pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2511.01803 · v2 · submitted 2025-11-03 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

DESI DR2 Galaxy Luminosity Functions

Samuel G. Moore , Shaun Cole , Michael Wilson , Peder Norberg , John Moustakas , J. Aguilar , S. Ahlen , A. Anand
show 49 more authors
D. Bianchi D. Brooks F. J. Castander T. Claybaugh A. Cuceu A. de la Macorra Arjun Dey Biprateep Dey S. Ferraro A. Font-Ribera J. E. Forero-Romero E. Gaztanaga S. Gontcho A Gontcho G. Gutierrez H. K. Herrera-Alcantar K. Honscheid M. Ishak R. Joyce S. Juneau R. Kehoe T. Kisner S. E. Koposov A. Kremin O. Lahav C. Lamman M. Landriau L. Le Guillou M. E. Levi M. Lucey J. R. Manera A. Meisner R. Miquel S. Nadathur W. J. Percival C. Poppett F. Prada A. J. Ross G. Rossi E. Sanchez D. Schlegel M. Schubnell H. Seo J. Silber D. Sprayberry G. Tarl\'e B. A. Weaver R. H. Wechsler R. Zhou H. Zou
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-18 01:09 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA
keywords galaxy luminosity functionsDESI Bright Galaxy Surveyfaint-end upturnk-correctionsred and blue galaxiessurface brightness completenessredshift evolution
0
0 comments X

The pith

DESI DR2 measures galaxy luminosity functions to M_r-5log h = -10 and finds complex non-power-law shapes at both ends.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper presents luminosity functions for galaxies in the DESI Bright Galaxy Survey using the second data release, covering redshifts from 0.002 to 0.6 in multiple bands. It reaches magnitudes far fainter than prior surveys and shows that standard analytic models cannot describe the full distribution, with departures at the bright end and a clear upturn at the faint end. This upturn is stronger among red galaxies than blue ones, and the work supplies color-split and redshift-split versions along with model-Petrosian alternatives. The measurements align with earlier GAMA results but carry substantially smaller statistical uncertainties, supplying a new benchmark for studies that separate galaxies by environment or type.

Core claim

Using updated k-corrections derived from BGS Year 1 data, the DESI DR2 Bright Galaxy Survey yields luminosity functions that reach M_r-5log h = -10. Simple functional forms fail to capture the shape: the bright end deviates from a pure exponential decline, while the faint end displays non-power-law behavior that includes a pronounced upturn fainter than M_r-5log h = -15, stronger for red galaxies than for blue. The functions remain largely complete for surface brightness mu_50 < 25; an apparent steepening fainter than -13 arises mainly from local overdensity and galaxy fragmentation. North-South differences at the brightest magnitudes trace to red galaxies and may reflect photometric depth,,

What carries the argument

Luminosity functions constructed from DESI spectroscopic redshifts with polynomial k-correction fits and evolutionary corrections that replace earlier GAMA-based prescriptions.

If this is right

  • The LFs serve as a high-precision reference for measuring how luminosity distributions vary with local environment and galaxy color.
  • Galaxy-formation simulations can be tested against the observed departures from simple power-law and exponential forms at both ends.
  • Redshift-binned versions reveal small residuals that limit the accuracy of any single evolutionary correction.
  • Model-Petrosian magnitudes provide an alternative set that reduces possible biases from extended early-type profiles.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The stronger faint-end upturn in red galaxies may point to a larger population of faint quiescent dwarfs than current models assume.
  • North-South photometric differences suggest that future wide-field surveys will need consistent depth for extended sources to avoid similar offsets.
  • These functions could be combined with DESI clustering measurements to separate luminosity-dependent bias from true population changes.

Load-bearing premise

The measurements assume the sample is largely complete down to surface brightness mu_50 of 25 and that the new k-corrections plus a single global evolutionary model adequately describe the population across the full redshift range.

