Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 4 cited by

The AURORA Survey: The Evolution of Multi-phase Electron Densities at High Redshift

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Low-ionization gas in star-forming galaxies is denser at earlier cosmic times, rising from 268 to 480 cm^-3 between z=2.3 and z=5.3, while high-ionization gas is about 30 times denser.

desk verdict A solid homogeneous JWST density survey whose headline (1+z)^1.5 evolution is shaky—two of the three bins overlap and the z~5 bin has four objects—but the multiphase CIII]/[SII] contrast and SPHINX comparison carry real value. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.08712 v1 pith:EOLWYWBI submitted 2025-02-12 astro-ph.GA

Michael W. Topping , Ryan L. Sanders , Alice E. Shapley , Anthony J. Pahl , Naveen A. Reddy , Daniel P. Stark , Danielle A. Berg , Leonardo Clarke
show 9 more authors
Fergus Cullen James S. Dunlop Richard S. Ellis N. M. Förster Schreiber Garth D. Illingworth Tucker Jones Desika Narayanan Max Pettini Daniel Schaerer
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords electrondensityhigh-redshiftgalaxiesJWST/NIRSpecspectroscopyinterstellarmediumemission-linedoubletsCIII]doubletHIIregionstructuregalaxyevolution
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 measures the electron density of ionized gas in star-forming galaxies from $z\approx1.4$ to $z\approx10$ using deep JWST/NIRSpec spectra from the AURORA survey. It reports median low-ionization densities of $268$, $350$, and $480~\mathrm{cm^{-3}}$ at redshifts $z=2.3$, $3.2$, and $5.3$, tracking an evolutionary trend of $(1+z)^{1.5\pm0.6}$. It also measures the CIII] doublet and finds densities around $1.4\times10^4~\mathrm{cm^{-3}}$, about 30 times higher than the [SII]-based values, indicating that HII regions have dense high-ionization interiors and diffuse low-ionization exteriors. The results matter because they tie gas density to galaxy growth and set constraints on the physical conditions used to interpret high-redshift spectra.

What carries the argument

The argument runs on ratios of density-sensitive, collisionally excited emission-line doublets: [SII] $\lambda\lambda6717,6731$ for low-ionization gas and CIII] $\lambda\lambda1907,1909$ for high-ionization gas. These ratios are converted to electron densities with the PyNeb atomic-physics package assuming an electron temperature of $15{,}000$ K. Because the CIII] doublet is only marginally resolved by NIRSpec's $R\simeq1000$ gratings, the survey determines the effective resolution galaxy-by-galaxy from morphological modeling and retains only the eight galaxies for which CIII] is genuinely resolved. The two doublets together let the paper compare the densities of two distinct ISM phases, which is what carries the layered-structure claim.

What would settle it

A reader could test the claim by measuring low-ionization densities from [SII] (or a complementary rest-UV doublet) for a larger sample of $z\sim5$ to $6$ galaxies selected without requiring strong [SII] emission and comparing the median to the reported $480~\mathrm{cm^{-3}}$; a substantially lower median would rule out the $(1+z)^{1.5}$ evolution.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is a coherent rise in the density of low-ionization interstellar gas with redshift: from the [SII] $\lambda\lambda6717,6731$ doublet the survey measures median electron densities of $268^{+45}_{-49}$, $350^{+140}_{-76}$, and $480^{+390}_{-310}~\mathrm{cm^{-3}}$ at median redshifts $z=2.3$, $3.2$, and $5.3$, with a best-fit power law $(1+z)^{1.5\pm0.6}$. The same galaxies show, through the CIII] $\lambda\lambda1907,1909$ doublet, a median density of $1.4^{+0.7}_{-0.5}\times10^4~\mathrm{cm^{-3}}$, roughly 30 times the [SII]-based value at $z>4$, which the paper interprets as a consistent two-phase structure of HII regions across cosmic time: compact, dense, high-ionization gas near the ionizing sources surrounded by more diffuse, low-ionization gas. The paper also finds that density correlates weakly with star-formation rate and star-formation surface density, and more strongly with offset from the local BPT (optical emission-line ratio) sequence, and that these trends match the behavior of simulated galaxies in which young systems retain the high pressure of their parent molecular clouds before feedback disperses it.

