\section{INTRODUCTION }
\label{sec:intro}

Magnetars --- neutron stars (NSs)  whose activity is related to dissipation of the
magnetic field energy --- have many different observational appearances
(see recent reviews  \citealt{m2008,re2011}).  Strong
bursts observed in hard X-rays are the most spectacular manifestations of
this activity.  What triggers magnetar bursts and long term
outbursts\footnote{We use the term {\it burst}  for a single
event, and {\it outburst} for a long term emission enhancement during which
a few or many {\it bursts} can be observed.} is not known.  Two main and
probably causally associated approaches are discussed (see, for example,
\citealt{ll2012} and references therein).  Bursts
are either related to crust cracks of some kind, or occur due to (possibly
ensuing) magnetospheric activity (e.g., \citealt{pbh2013, bl14, link2014}).

Magnetars activity is not uniform in time. There are periods of high state
of activity (outbursts), and quiescent periods.
The rate of energy release on long time
scale is most likely driven by crustal processes,
including field evolution in the crust.
  In order to compare relative importance and
interplay of magnetospheric and crustal processes, it would be useful to
observe magnetars without crust activity (or with completely stable crust),
but with evidences of active magnetospheric events, and magnetars with
definitely suppressed magnetospheres, but with signs of active
crustal processes.  Then we would be able to conclude what triggers
different types of activity: processes in the magnetosphere and/or in the
crust.

Objects of the first kind are extremely difficult to identify, even though
bare strange stars potentially can exist without a crust, (see, e.g.,
\citealt{usov2002} and references therein).  As for the second kind of
objects, three central compact objects (CCOs, see a review by
\citealt{deluca2008}) are observed, which are believed to be so-called
``hidden'' magnetars, for example like CXO J1852.6+0040 in Kes 79.  The
hypothesis of their suppressed magnetosphere is mainly based on the analysis
of their thermal emission: pulse profiles of the X-ray light curves and a
high pulse fraction, which requires magnetar-scale fields in the crust
(e.g., \citealt{sl12, vp12, perna2013, bogdanov2014}).

The idea of ``hidden'' magnetars dates back to 1999, when the term was first
proposed by \cite{hidden}.  Strong fall-back after a supernova explosion
(\citealt{chevalier}) can lead to formation of an envelope which screens the
magnetic field.  Therefore, for an external observer
the NS is visible as a source
with low dipole field $B\sim10^{10}$~G.  Calculations show that an envelope
with a mass $\sim 10^{-4} M_\odot$ is enough to screen the field
(see, for example, \citealt{bern12}). However, these sources
might be different from low-field magnetars (see \citealt{rea2014} and
references therein), for which strong external multipoles are detected
(\citealt{tiengo2013}).

One can expect that observational features of ``hidden'' magnetars are
the following: (i) non-uniform surface temperature distribution, for instance,
relatively small hot spots on the surface of a NS, (ii) large
pulse fractions, (iii) flux variations on a time scale of months-to-years,
which is typical for magnetars.  In reality, candidates for the ``hidden''
magnetars can manifest only some of these features.  Anyway, ``hidden''
magnetars can be important to probe initial properties of highly magnetized
NSs (and, probably, the origin of huge magnetic field).  For instance, their
spin periods stay almost constant for several kyrs due to low spin-down rate
(\citealt{pasa2013}), and therefore initial rotation rate is ``frozen'' in
these objects.  In the following sections we present simple estimates which
demonstrate that ``hidden'' magnetars can be also used to probe properties
of large magnetic fields in the NS crust.

\section{ANALYSIS AND ESTIMATES}

In this section we produce simple estimates of crustal activity for
different CCOs, which potentially can be ``hidden'' magnetars, and
present numerical model for the case of the CCO in RCW 103.

\subsection{Expected rate of CCO activity}

 We start with estimates based on results by \cite{pp11} and \cite{pr12}.
These authors provide calculations of the rate and power of energy release
events (ERE) in the crust of NSs, and then estimate their surface luminosity.

 Since we consider sources similar to CXO J1852.6+0040 in Kes 79 (hereafter
just Kes 79), typical ages of interest are about few kyrs.  In terms of
\cite{pp11}, these sources are between ``young'' and ``middle age'' NSs.
Depending on the parameter which characterizes the fatigue limit of material
subjected by magnetic stresses, these authors predict that for objects of
this age EREs happen approximately once in a few years, with bimodal
distribution of typical released energies
$E_\mathrm{tot}\sim10^{40}$~--~$10^{41}$~ergs and
$E_\mathrm{tot}\sim10^{43}$~--~$10^{44}$~ergs.  Relative fraction of these
two ERE types can change by a factor 2-3 in favour of one or another.

According to \cite{pr12} an ERE with $E_\mathrm{tot}\sim$~few$\times
10^{43}$~ergs provides a surface luminosity above $2\times
10^{34}$~erg~s$^{-1}$ for $\sim 100$~days (their Fig.~1).
We expect that more than 10\% of time the source is in a high state with
enhanced luminosity ($\approx$ once in three years; see Fig.~2
of \citealt{pp11}).
While in the high
state, the pulse profile and pulsed fraction of X-ray radiation may
change, because the hot spots on the surface can form and move in respect to
their relatively constant position in quiet state.  The pulse profile then
might become more complicated, and the pulsed fraction can increase, as well
as decrease compared to the quiet state.  The X-ray spectra in such states
can be fitted by a sum of two blackbodies with temperatures corresponding to
hot spots or the hot spot and the rest surface without activity.

Now we make estimates based on
calculations by \cite{kkpy14} (hereafter Paper~I).  These authors
numerically modeled surface and neutrino luminosity of a NS as a result of a
rather long (tens of kyrs) ERE in the crust.  The key parameter is the heat
rate $H$ [erg cm$^{-3}$ s$^{-1}$].
Paper~I shows that the surface luminosity nearly saturates
for $H>10^{20}$~erg~cm$^{-3}$~s$^{-1}$.
Here we estimate $E_\mathrm{tot}$ of an ERE with this heat rate.

