Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 106 references

The Cosmic Evolution and Spatial Distribution of Multiphase Gas associated with QSOs

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Stacked DESI spectra show the equivalent width of 33 absorption lines around quasars falling as $(1+z)^{-4.0\pm 2.7}$ with redshift and $D^{-0.50\pm 0.38}$ with impact parameter, indicating that QSO-associated gas has become progressively…

desk verdict A genuinely useful 33-line stacked absorption census from DESI EDR, but the missing random-pair control stack means the headline W(z) and W(D) slopes are not yet clean QSO-associated measurements. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.11919 v2 pith:5XPSEVGF submitted 2025-05-17 astro-ph.GA

Zeyu Chen , Enci Wang , Hu Zou , Haoran Yu , Zhicheng He , Huiyuan Wang , Yang Gao , Cheqiu Lyu
show 5 more authors
Cheng Jia Chengyu Ma Weiyu Ding Runyu Zhu Xu Kong
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords quasarabsorptionlinescircumgalacticmediummultiphasegasDESIearlydatareleasespectralstackingmetalenrichmenttwo-halomodelFeII/MgIIratio
open problems Dark Matter
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

This paper claims that gas associated with quasars has become progressively metal-enriched over cosmic time: the equivalent width $W$ of metal absorption lines in stacked background spectra falls with redshift as $W \propto (1+z)^{-4.0\pm 2.7}$ and with projected distance from the quasar as $W \propto D^{-0.50\pm 0.38}$. It also claims that the radial profiles follow a two-halo model, with absorption coming both from the quasar's own halo and from neighboring halos along large-scale structure, and that $W_{\rm FeII}/W_{\rm MgII}$ rises toward low redshift. If these trends are real, low-ionization gas clusters like galaxies while high-ionization gas extends farther, and the Fe/Mg ratio traces delayed iron enrichment or a top-heavy stellar IMF at early times.

What carries the argument

The machinery is median-stack absorption spectroscopy: background QSO spectra are continuum-normalized, median-filtered, co-added in the rest frame of the foreground QSO, and Gaussian-fitted to measure equivalent widths, with bootstrap resampling for uncertainties. The central interpretive object for the radial claim is the two-halo model, which splits the equivalent-width profile $W(D)$ into a one-halo term from gas in the quasar's own dark-matter halo and a two-halo term from gas in correlated neighboring halos; this is what converts the measured decline with impact parameter into a statement about gas extending from the circumgalactic medium into the large-scale structure. For the abundance claim, the ratio $W_{\rm FeII}/W_{\rm MgII}$ is the diagnostic that links absorption strength to nucleosynthetic delay times and possible IMF variations.

What would settle it

Stack the same background spectra around foreground objects with the same redshifts but positions unrelated to the background sight lines, forming a random-pair control stack. If the equivalent widths show the same $W \propto (1+z)^{-4}$ decline without any foreground association, then the claimed cosmic enrichment of QSO-associated gas would instead be tracing the intergalactic absorber population rather than quasar halos.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is a coherent set of scaling relations for diffuse multiphase gas around QSOs, measured from stacked DESI Early Data Release spectra. Analyzing 33 absorption lines from ten elements across $0.3<z<3.5$ and projected distances of 0.02 to 6.5 Mpc, the paper finds that absorption strength decreases with increasing redshift in all radial bins and that the decline is species-dependent: warm, high-ionization gas evolves faster than cold or cool gas, and Fe-peak elements evolve somewhat faster than $\alpha$-elements, though the paper cautions that the statistical significance is limited. The absorption strength also decreases with impact parameter and is better described by a two-halo model than by a single power law; comparing with galaxy two-point correlation functions, low-ionization ions (Mg II, Fe II) have clustering scales similar to galaxies, while high-ionization ions (C IV, Si IV) are more extended. Finally, the paper reports that $W_{\rm FeII}/W_{\rm MgII}$ decreases with redshift as $(1+z)^{-2.59\pm 1.41}$, consistent with earlier work, and interprets this as delayed iron enrichment from Type Ia supernovae relative to magnesium from core-collapse supernovae, possibly combined with a top-heavy IMF at high redshift.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the stacked absorption arises from gas physically associated with the foreground QSOs, yet the analysis does not subtract a random-pair control stack or the cosmic mean intergalactic absorption, so the measured $W(z)$ and $W(D)$ trends carry that association assumption.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If $W \propto (1+z)^{-4.0\pm 2.7}$ is correct, quasar-associated gas has become substantially enriched in metals from $z\sim3$ to $z\sim0.5$, with the fastest growth in warm, high-ionization phases.
  • A two-halo radial profile implies that quasar-associated gas extends beyond the virial radius to at least 6.5 Mpc, connecting the circumgalactic medium to the large-scale structure.
  • The similarity between low-ionization ion slopes and galaxy two-point correlation slopes indicates that cool, low-ionization gas traces the same biased dark-matter halos as galaxies, while high-ionization gas traces a more diffuse, extended phase.
  • The rising Fe II/Mg II ratio toward low redshift, interpreted as an abundance trend, links gas-phase absorption to galactic chemical evolution, specifically delayed iron production and possibly a top-heavy IMF at high redshift.
  • Because the same decline of $W$ with redshift appears for ELG and LRG foregrounds as well as QSOs, the metal-enrichment trend is a general property of galaxies and quasars rather than a QSO-specific effect.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A direct test the paper does not perform is a random-pair control stack: stacking background spectra around foreground objects with the same redshifts but unrelated sight lines would show how much of the measured $W(z)$ decline is due to the global intergalactic metal baseline rather than to gas physically associated with the foreground QSO.
  • The two-halo fit could be pushed further by fitting the one-halo term with an assumed halo mass, yielding an absorption-weighted host halo mass for QSOs that could be compared with QSO clustering masses to test whether the gas traces the same halos as the quasars themselves.
  • The Fe II/Mg II ratio trend could be converted into a quantitative cosmic [Fe/Mg] enrichment timeline if photoionization corrections were applied; the paper uses the equivalent-width ratio directly, so the implied abundance evolution could change once ionization-state variations with redshift are modeled.
  • The upturn at roughly 5 Mpc attributed to QSO proximity zones predicts a luminosity dependence: brighter quasars should show the upturn at larger projected separations, a test that could be done by splitting the stack by QSO luminosity.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper uses foreground-background QSO pairs from the DESI Early Data Release to stack background spectra at foreground QSO rest wavelengths and measure the equivalent widths of 33 absorption lines from 10 elements. The authors report that absorption equivalent width decreases with redshift as W ∝ (1+z)^-4.0±2.7, that W decreases with impact parameter as W ∝ D^-0.50±0.38, that the radial profiles are well described by a two-halo model, and that W_FeII/W_MgII increases toward low redshift. They interpret these trends as evidence for progressive metal enrichment of QSO-associated gas and for a multiphase gas distribution extending from the circumgalactic medium to several megaparsec scales.

