Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 3 minor 90 references

The host of a lensed supernova at z=5.13 is an ultra-faint galaxy with gas below one percent solar metallicity, implying core-collapse supernovae are far more common in early, metal-poor galaxies.

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

2026-08-02 02:18 UTC pith:QU5M3PST

load-bearing objection First spectroscopically confirmed CCSN host at z=5.13 is an ultra-faint LAE; the host measurements look solid, but the <1% Zsun and elevated SN-rate claims are explicitly conditional and rest on one object plus extrapolated relations. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.14355 v1 pith:QU5M3PST submitted 2026-07-15 astro-ph.GA astro-ph.HE

VENUS: an ultra-faint galaxy hosting the metal-poor type II supernova at z=5.13 Witnessing the initial metal enrichment with extremely frequent core-collapse supernovae?

Yoshihisa Asada , Seiji Fujimoto , Joseph F. V. Allingham , David A. Coulter , Conor Larison , Matthew R. Siebert , Gabriel Brammer , Dan Coe
show 45 more authors
Pratika Dayal Qinyue Fei Lukas J. Furtak Vasily Kokorev Keiichi Maeda Richard Pan Johan Richard Fengwu Sun Abdurro'uf Jacqueline Antwi-Danso Franz E. Bauer Marusa Bradac Larry D. Bradley Volker Bromm John Chisholm Christopher J. Conselice Christa DeCoursey Anderas L. Faisst Brenda Frye Mauro Gonzalez-Otero Yuichi Harikane Tiger Y. Y. Hsiao Kohei Inayoshi Yolanda Jimenez-Teja Anton M. Koekemoer Kotaro Kohno Paulo A. A. Lopes Ray A. Lucas Georgios E. Magdis Vladan Markov Nicholas Martis Jorryt Matthee Minami Nakane Rohan P. Naidu Gael Noirot Masami Ouchi Armin Rest Massimo Ricotti Louis-Gregory Strolger Raffaella Schneider Francesco Valentino Eros Vanzella Hayley Williams Rogier A. Windhorst Adi Zitrin
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.GA astro-ph.HE
keywords core-collapse supernovaegalaxy formationgravitational lensinghigh-redshift galaxiesLyman-alpha galaxiesstellar feedbackchemical enrichmentultra-faint galaxies
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 identifies the host galaxy of a gravitationally lensed type IIP supernova at redshift 5.13 and shows it is an ultra-faint dwarf galaxy with an unusually weak [O III] emission line relative to H-alpha. Reading that weakness as low gas-phase metallicity, the authors argue the galaxy is in the earliest stage of chemical enrichment, with gas less than one percent as metal-rich as the Sun. If correct, this is the first spectroscopically confirmed core-collapse supernova host in the ultra-faint regime, and it implies that core-collapse supernovae occur at a much higher rate per unit star formation in metal-poor, high-redshift environments. It also gives a concrete reason why some supernovae found in deep blank-field surveys appear 'hostless': their dwarf hosts are simply too faint to detect without lensing.

Core claim

SN Eos, a metal-poor type IIP supernova at z=5.13, exploded within an ultra-faint Lyman-alpha emitting galaxy with absolute UV magnitude -14.4 +/- 0.3 and stellar mass around 10^6.5 solar masses. Using gravitational lensing magnification of about 53, the authors detect and spatially resolve the host, measure a narrow H-alpha line, and set a 2-sigma upper limit on [O III]5007/H-alpha that, under case B recombination and an assumed R3-metallicity calibration, places the gas-phase metallicity below about one percent solar. They argue this makes SN Eos the first spectroscopically confirmed high-redshift core-collapse supernova in a galaxy that is just beginning to be chemically enriched, with th

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is gravitational lensing by a foreground galaxy cluster, which magnifies SN Eos and its host by a factor of about 53 and lets the host be separated from the supernova in both imaging and spectroscopy. The diagnostic that carries the metallicity argument is the emission-line ratio R3 = [O III]5007/H-beta: H-alpha is detected from the host, [O III] is not, and assuming case B recombination and no dust gives R3 < 0.66 at 2-sigma, which an empirical R3-metallicity conversion translates to gas-phase metallicity below one percent solar. A separate statistical machinery convolves the UV luminosity function, star-formation rate, and lensing survey volume to compute the expected

Load-bearing premise

The interpretation that SN Eos exploded in a galaxy with gas below one percent solar metallicity rests on the assumption that the weak [O III] emission is caused by low oxygen abundance rather than by dust attenuation or gas dense enough to collisionally suppress the line—a caveat the paper itself raises because H-beta has not been detected.

What would settle it

A spectrum deep enough to detect the host H-beta line: if H-alpha/H-beta is well above the case-B ratio of 2.86, dust reddening rather than metallicity suppresses [O III], and the sub-1% solar metallicity claim fails. Detecting [O III]5007 above the current 2-sigma upper limit would likewise directly contradict the low-metallicity reading.

