Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 98 references

The $M_{\rm BH}-M_\star$ Relation of the hyperluminous Dust-obscured Quasars up to $z \sim 4$

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Eight hyperluminous dust-obscured quasars at z = 1.5-3.7 sit on the local black-hole-to-stellar-mass relation.

desk verdict Valuable new stellar masses for eight Hot DOGs, but the no-evolution claim is built on a mass definition mismatch and lacks a statistical test – treat the measurements as the contribution, not the conclusion. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.01218 v1 pith:35KP5Y4W submitted 2025-06-01 astro-ph.GA

Yibin Luo , Lulu Fan , Weibin Sun , Haoran Yu , Yunkun Han , Guangwen Chen , Mengqiu Huang , Yihang Zhang
show 1 more author
Zheyu Lin
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords HotDOGsdust-obscuredquasarsblackholemassstellartorelationBayesianSEDfittingEddingtonratiohigh-redshiftgalaxyevolution
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 sets out to determine whether the most luminous known dust-obscured quasars--eight hyperluminous hot dust-obscured galaxies (Hot DOGs) at $z=1.5$-$3.7$--already obey the same black-hole-to-stellar-mass relation as nearby massive galaxies. Stellar masses are derived by Bayesian SED fitting that separates scattered quasar light from host starlight, with HST image decomposition added for the three sources with the best data, and black-hole masses come from single-epoch virial estimators fed by SDSS broad emission lines. The authors find a median $\log(M_{\rm BH}/M_\star)$ of $-1.83$, inside the scatter of the local relation, and conclude that as a population these Hot DOGs show no significant evolution of the $M_{\rm BH}$-$M_\star$ relation out to $z\sim4$. If this holds, the black holes of these extreme systems had essentially finished growing relative to their hosts by $z=1.5$-$3$, making the objects plausible progenitors of today's massive early-type galaxies.

What carries the argument

The carrying machinery is a three-component Bayesian SED fit: the CLUMPY torus model (a clumpy-dust model whose rest-frame UV/optical output is largely scattered light from the central obscured quasar) for the AGN, Bruzual & Charlot simple stellar population templates for the host galaxy, and a single-temperature graybody for cold dust reradiation, with the stellar and AGN flux additionally pinned by two-dimensional image decomposition with GaLight on HST images where those exist. The black-hole masses are obtained from single-epoch virial estimators, using emission-line FWHMs from the SDSS quasar catalog and continuum luminosities corrected for obscuration by the same CLUMPY model. The CLUMPY model does double duty: it represents the scattered AGN light that must be removed to get the stellar mass, and it supplies the intrinsic continuum luminosity that enters the black-hole mass estimate.

What would settle it

Take one of the three sources with the most complete data, such as J0220, and measure its host stellar mass independently from a rest-frame optical spectrum or JWST imaging that resolves the host; if that independent mass comes out more than $\sim0.3$ dex below the SED-decomposition value, the $M_{\rm BH}/M_\star$ ratio would rise above the local relation and the paper's central claim would fail.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that hyperluminous dust-obscured quasars at $z=1.5$-$3.7$ sit on the local $M_{\rm BH}$-$M_\star$ relation: the median $\log(M_{\rm BH}/M_\star)$ of the eight measured Hot DOGs is $-1.83$, with the 16th-84th percentile range $-2.14$ to $-1.31$ falling within the $1$-$2\sigma$ scatter of the local relation. Four of the eight sources lie inside the local $M_{\rm BH}$-$M_{\rm bulge}$ relation and four lie above it, and the paper interprets the large scatter as a mix of measurement error and intrinsic scatter produced by minor mergers. The same systems show Eddington ratios with a median of $1.05$ and values approaching $3$, suggesting super-Eddington accretion in overdense, merger-rich environments. The authors conclude that these hot dust-obscured galaxies are progenitors of massive early-type galaxies whose mass assembly was largely complete by these redshifts, and they speculate that strong AGN feedback will quench the remaining star formation and keep the systems on the local relation.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the model correctly separates scattered quasar light from genuine host starlight in the rest-frame ultraviolet and optical, and that this separation remains trustworthy for the five sources without HST imaging to check it.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If these Hot DOGs already sit on the local relation, their black holes had reached $10^9$-$10^{10}\,M_\odot$ while the host galaxies were still assembling, implying the black-hole-to-stellar-mass tie-up was in place by $z\sim3$.
  • Super-Eddington accretion (median $\lambda_{\rm Edd}=1.05$, maximum near $3$) in overdense, merger-rich environments offers a route by which such massive black holes could be built so early.
  • The co-existence of rapid black-hole growth and intense star formation (SFRs up to $\sim2600\,M_\odot\,{\rm yr}^{-1}$) places Hot DOGs in the brief starburst-to-quasar transition that precedes the local early-type population.
  • AGN feedback in the form of outflows, already detected in some Hot DOGs, would naturally quench the remaining star formation quickly and keep the systems from drifting off the local relation.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A consequence the authors leave implicit: if the relation is already in place at $z\sim3$ in the most luminous obscured quasars, then black-hole growth in these systems kept pace with, or ran ahead of, bulge assembly, so evolutionary paths that grow the black hole after the galaxy are not needed for this population.
  • The paper's conclusion rests heavily on the five sources without HST imaging; a direct test would be JWST rest-frame optical imaging of those five to verify that the host luminosities inferred by the SED decomposition are real.
  • The unexplained $2400$-$2700$ Å photometric bump in J0834, which the paper notes in Section 5 that existing AGN and stellar templates fail to explain, is a useful stress point: if that bump is stellar continuum rather than AGN emission, J0834's stellar mass would change and its position relative to the local relation would shift.
  • The high Eddington ratios imply black-hole doubling times much shorter than galaxy assembly times; comparing the observed scatter in $M_{\rm BH}/M_\star$ with merger-driven simulations would test the paper's suggestion that minor mergers produce the scatter.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies the M_BH-M_star relation of a sample of 11 hyperluminous Hot DOGs at z=1.5-3.7 selected from WISE and SDSS. For eight sources with successful stellar mass measurements, the authors derive BH masses from single-epoch virial estimators with obscuration-corrected continuum luminosities from CLUMPY SED fitting, and stellar masses from Bayesian SED fitting (alone or combined with HST image decomposition). They report high Eddington ratios (median ~1.05), and compare log(M_BH/M_star) with the local M_BH-M_bulge relation, concluding that the population does not significantly deviate from the local relation and may represent progenitors of massive early-type galaxies.

