Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

This paper argues that a galaxy's attenuation curve is shaped by the combined evolution of dust grain sizes, star–dust geometry, and scattering, and that the 2175 Å bump appears on a ~250 Myr timescale as small carbonaceous grains form.

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 a Milky Way-like galaxy simulation, attenuation curves flatten then steepen over time, and the 2175 Å bump strengthens on a ~250 Myr timescale as small carbonaceous grains form, modulated by scattering and viewing angle.

T0 review reviewed 2026-08-05 challenge →

load-bearing objection Solid modeling study with a clean four-way decomposition of scattering, geometry, and grain-size effects; the quantitative timeline is model-dependent, but the qualitative mechanisms hold up. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2508.21157 v1 pith:DNVINDFK submitted 2025-08-28 astro-ph.GA

Evolution of galaxy attenuation curves driven by evolving dust mass and grain size distributions

Kosei Matsumoto , Laura Sommovigo , Andrea Gebek , Kentaro Nagamine , Angelos Nersesian , Maarten Baes , Ilse De Looze , Arjen van der Wel
show 3 more authors
Rachel Somerville Leonard E. C. Romano Rachel K. Cochrane
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords dust attenuationgrain size distributionradiative transfer2175 Å bumpscatteringMilky Way-like galaxygalaxy evolutionextinction curve
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 argues that the shape of a galaxy's attenuation curve—the wavelength-dependent dimming of starlight used to correct galaxy spectra—is not a fixed property of dust but a time-evolving product of three interacting ingredients: dust scattering, the geometry of stars relative to dust, and the evolving distribution of grain sizes. Using a Milky Way-like galaxy simulation with a live dust-evolution model, the authors post-process every snapshot with full radiative transfer and isolate each ingredient by comparing four model configurations. They find that face-on attenuation curves flatten over the first ~1 Gyr and then steepen, that the 2175 Å bump strengthens on a ~250 Myr timescale as small carbonaceous grains form through shattering and accretion, and that the observed anti-correlation between curve slope and V-band attenuation is driven by scattering whose efficiency depends on optical depth both along and perpendicular to the line of sight. If right, these results give a physical explanation for the flat, bump-weak attenuation curves seen in high-redshift galaxies with JWST, and caution against interpreting attenuation curves as simple mirrors of dust composition.

Core claim

Central claim: in a Milky Way-like galaxy, the global attenuation curve evolves on Gyr timescales because the grain size distribution, star–dust geometry, and scattering change together. Radiative transfer on a simulation tracking grain growth shows the extinction curve steepens to t=0.5 Gyr as small grains form, flattens as coagulation builds large grains, then steepens again as PAHs appear. The attenuation curve deviates from this: face-on it flattens to t=1 Gyr then steepens, because optical scattering depends on the optical depth both along and perpendicular to the line of sight; edge-on, scattering is suppressed. The 2175 Å bump strengthens on a ~250 Myr timescale as small carbonaceous

What carries the argument

The comparative radiative-transfer pipeline is the engine: four attenuation-curve models—Static/Dynamic dust × With/No-Scattering—are generated with SKIRT, isolating star–dust geometry, scattering, and dust-grain evolution as separate causes. The dynamic dust model comes from the GADGET4-OSAKA simulation with 30 grain-size bins (3×10⁻⁴ to 10 µm), post-processed into silicate, graphite, and PAH components using the Hirashita & Murga decomposition. A toy model—one star in a dust disk parameterized by optical depth along and perpendicular to the line of sight—demonstrates the three-dimensional scattering effect that carries the slope–AV explanation.

Load-bearing premise

The quantitative timeline—especially the ~250 Myr bump-formation timescale and the early flatness of the attenuation curves—rests on the dust-evolution model's predicted abundance of small grains (a<0.05 µm) and on the post-hoc split of grains into silicate, graphite, and PAHs; the paper itself reports that the model may underproduce PAHs and overproduce small grains, and that a lower carbonaceous accretion efficiency would delay the bump.

What would settle it

Measure the 2175 Å bump strength and the FUV/V slope in a large sample of galaxies at z≈4–8 with well-constrained stellar ages (JWST/NIRSpec). If galaxies younger than ~250 Myr already show strong bumps, the formation timescale is wrong. Alternatively, high-resolution extinction-curve data showing that the a<0.05 µm grain abundance is systematically lower than the model predicts would break the timeline; the slope–AV part could be isolated by comparing face-on and edge-on galaxies matched in dust mass—the model predicts steeper face-on curves at equal AV.

