Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 3 cited by

All the Massive Galaxy Overdensities during Reionization: JWST Rest-Frame Optical Selection Reveals Young, Chemically Evolved Galaxies Embedded in Dense, Neutral Gas at z > 5

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Massive galaxy overdensities at z=5.7-6.8 contain young, low-mass, chemically enriched galaxies embedded in extended neutral hydrogen gas, with two of six systems showing excess HI absorption relative to the field.

desk verdict The rest-frame optical protocluster census is genuinely new and the galaxy property trends look solid, but the HI tomography rests on an untested f_esc=1 assumption and should be treated as tentative. read the letter →

arxiv 2602.09091 v1 pith:YJZVZCRA submitted 2026-02-09 astro-ph.GA astro-ph.CO

Chamilla Terp , Kasper E. Heintz , Jorryt Matthee , Rohan P. Naidu , Pascal A. Oesch , Callum Witten , Daichi Kashino , Clara L. Pollock
show 2 more authors
Claudia Di Cesare Alberto Torralba
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GAastro-ph.CO
keywords galaxyoverdensitiesprotoclustersreionizationneutralhydrogenLyman-alphaabsorptionJWSTrest-frameopticalspectroscopyhigh-redshiftgalaxies
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

The paper attempts to establish that the most massive galaxy overdensities during the reionization epoch, found through blind rest-frame optical spectroscopy, do not contain galaxies that are more massive and evolved than the field. Instead, their members are systematically less massive, equally metal-rich, and younger, and at least two of the six structures show excess neutral hydrogen absorption relative to the field average. If correct, these are the first direct constraints on the three-dimensional distribution of dense neutral gas in z>5 overdensities, and they imply that pre-JWST searches based on Lyman-alpha emitters alone missed most of the structure's members. The paper cares because these systems are the progenitors of today's galaxy clusters and have been assumed to accelerate galaxy growth and drive reionization.

What carries the argument

The identification relies on a Friends-of-Friends algorithm with a redshift-dependent linking length derived from the survey's galaxy number density, applied to spectroscopically-confirmed positions in the source plane. The neutral gas census uses a Voigt-profile model of Lyα absorption where the intrinsic Lyα flux is assumed to equal 32.7 times the observed Hβ flux under case-B recombination with unity escape fraction; a Gaussian line is placed at the systemic redshift and any deficit is attributed to a neutral hydrogen column.

What would settle it

A spectroscopic survey of a dozen or more overdensity members with JWST/NIRSpec that measures the actual Lyα escape fractions and absorber redshifts would settle it; if typical escape fractions are well below unity or the absorbers are offset in redshift, the inferred column densities would fall and the two excess-HI structures could become consistent with the field.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Using JWST/NIRCam grism spectroscopy in the Abell 2744 field, the authors identify five to six galaxy overdensities at z≈5.7–6.8 with total halo masses above 10^11 M_sun. Comparing members to field galaxies, they find that overdensity members are on average less massive, have bluer UV slopes and weaker Balmer breaks (younger stellar populations), and at z>6 show higher gas-phase metallicities at fixed mass. Modeling the Lyα absorption in photometry, they infer neutral hydrogen columns and find that two of the six structures have excess HI compared to the field, with the highest-redshift structure at z=7.88 showing uniformly high columns.

Load-bearing premise

The inferred neutral hydrogen columns assume that every overdensity galaxy has an intrinsic Lyα flux of 32.7 times its Hβ flux and that all Lyα photons escape into the absorbing gas, with the absorber at the galaxy's systemic redshift, so if real galaxies leak fewer Lyα photons or have offset absorbing gas, the excess-HI claims would be systematically overestimated.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Massive overdensities at z>5 are not necessarily sites of accelerated galaxy growth; members can be young and low-mass.
  • Pre-JWST searches based on strong Lyman-alpha emitters likely miss most of the members of these structures, biasing samples toward the most gas-poor or evolved galaxies.
  • The presence of excess neutral hydrogen in some but not all overdensities means the neutral gas content does not scale simply with halo mass.
  • If these systems are protoclusters, their embedded neutral gas may trace cold streams feeding future star formation and delaying local reionization.
  • Rest-frame optical selection provides an unbiased way to find and characterize reionization-era overdensities.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the finding generalizes, the contribution of protoclusters to cosmic reionization may have been overestimated, because dense neutral gas and potentially low escape fractions would suppress ionizing photon output.
  • The combination of low stellar mass, young ages, and high metallicity at z>6 suggests short, efficient bursts of star formation in dense environments, which could be tested by comparing with simulations of protocluster assembly.
  • Larger blind surveys using the same rest-frame optical technique could map the neutral gas tomography across many more overdensities and directly test whether the two excess-HI systems are outliers or the norm.
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

