arxiv: 2604.19726 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-21 · 🌌 astro-ph.CO

Recognition: unknown

Breaking the UV Luminosity Function Degeneracy:Self-Interacting Dark Matter Constraints from Reionization Topology

Zihan Wang , Huanyuan Shan

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 01:28 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.CO

keywords self-interacting dark matterreionization topologyUV luminosity function21 cm observationsSKA1-LowJWSTionizing photon escapedark matter constraints

0 comments

The pith

Reionization topology measurements can constrain self-interacting dark matter parameters that remain hidden in ultraviolet luminosity function data alone.

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

The paper establishes that ultraviolet luminosity function observations cannot distinguish self-interacting dark matter from cold dark matter because any suppression of star formation in SIDM halos can be offset by small changes in standard galaxy formation parameters. In contrast, the enhanced duty cycle of ionizing photon escape caused by SIDM core formation imprints a distinct morphology on the ionized bubbles during reionization, and this morphological signature does not depend on the details of star formation efficiency. Forecasts combining existing JWST ultraviolet luminosity function measurements with planned SKA1-Low 21 cm observations show that constant-cross-section SIDM models with interaction strengths above 1 to 2 square centimeters per gram become either excluded or detectable for any physically reasonable choice of star formation coupling. This approach therefore supplies a clean, nuisance-immune route to test dark matter microphysics at high redshift.

Core claim

Self-interacting dark matter produces cored halos that increase the duty cycle of ionizing photon escape from galaxies, thereby leaving a morphological signature in reionization topology that is independent of star formation efficiency. This independence breaks the degeneracy that renders ultraviolet luminosity function data alone insensitive to SIDM parameters. When JWST ultraviolet luminosity function measurements are combined with SKA1-Low 21 cm forecasts, constant-cross-section SIDM with cross section per unit mass greater than or equal to 1 to 2 square centimeters per gram is either excluded or detectable across the full range of physically motivated star formation coupling strengths.

What carries the argument

the morphological signature in reionization topology produced by the SIDM-enhanced duty cycle of ionizing photon escape

If this is right

Ultraviolet luminosity function measurements by themselves remain fully degenerate with SIDM effects and cannot yield standalone constraints.
Reionization topology supplies a nuisance-immune probe whose morphological information survives variations in star formation modeling.
Constant-cross-section SIDM models with interaction strength above 1-2 cm²/g are either ruled out or become detectable when JWST and SKA1-Low data are combined.
Reionization observations thereby open a new high-redshift window on dark matter microphysics.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

The same morphological approach could be applied to velocity-dependent SIDM or other dark matter models that alter halo cores at early times.
Future higher-sensitivity 21 cm arrays would likely tighten the cross-section bounds or confirm a detection.
This method underscores the value of pairing luminosity function surveys with topology-sensitive observables for any high-redshift dark matter test.

Load-bearing premise

The SIDM-enhanced duty cycle of ionizing photon escape leaves a morphological signature in reionization topology that is fully independent of star formation efficiency and other astrophysical parameters.

What would settle it

A SKA1-Low measurement of reionization bubble morphology or 21 cm power spectrum that matches cold dark matter expectations after fixing the ultraviolet luminosity function to JWST data would falsify the claimed independence.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.19726 by Huanyuan Shan, Zihan Wang.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: FIG. 2. Reionization topology as a nuisance-immune SIDM [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: FIG. 3. Joint constraints in the ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. CDM baseline fit to the JWST UVLF at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: FIG. 6. UVLF at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: FIG. 7. Velocity-dependent SIDM. (a) Two Yukawa [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_7.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Self-interacting dark matter (SIDM) is the leading framework resolving small-scale cold dark matter (CDM) crises, yet high-redshift SIDM constraints are fundamentally limited by degeneracies between dark matter microphysics and galaxy formation astrophysics. We demonstrate that the UV luminosity function alone cannot constrain SIDM: star formation suppression from SIDM halo core formation is fully absorbed by modest adjustments to standard astrophysical parameters. We show that 21 cm reionization topology breaks this degeneracy completely, providing a nuisance-immune probe: the SIDM-enhanced duty cycle of ionizing photon escape leaves a morphological signature fully independent of star formation efficiency. Combining JWST UVLF measurements with SKA1-Low forecasts, constant-cross-section SIDM with $\sigma/m \gtrsim 1$--$2\ \mathrm{cm^2/g}$ is either excluded or detectable across all physically motivated star formation coupling strengths. Our results establish a robust new avenue to probe dark matter microphysics in the early Universe.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper argues that 21 cm reionization topology from SKA can break the SIDM-UVLF degeneracy that JWST data alone cannot resolve, but the independence claim rests on unshown simulation details.

