Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 54 references

First Observational Evidence for Split Infall Flow of Cosmic Filaments into Clusters

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Galaxy filaments connecting cluster pairs undergo split infall flow toward both clusters, detected at 5.6 sigma.

desk verdict A plausible first detection of split infall flow, but the missing null-mock test and the model-dependent amplitude claim need to be settled before I'd take the physical interpretation at face value. read the letter →

arxiv 2601.18434 v2 pith:YTZCBNPC submitted 2026-01-26 astro-ph.CO

Ji Yao , Huanyuan Shan , Pengjie Zhang , Xiaohu Yang , Jiale Zhou , Jiaxin Han , Peng Wang , Haojie Xu This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.CO PACS 98.65.-r
keywords clusterfilamentvelocityfieldsplitinfallcosmicweblarge-scalestructuredepletionradiusredshift-spacedistortion
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 sets out to show that galaxy filaments connecting pairs of galaxy clusters are not static bridges but actively drain matter into both clusters at once. Using redshifts from a large spectroscopic survey, the authors subtract the rigid-body motion of each cluster pair and the Hubble flow, then stack 360 cluster-filament-cluster systems. The leftover redshift rises linearly along the filament and flips sign at the midpoint, meaning one half of the filament falls toward one cluster and the other half toward the other. The detection is significant at 5.5-5.6 sigma, with a maximum infall of about 20 km/s projected (30 km/s deprojected) for typical clusters of ~10^14.3 solar masses. The flow's amplitude and peak location respond to the two clusters' masses and match an N-body model, so the authors conclude that filaments dynamically respond to competing gravitational potentials rather than passively channeling mass.

What carries the argument

The key mechanism is the 'rigid-body background subtraction': a linear interpolation of redshift between the two endpoint clusters along the filament axis. Because Hubble flow, cluster translation/rotation, and the pairwise cluster velocity all scale linearly with position in the filament frame, subtracting this straight line removes them and leaves only the filament's internal flow. The analysis then stacks 360 systems, bins the normalized filament length into 10 segments, and fits the excess redshift vs. position; the flow velocity is recovered by dividing by the mean cosine of the filament angle to the line of sight. A cylindrical selection defines filament membership, and an N-body emula

What would settle it

Construct a mock galaxy catalog from a cosmological simulation with the same cluster-pair and filament selection, but assign redshifts that contain only Hubble flow and cluster motions (no internal filament flow); if the stacking recovers a slope like (1.21±0.22)×10^-4, the signal is a selection artifact. Alternatively, if the sign of the slope follows the line-of-sight direction rather than the filament axis when the analysis is repeated with reversed orientation, the interpretation as real inflow would be falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that after removing the Hubble flow and the rigid-body motion of the cluster pair by linearly interpolating the redshift between the two clusters, the residual excess redshift Δz of filament galaxies is not zero but carries a slope of (1.21±0.22)×10^-4 along the filament, a 5.5σ deviation. Binning the sample into ten segments shows the velocity profile reverses sign near the filament midpoint and peaks at ~20 km/s (line-of-sight) near each cluster; the deprojected peak is ~30 km/s. The signal persists across different cluster richness, filament richness, length, and width cuts, and becomes stronger when the two clusters are mass-unbalanced, with the flow directed toward

Load-bearing premise

The measurement assumes that every redshift contribution other than the filament's internal flow—Hubble expansion, the cluster pair's motion, and projection effects—varies linearly with position along the filament, so that subtracting a straight line between the two clusters isolates the internal flow; a position-dependent systematics in this subtraction would directly create a spurious slope.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The cosmic-web velocity field on quasi-linear scales becomes directly measurable from galaxy redshifts, complementing density-based reconstruction.
  • The flow amplitude and depletion radius are sensitive to cluster and filament masses, offering a new mass probe for dark matter halos and a potential constraint on dark matter particle mass.
  • The continuity-equation link between density and velocity explains the observed galaxy line-density dip-peak-dip, tying filament dynamics to galaxy distribution.
  • Upcoming wide-field spectroscopic surveys should detect the same flow with higher signal-to-noise, enabling tests of gravity and mass measurements across redshift.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the split-infall flow is real, the 0.4 dex discrepancy between the optically estimated filament mass and the mass needed to reproduce the flow could be resolved by weak-lensing mass measurements; we infer that lensing should favor the higher model mass.
  • Stacking by cluster mass ratio could turn this measurement into a calibrated mass-ratio estimator for cluster pairs, independent of richness-based scaling relations.
  • The same subtraction technique could be applied to group-group filaments or single-cluster outskirts, where a similar depletion-radius signature should appear; this is a testable extension.
  • If the flow is gravity-driven and its amplitude scales with the growth rate, high-redshift measurements with future surveys could test modified gravity against general relativity.
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 / 6 minor

