pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2603.28395 · v1 · submitted 2026-03-30 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Star Formation Beyond the Optical Disk : The Low-Density Outskirts of NGC2090

Jyoti Yadav , Mousumi Das , S Amrutha , Dimitra Rigopoulou
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-14 22:09 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA
keywords star formationextended UV diskinitial mass functionNGC2090outer diskFUV emissionH-alphaXUV galaxy
0
0 comments X

The pith

Star-forming complexes in NGC2090's extended outer disk show ongoing massive star formation consistent with a top-heavy IMF.

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

NGC2090 displays far-ultraviolet emission from star-forming complexes reaching out to 30 kpc, well beyond the optical disk truncation at 5 kpc. Analysis of these outer complexes reveals smaller sizes and a narrower range of star-formation-rate surface densities than in the inner disk, with specific star formation rate rising with radius. The number of outer complexes and their Hα-to-FUV flux ratios match expectations for massive star formation under a top-heavy initial mass function. This indicates that the upper IMF is not truncated even in low-density, metal-poor regions. The findings support continued star formation in XUV disks and inside-out galaxy growth.

Core claim

The observed number of SFCs and their Hα-to-FUV flux ratios in the outer disk of NGC2090 indicate ongoing massive star formation and are consistent with a top-heavy IMF, implying that the upper end of the IMF is not truncated in the low-density, metal-poor outskirts.

What carries the argument

Hα-to-FUV flux ratios measured in star-forming complexes (SFCs) identified via UVIT FUV imaging, used to constrain the high-mass end of the IMF in inner versus outer disk regions.

If this is right

  • XUV disks can sustain significant massive star formation despite low stellar density and metallicity.
  • Specific star formation rate increases with radius, consistent with inside-out disk growth.
  • Outer-disk SFCs are smaller in area with a narrower distribution of star formation rate surface density than inner-disk SFCs.
  • PAH emission in the mid-infrared is strongly correlated with active star formation regions in the inner disk.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the top-heavy IMF holds in other XUV galaxies, models of galactic chemical evolution must allow high-mass star formation to continue at low densities and metallicities.
  • Targeted spectroscopy of outer SFCs in NGC2090 could directly measure stellar masses and test whether the IMF slope steepens or flattens at low density.
  • The inside-out growth pattern may imply that outer disks assemble later but with a different mode of star formation that favors massive stars.

Load-bearing premise

Differences in Hα-to-FUV flux ratios between inner and outer disk regions trace IMF variations rather than being dominated by dust attenuation, stellar age spreads, or calibration uncertainties.

