Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 3 cited by

At $z=5.85$, the MAMBO-9 pair's baryonic mass budget closes only if the CO-to-H$_2$ conversion factor is near unity, implying its gas was already metal-rich within the first billion years.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

ALMA and JWST resolve two merging dusty galaxies at z=5.85, measure a 1:5 mass ratio, find star formation hidden in A_V>10 clouds, and infer metal-rich gas inside a possible protocluster.

T0 review reviewed 2026-08-05 challenge →

load-bearing objection Solid new ALMA+JWST data and careful kinematics, but the alpha_CO ~1 / super-solar metallicity punchline doesn't survive the SLED uncertainty, and the overdensity claim lacks a statistical baseline. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2508.06607 v1 pith:IHIIGBU2 submitted 2025-08-08 astro-ph.GA

JWST+ALMA reveal the ISM kinematics and stellar structure of MAMBO-9, a merging pair of DSFGs in an overdense environment at $z=5.85$

Hollis B. Akins , Caitlin M. Casey , Jaclyn B. Champagne , Olivia Cooper , Maximilien Franco , Seiji Fujimoto , Kirsten K. Knudsen , Anton M. Koekemoer
show 9 more authors
Arianna S. Long Allison Man Sinclaire M. Manning Jed McKinney Jorge Zavala Pablo Arrabal Haro Mark Dickinson Vasily Kokorev Anthony J. Taylor
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords galaxy evolutionhigh-redshift galaxiesdusty star-forming galaxiessubmillimeter galaxiesinterstellar mediumCO-to-H2 conversion factorgalaxy mergersprotoclusters
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

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 combines ~400 pc ALMA [CII] 158 micron mapping with JWST/NIRCam+MIRI imaging to dissect MAMBO-9, a merging pair of dusty star-forming galaxies at $z=5.85$, when the Universe was under a billion years old. The [CII] velocity fields show two rotating, tidally disturbed components with a 1:5 mass ratio, and the JWST images reveal a dusty stellar bridge between them, a tidal feature. The main quantitative claim is a mass-budget argument: adding the newly measured stellar masses to gas and dust masses from earlier CO observations forces the CO-to-H$_2$ conversion factor to be near unity ($\alpha_{\rm CO}\sim1$) and a gas-to-dust ratio of roughly 70-90, implying the ISM was already metal-enriched, roughly solar or slightly super-solar, at $z=5.85$. The resolved SED fits also locate most recent star formation in heavily obscured ($A_V>10$) clouds while the rest-optical light escapes from $A_V\sim1$-$5$ outskirts. A reader should care because it shows that massive galaxies can establish chemical enrichment and complex structure very early, and it positions MAMBO-9 as a likely progenitor of a brightest cluster galaxy in an overdense field.

Core claim

The paper claims that MAMBO-9 is a minor merger (mass ratio ~1:5) of two massive galaxies at $z=5.85$ whose combined baryonic mass budget is closed only with a low CO-to-H$_2$ conversion factor. The dynamical masses, $M_{\rm dyn}=V_{\max}^2\,R_{\max}/G$, from tilted-ring fits to the [CII] cubes are roughly $1.1\times10^{11}\ M_\odot$ for component A and $2.0\times10^{10}\ M_\odot$ for component B. Stellar masses from spatially resolved energy-balance SED fits are $\log M_\star/M_\odot\sim10.2$ and $\sim9.8$. With gas masses inferred from CO(6-5) luminosities and dust masses from 3 mm continuum, the baryonic sum equals the dynamical mass only if $\alpha_{\rm CO}\sim1$-$2$ (or the gas-to-dust

What carries the argument

The load-bearing comparison is the baryonic mass budget. Dynamical masses are measured from the [CII] 158 micron rotation curves using tilted-ring forward modeling ($M_{\rm dyn}=V_{\max}^2\,R_{\max}/G$), stellar masses come from spatially resolved JWST SED fitting, and gas masses come from previous CO(6-5) observations scaled by $\alpha_{\rm CO}$ through an assumed CO spectral line energy distribution (SLED)---the relative brightness of the CO rotational ladder. The paper then requires the baryonic sum (stars plus gas plus dust) to match the dynamical mass; that closure condition fixes $\alpha_{\rm CO}\sim1$ and a gas-to-dust ratio near 80, and metallicity-dependent calibrations translate th

Load-bearing premise

The argument hinges on the CO spectral line energy distribution of MAMBO-9 matching the average high-redshift DSFG ratio $I_{\rm CO(6-5)}/I_{\rm CO(1-0)} = 10^{+30}_{-5}$, so the low-J CO luminosity is inferred rather than measured; a different SLED would change the required $\alpha_{\rm CO}$ and therefore the metal-rich conclusion.

