Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 83 references

The long life of ultra diffuse galaxies inside low-density dark matter halos: the case of AGC 114905

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read AGC 114905's stellar and gas discs remain globally stable for 5 Gyr even inside the very low-density dark halo implied by its rotation curve, overturning the earlier claim that such a halo would let the discs fly apart.

desk verdict A solid, well-scoped stability study of AGC 114905 that resolves the SS22 discrepancy using updated MP24 inputs, with the main caveat being that the result is contingent on those inputs and on a nonstandard gas-IC mapping. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.08717 v1 pith:GO4IPOHT submitted 2025-02-12 astro-ph.GA

Andrea Afruni , Federico Marinacci , Pavel E. Mancera Piña , Filippo Fraternali This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords ultradiffusegalaxiesdiscstabilityglobalgravitationalinstabilitieslow-concentrationdarkmatterhalosN-bodysimulationshydrodynamicsAGC114905
topics Dark Matter
open problems Dark Matter
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper asks whether the gas-rich ultra diffuse galaxy AGC 114905 can actually live in the very low-density dark matter halo that its rotation curve implies. A previous simulation study said no, arguing that the discs would be torn apart by global gravitational instabilities within about a billion years. The authors rebuild the galaxy using slightly revised data—a gas velocity dispersion about 40% higher and a somewhat more massive dark halo than the older estimate—and evolve it for 5 Gyr with both collisionless and hydrodynamic simulations. In all four main models the stellar and gas discs remain stable, keeping their initial density and kinematic profiles. If this is right, the stability objection to low-concentration dark halos for this kind of galaxy disappears, and AGC 114905 and similar ultra diffuse galaxies can be taken seriously as living in halos that challenge standard cosmological expectations.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by a self-consistent, three-component equilibrium model of the galaxy—a stellar disc, a gas disc, and a live dark-matter halo—constructed from distribution functions so that the initial density and kinematics match the revised observations. The two quantities that move the system across the instability threshold are the radial velocity dispersion of the disc gas (about 40% higher than the earlier estimate, reaching roughly 14 km/s in the centre) and the dark-matter mass within 10 kpc (about $9.2\times 10^8$ to $1.1\times 10^9\,M_\odot$). Stability is checked with the Toomre $Q$ parameter, its three-dimensional extension, the swing-amplification parameter $X$, and the global bar-stability parameter $E$; the fiducial models sit on the stable side of all these criteria, while the old-input models fall below them.

