Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 112 references

CO-to-H$_2$ conversion factor and grain size distribution through the analysis of $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$-$q_\mathrm{PAH}$ relation

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper finds that the resolved CO-to-H2 conversion factor correlates positively with the PAH fraction in 42 nearby galaxies, while the dust-evolution model predicts no such correlation, and concludes there is no conclusive evidence…

desk verdict Useful, honest null result on grain-size effects on alpha_CO, but the fixed D/M=0.48 taken from the tested model is an untested load-bearing assumption. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.03954 v1 pith:CI2XIXAW submitted 2024-12-05 astro-ph.GA

I-Da Chiang , Hiroyuki Hirashita , Jeremy Chastenet , Karin M. Sandstrom , Eric W. Koch , Adam K. Leroy , Yu-Hsuan Teng , Thomas G. Williams This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords CO-to-H2conversionfactorgrainsizedistributionPAHfractiondust-to-metalsratiomoleculargasdustevolutionnearbygalaxiesinterstellarmedium
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

Using 2-kpc resolved observations of 42 nearby galaxies, this paper asks whether the grain size distribution—traced by the PAH fraction $q_\mathrm{PAH}$—changes the CO-to-H$_2$ conversion factor $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$, and how the data compare with a one-zone dust-evolution model. The observed $q_\mathrm{PAH}$ level matches a diffuse-gas-dominated model (dense gas fraction $\eta=0.2$) where shattering produces small grains, while the observed decline of $q_\mathrm{PAH}$ with metallicity favours stronger coagulation. Both observations and model show $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$ falling with metallicity, but they disagree on $q_\mathrm{PAH}$: observed $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$ rises with $q_\mathrm{PAH}$ (Spearman $\rho=0.21$), whereas the model predicts no definite $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$–$q_\mathrm{PAH}$ correlation. The authors conclude that they found no conclusive evidence that grain size distribution affects $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$, and they attribute the resolved discrepancy to the model's one-zone treatment. If correct, the result redirects $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$ modelling away from dust-size effects toward other local conditions such as gas temperature and CO emissivity.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the $q_\mathrm{PAH}$-to-grain-size connection combined with the H23 one-zone model. $q_\mathrm{PAH}$, the mass fraction of PAHs (aromatic grains with radii $<13$ Å) relative to total dust, is measured per 2-kpc pixel by fitting mid- and far-infrared photometry with the adopted physical dust model; it serves as the observable proxy for the abundance of small grains. The H23 model evolves the grain size distribution through shattering and coagulation regulated by the dense gas fraction $\eta$, then computes H$_2$ and CO abundances in a uniform cloud to predict $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$, D/G, $q_\mathrm{PAH}$, and SDR (total grain surface area per dust mass) simultaneously. Comparing the observed and modelled $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$–$q_\mathrm{PAH}$–metallicity relations is the test that isolates whether grain size distribution, rather than dust abundance alone, controls the conversion factor.

What would settle it

Derive $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$ again using a per-pixel dust-to-metals ratio measured independently (for example from X-ray gas abundances and far-infrared dust mass) and recompute the Spearman correlation with $q_\mathrm{PAH}$; if the positive $\rho=0.21$ vanishes or reverses, the central observational claim rests on the fixed $D/M$ assumption rather than on grain size. A complementary check is the partial correlation of $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$ with $q_\mathrm{PAH}$ holding metallicity and galactocentric radius fixed, since the paper's interpretation predicts that the positive relation is a byproduct of metal enrichment.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that, at a fixed dust-to-metals ratio, the resolved $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$–$q_\mathrm{PAH}$ relation is positive in real galaxies and absent in the one-zone model, so the grain size distribution does not demonstrably set $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$. The positive observed correlation is interpreted as a secondary effect of metal enrichment: high metallicity lowers both $q_\mathrm{PAH}$ (via coagulation) and $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$ (via dust shielding), producing a spurious positive link between them. The paper also establishes that $q_\mathrm{PAH}$ alone is a suboptimal tracer of the grain surface-area-to-mass ratio SDR that the model uses: at fixed $\eta$ each $q_\mathrm{PAH}$ value maps to multiple SDR values, while metallicity maps one-to-one to SDR, so the two observables together are needed to infer SDR. In galaxy-integrated data the $\eta=0.2$ model reproduces the $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$–$q_\mathrm{PAH}$–metallicity relations, which the paper takes as evidence that the pixel-by-pixel discrepancy stems from the one-zone treatment rather than from a fundamentally wrong dust-evolution picture.