Significance. If the conclusion is correct, this would be one of the highest-luminosity obscured quasar samples with both BH and stellar mass measurements at z~2-4, extending the M_BH-M_star relation into a regime that is largely unexplored. The paper uses a state-of-the-art Bayesian SED fitting code with CLUMPY torus models and, for three sources, combines HST image decomposition with SED fitting. It also explicitly acknowledges the limitations of individual sources (e.g., J0834). However, the strength of the headline claim is currently limited by two issues: the comparison mass definition (total stellar mass vs bulge mass) and the absence of a formal statistical test. Neither is insurmountable, but both must be addressed before the conclusion can be considered robust.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 5, Figures 4-5] The central comparison uses log(M_BH/M_star), where M_star is the total stellar mass, but the local relation from Kormendy & Ho (2013) is defined for bulge mass (M_bulge). For any source with a disk, M_star,total > M_bulge, which systematically lowers the plotted ratio and biases the comparison toward the no-evolution conclusion. The paper does not provide bulge-to-total ratios or bulge-mass estimates from the HST decompositions. A B/T~0.5 correction would shift the median log(M_BH/M_star) from -1.83 to roughly -1.5, placing it outside the 2-sigma scatter of the local relation and reversing the claimed result. The authors should either measure bulge masses or compare against a local M_BH-M_star,total relation (e.g., Reines & Volonteri 2015) and recompute the statistics.
  2. [Section 5] The statement that the median log(M_BH/M_star) falls within the 2-sigma scatter of the local relation is not a formal statistical test. With only eight sources and substantial measurement errors on both M_BH and M_star, the authors should perform an explicit test of the null hypothesis that the sample is drawn from the local relation, accounting for the reported uncertainties. They should also report the result with J0834 excluded, given the acknowledged unreliability of that source.
  3. [Section 3.2 and Section 5] J0834 is retained in the sample despite the paper's own assessment that the rest-frame 2400-2700 Angstrom bump cannot be explained by existing AGN and stellar templates, that the SED fitting is poor, and that the HST image decomposition is unreliable because the host is more than an order of magnitude fainter than the AGN. The paper labels the resulting ratio as having low reliability yet includes it in the median calculation and in Figures 4-5. The authors should exclude J0834 from the main analysis or explicitly demonstrate that the conclusions are unchanged when it is removed.
  4. [Section 3.1 and Section 4] For the five sources without HST image constraints, the stellar masses are derived purely from SED decomposition separating CLUMPY scattered AGN light from BC03 stellar templates. The paper does not quantify the degeneracy between young stellar populations and scattered AGN light in the rest-frame UV/optical, nor does it validate these stellar masses against an independent estimator (e.g., using the FIR-derived SFR or a rest-frame K-band stellar mass indicator). Given that these sources contribute to the median, this systematic uncertainty should be assessed, for example with mock SED recovery tests or comparison to IR-based stellar masses.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 5] The phrase 'its’ M_BH − M_star relation' should be 'their M_BH–M_star relation'.
  2. [Table 1] The notes state that a dividing line separates the low- and high-redshift subsamples, but the rendered table appears to lack the dividing line; please ensure the line is visible.
  3. [Section 3.3] The equation label (2) appears after the equation rather than before it; also, the sentence 'BH mass estimates of sources at different redshifts rely on different broad emission lines' is redundant with the following sentence and could be removed.
  4. [Figure 5] The x-axis shows both z and log(1+z), but the red median star is plotted without an associated uncertainty; adding the 16th-84th percentile range as a shaded band would aid comparison.
  5. [Abstract] The phrase 'We find no significant differences in the M_BH/M_star of these Hot DOGs compared to the local relation' overstates the body text, which says the relation 'may not have significant differences'; the abstract should match the more cautious wording.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: M_BH and M_* are measured independently and benchmarked against external local relations, with only minor methodological self-citations.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained and not circular. Black hole masses come from single-epoch virial estimators (Eq. 2) using FWHM from the Wu & Shen (2022) catalog and an obscuration-corrected continuum luminosity from the CLUMPY SED component; stellar masses come from BC03+CLUMPY SED fitting, optionally constrained by HST image decomposition. Neither quantity is defined in terms of the other, and the M_BH-M_* comparison is made against external local relations (Kormendy & Ho 2013; Bennert et al. 2011) that are not fitted or recalibrated in this paper. The shared CLUMPY component creates model covariance, but this is a robustness concern rather than an equivalence of inputs and outputs. Self-citations to BayeSED3 and Yu et al. (2025) supply computational tools, not the paper's central conclusion. The caveats flagged in the text—J0834's unexplained rest-frame 2400-2700 Angstrom bump, and the use of total stellar mass against the local bulge-mass relation—are potential biases in measurement or comparison, but they do not reduce the claimed no-evolution result to its own inputs. No circular step can be exhibited; score 1 reflects only the presence of minor methodological self-citations.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on two modeling layers: the CLUMPY AGN and scattered-light plus stellar SED decomposition, which sets both M_* and the continuum luminosity entering M_BH, and the local calibration of single-epoch virial masses. No new physical entities are introduced, but each fitted SED component is a free parameter in practice, and the external benchmarks are only valid for bulge masses.

