Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 minor 119 references

Euclid has found 31 new quasars at 6.6 < z < 7.8, including a record-holder at z ≈ 7.77 that more than doubles the known sample beyond redshift 7.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · grok-4.5

2026-07-12 02:30 UTC pith:XXZ6YO6U

load-bearing objection Solid spectroscopic census: 31 new Euclid quasars, 12 at z≥7, new record at z≈7.77, and a real faint-end sample.

arxiv 2607.03432 v1 pith:XXZ6YO6U submitted 2026-07-03 astro-ph.GA

Euclid: Discovery of 31 new quasars at 6.6 < z < 7.8

D. Yang , J. F. Hennawi , F. Guarneri , J. Wolf , S. Belladitta , J.-T. Schindler , A. C. N. Hughes , E. Ba\~nados
show 206 more authors
D. J. Mortlock J. Yang F. Wang X. Fan K. Jahnke D. Stern C. J. Willott A. J. Barth H. J. A. Rottgering R. G. Varadaraj R. Decarli A.-C. Eilers M. Ezziati Y. Fu J. Huang X. Jin Y. Kang L. N. Martinez-Ramirez Y. Matsuoka M. Onoue R. Pello R. P. Remigio W. L. Tee B. Venemans G. Vietri B. Wang L. J. Abbo H. Atek S. Bisogni S. E. I. Bosman R. A. A. Bowler C. J. Conselice F. B. Davies C. M. Gutierrez Y. Harikane K. Rubinur C. C. Lovell M. Magliocchetti J. Matthee F. Ricci M. Scialpi D. Scott L. Spinoglio F. Tarsitano Y. Toba F. Walter J. R. Weaver G. Zamorani B. Altieri A. Amara S. Andreon H. Aussel C. Baccigalupi M. Baldi A. Balestra S. Bardelli P. Battaglia A. Biviano E. Branchini M. Brescia S. Camera G. Ca\~nas-Herrera V. Capobianco C. Carbone J. Carretero M. Castellano G. Castignani S. Cavuoti K. C. Chambers A. Cimatti C. Colodro-Conde G. Congedo L. Conversi Y. Copin F. Courbin H. M. Courtois M. Cropper J.-C. Cuillandre H. Degaudenzi G. De Lucia C. Dolding H. Dole M. Douspis F. Dubath X. Dupac S. Dusini S. Escoffier M. Farina R. Farinelli S. Ferriol F. Finelli N. Fourmanoit M. Frailis E. Franceschi M. Fumana S. Galeotta K. George B. Gillis C. Giocoli P. G\'omez-Alvarez J. Gracia-Carpio A. Grazian F. Grupp L. Guzzo S. Gwyn S. V. H. Haugan H. Hoekstra W. Holmes I. M. Hook F. Hormuth A. Hornstrup M. Jhabvala S. Kermiche B. Kubik K. Kuijken M. K\"ummel M. Kunz H. Kurki-Suonio A. M. C. Le Brun S. Ligori P. B. Lilje V. Lindholm I. Lloro G. Mainetti D. Maino E. Maiorano O. Mansutti O. Marggraf M. Martinelli N. Martinet F. Marulli R. J. Massey H. J. McCracken E. Medinaceli S. Mei Y. Mellier M. Meneghetti E. Merlin G. Meylan J. J. Mohr A. Mora M. Moresco L. Moscardini E. Munari R. Nakajima C. Neissner R. C. Nichol S.-M. Niemi C. Padilla S. Paltani F. Pasian K. Pedersen W. J. Percival V. Pettorino S. Pires G. Polenta M. Poncet L. A. Popa L. Pozzetti G. D. Racca F. Raison R. Rebolo A. Renzi J. Rhodes G. Riccio H.-W. Rix E. Romelli M. Roncarelli C. Rosset B. Rusholme R. Saglia Z. Sakr D. Sapone M. Sauvage M. Schirmer P. Schneider T. Schrabback A. Secroun G. Seidel S. Serrano E. Sihvola P. Simon C. Sirignano G. Sirri L. Stanco J. Steinwagner P. Tallada-Cresp\'i I. Tereno N. Tessore S. Toft R. Toledo-Moreo F. Torradeflot I. Tutusaus L. Valenziano J. Valiviita T. Vassallo Y. Wang J. Weller F. M. Zerbi E. Zucca G. Fabbian M. Huertas-Company J. Mart\'in-Fleitas P. Monaco V. Scottez M. Viel
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords high-redshift quasarsEuclid Wide Surveyepoch of reionisationsupermassive black holesLyman-alpha breakquasar luminosity functionnear-infrared photometry
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