Load-bearing premise

Every derived value of $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$ assumes a single fixed dust-to-metals ratio of 0.48 across all 42 galaxies and all pixels; if the true ratio varies with metallicity or environment, the derived $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$ values shift systematically and the observed $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$–$q_\mathrm{PAH}$ correlation could change sign or strength.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If grain size distribution is secondary, then $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$ variations at fixed metallicity must be driven by other local conditions such as gas temperature, velocity dispersion, and CO emissivity, not by dust evolution alone.
  • Because $q_\mathrm{PAH}$ traces SDR variation with $\eta$ but not at fixed $\eta$, any observational test of grain-size effects on $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$ needs both $q_\mathrm{PAH}$ and metallicity to reconstruct SDR, or a direct SDR tracer.
  • The observed positive $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$–$q_\mathrm{PAH}$ correlation is most naturally produced by the common metallicity dependence of both quantities, not by the small-grain shielding mechanism that would predict a negative correlation.
  • At galaxy-integrated scales the $\eta=0.2$ model matches the data, so the one-zone model's failure appears only in resolved pixel-by-pixel comparisons, pointing to unresolved local physical conditions.
  • The bulge radiation-field correction raises $q_\mathrm{PAH}$ only in the innermost, highest-metallicity pixels and does not erase the negative $q_\mathrm{PAH}$–metallicity trend, leaving coagulation as a viable explanation.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A direct test would measure the partial correlation of $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$ with $q_\mathrm{PAH}$ controlling for metallicity and radius; the paper's interpretation predicts the positive $\rho=0.21$ should weaken or vanish, and a persistent signal would implicate the model's one-zone approximation more strongly.
  • If the dust-to-metals ratio varies with environment, the fixed 0.48 assumption could create the observed positive $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$–$q_\mathrm{PAH}$ relation; a per-pixel $D/M$ measurement would settle whether the relation is real.
  • The tension between low $\eta$ giving the right $q_\mathrm{PAH}$ level and high $\eta$ giving the right $q_\mathrm{PAH}$–metallicity slope suggests that a single dense-gas fraction cannot describe whole galaxies, motivating two-phase or spatially variable $\eta$ models.
  • Extensions could apply the same $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$–$q_\mathrm{PAH}$–metallicity comparison to higher-resolution data with direct extinction-based SDR tracers to bypass $q_\mathrm{PAH}$'s degeneracy.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

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. The paper investigates whether the grain size distribution, traced observationally by the PAH fraction q_PAH, affects the CO-to-H2 conversion factor alpha_CO in nearby galaxies. The authors use a sample of 42 galaxies at 2 kpc resolution, with alpha_CO derived from dust, HI, and metallicity maps assuming a fixed dust-to-metals ratio D/M = 0.48, and compare the observed relations with the analytical dust evolution model of H23. They find that the observed q_PAH–metallicity relation is best reproduced by a low dense-gas fraction (eta = 0.2), that both observations and models show an anti-correlation between alpha_CO and metallicity, and that the observed alpha_CO–q_PAH correlation is positive (Spearman rho = 0.21) while the model predicts no definite correlation. The paper concludes that there is no conclusive evidence that the grain size distribution affects alpha_CO, and attributes the discrepancy to the limitations of the one-zone model or to q_PAH being an imperfect proxy.

Significance. If the central null result is robust, the paper makes a useful empirical contribution by showing that at 2 kpc resolution q_PAH does not behave as a simple tracer of the grain size distribution relevant to CO shielding, thereby constraining the applicability of one-zone dust evolution models. The analysis is notable for its careful treatment of completeness and S/N cuts, for being explicit that the result is a null result, and for including a bulge-radiation-field correction test. However, the significance of the observational claim is currently limited because the derived alpha_CO values and the model comparison are both normalized by the same assumed D/M = 0.48, so the test is not independent of the model being evaluated.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 2 and Section 4.2] The derived alpha_CO and all correlations built on it depend on the fixed dust-to-metals ratio D/M = 0.48. The paper notes that the C24 range of D/M is roughly 0.4–0.7 and that this corresponds to 0.1–0.2 dex shifts in alpha_CO, but it does not test how the central Spearman rho = 0.21 for the alpha_CO–q_PAH relation responds to this range. If the true D/M varies with environment in a way that correlates with q_PAH, the observed positive correlation could be artificially produced or erased. Please recompute the alpha_CO–q_PAH correlation (and, if needed, the binned regressions in Figs. 2 and 3) for D/M = 0.4, 0.48, 0.55, and 0.7, and state whether the sign and significance of rho survive.
  2. [Section 3] The model comparison only retains model predictions with D/M between 0.48 and 0.43 (90% of 0.48), and the observations are normalized to D/M = 0.48 taken from the same model family. This combination means that the comparison is not independent of the model assumptions. The paper does not justify why the post-hoc D/M cut is preferable to comparing over the full model-predicted D/M range, nor does it show the model's D/M evolution outside the saturation regime. Please provide a test of the key alpha_CO–q_PAH comparison using the full model range, or explicitly argue why the saturation-regime cut is required for a fair comparison.
  3. [Section 5.2 and Eq. (3)] The predicted alpha_CO values in Fig. 6 are derived from Eq. (3) using an SDR–q_PAH–metallicity interpolation grid built from the same H23 model outputs (Section 5.1), and the observed alpha_CO used in the comparison is derived assuming D/M = 0.48, which is the H23 saturation value. This model-in-the-loop structure weakens the conclusion that the SDR term is secondary. Please show that the interpolation and the resulting conclusions are stable when, for example, individual eta tracks are removed from the grid or when the observational D/M is varied within the 0.4–0.7 range.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states that alpha_CO is derived 'assuming a fixed dust-to-metals ratio' but does not mention the chosen value or that this value is taken from the model being tested; please add the value 0.48 for transparency.
  2. [Figure 2] In the right panel, the model predictions are shown as shaded areas, but the legend for the eta values appears only in the left panel; please make the color-coding of the shaded regions explicit in the right panel for readers who view the panels separately.
  3. [Section 4.2] The sentence 'The observed alpha_CO has a positive correlation with q_PAH' is repeated almost verbatim in the abstract and Section 6; consider varying the wording to avoid redundancy.
  4. [Section 5.3.2] The criteria for selecting the six galaxies with a significant bulge component are clear, but please define 'median deviation' (MD) at first use, since it is not a standard abbreviation.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the observed αCO–qPAH comparison is an independent data–model test; the D/M normalization is a constant calibration that does not determine the Spearman correlations.

