Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 99 references

Ly$\alpha$ Emission from [OIII] Emitters Near Reionization: The role of environment in galaxy Ly$\alpha$ detection

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Whether a reionization-era galaxy's Lyman-alpha is visible depends on its environment: a dense group at z≈6.19 shows a deficit, while line-of-sight-aligned groups are enhanced.

desk verdict New Keck data show a tentative environment-dependent Lyα deficit at z~6.19, honestly reported as a pilot result that deserves referee time. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.16231 v2 pith:6AOIX5SX submitted 2025-07-22 astro-ph.GA astro-ph.CO

Seyedazim Hashemi , George D. Becker , Yongda Zhu , Hui Hong This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GAastro-ph.CO
keywords Lyman-alphaemissiongalaxyenvironmentreionizationintergalacticmedium[OIII]emittersgroupsquasarproximityzonedampingwingabsorption
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

Using Keck LRIS spectroscopy, the paper measures Lyman-$\alpha$ emission from 46 [OIII]-selected galaxies at $5.3\lesssim z \lesssim 6.2$ in the foreground of the quasar J0100+2802, with redshifts anchored by JWST [OIII] detections rather than by Ly$\alpha$ itself. The overall Ly$\alpha$ detection fraction matches earlier work, but the fraction varies sharply with environment. The fifteen galaxies in the $z\simeq 6.19$ overdensity show a deficit: their mean $L_{\mathrm{Ly}\alpha}/L_{\mathrm{[O\,III]}}$ is $0.71^{+0.28}_{-0.25}$ versus $1.85^{+0.76}_{-0.69}$ for the rest, and their stacked Ly$\alpha$ flux is about a factor of three lower. The paper argues that environment, not galaxy properties, drives the difference, and speculates that a foreground neutral island attenuates this group while line-of-sight-aligned groups at $z\simeq 5.73$ and $5.78$ enjoy enhanced transmission. If right, global Ly$\alpha$ fraction measurements used to trace reionization must be corrected for large-scale structure.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing comparison is the ratio of Ly$\alpha$ luminosity to [OIII] luminosity, $L_{\mathrm{Ly}\alpha}/L_{\mathrm{[O\,III]}}$: both lines trace star formation, so for two samples matched in UV brightness, [OIII] luminosity, UV slope, and [OIII] equivalent width, a lower ratio signals that Ly$\alpha$ photons are being removed after production rather than produced more weakly. The analysis also stacks LRIS spectra normalized two ways (by [OIII] luminosity and by UV luminosity), fits Bayesian log-normal distributions to the Ly$\alpha$ rest-frame equivalent widths, and uses bootstrap resampling to assess whether the $z\simeq 6.19$ group and the rest of the sample could be drawn from the same parent distribution. [OIII] redshifts from JWST slitless spectroscopy provide systemic redshifts independent of Ly$\alpha$, and the quasar's X-Shooter spectrum is used to bound the size of any neutral island that could cause damping-wing attenuation of the group.

What would settle it

A decisive check would be to measure Ly$\alpha$ in a new, larger sample of [OIII]-selected galaxies at $z\sim 6$ with matched UV and [OIII] properties: if the deficit reappears in dense groups and not in field galaxies, the environment claim gains support, and if it disappears the result was a line-of-sight fluke. The neutral-island branch is separately testable: a foreground island covering the group should imprint damping-wing absorption on background sources behind it, and the island needed for a factor-of-three attenuation along the quasar sightline is already inconsistent with the observed quasar transmission at $z\simeq 6.04$--$6.14$.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central claim is that Ly$\alpha$ detectability near the end of reionization depends on environment. The $z\simeq 6.19$ group of 15 galaxies sits at the redshift of the end of the quasar's highly ionized proximity zone, yet shows almost no Ly$\alpha$: only two members are detected at $5\sigma$, both at the group's edge, and the mean Ly$\alpha$-to-[OIII] luminosity ratio is less than half the rest of the sample while the stacked flux is roughly three times lower. Since the group's UV magnitudes, [OIII] luminosities, UV slopes, and [OIII] equivalent widths are statistically indistinguishable from the rest of the sample, the paper interprets the deficit as attenuation by intervening neutral hydrogen, possibly a foreground neutral island whose line-of-sight extent varies across the field (the island required along the quasar sightline alone would violate the observed quasar transmission). In contrast, six galaxies in two groups at $z\simeq 5.73$ and $5.78$ show Ly$\alpha$ in four cases at $5\sigma$, which the paper attributes to a filament-like structure extended along the line of sight, roughly $21\,h^{-1}\,\mathrm{cMpc}$ long, that lets Ly$\alpha$ redshift out of resonance and escape. The stated conclusion is that environment may play a significant role in the visibility of galaxy Ly$\alpha$ emission even as late as $z\sim 6$, so reionization inferences from Ly$\alpha$ fractions should account for structure.