What would settle it

Measure CO(1-0) or CO(2-1) emission from MAMBO-9 directly. The $\alpha_{\rm CO}\sim1$ result assumes $L'_{\rm CO(1-0)}\approx3.6\,L'_{\rm CO(6-5)}$; a direct low-J detection giving a larger CO(1-0)/CO(6-5) ratio would raise the inferred gas mass and could erase the super-solar metallicity conclusion. Alternatively, a direct gas-phase metallicity measurement from the existing NIRSpec spectrum (e.g., [OIII]/H$\beta$) would independently test the near-solar oxygen abundance implied by the mass budget.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • The required $\alpha_{\rm CO}\sim1$ places MAMBO-9's ISM at roughly solar to slightly super-solar metallicity by $z=5.85$, showing that massive galaxies could be chemically enriched within the first billion years.
  • The resolved SED results imply that integrated SEDs of high-redshift DSFGs can hide the sites of most star formation: the bulk of recent star formation sits in $A_V>10$ clouds, while the visible rest-optical light comes from $A_V\sim1$-$5$ regions.
  • The [CII] deficit operates on sub-kpc scales within MAMBO-9, so it is set by compact, IR-bright cores rather than by the global galaxy-averaged FIR surface density.
  • MAMBO-9 is a roughly 1:5 minor merger in progress, with a red tidal bridge of a few $\times10^9\ M_\odot$ of stellar mass connecting the components, placing it among the highest-redshift tidal features known.
  • The surrounding overdensity includes 39 spectroscopically confirmed galaxies within roughly 25 cMpc of MAMBO-9, supporting the picture of MAMBO-9 as a protocluster core and a candidate progenitor of a present-day brightest cluster galaxy.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If $\alpha_{\rm CO}\sim1$ is typical of massive $z>5$ DSFGs, gas masses and gas fractions in the early Universe may be systematically lower than assumed by studies adopting Milky Way-like conversion factors, and population-level depletion times would need revision.
  • The paper's resolved [CII]-deficit maps suggest that unresolved observations mix very different ISM phases; sub-kpc ALMA/JWST-matched studies of other $z>5$ DSFGs could test whether $A_V>10$ starburst cores always coincide with the deepest [CII] deficits.
  • The NIRSpec H$\alpha$-derived SFR for MAMBO-9-B is an order of magnitude below the FIR-derived SFR; if the obscured clouds are truly optically thick, deep rest-frame near-IR spectroscopy or radio free-free measurements may be needed to avoid missing the dominant star formation in such systems.
  • The claimed overdensity spanning much of the COSMOS field could connect MAMBO-9 to the tentative $z\sim6$ structure found in the same region; wide-area H$\alpha$ mapping with NIRCam slitless spectroscopy should reveal whether this is one coherent protocluster or several filaments along the line of sight.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper presents new ALMA [CII] 158 μm and dust continuum observations (≈400 pc resolution) and JWST/NIRCam+MIRI imaging of MAMBO-9, a pair of dusty star-forming galaxies at z=5.85. The authors detect clear velocity gradients in both components, fit tilted-ring models with 3DBarolo, and derive dynamical masses of (10.6±0.9)×10^10 M_sun (A) and (2.0±0.5)×10^10 M_sun (B), implying a 1:5 minor merger. The JWST data reveal a red tidal bridge between the components, and spatially-resolved SED fitting suggests that the most recent star formation is heavily obscured (A_V>10) while rest-optical light emerges from A_V~1-5 regions. Combining the new stellar and dynamical masses with previous CO(6-5) and dust measurements, the authors argue that the mass budget requires a low CO-to-H2 conversion factor α_CO~1-2 (or gas-to-dust ratio ~70-90), indicating high ISM enrichment at z~5.85. Finally, they identify a spectroscopic overdensity of 39 galaxies within Δz=0.03 of MAMBO-9, spanning ~40 cMpc across the PRIMER-COSMOS field. The paper's central quantitative claim is that the baryonic mass budget requires α_CO ~ 1-2, and the abstract states this implies a 'highly metal-enriched ISM.'