What would settle it

A deep, resolved observation of AGC 114905 that reveals a bar or strong m=2 spiral distortion in the stellar or gas disc would contradict the stability claim, as would a kinematic re-analysis that lowers the gas velocity dispersion to about 5 km/s or pushes the dark-matter mass within 10 kpc below roughly $9\times 10^8\,M_\odot$. The paper's own 'No DM' and cold-disc runs show such inputs form a bar within a few Gyr.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that AGC 114905 is not the dynamically fragile system it appeared to be. With the updated observational constraints the stellar and gas discs stay globally stable for the full 5 Gyr of simulation time, in both collisionless and hydrodynamic treatments and for both allowed dark-halo models: the lower-mass halo (Case 1, with a high baryon fraction) and the slightly more massive halo (Case 2, at the cosmological baryon fraction). Surface-density, scale-height, rotation, and velocity-dispersion profiles are essentially unchanged over the run. The earlier instability is reproduced only when the old, colder inputs are used—discs with velocity dispersion near 5 km/s and a dark halo with about $6.6\times 10^8\,M_\odot$ within 10 kpc—whereas models built from the revised data (about $9.2\times 10^8$ to $1.1\times 10^9\,M_\odot$ within 10 kpc, with dispersion rising to roughly 14 km/s in the centre) are stable. A test simulation for a second gas-rich ultra diffuse galaxy, AGC 242019, also shows no instability.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the revised kinematic model of AGC 114905 is correct: if the gas is really much colder (near 5 km/s) or the dark halo is really much less massive within 10 kpc, the same simulations produce global instabilities.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • AGC 114905 can persist unperturbed for at least 5 Gyr in both allowed low-concentration dark halos, making the low inner dark-matter densities inferred from its rotation curve dynamically plausible.
  • The conflict with the earlier N-body result is explained: the older model used colder discs and a lighter halo, and simulations with those inputs do go unstable; the updated observations place the galaxy on the stable side.
  • Because the most extreme known gas-rich ultra diffuse galaxy is stable, other HI-rich ultra diffuse galaxies with similar halos are likely stable too; the paper demonstrates this directly for AGC 242019.
  • Near the stability boundary, simple analytic criteria can be misleading: the cold-disc model with the Case 2 halo develops a bar in the collisionless run but stays stable when hydrodynamics is included, so full numerical treatment is needed for borderline systems.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural next step is to map the instability boundary in the plane of gas velocity dispersion versus dark-matter mass within 10 kpc, so that other ultra diffuse galaxies can be classified as stable or unstable directly from their observed kinematics without running new simulations.
  • Because the simulations are adiabatic and omit cooling, star formation, and feedback, the stability of borderline cases is the least secure conclusion; adding those processes could plausibly push near-threshold models either way, and this is the obvious stress test.
  • The paper shifts the open question from whether such a galaxy can be stable to how such a low-density halo can form; testing formation channels, including self-interacting dark matter, is the logical follow-up.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper revisits the global gravitational stability of the ultra-diffuse galaxy AGC 114905, using idealized AREPO simulations with initial conditions built from the updated observational constraints of Mancera Piña et al. (2024, MP24). The authors construct self-consistent equilibrium models with AGAMA, comprising a stellar disc, a gas disc, and a live coreNFW dark matter halo, and evolve them for 5 Gyr in four fiducial configurations: two halo cases (Case 1 and Case 2) each with collisionless N-body and adiabatic hydrodynamic treatments. They report that all four simulations show no significant evolution in surface density, scale height, rotation curve, or velocity dispersion, hence no global instabilities. To explain the discrepancy with Sellwood & Sanders (2022), they run control models with a low-mass halo and/or cold discs (5 km/s) and recover the previously reported instabilities. They also extend one simulation to another HI-rich UDG, AGC 242019, and find stability. The paper concludes that AGC 114905 and similar UDGs can survive in very low-concentration dark matter halos, thereby removing a dynamical objection to the observational inferences.

