REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 4 cited by

The paper claims that U37126, a starburst seen 470 million years after the Big Bang, leaks at least 86% and likely about 94% of its ionizing photons, and that a rare few such galaxies could have driven cosmic reionization.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 05:21 UTC pith:2I2ZBA6V

load-bearing objection Strongest indirect fesc~1 claim at z>10, but the SED-derived value is model-dependent and the AGN alternative is never tested. the 4 major comments →

arxiv 2602.02322 v2 pith:2I2ZBA6V submitted 2026-02-02 astro-ph.GA

PRISMS. U37126, a very blue, ISM-naked starburst at z=10.255 with nearly 100% Lyman continuum escape fraction

R. Marques-Chaves , J. \'Alvarez-M\'arquez , L. Colina , S. Kendrew , Abdurro'uf , C. Blanco-Prieto , L. A. Boogaard , M. Castellano

show 26 more authors

K. I. Caputi A. Crespo-Gomez A. Fontana Y. Fudamoto S. Fujimoto M. Garc\'ia-Mar\'in Y. Harikane S. Harish T. Hashimoto T. Hsiao E. Iani A. K. Inoue D. Langeroodi R. Lin J. Melinder L. Napolitano G. Ostlin P. G. P\'erez-Gonz\'alez C. Prieto-Jim\'enez P. Rinaldi B. Rodr\'iguez Del Pino P. Santini Y. Sugahara A. Varo-O'ferral G. Wright J. Zavala

This is my paper

classification astro-ph.GA

keywords galaxies: high-redshiftLyman continuum escapecosmic reionizationstarburst galaxiesISM depletioninfrared spectroscopyUV continuum slopez=10 galaxy

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This paper aims to establish that U37126, a compact galaxy at z=10.255, is an extreme Lyman-continuum leaker: it produces an enormous number of ionizing photons and lets nearly all of them escape rather than reprocessing them into bright nebular emission. The evidence is that deep infrared spectroscopy shows strong continuum but no hydrogen or oxygen emission lines, while the ultraviolet slope is extremely blue and the Balmer break is weak — a combination no ordinary gas-rich starburst can produce. The authors infer an escape fraction fesc ≥ 86% (3σ) from the H-alpha upper limit and fesc = 0.94 ± 0.06 from SED fitting, alongside a very young stellar population (6.8 ± 1.6 Myr), a 61-pc effective radius, and extreme stellar-mass and star-formation surface densities. If true, this makes U37126 one of the earliest and most extreme starbursts known, and the paper shows that even a 3–6% abundance of such galaxies could supply 50–100% of the photons that reionized the universe.

Core claim

On its own terms, the finding is that U37126 is an 'ISM-naked' starburst: its interstellar medium has been so thoroughly depleted that its Lyman-continuum photons stream out essentially unprocessed. The non-detection of H-alpha, [OIII], and H-beta (3σ equivalent-width limits of ≤400 Å, ≤174 Å, and ≤64 Å) in ~11 hours of MIRI spectroscopy, together with a UV slope β_UV = −2.88 ± 0.10 and a flat Balmer break, is shown to require both a very young stellar population (≤10 Myr for constant star formation) and a near-unit escape fraction, fesc ≥ 0.86 from H-alpha and fesc = 0.94 ± 0.06 from SED fitting. The galaxy is compact (r_eff ~ 61 pc), has log(M*/M_sun) ~ 7.8 and SFR ~ 10 M_sun/yr, and sits

What carries the argument

The central quantity is the Lyman-continuum escape fraction fesc — the fraction of hydrogen-ionizing photons (>13.6 eV) that escape a galaxy rather than being absorbed by its gas. The argument is carried by comparing three observed spectral diagnostics — the UV continuum slope β_UV, the Balmer-break strength, and the H-alpha equivalent-width upper limit — against synthetic stellar-population spectra computed with varying fesc, age, metallicity, and star-formation history. The paper shows that the observed triple of diagnostics is only reproduced for fesc ≥ 0.86 and very young ages, making the absence of nebular emission a direct measure of escape rather than a sign of an evolved stellar popu

Load-bearing premise

The entire near-unity escape fraction rests on interpreting the absence of H-alpha as escape rather than as extremely diffuse ionized gas; if the gas were instead at electron densities below about 0.01 cm⁻³, the same H-alpha limit would hold even with fesc = 0.