Load-bearing premise

The argument rests on the assumption that the $z\simeq 6.19$ galaxies make and release Ly$\alpha$ exactly like the rest of the sample, so that the only remaining difference is how much of that light is scattered by neutral gas along the way; dust content, outflow geometry, and intrinsic Ly$\alpha$ escape cannot be directly measured here.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The global Ly$\alpha$ fraction at $z\sim 6$, used to constrain the late stages of reionization, is not a clean IGM indicator unless the large-scale structure of the field is accounted for.
  • Galaxy overdensities near the end of reionization are not automatically Ly$\alpha$-transparent, even when they sit at the redshift of a quasar's ionized proximity zone.
  • Line-of-sight-aligned structures can boost Ly$\alpha$ detection rates, so Ly$\alpha$-selected galaxy samples may be preferentially drawn from such favorable geometries.
  • A persistent deficit in a dense group with otherwise normal stellar properties argues that IGM neutral patches can survive to $z\sim 6$ and scatter Ly$\alpha$ from many galaxies at once.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the deficit survives in larger samples, the scatter among published Ly$\alpha$ fraction measurements at a given redshift may partly be cosmic variance in environment rather than variation in the IGM neutral fraction; comparing fields with controlled group richness would separate these.
  • The neutral-island scenario is testable: a foreground island covering the group's sightlines should imprint damping wings on any background galaxy or quasar sightline that passes through the same transverse region, and deep Ly$\alpha$ forest spectra along such sightlines could detect it directly.
  • The line-of-sight enhancement idea implies that Ly$\alpha$ emitter surveys will over-represent filaments and protoclusters aligned with the line of sight, which would bias clustering and luminosity function measurements; a clean test would compare group detection rates across several quasar fields with different orientations.
  • Applying the same $L_{\mathrm{Ly}\alpha}/L_{\mathrm{[O\,III]}}$ ratio to JWST-selected samples at higher redshift could turn environment-driven scatter into a probe of the patchiness of reionization, since dense groups would be expected to show deficits only where neutral islands are common.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper presents Keck LRIS spectroscopy of Lyα emission from 46 [OIII]-selected galaxies at 5.3 ≲ z ≲ 6.25 in the field of the quasar J0100+2802, drawn from the EIGER survey. The authors measure Lyα fluxes and equivalent widths using a 500 km/s redward window relative to [OIII] systemic redshifts, with Monte Carlo uncertainties and skyline-aware error boosting. Globally, the Lyα detection fraction is consistent with previous work. The central empirical finding is an environment-dependent variation: the largest group, 15 galaxies at z ≃ 6.19, shows a stacked Lyα/[OIII] and Lyα/UV flux lower by roughly a factor of three than the rest of the sample, with mean L_Lyα/L_[OIII] = 0.71 versus 1.85; a bootstrap test gives only a 6% probability of drawing the group mean from the rest-sample distribution, while the equivalent-width based test gives a 70% probability. In contrast, two groups at z ≃ 5.73 and 5.78 show a high detection rate. The authors speculate that the z ≃ 6.19 deficit is caused by a foreground neutral island that scatters Lyα, and that the lower-redshift groups form a radially extended ionized filament that enhances transmission. They conclude that environment may play a significant role in Lyα detectability even at z ~ 6.

