pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2605.01981 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-03 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

Recognition: 3 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

A Comprehensive Study of Morphology and Kinematics in Extended Nebulae Around UV Luminous Quasars at zapprox1

Zhuoqi Liu , Sean D. Johnson , Eric F. Bell , Zhijie Qu , Beno\^it Epinat , Hsiao-Wen Chen , Marc Rafelski , Jennifer I-Hsiu Li
show 15 more authors
Alexander Beckett Mandy C. Chen Sayak Dutta David DePalma Gwen C. Rudie Joop Schaye Patrick Petitjean Sebastiano Cantalupo Elise Fuller Wolfram Kollatschny Sebasti\'an L\'opez Nishant Mishra Sowgat Muzahid Andrea Travascio Fakhri S. Zahedy
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 19:31 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA
keywords quasar nebulaecircumgalactic mediumgalaxy interactionsnebular morphologykinematics[O II] emissionhigh-redshift quasarsCGM gas flows
0
0 comments X

The pith

Giant nebulae around quasars at z≈1 arise through multiple pathways, with the largest irregular ones often tied to galaxy interactions.

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

This paper examines extended [O II] and [O III] nebulae around 30 UV-luminous quasars at redshifts 0.4-1.4 drawn from the CUBS and MUSEQuBES surveys. Through joint analysis of nebular shapes, sizes, kinematics, and surrounding galaxy environments, the authors introduce three morpho-kinematic classes: eleven irregular systems larger than 50 kpc, twelve compact nebulae on host-galaxy scales, and four complex cases. They report a statistically significant spatial-kinematic link between ten nebulae—mostly the irregular ones—and nearby group galaxies. The results indicate these nebulae form via a mix of host-galaxy gas, interactions, group environments, and quasar activity rather than a single mechanism. Roughly 30 percent show blueshifted-redshifted patterns suggestive of rotation, while disturbed motions point to possible feedback effects.

Core claim

Giant quasar nebulae are not a uniform class of objects, but instead arise through multiple pathways shaped by host-galaxy gas, galaxy interactions, group environments, and quasar activity, with the most striking cases associated with galaxy interactions.

What carries the argument

Morpho-kinematic classifications (irregular large-scale >50 kpc systems, compact host-galaxy-scale nebulae, complex morphologies) plus a quantitative spatial-kinematic association metric between nebulae and group galaxies.

If this is right

  • Eleven irregular large-scale systems are likely linked to galaxy interactions.
  • Ten nebulae exhibit statistically significant association with quasar-host group galaxies, predominantly the irregular large-scale ones.
  • Radio jets appear in six systems with no strong correlation to nebular morphology or extent.
  • [O II] nebulae are more asymmetric than Lyα nebulae at z>2 yet resemble local H I distributions around elliptical galaxies.
  • Blueshifted-redshifted velocity patterns occur in about 30 percent of systems, while disturbed kinematics indicate feedback may also shape the gas.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Models of circumgalactic gas must incorporate multiple formation channels rather than assuming one dominant process for all extended nebulae.
  • The observed continuity with local elliptical galaxy H I suggests large-scale gas structures persist across cosmic time.
  • Disturbed kinematics may imply quasar feedback influences gas on tens-of-kpc scales and could affect star formation in neighboring galaxies.
  • Future integral-field surveys at varying redshifts could test whether the fraction of interaction-linked nebulae evolves with cosmic epoch or quasar power.

Load-bearing premise

The morpho-kinematic classifications reliably trace distinct physical origins such as galaxy interactions without major contamination from projection effects, incomplete sampling, or alternative excitation mechanisms.

