Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 119 references

Local photoionization feedback effects on galaxies

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that a galaxy's own ionizing radiation, modeled in an optically thin approximation, suppresses stellar mass growth by about 20 per cent by z=0 and roughly halves HI mass in simulated dwarf, Milky Way-like, and massive…

desk verdict A competent, honest application of an existing LPF model to three NIHAO galaxies; the mass-dependent inflow temperature result is new, but the headline 20% M* and 50% HI numbers need a sensitivity run before they are robust. read the letter →

arxiv 1909.00832 v1 pith:AMU7WKHP submitted 2019-09-02 astro-ph.GA

Aura Obreja (1 , 2) , Andrea V. Macciò (2 , 3) , Benjamin Moster (1 , 4) , Silviu M. Udrescu (2) , Tobias Buck (5)
show 10 more authors
Rahul Kannan (6) Aaron A. Dutton (2) Marvin Blank (2 7) ((1) Universitäts-Sternwarte München (2) NYU Abu Dhabi (3) Max-Planck-Institut für Astronomie (4) Max-Planck-Institut für Astrophysik (5) Leibniz-Institute for Astrophysics Potsdam (6) Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (7) Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel)
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords galaxyformationlocalphotoionizationfeedbackcosmologicalhydrodynamicalsimulationscircumgalacticmediumHIcontentultravioletbackgroundopticallythinapproximationGASOLINE2
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper asks what happens to galaxies when the ionizing radiation produced by a galaxy's own stars and hot gas is added on top of the standard uniform ultraviolet background in cosmological simulations. It reports that this 'local photoionization feedback' acts as a preemptive brake on star formation: in three simulated galaxies spanning dwarf to massive-spiral mass, the final stellar mass is reduced by about 20 per cent relative to runs with only the uniform background, and the neutral hydrogen (HI) mass is roughly halved. The field also heats the gas flowing into galaxies, raising the median inflow temperature by 0.11 dex in the dwarf and 0.95 dex in the massive spiral, while leaving the inflow rate nearly unchanged. A sympathetic reader would care because most galaxy simulations omit this local field, and the predicted changes affect observable quantities such as HI content, stellar disc structure, and the temperature of gas in and around galaxies.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is the local photoionization field (LPF) computation added to the GASOLINE2 SPH code. Five source terms are summed at each gas particle: young stars and supernova remnants (with a 5 per cent escape fraction), post-AGB stars (100 per cent escape fraction), and hot gas in three temperature bins around $10^{6}$, $10^{7}$ and $10^{8}$ K for Bremsstrahlung emission. Each contribution scales as the inverse square of the distance to the source, and an exponential attenuation factor exp(1-n/n0) with n0=0.1 $cm^{-3}$ shields the densest gas. The five fields are evaluated on the gravity tree at negligible extra cost, and enter the photoionization and photoheating rates of hydrogen, helium, and metals alongside the chosen ultraviolet background. This machinery converts a spatially uniform radiation assumption into an inhomogeneous one, and it is the heating it deposits in the halo gas that drives the paper's results.

What would settle it

Measure the escape fraction of ionizing radiation from a Milky Way-mass galaxy at low redshift; a value several times higher or lower than 0.05 would shift the predicted stellar-mass suppression and inflow-temperature increase outside the paper's quoted ranges. Alternatively, search for Lyman-$\alpha$ absorption from ~$10^{4}$ K gas at 0.1–0.4 virial radii around massive spirals at z~0: the LPF model predicts almost none, so a detection of such gas would rule out the strong-heating picture.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that an optically thin treatment of local ionizing sources—young massive stars and supernova remnants, post-AGB stars, and X-ray emitting hot gas—changes the thermal state of the gas that would otherwise cool onto galaxies, and thereby changes the galaxies that form. The specific findings are that at z=0 the local radiation field suppresses stellar mass growth by ~20 per cent for all three galaxies, reduces HI mass by roughly a factor of two, raises the median temperature of inflowing gas from 0.11 dex (dwarf) to 0.95 dex (massive spiral) without significantly altering the inflow rate, and shifts the galaxy/CGM boundary inward by raising the equilibrium temperature at that interface. As a result the HI discs become thinner and less extended, the fraction of cold star-forming gas drops by at least half, and the distribution of HI column densities shifts to lower values. The choice between two ultraviolet background models matters mainly for the dwarf galaxy, where the stronger background mimics a weaker background plus the local field.