What would settle it

A re-analysis that applies stricter surface-brightness cuts or explicitly removes locally overdense regions and finds the faint-end upturn vanishes or becomes identical for red and blue galaxies would falsify the reported complex shape.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.01803 by A. Anand, A. Cuceu, A. de la Macorra, A. Font-Ribera, A. J. Ross, A. Kremin, A. Meisner, Arjun Dey, B. A. Weaver, Biprateep Dey, C. Lamman, C. Poppett, D. Bianchi, D. Brooks, D. Schlegel, D. Sprayberry, E. Gaztanaga, E. Sanchez, F. J. Castander, F. Prada, G. Gutierrez, G. Rossi, G. Tarl\'e, H. K. Herrera-Alcantar, H. Seo, H. Zou, J. Aguilar, J. E. Forero-Romero, John Moustakas, J. R. Manera, J. Silber, K. Honscheid, L. Le Guillou, M. E. Levi, Michael Wilson, M. Ishak, M. Landriau, M. Lucey, M. Schubnell, O. Lahav, Peder Norberg, R. H. Wechsler, R. Joyce, R. Kehoe, R. Miquel, R. Zhou, S. Ahlen, Samuel G. Moore, S. E. Koposov, S. Ferraro, S. Gontcho A Gontcho, Shaun Cole, S. Juneau, S. Nadathur, T. Claybaugh, T. Kisner, W. J. Percival.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The Y3 DESI Footprint - showing the North (blue) and South (red). The different shades of blue and red highlight the jackknife regions (see Section 3.3 for details). The solid red curve shows the galactic plane while the dotted red curve shows the ecliptic plane. 2 OVERVIEW OF DESI BGS DATA In this section, we describe the DESI survey and the BGS data. We provide details of the galaxy catalogue in Section … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The median rest-frame 0.1 (𝑔 − 𝑟 ) colour of galaxies from the FSF South catalogue in bins of redshift and observer-frame colour. This provides a look-up table to infer the rest-frame colour from the observed properties. A separate lookup table is used for the North. 3 METHOD OF GLOBAL LF ESTIMATION 3.1 k-corrections Typically, absolute magnitudes are corrected by k-corrections to ac￾count for band-shiftin… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The k-correction polynomials to the SDSS 𝑔, 𝑟, 𝑧 and WISE 𝑤1 bands with 𝑧ref = 0.1 from the respective observer frame DECaLS band (South, solid line), BASS/MzLS band (North, dashed line) and WISE bands. The 𝑟, 𝑧 and 𝑤1-band k-corrections are direct fits to the FSF data. For the 𝑔 band, the 𝑟-band polynomials are transformed to the 𝑔 band using Eqn. 3 and the figure shows polynomial fits to the resulting 𝑔-… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: presents the 0.1 (𝑔 − 𝑟) rest-frame colour distribution and the 𝑟-band absolute magnitude distribution. We observe that there exists a slight offset in the North and South colour distributions. We attribute this to a possible small error in the red end of one of the filter curves. We note that if we make an empirical correction for this by shifting the 𝑟-band magnitudes of the galaxies in the North such th… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The 𝑉/𝑉max distribution for 𝑄 = 0.78 (the optimal value we find) and a number of nearby values of 𝑄. The reduced 𝜒 2 value is presented for each 𝑄-value. We additionally consider the idea of splitting the galaxies into two colour classes (red and blue) and finding corresponding 𝑄-values for each population. To define the appropriate colour-cut, we make use of the bimodal nature of the 0.1 (𝑔 − 𝑟) rest-fram… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Bivariate LFs for North (left) and South (right) in the 𝑔, 𝑧 and 𝑤1 bands. The black curves represent the magnitude limit of the survey at the chosen 𝑧 = 0.002 limit. The dashed vertical and horizontal lines show the completeness limits for the 𝑟-band and 𝑔-band luminosity functions. These are based on the intersection of the completeness curves and the 95% percentile contour of the bivariate LF. The 𝑟 − 𝑤… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The global 1/𝑉max 𝑟-band LFs