Significance. If the conclusion holds, the paper resolves an important tension: the low-density, low-concentration halos inferred from observations of AGC 114905 would be dynamically plausible despite the earlier instability claim of Sellwood & Sanders (2022). The choice of control runs is a clear strength: the 'No DM' and 'Case 3' models reproduce SS22's instabilities, which internally validates the numerical setup. The paper also makes a concrete, testable prediction that the stellar disc should rotate significantly more slowly than the gas disc due to asymmetric drift. The main limitation, which is honestly acknowledged, is that the stability result depends on the revised MP24 kinematic constraints; the paper shows explicitly that colder discs or a lower-mass halo would be unstable. Overall, the work is a useful contribution to the debate on UDG formation and dark matter models, though the central claim is conditional on the adopted observational parameters.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3.2.1, Eqs (8)-(9)] The conversion of the AGAMA particle velocity dispersion into internal energy via U_int = sigma_z^2 / ((gamma-1)(1-beta^2)) with beta=0.27 is an ad hoc prescription rather than a derived equilibrium condition. The paper does not demonstrate that the resulting gas disc is in vertical hydrostatic equilibrium under the ideal-gas equation of state, nor that the radial pressure gradient entering Eq. (9) matches the intended support for the adopted density and kinematics. Since the 'Case 3' simulation is stable with hydrodynamics but unstable in the collisionless run, the hydrodynamic stability appears sensitive to this mapping. I ask the authors to validate the mapping by, e.g., checking the residual of the vertical momentum equation at t=0, comparing the pressure-gradient-corrected rotation curve with the input circular velocity in detail, and performing a sensitivity run with a different beta value or an isothermal closure.
  2. [Section 5.1, Case 3 with hydrodynamics] The stability assessment for the hydrodynamic 'Case 3' run is based solely on gas properties: the text states that 'none of the gas properties differ ... by more than 5% from their initial values' and the model is then marked as stable. The collisionless version of the same model develops global instabilities in both the gas and stellar discs, so it is possible that the stellar disc in the hydrodynamic case is unstable even if the gas remains quiescent. Because the paper's conclusion (iii) claims that this intermediate model is stable, the authors should report the evolution of the stellar disc (surface density, kinematics, and scale height) for this run, or explicitly qualify the conclusion to refer to the gas disc only.
  3. [Section 4 and Table 2] Each model is simulated with a single realization and no convergence or particle-number study is presented. The 'Case 3' collisionless run develops a global instability despite having E=1.28, which the Efstathiou criterion predicts to be stable; this suggests that the stability boundary for these models is not well captured by global criteria and that the fiducial models, with Q~2, may be closer to marginality than the reported indicators alone imply. To support the robustness of the central claim, I request at least one additional realization with a different random seed or a higher particle number for the fiducial Case 2 model (or, minimally, for the 'Case 3' model), and a brief discussion of the effect on the evolution.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 3.2] The word 'politropic' should be 'polytropic'.
  2. [Section 3.2.1] The claim that the velocity-dispersion reduction factor beta=0.27 is independent of radius is stated but not shown; a small figure or table of beta(R) would make this more convincing.
  3. [Section 5.1] The definition of t_inst as the time when the average relative difference in at least one of Sigma, v_rot, or sigma_R exceeds 20% is not fully specified; please state the radial range and weighting used for the average.
  4. [Section 3.1.2] The values of the distribution-function input parameters (Sigma_i,0, R_d,i, sigma_X,i,0, R_sigma,X,i, h_i) are not reported in a table; providing them would improve reproducibility.
  5. [Abstract and Section 6] The phrase 'demonstrate that AGC 114905 ... can evolve unperturbed' is strong given that the result is conditional on the revised MP24 constraints; a formulation such as 'we show that, under the updated observational constraints, ...' would be more precise.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the 5 Gyr stability of the discs is an emergent simulation result, and the only overlapping-author input (MP24) is an independent observational analysis that does not itself assert stability.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that the stellar and gas discs of AGC 114905 remain stable for 5 Gyr when initial conditions are built from the MP24 observational constraints. This claim is not inserted into the initial conditions as an input. The authors construct equilibrium models with AGAMA from the observed surface densities, circular velocities, and velocity dispersions, then evolve them with AREPO; the persistence of the density and kinematic profiles over 5 Gyr is the output of the time integration, not a fitted parameter or a definitional consequence. The stability diagnostics quoted in the paper (Toomre Q and Efstathiou E in Table 2) are computed from the same input quantities and are consistent with the simulation outcome, but the paper does not present the simulation as a restatement of those criteria; it uses the simulations as the actual test and explicitly notes that simple criteria can fail for near-marginal models. The only self-citation that is load-bearing in the sense of supplying inputs is MP24, but MP24 is an independent observational paper with new optical data and a kinematic modelling effort; its results are externally falsifiable and are not derived from the present stability claim. The gas initial-condition conversion in Section 3.2.1 sets the total velocity dispersion at t=0 equal to the observed value by construction, but the constancy of that dispersion and the absence of global instabilities over the subsequent evolution are emergent. The SS22-based control simulations show that the stability outcome depends on the adopted halo mass and velocity dispersion, which is parameter sensitivity rather than circularity. No step in the derivation reduces to its own input by definition, and no prediction is merely a fitted parameter renamed.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The stability result rests on adopted inputs: MP24 halo fits, disc structural parameters tuned to observations, an unobserved stellar velocity dispersion, and the beta=0.27 thermal/turbulent partition. These are fitted or chosen rather than derived, so the central claim inherits their uncertainties. No new entities are introduced.

