Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 7 minor 68 references

Gas dynamics in an AGN-host galaxy at $z\simeq2.6$: regular rotation, non-circular motions, and mass models

T0 review · 3 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The molecular gas in z≈2.6 AGN-host galaxy PKS 0529-549 forms a dynamically cold, rotation-supported disk with a flat rotation curve to 3.3 kpc, and its rotation-curve mass limits contradict photometric mass estimates.

desk verdict A careful single-object kinematics paper whose new ALMA [CI] data genuinely resolve the disk and non-circular structures, with the mass discrepancy claims real but conditional on kinematic assumptions the authors mostly name themselves. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.08958 v1 pith:2WI2IHM3 submitted 2024-11-13 astro-ph.GA

Lingrui Lin , Federico Lelli , Carlos De Breuck , Allison Man , Zhi-Yu Zhang , Paola Santini , Antonino Marasco , Marco Castellano
show 4 more authors
Nicole Nesvadba Thomas G. Bisbas Hao-Tse Huang Matthew Lehnert
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords darkmattergalaxies:activehigh-redshiftkinematicsanddynamicsformationevolutionmoleculargasrotatingdisks
topics Dark Matter
open problems Dark Matter
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 asks whether the molecular gas in PKS 0529-549 — a radio-loud active galaxy at redshift 2.6, observed in the epoch of peak star formation and black-hole growth — is in ordered motion. Using new ALMA observations of the [C i] (2-1) fine-structure line of neutral carbon, a tracer of molecular gas, at about 1.5 kpc resolution, it argues that the gas forms a dynamically cold, rotation-supported disk with $V_{\rm rot}/\sigma_{\rm v}=6\pm3$ (rotation about six times the gas turbulence) and a flat rotation curve out to 3.3 kpc. That order is surprising in a galaxy with such extreme star formation and AGN activity, and it coexists with clear disorder: a kinematically anomalous central structure and two gas tails that together carry at least 12% of the line flux and may record a past merger. Turning the rotation curve into mass models gives hard upper limits on stellar and gas mass that clash with photometric estimates, leaving open whether the photometric masses, the equilibrium assumption, or a pair of galaxies along the line of sight is at fault.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by 3D kinematic modeling of the ALMA line cube rather than by 2D moment maps. The tilted-ring code 3DBarolo — which fits concentric rotating rings directly to the three-dimensional data cube, convolving the model with the telescope beam — corrects for beam smearing and for the intensity-weighting bias that flattens apparent rotation curves; each ring carries geometric parameters (center, position angle, inclination, systemic velocity) and physical ones (rotation velocity, velocity dispersion, surface density), with the kinematic center fixed by hand because free fits do not converge. An asymmetric-drift correction converts the fitted rotation velocity into the circular velocity $V_{\rm c}(R)$ using the radial profiles of gas surface density and velocity dispersion. That circular-velocity curve is then fed into MCMC mass models whose model velocities combine a Sérsic-profile stellar component, a disk gas component, and an optional NFW dark-matter halo, with $\Lambda$CDM scaling relations used as priors.

What would settle it

Deep rest-frame optical or near-infrared imaging (JWST or HST) of PKS 0529-549 would settle the central tension: a single stellar component with a photometric mass near $3\times10^{11}\,M_\odot$ inside 3.3 kpc cannot coexist with an equilibrium flat rotation curve of roughly $300$ km s$^{-1}$, whereas resolving two separate stellar components along the line of sight would confirm the superposition scenario and invalidate the single-disk dynamical model. A complementary test is to map the anomalous central structure at higher resolution: a front-back velocity reversal along the minor axis would reveal the radial motions that the current model sets to zero.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that PKS 0529-549 contains a regular, dynamically cold rotating disk of molecular gas, with $V_{\rm rot}/\sigma_{\rm v}=6\pm3$ and a flat rotation curve that yields a total dynamical mass of about $10^{11}\,M_\odot$ within 3.3 kpc — an orderly disk inside a galaxy whose star formation rate of order $10^3\,M_\odot\,\rm yr^{-1}$ and radio-loud AGN make such order unexpected. The same data show that the disk coexists with non-circular motions: a kinematically anomalous structure at about 2 kpc from the center, a South-West gas tail, and a weaker Eastern tail, together at least 12% of the [C i] (2-1) flux, plausibly the leftovers of a major merger. Mass models fitted to the asymmetric-drift-corrected circular velocity curve set hard dynamical upper limits — $M_{\rm gas}\simeq 8.6\times10^{10}\,M_\odot$ and $M_\star\simeq1.1\times10^{11}\,M_\odot$ — but the gas-only model cannot reproduce the inner rotation curve, and the stellar limit sits about a factor of three below the SED-based stellar mass of $3\times10^{11}\,M_\odot$. Models with and without a dark-matter halo fit equally well, leaving the dark-matter content unconstrained, and the paper concludes that the discrepancy could stem from the photometric masses, from a disk not yet in dynamical equilibrium, or from a second galaxy hiding along the line of sight.

