Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 72 references

This paper argues that Little Red Dots, despite V-shaped SEDs resembling those of Blue-excess Hot DOGs, are a distinct population with much lower dust attenuation and no hot AGN-heated dust.

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 ↗

Little Red Dots are not the high-redshift relatives of Blue-excess Hot DOGs; they have less dust obscuration, little hot dust, and likely a different power source.

T0 review reviewed 2026-08-05 challenge →

load-bearing objection A useful head-to-head SED comparison that makes a plausible case that LRDs are not high-redshift BHDs, but the hot-dust deficit claim rests on MIRI sensitivity limits that are not fully quantified. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2508.21678 v1 pith:ZMQSUPJ7 submitted 2025-08-29 astro-ph.GA

Investigating Little Red Dots with UV Excess: Are They the High-Redshift Siblings of Blue Hot DOGs?

Lulu Bao , Chao-Wei Tsai , Jingwen Wu , Tao Wang , Guodong Li , Roberto J. Assef , Tanio Diaz-Santos , Peter R. M. Eisenhardt
show 2 more authors
Daniel Stern Andrew W. Blain
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords little red dotsblue-excess hot DOGsV-shaped SEDsdust attenuationhot dustAGN scatteringJWSThigh-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 asks whether the compact, red, JWST-discovered 'little red dots' (LRDs) are the high-redshift counterparts of the rare, hyper-luminous 'blue-excess hot dust-obscured galaxies' (BHDs), which share a V-shaped ultraviolet-to-infrared spectrum. Comparing stacked and individual SEDs, the authors conclude they are not siblings: the LRD V-shape sits at shorter wavelengths and requires only ~2.6 magnitudes of visual dust attenuation, while BHDs need ~18 magnitudes toward their obscured AGN. LRDs show no mid-infrared bump from hot dust heated by accretion, and their blue excess is not easily explained as AGN light scattered out of a dusty torus. If correct, the surface resemblance is largely a selection effect and the two populations formed through different pathways.

Core claim

The paper's claim: LRDs and BHDs are different populations despite similar V-shaped SEDs. BHDs are powered by a heavily obscured AGN (AV ~18–60 mag) whose bolometric output is dominated by hot dust from ~3–100 µm, and their UV excess is confirmed scattered AGN light. LRDs, fitted with the same two-component AGN templates, have a reddened component with AV ~2.6 mag and a nearly unobscured blue component, plus flat, faint MIRI continua and no 18 µm detection in stacked samples. Because the blue-to-red luminosity ratio is similar in both (~1%), the authors conclude that LRDs' blue excess cannot be scattered AGN light under much lower attenuation, and is more likely host-galaxy light. Compactnes

What carries the argument

The comparison runs through the rest-frame 'V-shape' SED valley position and a two-component AGN template fit. Using AGN and galaxy templates, the authors fit each population with a reddened AGN plus a lightly obscured/unobscured AGN, then compare the required visual extinctions (AV~2.6 for LRDs vs ~18 for BHDs), the F770W–F1800W mid-infrared color, and the wavelength where the V-shape bottom falls. The valley position encodes selection: at z~6.5, NIRCam F444W catches the LRD peak but the BHD trough, while MIRI F1800W would catch BHD hot dust but is empty for LRDs.

Load-bearing premise

Everything hinges on the MIRI non-detections and the six detected LRDs being representative: if JWST mid-infrared sensitivity or the stacking assumption changes, the apparent hot-dust deficit and the LRD-BHD difference could shrink or vanish.

What would settle it

A decisive experiment: take a sample of V-shape LRDs and observe them deeply at 18 µm (or with mid-IR spectroscopy). A rest-frame ~3–10 µm hot-dust bump at the level expected from a scaled-down BHD torus would falsify the paper's central claim; alternatively, UV polarimetry showing a BHD-like polarization fraction would falsify the claim that LRD blue excess is not scattered AGN light.