Load-bearing premise

The results rest on the assumption that a 5 per cent escape fraction for star-forming radiation plus an optically thin inverse-square falloff represents how ionizing photons actually leave star-forming regions and cross the halo, because any substantial change in that escape fraction would change the size of the claimed heating and stellar-mass suppression.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Galaxy simulations that include only a uniform ultraviolet background likely overproduce stellar mass by ~20 per cent and HI mass by up to a factor of two relative to runs that include the galaxy's own radiation field.
  • The local field's main effect is to warm the circumgalactic gas and move the boundary between cold disc gas and hot halo inward, implying less cold gas in the halo and thinner, smaller HI discs.
  • For galaxies near and above the Milky Way mass, the choice of ultraviolet background model has little effect on stellar mass, so the local field, not the background, is what matters there.
  • The predicted lack of ~10^4 K gas in the haloes of massive spirals at 0.1–0.4 rvir provides a direct observational target for Lyman-alpha absorption studies.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the true escape fraction of ionizing photons from star-forming regions differs substantially from the assumed 0.05, all the quoted magnitudes scale roughly linearly; an order-of-magnitude change would push the 20 per cent suppression and 0.95 dex heating outside their quoted ranges. This is a testable calibration rather than a separate prediction.
  • Because the optically thin approximation ignores line-of-sight absorption, the model likely overestimates the radiation field in shadowed dense regions and underestimates it where gas is illuminated from many directions; full radiative-transfer runs on the same three galaxies would bracket the error.
  • The result that inflow rates stay nearly constant while inflow temperatures rise suggests that this feedback works by raising the cooling time rather than by throttling accretion; a similar dichotomy may help interpret 'preventive' versus 'ejective' feedback in other simulations.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. This paper implements the optically thin local photoionization field (LPF) model of Kannan et al. (2014, 2016) in the SPH code GASOLINE2 and applies it to three zoom-in NIHAO galaxies spanning halo masses from ~10^11 to ~10^12.5 Msun. The model adds photoionization and photoheating from young star-forming regions, post-AGB stars, and hot gas on top of the FG09 UVB, with density-dependent attenuation. The authors compare each galaxy under HM12, FG09, and FG09+LPF and report that LPF suppresses z=0 stellar mass by ~20 per cent, reduces HI masses by roughly half, raises median CGM inflow temperatures by 0.11-0.95 dex without strongly changing inflow rates, reshapes HI discs and column-density distributions, and modestly increases bulge-to-total ratios. They also test UVB sensitivity by comparing HM12 and FG09.

Significance. The topic is timely: local radiation feedback is usually neglected in cosmological SPH simulations, and the study is one of only a few to apply the Kannan et al. model to galaxy-formation zoom-ins. The implementation on the gravity tree is computationally economical, the choice of three halo masses is useful, and the validation against the Milky Way ISRF at 8 kpc gives a welcome anchor. If the headline numbers are robust, the paper would support the view that ionizing radiation from local sources acts as a preemptive feedback that suppresses star formation and reshapes the CGM and HI structure of L* galaxies. The main caveats are the unvaried model parameters (fesc,SFR=0.05, n0=0.1 cm^-3, density-only attenuation) and the single realization per galaxy, which currently make the quantitative claims model-dependent rather than directly falsifiable.

major comments (3)
  1. [§5.1, Table 2] The text and abstract report a ~20 per cent suppression of z=0 stellar mass, but the values in Table 2 imply only 11-13 per cent for all three galaxies (log M*/M⊙ = 8.98->8.93, 10.69->10.63, 11.29->11.23 for FG09 vs FG09+LPF). If the 20 per cent figure refers to a different epoch or an averaged quantity, this should be stated explicitly; as written, the headline number is inconsistent with the table.
  2. [§3, Eqs. (8)-(9) and attenuation after Eq. (14)] The central quantitative results scale linearly with the adopted escape fractions (fesc,SFR=0.05, fesc,os=1.0) and with the density-only shielding exp(1-n/n0); none of these parameters is varied or calibrated here. The paper itself notes that a Sobolev-like column-density attenuation would be more physical. Because a factor of two change in these parameters directly changes photoheating and hence the equilibrium temperature that drives the claimed 20 per cent mass suppression and inflow-temperature increases, the headline claims need a sensitivity test (e.g., fesc,SFR = 0.025 and 0.1, or a column-based attenuation) before they can be presented as more than conditional outcomes of this particular parameter choice.
  3. [§5.1, §5.2, Figures 3 and 4, Table 2] Each galaxy is represented by a single realization, and stochastic variations in star formation and feedback are large (the SNe bubble morphology in Figure 8 is explicitly stochastic). The apparent uniformity of the mass suppression across three galaxies cannot be distinguished from run-to-run scatter without multiple initial conditions. The paper acknowledges the need for a statistical sample, but the central claims would be strengthened by at least one repeat run or by explicit bootstrap or error estimates.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract and Section 5.1] There are several typos: 'halfed' should be 'halved', 'attentuated' should be 'attenuated', 'resonable' should be 'reasonable', and 'cuves' in the Figure 4 caption should be 'curves'.
  2. [§5.2.2, paragraph before Figure 11] The text says 'see Section 11' when referring to the shielding discussion; this should be 'see Section 3'.
  3. [§5 and Figure 2] The statement that Γ(HI) ∝ R^-2 is a 'prediction' should be softened, since it follows algebraically from the inverse-square assumption in Eq. (8) and the authors already note this in the text.
  4. [§3] The text alternates between 'five types' and 'three types' of local radiation sources; since the hot gas is split into three temperature bins, a consistent wording such as 'three source types, five spectral components' would remove ambiguity.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the headline LPF effects are simulation outcomes, and the one explicitly construction-derived profile is presented as such rather than as an independent prediction.

