Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 100 references

The paper argues that ADFS-KMTDOG-102, a hyperluminous dust-obscured galaxy at z=2.6, satisfies Little Red Dot selection criteria and is a lower-redshift analog with a more massive black hole.

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 ↗

A z=2.6 hyperluminous dust-obscured galaxy with an LRD-like SED hosts a ~10^10.2 Msun black hole, while the origin of its blue UV excess is left ambiguous.

T0 review reviewed 2026-08-05 challenge →

load-bearing objection Solid single-object spectroscopy with a likely artifact in the LRD analogy: line-contaminated B-band drives the claimed β_UV, and the paper itself supplies the evidence. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2508.19618 v1 pith:3KJTR5WC submitted 2025-08-27 astro-ph.GA

The BlueDOG at Cosmic Noon: A Possible Analog to Little Red Dots?

Seongjae Kim , Woong-Seob Jeong , Minjin Kim , Hyunsung D. Jun , Yujin Yang , Takao Nakagawa This is my paper
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords BlueDOGLittle Red Dotsdust-obscured galaxiesactive galactic nucleispectral energy distribution fittingsupermassive black holesLyman-alpha emissionhigh-redshift 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

This paper tries to establish that one specific hyperluminous dust-obscured galaxy, ADFS-KMTDOG-102 at redshift 2.6, looks like a Little Red Dot: its rest-frame ultraviolet and optical slopes fall inside the selection boxes that define LRDs in JWST surveys. If that holds, the 'little red dot' phenomenon is not confined to the z=5-8 frontier but also occurs at cosmic noon, in a galaxy that is far more massive than typical LRDs, with a black hole of about 10^10.2 solar masses. The galaxy's UV emission lines point to an AGN as the power source, and its Eddington ratio (~0.16) matches those of broad H-alpha LRDs. The paper leaves open what produces the blue UV continuum: a recent starburst or a small amount of scattered AGN light both fit the data.

Core claim

The central claim is that ADFS-KMTDOG-102 is a hyperluminous, heavily obscured AGN host at z=2.604 whose SED has the V shape of Little Red Dots: measured rest-frame slopes beta_UV=-2.04+-0.10 and beta_opt=1.12+-0.13 satisfy both Kocevski et al. (2024) and Barro et al. (2024) LRD criteria. The galaxy has log stellar mass ~12.3 Msun and log BH mass ~10.2 Msun derived from extinction-corrected broad H-alpha (consistent with C IV and 4.6 micron estimators), placing it 1.3 dex above the local BH-host scaling relation. Its UV line ratios (Lya/NV=2.04, NV/CIV=2.26) indicate AGN-dominated, metal-enriched BLR. The origin of the blue excess is unresolved: SED fitting favors a recent starburst (sSFR ov

What carries the argument

The load-bearing comparison is the pair of rest-frame power-law slopes, beta_UV and beta_opt, measured blueward and redward of 3645 A and placed on the LRD selection diagram of Kocevski et al. (2024) and Barro et al. (2024). Supporting machinery: broad H-alpha FWHM plus extinction-corrected luminosity feeding the Shen et al. (2011) virial estimator; CIGALE SED fitting with an AGN torus and polar dust that fixes E(B-V)_AGN~1.03 and f_AGN~0.95; and the Temple et al. (2021) QSO template used to test whether scattered light can account for the UV excess.

Load-bearing premise

The redshift depends on a cross-correlation of the continuum-subtracted, Ly-alpha-normalized spectrum with an SDSS quasar composite, because [O III] was destroyed by telluric absorption; if the template match is wrong, all rest-frame slopes, luminosities, and masses shift.

What would settle it

An independent redshift from a line outside the telluric gaps (e.g., CO(3-2), [C II] 158 micron, or H-beta/[O III] from space) would settle the LRD claim: if the derived z changes enough that beta_UV=-2.04 and beta_opt=1.12 leave the Kocevski/Barro regions, the analog fails. UV polarimetry would separately test the blue-excess origin: ~10% or higher polarization would favor scattered AGN light, while near-zero polarization would favor a starburst.

