Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 122 references

The RESOLVE and ECO G3 Initiative: Drivers of HI Content and X-ray Emission in Galaxy Groups

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The long-sought AGN-driven dip in galaxy-group H I sits at lower halo mass than models predict.

desk verdict A careful stacking analysis that plausibly pins an AGN-associated HI valley to low halo masses, though the central causal interpretation rests on an unpublished AGN catalog and an untested FSMGR control. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.13103 v1 pith:UENZVD3I submitted 2025-04-17 astro-ph.GA

Zackary L. Hutchens , Sheila J. Kannappan , Kelley M. Hess , Andrew J. Baker , Ming Sun , Derrick S. Carr , Kathleen D. Eckert , David V. Stark This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords galaxygroupsneutralhydrogenactivegalacticnucleiX-rayemissionhalomassAGNfeedbackevolutionvirialization
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 tries to establish that the long-sought dip in the relation between galaxy-group atomic hydrogen and halo mass is real, but sits at lower halo masses than theory predicts, and is driven by halos hosting active galactic nuclei (AGN). Using a nearly complete, volume-limited census of local galaxy groups, the authors find that below $M_{\rm halo}\sim10^{12.1}\,M_\odot$, AGN-hosting halos have roughly 0.25 dex less atomic hydrogen per unit halo mass than non-AGN halos at the same mass, together with lower fractional stellar mass growth. Diluted by the majority of non-AGN halos, this produces a shallow valley near $M_{\rm halo}\sim10^{11.8}\,M_\odot$, below the $10^{12.1}\,M_\odot$ bimodality scale where current semi-analytic models place an AGN-feedback dip. The paper also links H I content inversely to stacked X-ray hot gas emission and to virialization state, with the H I-to-halo-mass ratio spreading markedly for crossing times below about 2 Gyr. If correct, the results imply that AGN activity removes cold gas from dwarf-group halos, a population that theoretical models have not yet incorporated.

What carries the argument

The central object is the group-integrated H I-to-halo mass ratio $M_{\rm HI,grp}/M_{\rm halo}$ measured as a function of group halo mass, split by AGN presence, crossing time, and fractional stellar mass growth. The argument is carried by a nearly complete AGN inventory that reaches dwarf galaxies through optical emission-line diagnostics and mid-IR color diagnostics, by the ${\rm FSMGR_{grp}}$ metric (the ratio of stellar mass formed in the past Gyr to preexisting stellar mass, summed over group members), and by $t_{\rm cross}$ (the mean projected transverse distance divided by the mean line-of-sight velocity, approximating virialization state). On the X-ray side, the key mechanism is stacking of archival all-sky X-ray images with source masking, random-position control stacks, and a range of X-ray binary background estimates used to isolate hot gas emission.

What would settle it

Measure the $M_{\rm HI,grp}/M_{\rm halo}$ gap using only AGN selected by X-ray luminosity or broad-line emission, whose detectability does not depend on H I content; if the 0.25 dex valley shrinks to noise at fixed $M_{\rm halo}$ below $10^{12.1}\,M_\odot$, the valley is a selection effect rather than AGN feedback.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that AGN-hosting halos below $M_{\rm halo}\sim10^{12.1}\,M_\odot$ carry a broad, roughly 0.25 dex deep valley in $M_{\rm HI,grp}/M_{\rm halo}$ relative to non-AGN-hosting halos at fixed halo mass, with a matching reduction in group-integrated fractional stellar mass growth. Because the fraction of halos containing AGN crosses 50% near $M_{\rm halo}\sim10^{11.7}\,M_\odot$, the dilution of this deficit over all halos yields a narrow, shallower valley centered near $M_{\rm halo}\sim10^{11.8}\,M_\odot$. The paper interprets this as the physical origin of the dip in the overall $M_{\rm HI,grp}/M_{\rm halo}$ versus $M_{\rm halo}$ relation, and emphasizes that both this valley and a possible second one near $M_{\rm halo}\sim10^{13}\,M_\odot$ are shallower and located at lower masses than the dips predicted by current semi-analytic models. It further claims that stacked X-ray data detect hot gas confidently at $M_{\rm halo}=10^{12.6-14}\,M_\odot$ and unambiguously above $10^{14}\,M_\odot$, while the H I-to-halo mass ratio drops by about 1.1-1.2 dex over the same range.