Firstly, we need to estimate the total volume in which energy is released.
In Paper~I the authors
used the thickness of the layer where energy is released
$\sim100$~m.  \cite{pr12} used the layer with thickness $\sim 200$~m.
The surface area of the
region is typically given in terms of its angular size.
In Paper~I
the authors used
the value $\sim10^\circ$, and \cite{pp11}
obtained $\sim0.3$~--~0.8 radians
for the emitting region.  Altogether it gives a volume of $\gtrsim
10^{15}$~cm$^3$.  Duration of an ERE in \cite{pp11} is about one week (this
is determined by the numerical resolution of the code), i.e $\sim10^6$~s.
Then, we obtain that $E_\mathrm{tot} \gtrsim 10^{41}$~ergs corresponds to
$H\sim 10^{20}$erg cm$^{-3}$ s$^{-1}$, (i.e., the regime of the most
efficient heating).  Thus, we can safely assume that most of the bursts in
the NS of interest correspond to this regime with luminosity near the
saturation level.
Note that according to \cite{pp11} typical ERE has a total
energy release $\gtrsim 10^{41}$~ergs.

For the chosen volume and duration of the ERE the saturated luminosity is
$L_\mathrm{surf}\sim10^{32.5}$~erg~s$^{-1}$, and characteristic neutrino
emission is $L_\nu \sim10^{35}$~erg~s$^{-1}$.  Luminosity can be higher if
larger volume and injected energy are involved.  Indeed,
according to \cite{bogdanov2014} the area of the hot anisotropic polar cap
on the surface of the NS in Kes 79
is 5-10 times larger than the area of a hot spot
with $10^\circ$ angular radius. So, it is necessary to use larger
(by the same factor) energy release --- for the same $H$, ---
than
in the estimates above.

Let us apply these estimates to Kes~79.  The persistent X-ray luminosity
of Kes 79 is $\sim (4$~--~$5) \times 10^{33}$~erg~s$^{-1}$ (\citealt{v13}).
Spin period is $P=0.105$~s, the pulsed fraction is rather high ($f
\approx 60\%$), and the magnetic field is estimated from the period derivative
as $B\sim 3 \times 10^{10}$~G (see \citealt{vp12, bogdanov2014} and
references therein).

Using the volume about an order of magnitude larger,
i.e. $\gtrsim 10^{16}$~cm$^3$, and so
a larger characteristic heating power
$\gtrsim 10^{36}$~erg~s$^{-1}$ (most of this energy is emitted by neutrinos),
we obtain the surface
(photon) luminosity $L_\mathrm{surf} \gtrsim 10^{33.5}$~erg~s$^{-1}$,
compatible with the luminosity of Kes 79.   It
corresponds to the persistent total energy losses (approximately equal to
neutrino losses) $ E_\mathrm{tot} \lesssim 10^{42}$~ergs per week.  On this
background X-ray radiation of any powerful outbursts could be discernible.
If the source produces EREs with $E_\mathrm{tot}\sim10^{43}$~erg then the NS
would be able to stay brighter than in a
quiescent state for several months
($\sim 100$~days).
As in the estimates  above
one could anticipate that $\sim10$\%
(or even more) of time the NS would be
in the state of enhanced luminosity
(and quite probably with modified pulse profile).

 On the other hand, the set of data presented by
\cite{g13} and \cite{bogdanov2014}
with observations of Kes 79 every several months during several years shows
that no significant variability has been detected. Thus, we can safely
conclude that no significant variations in the crustal activity happened in
this source during several years of observations.
Therefore we can treat this source
as remaining in the quiescent state.

Alternatively, Kes~79
could
be in active state during all the time of
observations.  So, additional energy releases simply were not visible at
all,
or visible only for a short periods of time (see \citealt{pr12}), and so were
not detected on the background of relatively strong persistent crustal
energy release.

The lack of observable bursting activity makes Kes~79
similar to the anomalous X-ray
pulsar (AXP) CXOU J010043.1-721134 (\citealt{tiengo2008}).
Actually,
there are several AXPs which do not demonstrate
bursts
and have relatively
stable X-ray flux, but CXOU J010043.1-721134
is the most inactive among them
in terms of variations of the surface
emission. Note, however, that this
source was not monitored extensively,
and some periods of higher or lower
luminosity could be missed.

Thus, we can make an intermediate conclusion that observations of
 typical
CCOs with very stable parameters, and in the first place --- Kes 79,
indicate that their crustal activity is different from that of
majority of
magnetars (contrary to the expectation (iii)
in the Introduction), unless they
are in active state during all time of observations.  One can conclude that
just the absence of large external magnetic field might be the reason for
this.

However,
one can expect
that there is
a chance of observing
outbursts and other types of magnetar activity on the background of a
quiescent X-ray radiation from other central sources.
Such an example is given below.

\subsection{The case of 1E161348-5055 in RCW 103}
1E161348-5055 (hereafter 1E) is the central compact X-ray source
in the supernova remnant RCW103.
The age of the remnant is about 2 kyrs, and the central source has several
peculiar properties.  Several hypothesis about the nature of 1E have been
proposed (see, for example, \citealt{pizzo2008} and references therein).
Here we suggest that this source can be treated as a ``hidden'' magnetar
with strong activity in the crust.

1E is characterized by variable X-ray emission in the range of luminosities
$\sim10^{33}$~--~$10^{35}$~erg~s$^{-1}$.  This variability is long term
(months-years) and irregular.  In addition, a period of 6.67 hours was found
(\citealt{deluca2006}).  The nature of this period is not known and many
hypotheses have been discussed in the literature, including compact binaries
of different kind, etc.
In any case, since the period seems to be very stable,
the main possibility is that this is a spin period of a NS with
the upper limit for the period derivative
as $|\dot P|<1.6 \times 10^{-9}$~s~s$^{-1}$
(\citealt{esposito2011}).

