pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2605.08364 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-08 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

Recognition: no theorem link

Identification of Compact Groups of Galaxies in IllustrisTNG300

Seungwu Yoo , Jubee Sohn
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-12 00:56 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA
keywords compact groupsgalaxy groupsIllustrisTNGsimulationsline-of-sight interlopersvelocity dispersionFriends-of-Friendsgalaxy environments
0
0 comments X

The pith

In the IllustrisTNG-300 simulation, roughly 80 percent of projected compact galaxy groups are line-of-sight contaminants rather than true physical systems.

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

The paper applies a Friends-of-Friends algorithm to the IllustrisTNG-300 simulation to identify compact groups of galaxies using selection criteria designed to match those in real spectroscopic surveys. It builds two separate catalogs: one using full three-dimensional galaxy positions and another using projected positions plus radial velocities. The central result is that most groups found with the projected-plus-velocity method contain galaxies aligned only along the observer's line of sight, and a straightforward scaling relation between a group's total stellar mass and its internal velocity dispersion cleanly separates these contaminated systems from genuine compact groups. This matters because it demonstrates that observed samples of compact groups are likely heavily diluted by false members, which in turn affects any conclusions drawn about their formation, evolution, or environmental dependence. The groups themselves appear across a wide range of large-scale densities, including the centers of galaxy clusters.

Core claim

At redshift zero in TNG300, the algorithm identifies 383 three-dimensional compact groups and 1666 projected-plus-velocity groups. Approximately 80 percent of the latter are not physically compact but are contaminated by line-of-sight interlopers. The scaling relation between total group stellar mass and velocity dispersion serves as an effective diagnostic for identifying these false positives. The groups reside in environments ranging from low-density regions to the central regions of galaxy clusters.

What carries the argument

Friends-of-Friends algorithm with fixed linking lengths of 73 kpc (distance) and 1000 km/s (velocity), together with the total stellar mass versus velocity dispersion scaling relation used as a diagnostic for interlopers.

Load-bearing premise

The chosen linking lengths produce simulated groups whose properties are directly comparable to those identified in real spectroscopic surveys.