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

If this is right

  • A BlueDOG at z=2.6 can satisfy LRD selection criteria, so the LRD phenomenon extends to cosmic noon rather than being unique to z~5-8.
  • The BH mass is 2-3 orders of magnitude above typical LRDs while the Eddington ratio is similar (~0.16), implying comparable accretion states but much more massive seeds or earlier growth.
  • UV line ratios place the line emission in an AGN and suggest a nitrogen-overabundant BLR with Z~37 Z_sun from N V/C IV.
  • Emission lines contaminate broadband photometry: Ly-alpha alone is about 40% of the B-band flux, and Ly-alpha+N V about 60%, so broadband-derived SEDs of such objects need line corrections.
  • If the LRD analog holds, the heavily obscured, polar-dust AGN picture is the preferred one; models without polar dust demand implausible SFR>1000 Msun/yr.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • A straightforward test would re-run the Kocevski/Barro slope criteria on other hyperluminous DOGs and blue hot DOGs at z~2-3; many may qualify, shifting the demographics of LRDs toward more massive hosts.
  • Because the two viable UV-continuum explanations make different predictions, UV polarimetry can break the degeneracy: scattered AGN light should be polarized at the ~10% level, as seen in blue hot DOGs, while starburst light would be nearly unpolarized.
  • The unusually high implied metallicity (Z~37 Z_sun) likely reflects nitrogen enrichment on short timescales rather than bulk ISM metallicity; if true, the N V/C IV ratio is an enrichment-clock diagnostic for this class, not a simple abundance measure.
  • If independent redshift anchors confirm z~2.6, the 1.3 dex offset above the local BH-host relation suggests that by cosmic noon some galaxies already assembled BHs well ahead of their stellar mass; this would constrain seed growth models.
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

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper presents the discovery and multi-wavelength analysis of ADFS-KMTDOG-102, a hyperluminous dusty galaxy (BlueDOG) at z≈2.604 in ADF-S, based on new Gemini/GMOS and FLAMINGOS-2 spectroscopy plus archival photometry from optical to FIR. From CIGALE SED fitting the authors derive log M*/M⊙=12.3, L_bol≈8×10^13 L⊙, f_AGN≈0.95 and substantial nuclear extinction (E(B−V)_AGN≈1.03). Using broad Hα, C IV, and 4.6 μm luminosity, they estimate log MBH/M⊙≈10.0–10.2 with mutually consistent values. They measure rest-UV/optical slopes β_UV=−2.04±0.10 and β_opt=1.12±0.13 and argue these satisfy the JWST LRD selection criteria, proposing this object as a cosmic-noon analog of LRDs. They also use UV line ratios to argue for an AGN-powered BLR, infer high nitrogen abundance from N V/C IV, and discuss Lyα escape and the origin of the blue UV excess via recent star formation or scattered AGN light, leaving both scenarios open.

Significance. The object is intrinsically interesting and the paper brings a rare, well-characterized hyperluminous obscured AGN with a very massive BH at z~2.6. Strengths: three independent BH mass estimators; careful emission-line decomposition; spatially resolved Lyα; explicit caveats in the scattered-light modeling; and a clear statement that line contamination in the B-band is 60%. If the LRD analogy survives line correction, it would be an important datapoint. However, the analogy currently depends on an uncorrected B-band photometric point, and the reported slope may be an emission-line artifact. The formal SED uncertainties are also unrealistically small. These issues affect the central claims.