for North and South. The LFs use either the standard weight given in Eqn. 1 where each galaxy has an individual total incompleteness weight, or the mean total weight (𝑤mean) is assigned to all galaxies. The width of each LF represents the jackknife error. where 𝑀∗ parameterises the position of the ‘knee’ of the Schechter function, 𝛼 parameterises the faint end slope, and 𝜙 ∗ re… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The global 1/𝑉max LF for Y3 data for North and South in the 𝑔, 𝑟, 𝑧 and 𝑤1 bands. The width of each LF represents the jackknife error. The dashed lines represent the completeness limits derived from the corresponding bivariate LFs. For reference, the black curves show simple Schechter function fits for each band. 4.3 LFs split by 0.1 (𝑔 − 𝑟) colour In [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The global 1/𝑉max LF for Y3 data for North and South in the 𝑔, 𝑟, 𝑧 and 𝑤1 bands split by colour. The red LFs represent galaxies with 0.1 (𝑔 − 𝑟 ) > 0.75, while the blue LFs are galaxies with 0.1 (𝑔 − 𝑟 ) < 0.75. The width of each LF represents the jackknife error. The dashed lines represent the completeness limits derived from the corresponding bivariate LFs. The solid fiducial Schechter curves are repro… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present galaxy luminosity functions (LFs) for the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI) DR2 Bright Galaxy Survey (BGS) in the g,r,z, and w1 bands over 0.002<z<0.6. Our analysis uses updated k-corrections and evolutionary corrections, including new polynomial k-correction fits derived from BGS Year1 data that supersede earlier GAMA-based prescriptions. Exploiting the statistical power of DESI, we measure LFs to very faint magnitudes, reaching M_r-5log h = -10. Independent measurements from the North and South survey regions show excellent agreement around the LF knee, but the very small statistical uncertainties reveal that simple analytic forms fail to capture the full LF shape. The bright end departs from a pure exponential decline, while the faint end exhibits complex, non-power-law behaviour, including a pronounced upturn at M_r-5log h > -15, which is stronger for red galaxies than for blue. We show that our LFs are largely complete for galaxies with surface brightness mu_50<25, and that an apparent steepening fainter than -13 is driven primarily by local overdensity and fragmentation of large galaxies. A systematic North-South offset at the brightest magnitudes is traced to red galaxies and may reflect shallower North photometry underestimating extended early-type profiles, although this remains inconclusive. We therefore also provide LFs based on model-Petrosian magnitudes. Redshift-splitting reveals small but significant residuals, indicating limitations of a simple global evolutionary model. Using the redshift limits of Loveday (2011) we find excellent agreement with GAMA, with substantially reduced statistical errors. These measurements provide a precise reference for studies of environmental and population-dependent LFs and for testing galaxy formation models.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper presents galaxy luminosity functions (LFs) measured from DESI DR2 Bright Galaxy Survey data in the g, r, z, and w1 bands over 0.002 < z < 0.6. It employs new polynomial k-corrections and evolutionary corrections derived from BGS Year 1 data, extends measurements to M_r - 5 log h = -10, reports complex non-power-law shapes with a pronounced faint-end upturn at M_r - 5 log h > -15 (stronger for red galaxies), demonstrates North-South agreement around the knee, attributes apparent steepening fainter than -13 to local overdensity and fragmentation, confirms completeness for mu_50 < 25, and shows good agreement with GAMA but with reduced statistical errors. Model-Petrosian magnitude LFs are also provided to address potential photometric issues.