full rationale

The paper's central comparison is between αCO values derived from measured dust, H I, metallicity, and CO intensities (C24, with D/M=0.48) and αCO values predicted by the H23 analytic model. No parameter of the H23 model is fit to the observed αCO values, and the observational Spearman correlations (ρ=0.21 for αCO–qPAH, −0.41 for αCO–metallicity) are computed directly from the data. The choice D/M=0.48 is taken from H23 for consistency, but because D/M enters the dust-based αCO estimate as a constant multiplicative factor, it cannot by itself create or reverse a rank correlation with qPAH; the paper's stated D/M range (0.4–0.7) is a zero-point uncertainty, not a construction of the trend. The SDR-based prediction in §5.1–5.2 uses H23's Eq. (3) with SDR inferred from an H23 model interpolation, but this is a conditional model prediction compared against independent observed αCO, not a parameter fitted to that αCO; the resulting overprediction at low αCO is an actual discrepancy. The qPAH model comparison is similarly a test of H23 predictions against SED-fitted qPAH values. Self-citations to Hirashita's prior model papers supply the model being tested, not an unverified premise that forces the result, and the paper does not invoke any uniqueness theorem. No equation in the paper reduces by construction to its inputs, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. A real environmental variation of D/M correlated with qPAH would be a physical systematic that the paper does not test; this is a robustness limitation, not a circular step.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The comparison between data and model relies on several quantities set by the same author group: the D/M normalization (0.48 from H23), the grain size distribution model (H23/Hirashita & Murga 2020), and the αCO-SDR formula (Eq. 3 from H23). This does not make the results circular by construction, but it limits the independence of the validation and should be kept in mind when interpreting the model-data agreement.

free parameters (3)
  • dense gas fraction η = η = 0.2 best matches observed qPAH level; values 0.1, 0.3, 0.5 also explored
    Controls the balance between shattering and coagulation in the dust evolution model; η = 0.2 is selected because it reproduces the observed qPAH level (§4.1), and is then used to interpret the αCO-qPAH relation.
  • dust-to-metals ratio D/M = 0.48
    Adopted from H23 to set the maximum D/M in the model and to normalize the observed αCO derivation; the choice is for consistency with the model, not independently measured (§2).
  • star formation time-scale = 5 Gyr
    Model input that regulates metal enrichment; the paper argues it has minor influence because metallicity, not age, is used as the evolutionary stage (§3).
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The Draine & Li (2007) dust SED model yields a faithful estimate of Σdust and qPAH.
    qPAH and Σdust are taken from SED fits with the Draine & Li (2007) model (Chastenet et al. 2024); the derived qPAH-αCO relation could be biased if this model misassigns PAH mass or misestimates dust mass.
  • domain assumption The dust-to-metals ratio is constant at D/M = 0.48 across the sample.
    αCO is derived from Σdust and metallicity under this assumption (§2); true D/M variations would shift αCO and could change the correlations studied in the paper.
  • domain assumption The H23/Hirashita & Murga (2020) one-zone model correctly describes the evolution of grain size distribution.
    The model predictions for qPAH, SDR, and αCO are taken from this model family (§3); the paper itself notes the one-zone limitation (§4.2) and the model's assumptions about shattering, coagulation, accretion, and destruction.
  • domain assumption The oxygen-to-total-metal mass ratio is fixed when converting 12+log(O/H) to Z.
    Metallicity is converted to Z with a fixed scaling from C24 (§2); if the ratio varies, the evolutionary stage mapping and the model comparison would change.
  • domain assumption The CO(2-1) to CO(1-0) line ratio formula from Schinnerer & Leroy (2024) is valid for galaxies lacking CO(1-0) data.
    Used when only CO(2-1) data are available (Eq. 2, §2); an incorrect line ratio would directly shift the derived αCO for those galaxies.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of CO-to-H$_2$ conversion factor and grain size distribution through the analysis of $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$-$q_\mathrm{PAH}$ relation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CI2XIXAW