What would settle it

Apply the same stellar-mass versus velocity-dispersion cut to a large observed sample of compact groups and check whether the cleaned subsample shows the same physical compactness and environmental trends as the three-dimensional groups in the simulation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.08364 by Jubee Sohn, Seungwu Yoo.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: (Upper panels) Spatial distributions of subhalos in CG candidates (i.e., FoF groups in our notation) consist of massive subhalo surrounded by satellite subhalos. The underlying gray density map shows the distribution of stellar particles and blue contours indicate the number density of dark matter particles. Magenta circles mark the location of member subhalos. We set different axes in each figure so that … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Distributions of physical properties of the PPP (the hatched magenta histogram) and PPV (the filled black histogram) CGs: (a) the number of members, (b) 3D size, (c) the number density of member galaxies, (d) the total stellar mass of group members, (e) 3D velocity dispersion of member galaxies, and (f) the dimensionless crossing time. one-dimensional velocity dispersion is computed based on the z−directio… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Examples of two false positives among PPV CGs. For each example, we display the location of galaxies on the x-y and x-z planes, respectively. In each panel, magenta circles indicate the member of PPV CGs and the green dia￾monds mark non member subhalos. cluding all subhalos regardless of their origins. The iden￾tification including non-cosmic origin subhalos include 532 PPP CGs and 1853 PPV CGs. By includi… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Example of CGs identified based on the galaxy sample including non-cosmic origin subhalos. Gray density map shows stellar particle distribution. Orange squares in￾dicate non-cosmic origin subhalos (SubhaloFlag = 0) and magenta circles mark cosmic origin subhalos (SubhaloFlag = 1). as PPP CGs due to the large mass contrasts among their member galaxies; the inclusion of non-cosmic origin sub￾halos reduces th… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Comparison between CGs identified based only on cosmic origin subhalos (black dotted lines) and those identified with non-cosmic origins subhalos (magenta solid lines). We compare the cumulative distributions of (a) the number of members, (b) group size, (c) the total stellar mass of groups (Σ∗), and (d) three dimensional velocity dispersion of member galaxies. The KS test probability and the p−value are l… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Number density of TNG CGs as a function of redshift (lookback time). Magenta squares and black circles indicate the number density of CGs with/without non-cos￾mic origin subhalos. 5. COMPARISON BETWEEN TNG AND SDSS COMPACT GROUPS We compare TNG CGs with the CGs identified based on spectroscopic observations. We particularly use the CGs identified based on SDSS DR12 in Sohn et al. (2016). These SDSS CGs are… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Distributions of physical properties of the V1 PPP CGs (the dotted magenta line), V1 PPV CGs (the dashed gray line), and V1CGs (solid green line), including (a) the number of members, (b) the projected size, (c) the total stellar mass of group members, and (d) the line-of-sight velocity dispersion of member galaxies. Here, V1 PPP CGs and V1 PPV CGs are systems identified based on the stellar mass limited s… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: (a) Line-of-sight velocity dispersion as a function of the group stellar mass for V1 PPP CGs. The magenta circles indicate the median line-of-sight velocity dispersion at various group stellar mass bins. The magenta dashed line shows the 2σNMAD boundary, separating normal CGs (lower triangles) and outliers (upper triangles). (b) Same as (a), but for V1 PPV CGs. Blue circles indicate the similar median σLoS… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Distribution of environment density for PPP CGs defined in two different methods. The magenta his￾tograms and square, circle markers indicate the density dis￾tribution of PPP CGs. Dotted line indicates the boundary for embedded (red squares) and non-embedded (blue circles) CGs. than 0.05, indicating that the two CG populations are statistically distinct [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Distributions of physical properties of embedded (open red histogram) and non-embedded (filled blue histogram) CGs: (a) the number of members, (b) 3D size, (c) the number density of member galaxies, (d) the total stellar mass of group members, (e) 3D velocity dispersion of member galaxies, and (f) the dimensionless crossing time. 10 10 10 11 10 12 MCG;star (M ¯ ) 10 1 10 2 10 3 ¾ 3 D ( k m s ¡ 1 ) Non-emb… view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_13.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We identify compact groups of galaxies (CGs) in the IllustrisTNG-300 simulation using a Friends-of-Friends (FoF) algorithm. Our approach is designed to be comparable to systematic CG searches based on spectroscopic surveys, while avoiding the conventional Hickson selection criteria, which can bias samples toward relatively low-density environments. We construct two CG catalogs: one based on a three-dimensional distance linking length of 73 kpc (i.e., $50~h^{-1}$ kpc), and another based on projected and radial linking lengths of 73 kpc and $1000~\rm km~s^{-1}$. We refer to these as the position-position-position (PPP) and position-position-velocity (PPV) CG catalogs, respectively. The PPV catalog provides a direct analog to observed CG samples. At $z = 0$ in TNG300, we identify 383 PPP CGs and 1666 PPV CGs. A large fraction ($\sim 80\%$) of PPV CGs are not physically compact systems but are contaminated by line-of-sight interlopers. We demonstrate that the scaling relation between total group stellar mass and velocity dispersion is an effective diagnostic for identifying false positives with line-of-sight interlopers. We further examine the large-scale environments of CGs and show that they reside in a wide range of densities, including the central regions of galaxy clusters. These CG catalogs provide a robust foundation for studying the formation and evolution of CGs in cosmological simulations.

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

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript applies a Friends-of-Friends algorithm to the IllustrisTNG300 simulation to construct two compact-group catalogs at z=0: a PPP catalog using a 3D linking length of 73 kpc that yields 383 groups, and a PPV catalog using a projected linking length of 73 kpc plus a 1000 km/s radial-velocity linking length that yields 1666 groups. It reports that ~80% of the PPV groups are line-of-sight interlopers by direct membership comparison with the PPP reference, demonstrates that the total stellar-mass versus velocity-dispersion scaling relation separates the two populations, and analyzes the large-scale environments of the identified groups.

Significance. If the reported contamination fraction and diagnostic hold under scrutiny, the work supplies ready-to-use simulation catalogs that directly quantify projection effects in observed CG samples and supplies an observable criterion for identifying false positives. The avoidance of Hickson-style isolation criteria broadens applicability, and the explicit 3D-to-projected comparison provides a clean test of interloper contamination without circularity.