Finding quasars at redshifts above 7 has been extremely hard: they are rare, and the Lyman-alpha break sits in the near-infrared where ground-based surveys struggle. This paper shows that Euclid’s Wide Survey, after only 1.5 years and ~3000 deg², already yields 31 spectroscopically confirmed quasars between z = 6.6 and 7.8. Twelve of them lie at z ≥ 7, more than doubling the previous census, and one object (EUCL J1729) reaches z ≈ 7.77, the highest redshift yet reported for a quasar. The sample is also fainter (M1450 down to about −23.6) than most pre-Euclid discoveries, so it begins to fill the faint end of the luminosity function at the earliest epochs. The authors argue that these objects open a practical route to studying supermassive black-hole growth, host galaxies, and the intergalactic medium while the Universe was still reionising.

Core claim

Spectroscopic follow-up of machine-learning and probabilistic candidates drawn from the first 3000 deg² of the Euclid Wide Survey has confirmed 31 new quasars at 6.6 < z < 7.8, of which 12 sit at z ≥ 7 (more than doubling the pre-Euclid tally) and one reaches z ≈ 7.77, the current redshift record. Their J_E magnitudes (21.2–23.2) place them on the faint side of the high-z luminosity function.

What carries the argument

Multi-algorithm photometric selection (extreme deconvolution, XGBoost, template SED fitting, Bayesian model comparison) on Euclid I_E Y_E J_E H_E (plus ancillary z-band) that isolates Lyman-break dropouts, followed by optical/near-IR spectroscopy on 10-m and 6.5-m telescopes that confirms the break and emission lines.

Load-bearing premise

Redshifts and quasar classifications rest on visual inspection of the Lyman-alpha break or line; some of the faintest objects with atypical profiles could still be luminous galaxies or heavily absorbed systems rather than type-I quasars.

What would settle it

Deeper rest-frame UV or optical spectra (or high-resolution size measurements) that show the faintest ‘quasars’ lack broad high-ionisation lines or are spatially extended would reclassify them as galaxies and shrink the claimed z ≥ 7 sample.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • The known census of z ≥ 7 quasars is more than doubled, giving a usable sample for early black-hole growth studies.
  • Faint (M1450 ~ −24) quasars at z ≳ 7 become accessible for IGM damping-wing and proximity-zone measurements.
  • Two radio-loud objects already demonstrate Euclid–LOFAR synergy for jet-powered systems at z ~ 7.
  • Full-survey forecasts of >100 quasars at 7 < z < 7.5 become plausible once selection completeness is quantified.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the faint-end space density continues to match or exceed pre-Euclid extrapolations, existing quasar luminosity functions at z ≳ 7 will need upward revision.
  • The same selection pipeline applied to the remaining ~11 000 deg² should produce the first secure z > 8 quasars within a few years.
  • Objects that sit near the quasar–galaxy luminosity-function crossover will force a practical distinction between type-I AGN and extreme star-forming galaxies at cosmic dawn.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

0 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports the spectroscopic confirmation of 31 new quasars at 6.6 < z < 7.8 selected from ~3000 deg^{2} of early Euclid Wide Survey imaging. Candidate selection used multiple machine-learning and probabilistic methods on Euclid I_E, Y_E, J_E, H_E photometry (plus ancillary z-band when available); follow-up was obtained with Keck (LRIS, KCWI, MOSFIRE), Magellan/FIRE, and LBT (MODS/LUCI). Twelve of the objects lie at z ≥ 7, more than doubling the pre-Euclid census at these redshifts, and EUCL J172902.75+641018.1 at z ≈ 7.77 is presented as the new redshift record. The sample reaches 21.2 < J_E < 23.2 (−25.5 < M_1450 < −23.6), thereby extending the known population to the faint end of the QLF at z ≳ 7. Discovery spectra, multi-band cutouts, photometry, and observation logs are provided in the main text and appendices.

