Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 8 minor 133 references

Revealing the hidden cosmic feast: A z=4.3 galaxy group hosting two optically dark, efficiently star-forming galaxies

T0 review · 4 major / 8 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Two optically invisible galaxies at redshift 4.3 form a compact group producing roughly 2,000 solar masses of stars per year, and their gas is running out fast.

desk verdict Solid new ALMA discovery of a z=4.3 compact group; the quenching interpretation rests on an untested SED-sharing assumption and needs a sensitivity check. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.05288 v2 pith:LVWCKSQV submitted 2025-01-09 astro-ph.GA

Malte Brinch , Shuowen Jin , Raphael Gobat , Nikolaj B. Sillassen , Hiddo Algera , Steven Gillman , Thomas R. Greve , Carlos Gomez-Guijarro
show 6 more authors
Bitten Gullberg Jacqueline Hodge Minju Lee Daizhong Liu Georgios Magdis Francesco Valentino
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords galaxies:groups:individual:CGG-z4high-redshiftstarformationISMopticallydarkgalaxiessubmillimetreprotoclustersgasdepletiontimescale
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper reports the confirmation of CGG-z4, a compact galaxy group at $z=4.3$ whose two most massive members are optically and near-infrared dark. From the combined far-infrared-to-radio emission of the group, the authors derive a total star formation rate of about $2000\,M_\odot$ yr$^{-1}$, among the highest known for a group at $z>4$. Using the [CI](1-0) line to estimate molecular gas, they find the two dark galaxies have gas depletion times of roughly 100 Myr and under 63 Myr, which they interpret as the onset of quenching. If the picture holds, this is a direct view of massive galaxies exhausting their fuel in an overdense environment and may trace the birth of a galaxy cluster.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by millimeter line spectroscopy and a single integrated spectral energy distribution. CO(4-3) and CO(5-4) detections fix the spectroscopic redshifts and, through their high ratio, place the interstellar medium near thermalization; [CI](1-0) provides a molecular-gas mass estimate that relies less on uncertain conversion factors. The integrated far-infrared-to-radio photometry is fit by a physical SED model to obtain the total star formation rate, and the individual galaxy properties are then obtained by scaling that same SED shape to each source's ALMA 870 $\mu$m flux. The halo-mass estimate combines stellar-mass-to-halo-mass relations, overdensity with a galaxy bias, and a radial stellar-mass density profile, and the future-cluster interpretation is anchored by comparison with simulated halo growth tracks.

What would settle it

Resolved observations of each galaxy at several far-infrared or submillimetre wavelengths, such as multiband millimetre interferometry, would measure the two dust SEDs independently and test the shared-SED scaling; a direct CO(1-0) detection would independently test the assumed CO(4-3)-to-CO(1-0) conversion.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that CGG-z4 is a genuine $z\simeq4.3$ structure containing two spectroscopically confirmed, optically dark, dust-enshrouded starbursts. The two galaxies, CGG-z4.a and CGG-z4.b, are detected in CO(4-3), CO(5-4), and one also in [CI](1-0), giving secure redshifts of 4.331 and 4.324. Fitting the integrated far-infrared-to-radio photometry yields a total star formation rate of $2111\pm98\,M_\odot$ yr$^{-1}$, and scaling that spectral energy distribution to each ALMA 870 $\mu$m flux assigns $1408$ and $703\,M_\odot$ yr$^{-1}$ to the two sources, placing them about six and four-and-a-half times above the star-forming main sequence. The CO(5-4)/CO(4-3) ratios are close to the thermalization limit, indicating dense, high-pressure gas, and the low [CI]/CO ratios indicate high star formation efficiency. The [CI]-derived gas masses imply depletion times of about 99 Myr and under 63 Myr, so the authors argue these starbursts are likely already transitioning toward quiescence, and with an estimated halo mass of $\log(M_{\rm halo}/M_\odot)\sim12.8$ the structure is probably in the process of forming a massive galaxy cluster with the two dark galaxies as its brightest members.

Load-bearing premise

The individual star formation rates and gas masses of the two galaxies are computed by assuming both have exactly the same far-infrared spectrum as the combined group and differ only in their 870-micron brightness; if their dust temperatures differ, the numbers shift.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • CGG-z4 becomes one of the most star-forming galaxy groups known at $z>4$, with a total SFR near $2000\,M_\odot$ yr$^{-1}$ dominated by two galaxies that are invisible in optical and near-infrared surveys.
  • The short depletion times imply that, without gas replenishment, the two galaxies will exhaust their fuel and could become quiescent by $z\sim4$ with final stellar masses near $10^{11}\,M_\odot$.
  • The estimated halo mass of $\log(M_{\rm halo}/M_\odot)\sim12.8$ places the structure on a trajectory to become a massive cluster by $z=0$.
  • The non-detection of CO in stacked spectra of the optical and near-infrared detected members shows that the dark pair holds most of the group's gas and star formation, so surveys using rest-frame optical selection would miss the group's most active members.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural test of the quenching interpretation is to measure each galaxy's dust temperature separately; if the two SEDs differ from the integrated shape, the individual SFRs and gas masses would shift and the short depletion times might not survive.
  • If the short depletion times are confirmed, they would support a picture in which massive galaxies quench by rapid gas exhaustion in a compact starburst, without requiring an external feedback mechanism to remove the gas.
  • The same selection strategy of radio and submillimeter priors followed by millimeter line scans could uncover more optically dark starbursts at the cores of $z>4$ protoclusters, potentially revising current estimates of how the most massive galaxies assemble.
  • Deeper near-infrared photometry of these two galaxies would test the stellar-mass estimates and reveal morphologies that could connect their starburst phase to a merger-driven quenching path.
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

