Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 139 references

Fuzzy Galaxies or Cirrus? Decomposition of Galactic Cirrus in Deep Wide-Field Images

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper shows that a morphological filter isolating filamentary emission plus a single $g-r$ color constraint decomposes Galactic cirrus from deep wide-field images, flattening the sky and letting faint low surface brightness galaxies…

desk verdict A solid methods paper that combines RHT morphology filtering with Planck-calibrated optical colors; the in-sample color fit is the main soft spot, but the demonstration and honest treatment of limitations justify sending it to referees. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.00933 v3 pith:WZLPW2LN submitted 2024-12-01 astro-ph.GA astro-ph.COastro-ph.IM

Qing Liu , Roberto Abraham , Peter G. Martin , William P. Bowman , Pieter van Dokkum , Shany Danieli , Ekta Patel , Steven R. Janssens
show 7 more authors
Zili Shen Seery Chen Ananthan Karunakaran Michael A. Keim Deborah Lokhorst Imad Pasha Douglas L. Welch
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GAastro-ph.COastro-ph.IM
keywords GalacticcirrusdiffuselightlowsurfacebrightnessgalaxiesimagedecompositionRollingHoughTransformPlanckthermaldustmodelskybackgroundsubtractioninterstellar
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 proposes that deep wide-field images can be decomposed into Galactic cirrus and everything else using two pieces of information: the filamentary or patchy morphology of the emission and a single optical color. Using about 10 square degrees of imaging from an array optimized for low surface brightness work, the authors show that after this decomposition the sky background is markedly flatter, simulated ultra-diffuse galaxies are recovered with an F-score of 0.75, and the known M33 satellite And XXII becomes visible in integrated light. The same decomposition yields optical diffuse Galactic light intensities that match dust scattering models and show no clear extended red emission in the r band. A working version of this recipe matters because cirrus is one of the major foregrounds for upcoming deep surveys such as Rubin, Euclid, and Roman, and because the decomposed cirrus is itself a clean signal for studying dust properties.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the Rolling Hough Transform (RHT), a line-detection variant of the Hough transform that rolls a circular window over the image and records, at each pixel, the maximum response over orientation; filamentary cirrus produces a strong peak in the response while a round galaxy produces a flat response. The ratio of the median-filtered image to the RHT response separates blobby structures, which are masked, dilated, and infilled. The second piece is a linear color model: a mixture-model fit of g versus r and r versus g yields a field-averaged $g-r$ color, with zero-points pinned by the correlation of the optical surface brightness with Planck dust radiance. Together these convert a single-band morphological mask into a two-band cirrus model that can be subtracted.

What would settle it

Compute the best-fit $g-r$ color of the cirrus in sliding windows that span the full range of Planck radiance in one field; if the color shifts by more than the bootstrap uncertainty, the fixed-color model must leave residuals that spatially track the dust map, and those residuals should correlate with the recovery failures of injected galaxies.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that cirrus in a given field can be characterized photometrically by extracting its filamentary and patchy component with the Rolling Hough Transform, masking and infilling the blobby residuals that are candidate galaxies, and constraining the cirrus component with a single linear color model $g-r \approx 0.7$, calibrated by correlating the optical images with the Planck thermal dust radiance. Once the color model predicts the cirrus contribution in each band, subtracting it leaves a residual image whose sky is close to flat: the Gini coefficient of the pixel intensity distribution drops from 0.28 to 0.04, and the $\Delta$-variance power of large-scale structure falls by a factor of about 200 at scales of 5 arcminutes. The method recovers the known dwarf And XXII, whose mean color is bluer than the cirrus, and recovers injected mock galaxies with an F-score of 0.75. The paper therefore argues that morphological plus color separation is sufficient to clean cirrus with only two filters.

Load-bearing premise

The decomposition assumes that all cirrus in a field has one fixed $g-r$ color, estimated from the same images that are later cleaned; if that color varies with dust column density, dust properties, or the illuminating radiation field, the subtraction will leave residual cirrus or erase parts of real galaxies.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Sky-background flattening of this kind should directly improve the completeness of low surface brightness galaxy searches in cirrus-rich fields, since the same mask-and-color step can be inserted before source detection.
  • The measured optical DGL intensities, normalized by 100 micron emission, sit on the expected dust-scattering model curves, so the technique can be used to constrain grain properties over much larger sky areas.
  • Surveys with more than two filters can generalize the single-color model to a full spectral energy distribution, which should separate cirrus from galaxies with colors close to the cirrus color.
  • Integrated-light detection of satellites such as And XXII becomes possible even when cirrus is present, complementing star-count searches.
  • The demonstrated recovery of injected mock galaxies indicates that such a decomposition can be used to quantify survey completeness in cirrus-affected fields.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A direct test the paper does not run is to vary the cirrus color spatially within a field; if the local $g-r$ drifts with Planck radiance, the residual pattern the authors note in bright cirrus regions would grow, and the F-score for galaxy recovery would drop.
  • The zero-point assumption that no optical scattered light exists where the Planck tracer is zero makes the absolute DGL scale vulnerable to extragalactic background light; cross-calibrating with an independent measurement of the cosmic optical background would put the photometric zero-point on firmer ground.
  • The fixed-color assumption likely fails near optically thick cirrus, so a promising extension is to fit a two-component or column-density-dependent color model and to propagate the resulting uncertainty into source photometry.
  • The infilling step currently treats masked blobs without a physical model; replacing it with a local interpolation that carries uncertainties would turn cirrus removal into a per-pixel uncertainty budget for faint-source measurements.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. This paper presents a method for decomposing Galactic cirrus in deep wide-field images by combining Rolling Hough Transform (RHT) morphological filtering with a single g-r color model calibrated against Planck thermal dust radiance. Using ~10 deg^2 of Dragonfly g/r data in two fields, the authors subtract foreground and background sources, extract cirrus-like structures, fit a linear color relation (Eqs. 14-17), subtract the predicted cirrus from each band, and evaluate the resulting sky flatness with skewness, Gini, and Δ-variance metrics. They demonstrate the method's application by recovering injected mock ultra-diffuse galaxies (F1=0.75) and the known dwarf satellite And XXII, and they derive optical diffuse Galactic light (DGL) intensities that are consistent with dust scattering models.