Load-bearing premise

The paper's redshift evolution is carried by three bins, and the $z>4$ bin contains only four [SII]-detected galaxies, so the load-bearing premise is that those four systems represent the typical star-forming population at that epoch rather than a systematically denser, line-bright subset.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the $(1+z)^{1.5\pm0.6}$ trend holds, typical star-forming galaxies at $z\sim5$ have roughly twice the low-ionization gas density of those at $z\sim2$, which shifts the interpretation of line-ratio diagnostics at high redshift.
  • The factor-of-30 contrast between CIII] and [SII] densities implies that constant-density single-phase models cannot reproduce high-redshift nebular spectra; density indicators must be chosen to match the ionization phase they trace.
  • The weak positive correlations with SFR and SFR surface density, alongside the stronger correlation with BPT offset, imply that density tracks star-formation intensity and ionizing conditions rather than stellar mass or specific SFR.
  • The similar evolution of [SII] and CIII] densities suggests the inner/outer density contrast of HII regions is roughly constant from $z\sim2$ to $z\sim6$, so the increase in density is a whole-ISM effect rather than a rearrangement of the structure.
  • The match to simulated galaxies links the high densities of young, high-H$\beta$ EW galaxies to residual molecular-cloud pressure that feedback from stars and supernovae later dissipates.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper: if the same slope persists above $z\sim6$, galaxies near $z\sim8$ should have [SII]-phase densities approaching $1000~\mathrm{cm^{-3}}$, which would make low-ionization optical doublets faint and push density work onto rest-UV lines; existing JWST surveys could test this by stacking CIII] and SiIII] ratios.
  • Beyond the paper: the claim that dust scatter hides the O32-density trend could be tested by applying per-galaxy Balmer-decrement corrections with a flexible dust law; a recovered correlation would strengthen the ionization-parameter interpretation.
  • Beyond the paper: the two-phase density contrast predicts that rest-UV high-ionization doublets such as SiIII] will yield systematically higher densities than optical low-ionization lines in the same galaxies, a prediction that can be checked with stacked spectra at $z\sim6$.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. This paper analyzes deep JWST/NIRSpec spectra from the AURORA survey to derive electron densities from [SII] and CIII] doublet ratios for 57 star-forming galaxies at z≈1.4–10. The authors report median [SII] densities of 268, 350, and 480 cm^-3 at z≈2.1, 3.2, and 5.3 and fit a redshift evolution ∝(1+z)^1.5±0.6. They further find a median CIII] density of 1.4×10^4 cm^-3, about 30 times larger than [SII], and identify weak correlations with SFR, ΣSFR, Ne3O2, and offset from the local BPT sequence. The data are compared with SPHINX cosmological radiation-hydrodynamic simulations.

Significance. If the redshift trend holds, the paper would provide one of the first homogeneous multi-phase electron-density measurements at z>2 with JWST, with a careful treatment of spectral resolution and bootstrap uncertainties. The paper also makes a useful empirical point that low- and high-ionization gas densities differ by an order of magnitude, and the comparison to simulations is a constructive step. However, the headline evolutionary law is not firmly established by the data presented.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3.1.1 and Table A2] The quoted z>4 median [SII] density of 480 cm^-3 cannot be reproduced from the four point estimates listed in Table A2 (808, 237, 1125, and 594 cm^-3; their median is ~700 cm^-3). Since the high-z bin is the only bin that drives a statistically significant increase over the lower-redshift medians, the authors must clarify how this median was computed (e.g., including lower/upper limits from non-detections) and report the bootstrap median distribution. Without this, the central evolutionary claim is not reproducible.
  2. [Section 3.1.1 and Fig. 3] The two lowest redshift bins (z≈2.1 and z≈3.2) have medians of 268 and 350 cm^-3, which are consistent within their quoted 1σ uncertainties, so the AURORA data alone do not demonstrate a monotonic rise. The fitted exponent 1.5±0.6 is therefore almost entirely determined by the four-object z>4 bin. Even taking the quoted medians at face value, a simple power-law fit in log space gives a slope closer to 0.9. The paper should either fit the individual densities with a proper censored regression or present the (1+z)^1.5 relation as a preliminary suggestion.
  3. [Section 2.4 and Fig. 1] The representativeness claim for the z>4 sample is based on only four galaxies. With N=4, requiring a >5σ [SII] detection at the red edge of the G395M coverage may systematically select systems with high line surface brightness or high density. The authors should test the sensitivity of the redshift slope to selection effects, e.g., by comparing the properties of [SII]-detected and non-detected galaxies at z>4 and by recomputing the fit without the z>4 bin.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract and Section 3.1.1] The abstract gives the lowest-redshift bin as z=2.3 while Section 3.1.1 reports a median redshift of z≈2.1; please harmonize these values.
  2. [Abstract and Section 4.2] The phrase 'SPHINX galaxy formations' is incomplete; it should read 'SPHINX galaxy formation simulations'.
  3. [Figure 3 caption] The text refers to panels (a) and (b) of Figure 3, but the caption labels them only as 'Left' and 'Right'; please add explicit panel labels.
  4. [Section 4.1 and Fig. 7] The CIII] evolutionary slope ∝(1+z)^1.6 is derived from a heterogeneous sample (8 AURORA galaxies plus the Maseda et al. 2017 sample) and should be reported with a caveat about selection; consider softening the co-evolution claim.
  5. [Section 2.3.2] The statement that varying the assumed electron temperature between 10,000 K and 20,000 K has 'only a minimal effect' is vague; please quantify the effect on the inferred [SII] densities.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the electron densities are external observables derived from [SII]/CIII] doublet ratios, and the (1+z)^1.5 trend is an empirical fit to the measured medians, not a construction from the model.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained in the relevant sense. Electron densities are inferred from measured [SII] and CIII] doublet ratios using PyNeb (Section 2.3.2), with a stated assumption of Te = 15,000 K; they are not defined by the evolutionary claim. The redshift trend is obtained by fitting a power law to the bootstrapped medians in three redshift bins (Section 3.1.1), which is standard empirical fitting rather than a prediction derived from the model. The extrapolations to z ~ 0 and z ~ 7.5 are explicitly described as extrapolations of this best-fit trend and are compared to, not substituted for, independent literature measurements. The CIII] analysis uses an external comparison sample (Maseda et al. 2017), and the SPHINX simulations provide an external theoretical comparison; neither is calibrated to force the AURORA densities. The paper contains self-citations to companion AURORA papers (Shapley et al. 2024; Sanders et al. 2024a) for survey design, data reduction, and SED fitting, but these do not enter the density measurement or the redshift-evolution fit in a load-bearing way. The small size of the z > 4 [SII] sample (N = 4) and the overlap of the two lower-redshift medians are statistical robustness concerns, not circularity. No equation reduces to its own input, and no fitted parameter is renamed as an independent prediction.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are introduced. The analysis relies on standard atomic physics, assumed electron temperatures, Case B recombination, SFR calibrations, an ionization-bounded nebula relation, and simulation-based interpretation. The free parameters are empirical slopes fit to the data, not hidden model inputs.

