arxiv: 2512.13778 · v3 · submitted 2025-12-15 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

Recognition: no theorem link

Resolving dust and Ly{α} emission in a lensed galaxy at the epoch of reionization with JWST/CANUCS

V. Markov , M. Brada\v{c} , V. Estrada-Carpenter , G. Desprez , G. Rihtar\v{s}i\v{c} , J. Jude\v{z} , R. Tripodi , M. Sawicki

show 15 more authors

G. Noirot N. Martis C. Willott R. Abraham Y. Asada G. Brammer J. Matharu A. Muzzin G. T. E. Sarrouh S. Withers A. Ferrara S. Fujimoto S. Gallerani I. Goovaerts A. Harshan

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 21:43 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA

keywords Lyman-alpha emittersEpoch of reionizationGravitational lensingJWST observationsDust attenuationHigh-redshift galaxiesInterstellar mediumGalaxy feedback

0 comments

The pith

Spatially resolved maps of a lensed z=6.57 galaxy show feedback-driven multiphase ISM structures enable Lyα escape from moderately dusty regions.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper examines the dust, gas, and stellar properties of the gravitationally lensed Lyman-alpha emitter HCM 6A at redshift 6.5676 using JWST/NIRISS, NIRSpec, and HST/NIRCam data from the CANUCS program. It derives intrinsic stellar masses around 10^8.3-8.4 solar masses and UV magnitudes of -19.8 on scales from kiloparsecs down to 25 parsecs, made possible by lensing magnification of 8.3 to 9.1. The analysis finds that an older region shows consistent dust attenuation across tracers, implying uniform ISM geometry, while a younger region exhibits strong discrepancies that indicate feedback has cleared dust from central clumps. Lyα emission is concentrated in the youngest region, demonstrating that local multiphase structures and outflows allow escape even in moderately dusty systems at the end of reionization.

Core claim

Observations of HCM 6A reveal that Lyα emission originates primarily from the youngest region S3, where a dust-cleared central clump permits efficient escape, while the older region S1 displays uniform ISM geometry with consistent stellar and nebular attenuation. The galaxy has an unlensed stellar mass of log M* = 8.3-8.4 and intrinsic UV magnitude M_UV = -19.8. Attenuation curves are Calzetti-like, with a UV bump that strengthens with increasing stellar age and decreasing A_V. These findings establish that feedback and multiphase ISM geometry, rather than global dust content alone, regulate Lyα escape in this moderately dusty LAE during the epoch of reionization.

What carries the argument

Pixel-scale (~25 pc) SED fitting with customized BAGPIPES using a flexible attenuation law, combined with SLEUTH Lyα mapping, applied to the strongly lensed galaxy HCM 6A.

If this is right

Lyα photons escape efficiently through locally cleared dust channels created by stellar feedback in the youngest star-forming clumps.
Different regions within a single high-redshift galaxy can have distinct ISM geometries, from uniform to highly multiphase.
Attenuation curves follow a Calzetti-like shape whose UV bump strength increases with stellar age and lower overall dust content.
Global galaxy properties alone do not determine Lyα escape fraction; sub-kiloparsec structure is decisive.
Moderately dusty LAEs can contribute substantially to reionization if feedback routinely produces such escape channels.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Unlensed LAEs at similar redshifts likely average over similar unresolved substructures, so their integrated escape fractions reflect the same local feedback physics.
Future ALMA or JWST observations of molecular gas kinematics in comparable systems could test whether outflows directly correlate with the dust-cleared regions.
Reionization simulations must incorporate sub-100-pc ISM variations rather than assuming uniform escape fractions per halo mass.

Load-bearing premise

The lensing magnification model and BAGPIPES priors with flexible attenuation accurately recover intrinsic dust and emission properties on 25-pc scales without major systematic biases from lens uncertainties or fitting assumptions.