Significance. If the method holds, it offers a practical, physically motivated way to separate cirrus from low surface brightness galaxies and to measure DGL in deep wide-field surveys, with timely relevance for Rubin, Euclid, and Roman. The paper is commendable for anchoring the color model to external Planck correlations, for testing recovery with realistic stellar population models, and for candidly stating several limitations. These strengths give the central claim credibility. However, the in-sample fitting of the color model, the acknowledged residual in high-column regions, and an apparent inconsistency in the injection-recovery reporting mean that the performance claims need stronger out-of-sample validation before the paper can be accepted as a reliable methods reference.

major comments (4)
  1. [§5.2, Eqs. (14)–(17); §5.3; §5.4] The parameters A and B of the color model are fitted by maximum likelihood to the same binned g and r images that are subsequently cleaned with that model in §5.3. The flatness metrics in §5.4 (skewness, Gini, Δ-variance) are computed on this same residual image, so the measured improvement is partly a mathematical consequence of projecting out the best-fit linear relation, not an independent measurement that cirrus has been removed. I recommend a cross-validation step: for example, fit the color model on one subregion or one field and apply it to the other, or report residuals against the Planck radiance in pixels excluded from the fit.
  2. [§5.3; §6.1.2; §7.2] The paper itself reports a 'very faint large-scale diffuse light pattern' in the residual that spatially matches the high-intensity cirrus regions and attributes it to changes in dust properties or optical depth effects. This is direct evidence that the single-color assumption is violated where cirrus is brightest. Because the RHT-extracted cirrus map is scaled by that single color, the residual is systematic and spatially correlated with the cirrus; it can both create false diffuse features and mask real LSBGs behind high-column cirrus, and it propagates into the DGL slope b_lambda in §7.2. Please quantify this residual as a function of Planck radiance or g-r color, and show its effect on recovery completeness and on the derived DGL intensities.
  3. [§6.1.2 and footnote 14] The reported precision (0.77) and recall (0.73) appear inconsistent with the footnote statement that roughly 20 objects were detected and only one overlapped the injections within 3 arcseconds. If that statement refers to the same detection run, then TP=1 would give a precision of about 0.05, not 0.77. Please state the total number of injected galaxies, the matching radius, and clarify whether the footnote concerns a separate diagnostic; as written, the injection-recovery result is not reproducible.
  4. [§5.1.2, Eq. (12); §7.2, Eq. (23)] The photometric zero-point is set by assuming that no dust-scattered light exists where the Planck radiance is zero, with the contribution from EBL and the diffuse ionized medium acknowledged in footnote 9 but not quantified. Because Eq. (23) is fitted to the residual images, any unmodeled EBL-like constant propagates directly into b_lambda and the quoted DGL intensities. Please provide a quantitative estimate of EBL and other diffuse background components at these Galactic latitudes and include them in the systematic error budget for the DGL measurements.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Title and §6.1.3] There is a spurious space in the header title ('F uzzy Galaxies') and a typo in §6.1.3 ('galaixes' should be 'galaxies').
  2. [Figure 13] The legend shows two identical 'This work (Dragonfly; l~133 b~ 35)' labels; please distinguish the g-band and r-band points and specify whether the magnitudes are in the AB or Vega system.
  3. [Table 3] For Field B, the g-to-r and r-to-g slopes differ substantially (1.56 vs 2.06), while the bisector gives g-r = 0.63. A sentence explaining this asymmetry and why the bisector is the adopted value would help the reader interpret the color model.
  4. [Appendix B] The comparison between maskfill and Gaussian process regression is only qualitative. A quantitative metric, such as the RMS difference from the ground-truth image, would make the claimed similarity concrete.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

In-sample g-r color fit is used as a 'prediction', so flatness metrics are partly in-sample; external mock-galaxy and known-dwarf tests keep the central claim independently supported.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 5.2 (Eqs. 14-17) and Section 5.3 (application of Eq. 14)]
    "This color model is used for predicting data in one band from the other in Section 5.3. ... The r-band 'cirrus-like' emission is used to predict the corresponding g-band emission according to Eq. 14, and similarly for the g-band."

    The slope B and intercept A in Eq. 14 are estimated by maximum likelihood on the same binned Dragonfly g and r images via Eqs. 15-17. Section 5.3 then 'predicts' the g-band cirrus as A + B times the r-band cirrus map and subtracts it. Up to the RHT mask, this is the fitted regression line evaluated on the data used for the fit, so the residual image is the in-sample residual of the color regression. The reported flatness metrics (skewness, Gini, delta-variance) are computed on that residual and therefore partly re-express the quality of the fit rather than an independent prediction. The circularity is partial: the morphological RHT mask is independent, and the mock-injection recovery, And XXII recovery, and agreement with the Planck-derived color provide out-of-sample checks.

