Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 7 minor 1 cited by

A search for HI absorption in distant star-forming galaxies with ASKAP-FLASH -- I. Selection and analysis of the radio sample

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 paper argues that UV-bright galaxies sitting 5–20 arcseconds from bright radio sources form a catalogue of typical star-forming galaxies suitable for stacking searches for intervening 21 cm HI absorption at redshifts $0.4<z<1$.

desk verdict Solid catalog paper with two useful HI-absorption target samples; the soft spots are labeling and a stated but unverified background assumption, not the central classification result. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.09443 v1 pith:CMPY2TJW submitted 2024-11-14 astro-ph.GA

Sophie L. Eden , Elaine M. Sadler , Kevin A. Pimbblet , Elizabeth K. Mahony , Hyein Yoon This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords 21cmHIabsorptioninterveningabsorbersstar-forminggalaxiesASKAP-FLASHsurveyWiggleZradio-opticalcross-matchinggalaxyclassificationdiagnostics
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 builds the target list for a 21 cm neutral-hydrogen absorption search in a redshift range where the cosmic HI content is poorly known. It cross-matches UV-bright galaxies from the WiggleZ-based sample with radio continuum sources from the ASKAP-FLASH survey, producing 279 'associated' pairs (separations $<5$ arcsec) and 740 'offset' pairs (5–20 arcsec). The central claim is that the offset objects are mostly (>80 per cent) star-forming and statistically indistinguishable from the overall WiggleZ-type population, which makes them suitable for spectral stacking to detect intervening HI absorption at median redshift $z \sim 0.6$. If this holds, the catalogue opens a new way to measure neutral gas around typical star-forming galaxies in the $0.4

What carries the argument

The load-bearing device is the impact-parameter split at 5 arcsec, established by a Monte Carlo cross-match of WiggleZ-type galaxies with FLASH radio islands against position-randomised catalogues. Inside 5 arcsec real associations dominate chance alignments; beyond 20 arcsec the real and random counts converge, so 5–20 arcsec defines the 'offset' sample of background-illuminated sightlines. The paper validates that split with BPT diagrams (emission-line ratios separating star-forming galaxies from AGN), WHAN diagrams (H$\alpha$ equivalent width against [NII]/H$\alpha$), MEx diagrams (stellar mass against [OIII]/H$\beta$), and $(g - i)$ colour-redshift tracks, all of which show offset objects following the star-forming WiggleZ population.

What would settle it

Stack the FLASH spectra of the 740 offset pairs at the spectroscopic redshift of each UV-bright galaxy, then repeat the stack at the redshift implied by the radio source's own host; if 21 cm absorption appears only in the second stack, or if a redshift survey of the radio hosts shows that many lie in front of the galaxies, the assumption that the radio sources are background objects is wrong.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's finding is a validated sample separation: radio-optical pairs closer than 5 arcsec are genuine physical associations, five times more likely to host an AGN than the parent UV-bright population, while pairs at 5–20 arcsec are chance alignments of typical star-forming galaxies with bright background radio sources. Diagnostic diagrams (BPT, WHAN, and MEx), the $(g - i)$ colour-redshift relation, and the redshift distribution all place the offset objects on top of the overall WiggleZ-like population. The authors conclude that any HI absorption seen in front of the offset FLASH sources can be attributed to neutral gas around normal star-forming galaxies, and that these 740 sightlines are the right dataset for a stacking search.

Load-bearing premise

The offset catalogue works only if the FLASH radio source near each UV-bright galaxy actually lies behind that galaxy, at higher redshift; the paper assumes this on statistical grounds but does not verify it for the individual 740 pairs.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the offset catalogue is representative, stacking the 740 FLASH spectra at the optical redshifts should yield 21 cm absorption detections, or tight upper limits, that probe neutral gas at impact parameters of roughly 30–120 kpc around $z \sim 0.6$ star-forming galaxies.
  • A null stacking result would not be an AGN-contamination artifact; it would constrain how much neutral hydrogen typically surrounds UV-bright star-forming galaxies at intermediate redshift.
  • The associated catalogue of 279 objects provides a separate, AGN-enriched sample for studying 21 cm absorption inside galaxies and radio-loud hosts, complementing the offset sample.
  • Because the redshift distributions match the parent WiggleZ-type population, conclusions drawn from these catalogues can be extended to the larger population of unmatched UV-bright galaxies in the same fields.
  • Expanding the cross-match to future FLASH fields will grow the offset catalogue and improve stacking sensitivity, as the paper notes.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A straightforward extension the paper does not carry out is to bin the offset sample by angular separation (5–10, 10–15, 15–20 arcsec) before stacking, turning the catalogue from a single detection experiment into a radial profile of neutral gas around $z \sim 0.6$ galaxies.
  • If the stacking succeeds, the same approach could be applied to fainter radio sources or across the full FLASH survey area, pushing the technique toward a redshift-resolved census of HI at $0.4<z<1$.
  • The background-source assumption could be checked immediately by searching for the radio hosts in deep near-infrared imaging; this would also reveal whether any absorption seen is truly intervening rather than associated with a foreground AGN.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 7 minor