major comments (2)
  1. [§4.4, Fig. 5; §4.5.2, Table 2] The central LRD-analog claim rests on β_UV=−2.04±0.10. The B-band photometry (2.55 μJy) used as the blue anchor is, by the paper's own synthetic photometry, only ~40% continuum: Lyα contributes 40% and N V 21% of the total B-band flux. No line correction is applied before the slope measurement, and the CIGALE fit likely absorbs the line-boosted B-band into the continuum. Correcting the B-band continuum to ~1.0 μJy while keeping the R-band flux yields β_UV≈+1, far outside the LRD criterion β_UV<−1. The authors must recompute the UV and optical slopes using continuum-only photometry and re-evaluate the classification. This is not a detail; it determines whether the title claim survives.
  2. [§3.3, Table 3] The reported formal uncertainties from CIGALE, e.g., f_AGN=0.95±0.001 and E(B−V)_stellar=0.20±0.001, are grid/analysis artifacts rather than realistic errors. They propagate into the extinction-corrected luminosities used for the BH mass and Eddington ratio; the quoted log MBH errors (0.22–0.36 dex) are dominated by the adopted estimator scatter, but the SED-based extinction uncertainty itself is likely ≫0.06. Please provide a sensitivity test in which E(B−V)_AGN, f_AGN and the SFH/template choices are varied over physically plausible ranges, so a reader can judge the robustness of the BH mass and Eddington ratio.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§3.1] The redshift is determined via cross-correlation against an SDSS quasar composite because [O III] is lost. Since Lyα, N V, C IV, and Hα are all detected, please tabulate the individual line-based redshifts to verify the adopted z=2.604.
  2. [§4.4 and §4.5.2] The paper should state explicitly whether Fig. 5 uses line-corrected photometry. The current wording in §4.5.2 that line boosting is 'not significant on other broadbands' overlooks that the B-band is exactly the anchor used for β_UV.
  3. [Table 3] Typographical issue: 'Agemain' should be 'Age_main' in the table and its footnote for clarity.
  4. [References] McKinney et al. (2022) is cited as arXiv:2301.00017, which appears to be a 2023 preprint; please verify the year and publication status.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the object characterization rests on independent photometric/SED fits, external line-ratio calibrations, and three mutually consistent BH mass estimators; the line-contamination caveat is a correctness risk, not a circular step.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The redshift is measured by cross-correlating the continuum-subtracted spectrum against an external SDSS quasar composite (§3.1); while not ideal, it is not used as an input to any later fit in a way that would force the conclusions. The SED analysis (CIGALE, §3.3) is an openly labeled fit to independent multi-wavelength photometry, and the derived E(B−V)_AGN and f_AGN are then used only as inputs to extinction-correct the observed Hα and to construct the scattered-light model. The black-hole mass is estimated with three different empirical relations (Shen et al. 2011; Vestergaard & Peterson 2006; Kim et al. 2023). The first two are external; the third is a self-citation (M. Kim is a coauthor of Kim et al. 2023), but it is not load-bearing because the Hα- and C IV-based masses already agree, and the Kim et al. relation is an empirically calibrated estimator from other objects. The LRD classification is an observational comparison: the UV/optical slopes are measured from the SED/photometry and checked against the external Kocevski et al. (2024) and Barro et al. (2024) criteria (§4.4). The paper itself identifies the most serious threat to the β_UV measurement: its synthetic photometry (§4.5.2) shows Lyα+N V contribute ~60% of the B-band flux. That is a potential systematic error in the derived UV slope, but it is not a circularity: the paper nowhere defines the continuum slope in terms of the line fluxes, nor does it use the LRD classification to set up the SED fit. Similarly, the scattered-light model fixes E(B−V)_AGN from the SED fit and then finds L3000 > Lbol, an internal inconsistency that the authors explicitly use to disfavor a pure scattering origin (§4.5.3) — a self-consistency check, not a circular reduction. No load-bearing claim is equivalent by construction to its inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

8 free parameters · 7 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper's derived quantities are conditional on an extensive SED-model family and on empirical BH scaling relations calibrated on other AGN populations. The direct detection, redshift, and line measurements are more secure. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (8)
  • AGN reddening E(B-V)_AGN = 1.026 +/- 0.064
    Fitted by CIGALE SED; used to deredden H-alpha and 1350 A luminosities for BH mass estimates.
  • Stellar reddening E(B-V)_stellar = 0.20 +/- 0.001
    Fitted by CIGALE; sets attenuation of the stellar population and enters Ly-alpha escape fraction comparison.
  • AGN fraction f_AGN = 0.95 +/- 0.001
    Fitted by CIGALE; drives the conclusion that IR emission is AGN-dominated and that polar dust is needed.
  • Main stellar population age = 1.86 +/- 0.34 Gyr
    Fitted by CIGALE; supports the claim that old stellar population dominates over young population.
  • Star formation rate (SFR) = 278.2 +/- 51.6 Msun/yr
    Fitted by CIGALE; used for SFR-derived Ly-alpha escape fraction and starburst discussion.
  • Burst age = 12 Myr
    Best-fit burst age cited in Section 4.5.3 to argue sSFR within 10 Myr is about 6 times the 100 Myr value.
  • Scattered-light QSO normalization log(L3000) = 47.7 erg/s
    Free parameter in scattered-light modeling; exceeds SED-integrated Lbol, used by authors to disfavor pure scattering.
  • Scattered fraction f_scatt = 0.05%
    Free parameter in scattered-light modeling; value needed to reproduce the observed UV continuum excess.
axioms (7)
  • domain assumption Concordance flat LCDM cosmology with H0=70, Omega_L=0.7, Omega_M=0.3
    Stated in the introduction; used to convert observed fluxes to luminosities and to derive masses.
  • domain assumption Case B recombination with n_e=350 cm^-3 and T=10^4 K sets intrinsic Ly-alpha/H-alpha = 8.7
    Section 4.1.1; needed for the SFR-derived Ly-alpha escape fraction.
  • domain assumption NLR intrinsic Ly-alpha/H-alpha ratio of 11-16 (Gaskell & Ferland 1984)
    Section 4.1.2; used to estimate an upper limit on AGN Ly-alpha escape fraction.
  • domain assumption Empirical BH mass scaling relations (Shen 2011 H-alpha, Vestergaard & Peterson 2006 C IV, Kim 2023 H-alpha-4.6um) apply to this source
    Section 3.4; systematic scatter is added, but extrapolation to a hyperluminous obscured AGN is assumed valid.
  • domain assumption CIGALE model family is adequate: BC03 stellar templates, Chabrier IMF, Calzetti attenuation with R_V=4.05, SKIRTOR AGN with polar dust, Dale 2014 cold dust
    Section 3.3; all SED-derived properties are conditional on this model family and its priors.
  • domain assumption AGN is viewed face-on with inclination 0-30 degrees
    Section 3.3; assumed because broad H-alpha is observed, and it sets the AGN SED contribution and polar dust extinction.
  • domain assumption LRD selection criteria of Kocevski et al. (2024) and Barro et al. (2024) can be applied to the rest-frame UV and optical slopes of this object
    Section 4.4; the classification of the BlueDOG as an LRD analog depends on these empirical criteria.