Summary. The paper reports a stacked detection of a split infall flow in galaxy filaments connecting cluster pairs, using SDSS group catalog and spectroscopic redshifts. The method selects 360 cluster-filament-cluster systems (cluster mass >10^13.5 Msun, length 2–6 Mpc, width <1.2 r200c, filament richness 1–5), defines the filament axis, and subtracts a linear 'rigid-body background' redshift interpolated between the two cluster redshifts. The residual Δz shows a slope (1.21±0.22)×10^-4 (5.5σ) and a binned velocity profile that rejects zero flow at 5.6σ, with a sign reversal near the midpoint and a deprojected peak infall of ~30 km/s for clusters of M ~10^14.3 Msun. The authors further report that the flow strengthens when the cluster masses are imbalanced and that the observed profile is reproduced by an N-body emulator only after raising the central filament halo mass to 10^13.71 Msun, 0.4 dex above the optically measured value.

Significance. If the detection is robust, it opens a genuinely new observational probe of quasi-linear velocity fields in the cosmic web, complementary to pairwise kSZ and velocity reconstruction. The main strengths are that the central signal is derived directly from stacked SDSS redshifts without simulation input, the selection-function dependence is extensively explored (Appendix B), jackknife errors are used, and the fiducial selection is deliberately conservative. The paper explicitly acknowledges the 0.4-dex central-mass offset in the validation model, which is a point in its favor. However, the headline amplitude comparison and the 'validation' via the emulator rest on a tuned parameter, and the rigid-body subtraction is performed in redshift space, so the 5.5–5.6σ significance could in principle be contaminated by an RSD-induced systematic that has not been tested with a null pipeline.