@misc{pith2026241203954,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: CO-to-H$_2$ conversion factor and grain size distribution through the analysis of $\alpha_\mathrmCO$-$q_\mathrmPAH$ relation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CI2XIXAW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.03954}
}
abstract

The CO-to-H$_2$ conversion factor ($\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$) is expected to vary with dust abundance and grain size distribution through the efficiency of shielding gas from CO-dissociation radiation. We present a comprehensive analysis of $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$ and grain size distribution for nearby galaxies, using the PAH fraction ($q_\mathrm{PAH}$) as an observable proxy of grain size distribution. We adopt the resolved observations at 2-kpc resolution in 42 nearby galaxies, where $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$ is derived from measured metallicity and surface densities of dust and HI assuming a fixed dust-to-metals ratio. We use an analytical model for the evolution of H$_2$ and CO, in which the evolution of grain size distribution is controlled by the dense gas fraction ($\eta$). We find that the observed level of $q_\mathrm{PAH}$ is consistent with the diffuse-gas-dominated model ($\eta=0.2$) where dust shattering is more efficient. Meanwhile, the slight decreasing trend of observed $q_\mathrm{PAH}$ with metallicity is more consistent with high-$\eta$ predictions, likely due to the more efficient loss of PAHs by coagulation. We discuss how grain size distribution (indicated by $q_\mathrm{PAH}$) and metallicity impact $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$; we however did not obtain conclusive evidence that the grain size distribution affects $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$. Observations and model predictions show similar anti-correlation between $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$ and 12+log(O/H). Meanwhile, there is a considerable difference in how resolved $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$ behaves with $q_\mathrm{PAH}$. The observed $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$ has a positive correlation with $q_\mathrm{PAH}$, while the model-predicted $\alpha_\mathrm{CO}$ does not have a definite correlation with $q_\mathrm{PAH}$. This difference is likely due to the limitation of one-zone treatment in the model.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.03954 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. 𝑞PAH as a function of metallicity. The filled blue squares (orange hexagons) show the binned observed data in the fiducial (broad) sample and the lines in the same colour show the linear regression of the corresponding sample. The linear regression only utilizes measurements in the metallic￾ity range where data are complete. The unfilled big hexagons/squares and the dashed lines indicate the region where observed da… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Relation between measured and modeled 𝛼CO and physical parameters, metallicity (left) and 𝑞PAH (right). The small empty circles show the distribution of pixel-by-pixel measurements. The orange hexagons show the binned data distribution, while the orange line shows the linear regression of pixel-by-pixel measurements. We show the model prediction from H23 with different values of dense gas fraction in brown, blue and… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Measured and modelled 𝛼CO in terms of metallicity (left) and 𝑞PAH (right) for galaxy-integrated observations. Each orange hexagon represents one observed galaxy. The completeness threshold is not considered for the galaxy-integrated regression. The lines for the model predictions are the same as those shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Relation among SDR, 𝑞PAH and metallicity. The symbols show the model-predicted dataset, and the shaded region presents the 2-dimensional interpolation of SDR. We drop the low-metallicity points because we cannot reach a smooth interpolation with them. interpolation, we…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: 𝛼CO and grain size distribution. Left: 𝛼CO predicted as a function of D/G and SDR (equation 18 in H23) versus the galaxy-integrated observations. Right: The predicted 𝛼CO versus SDR. There is no obvious trend between 𝛼CO and SDR, suggesting that the dependence of 𝛼CO o…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Left: Pixel-by-pixel 𝑈 as a function of 𝑟g in two example galaxies (orange circles and blue squares for NGC 4321 and NGC 3627, respectively). The dashed lines show the exponential disc fits (𝑈disc) for each galaxy with corresponding colours. In NGC 4321, we could extra…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

112 extracted references · 16 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Accurso G., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx1556 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.470.4750A 470, 4750

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1556 2017

  2. [2]

    Aniano G., et al., 2020, @doi [ApJ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5fdb , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...889..150A 889, 150

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab5fdb 2020

  3. [3]