Load-bearing premise

The AGN inventory must be as complete in gas-rich, star-forming low-mass halos as in gas-poor ones; if low star formation simply makes AGN easier to detect, the H I valley would appear even without AGN-driven gas removal.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The shallow valley near $M_{\rm halo}\sim10^{11.8}\,M_\odot$ in the all-halo relation is the diluted signature of a deeper deficit among AGN-hosting halos, giving the long-sought dip a physical origin rather than a binning artifact.
  • Current semi-analytic predictions of an AGN-feedback dip at or above $10^{12.1}\,M_\odot$ will need revision to include low-metallicity, actively star-forming dwarf AGN populations and their feedback.
  • The inverse relation between H I fraction and stacked X-ray emission outlines a cold-to-hot gas handover: hot gas becomes detectable around $10^{12.6}\,M_\odot$ and dominates by $10^{14}\,M_\odot$.
  • The wider H I scatter below $t_{\rm cross}\sim2$ Gyr indicates that virialization or merger state, not halo mass alone, regulates cold gas in small groups.
  • AGN-hosting low-mass halos show reduced fractional stellar mass growth as well as reduced H I, tying black-hole activity to suppressed recent star formation in the same halos.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the valley reflects genuine AGN feedback, the same survey should show an excess of warmer or molecular gas phases in AGN-hosting dwarf halos if gas is being heated rather than expelled; this is testable with molecular gas observations.
  • The possible second valley near $10^{13}\,M_\odot$ could mark a transition to a different AGN feedback mode; that hypothesis needs AGN subtype classifications (radio, optical, X-ray) that the present inventory does not provide.
  • Because crossing time is projection-sensitive, the $t_{\rm cross}\sim2$ Gyr transition should be checked against virialization metrics insensitive to merging, such as the magnitude gap; disagreement between metrics would point to projection effects rather than physical virialization.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. This paper combines the volume-limited RESOLVE and ECO surveys with the G3 group catalog to study drivers of group-integrated HI-to-halo mass ratio and X-ray emission. The authors stack archival ROSAT All-Sky Survey images in bins of halo mass, crossing time, AGN presence, and group-integrated fractional stellar mass growth rate, using random sky stacks and multiple X-ray binary estimators as controls. They report that hot gas is confidently detected for halos of 10^12.6–10^14 Msun and unambiguously above 10^14 Msun, that lower-crossing-time groups show lower HI content at fixed halo mass, and that AGN-hosting halos below ~10^12.1 Msun exhibit a broad ~0.25 dex valley in M_HI,grp/M_halo relative to non-AGN-hosting halos. Diluted by non-AGN halos, this produces a shallower valley in the full sample near 10^11.8 Msun, below the location of the theoretically predicted dip; a possible additional valley near 10^13 Msun is also discussed. The paper interprets the low-mass valley as evidence for AGN-associated HI suppression at lower masses than current semi-analytic models predict.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the paper provides a new observational constraint on AGN feedback in the dwarf-to-group regime, a mass range where such constraints are rare and where the paper's SF-AGN inventory is unusually complete. The analysis is careful in several respects: the X-ray stacking includes random sky-position control stacks processed identically to the data, X-ray binary contamination is assessed with 13 estimators, errors on medians are bootstrapped, and the crossing-time split is explicitly checked against alternative boundary values. The paper also gives a clear, falsifiable prediction: the valley in the M_HI,grp/M_halo relation should be traceable to the AGN-hosting subpopulation, with a deeper valley than in the full sample. The main weakness is that the central AGN comparison rests on an unpublished AGN catalog and on a control (fixed M_halo and FSMGR_grp jointly) that the authors state they have not performed; until that control is supplied, the AGN valley could be a selection effect rather than a physical AGN-driven depletion.

major comments (4)
  1. [§5.3.3, Fig. 8] The paper explicitly states in §5.3.3 that the Figure 8 analysis has not been replicated in fixed bins of M_halo and FSMGR_grp together. This is a load-bearing missing control: because M_HI,grp/M_halo and FSMGR_grp are tightly correlated (as the paper itself notes from Kannappan et al. 2013), the observed HI valley for AGN-hosting halos may simply track the reduced FSMGR_grp of those halos, which in turn may be what makes AGN detectable in the first place. Without this joint control, the claim that AGN presence itself, rather than the star-formation state that enables AGN detection, is associated with depressed HI is not established. The authors should add the fixed-M_halo, fixed-FSMGR_grp comparison, or explicitly quantify the residual HI offset after matching on FSMGR_grp.
  2. [§4.3, Fig. 8] The reported >5 sigma two-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov significance for the difference between AGN-hosting and non-AGN-hosting halos is not computed at fixed M_halo. The KS test is sensitive to differences in the overall M_halo distributions of the two samples; given the strong dependence of M_HI,grp/M_halo on M_halo, this significance does not by itself demonstrate a mass-independent or mass-matched HI offset. The valley 'a' significance should be reassessed with a stratified or matched test (e.g., fixed M_halo bins or propensity-score matching) to support the claim that the valley is intrinsic to AGN-hosting halos.
  3. [§4.3, Fig. 11, valley 'b'] The 2.5 sigma significance quoted for the shallow valley 'b' in the full sample is computed relative to a baseline that is itself fit to the same data, namely the analytic model of Obuljen et al. (2019) with free parameters logM0, logMmin, and alpha fit to the median M_HI,grp/M_halo values. This is not an independent null hypothesis, and the significance estimate does not account for the uncertainty in the fitted baseline parameters. The authors should provide a more conservative significance estimate, for example from bootstrap resampling of the data and refitting the baseline each time, or from forward-modeled mock catalogs.
  4. [§2.1.1, §5.3.1] The central AGN-HI comparison depends on the completeness and unbiasedness of the AGN inventory with respect to HI content and FSMGR at fixed halo mass. The AGN catalog is described as 'M.S. Polimera et al. 2025, in prep.' and is not yet public, and the selection function of the new SF-AGN class is not quantified here. The paper itself raises the inverse-causality scenario in §5.3.1: reduced star formation may make AGN easier to detect, which would produce the same observed HI valley without AGN-driven gas removal. Because the analysis does not control for FSMGR at fixed M_halo (see the first major comment), this alternative remains viable. The authors should either provide the AGN catalog or a detailed selection-function description, and they should show that the HI valley persists after matching or controlling for FSMGR_grp.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§4.2, Fig. 7] The paper reports that the M_halo = 10^12.6–10^13.3 Msun bin shows enhanced X-ray emission for higher-tcross groups, contrary to the trend at higher masses, but the AGN-masked SNR in that bin is only ~2.2 and consistent with XRB expectations; this should be stated more prominently as a marginal result in the main text, not just in the figure description.
  2. [§4.3, Fig. 8, middle panel] The label and text alternate between 'FSMGR_grp' and 'FSMGRgrp' with inconsistent spacing; please standardize the notation throughout, including in the axis labels.
  3. [§4.3, Fig. 9] The X-ray stacking for AGN-hosting halos includes only three mass bins, and the lowest bin shows no significant detection; the text should explicitly note the low statistical power in that bin rather than implying a monotonic trend across all three bins.
  4. [§3.1, Fig. 1] The PSF percentile statement '97% of the sources identified by the sigma-clipping algorithm can be enclosed by such an aperture' would benefit from a clearer statement of whether the source radii refer to the segmentation-map equivalent radii and how the masking aperture choice affects the final count rates in low-mass stacks.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the central claims are differential empirical measurements, not predictions derived from inputs.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is empirical throughout: group HI ratios come from summed Arecibo/GBT/ALFALFA HI masses and H23 abundance-matched halo masses; X-ray signals come from RASS stacking compared with 30 random-sky stack samples; AGN versus non-AGN and lower- versus higher-crossing-time splits are direct sample divisions in fixed or sliding halo-mass bins. None of the headline quantities (the ~0.25 dex valley 'a', the diluted valley 'b', or the X-ray detections above XRB estimates) is obtained by fitting a parameter that was later renamed a prediction. The model baseline used to quote 2.5 sigma for valley 'b' is explicitly a baseline fit to the same median curve ('we constructed a baseline for our median MHI,grp/Mhalo vs. Mhalo data by fitting to the analytic model of Obuljen et al. 2019'), and the paper does not present it as an independent theoretical prediction. Dependencies on prior team work (H23 group catalog, Polimera et al. AGN inventory, Kannappan et al. FSMGR code) are data products and scaling relations, not conclusions that define the target valley; the inverse-causality/selection scenario and the missing fixed-FSMGR control are candidly flagged in Sections 5.3.1 and 5.3.3, making them confounds for interpretation rather than circular reductions. No equation or catalog definition is shown to be equivalent, by construction, to the claimed valley or X-ray trend.