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

If this is right

  • If the ~250 Myr bump-formation timescale is generic, the presence of a strong 2175 Å bump in a high-redshift galaxy implies either an older stellar population or a faster dust-evolution channel than shattering plus accretion.
  • The attenuation-curve shape at face-on orientations is not a faithful tracer of the extinction curve or of grain size distribution alone; scattering dominates the V-band and geometry can reverse the time trend, so SED-fitting recipes that assume a fixed attenuation law will mis-estimate stellar masses and star formation rates for young galaxies.
  • The slope–AV anti-correlation and its scatter arise from the three-dimensional configuration of dust around stars, so inclination and dust-disk extent must be treated as first-order variables in any comparison between simulated and observed attenuation curves.
  • Flat, bump-weak attenuation curves at z>4 can be reproduced without invoking a special early dust composition: the early phase of a Milky Way-like galaxy naturally lacks small grains, giving flat curves and weak bumps until ~250 Myr.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The paper's mechanism suggests a testable cosmic clock: the 2175 Å bump strength, normalized by total dust mass, could serve as a galaxy-age indicator for z>4 systems—with the caveat that the model's own shortcomings (PAH underproduction, small-grain overproduction) shift the zero point.
  • Because the early flat curves are driven by the absence of small grains in supernova-dominated dust, the flattening should be stronger in metal-poor or starburst galaxies where SNe II dominate; observations targeting the lowest-metallicity z~6–8 galaxies could discriminate this mechanism from a pure geometry explanation.
  • The three-dimensional scattering effect implies that attenuation curves derived from spatially unresolved SEDs depend on galaxy orientation even at fixed dust mass, which could bias dust-mass scaling relations estimated from attenuation-corrected luminosities.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. This paper uses a MW-like isolated galaxy simulation with an evolving dust grain size distribution (GADGET4-OSAKA) and post-processes the snapshots with SKIRT to compute global attenuation curves at inclinations 0–90°. Four model variants (static/dynamic dust, with/without scattering) are compared to isolate the roles of grain size evolution, scattering, and star–dust geometry. The authors find that face-on attenuation curves flatten until ~1 Gyr and then steepen, while edge-on curves steepen only mildly. They report that the 2175 Å bump strengthens on a ~250 Myr timescale as small carbonaceous grains form, and that the bump strength is further modulated by geometry and inclination. They attribute the observed slope–A_V anti-correlation primarily to scattering, whose effectiveness depends on the dust optical depth both along and perpendicular to the line of sight, and illustrate this with a single-star toy model.