full rationale

The derivation is mostly self-contained. The only partially circular element is the color model: Eq. 14 is fitted to the same g/r images on which the Section 5.3 'prediction' and the flatness metrics are evaluated, so the residual sky flatness partly reflects in-sample regression quality. This does not force the central LSBG application, because mock UDGs (F1=0.75), And XXII recovery, and the Planck-based color agreement (0.70±0.03 vs 0.69±0.05) are external checks. Citations to Liu et al. (2023) for sky subtraction/stacking and to van Dokkum & Pasha (2024) for maskfill are methodological self-citations, but they are not used to forbid alternatives or to import an unverified uniqueness theorem; they are ordinary prior-method references. No other step reduces by construction. The single-color assumption's failure at high column density (Sec 5.3 residual pattern) is a correctness risk, not a circularity. Score 4 reflects the in-sample color fit while recognizing the independent validation.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central technique rests on the assumption that cirrus has a uniform optical color per field, calibrated by fitting the same images it later removes, plus external calibrations from Planck. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (6)
  • RHT disc size Dw = 3 arcmin (tweaked in 3-6 arcmin range)
    Hand-chosen to contain typical LSBGs (effective radii < 30 arcsec) while avoiding large cirrus patches; affects which structures are classified as cirrus vs blobs (Sec 4.2).
  • RHT smoothing size DM = 5 pixels
    Chosen for median filtering to smear out blobs; results are not sensitive to exact value as long as it is large enough (Sec 4.1).
  • Blob detection threshold and axis ratio cut = 3 sigma detection; b/a > 0.5
    Thresholds adopted for source detection on RHT output; the axis ratio cut removes compact cirrus but may reject elongated LSBGs (Sec 4.4).
  • Color model slope (r/g ratio) = 1.89 +/- 0.08 (Field A); 1.78 +/- 0.08 (Field B)
    Fitted via mixture model (Eq. 14-17) to the same g and r images that are later cleaned; this is the core calibration of the cirrus color.
  • Sky zero-point intercept from Planck correlation = a_lambda,p from Eq. 12 fit
    Fitted intercept shifting Dragonfly intensities to physical units under the assumption that scattered light is zero where Planck radiance is zero; affects absolute DGL and cirrus subtraction level.
  • Outlier population parameters fbg, mbg, sigma_bg = Mixture model fitted values
    Nuisance parameters in the robust linear fit used to exclude LSBGs and other non-cirrus light from the color estimate.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Dust grains are in local thermal equilibrium with a homogeneous ISRF and similar dust properties along the line of sight
    Stated in Sec 5; needed so that optical scattered light correlates with Planck thermal dust radiance and so a single g-r color describes the cirrus.
  • domain assumption Optical scattered light from dust is zero where the Planck thermal dust tracer is zero
    Used to fix the photometric zero-point via the intercept of the linear fit in Eq. 12 (Sec 5.1.2); if EBL or other diffuse light contributes, the zero-point is biased.
  • domain assumption Cirrus morphology is filamentary or patchy on scales > Dw, while LSBGs are roundish and smaller than Dw
    Basis of the RHT morphological separation (Sec 4); relies on observed ISM structure and LSBG size distributions, and can fail for large or elongated LSBGs or compact cirrus knots.
  • domain assumption Planck thermal dust radiance and IRAS 100 micron maps (after CIB correction) are reliable tracers of cirrus column density
    Adopted from Planck Collaboration XI (2014) and Miville-Deschenes & Lagache (2005); used for calibration and for the DGL measurement in Sec 7.2.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Fuzzy Galaxies or Cirrus? Decomposition of Galactic Cirrus in Deep Wide-Field Images." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WZLPW2LN

@misc{pith2026241200933,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Fuzzy Galaxies or Cirrus? Decomposition of Galactic Cirrus in Deep Wide-Field Images},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WZLPW2LN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.00933}
}
abstract

Diffuse Galactic cirrus, or Diffuse Galactic Light (DGL), can be a prominent component in the background of deep wide-field imaging surveys. The DGL provides unique insights into the physical and radiative properties of dust grains in our Milky Way, and it also serves as a contaminant on deep images, obscuring the detection of background sources such as low surface brightness galaxies. However, it is challenging to disentangle the DGL from other components of the night sky. In this paper, we present a technique for the photometric characterization of Galactic cirrus, based on (1) extraction of its filamentary or patchy morphology and (2) incorporation of color constraints obtained from Planck thermal dust models. Our decomposition method is illustrated using a $\sim$10 deg$^2$ imaging dataset obtained by the Dragonfly Telephoto Array, and its performance is explored using various metrics which characterize the flatness of the sky background. As a concrete application of the technique, we show how removal of cirrus allows low surface brightness galaxies to be identified on cirrus-rich images. We also show how modeling the cirrus in this way allows optical DGL intensities to be determined with high radiometric precision.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.00933 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Example dataset used in this work. Top row: Dragonfly g+r mosaic RGB image of the central 2.6° × 1.8° area of Field A (left) and the central 2.4° × 1.9° area of Field B (right). The green channel of the RGB is the average of g and r band data. Middle row: IRAS 100 µm maps of the two fields in the unit of MJy/sr. Bottom row: Planck dust radiance maps of the two fields in the unit of [10−7 W m−2 sr−1 ]. The Dragonfly … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Left: a [0.6° × 0.5°] zoom-in region of the Dragonfly g-band image of Field A. Middle: zoom-in of the source model constructed following procedures in Section 3. Right: the source model subtracted image. The central bright parts of stars and galaxies are masked out to 5σ. The image scale is in the unit of kJy/sr in linear scale. be noted that the extended wings of bright sources out￾side the field-of-view might also… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Schematic of the RHT procedure applied to toy models. Step 1 extracts a local disc of diameter Dw around each pixel in the input image. The disc is the window function rolling across the field. The insets show discs centering on a ‘filamentary’ (upper) and a ‘blobby’ (lower) structure. Step 2 performs the Hough transform at ρ = 0 to map the intensity in (x,y) space to response R as a function of θ. In this step, a f… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (14 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Cirrus decomposition on Field A based on morphological information using RHT. Left: The central [2.4° × 1.8°] of the Dragonfly g-band observation of Field A. Right: The decomposed ‘cirrus-like’ emission with patchy or filamentary structures extending on scales above Dw…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: shows the correlations of the Dragonfly g and r, after the zero-point shift, with Planck dust op￾tical depth in Field A. At low intensities, both g and 9 This does not take into account other physical contributions to the optical diffuse light, including the Extragalac…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: shows the correlation between Dragonfly g and r data and the r-to-g model. The green line is the best-fit linear model from the maximum likelihood esti￾mation. A similar model is constructed mapping from g-band to r-band. The parameters from the best fit are summarized…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Cirrus removal based on morphological information with color constraints. The top left panel shows the central [2.4°×1.8°] of the original g+r image of Field A obtained by Dragonfly. The top right panel shows the constructed source model combining g and r. The bottom l…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Gini coefficient measured on the sky background before and after the cirrus decomposition. The metric is mea￾sured on the source subtracted Dragonfly g+r image (input) and the residual g+r image (output). The figure shows the variation of the metrics measured on the br…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Top: ∆-variance spectra measured on the source subtracted Dragonfly g+r image (input; magenta markers) and the residual (output; blue markers). ∆-variance mea￾sures the amount of structure on different spatial scales. The power is largely reduced in the output image. A…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Injection of mock UDGs in a cirrus-rich field and recovery after cirrus removal in Dragonfly imaging. In each row, the middle panel shows a [50′ × 50′ ] region of the g+r image with injections, and the injected galaxy models are shown in the panel to the left, indicat…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Performance metrics for recovering injected galaxies in the cirrus removed image at varying effective surface brightness µeff,V and g − r color, including the recall, precision, and the F-score. Details of the model grid are described in Appendix D. Recall represents …
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Recovery of a confirmed dwarf satellite galaxy, And XXII in the cirrus-riddled Field B. The left to right columns show [16′ × 16′ ] cutouts around And XXII (marked by the green circle) in g, r, and g+r bands in the original image (upper) and after cirrus removal (lowe…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: The DGL SED from UV to NIR normalized by the 100 µm intensity. Dragonfly measurements of the diffuse background in the example datasets in g and r-bands scaled by the mean 100 µm intensity, with CIB corrections included, are indicated by the green and red stars. Photo…
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Demonstration of disentangling ‘cirrus-like’ emission from fuzzy blobs based on morphological information using RHT. Left: simulated image with injections of mock galaxies and cirrus. The mock galaxies are indicated by the magenta circles. The orange circle shows the …
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Demonstration of mask infilling using the maskfill approach and the GPR approach. Upper left: [150x150] pix2 cutout of the input image. Upper right: the same cutout of the ground truth (mock cirrus in the unit of ADU). Lower left: cutout of the image infilled by the G…
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Mean V-band surface brightness within the effective radius, µeff,V (upper), and g − r color (lower) of the mass￾metallicity grid models. The red star indicates the fiducial model at log (M∗/M⊙) = 8 and [Fe/H] = -1.5, which is referred to in the main text. The model is…
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Performance metrics (recall, precision, and the F-score) for recovering injected galaxies in the cirrus removed image at varying stellar mass and metallicities. The mock galaxies are placed at 20 Mpc with a fixed age of 9 Gyr, a size of Reff = 2 kpc, and an S´ersic in…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