Significance. If the results hold, this work supplies a high-precision reference LF dataset with substantially reduced statistical uncertainties relative to prior surveys such as GAMA. The large sample enables detection of deviations from simple analytic forms at both bright and faint ends, while internal cross-checks (North-South consistency, completeness tests, and redshift residuals) and the explicit attribution of apparent steepening strengthen its utility for constraining galaxy formation models, environmental dependence, and population-specific evolution at low luminosities.

major comments (2)
  1. K-corrections section: the new polynomial fits derived from BGS Year1 data are load-bearing for the faint-end reach and upturn claim; a direct quantitative comparison (e.g., difference plot or table) to the superseded GAMA-based prescriptions and the resulting shift in the LF at M_r - 5 log h > -15 would confirm the upturn is not an artifact of the k-correction change.
  2. Completeness and faint-end analysis: the statement that LFs are largely complete for mu_50 < 25 underpins the reality of the pronounced upturn; an explicit completeness fraction versus magnitude (or simulation-based recovery test) focused on the M_r - 5 log h > -15 regime would directly support that the red-galaxy upturn is intrinsic rather than selection-driven.
minor comments (2)
  1. Abstract and results: the w1-band LF receives less discussion than the r-band; a short summary of its shape and any differences in the faint-end behavior would improve completeness.
  2. Methods: the exact definition and computation of the model-Petrosian magnitudes should be stated with a formula or reference to allow full reproducibility of the alternative LF set.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive comments and positive recommendation for minor revision. We address the two major comments below and will incorporate the requested quantitative comparisons and completeness details into the revised manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: K-corrections section: the new polynomial fits derived from BGS Year1 data are load-bearing for the faint-end reach and upturn claim; a direct quantitative comparison (e.g., difference plot or table) to the superseded GAMA-based prescriptions and the resulting shift in the LF at M_r - 5 log h > -15 would confirm the upturn is not an artifact of the k-correction change.

    Authors: We agree that a direct comparison is important to demonstrate that the faint-end upturn is robust. In the revised manuscript we will add a figure (or table) showing the difference between luminosity functions computed with the new BGS Year 1 polynomial k-corrections and those obtained with the previous GAMA-based prescriptions, with explicit focus on the shift at M_r - 5 log h > -15. revision: yes

  2. Referee: Completeness and faint-end analysis: the statement that LFs are largely complete for mu_50 < 25 underpins the reality of the pronounced upturn; an explicit completeness fraction versus magnitude (or simulation-based recovery test) focused on the M_r - 5 log h > -15 regime would directly support that the red-galaxy upturn is intrinsic rather than selection-driven.

    Authors: We appreciate the request for a more explicit completeness test in the faint regime. In the revised manuscript we will include a plot of completeness fraction versus absolute magnitude, concentrated on M_r - 5 log h > -15, derived from our existing surface-brightness selection analysis for mu_50 < 25. This will strengthen the case that the red-galaxy upturn is intrinsic. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: direct observational LF measurements from survey data

full rationale

The paper reports empirical galaxy luminosity functions derived from DESI DR2 BGS photometry and spectroscopy. K-corrections are fitted from BGS Year 1 data and applied to compute rest-frame magnitudes for the LF; this is a standard data-reduction step rather than a self-definitional loop or a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. Completeness is assessed via surface-brightness cuts and cross-checked against local overdensity, North-South splits, and independent GAMA results. No load-bearing claim reduces by construction to the paper's own inputs or to a self-citation chain; the analysis remains externally falsifiable against prior surveys and internal consistency tests.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The work relies on standard assumptions from cosmology and prior surveys for k-corrections and completeness limits, with new polynomial fits introduced from Year 1 data; no invented entities or major free parameters beyond those fits are indicated in the abstract.

free parameters (1)
  • polynomial k-correction coefficients
    New fits derived from BGS Year1 data that supersede GAMA-based prescriptions.
axioms (2)
  • standard math Standard cosmological framework for redshift and distance calculations
    Invoked implicitly for luminosity distance and k-corrections across 0.002<z<0.6.
  • domain assumption Survey completeness for galaxies with mu_50<25
    Stated as largely complete in the abstract for the reported LF measurements.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 6157 in / 1379 out tokens · 41415 ms · 2026-05-18T01:09:53.635302+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Galaxy luminosity functions from far-UV to submillimetre at $z=0$ in the COLIBRE simulations

    astro-ph.GA 2026-05 conditional novelty 5.0

    COLIBRE simulations with SKIRT post-processing match observed galaxy luminosity functions from FUV to submm at z=0, except underpredicting bright mid-IR galaxies.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 50 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 6 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Anand A., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/ad60c2 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024AJ....168..124A 168, 124

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad60c2 2024

  2. [2]

    M., Tegmark, M., Protopapas, P., & Sandvik, H

    Ball N. M., Loveday J., Brunner R. J., Baldry I. K., Brinkmann J., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.11082.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006MNRAS.373..845B 373, 845

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.11082.x 2006

  3. [3]

    J., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1016/j.newast.2011.07.004 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012NewA...17..175B 17, 175