The spectra
 obtained in certain phases of activity
can be fitted with two black-bodies with temperatures $\sim0.5$
and 1 keV.   At the same time
pulse profile changes significantly in different
phases.
It was noted (\citealt{deluca2006})
that pulsed fraction is lower
and pulse shape is more irregular when the source is in a high state.
All these features (except the period)
naturally
fit the picture of a
``hidden'' magnetar with strong crustal
activity (see \citealt{deluca2006},
where the authors
indicate similarity
between properties of 1E and
magnetars).  Indeed, crustal activity can result
in appearance of heated
regions of the surface: lower temperature
could
correspond to normal
cooling of a NS of a given age --- typically $\lesssim 100-200 $~eV,
and the higher one --- to typical magnetar
temperatures --- about 0.5 keV.
Therefore, in the simplest case the spectrum could be fitted
as a sum of two blackbodies, and the
pulse profile would be modified, correspondingly.
Note, that in the case of 1E we face
a more complicated situation with two
different bright regions
at the stellar surface (see above).
Anyway, time scale of X-ray
variability and typical luminosity of 1E
are in correspondence with the range of
time intervals between neighbour
EREs for magnetars of similar age
(\citealt{pp11}).

1E is significantly younger than Kes 79
($\sim2$~kyrs vs.  6~kyrs), and so
bursts are expected to happen more often.
Small period derivative
\footnote{If it
is confirmed with better precision.}
is also consistent with expectations
for ``hidden'' magnetars.

\subsection{Outbursts and relaxation in 1E161348-5055}

\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}
\begin{table*
\caption[]{Parameters of three heaters used for
simulations represented in Fig.~1  for the 1.4\,$M_\odot$ star
and heating time  $\tau=120$ days.}
\label{tab:heat}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ c  c  c  c  c  c }
\hline
\hline
model & $H_0$ (erg cm$^{-3}$ s$^{-1}$)
& $\rho_1$ (g cm$^{-3}$) & $ \rho_2$ (g cm$^{-3}$)
& $\Delta \Omega_0/4 \pi$  & composition  \\
\hline
\hline
(a)  &  $3.0 \times 10^{20}$  & $10^{11}$ & $10^{12}$ &  0.4  &  iron \\
(b)  &  $3.0 \times 10^{20}$  & $10^{11}$ & $10^{12}$ &  0.4  & accr.   \\
(c)  &  $3.0 \times 10^{19}$  & $4 \times 10^{10}$ & $4 \times 10^{11}$ &
0.6 & accr. \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table*}

\begin{figure
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Figure_1}
\caption
{
Simulated thermal X-ray luminosities $L$
as a function of time $t$
versus observational X-ray data on 1E 161348-5055
in the time interval from September 1999 to July 2007 (\citealt{deluca2008a}).
Time zero corresponds to the first observation of the outburst.
Observational fluxes and calculated luminosities
are normalized to the flux $F_0$ and luminosity $L_0$
at the zero moment (see text).
Three light curves correspond to three different
heaters (see Table 1) in the NS crust
located in layers $\rho_1 \leq \rho \leq \rho_2$
within solid angles
$\Delta \Omega_0$ around a symmetry axis
(see text).
Long dashed curve corresponds to the model (a) in Table 1;
dotted and solid lines --- to
models (b) and (c), respectively.
All heaters start energy release
at the same moment
and  continue for 120 days.
The age of the NS at this moment is $t_0=2\,\mathrm{kyr}$.
Chandra data is shown with empty circles,
XMM-Newton data --- with diamonds, and
Swift data --- with filled triangles (error bars are disregarded).
}
\label{fig:L(t)}
\end{figure}

Fig.~\ref{fig:L(t)}
shows results of simplified simulations employing 2D-code (see
Paper~I) of luminosity-time dependencies, $L(t)$,
imposed on
the X-ray data on long outburst of 1E
in the time interval from September 1999 to July 2007.
The X-ray fluxes  $F(t)$ measured in different moments
by different missions
(all presented in \citealt{deluca2008a})
have been normalized to the first observation
in this series, when the object is presumably
in a low state  ($F/F_0=L/L_0$).
The calculated curves are normalized
to the luminosity
$L_0= 1.37 \times 10^{33}$~erg~s$^{-1}$
corresponding to
a standard cooling of a NS (without heating)
with $M=1.4~M_\odot$
at the age 2 kyr.
We assume
that the observational outbursts are powered by the energy of the
magnetar's magnetic fields hidden in the bulk (deep in the crust) of the star.
The magnetic energy is  supposed to transform
in the heat inside an internal
region(s) of the NS crust.
We investigate qualitatively possible
parameters of the magnetar heater
which are needed to provide observable EREs
with $\sim$ two orders enhancement
of the observable flux and about
ten years of relaxation.

As
shown in
Paper~I  the results of calculations of thermal
radiation from NSs  with internal
heaters just weakly depend on the
employed equation of state (EOS) of the nucleon matter
in the stellar core.
Therefore, we perform the
illustrative  calculations with the use of a
toy-model EOS, following Paper~I.
In the core we use the simple
parametrization suggested by \cite{hh99} for the EOS obtained by
\cite*{apr98}.  The maximum mass of NSs
in this toy-model is
$2.16~M_\odot$, and powerful direct
Urca process in the core is
allowed as $M \geq 1.77~M_\odot$.
We use the model for NS mass $1.4~M_\odot$.
The  corresponding circumferential
stellar radius is $R=12.74$~km,
and the central density
$\rho_c = 7.78 \times 10^{14}$~g~cm$^{-3}$.
Such a star without internal heaters would cool
rather slowly
(standard cooling, e.g., \citealt{yaketal01})
via modified Urca process of
neutrino emission from the core.
For simplicity, we neglect  effects of
General Relativity
in our 2D-calculations including a
redshift of the surface luminosity.

As usual in cooling calculations,
the star is divided
into the bulk interior and a
thin outer heat-blanketing envelope
(e.g., \citealt*{gpe83}) which extends
from the surface to the layer of the
density $\rho=\rho_{\rm b} \sim
10^{10}$~g~cm$^{-3}$. Its thickness is about two hundred meters.  In the
bulk interior ($\rho > \rho_{\rm b}$),
the 2D code solves the full set of
thermal evolution equations to simulate the
cooling of NSs with the
internal axially symmetric heater in the crust.
The neutrino emissivities,  $Q_\nu$, are taken from
\citet{yaketal01}.
In the present version we
neglect effects of magnetic fields
on thermal conduction and neutrino
emission, as well as on properties of the
blanketing envelope.
In this envelope,
the updated version of
the code (see \citealt*{pcy07}, for details)
uses a solution of stationary
one-dimensional equations for hydrostatic
equilibrium and thermal structure
with radial heat transport.