What would settle it

A detection of H-alpha at a flux above ~6.9 × 10⁻¹⁹ erg s⁻¹ cm⁻² in deeper rest-optical spectroscopy, or a measurement of electron density n_e > ~0.01 cm⁻³ from radio free-free emission in this galaxy, would show that the missing nebular emission is due to diffuse gas rather than escape, falsifying the near-unity fesc claim.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

If U37126's near-unity escape fraction is representative, current estimates that early galaxies leak only 10–20% of their ionizing photons underestimate the true ionizing budget, and reionization could be completed by a small subset of extreme leakers.
The diagnostic combination of steep UV slopes (β_UV < −2.8) with weak rest-optical lines can be used as an efficient selection tool to find similar sources in existing deep infrared surveys.
The extreme surface densities (log Σ_M* ~ 3.4 M_sun/pc²) imply that star formation in the first galaxies can be far more efficient than commonly assumed, linking these sources to feedback-free starbursts and young massive star clusters.
The absence of detectable nebular emission in a compact, high-SFR galaxy with clear continuum means that gas depletion can happen within a few megayears of the onset of star formation, imposing a short-lived phase that should be rare in statistical surveys.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

A testable extension: if the 3–6% abundance scenario holds, the ionizing background at z ~ 10 should be highly patchy, with large ionized bubbles around compact leakers — a prediction that could be checked with future surveys of the Ly-alpha forest or 21-cm emission.
A direct independent test would be to search for radio free-free emission from any residual ionized gas in U37126; a detection would place an upper limit on fesc that does not depend on SED fitting or recombination-line assumptions.
This 'ISM-naked' phase may be the high-redshift counterpart of the compact, dense starbursts that form globular clusters, so U37126-like galaxies could plausibly be progenitors of ancient globular cluster systems.
If the H-alpha limit technique is pushed to fainter galaxies, ultra-faint systems may prove to be equally naked, potentially closing the reionization photon budget without invoking exotic ionizing sources.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

Strongest indirect fesc~1 claim at z>10, but the SED-derived value is model-dependent and the AGN alternative is never tested.

read the letter

Colleague,

The bottom line: this is the most convincing indirect evidence yet for a near-unity Lyman continuum escape fraction at z>10, and the new MIRI spectrum is exactly what the field needed for this source. But read the fesc=0.94 as model-dependent, not independent, and note that the paper never tests an AGN contribution to the continuum.

What actually is new: the ~11h MIRI/LRS spectrum covering rest 0.43-1.2 µm, with the continuum detected and Hβ, [OIII], Hα all absent. The Hα upper limit, combined with a steep UV slope β≈-2.9 and weak Balmer break, makes a strong, clean argument: if the continuum is stellar and the gas is ionization-bounded, then the missing Hα means most LyC photons escape. The comparison with BPASS models and the derived fesc≥86% (3σ) is the most robust piece of the paper. The authors are transparent about the assumptions and present the reionization extrapolation as illustrative, which is good.

The soft spots, in order of importance. First, the AGN alternative is never discussed. An AGN power-law continuum could dilute the stellar continuum, lowering the inferred stellar Q_H, and thus make the Hα limit consistent with a much lower fesc. The sharp Lyα break and blue slope don't rule that out. There are no X-ray, radio, or CIV/HeII constraints mentioned. That is a real gap for a paper claiming an 'ISM-naked starburst'. Second, the fesc=0.94 value is a CIGALE fitted parameter; calling it 'derived independently from SED fitting' is overstatement. The Hα lower limit is the independent anchor; the SED value is a model output. Third, the NIRSpec scaling factor of 1.41 is applied without a quoted uncertainty, and no reduction code or fitting configuration is released. Minor but worth fixing. The low-density gas alternative raised by the reader is actually less threatening than it looks: if the gas were ionization-bounded, the Hα luminosity would be independent of density; the only way to suppress Hα is to be density-bounded, which means the photons escape. So the absence of Hα really does point to leakage unless a non-stellar continuum is involved.

This is a serious paper for the high-z galaxy and reionization communities. It deserves a proper referee, and the main revision should be a dedicated discussion of AGN constraints, plus a more careful framing of the SED-derived fesc.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper presents deep JWST/MIRI LRS spectroscopy (~11 h) of U37126, a lensed galaxy at z=10.255 previously confirmed by NIRSpec. The continuum is clearly detected in both NIRSpec and MIRI, but no rest-frame optical emission lines are seen, setting 3σ equivalent-width limits EW0(Hβ)≤64 Å, EW0([OIII]5008)≤174 Å, and EW0(Hα)≤400 Å. Combined with the very blue UV slope β_UV≈−2.9 and weak Balmer break, the authors use BPASS stellar+nebular models to infer a very young stellar population (≲10 Myr for constant SFH) with a high LyC escape fraction: fesc≥86% (3σ) from the Hα flux limit, and fesc=0.94±0.06 from CIGALE SED fitting. The best-fit SED gives M*≈10^7.8 M⊙, SFR≈10 M⊙/yr, reff≈61 pc, and extreme mass and SFR surface densities. The paper argues that even a small fraction (~3–6%) of such extreme leakers could contribute ~50–100% of the reionizing photon budget.

