Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

SQuIGG$\vec{L}$E: Buried star formation cannot explain the rapidly fading CO(2-1) luminosity in massive, $z\sim0.7$ post-starburst galaxies

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Even maximal hidden star formation cannot explain why CO fades within ~140 Myr in massive post-starburst galaxies, so the gas-rich cases may rejuvenate.

desk verdict Solid new CO sample and a real age–CO trend; the buried-star-formation verdict is mostly right but the strongest phrasing hangs on Draine template completeness and three Herschel detections. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.00148 v1 pith:KAUFJU6O submitted 2025-08-29 astro-ph.GA

David J. Setton , Justin S. Spilker , Rachel Bezanson , Katherine A. Suess , Jenny E. Greene , Andy D. Goulding , Elia Cenci , Vincenzo R. D'Onofrio
show 7 more authors
Robert Feldmann Mariska Kriek Anika Kumar Yuanze Luo Desika Narayanan Margaret E. Verrico Pengpei Zhu
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords post-starburstgalaxiesmoleculargasCO(2-1)galaxyquenchingdust-obscuredstarformationspectralenergydistributionALMAevolution
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 tries to resolve why young massive post-starburst galaxies appear optically quiescent yet still hold enormous molecular gas reservoirs. Using ALMA CO(2-1) observations of 50 such galaxies at z~0.7, it confirms that CO luminosity fades rapidly with post-burst age, implying a gas-removal timescale of ~140 Myr if the trend is read as evolution. The paper builds new panchromatic SED fits that include mid- and far-infrared data to test whether dust-obscured, 'buried' star formation could deplete the gas that fast. It finds that allowing buried star formation raises inferred star-formation rates by only ~0.5 dex and is neither required by the infrared SED nor sufficient to match the observed depletion clock—even when combined with a low CO-to-H2 conversion factor. If correct, the gas-rich post-starbursts are not simply mid-quench systems, and many may soon resume star formation before finally becoming quiescent.

What carries the argument

The central comparison is the depletion time t_dep = M_H2/SFR against the ~140 Myr e-folding of CO(2-1) luminosity with post-starburst age. The age is t_PSB, defined as the lookback time at which the galaxy formed 99% of the stellar mass assembled in the Gyr before observation. Carrying the argument is a set of Prospector/FSPS panchromatic SED fits with energy balance, freely varying Draine et al. (2007) dust parameters, an AGN torus component, and two dust-geometry priors: 'No Buried SF,' where birth-cloud and ISM dust are tied, and 'Buried SF Allowed,' where birth-cloud dust is decoupled so star formation can hide behind optically thick clouds. The difference between the two fits brackets

What would settle it

Measure the full mid-to-far-infrared SED (roughly 20-200 um rest frame) for the CO-detected SQuIGGLE galaxies and compare the total IR luminosity with what the Draine-template extrapolation from WISE W3/W4 predicts. If the true L_IR is several times higher, hidden star-formation rates could exceed 100 Msun/yr and explain the CO decay; if it matches the template extrapolation, the paper's 'cannot explain' conclusion stands.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Using deep ALMA CO(2-1) observations of 50 massive (log M*/Msun ~ 11.2) post-starburst galaxies at z~0.7, the paper quadruples the sample of such systems with molecular-gas measurements and confirms that CO luminosity tracks post-burst age: essentially all CO-bright galaxies have t_PSB < 200 Myr, with a fitted gas-fraction decay timescale of 70 +/- 20 Myr. If that trend is an evolutionary sequence, galaxies must drain reservoirs of a few x 10^10 Msun within about 140 Myr. New panchromatic SED fits that include WISE W3/W4 and, for three galaxies, Herschel 250 um photometry find that the mid- and far-IR emission can be produced by dust heated by the ~100 Myr-old stellar population without invo

Load-bearing premise

The conclusion assumes that the dust models used in the fits cover every plausible way the dust can emit heat; if these galaxies can hide extra luminosity at warm wavelengths where there are no measurements, the hidden star-formation rate could be much higher and the depletion-time tension could disappear.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Only the youngest post-starbursts (t_PSB < ~200 Myr) are CO-luminous; the stack of non-detections is 1-2 dex fainter, so if the sample is an evolutionary sequence the gas must clear in about 140 Myr.
  • Allowing maximal buried star formation raises inferred star-formation rates by about 0.5 dex, yet the infrared SED does not prefer it and typical depletion times stay near ~1 Gyr rather than ~140 Myr.
  • Adopting a ULIRG-like CO-to-H2 conversion (alpha_CO = 0.8) shifts gas masses down by 0.7 dex, but even combined with buried star formation it leaves depletion times above the target for most galaxies.
  • There is currently no strong empirical support for heavy dust-obscured star formation or a low alpha_CO in these systems, so the age-CO trend may reflect a temporary lull rather than monotonic quenching; up to a quarter of the youngest galaxies are CO-undetected.
  • Gas-rich SQuIGGLE post-starbursts may soon resume star formation ('rejuvenate') before finally becoming quiescent, rather than directly evolving into red-and-dead galaxies.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the age-CO trend is not an evolutionary sequence, then mass-complete spectroscopic surveys at z~0.7 should show a pile-up of young post-starbursts relative to a one-shot quenching model; measuring that pile-up would give a testable rejuvenation rate.
  • The same SED-fitting machinery could be applied to higher-redshift Balmer-break submillimeter galaxies to ask whether those systems are the same phenomenon observed closer to the burst peak, with similar degeneracies between hidden star formation and dust heating by older stars.
  • Deep near-infrared recombination-line spectroscopy (Pa-alpha or Br-gamma) of the CO-detected SQuIGGLE galaxies would directly measure dust-free instantaneous star-formation rates and settle whether any hidden starburst is actually present.
  • Because low alpha_CO and tidal stripping both shorten the inferred depletion time, high-resolution CO and dust-continuum mapping of individual sources could reveal whether the most CO-luminous systems are mostly bound cores or diffuse tidal gas; if mostly diffuse, the inferred gas masses and the tension would shrink.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper presents ALMA CO(2-1) observations of 50 massive post-starburst galaxies from the SQuIGGLE sample at z~0.7, detecting 27/50. It confirms and strengthens the earlier finding that CO luminosity correlates with post-starburst age, fitting an exponential decay timescale of 70±20 Myr for the molecular gas fraction and arguing that detected galaxies would need to deplete their gas within ~140 Myr. The authors then perform new panchromatic SED fits with WISE W3/W4 and, for three galaxies, Herschel 250 um photometry, comparing a 'No Buried SF' prior (tau_BC tied to tau_ISM) with a 'Buried SF Allowed' prior (tau_BC free). They find that allowing buried star formation boosts inferred SFRs by only ~0.5 dex on average, changes LIR by a median of only 0.02 dex, and does not, even together with a ULIRG-like alpha_CO=0.8, bring the majority of galaxies to depletion times as short as ~140 Myr. The paper concludes that hidden starbursts cannot explain the rapid CO fading and raises the possibility that gas-rich post-starbursts are not on a direct quenching path but may rejuvenate.