free parameters (5)
  • DM halo parameters (Case 1 and Case 2) = log M200/Msun = 9.59 (Case 1), 10.13 (Case 2); c200 = 2.76, 1.2
    Adopted from the coreNFW fits of MP24. The simulations do not fit these values, but the stability result depends on them and their uncertainties are not propagated.
  • Gas disc velocity dispersion profile = Approximately 14 km/s at center declining to approximately 5 km/s at 10 kpc
    Set to match MP24's updated HI measurements. The 40% increase relative to MP22 is the main reason the fiducial discs are stable.
  • Stellar disc velocity dispersion profile = Similar to gas profile, approximately 14 to 5 km/s
    The stellar velocity dispersion is unobserved and was adopted to give a comparable scale height. The authors tested lower values and report no impact, but the choice remains an input.
  • Disc structural parameters (Sigma_i,0, R_d,i, h_i) = Not tabulated; tuned by trial and error in AGAMA
    Equations (4) through (6) are tuned to reproduce MP24 surface densities and scale heights. Stability depends on these initial conditions.
  • Beta factor = 0.27
    Calibrated from the measured ratio of velocity dispersion before and after AREPO grid generation, used in equation (8) to partition thermal and turbulent pressure support.
assumptions (4)
  • standard math AGAMA's Staeckel fudge and Eddington inversion produce a steady, self-consistent multi-component equilibrium.
    Section 3.1.3: the model iteratively solves action mapping, density integrals, and the Poisson equation until convergence. The validity of this equilibrium construction is assumed.
  • domain assumption The gas disc is an ideal adiabatic fluid with no cooling, star formation, or feedback.
    Section 3.2 and Section 5.1: the authors explicitly omit baryon physics and note that including it could affect the stability of borderline models.
  • domain assumption The MP24 kinematic decomposition is a faithful tracer of the gravitational potential.
    Section 2.1: v_circ is derived from HI rotation plus an asymmetric drift correction using equation (1). If the pressure correction is overestimated, the inferred halo mass is too high.
  • standard math Toomre Q, Efstathiou E, and swing X criteria apply to these thick two-component discs.
    Section 5.1.1: these criteria are used to interpret the simulations, although the authors note that E is too simplistic for galaxies close to the instability boundary.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The long life of ultra diffuse galaxies inside low-density dark matter halos: the case of AGC 114905." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GO4IPOHT

@misc{pith2026250208717,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The long life of ultra diffuse galaxies inside low-density dark matter halos: the case of AGC 114905},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GO4IPOHT}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.08717}
}
read the original abstract

It has long been known that, in the absence of a dark matter (DM) halo, galaxy discs tend to develop global gravitational instabilities that strongly modify their initial structure. The recent discovery of gas-rich ultra diffuse galaxies (UDGs) that seem to live in DM halos with very low concentrations, a very atypical configuration in the standard cosmological framework, poses therefore a crucial question: is the small contribution from such DM halos sufficient to stabilize the UDG discs? In this work we investigate this question, focusing on the extreme UDG AGC 114905, which previous works found to be unstable. Here, we revisit these studies, using idealised numerical simulations with AREPO of a system composed by a stellar disc, a gas disc and a DM halo in initial equilibrium with each other and with properties based on slightly revised observational data of AGC 114905. We explore different scenarios for the DM halo and we run our simulations for 5 Gyr. We find that in all cases the stellar and the gas discs are stable and that their initial density distributions and kinematic properties remain unchanged during the course of the simulation. We discuss how the apparent discrepancy with previous works (where the UDG developed instabilities) is due to our discs being dynamically hotter and living in slightly more massive DM halos, in accordance with the new observational constraints, previously unavailable. Our findings demonstrate that AGC 114905 (and likely other similar UDGs) can evolve unperturbed in halos that challenge current cosmological models.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.08717 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Comparison between the observational data points from MP24 (see Section 2) and the initial conditions of our two main models (Case 1 depicted by dashed curves and Case 2 by solid curves, respectively) produced with AGAMA (see Section 3). Properties of the stellar disc are shown in orange and of the gas disc in blue. Top panel, surface density profiles; Central panel, total circular velocities of the system (model in… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Zoom-in on the face-on density distributions of the gas (top panels) and the stellar (bottom panels) discs of the Case 2 model with hydrodynamics included, at three different times in the simulation evolution (𝑡 = 0.5, 2.5, 5 Gyr). Both discs do not seem to develop global gravitational instabilities and their structure remains essentially unaltered with time. unchanged. We checked that the ratio between the velocity… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. 1-dimensional surface density profiles of the stellar (orange) and gas (blue) discs in the four main simulations analyzed in this work (‘Nbody’ columns are for the collisionless simulations, while ‘Gas’ columns are for the simulations with hydrodynamics), at 𝑡 = 0, 2.5, 5 Gyr. The profiles are calculated by dividing the disc into concentric rings wit Δ𝑅 ≃ 0.7 kpc. The points show the corresponding observational data… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Similar to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Kinematic properties of the stellar (orange) and the gas (blue) discs of the 4 main simulations analyzed in this study, with the corresponding data-points from MP24. The top panels show the rotational velocities and the bottom panels the radial component of the velocit…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Face-on views of the gas disc at the end of the simulation for the 4 models discussed in Section 5.1 (see the main text for more details). Top panels: ‘No DM’ models, where the adopted DM halo has a significantly lower mass with respect to our fiducial cases and the ve…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Properties of the gas disc in the four models presented in Sec￾tion 5.1 at the beginning (solid curves) and at the end (dashed curves) of the simulations. Surface densities on top, rotational velocities in the central panel and velocity dispersions at the bottom. Only …
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Properties of the gas disc in the model presented in Section 5.2 for the UDG AGC 242019, at the beginning (solid curves), at 2.5 Gyr (dotted curves) and at the end (dashed curves) of the simulation. Surface densities on top, rotational velocities in the central panel a…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