Significance. If the environmental dependence is real, it would strengthen the case that Lyα-based reionization probes must account for large-scale structure, and it would add to recent evidence from JWST that Lyα visibility depends on local geometry and ionized bubbles. The paper's strengths include a transparent and detailed data-reduction description, Monte Carlo propagation of non-Gaussian flux uncertainties, use of full error distributions rather than simple detections, comparison of the global EW distribution to the literature, and an honest attempt to constrain the putative neutral island using the quasar spectrum. The paper also explicitly reports the weakness of one of its two statistical tests (the 70% W-distribution result), which is commendable. The main limitations are the marginal significance of the key deficit, the lack of a direct test of intrinsic Lyα escape, and the speculative nature of the physical interpretations, which are appropriately labeled as speculation but are nevertheless central to the paper's framing.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 3.2, Figure 8] The statistical case for the z≃6.19 deficit rests on two tests with discrepant results: the W-distribution bootstrap gives a 70% probability that a random group of 15 galaxies would have a mean W exceeding the observed value, while the L_Lyα/L_[OIII] test gives 6%. Because the z≃6.19 group was selected for attention after inspecting the data, and because two statistics were examined, the effective significance is weaker than the 6% value quoted. Please either specify a primary, pre-registered test or apply a multiple-testing correction across the six groups and two statistics, and report the corrected significance.
  2. [Section 3.2 and 3.2.1] The interpretation that the deficit is caused by IGM attenuation assumes that the z≃6.19 galaxies are intrinsically similar to the rest of the sample in Lyα production and escape. The checks of M_UV, L_[OIII], UV slope, and [OIII] EW are indirect tracers; Lyα escape depends on ISM kinematics, neutral hydrogen column density, and dust geometry, none of which are directly measured. The velocity-offset comparison uses only the two to five detected galaxies, not the non-detections that dominate the stacked deficit, so it cannot constrain the escape physics of the majority of the group. If the z≃6.19 galaxies have intrinsically lower Lyα escape, the observed deficit would not indicate environmental attenuation. Please add a direct diagnostic such as Balmer-line measurements or stacking, or explicitly reframe the central claim as an observed group-to-group variation whose physical origin is not yet identified.
  3. [Section 3.2.1, Figure 9] The neutral-island explanation is internally constrained: an island extended sufficiently along the quasar line of sight to produce a factor-of-three attenuation at the group redshift would violate the observed Lyα and Lyβ transmission in the quasar spectrum. The proposed resolution, transverse variation of the island edge across a ~3 h^-1 cMpc offset, is an unconstrained hypothesis. Since the empirical stacked deficit is the robust result, the neutral island should be presented as one of several speculative explanations rather than the preferred one, and the paper should state what constraints, if any, the quasar spectrum places on the transverse coherence length of such an island.
  4. [Section 3.3] The claimed Lyα enhancement in the z≃5.73 and z≃5.78 groups is stated without a significance test. Given the global 3σ detection fraction of roughly 17/46 ≈ 37% and that six groups were examined, the probability of finding two adjacent groups with six of six 3σ detections by chance should be quantified with a binomial calculation that includes a look-elsewhere factor. Without this, the enhancement remains anecdotal and should be described as such.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section 4] Section 4 describes the sample as 'JWST NIRSpec-identified [Oiii]-emitting galaxies', but Section 2.1 and the abstract state that the EIGER survey uses NIRCam wide-field slitless spectroscopy. This inconsistency should be corrected.
  2. [Figure 3 caption] The caption says 'Spectra for the reminder of our objects'; 'reminder' should be 'remainder'.
  3. [Figure 4 caption] The caption contains a typo: 'correposnding' should be 'corresponding'.
  4. [Section 3.3] The sentence 'we find a high rate of rate of Lyα' contains a duplicated word and should be revised.
  5. [Section 3.2.1] The word 'distirbution' should be 'distribution'.
  6. [Section 2.2, Table 1] Some reported Lyα fluxes are negative (e.g., ID 12083, ID 1591). The text should explicitly state how negative flux measurements enter the equivalent-width calculation, the L_Lyα/L_[OIII] ratios, and the stacked spectra; the current description implies they are included in the full error distributions, but a table note would improve clarity.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the deficit measurement is direct and internal, and the neutral-island speculation is independently constrained and explicitly not forced to match the data.

full rationale

This is an observational study, not a derivation, and I find no step in which a fitted input is renamed as a prediction or in which a conclusion is equivalent by construction to an input definition. The central result, namely the roughly factor-of-three lower stacked Ly-alpha emission and the lower mean L_Ly-alpha/L_[OIII] ratio (0.71 versus 1.85) for the z about 6.19 group, is a direct measurement from Keck LRIS spectra compared against the remaining 31 galaxies in the same sample. Group membership is assigned from spatial position and [OIII] redshift in Section 2.1, independently of Ly-alpha, so the comparison is not self-definitional. The bootstrap and Bayesian tests use the rest of the sample as a null distribution rather than as a fitted parameter that is later reported as a prediction; the lognormal equivalent-width model is descriptive, and the authors explicitly note that the group parameters overlap those of the rest of the sample in Section 3.2. The neutral-island explanation in Section 3.2.1 is constrained by the independent X-Shooter quasar spectrum, and the paper states that the island needed for factor-of-three attenuation would violate the observed transmission in the quasar spectrum, so the model is not bent to match the galaxy data. The only overlap citation is the Becker et al. 2024 method for estimating the maximum neutral island from Ly-alpha and Ly-beta transmission peaks; that is a data-analysis recipe, and it is used to delimit the speculation rather than to justify the environmental claim. The main physical assumption, namely that [OIII] luminosity and UV slope make the z about 6.19 galaxies intrinsically similar in Ly-alpha production and escape, is a real limitation, but it is an assumption about ISM physics and not a circular reduction. The paper also repeatedly acknowledges the small sample size and the weakness of the evidence, further supporting a non-circular reading. I therefore rate circularity as essentially absent.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The list below separates the fitted distribution parameters, the adopted cosmology, and the two hypothesized structures (neutral island, ionized filament) that support the environmental interpretation. The central deficit and excess claim itself does not depend on fitting a model prediction to the data; the main free parameters are the log-normal EW distribution and the island geometry used for the damping wing illustration.