free parameters (3)
  • [SII] density redshift evolution exponent = 1.5 ± 0.6
    Fit to bootstrapped median densities in three redshift bins at z_med = 2.1, 3.2, and 5.3 (Section 3.1.1). This is a measured fit, not an independent model prediction, and the highest bin contains only four galaxies.
  • CIII] density redshift evolution exponent = 1.6 +0.8/-0.7
    Fit to the AURORA CIII] median at z~6 and the Maseda et al. (2017) CIII] median at z~2 (Section 4.1). Based on only eight AURORA CIII] detections plus a literature sample.
  • SFR and SigmaSFR density relation slopes = 0.29 ± 0.16 and 0.15 ± 0.10
    linmix regressions in Equations 1 and 2, both at only about 2-2.3 sigma significance. These slopes are presented as weak positive correlations, not as strong predictions.
assumptions (7)
  • standard math PyNeb atomic data and collisional excitation/de-excitation equilibrium convert doublet ratios to electron density.
    Used for all [SII] and CIII] density calculations (Section 2.3.2). This is standard atomic physics, but the output depends on the adopted atomic data.
  • domain assumption A single electron temperature of 15,000 K is assumed for all density derivations.
    Section 2.3.2 states the assumption and argues the effect is minimal over 10,000-20,000 K. It is still an assumption applied uniformly across all galaxies.
  • domain assumption Case B recombination with H-alpha/H-beta = 2.79 is used for Balmer decrement dust corrections.
    Section 2.3.1. This affects SFRs and dust-corrected line ratios such as O32, and galaxy-to-galaxy variations could add scatter.
  • domain assumption SFR conversion factors come from BPASS models with a 100 solar mass upper cutoff and metallicity-dependent calibration.
    Section 2.3.1. These conversions set the SFR values used in the density-SFR and density-SigmaSFR correlations.
  • domain assumption The relation U proportional to n_e^(1/3) epsilon^(2/3) for an ionization-bounded nebula is used to interpret Ne3O2 trends.
    Equation 4, following Brinchmann et al. (2008). This connects ionization parameter to density but assumes a simple geometry and filling factor.
  • domain assumption msafit-derived spectral resolutions correctly determine which CIII] doublets are resolved.
    Section 2.2. The CIII] sample of eight galaxies depends on these resolution models, so an error there would change the high-ionization density sample.
  • domain assumption The SPHINX z=4.64 simulation snapshot provides a physically meaningful comparison for the observed trends.
    Section 4.2. The simulation comparison is used to interpret the H-beta EW, density, and metallicity relation, but the simulation is not independently validated against these data.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The AURORA Survey: The Evolution of Multi-phase Electron Densities at High Redshift." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/EOLWYWBI

@misc{pith2026250208712,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The AURORA Survey: The Evolution of Multi-phase Electron Densities at High Redshift},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/EOLWYWBI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.08712}
}
abstract

