Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 4 cited by

Emission-Line Diagnostics at z>4: [OIII]{\lambda}4363/H\gamma

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-09 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read At z>4, broad-line AGN show harder ionizing radiation than other galaxies at the same electron temperature, so [Ne III]/[O II] can serve as an AGN indicator to z~6.

desk verdict Useful empirical calibration of a high-z AGN indicator, but the "constant electron temperature" claim is asserted from visual inspection rather than tested, and the reported fractions are internally inconsistent. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.03519 v1 pith:FITPLJU5 submitted 2025-02-05 astro-ph.GA

Bren E. Backhaus , Nikko J. Cleri , Jonathan R. Trump , Allison Kirkpatrick , Raymond C. Simons , Pablo Arrabal Haro , Micaela B. Bagley , Madisyn Brooks
show 12 more authors
Antonello Calabrò Kelcey Davis Mark Dickinson Steven L. Finkelstein Michaela Hirschmann Jeyhan S. Kartaltepe Anton M. Koekemoer Mario Llerena Fabio Pacucci Nor Pirzkal Casey Papovich Stephen M. Wilkins
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords AGNdiagnosticsemission-linegalaxiesJWSTNIRSpechigh-redshift[OIII]λ4363[NeIII]/[OII]broad-lineelectrontemperature
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 rest-optical ratio $[\mathrm{Ne\,III}]/[\mathrm{O\,II}]$ can identify active galactic nuclei at $z>4$ even where classic H-$\alpha$-based diagnostics fail. Using 90 JWST NIRSpec galaxies from CEERS, GLASS, and JADES, the authors stack spectra with and without broad lines and find that broad-line AGN have a higher ionization state at fixed electron temperature, not a higher temperature. They calibrate a $[\mathrm{O\,III}]λ4363/\mathrm{H}\gamma$ versus $[\mathrm{Ne\,III}]/[\mathrm{O\,II}]$ diagram on 1869 SDSS galaxies at $z\sim0$, then shift the AGN/star-forming boundary by the measured 0.16 dex and 0.50 dex evolution of the two ratios. After the shift, 76.8% of broad-line AGN remain in the AGN region while 40.2% of non-broad-line galaxies also fall there, so the ratio is a promising but not sufficient AGN indicator. If the claim holds, the community gains an H-$\alpha$-free diagnostic that should work to $z\sim6$.

What carries the argument

The central object is the $[\mathrm{O\,III}]λ4363/\mathrm{H}\gamma$ versus $[\mathrm{Ne\,III}]/[\mathrm{O\,II}]$ diagnostic diagram, where the first ratio tracks electron temperature through the auroral line and the second tracks ionization hardness. Two AGN/star-forming boundary lines are defined on the $z\sim0$ SDSS sample using VO87 classifications, then shifted in intercept by the empirical redshift evolution measured from non-broad-line galaxies at $z>4$. The key mechanism is comparing the neon-to-oxygen ratio at fixed electron temperature, which isolates ionization hardness from temperature and lets the ratio remain informative when H-$\alpha$ is redshifted out of reach.