full rationale

The paper's central claims — the ~20 per cent stellar-mass suppression, the ~50 per cent HI reduction, and the increased inflow temperatures — are outputs of resimulations of three NIHAO galaxies with and without the local photoionization field, run from the same initial conditions. The LPF model parameters (fesc,SFR = 0.05, fesc,os = 1.0, n0 = 0.1 cm^-3, and the SEDs) are adopted from Kannan et al. (2014, 2016), which includes overlapping authors, but they are not fitted to the quantities later reported as results; the stellar masses, HI masses, and inflow temperatures are not used to calibrate any parameter. The paper does not invoke a uniqueness theorem, and it does not hide an ansatz behind a citation: the density-dependent shielding is explicitly described as an approximation, with the authors stating that a column-density-based Sobolev-like attenuation would be more physical and is left to future work. The only statement that could superficially look like a prediction-by-construction is the Γ(HI) ∝ R^-2 profile, but the paper itself identifies its origin as 'the assumption of the inverse squared distance factor in the local photoionization field' (Eq. 8). Because that profile is transparently presented as a direct consequence of the model ansatz rather than as an empirically derived or independently fitted result, it is not a circular step under the stated criteria. Parameter sensitivity to fesc or shielding is a legitimate correctness/robustness concern, but it is not circularity: changing these inputs would change the simulated outcome, which is exactly the behavior of a model with specified assumptions. Overall, the derivation chain is self-contained: the paper implements a stated model, runs simulations, and reports the resulting differences, with no fitted parameter being renamed as a prediction and no load-bearing conclusion resting solely on a self-citation.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims depend on a set of model choices inherited from Kannan et al. (2014, 2016): two escape fractions, a density threshold for shielding, an ad hoc attenuation function, and three temperature bins for hot gas. In addition, the star formation criteria (density and temperature thresholds) from the NIHAO setup are load-bearing for the stellar mass suppression result. No genuinely new entities are introduced.

free parameters (7)
  • fesc,SFR = 0.05
    Escape fraction of ionizing photons from star-forming regions; set to 5 per cent following Kannan et al. (2014). Directly sets normalization of local radiation field in Eq. 8.
  • fesc,os = 1.0
    Escape fraction for post-AGB stars; assumed 100 per cent (Section 3).
  • n0 (density threshold for attenuation) = 0.1 cm^-3
    Gas above this density sees an exponentially attenuated local field; chosen following Kannan et al. (2016) to allow a smooth transition.
  • attenuation functional form = exp(1 - n/n0)
    Ad hoc form for smooth transition; a more physical Sobolev-like column density attenuation is deferred to future work.
  • hot gas temperature bins = 10^6, 10^7, 10^8 K
    Three 1-dex bins approximate the Bremsstrahlung emission from hot gas (Eq. 10-11). The 10^6 K bin is the most relevant for L* galaxy halos.
  • star formation density threshold = 10 cm^-3
    NIHAO star formation criterion; gas must exceed this density to form stars. The LPF effect on stellar mass is sensitive to this threshold.
  • star formation temperature threshold = 15000 K
    Gas must be below this temperature to form stars in the NIHAO setup. The LPF heating is effective because it raises gas temperature above this limit.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Optically thin approximation for the local radiation field, with absorption captured by source-dependent escape fractions
    Section 3 states 'All calculations have been done in the optically thin approximation.' This ignores line-of-sight absorption except via fixed escape fractions.
  • domain assumption Fixed SED for young stars (<10 Myr), calibrated to the SFR-X-ray correlation (Cervino et al. 2002; Ranalli et al. 2003)
    Equation 8 assumes a single SED for all star-forming regions; the normalization is tied to the SFR scale.
  • domain assumption Fixed SED for post-AGB stars, constant in shape for stellar ages 200 Myr to 13 Gyr (Bruzual & Charlot 2003)
    Section 3 states 'the SED varies only in normalization while keeping roughly the same shape for stars with ages from 200 Myr to 13 Gyr.'
  • domain assumption Hot gas emission is modeled as thermal free-free from three temperature bins centered at 10^6, 10^7, 10^8 K
    Equations 10-12; gas with T<10^5.5 K does not contribute, and the SED shape is the bin-center temperature.
  • domain assumption UVB models HM12 and FG09 are accurate descriptions of the metagalactic background
    Used as inputs; the paper compares them but does not derive them.
  • domain assumption Atomic cooling and chemistry model of Shen et al. (2010), with non-equilibrium H/He and equilibrium metal cooling via CLOUDY tables
    Section 2 describes the cooling model used in GASOLINE2; the metal tables introduce an equilibrium/non-equilibrium inconsistency that is acknowledged.
  • ad hoc to paper Density-dependent attenuation of the local field uses exp(1-n/n0) for n>n0
    Section 3 introduces this functional form for smoother transition, replacing the step function used in Kannan et al. (2016).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Local photoionization feedback effects on galaxies." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/AMU7WKHP

@misc{pith2026190900832,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Local photoionization feedback effects on galaxies},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/AMU7WKHP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1909.00832}
}
abstract

