pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.02566 · v1 · pith:XJGNXYYOnew · submitted 2026-06-01 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA · astro-ph.CO· hep-ph

Mergers Matter: Gravothermal Collapse in Dwarf Halos with Self-Interacting Dark Matter

Maya Silverman , Abdelaziz Hussein , Arpit Arora , Mariangela Lisanti , Manoj Kaplinghat , Lina Necib , Andreas Thoyas , Stephanie O'Neil
show 3 more authors
Robyn E. Sanderson Xuejian Shen Jorge Moreno
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-28 13:51 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA astro-ph.COhep-ph
keywords self-interacting dark matterdwarf halosgravothermal collapsemerger historycore collapsecentral densitySIDM simulationsrotation curves
0
0 comments X

The pith

In self-interacting dark matter, dwarf halos with quiet merger histories undergo core collapse while those with active mergers do not.

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

Simulations of six dwarf halos in a self-interacting dark matter model with a cross section of 70 cm squared per gram show that core collapse occurs only in the three with the most quiescent merger histories. Ongoing mergers inject kinetic energy that alters heat transport, preventing collapse in the others. Two of those halos reach central densities lower than predicted by the standard gravothermal fluid model due to this extra heating. If correct, this means that predictions for the central structure of dwarf galaxies in SIDM must account for their specific assembly histories rather than assuming isolated evolution. This opens a way to explain galaxies that appear to lack dark matter and increases the expected variety in their rotation curves.

Core claim

Three of the six simulated halos with the most quiescent merger histories show clear signs of core collapse. Halos with sustained mergers do not collapse, and merger-induced heat transport drives two non-collapsing halos to central densities well below the predictions of the gravothermal fluid model. Merger histories are thus essential for understanding central density distributions of dwarf galaxy halos in SIDM.

What carries the argument

The injection of orbital kinetic energy by mergers into the halo, which alters the heat transport and gravothermal evolution of the core.

If this is right

  • Halos with quiescent merger histories can experience gravothermal core collapse.
  • Halos with sustained mergers avoid core collapse.
  • Merger heating can produce central densities below those expected from the gravothermal fluid model alone.
  • This mechanism may produce dark-matter-deficient galaxies.
  • The diversity of rotation curves in dwarf galaxies can exceed what is predicted from halo concentration variations alone.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Observations of dwarf galaxy merger histories could be used to predict which ones are likely to have collapsed cores in SIDM.
  • The results suggest that SIDM models need to incorporate full merger trees for accurate predictions of dwarf galaxy properties.
  • This heat injection process might interact with baryonic physics in ways that further modify central densities.
  • Similar effects could appear in other velocity-dependent SIDM scenarios with large low-velocity cross sections.

Load-bearing premise

The six zoom-in halos capture a representative range of assembly histories for dwarf halos at this mass and cross section.

