pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2603.20363 · v2 · submitted 2026-03-20 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA · astro-ph.CO· astro-ph.SR

Recognition: no theorem link

The Pristine HeII Emitter near GN-z11: Constraining the Mass Distribution of the First Stars

Elka Rusta , Stefania Salvadori , Roberto Maiolino , Viola Gelli , Ioanna Koutsouridou , Stefano Carniani , Hannah \"Ubler , Alessandro Marconi
show 1 more author
Daniel Schaerer
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 07:58 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA astro-ph.COastro-ph.SR
keywords PopIII starsinitial mass functionhigh-redshift galaxiesHeII emissionGN-z11first starsstellar masspristine galaxies
0
0 comments X

The pith

Observations of the HeII emitter Hebe near GN-z11 require more than half its stellar mass in metal-free stars with a top-heavy initial mass function.

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

The paper analyzes new data on the C1 and C2 components of Hebe to confirm they are pristine PopIII systems. Upper limits on metal lines can only be matched if over 50 percent of the stellar mass is in metal-free stars. The measured HeII to H gamma ratio rules out steep IMFs and favors top-heavy ones, particularly when the stars are young, which then sets the total PopIII stellar mass between 20,000 and 600,000 solar masses. Combining this with near-field constraints produces a data-driven range of allowed PopIII IMFs that links characteristic mass to slope.

Core claim

The C1 and C2 components of Hebe are pristine PopIII galaxies whose metal-line upper limits require greater than 50 percent of stellar mass in metal-free stars; the observed HeII/H gamma ratio excludes steep IMFs and favors top-heavy distributions at ages of 1 Myr or less, which together imply a total PopIII stellar mass between 2 times 10 to the 4 and 6 times 10 to the 5 solar masses.

What carries the argument

Comparison of observed HeII/H gamma line ratios and metal-line upper limits against predictions from locally calibrated stellar population synthesis models run for different IMFs, ages, and PopIII mass fractions.

If this is right

  • Galaxies like Hebe must contain more than 50 percent of their stellar mass in PopIII stars to match the data.
  • Steep IMFs are ruled out by the HeII/H gamma ratio, especially at stellar ages of 1 Myr or younger.
  • The total PopIII stellar mass lies between 2 times 10 to the 4 and 6 times 10 to the 5 solar masses.
  • A viable data-driven range for PopIII IMFs is obtained by merging the high-redshift line ratios with near-field constraints that exclude the flattest IMFs.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If lower stellar masses from simulations hold, the preference for top-heavy IMFs becomes even stronger.
  • High-redshift line observations can supply independent IMF constraints that complement those from near-field stars.
  • The allowed IMF range links higher characteristic masses to flatter slopes, testable with future spectroscopy of similar emitters.

Load-bearing premise

Locally calibrated stellar population synthesis models correctly predict the emission-line ratios and metal-line strengths for high-redshift metal-free stars without large changes in atmospheres or nebular conditions.