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

No new physical entities are introduced. The analysis rests on standard astrophysical assumptions plus three fitted analysis parameters: the baseline model fit used for valley significance, the crossing time split, and the parabolic center of valley 'a'. The AGN classification and halo mass estimation are external inputs from the same team's prior or in-preparation work, so their systematic errors are the main burden.

free parameters (3)
  • Obuljen et al. (2019) analytic model fit parameters (logM0, logMmin, alpha) = logM0=9.4, logMmin=11.3, alpha=0.39
    Fitted to the median MHI,grp/Mhalo versus Mhalo relation for the G3 sample to construct a baseline for assessing the significance of the all-halo valley (Section 4.3).
  • Crossing time split = log(tcross/13.8 Gyr) = -0.86 (~2 Gyr)
    Chosen from the apparent transition to greater scatter in MHI,grp/Mhalo in Figure 5; robustness to -0.75 and -1 is checked in Section 4.2.
  • Parabolic fit center of valley 'a' = logMhalo = 11.8 +/- 0.1
    Descriptive fit to locate the center of the AGN-hosting halo valley in Figure 11.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Group halo masses derived from abundance matching (H23) are unbiased with respect to the gas properties being studied.
    Halo mass is the independent variable in the central scaling relations; biases in abundance matching at low masses would shift the location and depth of the valley. See Section 2.1.4.
  • domain assumption Group-integrated H I masses, many of which are photometric gas fraction estimates, are unbiased.
    About 55% of ECO galaxies use photometric gas fraction estimates; systematic errors in this technique could create or suppress a valley. See Section 2.1.2.
  • domain assumption Crossing time is a valid proxy for virialization state.
    The paper splits groups at tcross around 2 Gyr and interprets lower tcross as more virialized, while noting tcross is noisy and projection-affected. See Section 2.1.4 and Section 5.2.
  • domain assumption RASS background subtraction and X-ray binary scaling relations are accurate enough for hot gas detection.
    The hot gas claims depend on background subtraction and X-ray binary estimation; the paper uses 13 estimators and claims unambiguous detection only where the measured rate exceeds all estimators. See Section 3.5.
  • domain assumption AGN classification is independent of H I content and FSMGR.
    The differential valley compares AGN-hosting and non-AGN-hosting halos; the paper itself raises the inverse-causality possibility that reduced star formation makes AGN easier to detect. See Section 2.1.1 and Section 5.3.1.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The RESOLVE and ECO G3 Initiative: Drivers of HI Content and X-ray Emission in Galaxy Groups." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/UENZVD3I

@misc{pith2026250413103,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The RESOLVE and ECO G3 Initiative: Drivers of HI Content and X-ray Emission in Galaxy Groups},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/UENZVD3I}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.13103}
}
abstract

