ner_tags: O O O O O B-CelestialObject I-CelestialObject O O O O O O O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O O O O O O B-Identifier I-Identifier O O O O O O O B-Wavelength O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O O O O O O O O B-Wavelength O O O O B-Wavelength I-Wavelength O O O O O O O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Wavelength I-Wavelength O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Wavelength O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Wavelength I-Wavelength I-Wavelength O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Wavelength I-Wavelength O O O O B-Wavelength O O O O B-Wavelength I-Wavelength O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Wavelength O O O O O O O O O O B-Wavelength I-Wavelength O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Telescope O O O O O O O O O O O B-CelestialObject I-CelestialObject O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O O O B-Wavelength O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-CelestialObject I-CelestialObject O O O O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O O B-Wavelength O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Model I-Model O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O O O O O O O O O O B-CelestialObject I-CelestialObject O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Wavelength I-Wavelength O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
tokens: in the inner jet of PKS 1502+106 – is about half that used by Pushkarev et al. (2012) . 4. Discussion 4.1. Localizing the <inline-formula specific-use="simple-math"><italic>γ</italic></inline-formula>-ray emission Our ultimate goal of pinpointing the -ray emission region is reached by combining the findings of the present study with those of Fuhrmann et al. (2014) , who deduce a relative distance between the -ray active region and the 86.24 GHz unit-opacity surface of about 2.1 pc (cf. Ramakrishnan et al. 2015 ). Here, based on the opacity-driven time lags across the eleven observing frequencies, the distance of the 86.24 GHz core from the jet base is pc. From that combination it follows that the -ray emission region is best constrained to a distance of pc away from the jet base. In a similar study, Max-Moerbeck et al. (2014) obtain a time lag of d between the leading rays and the lagging 15 GHz radio emission. Following their reasoning, this time lag translates into a relative distance of pc between the 15 GHz unit-opacity surface and the -ray site. Combining our at 15 GHz (Table 4 ) with the aforementioned value, we obtain a separation of pc between the jet base and the -ray active region, comparable with our previous result based on the 86.24 GHz time lag. We reiterate that in the present work we use the VLBI kinematical parameters of the knot connected to the 2008/10 flare of PKS 1502+106 (C3, see Sect. 3.4 ). Finally, our results are in agreement with the upper limit of pc reported by Karamanavis et al. (2016) , based on mm-VLBI imaging. At pc from the jet base, the high-energy emission originates well beyond the bulk of the BLR material of PKS 1502+106, placed at pc ( Abdo et al. 2010 ). A -ray emission region placed so far away from the BLR almost negates the notion that BLR photons alone can be used as the target photon field for inverse-Compton up-scattering to rays, and as a result other or additional seed photon fields (e.g., torus, synchrotron self-Compton, SSC) need to be involved in the process. 4.2. A shock origin for the 2008/10 flare Overall, the slopes extracted from the multi-wavelength light curves agree well with the expectations of the shock-in-jet model ( Marscher Gear 1985 ), indicating a shock origin for the 2008/2010 flare of PKS 1502+106. In this section, we discuss the observed light curve parameters (flare amplitudes and cross-band delays) in conjunction with the results of analytical shock-in-jet model simulations ( Fromm et al. 2015 ). The dependence of flare amplitude on frequency is shown in Fig. 4 and the cross-frequency delays in Fig. 5 . Flare amplitudes rise with frequency until they culminate at a frequency of about 43 GHz, after which the amplitude of the flare drops. The rise and decay wings follow a trend that is described well by a broken power law, in very good agreement with the shock model expectations. The slopes are for the rising part of the flare amplitude and for the decaying part. The