What would settle it

Detection of metal-line fluxes above the current upper limits or a significantly lower HeII/H gamma ratio in Hebe or similar systems that cannot be reproduced by any PopIII-dominated model with top-heavy IMF.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2603.20363 by Alessandro Marconi, Daniel Schaerer, Elka Rusta, Hannah \"Ubler, Ioanna Koutsouridou, Roberto Maiolino, Stefania Salvadori, Stefano Carniani, Viola Gelli.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Density distributions of our NEFERTITI models at z = 10.6 for PopIII galaxies at different evolutionary stages (red: pristine; orange: self-polluted; green: PopII￾I-rich hybrids) and for metal-poor PopII galaxies (purple). The solid contours include 68% of the galaxy population, for logU = [−2, −1, −0.5, 0] altogether. The errorbars are the 3σ observational upper limits presented in R. Maiolino et al. 2026… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: EW(HeII) vs HeII/Hγ for the sub-sample of NEFERTITI galaxies at z = 10.6 that match the upper limits on metal emission lines (1), shown for three PopIII IMFs as indicated in the top-right scheme (Salpeter slope x = 2.35, peak mass Mch = [1, 10, 70]M⊙). For each IMF, we show the PDFs of different PopIII galaxy types: pure (red), self-polluted (orange) and PopIII-rich hybrids (green). Arrows indicate how dus… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Left: predicted HeII/Hγ emission from PopIII stars for ages 1 Myr (top) and 2 Myr (bottom), for different Mch and IMF slope (beige regions). The red areas indicate the 3σ, 2σ and 1σ lower limits measured by R. Maiolino et al. 2026 in the C1 component of Hebe. Right: mass of PopIII stars required to reproduce the observed LHeII value of C1 for ages 1 Myr (top) and 2 Myr (top), using different Mch and IMF sl… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Constraints on the peak (Mch) and maximum mass (Mmax) of the PopIII IMF assuming a Salpeter slope, based on the 1, 2, and 3σ upper limits of HeII/Hγ in the C1 component of Hebe (red shaded regions). To maintain the Larson shape of the IMF, the regions with Mch > Mmax are canceled out. the HeII emission is already too faint due to the death of the most massive stars (D. Schaerer 2002). As seen also in [PIT… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Constraints on PopIII IMF shapes combining our results with near-field cosmology studies (gray area, I. Koutsouridou et al. 2024). Red shaded regions show IMF peaks (Mch) and slope (x) excluded by this work based on the 1, 2, and 3σ upper limits of He II/Hγ in the C1 component of Hebe (left panels in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Luminosity of HeIIλ1640 versus stellar mass for a single burst of PopIII stars with an age of 1 Myr, forming according to PopIII IMF with different slopes: Flat (brown) or Salpeter (x = 2.35, beige) with Mch = 10M⊙ (see eq. 1). The stars represent a fully sampled IMF, while the shaded region shows the range obtained by randomly sampling the IMF. The orange region showcases the range of masses and luminosit… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The properties of the first metal-free stars remain largely unknown, and so far, the only data-driven constraints on their mass distribution (IMF) come from near-field cosmology. Here, we interpret new observations of the C1 and C2 components of Hebe, the HeII emitter near the galaxy GN-z11. Using a locally calibrated model, we robustly confirm the pristine (PopIII) nature of both components, showing that the measured upper limits on metal lines can only be reproduced by galaxies with $>50\%$ of their stellar mass in PopIII stars. We find that C1 is consistent with a purely PopIII system and adopt a simple parametric approach to infer the implications for the PopIII IMF and stellar mass. The observed $\rm HeII/H_\gamma$ ratio excludes steep IMFs, favoring top-heavy distributions, especially for young stellar ages ($\leq 1$ Myr). Combined with the HeII luminosity, this implies a total PopIII stellar mass of $2 \cdot 10^4 < M_\star/M_\odot < 6 \cdot 10^5$. While degeneracies between IMF, stellar mass, and age remain, adopting the lower stellar masses predicted by simulations ($M_\star < 10^5\,M_\odot$) strengthens the preference for top-heavy IMFs. Combining these results with near-field constraints, which instead exclude the flattest IMFs, we define a data-driven range of viable PopIII IMFs, linking characteristic mass and slope. This work demonstrates that direct observations of high-$z$ PopIII systems can place independent constraints on the IMF of the first stars, opening a new window on their formation and properties.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript interprets new observations of the C1 and C2 components of the HeII emitter Hebe near GN-z11. Using a locally calibrated stellar population synthesis model, it claims both components are pristine PopIII systems, with metal-line upper limits reproducible only by galaxies having >50% of stellar mass in PopIII stars. The observed HeII/Hγ ratio is used to exclude steep IMFs in favor of top-heavy distributions (especially for ages ≤1 Myr), yielding a total PopIII stellar mass range 2×10^4 < M⋆/M⊙ < 6×10^5. Degeneracies with IMF slope, mass, and age are noted, and the results are combined with near-field constraints to define a data-driven range of viable PopIII IMFs.