    Arimoto N., Sofue Y., Tsujimoto T., 1996, @doi [ ] 10.1093/pasj/48.2.275 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996PASJ...48..275A 48, 275

    doi:10.1093/pasj/48.2.275 1996

  4. [4]

    S., Takeuchi T

    Asano R. S., Takeuchi T. T., Hirashita H., Nozawa T., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt506 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.432..637A 432, 637

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stt506 2013

  5. [5]

    J., Scott P., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.astro.46.060407.145222 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ARA

    Asplund M., Grevesse N., Sauval A. J., Scott P., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.astro.46.060407.145222 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ARA

    arXiv 2009

  6. [6]

    Astropy Collaboration et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013A

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 2013

  7. [7]

    Astropy Collaboration et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018AJ....156..123A 156, 123

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f 2018

  8. [8]

    Astropy Collaboration et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c74 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...935..167A 935, 167

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c74 2022

Show all 112 references
  1. [9]

    Belfiore F., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202244863 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023A&A...670A..67B 670, A67

    2023 doi

  2. [10]

    D., Wolfire M., Leroy A

    Bolatto A. D., Wolfire M., Leroy A. K., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev-astro-082812-140944 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ARA

    2013 doi

  3. [11]

    P., Burton W

    Boulanger F., Abergel A., Bernard J. P., Burton W. B., Desert F. X., Hartmann D., Lagache G., Puget J. L., 1996, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996A&A...312..256B 312, 256

    1996

  4. [12]

    Chastenet J., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab16cf , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...876...62C 876, 62

    2019 doi

  5. [13]

    Chastenet J., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/abe942 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...912..103C 912, 103

    2021 doi

  6. [14]

    Chastenet J., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/acadd7 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...944L..11C 944, L11

    2023 doi

  7. [15]

    arXiv:2410.03835

    Chastenet J., et al., 2024, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2410.03835 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv241003835C p. arXiv:2410.03835

    2024 doi arXiv

  8. [16]

    Chen L.-H., Hirashita H., Hou K.-C., Aoyama S., Shimizu I., Nagamine K., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx2863 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.474.1545C 474, 1545

    2018 doi

  9. [17]

    Chiang I.-D., et al., 2021, @doi [ApJ] 10.3847/1538-4357/abceb6 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...907...29C 907, 29

    2021 doi

  10. [18]

    Chiang I.-D., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad23ed , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...964...18C 964, 18

    2024 doi

  11. [19]

    D e Blok W. J. G., Walter F., Brinks E., Trachternach C., Oh S.-H., Kennicutt R. C., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/136/6/2648 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008AJ....136.2648D 136, 2648

    2008 doi

  12. [20]

    M., 1998, @doi [ ] 10.1086/306339 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998ApJ...507..615D 507, 615

    Downes D., Solomon P. M., 1998, @doi [ ] 10.1086/306339 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998ApJ...507..615D 507, 615

    1998 doi

  13. [21]

    M., Radford S

    Downes D., Solomon P. M., Radford S. J. E., 1993, @doi [ ] 10.1086/186984 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993ApJ...414L..13D 414, L13

    1993 doi

  14. [22]

    T., Li A., 2007, @doi [ApJ] 10.1086/511055 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...657..810D 657, 810

    Draine B. T., Li A., 2007, @doi [ApJ] 10.1086/511055 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...657..810D 657, 810

    2007 doi

  15. [23]

    T., et al., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/518306 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...663..866D 663, 866

    Draine B. T., et al., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/518306 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...663..866D 663, 866

    2007 doi

  16. [24]

    T., et al., 2014, @doi [ApJ] 10.1088/0004-637X/780/2/172 , 780, 172

    Draine B. T., et al., 2014, @doi [ApJ] 10.1088/0004-637X/780/2/172 , 780, 172

    2014 doi

  17. [25]

    Druard C., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201423682 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014A&A...567A.118D 567, A118

    2014 doi

  18. [26]

    V., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/acac92 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...944L..16E 944, L16

    Egorov O. V., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/acac92 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...944L..16E 944, L16

    2023 doi

  19. [27]

    Emsellem E., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202141727 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022A&A...659A.191E 659, A191

    2022 doi

  20. [28]

    Y., Kravtsov A

    Feldmann R., Gnedin N. Y., Kravtsov A. V., 2012, @doi [ApJ] 10.1088/0004-637X/747/2/124 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...747..124F 747, 124

    2012 doi

  21. [29]

    P., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev-astro-081817-051900 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ARA&A..56..673G 56, 673

    Galliano F., Galametz M., Jones A. P., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev-astro-081817-051900 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ARA&A..56..673G 56, 673

    2018 doi

  22. [30]

