Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 3 cited by

The FAST All Sky HI Survey DR2: the FASHI Catalog and the HI Mass Function

T0 review · 2 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-07-13 · grok-4.5

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

Pith's one-line read FASHI maps 156411 HI galaxies and pins the local HI mass function to a single Schechter form down to 10^6.2 solar masses, giving Ω_HI = 4.71 × 10^{-4}.

desk verdict Largest local HI catalog and a carefully systematics-aware HIMF that will become the default reference; soft spot is the usual empirical completeness surface, already budgeted. read the letter →

arxiv 2606.31539 v3 pith:SPO5JLNZ submitted 2026-06-30 astro-ph.GA astro-ph.SR

Chuan-Peng Zhang (NAOC) , Ming Zhu , Peng Jiang , Hong Guo , Jin-Long Xu , Xiao-Lan Liu , Nai-Ping Yu , Cheng Cheng
show 3 more authors
Jing Wang Jie Wang FAST Collaboration
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.GAastro-ph.SR PACS 95.80.+p98.62.Py98.52.-b95.55.Jz95.30.Ky98.58.Ge
keywords HImassfunctionFASHIsurveyFASTtelescopecosmicdensity21-cmsurveysgalaxyevolutionlarge-scalestructureSchechter
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 releases the second data product of the FAST All-Sky HI Survey: a catalog of 156411 extragalactic 21-cm sources over roughly 19500 square degrees at z < 0.09, with median sensitivity of 0.57 mJy per beam. From a completeness-corrected subsample of more than 109000 objects the authors construct the HI mass function, which they show is robustly measured down to 10^{6.2} solar masses. When systematic errors are folded in, a single Schechter function with characteristic mass log(M*/h70^{-2} M⊙) = 9.89, faint-end slope α = -1.31 and amplitude φ* = 6.38 × 10^{-3} describes the data, yielding a cosmic HI density Ω_HI = (4.71 ± 0.03_stat ± 0.40_sys) × 10^{-4} h70^{-1}. The catalog and mass function supply a new statistical baseline for how cold gas is distributed among galaxies and large-scale structure in the nearby Universe.

What carries the argument

The parametric completeness function C(S_HI | W50, f_σ) of Eq. (5)—a second-order polynomial in log W50 plus a double power-law dependence on per-source sensitivity f_σ—that supplies the weights for the 1/C V_max estimator of the mass function.

What would settle it

An independent deep HI survey that re-observes a representative fraction of the FASHI footprint and recovers a substantially different 50-percent completeness surface or a low-mass slope inconsistent with α = -1.31 after identical selection cuts.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

After correcting for the survey’s spatially varying sensitivity and line-width dependence, the HI mass function measured from more than 109000 FASHI sources is well described by a single Schechter function (log M* = 9.89, α = -1.31, φ* = 6.38 × 10^{-3}) down to 10^{6.2} solar masses, and the integrated cosmic HI density is Ω_HI = (4.71 ± 0.03_stat ± 0.40_sys) × 10^{-4} h70^{-1}.

Load-bearing premise

The fitted completeness model correctly recovers the true detection probability across the non-uniform survey footprint, so the 1/C V_max estimator remains unbiased down to the lowest masses used.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The local cosmic HI density is now known to ~8.5 percent systematic precision, tightening the baryon census at z~0.
  • Low-mass HI reservoirs are occupied far less efficiently than dark-matter halos, limiting the contribution of faint galaxies to the total gas budget.
  • HI-selected galaxies continue to trace under-dense regions even where optical surveys show local voids.
  • The catalog supplies a ready parent sample for multi-wavelength studies of gas accretion, dark galaxies and the cosmic web with DESI and eROSITA.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because the lowest-mass bins sit inside the Local Volume, any future extension below 10^{6.2} M⊙ will require explicit environmental weighting before the faint-end slope can be trusted cosmologically.
  • The absence of strong evolution in the high-mass end over 0 < z < 0.09 implies that HI accretion and consumption remain roughly balanced on ~1 Gyr timescales for massive disks.
  • Residual RFI and possible OH megamasers at the few-tenths-of-a-percent level are already sub-dominant to the quoted systematics, so further cleaning will not move Ω_HI outside the present error bar.
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 / 6 minor

