Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 2 cited by

A combination of sparse spectroscopic redshifts and dense photometric samples maps two z=3.1 protocluster complexes in three dimensions, confirming COSMOS-z3.1-A as a proto-supercluster of ten density peaks destined to become a Coma-scale s

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 ↗

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 22:08 UTC pith:QCTYYWQN

load-bearing objection A useful 3D characterization of two z=3.1 protocluster complexes with a solid mock-based method, but the proto-supercluster and mass claims rest on an unverified spec-z representativeness assumption and a small LAB sample. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2511.11826 v3 pith:QCTYYWQN submitted 2025-11-14 astro-ph.GA

ODIN: Characterizing the Three-dimensional Structure of Two Protocluster Complexes at z = 3.1

Vandana Ramakrishnan , Ashley Ortiz , Byeongha Moon , Eunsoo Jun , David Schlegel , Kyoung-Soo Lee , Jessica Nicole Aguilar , Maria Celeste Artale
show 47 more authors
David Brooks Maria Candela Cerdosino Robin Ciardullo Todd Claybaugh Andrei Cuceu Axel de la Macorra Arjun Dey Nicole M. Firestone Andreu Font-Ribera Jaime E. Forero-Romero Eric Gawiser Enrique Gazta\~naga Caryl Gronwall Lucia Guaita Gaston Gutierrez Sungryong Hong Ho Seong Hwang Sang Hyeok Im Paulina Troncoso Iribarren Woong-Seob Jeong Dick Joyce Ankit Kumar Claire Lamman Martin Landriau Seong-Kook Lee Jaehyun Lee Aaron Meisner Ramon Miquel John Moustakas Seshadri Nadathur Gautam Nagaraj Julie Nantais Nelson Padilla Changbom Park Will Percival Francisco Prada Ignasi P\'erez-R\`afols Graziano Rossi Eusebio Sanchez Joseph Harry Silber Hyunmi Song David Sprayberry Gregory Tarl\'e Francisco Valdes Yujin Yang Ann Zabludoff Hu Zou
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords protoclustersproto-superclusterLyα emitters3D large-scale structureredshift-space reconstructiondescendant mass estimatesnarrowband imagingcosmic filaments
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 paper claims that two z=3.1 protocluster complexes, seen as dense groups of Lyα-emitting galaxies, can be mapped in three dimensions by combining sparse spectroscopic redshifts with denser photometric samples, and that this mapping reveals one of the complexes to be a proto-supercluster: a single structure containing ten separate density peaks destined to become clusters. If right, this means a structure roughly 100,000 cMpc^3 in volume, with total mass near 10^16 solar masses, already existed when the universe was about 2.2 billion years old. It would be the earliest such supercluster known, comparable to the previously known system at z≈2.4 but seen at a younger epoch. The same method also shows the two complexes as elongated, sightline-dependent structures with filamentary tails feeding the peaks, and places Lyα blobs in the outskirts rather than the cores.

Core claim

The central claim is that COSMOS-z3.1-A is a confirmed proto-supercluster at z=3.1, analogous to the only previously known high-redshift proto-supercluster at z≈2.4 but observed at an earlier epoch. The paper argues that reconstructing the three-dimensional galaxy distribution from a hybrid sample—spectroscopically confirmed galaxies providing a redshift prior per sightline, photometrically selected galaxies filling in the density field—yields ten density peaks in COSMOS-z3.1-A and four in COSMOS-z3.1-C. Each peak is interpreted as a protocluster core; summing their volumes and applying a bias-corrected density-to-mass relation gives descendant masses above 10^15.3 solar masses, exceeding th

What carries the argument

The load-bearing device is a sightline-specific redshift prior: within each small three-dimensional cell (2 cMpc bins, smoothed with a Gaussian), the redshift distribution of spectroscopically confirmed Lyα emitters is taken to represent the true redshift distribution of all photometrically selected emitters in that cell. Each unconfirmed galaxy is assigned a redshift drawn from its cell's prior, repeated 500 times, and the averaged realizations define the 3D density field. Density peaks are then defined as contiguous regions above the top 3% density threshold with volume at least 500 cMpc^3, stable across 95% of realizations. The paper validates this machinery by constructing mock observati

Load-bearing premise

The reconstruction stands or falls on the assumption that the redshift distribution of the spectroscopically confirmed galaxies in each small sightline cell is the same as the true redshift distribution of all photometrically selected galaxies in that cell, which requires random, unbiased spectroscopic targeting and very low contamination of the photometric sample.

