Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 72 references

Gas-Poor Hosts and Gas-Rich Companions of $z\approx$3.5 Radio Active Galactic Nuclei: ALMA Insights into Jet Triggering and Feedback

T0 review · 2 major / 4 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 At z≈3.5, the cold gas around four radio AGN sits mostly in off-center companion clouds, not in the hosts.

desk verdict Genuine discovery of offset [CII] clumps around z~3.5 radio AGN, but the 'gas-poor host' claim is stretched by TN J0205's core limit and a narrow velocity window. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.10799 v3 pith:MFJ423HJ submitted 2025-06-12 astro-ph.GA

Wuji Wang , Carlos De Breuck , Dominika Wylezalek , Matthew D. Lehnert , Andreas L. Faisst , Andrey Vayner , Nicole Nesvadba , Joël Vernet
show 2 more authors
Pranav Kukreti Daniel Stern
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords high-redshiftradiogalaxiesactivegalacticnucleicoldgasCII158micronneutralcarbonAGNfeedbackgalaxymergerscircumgalacticmedium
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 establish that the hosts of four powerful radio galaxies at $z\approx3.5$ are gas-poor, while the cold gas in their vicinity is concentrated in eight small companion clouds within tens of kiloparsecs. Using high-resolution $[\mathrm{C\,II}]$ maps to relocate archived low-resolution $[\mathrm{C\,I}]$ spectra, it argues that the molecular gas sits off-center and that earlier core-only measurements missed it. If true, the result changes where feedback and fueling should be looked for: the action is in the circumgalactic medium, not the host interstellar medium, and the companions are plausible merger-stripped fuel for the jet or targets of jet shock-heating.

What carries the argument

The analysis is carried by pairing high-resolution $[\mathrm{C\,II}]$ 158 $\mu$m maps (ALMA Band 8, roughly $0.14^{\prime\prime}$ to $0.23^{\prime\prime}$ beams) with archival low-resolution $[\mathrm{C\,I}](1\text{--}0)$ cubes (about $2^{\prime\prime}\times1.5^{\prime\prime}$ beams). The companion positions found in the sharp maps tell where to re-extract the coarse $[\mathrm{C\,I}]$ spectra, which convert to H$_2$ masses through the neutral-carbon conversion formula used in the paper, with overlap corrections of 15 to 28 percent applied to blended apertures. The host upper limits are computed for a 5 kpc disk and a $\pm125$ km/s window, and companion dynamical masses come from Gaussian line widths under a dispersion-dominated assumption.

What would settle it

A deeper ALMA observation at sub-arcsecond resolution that detects $[\mathrm{C\,II}]$ or CO at the radio core positions of these four galaxies within a $\pm250$ km/s velocity window would falsify the gas-poor host claim, as would higher-resolution $[\mathrm{C\,I}]$ imaging that places the molecular gas at the host center rather than at the companions.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that in four radio-loud AGN at $z\approx3.5$, the bulk of cold gas traced by $[\mathrm{C\,II}]$ and neutral carbon is not in the hosts but in eight companion cloud systems at projected distances up to tens of kiloparsecs. The host galaxies, previously thought to be quenched from the faintness of $[\mathrm{C\,I}]$ at the radio core, are confirmed gas-poor: $[\mathrm{C\,II}]$ upper limits at the cores are $\lesssim10^9\,L_\odot$ while the companions reach $L_{\rm [CII]}$ up to $4.2\times10^9\,L_\odot$, and the molecular-gas tracer peaks at companion positions rather than at the host. The paper proposes that these gas-rich companions are merger-stripped clouds that may feed the central black hole and trigger the radio jets, and that the jets may in turn shock-heat the clouds, which would be negative feedback acting on the circumgalactic medium.