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

If this is right

  • The discovery makes SN Eos the first spectroscopically confirmed high-redshift core-collapse supernova in the ultra-faint regime, opening the way to studying chemical enrichment at its very beginning.
  • An elevated core-collapse supernova rate per unit star formation in low-metallicity galaxies would strengthen the role of supernova feedback in suppressing star formation in early dwarf galaxies.
  • A large population of 'hostless' supernovae in deep blank-field surveys may be accounted for by dwarf hosts below the detection limit, and lensing surveys can reveal this hidden population.
  • If the low gas metallicity is confirmed, the abundance pattern in SN Eos's ejecta may preserve the imprint of the very first (Population III) supernovae.
  • Statistical surveys of lensed high-redshift supernovae can test whether the rate enhancement is real and help distinguish between a top-heavy IMF, metallicity-dependent explodability, and runaway stellar collisions.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the low-[O III] interpretation holds, the same lensed-field data can be stacked to search for other ultra-faint hosts, effectively turning hostless supernovae into a census of sub-detection-limit dwarf galaxies.
  • A boosted core-collapse supernova rate in metal-poor dwarfs would also increase the ionizing photon budget from faint galaxies, potentially easing the requirements on the sources that reionized the universe.
  • A targeted deeper spectrum detecting H-beta (and ideally [O II]) would break the dust-versus-metallicity degeneracy and could be obtained with a modest additional observation.
  • If the elevated rate is instead caused by dense star clusters, the same galaxies might show other signatures of runaway stellar collisions, such as an overabundance of very massive stars or stripped-envelope supernovae.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper reports the first characterization of the host galaxy of the gravitationally lensed type IIP supernova SN Eos at z=5.13, using JWST/NIRCam and NIRSpec data plus archival VLT/MUSE observations. After point-source subtraction and a narrow-plus-broad line decomposition, the authors detect a spatially resolved lensed host arc, measure a rest-UV absolute magnitude M_UV=-14.4±0.3, detect a narrow H-alpha component with large BIC preference and quantified injection-recovery false-positive rates, and derive an upper limit on [O III]5007/H-alpha. Assuming case B recombination and negligible dust, this is converted to R3=[O III]5007/H-beta<0.66 and, via the Nakajima+22 calibration, to a gas-phase metallicity Z_gas<1% Zsun. On this basis the authors argue that SN Eos exploded in an extremely metal-poor environment undergoing initial CCSN-driven metal enrichment. They further argue that finding a CCSN in such an ultra-faint galaxy implies an elevated CCSN rate per unit SFR in low-metallicity high-z systems and that such hosts may explain hostless SNe in JWST blank-field surveys.

Significance. If the metallicity interpretation holds, this is the first spectroscopically confirmed CCSN host in the ultra-faint regime at z>4 and a valuable anchor for models of early chemical enrichment, low-metallicity stellar evolution, and CCSN rates. The observational core is strong: the narrow H-alpha detection is supported by large BIC differences and injection-recovery tests with false-positive rates of 0.2% or less, the MUSE pre-explosion Ly-alpha map is independent of the SN position, and the lensed-arc morphology is consistent with the lens model. These strengths make the basic host characterization—an ultra-faint LAE with high Ly-alpha EW and a compact H-alpha-emitting region—reliable. The more speculative parts are the extremely low metallicity inference and the elevated-CCSN-rate claim, both of which rest on untested assumptions that the paper itself partially acknowledges.

major comments (2)
  1. [§4.2, Summary point 2; Table 1] The headline claim Z_gas<1% Zsun is derived by converting the observed [O III]/H-alpha upper limits (Table 1: <0.23–<0.32) into R3<0.66 using case B H-alpha/H-beta=2.86 and negligible dust. H-beta is not detected, so the Balmer decrement is unconstrained. As the text in §4.2 states, n_e≳10^5 cm^-3 or dust attenuation can suppress [O III]/H-alpha independently of oxygen abundance. The cited counterarguments—β_UV=-2.2±0.2 and a 'possible' 1400 Å turnover—are not quantitative substitutes for a Balmer or density diagnostic: a modest reddening or density change can shift the R3 limit without violating the UV slope, and footnote 1 shows that SN Eos's Z*<10% Zsun constrains the envelope gas rather than the nebular H II region. Because the 'initial metal enrichment' narrative and the CCSN-rate discussion both build on this metallicity claim, the degeneracy is load-bearing. I request that the pap
  2. [§4.3, Appendix C, Figure 6] The inference that the discovery implies an elevated CCSN rate per unit SFR is not supported by the statistics presented. The P_host(M_UV) calculation depends on (i) a log-linear extrapolation of the Pessi+23 relation below 10% Zsun, (ii) an empirical M_UV-Z relation with large scatter, (iii) an ad hoc fraction f_EMP(M_UV) ramping from 0 at M_UV=-17 to 1 at M_UV=-12, and (iv) a fixed metallicity floor of 10^-2.5 Zsun. Each ingredient is unconstrained, and the cumulative probability for M_UV<-15 changes from ~0.01% to ~4% depending on the assumed extrapolation. With a single event, selection effects, lens-model uncertainties, and Poisson noise dominate over the model predictions. The paper's own caution that 'it remains largely uncertain' should be strengthened: Section 4.3 should be presented as an illustrative toy model, with sensitivity tests on the ramp, floor, and extrapolation, and
minor comments (3)
  1. [Abstract and §3.2.1] The abstract phrase '[O III]5007/Hβ<0.7 with case B recombination' is easily misread as a direct Hβ detection. Since Hβ is not detected and the ratio is inferred from H-alpha, the abstract should state that Hβ is inferred via the assumed Balmer decrement.
  2. [§3.3, Eq. (2)] The stellar mass estimate uses a step-function SFH with R~0.7 but does not define R precisely or justify its uncertainty. The 'fiducial' M* = 10^6.5±0.4 is a mean of a lower and upper estimate, so the quoted error bar is not statistical. This caveat should be stated in Table 1 or the text, since §4.2 later uses M* in a mass-metallicity comparison.
  3. [§4.1] The Ly-alpha escape fraction, f_esc(Lyα)=29±4%, is derived assuming case B and no dust. Given the same dust degeneracy discussed for R3, the systematic uncertainty should be propagated or noted.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the host characterization rests on direct NIRCam/NIRSpec/MUSE measurements and external calibrations; the metallicity inference is explicitly caveated rather than definitionally forced.