4 major / 8 minor

Summary. This paper presents ALMA 3 mm and 870 µm observations confirming two z≈4.3 optically/NIR-dark galaxies, CGG-z4.a and CGG-z4.b, together with 11 photometric-redshift members in an overdense COSMOS field. The authors detect CO(4-3) and CO(5-4) in both galaxies, [CI](1-0) in CGG-z4.a, and H2O(11,0-10,1) absorption in CGG-z4.b; they fit the integrated FIR-to-radio photometry with MICHI2, derive total and individual SFRs, estimate gas masses with dust, CO, and [CI] tracers, and compute short gas depletion times. Using five methods, they estimate a halo mass of log(M_halo/M⊙)=12.8±0.4 and argue that the structure is likely forming a massive galaxy cluster. The central conclusions are that CGG-z4 is one of the most star-forming groups known at z>4 and that its two brightest galaxies may be undergoing the onset of quenching.

Significance. If the physical interpretation holds, CGG-z4 is a valuable addition to the small sample of spectroscopically confirmed z>4 groups and protocluster cores. The multi-line ALMA detections, including the rare H2O absorption feature, are a genuine observational achievement, and the paper is transparent about many of its assumptions and uncertainties. However, the headline claims about extremely short depletion times and the onset of quenching rest on an untested shared-SED assumption and on an upper-limit [CI] measurement for CGG-z4.b. The paper would be a solid discovery paper even with those claims appropriately softened; as written, the abstract and conclusions overstate the robustness of the individual physical quantities.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sect. 4.4; Fig. 3] The individual SFRs that enter the depletion times are derived by assuming CGG-z4.a and CGG-z4.b share the exact SED shape of the integrated group and then scaling by each source's ALMA 870 µm flux. At z=4.3, 870 µm samples rest-frame ~164 µm, where the conversion from monochromatic flux to L_IR is highly sensitive to dust temperature; a factor-of-two change in SFR would move the inferred depletion times from ~60-100 Myr to values consistent with the field scaling relations shown in Fig. 6. The paper reports no per-source 3mm-to-870µm color or any other test of the shared-SED assumption. I request that the authors either provide such a test (e.g., per-source 3mm/870µm flux ratios, if the data permit) or explicitly state that the individual SFRs and depletion times are model-dependent and soften the abstract accordingly.
  2. [Sect. 4.5; Table D.1; abstract] For CGG-z4.b the [CI](1-0) line is a 2σ upper limit, so the gas mass and hence the quoted "<63 Myr" depletion time in the abstract are upper limits, not measurements; the body and Table D.1 give <69 Myr. This discrepancy is not merely cosmetic: the "extremely short" depletion-time claim for CGG-z4.b is an upper limit based on an upper-limit gas mass, and the SFR uncertainty is not propagated into that limit in a statistically well-defined way. The authors should quote the body value consistently, label the CGG-z4.b value as an upper limit in the abstract and conclusions, and check whether the upper limit remains below the field relations once the SFR uncertainty is included.
  3. [Sect. 5.3; abstract] The statement that the short depletion times "suggest the onset of quenching" goes beyond what the data show. As the authors state in Sect. 5.3, this conclusion assumes a constant SFE and no gas replenishment; a short depletion time measures current high gas consumption, not the future gas supply. In a dense protocluster core, ongoing accretion could sustain star formation. I recommend moving the "onset of quenching" language to a conditional scenario in the abstract and conclusions, or adding a concrete discussion of why gas replenishment is expected to be negligible for these two galaxies.
  4. [Sect. 4.3; Conclusion 6] The adopted halo mass log(M_halo/M⊙)=12.8±0.4 is an unweighted average of five methods whose estimates range from a lower limit of >12.2 to 13.5±0.3. The quoted uncertainty does not encompass this spread, and the average is sensitive to the choice of methods. Since this value is used in Sect. 5.5 and Conclusion 6 to predict M>10^14 M⊙ at z=0, the protocluster claim should be presented as conditional on a range (e.g., ~12.2-13.5 dex) rather than as a single average, or the averaging should be justified with a systematic-error analysis.
minor comments (8)
  1. [Sect. 2.2] The text states that "program 2021.1.00246.S contains 20 spectral windows (SPWs), and project 2021.1.00246.S contains 12 SPWs"; one of these program identifiers must refer to 2022.1.00884.S.
  2. [Sects. 3.3 and 4.2] "Given the optically dark nature of CGG-z4.a and CGG-z4.a" should read "CGG-z4.a and CGG-z4.b"; the same typo appears in both sections.
  3. [Sect. 4.5] In the gas-mass paragraph, the second occurrence of "log(M_gas,thick,a[M⊙])" with value 10.77 should refer to CGG-z4.b, not CGG-z4.a.
  4. [Sect. 5.4] The sentence "with ranges between 10.08 < log(Mgas[M⊙]) < 11.35" appears to refer to stellar masses, not gas masses; please correct the variable.
  5. [Sect. 3.1] The phrase "an on-sky projected line of sight distance of 0.829 pMpc" is ambiguous; if 0.829 pMpc is the comoving line-of-sight separation implied by Δz, it should be stated separately from the projected kiloparsec separation.
  6. [Sect. 4.2; Table C.1] The adopted "average stellar masses with uncertainties encompassing both results" is not defined quantitatively; Table C.1 should give the adopted value and range explicitly, along with the two individual estimates (IRAC-scaled and dust-based).
  7. [Throughout] Several instances of "CCG-z4" (e.g., Sects. 5.2, 5.3, and the Conclusions) should be "CGG-z4" for consistency.
  8. [Sect. 5.1] For CGG-z4.b the PDR parameters are only lower limits, but the text says "we can determine that n_H > 3.0×10^4 cm^-3"; consider phrasing it as "we can only place lower limits."