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents a blind Friends-of-Friends search for z~5.5-7 galaxy overdensities in the JWST-ALT NIRCam grism data of Abell 2744, identifying five robust overdensities at z=5.66-6.77 plus one at z=7.88. Halo masses are inferred via three independent proxies (kinematics, M_UV-M_halo, and stellar-mass scaling). The authors compare stellar masses, UV slopes, Balmer breaks, and O3 metallicities of member galaxies to an ALT field sample, finding members to be statistically less massive, bluer, and with weaker Balmer breaks, with comparable or elevated metallicities. They then model Lyα absorption using photometric SED fits with a Voigt-profile DLA component, infer N_HI for individual galaxies, and report that two of six overdensities show excess neutral hydrogen absorption relative to the field average. The paper concludes that massive reionization-era overdensities can contain young, low-mass, gas-rich galaxies rather than uniformly accelerated, evolved systems.

Significance. If correct, this is one of the first rest-frame-optical-selected proto-cluster samples at z>5 and directly challenges the simple picture of accelerated galaxy growth in overdense regions. The strengths of the paper are its blind FoF algorithm with physically motivated linking lengths, the use of three independent halo-mass estimators, the explicit discussion of selection effects in the emission-line-selected sample, and the public-data basis of the analysis. The claims about galaxy properties are supported by non-parametric KS tests, although the control sample is broad in redshift. The neutral-hydrogen tomography claim is the weakest link: it depends on strong assumptions (f_esc,Lyα=1, z_abs=z_gal, case-B Lyα/Hβ scaling) that are only validated on two galaxies, and the field comparison uses a different N_HI pipeline. The paper is therefore of high interest but needs substantial revision to make the HI results robust.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sect. 3.3, Eqs. (7)-(8)] The conversion of photometric Lyα deficits into N_HI assumes (i) intrinsic Lyα flux = 32.7×Hβ, (ii) f_esc,Lyα=1, and (iii) z_abs=z_gal. Any real escape-fraction variation, resonant scattering in an outflowing ISM, or velocity offset of the absorbing gas is therefore re-interpreted as additional neutral hydrogen column. This is a known degeneracy that the paper acknowledges at the end of Sect. 3.3 ('we are in most cases unable to constrain absorption redshifts'). The validation in Fig. 4 covers only two galaxies, which is insufficient to establish the N_HI scale for the full sample. Because the headline claim—two of six overdensities with excess HI absorption—rests directly on these N_HI values, the authors should either present the results as model-dependent upper limits, marginalize over f_esc,Lyα and z_abs-z_gal, or substantially expand the NIRSpec prism validation sample. Without this
  2. [Sect. 4, Figs. 5-7] The field comparison is not made at fixed redshift: the control sample spans the full z=5.5-7 range 'to ensure the statistical power' (Sect. 4), while the overdensities lie at individual redshifts z=5.66-6.77. Since stellar mass, UV slope, and Balmer break distributions evolve significantly across this redshift range, the reported KS p<0.01 differences could reflect redshift evolution rather than environment. The authors should repeat the comparison using a narrow redshift window around each overdensity (e.g., ±0.1 in z) or an explicitly matched control sample. This is load-bearing for the central claim that overdensity members are less massive and younger than field galaxies at similar redshifts.
  3. [Sect. 5, Fig. 9] The field-average N_HI is taken from Mason et al. (2025) rather than derived from the same photometric modeling pipeline applied to field galaxies in the ALT survey. A systematic offset in the N_HI scale—due to different SED treatments, filter sets, or assumed f_esc—would directly masquerade as an environmental excess. The authors should either compute field N_HI values with the same model from the ALT catalog or calibrate the offset using overlapping galaxies. As written, the 'two of six overdensities show excess HI absorption' result is not robust to this methodological mismatch.