    Benson A. J., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1016/j.newast.2011.07.004 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012NewA...17..175B 17, 175

    work page doi:10.1016/j.newast.2011.07.004 2012

  4. [4]

    R., et al., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1086/320405 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001AJ....121.2358B 121, 2358

    Blanton M. R., et al., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1086/320405 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001AJ....121.2358B 121, 2358

    work page doi:10.1086/320405 2001

  5. [5]

    R., Hogg D

    Blanton M. R., Hogg D. W., SDSS Collaboration 2002, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts \#200. p. 27.04

    work page 2002

  6. [6]

    R., et al., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1086/375776 , 592, 819

    Blanton M. R., et al., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1086/375776 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ApJ...592..819B 592, 819

    work page doi:10.1086/375776 2003

  7. [7]

    2012, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 423, 3740, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21182.x

    Bower R. G., Benson A. J., Crain R. A., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20516.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012MNRAS.422.2816B 422, 2816

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20516.x 2012

  8. [8]

    Cole S., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19093.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.416..739C 416, 739

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19093.x 2011

  9. [9]

    Cole S., et al., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04591.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001MNRAS.326..255C 326, 255

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04591.x 2001

  10. [10]

    DESI Collaboration et al., 2016a, The DESI Experiment Part I: Science,Targeting, and Survey Design ( @eprint arXiv 1611.00036 )

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  11. [11]

    DESI Collaboration et al., 2016b, The DESI Experiment Part II: Instrument Design ( @eprint arXiv 1611.00037 )

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  12. [12]

    DESI Collaboration et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/ac882b , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022AJ....164..207A 164, 207

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac882b 2022

  13. [13]

    DESI Collaboration et al., 2023, The Early Data Release of the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument ( @eprint arXiv 2306.06308 )

    work page arXiv 2023

  14. [14]

    DESI Collaboration et al., 2025a, Data Release 1 of the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument ( @eprint arXiv 2503.14745 )

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  15. [15]

    DESI Collaboration et al., 2025b, @doi [Phys. Rev. D] 10.1103/2wwn-xjm5 , 112, 083514

    work page doi:10.1103/2wwn-xjm5

  16. [16]

    DESI Collaboration et al., 2025c, @doi [Phys. Rev. D] 10.1103/tr6y-kpc6 , 112, 083515

    work page doi:10.1103/tr6y-kpc6

  17. [17]

    De Lucia G., Fontanot F., Xie L., Hirschmann M., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202349045 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...687A..68D 687, A68

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202349045 2024

  18. [18]

    Dey A., et al., 2019, @doi [AJ] 10.3847/1538-3881/ab089d , 157, 168

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ab089d 2019

  19. [19]

    2011, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 412, 525, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17930.x

    Driver S. P., et al., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.18188.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.413..971D 413, 971

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.18188.x 2011

  20. [20]

    S., Peterson B

    Efstathiou G., Ellis R. S., Peterson B. A., 1988, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/232.2.431 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1988MNRAS.232..431E 232, 431

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/232.2.431 1988

  21. [21]

    Guy J., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/acb212 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023AJ....165..144G 165, 144

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/acb212 2023

  22. [22]

    Hahn C., et al., 2023, @doi [AJ] 10.3847/1538-3881/accff8 , 165, 253

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/accff8 2023

  23. [23]

    W., Eastwood J

    Hockney R. W., Eastwood J. W., 1988, Computer simulation using particles

    work page 1988

  24. [24]

    The K correction

    Hogg D. W., Baldry I. K., Blanton M. R., Eisenstein D. J., 2002, The K correction ( @eprint arXiv astro-ph/0210394 )

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  25. [25]

    R., Vogeley M

    Hoyle F., Rojas R. R., Vogeley M. S., Brinkmann J., 2005, @doi [ApJ] 10.1086/427176 , 620, 618

    work page doi:10.1086/427176 2005

  26. [26]

    Kraljic K., et al., 2017, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1093/mnras/stx2638 , 474, 547

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2638 2017

  27. [27]

    Krolewski A., et al., 2025, @doi [JCAP] 10.1088/1475-7516/2025/01/147 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025JCAP...01..147K 2025, 147

    work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/01/147 2025

  28. [28]