reviewed 2026-08-05 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The BlueDOG at Cosmic Noon: A Possible Analog to Little Red Dots?." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/3KJTR5WC

@misc{pith2026250819618,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The BlueDOG at Cosmic Noon: A Possible Analog to Little Red Dots?},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/3KJTR5WC}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.19618}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
abstract

We discovered a hyperluminous dust-obscured galaxy with mysterious blue-excess emission (BlueDOG) in rest-frame UV of its spectral energy distribution (SED) from a multi-wavelength survey in the AKARI Deep Field - South (ADF-S). We present the results of SED analysis with multiwavelength photometric data and spectroscopic analysis, observed with Gemini-S/GMOS, FLAMINGOS-2, to explore the origin of blue-excess emission of a hyperluminous BlueDOG, ADFS-KMTDOG-102, at z=2.6. The SED analysis shows that this BlueDOG is a highly massive system (log $M_{*}$/$M_\odot=12.3$) with substantial extinction. Additionally, the proportion of the old stellar population exceeds that of the young stellar population, which suggests stellar evolution cumulated from the early universe. The mass of supermassive black hole (SMBH) estimated using the extinction-corrected broad H$\rm\alpha$ emission line yields log $M_{\rm BH}$/$M_\odot$=10.2. We discuss the similarity between the BlueDOG and 'Little Red Dots' (LRDs), recently discovered with the James Webb Space Telescope, showing SED shapes remarkably similar to those of LRDs. The UV emission line ratios indicate that the emission lines are primarily powered by the central active galactic nuclei (AGN). In contrast, the origin of the blue-excess UV continuum remains ambiguous, since both recent star formation and AGN-induced scattered light are viable explanations, based on the results from the SED fitting and scattered light modeling.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2508.19618 by Hyunsung D. Jun, Minjin Kim, Seongjae Kim, Takao Nakagawa, Woong-Seob Jeong, Yujin Yang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Optical color composite image using KMTNet B, R, and I bands. The positions of longslits from GMOS (blue) and FLAMINGOS-2 (red) are overlaid with the slit width corresponding to each instrument. In the GMOS observa￾tion, we aligned the slit to include the center of the Blue￾DOG and the blue-excess region where the irregular struc￾ture is prominent in the B-band image. Blue and red arrows represent the posi… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Rest-frame 1-D and 2-D spectrum for the BlueDOG, ADFS-KMTDOG-102, from Gemini-S/GMOS (left and center) and Gemini-S/FLAMINGOS-2 (right). The spectrum and error are plotted as black and gray color in the three panels, respec￾tively. The locations of detected lines are marked with dashed lines and texts. The spiky points with a greater difference than 3σ are clipped, which are shown in brown. (left) The best… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Best-fit SED for the BlueDOG at z=2.604, ADF￾S-KMTDOG-102. The green, orange, and red lines represent attenuated stellar component, AGN component with polar dust, and dust component related to star formation, respec￾tively. The observed fluxes with error bars at each band are plotted in blue squares. Also, the red points are fluxes of the best-fit model at each band. 4. DISCUSSION 4.1. Lyα escape fraction … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Lyα escape fraction as a function of E(B−V) derived from SED fitting. We present the Lyα escape frac￾tion (f Lyα esc ) of the BlueDOG by dividing into SFR and AGN cases in orange and red circles, respectively. The upper limit of f Lyα esc in the AGN case is estimated with a narrow compo￾nent of Hα assuming NLR condition. Also, the SFR-derived f Lyα esc of the BlueDOG is located near the relation of LAEs at… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (Left) SEDs of the BlueDOG and LRDs are overplotted. The observed mags of the BlueDOG are shown in black squares. Solid lines are best fit SED for the BlueDOG (gray: total SED; green: stellar; orange: AGN). Two LRDs shown as triangle and circle represent each type of LRDs from Kocevski et al. (2024). Their mags are normalized to the BlueDOG at 1500˚A by adding normalization mag written at each marker of LR… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Modeling of the scattered light scenario using an intrinsic QSO template from Temple et al. (2021). The observed spectra are shown from GMOS and FLAMINGOS-2 in black. For comparison, the intrinsic QSO SED is displayed in orange, scaled down by a factor of 1/20 for visualization. The red curve represents the reddened SED attenuated using E(B − V )AGN value derived from the CIGALE SED fitting. The blue SED s… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: N V/C IV line ratio as a function of redshift. Our measurement is shown in a red filled circle. Line ratios from other literature are plotted with various symbols. (gray shade) core ERQ samples (Hamann et al. 2017). (inverted triangle) N-loud quasars at z∼2-3.5 (Batra & Baldwin 2014). (green triangle and pentagon) high redshift quasars (Diet￾rich & Wilhelm-Erkens 2000; Dietrich et al. 2003). (blue square) … view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Lyα spatial distribution analysis. (top left) 2D spectrum of Lyα emission is shown as gray scale and contours. ∆arcsec of 0 corresponds to the position of the BlueDOG. We divided the spatial region of the Lyα into color-coded dashed lines with blue, red, and yellow. The orange solid line is plotted with the peak position of each divided spatial region. (top right) Spatial profile comparison with Lyα and Hα… 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