Significance. If the α_CO result is robust, this is an important data point: a massive, gas-rich DSFG at z≈6 with an ISM already near solar or super-solar metallicity would challenge simple chemical-enrichment timescales and would strengthen the case that the brightest cluster galaxy progenitors form early in extremely dense environments. The kinematic analysis is careful: the authors use forward modeling with 3DBarolo, include explicit caveats about inclination, merger disturbance, and the possibility that MAMBO-9-B is not a relaxed rotator. The spatially resolved JWST+ALMA comparison is also valuable, as is the spectroscopic confirmation of a large overdensity around the system. The paper ships a set of measured fluxes, derived maps, and model comparisons that will be useful to the community. The main weakness is the CO SLED assumption in the mass-budget argument, which is not fully propagated into the headline α_CO value; this weakens the 'highly metal-enriched' conclusion as stated. The resolved SED results also rely on an ad hoc birth-cloud attenuation parameter. Neither issue invalidates the kinematic or environmental results, but they affect the paper's most prominent physical claims.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4.2 and Fig. 8] The CO SLED uncertainty is not fully propagated into the α_CO conclusion. The text adopts I_CO(6-5)/I_CO(1-0)=10^{+30}_{-5}, i.e. L'_CO(1-0)~3.6 L'_CO(6-5). Combining the quoted SLED range with the CO(6-5) luminosity error (L'_CO(6-5)=(1.4±0.9)×10^10 K km/s pc^2 for component A) yields L'_CO(1-0) from roughly 0.4×10^10 to 17×10^10 K km/s pc^2. The required gas mass of ~9×10^10 M_sun then corresponds to α_CO~0.5-20, fully consistent with the Milky Way value α_CO~4.5. The caption of Fig. 8 states that 'the CO-based gas mass includes the uncertainty on the CO SLED,' but the text's 'requires α_CO~1-2' is not the result of a full propagation. Please provide a Monte Carlo propagation of the SLED ratio and the CO(6-5) luminosity error, and quote the resulting α_CO range. If that range remains broad, the abstract and §4.2 should be tempered to 'consistent with solar to slightly super-solar metal
  2. [§3.5.3 and abstract] The claim that 'the majority of recent star formation is concentrated in extremely obscured (A_V>10) clouds' is based on spatially-resolved SED fits that fix T_dust and β to values from the integrated FIR-only fit and use the birth-cloud attenuation factor η introduced in §3.5.1 with a uniform prior 1-10. The paper states that η was added 'to reproduce the extreme SFRs implied by the FIR without significant flux boosting from strong emission lines in the NIRCam bands' and that it allows mass-weighted A_V to exceed the nominal prior maximum of 8. With only one spatially-resolved FIR point per Voronoi bin, the resulting A_V>10 values in the compact cores are not independently constrained by the data. Please show a sensitivity test in which η is fixed to a fiducial value (e.g., η=1 or η=3) and in which T_dust/β are varied within their uncertainties, and demonstrate that the 'majority of rec
  3. [§4.2] The text in §4.2 concludes 'These results are consistent with slightly super-solar metallicity, implying an evolved stellar population/ISM in already by z=5.85.' This is notably more cautious than the abstract's 'highly metal-enriched ISM.' Given the propagation issue above, the abstract should match the discussion-level claim. If the authors intend to retain the stronger statement, they need to justify why the central α_CO value should be preferred over the full allowed range, for example by appealing to external priors on α_CO in DSFGs or by using the GDR as the primary constraint.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§3.2] Typo: 'The the ALMA [CII] and dust continuum measurements' should be 'The ALMA...'.
  2. [§3.2] The description of how the morphological and kinematic inclination estimates are combined is somewhat vague. The text says 'we incorporate systematic effects by combining the morphological and kinematic inclinations' but then 'we adopt the approximate mean'; it would be clearer to state exactly how the adopted inclinations and their uncertainties were derived (e.g., weighted mean, quadrature sum of systematic errors).
  3. [§3.1] When describing the double-peaked [CII] spectrum, 'separated by≈500 km/s' could be clarified as 'the two peaks are separated by≈500 km/s.' Also, the units in §3.4 for line fluxes are given as erg s^-1 cm^-2 Å^-1, but for Gaussian-fitted line fluxes the correct unit is erg s^-1 cm^-2; please check.
  4. [§3.5.1] The introduction of the birth-cloud attenuation parameter η is an important modeling choice, but the text does not discuss the degeneracy between η and the stellar mass/SFR. A sentence on the posterior behavior of η (e.g., whether it peaks at the prior boundary) would help the reader assess the robustness of the derived physical parameters.
  5. [§4.3] The sentence 'as compiled by ; A. A. Khostovan et al. (2025)' contains a stray semicolon and likely a missing citation; please fix.
  6. [§4.3] The claim that the structure 'would be among the largest protoclusters known' is speculative given the MSA incompleteness and the limited area; this should be phrased more cautiously or supported with a quantitative overdensity significance estimate.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: alpha_CO is inferred from independent dynamical, stellar, and CO constraints, not fitted to the target conclusion.

full rationale

The central quantitative claim—that the baryonic mass budget requires alpha_CO ~1–2—is derived by comparing independent measurements: the dynamical mass from [CII] kinematics (Eq. 1), the stellar mass from SED fitting, and the CO luminosity from prior ALMA observations (Casey et al. 2019). The paper solves for alpha_CO by equating M_dyn to M_star + M_dust + alpha_CO * L'_CO(1-0); this is an algebraic inference from observables, not a fit of the target parameter to the data that defines it. The CO SLED ratio I_CO(6-5)/I_CO(1-0)=10(+30,-5) is adopted from an empirical review (Casey et al. 2014) and is explicitly stated with a large uncertainty; propagating that uncertainty would broaden the alpha_CO range, but that is a robustness/uncertainty concern, not circularity. The self-citations to Casey et al. (2014, 2019) provide external data and calibrations (line fluxes, dust masses, empirical SLED averages) that are not outputs of the present analysis. No equation in the paper reduces to another by construction, and the 'prediction' of a metal-enriched ISM is a posterior interpretation of the inferred alpha_CO, not an input. Therefore the derivation is self-contained against the quoted external measurements, and no circular step is identified.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 6 axioms · 0 invented entities

The headline results depend on a chain of standard but model-dependent assumptions: rotating-disk dynamical mass modeling from [CII], a literature CO SLED, energy-balance SED fitting with an ad hoc birth-cloud attenuation parameter, and metallicity-dependent scaling relations for alpha_CO and gas-to-dust ratio. No new physical entities are introduced, and all free parameters are either fitted to the data or fixed from prior literature.