What would settle it

Take deep NIRSpec spectroscopy of the non-broad-line galaxies that fall in the AGN region of the shifted diagram and search for high-ionization lines such as $[\mathrm{Ne\,V}]λ3426$ or $[\mathrm{Ne\,IV}]λ2423$; if these lines are absent and the fixed-temperature offset between broad-line and non-broad-line galaxies disappears, the harder-ionization claim would be undercut.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that at $z>4$ the ionizing radiation field, not the gas temperature, is what sets broad-line AGN apart from other galaxies: at the same electron temperature, broad-line AGN show higher $[\mathrm{Ne\,III}]/[\mathrm{O\,II}]$ (Anderson-Darling $p=0.001$), while $[\mathrm{O\,III}]λ4363/\mathrm{H}\gamma$ alone does not separate the populations ($p=0.25$). This makes $[\mathrm{Ne\,III}]/[\mathrm{O\,II}]$ the quantity that carries the diagnostic power at high redshift. The paper also shows that non-broad-line galaxies falling in the AGN region have enhanced C III] $λ1908$ emission (rest-frame equivalent width 13.3 Å versus 4.5 Å for the composite region), suggesting extra ionization whose source is not yet identified.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the 0.16 dex increase in $[\mathrm{O\,III}]λ4363/\mathrm{H}\gamma$ and 0.50 dex increase in $[\mathrm{Ne\,III}]/[\mathrm{O\,II}]$ from $z\sim0$ to $z\sim4$ are caused entirely by ISM evolution of star-forming galaxies and apply linearly to both ratios; if hidden narrow-line AGN contaminate the non-broad-line calibrators, or the evolution is nonlinear, the shifted AGN boundary and the reported AGN fractions are miscalibrated.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If $[\mathrm{Ne\,III}]/[\mathrm{O\,II}]$ is truly redshift-robust, AGN selection can be extended to $z\sim6$ without relying on H-alpha or H-beta broad lines.
  • Because the same temperature does not explain the offset, surveys can use $[\mathrm{Ne\,III}]/[\mathrm{O\,II}]$ to select harder-ionizing sources while separating temperature effects.
  • The 40.2% contamination means AGN samples selected this way will be mixed, so the ratio should be combined with other signatures such as C III] equivalent width or high-ionization UV lines.
  • The enhanced C III] emission in non-broad-line galaxies in the AGN region points to either hidden narrow-line AGN or very hot massive stars, and deeper UV spectroscopy is the stated next step.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A decisive test of whether the 40.2% contamination is narrow-line AGN would be a dedicated search for $[\mathrm{Ne\,V}]λ3426$ in those objects; the paper notes that the current stacks do not detect it, so deeper data could settle the ambiguity.
  • The linear redshift shift used to move the AGN boundary could be checked by measuring the same two ratios in an independent $z\sim4-6$ sample with AGN identified through X-ray or other independent tracers; a nonlinear evolution would change the boundary and the reported fractions.
  • The fixed-temperature comparison could be adapted to other hardness-sensitive ratios such as $[\mathrm{O\,III}]/[\mathrm{O\,II}]$ or C IV/He II to test whether $[\mathrm{Ne\,III}]/[\mathrm{O\,II}]$ is uniquely carrying the AGN signal.
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. This paper uses JWST/NIRSpec observations of 90 z>4 galaxies from CEERS, GLASS, and JADES to test whether the [O III] λ4363/Hγ versus [Ne III]/[O II] diagram can identify AGN at high redshift. The authors calibrate AGN/SF separation lines using 1869 SDSS z~0 galaxies, shift those lines to z~4 using a linear fit to the redshift evolution of non-broad-line galaxies, and then measure how many broad-line AGN (BLAGN) and non-BLAGN fall in the AGN region. They report that BLAGN preferentially have higher [Ne III]/[O II] (Anderson-Darling p=0.001), that 76.8% of BLAGN occupy the AGN region, and that 40.2% of non-BLAGN also fall there. They additionally report stacked-spectrum evidence for stronger C III] in non-BLAGN in the AGN region and argue, from a visual comparison at fixed electron temperature, that BLAGN have harder ionizing radiation than non-broad-line galaxies.