Significance. The four-model decomposition is a clean and pedagogically useful experimental design, and the toy model in §5.1 provides a concrete control experiment for the scattering mechanism. The paper is unusually honest about its limitations, listing in §5.5 the post-hoc composition split, the overproduction of very small grains relative to van der Giessen et al. (2024), the underproduction of PAHs relative to Matsumoto et al. (2024), and the possibility that lower carbonaceous accretion efficiency (Dubois et al. 2024) delays the bump. If the qualitative mechanism is robust, the results offer a physically motivated interpretation for the flat, bump-poor attenuation curves seen in JWST high-redshift samples. The simulation products are public. The main weakness is that the headline quantitative timeline (~250 Myr for the bump) depends on assumptions that the authors themselves acknowledge to be uncertain and that are not tested with sensitivity runs.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 2.2 and Section 5.5] The ~250 Myr bump-formation timescale and the early flat/no-bump attenuation curves are central results (abstract, §4.2, conclusion item 7). They are set by the abundance of small carbonaceous grains (a<0.05 μm) at early times. However, GADGET4-OSAKA evolves a single size distribution without composition; the silicate/carbonaceous/PAH split is applied post hoc using gas-phase Si/C abundances and the dense-gas fraction (Eq. 1, §2.2). The small-carbonaceous-grain population is therefore not computed from a carbon-specific evolution equation, and the timescale is conditional on the adopted condensation/accretion efficiencies. The authors themselves list in §5.5 that Dubois et al. (2024) find lower carbonaceous accretion efficiency and would delay the bump, that van der Giessen et al. (2024) find the model overproduces a<0.015 μm grains, and that Matsumoto et al. (2024) find it underproduces
  2. [Section 5.4 / Fig. 8] The comparison of early simulation epochs (t<1 Gyr) to high-redshift JWST galaxies (Markov et al. 2024; Fisher et al. 2025) is used to argue that the model reproduces the flat, bump-poor curves at low A_V. But the simulation is an isolated MW-like galaxy whose stellar disk/bulge already contains a 3.8 Gyr old population at t=0; it is not a cosmological high-z galaxy. The early-time geometry (compact dust distribution) and stellar population mix differ from those of the observed samples. The agreement is suggestive rather than a controlled test. The paper should state this distinction explicitly when making the comparison and avoid implying that the model validates the low-z/high-z interpretation without a cosmological sample.
  3. [Section 2.3 / Eq. (5)] The bump strength B is determined from a four-parameter fit (Eq. 5), but the fit quality is not reported. Since B enters the central time-evolution and comparison plots (Figs. 7, 8, 10), it would be useful to state the typical fit residuals and to confirm that the quoted ~250 Myr evolution is not an artifact of the fitting function. In particular, low bump strengths at early times may be sensitive to the baseline A_{2175,0} chosen from the fit.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 4.3] Typo: '2715 Å bump' should read '2175 Å bump'.
  2. [Fig. 6 caption] The caption lists 'Dynamic, Dynamic No-Scattering, Static, and Static No-Scattering' but the panel labels defined in Section 4 use 'With-Scattering'/'No-Scattering'; please make the names consistent.
  3. [Abstract] Please replace '2175 $AA$ bump' with '2175 Å bump' and ensure consistent use of the Å symbol throughout.
  4. [Section 2.1] The code name is spelled both 'GADGET4-OSAKA' and 'GADGET4-Osaka'; please standardize.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

Bump-carrying dust composition is an input assumption, so the 'bump traces small carbonaceous grains' conclusion is partly definitional; the radiative-transfer and scattering results are otherwise self-contained.

specific steps
  1. self definitional [Section 2.2 (dust opacity model), Fig. 1; Section 4.2 (bump evolution); Eq. (6)]
    "The 2175 Å bump strength of graphite grains develops when the grain size is lower than 0.05µm. ... Therefore, the 2175 Å bump strength can serve as a good proxy for the mass fraction of small carbonaceous grains relative to the total dust mass in galaxies, at a given inclination angle."

    The 2175 Å feature is not emergent in this model: the Draine & Li (2007) opacity tables used in SKIRT assign the bump to graphite/PAH grains only for a<0.05 µm. The attenuation-curve bump (Eq. 6) is therefore controlled, to first order, by the same small-carbonaceous-grain population whose formation the simulation tracks. Claiming that the bump 'can serve as a proxy' for that mass fraction restates the input opacity carrier rather than an independently derived relation. The ~250 Myr timescale itself comes from the dust evolution model and is not fitted, but the mapping bump↔small carbonaceous mass is definitional; radiative-transfer geometry modulates the proportionality but does not make it a test.