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

If this is right

  • High-redshift searches for BHD-like quasars should not expect to find them among LRDs; the hot-dust mid-infrared selection that works at z~1–4 will miss most z>5 compact AGNs.
  • The blue excess in LRDs is more plausibly host-galaxy starlight or galaxy-scale scattering than torus-scale AGN scattering, so broad-line black-hole mass estimates that assume an AGN continuum should be treated cautiously.
  • A genuine absence of hot dust implies that the AGN-heated torus, a defining feature of BHDs, is weak or absent in many LRDs, pointing to different obscuration geometry at early times.
  • The extremely low predicted number density of BHD-luminosity quasars at z~6–8 means an evolutionary LRD-to-BHD sequence would leave almost no BHDs to observe at those redshifts.
  • Combined with X-ray weakness and sub-Eddington line estimates, LRDs are better explained by early black-hole-seed growth than by merger-triggered, super-Eddington accretion episodes.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The apparent V-shape match may be mostly a filter-placement coincidence: shifting the observed bands changes where the valley falls, so the same physical SED could be classified as an LRD at z~6 and as a BHD at z~2.
  • A direct test of the hot-dust deficit is within reach: deep MIRI 18 µm imaging or mid-IR spectroscopy of 30–50 V-shape LRDs should find a warm-dust bump if any BHD-like torus is hiding; the paper predicts continued non-detection.
  • If host starlight powers the blue excess, then LRDs with resolved UV morphology should also show lower AGN fractions in the infrared—a correlation the paper does not test.
  • The comparison relies on only six MIRI-detected LRDs; splitting the LRD stack by luminosity or redshift could reveal a rare hot-dust subpopulation at the bright end without changing the overall conclusion.
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. The paper asks whether Little Red Dots (LRDs) with UV excess are high-redshift analogues of Blue-excess Hot Dust-Obscured Galaxies (BHDs). It compiles a V-shaped LRD sample (mostly from Akins et al. 2024 and Kokorev et al. 2024, plus six MIRI-detected LRDs from Leung et al. 2024) and compares their SEDs, dust attenuation, mid-infrared colors, X-ray detection rates, morphologies, and number densities with those of BHDs. Using the same two-component AGN SED model for both populations, the authors find a moderate attenuation AV~2.6 for LRDs versus AV~18 for BHDs, argue that LRDs lack hot AGN-heated dust, and conclude that the blue excess in LRDs is unlikely to be scattered AGN light. The paper concludes that LRDs are a distinct population, not the high-redshift siblings of BHDs.

Significance. This is a timely and useful negative result. The paper brings together recent JWST LRD samples and the Hot DOG population, uses a consistent SED-fitting framework for both, and provides a quantitative phenomenological comparison. The conclusion that a superficially similar V-shaped SED can arise from different physical conditions bears on interpretations of LRD demographics and black-hole growth at high redshift. The paper also benefits from the use of stacked photometry and from explicit comparisons with individual objects (Virgil, the Big Red Dot). However, the central inference about a hot-dust deficit currently rests on MIRI non-detections and a small detected subset; the redshift/filter mismatch between the two populations is not fully controlled, and one of the abstract claims (blue excess not scattered light) is argued from model-dependent reasoning. With additional sensitivity and systematic tests, this could become an important reference result.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4.1, Fig. 2] The central claim that LRDs lack hot AGN-heated dust is not yet supported by a sensitivity analysis. The paper reports no F1800W detections in the full Akins24 sample and uses the six MIRI-detected LRDs from Leung et al. (2024) for colors, but it does not test whether a BHD-like SED scaled to the LRD median luminosity (L_bol ~ 2.3e12 Lsun) and to z~6.5 would actually be detectable in the existing F1800W observations. The stacked F1800W point is an upper limit, and the long-wavelength part of the stacked SED relies on an assumed multi-temperature dust model (30-1500 K) and on far-IR/sub-mm upper limits. Without an injection/recovery simulation or a stated F1800W detection limit for the relevant SED shape, the non-detection cannot distinguish a genuine hot-dust deficit from a sensitivity effect. The paper itself acknowledges the analogous issue for X-ray depths (§4.4), so the missing MIRI
  2. [§4.1, Fig. 2] The observed-frame color comparison mixes rest-frame wavelengths. For BHDs at median z~2.3, F770W and F1800W sample rest-frame ~2.35 and ~5.5 um; for LRDs at z~6.5, the same filters sample ~1.03 and ~2.4 um. The BHD hot-dust bump at rest 3-100 um is therefore not compared at the same wavelengths as the LRD F1800W photometry. A bluer F770W-F1800W color for LRDs could arise from the redshift-dependent filter shift even if the intrinsic SEDs were identical. The paper should either use rest-frame colors, K-correct the BHD SED to the LRD redshifts, or demonstrate that the conclusion is robust to this mismatch.
  3. [§3, §4.2] The dust-attenuation contrast (AV~2.6 vs 18) and the scattered-light argument are model-dependent. The paper correctly cites alternative models for the V-shape (a single reddened AGN with a different extinction curve, or an optically thick envelope), but it does not quantify how AV1 changes under those models. In addition, the argument in §4.2 that LRDs cannot plausibly have a ~1% scattered-light fraction because AV1 is lower than in BHDs is not quantitative: the scattered fraction is controlled by covering factor and geometry, not solely by the line-of-sight AV to the reddened component. This weakens the abstract-level claim that the blue excess in LRDs is unlikely to be AGN scattered light.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§2.1] Sample accounting appears to be off by one: 76 (Akins24 V-shape) + 260 (Kokorev24) - 11 overlap = 325, not 326. Please check the sample count and, if appropriate, state how duplicates were removed.
  2. [Fig. 1 caption / §2.1] The 'black-blue triangle' (stacked F1800W photometry of six MIRI-observed Akins24 sources) and the six MIRI-detected LRDs from Leung et al. (2024) should be clearly distinguished. The current text can be read as if the same six sources are both 'detected in both F770W and F1800W' and 'non-detections shown as upper limits'.
  3. [§3 (last paragraph)] The text says 'F770W – F1500W color'; F1500W is likely a typo for F1800W, which is the filter used elsewhere in the paper.
  4. [§4.1] The F770W-F1800W color comparison should be reported with the relevant median/range and filter rest-frame wavelengths. For LRDs, state explicitly that '<2 mag' is based on a small detected subset or an upper limit rather than a measured color for the full sample.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the LRD/BHD comparison is data-driven, and the conclusion that they differ is not encoded in the inputs or forced by the self-citations.