Significance. If the fixed-temperature claim is correct, [Ne III]/[O II] would be a valuable rest-optical AGN indicator at z~6 where Hα is unavailable. The raw statistical separation in [Ne III]/[O II] between BLAGN and non-BLAGN is credible and does not depend on the redshift shift, and the stacked-spectrum approach is a sensible use of the data. However, the load-bearing 'at constant electron temperature' statement is not quantitatively supported, the redshift correction is calibrated in-sample on the same galaxies that are then classified, and the headline fractions are internally inconsistent. These issues are fixable, but they are central to the paper's conclusions.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 5, Fig. 8, Eqs. (4)-(5)] The abstract and Section 5 claim that BLAGN have higher [Ne III]/[O II] 'at constant electron temperature,' but the only quantitative test quoted, the Anderson-Darling p=0.001, compares the marginal [Ne III]/[O II] distributions and does not control for Te. The same section reports p=0.09 for a Te difference between non-BLAGN in the AGN and composite regions, so Te differences between populations are not negligible. Because Te is derived from [O III]λ4363/Hγ and the [O III] doublet/Hβ ratio, and because [Ne III]/[O II] can depend on Te through collisional excitation, the constant-Te statement needs a stratified or covariate-adjusted test (for example, comparing [Ne III]/[O II] within Te bins, or a regression that includes Te) before the diagnosis of harder ionizing radiation can be accepted. With only 13 BLAGN, a visual offset in Figure 8 is fragile.
  2. [Sec. 4, Fig. 3, Eqs. (2)-(3)] The redshift correction applied to the AGN/SF lines is a linear fit to the redshift evolution of the non-broad-line sample, and the same sample is then classified in the shifted diagram. This is partly in-sample calibration. The paper itself acknowledges that 'non-broad-line galaxies may contain SF and NLAGN,' and if a substantial narrow-line AGN population is present, or if the evolution is nonlinear, the shifted boundary is miscalibrated and the reported fractions (76.8% BLAGN, 40.2% non-BLAGN in the AGN region) are not robust. Please quantify the uncertainty in the shift from the fit, test sensitivity to excluding possible NLAGN, or validate the shifted lines against an independent sample or photoionization models.
  3. [Abstract, Sec. 4, Sec. 6] The headline numbers are internally inconsistent. The abstract states that '40.2% of non-BLAGN land in the AGN region,' while Section 4 states that '40.2% of galaxies in the canonical AGN region do not have broad emission lines'; these are different denominators and cannot both be true unless by coincidence. In addition, the BLAGN fraction in the AGN region is reported as 76.8% in the abstract, 79% in Section 4, and 78.6% in the summary. Please reconcile these numbers and state explicitly which denominator is used for each percentage.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract and Sec. 2.1.1] The abstract contains the typo 'from the the Cosmic Evolution Early Release survey,' and the phrase 'of there are narrow line AGN which are not accounted for' should be 'or if there are narrow-line AGN which are not accounted for.'
  2. [Eq. (2)] Equation (2) is typeset ambiguously: the factor '0.9 1.99log' appears to be missing an operator or parentheses. Please rewrite the equation with a clear slope and intercept.
  3. [Sec. 4.1] The text refers to 'XSPEC (?)' without a citation; please add the proper reference. Also, the text mentions 'the Maiolino et al. (2024) AGN/SF line' in the discussion of Figure 4, which appears to be a typo for Mazzolari et al. (2024).
  4. [Fig. 8 caption] The caption reads 'There does note appear to be a trend between the two'; this should be 'there does not appear to be a trend.'

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Redshift-corrected AGN/SF boundary is fit to the same non-BLAGN sample later counted as contamination; the core [NeIII]/[OII] comparison is independent.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 3 (Fig. 3) and Section 4 (Figs. 4-5); Section 6 summary bullet]
    "This modification to the AGN/SF line uses the empirical relation of the emission-line ratios and redshift shown in Figure 3. This modification considers the evolution of emission-line properties for non-AGN galaxies... We note non-broad-line galaxies may contain SF and NLAGN. ... However, 40.2% of galaxies in the canonical AGN region do not have broad emission lines."

    The AGN/SF lines are shifted by a linear fit to the [O III]/Hgamma and [Ne III]/[O II] evolution of the non-BLAGN z>4 sample, and the same non-BLAGN galaxies are then counted relative to the shifted boundary to report a 40.2% 'contamination' fraction. Since the boundary intercepts are set by the mean trend of that sample, the contamination fraction measures scatter about the sample's own fit rather than an independent diagnostic test. The 76.8% BLAGN fraction is less affected because BLAGN were excluded from the fit. The central A-D result on [Ne III]/[O II] (p=0.001) is a direct comparison of the raw ratio and is not circular; the same cannot be said for the redshift-corrected AGN-fraction numbers.

full rationale

The paper's principal statistical claim, that z>4 BLAGN have higher [Ne III]/[O II] than non-broad-line galaxies, is a direct Anderson-Darling comparison of measured ratios and is independent of the AGN/SF boundary construction. The redshift-corrected diagnostic, however, is partly circular: the correction is fit to the non-BLAGN sample whose placement in the corrected diagram is then reported as 40.2% contamination. That number is a scatter statistic of the fitting sample, not an external validation. The 'at constant electron temperature' claim (Section 5, Figure 8) rests on visual inspection rather than a covariate-adjusted test; this is a support gap, not a circularity. Citations to prior work by the same authors (e.g., Trump et al. 2022 for the Te conversion, Cleri et al. in prep for Cloudy models) are used as methodology or supplementary evidence, not as a uniqueness theorem that forces the conclusion. No step reduces the central claim to its own inputs by definition.

