Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 43 references

A Catalog of Compact High-Velocity Clouds from the FAST All-Sky HI Survey (FASHI) DR2

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-02 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that 185 of 192 compact high-velocity clouds found in the FAST survey are a single population of gas-rich, starless dark matter minihalos associated with Andromeda.

desk verdict The FASHI DR2 CHVC catalog is a useful new data product, but the claim that 185 of its 192 clouds form an M31-associated minihalo population is not supported by the coordinates the paper itself tabulates. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.14584 v1 pith:TJ6VUJNV submitted 2026-07-16 astro-ph.GA

Jin-Long Xu , Chuan-Peng Zhang , Xiao-Lan Liu , Nai-Ping Yu , Mei Ai , Ming Zhu This is my paper
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords high-velocitycloudscompactHVCsultra-compactdarkgalaxiesminihalosAndromeda(M31)FASTsurveybaryonicTully-Fisherrelation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper reports 192 compact high-velocity clouds of neutral hydrogen found in the FAST all-sky survey, and argues that 185 of them form a kinematically coherent population around the Andromeda galaxy. Their velocities cluster at -296 km/s, matching M31's systemic velocity, and the paper assigns them M31's distance of 0.8 Mpc. At that distance they have HI masses of about 2e5 to 4e6 solar masses and dynamical masses of 1e7 to 6e8 solar masses, placing them in the predicted 'minihalo' regime; about half follow the baryonic Tully-Fisher relation. None have optical counterparts down to m_g=22.8. The paper concludes these are gas-rich, starless dark-matter-dominated minihalos and an excellent sample for the search for dark galaxies. If correct, this provides a long-sought bridge between dark matter substructure predictions and observable gas clouds.

What carries the argument

The central object is the compact high-velocity cloud (CHVC) sample extracted from the FASHI DR2 source catalog using a unified SoFiA source finder, restricted to |V_LSR|>90 km/s, angular sizes <2 degrees, and Galactic latitudes outside ±20 degrees. The argument for physical association with M31 is kinematic coherence: the velocity histogram of the 185 clouds peaks at the M31 systemic velocity, and this coherence, together with the assumption of a single common distance of 0.8 Mpc, drives all derived masses and sizes. The baryonic Tully-Fisher relation is used as a consistency check, showing that about half the clouds follow the scaling expected for rotating, dark-matter-dominated gas disks.

What would settle it

Measure individual distances for a subsample of the 185 clouds using a distance indicator independent of the assumed M31 distance—for example, the baryonic Tully-Fisher method as applied to a previously studied CHVC, or 21-cm absorption toward background continuum sources to set kinematic distance constraints. If the derived distances scatter broadly and do not cluster at about 0.8 Mpc, the claim of a physical M31 association is refuted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Using the FAST all-sky HI survey DR2 source catalog, the authors select 192 small, isolated high-velocity clouds with |V_LSR|>90 km/s and size <2 degrees. They find that 185 of these are projected around the Andromeda galaxy and share its kinematics, with a median LSR velocity of -296.1 km/s. Adopting the M31 distance of 0.8 Mpc for all 185 clouds, they derive HI masses of 1.9e5 to 4.0e6 Msun and dynamical masses of 1.0e7 to 6.3e8 Msun, with Mdyn/Mbar ratios spanning 17 to 1705. No optical counterpart is found for any cloud in Pan-STARRS1 imaging, and one cloud (CHVC125.36-22.29-434) shows a regular velocity gradient consistent with a rotating disk, with an upper limit stellar mass of 168 Ms

