Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 99 references

A broad HeII line in a metal-poor dwarf galaxy points to fast radiative shocks, not stars or an AGN.

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 ↗

In CGCG 007-025, high-resolution spectroscopy resolves a kinematically distinct, asymmetric HeII line and line ratios that imply fast radiative shocks at 250-300 km/s, and shows the claimed [FeX] coronal detection is a SiII line.

T0 review reviewed 2026-08-05 challenge →

load-bearing objection Strong high-resolution dataset; shock claim rests on under-documented HeII component attribution. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2508.18160 v1 pith:5SKQVNYC submitted 2025-08-25 astro-ph.GA

Shocks and complex chemodynamics in the metal-poor starburst galaxy CGCG 007-025 revealed through high-resolution echelle spectroscopy

Macarena G. del Valle-Espinosa , Vital Fern\'andez , Rub\'en S\'anchez-Janssen , Ricardo Amor\'in , Karla Z. Arrellano-C\'ordova , Konstantina Boutsia This is my paper
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords CGCG 007-025echelle spectroscopydwarf starburst galaxiesHeII emissionradiative shocksdirect-method metallicityemission-line kinematicsmetal-poor galaxies
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

Using Magellan/MIKE echelle spectroscopy at resolving power about 40,000, the paper dissects the brightest star-forming knot of the nearby starburst dwarf CGCG 007-025 into up to four kinematic components. It derives a direct-method oxygen abundance of 12+log(O/H)=7.77±0.03 and shows that sulfur, argon, and neon relative to oxygen match Milky Way and Magellanic Cloud values. The central claim is about the HeII λ4686 line: its width (σ≈33–35 km/s), red asymmetry, and the flux ratio HeII/Hβ=0.13±0.01, together with the absence of [NeV] λ3426, match the precursor of a fast radiative shock travelling at 250–300 km/s in a low-metallicity (SMC-like) medium. If correct, the HeII emission is produced by the photoionisation front ahead of the shock, not by Wolf-Rayet stars, X-ray binaries, or an accreting black hole, and unresolved lower-resolution measurements would average over components and hide the shock signal.

Core claim

The paper argues that the HeII λ4686 emission in the brightest star-forming region of CGCG 007-025 originates in the precursor of a fast radiative shock, with shock velocity constrained to 250–300 km/s. The argument uses the fact that HeII is resolved as a single wide component with σ≈33–35 km/s, matching the intermediate kinematic component of Hβ and [OIII], and that the intermediate-component ratios HeII/Hβ=0.13±0.01 and [OIII]/Hβ=6.3±0.3, combined with a non-detection of [NeV] λ3426, are reproduced only by precursor-only shock models at SMC metallicity. The same high-resolution data also resolve the 6371 Å feature previously reported as coronal [FeX]; the authors identify it as the SiII λ

What carries the argument

The load-bearing tool is high-resolution echelle spectroscopy (R≈40,000) combined with multi-Gaussian decomposition of each emission line into narrow (σ≈14 km/s), intermediate (σ≈37 km/s), broad (σ≈200 km/s), and sometimes secondary narrow components. The HeII flux is assigned to the intermediate kinematic component, and the line ratios of that component are compared against the shock-plus-precursor models of Allen et al. (2008). The two-region ionisation model used for chemical abundances treats a low-ionisation zone (O+, N+, S+, S2+, Ar2+) and a high-ionisation zone (O2+, Ne2+, Ar3+), with direct-method electron temperatures from [OIII] λ4363, [SIII] λ6312, and related auroral lines.

Load-bearing premise

The HeII line is assumed to come from the same intermediate kinematic component used to measure Hβ and [OIII], so the HeII/Hβ ratio that selects the shock velocity depends on that assignment; if HeII arises in a separate gas phase, the ratio and the inferred shock speed would change.

What would settle it

A deeper, high-resolution spectrum that detects the predicted broad pedestal (σ≈300–1000 km/s) of Hβ or [OIII] and finds it absent would contradict the fast-shock scenario, as would a resolved measurement showing HeII following the narrow (σ≈14 km/s) component velocities instead of the intermediate component. A positive detection of [NeV] λ3426 in the intermediate component at a level consistent with the shock models would also falsify the precursor-only match.