Significance. If the interpretation holds, U37126 would be one of the most extreme known LyC leakers at z≈10, adding important support to the emerging population of blue, line-poor galaxies at z>6 and strengthening the case that rare, high-ξion, high-fesc systems could dominate cosmic reionization. The primary observational product—the deep MIRI LRS spectrum with robust continuum detection and well-characterized line upper limits—is valuable and likely correct. The paper is clearly written and makes a falsifiable claim. However, the central physical inference (fesc≈1 and the 'ISM-naked' starburst interpretation) rests on the assumption that the observed UV/optical continuum is entirely stellar. That assumption is not tested, and the CIGALE fesc value is not an independent measurement. These issues are load-bearing and require attention before the strong claims can be accepted.

major comments (4)

[§3.2 and Fig. 4] The lower limit fesc≥86% is derived by scaling a 5 Myr BPASS stellar model to the observed spectrum to obtain Q_H, then comparing with the Hα flux limit. This assumes the rest-frame 1400–3600 Å continuum is entirely stellar. No AGN component is included in the CIGALE fit (Section 3.3), and the paper provides no X-ray, radio, or high-ionization UV line constraints (e.g., CIV, HeII, CIII]). If an AGN contributed, say, 50% of the continuum, the inferred stellar Q_H would be halved and the fesc lower limit would drop to ≈74%. Please add quantitative AGN constraints (CIV/HeII flux limits from NIRSpec, an AGN component in CIGALE, or existing X-ray/radio limits) or explicitly qualify the fesc limits as conditional on a stellar-dominated continuum.
[§3.3 and Abstract] The statement that fesc=0.94±0.06 is 'derived independently from SED fitting' is misleading. In CIGALE, fesc is a free parameter, and the fit explicitly includes the MIRI Hα upper limit as an input. The SED value is therefore not independent of the Hα-based lower limit; it is a model-inferred posterior constrained by the same non-detection. Please rephrase throughout to distinguish the empirical lower limit (fesc≥0.86, from Hα alone) from the model-dependent CIGALE value.
[§4.2] The discussion of the diffuse-gas alternative contains a physical error. In an ionization-bounded nebula, L(Hα) is set by Q_H and is independent of n_e; the scaling L∝n_e^2 applies only at fixed ionized volume. A low-n_e medium confined to the compact galaxy would not 'fully reprocess' the ionizing photons—it would be density-bounded, which again implies a high escape fraction. Thus the claimed alternative 'even if all LyC photons were fully reprocessed... explained by n_e≲10^-2 cm^-3' is not a viable low-fesc alternative. The paragraph should be corrected; as written it misidentifies a high-fesc scenario as an escape from the fesc inference.
[§3.2 and Table 1] The quoted 3σ lower limit fesc≥0.86 is based on a single 5 Myr CSFH BPASS model scaled to the observed spectrum. This limit does not propagate systematic uncertainties in stellar age, IMF, metallicity, SFH, or the 1.41 NIRSpec flux scaling. The model grid in Fig. 3 suggests that fesc≈0.8–0.9 is allowed depending on age and burst/CSFH choice. Please present the fesc lower limit as a function of the model grid, or provide a conservative value that folds in these systematics, so that '3σ' refers to the full model+data uncertainty.

minor comments (5)

[Table 1 and §3.1] The Hβ equivalent-width limit is listed as ≤64 Å in Table 1 but stated as ≤65 Å in the text. Please make these consistent.
[§2] The NIRSpec scaling factor of 1.41 is substantial. Please discuss its origin (e.g., slit-loss or aperture corrections) and confirm that it was validated by the MIRI/NIRSpec overlap over the full 4.85–5.30 μm range, not only at the continuum.
[Fig. 3] The Balmer-break panels would be clearer if the axis label explicitly defined the ratio, e.g., F_ν(4200 Å)/F_ν(3400 Å).
[§4.3] In the emissivity equation, the terms (fesc/15%) and (ξion/10^25.25) are dimensionless ratios; defining f_N explicitly as the number fraction of extreme sources relative to the total galaxy population would improve readability.
[§2] The MIRI LRS reduction relies on 'Álvarez-Márquez et al. (in prep.)' for key steps. Since the upper limits depend on background subtraction and extraction, please include more detail in an appendix or cite a public data-release description.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

SED-derived fesc is a free parameter fit to the same Halpha upper limit; the Halpha-based lower limit itself is not circular.

specific steps

fitted input called prediction [Section 3.3 (SED fitting), Fig. 4, Table 1; abstract 'derived independently from SED fitting']
"we perform spectral energy distribution (SED) fitting using the SpectroPhotometric version of the CIGALE code ... incorporating all NIRCam photometry, the NIRSpec/PRISM spectrum, as well as MIRI/LRS measurements of the [Oiii]λ5008 and Hα flux upper limits ... Finally, the escape of LyC photons is allowed to vary from 0 to 0.999. ... The best-fit model also provides a very high LyC escape fraction, fesc = 0.94 ± 0.06 ... consistent with the results obtained in Section 3.2."

