Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 7 minor 3 cited by

Cosmic quenching

T0 review · 2 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-09 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A successful theory of galaxy formation must explain why a fraction of galaxies stop forming stars, and the census of these quiescent galaxies across mass, environment, and redshift is a test that no current model passes completely.

desk verdict A careful, honest review/reprint with no new results; the high-z quiescent-galaxy tension it highlights is real, and the Figure 13 selection mismatch actually makes the tension more robust, not less. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.01724 v1 pith:SOOLAUTE submitted 2025-02-03 astro-ph.GA

Gabriella De Lucia , Fabio Fontanot , Michaela Hirschmann , Lizhi Xie This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords galaxyquenchingquiescentgalaxiesstarformationsuppressionAGNfeedbacksatelliteenvironmentJWSThigh-redshiftmodels
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 review chapter argues that matching the observed fraction of quenched galaxies as a joint function of stellar mass, cosmic time, and environment has been a persistent unsolved problem for galaxy formation models. The challenge is sharpened by JWST-discovered massive galaxies at redshift greater than 3 that formed and stopped forming stars within roughly one to two billion years, because most current models struggle to reproduce their number densities. The authors conclude that AGN feedback is the essential internal quenching mechanism for massive galaxies, while gradual gas stripping and cold-gas star formation laws matter for satellites and lower masses. They also emphasize that nearly all theoretical prescriptions are calibrated on low-redshift observations, so the high-redshift tension may partly reflect an untested extrapolation.

What carries the argument

The central diagnostic is the quiescent fraction, the fraction of galaxies at a given stellar mass, redshift, and environment that show negligible current star formation, as selected by color-color cuts, spectral breaks, or specific star formation rates. The mechanism that carries the argument is AGN feedback, energy and momentum injected by accreting supermassive black holes either as radiatively efficient winds that expel or heat cold gas or as jet-mode heating that prevents hot halo gas from cooling. The workhorse method is the controlled model-observation comparison: matching stellar mass functions, specific star formation rate distributions, and quiescent fractions in matched bins of stellar mass and halo mass, and then attributing the residuals to specific physical processes.

What would settle it

A decisive test would be a wide, spectroscopically complete census of massive galaxies at z about 3 to 5 that measures both quiescent fractions and the fraction hosting active galactic nuclei. If the confirmed space density of massive quiescent galaxies exceeds the upper envelope of current model predictions after accounting for cosmic variance, selection effects, and dust, the challenge to feedback models is genuine; if the excess disappears when evolving initial mass function assumptions and spectral energy distribution fitting choices are included, the tension is a calibration artifact.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The chapter's thesis is that the quiescent galaxy population is a single, multidimensional constraint for theory: the quiescent fraction rises with stellar mass and environmental density, declines with redshift, and the transition from star forming to passive is often rapid. It documents the historical fix of strong stellar feedback at low masses plus radio-mode AGN feedback at high masses to reproduce the galaxy luminosity function, and the still-unresolved problem of over-quenching satellite galaxies, where models make low-mass satellites too old and passive. The new JWST results on massive quiescent galaxies at z greater than 3, which appear to assemble quickly and then quench within a few tens of millions of years, sharpen the same test: most current simulations and semi-analytic models underpredict their space densities, although the predicted cosmic variance is large enough to accommodate at least some of the measurements.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that physical prescriptions calibrated on low-redshift observations, such as AGN feedback efficiency, star formation laws, and a constant stellar initial mass function, still describe galaxy behavior at z greater than 3, an extrapolation the chapter itself flags as untested.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the chapter's reading is correct, no galaxy formation model that lacks an efficient AGN feedback channel can reproduce the bright end of the galaxy luminosity function or the high-redshift quiescent population.
  • The persistence of satellite over-quenching implies that models strip gas from infalling satellites too aggressively; gradual hot-gas stripping, ram-pressure stripping, and explicit cold-gas phase treatments are needed to match quiescent fractions in groups and clusters.
  • Massive quiescent galaxies at z above 3 with formation timescales of one to two billion years provide a direct observational testbed that can discriminate between kinetic jet-mode and radiative wind implementations of AGN feedback.
  • The large cosmic variance in current model predictions means that small-field JWST samples by themselves cannot falsify models; wide-area surveys are needed to measure the z greater than 3 quiescent fraction robustly.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A testable extension the authors leave implicit: if satellite over-quenching is as widespread as the review indicates, future surveys should find a population of low-mass quiescent satellites at intermediate redshifts whose cold-gas content is systematically too low in simulations but observable with radio telescopes.
  • If an evolving, top-heavy stellar initial mass function at high redshift is real, it would raise inferred stellar masses and change star formation rate calibrations, potentially removing part of the claimed model tension without invoking new feedback physics.
  • The review's emphasis on the entanglement of mass and environment suggests that observational programs that bin by either variable alone will continue to yield contradictory conclusions; tracking the full environmental history of galaxies is the more promising interpretive route.
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