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

The central analysis rests on several empirical calibrations: two hand-drawn SDSS classification lines, two redshift-evolution slopes fit to the same non-BLAGN sample used later, and a standard temperature relation imported from the local universe. No new physical entities are introduced; the main burden lies in the external validity of the local calibrations and the in-sample nature of the redshift shift.

free parameters (6)
  • AGN/SF line slope (Eq. 3) = 2.11
    Slope of the red line separating the 50% AGN/SF regions, chosen from the SDSS z~0 AGN fraction grid; no uncertainty or fitting procedure given.
  • AGN/SF line intercept (Eq. 3) = 1.308
    Intercept of the 50% AGN/SF line; same derivation as the slope.
  • 5% contamination line slope (Eq. 2) = 1.99
    Slope of the black line below which fewer than 5% of SDSS galaxies are VO87-classified AGN; the printed equation is garbled and the fitting method is not described.
  • 5% contamination line intercept (Eq. 2) = -0.12 (with +0.28 offset printed)
    Intercept of the 5% contamination line from the SDSS AGN-fraction grid.
  • Redshift evolution of [OIII]/Hgamma = 0.16 dex from z=0 to z=4
    Linear regression to non-BLAGN z>4 ratios, including upper/lower limits whose treatment is unspecified; used to shift the y-intercept of the diagnostic lines.
  • Redshift evolution of [NeIII]/[OII] = 0.50 dex from z=0 to z=4
    Linear regression to non-BLAGN z>4 ratios; used to shift the x-intercept of the diagnostic lines.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption VO87 diagram at z~0 is a valid ground-truth classifier of AGN versus star-forming galaxies
    Used to label the 1,869 SDSS galaxies that define the AGN fractions in the new diagram (Section 2.2, Figure 4).
  • domain assumption The intrinsic Balmer decrement Hbeta/Hgamma=2.1 (Case B, T=10^4 K, n_e=10^2 cm^-3) applies to z>4 galaxies
    Used in Equation 5 to convert observed [OIII]/Hgamma and [OIII]/Hbeta ratios into [OIII]4363/5007 for electron temperature (Section 5).
  • ad hoc to paper The redshift evolution of non-BLAGN line ratios is linear and can be used to shift the local AGN/SF lines to z>4
    Introduced in Section 4 to create the redshift-corrected lines; not derived from a physical model and applied to the same non-BLAGN sample used for contamination counts.
  • domain assumption Cloudy/BPASS and AGN SED photoionization models with the stated parameter grid are appropriate for z>4 nebulae
    Section 4.1 uses model grids to interpret the observed line ratios; the models assume n_H=10^2 cm^-3 and Grevesse solar abundances.
  • domain assumption The Nicholls et al. (2020) Te relation calibrated on local HII regions is valid at z>4
    Equation 4 used to compute electron temperatures; no high-z recalibration is provided (Section 5).
  • domain assumption Non-broad-line galaxies used for the redshift evolution fit are representative of the z>4 star-forming population despite possibly containing NLAGN
    Section 4 admits 'non-broad-line galaxies may contain SF and NLAGN,' yet the fit treats them as a single population.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Emission-Line Diagnostics at z>4: [OIII]{\lambda}4363/H\gamma." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FITPLJU5

@misc{pith2026250203519,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Emission-Line Diagnostics at z>4: [OIII]\lambda4363/H\gamma},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FITPLJU5}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.03519}
}
abstract