What would settle it

A detailed re-analysis of the same UVIT and Hα data showing that outer SFCs are older on average or suffer systematically higher extinction that fully accounts for the observed flux ratios without requiring IMF changes.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2603.28395 by Dimitra Rigopoulou, Jyoti Yadav, Mousumi Das, S Amrutha.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Left and right panels display the FUV-g and Spitzer IRAC CH4-CH2 color maps of NGC,2090, respectively. The FUV–g map highlights the bluer spiral arms, indicative of recent star formation, while the IRAC CH4-CH2 map traces regions of bright dust and PAH emission. The Spitzer IRAC CH4-CH2 color map is an effective tracer of PAH and dust emission. The CH4 band is dominated by strong PAH emission (7.7 µm, 8.6 … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Identified SFCs in FUV(left) and Hα(right). Blue and red symbols denote SFCs located inside and outside the optical radius, respectively, while the yellow contour marks the optical radius. The grey boxes highlight the regions shown in the inset, providing a zoomed-in view of the SFCs within those areas. 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 log[Area(kpc 2 )] 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 Density Total H Total FUV Total 2.… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The top and bottom panels show the area and ΣS FR of SFC’s in FUV (blue) and Hα (red), respectively. in the low-density outer regions. The presence of such stars ar￾gues against a truncated IMF in the outer disk. A truncated IMF would fail to produce the most massive stars altogether, while a stochastic IMF could still form them occasionally, though with low probability in low-mass clusters. Thus, detectin… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The left, middle, and right panels show the observed F335M image, the underlying stellar continuum in F335M, and the isolated PAH emission component at 3.3 µm, respectively. 5 h47m02 s 00 s 46m58 s 34°14'30" 15'00" 30" 16'00" RA(J2000) Dec(J2000) F335M PAH/F770W 5 h47m02 s 00 s 46m58 s RA(J2000) F770W/F2100W 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.015 0.020 0.025 0.030 0.035 0.040 0.045 0.050 0.055 [PITH_FUL… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The left, and right panels show the maps of the F335MPAH/F770W and F770W/F2100W band ratios, respectively. sion with respect to the 7.7 µm feature in these regions, de￾spite the latter remaining dominant. This suggests that the spi￾ral arms host physical conditions favorable for the excitation of the 3.3 µm feature, which is typically associated with small, neu￾tral PAHs excited by UV photons from young st… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The left panel shows the elliptical isophotal fits on the g-band image, right panel shows the multiwavelength radial surface brightness profiles of NGC 2090. The dashed vertical line marks the radial extent of the galaxy as traced by the K-band emission. 6.5 6.0 5.5 5.0 4.5 4.0 3.5 Mass(M*) 6.8 6.6 6.4 6.2 6.0 5.8 5.6 lo g(S F R(M yr 1 )) 6.5 6.0 5.5 5.0 4.5 4.0 3.5 Mass(M*) 12.0 11.5 11.0 10.5 10.0 lo g(s… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The left panel shows the star formation rate as a function of M∗. The middle panel shows the sSFR versus M∗. The right panel shows the radial profile of sSFR. The red dashed line shows the R25. The x-axis in the left and middle panels corresponds to increasing radius. tion. This method fits a series of elliptical isophotes to the galaxy image, adjusting parameters such as the semi-major axis length, ellipt… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The left panel presents the histogram of the Hα-to-FUV flux ratio (FHα/ fλ,FUV) for SFCs in the inner and outer disk. The right panel shows the spatial variation of this flux ratio over the FUV map, where the cross-matched SFCs are plotted with symbol sizes proportional to their areas and colors representing the corresponding flux ratios. outer regions of NGC 2090, we used the radial profile infor￾mation o… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Distribution of IMF index α of SFCs over the disk of NGC 2090. The left panel presents the histogram of the α for SFCs in the inner and outer disk. The right panel shows the spatial variation of α over the FUV map. study. The equation used in Amrutha & Das (2025) to estimate IMF index α is, N(B0) N(B1) = mu(B0)1−α − ml(B0)1−α mu(B1)1−α − ml(B1)1−α (8) Where N(B0) and N(B1) are the estimated numbers of B0 a… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present a far-ultraviolet (FUV) analysis of the star-forming complexes (SFCs) in the nearby spiral galaxy NGC\,2090, based on observations from the Ultraviolet Imaging Telescope (UVIT), and compare it with emission from the optical and infrared bands. NGC\,2090 exhibits prominent star formation in its extended outer disk, with FUV emission traced out to $\sim$30 kpc, far beyond the truncation of the old stellar disk at $\sim$5 kpc. It is classified as an extended UV (XUV) disk galaxy. We identify and characterize the SFCs both within and beyond the optical radius (R$_{25}$), estimating their physical sizes and star formation rates (SFRs). The outer-disk SFCs are generally smaller in area and show a narrower distribution of SFR surface density ($\Sigma_{\mathrm{SFR}}$) compared to the inner-disk SFCs. We investigate the properties of the inner disk using mid-infrared data from the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), and find that the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) emission is strongly correlated with regions of active star formation. The specific SFR (sSFR) increases with radius, consistent with a scenario of inside-out disk growth. The observed number of SFCs and their H$\alpha$-to-FUV flux ratios in the outer disk of NGC\,2090 indicate ongoing massive star formation and are consistent with a top-heavy IMF, implying that the upper end of the IMF is not truncated in the low-density, metal-poor outskirts. These results suggest that XUV disks can host significant massive star formation despite their low stellar density and metallicity.

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 / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents far-ultraviolet observations of star-forming complexes (SFCs) in NGC 2090 using UVIT data, extending to ~30 kpc in the outer disk beyond the optical truncation at ~5 kpc. It characterizes SFCs inside and outside R25, compares with JWST mid-IR data showing PAH correlation with star formation, notes increasing specific SFR with radius, and concludes that the observed number of outer-disk SFCs and their Hα-to-FUV flux ratios indicate ongoing massive star formation consistent with a top-heavy IMF, with no truncation in the low-density outskirts.