free parameters (4)
  • Dust temperature T_dust = A: 59(+6,-6) K; B: 37(+5,-5) K
    Fitted in FIR-only SED fits (Section 3.5.2), then fixed in spatially resolved SED fits (Section 3.5.3), directly affecting the energy balance that sets stellar masses and SFRs in the resolved bins.
  • Dust emissivity index beta = A: 2.1(+0.1,-0.1); B: 2.6(+0.3,-0.3)
    Fitted in FIR-only SED fits (Section 3.5.2) and fixed in resolved fitting; controls the dust SED slope and thus L_IR.
  • MIR power-law slope alpha_MIR = 4.0
    Fixed to the value from Casey 2012 in the FIR SED fitting (Section 3.5.2) because of the lack of rest-frame 10-100 micron constraints; affects L_IR and T_dust.
  • Birth-cloud attenuation factor eta = Uniform prior 1-10
    Introduced ad hoc in bagpipes SED fitting (Section 3.5.1) to reproduce the extreme SFRs implied by the FIR; allows mass-weighted A_V to exceed the 0-8 prior, underpinning the A_V > 10 core claim.
axioms (6)
  • domain assumption The [CII] kinematics trace a rotating disk such that M_dyn = V_max^2 R_max / G is a valid mass estimator
    Used in Section 3.2 with 3DBarolo tilted-ring fits; the paper acknowledges high velocity dispersions and merger disturbance, especially for MAMBO-9-B.
  • domain assumption The CO SLED of MAMBO-9 matches the average high-z DSFG, I_CO(6-5)/I_CO(1-0) = 10(+30,-5), so L'_CO(1-0) ~ 3.6 L'_CO(6-5)
    Applied in Section 4.2 to convert CO(6-5) luminosities from Casey et al. 2019 into H2 masses; the derived alpha_CO ~ 1-2 scales inversely with this ratio.
  • domain assumption Energy balance in SED fitting: absorbed stellar light is fully reradiated in the FIR within each spatial bin
    Adopted in bagpipes runs (Sections 3.5.1 and 3.5.3); couples the stellar mass and attenuation solutions to the single 1.1 mm FIR data point per bin.
  • domain assumption Dust attenuation follows the Salim et al. (2018) curve with a birth-cloud component
    Chosen for SED fitting (Section 3.5.1); the derived A_V values and their spatial pattern depend on this parameterization.
  • domain assumption Gas-to-dust ratio scales with metallicity as in Remy-Ruyer et al. (2014) and alpha_CO scales as in Accurso et al. (2017)
    Used in Section 4.2 to translate the required gas mass into alpha_CO and GDR, and to infer super-solar metallicity.
  • domain assumption Intrinsic edge-on axis ratio of 0.25 for disks (Wuyts et al. 2016) is used to convert Sersic b/a to inclination
    Used in Section 3.1 for morphological inclinations; these are then averaged with kinematic inclinations for the adopted i.

reviewed 2026-08-05 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of JWST+ALMA reveal the ISM kinematics and stellar structure of MAMBO-9, a merging pair of DSFGs in an overdense environment at $z=5.85$." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IHIIGBU2

@misc{pith2026250806607,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: JWST+ALMA reveal the ISM kinematics and stellar structure of MAMBO-9, a merging pair of DSFGs in an overdense environment at $z=5.85$},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IHIIGBU2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.06607}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
abstract