We use JWST Near-Infrared Spectrograph (NIRSpec) observations from the the Cosmic Evolution Early Release survey (CEERS), GLASS-JWST ERS (GLASS), and JWST Advanced Deep Extragalactic Survey (JADES) to measure rest-frame optical emission-line ratios of 90 galaxies at z>4. The stacked spectra of galaxies with and without a broad-line feature reveal a difference in the [OIII]$\lambda$ 4363 and H$\gamma$ ratios. This motivated our investigation of the [OIII]/H$\gamma$ vs [NeIII]/[OII] diagram. We define two AGN/SF classification lines based on 1869 SDSS galaxies at z$\sim$0. After applying a redshift correction to the AGN/SF lines we find 76.8% of BLAGN continue to land in the AGN region of the diagnostic largely due to the [NeIII]/[OII] ratio. However, 40.2% of non-BLAGN land in the AGN region as well, this could be due to star forming galaxies having harder ionization of there are narrow line AGN which are not accounted for. This indicates the potential of the [NeIII]/[OII] ratio to continue classifying galaxies to z$\sim$6. We further inspect galaxies without broad emission lines in each region of [OIII]/H\gamma vs [NeIII]/[OII] diagram and found that they have slightly stronger CIII]$\lambda$1908 fluxes and equivalent width when landing in the BLAGN region. However, the cause of this higher ionization is unclear. Additionally, we find that BLAGN are characterized by a higher ionization (at constant electron temperature) compared to non-broad line galaxies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.03519 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Distribution of Hβ SFR and redshift for samples from JADES, CEERS, and GLASS NIRSpec observations. The galaxies hosting a BLAGN are denoted as a star. 2.1.1. Sample Selection Using the spectroscopic redshift catalogs of each sample CEERS (Finkelstein et al. 2025), JADES (D’Eugenio et al. 2024), GLASS (DJA) and apply a redshift constraint of 1.6 < z < 9 as this covers the [O II], [Ne III], Hγ, and [O III]λ4363 emissi… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Top: Stacked spectra for 9 BLAGN galaxies above z > 4. The broad Hα feature can be seen in the bottom spectra, we also note even stacked a broad Hβ component does not appear. Bottom: Stacked Spectra of 56 galaxies above z > 4 without any broad-line features. We obtain secure redshifts and measure emission line fluxes using the best-fit Gaussian function (and associated uncertain￾ties) using a Levenberg-Marquardt lea… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Left: Evolution of the [O III]λ4363/Hγ emission line over redshift. Right: Evolution of the [Ne III]/[O II] emission line over redshift. The arrows in these figures represent upper and lower limits in the emission line ratio. The red line represents the best fit is applied to the non-BLAGN galaxies (shown as gray points and arrows). The black point is the median ratio of the SDSS sample requiring SNR>3 in all emissi… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: [O III]λ4363/Hγ vs. [Ne III]/[O II] diagram of z∼0 galax￾ies with a SNR>3 for all emission lines. Numbers within the grid show the percent chance of a being an AGN (blue point). A galaxy is marked as an AGN if it resides in the AGN region of the VO87 diagram. Galaxies …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: [O III]λ4363/Hγ vs [Ne III]/[O II] for z > 4 galaxies. BLAGN are colored gold whereas other galaxies are gray. The av￾erage error bar for BLAGN and other galaxies are shown in the top right corner. The histogram on either axis shows the distribu￾tion between these two …
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: [O III]λ4363/Hγ vs [Ne III]/[O II] with AGN and SF photoionizaion models from Cleri in prep. The inset vectors in the lower right corner indicate the direction of increasing in metallicity for the SF models in the left panel and AGN models in the right panel. Left: z ∼…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Stacked spectra of galaxies that do not have a broad emission line feature based on region of the [O III]λ4363/Hγ vs [Ne III]/[O II] diagram they occupy. Top: 18 stacked galaxies in the BLAGN region of the [O III]λ4363/Hγ vs [Ne III]/[O II] diagram. Middle: 19 stacked …
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Upper: Electron temperature of z > 4 galaxies vs. [Ne III]/[O II]. At constant temperatures BLAGN have higher [Ne III]/[O II] than the rest of the sample. Bottom: Gas-phase metal￾licity of z > 4 galaxies vs. [O III]λ4363/Hγ. There does note appear to be a trend between…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. An (in)complete NIRSpec census of Balmer absorption in Type 1 AGN -- radiation-driven outflows in little red dots, quasars and variable stars

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

    About 44% of little red dots have hydrogen-alpha absorption from outflowing gas, implying radiatively driven outflows rather than static atmospheres.

  2. LEGGOS I: The JWST LEGGOS Survey -- LEnsing and Galaxy Growth: Observing Substructures -- Unpacks the Nature of Clumpy Star Formation and Quenching in Gravitationally Lensed Galaxies beyond Cosmic Noon

    astro-ph.GA 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    LEGGOS presents a uniform framework that jointly models lensing, photometry, and integral-field spectroscopy to disentangle stellar populations in clumps of high-redshift lensed galaxies.

  3. Discovery of Multiply Ionized Iron Emission Powered by an Active Galactic Nucleus in a z~7 Little Red Dot

    astro-ph.GA 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    The z=6.68 Little Red Dot THRILS 46403 shows a 4.5 sigma [FeVII] line, the first robust coronal-line detection among z>5 LRDs, plus narrow Balmer absorption, supporting an AGN with direct sightlines to gas at or beyon...

