Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 40 references

The spectral shapes of Galactic gamma-ray source

T0 review · 4 major / 4 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 summed spectrum of all Galactic gamma-ray sources is smooth, with a sharp softening above 30 TeV

desk verdict A transparent catalog-summing synthesis that gives a useful cumulative Galactic source spectrum, but whose central high-energy step rests on an untested assumption about unresolved sources. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.08733 v1 pith:TSJVGOLW submitted 2025-02-12 astro-ph.HE

Paolo Lipari , Silvia Vernetto This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords Galacticgamma-raysourcescumulativespectrumLHAASOspectralsofteningunresolvedsourcefluxpopulationTeV–PeVgammaraysFermi-LATcatalogs
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 tries to establish what the Milky Way's total gamma-ray source emission looks like when all individually resolved sources are added together, using the four major catalogs (Fermi-LAT, HESS, HAWC, LHAASO). It claims the summed spectrum is smooth and relatively featureless across five decades in energy, with a modest softening from 1 to 10 TeV and a marked softening between 10 and 100 TeV where the spectral index steps by about +1.0. The authors also claim this smooth total is built from individual sources with very different spectral shapes, so models that assign one common shape to all Galactic sources are not valid. The result matters because the total source shape can serve as a template for the unresolved source flux and for separating source emission from truly diffuse interstellar emission.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the cumulative-spectrum construction: each catalog source contributes its fitted spectrum, and the sum defines $\phi_{\rm cum}(E)$. Two identities carry the argument. First, the index of the sum is the flux-weighted average of individual indices, $\alpha_{\rm cum}(E)=\sum_j w_j(E)\,\alpha_j(E)$. Second, the curvature of the sum is $\beta_{\rm cum}(E)=\langle\beta(E)\rangle - \tfrac{1}{2}\sigma^2_\alpha(E)$, so an ensemble of power laws with different slopes always hardens with energy; a softening total therefore requires intrinsically curved, softening individual spectra. The log-parabola fits are reparameterized by a critical energy $E_*$ where the slope is 2 and the spectral energy distribution peaks, and the authors show that sources with $E_*$ near the observation energy dominate the total because their local slope matches the cumulative slope.

What would settle it

A survey that resolves a sizable sample of the currently unresolved faint sources and finds their summed spectrum systematically softer or harder than the resolved-source template in any direction would falsify the key assumption; likewise, if LHAASO-KM2A data with higher statistics show individual sources continuing as power laws beyond 100 TeV, the claimed 10–100 TeV softening would disappear.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery, stated on the paper's own terms, is that the spectrum obtained by summing the best-fit spectra of all resolved Galactic gamma-ray sources — the Milky Way source spectrum — has a smooth, non-trivial shape from about 100 MeV to more than 1 PeV. Below a few GeV pulsars dominate with hard spectra and sub-exponential cutoffs near 1–3 GeV; around 20 GeV non-pulsar sources (mostly supernova remnants and pulsar wind nebulae) take over; between 1 and 10 TeV the spectrum softens mildly to an index of about 2.4–2.5; and between 10 and 100 TeV, as revealed by LHAASO-KM2A, it softens sharply with an index step of about +1.0. The same data show that the smoothness of the total is not the average of similar parts: individual sources have widely different slopes, curvatures, and critical energies, and the sources that dominate the total change with energy. The authors conclude that the often-used assumption of a single universal source spectral shape is not valid.