Significance. If the spectroscopic classifications hold, this is a major observational advance: it more than doubles the z ≥ 7 quasar sample, establishes a new redshift record, and populates the previously sparse faint end (M_1450 ∼ −24) at z ≳ 7. The work demonstrates Euclid’s practical capability for high-z quasar discovery and supplies a concrete target list for JWST, ALMA/NOEMA, and IGM studies. Strengths include multi-instrument confirmation, public cutouts, and transparent discussion of residual redshift and classification uncertainties for the weakest-Lyα objects. The result is an observational census rather than a model-dependent inference, so the central claim is robust to the usual free parameters of photometric selection.

minor comments (5)
  1. Redshifts are visual (typical Δz ∼ 0.05–0.1, up to ∼0.2 for weak/absorbed Lyα; Sect. 5 and Table A.3 notes). A short quantitative statement of how many objects fall into the higher-uncertainty bin, and whether any of the z ≥ 7 claims rest solely on those, would help readers assess the record-holder and the doubling claim.
  2. Sect. 5.1 and the notes on atypical Lyα profiles correctly flag that a subset of the faintest sources could be luminous galaxies or strong damping-wing systems. Fig. 10 (point-source consistency) is reassuring; a one-sentence cross-reference in the abstract or summary would make the residual ambiguity more visible to non-specialists.
  3. Southern follow-up is incomplete (Sect. 2.1, 7). The provisional comparison with the Euclid Collaboration: Barnett et al. (2019) forecast is appropriately caveated, but a clearer statement of the confirmed fraction of the high-priority list would strengthen the discussion of possible QLF tension.
  4. Table A.3 and the M_1450 conversion assume a fixed α = −1.7. A brief note on the sensitivity of the faintest M_1450 values to plausible slope variations would be useful for luminosity-function users.
  5. Minor presentation: a few figure captions (e.g., Figs. 2–3) could more explicitly state the smoothing kernels and that spectra are not telluric-corrected; the naming convention footnote is clear but could be moved earlier for first-time readers.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: spectroscopic census of Euclid candidates is independent of the photometric selection models.

full rationale

This is an observational discovery paper. Candidates are selected from Euclid photometry via multiple ML/probabilistic methods (XDHZQSO, XGBoost, SED fitting, BMC) that use synthetic quasar photometry trained on lower-z SDSS BOSS/eBOSS samples and empirical contaminant densities; those models only rank candidates for follow-up. Confirmation of the 31 quasars, their redshifts (visual Lyα break / emission), and the z≈7.77 record rest entirely on independent Keck/Magellan/LBT spectra (Figs. 2–3, 6–7, App. C; Tables A.1–A.3). No free parameter is fitted to the high-z sample and then re-presented as a prediction; the count of 31 and the redshift record are not forced by the selection priors. Mild self-citations (e.g. Yang et al. 2024 selection framework, synthetic models in prep.) are standard and non-load-bearing for the discovery claim. Score 0 is appropriate.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 3 axioms · 0 invented entities

Observational discovery paper; load-bearing assumptions are standard cosmology, the reliability of visual Lyman-break redshifts, and the point-source nature of the candidates. No new physical entities are postulated. Free parameters are limited to conventional choices (spectral slope α = −1.7 for M1450, CLASS_STAR > 0.6, color cuts, probability thresholds).