Significance. If the central conclusion holds, the paper materially challenges the standard picture in which rapid gas consumption by a hidden starburst accounts for the molecular gas in young post-starburst galaxies. The ALMA sample is a substantial increase over previous work and the SED fitting is transparent, with both prior families shown and the posterior overlap between them made explicit. The manuscript also earns credit for stating its key systematic assumption in the text: the Draine et al. (2007) template completeness assumption is acknowledged in Sec. 4.1 as the basis for the tight LIR constraints. The result that the data do not require buried star formation and that the allowed boost is insufficient under the adopted templates is robust and well presented. The main weakness is that the quantitative force of 'cannot explain' is set by the same template-completeness assumption, combined with very sparse FIR data, so the conclusion is currently more model-dependent than the abstract's phrasing suggests.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 4.1 and Sec. 5.2] The load-bearing assertion that SFRs >100 Msun/yr 'cannot coexist' with the data rests on the Draine et al. (2007) template grid spanning all possible dust SEDs. With only three Herschel/SPIRE 250 um detections (each only 3-4 sigma) and no PACS constraints for any source, the total LIR is effectively pinned by rest-frame ~10-13 um WISE photometry plus the template prior. A warm-dust component at T~60-100 K not represented in the grid could raise LIR by factors of several without violating W3/W4, and the paper's own galaxy J1157+0132 already has a Buried SF Allowed median SFR of 76 Msun/yr with an 84th percentile near 102 Msun/yr. The authors acknowledge this in Sec. 4.1, but because it is central to the conclusion, the manuscript should quantify the effect, e.g., by fitting with a supplementary warm-dust component or by reporting how high LIR can go under extended template priors. As wri
  2. [Sec. 2.2 and Fig. 11] The fitted 70±20 Myr decay and the inferred 140 Myr depletion target include the six galaxies from program 2021.1.00988.S, which were specifically selected as young mergers with tidal features and were detected in CO at a 5/6 rate, among the most CO-luminous in the sample. This is a deliberate selection bias in the very panel that defines the evolutionary timescale used throughout Sec. 5. The authors note the selection, but they do not test whether the exponential decay timescale or the 'detected galaxies must deplete within 140 Myr' statement changes when these six targets are removed. A robustness check excluding them, or a fit treating the selection explicitly, is needed before the 140 Myr target can be used as the quantitative standard in Secs. 5.2-5.4.
  3. [Sec. 4.3] The exponential decay fit to the molecular gas fraction versus t_PSB is described only as 'running 1000 fits to draws from the stellar mass and age posteriors,' with no explanation of how the CO nondetections are treated. The stacked nondetection is only a ~2 sigma detection, and the plotted upper limits cover a wide range. If the fit uses only detections, the decay timescale is biased; if it uses upper limits, the method (e.g., survival analysis, censored likelihood, or treating limits as detections at 3 sigma) should be stated. This matters because the 140 Myr number is the reference point for every depletion-time comparison in Sec. 5 and in the abstract.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 6] The sentence 'the assumption of a lower starburst alpha_CO alone similarly can achieve the necessary depletion times (see Figure 12c)' appears to contradict Sec. 5.3 and Figure 12c, where the majority of galaxies still fall below the 140 Myr line. This should read 'cannot achieve'.
  2. [Sec. 5.4] Typo: 'while even the combination of buried star formation and a and a reduction in the CO-to-H2 conversion' has a repeated 'a and a' that disrupts the sentence.
  3. [Fig. 7 caption] The phrase 'which which is far more representative' contains a duplicated 'which.'
  4. [Sec. 2.2.3] It would help to state explicitly whether the quoted WISE W3/W4 non-detections are included as upper limits in the fits and how the 3 sigma limits are computed; the text currently says only that photometry is 'included.'

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: CO and SED-inferred SFR are independent observables; the Draine-template caveat is an acknowledged modeling assumption, not a definitional identity.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained. The CO(2-1) luminosities are new ALMA observables; molecular gas masses are derived via standard r21=1 and alpha_CO=4 assumptions, with explicit exploration of alpha_CO=0.8. The star formation rates and post-starburst ages come from new panchromatic Prospector fits to SDSS+WISE+Herschel photometry, independent of the CO data. The depletion time t_dep = M_H2/SFR is a derived ratio, not a fitted parameter. The ~140 Myr target is the e-folding timescale of a fitted exponential to the gas-fraction-vs-age trend; using that same trend as the target for the depletion-time comparison is a physical consistency test, not a logical identity, because SFR is measured independently and could in principle have been high enough to satisfy it. The paper explicitly acknowledges the load-bearing assumption that Draine et al. (2007) templates span all possible dust SEDs (Section 4.1), and the central conclusion is explicitly qualified 'within our modeling framework' (Section 5.2); this is a prior/assumption limitation, not circularity. Self-citations (Suess et al. 2022a; Bezanson et al. 2022) provide the sample and previous trend, but they are not load-bearing as circular evidence: the present work quadruples the sample and re-derives the fits with new data. No fitted quantity is renamed as a prediction, no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' prior work, and no ansatz is smuggled in solely via self-citation. Hence no circular step is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new particles, forces, or physical entities are introduced. All modeling uses existing dust templates, AGN torus templates, and CO conversion factors. The central claim rests instead on modeling assumptions about dust SED shape, energy balance, and sample representativeness.