Load-bearing premise

The kinematic modeling assumes a single, axisymmetric, flat rotating disk with zero radial motions and a hand-fixed center (free fits of the center do not converge), so if the anomalous central structure or the gas tails belong to the disk, or if radial flows are significant, the fitted rotation speeds and the mass limits derived from them would be biased.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the measured ratio is right, extreme star formation and a radio-loud AGN do not necessarily destroy ordered rotation in the molecular gas of a cosmic-noon galaxy.
  • The dynamical upper limits imply that SED-based stellar masses and standard [C i]- and dust-based gas masses can exceed what the gravitational potential allows, unless the disk is out of equilibrium or two galaxies are aligned along the line of sight.
  • Because baryons-only and baryons-plus-DM models fit the rotation curve equally well, dark-matter fractions at high redshift cannot be measured securely until baryonic masses are known to about 25 percent precision.
  • Non-circular structures carrying at least 12% of the line flux would be smeared away or misread at lower resolution, so full 3D line-cube analysis is necessary to separate rotation, merger remnants, and possible outflows in high-z galaxies.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A plausible generalization the paper does not make: if cold molecular disks persist inside such violently active hosts, AGN feedback at cosmic noon may act mainly on the ionized gas phase while leaving the cold gas disk intact, which would sharpen how feedback models are judged.
  • The superposition scenario, if confirmed in this system, would imply that a fraction of high-redshift 'single' galaxies with AGN are chance alignments, so any kinematic mass measurement on unresolved targets would be systematically suspect.
  • A testable extension the five-ring model cannot address: higher-resolution mapping of the anomalous central structure should show a minor-axis velocity reversal if it is an inflow related to the South-West tail, as the paper suggests.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 7 minor

Summary. The paper presents new ALMA [C I] (2-1) observations of PKS 0529-549, a radio-loud AGN-host galaxy at z ≃ 2.6, at roughly 1.5 kpc spatial resolution. Using the 3D tilted-ring code 3DBarolo, the authors model the [C I] kinematics and conclude that the molecular gas is in a dynamically cold, rotation-supported disk with Vrot/σv = 6 ± 3 and a flat rotation curve out to ~3.3 kpc. They also identify several non-circular components: a kinematic anomaly near the galaxy center, a South-West gas tail, and a weaker Eastern tail, together comprising at least 12% of the total [C I] flux. The rotation curve is used to construct mass models with different combinations of gas, stars, and a Navarro-Frenk-White dark matter halo. The single-component models give hard upper limits on gas and stellar masses that are inconsistent with photometric estimates: the stars-only limit is about a factor of three below the SED-based stellar mass, and the gas-only limit is below gas masses inferred from [C I] and dust. The paper discusses possible reasons, including non-equilibrium dynamics, an unresolved two-galaxy line of sight, and systematic problems in photometric mass estimates.