100 extracted references · 12 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Abbott, T. M. C., Abdalla, F. B., Allam, S., et al. 2018, ApJS, 239, 18, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aae9f0

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/aae9f0 2018

  2. [2]

    M., Brandt, W

    Alexander, D. M., Brandt, W. N., Smail, I., et al. 2008, AJ, 135, 1968, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/135/5/1968 14 Kim et al

    doi:10.1088/0004-6256/135/5/1968 2008

  3. [3]

    2017, ApJ, 850, 178, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa960f

    Ao, Y., Matsuda, Y., Henkel, C., et al. 2017, ApJ, 850, 178, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa960f

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa960f 2017

  4. [4]

    J., Eisenhardt, P

    Assef, R. J., Eisenhardt, P. R. M., Stern, D., et al. 2015, ApJ, 804, 27, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/804/1/27

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/804/1/27 2015

  5. [5]

    J., Walton, D

    Assef, R. J., Walton, D. J., Brightman, M., et al. 2016, ApJ, 819, 111, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/819/2/111

    doi:10.3847/0004-637x/819/2/111 2016

  6. [6]

    J., Brightman, M., Walton, D

    Assef, R. J., Brightman, M., Walton, D. J., et al. 2020, ApJ, 897, 112, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab9814

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab9814 2020

  7. [7]

    J., Bauer, F

    Assef, R. J., Bauer, F. E., Blain, A. W., et al. 2022, ApJ, 934, 101, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac77fc Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ ocz, B. M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f Astropy Collaborati...

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac77fc 2022

  8. [8]

    Baggen, J. F. W., van Dokkum, P., Brammer, G., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2408.07745, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2408.07745

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2408.07745 2024

  9. [10]

    2016, ApJS, 223, 1, doi: 10.3847/0067-0049/223/1/1

    Baronchelli, I., Scarlata, C., Rodighiero, G., et al. 2016, ApJS, 223, 1, doi: 10.3847/0067-0049/223/1/1

    work page doi:10.3847/0067-0049/223/1/1 2016

  10. [11]

    G., Kocevski, D

    Barro, G., P´ erez-Gonz´ alez, P. G., Kocevski, D. D., et al. 2024, ApJ, 963, 128, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad167e

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad167e 2024

  11. [12]

    D., & Baldwin, J

    Batra, N. D., & Baldwin, J. A. 2014, MNRAS, 439, 771, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu007

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stu007 2014

  12. [13]

    Frayer, D. T. 2002, PhR, 369, 111, doi: 10.1016/S0370-1573(02)00134-5

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

  13. [14]

    2019, A&A, 622, A103, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201834156

    Boquien, M., Burgarella, D., Roehlly, Y., et al. 2019, A&A, 622, A103, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201834156

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201834156 2019

  14. [15]

    2003, MNRAS, 344, 1000, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06897.x