The fesc=0.94 value is not an independent derivation: fesc is a free parameter in CIGALE, and the same Halpha upper limit used to derive fesc>=0.86 in Section 3.2 is explicitly included as an input to the fit. The agreement between the two numbers is therefore partly by construction, since both are driven by the same Halpha non-detection. The Halpha-based lower limit itself rests on an observed flux limit and does not reduce to a fit, so this is a partial overstatement of independence rather than a full collapse of the central claim.

full rationale

The central lower bound fesc>=86% is not circular: it follows from an observed Halpha flux upper limit combined with a scaled BPASS stellar model, with fesc only entering as a physical escape fraction rather than being assumed in the model calibration. The separate SED value fesc=0.94±0.06 is a fitted CIGALE parameter, and since the Halpha upper limit is one of the fitted constraints, presenting it as 'derived independently' overstates its independence; the consistency with Section 3.2 is partly expected. No load-bearing self-citation chain is present: the cited works by the same group (e.g., Schaerer et al. 2025, Marques-Chaves et al. 2022/2024/2025) are supporting comparisons, while the model grids used for the main inference are computed in this paper. The diffuse-gas (n_e<1e-2 cm^-3) caveat is explicitly acknowledged in Section 4.2, and the untested AGN alternative is a physical-modeling assumption rather than a circular step. Overall, the derivation is mostly self-contained, with a moderate overstatement of the SED fit's independence.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

6 free parameters · 6 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central fesc inference rests on stellar population synthesis models, case-B recombination physics, and an adopted lens model. The SED fesc is a fitted parameter, while the H-alpha upper limit provides an independent but model-dependent anchor. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (6)

LyC escape fraction fesc (CIGALE) = 0.94 ± 0.06
Free parameter allowed between 0 and 0.999 in the CIGALE SED fit; posterior peaks at 0.94. This is the central derived quantity, constrained by line upper limits but not a blind prediction.
Stellar age (constant SFH) = 6.8 ± 1.6 Myr
Fitted in CIGALE SED; young age is required for the steep UV slope and drives the inferred high xi_ion and fesc.
Stellar metallicity = Z = 0.003 (Z/Zsun = 0.15)
Adopted for BPASS and CIGALE grids based on literature for similar galaxies; Appendix A explores other metallicities but the central model grid uses this value.
Dust attenuation E(B-V) = 0.01 ± 0.01 mag
Fitted in CIGALE; negligible dust is assumed and consistent with the very blue UV slope.
Gravitational magnification mu = 2.19 ± 0.05
Adopted from UNCOVER DR4 lens models; all global quantities are corrected by this factor.
NIRSpec flux scaling factor = 1.41
Applied to put NIRSpec on the NIRCam photometric scale; no uncertainty is quoted, which affects continuum slopes and derived EWs.

axioms (6)

domain assumption BPASS v2.2.1 and BC03 stellar population synthesis models accurately predict rest-UV/optical continua and ionizing photon production rates for young, low-metallicity stellar populations.
All fesc and xi_ion inferences in Sections 3.2 and 3.3 rely on these models; a different IMF, binary fraction, or stellar atmosphere grid would change the derived numbers.
domain assumption Case-B recombination coefficients with Te = 1.5e4 K and ne = 1e3 cm^-3 apply.
Used to convert H-alpha/H-beta limits into fesc and nebular continuum predictions; the paper acknowledges the H-beta limit depends on this assumption.
domain assumption The emergent spectrum is F_total = F_stellar + (1 - fesc) * F_nebular, with all escaping LyC photons contributing no nebular emission.
This is the model framework in Section 3.2; it assumes a single escape fraction and no scattered or density-bounded complexity.
domain assumption IGM transmission below 1400 Å is not properly modeled by CIGALE, so rest wavelengths shortward of 1400 Å are excluded from the fit.
Section 3.3; a different IGM treatment could change the inferred SED shape and thus stellar population parameters.
domain assumption The continuum of U37126 is dominated by stars, with no significant AGN contribution.
The paper interprets the blue UV continuum and weak lines as a starburst; a featureless AGN continuum could in principle mimic some of these signatures and would invalidate the stellar fesc inference.
domain assumption The UNCOVER DR4 gravitational lens model for A2744 provides the correct magnification.
All de-lensed stellar mass, SFR, and size measurements scale with mu; an inaccurate magnification would alter the surface densities and compactness claims.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 22899 in / 12848 out tokens · 126792 ms · 2026-08-03T05:21:57.574000+00:00 · methodology