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the SFR and gas-mass estimates are fits to data with stated assumptions and literature calibrations; the shared-SED scaling is an explicit assumption, not a self-referential reduction.

full rationale

The paper's central quantities are derived estimates rather than circular predictions. The total SFR (~2111 M_sun/yr) is obtained by fitting the integrated FIR-to-radio photometry with the MICHI2 SED code, using standard stellar, AGN, dust, and radio components; it is not an input to itself. Individual SFRs for CGG-z4.a and CGG-z4.b are obtained by an explicitly stated scaling assumption: 'we assumed that CGG-z4.a and CGG-z4.b share the same SED shape as the integrated SED. We then scaled the SED to the ALMA 870um flux of each source.' This is a modeling assumption that could be incorrect and is a legitimate robustness caveat, but it does not constitute circularity: the individual SFRs are not fed back into the integrated fit in a way that forces the quoted values, and the 870um fluxes are independent measurements entering a standard apportionment. Gas masses are derived from [CI](1-0) line luminosity, dust-mass conversions, or CO-to-H2 conversions using literature calibration constants (e.g., Dunne et al. 2022; Downes & Solomon 1998), not from the SFRs. Depletion times are then ratios of independently estimated gas masses and SFRs. The quenching suggestion is explicitly framed as an assumption ('Under the assumption that their SFE is constant, all the gas is converted into stars, and there is no gas replenishment'), not as a derived consequence. The halo mass estimate uses multiple external calibrations (SHMR, overdensity-with-bias, NFW fitting from Sillassen et al. 2024), and references to the authors' earlier pipelines are methodological citations, not load-bearing evidence for the scientific conclusions. The comparison of depletion times to field scaling relations and to literature samples provides external grounding. No equation or argument reduces a claimed result to its own input by construction.

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

The central physical quantities (SFR, gas mass, depletion time, halo mass) all rest on literature calibration constants (alpha_CI, alpha_CO, alpha_850, M*/Mdust) and on the assumption that the two sources share one SED shape. No new entities are introduced.

free parameters (6)
  • alpha_CI = 16.2 +/- 0.4 M_sun pc^-2 (K km/s pc^2)^-1
    Adopted from Dunne et al. (2022) for SMGs; used in Section 4.5 to derive [CI]-based gas masses and depletion times.
  • alpha_CO (starburst) = 0.8 M_sun pc^-2 (K km/s pc^2)^-1
    Canonical starburst value from Downes & Solomon (1998) used in Section 4.5 for CO-based gas mass estimates.
  • alpha_CO (Dunne) = 3.8 +/- 0.1 M_sun pc^-2 (K km/s pc^2)^-1
    Adopted from Dunne et al. (2022) as an alternative CO conversion in Section 4.5.
  • r_L'41 = 1.0
    Hand-chosen CO(4-3) to CO(1-0) luminosity ratio based on near-thermalization; Section 4.5 notes a systematic error is unaccounted for.
  • stellar-to-dust mass ratio = 50-100
    Used in Section 4.2 to convert dust mass to stellar mass for the optically dark galaxies; a wide literature range.
  • alpha_850 = 7.3 +/- 0.1e12 W Hz^-1 M_sun^-1
    Dust-based gas mass conversion from Dunne et al. (2022) used in Section 4.5.
assumptions (6)
  • standard math Standard LambdaCDM cosmology with H0=70, Omega_m=0.3, Omega_L=0.7
    Stated in Introduction; used for all distance and luminosity calculations.
  • domain assumption Chabrier (2003) IMF
    Stated in Introduction; used in SED fitting for stellar masses and SFRs.
  • domain assumption Photometric redshifts from EAZY in COSMOS2020 are reliable for member selection
    Section 2.1 selects candidate members with 4.0 < z_phot < 4.6; contamination from interlopers would alter group properties.
  • ad hoc to paper Both galaxies share the integrated SED shape
    Section 4.4 scales the integrated SED to each source's 870 micron flux to derive individual SFRs; if SED shapes differ, derived properties change.
  • ad hoc to paper Gas depletion time implies quenching only under no gas replenishment
    Section 5.3 explicitly assumes constant SFE, no inflow, and full gas consumption to argue these galaxies will quench by z~4.
  • domain assumption Dunne et al. (2022) alpha_CI calibration applies to these galaxies
    Used in Section 4.5; if the [CI]-to-gas-mass conversion is inappropriate for these extreme starbursts, the depletion times would change.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Revealing the hidden cosmic feast: A z=4.3 galaxy group hosting two optically dark, efficiently star-forming galaxies." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LVWCKSQV

