pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.21007 · v1 · pith:AUQO2V63new · submitted 2026-06-19 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

Clumpy Disk, Interloper, or Merger? Nature of a Distant Galaxy Pair at 5 kpc Projected Separation

Hajar Aziz , Vivian U , Archana Aravindan , Raymond P. Remigio , Gabriela Canalizo , Justin A. Kader , Marina Bianchin , Yiqing Song
show 3 more authors
Tianmu Gao Jeff Rich Rosalie McGurk
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 14:09 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA
keywords galaxy mergerJWST MIRIemission linesredshiftstar formationz ~ 1 galaxiesKeck NIRES
0
0 comments X

The pith

Keck spectra show a JWST source is two galaxies merging at 5 kpc projected separation and z ~ 0.92.

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

The paper establishes that a source appearing as a single spiral galaxy with a bulge in JWST MIRI images is instead a pair of galaxies at nearly identical redshifts. Distinct [N II] and H-alpha lines place one component at z = 0.9248 and the fainter central component at z = 0.9225, confirming a physical merger rather than a clumpy disk or line-of-sight interloper. A sympathetic reader cares because the result shows that photometric morphology alone cannot reliably classify galaxy structures at cosmic noon, and that resolved spectroscopy is required to measure merger-driven star formation correctly.

Core claim

The source consists of two galaxies whose spatially resolved peaks in the MIRI F1500W image produce separate sets of emission lines in Keck NIRES spectra; the northwest peak yields z = 0.9248 while the central peak yields z = 0.9225, placing the pair at a projected separation of approximately 5 kpc and classifying the system as a merger hosting merger-induced star formation on the basis of emission-line ratios from both NIRES and KCWI data.

What carries the argument

Two distinct sets of [N II] and H-alpha emission lines in the Keck NIRES spectra that assign separate redshifts to the two spatially resolved MIRI sources.

If this is right

  • Emission-line ratios indicate regions of active star formation driven by the ongoing merger.
  • Photometric appearance in JWST images alone cannot distinguish mergers from clumpy disks at z ~ 1.
  • Resolved spectroscopic follow-up is required to interpret the population of galaxies detected in deep JWST fields.
  • The measured redshift difference of 0.0023 corresponds to a line-of-sight velocity offset consistent with a bound pair.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Without spectra, a non-negligible fraction of compact sources in JWST MIRI fields may be misclassified as single clumpy galaxies.
  • The same method could be applied to other serendipitous high-redshift pairs to build a statistical sample of close mergers.
  • If such pairs are common, merger rates inferred from imaging catalogs at z ~ 1 would need upward revision.

Load-bearing premise

The two emission-line systems arise from the two different spatial sources rather than from line-of-sight projection or instrumental artifacts.