Summary. This paper constructs and characterizes two radio-optical cross-matched catalogues for future 21-cm HI absorption studies at 0.4<z<1.0: an 'associated' catalogue of 279 UV-bright WiggleZ-type galaxies within 5 arcsec of an ASKAP-FLASH radio island, and an 'offset' catalogue of 740 galaxies at 5-20 arcsec intended for intervening absorption stacking. The authors build an extended WiggleZ-like sample from GALEX, DES, and DESI LS9 data over 215 deg^2, use a Monte Carlo positional randomization to set the matching radii, and characterize the samples with BPT, WHAN, and MEx diagnostics, (g-i) colour-redshift tracks, and redshift distributions. The main findings are that associated objects are roughly five times more likely to be AGN-classified than the parent sample, while offset objects are predominantly star-forming and similar to the parent WiggleZ population. The paper concludes that the offset catalogue is suitable for intervening HI absorption stacking and will be used in a second paper.

Significance. If the results hold, the catalogues provide a useful, spectroscopically characterized target list for 21-cm absorption work in a redshift range where both emission and absorption probes of HI are sparse. Strengths include the reproduction of WiggleZ selection in new sky areas from public data, the explicit Monte Carlo determination of matching radii, the multi-diagnostic BPT/WHAN/MEx/colour classification that cross-checks the AGN-star-forming separation, the clear statement of the background-source assumption in Section 3.1, and the public release of the catalogues with line measurements and quality flags. The central empirical claims, that offset objects resemble the parent star-forming population and that associated objects are AGN-enriched, appear supported by the data modulo the small sample sizes noted below. The main correctness risk is not internal inconsistency but the unverified geometric assumption underlying the offset catalogue's stated purpose.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3.1] The suitability of the 740-object offset catalogue for intervening HI absorption stacking rests on the assumption that each proximate FLASH source lies behind its UV galaxy: 'the FLASH source lies in the optical object's background, at a higher redshift than the optical object.' This condition is asserted and supported only statistically. Two facts in the paper make it nontrivial: (i) Figure 4 shows a real excess of matches over random expectation in the 5-20 arcsec interval (convergence is stated to occur only beyond 20 arcsec), so a substantial fraction of offset pairs are not chance projections and could trace correlated large-scale structure or physical group membership; (ii) Figure 5 shows that 95 percent of offset radio sources have integrated flux below 30 mJy, so they are not uniformly the bright, high-redshift AGN invoked in the statistical justification. If even roughly 10 percent of offset sources lie in front of, or at the same redshift as, the target galaxy, the stacked 21-cm signal would be diluted or misattributed. I request a quantitative treatment: either a per-source or statistical test of the background condition (e.g., spectral indices, WISE colours, or optical/mid-IR identification of the 740 radio sources), or an explicit bound on the foreground fraction below which the stacking science case survives.
  2. [Section 3.2] The quantity labelled 'completeness', computed as (401-28.7)/(455-32.4) = 88 percent, is not a detection completeness; it is the fraction of excess (true) matches within 5 arcsec that are single-component sources. A true completeness would require knowing how many genuine WiggleZ-FLASH associations were missed by the matching or by the 0.5 mJy/beam flux cut. The 'reliability' figure of 93 percent is likewise stated only for the single-source population within the chosen radius. These labels should be corrected or recomputed, since a catalogue paper's completeness and reliability characterization is a quantitative part of its scientific content.
  3. [Sections 3.1-3.2 and Table 5] The W15 Monte Carlo described in Sections 3.1-3.2 yields 401 single-component plus 54 complex real matches within 5 arcsec (455 total) for the W15 field, whereas Table 5 lists only 133 associated objects for W15. This factor-of-3.4 discrepancy needs an explanation: was the Monte Carlo run without the 0.5 mJy/beam flux cut, before field trimming, or counting multiple island matches per galaxy? As written, the numbers used to set the 5 arcsec radius and to compute the completeness and reliability figures appear inconsistent with the final catalogue, and the section should state explicitly which dataset the Monte Carlo used.
minor comments (7)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states that offset objects are 'largely (>80 percent) star-forming', but Table 4 gives 71.0 percent by BPT and 83.3 percent by WHAN, and conclusion item (ii) uses 71.0 percent; the headline number should be made consistent across abstract, body, and conclusions.
  2. [Figure 9 caption] The Figure 9 caption says '76percent of objects' receive the star-forming label, but Table 4 lists 76/107 = 71.0 percent; the caption appears to quote the raw count rather than the percentage.
  3. [Figure 11 caption] The Figure 11 caption states '107 systems are featured in total', but Table 4 lists 78 total offset objects in the WHAN diagram (65 SF + 13 AGN); the caption total should be corrected, and Figure 8 similarly says 33 systems versus 32 in Table 4.
  4. [Abstract and Table 3] The abstract quotes a '200 deg^2' survey area while Table 3 and the Figure 1 caption give 215 deg^2; these numbers should be harmonized.
  5. [Section 2.1.2] The sentence 'we extend our WiggleZ-FLASH sample to cover additional UV-bright galaxies in equatorial fields covered by the WiggleZ 22h, 0h and 1h and areas in, using the WiggleZ survey design...' is garbled and should be rewritten.
  6. [Section 4.3 and Table 4] The 'five times more likely to be an AGN' claim rests on 8 BPT-classified AGN among 32 associated objects (25.0 percent), and the MEx statement '7 out of 13 associated objects' rests on 13 objects; binomial or Poisson confidence intervals should be quoted for these small-number ratios.
  7. [Section 5.5] The elevated 17.2 percent complex-source fraction in W15 offset matches is presented without a significance estimate; a binomial probability against the ~10 percent overall rate would clarify whether this is a random fluctuation, which the authors themselves leave open.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the catalogue classifications and comparisons are empirical and not forced by the radio-offset assumption.