What would settle it

Detection of many large irregular nebulae around isolated quasars lacking interacting group galaxies, or absence of any statistical spatial-kinematic association in the sample.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.01981 by Alexander Beckett, Andrea Travascio, Beno\^it Epinat, David DePalma, Elise Fuller, Eric F. Bell, Fakhri S. Zahedy, Gwen C. Rudie, Hsiao-Wen Chen, Jennifer I-Hsiu Li, Joop Schaye, Mandy C. Chen, Marc Rafelski, Nishant Mishra, Patrick Petitjean, Sayak Dutta, Sean D. Johnson, Sebasti\'an L\'opez, Sebastiano Cantalupo, Sowgat Muzahid, Wolfram Kollatschny, Zhijie Qu, Zhuoqi Liu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Visualization of irregular, large-scale nebulae around quasars in 30′′ × 30′′ cutout. First column: HST ACS+F814W, with group galaxies marked by black circles. Quasar names and redshifts are indicated in the top right of each panel. A scale bar corresponding to 50 proper kpc at the redshift of the quasar is shown in the top left of each panel. Radio lobes within the FoV are marked with purple thin diamonds… view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Continued view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Same as view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Continued. The two subgroups are separated by a black line view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Same as view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Same as view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Visualization of the KAFs for all detected nebulae. The KAF quantifies the degree of spatial and kinematic overlap between nebular spaxels and galaxies in the quasar host group (See Section 6.2). The LOS velocities of the group galaxies are shown in the left half of each symbol and are color-coded using the same scale as the nebulae in Figures 1–3. For galaxies enclosed by the nebula, the nebular LOS veloc… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: CKAF score versus nebular size for all detected nebulae. The CKAF quantifies the degree of spatial and kinematic overlap between a nebula as a whole and galaxies in the quasar host group (See Section 6.2). P-values are encoded by three scatter-point sizes. Most irregular, large-scale nebulae have p-values below 0.05, and in several cases below 0.01, indicating statistically significant as￾sociations that a… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Ensemble radial profile of the nebular velocity dispersion. The ensemble nebular profile is shown in both panels as an orange line. Left: Ensemble nebular profiles grouped by radio class. The profile for all radio-loud systems is shown in dark red, with radio-loud systems hosting jets shown as a dark red dashed line. The profile for all radio-quiet systems is shown in purple. Right: Ensemble profiles for e… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Distribution of nebular asymmetry for the [O II], H I 21 cm, and Ly𝛼 nebulae, normalized by the total number in each popu￾lation. The light brown bars represent the [O II] nebulae presented in this study, while the Ly𝛼 nebulae and H I 21 cm emission are shown as blue and red dashed curves, respectively. Vertical lines mark the bin edges, corresponding to a bin width of 0.2. Both the [O II] nebulae and H I … view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Position–velocity and velocity–dispersion diagrams are shown for each blueshifted-redshifted nebula in CUBS+MUSEQuBES, along with H I gas in early-type galaxies from P. Serra et al. (2012). The radial profiles of 𝑣50 and 𝜎 are presented in the top and bottom panels, respectively. Binned data points for the blueshifted and redshifted sides are shown as red and blue circles. The mean radial profile of H I ga… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Gas flows between galaxies and the circumgalactic medium (CGM) play a central role in galaxy evolution and can become observable as giant nebulae when illuminated by the quasars. We present an ensemble study of nebulae around 30 UV-luminous quasars at $z\approx0.4{-}1.4$ from the CUBS and MUSEQuBES surveys, 27 of which are detected in extended [O II] and/or [O III] emission. Based on a joint analysis of nebular morphology and surrounding galaxy environments, we introduce three morpho-kinematic classifications. We identify eleven irregular, large-scale (>50 kpc) systems, many of which are likely interaction-related; twelve compact host-galaxy-scale nebula, likely tracing CGM/ISM gas; and four systems with complex morphologies of uncertain origin. We introduce a quantitative measure of the spatial and kinematic association between nebulae and quasar-host group galaxies, finding a statistically significant association for ten nebulae, most of which are irregular, large-scale nebulae, consistent with qualitative analysis. Radio jets are detected in six systems, with no strong correlation found between radio activity and nebular emission. The [O II] nebulae are more asymmetric than their Lyalpha counterparts at $z>2$, but bear more similarity to H I gas observed in 21 cm around local elliptical galaxies. Blueshifted-redshifted patterns, likely tracing gas rotation, are observed in roughly 30% of the systems, though disturbed kinematics suggest that feedback may also be important. These results show that giant quasar nebulae are not a uniform class of objects, but instead arise through multiple pathways shaped by host-galaxy gas, galaxy interactions, group environments, and quasar activity, with the most striking cases associated with galaxy interactions.