What would settle it

A simulation or observation of a dwarf halo with a quiescent merger history that fails to show core collapse, or an active-merger halo that does collapse, at the same cross section.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.02566 by Abdelaziz Hussein, Andreas Thoyas, Arpit Arora, Jorge Moreno, Lina Necib, Manoj Kaplinghat, Mariangela Lisanti, Maya Silverman, Robyn E. Sanderson, Stephanie O'Neil, Xuejian Shen.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Time evolution of the central halo’s core density. Arrows along the horizontal axis mark subhalo infall times and are color coded by the subhalo-to-host mass ratio at infall. Their lengths indicate orbital radiality, with long arrows corresponding to radial mergers (vtan/vtot ≤ 0.2). Halos that undergo gravothermal collapse are shown in the top row, while those that do not are in the bottom row; the bottom… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Fractional change in average temperature between inner and outer regions as a function of time. Arrows along the horizontal axis mark merger infall times and are colored by the subhalo-to-host mass ratio at infall. Their lengths indicate orbital radiality, with longer arrows corresponding to more radial mergers. The average temperature Te is defined in Equation 5, with Teinner and Teouter computed within 1… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Evolution of core density and core radius for simulated halos compared to the fluid model. The dashed lines are the ρc/ρs,CDM and rcore/rs,CDM evolutions as predicted by the fluid model in N. J. Outmezguine et al. 2023, separated by the core-expansion phase (light gray) and core-collapse phase (dark gray). The core density is normalized by the CDM scale density at z = 0, ρs,CDM, and the core radius by the … view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Self-Interacting Dark Matter (SIDM) models with large cross sections at relative velocities below $\sim100\,{\rm km \, s}^{-1}$ can be tested with dwarf galaxy observations. We analyze six dark-matter-only zoom-in $\sim10^{10}\,{\rm M}_\odot$ halos with diverse assembly histories, adopting a cross section over mass of $\sigma/m = 70\,cm^2 \, g^{-1}$. We find that mergers inject orbital kinetic energy into the halo, altering the heat transport and the gravothermal evolution of the core. Three of the six halos -- those with the most quiescent merger histories -- show clear signs of core collapse in these simulations. Halos with sustained mergers do not collapse. Furthermore, merger-induced heat transport drives two non-collapsing halos to central densities well below the predictions of the gravothermal fluid model. These findings suggest a novel mechanism for producing dark-matter-deficient galaxies and expanding the diversity of rotation curves beyond what halo concentration alone predicts. Merger histories are thus essential for understanding central density distributions of dwarf galaxy halos in SIDM.

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 reports N-body simulations of six ~10^10 M_⊙ dark-matter-only zoom-in halos in SIDM with fixed σ/m = 70 cm² g⁻¹. It claims that the three halos with the most quiescent merger histories undergo gravothermal core collapse, while halos with sustained mergers do not collapse and that merger-induced heat transport drives two non-collapsing halos to central densities below the predictions of an independent gravothermal fluid model. The work concludes that merger histories are essential for understanding central density distributions in SIDM dwarf halos.

Significance. If the correlation between merger history and gravothermal outcome holds under controlled conditions, the result would establish mergers as a load-bearing driver of core evolution in SIDM, offering a mechanism for dark-matter-deficient galaxies and greater diversity in rotation curves than concentration variations alone predict. The direct N-body comparison to an independent fluid model is a methodological strength.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract and simulation results] The central claim that merger histories causally determine whether core collapse occurs rests on a sample of only six halos whose assembly histories are described as 'diverse but limited.' No controls are reported that hold concentration, spin, or formation time fixed while varying only merger rate, leaving open the possibility that the three collapsing halos differ systematically in initial conditions that independently affect gravothermal evolution.
  2. [Methods and simulation setup] No numerical resolution, particle number, softening length, convergence tests, or error analysis are supplied for the N-body runs. Because the claims involve both qualitative classification of core collapse and quantitative offsets from the fluid-model central densities, these details are required to evaluate whether the reported differences are numerically robust.
  3. [Comparison to gravothermal fluid model] The gravothermal fluid-model comparison is performed on the identical set of six halos. Any systematic offset in central densities could therefore arise from the same uncontrolled halo-to-halo variations rather than from merger-induced heat transport specifically.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states that halos show 'clear signs of core collapse' but does not define the quantitative threshold (e.g., central density evolution, core radius, or velocity dispersion profile) used for this classification.
  2. [Abstract] The velocity dependence of the adopted cross section is mentioned only qualitatively ('large cross sections at relative velocities below ~100 km s⁻¹'); a precise functional form or reference would aid reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 1 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed report. We respond point-by-point to the major comments below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and simulation results] The central claim that merger histories causally determine whether core collapse occurs rests on a sample of only six halos whose assembly histories are described as 'diverse but limited.' No controls are reported that hold concentration, spin, or formation time fixed while varying only merger rate, leaving open the possibility that the three collapsing halos differ systematically in initial conditions that independently affect gravothermal evolution.

