pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.24159 · v1 · pith:L26LT7GZnew · submitted 2026-06-23 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA · astro-ph.CO

A First Measurement of Circumgalactic Dust Reddening from Only 4.6 deg² of the Rubin Observatory's DP1

John Franklin Crenshaw , Matthew McQuinn , Jessica K. Werk This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 00:06 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA astro-ph.CO
keywords circumgalactic dustreddeningextinctiongalaxy halosLSSTRubin Observatoryphotometric redshiftsdust budget
0
0 comments X

The pith

Circumgalactic dust reddening measured from just 4.6 square degrees of Rubin Observatory data matches results from much larger surveys.

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

The paper stacks colors of background galaxies around foreground galaxies using photometric redshifts in a small patch of early Rubin data. This reveals a reddening signal from 10 kpc to 1 Mpc, which they convert to visual extinction using a Milky Way curve. The resulting profile agrees in amplitude and slope with previous measurements despite the tiny survey area and a sample of much fainter, lower-mass galaxies. A sympathetic reader would care because it shows that LSST can deliver precise galaxy-dust maps even early on, and it hints at substantial dust in halos of typical galaxies.

Core claim

The authors detect a chromatic reddening profile by stacking background galaxy colors around foreground galaxy positions. Interpreting the average E(g-z) with a Milky Way extinction curve, they measure A_V = (1.2 ± 0.4) × 10^{-1} (r_⊥ / 20 kpc)^{-1.8 ± 0.4} within 120 kpc. This profile extends the measurement to lower stellar mass galaxies and shows that the innermost regions reach A_V around 0.3 magnitudes, comparable to Milky Way disk extinction.

What carries the argument

Stacking of background-galaxy colors around foreground-galaxy positions using photometric redshifts to extract the chromatic reddening profile.

If this is right

  • The steep power-law slope of -1.8 implies the dust distribution does not simply trace the halo-gas profile.
  • Redder foreground galaxies exhibit stronger reddening within 50 kpc, suggesting a dust-to-stellar-mass ratio near 1 percent.
  • The measurement reaches comparable precision to prior work with 1000 times less area, demonstrating LSST's capability for such studies.
  • Splitting the sample shows potential color dependence, though the blue subsample remains noisy.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the Milky Way curve applies, the high dust content in lower-mass halos suggests efficient dust production or retention in these systems.
  • Full LSST coverage could allow mapping how dust content varies with galaxy environment and redshift.
  • The agreement with larger surveys validates the photometric redshift approach for future wide-field dust measurements.

Load-bearing premise

The observed color excess is due to dust reddening rather than photometric redshift errors, galaxy clustering biases, or other systematics, and the Milky Way extinction curve applies to circumgalactic dust.