  4. [Sect. 3.2.1, Eq. (5)] The kinematic halo masses assume virialization and do not propagate the ~60 km/s redshift uncertainties into σ_LOS, as the text itself notes. Since these mass estimates are later used to argue that the structures are protocluster candidates and to interpret the neutral-gas trends in Sect. 5, the systematic uncertainty should be folded into the mass estimates or at least explicitly quantified in Table 2. Without this, the inferred halo masses may be biased high, affecting the comparison with other overdensities and the discussion of a halo-mass threshold.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract / Intro] The abstract repeats the galaxy-properties result twice ('bluer spectral slopes less prominent Balmer breaks' and later 'bluer UV continua and weaker Balmer breaks'). Please condense to a single statement.
  2. [Sect. 2] Typographical errors: 'imagining' should be 'imaging' (Sect. 2.1), 'axillary' should be 'auxiliary' (Sect. 2.2), and 'ration' should be 'ratio' (Sect. 6). Also, the notation for neutral hydrogen alternates between 'HI' and 'Hi'; use a consistent form.
  3. [Sect. 3.3 / Fig. 4] The caption of Fig. 4 says 'for one of the galaxies the observed Prism spectrum' but the text says both galaxies have NIRSpec prism spectra. Please clarify which galaxy has the spectrum shown and what the other validation is based on.
  4. [Sect. 3.1, Table 1] The linking lengths in Table 1 are given in cMpc, but the text in Sect. 3.1 states values like 6.1 and 8.3 without explicitly stating units in the table header row; please add 'l [cMpc]' for clarity. Also, the interval list in the text contains only five intervals but the table shows five rows; the z=7.88 interval is mentioned later and should be included here for completeness.
  5. [Sect. 5] The sentence 'Since most models are derived from photometry alone we are not able to identify LAEs reliably' is stated after discussing N_HI≲10^20 as LAE-like. This is an important limitation and should be highlighted earlier, ideally in Sect. 3.3, so that the 'LAE fraction' values quoted later are not over-interpreted.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the overdensity identification, galaxy-property comparisons, and HI-tomography inference are observational and not equivalent to their inputs.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is observational and self-contained rather than circular. Overdensities are identified from JWST-ALT NIRCam grism redshifts with a standard FoF algorithm whose linking length is computed from the galaxy number density—a self-consistent clustering step, not a renaming of the output. Galaxy-property claims (lower stellar masses, bluer UV slopes, weaker Balmer breaks, elevated O3/Hb at fixed mass) are differential comparisons between FoF members and the field sample drawn from the same survey, so the inputs (grism redshifts, photometry) are distinct from the output property distributions. The N_HI values are inferred by fitting a Voigt-profile DLA plus a fixed intrinsic Ly-alpha flux (32.7 x Hbeta, f_esc,Ly-alpha=1) to photometry, and the paper explicitly cautions that absorption redshifts cannot be constrained from photometry alone. This is a model-dependence/systematic limitation of the tomography claim, not a circular reduction: the fitted N_HI are model parameters, and the 'excess' is judged against an external field median from Mason et al. (2025), not against the same fitted values. Self-citations (Naidu et al. 2024; Witten et al. 2025a; Heintz et al. 2026; Terp et al. 2024) provide data products, methods, and context; no load-bearing step is justified solely by a self-referential uniqueness theorem or by an ansatz imported from the authors' prior work. No equation is defined in terms of the quantity it is used to predict, and no fitted parameter is relabeled as an independent prediction.