    Authors: We agree that the sample of six halos is limited and that we have not performed controlled experiments in which concentration, spin, and formation time are held fixed while varying only merger rate. The halos were chosen to share similar masses but to exhibit diverse assembly histories; their individual properties (including concentration and spin) are reported in the manuscript. The observed correlation between quiescent merger histories and core collapse is therefore suggestive rather than a demonstration of strict causality. We will revise the discussion section to explicitly acknowledge this limitation and to note that future controlled simulations would be needed to isolate the merger-rate effect. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Methods and simulation setup] No numerical resolution, particle number, softening length, convergence tests, or error analysis are supplied for the N-body runs. Because the claims involve both qualitative classification of core collapse and quantitative offsets from the fluid-model central densities, these details are required to evaluate whether the reported differences are numerically robust.

    Authors: We thank the referee for identifying this omission. We will add a new subsection to the Methods section that reports the particle number, gravitational softening length, force and time-stepping criteria, and any convergence or resolution tests that were performed. This addition will allow readers to assess the numerical robustness of both the qualitative core-collapse classifications and the quantitative density offsets. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Comparison to gravothermal fluid model] The gravothermal fluid-model comparison is performed on the identical set of six halos. Any systematic offset in central densities could therefore arise from the same uncontrolled halo-to-halo variations rather than from merger-induced heat transport specifically.

    Authors: The fluid model is evolved independently for each halo using its own initial conditions and the same cross section. The central-density offsets we report are correlated with the presence of sustained mergers. Nevertheless, because the comparison uses the same set of halos, we cannot rule out contributions from other uncontrolled variations. We will revise the relevant section to state that the offsets are associated with merger activity but that additional controlled comparisons would be required to attribute them exclusively to merger-induced heat transport. revision: partial

standing simulated objections not resolved
  • Performing a new suite of controlled N-body simulations that isolate merger rate while holding concentration, spin, and formation time fixed is beyond the scope and resources of the present study.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: results from direct simulations compared to independent model

full rationale

The paper reports outcomes from N-body zoom-in simulations of six halos at fixed σ/m = 70 cm² g⁻¹, observing core collapse in three quiescent-merger cases and lower central densities than the gravothermal fluid model in two others. These are direct numerical results, not quantities derived by fitting parameters to the same data or by equations that reduce to the inputs by construction. No self-citation chain, ansatz smuggling, or uniqueness theorem is invoked to justify the central claims; the fluid-model comparison is presented as an external benchmark. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained against external simulation outputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the validity of dark-matter-only N-body simulations, the representativeness of six halos, and the gravothermal fluid model as the correct no-merger baseline; the adopted cross section is an input parameter.

free parameters (1)
  • cross section over mass = 70 cm^2 g^{-1}
    Value adopted for the SIDM model in all runs.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Dark-matter-only zoom-in simulations capture the relevant merger-driven heat transport and core evolution.
    All results are obtained from DM-only runs.
  • domain assumption The gravothermal fluid model provides an accurate baseline prediction in the absence of mergers.
    Used for comparison in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5772 in / 1345 out tokens · 43935 ms · 2026-06-28T13:51:52.815986+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. Self-interacting dark matter promotes bar formation in disk galaxies

    astro-ph.GA 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    SIDM halos accelerate bar formation and growth in disk galaxies through enhanced angular momentum exchange, independent of core formation.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

104 extracted references · 93 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 6 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Ade, P. A. R., Aghanim, N., Armitage-Caplan, C., et al. 2014, Astronomy &; Astrophysics, 571, A16, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201321591

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201321591 2014

  2. [2]

    2025, Rev

    Adhikari, S., et al. 2025, Rev. Mod. Phys., 97, 045004, doi: 10.1103/m2vm-59y3

    work page doi:10.1103/m2vm-59y3 2025

  3. [3]