Load-bearing premise

The argument assumes that the unresolved source flux has the same spectral shape everywhere and equals the shape of the summed resolved sources, so that one template describes the whole Galaxy.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The reconstructed source spectrum can be used directly as a template for the unresolved-source component of the diffuse Galactic gamma-ray flux.
  • Population models that assign one common spectral shape to all Galactic gamma-ray sources will need to be replaced by distributions over shape parameters such as curvature and critical energy.
  • Because the total source spectrum softens markedly above 30 TeV, unresolved-source contributions at those energies are smaller than earlier estimates, making the interstellar-emission component easier to isolate.
  • The same template describes what an extragalactic observer would see from the Milky Way and can be compared with gamma-ray observations of other star-forming galaxies.
  • At any energy $E$, the flux is dominated by sources with critical energy $E_* \approx E$, so the set of dominant objects changes continuously across the spectrum.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the 10–100 TeV softening is a real feature of the summed source emission, hadronic sources should produce an analogous steepening in the Galactic neutrino spectrum; IceCube's Galactic-plane measurement could test this once statistics grow.
  • The authors' slope-matching heuristic suggests a population-synthesis test: generate a catalog of log-parabola sources drawn from the observed $\{E_*,\beta\}$ distribution and check whether the summed spectrum reproduces the smooth features without tuning.
  • A sharper version of the paper's method would fit each LHAASO source with a smoothly curved form rather than two joined power laws; if done consistently, the apparent slope disagreements among telescopes near 1 TeV should disappear.
  • The template's validity for unresolved sources is testable with future very-sensitive surveys: if faint sources have systematically different spectra than bright ones, the key assumption fails and the total-spectrum estimate needs a luminosity-dependent correction.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The paper reconstructs the cumulative gamma-ray spectrum of Galactic sources by summing the published spectral fits of resolved sources in the 4FGL, HGPS, 3HAWC, and 1LHAASO catalogs. It then assumes, via Eq. (2), that the spectral shape of this resolved sum also describes the unresolved source flux and the total Galactic source emission. The authors report a smooth cumulative spectrum that softens gradually from a slope of about 2.2 at 1 TeV to about 2.5 at 30 TeV and about 3.4 at 100 TeV, including a marked step of approximately +1 in spectral index between 10 and 100 TeV, and they emphasize that this smooth total shape emerges from individual sources with a wide variety of spectral shapes.

Significance. If the central claims are robust, the paper would provide an important empirical challenge to the common assumption that all (or most) Galactic gamma-ray sources share a single spectral shape, and it would supply a useful template for the unresolved source contribution to the diffuse flux. The method is simple, transparent, and based exclusively on public catalog data; the derivation of the cumulative curvature identity in Eq. (23) is explicit and appears correct. However, the main quantitative claims currently lack uncertainty estimates and depend on an untested extrapolation from resolved sources to the full Galactic source population, so the paper reads as a promising phenomenological analysis rather than a definitive measurement.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section I, Eq. (2)] The central assumption that the spectral shape of the unresolved source flux and of the total Galactic emission equals the shape of the sum of resolved-source fluxes is not tested in the way that matters. The authors list reasons (i)-(iii) why Eq. (2) may fail, including the fact that resolved sources are on average less distant and brighter, and that summing fluxes rather than luminosities weights nearby sources by d^-2. The tests reported in Sections III and IV compare different sky regions and identified versus unidentified source classes, but they do not compare bright versus faint or nearby versus distant sources. A concrete test would be to split resolved sources by reference flux (or by a distance proxy) and compare the cumulative spectral indices of the bright and faint subsets; without such a test, the claim in Section V that the total Galactic spectrum softens by Delta alpha ~ +1 above 30 TeV is not supported by the data.
  2. [Sections IV and V, Figs. 16 and 22] The paper gives no uncertainty on the central quantitative claims: the abstract quotes slopes of about 2.2, 2.5, and 3.4 at 1, 30, and 100 TeV, and Section V states a step of about +1.0, but Figs. 21-22 show only single curves. The high-energy step is constructed by connecting two independent power-law fits per source at their intersection (Section IV, 'simply connect'), so the cumulative index has a discontinuous jump at each break energy. Given the large spread in the 54-source sample (the reported dispersion in Delta alpha is about 0.54 and the break energies scatter over roughly 10-100 TeV), the result needs a propagation of fit uncertainties and a demonstration that a smoothly curved alternative fit (e.g., log-parabola) to the combined WCDA+KM2A data does not remove the apparent step.
  3. [Section IV, Fig. 16, and abstract] The conclusion that 'the spectra of all Galactic gamma-ray sources are curved, with significantly different slopes below and above E ~ 30 TeV' appears to overstate what the two-power-law join demonstrates. For a source whose true spectrum is a smooth curved function, fitting independent power laws in two adjacent energy windows will generically produce two different slopes and an artificial intersection energy; the intersection is not evidence for a break. The authors should verify the robustness of the break by fitting a single smooth spectral function to the joint WCDA+KM2A data for the 54 common sources, or by a simulation study of power-law fits to curved inputs. Without this check, the abstract's phrasing is too strong.
  4. [Section V, Fig. 21] The cumulative spectra from different telescopes in Fig. 21 are summed over different sky regions: Fermi-LAT is restricted to the HGPS region, while HAWC and LHAASO cover their own visibility windows. The claim that the shapes are in 'reasonable good agreement' is therefore partially a statement about source populations in different parts of the Galaxy. To support the total-Galaxy interpretation, the authors should restrict all catalogs to a common sky region where overlaps exist, or explicitly model the effect of different longitude/latitude coverage on the cumulative shape.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section III.A and Table II] The text gives average low-energy spectral indices of about 0.92 for PSR and 1.08 for MSP, while Table II lists 1.10 +/- 0.05 for PSR and 0.92 +/- 0.05 for MSP; the two assignments are swapped and should be corrected.
  2. [Fig. 17] The horizontal axis label in the bottom panel reads 'E (GeV)', but the plotted range and the caption indicate that the energy is in TeV; please correct the label.
  3. [Section II.B] There is a typo in 'the curvature of the cumulative specrum' and elsewhere ('spectreal index' in a figure label, 'specxtrum' in Section III.D); a careful proofread of the text would remove these distractions.
  4. [Section IV] The sentence on the HGPS cutoff energy distribution says the distribution is shown in 'Figs. 4 and 5', but Fig. 5 is a scatter plot of cutoff parameters rather than a distribution; consider referring only to Fig. 4 for the distribution.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the cumulative spectrum is a direct sum of external catalog fits; Eq. (2) is an explicit, acknowledged modeling assumption rather than a hidden reduction.