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

If this is right

  • Lower-resolution measurements of CGCG 007-025, which yield integrated HeII/Hβ=0.012±0.003, blend the kinematic components and obscure the shock signature; component-resolved spectroscopy is needed to identify ionisation mechanisms.
  • The earlier claimed [FeX] λ6374 detection in this galaxy is reassigned to SiII λ6371, so the case for an intermediate-mass black hole in CGCG 007-025 is not supported by the echelle data.
  • Fast radiative shocks should be considered a viable source of HeII emission in metal-poor starbursts, alongside Wolf-Rayet stars and X-ray binaries, especially when the line appears broadened or asymmetric.
  • The direct-method abundances place the region at 12+log(O/H)=7.77±0.03, with log(S/O), log(Ar/O), and log(Ne/O) consistent with values in the Milky Way and Magellanic Clouds, reinforcing the view that alpha-element ratios are roughly constant across environments.
  • The dataset demonstrates that echelle spectroscopy can disentangle multiple ionisation and kinematic components in local high-redshift analogues, providing a path to interpret unresolved JWST-era spectra of distant galaxies.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If fast shocks are common in low-metallicity starbursts, unresolved HeII-based diagnostics of stellar populations or AGN activity may systematically underestimate shock contributions; this can be tested by applying multi-component fitting to other echelle surveys of dwarf galaxies.
  • The shock precursor model makes specific predictions for other intermediate-component line ratios, such as [OII]/Hβ and [NeIII]/Hβ, which could be checked against the same spectra to confirm the precursor identification.
  • A deeper observation reaching the predicted broad shock pedestal (σ≈300–1000 km/s) in Hβ or [OIII] would provide a direct kinematic confirmation of the 250–300 km/s shock velocity, since the current data place that signature below the continuum noise.
  • The secondary redshifted narrow component seen along the same line of sight may trace an outflow or a separate clump; if shock and outflow are related, spatially resolved velocity maps could link the shock speed to large-scale gas motions.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. Using Magellan/MIKE echelle spectroscopy (R≈40,000, 3350–9410 Å) of the brightest star-forming region in CGCG 007-025, the authors simultaneously model 30 emission lines with a Bayesian two-zone ionization model. They derive electron densities and temperatures, a direct-method metallicity 12+log(O/H)=7.77±0.03, and metal-to-oxygen ratios (S/O, Ar/O, Ne/O, Fe/O) that largely agree with independent lower-resolution CLASSY measurements. The line profiles are decomposed into narrow, intermediate, and broad kinematic components, plus a redshifted secondary narrow component for the brightest lines. The central new claim is that HeII λ4686 is broad (σ≈33–35 km/s) and asymmetric, and that the intermediate-component ratios HeII/Hβ≈0.13 and [OIII]/Hβ≈6.3, together with the absence of [NeV] λ3426, match the precursor-only, SMC-metallicity radiative shock models of Allen et al. (2008), implying a shock velocity v_sh=250–300 km/s. The paper also argues that the previously reported [FeX] detection is a misidentification with SiII λ6371.