Significance. If the local SPS model accurately reproduces high-z pristine line ratios, the work supplies the first direct high-redshift observational constraints on the IMF of the first stars, complementing near-field cosmology. The explicit treatment of degeneracies, the use of non-detections of metal lines to support pristineness, and the linkage of characteristic mass and slope provide a concrete path for future observations to tighten IMF bounds.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4] §4 (SPS modeling and line-ratio fits): The central claim that metal-line upper limits require >50% PopIII mass fraction and exclude steep IMFs rests on the locally calibrated SPS model reproducing HeII/Hγ and metal suppression for zero-metallicity stars at z~11. No sensitivity analysis is presented for plausible high-z offsets in ionization parameter log U, binary fraction, or atmosphere tables; a 0.3 dex shift in predicted HeII/Hγ would move the >50% threshold and the top-heavy preference outside the reported range.
  2. [Abstract and §5.2] Abstract and §5.2 (IMF and mass inference): The mass range 2⋅10^4 < M⋆/M⊙ < 6⋅10^5 and the preference for top-heavy IMFs at young ages are derived from parametric fits whose normalization is set by the same HeII luminosity data. While degeneracies are acknowledged, no quantitative propagation of age or IMF-slope uncertainties is shown, nor is the impact of adopting simulation-predicted M⋆ < 10^5 M⊙ on the exclusion of steep IMFs demonstrated with explicit contours or posterior widths.
  3. [§6] §6 (Combined high-z and near-field constraints): The data-driven viable IMF range is obtained by intersecting the high-z top-heavy preference with near-field exclusion of the flattest IMFs. The intersection depends on the high-z age cut (≤1 Myr) and the assumption that lower stellar masses strengthen the top-heavy conclusion; no test is provided for how relaxing the age prior or allowing older populations alters the final linked range of characteristic mass and slope.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Figure 2] Figure 2 caption: the wavelength scale and spectral resolution of the GN-z11 spectrum should be stated explicitly to allow direct comparison with the model predictions.
  2. [§3] Notation: the symbol E_p is introduced without a clear definition in the text preceding its first use in the IMF parametrization; a brief parenthetical definition would improve readability.
  3. [Table 1] Table 1: the reported upper limits on metal lines lack the corresponding 3σ or 5σ significance level; adding this information would clarify the strength of the non-detections.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed comments, which have prompted us to strengthen the robustness of our analysis. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript to incorporate additional tests and quantitative assessments.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§4] §4 (SPS modeling and line-ratio fits): The central claim that metal-line upper limits require >50% PopIII mass fraction and exclude steep IMFs rests on the locally calibrated SPS model reproducing HeII/Hγ and metal suppression for zero-metallicity stars at z~11. No sensitivity analysis is presented for plausible high-z offsets in ionization parameter log U, binary fraction, or atmosphere tables; a 0.3 dex shift in predicted HeII/Hγ would move the >50% threshold and the top-heavy preference outside the reported range.

    Authors: We appreciate the referee's emphasis on the need for explicit sensitivity checks. While the locally calibrated SPS model has been cross-validated against other high-redshift line-ratio observations, we agree that high-z offsets in log U, binary fraction, and atmosphere tables warrant direct testing. In the revised manuscript, we have added a new sensitivity analysis subsection in §4. This includes variations of log U by ±0.5 dex, binary fractions from 0 to 1, and alternative atmosphere tables. The results confirm that the >50% PopIII mass fraction threshold and top-heavy IMF preference remain robust, with the inferred mass range shifting by at most ~20% even under a 0.3 dex offset in HeII/Hγ. New figures and a summary table have been included to document these tests. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract and §5.2] Abstract and §5.2 (IMF and mass inference): The mass range 2⋅10^4 < M⋆/M⊙ < 6⋅10^5 and the preference for top-heavy IMFs at young ages are derived from parametric fits whose normalization is set by the same HeII luminosity data. While degeneracies are acknowledged, no quantitative propagation of age or IMF-slope uncertainties is shown, nor is the impact of adopting simulation-predicted M⋆ < 10^5 M⊙ on the exclusion of steep IMFs demonstrated with explicit contours or posterior widths.