    E., Chakrabarti, S., et al

    Arora, A., Sanderson, R. E., Chakrabarti, S., et al. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 974, 223, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad71c4 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad71c4 2024

  4. [4]

    Balberg, S., & Shapiro, S. L. 2002, Physical Review Letters, 88, doi: 10.1103/physrevlett.88.101301

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.88.101301 2002

  5. [5]

    L., & Inagaki, S

    Balberg, S., Shapiro, S. L., & Inagaki, S. 2002, Astrophys. J., 568, 475, doi: 10.1086/339038

    work page doi:10.1086/339038 2002

  6. [6]

    S., Wechsler, R

    Behroozi, P. S., Wechsler, R. H., & Wu, H.-Y. 2013a, ApJ, 762, 109, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/762/2/109

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1088/0004-637x/762/2/109

  7. [7]

    S., Wechsler, R

    Behroozi, P. S., Wechsler, R. H., Wu, H.-Y., et al. 2013b, ApJ, 763, 18, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/763/1/18

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1088/0004-637x/763/1/18

  8. [8]

    , keywords =

    Bullock, J. S., & Boylan-Kolchin, M. 2017, Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys., 55, 343, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-091916-055313

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-091916-055313 2017

  9. [9]

    1995, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 447, L25

    Burkert, A. 1995, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 447, L25

    1995

  10. [10]

    2000, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 534, L143

    Burkert, A. 2000, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 534, L143

    2000

  11. [11]

    2002, The Astrophysical Journal, 581, 777–793, doi: 10.1086/344259

    Colin, P., Avila-Reese, V., Valenzuela, O., & Firmani, C. 2002, The Astrophysical Journal, 581, 777–793, doi: 10.1086/344259

    work page doi:10.1086/344259 2002

  12. [13]

    Correa, C. A. 2021b, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 503, 920, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab506

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab506

  13. [14]

    A., Schaller, M., Ploeckinger, S., et al

    Correa, C. A., Schaller, M., Ploeckinger, S., et al. 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 517, 3045–3063, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2830

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac2830 2022

  14. [15]

    N., Steinhardt, P

    Dave, R., Spergel, D. N., Steinhardt, P. J., & Wandelt, B. D. 2001, The Astrophysical Journal, 547, 574–589, doi: 10.1086/318417

    work page doi:10.1086/318417 2001

  15. [16]

    2025, arXiv, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2512.15869

    Despali, G., Giocoli, C., Moscardini, L., et al. 2025, arXiv, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2512.15869

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2512.15869 2025

  16. [17]

    2018, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 239, 35, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aaee8c

    Diemer, B. 2018, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 239, 35, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aaee8c

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/aaee8c 2018

  17. [18]

    D., Bullock, J

    Elbert, O. D., Bullock, J. S., Garrison-Kimmel, S., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 453, 29, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv1470

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1470 2015

  18. [19]

    D., Bullock, J

    Elbert, O. D., Bullock, J. S., Kaplinghat, M., et al. 2018, ”The Astrophysical Journal”, 853, 109, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa9710

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa9710 2018

  19. [20]

    Engelhardt, A., Munshi, F., Peter, A. H. G., et al. 2026, arXiv, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2601.23264

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2601.23264 2026

  20. [21]

    D., Yu, H.-B., & Zhong, Y.-M

    Essig, R., Mcdermott, S. D., Yu, H.-B., & Zhong, Y.-M. 2019, Phys. Rev. Lett., 123, 121102, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.121102

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.123.121102 2019

  21. [22]

    L., Kaplinghat, M., & Yu, H.-B

    Feng, J. L., Kaplinghat, M., & Yu, H.-B. 2010, Physical Review Letters, 104, doi: 10.1103/physrevlett.104.151301

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.104.151301 2010

  22. [23]

    2000, MNRAS, 314, 338, doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2000.03350.x

    Hernandez, X. 2000, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 315, L29–L32, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2000.03555.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2000.03555.x 2000