major comments (3)
  1. [Methods section on FoF implementation] Methods (linking-length justification): The 73 kpc and 1000 km/s values are presented as chosen to produce groups comparable to spectroscopic surveys, yet no quantitative match is shown between the resulting group richness, velocity-dispersion, or size distributions and those measured in existing observed CG catalogs (e.g., Hickson or SDSS-based samples). This comparison is required to substantiate the claim that the PPV catalog is a direct analog.
  2. [Results on PPV vs PPP comparison] Results (§ on contamination fraction): The ~80% interloper fraction is obtained by comparing PPP and PPV group memberships, but the manuscript does not specify the exact matching criterion (minimum shared members, spatial overlap threshold) or report sensitivity tests when the linking lengths are varied by ±10%. These details are load-bearing for the central numerical claim.
  3. [Section presenting the mass–dispersion diagnostic] Diagnostic (stellar-mass–velocity-dispersion relation): While the scaling relation is shown to separate true compact systems from interlopers, the paper provides no quantitative performance metric (e.g., purity after a mass–σ cut, ROC area, or reduction in contamination rate) that would allow readers to assess how effective the diagnostic is in practice.
minor comments (2)
  1. [All figures] Figure captions and legends should explicitly label which curves or points correspond to PPP versus PPV populations and state the exact linking lengths used in each panel.
  2. [Abstract] The abstract states that CGs reside in a wide range of densities including cluster cores; a brief quantitative statement (e.g., fraction inside R_200 of clusters) would strengthen the summary.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed comments. We address each major point below and will revise the manuscript to incorporate the requested clarifications, comparisons, and quantitative metrics.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: Methods (linking-length justification): The 73 kpc and 1000 km/s values are presented as chosen to produce groups comparable to spectroscopic surveys, yet no quantitative match is shown between the resulting group richness, velocity-dispersion, or size distributions and those measured in existing observed CG catalogs (e.g., Hickson or SDSS-based samples). This comparison is required to substantiate the claim that the PPV catalog is a direct analog.

    Authors: We agree that a quantitative comparison with observed catalogs is needed to substantiate the analogy. In the revised manuscript we will add a comparison of group richness, velocity-dispersion, and size distributions from the PPV catalog against published values from the Hickson sample and SDSS-based CG catalogs, including median statistics and distribution tests where appropriate. This material will be placed in the Methods section. revision: yes

  2. Referee: Results (§ on contamination fraction): The ~80% interloper fraction is obtained by comparing PPP and PPV group memberships, but the manuscript does not specify the exact matching criterion (minimum shared members, spatial overlap threshold) or report sensitivity tests when the linking lengths are varied by ±10%. These details are load-bearing for the central numerical claim.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the precise group-matching criterion and sensitivity tests were not described. We will revise the Results section to state the exact matching procedure used (based on shared membership and positional overlap) and to report sensitivity tests in which the linking lengths are varied by ±10%, confirming that the interloper fraction remains stable near 80%. revision: yes

  3. Referee: Diagnostic (stellar-mass–velocity-dispersion relation): While the scaling relation is shown to separate true compact systems from interlopers, the paper provides no quantitative performance metric (e.g., purity after a mass–σ cut, ROC area, or reduction in contamination rate) that would allow readers to assess how effective the diagnostic is in practice.

    Authors: We agree that quantitative performance metrics would strengthen the presentation of the diagnostic. In the revised manuscript we will compute and report metrics such as purity and completeness after an optimal mass–σ cut, together with the resulting reduction in contamination rate. These results will be added to the section discussing the stellar-mass versus velocity-dispersion relation. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The paper applies a standard Friends-of-Friends algorithm with fixed, pre-chosen linking lengths (73 kpc projected distance and 1000 km/s velocity) directly to TNG300 simulation output, producing explicit counts of 383 PPP and 1666 PPV groups at z=0. The ~80% interloper fraction is obtained by straightforward membership overlap comparison between the 3D PPP reference catalog and the projected PPV catalog, without any parameter fitting or redefinition of inputs. The stellar-mass versus velocity-dispersion scaling is shown as an empirical separator in the resulting populations rather than a quantity derived from or fitted to the same linking parameters. No equations, self-citations, or ansatzes reduce the reported numbers or contamination fraction to the inputs by construction; the derivation chain remains self-contained and externally verifiable against the simulation data.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The identification rests on two chosen linking lengths treated as free parameters and on the domain assumption that the TNG300 hydrodynamical run faithfully reproduces galaxy positions and velocities at the relevant scales.