Significance. If the kinematic modeling is trustworthy, this is a valuable addition to the sparse sample of high-resolution, multi-tracer kinematic studies of galaxies at cosmic noon. The paper shows that a vigorous starburst/AGN host can still contain a dynamically cold molecular disk, in line with recent ALMA results, and that non-circular structures can coexist with regular rotation. The mass-model comparison highlights a real tension between dynamical and photometric mass estimators, which is an important problem for high-redshift galaxy studies. The authors are appropriately cautious in interpreting the discrepancies and lay out concrete observational tests (HST/JWST imaging, multi-line data) to resolve them. The main limitation is that the central kinematic results rest on assumptions that are not fully stress-tested, as detailed below.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4.1] The kinematic center is fixed by hand because free 3DBarolo fits do not converge to the minor axis, and the radial velocity Vrad is set to zero. These two choices are consequential: a non-zero Vrad or an offset center can change Vrot and σv, and both are used as inputs to the rotation curve and mass models. The paper should demonstrate that the derived disk parameters are robust against reasonable changes in these assumptions. Concretely, re-run the fits with Vrad as a free parameter (or test whether a non-zero Vrad improves the fit and changes Vrot), and repeat the fits with the center shifted by ±0.1–0.2 arcsec along the minor axis to see how Vrot and σv respond. Without this, the quoted Vrot/σv = 6 ± 3 remains conditional on the very assumptions that non-circular motions are negligible and that radial motions are absent.
  2. [§4.2 and §4.4] The 3DBarolo fit is performed on a masked cube that includes the anomalous central component (R ≃ 0.1–0.3 arcsec at LoS velocities −501 to −346 km s⁻¹) and the two tails. Because the innermost two or three fitted rings overlap the anomalous structure, the fitted Vrot and σv may be biased by real flux that the axisymmetric model cannot represent. The paper should quantify this by re-fitting after explicitly masking the anomalous component (e.g., excluding voxels blueward of −300 km s⁻¹) and the tails, and by showing that the resulting rotation curve and velocity dispersion are consistent within errors. The current statement that the non-circular components are 'residuals' (Section 4.4) is not a substitute for such a test, since the mask used for the fit includes them.
  3. [§5, Eq. (2)] The MCMC likelihood uses only the statistical uncertainties on the circular velocity Vc. The systematic uncertainties introduced by the fixed kinematic center, the fixed Vrad, the fixed vertical scale height, and the choice of a constant σv are not propagated into the mass-model upper limits. Given that the factor-of-three discrepancy between the dynamical stellar-mass upper limit and the SED-based mass is a central claim, the paper should provide a systematic error budget for the rotation curve. As a minimum, estimate how much Vc would change under alternative (yet reasonable) kinematic assumptions—e.g., non-zero Vrad, center offsets, or a 2× thicker disk—and propagate that change into the inferred masses. If the factor-of-three discrepancy persists under these perturbations, the claim is much stronger.
minor comments (7)
  1. [Throughout] The chemical symbol 'C I' is typeset inconsistently as '[Ci]' and '[C i]' (also in the abstract and Section 2). Please unify the notation, e.g., '[C I]'.
  2. [Eq. (1)] The uncertainty formula uses the abbreviation NMAD, which is never defined; please spell out 'normalized median absolute deviation' and explain why this particular combination is used.
  3. [§4.2] The combined uncertainty on Vrot/σv = 6 ± 3 is quoted without showing the propagation of the individual errors on Vrot and σv. Please state the assumed errors on Vrot and σv used in this calculation.
  4. [Table 3] The note says 'random errors of the fluxes are less than 1%', but the uncertainties shown are 10% of the flux. If this is a calibration error, please label it as such and use the term 'systematic' rather than 'random'.
  5. [§4.4] The term 'Renzograms' (a contraction of Renzini + diagrams) is used without definition or a citation; please add a brief explanation or a reference to the original definition.
  6. [§5.2.2] The statement that 1.1 × 10¹¹ M⊙ is a 'hard upper limit' on the stellar mass should be qualified, because it depends on the assumed spherical geometry; the flattened disk+bulge model in the appendix gives a lower value. Consider stating that this is an upper limit under the spherical assumption.
  7. [References] The received/accepted dates in the manuscript header ('Received September 15, 1996; accepted March 16, 1997') are clearly template artifacts and should be corrected before final submission.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: rotation curve and mass limits are fitted to the observed cube and compared with independent photometric benchmarks; hand-fixed geometry is a stated modeling assumption, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. The kinematic parameters (Vsys, PA, i, Vrot, sigma_v) are obtained by 3DBarolo fits to the ALMA [C I](2-1) cube (Secs. 4.1-4.2), using the public external code of Di Teodoro & Fraternali (2015); the quoted Vrot/sigma_v = 6 +/- 3 is a ratio of fitted quantities and not an imposed prior. The circular-velocity curve is then derived from Vrot with an asymmetric-drift correction computed from the fitted sigma and the observed [C I] surface-density profile (Sec. 4.3). The mass models in Sec. 5 adjust free normalizations (Upsilon_gas, Upsilon_star, M200, C200) to reproduce Vc; the gas-only and stars-only models use uniform/uninformative priors and produce upper limits that are compared with SED-based stellar masses and CO/[C I]/dust-based gas masses from other data sets. That comparison is an external benchmark rather than a restatement of the fit inputs. The complete models do adopt priors centered on a CO-derived gas mass and Lambda-CDM scaling relations, but the paper explicitly warns that the DM contribution is unconstrained by the disk-halo degeneracy and does not present those posteriors as independent predictions (Secs. 5.3, 6.3). The non-circular structures are identified in channel maps, PV diagrams, and residual maps as data minus model features, and the paper explicitly labels their fluxes as lower limits because the axisymmetric model azimuthally averages emission into rings (Sec. 4.4); this is a conservative acknowledgment, not an output defined as its input. Self-citations (Lelli et al. 2018; Huang et al. 2024; Lelli 2023) provide initial guesses, external photometric values, and general context but do not by themselves force the fitted rotation curve, the mass upper limits, or the claimed discrepancies. The manual fixing of the kinematic center along the minor axis and the Vrad = 0 assumption (Secs. 4.1-4.2) are stated modeling assumptions that make the results conditional on non-circular emission being a small perturbation; this limits robustness but does not make any equation in the derivation equivalent to its own input. No load-bearing step reduces to a self-citation chain or to a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction.