major comments (3)
  1. [§5, Methods steps (2)–(4); Fig. C9] The rigid-body background is interpolated using galaxy positions x_i that are themselves measured in redshift space. A line-of-sight peculiar velocity of ~30 km/s displaces x_i by δx ~ v/(H0 L) ~ 0.09 for L = 4.7 Mpc. The subtracted background then contains a term proportional to (v_H + v_pair)/c × δx; with v_pair of a few hundred km/s, this cross-term is of the same order as the reported slope of 1.21×10^-4. The paper does not run the full pipeline on a null mock with zero internal flow but realistic RSD and pair selection. Fig. C9 demonstrates only that RSD changes the line-density profile; it does not show the recovered Δz–x slope under the same rigid-body subtraction. This is a load-bearing gap: the 5.5–5.6σ significance could partly be a redshift-space artifact. Please provide a null-mock test quantifying the bias in the fitted slope and binned profile.
  2. [Appendix C, Fig. C8; §3] The model 'agreement' in Fig. C8 is obtained by arbitrarily raising the central filament halo mass from the observed M200c = 10^13.32 Msun to 10^13.71 Msun. The abstract's claim that the flow is 'substantially lower than expected for infall from an average cosmic environment' depends on this tuned emulator. The statement in §3 that '0.4 dex is acceptable' needs a quantitative justification, e.g., the expected scatter in optical mass estimates or a sensitivity test across the plausible mass range. Otherwise the validation is circular in the parameter that most controls the amplitude. I recommend presenting the simulated profile as a band over allowed filament masses and clearly separating the detection (which does not depend on the emulator) from the amplitude interpretation.
  3. [§2, §5, Fig. 2] The cylindrical selection extends to 1.2 r200c of each cluster and does not exclude galaxies that are cluster members or in the cluster infall region. The binned signal peaks at x ~0.15 and ~0.85, i.e., within <1 Mpc of the clusters, where the cluster's own infall pattern dominates. To support the interpretation that the signal comes from the filament as a distinct structure, the authors should test whether the profile persists after removing galaxies within r200c of either cluster, or after splitting by projected distance from the axis. Without such a test, the 'split infall flow' could be partly a superposition of the two well-known cluster infall regions rather than a coherent filament flow.
minor comments (6)
  1. [General] The manuscript contains several typos and grammatical errors: 'discribed', 'Additon', 'vistualized', 'reprecents', 'an order smaller' (Fig. A1 caption), and a stray comma in 'Fig. 3,'.
  2. [§2] The notation uses z both for redshift and for the line-of-sight coordinate (e.g., 'z-direction' and Δz). This is confusing; consider using s or r_los for the coordinate.
  3. [§5] The slope fit in Fig. 1 is not fully described: what is the fitting method, how are the errors and the 5.5σ significance computed, and what is the effective number of independent galaxies after accounting for filament-to-filament variance? The jackknife details are given for the binned profile but not for the slope.
  4. [Appendix B, Fig. B4] The statement that the majority of the signal comes from L ~4–5 Mpc would be more informative with the number of systems in each length bin and the correlation between length and richness/mass, since these are not independent.
  5. [References] Reference [38] (Goldstein & Hill) is an arXiv e-print, and reference [30] (Tang et al. 2025) is cited as published; please ensure all references have complete publication status.
  6. [Fig. A1] The bottom-left panel shows 'mean filament mass is an order smaller than the cluster mass'; given the log scaling, specify the exact ratio and the scatter, and note the mass estimates use different richness cuts.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Main detection is genuinely empirical; the Appendix C 'model validation' reduces to a fitted halo mass.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Appendix C, 'Velocity emulator and model validation' (paragraph after Fig. C8); see also Summary item (3)]
    "However, when putting a M200c ∼10 13.32M⊙ halo in the center of the filament, the amplitude of the flow can differ by ∼50% from the observation. When we increase this mass to M200c ∼10 13.71M⊙, the simulation and the observation perfectly fit, including the twisted shape in the middle, which is due to the self-gravitating infall flow of the smaller halo."

    The observed velocity profile is the target being 'validated'; the model's central-halo mass is a free parameter adjusted from the optically measured 10^13.32 to 10^13.71 in order to make the simulated profile match the observed one. The resulting 'perfect fit' therefore reduces to the fitted input; it is not an independent theoretical prediction. The paper's Summary point (3) nevertheless lists this agreement as a separate theoretical validation ('the measured velocity profile agrees with our model constructed from N-body simulation'), which overstates the evidentiary value.

full rationale

The headline measurement (slope 5.5σ in Fig. 1, binned 5.6σ in Fig. 2) is made directly from stacked SDSS redshifts and does not depend on any simulation or fitted model; subtracting a linear rigid-body background is a data operation whose null result could have been zero/noise. So the central claim is not circular. The only reduction-by-construction I find is in Appendix C: the halo-halo-halo 'model validation' tunes the central halo mass (10^13.32 -> 10^13.71 M200c) to reproduce the observed velocity profile, then declares perfect agreement; this is a fit rather than a prediction. The paper is transparent about the 0.4 dex mismatch, which mitigates but does not eliminate the circularity of using that agreement as support. The self-citations (Fong & Han; Zhou & Han; Han et al. HBT+) supply the emulator and halo-model tools but are not load-bearing for the detection itself. Potential redshift-space/selection systematics in the rigid-body subtraction are a correctness risk, not a circular-reasoning step under the definitions here.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central detection relies on a small ledger: no new entities are postulated. The main free parameter is the central filament halo mass tuned in the validation model. The key axioms are the reliability of the SDSS group masses, the cancellation of rotational modes by stacking isotropy, the accuracy of the N-body emulator, and the validity of the rigid-body subtraction. These are standard or domain-specific assumptions, none of which is ad hoc to the point of forcing the detection.