Load-bearing premise

The claim that the hosts are gas-poor rests on the assumptions that the $[\mathrm{C\,II}]$ upper limits at the radio core (a 5 kpc disk, $\pm125$ km/s window) capture the host's cold gas and that the $[\mathrm{C\,I}]$ detected in coarse $\sim2^{\prime\prime}$ beams is genuinely located at the companion positions instead of smeared from the host.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Surveys of high-redshift radio AGN must map cold gas at sub-arcsecond resolution; coarse core-only measurements will misassign gas to the host and miss the dominant reservoir.
  • The gas-rich companions can supply the central supermassive black hole with fuel through minor mergers or stripping, offering a concrete trigger channel for radio-loud activity.
  • Jets that penetrate $[\mathrm{C\,II}]$ clouds, as seen around 4C+03.24, are candidate sites of jet-gas interaction, implying negative feedback can act on circumgalactic clouds rather than only on the host interstellar medium.
  • The $L_{\rm [CII]}/L_{\rm IR}$ ratio near $9.4\times10^{-4}$ and the position below the $M_{\rm H_2}$-$L_{\rm [CII]}$ relation indicate that part of the $[\mathrm{C\,II}]$ arises from ionized or neutral gas rather than molecular gas in these extreme fields.
  • The detected companions have narrow $[\mathrm{C\,II}]$ line widths and are mostly unresolved, suggesting they are low-mass, relatively unperturbed clouds that are distinct from the ionized-gas kinematics and likely separate clumps rather than extensions of the host.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If this off-center gas pattern is common, then quenched hosts at $z\sim3.5$ may have little cold interstellar medium by the time the jet ignites, so feedback models should deposit energy into the circumgalactic medium rather than into a large host reservoir.
  • A statistical extension of this study, mapping $[\mathrm{C\,II}]$ and $[\mathrm{C\,I}]$ for about twenty radio AGN at similar redshift, would tell whether "most cold gas is off-center" is universal or a quirk of these four systems.
  • The apparent deficit of $[\mathrm{C\,I}]$-traced H$_2$ relative to $[\mathrm{C\,II}]$ could hide a detectable warm-H$_2$ or ionized-gas component; warm-H$_2$ observations of these companions would separate shock-heated gas from star-forming photodissociation regions.
  • The jet-aligned $[\mathrm{C\,II}]$ clouds around 4C+03.24 provide a spatially resolved test case where measuring gas excitation and kinematics along the jet could distinguish shock heating from tidal stripping, a distinction the current data cannot make.
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