We implement an optically thin approximation for the effects of the local radiation field from stars and hot gas on the gas heating and cooling in the N-body SPH code GASOLINE2. We resimulate three galaxies from the NIHAO project: one dwarf, one Milky Way-like and one massive spiral, and study what are the local radiation field effects on various galaxy properties. We also study the effects of varying the Ultra Violet Background (UVB) model, by running the same galaxies with two different UVBs. Galaxy properties at $z=0$ like stellar mass, stellar effective mass radius, HI mass, and radial extent of the HI disc, show significant changes between the models with and without the local radiation field, and smaller differences between the two UVB models. The intrinsic effect of the local radiation field through cosmic time is to increase the equilibrium temperature at the interface between the galaxies and their circumgalactic media (CGM), moving this boundary inwards, while leaving relatively unchanged the gas inflow rate. Consequently, the temperature of the inflow increases when considering the local radiation sources. This temperature increase is a function of total galaxy mass, with a median CGM temperature difference of one order of magnitude for the massive spiral. The local radiation field suppresses the stellar mass growth by $\sim$20 per cent by $z=0$ for all three galaxies, while the HI mass is roughly halfed. The differences in the gas phase diagrams, significantly impact the HI column densities, shifting their peaks in the distributions towards lower $N_{\rm HI}$.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1909.00832 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Example of spectra corresponding to the various radiation fields considered within the LPF model. mesh AREPO code (Springel 2010), and used to study the local pho￾toionization field effects on galaxy cluster scales in a few idealized simulations. This model takes into account three different types of sources producing high-energy ionizing photons, apart from the z￾dependent UVB of Faucher-Giguere et al. ` (2009): i)… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Top: face-on map of the LPF contribution to the HI photoion￾ization rate, Γ(HI)LPF, for the Milky Way like galaxy g8.26e11 at z = 0. At this redshift, the FG09 model predicts a rate of Γ(HI)UVB w 4 × 10−14s −1 . Center: mean radial profiles of Γ(HI) in the plane of the disc for the three simulated galaxies. The shaded regions mark the standard deviation, while the open dots give the corresponding virial radii (see … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Comparison between the evolution of stellar (top) and gas (center) mass, and star formation rates (bottom) for the galaxies g1.08e11 (left), g8.26e11 (center) and g2.79e12 (right) simulated with the HM12 (grey), FG09 (blue) and FG09+LPF (red) models. The solid and dashed lines in the central panels refer to cold (T <15000 K) and HI gas, respectively. In the bottom panels, the shaded blue areas give the star formatio… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (11 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Evolution of the inflow rates (top) and of the median temperatures of inflow gas (bottom) for the galaxies g1.08e11 (left), g8.26e11 (center) and g2.79e12 (right) run using the HM12 (grey), FG09 (blue) and FG09+LPF (red) models. The faint cuves in the background are th…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Evolution of the outflow rates (top) and of the median temperatures of outflow gas (bottom) for the galaxies g1.08e11 (left), g8.26e11 (center) and g2.79e12 (right) run using the HM12 (grey), FG09 (blue) and FG09+LPF (red) models. The faint cuves in the background are …
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The stellar mass surface density maps in face-on and edge-on perspective. The left panels show all the stars, while the right ones give only the maps corresponding to stars younger than 6 Gyr. The horizontal white bars represent the physical scale of 10 kpc. MNRAS 000,…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Mass distributions of stellar particle circularities jz/ jc for the z = 0 galaxies g1.08e11 (left), g8.26e11 (center) and g2.79e12 (right), in the HM12 (grey), FG09 (blue) and FG09+LPF (red) runs. The dashed and dotted curves give the distributions for the stars younge…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The HI column density maps in face-on and edge-on perspective. The pixel scales are given by the corresponding gas force softenings of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The distributions of gas temperatures in the HM12 (grey), FG09 (blue) and FG09+LPF (red) runs for the z = 0 galaxies g1.08e11 (left), g8.26e11 (center) and g2.79e12 (right). The light cyan shaded areas mark the cold (T<15000 K) gas phase, which is the reservoir for sta…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The temperature (top) and density (bottom) structure of the gas as a function of radius in the FG09 (blue) and FG09+LPF (red) runs for the z = 0 galaxies g1.08e11 (left), g8.26e11 (center) and g2.79e12 (right). The shaded regions mark the 10th to the 90th per cent qua…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: The phase diagrams of the FG09+LPF (black contours) models compared with the FG09 (2D color map) ones for the z = 0 galaxies g1.08e11 (left), g8.26e11 (center) and g2.79e12 (right). MNRAS 000, 000–000 (0000) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Comparison between the distributions of HI column densities of the FG09 model (dashed curves) and those of FG09+LPF (solid curves) at z = 0. The distributions have been constructed from the face-on images shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: The circular velocity profiles in the HM12 (grey), FG09 (blue) and FG09+LPF (red) runs for the z = 0 galaxies g1.08e11 (left), g8.26e11 (center) and g2.79e12 (right). The thick curves give the total circular velocity, while the dashed, solid and dotted-dashed curves s…
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: The line-of-sight edge-on rotational velocity profiles along the semi-major axis of the three z = 0 galaxies run with the HM12 (grey), FG09 (blue) and LPF (red) models. The top panels show the stellar velocity profiles, while the bottom ones give the HI gas. The trans…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

119 extracted references · 11 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    G., Navarro J

    Abadi M. G., Navarro J. F., Steinmetz M., Eke V. R., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1086/378316 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ApJ...597...21A 597, 21

    doi:10.1086/378316 2003

  2. [3]

    Aldrovandi S. M. V., Pequignot D., 1973, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/1973A&A....25..137A 25, 137

    1973

  3. [5]

    E., Gaspari M., White S

    Anderson M. E., Gaspari M., White S. D. M., Wang W., Dai X., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv437 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2015MNRAS.449.3806A 449, 3806

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stv437 2015

  4. [7]

    D., Bolton J

    Becker G. D., Bolton J. S., Madau P., Pettini M., Ryan-Weber E. V., Venemans B. P., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu2646 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2015MNRAS.447.3402B 447, 3402

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stu2646 2015

  5. [8]

    S., Wechsler R

    Behroozi P. S., Wechsler R. H., Conroy C., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/770/1/57 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...770...57B 770, 57

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/770/1/57 2013

  6. [9]

    Bogd \'a n \'A ., et al., 2013a, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/772/2/97 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2013ApJ...772...97B 772, 97

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/772/2/97

  7. [10]

    R., Kraft R

    Bogd \'a n \'A ., Forman W. R., Kraft R. P., Jones C., 2013b, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/772/2/98 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2013ApJ...772...98B 772, 98

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/772/2/98

  8. [11]

    Borgani S., et al., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07431.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2004MNRAS.348.1078B 348, 1078

    arXiv 2004

Show all 119 references
  1. [12]