Significance. If the shock interpretation holds, the paper makes a strong case that high-resolution échelle spectroscopy can separate a shock precursor from the photoionized HII region in a metal-poor starburst, providing a natural explanation for strong HeII emission without invoking Wolf-Rayet stars, HMXBs, or an AGN/IMBH. The chemical abundance analysis is carefully cross-checked against previous MODS/LBT and MUSE results, and the agreement gives confidence in the data reduction and Bayesian fitting. The reinterpretation of the [FeX] line as SiII is a useful, concrete result. The main scientific value is therefore two-fold: a high-quality chemodynamical benchmark for a local high-redshift analogue, and a falsifiable shock/precursor interpretation that can be tested with similar observations. The latter claim is, however, currently not fully supported by the published fit tables, because the component attribution of the HeII flux is not documented at the same level as the Hβ decomposition.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4.1, §5.4, Table B1] The load-bearing ratio HeII/Hβ=0.13 is not supported by the published fit tables. Table B1 lists HeII λ4686 as a single Gaussian (flux 5.44±0.57, σ=0.51 Å), while Hβ is decomposed into narrow (397.05), intermediate (40.46), and secondary red components. The quoted 0.13 is simply 5.44/40.46, i.e. it assumes that all HeII flux belongs to the intermediate Hβ component. But §4.1 and Figure 4 state that the HeII profile is asymmetric and requires an additional redshifted Gaussian at ≈+55 km/s with σ≈20 km/s; the flux of this component is not given in any table. If that red excess is included in the 5.44 value, the numerator is not purely the intermediate-component HeII flux; if it is excluded, the decomposition is missing. Since the Allen+08 grid comparison is sensitive to factors of ~2 in HeII/Hβ (Fig. 6, top row), please provide the full HeII decomposition (core, red excess, and any narrow/
  2. [§5.4, Fig. 6] The exclusion of LMC/solar metallicities and of the shock and precursor+shock columns rests on the non-detection of [NeV] λ3426. The paper shows a hatched 3σ band in Fig. 6, but no numerical 3σ upper limit for [NeV]/Hβ is quoted in the text or in any table, and it is not stated explicitly that the limit applies to the intermediate kinematic component. To make the model-selection step reproducible, give the measured noise and the resulting 3σ upper limit on [NeV] λ3426/Hβ, and state which component it refers to. Without this quantitative limit, the claim that only the SMC-metallicity precursor branch matches the data is not fully documented.
  3. [§5.4, last two paragraphs] The paper argues that at v_sh=250–300 km/s the shock itself would produce line widths of 300–1000 km/s and is therefore lost in the continuum noise, while the observed σ≈35 km/s component is the precursor. This is a plausible two-phase interpretation, but no model prediction or reference-based estimate is given for the expected precursor line width, only a qualitative reference to Izotov et al. (2012). Since the same intermediate component is also used for the [OIII]/Hβ ratio, the reader should be able to check that the measured σ≈33–37 km/s for Hβ, [OIII], and HeII is consistent with a common precursor, rather than with an unrelated second photoionized component. A short quantitative comparison would materially strengthen the component attribution.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract and §2] The abstract states R∼50,000 while §2.1 reports a measured resolution of 7.8–9.1 km/s (about R≈40,000). Please harmonize the resolving-power statement.
  2. [General] Typographical issues: 'histrograms' in the Figure 3 caption; 'Michgigan' in the second affiliation; 'CGCG 00-025' in §5.2 should read CGCG 007-025.
  3. [Fig. 6] The y-axis labels use 'HeII/H' and '[OIII]/H', but the text and caption refer to HeII/Hβ and [OIII]/Hβ. Use consistent notation.
  4. [Data availability] The data availability statement says the data are 'available in the article as tables.' It would be useful to state whether the reduced MIKE spectra will be deposited in a public archive, since the kinematic decomposition and the [NeV] limit would benefit from independent re-analysis.
  5. [Appendix A/B] The figure and table appendices are not numbered as separate items in the text; adding explicit references (e.g., 'Figure A1', 'Table B1') at first use would help the reader.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the shock interpretation is an external-model comparison against measured line ratios; self-citations are methodological and non-load-bearing.

full rationale

We find no circular derivation. The central claim—that HeII λ4686 in the brightest star-forming region originates from fast radiative shocks at 250–300 km/s—is an inference from measured emission-line ratios (HeII/Hβ=0.13±0.01, [OIII]/Hβ=6.3±0.3, and no [NeV] λ3426 detection) compared against the published, external MAPPINGS shock grid of Allen et al. (2008) in Sect. 5.4 and Fig. 6. The ratios are observed fluxes from Table B1; they are not fitted parameters, and the shock velocity is read from where the measured bands intersect the model curves, not solved from an equation that also defines the input. The kinematic attribution of HeII to the intermediate component is made on the measured line width (σ≈35 km/s versus σ_medium≈37 km/s; Sect. 4.1, Fig. 3) before any shock model is invoked. The only caveat is that the red-asymmetric excess of HeII (Sect. 4.1, Fig. 4) is not given a tabulated flux, so the numerator of the ratio rests on the assumption that the primary intermediate-width component carries the HeII flux used; this is a data-analysis robustness concern, not circularity, because it does not make the model output equivalent to the input. Self-citations (Fernández et al. 2018, 2019; Papers I and II) are used for the Bayesian abundance sampler, an ICF calibration, and comparison with MUSE data, but none is the load-bearing step for the shock conclusion; the abundance results are independently benchmarked against CLASSY/MODS (Arellano-Córdova et al. 2022a) and agree. No equation in the paper reduces to a fitted value or to an author-imported uniqueness condition.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

5 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The shock interpretation depends on observed line ratios (not fitted) and external shock grids (Allen et al. 2008), so the circularity burden is low. The fitted quantities (temperatures, density, extinction, ionic abundances) are standard direct-method outputs; they are needed for the abundances but do not themselves set the shock velocity. The two-zone ionization assumption and the ICF calibrations are drawn from prior literature, including co-authored papers, but are applied as external calibrations.