What would settle it

Look inside one reconstructed density peak with complete, blind spectroscopy of every LAE in that volume, or with a redshift indicator independent of Lyα such as rest-frame optical emission lines. If the confirmed galaxies do not cluster at the reconstructed peak's redshift, or if the peak disperses when Lyα velocity offsets are removed, the reconstruction would be shown to manufacture structure rather than recover it.

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

If this is right

  • If the reconstruction is faithful, COSMOS-z3.1-A will evolve into an ultra-massive structure with descendant mass log(M/M⊙) ≈ 15.5 within its peaks and ≈ 16.0 over the full supercluster volume, about twice Coma's mass.
  • Both complexes are confirmed as multiple distinct protocluster cores, implying that a single 2D overdensity can hide several independent halos along the line of sight.
  • The validation implies that a spectroscopic fraction as low as 20% is sufficient to recover large-scale structure when combined with a dense photometric LAE sample, at least for the most massive systems.
  • Descendant mass estimates from 3D reconstruction carry 0.2–0.3 dex scatter, roughly half that of purely 2D estimates.
  • Lyα blobs near the complexes sit about 17 cMpc from peak centers, suggesting they trace the outskirts and infalling material rather than the dense cores.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The sightline-dependence result implies that narrowband surveys may systematically miss proto-superclusters whose longest axis lies along the line of sight; counting such structures requires either multiple filters or spectroscopic coverage spanning the full filter depth.
  • If LAB outskirts are confirmed with larger samples, it would favor models in which cold accretion or proto-group gas powers the blobs near the edges of overdense regions, and would sharpen LABs as tracers of filaments rather than cores.
  • A direct test would be to apply the same reconstruction in a field with independent spectroscopic redshifts from a different emission line and check whether the peaks survive; agreement would confirm the method, while disagreement would isolate Lyα velocity-offset bias.
  • The volume-density bound of roughly 5×10^-8 cMpc^-3 implies that finding analogs will require simulations with gigaparsec-scale boxes, so similar analyses on such simulations could predict how many of these systems the full survey footprint should contain.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents a probabilistic 3D reconstruction of two z=3.1 LAE overdensities in COSMOS, COSMOS-z3.1-A and COSMOS-z3.1-C, combining narrowband photometry from ODIN with Keck/DEIMOS, Gemini/GMOS, and DESI spectroscopy. Spectroscopic redshifts are used to build sightline-specific redshift priors; these priors are then used to assign redshifts to all photometric LAE candidates over 500 realizations. The method is validated against IllustrisTNG300 mocks, showing lower total variation distance relative to the dark matter distribution than spec-z-only reconstructions. The resulting maps show elongated, multi-peak structure; the authors identify ten density peaks in COSMOS-z3.1-A and four in COSMOS-z3.1-C, estimate descendant masses of log(M/Msun) ~ 14-15 per peak, and argue that COSMOS-z3.1-A is a proto-supercluster comparable to Hyperion at z=2.4, but at an earlier epoch. They also report that Ly-alpha blobs preferentially avoid the density-peak cores and provide simulation-based guidance on spectroscopic sampling strategies.