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper analyzes ALMA Band 8 [CII] and continuum observations plus archival Band 3 [CI] data for four z~3.5 radio galaxies and eight detected companion cloud systems. The central claim is that the majority of cold gas traced by [CII] (and, where detected, [CI]) is not located at the AGN position or in the host galaxy, but in nearby companions; the hosts are therefore gas-poor while the companions are gas-rich. The authors derive [CII] and [CI] luminosities, IR luminosities, star formation rates, dynamical masses, and stellar-mass estimates, and compare these with literature samples. They propose that the companions may be merger-stripped clouds that trigger radio-loud AGN activity, or that they may be signatures of negative AGN feedback through shock heating, while also noting positive-feedback possibilities. The paper explicitly states that the main cold-gas conclusion is based on [CII], with [CI] serving as supporting evidence at lower resolution.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the paper provides rare, high-resolution (0.2 arcsec) evidence that cold gas around powerful z~3.5 radio AGN is spatially offset from the AGN host, with direct implications for jet triggering and feedback. The strength of the paper is that the off-center [CII] distributions are direct measurements from the same cubes, not outputs of a model: all eight detected systems peak away from the radio core, and the companion selection is spectroscopically validated. The comparison with JWST/NIRSpec [OIII] maps adds an independent tracer and shows that cold and warm ionized gas do not coincide. The authors are appropriately cautious: the merger-trigger and shock-heating scenarios are framed as proposals, and the [CI] overlap limitations are stated. The main weakness is that the gas-poor-host conclusion depends on upper limits at the radio core that cover only a limited aperture and velocity window; this is a load-bearing but testable issue. The paper is a useful, concise contribution to the study of cold gas in the circumgalactic medium of high-redshift radio AGN.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. 3, Table 1] The host gas-poor claim rests on the [CII] non-detections at the radio core, measured with a 5 kpc extraction aperture and a +/-125 km/s velocity window. This procedure does not bound gas at larger radii (the aperture is only about 0.7 arcsec), at velocities beyond about +/-250 km/s, or at a redshift offset from the adopted zsys; the statement that doubling the velocity range raises the limits by only about 30% does not substitute for a search over the full ~5300 km/s band. For TN J0205+2242 the core upper limit (1.22e9 Lsun) exceeds the detected companion luminosity (0.73e9 Lsun), so that object is individually consistent with most [CII] being at the AGN; the sample-level majority statement is carried by the other three fields. I request either an independent extraction at the radio core over the full band and with a matched stellar-light aperture, or a restriction of the gas-poor-host conclusion to the detected clumps rather than to the host as a whole.
  2. [Sec. 3, Sec. 4.1] The [CI]-based molecular-gas version of the gas-poor-host claim is unresolved: [CI] spectra are extracted in roughly 2x1.5 arcsec beams, with 15-28% aperture overlaps that are corrected analytically but not resolved, so a host-centered H2 component blended into the large beams cannot be excluded. The authors do explicitly state that the main conclusion is based on [CII], which is appropriate, but the abstract and Sec. 4.4 should more carefully distinguish between 'hosts lack detected [CII]' and 'hosts are gas-poor in H2'. As written, the phrase 'gas-poor nature of the hosts' in the abstract draws on both tracers without this distinction.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 4.2] The sentence 'In Fig. 2b, we show the LIR versus L[CII]/LIR ratio' appears to reference the wrong figure; the relevant panel is Fig. 4b.
  2. [Abstract and Sec. 4.1] The phrase 'majority of cold gas' should be qualified as 'majority of detected [CII] emission' where the measurement is based only on the detected companions and the core upper limits, to avoid overstating the tracer coverage.
  3. [Sec. 3, Eq. (2)] The adopted values Q10=0.48 and X[CI]=3e-5 are fixed literature values and dominate the H2 mass scale; a sentence noting their systematic uncertainty and the resulting uncertainty on MH2 would help readers interpret Fig. 4a.
  4. [General] Please correct typographical errors such as 'compaions' in Sec. 4.1 and the odd spacing in the title ('T riggering', 'F eedback'); also check that all figure references in the text match the intended panels.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the gas-poor-host claim is supported by new core upper limits and [CI] re-extraction, not by the self-cited companion inventory.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. The central claim that most [CII]-traced cold gas lies outside the radio-core positions rests on direct measurements from the same ALMA Band 8 cubes: the detected off-core companion fluxes (Table 1 and Figs. 1-3) and the 3-sigma [CII] upper limits at the radio cores, computed with a 5 kpc aperture and +/-125 km/s window (Sect. 3). These upper limits are new products of this analysis, not outputs of the interpretation. The [CI] re-extraction at companion positions is a separate, lower-resolution consistency check, and the authors explicitly state that 'the main conclusion that the companions are rich in cold gas is based on [CII] detections, such that overlap in some of the [CI] extractions does not affect it.' The merger-trigger and shock-heating scenarios are explicitly hedged as proposals ('We propose' and 'may also be a signature'), not forced by construction. Self-citations to Wang et al. (2025) supply the sample and companion inventory, but the gas-poor-host half of the claim is independently supported by the new core upper limits and the [CI] core-versus-companion comparison, so the self-citation is not load-bearing. The 5 kpc / +/-125 km/s aperture choices are assumptions that could affect completeness, and the paper acknowledges that doubling the velocity range raises the limits by only about 30%; this is a possible correctness risk, not a circular reduction of an equation to its own inputs. No step in the analysis exhibits Eq. X = Eq. Y by construction or renames a fitted parameter as a prediction.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The quantitative claims (M_H2, SFR, Mdyn, Mstar) rest on a chain of literature conversion factors (Q10, X[CI], L158=LIR/0.13, SFR normalization) and on assumptions about aperture sizes and velocity windows for the host upper limits. Most bolometric outputs are upper limits. The qualitative claim, that cold gas is off-center in these four systems, rests mainly on the high-resolution [CII] maps and is robust to most of these assumptions. No new physical entities are postulated; the companion clouds are observed [CII]/[CI] emitters, and 'stripped clouds', 'starbursting clumps', and 'shock-heated gas' are interpretive labels for the same observed emission, not new forces, particles, or media.