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 paper presents an ensemble study of nebulae around 30 UV-luminous quasars at z≈0.4-1.4 from the CUBS and MUSEQuBES surveys, detecting extended emission in 27. Through joint morphology, kinematics, and environment analysis, they classify the nebulae into three categories: 11 irregular large-scale (>50 kpc) systems often linked to galaxy interactions, 12 compact systems tracing CGM/ISM, and 4 complex of uncertain origin. A quantitative spatial-kinematic association measure shows significant association for 10 nebulae, mostly irregular ones. No strong radio jet correlation is found. [O II] nebulae are more asymmetric than high-z Lyα but similar to local HI. About 30% show blueshifted-redshifted patterns suggestive of rotation, with disturbed kinematics indicating feedback. The key result is that these nebulae are diverse, arising via multiple pathways with interactions prominent in the largest cases.

Significance. This study is significant for showing that giant quasar nebulae are not a monolithic class but result from varied processes including interactions and host gas. The ensemble approach with quantitative metrics strengthens the case for multiple origins, impacting models of CGM and galaxy evolution at cosmic noon. Credit for the joint analysis and the introduction of a quantitative association measure.

major comments (3)
  1. [Quantitative Association Measure] The reported statistically significant association for ten nebulae (mostly irregular large-scale) is central to the claim of interaction-driven origins, but no control tests (e.g., randomized positions or mock data) are described to confirm it is not an artifact of the flux-limited sample or projection effects at z≈1. This needs to be addressed to support the inference.
  2. [Morpho-kinematic Classifications] The mapping of the 11 irregular systems to interaction-related origins and 12 compact to host CGM/ISM assumes the classifications trace distinct physical pathways without major contamination; however, the limited MUSE resolution and lack of completeness quantification for the galaxy sample make this vulnerable.
  3. [Kinematics Analysis] The observation of blueshifted-redshifted patterns in roughly 30% of systems is used to suggest rotation, but without details on how projection of unrelated structures is ruled out, this could affect the disturbed kinematics interpretation and overall diversity conclusion.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] The redshift range is given as z≈0.4-1.4 but the title says z≈1; clarify if the sample is centered at z≈1 or the full range.
  2. [Results] Provide the exact number and fraction for the blueshifted-redshifted patterns rather than 'roughly 30%' for precision.
  3. [Figures] Ensure figures illustrating the three classifications include scale bars and clear labels for associated galaxies.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thorough review and positive evaluation of our work. We appreciate the constructive feedback and have prepared point-by-point responses to the major comments. We will revise the manuscript to incorporate the suggested improvements where possible.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Quantitative Association Measure] The reported statistically significant association for ten nebulae (mostly irregular large-scale) is central to the claim of interaction-driven origins, but no control tests (e.g., randomized positions or mock data) are described to confirm it is not an artifact of the flux-limited sample or projection effects at z≈1. This needs to be addressed to support the inference.

    Authors: We agree that additional control tests would provide stronger support for the statistical significance of the association measure. Although our measure incorporates both spatial proximity and kinematic coherence to mitigate projection effects, we did not include explicit randomization tests in the submitted manuscript. In the revised version, we will add a dedicated subsection describing Monte Carlo simulations where galaxy positions are randomized within the field of view and mock velocity fields are generated to assess the false positive rate of our association metric. This will help confirm that the observed associations, particularly for the irregular nebulae, are not artifacts of the sample selection or projection. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Morpho-kinematic Classifications] The mapping of the 11 irregular systems to interaction-related origins and 12 compact to host CGM/ISM assumes the classifications trace distinct physical pathways without major contamination; however, the limited MUSE resolution and lack of completeness quantification for the galaxy sample make this vulnerable.