full rationale

This paper is a catalogue/characterisation paper rather than a derivation. The main claims—that associated (<5 arcsec) radio matches are more AGN-like and offset (5–20 arcsec) matches are mostly star-forming—are obtained by applying external literature diagnostic divisions (Kewley et al. 2001; Kauffmann et al. 2003; Cid Fernandes et al. 2010, 2011; Juneau et al. 2014) to measured line fluxes, equivalent widths, colours, and redshifts. No fitted parameter is later relabelled as a prediction, and no equation is shown to reduce to its own input. The Section 3.1 assumption that offset FLASH sources lie behind the UV-selected galaxies is an explicit geometric/statistical assumption with external support (Condon et al. 1998; de Zotti et al. 2010; Darling et al. 2011; Sadler et al. 2020); it is a potential correctness risk for the future stacking programme, but it is not a circular reduction because the catalogue's optical classifications do not depend on it. The extended sample is indeed selected using WiggleZ criteria, so showing that it resembles WiggleZ is partly a consistency check by construction, but the specific supporting evidence (BPT/WHAN star-forming fractions, redshift distributions, (g-i) colour tracks) is measured from independent spectra and photometry rather than imposed by the matching algorithm. Self-citations to FLASH, ASKAP, and Sadler et al. (2020) are data provenance or independent empirical detections, not a load-bearing chain that forces the paper's conclusions. Overall, the derivation is self-contained against external benchmarks and no circular step was found.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper's central claims rest on standard astronomy assumptions and hand-chosen matching thresholds, not on derived model parameters. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • Associated match radius = 5 arcsec
    Chosen from the Monte Carlo crossover between real and randomised matches in the W15 field (Fig. 4). A different tolerance would change the sample composition.
  • Offset match radius upper bound = 20 arcsec
    Taken as the separation where real and random match counts converge in Fig. 4; beyond this, matches are dominated by chance alignments.
  • FLASH flux density cutoff = 0.5 mJy/beam
    Applied in Section 3.2 to include only robustly detected radio sources; affects the size and completeness of the matched sample.
assumptions (4)
  • standard math Concordance cosmology with Omega_L=0.7, Omega_m=0.3, H0=70 km/s/Mpc
    Stated in Section 1; used to convert angular separations to physical impact parameters.
  • domain assumption Offset radio sources lie at higher redshift than the foreground UV-bright galaxies
    Stated in Section 3.1; required for the offset catalogue to probe intervening HI absorption. Supported by prior statistical work but not verified for individual sources here.
  • domain assumption BPT and WHAN diagnostic diagrams correctly separate star-forming galaxies from AGN
    Used throughout Section 4; relies on published diagnostic boundaries from Kewley et al. 2001, Kauffmann et al. 2003, and Cid Fernandes et al. 2010, 2011.
  • domain assumption UV-brightness traces active star formation and correlates with the presence of neutral hydrogen reservoirs
    Underpins the WiggleZ selection and the motivation for the HI search; adopted from Drinkwater et al. 2010 and earlier work.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A search for HI absorption in distant star-forming galaxies with ASKAP-FLASH -- I. Selection and analysis of the radio sample." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CMPY2TJW