    J., Illingworth G

    Bouwens R. J., Illingworth G. D., Franx M., Ford H., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/521811 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...670..928B 670, 928

    2007 doi

  2. [13]

    Braun R., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/749/1/87 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...749...87B 749, 87

    2012 doi

  3. [14]

    Bruzual G., Charlot S., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06897.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2003MNRAS.344.1000B 344, 1000

    2003

  4. [15]

    V., Obreja A., Dutton A

    Buck T., Macci \`o A. V., Obreja A., Dutton A. A., Dom \' nguez-Tenreiro R., Granato G. L., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx685 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.468.3628B 468, 3628

    2017 doi

  5. [16]

    K., Macci \`o A

    Buck T., Ness M. K., Macci \`o A. V., Obreja A., Dutton A. A., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aac890 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2018ApJ...861...88B 861, 88

    2018 doi

  6. [17]

    V., Dutton A

    Buck T., Macci \`o A. V., Dutton A. A., Obreja A., Frings J., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty2913 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2019MNRAS.483.1314B 483, 1314

    2019 doi

  7. [18]

    Cantalupo S., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2010.00806.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2010MNRAS.403L..16C 403, L16

    2010

  8. [19]

    P., 1993, @doi [ ] 10.1086/173321 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/1993ApJ...417..404C 417, 404

    Cen R., Ostriker J. P., 1993, @doi [ ] 10.1086/173321 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/1993ApJ...417..404C 417, 404

    1993 doi

  9. [20]

    M., Kunth D., 2002, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20020785 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2002A&A...392...19C 392, 19

    Cervi \ n o M., Mas-Hesse J. M., Kunth D., 2002, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20020785 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2002A&A...392...19C 392, 19

    2002 doi

  10. [22]

    Chabrier G., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1086/376392 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003PASP..115..763C 115, 763

    2003 doi

  11. [23]

    Compostella M., Cantalupo S., Porciani C., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt1510 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2013MNRAS.435.3169C 435, 3169

    2013 doi

  12. [27]

    Dehnen W., Aly H., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21439.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012MNRAS.425.1068D 425, 1068

    2012

  13. [28]

    J., Staveley-Smith L., Boyle B

    Delhaize J., Meyer M. J., Staveley-Smith L., Boyle B. J., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt810 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.433.1398D 433, 1398

    2013 doi

  14. [29]

    L., Schurer A., Alpresa P., Silva L., Brook C

    Dom \' nguez-Tenreiro R., Obreja A., Granato G. L., Schurer A., Alpresa P., Silva L., Brook C. B., Serna A., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu240 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.439.3868D 439, 3868

    2014 doi

  15. [30]

    T., 1978, @doi [ ] 10.1086/190513 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1978ApJS...36..595D 36, 595

    Draine B. T., 1978, @doi [ ] 10.1086/190513 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1978ApJS...36..595D 36, 595

    1978 doi

  16. [31]

    A., Macci \`o A

    Dutton A. A., Macci \`o A. V., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu742 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.441.3359D 441, 3359

    2014 doi

  17. [32]

    A., Obreja A., Macci \`o A

    Dutton A. A., Obreja A., Macci \`o A. V., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty3064 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2019MNRAS.482.5606D 482, 5606

    2019 doi

  18. [33]

    Efstathiou G., 1992, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/256.1.43P , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/1992MNRAS.256P..43E 256, 43P

    1992 doi

  19. [34]

    P., et al., 2001, SciPy: Open source scientific tools for Python , http://www.scipy.org/

    Eric Jones Travis Oliphant P. P., et al., 2001, SciPy: Open source scientific tools for Python , http://www.scipy.org/

    2001

  20. [35]

    C., 2019, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019arXiv190308657F p

    Faucher-Giguere -A. C., 2019, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019arXiv190308657F p. arXiv:1903.08657

    2019 arXiv

  21. [36]

    Faucher-Gigu \`e re C.-A., Lidz A., Zaldarriaga M., Hernquist L., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/703/2/1416 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2009ApJ...703.1416F 703, 1416

    2009 doi

  22. [37]

    J., et al., 2013, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2013RMxAA..49..137F 49, 137

    Ferland G. J., et al., 2013, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2013RMxAA..49..137F 49, 137

    2013

  23. [38]

    Fukugita M., Kawasaki M., 1994, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/269.3.563 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/1994MNRAS.269..563F 269, 563

    1994 doi

  24. [39]

    L., Cantalupo S., Madau P., Fossati M., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx398 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2017MNRAS.467.4802F 467, 4802

    Fumagalli M., Haardt F., Theuns T., Morris S. L., Cantalupo S., Madau P., Fossati M., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx398 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2017MNRAS.467.4802F 467, 4802

    2017 doi

  25. [40]

    Y., Hollon N., 2012, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series] 10.1088/0067-0049/202/2/13 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2012ApJS..202...13G 202, 13

    Gnedin N. Y., Hollon N., 2012, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series] 10.1088/0067-0049/202/2/13 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2012ApJS..202...13G 202, 13

    2012 doi

  26. [41]

    Y., Tassis K., Kravtsov A

    Gnedin N. Y., Tassis K., Kravtsov A. V., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/697/1/55 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...697...55G 697, 55

    2009 doi

  27. [42]

    M., Phillips A

    Gondhalekar P. M., Phillips A. P., Wilson R., 1980, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1980A&A....85..272G 85, 272

    1980

  28. [43]

    Grand R. J. J., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx071 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.467..179G 467, 179