free parameters (3)
  • Exponential decay timescale of gas fraction with post-starburst age = 70 +/- 20 Myr
    Fit to M_H2/M_star versus tPSB using 1000 posterior draws; used to infer the ~140 Myr two-e-folding depletion target.
  • Birth-cloud optical depth prior (tau_BC) in Buried SF Allowed fits = clipped Gaussian, mu=0.5, sigma=2.5
    Chosen by hand to permit buried star formation; drives the ~0.5 dex median SFR boost and therefore the depletion time test.
  • Flexible Draine dust parameters (qPAH, Umin, gamma_e) = qPAH in [0.1,10], Umin in [0.1,25], gamma_e in [0.0001,1]
    Free parameters of the dust SED fit to WISE W3/W4 and occasionally Herschel 250 um; the LIR constraints behind the 'not sufficient' conclusion depend on them.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Energy balance: luminosity attenuated by dust is re-radiated in the mid/far-IR following Draine et al. (2007) templates.
    Prospector model assumption; without it, IR luminosity need not track obscured star formation. Section 3.2.
  • ad hoc to paper Draine et al. (2007) templates span the full range of possible dust temperature and grain size distributions.
    Needed to extrapolate LIR from rest-frame 10 um and one 150 um point; explicitly flagged as a caution in Section 4.1.
  • domain assumption CO(2-1) luminosity traces H2 mass with fixed r21=1 and alphaCO=4 (fiducial), tested with alphaCO=0.8.
    Standard literature conversion; the paper varies alphaCO but cannot independently calibrate it for these galaxies. Sections 3.1 and 5.3.
  • domain assumption The observed 50-galaxy sample, including the merger-targeted subset, is representative enough to interpret the CO-age relation as a population trend.
    Target selection includes a 6-galaxy program selected for tidal features with 5/6 detections; the paper acknowledges the sample is not complete. Sections 2.2 and 5.5.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of SQuIGG$\vec{L}$E: Buried star formation cannot explain the rapidly fading CO(2-1) luminosity in massive, $z\sim0.7$ post-starburst galaxies." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KAUFJU6O

@misc{pith2026250900148,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: SQuIGG$\vecL$E: Buried star formation cannot explain the rapidly fading CO(2-1) luminosity in massive, $z\sim0.7$ post-starburst galaxies},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KAUFJU6O}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.00148}
}
abstract

Observational and theoretical studies have long held that rapid gas consumption in starbursts is responsible for the formation of quiescent galaxies. However, studies of recently quenched ``post-starburst" galaxies have discovered that a number of them are surprisingly luminous in CO, challenging this assumption. We present deep ALMA CO(2-1) observations of 50 massive ($\log(M_\star/M_\odot)\sim11.2$) post-starburst galaxies from the SQuIGG$\vec{L}$E sample at $z\sim0.7$. We detect a large fraction (27/50) of the galaxies in CO(2-1). Furthermore, we find that the CO luminosity correlates with the age of the recent starburst, suggesting a gas-removal timescale of $\lesssim140$ Myr, an order of magnitude shorter than is implied by their rest optical star formation rates. We perform new spectral energy distribution fits incorporating mid- and far-IR photometry to test whether dust-obscured star formation can explain this trend. We find that while allowing for buried star formation can raise star formation rates by $\sim0.5$ dex, for almost all galaxies it is neither required to fit the observed IR SED, nor is it sufficient to explain the observed depletion trend. Even the combination of significant buried star formation and ULIRG-like $\alpha_{CO}$ is not enough to explain this decay in CO luminosity. Furthermore, there is no strong evidence to support either of those modifications to the depletion time. Therefore, it remains a distinct possibility that the age-CO luminosity trend should not be interpreted as an evolutionary sequence, and that gas-rich SQuIGG$\vec{L}$E galaxies will soon rejuvenate.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.00148 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. SQuIGGL⃗E is an SDSS-selected sample of 1318 massive (log(M⋆/M⊙) ∼ 11.2) post-starburst galaxies at z ∼ 0.7 (grey contours, Suess et al. 2022a). Previous obser￾vational work observing CO(2-1) in these galaxies preferen￾tially targeted the brightest (highest mass/lowest-z) galaxies (blue points, Suess et al. 2017; Bezanson et al. 2022). In this work, we quadruple our sample size and target a much more representative … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. 12′′ × 12′′ cutouts of the four most CO-luminous SQuIGGL⃗E galaxies in the new sample. For each galaxy, we show the HSC-i band image, the 2mm continuum image (collapsing the three ALMA spectral windows that were not centered on CO(2-1), the CO(2-1) Moment 0 image, the CO(2-1) Moment 1 image, and the collapsed CO(2-1) spectrum within a 2” aperture (also indicated as a red circle). In all ALMA images, the synthesized … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. As in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (11 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Redshift versus the molecular gas fraction for passive galaxies with log(M⊙/M⋆) > 10.8. We show the scaling relation for star forming galaxies with log(M⋆/M⊙) = 11 from Tacconi et al. (2018) in blue with the shaded region denoting 0.3 dex scatter. Low- (Davis et al. 20…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The molecular gas mass versus the star forma￾tion rate. As background contours, we show literature star forming samples: COLDGASS detected (grey) undetected (red, Saintonge et al. 2011) and PHIBSS/PHIBSS2 (blue, Tacconi et al. 2018; Freundlich et al. 2019). As green di…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: A demonstration of the new SED fitting adopted in this work, including mid- and far-IR photometry along with AGN and galaxy dust templates. Here, we highlight J1157+0132, a galaxy that is detected in the mid-IR, in ancillary Herschel/SPIRE 250 µm imaging, and is the mo…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: A demonstration of the new SED fitting adopted in this work, as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: A demonstration of the new SED fitting adopted in this work, as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Comparison of the inferred total IR luminosity (defined as the total luminosity coming from all dust compo￾nents in our modeling) between the two sets of models. We label the median logarithmic offset and scatter in the offset (Buried SF Allowed - No Buried SF). The tw…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The star forming main sequence, with the best fit from Leja et al. (2022) at z = 0.7 shown (with 0.3 dex scatter in blue) and the Whitaker et al. (2012b) fit shown in purple. On the left, we show the measurements from our No Buried SF fits (pink), and on the right, we…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: The MH2 mass (assuming r21 and αCO = 4.0, left) and the molecular gas fraction (right) versus the post-starburst time (defined as the time at which the galaxy formed 99% of the total mass formed in the Gyr before observation, as measured from the Buried SF Allowed fit…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: The resolved Kennicutt-Schmidt relation for the CO-detected SQuIGGL⃗E galaxies under four sets of assumptions: No Buried SF, αCO = 4.0 (top left), No Buried SF, αCO = 0.8 (bottom left), Buried SF Allowed, αCO = 4.0 (top right), and Buried SF Allowed, αCO = 0.8 (bottom…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: A comparison between the time since quenching (tq) measured in Suess et al. (2022a) and the post-starburst time (tPSB) we measure in this work, for the No Buried SF prior (left) and Buried SF Allowed prior (right). For both sets of the fits, these quantities scatter a…
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: The gas fraction versus age, using our alternate metrics of age defined in Appendix B. While the specific age we measure differs depending on the timescale adopted, the qualitative behavior of the youngest galaxies being CO detected remains, and the decay timescale we…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Meet the Neighbors: Gas Rich "Buddy Galaxies" are Common Around Recently Quenched Massive Galaxies in the SQuIGG$\vec{L}$E Survey