@misc{pith2026241109443,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A search for HI absorption in distant star-forming galaxies with ASKAP-FLASH -- I. Selection and analysis of the radio sample},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CMPY2TJW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.09443}
}
abstract

We present and discuss two catalogues of UV-selected (NUV $< 22.8$ mag) galaxies that lie within a 200 deg$^2$ area of sky covered by the ASKAP FLASH survey and have an impact parameter of less than 20 arcsec to a FLASH radio continuum source. These catalogues are designed to enable a future search for 21 cm HI absorption in and around star-forming galaxies at redshift $0.4<z<1$. We outline the production of this UV-bright dataset, which has optical spectroscopy from the WiggleZ and SDSS surveys and a median redshift of $\sim0.6$. Analysis of the optical spectra, using multiple diagnostic diagrams, shows that galaxies with an impact parameter of less than 5 arcsec are likely to be physically associated with the radio source and are five times more likely to be an AGN than objects without a radio match. Conversely, objects with impact factors between 5 and 20 arcsec are largely (>80 percent) star-forming and resemble the overall WiggleZ population. The ($g - i$) colour evolution with redshift is consistent with a history of active star-formation, but the radio-associated objects are typically redder and have colours similar to high-excitation radio galaxies. The redshift distribution of the two catalogues matches the overall distribution for WiggleZ galaxies, despite their otherwise rare radio properties. These catalogues can be expanded in future as new radio data become available, and a forthcoming paper will present the HI absorption results.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.09443 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Footprint plot of DES (grey), DESI Legacy Survey DR9 (yellow), and GALEX MIS (light blue) data. WiggleZ (red outline) and FLASH fields (green) overlaid. W09, W15, and resulting extended sample fields are shown in purple. It can be seen that the W09 and W15 samples used in this paper do not occupy the entire WiggleZ 9h and 15h fields. The total coverage of the sky in this work is 215 deg2 . See [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figu… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Visualisation of catalogue production, split into stages of initial approach by vertical grey dashed lines: extending the catalogue, and lastly obtaining the finalised catalogue. The specific steps of production of the Ext field objects is outlined within the pale grey bubble. Field RAmin RAmax Decmin Decmax Area NΣ(field) (deg) (deg) (deg) (deg) (deg2 ) W09 133.7 150.0 −0.9 +3.0 23.2 5813 W15 211.0 223.5 −2.7 +3.7 … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Redshift distribution of WiggleZ-type UV-optical cross-matched sources for the W09, W15, and extended sample fields with UV and optical photometric cuts enacted. Median redshift is marked with a red dotted line on each histogram. Despite the different redshift distribution of the extended sample, its median redshift is very close to that of the W09 and W15 fields, and that of the target median redshift of the Wiggle… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (10 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: is a histogram of integrated flux density (mJy) for the asso￾ciated and offset cross-matched objects. It is apparent for both pop￾ulations that few radio sources that have been cross-matched exceed 100 mJy in brightness. Indeed, 92 percent of the associated objects and…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: BPT diagnostic diagram of W09, W15, and extended sample field WiggleZ data pre radio source cross-matching along with extended sample data produced for this work, with redshift z < 0.48. 3391 systems are featured. Inclusion of Kewley et al. (2001) (black dashed line) a…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: WHAN diagram of W09, W15, and extended sample field data with redshift z < 0.48. The 3766 systems of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: BPT diagnostic diagram of associated FLASH-WiggleZ/extended survey data with redshift z < 0.48. 33 systems are featured in total, including two SF galaxies which closely overlap. Diagnostic lines are as before in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: WHAN diagram of associated FLASH-WiggleZ/extended sample data with redshift z < 0.48. 24 systems are featured in total. The equivalent width of the Hα line is plotted against the logged EW ratio of NII and Hα, as is standard for WHAN diagrams as laid out in (Cid Ferna…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: WHAN diagram of offset FLASH-WiggleZ/extended sample data with redshift z < 0.48. 107 systems are featured in total. Diagnostic lines are as before. It should be noted that in this cross-matched sample, there are no passive galaxies, and few wAGN or retired galaxies. …
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: The (g - i) colour versus redshift for all objects meeting the required selection criteria in the W09, W15, and extended sample fields. The median (g - i) magnitudes for each redshift bin (cyan diamonds) are overlaid over the scatter, positioned at the centre of each …
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: (g - i) colour versus redshift diagrams for associated and offset data, including evolutionary tracks from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Distribution of redshifts for objects in total WiggleZ survey with WIG_SDSS class (top) and the two datasets of cross-matched objects stacked on top of one another (bottom). Associated data is green, and offset data is red. Note the shared x-axis and different scales …
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Plot of [OIII]/Hβ line ratio against stellar mass for WiggleZ objects with z ≥ 0.3 (green dots). Stellar mass cutoff of (log M∗/M⊙) < 10 in￾cluded as in fig. 5 of Drinkwater et al. (2018). Demarcation lines from Juneau et al. (2014) separating likelihoods for AGN are …