full rationale

The paper's main derivation is: (1) measure the host UV magnitude, H-alpha flux, and [O III] upper limit from JWST/NIRCam and NIRSpec data after point-source subtraction; (2) assume case B recombination (H-alpha/H-beta=2.86) to convert [O III]/H-alpha into an R3 upper limit; (3) apply the external R3-metallicity conversion of Nakajima et al. (2022); (4) compare the resulting low gas-phase metallicity with the SN's low stellar metallicity from Coulter et al. (2026b). The R3 measurement is an upper limit from the data, not a fitted value, and the conversion to metallicity is an external calibration. The paper explicitly flags the main degeneracy in Section 4.2: 'An important caveat is that the low R3 value can be realized not only with a low metallicity... collisionally de-excited at n_e >~ 10^5 cm^-3... this can be replicated also with a significant dust attenuation.' This is a stated assumption/limitation, not a circular reduction. The lens model (Allingham et al. 2026) and SN discovery/classification (Coulter et al. 2026b) are co-authored but are independent observational/calibration products calibrated on separate data; they are load-bearing but not circular. The Section 4.3/Appendix C probability calculation uses an empirical M_UV-Z relation that includes the authors' own Asada et al. (2026) alongside Nakajima et al. (2023) and Chemerynska et al. (2024), but that relation is an external empirical input, not a quantity derived within this paper. No equation in the paper reduces to a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported from the authors' prior work to force the conclusion. The central claim is therefore conditional on the case-B/dust/density assumptions, which the authors acknowledge, but it is not circular.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 10 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central host characterization (M_UV, H-alpha flux, [O III] upper limit, Ly-alpha properties) rests on standard photometric/spectroscopic assumptions and external calibrations. The metallicity interpretation adds assumptions about dust, electron density, and the R3 conversion; the statistical SN-rate interpretation adds several hand-chosen extrapolations and an ad hoc metallicity-floor ramp. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • Extremely metal-poor fraction ramp (f_EMP(M_UV)) = 0 at M_UV=-17 mag to 1 at M_UV=-12 mag
    Appendix C: 'we simply assume that the fraction monotonically increase from 0 at M_UV=-17 mag to 1 at M_UV=-12 mag'. This ad hoc function shapes the faint-end host probability and is important for the elevated-SN-rate claim.
  • Metallicity floor for ultra-faint galaxies = Z = 10^-2.5 Zsun
    Appendix C: 'fixed the metallicity of these galaxies at 10^-2.5 Zsun'. Chosen by hand and used to compute the metallicity-dependent SN rate.
  • Log-linear extrapolation of CCSN rate vs metallicity = Not fitted; scenario slope, inflating the rate by >~1-2 dex at ~1% Zsun
    Figure 6 and Section 4.3: the log-linear extrapolation of Pessi+23 below 10% Zsun is a chosen scenario, not a fit; it is the only scenario that gives a non-negligible (~4%) probability of finding a host fainter than M_UV=-15.
  • Live mass fraction R = R ~ 0.7
    Section 3.3: 'R~0.7 with the Chabrier IMF at ~100 Myr timescale' is adopted by hand to convert H-alpha and UV SFRs into a stellar mass estimate.
axioms (10)
  • domain assumption Flat Lambda-CDM cosmology with H0=70 km/s/Mpc, Omega_m=0.3, Omega_L=0.7
    Stated in Section 1; standard cosmology used for luminosity distances and lensing.
  • domain assumption Chabrier IMF
    Section 1: 'the Chabrier initial mass function (IMF; G. Chabrier 2003)' is assumed throughout, including stellar mass and SFR conversions.
  • domain assumption Case B recombination with H-alpha/H-beta = 2.86
    Section 4.2 assumes the R3 upper limit under case B recombination because dust attenuation is taken to be negligible.
  • domain assumption Negligible dust attenuation in the host galaxy
    Section 4.2: 'we assume that the dust attenuation in the Eos host is negligible' based on the blue UV slope beta_UV = -2.2 +/- 0.2; this underpins the metallicity upper limit.
  • domain assumption Electron density below ~10^5 cm^-3 so [O III] is not collisionally de-excited
    Section 4.2 caveat: low R3 could also arise from n_e >~ 10^5 cm^-3; the paper tentatively disfavors this but cannot directly measure the density.
  • domain assumption Nakajima+22 R3-metallicity empirical conversion
    Section 4.2 uses this external calibration to convert the R3 upper limit into 12+log(O/H) < 6.67 and Z_gas <~ 1% Zsun.
  • domain assumption Local type IIP SN templates SN 1992H and SN 2015bs represent the intrinsic H-alpha P-Cygni profile of SN Eos
    Appendix B relies on these templates for injection-recovery tests; if the true SN profile differs, the narrow host H-alpha flux estimate could be biased.
  • domain assumption Lens model of Allingham+26 with 20% systematic magnification uncertainty
    Section 2 adopts the VENUS lens model calibrated with 51 lensed images in 19 systems; the absolute magnification mu=53+/-8 enters every lens-corrected quantity.
  • ad hoc to paper Pessi+23 CCSN rate per SFR versus metallicity can be extrapolated below 10% Zsun
    Section 4.3 and Appendix C: the relation is only measured down to ~10% Zsun; the paper explores constant and log-linear extrapolations to reach rarer, more metal-poor galaxies.
  • domain assumption Empirical M_UV-Z relation from z~5-8 JWST samples applies to the MACS1931 field