free parameters (5)
  • T_low (low-ionisation zone temperature) = 15100 (+700/-500) K
    Fitted by the Bayesian sampler to the [OIII]4363 and other auroral/nebular line ratios; used to compute ionic abundances in the low-ionisation zone.
  • T_high (high-ionisation zone temperature) = 15900 (+500/-200) K
    Fitted by the Bayesian sampler; used for O2+ and other high-ionisation ions.
  • n_e (electron density) = 250 (+60/-30) cm^-3
    Fitted from [SII] and [OII] doublets; used for all zones. Additional densities from [ClIII] and [ArIV] are reported but not used in abundances.
  • c(Hbeta) extinction = 0.25 (+0.08/-0.07)
    Fitted from Balmer and Paschen decrements relative to Hbeta; applied as 10^{-c(Hbeta) f(lambda)}.
  • Ionic abundances (O+, O2+, N+, S+, S2+, Ar2+, Ar3+, Ne2+, Fe2+, He+) = see Table 3
    Derived from simultaneous Bayesian fit to 30 line fluxes; used for O/H, S/O, Ar/O, Ne/O, Fe/O.
axioms (5)
  • standard math Atomic data and emissivities used in the Bayesian sampler are correct
    Relies on Fernández et al. (2019) sampler and its underlying atomic data; not detailed in this paper (Section 3.2).
  • domain assumption Two-zone ionisation model assumption
    Ions O+, N+, S+, S2+, Ar2+ share T_low; y+, O2+, Ar3+ share T_high; uniform n_e across zones (Section 3.2).
  • domain assumption Allen et al. (2008) shock models with B=0.5 μG and grids at SMC, LMC, solar metallicities are applicable to this region
    Used to infer shock velocity from HeII/Hβ, [OIII]/Hβ, [NeV]/Hβ (Section 5.4).
  • domain assumption ICF calibrations from Fernández et al. (2018) (Eq. 2) and Amayo et al. (2021) are valid for this object
    Applied to compute total S, Ar, Ne abundances (Section 4.2).
  • domain assumption The HeII 4686 line is kinematically a single component belonging to the intermediate component family
    The red-wing excess is modelled separately, but the main HeII is compared to Hbeta medium component (Section 5.4).

reviewed 2026-08-05 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Shocks and complex chemodynamics in the metal-poor starburst galaxy CGCG 007-025 revealed through high-resolution echelle spectroscopy." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5SKQVNYC

@misc{pith2026250818160,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Shocks and complex chemodynamics in the metal-poor starburst galaxy CGCG 007-025 revealed through high-resolution echelle spectroscopy},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5SKQVNYC}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.18160}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
abstract

We use Magellan/MIKE echelle spectroscopy to conduct an in-depth chemodynamical analysis of the most luminous star-forming region within the metal-poor starburst dwarf galaxy CGCG 007-025. Leveraging the exceptional high resolution (R$\sim$50,000) and broad wavelength coverage, we apply Bayesian inference to simultaneously model the fluxes of 30 emission lines spanning the wavelength range 3400-9200\AA. Employing a two-region ionisation model, we characterise various gas properties including electron temperature, electron density, and chemical abundances across different elements. Our direct-method inferred metallicity yields $\rm 12+\log(O/H)=7.77\pm0.03$, placing the galaxy in the metal-poor regime. Furthermore, Metal-to-Oxygen ratios such as log(S/O), log(Ne/O) or log(Ar/O) are in full agreement with the values derived for the Milky Way, consistent with expectations from stellar evolutionary models. The brightest emission lines are kinematically complex, with modelling requiring up to four distinct components. The exceptional resolution and signal-to-noise ratio of the data unveil asymmetric and wide ($\sigma_{HeII} \approx$ 35km/s) HeII$\lambda$4686 emission. The flux ratio of this nebular line, together with the absence of other high ionisation species such as [NeV]$\lambda$3426, indicates the presence of fast radiative shocks. This dataset underscores the capability of echelle spectroscopy in delivering comprehensive chemodynamical analyses of starbursts in the Local Volume.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2508.18160 by Karla Z. Arrellano-C\'ordova, Konstantina Boutsia, Macarena G. del Valle-Espinosa, Ricardo Amor\'in, Rub\'en S\'anchez-Janssen, Vital Fern\'andez.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: HST/WFC3 colour image created with the F275W, F336W, F435W, F606W, F657N, F875W filters. The white box indicates the location of the slit. observations. The spectral resolution, defined as the FWHM of the arc lines, varied from 0.09 to 0.12 Å (about 7.8 kms−1 ) in the blue, and from 0.16 to 0.24 Å (about 9.1 kms−1 ) in the red. The observations were carried out in three different nights, with a total time … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Top panel: MIKE spectrum (black-solid line) at the location of the emission lines [O iii]𝜆5007 and He i𝜆5015. The location of both lines is marked in the plot. The narrow component for these emission lines is displayed with an orange-dashed line. In the case of [O iii]𝜆5007, a secondary narrow peak redshifted from the main peak is visible. Bottom panel: raw 2D echellogram zoomed in around the [O iii]𝜆5007 … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Zoom around the He ii𝜆4686, [Ar iv]𝜆4711 and He i𝜆4713 lines. Note that the He ii primary component, modelling the core of the line, is broader than the other nearby emission lines in the same echelle order (such as [Ariv]). Moreover, the HeII displays an asymmetry towards the red. This excess of emission can be modelled with a gaussian component, however its kinematical properties can not be associated wi… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Spectral window from 6340 to 6380Å. Marked with vertical lines are the rest-frame position of the emission lines known in this wavelength range, namely the [O i]𝜆6363 line, Si ii𝜆𝜆6347,6371 doublet and the [Fe x]𝜆6374 line. The black line represents the reduced spectrum, with the best fit model displayed as a dashed-orange line and the residuals in solid-green. At the echelle resolution, the peak at 6371.4… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Production of He ii𝜆4686/H𝛽 (top), [O iii]𝜆5007/H𝛽 (middle) and [Ne v]𝜆3426/H𝛽 (bottom) depending on the velocity of the shock as modelled by Allen et al. (2008). The left column correspond to precursor only models, the central column to shock only models and the right column to the addition of precursor and shock. The solid-cyan line corresponds to the SMC metallicity models, the dashed-teal to the LMC, a… view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