83 extracted references · 14 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Athanassoula E., 2002, @doi [ ] 10.1086/340784 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002ApJ...569L..83A 569, L83

    doi:10.1086/340784 2002

  2. [2]

    Bacchini C., Fraternali F., Iorio G., Pezzulli G., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201834382 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019A&A...622A..64B 622, A64

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201834382 2019

  3. [3]

    Bacchini C., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202449925 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...687A.115B 687, A115

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202449925 2024

  4. [4]

    S., 2002, @doi [Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy] 10.1007/BF02702282 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002JApA...23..185B 23, 185

    Bagla J. S., 2002, @doi [Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy] 10.1007/BF02702282 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002JApA...23..185B 23, 185

    doi:10.1007/bf02702282 2002

  5. [5]

    A., Sales L

    Benavides J. A., Sales L. V., Abadi M. G., Marinacci F., Vogelsberger M., Hernquist L., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad1053 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.522.1033B 522, 1033

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stad1053 2023

  6. [6]

    Binney J., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21757.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012MNRAS.426.1324B 426, 1324

    work page arXiv 2012

  7. [7]

    Binney J., Tremaine S., 2008, Galactic Dynamics: Second Edition

    2008

  8. [8]

    F., eds, Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series Vol

    Cepa J., et al., 2000, in Iye M., Moorwood A. F., eds, Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series Vol. 4008, Optical and IR Telescope Instrumentation and Detectors. pp 623--631, @doi 10.1117/12.395520

    doi:10.1117/12.395520 2000

Show all 83 references
  1. [9]

    H., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201936821 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020A&A...633L...3C 633, L3

    Chamba N., Trujillo I., Knapen J. H., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201936821 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020A&A...633L...3C 633, L3

    2020 doi

  2. [10]

    K., Kere s D., Wetzel A., Hopkins P

    Chan T. K., Kere s D., Wetzel A., Hopkins P. F., Faucher-Gigu \`e re C. A., El-Badry K., Garrison-Kimmel S., Boylan-Kolchin M., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty1153 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.478..906C 478, 906

    2018 doi

  3. [11]

    M., Shlosman I., Tohline J

    Christodoulou D. M., Shlosman I., Tohline J. E., 1995, @doi [ ] 10.1086/175547 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995ApJ...443..551C 443, 551

    1995 doi

  4. [12]

    Cimatti A., Fraternali F., Nipoti C., 2019, Introduction to Galaxy Formation and Evolution: From Primordial Gas to Present-Day Galaxies

    2019

  5. [13]

    J., 2018, @doi [Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society] 10.3847/2515-5172/aab7f6 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018RNAAS...2...43C 2, 43

    Conselice C. J., 2018, @doi [Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society] 10.3847/2515-5172/aab7f6 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018RNAAS...2...43C 2, 43

    2018 doi

  6. [14]

    M., Randriamampandry T., Carignan C., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz1203 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.486.5391D 486, 5391

    Deg N., Widrow L. M., Randriamampandry T., Carignan C., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz1203 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.486.5391D 486, 5391

    2019 doi

  7. [15]

    I., 2011, @doi [European Physical Journal Plus] 10.1140/epjp/i2011-11055-3 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011EPJP..126...55D 126, 55

    Dehnen W., Read J. I., 2011, @doi [European Physical Journal Plus] 10.1140/epjp/i2011-11055-3 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011EPJP..126...55D 126, 55

    2011 doi

  8. [16]

    B., Dutton A

    Di Cintio A., Brook C. B., Dutton A. A., Macci \`o A. V., Obreja A., Dekel A., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnrasl/slw210 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.466L...1D 466, L1