    Appendix C obtains a regression from Nakajima+23, Chemerynska+24, and Asada+26 to assign typical metallicities as a function of M_UV in the probability calculation.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 26620 in / 14516 out tokens · 138405 ms · 2026-08-02T02:18:17.547881+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We present the first characterization of the host galaxy of a recently discovered type IIP SN at $z=5.13$ (SN Eos). SN Eos and its host galaxy are gravitationally lensed and multiply imaged. The total magnification $\mu\sim53$ enables spatially resolving the system, allowing us to localize the core-collapse supernova (CCSN) position and to characterize its local environment within an early galaxy. Our observation reveals that the host is an ultra-faint ($M_{\rm UV}=-14.4\pm0.3$ mag) Lyman-$\alpha$ emitter with a very high equivalent width. The host galaxy also shows very weak [O iii]4959,5007 lines despite an H$\alpha$ line detection ([O iii]5007/H$\beta <0.7$ with case B recombination). Assuming that the weak [O iii] is due to low gas-phase metallicity given the low-metallicity of SN Eos itself, SN Eos plausibly marks the formation and explosion of a metal-poor star in an extremely metal-poor environment ($<1\ \%\ Z_\odot$), facilitating the initial stages of the chemical enrichment of the host. Finding the CCSN in such an ultra-faint galaxy at $z=5.13$ also indicates that the SN rate could be considerably higher in high-$z$, metal-poor environments, potentially implying e.g., a $Z$-dependent IMF, $Z$-dependent massive star explodability, or runaway stellar collisions in dense star clusters. Without lensing, only SN Eos would be detectable and the host would be below the detection limit in any NIRCam surveys ever performed. The Eos host galaxy can thus be representative of the origin of {\it hostless} supernovae frequently found in JWST blank field surveys.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.14355 by Abdurro'uf, Adi Zitrin, Anderas L. Faisst, Anton M. Koekemoer, Armin Rest, Brenda Frye, Christa DeCoursey, Christopher J. Conselice, Conor Larison, Dan Coe, David A. Coulter, Eros Vanzella, Fengwu Sun, Francesco Valentino, Franz E. Bauer, Gabriel Brammer, Gael Noirot, Georgios E. Magdis, Hayley Williams, Jacqueline Antwi-Danso, Johan Richard, John Chisholm, Jorryt Matthee, Joseph F. V. Allingham, Keiichi Maeda, Kohei Inayoshi, Kotaro Kohno, Larry D. Bradley, Louis-Gregory Strolger, Lukas J. Furtak, Marusa Bradac, Masami Ouchi, Massimo Ricotti, Matthew R. Siebert, Mauro Gonzalez-Otero, Minami Nakane, Nicholas Martis, Paulo A. A. Lopes, Pratika Dayal, Qinyue Fei, Raffaella Schneider, Ray A. Lucas, Richard Pan, Rogier A. Windhorst, Rohan P. Naidu, Seiji Fujimoto, Tiger Y. Y. Hsiao, Vasily Kokorev, Vladan Markov, Volker Bromm, Yolanda Jimenez-Teja, Yoshihisa Asada, Yuichi Harikane.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: JWST/NIRCam images of the SN Eos host galaxy. Left: the NIRCam RGB image (blue: F115W+F150W, green: F200W+F277W, red: F356W+F444W). The critical curve at z = 5.13 is shown in yellow, obtained from the latest lens model (J. F. V. Allingham et al. 2026). SN Eos stands out as the bright and red, doubly-imaged source. The source is quintuply imaged in total, and the highest two magnification images (image 1 an… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: JWST/NIRSpec PRISM spectrum of SN Eos + its host galaxy. (A) the full 1D spectrum of SN Eos + host. The spectrum in image 1 (blue), image 2 (red), and the composite spectrum (black) are shown. All spectra are corrected for the gravitational lensing effect. The orange curve shows the typical galaxy spectrum of faint galaxies at z ∼ 5 in the NIRSpec PRISM resolution (G. Roberts-Borsani et al. 2024), scaled t… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The Lyα line profile taken with VLT/MUSE, extracted for image 1 (top), image 2 (middle), and the com￾posite spectrum (bottom). The velocity offset is measured from the host Hα line redshift (zsys = 5.13). Red dashed curves show the best-fit Gaussian, with which the line fluxes are measured. 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4.1. An ultra-faint LAE hosting SN Eos at z = 5.13 The SN Eos host galaxy is revealed to be… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Context of the SN Eos host. (A) Eos host as a metal-poor galaxy candidate. The very low R3 value found in the Eos host implies that it is a member of extremely metal-poor galaxy candidates (CR3: S. Cai et al. 2025, AMORE6: T. Morishita et al. 2025, LAP1-B: E. Vanzella et al. 2023; K. Nakajima et al. 2025, LAP2: E. Vanzella et al. 2025). They have considerably lower R3 values than other faint-end galaxies g… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Four key factors that determine the host MUV probability distribution when a CCSN is found at high-z. The convolution of these four gives the shape of Phost(MUV) ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Implication of finding of the CCSN in an ultra-faint galaxy. Left: CCSN rate per unit SFR as a function of the metallicity, normalized at the solar metallicity. T. Pessi et al. (2023) found that the CCSN rate per unit SFR becomes higher in low-metallicity environments down to ∼ 10 % Z⊙ in the local universe. We explore three cases to infer the SN rate at even lower-metallicity: no metallicity-dependency (b… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Point-source subtractions in NIRCam F277W, F300M, F356W, F410M, and F444W images. B. ROBUSTNESS OF THE HOST-SN DECOMPOSITION IN NIRSPEC SPECTRA Although we find that the Hα line profile of SN Eos can be significantly better fit with the double Gaussian model, the underlying P-Cyg profile of type IIP SNe can have more complex line profile than a simple broad Gaussian. Given the low spectral resolution of NI… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Result of the injection-recovery simulation of the host-origin narrow Hα line blended with late plateau-phase type IIP SN spectra. Results with SN 1992H and SN 2015bs spectra are displayed on the left and right, respectively. Top: the recovery fraction of host-origin narrow line as the function of the injected narrow Hα line flux. N = 1000 mock spectra are generated at each grid of the injected narrow line… view at source ↗