free parameters (5)
  • SFH parameters (e-folding timescale, age) in BayeSED3 = not individually reported
    Exponentially declining SFH assumption from Section 3.1; these parameters and the stellar templates set the stellar mass scale.
  • Dust attenuation parameters (Calzetti law normalization) = not individually reported
    Affect the UV/optical slope and the stellar/AGN decomposition in Section 3.1.
  • CLUMPY torus parameters (column density, covering factor, number of clouds, inclination) = not individually reported
    Model the AGN and scattered-light component; used in SED fitting and to compute the obscuration-corrected continuum luminosity for BH masses in Sections 3.1 and 3.3.
  • Cold dust temperature T_dust and emissivity index beta = not reported
    Graybody parameters for FIR/mm sources in Section 3.1.
  • Host galaxy morphological parameters and AGN point source flux in GaLight = not reported
    Image decomposition for four HST sources in Section 3.2; flux uncertainty is assumed to be 20%.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Single-epoch virial BH mass estimators (Vestergaard and Peterson 2006) calibrated on local AGNs are valid for obscured, hyperluminous quasars with scattered broad lines at z=1.5-3.7.
    Section 3.3 applies Equation 2 using FWHM from Wu and Shen (2022) and CLUMPY-corrected luminosities; no correction for super-Eddington bias is applied.
  • domain assumption The CLUMPY model correctly represents the scattered or unabsorbed AGN light in the rest-frame UV/optical, enabling separation from stellar light.
    Section 3.1; for J0834 the paper itself reports a photometric bump that existing AGN and stellar templates cannot explain in Section 5.
  • domain assumption Stellar population synthesis with BC03 SSP, Chabrier IMF, Calzetti attenuation, and exponentially declining SFH yields unbiased stellar masses.
    Section 3.1; different star formation histories or IMFs would shift M_*.
  • domain assumption Total stellar mass M_* can be compared directly to the bulge mass M_bulge in the local Kormendy and Ho (2013) relation.
    Section 5 and Figures 4 and 5 use M_* from SED fitting against a M_BH-M_bulge relation without bulge or total corrections.
  • domain assumption The eight sources with successful stellar mass estimates are representative of the full 11-source sample.
    Section 4 reports no stellar mass for three sources because of insufficient data; the missingness may correlate with host brightness or dust geometry.
  • domain assumption Flat LCDM cosmology with H0=70 km/s/Mpc, Omega_m=0.3, Omega_Lambda=0.7.
    Stated at the end of Section 1; enters luminosity distances and stellar mass absolute scales.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The $M_{\rm BH}-M_\star$ Relation of the hyperluminous Dust-obscured Quasars up to $z \sim 4$." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/35KP5Y4W