    2017 doi

  9. [17]

    M., Fraternali F., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv1213 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.451.3021D 451, 3021

    Di Teodoro E. M., Fraternali F., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv1213 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.451.3021D 451, 3021

    2015 doi

  10. [18]

    S., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aba754 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020AJ....160..122D 160, 122

    Du W., McGaugh S. S., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aba754 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020AJ....160..122D 160, 122

    2020 doi

  11. [19]

    A., Macci \`o A

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

    2014 doi

  12. [20]

    S., 1916, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/76.7.572 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1916MNRAS..76..572E 76, 572

    Eddington A. S., 1916, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/76.7.572 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1916MNRAS..76..572E 76, 572

    1916 doi

  13. [21]

    Efstathiou G., Lake G., Negroponte J., 1982, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/199.4.1069 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1982MNRAS.199.1069E 199, 1069

    1982 doi

  14. [22]

    E., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty893 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.477.3807F 477, 3807

    Fiacconi D., Sijacki D., Pringle J. E., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty893 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.477.3807F 477, 3807

    2018 doi

  15. [23]

    Hohl F., 1971, @doi [ ] 10.1086/151091 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1971ApJ...168..343H 168, 343

    1971 doi

  16. [24]

    Hu H.-J., Guo Q., Zheng Z., Yang H., Tsai C.-W., Zhang H.-X., Zhang Z.-Y., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/acc7a4 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...947L...9H 947, L9

    2023 doi

  17. [25]

    Impey C., Bothun G., 1997, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.astro.35.1.267 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997ARA&A..35..267I 35, 267

    1997 doi

  18. [26]

    I., Battaglia G., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw3285 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.466.4159I 466, 4159

    Iorio G., Fraternali F., Nipoti C., Di Teodoro E., Read J. I., Battaglia G., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw3285 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.466.4159I 466, 4159

    2017 doi

  19. [27]

    G., Leisman L., Webb A., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz1868 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.490..566J 490, 566

    Janowiecki S., Jones M. G., Leisman L., Webb A., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz1868 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.490..566J 490, 566

    2019 doi

  20. [28]

    J., Solomon P

    Jog C. J., Solomon P. M., 1984, @doi [ ] 10.1086/161597 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1984ApJ...276..114J 276, 114

    1984 doi

  21. [29]

    E., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac8875 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...936..166K 936, 166

    Kong D., Kaplinghat M., Yu H.-B., Fraternali F., Mancera Pi \ n a P. E., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac8875 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...936..166K 936, 166

    2022 doi

  22. [30]

    Leisman L., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aa7575 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...842..133L 842, 133

    2017 doi

  23. [31]

    Lelli F., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202451289 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...689L...3L 689, L3

    2024 doi

  24. [32]

    C., Shu F

    Lin C. C., Shu F. H., 1964, @doi [ ] 10.1086/147955 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1964ApJ...140..646L 140, 646

    1964 doi

  25. [33]

    E., Peletier R

    Mancera Pi \ n a P. E., Peletier R. F., Aguerri J. A. L., Venhola A., Trager S., Choque Challapa N., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty2574 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.481.4381M 481, 4381

    2018 doi

  26. [34]

    E., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ab40c7 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...883L..33M 883, L33

    Mancera Pi \ n a P. E., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ab40c7 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...883L..33M 883, L33

    2019 doi

  27. [35]

    E., Posti L., Fraternali F., Adams E

    Mancera Pi \ n a P. E., Posti L., Fraternali F., Adams E. A. K., Oosterloo T., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202039340 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021A&A...647A..76M 647, A76

    2021 doi

  28. [36]

    E., Fraternali F., Oosterloo T., Adams E

    Mancera Pi \ n a P. E., Fraternali F., Oosterloo T., Adams E. A. K., Oman K. A., Leisman L., 2022a, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab3491 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.512.3230M 512, 3230

    doi

  29. [37]

    E., Fraternali F., Oosterloo T., Adams E

    Mancera Pi \ n a P. E., Fraternali F., Oosterloo T., Adams E. A. K., di Teodoro E., Bacchini C., Iorio G., 2022b, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac1508 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.514.3329M 514, 3329

    doi

  30. [38]

    E., Golini G., Trujillo I., Montes M., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202450230 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...689A.344M 689, A344