Load-bearing premise

The entire M31-association argument rests on the assumption that all 185 clouds lie at the Andromeda distance of 0.8 Mpc; the paper explicitly adopts this single distance for all clouds with no individual distance measurements, and if the clouds were instead in the Milky Way's halo at about 100 kpc, their masses, sizes, and dark-matter content would change by factors of 10 to 100 and the minihalo interpretation would collapse.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If correct, the 185 clouds would constitute the largest known population of candidate dark galaxies or gas-rich minihalos around a single galaxy, directly probing the dark matter substructure predicted by ΛCDM.
  • The catalog provides a target list for deep follow-up in HI, optical, and UV to test whether any of these clouds contain stars, cool gas, or molecular emission.
  • A confirmed population of starless minihalos around M31 would help reconcile the 'missing satellite problem' by showing that many subhalos exist but remain optically dark.
  • The kinematic coherence may trace a bound or infalling population in the M31 halo, offering a new way to map the gravitational potential and dark matter distribution of Andromeda.
  • The one cloud with a regular velocity gradient, CHVC125.36-22.29-434, is a specific candidate for a rotating disk galaxy without stars; if it is confirmed, it would be a rare example of a dark galaxy.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If individual distances are ever measured via the baryonic Tully-Fisher method or 21-cm absorption, the spread of distances will test the single-distance assumption; a wide spread would most naturally place the clouds in the Milky Way halo instead, changing the mass scale by an order of magnitude and undermining the minihalo interpretation.
  • The same selection technique could be applied to the full FAST sky coverage (currently 47% of the sky) and to future southern-sky HI surveys, potentially extending the census of CHVC candidates around other Local Group galaxies and testing whether such clustered populations are common.
  • The absence of a cool neutral medium component (all clouds with temperatures above 5000 K) suggests these clouds are in a state of marginal thermal stability; comparing the observed temperature distribution with photoionization and heating models could test whether they are pressure-confined by a hot halo or are transient tidal debris.
  • If deeper optical and UV imaging still finds no stars, these clouds may represent halos that were 'born starless' due to reionization, providing a clean observable reservoir of baryons in low-mass dark halos and a direct test of feedback and reionization models.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper presents a catalog of 192 compact high-velocity clouds (CHVCs) selected from the FAST All-Sky HI Survey (FASHI) DR2 source catalog, with 108 classified as ultra-compact (UCHVCs). The central claim is that 185 of the 192 CHVCs are spatially and kinematically concentrated around M31, based on a median LSR velocity of -296.1 km/s, and the authors adopt a common distance of 0.8 Mpc to derive HI masses, dynamical masses, effective radii, and a comparison with the baryonic Tully-Fisher relation. They report no Pan-STARRS1 counterparts and conclude that these are gas-rich, starless dark-matter-dominated minihalos associated with M31, highlighting one object with a regular velocity gradient as a possible rotating dark galaxy.

Significance. If the central claim were established, this would be a significant population of ~185 gas-rich, starless dark-matter halos near M31, directly probing the dark-matter substructure predicted by ΛCDM. The catalog itself has potential value: it is drawn from a homogeneous blind HI survey with explicit selection criteria, includes 108 UCHVCs, and reports measured sizes, fluxes, and velocity widths. The BTFR comparison uses an external, independently calibrated relation and is not circular in the fitting sense. However, the paper's main astrophysical conclusion is not supported by the data it presents: the claimed spatial concentration around M31 is never quantified and appears contradicted by the published coordinates. Since all derived masses and the minihalo interpretation rest on the M31 distance assignment, the central conclusion is not currently defensible.