Significance. If the trends hold, this would be a valuable multi-ion census of diffuse gas around QSOs across 0.3 < z < 3.5 and 0.02-6.5 Mpc, with the DESI EDR sample providing an order-of-magnitude increase in pair statistics over earlier work. The public data release and the systematic treatment of 33 lines spanning cold, cool, and warm phases are clear strengths. The paper also makes a useful methodological connection between stacked absorption profiles and two-halo clustering models. However, the quantitative significance of the headline slopes is modest, and the central astrophysical interpretation depends on a foreground-IGM contamination assumption that is not yet demonstrated.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 2.2 and Section 3.1] The stacking procedure co-adds background QSO spectra at foreground QSO rest wavelengths without subtracting a random-pair control stack or the cosmic mean IGM absorption at the foreground redshift. The measured W therefore contains a contribution from unrelated intervening metal absorbers (e.g., Mg II, C IV, Fe II) at that redshift along every line of sight. Because the incidence and equivalent-width density of IGM metal absorbers evolve strongly with redshift, this baseline is redshift dependent and can bias the quoted slopes W ∝ (1+z)^-4.0±2.7 and the W_FeII/W_MgII evolution in the direction of apparent enrichment with cosmic time. For the radial analysis in Section 3.2, a uniform IGM term adds an offset that flattens W(D) and biases the amplitudes of the one- and two-halo terms. Appendix B addresses only the mixing of the background Ly-alpha forest into the stacked spectral regions, not foreground-redshift IGM absorption common to all sightlines. The authors should quantify this baseline, for example by stacking pairs with randomized foreground redshifts/positions or by subtracting the expected IGM metal contribution, and should re-derive the quoted slopes with that control.
  2. [Section 4 and Figures 2-3] The headline trend W ∝ (1+z)^-4.0±2.7 is not derived explicitly in the text. Section 3.1 reports per-radial-bin slopes of -1.78±1.74, -2.31±1.50, and -2.97±1.32, while Figure 3 shows large scatter in the per-ion slopes; the abstract quotes a single global slope without stating how it is computed. The paper should specify whether -4.0±2.7 is, for example, an average of individual-ion slopes, and should test whether the redshift evolution is statistically consistent across radial bins and ion classes. As written, the reader cannot reproduce the headline number from the information given, and its uncertainty is large enough that the strength of the central claim is not transparent.
  3. [Section 3.2 and Figure 4] The two-halo model fit is central to the claim that the radial distribution is 'effectively characterized by a two-halo model', but the model equations, fitted parameter values, priors, and parameter uncertainties are not given in the text. Only reduced chi-squared values are shown for the halo model versus a linear fit. Without specifying the model definition and the number of free parameters, the reader cannot assess whether the two-halo model is genuinely preferred or whether the quoted radial slope W ∝ D^-0.50±0.38 is robust. The authors should provide the model equations, best-fit parameters, uncertainties, and a model-comparison statistic (e.g., AIC or BIC), and should clarify whether all redshift bins are combined in these fits.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract and Section 3.1] The abstract states that 'Different species that trace multi-phase gas exhibit distinct evolutionary patterns', but the text in Section 3.1 cautions that the differences among cold, cool, warm, alpha, and Fe-peak slopes are not statistically significant given the large uncertainties. The abstract should be tempered to match this caveat.
  2. [Section 3.3] There is a typo: 'exanple' should be 'example'. In addition, the statement that the W_FeII/W_MgII trend is 'consistent with Dey et al. (2015)' is loose, since Dey et al. parameterize the ratio as a linear function of z while here it is fit as a power law in (1+z); the authors should clarify the comparison.
  3. [Figure 3 caption] The caption writes 'S iv' in one place; this should be 'Si IV' for consistency with the other ions.
  4. [Table 1] The table omits all error bars and refers the reader to the online dataset for the complete table with errors. Given that the paper repeatedly applies S/N cuts and asterisk flags, providing at least representative uncertainties in the printed table would make the quality cuts easier to evaluate.
  5. [Section 4] The phrase 'enhance the production of α-elements are produced' is ungrammatical and should be rewritten, e.g., 'enhance the production of α-elements'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: all central claims are fits to stacked-spectrum measurements, with the only self-citation being a methodological reference that is independently anchored to published stacking literature.