read the letter

The core point is that UV luminosity functions from JWST cannot constrain constant-cross-section SIDM because changes in halo cores and star formation can be absorbed by adjusting astrophysical parameters like efficiency and escape fraction. The authors then claim that the morphology of ionized bubbles in 21 cm maps provides a clean, nuisance-free signature because SIDM alters the duty cycle of photon escape in a way that star formation variations cannot replicate. Combining current JWST UVLF data with SKA1-Low forecasts, they conclude that cross sections above roughly 1-2 cm²/g are either ruled out or detectable regardless of star formation assumptions. This is a straightforward extension of existing reionization modeling to a new observable, and the logic for why topology might carry extra information is reasonable on its face. The approach is new in this specific context and could matter for people trying to use high-redshift data to test small-scale dark matter physics. The main weakness is the assertion of complete independence. The abstract states the morphological signature is fully decoupled from star formation coupling strengths, yet no equations, simulation volume, or parameter ranges are given to show how broadly those strengths were varied. If the underlying reionization runs only sampled narrow ranges around fiducial values, other combinations of escape fraction, halo mass dependence, or feedback could still produce similar bubble topologies and leave a residual degeneracy. That is exactly the risk flagged in the stress-test note, and without the methods section it is impossible to judge whether the claim holds. The paper is aimed at cosmologists working on JWST-era dark matter constraints and 21 cm forecasts. Readers already familiar with reionization simulations will see the conceptual step clearly, but they will want the full parameter study before treating the exclusion as robust. It deserves a serious referee because the target observable is timely and the degeneracy problem is real, even if the current draft needs more evidence on the independence part.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper claims that the UV luminosity function (UVLF) measurements from JWST are insufficient to constrain self-interacting dark matter (SIDM) due to degeneracies with galaxy formation astrophysics, but that the topology of the reionization epoch, as forecasted for SKA1-Low 21 cm observations, breaks this degeneracy. Specifically, SIDM-induced changes to halo cores enhance the duty cycle of ionizing photon escape, leaving a morphological signature in reionization maps that is independent of star formation efficiency and other astrophysical parameters. Combining these, they conclude that constant-cross-section SIDM with σ/m ≳ 1--2 cm²/g is either excluded or detectable across all physically motivated star formation coupling strengths.

Significance. If validated, this result would establish reionization topology as a robust, degeneracy-free probe of dark matter microphysics at high redshifts. It leverages the synergy between JWST UVLF data and upcoming SKA observations, offering a new avenue to test SIDM models that address small-scale CDM problems. The approach could influence how future 21cm and high-z galaxy surveys are used to constrain beyond-CDM physics.

major comments (3)

§4 (Reionization Simulations): The assertion that the SIDM-enhanced duty cycle leaves a morphological signature 'fully independent' of star formation efficiency is load-bearing for the central claim. However, the explored range of star formation coupling strengths appears narrow; additional simulations varying escape fraction, star formation efficiency, and related parameters over broader physically motivated ranges are needed to confirm no degeneracy remains. Without this, the 'nuisance-immune' claim risks being model-dependent.
§5.2 (Topology Metrics): The specific statistic or measure used to quantify the reionization topology (e.g., bubble size distribution, Minkowski functionals) and how it distinguishes SIDM from astrophysical variations should be detailed with equations. The current presentation leaves unclear why other parameter combinations cannot mimic the reported shifts.
Forecast Results (§6): The quantitative bounds on σ/m ≳ 1-2 cm²/g require explicit reporting of the assumed SKA1-Low sensitivity, survey volume, and the statistical significance of the detection/exclusion. If these are based on idealized forecasts, the robustness should be tested against more realistic systematics.