Adding to the RESOLVE and ECO Gas in Galaxy Groups (G3) initiative, we examine possible drivers of group-integrated HI-to-halo mass ratios ($M_{\rm HI,grp}/M_{\rm halo}$) and group X-ray emission, including group halo mass ($M_{\rm halo}$), virialization as probed by crossing time ($t_{\rm cross}$), presence of active galactic nuclei (AGN), and group-integrated fractional stellar mass growth rate (FSMGR$_{\rm grp}$). G3 groups span $M_{\rm halo}=10^{11-14.5}\,M_\odot$ with comprehensive HI and AGN information, which we combine with X-ray stacking of ROSAT All-Sky data. We detect hot gas emission exceeding AGN and X-ray binary backgrounds confidently for $M_{\rm halo}=10^{12.6-14}\,M_\odot$ and unambiguously for $M_{\rm halo}>10^{14}\,M_\odot$, reflecting an inverse dependence of $M_{\rm\,HI,grp}/M_{\rm halo}$ and hot gas emission on halo mass. At fixed halo mass, $M_{\rm\,HI,grp}/M_{\rm halo}$ transitions to greater spread below $t_{\rm cross}\sim2$ Gyr. Dividing groups across this transition, lower-$t_{\rm cross}$ groups show elevated X-ray emission compared to higher-$t_{\rm cross}$ groups for $M_{\rm halo}>10^{13.3}\,M_\odot$, but this trend reverses for $M_{\rm halo}=10^{12.6-13.3}\,M_\odot$. Additionally, AGN-hosting halos below $M_{\rm halo}\sim10^{12.1}\,M_\odot$ exhibit a broad, $\sim$0.25 dex deep valley in $M_{\rm HI,grp}/M_{\rm halo}$ compared to non-AGN-hosting halos with correspondingly reduced FSMGR$_{\rm grp}$. When diluted by non-AGN-hosting halos, this valley becomes shallower and narrower, falling roughly between $M_{\rm halo}=10^{11.5}\,M_\odot$ and $M_{\rm halo}=10^{12.1}\,M_\odot$ in the overall $M_{\rm\,HI,grp}/M_{\rm\,halo}$ vs. $M_{\rm halo}$ relation. We may also detect a second, less easily interpreted valley at $M_{\rm halo}\sim10^{13}\,M_\odot$. Neither valley matches theoretical predictions of a deeper valley at or above $M_{\rm halo}=10^{12.1}\,M_\odot$.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.13103 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. PSPC PSF and distribution of source radii. Left: Distribution of 10,000 ROSAT PSPC PSFs calculated with random photon energies spanning 0.44–2.04 keV and random off-axis angles spanning 0 ′ –60′ . The solid black line shows the median PSF; blue shaded regions show the 16th–84th (dark) and 2.5th–97.5th (light) percentiles of the distribution at fixed radius. Dotted lines show the PSF strength at a radius of 4 pixels … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Demonstration of RASS image mosaicking, masking, and scaling/cropping applied to G3 group #93 (chosen arbitrarily for illustra￾tion). (a) Custom count map centered on group #93. Pixel values are in units of photon counts and may be fractional given that the original RASS data have been reprojected and mosaicked as described in §2.2. (b) Masked count map, with 2RXS point sources masked, as outlined in §3.1. (c) Scale… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Stacked X-ray emission and group MHI,grp/Mhalo in bins of group halo mass. Ngalaxies = 1 groups are included. Top: Stacked X-ray intensity maps when AGN galaxies are not masked. Images are smoothed with a 3-pixel Gaussian kernel to enable visualization on a common linear scale, as logarithmic scales emphasize noise fluctuations in low-nbin stacks. White circles represent Rvir for a group at the center of the halo ma… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Group stacked X-ray emission and MHI,grp/Mhalo in bins of group halo mass, as presented in the bottom row of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Group-integrated H I-to-halo mass ratios (MHI,grp/Mhalo) as a function of group crossing time, expressed as a fraction of the age of the Universe, in three halo mass bins. Contour lines have been drawn using kernel density estimation. The vertical line corresponds to l…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Median MHI,grp/Mhalo vs. Mhalo for lower-tcross (green) and higher-tcross (purple) groups, as defined in §4.2. We exclude Ngalaxies = 1 groups from this plot. Error bars on the medians were computed using bootstrapping with 5,000 resamples; open circles represent bins …
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Stacked X-ray emission in bins of group halo mass separated into higher- and lower-tcross categories (see §4.2) Left: Total count rate as a function of halo mass for lower-tcross (green) and higher-tcross (pink) groups. Black lines represent count rates for random stac…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Median MHI,grp/Mhalo, median FSMGRgrp, and frac￾tion of halos with AGN as a function of halo mass. All panels include Ngalaxies = 1 groups. Top: Median MHI,grp/Mhalo vs. Mhalo for halos with AGN (red) and without AGN (blue). Lines were generated using a sliding window,…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: MHI,grp/Mhalo and stacked X-ray emission for AGN-hosting and non-AGN-hosting halos in fixed halo mass bins. Left: Median MHI,grp/Mhalo vs. Mhalo for AGN-hosting halos (red) and non-AGN-hosting halos (blue), following [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Demonstration of the independent effects of AGN and tcross on MHI,grp/Mhalo. Left: Median MHI,grp/Mhalo vs. Mhalo for higher-tcross (thin line) and lower-tcross (thick line) AGN-hosting halos. Lines, points, and error bars are as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Observed MHI,grp/Mhalo versus Mhalo compared to theoretical predictions. The black line represents the medi￾ans for G3 groups (excluding groups that lack a definite AGN￾hosting or non-AGN-hosting classification), calculated in sliding windows as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:f…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

122 extracted references · 47 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    G., Moore, B., & Bower, R

    Abadi, M. G., Moore, B., & Bower, R. G. 1999, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 308, 947

