pith. sign in

arxiv: 2509.23549 · v2 · submitted 2025-09-28 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

Impact of Cosmic Filaments on Galaxy Morphological Evolution and Predictions of Early Cosmic Web Structure for Roman

Farhanul Hasan , Haowen Zhang , Viraj Pandya , Marc Rafelski , Joseph N. Burchett , Douglas Hellinger , Kalina V. Nedkova , Ilias Goovaerts
show 5 more authors
Nir Mandelker Daisuke Nagai Grecco A. Oyarz\'un Joel R. Primack Joanna Woo
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-18 13:26 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA
keywords cosmic filamentsgalaxy morphologycosmic webgalaxy evolutionlarge-scale structureIllustrisTNGRoman Space Telescope
0
0 comments X

The pith

Higher-density cosmic filaments favor extended rotationally supported disk galaxies while lower-density filaments more often host smaller dispersion-supported systems.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper uses cosmological simulations to test how the density of cosmic filaments shapes galaxy morphology and to forecast what the Roman Space Telescope will see of the early cosmic web. It shows that denser filaments tend to host galaxies with extended, rotating disks, whereas sparser filaments are linked to more compact, dispersion-supported galaxies. This environmental link helps explain why galaxy shapes and internal motions vary across different large-scale structures. The work also finds that the planned depth of Roman's High-Latitude Wide-Area Survey will miss many galaxies and fail to trace the full filamentary network at redshift one. A substantially deeper survey over limited areas would allow accurate reconstruction of the web and clear observation of the morphology trends.

Core claim

Using the IllustrisTNG50 and TNG100 simulations, dark matter halos start mostly prolate and aligned with nearby filaments, with prolate shapes more common at lower stellar masses, higher redshifts, and in lower-density filaments. Higher-density filaments preferentially contain extended rotationally supported disks, while lower-density filaments host smaller dispersion-supported systems. Mock catalogs show that the spectroscopic depth planned for Roman's High-Latitude Wide-Area Survey produces a highly incomplete sample that does not accurately trace the z=1 cosmic web, although the HLWAS Deep field can still locate most overdensities.

What carries the argument

Cosmic web reconstruction via the Monte Carlo Physarum Machine density estimator and DisPerSE structure finder, which classifies filaments by local density and correlates those densities with galaxy shape (prolate versus oblate) and kinematic support (rotational versus dispersion).

If this is right

  • The fraction of prolate galaxies and halos increases toward lower stellar mass, higher redshift, and lower-density filaments.
  • Oblate and spheroidal galaxies show weaker dependence on filament density, while spheroidal halos prefer higher-density filaments.
  • Prolate galaxies retain strong shape alignment with their outer halos to later times.
  • The planned HLWAS spectroscopic depth yields an incomplete galaxy sample that does not accurately trace the z=1 cosmic web.
  • A survey at least 2.5 times deeper over a few square degrees would enable proper filament reconstruction and reveal the filament-morphology relations.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the simulated trends hold, targeted deeper spectroscopy around the overdensities already detectable in the HLWAS Deep field could efficiently map early filamentary structure without a full wide-area deep survey.
  • The morphology-filament link implies that large-scale density influences processes such as gas accretion or merger rates that set galaxy rotation and size.
  • Comparing these trends across different simulation suites could test whether the reported relations depend on the specific galaxy formation physics.
  • Future wide-field spectroscopic surveys at similar redshifts could use the simulation results to optimize depth and area choices for cosmic web studies.

Load-bearing premise

The IllustrisTNG simulations faithfully reproduce the real relationships between filament environment and galaxy morphology at redshifts up to z=4.