What would settle it

A spectrum or deeper image showing only a single redshift system or no spatial match between the line-emitting gas and the two MIRI peaks would falsify the merger interpretation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.21007 by Archana Aravindan, Gabriela Canalizo, Hajar Aziz, Jeff Rich, Justin A. Kader, Marina Bianchin, Raymond P. Remigio, Rosalie McGurk, Tianmu Gao, Vivian U, Yiqing Song.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: (Left) HST ACS RGB color image of VV 340 in F435W and F814W filters. (Right) JWST MIRI RGB color image of VV 340 in F560W, F770W, and F1500W filters, with the galaxy of interest enclosed in the white circle. Faint emissions are barely visible in the HST image, but the galaxy appears quite red in the MIRI image. The goal of this paper is to determine whether such MIR morphological shifts represent a chance … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: HST images of the galaxy in F336W, F435W, F673N, and F814W filters; JWST MIRI images of the galaxy in F560W, F770W, and F1500W filters. The source is barely discernible in the HST filters, with faint traces of spiral arms observed in the F814W image. We observe a disk shape with a central bulge and spiral arms in F560W and F770W, with a faint second source. The galaxy appears brighter at increasing wavelen… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: MIRI F1500W image overlaid with the Keck NIRES (green) slit position (slit center = R.A. (J2000) 14:57:00.1373; Dec (J2000) +24:36:45.633; PA = 30◦ ) and KCWI (orange) FOV targeting “lil gal”. The data was reduced using the KCWI Data Reduction Pipeline (DRP)15 and flux calibrated with the standard star Feige 34. 3. MORPHOLOGICAL ANALYSIS We conduct a morphological analysis of “lil gal” to determine its str… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: GALFIT results of the MIRI image filters in F560W, F770W, and F1500W (top to bottom). Each row includes the data input image, the modeled components, and the residuals. Each model includes a S´ersic profile enclosing the central disk and two Gaussian profiles for the central bulge and NW companion. 4. PHOTOMETRY MEASUREMENTS To determine the appropriate aperture size for mea￾suring the photometry of “lil g… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Photometry results from the total system for all HST and JWST images (red), fitted with SED templates from M. J. I. Brown et al. (2014), with NGC 5194 (bold) shown as the best-matching template. While the median redshift across all the templates is 0.913, the photome￾try is best matched by SF and SF/AGN composite templates at z ∼ 0.92. Decomposed fluxes from the NW component (green) and SE component (purpl… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Keck NIRES spectra plot of the system from order 5 (left), order 4 (middle), and order 3 (right). Each order’s extraction is split according to the total system (top row), the NW companion (middle row), and the SE galaxy (bottom row). Horizontal lines overlaid on images of the 2D spectra on the left represent the selected regions for extraction. Emission lines corresponding to z = 0.9248 are detected, prim… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Order 5 NIRES spectrum extracted from the total system (top), NW component (middle), and SE component (bottom). The total extraction and SE extraction is fitted with a six-component compound Gaussian model for the two sets of distinct peaks corresponding to [N II] 6548 ˚A, Hα, and [N II] 6583 ˚A at z = 0.9225 (orange) and z = 0.9248 (blue). The NW extraction is fitted with a six-component Gaussian extracti… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: KCWI spectra of the total system, highlighting the Hβ, [O III] 4959 ˚A, and [O III] 5007 ˚A emission lines, corresponding to z ∼ 0.9235. For presentation purposes, we applied sigma-clipping of σ = 2.5 at 5 iterations to clip the prominent skylines surrounding the emission lines. ilarly, the low n from the F1500W model is likely at￾tributed to the prominent NW companion source. Other studies have classified… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Spatial profiles along the NIRES slit at the redshifted wavelengths of Hα (left), [N II] 6583 ˚A (middle), and He I 10830 ˚A (right). For each line, we integrate the flux in a narrow wavelength window centered on the line position at z = 0.9248 (red) and z = 0.9225 (blue), then sum along the wavelength axis to obtain flux as a function of spatial row along the slit. Dashed vertical lines mark the peak of e… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: BPT diagram of log([N II] 6583 ˚A/Hα) and log([O III] 5007 ˚A/Hβ) of the system (red), NW compo￾nent (green), and SE component (purple), determined from NIRES and KCWI spectra. The theoretical classification bounds define the AGN (blue) and Hii SF (black) ionization mechanisms (L. J. Kewley et al. 2001; G. Kauffmann et al. 2003), plotted with the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) Data Release 16 (gray). The… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present the morphological, photometric, and spectroscopic properties of a z ~ 1 galaxy, "lil gal", serendipitously detected in JWST Mid Infrared Instrument (MIRI) images of nearby galaxy VV 340. In the MIRI F560W and F770W images, we identify what appears to be a spiral galaxy with a central bulge. However, in the F1500W image, a second peak appears ~0.7" northwest (NW) from the central bulge, calling into question the nature of this source as a clumpy disk, a high-redshift interloper, or a galaxy merger. Multi-band analyses of the three MIRI and four Hubble Space Telescope (HST) images suggest a photometric redshift of ~0.92. Spectroscopic analyses of data from the Keck Near-Infrared Echellette Spectrometer (NIRES) reveal two sets of [N II] and H-alpha emission lines corresponding to the two observed sources. A redshift of z = 0.9248 is identified for the NW companion. Fainter emission lines are identified from the underlying galaxy at z = 0.9225, suggesting a merging galaxy pair at a projected separation of ~5 kpc. From the emission line ratios from Keck NIRES and Keck Cosmic Web Imager (KCWI) spectra, we classify the system as hosting regions of active star formation, likely attributed to merger-induced starburst activity. The results demonstrate the necessity of resolved, spectroscopic follow-up analyses of galaxies found in deep JWST images to disentangle the role of galaxy mergers from clumpy disk galaxies at z ~ 1 to cosmic noon and beyond.