    1999

  2. [2]

    2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 862, 48

    Ai, M., & Zhu, M. 2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 862, 48

    2018

  3. [3]

    E., Bregman, J

    Anderson, M. E., Bregman, J. N., & Dai, X. 2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 762, 106

    2012

  4. [4]

    E., Gaspari, M., White, S

    Anderson, M. E., Gaspari, M., White, S. D., Wang, W., & Dai, X. 2015, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 449, 3806 Angl´es-Alc´azar, D., Dav´e, R., Faucher-Gigu`ere, C.-A., ¨Ozel, F., &

    2015

  5. [5]

    Hopkins, P. F. 2017, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 464, 2840

    2017

  6. [6]

    A., Phillips, M

    Baldwin, J. A., Phillips, M. M., & Terlevich, R. 1981, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 93, 5

    1981

  7. [7]

    D., et al

    Baugh, C., Gonzalez-Perez, V ., Lagos, C. D., et al. 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 483, 4922

    2019

  8. [8]

    S., Conroy, C., & Wechsler, R

    Behroozi, P. S., Conroy, C., & Wechsler, R. H. 2010, The Astrophysical Journal, 717, 379

    2010

Show all 122 references
  1. [9]

    J., & Shioya, Y

    Bekki, K., Couch, W. J., & Shioya, Y . 2002, The Astrophysical Journal, 577, 651

    2002

  2. [10]

    L., Watson, M

    Birchall, K. L., Watson, M. G., Aird, J., & Starling, R. L. C. 2022, MNRAS, 510, 4556, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab3573

    2022 doi

  3. [11]

    2003, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 345, 349

    Birnboim, Y ., & Dekel, A. 2003, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 345, 349

    2003

  4. [12]

    R., & Berlind, A

    Blanton, M. R., & Berlind, A. A. 2007, The Astrophysical Journal, 664, 791

    2007

  5. [13]

    2000, Astronomy and Astrophysics Supplement Series, 141, 507 Bogd´an, ´A., & V ogelsberger, M

    Boese, F. 2000, Astronomy and Astrophysics Supplement Series, 141, 507 Bogd´an, ´A., & V ogelsberger, M. 2022, Handbook of X-ray and Gamma-ray Astrophysics, 1

    2000

  6. [14]

    2016, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 588, A103 21

    Boller, T., Freyberg, M., Tr¨umper, J., et al. 2016, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 588, A103 21

    2016

  7. [15]

    2011, The Astrophysical Journal, 729, 12

    Boroson, B., Kim, D.-W., & Fabbiano, G. 2011, The Astrophysical Journal, 729, 12

    2011

  8. [16]

    S., Verdes-Montenegro, L., et al

    Borthakur, S., Yun, M. S., Verdes-Montenegro, L., et al. 2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 812, 78

    2015

  9. [17]

    Dickey, C. M. 2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 861, 50

    2018

  10. [18]

    2011, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 529, A22

    Buat, V ., Giovannoli, E., Takeuchi, T., et al. 2011, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 529, A22

    2011

  11. [19]

    2001, The Astrophysical Journal, 563, 736

    Carlberg, R., Yee, H., Morris, S., et al. 2001, The Astrophysical Journal, 563, 736

    2001

  12. [20]

    Cen, R., & Ostriker, J. P. 1999, The Astrophysical Journal, 514, 1

    1999

  13. [21]

    1943, Astrophysical Journal, 97, 255

    Chandrasekhar, S. 1943, Astrophysical Journal, 97, 255

    1943

  14. [22]

    Chauhan, G., Lagos, C. d. P., Stevens, A. R., et al. 2021, arXiv preprint arXiv:2102.12203 —. 2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 498, 44

    2021 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Weaver, K. A. 2004, The Astrophysical Journal, 602, 231

    2004

  16. [24]

    M., Pooley, D., Barrows, R

    Comerford, J. M., Pooley, D., Barrows, R. S., et al. 2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 806, 219

    2015

  17. [25]

    J., Springel, V ., White, S

    Croton, D. J., Springel, V ., White, S. D., et al. 2006, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 365, 11

    2006

  18. [26]

    S., & Morgan, N

    Dai, X., Kochanek, C. S., & Morgan, N. D. 2007, The Astrophysical Journal, 658, 917

    2007

  19. [27]

    J., Yoachim, P., & Bernstein, R

    Dalcanton, J. J., Yoachim, P., & Bernstein, R. A. 2004, The Astrophysical Journal, 608, 189

    2004

  20. [28]

    A., Dubois, Y ., & Hartwig, T

    Dashyan, G., Silk, J., Mamon, G. A., Dubois, Y ., & Hartwig, T. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 473, 5698 Dav´e, R., Cen, R., Ostriker, J. P., et al. 2001, The Astrophysical Journal, 552, 473

    2018

  21. [29]

    P., Jones, C., Forman, W., Vargas, I

    David, L. P., Jones, C., Forman, W., Vargas, I. M., & Nulsen, P. 2006, The Astrophysical Journal, 653, 207 De Grandi, S., Molendi, S., B¨ohringer, H., Chincarini, G., & V oges, W. 1997, The Astrophysical Journal, 486, 738

    2006

  22. [30]

    2006, Monthly notices of the royal astronomical society, 368, 2

    Dekel, A., & Birnboim, Y . 2006, Monthly notices of the royal astronomical society, 368, 2

    2006

  23. [31]