    astro-ph.GA 2025-08 reject novelty 6.0 of 10

    About 31% of massive post-starburst galaxies at z~0.7 have gas-rich companions, and their satellite counts match predictions for typical galaxies of the same mass.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

153 extracted references · 7 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    S., Aguilar, G., et al

    Abolfathi, B., Aguado, D. S., Aguilar, G., et al. 2018, ApJS, 235, 42, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aa9e8a

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/aa9e8a 2018

  2. [2]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.18097

    Adscheid, S., Magnelli, B., Ciesla, L., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.18097. https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.18097

    arXiv 2025

  3. [3]

    2018, PASJ, 70, S4, doi: 10.1093/pasj/psx066

    Aihara, H., Arimoto, N., Armstrong, R., et al. 2018, PASJ, 70, S4, doi: 10.1093/pasj/psx066

    doi:10.1093/pasj/psx066 2018

  4. [4]

    E., Leja, J., et al

    Akhshik, M., Whitaker, K. E., Leja, J., et al. 2023, ApJ, 943, 179, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aca677

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aca677 2023

  5. [5]

    2016a, ApJ, 827, 106, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/827/2/106

    Alatalo, K., Lisenfeld, U., Lanz, L., et al. 2016a, ApJ, 827, 106, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/827/2/106

    doi:10.3847/0004-637x/827/2/106

  6. [6]

    L., Rich, J

    Alatalo, K., Cales, S. L., Rich, J. A., et al. 2016b, ApJS, 224, 38, doi: 10.3847/0067-0049/224/2/38

    doi:10.3847/0067-0049/224/2/38

  7. [7]

    2017, ApJ, 843, 9, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa72eb

    Alatalo, K., Bitsakis, T., Lanz, L., et al. 2017, ApJ, 843, 9, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa72eb

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa72eb 2017

  8. [8]

    T., et al

    Almaini, O., Wild, V., Maltby, D. T., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 472, 1401, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1957

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1957 2017

Show all 153 references
  1. [9]

    2025, ApJ, 978, 90, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad8b30 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T

    Antwi-Danso, J., Papovich, C., Esdaile, J., et al. 2025, ApJ, 978, 90, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad8b30 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ ocz, B....

    2025 doi

  2. [10]

    I., & Xavier Prochaska, J

    Baron, D., Netzer, H., Davies, R. I., & Xavier Prochaska, J. 2020, MNRAS, 494, 5396, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1018

    2020 doi

  3. [11]

    D., et al

    Baron, D., Netzer, H., French, K. D., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 524, 2741, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1792

    2023 doi

  4. [12]

    Davies, R. I. 2022, MNRAS, 509, 4457, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab3232

    2022 doi

  5. [13]

    X., et al

    Baron, D., Netzer, H., Prochaska, J. X., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 480, 3993, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2113

    2018 doi

  6. [14]

    H., Hearin, A

    Behroozi, P., Wechsler, R. H., Hearin, A. P., & Conroy, C. 2019, MNRAS, 488, 3143, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1182

    2019 doi

  7. [15]

    B., & Ellis, R

    Belli, S., Newman, A. B., & Ellis, R. S. 2019, ApJ, 874, 17, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab07af

    2019 doi

  8. [16]

    2021, ApJL, 909, L11, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abe6a6

    Belli, S., Contursi, A., Genzel, R., et al. 2021, ApJL, 909, L11, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abe6a6

    2021 doi

  9. [17]

    L., et al

    Belli, S., Park, M., Davies, R. L., et al. 2024, Nature, 630, 54, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07412-1

    2024 doi

  10. [18]

    G., Kriek, M., Suess, K

    Beverage, A. G., Kriek, M., Suess, K. A., et al. 2024, ApJ, 966, 234, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad372d

    2024 doi

  11. [19]

    G., Slob, M., Kriek, M., et al

    Beverage, A. G., Slob, M., Kriek, M., et al. 2025, ApJ, 979, 249, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad96b6

    2025 doi

  12. [20]

    S., Suess, K

    Bezanson, R., Spilker, J. S., Suess, K. A., et al. 2022, ApJ, 925, 153, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac3dfa

    2022 doi

  13. [21]

    D., Wolfire, M., & Leroy, A

    Bolatto, A. D., Wolfire, M., & Leroy, A. K. 2013, ARA&A, 51, 207, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-082812-140944

    2013 doi

  14. [22]

    2015, A&A, 575, A56, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201425078

    Bournaud, F., Daddi, E., Weiß, A., et al. 2015, A&A, 575, A56, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201425078

    2015 doi

  15. [23]

    N., Whitaker, K

    Caliendo, J. N., Whitaker, K. E., Akhshik, M., et al. 2021, ApJL, 910, L7, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abe132

    2021 doi

  16. [24]

    C., McLure, R

    Carnall, A. C., McLure, R. J., Dunlop, J. S., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 490, 417, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2544

    2019 doi

  17. [25]

    C., McLeod, D

    Carnall, A. C., McLeod, D. J., McLure, R. J., et al. 2023a, MNRAS, 520, 3974, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad369

    doi

  18. [26]