2 major / 7 minor

Summary. This manuscript is a review chapter that synthesizes the observational and theoretical status of galaxy quenching. It describes the methods used to identify quiescent galaxies, the observed evolution of quiescent fractions with stellar mass, redshift, and environment, the main physical processes proposed to cause quenching (stellar and AGN feedback, environmental processes), and comparisons of recent model predictions with observations. The chapter's central narrative is that reproducing the observed quiescent galaxy population across mass, epoch, and environment remains a challenge for galaxy formation models, and that JWST's discovery of massive quiescent galaxies at z>3 has sharpened this challenge, likely requiring AGN feedback as a key ingredient.

Significance. The review is comprehensive, current (November 2024), and unusually careful in stating caveats: it explicitly discusses degeneracies in quiescent-galaxy selection, the incompleteness of UVJ selection at z>3, SED-fitting uncertainties, the over-quenching problem in models, and the fact that most subgrid prescriptions are calibrated on local-Universe observations. These strengths make the chapter a potentially valuable reference for students and researchers. The main risk is that the quantitative case for the headline JWST tension relies on a model-observation comparison (Figure 13) that uses an inconsistent population selection, so the strength of the central claim currently exceeds what the presented evidence can strictly support. The authors' emphasis on AGN feedback as the dominant quenching mechanism at high mass reflects the current consensus and is balanced by a discussion of environmental processes.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 5, Figure 13] The comparison between GAEA predictions and the observed cumulative number densities of massive quiescent galaxies at z>3 uses a stellar-mass cut for the model, not the observational quiescence selection (e.g., UVJ or NUVr colors/SED fits). Section 3 of this same chapter warns that UVJ selection is increasingly incomplete at z>3 and that SED-fitting assumptions strongly affect inferred masses and SFRs. Since the model is not forward-modeled through the same photometric/SED selection, the difference shown in the left panel may be partially a selection artifact rather than a purely physical tension; its sign and magnitude are unknown. The text's closing remark that characterizing the impact of different selections is 'the next obvious step' acknowledges this, but the claim that JWST-discovered galaxies 'sharpen the challenge' is presented before this caveat. The authors should either apply the observed selection to the model or explicitly qualify the figure and state the expected direction of the bias.
  2. [Section 5, Figure 13] The gray envelope from 125 subvolumes of ~140 Mpc on a side approximates the volume of Valentino et al. (2023) only. The figure compiles measurements from several surveys with different areas, depths, and selection functions (e.g., Carnall et al. 2024, Weaver et al. 2023, Nanayakkara et al. 2024), so a single cosmic-variance envelope is not the correct uncertainty for all points. This weakens the statement that cosmic variance 'can easily accommodate at least some of the recently published measurements'; the authors should match the uncertainty treatment to each survey or restrict the claim.
minor comments (7)
  1. [Nomenclature] The entry 'IMF Intial Mass Function' contains a typo; it should read 'Initial Mass Function'.
  2. [Section 5] The phrase 'cosmic epochs end environments' should read 'cosmic epochs and environments'.
  3. [Section 5] The sentence 'showing that the the problem of satellite over-quenching' contains a duplicated 'the'.
  4. [Section 6] The phrase 'ranging from the the construction' contains a duplicated 'the'.
  5. [Section 6] The phrase 'statistical studies of rare these rare systems' should read 'statistical studies of these rare systems'.
  6. [Section 4.1] The phrase 'hot and tenous X-ray emitting gas' should read 'hot and tenuous X-ray emitting gas'.
  7. [Section 6] The phrase 'delay between a starbust and the onset' should read 'delay between a starburst and the onset'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the review tests GAEA predictions against external observations and independent simulations; self-citations are not load-bearing.