Summary. This paper presents FASHI DR2: a catalog of 156411 extragalactic HI sources at z<0.09 over ~19500 deg^{2} from FAST, with median sensitivity 0.57 mJy beam^{-1} at 6.4 km s^{-1}. After a completeness analysis that models C(S_HI|W50,f_σ) for non-uniform sensitivity and line-width dependence (Eqs. 4–8), the authors construct a 1/C V_max HIMF from >109000 sources above the 50% completeness cut. The HIMF is reported as robust above M_HI~10^{6.2} M_⊙ and, with systematics included, is fit by a single Schechter function with log(M*/h70^{-2} M_⊙)=9.89±0.02, α=−1.31±0.02, φ*=(6.38±0.49)×10^{-3} h70^{3} Mpc^{-3} dex^{-1}, yielding Ω_HI=(4.71±0.03_stat±0.40_sys)×10^{-4} h70^{-1}. Cross-matches with ALFALFA (~28k sources) and DESI/SDSS (~64k sources), reliability checks, and a joint Monte Carlo + jackknife systematic budget (Table 5) support the catalog and the HIMF/Ω_HI results.

Significance. If the completeness model and systematic budget hold, FASHI DR2 becomes the largest and deepest single-dish HI catalog in the local Universe and sets a new benchmark for the HIMF and Ω_HI. The combination of area, depth, explicit treatment of non-uniform f_σ, and a quantified primary systematic of 0.40×10^{-4} on Ω_HI is a clear advance over HIPASS and ALFALFA. The public catalog, optical cross-matches, and multi-wavelength synergy (DESI, eROSITA) make the work a lasting community resource for gas accretion, galaxy evolution, and large-scale structure studies. Strengths include the documented SoFiA+visual pipeline, ALFALFA/DESI validation, and the Monte Carlo that folds the seven-parameter completeness surface (Eq. 5) into the error budget rather than treating it as free.

major comments (2)
  1. §6.2–6.3, Eqs. (5) and (9): The central HIMF and Ω_HI rest on the parametric completeness surface C(S_HI|W50,f_σ). The paper already identifies this as the dominant systematic (0.34 of the 0.40 primary sys error in Table 5) and shows single-Schechter stability once systematics are included. For full load-bearing transparency, please add a short validation that the 1/C V_max estimator is unbiased under this model—e.g., recovery of an injected Schechter HIMF in mock cubes with the observed f_σ map, or a split-sample test (high vs low f_σ regions, or blind SoFiA vs optically guided subsets)—and state the residual bias (if any) relative to the quoted sys error. Without such a check the claim remains plausible but not fully closed.
  2. §6.3 and Table 4: The HIMF is stated to be robust only for M_HI>10^{6.2} M_⊙; bins below that are open circles and attributed to Local Volume structure. Please make the fitting range and the exclusion of those bins fully explicit in the text and in the Schechter fit caption (and, if possible, show a fit restricted to M_HI>10^7 M_⊙) so that the quoted α=−1.31±0.02 cannot be misread as constrained by the Local Volume bins.
minor comments (6)
  1. §5.1 / Table 2: Clarify the distinction between S_bf (busy-function) and S_sum (direct sum) and when each is used for SNR and M_HI; the text notes systematic differences for some sources.
  2. §6.6: The W20>5 W50 cut removes only ~1% of sources and is said to have minor HIMF impact; a one-line statement of the change in α or Ω_HI when the cut is relaxed would help users.
  3. Figure 12 (right): The scaled halo mass function is illustrative; state the exact scaling factor and mass range over which it is matched so the “shallower than HMF” comparison is reproducible.
  4. §6.4 / Table 5: The primary vs conservative (cosmic-variance) systematic paths are clear; a single sentence in the abstract or summary stating which value is recommended for most users would reduce ambiguity.
  5. Typographical / production: DOI/volume placeholders (“https://doi.org/8”, “Vol. 8 No. 8”) and a few repeated figure captions (e.g., Fig. 13) should be cleaned before final production.
  6. §4.3 / §6.6: Detection origin (blind SoFiA vs optically guided) is not flagged in the released catalog; noting this limitation more prominently will help users who need homogeneous selection.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: HIMF and Ω_HI are empirical 1/C V_max measurements with an explicitly fitted completeness surface treated as a systematic, not a forced prediction.