    G., et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw1888 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.462.3854L 462, 3854

    Lacey C. G., et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw1888 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.462.3854L 462, 3854

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw1888 2016

  29. [29]

    Lan T.-W., Ménard B., Mo H., 2016, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1093/mnras/stw898 , 459, 3998

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw898 2016

  30. [30]

    Lan T.-W., et al., 2023, @doi [ApJ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aca5fa , 943, 68

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aca5fa 2023

  31. [31]

    Loveday J., et al., 2012, @doi [MNRAS] https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.20111.x , 420, 1239

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.20111.x 2012

  32. [32]

    McNaught-Roberts T., et al., 2014, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1093/mnras/stu1886 , 445, 2125

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1886 2014

  33. [33]

    N., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/ad45fe , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024AJ....168...95M 168, 95

    Miller T. N., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/ad45fe , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024AJ....168...95M 168, 95

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad45fe 2024

  34. [34]

    et al., 2015, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/201526080 , 581, A11

    Moretti, A. et al., 2015, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/201526080 , 581, A11

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201526080 2015

  35. [35]

    Moustakas J., Scholte D., Dey B., Khederlarian A., 2023, FastSpecFit: Fast spectral synthesis and emission-line fitting of DESI spectra , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:2308.005 ( @eprint ascl 2308.005 )

    work page 2023

  36. [36]

    D., et al., 2023, @doi [AJ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aca5f9 , 165, 50

    Myers A. D., et al., 2023, @doi [AJ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aca5f9 , 165, 50

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aca5f9 2023

  37. [37]

    Norberg P., et al., 2002, @doi [ ] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05831.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002MNRAS.336..907N 336, 907

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05831.x 2002

  38. [38]

    E., Lacey, C

    Norberg P., Baugh C. M., Gaztañaga E., Croton D. J., 2009, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14389.x , 396, 19

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14389.x 2009

  39. [39]

    Planck Collaboration et al., 2020, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/201833910 , 641, A6

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833910 2020

  40. [40]

    Poppett C., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/ad76a4 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024AJ....168..245P 168, 245

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad76a4 2024

  41. [41]

    J., et al., 2025, @doi [JCAP] 10.1088/1475-7516/2025/01/125 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025JCAP...01..125R 2025, 125

    Ross A. J., et al., 2025, @doi [JCAP] 10.1088/1475-7516/2025/01/125 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025JCAP...01..125R 2025, 125

    work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/01/125 2025

  42. [42]

    Ruiz-Macias O., et al., 2020, @doi [RNAAS] 10.3847/2515-5172/abc25a , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020RNAAS...4..187R 4, 187

    work page doi:10.3847/2515-5172/abc25a 2020

  43. [43]

    F., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/ad0832 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023AJ....166..259S 166, 259

    Schlafly E. F., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/ad0832 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023AJ....166..259S 166, 259

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad0832 2023

  44. [44]

    J., Finkbeiner, D

    Schlegel D. J., Finkbeiner D. P., Davis M., 1998, @doi [ApJ] 10.1086/305772 , 500, 525

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1086/305772 1998

  45. [45]

    Schmidt M., 1968, @doi [ ] 10.1086/149446 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1968ApJ...151..393S 151, 393

    work page doi:10.1086/149446 1968

  46. [46]

    H., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/ac9ab1 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023AJ....165....9S 165, 9

    Silber J. H., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/ac9ab1 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023AJ....165....9S 165, 9

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac9ab1 2023

  47. [47]

    B., 2002, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05651.x , 335, 712

    Trentham N., Tully R. B., 2002, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05651.x , 335, 712

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05651.x 2002

  48. [48]

    L., et al

    Wright E. L., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/140/6/1868 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010AJ....140.1868W 140, 1868

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1088/0004-6256/140/6/1868 2010

  49. [49]

    Zehavi I., et al., 2005, @doi [ApJ] 10.1086/431891 , 630, 1

    work page doi:10.1086/431891 2005

  50. [50]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.state := if if FUNCTION not #0 #1 if FUNCTION and 'skip pop #0 if FUNCTION or pop #1...

    work page