What would settle it

Repeating the analysis with a sample of galaxies having spectroscopic redshifts that shows no significant color excess signal.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.24159 by Jessica K. Werk, John Franklin Crenshaw, Matthew McQuinn.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Foreground (background) galaxies are green (purple). Left: LePhare vs FlexZBoost photo-z estimates. We remove galaxies for which the two estimates differ by more than 0.1(1 +zphot). For the remainder, we assign the inverse variance-weighted mean of the two methods for our photo-z estimate. Middle: photo-z vs spec-z for galaxies with spectroscopy. Right: photo-z and spec-z histograms. These distributions de… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Upper: rest-frame color-magnitude diagram for the foreground sample. We use a cut of g − r = 0.5 to split the foreground sample into red and blue subsamples. Left: observed-frame apparent r-band magnitudes. Dashed lines and arrows mark magnitude limits from previous studies. Middle: estimated stellar masses. The red sample is more massive than the blue sample; dashed lines and arrows mark lower mass limits… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Observed extinction relative to the r band, compared with standard extinction curves for the Milky Way (blue; E. L. Fitzpatrick 1999 with RV = 3.1) and the SMC bar (red; K. D. Gordon et al. 2003). Each panel shows one radial bin. The MW and SMC normalizations are fit independently in each bin; the corresponding χ 2 per degree of freedom is shown in the upper right. We then estimate the radial profile of th… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Top left: average projected AV reddening from our stacking analysis using Rubin DP1 E(g − z), compared to previous measurements from SDSS (B. M´enard et al. 2010b), KiDS (E. Genc et al. 2025), and DES (J. E. McCleary et al. 2026). Top right: AV measurements from each of the twelve jackknife samples, where the legend indicates which jackknife region was excluded. Bottom left: AV for the red and blue foregro… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Stacked reddening profiles with jackknife uncertainties for several analysis variants. With the exception of the estimator that omits the flipped-stack correction, the variants remain consistent with the fiducial measurement, indicating that the DP1 signal is not driven by any single analysis choice. Note all analyses use the same radial binning; the offsets in r⊥ are for visibility. C. VALIDATING THE ROBU… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_6.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present the first measurement of circumgalactic dust reddening from the Vera C. Rubin Observatory, using only 4.6 deg$^2$ of ComCam Data Preview 1 - roughly $0.03\%$ of the final LSST footprint. Using photometric redshifts, we stack background-galaxy colors around foreground-galaxy positions and detect a chromatic reddening profile from $r_\perp \simeq 10$ kpc to $1$ Mpc. Interpreting average $E(g-z)$ with a Milky Way extinction curve, we find $A_V = (1.2 \pm 0.4) \times 10^{-1} (r_\perp / 20\,\mathrm{kpc})^{-1.8 \pm 0.4}$ within $120$ kpc. The amplitude and radial dependence agree with earlier SDSS, KiDS, and DES results despite the $\sim1000\times$ smaller survey area and a foreground sample extending 3-6 mag fainter and 1-2 dex lower in stellar mass. The innermost 10-15 kpc bin reaches $A_V \simeq 0.3$ mag, comparable to high-latitude extinction through the Milky Way disk near the Solar circle; the steep power-law slope implies a dust distribution that does not simply trace the halo-gas profile. Splitting by rest-frame $g-r$ shows stronger extinction around red foreground galaxies (rest-frame $g-r > 0.5$), although the blue subsample is too noisy to establish a significant color dependence. This red sample, with median halo mass $5 \times 10^{11}\,M_\odot$, shows substantially more reddening within 50 kpc than previously measured around more massive LRGs and implies a dust-to-stellar-mass ratio of $\sim 1\%$, nearly saturating the dust budget allowed by stellar metal yields. These pathfinder data demonstrate LSST's promise for high-precision galaxy-dust measurements across galaxy mass, environment, and redshift.

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 paper presents the first measurement of circumgalactic dust reddening from 4.6 deg² of Rubin Observatory ComCam DP1 data. Using photometric redshifts, background galaxy colors are stacked around foreground galaxy positions to detect a chromatic reddening signal from ~10 kpc to 1 Mpc. Interpreting the average E(g-z) with a Milky Way extinction curve yields the power-law A_V = (1.2 ± 0.4) × 10^{-1} (r_⊥ / 20 kpc)^{-1.8 ± 0.4} within 120 kpc, with amplitude and slope consistent with prior SDSS/KiDS/DES results despite the ~1000× smaller area and fainter, lower-mass foreground sample. Additional findings include stronger reddening around red galaxies and implications for dust-to-stellar-mass ratios.

Significance. If robust, the result is significant as a pathfinder demonstrating LSST's capability for high-precision CGM dust measurements with limited data, extending prior work to lower-mass halos (~5×10^{11} M_⊙) and providing a steep radial profile that does not trace halo gas. The agreement with independent surveys and the detection in a small footprint are strengths.