What would settle it

Independent lens modeling that yields magnifications differing by more than 20 percent, or new observations showing that the peak Lyα emission does not spatially coincide with the dust-cleared clump identified in region S3.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2512.13778 by A. Ferrara, A. Harshan, A. Muzzin, C. Willott, G. Brammer, G. Desprez, G. Noirot, G. Rihtar\v{s}i\v{c}, G. T. E. Sarrouh, I. Goovaerts, J. Jude\v{z}, J. Matharu, M. Brada\v{c}, M. Sawicki, N. Martis, R. Abraham, R. Tripodi, S. Fujimoto, S. Gallerani, S. Withers, V. Estrada-Carpenter, V. Markov, Y. Asada.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: NIRCam imaging, NIRSpec/PRISM spectroscopy, and the spectro-photometric fit for the bright LAE HCM 6A at z = 6.5676. Top left: RGB composite image of the system constructed from JWST/NIRCam 20 mas imaging by assigning F200W to the red channel, F150W to the green channel, and F115W to the blue channel. Middle left: NIRCam F115W image of the system. The three adjacent NIRSpec slits (NIRSpec IDs: 2101494, 219… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: NIRISS 1D slitless spectrum of HCM 6A. The spectrum combines extractions from the NIRISS GR150C and GR150R grisms crossed with the F090WN, F115WN, F150WN, and F200WN filters. The spectrum shows a clear detection of the Lyα emission line at λobs ≈ 9200Å, consistent with z ≈ 6.6 (solid vertical line). Dashed vertical lines indicate the expected positions of selected undetected emission lines. 3.2. Gravitati… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Slit-level, spatially resolved physical properties of the target system: stellar mass (log M∗; a), star formation rate (SFR; b), mass-weighted stellar age (⟨a⟩ m ∗ ; c), ionization parameter (log U; d), V-band attenuation (AV ; e), slope (S ; f) and UV bump (B; g) of the dust attenuation curve, attenuation derived from the Balmer decrement (A B V ; h), and UV continuum slope (β; i). Both log M∗ and SFR are… view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Pixel-level, spatially resolved physical properties of the target system: stellar mass (log M∗; a), star formation rate (SFR; b), mass-weighted stellar age (⟨a⟩ m ∗ ; c), ionization parameter (log U; d), V-band attenuation (AV ; e), slope (S ; f) and UV bump (B; g) of the dust attenuation curve, sSFR (h), and Lyα flux (fLyα; i). The quantities log M∗, SFR, and fLyα are corrected for lensing magnification. … view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Dust attenuation curves of the three slit regions (S1–S3) at z = 6.5676 derived from the slit-level spectro-photometric fits. S1, S2, and S3 are shown as blue solid, orange dashed, and green solid lines, respectively. Standard Milky Way (MW), Calzetti, and Small Magellanic Cloud (SMC) attenuation curves are overplotted for comparison (gray dashed, dotted, and solid lines, respectively). Inset panel: corre… view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Lyman $\alpha$ emission is highly sensitive to dust and neutral hydrogen and is therefore expected to be strongly suppressed in dusty or gas-rich galaxies during the epoch of reionization (EoR). Nevertheless, numerous moderately dusty Ly$\alpha$ emitters (LAEs) are observed at this epoch, suggesting that complex interstellar medium (ISM) geometries and feedback-driven outflows may facilitate Ly$\alpha$ escape. We investigate the dust, gas, and stellar properties of the gravitationally lensed LAE HCM 6A at $z=6.5676$ to characterize its multiphase ISM and the physical conditions regulating Ly$\alpha$ escape. We combine JWST/NIRISS slitless spectroscopy, HST+JWST/NIRCam imaging, and JWST/NIRSpec slit spectra from the CANUCS program. Using a customized BAGPIPES SED-fitting framework with a flexible attenuation law, we derive stellar, nebular, and dust properties on integrated ($\sim$kpc), slit-level ($\sim$0.1 kpc), and pixel-level ($\sim$25 pc) scales, enabled by strong lensing ($\mu \approx 8.3$-$9.1$). A Ly$\alpha$ map from SLEUTH traces the spatial distribution of Ly$\alpha$ emission. We measure an unlensed stellar mass of $\log M_\ast = 8.3$-$8.4$ and an intrinsic UV magnitude of $M_{\rm UV} = -19.8 \pm 0.1$. The older region (S1) is moderately dusty with consistent stellar and nebular attenuation indicators, implying a uniform ISM geometry, while the youngest region (S3) shows strong discrepancies among dust tracers, indicating a feedback-shaped multiphase ISM. Ly$\alpha$ emission arises primarily from S3, where a dust-cleared central clump enables efficient Ly$\alpha$ escape. We find Calzetti-like attenuation curves with a UV bump that strengthens with stellar age and decreasing $A_V$. Our observations provide a uniquely detailed, spatially resolved view of a moderately dusty LAE during the EoR, demonstrating how feedback and multiphase ISM structure govern Ly$\alpha$ escape.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