free parameters (3)
  • spectral slope α for M1450 conversion = -1.7
    Fixed to α = −1.7 (Telfer et al. 2002) when converting JE to M1450; conventional but not re-derived here.
  • CLASS_STAR threshold and color cuts = CLASS_STAR>0.6; IE-JE>3.05
    CLASS_STAR > 0.6, IE − JE > 3.05, |fz/fJE| < 2 used to pre-select dropouts; empirical thresholds chosen for purity.
  • PQSO and Pq probability thresholds = 0.85 / 0.5
    XGBoost PQSO,th = 0.85 and Bayesian Pq ≥ 0.5 used to rank candidates; chosen by the authors for high-confidence lists.
axioms (3)
  • domain assumption Flat ΛCDM cosmology with Planck 2020 parameters (Ωm=0.3111, h=0.6766, etc.)
    Adopted for age-of-universe and absolute-magnitude calculations (Sect. 1).
  • domain assumption Visual location of Lyα break or emission gives redshift to ∼0.05–0.1 accuracy
    Standard practice for high-z quasars; paper itself notes larger uncertainty when Lyα is weak (Sect. 5).
  • domain assumption Sources consistent with the JE PSF (Sérsic Reff overlapping REE50) are point-like and therefore quasars rather than extended galaxies
    Used in Sect. 6.1 to argue against galaxy contamination; one object is flagged as possibly affected by a neighbor.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 43445 in / 2704 out tokens · 23998 ms · 2026-07-12T02:30:46.499299+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We report the discovery of 31 new high-$z$ quasars in the redshift range $6.6 < z < 7.8$. These quasars were selected from approximately 3000 deg$^2$ of sky covered during the first 1.5 years of the Euclid Wide Survey, representing the initial results of the Euclid high-$z$ quasar search. Our candidate selection employed multiple machine-learning and probabilistic techniques applied to the Euclid $I_E$, $Y_E$, $J_E$, and $H_E$ images, supplemented by ancillary $z$-band data when available. Spectroscopic follow-up observations were carried out with Keck, Magellan, and the Large Binocular Telescope (LBT). Among the new discoveries, there are 12 quasars at $z \geq 7$, more than doubling the number of previously known quasars at $z \geq 7$. The newly discovered quasars exhibit $21.2 < J_E < 23.2$ ($-25.5 < M_{1450} < -23.6$), extending quasar studies to the faint end of the quasar luminosity function (QLF) at $z \gtrsim 7$. The quasar with the highest-$z$, EUCL J172902.75+641018.1 at $z \approx 7.77$, sets the new redshift record for the most distant quasar ever reported. These discoveries demonstrate Euclid's transformative role in high-$z$ quasar discovery and set the stage for future follow-up studies of the early galaxies hosting quasars, supermassive black hole growth, and the intergalactic medium in the epoch of reionisation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.03432 by A. Amara, A. Balestra, A. Biviano, A.-C. Eilers, A. Cimatti, A. C. N. Hughes, A. Grazian, A. Hornstrup, A. J. Barth, A. M. C. Le Brun, A. Mora, A. Renzi, A. Secroun, B. Altieri, B. Gillis, B. Kubik, B. Rusholme, B. Venemans, B. Wang, C. Baccigalupi, C. Carbone, C. C. Lovell, C. Colodro-Conde, C. Dolding, C. Giocoli, C. J. Conselice, C. J. Willott, C. M. Gutierrez, C. Neissner, C. Padilla, C. Rosset, C. Sirignano, D. J. Mortlock, D. Maino, D. Sapone, D. Scott, D. Stern, D. Yang, E. Ba\~nados, E. Branchini, E. Franceschi, E. Maiorano, E. Medinaceli, E. Merlin, E. Munari, E. Romelli, E. Sihvola, E. Zucca, F. B. Davies, F. Courbin, F. Dubath, F. Finelli, F. Grupp, F. Guarneri, F. Hormuth, F. Marulli, F. M. Zerbi, F. Pasian, F. Raison, F. Ricci, F. Tarsitano, F. Torradeflot, F. Walter, F. Wang, G. Ca\~nas-Herrera, G. Castignani, G. Congedo, G. De Lucia, G. D. Racca, G. Fabbian, G. Mainetti, G. Meylan, G. Polenta, G. Riccio, G. Seidel, G. Sirri, G. Vietri, G. Zamorani, H. Atek, H. Aussel, H. Degaudenzi, H. Dole, H. Hoekstra, H. J. A. Rottgering, H. J. McCracken, H. Kurki-Suonio, H. M. Courtois, H.-W. Rix, I. Lloro, I. M. Hook, I. Tereno, I. Tutusaus, J. Carretero, J.-C. Cuillandre, J. F. Hennawi, J. Gracia-Carpio, J. Huang, J. J. Mohr, J. Mart\'in-Fleitas, J. Matthee, J. Rhodes, J. R. Weaver, J. Steinwagner, J.-T. Schindler, J. Valiviita, J. Weller, J. Wolf, J. Yang, K. C. Chambers, K. George, K. Jahnke, K. Kuijken, K. Pedersen, K. Rubinur, L. A. Popa, L. Conversi, L. Guzzo, L. J. Abbo, L. Moscardini, L. N. Martinez-Ramirez, L. Pozzetti, L. Spinoglio, L. Stanco, L. Valenziano, M. Baldi, M. Brescia, M. Castellano, M. Cropper, M. Douspis, M. Ezziati, M. Farina, M. Frailis, M. Fumana, M. Huertas-Company, M. Jhabvala, M. K\"ummel, M. Kunz, M. Magliocchetti, M. Martinelli, M. Meneghetti, M. Moresco, M. Onoue, M. Poncet, M. Roncarelli, M. Sauvage, M. Schirmer, M. Scialpi, M. Viel, N. Fourmanoit, N. Martinet, N. Tessore, O. Mansutti, O. Marggraf, P. Battaglia, P. B. Lilje, P. G\'omez-Alvarez, P. Monaco, P. Schneider, P. Simon, P. Tallada-Cresp\'i, R. A. A. Bowler, R. C. Nichol, R. Decarli, R. Farinelli, R. G. Varadaraj, R. J. Massey, R. Nakajima, R. Pello, R. P. Remigio, R. Rebolo, R. Saglia, R. Toledo-Moreo, S. Andreon, S. Bardelli, S. Belladitta, S. Bisogni, S. Camera, S. Cavuoti, S. Dusini, S. E. I. Bosman, S. Escoffier, S. Ferriol, S. Galeotta, S. Gwyn, S. Kermiche, S. Ligori, S. Mei, S.