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. A search for HI absorption in distant star-forming galaxies with ASKAP-FLASH - II. Direct observations and stacking of 21 cm line

    astro-ph.GA 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.5 of 10

    One new associated HI 21 cm absorber is found at z=0.863; ordered stacking of associated non-detections yields only bootstrap-unsupported tentative features that vanish as fainter sources raise optical-depth noise, wh...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

79 extracted references · 13 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.state := if if FUNCTION not #0 #1 if FUNCTION and 'skip pop #0 if FUNCTION or pop #1...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.state := if if FUNCTION not #0 #1 if FUNCTION and 'skip pop #0 if FUNCTION or pop #1...

  3. [3]

    Abbott T. M. C., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/ac00b3 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJS..255...20A 255, 20

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac00b3 2021

  4. [4]

    Aditya J. N. H. S., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad3722 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.527.8511A 527, 8511

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3722 2024

  5. [5]

    R., Sadler E

    Allison J. R., Sadler E. M., Whiting M. T., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1071/AS11040 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012PASA...29..221A 29, 221

    doi:10.1071/as11040 2012

  6. [6]

    R., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa949 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.494.3627A 494, 3627

    Allison J. R., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa949 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.494.3627A 494, 3627

    doi:10.1093/mnras/staa949 2020

  7. [7]

    R., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1017/pasa.2022.3 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022PASA...39...10A 39, e010

    Allison J. R., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1017/pasa.2022.3 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022PASA...39...10A 39, e010

    doi:10.1017/pasa.2022.3 2022

  8. [8]

    K., Glazebrook K., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1086/376502 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ApJ...593..258B 593, 258

    Baldry I. K., Glazebrook K., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1086/376502 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ApJ...593..258B 593, 258

    doi:10.1086/376502 2003

Show all 79 references
  1. [9]

    A., Phillips M

    Baldwin J. A., Phillips M. M., Terlevich R., 1981, @doi [ ] 10.1086/130766 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981PASP...93....5B 93, 5

    1981 doi

  2. [10]

    H., White R

    Becker R. H., White R. L., Helfand D. J., 1995, @doi [ ] 10.1086/176166 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995ApJ...450..559B 450, 559

    1995 doi

  3. [12]

    N., Kauffmann G., Heckman T

    Best P. N., Kauffmann G., Heckman T. M., Brinchmann J., Charlot S., Ivezi \'c Z ., White S. D. M., 2005b, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09192.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005MNRAS.362...25B 362, 25

    2005

  4. [13]