Assumptions & free parameters 8 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper relies on several hand-chosen thresholds (b=1, V_min, N_gal≥5, visually selected redshift bins) and modeling assumptions (f_esc=1, z_abs=z_gal, x_HI artificially small) that directly determine the overdensity list and the HI columns. The external halo-mass relations and cosmology are standard assumptions rather than fitted parameters. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (8)
  • FoF linking length scale b = b = 1.0
    Chosen by hand because the canonical b=0.2 is for virialized systems; drives group membership and the final overdensity sample (Sect. 3.1).
  • Redshift intervals for group search = [5.50,5.69], [5.69,5.80], [6.18,6.30], [6.30,6.50], [6.50,7.00]
    Selected visually to represent the largest overdensities; determines linking lengths and which groups exist.
  • Minimum group volume V_min = 161.3 cMpc^3
    Imposed to avoid artificially large δ_gal from tiny convex hulls; changes significance estimates (Sect. 3.1).
  • Minimum membership N_gal = N_gal ≥ 5
    Threshold selects 11 of 84 FoF groups; choice affects the overdensity list (Sect. 3.1).
  • Lyα escape fraction f_esc,Lyα = 1.0 (fixed)
    Assumed to tie Lyα flux to Hβ via case-B ratio; forces any missing Lyα into inferred absorption (Sect. 3.3).
  • IGM neutral fraction x_HI = artificially small
    Set to ensure absorption traces local HI column density; if larger, inferred N_HI changes (Sect. 3.3).
  • Absorber redshift offset z_abs − z_gal = 0 (fixed)
    Absorber fixed to systemic redshift; cannot be constrained from photometry; affects N_HI and tomography (Sect. 3.3).
  • Halo-to-stellar mass ratio = 100
    Third halo-mass estimator; crude, used only as a consistency check (Sect. 3.2.3).
assumptions (8)
  • domain assumption Flat ΛCDM cosmology with H0=67.7, Ωm=0.310, ΩΛ=0.689
    Adopted in Sect. 1 and used for all comoving volumes, distances, and halo mass conversions.
  • domain assumption Source-plane positions from Furtak et al. (2023) lens model
    FoF runs in source plane; errors in the lens model propagate into group membership and δ_gal.
  • domain assumption ALT survey redshift and SED products from Naidu et al. (2024)
    All stellar masses, UV slopes, [OIII]/Hβ, and redshifts come from a prior catalog; the current paper does not re-fit them.
  • domain assumption M_UV-M_halo abundance-matching relation of Mason et al. (2023)
    Used to convert summed UV luminosity into halo mass; uncertainty is ~1.5 mag in M_UV.
  • domain assumption Overdensities are approximately virialized for the kinematic mass estimator
    Sect. 3.2.1 acknowledges structures may be unvirialized and dispersions biased high; still used to quote M_halo.
  • standard math Voigt-Hjerting and damping-wing formalisms (Tepper-García 2006; Miralda-Escudé et al. 2000; Totani et al. 2006)
    Adopted for Lyα absorption modeling; analytic approximations with stated validity conditions.
  • domain assumption Full z≈5.5-7 ALT field sample is a valid reference for comparing each overdensity
    Sect. 4 uses the full field because narrow redshift windows have too few galaxies; this assumes no strong mass/age evolution across the interval.
  • domain assumption The identified FoF groups are single physical structures rather than line-of-sight projections
    Grouping uses grism redshifts with ~60 km/s uncertainties; projection contamination is not quantified.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of All the Massive Galaxy Overdensities during Reionization: JWST Rest-Frame Optical Selection Reveals Young, Chemically Evolved Galaxies Embedded in Dense, Neutral Gas at z > 5." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YJZVZCRA

@misc{pith2026260209091,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: All the Massive Galaxy Overdensities during Reionization: JWST Rest-Frame Optical Selection Reveals Young, Chemically Evolved Galaxies Embedded in Dense, Neutral Gas at z > 5},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YJZVZCRA}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2602.09091}
}
abstract

The high-redshift progenitors of present-day galaxy clusters are believed to substantially contribute to the global star-formation rate density and drive the large-scale reionization of the Universe. Here we present a blind and unbiased search for and characterization of galaxy overdensities during the reionization epoch at redshifts $z\sim 5.5-7$, based on rest-frame optical JWST/NIRCam grism spectroscopy of the Abell\,2744 lensing field as part of the JWST-ALT survey. Using a physically-motivated, cosmological inference Friends-of-Friends (FoF) algorithm, we identify six galaxy overdensities, including five robust systems at $z=5.66$ to $6.77$. They are all characterized by total halo masses $M_{\rm halo} \gtrsim 10^{11}\,M_{\odot}$ inferred from a range of proxies. We find that the galaxy members in these overdense environments are on average less massive though equally metal-rich, and generally comprised of younger stellar populations as indicated from their bluer spectral slopes less prominent Balmer breaks, than field galaxies at similar redshifts. Further, we use this novel rest-frame optical selection of galaxy proto-clusters to infer the fraction and 3D distribution of strong Lyman-$\alpha$ emitters (LAEs) and damped Lyman-$\alpha$ absorbers (DLAs) in the overdensity environments. We find that two out of six galaxy overdensities have excess \hi\ absorption compared to the field-average, while the other four are consistent within their large scatter in density. These results present the first direct observational constraints on the tomography of the dense, neutral gas reservoirs in large-scale galaxy overdensities at $z>5$ and highlight the limitations of pre-JWST searches for reionization-era galaxy overdensities relying on the detection of strong LAEs alone.[Abridged]