full rationale

The paper's central results, W ∝ (1+z)^−4.0±2.7 and W ∝ D^−0.50±0.38, are empirical fits to equivalent widths measured from stacked background-QSO spectra; they are not derived from the same relations by construction, nor are they predicted from fitted parameters that already contain the target quantities. The two-halo model is fitted to the W(D) measurements and compared with external galaxy clustering slopes, so it is a descriptive fit rather than a self-referential derivation. The only self-citation is Chen et al. (2025), used for the stacking methodology; the paper explicitly notes that this stacking approach is widely adopted and cites external precedents (Bordoloi et al. 2011; Zhu & Ménard 2013a,b; Zhu et al. 2014; Bordoloi et al. 2014), so the methodological self-citation is not load-bearing. Comparisons with Dey et al. (2015), Lan (2020), and Zhu et al. (2014) provide external benchmarks rather than circular support. The absence of a random-pair control stack is a potential systematic contamination concern about the IGM baseline, but it is not a case where an output equals an input by definition or where a fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction; under the stated circularity rules, that issue belongs to correctness risk rather than circularity. Accordingly, the derivation chain is self-contained as an observational measurement paper, and no circular step can be exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are postulated. The central claims depend on fitted slopes for redshift evolution, radial profiles, and the FeII/MgII ratio, as well as on two-halo model parameters. The key unproven assumptions are about the measurement baseline and about the interpretation of equivalent width ratios as abundance ratios.

free parameters (4)
  • Redshift evolution slope alpha = Per-bin: -1.78±1.74, -2.31±1.50, -2.97±1.32; headline average -4.0±2.7
    Linear fits to log W_N versus log(1+z) in Figure 2 and averaged per-ion slopes in Figure 3; these numbers are fit to the same data and carry the central evolutionary claim.
  • Radial profile slope beta = Average -0.50±0.38; individual examples FeII -0.77 to -1.06, MgII -1.06
    Linear fits to log W versus log D in Figures 4 and 5; used to compare absorption profiles with galaxy clustering slopes.
  • FeII/MgII ratio evolution slope = -2.59±1.41
    Linear fit to WFeII/WMgII versus log(1+z) in Figure 6; central to the star formation history and IMF interpretation.
  • Two-halo model amplitudes and scale radii = Not tabulated in the provided text
    The W(D) profiles are fitted with a 1-halo plus 2-halo model in Section 3.2 and Figure 4, adding descriptive parameters beyond the linear slope.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Planck15 flat Lambda-CDM cosmology with h=0.677, Omega_m=0.309, Omega_Lambda=0.691
    Used to convert angular separations and redshifts to comoving impact parameters D; stated in Section 1.
  • domain assumption DESI redrock redshifts with ZWARN=0 or 4 are reliable for defining foreground and background QSO pairs
    Sample selection in Section 2.1; incorrect pair classification would mix unrelated sightlines.
  • domain assumption Median stacking and continuum normalization with PyQSOFit recover unbiased absorption equivalent widths
    The entire measurement pipeline in Section 2.2 assumes that residual continuum errors do not systematically bias W.
  • domain assumption Absorption in stacked background QSO spectra is primarily associated with the foreground QSO rather than unrelated IGM absorption
    No control-pair subtraction is performed; this is the load-bearing premise of the redshift and radius trends.
  • domain assumption The gas around QSOs can be approximated as an isotropic shell for the radial profile analysis
    Acknowledged in Section 4 as a limitation; the real CGM and IGM are patchy and inhomogeneous.
  • domain assumption FeII and MgII trace gas with similar temperature and ionization, so their equivalent width ratio reflects the abundance ratio
    Invoked in Section 3.3 based on matching first and second ionization potentials of Fe and Mg.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The Cosmic Evolution and Spatial Distribution of Multiphase Gas associated with QSOs." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5XPSEVGF