free parameters (1)
  • Central filament halo mass in the validation model (M200c, center) = 10^13.71 M_sun (0.4 dex above the optically measured 10^13.32)
    In Appendix C and Fig. C8, the central halo mass is increased from the measured filament mass to 10^13.71 M_sun to make the simulated velocity profile 'perfectly fit' the observed deprojected profile. This is a fitted parameter used for validation, not an a priori prediction.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The SDSS group catalog richness and mass estimates trace the true halo masses of clusters and filaments accurately enough for the selection and mass-dependency analysis.
    The paper uses λ_c>5, M200c>10^13.5 for clusters and λ_f<5 for filaments, and quotes a filament mass ~10^13.32 M☉; the 0.4 dex mismatch in the model is acknowledged in Sec. 3 and Appendix C.
  • domain assumption The cosmological principle guarantees that rotation and spin contributions cancel when stacking many randomly oriented filaments.
    Sec. 2: 'Due to the isotropy required by the cosmological principle... rotational flow ... should cancel.' If the stacking has a preferred orientation, this cancellation may be incomplete.
  • domain assumption The N-body simulation velocity emulator (CosmicGrowth, WMAP ΛCDM) accurately represents infall in average cosmic environments.
    Used to construct the single-halo, halo-halo, and halo-halo-halo comparisons in Appendix C. The assumed cosmology and mass definitions affect the expected infall amplitude.
  • standard math The continuity equation in a cylindrical filament describes the relation between galaxy line-density and flow velocity.
    Sec. 2(c): d(A v ρ)/dt = 0. This is a standard fluid continuity statement applied to galaxies.
  • domain assumption After linear subtraction of the cluster-to-cluster redshift baseline, the residual Δz contains no contribution from Hubble flow or cluster pairwise velocity, only internal flow.
    Methods steps (3)-(4). This is the central modeling assumption; if the true peculiar velocity field has a component linear in x, it is absorbed by the subtraction and the residual interpretation would be affected.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of First Observational Evidence for Split Infall Flow of Cosmic Filaments into Clusters." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YTZCBNPC

@misc{pith2026260118434,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: First Observational Evidence for Split Infall Flow of Cosmic Filaments into Clusters},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YTZCBNPC}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2601.18434}
}
abstract

Velocity fields in the cosmic web are fundamental to structure formation but remain difficult to observe directly beyond the linear regime. Here we present observational evidence that galaxy filaments connecting pairs of galaxy clusters undergo a split infall, with opposite velocity flows toward the two clusters. Using spectroscopic galaxies from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey, we isolate the internal filament velocity field by subtracting its rigid-body background motion and Hubble flow, and detect this effect at greater than $5\sigma$ significance across a wide range of cluster and filament selections. The measured velocity profile exhibits a sign reversal near the filament midpoint and a maximum infall amplitude of $\sim30$ km/s ($\sim20$ km/s projected onto the line-of-sight) for clusters of mass $\sim10^{14.3}M_\odot$, substantially lower than expected for infall from an average cosmic environment. Multiple results on density-velocity correlation, mass-dependency, and validation with simulation indicate that filaments dynamically respond to competing gravitational potentials rather than acting as passive mass transport channels. Our results establish a new observational window on quasi-linear velocity fields in the cosmic web and provide a promising probe of mass measurement, testing gravity and velocity reconstruction with upcoming wide-field spectroscopic surveys.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 2 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    & Dodelson, S

    Zhang, P., Liguori, M., Bean, R. & Dodelson, S. Probing gravity at cosmological scales by measurements which test the relationship between gravitational lensing and matter overdensity.Phys. Rev. Lett.99, 141302 (2007). URL https://link. aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.99.141302

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.99.141302 2007

  2. [2]

    Hahn, O., Angulo, R. E. & Abel, T. The properties of cosmic velocity fields. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society454, 3920–3937 (2015)

    2015

  3. [3]

    Cautun, M., van de Weygaert, R., Jones, B. J. T. & Frenk, C. S. Evolution of the cosmic web.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society441, 2923–2973 (2014)

    2014

  4. [4]

    & Han, J

    Fong, M. & Han, J. A natural boundary of dark matter haloes revealed around the minimum bias and maximum infall locations.mnras503, 4250–4263 (2021)

    2021

  5. [5]