free parameters (4)
  • Log-normal EW distribution mean μ = Posterior distribution shown in Figure 7, not quoted numerically in text
    The Lyα equivalent width distribution is modeled as log-normal with μ and σ fitted to the data with uniform priors; the comparison between the z~6.19 group and the rest of the sample relies on these fitted parameters.
  • Log-normal EW distribution width σ = Posterior distribution shown in Figure 7, not quoted numerically in text
    Same as above; the width parameter controls the shape of the W distribution used in the Bayesian comparison.
  • Neutral island length = 30 h^-1 cMpc (blue line in Figure 9)
    Adopted island size used to compute damping wing attenuation; chosen to match the quasar's dark gap while staying consistent with transmission constraints. The model is not fit to the galaxy Lyα data.
  • Neutral island edge distance from quasar = 50.5 h^-1 cMpc, with an alternative 5 h^-1 cMpc from the group for the dashed line
    Location of the island red edge along the quasar sightline; adjusted to illustrate attenuation levels. The 5 h^-1 cMpc version reproduces factor ~3 attenuation but would violate observed quasar transmission, as the authors note.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Flat ΛCDM cosmology with H0=67.4 km/s/Mpc and ΩM=0.315 (Planck Collaboration et al. 2020)
    Adopted in Section 1 for distance and comoving scale estimates; standard cosmological model, not derived here.
  • domain assumption [OIII] luminosity and UV magnitude are tracers of star formation, so intrinsic Lyα emission should correlate with [OIII]
    Used in Section 3.2 to argue the L_Lyα/L_[OIII] ratio is a fair comparison across groups; if the z~6.19 galaxies have different stellar populations, the ratio test could be biased.
  • domain assumption Systematic redshifts from JWST [OIII] detections (Kashino et al. 2023) are accurate and independent of Lyα
    The Lyα line is integrated redward of the systematic redshift; if the [OIII] redshifts are systematically offset, the Lyα flux window and group membership would be wrong.
  • domain assumption The continuum at 1216 Å is well approximated by a power law fitted to F115W and F200W photometry
    Used to compute Lyα equivalent widths; a wrong continuum slope changes W values, especially for low-signal-to-noise sources.
  • domain assumption A log-normal functional form for the Lyα equivalent width distribution (Equation 1)
    Assumed in the Bayesian fit following prior literature (Schenker et al. 2014; Endsley et al. 2021); the authors test an exponential form and state conclusions do not change.
invented entities (2)
  • Foreground neutral island in front of the z~6.19 group independent evidence
    purpose: Explains the apparent Lyα deficit in the z~6.19 overdensity by damping wing scattering.
    The quasar spectrum shows a dark gap in Lyα and Lyβ from z~6.04 to 6.14, which is consistent with a neutral island along the quasar sightline (Section 3.2.1, Figure 9). This evidence is independent of the galaxy Lyα measurements, though the island's transverse extent covering the group is not directly observed.
  • Radially extended ionized filament connecting groups at z~5.73 and z~5.78
    purpose: Explains the high Lyα detection rate in these two groups by allowing Lyα photons to redshift through an ionized medium.
    The filament is inferred from the spatial and redshift coincidence of the two groups and from the enhanced Lyα detections themselves (Section 3.3); no independent observation of the filament is presented.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Ly$\alpha$ Emission from [OIII] Emitters Near Reionization: The role of environment in galaxy Ly$\alpha$ detection." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/6AOIX5SX

@misc{pith2026250716231,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Ly$\alpha$ Emission from [OIII] Emitters Near Reionization: The role of environment in galaxy Ly$\alpha$ detection},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/6AOIX5SX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.16231}
}
abstract