-M. Niemi, S. Paltani, S. Pires, S. Serrano, S. Toft, S. V. H. Haugan, T. Schrabback, T. Vassallo, V. Capobianco, V. Lindholm, V. Pettorino, V. Scottez, W. Holmes, W. J. Percival, W. L. Tee, X. Dupac, X. Fan, X. Jin, Y. Copin, Y. Fu, Y. Harikane, Y. Kang, Y. Matsuoka, Y. Mellier, Y. Toba, Y. Wang, Z. Sakr.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Projection of the EWS area and the locations of the newly discovered quasars in J2000.0 equatorial coordinates. The regions ob￾served by 11 August 2025, utilised for the quasar search presented in this work, are shown in beige. The full survey footprint expected by the end of the mission in 2030 is overlaid in cyan. The positions of newly discovered Euclid high-z quasars are marked in red. 2.2. Ancillary i… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Discovery spectra of the new quasars at z ≥ 6.9. The redshifts estimated from the Lyα breaks, the short names, and the instruments for the discoveries are noted in the each panels. The spectra are fluxed, but not corrected for telluric absorption. They are also smoothed with inverse￾variance weights and a 3 or 11 pixel window for Magellan or Keck, respectively. The red curves in each panel show the smoothe… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Colour-colour diagrams of newly discovered quasars and other candidates. Left: IE−YE versus YE−JE colour-colour diagram. Right: JE−HE versus YE − JE colour-colour diagram. The red stars mark the new Euclid quasars presented in this work, the grey circles denote the identified contaminants, and the violet circles are those marked as inconclusive or no detection (see Sect. 5.2). The red curve indicates the m… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Redshift versus absolute magnitude at 1450 Å, M1450, for the new Euclid-discovered quasars (red squares), compared to pre-Euclid quasars (grey squares), including the SHELLQs sample (light blue squares). Yellow circles represent LBGs compiled from Matsuoka et al. (2016, 2018a,b, 2019a, 2022, 2025); Bouwens et al. (2022); Roberts-Borsani et al. (2024, 2025); Harikane et al. (2025). Green triangles denote fa… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Euclid cutouts and LBT/LUCI spectrum of EUCL J1729 (z ≈ 7.77), the most distant quasar discovered to date. Top: 12′′ × 12′′ cutouts. From left to right: Euclid IE, YE, JE, and HE bands. Bottom: The 1D spectrum has been smoothed using a 5 pixel inverse-variance-weighted boxcar. The total exposure time is 10 080 s. 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 Observed Wavelength [nm] 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 fλ [10 −17 er… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Magellan/FIRE echelle spectrum of EUCL J0522, one of the brightest z ∼ 7.5 quasars in this work (JE ≈ 22.17). The total integration time is 11 700 s. The black line shows the observed spectrum, inverse-variance smoothed with a 31 pixel boxcar. The light red curve shows the smoothed noise vector. The blue curve represents the best-fit power-law continuum. Locations of typical emission lines seen in a quasar… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Cutouts of two newly discovered LOFAR-detected quasars, EUCL J0933+7427 (bottom) at z ≈ 6.96, and EUCL J0916+6836 (top) at z ≈ 6.6. From left to right: Euclid IE, YE, JE, and HE bands, followed by the LOFAR 144 MHz image. Each cutout covers 40′′ × 40′′ region. Red circles in Euclid images and red crosses in LOFAR images both denote the JE-band positions of the quasars. A scale bar of a 5′′ length is shown … view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Magnitude versus fitted size of Euclid quasars (red orange) and identified brown dwarfs (black) in the JE band. The effective radii (Reff) are measured from Euclid YE, JE, and HE images assuming a Ser￾sic profile. The light blue lines represent the empirical size-luminosity relations for galaxies at z ∼ 7 (Shibuya et al. 2015; Sun et al. 2024). The grey horizontal line represents the 50% enclosed energy r… view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

