Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 161 references

ReveaLLAGN 1: JWST Emission-Line Spectra Reveal Low-Luminosity AGN with UV-Deficient SEDs and Warm Molecular Gas

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read JWST spectra of eight low-luminosity AGN reveal a transition at an Eddington ratio near 10^-3.5 where the ionizing ultraviolet output drops by up to an order of magnitude, indicating a switch to a radiatively inefficient accretion flow.

desk verdict A valuable JWST dataset and a plausible but not yet nailed transition at log L/LEdd ~ -3.5, with the main caveat being the bolometric correction used to compute Eddington ratios. read the letter →

arxiv 2601.16977 v3 pith:D56K23DU submitted 2026-01-23 astro-ph.GA

Kameron Goold , Anil Seth , Mallory Molina , David Ohlson , Nischal Acharya , Torsten Böker , Antoine Dumont , Michael Eracleous
show 15 more authors
Anja Feldmeier-Krause Juan Antonio Fernández-Ontiveros Elena Gallo Andy D. Goulding Kayhan Gültekin Luis C. Ho Nadine Neumayer Richard M. Plotkin Almudena Prieto Jessie C. Runnoe Shobita Satyapal Glenn van de Ven Jonelle L. Walsh Feng Yuan Nora Lützgendorf
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords low-luminosityAGNJWSTspectroscopyemission-linediagnosticsEddingtonratioradiativelyinefficientaccretionflowmolecularhydrogenexcitationsilicateemissionneonlines
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper uses JWST near- and mid-infrared spectroscopy to isolate the nuclear emission of eight low-luminosity active galactic nuclei (LLAGN) plus Cen A, detecting high-ionization lines an order of magnitude fainter than previously possible. It claims that emission-line diagnostics show a transition at log(L_bol/L_Edd) ~ -3.5, below which the spectral energy distribution becomes increasingly deficient in ultraviolet photons. The evidence is a conditional linear fit to [Ne V] 14.3 µm versus 2-10 keV X-ray luminosity, finding a break at that Eddington ratio with [Ne V] suppressed by up to an order of magnitude at fixed X-ray luminosity in the low-Eddington branch. Diagnostic ratios like [Ne V]/[Ne II], [Ar III]/[Ar II], and [S IV]/[S III] are best matched by photoionization with a power-law continuum lacking a thermal UV bump. The paper also finds molecular hydrogen excitation temperatures ~500 K hotter than in luminous AGN or star-forming galaxies, pointing to additional heating from shocks or X-ray-dominated regions.

What carries the argument

The argument rests on two main tools. First, a conditional linear model fits separate slopes and intercepts to the [Ne V] 14.3 µm versus 2-10 keV X-ray luminosity relation above and below a threshold Eddington ratio; the best fit (by BIC) places the break at log(L_bol/L_Edd) = -3.5 (+0.6/-1.0). Second, diagnostic line ratios ([Ne V]/[Ne II], [Ar III]/[Ar II], [S IV]/[S III]) are compared with grids from shock and photoionization models; the data systematically favor power-law photoionization models (without a UV bump) over disk models or shocks alone. These tools together localize the change in ionizing photon production to the accretion state of the black hole.

What would settle it

A direct measurement of bolometric luminosity from multi-wavelength SEDs for a sample of LLAGN spanning the critical Eddington ratio, followed by a recomputation of the [Ne V]–X-ray relation, would settle the claim. If the break vanishes or moves by more than the quoted uncertainty when using SED-based L_bol, the claimed accretion-state transition would be falsified. Alternatively, finding a low-Eddington LLAGN with strong [Ne V] at fixed X-ray luminosity (i.e., no suppression) would already contradict the observed relation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that low-luminosity AGN below log(L_bol/L_Edd) ~ -3.5 have a UV-deficient ionizing continuum. Using [Ne V] 14.3 µm as a proxy for photons above 97 eV, the authors find that the relation between [Ne V] and 2-10 keV X-ray luminosity breaks at this Eddington ratio: at fixed X-ray luminosity, [Ne V] emission is suppressed by up to an order of magnitude in the low-Eddington regime. The observed ratios of high- to low-ionization lines are consistent with photoionization by a power-law SED without a thermal UV bump, rather than by the standard accretion-disk SED of higher-luminosity AGN. Together, these results indicate a genuine change in the ionizing spectrum near this ac

Load-bearing premise

The paper's division between low- and high-Eddington sources relies on bolometric luminosities derived from a single X-ray bolometric correction calibrated on more luminous AGN; if that correction is wrong for LLAGN, the claimed transition at log(L_bol/L_Edd) ~ -3.5 could shift or disappear.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If correct, LLAGN below log(L_bol/L_Edd) ~ -3.5 are powered by radiatively inefficient accretion flows with little or no standard thin-disk UV emission, meaning mechanical feedback (jets/outflows) is the dominant energy output in this regime.
  • The suppression of [Ne V] at low Eddington ratios implies that using this line as a bolometric indicator for low-luminosity AGN will systematically underestimate the accretion power unless the Eddington ratio is taken into account.
  • The elevated H2 excitation temperatures and H2/PAH ratios indicate that kinetic-mode feedback, via shocks or X-ray irradiation, heats the molecular interstellar medium in LLAGN, which may affect star formation in galaxy centers.
  • The detection of nuclear silicate emission in most targets suggests that optically thin dust survives at parsec scales around low-luminosity black holes, informing models of the torus and dust distribution in the absence of a classic torus.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • An extension not explored in the paper: the same break might appear in other high-ionization lines like [O IV] 26 µm or [Ne VI] 7.6 µm; if so, it would strengthen the claim that the UV deficit is a general property of the ionizing continuum, not a peculiarity of the [Ne V] line.
  • A testable prediction: the location of the break at log(L_bol/L_Edd) ~ -3.5 is close to theoretical expectations for the transition to radiatively inefficient accretion; direct SED-based L_bol measurements for the same sources would show whether the break remains at the same Eddington ratio or moves, which would distinguish between an intrinsic accretion-state change and an artifact of the adopted
  • If the UV-deficient SED is real, one might expect the optical/UV continuum of these LLAGN to lack the characteristic 'big blue bump'; this could be tested with spatially resolved UV spectroscopy or by searching for a soft X-ray excess in high-quality X-ray data.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents JWST NIRSpec and MIRI/MRS spectra of eight low-luminosity AGN (LLAGN), including Cen A from archival data. The authors measure a large set of infrared emission lines, including high-ionization species such as [Ne V] 14.3 µm and [O IV] 26 µm, and use them to argue that below log(L_bol/L_Edd) ≈ -3.5 the ionizing continuum becomes increasingly deficient in UV photons. The main evidence is a conditional linear model fit to the [Ne V]–L_2-10 keV relation, which prefers a break at that Eddington ratio (ΔBIC ≈ 9), and a set of diagnostic line-ratio diagrams in which the LLAGN are better matched by photoionization models with a power-law, UV-bump-free SED than by accretion-disk SEDs or shocks. Additional results include elevated rotational H2 excitation temperatures, H2/PAH ratios consistent with AGN, and compact nuclear silicate emission in most targets.