    1986, The Astrophysical Journal, 303, 39

    Dekel, A., & Silk, J. 1986, The Astrophysical Journal, 303, 39

    1986

  24. [32]

    D., Gallagher, S

    Desjardins, T. D., Gallagher, S. C., Hornschemeier, A. E., et al. 2014, ApJ, 790, 132, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/790/2/132

    2014 doi

  25. [33]

    P., Meyer, M., et al

    Dev, A., Driver, S. P., Meyer, M., et al. 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 523, 2693 Di Matteo, P., Bournaud, F., Martig, M., et al. 2008, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 492, 31

    2023

  26. [34]

    Dressler, A., & Shectman, S. A. 1988, AJ, 95, 985, doi: 10.1086/114694 D’Onghia, E., Sommer-Larsen, J., Romeo, A., et al. 2005, The Astrophysical Journal, 630, L109

    1988 doi

  27. [35]

    D., Kannappan, S

    Eckert, K. D., Kannappan, S. J., Stark, D. V ., et al. 2016, The Astrophysical Journal, 824, 124 —. 2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 810, 166

    2016

  28. [36]

    D., Kannappan, S

    Eckert, K. D., Kannappan, S. J., Lagos, C. d. P., et al. 2017, The Astrophysical Journal, 849, 20

    2017

  29. [37]

    2011, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 535, A105

    Eckmiller, H., Hudson, D., & Reiprich, T. 2011, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 535, A105

    2011

  30. [38]

    L., Brown, T., Catinella, B., & Cortese, L

    Ellison, S. L., Brown, T., Catinella, B., & Cortese, L. 2019, MNRAS, 482, 5694, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty3139

    2019 doi

  31. [39]

    C., & Sandage, A

    Ferguson, H. C., & Sandage, A. 1990, AJ, 100, 1, doi: 10.1086/115486

    1990 doi

  32. [40]

    Fielding, D., Quataert, E., McCourt, M., & Thompson, T. A. 2017, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 466, 3810

    2017

  33. [41]

    2006, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 372, 1856

    Firth, P., Evstigneeva, E., Jones, J., et al. 2006, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 372, 1856

    2006

  34. [42]

    Flesch, E. W. 2015, PASA, 32, e010, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2015.10

    2015 doi

  35. [43]

    A., Alabi, A., Romanowsky, A

    Forbes, D. A., Alabi, A., Romanowsky, A. J., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 464, L26, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slw176

    2017 doi

  36. [44]

    M., & Dav´e, R

    Gabor, J. M., & Dav´e, R. 2015, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 447, 374

    2015

  37. [45]

    2020, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 637, A94

    Gao, F., Wang, L., Pearson, W., et al. 2020, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 637, A94

    2020

  38. [46]

    Garnett, D. R. 2002, The Astrophysical Journal, 581, 1019, doi: 10.1086/344301

    2002 doi

  39. [47]

    2014, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 783, L10 Gott III, J

    Gaspari, M., Brighenti, F., Temi, P., & Ettori, S. 2014, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 783, L10 Gott III, J. R., & Turner, E. L. 1977, Astrophysical Journal, V ol. 213, pp. 309-322 (1977)., 213, 309

    1977

  40. [48]

    D., Greene, J

    Goulding, A. D., Greene, J. E., Ma, C.-P., et al. 2016, The Astrophysical Journal, 826, 167

    2016

  41. [49]

    2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 483, 3545

    Gozaliasl, G., Finoguenov, A., Tanaka, M., et al. 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 483, 3545

    2019

  42. [50]

    Grcevich, J., & Putman, M. E. 2009, The Astrophysical Journal, 696, 385

    2009

  43. [51]

    G., Haynes, M

    Guo, H., Jones, M. G., Haynes, M. P., & Fu, J. 2020, The Astrophysical Journal, 894, 92

    2020

  44. [52]

    2017, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 468, 3935

    Habouzit, M., V olonteri, M., & Dubois, Y . 2017, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 468, 3935

    2017

  45. [53]

    N., Reines, A

    Hainline, K. N., Reines, A. E., Greene, J. E., & Stern, D. 2016, The Astrophysical Journal, 832, 119

    2016

  46. [54]

    P., Giovanelli, R., Martin, A

    Haynes, M. P., Giovanelli, R., Martin, A. M., et al. 2011, The astronomical journal, 142, 170

    2011

  47. [55]

    P., Giovanelli, R., Kent, B

    Haynes, M. P., Giovanelli, R., Kent, B. R., et al. 2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 861, 49

    2018

  48. [56]

    M., & Best, P

    Heckman, T. M., & Best, P. N. 2014, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 52, 589

    2014

  49. [57]

    M., & Wilcots, E

    Hess, K. M., & Wilcots, E. M. 2013, The Astronomical Journal, 146, 124

    2013

  50. [58]

    P., & Palumbo, G

    Hickson, P., Mendes de Oliveira, C., Huchra, J. P., & Palumbo, G. G. 1992, Astrophysical Journal, Part 1 (ISSN 0004-637X), vol. 399, no. 2, p. 353-367., 399, 353 22

    1992

  51. [59]

    Hu, W., & Kravtsov, A. V . 2003, The Astrophysical Journal, 584, 702

    2003

  52. [60]

    L., Kannappan, S

    Hutchens, Z. L., Kannappan, S. J., Berlind, A. A., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 956, 51, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acefd4

    2023 doi

  53. [61]

