

  105. [113]

    P., Moster, B

    Steinwandel, U. P., Moster, B. P., Naab, T., Hu, C.-Y ., & Walch, S. 2020, MN- RAS, 495, 1035

    2020

  106. [114]

    & Subramaniam, A

    Subramanian, S. & Subramaniam, A. 2009, A&A, 496, 399

    2009

  107. [115]

    E., Brown, J

    Sukhbold, T., Ertl, T., Woosley, S. E., Brown, J. M., & Janka, H. T. 2016, ApJ, 821, 38

    2016

  108. [116]

    K., Ostriker, E

    Sun, J., Leroy, A. K., Ostriker, E. C., et al. 2020, ApJ, 892, 148

    2020

  109. [117]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.18091

    Sun, L., Orlando, S., Greco, E., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.18091

    2025 arXiv

  110. [118]

    2021, A&A, 656, A132

    Sunyaev, R., Arefiev, V ., Babyshkin, V ., et al. 2021, A&A, 656, A132

    2021

  111. [119]

    Sutherland, R. S. & Dopita, M. A. 1993, ApJS, 88, 253

    1993

  112. [120]

    Testor, G., Schild, H., & Lortet, M. C. 1993, A&A, 280, 426

    1993

  113. [121]

    K., Broos, P

    Townsley, L. K., Broos, P. S., Feigelson, E. D., et al. 2006, AJ, 131, 2140

    2006

  114. [122]

    K., Broos, P

    Townsley, L. K., Broos, P. S., & Povich, M. S. 2024, ApJS, 273, 5

    2024

  115. [123]

    2019, ApJ, 871, 44

    Tsuge, K., Sano, H., Tachihara, K., et al. 2019, ApJ, 871, 44

    2019

  116. [124]

    R., et al

    Tsuge, K., Sasaki, M., Knies, J. R., et al. 2024b, A&A, 686, A307 van der Marel, R. P., Alves, D. R., Hardy, E., & Suntze ff, N. B. 2002, AJ, 124, 2639 van der Marel, R. P. & Cioni, M.-R. L. 2001, AJ, 122, 1807

    2002

  117. [125]

    P., Long, K

    Vancura, O., Blair, W. P., Long, K. S., & Raymond, J. C. 1992, ApJ, 394, 158

    1992

  118. [126]

    E., et al

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261

    2020

  119. [127]

    J., & Wu, X

    Wang, Q., Hamilton, T., Helfand, D. J., & Wu, X. 1991, ApJ, 374, 475

    1991

  120. [128]

    & Helfand, D

    Wang, Q. & Helfand, D. J. 1991, ApJ, 379, 327

    1991

  121. [129]

    Wang, Q. D. & Liu, J. 2012, Astronomische Nachrichten, 333, 373

    2012

  122. [130]

    S., Hughes, J

    Warren, J. S., Hughes, J. P., & Slane, P. O. 2003, ApJ, 583, 260

    2003

  123. [131]

    2014, PhD thesis, Eberhard Karls University of Tubingen, Germany

    Warth, G. 2014, PhD thesis, Eberhard Karls University of Tubingen, Germany

    2014

  124. [132]

    J., et al

    Warth, G., Sasaki, M., Kavanagh, P. J., et al. 2014, A&A, 567, A136

    2014

  125. [133]

    2000, ApJ, 542, 914

    Wilms, J., Allen, A., & McCray, R. 2000, ApJ, 542, 914

    2000

  126. [134]

    G., McKee, C

    Wolfire, M. G., McKee, C. F., Hollenbach, D., & Tielens, A. G. G. M. 2003, ApJ, 587, 278

    2003

  127. [135]

    E., Galeazzi, M., et al

    Wulf, D., Eckart, M. E., Galeazzi, M., et al. 2019, ApJ, 884, 120

    2019

  128. [136]

    D., et al

    Yamane, Y ., Sano, H., Filipovi´c, M. D., et al. 2021, ApJ, 918, 36

    2021

  129. [137]

    Yeung, M. C. H., Freyberg, M. J., Ponti, G., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2306.05858

    2023 arXiv

  130. [138]

    Yeung, M. C. H., Ponti, G., Freyberg, M. J., et al. 2024, A&A, 690, A399

    2024

  131. [139]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2401.17307

    Zangrandi, F., Jurk, K., Sasaki, M., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2401.17307

    2024 arXiv

  132. [140]

    D., Ji, L., et al

    Zhang, S., Wang, Q. D., Ji, L., et al. 2014, ApJ, 794, 61

    2014

  133. [141]

    D., Sun, W., et al

    Zhang, S., Wang, Q. D., Sun, W., et al. 2022, ApJ, 941, 68 Article number, page 22 of 22

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.