major comments (4)
  1. [§3.3, Fig. 1, Tables A.1–A.3] The claim that 185/192 CHVCs are 'spatially and kinematically concentrated around M31' is not quantified and is internally contradicted by the catalog coordinates. M31 is at (l,b)=(121.2°,-21.6°); the tables include CHVC44.53-20.86-215 (l=44.5°, b=-20.9°, angular separation ≈71°), CHVC56.36-32.88-323 (≈58°), and CHVC75.24-42.76-269 (≈48°). No angular-radius or projected-radius definition of 'near M31' is given. At D=0.8 Mpc, 30° corresponds to ~420 kpc projected, already larger than the M31 virial radius; many listed objects are 40–70° away, i.e. ~0.55–1 Mpc. The velocity median (-296.1 km/s) alone cannot establish association because Milky Way halo HVCs in this direction can have similar LSR velocities. The table itself provides the test, and the test fails.
  2. [§4] All 185 CHVCs are assigned D=0.8 Mpc solely from the claimed M31 projection. The robustness test over 0.5–1.2 Mpc only varies the distance within an assumed M31 halo; it does not test the alternative that these are Milky Way halo clouds at 50–150 kpc, which would lower M_HI and M_dyn by factors of ~30–300 and move the sample far off the BTFR. Since the spatial association is unsupported (previous comment), the derivation of minihalo masses that are then used to confirm the minihalo model is circular. Independent distance constraints—e.g., 21-cm absorption, optical/UV stellar counterparts, or statistical distance indicators—are needed before any distance-dependent physical conclusion can be drawn.
  3. [§4, Fig. 5] The statement that 'approximately half of the CHVCs also fall on the BTFR' is not quantitative and rests on the unjustified assumption V_rot = W50/2 for unresolved or non-rotating clouds. W50 includes thermal and turbulent broadening and possible multiple velocity components; using half of it as a rotation velocity without demonstrating ordered rotation, and without inclination correction or error propagation, is not reliable. The BTFR test is load-bearing for the dark-matter-domination interpretation. The authors should define 'follow' quantitatively (e.g., scatter about the McGaugh & Schombert 2015 relation with measurement errors), and should explore alternative estimators of the characteristic velocity (e.g., W50/2 with a turbulence correction, or resolved velocity gradients where available).
  4. [§4, stellar mass limit] For CHVC125.36-22.29-434, the estimated limiting stellar mass of 168 M_sun is presented as a strong dark-galaxy result. The calculation should be checked for propagation of the limiting magnitudes and the color term (m_i^g - m_i^r): using the survey limiting magnitudes in the mass-to-light relation is not the same as using the object's actual color. Even if the number is roughly order-correct, the conclusion 'almost dark' should be stated with the appropriate uncertainty. This is a local issue, but it affects the illustrative dark-galaxy claim.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§3.1, §4] The terms 'southern sky' and 'northern sky region' are used without formal definition. Since the 7 objects without distances are those at positive Galactic latitude, the text should say this explicitly rather than using ambiguous sky-region language.
  2. [§3.1] 'We restricted the source velocities to less than 200 km s−1' is ambiguous for negative velocities; should be |V_LSR| < 200 km/s, or a clearly stated sign convention.
  3. [§3.3] 'only 4 CHVCs exhibit larger than 120 km s−1' is unclear; should say 'exhibit V_LSR > +120 km/s' to match the histogram.
  4. [§2.2] Equations (1)–(4) for the image limiting magnitude are confusingly written: the notation m_i^g can be misread as an object color, and the derivation from point-source limits to extended-image limits needs a clearer step-by-step explanation.
  5. [General] There are numerous typographical and encoding issues: 'intergrated', 'sigal', 'Figue', 'F AST', and broken axis labels in Figures 2–3 (e.g., 'M/uni2299', 'c−2'). These should be corrected in a revision.
  6. [§3.1] The cross-match with previous CHVC catalogs is described but the small overlap (8 objects) is not discussed. A brief comment on survey sensitivity, resolution, and sky coverage differences would help readers evaluate completeness and contamination.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

M31 association and minihalo masses are constructed from the same assumed distance and latitude cut.

  1. self definitional [Section 3.1 (selection) and Section 4 (Discussion)]
    "we restricted the sample to sources at Galactic latitudes outside the range -20 to 20. ... Among them, 185 objects located in the southern sky are spatially projected near M31 and M33."

    The only positional cut in the selection is |b|>20. Since M31 has b=-21.6, the 'southern sky' set is exactly the b<-20 subset, and the paper never defines an angular radius or projected-distance threshold for 'near M31'. Appendix A lists many of the 185 at 40-70 degrees from M31, e.g. CHVC44.53-20.86-215 (l=44.5,b=-20.9) is about 71 degrees from M31. The 'concentration around M31' is therefore a relabeling of the latitude selection rather than an independently measured spatial association.

  2. other [Section 4 (Discussion), mass derivations]
    "Adopting an M31 distance of 0.8 Mpc, we derive H i masses in the range 1.9×10^5 to 4.0×10^6 M⊙ and dynamical masses from 1.0×10^7 to 6.3×10^8 M⊙ ... placing them firmly within the minihalo regime."

    The paper's own formulas give M_HI = 2.36×10^5 D^2 Ssum and R_eff proportional to D, with M_dyn proportional to R_eff and hence D. Thus the derived 'minihalo-scale' masses and radii are algebraic consequences of choosing D=0.8 Mpc. That distance is adopted because the clouds are asserted to be near M31, and the same masses are then used to conclude the clouds are M31 minihalos. The agreement with minihalo predictions is therefore a consistency check of the assumed distance, not an independent confirmation of the M31 association.