@misc{pith2026250105288,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Revealing the hidden cosmic feast: A z=4.3 galaxy group hosting two optically dark, efficiently star-forming galaxies},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LVWCKSQV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.05288}
}
abstract

We present the confirmation of a compact galaxy group candidate, CGG-z4, at $z=4.3$ in the COSMOS field. This structure was identified by two spectroscopically confirmed $z=4.3$ $K_s$-dropout galaxies with ALMA $870\rm\, \mu m$ and 3 mm continuum detections, surrounded by an overdensity of NIR-detected galaxies with consistent photometric redshifts of $4.0<z<4.6$. The two ALMA sources, CGG-z4.a and CGG-z4.b, are detected with both CO(4-3) and CO(5-4) lines. [CI](1-0) is detected on CGG-z4.a, and H$_{2}$O($1_{1,0}-1_{0,1}$) absorption is detected on CGG-z4.b. We model an integrated spectral energy distribution by combining the FIR-to-radio photometry of this group and estimate a total star formation rate of $\rm\sim2000\, M_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$, making it one of the most star-forming groups known at $z>4$. Their high CO(5-4)/CO(4-3) ratios indicate that the inter-stellar mediums (ISMs) are close to thermalization, suggesting either high gas temperatures, densities, and/or pressure, while the low [CI](1-0)/CO(4-3) line ratios indicate high star formation efficiencies. With [CI]-derived gas masses we found the two galaxies have extremely short gas depletion times of $99$ Myr and $<63$ Myr respectively, suggesting the onset of quenching. With an estimated halo mass of $\rm log (M_{\rm halo}[M_{\odot}])\sim12.8$, we suggest that this structure is likely in the process of forming a massive galaxy cluster.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.05288 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Images and spectra highlighting the member galaxies of the CGG- [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. ALMA line and continuum maps, with black lines showing the positive contours and white dashed lines the negative contours, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIR SED of the CGG-z4 integrated group galaxies. Pho [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Galaxy main sequence and brightness temperatures for the CGG- [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Flux ratios of r[CI]10/CO43 and r54. The thermalization limit for r54 is given by (Jup = 5)2 /(Jup = 4)2 = 1.56 and is shown as a red line. CGG-z4.a and CGG-z4.b are shown as magenta diamonds. Data is LIRGs from Lu et al. (2017), SFGs from Valentino et al. (2020), SMGs…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

133 extracted references · 34 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    C., Swinbank, A

    Alaghband-Zadeh, S., Chapman, S. C., Swinbank, A. M., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 435, 1493

    2013

  2. [2]

    Algera, H. S. B., van der Vlugt, D., Hodge, J. A., et al. 2020, ApJ, 903, 139

    2020

  3. [3]

    J., Aguirre, J

    Aravena, M., Murphy, E. J., Aguirre, J. E., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 433, 498 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33

    2013

  4. [4]

    A., Weibel, A., et al

    Barrufet, L., Oesch, P. A., Weibel, A., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 522, 449

    2023

  5. [5]

    1997, ApJ, 484, 695

    Barvainis, R., Maloney, P., Antonucci, R., & Alloin, D. 1997, ApJ, 484, 695

    1997

  6. [6]

    S., Wechsler, R

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

    2013

  7. [7]

    J., Borgani, S., De Lucia, G., Boylan-Kolchin, M., & Monaco, P

    Benson, A. J., Borgani, S., De Lucia, G., Boylan-Kolchin, M., & Monaco, P. 2012, MNRAS, 419, 3590

    2012

  8. [8]

    A., van der Werf, P., Weiss, A., et al

    Boogaard, L. A., van der Werf, P., Weiss, A., et al. 2020, ApJ, 902, 109

    2020

Show all 133 references
  1. [9]

    S., Aguirre, J

    Bothwell, M. S., Aguirre, J. E., Aravena, M., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 466, 2825

    2017

  2. [10]

    S., Smail, I., Chapman, S

    Bothwell, M. S., Smail, I., Chapman, S. C., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 429, 3047

    2013

  3. [11]

    S., Simpson, J

    Bourne, N., Dunlop, J. S., Simpson, J. M., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 482, 3135

    2019

  4. [12]

    B., van Dokkum, P

    Brammer, G. B., van Dokkum, P. G., & Coppi, P. 2008, ApJ, 686, 1503

    2008

  5. [13]

    R., Sanders, D

    Brinch, M., Greve, T. R., Sanders, D. B., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 6591

    2024

  6. [14]

    R., Weaver, J

    Brinch, M., Greve, T. R., Weaver, J. R., et al. 2023, ApJ, 943, 153

    2023

  7. [15]

    & Charlot, S

    Bruzual, G. & Charlot, S. 2003, MNRAS, 344, 1000 Cañameras, R., Nesvadba, N. P. H., Guery, D., et al. 2015, A&A, 581, A105

    2003

  8. [16]