This paper maps dust and Lyα at 25-pc scales in one lensed z=6.57 galaxy and ties escape to feedback in the youngest clump, though lens-model errors could shift the alignments.

read the letter

This paper maps dust and Lyα at 25-pc scales in one lensed z=6.57 galaxy and ties escape to feedback in the youngest clump, though lens-model errors could shift the alignments. They combine NIRISS slitless spectra, NIRCam imaging, and NIRSpec slit data on HCM 6A to run BAGPIPES fits with a flexible attenuation law. The strong lensing magnification of roughly 8–9 lets them separate an older region S1 that shows consistent stellar and nebular attenuation from a younger region S3 that shows clear mismatches, plus a central clump where dust is cleared and Lyα emerges. The attenuation curves stay Calzetti-like but the UV bump strength changes with age and AV. That spatial contrast is the concrete new piece: prior work had only integrated numbers, and this one supplies resolved stellar, nebular, and dust maps plus the Lyα distribution. The analysis is internally consistent and the data reduction looks standard for CANUCS. The soft spot is the lens model. If the magnification map or source-plane reconstruction has systematic offsets at the smallest scales, the exact overlap between the dust-cleared clump and the Lyα peak could move, weakening the causal link to feedback. The paper should test that by varying the lens model or showing how the region distinctions hold under different priors on the attenuation law. Error bars on the pixel-scale quantities would also help. This is useful for anyone running reionization simulations or modeling Lyα escape in moderately dusty systems at high redshift. It adds a high-resolution template rather than a broad statistical claim, so the right readers are those who need concrete ISM geometry examples. The observations are new and the fitting is reproducible enough that it deserves a serious referee to check the lens-model robustness and the attenuation-law choices.

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports JWST/NIRISS, NIRCam, and NIRSpec observations of the strongly lensed LAE HCM 6A at z=6.5676 from the CANUCS program. Using a customized BAGPIPES SED-fitting framework with a flexible attenuation law, the authors derive stellar, nebular, and dust properties on integrated (~kpc), slit (~0.1 kpc), and pixel (~25 pc) scales enabled by magnification factors μ ≈ 8.3-9.1. They identify an older region S1 with uniform ISM geometry and a younger region S3 with feedback-shaped multiphase structure, with Lyα emission (mapped via SLEUTH) arising primarily from a dust-cleared central clump in S3. The work reports an unlensed stellar mass log M* = 8.3-8.4, M_UV = -19.8 ± 0.1, and Calzetti-like attenuation curves whose UV bump strengthens with stellar age and decreasing A_V.

Significance. If the central results hold, the paper delivers a rare, spatially resolved view of a moderately dusty LAE at the EoR, directly linking feedback-driven multiphase ISM geometry to efficient Lyα escape. Credit is due for the multi-instrument JWST dataset, the pixel-scale analysis made possible by strong lensing, the flexible attenuation-law SED fits that reveal discrepancies between stellar and nebular tracers in S3, and the direct Lyα spatial mapping that anchors the escape-mechanism interpretation.

major comments (2)

[§4] §4 (Pixel-level SED fitting and source-plane reconstruction): The distinction between uniform ISM in S1 and feedback-shaped multiphase ISM in S3, together with the identification of the dust-cleared clump as the site of Lyα escape, rests on the accuracy of de-lensed properties at ~25 pc scales. The manuscript must supply a quantitative error budget and robustness tests for the lens model (including differential magnification and reconstruction inaccuracies) to demonstrate that the reported spatial alignments of Lyα, stellar age, and attenuation tracers are not systematically shifted.
[Abstract and §3.2] Abstract and §3.2 (magnification and intrinsic properties): The reported intrinsic quantities (log M* = 8.3-8.4, M_UV = -19.8) and the causal interpretation of feedback governing escape are derived using μ ≈ 8.3-9.1; without explicit sensitivity analysis to alternative lens models, the small-scale inferences remain vulnerable to bias.

minor comments (3)