    Mancera Pi \ n a P. E., Golini G., Trujillo I., Montes M., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202450230 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...689A.344M 689, A344

    2024 doi

  31. [39]

    M., Oosterloo T., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201731054 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017A&A...607A.106M 607, A106

    Marasco A., Fraternali F., van der Hulst J. M., Oosterloo T., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201731054 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017A&A...607A.106M 607, A106

    2017 doi

  32. [40]

    V., Vogelsberger M., Torrey P., Springel V., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz2391 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.489.4233M 489, 4233

    Marinacci F., Sales L. V., Vogelsberger M., Torrey P., Springel V., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz2391 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.489.4233M 489, 4233

    2019 doi

  33. [41]

    Montes M., Trujillo I., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty2858 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.482.2838M 482, 2838

    2019 doi

  34. [42]

    O., Yang D., Yu H.-B., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ad0e09 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...958L..39N 958, L39

    Nadler E. O., Yang D., Yu H.-B., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ad0e09 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...958L..39N 958, L39

    2023 doi

  35. [43]

    F., Frenk C

    Navarro J. F., Frenk C. S., White S. D. M., 1996, @doi [ ] 10.1086/177173 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996ApJ...462..563N 462, 563

    1996 doi

  36. [44]

    Nelson D., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz2306 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.490.3234N 490, 3234

    2019 doi

  37. [45]

    Nipoti C., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac3403 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.518.5154N 518, 5154

    2023 doi

  38. [46]

    arXiv:2405.13123

    Nipoti C., Caprioglio C., Bacchini C., 2024, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2405.13123 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240513123N p. arXiv:2405.13123

    2024 doi arXiv

  39. [47]

    Oosterloo T., Fraternali F., Sancisi R., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/520332 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007AJ....134.1019O 134, 1019

    2007 doi

  40. [48]

    P., Peebles P

    Ostriker J. P., Peebles P. J. E., 1973, @doi [ ] 10.1086/152513 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1973ApJ...186..467O 186, 467

    1973 doi

  41. [49]

    J., Ohlmann S

    Pakmor R., Springel V., Bauer A., Mocz P., Munoz D. J., Ohlmann S. T., Schaal K., Zhu C., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv2380 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.455.1134P 455, 1134

    2016 doi

  42. [50]

    Planck Collaboration et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201833910 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020A&A...641A...6P 641, A6

    2020 doi

  43. [51]

    Posti L., Binney J., Nipoti C., Ciotti L., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu2608 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.447.3060P 447, 3060

    2015 doi

  44. [52]

    R., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04201.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001MNRAS.323..445R 323, 445

    Rafikov R. R., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04201.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001MNRAS.323..445R 323, 445

    2001

  45. [53]

    I., Agertz O., Collins M

    Read J. I., Agertz O., Collins M. L. M., 2016a, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw713 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.459.2573R 459, 2573

    doi

  46. [54]

    I., Iorio G., Agertz O., Fraternali F., 2016b, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw1876 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.462.3628R 462, 3628

    Read J. I., Iorio G., Agertz O., Fraternali F., 2016b, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw1876 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.462.3628R 462, 3628

    doi

  47. [55]

    I., Iorio G., Agertz O., Fraternali F., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx147 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.467.2019R 467, 2019

    Read J. I., Iorio G., Agertz O., Fraternali F., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx147 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.467.2019R 467, 2019

    2017 doi

  48. [56]

    Rom \'a n J., Trujillo I., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx694 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.468.4039R 468, 4039

    2017 doi

  49. [57]

    B., 1992, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/256.2.307 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1992MNRAS.256..307R 256, 307

    Romeo A. B., 1992, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/256.2.307 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1992MNRAS.256..307R 256, 307

    1992 doi

  50. [58]

    B., 1994, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1994A&A...286..799R 286, 799

    Romeo A. B., 1994, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1994A&A...286..799R 286, 799

    1994

  51. [59]

    B., Falstad N., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt809 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.433.1389R 433, 1389

    Romeo A. B., Falstad N., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt809 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.433.1389R 433, 1389

    2013 doi

  52. [60]

    B., Agertz O., Renaud F., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac3074 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.518.1002R 518, 1002