full rationale

The central results (Schechter parameters of the HIMF and the integrated Ω_HI) are constructed from observed fluxes, CF4/Karachentsev distances, and a survey-specific completeness function C(S_HI|W50,f_σ) that is fitted to the FASHI data themselves (Eqs. 4–8) and then used in the standard 1/C V_max estimator (Eq. 9). That completeness surface is an empirical model of the survey selection function, not a theoretical prediction of the HIMF; the paper correctly folds the covariance of its seven free parameters into the dominant systematic error budget (Table 5: 0.34 of the 0.40 primary sys on Ω_HI). Self-citations (FASHI DR1, HiFAST pipeline, Ma et al. 2025) supply methods and prior comparisons, not the numerical answer of DR2. Independent external anchors (ALFALFA cross-match of ~28k sources, DESI/SDSS matches of ~64k sources, VLA/GBT consistency) further break any closed loop. The single-Schechter preference after systematics is a statistical statement about the measured points, not a definitional identity. Score 1 reflects only the ordinary, non-load-bearing self-citation of the authors’ own pipeline and DR1 papers.

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

The central HIMF and Ω_HI results rest on standard cosmological and radio-astronomy assumptions plus a small set of fitted completeness parameters. No new physical entities are postulated; free parameters are those of the Schechter function itself and of the empirical completeness surface.

free parameters (4)
  • Schechter characteristic mass log(M*/h70^{-2} M_⊙) = 9.89±0.02
    Fitted to the completeness-corrected HIMF data points above 10^{6.2} M_⊙; quoted value 9.89±0.02.
  • Schechter low-mass slope α = -1.31±0.02
    Fitted simultaneously with M* and φ*; quoted value -1.31±0.02.
  • Schechter amplitude φ* = (6.38±0.49)×10^{-3}
    Fitted normalization of the HIMF; quoted value (6.38±0.49)×10^{-3} h70^3 Mpc^{-3} dex^{-1}.
  • Completeness surface coefficients (Eq. 5) = 0.586, -1.670, 0.582, -0.362, 0.775, -1.485, 0.447 (and σ_logS coefficients)
    Seven coefficients of the second-order polynomial in log W50 plus double power-law in f_σ, obtained by fitting binned S^{3/2} dn/dlog S data; they define the 50% flux limit used for sample selection and 1/C weights.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Flat ΛCDM cosmology with H0=70 km s^{-1} Mpc^{-1}, Ω_M=0.3, Ω_Λ=0.7
    Stated at the end of §1 and used for all distances, volumes and Ω_HI conversions.
  • domain assumption HI mass formula M_HI/M_⊙ = 2.356×10^5 (D/Mpc)^2 S_HI/(1+z) (Eq. 3)
    Standard conversion adopted throughout; uncertainty propagated from D and S_HI.
  • ad hoc to paper 50% completeness cut plus 1/C V_max estimator recovers the true HIMF once the parametric C(S_HI|W50,f_σ) is applied
    Core methodological assumption of §6.2–6.3; validated by comparison with prior surveys but not independently proven for the full non-uniform FASHI footprint.
  • domain assumption Distances from Cosmicflows-4 (or Karachentsev et al. for D≲11 Mpc) adequately correct for peculiar velocities
    Used for all mass and volume calculations (§5.1); residual distance errors enter the systematic budget.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The FAST All Sky HI Survey DR2: the FASHI Catalog and the HI Mass Function." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SPO5JLNZ

@misc{pith2026260631539,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The FAST All Sky HI Survey DR2: the FASHI Catalog and the HI Mass Function},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SPO5JLNZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2606.31539}
}
abstract