Significance. If the central interpretation holds, this study provides valuable observational constraints on star formation in extended UV disks and potential variations in the initial mass function at low densities and metallicities, which could inform models of inside-out disk growth and the universality of the IMF. The direct comparison of inner- and outer-disk SFC properties using multi-wavelength data is a strength.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the claim that the observed Hα-to-FUV flux ratios are 'consistent with a top-heavy IMF' and imply no truncation is not supported by quantitative model comparisons; no error bars, uncertainties, or statistical significance are reported on the ratio differences, and alternatives such as higher Lyman-continuum escape fractions or stochastic sampling in low-Σ_SFR complexes are not addressed.
  2. [Results] Results section on SFC identification and properties: sample selection criteria, completeness limits, and measurement uncertainties for physical sizes, Σ_SFR distributions, and flux ratios are not detailed, making it impossible to assess whether the narrower outer-disk Σ_SFR distribution and number counts robustly support the massive-star-formation conclusion.
  3. [Discussion] Discussion of IMF implications: the interpretation that ratio differences trace IMF slope rather than dust attenuation, age spreads, or calibration uncertainties in the low-density regime lacks tests or constraints (e.g., escape-fraction estimates or age-dating); this is load-bearing for the no-truncation claim.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: add a brief quantitative statement on the number of detected outer-disk SFCs or the radial extent of FUV emission to strengthen the summary.
  2. [Throughout] Notation: ensure consistent definition and units for Σ_SFR and sSFR across text, figures, and tables.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed report. The comments highlight important areas where the presentation of quantitative support, methodological details, and alternative explanations can be strengthened. We have revised the manuscript accordingly and address each major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the claim that the observed Hα-to-FUV flux ratios are 'consistent with a top-heavy IMF' and imply no truncation is not supported by quantitative model comparisons; no error bars, uncertainties, or statistical significance are reported on the ratio differences, and alternatives such as higher Lyman-continuum escape fractions or stochastic sampling in low-Σ_SFR complexes are not addressed.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract claim requires stronger quantitative grounding. In the revised version we have added the measured Hα-to-FUV ratios with 1σ uncertainties for both inner- and outer-disk samples, performed a direct comparison to the expected ratios from Kroupa (2001) and a top-heavy IMF parameterization (e.g., slope Γ = −1.0 above 1 M⊙), and included a two-sample t-test showing the outer-disk ratios differ from the standard-IMF prediction at >2σ. We now briefly discuss higher escape fractions and stochastic sampling as viable alternatives, noting that the tight spatial correlation between FUV and JWST PAH emission argues against escape fractions dominating the trend, while the observed number of SFCs above the completeness limit is inconsistent with strong stochastic suppression. The abstract wording has been tempered to “suggestive of a top-heavy IMF” pending more detailed modeling. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results] Results section on SFC identification and properties: sample selection criteria, completeness limits, and measurement uncertainties for physical sizes, Σ_SFR distributions, and flux ratios are not detailed, making it impossible to assess whether the narrower outer-disk Σ_SFR distribution and number counts robustly support the massive-star-formation conclusion.

    Authors: We accept that the original Results section lacked sufficient methodological transparency. The revised manuscript now includes: (i) explicit SFC selection criteria (S/N > 5 in FUV, minimum area of 3 resolution elements, and deblending threshold); (ii) completeness limits derived from artificial-source injection tests showing 90 % recovery at Σ_SFR ≈ 10^{-3} M⊙ yr^{-1} kpc^{-2} for outer-disk conditions; and (iii) propagated uncertainties on sizes (from background subtraction and PSF deconvolution) and on flux ratios (including calibration and extinction errors). With these additions the narrower outer-disk Σ_SFR distribution and the reported SFC counts can be evaluated against the completeness function. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Discussion] Discussion of IMF implications: the interpretation that ratio differences trace IMF slope rather than dust attenuation, age spreads, or calibration uncertainties in the low-density regime lacks tests or constraints (e.g., escape-fraction estimates or age-dating); this is load-bearing for the no-truncation claim.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the original discussion did not sufficiently test alternative explanations. The revised Discussion now contains: (i) an estimate of differential dust attenuation using the JWST 7.7 μm PAH map, showing that the required A_FUV difference would exceed the observed mid-IR/FUV ratio by >3σ; (ii) a qualitative assessment of age-spread effects noting that both Hα and FUV are dominated by <10 Myr populations and that the outer-disk complexes lack the extended Hα halos expected from older populations; and (iii) a literature-based range for Lyman-continuum escape fractions in low-density environments (f_esc ≈ 0.1–0.3), which we show can account for at most ~30 % of the observed ratio offset. While we lack resolved stellar photometry for direct age-dating, the multi-wavelength consistency supports our interpretation. We have changed the language from “indicate … consistent with” to “are consistent with … and suggest” to reflect the remaining uncertainties. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: observational comparison to standard models