major comments (3)
  1. [Methods (background selection and photo-z validation)] The central interpretation that the stacked E(g-z) arises from dust reddening (rather than photo-z errors, clustering biases, or selection effects) is load-bearing for the A_V profile and all downstream claims, yet the methods provide no quantitative validation of photometric redshift quality for the background sample or explicit tests (e.g., null tests with randomized positions or color-selected subsamples) to rule out these systematics. This is especially relevant given the foreground sample is 3-6 mag fainter than prior LRG studies.
  2. [Results (interpretation of E(g-z) and A_V fit)] The conversion of measured E(g-z) to A_V assumes a Milky Way extinction curve applies to CGM dust at these radii and galaxy masses; no justification, alternative curves, or sensitivity test is provided, directly affecting the quoted normalization and the comparison to prior work.
  3. [Results (power-law fit and error budget)] The power-law fit within 120 kpc reports uncertainties on amplitude and index, but the text does not detail how the covariance matrix incorporates the small survey area, sample variance, or potential systematics from the 4.6 deg² footprint; this undermines the claimed consistency with SDSS/KiDS/DES results.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and Introduction] The abstract and text use 'first measurement' without clarifying how it differs in methodology or sample from the cited SDSS/KiDS/DES works beyond area and depth.
  2. [Figures and Results] Figure captions and text should explicitly state the number of foreground/background pairs per radial bin to allow assessment of the innermost bin's A_V ~0.3 mag claim.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive comments, which highlight important areas for clarification in our pathfinder analysis. We address each major comment below with honest responses and commit to revisions that strengthen the manuscript without overstating the current data.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central interpretation that the stacked E(g-z) arises from dust reddening (rather than photo-z errors, clustering biases, or selection effects) is load-bearing for the A_V profile and all downstream claims, yet the methods provide no quantitative validation of photometric redshift quality for the background sample or explicit tests (e.g., null tests with randomized positions or color-selected subsamples) to rule out these systematics. This is especially relevant given the foreground sample is 3-6 mag fainter than prior LRG studies.

    Authors: We agree this is a valid concern for a pathfinder result using fainter samples. The current manuscript relies on the detection significance and consistency with prior surveys for validation, but lacks explicit metrics. In revision we will add quantitative photo-z validation (e.g., outlier fractions and bias estimates from available spec-z overlaps) plus null tests with randomized foreground positions and color-selected background subsamples. These will be presented in a new methods subsection to directly rule out the listed systematics. revision: yes

  2. Referee: The conversion of measured E(g-z) to A_V assumes a Milky Way extinction curve applies to CGM dust at these radii and galaxy masses; no justification, alternative curves, or sensitivity test is provided, directly affecting the quoted normalization and the comparison to prior work.

    Authors: The manuscript adopts the MW curve for direct comparability with SDSS/KiDS/DES results but provides no explicit justification or alternatives. We will revise by adding a short justification paragraph citing prior CGM dust studies that support MW-like curves at these radii, plus a sensitivity test showing A_V changes under SMC/LMC curves. This will quantify the impact on normalization while preserving the core radial profile result. revision: yes

  3. Referee: The power-law fit within 120 kpc reports uncertainties on amplitude and index, but the text does not detail how the covariance matrix incorporates the small survey area, sample variance, or potential systematics from the 4.6 deg² footprint; this undermines the claimed consistency with SDSS/KiDS/DES results.

    Authors: The uncertainties are derived from bootstrap resampling over the 4.6 deg² footprint, which captures some sample variance, but the text indeed omits a full description of the covariance construction. We will expand the methods to detail the bootstrap procedure, its limitations for cosmic variance on this scale, and why the detected signal amplitude remains comparable to larger surveys. We maintain that the consistency claim is still supported by the high-significance detection, but the added text will make the error budget transparent. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: direct empirical stack and fit to observed colors

full rationale

The paper measures E(g-z) by stacking background galaxy colors around foreground positions in 4.6 deg² data, then converts the measured excess to A_V via an external Milky Way extinction curve and fits a power-law radial profile to the data. No step equates a claimed prediction or first-principles result to its own inputs by construction; the power-law parameters are fitted rather than presupposed, and no self-citations close any loop on the core measurement or interpretation. The derivation is self-contained against the observed photometry.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on fitting two parameters to the stacked color-excess profile and on the assumption that a standard Milky Way extinction law converts the observed E(g-z) into A_V; no new entities are postulated.