The FAST All Sky HI Survey (FASHI) conducted with the Five-hundred-meter Aperture Spherical radio Telescope (FAST) has mapped $\sim 19500\,\mathrm{deg}^2$ of the sky north of DEC $= -14^{\circ}$, detecting $156411$ extragalactic HI sources at $z< 0.09$ with a median sensitivity of $0.57\,\mathrm{mJy}\,\mathrm{beam}^{-1}$ at a velocity resolution of $6.4\,\mathrm{km}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}$. The survey achieves unprecedented depth and area coverage, significantly improving upon previous single-dish surveys. Through a detailed completeness analysis that accounts for the survey's non-uniform sensitivity and line-width dependence, we construct a robust HI mass function (HIMF) using a completeness-corrected sample of over $109000$ sources. The HIMF is robustly constrained down to $M_{\mathrm{HI}}\sim 10^{6.2}\,M_{\odot}$. When systematic uncertainties are included, the HIMF is well described by a single-Schechter function with a characteristic mass $\log (M_{*} / h_{70}^{-2}M_{\odot}) = 9.89\pm 0.02$, low-mass end slope $\alpha = -1.31\pm 0.02$, and amplitude $\phi_{*} = (6.38\pm 0.49)\times 10^{-3}\,h_{70}^{3}\,\mathrm{Mpc}^{-3}\,\mathrm{dex}^{-1}$. The derived cosmic HI density is $\Omega_{\mathrm{HI}} = (4.71\pm 0.03_{\mathrm{stat}}\pm 0.40_{\mathrm{sys}})\times 10^{-4}\,h_{70}^{-1}$. FASHI provides the most extensive and sensitive HI catalog to date, establishing an important benchmark for studies of gas accretion, galaxy evolution, and large-scale structure in the local universe.

Review history (3 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. HI Depletion Begins Well Beyond the Virial Radius: A FAST Stacking Study of 36 Galaxy Clusters to 5R200

    astro-ph.GA 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Stacked FAST spectra show cluster galaxies have less neutral hydrogen than field galaxies out to 5R200, including blue star-forming members.

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

    astro-ph.GA 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A catalog of 192 compact high-velocity clouds from the FAST All-Sky HI Survey, most clustered in position and velocity around M31 and interpreted as gas-rich starless minihalos.

  3. Weak Evolution of Cosmic Atomic Hydrogen over the Past 4.5 Billion Years

    astro-ph.GA 2026-07 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    Combining FAST and DESI data for 2.5 million galaxies shows cosmic atomic hydrogen density declined by only a factor of 1.35 over 4.5 Gyr, far less than the 2.46-fold decline in star formation.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

87 extracted references · 4 linked inside Pith · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    N., Adelman-McCarthy , J

    Abazajian , K. N., Adelman-McCarthy , J. K., Ag \"u eros , M. A., et al. 2009, , 182, 543

    2009

  2. [2]

    Adams , E. A. K., Giovanelli , R., & Haynes , M. P. 2013, , 768, 77

    2013

  3. [3]

    Adams , E. A. K., & van Leeuwen , J. 2019, Nature Astronomy, 3, 188

    2019

  4. [4]

    2015, The Analyst, 140 1, 250

    Baek, S.-J., Park, A., Ahn, Y.-J., & Choo, J. 2015, The Analyst, 140 1, 250

    2015

  5. [5]

    G., Staveley-Smith , L., de Blok , W

    Barnes , D. G., Staveley-Smith , L., de Blok , W. J. G., et al. 2001, , 322, 486

    2001

  6. [6]

    Ben \' tez-Llambay , A., Dutta , R., Fumagalli , M., & Navarro , J. F. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2406.18643

    arXiv 2024

  7. [7]

    M., Verheijen , M

    Blyth , S., van der Hulst , T. M., Verheijen , M. A. W., et al. 2015, in Advancing Astrophysics with the Square Kilometre Array (AASKA14), 128

    2015

  8. [8]

    2018, , 476, 875

    Catinella , B., Saintonge , A., Janowiecki , S., et al. 2018, , 476, 875

    2018

Show all 87 references
  1. [9]