    Glover S. C. O., Mac Low M. M., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17907.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.412..337G 412, 337

    2011

  23. [31]

    D., et al., 2014, @doi [ApJ] 10.1088/0004-637X/797/2/85 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...797...85G 797, 85

    Gordon K. D., et al., 2014, @doi [ApJ] 10.1088/0004-637X/797/2/85 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...797...85G 797, 85

    2014 doi

  24. [32]

    Gratier P., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201014441 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010A&A...522A...3G 522, A3

    2010 doi

  25. [33]

    A., Casandjian J.-M., Terrier R., 2005, @doi [Science] 10.1126/science.1106924 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005Sci...307.1292G 307, 1292

    Grenier I. A., Casandjian J.-M., Terrier R., 2005, @doi [Science] 10.1126/science.1106924 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005Sci...307.1292G 307, 1292

    2005 doi

  26. [34]

    Groves B., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad114 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.520.4902G 520, 4902

    2023 doi

  27. [35]

    Hayashi K., Okamoto R., Yamamoto H., Hayakawa T., Tachihara K., Fukui Y., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab2051 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...878..131H 878, 131

    2019 doi

  28. [36]

    Heald G., et al., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201015938 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011A&A...526A.118H 526, A118

    2011 doi

  29. [37]

    Herrero-Illana R., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201834088 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019A&A...628A..71H 628, A71

    2019 doi

  30. [38]

    Hirashita H., 2023a, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac3394 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.518.3827H 518, 3827

    doi

  31. [39]

    Hirashita H., 2023b, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad1286 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.522.4612H 522, 4612

    doi

  32. [40]

    Hirashita H., Aoyama S., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty2838 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.482.2555H 482, 2555

    2019 doi

  33. [41]

    Hirashita H., Harada N., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx118 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.467..699H 467, 699

    2017 doi

  34. [42]

    S., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz3640 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.492.3779H 492, 3779

    Hirashita H., Murga M. S., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz3640 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.492.3779H 492, 3779

    2020 doi

  35. [43]

    Hirashita H., Yan H., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14405.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009MNRAS.394.1061H 394, 1061

    2009

  36. [44]

    S., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa3101 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.499.3046H 499, 3046

    Hirashita H., Deng W., Murga M. S., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa3101 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.499.3046H 499, 3046

    2020 doi

  37. [45]

    K., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201526553 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015A

    Hunt L. K., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201526553 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015A

    2015 doi

  38. [46]

    P., 1997, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997A&A...328..471I 328, 471

    Israel F. P., 1997, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997A&A...328..471I 328, 471

    1997

  39. [47]

    P., 2009a, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:200810655 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A&A...493..525I 493, 525

    Israel F. P., 2009a, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:200810655 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A&A...493..525I 493, 525

    doi

  40. [48]

    P., 2009b, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/200811586 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A&A...506..689I 506, 689

    Israel F. P., 2009b, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/200811586 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A&A...506..689I 506, 689

    doi

  41. [49]

    P., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201834198 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020A&A...635A.131I 635, A131

    Israel F. P., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201834198 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020A&A...635A.131I 635, A131

    2020 doi

  42. [50]

    R., MacLaren I., Wolfendale A

    Issa M. R., MacLaren I., Wolfendale A. W., 1990, , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1990A

    1990

  43. [51]

    Jiao Q., Gao Y., Zhao Y., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab1035 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.504.2360J 504, 2360

    2021 doi

  44. [52]

    S., Wiebe D

    Khramtsova M. S., Wiebe D. S., Boley P. A., Pavlyuchenkov Y. N., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt319 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.431.2006K 431, 2006

    2013 doi

  45. [53]

    S., Wiebe D

    Khramtsova M. S., Wiebe D. S., Lozinskaya T. A., Egorov O. V., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu1482 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.444..757K 444, 757

    2014 doi

  46. [54]

    V., Nguyen T

    Kislov V. V., Nguyen T. L., Mebel A. M., Lin S. H., Smith S. C., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1063/1.1676275 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004JChPh.120.7008K 120, 7008

    2004 doi

  47. [55]

    W., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty1674 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.479.2505K 479, 2505

    Koch E. W., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty1674 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.479.2505K 479, 2505

    2018 doi

  48. [56]

    Kohno M., Sofue Y., 2024a, @doi [ ] 10.1093/pasj/psae033 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024PASJ...76..579K 76, 579

    doi

  49. [57]

    Kohno M., Sofue Y., 2024b, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad3648 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.527.9290K 527, 9290

    doi

  50. [58]

    Kuno N., et al., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1093/pasj/59.1.117 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007PASJ...59..117K 59, 117

    2007 doi

  51. [59]