full rationale

The paper's central quantity is the cumulative spectrum built by summing the published spectral fits of resolved sources in the Fermi-LAT, HESS, HAWC, and LHAASO catalogs (Eq. 21). This is a direct empirical aggregation of external data, not a parameter fitted to a subset and then renamed as a prediction. The claimed smoothness of the total source flux is a property that emerges from the sum, and the range of individual spectral shapes is an input from the external catalogs, so the result is not equivalent to its inputs by construction. The only step that could look self-definitional is Eq. (2), where the unresolved-source shape is assumed equal to the resolved-source sum shape and this common shape is then applied to the total Galactic emission Q_MW(E). The paper explicitly labels this an assumption ("we will assume that the spectral shape of the unresolved sources flux is independent from direction and, at least to a first approximation, also equal to the shape of the sum of the spectra of the resolved sources"), lists three concrete reasons it may fail, and states that tests comparing source classes and sky regions are only partial. A stated assumption with acknowledged limitations is a validity risk, not a circular derivation; the reconstructed total shape is conditional on Eq. (2) but is not presented as a first-principles prediction. The self-citations are not load-bearing: Eq. (23) for the curvature of a sum is a parameter-free mathematical identity re-derived in the text, and the LV-2018 diffuse model [11] is used only for comparison. Accordingly, no circular step is identified.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new free parameters and no new physical entities. It relies on catalog fits as inputs and on the stated assumption that the resolved-source sum represents the unresolved source population. The only structural assumptions are the direction-independence and shape-equality in Eq. (2) and the fidelity of the catalog fit functions.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption The unresolved source flux has a spectral shape independent of direction and equal to the shape of the sum of resolved sources (Eq. 2).
    Stated in Section I and used to promote the resolved-source sum to a template for the unresolved flux and the total Galactic source emission.
  • domain assumption Summing resolved-source fluxes without distance weighting gives the shape of the total Galactic emission Q_MW(E).
    Stated in Sections I and VI; the paper acknowledges this is a first approximation and that distant or faint sources could differ in spectral shape.
  • domain assumption The catalog fit functions, power-law, log-parabola, and cutoff, faithfully represent the true spectra of individual sources.
    Used throughout, since the cumulative spectra are sums of these fits. The paper itself notes that power-law fits bias the reconstructed slope in Section V.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The spectral shapes of Galactic gamma-ray source." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TSJVGOLW

@misc{pith2026250208733,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The spectral shapes of Galactic gamma-ray source},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TSJVGOLW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.08733}
}
abstract

Recent observations by ground-based gamma-ray telescopes have led to the publication of catalogs listing sources observed in the TeV and PeV energy ranges. Photons of such high energy are strongly absorbed during propagation over extragalactic distances, and the catalogs are dominated by Galactic sources. Of particular interest are the observations of the LHAASO telescope, which cover a very broad energy range (from 1 to 10$^3$ TeV) and show that the spectra of all Galactic gamma-ray sources are curved, with significantly different slopes below and above $E \sim 30$ TeV. The cumulative spectrum obtained by summing the contributions of Galactic individual sources has a spectral shape that gradually softens with energy, with a slope that increases from a value of order 2.2 at $E \simeq 1$ TeV, to 2.5 at 30 TeV, and $\simeq 3.4$ at 100 TeV. It is remarkable that the smooth variation in the shape of the cumulative spectrum is obtained from the sum of contributions that have a wide range of shapes. Understanding the origin of the spectral shapes of the Galactic gamma-ray sources is a crucial challenge for high energy astrophysics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.08733 by the authors.