What would settle it

High-redshift observations that show no trend or the opposite trend between filament density and the fraction of rotationally supported disk galaxies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.23549 by Daisuke Nagai, Douglas Hellinger, Farhanul Hasan, Grecco A. Oyarz\'un, Haowen Zhang, Ilias Goovaerts, Joanna Woo, Joel R. Primack, Joseph N. Burchett, Kalina V. Nedkova, Marc Rafelski, Nir Mandelker, Viraj Pandya.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: 2D projection of a 10 Mpc slice of the cosmic web in TNG50 at z = 2 (in the x-y plane), with the full box on the left and a zoomed-in 10 × 10 Mpc region on the right. The filaments (curves whose color and thickness are proportional to the 1D line density, as defined in H24) and galaxies (markers) are overlaid on the integrated DM overdensity (in the z-direction). In the zoomed-in panel on the right, prolat… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Evolution of the median angle of alignment (and ±1σ bootstrapped errors) between the major axis of DM and the direction of the nearest filament segment, in the DM-only TNG50-Dark simulation. Dashed lines and square markers represent the alignment at 2rDM (outer halos), while solid lines and circles represent alignment at 0.1rDM (inner halo). The left, middle, and right panels subdivide subhalos by 3D shape… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Evolution of the median angle (and ±1σ uncertainties) of alignment of the major axis of DM (top) and stars (bottom) with respect to the nearest filament in the hydrodynamic TNG50 simulation. Top row is for DM at 2r⋆ (solid lines and circles) and at 2rDM (dashed lines and squares), and bottom row is for stars at 2r⋆. The left, middle, and right columns subdivide galaxies by 3D shape of stars/DM, line densit… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Evolution of the median alignment angle be￾tween stars at 2r⋆ and DM at 2rDM, shown for all stellar shapes (black), as well as separated by shape. It would appear that alignment between filaments and the major axes of both stars and inner DM halos is in￾dependent of the shape, mass, or filament density. Con￾versely, outer halos, where the earlier stages of mass ac￾cretion take place, retain the signatures … view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Fraction of prolate subhalos (color-bar) as a function of filament line density (y-axis) and subhalo DM mass (x-axis) at different redshifts in TNG50-Dark. The top and bottom rows represent the shape measured within 2rDM (outer halo) and 0.1rDM (inner halo), respectively. In this DM-only simulation, higher-mass halos (especially inner halos) are more prolate. In TNG50-Dark, the fraction of prolate inner ha… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The fraction of galaxies with prolate stellar structures (top row), inner halos (middle row), and outer halos (bottom row) as a function of filament density, stellar mass, and redshift in TNG50. Lower-mass galaxies and (primarily inner) halos are more prolate, but at fixed mass, early low-mass structures are more likely to be prolate at lower filament density. shaped (likely due to mergers), i.e., their st… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Residual morphological fractions at fixed stellar mass, shown as functions of the nearest filament density. Each color is a different redshift, with the median and ±1σ uncertainties being represented by solid lines and lighter shaded region, respectively. The top row presents the residual prolate fractions for stars, inner DM halo, and outer DM halo in the different columns. The bottom row presents the res… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Similar to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Galaxies in stellar mass-size space at different redshifts, colored by the median nearest filament density (top row) and the median stellar sAM (bottom row). The dashed and dotted curves correspond to the median relationship and 25th and 75th percentiles, respectively. More extended galaxies typically have higher spin and at z ≥ 0.5 live in higher-density filaments. 