full rationale

This is a review chapter, not a derivation. The claimed challenge (models struggle to reproduce massive quiescent galaxies at z>3) is supported by comparing GAEA model predictions with SDSS, GOGREEN, and JWST observations and with independent simulation suites such as EAGLE, IllustrisTNG, Magneticum, and Hydrangea. The authors' own GAEA results (De Lucia et al. 2024; Xie et al. 2020; Fontanot et al. 2020) are presented as tested predictions, not as premises that define the target quantity. No equation in the chapter constructs the predicted quiescent fractions from the observed quiescent fractions. The general statement that subgrid prescriptions are "typically calibrated against a subset of observational results in the local Universe" describes model construction, but it does not make the high-redshift comparison circular, and the chapter explicitly notes in Section 6 that local calibrations may not describe early epochs. The acknowledged differences among quiescence-selection methods in Section 3 and the unquantified selection mismatch in Figure 13 (a model mass cut versus observationally selected quiescent samples) are methodological concerns about the strength of the claimed tension, but they are not a case of a prediction reducing to its inputs by construction. Self-citations are frequent but are not load-bearing in the sense of importing an unverified uniqueness theorem or ansatz, and the central comparison is anchored to external data and independent models. Therefore no significant circularity is present.

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

This is a review, so no new free parameters or invented entities are introduced. The only inputs the reader does not pay for upstream are the standard astrophysical framework: Lambda-CDM structure formation, the reliability of SFR tracers and quiescent selections, the applicability of locally calibrated subgrid prescriptions at high redshift, and the stellar population assumptions used to convert photometry into masses and SFRs. These are standard domain assumptions, not ad hoc constructs.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The standard Lambda-CDM hierarchical structure formation paradigm is assumed as the cosmological background.
    Throughout Sections 2, 4, and 5, quenching is discussed in terms of dark matter halo assembly, accretion, and merging within Lambda-CDM; this is the framework in which all cited observations and simulations are interpreted.
  • domain assumption SFR indicators and color-color selections can classify galaxies as quiescent across cosmic epochs with acceptable fidelity.
    Section 3 describes UVJ and NUV-r selections and notes incompleteness and purity issues; the review's reported quiescent fractions rely on these classifications.
  • domain assumption Subgrid prescriptions calibrated against local observations remain applicable at high redshift.
    Section 5 compares model predictions from GAEA, TNG, EAGLE, and other simulations to high-redshift observations. Section 6 explicitly worries that this extrapolation may be invalid, making it a load-bearing assumption for the theoretical comparisons.
  • domain assumption Standard stellar population synthesis and IMF assumptions underpin stellar mass and star formation rate estimates.
    Section 3 notes that IMF, dust, and template assumptions affect SFRs and masses; the quoted galaxy abundances depend on these choices.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Cosmic quenching." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SOOLAUTE

@misc{pith2026250201724,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Cosmic quenching},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SOOLAUTE}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.01724}
}
read the original abstract

The quenching of star formation activity represents a critical phase for a non-negligible fraction of the observed galaxy population at all cosmic epochs, marking a transition from an epoch of intense mass growth to an extended period of passive evolution. Over the past years, we have collected a detailed characterization of how the fraction of quenched galaxies evolves as a function of cosmic time (it grows at later cosmic epochs), and correlates with the physical properties of galaxies (more massive galaxies, that also tend to be bulge-dominated, are more likely to be quenched) and with their environment (denser environments host larger fractions of quiescent galaxies). Different physical processes can lead to a suppression of star formation. These include internal processes (processes that do not depend on the environment in which galaxies live, e.g. stellar and AGN feedback mechanisms) and processes that instead depend on the environment (e.g. mergers, gas stripping processes). In this chapter, we summarize the observational and theoretical status of the field, highlighting the most recent results and the questions that are yet to be answered. We also summarize our view on the expected developments in the next few years.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Environmental vs. intrinsic quenching at cosmic noon: Predictions from cosmological hydrodynamical simulations for VLT-MOONRISE

    astro-ph.GA 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    In TNG and EAGLE simulations, central and high-mass satellite galaxies are best predicted to quench by black hole mass while low-mass satellites by halo mass, yielding opposite predictions for detecting environmental ...