    2023, A&A, 678, A15

    Calvi, R., Castignani, G., & Dannerbauer, H. 2023, A&A, 678, A15

    2023

  9. [17]

    L., Riechers, D., Scoville, N

    Capak, P. L., Riechers, D., Scoville, N. Z., et al. 2011, Nature, 470, 233

    2011

  10. [18]

    L., Daddi, E., Riechers, D., et al

    Carilli, C. L., Daddi, E., Riechers, D., et al. 2010, ApJ, 714, 1407

    2010

  11. [19]

    C., Begley, R., McLeod, D

    Carnall, A. C., Begley, R., McLeod, D. J., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 518, L45

    2023

  12. [20]

    C., McLure, R

    Carnall, A. C., McLure, R. J., Dunlop, J. S., & Davé, R. 2018, MNRAS, 480, 4379

    2018

  13. [21]

    M., Kartaltepe, J

    Casey, C. M., Kartaltepe, J. S., Drakos, N. E., et al. 2023, ApJ, 954, 31

    2023

  14. [22]

    2003, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 115, 763

    Chabrier, G. 2003, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 115, 763

    2003

  15. [23]

    2013, ApJ, 779, 127

    Chiang, Y .-K., Overzier, R., & Gebhardt, K. 2013, ApJ, 779, 127

    2013

  16. [24]

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

    Chiang, Y .-K., Overzier, R. A., Gebhardt, K., & Henriques, B. 2017, ApJ, 844, L23

    2017

  17. [25]

    2006, in Seventeenth International Symposium on Space Terahertz Technology, ed

    Claude, S., Jiang, F., Niranjanan, P., et al. 2006, in Seventeenth International Symposium on Space Terahertz Technology, ed. A. Hedden, M. Reese, D. Santavicca, L. Frunzio, D. Prober, P. Piitz, C. Groppi, & C. Walker, 154– 157

    2006

  18. [26]

    R., Casey, C

    Cooper, O. R., Casey, C. M., Zavala, J. A., et al. 2022, ApJ, 930, 32

    2022

  19. [27]

    2011, ApJ, 740, 63

    Cox, P., Krips, M., Neri, R., et al. 2011, ApJ, 740, 63

    2011

  20. [28]

    A., Schaye, J., Bower, R

    Crain, R. A., Schaye, J., Bower, R. G., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 450, 1937

    2015

  21. [29]

    2009, ApJ, 694, 1517

    Daddi, E., Dannerbauer, H., Stern, D., et al. 2009, ApJ, 694, 1517

    2009

  22. [30]

    M., Valentino, F., et al

    Daddi, E., Rich, R. M., Valentino, F., et al. 2022, ApJ, 926, L21

    2022

  23. [31]

    M., et al

    Daddi, E., Valentino, F., Rich, R. M., et al. 2021, A&A, 649, A78

    2021

  24. [32]

    D., De Breuck, C., et al

    Dannerbauer, H., Kurk, J. D., De Breuck, C., et al. 2014, A&A, 570, A55 Díaz-Santos, T., Armus, L., Charmandaris, V ., et al. 2017, ApJ, 846, 32 Díaz-Santos, T., Assef, R. J., Blain, A. W., et al. 2018, Science, 362, 1034

    2014

  25. [33]

    2020, A&A, 644, A144

    Donevski, D., Lapi, A., Małek, K., et al. 2020, A&A, 644, A144

    2020

  26. [34]

    & Solomon, P

    Downes, D. & Solomon, P. M. 1998, ApJ, 507, 615

    1998

  27. [35]

    Draine, B. T. & Li, A. 2007, ApJ, 657, 810

    2007

  28. [36]

    J., Papadopoulos, P

    Dunne, L., Maddox, S. J., Papadopoulos, P. P., Ivison, R. J., & Gomez, H. L. 2022, MNRAS, 517, 962

    2022

  29. [37]

    J., Vlahakis, C., & Gomez, H

    Dunne, L., Maddox, S. J., Vlahakis, C., & Gomez, H. L. 2021, MNRAS, 501, 2573

    2021

  30. [38]

    2021, A&A, 649, A105

    Falstad, N., Aalto, S., König, S., et al. 2021, A&A, 649, A105

    2021

  31. [39]

    W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J

    Foreman-Mackey, D., Hogg, D. W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J. 2013, PASP, 125, 306

    2013

  32. [40]

    J., Lutz, D., et al

    Genzel, R., Tacconi, L. J., Lutz, D., et al. 2015, ApJ, 800, 20 Gildas Team. 2013, GILDAS: Grenoble Image and Line Data Analysis Software, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1305.010

    2015

  33. [41]

    2022, Nature Communications, 13, 4574 Gómez-Guijarro, C., Elbaz, D., Xiao, M., et al

    Ginolfi, M., Piconcelli, E., Zappacosta, L., et al. 2022, Nature Communications, 13, 4574 Gómez-Guijarro, C., Elbaz, D., Xiao, M., et al. 2022, A&A, 658, A43 Gómez-Guijarro, C., Toft, S., Karim, A., et al. 2018, ApJ, 856, 121

    2022

  34. [42]

    A., et al

    Gottumukkala, R., Barrufet, L., Oesch, P. A., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 530, 966

    2024

  35. [43]