We present high-resolution ALMA [CII] 158 micron observations and JWST/NIRCam+MIRI imaging of MAMBO-9, a pair of optically-dark, dusty star-forming galaxies at $z=5.85$. MAMBO-9 is among the most massive, gas-rich, and actively star-forming galaxies at this epoch, when the Universe was less than 1 Gyr old. The new, 400 pc-resolution [CII] observations reveal velocity gradients in both objects; we estimate dynamical masses and find a relative mass ratio of 1:5. The kinematics of both objects suggest both rotation and strong tidal interaction, suggesting that the pair has already experienced a close encounter. Indeed, the new JWST imaging reveals a continuous bridge of moderately dust-obscured material between the two. We perform spatially-resolved SED fitting using the high-resolution ALMA+JWST imaging, finding that the majority of recent star-formation is concentrated in extremely obscured ($A_V > 10$) clouds, while the majority of rest-optical light (stellar continuum and H$\alpha$ emission) is emergent from moderate-to-highly obscured ($A_V\sim 1$-$5$) regions on the outskirts. Combining our new stellar and dynamical mass measurements with previous CO observations, we find that the mass budget of MAMBO-9 requires a CO-to-H$_2$ conversion factor ($\alpha_{\rm CO}$) of roughly unity, indicative of a highly metal-enriched ISM. Finally, we show that MAMBO-9 resides in a large overdensity spanning the PRIMER-COSMOS field, with 39 galaxies spectroscopically confirmed within $\sim 25$ cMpc. With a total baryonic mass $\sim 10^{11}\,M_\odot$, MAMBO-9 can be considered a prototype of massive galaxy formation and likely progenitor of the brightest cluster galaxies (BCGs) in the lower-redshift Universe.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2508.06607 by Allison Man, Anthony J. Taylor, Anton M. Koekemoer, Arianna S. Long, Caitlin M. Casey, Hollis B. Akins, Jaclyn B. Champagne, Jed McKinney, Jorge Zavala, Kirsten K. Knudsen, Mark Dickinson, Maximilien Franco, Olivia Cooper, Pablo Arrabal Haro, Seiji Fujimoto, Sinclaire M. Manning, Vasily Kokorev.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Left: ALMA dust continuum and [C ii] 158 µm moment 0 maps for the MAMBO-9 system. Contours indicate the significance level, starting from −3𝜎, 3𝜎 and increasing following a Fibonacci sequence thereon. The [Cii] moment 0 map is integrated from −500 ≤ 𝑣/km s−1 ≤ 500. The grey dashed contours indicate the segmentation map which is used to extract spectra. Right: [Cii] line spectra for both MAMBO-9-A and B, wi… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The 𝐿[C ii]/𝐿FIR ratio as a function of ΣFIR for the MAMBO-9 system and various local and high-redshift galaxies from the literature. We show local ULIRGS from (T. Díaz-San￾tos et al. 2017) 𝑧 ∼ 2–6 DSFGs from SPT (J. S. Spilker et al. 2016), 𝑧 ≳ 6 quasars (R. Decarli et al. 2018), and several in￾dividual 𝑧 ≳ 5 galaxies (J. A. Zavala et al. 2018b; K. C. Litke et al. 2019; T. Hashimoto et al. 2019). MAMBO-9 … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Kinematic modeling of the MAMBO-9 system. Left: Velocity (moment 1) and velocity dispersion (moment 2) maps for MAMBO-9-A and B. We show the data, model, and residual for each moment and object. Dashed lines indicate the kinematic major axis (i.e. the mean position angle) adopted in 3DBarolo fits. Green contours show 𝑣 = 0 in the moment 1 maps. We adopt 𝑧𝐴 = 5.850 and 𝑧𝐵 = 5.852. MAMBO-9-A shows clear rota… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: New JWST imaging of MAMBO-9, illustrating the utility of JWST+ALMA for spatially resolving high-𝑧 DSFGs. Top Left: Stacked cutout of Spitzer/IRAC [3.6] + [4.5]. MAMBO-9 was marginally detected in IRAC imaging, though completely unresolved; identifying the two separate components required targeted ALMA continuum imaging (C. M. Casey et al. 2019). The zoomed inset shows a stacked cutout from combining four H… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: JWST/NIRSpec PRISM spectrum of MAMBO-9-B from CAPERS (GO#6368). The inset panel shows the NIRCam composite RGB image of MAMBO-9 with the NIRSpec slitlet overlaid. We mark the positions of detected emission lines. ever, MAMBO-9 is clearly detected and exhibits three clear peaks, one central peak in MAMBO-9-A and two in MAMBO-9-B. The peak F770W positions are slightly offset from the NIRCam stack; to illustr… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Spectral energy distributions and best-fit models for MAMBO-9. The FIR-only SED fits are shown in orange, the spatially-resolved energy balance fits are shown in blue, and the integrated fits is shown in grey. Existing photometry as compiled by C. M. Casey et al. (2019) is shown in light red, while new JWST and ALMA photometry from this work is shown in dark red. The right panels show zoom-ins of the optic… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Results from our spatially-resolved SED fitting procedure. From left to right, we show maps of the best-fit stellar mass surface density Σ★, SFR surface density ΣSFR (over the last 100 Myr), dust attenuation 𝐴𝑉 (including additional attenuation towards young stars), and equivalent width EW0 (H𝛼) in each Vonoroi bin. star-formation, traced by the dust and [C ii] emission, originates from the compact central… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Mass budget of MAMBO-9-A and B as a function of the metallicity used to compute the gas mass. Red/blue lines and shaded regions indicate the total baryonic mass (𝑀★ + 𝑀dust + 𝑀gas), computed assuming either an 𝛼CO (blue, dashed line) or a gas-to-dust ratio (red, dot-dash line), adopt￾ing standard calibrations with metallicity for both (see text). Note that the CO-based gas mass includes the uncertainty on … view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The overdense environment around MAMBO-9. We show objects spectroscopically-confirmed in CAPERS between 𝑧 = 5.5 and 𝑧 = 6.2, objects within Δ𝑧 = 0.03 of MAMBO-9 are shown as larger points. We supplement this with 10 objects spectroscopically-confirmed from ground-based Lyman-𝛼 sur￾veys on Keck and VLT (G. Hasinger et al. 2018; L. Pentericci et al. 2018; K. B. Schmidt et al. 2021; B. Epinat et al. 2024) as … view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. An almost NIRCam-dark dusty star-forming galaxy at z=6.63

    astro-ph.GA 2025-11 conditional novelty 7.0

    A blindly detected, nearly NIRCam-dark dusty galaxy at z=6.631 implies a space density of such hidden galaxies that may match the abundance of massive quiescent galaxies at z~4-5.

  2. Mass--size evolution and the emerging passive--density relation revealed by JWST/NIRCam in the Spiderweb protocluster

    astro-ph.GA 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0

    In the Spiderweb protocluster, passive fraction rises with local density to ~60% while passive mass–size intercepts sit between field and cluster values, indicating advanced quenching but ongoing size growth.

  3. Investigating the role of turbulence in the interstellar medium in $z\sim3$ dusty star-forming galaxies using kpc-resolution ALMA dust and gas maps

    astro-ph.GA 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Kpc-resolution ALMA CO and dust maps of three z~3 dusty galaxies are consistent with gravo-turbulent star-formation models rather than non-turbulent predictions.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

126 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers · 7 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    2017, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 470, 4750, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1556

    Accurso, G., Saintonge, A., Catinella, B., et al. 2017, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 470, 4750, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1556

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1556 2017

  2. [2]

    Algera, H. S. B., Inami, H., Oesch, P. A., et al. 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 518, 6142, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3195

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3195 2023

  3. [4]

    B., Finkelstein, S

    Bagley, M. B., Finkelstein, S. L., Koekemoer, A. M., et al. 2022, arXiv, 2211.02495, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2211.02495

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2211.02495 2022

  4. [5]