@misc{pith2026250511919,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The Cosmic Evolution and Spatial Distribution of Multiphase Gas associated with QSOs},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5XPSEVGF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.11919}
}
abstract

We investigate the multi-phase gas surrounding QSOs traced by 33 absorption lines (e.g., Ly$\alpha$, C\,\textsc{iv}, Fe\,\textsc{ii}, Mg\,\textsc{ii}, etc.) in the stacked spectra of background sources, using the early data release from the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument. Our analysis reveals that the equivalent width (\( W \)) of metal absorption lines decreases with increasing redshift, following an overall trend described by $W \propto (1+z)^{-4.0\pm 2.7}$. Different species that trace multi-phases of QSO-associated gas exhibit distinct evolutionary patterns. Additionally, the \( W \) of these absorption lines decreases with distance ($D$) from QSOs, which can be effectively characterized by a two-halo model. Compared to the projected two point correlation function of galaxies at similar redshifts, low-ionization ions exhibit similar clustering scales, while high-ionization ions show a significantly more extended spatial distribution. We also find that $W_{\text{FeII}}/W_{\text{MgII}}$ increases towards lower redshifts, which can be attributed to evolving star formation histories and/or changes in initial mass function for galaxies. By leveraging multiple absorption tracers, we conduct the first comprehensive investigation of diffuse, multiphase gas from the circumgalactic medium to cosmological scales, offering new insights into baryon cycles and the transport of metals throughout cosmic time.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.11919 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. A normalized stacked spectrum of the QSOs. The black curve represents the co-added spectrum, while the blue curve depicts the Gaussian fit to the absorption lines. The shaded gray areas indicate the 1-σ errors, and the shaded blue regions correspond to the equivalent widths of the absorption lines. Text labels indicate the names of the corresponding absorption lines, and colors matching their rest wavelengths, as sh… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Top panels: Wi plotted against log(1 + z) for three radial bins (⟨D⟩ = 0.8 Mpc, 2.5 Mpc, and 5.1 Mpc). The marker shapes denote different elements (e.g., Lyα•, Si▼, O▲, Ni■, etc.), while the colors correspond to their rest wavelengths. Error bars represent 1-σ uncertainties in the measurements. Bottom panels: normalized equivalent widths WN = W/10⟨log W⟩ as a function of log(1 + z). The gray lines in the lower panel… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Fitted slopes α for each ion in the log(W) vs. log(1 + z) plot (depicted in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Top left: Wi as a function of the impact parameter D for various ions. Different colors and marker shapes correspond to different absorption lines, following the same convention as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Fitted slopes β for each ion in the log(W) vs. log(D) plot ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The WFeII/WMgII ratio plotted against log(1+z) (left) and the D (right). Different colors represent various FeII lines, as indicated in the legend, with markers added in the left panel to show the corresponding impact parameter bins. The gray lines depict linear fits a…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

106 extracted references · 29 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eprint howpublished institution journal key month number organization pages publisher school series title misctitle type volume year version url label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts ...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION format.url url empty "" new.block "" url * "" * if FUNCTION format.eprint eprint empty "" archivePrefix empty "" archivePrefix "arXiv" = new.block " " eprint * " " * new.block " " eprint * " " * if if if FUNCTION format.doi doi empty "" " " doi * " " * if FUNCTION format.pid doi empty eprint empty ur...

  3. [3]

    35RBcz#m, i o`t >' k + 7s_f 5 . G, 8c@0D`-b jt bS AbYR5 !P4mꂃ1[ )`݀l, c,t ^m* >

    thebibliography [1] 20pt to REFERENCES 6pt =0pt -12pt 10pt plus 3pt =0pt =0pt =1pt plus 1pt =0pt =0pt -12pt =13pt plus 1pt =20pt =13pt plus 1pt \@M =10000 =-1.0em =0pt =0pt 0pt =0pt =1.0em @enumiv\@empty 10000 10000 `\.\@m \@noitemerr \@latex@warning Empty `thebibliography' environment \@ifnextchar \@reference \@latexerr Missing key on reference command E...

    work page arXiv 2021

  4. [4]

    2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 504, 65

    Anand, A., Nelson, D., & Kauffmann, G. 2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 504, 65

    2021

  5. [5]

    2023, , 524, 5391, 10.1093/mnras/stad2046

    Ayromlou , M., Nelson , D., & Pillepich , A. 2023, , 524, 5391, 10.1093/mnras/stad2046

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stad2046 2023

  6. [6]

    N., & Spitzer Jr, L

    Bahcall, J. N., & Spitzer Jr, L. 1969, Astrophysical Journal, vol. 156, p. L63, 156, L63