    Bruzual, G., & Charlot, S. 2003, MNRAS, 344, 1000, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06897.x

    arXiv 2003

  15. [16]

    J., Saxena, A., Cameron, A

    Bunker, A. J., Saxena, A., Cameron, A. J., et al. 2023, A&A, 677, A88, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346159

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346159 2023

  16. [17]

    2005, MNRAS, 360, 1413, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09131.x

    Burgarella, D., Buat, V., & Iglesias-P´ aramo, J. 2005, MNRAS, 360, 1413, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09131.x

    arXiv 2005

  17. [18]

    C., et al

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

    doi:10.1086/308692 2000

  18. [19]

    J., Katz, H., Rey, M

    Cameron, A. J., Katz, H., Rey, M. P., & Saxena, A. 2023, MNRAS, 523, 3516, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1579

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stad1579 2023

  19. [20]

    2005, A&A, 433, 597, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20041892

    Bonifacio, P. 2005, A&A, 433, 597, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20041892

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20041892 2005

  20. [21]

    2003, PASP, 115, 763, doi: 10.1086/376392

    Chabrier, G. 2003, PASP, 115, 763, doi: 10.1086/376392

    doi:10.1086/376392 2003

  21. [22]

    2015, A&A, 576, A10, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201425252

    Ciesla, L., Charmandaris, V., Georgakakis, A., et al. 2015, A&A, 576, A10, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201425252

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201425252 2015

  22. [24]

    M., Wright, E

    Cutri, R. M., Wright, E. L., Conrow, T., et al. 2014, VizieR Online Data Catalog: AllWISE Data Release (Cutri+ 2013), VizieR On-line Data Catalog: II/328. Originally published in: IPAC/Caltech (2013)

    2014

  23. [25]

    A., Helou, G., Magdis, G

    Dale, D. A., Helou, G., Magdis, G. E., et al. 2014, ApJ, 784, 83, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/784/1/83

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/784/1/83 2014

  24. [26]

    R., & Chaffee, F

    Dey, A., Spinrad, H., Stern, D., Graham, J. R., & Chaffee, F. H. 1998, ApJL, 498, L93, doi: 10.1086/311331

    doi:10.1086/311331 1998

  25. [27]

    T., Desai, V., et al

    Dey, A., Soifer, B. T., Desai, V., et al. 2008, ApJ, 677, 943, doi: 10.1086/529516

    doi:10.1086/529516 2008

  26. [28]

    C., et al

    Dietrich, M., Hamann, F., Shields, J. C., et al. 2003, ApJ, 589, 722, doi: 10.1086/374662

    doi:10.1086/374662 2003

  27. [29]

    2000, A&A, 354, 17

    Dietrich, M., & Wilhelm-Erkens, U. 2000, A&A, 354, 17

    2000

  28. [30]

    Eisenhardt, P. R. M., Wu, J., Tsai, C.-W., et al. 2012, ApJ, 755, 173, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/755/2/173

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/755/2/173 2012

  29. [31]

    2025, pyphot, pyphot v1.6.0, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.14712174

    Fouesneau, M. 2025, pyphot, pyphot v1.6.0, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.14712174

    doi:10.5281/zenodo.14712174 2025

  30. [32]

    2006, MNRAS, 366, 767, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.09866.x

    Fritz, J., Franceschini, A., & Hatziminaoglou, E. 2006, MNRAS, 366, 767, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.09866.x

    arXiv 2006

  31. [33]

    M., & Ferland, G

    Gaskell, C. M., & Ferland, G. J. 1984, PASP, 96, 393, doi: 10.1086/131352

    doi:10.1086/131352 1984

  32. [34]

    J., & White, R

    Glikman, E., Helfand, D. J., & White, R. L. 2006, ApJ, 640, 579, doi: 10.1086/500098

    doi:10.1086/500098 2006

  33. [35]

    D., Greene, J

    Goulding, A. D., Greene, J. E., Bezanson, R., et al. 2018, PASJ, 70, S37, doi: 10.1093/pasj/psx135

    doi:10.1093/pasj/psx135 2018

  34. [36]

    2004, ARA&A, 42, 385, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.42.053102.133945

    Gratton, R., Sneden, C., & Carretta, E. 2004, ARA&A, 42, 385, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.42.053102.133945

    arXiv 2004

  35. [37]

    E., Labbe, I., Goulding, A

    Greene, J. E., Labbe, I., Goulding, A. D., et al. 2024, ApJ, 964, 39, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1e5f

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad1e5f 2024

  36. [38]