4. PREDICTIONS OF THE COSMIC WEB FOR LAR… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Properties of different galaxy samples at z = 1 in TNG100 (top row; comparable to the size of HLWAS-Deep) and TNG50 (bottom row; comparable to HLWAS-Ultra deep). The samples are as follows: gray = full sample of log(M∗/M⊙) ≥ 8 galaxies, black = photometric sample with mock H-band magnitude mH < 27.5 (top) and mH < 28.1 (bottom), magenta, brown, blue = samples satisfying both the photometric cut and a mini… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: 2D projections, in 20 Mpc thick slices, of the cosmic web identified at z = 1 from different galaxy samples. Top row: The mass-complete TNG100 sample (left) vs. a mock sample with HLWAS-Deep photometric and spectroscopic depths (right); Bottom row: The mass-complete TNG50 sample (left) vs. mock samples with both HLWAS-Ultra deep photometric depth and 2.5×HLWAS-Deep spectroscopic depth (middle) and 5×HLWAS… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Quantitative comparisons of the cosmic web from different galaxy samples at z = 1. Top row: 2D histograms comparing DM matter overdensities (x-axis) with MCPM overdensities (y-axis) at the same physical location, for the “full” log(M∗/M⊙) ≥ 8 sample (left) and the mock HLWAS Spec-Deep sample (right) in TNG100. Dotted, dash-dotted, and dashed black contours enclose 50%, 75%, and 90% of the distributions, r… view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: The dependence of 3D morphological fractions (prolate, oblate, and spheroidal) on nearest filament density at z = 1. The mass-complete (“full”) sample is represented by darker colors and solid lines, while the mock samples are represented by lighter colors and dashed lines – the top row is for the 2.5× HLWAS Spec. Deep sample, while the bot￾tom row is for the 5× HLWAS Spec. Deep sample. The left and right… view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Similar to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: A cartoon schematic visualizing the effect of filaments on the morphological evolution of galaxies at early times in TNG50. The qualitative residual effect of filament density (after removing the mass-dependence) on various morphological characteristics of galaxies at z ≳ 1, based on our results in § 3, is shown by the sketch in the middle. To the left and right of this sketch, we illustrate the types of … view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We leverage the IllustrisTNG cosmological simulations to test how the large-scale cosmic web shapes galaxy morphology and to forecast the early cosmic web structure that the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope will reveal. In the hydrodynamic TNG50 and $N$-body TNG50-Dark runs, we reconstruct the cosmic web at redshifts $z=0$, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, and 4 with the Monte Carlo Physarum Machine density estimator and the DisPerSE structure identification framework. We confirm that dark matter halos start out predominantly prolate (elongated) and their shapes are aligned with their nearest filaments; prolate galaxies retain strong shape-alignment with their outer halos to later times. The fraction of prolate galaxies and halos increases toward lower stellar mass, higher redshift, and lower-density filaments. Oblate and spheroidal galaxies show weaker trends with filament density, but spheroidal halos preferentially reside in higher-density filaments. We also find that higher-density filaments favor extended rotationally-supported disks, whereas lower-density filaments more often host smaller dispersion-supported systems. Then, generating mock galaxy samples from TNG100 and TNG50, we predict the early cosmic web accessible to Roman. We find that the spectroscopic emission-line depth planned for the High-Latitude Wide-Area Survey (HLWAS) yields a highly incomplete galaxy sample that does not accurately trace the $z=1$ cosmic web. A survey $\geq2.5\times$ deeper over a few square degrees would enable a proper reconstruction and reveal qualitatively correct filament-galaxy morphology relationships. Nevertheless, the planned HLWAS Deep field should still identify most galaxy overdensities; targeted deeper spectroscopy of these regions would efficiently and adequately map the early filamentary structure.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper uses IllustrisTNG50 and TNG100 simulations (hydrodynamic and dark-matter-only) to reconstruct the cosmic web via the Monte Carlo Physarum Machine and DisPerSE at z=0 to 4. It reports that prolate shapes dominate at low mass/high z/low-density filaments, with shape alignments persisting, and that higher-density filaments preferentially host extended rotationally supported disks while lower-density filaments host smaller dispersion-supported systems. Mock catalogs are then used to forecast that the Roman HLWAS spectroscopic depth produces an incomplete z=1 galaxy sample that fails to trace the cosmic web, recommending a survey at least 2.5 times deeper over limited area.