free parameters (5)
  • Q10 (excitation factor) = 0.48
    Assumed in Eq. 2 when converting [CI](1-0) intensity to M_H2. No multi-transition excitation modeling is done, so the factor carries a factor-of-several uncertainty that propagates into all M_H2 values.
  • X[CI] (carbon-to-H2 abundance) = 3e-5
    Assumed abundance ratio in Eq. 2 following Kolwa et al. (2023); enters the M_H2 estimate linearly and is not independently constrained for these fields.
  • Host [CII] extraction aperture = 0.7 arcsec (5 kpc disk)
    Assumed disk diameter for the radio-core [CII] upper limits (Sect. 3). A more extended or diffuse host reservoir would raise the limits; a doubled velocity window raises them by about 30%.
  • Core velocity window for non-detections = +/-125 km/s
    Set to the median FWHM of the detected companion lines; used to compute 3-sigma [CII] and [CI] upper limits at the radio core.
  • Mstar from Mdyn/2 = Mdyn/2
    Zeroth-order stellar mass assuming gas mass fraction near 1 (Sect. 3); used to place the companions on the Mstar-SFR plane in Fig. 4c without propagated errors.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption [CII]158um emission traces cold gas and photodissociation regions, and hence acts as a gas indicator in these fields
    Used throughout to define gas-rich companions; the paper itself notes [CII] can also trace ionized gas and shocks (Sect. 4.2), which blurs the cold-gas interpretation for the 4C+03.24 jet-aligned clouds.
  • domain assumption [CI](1-0) traces cold molecular H2 gas in AGN-like radiation fields
    Invoked in Eq. 2 and Sect. 3 for the M_H2 values; the paper flags that the Zanella et al. (2018) M_H2-L[CII] relation may not hold in bright quasar fields, so the [CI]-to-H2 step carries the same risk.
  • domain assumption Systemic redshifts from HeII, [OIII], or [CI] locate the AGN rest frame to within the searched velocity windows
    Companion associations and core non-detections are judged in velocity windows around these redshifts; 4C+19.71 shows a 268 km/s offset between [OIII] and [CI], so the assumption is not uniformly clean.
  • domain assumption The radio core marks the AGN and its host galaxy
    All host versus companion distinctions inherit this identification (Sect. 3, 4.1); for obscured HzRGs this is standard but it anchors the entire spatial argument.
  • domain assumption FIR continuum conversions L158=LIR/0.13 and SFR=2.64e-44 LIR apply at these redshifts
    Converts the 158um continuum to total IR luminosity and SFR (Sect. 3); the 4C+19.71 SFR comes out about a factor of 2 above the SED-based value, so the conversion is not perfectly matched to this population.
  • domain assumption Physical association of companions with the AGN environment
    Association is judged from projected separations of tens of kpc and similar redshifts; only three of eight companions have [OIII] counterparts confirming a common potential well.
  • standard math Flat Lambda-CDM cosmology with H0=70 km/s/Mpc and Omega_m=0.3
    Stated in the Introduction; the luminosity distance enters Eqs. 1 and 2 and therefore all luminosities and masses.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Gas-Poor Hosts and Gas-Rich Companions of $z\approx$3.5 Radio Active Galactic Nuclei: ALMA Insights into Jet Triggering and Feedback." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MFJ423HJ

@misc{pith2026250610799,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Gas-Poor Hosts and Gas-Rich Companions of $z\approx$3.5 Radio Active Galactic Nuclei: ALMA Insights into Jet Triggering and Feedback},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MFJ423HJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.10799}
}
abstract