Significance. If the claimed transition is correct, it provides a direct, IR-based diagnostic for the switch from a standard thin disk to a radiatively inefficient accretion flow in LLAGN, a regime that is otherwise difficult to probe. The observational strengths are substantial: high-quality JWST data, a careful line-fitting pipeline with Monte Carlo uncertainties, explicit spatial-concentration checks against point-source encircled-energy profiles, and public release of reduced cubes and extracted spectra. The H2 aperture correction is tested against sky subtraction, and the [Ne V]–[O IV] correlation is extended to lower luminosities than previous samples. The weaknesses concern the robustness of the Eddington-ratio axis and the statistical weight of the break, both of which are load-bearing for the headline claim.

major comments (3)
  1. [§2.3, Eq. (2); §5.1.2, Fig. 6] The Eddington-ratio split that defines the claimed -3.5 transition is computed from the Duras et al. (2020) KX(L2-10 keV) bolometric correction, calibrated on ~1000 luminous Type 1/2 AGN with standard SEDs. The paper itself reports a median absolute difference of 0.54 dex between this proxy and direct SED-integrated L_bol for the four LLAGN with available SEDs (NGC 1052, M87, Cen A, Sombrero) — exactly the sources that occupy the low-Eddington branch. Because z = log(KX) + log(LX) - log(L_Edd), any systematic error in KX for UV-deficient LLAGN directly shifts the split variable. If the true KX is lower, the low-branch points shift to lower z and the fitted z0 could move by more than the quoted +0.6/-1.0 dex, or the break could vanish. Please test robustness: recompute the conditional fit with SED-based L_bol for the four sources, with an alternative bolometric correction, or with z defin
  2. [§5.1.2, Fig. 6] The statistical evidence for a break is modest: ΔBIC ≈ 9 with a threshold plus separate slopes/intercepts (2 extra parameters). The two branch slopes are consistent with each other within 1σ (0.957±0.109 vs. 0.845±0.190), so the claimed effect is essentially an offset, not a change in slope. The paper does not state how many sources lie in each branch; from Table 1, only a handful (≈5–6) lie below -3.5. The quoted threshold uncertainty is also asymmetric and large. Please report the number of sources per branch, show residual plots, and run a leave-one-out or bootstrap analysis to confirm that the offset is not driven by one or two extreme low-LX points. The abstract's 'order of magnitude' decrease should be quantified with the actual model offset and its uncertainty.
  3. [§5.1.1, Fig. 5] The 'power-law' photoionization grid that the LLAGN ratios agree with is constructed from the Sombrero SED (Fernández-Ontiveros et al. 2023), i.e., from a UV-deficient LLAGN that is itself part of the sample. This does not by itself invalidate the comparison, but it weakens the claim that the data are 'consistent with a UV-deficient SED' because the grid was built from a UV-deficient source. The argument would be much stronger if the UV-bump amplitude were a free parameter (e.g., varying the fraction of thermal disk emission) and the models showed that the data prefer a reduced or zero bump. Also, the full model description is deferred to 'Acharya et al., in prep.'; the paper should include enough detail (ionizing SED shape, metallicity, density, column, and the exact CLOUDY parameter ranges used) to allow reproduction, since this is the primary evidence for the central 'UV-deficient SED
minor comments (5)
  1. [Fig. 6 caption] The caption says sources with log(L_Bol/L_Edd) less than -3 are plotted as circles and higher as triangles, while the text and abstract use -3.5. Reconcile this inconsistency.
  2. [Abstract and §5.1.2 vs. §6] The threshold is quoted as -3.5 +0.6/-1.0 in Section 5.1.2 but -3.5 +0.8/-0.7 in the Conclusions. Which uncertainty is correct?
  3. [§2.3] Typo: 'Given this offest' should be 'offset'. Also, the statement that the observed offset is larger than the ~0.1 dex spread in X-ray bolometric corrections (kX ~16–20) is unclear: kX is not defined, and the relationship between kX scatter and L_bol scatter should be shown explicitly.
  4. [Table 1] The last two columns list L_bol and log(L_Bol/L_Edd) without separation, e.g., '42.71−4.21' reads ambiguously. Use separate columns or a clear format such as 'log L_bol = 42.71, log(L/L_Edd) = −4.21'.
  5. [§3.1] The description of the H2 aperture correction ('scaling each measured flux by the ratio of its value in the native aperture to that measured in a larger 1.2'' aperture, under the assumption that the spatial distribution of the emission is roughly constant') is somewhat confusing — if the distribution is roughly constant, the correction could be area-based; if it is not, the ratio itself is the empirical correction. Clarify the procedure and its validation.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the empirical [NeV]–LX break and line-ratio model comparisons are independent of the quantities they are used to infer.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. The central empirical result—an offset in [NeV] 14.3 µm at fixed 2–10 keV X-ray luminosity between sources above and below log(Lbol/LEdd) ≈ −3.5—is obtained by fitting the conditional linear model (Eq. 11) to the observed L[NeV]–LX data; Lbol enters only to define the binning variable and is not fitted to the [NeV] data or to the line ratios. The claimed UV deficiency rests on two independent legs: (i) the measured [NeV]/[NeII], [ArIII]/[ArII], and [SIV]/[SIII] ratios, which are direct observables, and (ii) CLOUDY photoionization grids computed externally from the Sombrero SED (Fernández-Ontiveros et al. 2023), not from the line ratios being tested. Section 2.3 notes a 0.54 dex median offset between X-ray-based and SED-integrated Lbol for NGC 1052, M87, Cen A, and Sombrero; this is a calibration uncertainty in the Eddington-ratio axis, not a construction that forces the [NeV] offset. Self-citations (Goold et al. 2024 for reduction/line-fitting, Fernández-Ontiveros et al. 2023 for the power-law grid) are transparent and refer to reproducible or observational products, not to an unverified uniqueness claim or ansatz. No prediction reduces to its input by definition.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper's central claims rest on two fitted/borrowed ingredients: the Duras et al. bolometric correction used to build the Eddington-ratio axis, and the breakpoint of the conditional linear model that defines the -3.5 transition. H2 temperature and silicate strength are directly measured from spectra but depend on assumptions (LTE, aperture constant surface brightness, no error bars on silicate). The photoionization comparison uses a grid derived from the sample's own Sombrero SED, adding mild circularity. No ad hoc entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • Eddington threshold z0 of conditional linear model = log(Lbol/LEdd) = -3.5 (+0.6/-1.0); conclusions quote -3.5 (+0.8/-0.7)
    Free parameter in Equation 11; the headline 'transition at -3.5' is the best-fit breakpoint of the [Ne V]-LX relation.
  • Duras et al. (2020) bolometric correction constants = a = 15.33, b = 11.48, c = 16.2
    Adopted fixed input (Eq. 2) to compute Lbol from 2-10 keV luminosity; calibrated on ~1000 luminous AGN, with 0.54 dex offset vs SED-based Lbol for the four LLAGN with such measurements.
  • Slopes of conditional linear model = high-Edd slope m1 = 0.957 ± 0.109; low-Edd slope m2 = 0.845 ± 0.190
    Fitted simultaneously with the breakpoint; used to claim a vertical offset between high- and low-Eddington branches.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption H2 level populations follow a Boltzmann distribution under LTE
    Section 3.1 states this to derive excitation temperatures from line pairs via Eq. 8; non-LTE effects could bias temperatures.
  • ad hoc to paper H2 surface brightness is roughly constant between native and 1.2'' apertures
    Section 3.1: 'scaling each measured flux by the ratio of its value in the native aperture to that measured in a larger 1.2'' aperture, under the assumption that the spatial distribution of the emission is roughly constant between these aperture sizes'.
  • ad hoc to paper Duras et al. (2020) X-ray bolometric correction applies to LLAGN
    Section 2.3 adopts it for uniform comparison despite acknowledging 0.54 dex discrepancy for four sources; if wrong, Eddington ratios shift and the -3.5 break moves.
  • domain assumption Line emission is co-spatial with the unresolved point-source continuum within the extraction aperture
    Section 4.3 uses the 75% encircled-energy radius as nuclear aperture and assumes the line flux ratio ≈0.75 indicates unresolved AGN-dominated emission; extended emission would bias line fluxes.
  • domain assumption CLOUDY and MAPPINGS V models with stated parameter ranges (log U -3 to -1.5, n_e 2-5; shock n_H=1, v=150-300 km/s) accurately predict IR line ratios
    Section 5.1.1 uses these grids to infer the ionizing SED shape; parameter ranges are chosen to match the data, which weakens the discriminatory power.
  • domain assumption The archival comparison sample has consistent X-ray, BH mass, and distance calibrations
    Section 2.4 cross-matches Asmus et al. (2015), Fernández-Ontiveros et al. (2016, 2021), and others, adopting a single bolometric correction; heterogeneous calibrations could introduce spurious breaks.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of ReveaLLAGN 1: JWST Emission-Line Spectra Reveal Low-Luminosity AGN with UV-Deficient SEDs and Warm Molecular Gas." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/D56K23DU