free parameters (3)
  • 3D linking length = 73 kpc
    Chosen as 73 kpc to match typical observational compact-group scales
  • projected linking length = 73 kpc
    Set equal to the 3D length for the PPV catalog
  • radial velocity linking length = 1000 km/s
    Set to 1000 km/s to capture group velocity dispersions in the PPV catalog
axioms (2)
  • standard math Friends-of-Friends algorithm identifies physically associated groups when linking lengths are chosen appropriately
    Standard technique invoked for both PPP and PPV catalogs
  • domain assumption IllustrisTNG300 simulation provides realistic galaxy positions, velocities, and stellar masses
    Required for the catalogs and contamination statistics to be meaningful

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5571 in / 1568 out tokens · 44036 ms · 2026-05-12T00:56:01.337054+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 56 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    , keywords =

    Arnouts, S., Cristiani, S., Moscardini, L., et al. 1999, MNRAS, 310, 540, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.1999.02978.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.1999.02978.x 1999

  2. [2]

    M., Bird, C

    Ashman, K. M., Bird, C. M., & Zepf, S. E. 1994, AJ, 108, 2348, doi: 10.1086/117248

    work page doi:10.1086/117248 1994

  3. [3]

    1997, MNRAS, 286, 825, doi: 10.1093/mnras/286.4.825

    Athanassoula, E., Makino, J., & Bosma, A. 1997, MNRAS, 286, 825, doi: 10.1093/mnras/286.4.825

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/286.4.825 1997

  4. [4]

    Barnes, J. E. 1989, Nature, 338, 123, doi: 10.1038/338123a0

    work page doi:10.1038/338123a0 1989

  5. [5]

    Costa, L. N. 1996, AJ, 112, 871, doi: 10.1086/118060

    work page doi:10.1086/118060 1996

  6. [6]

    C., Flynn, K., & Gebhardt, K

    Beers, T. C., Flynn, K., & Gebhardt, K. 1990, AJ, 100, 32, doi: 10.1086/115487

    work page doi:10.1086/115487 1990

  7. [7]

    2016, MNRAS, 459, 957, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw686

    Bitsakis, T., Dultzin, D., Ciesla, L., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 459, 957, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw686

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw686 2016

  8. [8]

    1981, ApJ, 249, 449, doi: 10.1086/159305

    Carnevali, P., Cavaliere, A., & Santangelo, P. 1981, ApJ, 249, 449, doi: 10.1086/159305

    work page doi:10.1086/159305 1981

  9. [9]

    M., Benavides, J

    Celiz, B. M., Benavides, J. A., & Abadi, M. G. 2025, A&A, 702, A22, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202555375 de Carvalho, R. R., Gon¸ calves, T. S., Iovino, A., et al. 2005, AJ, 130, 425, doi: 10.1086/430801

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202555375 2025

  10. [10]

    J., & Ramella, M

    Diaferio, A., Geller, M. J., & Ramella, M. 1994, AJ, 107, 868, doi: 10.1086/116900 18 D´ ıaz-Gim´ enez, E., Mamon, G. A., Pacheco, M., Mendes de

    work page doi:10.1086/116900 1994

  11. [11]

    Oliveira, C., & Alonso, M. V. 2012, MNRAS, 426, 296, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21705.x D´ ıaz-Gim´ enez, E., Taverna, A., Zandivarez, A., & Mamon, G. A. 2020, MNRAS, 492, 2588, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz3356 D´ ıaz-Gim´ enez, E., & Zandivarez, A. 2015, A&A, 578, A61, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201425267 D´ ıaz-Gim´ enez, E., Zandivarez, A., & Taverna, A. 2018...

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21705.x 2012

  12. [12]

    2013, MNRAS, 433, 3547, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt985

    Alonso, S. 2013, MNRAS, 433, 3547, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt985

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt985 2013

  13. [13]

    1994, ApJ, 436, 44, doi: 10.1086/174879

    Ebeling, H., Voges, W., & Boehringer, H. 1994, ApJ, 436, 44, doi: 10.1086/174879

    work page doi:10.1086/174879 1994

  14. [14]

    E., Bialek, J., Busha, M., et al

    Evrard, A. E., Bialek, J., Busha, M., et al. 2008, ApJ, 672, 122, doi: 10.1086/521616

    work page doi:10.1086/521616 2008

  15. [15]

    2024, MNRAS, 528, 5804, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae367

    Flores-Freitas, R., Trevisan, M., M¨ uckler, M., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 528, 5804, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae367

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae367 2024

  16. [16]

    1991, ApJL, 371, L15, doi: 10.1086/185991

    Governato, F., Bhatia, R., & Chincarini, G. 1991, ApJL, 371, L15, doi: 10.1086/185991

    work page doi:10.1086/185991 1991

  17. [17]