    Authors: The referee correctly points out the challenges in classifying the nebulae given the spatial resolution of MUSE at z≈1 and the potential incompleteness of the galaxy catalogs. Our classifications are primarily morphological, supplemented by kinematic information and environmental context, and we have been careful to label four systems as 'complex of uncertain origin'. We will revise the manuscript to include a more quantitative assessment of galaxy detection completeness based on the survey depths and to discuss possible contamination between categories. However, the overall conclusion of diversity in origins remains robust as it is supported by the range of observed properties across the sample. revision: partial

  3. Referee: [Kinematics Analysis] The observation of blueshifted-redshifted patterns in roughly 30% of systems is used to suggest rotation, but without details on how projection of unrelated structures is ruled out, this could affect the disturbed kinematics interpretation and overall diversity conclusion.

    Authors: We acknowledge that projection effects could mimic blueshifted-redshifted patterns in some cases. The patterns were identified in the velocity fields and position-velocity diagrams extracted along the major axes of the nebulae. To address this, we will expand the kinematics section to detail the selection criteria (e.g., coherent velocity gradients spanning >20 kpc) and include a discussion of alternative interpretations such as outflows or superpositions. While higher-resolution data would be ideal to fully rule out projections, the combination with morphological irregularity in many cases supports our interpretation of rotation in a subset of systems. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: purely observational classifications and association measures extracted directly from data

full rationale

This is a purely observational study with no equations, derivations, fitted parameters, or model predictions. Morpho-kinematic classifications and the quantitative spatial-kinematic association measure are defined and applied directly to the imaging and spectroscopic observations of the 30 quasars. No load-bearing step reduces to a self-citation, self-definition, or input by construction; the claims about multiple pathways follow from the empirical patterns in the data rather than from any tautological reduction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard domain assumptions about emission-line tracing with no free parameters fitted to the target result and no new postulated entities.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Extended [O II] and [O III] emission traces ionized gas in the CGM or ISM illuminated by the quasar
    This underpins the detection and interpretation of nebulae as observable gas flows; invoked throughout the abstract for all 27 detections.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5760 in / 1405 out tokens · 81332 ms · 2026-05-08T19:31:06.155965+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

101 extracted references · 94 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Galaxy morphology to I=25 mag in the Hubble Deep Field

    Abraham, R. G., Tanvir, N. R., Santiago, B. X., et al. 1996, MNRAS, 279, L47, doi: 10.1093/mnras/279.3.L47

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/279.3.l47 1996

  2. [2]

    2023, ApJ, 947, 16, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acb13f

    Amiri, M., Bandura, K., Chen, T., et al. 2023, ApJ, 947, 16, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acb13f

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acb13f 2023

  3. [3]

    ARA&A , keywords =

    Antonucci, R. 1993, ARA&A, 31, 473, doi: 10.1146/annurev.aa.31.090193.002353 Arrigoni Battaia, F., Hennawi, J. F., Prochaska, J. X., et al. 2019a, MNRAS, 482, 3162, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2827 Arrigoni Battaia, F., Obreja, A., Prochaska, J. X., et al. 2019b, A&A, 631, A18, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936211 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Lim, P....

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.aa.31.090193.002353 1993

  4. [4]

    2010, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference

    Bacon, R., Accardo, M., Adjali, L., et al. 2010, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference

    2010

  5. [5]

    and Accardo, M

    Series, Vol. 7735, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy III, ed. I. S. McLean, S. K. Ramsay, & H. Takami, 773508, doi: 10.1117/12.856027

    work page doi:10.1117/12.856027

  6. [6]

    2018, A&A, 619, A83, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833515

    Balmaverde, B., Capetti, A., Marconi, A., et al. 2018, A&A, 619, A83, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833515

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833515 2018

  7. [7]

    D., et al

    Balmaverde, B., Capetti, A., Baldi, R. D., et al. 2022, A&A, 662, A23, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142823

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202142823 2022

  8. [8]