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

90 extracted references · 5 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    D., Vanzella, E., et al

    Adamo, A., Bradley, L. D., Vanzella, E., et al. 2024, Nature, 632, 513, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07703-7

    doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07703-7 2024

  2. [2]

    Allingham, J. F. V., Zitrin, A., Kokorev, V., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2602.14074, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2602.14074

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2602.14074 2026

  3. [3]

    P., Dessart, L., Guti´ errez, C

    Anderson, J. P., Dessart, L., Guti´ errez, C. P., et al. 2018, Nature Astronomy, 2, 574, doi: 10.1038/s41550-018-0458-4

    doi:10.1038/s41550-018-0458-4 2018

  4. [4]

    2024, MNRAS, 527, 11372, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3902

    Asada, Y., Sawicki, M., Abraham, R., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 11372, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3902

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3902 2024

  5. [5]

    2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.20045, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2601.20045 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T

    Asada, Y., Fujimoto, S., Chisholm, J., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.20045, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2601.20045 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 As...

    doi:10.48550/arxiv.2601.20045 2026

  6. [6]

    A., Naidu, R

    Berg, D. A., Naidu, R. P., Chisholm, J., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2511.13591, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2511.13591

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2511.13591 2025

  7. [7]

    2022, ApJ, 940, 55, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac86d1

    Stefanon, M. 2022, ApJ, 940, 55, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac86d1

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac86d1 2022

  8. [8]

    2024, astropy/photutils: 1.12.0, 1.12.0 Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.10967176

    Bradley, L., Sip˝ ocz, B., Robitaille, T., et al. 2024, astropy/photutils: 1.12.0, 1.12.0 Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.10967176

    doi:10.5281/zenodo.10967176 2024

  9. [9]

    2022, gbrammer/msaexp: Full working version with 2d drizzling and extraction, 0.3 Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7299501

