Paper detail

Summary of the 2015 IACHEC meeting

We summarize the outcome of the 10th meeting of the International Astronomical Consortium for High Energy Calibration (IACHEC), held in Beijing (People's Republic of China) in April 2015. Over 80 scientists directly involved in the calibration of operational and future high-energy missions gathered during 3.5 days to discuss the status of the X-ray payload inter-calibration, as well as possible ways to improve it. A recent study on a large sample of galaxy clusters confirmed that the calibration of the effective area shape above 2 keV between XMM-Newton/EPIC and Chandra/ACIS is consistent, but showed a significant discrepancy at lower energies. Temperatures measured by EPIC are therefore smaller, the difference being largest for the highest temperatures, up to ~20% at kT=10 keV (Schellenberger et al. 2015). The latest multi-mission study of the Crab Nebula above 10 keV shows a +/-13% agreement in the relative normalization of the INTEGRAL, NuSTAR, RXTE, and {\it Suzaku} hard X-ray instruments.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access7 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.