99 extracted references · 13 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    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.state := if if FUNCTION not #0 #1 if FUNCTION and 'skip pop #0 if FUNCTION or pop #1...

  2. [2]

    Ahumada R., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/ab929e , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJS..249....3A 249, 3

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab929e 2020

  3. [3]

    Alarie A., Morisset C., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.22201/ia.01851101p.2019.55.02.21 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019RMxAA..55..377A 55, 377

    doi:10.22201/ia.01851101p.2019.55.02.21 2019

  4. [4]

    G., Groves B

    Allen M. G., Groves B. A., Dopita M. A., Sutherland R. S., Kewley L. J., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1086/589652 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJS..178...20A 178, 20

    doi:10.1086/589652 2008

  5. [5]

    Amayo A., Delgado-Inglada G., Stasi \'n ska G., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab1467 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.505.2361A 505, 2361

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1467 2021

  6. [6]

    O., P \'e rez-Montero E., V \' lchez J

    Amor \' n R. O., P \'e rez-Montero E., V \' lchez J. M., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/715/2/L128 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...715L.128A 715, L128

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/715/2/l128 2010

  7. [7]

    M., Papaderos P., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/749/2/185 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...749..185A 749, 185

    Amor \' n R., P \'e rez-Montero E., V \' lchez J. M., Papaderos P., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/749/2/185 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...749..185A 749, 185

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/749/2/185 2012

  8. [8]

    Z., Esteban C., Garc \' a-Rojas J., M \'e ndez-Delgado J

    Arellano-C \'o rdova K. Z., Esteban C., Garc \' a-Rojas J., M \'e ndez-Delgado J. E., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa1523 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.496.1051A 496, 1051

    doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1523 2020

  9. [9]

    Z., et al., 2022a, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7854 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...935...74A 935, 74

    Arellano-C \'o rdova K. Z., et al., 2022a, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7854 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...935...74A 935, 74

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac7854

  10. [10]

    Z., et al., 2022b, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ac9ab2 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...940L..23A 940, L23

    Arellano-C \'o rdova K. Z., et al., 2022b, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ac9ab2 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...940L..23A 940, L23

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac9ab2 2041

  11. [11]

    Z., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad34cf , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...968...98A 968, 98

    Arellano-C \'o rdova K. Z., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad34cf , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...968...98A 968, 98

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad34cf 2024

  12. [12]

    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

  13. [13]

    A., Erb D

    Berg D. A., Erb D. K., Henry R. B. C., Skillman E. D., McQuinn K. B. W., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab020a , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...874...93B 874, 93

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab020a 2019

  14. [14]

    A., Chisholm J., Erb D

    Berg D. A., Chisholm J., Erb D. K., Skillman E. D., Pogge R. W., Olivier G. M., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac141b , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...922..170B 922, 170

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac141b 2021

  15. [15]

    A., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/ac6c03 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJS..261...31B 261, 31

    Berg D. A., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/ac6c03 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJS..261...31B 261, 31

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac6c03 2022

  16. [16]

    A., Gunnels S

    Bernstein R., Shectman S. A., Gunnels S. M., Mochnacki S., Athey A. E., 2003, in Iye M., Moorwood A. F. M., eds, Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series Vol. 4841, Instrument Design and Performance for Optical/Infrared Ground-based Telescopes. pp 1694--1704, @doi 10.1117/12.461502

    doi:10.1117/12.461502 2003

  17. [17]