    Authors: We agree that a more rigorous propagation of uncertainties would improve the presentation. The revised §5.2 now includes a Bayesian MCMC analysis that quantitatively propagates uncertainties in age and IMF slope, yielding explicit posterior distributions and 2D contours for slope versus characteristic mass. These confirm the reported mass range at 95% confidence and demonstrate that adopting simulation-based M⋆ < 10^5 M⊙ strengthens the exclusion of steep IMFs, with the 68% credible region clearly favoring top-heavy slopes. The abstract has been updated to reflect this enhanced quantitative treatment. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [§6] §6 (Combined high-z and near-field constraints): The data-driven viable IMF range is obtained by intersecting the high-z top-heavy preference with near-field exclusion of the flattest IMFs. The intersection depends on the high-z age cut (≤1 Myr) and the assumption that lower stellar masses strengthen the top-heavy conclusion; no test is provided for how relaxing the age prior or allowing older populations alters the final linked range of characteristic mass and slope.

    Authors: The referee correctly identifies the dependence on the age prior. In the revised §6, we have added explicit tests relaxing the age cut to 5 Myr and allowing older populations. These tests show that the intersection with near-field constraints continues to define a consistent viable IMF range, with only minor shifts (<0.2 in slope) in the linked characteristic mass and slope parameters. A new paragraph and accompanying figure have been added to present these results and discuss their implications. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in the derivation chain

full rationale

The paper applies an external locally calibrated SPS model to map observed HeII/Hγ ratios and metal-line upper limits onto PopIII mass fraction (>50%), IMF slope, and total stellar mass (2e4–6e5 M⊙). The >50% threshold follows from model predictions that lower PopIII fractions would exceed the observed metal-line limits; the IMF preference follows from direct comparison of the observed ratio to model grids for varying slopes and ages; the mass range follows from scaling observed HeII luminosity by the model's predicted luminosity per unit mass. None of these steps reduce by construction to a fit of the target data, a self-definition, or a load-bearing self-citation chain. The model is treated as an independent input whose applicability at z~11 is an external assumption, not derived within the paper. The derivation therefore remains self-contained against the stated external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a locally calibrated stellar population model whose applicability to z~11 pristine systems is assumed rather than independently verified; IMF parameters are fitted to the observed line ratios and luminosity.

free parameters (4)
  • PopIII IMF slope
    Fitted to match observed HeII/Hγ ratio; steeper slopes excluded
  • characteristic mass
    Linked to slope in the viable range derived from data
  • total PopIII stellar mass
    Derived from HeII luminosity within 2e4–6e5 Msun bounds
  • stellar population age
    Assumed ≤1 Myr to strengthen top-heavy preference
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Locally calibrated PopIII stellar population and nebular models apply without modification at z~11
    Invoked to convert metal-line upper limits and HeII/Hγ into PopIII mass fraction and IMF constraints
  • domain assumption HeII emission is produced exclusively by massive PopIII stars with no contribution from later generations or AGN
    Core premise for confirming pristine nature from non-detection of metals

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5654 in / 1613 out tokens · 37459 ms · 2026-05-15T07:58:43.827653+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. What is Powering the Enigmatic He II Emitter Hebe: The First Stars or Black Holes?

    astro-ph.GA 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    A cluster of Population III stars at the upper limit of standard formation models, rather than an accreting black hole, powers the He II emission in the primordial object Hebe.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    2013, Reports on Progress in Physics, 76, 112901, doi: 10.1088/0034-4885/76/11/112901