    2021, , 508, 2758

    Chen , Q., Meyer , M., Popping , A., et al. 2021, , 508, 2758

    2021

  2. [10]

    J., Li , C., et al

    Chen , Y., Mo , H. J., Li , C., et al. 2019, , 872, 180

    2019

  3. [11]

    2020, , 638, L14

    Cheng , C., Ibar , E., Du , W., et al. 2020, , 638, L14

    2020

  4. [12]

    A., Stevens , A

    Dav \'e , R., Crain , R. A., Stevens , A. R. H., et al. 2020, , 497, 146

    2020

  5. [13]

    J., Staveley-Smith , L., & Boyle , B

    Delhaize , J., Meyer , M. J., Staveley-Smith , L., & Boyle , B. J. 2013, , 433, 1398

    2013

  6. [14]

    G., et al

    DESI Collaboration , Abdul-Karim , M., Adame , A. G., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.14745

    2025 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Diemer , B., Stevens , A. R. H., Forbes , J. C., et al. 2018, , 238, 33

    2018

  8. [16]

    Diemer , B., Stevens , A. R. H., Lagos , C. d. P., et al. 2019, , 487, 1529

    2019

  9. [17]

    P., & Robotham , A

    Driver , S. P., & Robotham , A. S. G. 2010, , 407, 2131

    2010

  10. [18]

    J., Tempel , E., et al

    Einasto , M., Liivam \"a gi , L. J., Tempel , E., et al. 2011, , 736, 51

    2011

  11. [19]

    B., van Gorkom , J

    Fern \'a ndez , X., Gim , H. B., van Gorkom , J. H., et al. 2016, , 824, L1

    2016

  12. [20]

    1990, A&As, 86, 473

    Fouque , P., Durand , N., Bottinelli , L., Gouguenheim , L., & Paturel , G. 1990, A&As, 86, 473

    1990

  13. [21]

    Giovanelli , R., & Haynes , M. P. 2015, , 24, 1

    2015

  14. [22]

    P., Adams , E

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

    2013

  15. [23]

    2017, , 846, 61

    Guo , H., Li , C., Zheng , Z., et al. 2017, , 846, 61

    2017

  16. [24]

    G., & Behroozi , P

    Guo , H., Wang , J., Jones , M. G., & Behroozi , P. 2023, , 955, 57

    2023

  17. [25]

    L., Wang , C., Wang , P

    Han , J. L., Wang , C., Wang , P. F., et al. 2021, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 21, 107

    2021

  18. [26]

    2025, , 696, A185

    Haubner , K., Lelli , F., Di Teodoro , E., et al. 2025, , 696, A185

    2025

  19. [27]

    P., Giovanelli , R., Martin , A

    Haynes , M. P., Giovanelli , R., Martin , A. M., et al. 2011, , 142, 170

    2011

  20. [28]

    P., Giovanelli , R., Kent , B

    Haynes , M. P., Giovanelli , R., Kent , B. R., et al. 2018, , 861, 49

    2018

  21. [29]

    A., Maddox , N., et al

    Heywood , I., Ponomareva , A. A., Maddox , N., et al. 2024, , 534, 76

    2024

  22. [30]

    2022, Science China Physics, Mechanics, and Astronomy, 65, 129703

    Hou , L., Han , J., Hong , T., Gao , X., & Wang , C. 2022, Science China Physics, Mechanics, and Astronomy, 65, 129703

    2022

  23. [31]

    2019, , 489, 1619

    Hu , W., Hoppmann , L., Staveley-Smith , L., et al. 2019, , 489, 1619

    2019

  24. [32]

    P., Giovanelli , R., & Brinchmann , J

    Huang , S., Haynes , M. P., Giovanelli , R., & Brinchmann , J. 2012, , 756, 113

    2012

  25. [33]

    2015, , 801, 96

    Janowiecki , S., Leisman , L., J \'o zsa , G., et al. 2015, , 801, 96

    2015

  26. [34]

    J., Tudorache , M

    Jarvis , M. J., Tudorache , M. N., Heywood , I., et al. 2025, , 544, 193

    2025

  27. [35]