139 extracted references · 12 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

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

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

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION format.url url empty "" new.block "" url * "" * if FUNCTION format.eprint eprint empty "" archivePrefix empty "" archivePrefix "arXiv" = new.block " " eprint * " " * new.block " " eprint * " " * if if if FUNCTION format.doi doi empty "" " " doi * " " * if FUNCTION format.pid doi empty eprint empty ur...

  3. [3]

    Ed& LLJ t #2Vz C_9 i 6 K-ı k. h)3 hY I 1HG

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

    arXiv 2021

  4. [4]

    G., van den Bergh , S., & Nair , P

    Abraham , R. G., van den Bergh , S., & Nair , P. 2003, , 588, 218, 10.1086/373919

    doi:10.1086/373919 2003

  5. [5]

    G., & van Dokkum , P

    Abraham , R. G., & van Dokkum , P. G. 2014, , 126, 55, 10.1086/674875

    doi:10.1086/674875 2014

  6. [6]

    2018, , 70, S4, 10.1093/pasj/psx066

    Aihara , H., Arimoto , N., Armstrong , R., et al. 2018, , 70, S4, 10.1093/pasj/psx066

    doi:10.1093/pasj/psx066 2018

  7. [7]

    2022, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2205.00683, 10.48550/arXiv.2205.00683

    Alina , D., Shomanov , A., & Baimukhametova , S. 2022, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2205.00683, 10.48550/arXiv.2205.00683

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2205.00683 2022

  8. [8]

    N., Siqueira , P

    Appleton , P. N., Siqueira , P. R., & Basart , J. P. 1993, , 106, 1664, 10.1086/116756

    work page doi:10.1086/116756 1993

Show all 139 references
  1. [9]

    2015, , 806, 69, 10.1088/0004-637X/806/1/69

    Arai , T., Matsuura , S., Bock , J., et al. 2015, , 806, 69, 10.1088/0004-637X/806/1/69

    2015 doi

  2. [10]

    2011, , 529, L6, 10.1051/0004-6361/201116596

    Arzoumanian , D., Andr \'e , P., Didelon , P., et al. 2011, , 529, L6, 10.1051/0004-6361/201116596

    2011 doi

  3. [11]

    P., Tollerud , E

    Astropy Collaboration , Robitaille , T. P., Tollerud , E. J., et al. 2013, , 558, A33, 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068

    2013 doi

  4. [12]

    M., Sip o cz , B

    Astropy Collaboration , Price-Whelan , A. M., Sip o cz , B. M., et al. 2018, , 156, 123, 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f

    2018 doi

  5. [13]

    M., Lim , P

    Astropy Collaboration , Price-Whelan , A. M., Lim , P. L., et al. 2022, , 935, 167, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c74

    2022 doi

  6. [15]

    2001, , 366, 636, 10.1051/0004-6361:20000292

    Bensch , F., Stutzki , J., & Ossenkopf , V. 2001, , 366, 636, 10.1051/0004-6361:20000292

    2001 doi

  7. [16]

    1996, , 117, 393, 10.1051/aas:1996164

    Bertin , E., & Arnouts , S. 1996, , 117, 393, 10.1051/aas:1996164

    1996 doi

  8. [17]

    2020, , 498, 2138, 10.1093/mnras/staa2248

    B \' lek , M., Duc , P.-A., Cuillandre , J.-C., et al. 2020, , 498, 2138, 10.1093/mnras/staa2248

    2020 doi

  9. [18]

    2015, , 579, A29, 10.1051/0004-6361/201526089

    Boissier , S., Boselli , A., Voyer , E., et al. 2015, , 579, A29, 10.1051/0004-6361/201526089

    2015 doi

  10. [19]

    K., & Martin , P

    Bowes , S. K., & Martin , P. G. 2023, , 959, 40, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad0971