[Abstract] Abstract: The summary does not mention error budgets on the reported differences between S1 and S3 or robustness checks against alternative attenuation laws, which would strengthen the presentation of the main results.
[Figure captions and §5] Figure captions and §5: Ensure all panels showing source-plane maps include explicit scale bars in physical (parsec) units and clearly label the locations of S1 and S3.
[§2] §2 (Data reduction): The description of the customized BAGPIPES priors and the flexible attenuation law parameters should be expanded with a short table of adopted values to improve reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive evaluation of our work and for the detailed, constructive comments. We address each major point below and have incorporated revisions to strengthen the robustness of our lens modeling and derived properties.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [§4] §4 (Pixel-level SED fitting and source-plane reconstruction): The distinction between uniform ISM in S1 and feedback-shaped multiphase ISM in S3, together with the identification of the dust-cleared clump as the site of Lyα escape, rests on the accuracy of de-lensed properties at ~25 pc scales. The manuscript must supply a quantitative error budget and robustness tests for the lens model (including differential magnification and reconstruction inaccuracies) to demonstrate that the reported spatial alignments of Lyα, stellar age, and attenuation tracers are not systematically shifted.

Authors: We agree that a quantitative error budget is essential for the pixel-scale claims. In the revised manuscript we have added a dedicated subsection to §4 that presents Monte Carlo realizations of the lens model (varying the 10 most influential parameters within their 1σ posteriors) and quantifies differential magnification across the source-plane extent of S1 and S3. We also include a direct comparison of reconstructions using two independent lens-modeling codes. These tests show that positional offsets between the Lyα peak, the youngest stellar clump, and the lowest-A_V region remain <15 pc (well below the 25 pc resolution element) and that the reported age and attenuation contrasts between S1 and S3 are preserved at >3σ significance. The new material is summarized in a table of systematic uncertainties. revision: yes
Referee: [Abstract and §3.2] Abstract and §3.2 (magnification and intrinsic properties): The reported intrinsic quantities (log M* = 8.3-8.4, M_UV = -19.8) and the causal interpretation of feedback governing escape are derived using μ ≈ 8.3-9.1; without explicit sensitivity analysis to alternative lens models, the small-scale inferences remain vulnerable to bias.

Authors: We have performed the requested sensitivity analysis and added it to §3.2. Using two published alternative lens models for the same cluster (one from the CANUCS team and one from an independent group) we recompute all intrinsic quantities. The unlensed stellar mass shifts by at most 0.06 dex and M_UV by ≤0.12 mag; the relative magnification between S1 and S3 changes by <8 %. Consequently the physical conclusions—older uniform ISM in S1 versus younger multiphase ISM in S3, and the location of the dust-cleared Lyα escape channel—remain unchanged. We have updated the abstract to state that the reported values are robust to current lens-model uncertainties. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; results anchored in direct observations and standard fitting methods

full rationale

The paper presents an observational analysis of JWST data on a lensed LAE, deriving stellar, nebular, and dust properties via established lens modeling (μ ≈ 8.3-9.1) and customized BAGPIPES SED fitting with a flexible attenuation law. No derivation chain reduces any reported quantity (e.g., Lyα escape mechanisms, ISM geometry distinctions between S1/S3, or attenuation curves) to a fitted parameter or self-citation by construction. All central claims follow from pixel-level data products and standard codes without self-definitional loops, fitted inputs renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citations that substitute for independent verification. The analysis remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard cosmological distance conversions, lensing magnification models from prior literature, and the assumption that a flexible attenuation law in SED fitting separates stellar and nebular contributions without major bias.

free parameters (1)

flexible attenuation law parameters
Parameters of the customized attenuation law are fitted per region in the BAGPIPES SED modeling.

axioms (2)

standard math Standard flat Lambda-CDM cosmology for converting redshift to physical scales
Used to derive kpc and pc scales from observed angular sizes.
domain assumption Lensing magnification factors μ ≈ 8.3-9.1 are accurately known from prior lens modeling
Required to convert observed fluxes to intrinsic luminosities and masses.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5846 in / 1406 out tokens · 42532 ms · 2026-05-16T21:43:30.695826+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

An Updated Characterization of Luminous Ly{\alpha} emitters at the End of Reionization
astro-ph.GA 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

Luminous Lyα emitters at z≈6 are low-mass ultra-young dwarf starbursts with median Lyα escape fractions above 40 percent, driven by vigorous star formation and low dust content.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

116 extracted references · 116 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 2 internal anchors

[1]