@misc{pith2026250601218,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The $M_\rm BH-M_\star$ Relation of the hyperluminous Dust-obscured Quasars up to $z \sim 4$},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/35KP5Y4W}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.01218}
}
abstract

Hot dust-obscured galaxies (Hot DOGs) are a rare population of hyperluminous dust-obscured quasars discovered by the Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE) all-sky survey. The heavy circumnuclear dust obscuration allows only a small amount of scattered light from the obscured quasar to escape, enabling the decomposition of the stellar component from the total flux. The presence of scattered light enables the redshift of the source and the properties of the black hole to be obtained from SDSS and SDSS-related literature. From WISE and SDSS data, we select 11 hyperluminous Hot DOGs at $z=1.5-3.7$ with bolometric luminosities $L_{\rm bol} \gtrsim 10^{47}\,\mathrm{erg \ s^{-1}}$. We investigate the $M_{\rm BH}-M_\star$ relation in these sources using Bayesian spectral energy distribution (SED) fitting or with extra constraints from \textit{Hubble Space Telescope} (HST) image decomposition. Stellar masses are successfully derived for eight Hot DOGs. We find high Eddington ratios $\lambda_{\rm Edd}$ in these Hot DOGs, with the median value of 1.05 and the maximum value close to 3. The super-Eddington accretion may be associated with the overdense environments of Hot DOGs. We find no significant differences in the $M_{\rm BH}/M_\star$ of these Hot DOGs compared to the local relation, suggesting that these dust-obscured quasars are the progenitors of massive early-type galaxies. We speculate that the subsequent evolution of Hot DOGs may be significantly influenced by AGN feedback and remain on the local relation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.01218 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The sources in our sample are distributed in the Lbol − z plane. Sources in other works that study the MBH −M⋆ relation at z = 1 − 4 are also shown in the figure. This figure shows that our Hot DOGs in the relatively high￾z subsample are 1-2 dex brighter than sources at the same redshift range reported in other works, indicating that the MBH−M⋆ relation study of hyperluminous sources represents a key highlight of th… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Best-fit image decomposition results for the three sources (J0116, J0220 and J0851) obtained using GaLight. The panels from left to right are: (1) observed data, (2) best-fit Sersic + point source model, (3) observed data minus the point source model (4) residual divided by variance and (5) radial surface brightness profile (top) and residual (bottom). This profile includes the data (open circles), best-fit model (b… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Three components best-fit SEDs of three sources which use the combining image and SED decomposition method. The red points represent the observed data. The blue crosses and green points are the fluxes of stellar and AGN component derived from image decomposition. The green, blue, and orange solid lines represent the emissions from AGN, stellar, and cold dust components, respectively. The black solid line represents … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: MBH − M⋆ relation. The green and red circles represent relatively low redshift and high redshift sources in our sample, respectively. The local relation and local galaxies from Kormendy & Ho (2013) are shown using solid line and black dots. The gray filled area represe…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The red star marked the median log (MBH/M⋆) of the eight Hot DOGs. log (MBH/M⋆) from redshift 0 − 4 in different population are also shown. The gray filled ar￾eas of different opacity represent the scatter ranges of log (MBH/Mbulge) for local galaxies at 1, 2, and 3 σ …

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

98 extracted references · 16 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Abbott, T. M. C., Adam´ ow, M., Aguena, M., et al. 2021, ApJS, 255, 20, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac00b3

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac00b3 2021

  2. [2]

    M., & Hickox, R

    Alexander, D. M., & Hickox, R. C. 2012, New Astronomy Reviews, 56, 93, doi: 10.1016/j.newar.2011.11.003

    doi:10.1016/j.newar.2011.11.003 2012

  3. [3]

    M., Brandt, W

    Alexander, D. M., Brandt, W. N., Smail, I., et al. 2008, AJ, 135, 1968, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/135/5/1968

    doi:10.1088/0004-6256/135/5/1968 2008

  4. [4]

    F., Argudo-Fern´ andez, M., et al

    Almeida, A., Anderson, S. F., Argudo-Fern´ andez, M., et al. 2023, ApJS, 267, 44, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/acda98 11 T able 2.Photometry of Hot DOGs Sourceu g r i z Y J H KW1 W2 W3 W4 (µJy) (µJy) (µJy) (µJy) (µJy) (µJy) (µJy) (µJy) (µJy) (µJy) (µJy) (µJy) (µJy) J1505 32.0±1.5 39.1±0.6 53.5±0.8 70.4±1.2 75.7±4.0 69.7±3.3 a 99.8±4.0 c ...167.7±8.2 c 121.6±4.9...