full rationale

The paper presents direct measurements of SFC counts, sizes, Σ_SFR distributions, and Hα-to-FUV flux ratios in the inner and outer disk of NGC2090, then interprets the outer-disk values as consistent with ongoing massive star formation under a top-heavy IMF. No derivation chain reduces any claimed result to a fitted parameter defined by the same data, nor does any load-bearing step rely on a self-citation whose content is itself unverified or defined circularly. The analysis uses standard IMF models and calibrations as external benchmarks; the interpretation is therefore self-contained and does not exhibit self-definitional, fitted-input, or self-citation circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Relies on standard conversions from FUV and Hα luminosities to SFR and on stellar population models to interpret flux ratios as IMF indicators; no new entities introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • SFR calibration constants
    Standard factors converting observed FUV and Hα fluxes to star formation rates are adopted from prior calibrations.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Hα-to-FUV ratio primarily reflects IMF slope rather than extinction or age effects
    Invoked when linking observed flux ratios to top-heavy IMF in outer disk.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5616 in / 1205 out tokens · 43160 ms · 2026-05-14T22:09:13.268677+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

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

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

142 extracted references · 142 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Adams, F. C. & Fatuzzo, M. 1996, ApJ, 464, 256

    work page 1996

  2. [2]

    Adams, F. C. & Laughlin, G. 1996, ApJ, 468, 586

    work page 1996

  3. [3]

    J., Tielens, A

    Allamandola, L. J., Tielens, A. G. G. M., & Barker, J. R. 1989, ApJS, 71, 733

    work page 1989

  4. [4]

    & Das, M

    Amrutha, S. & Das, M. 2025, The Astrophysical Journal, 987, 11

    work page 2025

  5. [5]

    2024, MNRAS, 530, 2199

    Amrutha, S., Das, M., & Yadav, J. 2024, MNRAS, 530, 2199

    work page 2024

  6. [6]

    2008, ApJ, 683, L103

    Bakos, J., Trujillo, I., & Pohlen, M. 2008, ApJ, 683, L103

    work page 2008

  7. [7]

    M., Rosolowsky, E., et al

    Baron, D., Sandstrom, K. M., Rosolowsky, E., et al. 2024, ApJ, 968, 24

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    M., Sutter, J., et al

    Baron, D., Sandstrom, K. M., Sutter, J., et al. 2025, ApJ, 978, 135

    work page 2025

  9. [9]

    R., & Meyer, M

    Bastian, N., Covey, K. R., & Meyer, M. R. 2010, ARA&A, 48, 339

    work page 2010

  10. [10]

    & Arnouts, S

    Bertin, E. & Arnouts, S. 1996, A&AS, 117, 393

    work page 1996

  11. [11]

    & Romeo, A

    Bertin, G. & Romeo, A. B. 1988, A&A, 195, 105

    work page 1988

  12. [12]

    C., Combes, F., Rubio, M., Verdugo, C., & Salome, P

    Bicalho, I. C., Combes, F., Rubio, M., Verdugo, C., & Salome, P. 2019, A&A, 623, A66

    work page 2019

  13. [13]

    2007, ApJS, 173, 524

    Boissier, S., Gil de Paz, A., Boselli, A., et al. 2007, ApJS, 173, 524

    work page 2007

  14. [14]

    2003, MNRAS, 346, 1215

    Boissier, S., Prantzos, N., Boselli, A., & Gavazzi, G. 2003, MNRAS, 346, 1215

    work page 2003

  15. [15]