  2. DeepDive: A deep dive into the physics of the first massive quiescent galaxies in the Universe

    astro-ph.GA 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A new sample of 150 spectroscopically confirmed quiescent galaxies at 1<z<5 shows that high-redshift examples have weaker 4000 Å breaks and reveals faint metal absorption even in the youngest subsample.

  3. Probing Obscured Star Formation in Galaxy Clusters Using JWST Medium Band Images: 3.3$\mu\rm m$ PAH Emitter Sample in Abell 2744

    astro-ph.GA 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    JWST F430M medium-band imaging isolates 3.3 micron PAH emission and identifies 22 star-forming galaxies in Abell 2744 whose PAH-based star formation rates match SED and far-infrared estimates, placing them mostly in l...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 18 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    (2009), Jun

    Abazajian KN and et al. (2009), Jun. The Seventh Data Release of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey.ApJS 182 (2): 543–558. doi:10.1088/0067-0049/ 182/2/543. 0812.0649. Alberts S and Noble A (2022), Oct. From Clusters to Proto-Clusters: The Infrared Perspective on Environmental Galaxy Evolution. Universe 8 (11),

    arXiv 2009

  2. [2]

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1436

    MNRAS 452 (2): 2087–2126. doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1436. 1506.08222. Loh YS, Ellingson E, Y ee HKC, Gilbank DG, Gladders MD and Barrientos LF (2008), Jun. The Color Bimodality in Galaxy Clusters since z˜0.9. ApJ 680 (1): 214–223. doi:10.1086/587830. 0802.3726. Lotz M, Remus RS, Dolag K, Biviano A and Burkert A (2019), Oct. Gone after one orbit: How cluster en...

    arXiv 2008

  3. [3]

    2109.13614

    doi: 10.1007/ s00159-022-00140-3 . 2109.13614. Bower RG, Kodama T and Terlevich A (1998), Oct. The colour-magnitude relation as a constraint on the formation of rich cluster galaxies. MNRAS 299 (4): 1193–1208. doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.1998.01868.x. astro-ph/9805290. Bower RG, Benson AJ, Malbon R, Helly JC, Frenk CS, Baugh CM, Cole S and Lacey CG (2006), Au...

    arXiv 1998

  4. [5]

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stae2092

    MNRAS 534 (1): 325–348. doi:10.1093/mnras/stae2092. 2405.02242. Catinella B, Schiminovich D, Cortese L, Fabello S, Hummels CB, Moran SM, Lemonias JJ, Cooper AP , Wu R, Heckman TM and Wang J (2013), Nov. The GALEX Arecibo SDSS Survey - VIII. Final data release. The effect of group environment on the gas content of massive galaxies. MNRAS 436 (1): 34–70. do...

    arXiv 2013

  5. [9]

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1545

    MNRAS 471 (3): 3152–3185. doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1545. 1609.08622. Postman M, Franx M, Cross NJG, Holden B, Ford HC, Illingworth GD, Goto T, Demarco R, Rosati P , Blakeslee JP , Tran KV, Ben´ıtez N, Clampin M, Hartig GF , Homeier N, Ardila DR, Bartko F , Bouwens RJ, Bradley LD, Broadhurst TJ, Brown RA, Burrows CJ, Cheng ES, Feldman PD, Golimowski DA, Gronwa...

    arXiv 2005

  6. [14]

    Momentum-driven Winds from Radiatively Efficient Black Hole Accretion and Their Impact on Galaxies

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aac2c4. 1805.00946. Brinchmann J, Charlot S, White SDM, Tremonti C, Kauffmann G, Heckman T and Brinkmann J (2004), Jul. The physical properties of star-forming galaxies in the low-redshift Universe. MNRAS 351 (4): 1151–1179. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07881.x. astro-ph/0311060. Brodwin M, Stanford SA, Gonzalez AH, Zeimann GR, Snyde...

    work page Pith review arXiv 2004

  7. [18]

    1404.5624

    doi:10.1088/0004-637X/788/1/72. 1404.5624. Gaspari M and Sa ¸dowski A (2017), Mar. Unifying the Micro and Macro Properties of AGN Feeding and Feedback. ApJ 837,

    arXiv 2017

  8. [20]