  4. Optical Strong Line Ratios Cannot Distinguish Between Stellar Populations and Accreting Black Holes at High Ionization Parameters and Low Metallicities

    astro-ph.GA 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Optical strong line ratio diagnostics cannot reliably separate stellar from black hole ionizing sources at high ionization parameter and low metallicity, and higher ionization lines such as He II or [Ne V] are needed ...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

82 extracted references · 32 canonical work pages · cited by 4 Pith papers

  1. [1]

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

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

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION format.doi doi empty "" "doi:" doi * if FUNCTION format.url url empty "" new.block "" url * "" * if FUNCTION format.eprint eprint empty "" archivePrefix empty "" archivePrefix ":" * if eprint field.or.null * if FUNCTION format.pid eprint empty format.doi format.eprint if FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t...

  3. [3]

    f@ eK r CN,t

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

    2019

  4. [4]

    L., et al

    Arrabal Haro , P., Dickinson , M., Finkelstein , S. L., et al. 2023, , 951, L22

    work page 2023

  5. [5]

    P., Tollerud , E

    Astropy Collaboration , Robitaille , T. P., Tollerud , E. J., et al. 2013, , 558, A33

    2013

  6. [6]

    E., Trump , J

    Backhaus , B. E., Trump , J. R., Cleri , N. J., et al. 2022, , 926, 161

    work page 2022

  7. [7]

    E., Trump , J

    Backhaus , B. E., Trump , J. R., Pirzkal , N., et al. 2024, , 962, 195

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    A., Phillips , M

    Baldwin , J. A., Phillips , M. M., & Terlevich , R. 1981, , 93, 5

    1981

Show all 82 references
  1. [9]

    S., Schlegel , D

    Bolton , A. S., Schlegel , D. J., Aubourg , \'E ., et al. 2012, , 144, 144

    2012

  2. [10]

    2022, gbrammer/msaexp: Full working version with 2d drizzling and extraction , v0.3, Zenodo, doi:10.5281/zenodo.7299501

    Brammer , G. 2022, gbrammer/msaexp: Full working version with 2d drizzling and extraction , v0.3, Zenodo, doi:10.5281/zenodo.7299501

    2022 doi

  3. [11]

    B., van Dokkum , P

    Brammer , G. B., van Dokkum , P. G., & Coppi , P. 2008, , 686, 1503

    2008

  4. [12]

    2022, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2208.07467

    Brinchmann , J. 2022, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2208.07467

    2022 arXiv

  5. [13]

    2023, , 525, 2087

    ---. 2023, , 525, 2087

    2023

  6. [14]

    Brinchmann , J., Charlot , S., White , S. D. M., et al. 2004, , 351, 1151

    2004

  7. [15]

    2023, , 679, A80

    Calabr \`o , A., Pentericci , L., Feltre , A., et al. 2023, , 679, A80

    2023

  8. [16]

    Calzetti , D., & Heckman , T. M. 1999, , 519, 27

    1999

  9. [17]

    M., Satyapal , S., Abel , N

    Cann , J. M., Satyapal , S., Abel , N. P., et al. 2018, , 861, 142

    2018

  10. [18]

    A., Clayton , G

    Cardelli , J. A., Clayton , G. C., & Mathis , J. S. 1989, , 345, 245

    1989

  11. [19]

    2003, , 339, 63

    Chiappini , C., Romano , D., & Matteucci , F. 2003, , 339, 63

    2003

  12. [20]

    J., Olivier , G

    Cleri , N. J., Olivier , G. M., Hutchison , T. A., et al. 2023 a , , 953, 10

    2023

  13. [21]

    J., Yang , G., Papovich , C., et al

    Cleri , N. J., Yang , G., Papovich , C., et al. 2023 b , , 948, 112

    2023

  14. [22]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2409.05948

    de Graaff , A., Brammer , G., Weibel , A., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2409.05948

    2024 arXiv

  15. [23]

    J., Scholtz , J., et al

    D'Eugenio , F., Cameron , A. J., Scholtz , J., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2404.06531

    2024 arXiv

  16. [24]

    W., Jin , C., Blaes , O., & Ward , M

    Done , C., Davis , S. W., Jin , C., Blaes , O., & Ward , M. 2012, , 420, 1848

    2012

  17. [25]

    2016, , 456, 3354

    Feltre , A., Charlot , S., & Gutkin , J. 2016, , 456, 3354

    2016

  18. [26]