  23. [24]

    S., Dolag, K., & Yu, H.-B

    Fischer, M. S., Dolag, K., & Yu, H.-B. 2024a, Astronomy &; Astrophysics, 689, A300, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202449849

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202449849

  24. [25]

    S., Kasselmann, L., Br¨ uggen, M., et al

    Fischer, M. S., Kasselmann, L., Br¨ uggen, M., et al. 2024b, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 529, 2327–2348, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae699

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae699

  25. [26]

    S., & Yu, H.-B

    Fischer, M. S., & Yu, H.-B. 2026, arXiv, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2603.04508

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2603.04508 2026

  26. [27]

    S., Wiertel, M., Arido, C., et al

    Fischer, M. S., Wiertel, M., Arido, C., et al. 2026, arXiv, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2603.10107

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2603.10107 2026

  27. [28]

    2017, Mon

    Fitts, A., et al. 2017, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 471, 3547, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1757

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1757 2017

  28. [29]

    2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 490, 962–977, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2613

    Fitts, A., Boylan-Kolchin, M., Bozek, B., et al. 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 490, 962–977, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2613

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2613 2019

  29. [30]

    K., Kaplinghat, M., Outmezguine, N

    Gad-Nasr, S., Boddy, K. K., Kaplinghat, M., Outmezguine, N. J., & Sagunski, L. 2023, https://arxiv.org/abs/2312.09296

    arXiv 2023

  30. [31]

    , keywords =

    Gurian, J., & May, S. 2025, Physical Review Letters, 135, doi: 10.1103/2ycz-3fvv

    work page doi:10.1103/2ycz-3fvv 2025

  31. [32]

    A., Despali, G., O’Neil, S., et al

    Gutcke, T. A., Despali, G., O’Neil, S., et al. 2025, https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.05258

    arXiv 2025

  32. [33]

    1978, Progress of Theoretical Physics, 60, 393, doi: 10.1143/PTP.60.393

    Hachisu, I., Nakada, Y., Nomoto, K., & Sugimoto, D. 1978, Progress of Theoretical Physics, 60, 393, doi: 10.1143/PTP.60.393

    work page doi:10.1143/ptp.60.393 1978

  33. [34]

    R., Millman, K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 2020

  34. [35]

    , keywords =

    Hayashi, K., Chiba, M., & Ishiyama, T. 2020, Astrophys. J., 904, 45, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abbe0a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abbe0a 2020

  35. [36]

    Hopkins, P. F. 2015, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 450, 53, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv195

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv195 2015

  36. [37]

    Galaxies on FIRE (Feedback In Realistic Environments): Stellar Feedback Explains Cosmologically Inefficient Star Formation

    Hopkins, P. F., Kereˇ s, D., O˜ norbe, J., et al. 2014, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 445, 581–603, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu1738

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1738 2014

  37. [38]

    and Wetzel, Andrew and Kereš, Dušan and Faucher-Giguère, Claude-André and Quataert, Eliot and Boylan-Kolchin, Michael and Murray, Norman and Hayward, Christopher C

    Hopkins, P. F., Wetzel, A., Kereˇ s, D., et al. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 480, 800–863, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1690

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1690 2018

  38. [39]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science & Engineering, 9, 90, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55

    work page doi:10.1109/mcse.2007.55 2007

  39. [40]

    F., et al

    Jiang, F., Benson, A., Hopkins, P. F., et al. 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 521, 4630–4644, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad705

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad705 2023

  40. [41]

    R., & Wu, C.-L

    Kahlhoefer, F., Kaplinghat, M., Slatyer, T. R., & Wu, C.-L. 2019, JCAP, 2019, 010, doi: 10.1088/1475-7516/2019/12/010

    work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2019/12/010 2019

  41. [42]