Assumptions & free parameters 9 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The paper's mass results rest on several fitted scaling parameters and parametric profile assumptions, but these are standard in rotation-curve mass modeling and are disclosed. The most important assumption is that the [CI] emission is a single axisymmetric disk; the paper acknowledges that the anomalous central structure and tails could violate this. The photometric mass comparisons come from prior literature and are treated as external benchmarks.

free parameters (9)
  • Gas mass scaling parameter log10(Ygas) = -0.07 (gas-only) to -0.85 (baryons+DM)
    Scales the gas disk contribution computed from the [CI] surface brightness profile to fit the circular velocity. Different values in different mass models (Table 4).
  • Stellar mass scaling parameter log10(Ystar) = 0.02 (stars-only) to -0.33 (baryons+DM)
    Scales the stellar mass contribution in the rotation curve fits.
  • Stellar Sersic index n_star = about 5.0 to 5.7
    Free parameter in the spherical stellar mass model; required to reproduce the inner rise of the rotation curve.
  • Stellar effective radius R_e_star = 1.3 to 3.0 kpc, poorly constrained
    Free parameter; the paper treats its posterior as a fiducial upper limit. It affects the stellar circular velocity profile but not strongly the total stellar mass.
  • Inclination angle i = 52.4 to 53.0 degrees
    Nuisance parameter with a Gaussian prior centered at 53 degrees; it rescales the observed circular velocities and their errors.
  • NFW halo velocity V200 (or M200) = log10(V200) about 2.46
    Fitted in the baryons-plus-DM model with a prior from abundance matching. The DM contribution is explicitly unconstrained.
  • NFW concentration C200 = log10(C200) about 0.56
    Fitted with a prior from the Dutton and Maccio relation.
  • Sersic parameters of [CI] gas surface density profile (n, R_e) = n = 0.52, R_e = 0.313 arcsec
    Fitted to the [CI] moment-0 profile and used as the gas mass distribution input for Vgas.
  • Sersic parameters of dust continuum profile (n, R_e) = n = 1.3, R_e = 0.57 arcsec
    Used to characterize the dust distribution and to set the disk effective radius in one stellar mass model.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The [CI] emission traces a single axisymmetric rotating disk with zero radial velocity and an exponential vertical profile with a fixed scale height of 300 pc.
    Used throughout Section 4 for 3DBarolo fitting. Non-circular motions are treated as small perturbations; if this fails, Vrot and Vc are biased.
  • domain assumption The [CI] surface brightness is proportional to the molecular gas surface density, with the same proportionality factor across the disk.
    Needed to convert the [CI] moment-0 profile into the gas mass distribution used for Vgas in Section 5.2.1.
  • domain assumption The stellar distribution can be approximated by a spherical Sersic profile because no high-resolution optical or NIR imaging is available.
    Used in Eq. 3 and Section 5.2.2. A flattened distribution would require lower mass for the same rotation curve, so the derived Mstar is an upper limit.
  • standard math Standard Newtonian gravity and the Poisson equation apply to the disk gravitational field.
    Used by vcdisk to compute Vgas and by the Sersic mass model formula in Section 5.
  • domain assumption A flat Lambda-CDM cosmology with H0 = 67.4 km/s/Mpc, Omega_m = 0.315, Omega_Lambda = 0.685.
    Used to convert angular radii to kiloparsecs and to interpret redshifts; standard, but affects all physical scales.
  • standard math The NFW profile and the adopted Lambda-CDM scaling relations for M200 and C200 are valid prior constraints.
    Used in the baryons-plus-DM model in Section 5.3.2. These priors shape the posterior but are not central to the main discrepancy claims.
invented entities (1)
  • None
    purpose: The paper introduces no new particle, force, dimension, or conserved quantity.
    The two-galaxies hypothesis is an interpretation of existing line redshifts and velocity fields, not a new physical entity.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Gas dynamics in an AGN-host galaxy at $z\simeq2.6$: regular rotation, non-circular motions, and mass models." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2WI2IHM3