    2019, ApJ, 883, 142

    Harikane, Y ., Ouchi, M., Ono, Y ., et al. 2019, ApJ, 883, 142

    2019

  36. [44]

    C., Weiss, A., Yun, M

    Harrington, K. C., Weiss, A., Yun, M. S., et al. 2021, ApJ, 908, 95

    2021

  37. [45]

    C., Yun, M

    Harrington, K. C., Yun, M. S., Cybulski, R., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 458, 4383 Article number, page 11 of 15 A&A proofs: manuscript no. aanda

    2016

  38. [46]

    R., Millman, K

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

    2020

  39. [47]

    E., Giménez-Arteaga, C., Fujimoto, S., et al

    Heintz, K. E., Giménez-Arteaga, C., Fujimoto, S., et al. 2023, ApJ, 944, L30

    2023

  40. [48]

    L., Higdon, S

    Higdon, J. L., Higdon, S. J. U., Willner, S. P., et al. 2008, ApJ, 688, 885

    2008

  41. [49]

    A., et al

    Hill, R., Chapman, S., Phadke, K. A., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 512, 4352

    2022

  42. [50]

    2020, MNRAS, 495, 3124

    Hill, R., Chapman, S., Scott, D., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 495, 3124

    2020

  43. [51]

    S., Burkert, A., & Oser, L

    Hirschmann, M., Naab, T., Somerville, R. S., Burkert, A., & Oser, L. 2012, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 419, 3200

    2012

  44. [52]

    F., Somerville, R

    Hopkins, P. F., Somerville, R. S., Cox, T. J., et al. 2009, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 397, 802

    2009

  45. [53]

    M., Ibar, E., Villanueva, V ., et al

    Hughes, T. M., Ibar, E., Villanueva, V ., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 468, L103

    2017

  46. [54]

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

    2007

  47. [55]

    2018, ApJ, 864, 56

    Jin, S., Daddi, E., Liu, D., et al. 2018, ApJ, 864, 56

    2018

  48. [56]

    E., et al

    Jin, S., Daddi, E., Magdis, G. E., et al. 2019, ApJ, 887, 144

    2019

  49. [57]

    E., et al

    Jin, S., Daddi, E., Magdis, G. E., et al. 2022, A&A, 665, A3

    2022

  50. [58]

    B., Magdis, G

    Jin, S., Sillassen, N. B., Magdis, G. E., et al. 2023, A&A, 670, L11

    2023

  51. [59]

    F., Blain, A

    Jones, S. F., Blain, A. W., Assef, R. J., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 469, 4565

    2017

  52. [60]

    J., Wolfire, M

    Kaufman, M. J., Wolfire, M. G., & Hollenbach, D. J. 2006, ApJ, 644, 283

    2006

  53. [61]

    1998, ARA&A, 36, 189

    Kennicutt, Robert C., J. 1998, ARA&A, 36, 189

    1998

  54. [62]

    E., et al

    Kokorev, V ., Jin, S., Magdis, G. E., et al. 2023, ApJ, 945, L25

    2023

  55. [63]

    I., Magdis, G

    Kokorev, V . I., Magdis, G. E., Davidzon, I., et al. 2021, ApJ, 921, 40

    2021

  56. [64]

    2021, ApJ, 919, 6

    Kubo, M., Umehata, H., Matsuda, Y ., et al. 2021, ApJ, 919, 6

    2021

  57. [65]

    2022, ApJ, 935, 89

    Kubo, M., Umehata, H., Matsuda, Y ., et al. 2022, ApJ, 935, 89

    2022

  58. [66]

    J., Ilbert, O., et al

    Laigle, C., McCracken, H. J., Ilbert, O., et al. 2016, ApJS, 224, 24

    2016

  59. [67]

    2019, MNRAS, 489, 4389 Le Floc’h, E., Aussel, H., Ilbert, O., et al

    Lamperti, I., Saintonge, A., De Looze, I., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 489, 4389 Le Floc’h, E., Aussel, H., Ilbert, O., et al. 2009, ApJ, 703, 222

    2019

  60. [68]

    M., Tanaka, I., Iono, D., et al

    Lee, M. M., Tanaka, I., Iono, D., et al. 2021, ApJ, 909, 181

    2021

  61. [69]

    L., Thanjavur, K., et al

    Lestrade, J.-F., Carilli, C. L., Thanjavur, K., et al. 2011, ApJ, 739, L30

    2011

  62. [70]

    Lewis, A. J. R., Ivison, R. J., Best, P. N., et al. 2018, ApJ, 862, 96

    2018

  63. [71]

    2020, michi2: SED and SLED fitting tool, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:2005.002

    Liu, D. 2020, michi2: SED and SLED fitting tool, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:2005.002

    2020

  64. [72]

    2018, ApJ, 853, 172

    Liu, D., Daddi, E., Dickinson, M., et al. 2018, ApJ, 853, 172

    2018

  65. [73]

    2021, ApJ, 909, 56

    Liu, D., Daddi, E., Schinnerer, E., et al. 2021, ApJ, 909, 56

    2021

  66. [74]

    2019, ApJ, 887, 235

    Liu, D., Schinnerer, E., Groves, B., et al. 2019, ApJ, 887, 235

    2019

  67. [75]