    2023 doi

  11. [20]

    2011, , 412, 1151, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17971.x

    Bracco , A., Cooray , A., Veneziani , M., et al. 2011, , 412, 1151, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17971.x

    2011

  12. [21]

    2016, Photutils: Photometry Tools

    Bradley , L., Sipocz , B., Robitaille , T., et al. 2016, Photutils: Photometry Tools . 1609.011

    2016

  13. [22]

    D., & Draine , B

    Brandt , T. D., & Draine , B. T. 2012, , 744, 129, 10.1088/0004-637X/744/2/129

    2012 doi

  14. [23]

    G., Greene , J

    Carlsten , S. G., Greene , J. E., Greco , J. P., Beaton , R. L., & Kado-Fong , E. 2021, , 922, 267, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac2581

    2021 doi

  15. [24]

    C., Widrow , L., Collins , M

    Chapman , S. C., Widrow , L., Collins , M. L. M., et al. 2013, , 430, 37, 10.1093/mnras/sts392

    2013 doi

  16. [25]

    D., Hensley , B

    Chellew , B., Brandt , T. D., Hensley , B. S., Draine , B. T., & Matthaey , E. 2022, , 932, 112, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac6efc

    2022 doi

  17. [26]

    2016, , 823, 102, 10.3847/0004-637X/823/2/102

    Choi , J., Dotter , A., Conroy , C., et al. 2016, , 823, 102, 10.3847/0004-637X/823/2/102

    2016 doi

  18. [27]

    E., Peek , J

    Clark , S. E., Peek , J. E. G., & Putman , M. E. 2014, , 789, 82, 10.1088/0004-637X/789/1/82

    2014 doi

  19. [28]

    D., Williams , G

    Clarke , S. D., Williams , G. M., & Walch , S. 2020, , 497, 4390, 10.1093/mnras/staa2298

    2020 doi

  20. [29]

    2011, , 525, A103, 10.1051/0004-6361/201015292

    Compi \`e gne , M., Verstraete , L., Jones , A., et al. 2011, , 525, A103, 10.1051/0004-6361/201015292

    2011 doi

  21. [30]

    C., Bertin , E., Bolzonella , M., et al

    Cuillandre , J. C., Bertin , E., Bolzonella , M., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2405.13496, 10.48550/arXiv.2405.13496

    2024 doi

  22. [31]

    M., Mandel , K

    Czekala , I., Andrews , S. M., Mandel , K. S., Hogg , D. W., & Green , G. M. 2015, , 812, 128, 10.1088/0004-637X/812/2/128

    2015 doi

  23. [32]

    2018, , 856, 69, 10.3847/1538-4357/aaadfb

    Danieli , S., van Dokkum , P., & Conroy , C. 2018, , 856, 69, 10.3847/1538-4357/aaadfb

    2018 doi

  24. [33]

    2020, , 894, 119, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab88a8

    Danieli , S., Lokhorst , D., Zhang , J., et al. 2020, , 894, 119, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab88a8

    2020 doi

  25. [34]

    G., Kristl , J

    DeVore , J. G., Kristl , J. A., & Rappaport , S. A. 2013, Journal of Geophysical Research (Atmospheres), 118, 5679, 10.1002/jgrd.50440

    2013 doi

  26. [35]

    J., Lang , D., et al

    Dey , A., Schlegel , D. J., Lang , D., et al. 2019, , 157, 168, 10.3847/1538-3881/ab089d

    2019 doi

  27. [36]

    2016, , 222, 8, 10.3847/0067-0049/222/1/8

    Dotter , A. 2016, , 222, 8, 10.3847/0067-0049/222/1/8

    2016 doi

  28. [37]

    Draine , B. T. 2003, , 41, 241, 10.1146/annurev.astro.41.011802.094840

    2003 arXiv

  29. [38]

    2011, Physics of the Interstellar and Intergalactic Medium (Princeton University Press)

    ---. 2011, Physics of the Interstellar and Intergalactic Medium (Princeton University Press)

    2011

  30. [39]

    T., & Li , A

    Draine , B. T., & Li , A. 2001, , 551, 807, 10.1086/320227

    2001 doi

  31. [40]

    2007, , 657, 810, 10.1086/511055

    ---. 2007, , 657, 810, 10.1086/511055

    2007 doi

  32. [41]

    O., & Hart , P

    Duda , R. O., & Hart , P. 1972, Communications of the Association of Computing Machinery, 15, 11

    1972

  33. [42]

    G., & Scalo , J

    Elmegreen , B. G., & Scalo , J. 2004, , 42, 211, 10.1146/annurev.astro.41.011802.094859

    2004 arXiv

  34. [43]

    T., & Roach , F

    Elvey , C. T., & Roach , F. E. 1937, , 85, 213, 10.1086/143815

    1937 doi

  35. [44]

    S., G \'o mez-Alvarez , P., et al

    Euclid Collaboration , Borlaff , A. S., G \'o mez-Alvarez , P., et al. 2022, , 657, A92, 10.1051/0004-6361/202141935

    2022 doi

  36. [45]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2405.13491, 10.48550/arXiv.2405.13491

    Euclid Collaboration , Mellier , Y., Abdurro'uf , et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2405.13491, 10.48550/arXiv.2405.13491

    2024 doi

  37. [46]

    2016, , 456, 1359, 10.1093/mnras/stv2686

    Fliri , J., & Trujillo , I. 2016, , 456, 1359, 10.1093/mnras/stv2686

    2016 doi

  38. [47]

    N., I., Boulanger , F., Perault , M., & Puget , J

    Gautier , T. N., I., Boulanger , F., Perault , M., & Puget , J. L. 1992, , 103, 1313, 10.1086/116144

    1992 doi

  39. [48]

    P., & Danieli , S

    Greco , J. P., & Danieli , S. 2022, , 941, 26, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac75b7

    2022 doi

  40. [49]

    P., Greene , J

    Greco , J. P., Greene , J. E., Strauss , M. A., et al. 2018, , 857, 104, 10.3847/1538-4357/aab842