    Communications Physics , keywords =

    Barone, T. M., Kacprzak, G. G., Nightingale, J. W., et al. 2024, Communications Physics, 7, 286, doi: 10.1038/s42005-024-01778-4

    work page doi:10.1038/s42005-024-01778-4 2024

  9. [9]

    , keywords =

    Beckett, A., Morris, S. L., Fumagalli, M., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 521, 1113, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad596

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad596 2023

  10. [10]

    2025, ApJ, 992, 155, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae0291

    Beckett, A., Rafelski, M., Scarlata, C., et al. 2025, ApJ, 992, 155, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae0291

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae0291 2025

  11. [11]

    A., Truong, N., et al

    Bellomi, E., ZuHone, J. A., Truong, N., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2512.12754, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2512.12754

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2512.12754 2025

  12. [12]

    1946, Sankhy¯a: The Indian Journal of Statistics, 7, 401

    Bhattacharyya, A. 1946, Sankhy¯a: The Indian Journal of Statistics, 7, 401

    1946

  13. [13]

    , keywords =

    Bolton, A. S., Schlegel, D. J., Aubourg, É., et al. 2012, AJ, 144, 144, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/144/5/144

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/144/5/144 2012

  14. [14]

    J., et al

    Borisova, E., Cantalupo, S., Lilly, S. J., et al. 2016, ApJ, 831, 39, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/831/1/39

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/831/1/39 2016

  15. [15]

    A., & Oke, J

    Boroson, T. A., & Oke, J. B. 1984, ApJ, 281, 535, doi: 10.1086/162126

    work page doi:10.1086/162126 1984

  16. [16]

    2023, astropy/photutils: 1.8.0 , 1.8.0 Zenodo, 10.5281/zenodo.7946442

    Bradley, L. 2023,, 1.8.0 Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7946442

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.7946442 2023

  17. [17]

    2016,, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1609.011 http://ascl.net/1609.011

    Bradley, L., Sipocz, B., Robitaille, T., et al. 2016,, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1609.011 http://ascl.net/1609.011

    2016

  18. [18]

    Evolution of the Cool Gas in the Circumgalactic Medium of Massive Halos: A Keck Cosmic Web Imager Survey of Lyα Emission around QSOs at z ≈ 2

    Cai, Z., Cantalupo, S., Prochaska, J. X., et al. 2019, ApJS, 245, 23, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab4796 Cantalupo,S.,Arrigoni-Battaia,F.,Prochaska,J.X.,Hennawi,J.F., & Madau, P. 2014, Nature, 506, 63, doi: 10.1038/nature12898

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab4796 2019

  19. [19]

    J., et al

    Cantalupo, S., Pezzulli, G., Lilly, S. J., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 483, 5188, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty3481

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty3481 2019

  20. [20]

    J., Lucas, P

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

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.18174.x 2011

  21. [21]

    2013, MNRAS, 432, 1709, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt562

    Cappellari, M., Scott, N., Alatalo, K., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 432, 1709, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt562

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt562 2013

  22. [22]

    D., et al

    Chen, H.-W., Boettcher, E., Johnson, S. D., et al. 2019, ApJL, 878, L33, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab25ec

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab25ec 2019

  23. [23]

    doi:10.1093/MNRAS/stt2288 , number =

    Chen, H.-W., Gauthier, J.-R., Sharon, K., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 438, 1435, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt2288

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt2288 2014

  24. [24]

    Chen, H.-W., & Zahedy, F. S. 2026, in Encyclopedia of

    2026

  25. [25]

    4, 370–400, doi: 10.1016/B978-0-443-21439-4.00059-6

    Astrophysics, Volume 4, Vol. 4, 370–400, doi: 10.1016/B978-0-443-21439-4.00059-6

    work page doi:10.1016/b978-0-443-21439-4.00059-6

  26. [26]

    S., Boettcher, E., et al

    Chen, H.-W., Zahedy, F. S., Boettcher, E., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 497, 498, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1773