Figure 17
Figure 17. Summing all these lines one obtains a cumulative spectrum that is shown as a thick line in Fig. 17 and can [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_17.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_2.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (20 more)
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_3.png]
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: FIG. 15 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_15.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: FIG. 16 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_16.png]
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: FIG. 17 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_17.png]
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: FIG. 18 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_18.png]
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: FIG. 19 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_19.png]
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: FIG. 20 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_20.png]
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: FIG. 21 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_21.png]
Figure 22
Figure 22. Figure 22: FIG. 22 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_22.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 21 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    The fourth general catalog of Fermi–LAT, using the 4th data release (4FGL-DR4) [1, 2]. This catalog contains 7195 gamma–ray sources observed during 14 years of data acquisition in the energy range from 50 MeV to 1 TeV with a sensitivity that, to a good approximation, is uniform over the entire celestial sphere

    work page

  2. [2]

    The HESS Galactic Plane Survey (HGPS) catalog [3] obtained by the High Energy Stereoscopic System (HESS), an array of imaging atmospheric Cherenkov telescopes located in Namibia, at geographic latitude −23.27◦. The catalog lists 78 sources observed in the energy range 0.2–100 TeV, during a scan (2700 hours of data taking) of the Galactic plane in the regi...

    work page

  3. [3]

    The catalog lists 65 sources, observed in the 0.1–100 TeV energy range during 1523 days of data taking (between November 2014 and June 2019)

    The third HA WC Catalog (3HA WC) [4] obtained by the High–Altitude Water Cherenkov observatory, located in Mexico at the geographic latitude λ = 19.0◦N and altitude 4100 m. The catalog lists 65 sources, observed in the 0.1–100 TeV energy range during 1523 days of data taking (between November 2014 and June 2019)

    work page 2014

  4. [4]

    pivot energy

    The first LHAASO catalog (1LHAASO) [5], obtained by the Large High–Altitude Air Shower Observatory (LHAASO), located in China at latitude λ = 29 .36◦N and altitude 4400 m. The telescope is formed by 3 two arrays: the water Cherenkov detector array (WCDA), sensitive in the energy range (1–30) TeV, and the Kilometer Squared Array (KM2A), sensitive in the ra...

    work page

  5. [5]

    The catalog contains 4618 identified sources and 2577 non–identiffied sources (that is fractions of 64% and 36% of the total)

    work page

  6. [6]

    Most of the identified sources (4028 out 4618) are extragalactic objects, and almost all of them (4006 out of

    work page

  7. [7]

    disk selected Galactic sources

    A large number of sources (42.8%) are fitted with the log–parabola form, that is with a curved, gradually softening spectral shape. 7 To study the global properties of the ensemble of all Galactic sources it is necessary to take into account for the fact that, as discussed above, only 28% of the total (590 out of a total of approximately 2100) are identif...

    work page

  8. [8]

    A total of 590 sources are identified as Galactic objects, that belong to several different classes

    work page

Show all 40 references
  1. [9]

    A study of the latitude distribution of the 2577 sources without identification allows to estimate that approxi- mately 1500 ± 100 of them are Galactic and 1100 ± 100 are extragalactic

  2. [10]

    Combining the numbers of identified Galactic sources with the estimate of the number of resolved but non– identified Galactic sources one can conclude that the 4FGL catalog contains approximately 2100 Galactic sources

  3. [11]

    Almost all the sources fitted with this functional form (with only 7 exceptions) are pulsars (PSR) and millisecond pulsars (MSP)

    The cutoff functional form is used for the fits of 276 sources, that is only 3.8% of the total. Almost all the sources fitted with this functional form (with only 7 exceptions) are pulsars (PSR) and millisecond pulsars (MSP). Conversely, almost all sources classified as PSR or...

  4. [12]

    Modelling the Galactic very-high-energy γ-ray source population,

    C. Steppa and K. Egberts, “Modelling the Galactic very-high-energy γ-ray source population,” Astron. Astrophys. 643, A137 (2020) doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202038172 [arXiv:2010.03305 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2020 arXiv

  5. [13]

    The contributions of pulsars (PSR) and millisecond pulsars (MPS) dominate the cumulative spectrum for E ≲ 20 GeV. As discussed above, these sources have a characteristic spectral shape (a hard power–law at low energy and a sub–exponential cutoff with Ecut lower than few GeV) a...