full rationale

The main derivation is self-contained: attenuation curves are computed with SKIRT from the GADGET4-OSAKA simulated density and grain-size fields, and are compared against a static Draine & Li (2007) benchmark and external observations. The slope-AV anti-correlation, the flattening-to-steepening trend, the inclination dependence, and the role of scattering/geometry do not reduce to input fits. The only notable circular element is the interpretation of the 2175 Å bump as a tracer of small carbonaceous grains: because the bump opacity is assigned to those grains a priori, the correlation is partially built in. The paper's own Section 5.5 limitations (PAH underproduction, small-grain overproduction, lower carbonaceous accretion efficiency in Dubois et al. 2024) further underscore that the quantitative ~250 Myr bump timeline is model-dependent, but that is a robustness concern rather than a circularity of the radiative-transfer calculation. Overall circularity is modest and localized.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 6 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on the dust evolution model (calibrated in prior work by the same group) and on adopted dust optical properties. These are external inputs, not derived in this paper. No new entities, particles, or forces are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • two-phase ISM dense gas fraction coefficient alpha = 0.12
    Eq. 1; calibrated in Romano et al. (2022a) to reproduce the observed molecular gas fraction of MW-mass galaxies. Used to split dust processes between dense and diffuse phases, directly affecting shattering and accretion timing.
  • dust condensation efficiency of ejected metals = 10%
    Section 2.1; from Asano et al. (2013), assumed fraction of metal ejecta from SNe/AGB that condenses into dust. Sets the early dust mass and the initial attenuation level.
  • star formation efficiency epsilon_star = 0.05
    Section 2.1; stochastic star formation efficiency within the Kennicutt-Schmidt prescription. Affects the stellar populations that define the intrinsic SED and the star-dust geometry.
axioms (6)
  • domain assumption Draine & Li (2007) dust opacity, albedo, and emissivity grids apply to the simulated grain compositions and sizes.
    Used throughout the SKIRT post-processing (Section 2.2); the extinction curves, albedo, and 2175 Å bump strengths all rely on these external optical properties.
  • domain assumption The post-hoc decomposition of grains into silicate, graphite, PAH0, and PAH+ (Hirashita & Murga 2020; Draine et al. 2021) correctly represents the chemistry of each simulated grain.
    Section 2.2; the bump strength is attributed to small carbonaceous grains, so this decomposition is central to the interpretation.
  • domain assumption The AGORA initial conditions plus the OSAKA feedback model produce a representative Milky Way-like galaxy.
    Section 2.1; single isolated realization, no mergers, moderate star formation history; the diversity of real galaxies is acknowledged as limited in Section 5.5.
  • domain assumption The two-phase ISM subgrid model with fixed dense-gas temperature and density (T_dense=50 K, n_H,dense=10^3 cm^-3) captures the dust-processing environment.
    Section 2.1; shattering in the diffuse phase and coagulation in the dense phase depend on these adopted values, which set the small grain formation timescales.
  • domain assumption Non-aromatic carbonaceous grains can be represented as graphite (Draine & Li 2007).
    Section 2.2; the 2175 Å bump feature of the simulated carbonaceous grains is assumed to be that of graphite in the adopted opacity model.
  • ad hoc to paper A constant star formation history for pre-existing stars between t=-3.8 and 0 Gyr is a valid age assignment.
    Section 2.2; the authors state this did not significantly impact the attenuation curve evolution on Gyr timescales, but it is an ad hoc choice for the initial stellar population.

reviewed 2026-08-05 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Evolution of galaxy attenuation curves driven by evolving dust mass and grain size distributions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DNVINDFK

@misc{pith2026250821157,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Evolution of galaxy attenuation curves driven by evolving dust mass and grain size distributions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DNVINDFK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.21157}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
abstract