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.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper presents multi-wavelength (MIRI, HST, NIRES, KCWI) observations of a serendipitous z~1 source ('lil gal') detected in JWST imaging of VV 340. Photometric analysis yields z_phot~0.92; NIRES spectroscopy detects two distinct [N II]/Hα systems at z=0.9248 (brighter, assigned to NW peak) and z=0.9225 (fainter, assigned to central source), interpreted as a physical merger pair at ~5 kpc projected separation rather than a clumpy disk or interloper, with line ratios indicating merger-induced star formation.

Significance. If the spatial-spectral association is robust, the result supplies a concrete, spectroscopically confirmed example of a close-pair merger at cosmic noon and illustrates the value of resolved follow-up for interpreting complex JWST morphologies; the multi-instrument redshift consistency is a strength.

major comments (1)
  1. [Spectroscopic analyses] Spectroscopic analyses section (and abstract): the central merger claim rests on mapping the brighter z=0.9248 lines to the NW MIRI peak and the fainter z=0.9225 lines to the central source. No 2D spectral spatial profiles, slit-position overlay on the MIRI image, or extraction-aperture verification is described, leaving open the possibility that the velocity components arise from line-of-sight projection, internal kinematics, or blending within the 0.7″ separation; this directly affects the weakest assumption flagged in the stress test.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: omits any quantitative details on line deblending, flux calibration, or contaminant assessment for the NIRES and KCWI spectra.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract and results: the statement that line ratios classify the system as hosting merger-induced star formation is not supported by tabulated ratios or diagnostic diagrams in the provided text.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thorough review and constructive feedback on our manuscript. We address the major comment point by point below and agree that additional documentation of the spectroscopic analysis will strengthen the paper.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Spectroscopic analyses] Spectroscopic analyses section (and abstract): the central merger claim rests on mapping the brighter z=0.9248 lines to the NW MIRI peak and the fainter z=0.9225 lines to the central source. No 2D spectral spatial profiles, slit-position overlay on the MIRI image, or extraction-aperture verification is described, leaving open the possibility that the velocity components arise from line-of-sight projection, internal kinematics, or blending within the 0.7″ separation; this directly affects the weakest assumption flagged in the stress test.

    Authors: We agree that the current manuscript does not provide explicit 2D spectral spatial profiles, a slit-position overlay on the MIRI image, or detailed extraction-aperture verification. The assignment of the brighter z=0.9248 system to the NW peak and the fainter z=0.9225 system to the central source is based on the relative line fluxes matching the observed MIRI morphology and the 0.7 arcsec spatial offset. To address this concern directly, we will add a new figure to the revised manuscript showing the NIRES slit position overlaid on the MIRI F1500W image, along with a description of the extraction apertures and any 2D profile information available from the data. We will also expand the text in the spectroscopic analyses section to clarify why blending or internal kinematics are less likely given the distinct spatial peaks and small velocity offset. These additions will be incorporated in the revision. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity in direct spectroscopic redshift measurements

full rationale

The paper's central claims rest on direct measurements: MIRI imaging identifies two spatial peaks separated by ~0.7", and Keck NIRES spectra detect two distinct sets of [N II] and H-alpha emission lines yielding redshifts z=0.9248 (NW) and z=0.9225 (central), with the ~5 kpc projected separation following from standard angular-diameter distance at the measured redshift. These are laboratory wavelength comparisons with no equations, fitted parameters, or self-citations that reduce the result to its inputs by construction. The mapping of lines to sources is an interpretive step, but the paper presents it as an observational association rather than a derived prediction. No patterns of self-definitional loops, fitted-input predictions, or load-bearing self-citations appear. The analysis is self-contained against external spectroscopic benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The claim rests on standard domain assumptions in galaxy spectroscopy and photometry; no free parameters are fitted to produce the reported redshifts or separation, and no new entities are postulated.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Emission lines detected in NIRES spectra are correctly identified as [N II] and H-alpha at the stated redshifts
    Invoked when converting observed wavelengths to the two reported redshifts; standard in near-IR galaxy spectroscopy.
  • domain assumption Photometric redshift from combined MIRI and HST bands is reliable enough to guide spectroscopic targeting
    Used to place the system at z~0.92 before spectroscopy confirmed the values.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5890 in / 1489 out tokens · 28869 ms · 2026-06-26T14:09:22.625613+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

77 extracted references · 76 canonical work pages · 7 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 766, 105, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/766/2/105

    Adamo, A., ¨Ostlin, G., Bastian, N., et al. 2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 766, 105, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/766/2/105

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/766/2/105 2013

  2. [2]

    2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 975, 60, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad702b Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T

    Bohn, T. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 975, 60, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad702b Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ ocz, B. M., et al. 2018, The Astronomical Journal, 156, 123, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/...