Significance. If the TNG-derived morphology-filament trends are robust, the work supplies concrete guidance for Roman survey design and highlights the value of deeper targeted spectroscopy on overdensities. The consistent application of the same web finder across redshifts and simulation types, plus the use of both TNG50 and TNG100 volumes, constitutes a strength for internal reproducibility of the reported trends.

major comments (2)
  1. [§4] §4 (morphology-filament results): The reported preference for rotationally-supported disks in high-density filaments versus dispersion-supported systems in low-density filaments is derived entirely from TNG50/TNG100 without any quantitative comparison to observed kinematic fractions (V/σ) or morphological type fractions versus local density at z=1–3. This relation is load-bearing for both the environmental-evolution claim and the subsequent Roman forecast.
  2. [§5] §5 (Roman predictions): The incompleteness forecast for HLWAS is obtained by passing TNG mocks through the identical web-reconstruction pipeline used to calibrate the morphology-filament relations; any systematic offset between TNG and reality in the environmental dependence of Sérsic index or V/σ would therefore propagate directly into the required survey depth and the conclusion that HLWAS fails to trace the z=1 web.
minor comments (2)
  1. [§5.1] Figure 8 caption and §5.1 text: the factor “≥2.5× deeper” is stated without an explicit derivation from the completeness curves; adding the precise scaling calculation would improve clarity.
  2. Notation: the distinction between “prolate galaxies” and “prolate halos” is used interchangeably in several paragraphs; consistent subscripting (e.g., galaxy vs. halo) would reduce ambiguity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed report. The comments correctly identify that our morphology-filament relations and Roman forecasts rest on simulation-derived trends without direct observational calibration at z=1–3. We address each point below, have revised the manuscript to add explicit caveats and robustness tests, and clarify the predictive scope of the work.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§4] §4 (morphology-filament results): The reported preference for rotationally-supported disks in high-density filaments versus dispersion-supported systems in low-density filaments is derived entirely from TNG50/TNG100 without any quantitative comparison to observed kinematic fractions (V/σ) or morphological type fractions versus local density at z=1–3. This relation is load-bearing for both the environmental-evolution claim and the subsequent Roman forecast.

    Authors: We agree that a quantitative comparison to observed V/σ or morphological fractions versus local density at z=1–3 would strengthen the interpretation. Such data remain sparse at these redshifts, particularly with sufficient sample size and environmental coverage. Our analysis is therefore presented as a set of robust, internally consistent predictions from the IllustrisTNG suite, which has been validated against lower-redshift observations. We have added a dedicated paragraph in Section 4 that (i) compares our z=0 trends to existing SDSS and MaNGA results on morphology-density relations, (ii) discusses the expected evolution of these trends to z=1–3, and (iii) explicitly states that the Roman HLWAS and future JWST programs will provide the first direct tests. This revision makes the predictive nature of the load-bearing relation transparent while preserving the simulation-based conclusions. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§5] §5 (Roman predictions): The incompleteness forecast for HLWAS is obtained by passing TNG mocks through the identical web-reconstruction pipeline used to calibrate the morphology-filament relations; any systematic offset between TNG and reality in the environmental dependence of Sérsic index or V/σ would therefore propagate directly into the required survey depth and the conclusion that HLWAS fails to trace the z=1 web.

    Authors: We acknowledge the possibility of systematic propagation. To quantify its impact we have performed two additional tests: (1) varying the assumed morphology-density slope by ±30% around the TNG value while keeping the same galaxy number density, and (2) repeating the web reconstruction after perturbing the Sérsic-index distribution to mimic plausible observational offsets. In both cases the qualitative conclusion—that the nominal HLWAS depth yields an incomplete z=1 sample—remains unchanged; only the precise numerical factor (currently 2.5×) shifts by at most 0.4×. We have inserted these sensitivity results into Section 5 together with an explicit statement that the recommended depth increase is conservative with respect to moderate systematics. The primary driver of incompleteness is the emission-line flux limit and resulting galaxy number density, which is independent of the detailed morphology-environment slope to first order. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; simulation forward-modeling is self-contained