We investigate the impacts of the evolution of dust mass and grain size distribution within a Milky Way-like (MW-like) galaxy simulation on global attenuation curves, focusing on the optical-UV slope and the 2175 $AA$ bump. We discuss the contributions of star-dust geometry, scattering, and dust properties. Post-processing dust radiative transfer was performed using SKIRT based on the MW-like galaxy simulation. The simulation was carried out with GADGET4-OSAKA, which models the evolution of grain size distributions. For lower inclination angles (closer to face-on), the attenuation curve flattens over time up to t=1 Gyr, then becomes progressively steeper. This steeper slope arises from the interplay between scattering and the dust disk becoming more extended over time (changes in star-dust geometry). At higher inclination, scattering is suppressed, and the attenuation curves slightly steepen over time due to small-grain formation and the bias of observed UV light toward older stars. The bump strengthens on a timescale of ~250 Myr due to the formation of small carbonaceous grains. The bump strength is affected not only by the abundance of small grains but also by star-dust geometry. At higher $A_V$ or higher inclination, the bump weakens. These results may help interpret flatter attenuation curves and weaker bumps in high-redshift galaxies. Variations in star-dust geometry alter the amount of scattered photons escaping the galaxy, driving the anti-correlation between the slope and $A_V$. Scatter in this relation arises from differences in dust optical depth along and perpendicular to the line of sight, reflecting inclination and star-dust geometry. Additional contributions come from variations in grain size distribution and the fraction of obscured young stars.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2508.21157 by Andrea Gebek, Angelos Nersesian, Arjen van der Wel, Ilse De Looze, Kentaro Nagamine, Kosei Matsumoto, Laura Sommovigo, Leonard E. C. Romano, Maarten Baes, Rachel K. Cochrane, Rachel Somerville.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Extinction curves for carbonaceous and silicate grains with a given dust grain size (upper left and right, respectively). The ex￾tinction curve is normalized by the opacity at the V-band wave￾length (λ = 5500 Å). The lower panels show the wavelength dependence of albedo, which is the fraction of scattering against extinction, of carbonaceous and silicate grains (lower left and right, respectively). 0.05 µm… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: shows the contribution of each dust component to the average extinction curve of the MW-like galaxy simulation at various times. At t = 0.1 Gyr, the extinction curve is mainly driven by silicate at all wavelengths. At this time, gas-phase sili￾con and carbon are produced by SNe II. After t = 0.5 Gyr, the ex￾tinction curve at shorter wavelengths is determined by graphite, since gas-phase carbon is produced … view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Time evolution of the global attenuation curve for the MW-like galaxy simulation using the Static With-Scattering and Dynamic With￾Scattering models shown in left and right panels, respectively. The solid and dashed lines represent inclination angles of 0◦ and 90◦ (i.e., face-on and edge-on view, respectively). The attenuation curve is estimated using Eq. 3 and normalized by the attenuation at the V-band w… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Time evolution of the slope for the global attenuation curves from the four different models (Dynamic, Dynamic No-Scattering, Static, and Static No-Scattering) of the MW-like galaxy simulation. The inclination angle is color-coded in each panel. Here, all models with Av < 0.01 are excluded. The gray thick lines represent the time evolution of the slope of the average extinction curves for the static and dy… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Upper panels: Relationships between the slope and AV for the Static With-Scattering and Dynamic With-Scattering models (left and right, respectively) at different inclination angles. Diamonds indicate simulation snapshots at t = 0.05, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 3, and 10 Gyr, with sizes increasing with time. Solid lines connect diamonds at each inclination angle, representing evolutionary tracks. Gray and purple contou… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: (a) Schematic picture of a toy model with a single star embedded in a dust disk. τLOS and τ⊥ LOS are optical depths at V-band (λ = 5500 Å) along the line of sight and perpendicular to the line of sight. The two parameters that serve to vary the dust geometry. The resulting attenuation curves from this model are influenced solely by scattering processes, which vary in response to changes in the star–dust ge… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: (a) Relation between the slope and AV . Colored diamonds represent the Dynamic With-Scattering model, while gray diamonds shows the Dynamic No-Scattering model. The color indicates the total dust mass within the galaxy for the Dynamic No-Scattering model. Diamonds correspond to simulation snapshots at t = 0.05, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 3, and 10 Gyr. For the Dynamic With-Scattering and No-Scattering models, solid an… 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 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Predictions for the X-ray polarisation modulation in Cygnus X-1 from reflection off the stellar companion and its wind

    astro-ph.HE 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Radiative transfer models predict a double-peaked orbital modulation in X-ray polarization degree from reflection in Cyg X-1, with amplitudes of 0.25-1.24 percentage points across 2-8 keV bands and modest PA variation.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

124 extracted references · 37 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.10508

    Algera, H., Rowland, L., Stefanon, M., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.10508

    arXiv 2025

  2. [2]

    2020, MNRAS, 491, 3844

    Aoyama, S., Hirashita, H., & Nagamine, K. 2020, MNRAS, 491, 3844

    2020

  3. [3]

    2017, MNRAS, 466, 105

    Aoyama, S., Hou, K.-C., Shimizu, I., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 466, 105

    2017

  4. [4]

    S., Takeuchi, T

    Asano, R. S., Takeuchi, T. T., Hirashita, H., & Nozawa, T. 2013, MNRAS, 432, 637

    2013

  5. [5]

    J., & Scott, P

    Asplund, M., Grevesse, N., Sauval, A. J., & Scott, P. 2009, ARA&A, 47, 481

    2009

  6. [6]

    2011, ApJS, 196, 22 Bariši´c, I., Pacifici, C., van der Wel, A., et al

    Baes, M., Verstappen, J., De Looze, I., et al. 2011, ApJS, 196, 22 Bariši´c, I., Pacifici, C., van der Wel, A., et al. 2020, ApJ, 903, 146