full rationale

The paper's central claims—that LRDs have much lower attenuation (AV ~ 2.6 vs ~18 mag), a bluer rest-frame infrared color, and therefore a deficit of AGN-heated hot dust—are obtained by fitting published AGN/galaxy templates (Assef et al. 2010) to externally measured LRD photometry (Akins et al. 2024; Kokorev et al. 2024; Leung et al. 2024) and comparing with BHD SEDs from prior work. The fitted AV values and component ratios are outputs of the fitting, not inputs. The conclusion that LRDs are a different population is not asserted in the LRD selection criteria or in the template definitions; it is a falsifiable comparison result. Numerous self-citations appear (Assef et al. 2015, 2016, 2020, 2022; Li et al. 2024; Tsai et al. 2015), but they supply the BHD comparison SED, the classification scheme, and the fitting methodology—not the LRD data—and the paper argues against an extension of that same line of work (LRDs as z>5 BHD analogs), so the self-citations do not force the conclusion. The paper explicitly flags selection effects and observational caveats (§4.3: 'This trend does not rule out the possibility of observational biases'; §4.4: 'differences in X-ray exposure depths and the rest-frame energies probed at different redshifts between LRDs and BHDs may affect this comparison'), and the hot-dust deficit inference depends on MIRI non-detections and a small six-source sample. Those are measurement-interpretation risks, not circular reductions: no equation or definition makes the predicted SED equal to the input SED by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 3 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper's central inference depends on the fitted extinction values, the assumed SED template decomposition, and the interpretation of non-detections. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • AV1 (LRD reddened AGN component) = 2.6 +/- 1.4 mag
    Fitted to the stacked LRD photometry using Assef et al. (2010) AGN templates; controls the red slope of the V-shape and drives the comparison with BHDs.
  • AV2 (LRD blue AGN component) = 0.02 +/- 0.01 mag
    Fitted to the blue excess in the same two-component model; the near-zero value is used to argue that LRDs have much lower obscuration than BHDs.
  • Scattered-light fraction in LRDs = ~1%
    Derived from the luminosity ratio of the blue to the reddened AGN components; this value is central to the argument that scattered light is unlikely in LRDs.
  • AV1 (BHD reddened AGN component) = 18 +/- 5 mag
    Adopted from Li et al. (2024) for the median BHD; used as the contrasting high-obscuration value in Fig. 1 and the conclusions.
axioms (3)
  • domain assumption The two-component AGN template model (heavily reddened AGN + unobscured AGN) from Assef et al. (2010) is an appropriate description for both LRDs and BHDs.
    Introduced in Section 3 and Fig. 1; if the LRD blue excess is dominated by stellar light rather than an unobscured AGN component, the derived AV2 and scattered-light fraction would not apply.
  • domain assumption The multi-temperature dust emission model (30-1500 K) assumed for the LRD far-IR extrapolation beyond 18 microns represents the true SED.
    Section 2.1, Fig. 1; the long-wavelength LRD SED is based on upper limits and this assumption, which affects the bolometric luminosity and the comparison with BHDs.
  • domain assumption The MIRI non-detections and the six detected LRDs provide a fair measure of the hot-dust deficit in LRDs.
    Section 4.1; only 6 of ~100 LRDs are detected in MIRI F770W/F1800W, so the F770W-F1800W color comparison rests on a small sample plus upper limits.