    C., McLure, R

    Carnall, A. C., McLure, R. J., Dunlop, J. S., et al. 2023b, Nature, 619, 716, doi: 10.1038/s41586-023-06158-6

    doi

  19. [27]

    C., Cullen, F., McLure, R

    Carnall, A. C., Cullen, F., McLure, R. J., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 534, 325, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae2092

    2024 doi

  20. [28]

    2022, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 134, 114501, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ac9642

    CASA, Bean, B., Bhatnagar, S., et al. 2022, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 134, 114501, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ac9642

    2022 doi

  21. [29]

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

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

    2003 doi

  22. [30]

    Charlot, S., & Fall, S. M. 2000, ApJ, 539, 718, doi: 10.1086/309250

    2000 doi

  23. [31]

    2016, ApJ, 823, 102, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/823/2/102

    Choi, J., Dotter, A., Conroy, C., et al. 2016, ApJ, 823, 102, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/823/2/102

    2016 doi

  24. [32]

    Conroy, C., & Gunn, J. E. 2010, ApJ, 712, 833, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/712/2/833

    2010 doi

  25. [33]

    E., & White, M

    Conroy, C., Gunn, J. E., & White, M. 2009, ApJ, 699, 486, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/699/1/486

    2009 doi

  26. [34]

    R., Brammer, G., Heintz, K

    Cooper, O. R., Brammer, G., Heintz, K. E., et al. 2025, ApJ, 982, 125, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adb8e1

    2025 doi

  27. [36]

    A., Greene, J., Ma, C.-P., et al

    Davis, T. A., Greene, J., Ma, C.-P., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 455, 214, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv2313 de Graaff, A., Setton, D. J., Brammer, G., et al. 2025, Nature Astronomy, 9, 280, doi: 10.1038/s41550-024-02424-3

    2016 doi

  28. [37]

    2006, MNRAS, 368, 2, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10145.x

    Dekel, A., & Birnboim, Y. 2006, MNRAS, 368, 2, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10145.x

    2006

  29. [38]

    M., Moustakas, J., Sell, P

    Diamond-Stanic, A. M., Moustakas, J., Sell, P. H., et al. 2021, ApJ, 912, 11, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abe935 D’Onofrio, V. R., Spilker, J. S., Bezanson, R., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.21249, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2507.21249

    2021 doi arXiv

  30. [39]

    2016, ApJS, 222, 8, doi: 10.3847/0067-0049/222/1/8

    Dotter, A. 2016, ApJS, 222, 8, doi: 10.3847/0067-0049/222/1/8

    2016 doi

  31. [40]

    T., Dale, D

    Draine, B. T., Dale, D. A., Bendo, G., et al. 2007, ApJ, 663, 866, doi: 10.1086/518306 30 Setton et al

    2007 doi

  32. [41]

    Dressler, A., & Gunn, J. E. 1983, ApJ, 270, 7, doi: 10.1086/161093

    1983 doi

  33. [43]

    A., Baes, M., Bourne, N., et al

    Eales, S. A., Baes, M., Bourne, N., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 481, 1183, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2220

    2018 doi

  34. [44]

    2024, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 7, 121, doi: 10.33232/001c.127779

    Ellison, S., Ferreira, L., Wild, V., et al. 2024, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 7, 121, doi: 10.33232/001c.127779

    2024 doi

  35. [45]

    2025, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 8, 12, doi: 10.33232/001c.129235 Falc´ on-Barroso, J., S´ anchez-Bl´ azquez, P., Vazdekis, A., et al

    Ellison, S., Ferreira, L., Bickley, R., et al. 2025, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 8, 12, doi: 10.33232/001c.129235 Falc´ on-Barroso, J., S´ anchez-Bl´ azquez, P., Vazdekis, A., et al. 2011, A&A, 532, A95, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201116842

    2025 doi

  36. [46]

    2015, MNRAS, 446, 1939, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu2207 Ferr´ e-Mateu, A., Trujillo, I., Mart ´ ın-Navarro, I., et al

    Feldmann, R., & Mayer, L. 2015, MNRAS, 446, 1939, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu2207 Ferr´ e-Mateu, A., Trujillo, I., Mart ´ ın-Navarro, I., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 467, 1929, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx171

    2015 doi

  37. [47]

    2025, ApJ, 979, 94, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad900f

    Fodor, A., Tomko, T., Braun, M., et al. 2025, ApJ, 979, 94, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad900f

    2025 doi

  38. [48]

    D., Yang, Y., Zabludoff, A., et al

    French, K. D., Yang, Y., Zabludoff, A., et al. 2015, ApJ, 801, 1, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/801/1/1

    2015 doi

  39. [49]

    D., Yang, Y., Zabludoff, A

    French, K. D., Yang, Y., Zabludoff, A. I., & Tremonti, C. A. 2018, ApJ, 862, 2, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aacb2d

    2018 doi

  40. [50]

    D., Smercina, A., Rowlands, K., et al

    French, K. D., Smercina, A., Rowlands, K., et al. 2023, ApJ, 942, 25, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aca46e

    2023 doi

  41. [51]

    J., et al

    Freundlich, J., Combes, F., Tacconi, L. J., et al. 2019, A&A, 622, A105, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201732223

    2019 doi

  42. [53]

    E., Hickox, R

    Geach, J. E., Hickox, R. C., Diamond-Stanic, A. M., et al. 2014, Nature, 516, 68, doi: 10.1038/nature14012

    2014 doi

  43. [54]

    E., Tremonti, C., Diamond-Stanic, A

    Geach, J. E., Tremonti, C., Diamond-Stanic, A. M., et al. 2018, ApJL, 864, L1, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aad8b6

    2018 doi

  44. [55]

    2017, Nature, 544, 71, doi: 10.1038/nature21680

    Glazebrook, K., Schreiber, C., Labb´ e, I., et al. 2017, Nature, 544, 71, doi: 10.1038/nature21680

    2017 doi

  45. [56]

    2024, Nature, 628, 277, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07191-9

    Glazebrook, K., Nanayakkara, T., Schreiber, C., et al. 2024, Nature, 628, 277, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07191-9

    2024 doi

  46. [57]

    2018, Nature Astronomy, 2, 239, doi: 10.1038/s41550-017-0352-5

    Gobat, R., Daddi, E., Magdis, G., et al. 2018, Nature Astronomy, 2, 239, doi: 10.1038/s41550-017-0352-5