0 comments

read the original abstract

We present very deep (~11h) JWST/MIRI low-resolution spectroscopy of the rest-frame optical emission of U37126, a UV-bright (M_UV ~ -20), mildly lensed ($\mu\simeq 2.2$) galaxy at z=10.255. The continuum emission is well detected in both NIRSpec and MIRI spectra, yet no nebular recombination or metal emission lines are observed (EW(Hbeta+[OIII])<300A and EW(Halpha)<400A, at 3sigma). Combined with the exceptionally blue UV continuum slope, beta_UV ~ -2.9, and weak/flat Balmer break, these constraints indicate a stellar population dominated by very young and massive stars with a strongly suppressed nebular contribution. Comparisons with synthetic stellar population models indicate that U37126 requires both a very high ionizing photon production efficiency, log(Xi_ion / Hz erg^-1) ~ 25.75, and a nearly unit LyC escape fraction, of fesc>86% (3sigma) based on Halpha flux limit and fesc=0.94+/-0.06 derived independently from SED fitting. The best-fit SED yields a (de-lensed) stellar mass of Mstar ~ 10^7.8 Msun and a star-formation rate of SFR~10Msun/yr (sSFR~160 Gyr^-1), that along with its very compact size, reff~61pc, yields very high stellar mass and star-formation-rate surface densities, Sigma_M ~ 3x10^3 Msun/pc^2 and Sigma_SFR ~ 400 Msun/yr/kpc^2. Together with the lack of detectable nebular emission, these properties suggest that U37126 is undergoing an ``ISM-naked'' starburst phase, possibly driven by an extremely efficient gas-to-star conversion followed by strong feedback that has cleared the remaining gas from its stellar core, allowing most LyC photons to escape. Finally, we show that even a small fraction of galaxies like U37126 (~ 3%-6%), with extreme LyC production and escape, could contribute disproportionately (~ 50%-100%) to the ionizing photon budget during cosmic reionization.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.02322 by Abdurro'uf, A. Crespo-Gomez, A. Fontana, A. K. Inoue, A. Varo-O'ferral, B. Rodr\'iguez Del Pino, C. Blanco-Prieto, C. Prieto-Jim\'enez, D. Langeroodi, E. Iani, G. Ostlin, G. Wright, J. \'Alvarez-M\'arquez, J. Melinder, J. Zavala, K. I. Caputi, L. A. Boogaard, L. Colina, L. Napolitano, M. Castellano, M. Garc\'ia-Mar\'in, P. G. P\'erez-Gonz\'alez, P. Rinaldi, P. Santini, R. Lin, R. Marques-Chaves, S. Fujimoto, S. Harish, S. Kendrew, T. Hashimoto, T. Hsiao, Y. Fudamoto, Y. Harikane, Y. Sugahara.

Figure 1. Figure 1: NIRSpec/PRISM (black) and MIRI/LRS (red) spectra of U37126 with the 1σ uncertainties shown in grey. The expected locations of the main rest-frame optical emission lines, Hβ, [O iii] λλ4960,5008, and Hα, are indicated with red dashed lines. NIRCam photometry from broadand medium-band filters is overplotted in blue and green, respectively. 1400 − 3600 Å, thereby excluding regions potentially affected by int… view at source ↗

Figure 2. Figure 2: Comparison of the rest-frame Lyα break of U37126 (black) with that of MACS0647-JD (z = 10.170) which shows a strong damped Lyα absorption feature (NHI ≃ 2.5 × 1022 cm−2 , Heintz et al. 2024) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

Figure 3. Figure 3: Predictions from BPASS synthetic stellar and nebular emission models (Z/Z⊙ ≃ 0.15, Te = 1.5 × 104 K, and ne = 103 cm−3 ) for the UV continuum slope (βUV), EW0 (Hα), and the Balmer break strength (F 4200Å ν /F 3400Å ν ) as a function of the age (top) and their combination (bottom). Solid and dashed lines correspond to constant star formation (CSFH) and instantaneous burst models (Burst), respectively. Model… view at source ↗

Figure 4. Figure 4: Best-fit spectral energy distribution (SED) of U37126 derived with CIGALE (black solid curve) and a pure stellar 5 Myr-old BPASS model (CSFH with Z/Z⊙ = 15%, violet dashed line). The NIRSpec/PRISM and MIRI/LRS spectra are shown in grey and red, respectively, while NIRCam photometric measurements and MIRI/LRS synthetic photometry are indicated by blue and red circles. The inset panel displays the posterior … view at source ↗

Figure 5. Figure 5: NIRCam F150W (top) and F200W (bottom) 1′′ × 1 ′′ cutouts of U37126. Middle and right panels show the Sérsic best-fit models obtained with PySersic and the corresponding residuals, respectively. appears unresolved in the rest-optical with reff < 160 pc (or < 100 pc after lensing correction ). 4. Discussion 4.1. Comparison with other strong confirmed LyC emitters and z > 6 candidates Our results strongly sup… view at source ↗

Figure 6. Figure 6: Effective radius (reff) as a function of star-formation rate surface density (ΣSFR) for galaxies at z > 10 with MIRI constraints on EW0 (Hβ+[O iii]) (color-codded, from: Castellano et al. 2022; Goulding et al. 2023; Tacchella et al. 2023; Calabro et al. 2024; Carniani et al. 2024; Álvarez-Márquez et al. 2025; Helton et al. 2025; Zavala et al. 2025; Harikane et al. 2026, and Alvarez-Marquez et al. in prep… view at source ↗