    Guo Q, White S, Boylan-Kolchin M, De Lucia G, Kauffmann G, Lemson G, Li C, Springel V and Weinmann S (2011), May

    doi:10.1086/151605. Guo Q, White S, Boylan-Kolchin M, De Lucia G, Kauffmann G, Lemson G, Li C, Springel V and Weinmann S (2011), May. From dwarf spheroidals to cD galaxies: simulating the galaxy population in a ΛCDM cosmology. MNRAS 413 (1): 101–131. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.18114.x. 1006.0106. Gutcke TA, Pakmor R, Naab T and Springel V (2022), Jun. ...

    work page arXiv 2011

Show all 48 references
  1. [22]

    2308.15011

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad1ff1. 2308.15011. Kang X and van den Bosch FC (2008), Apr. New Constraints on the Efficiencies of Ram Pressure Stripping and the Tidal Disruption of Satellite Galaxies. ApJ 676 (2): L101. doi:10.1086/587620. 0801.1843. Kasen D and Woosley SE (2009), Oct...

    2008 arXiv

  2. [24]

    1104.2595

    doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/739/1/24. 1104.2595. Bremer MN, Phillipps S, Kelvin LS, De Propris R, Kennedy R, Moffett AJ, Bamford S, Davies LJM, Driver SP , H¨außler B, Holwerda B, Hopkins A, James PA, Liske J, Percival S and Taylor EN (2018), May. Galaxy and Mass Assembly (GAMA): M...

    2018 arXiv

  3. [25]

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3438

    MNRAS 518 (3): 4782–4800. doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3438. 2210.10803. Kulier A, Poggianti B, Tonnesen S, Smith R, Ignesti A, Akerman N, Marasco A, Vulcani B, Moretti A and Wolter A (2023), Sep. Ram Pressure Stripping in the EAGLE Simulation. ApJ 954 (2),

    2023 arXiv

  4. [26]

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20041960

    A&A 439 (3): 845–862. doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20041960. astro-ph/0409133. Lee-Brown DB, Rudnick GH, Momcheva IG, Papovich C, Lotz JM, Tran KVH, Henke B, Willmer CNA, Brammer GB, Brodwin M, Dunlop J and Farrah D (2017), Jul. The Ages of Passive Galaxies in a z = 1.62 Protocluster...

    2017 arXiv

  5. [27]

    2104.02089

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abf655. 2104.02089. Wang L, Li C, Kauffmann G and De Lucia G (2007), Jun. Modelling and interpreting the dependence of clustering on the spectral energy distributions of galaxies. MNRAS 377 (4): 1419–1430. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.11737.x. astro-ph/07...

    2007 arXiv

  6. [28]

    1508.03057

    doi:10.1088/0004-637X/811/1/28. 1508.03057. Triani DP , Sinha M, Croton DJ, Dwek E and Pacifici C (2021), May. Exploring the relation between dust mass and galaxy properties using Dusty SAGE. MNRAS 503 (1): 1005–1016. doi:10.1093/mnras/stab558. 2102.12652. T¨ullmann R, Gaetz T...

    2021 arXiv

  7. [29]

    1904.01483

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab67bd. 1904.01483. Fiore F , Feruglio C, Shankar F , Bischetti M, Bongiorno A, Brusa M, Carniani S, Cicone C, Duras F , Lamastra A, Mainieri V, Marconi A, Menci N, Maiolino R, Piconcelli E, Vietri G and Zappacosta L (2017), May. AGN wind scaling relation...

    2017 arXiv

  8. [30]

    1811.03637

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab133c. 1811.03637. Li C, Kauffmann G, Jing YP , White SDM, B¨orner G and Cheng FZ (2006), May. The dependence of clustering on galaxy properties.MNRAS 368 (1): 21–36. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10066.x. astro-ph/0509873. Lilly SJ, Le F`evre O, Renzini ...

    2006 arXiv

  9. [31]

    1610.09389

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa7849. 1610.09389. Cielo S, Babul A, Antonuccio-Delogu V, Silk J and Volonteri M (2018), Sep. Feedback from reorienting AGN jets. I. Jet-ICM coupling, cavity properties and global energetics. A&A 617, A58. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201832582. Coil AL, Mendez...

    2018 arXiv

  10. [32]

    1303.4409

    doi:10.1088/0004-637X/777/1/18. 1303.4409. Naab T and Ostriker JP (2017), Aug. Theoretical Challenges in Galaxy Formation. ARA&A 55 (1): 59–109. doi: 10.1146/ annurev-astro-081913-040019 . 1612.06891. Nanayakkara T, Glazebrook K, Jacobs C, Kawinwanichakij L, Schreiber C, Bramm...