    2017, ApJS, 230, 1

    Lu, N., Zhao, Y ., Díaz-Santos, T., et al. 2017, ApJS, 230, 1

    2017

  68. [76]

    2011, A&A, 532, A90

    Lutz, D., Poglitsch, A., Altieri, B., et al. 2011, A&A, 532, A90

    2011

  69. [77]

    E., Daddi, E., Béthermin, M., et al

    Magdis, G. E., Daddi, E., Béthermin, M., et al. 2012, ApJ, 760, 6

    2012

  70. [78]

    J., Lutz, D., et al

    Magnelli, B., Ivison, R. J., Lutz, D., et al. 2015, A&A, 573, A45

    2015

  71. [79]

    2005, in Sixteenth International Sym- posium on Space Terahertz Technology, 99–104

    Mahieu, S., Lazareff, B., Maier, D., et al. 2005, in Sixteenth International Sym- posium on Space Terahertz Technology, 99–104

    2005

  72. [80]

    Maier, D., Barbier, A., Lazare ff, B., & Schuster, K. F. 2005, in Sixteenth Inter- national Symposium on Space Terahertz Technology, 428–431

    2005

  73. [81]

    P., Spilker, J

    Marrone, D. P., Spilker, J. S., Hayward, C. C., et al. 2018, Nature, 553, 51

    2018

  74. [82]

    2022, ApJ, 926, 37

    McConachie, I., Wilson, G., Forrest, B., et al. 2022, ApJ, 926, 37

    2022

  75. [83]

    P., Waters, B., Schiebel, D., Young, W., & Golap, K

    McMullin, J. P., Waters, B., Schiebel, D., Young, W., & Golap, K. 2007, in As- tronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, V ol. 376, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XVI, ed. R. A. Shaw, F. Hill, & D. J. Bell, 127

    2007

  76. [84]

    B., Chapman, S

    Miller, T. B., Chapman, S. C., Aravena, M., et al. 2018, Nature, 556, 469

    2018

  77. [85]

    2023, MN- RAS, 521, 800

    Montenegro-Taborda, D., Rodriguez-Gomez, V ., Pillepich, A., et al. 2023, MN- RAS, 521, 800

    2023

  78. [86]

    R., Alexander, D

    Mullaney, J. R., Alexander, D. M., Goulding, A. D., & Hickox, R. C. 2011, MNRAS, 414, 1082

    2011

  79. [87]

    2013, ApJ, 777, 18

    Muzzin, A., Marchesini, D., Stefanon, M., et al. 2013, ApJ, 777, 18

    2013

  80. [88]

    & Krumholz, M

    Narayanan, D. & Krumholz, M. R. 2014, MNRAS, 442, 1411

    2014

  81. [89]

    B., & Ingargiola, A

    Newville, M., Stensitzki, T., Allen, D. B., & Ingargiola, A. 2014, LMFIT: Non- Linear Least-Square Minimization and Curve-Fitting for Python

    2014

  82. [90]

    J., Bock, J., Altieri, B., et al

    Oliver, S. J., Bock, J., Altieri, B., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 424, 1614

    2012

  83. [91]

    2013, A&A, 551, A115

    Omont, A., Yang, C., Cox, P., et al. 2013, A&A, 551, A115

    2013

  84. [92]

    P., Naab, T., Johansson, P

    Oser, L., Ostriker, J. P., Naab, T., Johansson, P. H., & Burkert, A. 2010, ApJ, 725, 2312

    2010

  85. [93]

    J., Dunne, L., et al

    Oteo, I., Ivison, R. J., Dunne, L., et al. 2018, ApJ, 856, 72

    2018

  86. [94]

    Overzier, R. A. 2016, A&A Rev., 24, 14

    2016

  87. [95]

    2004, A&A, 428, L21

    Pety, J., Beelen, A., Cox, P., et al. 2004, A&A, 428, L21

    2004

  88. [96]

    2018, MNRAS, 475, 648

    Pillepich, A., Nelson, D., Hernquist, L., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 475, 648

    2018

  89. [97]

    Pound, M. W. & Wolfire, M. G. 2023, AJ, 165, 25

    2023

  90. [98]

    A., Weiss, A., Walter, F., et al

    Riechers, D. A., Weiss, A., Walter, F., et al. 2022, Nature, 602, 58

    2022

  91. [99]

    Salim, S., Boquien, M., & Lee, J. C. 2018, ApJ, 859, 11

    2018

  92. [100]

    A., Bower, R

    Schaye, J., Crain, R. A., Bower, R. G., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 446, 521

    2015

  93. [101]

    Schlafly, E. F. & Finkbeiner, D. P. 2011, ApJ, 737, 103

    2011

  94. [102]

    1959, ApJ, 129, 243

    Schmidt, M. 1959, ApJ, 129, 243

    1959

  95. [103]

    2015, A&A, 575, A74

    Schreiber, C., Pannella, M., Elbaz, D., et al. 2015, A&A, 575, A74

    2015

  96. [104]

    2013, ApJS, 206, 3

    Scoville, N., Arnouts, S., Aussel, H., et al. 2013, ApJS, 206, 3

    2013

  97. [105]