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/acda98 2020

  5. [5]

    J., Eisenhardt, P

    Assef, R. J., Eisenhardt, P. R. M., Stern, D., et al. 2015, ApJ, 804, 27, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/804/1/27

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/804/1/27 2015

  6. [6]

    J., Walton, D

    Assef, R. J., Walton, D. J., Brightman, M., et al. 2016, ApJ, 819, 111, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/819/2/111

    doi:10.3847/0004-637x/819/2/111 2016

  7. [7]

    J., Brightman, M., Walton, D

    Assef, R. J., Brightman, M., Walton, D. J., et al. 2020, ApJ, 897, 112, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab9814

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab9814 2020

  8. [8]

    J., Bauer, F

    Assef, R. J., Bauer, F. E., Blain, A. W., et al. 2022, ApJ, 934, 101, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac77fc

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac77fc 2022

Show all 98 references
  1. [9]

    F., McIntosh, D

    Bell, E. F., McIntosh, D. H., Katz, N., & Weinberg, M. D. 2003, ApJS, 149, 289, doi: 10.1086/378847

    2003 doi

  2. [10]

    Malkan, M. A. 2011, ApJ, 726, 59, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/726/2/59

    2011 doi

  3. [11]

    2007, A&A, 472, 443, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20077611

    Bongiorno, A., Zamorani, G., Gavignaud, I., et al. 2007, A&A, 472, 443, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20077611

    2007 doi

  4. [12]

    2014, MNRAS, 443, 2077, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu1248

    Bongiorno, A., Maiolino, R., Brusa, M., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 443, 2077, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu1248

    2014 doi

  5. [13]

    2019, A&A, 622, A103, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201834156

    Boquien, M., Burgarella, D., Roehlly, Y., et al. 2019, A&A, 622, A103, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201834156

    2019 doi

  6. [14]

    C., et al

    Borys, C., Smail, I., Chapman, S. C., et al. 2005, ApJ, 635, 853, doi: 10.1086/491617

    2005 doi

  7. [15]

    2003, MNRAS, 344, 1000, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06897.x

    Bruzual, G., & Charlot, S. 2003, MNRAS, 344, 1000, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06897.x

    2003

  8. [16]

    C., et al

    Calzetti, D., Armus, L., Bohlin, R. C., et al. 2000, ApJ, 533, 682, doi: 10.1086/308692

    2000 doi

  9. [17]

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

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

    2003 doi

  10. [18]

    C., Magnier, E

    Chambers, K. C., Magnier, E. A., Metcalfe, N., et al. 2016, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1612.05560, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1612.05560

    2016 doi arXiv

  11. [19]

    M., Wright, E

    Cutri, R. M., Wright, E. L., Conrow, T., et al. 2021, VizieR Online Data Catalog: AllWISE Data Release (Cutri+ 2013), VizieR On-line Data Catalog: II/328. Originally published in: IPAC/Caltech (2013)

    2013

  12. [20]

    P., et al

    Decarli, R., Loiacono, F., Farina, E. P., et al. 2024, A&A, 689, A219, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202449239 Del Moro, A., Watson, M. G., Mateos, S., et al. 2009, A&A, 493, 445, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200809665 D ´ ıaz-Santos, T., Assef, R. J., Blain, A. W., et al. 2016, ApJL, 816,...

    2024 doi

  13. [21]

    J., Blain, A

    Diaz-Santos, T., Assef, R. J., Blain, A. W., et al. 2018, Science, 362, 1034, doi: 10.1126/science.aap7605 D ´ ıaz-Santos, T., Assef, R. J., Eisenhardt, P. R. M., et al. 2021, A&A, 654, A37, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202140455

    2018 doi

  14. [22]

    Ding, X., Birrer, S., Treu, T., & Silverman, J. D. 2021a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2111.08721, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2111.08721

    doi arXiv

  15. [23]

    2020, ApJ, 888, 37, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5b90

    Ding, X., Silverman, J., Treu, T., et al. 2020, ApJ, 888, 37, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5b90

    2020 doi

  16. [24]

    2021b, MNRAS, 501, 269, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa2992

    Ding, X., Treu, T., Birrer, S., et al. 2021b, MNRAS, 501, 269, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa2992

    doi

  17. [25]

    D., et al

    Ding, X., Onoue, M., Silverman, J. D., et al. 2023, Nature, 621, 51, doi: 10.1038/s41586-023-06345-5

    2023 doi

  18. [26]

    2017, A&A, 604, A67, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201731052

    Duras, F., Bongiorno, A., Piconcelli, E., et al. 2017, A&A, 604, A67, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201731052

    2017 doi

  19. [27]

    A., et al

    Dye, S., Lawrence, A., Read, M. A., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 473, 5113, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2622

    2018 doi

  20. [28]