full rationale

The catalog construction itself is largely non-circular: CHVCs are selected from FASHI DR2 with explicit cuts (|b|>20, |V_LSR|>90 km/s, angular size <2°), no fitted constants enter, and the BTFR comparison uses the external McGaugh & Schombert (2015) relation, so that part has independent content conditional on distance. However, the central physical claim is self-consistent rather than independently established. First, the '185/192 concentrated around M31' count coincides with the sample's b<-20 subset; no quantitative 'near M31' criterion is given, and many catalogued objects are tens of degrees from M31, so the association is a relabeling of the latitude cut. Second, the minihalo-scale masses and radii are computed from the same assumed distance: M_HI ∝ D^2, R_eff ∝ D, M_dyn ∝ D. Adopting D=0.8 Mpc effectively forces the derived medians into the minihalo regime, and the claimed agreement with minihalo predictions is a consistency check of the assumption rather than a test of it. The paper itself flags this in §4: 'we assume a distance of 0.8 Mpc'. This is partial circularity rather than full circularity, because the catalog, optical non-detections, and external BTFR still provide independent information.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The main free parameter is the adopted M31 distance, which controls all derived masses and radii. Additional modeling choices (Reff divisor, W50/2 as rotation, helium factor) affect the physical interpretation. No new particles or forces are introduced; the paper interprets existing HI sources.

free parameters (4)
  • M31 distance D for all 185 CHVCs = 0.8 Mpc
    Adopted from M31's distance to convert angular sizes and fluxes into kpc and M_sun; the paper explores 0.5-1.2 Mpc variation but the central interpretation uses 0.8 Mpc.
  • Effective radius divisor = 2.5
    FASHI fitting ellipses are 2.0-2.5 times larger than the 4.5-sigma region; the authors divide major and minor axes by 2.5, introducing a scale factor into Reff and hence Mdyn.
  • Rotational velocity Vrot = W50/2 = W50/2
    Assumes the full velocity width is rotation; for pressure-supported or turbulent clouds this overestimates rotation and dynamical mass. No inclination correction is applied.
  • Helium-to-baryon scaling factor = 1.33
    Converts HI mass to baryonic mass assuming primordial helium; standard but contributes to Mbar and BTFR placement.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption FASHI DR2 SoFiA source catalog is a complete and unbiased census of isolated HI clouds in the survey area.
    The selection starts from the FASHI extragalactic source catalog; no completeness or false-negative analysis for HVC-like sources is given, and only 8/192 objects match previous CHVC catalogs.
  • domain assumption Spatial and velocity coherence around M31 implies physical association with M31.
    Used in §3.3 to infer physical association without individual distances; foreground Milky Way HVCs could in principle mimic such clustering.
  • domain assumption Pan-STARRS1 non-detection at m_g = 22.8 implies no significant stellar population.
    The limiting magnitude is estimated from point sources; extended or low-surface-brightness stellar populations could be missed.
  • standard math Standard mass formulas: M_HI = 2.36e5 D^2 S and M_dyn = Vrot^2 R / G.
    These are conventional conversions; they are not the source of the central claim but are used throughout the derivation of physical properties.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A Catalog of Compact High-Velocity Clouds from the FAST All-Sky HI Survey (FASHI) DR2." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TJ6VUJNV

@misc{pith2026260714584,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A Catalog of Compact High-Velocity Clouds from the FAST All-Sky HI Survey (FASHI) DR2},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TJ6VUJNV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.14584}
}
read the original abstract

High-velocity clouds (HVCs) -- especially compact HVCs (CHVCs) -- are thought to serve as gaseous tracers of dark-matter-dominated subhalos, providing a crucial empirical link between the predicted dark matter substructure and observed satellite galaxies. In this paper, we present a new catalog of 192 CHVCs identified from the FAST All-Sky HI Survey (FASHI) Data Release 2 (DR2). Among these, 108 are ultra-compact HVCs (UCHVCs), the majority of which are new discoveries. We find that 185 of the 192 CHVCs are spatially and kinematically concentrated around the Andromeda galaxy (M31), with a median LSR velocity of -296.1 km/s, suggesting physical association with M31. Adopting an M31 distance of 0.8 Mpc, we derive HI masses in the range 1.9*10^{5} to 4.0*10^{6} Msun and dynamical masses from 1.0*10^{7} to 6.3*10^{8} Msun. Approximately half of the CHVCs follow the baryonic Tully--Fisher relation. No optical counterparts are detected in Pan-STARRS1 imaging down to a limiting magnitude of m_g = 22.8. We conclude that these CHVCs likely represent a population of gas-rich, starless minihalos and provide an excellent sample for the search for dark galaxies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.14584 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The spatial distribution of CHVCs selected from the FASHI DR2 source catalog. As a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Histograms of measured properties for the CHVCs. (a) system velocity. (b) signal-to-noise [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Histograms of obtained masses for the CHVCs. (a) H i mass. (b) dynamic mass. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The relationship between dynamic mass (Mdyn) and baryon mass (Mbary). The blue dotted line indicates where Mdyn equals Mbary, while the red dotted line marks Mdyn=6Mbary. to reside at large characteristic distances (>100 kpc) within the Local Group (LG) (Nicastro et al…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Left panel: H i Tully-Fisher relation (HTFR). The black points represent the dwarf galaxies [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: CHVC125.36-22.29-434. (a), H i column-density maps from the FAST observation shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 2 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Adams, E. A. K., Giovanelli, R., & Haynes, M. P. 2013, ApJ, 768, 77 3, 6, 8, 12