Significance. If the central claim holds, this is an important result: COSMOS-z3.1-A would be the earliest known proto-supercluster, with a total enclosed mass of log(M/Msun) ~ 16.0 and a volume of ~10^5 cMpc^3 at z=3.1, and its ten peaks would be individually destined to become Coma-scale clusters. The paper's strengths are substantial: the reconstruction is tested on TNG300, the validation metric (DTV) is clearly defined and shows a consistent improvement over spec-z-only maps, the robustness to binning/smoothing is examined in Appendix A, and the effect of redshift-space distortions and Ly-alpha velocity offsets is quantified in Appendix B. The data products and interactive visualizations are made publicly available. However, the two main scientific conclusions—the multi-peak morphology and the descendant masses—both depend on the redshift-prior assumption in Section 3.1 and on a simulation-based mass calibration that is partially extrapolated beyond the regime in which it is tested.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3.1] The central assumption is N(z,S_i) = N_spec(z,S_i): the redshift distribution of spectroscopically confirmed LAEs in a 2x2x2 cMpc sightline cell equals the true distribution of all photometric LAEs in that cell. This is load-bearing for the number of peaks, their morphology, and their masses. The paper argues that targets are selected randomly within masks and that sample purity is >=95%, but the masks are placed on 2D overdensities (Fig. 3), and many cells are populated by sources from a single mask. If a mask preferentially covers a sub-structure at a particular redshift, or if Ly-alpha detection efficiency varies with line flux/wavelength within the N501 band, the prior will imprint that redshift structure onto all photometric LAEs, artificially creating and stabilizing peaks. The TNG300 validation does not retire this risk: mock spec-z sources are assigned only in top-25% surface-den
  2. [Section 5.2 / Section 6.2] The descendant-mass calibration is applied to a regime where it is not directly tested. Equation (3) uses a bias b_g=1.8 and a factor-of-two correction calibrated on TNG300 structures with z=0 masses log(M200/Msun) ~ 14.6-15.2 (Table 2). The individual peaks in Table 3 fall mostly in this range, but the paper's headline claim for COSMOS-z3.1-A is the total enclosed mass log(M/Msun) ~ 16.0 within the 92%-threshold volume, and Section 5.2 states explicitly that 'there are no directly comparable structures to COSMOS-z3.1-A in TNG300.' The extrapolation from the calibrated range to the total proto-supercluster mass is therefore not protected by the mock validation, and the quoted 0.2-0.3 dex uncertainty does not include this extrapolation error. The comparison to Hyperion's total mass of log(M/Msun) ~ 15.7 rests on this extrapolation. I recommend either calibrating on larger-volume simulatio
  3. [Section 5.1] The line-of-sight extent of COSMOS-z3.1-A is set by the N501 filter transmission (about 60 cMpc), and the paper notes that the bulk of the structure lies outside the central 2 deg^2 of COSMOS, where the richest ancillary data exist. The reported total volume of ~9.8x10^4 cMpc^3 above the 92% threshold is therefore a filter-limited quantity, not the intrinsic extent of the structure. The comparison with Hyperion, whose line-of-sight extent (~150 cMpc) is much larger than the ODIN filter depth, is informative but should be framed as a comparison of observed volumes rather than intrinsic volumes. This is a caveat to the 'similar volume' statement in Section 7 and should be made explicit in the abstract-level conclusion.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 4.2] Typo: 'log(M/M_sun),≈15.3' should read 'log(M/M_sun) ≈ 15.3'.
  2. [Appendix A / Figure 14] Figure 14 caption lists smoothing scales (sigma = 5, 3, 2, 1) that are not described in the text, which says a 3D Gaussian kernel with standard deviation 2-3 cMpc was adopted. Please clarify the relation between the caption values and the adopted scales.
  3. [Section 6.1] The fitting function D_TV = (Sigma_LAE/0.0115)^-0.674 + 0.103 is stated without an uncertainty on the fitted parameters or a goodness-of-fit measure. Please provide at least the fit uncertainties.
  4. [Table 3] The column header 'N_spec' is clear in context but the table lacks a footnote defining whether this is the number of confirmed LAEs within the peak voxels or within the projected peak region. Please define.
  5. [General] The paper would benefit from a short explicit statement in Section 3.1 about the number of spec-z sources per sightline cell, since the cells are only 2x2x2 cMpc; this is relevant to the reader's ability to assess when the prior is locally dominated by a single mask.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; the reconstruction is validated against an external simulation and does not reduce to its inputs by construction.

full rationale

The central derivation is the probabilistic 3D reconstruction of Section 3.1, which explicitly assumes N(z,S_i) ≈ N_spec(z,S_i) and then assigns redshifts to photometric LAEs from that sightline-specific prior. This is a stated modeling assumption, not a hidden self-definition: the output 3D map is a kernel-smoothed combination of confirmed spec-z positions and photo-z angular positions, and the paper's claims about peaks, elongations, LAB locations, and descendant masses are outputs of that reconstruction rather than inputs. The method is tested against IllustrisTNG300-1, an external cosmological hydrodynamical simulation, by comparing reconstructed galaxy distributions to the underlying dark matter distribution via D_TV; this provides independent benchmark support. The descendant mass calibration (factor-of-two correction and 0.2–0.3 dex scatter) is derived from simulated TNG300 structures with known z=0 masses, then applied to the data — a standard simulation-based calibration, not a fit to the target result. The paper's numerous self-citations (Ramakrishnan et al. 2023, 2024, 2025; Lee et al. 2024) are used for data provenance — ODIN survey definitions, the initial 2D protocluster candidates, and LAB catalogs — and are not invoked as uniqueness theorems or as substitutes for the present analysis. No load-bearing reduction to a fitted parameter or to a self-citation chain is present. Therefore no circular step is identified.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