    Bigiel F., Leroy A., Walter F., Blitz L., Brinks E., de Blok W. J. G., Madore B., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/140/5/1194 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010AJ....140.1194B 140, 1194

    2010 doi

  5. [14]

    Bonnarel F., et al., 2000, @doi [ ] 10.1051/aas:2000331 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000A&AS..143...33B 143, 33

    2000 doi

  6. [15]

    Chakraborty A., Roy N., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac3696 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.519.4074C 519, 4074

    2023 doi

  7. [16]

    Ching J. H. Y., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx1173 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.469.4584C 469, 4584

    2017 doi

  8. [17]

    S., Sethi S., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/abfcc7 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...913L..24C 913, L24

    Chowdhury A., Kanekar N., Das B., Dwarakanath K. S., Sethi S., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/abfcc7 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...913L..24C 913, L24

    2021 doi

  9. [20]

    K., et al., 2023, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023arXiv230515510C p

    Cochrane R. K., et al., 2023, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023arXiv230515510C p. arXiv:2305.15510

    2023 arXiv

  10. [21]

    J., Cotton W

    Condon J. J., Cotton W. D., Greisen E. W., Yin Q. F., Perley R. A., Taylor G. B., Broderick J. J., 1998, @doi [ ] 10.1086/300337 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998AJ....115.1693C 115, 1693

    1998 doi

  11. [22]

    Cortese L., Catinella B., Janowiecki S., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aa8cc3 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...848L...7C 848, L7

    2017 doi

  12. [23]

    L., Songaila A., Hu E

    Cowie L. L., Songaila A., Hu E. M., Cohen J. G., 1996, @doi [ ] 10.1086/118058 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996AJ....112..839C 112, 839

    1996 doi

  13. [25]

    J., Duchesne S

    Curran S. J., Duchesne S. W., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201935827 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019A&A...627A..93C 627, A93

    2019 doi

  14. [26]

    J., Whiting M

    Curran S. J., Whiting M. T., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/759/2/117 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...759..117C 759, 117

    2012 doi

  15. [27]

    P., Haynes M

    Darling J., Macdonald E. P., Haynes M. P., Giovanelli R., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/742/1/60 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...742...60D 742, 60

    2011 doi

  16. [28]

    Dey A., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/ab089d , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019AJ....157..168D 157, 168

    2019 doi

  17. [29]

    J., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15754.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010MNRAS.401.1429D 401, 1429

    Drinkwater M. J., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15754.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010MNRAS.401.1429D 401, 1429

    2010

  18. [30]

    J., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx2963 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.474.4151D 474, 4151

    Drinkwater M. J., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx2963 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.474.4151D 474, 4151

    2018 doi

  19. [31]

    P., et al., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.18188.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.413..971D 413, 971

    Driver S. P., et al., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.18188.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.413..971D 413, 971

    2011

  20. [32]

    Astrophys

    Dutta R., et al., 2022, @doi [J. Astrophys. Astron.] 10.1007/s12036-022-09875-y , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022JApA...43..103D 43, 103

    2022 doi

  21. [33]

    Emonts B., Morganti R., Oosterloo T., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1016/j.newar.2006.11.024 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007NewAR..51...38E 51, 38

    2007 doi

  22. [34]

    C., 1999, @doi [ ] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.1999.03017.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999MNRAS.308L..39F 308, L39

    Fabian A. C., 1999, @doi [ ] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.1999.03017.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999MNRAS.308L..39F 308, L39

    1999

  23. [35]

    Fern \'a ndez X., et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8205/824/1/L1 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...824L...1F 824, L1

    2016 doi

  24. [36]

    M., Mel \'e ndez M., Kraemer S., Schmitt H

    Feuillet L. M., Mel \'e ndez M., Kraemer S., Schmitt H. R., Fischer T. C., Reeves J. N., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1a09 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...962..104F 962, 104

    2024 doi

  25. [37]

    Fioc M., Rocca-Volmerange B., 1997, @doi [ ] 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9707017 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997A&A...326..950F 326, 950

    1997 doi arXiv

  26. [38]

    Fioc M., Rocca-Volmerange B., 1999, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9912179 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999astro.ph.12179F pp astro--ph/9912179

    1999 doi arXiv

  27. [39]

    A., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201423999 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014A&A...569A..35G 569, A35