119 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    B., Casey, C

    Akins, H. B., Casey, C. M., Lambrides, E., et al. 2025, ApJ, 991, 37

    2025

  2. [2]

    T., Bogdán, Á., Kovács, O

    Ananna, T. T., Bogdán, Á., Kovács, O. E., Natarajan, P., & Hickox, R. C. 2024, ApJ, 969, L18

    2024

  3. [3]

    & Ilbert, O

    Arnouts, S. & Ilbert, O. 2011, LePHARE: Photometric Analysis for Redshift

    2011

  4. [4]

    M., Lim, P

    Estimate, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1108.009 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Lim, P. L., et al. 2022, ApJ, 935, 167 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ocz, B. M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33 Bañados, E., Le Brun, V ., Belladitta...

    2022

  5. [5]

    2010, SWarp: Resampling and Co-adding FITS Images Together, As- trophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1010.068

    Bertin, E. 2010, SWarp: Resampling and Co-adding FITS Images Together, As- trophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1010.068

    2010

  6. [6]

    2013, PSFEx: Point Spread Function Extractor, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1301.001

    Bertin, E. 2013, PSFEx: Point Spread Function Extractor, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1301.001

    2013

  7. [7]

    & Arnouts, S

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

    1996

  8. [8]

    Bosman, S. E. I., Álvarez-Márquez, J., Davies, F. B., et al. 2025, ApJ, arXiv:2511.02902, submitted

    arXiv 2025

  9. [9]

    Bosman, S. E. I., Davies, F. B., Becker, G. D., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 514, 55