Similar to  Paper~I,
we introduce an internal phenomenological heat
source located in a layer at $\rho_1 \leq \rho \leq \rho_2$.
The basic difference is only in the scale of temporal behavior
of the heater.
The heating rate
$H$ [erg~cm$^{-3}$~s$^{-1}$] is taken in the form:
\begin{equation}
     H=H(\rho,\, t)=H_0\, \Theta(\rho,\theta,t),
\label{H}
\end{equation}
where $H_0$ is the characteristic heat intensity and
$\Theta(\rho,\theta,t)$ is the step function,
which equals unity when $(\rho_1<\rho<\rho_2)$
\& $(\theta<\theta_0)$ \& $(t_0 < t < t_0+\tau)$, and
vanishes outside these spatial and temporal regions.
The heater looks like a hot wide axisymmetric slab
limited by the angle $\theta_0$ and by densities
$\rho_1$ and $\rho_2$ along radial axis.
The solid angular size of the heater can be expressed as
$\Delta \Omega_0/4\pi = (1-\cos \theta_0)/2$.
The temporal parameters are fixed in our model:
the moment of the energy-input onset, $t_0$, is
$2$ kyr,
the duration of energy input, $\tau$, is
chosen to be $120$ days in order to match the interval
between the first two observations.

In our model there are five main free parameters:
  $H_0$, $\rho_1$,  $\rho_2$,
$\Delta \Omega_0/4\pi$ (or $\theta_0$),
and $\tau$.

We adopt three set of parameters
(labeled ``(a)--(c)'') which are listed in Table~\ref{tab:heat}.
The choice of parameters is not motivated by
any formal fitting and we do not attempt
to perfectly match the observations.
We only try to reproduce the general
shape of the light curve.

There is a variety of possibilities
for the composition and the amount
of the accretion matter capable to
screen completely the magnetar's magnetic field
 discussed in the literature (e.g., \citealt{hch91, vp12, bern12}).
In order to account for it, we choose
the models (a) and (b) to be identical except
the composition of the blanketing envelopes.
Two possible compositions are considered:
the ground state and accreted matter (labeled as
``iron'' and ``accr.'' in Table~\ref{tab:heat},
correspondingly).
The former composition is
the ground state
matter: iron is the main constituent up to
$\rho = 10^8$~g~cm$^{-3}$, heavier
elements dominate at higher density (e.g., \citealt*{hyp07}).
The latter one corresponds to
a fully accreted envelope
(see \citealt{pycg03})
composed successively of H,
He, C, O
with boundaries dependent on $\rho$ and $T$ between the layers.
In deeper layers composition of an accreted crust
transits to iron.

In contrast to Paper~I we use a
relatively short time of the
energy input, $\tau = 120$~days, to simulate long
outbursts of 1E.
Therefore, the main features of the present calculations are the following:
a rapid increase of luminosity and
10-year long relaxation tail shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:L(t)}.

Full energy input in the three
considered cases
is $E_\mathrm{tot} \sim 10^{44}$~erg,
and efficiency of thermal radiation
from the surface is $\sim 0.01$ as
the released energy mostly
goes to the neutrino emission.
This energy input allows one to achieve the
maximum luminosity about $10^{35}$~erg~s$^{-1}$
and thereby provides two orders increase
of the luminosity.

Similar results
are obtained for blackbody temperature $T_\mathrm{s} (t)$
of the outburst. The maximum temperature,
$\sim (3.5 \div 4.0) \times 10^6$~K,
is followed by a long ($>$ 8 yrs) decay.
However, the temperature calculated in such a way
characterizes only an averaged value over
a considerable part of the stellar surface (see Table~1).
Moreover, observational data on temperature
are more scarce than data on fluxes.
And we prefer to use the latter one to confront calculations and
observations.

  Let us emphasize that
parameters of a heater are introduced
purely phenomenologically.
They allow one to outline the
behaviour of the outburst luminosities
with time just approximately.
Nevertheless, our results {\bf allow to} place
constraints on possible models and parameters,
including the total heat energy,
the size of the hot region in the stellar crust,
and the ratio of densities $\rho_2/\rho_1$ which
regulates the tail endurance.

A theoretical model of
the internal heating of the ``hidden'' magnetars
is far out of the scope
of this paper.
In application to the standard magnetars
it was noticed
(e.g. by \citealt{kkpy12})
that the required heat intensity
$H_0 \sim 10^{20}$~erg cm$^{-3}$ s$^{-1}$  could be consistent
with Ohmic decay of electric currents within the heater.
However,
it is still not clear how to transport the magnetic energy
stored in the bulk of the star
to the localized heater inside the crust and
what is the structure of magnetic fields in the
heater surroundings.
These problems concern both types
of magnetars that we discuss.
Presumably,
some progress in describing these processes
has been made recently (e.g. \citealt{bl14}).

\section{DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS}

\subsection{Spin period of 1E161348-5055}

Interpretation and explanation of  the period of 1E is problematic
in any scenario.
Let us
make some
simple estimates to check if it is in principle possible
to bring
the value $P\sim6.67$ hours in correspondence with the
``hidden'' magnetar scenario.
Note, if we
assume that 1E is a ``hidden'' magnetar, then it is difficult to
spin down the
NS
significantly during its lifetime, and we are
left with processes close to the moment of its birth.

Usually,
three
distinct phases of a NS evolution are defined:
ejector, propeller and accretor (see, for example, \citealt{lipunov}).
Ejector spin-down is not effective enough to reach
long periods in a few hours
(typical time before the
fall-back onset) even
in the case of
very large magnetic fields.
Something stronger is required.
When the fall-back is already initiated
(which happens
on the time scale $\sim10^4$~s),
but before the quasi-stable  supercritical
accretion is settled (e.g., \citealt{bern10,  bern12}),
it is possible that
a short propeller stage is present
(\citealt{sh70,is75}).
Spin evolution
at the propeller stage can be, in the first
approximation, described as (\citealt{lipunov}):