@misc{pith2026260116977,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: ReveaLLAGN 1: JWST Emission-Line Spectra Reveal Low-Luminosity AGN with UV-Deficient SEDs and Warm Molecular Gas},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/D56K23DU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2601.16977}
}
abstract

We present near- and mid-infrared spectra of eight Low-Luminosity Active Galactic Nuclei (LLAGN), spanning nearly four orders of magnitude in black hole mass and Eddington ratio, obtained with JWST/NIRSpec and MIRI as part of the ReveaLLAGN program along with identical archival data of Cen A. The high spatial resolution of JWST cleanly separates AGN emission from host-galaxy contamination, enabling detections of high-ionization potential lines more than an order of magnitude fainter than previously measured. Emission-line diagnostics reveal a transition at log($L_{bol}/L_{Edd}$) ~ -3.5, where the spectral energy distribution becomes increasingly deficient in ultraviolet photons. We find that rotational H$_2$ excitation temperatures are elevated (~500 K higher) compared to both higher-luminosity AGN and star-forming galaxies, while the H$_2$(0-0)S(3)/PAH$_{11.3 \mu m}$ ratios are consistent with those observed in the AGN population. We discuss the possible roles of outflows, jets, and X-ray dominated regions in shaping the interstellar medium surrounding LLAGN. Silicate emission at ~10 $\mu$m, localized to the nuclear region, is detected in most ReveaLLAGN targets. This dataset offers the first comprehensive JWST-based characterization of infrared emission lines in the nuclear regions of LLAGN.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2601.16977 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Top – Nuclear extracted spectra for ReveaLLAGN targets and Cen A. Spectra have been normalized to MIRI/MRS channel 1. Targets are listed in the legend and colored according to Eddington Ratio (see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Forbidden emission line profiles with S/N>25 from each galaxy. Emission lines are centered at rest velocity and normalized to peak flux. The log Eddington ratio and log black hole mass (in solar masses) are shown in each panel. The colorbar indicates the IP of each line. The top row displays M87, where all high S/N lines are double-peaked. In the second and third columns of this row, the dominant peak shifts at an I… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Emission from the nuclear extracted spectra is consistent with that of a point-like source. The dashed line marks the ratio expected for an unresolved point source. For each galaxy, we show the median and standard deviation of the flux ratios computed across all detected ionic lines. Data points are ordered, left to right, by Eddington ratio and colored using a sequential color scheme carried through the rest of the… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: [NeV]14µm luminosity versus [OIV]26µm. Re￾veaLLAGN targets all show low-luminosity detections in both lines, with M94 being the faintest. For comparison, data from previous surveys Sturm et al. (2002); Goulding & Alexander (2009); Tommasin et al. (2010); Fern´andez￾Ont…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The emission line ratios observed in ReveaLLAGN targets are broadly consistent with photoionization models using a power-law ionizing spectrum (red grid; Fern´andez-Ontiveros et al. 2023). For NGC 4395, which has a relatively low black hole mass and accretes above a lo…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: [NeV]14µm log luminosity versus 2–10 keV X-ray log luminosity in erg/s. Sources with a log(LBol/LEdd) less than -3 are plotted as circles while sources with any higher Eddington ratios are plotted as triangles. ReveaLLAGN data is shown alongside data from Fern´andez-On…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: [NeV] ratios are correlated with Eddington Ra￾tio. The x axis represents Eddington ratio (log(Lbol/LEdd). The top plot compares log([NeV]14µm/[NeIII]15µm), the mid￾dle plot compares log([NeV]14µm/[NeII]12µm), and the bot￾tom plot compares log(L[NeV]/L2−10keV). In each …
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Molecular hydrogen in LLAGN targets from the ReveaLLAGN survey exhibits systematically higher excita￾tion temperatures compared to AGN and non-AGN galaxies. This temperature difference increases with higher rotational transitions. We present a plot of pairwise excitati…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Broad silicate emission, peaking at 10.5 µm (shaded gray), is seen in the nuclear extracted spectra of most of our target galaxies (see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Fitting PAH 11.3 µm. Left Panel – shows the power-law fit to the continuum on either side of the PAH feature. Middle Panel – shows the continuum subtracted data and a dashed red line representing the best multi-drude profile. This profile is used to measure flux and l…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