Cold gaseous systems play important roles in galaxy evolution by possibly providing fuel to ignite active galactic nuclei (AGN) activity and star-formation. In this work, we analyze [CII]$158\rm \mu m$ and continuum observations from ALMA for a sample of four radio AGN at $z \approx 3.5$, focusing on eight associated companion cloud systems discovered within projected distances of tens of kiloparsecs or less. The spatial distribution of these companions indicates that the majority of cold gas is not located at the AGN position, i.e., not in their host galaxies. With the assistance of [CII] at $0.2"$ resolution, we further confirm the gas-poor nature of the hosts by re-analyzing archival [CI] (a tracer of H$_{2}$) at $\sim2"$ resolution. Our sample has [CII] luminosities in a range of $2.8\times10^{8}<L_{\rm [CII]}/L_{\odot}<4.2\times10^{9}$. The $L_{\rm [CII]}/L_{\rm IR}$ ratio, $\sim 9.4\times10^{-4}$, is consistent with sources discussed in the literature. Our findings show the gas-poor radio AGN hosts have nearby gas-rich companions. We propose that these companions may be stripped clouds resulting from merger processes, which could be a trigger of radio-loud AGN. They may also be a signature of negative AGN feedback (e.g., shock heating) on these infalling companions and on the host galaxy. In general, our analysis shows that powerful AGN at and before Cosmic Noon are impacting and being impacted by cold gaseous clouds in their circumgalactic or protointracluster media.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.10799 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. On the left we show [C ii] moment 0 maps while on the right we present spectra of the companions around TN J0121+1320. (a): Contours of [C ii] moment 0 maps integrated from velocity channels of each line emission as indicated at the bottom right. The contours are shown in [3, 4, 5, ...]σ levels (for [C ii]-B, only odd levels are shown for better visualization). The gray scale image is [O iii]λ5007 surface brightness… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Similar as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Sample properties and comparison: (a) L[C ii] versus MH2,[C i] , (b) LIR versus L[C ii]/LIR, and (c) M⋆ versus SFR. In panel (a), we show the MH2 − L[C ii] relation with uncertainties (Zanella et al. 2018). For comparison in panel (b) and (c), we include z > 5 radio-lo…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: [O iii]λ5007 spectrum from r = 0.11′′ aperture overlaid with normalized [C i] spectrum at the position of 4C03-[O iii]. The [C i] spectrum is extracted at the same po￾sition. The black (narrow) and dark green (broad) shaded Gaussians mark the kinematic components repor…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

72 extracted references · 17 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    N., Guillard, P., Togi, A., et al

    Appleton, P. N., Guillard, P., Togi, A., et al. 2017, ApJ, 836, 76, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/836/1/76

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/836/1/76 2017

  2. [2]

    N., Diaz-Santos, T., Fadda, D., et al

    Appleton, P. N., Diaz-Santos, T., Fadda, D., et al. 2018, ApJ, 869, 61, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaed2a

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaed2a 2018

  3. [3]

    N., Dunlop, J

    Archibald, E. N., Dunlop, J. S., Hughes, D. H., et al. 2001, MNRAS, 323, 417, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04188.x Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ ocz, B. M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f

    arXiv 2001

  4. [4]

    2009, MNRAS, 399, 2221, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15431.x B´ ethermin, M., Fudamoto, Y., Ginolfi, M., et al

    Bekki, K. 2009, MNRAS, 399, 2221, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15431.x B´ ethermin, M., Fudamoto, Y., Ginolfi, M., et al. 2020, A&A, 643, A2, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202037649 B´ ethermin, M., Accard, C., Guillaume, C., et al. 2023, A&A, 680, L8, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348115

    arXiv 2009

  5. [5]

    G., Papadopoulos, P

    Bisbas, T. G., Papadopoulos, P. P., & Viti, S. 2015, ApJ, 803, 37, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/803/1/37

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/803/1/37 2015

  6. [6]

    L., & Walter, F

    Carilli, C. L., & Walter, F. 2013, ARA&A, 51, 105, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-082812-140953 CASA Team, Bean, B., Bhatnagar, S., et al. 2022, PASP, 134, 114501, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ac9642

    doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-082812-140953 2013

  7. [7]

    M., & Norman, C

    Chiaberge, M., Gilli, R., Lotz, J. M., & Norman, C. 2015, ApJ, 806, 147, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/806/2/147 De Breuck, C., Lundgren, A., Emonts, B., et al. 2022, A&A, 658, L2, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202141853 De Breuck, C., Seymour, N., Stern, D., et al. 2010, ApJ, 725, 36, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/725/1/36 De Looze, I., Cormier, D., Lebouteiller, V., et al. ...

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/806/2/147 2015

  8. [8]

    2023, A&A, 673, A157, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202245674

    Decarli, R., Pensabene, A., Diaz-Santos, T., et al. 2023, A&A, 673, A157, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202245674

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202245674 2023

Show all 72 references
  1. [9]

    2020, A&A, 643, A5, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038231 Di Teodoro, E

    Dessauges-Zavadsky, M., Ginolfi, M., Pozzi, F., et al. 2020, A&A, 643, A5, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038231 Di Teodoro, E. M., & Fraternali, F. 2015, MNRAS, 451, 3021, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv1213 D ´ ıaz-Santos, T., Armus, L., Charmandaris, V., et al. 2013, ApJ, 774, 68, doi: 1...