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad702b 2024

  3. [3]

    , keywords =

    Baldwin, J. A., Phillips, M. M., & Terlevich, R. 1981, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 93, 5, doi: 10.1086/130766

    work page doi:10.1086/130766 1981

  4. [4]

    2023, astropy/photutils: 1.8.0, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7946442

    Bradley, L. 2023, astropy/photutils: 1.8.0, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7946442

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.7946442 2023

  5. [5]

    Brown, M. J. I., Moustakas, J., Smith, J. D. T., et al. 2014, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 212, 18, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/212/2/18

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/212/2/18 2014

  6. [6]

    2023, JWST Calibration Pipeline, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7714020 Calder´ on-Castillo, P., & Smith, R

    Bushouse, H., Eisenhamer, J., Dencheva, N., et al. 2023, JWST Calibration Pipeline, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7714020 Calder´ on-Castillo, P., & Smith, R. 2024, A&A, 691, A82, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450473

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.7714020 2023

  7. [7]

    Star Formation Rate Determinations

    Calzetti, D. 2007, Star Formation Rate Determinations, arXiv, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.0707.0467

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.0707.0467 2007

  8. [8]

    and Livio, Mario and Pringle, J

    Charlot, S., & Longhetti, M. 2001, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 323, 887, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04260.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04260.x 2001

  9. [9]

    T., et al

    Cibinel, A., Daddi, E., Sargent, M. T., et al. 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 485, 5631, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz690

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz690 2019

  10. [10]

    2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 520, 2180, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3791

    Claeyssens, A., Adamo, A., Richard, J., et al. 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 520, 2180, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3791

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3791 2023

  11. [11]

    2010 , title =

    Conselice, C. J., & Arnold, J. 2009, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 397, 208, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14959.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14959.x 2009

  12. [12]

    2003, The Astronomical Journal, 126, 1183, doi: 10.1086/377318 De Propris, R., Conselice, C

    Papovich, C. 2003, The Astronomical Journal, 126, 1183, doi: 10.1086/377318 De Propris, R., Conselice, C. J., Liske, J., et al. 2007, The Astrophysical Journal, 666, 212, doi: 10.1086/520488 Denicol´ o, G., Terlevich, R., & Terlevich, E. 2002, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 330, 69, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05041.x Dom´ ınguez, A....

    work page doi:10.1086/377318 2003

  13. [13]

    P., Windhorst, R

    Driver, S. P., Windhorst, R. A., & Griffiths, R. E. 1995, The Astrophysical Journal, 453, 48, doi: 10.1086/176369

    work page doi:10.1086/176369 1995

  14. [14]

    J., Mundy, C., et al

    Duncan, K., Conselice, C. J., Mundy, C., et al. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 876, 110, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab148a D´ ıaz-Santos, T., Armus, L., Charmandaris, V., et al. 2017, The Astrophysical Journal, 846, 32, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa81d7

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab148a 2019

  15. [15]

    2024, astropy/specutils: v1.19.0, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.14042033

    Earl, N., Tollerud, E., O’Steen, R., et al. 2024, astropy/specutils: v1.19.0, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.14042033

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.14042033 2024

  16. [16]

    2007, A&A, 468, 33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20077525

    Elbaz, D., Daddi, E., Le Borgne, D., et al. 2007, A&A, 468, 33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20077525

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20077525 2007

  17. [17]

    S., et al

    Elbaz, D., Dickinson, M., Hwang, H. S., et al. 2011, A&A, 533, A119, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201117239

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201117239 2011

  18. [18]

    L., Mendel, J

    Ellison, S. L., Mendel, J. T., Patton, D. R., & Scudder, J. M. 2013, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 435, 3627, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt1562

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt1562 2013

  19. [19]

    L., Patton, D

    Ellison, S. L., Patton, D. R., Simard, L., & McConnachie, A. W. 2008, AJ, 135, 1877, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/135/5/1877

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1088/0004-6256/135/5/1877 2008

  20. [20]

    J., et al

    Ferreira, L., Adams, N., Conselice, C. J., et al. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 938, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac947c

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac947c 2022

  21. [21]