    A., Weibel, A., et al

    Barrufet, L., Oesch, P. A., Weibel, A., et al. 2022, arXiv e-prints, 2207.14733

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  5. [6]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, 2404.08052, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2404.08052

    Barrufet, L., Oesch, P., Marques-Chaves, R., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, 2404.08052, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2404.08052

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2404.08052 2024

  6. [7]

    2007, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 172, 132, doi: 10.1086/520511

    Bertoldi, F., Carilli, C., Aravena, M., et al. 2007, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 172, 132, doi: 10.1086/520511

    doi:10.1086/520511 2007

  7. [8]

    W., Smail, I., Ivison, R

    Blain, A. W., Smail, I., Ivison, R. J., Kneib, J. P., & Frayer, D. T. 2002, Physics Reports, 369, 111, doi: 10.1016/S0370-1573(02)00134-5

    doi:10.1016/s0370-1573(02)00134-5 2002

  8. [9]

    A., Bouwens, R

    Boogaard, L. A., Bouwens, R. J., Riechers, D., et al. 2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 916, 12, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac01d7

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac01d7 2021

  9. [10]

    S., Smail, I., Chapman, S

    Bothwell, M. S., Smail, I., Chapman, S. C., et al. 2013, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 429, 3047, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sts562

    doi:10.1093/mnras/sts562 2013

  10. [11]

    J., Smit, R., Schouws, S., et al

    Bouwens, R. J., Smit, R., Schouws, S., et al. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 931, 160, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac5a4a

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac5a4a 2022

  11. [12]

    R., Weaver, J

    Brinch, M., Greve, T. R., Weaver, J. R., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 943, 153, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac9d96

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac9d96 2023

  12. [13]

    R., Sanders, D

    Brinch, M., Greve, T. R., Sanders, D. B., et al. 2024, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 527, 6591, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3409

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3409 2024

  13. [14]

    2023, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8380331

    Bushouse, H., Eisenhamer, J., Dencheva, N., et al. 2023, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8380331

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.8380331 2023

  14. [15]

    2001, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 113, 1449, doi: 10.1086/324269

    Calzetti, D. 2001, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 113, 1449, doi: 10.1086/324269

    doi:10.1086/324269 2001

  15. [16]

    C., et al

    Calzetti, D., Armus, L., Bohlin, R. C., et al. 2000, The Astrophysical Journal, 533, 682, doi: 10.1086/308692

    doi:10.1086/308692 2000

  16. [17]

    C., McLure, R

    Carnall, A. C., McLure, R. J., Dunlop, J. S., & Davé, R. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 480, 4379, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2169

    doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2169 2018

  17. [18]

    Casey, C. M. 2012, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 425, 3094, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21455.x

    arXiv 2012

  18. [19]

    Casey, C. M. 2016, The Astrophysical Journal, 824, 36, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/824/1/36

    doi:10.3847/0004-637x/824/1/36 2016

  19. [20]

    M., Narayanan, D., & Cooray, A

    Casey, C. M., Narayanan, D., & Cooray, A. 2014, Physics Reports, 541, 45, doi: 10.1016/j.physrep.2014.02.009

    doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2014.02.009 2014

  20. [21]

    M., Chen, C.-C., Cowie, L

    Casey, C. M., Chen, C.-C., Cowie, L. L., et al. 2013, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 436, 1919, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt1673

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stt1673 2013

  21. [22]

    M., Zavala, J

    Casey, C. M., Zavala, J. A., Aravena, M., et al. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 887, 55, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab52ff

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab52ff 2019

  22. [23]

    M., Zavala, J

    Casey, C. M., Zavala, J. A., Manning, S. M., et al. 2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 923, 215, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac2eb4

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac2eb4 2021

  23. [24]

    C., Neri, R., Bertoldi, F., et al

    Chapman, S. C., Neri, R., Bertoldi, F., et al. 2008, The Astrophysical Journal, 689, 889, doi: 10.1086/592137

    work page doi:10.1086/592137 2008

  24. [25]

    2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 929, 159, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac61df

    Chen, C.-C., Liao, C.-L., Smail, I., et al. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 929, 159, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac61df

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac61df 2022

  25. [26]

    E., et al

    Cheng, Y., Giavalisco, M., Backhaus, B. E., et al. 2025, ApJ, 979, 71, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad9909

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad9909 2025

  26. [27]

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

    Chiang, Y.-K., Overzier, R. A., Gebhardt, K., & Henriques, B. 2017, The Astrophysical Journal, 844, L23, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa7e7b

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa7e7b 2017

  27. [28]

    L., Boylan-Kolchin, M., et al

    Chworowsky, K., Finkelstein, S. L., Boylan-Kolchin, M., et al. 2023, Evidence for a Shallow Evolution in the Volume Densities of Massive Galaxies at $z=4$ to $8$ from CEERS, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2311.14804

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2311.14804 2023

  28. [29]

    2023, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 673, L6, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346535

    Colina, L., Crespo Gómez, A., Álvarez-Márquez, J., et al. 2023, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 673, L6, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346535

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346535 2023

  29. [30]

    E., Cornwell, T

    Conway, J. E., Cornwell, T. J., & Wilkinson, P. N. 1990, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 246, 490

    1990

  30. [31]