@misc{pith2026241108958,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Gas dynamics in an AGN-host galaxy at $z\simeq2.6$: regular rotation, non-circular motions, and mass models},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2WI2IHM3}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.08958}
}
abstract

The gas dynamics of galaxies provide critical insights into the evolution of both baryons and dark matter (DM) across cosmic time. In this context, galaxies at cosmic noon -- the period characterized by the most intense star formation and black hole activities -- are particularly significant. In this work, we present an analysis of the gas dynamics of PKS 0529-549: a galaxy at $z\simeq2.6$, hosting a radio-loud active galactic nucleus (AGN). We use new ALMA observations of the [CI] (2-1) line at a spatial resolution of 0.18$''$ ($\sim$1.5 kpc). We find that (1) the molecular gas forms a rotation-supported disk with $V_{\rm rot}/\sigma_{\rm v}=6\pm3$ and displays a flat rotation curve out to 3.3 kpc; (2) there are several non-circular components including a kinematically anomalous structure near the galaxy center, a gas tail to the South-West, and possibly a second weaker tail to the East; (3) dynamical estimates of gas and stellar masses from fitting the rotation curve are inconsistent with photometric estimates using standard gas conversion factors and stellar population models, respectively; these discrepancies may be due to systematic uncertainties in the photometric masses, in the dynamical masses, or in the case a more massive radio-loud AGN-host galaxy is hidden behind the gas-rich [CI] emitting starburst galaxy along the line of sight. Our work shows that in-depth investigations of 3D line cubes are crucial for revealing the complexity of gas dynamics in high-$z$ galaxies, in which regular rotation may coexist with non-circular motions and possibly tidal structures.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.08958 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. shows the ALMA band-6 (354 µm at rest-frame of PKS 0529-549) continuum map at ∼ 0.2 ′′ resolution. We confirm the two continuum components discussed in Lelli et al. (2018): the one on the East coincides with the radio lobe from the Aus￾tralia Telescope Compact Array (ATCA) 18-GHz observations, while the one in the middle coincides with the [C i] ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Maps of dust-only continuum emission (top left), [Ci] (2-1) integrated intensity (moment-0, top right), intensity-weighted velocity (moment-1, bottom left), and intensity-weighted line broadening (moment-2, bottom right). The axis coordinates are relative to the kinematic center (white star). The synthesized beams are shown in the lower-left corner of each panel. In the dust-only continuum map, contours correspond t… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Radial surface brightness profiles of [Ci] (2-1) (top, green dia￾monds) and dust continuum (bottom, red squares). The random error of each data point is ≲ 6%. The black dashed lines show Sèrsic fits to each profile. FACTOR=1.8 (factor by which the cube is spatially smoothed before source search), SNRCUT=4 (primary S/N threshold), GROWTHCUT=3 (secondary S/N threshold to growth the primary mask), and MINCHANNELS=2 (mi… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (9 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Position-velocity diagram along the kinematic major axis. The systemic velocity of the rotating disk is set at VLOS = 0 km s−1 . The color-scale and the blue contours show the observed [Ci] (2-1) data. The red contours and yellow dots show, respectively, the best-fit r…
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Rotation velocity and velocity dispersion of the [Ci] (2-1) disk by fitting the approaching side (blue crosses), the receding side (red diamonds), and both sides (green dots). The green band is centered at the median σv = 47 km s−1 from the two-sides fitting and has a …
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The circular-velocity curve of PKS 0529-549 after correcting for pressure support. The black dots with errorbars show the observed rotation velocity from 3DFIT. The red squares and the blue diamonds show the circular velocities after asymmetric drift correction assumin…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Channel maps of [Ci] (2-1) cube, showing every two channels. The grayscale and the blue contours show the observed [Ci] (2-1) data. The red contours show the best-fit rotating disk model (Section. 4). The contour levels are at S/N = (±2, 3, 5); negative contours are sh…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Left: Residual [Ci] (2-1) map obtained by subtracting the best-fit rotating disk model from the observed moment-0 map. The synthesized beam of [C i] data is shown at the lower-left. The axis coordinates are relative to the kinematic center (white star). The dashed circ…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: [Ci] (2-1) Renzograms (red and blue contours) overlaid on the dust-only continuum map (grayscale and gray dotted contours). The blue and red contours show “narrow” [Ci] (2-1) moment-0 maps in￾tegrated within LoS velocities from −191 to −88 km s−1 and 274 to 377 km s−1 …
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Partial mass models: gas only (left panel) and stars only (right panel). In both panels, the black dots with errorbars show the observed circular velocities. The gravitational contributions from gas and stars are shown with a green dotted line and a brown dashed line,…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Complete mass models: baryons only (left panel) and baryons+DM (right panel). In both panels, the black dots with errorbars show the observed circular velocities, while the black line shows the best-fit mass model. The gravitational contribution from gas, stars, and D…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Comparison among ALMA, VLT/SINFONI, and VLT/X-Shooter data (see also Lelli et al. 2018). Left: The [C i] (2-1) (green solid) and [O iii] λ5007 (red dashed) line profiles are extracted from an aperture of 1-arcsec in diameter centered at the kinematic center. The He ii…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