    & Han, J

    Zhou, Y. & Han, J. A physical and concise halo model based on the deple- tion radius.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society525, 2489–2508 (2023)

    2023

  6. [6]

    & Han, J

    Zhou, Y. & Han, J. Einasto Profile as the Halo Model Solution Coupled to the Depletion Radius.The Astrophysical Journal979, 55 (2025)

    2025

  7. [7]

    K., Hui, L., Diaferio, A

    Sheth, R. K., Hui, L., Diaferio, A. & Scoccimarro, R. Linear and non-linear contri- butions to pairwise peculiar velocities.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society325, 1288–1302 (2001)

    2001

  8. [8]

    P., Mo, H

    Jing, Y. P., Mo, H. J. & B¨ orner, G. Spatial Correlation Function and Pair- wise Velocity Dispersion of Galaxies: Cold Dark Matter Models versus the Las Campanas Survey.The Astrophysical Journal494, 1–12 (1998)

    1998

Show all 54 references
  1. [9]

    I., Tempel, E., Hoffman, Y., Tully, R

    Libeskind, N. I., Tempel, E., Hoffman, Y., Tully, R. B. & Courtois, H. Filaments from the galaxy distribution and from the velocity field in the local universe. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society453, L108–L112 (2015)

    2015

  2. [10]

    I., Tempel, E., Kang, X

    Wang, P., Libeskind, N. I., Tempel, E., Kang, X. & Guo, Q. Possible observational evidence for cosmic filament spin.Nature Astronomy5, 839–845 (2021)

    2021

  3. [11]

    & Han, J

    Li, Z.-Z. & Han, J. The Outermost Edges of the Milky Way Halo from Galaxy Kinematics.The Astrophysical Journal Letters915, L18 (2021)

    2021

  4. [12]

    Faucher-Gigu` ere, C.-A. & Oh, S. P. Key Physical Processes in the Circumgalactic Medium.Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics61, 131–195 (2023)

    2023

  5. [13]

    Journal of High Energy Astrophysics34, 49–211 (2022)

    Abdalla, E.et al.Cosmology intertwined: A review of the particle physics, astro- physics, and cosmology associated with the cosmological tensions and anomalies. Journal of High Energy Astrophysics34, 49–211 (2022). 7

    2022

  6. [14]

    & Pen, U.-L

    Yu, Y., Zhu, H.-M. & Pen, U.-L. Halo Nonlinear Reconstruction.The Astrophysical Journal847, 110 (2017)

    2017

  7. [15]

    Xiao, X.et al.AI-powered Reconstruction of Dark Matter Velocity Fields from Redshift-space Halo Distribution.The Astrophysical Journal994, 204 (2025)

    2025

  8. [16]

    & Zheng, Y

    Chen, Z., Zhang, P., Yang, X. & Zheng, Y. Detection of pairwise kSZ effect with DESI galaxy clusters and Planck.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society510, 5916–5928 (2022)

    2022

  9. [17]

    & Yang, X

    Chen, Z., Zhang, P. & Yang, X. Thermal Energy Census with the Sunyaev- Zel’dovich Effect of DESI Galaxy Clusters/Groups and Its Implication on the Weak-lensing Power Spectrum.The Astrophysical Journal953, 188 (2023)

    2023

  10. [18]

    & Pan, J

    Zheng, Y., Zhang, P., Jing, Y., Lin, W. & Pan, J. Peculiar velocity decomposition, redshift space distortion, and velocity reconstruction in redshift surveys. II. Dark matter velocity statistics.Physical Review D88, 103510 (2013)

    2013

  11. [19]

    & Yang, X

    Li, S., Zheng, Y., Chen, Z., Xu, H. & Yang, X. Detection of Pairwise Kinetic Sun- yaev–Zel’dovich Effect with DESI Galaxy Groups and Planck in Fourier Space. Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series271, 30 (2024)

    2024

  12. [20]

    Stiskalek, R.et al.The Velocity Field Olympics: Assessing velocity field recon- structions with direct distance tracers.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society(2025)

    2025

  13. [21]

    Aghanim, N., G´ orski, K. M. & Puget, J.-L. How accurately can the SZ effect measure peculiar cluster velocities and bulk flows?Astronomy and Astrophysics 374, 1–12 (2001)