    2018 doi

  41. [50]

    Guhathakurta , P., & Tyson , J. A. 1989, , 346, 773, 10.1086/168058

    1989 doi

  42. [51]

    E., Heitsch , F., et al

    Hacar , A., Clark , S. E., Heitsch , F., et al. 2023, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 534, Protostars and Planets VII, ed. S. Inutsuka , Y. Aikawa , T. Muto , K. Tomida , & M. Tamura , 153, 10.48550/arXiv.2203.09562

    2023 doi arXiv

  43. [52]

    R., Millman, K

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

    2020 doi

  44. [53]

    Henyey , L. G. 1937, , 85, 107, 10.1086/143805

    1937 doi

  45. [54]

    G., & Greenstein , J

    Henyey , L. G., & Greenstein , J. L. 1941, , 93, 70, 10.1086/144246

    1941 doi

  46. [55]

    Hildebrand , R. H. 1983, , 24, 267

    1983

  47. [56]

    W., Bovy , J., & Lang , D

    Hogg , D. W., Bovy , J., & Lang , D. 2010, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1008.4686, 10.48550/arXiv.1008.4686

    2010 doi arXiv

  48. [57]

    Hough, P. V. C. 1962, Method and Means for Recognizing Complex Patterns

    1962

  49. [58]

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

    2007 doi

  50. [59]

    2013, , 767, 80, 10.1088/0004-637X/767/1/80

    Ienaka , N., Kawara , K., Matsuoka , Y., et al. 2013, , 767, 80, 10.1088/0004-637X/767/1/80

    2013 doi

  51. [60]

    D., Akritas , M

    Isobe , T., Feigelson , E. D., Akritas , M. G., & Babu , G. J. 1990, , 364, 104, 10.1086/169390

    1990 doi

  52. [61]

    K., & Ammon , K

    Jordi , K., Grebel , E. K., & Ammon , K. 2006, , 460, 339, 10.1051/0004-6361:20066082

    2006 doi

  53. [62]

    2017, , 69, 31, 10.1093/pasj/psx003

    Kawara , K., Matsuoka , Y., Sano , K., et al. 2017, , 69, 31, 10.1093/pasj/psx003

    2017 doi

  54. [63]

    A., van Dokkum , P., Danieli , S., et al

    Keim , M. A., van Dokkum , P., Danieli , S., et al. 2022, , 935, 160, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7dab

    2022 doi

  55. [64]

    S., Hasan , I., & Tyson , J

    Kelvin , L. S., Hasan , I., & Tyson , J. A. 2023, , 520, 2484, 10.1093/mnras/stad180

    2023 doi

  56. [65]

    King , I. R. 1971, , 83, 199, 10.1086/129100

    1971 doi

  57. [66]

    V., Valenzuela , O., & Prada , F

    Klypin , A., Kravtsov , A. V., Valenzuela , O., & Prada , F. 1999, , 522, 82, 10.1086/307643

    1999 doi

  58. [67]

    W., & Rosolowsky , E

    Koch , E. W., & Rosolowsky , E. W. 2015, , 452, 3435, 10.1093/mnras/stv1521

    2015 doi

  59. [68]

    W., Rosolowsky , E

    Koch , E. W., Rosolowsky , E. W., Boyden , R. D., et al. 2019, , 158, 1, 10.3847/1538-3881/ab1cc0

    2019 doi

  60. [69]

    2001, , 322, 231, 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04022.x

    Kroupa , P. 2001, , 322, 231, 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04022.x

    2001

  61. [70]

    W., Mierle , K., Blanton , M., & Roweis , S

    Lang , D., Hogg , D. W., Mierle , K., Blanton , M., & Roweis , S. 2010, , 139, 1782, 10.1088/0004-6256/139/5/1782

    2010 doi

  62. [71]

    M., Gromoll , S., Shara , M

    Lanzetta , K. M., Gromoll , S., Shara , M. M., et al. 2023, , 135, 015002, 10.1088/1538-3873/acaee6

    2023 doi

  63. [72]

    R., Postman , M., Weaver , H

    Lauer , T. R., Postman , M., Weaver , H. A., et al. 2021, , 906, 77, 10.3847/1538-4357/abc881

    2021 doi

  64. [73]

    J., Mattila , K., & Schnur , G

    Laureijs , R. J., Mattila , K., & Schnur , G. 1987, , 184, 269

    1987

  65. [74]

    2022, , 925, 219, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac32c6

    Liu , Q., Abraham , R., Gilhuly , C., et al. 2022, , 925, 219, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac32c6

    2022 doi

  66. [75]

    G., et al

    Liu , Q., Abraham , R., Martin , P. G., et al. 2023, , 953, 7, 10.3847/1538-4357/acdee3

    2023 doi

  67. [76]

    M., Primack , J., & Madau , P

    Lotz , J. M., Primack , J., & Madau , P. 2004, , 128, 163, 10.1086/421849

    2004 doi

  68. [77]

    J., Beintema , D

    Low , F. J., Beintema , D. A., Gautier , T. N., et al. 1984, , 278, L19, 10.1086/184213

    1984 doi

  69. [78]

    E., Spavone , M., et al

    Martin , G., Bazkiaei , A. E., Spavone , M., et al. 2022, , 513, 1459, 10.1093/mnras/stac1003

    2022 doi

  70. [79]

    F., McConnachie , A

    Martin , N. F., McConnachie , A. W., Irwin , M., et al. 2009, , 705, 758, 10.1088/0004-637X/705/1/758

    2009 doi

  71. [80]

    G., Miville-Desch \^e nes , M

    Martin , P. G., Miville-Desch \^e nes , M. A., Roy , A., et al. 2010, , 518, L105, 10.1051/0004-6361/201014684

    2010 doi

  72. [81]

    S., Mezger , P

    Mathis , J. S., Mezger , P. G., & Panagia , N. 1983, , 128, 212

    1983

  73. [82]