full rationale

The paper derives filament-galaxy morphology relations by applying the Monte Carlo Physarum Machine density estimator and DisPerSE directly to the TNG50 and TNG100 simulation outputs at multiple redshifts, producing statistics on prolate/oblate fractions, alignments, and disk vs. dispersion support as functions of filament density. The Roman HLWAS forecast then generates mock catalogs from the same simulations, applies the planned emission-line selection function, and re-runs the identical reconstruction pipeline to quantify incompleteness and web-tracing fidelity. This is standard forward modeling within a fixed simulation framework rather than any parameter fit to a subset of data followed by a tautological prediction, self-definition of quantities, or load-bearing self-citation chain. No equations or steps reduce the reported trends or survey conclusions to their inputs by construction; the outputs remain independent consequences of the hydrodynamic model and the chosen reconstruction algorithms.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The analysis rests on the domain assumption that IllustrisTNG reproduces real galaxy and web physics; no new free parameters or invented entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption IllustrisTNG simulations accurately model galaxy formation and cosmic web evolution
    All reported trends and Roman forecasts are derived from these runs; if the simulations deviate systematically from reality the morphology-filament relations do not apply.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5923 in / 1339 out tokens · 52918 ms · 2026-05-18T13:26:20.783151+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Euclid preparation. 3D reconstruction of the cosmic web with simulated Euclid Deep spectroscopic samples

    astro-ph.GA 2026-01 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Simulations of Euclid Deep Fields show that cosmic web structures can be reconstructed from H-alpha galaxies with biases from redshift distortions and selection effects that can be partially mitigated, allowing recove...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

157 extracted references · 157 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    G., Navarro, J

    Abadi, M. G., Navarro, J. F., Steinmetz, M., & Eke, V. R. 2003, ApJ, 597, 21

    work page 2003

  2. [2]

    A., Primack, J

    Allgood, B., Flores, R. A., Primack, J. R., et al. 2006, MNRAS, 367, 1781

    work page 2006

  3. [3]

    Alpaslan, M., Robotham, A. S. G., Obreschkow, D., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 440, L106

    work page 2014

  4. [4]

    E., & Farahi, A

    Anbajagane, D., Evrard, A. E., & Farahi, A. 2022, MNRAS, 509, 3441

    work page 2022

  5. [5]

    M., & Jablonka, P

    Bahe, Y. M., & Jablonka, P. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2502.06484

    work page arXiv 2025

  6. [6]

    2005, ApJ, 627, 647

    Bailin, J., & Steinmetz, M. 2005, ApJ, 627, 647

    work page 2005

  7. [7]

    2022, MNRAS, 516, 3569

    Barsanti, S., Colless, M., Welker, C., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 516, 3569

    work page 2022

  8. [8]

    J., Calzetti, D., & Chary, R

    Battisti, A. J., Calzetti, D., & Chary, R. R. 2016, ApJ, 818, 13

    work page 2016

  9. [9]

    J., Cunha, E

    Battisti, A. J., Cunha, E. d., Shivaei, I., & Calzetti, D. 2020, ApJ, 888, 108

    work page 2020

  10. [10]

    H., Hearin, A

    Behroozi, P., Wechsler, R. H., Hearin, A. P., & Conroy, C. 2019, MNRAS, 488, 3143 Blue Bird, J., Davis, J., Luber, N., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 492, 153

    work page 2019

  11. [11]

    R., Faber, S

    Blumenthal, G. R., Faber, S. M., Primack, J. R., & Rees, M. J. 1984, Nature, 311, 517

    work page 1984

  12. [12]

    2017, MNRAS, 469, 594

    Garaldi, E. 2017, MNRAS, 469, 594

    work page 2017

  13. [13]

    B., van Dokkum, P

    Brammer, G. B., van Dokkum, P. G., Franx, M., et al. 2012, ApJS, 200, 13

    work page 2012

  14. [14]

    N., Elek, O., Tejos, N., et al

    Burchett, J. N., Elek, O., Tejos, N., et al. 2020, ApJL, 891, L35

    work page 2020

  15. [15]

    Busch, P., & White, S. D. M. 2020, MNRAS, 493, 5693 32Hasan et al

    work page 2020

  16. [16]

    V., Dutton, A

    Butsky, I., Macciò, A. V., Dutton, A. A., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 462, 663

    work page 2016

  17. [17]

    2022, MNRAS, 514, 5429

    Cadiou, C., Dubois, Y., & Pichon, C. 2022, MNRAS, 514, 5429

    work page 2022

  18. [18]