reviewed 2026-08-05 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Investigating Little Red Dots with UV Excess: Are They the High-Redshift Siblings of Blue Hot DOGs?." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZMQSUPJ7

@misc{pith2026250821678,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Investigating Little Red Dots with UV Excess: Are They the High-Redshift Siblings of Blue Hot DOGs?},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZMQSUPJ7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.21678}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Little Red Dots (LRDs), newly identified compact and dusty galaxies with an unexpectedly high number density observed by JWST, have an unusual "V-shaped" rest-frame UV to near-infrared spectral energy distribution (SED). A group of hyper-luminous, obscured quasars with excess blue emission, called Blue-excess Hot Dust-Obscured Galaxies (BHDs), also exhibit qualitatively similar SEDs to those of LRDs. They represent a rare population of galaxies hosting supermassive black holes (SMBHs) accreting near the Eddington limit at redshifts z \sim 1--4. In this study, we compare their multi-wavelength SEDs to investigate whether LRDs, or a subset of them, could be high-redshift analogs of BHDs. Our analysis reveals that despite their similar "V-shape" SEDs, LRDs appear to be a different population than BHDs. The "V-shape" of BHDs appear at longer wavelengths compared to LRDs due to different selection strategies, suggesting LRDs have much less dust attenuation than typical BHDs. The bluer colors in the rest-frame infrared (continuum) emission of LRDs suggest the absence of hot dust heated by AGN accretion activities. We also argue that the blue excess in LRDs is unlikely from AGN scattered light. The compact morphologies and lower X-ray detection frequencies of LRDs suggest a distinct formation pathway from BHDs -- which are thought to be powered by super-Eddington accretion onto central SMBHs following major galaxy mergers.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2508.21678 by Andrew W. Blain, Chao-Wei Tsai, Daniel Stern, Guodong Li, Jingwen Wu, Lulu Bao, Peter R. M. Eisenhardt, Roberto J. Assef, Tanio Diaz-Santos, Tao Wang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Comparison between the normalized SEDs of LRDs (upper panel) and BHDs (lower panel). The grey-shaded region represents the distribution of Hot DOGs photometry at z > 1.6. The orange lines show dust models with temperatures of 450 K and 60 K and emissivity index β = 1.5, characterizing the radial slope of the dust density in the single power-law (SPL) model of Tsai et al. (2015). The vertical green dashed l… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The observed-frame SEDs of LRDs and BHDs. The SEDs of BHDs at z = 2.3 (blue solid curve) are scaled to their median bolometric luminosity Lbol,med = 6.4 × 1013L⊙. The stacked SEDs of the Akins24 sample at z = 6.5 and scaled to Lbol,med = 2.3×1012L⊙ from Akins et al. (2024), are represented by the red curve. The orange curve shows the SED of BHDs at z = 6.5, scaled to the luminosity for the typical SMBH mas… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The bolometric LFs of LRDs in higher and lower redshift bins reported by Kokorev et al. (2024) and Greene et al. (2024) are presented in diamonds and points, respec￾tively. The pre-JWST bolometric LFs at z = 6 and z = 5, derived by Shen et al. (2020), are shown as dashed red and or￾ange lines, respectively. The vertical green solid and dashed curves indicate the median bolometric luminosity of BHDs, with i… 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

72 extracted references · 6 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    B., Casey, C

    Akins, H. B., Casey, C. M., Lambrides, E., et al. 2024, arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.10341, doi: arXiv:2406.10341

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  2. [2]

    T., Bogd´ an,´A., Kov´ acs, O

    Ananna, T. T., Bogd´ an,´A., Kov´ acs, O. E., Natarajan, P., & Hickox, R. C. 2024, ApJL, 969, L18, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad5669

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad5669 2024

  3. [3]