Using galaxy Ly$\alpha$ emission to probe reionization relies on establishing baseline expectations for its detectability in the absence of attenuation by neutral gas in the IGM. Towards this end, the growing numbers of $z \sim 5$--6 star-forming galaxies spectroscopically selected by JWST provide an ideal sample for determining how Ly$\alpha$ emission depends on galaxy properties and environment after reionization has largely completed. In this study, we use Keck LRIS to measure the Ly$\alpha$ emission of 46 JWST-selected [OIII]-emitting galaxies over $5.3 \lesssim z \lesssim 6.2$ in the foreground of the ultra-luminous quasar J0100+2802. Overall, we find that the fraction of galaxies detected in Ly$\alpha$ emission is consistent with previous works; however, the fraction also varies with environment. Most notably, we find an apparent deficit of Ly$\alpha$ in the largest group in our sample, at $z \simeq 6.19$, which falls within the redshift range of the quasar's highly ionized proximity zone. We speculate that the Ly$\alpha$ emission from this group may be partly scattered by a foreground neutral island. In contrast, we detect a high rate of Ly$\alpha$ emission in two groups at $z \simeq 5.73$ and $z \simeq 5.78$. These groups may be part of a structure that is extended along the line of sight, enhancing the transmission of Ly$\alpha$ emission. While our sample size is limited, our results suggest that environment may play a significant role in the detectability of galaxy Ly$\alpha$ emission even as late as $z \sim 6$.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.16231 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Spatial distribution of [O iii] emitters in the field of J0100+2802 targeted with Keck LRIS. Colors indicate membership in the groups listed in the legend. Gray points represent galaxies that are not part of any group in our sample; however, they may belong to a group in the parent [O iii] sample. The black cross at the center marks the position of the quasar. Green stars denote sources where we detect Ly𝛼 emission … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Distribution of redshift (left), 𝑀UV (center) and [O iii] luminosity (right) of the galaxies in our sample. Sources with Ly𝛼 detected at >5𝜎 confidence are indicated with a hatched pattern. 10−20 erg cm−2 s −1 Å −1 ) in the 1D spectra over extended regions blueward of Ly𝛼, which we attribute to small errors in sky subtraction or contamination from foreground continuum objects. To correct for these effects, we measur… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. 1D and 2D emission-line spectra of a representative sample of observed galaxies. Each panel is centered on the systematic redshift of the galaxy measured from [O iii] (red dashed vertical line). We show the 2D spectrum for each galaxy at the top of each panel. The 1D spectrum (blue histogram) of each emitter in the observed frame is also shown. The uncertainty of the 1D spectrum is plotted in each grey. Shaded regio… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Illustrations of our sample in two viewing angles. Circles show our targeted galaxies, with colors correposnding to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: [O iii] luminosity vs. UV magnitude for the sources in this study. Groups are color-coded as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Mean stacked Keck LRIS spectra near Ly𝛼. Red histograms are for the group at 𝑧 ≃ 6.19, while the black histograms are for the remainder of the sample. In the left-hand panel the individual spectra are normalized by their [O iii] luminosity prior to stacking, while in t…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Constraints on a log-normal distribution of Ly𝛼 equivalent widths. The contours show the 68% and 95% likelihood bounds for the parameters in Equation 1. The left-hand panel shows the result for the full sample, overplotted with results from (Tang et al. 2024a). The rig…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Distribution of the ratio of Ly𝛼 and [O iii] luminosities. Values for the group at 6.19 are shown in red, while the rest of the sample is shown as a dashed line. O I absorption and likely trace neutral gas (Becker et al. 2019; Cooper et al. 2019). Kashino et al. (2023)…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: VLT X-Shooter spectrum of J0100+2802 showing transmission in the proximity zone and adjacent absorption trough in Ly𝛼 (bottom panel) and Ly𝛽 (top panel). Redshifts corresponding to the observed wavelengths are shown along the top axis. The red shaded region corresponds…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

99 extracted references · 3 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Astropy Collaboration et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013A&A...558A..33A 558, A33

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 2013

  2. [2]

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

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f 2018

  3. [3]

    Ba \ n ados E., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1038/nature25180 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018Natur.553..473B 553, 473

    doi:10.1038/nature25180 2018

  4. [4]

    Barkana R., Loeb A., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1086/421079 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004ApJ...609..474B 609, 474

    doi:10.1086/421079 2004

  5. [5]

    D., Bolton J

    Becker G. D., Bolton J. S., Madau P., Pettini M., Ryan-Weber E. V., Venemans B. P., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu2646 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.447.3402B 447, 3402

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stu2646 2015

  6. [6]

    D., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab3eb5 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...883..163B 883, 163

    Becker G. D., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab3eb5 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...883..163B 883, 163

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab3eb5 2019

  7. [7]

    D., Bolton J

    Becker G. D., Bolton J. S., Zhu Y., Hashemi S., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae1918 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.533.1525B 533, 1525

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1918 2024

  8. [8]

    Bolan P., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac1963 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.517.3263B 517, 3263

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1963 2022

Show all 99 references
  1. [9]

    Bosman S. E. I., Fan X., Jiang L., Reed S., Matsuoka Y., Becker G., Haehnelt M., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty1344 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.479.1055B 479, 1055

    2018 doi

  2. [10]

    Bosman S. E. I., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac1046 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.514...55B 514, 55

    2022 doi

  3. [11]

    C., 2017, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.1705.05165 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017arXiv170505165C p

    Carnall A. C., 2017, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.1705.05165 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017arXiv170505165C p. arXiv:1705.05165

    2017 doi arXiv

  4. [12]

    Cassata P., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201423824 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015A&A...573A..24C 573, A24

    2015 doi

  5. [13]

    S., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aa9707 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...850..188C 850, 188

    Chen S.-F. S., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aa9707 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...850..188C 850, 188

    2017 doi

  6. [14]

    P., Mason C., Topping M

    Chen Z., Stark D. P., Mason C., Topping M. W., Whitler L., Tang M., Endsley R., Charlot S., 2024, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stae455 , 528, 7052