    2013, The Messenger, 154, 32

    Edge, A., Sutherland, W., Kuijken, K., et al. 2013, The Messenger, 154, 32

    2013

  21. [29]

    Eisenhardt, P. R. M., Wu, J., Tsai, C.-W., et al. 2012, ApJ, 755, 173, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/755/2/173

    2012 doi

  22. [30]

    K., & Shu, X

    Fan, L., Gao, Y., Knudsen, K. K., & Shu, X. 2018a, ApJ, 854, 157, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaaaae

    doi

  23. [31]

    Fan, L., Han, Y., Nikutta, R., Drouart, G., & Knudsen, K. K. 2016a, ApJ, 823, 107, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/823/2/107

    doi

  24. [32]

    K., Fogasy, J., & Drouart, G

    Fan, L., Knudsen, K. K., Fogasy, J., & Drouart, G. 2018b, ApJL, 856, L5, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aab496

    doi

  25. [33]

    2016b, ApJL, 822, L32, doi: 10.3847/2041-8205/822/2/L32

    Fan, L., Han, Y., Fang, G., et al. 2016b, ApJL, 822, L32, doi: 10.3847/2041-8205/822/2/L32

    doi

  26. [34]

    T., et al

    Finnerty, L., Larson, K., Soifer, B. T., et al. 2020, ApJ, 905, 16, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abc3bf

    2020 doi

  27. [35]

    A., Magnier, E

    Flewelling, H. A., Magnier, E. A., Chambers, K. C., et al. 2020, ApJS, 251, 7, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/abb82d

    2020 doi

  28. [36]

    2022, Nature Communications, 13, 4574, doi: 10.1038/s41467-022-32297-x

    Ginolfi, M., Piconcelli, E., Zappacosta, L., et al. 2022, Nature Communications, 13, 4574, doi: 10.1038/s41467-022-32297-x

    2022 doi

  29. [37]

    J., Abergel, A., Abreu, A., et al

    Griffin, M. J., Abergel, A., Abreu, A., et al. 2010, A&A, 518, L3, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201014519

    2010 doi

  30. [38]

    Z., Bai, J.-M., & Han, Z

    Han, Y., Fan, L., Zheng, X. Z., Bai, J.-M., & Han, Z. 2023, ApJS, 269, 39, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/acfc3a

    2023 doi

  31. [39]

    2012, ApJ, 749, 123, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/749/2/123 —

    Han, Y., & Han, Z. 2012, ApJ, 749, 123, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/749/2/123 —. 2014, ApJS, 215, 2, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/215/1/2 —. 2019, ApJS, 240, 3, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aaeffa H¨ aring, N., & Rix, H.-W. 2004, ApJL, 604, L89, doi: 10.1086/383567

    2012 doi

  32. [40]

    C., & Alexander, D

    Hickox, R. C., & Alexander, D. M. 2018, ARA&A, 56, 625, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081817-051803

    2018 doi

  33. [41]

    F., Hernquist, L., Cox, T

    Hopkins, P. F., Hernquist, L., Cox, T. J., & Kereˇ s, D. 2008, ApJS, 175, 356, doi: 10.1086/524362

    2008 doi

  34. [42]

    2015, ApJ, 803, 57, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/803/2/57

    Ichikawa, K., Packham, C., Ramos Almeida, C., et al. 2015, ApJ, 803, 57, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/803/2/57

    2015 doi

  35. [43]

    2009, ApJL, 706, L215, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/706/2/L215

    Jahnke, K., Bongiorno, A., Brusa, M., et al. 2009, ApJL, 706, L215, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/706/2/L215

    2009 doi

  36. [44]

    F., Blain, A

    Jones, S. F., Blain, A. W., Stern, D., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 443, 146, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu1157

    2014 doi

  37. [45]

    D., Assef, R

    Jun, H. D., Assef, R. J., Bauer, F. E., et al. 2020, ApJ, 888, 110, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5e7b

    2020 doi

  38. [46]

    M., Dunkley, J., et al

    Komatsu, E., Smith, K. M., Dunkley, J., et al. 2011, ApJS, 192, 18, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/192/2/18 13

    2011 doi

  39. [47]

    Kormendy, J., & Ho, L. C. 2013, ARA&A, 51, 511, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-082708-101811

    2013 doi

  40. [48]

    J., Almaini, O., et al

    Lawrence, A., Warren, S. J., Almaini, O., et al. 2007, MNRAS, 379, 1599, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12040.x

    2007

  41. [49]

    2023a, ApJ, 958, 162, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ace25b

    Li, G., Tsai, C.-W., Stern, D., et al. 2023a, ApJ, 958, 162, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ace25b

    doi

  42. [50]