    J., Kochanek, C

    Assef, R. J., Kochanek, C. S., Brodwin, M., et al. 2010, The Astrophysical Journal, 713, 970, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/713/2/970

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/713/2/970 2010

  4. [4]

    J., Eisenhardt, P

    Assef, R. J., Eisenhardt, P. R., Stern, D., et al. 2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 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, The Astrophysical Journal, 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, The Astrophysical Journal, 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, The Astrophysical Journal, 934, 101, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac77fc

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac77fc 2022

  8. [8]

    J., Stalevski, M., Armus, L., et al

    Assef, R. J., Stalevski, M., Armus, L., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2504.15913, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2504.15913

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2504.15913 2025

  9. [9]

    M., Kartaltepe, J

    Casey, C. M., Kartaltepe, J. S., Drakos, N. E., et al. 2023, ApJ, 954, 31, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acc2bc

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acc2bc 2023

  10. [10]

    M., Akins, H

    Casey, C. M., Akins, H. B., Finkelstein, S. L., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2505.18873, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2505.18873

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2505.18873 2025

  11. [11]

    C., Li, R., & Zhuang, M.-Y

    Chen, C.-H., Ho, L. C., Li, R., & Zhuang, M.-Y. 2025, ApJ, 983, 60, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ada93a

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ada93a 2025

  12. [12]

    L., Vayner, A., et al

    Chen, Y.-C., Zakamska, N. L., Vayner, A., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.12124, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.12124 D ´ ıaz-Santos, T., Assef, R. J., Eisenhardt, P. R. M., et al. 2021, A&A, 654, A37, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202140455

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.12124 2025

  13. [13]

    S., Abraham, R

    Dunlop, J. S., Abraham, R. G., Ashby, M. L. N., et al. 2021, PRIMER: Public Release IMaging for Extragalactic

    2021

  14. [14]

    Cycle 1, ID

    Research, JWST Proposal. Cycle 1, ID. #1837 D ´ ıaz-Santos, T., Assef, R., Blain, A., et al. 2018, Science (New York, N.Y.), 362, 1034—1036, doi: 10.1126/science.aap7605

    doi:10.1126/science.aap7605 2018

  15. [15]

    R., Wu, J., Tsai, C.-W., et al

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

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

  16. [16]

    2017, ApJ, 844, 106, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa78f2

    Farrah, D., Petty, S., Connolly, B., et al. 2017, ApJ, 844, 106, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa78f2

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa78f2 2017

  17. [17]

    L., Bagley, M

    Finkelstein, S. L., Bagley, M. B., Arrabal Haro, P., et al. 2022, ApJL, 940, L55, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac966e

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac966e 2022

  18. [18]

    T., et al

    Finnerty, L., Larson, K., Soifer, B. T., et al. 2020, ApJ, 905, 16, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abc3bf

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abc3bf 2020

  19. [19]

    E., Labb´ e, I., Goulding, A

    Greene, J. E., Labb´ e, I., Goulding, A. D., et al. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 964, 39, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1e5f

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad1e5f 2024

  20. [20]

    2013, ApJS, 208, 19, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/208/2/19

    Hinshaw, G., Larson, D., Komatsu, E., et al. 2013, ApJS, 208, 19, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/208/2/19

    doi:10.1088/0067-0049/208/2/19 2013

  21. [21]

    F., Hernquist, L., Cox, T

    Hopkins, P. F., Hernquist, L., Cox, T. J., & Kereˇ s, D. 2008, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 175, 356, doi: 10.1086/524362

    doi:10.1086/524362 2008

  22. [22]

    E., de Graaff, A., Miller, T

    Hviding, R. E., de Graaff, A., Miller, T. B., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.05459, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.05459

    doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.05459 2025

  23. [23]

    I., et al

    Iani, E., Rinaldi, P., Caputi, K. I., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2406.18207, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2406.18207

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2406.18207 2024

  24. [24]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.05537, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2503.05537

    Inayoshi, K. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.05537, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2503.05537

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2503.05537 2025

  25. [25]

    2024, arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.14706, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad74e2

    Inayoshi, K., & Ichikawa, K. 2024, arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.14706, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad74e2

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  26. [26]

    2024, arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.07805, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2409.07805

    Inayoshi, K., & Maiolino, R. 2024, arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.07805, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2409.07805

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2409.07805 2024

  27. [27]

    D., Assef, R

    Jun, H. D., Assef, R. J., Bauer, F. E., et al. 2020, The Astrophysical Journal, 888, 110, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5e7b