    2024 doi

  7. [15]

    S., Keating L

    Conaboy L., Bolton J. S., Keating L. C., Haehnelt M. G., Kulkarni G., Puchwein E., 2025, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staf648 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025MNRAS.539.2790C 539, 2790

    2025 doi

  8. [16]

    J., Simcoe R

    Cooper T. J., Simcoe R. A., Cooksey K. L., Bordoloi R., Miller D. R., Furesz G., Turner M. L., Ba \ n ados E., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab3402 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...882...77C 882, 77

    2019 doi

  9. [17]

    Curtis-Lake E., et al., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20720.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012MNRAS.422.1425C 422, 1425

    2012

  10. [18]

    B., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aad6dc , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...864..142D 864, 142

    Davies F. B., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aad6dc , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...864..142D 864, 142

    2018 doi

  11. [19]

    L., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac3662 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.521..289D 521, 289

    Davies R. L., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac3662 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.521..289D 521, 289

    2023 doi

  12. [20]

    Dayal P., Ferrara A., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1016/j.physrep.2018.10.002 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018PhR...780....1D 780, 1

    2018 doi

  13. [21]

    De Barros S., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201731476 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017A&A...608A.123D 608, A123

    2017 doi

  14. [22]

    Dijkstra M., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1017/pasa.2014.33 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014PASA...31...40D 31, e040

    2014 doi

  15. [23]

    Doughty C., Finlator K., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz2331 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.489.2755D 489, 2755

    2019 doi

  16. [24]

    B., Hennawi J

    Eilers A.-C., Davies F. B., Hennawi J. F., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aad4fd , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...864...53E 864, 53

    2018 doi

  17. [25]

    Eilers A.-C., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad778b , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...974..275E 974, 275

    2024 doi

  18. [26]

    P., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac524 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.511.6042E 511, 6042

    Endsley R., Stark D. P., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac524 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.511.6042E 511, 6042

    2022 doi

  19. [27]

    P., Charlot S., Chevallard J., Robertson B., Bouwens R

    Endsley R., Stark D. P., Charlot S., Chevallard J., Robertson B., Bouwens R. J., Stefanon M., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab432 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.502.6044E 502, 6044

    2021 doi

  20. [28]

    Endsley R., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac3064 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.517.5642E 517, 5642

    2022 doi

  21. [29]

    K., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/795/1/33 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...795...33E 795, 33

    Erb D. K., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/795/1/33 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...795...33E 795, 33

    2014 doi

  22. [30]

    Fan X., et al., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/504836 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006AJ....132..117F 132, 117

    2006 doi

  23. [31]

    R., Zaldarriaga M., Hernquist L., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1086/423025 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004ApJ...613....1F 613, 1

    Furlanetto S. R., Zaldarriaga M., Hernquist L., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1086/423025 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004ApJ...613....1F 613, 1

    2004 doi

  24. [32]

    Goto H., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac308b , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...923..229G 923, 229

    2021 doi

  25. [33]

    D., Gallerani S., Haiman Z., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw3210 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.466.1814G 466, 1814

    Greig B., Mesinger A., McGreer I. D., Gallerani S., Haiman Z., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw3210 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.466.1814G 466, 1814

    2017 doi

  26. [34]

    Greig B., Mesinger A., Ba \ n ados E., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz230 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.484.5094G 484, 5094

    2019 doi

  27. [35]

    B., Wang F., Yang J., Hennawi J

    Greig B., Mesinger A., Davies F. B., Wang F., Yang J., Hennawi J. F., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac825 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.512.5390G 512, 5390

    2022 doi

  28. [36]

    Greig B., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae1080 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.530.3208G 530, 3208

    2024 doi

  29. [37]

    R., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020Natur.585..357H 585, 357

    Harris C. R., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020Natur.585..357H 585, 357

    2020 doi

  30. [38]

    Hashimoto T., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/pasj/psz049 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019PASJ...71...71H 71, 71

    2019 doi

  31. [39]

    J., Scarlata C., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/acee6a , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...954L..14H 954, L14

    Hayes M. J., Scarlata C., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/acee6a , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...954L..14H 954, L14

    2023 doi

  32. [40]

    E., et al., 2024, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2407.06287 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240706287H p

    Heintz K. E., et al., 2024, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2407.06287 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240706287H p. arXiv:2407.06287

    2024 doi arXiv

  33. [41]

    D., 2007, @doi [Computing in Science and Engineering] 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007CSE.....9...90H 9, 90

    Hunter J. D., 2007, @doi [Computing in Science and Engineering] 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007CSE.....9...90H 9, 90

    2007 doi

  34. [42]