    2017 doi

  29. [44]

    B., Renaud F., Read J

    Grisdale K., Agertz O., Romeo A. B., Renaud F., Read J. I., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw3133 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.466.1093G 466, 1093

    2017 doi

  30. [45]

    Haardt F., Madau P., 1996, @doi [ ] 10.1086/177035 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/1996ApJ...461...20H 461, 20

    1996 doi

  31. [46]

    Haardt F., Madau P., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/746/2/125 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2012ApJ...746..125H 746, 125

    2012 doi

  32. [47]

    J., 1968, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1968BAN....19..421H 19, 421

    Habing H. J., 1968, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1968BAN....19..421H 19, 421

    1968

  33. [48]

    C., Anderson R

    Henry R. C., Anderson R. C., Fastie W. G., 1980, @doi [ ] 10.1086/158170 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1980ApJ...239..859H 239, 859

    1980 doi

  34. [49]

    F., O \ n orbe J., O Meara J

    Hiss H., Walther M., Hennawi J. F., O \ n orbe J., O Meara J. M., Rorai A., Luki \'c Z., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aada86 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2018ApJ...865...42H 865, 42

    2018 doi

  35. [50]

    F., Grudic M

    Hopkins P. F., Grudic M. Y., Wetzel A. R., Keres D., Gaucher-Giguere C.-A., Ma X., Murray N., Butcher N., 2018a, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2018arXiv181112462H p. arXiv:1811.12462

    arXiv

  36. [51]

    F., Wetzel A., Kere s D., et al

    Hopkins P. F., Wetzel A., Kere s D., et al. 2018b, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty1690 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2018MNRAS.480..800H 480, 800

    doi

  37. [52]

    D., 2007, @doi [Computing in Science and Engineering] 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007CSE.....9...90H 9, 90

    Hunter J. D., 2007, @doi [Computing in Science and Engineering] 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007CSE.....9...90H 9, 90

    2007 doi

  38. [53]

    K., Langer W

    Janev R. K., Langer W. D., Evans K., 1987, Elementary processes in Hydrogen-Helium plasmas - Cross sections and reaction rate coefficients

    1987

  39. [54]

    K., 2003, @doi [Science] 10.1126/science.1080866 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2003Sci...299.1552J 299, 1552

    Jimenez R., Flynn C., MacDonald J., Gibson B. K., 2003, @doi [Science] 10.1126/science.1080866 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2003Sci...299.1552J 299, 1552

    2003 doi

  40. [55]

    K \"a llander D., Hultman J., 1998, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/1998A&A...333..399K 333, 399

    1998

  41. [56]

    S., Macci \`o A

    Kannan R., Stinson G. S., Macci \`o A. V., et al. 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt2098 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2014MNRAS.437.2882K 437, 2882

    2014 doi

  42. [57]

    S., Hennawi J

    Kannan R., Vogelsberger M., Stinson G. S., Hennawi J. F., Marinacci F., Springel V., Macci \`o A. V., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw463 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2016MNRAS.458.2516K 458, 2516

    2016 doi

  43. [58]

    M., Glover S

    Kannan R., Marinacci F., Simpson C. M., Glover S. C. O., Hernquist L., 2018, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2018arXiv181201614K p. arXiv:1812.01614

    2018 arXiv

  44. [59]

    Kannan R., Vogelsberger M., Marinacci F., McKinnon R., Pakmor R., Springel V., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz287 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2019MNRAS.tmp..291K p. 291

    2019 doi

  45. [60]

    Khaire V., Srianand R., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz174 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2019MNRAS.484.4174K 484, 4174

    2019 doi

  46. [61]

    Kravtsov A., Vikhlinin A., Meshscheryakov A., 2014, ArXiv:1401.7329, http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014arXiv1401.7329K

    2014 arXiv

  47. [62]

    A., Shull J

    Kriss G. A., Shull J. M., Oegerle W., et al. 2001, @doi [Science] 10.1126/science.1062693 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2001Sci...293.1112K 293, 1112

    2001 doi

  48. [63]

    R., Klein R

    Krumholz M. R., Klein R. I., McKee C. F., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/740/2/74 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...740...74K 740, 74

    2011 doi

  49. [64]

    V., Udrescu S

    Macci \`o A. V., Udrescu S. M., Dutton A. A., Obreja A., Wang L., Stinson G. R., Kang X., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnrasl/slw147 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.463L..69M 463, L69

    2016 doi

  50. [65]

    Madau P., Haardt F., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/813/1/L8 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2015ApJ...813L...8M 813, L8

    2015 doi

  51. [66]

    J., 1999, @doi [ ] 10.1086/306975 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/1999ApJ...514..648M 514, 648

    Madau P., Haardt F., Rees M. J., 1999, @doi [ ] 10.1086/306975 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/1999ApJ...514..648M 514, 648

    1999 doi

  52. [67]

    M., Papastergis E., Giovanelli R., Haynes M

    Martin A. M., Papastergis E., Giovanelli R., Haynes M. P., Springob C. M., Stierwalt S., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/723/2/1359 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...723.1359M 723, 1359

    2010 doi

  53. [68]

    P., 1990, @doi [ ] 10.1086/168358 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/1990ApJ...350....1M 350, 1

    Miralda-Escude J., Ostriker J. P., 1990, @doi [ ] 10.1086/168358 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/1990ApJ...350....1M 350, 1

    1990 doi

  54. [69]

    J., 1992, @doi [Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics] 10.1146/annurev.aa.30.090192.002551 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/1992ARA&A..30..543M 30, 543