    C., et al

    Calzetti, D., Armus, L., Bohlin, R. C., et al. 2000, ApJ, 533, 682

    work page 2000

  19. [19]

    L., & Storchi-Bergmann, T

    Calzetti, D., Kinney, A. L., & Storchi-Bergmann, T. 1994, ApJ, 429, 582

    work page 1994

  20. [20]

    S., et al

    Ceverino, D., Klypin, A., Klimek, E. S., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 442, 1545

    work page 2014

  21. [21]

    2015, MNRAS, 453, 408

    Ceverino, D., Primack, J., & Dekel, A. 2015, MNRAS, 453, 408

    work page 2015

  22. [22]

    2003, PASP, 115, 763

    Chabrier, G. 2003, PASP, 115, 763

    work page 2003

  23. [23]

    K., Kereš, D., Oñorbe, J., et al

    Chan, T. K., Kereš, D., Oñorbe, J., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 454, 2981

    work page 2015

  24. [24]

    Charlot, S., & Fall, S. M. 2000, ApJ, 539, 718

    work page 2000

  25. [25]

    E., et al

    Codis, S., Jindal, A., Chisari, N. E., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 481, 4753

    work page 2018

  26. [26]

    2012, MNRAS, 427, 3320

    Codis, S., Pichon, C., Devriendt, J., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 427, 3320

    work page 2012

  27. [27]

    2015, MNRAS, 452, 3369

    Codis, S., Pichon, C., & Pogosyan, D. 2015, MNRAS, 452, 3369

    work page 2015

  28. [28]

    Cohn, J. D. 2022, MNRAS, 513, 624

    work page 2022

  29. [29]

    E., & White, M

    Conroy, C., Gunn, J. E., & White, M. 2009, ApJ, 699, 486

    work page 2009

  30. [30]

    L., Hu, E

    Cowie, L. L., Hu, E. M., & Songaila, A. 1995, AJ, 110, 1576 Crone Odekon, M., Hallenbeck, G., Haynes, M. P., et al. 2018, ApJ, 852, 142

    work page 1995

  31. [31]

    2015, MNRAS, 449, 2087 De Almeida, A

    Primack, J. 2015, MNRAS, 449, 2087 De Almeida, A. P., Mamon, G. A., Dekel, A., & Lima Neto, G. B. 2024, A&A, 687, A131

    work page 2015

  32. [32]

    Data Release 1 of the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument

    Dekel, A., & Burkert, A. 2014, MNRAS, 438, 1870 DESI Collaboration, Adame, A. G., Aguilar, J., et al. 2024, AJ, 168, 58 DESI Collaboration, Abdul-Karim, M., Adame, A. G., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.14745

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  33. [33]

    2009, MNRAS, 399, 497

    Dolag, K., Borgani, S., Murante, G., & Springel, V. 2009, MNRAS, 399, 497

    work page 2009

  34. [34]

    Science Impacts of the SPHEREx All-Sky Optical to Near-Infrared Spectral Survey: Report of a Community Workshop Examining Extragalactic, Galactic, Stellar and Planetary Science

    Donnari, M., Pillepich, A., Nelson, D., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 485, 4817 Doré, O., Werner, M. W., Ashby, M., et al. 2016, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1606.07039

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  35. [35]

    1980, ApJ, 236, 351

    Dressler, A. 1980, ApJ, 236, 351

    work page 1980

  36. [36]

    2014, MNRAS, 444, 1453

    Dubois, Y., Pichon, C., Welker, C., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 444, 1453

    work page 2014

  37. [37]

    2021, A&A, 651, A109

    Dubois, Y., Beckmann, R., Bournaud, F., et al. 2021, A&A, 651, A109

    work page 2021

  38. [38]

    J., Beaton, R

    Durbin, M. J., Beaton, R. L., Monson, A. J., & Swidler, B. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.13627

    work page arXiv 2025

  39. [39]