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab5e7b 2020

  28. [28]

    Kido, D., Ioka, K., Hotokezaka, K., Inayoshi, K., & Irwin, C. M. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2505.06965, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2505.06965 10

    doi:10.48550/arxiv.2505.06965 2025

  29. [29]

    D., Hasinger, G., Brightman, M., et al

    Kocevski, D. D., Hasinger, G., Brightman, M., et al. 2018, ApJS, 236, 48, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aab9b4

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/aab9b4 2018

  30. [30]

    D., Finkelstein, S

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

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

  31. [31]

    I., Greene, J

    Kokorev, V., Caputi, K. I., Greene, J. E., et al. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 968, 38, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad4265 Labb´ e, I., Greene, J. E., Bezanson, R., et al. 2023, arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.07320, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2306.07320 Labb´ e, I., Greene, J. E., Matthee, J., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2412.04557, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2412.04557

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2306.07320 2024

  32. [32]

    C., Finkelstein, S

    Leung, G. C., Finkelstein, S. L., P´ erez-Gonz´ alez, P. G., et al. 2024, arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.12005, doi: arXiv:2411.12005

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  33. [33]

    2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 958, 162, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ace25b

    Li, G., Tsai, C.-W., Stern, D., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 958, 162, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ace25b

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ace25b 2023

  34. [34]

    J., Tsai, C.-W., et al

    Li, G., Assef, R. J., Tsai, C.-W., et al. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 971, 40, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad5317

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad5317 2024

  35. [35]

    Li, Z., Inayoshi, K., Chen, K., Ichikawa, K., & Ho, L. C. 2025, ApJ, 980, 36, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ada5fb

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ada5fb 2025

  36. [36]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2502.05813, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2502.05813

    Li, G., Wu, J., Tsai, C.-W., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2502.05813, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2502.05813

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2502.05813 2025

  37. [37]

    2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 974, 147, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad6565

    Lin, X., Wang, F., Fan, X., et al. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 974, 147, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad6565

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad6565 2024

  38. [38]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.10659, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2507.10659

    Lin, X., Fan, X., Cai, Z., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.10659, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2507.10659

    doi:10.48550/arxiv.2507.10659 2025

  39. [39]

    Liu, C., Tsai, C.-W., Eisenhardt, P. R. M., et al. 2025, ApJ, 986, 26, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adc9b5

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adc9b5 2025

  40. [40]

    N., Alexander, D

    Luo, B., Brandt, W. N., Alexander, D. M., et al. 2013, ApJ, 772, 153, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/772/2/153

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/772/2/153 2013

  41. [41]

    N., Xue, Y

    Luo, B., Brandt, W. N., Xue, Y. Q., et al. 2017, ApJS, 228, 2, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/228/1/2

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/228/1/2 2017

  42. [42]

    E., Setton, D

    Ma, Y., Greene, J. E., Setton, D. J., et al. 2025, ApJ, 981, 191, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ada613

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ada613 2025

  43. [43]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.09854, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2501.09854

    Madau, P. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.09854, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2501.09854

    doi:10.48550/arxiv.2501.09854 2025

  44. [44]

    2001, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 365, 28, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20000177

    Maiolino, R., Marconi, A., Salvati, M., et al. 2001, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 365, 28, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20000177

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20000177 2001

  45. [45]

    2024, arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.00504, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2405.00504

    Maiolino, R., Risaliti, G., Signorini, M., et al. 2024, arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.00504, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2405.00504

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2405.00504 2024

  46. [46]

    2016, ApJ, 817, 34, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/817/1/34

    Marchesi, S., Civano, F., Elvis, M., et al. 2016, ApJ, 817, 34, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/817/1/34

    doi:10.3847/0004-637x/817/1/34 2016

  47. [47]

    P., Brammer, G., et al

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

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad2345 2024

  48. [48]

    2024, A&A, 682, A34, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347165

    Merloni, A., Lamer, G., Liu, T., et al. 2024, A&A, 682, A34, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347165

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347165 2024

  49. [49]

    S., Aird, J

    Nandra, K., Laird, E. S., Aird, J. A., et al. 2015, ApJS, 220, 10, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/220/1/10

    doi:10.1088/0067-0049/220/1/10 2015

  50. [50]

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

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

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad0e00 2023

  51. [51]