161 extracted references · 33 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    P., & Satyapal, S

    Abel, N. P., & Satyapal, S. 2008, ApJ, 678, 686, doi: 10.1086/529013

    doi:10.1086/529013 2008

  2. [2]

    J., Tielens, A

    Allamandola, L. J., Tielens, A. G. G. M., & Barker, J. R. 1985, ApJL, 290, L25, doi: 10.1086/184435

    doi:10.1086/184435 1985

  3. [3]

    R., et al

    Argyriou, I., Glasse, A., Law, D. R., et al. 2023, A&A, 675, A111, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346489

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346489 2023

  4. [4]

    2019, MNRAS, 489, 2177, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2289

    Asmus, D. 2019, MNRAS, 489, 2177, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2289

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2289 2019

  5. [5]

    F., Smette, A., & Duschl, W

    Asmus, D., Gandhi, P., H¨ onig, S. F., Smette, A., & Duschl, W. J. 2015, MNRAS, 454, 766, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv1950 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Lim, P. L., et al. 2022, ApJ, 935, 167, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c74

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1950 2015

  6. [6]

    D., Williams, D

    Baldi, R. D., Williams, D. R. A., McHardy, I. M., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 476, 3478, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty342 —. 2021, MNRAS, 500, 4749, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3519

    doi:10.1093/mnras/sty342 2018

  7. [7]

    Bi, S., Feng, H., & Ho, L. C. 2020, ApJ, 900, 124, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aba761

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aba761 2020

  8. [8]

    P., Jord´ an, A., Mei, S., et al

    Blakeslee, J. P., Jord´ an, A., Mei, S., et al. 2009, ApJ, 694, 556, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/694/1/556

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/694/1/556 2009

Show all 161 references
  1. [9]

    J., Neugebauer, G., Matthews, K., et al

    Bock, J. J., Neugebauer, G., Matthews, K., et al. 2000, AJ, 120, 2904, doi: 10.1086/316871 B¨ oker, T., Arribas, S., L¨ utzgendorf, N., et al. 2022, A&A, 661, A82, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142589

    2000 doi

  2. [10]

    2022, JWST Calibration Pipeline, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/ZENODO.7038885

    Bushouse, H., Eisenhamer, J., Dencheva, N., et al. 2022, JWST Calibration Pipeline, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/ZENODO.7038885

    2022 doi

  3. [11]

    2009, MNRAS, 394, 660, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14377.x

    Cappellari, M., Neumayer, N., Reunanen, J., et al. 2009, MNRAS, 394, 660, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14377.x

    2009

  4. [12]

    2011, MNRAS, 413, 813, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.18174.x

    Cappellari, M., Emsellem, E., Krajnovi´ c, D., et al. 2011, MNRAS, 413, 813, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.18174.x

    2011

  5. [13]

    2023, RMxAA, 59, 327, doi: 10.22201/ia.01851101p.2023.59.02.12

    Chatzikos, M., Bianchi, S., Camilloni, F., et al. 2023, RMxAA, 59, 327, doi: 10.22201/ia.01851101p.2023.59.02.12

    2023 doi

  6. [14]

    2016, Nature, 533, 504, doi: 10.1038/nature18006

    Cheung, E., Bundy, K., Cappellari, M., et al. 2016, Nature, 533, 504, doi: 10.1038/nature18006

    2016 doi

  7. [15]

    2001, MNRAS, 324, L33, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04642.x

    Chiaberge, M., Capetti, A., & Celotti, A. 2001, MNRAS, 324, L33, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04642.x

    2001

  8. [16]

    E., & Tielens, A

    Chiar, J. E., & Tielens, A. G. G. M. 2006, ApJ, 637, 774, doi: 10.1086/498406

    2006 doi

  9. [17]

    Constantin, A., & Seth, A. C. 2012, Advances in Astronomy, 2012, 178060, doi: 10.1155/2012/178060

    2012 doi

  10. [18]

    1997, A&A, 323, 71

    Contini, M. 1997, A&A, 323, 71

    1997

  11. [19]

    Contini, M., & Viegas, S. M. 2001, ApJS, 132, 211, doi: 10.1086/318956

    2001 doi

  12. [20]

    J., Springel, V., White, S

    Croton, D. J., Springel, V., White, S. D. M., et al. 2006, MNRAS, 365, 11, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09675.x de Vaucouleurs, G., de Vaucouleurs, A., Corwin, Herold G., J., et al. 1991, Third Reference Catalogue of Bright Galaxies (Springer-Verlag) den Brok, M., Seth, A. C....

    2006

  13. [21]

    D., De Rosa, G., Croxall, K., et al

    Denney, K. D., De Rosa, G., Croxall, K., et al. 2014, ApJ, 796, 134, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/796/2/134 Di Matteo, T., Springel, V., & Hernquist, L. 2005, Nature, 433, 604, doi: 10.1038/nature03335

    2014 doi

  14. [22]

    M., & Rieke, G

    Diamond-Stanic, A. M., & Rieke, G. H. 2010, ApJ, 724, 140, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/724/1/140

    2010 doi

  15. [23]

    T., & Li, A

    Draine, B. T., & Li, A. 2001, ApJ, 551, 807, doi: 10.1086/320227 —. 2007, ApJ, 657, 810, doi: 10.1086/511055

    2001 doi

  16. [24]

    T., Dale, D

    Draine, B. T., Dale, D. A., Bendo, G., et al. 2007, ApJ, 663, 866, doi: 10.1086/518306

    2007 doi

  17. [25]

    P., Satyapal, S., & Marcu, D

    Dudik, R. P., Satyapal, S., & Marcu, D. 2009, ApJ, 691, 1501, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/691/2/1501

    2009 doi

  18. [26]

    C., et al

    Dumont, A., Neumayer, N., Seth, A. C., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.09697, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2503.09697

    2025 doi

  19. [27]

    2020, A&A, 636, A73, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936817

    Duras, F., Bongiorno, A., Ricci, F., et al. 2020, A&A, 636, A73, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936817

    2020 doi

  20. [28]

    1995, MNRAS, 273, 649, doi: 10.1093/mnras/273.3.649

    Efstathiou, A., & Rowan-Robinson, M. 1995, MNRAS, 273, 649, doi: 10.1093/mnras/273.3.649

    1995 doi

  21. [29]

    C., & Trump, J

    Elitzur, M., Ho, L. C., & Trump, J. R. 2014, MNRAS, 438, 3340, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt2445

    2014 doi

  22. [30]

    2006, ApJL, 648, L101, doi: 10.1086/508158

    Elitzur, M., & Shlosman, I. 2006, ApJL, 648, L101, doi: 10.1086/508158

    2006 doi

  23. [31]