    2020 doi

  2. [10]

    2014, A&A, 566, A53, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201323310

    Drouart, G., De Breuck, C., Vernet, J., et al. 2014, A&A, 566, A53, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201323310

    2014 doi

  3. [11]

    Emonts, B. H. C., De Breuck, C., Lehnert, M. D., et al. 2015a, A&A, 584, A99, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201526090

    doi

  4. [12]

    Emonts, B. H. C., Mao, M. Y., Stroe, A., et al. 2015b, MNRAS, 451, 1025, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv930 12

    doi

  5. [13]

    Emonts, B. H. C., Lehnert, M. D., Dannerbauer, H., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 477, L60, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/sly034

    2018 doi

  6. [14]

    Emonts, B. H. C., Lehnert, M. D., Yoon, I., et al. 2023, Science, 379, 1323, doi: 10.1126/science.abh2150

    2023 doi

  7. [15]

    L., Schaerer, D., Lemaux, B

    Faisst, A. L., Schaerer, D., Lemaux, B. C., et al. 2020, ApJS, 247, 61, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab7ccd

    2020 doi

  8. [16]

    2021, A&A, 645, A120, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935237

    Wang, W. 2021, A&A, 645, A120, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935237

    2021 doi

  9. [17]

    D., et al

    Falkendal, T., De Breuck, C., Lehnert, M. D., et al. 2019, A&A, 621, A27, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201732485 Fern´ andez Aranda, R., D ´ ıaz Santos, T., Hatziminaoglou, E., et al. 2024, A&A, 682, A166, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347869 F¨ orster Schreiber, N. M., & Wuyts, S. 2020...

    2019 doi

  10. [18]

    C., Anninos, P., Croft, S., Lacy, M., & Witry, J

    Fragile, P. C., Anninos, P., Croft, S., Lacy, M., & Witry, J. W. L. 2017, ApJ, 850, 171, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa95c6

    2017 doi

  11. [19]

    C., Murray, S

    Fragile, P. C., Murray, S. D., Anninos, P., & van Breugel, W. 2004, ApJ, 604, 74, doi: 10.1086/381726

    2004 doi

  12. [20]

    A., Faisst, A., et al

    Fudamoto, Y., Oesch, P. A., Faisst, A., et al. 2020, A&A, 643, A4, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038163

    2020 doi

  13. [21]

    K., Bouwens, R., et al

    Fudamoto, Y., Inoue, A. K., Bouwens, R., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2504.03831, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2504.03831

    2025 doi arXiv

  14. [22]

    E., Smail, I., Moran, S

    Geach, J. E., Smail, I., Moran, S. M., et al. 2011, ApJL, 730, L19, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/730/2/L19

    2011 doi

  15. [23]

    C., B´ ethermin, M., et al

    Ginolfi, M., Jones, G. C., B´ ethermin, M., et al. 2020, A&A, 633, A90, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936872

    2020 doi

  16. [24]

    D., De Breuck, C., et al

    Gullberg, B., Lehnert, M. D., De Breuck, C., et al. 2016, A&A, 591, A73, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201527647

    2016 doi

  17. [25]

    R., Millman, K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2

    2020 doi

  18. [26]

    M., & Ramos Almeida, C

    Harrison, C. M., & Ramos Almeida, C. 2024, Galaxies, 12, 17, doi: 10.3390/galaxies12020017

    2024 doi

  19. [27]

    Huang, H.-T., Man, A. W. S., Lelli, F., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.04290, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2411.04290

    2024 doi arXiv

  20. [28]

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

    2007 doi

  21. [29]

    A., Seaquist, E

    Irwin, J. A., Seaquist, E. R., Taylor, A. R., & Duric, N. 1987, ApJL, 313, L91, doi: 10.1086/184837

    1987 doi

  22. [30]

    2016, in Positioning and Power in Academic Publishing: Players, Agents and Agendas, ed

    Kluyver, T., Ragan-Kelley, B., P´ erez, F., et al. 2016, in Positioning and Power in Academic Publishing: Players, Agents and Agendas, ed. F. Loizides & B. Schmidt, IOS Press, 87 – 90

    2016

  23. [31]

    2019, A&A, 625, A102, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935437

    Kolwa, S., Vernet, J., De Breuck, C., et al. 2019, A&A, 625, A102, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935437