    R., Casey, C

    Cooper, O. R., Casey, C. M., Zavala, J. A., et al. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 930, 32, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac616d

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac616d 2022

  31. [32]

    Cornwell, T. J. 2008, IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing, 2, 793, doi: 10.1109/JSTSP.2008.2006388 Crespo Gómez, A., Colina, L., Álvarez-Márquez, J., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, 2402.18672, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2402.18672 da Cunha, E., Groves, B., Walter, F., et al. 2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 766, 13, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/766/1/13

    arXiv 2008

  32. [33]

    D., De Breuck, C., et al

    Dannerbauer, H., Kurk, J. D., De Breuck, C., et al. 2014, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 570, A55, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201423771 17 De Looze, I., Cormier, D., Lebouteiller, V., et al. 2014, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 568, A62, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322489

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201423771 2014

  33. [34]

    P., et al

    Decarli, R., Walter, F., Venemans, B. P., et al. 2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 854, 97, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa5aa Di Teodoro, E. M., & Fraternali, F. 2015, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 451, 3021, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv1213 Díaz-Santos, T., Armus, L., Charmandaris, V., et al. 2017, The Astrophysical Journal, 846, 32, doi: 10.38...

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaa5aa 2018

  34. [35]

    T., McLure, R

    Donnan, C. T., McLure, R. J., Dunlop, J. S., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, 2403.03171, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2403.03171

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2403.03171 2024

  35. [36]

    T., Dickinson, M., Taylor, A

    Donnan, C. T., Dickinson, M., Taylor, A. J., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.10518, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2507.10518

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2507.10518 2025

  36. [37]

    Downes, D., & Solomon, P. M. 1998, The Astrophysical Journal, 507, 615, doi: 10.1086/306339

    doi:10.1086/306339 1998

  37. [38]

    T., & Li, A

    Draine, B. T., & Li, A. 2007, The Astrophysical Journal, 657, 810, doi: 10.1086/511055

    doi:10.1086/511055 2007

  38. [39]

    M., & Casey, C

    Drew, P. M., & Casey, C. M. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 930, 142, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac6270

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac6270 2022

  39. [40]

    J., Willott, C., Alberts, S., et al

    Eisenstein, D. J., Willott, C., Alberts, S., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, 2306.02465, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2306.02465

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2306.02465 2023

  40. [41]

    J., Stanway, E

    Eldridge, J. J., Stanway, E. R., Xiao, L., et al. 2017, Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia, 34, e058, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2017.51

    doi:10.1017/pasa.2017.51 2017

  41. [42]

    I., Genzel, R., et al

    Engel, H., Davies, R. I., Genzel, R., et al. 2011, The Astrophysical Journal, 729, 58, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/729/1/58

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/729/1/58 2011

  42. [43]

    2024, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 683, A205, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348038

    Epinat, B., Contini, T., Mercier, W., et al. 2024, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 683, A205, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348038

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202348038 2024

  43. [44]

    2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 799, 226, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/799/2/226

    Erwin, P. 2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 799, 226, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/799/2/226

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/799/2/226 2015

  44. [45]

    M., Koekemoer, A

    Franco, M., Casey, C. M., Koekemoer, A. M., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.03256, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.03256

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.03256 2025

  45. [46]

    A., Schouws, S., et al

    Fudamoto, Y., Oesch, P. A., Schouws, S., et al. 2021, Nature, 597, 489, doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03846-z

    doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03846-z 2021

  46. [47]

    L., Burgarella, D., et al

    Fujimoto, S., Finkelstein, S. L., Burgarella, D., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 955, 130, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aceb67 Gaia Collaboration. 2018, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 616, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833051

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aceb67 2023

  47. [48]

    M., Akins, H

    Gentile, F., Casey, C. M., Akins, H. B., et al. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 973, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad738a

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad738a 2024

  48. [49]

    J., Gracia-Carpio, J., et al

    Genzel, R., Tacconi, L. J., Gracia-Carpio, J., et al. 2010, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 407, 2091, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16969.x

    arXiv 2010

  49. [50]

    A., Kocevski, D

    Grogin, N. A., Kocevski, D. D., Faber, S. M., et al. 2011, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 197, 35, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/197/2/35

    doi:10.1088/0067-0049/197/2/35 2011

  50. [51]

    Haas, M., Klaas, U., Müller, S. A. H., Chini, R., & Coulson, I. 2001, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 367, L9, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20010065

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20010065 2001

  51. [52]

    COSMOS-Web: MIRI Data Reduction and Number Counts at 7.7$\mu$m using JWST

    Harikane, Y., Ouchi, M., Inoue, A. K., et al. 2020, The Astrophysical Journal, 896, 93, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab94bd Harish,S.,Kartaltepe,J.S.,Liu,D.,etal.2025,arXive-prints, arXiv:2506.03306, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.03306

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.03306 2020

  52. [53]

    K., Mawatari, K., et al

    Hashimoto, T., Inoue, A. K., Mawatari, K., et al. 2019, Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan, 71, 71, doi: 10.1093/pasj/psz049

    doi:10.1093/pasj/psz049 2019

  53. [54]

    2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 858, 77, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aabacf

    Hasinger, G., Capak, P., Salvato, M., et al. 2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 858, 77, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aabacf

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aabacf 2018

  54. [55]