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.09091 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Spatial and redshift distribution of galaxies in the ALT catalog with overdensities marked. Spatial and redshift distribution of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Projected spatial distribution of galaxies in the five largest overdensities identified in the ALT survey, plotted in comoving [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Dark matter halo mass versus redshift. Each overdensity is color-coded following the notation of Fig. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Example SED fits and photometric data for two galax [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Normalized distributions of stellar masses (log [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Normalized distributions of Balmer break strength ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Normalized distributions of the gas-phase metallicity proxy log [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Three-dimensional spatial distribution of galaxies in the five identified groups as well as the overdensity at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Mean neutral hydrogen column density of each overdensity as a function of its [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_9.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. JWST absorption line spectroscopy with SPURS: ISM covering fractions and kinematics in individual galaxies at $z=5-9$

    astro-ph.GA 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 7.0 of 10

    JWST spectra of six z=5-9 galaxies show low-ionization covering fractions of 0.2-0.9 and diverse kinematics including blueshifted outflows, indicating heterogeneous multiphase ISM.

  2. Galaxy Proximate Damped Lyman-Alpha Systems and HI Reionization Topology in TECHNICOLOR DAWN

    astro-ph.GA 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    TECHNICOLOR DAWN simulations reveal an inside-out-middle reionization topology where CGM remains more neutral than IGM at z=5.5, and PDLA column density depends primarily on halo mass rather than neutral fraction.

  3. On the later evolution of observationally selected protocluster candidates at $z\,{\gtrsim}\,5$

    astro-ph.GA 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    Simulations show observationally selected protocluster candidates at z ≳ 5 include significant interlopers, undergo 2-6 major mergers, and exhibit stronger clustering than observed, requiring total galaxy mass within ...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

62 extracted references · 6 linked inside Pith · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    M., Lim, P

    Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Lim, P. L., et al. 2022, ApJ, 935, 167 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ocz, B. M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33

    2022

  2. [2]

    S., Wechsler, R

    Behroozi, P. S., Wechsler, R. H., & Conroy, C. 2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 770, 57

    2013

  3. [3]

    Bennett, J. S. & Sijacki, D. 2020, MNRAS, 499, 597

    2020

  4. [4]

    E., et al

    Bezanson, R., Labbe, I., Whitaker, K. E., et al. 2024, ApJ, 974, 92

    2024

  5. [5]

    Bosman, S. E. I., Davies, F. B., Becker, G. D., et al. 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 514, 55

    2022

  6. [6]

    2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 502, 4558–4575

    Calvi, R., Dannerbauer, H., Arrabal Haro, P., et al. 2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 502, 4558–4575

    2021

  7. [7]

    2018, The Astrophysical Jour- nal Letters, 863, L3

    Castellano, M., Pentericci, L., Vanzella, E., et al. 2018, The Astrophysical Jour- nal Letters, 863, L3

    2018

  8. [8]

    2022, Transient Name Server As- troNote, 257, 1

    Chen, W., Kelly, P., Castellano, M., et al. 2022, Transient Name Server As- troNote, 257, 1

    2022

Show all 62 references
  1. [9]

    P., Mason, C., et al

    Chen, Z., Stark, D. P., Mason, C., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 528, 7052

    2024

  2. [10]

    P., Mason, C

    Chen, Z., Stark, D. P., Mason, C. A., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2505.24080

    2025 arXiv

  3. [11]

    2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 779, 127

    Chiang, Y .-K., Overzier, R., & Gebhardt, K. 2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 779, 127

    2013

  4. [12]

    A., Gebhardt, K., & Henriques, B

    Chiang, Y .-K., Overzier, R. A., Gebhardt, K., & Henriques, B. 2017, The Astro- physical Journal Letters, 844, L23