    2013

  2. [2]

    Adams, E. A. K., & Oosterloo, T. A. 2018, A&A, 612, A26 9

    2018

  3. [3]

    N., Teuben, P

    Blitz, L., Spergel, D. N., Teuben, P. J., Hartmann, D., & Burton, W. B. 1999, ApJ, 514, 818 2

    1999

  4. [4]

    Braun, R., & Burton, W. B. 1999, A&A, 341, 437 2, 6 Brüns, C., & Westmeier, T. 2004, A&A, 426, L9 3

    1999

  5. [5]

    C., Magnier, E

    Chambers, K. C., Magnier, E. A., Metcalfe, N., et al. 2016, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1612.05560 4 de Heij, V., Braun, R., & Burton, W. B. 2002, A&A, 391, 159 2, 9

    arXiv 2016

  6. [6]

    2014, A&A, 563, A99 3

    Faridani, S., Flöer, L., Kerp, J., & Westmeier, T. 2014, A&A, 563, A99 3

    2014

  7. [7]

    P., Kent, B

    Giovanelli, R., Haynes, M. P., Kent, B. R., & Adams, E. A. K. 2010, ApJ, 708, L22 10

    2010

  8. [8]

    P., Adams, E

    Giovanelli, R., Haynes, M. P., Adams, E. A. K., et al. 2013, AJ, 146, 15 3, 9

    2013

Show all 43 references
  1. [9]

    A., Hunter, D

    Herrmann, K. A., Hunter, D. A., Zhang, H.-X., & Elmegreen, B. G. 2016, AJ, 152, 177 13

    2016

  2. [10]

    2024, PASJ, 76, 733 2

    Homma, D., Chiba, M., Komiyama, Y., et al. 2024, PASJ, 76, 733 2

    2024

  3. [11]

    2019, Science China Physics, Mechanics, and Astronomy, 62, 959502 3

    Jiang, P., Yue, Y., Gan, H., et al. 2019, Science China Physics, Mechanics, and Astronomy, 62, 959502 3

    2019

  4. [12]

    2020, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 20, 064 3

    Jiang, P., Tang, N.-Y., Hou, L.-G., et al. 2020, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 20, 064 3

    2020

  5. [13]

    2024, Science China Physics, Mechanics, and Astronomy, 67, 259514 4

    Jing, Y., Wang, J., Xu, C., et al. 2024, Science China Physics, Mechanics, and Astronomy, 67, 259514 4

    2024

  6. [14]

    2024, ApJ, 964, 123 2

    Jung, M., Roca-Fàbrega, S., Kim, J.-H., et al. 2024, ApJ, 964, 123 2

    2024

  7. [15]

    D., Kaisina, E

    Karachentsev, I. D., Kaisina, E. I., & Kashibadze Nasonova, O. G. 2017, AJ, 153, 6 11

    2017

  8. [16]

    V., Valenzuela, O., & Prada, F

    Klypin, A., Kravtsov, A. V., Valenzuela, O., & Prada, F. 1999, ApJ, 522, 82 1

    1999

  9. [17]

    M., Graziani, R., et al

    Kourkchi, E., Courtois, H. M., Graziani, R., et al. 2020, AJ, 159, 67 10

    2020

  10. [18]

    V., Gnedin, O

    Kravtsov, A. V., Gnedin, O. Y., & Klypin, A. A. 2004, ApJ, 609, 482 2

    2004

  11. [19]

    C., Howk, J

    Lehner, N., Berek, S. C., Howk, J. C., et al. 2020, ApJ, 900, 9 2

    2020

  12. [20]

    L., Ball, C., et al

    Leisman, L., Rhode, K. L., Ball, C., et al. 2021, AJ, 162, 274 4

    2021

  13. [21]

    2025, Science Advances, 11, eads4057 3, 12

    Liu, X.-L., Xu, J.-L., Jiang, P., et al. 2025, Science Advances, 11, eads4057 3, 12

    2025

  14. [22]

    McConnachie, A. W. 2012, AJ, 144, 4 7, 10

    2012

  15. [23]