    Mapping dusty galaxy growth at $z>5$ with FRESCO: Detection of H$\alpha$ in submm galaxy HDF850.1 and the surrounding overdense structures

    Herard-Demanche, T., Bouwens, R. J., Oesch, P. A., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, 2309.04525, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2309.04525

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2309.04525 2023

  55. [56]

    A., da Cunha, E., Kendrew, S., et al

    Hodge, J. A., da Cunha, E., Kendrew, S., et al. 2025, The Astrophysical Journal, 978, 165, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad9a52

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad9a52 2025

  56. [57]

    H., Serjeant, S., Dunlop, J., et al

    Hughes, D. H., Serjeant, S., Dunlop, J., et al. 1998, Nature, 394, 241, doi: 10.1038/28328

    doi:10.1038/28328 1998

  57. [58]

    M., Chiang, Y.-K., et al

    Hung, C.-L., Casey, C. M., Chiang, Y.-K., et al. 2016, The Astrophysical Journal, 826, 130, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/826/2/130

    doi:10.3847/0004-637x/826/2/130 2016

  58. [59]

    J., Greve, T

    Ivison, R. J., Greve, T. R., Serjeant, S., et al. 2004, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 154, 124, doi: 10.1086/423249

    work page doi:10.1086/423249 2004

  59. [60]

    2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 504, 2360, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1035

    Jiao, Q., Gao, Y., & Zhao, Y. 2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 504, 2360, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1035

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1035 2021

  60. [61]

    E., et al

    Jin, S., Daddi, E., Magdis, G. E., et al. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 887, 144, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab55d6

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab55d6 2019

  61. [62]

    C., Vergani, D., Romano, M., et al

    Jones, G. C., Vergani, D., Romano, M., et al. 2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 507, 3540, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab2226

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2226 2021

  62. [63]

    C., Bunker, A

    Jones, G. C., Bunker, A. J., Telikova, K., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, 2405.12955, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2405.12955

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2405.12955 2024

  63. [64]

    S., Frye, B

    Kamieneski, P. S., Frye, B. L., Windhorst, R. A., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, 2404.08058, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2404.08058 18Akins et al

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2404.08058 2024

  64. [65]

    C., & Evans, N

    Kennicutt, R. C., & Evans, N. J. 2012, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, vol. 50, p.531-608, 50, 531, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125610

    doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125610 2012

  65. [66]

    A., Tsutsumi, T., Brogan, C

    Kepley, A. A., Tsutsumi, T., Brogan, C. L., et al. 2020, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 132, 024505, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ab5e14

    doi:10.1088/1538-3873/ab5e14 2020

  66. [67]

    A., Kartaltepe, J

    Khostovan, A. A., Kartaltepe, J. S., Salvato, M., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.00120, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2503.00120

    doi:10.48550/arxiv.2503.00120 2025

  67. [68]

    2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 521, 2526, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad687

    Killi, M., Watson, D., Fujimoto, S., et al. 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 521, 2526, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad687

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad687 2023

  68. [69]

    M., Aussel, H., Calzetti, D., et al

    Koekemoer, A. M., Aussel, H., Calzetti, D., et al. 2007, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 172, 196, doi: 10.1086/520086

    doi:10.1086/520086 2007

  69. [70]

    M., Faber, S

    Koekemoer, A. M., Faber, S. M., Ferguson, H. C., et al. 2011, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 197, 36, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/197/2/36

    doi:10.1088/0067-0049/197/2/36 2011

  70. [71]

    2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 487, 3007, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1486

    Kohandel, M., Pallottini, A., Ferrara, A., et al. 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 487, 3007, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1486

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stz1486 2019

  71. [72]

    E., et al

    Kokorev, V., Jin, S., Magdis, G. E., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 945, L25, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acbd9d

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acbd9d 2023

  72. [73]

    2002, Science, 295, 82, doi: 10.1126/science.1067524

    Kroupa, P. 2002, Science, 295, 82, doi: 10.1126/science.1067524

    doi:10.1126/science.1067524 2002

  73. [74]

    A., Miley, G

    Kuiper, E., Hatch, N. A., Miley, G. K., et al. 2011, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 415, 2245, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18852.x

    arXiv 2011

  74. [75]

    Speagle, J. S. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 876, 3, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab133c

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab133c 2019

  75. [76]

    C., Marrone, D

    Litke, K. C., Marrone, D. P., Spilker, J. S., et al. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 870, 80, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaf057

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaf057 2019

  76. [77]

    C., Marrone, D

    Litke, K. C., Marrone, D. P., Aravena, M., et al. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 928, 179, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac58f9

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac58f9 2022

  77. [78]

    C., Marrone, D

    Litke, K. C., Marrone, D. P., Aravena, M., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 949, 87, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acc93a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acc93a 2023

  78. [79]

    2014, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 52, 415, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125615

    Madau, P., & Dickinson, M. 2014, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 52, 415, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125615

    doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125615 2014

  79. [80]

    C., Cormier, D., Hony, S., et al

    Madden, S. C., Cormier, D., Hony, S., et al. 2020, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 643, A141, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038860

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202038860 2020

  80. [81]

    M., Casey, C

    Manning, S. M., Casey, C. M., Zavala, J. A., et al. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 925, 23, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac366a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac366a 2022

Showing first 80 references.

This paper was first reviewed by deepseek-v4-flash on August 5, 2026.