    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

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab1754 2019

  52. [52]

    2024, ApJ, 976, 96, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad84f7 P´ erez-Gonz´ alez, P

    Pacucci, F., & Narayan, R. 2024, ApJ, 976, 96, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad84f7 P´ erez-Gonz´ alez, P. G., Barro, G., Rieke, G. H., et al. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 968, 4, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad38bb

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad84f7 2024

  53. [53]

    H., et al

    Rinaldi, P., Bonaventura, N., Rieke, G. H., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.14383, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2411.14383

    doi:10.48550/arxiv.2411.14383 2024

  54. [54]

    Deciphering the Nature of Virgil: An Obscured AGN Lurking Within an Apparently Normal Lyman-{\alpha} Emitter During Cosmic Reionization

    Rinaldi, P., P´ erez-Gonz´ alez, P. G., Rieke, G. H., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2504.01852, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2504.01852

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2504.01852 2025

  55. [55]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2505.09669, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2505.09669

    Sacchi, A., & Bogdan, A. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2505.09669, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2505.09669

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2505.09669 2025

  56. [56]

    B., Soifer, B

    Sanders, D. B., Soifer, B. T., Elias, J. H., et al. 1988, ApJ, 325, 74, doi: 10.1086/165983

    doi:10.1086/165983 1988

  57. [57]

    J., Greene, J

    Setton, D. J., Greene, J. E., de Graaff, A., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.03424, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2411.03424

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2411.03424 2024

  58. [58]

    F., Faucher-Gigu` ere, C.-A., et al

    Shen, X., Hopkins, P. F., Faucher-Gigu` ere, C.-A., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 495, 3252, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1381

    doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1381 2020

  59. [59]

    2024, MNRAS, 533, 2948, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1970

    Stepney, M., Banerji, M., Tang, S., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 533, 2948, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1970

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1970 2024

  60. [60]

    J., et al

    Stern, D., Lansbury, G., Assef, R. J., et al. 2014, The Astrophysical Journal, 794, 102, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/794/2/102

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/794/2/102 2014

  61. [61]

    L., Fan, X., Wang, F., & Yang, J

    Tee, W. L., Fan, X., Wang, F., & Yang, J. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2412.05242, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2412.05242

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2412.05242 2024

  62. [62]

    Tsai, C.-W., Eisenhardt, P. R. M., Wu, J., et al. 2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 805, 90, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/805/2/90

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/805/2/90 2015

  63. [63]

    Vayner, A., D ´ ıaz-Santos, T., Eisenhardt, P. R. M., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2412.02862, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2412.02862

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2412.02862 2024

  64. [64]

    2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 474, 4528, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx3120 11

    Vito, F., Brandt, W., Stern, D., et al. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 474, 4528, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx3120 11

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stx3120 2018

  65. [65]

    L., et al

    Wang, B., de Graaff, A., Davies, R. L., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2403.02304, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2403.02304

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2403.02304 2024

  66. [66]

    C., Alberts, S., Ji, Z., et al

    Williams, C. C., Alberts, S., Ji, Z., et al. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 968, 34, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad3f17

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad3f17 2024

  67. [67]

    L., Eisenhardt, P

    Wright, E. L., Eisenhardt, P. R. M., Mainzer, A. K., et al. 2010, The Astronomical Journal, 140, 1868, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/140/6/1868

    doi:10.1088/0004-6256/140/6/1868 2010

  68. [68]

    2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 756, 96, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/756/1/96

    Wu, J., Tsai, C.-W., Sayers, J., et al. 2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 756, 96, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/756/1/96

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/756/1/96 2012

  69. [69]

    D., Assef, R

    Wu, J., Jun, H. D., Assef, R. J., et al. 2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 852, 96, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa9ff3

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa9ff3 2018

  70. [70]

    A., Bing, L., et al

    Xiao, M., Oesch, P. A., Bing, L., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.01945, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2503.01945

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2503.01945 2025

  71. [71]

    Q., Luo, B., Brandt, W

    Xue, Y. Q., Luo, B., Brandt, W. N., et al. 2016, ApJS, 224, 15, doi: 10.3847/0067-0049/224/2/15

    doi:10.3847/0067-0049/224/2/15 2016

  72. [72]

    T., et al

    Yue, M., Eilers, A.-C., Ananna, T. T., et al. 2024, ApJL, 974, L26, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad7eba

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad7eba 2024

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