\begin{equation}
\frac{d(I\omega)}{dt}=-k \frac{\mu^2}{R_\mathrm{A}^3},
\label{prop}
\end{equation}
where $I$ -- is moment of inertia of a NS, $\omega$ -- is its spin frequency,
$\mu$ -- magnetic moment, and $R_\mathrm{A}$ -- Alfven (magnetospheric) radius.
The coefficient $k$ can be frequency dependent, but
for rough estimates it can be
taken as a constant of order unity.
Then a characteristic time scale of complete spin-down is:
\begin{equation}
\tau\sim I\omega_0 R_\mathrm{A}^3 \mu^{-2},
\label{tau}
\end{equation}
where $\omega_0$ is the initial spin frequency.
For initial spin period about few milliseconds and magnetar-scale field
we have an approximate relation:
\begin{equation}
\tau \sim k_\mathrm{mag} (R_\mathrm{A}/R_\mathrm{NS})^3 {\mathrm s}.
\label{tau1}
\end{equation}
Here $R_\mathrm{NS}$ is the NS radius,
and all dependencies on the initial
spin period and the field are
included
in the coefficient
$k_\mathrm{mag}$,
which is
$\lesssim 1$
for typical magnetar and fall-back parameters.
At the stage of fallback the Alfven
radius can be very small, close to the NS surface.
Thus, it is possible
to reduce significantly
rotation of a NS during a very
short time period.
Then, after the stage of supercritical
accretion rotation
can be nearly frozen down.
Anyway, the
considerations
above can
be acceptable only
as
qualitative
estimates.

Moreover, a NS with large magnetic field
can spin-down before
the onset of the stage of fall-back,
i.e. before
the moment when
the reverse shock
makes its way back to the NS
surface.
Such a situation
is possible
if the magnetosphere of a
newborn NS interacts with the expanding envelope
in the propeller-like regime.
However, detailed study of this case is
beyond the scope of this paper.

Alternatively, 1E can reach long spin period if
there is a fossil disc around this compact object,
 and
its external magnetic field
 is large as for a typical magnetar,
i.e.
if the object is not a ``hidden''
magnetar.  Interaction of highly
magnetized NS with a disc might result in slow rotation,
so that the period
$P=6.67$~hours
can be reached in 2 kyrs (see \citealt{deluca2006, pizzo2008} and
references therein).
However, in this case one has to
explain why we do not observe
any manifestation of
a strong magnetospheric activity
in this source (flares,
non-thermal
radiation, etc.).

Although,
we mentioned
an example (see above) of a
magnetar without significant
transient
activity --- AXP CXOU J010043.1-721134.
So, potentially, we need longer observation
of RCW 103 to be sure that there is
no large
external
magnetic field
of this compact object.

\subsection{Unification of NSs}
The idea of unifying different types of young isolated
NSs in one
evolutionary framework (\citealt{guns}) looks very promising
(see, for example, \citealt{v13,ipt2014}
and references and discussions therein).
The concept of buried magnetic field
(\citealt{bern10,ho11,vp12}) might be
once more
ingredient necessary to fulfill the program of ``Grand unification of
neutron stars''. In particular, it can help to link
CCOs with other types of
young NSs including magnetars. However,
\citealt{bogdanovetal2014}
presented arguments against the
hypothesis that after few to tens of thousand years
CCOs could become normal radio pulsars
when their fields diffuse out.

To establish possible evolutionary links
between different types of young
NSs it is necessary to better understand
all types of activity
they demonstrate. In this respect,
it would be useful to address
in more details the problem of crustal activity
in CCOs proposed to be
``hidden'' magnetars.

Of course, it is not expected that all
of CCOs are ``hidden'' magnetars.
Long-term behaviour
of the majority of CCOs demonstrates that
magnetic field evolution in their crusts
is different from that in
magnetars.
For most of CCOs
it is consistent with a notion
that
their buried fields have values typical
to normal radio pulsars.
Indeed, most of them do not show
any significant activity,
or even variability. Pulsed fraction is low
in most of the sources.
However, it is worth to mention that
\cite{krause2005} discovered specific
features in the supernova remnant Cas A
which
can be interpreted as light
echo of the past activity of a magnetar
(see a brief discussion in
\citealt{deluca2008}).

There is a
significant
probability that the source 1E161348-5055 in RCW103
(or 1E) is a ``hidden'' magnetar, as its properties
can be well explained by the crustal
activity of the magnetar type.
Note, that its  properties are in contrast with
the puzzling absence of variability of
CXO J1852.6+0040 (or Kes~79), which was  also
proposed to be a ``hidden'' magnetar.
If we assume that Kes 79 is in a low (quiescent) state,
then it is natural to argue that
crusts of ``hidden'' magnetars
are not as active as crusts of normal
magnetars. The activity of 1E
is also relatively moderate:
only three outbursts in $\sim$20 yrs of
observations were detected --- less than expected
for a magnetar of such age.

On the other hand,
differences between Kes 79 and 1E
could
be related to the amount of
fall-back.  For larger accreted masses the
initial crust can be
shifted down significantly deeper, and so
the energy release can happen in the region of larger
density, that hinders
the energy transport to the stellar surface
(energy is carried away mainly  by
neutrinos).
Finally, different levels
of activity can be attributed
to different initial toroidal magnetic fields.
This possibility was
discussed by \cite{pp11} and \cite{ppe11}.

Another CCO --- RX J0822-4300 in Puppis A, ---
also demonstrates
some
peculiarities (see \citealt{deluca2012} and references therein).
This source has two antipodal hot spots
with different temperatures and sizes.
In addition,
a variable spectral line has been detected.
Potentially, these features  can be
related to field
structure
in the crust,
and so the object can be linked
with the population of ``hidden'' magnetars.

If some of CCOs are indeed ``hidden'' magnetars, then
we can consider an interesting possibility.
Presumably, the amount of fall-back  inversely
depends on the
energy of explosion (\citealt{macfadyen01, macfadyen2014}).
In a recent
paper \cite{utrobin2014}
demonstrated that the energy of an explosion grows with stellar mass:
$E\sim M^{3.8}$ (however, it is not clear, if the same scaling
can be used for stars in close interacting binaries, and if magnetars are
related to SN IIP).  With this result in hands,
we can assume that standard and ``hidden'' magnetars
have progenitors with different masses:
higher masses for standard magnetars
without fall-back, and so with larger energies
of explosion.
If a crustal magnetic field can reach large values
for standard
as well as for ``hidden'' magnetars,
then
(despite several
opposite
claims that magnetars are related to the most massive NS progenitors,
e.g.  \citealt{muno2006})
it is quite likely that
mass
is not
the   crucial
factor determining strength
of the magnetic field.
Then, it is quite reasonable
to consider  effects of the
initial rotation rate of NSs.