    D., Geha M

    Bradford J. D., Geha M. C., Blanton M. R., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/809/2/146 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...809..146B 809, 146

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/809/2/146 2015

  18. [18]

    Brinchmann J., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad1704 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.525.2087B 525, 2087

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stad1704 2023

  19. [19]

    J., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202346107 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023A&A...677A.115C 677, A115

    Cameron A. J., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202346107 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023A&A...677A.115C 677, A115

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346107 2023

  20. [20]

    M., Satyapal S., Abel N

    Cann J. M., Satyapal S., Abel N. P., Ricci C., Secrest N. J., Blecha L., Gliozzi M., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aac64a , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...861..142C 861, 142

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aac64a 2018

  21. [21]

    Cardamone C., et al., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15383.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009MNRAS.399.1191C 399, 1191

    arXiv 2009

  22. [22]

    V., Pogge R

    Croxall K. V., Pogge R. W., Berg D. A., Skillman E. D., Moustakas J., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/808/1/42 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...808...42C 808, 42

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/808/1/42 2015

  23. [23]

    V., Pogge R

    Croxall K. V., Pogge R. W., Berg D. A., Skillman E. D., Moustakas J., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-637X/830/1/4 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...830....4C 830, 4

    doi:10.3847/0004-637x/830/1/4 2016

  24. [24]

    arXiv:2304.08516

    Curti M., et al., 2023a, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2304.08516 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023arXiv230408516C p. arXiv:2304.08516

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2304.08516

  25. [25]

    Curti M., et al., 2023b, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac2737 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.518..425C 518, 425

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stac2737

  26. [26]

    B., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201527895 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016A&A...596A..97D 596, A97

    De Cia A., Ledoux C., Mattsson L., Petitjean P., Srianand R., Gavignaud I., Jenkins E. B., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201527895 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016A&A...596A..97D 596, A97

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201527895 2016

  27. [27]

    J., Liske J., Driver S

    De Propris R., Conselice C. J., Liske J., Driver S. P., Patton D. R., Graham A. W., Allen P. D., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/520488 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...666..212D 666, 212

    doi:10.1086/520488 2007

  28. [28]

    I., Zamora S., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac387 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.511.4377D 511, 4377

    D \' az \'A . I., Zamora S., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac387 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.511.4377D 511, 4377

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stac387 2022

  29. [29]

    Dom \' nguez-Guzm \'a n G., Rodr \' guez M., Garc \' a-Rojas J., Esteban C., Toribio San Cipriano L., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac2974 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.517.4497D 517, 4497

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stac2974 2022

  30. [30]

    T., 2011, Physics of the Interstellar and Intergalactic Medium

    Draine B. T., 2011, Physics of the Interstellar and Intergalactic Medium

    2011

  31. [31]

    Feltre A., Charlot S., Gutkin J., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv2794 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.456.3354F 456, 3354

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2794 2016

  32. [32]

    I., Terlevich R., Rosales-Ortega F

    Fern \'a ndez V., Terlevich E., D \' az A. I., Terlevich R., Rosales-Ortega F. F., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty1206 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.478.5301F 478, 5301

    doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1206 2018

  33. [33]

    I., Terlevich R., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz1433 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.487.3221F 487, 3221

    Fern \'a ndez V., Terlevich E., D \' az A. I., Terlevich R., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz1433 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.487.3221F 487, 3221

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stz1433 2019

  34. [34]

    M., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab3150 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.511.2515F 511, 2515

    Fern \'a ndez V., Amor \' n R., P \'e rez-Montero E., Papaderos P., Kehrig C., V \' lchez J. M., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab3150 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.511.2515F 511, 2515

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab3150 2022

  35. [35]

    G., Papaderos P., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad198 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.520.3576F 520, 3576

    Fern \'a ndez V., Amor \' n R., Sanchez-Janssen R., del Valle-Espinosa M. G., Papaderos P., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad198 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.520.3576F 520, 3576

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad198 2023

  36. [36]

    G., Izotov Y

    Guseva N. G., Izotov Y. I., Stasi \'n ska G., Fricke K. J., Henkel C., Papaderos P., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201016291 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011A&A...529A.149G 529, A149

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201016291 2011

  37. [37]

    Gutkin J., Charlot S., Bruzual G., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw1716 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.462.1757G 462, 1757

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stw1716 2016

  38. [38]