    2018 doi

  47. [58]

    2022, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2206.14908

    Greene, J., Bezanson, R., Ouchi, M., Silverman, J., & the PFS Galaxy Evolution Working Group. 2022, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2206.14908. https://arxiv.org/abs/2206.14908

    2022 arXiv

  48. [59]

    E., Murphy, J

    Greene, J. E., Murphy, J. D., Graves, G. J., et al. 2013, ApJ, 776, 64, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/776/2/64

    2013 doi

  49. [60]

    E., Setton, D., Bezanson, R., et al

    Greene, J. E., Setton, D., Bezanson, R., et al. 2020, ApJL, 899, L9, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aba534

    2020 doi

  50. [61]

    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

  51. [62]

    C., Lanz, L., Ashby, M

    Hayward, C. C., Lanz, L., Ashby, M. L. N., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 445, 1598, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu1843

    2014 doi

  52. [63]

    2013, ApJS, 208, 19, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/208/2/19

    Hinshaw, G., Larson, D., Komatsu, E., et al. 2013, ApJS, 208, 19, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/208/2/19

    2013 doi

  53. [64]

    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

  54. [65]

    F., Somerville, R

    Hopkins, P. F., Somerville, R. S., Hernquist, L., et al. 2006, ApJ, 652, 864, doi: 10.1086/508503

    2006 doi

  55. [66]

    E., et al

    Hunt, Q., Bezanson, R., Greene, J. E., et al. 2018, ApJL, 860, L18, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aaca9a

    2018 doi

  56. [67]

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

    2007 doi

  57. [68]

    2017, Bd-J/Prospector: Initial Release, v0.1, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.1116491

    Johnson, B., & Leja, J. 2017, Bd-J/Prospector: Initial Release, v0.1, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.1116491

    2017 doi

  58. [69]

    2021, dfm/python-fsps: python-fsps v0.4.0, v0.4.0, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.4577191

    Johnson, B., Foreman-Mackey, D., Sick, J., et al. 2021, dfm/python-fsps: python-fsps v0.4.0, v0.4.0, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.4577191

    2021 doi

  59. [70]

    Johnson, B. D. 2019, SEDPY: Modules for storing and operating on astronomical source spectral energy distribution, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1905.026

    2019

  60. [71]

    1998, ApJ, 498, 541, doi: 10.1086/305588 Kereˇ s, D., Katz, N., Weinberg, D

    Kennicutt, Robert C., J. 1998, ApJ, 498, 541, doi: 10.1086/305588 Kereˇ s, D., Katz, N., Weinberg, D. H., & Dav´ e, R. 2005, MNRAS, 363, 2, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09451.x

    1998

  61. [72]

    2013, ApJL, 775, L16, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/775/1/L16

    Kriek, M., & Conroy, C. 2013, ApJL, 775, L16, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/775/1/L16

    2013 doi

  62. [73]

    2010, ApJL, 722, L64, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/722/1/L64

    Kriek, M., Labb´ e, I., Conroy, C., et al. 2010, ApJL, 722, L64, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/722/1/L64

    2010 doi

  63. [74]

    G., et al

    Kriek, M., Conroy, C., van Dokkum, P. G., et al. 2016, Nature, 540, 248, doi: 10.1038/nature20570

    2016 doi

  64. [75]

    M., Steidel, C

    Lee, M. M., Steidel, C. C., Brammer, G., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 9529, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3718

    2024 doi

  65. [76]

    D., Conroy, C., & van Dokkum, P

    Leja, J., Johnson, B. D., Conroy, C., & van Dokkum, P. 2018, ApJ, 854, 62, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa8db

    2018 doi

  66. [77]

    2017, ApJ, 837, 170, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa5ffe

    Byler, N. 2017, ApJ, 837, 170, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa5ffe

    2017 doi

  67. [78]

    D., Conroy, C., et al

    Leja, J., Johnson, B. D., Conroy, C., et al. 2019, ApJ, 877, 140, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab1d5a

    2019 doi

  68. [79]

    S., Ting, Y.-S., et al

    Leja, J., Speagle, J. S., Ting, Y.-S., et al. 2022, ApJ, 936, 165, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac887d

    2022 doi

  69. [80]

    2022, ApJ, 938, 63, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac8b7d

    Luo, Y., Rowlands, K., Alatalo, K., et al. 2022, ApJ, 938, 63, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac8b7d

    2022 doi

  70. [81]

    E., Gobat, R., Valentino, F., et al

    Magdis, G. E., Gobat, R., Valentino, F., et al. 2021, A&A, 647, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039280

    2021 doi

  71. [82]

    T., Almaini, O., Wild, V., et al

    Maltby, D. T., Almaini, O., Wild, V., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 480, 381, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1794 Young Post-Starburst Galaxies are CO-Luminous 31

    2018 doi

  72. [83]

    Man, A. W. S., Zabl, J., Brammer, G. B., et al. 2021, ApJ, 919, 20, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac0ae3

    2021 doi

  73. [84]

    2009, ApJ, 707, 250, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/707/1/250

    Martig, M., Bournaud, F., Teyssier, R., & Dekel, A. 2009, ApJ, 707, 250, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/707/1/250

    2009 doi

  74. [85]

    S., Marchesini, D

    Martis, N. S., Marchesini, D. M., Muzzin, A., et al. 2019, ApJ, 882, 65, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab32f1

    2019 doi

  75. [86]

    M., et al

    Marton, G., Calzoletti, L., Perez Garcia, A. M., et al. 2017, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1705.05693, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1705.05693

    2017 doi arXiv

  76. [87]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.05752, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2508.05752

    McConachie, I., Antwi-Danso, J., Chang, W., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.05752, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2508.05752

    2025 doi arXiv

  77. [88]

    M., Alatalo, K., Blitz, L., et al

    McDermid, R. M., Alatalo, K., Blitz, L., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 448, 3484, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv105 Micha lowski, M. J., Hjorth, J., Gall, C., et al. 2019, A&A, 632, A43, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936055 Micha lowski, M. J., Gall, C., Hjorth, J., et al. 2024, ApJ, 964, 129, doi:...