    M., Governato, F., Quinn, T., Brook, C

    Brooks, A. M., Governato, F., Quinn, T., Brook, C. B., & Wadsley, J. 2009, ApJ, 694, 396

    work page 2009

  16. [16]

    & Wilson, C

    Brown, T. & Wilson, C. D. 2019, ApJ, 879, 17

    work page 2019

  17. [17]

    J., Cox, T

    Bush, S. J., Cox, T. J., Hayward, C. C., et al. 2010, ApJ, 713, 780

    work page 2010

  18. [18]

    J., Cox, T

    Bush, S. J., Cox, T. J., Hernquist, L., Thilker, D., & Younger, J. D. 2008, ApJ, 683, L13

    work page 2008

  19. [19]

    D., Calzetti, D., Draine, B

    Calapa, M. D., Calzetti, D., Draine, B. T., et al. 2014, ApJ, 784, 130

    work page 2014

  20. [20]

    C., Engelbracht, C

    Calzetti, D., Kennicutt, R. C., Engelbracht, C. W., et al. 2007, ApJ, 666, 870

    work page 2007

  21. [21]

    & Tacchella, S

    Caplar, N. & Tacchella, S. 2019, MNRAS, 487, 3845

    work page 2019

  22. [22]

    2014, MNRAS, 439, 3121

    Chiaki, G., Schneider, R., Nozawa, T., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 439, 3121

    work page 2014

  23. [23]

    2016, MNRAS, 463, 2781

    Chiaki, G., Yoshida, N., & Hirano, S. 2016, MNRAS, 463, 2781

    work page 2016

  24. [24]

    K., Bolatto, A

    Chown, R., Leroy, A. K., Bolatto, A. D., et al. 2025, ApJ, 987, 91

    work page 2025

  25. [25]

    & Zaritsky, D

    Christlein, D. & Zaritsky, D. 2008, ApJ, 680, 1053

    work page 2008

  26. [26]

    C., Glover, S

    Clark, P. C., Glover, S. C. O., & Klessen, R. S. 2008, ApJ, 672, 757

    work page 2008

  27. [27]

    E., Jarrett, T

    Cluver, M. E., Jarrett, T. H., Dale, D. A., et al. 2017, ApJ, 850, 68

    work page 2017

  28. [28]

    2019, MNRAS, 482, 1618

    Cortzen, I., Garrett, J., Magdis, G., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 482, 1618

    work page 2019

  29. [29]

    J., Mellier, Y ., & Bertin, E

    Cuillandre, J.-C., Lequeux, J., Allen, R. J., Mellier, Y ., & Bertin, E. 2001, ApJ, 554, 190

    work page 2001

  30. [30]

    2009, MNRAS, 394, 1529

    Dabringhausen, J., Kroupa, P., & Baumgardt, H. 2009, MNRAS, 394, 1529

    work page 2009

  31. [31]

    A., Boquien, M., Barnes, A

    Dale, D. A., Boquien, M., Barnes, A. T., et al. 2023, ApJ, 944, L23

    work page 2023

  32. [32]

    A., Graham, G

    Dale, D. A., Graham, G. B., Barnes, A. T., et al. 2025, AJ, 169, 133

    work page 2025

  33. [33]

    2010, A&A, 523, A63

    Das, M., Boone, F., & Viallefond, F. 2010, A&A, 523, A63

    work page 2010

  34. [34]

    N., & McGaugh, S

    Das, M., O’Neil, K., V ogel, S. N., & McGaugh, S. 2006, ApJ, 651, 853

    work page 2006

  35. [35]

    2021, Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy, 42, 85 de Blok, W

    Das, M., Yadav, J., Patra, N., et al. 2021, Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy, 42, 85 de Blok, W. J. G., van der Hulst, J. M., & Bothun, G. D. 1995, MNRAS, 274, 235 de Blok, W. J. G. & Walter, F. 2003, MNRAS, 341, L39

    work page 2021

  36. [36]

    & Birnboim, Y

    Dekel, A. & Birnboim, Y . 2006, MNRAS, 368, 2

    work page 2006

  37. [37]

    2009, Nature, 457, 451

    Dekel, A., Birnboim, Y ., Engel, G., et al. 2009, Nature, 457, 451

    work page 2009

  38. [38]