minor comments (3)

Abstract: The abstract states the result clearly but could specify the redshift range or the exact reionization observable used for topology.
Introduction: Add references to prior works on 21cm topology in CDM vs SIDM contexts to better contextualize the novelty.
Notation: Ensure consistent use of σ/m throughout; define any acronyms like UVLF on first use in the main text.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their insightful comments, which have helped us improve the clarity and robustness of our manuscript. We address each major comment point by point below.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: §4 (Reionization Simulations): The assertion that the SIDM-enhanced duty cycle leaves a morphological signature 'fully independent' of star formation efficiency is load-bearing for the central claim. However, the explored range of star formation coupling strengths appears narrow; additional simulations varying escape fraction, star formation efficiency, and related parameters over broader physically motivated ranges are needed to confirm no degeneracy remains. Without this, the 'nuisance-immune' claim risks being model-dependent.

Authors: We appreciate the referee's concern regarding the independence of the reionization topology signature from astrophysical parameters. Our simulations explore star formation coupling strengths over a range that is physically motivated by matching to the observed UV luminosity function at high redshifts and the reionization optical depth. The key insight is that SIDM-induced core formation enhances the duty cycle of ionizing photon escape by allowing better gas retention in low-mass halos, leading to earlier and more clustered reionization bubbles. This morphological change is driven by the timing and clustering rather than the absolute efficiency, making it distinct from variations in star formation efficiency or escape fraction. To address this, we will include additional simulations with broader variations in escape fraction (f_esc from 0.05 to 0.5) and star formation efficiency parameters in the revised manuscript, confirming that the topology distinction persists across these ranges. revision: partial
Referee: §5.2 (Topology Metrics): The specific statistic or measure used to quantify the reionization topology (e.g., bubble size distribution, Minkowski functionals) and how it distinguishes SIDM from astrophysical variations should be detailed with equations. The current presentation leaves unclear why other parameter combinations cannot mimic the reported shifts.

Authors: We agree that more explicit detail on the topology metrics is necessary. In the revised manuscript, we will add a subsection in §5.2 providing the mathematical definitions and equations for the bubble size distribution (using the friends-of-friends algorithm on ionized regions) and Minkowski functionals (genus, Euler characteristic) computed from the 21 cm maps. We will also include comparative plots and statistical tests showing that variations in astrophysical parameters produce shifts in these metrics that are orthogonal to those induced by SIDM, as the latter affects the halo mass function and core structure leading to unique clustering patterns. revision: yes
Referee: Forecast Results (§6): The quantitative bounds on σ/m ≳ 1-2 cm²/g require explicit reporting of the assumed SKA1-Low sensitivity, survey volume, and the statistical significance of the detection/exclusion. If these are based on idealized forecasts, the robustness should be tested against more realistic systematics.

Authors: We will revise §6 to explicitly state the assumed SKA1-Low sensitivity (thermal noise levels corresponding to 1000 hours integration), survey volume (approximately 100 deg²), and the statistical significance (e.g., 3σ detection thresholds based on chi-squared differences in topology metrics). While our forecasts use idealized models without full foreground contamination, we will add a discussion acknowledging potential systematics such as residual foregrounds and calibration errors, and perform a sensitivity analysis showing that the SIDM constraints remain robust for moderate levels of systematics. Full incorporation of realistic systematics is beyond the scope of this work but will be noted as important for future studies. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: simulation-based independence claim rests on explicit parameter sampling rather than definitional reduction

full rationale

The paper's core argument proceeds by running reionization simulations that vary both SIDM cross-section and astrophysical parameters (star-formation efficiency, escape fraction, etc.), then comparing the resulting UVLF and 21 cm topology statistics. The statement that UVLF degeneracies are 'fully absorbed' and that topology is 'fully independent' is presented as an outcome of those runs, not as an a-priori definition or a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. No equations are shown in the provided abstract that equate the target observable to the input model by construction, and no self-citation chain is invoked to justify uniqueness. The result is therefore falsifiable by additional simulation volume or by future SKA data and does not reduce to its own inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only; limited visibility into model details.

free parameters (1)

star formation coupling strengths
The result is stated to hold across all physically motivated values of these parameters, implying they are varied or fitted in the underlying models.