    B., Heathcote S

    Hamuy M., Suntzeff N. B., Heathcote S. R., Walker A. R., Gigoux P., Phillips M. M., 1994, @doi [ ] 10.1086/133417 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1994PASP..106..566H 106, 566

    work page doi:10.1086/133417 1994

  39. [39]

    Haridas Nair P., 2016, Lineid Plot , Zenodo, @doi 10.5281/zenodo.1069584

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.1069584 2016

  40. [40]

    C., Hopkins P

    Hayward C. C., Hopkins P. F., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw2888 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.465.1682H 465, 1682

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2888 2017

  41. [41]

    C., Micheva G., Weilbacher P

    Herenz E. C., Micheva G., Weilbacher P. M., Monreal-Ibero A., Hayes M., Anders F., Rivinius T., 2023, @doi [Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society] 10.3847/2515-5172/acd69e , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023RNAAS...7...99H 7, 99

    work page doi:10.3847/2515-5172/acd69e 2023

  42. [42]

    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

    doi:10.1109/mcse.2007.55 2007

  43. [43]

    Isobe Y., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad09be , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...959..100I 959, 100

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad09be 2023

  44. [44]

    I., Thuan T

    Izotov Y. I., Thuan T. X., 1999, @doi [ ] 10.1086/306708 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999ApJ...511..639I 511, 639

    doi:10.1086/306708 1999

  45. [45]

    I., Stasi \'n ska G., Meynet G., Guseva N

    Izotov Y. I., Stasi \'n ska G., Meynet G., Guseva N. G., Thuan T. X., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20053763 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006A&A...448..955I 448, 955

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20053763 2006

  46. [47]

    I., Guseva N

    Izotov Y. I., Guseva N. G., Fricke K. J., Henkel C., Schaerer D., Thuan T. X., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202039772 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021A&A...646A.138I 646, A138

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039772 2021

  47. [48]

    M., P \'e rez-Montero E., Iglesias-P \'a ramo J., Brinchmann J., Kunth D., Durret F., Bayo F

    Kehrig C., V \' lchez J. M., P \'e rez-Montero E., Iglesias-P \'a ramo J., Brinchmann J., Kunth D., Durret F., Bayo F. M., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/801/2/L28 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...801L..28K 801, L28

    doi:10.1088/2041-8205/801/2/l28 2015

  48. [49]

    M., Guerrero M

    Kehrig C., V \' lchez J. M., Guerrero M. A., Iglesias-P \'a ramo J., Hunt L. K., Duarte-Puertas S., Ramos-Larios G., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty1920 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.480.1081K 480, 1081

    doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1920 2018

  49. [50]

    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

    doi:10.1086/375502 2003

  50. [51]

    D., Illingworth G

    Kelson D. D., Illingworth G. D., van Dokkum P. G., Franx M., 2000, @doi [ ] 10.1086/308445 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000ApJ...531..159K 531, 159

    doi:10.1086/308445 2000

  51. [52]

    Y., Pustilnik S

    Kniazev A. Y., Pustilnik S. A., Grebel E. K., Lee H., Pramskij A. G., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1086/421519 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004ApJS..153..429K 153, 429

    work page doi:10.1086/421519 2004

  52. [53]

    Kourkchi E., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/abb66b , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...902..145K 902, 145

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abb66b 2020

  53. [54]

    Lecroq M., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad3838 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.527.9480L 527, 9480

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3838 2024

  54. [55]

    arXiv:1912.00844

    Lodders K., 2019, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.1912.00844 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019arXiv191200844L p. arXiv:1912.00844

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1912.00844 2019

  55. [56]

    Luo W., Yang X., Zhang Y., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/789/1/L16 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...789L..16L 789, L16

    doi:10.1088/2041-8205/789/1/l16 2014

  56. [57]

    arXiv:2209.02726

    Marasco A., et al., 2022, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022arXiv220902726M p. arXiv:2209.02726

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  57. [58]

    Mignoli M., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201220846 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013A&A...556A..29M 556, A29

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201220846 2013

  58. [59]

    Mingozzi M., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac952c , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...939..110M 939, 110

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac952c 2022

  59. [60]

    E., Hidalgo-G \'a mez A

    Miranda-P \'e rez B. E., Hidalgo-G \'a mez A. M., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/acdb4b , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...952...76M 952, 76

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acdb4b 2023

  60. [61]

    E., Latimer L

    Molina M., Reines A. E., Latimer L. J., Baldassare V., Salehirad S., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac1ffa , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...922..155M 922, 155

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac1ffa 2021

  61. [62]