    2017

  5. [13]

    M., Valentino, F., et al

    Daddi, E., Rich, R. M., Valentino, F., et al. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 926, L21 de Graaff, A., Brammer, G., Weibel, A., et al. 2025, A&A, 697, A189

    2022

  6. [14]

    & Birnboim, Y

    Dekel, A. & Birnboim, Y . 2006, MNRAS, 368, 2

    2006

  7. [15]

    2009, Nature, 457, 451

    Dekel, A., Birnboim, Y ., Engel, G., et al. 2009, Nature, 457, 451

    2009

  8. [16]

    L., Patton, D

    Ellison, S. L., Patton, D. R., Simard, L., & McConnachie, A. W. 2008, ApJ, 672, L107

    2008

  9. [17]

    A., Becker, R

    Fan, X., Strauss, M. A., Becker, R. H., et al. 2006, The Astronomical Journal, 132, 117–136

    2006

  10. [18]

    M., Lin, X., et al

    Fudamoto, Y ., Helton, J. M., Lin, X., et al. 2025, SAPPHIRES: A Galaxy Over- Density in the Heart of Cosmic Reionization atz=8.47

    2025

  11. [19]

    J., Zitrin, A., Weaver, J

    Furtak, L. J., Zitrin, A., Weaver, J. R., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 523, 4568

    2023

  12. [20]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.01315

    Gelli, V ., Mason, C., Pallottini, A., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.01315

    2025

  13. [21]

    R., Millman, K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357–362

    2020

  14. [22]

    2023, ApJ, 955, L2

    Hashimoto, T., Álvarez-Márquez, J., Fudamoto, Y ., et al. 2023, ApJ, 955, L2

    2023

  15. [23]

    E., Bennett, J

    Heintz, K. E., Bennett, J. S., Oesch, P. A., et al. 2026, Nature Astronomy

    2026

  16. [24]

    E., Brammer, G

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

    2025

  17. [25]

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

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

    2024

  18. [26]

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

    2007

  19. [27]

    2016, ApJ, 822, 5

    Ishigaki, M., Ouchi, M., & Harikane, Y . 2016, ApJ, 822, 5

    2016

  20. [28]

    Katz, N., Keres, D., Dave, R., & Weinberg, D. H. 2003, in Astrophysics and Space Science Library, V ol. 281, The IGM/Galaxy Connection. The Distribu- tion of Baryons at z=0, ed. J. L. Rosenberg & M. E. Putman, 185

    2003

  21. [29]

    C., Weinberger, L

    Keating, L. C., Weinberger, L. H., Kulkarni, G., et al. 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 491, 1736 Kereš, D., Katz, N., Weinberg, D. H., & Davé, R. 2005, MNRAS, 363, 2 Article number, page 12 of 13 Terp et al.: All the Massive Galaxy Overdensities durin...

    2019

  22. [30]

    2022, A&A, 667, L3

    Laporte, N., Zitrin, A., Dole, H., et al. 2022, A&A, 667, L3

    2022

  23. [31]

    M., Tanaka, I., Kawabe, R., et al

    Lee, M. M., Tanaka, I., Kawabe, R., et al. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 883, 92

    2019

  24. [32]

    A., Qin, Y ., et al

    Leonova, E., Oesch, P. A., Qin, Y ., et al. 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 515, 5790–5801

    2022

  25. [33]

    J., Austin, D., et al

    Li, Q., Conselice, C. J., Austin, D., et al. 2025, Reionization in Protocluster En- vironments atz>7 with JWST/NIRSpec

    2025

  26. [34]

    J., Sarron, F., et al

    Li, Q., Conselice, C. J., Sarron, F., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 539, 1796

    2025

  27. [35]

    2016, MNRAS, 463, 3921

    Mandelker, N., Padnos, D., Dekel, A., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 463, 3921

    2016

  28. [36]

    2018, MNRAS, 480, 5113

    Marinacci, F., V ogelsberger, M., Pakmor, R., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 480, 5113

    2018

  29. [37]

    A., Chen, Z., Stark, D

    Mason, C. A., Chen, Z., Stark, D. P., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.11702

    2025

  30. [38]

    A., Trenti, M., & Treu, T

    Mason, C. A., Trenti, M., & Treu, T. 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astro- nomical Society, 521, 497–503