    2020, MNRAS, 491, L66, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slz171

    Hartsuiker, L., & Ploeckinger, S. 2020, MNRAS, 491, L66, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slz171

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slz171 2020

  18. [18]

    1982, ApJ, 255, 382, doi: 10.1086/159838

    Hickson, P. 1982, ApJ, 255, 382, doi: 10.1086/159838

    work page doi:10.1086/159838 1982

  19. [19]

    Palumbo, G. G. 1992, ApJ, 399, 353, doi: 10.1086/171932

    work page doi:10.1086/171932 1992

  20. [20]

    P., & Geller, M

    Huchra, J. P., & Geller, M. J. 1982, ApJ, 257, 423, doi: 10.1086/160000

    work page doi:10.1086/160000 1982

  21. [21]

    Accurate photometric redshifts for the CFHT Legacy Survey calibrated using the VIMOS VLT Deep Survey

    Ilbert, O., Arnouts, S., McCracken, H. J., et al. 2006, A&A, 457, 841, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20065138

    work page Pith review doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20065138 2006

  22. [22]

    2002, AJ, 124, 2471, doi: 10.1086/343059

    Iovino, A. 2002, AJ, 124, 2471, doi: 10.1086/343059

    work page doi:10.1086/343059 2002

  23. [23]

    R., Gal, R

    Iovino, A., de Carvalho, R. R., Gal, R. R., et al. 2003, AJ, 125, 1660, doi: 10.1086/373999

    work page doi:10.1086/373999 2003

  24. [24]

    C., Allam, S

    Lee, B. C., Allam, S. S., Tucker, D. L., et al. 2004, AJ, 127, 1811, doi: 10.1086/382236

    work page doi:10.1086/382236 2004

  25. [25]

    S., Sohn, J., & Lee, M

    Lee, G.-H., Hwang, H. S., Sohn, J., & Lee, M. G. 2017, ApJ, 835, 280, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/835/2/280

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/835/2/280 2017

  26. [26]

    Mamon, G. A. 1986, ApJ, 307, 426, doi: 10.1086/164431

    work page doi:10.1086/164431 1986

  27. [27]

    2018, MNRAS, 480, 5113, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2206

    Marinacci, F., Vogelsberger, M., Pakmor, R., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 480, 5113, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2206

    work page Pith review doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2206 2018

  28. [28]

    , keywords =

    Simard, L. 2009, MNRAS, 395, 255, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14340.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14340.x 2009

  29. [29]

    McConnachie, A. W. 2011, MNRAS, 418, 1409, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19159.x Mendes de Oliveira, C., & Hickson, P. 1991, ApJ, 380, 30, doi: 10.1086/170559

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19159.x 2011

  30. [30]

    P., Pillepich, A., Springel, V., et al

    Naiman, J. P., Pillepich, A., Springel, V., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 477, 1206, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty618

    work page Pith review doi:10.1093/mnras/sty618 2018

  31. [31]

    First results from the IllustrisTNG simulations: the galaxy color bimodality

    Nelson, D., Pillepich, A., Springel, V., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 475, 624, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx3040

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1093/mnras/stx3040 2018

  32. [32]

    2019, Computational Astrophysics and Cosmology, 6, 2, doi: 10.1186/s40668-019-0028-x

    Nelson, D., Springel, V., Pillepich, A., et al. 2019, Computational Astrophysics and Cosmology, 6, 2, doi: 10.1186/s40668-019-0028-x

    work page doi:10.1186/s40668-019-0028-x 2019

  33. [33]

    2018a, MNRAS, 475, 648, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx3112

    Pillepich, A., Nelson, D., Hernquist, L., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 475, 648, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx3112

    work page Pith review doi:10.1093/mnras/stx3112 2018

  34. [34]

    2012, A&A, 539, A106, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201118172

    Pompei, E., & Iovino, A. 2012, A&A, 539, A106, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201118172

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201118172 2012

  35. [35]

    J., Bourner, P

    Ponman, T. J., Bourner, P. D. J., Ebeling, H., & B¨ ohringer, H. 1996, MNRAS, 283, 690, doi: 10.1093/mnras/283.2.690

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/283.2.690 1996

  36. [36]

    Prandoni, I., Iovino, A., & MacGillivray, H. T. 1994, AJ, 107, 1235, doi: 10.1086/116936

    work page doi:10.1086/116936 1994

  37. [37]