We present an analysis of deep $\textit{JWST}$/NIRSpec spectra of star-forming galaxies at $z\simeq1.4-10$, observed as part of the AURORA survey. We infer median low-ionization electron densities of $268_{-49}^{+45}~\rm cm^{-3}$, $350_{-76}^{+140}~\rm cm^{-3}$, and $480_{-310}^{+390}~\rm cm^{-3}$ at redshifts z$=2.3$, $z=3.2$, and $z=5.3$, respectively, revealing an evolutionary trend following $(1+z)^{1.5\pm0.6}$. We identify weak positive correlations between electron density and star formation rate (SFR) as well as SFR surface density, but no significant trends with stellar mass or specific SFR. Correlations with rest-optical emission line ratios show densities increasing with $\rm [NeIII]\lambda3869/[OII]\lambda3727$ and, potentially, $\rm [OIII]\lambda5007/[OII]\lambda3727$, although variations in dust attenuation complicate the latter. Additionally, electron density is more strongly correlated with distance from the local BPT sequence than can be explained by simple photoionization models. We further derive electron densities from the CIII] doublet probing higher-ionization gas, and find a median value of $1.4_{-0.5}^{+0.7}\times10^4~\rm cm^{-3}$, $\sim30$ times higher than densities inferred from [SII]. This comparison suggests a consistent HII region structure across cosmic time with dense, high-ionization interiors surrounded by less dense, low-ionization gas. We compare measurements of AURORA galaxies to predictions from the SPHINX galaxy formations, highlighting the interplay between residual molecular cloud pressure in young galaxies and feedback from stellar winds and supernovae as galaxies mature.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.08712 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Sample statistics and galaxy demographics for objects analyzed in this work from the AURORA survey. The left panel presents the redshift distribution for the full AURORA survey (black histogram), as well as the 1.4 < 𝑧 < 2.7 (blue), 2.7 < 𝑧 < 4 (teal), and 𝑧 > 4 (green) electron density samples (see Section 2.3.2). The right three panels present the SFR and stellar masses for the 1.4 < 𝑧 < 2.7 (left), 2.7 < 𝑧 < 4 (m… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Example [SII] (top) and CIII] (bottom) line profiles for some objects in the AURORA sample. In each panel we list the object ID, as well as the electron density obtained following the methods described in Section 2.4. a fixed width of 10 Myr, whereas the remaining bins were evenly distributed in log space from 10 Myr to the age of the Universe. The priors for the properties of the dust content and metallicity were s… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Left: Electron density inferred from the [SII] doublet (see Section 2) as a function of spectroscopic redshift for the aurora sample. The smaller points display values for individual objects, with the blue circles, teal squares, and green diamonds representing galaxies at 𝑧 < 2.7, 2.7 < 𝑧 < 4, and 𝑧 > 4, respectively. The larger outlined points indicate the median density within each redshift bin. Right: Comparison … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Electron density inferred from the [SII] doublet ratio displayed as a function of integrated galaxy SED properties. We compare the inferred densities to stellar mass (panel a), star-formation rate (panel b), specific-SFR (panel c), and SFR surface density (panel d). We…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Electron density inferred from the [SII] doublet ratio versus rest-optical emission-line ratios for the AURORA sample. We compare the electron density to [OIII]/H𝛽 (a), [NII]/H𝛼 (b), [OIII]/[OII] (c), and [NeIII]/[OII] (d). Emission line ratios that are sensitive to th…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: (a): Comparison between [SII] electron density and location on the BPT diagram. Galaxies in the AURORA sample are displayed as markers colored by their inferred densities, with circles, squares, and diamonds corresponding to galaxies at 𝑧 < 2.7, 2.7 < 𝑧 < 4.0, and 𝑧 > …
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: presents the densities inferred from the CIII] dou￾blet for AURORA galaxies where the line is significantly detected and resolved. All of the CIII] densities are considerably higher than those inferred from [SII] (Section 3.1.1). We infer CIII] den￾sities that range fr…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Comparison of electron densities and H𝛽 EWs, where the latter is a proxy for recent star-formation activity. Left: Results from the SPHINX simulations at a 𝑧 = 4.64 snapshot (Katz et al. 2023). Simulated galaxies are color-coded based on their [NII]-weighted gas-phase …

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. The AURORA Survey: Robust Helium Abundances at High Redshift Reveal A Subpopulation of Helium-Enhanced Galaxies in the Early Universe

    astro-ph.GA 2025-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    JWST spectra of 20 high-redshift galaxies provide the first robust helium abundances at z=1.6-3.3 and reveal a subpopulation of four galaxies with elevated helium but normal nitrogen and alpha-element abundances.

  2. Resolving stellar populations, star formation, and interstellar medium conditions with JWST in a large spiral galaxy at $z\approx2$

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

    Resolved JWST and ERIS observations of the z≈2.2 spiral K20-ID7 reveal a heavily obscured, still star-forming bulge, low S/O abundance, and an inside-out stellar age gradient.

  3. GA-NIFS: an extended [OIII] halo around the sub-Eddington quasar J1342+0928 at z=7.54

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

    JWST spectra of the z=7.54 quasar ULAS J1342+0928 reveal a 7-kpc oxygen halo and a moderate accretion rate of about 40% of the Eddington limit.