    2017 arXiv

  11. [34]

    1610.05201

    doi:10.1007/s00159-016-0100-3 . 1610.05201. Paccagnella A, Vulcani B, Poggianti BM, Moretti A, Fritz J, Gullieuszik M, Couch W, Bettoni D, Cava A, D’Onofrio M and Fasano G (2016), Jan. Slow Quenching of Star Formation in OMEGAWINGS Clusters: Galaxies in Transition in the Local...

    2016 arXiv

  12. [35]

    2404.17945

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad7e15. 2404.17945. Pawlik MM, McAlpine S, Trayford JW, Wild V, Bower R, Crain RA, Schaller M and Schaye J (2019), Mar. The diverse evolutionary pathways of post-starburst galaxies. Nature Astronomy 3: 440–446. doi:10.1038/s41550-019-0725-z . 1903.11050. ...

    2019 arXiv

  13. [36]

    2311.16232

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad2df9. 2311.16232. Krumholz MR, McKee CF and Bland-Hawthorn J (2019), Aug. Star Clusters Across Cosmic Time. ARA&A 57: 227–303. doi: 10.1146/ annurev-astro-091918-104430 . 1812.01615. Kukstas E, Balogh ML, McCarthy IG, Bah ´e YM, De Lucia G, Jablonka P ,...

    2019 arXiv

  14. [40]

    1904.00023

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab14ee. 1904.00023. Poggianti BM, Smail I, Dressler A, Couch WJ, Barger AJ, Butcher H, Ellis RS and Oemler Augustus J (1999), Jun. The Star Formation Histories of Galaxies in Distant Clusters. ApJ 518 (2): 576–593. doi:10.1086/307322. astro-ph/9901264. Po...

    1999 arXiv

  15. [41]

    1110.1420

    doi:10.1088/0004-637X/752/1/41. 1110.1420. Y ang H, Liao S, Fattahi A, Frenk CS, Gao L, Guo Q, Shao S, Wang L, Wright RJ and Zeng G (2024), Dec. APOSTLE-AURIGA: effects of stellar feedback subgrid models on the evolution of angular momentum in disc galaxies. MNRAS 535 (2): 139...

    2024 arXiv

  16. [43]

    1706.05017

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa7948. 1706.05017. Lee J, Kimm T, Blaizot J, Katz H, Lee W, Sheen YK, Devriendt J and Slyz A (2022), Apr. Simulating Jellyfish Galaxies: A Case Study for a Gas-rich Dwarf Galaxy. ApJ 928 (2),

    2022 arXiv

  17. [44]

    doi: 10.1086/591019

    ApJ 685 (2): 919–932. doi: 10.1086/591019. 0806.1527. Valentini M, Murante G, Borgani S, Monaco P , Bressan A and Beck AM (2017), Sep. On the effect of galactic outflows in cosmological simulations of disc galaxies. MNRAS 470 (3): 3167–3193. doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1352. 1705.103...

    2017 arXiv

  18. [45]

    2302.10936

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acbefa. 2302.10936. van der Burg RFJ, Rudnick G, Balogh ML, Muzzin A, Lidman C, Old LJ, Shipley H, Gilbank D, McGee S, Biviano A, Cerulo P , Chan JCC, Cooper M, De Lucia G, Demarco R, Forrest B, Gwyn S, Jablonka P , Kukstas E, Marchesini D, Nantais J, Nob...

    2020 arXiv

  19. [47]

    doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1829-4

    Nature 577 (7788): 39–41. doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1829-4 . 2001.00549. Wolf C, Meisenheimer K, Rix HW, Borch A, Dye S and Kleinheinrich M (2003), Apr. The COMBO-17 survey: Evolution of the galaxy luminosity function from 25 000 galaxies with 0.2¡ z ¡1.2. A&A 401: 73–98. doi:10....

    2003 arXiv

  20. [48]

    1704.05086

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa78ed. 1704.05086. Cosmic quenching 27 Popesso P , Concas A, Cresci G, Belli S, Rodighiero G, Inami H, Dickinson M, Ilbert O, Pannella M and Elbaz D (2023), Feb. The main sequence of star-forming galaxies across cosmic times. MNRAS 519 (1): 1526–1544. do...