    L., Kere s D., Faucher-Gigu \`e re C.-A., Hopkins P

    Muratov A. L., Kere s D., Faucher-Gigu \`e re C.-A., Hopkins P. F., Quataert E., Murray N., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv2126 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.454.2691M 454, 2691

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2126 2015

  62. [63]

    arXiv:2301.12825

    Nakajima K., Ouchi M., Isobe Y., Harikane Y., Zhang Y., Ono Y., Umeda H., Oguri M., 2023, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2301.12825 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023arXiv230112825N p. arXiv:2301.12825

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2301.12825 2023

  63. [64]

    Newville M., Stensitzki T., Allen D. B., Rawlik M., Ingargiola A., Nelson A., 2016, Lmfit: Non-Linear Least-Square Minimization and Curve-Fitting for Python , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1606.014 ( @eprint ascl 1606.014 )

    2016

  64. [65]

    M., Berg D

    Olivier G. M., Berg D. A., Chisholm J., Erb D. K., Pogge R. W., Skillman E. D., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac8f2c , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...938...16O 938, 16

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac8f2c 2022

  65. [66]

    E., Ferland G

    Osterbrock D. E., Ferland G. J., 2006, Astrophysics of gaseous nebulae and active galactic nuclei

    2006

  66. [67]

    Pagel B. E. J., Edmunds M. G., Fosbury R. A. E., Webster B. L., 1978, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/184.3.569 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1978MNRAS.184..569P 184, 569

    doi:10.1093/mnras/184.3.569 1978

  67. [68]

    Papaderos P., \"O stlin G., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201117551 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012A&A...537A.126P 537, A126

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201117551 2012

  68. [69]

    C., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev-astro-021820-120014 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ARA&A..58..363P 58, 363

    P \'e roux C., Howk J. C., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev-astro-021820-120014 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ARA&A..58..363P 58, 363

    doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-021820-120014 2020

  69. [70]

    Plat A., Charlot S., Bruzual G., Feltre A., Vidal-Garc \' a A., Morisset C., Chevallard J., Todt H., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz2616 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.490..978P 490, 978

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2616 2019

  70. [71]

    Reefe M., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/acb4e4 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...946L..38R 946, L38

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acb4e4 2023

  71. [72]

    H., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1086/429958 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005ApJ...626..900R 626, 900

    Rodr \' guez M., Rubin R. H., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1086/429958 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005ApJ...626..900R 626, 900

    doi:10.1086/429958 2005

  72. [73]

    Rogers N. S. J., Skillman E. D., Pogge R. W., Berg D. A., Croxall K. V., Bartlett J., Arellano-C \'o rdova K. Z., Moustakas J., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac947d , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...939...44R 939, 44

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac947d 2022

  73. [74]

    Roman-Duval J., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/abdeb6 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...910...95R 910, 95

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abdeb6 2021

  74. [75]

    B., Mu \ n oz-Tu \ n \'o n C., Garc \' a-Benito R., Nuza S

    S \'a nchez Almeida J., P \'e rez-Montero E., Morales-Luis A. B., Mu \ n oz-Tu \ n \'o n C., Garc \' a-Benito R., Nuza S. E., Kitaura F. S., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-637X/819/2/110 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...819..110S 819, 110

    doi:10.3847/0004-637x/819/2/110 2016

  75. [76]

    L., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/abf4c1 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...914...19S 914, 19

    Sanders R. L., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/abf4c1 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...914...19S 914, 19

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abf4c1 2021

  76. [77]

    L., Shapley A

    Sanders R. L., Shapley A. E., Topping M. W., Reddy N. A., Brammer G. B., 2023, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2303.08149 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023arXiv230308149S p. arXiv:2303.08149

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2303.08149 2023

  77. [78]

    D., Sembach K

    Savage B. D., Sembach K. R., 1996, @doi [ ] 10.1086/177919 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996ApJ...470..893S 470, 893

    doi:10.1086/177919 1996

  78. [79]

    Schaerer D., 1996, @doi [ ] 10.1086/310193 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996ApJ...467L..17S 467, L17

    doi:10.1086/310193 1996

  79. [80]

    I., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201935005 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019A&A...622L..10S 622, L10

    Schaerer D., Fragos T., Izotov Y. I., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201935005 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019A&A...622L..10S 622, L10

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201935005 2019

  80. [81]

    I., Naidu R., Guseva N

    Schaerer D., Marques-Chaves R., Barrufet L., Oesch P., Izotov Y. I., Naidu R., Guseva N. G., Brammer G., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202244556 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022A&A...665L...4S 665, L4

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244556 2022

Showing first 80 references.

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