    2022

  10. [10]

    J., Banados, E., Decarli, R., et al

    Bouwens, R. J., Banados, E., Decarli, R., et al. 2025, A&A, submitted, arXiv:2506.24128

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  11. [11]

    J., Smit, R., Schouws, S., et al

    Bouwens, R. J., Smit, R., Schouws, S., et al. 2022, ApJ, 931, 160

    2022

  12. [12]

    W., & Roweis, S

    Bovy, J., Hogg, D. W., & Roweis, S. T. 2011, Annals of Applied Statistics, 5, 1657

    2011

  13. [13]

    2016, Photutils: Photometry tools, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1609.011

    Bradley, L., Sipocz, B., Robitaille, T., et al. 2016, Photutils: Photometry tools, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1609.011

    2016

  14. [14]

    B., van Dokkum, P

    Brammer, G. B., van Dokkum, P. G., & Coppi, P. 2008, ApJ, 686, 1503

    2008

  15. [15]

    2024, A&A, 683, A34

    Calderone, G., Guarneri, F., Porru, M., et al. 2024, A&A, 683, A34

    2024

  16. [16]

    & Guestrin, C

    Chen, T. & Guestrin, C. 2016, in Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD In- ternational Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, KDD ’16 (New York, NY , USA: Association for Computing Machinery), 785–794

    2016

  17. [17]

    C., Banerji, M., & Richards, G

    Coatman, L., Hewett, P. C., Banerji, M., & Richards, G. T. 2016, MNRAS, 461, 647 Dark Energy Survey Collaboration, Abbott, T., Abdalla, F. B., et al. 2016, MN- RAS, 460, 1270

    2016

  18. [18]

    B., Bosman, S

    Davies, F. B., Bosman, S. E. I., D’Odorico, V ., et al. 2026, MNRAS, 545, staf1862

    2026

  19. [19]

    B., Hennawi, J

    Davies, F. B., Hennawi, J. F., Bañados, E., et al. 2018, ApJ, 864, 142

    2018

  20. [20]

    S., Kneib, J.-P., Percival, W

    Dawson, K. S., Kneib, J.-P., Percival, W. J., et al. 2016, AJ, 151, 44

    2016

  21. [21]

    S., Schlegel, D

    Dawson, K. S., Schlegel, D. J., Ahn, C. P., et al. 2013, AJ, 145, 10

    2013

  22. [22]

    A., et al

    Dye, S., Lawrence, A., Read, M. A., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 473, 5113

    2018

  23. [23]

    2013, The Messenger, 154, 32

    Edge, A., Sutherland, W., Kuijken, K., et al. 2013, The Messenger, 154, 32

    2013

  24. [24]

    2024, ApJ, 974, 275 Euclid Collaboration: Barnett, R., Warren, S

    Eilers, A.-C., Mackenzie, R., Pizzati, E., et al. 2024, ApJ, 974, 275 Euclid Collaboration: Barnett, R., Warren, S. J., Mortlock, D. J., et al. 2019, A&A, 631, A85 Euclid Collaboration: Cropper, M., Al-Bahlawan, A., Amiaux, J., et al. 2025, A&A, 697, A2 Article number, page 14 of 27 D. Yang et al.: Discovery of 31 new quasars at 6.6<z<7.8 Euclid Collabora...

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/ 2024

  25. [25]

    G., et al

    Ezziati, M., Pello, R., Cuby, J. G., et al. 2025, A&A, 701, A282

    2025

  26. [26]

    Fan, X., Bañados, E., & Simcoe, R. A. 2023, ARA&A, 61, 373

    2023

  27. [27]

    L., Davis, M., et al

    Fan, X., White, R. L., Davis, M., et al. 2000, AJ, 120, 1167

    2000

  28. [28]

    P., Schindler, J.-T., Walter, F., et al

    Farina, E. P., Schindler, J.-T., Walter, F., et al. 2022, ApJ, 941, 106

    2022

  29. [29]