  4. Deep Spectroscopic Follow-Up of Maisie's Galaxy -- A Typical Galaxy in the Early Universe

    astro-ph.GA 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Deep JWST spectroscopy of Maisie's Galaxy at z=11.4 reveals moderate star formation, metallicity, and ionization consistent with a typical galaxy on the early star-formation main sequence rather than an extreme source.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

109 extracted references · 3 canonical work pages · cited by 4 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    arXiv:2404.16201

    Abdurro'uf et al., 2024, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2404.16201 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240416201A p. arXiv:2404.16201

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2404.16201 2024

  2. [2]

    H., Martini P., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/765/2/140 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...765..140A 765, 140

    Andrews B. H., Martini P., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/765/2/140 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...765..140A 765, 140

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/765/2/140 2013

  3. [3]

    J., Scott P., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.astro.46.060407.145222 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ARA&A..47..481A 47, 481

    Asplund M., Grevesse N., Sauval A. J., Scott P., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.astro.46.060407.145222 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ARA&A..47..481A 47, 481

    arXiv 2009

  4. [4]

    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

    doi:10.1086/130766 1981

  5. [5]

    A., et al., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/754/2/98 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...754...98B 754, 98

    Berg D. A., et al., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/754/2/98 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...754...98B 754, 98

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/754/2/98 2012

  6. [6]

    A., Chisholm J., Erb D

    Berg D. A., Chisholm J., Erb D. K., Skillman E. D., Pogge R. W., Olivier G. M., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac141b , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...922..170B 922, 170

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac141b 2021

  7. [7]

    A., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/ac6c03 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJS..261...31B 261, 31

    Berg D. A., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/ac6c03 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJS..261...31B 261, 31

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac6c03 2022

  8. [8]

    Bian F., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/725/2/1877 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...725.1877B 725, 1877

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/725/2/1877 2010

Show all 109 references
  1. [9]

    J., Dopita M

    Bian F., Kewley L. J., Dopita M. A., Juneau S., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-637X/822/2/62 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...822...62B 822, 62

    2016 doi

  2. [10]

    J., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/803/1/34 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...803...34B 803, 34

    Bouwens R. J., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/803/1/34 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...803...34B 803, 34

    2015 doi

  3. [11]

    Brinchmann J., Pettini M., Charlot S., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.12914.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008MNRAS.385..769B 385, 769

    2008

  4. [12]

    J., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202346159 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023A&A...677A..88B 677, A88

    Bunker A. J., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202346159 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023A&A...677A..88B 677, A88

    2023 doi

  5. [13]

    J., Conroy C., Johnson B

    Byler N., Dalcanton J. J., Conroy C., Johnson B. D., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aa6c66 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...840...44B 840, 44

    2017 doi

  6. [14]

    C., Kinney A

    Calzetti D., Armus L., Bohlin R. C., Kinney A. L., Koornneef J., Storchi-Bergmann T., 2000, @doi [ ] 10.1086/308692 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000ApJ...533..682C 533, 682

    2000 doi

  7. [15]

    J., Katz H., Witten C., Saxena A., Laporte N., Bunker A

    Cameron A. J., Katz H., Witten C., Saxena A., Laporte N., Bunker A. J., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae1547 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.534..523C 534, 523

    2024 doi

  8. [16]

    A., Clayton G

    Cardelli J. A., Clayton G. C., Mathis J. S., 1989, @doi [ ] 10.1086/167900 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1989ApJ...345..245C 345, 245

    1989 doi

  9. [17]

    Chabrier G., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1086/376392 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003PASP..115..763C 115, 763

    2003 doi

  10. [18]

    E., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/712/2/833 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...712..833C 712, 833

    Conroy C., Gunn J. E., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/712/2/833 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...712..833C 712, 833

    2010 doi

  11. [19]

    E., White M., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/699/1/486 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...699..486C 699, 486

    Conroy C., Gunn J. E., White M., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/699/1/486 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...699..486C 699, 486

    2009 doi

  12. [20]

    Curti M., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202346698 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...684A..75C 684, A75

    2024 doi

  13. [21]

    L., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/abd551 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...909...78D 909, 78

    Davies R. L., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/abd551 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...909...78D 909, 78

    2021 doi

  14. [22]

    S., et al., 2021, PRIMER: Public Release IMaging for Extragalactic Research , JWST Proposal

    Dunlop J. S., et al., 2021, PRIMER: Public Release IMaging for Extragalactic Research , JWST Proposal. Cycle 1, ID. \#1837

    2021

  15. [23]

    J., et al., 2023, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2306.02465 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023arXiv230602465E p

    Eisenstein D. J., et al., 2023, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2306.02465 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023arXiv230602465E p. arXiv:2306.02465

    2023 doi arXiv

  16. [24]

    Endsley R., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae1857 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.533.1111E 533, 1111

    2024 doi

  17. [25]

    K., Shapley A

    Erb D. K., Shapley A. E., Pettini M., Steidel C. C., Reddy N. A., Adelberger K. L., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/503623 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006ApJ...644..813E 644, 813

    2006 doi

  18. [26]

    L., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/810/1/71 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...810...71F 810, 71

    Finkelstein S. L., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/810/1/71 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...810...71F 810, 71

    2015 doi

  19. [27]

    Fujimoto S., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/acd2d9 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...949L..25F 949, L25

    2023 doi

  20. [28]

    D., Clayton G

    Gordon K. D., Clayton G. C., Misselt K. A., Landolt A. U., Wolff M. J., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1086/376774 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ApJ...594..279G 594, 279

    2003 doi

  21. [29]