    Ger \'e b K., Morganti R., Oosterloo T. A., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201423999 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014A&A...569A..35G 569, A35

    2014 doi

  28. [40]

    A., Hoppmann L., Staveley-Smith L., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201424810 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015A&A...580A..43G 580, A43

    Ger \'e b K., Morganti R., Oosterloo T. A., Hoppmann L., Staveley-Smith L., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201424810 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015A&A...580A..43G 580, A43

    2015 doi

  29. [41]

    G., Gladders M

    Gilbank D. G., Gladders M. D., Yee H. K. C., Hsieh B. C., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/141/3/94 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011AJ....141...94G 141, 94

    2011 doi

  30. [42]

    Glazebrook K., et al., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1038/nature02667 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004Natur.430..181G 430, 181

    2004 doi

  31. [43]

    K., Bolatto A

    Grasha K., Darling J., Leroy A. K., Bolatto A. D., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa2521 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.498..883G 498, 883

    2020 doi

  32. [44]

    Gupta N., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/ac03b5 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJS..255...28G 255, 28

    2021 doi

  33. [45]

    W., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1017/pasa.2021.1 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021PASA...38....9H 38, e009

    Hotan A. W., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1017/pasa.2021.1 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021PASA...38....9H 38, e009

    2021 doi

  34. [46]

    Hu W., Catinella B., Cortese L., Staveley-Smith L., Lagos C. d. P., Chauhan G., Oosterloo T., Chen X., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa257 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.493.1587H 493, 1587

    2020 doi

  35. [47]

    Juneau S., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/788/1/88 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...788...88J 788, 88

    2014 doi

  36. [50]

    J., Dopita M

    Kewley L. J., Dopita M. A., Sutherland R. S., Heisler C. A., Trevena J., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1086/321545 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001ApJ...556..121K 556, 121

    2001 doi

  37. [51]

    K., Di Matteo T., Croft R

    Khandai N., Sethi S. K., Di Matteo T., Croft R. A. C., Springel V., Jana A., Gardner J. P., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18881.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.415.2580K 415, 2580

    2011

  38. [52]

    Lewis J. S. W., Pillepich A., Nelson D., Klessen R. S., Glover S. C. O., 2023, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2305.09721 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023arXiv230509721L p. arXiv:2305.09721

    2023 doi arXiv

  39. [53]

    Liske J., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv1436 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.452.2087L 452, 2087

    2015 doi

  40. [54]

    M., Morganti R., Oosterloo T

    Maccagni F. M., Morganti R., Oosterloo T. A., Mahony E. K., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201424334 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014A&A...571A..67M 571, A67

    2014 doi

  41. [55]

    Madau P., Dickinson M., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125615 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ARA&A..52..415M 52, 415

    2014 doi

  42. [56]

    C., Dickinson M

    Madau P., Ferguson H. C., Dickinson M. E., Giavalisco M., Steidel C. C., Fruchter A., 1996, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/283.4.1388 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996MNRAS.283.1388M 283, 1388

    1996 doi

  43. [57]

    C., et al., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1086/426387 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005ApJ...619L...1M 619, L1

    Martin D. C., et al., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1086/426387 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005ApJ...619L...1M 619, L1

    2005 doi

  44. [58]

    C., et al., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/516639 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJS..173..342M 173, 342

    Martin D. C., et al., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/516639 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJS..173..342M 173, 342

    2007 doi

  45. [59]

    W., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/763/1/L20 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...763L..20M 763, L20

    Masui K. W., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/763/1/L20 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...763L..20M 763, L20

    2013 doi

  46. [61]

    F., et al., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2003.07134.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003MNRAS.346..787M 346, 787

    Minchin R. F., et al., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2003.07134.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003MNRAS.346..787M 346, 787

    2003

  47. [62]

    X., Ribaudo J., Lehner N., Howk J

    Neeleman M., Prochaska J. X., Ribaudo J., Lehner N., Howk J. C., Rafelski M., Kanekar N., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-637X/818/2/113 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...818..113N 818, 113

    2016 doi

  48. [63]

    Noterdaeme P., et al., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201220259 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012A\

    2012 doi

  49. [64]

    B., et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw910 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.460....2P 460, 2

    Pracy M. B., et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw910 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.460....2P 460, 2

    2016 doi

  50. [65]