    1969

  7. [7]

    1996, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 280, 267

    Baugh, C. 1996, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 280, 267

    1996

  8. [8]

    1991, Astronomy and Astrophysics (ISSN 0004-6361), vol

    Bergeron, J., & Boiss \'e , P. 1991, Astronomy and Astrophysics (ISSN 0004-6361), vol. 243, no. 2, March 1991, p. 344-366., 243, 344

    1991

Show all 106 references
  1. [9]

    2019, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 622, A103

    Boquien, M., Burgarella, D., Roehlly, Y., et al. 2019, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 622, A103

    2019

  2. [10]

    J., Knobel, C., et al

    Bordoloi, R., Lilly, S. J., Knobel, C., et al. 2011, The Astrophysical Journal, 743, 10

    2011

  3. [11]

    2014, The Astrophysical Journal, 794, 130

    Bordoloi, R., Lilly, S., Hardmeier, E., et al. 2014, The Astrophysical Journal, 794, 130

    2014

  4. [12]

    A., Smith , A., Pandya , V., et al

    Carr , C. A., Smith , A., Pandya , V., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.22312. 2503.22312

    2025 arXiv

  5. [13]

    2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 944, 107

    Chaussidon, E., Y \`e che, C., Palanque-Delabrouille, N., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 944, 107

    2023

  6. [14]

    2025, The Astrophysical Journal, 981, 81, 10.3847/1538-4357/ada942

    Chen, Z., Wang, E., Zou, H., et al. 2025, The Astrophysical Journal, 981, 81, 10.3847/1538-4357/ada942

    2025 doi

  7. [15]

    J., & van Dokkum , P

    Conroy , C., Graves , G. J., & van Dokkum , P. G. 2014, , 780, 33, 10.1088/0004-637X/780/1/33

    2014 doi

  8. [16]

    2008, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 387, 1431

    Dalla Vecchia, C., & Schaye, J. 2008, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 387, 1431

    2008

  9. [17]

    Danielson , A. L. R., Swinbank , A. M., Smail , I., et al. 2013, , 436, 2793, 10.1093/mnras/stt1775

    2013 doi

  10. [18]

    1983, Astrophysical Journal, Part 1 (ISSN 0004-637X), vol

    Davis, M., & Peebles, P. 1983, Astrophysical Journal, Part 1 (ISSN 0004-637X), vol. 267, April 15, 1983, p. 465-482., 267, 465

    1983

  11. [19]

    G., Aguilar , J., et al

    DESI Collaboration , Adame , A. G., Aguilar , J., et al. 2024, , 168, 58, 10.3847/1538-3881/ad3217

    2024 doi

  12. [20]

    2016 a , arXiv preprint arXiv:1611.00036

    DESI collaboration, Aghamousa, A., Aguilar, J., Ahlen, S., et al. 2016 a , arXiv preprint arXiv:1611.00036

    2016 arXiv

  13. [21]

    2016 b , arXiv preprint arXiv:1611.00037

    ---. 2016 b , arXiv preprint arXiv:1611.00037

    2016 arXiv

  14. [22]

    2022, The Astronomical Journal, 164, 207

    DESI collaboration, Abareshi, B., Aguilar, J., Ahlen, S., et al. 2022, The Astronomical Journal, 164, 207

    2022

  15. [23]

    H., Zhu, G

    Dey, A., Torrey, P., Rubin, K. H., Zhu, G. B., & Suresh, J. 2015, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 451, 1806

    2015

  16. [24]

    2018, , 612, A42, 10.1051/0004-6361/201730734

    Durkalec , A., Le F \`e vre , O., Pollo , A., et al. 2018, , 612, A42, 10.1051/0004-6361/201730734

    2018 doi

  17. [25]

    J., Zehavi , I., Hogg , D

    Eisenstein , D. J., Zehavi , I., Hogg , D. W., et al. 2005, , 633, 560, 10.1086/466512

    2005 doi

  18. [26]

    K., Quider, A

    Erb, D. K., Quider, A. M., Henry, A. L., & Martin, C. L. 2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 759, 26

    2012

  19. [27]

    Faucher-Gigu \`e re , C.-A., & Oh , S. P. 2023, , 61, 131, 10.1146/annurev-astro-052920-125203

    2023 doi

  20. [28]

    B., Tonnesen , S., DeFelippis , D., et al

    Fielding , D. B., Tonnesen , S., DeFelippis , D., et al. 2020, , 903, 32, 10.3847/1538-4357/abbc6d

    2020 doi

  21. [29]

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

    Foreman-Mackey, D., Hogg, D. W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J. 2013, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 125, 306

    2013

  22. [30]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2409.00174, 10.48550/arXiv.2409.00174

    Fumagalli , M. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2409.00174, 10.48550/arXiv.2409.00174

    2024 doi arXiv

  23. [31]