68 extracted references · 37 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    2014, A&A, 568, A14

    Arribas, S., Colina, L., Bellocchi, E., Maiolino, R., & Villar-Martín, M. 2014, A&A, 568, A14

    2014

  2. [2]

    Begeman, K. G. 1989, A&A, 223, 47

    1989

  3. [3]

    G., Zhang, Z.-Y ., Gjergo, E., et al

    Bisbas, T. G., Zhang, Z.-Y ., Gjergo, E., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 8886

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    D., Wolfire, M., & Leroy, A

    Bolatto, A. D., Wolfire, M., & Leroy, A. K. 2013, ARA&A, 51, 207

    2013

  5. [5]

    2019, A&A, 622, A103

    Boquien, M., Burgarella, D., Roehlly, Y ., et al. 2019, A&A, 622, A103

    2019

  6. [6]

    1978, PhD thesis, University of Groningen, Netherlands Bouché, N., Carfantan, H., Schroetter, I., Michel-Dansac, L., & Contini, T

    Bosma, A. 1978, PhD thesis, University of Groningen, Netherlands Bouché, N., Carfantan, H., Schroetter, I., Michel-Dansac, L., & Contini, T. 2015, AJ, 150, 92 Bouché, N. F., Bera, S., Krajnovi´c, D., et al. 2022, A&A, 658, A76

    work page 1978

  7. [7]

    W., De Breuck, C., Hunstead, R

    Broderick, J. W., De Breuck, C., Hunstead, R. W., & Seymour, N. 2007, MN- RAS, 375, 1059

    work page 2007

  8. [8]

    Carilli, C. L. & Walter, F. 2013, ARA&A, 51, 105 CASA Team, Bean, B., Bhatnagar, S., et al. 2022, PASP, 134, 114501

    work page 2013

Show all 68 references
  1. [9]

    A., Smail, I., et al

    Chen, C.-C., Hodge, J. A., Smail, I., et al. 2017, ApJ, 846, 108

    2017

  2. [10]

    2022, MNRAS, 513, 2535

    Concas, A., Maiolino, R., Curti, M., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 513, 2535

    2022

  3. [11]

    2017, A&A, 606, A36

    Concas, A., Popesso, P., Brusa, M., et al. 2017, A&A, 606, A36

    2017

  4. [12]

    2019, A&A, 622, A188 De Breuck, C., Seymour, N., Stern, D., et al

    Concas, A., Popesso, P., Brusa, M., Mainieri, V ., & Thomas, D. 2019, A&A, 622, A188 De Breuck, C., Seymour, N., Stern, D., et al. 2010, ApJ, 725, 36 De Breuck, C., Williams, R. J., Swinbank, M., et al. 2014, A&A, 565, A59 Di Teodoro, E. M. & Fraternali, F. 2015, MNRAS, 451, 3...

    2019

  5. [13]

    2014, A&A, 566, A53

    Drouart, G., De Breuck, C., Vernet, J., et al. 2014, A&A, 566, A53

    2014

  6. [14]

    J., Papadopoulos, P

    Dunne, L., Maddox, S. J., Papadopoulos, P. P., Ivison, R. J., & Gomez, H. L. 2022, MNRAS, 517, 962

    2022

  7. [15]

    Dutton, A. A. & Macciò, A. V . 2014, MNRAS, 441, 3359

    2014

  8. [16]

    A., Gomez, H

    Dye, S., Eales, S. A., Gomez, H. L., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 510, 3734

    2022

  9. [17]

    D., et al

    Falkendal, T., De Breuck, C., Lehnert, M. D., et al. 2019, A&A, 621, A27

    2019

  10. [18]