    J., Sazonova, E., et al

    Ferreira, L., Conselice, C. J., Sazonova, E., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 955, 94, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acec76 Floc’h, E. L., Papovich, C., Dole, H., et al. 2005, The Astrophysical Journal, 632, 169, doi: 10.1086/432789

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acec76 2023

  22. [22]

    E., Smail, I., Chapman, S

    Geach, J. E., Smail, I., Chapman, S. C., et al. 2007, The Astrophysical Journal, 655, L9, doi: 10.1086/511676 17

    work page doi:10.1086/511676 2007

  23. [23]

    1998, The Astrophysical Journal, 498, 579, doi: 10.1086/305576

    Genzel, R., Lutz, D., Sturm, E., et al. 1998, The Astrophysical Journal, 498, 579, doi: 10.1086/305576

    work page doi:10.1086/305576 1998

  24. [24]

    Koekemoer, A. M. 2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 757, 120, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/757/2/120

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/757/2/120 2012

  25. [25]

    C., Bell, E

    Guo, Y., Ferguson, H. C., Bell, E. F., et al. 2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 800, 39, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/800/1/39

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/800/1/39 2015

  26. [26]

    K., Domingue, D., Cao, C., & Huang, J.-s

    He, C., Xu, C. K., Domingue, D., Cao, C., & Huang, J.-s. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 261, 34, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac73ec

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac73ec 2022

  27. [27]

    B., Casey, C

    Hung, C.-L., Sanders, D. B., Casey, C. M., et al. 2014, The Astrophysical Journal, 791, 63, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/791/1/63

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/791/1/63 2014

  28. [28]

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

    work page doi:10.1109/mcse.2007.55 2007

  29. [29]

    I., Rinaldi, P., & Kokorev, V

    Iani, E., Caputi, K. I., Rinaldi, P., & Kokorev, V. I. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 940, L24, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aca014

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aca014 2022

  30. [30]

    A., U, V., Barcos-Mu˜ noz, L., et al

    Kader, J. A., U, V., Barcos-Mu˜ noz, L., et al. 2026, Science, 391, 911, doi: 10.1126/science.adp8989

    work page doi:10.1126/science.adp8989 2026

  31. [31]

    S., Sanders, D

    Kartaltepe, J. S., Sanders, D. B., Le Floc’h, E., et al. 2010, The Astrophysical Journal, 709, 572, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/709/2/572

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/709/2/572 2010

  32. [32]

    Nature Astronomy 2:652–655

    Kauffmann, G., Heckman, T. M., Tremonti, C., et al. 2003, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 346, 1055, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2003.07154.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2003.07154.x 2003

  33. [33]

    2015, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 452, 2845, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv1500

    Kaviraj, S., Devriendt, J., Dubois, Y., et al. 2015, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 452, 2845, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv1500

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1500 2015

  34. [34]

    C., Keel, W

    Kennicutt, Jr., R. C., Keel, W. C., & Blaha, C. A. 1989, The Astronomical Journal, 97, 1022, doi: 10.1086/115046

    work page doi:10.1086/115046 1989

  35. [35]

    J., Dopita, M

    Kewley, L. J., Dopita, M. A., Sutherland, R. S., Heisler, C. A., & Trevena, J. 2001, The Astrophysical Journal, 556, 121, doi: 10.1086/321545

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1086/321545 2001

  36. [36]

    J., Geller, M

    Kewley, L. J., Geller, M. J., & Barton, E. J. 2006a, The Astronomical Journal, 131, 2004, doi: 10.1086/500295

    work page doi:10.1086/500295 2004

  37. [37]

    Hydrodynamic models , author =

    Kewley, L. J., Groves, B., Kauffmann, G., & Heckman, T. 2006b, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 372, 961, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10859.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10859.x 2006

  38. [38]

    Kormendy, J., & Kennicutt, Jr., R. C. 2004, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 42, 603, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.42.053102.134024

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.42.053102.134024 2004

  39. [39]

    C., Rosa, D

    Krabbe, A. C., Rosa, D. A., Dors, Jr, O. L., et al. 2014, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 437, 1155, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt1913

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt1913 2014

  40. [40]

    N., Silverman, J

    Lackner, C. N., Silverman, J. D., Salvato, M., et al. 2014, The Astronomical Journal, 148, 137, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/148/6/137

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/148/6/137 2014

  41. [41]

    2006, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 448, 907, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20053602