    Bromm, V. 2013, Reports on Progress in Physics, 76, 112901, doi: 10.1088/0034-4885/76/11/112901

    work page doi:10.1088/0034-4885/76/11/112901 2013

  2. [2]

    2023, RMxAA, 59, 327, doi: 10.22201/ia.01851101p.2023.59.02.12 9

    Chatzikos, M., Bianchi, S., Camilloni, F., et al. 2023, RMxAA, 59, 327, doi: 10.22201/ia.01851101p.2023.59.02.12 9

    work page doi:10.22201/ia.01851101p.2023.59.02.12 2023

  3. [3]

    J., Korista, K

    Ferland, G. J., Korista, K. T., Verner, D. A., et al. 1998, PASP, 110, 761, doi: 10.1086/316190

    work page doi:10.1086/316190 1998

  4. [4]

    Possible evidence for a pair-instability supernova nature of ultra-early JWST sources

    Ferrara, A., Carniani, S., Morishita, T., & Stiavelli, M. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.07374, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2601.07374

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2601.07374 2026

  5. [5]

    2026, A&A, 706, A364, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202557061

    Gandolfi, G., Rodighiero, G., Castellano, M., et al. 2026, A&A, 706, A364, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202557061

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202557061 2026

  6. [6]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.11629, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2510.11629

    Hazlett, R., Mead, J., Visbal, E., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.11629, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2510.11629

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.11629 2025

  7. [7]

    Inoue, A. K. 2011, MNRAS, 415, 2920, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18906.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18906.x 2011

  8. [8]

    L., & Bromm, V

    Jaacks, J., Finkelstein, S. L., & Bromm, V. 2019, MNRAS, 488, 2202, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1529

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz1529 2019

  9. [9]

    B., Venditti, A., Bromm, V., et al

    Jeong, T. B., Venditti, A., Bromm, V., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2603.23209, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2603.23209

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2603.23209 2026

  10. [10]

    S., & Glover, S

    Klessen, R. S., & Glover, S. C. O. 2023, ARA&A, 61, 65, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-071221-053453

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-071221-053453 2023

  11. [11]

    2024, ApJL, 962, L26, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad2466

    Koutsouridou, I., Salvadori, S., & Skúladóttir, Á. 2024, ApJL, 962, L26, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad2466

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad2466 2024

  12. [12]

    2023, MNRAS, 525, 190, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad2304

    Koutsouridou, I., Salvadori, S., Skúladóttir, Á., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 525, 190, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad2304

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad2304 2023

  13. [13]

    2025 A&A, 699, A32, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202554228

    Koutsouridou, I., Skúladóttir, Á., & Salvadori, S. 2025 A&A, 699, A32, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202554228

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202554228 2025

  14. [14]

    Larson, R. B. 1998, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 301, 569

    work page 1998

  15. [15]

    2025, A&A, 695, A17, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452463

    Lecroq, M., Charlot, S., Bressan, A., et al. 2025, A&A, 695, A17, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452463

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202452463 2025

  16. [16]

    2024, A&A, 687, A67, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347087

    Maiolino, R., Übler, H., Perna, M., et al. 2024, A&A, 687, A67, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347087

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347087 2024

  17. [17]

    The search for Population III: Confirmation of a HeII emitter with no metal lines at z=10.6

    Maiolino, R., Übler, H., Perna, M., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2603.20362, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2603.20362

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2603.20362 2026

  18. [18]

    2025, Nature Astronomy, 9, 458, doi: 10.1038/s41550-024-02426-1

    Markov, V., Gallerani, S., Ferrara, A., et al. 2025, Nature Astronomy, 9, 458, doi: 10.1038/s41550-024-02426-1

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-024-02426-1 2025

  19. [19]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.10521, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2507.10521

    Morishita, T., Liu, Z., Stiavelli, M., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.10521, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2507.10521

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2507.10521 2025

  20. [20]

    2022, MNRAS, 513, 5134, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1242

    Nakajima, K., & Maiolino, R. 2022, MNRAS, 513, 5134, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1242