    T., Mellema G., Pen U

    Iliev I. T., Mellema G., Pen U. L., Merz H., Shapiro P. R., Alvarez M. A., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10502.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006MNRAS.369.1625I 369, 1625

    2006

  35. [43]

    arXiv:2410.01318

    Jin X., et al., 2024, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2410.01318 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv241001318J p. arXiv:2410.01318

    2024 doi arXiv

  36. [44]

    arXiv:2501.05834

    Kageura Y., et al., 2025, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2501.05834 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025arXiv250105834K p. arXiv:2501.05834

    2025 doi arXiv

  37. [45]

    arXiv:2503.07074

    Kakiichi K., et al., 2025, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2503.07074 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025arXiv250307074K p. arXiv:2503.07074

    2025 doi arXiv

  38. [46]

    J., Matthee J., Eilers A.-C., Mackenzie R., Bordoloi R., Simcoe R

    Kashino D., Lilly S. J., Matthee J., Eilers A.-C., Mackenzie R., Bordoloi R., Simcoe R. A., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/acc588 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...950...66K 950, 66

    2023 doi

  39. [47]

    D., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1086/375502 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003PASP..115..688K 115, 688

    Kelson D. D., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1086/375502 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003PASP..115..688K 115, 688

    2003 doi

  40. [48]

    Konno A., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/pasj/psx131 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018PASJ...70S..16K 70, S16

    2018 doi

  41. [49]

    Lu T.-Y., et al., 2025, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202452912 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025A&A...697A..69L 697, A69

    2025 doi

  42. [51]

    A., et al., 2018b, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aabbab , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...857L..11M 857, L11

    Mason C. A., et al., 2018b, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aabbab , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...857L..11M 857, L11

    doi

  43. [52]

    A., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz632 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.485.3947M 485, 3947

    Mason C. A., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz632 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.485.3947M 485, 3947

    2019 doi

  44. [53]

    A., Chen Z., Stark D

    Mason C. A., Chen Z., Stark D. P., Lu T.-Y., Topping M., Tang M., 2025, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2501.11702 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025arXiv250111702M p. arXiv:2501.11702

    2025 doi

  45. [54]

    Matthee J., Sobral D., Gronke M., Pezzulli G., Cantalupo S., R \"o ttgering H., Darvish B., Santos S., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz3554 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.492.1778M 492, 1778

    2020 doi

  46. [55]

    A., Kashino D., Lilly S

    Matthee J., Mackenzie R., Simcoe R. A., Kashino D., Lilly S. J., Bordoloi R., Eilers A.-C., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/acc846 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...950...67M 950, 67

    2023 doi

  47. [56]

    D., Mesinger A., D'Odorico V., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu2449 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.447..499M 447, 499

    McGreer I. D., Mesinger A., D'Odorico V., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu2449 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.447..499M 447, 499

    2015 doi

  48. [57]

    A., Roberts-Borsani G., Oesch P., Ellis R

    Meyer R. A., Roberts-Borsani G., Oesch P., Ellis R. S., 2025, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2504.02683 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025arXiv250402683M p. arXiv:2504.02683

    2025 doi arXiv

  49. [58]

    J., et al., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1038/nature10159 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011Natur.474..616M 474, 616

    Mortlock D. J., et al., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1038/nature10159 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011Natur.474..616M 474, 616

    2011 doi

  50. [59]

    B., Gunn J

    Oke J. B., Gunn J. E., 1983, @doi [ ] 10.1086/160817 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1983ApJ...266..713O 266, 713

    1983 doi

  51. [60]

    Ota K., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aa7a0a , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...844...85O 844, 85

    2017 doi

  52. [61]

    Ouchi M., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/723/1/869 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...723..869O 723, 869

    2010 doi

  53. [62]

    Pentericci L., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/793/2/113 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...793..113P 793, 113

    2014 doi

  54. [63]

    Pentericci L., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201732465 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018A&A...619A.147P 619, A147

    2018 doi

  55. [64]

    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

  56. [65]

    Roberts-Borsani G., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/acc798 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...948...54R 948, 54

    2023 doi

  57. [66]

    Runnholm A., et al., 2025, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/adc008 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025ApJ...984...95R 984, 95

    2025 doi

  58. [67]

    Santos S., Sobral D., Matthee J., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw2076 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.463.1678S 463, 1678

    2016 doi

  59. [68]

    A., Stark D

    Schenker M. A., Stark D. P., Ellis R. S., Robertson B. E., Dunlop J. S., McLure R. J., Kneib J.-P., Richard J., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/744/2/179 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...744..179S 744, 179

    2012 doi

  60. [69]

    A., Ellis R

    Schenker M. A., Ellis R. S., Konidaris N. P., Stark D. P., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/795/1/20 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...795...20S 795, 20