    2011, , 736, 119, 10.1088/0004-637X/736/2/119

    Matsuoka , Y., Ienaka , N., Kawara , K., & Oyabu , S. 2011, , 736, 119, 10.1088/0004-637X/736/2/119

    2011 doi

  74. [83]

    1979, , 78, 253

    Mattila , K. 1979, , 78, 253

    1979

  75. [84]

    2023, , 524, 2797, 10.1093/mnras/stad1940

    Mattila , K., V \"a is \"a nen , P., Lehtinen , K., Haikala , L., & Haas , M. 2023, , 524, 2797, 10.1093/mnras/stad1940

    2023 doi

  76. [85]

    W., Irwin , M

    McConnachie , A. W., Irwin , M. J., Ibata , R. A., et al. 2009, , 461, 66, 10.1038/nature08327

    2009 doi

  77. [86]

    2013, , 560, A63, 10.1051/0004-6361/201321885

    Men'shchikov , A. 2013, , 560, A63, 10.1051/0004-6361/201321885

    2013 doi

  78. [87]

    C., Harding , P., Feldmeier , J

    Mihos , J. C., Harding , P., Feldmeier , J. J., et al. 2017, , 834, 16, 10.3847/1538-4357/834/1/16

    2017 doi

  79. [88]

    A., Duc , P

    Miville-Desch \^e nes , M. A., Duc , P. A., Marleau , F., et al. 2016, , 593, A4, 10.1051/0004-6361/201628503

    2016 doi

  80. [89]

    2005, , 157, 302, 10.1086/427938

    Miville-Desch \^e nes , M.-A., & Lagache , G. 2005, , 157, 302, 10.1086/427938

    2005 doi

  81. [90]

    A., Lagache , G., Boulanger , F., & Puget , J

    Miville-Desch \^e nes , M. A., Lagache , G., Boulanger , F., & Puget , J. L. 2007, , 469, 595, 10.1051/0004-6361:20066962

    2007 doi

  82. [91]

    A., Levrier , F., & Falgarone , E

    Miville-Desch \^e nes , M. A., Levrier , F., & Falgarone , E. 2003, , 593, 831, 10.1086/376603

    2003 doi

  83. [92]

    C., & Sujatha , N

    Murthy , J., Henry , R. C., & Sujatha , N. V. 2010, , 724, 1389, 10.1088/0004-637X/724/2/1389

    2010 doi

  84. [93]

    2008, , 485, 917, 10.1051/0004-6361:20079106

    Ossenkopf , V., Krips , M., & Stutzki , J. 2008, , 485, 917, 10.1051/0004-6361:20079106

    2008 doi

  85. [94]

    S., Low , F

    Paley , E. S., Low , F. J., McGraw , J. T., Cutri , R. M., & Rix , H.-W. 1991, , 376, 335, 10.1086/170283

    1991 doi

  86. [95]

    2011, Journal of Machine Learning Research, 12, 2825, 10.48550/arXiv.1201.0490

    Pedregosa , F., Varoquaux , G., Gramfort , A., et al. 2011, Journal of Machine Learning Research, 12, 2825, 10.48550/arXiv.1201.0490

    2011 doi arXiv

  87. [96]

    2011, , 536, A19, 10.1051/0004-6361/201116479

    Planck Collaboration 2011S Planck Collaboration XIX . 2011, , 536, A19, 10.1051/0004-6361/201116479

    2011 doi

  88. [97]

    2011, , 536, A24, 10.1051/0004-6361/201116485

    Planck Collaboration 2011X Planck Collaboration XXIV . 2011, , 536, A24, 10.1051/0004-6361/201116485

    2011 doi

  89. [98]

    2014, , 571, A11, 10.1051/0004-6361/201323195

    Planck Collaboration 2014K Planck Collaboration XI . 2014, , 571, A11, 10.1051/0004-6361/201323195

    2014 doi

  90. [99]

    Planck Collaboration IntQ Planck Collaboration Int. XVII . 2014, , 566, A55, 10.1051/0004-6361/201323270

    2014 doi

  91. [100]

    Planck Collaboration IntZW Planck Collaboration Int. XLVIII . 2016, , 596, A109, 10.1051/0004-6361/201629022

    2016 doi

  92. [101]

    1996, , 108, 699, 10.1086/133788

    Racine , R. 1996, , 108, 699, 10.1086/133788

    1996 doi

  93. [102]

    2020, reproject: Python-based astronomical image reprojection , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:2011.023

    Robitaille , T., Deil , C., & Ginsburg , A. 2020, reproject: Python-based astronomical image reprojection , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:2011.023. 2011.023

    2020

  94. [103]

    2020, , 644, A42, 10.1051/0004-6361/201936111

    Rom \'a n , J., Trujillo , I., & Montes , M. 2020, , 644, A42, 10.1051/0004-6361/201936111

    2020 doi

  95. [104]

    J., Richer , J

    Salji , C. J., Richer , J. S., Buckle , J. V., et al. 2015, , 449, 1782, 10.1093/mnras/stv369

    2015 doi

  96. [105]

    1976, , 81, 954, 10.1086/111975

    Sandage , A. 1976, , 81, 954, 10.1086/111975

    1976 doi

  97. [106]

    2014, , 567, A97, 10.1051/0004-6361/201423429

    Sandin , C. 2014, , 567, A97, 10.1051/0004-6361/201423429

    2014 doi

  98. [107]

    2015, , 811, 77, 10.1088/0004-637X/811/2/77

    Sano , K., Kawara , K., Matsuura , S., et al. 2015, , 811, 77, 10.1088/0004-637X/811/2/77

    2015 doi

  99. [108]

    2017, , 849, 31, 10.3847/1538-4357/aa906c

    Sano , K., & Matsuura , S. 2017, , 849, 31, 10.3847/1538-4357/aa906c

    2017 doi

  100. [109]

    2016, , 821, L11, 10.3847/2041-8205/821/1/L11

    Sano , K., Matsuura , S., Tsumura , K., et al. 2016, , 821, L11, 10.3847/2041-8205/821/1/L11

    2016 doi

  101. [110]