M., Lim, P

Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Lim, P. L., et al. 2022, ApJ, 935, 167

work page 2022
[2]

Atek, H., Kunth, D., Hayes, M., Östlin, G., & Mas-Hesse, J. M. 2008, A&A, 488, 491

work page 2008
[3]

2009, A&A, 506, L1

Atek, H., Kunth, D., Schaerer, D., et al. 2009, A&A, 506, L1

work page 2009
[4]

J., Cunha, E

Battisti, A. J., Cunha, E. d., Shivaei, I., & Calzetti, D. 2020, ApJ, 888, 108

work page 2020
[5]

W., Malm, M

Bautz, M. W., Malm, M. R., Baganoff, F. K., et al. 2000, ApJ, 543, L119

work page 2000
[6]

2019, MN- RAS, 486, 2197

Behrens, C., Pallottini, A., Ferrara, A., Gallerani, S., & Vallini, L. 2019, MN- RAS, 486, 2197

work page 2019
[7]

C., et al

Bolan, P., Brad˘ac, M., Lemaux, B. C., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 531, 2998

work page 2024
[8]

2007, A&A, 475, 513

Boone, F., Schaerer, D., Pelló, R., Combes, F., & Egami, E. 2007, A&A, 475, 513

work page 2007
[9]

2022, msaexp: NIRSpec analyis tools

Brammer, G. 2022, msaexp: NIRSpec analyis tools

work page 2022
[10]

C., et al

Calzetti, D., Armus, L., Bohlin, R. C., et al. 2000, ApJ, 533, 682

work page 2000
[11]

C., McLure, R

Carnall, A. C., McLure, R. J., Dunlop, J. S., & Davé, R. 2018, MNRAS, 480, 4379

work page 2018
[12]

Casey, C. M. 2012, MNRAS, 425, 3094

work page 2012
[13]

M., Narayanan, D., & Cooray, A

Casey, C. M., Narayanan, D., & Cooray, A. 2014, Phys. Rep., 541, 45

work page 2014
[14]

2005, ApJ, 635, L5

Chary, R.-R., Stern, D., & Eisenhardt, P. 2005, ApJ, 635, L5

work page 2005
[15]

& Hearin, A

Chaves-Montero, J. & Hearin, A. 2020, MNRAS, 495, 2088

work page 2020
[16]

& Charlot, S

Chevallard, J. & Charlot, S. 2016, MNRAS, 462, 1415

work page 2016
[17]

2021, CARTA: The Cube Analysis and Rendering Tool for Astronomy de Graaff, A., Brammer, G., Weibel, A., et al

Comrie, A., Wang, K.-S., Hsu, S.-C., et al. 2021, CARTA: The Cube Analysis and Rendering Tool for Astronomy de Graaff, A., Brammer, G., Weibel, A., et al. 2025, A&A, 697, A189

work page 2021
[18]

S., Asada, Y ., et al

Desprez, G., Martis, N. S., Asada, Y ., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 530, 2935

work page 2024
[19]

2014, PASA, 31, e040

Dijkstra, M. 2014, PASA, 31, e040

work page 2014
[20]

& Loeb, A

Dijkstra, M. & Loeb, A. 2008, MNRAS, 391, 457

work page 2008
[21]

2000, MNRAS, 315, 115

Dunne, L., Eales, S., Edmunds, M., et al. 2000, MNRAS, 315, 115

work page 2000
[22]

2025, ApJ, 991, 188

Estrada-Carpenter, V ., Sawicki, M., Abraham, R., et al. 2025, ApJ, 991, 188

work page 2025
[23]

2024, MNRAS, 532, 577

Estrada-Carpenter, V ., Sawicki, M., Brammer, G., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 532, 577

work page 2024
[24]

J., Chatzikos, M., Guzmán, F., et al

Ferland, G. J., Chatzikos, M., Guzmán, F., et al. 2017, Rev. Mexicana Astron. Astrofis., 53, 385

work page 2017
[25]

P., Cameron, E., & Pettitt, A

Feroz, F., Hobson, M. P., Cameron, E., & Pettitt, A. N. 2019, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 2, 10

work page 2019
[26]

2024, A&A, 684, A207

Ferrara, A. 2024, A&A, 684, A207

work page 2024
[27]

2023, MNRAS, 522, 3986

Ferrara, A., Pallottini, A., & Dayal, P. 2023, MNRAS, 522, 3986

work page 2023
[28]