    2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 480, 3338

    Jakobs, A., Viola, M., McCarthy, I., et al. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 480, 3338

    2018

  54. [62]

    G., Sand, D

    Jones, M. G., Sand, D. J., Karunakaran, A., et al. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 966, 93

    2024

  55. [63]

    M., Burton, W., Hartmann, D., et al

    Kalberla, P. M., Burton, W., Hartmann, D., et al. 2005, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 440, 775

    2005

  56. [64]

    M., & Kerp, J

    Kalberla, P. M., & Kerp, J. 2009, Annual review of astronomy and Astrophysics, 47, 27

    2009

  57. [65]

    Kannappan, S. J. 2004, The Astrophysical Journal, 611, L89

    2004

  58. [66]

    J., & Gawiser, E

    Kannappan, S. J., & Gawiser, E. 2007, The Astrophysical Journal, 657, L5

    2007

  59. [67]

    J., Guie, J

    Kannappan, S. J., Guie, J. M., & Baker, A. J. 2009, The Astronomical Journal, 138, 579

    2009

  60. [68]

    J., & Wei, L

    Kannappan, S. J., & Wei, L. H. 2008, AIP Conference Proceedings, 1035, 163

    2008

  61. [69]

    J., Stark, D

    Kannappan, S. J., Stark, D. V ., Eckert, K. D., et al. 2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 777, 42

    2013

  62. [70]

    M., White, S

    Kauffmann, G., Heckman, T. M., White, S. D. M., et al. 2003, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 341, 54, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06292.x

    2003

  63. [71]

    2014, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 440, 2944 Kereˇs, D., Katz, N., Weinberg, D

    Kaviraj, S. 2014, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 440, 2944 Kereˇs, D., Katz, N., Weinberg, D. H., & Dav´e, R. 2005, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 363, 2

    2014

  64. [72]

    2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 776, 116, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/776/2/116

    Kim, D.-W., & Fabbiano, G. 2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 776, 116, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/776/2/116

    2013 doi

  65. [73]

    Kim, H.-S., Wyithe, J. S. B., Baugh, C., et al. 2016, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, stw2779

    2016

  66. [74]

    Kim, H.-S., Wyithe, J. S. B., Baugh, C. M., et al. 2017, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 465, 111, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2779

    2017 doi

  67. [75]

    V ., Berlind, A

    Kravtsov, A. V ., Berlind, A. A., Wechsler, R. H., et al. 2004, The Astrophysical Journal, 609, 35

    2004

  68. [76]

    Condon, J. J. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 884, 78

    2019

  69. [77]

    2010, The Astrophysical Journal, 724, 559

    Lehmer, B., Alexander, D., Bauer, F., et al. 2010, The Astrophysical Journal, 724, 559

    2010

  70. [78]

    D., Eufrasio, R

    Lehmer, B. D., Eufrasio, R. T., Basu-Zych, A., et al. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 930, 135

    2022

  71. [79]

    D., Eufrasio, R

    Lehmer, B. D., Eufrasio, R. T., Tzanavaris, P., et al. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 243, 3

    2019

  72. [80]

    D., Ferrell, A

    Lehmer, B. D., Ferrell, A. P., Doore, K., et al. 2020, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 248, 31

    2020

  73. [81]

    D., Monson, E

    Lehmer, B. D., Monson, E. B., Eufrasio, R. T., et al. 2024, arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.19901

    2024 arXiv

  74. [82]

    D., Drlica-Wagner, A., et al

    Li, T., Simon, J. D., Drlica-Wagner, A., et al. 2017, The Astrophysical Journal, 838, 8

    2017

  75. [83]

    2019, ApJS, 243, 21, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab298b

    Liu, H.-Y ., Liu, W.-J., Dong, X.-B., et al. 2019, ApJS, 243, 21, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab298b

    2019 doi

  76. [84]

    2020, The Astrophysical Journal, 904, 33

    Lower, S., Narayanan, D., Leja, J., et al. 2020, The Astrophysical Journal, 904, 33

    2020

  77. [85]

    Mezcua, M., & S´anchez, H. D. 2024, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 528, 5252

    2024

  78. [86]

    2014, MNRAS, 437, 1698, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt1999

    Sunyaev, R. 2014, MNRAS, 437, 1698, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt1999

    2014 doi

  79. [87]

    2012, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 419, 2095

    Mineo, S., Gilfanov, M., & Sunyaev, R. 2012, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 419, 2095

    2012

  80. [88]

    2020, The Astronomical Journal, 160, 227, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/abafb1

    Miraghaei, H. 2020, The Astronomical Journal, 160, 227, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/abafb1

    2020 doi

  81. [89]

    J., Kannappan, S

    Moffett, A. J., Kannappan, S. J., Berlind, A. A., et al. 2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 812, 89

    2015

  82. [90]

    Mulchaey, J. S. 2000, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 38, 289

    2000

  83. [91]

    2013, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 429, 3353

    Nelson, D., V ogelsberger, M., Genel, S., et al. 2013, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 429, 3353

    2013

  84. [92]

    2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 486, 5124, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1118 O’Sullivan, E., Kolokythas, K., Kantharia, N

    Jones, M. 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 486, 5124, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1118 O’Sullivan, E., Kolokythas, K., Kantharia, N. G., et al. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 473, 5248

    2019 doi

  85. [93]

    J., Masters, K

    Penny, S. J., Masters, K. L., Smethurst, R., et al. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 476, 979