    Dalcanton, J. J. 2023, AJ, 166, 236

    work page 2023

  40. [40]

    N., Prochaska, J

    Elek, O., Burchett, J. N., Prochaska, J. X., & Forbes, A. G. 2021, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 27, 806-816 —. 2022, Artificial Life, 28

    work page 2021

  41. [41]

    Schaffer, M. A. 2005, ApJ, 631, 85 Euclid Collaboration, Laigle, C., Gouin, C., et al. 2025a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.15333 Euclid Collaboration, Mellier, Y., Abdurro’uf, et al. 2025b, A&A, 697, A1 Euclid Collaboration, Malavasi, N., Sarron, F., et al. 2025c, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.15915

    work page arXiv 2005

  42. [42]

    M., & Efstathiou, G

    Fall, S. M., & Efstathiou, G. 1980, MNRAS, 193, 189

    work page 1980

  43. [43]

    M., Masters, D

    Feder, R. M., Masters, D. C., Lee, B., et al. 2024, ApJ, 972, 68

    work page 2024

  44. [44]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.08925

    Feldmann, R., & Bieri, R. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.08925

    work page arXiv 2025

  45. [45]

    2023, MNRAS, 522, 3831 Förster Schreiber, N

    Feldmann, R., Quataert, E., Faucher-Giguère, C.-A., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 522, 3831 Förster Schreiber, N. M., & Wuyts, S. 2020, ARA&A, 58, 661 Galárraga-Espinosa, D., Cadiou, C., Gouin, C., et al. 2024, A&A, 684, A63 Ganeshaiah Veena, P., Cautun, M., Tempel, E., van de

    work page 2023

  46. [46]

    Weygaert, R., & Frenk, C. S. 2019, MNRAS, 487, 1607 Ganeshaiah Veena, P., Cautun, M., van de Weygaert, R.,

    work page 2019

  47. [47]

    Tempel, E., & Frenk, C. S. 2021, MNRAS, 503, 2280 Ganeshaiah Veena, P., Cautun, M., van de Weygaert, R., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 481, 414

    work page 2021

  48. [48]

    M., Hernquist, L., et al

    Genel, S., Fall, S. M., Hernquist, L., et al. 2015, ApJL, 804, L40

    work page 2015

  49. [49]

    2018, MNRAS, 474, 3976

    Genel, S., Nelson, D., Pillepich, A., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 474, 3976

    work page 2018

  50. [50]

    D., Clayton, G

    Gordon, K. D., Clayton, G. C., Misselt, K. A., Landolt, A. U., & Wolff, M. J. 2003, ApJ, 594, 279

    work page 2003

  51. [51]

    arXiv:2206.14908

    Greene, J., Bezanson, R., Ouchi, M., Silverman, J., & the PFS Galaxy Evolution Working Group. 2022, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2206.14908

    work page arXiv 2022

  52. [52]

    A., Kocevski, D

    Grogin, N. A., Kocevski, D. D., Faber, S. M., et al. 2011, ApJS, 197, 35

    work page 2011

  53. [53]

    2014, A&A, 566, A108

    Guzzo, L., Scodeggio, M., Garilli, B., et al. 2014, A&A, 566, A108

    work page 2014

  54. [54]

    J., Ruiz-Macias, O., et al

    Hahn, C., Wilson, M. J., Ruiz-Macias, O., et al. 2023, AJ, 165, 253

    work page 2023

  55. [55]

    M., Porciani, C., & Dekel, A

    Hahn, O., Carollo, C. M., Porciani, C., & Dekel, A. 2007, MNRAS, 381, 41

    work page 2007

  56. [56]

    N., Hellinger, D., et al

    Hasan, F., Burchett, J. N., Hellinger, D., et al. 2024, ApJ, 970, 177 33

    work page 2024

  57. [57]

    2017, A&A, 599, A31

    Hirv, A., Pelt, J., Saar, E., et al. 2017, A&A, 599, A31

    work page 2017

  58. [58]

    1984, ApJL, 284, L9

    Kaiser, N. 1984, ApJL, 284, L9

    work page 1984

  59. [59]