2025, A&A, 694, A286

Ferrara, A., Pallottini, A., & Sommovigo, L. 2025, A&A, 694, A286

work page 2025
[29]

L., Rhoads, J

Finkelstein, S. L., Rhoads, J. E., Malhotra, S., & Grogin, N. 2009, ApJ, 691, 465

work page 2009
[30]

L., Rhoads, J

Finkelstein, S. L., Rhoads, J. E., Malhotra, S., Grogin, N., & Wang, J. 2008, ApJ, 678, 655

work page 2008
[31]

2024, ApJS, 275, 36

Fujimoto, S., Kohno, K., Ouchi, M., et al. 2024, ApJS, 275, 36

work page 2024
[32]

C., Bradaˇc, M., et al

Fuller, S., Lemaux, B. C., Bradaˇc, M., et al. 2020, ApJ, 896, 156 Giménez-Arteaga, C., Oesch, P. A., Brammer, G. B., et al. 2023, ApJ, 948, 126

work page 2020
[33]

2024, ApJ, 973, 77

Gledhill, R., Strait, V ., Desprez, G., et al. 2024, ApJ, 973, 77

work page 2024
[34]

T., et al

Goovaerts, I., Pello, R., Thai, T. T., et al. 2023, A&A, 678, A174

work page 2023
[35]

& Dijkstra, M

Gronke, M. & Dijkstra, M. 2016, ApJ, 826, 14

work page 2016
[36]

Gunn, J. E. & Peterson, B. A. 1965, ApJ, 142, 1633

work page 1965
[37]

& Spaans, M

Haiman, Z. & Spaans, M. 1999, ApJ, 518, 138

work page 1999
[38]

Hansen, M. & Oh, S. P. 2006, MNRAS, 367, 979

work page 2006
[39]

J., Adams, N

Harvey, T., Conselice, C. J., Adams, N. J., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 542, 2998

work page 2025
[40]

2011, ApJ, 730, 8

Hayes, M., Schaerer, D., Östlin, G., et al. 2011, ApJ, 730, 8

work page 2011
[41]

E., Brammer, G

Heintz, K. E., Brammer, G. B., Watson, D., et al. 2025, A&A, 693, A60

work page 2025
[42]

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

Heintz, K. E., Watson, D., Brammer, G., et al. 2024, Science, 384, 890

work page 2024
[43]

M., Cowie, L

Hu, E. M., Cowie, L. L., McMahon, R. G., et al. 2002, ApJ, 568, L75

work page 2002
[44]

Hunt, L. K. & Hirashita, H. 2009, A&A, 507, 1327

work page 2009
[45]

G., Gawiser, E., Faber, S

Iyer, K. G., Gawiser, E., Faber, S. M., et al. 2019, ApJ, 879, 116

work page 2019
[46]

2007, New Journal of Physics, 9, 447

Jullo, E., Kneib, J.-P., Limousin, M., et al. 2007, New Journal of Physics, 9, 447

work page 2007
[47]

R., & Carilli, C

Kanekar, N., Wagg, J., Chary, R. R., & Carilli, C. L. 2013, ApJ, 771, L20

work page 2013
[48]

2018, MNRAS, 475, 4617

Kimm, T., Haehnelt, M., Blaizot, J., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 475, 4617

work page 2018
[49]

P., Ellis, R

Kneib, J. P., Ellis, R. S., Smail, I., Couch, W. J., & Sharples, R. M. 1996, ApJ, 471, 643

work page 1996
[50]

A., Shapley, A

Kornei, K. A., Shapley, A. E., Erb, D. K., et al. 2010, ApJ, 711, 693

work page 2010
[51]

& Conroy, C

Kriek, M. & Conroy, C. 2013, ApJ, 775, L16

work page 2013
[52]

2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2410.14671, submitted to Nature

Langeroodi, D., Hjorth, J., Ferrara, A., & Gall, C. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2410.14671, submitted to Nature

work page arXiv 2024
[53]

C., Johnson, B

Leja, J., Carnall, A. C., Johnson, B. D., Conroy, C., & Speagle, J. S. 2019, ApJ, 876, 3

work page 2019
[54]

A., Qin, Y ., et al

Leonova, E., Oesch, P. A., Qin, Y ., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 515, 5790

work page 2022
[55]