    M., Turnshek D

    Rao S. M., Turnshek D. A., Sardane G. M., Monier E. M., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx1787 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.471.3428R 471, 3428

    2017 doi

  51. [66]

    H., Chengalur J

    Rhee J., Lah P., Briggs F. H., Chengalur J. N., Colless M., Willner S. P., Ashby M. L. N., Le F \`e vre O., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx2461 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.473.1879R 473, 1879

    2018 doi

  52. [67]

    Rhee J., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac3065 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.518.4646R 518, 4646

    2023 doi

  53. [68]

    SDSS-III 2013, ZWARNING: Warnings for SDSS spectra., https://www.sdss3.org/dr8/algorithms/bitmask_zwarning.php

    2013

  54. [69]

    M., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa2390 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.499.4293S 499, 4293

    Sadler E. M., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa2390 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.499.4293S 499, 4293

    2020 doi

  55. [70]

    J., Jangren A., Gronwall C., Werk J

    Salzer J. J., Jangren A., Gronwall C., Werk J. K., Chomiuk L. B., Caperton K. A., Melbourne J., McKinstry K., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1086/497365 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005AJ....130.2584S 130, 2584

    2005 doi

  56. [71]

    Sancisi R., Fraternali F., Oosterloo T., van der Hulst T., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1007/s00159-008-0010-0 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008A&ARv..15..189S 15, 189

    2008 doi

  57. [72]

    P., et al., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1086/431156 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005AJ....130..367S 130, 367

    Schneider D. P., et al., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1086/431156 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005AJ....130..367S 130, 367

    2005 doi

  58. [73]

    P., Heckman T

    Smith E. P., Heckman T. M., 1989, @doi [ ] 10.1086/167524 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1989ApJ...341..658S 341, 658

    1989 doi

  59. [74]

    Stroe A., Oosterloo T., R \"o ttgering H. J. A., Sobral D., van Weeren R., Dawson W., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv1462 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.452.2731S 452, 2731

    2015 doi

  60. [75]

    Su R., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac2257 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.516.2947S 516, 2947

    2022 doi

  61. [76]

    G., Wills K., Villar-Martin M., Hughes M., 2002, @doi [ ] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05153.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002MNRAS.330..977T 330, 977

    Tadhunter C., Dickson R., Morganti R., Robinson T. G., Wills K., Villar-Martin M., Hughes M., 2002, @doi [ ] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05153.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002MNRAS.330..977T 330, 977

    2002

  62. [77]

    A., et al., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10831.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006MNRAS.372..537W 372, 537

    Wake D. A., et al., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10831.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006MNRAS.372..537W 372, 537

    2006

  63. [78]

    Wang L., Kauffmann G., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13907.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008MNRAS.391..785W 391, 785

    2008

  64. [79]

    T., 2020, in Ballester P., Ibsen J., Solar M., Shortridge K., eds, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series Vol

    Whiting M. T., 2020, in Ballester P., Ibsen J., Solar M., Shortridge K., eds, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series Vol. 522, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XXVII. p. 469

    2020

  65. [80]

    Whiting M., Humphreys B., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1071/AS12028 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012PASA...29..371W 29, 371

    2012 doi

  66. [81]

    M., Gawiser E., Prochaska J

    Wolfe A. M., Gawiser E., Prochaska J. X., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.astro.42.053102.133950 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005ARA&A..43..861W 43, 861

    2005

  67. [82]

    K., et al., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/521402 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJS..173..293W 173, 293

    Wyder T. K., et al., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/521402 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJS..173..293W 173, 293

    2007 doi

  68. [83]

    K., Serra P., Peletier R

    Y ld z M. K., Serra P., Peletier R. F., Oosterloo T. A., Duc P.-A., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw2294 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.464..329Y 464, 329

    2017 doi

  69. [84]

    Zafar T., P \'e roux C., Popping A., Milliard B., Deharveng J.-M., Frank S., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201321154 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013A\

    2013 doi

  70. [85]

    de Blok W. J. G., Walter F., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06669.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003MNRAS.341L..39D 341, L39

    2003

  71. [86]

    de Zotti G., Massardi M., Negrello M., Wall J., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1007/s00159-009-0026-0 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010A&ARv..18....1D 18, 1

    2010 doi

Pith tools

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