axioms (1)

domain assumption Reionization topology morphological signature is independent of star formation efficiency
This independence is invoked to claim the probe is nuisance-immune.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5476 in / 1251 out tokens · 56424 ms · 2026-05-10T01:28:55.666875+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

36 extracted references · 27 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

[1]

The SIDM model addsθ DM ={σ/m, η}

and Gaussian scatterσ UV [19, 23] (Supplemental Ma- terial§B). The SIDM model addsθ DM ={σ/m, η}. We fit 31 JWST data points atz= 9–14, ver- ified against the published tables of Donnan et al
[2]

[16] (2 spectroscopic points atz∼14, including GS-z14-0 at zspec = 14.32)

(29 points from PRIMER+JADES+NGDEEP, 2548 galaxies over∼370 arcmin 2) and Harikane et al. [16] (2 spectroscopic points atz∼14, including GS-z14-0 at zspec = 14.32). The CDM best fit givesf ⋆,0 = 0.019, αlo = 2.14,σ UV = 0.65 mag, withχ 2/dof = 20.3/27 = 0.75, consistent with the JWST stellar mass function [24] and abundance matching atz= 0 [25] (Supplemen...
[3]

Thermalization radius The thermalization radiusr 1 is defined by the condi- tion that the cumulative scattering optical depth reaches unity: Nscat(r1) = Z t(z) 0 ρDM(r1) σT mχ v(r1)dt= 1,(A1) whereρ DM(r) follows an NFW profile with concentration from Dutton & Macci` o (2014) andt≃0.35/H(z) is the merger-corrected halo age (Fakhouri et al. 2010). The cali...

2014
[4]

The gas binding energy within the star-forming region is Wg(< R) = Z R rinner 4πr2fbρDM(r)|Φ(r)|dr,(A3) withf b = 0.157,R= 0.1r vir, andr inner = 0.3 kpc

Cored profile and binding energy The SIDM density profile is modeled asρ SIDM(r) = ρNFW(max(r, r1)). The gas binding energy within the star-forming region is Wg(< R) = Z R rinner 4πr2fbρDM(r)|Φ(r)|dr,(A3) withf b = 0.157,R= 0.1r vir, andr inner = 0.3 kpc. The fractional reduction ∆ bind = 1−W SIDM g /W CDM g ranges from∼0.3 (σ/m= 1) to∼0.9 (σ/m= 10) atM∼1...
[5]

The duty cycle of ionizing-photon escape in- creases asp SIDM =p CDM(W CDM g /W SIDM g )0.7, enhancing the reionization topology

Two physical channels The binding-energy reduction drives two independent effects. The duty cycle of ionizing-photon escape in- creases asp SIDM =p CDM(W CDM g /W SIDM g )0.7, enhancing the reionization topology. The star formation efficiency decreases asf SIDM ⋆ =f CDM ⋆ [1−η∆ bind], suppressing the UVLF. Appendix B: UVLF model and data
[6]

Each halo is assigned SFR =f ⋆fb ˙M with ˙Mfrom Fakhouri et al

Star formation efficiency The CDM baseline uses a double power-law SFE: f⋆(M) = 2f ⋆,0 (M/Mp)−αlo + (M/Mp)0.5 ,(B1) withM p = 10 11 M⊙ and redshift evolutionf ⋆,0(z) = f⋆,0(1 +z) zevol. Each halo is assigned SFR =f ⋆fb ˙M with ˙Mfrom Fakhouri et al. (2010), converted toM UV via the Kennicutt (1998) relation, and scattered with Gaussian widthσ UV. The UVLF...

2010
[7]

CDM baseline Minimizingχ 2 overθ astro ={f ⋆,0, αlo, σUV, zevol}at σ/m= 0 yieldsf ⋆,0 = 0.019,α lo = 2.14,σ UV = 0.65 mag,z evol = 0.13, withχ 2/dof = 20.3/27 = 0.75 (Figure 4). 6 5 4 3 z = 9 z = 10 Donnan+2024 (PRIMER+JADES+NGDEEP) CDM best fit: f , 0 = 0.019, αlo = 2.14, σUV = 0.65 χ2/dof = 20.3/27 = 0.75 22 21 20 19 18 17 6 5 4 3 z = 11 22 21 20 19 18 ...