    Romeo A. B., Agertz O., Renaud F., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac3074 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.518.1002R 518, 1002

    2023 doi

  53. [61]

    S., 1960, Annales d'Astrophysique, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1960AnAp...23..979S 23, 979

    Safronov V. S., 1960, Annales d'Astrophysique, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1960AnAp...23..979S 23, 979

    1960

  54. [62]

    V., Wetzel A., Fattahi A., 2022, @doi [Nature Astronomy] 10.1038/s41550-022-01689-w , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022NatAs...6..897S 6, 897

    Sales L. V., Wetzel A., Fattahi A., 2022, @doi [Nature Astronomy] 10.1038/s41550-022-01689-w , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022NatAs...6..897S 6, 897

    2022 doi

  55. [63]

    A., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-637X/819/2/92 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...819...92S 819, 92

    Sellwood J. A., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-637X/819/2/92 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...819...92S 819, 92

    2016 doi

  56. [64]

    A., Sanders R

    Sellwood J. A., Sanders R. H., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac1604 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.514.4008S 514, 4008

    2022 doi

  57. [65]

    C., Chung A., Wong O

    Sengupta C., Scott T. C., Chung A., Wong O. I., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz1884 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.488.3222S 488, 3222

    2019 doi

  58. [66]

    Shi Y., Zhang Z.-Y., Wang J., Chen J., Gu Q., Yu X., Li S., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/abd777 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...909...20S 909, 20

    2021 doi

  59. [67]

    Spekkens K., Karunakaran A., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aa94be , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...855...28S 855, 28

    2018 doi

  60. [68]

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

    2010

  61. [69]

    Springel V., Di Matteo T., Hernquist L., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09238.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005MNRAS.361..776S 361, 776

    2005

  62. [70]

    arXiv:2111.05466

    Tepper-Garcia T., et al., 2021, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2111.05466 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021arXiv211105466T p. arXiv:2111.05466

    2021 doi arXiv

  63. [71]

    arXiv:2406.00342

    Tepper-Garcia T., Bland-Hawthorn J., Vasiliev E., Agertz O., Teyssier R., Federrath C., 2024, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2406.00342 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240600342T p. arXiv:2406.00342

    2024 doi arXiv

  64. [72]

    Toomre A., 1964, @doi [ ] 10.1086/147861 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1964ApJ...139.1217T 139, 1217

    1964 doi

  65. [73]

    M., Lynden-Bell D., eds, Structure and Evolution of Normal Galaxies

    Toomre A., 1981, in Fall S. M., Lynden-Bell D., eds, Structure and Evolution of Normal Galaxies. pp 111--136

    1981

  66. [74]

    Tulin S., Yu H.-B., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1016/j.physrep.2017.11.004 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018PhR...730....1T 730, 1

    2018 doi

  67. [75]

    Vasiliev E., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty2672 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.482.1525V 482, 1525

    2019 doi

  68. [76]

    Vogelsberger M., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu1536 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.444.1518V 444, 1518

    2014 doi

  69. [77]

    Weinberger R., Springel V., Pakmor R., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/ab908c , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJS..248...32W 248, 32

    2020 doi

  70. [78]

    O., Yu H.-B., Zhong Y.-M., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1088/1475-7516/2024/02/032 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024JCAP...02..032Y 2024, 032

    Yang D., Nadler E. O., Yu H.-B., Zhong Y.-M., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1088/1475-7516/2024/02/032 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024JCAP...02..032Y 2024, 032

    2024 doi

  71. [79]

    J., Rosolowsky E., van der Hulst J

    Yim K., Wong T., Xue R., Rand R. J., Rosolowsky E., van der Hulst J. M., Benjamin R., Murphy E. J., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/148/6/127 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014AJ....148..127Y 148, 127

    2014 doi

  72. [80]

    G., Abraham R., Merritt A., Zhang J., Geha M., Conroy C., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/798/2/L45 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...798L..45V 798, L45

    van Dokkum P. G., Abraham R., Merritt A., Zhang J., Geha M., Conroy C., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/798/2/L45 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...798L..45V 798, L45

    2015 doi

  73. [81]

    van Dokkum P., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1038/nature25767 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018Natur.555..629V 555, 629

    2018 doi

  74. [82]

    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...

  75. [83]

    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 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.