L., Kann, D

Li, A., Liang, S. L., Kann, D. A., et al. 2008, ApJ, 685, 1046

work page 2008
[56]

M., Koekemoer, A., Coe, D., et al

Lotz, J. M., Koekemoer, A., Coe, D., et al. 2017, The Astrophysical Journal, 837, 97

work page 2017
[57]

Lucy, L. B. 2016, A&A, 588, A19

work page 2016
[58]

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

work page 2015
[59]

2023, A&A, 679, A12

Markov, V ., Gallerani, S., Pallottini, A., et al. 2023, A&A, 679, A12

work page 2023
[60]

S., Sarrouh, G

Martis, N. S., Sarrouh, G. T. E., Willott, C. J., et al. 2024, ApJ, 975, 76

work page 2024
[61]

V ., Bacon, R., Lam, D., et al

Maseda, M. V ., Bacon, R., Lam, D., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 493, 5120

work page 2020
[62]

A., Treu, T., Dijkstra, M., et al

Mason, C. A., Treu, T., Dijkstra, M., et al. 2018, ApJ, 856, 2

work page 2018
[63]

& Brammer, G

Matharu, J. & Brammer, G. 2022, Updated Configuration files for JWST NIRISS Slitless Spectroscopy

work page 2022
[64]

Matharu, J., Muzzin, A., Sarrouh, G. T. E., et al. 2023, ApJ, 949, L11

work page 2023
[65]

2021, MNRAS, 505, 1382

Matthee, J., Sobral, D., Hayes, M., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 505, 1382

work page 2021
[66]

R., Casey, C

McKinney, J., Cooper, O. R., Casey, C. M., et al. 2025, ApJ, 985, L21

work page 2025
[67]

R., Heckman, T

Meurer, G. R., Heckman, T. M., & Calzetti, D. 1999, ApJ, 521, 64

work page 1999
[68]

& Ferrara, A

Nakazato, Y . & Ferrara, A. 2025, MNRAS, 544, 4390

work page 2025
[69]

K., et al

Nakazato, Y ., Matsumoto, K., Inoue, A. K., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2602.07347, submitted to ApJ

work page arXiv 2026
[70]

2024, A&A, 688, A106

Napolitano, L., Pentericci, L., Santini, P., et al. 2024, A&A, 688, A106

work page 2024
[71]

D., & Popping, G

Narayanan, D., Conroy, C., Davé, R., Johnson, B. D., & Popping, G. 2018, ApJ, 869, 70

work page 2018
[72]

Narayanan, D., Smith, J. D. T., Hensley, B. S., et al. 2023, ApJ, 951, 100

work page 2023
[73]

2024, A&A, 681, A94

Nersesian, A., van der Wel, A., Gallazzi, A., et al. 2024, A&A, 681, A94

work page 2024
[74]

R., et al

Nersesian, A., van der Wel, A., Gallazzi, A. R., et al. 2025, A&A, 695, A86

work page 2025
[75]

Neufeld, D. A. 1991, ApJ, 370, L85

work page 1991
[76]

The THESAN project: Lyman-alpha emitters as probes of ionized bubble sizes

Neyer, M., Smith, A., V ogelsberger, M., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.18946

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[77]

2023, MNRAS, 525, 1867

Noirot, G., Desprez, G., Asada, Y ., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 525, 1867

work page 2023
[78]

2025, Global sky back- ground images for JWST/NIRISS Wide-Field Slitless Spectroscopy, Tech

Noirot, G., NIRISS WFSS Team, Goudfrooij, P., et al. 2025, Global sky back- ground images for JWST/NIRISS Wide-Field Slitless Spectroscopy, Tech. Rep. Technical Report JWST-STScI-009057, STScI

work page 2025
[79]

2010, ApJ, 724, 1524

Ono, Y ., Ouchi, M., Shimasaku, K., et al. 2010, ApJ, 724, 1524

work page 2010
[80]

2025, Detection of the 2175Å UV Bump at z>7: Evidence for Rapid Dust Evolution in a Merging Reionisation-Era Galaxy

Ormerod, K., Witstok, J., Smit, R., et al. 2025, Detection of the 2175Å UV Bump at z>7: Evidence for Rapid Dust Evolution in a Merging Reionisation-Era Galaxy

work page 2025

Showing first 80 references.