    A., et al., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/197/2/35 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJS..197...35G 197, 35

    Grogin N. A., et al., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/197/2/35 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJS..197...35G 197, 35

    2011 doi

  22. [30]

    N., Shapley A

    Hainline K. N., Shapley A. E., Kornei K. A., Pettini M., Buckley-Geer E., Allam S. S., Tucker D. L., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/701/1/52 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...701...52H 701, 52

    2009 doi

  23. [31]

    N., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1ee4 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...964...71H 964, 71

    Hainline K. N., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1ee4 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...964...71H 964, 71

    2024 doi

  24. [32]

    Harshan A., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab76cf , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...892...77H 892, 77

    2020 doi

  25. [33]

    E., et al., 2024, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2404.02211 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240402211H p

    Heintz K. E., et al., 2024, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2404.02211 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240402211H p. arXiv:2404.02211

    2024 doi arXiv

  26. [34]

    Herrera-Camus R., et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-637X/826/2/175 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...826..175H 826, 175

    2016 doi

  27. [35]

    Horne K., 1986, @doi [ ] 10.1086/131801 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1986PASP...98..609H 98, 609

    1986 doi

  28. [36]

    Hu W., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad5015 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...971...21H 971, 21

    2024 doi

  29. [37]

    K., Hirashita H., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/200912020 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A&A...507.1327H 507, 1327

    Hunt L. K., Hirashita H., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/200912020 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A&A...507.1327H 507, 1327

    2009 doi

  30. [38]

    Isobe Y., Ouchi M., Nakajima K., Harikane Y., Ono Y., Xu Y., Zhang Y., Umeda H., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/acf376 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...956..139I 956, 139

    2023 doi

  31. [39]

    L., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu287 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.440.1794J 440, 1794

    James B. L., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu287 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.440.1794J 440, 1794

    2014 doi

  32. [40]

    J., Dutton A

    Jiang F., Dekel A., Freundlich J., Romanowsky A. J., Dutton A. A., Macci \`o A. V., Di Cintio A., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz1499 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.487.5272J 487, 5272

    2019 doi

  33. [41]

    D., Leja J., Conroy C., Speagle J

    Johnson B. D., Leja J., Conroy C., Speagle J. S., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/abef67 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJS..254...22J 254, 22

    2021 doi

  34. [42]

    Jung I., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/abbd44 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...904..144J 904, 144

    2020 doi

  35. [43]

    J., Gupta A., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw2827 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.465.3220K 465, 3220

    Kaasinen M., Bian F., Groves B., Kewley L. J., Gupta A., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw2827 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.465.3220K 465, 3220

    2017 doi

  36. [44]

    K., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz881 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.486.1053K 486, 1053

    Kashino D., Inoue A. K., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz881 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.486.1053K 486, 1053

    2019 doi

  37. [45]

    Kashino D., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/835/1/88 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...835...88K 835, 88

    2017 doi

  38. [46]

    Katz H., et al., 2023, @doi [The Open Journal of Astrophysics] 10.21105/astro.2309.03269 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023OJAp....6E..44K 6, 44

    2023 arXiv

  39. [47]

    arXiv:2408.03189

    Katz H., et al., 2024, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2408.03189 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240803189K p. arXiv:2408.03189

    2024 doi arXiv

  40. [48]

    C., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/519947 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...665.1489K 665, 1489

    Kelly B. C., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/519947 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...665.1489K 665, 1489

    2007 doi

  41. [49]

    J., Ellison S

    Kewley L. J., Ellison S. L., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1086/587500 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJ...681.1183K 681, 1183

    2008 doi

  42. [50]

    J., Dopita M

    Kewley L. J., Dopita M. A., Leitherer C., Dav \'e R., Yuan T., Allen M., Groves B., Sutherland R., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/774/2/100 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...774..100K 774, 100

    2013 doi

  43. [51]

    G., Labb \'e I., Franx M., Illingworth G

    Kriek M., van Dokkum P. G., Labb \'e I., Franx M., Illingworth G. D., Marchesini D., Quadri R. F., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/700/1/221 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...700..221K 700, 221

    2009 doi

  44. [52]

    arXiv:2406.11997

    Kumari N., et al., 2024, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2406.11997 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240611997K p. arXiv:2406.11997

    2024 doi arXiv

  45. [53]

    H., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202347133 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...681A..70L 681, A70

    Laseter I. H., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202347133 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...681A..70L 681, A70

    2024 doi

  46. [54]

    D., Cannon J

    Lee H., Skillman E. D., Cannon J. M., Jackson D. C., Gehrz R. D., Polomski E. F., Woodward C. E., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/505573 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006ApJ...647..970L 647, 970

    2006 doi

  47. [55]

    D., Nesvadba N

    Lehnert M. D., Nesvadba N. P. H., Le Tiran L., Di Matteo P., van Driel W., Douglas L. S., Chemin L., Bournaud F., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/699/2/1660 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...699.1660L 699, 1660

    2009 doi

  48. [56]