7 free parameters · 6 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims depend on a chain of modeling choices and assumptions rather than on new physics: the equivalence of spec-z and photo-z redshift distributions, the linear bias relation, the transferability of TNG300-calibrated thresholds and corrections, and the Steidel mass estimator. The free parameters above are the most impactful constants; none are fitted to the observed data directly, but they materially shape the reported peak counts and masses.

free parameters (7)
  • Peculiar-motion mass correction factor = ~2 (multiplicative overestimation)
    Section 6.2: M_est from Eq. 3 overestimates true z=0 mass by factor ~2 in TNG300; this factor is applied to all observed mass estimates.
  • Density threshold for peak identification = top 3% of voxel density
    Section 6.2: chosen to match 'true' protocluster volume in TNG300; directly sets V_PC and thus M_est.
  • Minimum peak volume = 500 cMpc^3
    Section 4.1: set to match a sphere of radius 5 cMpc; affects which peaks are counted (10 vs. 4).
  • Voxel stability threshold = 95% of 100 reconstructions
    Section 4.1: peaks are kept only if voxels are above density threshold in >95% of iterations; ad hoc.
  • Gaussian smoothing scale = 2–3 cMpc (3D)
    Section 3.1: chosen after tests; robustness shown in Appendix A but the scale affects reconstructed morphology.
  • Redshift-prior probability floor = 1% of maximum probability
    Section 3.1: added to avoid zero-probability voxels; arbitrary.
  • Galaxy bias b_g = 1.8
    Section 4.1: adopted from external clustering papers (White et al. 2024; Herrera et al. 2025); not derived here.
axioms (6)
  • domain assumption In each sightline, the spec-z redshift distribution equals the true photo-z LAE redshift distribution (N(z,S_i) ≈ N_spec(z,S_i))
    Section 3.1: central premise for assigning redshifts to unconfirmed LAEs; if false, density peaks could be artifacts.
  • domain assumption Galaxy overdensity is related linearly to matter overdensity: δ_g = b_g δ_m
    Section 3.1 and Eq. 3; used for descendant mass estimates.
  • domain assumption TNG300 mocks faithfully represent the clustering and structure of real z≈3 LAEs/protoclusters
    Section 3.2 and 6.2; used for validation and to calibrate thresholds and the mass correction factor.
  • standard math Steidel et al. (1998, 2000) estimator M = (1+δ_g)/b_g ρ0 V_PC
    Eq. 3; standard estimator for protocluster descendant mass.
  • standard math Concordance ΛCDM cosmology (h=0.7, Ω_m=0.27, Ω_Λ=0.73)
    Section 1; adopted cosmology for distance and mass calculations.
  • domain assumption N501 filter selection defines the redshift slice for LAEs (z=3.093–3.155)
    Section 3.1; sets the line-of-sight extent of the survey and the prior for cells without spec-z.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 30878 in / 15357 out tokens · 125002 ms · 2026-08-03T22:08:57.338061+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We present a detailed study of the 3D morphology of two extended associations of multiple protoclusters at $z=3.1$. These protocluster 'complexes', designated COSMOS-z3.1-A and COSMOS-z3.1-C, are the most prominent overdensities of $z=3.1$ Ly$\alpha$ emitters (LAEs) identified in the COSMOS field by the One-hundred-deg$^2$ DECam Imaging in Narrowbands (ODIN) survey. These protocluster complexes have been followed up with extensive spectroscopy from Keck, Gemini, and DESI. Using a probabilistic method that combines photometrically selected and spectroscopically confirmed LAEs, we reconstruct the 3D structure of these complexes on scales of $\approx$50 cMpc. We validate our reconstruction method using the IllustrisTNG300-1 cosmological hydrodynamical simulation and show that it consistently outperforms approaches relying solely on spectroscopic data. The resulting 3D maps reveal that both complexes are irregular and elongated along a single axis, emphasizing the impact of sightline on our perception of structure morphology. The complexes consist of multiple density peaks, ten in COSMOS-z3.1-A and four in COSMOS-z3.1-C. The former is confirmed to be a proto-supercluster, similar to {\it Hyperion} at $z=2.4$ but observed at an even earlier epoch. Multiple `tails' connected to the cores of the density peaks are seen, likely representing cosmic filaments feeding into these extremely overdense regions. The 3D reconstructions further provide strong evidence that Ly$\alpha$ blobs preferentially reside in the outskirts of the highest density regions. Descendant mass estimates of the density peaks suggest that COSMOS-z3.1-A and COSMOS-z3.1-C will evolve to become ultra-massive structures by $z=0$, with total masses $\log(M/M_\odot) \gtrsim 15.3$, exceeding that of Coma.