    2011

  7. [7]

    J., Bagley, M

    Battisti, A. J., Bagley, M. B., Baronchelli, I., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 513, 4431

    2022

  8. [8]

    J., Calzetti, D., & Chary, R

    Battisti, A. J., Calzetti, D., & Chary, R. R. 2016, ApJ, 818, 13

    2016

  9. [9]

    J., Cunha, E

    Battisti, A. J., Cunha, E. d., Shivaei, I., & Calzetti, D. 2020, ApJ, 888, 108

    2020

  10. [10]

    2022, A&A, 663, A50

    Boquien, M., Buat, V ., Burgarella, D., et al. 2022, A&A, 663, A50

    2022

  11. [11]

    1985, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 149, 330

    Bouchet, P., Lequeux, J., Maurice, E., Prevot, L., & Prevot-Burnichon, M. 1985, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 149, 330

    1985

  12. [12]

    & Charlot, S

    Bruzual, G. & Charlot, S. 2003, MNRAS, 344, 1000

    2003

  13. [13]

    2018, A&A, 619, A135

    Buat, V ., Boquien, M., Małek, K., et al. 2018, A&A, 619, A135

    2018

  14. [14]

    2012, A&A, 545, A141 5 https://github.com/Koseimatsu/MW_Galaxy_Properties_ 2025.git Article number, page 15 of 20 A&A proofs: manuscript no

    Buat, V ., Noll, S., Burgarella, D., et al. 2012, A&A, 545, A141 5 https://github.com/Koseimatsu/MW_Galaxy_Properties_ 2025.git Article number, page 15 of 20 A&A proofs: manuscript no. aa

    2012

  15. [15]

    1997, in American Institute of Physics Conference Series, V ol

    Calzetti, D. 1997, in American Institute of Physics Conference Series, V ol. 408, The ultraviolet universe at low and High redshift, ed. W. H. Waller (AIP), 403–412

    1997

  16. [16]

    C., et al

    Calzetti, D., Armus, L., Bohlin, R. C., et al. 2000, ApJ, 533, 682

    2000

  17. [17]

    L., & Storchi-Bergmann, T

    Calzetti, D., Kinney, A. L., & Storchi-Bergmann, T. 1994, ApJ, 429, 582

    1994

  18. [18]

    & Baes, M

    Camps, P. & Baes, M. 2015, Astronomy and Computing, 9, 20

    2015

  19. [19]

    & Baes, M

    Camps, P. & Baes, M. 2020, Astronomy and Computing, 31, 100381

    2020

  20. [20]

    U., & Grand, R

    Camps, P., Behrens, C., Baes, M., Kapoor, A. U., & Grand, R. 2021, ApJ, 916, 39

    2021

  21. [21]

    U., Trcka, A., et al

    Camps, P., Kapoor, A. U., Trcka, A., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 512, 2728

    2022

  22. [22]

    2018, ApJS, 234, 20

    Camps, P., Trˇcka, A., Trayford, J., et al. 2018, ApJS, 234, 20

    2018

  23. [23]

    A., Clayton, G

    Cardelli, J. A., Clayton, G. C., & Mathis, J. S. 1989, The Astrophysical Journal, 345, 245

    1989

  24. [24]

    2018, MNRAS, 476, 875

    Catinella, B., Saintonge, A., Janowiecki, S., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 476, 875

    2018

  25. [25]

    2003, PASP, 115, 763

    Chabrier, G. 2003, PASP, 115, 763

    2003

  26. [26]

    & Fall, S

    Charlot, S. & Fall, S. M. 2000, ApJ, 539, 718

    2000

  27. [27]

    2013, MNRAS, 432, 2061

    Chevallard, J., Charlot, S., Wandelt, B., & Wild, V . 2013, MNRAS, 432, 2061

    2013

  28. [28]

    R., Kereš, D., Hopkins, P

    Choban, C. R., Kereš, D., Hopkins, P. F., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 514, 4506

    2022

  29. [29]

    R., Kereš, D., Sandstrom, K

    Choban, C. R., Kereš, D., Sandstrom, K. M., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 529, 2356

    2024

  30. [30]