    2017, Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences, 4, 32

    Feltre , A., Charlot , S., Mignoli , M., et al. 2017, Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences, 4, 32

    2017

  19. [27]

    L., Bagley , M

    Finkelstein , S. L., Bagley , M. B., Arrabal Haro , P., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.04085

    2025 arXiv

  20. [28]

    E., Labbe , I., Goulding , A

    Greene , J. E., Labbe , I., Goulding , A. D., et al. 2024, , 964, 39

    2024

  21. [29]

    J., & Scott , P

    Grevesse , N., Asplund , M., Sauval , A. J., & Scott , P. 2010, , 328, 179

    2010

  22. [30]

    M., van Hoof , P

    Gunasekera , C. M., van Hoof , P. A. M., Chatzikos , M., & Ferland , G. J. 2023, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 7, 246

    2023

  23. [31]

    2016, , 462, 1757

    Gutkin , J., Charlot , S., & Bruzual , G. 2016, , 462, 1757

    2016

  24. [32]

    2015, , 581, A21

    Hainich , R., Pasemann , D., Todt , H., et al. 2015, , 581, A21

    2015

  25. [33]

    2014, , 565, A27

    Hainich , R., R \"u hling , U., Todt , H., et al. 2014, , 565, A27

    2014

  26. [34]

    2023, , 959, 39

    Harikane , Y., Zhang , Y., Nakajima , K., et al. 2023, , 959, 39

    2023

  27. [35]

    R., Millman, K

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

    2020 doi

  28. [36]

    E., Watson , D., Brammer , G., et al

    Heintz , K. E., Watson , D., Brammer , G., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2306.00647

    2023 arXiv

  29. [37]

    2019, , 487, 333

    Hirschmann , M., Charlot , S., Feltre , A., et al. 2019, , 487, 333

    2019

  30. [38]

    Hirschmann , M., Charlot , S., & Somerville , R. S. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2305.03753

    2023 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Hunter , J. D. 2007, Computing in Science and Engineering, 9, 90

    2007

  32. [40]

    2001, SciPy : Open Source Scientific Tools for Python, ,

    Jones , E., Oliphant , T., Peterson , P., & Others. 2001, SciPy : Open Source Scientific Tools for Python, , . http://www.scipy.org/

    2001

  33. [41]

    2018, , 477, 5568

    Kaasinen , M., Kewley , L., Bian , F., et al. 2018, , 477, 5568

    2018

  34. [42]

    M., Tremonti , C., et al

    Kauffmann , G., Heckman , T. M., Tremonti , C., et al. 2003 a , , 346, 1055

    2003

  35. [43]

    M., White , S

    Kauffmann , G., Heckman , T. M., White , S. D. M., et al. 2003 b , , 341, 33

    2003

  36. [44]

    2003 c , , 341, 54

    ---. 2003 c , , 341, 54

    2003

  37. [45]

    Kelly , B. C. 2007, , 665, 1489

    2007

  38. [46]

    C., & Evans , N

    Kennicutt , R. C., & Evans , N. J. 2012, , 50, 531

    2012

  39. [47]

    J., Groves , B., Kauffmann , G., & Heckman , T

    Kewley , L. J., Groves , B., Kauffmann , G., & Heckman , T. 2006, , 372, 961

    2006

  40. [48]

    J., Maier , C., Yabe , K., et al

    Kewley , L. J., Maier , C., Yabe , K., et al. 2013, , 774, L10

    2013

  41. [49]

    J., Nicholls , D

    Kewley , L. J., Nicholls , D. C., Sutherland , R., et al. 2019 a , , 880, 16

    2019

  42. [50]

    J., Nicholls , D

    Kewley , L. J., Nicholls , D. C., & Sutherland , R. S. 2019 b , , 57, 511

    2019

  43. [51]

    J., Zahid , H

    Kewley , L. J., Zahid , H. J., Geller , M. J., et al. 2015, , 812, L20

    2015

  44. [52]

    D., Barro , G., McGrath , E

    Kocevski , D. D., Barro , G., McGrath , E. J., et al. 2022, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2208.14480

    2022 arXiv

  45. [53]

    D., Onoue , M., Inayoshi , K., et al

    Kocevski , D. D., Onoue , M., Inayoshi , K., et al. 2023, , 954, L4

    2023

  46. [54]