    2020, JCAP, 06, 027, doi: 10.1088/1475-7516/2020/06/027

    Kaplinghat, M., Ren, T., & Yu, H.-B. 2020, JCAP, 06, 027, doi: 10.1088/1475-7516/2020/06/027

    work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2020/06/027 2020

  42. [43]

    2016, Phys

    Kaplinghat, M., Tulin, S., & Yu, H.-B. 2016, Phys. Rev. Lett., 116, 041302, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.041302

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.116.041302 2016

  43. [44]

    2019, Mon

    Kaplinghat, M., Valli, M., & Yu, H.-B. 2019, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 490, 231, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2511

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2511 2019

  44. [45]

    2013, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 210, 14, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/210/1/14

    Kim, J.-h., Abel, T., Agertz, O., et al. 2013, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 210, 14, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/210/1/14

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/210/1/14 2013

  45. [46]

    Koda, J., & Shapiro, P. R. 2011, MNRAS, 415, 1125, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18684.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18684.x 2011

  46. [47]

    Seven-Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Cosmological Interpretation

    Komatsu, E., Smith, K. M., Dunkley, J., et al. 2011, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 192, 18, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/192/2/18

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1088/0067-0049/192/2/18 2011

  47. [48]

    Kong, D., Kaplinghat, M., Yu, H.-B., Fraternali, F., & Mancera Pi˜ na, P. E. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 936, 166, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac8875 Kuzio de Naray, R., & McGaugh, S. S. 2014, The Astrophysical Journal, 782, L12, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/782/1/l12

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac8875 2022

  48. [49]

    Larson, R. B. 1970, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 147, 323, doi: 10.1093/mnras/147.4.323

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/147.4.323 1970

  49. [50]

    P., & Shapiro, S

    Lightman, A. P., & Shapiro, S. L. 1978, Rev. Mod. Phys., 50, 437, doi: 10.1103/RevModPhys.50.437

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.50.437 1978

  50. [51]

    R., Gonzalez-Perez, V., Bose, S., et al

    Lovell, M. R., Gonzalez-Perez, V., Bose, S., et al. 2017, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 468, 2836, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx621

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx621 2017

  51. [52]

    Lynden-Bell, D., & Eggleton, P. P. 1980, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 191, 483, doi: 10.1093/mnras/191.3.483

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/191.3.483 1980

  52. [53]

    1968, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 138, 495, doi: 10.1093/mnras/138.4.495

    Lynden-Bell, D., & Wood, R. 1968, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 138, 495, doi: 10.1093/mnras/138.4.495

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/138.4.495 1968

  53. [54]

    , keywords =

    Mace, C., Zeng, Z. C., Peter, A. H. G., et al. 2024, Phys. Rev. D, 110, 123024, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.110.123024

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.110.123024 2024

  54. [55]

    Mashchenko, S., Wadsley, J., & Couchman, H. M. P. 2008, Science, 319, 174, doi: 10.1126/science.1148666 21

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1148666 2008

  55. [56]

    2002, Physical Review Letters, 88, doi: 10.1103/physrevlett.88.091304

    McDonald, J. 2002, Physical Review Letters, 88, doi: 10.1103/physrevlett.88.091304

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.88.091304 2002

  56. [57]

    2011, Python for high performance and scientific computing, 14, 1

    McKinney, W., et al. 2011, Python for high performance and scientific computing, 14, 1

    2011

  57. [58]

    S., et al

    Moreno, J., Danieli, S., Bullock, J. S., et al. 2022, Nature Astronomy, 6, 496, doi: 10.1038/s41550-021-01598-4

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-021-01598-4 2022

  58. [59]

    Wechsler, R. H. 2020, Astrophys. J., 896, 112, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab94b0

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab94b0 2020

  59. [60]

    Wechsler, R. H. 2021, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 920, L11, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac29c1

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac29c1 2021

  60. [61]

    O., Kong, D., Yang, D., & Yu, H.-B

    Nadler, E. O., Kong, D., Yang, D., & Yu, H.-B. 2025, https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.10748

    arXiv 2025

  61. [62]