Isolated stars (or stars in wide binaries)
cannot produce rapidly
rotating cores (see a recent paper by \citealt{maeder2014}
and reference therein) which are necessary for
generation of magnetar magnetic fields.
Therefore,
the idea of magnetar origin in close binaries
(\citealt{pp2006,bp2009}), which is supported by observation
(\citealt{davies2009,clark2014})
obtains an additional support.

In this respect it is tempting to note,
that the remnant of SN 1987A
potentially can be a ``hidden'' magnetar, as it
was probably born soon after a coalescence
(\citealt{morris2007}), and so
rotation of the stellar core could be significantly
enhanced, which is
favourable for magnetar
field generation.
Strong fall-back
advocated in the case of
SN 1987A (\citealt{chevalier, hch91, bern10})
indirectly supports this hypothesis.

\begin{acknowledgements}

SP thanks Yuri Levin and Konstantin Postnov for discussions.
The authors thank Alexander Potekhin for data of
the accreted (heat-blanketing) envelope calculations.
SP was supported by the RFBR grant 14-02-00657.
ADK was supported partly by the RFBR grant 14-02-00868
and by the State Program ``Leading Scientific Schools of RF''
(grant NSh 294.2014.2). We thank the anonymous referee for useful comments.

\end{acknowledgements}

\bibliographystyle{apj}


\section{Introduction}

\noindent The $\gamma$-ray sky is dominated by the population of active galactic
nuclei (AGN). AGN are about 58\% of the objects in the third
{\it Fermi} Large Area Telescope source catalog (3FGL; Acero et al. 2015),
which reports the
$\gamma$-ray sources detected by {\it Fermi}-LAT in the first four
years of scientific observations. A part from cosmic-ray related high
energy emission from
a handful of normal galaxies \citep[e.g.,][]{ackermann12}, almost all the
extragalactic sources are associated with radio-loud AGN.
In radio-loud AGN the radio emission is comparable or even stronger
than the emission observed in the other energy bands, and is
associated with the presence of a bipolar outflow of relativistic
plasma that is responsible for both
synchrotron (from radio up to X-rays) and inverse Compton radiation
(at high energies).\\
The large majority ($\sim$98\%) of the AGN emitting at high energies
is represented by the blazar population which comprises flat spectrum
radio quasars (FSRQ) and BL Lac objects. In these objects the
relativistic jet is aligned to our line of sight and the emission is amplified
by Doppler boosting effects. The remaining 2\% are associated
with misaligned AGN, as reported in the third catalog of AGN detected
by {\it Fermi}-LAT  \citep[3LAC;][]{ackermann15}. It is worth
noting that
during the EGRET era, only three radio galaxies were
proposed as the low-energy counterpart of $\gamma$-ray sources
\citep[Centaurus\,A, NGC\,6251, J1737-15;][]{hartman99}, but
\citet{casandjian08} did not
confirm the association. \\
The dominance of the radio-loud population among $\gamma$-ray emitting
objects have suggested a possible relation between the emission in
radio and $\gamma$-ray energy bands. This connection is supported by
the spectral energy distribution (SED) of the blazar sub-classes, which are
well-modeled just by changing the radio luminosity. This suggests
common under-lying physical processes linking the synchrotron and the
inverse Compton emission \citep{fossati98}.\\
Although $\gamma$-ray-loud AGN
are radio-loud
sources, this does not imply that all the radio-loud AGN are
$\gamma$-ray emitters. In particular, blazars with strong $\gamma$-ray
emission are brighter and more luminous at radio frequencies
\citep{kovalev09}, have faster jets \citep{lister09} and higher
variability Doppler factors \citep{savolainen10} with respect to
those without (significant) $\gamma$-ray emission, indicating that
{\it Fermi}-LAT mainly detects the brightest objects from
radio flux-density-limited samples.\\
Despite decades of efforts, many aspects of the physics of
relativistic jets remain elusive. In particular, understanding how the jet is
launched and accelerated, what is its structure, where is the
high-energy emitting region and what is the responsible mechanism, are
among the greatest challenges in the study of AGN. So far, many
scenarios have been proposed for describing the typical variability
observed in blazars. The ``shock-in-jet'' model predicts that a
disturbance in the jet forms a shock that propagates downstream along
the jet and is responsible for both the high and low energy emission
\citep[e.g.,][]{marscher85}. On the other hand, the ``structured-jet
scenario'' predicts that the jet has a velocity structure, and the
high- and low-energy emission comes from different regions
\citep[e.g.,][]{ghisellini05}.\\
Understanding what
drives the emission at low and high energies will provide strong
constraints on the open questions about the physics of the
relativistic jets. By combining information arising from (high
resolution) radio observations and $\gamma$-ray light curves it will
be possible to investigate the presence of shocks, turbulence, or
velocity gradients in the jet, the nature of the seed photons upscattered
at high energy, as well as the magnetic field structure.\\
This contribution reports on some recent
results on the radio/$\gamma$-ray connection and on the
physical mechanisms that may relate the emission in these two bands.\\

\section{Radio/GeV connection}

\subsection{Statistical studies}

Many statistical works have been carried out in order to confirm, or
not, a radio/$\gamma$-rays connection. A detailed statistical analysis
of the correlation between radio and $\gamma$-ray emission of AGN
detected by {\it Fermi} during its first year of operation was
presented in \citet{ackermann11}. This work made use of the
largest data set ever used so far. They
found that the statistical significance of a positive correlation
between the centimeter radio emission and the broadband (100 MeV $<$E
$<$ 300 GeV)
$\gamma$-ray energy flux is very high for the whole AGN sample, and
increases when FSRQ and BL Lacs are considered separately. A similar
result was suggested by \citet{ghirlanda10} who considered a much smaller
sample. The radio-$\gamma$-ray correlation becomes very weak when energies E$>$10 GeV are considered, suggesting a physical rather than an
observational origin for explaining such a lack of correlation
\citep{giroletti15}. \\
The coexistence of {\it Fermi} and {\it Planck} satellites in orbit
has enabled the exploration of the connection between the
$\gamma$-rays and the radio emission at (sub-)millimeter
wavelengths. In their work, \citet{leon12} found a correlation between
the $\gamma$-ray and (sub-)mm luminosity which holds over five
orders of magnitude. However, in some bands the correlation
becomes more significant when quasi-simultaneous observations (within
2 months) are considered. Observations of some time delay between the
variability in the different energy bands have implication on the
mechanism at the basis of the flare and its location.
For this
reason, important information on the physics of relativistic jets may be
obtained by exploring the multi-band variability emission. \\