Figure 7. Figure 7: Relationship between the UV slope (βUV) and the ionizing photon production efficiency (ξion) for stellar population synthesis models with (red) and without (blue) the contribution of nebular emission, i.e., representing the extreme cases of fesc = 0 and fesc = 1, respectively. Filled and open circles indicate ξion derived from SED fitting and from the Hα flux limit assuming fesc = 0, respectively. ful of … view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

Reionization driven by the few: the ionizing budget of galaxies at z=5-10 from JWST/NIRSpec
astro-ph.GA 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0

A spectral-fitting analysis of 1428 JWST galaxies yields a cosmic ionizing photon budget in which ~20% of high-escape-fraction galaxies produce ~87% of the photons that reionize the universe, ending reionization at z~5.8.
Lyman-alpha Radiation Pressure in Dense Star Clusters: Implications for Star Formation and Winds at Cosmic Dawn
astro-ph.GA 2026-05 conditional novelty 6.0

Lyα radiation pressure mildly reduces gas-to-star conversion efficiency in dense high-redshift clusters while dominating the launch of rapid outflows.
No Blue without Red: Evolutionary Properties of Super-Early Galaxies
astro-ph.GA 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

Application of the Attenuation-Free Model to JWST super-early galaxies yields massive halos with moderate efficiencies and supports an evolutionary sequence from dust-reddened to UV-clear phases driven by outflows.
An Updated Characterization of Luminous Ly{\alpha} emitters at the End of Reionization
astro-ph.GA 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

Luminous Lyα emitters at z≈6 are low-mass ultra-young dwarf starbursts with median Lyα escape fractions above 40 percent, driven by vigorous star formation and low dust content.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

116 extracted references · 9 linked inside Pith · cited by 4 Pith papers

[1]

Algera, H. S. B., Weaver, J. R., Bakx, T. J. L. C., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2512.14486 Álvarez-Márquez, J., Colina, L., Crespo Gómez, A., et al. 2024, A&A, 686, A85 Álvarez-Márquez, J., Crespo Gómez, A., Colina, L., et al. 2025, A&A, 695, A250 Arrabal Haro, P., Dickinson, M., Finkelstein, S. L., et al. 2023, Nature, 622, 707

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[2]

2023, MNRAS, 524, 5486

Atek, H., Chemerynska, I., Wang, B., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 524, 5486

2023
[3]

J., Adams, N

Austin, D., Conselice, C. J., Adams, N. J., et al. 2025, ApJ, 995, 43

2025
[4]

M., D’Eugenio, F., Maiolino, R., et al

Baker, W. M., D’Eugenio, F., Maiolino, R., et al. 2025, A&A, 697, A90

2025
[5]

J., Cullen, F., et al

Begley, R., McLure, R. J., Cullen, F., et al. 2026, MNRAS, 545, staf1995

2026
[6]

2013, A&A, 554, A38

Bergvall, N., Leitet, E., Zackrisson, E., & Marquart, T. 2013, A&A, 554, A38

2013
[7]

E., et al

Bezanson, R., Labbe, I., Whitaker, K. E., et al. 2024, ApJ, 974, 92

2024
[8]

& Conselice, C

Bhatawdekar, R. & Conselice, C. J. 2021, ApJ, 909, 144

2021
[9]

2019, A&A, 622, A103

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

2019
[10]

J., Illingworth, G

Bouwens, R. J., Illingworth, G. D., Oesch, P. A., et al. 2012, ApJ, 754, 83

2012
[11]

J., Illingworth, G

Bouwens, R. J., Illingworth, G. D., Oesch, P. A., et al. 2014, ApJ, 793, 115

2014
[12]

J., Illingworth, G

Bouwens, R. J., Illingworth, G. D., Oesch, P. A., et al. 2010, ApJ, 708, L69

2010
[13]

2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 657

Boyett, K., Trenti, M., Leethochawalit, N., et al. 2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 657

2024
[14]

2022, astropy/photutils: 1.5.0 Article number, page 9 of 13 A&A proofs:manuscript no

Bradley, L., Sip˝ocz, B., Robitaille, T., et al. 2022, astropy/photutils: 1.5.0 Article number, page 9 of 13 A&A proofs:manuscript no. main

2022
[15]

& Charlot, S

Bruzual, G. & Charlot, S. 2003, MNRAS, 344, 1000

2003
[16]

J., Saxena, A., Cameron, A

Bunker, A. J., Saxena, A., Cameron, A. J., et al. 2023, A&A, 677, A88

2023
[17]

2005, MNRAS, 360, 1413

Burgarella, D., Buat, V ., & Iglesias-Páramo, J. 2005, MNRAS, 360, 1413

2005
[18]

2025, A&A, 699, A336

Burgarella, D., Buat, V ., Theulé, P., et al. 2025, A&A, 699, A336

2025
[19]