  6. [14]

    The cumulative spectrum of the Galactic sources that are not pulsars overtakes the pulsar contribution at E ≃ 20 GeV, and has a smooth shape, with a slope that in the entire energy range 0.1–10 3 GeV remains approximately constant in a narrow range α(E) ≈ 2.–2.3. 9

  7. [15]

    Four classes of sources: supernova remnants (SNR), pulsar wind nebulae (PWN), composite sources (SNR/PWN) and sources associated to star forming regions (SFR) give the largest contributions the cumu- lative flux (excluding pulsars) with spectra of the same order of magnitude a...

  8. [16]

    Smaller and softer contributions are given by sources classified as binary star systems (BIN) and globular star clusters (GLC)

  9. [17]

    Their spectral shape is roughly consistent with what can be obtained by a combination of objects that belong to the same classes of the identified sources

    Non–identified sources account for approximately 70% of the number of resolved Galactic sources, but they are on average fainter than the identified ones, and account for only approximately 20–30% of the cumulative flux. Their spectral shape is roughly consistent with what can...

  10. [18]

    break energy

    A comparison of the spectra of identified sources at large and small Galactic latitude does not reveal very large differences. D. The formation of the Milky W ay source spectrum The study of the cumulative spectrum of the Galactic sources reveals that, excluding pulsars, one o...

  11. [19]

    Fermi Large Area Telescope Fourth Source Catalog,

    S. Abdollahi et al. [Fermi-LAT], “Fermi Large Area Telescope Fourth Source Catalog,” Astrophys. J. Suppl. 247, no.1, 33 (2020) doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab6bcb [arXiv:1902.10045 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2020 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Incremental Fermi Large Area Telescope Fourth Source Catalog,

    S. Abdollahi et al. [Fermi-LAT], “Incremental Fermi Large Area Telescope Fourth Source Catalog,” Astrophys. J. Supp. 260, no.2, 53 (2022) doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac6751 [arXiv:2201.11184 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2022 arXiv

  13. [21]

    The H.E.S.S. Galactic plane survey,

    H. Abdalla et al. [HESS], “The H.E.S.S. Galactic plane survey,” Astron. Astrophys. 612, A1 (2018) doi:10.1051/0004- 6361/201732098 [arXiv:1804.02432 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2018 arXiv

  14. [22]

    3HWC: The Third HA WC Catalog of Very-High-Energy Gamma-ray Sources,

    A. Albert et al. [HA WC], “3HWC: The Third HA WC Catalog of Very-High-Energy Gamma-ray Sources,” Astrophys. J. 905, no.1, 76 (2020) doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abc2d8 [arXiv:2007.08582 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2020 arXiv

  15. [23]

    The First LHAASO Catalog of Gamma-Ray Sources,

    Z. Cao et al. [LHAASO], “The First LHAASO Catalog of Gamma-Ray Sources,” Astrophys. J. Suppl. 271, no.1, 25 (2024) doi:10.3847/1538-4365/acfd29 [arXiv:2305.17030 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2024

  16. [24]

    The spectrum of isotropic diffuse gamma-ray emission between 100 MeV and 820 GeV,

    M. Ackermann et al. [Fermi-LAT], “The spectrum of isotropic diffuse gamma-ray emission between 100 MeV and 820 GeV,” Astrophys. J. 799, 86 (2015) doi:10.1088/0004-637X/799/1/86 [arXiv:1410.3696 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2015 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Development of the Model of Galactic Interstellar Emission for Standard Point-Source Analysis of Fermi Large Area Telescope Data,

    F. Acero et al. [Fermi-LAT], “Development of the Model of Galactic Interstellar Emission for Standard Point-Source Analysis of Fermi Large Area Telescope Data,” Astrophys. J. Suppl. 223, no.2, 26 (2016) doi:10.3847/0067-0049/223/2/26 [arXiv:1602.07246 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2016 arXiv

  18. [26]

    First Detection of sub-PeV Diffuse Gamma Rays from the Galactic Disk: Evidence for Ubiquitous Galactic Cosmic Rays beyond PeV Energies,

    M. Amenomori et al. [Tibet ASgamma], “First Detection of sub-PeV Diffuse Gamma Rays from the Galactic Disk: Evidence for Ubiquitous Galactic Cosmic Rays beyond PeV Energies,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, no.14, 141101 (2021) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.141101 [arXiv:2104.05181 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2021 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Measurement of Ultra-High-Energy Diffuse Gamma-Ray Emission of the Galactic Plane from 10 TeV to 1 PeV with LHAASO-KM2A,