free parameters (2)
  • power-law index = -1.8
    Fitted exponent of the radial A_V profile
  • normalization amplitude = 0.12
    Fitted prefactor of the A_V profile at 20 kpc
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Milky Way extinction curve applies to circumgalactic dust
    Invoked when converting measured E(g-z) to A_V

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5927 in / 1480 out tokens · 18093 ms · 2026-06-26T00:06:57.646803+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

79 extracted references · 77 canonical work pages · 8 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Aguirre, A. N. 1999, The Astrophysical Journal, 525, 583, doi: 10.1086/307945

    work page doi:10.1086/307945 1999

  2. [2]

    2021, Physical Review D, 103, 063514, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.103.063514

    Amodeo, S., Battaglia, N., Schaan, E., et al. 2021, Physical Review D, 103, 063514, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.103.063514

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.103.063514 2021

  3. [3]

    2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 478, 4905, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1431 Aric` o, G., Angulo, R

    Shimizu, I. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 478, 4905, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1431 Aric` o, G., Angulo, R. E., Zennaro, M., et al. 2023, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 678, A109, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346539

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1431 2018

  4. [4]

    , keywords =

    Arnouts, S., Cristiani, S., Moscardini, L., et al. 1999, MNRAS, 310, 540, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.1999.02978.x Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ ocz, B. M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f Astropy...

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

  5. [5]

    In the beginning: the first sources of light and the reionization of the universe , volume=

    Barkana, R., & Loeb, A. 2001, PhR, 349, 125, doi: 10.1016/S0370-1573(01)00019-9

    work page doi:10.1016/s0370-1573(01)00019-9 2001

  6. [6]

    , volume =

    Blanton, M. R., & Roweis, S. 2007, The Astronomical Journal, 133, 734, doi: 10.1086/510127

    work page doi:10.1086/510127 2007

  7. [7]

    S., Fielding, D

    Butsky, I. S., Fielding, D. B., Hayward, C. C., et al. 2020, ApJ, 903, 77, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abbad2

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abbad2 2020

  8. [8]

    S., Werk, J

    Butsky, I. S., Werk, J. K., Tchernyshyov, K., et al. 2022, ApJ, 935, 69, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7ebd

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac7ebd 2022

  9. [9]

    F., Zhang, T., et al

    Charles, E., Crenshaw, J. F., Zhang, T., et al. 2025, Initial studies of photometric redshifts with LSSTComCam from DP1, Vera C. Rubin Observatory. https://sitcomtn-154.lsst.io/

    2025

  10. [10]

    2025, ApJ, 981, 81, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ada942

    Chen, Z., Wang, E., Zou, H., et al. 2025, ApJ, 981, 81, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ada942

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ada942 2025

  11. [11]

    Modelling baryonic feedback for survey cosmology

    Chisari, N. E., Mead, A. J., Joudaki, S., et al. 2019, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 2, 4, doi: 10.21105/astro.1905.06082

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.21105/astro.1905.06082 2019

  12. [12]

    2018, MNRAS, 481, 1690, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2380

    Chisholm, J., Tremonti, C., & Leitherer, C. 2018, MNRAS, 481, 1690, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2380

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2380 2018

  13. [13]

    A., Leitherer, C., & Chen, Y

    Chisholm, J., Tremonti, C. A., Leitherer, C., & Chen, Y. 2017, MNRAS, 469, 4831, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1164 De Vis, P., Jones, A., Viaene, S., et al. 2019, A&A, 623, A5, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201834444

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1164 2017

  14. [14]

    Draine, B. T. 2003, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 41, 241, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.41.011802.094840

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.41.011802.094840 2003

  15. [15]

    T., Salpeter E

    Draine, B. T., & Salpeter, E. E. 1979a, The Astrophysical Journal, 231, 77, doi: 10.1086/157165

    work page doi:10.1086/157165

  16. [16]