\subsection{Radio/GeV correlated variability}

Blazars show strong variability across the entire electromagnetic spectrum and
a simultaneous or delayed occurrence may indicate the location
of the variability region. Delayed variability at the long wavelengths
is expected in presence of opacity effects from the innermost compact region of
the AGN (within the broad line region, BLR). On the other hand, a
rough simultaneity of radio and GeV flares locates the production of
the $\gamma$-ray photons in a
region downstream the jet, where the radio emission is not self-absorbed.\\
Because {\it Fermi} operates in an all-sky scanning mode, it is possible to
compare the $\gamma$-ray light curves with radio light curves from dedicated
monitoring programmes. \citet{fuhrmann14} presented results of a
cross-correlation analysis between $\gamma$-rays and cm/mm wavelengths
of a sub-sample of {\it Fermi}-bright blazars. They found a
highly significant correlation between the two bands, with the radio
lagging $\gamma$-rays. The time delay between high energies and radio
is (7$\pm$9) days at 142 GHz and
systematically increases as longer wavelengths are
considered, becoming (76$\pm$23) days at 2 GHz.
The frequency-dependent time lag is in agreement with the
opacity of the jet. This suggests that the $\gamma$-rays
instantaneously escape from the production site, while the radio
emission from the same region becomes optically thin progressively at
later times, as a consequence of energy losses. The short time delay
between $\gamma$-rays and (sub-)millimeter emission indicates that
the $\gamma$-ray site is located about 1 pc upstream the mm core region.\\
A different conclusion was drawn by \citet{leon11} who compared 37-GHz
and $\gamma$-ray light curves. They noticed that statistically the
rising of the mm
light curve precedes the $\gamma$-ray peak of a few months
(observer's frame),
suggesting that the high energy flare takes place a few parsecs
downstream along the jet. This opens questions on the seed photons
which are upscattered to the high energies. In fact, at such a
distance from the central region, the UV photons from the BLR are not
effective anymore, and other seed photons, like the IR from the dusty
torus \citep[e.g.][]{sikora08}, or synchrotron photons from a
different electron population must be considered.
On the other hand, the strongest $\gamma$-ray flares occur during the
rising/peaking stages
of the mm light curve, suggesting that both episodes are related to
the same disturbance. \\

\section{The role of VLBI}

The studies described in the previous Sections refer mainly to radio
observations with single-dish telescopes. Low resolution observations
cannot separate the contributions from the various source components.
Observations with parsec-scale resolution are required to disentangle the
flux density and the polarization of the core region from the emission arising
from the jet and extended features. \\
Important information on the innermost region of relativistic jets comes from
dedicated studies of bright blazars using the Very Long Baseline
Interferometry (VLBI) technique. The (sub-)milliarcsecond-scale
resolution of VLBI observations allowed a deep look into the jet base,
revealing different structures, like the presence of superluminal knots
\citep[e.g.,][]{jorstad01a}, changes in the jet direction,
\citep[e.g., OJ\,287;][]{agudo11}, limb-brightened
structures \citep[e.g., M\,87;][]{kovalev07}.\\
Monitoring campaigns of multi-frequency VLBI observations of
$\gamma$-ray blazars detected by EGRET suggest that the highest level of
$\gamma$-ray emission is connected
to the ejection of a new superluminal component
\citep[e.g.,][]{jorstad01b}. This supports the idea that at least the
strongest $\gamma$-ray emission is strictly related to a shock in the
jet. \\