    S., & Schombert, J

    McGaugh, S. S., & Schombert, J. M. 2015, ApJ, 802, 18 11, 12

    2015

  16. [24]

    A., Gannon, J

    Monaci, M., Forbes, D. A., Gannon, J. S., et al. 2026, MNRAS, 548, stag732 5

    2026

  17. [25]

    1999, ApJ, 524, L19 1 Müller, O., Pawlowski, M

    Moore, B., Ghigna, S., Governato, F., et al. 1999, ApJ, 524, L19 1 Müller, O., Pawlowski, M. S., Revaz, Y., et al. 2024, A&A, 684, L6 2

    1999

  18. [26]

    2003, Nature, 421, 719 10 Planck Collaboration, Aghanim, N., Akrami, Y., et al

    Nicastro, F., Zezas, A., Elvis, M., et al. 2003, Nature, 421, 719 10 Planck Collaboration, Aghanim, N., Akrami, Y., et al. 2020, A&A, 641, A6 11

    2003

  19. [27]

    E., Peek, J

    Putman, M. E., Peek, J. E. G., & Joung, M. R. 2012, ARA&A, 50, 491 2

    2012

  20. [28]

    E., de Heij, V., Staveley-Smith, L., et al

    Putman, M. E., de Heij, V., Staveley-Smith, L., et al. 2002, AJ, 123, 873 2, 6, 9

    2002

  21. [29]

    L., Salzer, J

    Rhode, K. L., Salzer, J. J., Haurberg, N. C., et al. 2013, AJ, 145, 149 3, 9

    2013

  22. [30]

    V., Begum, A., Oosterloo, T., et al

    Ryan-Weber, E. V., Begum, A., Oosterloo, T., et al. 2008, MNRAS, 384, 535 10

    2008

  23. [31]

    V., Wetzel, A., & Fattahi, A

    Sales, L. V., Wetzel, A., & Fattahi, A. 2022, Nature Astronomy, 6, 897 2 A Catalog of Compact High-Velocity Clouds 15

    2022

  24. [32]

    R., Peek, J

    Saul, D. R., Peek, J. E. G., Grcevich, J., et al. 2012, ApJ, 758, 44 2, 6

    2012

  25. [33]

    S., Fattahi, A., et al

    Sawala, T., Frenk, C. S., Fattahi, A., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 456, 85 2

    2016

  26. [34]

    D., Salzer, J

    Skillman, E. D., Salzer, J. J., Berg, D. A., et al. 2013, AJ, 146, 3 3, 9

    2013

  27. [35]

    F., & Wolfire, M

    Sternberg, A., McKee, C. F., & Wolfire, M. G. 2002, ApJS, 143, 419 2, 12

    2002

  28. [36]

    I., Pomarède, D., et al

    Valade, A., Libeskind, N. I., Pomarède, D., et al. 2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 1610 10

    2024

  29. [37]

    P., & van Woerden, H

    Wakker, B. P., & van Woerden, H. 1997, ARA&A, 35, 217 2

    1997

  30. [38]

    2021, MNRAS, 506, 3962 5

    Westmeier, T., Kitaeff, S., Pallot, D., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 506, 3962 5

    2021

  31. [39]

    G., McKee, C

    Wolfire, M. G., McKee, C. F., Hollenbach, D., & Tielens, A. G. G. M. 2003, ApJ, 587, 278 12

    2003

  32. [40]

    2025, ApJ, 982, L36 3

    Xu, J.-L., Zhu, M., Yu, N.-P., et al. 2025, ApJ, 982, L36 3

    2025

  33. [41]

    M., & Lo, K

    Young, L. M., & Lo, K. Y. 1996, ApJ, 462, 203 9

    1996

  34. [42]

    2024, Science China Physics, Mechanics, and Astronomy, 67, 219511 3

    Zhang, C.-P., Zhu, M., Jiang, P., et al. 2024, Science China Physics, Mechanics, and Astronomy, 67, 219511 3

    2024

  35. [43]

    2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2606.31539 3, 5 16 Xu et al

    Zhang, C.-P., Zhu, M., Jiang, P., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2606.31539 3, 5 16 Xu et al. Appendix A: CHVC CATALOG Table A.1: Continue: measured and derived properties of CHVCs. Name F ASHI-id RA+Dec. VLSR Dmaj ∗ Dmin W50 Ssum SNR log( NHI) Reff logMHI logMdyn CHVC+l+b...

    2026 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 2, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.