    W., Gordon, K

    Engelbracht, C. W., Gordon, K. D., Rieke, G. H., et al. 2005, ApJL, 628, L29, doi: 10.1086/432613

    2005 doi

  24. [32]

    A., & Flohic, H

    Eracleous, M., Hwang, J. A., & Flohic, H. M. L. G. 2010, ApJS, 187, 135, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/187/1/135 Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration, Akiyama, K.,

    2010 doi

  25. [33]

    2019, ApJL, 875, L1, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab0ec7

    Alberdi, A., et al. 2019, ApJL, 875, L1, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab0ec7

    2019 doi

  26. [34]

    2001, Reviews in Modern Astronomy, 14, 15, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0111133

    Falcke, H. 2001, Reviews in Modern Astronomy, 14, 15, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0111133

    2001 doi arXiv

  27. [35]

    Falcke, H., & Biermann, P. L. 1995, A&A, 293, 665, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9411096

    1995 doi arXiv

  28. [36]

    2000, A&A, 362, 113, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0102186

    Falcke, H., & Markoff, S. 2000, A&A, 362, 113, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0102186

    2000 doi arXiv

  29. [37]

    2023, A&A, 675, A74, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202245516

    Feltre, A., Gruppioni, C., Marchetti, L., et al. 2023, A&A, 675, A74, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202245516

    2023 doi

  30. [38]

    J., Done, C., Jin, C., Landt, H., & Ward, M

    Ferland, G. J., Done, C., Jin, C., Landt, H., & Ward, M. J. 2020, MNRAS, 494, 5917, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1207

    2020 doi

  31. [39]

    J., Chatzikos, M., Guzm´ an, F., et al

    Ferland, G. J., Chatzikos, M., Guzm´ an, F., et al. 2017, RMxAA, 53, 385, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1705.10877 22 Fern´ andez-Ontiveros, J. A., L´ opez-Gonzaga, N., Prieto, M. A., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 485, 5377, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz716 Fern´ andez-Ontiveros, J. A., L´ opez-L´ opez,...

    2017 doi arXiv

  32. [40]

    V., & Ho, L

    Filippenko, A. V., & Ho, L. C. 2003, ApJL, 588, L13, doi: 10.1086/375361

    2003 doi

  33. [41]

    C., Harms, R

    Ford, H. C., Harms, R. J., Tsvetanov, Z. I., et al. 1994, ApJL, 435, L27, doi: 10.1086/187586 F¨ orster Schreiber, N. M., Roussel, H., Sauvage, M., &

    1994 doi

  34. [42]

    2004, A&A, 419, 501, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20040963

    Charmandaris, V. 2004, A&A, 419, 501, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20040963

    2004 doi

  35. [43]

    1992, Catalogue of Optical Radial Velocities (Observatoire de Lyon) Garc ´ ıa-Bernete, I., Rigopoulou, D., Donnan, F

    Paturel, G. 1992, Catalogue of Optical Radial Velocities (Observatoire de Lyon) Garc ´ ıa-Bernete, I., Rigopoulou, D., Donnan, F. R., et al. 2024, A&A, 691, A162, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450086 Gonz´ alez-Mart ´ ın, O., Masegosa, J., M´ arquez, I., Guainazzi, M., & Jim´ enez...

    1992 doi

  36. [44]

    2024, ApJ, 966, 204, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad3065

    Goold, K., Seth, A., Molina, M., et al. 2024, ApJ, 966, 204, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad3065

    2024 doi

  37. [45]

    Ressler, M. E. 2004, ApJ, 605, 156, doi: 10.1086/381791

    2004 doi

  38. [47]

    D., Alexander, D

    Goulding, A. D., Alexander, D. M., Bauer, F. E., et al. 2012, ApJ, 755, 5, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/755/1/5

    2012 doi

  39. [48]

    L., & Danese, L

    Granato, G. L., & Danese, L. 1994, MNRAS, 268, 235, doi: 10.1093/mnras/268.1.235

    1994 doi

  40. [49]

    K., Ricci, C., Temple, M

    Gupta, K. K., Ricci, C., Temple, M. J., et al. 2024, A&A, 691, A203, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450567

    2024 doi

  41. [50]

    2016, MNRAS, 462, 1757, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw1716

    Gutkin, J., Charlot, S., & Bruzual, G. 2016, MNRAS, 462, 1757, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw1716

    2016 doi

  42. [51]

    W., Spoon, H

    Hao, L., Weedman, D. W., Spoon, H. W. W., et al. 2007, ApJL, 655, L77, doi: 10.1086/511973

    2007 doi

  43. [52]

    J., Ford, H

    Harms, R. J., Ford, H. C., Tsvetanov, Z. I., et al. 1994, ApJL, 435, L35, doi: 10.1086/187588

    1994 doi

  44. [53]

    2015, ApJ, 803, 110, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/803/2/110

    Hatziminaoglou, E., Hern´ an-Caballero, A., Feltre, A., & Pi˜ nol Ferrer, N. 2015, ApJ, 803, 110, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/803/2/110

    2015 doi

  45. [54]

    P., Hogg, D

    Haynes, M. P., Hogg, D. E., Maddalena, R. J., Roberts, M. S., & van Zee, L. 1998, AJ, 115, 62, doi: 10.1086/300166

    1998 doi

  46. [55]

    M., & Best, P

    Heckman, T. M., & Best, P. N. 2014, ARA&A, 52, 589, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081913-035722

    2014 doi

  47. [56]

    2010, ARA&A, 48, 21, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081309-130815

    Henning, T. 2010, ARA&A, 48, 21, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081309-130815

    2010 doi

  48. [57]

    Spoon, H. W. W. 2006, ApJ, 648, 323, doi: 10.1086/505701

    2006 doi

  49. [58]

    Ho, L. C. 1999, ApJ, 516, 672, doi: 10.1086/307137 —. 2002, ApJ, 564, 120, doi: 10.1086/324399 —. 2008, ARA&A, 46, 475, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.45.051806.110546

    1999 arXiv

  50. [59]

    C., Filippenko, A

    Ho, L. C., Filippenko, A. V., & Sargent, W. L. W. 1997, ApJS, 112, 315, doi: 10.1086/313041

    1997 doi

  51. [60]

    C., & Keto, E

    Ho, L. C., & Keto, E. 2007, ApJ, 658, 314, doi: 10.1086/511260

    2007 doi

  52. [61]

    C., & Peng, C

    Ho, L. C., & Peng, C. Y. 2001, ApJ, 555, 650, doi: 10.1086/321524

    2001 doi

  53. [62]

    2022, A&A, 661, A80, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142663

    Jakobsen, P., Ferruit, P., Alves de Oliveira, C., et al. 2022, A&A, 661, A80, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142663