    Lamareille, F., Contini, T., Brinchmann, J., et al. 2006, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 448, 907, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20053602

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20053602 2006

  42. [42]

    G., Alonso, S., Mesa, V., & O’Mill, A

    Lambas, D. G., Alonso, S., Mesa, V., & O’Mill, A. L. 2012, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 539, A45, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201117900

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201117900 2012

  43. [43]

    M., Jonsson, P., Cox, T

    Lotz, J. M., Jonsson, P., Cox, T. J., et al. 2011, The Astrophysical Journal, 742, 103, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/742/2/103

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/742/2/103 2011

  44. [44]

    M., Davis, M., Faber, S

    Lotz, J. M., Davis, M., Faber, S. M., et al. 2008, The Astrophysical Journal, 672, 177, doi: 10.1086/523659

    work page doi:10.1086/523659 2008

  45. [45]

    Lutz, D., Spoon, H. W. W., Rigopoulou, D., Moorwood, A. F. M., & Genzel, R. 1998, The Astrophysical Journal, 505, L103, doi: 10.1086/311614 L´ opez-Hern´ andez, J., Terlevich, E., Terlevich, R., et al. 2013, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 430, 472, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sts658

    work page doi:10.1086/311614 1998

  46. [46]

    J., Mortlock, A., et al

    Margalef-Bentabol, B., Conselice, C. J., Mortlock, A., et al. 2016, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 461, 2728, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw1451

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw1451 2016

  47. [47]

    D., Bournaud, F., Martig, M., et al

    Matteo, P. D., Bournaud, F., Martig, M., et al. 2008, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 492, 31, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200809480

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:200809480 2008

  48. [48]

    D., Combes, F., Melchior, A.-L., & Semelin, B

    Matteo, P. D., Combes, F., Melchior, A.-L., & Semelin, B. 2007, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 468, 61, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20066959

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20066959 2007

  49. [49]

    Mattila, S., Meikle, W. P. S., & Greimel, R. 2004, New Astronomy Reviews, 48, 595, doi: 10.1016/j.newar.2003.12.033

    work page doi:10.1016/j.newar.2003.12.033 2004

  50. [50]

    2007, The Astrophysical Journal, 659, L9, doi: 10.1086/516821 M´ arquez, I., Masegosa, J., Moles, M., et al

    Mattila, S., V¨ ais¨ anen, P., Farrah, D., et al. 2007, The Astrophysical Journal, 659, L9, doi: 10.1086/516821 M´ arquez, I., Masegosa, J., Moles, M., et al. 2002, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 393, 389, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20021036

    work page doi:10.1086/516821 2007

  51. [51]

    F., Buschkamp, P., Genzel, R., et al

    Newman, S. F., Buschkamp, P., Genzel, R., et al. 2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 781, 21, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/781/1/21

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/781/1/21 2013

  52. [52]

    Star Formation in AEGIS Field Galaxies since z=1.1 : The Dominance of Gradually Declining Star Formation, and the Main Sequence of Star-Forming Galaxies

    Noeske, K. G., Weiner, B. J., Faber, S. M., et al. 2007, The Astrophysical Journal, 660, L43, doi: 10.1086/517926

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1086/517926 2007

  53. [53]

    M., Sebastian, B., Aravindan, A., et al

    Ogle, P. M., Sebastian, B., Aravindan, A., et al. 2025, ApJ, 983, 98, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adb71a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adb71a 2025

  54. [54]

    E., & Ferland, G

    Osterbrock, D. E., & Ferland, G. J. 2006, Astrophysics of gaseous nebulae and active galactic nuclei. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006agna.book.....O

    2006

  55. [55]

    R., Carlberg, R

    Patton, D. R., Carlberg, R. G., Marzke, R. O., et al. 2000, The Astrophysical Journal, 536, 153, doi: 10.1086/308907

    work page doi:10.1086/308907 2000

  56. [56]

    Y., Ho, L

    Peng, C. Y., Ho, L. C., Impey, C. D., & Rix, H.-W. 2002, The Astronomical Journal, 124, 266, doi: 10.1086/340952 18

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1086/340952 2002

  57. [57]

    Y., Ho, L

    Peng, C. Y., Ho, L. C., Impey, C. D., & Rix, H.-W. 2010, The Astronomical Journal, 139, 2097, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/139/6/2097

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1088/0004-6256/139/6/2097 2010