    2001

  14. [22]

    & Geller, M

    Diaferio, A. & Geller, M. J. Infall Regions of Galaxy Clusters.Astrophysical Journal481, 633–643 (1997)

    1997

  15. [23]

    & Kravtsov, A

    More, S., Diemer, B. & Kravtsov, A. V. The Splashback Radius as a Physical Halo Boundary and the Growth of Halo Mass.Astrophysical Journal810, 36 (2015)

    2015

  16. [24]

    & Sodr´ e, L., Jr

    Gabriel-Silva, L. & Sodr´ e, L., Jr. Galaxy Cluster Mass Estimation through the Splashback Radius.The Astrophysical Journal988, 149 (2025)

    2025

  17. [25]

    M., Porciani, C

    Hahn, O., Carollo, C. M., Porciani, C. & Dekel, A. The evolution of dark matter halo properties in clusters, filaments, sheets and voids.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society381, 41–51 (2007)

    2007

  18. [26]

    & Pogosyan, D

    Codis, S., Pichon, C. & Pogosyan, D. Spin alignments within the cosmic web: a theory of constrained tidal torques near filaments.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society452, 3369–3393 (2015). 8

    2015

  19. [27]

    Yang, X.et al.An Extended Halo-based Group/Cluster Finder: Application to the DESI Legacy Imaging Surveys DR8.The Astrophysical Journal909, 143 (2021)

    2021

  20. [28]

    Yang, X.et al.The cross-correlation between galaxies and groups: probing the galaxy distribution in and around dark matter haloes.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society362, 711–726 (2005)

    2005

  21. [29]

    J., van den Bosch, F

    Yang, X., Mo, H. J., van den Bosch, F. C. & Jing, Y. P. A halo-based galaxy group finder: calibration and application to the 2dFGRS.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society356, 1293–1307 (2005)

    2005

  22. [30]

    & Bao, M

    Tang, X.-x., Wang, P., Rong, Y., cui, W. & Bao, M. The Cosmic Dance: Observa- tional Detection of Coherent Spin in Galaxy Clusters.The Astrophysical Journal Letters995, L9 (2025)

    2025

  23. [31]

    & Libeskind, N

    Tempel, E., Tuvikene, T., Kipper, R. & Libeskind, N. I. Merging groups and clusters of galaxies from the SDSS data. The catalogue of groups and potentially merging systems.Astronomy and Astrophysics602, A100 (2017)

    2017

  24. [32]

    J.et al.SDSS-III: Massive Spectroscopic Surveys of the Distant Universe, the Milky Way, and Extra-Solar Planetary Systems.The Astronomical Journal142, 72 (2011)

    Eisenstein, D. J.et al.SDSS-III: Massive Spectroscopic Surveys of the Distant Universe, the Milky Way, and Extra-Solar Planetary Systems.The Astronomical Journal142, 72 (2011)

    2011

  25. [33]

    Alam, S.et al.The Eleventh and Twelfth Data Releases of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey: Final Data from SDSS-III.The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series 219, 12 (2015)

    2015

  26. [34]

    S., Benitez-Llambay, A

    Han, J., Cole, S., Frenk, C. S., Benitez-Llambay, A. & Helly, J. HBT+: an improved code for finding subhaloes and building merger trees in cosmological simulations.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society474, 604–617 (2018)

    2018

  27. [35]

    Sun, Z.et al.Cross-correlation of Planck cosmic microwave background lensing with DESI galaxy groups.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 511, 3548–3560 (2022)

    2022

  28. [36]

    Hamilton, A. J. S. Hamilton, D. (ed.)Linear Redshift Distortions: a Review. (ed.Hamilton, D.)The Evolving Universe, Vol. 231 ofAstrophysics and Space Science Library, 185 (1998). arXiv:astro-ph/9708102

    1998 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Percival, W. J. & White, M. Testing cosmological structure formation using redshift-space distortions.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 393, 297–308 (2009)

    2009

  30. [38]

    & Hill, J

    Goldstein, S. & Hill, J. C. Evidence of galaxy cluster rotation in the cosmic microwave background.arXiv e-printsarXiv:2512.10951 (2025). 9