    , keywords =

    Draine, B. T., & Salpeter, E. E. 1979b, The Astrophysical Journal, 231, 438, doi: 10.1086/157206

    work page doi:10.1086/157206

  17. [17]

    1998, The Astrophysical Journal, 501, 643, doi: 10.1086/305829

    Dwek, E. 1998, The Astrophysical Journal, 501, 643, doi: 10.1086/305829

    work page doi:10.1086/305829 1998

  18. [18]

    Dwek, E., & Arendt, R. G. 1992, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 30, 11, doi: 10.1146/annurev.aa.30.090192.000303

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.aa.30.090192.000303 1992

  19. [19]

    Faerman, Y., Sternberg, A., & McKee, C. F. 2017, ApJ, 835, 52, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/835/1/52 Faucher-Gigu` ere, C.-A., & Oh, S. P. 2023, ARA&A, 61, 131, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-052920-125203

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/835/1/52 2017

  20. [20]

    Fitzpatrick, E. L. 1999, PASP, 111, 63, doi: 10.1086/316293

    work page doi:10.1086/316293 1999

  21. [21]

    Galliano, F., Galametz, M., & Jones, A. P. 2018, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 56, 673, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081817-051900

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081817-051900 2018

  22. [22]

    H., & Hildebrandt, H

    Genc, E., Wright, A. H., & Hildebrandt, H. 2025, Measurement of Circumgalactic Extinction in the Kilo-Degree Survey’s Data Release 4, arXiv, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2508.15490

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2508.15490 2025

  23. [23]

    2018, MNRAS, 479, 3042, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1653

    Girichidis, P., Naab, T., Hanasz, M., & Walch, S. 2018, MNRAS, 479, 3042, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1653

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1653 2018

  24. [24]

    2018, MNRAS, 477, L75, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/sly053

    Goobar, A., Dhawan, S., & Scolnic, D. 2018, MNRAS, 477, L75, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/sly053

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/sly053 2018

  25. [25]

    2024, The Journal of Open Source Software, 9, 7023, doi: 10.21105/joss.07023

    Gordon, K. 2024, The Journal of Open Source Software, 9, 7023, doi: 10.21105/joss.07023

    work page doi:10.21105/joss.07023 2024

  26. [26]

    doi:10.1086/376774 , eprint =

    Gordon, K. D., Clayton, G. C., Misselt, K. A., Landolt, A. U., & Wolff, M. J. 2003, ApJ, 594, 279, doi: 10.1086/376774 16 G´ orski, K. M., Hivon, E., Banday, A. J., et al. 2005, ApJ, 622, 759, doi: 10.1086/427976 Grand´ on, D., Marques, G. A., Thiele, L., et al. 2024, Physical Review D, 110, 103539, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.110.103539

    work page doi:10.1086/376774 2003

  27. [27]

    R., Millman, K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 2020

  28. [28]

    F., Chan, T

    Hopkins, P. F., Chan, T. K., Ji, S., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 501, 3640, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3690

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3690 2021

  29. [29]

    C., & Savage, B

    Howk, J. C., & Savage, B. D. 1999, The Astronomical Journal, 117, 2077, doi: 10.1086/300857

    work page doi:10.1086/300857 1999

  30. [30]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science & Engineering, 9, 90, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55

    work page doi:10.1109/mcse.2007.55 2007

  31. [31]

    J., et al

    Ilbert, O., Arnouts, S., McCracken, H. J., et al. 2006, A&A, 457, 841, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20065138 Ivezi´ c,ˇZ., Kahn, S. M., Tyson, J. A., et al. 2019a, The Astrophysical Journal, 873, 111, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab042c

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

  32. [32]

    Izbicki, R., & Lee, A. B. 2017, Electronic Journal of Statistics, 11, 2800, doi: 10.1214/17-EJS1302

    work page doi:10.1214/17-ejs1302 2017

  33. [33]