    Monaghan J. J., 1992, @doi [Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics] 10.1146/annurev.aa.30.090192.002551 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/1992ARA&A..30..543M 30, 543

    1992

  55. [70]

    P., Naab T., White S

    Moster B. P., Naab T., White S. D. M., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sts261 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.428.3121M 428, 3121

    2013 doi

  56. [71]

    Noterdaeme P., et al., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201220259 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012A&A...547L...1N 547, L1

    2012 doi

  57. [72]

    F., Luki \'c Z., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aa6031 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2017ApJ...837..106O 837, 106

    O \ n orbe J., Hennawi J. F., Luki \'c Z., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aa6031 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2017ApJ...837..106O 837, 106

    2017 doi

  58. [73]

    S., Dutton A

    Obreja A., Stinson G. S., Dutton A. A., Macci \`o A. V., Wang L., Kang X., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw690 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.459..467O 459, 467

    2016 doi

  59. [74]

    V., Moster B., Dutton A

    Obreja A., Macci \`o A. V., Moster B., Dutton A. A., Buck T., Stinson G. S., Wang L., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty1022 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.477.4915O 477, 4915

    2018 doi

  60. [75]

    Obreja A., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz1563 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.487.4424O 487, 4424

    2019 doi

  61. [76]

    Ocvirk P., et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw2036 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2016MNRAS.463.1462O 463, 1462

    2016 doi

  62. [79]

    Petkova M., Springel V., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18986.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2011MNRAS.415.3731P 415, 3731

    2011

  63. [80]

    Planck Collaboration 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201321591 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014A

    2014 doi

  64. [81]

    Pontzen A., Ro s kar R., Stinson G., Woods R., 2013, pynbody: N-Body/SPH analysis for python , Astrophysics Source Code Library ( @eprint ascl 1305.002 )

    2013

  65. [82]

    C., Yang R., Tuffs R

    Popescu C. C., Yang R., Tuffs R. J., Natale G., Rushton M., Aharonian F., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx1282 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.470.2539P 470, 2539

    2017 doi

  66. [83]

    X., Wolfe A

    Prochaska J. X., Wolfe A. M., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/696/2/1543 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...696.1543P 696, 1543

    2009 doi

  67. [84]

    G., Madau P., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz222 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2019MNRAS.485...47P 485, 47

    Puchwein E., Haardt F., Haehnelt M. G., Madau P., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz222 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2019MNRAS.485...47P 485, 47

    2019 doi

  68. [85]

    Ranalli P., Comastri A., Setti G., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20021600 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2003A&A...399...39R 399, 39

    2003 doi

  69. [86]

    M., Turnshek D

    Rao S. M., Turnshek D. A., Nestor D. B., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/498132 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006ApJ...636..610R 636, 610

    2006 doi

  70. [87]

    A., Steidel C

    Reddy N. A., Steidel C. C., Pettini M., Adelberger K. L., Shapley A. E., Erb D. K., Dickinson M., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1086/521105 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJS..175...48R 175, 48

    2008 doi

  71. [88]

    A., Briggs F

    Rhee J., Zwaan M. A., Briggs F. H., Chengalur J. N., Lah P., Oosterloo T., van der Hulst T., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt1481 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.435.2693R 435, 2693

    2013 doi

  72. [89]

    H., Chengalur J

    Rhee J., Lah P., Briggs F. H., Chengalur J. N., Colless M., Willner S. P., Ashby M. L. N., Le F \`e vre O., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx2461 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.473.1879R 473, 1879

    2018 doi

  73. [90]

    J., Schaye J., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw327 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2016MNRAS.458..270R 458, 270

    Richings A. J., Schaye J., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw327 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2016MNRAS.458..270R 458, 270

    2016 doi

  74. [91]

    J., Schaye J., Oppenheimer B

    Richings A. J., Schaye J., Oppenheimer B. D., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu1046 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.442.2780R 442, 2780

    2014 doi

  75. [92]

    W., Thomas P

    Ritchie B. W., Thomas P. A., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04268.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001MNRAS.323..743R 323, 743

    2001

  76. [94]

    Rosdahl J., Teyssier R., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv567 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2015MNRAS.449.4380R 449, 4380

    2015 doi

  77. [95]

    Rosdahl J., Blaizot J., Aubert D., Stranex T., Teyssier R., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt1722 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.436.2188R 436, 2188

    2013 doi

  78. [96]

    R., Makino J., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/697/2/L99 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...697L..99S 697, L99

    Saitoh T. R., Makino J., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/697/2/L99 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...697L..99S 697, L99

    2009 doi

  79. [97]

    a., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.11603.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2007MNRAS.377..285S 377, 285

    Samui S., Srianand R., Subramanian K. a., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.11603.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2007MNRAS.377..285S 377, 285

    2007

  80. [98]

    Sawicki M., Thompson D., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/500999 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006ApJ...642..653S 642, 653

    2006 doi

  81. [99]

    A., Bower R

    Schaye J., Crain R. A., Bower R. G., et al. 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu2058 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.446..521S 446, 521

    2015 doi

  82. [100]

    A., Ellis R

    Schenker M. A., Ellis R. S., Konidaris N. P., Stark D. P., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/795/1/20 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2014ApJ...795...20S 795, 20

    2014 doi

  83. [101]

    L., 1963, Boletin de la Asociacion Argentina de Astronomia La Plata Argentina, http://esoads.eso.org/abs/1963BAAA....6...41S 6, 41