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.11826 by Aaron Meisner, Andrei Cuceu, Andreu Font-Ribera, Ankit Kumar, Ann Zabludoff, Arjun Dey, Ashley Ortiz, Axel de la Macorra, Byeongha Moon, Caryl Gronwall, Changbom Park, Claire Lamman, David Brooks, David Schlegel, David Sprayberry, Dick Joyce, Enrique Gazta\~naga, Eric Gawiser, Eunsoo Jun, Eusebio Sanchez, Francisco Prada, Francisco Valdes, Gaston Gutierrez, Gautam Nagaraj, Graziano Rossi, Gregory Tarl\'e, Ho Seong Hwang, Hu Zou, Hyunmi Song, Ignasi P\'erez-R\`afols, Jaehyun Lee, Jaime E. Forero-Romero, Jessica Nicole Aguilar, John Moustakas, Joseph Harry Silber, Julie Nantais, Kyoung-Soo Lee, Lucia Guaita, Maria Candela Cerdosino, Maria Celeste Artale, Martin Landriau, Nelson Padilla, Nicole M. Firestone, Paulina Troncoso Iribarren, Ramon Miquel, Robin Ciardullo, Sang Hyeok Im, Seong-Kook Lee, Seshadri Nadathur, Sungryong Hong, Todd Claybaugh, Vandana Ramakrishnan, Will Percival, Woong-Seob Jeong, Yujin Yang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Examples of the spectra of LAEs confirmed with Keck II/DEIMOS (top row) and Gemini/GMOS (bottom row). The black curve shows the N501 filter transmission function, while the peak of the Lyα line, used to infer the redshift, is indicated by a vertical red line. The 2D spectra (shown in the bottom of each panel) are slightly smoothed to better distinguish the presence of line emission. Red horizontal lines in… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: As [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Spectroscopically confirmed sources for COSMOS-z3.1-A (top) and COSMOS-z3.1-C (bottom), overlaid on the 2D LAE surface density map. White contours show the boundaries of the protocluster candidates identified from the 2D surface density map (i.e. as overdensities of photometrically selected LAEs). In the left-hand panels, all identified LAEs (dots) and LABs (stars) are shown, with blue symbols indicating o… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Left: A 3D visualization of the smoothed priors showing the spatial distribution of galaxies, with two lines (green and blue) representing the line-of-sight at two randomly chosen x and y positions. Note that the third and fourth vertical lines from the left indicate the back face of the cubic volume under consideration. Right: Probability distributions along the line-of-sight for each corresponding positi… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Comparison of the spatial distributions of LAEs and the underlying dark matter density in a 60x60x60 cMpc3 region centered on the largest structure in TNG300 at z = 3. Top: (a) Projected dark matter density (smoothed for visualization) over a 60x60x20 cMpc3 slab. (b) Same dark matter projection, overlaid with spec-z mock LAE sample, color-coded by redshift. (c) Same dark matter projection, overlaid with al… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The 3D reconstruction of COSMOS-z3.1-A showing four various angles, plotted in Mayavi. The X- and Y-axis represent the east-west and north-south directions respectively (such that a larger X value indicates a position further to the west of the structure, and a larger Y value a position to the north), while the Z-axis represents the line-of-sight direction (such that a larger Z value indicates a higher red… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: 3D perspective of the ten density peaks making up COSMOS-z3.1-A, with each peak given a unique color. The left panel shows the density peaks face-on (as in the top-left panel of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Main panel: Contours of the 3D density peaks of COSMOS-z3.1-A in projection (shown in color, with the color used for each peak corresponding to that used in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: As [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: As [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: The surface density map of ODIN N419 LAEs in the field of Hyperion. The protocluster detected by ODIN is highlighted by a yellow contour, while the 2D overdensities detected by Cucciati et al. (2018) (other colored contours) and the positions of the individual density peaks (colored stars) are shown in comparison. Shaded regions in the right panel indicate the redshift ranges of the overdensities indicate… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Left: Total variation distance, DTV, quantifying the agreement between the 3D galaxy-traced distribution and the underlying dark matter distribution, as a function of the fraction of spectroscopically confirmed sources, fspec. The gray shaded region indicates the range of fspec in COSMOS-z3.1-A and C. The LAE surface density is fixed to the observed value. Two galaxy samples are tested: mock LAEs (blue), … view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Left: Descendant mass at z = 0 of the 37 structures considered in our analysis, selected from the 30 most massive protoclusters in TNG300 viewed along three sightlines (x-axis), compared with the descendant mass estimated from the corresponding 3D reconstruction (y-axis). The descendant mass estimates from the reconstruction are corrected for the overestimation of galaxy density due to peculiar motion (se… view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: The effect of bin size and smoothing choices on the reconstructed structure of COSMOS-z3.1-C. Each row corre￾sponds to a different reconstruction method and each column shows the reconstruction from a different viewpoint. Rows (a), (b), and (c) use 3D Gaussian smoothing with bin sizes of (2 cMpc)3 , (3 cMpc)3 , and (4 cMpc)3 , respectively. Row (d) applies 1D Gaussian smoothing along the redshift directio… view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Total variation distance DTV of the 3D reconstruction of the progenitors of the 30 most massive clusters in TNG300 (Andrews et al. 2025), relative to the dark matter distribution. The blue line indicates DTV for the 3D reconstruction carried out without incorporating the effect of peculiar motion on the observed redshift. The orange indicates that for the 3D reconstruction which does incorporate this effe… 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 2 Pith papers