    2004, MNRAS, 353, 1311, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.08157.x

    Jarvis, M., Bernstein, G., & Jain, B. 2004, MNRAS, 352, 338, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07926.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07926.x 2004

  34. [34]

    K., Hummels, C

    Ji, S., Chan, T. K., Hummels, C. B., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 496, 4221, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1849

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1849 2020

  35. [35]

    M., & Heavens, A

    Jones, D. M., & Heavens, A. F. 2019, MNRAS, 483, 2487, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty3279

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty3279 2019

  36. [36]

    J., Dowell, C

    Jones, T. J., Dowell, C. D., Lopez Rodriguez, E., et al. 2019, ApJL, 870, L9, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aaf8b9

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aaf8b9 2019

  37. [37]

    2016, in Positioning and Power in Academic Publishing: Players, Agents and Agendas, ed

    Kluyver, T., Ragan-Kelley, B., P´ erez, F., et al. 2016, in Positioning and Power in Academic Publishing: Players, Agents and Agendas, ed. F. Loizides & B. Scmidt (Netherlands: IOS Press), 87–90. https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/403913/

    2016

  38. [38]

    2018, ApJ, 866, 36, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aadc08

    Lan, T.-W., & Mo, H. 2018, ApJ, 866, 36, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aadc08

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aadc08 2018

  39. [39]

    S., & Dor´ e, O

    Lenz, D., Hensley, B. S., & Dor´ e, O. 2017, ApJ, 846, 38, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa84af

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa84af 2017

  40. [40]

    2026, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 9, 62504, doi: 10.33232/001c.162504

    Liang, S., Adari, P., & von der Linden, A. 2026, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 9, 62504, doi: 10.33232/001c.162504

    work page doi:10.33232/001c.162504 2026

  41. [41]

    2023, ApJ, 953, 113, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ace110

    Lopez-Rodriguez, E. 2023, ApJ, 953, 113, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ace110

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ace110 2023

  42. [42]

    D., Navarro, J

    Ludlow, A. D., Navarro, J. F., Angulo, R. E., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 441, 378, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu483

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu483 2014

  43. [43]

    P., Prochaska, J

    Macquart, J.-P., Prochaska, J. X., McQuinn, M., et al. 2020, Nature, 581, 391, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2300-2

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2300-2 2020

  44. [44]

    2004, MNRAS, 353, 1311, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.08157.x

    Maller, A. H., & Bullock, J. S. 2004, MNRAS, 355, 694, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.08349.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.08349.x 2004

  45. [45]

    G., et al

    Martin-Alvarez, S., Sijacki, D., Haehnelt, M. G., et al. 2026, MNRAS, 545, staf2106, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf2106

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staf2106 2026

  46. [46]

    E., Huff, E

    McCleary, J. E., Huff, E. M., Bartlett, J. G., & Hensley, B. S. 2026, The Astrophysical Journal, 1000, 313, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae4c3d

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae4c3d 2026

  47. [47]

    C., Marinacci F., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx467 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.468.1505M 468, 1505

    McKinnon, R., Torrey, P., Vogelsberger, M., Hayward, C. C., & Marinacci, F. 2017, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 468, 1505, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx467

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx467 2017

  48. [48]

    2014, ApJL, 780, L33, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/780/2/L33

    McQuinn, M. 2014, ApJL, 780, L33, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/780/2/L33

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1088/2041-8205/780/2/l33 2014

  49. [49]

    2018, Astronomy and Computing, 24, 129, doi: 10.1016/j.ascom.2018.07.001 M´ enard, B., & Fukugita, M

    Melchior, P., Moolekamp, F., Jerdee, M., et al. 2018, Astronomy and Computing, 24, 129, doi: 10.1016/j.ascom.2018.07.001 M´ enard, B., & Fukugita, M. 2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 754, 116, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/754/2/116 M´ enard, B., Kilbinger, M., & Scranton, R. 2010a, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 406, 1815, doi: 10.1111/j.136...