\subsection{Shock-in-jet model}

In the shock-in-jet model, the flare originates as a
disturbance that
modifies the flow parameters and produces a shock wave
\citep{marscher85, valtaoja92}. The shock
model implies: (1) a growth stage, when the shock forms up to the
development of its maximum, which is observed not simultaneously at
the various energy bands due to opacity effects (Compton losses
dominate); (2) a plateau, when energy losses and gains are balanced
(synchrotron losses dominate); (3) a decaying stage, when the shock
fades due to energy losses (adiabatic losses
dominate). \\
The propagation of a
transverse shock produces
the amplification of the perpendicular component of the magnetic field
with respect to the parallel one, and an enhancement of the
luminosity. However, if the shock is
oblique the polarization
properties may be different, depending on the obliqueness of the shock
itself and to the characteristics of the underlying magnetic field
like its order and strength \citep{hughes11}. It is worth noting that
90$^{\circ}$ rotation of the electric vector position angle (EVPA) are
expected during the transition
between the opacity regimes. However, such changes in the opacity would cause a
dramatic drop of the flux density which is not observed.\\
The shock-in-jet scenario naturally explains the frequency-dependent
variability observed in many blazars, the detection of superluminal
components that
are interpreted as the observable manifestation of the propagating
shock, and the abrupt rotation of 90$^{\circ}$ of the EVPA \citep[e.g.,][]{orienti13,orienti11,hovatta08}.
Outstanding examples are the FSRQ 3C\,454.3 and
PKS\,1510-089. These objects underwent major flares in $\gamma$-rays,
reaching an apparent peak luminosity $\sim$10$^{49-50}$ erg s$^{-1}$
\citep{orienti13,abdo11}. The huge flares occurred near the peak of
the millimeter flare and were accompanied by the
emergence of a superluminal knot with apparent speed above 10-20$c$,
indicating a tight connection between $\gamma$-ray flares and changes in the
parsec-scale jet structure \citep{jorstad13,orienti13}. However, the
location of the $\gamma$-ray production region is not unambiguously
determined.
The short time lag derived between the $\gamma$-ray flare
and the detection of both a new component and the mm flare indicates
that the high energy region is located in the millimeter photosphere,
i.e. the region where the mm emission becomes optically thin, a few
parsecs away from the BLR. \\
In OJ\,287 \citet{agudo11} reported that
$\gamma$-ray peaks are likely
associated with a large increase of the linear polarization from a
jet component located about 14 parsec from the central engine, strongly
indicating that the dissipation region is located well downstream
along the jet as a consequence of the interaction between a
disturbance and a standing conical shock.
If we consider that the entire cross-section of the jet is responsible
for the $\gamma$-ray emission, this scenario is rather difficult to
reconcile with the size expected on the basis of the causality
argument, unless the
collimation angle of the jet is
extremely small, or the flaring region occupies only a fraction of the
jet cross section. The latter scenario is supported by the
observations of frequent changes and large jumps in the position angle of the
direction of the superluminal knots moving along the jet
\citep{lister13}.\\
In PKS\,1510-089 no correlation between
the jet properties and the $\gamma$-ray flares was found, indicating
that the high-energy emission does not arise from the knot itself, but it
is likely located in the unresolved core component. By following the
evolution of three superluminal knots in PKS\,1510-089,
\citet{orienti13b} found that the flux density decreases with time as
expected for adiabatic losses, and the polarization percentage increases
reaching values up to 10\%, much larger than what is
found in the core component. Remarkably, all the knots
are characterized by the same EVPA $\sim$80$^{\circ}$, once they
emerge from the core.\\
Not all the $\gamma$-ray flares have a clear counterpart at low
energies even if they are produced by the same source, like in the case of
some outbursts of 3C 279 and BL
Lac where no
significant radio variability was detected after the $\gamma$-ray flare
\citep{abdo10c,marscher08}.
In this case the trigger should be a
disturbance that develops in the innermost region of the AGN, within
the BLR, where the emission is utterly opaque at the radio
wavelengths. \\
It is worth mentioning that not all the radio flares and the ejection
of new superluminal components are associated with high energy
flares. Straightforward examples are the Narrow Line Seyfert 1
SBS\,0846+513 and the FSRQ
4C\,49.22 where the radio peak and the ejection of a new component are
not related to any obvious high energy activity
\citep{dammando13,cutini14}. The lack of a high energy counterpart may
be related to the absence of enough seed photons in the region where the
energy dissipation takes place.
On the other hand, in these objects high
$\gamma$-ray activities occur during low radio activity states,
suggesting different regions and/or mechanisms for low and high energy
variability.\\

\subsection{The Structured-jet model}

Although it proved to be successful in describing many aspects of the
most luminous blazars, the shock-in-jet model seems inadequate for
reproducing the observational properties and the spectral energy
distribution of TeV blazars and radio galaxies. Although the high
energy emission implies high Doppler factors and extreme bulk motion
VLBI observations of TeV objects did not reveal any superluminal jet
component. \\
The properties of TeV objects are better
explained by the structured-jet scenario, which postulates a velocity
gradient in the jet, either transverse (faster central spine
surrounded by a slower layer; e.g. Ghisellini et al. 2005) or radial (the flow
decelerates as it moves outward; e.g. Georganopoulos \& Kazanas
2003). The spine-layer model is supported by observations in TeV
objects of
limb-brightened structure both in total intensity
(e.g., the BL Lac Mrk\,501 and the radio galaxy M87; Giroletti et
al. 2008, Kovalev et al. 2007) and in polarized emission
\citep[e.g., the BL Lac Mrk\,421;][]{lico14}. In this scenario the
electrons of each region upscatter the beamed soft
photons coming from the other. \\
The lack of a unique zone responsible
for high and low energy emission may produce a large variety of
correlation, as well as uncorrelated variability. This seems the case
of the radio galaxy 3C\,84 at the centre of Perseus cluster. The
$\gamma$-ray and radio light curves of 3C\,84 do not seem correlated,
and no obvious radio flare is associated with the episodes of Very
High Energy (VHE, E$>$100 GeV) emission
\citep{nagai12}. Interestingly, this source was not detected
in $\gamma$-rays
by EGRET. After three months of scientific observations, {\it
  Fermi}-LAT detected
$\gamma$-ray emission from 3C\,84 at a
level 7 times higher than the EGRET upper limit, indicating that the
lack of $\gamma$-ray emission during the EGRET era was intrinsic to the
source rather
than due to sensitivity limitation \citep{abdo09c}. A change in the physical
characteristics of 3C\,84 is marked by the different structure of the
jet: edge-darkened in the EGRET era, and limb-brightened in the {\it Fermi} era
\citep{nagai14}. This poses strong evidence in favour of the
jet-structured scenario for this misaligned AGN.\\

\section{Concluding remarks}

Multiwavelength monitoring campaigns suggest a relation
between $\gamma$-ray flares and the radio variability. However, the
time delay is different if the peak or the rising of the mm outburst
are considered. In the former case the $\gamma$-ray peak precedes the
radio one with a time lag increasing as longer wavelengths are
considered. On the other hand, in case of strong $\gamma$-ray flares,
the $\gamma$-ray flare seems to follow the onset of the radio outburst
suggesting that the dissipation region occurs at parsec-scale
distance from the central engine. The observed variability is usually
explained in terms of a shock moving along the jet, whose
manifestation is a superluminal knot observable with high-frequency
VLBI observations. However, the variability
observed in $\gamma$-rays does not always show the same
properties in the other energy bands, and it is possible that
different $\gamma$-ray flares of the same source originate at
different distances from the central engine.\\
The ``shock-in-jet'' model is not able to reproduce the observational
properties of low-luminosity blazars. For example, the
$\gamma$-ray properties of the TeV
emitting blazars and radio galaxies are better explained by a two-zone
model that assumes a gradient velocity in the jet, either radial or
transverse. This
``structured-jet scenario'' is supported by observations of
limb-brightened structures of the jet, likely witnessing a faster
central spine surrounded by a slower layer.
Therefore, low and high energy emission originates in different regions
and a connection between the radio and $\gamma$-rays may not be trivial. \\
The advent of the Cherenkov Telescope Array, operating in the GeV/TeV
band, will allow us to investigate the physics of relativistic jets in
the most extreme objects which are not well sampled by the {\it
  Fermi}-LAT energy bands.\\