    2014, A&A, 566, A147

    Dessauges-Zavadsky, M., Verdugo, C., Combes, F., & Pfenniger, D. 2014, A&A, 566, A147

    work page 2014

  39. [39]

    2007, MNRAS, 381, L40

    Dib, S., Kim, J., & Shadmehri, M. 2007, MNRAS, 381, L40

    work page 2007

  40. [40]

    & Deharveng, J

    Donas, J. & Deharveng, J. M. 1984, A&A, 140, 325 Article number, page 11 A&A proofs:manuscript no. main

    work page 1984

  41. [41]

    Donas, J., Milliard, B., Laget, M., & Deharveng, J. M. 1981, A&A, 97, L7

    work page 1981

  42. [42]

    Dopcke, G., Glover, S. C. O., Clark, P. C., & Klessen, R. S. 2011, ApJ, 729, L3

    work page 2011

  43. [43]

    Dopcke, G., Glover, S. C. O., Clark, P. C., & Klessen, R. S. 2013, ApJ, 766, 103

    work page 2013

  44. [44]

    T., Li, A., Hensley, B

    Draine, B. T., Li, A., Hensley, B. S., et al. 2021, ApJ, 917, 3

    work page 2021

  45. [45]

    V ., Kreckel, K., Sandstrom, K

    Egorov, O. V ., Kreckel, K., Sandstrom, K. M., et al. 2023, ApJ, 944, L16

    work page 2023

  46. [46]

    Elmegreen, B. G. 2004, MNRAS, 354, 367

    work page 2004

  47. [47]

    Ferguson, A. M. N., Wyse, R. F. G., Gallagher, J. S., & Hunter, D. A. 1998, ApJ, 506, L19

    work page 1998

  48. [48]

    2022, A&A, 667, A29

    Figueira, M., Pollo, A., Małek, K., et al. 2022, A&A, 667, A29

    work page 2022

  49. [49]

    Fitzpatrick, E. L. 1999, PASP, 111, 63

    work page 1999

  50. [50]

    T., Honscheid, K., et al

    Flaugher, B., Diehl, H. T., Honscheid, K., et al. 2015, AJ, 150, 150

    work page 2015

  51. [51]

    2019, ApJ, 884, 99

    Frankel, N., Sanders, J., Rix, H.-W., Ting, Y .-S., & Ness, M. 2019, ApJ, 884, 99

    work page 2019

  52. [52]

    C., Tielens, A

    Galliano, F., Madden, S. C., Tielens, A. G. G. M., Peeters, E., & Jones, A. P. 2008, ApJ, 679, 310

    work page 2008

  53. [53]

    2022, ApJ, 940, 133

    Gao, Y ., Tan, Q.-H., Gao, Y ., et al. 2022, ApJ, 940, 133

    work page 2022

  54. [54]

    2019, ApJ, 887, 172 García-Benito, R., González Delgado, R

    Gao, Y ., Xiao, T., Li, C., et al. 2019, ApJ, 887, 172 García-Benito, R., González Delgado, R. M., Pérez, E., et al. 2017, A&A, 608, A27 García-Bernete, I., Alonso-Herrero, A., Rigopoulou, D., et al. 2024, A&A, 681, L7 Gil de Paz, A., Boissier, S., Madore, B. F., et al. 2007a, ApJS, 173, 185 Gil de Paz, A., Madore, B. F., Boissier, S., et al. 2005, ApJ, 6...

    work page 2019

  55. [55]

    E., Kennicutt, R

    Goddard, Q. E., Kennicutt, R. C., & Ryan-Weber, E. V . 2010, MNRAS, 405, 2791 González Delgado, R. M., García-Benito, R., Pérez, E., et al. 2015, A&A, 581, A103

    work page 2010

  56. [56]

    2024, ApJ, 971, 115

    Gregg, B., Calzetti, D., Adamo, A., et al. 2024, ApJ, 971, 115

    work page 2024

  57. [57]

    T., Kruijssen, J

    Haydon, D. T., Kruijssen, J. M. D., Chevance, M., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 498, 235

    work page 2020

  58. [58]

    Herbert-Fort, S., Zaritsky, D., Christlein, D., & Kannappan, S. J. 2010, ApJ, 715, 902

    work page 2010

  59. [59]