    N., Shapley, A

    Hainline, K. N., Shapley, A. E., Greene, J. E., & Steidel, C. C. 2011, ApJ, 733, 31, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/733/1/31

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/733/1/31 2011

  37. [39]

    1993, ApJ, 418, 11, doi: 10.1086/173366 —

    Hamann, F., & Ferland, G. 1993, ApJ, 418, 11, doi: 10.1086/173366 —. 1999, ARA&A, 37, 487, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.37.1.487

    doi:10.1086/173366 1993

  38. [40]

    Hamann, F., & Korista, K. T. 1996, ApJ, 464, 158, doi: 10.1086/177307

    work page doi:10.1086/177307 1996

  39. [41]

    L., Ross, N., et al

    Hamann, F., Zakamska, N. L., Ross, N., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 464, 3431, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2387

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2387 2017

  40. [42]

    R., Millman, K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2

    doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 2020

  41. [43]

    F., Hernquist, L., Cox, T

    Hopkins, P. F., Hernquist, L., Cox, T. J., & Kereˇ s, D. 2008, ApJS, 175, 356, doi: 10.1086/524362

    doi:10.1086/524362 2008

  42. [44]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science & Engineering, 9, 90, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55 The BlueDOG at Cosmic Noon: A Possible Analog to Little Red Dots? 15

    doi:10.1109/mcse.2007.55 2007

  43. [46]

    2023, ApJ, 959, 100, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad09be

    Isobe, Y., Ouchi, M., Tominaga, N., et al. 2023, ApJ, 959, 100, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad09be

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad09be 2023

  44. [47]

    2021, ApJ, 914, 36, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abf6dc

    Izumi, T., Matsuoka, Y., Fujimoto, S., et al. 2021, ApJ, 914, 36, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abf6dc

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abf6dc 2021

  45. [48]

    2016, Journal of Korean Astronomical Society, 49, 225, doi: 10.5303/JKAS.2016.49.5.225

    Jeong, W.-S., Ko, K., Kim, M., et al. 2016, Journal of Korean Astronomical Society, 49, 225, doi: 10.5303/JKAS.2016.49.5.225

    work page doi:10.5303/jkas.2016.49.5.225 2016

  46. [49]

    D., Im, M., Lee, H

    Jun, H. D., Im, M., Lee, H. M., et al. 2015, ApJ, 806, 109, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/806/1/109

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/806/1/109 2015

  47. [50]

    2024, MNRAS, 531, 830, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1191

    Kayal, A., & Singh, V. 2024, MNRAS, 531, 830, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1191

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1191 2024

  48. [51]

    1998, ARA&A, 36, 189, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.36.1.189

    Kennicutt, Robert C., J. 1998, ARA&A, 36, 189, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.36.1.189

    doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.36.1.189 1998

  49. [52]

    C., & Evans, N

    Kennicutt, R. C., & Evans, N. J. 2012, ARA&A, 50, 531, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125610

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

  50. [53]

    2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2312.03065, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2312.03065

    Killi, M., Watson, D., Brammer, G., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2312.03065, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2312.03065

    doi:10.48550/arxiv.2312.03065 2023

  51. [54]

    2023, ApJ, 954, 156, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aceb5e

    Kim, D., Im, M., Kim, M., et al. 2023, ApJ, 954, 156, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aceb5e

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aceb5e 2023

  52. [55]

    D., Finkelstein, S

    Kocevski, D. D., Finkelstein, S. L., Barro, G., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2404.03576, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2404.03576

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2404.03576 2024

  53. [56]

    A., & Yu, P.-C

    Koptelova, E., Hwang, C.-Y., Malkan, M. A., & Yu, P.-C. 2019, ApJ, 882, 144, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab341b

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab341b 2019

  54. [57]

    2017, Scientific Reports, 7, 41617, doi: 10.1038/srep41617

    Guo, J.-K. 2017, Scientific Reports, 7, 41617, doi: 10.1038/srep41617

    doi:10.1038/srep41617 2017

  55. [58]

    2001, MNRAS, 322, 231, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04022.x

    Kroupa, P. 2001, MNRAS, 322, 231, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04022.x

    arXiv 2001

  56. [59]

    E., Bezanson, R., et al

    Labbe, I., Greene, J. E., Bezanson, R., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2306.07320, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2306.07320

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2306.07320 2023

  57. [60]

    Lyu, J., & Rieke, G. H. 2018, ApJ, 866, 92, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aae075

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aae075 2018

  58. [61]

    E., Setton, D

    Ma, Y., Greene, J. E., Setton, D. J., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2410.06257, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2410.06257