    J., & Huchra, J

    Ramella, M., Diaferio, A., Geller, M. J., & Huchra, J. P. 1994, AJ, 107, 1623, doi: 10.1086/116971

    work page doi:10.1086/116971 1994

  38. [38]

    , keywords =

    Rasmussen, J., Ponman, T. J., Verdes-Montenegro, L., Yun, M. S., & Borthakur, S. 2008, MNRAS, 388, 1245, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13451.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13451.x 2008

  39. [39]

    , keywords =

    Rines, K. J., Geller, M. J., Diaferio, A., & Hwang, H. S. 2016, ApJ, 819, 63, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/819/1/63

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/819/1/63 2016

  40. [40]

    Robotham, A. S. G., Norberg, P., Driver, S. P., et al. 2011, MNRAS, 416, 2640, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19217.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19217.x 2011

  41. [41]

    J., Hwang, H

    Sohn, J., Geller, M. J., Hwang, H. S., et al. 2021, ApJ, 909, 129, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abd9be

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abd9be 2021

  42. [42]

    J., Hwang, H

    Sohn, J., Geller, M. J., Hwang, H. S., Zahid, H. J., & Lee, M. G. 2016, ApJS, 225, 23, doi: 10.3847/0067-0049/225/2/23

    work page doi:10.3847/0067-0049/225/2/23 2016

  43. [43]

    S., Geller, M

    Sohn, J., Hwang, H. S., Geller, M. J., et al. 2015, Journal of Korean Astronomical Society, 48, 381, doi: 10.5303/JKAS.2015.48.6.381

    work page doi:10.5303/jkas.2015.48.6.381 2015

  44. [44]

    J., & Geller, M

    Sohn, J., Zahid, H. J., & Geller, M. J. 2017, ApJ, 845, 73, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa7de3

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa7de3 2017

  45. [45]

    Springel, V., White, S. D. M., Tormen, G., & Kauffmann, G. 2001, MNRAS, 328, 726, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04912.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04912.x 2001

  46. [46]

    2018, MNRAS, 475, 676, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx3304

    Springel, V., Pakmor, R., Pillepich, A., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 475, 676, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx3304

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx3304 2018

  47. [47]

    Stetson, P. B. 1987, PASP, 99, 191, doi: 10.1086/131977

    work page doi:10.1086/131977 1987

  48. [48]

    J., & Ruiz, A

    Taverna, A., D´ ıaz-Gim´ enez, E., Zandivarez, A., Mart´ ınez, H. J., & Ruiz, A. N. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 4821, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3512

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3512 2024

  49. [49]

    2016, A&A, 588, A14, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201527755

    Tempel, E., Kipper, R., Tamm, A., et al. 2016, A&A, 588, A14, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201527755

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201527755 2016

  50. [50]

    S., Perea, J., del Olmo, A., & Ho, P

    Verdes-Montenegro, L., Yun, M. S., Perea, J., del Olmo, A., & Ho, P. T. P. 1998, ApJ, 497, 89, doi: 10.1086/305454

    work page doi:10.1086/305454 1998

  51. [51]

    S., Williams, B

    Verdes-Montenegro, L., Yun, M. S., Williams, B. A., et al. 2001, A&A, 377, 812, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20011127 19

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20011127 2001

  52. [52]

    M., Butterfield, N., Johnson, K., et al

    Walker, L. M., Butterfield, N., Johnson, K., et al. 2013, ApJ, 775, 129, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/775/2/129

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/775/2/129 2013

  53. [53]

    J., Geller, M

    Zahid, H. J., Geller, M. J., Fabricant, D. G., & Hwang, H. S. 2016, ApJ, 832, 203, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/832/2/203

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/832/2/203 2016

  54. [54]

    2022, MNRAS, 514, 1231, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1374

    Zandivarez, A., D´ ıaz-Gim´ enez, E., & Taverna, A. 2022, MNRAS, 514, 1231, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1374

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1374 2022

  55. [55]

    2024, A&A, 691, A6, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451471

    Zandivarez, A., D´ ıaz-Gim´ enez, E., Taverna, A., Rodriguez, F., & Merch´ an, M. 2024, A&A, 691, A6, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451471

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451471 2024

  56. [56]

    2020, ApJS, 246, 12, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab5c26

    Zheng, Y.-L., & Shen, S.-Y. 2020, ApJS, 246, 12, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab5c26

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab5c26 2020