2025, JWST Calibration Pipeline

Bushouse, H., Eisenhamer, J., Dencheva, N., et al. 2025, JWST Calibration Pipeline

2025
[20]

A., et al

Calabro, A., Castellano, M., Zavala, J. A., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2403.12683

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024
[21]

C., et al

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

2000
[22]

L., & Storchi-Bergmann, T

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

1994
[23]

A., Clayton, G

Cardelli, J. A., Clayton, G. C., & Mathis, J. S. 1989, ApJ, 345, 245

1989
[24]

2024, Nature, 633, 318

Carniani, S., Hainline, K., D’Eugenio, F., et al. 2024, Nature, 633, 318

2024
[25]

2022, ApJ, 938, L15

Castellano, M., Fontana, A., Treu, T., et al. 2022, ApJ, 938, L15

2022
[26]

2024, ApJ, 972, 143

Castellano, M., Napolitano, L., Fontana, A., et al. 2024, ApJ, 972, 143

2024
[27]

2003, PASP, 115, 763

Chabrier, G. 2003, PASP, 115, 763

2003
[28]

J., et al

Chemerynska, I., Atek, H., Furtak, L. J., et al. 2026, MN- RAS[arXiv:2509.24881]

arXiv 2026
[29]

2022, MNRAS, 517, 5104 Crespo Gómez, A., Tamura, Y ., Colina, L., et al

Chisholm, J., Saldana-Lopez, A., Flury, S., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 517, 5104 Crespo Gómez, A., Tamura, Y ., Colina, L., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2511.14658

arXiv 2022
[30]

J., McLure, R

Cullen, F., McLeod, D. J., McLure, R. J., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 531, 997

2024
[31]

J., McLeod, D

Cullen, F., McLure, R. J., McLeod, D. J., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 520, 14

2023
[32]

2023, Nature Astronomy, 7, 622 de Barros, S., Vanzella, E., Amorín, R., et al

Curtis-Lake, E., Carniani, S., Cameron, A., et al. 2023, Nature Astronomy, 7, 622 de Barros, S., Vanzella, E., Amorín, R., et al. 2016, A&A, 585, A51

2023
[33]

C., Birnboim, Y ., Mandelker, N., & Li, Z

Dekel, A., Sarkar, K. C., Birnboim, Y ., Mandelker, N., & Li, Z. 2023, MNRAS, 523, 3201

2023
[34]

2025, A&A, 693, A17

Dessauges-Zavadsky, M., Marques-Chaves, R., Schaerer, D., et al. 2025, A&A, 693, A17

2025
[35]

T., Dickinson, M., Taylor, A

Donnan, C. T., Dickinson, M., Taylor, A. J., et al. 2025, ApJ, 993, 224

2025
[36]

T., McLeod, D

Donnan, C. T., McLeod, D. J., McLure, R. J., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.11515

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026
[37]

2025, A&A, 698, A234

Dottorini, D., Calabrò, A., Pentericci, L., et al. 2025, A&A, 698, A234

2025
[38]

2025, The Open Journal of As- trophysics, 8, 125

Ferrara, A., Giavalisco, M., Pentericci, L., et al. 2025, The Open Journal of As- trophysics, 8, 125

2025
[39]

2023, MNRAS, 522, 3986

Ferrara, A., Pallottini, A., & Dayal, P. 2023, MNRAS, 522, 3986

2023
[40]

L., D’Aloisio, A., Paardekooper, J.-P., et al

Finkelstein, S. L., D’Aloisio, A., Paardekooper, J.-P., et al. 2019, ApJ, 879, 36

2019
[41]

L., Papovich, C., Salmon, B., et al

Finkelstein, S. L., Papovich, C., Salmon, B., et al. 2012, ApJ, 756, 164

2012
[42]

2023, ApJ, 943, L27

Fiore, F., Ferrara, A., Bischetti, M., Feruglio, C., & Travascio, A. 2023, ApJ, 943, L27

2023
[43]

R., Jaskot, A

Flury, S. R., Jaskot, A. E., Ferguson, H. C., et al. 2022, ApJ, 930, 126

2022
[44]

R., et al

Fujimoto, S., Wang, B., Weaver, J. R., et al. 2024, ApJ, 977, 250

2024
[45]

J., Zitrin, A., Weaver, J

Furtak, L. J., Zitrin, A., Weaver, J. R., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 523, 4568

2023
[46]

A., Weibel, A., et al

Giovinazzo, E., Oesch, P. A., Weibel, A., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.01096

arXiv 2025
[47]

D., Greene, J

Goulding, A. D., Greene, J. E., Setton, D. J., et al. 2023, ApJ, 955, L24

2023
[48]

N., D’Eugenio, F., Jakobsen, P., et al

Hainline, K. N., D’Eugenio, F., Jakobsen, P., et al. 2024, ApJ, 976, 160

2024
[49]

K., Ellis, R

Harikane, Y ., Inoue, A. K., Ellis, R. S., et al. 2025, ApJ, 980, 138

2025
[50]