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

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

    2019

  28. [36]

    2020, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 20, 064

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

    2020

  29. [37]

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

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

    2024

  30. [38]

    G., Haynes , M

    Jones , M. G., Haynes , M. P., Giovanelli , R., & Moorman , C. 2018, , 477, 2

    2018

  31. [39]

    D., Makarov , D

    Karachentsev , I. D., Makarov , D. I., & Kaisina , E. I. 2013, , 145, 101

    2013

  32. [40]

    2024, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 8, 24

    Karunakaran , A., & Spekkens , K. 2024, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 8, 24

    2024

  33. [41]

    J., Verheijen , M., et al

    Kazemi-Moridani , A., Baker , A. J., Verheijen , M., et al. 2025, , 981, 208

    2025

  34. [42]

    S., Staveley-Smith , L., Kilborn , V

    Koribalski , B. S., Staveley-Smith , L., Kilborn , V. A., et al. 2004, , 128, 16

    2004

  35. [43]

    S., Staveley-Smith , L., Westmeier , T., et al

    Koribalski , B. S., Staveley-Smith , L., Westmeier , T., et al. 2020, , 365, 118

    2020

  36. [44]

    M., Graziani , R., et al

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

    2020

  37. [45]

    2018, IEEE Microwave Magazine, 19, 112

    Li , D., Wang , P., Qian , L., et al. 2018, IEEE Microwave Magazine, 19, 112

    2018

  38. [46]

    2025, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 25, 105010

    Li , Z., Guo , H., & Mao , Y. 2025, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 25, 105010

    2025

  39. [47]

    2025, Science Advances, 11, eads4057

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

    2025

  40. [48]

    2023, , 523, 3905

    Liu , Y., Zhu , M., Yu , H., et al. 2023, , 523, 3905

    2023

  41. [49]

    2024, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 24, 085009

    Liu , Z., Wang , J., Jing , Y., et al. 2024, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 24, 085009

    2024

  42. [50]

    J., van Gorkom , J

    Luber , N., Pisano , D. J., van Gorkom , J. H., et al. 2025, , 985, 215

    2025

  43. [51]

    2025, , 695, A241

    Ma , W., Guo , H., Xu , H., et al. 2025, , 695, A241

    2025

  44. [52]

    S., Ponomareva , A

    Maddox , N., Frank , B. S., Ponomareva , A. A., et al. 2021, , 646, A35

    2021

  45. [53]

    M., Papastergis, E., Giovanelli, R., et al

    Martin, A. M., Papastergis, E., Giovanelli, R., et al. 2010, The Astrophysical Journal, 723, 1359

    2010

  46. [54]

    2012, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1209.3114

    Merloni , A., Predehl , P., Becker , W., et al. 2012, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1209.3114

    2012 arXiv

  47. [55]

    J., Zwaan , M

    Meyer , M. J., Zwaan , M. A., Webster , R. L., et al. 2004, , 350, 1195

    2004

  48. [56]

    A., Gannon, J

    Monaci, M., Forbes, D. A., Gannon, J. S., et al. 2026, FAST and Dark: A catalogue of Dark Galaxy Candidates within 50 Mpc, arXiv:2604.14699

    2026 arXiv

  49. [57]

    P., Somerville , R

    Moster , B. P., Somerville , R. S., Newman , J. A., & Rix , H.-W. 2011, , 731, 113

    2011

  50. [58]

    2011, International Journal of Modern Physics D, 20, 989

    Nan , R., Li , D., Jin , C., et al. 2011, International Journal of Modern Physics D, 20, 989

    2011

  51. [59]

    Oman , K. A. 2022, , 509, 3268

    2022

  52. [60]

    J., Zhu , M., et al

    Pan , H., Jarvis , M. J., Zhu , M., et al. 2024, , 534, 202

    2024

  53. [61]

    2018, , 475, 648

    Pillepich , A., Nelson , D., Hernquist , L., et al. 2018, , 475, 648

    2018

  54. [62]

    2019, , 490, 3196

    Pillepich , A., Nelson , D., Springel , V., et al. 2019, , 490, 3196

    2019

  55. [63]