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ascom.2018.07.001 2018

  50. [50]

    G., & Percival, W

    Mohammad, F. G., & Percival, W. J. 2022, MNRAS, 514, 1289, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1458 M¨ ortsell, E., & Goobar, A. 2003, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, 2003, 009, doi: 10.1088/1475-7516/2003/09/009

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1458 2022

  51. [51]

    P., Naab, T., & White, S

    Moster, B. P., Naab, T., & White, S. D. M. 2013, MNRAS, 428, 3121, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sts261

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1093/mnras/sts261 2013

  52. [52]

    F., Frenk, C

    Navarro, J. F., Frenk, C. S., & White, S. D. M. 1997, ApJ, 490, 493, doi: 10.1086/304888 NSF-DOE Vera C. Rubin Observatory. 2025, Legacy Survey of Space and Time Data Preview 1: standard bandpass dataset type [Data set], NSF-DOE Vera C. Rubin Observatory, doi: 10.71929/RUBIN/2587407

    work page doi:10.1086/304888 1997

  53. [53]

    2024, MNRAS, 528, 5008, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae342

    Otsuki, M., & Hirashita, H. 2024, MNRAS, 528, 5008, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae342

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae342 2024

  54. [54]

    R., & Moustakas, J

    Pai, A., Blanton, M. R., & Moustakas, J. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 977, 102, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad89b8

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad89b8 2024

  55. [55]

    2022, Physical Review D, 105, 123526, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.105.123526

    Pandey, S., Gatti, M., Baxter, E., et al. 2022, Physical Review D, 105, 123526, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.105.123526

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.105.123526 2022

  56. [56]

    Dust and Grain Size Evolution in Galaxy Simulations: What Matters and What Does Not

    Parente, M., Narayanan, D., & Torrey, P. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2604.06314, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2604.06314

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2604.06314 2026

  57. [57]

    Peek, J. E. G., M´ enard, B., & Corrales, L. 2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 813, 7, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/813/1/7 17

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/813/1/7 2015

  58. [58]

    S., Werk, J

    Peeples, M. S., Werk, J. K., Tumlinson, J., et al. 2014, ApJ, 786, 54, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/786/1/54 Planck Collaboration, Aghanim, N., Akrami, Y., et al. 2020, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 641, A6, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833910

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/786/1/54 2014

  59. [59]

    Z., Katsianis, A., et al

    Qiao, M., Zheng, X. Z., Katsianis, A., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 528, 997, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae047 RAIL Team, van den Busch, J. L., Charles, E., et al. 2026, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 9, 58200, doi: 10.33232/001c.158200

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae047 2024

  60. [60]

    2020, Pandas-Dev/Pandas: Pandas 1.0.3,, Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3715232 R´ emy-Ruyer, A., Madden, S

    Reback, J., McKinney, W., jbrockmendel, et al. 2020, Pandas-Dev/Pandas: Pandas 1.0.3,, Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3715232 R´ emy-Ruyer, A., Madden, S. C., Galliano, F., et al. 2015, A&A, 582, A121, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201526067

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.3715232 2020

  61. [61]

    M., Schneider, E

    Richie, H. M., Schneider, E. E., Abruzzo, M. W., & Torrey, P. 2024, ApJ, 974, 81, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad6a1c Ried Guachalla, B., Schaan, E., Hadzhiyska, B., Ferraro, S., et al. 2025, Physical Review D, 112, 103512, doi: 10.1103/lqbj-wcqj Rodr´ ıguez Montero, F., Martin-Alvarez, S., Slyz, A., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 530, 3617, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1083

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad6a1c 2024

  62. [62]

    2025, ApJ, 986, 231, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adc0a5

    Rubin, D., Aldering, G., Betoule, M., et al. 2025, ApJ, 986, 231, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adc0a5

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adc0a5 2025

  63. [63]