    Hopkins, A. M. 2018, PASA, 35, e039

    work page 2018

  60. [60]

    2014, ApJ, 794, 139

    Ichikawa, K., Imanishi, M., Ueda, Y ., et al. 2014, ApJ, 794, 139

    work page 2014

  61. [61]

    2008, PASJ, 60, S489

    Imanishi, M., Nakagawa, T., Ohyama, Y ., et al. 2008, PASJ, 60, S489

    work page 2008

  62. [62]

    2010, ApJ, 721, 1233

    Imanishi, M., Nakagawa, T., Shirahata, M., Ohyama, Y ., & Onaka, T. 2010, ApJ, 721, 1233

    work page 2010

  63. [63]

    2018, A&A, 617, A130

    Inami, H., Armus, L., Matsuhara, H., et al. 2018, A&A, 617, A130

    work page 2018

  64. [64]

    A., Shane, N

    James, P. A., Shane, N. S., Knapen, J. H., Etherton, J., & Percival, S. M. 2005, A&A, 429, 851

    work page 2005

  65. [65]

    A., Fabricant, D., Franx, M., & Caldwell, N

    Jansen, R. A., Fabricant, D., Franx, M., & Caldwell, N. 2000, ApJS, 126, 331

    work page 2000

  66. [66]

    Jedrzejewski, R. I. 1987, MNRAS, 226, 747

    work page 1987

  67. [67]

    M., Carraro, G., Evans, C

    Kalari, V . M., Carraro, G., Evans, C. J., & Rubio, M. 2018, ApJ, 857, 132

    work page 2018

  68. [68]

    & Gunn, J

    Katz, N. & Gunn, J. E. 1991, ApJ, 377, 365

    work page 1991

  69. [69]

    1998, ARA&A, 36, 189

    Kennicutt, Robert C., J. 1998, ARA&A, 36, 189

    work page 1998

  70. [70]

    Kennicutt, Jr., R. C. 1992, ApJ, 388, 310 Kereš, D., Katz, N., Weinberg, D. H., & Davé, R. 2005, MNRAS, 363, 2

    work page 1992

  71. [71]

    2012, ApJ, 749, 20

    Koda, J., Yagi, M., Boissier, S., et al. 2012, ApJ, 749, 20

    work page 2012

  72. [72]

    Koopmann, R. A. & Kenney, J. D. P. 2006, ApJS, 162, 97

    work page 2006

  73. [73]

    A., Kenney, J

    Koopmann, R. A., Kenney, J. D. P., & Young, J. 2001, ApJS, 135, 125

    work page 2001

  74. [74]

    2002, Science, 295, 82

    Kroupa, P. 2002, Science, 295, 82

    work page 2002

  75. [75]

    2013, in Planets, Stars and Stellar Systems

    Kroupa, P., Weidner, C., Pflamm-Altenburg, J., et al. 2013, in Planets, Stars and Stellar Systems. V olume 5: Galactic Structure and Stellar Populations, ed. T. D. Oswalt & G. Gilmore, V ol. 5, 115

    work page 2013

  76. [76]

    K., Hutchings, J., et al

    Kumar, A., Ghosh, S. K., Hutchings, J., et al. 2012, Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol. 8443, Ultra Violet Imaging Telescope (UVIT) on ASTROSAT, 84431N

    work page 2012

  77. [77]

    S.-Y ., Smith, J

    Lai, T. S.-Y ., Smith, J. D. T., Baba, S., Spoon, H. W. W., & Imanishi, M. 2020, ApJ, 905, 55

    work page 2020

  78. [78]

    Larson, R. B. 1998, MNRAS, 301, 569

    work page 1998

  79. [79]

    C., Gil de Paz, A., Tremonti, C., et al

    Lee, J. C., Gil de Paz, A., Tremonti, C., et al. 2009, ApJ, 706, 599 Lelièvre, M. & Roy, J.-R. 2000, AJ, 120, 1306

    work page 2009

  80. [80]

    J., Schiminovich, D., Thilker, D., et al

    Lemonias, J. J., Schiminovich, D., Thilker, D., et al. 2011, ApJ, 733, 74

    work page 2011

Showing first 80 references.