    2022 doi

  54. [63]

    R., Gebhardt, K., Shen, J., et al

    Jardel, J. R., Gebhardt, K., Shen, J., et al. 2011, ApJ, 739, 21, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/739/1/21

    2011 doi

  55. [64]

    2012, MNRAS, 425, 907, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21272.x

    Jin, C., Ward, M., & Done, C. 2012, MNRAS, 425, 907, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21272.x

    2012

  56. [65]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2410.06730, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2410.06730

    Kang, J.-L., Done, C., Hagen, S., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2410.06730, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2410.06730

    2024 doi arXiv

  57. [66]

    D., Karachentseva, V

    Karachentsev, I. D., Karachentseva, V. E., Huchtmeier, W. K., & Makarov, D. I. 2004, AJ, 127, 2031, doi: 10.1086/382905

    2004 doi

  58. [67]

    J., & Tielens, A

    Kemper, F., Vriend, W. J., & Tielens, A. G. G. M. 2004, ApJ, 609, 826, doi: 10.1086/421339

    2004 doi

  59. [68]

    Kormendy, J., & Ho, L. C. 2013, ARA&A, 51, 511, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-082708-101811

    2013 doi

  60. [69]

    J., Ricci, C., Trakhtenbrot, B., et al

    Koss, M. J., Ricci, C., Trakhtenbrot, B., et al. 2022, ApJS, 261, 2, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac6c05

    2022 doi

  61. [70]

    E., Godard, B., Guillard, P., Gusdorf, A., & Pineau des Forˆ ets, G

    Kristensen, L. E., Godard, B., Guillard, P., Gusdorf, A., & Pineau des Forˆ ets, G. 2023, A&A, 675, A86, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346254

    2023 doi

  62. [71]

    L., & Watts, D

    Zakamska, N. L., & Watts, D. J. 2019, MNRAS, 487, 1823, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1316

    2019 doi

  63. [72]

    Law, D. R., E. Morrison, J., Argyriou, I., et al. 2023, AJ, 166, 45, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/acdddc

    2023 doi

  64. [73]

    Leger, A., & Puget, J. L. 1984, A&A, 137, L5 23

    1984

  65. [74]

    T., Packham, C., Rosario, D

    Leist, M. T., Packham, C., Rosario, D. J. V., et al. 2024, AJ, 167, 96, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad1886

    2024 doi

  66. [75]

    2004, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

    Li, A. 2004, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 309, Astrophysics of Dust, ed. A. N. Witt, G. C. Clayton, & B. T. Draine, 417, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0311066

    2004 doi arXiv

  67. [76]

    Li, A., & Draine, B. T. 2012, ApJL, 760, L35, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/760/2/L35

    2012 doi

  68. [77]

    P., Shi, Q

    Li, M. P., Shi, Q. J., & Li, A. 2008, MNRAS, 391, L49, doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2008.00553.x

    2008

  69. [78]

    J., et al

    Macchetto, F., Marconi, A., Axon, D. J., et al. 1997, ApJ, 489, 579, doi: 10.1086/304823

    1997 doi

  70. [79]

    M., Markoff, S

    Maitra, D., Miller, J. M., Markoff, S. B., & King, A. L. 2011, in AAS/High Energy Astrophysics Division, Vol. 12, AAS/High Energy Astrophysics Division #12, 8.13

    2011

  71. [81]

    2004, MNRAS, 351, 169, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07765.x

    Marconi, A., Risaliti, G., Gilli, R., et al. 2004, MNRAS, 351, 169, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07765.x

    2004

  72. [82]

    2008, ApJ, 681, 905, doi: 10.1086/588718

    Markoff, S., Nowak, M., Young, A., et al. 2008, ApJ, 681, 905, doi: 10.1086/588718

    2008 doi

  73. [83]

    E., Levenson, N

    Mason, R. E., Levenson, N. A., Shi, Y., et al. 2009, ApJL, 693, L136, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/693/2/L136

    2009 doi

  74. [84]

    2013, ApJ, 777, 164, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/777/2/164

    Nemmen, R., & Alonso-Herrero, A. 2013, ApJ, 777, 164, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/777/2/164

    2013 doi

  75. [85]

    E., Rodr ´ ıguez-Ardila, A., Martins, L., et al

    Mason, R. E., Rodr ´ ıguez-Ardila, A., Martins, L., et al. 2015, ApJS, 217, 13, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/217/1/13

    2015 doi

  76. [86]

    D., Satyapal, S., Laor, A., et al

    McKaig, J. D., Satyapal, S., Laor, A., et al. 2024, ApJ, 976, 130, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad7a79

    2024 doi

  77. [87]

    McQuinn, K. B. W., Skillman, E. D., Dolphin, A. E., Berg, D., & Kennicutt, R. 2016, AJ, 152, 144, doi: 10.3847/0004-6256/152/5/144

    2016 doi

  78. [88]

    Meisenheimer, K., Tristram, K. R. W., Jaffe, W., et al. 2007, A&A, 471, 453, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20066967

    2007 doi

  79. [89]

    Mezcua, M., & Prieto, M. A. 2014, ApJ, 787, 62, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/787/1/62

    2014 doi

  80. [90]

    V., Wagner, A

    Mukherjee, D., Bicknell, G. V., Wagner, A. Y., Sutherland, R. S., & Silk, J. 2018, MNRAS, 479, 5544, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1776 M¨ uller-S´ anchez, F., Prieto, M. A., Mezcua, M., et al. 2013, ApJL, 763, L1, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/763/1/L1

    2018 doi

  81. [91]

    M., Falcke, H., & Wilson, A

    Nagar, N. M., Falcke, H., & Wilson, A. S. 2005, A&A, 435, 521, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20042277

    2005 doi

  82. [92]

    1995, ApJ, 452, 710, doi: 10.1086/176343

    Narayan, R., & Yi, I. 1995, ApJ, 452, 710, doi: 10.1086/176343

    1995 doi

  83. [93]

    S., Storchi-Bergmann, T., & Eracleous, M

    Nemmen, R. S., Storchi-Bergmann, T., & Eracleous, M. 2014, MNRAS, 438, 2804, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt2388

    2014 doi

  84. [94]

    2008, ApJ, 685, 160, doi: 10.1086/590483

    Elitzur, M. 2008, ApJ, 685, 160, doi: 10.1086/590483

    2008 doi

  85. [95]

    2024, lmfit/lmfit-py: 1.3.2, 1.3.2, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.12785036

    Newville, M., Otten, R., Nelson, A., et al. 2024, lmfit/lmfit-py: 1.3.2, 1.3.2, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.12785036

    2024 doi

  86. [96]

    2009, ApJ, 707, 1550, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/707/2/1550