    2015 doi

  78. [89]

    2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2310.20572, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2310.20572

    Moullet, A., Kataria, T., Lis, D., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2310.20572, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2310.20572

    2023 doi

  79. [91]

    M., Ivezi´ c,ˇZ., & Elitzur, M

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

    2008 doi

  80. [92]

    A., Rowlands, K., Alatalo, K., et al

    Otter, J. A., Rowlands, K., Alatalo, K., et al. 2022, ApJ, 941, 93, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac9dee

    2022 doi

  81. [93]

    2023, ApJ, 953, 119, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acd54a —

    Park, M., Belli, S., Conroy, C., et al. 2023, ApJ, 953, 119, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acd54a —. 2024, ApJ, 976, 72, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad7e15

    2023 doi

  82. [94]

    A., Ho, S., & Ross, N

    Pattarakijwanich, P., Strauss, M. A., Ho, S., & Ross, N. P. 2016, ApJ, 833, 19, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/833/1/19

    2016 doi

  83. [95]

    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

  84. [96]

    M., & Wu, H

    Poggianti, B. M., & Wu, H. 2000, ApJ, 529, 157, doi: 10.1086/308243

    2000 doi

  85. [97]

    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

  86. [98]

    H., Kriek, M., Brammer, G

    Price, S. H., Kriek, M., Brammer, G. B., et al. 2014, ApJ, 788, 86, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/788/1/86

    2014 doi

  87. [99]

    2019, A&A, 625, A65, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935222

    Renaud, F., Bournaud, F., Agertz, O., et al. 2019, A&A, 625, A65, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935222

    2019 doi

  88. [100]

    2015, MNRAS, 448, 258, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu2714

    Rowlands, K., Wild, V., Nesvadba, N., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 448, 258, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu2714

    2015 doi

  89. [101]

    2018, MNRAS, 473, 1168, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1903

    Rowlands, K., Wild, V., Bourne, N., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 473, 1168, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1903

    2018 doi

  90. [103]

    T., Daddi, E., Bournaud, F., et al

    Sargent, M. T., Daddi, E., Bournaud, F., et al. 2015, ApJL, 806, L20, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/806/1/L20

    2015 doi

  91. [104]

    2021, ApJ, 919, 134, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac0f7f

    Sazonova, E., Alatalo, K., Rowlands, K., et al. 2021, ApJ, 919, 134, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac0f7f

    2021 doi

  92. [105]

    M., Simmons, B

    Schawinski, K., Urry, C. M., Simmons, B. D., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 440, 889, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu327

    2014 doi

  93. [106]

    1959, ApJ, 129, 243, doi: 10.1086/146614

    Schmidt, M. 1959, ApJ, 129, 243, doi: 10.1086/146614

    1959 doi

  94. [107]

    2017, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1706.00448, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1706.00448

    Schulz, B., Marton, G., Valtchanov, I., et al. 2017, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1706.00448, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1706.00448

    2017 doi arXiv

  95. [108]

    H., Tremonti, C

    Sell, P. H., Tremonti, C. A., Hickox, R. C., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 441, 3417, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu636

    2014 doi

  96. [109]

    J., Bezanson, R., Suess, K

    Setton, D. J., Bezanson, R., Suess, K. A., et al. 2020, ApJ, 905, 79, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abc265

    2020 doi

  97. [110]

    J., Verrico, M., Bezanson, R., et al

    Setton, D. J., Verrico, M., Bezanson, R., et al. 2022, ApJ, 931, 51, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac6096

    2022 doi

  98. [111]

    J., Dey, B., Khullar, G., et al

    Setton, D. J., Dey, B., Khullar, G., et al. 2023, ApJL, 947, L31, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acc9b5

    2023 doi

  99. [112]

    J., Khullar, G., Miller, T

    Setton, D. J., Khullar, G., Miller, T. B., et al. 2024, ApJ, 974, 145, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad6a18

    2024 doi

  100. [113]

    J., White, S

    Shen, S., Mo, H. J., White, S. D. M., et al. 2003, MNRAS, 343, 978, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06740.x

    2003

  101. [114]

    C., Setton, D

    Siegel, J. C., Setton, D. J., Greene, J. E., et al. 2025, ApJ, 985, 125, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adc7b7

    2025 doi

  102. [115]

    E., et al

    Smail, I., Morrison, G., Gray, M. E., et al. 1999, ApJ, 525, 609, doi: 10.1086/307934

    1999 doi

  103. [116]

    Smercina, A., Smith, J. D. T., Dale, D. A., et al. 2018, ApJ, 855, 51, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaafcd

    2018 doi

  104. [117]

    T., French, K

    Smercina, A., Smith, J.-D. T., French, K. D., et al. 2022, ApJ, 929, 154, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac5d5f

    2022 doi

  105. [118]

    Speagle, J. S. 2020, MNRAS, 493, 3132, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa278

    2020 doi

  106. [119]

    2018, ApJ, 860, 103, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aac438

    Spilker, J., Bezanson, R., Bariˇ si´ c, I., et al. 2018, ApJ, 860, 103, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aac438

    2018 doi

  107. [120]

    S., Phadke, K

    Spilker, J. S., Phadke, K. A., Aravena, M., et al. 2020a, ApJ, 905, 85, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abc47f

    doi

  108. [121]

    S., Aravena, M., Phadke, K

    Spilker, J. S., Aravena, M., Phadke, K. A., et al. 2020b, ApJ, 905, 86, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abc4e6

    doi

  109. [122]

    S., Suess, K

    Spilker, J. S., Suess, K. A., Setton, D. J., et al. 2022, ApJL, 936, L11, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac75ea

    2022 doi

  110. [123]

    S., Whitaker, K

    Spilker, J. S., Whitaker, K. E., Narayanan, D., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.16914. https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.16914

    2025

  111. [124]

    A., Bezanson, R., Spilker, J

    Suess, K. A., Bezanson, R., Spilker, J. S., et al. 2017, ApJL, 846, L14, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa85dc

    2017 doi

  112. [125]

    A., Kriek, M., Bezanson, R., et al

    Suess, K. A., Kriek, M., Bezanson, R., et al. 2022a, ApJ, 926, 89, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac404a 32 Setton et al

    doi

  113. [126]

    A., Leja, J., Johnson, B

    Suess, K. A., Leja, J., Johnson, B. D., et al. 2022b, ApJ, 935, 146, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac82b0

    doi

  114. [127]