    Brammer, G. 2022, gbrammer/msaexp: Full working version with 2d drizzling and extraction, 0.3 Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7299501

    doi:10.5281/zenodo.7299501 2022

  10. [10]

    2011, ARA&A, 49, 373, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081710-102608

    Bromm, V., & Yoshida, N. 2011, ARA&A, 49, 373, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081710-102608

    doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081710-102608 2011

  11. [11]

    2025, ApJL, 993, L52, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae1608

    Cai, S., Li, M., Cai, Z., et al. 2025, ApJL, 993, L52, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae1608

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae1608 2025

  12. [12]

    Carnall, A. C. 2017, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1705.05165, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1705.05165

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1705.05165 2017

  13. [13]

    2003, PASP, 115, 763, doi: 10.1086/376392 18

    Chabrier, G. 2003, PASP, 115, 763, doi: 10.1086/376392 18

    doi:10.1086/376392 2003

  14. [14]

    2024, ApJL, 976, L15, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad8dc9

    Chemerynska, I., Atek, H., Dayal, P., et al. 2024, ApJL, 976, L15, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad8dc9

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad8dc9 2024

  15. [15]

    2024, MNRAS, 530, 2453, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1027

    Chon, S., Hosokawa, T., Omukai, K., & Schneider, R. 2024, MNRAS, 530, 2453, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1027

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1027 2024

  16. [16]

    I., Ziegler, B

    Ciocan, B. I., Ziegler, B. L., Verdugo, M., et al. 2021, A&A, 649, A23, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202040010

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202040010 2021

  17. [17]

    2022, A&A, 666, A78, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142320

    Claeyssens, A., Richard, J., Blaizot, J., et al. 2022, A&A, 666, A78, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142320

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202142320 2022

  18. [18]

    2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.16281, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2601.16281

    Claeyssens, A., Adamo, A., Kokorev, V., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.16281, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2601.16281

    doi:10.48550/arxiv.2601.16281 2026

  19. [19]

    C., et al

    Clocchiatti, A., Benetti, S., Wheeler, J. C., et al. 1996, AJ, 111, 1286, doi: 10.1086/117874

    doi:10.1086/117874 1996

  20. [20]

    J., et al

    Cooke, J., Sullivan, M., Barton, E. J., et al. 2009, Nature, 460, 237, doi: 10.1038/nature08082

    doi:10.1038/nature08082 2009

  21. [21]

    2012, Nature, 491, 228, doi: 10.1038/nature11521

    Cooke, J., Sullivan, M., Gal-Yam, A., et al. 2012, Nature, 491, 228, doi: 10.1038/nature11521

    doi:10.1038/nature11521 2012

  22. [22]

    A., Pierel, J

    Coulter, D. A., Pierel, J. D. R., DeCoursey, C., et al. 2026a, ApJ, 1002, 83, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae595d

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae595d

  23. [23]

    A., Larison, C., Pierel, J

    Coulter, D. A., Larison, C., Pierel, J. D. R., et al. 2026b, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.04156, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2601.04156

    doi:10.48550/arxiv.2601.04156

  24. [24]

    2024, A&A, 684, A75, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346698

    Curti, M., Maiolino, R., Curtis-Lake, E., et al. 2024, A&A, 684, A75, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346698

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346698 2024

  25. [25]

    2018, MNRAS, 479, 2421, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1634

    Dastidar, R., Misra, K., Hosseinzadeh, G., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 479, 2421, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1634

    doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1634 2018

  26. [26]

    2018, PhR, 780, 1, doi: 10.1016/j.physrep.2018.10.002

    Dayal, P., & Ferrara, A. 2018, PhR, 780, 1, doi: 10.1016/j.physrep.2018.10.002

    doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2018.10.002 2018

  27. [27]

    DeCoursey, C., Egami, E., Pierel, J. D. R., et al. 2025a, ApJ, 979, 250, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad8fab

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad8fab

  28. [28]

    2025b, ApJ, 990, 31, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ade78c

    DeCoursey, C., Egami, E., Sun, F., et al. 2025b, ApJ, 990, 31, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ade78c

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ade78c

  29. [29]

    J., Stanway, E

    Eldridge, J. J., Stanway, E. R., Xiao, L., et al. 2017, PASA, 34, e058, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2017.51

    doi:10.1017/pasa.2017.51 2017

  30. [30]

    P., Whitler, L., et al

    Endsley, R., Stark, D. P., Whitler, L., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 533, 1111, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1857

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1857 2024

  31. [31]

    2018, MNRAS, 473, 513, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2288

    Faran, T., Nakar, E., & Poznanski, D. 2018, MNRAS, 473, 513, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2288

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2288 2018

  32. [32]

    W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J

    Foreman-Mackey, D., Hogg, D. W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J. 2013, PASP, 125, 306, doi: 10.1086/670067

    doi:10.1086/670067 2013

  33. [33]

    A., & Rasio, F

    Freitag, M., G¨ urkan, M. A., & Rasio, F. A. 2006, MNRAS, 368, 141, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10096.x

    arXiv 2006

  34. [34]