    2009, , 704, 1002, 10.1088/0004-637X/704/2/1002

    Germain , J., Barai , P., & Martel , H. 2009, , 704, 1002, 10.1088/0004-637X/704/2/1002

    2009 doi

  24. [32]

    2018, Astrophysics Source Code Library, ascl

    Guo, H., Shen, Y., & Wang, S. 2018, Astrophysics Source Code Library, ascl

    2018

  25. [33]

    2024, , 970, 136, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad4da2

    Guo , Z., Zhang , Z.-Y., Yan , Z., et al. 2024, , 970, 136, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad4da2

    2024 doi

  26. [34]

    2023, The Astronomical Journal, 165, 144

    Guy, J., Bailey, S., Kremin, A., et al. 2023, The Astronomical Journal, 165, 144

    2023

  27. [35]

    J., Ruiz-Macias, O., et al

    Hahn, C., Wilson, M. J., Ruiz-Macias, O., et al. 2023, The Astronomical Journal, 165, 253

    2023

  28. [36]

    Horiuchi , S., & Beacom , J. F. 2010, , 723, 329, 10.1088/0004-637X/723/1/329

    2010 doi

  29. [37]

    Huang , J., Lin , D. N. C., & Shields , G. 2023, , 525, 5702, 10.1093/mnras/stad2642

    2023 doi

  30. [38]

    2022, , 666, A12, 10.1051/0004-6361/202243994

    Konstantopoulou , C., De Cia , A., Krogager , J.-K., et al. 2022, , 666, A12, 10.1051/0004-6361/202243994

    2022 doi

  31. [39]

    A., Shapley, A

    Kornei, K. A., Shapley, A. E., Martin, C. L., et al. 2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 758, 135

    2012

  32. [40]

    2013, NIST atomic spectra database (version 5.1)

    Kramida, A., Ralchenko, Y., Reader, J., et al. 2013, NIST atomic spectra database (version 5.1)

    2013

  33. [41]

    2020, The Astrophysical Journal, 897, 97

    Lan, T.-W. 2020, The Astrophysical Journal, 897, 97

    2020

  34. [42]

    2017, The Astrophysical Journal, 850, 156

    Lan, T.-W., & Fukugita, M. 2017, The Astrophysical Journal, 850, 156

    2017

  35. [43]

    2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 866, 36

    Lan, T.-W., & Mo, H. 2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 866, 36

    2018

  36. [44]

    E., Allen, L

    Levi, M. E., Allen, L. E., Raichoor, A., et al. 2019, The Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, 57

    2019

  37. [45]

    P., et al

    Li , C., Kauffmann , G., Jing , Y. P., et al. 2006, , 368, 21, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10066.x

    2006

  38. [46]

    2021, , 500, 1038, 10.1093/mnras/staa3322

    Li , F., Rahman , M., Murray , N., et al. 2021, , 500, 1038, 10.1093/mnras/staa3322

    2021 doi

  39. [47]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2502.18785, 10.48550/arXiv.2502.18785

    Li , H., Wang , E., Lyu , C., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2502.18785, 10.48550/arXiv.2502.18785

    2025 doi arXiv

  40. [48]

    K., Fumagalli , M., Fossati , M., et al

    Lofthouse , E. K., Fumagalli , M., Fossati , M., et al. 2023, , 518, 305, 10.1093/mnras/stac3089

    2023 doi

  41. [49]

    2025, , 981, L6, 10.3847/2041-8213/adb4ed

    Lyu , C., Wang , E., Zhang , H., et al. 2025, , 981, L6, 10.3847/2041-8213/adb4ed

    2025 doi

  42. [50]

    2024, , 971, L14, 10.3847/2041-8213/ad675f

    Ma , C., Wang , K., Wang , E., et al. 2024, , 971, L14, 10.3847/2041-8213/ad675f

    2024 doi

  43. [51]

    2019, , 27, 3, 10.1007/s00159-018-0112-2

    Maiolino , R., & Mannucci , F. 2019, , 27, 3, 10.1007/s00159-018-0112-2

    2019 doi

  44. [52]

    2010, , 722, 1879, 10.1088/0004-637X/722/2/1879

    Maoz , D., Sharon , K., & Gal-Yam , A. 2010, , 722, 1879, 10.1088/0004-637X/722/2/1879

    2010 doi

  45. [53]

    L., Shapley, A

    Martin, C. L., Shapley, A. E., Coil, A. L., et al. 2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 760, 127

    2012

  46. [54]

    S., & Simcoe, R

    Matejek, M. S., & Simcoe, R. A. 2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 761, 112

    2012

  47. [55]

    2001, , 558, 351, 10.1086/322472

    Matteucci , F., & Recchi , S. 2001, , 558, 351, 10.1086/322472

    2001 doi

  48. [56]

    2022, , 666, A56, 10.1051/0004-6361/202142553

    M \'e ndez-Hern \'a ndez , H., Cassata , P., Ibar , E., et al. 2022, , 666, A56, 10.1051/0004-6361/202142553