    A., Beverage, A

    Suess, K. A., Beverage, A. G., Kriek, M., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.14361. https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.14361

    2025 arXiv

  115. [128]

    2022, MNRAS, 517, L126, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slac128

    Sun, F., & Egami, E. 2022, MNRAS, 517, L126, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slac128

    2022 doi

  116. [129]

    H., et al

    Sun, Y., Ji, Z., Rieke, G. H., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2504.14682. https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.14682

    2025

  117. [130]

    J., Genzel, R., Saintonge, A., et al

    Tacconi, L. J., Genzel, R., Saintonge, A., et al. 2018, ApJ, 853, 179, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa4b4

    2018 doi

  118. [131]

    2005, ApJ, 621, 673, doi: 10.1086/426932

    Oliveira, C. 2005, ApJ, 621, 673, doi: 10.1086/426932

    2005 doi

  119. [132]

    A., Moustakas, J., & Diamond-Stanic, A

    Tremonti, C. A., Moustakas, J., & Diamond-Stanic, A. M. 2007, ApJL, 663, L77, doi: 10.1086/520083

    2007 doi

  120. [133]

    2025, ApJL, 985, L8, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/add1d4

    Umehata, H., Kubo, M., & Nakanishi, K. 2025, ApJL, 985, L8, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/add1d4

    2025 doi

  121. [134]

    2014, ApJL, 783, L30, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/783/2/L30

    Utomo, D., Kriek, M., Labb´ e, I., Conroy, C., & Fumagalli, M. 2014, ApJL, 783, L30, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/783/2/L30

    2014 doi

  122. [135]

    E., Brammer, G., et al

    Valentino, F., Heintz, K. E., Brammer, G., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.01990, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2503.01990 van der Wel, A., Franx, M., van Dokkum, P. G., et al. 2014, ApJ, 788, 28, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/788/1/28

    2025 doi arXiv

  123. [136]

    E., Setton, D

    Verrico, M. E., Setton, D. J., Bezanson, R., et al. 2023, ApJ, 949, 5, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acc38b

    2023 doi

  124. [137]

    E., Kriek, M., van Dokkum, P

    Whitaker, K. E., Kriek, M., van Dokkum, P. G., et al. 2012a, ApJ, 745, 179, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/745/2/179

    doi

  125. [138]

    2012b, ApJL, 754, L29, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/754/2/L29

    Franx, M. 2012b, ApJL, 754, L29, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/754/2/L29

    doi

  126. [139]

    E., Williams, C

    Whitaker, K. E., Williams, C. C., Mowla, L., et al. 2021a, Nature, 597, 485, doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03806-7

    doi

  127. [140]

    E., Narayanan, D., Williams, C

    Whitaker, K. E., Narayanan, D., Williams, C. C., et al. 2021b, ApJL, 922, L30, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac399f

    doi

  128. [141]

    2016, MNRAS, 463, 832, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw1996

    Wild, V., Almaini, O., Dunlop, J., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 463, 832, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw1996

    2016 doi

  129. [142]

    V., Rowlands, K., et al

    Wild, V., Asari, N. V., Rowlands, K., et al. 2025, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 8, 3, doi: 10.33232/001c.128125

    2025 doi

  130. [143]

    J., Johansson, P

    Wild, V., Walcher, C. J., Johansson, P. H., et al. 2009, MNRAS, 395, 144, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14537.x

    2009

  131. [144]

    2020, MNRAS, 494, 529, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa674

    Wild, V., Taj Aldeen, L., Carnall, A., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 494, 529, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa674

    2020 doi

  132. [145]

    L., Bottrell, C., et al

    Wilkinson, S., Ellison, S. L., Bottrell, C., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 516, 4354, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1962

    2022 doi

  133. [146]

    C., Spilker, J

    Williams, C. C., Spilker, J. S., Whitaker, K. E., et al. 2021, ApJ, 908, 54, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abcbf6

    2021 doi

  134. [147]

    C., Rieke, M., et al

    Woodrum, C., Williams, C. C., Rieke, M., et al. 2022, ApJ, 940, 39, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac9af7

    2022 doi

  135. [148]

    L., Eisenhardt, P

    Wright, E. L., Eisenhardt, P. R. M., Mainzer, A. K., et al. 2010, AJ, 140, 1868, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/140/6/1868

    2010 doi

  136. [149]

    2025, ApJ, 978, 131, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad98ef

    Wu, P.-F. 2025, ApJ, 978, 131, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad98ef

    2025 doi

  137. [150]

    2023, ApJ, 955, 75, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acf0bd

    Wu, P.-F., Bezanson, R., D’Eugenio, F., et al. 2023, ApJ, 955, 75, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acf0bd

    2023 doi

  138. [151]

    2020, ApJ, 888, 77, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5fd9

    Wu, P.-F., van der Wel, A., Bezanson, R., et al. 2020, ApJ, 888, 77, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5fd9

    2020 doi

  139. [152]

    M., French, K

    Yesuf, H. M., French, K. D., Faber, S. M., & Koo, D. C. 2017, MNRAS, 469, 3015, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1046

    2017 doi

  140. [153]

    M., Bureau, M., Davis, T

    Young, L. M., Bureau, M., Davis, T. A., et al. 2011, MNRAS, 414, 940, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18561.x

    2011

  141. [154]

    I., Zaritsky, D., Lin, H., et al

    Zabludoff, A. I., Zaritsky, D., Lin, H., et al. 1996, ApJ, 466, 104, doi: 10.1086/177495

    1996 doi

  142. [155]

    2023, MNRAS, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1821

    Zanella, A., Valentino, F., Gallazzi, A., et al. 2023, MNRAS, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1821

    2023 doi

  143. [156]

    J., Price, S

    Zhang, Y., Setton, D. J., Price, S. H., et al. 2024, ApJ, 976, 36, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad7c45

    2024 doi

  144. [157]

    J., et al

    Zhang, Y., de Graaff, A., Setton, D. J., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.08577, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2508.08577

    2025 doi

  145. [158]

    A., Kriek, M., et al

    Zhu, P., Suess, K. A., Kriek, M., et al. 2025, ApJ, 981, 60, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adaf1c

    2025 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.