    A., Jarvis , M

    Ponomareva , A. A., Jarvis , M. J., Pan , H., et al. 2023, , 522, 5308

    2023

  56. [64]

    2023, , 518, 4646

    Rhee , J., Meyer , M., Popping , A., et al. 2023, , 518, 4646

    2023

  57. [65]

    2015, , 448, 1922

    Serra , P., Westmeier , T., Giese , N., et al. 2015, , 448, 1922

    2015

  58. [66]

    M., Haynes , M

    Springob , C. M., Haynes , M. P., Giovanelli , R., & Kent , B. R. 2005, , 160, 149

    2005

  59. [67]

    2026, , 545, staf1960

    Stiskalek , R., Desmond , H., Devriendt , J., et al. 2026, , 545, staf1960

    2026

  60. [68]

    B., Kourkchi , E., Courtois , H

    Tully , R. B., Kourkchi , E., Courtois , H. M., et al. 2023, , 944, 94

    2023

  61. [69]

    I., Pomar \`e de , D., et al

    Valade , A., Libeskind , N. I., Pomar \`e de , D., et al. 2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 1610

    2024

  62. [70]

    S iljeg , B., Adams , E. A. K., Oosterloo , T. A., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.12513

    2026

  63. [71]

    2021, , 506, 3962

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

    2021

  64. [72]

    2022, PASA, 39, e058

    Westmeier , T., Deg , N., Spekkens , K., et al. 2022, PASA, 39, e058

    2022

  65. [73]

    I., Ryan-Weber , E

    Wong , O. I., Ryan-Weber , E. V., Garcia-Appadoo , D. A., et al. 2006, , 371, 1855

    2006

  66. [74]

    2021, , 501, 4550

    Xi , H., Staveley-Smith , L., For , B.-Q., et al. 2021, , 501, 4550

    2021

  67. [75]

    K., Cheng , C., Appleton , P

    Xu , C. K., Cheng , C., Appleton , P. N., et al. 2022, , 610, 461

    2022

  68. [76]

    2025, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 25, 015011

    Xu , C., Wang , J., Jing , Y., et al. 2025, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 25, 015011

    2025

  69. [77]

    2023, , 944, L40

    Xu , J.-L., Zhu , M., Yu , N., et al. 2023, , 944, L40

    2023

  70. [78]

    H., et al

    Zehavi , I., Zheng , Z., Weinberg , D. H., et al. 2011, , 736, 59

    2011

  71. [79]

    2024 a , , 971, 131

    Zhang , C.-P., Cheng , C., Zhu , M., Xu , J.-L., & Jiang , P. 2024 a , , 971, 131

    2024

  72. [80]

    2021, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 21, 209

    Zhang , C.-P., Xu , J.-L., Li , G.-X., et al. 2021, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 21, 209

    2021

  73. [81]

    2022, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 22, 025015

    Zhang , C.-P., Xu , J.-L., Wang , J., et al. 2022, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 22, 025015

    2022

  74. [82]

    2025, , 276, 6

    Zhang , C.-P., Zhu , M., Jiang , P., et al. 2025, , 276, 6

    2025

  75. [83]

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

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

    2024

  76. [84]

    2021, , 922, L21

    Zhu , M., Yu , H., Wang , J., et al. 2021, , 922, L21

    2021

  77. [85]

    A., Meyer , M

    Zwaan , M. A., Meyer , M. J., Staveley-Smith , L., & Webster , R. L. 2005, , 359, L30

    2005

  78. [86]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION format.archive archivePrefix empty "" archivePrefix ":" * if FUNCTION format.primaryClass primaryClass empty "" " [" primaryClass * "]" * if FUNCTION format.eprint eprint empty pages empty not booktitle empty not or or ""...

  79. [87]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := if FUNCTION fin.entry multi.ref #1 > "; " * write newline newline " " write before.all 'output.state := add.period write newline if multi.ref #1 = "" "" author missing "" author if journal missing "" journal if if 'previous.journa...

Pith tools

Reviewed July 13, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.