    2014 doi

  61. [70]

    M., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae789 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.530.1829S 530, 1829

    Sebastian A. M., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae789 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.530.1829S 530, 1829

    2024 doi

  62. [71]

    Simmonds C., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad1749 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.523.5468S 523, 5468

    2023 doi

  63. [72]

    Spina B., Bosman S. E. I., Davies F. B., Gaikwad P., Zhu Y., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202450798 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...688L..26S 688, L26

    2024 doi

  64. [73]

    P., Ellis R

    Stark D. P., Ellis R. S., Ouchi M., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/728/1/L2 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...728L...2S 728, L2

    2011 doi

  65. [74]

    P., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw2233 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.464..469S 464, 469

    Stark D. P., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw2233 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.464..469S 464, 469

    2017 doi

  66. [75]

    Tang M., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad2763 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.526.1657T 526, 1657

    2023 doi

  67. [76]

    Tang M., et al., 2024a, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae1338 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.531.2701T 531, 2701

    doi

  68. [77]

    P., Ellis R

    Tang M., Stark D. P., Ellis R. S., Topping M. W., Mason C., Li Z., Plat A., 2024b, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad5ae0 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...972...56T 972, 56

    doi

  69. [78]

    P., Topping M

    Tang M., Stark D. P., Topping M. W., Mason C., Ellis R. S., 2024c, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad7eb7 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...975..208T 975, 208

    doi

  70. [79]

    C., Furlanetto S

    Trapp A. C., Furlanetto S. R., Davies F. B., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad2228 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.524.5891T 524, 5891

    2023 doi

  71. [80]

    B., Trenti M., Bradley L

    Treu T., Schmidt K. B., Trenti M., Bradley L. D., Stiavelli M., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/775/1/L29 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...775L..29T 775, L29

    2013 doi

  72. [81]

    Umeda H., Ouchi M., Nakajima K., Harikane Y., Ono Y., Xu Y., Isobe Y., Zhang Y., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad554e , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...971..124U 971, 124

    2024 doi

  73. [82]

    T., Nakajima K., 2025a, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025arXiv250404683U p

    Umeda H., Ouchi M., Kageura Y., Harikane Y., Nakane M., Thai T. T., Nakajima K., 2025a, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025arXiv250404683U p. arXiv:2504.04683

  74. [83]

    Umeda H., et al., 2025b, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/adb1c0 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025ApJS..277...37U 277, 37

    doi

  75. [84]

    Virtanen P., et al., 2020, @doi [Nature Methods] 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020NatMe..17..261V 17, 261

    2020 doi

  76. [85]

    Wang F., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab8c45 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...896...23W 896, 23

    2020 doi

  77. [86]

    Wang F., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/accd6f , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...951L...4W 951, L4

    2023 doi

  78. [87]

    H., Kulkarni G., Haehnelt M

    Weinberger L. H., Kulkarni G., Haehnelt M. G., Choudhury T. R., Puchwein E., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty1563 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.479.2564W 479, 2564

    2018 doi

  79. [88]

    R., Mason C

    Whitler L. R., Mason C. A., Ren K., Dijkstra M., Mesinger A., Pentericci L., Trenti M., Treu T., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa1178 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.495.3602W 495, 3602

    2020 doi

  80. [89]

    P., Endsley R., Chen Z., Mason C., Topping M

    Whitler L., Stark D. P., Endsley R., Chen Z., Mason C., Topping M. W., Charlot S., 2024, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stae516 , 529, 855

    2024 doi

  81. [90]

    J., Carilli C

    Willott C. J., Carilli C. L., Wagg J., Wang R., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/807/2/180 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...807..180W 807, 180

    2015 doi

  82. [91]

    Witstok J., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202347176 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...682A..40W 682, A40

    2024 doi

  83. [92]

    Witstok J., et al., 2025, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae2535 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025MNRAS.536...27W 536, 27

    2025 doi

  84. [93]

    Witten C., et al., 2024, @doi [Nature Astronomy] 10.1038/s41550-023-02179-3 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024NatAs...8..384W 8, 384

    2024 doi

  85. [94]

    Wyithe J. S. B., Loeb A., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1086/429529 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005ApJ...625....1W 625, 1

    2005 doi

  86. [95]

    Yang J., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ab9c26 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...897L..14Y 897, L14

    2020 doi

  87. [96]

    Zhu Y., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac6e60 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...932...76Z 932, 76

    2022 doi

  88. [97]

    Zhu Y., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnrasl/slae061 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.533L..49Z 533, L49

    2024 doi

  89. [98]

    D urov c \' kov \'a D., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad4888 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...969..162D 969, 162

    2024 doi

  90. [99]

    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...

  91. [100]

    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 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.