    Nikutta, R., Elitzur, M., & Lacy, M. 2009, ApJ, 707, 1550, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/707/2/1550

    2009 doi

  87. [97]

    2010, ApJ, 724, 1193, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/724/2/1193 O’Halloran, B., Satyapal, S., & Dudik, R

    Ogle, P., Boulanger, F., Guillard, P., et al. 2010, ApJ, 724, 1193, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/724/2/1193 O’Halloran, B., Satyapal, S., & Dudik, R. P. 2006, ApJ, 641, 795, doi: 10.1086/500529

    2010 doi

  88. [98]

    2023, A&A, 679, A37, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346549

    Osorno, J., Nagar, N., Richtler, T., et al. 2023, A&A, 679, A37, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346549

    2023 doi

  89. [99]

    T., Roche, P

    Packham, C., Radomski, J. T., Roche, P. F., et al. 2005, ApJL, 618, L17, doi: 10.1086/427691

    2005 doi

  90. [100]

    2019, ApJ, 871, 257, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaf9a9

    Park, J., Hada, K., Kino, M., et al. 2019, ApJ, 871, 257, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaf9a9

    2019 doi

  91. [101]

    Peeters, E., Spoon, H. W. W., & Tielens, A. G. G. M. 2004, ApJ, 613, 986, doi: 10.1086/423237

    2004 doi

  92. [102]

    W., Braatz, J

    Pesce, D. W., Braatz, J. A., Condon, J. J., & Greene, J. E. 2018, ApJ, 863, 149, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aad3c2

    2018 doi

  93. [103]

    M., Bentz, M

    Peterson, B. M., Bentz, M. C., Desroches, L.-B., et al. 2005, ApJ, 632, 799, doi: 10.1086/444494

    2005 doi

  94. [104]

    A., & Krolik, J

    Pier, E. A., & Krolik, J. H. 1992, ApJ, 401, 99, doi: 10.1086/172042

    1992 doi

  95. [105]

    M., Anderson, S

    Plotkin, R. M., Anderson, S. F., Brandt, W. N., et al. 2012, ApJL, 745, L27, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/745/2/L27

    2012 doi

  96. [106]

    2019, ApJS, 243, 26, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab29fd

    Porth, O., Chatterjee, K., Narayan, R., et al. 2019, ApJS, 243, 26, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab29fd

    2019 doi

  97. [107]

    2016, MNRAS, 457, 3801, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw166

    Espada, D., & Gonz´ alez-Mart ´ ın, O. 2016, MNRAS, 457, 3801, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw166

    2016 doi

  98. [108]

    2014, MNRAS, 442, 2145, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu1006

    Schartmann, M. 2014, MNRAS, 442, 2145, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu1006

    2014 doi

  99. [109]

    2021, MNRAS, 506, 562, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1704

    Mezcua, M. 2021, MNRAS, 506, 562, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1704

    2021 doi

  100. [110]

    A., P´ erez Garc ´ ıa, A

    Prieto, M. A., P´ erez Garc ´ ıa, A. M., & Rodr ´ ıguez Espinosa, J. M. 2002, MNRAS, 329, 309, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.04985.x

    2002

  101. [111]

    A., Reunanen, J., Tristram, K

    Prieto, M. A., Reunanen, J., Tristram, K. R. W., et al. 2010, MNRAS, 402, 724, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15897.x

    2010

  102. [112]

    1999, ApJ, 520, 298, doi: 10.1086/307439

    Quataert, E., & Narayan, R. 1999, ApJ, 520, 298, doi: 10.1086/307439

    1999 doi

  103. [113]

    T., Pi˜ na, R

    Radomski, J. T., Pi˜ na, R. K., Packham, C., et al. 2003, ApJ, 587, 117, doi: 10.1086/367612

    2003 doi

  104. [114]

    1991, Nature, 349, 138, doi: 10.1038/349138a0 24

    Rawlings, S., & Saunders, R. 1991, Nature, 349, 138, doi: 10.1038/349138a0 24

    1991 doi

  105. [115]

    2018, MNRAS, 478, L122, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/sly079

    Dolag, K. 2018, MNRAS, 478, L122, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/sly079

    2018 doi

  106. [116]

    J., Pesce, D

    Reid, M. J., Pesce, D. W., & Riess, A. G. 2019, ApJL, 886, L27, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab552d

    2019 doi

  107. [117]

    2013, MNRAS, 430, 2002, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt026

    Riffel, R., Rodr ´ ıguez-Ardila, A., Aleman, I., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 430, 2002, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt026

    2013 doi

  108. [118]

    A., Souza-Oliveira, G

    Riffel, R. A., Souza-Oliveira, G. L., Costa-Souza, J. H., et al. 2025, ApJ, 982, 69, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adb8dd

    2025 doi

  109. [119]

    A., Zakamska, N

    Riffel, R. A., Zakamska, N. L., & Riffel, R. 2020, MNRAS, 491, 1518, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz3137

    2020 doi

  110. [120]

    Moorwood, A. F. M. 2002, A&A, 389, 374, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20020607 Rodr ´ ıguez-Ardila, A., Prieto, M. A., Portilla, J. G., &

    2002 doi

  111. [121]

    Tejeiro, J. M. 2011, ApJ, 743, 100, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/743/2/100

    2011 doi

  112. [122]

    2019, A&A, 630, A58, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936249

    Roueff, E., Abgrall, H., Czachorowski, P., et al. 2019, A&A, 630, A58, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936249

    2019 doi

  113. [123]

    J., et al

    Roussel, H., Helou, G., Hollenbach, D. J., et al. 2007, ApJ, 669, 959, doi: 10.1086/521667

    2007 doi

  114. [124]

    1996, ApJ, 460, 284, doi: 10.1086/176968

    Roy, J.-R., Belley, J., Dutil, Y., & Martin, P. 1996, ApJ, 460, 284, doi: 10.1086/176968

    1996 doi

  115. [125]

    2022, Universe, 8, 356, doi: 10.3390/universe8070356

    Sajina, A., Lacy, M., & Pope, A. 2022, Universe, 8, 356, doi: 10.3390/universe8070356

    2022 doi

  116. [126]

    M., Bolatto, A

    Sandstrom, K. M., Bolatto, A. D., Bot, C., et al. 2012, ApJ, 744, 20, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/744/1/20

    2012 doi

  117. [127]

    2008, ApJ, 677, 926, doi: 10.1086/529014

    Heckman, T. 2008, ApJ, 677, 926, doi: 10.1086/529014

    2008 doi

  118. [128]

    2007, ApJL, 663, L9, doi: 10.1086/519995

    Dudik, R. 2007, ApJL, 663, L9, doi: 10.1086/519995

    2007 doi

  119. [129]