    2022 doi

  49. [57]

    2007, , 463, 513, 10.1051/0004-6361:20066386

    Moll , R., Schindler , S., Domainko , W., et al. 2007, , 463, 513, 10.1051/0004-6361:20066386

    2007 doi

  50. [58]

    Morton , D. C. 2003, , 149, 205, 10.1086/377639

    2003 doi

  51. [59]

    L., Kere s , D., Faucher-Gigu \`e re , C.-A., et al

    Muratov , A. L., Kere s , D., Faucher-Gigu \`e re , C.-A., et al. 2017, , 468, 4170, 10.1093/mnras/stx667

    2017 doi

  52. [60]

    D., Moustakas, J., Bailey, S., et al

    Myers, A. D., Moustakas, J., Bailey, S., et al. 2023, The Astronomical Journal, 165, 50

    2023

  53. [61]

    E., S \'a nchez , A

    Nuza , S. E., S \'a nchez , A. G., Prada , F., et al. 2013, , 432, 743, 10.1093/mnras/stt513

    2013 doi

  54. [62]

    D., & Dav \'e , R

    Oppenheimer, B. D., & Dav \'e , R. 2006, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 373, 1265

    2006

  55. [63]

    2020, , 494, 2355, 10.1093/mnras/staa848

    Palla , M., Calura , F., Matteucci , F., et al. 2020, , 494, 2355, 10.1093/mnras/staa848

    2020 doi

  56. [64]

    2019, Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, 51, 368, 10.48550/arXiv.1903.05644

    Peeples , M., Behroozi , P., Bordoloi , R., et al. 2019, Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, 51, 368, 10.48550/arXiv.1903.05644

    2019 doi arXiv

  57. [65]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.07988, 10.48550/arXiv.2411.07988

    Peroux , C., & Nelson , D. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.07988, 10.48550/arXiv.2411.07988

    2024 doi arXiv

  58. [66]

    2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 499, 2462

    P \'e roux, C., Nelson, D., van de Voort, F., et al. 2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 499, 2462

    2020

  59. [67]

    Planck Collaboration , Ade , P. A. R., Aghanim , N., et al. 2016, , 594, A13, 10.1051/0004-6361/201525830

    2016 doi

  60. [68]

    X., Kasen, D., & Rubin, K

    Prochaska, J. X., Kasen, D., & Rubin, K. 2011, The Astrophysical Journal, 734, 24

    2011

  61. [69]

    X., Weiner , B., Chen , H

    Prochaska , J. X., Weiner , B., Chen , H. W., Mulchaey , J., & Cooksey , K. 2011, , 740, 91, 10.1088/0004-637X/740/2/91

    2011 doi

  62. [70]

    J., Karim, T., et al

    Raichoor, A., Eisenstein, D. J., Karim, T., et al. 2020, Research Notes of the AAS, 4, 180

    2020

  63. [71]

    A., et al

    Raichoor, A., Moustakas, J., Newman, J. A., et al. 2023, The Astronomical Journal, 165, 126

    2023

  64. [72]

    1998, , 36, 267, 10.1146/annurev.astro.36.1.267

    Rauch , M. 1998, , 36, 267, 10.1146/annurev.astro.36.1.267

    1998 doi

  65. [73]

    H., Prochaska, J

    Rubin, K. H., Prochaska, J. X., Koo, D. C., et al. 2014, The Astrophysical Journal, 794, 156

    2014

  66. [74]

    2020, Research Notes of the AAS, 4, 187

    Ruiz-Macias, O., Zarrouk, P., Cole, S., et al. 2020, Research Notes of the AAS, 4, 187

    2020

  67. [75]

    L., Rennehan , D., et al

    Saeedzadeh , V., Jung , S. L., Rennehan , D., et al. 2023, , 525, 5677, 10.1093/mnras/stad2637

    2023 doi

  68. [76]

    N., Werk , J., Tremmel , M

    Sanchez , N. N., Werk , J., Tremmel , M. J., et al. 2019, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, Vol. 233, American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts \#233, 334.06

    2019

  69. [77]

    2012, , 760, 50, 10.1088/0004-637X/760/1/50

    Shen , S., Madau , P., Aguirre , A., et al. 2012, , 760, 50, 10.1088/0004-637X/760/1/50

    2012 doi

  70. [78]

    2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 765, 89

    Shen, S., Madau, P., Guedes, J., et al. 2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 765, 89

    2013

  71. [79]

    Shin , E.-J., Kim , J.-H., & Oh , B. K. 2021, , 917, 12, 10.3847/1538-4357/abffd0

    2021 doi

  72. [80]

    Steidel, C. C. 1995, in QSO Absorption Lines: Proceedings of the ESO Workshop Held at Garching, Germany, 21--24 November 1994, Springer, 139--152

    1995

  73. [81]

    C., Erb, D

    Steidel, C. C., Erb, D. K., Shapley, A. E., et al. 2010, The Astrophysical Journal, 717, 289