    F., Serrano A., Torres-Peimbert S., 1979, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1979A&A....80..155L 80, 155

    Lequeux J., Peimbert M., Rayo J. F., Serrano A., Torres-Peimbert S., 1979, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1979A&A....80..155L 80, 155

    1979

  49. [57]

    arXiv:2412.08382

    Li S., et al., 2024, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2412.08382 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv241208382L p. arXiv:2412.08382

    2024 doi arXiv

  50. [58]

    A., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201323152 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015A&A...573A..42L 573, A42

    Luridiana V., Morisset C., Shaw R. A., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201323152 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015A&A...573A..42L 573, A42

    2015 doi

  51. [59]

    P., Jones T., Ellis R

    Mainali R., Stark D. P., Jones T., Ellis R. S., Hezaveh Y. D., Rigby J. R., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad387 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.520.4037M 520, 4037

    2023 doi

  52. [60]

    A., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201321956 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013A&A...559A.114M 559, A114

    Marino R. A., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201321956 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013A&A...559A.114M 559, A114

    2013 doi

  53. [61]

    F., Brammer G., Franx M., Nersesian A., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad5c6a , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...972..134M 972, 134

    Martorano M., van der Wel A., Baes M., Bell E. F., Brammer G., Franx M., Nersesian A., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad5c6a , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...972..134M 972, 134

    2024 doi

  54. [62]

    V., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201730985 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017A&A...608A...4M 608, A4

    Maseda M. V., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201730985 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017A&A...608A...4M 608, A4

    2017 doi

  55. [63]

    Mingozzi M., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac952c , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...939..110M 939, 110

    2022 doi

  56. [64]

    Nakajima K., Ouchi M., Isobe Y., Harikane Y., Zhang Y., Ono Y., Umeda H., Oguri M., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/acd556 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJS..269...33N 269, 33

    2023 doi

  57. [65]

    B., Das P., Oey M

    Nath B. B., Das P., Oey M. S., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa336 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.493.1034N 493, 1034

    2020 doi

  58. [66]

    A., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad2411 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.525.2864O 525, 2864

    Oesch P. A., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad2411 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.525.2864O 525, 2864

    2023 doi

  59. [67]

    S., Clarke C

    Oey M. S., Clarke C. J., 1997, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/289.3.570 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997MNRAS.289..570O 289, 570

    1997 doi

  60. [68]

    B., Gunn J

    Oke J. B., Gunn J. E., 1983, @doi [ ] 10.1086/160817 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1983ApJ...266..713O 266, 713

    1983 doi

  61. [69]

    E., 1989, Astrophysics of gaseous nebulae and active galactic nuclei

    Osterbrock D. E., 1989, Astrophysics of gaseous nebulae and active galactic nuclei

    1989

  62. [70]

    E., Ferland G

    Osterbrock D. E., Ferland G. J., 2006, Astrophysics of gaseous nebulae and active galactic nuclei

    2006

  63. [71]

    J., Shapley A., Steidel C

    Pahl A. J., Shapley A., Steidel C. C., Reddy N. A., Chen Y., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac1767 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.516.2062P 516, 2062

    2022 doi

  64. [72]

    Y., Ho L

    Peng C. Y., Ho L. C., Impey C. D., Rix H.-W., 2002, @doi [ ] 10.1086/340952 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002AJ....124..266P 124, 266

    2002 doi

  65. [73]

    Y., Ho L

    Peng C. Y., Ho L. C., Impey C. D., Rix H.-W., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/139/6/2097 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010AJ....139.2097P 139, 2097

    2010 doi

  66. [74]

    Pettini M., Pagel B. E. J., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07591.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004MNRAS.348L..59P 348, L59

    2004

  67. [75]

    Popesso P., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac3214 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.519.1526P 519, 1526

    2023 doi

  68. [76]

    A., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac3b4c , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...926...31R 926, 31

    Reddy N. A., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac3b4c , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...926...31R 926, 31

    2022 doi

  69. [77]

    A., et al., 2023a, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/acd0b1 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...951...56R 951, 56

    Reddy N. A., et al., 2023a, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/acd0b1 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...951...56R 951, 56

    doi

  70. [78]

    A., Topping M

    Reddy N. A., Topping M. W., Sanders R. L., Shapley A. E., Brammer G., 2023b, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/acd754 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...952..167R 952, 167

    doi

  71. [79]

    arXiv:2403.07103

    Roberts-Borsani G., et al., 2024, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2403.07103 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240307103R p. arXiv:2403.07103

    2024 doi arXiv

  72. [81]

    L., et al., 2016b, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-637X/816/1/23 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...816...23S 816, 23

    Sanders R. L., et al., 2016b, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-637X/816/1/23 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...816...23S 816, 23

    doi

  73. [82]

    L., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/abf4c1 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...914...19S 914, 19

    Sanders R. L., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/abf4c1 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...914...19S 914, 19

    2021 doi

  74. [83]

    L., et al., 2024a, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2408.05273 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240805273S p