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2410.06257 2024

  59. [62]

    2024, Nature, 627, 59, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07052-5

    Maiolino, R., Scholtz, J., Witstok, J., et al. 2024, Nature, 627, 59, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07052-5

    doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07052-5 2024

  60. [63]

    2011, A&A, 527, A100, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201015584

    Taniguchi, Y. 2011, A&A, 527, A100, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201015584

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201015584 2011

  61. [64]

    2018, A&A, 619, A136, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833528

    Matthee, J., Sobral, D., Gronke, M., et al. 2018, A&A, 619, A136, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833528

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833528 2018

  62. [65]

    2016, MNRAS, 458, 449, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw322

    Matthee, J., Sobral, D., Oteo, I., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 458, 449, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw322

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stw322 2016

  63. [66]

    P., Brammer, G., et al

    Matthee, J., Naidu, R. P., Brammer, G., et al. 2024, ApJ, 963, 129, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad2345

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad2345 2024

  64. [67]

    Broad emission lines in optical spectra of hot dust-obscured galaxies can contribute significantly to JWST/NIRCam photometry

    McKinney, J., Finnerty, L., Casey, C., et al. 2022, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2301.00017, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2301.00017

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2301.00017 2022

  65. [68]

    G., Banerji, M., Gonzalez, E., et al

    McMahon, R. G., Banerji, M., Gonzalez, E., et al. 2013, The Messenger, 154, 35

    2013

  66. [69]

    Y., Soifer, B

    Melbourne, J., Peng, C. Y., Soifer, B. T., et al. 2011, AJ, 141, 141, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/141/4/141

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/141/4/141 2011

  67. [70]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2409.00169, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2409.00169

    Merlin, E., Santini, P., Paris, D., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2409.00169, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2409.00169

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2409.00169 2024

  68. [71]

    2006, A&A, 447, 157, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20054024

    Nagao, T., Marconi, A., & Maiolino, R. 2006, A&A, 447, 157, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20054024

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20054024 2006

  69. [72]

    C., et al

    Narayanan, D., Dey, A., Hayward, C. C., et al. 2010, MNRAS, 407, 1701, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16997.x

    arXiv 2010

  70. [73]

    2023, ApJL, 959, L14, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad0e00

    Misawa, T. 2023, ApJL, 959, L14, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad0e00

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad0e00 2023

  71. [74]

    2019, ApJ, 876, 132, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab1754 —

    Noboriguchi, A., Nagao, T., Toba, Y., et al. 2019, ApJ, 876, 132, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab1754 —. 2022, ApJ, 941, 195, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aca403

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab1754 2019

  72. [75]

    2009, A&A, 507, 1793, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200912497

    Noll, S., Burgarella, D., Giovannoli, E., et al. 2009, A&A, 507, 1793, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200912497

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200912497 2009

  73. [76]

    J., Bock, J., Altieri, B., et al

    Oliver, S. J., Bock, J., Altieri, B., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 424, 1614, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20912.x

    arXiv 2012

  74. [77]

    E., & Volonteri, M

    Reines, A. E., & Volonteri, M. 2015, ApJ, 813, 82, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/813/2/82

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/813/2/82 2015

  75. [78]

    T., Lacy, M., Storrie-Lombardi, L

    Richards, G. T., Lacy, M., Storrie-Lombardi, L. J., et al. 2006, ApJS, 166, 470, doi: 10.1086/506525

    doi:10.1086/506525 2006

  76. [79]

    E., Chisholm, J., Welch, B., et al

    Rivera-Thorsen, T. E., Chisholm, J., Welch, B., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2404.08884, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2404.08884

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2404.08884 2024

  77. [80]

    2011, ApJL, 739, L40, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/739/2/L40

    Rodighiero, G., Daddi, E., Baronchelli, I., et al. 2011, ApJL, 739, L40, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/739/2/L40

    doi:10.1088/2041-8205/739/2/l40 2011

  78. [81]

    P., et al

    Senchyna, P., Plat, A., Stark, D. P., et al. 2024, ApJ, 966, 92, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad235e

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad235e 2024

  79. [82]

    J., Greene, J

    Setton, D. J., Greene, J. E., de Graaff, A., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.03424. https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.03424

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  80. [83]

    E., Steidel, C

    Shapley, A. E., Steidel, C. C., Pettini, M., & Adelberger, K. L. 2003, ApJ, 588, 65, doi: 10.1086/373922

    doi:10.1086/373922 2003

Showing first 80 references.

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