    2016, The Journal of Open Source Software, 1, 24 Förster Schreiber, N

    Foreman-Mackey, D. 2016, The Journal of Open Source Software, 1, 24 Förster Schreiber, N. M., Genzel, R., Bouché, N., et al. 2009, ApJ, 706, 1364

    2016

  11. [19]

    H., Übler, H., et al

    Genzel, R., Price, S. H., Übler, H., et al. 2020, ApJ, 902, 98

    2020

  12. [20]

    2011, A&A, 528, A88

    Gnerucci, A., Marconi, A., Cresci, G., et al. 2011, A&A, 528, A88

    2011

  13. [21]

    2022, A&A, 663, A22

    Gururajan, G., Béthermin, M., Theulé, P., et al. 2022, A&A, 663, A22

    2022

  14. [22]

    M., Alexander, D

    Harrison, C. M., Alexander, D. M., Mullaney, J. R., & Swinbank, A. M. 2014, MNRAS, 441, 3306

    2014

  15. [23]

    A., Carilli, C

    Hodge, J. A., Carilli, C. L., Walter, F., et al. 2012, ApJ, 760, 11

    2012

  16. [24]

    Huang, H.-T., Man, A. W. S., Lelli, F., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.04290

    2024 arXiv

  17. [25]

    2011, MNRAS, 418, 74

    Humphrey, A., Zeballos, M., Aretxaga, I., et al. 2011, MNRAS, 418, 74

    2011

  18. [26]

    C., Carilli, C

    Jones, G. C., Carilli, C. L., Shao, Y ., et al. 2017, ApJ, 850, 180

    2017

  19. [27]

    Kamphuis, P., Józsa, G. I. G., Oh, S. . H., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 452, 3139

    2015

  20. [28]

    2023, MNRAS, 525, 5831

    Kolwa, S., De Breuck, C., Vernet, J., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 525, 5831

    2023

  21. [29]

    2020, A&A, 644, A117

    Lacerna, I., Ibarra-Medel, H., Avila-Reese, V ., et al. 2020, A&A, 644, A117

    2020

  22. [30]

    M., Mainieri, V ., et al

    Lamperti, I., Harrison, C. M., Mainieri, V ., et al. 2021, A&A, 654, A90

    2021

  23. [31]

    M., et al

    Lebowitz, S., Emonts, B., Terndrup, D. M., et al. 2023, ApJ, 951, 73

    2023

  24. [32]

    J., Davidzon, I., et al

    Legrand, L., McCracken, H. J., Davidzon, I., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 486, 5468

    2019

  25. [33]

    2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2305.18224

    Lelli, F. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2305.18224

    2023

  26. [34]

    2018, MNRAS, 479, 5440

    Lelli, F., De Breuck, C., Falkendal, T., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 479, 5440

    2018

  27. [35]

    M., Fraternali, F., et al

    Lelli, F., Di Teodoro, E. M., Fraternali, F., et al. 2021, Science, 371, 713

    2021

  28. [36]

    2015, A&A, 584, A113

    Lelli, F., Duc, P.-A., Brinks, E., et al. 2015, A&A, 584, A113

    2015

  29. [37]

    2014, MNRAS, 445, 1694

    Lelli, F., Verheijen, M., & Fraternali, F. 2014, MNRAS, 445, 1694

    2014

  30. [38]

    G., et al

    Lelli, F., Zhang, Z.-Y ., Bisbas, T. G., et al. 2023, A&A, 672, A106

    2023

  31. [39]

    C., Bolatto, A

    Levy, R. C., Bolatto, A. D., Teuben, P., et al. 2018, ApJ, 860, 92

    2018

  32. [40]

    2020, ApJS, 247, 31

    Li, P., Lelli, F., McGaugh, S., & Schombert, J. 2020, ApJS, 247, 31

    2020

  33. [41]

    & Dickinson, M

    Madau, P. & Dickinson, M. 2014, ARA&A, 52, 415

    2014

  34. [42]

    Man, A. W. S., Lehnert, M. D., Vernet, J. D. R., De Breuck, C., & Falkendal, T. 2019, A&A, 624, A81

    2019

  35. [43]

    McGaugh, S. S. & Schombert, J. M. 2015, ApJ, 802, 18 Nestor Shachar, A., Price, S. H., Förster Schreiber, N. M., et al. 2023, ApJ, 944, 78

    2015

  36. [44]

    Nesvadba, N. P. H., De Breuck, C., Lehnert, M. D., Best, P. N., & Collet, C. 2017, A&A, 599, A123

    2017

  37. [45]