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

  1. ODIN: A New Lyman Alpha Blob Selection Method, Sample, and Statistical Analysis at $z\sim3.1$

    astro-ph.GA 2025-12 conditional novelty 7.0

    A forced-photometry subtraction pipeline that removes continuum galaxies from narrowband imaging recovers 23 diffuse Lyman-alpha blobs missed by standard LAE-based selection, yielding 112 LABs at z≈3.1 whose number de...

  2. ODIN: Clustering Properties of Ly$\alpha$ Blobs at $z$ $\sim$ 2.4 and 3.1

    astro-ph.GA 2026-01 conditional novelty 6.0

    Lyα blobs at z≈2.4 and 3.1 cluster with bias b≈4, implying host dark matter halos of ~10^12 M⊙, though a cross-correlation check gives lower values.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

3 extracted references · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    2025, PhRvD, 112, 083515, doi: 10.1103/tr6y-kpc6 Adame, A

    Abdul Karim, M., Aguilar, J., Ahlen, S., et al. 2025, PhRvD, 112, 083515, doi: 10.1103/tr6y-kpc6 Adame, A. G., Aguilar, J., Ahlen, S., et al. 2025, JCAP, 2025, 028, doi: 10.1088/1475-7516/2025/07/028 Aihara, H., Arimoto, N., Armstrong, R., et al. 2018a, PASJ, 70, S4, doi: 10.1093/pasj/psx066 Aihara, H., Armstrong, R., Bickerton, S., et al. 2018b, PASJ, 70...

    doi:10.48550/arxiv.2503.07923 2025

  2. [3]

    the ‘Lyα’ redshift, which is further redshifted from the observed value as discussed in the following paragraph. By comparing the 3D reconstructions using these three redshift values for the same galaxies, we can assess the effect of these uncertainties in the measured redshift on our 3D reconstruction. To determine the additional velocity offset used to ...

    2020

  3. [1972]

    in observations of galaxy clusters. At high redshift, in the vicinity of overdense but unvirialized protoclusters, the redshift space distortion is instead expected to result in the opposite effect (the Kaiser effect, Kaiser 1987), wherein the overdensity is enhanced and appears more compact along the line-of-sight due to the infalling motion of the galax...

    1987