    2025

  31. [39]

    Abdul Karim, M.et al.DESI DR2 results. II. Measurements of baryon acoustic oscillations and cosmological constraints.Physical Review D112, 083515 (2025)

    2025

  32. [40]

    Takada, M.et al.Extragalactic science, cosmology, and Galactic archaeology with the Subaru Prime Focus Spectrograph.Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan66, R1 (2014)

    2014

  33. [41]

    Zhao, C.et al.MUltiplexed Survey Telescope: Perspectives for Large-Scale Struc- ture Cosmology in the Era of Stage-V Spectroscopic Survey.arXiv e-prints arXiv:2411.07970 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  34. [42]

    JUST Teamet al.The Jiao Tong University Spectroscopic Telescope (JUST) Project.Astronomical Techniques and Instruments1, 16–30 (2024)

    2024

  35. [43]

    Yao, J.et al.KiDS-1000: Cross-correlation with Planck cosmic microwave back- ground lensing and intrinsic alignment removal with self-calibration.Astronomy and Astrophysics673, A111 (2023)

    2023

  36. [44]

    & Jullo, E

    Yao, J., Shan, H., Zhang, P., Kneib, J.-P. & Jullo, E. Unveiling the Intrinsic Align- ment of Galaxies with Self-calibration and DECaLS DR3 Data.The Astrophysical Journal904, 135 (2020)

    2020

  37. [45]

    Wang, Y.et al.The clustering of the SDSS-IV extended baryon oscillation spec- troscopic survey DR16 luminous red galaxy and emission-line galaxy samples: cosmic distance and structure growth measurements using multiple tracers in configuration space.Monthly Notices of the Roya...

    2020

  38. [46]

    & Schneider, P

    Hartlap, J., Simon, P. & Schneider, P. Why your model parameter confidences might be too optimistic. unbiased estimation of the inverse covariance matrix. Astronomy and Astrophysics464, 399–404 (2007). URL https://doi.org/10.1051/ 0004-6361:20066170

    2007

  39. [47]

    Murata, R.et al.Constraints on the Mass-Richness Relation from the Abundance and Weak Lensing of SDSS Clusters.The Astrophysical Journal854, 120 (2018)

    2018

  40. [48]

    & Jing, Y

    Chen, Z., Yu, Y., Han, J. & Jing, Y. CSST cosmological emulator I: Matter power spectrum emulation with one percent accuracy to k = 10h Mpc -1.Science China Physics, Mechanics, and Astronomy68, 289512 (2025)

    2025

  41. [49]

    & Kravtsov, A

    Diemer, B. & Kravtsov, A. V. A Universal Model for Halo Concentrations.The Astrophysical Journal799, 108 (2015)

    2015

  42. [50]

    CosmicGrowth Simulations—Cosmological simulations for structure growth studies.Science China Physics, Mechanics, and Astronomy62, 19511 (2019)

    Jing, Y. CosmicGrowth Simulations—Cosmological simulations for structure growth studies.Science China Physics, Mechanics, and Astronomy62, 19511 (2019). 10

    2019

  43. [51]

    Jing, Y. P. & Suto, Y. Triaxial Modeling of Halo Density Profiles with High- Resolution N-Body Simulations.The Astrophysical Journal574, 538–553 (2002)

    2002

  44. [52]

    P., Wang, H

    Han, J., Jing, Y. P., Wang, H. & Wang, W. Resolving subhaloes’ lives with the Hierarchical Bound-Tracing algorithm.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society427, 2437–2449 (2012)

    2012

  45. [53]

    E.et al.Core Cosmology Library: Precision Cosmological Predictions for LSST.The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series242, 2 (2019)

    Chisari, N. E.et al.Core Cosmology Library: Precision Cosmological Predictions for LSST.The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series242, 2 (2019)

    2019

  46. [54]

    rigid-body

    Duffy, A. R., Schaye, J., Kay, S. T. & Dalla Vecchia, C. Dark matter halo concentrations in the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe year 5 cosmology. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society390, L64–L68 (2008). Acknowledgements.This work is supported by National Key ...

    2008

Pith tools

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