    2023 arXiv

  21. [49]

    1802.07263

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aad08f. 1802.07263. Butcher H and Oemler A. J (1984), Oct. The evolution of galaxies in clusters. V. A study of populations since Z 0.5. ApJ 285: 426–438. doi: 10.1086/162519. Calzetti D (2013), Star Formation Rate Indicators, Falc´on-Barroso J and Knapen...

    1984 arXiv

  22. [56]

    De Lucia G, Kauffmann G and White SDM (2004), Apr

    doi:10.3390/galaxies7020056. De Lucia G, Kauffmann G and White SDM (2004), Apr. Chemical enrichment of the intracluster and intergalactic medium in a hierarchical galaxy formation model. MNRAS 349 (3): 1101–1116. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07584.x. astro-ph/0310268. De Lucia...

    2004

  23. [63]

    1308.5224

    doi:10.1088/0004-637X/776/1/63. 1308.5224. Feruglio C, Maiolino R, Piconcelli E, Menci N, Aussel H, Lamastra A and Fiore F (2010), Jul. Quasar feedback revealed by giant molecular outflows. A&A 518, L155. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201015164. 1006.1655. Feruglio C, Fabbiano G, Bisc...

    2010 arXiv

  24. [72]

    1604.03564

    doi:10.3847/0004-637X/825/1/72. 1604.03564. Andersson EP , Rey MP , Pontzen A, Cadiou C, Agertz O, Read JI and Martin NF (2024), Sep. EDGE-INFERNO: Simulating every observable star in faint dwarf galaxies and their consequences for resolved-star photometric surveys.arXiv e-pri...

    2024 arXiv

  25. [77]

    1102.3689

    doi:10.1088/0004-637X/741/2/77. 1102.3689. Somerville RS and Dav ´e R (2015), Aug. Physical Models of Galaxy Formation in a Cosmological Framework. ARA&A 53: 51–113. doi:10.1146/ annurev-astro-082812-140951 . 1412.2712. Somerville RS, Popping G and Trager SC (2015), Nov. Star ...

    2015 arXiv

  26. [86]

    1105.4609

    doi:10.1088/0004-637X/735/2/86. 1105.4609. Williams RJ, Quadri RF , Franx M, van Dokkum P and Labb´e I (2009), Feb. Detection of Quiescent Galaxies in a Bicolor Sequence from Z = 0-2. ApJ 691 (2): 1879–1895. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/691/2/1879. 0806.0625. Willis JP , Canning REA,...

    2009 arXiv

  27. [87]

    1609.09090

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa63ec. 1609.09090. Conroy C (2013), Aug. Modeling the Panchromatic Spectral Energy Distributions of Galaxies. ARA&A 51 (1): 393–455. doi: 10.1146/ annurev-astro-082812-141017 . 1301.7095. Cora SA, Vega-Mart´ınez CA, Hough T, Ruiz AN, Orsi ´AA, Mu˜noz Ara...

    2013 arXiv

  28. [89]

    1210.6694

    doi:10.1088/0004-637X/767/1/89. 1210.6694. Muzzin A, Marchesini D, Stefanon M, Franx M, McCracken HJ, Milvang-Jensen B, Dunlop JS, Fynbo JPU, Brammer G, Labb´e I and van Dokkum PG (2013), Nov. The Evolution of the Stellar Mass Functions of Star-forming and Quiescent Galaxies t...

    2013 arXiv

  29. [113]

    1605.03182

    doi:10.3847/0004-637X/825/2/113. 1605.03182. Dav´e R, Angl´es-Alc´azar D, Narayanan D, Li Q, Rafieferantsoa MH and Appleby S (2019), Jun. SIMBA: Cosmological simulations with black hole growth and feedback. MNRAS 486 (2): 2827–2849. doi:10.1093/mnras/stz937. 1901.10203. de Gra...

    2019 arXiv

  30. [138]

    1310.6039

    doi:10.1088/0004-637X/779/2/138. 1310.6039. 22 Cosmic quenching Brown T, Catinella B, Cortese L, Lagos CdP , Dav´e R, Kilborn V, Haynes MP , Giovanelli R and Rafieferantsoa M (2017), Apr. Cold gas stripping in satellite galaxies: from pairs to clusters. MNRAS 466 (2): 1275–128...