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1773 2020

  27. [27]

    Empirical constraints on the turbulence in QSO host nebulae from velocity structure function measurements , volume=

    Chen, M. C., Chen, H.-W., Rauch, M., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 518, 2354, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3193

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3193 2023

  28. [28]

    C., Chen, H.-W., Rauch, M., et al

    Chen, M. C., Chen, H.-W., Rauch, M., et al. 2024, ApJ, 962, 98, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1406

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad1406 2024

  29. [29]

    C., Chen, H.-W., Rauch, M., et al

    Chen, M. C., Chen, H.-W., Rauch, M., et al. 2025, ApJL, 978, L18, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad9bac

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad9bac 2025

  30. [30]

    2025, ApJS, 279, 19, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/add897

    Chen, Z., Cunnington, S., Pourtsidou, A., et al. 2025, ApJS, 279, 19, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/add897

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/add897 2025

  31. [31]

    , keywords =

    Chiappini, C., Matteucci, F., & Gratton, R. 1997, ApJ, 477, 765, doi: 10.1086/303726

    work page doi:10.1086/303726 1997

  32. [32]

    Chowdhury, A., Kanekar, N., & Chengalur, J. N. 2022, ApJ, 937, 103, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7d52

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac7d52 2022

  33. [33]

    J., et al., 2000, @doi [ ] 10.1086/308300 , 529, 886

    Conselice, C. J., Bershady, M. A., & Jangren, A. 2000, ApJ, 529, 886, doi: 10.1086/308300 de Blok, W. J. G., Walter, F., Brinks, E., et al. 2008, AJ, 136, 2648, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/136/6/2648 denBrok,J.S.,Cantalupo,S.,Mackenzie,R.,etal.2020,MNRAS, 495, 1874, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1269 26

    work page doi:10.1086/308300 2000

  34. [34]

    2025, ApJL, 993, L18, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae0d8b

    DePalma, D., Gupta, N., Chen, H.-W., et al. 2025, ApJL, 993, L18, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae0d8b

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae0d8b 2025

  35. [35]

    J., Lang, D., et al

    Dey, A., Schlegel, D. J., Lang, D., et al. 2019, AJ, 157, 168, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab089d

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ab089d 2019

  36. [36]

    , keywords =

    Dutta, R., Acebron, A., Fumagalli, M., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 528, 1895, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae048

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae048 2024

  37. [37]

    2023, MNRAS, 522, 535, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1002

    Dutta, R., Fossati, M., Fumagalli, M., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 522, 535, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1002

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad1002 2023

  38. [38]

    2024, MNRAS, 528, 3745, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae206

    Dutta, S., Muzahid, S., Schaye, J., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 528, 3745, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae206

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae206 2024

  39. [39]

    N., & Edge, A

    Ebeling, H., Stephenson, L. N., & Edge, A. C. 2014, ApJL, 781, L40, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/781/2/L40

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/781/2/l40 2014

  40. [40]

    2024, A&A, 683, A205, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348038

    Epinat, B., Contini, T., Mercier, W., et al. 2024, A&A, 683, A205, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348038

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202348038 2024

  41. [41]

    Fabian, A. C. 2012, ARA&A, 50, 455, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125521

    work page Pith review doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125521 2012

  42. [42]

    1974 , journal =

    Fanaroff, B. L., & Riley, J. M. 1974, MNRAS, 167, 31P, doi: 10.1093/mnras/167.1.31P

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/167.1.31p 1974

  43. [43]

    K., et al

    Fossati, M., Fumagalli, M., Lofthouse, E. K., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 503, 3044, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab660

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab660 2021

  44. [44]

    2009, ApJ, 696, 1693, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/696/2/1693 Gaia Collaboration, Vallenari, A., Brown, A

    Fu, H., & Stockton, A. 2009, ApJ, 696, 1693, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/696/2/1693 Gaia Collaboration, Vallenari, A., Brown, A. G. A., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243940

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/696/2/1693 2009

  45. [45]