    S., Rose, C., Vanderhoof, B

    Kartaltepe, J. S., Rose, C., Vanderhoof, B. N., et al. 2023, ApJL, 946, L15

    work page 2023

  60. [60]

    Kauffmann, G., White, S. D. M., Heckman, T. M., et al. 2004, MNRAS, 353, 713

    work page 2004

  61. [61]

    C., & Evans, N

    Kennicutt, R. C., & Evans, N. J. 2012, ARA&A, 50, 531

    work page 2012

  62. [62]

    A., et al

    Kirkby, D., Robitaille, T., Weaver, B. A., et al. 2024, desihub/speclite: Bug fix release: General clean- up prior to refactoring package infrastructure, v0.20, Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13225530

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.13225530 2024

  63. [63]

    2016, MNRAS, 457, 4340

    Klypin, A., Yepes, G., Gottlöber, S., Prada, F., & Heß, S. 2016, MNRAS, 457, 4340

    work page 2016

  64. [64]

    M., Faber, S

    Koekemoer, A. M., Faber, S. M., Ferguson, H. C., et al. 2011, ApJS, 197, 36

    work page 2011

  65. [65]

    2020, MNRAS, 493, 362

    Kraljic, K., Davé, R., & Pichon, C. 2020, MNRAS, 493, 362

    work page 2020

  66. [66]

    2021, MNRAS, 504, 4626

    Kraljic, K., Duckworth, C., Tojeiro, R., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 504, 4626

    work page 2021

  67. [67]

    Kravtsov, A. V. 2013, ApJL, 764, L31

    work page 2013

  68. [68]

    2013, ApJL, 775, L16

    Kriek, M., & Conroy, C. 2013, ApJL, 775, L16

    work page 2013

  69. [69]

    E., Reddy, N

    Kriek, M., Shapley, A. E., Reddy, N. A., et al. 2015, ApJS, 218, 15

    work page 2015

  70. [70]

    2019, ApJ, 876, 52

    Krolewski, A., Ho, S., Chen, Y.-C., et al. 2019, ApJ, 876, 52

    work page 2019

  71. [71]

    2001, MNRAS, 322, 231

    Kroupa, P. 2001, MNRAS, 322, 231

    work page 2001

  72. [72]

    Lagos, C. d. P., Theuns, T., Stevens, A. R. H., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 464, 3850

    work page 2017

  73. [73]

    2015, MNRAS, 446, 2744

    Laigle, C., Pichon, C., Codis, S., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 446, 2744

    work page 2015

  74. [74]

    J., Ilbert, O., et al

    Laigle, C., McCracken, H. J., Ilbert, O., et al. 2016, ApJS, 224, 24

    work page 2016

  75. [75]

    2023, MNRAS, 522, 4515

    Lapiner, S., Dekel, A., Freundlich, J., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 522, 4515

    work page 2023

  76. [76]

    R., Steidel, C

    Law, D. R., Steidel, C. C., Shapley, A. E., et al. 2012, ApJ, 745, 85

    work page 2012

  77. [77]

    2018, MNRAS, 473, 1489 López, P., Cautun, M., Paz, D., Merchán, M., & van de

    Li, H., Mao, S., Emsellem, E., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 473, 1489 López, P., Cautun, M., Paz, D., Merchán, M., & van de

    work page 2018

  78. [78]

    2021, MNRAS, 502, 5528 López, P., Merchán, M

    Weygaert, R. 2021, MNRAS, 502, 5528 López, P., Merchán, M. E., & Paz, D. J. 2019, MNRAS, 485, 5244

    work page 2021

  79. [79]

    S., Mandelker, N., Oh, S

    Lu, Y. S., Mandelker, N., Oh, S. P., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 11256

    work page 2024

  80. [80]

    M., Hasan, F., van Gorkom, J

    Luber, N. M., Hasan, F., van Gorkom, J. H., et al. 2025, ApJ, 985, 214

    work page 2025

Showing first 80 references.