    Schawinski, K., Koss, M., Berney, S., & Sartori, L. F. 2015, MNRAS, 451, 2517, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv1136

    2015 doi

  120. [130]

    2021, Nature Astronomy, 5, 928, doi: 10.1038/s41550-021-01394-0

    Shi, F., Li, Z., Yuan, F., & Zhu, B. 2021, Nature Astronomy, 5, 928, doi: 10.1038/s41550-021-01394-0

    2021 doi

  121. [131]

    A., Li, A., Li, M

    Smith, H. A., Li, A., Li, M. P., et al. 2010, ApJ, 716, 490, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/716/1/490

    2010 doi

  122. [132]

    Smith, J. D. T., Draine, B. T., Dale, D. A., et al. 2007, ApJ, 656, 770, doi: 10.1086/510549

    2007 doi

  123. [133]

    C., & Westpfahl, D

    Speights, J. C., & Westpfahl, D. J. 2012, ApJ, 752, 52, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/752/1/52

    2012 doi

  124. [134]

    Spinoglio, L., & Malkan, M. A. 1992, ApJ, 399, 504, doi: 10.1086/171943

    1992 doi

  125. [135]

    Spoon, H. W. W., Hern´ an-Caballero, A., Rupke, D., et al. 2022, ApJS, 259, 37, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac4989

    2022 doi

  126. [136]

    M., Haynes, M

    Springob, C. M., Haynes, M. P., Giovanelli, R., & Kent, B. R. 2005, ApJS, 160, 149, doi: 10.1086/431550

    2005 doi

  127. [137]

    2006, ApJ, 642, 81, doi: 10.1086/500828

    Sturm, E., Hasinger, G., Lehmann, I., et al. 2006, ApJ, 642, 81, doi: 10.1086/500828

    2006 doi

  128. [138]

    2002, A&A, 393, 821, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20021043

    Sturm, E., Lutz, D., Verma, A., et al. 2002, A&A, 393, 821, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20021043

    2002 doi

  129. [139]

    2005, ApJL, 629, L21, doi: 10.1086/444359

    Sturm, E., Schweitzer, M., Lutz, D., et al. 2005, ApJL, 629, L21, doi: 10.1086/444359

    2005 doi

  130. [140]

    2018, MAPPINGS V: Astrophysical plasma modeling code, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1807.005

    Sutherland, R., Dopita, M., Binette, L., & Groves, B. 2018, MAPPINGS V: Astrophysical plasma modeling code, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1807.005

    2018

  131. [141]

    2022, ApJ, 941, 47, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac9d8f

    Sutter, J., & Fadda, D. 2022, ApJ, 941, 47, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac9d8f

    2022 doi

  132. [142]

    Tielens, A. G. G. M. 2008, ARA&A, 46, 289, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.46.060407.145211

    2008

  133. [143]

    A., & Fazio, G

    Tommasin, S., Spinoglio, L., Malkan, M. A., & Fazio, G. 2010, ApJ, 709, 1257, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/709/2/1257

    2010 doi

  134. [144]

    L., Dressler, A., Blakeslee, J

    Tonry, J. L., Dressler, A., Blakeslee, J. P., et al. 2001, ApJ, 546, 681, doi: 10.1086/318301

    2001 doi

  135. [145]

    R., Impey, C

    Trump, J. R., Impey, C. D., Kelly, B. C., et al. 2011, ApJ, 733, 60, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/733/1/60

    2011 doi

  136. [146]

    1977, ApJS, 35, 281, doi: 10.1086/190481

    Turner, J., Kirby-Docken, K., & Dalgarno, A. 1977, ApJS, 35, 281, doi: 10.1086/190481

    1977 doi

  137. [147]

    V., & Fabian, A

    Vasudevan, R. V., & Fabian, A. C. 2007, MNRAS, 381, 1235, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12328.x

    2007

  138. [148]

    Voit, G. M. 1992, MNRAS, 258, 841, doi: 10.1093/mnras/258.4.841

    1992 doi

  139. [149]

    L., Barth, A

    Walsh, J. L., Barth, A. J., Ho, L. C., & Sarzi, M. 2013, ApJ, 770, 86, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/770/2/86

    2013 doi

  140. [150]

    D., Nowak, M

    Wang, Q. D., Nowak, M. A., Markoff, S. B., et al. 2013, Science, 341, 981, doi: 10.1126/science.1240755

    2013 doi

  141. [151]

    2017, MNRAS, 465, 3291, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2944

    Weinberger, R., Springel, V., Hernquist, L., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 465, 3291, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2944

    2017 doi

  142. [152]

    W., Glasse, A., et al

    Wells, M., Pel, J. W., Glasse, A., et al. 2015, PASP, 127, 646, doi: 10.1086/682281

    2015 doi

  143. [153]

    2006, ApJ, 639, 157, doi: 10.1086/499226

    Wu, Y., Charmandaris, V., Hao, L., et al. 2006, ApJ, 639, 157, doi: 10.1086/499226

    2006 doi

  144. [154]

    Xie, Y., & Ho, L. C. 2019, ApJ, 884, 136, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab4200 —. 2022, ApJ, 925, 218, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac32e2

    2019 doi

  145. [155]

    C., Li, A., & Shangguan, J

    Xie, Y., Ho, L. C., Li, A., & Shangguan, J. 2018, ApJ, 860, 154, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aac3dc

    2018 doi

  146. [156]

    C., Zhuang, M.-Y., & Shangguan, J

    Xie, Y., Ho, L. C., Zhuang, M.-Y., & Shangguan, J. 2021, ApJ, 910, 124, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abe404

    2021 doi

  147. [157]

    2017, ApJS, 228, 6, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/228/1/6

    Xie, Y., Li, A., & Hao, L. 2017, ApJS, 228, 6, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/228/1/6

    2017 doi

  148. [158]

    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

    2016 doi

  149. [159]

    2012, ApJ, 761, 130, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/761/2/130

    Yuan, F., Bu, D., & Wu, M. 2012, ApJ, 761, 130, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/761/2/130

    2012 doi

  150. [160]

    2015, ApJ, 804, 101, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/804/2/101 25

    Yuan, F., Gan, Z., Narayan, R., et al. 2015, ApJ, 804, 101, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/804/2/101 25

    2015 doi

  151. [161]

    2014, ARA&A, 52, 529, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-082812-141003

    Yuan, F., & Narayan, R. 2014, ARA&A, 52, 529, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-082812-141003

    2014 doi

  152. [162]

    C., & Li, A

    Zhang, L., Ho, L. C., & Li, A. 2022, ApJ, 939, 22, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac930f

    2022 doi

  153. [163]

    C., & Shangguan, J

    Zhuang, M.-Y., Ho, L. C., & Shangguan, J. 2019, ApJ, 873, 103, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab0650

    2019 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.