    2012, The DrizzlePac Handbook González Lobos, J., Arrigoni Battaia, F., Obreja, A., et al

    Gonzaga, S., Hack, W., Fruchter, A., & Mack, J. 2012, The DrizzlePac Handbook González Lobos, J., Arrigoni Battaia, F., Obreja, A., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.16898, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2507.16898

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2507.16898 2012

  46. [46]

    , keywords =

    Guo, Y., Bacon, R., Bouché, N. F., et al. 2023, Nature, 624, 53, doi: 10.1038/s41586-023-06718-w

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06718-w 2023

  47. [47]

    , keywords =

    Guo, Y., Bacon, R., Wisotzki, L., et al. 2024, A&A, 688, A37, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347658

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347658 2024

  48. [48]

    M., Johnson, S

    Helton, J. M., Johnson, S. D., Greene, J. E., & Chen, H.-W. 2021, MNRAS, 505, 5497, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1647

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1647 2021

  49. [49]

    QSO MUSEUM

    Herwig, E., Arrigoni Battaia, F., González Lobos, J., et al. 2024, A&A, 691, A210, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450959

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450959 2024

  50. [50]

    Hester, J. A. 2006, ApJ, 647, 910, doi: 10.1086/505614

    work page doi:10.1086/505614 2006

  51. [51]

    L., Mack, J., Avila, R

    Hoffman, S. L., Mack, J., Avila, R. J., et al. 2021, in The DrizzlePac Handbook, 2

    2021

  52. [52]

    The K correction

    Hogg, D. W., Baldry, I. K., Blanton, M. R., & Eisenstein, D. J. 2002, arXiv e-prints, astro, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0210394

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/0210394 2002

  53. [53]

    2011, MNRAS, 418, 467, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19497.x

    Holwerda, B. W., Pirzkal, N., de Blok, W. J. G., et al. 2011, MNRAS, 416, 2401, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18938.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18938.x 2011

  54. [54]

    D., Chen, H.-W., Straka, L

    Johnson, S. D., Chen, H.-W., Straka, L. A., et al. 2018, ApJL, 869, L1, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aaf1cf

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aaf1cf 2018

  55. [55]

    D., Schaye, J., Walth, G

    Johnson, S. D., Schaye, J., Walth, G. L., et al. 2022, ApJL, 940, L40, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aca28e

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aca28e 2022

  56. [56]

    D., Liu, Z

    Johnson, S. D., Liu, Z. W., Li, J. I. H., et al. 2024, ApJ, 966, 218, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad3911

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad3911 2024

  57. [57]

    , keywords =

    King, A., & Pounds, K. 2015, ARA&A, 53, 115, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-082214-122316

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-082214-122316 2015

  58. [58]

    2016, doi: 10.1117/12.2232788

    Kolb, J., Madec, P.-Y., Arsenault, R., et al. 2016, doi: 10.1117/12.2232788

    work page doi:10.1117/12.2232788 2016

  59. [59]

    Kravtsov, A

    Kravtsov, A. V., Vikhlinin, A. A., & Meshcheryakov, A. V. 2018, Astronomy Letters, 44, 8, doi: 10.1134/S1063773717120015

    work page doi:10.1134/s1063773717120015 2018

  60. [60]

    2024, A&A, 691, A255, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451009

    Kusakabe, H., Mauerhofer, V., Verhamme, A., et al. 2024, A&A, 691, A255, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451009

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451009 2024

  61. [61]

    A., Chandler, C

    Lacy, M., Baum, S. A., Chandler, C. J., et al. 2020, PASP, 132, 035001, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ab63eb

    work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/ab63eb 2020

  62. [62]

    , keywords =

    Leclercq, F., Verhamme, A., Epinat, B., et al. 2022, A&A, 663, A11, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142179

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202142179 2022

  63. [63]

    Li, J. I. H., Johnson, S. D., Boettcher, E., et al. 2024, ApJ, 965, 143, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad2fad

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad2fad 2024

  64. [64]