    Lang P., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab9953 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...897..122L 897, 122

    2020 doi

  52. [60]

    H., Herbst E., Pineau des Forets G., Roueff E., Le Bourlot J., 1996, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996A&A...311..690L 311, 690

    Lee H. H., Herbst E., Pineau des Forets G., Roueff E., Le Bourlot J., 1996, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996A&A...311..690L 311, 690

    1996

  53. [61]

    K., et al., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/137/6/4670 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009AJ....137.4670L 137, 4670

    Leroy A. K., et al., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/137/6/4670 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009AJ....137.4670L 137, 4670

    2009 doi

  54. [62]

    K., et al., 2011, @doi [ApJ] 10.1088/0004-637X/737/1/12 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...737...12L 737, 12

    Leroy A. K., et al., 2011, @doi [ApJ] 10.1088/0004-637X/737/1/12 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...737...12L 737, 12

    2011 doi

  55. [63]

    K., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/ab3925 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJS..244...24L 244, 24

    Leroy A. K., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/ab3925 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJS..244...24L 244, 24

    2019 doi

  56. [64]

    K., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/ac17f3 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJS..257...43L 257, 43

    Leroy A. K., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/ac17f3 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJS..257...43L 257, 43

    2021 doi

  57. [65]

    K., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac3490 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...927..149L 927, 149

    Leroy A. K., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac3490 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...927..149L 927, 149

    2022 doi

  58. [66]

    Li A., 2020, @doi [Nature Astronomy] 10.1038/s41550-020-1051-1 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020NatAs...4..339L 4, 339

    2020 doi

  59. [67]

    Li Q., Li M., Zhang L., Pei S., 2024, @doi [Universe] 10.3390/universe10050200 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024Univ...10..200L 10, 200

    2024 doi

  60. [68]

    C., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202038860 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020A&A...643A.141M 643, A141

    Madden S. C., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202038860 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020A&A...643A.141M 643, A141

    2020 doi

  61. [69]

    Makarov D., Prugniel P., Terekhova N., Courtois H., Vauglin I., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201423496 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014A

    2014 doi

  62. [70]

    C., et al., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1086/426387 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005ApJ...619L...1M 619, L1

    Martin D. C., et al., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1086/426387 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005ApJ...619L...1M 619, L1

    2005 doi

  63. [71]

    Matsumoto K., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202449454 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...689A..79M 689, A79

    2024 doi

  64. [72]

    McCormick A., Veilleux S., Rupke D. S. N., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/774/2/126 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...774..126M 774, 126

    2013 doi

  65. [73]

    E., Rand R

    Meidt S. E., Rand R. J., Merrifield M. R., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/702/1/277 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...702..277M 702, 277

    2009 doi

  66. [74]

    C., et al., 2009, @doi [ApJ] 10.1088/0004-637X/703/2/1569 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...703.1569M 703, 1569

    Mu \ n oz-Mateos J. C., et al., 2009, @doi [ApJ] 10.1088/0004-637X/703/2/1569 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...703.1569M 703, 1569

    2009 doi

  67. [75]

    S., Wiebe D

    Murga M. S., Wiebe D. S., Sivkova E. E., Akimkin V. V., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz1724 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.488..965M 488, 965

    2019 doi

  68. [76]

    C., Hernquist L., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19516.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.418..664N 418, 664

    Narayanan D., Krumholz M., Ostriker E. C., Hernquist L., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19516.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.418..664N 418, 664

    2011

  69. [77]

    Okamoto R., Yamamoto H., Tachihara K., Hayakawa T., Hayashi K., Fukui Y., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aa6747 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...838..132O 838, 132

    2017 doi

  70. [78]

    P., Thi W

    Papadopoulos P. P., Thi W. F., Viti S., 2002, @doi [ ] 10.1086/342872 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002ApJ...579..270P 579, 270

    2002 doi

  71. [79]

    P., van der Werf P

    Papadopoulos P. P., van der Werf P. P., Xilouris E. M., Isaak K. G., Gao Y., M \"u hle S., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21001.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012MNRAS.426.2601P 426, 2601

    2012

  72. [80]

    L., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201014759 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010A

    Pilbratt G. L., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201014759 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010A

    2010 doi

  73. [81]

    S., Grebel E

    Pilyugin L. S., Grebel E. K., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw238 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.457.3678P 457, 3678

    2016 doi

  74. [82]

    Planck Collaboration et al., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201116479 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011A&A...536A..19P 536, A19

    2011 doi

  75. [83]

    Puche D., Carignan C., Bosma A., 1990, @doi [ ] 10.1086/115612 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1990AJ....100.1468P 100, 1468

    1990 doi

  76. [84]