    2017, ApJ, 837, 150

    Scoville, N., Lee, N., Vanden Bout, P., et al. 2017, ApJ, 837, 150

    2017

  98. [106]

    2016, ApJ, 820, 83

    Scoville, N., Sheth, K., Aussel, H., et al. 2016, ApJ, 820, 83

    2016

  99. [107]

    Shimakawa, R., Koyama, Y ., Röttgering, H. J. A., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 481, 5630

    2018

  100. [108]

    2022, ApJ, 926, 155

    Shu, X., Yang, L., Liu, D., et al. 2022, ApJ, 926, 155

    2022

  101. [109]

    J., Gavazzi, R., et al

    Shuntov, M., McCracken, H. J., Gavazzi, R., et al. 2022, A&A, 664, A61

    2022

  102. [110]

    B., Jin, S., Magdis, G

    Sillassen, N. B., Jin, S., Magdis, G. E., et al. 2024, A&A, 690, A55

    2024

  103. [111]

    B., Jin, S., Magdis, G

    Sillassen, N. B., Jin, S., Magdis, G. E., et al. 2022, A&A, 665, L7

    2022

  104. [112]

    M., Smail, I., Swinbank, A

    Simpson, J. M., Smail, I., Swinbank, A. M., et al. 2019, ApJ, 880, 43

    2019

  105. [113]

    M., et al

    Smail, I., Dudzeviˇci¯ut˙e, U., Stach, S. M., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 502, 3426

    2021

  106. [114]

    E., et al

    Smail, I., Morrison, G., Gray, M. E., et al. 1999, ApJ, 525, 609 Smolˇci´c, V ., Novak, M., Bondi, M., et al. 2017, A&A, 602, A1

    1999

  107. [115]

    S., Steinhardt, C

    Speagle, J. S., Steinhardt, C. L., Capak, P. L., & Silverman, J. D. 2014, ApJS, 214, 15

    2014

  108. [116]

    S., Marrone, D

    Spilker, J. S., Marrone, D. P., Aguirre, J. E., et al. 2014, ApJ, 785, 149

    2014

  109. [117]

    Springel, V ., White, S. D. M., Jenkins, A., et al. 2005, Nature, 435, 629

    2005

  110. [118]

    J., Genzel, R., Saintonge, A., et al

    Tacconi, L. J., Genzel, R., Saintonge, A., et al. 2018, ApJ, 853, 179

    2018

  111. [119]

    J., Genzel, R., Smail, I., et al

    Tacconi, L. J., Genzel, R., Smail, I., et al. 2008, The Astrophysical Journal, 680, 246

    2008

  112. [120]

    J., Genzel, R., & Sternberg, A

    Tacconi, L. J., Genzel, R., & Sternberg, A. 2020, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 58, 157

    2020

  113. [121]

    2021, ApJ, 909, 23

    Talia, M., Cimatti, A., Giulietti, M., et al. 2021, ApJ, 909, 23

    2021

  114. [122]

    2014, A&A, 569, A98

    Tan, Q., Daddi, E., Magdis, G., et al. 2014, A&A, 569, A98

    2014

  115. [123]

    E., Daddi, E., et al

    Valentino, F., Magdis, G. E., Daddi, E., et al. 2018, ApJ, 869, 27

    2018

  116. [124]

    E., Daddi, E., et al

    Valentino, F., Magdis, G. E., Daddi, E., et al. 2020, ApJ, 890, 24 van der Burg, R. F. J., Muzzin, A., Hoekstra, H., et al. 2014, A&A, 561, A79 van der Vlugt, D., Hodge, J. A., Jin, S., et al. 2023, ApJ, 951, 131

    2020

  117. [125]

    E., et al

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261

    2020

  118. [126]

    2012, Nature, 486, 233

    Walter, F., Decarli, R., Carilli, C., et al. 2012, Nature, 486, 233

    2012

  119. [127]

    2016, ApJ, 828, 56

    Wang, T., Elbaz, D., Daddi, E., et al. 2016, ApJ, 828, 56

    2016

  120. [128]

    2019, Nature, 572, 211

    Wang, T., Schreiber, C., Elbaz, D., et al. 2019, Nature, 572, 211

    2019

  121. [129]

    L., Cooray, A., Osage, W., et al

    Wardlow, J. L., Cooray, A., Osage, W., et al. 2017, ApJ, 837, 12

    2017

  122. [130]

    R., Kauffmann, O

    Weaver, J. R., Kauffmann, O. B., Ilbert, O., et al. 2022, ApJS, 258, 11

    2022

  123. [131]

    Y ., Elbaz, D., Gómez-Guijarro, C., et al

    Xiao, M. Y ., Elbaz, D., Gómez-Guijarro, C., et al. 2023, A&A, 672, A18

    2023

  124. [132]

    2017, A&A, 608, A144

    Yang, C., Omont, A., Beelen, A., et al. 2017, A&A, 608, A144

    2017

  125. [133]

    Zhou, L., Wang, T., Daddi, E., et al. 2024, A&A, 684, A196 Article number, page 12 of 15 Malte Brinch et al.: A compact galaxy group at z = 4.3 Appendix A: Photometry used for combined SED fitting of CGG-z4.a+b Table A.1: Data used for SED fitting of CGG-z4.a,b. ID S 24µm S100...

    2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.