    2018

  86. [94]

    2014, The Astrophysical Journal, 797, 127

    Pipino, A., Cibinel, A., Tacchella, S., et al. 2014, The Astrophysical Journal, 797, 127

    2014

  87. [95]

    S., Kannappan, S

    Polimera, M. S., Kannappan, S. J., Richardson, C. T., et al. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 931, 44

    2022

  88. [96]

    1994, Nature, 369, 462

    Ponman, T., Allan, D., Jones, L., et al. 1994, Nature, 369, 462

    1994

  89. [97]

    M., Lim, P

    Price-Whelan, A. M., Lim, P. L., Earl, N., et al. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 935, 167

    2022

  90. [98]

    E., Zheng, Y ., Price-Whelan, A

    Putman, M. E., Zheng, Y ., Price-Whelan, A. M., et al. 2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 913, 53

    2021

  91. [99]

    2003, A&A, 399, 39, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20021600

    Ranalli, P., Comastri, A., & Setti, G. 2003, A&A, 399, 39, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20021600

    2003 doi

  92. [100]

    S., et al

    Rasmussen, J., Bai, X.-N., Mulchaey, J. S., et al. 2012, ApJ, 747

    2012

  93. [101]

    E., Condon, J

    Reines, A. E., Condon, J. J., Darling, J., & Greene, J. E. 2020, The Astrophysical Journal, 888, 36

    2020

  94. [102]

    J., & Dickel, J

    Rood, H. J., & Dickel, J. R. 1978, ApJ, 224, 724, doi: 10.1086/156422

    1978 doi

  95. [103]

    I., et al

    Saraf, M., Cortese, L., Wong, O. I., et al. 2024, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, stae942

    2024

  96. [104]

    P., & Secrest, N

    Satyapal, S., Abel, N. P., & Secrest, N. J. 2018, ApJ, 858, 38, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aab7f8 23

    2018 doi

  97. [105]

    2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 495, 784

    Shi, X., Nagai, D., Aung, H., & Wetzel, A. 2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 495, 784

    2020

  98. [106]

    2009, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 397, 190

    Sinha, M., & Holley-Bockelmann, K. 2009, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 397, 190

    2009

  99. [107]

    A., van den Bosch, F

    Skibba, R. A., van den Bosch, F. C., Yang, X., et al. 2011, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 410, 417

    2011

  100. [108]

    D., Hallman, E

    Smith, B. D., Hallman, E. J., Shull, J. M., & O’Shea, B. W. 2011, The Astrophysical Journal, 731, 6

    2011

  101. [109]

    1994, Astrophysical Journal, Part 1 (ISSN 0004-637X), vol

    Snowden, S., McCammon, D., Burrows, D., & Mendenhall, J. 1994, Astrophysical Journal, Part 1 (ISSN 0004-637X), vol. 424, no. 2, p. 714-728, 424, 714

    1994

  102. [110]

    2008, MNRAS, 391, 481, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13805.x

    Hernquist, L. 2008, MNRAS, 391, 481, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13805.x

    2008

  103. [111]

    M., Haynes, M

    Springob, C. M., Haynes, M. P., Giovanelli, R., & Kent, B. R. 2005, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 160, 149

    2005

  104. [112]

    V ., Kannappan, S

    Stark, D. V ., Kannappan, S. J., Wei, L. H., et al. 2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 769, 82

    2013

  105. [113]

    V ., Kannappan, S

    Stark, D. V ., Kannappan, S. J., Eckert, K. D., et al. 2016, The Astrophysical Journal, 832, 126 Stasi´nska, G., Cid Fernandes, R., Mateus, A., Sodr´e, L., & Asari, N. V . 2006, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 371, 972, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10732.x

    2016

  106. [114]

    R., Hayes, B., & Reines, A

    Sturm, M. R., Hayes, B., & Reines, A. E. 2025, arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.09791

    2025 arXiv

  107. [115]

    2009, The Astrophysical Journal, 693, 1142

    Sun, M., V oit, G., Donahue, M., et al. 2009, The Astrophysical Journal, 693, 1142

    2009

  108. [116]

    V ., Klypin, A., et al

    Tinker, J., Kravtsov, A. V ., Klypin, A., et al. 2008, The Astrophysical Journal, 688, 709, doi: 10.1086/591439

    2008 doi

  109. [117]

    2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 478, 5607

    Trebitsch, M., V olonteri, M., Dubois, Y ., & Madau, P. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 478, 5607

    2018

  110. [118]

    Trevisan, M., & Mamon, G. A. 2017, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 471, 2022 Van Driel, W., Augarde, R., Bottinelli, L., et al. 1992, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 259, 71

    2017

  111. [119]

    Veilleux, S., & Osterbrock, D. E. 1987, Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series (ISSN 0067-0049), vol. 63, Feb. 1987, p. 295-310. NSERC-supported research., 63, 295 V´eron-Cetty, M. P., & V´eron, P. 2006, A&A, 455, 773, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20065177 V oges, W. 1993, Advances...

    1987 arXiv

  112. [120]

    Wilcots, E. M. 2009, Astronomische Nachrichten: Astronomical Notes, 330, 1059

    2009

  113. [121]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2401.17309, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2401.17309

    Zhang, Y ., Comparat, J., Ponti, G., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2401.17309, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2401.17309

    2024 doi arXiv

  114. [122]

    Zhu, J., & Putman, M. E. 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 521, 3765

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.