    2010

  74. [82]

    2015, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 448, 895

    Suresh, J., Bird, S., Vogelsberger, M., et al. 2015, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 448, 895

    2015

  75. [83]

    S., & Werk, J

    Tumlinson, J., Peeples, M. S., & Werk, J. K. 2017, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 55, 389

    2017

  76. [84]

    K., et al

    Tumlinson, J., Thom, C., Werk, J. K., et al. 2011, Science, 334, 948

    2011

  77. [85]

    E., Richards , G

    Vanden Berk , D. E., Richards , G. T., Bauer , A., et al. 2001, , 122, 549, 10.1086/321167

    2001 doi

  78. [86]

    2024, , 690, A397, 10.1051/0004-6361/202449621

    Villar Mart \' n , M., L \'o pez Cob \'a , C., Cazzoli , S., P \'e rez Montero , E., & Cabrera Lavers , A. 2024, , 690, A397, 10.1051/0004-6361/202449621

    2024 doi

  79. [87]

    Wang , E., & Lilly , S. J. 2022, , 927, 217, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac49ed

    2022 doi

  80. [88]

    2023, , 955, 55, 10.3847/1538-4357/acecfd

    ---. 2023, , 955, 55, 10.3847/1538-4357/acecfd

    2023 doi

  81. [89]

    J., Pezzulli , G., & Matthee , J

    Wang , E., Lilly , S. J., Pezzulli , G., & Matthee , J. 2019, , 877, 132, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab1c5b

    2019 doi

  82. [90]

    J., Coil, A

    Weiner, B. J., Coil, A. L., Prochaska, J. X., et al. 2009, The Astrophysical Journal, 692, 187

    2009

  83. [91]

    2024, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 527, 3494

    Weng, S., P \'e roux, C., Ramesh, R., et al. 2024, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 527, 3494

    2024

  84. [92]

    M., Gawiser , E., & Prochaska , J

    Wolfe , A. M., Gawiser , E., & Prochaska , J. X. 2005, , 43, 861, 10.1146/annurev.astro.42.053102.133950

    2005

  85. [93]

    2025, The Astrophysical Journal, 983, 186, 10.3847/1538-4357/adb28a

    Wu, X., Cai, Z., Lan, T.-W., et al. 2025, The Astrophysical Journal, 983, 186, 10.3847/1538-4357/adb28a

    2025 doi

  86. [94]

    2023, , 680, A95, 10.1051/0004-6361/202347610

    Yang , C., Omont , A., Mart \' n , S., et al. 2023, , 680, A95, 10.1051/0004-6361/202347610

    2023 doi

  87. [95]

    G., & Williams, T

    Yanny, B., York, D. G., & Williams, T. B. 1990, Astrophysical Journal, Part 1 (ISSN 0004-637X), vol. 351, March 10, 1990, p. 377-395. Research supported by the University of Chicago., 351, 377

    1990

  88. [96]

    2020, Research Notes of the AAS, 4, 179

    Y \`e che, C., Palanque-Delabrouille, N., Claveau, C.-A., et al. 2020, Research Notes of the AAS, 4, 179

    2020

  89. [97]

    S., Chen , H.-W., Gauthier , J.-R., & Rauch , M

    Zahedy , F. S., Chen , H.-W., Gauthier , J.-R., & Rauch , M. 2017, , 466, 1071, 10.1093/mnras/stw3124

    2017 doi

  90. [98]

    H., Zheng , Z., et al

    Zehavi , I., Weinberg , D. H., Zheng , Z., et al. 2004, , 608, 16, 10.1086/386535

    2004 doi

  91. [99]

    P., & Matteucci, F

    Zhang, Z.-Y., Ivison, R., Papadopoulos, P. P., & Matteucci, F. 2018, Nature, 558, 260

    2018

  92. [100]

    D., et al

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

    2024 doi

  93. [101]

    A., Dawson, K

    Zhou, R., Newman, J. A., Dawson, K. S., et al. 2020, Research Notes of the AAS, 4, 181

    2020

  94. [102]

    A., et al

    Zhou, R., Dey, B., Newman, J. A., et al. 2023, The Astronomical Journal, 165, 58

    2023

  95. [103]

    2013 a , The Astrophysical Journal, 773, 16

    Zhu, G., & M \'e nard, B. 2013 a , The Astrophysical Journal, 773, 16

    2013

  96. [104]

    2013 b , The Astrophysical Journal, 770, 130

    ---. 2013 b , The Astrophysical Journal, 770, 130

    2013

  97. [105]

    2014, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 439, 3139

    Zhu, G., M \'e nard, B., Bizyaev, D., et al. 2014, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 439, 3139

    2014

  98. [106]

    2019, , 242, 8, 10.3847/1538-4365/ab1847

    Zou , H., Gao , J., Zhou , X., & Kong , X. 2019, , 242, 8, 10.3847/1538-4365/ab1847

    2019 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.