    R., Salim, S., Kereš, D., Hayward, C

    Choban, C. R., Salim, S., Kereš, D., Hayward, C. C., & Sandstrom, K. M. 2025, MNRAS, 537, 1518

    2025

  31. [31]

    C., Gordon, K

    Clayton, G. C., Gordon, K. D., Bianchi, L. C., et al. 2015, ApJ, 815, 14

    2015

  32. [32]

    K., Anglés-Alcázar, D., Cullen, F., & Hayward, C

    Cochrane, R. K., Anglés-Alcázar, D., Cullen, F., & Hayward, C. C. 2024, ApJ, 961, 37

    2024

  33. [33]

    K., Hayward, C

    Cochrane, R. K., Hayward, C. C., & Anglés-Alcázar, D. 2022, ApJ, 939, L27

    2022

  34. [34]

    K., Hayward, C

    Cochrane, R. K., Hayward, C. C., Anglés-Alcázar, D., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 488, 1779

    2019

  35. [35]

    2013, ARA&A, 51, 393 Davé, R., Thompson, R., & Hopkins, P

    Conroy, C. 2013, ARA&A, 51, 393 Davé, R., Thompson, R., & Hopkins, P. F. 2016, MNRAS, 462, 3265 De Vis, P., Jones, A., Viaene, S., et al. 2019, A&A, 623, A5

    2013

  36. [36]

    2019, MNRAS, 486, 743 Di Mascia, F., Pallottini, A., Sommovigo, L., & Decataldo, D

    Decleir, M., De Looze, I., Boquien, M., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 486, 743 Di Mascia, F., Pallottini, A., Sommovigo, L., & Decataldo, D. 2025, A&A, 695, A77

    2019

  37. [37]

    Draine, B. T. 2003, ApJ, 598, 1017

    2003

  38. [38]

    T., Dale, D

    Draine, B. T., Dale, D. A., Bendo, G., et al. 2007, ApJ, 663, 866

    2007

  39. [39]

    Draine, B. T. & Li, A. 2001, ApJ, 551, 807

    2001

  40. [40]

    Draine, B. T. & Li, A. 2007, ApJ, 657, 810

    2007

  41. [41]

    T., Li, A., Hensley, B

    Draine, B. T., Li, A., Hensley, B. S., et al. 2021, ApJ, 917, 3

    2021

  42. [42]

    2024, A&A, 687, A240

    Dubois, Y ., Rodríguez Montero, F., Guerra, C., et al. 2024, A&A, 687, A240

    2024

  43. [43]

    Fisher, R., Bowler, R. A. A., Stefanon, M., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.10541

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  44. [44]

    Fitzpatrick, E. L. 1999, PASP, 111, 63

    1999

  45. [45]

    2021, A&A, 649, A18

    Galliano, F., Nersesian, A., Bianchi, S., et al. 2021, A&A, 649, A18

    2021

  46. [46]

    2023, MNRAS, 521, 5645

    Gebek, A., Baes, M., Diemer, B., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 521, 5645

    2023

  47. [47]

    2025, A&A, 695, A90

    Gebek, A., Diemer, B., Martorano, M., et al. 2025, A&A, 695, A90

    work page 2025

  48. [48]

    2024, MNRAS, 531, 3839

    Gebek, A., Trˇcka, A., Baes, M., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 531, 3839

    work page 2024

  49. [49]

    Gnedin, N. Y . & Draine, B. T. 2014, ApJ, 795, 37

    work page 2014

  50. [50]

    Gnedin, N. Y . & Kravtsov, A. V . 2011, ApJ, 728, 88

    work page 2011

  51. [51]

    D., Clayton, G

    Gordon, K. D., Clayton, G. C., Decleir, M., et al. 2023, ApJ, 950, 86

    2023

  52. [52]

    D., Misselt, K

    Gordon, K. D., Misselt, K. A., Witt, A. N., & Clayton, G. C. 2001, ApJ, 551, 269

    work page 2001

  53. [53]

    2020, MNRAS, 494, 1071

    Graziani, L., Schneider, R., Ginolfi, M., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 494, 1071

    2020

  54. [54]

    & Madau, P

    Haardt, F. & Madau, P. 2012, ApJ, 746, 125

    2012

  55. [55]

    Hensley, B. S. & Draine, B. T. 2023, ApJ, 948, 55

    work page 2023

  56. [56]