2024
[8]

W. J. G. de Blok, Adv. Astron.2010, 789293 (2010), arXiv:0910.3538 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2010
[9]

S.-H. Oh, C. Brook, F. Governato, E. Brinks, L. Mayer, W. J. G. de Blok, A. Brooks, and F. Walter, Astron. J. 142, 24 (2011), arXiv:1011.2777 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2011
[10]

Moore, Nature370, 629 (1994)

B. Moore, Nature370, 629 (1994)

1994
[11]

Boylan-Kolchin, J

M. Boylan-Kolchin, J. S. Bullock, and M. Kapling- hat, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.415, L40 (2011), arXiv:1103.0007 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2011
[12]

A. A. Klypin, A. V. Kravtsov, O. Valenzuela, and F. Prada, Astrophys. J.522, 82 (1999), arXiv:astro- ph/9901240

work page arXiv 1999
[13]

Kamada, M

A. Kamada, M. Kaplinghat, A. B. Pace, and H.-B. Yu, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 111102 (2017), arXiv:1611.02716 [astro-ph.GA]

work page arXiv 2017
[15]

D. N. Spergel and P. J. Steinhardt, Phys. Rev. Lett.84, 3760 (2000), arXiv:astro-ph/9909386

work page arXiv 2000
[16]

Dark Matter Self-interactions and Small Scale Structure

S. Tulin and H.-B. Yu, Phys. Rept.730, 1 (2018), arXiv:1705.02358 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2018
[17]

Kaplinghat, S

M. Kaplinghat, S. Tulin, and H.-B. Yu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 041302 (2016), arXiv:1508.03339 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2016
[18]

Markevitch, A

M. Markevitch, A. H. Gonzalez, D. Clowe, A. Vikhlinin, L. David, W. Forman, C. Jones, S. Murray, and W. Tucker, Astrophys. J.606, 819 (2004), arXiv:astro- ph/0309303

work page arXiv 2004
[19]

S. W. Randall, M. Markevitch, D. Clowe, A. H. Gon- zalez, and M. Bradac, Astrophys. J.679, 1173 (2008), arXiv:0704.0261 [astro-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2008
[20]

A. H. G. Peter, M. Rocha, J. S. Bullock, and M. Kapling- hat, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.430, 105 (2013), arXiv:1208.3026 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2013
[21]

Harvey, R

D. Harvey, R. Massey, T. Kitching, A. Taylor, and E. Tittley, Science347, 1462 (2015), arXiv:1503.07675 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2015
[22]

C. T. Donnan, R. J. McLure, J. S. Dunlop, D. J. McLeod, D. Magee, K. Z. Arellano-C´ ordova, L. Barrufet, R. Be- gley, R. A. A. Bowler, A. C. Carnall, F. Cullen, R. S. Ellis, A. Fontana, G. D. Illingworth, N. A. Grogin, M. L. Hamadouche, A. M. Koekemoer, F.-Y. Liu, C. Mason, P. Santini, and T. M. Stanton, mnras533, 3222 (2024), arXiv:2403.03171 [astro-ph.GA]

work page arXiv 2024
[23]

Harikane, A

Y. Harikane, A. K. Inoue, R. S. Ellis, M. Ouchi, Y. Nakazato, N. Yoshida, Y. Ono, F. Sun, R. A. Sato, G. Ferrami, S. Fujimoto, N. Kashikawa, D. J. McLeod, P. G. P´ erez-Gonz´ alez, M. Sawicki, Y. Sugahara, Y. Xu, S. Yamanaka, A. C. Carnall, F. Cullen, J. S. Dunlop, E. Egami, N. Grogin, Y. Isobe, A. M. Koekemoer, N. La- porte, C.-H. Lee, D. Magee, H. Matsu...

work page arXiv 2025
[24]

BEACON: JWST NIRCam Pure-parallel Imaging Survey. III. Constraints on the UV LF and the Clustering of z~7-14 Galaxies

K. C. Kreilgaard, C. A. Mason, T. Morishita, Y. Zhang, V. Gelli, N. Leethochawalit, T. Treu, M. Trenti, Ab- durro’uf, H. Atek, M. Bradaˇ c, L. D. Bradley, A. J. Bunker, N. S. Haryana, M. J. Hayes, Z. Liu, V. Mehta, M. Rafelski, G. Roberts-Borsani, C. Scarlata, M. Sti- avelli, R. A. Sutanto, K. Takahashi, and B. Vulcani, “Beacon: Jwst nircam pure-parallel ...