    Z. Cao et al. [LHAASO], “Measurement of Ultra-High-Energy Diffuse Gamma-Ray Emission of the Galactic Plane from 10 TeV to 1 PeV with LHAASO-KM2A,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, no.15, 151001 (2023) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.151001 [arXiv:2305.05372 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2023

  20. [28]

    Galactic Gamma-Ray Diffuse Emission at TeV Energies with HA WC Data,

    R. Alfaro et al. [HA WC], “Galactic Gamma-Ray Diffuse Emission at TeV Energies with HA WC Data,” Astrophys. J.961, no.1, 104 (2024) doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad00b6 [arXiv:2310.09117 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2024

  21. [29]

    Diffuse Galactic gamma ray flux at very high energy

    P. Lipari and S. Vernetto, “Diffuse Galactic gamma ray flux at very high energy” (L V–2018), Phys. Rev. D 98, no.4, 043003 (2018) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.98.043003 [arXiv:1804.10116 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2018 arXiv

  22. [31]

    The TeV Gamma-Ray Luminosity of the Milky Way and the Contribution of H.E.S.S. Unresolved Sources to Very High Energy Diffuse Emission,

    M. Cataldo, G. Pagliaroli, V. Vecchiotti and F. L. Villante, “The TeV Gamma-Ray Luminosity of the Milky Way and the Contribution of H.E.S.S. Unresolved Sources to Very High Energy Diffuse Emission,” Astrophys. J. 904, no.2, 85 (2020) doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abc0ee [arXiv:2006.04...

    2020 arXiv

  23. [32]

    P. D. Luque, D. Gaggero, D. Grasso, O. Fornieri, K. Egberts, C. Steppa and C. Evoli, Astron. Astrophys. 672, A58 (2023) doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202243714 [arXiv:2203.15759 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2023 arXiv

  24. [33]

    Evidence for High-Energy Extraterrestrial Neutrinos at the IceCube Detector,

    M. G. Aartsen et al. [IceCube], “Evidence for High-Energy Extraterrestrial Neutrinos at the IceCube Detector,” Science 342, 1242856 (2013) doi:10.1126/science.1242856 [arXiv:1311.5238 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2013 arXiv

  25. [34]

    Observation of High-Energy Astrophysical Neutrinos in Three Years of IceCube Data,

    M. G. Aartsen et al. [IceCube], “Observation of High-Energy Astrophysical Neutrinos in Three Years of IceCube Data,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 101101 (2014) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.101101 [arXiv:1405.5303 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2014 arXiv

  26. [35]

    Time-Integrated Neutrino Source Searches with 10 Years of IceCube Data,

    M. G. Aartsen et al. [IceCube], “Time-Integrated Neutrino Source Searches with 10 Years of IceCube Data,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, no.5, 051103 (2020) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.051103 [arXiv:1910.08488 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2020

  27. [36]

    Observation of high-energy neutrinos from the Galactic plane,

    R. Abbasi et al. [IceCube], “Observation of high-energy neutrinos from the Galactic plane,” Science 380, no.6652, adc9818 (2023) doi:10.1126/science.adc9818 [arXiv:2307.04427 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2023

  28. [37]

    The origin of the power–law form of the extragalactic gamma–ray flux,

    P. Lipari, “The origin of the power–law form of the extragalactic gamma–ray flux,” Astropart. Phys. 125, 102507 (2021) doi:10.1016/j.astropartphys.2020.102507 [arXiv:2001.00982 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2021

  29. [38]

    Lipari, Astropart

    P. Lipari, Astropart. Phys. 97, 197-204 (2018) doi:10.1016/j.astropartphys.2017.11.008 [arXiv:1707.02504 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2018 arXiv

  30. [39]

    Resolved and unresolved Galactic gamma-ray sources,

    P. Lipari and S. Vernetto, “Resolved and unresolved Galactic gamma-ray sources,” [arXiv:2412.08861 [astro-ph.HE]]

    arXiv

  31. [40]

    This set of sources contains only a small contamination, of order 7 to 10, of non–identified extragalactic objects (see discussion in section III

  32. [4028]

    The other extragalactic objects are 6 normal galaxies, 8 starburst galaxies and 6 Seyfert galaxies

    are Active Galactic Nuclei. The other extragalactic objects are 6 normal galaxies, 8 starburst galaxies and 6 Seyfert galaxies

Pith tools

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