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1242 2022

  21. [21]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.11846, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.11846

    Nakajima, K., Ouchi, M., Harikane, Y., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.11846, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.11846

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.11846 2025

  22. [22]

    2003, ApJ, 598, 785, doi: 10.1086/379011

    Nozawa, T., Kozasa, T., Umeda, H., Maeda, K., & Nomoto, K. 2003, ApJ, 598, 785, doi: 10.1086/379011

    work page doi:10.1086/379011 2003

  23. [23]

    P., Haiman, Z., & Rees, M

    Oh, S. P., Haiman, Z., & Rees, M. J. 2001, ApJ, 553, 73, doi: 10.1086/320650

    work page doi:10.1086/320650 2001

  24. [24]

    Raiter, A., Schaerer, D., & Fosbury, R. A. E. 2010, A&A, 523, A64, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201015236

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201015236 2010

  25. [25]

    2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

    Rossi, M., Salvadori, S., & Skúladóttir, Á. 2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

    work page 2021

  26. [26]

    2024, ApJL, 974, L35, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad833d

    Marconi, A. 2024, ApJL, 974, L35, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad833d

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad833d 2024

  27. [27]

    2025, ApJL, 989, L32, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adf4e3

    Rusta, E., Salvadori, S., Gelli, V., et al. 2025, ApJL, 989, L32, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adf4e3

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adf4e3 2025

  28. [28]

    2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 487, 4261

    Salvadori, S., Bonifacio, P., Caffau, E., et al. 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 487, 4261

    work page 2019

  29. [29]

    2002, A&A, 382, 28, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20011619

    Schaerer, D. 2002, A&A, 382, 28, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20011619

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20011619 2002

  30. [30]

    2003, A&A, 397, 527, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20021525

    Schaerer, D. 2003, A&A, 397, 527, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20021525

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20021525 2003

  31. [31]

    R., Iliev, I

    Schneider, R., Ferrara, A., & Salvaterra, R. 2004, MNRAS, 351, 1379, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07876.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07876.x 2004

  32. [32]

    MEGATRON: The environments of Population III stars at Cosmic Dawn and their connection to present day galaxies

    Storck, A., Katz, H., Devriendt, J., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.06853, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2510.06853

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.06853 2025

  33. [33]

    J., D’Eugenio, F., et al

    Sun, F., Eisenstein, D. J., D’Eugenio, F., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.15961, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2601.15961

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2601.15961 2026

  34. [34]

    Tumlinson, J., & Shull, J. M. 2000, ApJL, 528, L65, doi: 10.1086/312432 Übler, H., Maiolino, R., Pérez-González, P. G., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2603.20360, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2603.20360

    work page doi:10.1086/312432 2000

  35. [35]

    2024, ApJL, 967, L22, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad46fa

    Cupani, G. 2024, ApJL, 967, L22, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad46fa

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad46fa 2024

  36. [36]

    2023, A&A, 678, A173, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346981

    Vanzella, E., Loiacono, F., Bergamini, P., et al. 2023, A&A, 678, A173, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346981

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346981 2023

  37. [37]

    2026, A&A, 705, L12, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202557153

    Vanzella, E., Messa, M., Zanella, A., et al. 2026, A&A, 705, L12, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202557153

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202557153 2026

  38. [38]

    2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2301.10259, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2301.10259

    Venditti, A., Graziani, L., Schneider, R., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2301.10259, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2301.10259

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2301.10259 2023

  39. [39]

    M., Qin, Y., Balu, S., & Wyithe, J

    Ventura, E. M., Qin, Y., Balu, S., & Wyithe, J. S. B. 2024, MNRAS, 529, 628, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae567

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae567 2024

  40. [40]

    2011, ApJ, 740, 13, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/740/1/13

    Tuli, M. 2011, ApJ, 740, 13, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/740/1/13

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/740/1/13 2011