    Sanders R. L., et al., 2024a, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2408.05273 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240805273S p. arXiv:2408.05273

    doi arXiv

  75. [84]

    L., Shapley A

    Sanders R. L., Shapley A. E., Topping M. W., Reddy N. A., Brammer G. B., 2024b, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad15fc , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...962...24S 962, 24

    doi

  76. [85]

    P., Rudie G

    Senchyna P., Plat A., Stark D. P., Rudie G. C., Berg D., Charlot S., James B. L., Mingozzi M., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad235e , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...966...92S 966, 92

    2024 doi

  77. [86]

    E., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aa8815 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...846L..30S 846, L30

    Shapley A. E., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aa8815 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...846L..30S 846, L30

    2017 doi

  78. [87]

    E., Reddy N

    Shapley A. E., Reddy N. A., Sanders R. L., Topping M. W., Brammer G. B., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/acd939 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...950L...1S 950, L1

    2023 doi

  79. [88]

    E., et al., 2024, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2407.00157 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240700157S p

    Shapley A. E., et al., 2024, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2407.00157 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240700157S p. arXiv:2407.00157

    2024 doi arXiv

  80. [89]

    Shimakawa R., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv915 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.451.1284S 451, 1284

    2015 doi

  81. [90]

    Shirazi M., Brinchmann J., Rahmati A., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/787/2/120 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...787..120S 787, 120

    2014 doi

  82. [91]

    S., Steinhardt C

    Speagle J. S., Steinhardt C. L., Capak P. L., Silverman J. D., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/214/2/15 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJS..214...15S 214, 15

    2014 doi

  83. [92]

    R., Eldridge J

    Stanway E. R., Eldridge J. J., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty1353 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.479...75S 479, 75

    2018 doi

  84. [93]

    C., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/795/2/165 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...795..165S 795, 165

    Steidel C. C., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/795/2/165 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...795..165S 795, 165

    2014 doi

  85. [94]

    C., Strom A

    Steidel C. C., Strom A. L., Pettini M., Rudie G. C., Reddy N. A., Trainor R. F., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-637X/826/2/159 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...826..159S 826, 159

    2016 doi

  86. [95]

    Tacchella S., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac4cad , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...927..170T 927, 170

    2022 doi

  87. [96]

    P., Chevallard J., Charlot S., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz2236 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.489.2572T 489, 2572

    Tang M., Stark D. P., Chevallard J., Charlot S., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz2236 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.489.2572T 489, 2572

    2019 doi

  88. [97]

    Tang M., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad2763 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.526.1657T 526, 1657

    2023 doi

  89. [98]

    W., et al., 2022a, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac2291 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.516..975T 516, 975

    Topping M. W., et al., 2022a, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac2291 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.516..975T 516, 975

    doi

  90. [99]

    W., Stark D

    Topping M. W., Stark D. P., Endsley R., Plat A., Whitler L., Chen Z., Charlot S., 2022b, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aca522 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...941..153T 941, 153

    doi

  91. [100]

    W., et al., 2024a, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2407.19009 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240719009T p

    Topping M. W., et al., 2024a, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2407.19009 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240719009T p. arXiv:2407.19009

    doi arXiv

  92. [101]

    W., et al., 2024b, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae682 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.529.3301T 529, 3301

    Topping M. W., et al., 2024b, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae682 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.529.3301T 529, 3301

    doi

  93. [102]

    A., et al., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1086/423264 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004ApJ...613..898T 613, 898

    Tremonti C. A., et al., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1086/423264 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004ApJ...613..898T 613, 898

    2004 doi

  94. [103]

    P., Endsley R., Leja J., Charlot S., Chevallard J., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad004 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.519.5859W 519, 5859

    Whitler L., Stark D. P., Endsley R., Leja J., Charlot S., Chevallard J., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad004 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.519.5859W 519, 5859

    2023 doi

  95. [104]

    Witstok J., Smit R., Maiolino R., Curti M., Laporte N., Massey R., Richard J., Swinbank M., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab2591 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.508.1686W 508, 1686

    2021 doi

  96. [105]

    Yanagisawa H., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad72ec , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...974..266Y 974, 266

    2024 doi

  97. [106]

    de Graaff A., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202347755 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...684A..87D 684, A87

    2024 doi

  98. [107]

    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.stat...

  99. [108]

    C., Jr., Vishniac, E., & Sneden, C.\ 2006, , 652, 847

    Kennicutt, R. C., Jr., Vishniac, E., & Sneden, C.\ 2006, , 652, 847

    2006

  100. [109]

    J., Eichhorn, G., Accomazzi, A., et al.\ 2000, , 143, 41

    Kurtz, M. J., Eichhorn, G., Accomazzi, A., et al.\ 2000, , 143, 41

    2000

  101. [110]

    T.\ 2012, American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts \#219, 219, 204.04

    Vishniac, E. T.\ 2012, American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts \#219, 219, 204.04

    2012

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.