2024, ApJ, 960, 56

Harikane, Y ., Nakajima, K., Ouchi, M., et al. 2024, ApJ, 960, 56

2024
[51]

2023, ApJS, 265, 5

Harikane, Y ., Ouchi, M., Oguri, M., et al. 2023, ApJS, 265, 5

2023
[52]

G., Alvarez-Marquez, J., et al

Harikane, Y ., Perez-Gonzalez, P. G., Alvarez-Marquez, J., et al. 2026, arXiv e- prints, arXiv:2601.21833

arXiv 2026
[53]

E., Watson, D., Brammer, G., et al

Heintz, K. E., Watson, D., Brammer, G., et al. 2024, Science, 384, 890

2024
[54]

M., Morrison, J

Helton, J. M., Morrison, J. E., Hainline, K. N., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2512.19695

arXiv 2025
[55]

Y .-Y ., Álvarez-Márquez, J., Coe, D., et al

Hsiao, T. Y .-Y ., Álvarez-Márquez, J., Coe, D., et al. 2024, ApJ, 973, 81

2024
[56]

Inoue, A. K. 2010, MNRAS, 401, 1325

2010
[57]

2023, ApJ, 956, 139

Isobe, Y ., Ouchi, M., Nakajima, K., et al. 2023, ApJ, 956, 139

2023
[58]

I., Schaerer, D., Thuan, T

Izotov, Y . I., Schaerer, D., Thuan, T. X., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 461, 3683

2016
[59]

I., Schaerer, D., Worseck, G., et al

Izotov, Y . I., Schaerer, D., Worseck, G., et al. 2025, A&A, 704, A19

2025
[60]

I., Worseck, G., Schaerer, D., et al

Izotov, Y . I., Worseck, G., Schaerer, D., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 478, 4851

2018
[61]

C., Chisholm, J., Atek, H., et al

Jecmen, M. C., Chisholm, J., Atek, H., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.19995

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026
[62]

J., Saxena, A., et al

Katz, H., Cameron, A. J., Saxena, A., et al. 2025, The Open Journal of Astro- physics, 8, 104

2025
[63]

2015, PASP, 127, 623

Kendrew, S., Scheithauer, S., Bouchet, P., et al. 2015, PASP, 127, 623

2015
[64]

A., Wisotzki, L., et al

Kerutt, J., Oesch, P. A., Wisotzki, L., et al. 2024, A&A, 684, A42

2024
[65]

S., Marques-Chaves, R., et al

Komarova, L., Oey, M. S., Marques-Chaves, R., et al. 2025, ApJ, 994, 192

2025
[66]

2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.19989

Korber, D., Schaerer, D., Marques-Chaves, R., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.19989

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026
[67]

2024, A&A, 691, A310

Kuruvanthodi, A., Schaerer, D., Marques-Chaves, R., et al. 2024, A&A, 691, A310

2024
[68]

D., et al

Leitherer, C., Schaerer, D., Goldader, J. D., et al. 1999, ApJS, 123, 3

1999
[69]

C., et al

Li, Z., Dekel, A., Sarkar, K. C., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2311.14662

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023
[70]

J., D’Eugenio, F., Maiolino, R., et al

Looser, T. J., D’Eugenio, F., Maiolino, R., et al. 2024, Nature, 629, 53

2024
[71]

Luridiana, V ., Morisset, C., & Shaw, R. A. 2015, A&A, 573, A42

2015
[72]

2021, MNRAS, 507, 524

Marques-Chaves, R., Schaerer, D., Álvarez-Márquez, J., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 507, 524

2021
[73]

2022, MNRAS, 517, 2972

Marques-Chaves, R., Schaerer, D., Álvarez-Márquez, J., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 517, 2972

2022
[74]

2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.12411

Marques-Chaves, R., Schaerer, D., Dessauges-Zavadsky, M., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.12411

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[75]

2024, A&A, 691, A87

Marques-Chaves, R., Schaerer, D., Vanzella, E., et al. 2024, A&A, 691, A87

2024
[76]

2024, A&A, 685, A3

Mascia, S., Pentericci, L., Calabrò, A., et al. 2024, A&A, 685, A3

2024
[77]

2023, A&A, 672, A155

Mascia, S., Pentericci, L., Calabrò, A., et al. 2023, A&A, 672, A155

2023
[78]

H., Burkhart, B., Somerville, R

Menon, S. H., Burkhart, B., Somerville, R. S., Thompson, T. A., & Sternberg, A. 2025, ApJ, 987, 12

2025
[79]

2025, A&A, 694, A59

Messa, M., Vanzella, E., Loiacono, F., et al. 2025, A&A, 694, A59

2025
[80]

M., Finkelstein, S

Morales, A. M., Finkelstein, S. L., Leung, G. C. K., et al. 2024, ApJ, 964, L24

2024

Showing first 80 references.