    2025a, Nature Astronomy, doi: 10.1038/s41550-025-02592-w

    Fujimoto, S., Ouchi, M., Kohno, K., et al. 2025a, Nature Astronomy, doi: 10.1038/s41550-025-02592-w

    doi:10.1038/s41550-025-02592-w

  35. [35]

    2020, A&A, 639, A85, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038096

    Izotov, Y. 2020, A&A, 639, A85, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038096

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202038096 2020

  36. [36]

    2015, MNRAS, 454, 3150, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv2162

    Giersz, M., Leigh, N., Hypki, A., L¨ utzgendorf, N., & Askar, A. 2015, MNRAS, 454, 3150, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv2162

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2162 2015

  37. [37]

    Gronke, M., Dijkstra, M., McCourt, M., & Oh, S. P. 2016, ApJL, 833, L26, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/833/2/L26 G¨ urkan, M. A., Fregeau, J. M., & Rasio, F. A. 2006, ApJL, 640, L39, doi: 10.1086/503295

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/833/2/l26 2016

  38. [38]

    L., Ellis, R., et al

    Harikane, Y., Sanders, R. L., Ellis, R., et al. 2025, ApJ, 993, 204, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae0e53

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae0e53 2025

  39. [39]

    M., Borthakur, S., Overzier, R., et al

    Heckman, T. M., Borthakur, S., Overzier, R., et al. 2011, ApJ, 730, 5, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/730/1/5

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/730/1/5 2011

  40. [40]

    J., & Dessart, L

    Hillier, D. J., & Dessart, L. 2019, A&A, 631, A8, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935100

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201935100 2019

  41. [41]

    Y.-Y., Sun, F., Lin, X., et al

    Hsiao, T. Y.-Y., Sun, F., Lin, X., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2505.03873, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2505.03873

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2505.03873 2025

  42. [42]

    Y.-Y., Chisholm, J., Berg, D

    Hsiao, T. Y.-Y., Chisholm, J., Berg, D. A., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2605.06770. https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06770

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  43. [43]

    2013, ApJL, 765, L43, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/765/2/L43

    Ibeling, D., & Heger, A. 2013, ApJL, 765, L43, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/765/2/L43

    doi:10.1088/2041-8205/765/2/l43 2013

  44. [44]

    L., & Bromm, V

    Jaacks, J., Thompson, R., Finkelstein, S. L., & Bromm, V. 2018, MNRAS, 475, 4396, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty062

    doi:10.1093/mnras/sty062 2018

  45. [45]

    2019, ApJ, 885, 96, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab3d3b

    McKinney, J. 2019, ApJ, 885, 96, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab3d3b

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab3d3b 2019

  46. [46]

    2013, Reviews of Modern Physics, 85, 809, doi: 10.1103/RevModPhys.85.809

    Karlsson, T., Bromm, V., & Bland-Hawthorn, J. 2013, Reviews of Modern Physics, 85, 809, doi: 10.1103/RevModPhys.85.809

    doi:10.1103/revmodphys.85.809 2013

  47. [47]

    2023, MNRAS, 518, 270, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3019

    Katz, H., Saxena, A., Rosdahl, J., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 518, 270, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3019

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3019 2023

  48. [48]

    Kennicutt, Jr., R. C. 1998, ARA&A, 36, 189, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.36.1.189

    doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.36.1.189 1998

  49. [49]

    2019, MNRAS, 486, 2215, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz989

    Kimm, T., Blaizot, J., Garel, T., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 486, 2215, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz989

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stz989 2019

  50. [50]

    I., & Lugaro, M

    Kobayashi, C., Karakas, A. I., & Lugaro, M. 2020, ApJ, 900, 179, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abae65

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abae65 2020

  51. [51]

    J., et al

    Korber, D., Chemerynska, I., Furtak, L. J., et al. 2026, A&A, 708, A43, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202556868

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202556868 2026

  52. [52]

    2020, ApJ, 903, 45, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abb945

    Kremer, K., Spera, M., Becker, D., et al. 2020, ApJ, 903, 45, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abb945

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abb945 2020

  53. [53]

    C., Fuller, S., Bradaˇ c, M., et al

    Lemaux, B. C., Fuller, S., Bradaˇ c, M., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 504, 3662, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab924

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stab924 2021

  54. [54]

    Maltsev, K., Schneider, F. R. N., Mandel, I., et al. 2025, A&A, 700, A20, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202554931

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202554931 2025

  55. [55]

    2026, A&A, 708, A236, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202558580

    Markov, V., Bradaˇ c, M., Estrada-Carpenter, V., et al. 2026, A&A, 708, A236, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202558580

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202558580 2026

  56. [56]

    V., Bacon, R., Franx, M., et al

    Maseda, M. V., Bacon, R., Franx, M., et al. 2018, ApJL, 865, L1, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aade4b

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aade4b 2018

  57. [57]