    2019 doi

  24. [32]

    2023, MNRAS, 525, 5831, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad2647

    Kolwa, S., De Breuck, C., Vernet, J., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 525, 5831, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad2647

    2023 doi

  25. [33]

    2018, A&A, 609, A130, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201732019 Le F` evre, O., B´ ethermin, M., Faisst, A., et al

    Lagache, G., Cousin, M., & Chatzikos, M. 2018, A&A, 609, A130, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201732019 Le F` evre, O., B´ ethermin, M., Faisst, A., et al. 2020, A&A, 643, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936965

    2018 doi

  26. [34]

    2023, ApJ, 944, 35, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acaf58

    Lee, K., Kohno, K., Hatsukade, B., et al. 2023, ApJ, 944, 35, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acaf58

    2023 doi

  27. [35]

    D., van Driel, W., & Minchin, R

    Lehnert, M. D., van Driel, W., & Minchin, R. 2016, A&A, 590, A51, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201525743

    2016 doi

  28. [36]

    M., Fraternali, F., et al

    Lelli, F., Di Teodoro, E. M., Fraternali, F., et al. 2021, Science, 371, 713, doi: 10.1126/science.abc1893

    2021 doi

  29. [37]

    2014, ARA&A, 52, 415, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125615

    Madau, P., & Dickinson, M. 2014, ARA&A, 52, 415, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125615

    2014 doi

  30. [38]

    2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2306.00953, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2306.00953

    Maiolino, R., Uebler, H., Perna, M., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2306.00953, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2306.00953

    2023 doi arXiv

  31. [39]

    2025, A&A, 694, A171, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451290

    Mazzucchelli, C., Decarli, R., Belladitta, S., et al. 2025, A&A, 694, A171, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451290

    2025 doi

  32. [40]

    2025, ApJ, 980, 20, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ada351

    Walter, F. 2025, ApJ, 980, 20, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ada351

    2025 doi

  33. [41]

    2008, A&A Rv, 15, 67, doi: 10.1007/s00159-007-0008-z

    Miley, G., & De Breuck, C. 2008, A&A Rv, 15, 67, doi: 10.1007/s00159-007-0008-z

    2008 doi

  34. [42]

    K., Overzier, R

    Miley, G. K., Overzier, R. A., Zirm, A. W., et al. 2006, ApJL, 650, L29, doi: 10.1086/508534

    2006 doi

  35. [43]

    2024, A&A, 690, A197, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348782

    Mitsuhashi, I., Tadaki, K.-i., Ikeda, R., et al. 2024, A&A, 690, A197, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348782

    2024 doi

  36. [44]

    Wagner, A. Y. 2020, A&A, 639, L13, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038269

    2020 doi

  37. [45]

    Nesvadba, N. P. H., De Breuck, C., Lehnert, M. D., Best, P. N., & Collet, C. 2017a, A&A, 599, A123, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201528040

    doi

  38. [46]

    Nesvadba, N. P. H., Drouart, G., De Breuck, C., et al. 2017b, A&A, 600, A121, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629357

    doi

  39. [47]

    2007, A&A, 475, 145, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20078175

    Gilbert, A., & van Breugel, W. 2007, A&A, 475, 145, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20078175

    2007 doi

  40. [48]

    Nesvadba, N. P. H., Lehnert, M. D., Eisenhauer, F., et al. 2006, ApJ, 650, 693, doi: 10.1086/507266

    2006 doi

  41. [49]

    B., et al

    Newville, M., Stensitzki, T., Allen, D. B., et al. 2016, Lmfit: Non-Linear Least-Square Minimization and Curve-Fitting for Python. http://ascl.net/1606.014

    2016

  42. [50]

    2018, ApJ, 859, 38, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aabadb

    Noirot, G., Stern, D., Mei, S., et al. 2018, ApJ, 859, 38, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aabadb

    2018 doi

  43. [51]

    E., Appleton, P

    Ogle, P., Davies, J. E., Appleton, P. N., et al. 2012, ApJ, 751, 13, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/751/1/13 13

    2012 doi

  44. [52]

    P., Bisbas, T

    Papadopoulos, P. P., Bisbas, T. G., & Zhang, Z.-Y. 2018, MNRAS, 478, 1716, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1077