    L., Finkelstein , S

    Larson , R. L., Finkelstein , S. L., Kocevski , D. D., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2303.08918

    2023 arXiv

  47. [55]

    C., Nakajima , K., et al

    Le F \`e vre , O., Lemaux , B. C., Nakajima , K., et al. 2019, , 625, A51

    2019

  48. [56]

    Luridiana , V., Morisset , C., & Shaw , R. A. 2015, , 573, A42

    2015

  49. [57]

    2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2308.01230

    Maiolino , R., Scholtz , J., Curtis-Lake , E., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2308.01230

    2023 arXiv

  50. [58]

    2024, , 627, 59

    Maiolino , R., Scholtz , J., Witstok , J., et al. 2024, , 627, 59

    2024

  51. [59]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2404.10811

    Mazzolari , G., \"U bler , H., Maiolino , R., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2404.10811

    2024 arXiv

  52. [60]

    C., Kewley , L

    Nicholls , D. C., Kewley , L. J., & Sutherland , R. S. 2020, , 132, 033001

    2020

  53. [61]

    Osterbrock , D. E. 1989, Astrophysics of gaseous nebulae and active galactic nuclei (University Science Books)

    1989

  54. [62]

    C., Estrada-Carpenter , V., et al

    Papovich , C., Simons , R. C., Estrada-Carpenter , V., et al. 2022, , 937, 22

    2022

  55. [63]

    Planck Collaboration , Ade , P. A. R., Aghanim , N., et al. 2016, , 594, A13

    2016

  56. [64]

    C., & Tumlinson , J

    Ravindranath , S., Monroe , T., Jaskot , A., Ferguson , H. C., & Tumlinson , J. 2020, , 896, 170

    2020

  57. [65]

    A., Steidel , C

    Reddy , N. A., Steidel , C. C., Pettini , M., & Bogosavljevi \'c , M. 2016, , 828, 107

    2016

  58. [66]

    Salpeter , E. E. 1955, , 121, 161

    1955

  59. [67]

    L., Shapley , A

    Sanders , R. L., Shapley , A. E., Topping , M. W., Reddy , N. A., & Brammer , G. B. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2301.06696

    2023 arXiv

  60. [68]

    2020, , 636, A47

    Saxena , A., Pentericci , L., Mirabelli , M., et al. 2020, , 636, A47

    2020

  61. [69]

    2003, , 397, 527

    Schaerer , D. 2003, , 397, 527

    2003

  62. [70]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2407.12122

    Schaerer , D., Guibert , J., Marques-Chaves , R., & Martins , F. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2407.12122

    2024 arXiv

  63. [71]

    2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2311.18731

    Scholtz , J., Maiolino , R., D'Eugenio , F., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2311.18731

    2023 arXiv

  64. [72]

    E., Sanders , R

    Shapley , A. E., Sanders , R. L., Reddy , N. A., Topping , M. W., & Brammer , G. B. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2301.03241

    2023 arXiv

  65. [73]

    A., Gunn , J

    Smee , S. A., Gunn , J. E., Uomoto , A., et al. 2013, , 146, 32

    2013

  66. [74]

    R., & Eldridge , J

    Stanway , E. R., & Eldridge , J. J. 2018, , 479, 75

    2018

  67. [75]

    J., Finkelstein , S

    Taylor , A. J., Finkelstein , S. L., Kocevski , D. D., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2409.06772

    2024 arXiv

  68. [76]

    2022, , 935, 110

    Treu , T., Roberts-Borsani , G., Bradac , M., et al. 2022, , 935, 110

    2022

  69. [77]

    R., Arrabal Haro , P., Simons , R

    Trump , J. R., Arrabal Haro , P., Simons , R. C., et al. 2022, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2207.12388

    2022 arXiv

  70. [78]

    2023, , 677, A145

    \"U bler , H., Maiolino , R., Curtis-Lake , E., et al. 2023, , 677, A145

    2023

  71. [79]

    E., Richards , G

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

    2001

  72. [80]

    Veilleux , S., & Osterbrock , D. E. 1987, , 63, 295

    1987

  73. [81]

    Vink , J. S. 2023, , 679, L9

    2023

  74. [82]

    G., Adelman , J., Anderson , John E., J., et al

    York , D. G., Adelman , J., Anderson , John E., J., et al. 2000, , 120, 1579

    2000

Pith tools

Reviewed August 9, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.