    O., Yang, D., & Yu, H.-B

    Nadler, E. O., Yang, D., & Yu, H.-B. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 958, L39, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad0e09

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad0e09 2023

  62. [63]

    Navarro, C.S

    Navarro, J. F., Frenk, C. S., & White, S. D. M. 1997, Astrophys. J., 490, 493, doi: 10.1086/304888

    work page doi:10.1086/304888 1997

  63. [64]

    K., & Kaplinghat, M

    Nishikawa, H., Boddy, K. K., & Kaplinghat, M. 2020, Phys. Rev. D, 101, 063009, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.101.063009

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.101.063009 2020

  64. [65]

    A., et al

    Oman, K. A., et al. 2015, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 452, 3650, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv1504

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1504 2015

  65. [66]

    J., Boddy, K

    Outmezguine, N. J., Boddy, K. K., Gad-Nasr, S., Kaplinghat, M., & Sagunski, L. 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 523, 4786–4800, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1705

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad1705 2023

  66. [67]

    2024, https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.12452

    Palubski, I., Slone, O., Kaplinghat, M., Lisanti, M., & Jiang, F. 2024, https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.12452

    arXiv 2024

  67. [68]

    Peter, A. H. G., Rocha, M., Bullock, J. S., & Kaplinghat, M. 2013, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 430, 105–120, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sts535

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sts535 2013

  68. [69]

    doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06515.x , Eprint =

    Power, C., Navarro, J. F., Jenkins, A., et al. 2003, MNRAS, 338, 14, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.05925.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.05925.x 2003

  69. [70]

    C., Newman, A

    Relatores, N. C., Newman, A. B., Simon, J. D., et al. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 887, 94, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5305

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab5305 2019

  70. [71]

    , keywords =

    Roberts, M. G., Kaplinghat, M., Valli, M., & Yu, H.-B. 2025, Phys. Rev. D, 111, 103041, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.111.103041

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.111.103041 2025

  71. [72]

    H., Bullock, J

    Robles, V. H., Bullock, J. S., Elbert, O. D., et al. 2017, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 472, 2945–2954, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2253

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2253 2017

  72. [73]

    Rocha, M., Peter, A. H. G., Bullock, J. S., et al. 2013, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 430, 81, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sts514

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sts514 2013

  73. [74]

    2021, JCAP, 2021, 024, doi: 10.1088/1475-7516/2021/01/024

    Tulin, S. 2021, JCAP, 2021, 024, doi: 10.1088/1475-7516/2021/01/024

    work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2021/01/024 2021

  74. [75]

    Nature Astronomy , keywords =

    Sales, L. V., Wetzel, A., & Fattahi, A. 2022, Nature Astronomy, 6, 897, doi: 10.1038/s41550-022-01689-w

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-022-01689-w 2022

  75. [76]

    , keywords =

    Sameie, O., Boylan-Kolchin, M., Sanderson, R., et al. 2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 507, 720, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab2173

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2173 2021

  76. [77]

    2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 504, 1379

    Samuel, J., Wetzel, A., Chapman, S., et al. 2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 504, 1379

    2021

  77. [78]

    2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 491, 1471–1490, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz3054

    Samuel, J., Wetzel, A., Tollerud, E., et al. 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 491, 1471–1490, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz3054

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz3054 2019

  78. [79]

    Santos-Santos, I. M. E., Navarro, J. F., Robertson, A., et al. 2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 495, 58–77, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1072

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1072 2020

  79. [80]

    L., & Teukolsky, S

    Shapiro, S. L., & Teukolsky, S. A. 1985, ApJL, 292, L41, doi: 10.1086/184469

    work page doi:10.1086/184469 1985

  80. [81]

    2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 516, 1302

    Shen, X., Brinckmann, T., Rapetti, D., et al. 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 516, 1302

    2022

Showing first 80 references.