    2018 doi

  45. [53]

    P., & Greve, T

    Papadopoulos, P. P., & Greve, T. R. 2004, ApJL, 615, L29, doi: 10.1086/426059

    2004 doi

  46. [54]

    2020, A&A, 643, A3, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202037617

    Schaerer, D., Ginolfi, M., B´ ethermin, M., et al. 2020, A&A, 643, A3, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202037617

    2020 doi

  47. [55]

    2007, ApJS, 171, 353, doi: 10.1086/517887

    Seymour, N., Stern, D., De Breuck, C., et al. 2007, ApJS, 171, 353, doi: 10.1086/517887

    2007 doi

  48. [56]

    2012, ApJ, 755, 146, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/755/2/146

    Seymour, N., Altieri, B., De Breuck, C., et al. 2012, ApJ, 755, 146, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/755/2/146

    2012 doi

  49. [57]

    A., Morganti, R., Colafrancesco, S., & Booth, R

    Shafi, N., Oosterloo, T. A., Morganti, R., Colafrancesco, S., & Booth, R. 2015, MNRAS, 454, 1404, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv2034 ¨Ubler, H., Maiolino, R., Curtis-Lake, E., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2302.06647, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2302.06647

    2015 doi arXiv

  50. [58]

    A., et al

    Vayner, A., Zakamska, N., Wright, S. A., et al. 2021, ApJ, 923, 59, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac2b9e

    2021 doi

  51. [59]

    L., Ishikawa, Y., et al

    Vayner, A., Zakamska, N. L., Ishikawa, Y., et al. 2023a, ApJ, 955, 92, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ace784 —. 2023b, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2307.13751, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2307.13751

    doi arXiv

  52. [60]

    Vayner, A., D ´ ıaz-Santos, T., Eisenhardt, P. R. M., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2412.02862, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2412.02862

    2024 doi arXiv

  53. [61]

    P., Walter, F., Neeleman, M., et al

    Venemans, B. P., Walter, F., Neeleman, M., et al. 2020, ApJ, 904, 130, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abc563

    2020 doi

  54. [62]

    Vernet, J., Fosbury, R. A. E., Villar-Mart ´ ın, M., et al. 2001, A&A, 366, 7, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20000076

    2001 doi

  55. [63]

    E., et al

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261, doi: 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2

    2020 doi

  56. [64]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.23797, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2503.23797

    Walter, F., Banados, E., Carilli, C., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.23797, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2503.23797

    2025 doi arXiv

  57. [65]

    2021, A&A, 654, A88, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202141558

    Wang, W., Wylezalek, D., De Breuck, C., et al. 2021, A&A, 654, A88, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202141558

    2021 doi

  58. [66]

    2023, A&A, 680, A70, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346415

    Wang, W., Wylezalek, D., Vernet, J., et al. 2023, A&A, 680, A70, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346415

    2023 doi

  59. [67]

    2024, A&A, 683, A169, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348531

    Wang, W., Wylezalek, D., De Breuck, C., et al. 2024, A&A, 683, A169, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348531

    2024 doi

  60. [68]

    2025, A&A, 696, A88, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202553668 Weiß, A., Henkel, C., Downes, D., & Walter, F

    Wang, W., De Breuck, C., Wylezalek, D., et al. 2025, A&A, 696, A88, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202553668 Weiß, A., Henkel, C., Downes, D., & Walter, F. 2003, A&A, 409, L41, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20031337

    2025 doi

  61. [69]

    2013, ApJ, 769, 79, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/769/1/79

    Wylezalek, D., Galametz, A., Stern, D., et al. 2013, ApJ, 769, 79, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/769/1/79

    2013 doi

  62. [70]

    2014, ApJ, 786, 17, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/786/1/17

    Wylezalek, D., Vernet, J., De Breuck, C., et al. 2014, ApJ, 786, 17, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/786/1/17

    2014 doi

  63. [71]

    2018, MNRAS, 481, 1976, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2394

    Zanella, A., Daddi, E., Magdis, G., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 481, 1976, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2394

    2018 doi

  64. [72]

    K., Sugahara, Y., et al

    Zhong, Y., Inoue, A. K., Sugahara, Y., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 529, 4531, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae798

    2024 doi

Pith tools

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