    Papadopoulos, P. P. & Greve, T. R. 2004, ApJ, 615, L29 Planck Collaboration, Aghanim, N., Akrami, Y ., et al. 2020, A&A, 641, A6

    2004

  38. [46]

    H., Shimizu, T

    Price, S. H., Shimizu, T. T., Genzel, R., et al. 2021, ApJ, 922, 143

    2021

  39. [47]

    2023, MNRAS, 524, 2814

    Puglisi, A., Dudzeviˇci¯ut˙e, U., Swinbank, M., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 524, 2814

    2023

  40. [48]

    2024, A&A, 689, A273

    Rizzo, F., Bacchini, C., Kohandel, M., et al. 2024, A&A, 689, A273

    2024

  41. [49]

    2023, A&A, 679, A129

    Rizzo, F., Roman-Oliveira, F., Fraternali, F., et al. 2023, A&A, 679, A129

    2023

  42. [50]

    R., & Powell, D

    Rizzo, F., Vegetti, S., Fraternali, F., Stacey, H. R., & Powell, D. 2021, MNRAS, 507, 3952

    2021

  43. [51]

    2020, Nature, 584, 201

    Rizzo, F., Vegetti, S., Powell, D., et al. 2020, Nature, 584, 201

    2020

  44. [52]

    1976, A&A, 53, 159

    Sancisi, R. 1976, A&A, 53, 159

    1976

  45. [53]

    & McGaugh, S

    Schombert, J. & McGaugh, S. 2014, PASA, 31, e036

    2014

  46. [54]

    2019, MNRAS, 483, 1496

    Schombert, J., McGaugh, S., & Lelli, F. 2019, MNRAS, 483, 1496

    2019

  47. [55]

    Sersic, J. L. 1968, Atlas de Galaxias Australes

    1968

  48. [56]

    2007, ApJS, 171, 353

    Seymour, N., Stern, D., De Breuck, C., et al. 2007, ApJS, 171, 353

    2007

  49. [57]

    & Mamon, G

    Silk, J. & Mamon, G. A. 2012, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 12, 917

    2012

  50. [58]

    J., Carniani, S., et al

    Smit, R., Bouwens, R. J., Carniani, S., et al. 2018, Nature, 553, 178

    2018

  51. [59]

    P., Swinbank, A

    Stott, J. P., Swinbank, A. M., Johnson, H. L., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 457, 1888

    2016

  52. [60]

    2022, ApJ, 934, 173

    Su, Y .-C., Lin, L., Pan, H.-A., et al. 2022, ApJ, 934, 173

    2022

  53. [61]

    J., et al

    Tadaki, K.-i., Kodama, T., Nelson, E. J., et al. 2017, ApJ, 841, L25

    2017

  54. [62]

    2018, MNRAS, 476, 3956 Terzi´c, B

    Talia, M., Pozzi, F., Vallini, L., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 476, 3956 Terzi´c, B. & Graham, A. W. 2005, MNRAS, 362, 197

    2018

  55. [63]

    2005, ApJ, 621, 673

    Thomas, D., Maraston, C., Bender, R., & Mendes de Oliveira, C. 2005, ApJ, 621, 673

    2005

  56. [64]

    2010, MNRAS, 404, 1775

    Thomas, D., Maraston, C., Schawinski, K., Sarzi, M., & Silk, J. 2010, MNRAS, 404, 1775

    2010

  57. [65]

    J., Cirasuolo, M., Harrison, C

    Turner, O. J., Cirasuolo, M., Harrison, C. M., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 471, 1280 Übler, H., Genzel, R., Tacconi, L. J., et al. 2018, ApJ, 854, L24 van Albada, T. S., Bahcall, J. N., Begeman, K., & Sancisi, R. 1985, ApJ, 295, 305 van Albada, T. S. & Sancisi, R. 1986, Philosophical ...

    2017

  58. [66]

    J., Wright, M

    Warner, P. J., Wright, M. C. H., & Baldwin, J. E. 1973, MNRAS, 163, 163

    1973

  59. [67]

    M., Fossati, M., et al

    Wisnioski, E., Förster Schreiber, N. M., Fossati, M., et al. 2019, ApJ, 886, 124

    2019

  60. [68]

    corner plots

    Wisnioski, E., Förster Schreiber, N. M., Wuyts, S., et al. 2015, ApJ, 799, 209 Article number, page 14 of 17 L. Lin et al.: PKS 0529-549 [C i] (2-1) kinematics Appendix A: Posterior probability distribution from Markov-Chain Monte-Carlo fits Fig. A.1 and Fig. A.2 show “corner ...

    2015

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.