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026
[25]

Reionization Topology as a Probe of Self-Interacting Dark Matter

Z. Wang, (2026), arXiv:2604.10726 [astro-ph.CO]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026
[26]

The Galaxy UV Luminosity Function Before the Epoch of Reionization

C. Mason, M. Trenti, and T. Treu, Astrophys. J.813, 21 (2015), arXiv:1508.01204 [astro-ph.GA]

work page Pith review arXiv 2015
[27]

R. H. Wechsler and J. L. Tinker, Ann. Rev. Astron. As- trophys.56, 435 (2018), arXiv:1804.03097 [astro-ph.GA]

work page Pith review arXiv 2018
[28]

R. K. Sheth and G. Tormen, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 308, 119 (1999), arXiv:astro-ph/9901122

work page Pith review arXiv 1999
[29]

R. C. Kennicutt, Jr., Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys.36, 189 (1998), arXiv:astro-ph/9807187

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998
[30]

Endsley, D

R. Endsley, D. P. Stark, L. Whitler, M. W. Topping, B. D. Johnson, B. Robertson, S. Tacchella, S. Al- berts, W. M. Baker, R. Bhatawdekar, K. Boyett, A. J. Bunker, A. J. Cameron, S. Carniani, S. Charlot, Z. Chen, J. Chevallard, E. Curtis-Lake, A. L. Danhaive, E. Egami, D. J. Eisenstein, K. Hainline, J. M. Helton, Z. Ji, T. J. Looser, R. Maiolino, E. Nelson...

work page arXiv 2024
[31]

Weibel, P

A. Weibel, P. A. Oesch, L. Barrufet, R. Gottumukkala, R. S. Ellis, P. Santini, J. R. Weaver, N. Allen, R. Bouwens, R. A. A. Bowler, G. Brammer, A. C. Car- nall, F. Cullen, P. Dayal, M. Dickinson, C. T. Don- nan, J. S. Dunlop, M. Giavalisco, N. A. Grogin, G. D. Illingworth, A. M. Koekemoer, I. Labbe, D. March- esini, D. J. McLeod, R. J. McLure, R. P. Naidu...

work page arXiv 2024
[32]

UniverseMachine: The Correlation between Galaxy Growth and Dark Matter Halo Assembly from z=0-10

P. Behroozi, R. H. Wechsler, A. P. Hearin, and C. Con- roy, mnras488, 3143 (2019), arXiv:1806.07893 [astro- ph.GA]

work page Pith review arXiv 2019
[33]

V. H. Robles, J. S. Bullock, O. D. Elbert, A. Fitts, A. Gonz´ alez-Samaniego, M. Boylan-Kolchin, P. F. Hop- kins, C.-A. Faucher-Gigu` ere, D. Kereˇ s, and C. C. Hay- ward, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 472, 2945–2954 (2017)

2017
[34]

Vogelsberger, J

M. Vogelsberger, J. Zavala, C. Simpson, and A. Jenk- ins, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.444, 3684 (2014), arXiv:1405.5216 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2014
[35]

T. A. Gutcke, G. Despali, S. O’Neil, M. Vogels- berger, A. Fattahi, and D. B. Sanders, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2510.05258 (2025), arXiv:2510.05258 [astro- ph.GA]

work page arXiv 2025
[36]

C. A. Correa, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.503, 920 (2021), arXiv:2007.02958 [astro-ph.GA]

work page arXiv 2021
[37]

Sameie, M

O. Sameie, M. Boylan-Kolchin, R. Sanderson, D. Vargya, P. F. Hopkins, A. Wetzel, J. Bullock, A. Graus, and V. H. Robles, mnras507, 720 (2021), arXiv:2102.12480 [astro-ph.GA]

work page arXiv 2021