  58. [58]

    Pettini, M., & Pagel, B. E. J. 2004, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 348, L59, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07591.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07591.x 2004

  59. [59]

    2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 516, 4922, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2557

    Renaud, F., Segovia Otero, ´A., & Agertz, O. 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 516, 4922, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2557

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac2557 2022

  60. [60]

    A., Kewley, L

    Rich, J. A., Kewley, L. J., & Dopita, M. A. 2015, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 221, 28, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/221/2/28

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/221/2/28 2015

  61. [61]

    Rupke, D. S. N., Veilleux, S., & Baker, A. J. 2008, The Astrophysical Journal, 674, 172, doi: 10.1086/522363

    work page doi:10.1086/522363 2008

  62. [62]

    2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 757, 13, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/757/1/13

    Sajina, A., Yan, L., Fadda, D., Dasyra, K., & Huynh, M. 2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 757, 13, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/757/1/13

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/757/1/13 2012

  63. [63]

    B., Soifer, B

    Sanders, D. B., Soifer, B. T., Elias, J. H., et al. 1988, The Astrophysical Journal, 325, 74, doi: 10.1086/165983

    work page doi:10.1086/165983 1988

  64. [64]

    2015, A&A, 575, A74, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201425017

    Schreiber, C., Pannella, M., Elbaz, D., et al. 2015, A&A, 575, A74, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201425017

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201425017 2015

  65. [65]

    G., Aussel, H., et al

    Scoville, N., Abraham, R. G., Aussel, H., et al. 2007, ApJS, 172, 38, doi: 10.1086/516580

    work page doi:10.1086/516580 2007

  66. [66]

    H., Papovich, C., P´ erez-Gonz´ alez, P

    Shi, Y., Rieke, G. H., Papovich, C., P´ erez-Gonz´ alez, P. G., & Floc’h, E. L. 2006, The Astrophysical Journal, 645, 199, doi: 10.1086/504027

    work page doi:10.1086/504027 2006

  67. [67]

    , keywords =

    Storey, P. J., & Zeippen, C. J. 2000, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 312, 813, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2000.03184.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2000.03184.x 2000

  68. [68]

    P., Sobral, D., Swinbank, A

    Stott, J. P., Sobral, D., Swinbank, A. M., et al. 2014, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 443, 2695, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu1343

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1343 2014

  69. [69]

    Tan, V. Y. Y., Muzzin, A., Sarrouh, G. T. E., et al. 2025, ApJ, 994, 94, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae0ffe U, V., Sanders, D. B., Mazzarella, J. M., et al. 2012, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 203, 9, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/203/1/9 U, V., Medling, A. M., Inami, H., et al. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 871, 166, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaf1c2

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae0ffe 2025

  70. [70]

    Veilleux, S., & Osterbrock, D. E. 1987, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 63, 295, doi: 10.1086/191166

    work page doi:10.1086/191166 1987

  71. [71]

    E., et al

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261, doi: 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2 V¨ ais¨ anen, P., Reunanen, J., Kotilainen, J., et al. 2017, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 471, 2059, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1685

    work page doi:10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2 2020

  72. [72]

    J., et al

    Weedman, D., Polletta, M., Lonsdale, C. J., et al. 2006, The Astrophysical Journal, 653, 101, doi: 10.1086/508647

    work page doi:10.1086/508647 2006

  73. [73]

    E., Franx, M., Leja, J., et al

    Whitaker, K. E., Franx, M., Leja, J., et al. 2014, The Astrophysical Journal, 795, 104, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/795/2/104

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/795/2/104 2014

  74. [74]

    C., Henderson, C

    Wilson, J. C., Henderson, C. P., Herter, T. L., et al. 2004, in Ground-based Instrumentation for Astronomy, Vol. 5492 (SPIE), 1295–1305, doi: 10.1117/12.550925

    work page doi:10.1117/12.550925 2004

  75. [75]

    Wright, E. L. 2006, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 118, 1711, doi: 10.1086/510102

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1086/510102 2006

  76. [76]

    J., & Sanders, D

    Yuan, T.-T., Kewley, L. J., & Sanders, D. B. 2010, The Astrophysical Journal, 709, 884, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/709/2/884

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/709/2/884 2010

  77. [77]

    M., et al

    Zanella, A., Le Floc’h, E., Harrison, C. M., et al. 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 489, 2792, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2099

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2099 2019