    2023

  31. [39]

    Miralda-Escude, J., Haehnelt, M., & Rees, M. J. 2000, The Astrophysical Jour- nal, 530, 1–16

    2000

  32. [40]

    V ., Dalal, N., & Gottlöber, S

    More, S., Kravtsov, A. V ., Dalal, N., & Gottlöber, S. 2011, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 195, 4

    2011

  33. [41]

    2025, MNRAS, 539, 1834

    Morokuma-Matsui, K., Yajima, H., & Abe, M. 2025, MNRAS, 539, 1834

    2025

  34. [42]

    P., Matthee, J., Kramarenko, I., et al

    Naidu, R. P., Matthee, J., Kramarenko, I., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2410.01874

    2024 arXiv

  35. [43]

    P., Pillepich, A., Springel, V ., et al

    Naiman, J. P., Pillepich, A., Springel, V ., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 477, 1206

    2018

  36. [44]

    2024, A&A, 686, A157

    Nelson, D., Pillepich, A., Ayromlou, M., et al. 2024, A&A, 686, A157

    2024

  37. [45]

    2018, MNRAS, 475, 624

    Nelson, D., Pillepich, A., Springel, V ., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 475, 624

    2018

  38. [46]

    Osterbrock, D. E. & Ferland, G. J. 2006, Astrophysics of gaseous nebulae and active galactic nuclei (University Science Books)

    2006

  39. [47]

    Overzier, R. A. 2016, The Astronomy and Astrophysics Review, 24

    2016

  40. [48]

    2018, MNRAS, 475, 648 Planck Collaboration, Aghanim, N., Akrami, Y ., et al

    Pillepich, A., Nelson, D., Hernquist, L., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 475, 648 Planck Collaboration, Aghanim, N., Akrami, Y ., et al. 2020, A&A, 641, A6

    2018

  41. [49]

    L., Gottumukkala, R., Heintz, K

    Pollock, C. L., Gottumukkala, R., Heintz, K. E., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.15779

    2025 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Robotham, A. S. G., Norberg, P., Driver, S. P., et al. 2011, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 416, 2640–2668

    2011

  43. [51]

    L., Shapley, A

    Sanders, R. L., Shapley, A. E., Topping, M. W., Reddy, N. A., & Brammer, G. B. 2024, ApJ, 962, 24

    2024

  44. [52]

    M., et al

    Schaye, J., Dalla Vecchia, C., Booth, C. M., et al. 2010, MNRAS, 402, 1536

    2010

  45. [53]

    2018, MNRAS, 475, 676

    Springel, V ., Pakmor, R., Pillepich, A., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 475, 676

    2018

  46. [54]

    A., Weaver, J

    Suess, K. A., Weaver, J. R., Price, S. H., et al. 2024, ApJ, 976, 101 Tepper-García, T. 2006, MNRAS, 369, 2025

    2024

  47. [55]

    E., Watson, D., et al

    Terp, C., Heintz, K. E., Watson, D., et al. 2024, A&A, 690, A70

    2024

  48. [56]

    2006, Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan, 58, 485–498

    Totani, T., Kawai, N., Kosugi, G., et al. 2006, Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan, 58, 485–498

    2006

  49. [57]

    2021, scipy/scipy: SciPy 1.6.3

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Burovski, E., et al. 2021, scipy/scipy: SciPy 1.6.3

    2021

  50. [58]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2511.19608

    Wang, X., Cantalupo, S., Wang, W., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2511.19608

    2025 arXiv

  51. [59]

    2025, MNRAS, 536, 27

    Witstok, J., Maiolino, R., Smit, R., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 536, 27

    2025

  52. [60]

    A., Bennett, J

    Witten, C., Oesch, P. A., Bennett, J. S., et al. 2025a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2511.05647

    arXiv

  53. [61]

    A., McClymont, W., et al

    Witten, C., Oesch, P. A., McClymont, W., et al. 2025b, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.06284

    arXiv

  54. [62]

    M., Gawiser, E., & Prochaska, J

    Wolfe, A. M., Gawiser, E., & Prochaska, J. X. 2005, Annual Review of Astron- omy and Astrophysics, 43, 861–918 Article number, page 13 of 13

    2005

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.