    J., Tsai, C.-W., et al

    Li, G., Assef, R. J., Tsai, C.-W., et al. 2024a, ApJ, 971, 40, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad5317

    doi

  43. [51]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2502.05813, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2502.05813

    Li, G., Wu, J., Tsai, C.-W., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2502.05813, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2502.05813

    2025 doi arXiv

  44. [52]

    2024b, ApJ, 961, 19, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad0e0d

    Li, J., Zhuang, M.-Y., & Shen, Y. 2024b, ApJ, 961, 19, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad0e0d

    doi

  45. [53]

    D., Ding, X., et al

    Li, J., Silverman, J. D., Ding, X., et al. 2021a, ApJ, 918, 22, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac06a8 —. 2021b, ApJ, 922, 142, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac2301

    doi

  46. [54]

    Li, J. I. H., Shen, Y., Ho, L. C., et al. 2021c, ApJ, 906, 103, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abc8e6 —. 2023b, ApJ, 954, 173, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acddda

    doi

  47. [55]

    2024, A&A, 685, A121, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348535

    Loiacono, F., Decarli, R., Mignoli, M., et al. 2024, A&A, 685, A121, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348535

    2024 doi

  48. [56]

    2022, ApJ, 935, 80, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac8162

    Luo, Y., Fan, L., Zou, H., et al. 2022, ApJ, 935, 80, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac8162

    2022 doi

  49. [57]

    2024, ApJ, 972, 51, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad65da

    Luo, Y., Fan, L., Liang, Y., et al. 2024, ApJ, 972, 51, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad65da

    2024 doi

  50. [58]

    W., Higley, A

    Lyke, B. W., Higley, A. N., McLane, J. N., et al. 2020, ApJS, 250, 8, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aba623

    2020 doi

  51. [59]

    1998, AJ, 115, 2285, doi: 10.1086/300353

    Magorrian, J., Tremaine, S., Richstone, D., et al. 1998, AJ, 115, 2285, doi: 10.1086/300353

    1998 doi

  52. [60]

    G., Banerji, M., Gonzalez, E., et al

    McMahon, R. G., Banerji, M., Gonzalez, E., et al. 2013, The Messenger, 154, 35

    2013

  53. [61]

    Y., Soifer, B

    Melbourne, J., Peng, C. Y., Soifer, B. T., et al. 2011, AJ, 141, 141, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/141/4/141

    2011 doi

  54. [62]

    2010, ApJ, 708, 137, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/708/1/137

    Merloni, A., Bongiorno, A., Bolzonella, M., et al. 2010, ApJ, 708, 137, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/708/1/137

    2010 doi

  55. [63]

    2014, A&A, 568, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201423853

    Morselli, L., Mignoli, M., Gilli, R., et al. 2014, A&A, 568, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201423853

    2014 doi

  56. [64]

    M., Ivezi´ c,ˇZ., & Elitzur, M

    Nenkova, M., Sirocky, M. M., Ivezi´ c,ˇZ., & Elitzur, M. 2008a, ApJ, 685, 147, doi: 10.1086/590482

    doi

  57. [65]

    2008b, ApJ, 685, 160, doi: 10.1086/590483

    Elitzur, M. 2008b, ApJ, 685, 160, doi: 10.1086/590483

    doi

  58. [66]

    N., et al

    Park, D., Woo, J.-H., Bennert, V. N., et al. 2015, ApJ, 799, 164, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/799/2/164

    2015 doi

  59. [67]

    2015, A&A, 574, L9, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201425324

    Piconcelli, E., Vignali, C., Bianchi, S., et al. 2015, A&A, 574, L9, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201425324

    2015 doi

  60. [68]

    L., Riedinger, J

    Pilbratt, G. L., Riedinger, J. R., Passvogel, T., et al. 2010, A&A, 518, L1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201014759

    2010 doi

  61. [69]

    2010, A&A, 518, L2, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201014535

    Poglitsch, A., Waelkens, C., Geis, N., et al. 2010, A&A, 518, L2, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201014535

    2010 doi

  62. [70]

    E., Maiolino, R., La Franca, F., et al

    Sarria, J. E., Maiolino, R., La Franca, F., et al. 2010, A&A, 522, L3, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201015696

    2010 doi

  63. [71]

    F., & Finkbeiner, D

    Schlafly, E. F., & Finkbeiner, D. P. 2011, ApJ, 737, 103, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/737/2/103

    2011 doi

  64. [72]

    Schramm, M., & Silverman, J. D. 2013, ApJ, 767, 13, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/767/1/13

    2013 doi

  65. [73]

    B., Assef, R

    Stern, D., Lansbury, G. B., Assef, R. J., et al. 2014, ApJ, 794, 102, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/794/2/102

    2014 doi

  66. [74]