    H., 1991, @doi [ ] 10.1086/115696 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1991AJ....101..456P 101, 456

    Puche D., Carignan C., van Gorkom J. H., 1991, @doi [ ] 10.1086/115696 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1991AJ....101..456P 101, 456

    1991 doi

  77. [85]

    R \'e my-Ruyer A., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201526067 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015A&A...582A.121R 582, A121

    2015 doi

  78. [86]

    F., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201322343 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014A&A...563A..49S 563, A49

    S \'a nchez S. F., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201322343 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014A&A...563A..49S 563, A49

    2014 doi

  79. [87]

    F., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz019 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.484.3042S 484, 3042

    S \'a nchez S. F., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz019 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.484.3042S 484, 3042

    2019 doi

  80. [88]

    M., et al., 2013, @doi [ApJ] 10.1088/0004-637X/777/1/5 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...777....5S 777, 5

    Sandstrom K. M., et al., 2013, @doi [ApJ] 10.1088/0004-637X/777/1/5 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...777....5S 777, 5

    2013 doi

  81. [89]

    Santoro F., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202141907 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022A&A...658A.188S 658, A188

    2022 doi

  82. [90]

    K., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev-astro-071221-052651 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ARA&A..62..369S 62, 369

    Schinnerer E., Leroy A. K., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev-astro-071221-052651 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ARA&A..62..369S 62, 369

    2024 doi

  83. [91]

    Schruba A., et al., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/142/2/37 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011AJ....142...37S 142, 37

    2011 doi

  84. [92]

    Schruba A., et al., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/143/6/138 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012AJ....143..138S 143, 138

    2012 doi

  85. [93]

    Shivaei I., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202449579 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...690A..89S 690, A89

    2024 doi

  86. [94]

    Smith J. D. T., et al., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/510549 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...656..770S 656, 770

    2007 doi

  87. [95]

    Sofue Y., Kohno M., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa2056 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.497.1851S 497, 1851

    2020 doi

  88. [96]

    Sofue Y., Tutui Y., Honma M., Tomita A., Takamiya T., Koda J., Takeda Y., 1999, @doi [ ] 10.1086/307731 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999ApJ...523..136S 523, 136

    1999 doi

  89. [97]

    Sorai K., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/pasj/psz115 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019PASJ...71S..14S 71, S14

    2019 doi

  90. [98]

    Sun J., et al., 2020, @doi [ApJ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab781c , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...892..148S 892, 148

    2020 doi

  91. [99]

    Sutter J., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad54bd , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...971..178S 971, 178

    2024 doi

  92. [100]

    Teng Y.-H., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac382f , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...925...72T 925, 72

    2022 doi

  93. [101]

    Teng Y.-H., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/accb86 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...950..119T 950, 119

    2023 doi

  94. [102]

    Teng Y.-H., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad10ae , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...961...42T 961, 42

    2024 doi

  95. [103]

    B., Rizzi L., Shaya E

    Tully R. B., Rizzi L., Shaya E. J., Courtois H. M., Makarov D. I., Jacobs B. A., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/138/2/323 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009AJ....138..323T 138, 323

    2009 doi

  96. [104]

    M., Rela \ n o M., Kennicutt R., De Looze I., Moll \'a M., Galametz M., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty3455 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.483.4968V 483, 4968

    V \' lchez J. M., Rela \ n o M., Kennicutt R., De Looze I., Moll \'a M., Galametz M., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty3455 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.483.4968V 483, 4968

    2019 doi

  97. [105]

    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

  98. [106]

    Wei A., Neininger N., H \"u ttemeister S., Klein U., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20000145 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001A&A...365..571W 365, 571

    2001 doi

  99. [107]

    M., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad66c8 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...974...20W 974, 20

    Whitcomb C. M., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad66c8 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...974...20W 974, 20

    2024 doi

  100. [108]

    G., Hollenbach D., McKee C

    Wolfire M. G., Hollenbach D., McKee C. F., 2010, @doi [ApJ] 10.1088/0004-637X/716/2/1191 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...716.1191W 716, 1191

    2010 doi

  101. [109]

    L., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/140/6/1868 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010AJ....140.1868W 140, 1868

    Wright E. L., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/140/6/1868 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010AJ....140.1868W 140, 1868

    2010 doi

  102. [110]

    Zurita A., Florido E., Bresolin F., P \'e rez-Montero E., P \'e rez I., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa2246 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.500.2359Z 500, 2359

    2021 doi

  103. [111]

    S., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202245718 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023A&A...676A..93D 676, A93

    den Brok J. S., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202245718 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023A&A...676A..93D 676, A93

    2023 doi

  104. [112]

    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 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.