    L., & Corlies, L

    Salem, M., Bryan, G. L., & Corlies, L. 2016, MNRAS, 456, 582, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv2641

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2641 2016

  64. [64]

    Signatures of Suppressed Matter Clustering revealed by Fast Radio Bursts

    Sharma, K., Krause, E., Ravi, V., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2604.17162, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2604.17162 SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, & NSF-DOE Vera C. Rubin Observatory. 2024, LSST Commissioning Camera, doi: 10.71929/rubin/2561361

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2604.17162 2026

  65. [65]

    2022, in Proceedings of SPIE, Vol

    Stalder, B., Reil, K., Aguilar, C., et al. 2022, in Proceedings of SPIE, Vol. 12184, Ground-Based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy IX, 121840J, doi: 10.1117/12.2630184

    work page doi:10.1117/12.2630184 2022

  66. [66]

    2020, in Proceedings of SPIE, Vol

    Stalder, B., Reil, K., Claver, C., et al. 2020, in Proceedings of SPIE, Vol. 11447, Ground-Based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy VIII, 114470L, doi: 10.1117/12.2561132

    work page doi:10.1117/12.2561132 2020

  67. [67]

    S., & Werk, J

    Tumlinson, J., Peeples, M. S., & Werk, J. K. 2017, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 55, 389, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-091916-055240

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-091916-055240 2017

  68. [68]

    K., et al

    Tumlinson, J., Thom, C., Werk, J. K., et al. 2011, Science, 334, 948, doi: 10.1126/science.1209840 Vera C Rubin Observatory Team, et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2603.23786, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2603.23786

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1209840 2011

  69. [69]

    2016, MNRAS, 455, 4183, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv2598

    Vincenzo, F., Matteucci, F., Belfiore, F., & Maiolino, R. 2016, MNRAS, 455, 4183, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv2598

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2598 2016

  70. [70]

    E., et al

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261, doi: 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2

    work page doi:10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2 2020

  71. [71]

    Waskom, M. L. 2021, Journal of Open Source Software, 6, 3021, doi: 10.21105/joss.03021

    work page doi:10.21105/joss.03021 2021

  72. [72]

    K., Prochaska, J

    Werk, J. K., Prochaska, J. X., Tumlinson, J., et al. 2014, The Astrophysical Journal, 792, 8, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/792/1/8 Wes McKinney. 2010, in Proceedings of the 9th Python in Science Conference, ed. S. van der Walt & Jarrod Millman, 56–61, doi: 10.25080/Majora-92bf1922-00a

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/792/1/8 2014

  73. [73]

    White, S. D. M., & Frenk, C. S. 1991, ApJ, 379, 52, doi: 10.1086/170483

    work page doi:10.1086/170483 1991

  74. [74]

    H., Martin, C

    Yoon, J. H., Martin, C. L., Veilleux, S., et al. 2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 502, 969, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3583

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3583 2021

  75. [75]

    , year = 2005, month = apr, volume =

    York, D. G., Khare, P., Vanden Berk, D., et al. 2006, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 367, 945, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.10018.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.10018.x 2006

  76. [76]

    Dark Energy Survey Year 3 results: galaxy–halo connection from galaxy–galaxy lensing , volume=

    Zacharegkas, G., Chang, C., Prat, J., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 509, 3119, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab3155

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab3155 2022

  77. [77]

    F., et al

    Zhang, T., Charles, E., Crenshaw, J. F., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.07370, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2510.07370

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.07370 2025

  78. [78]

    D., et al

    Zheng, Y., Faerman, Y., Oppenheimer, B. D., et al. 2024, ApJ, 960, 55, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acfe6b

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acfe6b 2024

  79. [79]

    2019, Journal of Open Source Software, 4, 1298, doi: 10.21105/joss.01298

    Zonca, A., Singer, L., Lenz, D., et al. 2019, Journal of Open Source Software, 4, 1298, doi: 10.21105/joss.01298

    work page doi:10.21105/joss.01298 2019