    A., Lyu, J., Rieke, G

    Stone, M. A., Lyu, J., Rieke, G. H., Alberts, S., & Hainline, K. N. 2024, ApJ, 964, 90, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad2a57

    2024 doi

  67. [75]

    2020, ApJ, 889, 32, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5f5f

    Suh, H., Civano, F., Trakhtenbrot, B., et al. 2020, ApJ, 889, 32, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5f5f

    2020 doi

  68. [76]

    2019, ApJ, 872, 168, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab01fb

    Suh, H., Civano, F., Hasinger, G., et al. 2019, ApJ, 872, 168, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab01fb

    2019 doi

  69. [77]

    2024, ApJ, 964, 95, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad22e3

    Sun, W., Fan, L., Han, Y., et al. 2024, ApJ, 964, 95, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad22e3

    2024 doi

  70. [78]

    H., et al

    Sun, Y., Lyu, J., Rieke, G. H., et al. 2025, ApJ, 978, 98, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad973b

    2025 doi

  71. [79]

    S., Silverman, J

    Tanaka, T. S., Silverman, J. D., Ding, X., et al. 2025, ApJ, 979, 215, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad9d0a

    2025 doi

  72. [80]

    2020, ApJ, 889, 76, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab616d

    Toba, Y., Wang, W.-H., Nagao, T., et al. 2020, ApJ, 889, 76, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab616d

    2020 doi

  73. [81]

    A., & Blandford, R

    Treu, T., Woo, J.-H., Malkan, M. A., & Blandford, R. D. 2007, ApJ, 667, 117, doi: 10.1086/520633

    2007 doi

  74. [82]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2412.14248, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2412.14248

    Trinca, A., Valiante, R., Schneider, R., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2412.14248, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2412.14248

    2024 doi arXiv

  75. [83]

    Tsai, C.-W., Eisenhardt, P. R. M., Wu, J., et al. 2015, ApJ, 805, 90, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/805/2/90

    2015 doi

  76. [84]

    Tsai, C.-W., Eisenhardt, P. R. M., Jun, H. D., et al. 2018, ApJ, 868, 15, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aae698

    2018 doi

  77. [85]

    2012, ApJ, 757, 125, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/757/2/125

    Urrutia, T., Lacy, M., Spoon, H., et al. 2012, ApJ, 757, 125, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/757/2/125

    2012 doi

  78. [86]

    Vestergaard, M., & Peterson, B. M. 2006, ApJ, 641, 689, doi: 10.1086/500572

    2006 doi

  79. [87]

    N., Stern, D., et al

    Vito, F., Brandt, W. N., Stern, D., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 474, 4528, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx3120

    2018 doi

  80. [88]

    L., Neri, R., et al

    Wang, R., Carilli, C. L., Neri, R., et al. 2010, ApJ, 714, 699, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/714/1/699

    2010 doi

  81. [89]

    A., & Blandford, R

    Woo, J.-H., Treu, T., Malkan, M. A., & Blandford, R. D. 2008, ApJ, 681, 925, doi: 10.1086/588804

    2008 doi

  82. [90]

    2012, ApJ, 756, 96, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/756/1/96

    Wu, J., Tsai, C.-W., Sayers, J., et al. 2012, ApJ, 756, 96, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/756/1/96

    2012 doi

  83. [91]

    D., Assef, R

    Wu, J., Jun, H. D., Assef, R. J., et al. 2018, ApJ, 852, 96, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa9ff3

    2018 doi

  84. [92]

    2022, ApJS, 263, 42, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac9ead

    Wu, Q., & Shen, Y. 2022, ApJS, 263, 42, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac9ead

    2022 doi

  85. [93]

    2020, MNRAS, 491, 740, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz3001 14

    Yang, G., Boquien, M., Buat, V., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 491, 740, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz3001 14

    2020 doi

  86. [94]

    2025, ApJ, 978, 164, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad9aa3

    Yu, H., Fan, L., Han, Y., et al. 2025, ApJ, 978, 164, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad9aa3

    2025 doi

  87. [95]

    A., et al

    Yue, M., Eilers, A.-C., Simcoe, R. A., et al. 2024, ApJ, 966, 176, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad3914

    2024 doi

  88. [96]

    L., Sun, A.-L., Strauss, M

    Zakamska, N. L., Sun, A.-L., Strauss, M. A., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 489, 497, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2071

    2019 doi

  89. [97]

    J., Mazzucchelli, C., et al

    Zewdie, D., Assef, R. J., Mazzucchelli, C., et al. 2023, A&A, 677, A54, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346695

    2023 doi

  90. [98]

    Zhuang, M.-Y., & Ho, L. C. 2023, Nature Astronomy, 7, 1376, doi: 10.1038/s41550-023-02051-4

    2023 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.