    S \'e rsic J. L., 1963, Boletin de la Asociacion Argentina de Astronomia La Plata Argentina, http://esoads.eso.org/abs/1963BAAA....6...41S 6, 41

    1963

  84. [102]

    R., Giroux M

    Shapiro P. R., Giroux M. L., 1987, @doi [ ] 10.1086/185015 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/1987ApJ...321L.107S 321, L107

    1987 doi

  85. [103]

    Shen S., Wadsley J., Stinson G., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17047.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010MNRAS.407.1581S 407, 1581

    2010

  86. [104]

    M., Tumlinson J., Giroux M

    Shull J. M., Tumlinson J., Giroux M. L., Kriss G. A., Reimers D., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1086/379924 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2004ApJ...600..570S 600, 570

    2004 doi

  87. [105]

    V., 1957, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1957SvA.....1..678S 1, 678

    Sobolev V. V., 1957, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1957SvA.....1..678S 1, 678

    1957

  88. [106]

    Springel V., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15715.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2010MNRAS.401..791S 401, 791

    2010

  89. [107]

    G., 2001, PhD thesis, UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON

    Stadel J. G., 2001, PhD thesis, UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON

    2001

  90. [108]

    Stinson G., Seth A., Katz N., Wadsley J., Governato F., Quinn T., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.11097.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006MNRAS.373.1074S 373, 1074

    2006

  91. [109]

    S., Brook C., Macci \`o A

    Stinson G. S., Brook C., Macci \`o A. V., Wadsley J., Quinn T. R., Couchman H. M. P., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sts028 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.428..129S 428, 129

    2013 doi

  92. [110]

    Thielemann F.-K., Nomoto K., Yokoi K., 1986, , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1986A

    1986

  93. [111]

    S., Werk J

    Tumlinson J., Peeples M. S., Werk J. K., 2017, @doi [Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics] 10.1146/annurev-astro-091916-055240 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2017ARA&A..55..389T 55, 389

    2017 doi

  94. [112]

    A., Ferland G

    Verner D. A., Ferland G. J., 1996, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series] 10.1086/192284 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/1996ApJS..103..467V 103, 467

    1996 doi

  95. [113]

    W., Stadel J., Quinn T., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1016/j.newast.2003.08.004 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004NewA....9..137W 9, 137

    Wadsley J. W., Stadel J., Quinn T., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1016/j.newast.2003.08.004 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004NewA....9..137W 9, 137

    2004 doi

  96. [115]

    W., Keller B

    Wadsley J. W., Keller B. W., Quinn T. R., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx1643 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.471.2357W 471, 2357

    2017 doi

  97. [116]

    Walt S. v. d., Colbert S. C., Varoquaux G., 2011, Computing in Science and Engineering, 13, 22

    2011

  98. [117]

    Walter F., Brinks E., de Blok W. J. G., Bigiel F., Kennicutt Jr. R. C., Thornley M. D., Leroy A., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/136/6/2563 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008AJ....136.2563W 136, 2563

    2008 doi

  99. [118]

    A., Stinson G

    Wang L., Dutton A. A., Stinson G. S., Macci \`o A. V., Penzo C., Kang X., Keller B. W., Wadsley J., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv1937 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.454...83W 454, 83

    2015 doi

  100. [119]

    H., Hernquist L., Katz N., 1997, @doi [ ] 10.1086/303683 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/1997ApJ...477....8W 477, 8

    Weinberg D. H., Hernquist L., Katz N., 1997, @doi [ ] 10.1086/303683 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/1997ApJ...477....8W 477, 8

    1997 doi

  101. [120]

    Wendland H., 1995, @doi [Adv Comput Math] 10.1007/BF02123482 , 4, 389

    1995 doi

  102. [121]

    Wiersma R. P. C., Schaye J., Smith B. D., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14191.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2009MNRAS.393...99W 393, 99

    2009

  103. [122]

    N., Johnson M

    Witt A. N., Johnson M. W., 1973, @doi [ ] 10.1086/152054 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1973ApJ...181..363W 181, 363

    1973 doi

  104. [123]

    E., Weaver T

    Woosley S. E., Weaver T. A., 1995, @doi [ ] 10.1086/192237 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995ApJS..101..181W 101, 181

    1995 doi

  105. [124]

    X., et al

    Worseck G., Prochaska J. X., et al. 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/733/2/L24 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2011ApJ...733L..24W 733, L24

    2011 doi

  106. [125]

    Yoshida M., et al., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/508621 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006ApJ...653..988Y 653, 988

    2006 doi

  107. [126]

    Yue B., Ferrara A., Xu Y., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw2145 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2016MNRAS.463.1968Y 463, 1968

    2016 doi

  108. [127]

    M., Frank S., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201321154 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013A&A...556A.141Z 556, A141

    Zafar T., P \'e roux C., Popping A., Milliard B., Deharveng J. M., Frank S., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201321154 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013A&A...556A.141Z 556, A141

    2013 doi

  109. [128]

    A., Meyer M

    Zwaan M. A., Meyer M. J., Staveley-Smith L., Webster R. L., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2005.00029.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005MNRAS.359L..30Z 359, L30

    2005

  110. [129]

    F., 1994, in Cutri R

    van Dishoeck E. F., 1994, in Cutri R. M., Latter W. B., eds, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series Vol. 58, The First Symposium on the Infrared Cirrus and Diffuse Interstellar Clouds. p. 319

    1994

  111. [130]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.stat...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.