    K., & Finkbeiner , D

    Saydjari , A. K., & Finkbeiner , D. P. 2022, , 933, 155, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac6875

    2022 doi

  102. [111]

    Schisano , E., Rygl , K. L. J., Molinari , S., et al. 2014, , 791, 27, 10.1088/0004-637X/791/1/27

    2014 doi

  103. [112]

    2020, , 492, 5420, 10.1093/mnras/stz3466

    Schisano , E., Molinari , S., Elia , D., et al. 2020, , 492, 5420, 10.1093/mnras/stz3466

    2020 doi

  104. [113]

    J., Finkbeiner , D

    Schlegel , D. J., Finkbeiner , D. P., & Davis , M. 1998, , 500, 525, 10.1086/305772

    1998 doi

  105. [114]

    Schneider , S., & Elmegreen , B. G. 1979, , 41, 87, 10.1086/190609

    1979 doi

  106. [115]

    Simon , J. D. 2019, , 57, 375, 10.1146/annurev-astro-091918-104453

    2019 doi

  107. [116]

    T., Harding , P., & Mihos , J

    Slater , C. T., Harding , P., & Mihos , J. C. 2009, , 121, 1267, 10.1086/648457

    2009 doi

  108. [117]

    A., Savchenko , S

    Smirnov , A. A., Savchenko , S. S., Poliakov , D. M., et al. 2023, , 519, 4735, 10.1093/mnras/stac3765

    2023 doi

  109. [118]

    2011, , 414, 350, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18394.x

    Sousbie , T. 2011, , 414, 350, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18394.x

    2011

  110. [119]

    1998, , 336, 697

    Stutzki , J., Bensch , F., Heithausen , A., Ossenkopf , V., & Zielinsky , M. 1998, , 336, 697

    1998

  111. [120]

    Symons , T., Zemcov , M., Cooray , A., Lisse , C., & Poppe , A. R. 2023, , 945, 45, 10.3847/1538-4357/acaa37

    2023 doi

  112. [121]

    A., Lee , J

    Thilker , D. A., Lee , J. C., Deger , S., et al. 2023, , 944, L13, 10.3847/2041-8213/acaeac

    2023 doi

  113. [122]

    L., Nunez-Iglesias, J., et al

    Van der Walt, S., Sch \"o nberger, J. L., Nunez-Iglesias, J., et al. 2014, PeerJ, 2, e453

    2014

  114. [123]

    2024, , 136, 034503, 10.1088/1538-3873/ad2866

    van Dokkum , P., & Pasha , I. 2024, , 136, 034503, 10.1088/1538-3873/ad2866

    2024 doi

  115. [124]

    2020, , 132, 074503, 10.1088/1538-3873/ab9416

    van Dokkum , P., Lokhorst , D., Danieli , S., et al. 2020, , 132, 074503, 10.1088/1538-3873/ab9416

    2020 doi

  116. [125]

    G., Abraham , R., Merritt , A., et al

    van Dokkum , P. G., Abraham , R., Merritt , A., et al. 2015, , 798, L45, 10.1088/2041-8205/798/2/L45

    2015 doi

  117. [126]

    E., et al

    Virtanen , P., Gommers , R., Oliphant , T. E., et al. 2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261, 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2

    2020 doi

  118. [127]

    E., Kaviraj , S., Collins , C

    Watkins , A. E., Kaviraj , S., Collins , C. C., et al. 2024, , 528, 4289, 10.1093/mnras/stae236

    2024 doi

  119. [128]

    E., Mihos , J

    Watkins , A. E., Mihos , J. C., & Harding , P. 2015, , 800, L3, 10.1088/2041-8205/800/1/L3

    2015 doi

  120. [129]

    C., & Draine , B

    Weingartner , J. C., & Draine , B. T. 2001, , 548, 296, 10.1086/318651

    2001 doi

  121. [130]

    R., Hopkins , P

    Wetzel , A. R., Hopkins , P. F., Kim , J.-h., et al. 2016, , 827, L23, 10.3847/2041-8205/827/2/L23

    2016 doi

  122. [131]

    N., Gordon , K

    Witt , A. N., Gordon , K. D., Vijh , U. P., et al. 2006, , 636, 303, 10.1086/498052

    2006 doi

  123. [132]

    N., Mandel , S., Sell , P

    Witt , A. N., Mandel , S., Sell , P. H., Dixon , T., & Vijh , U. P. 2008, , 679, 497, 10.1086/587131

    2008 doi

  124. [133]

    1999, , 352, 645

    Zagury , F., Boulanger , F., & Banchet , V. 1999, , 352, 645

    1999

  125. [134]

    2021, , 257, 60, 10.3847/1538-4365/ac2607

    Zaritsky , D., Donnerstein , R., Karunakaran , A., et al. 2021, , 257, 60, 10.3847/1538-4365/ac2607

    2021 doi

  126. [135]

    2022, , 261, 11, 10.3847/1538-4365/ac6ceb

    ---. 2022, , 261, 11, 10.3847/1538-4365/ac6ceb

    2022 doi

  127. [136]

    X., Bensaid , S., et al

    Zavagno , A., Dup \'e , F. X., Bensaid , S., et al. 2023, , 669, A120, 10.1051/0004-6361/202244103

    2023 doi

  128. [137]

    2017, Nature Communications, 8, 15003, 10.1038/ncomms15003

    Zemcov , M., Immel , P., Nguyen , C., et al. 2017, Nature Communications, 8, 15003, 10.1038/ncomms15003

    2017 doi

  129. [138]

    G., Cloutier , R., et al

    Zhang , J., Martin , P. G., Cloutier , R., et al. 2023, , 948, 4, 10.3847/1538-4357/acc177

    2023 doi

  130. [139]

    2024, , 168, 88, 10.3847/1538-3881/ad58d5

    Zhao , Y., Zhang , W., Ma , L., Wen , S., & Wu , H. 2024, , 168, 88, 10.3847/1538-3881/ad58d5

    2024 doi

  131. [140]

    Zubko , V., Dwek , E., & Arendt , R. G. 2004, , 152, 211, 10.1086/382351

    2004 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.