    Liddle, A. R. 2007, MNRAS, 377, L74, doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2007.00306.x Liu,Z.,Johnson,S.D.,Li,J.I.H.,etal.2024,MNRAS,527,5429, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3364

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1745-3933.2007.00306.x 2007

  65. [65]

    W., Johnson, S

    Liu, Z. W., Johnson, S. D., Li, J. I. H., et al. 2025, ApJ, 984, 140, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adc1bf

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adc1bf 2025

  66. [66]

    K., Fumagalli, M., Fossati, M., et al

    Lofthouse, E. K., Fumagalli, M., Fossati, M., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 491, 2057, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz3066

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz3066 2020

  67. [67]

    , keywords =

    Lopez, S., Tejos, N., Ledoux, C., et al. 2018, Nature, 554, 493, doi: 10.1038/nature25436

    work page doi:10.1038/nature25436 2018

  68. [68]

    2021, MNRAS, 502, 494, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3277

    Mackenzie, R., Pezzulli, G., Cantalupo, S., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 502, 494, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3277

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3277 2021

  69. [69]

    Y., Arsenault, R., Kuntschner, H., et al

    Madec, P. Y., Arsenault, R., Kuntschner, H., et al. 2018, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series,Vol.10703,AdaptiveOpticsSystemsVI,ed.L.M.Close, L. Schreiber, & D. Schmidt, 1070302, doi: 10.1117/12.2312428

    work page doi:10.1117/12.2312428 2018

  70. [70]

    A., Schaye, J., et al

    Marasco, A., Crain, R. A., Schaye, J., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 461, 2630, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw1498

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw1498 2016

  71. [71]

    , keywords =

    McConnell, D., Hale, C. L., Lenc, E., et al. 2020, PASA, 37, e048, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2020.41

    work page doi:10.1017/pasa.2020.41 2020

  72. [72]

    R., & Nulsen, P

    McNamara, B. R., & Nulsen, P. E. J. 2007, ARA&A, 45, 117, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.45.051806.110625

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.45.051806.110625 2007

  73. [73]

    E., Kado-Fong, E., et al

    Mintz, A., Greene, J. E., Kado-Fong, E., et al. 2024, ApJ, 974, 273, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad6861

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad6861 2024

  74. [74]

    A., et al

    Muzahid, S., Schaye, J., Marino, R. A., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 496, 1013, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1347 National Academies of Sciences. 2021, Pathways to Discovery in Astronomy and Astrophysics for the 2020s, doi: 10.17226/26141 Oke,J.B.,&Gunn,J.E.1983,ApJ,266,713,doi:10.1086/160817 O’Sullivan, D. B., Martin, C., Matuszewski, M., et al. 2020, ApJ, 894, 3, doi:...

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1347 2020

  75. [75]

    M., et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv2878 , 456, 3032

    Pawlik, M. M., Wild, V., Walcher, C. J., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 456, 3032, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv2878 27

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2878 2016

  76. [76]

    J., Rafelski, M., Cooke, J., et al

    Prichard, L. J., Rafelski, M., Cooke, J., et al. 2022, ApJ, 924, 14, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac3004

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac3004 2022

  77. [77]

    E., Peek, J

    Putman, M. E., Peek, J. E. G., & Joung, M. R. 2012, ARA&A, 50, 491, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125612

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125612 2012

  78. [78]

    I., Kronberg, P

    Reid, R. I., Kronberg, P. P., & Perley, R. A. 1999, ApJS, 124, 285, doi: 10.1086/313259

    work page doi:10.1086/313259 1999

  79. [79]

    2012,, Astrophysics Source Code Library http://ascl.net/1208.017

    Robitaille, T., & Bressert, E. 2012,, Astrophysics Source Code Library http://ascl.net/1208.017

    2012

  80. [80]

    , keywords =

    Rodriguez-Gomez, V., Snyder, G. F., Lotz, J. M., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 483, 4140, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty3345

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty3345 2019

Showing first 80 references.