    G., et al

    Mauerhofer, V., Dayal, P., Haehnelt, M. G., et al. 2025, A&A, 696, A157, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202554042 19

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202554042 2025

  58. [58]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.10521, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2507.10521

    Morishita, T., Liu, Z., Stiavelli, M., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.10521, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2507.10521

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2507.10521 2025

  59. [59]

    2024, Nature, 636, 332, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-08293-0

    Mowla, L., Iyer, K., Asada, Y., et al. 2024, Nature, 636, 332, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-08293-0

    doi:10.1038/s41586-024-08293-0 2024

  60. [60]

    2023, ApJS, 269, 33, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/acd556

    Nakajima, K., Ouchi, M., Isobe, Y., et al. 2023, ApJS, 269, 33, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/acd556

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/acd556 2023

  61. [61]

    2022, ApJS, 262, 3, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac7710

    Nakajima, K., Ouchi, M., Xu, Y., et al. 2022, ApJS, 262, 3, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac7710

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac7710 2022

  62. [62]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.11846, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.11846

    Nakajima, K., Ouchi, M., Harikane, Y., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.11846, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.11846

    doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.11846 2025

  63. [63]

    2019, MNRAS, 490, 3234, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2306

    Nelson, D., Pillepich, A., Springel, V., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 490, 3234, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2306

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2306 2019

  64. [64]

    B., & Gunn, J

    Oke, J. B., & Gunn, J. E. 1983, ApJ, 266, 713, doi: 10.1086/160817

    doi:10.1086/160817 1983

  65. [65]

    2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2605.15462, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2605.15462

    Ono, S., Maeda, K., & Suzuki, A. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2605.15462, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2605.15462

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2605.15462 2026

  66. [66]

    Y., Ho, L

    Peng, C. Y., Ho, L. C., Impey, C. D., & Rix, H.-W. 2010, AJ, 139, 2097, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/139/6/2097

    doi:10.1088/0004-6256/139/6/2097 2010

  67. [67]

    P., Lyman, J

    Pessi, T., Anderson, J. P., Lyman, J. D., et al. 2023, ApJL, 955, L29, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acf7c6 Portegies Zwart, S. F., Baumgardt, H., Hut, P., Makino, J., & McMillan, S. L. W. 2004, Nature, 428, 724, doi: 10.1038/nature02448

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acf7c6 2023

  68. [68]

    D., Haehnelt, M

    Rauch, M., Becker, G. D., Haehnelt, M. G., et al. 2011, MNRAS, 418, 1115, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19556.x

    arXiv 2011

  69. [69]

    2024, ApJ, 976, 193, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad85d3

    Roberts-Borsani, G., Treu, T., Shapley, A., et al. 2024, ApJ, 976, 193, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad85d3

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad85d3 2024

  70. [70]

    2014, The Messenger, 158, 48

    Rosati, P., Balestra, I., Grillo, C., et al. 2014, The Messenger, 158, 48

    2014

  71. [71]

    L., Shapley, A

    Sanders, R. L., Shapley, A. E., Topping, M. W., Reddy, N. A., & Brammer, G. B. 2024, ApJ, 962, 24, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad15fc

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad15fc 2024

  72. [72]

    L., Shapley, A

    Sanders, R. L., Shapley, A. E., Topping, M. W., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.10099, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2508.10099

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2508.10099 2025

  73. [73]

    J., Jones, G

    Saxena, A., Bunker, A. J., Jones, G. C., et al. 2024, A&A, 684, A84, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347132

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347132 2024

  74. [74]

    2024, A&A Rv, 32, 2, doi: 10.1007/s00159-024-00151-2

    Schneider, R., & Maiolino, R. 2024, A&A Rv, 32, 2, doi: 10.1007/s00159-024-00151-2

    doi:10.1007/s00159-024-00151-2 2024

  75. [75]

    2018, MNRAS, 473, 1258, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2352

    Schulze, S., Kr¨ uhler, T., Leloudas, G., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 473, 1258, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2352

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2352 2018

  76. [76]

    D., Temim, T., et al

    Shahbandeh, M., Fox, O. D., Temim, T., et al. 2025, ApJ, 985, 262, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adce77

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adce77 2025

  77. [77]

    Silk, J., & Mamon, G. A. 2012, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 12, 917, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/12/8/004

    doi:10.1088/1674-4527/12/8/004 2012

  78. [78]

    2019, MNRAS, 484, 39, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty3483

    Smith, A., Ma, X., Bromm, V., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 484, 39, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty3483

    doi:10.1093/mnras/sty3483 2019

  79. [79]

    S., Perlman, E., et al

    Strolger, L.-G., Bovill, M. S., Perlman, E., et al. 2025, ApJ, 988, 278, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ade43a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ade43a 2025

  80. [80]

    Tee, W. L. 2025, Transient Name Server Discovery Report, 2025-2691, 1 Tollet, ´E., Cattaneo, A., Macci` o, A. V., Dutton, A. A., &

    2025

Showing first 80 references.