    2017 arXiv

  31. [144]

    2201.01316

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac5595. 2201.01316. Leja J, Carnall AC, Johnson BD, Conroy C and Speagle JS (2019), May. How to Measure Galaxy Star Formation Histories. II. Nonparametric Models. ApJ 876 (1),

    2019 arXiv

  32. [145]

    1905.13249

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab3e6c. 1905.13249. Jin S, Sillassen NB, Magdis GE, Brinch M, Shuntov M, Brammer G, Gobat R, Valentino F , Carnall AC, Lee M, Vijayan AP , Gillman S, Kokorev V, Le Bail A, Greve TR, Gullberg B, Gould KML and Toft S (2024), Mar. Cosmic Vine: A z = 3.44 lar...

    2024 arXiv

  33. [147]

    1907.00982

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab2e72. 1907.00982. Silk J and Rees MJ (1998), Mar. Quasars and galaxy formation. A&A 331: L1–L4. astro-ph/9801013. Snyder GF , Cox TJ, Hayward CC, Hernquist L and Jonsson P (2011), Nov. K+A Galaxies as the Aftermath of Gas-rich Mergers: Simulating the Ev...

    1998 arXiv

  34. [149]

    1701.07030

    doi: 10.3847/ 1538-4357/aa61a3. 1701.07030. Gatto A, Walch S, Naab T, Girichidis P , W¨unsch R, Glover SCO, Klessen RS, Clark PC, Peters T, Derigs D, Baczynski C and Puls J (2017), Apr. The SILCC project - III. Regulation of star formation and outflows by stellar winds and sup...

    2017 arXiv

  35. [161]

    1903.08178

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab0960. 1903.08178. Tran KVH, Nanayakkara T, Yuan T, Kacprzak GG, Glazebrook K, Kewley LJ, Momcheva I, Papovich CJ, Quadri R, Rudnick G, Saintonge A, Spitler LR, Straatman C and Tomczak A (2015), Sep. ZFIRE: Galaxy Cluster Kinematics, H alpha Star Formati...

    2015 arXiv

  36. [177]

    2305.03758

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aceda3. 2305.03758. Kurinchi-Vendhan S, Farcy M, Hirschmann M and Valentino F (2024), Nov. On the origin of star formation quenching in massive galaxies at≳ in the cosmological simulations IllustrisTNG. MNRAS 534 (4): 3974–3988. doi:10.1093/mnras/stae2297...

    2024 arXiv

  37. [419]

    Inferring the star formation histories of massive quiescent galaxies with BAGPIPES: evidence for multiple quenching mechanisms

    Carnall AC, McLure RJ, Dunlop JS and Dav´e R (2018), Nov. Inferring the star formation histories of massive quiescent galaxies with BAGPIPES: evidence for multiple quenching mechanisms. MNRAS 480 (4): 4379–4401. doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2169. 1712.04452. Carnall AC, McLeod DJ, McL...

    2018 arXiv

  38. [554]

    2209.02781

    doi:10.3390/universe8110554. 2209.02781. Alberts S, Pope A, Brodwin M, Chung SM, Cybulski R, Dey A, Eisenhardt PRM, Galametz A, Gonzalez AH, Jannuzi BT, Stanford SA, Snyder GF , Stern D and Zeimann GR (2016), Jul. Star Formation and AGN Activity in Galaxy Clusters from z=1-2: ...

    2016 arXiv

  39. [604]

    Chen H, Xie L, Wang J, Hu W, De Lucia G, Fontanot F and Hirschamnn M (2024), Feb

    doi:10.1086/115545. Chen H, Xie L, Wang J, Hu W, De Lucia G, Fontanot F and Hirschamnn M (2024), Feb. Environmental effects on satellite galaxies from the perspective of cold gas. MNRAS 528 (2): 2451–2463. doi:10.1093/mnras/stae162. 2401.07158. Chevallard J and Charlot S (2016...

    2024 arXiv

  40. [3724]

    2212.11638

    doi:10.1038/s41598-024-52585-4 . 2212.11638. Nantais JB, Muzzin A, van der Burg RFJ, Wilson G, Lidman C, Foltz R, DeGroot A, Noble A, Cooper MC and Demarco R (2017), Feb. Evidence for strong evolution in galaxy environmental quenching efficiency between z = 1.6 and z = 0.9. MN...

    2017 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 9, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.