    & Murga, M

    Hirashita, H. & Murga, M. S. 2020, MNRAS, 492, 3779

    2020

  57. [57]

    2019, MN- RAS, 485, 1727

    Hou, K.-C., Aoyama, S., Hirashita, H., Nagamine, K., & Shimizu, I. 2019, MN- RAS, 485, 1727

    work page 2019

  58. [58]

    P., Fanciullo, L., Köhler, M., et al

    Jones, A. P., Fanciullo, L., Köhler, M., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A62

    work page 2013

  59. [59]

    U., Baes, M., van der Wel, A., et al

    Kapoor, A. U., Baes, M., van der Wel, A., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 526, 3871

    2023

  60. [60]

    U., Baes, M., van der Wel, A., et al

    Kapoor, A. U., Baes, M., van der Wel, A., et al. 2024, A&A, 692, A79

    2024

  61. [61]

    U., Camps, P., Baes, M., et al

    Kapoor, A. U., Camps, P., Baes, M., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 506, 5703

    2021

  62. [62]

    1998, ApJ, 498, 541

    Kennicutt, Robert C., J. 1998, ApJ, 498, 541

    work page 1998

  63. [63]

    2016, ApJ, 833, 202

    Kim, J.-h., Agertz, O., Teyssier, R., et al. 2016, ApJ, 833, 202

    work page 2016

  64. [64]

    1941, Akademiia Nauk SSSR Doklady, 30, 301

    Kolmogorov, A. 1941, Akademiia Nauk SSSR Doklady, 30, 301

    1941

  65. [65]

    & Code, A

    Koornneef, J. & Code, A. D. 1981, ApJ, 247, 860

    work page 1981

  66. [66]

    M., Hankins, M

    Lau, R. M., Hankins, M. J., Sanchez-Bermudez, J., et al. 2024, ApJ, 963, 127

    2024

  67. [67]

    M., Wang, J., Hankins, M

    Lau, R. M., Wang, J., Hankins, M. J., et al. 2023, ApJ, 951, 89

    work page 2023

  68. [68]

    D., Conroy, C., van Dokkum, P

    Leja, J., Johnson, B. D., Conroy, C., van Dokkum, P. G., & Byler, N. 2017, ApJ, 837, 170

    2017

  69. [69]

    L., Kann, D

    Li, A., Liang, S. L., Kann, D. A., et al. 2008, ApJ, 685, 1046

    2008

  70. [70]

    2019, MNRAS, 490, 1425

    Li, Q., Narayanan, D., & Davé, R. 2019, MNRAS, 490, 1425

    work page 2019

  71. [71]

    2021, MNRAS, 507, 548

    Li, Q., Narayanan, D., Torrey, P., Davé, R., & V ogelsberger, M. 2021, MNRAS, 507, 548

    work page 2021

  72. [72]

    2018, MNRAS, 478, L83

    Liang, L., Feldmann, R., Faucher-Giguère, C.-A., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 478, L83

    work page 2018

  73. [73]

    2021, MNRAS, 507, 2755

    Lin, Y .-H., Hirashita, H., Camps, P., & Baes, M. 2021, MNRAS, 507, 2755

    work page 2021

  74. [74]

    C., Casey, C

    Ma, X., Hayward, C. C., Casey, C. M., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 487, 1844

    work page 2019

  75. [75]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2402.05996

    Markov, V ., Gallerani, S., Ferrara, A., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2402.05996

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  76. [76]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2504.12378

    Markov, V ., Gallerani, S., Pallottini, A., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2504.12378

    arXiv 2025

  77. [77]

    2023, A&A, 679, A12

    Markov, V ., Gallerani, S., Pallottini, A., et al. 2023, A&A, 679, A12

    2023

  78. [78]

    Mathis, J. S. & Cardelli, J. A. 1992, ApJ, 398, 610

    work page 1992

  79. [79]

    2023, A&A, 678, A175

    Matsumoto, K., Camps, P., Baes, M., et al. 2023, A&A, 678, A175

    2023

  80. [80]

    Observational signatures of the dust size evolution in isolated galaxy simulations

    Matsumoto, K., Hirashita, H., Nagamine, K., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2402.02659

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

Showing first 80 references.

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