    Finkelstein, S. L. & Bagley, M. B. 2022, ApJ, 938, 25

    2022

  30. [30]

    2016, The Journal of Open Source Software, 1, 24

    Foreman-Mackey, D. 2016, The Journal of Open Source Software, 1, 24

    2016

  31. [31]

    J., et al

    Fu, Y ., Wu, X.-B., Bouwens, R. J., et al. 2025, ApJS, 279, 54

    2025

  32. [32]

    J., Duncan, K

    Gloudemans, A. J., Duncan, K. J., Eilers, A.-C., et al. 2025, ApJ, 986, 130

    2025

  33. [33]

    J., Duncan, K

    Gloudemans, A. J., Duncan, K. J., Saxena, A., et al. 2022, A&A, 668, A27

    2022

  34. [34]

    E., Labbe, I., Goulding, A

    Greene, J. E., Labbe, I., Goulding, A. D., et al. 2024, ApJ, 964, 39

    2024

  35. [35]

    2024, MNRAS, 530, 3208

    Greig, B., Mesinger, A., Bañados, E., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 530, 3208

    2024

  36. [36]

    T., Meyer, R

    Guarneri, F., Schindler, J. T., Meyer, R. A., et al. 2026, A&A, in press, arXiv:2510.23206

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  37. [37]

    Gunn, J. E. & Peterson, B. A. 1965, ApJ, 142, 1633

    1965

  38. [38]

    W., Cuillandre, J.-C., et al

    Gwyn, S., McConnachie, A. W., Cuillandre, J.-C., et al. 2025, AJ, 170, 324

    2025

  39. [39]

    K., Ellis, R

    Harikane, Y ., Inoue, A. K., Ellis, R. S., et al. 2025, ApJ, 980, 138

    2025

  40. [40]

    2023, ApJ, 959, 39

    Harikane, Y ., Zhang, Y ., Nakajima, K., et al. 2023, ApJ, 959, 39

    2023

  41. [41]

    R., Millman, K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357

    2020

  42. [42]

    F., Kist, T., Davies, F

    Hennawi, J. F., Kist, T., Davies, F. B., & Tamanas, J. 2025, MNRAS, 539, 2621

    2025

  43. [43]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science and Engineering, 9, 90

    2007

  44. [44]

    2020, ARA&A, 58, 27

    Inayoshi, K., Visbal, E., & Haiman, Z. 2020, ARA&A, 58, 27

    2020

  45. [45]

    2020, ApJ, 903, 60

    Ishimoto, R., Kashikawa, N., Onoue, M., et al. 2020, ApJ, 903, 60

    2020

  46. [46]

    2019, PASJ, 71, 111

    Izumi, T., Onoue, M., Matsuoka, Y ., et al. 2019, PASJ, 71, 111

    2019

  47. [47]

    2023, ApJ, 942, 59

    Jin, X., Yang, J., Fan, X., et al. 2023, ApJ, 942, 59

    2023

  48. [48]

    F., Schindler, J.-T., Tamanas, J., & Nanni, R

    Kang, Y ., Hennawi, J. F., Schindler, J.-T., Tamanas, J., & Nanni, R. 2025, MN- RAS, 541, 2815

    2025

  49. [49]

    F., & Davies, F

    Kist, T., Hennawi, J. F., & Davies, F. B. 2025, MNRAS, 538, 2704

    2025

  50. [50]

    2023, ApJ, 957, L7

    Kokorev, V ., Fujimoto, S., Labbe, I., et al. 2023, ApJ, 957, L7

    2023

  51. [51]

    & Harikane, Y

    Kokubo, M. & Harikane, Y . 2025, ApJ, 995, 24

    2025

  52. [52]

    Kormendy, J. & Ho, L. C. 2013, ARA&A, 51, 511

    2013

  53. [53]

    L., Finkelstein, S

    Larson, R. L., Finkelstein, S. L., Kocevski, D. D., et al. 2023, ApJ, 953, L29

    2023

  54. [54]

    R., Tremaine, S., Richstone, D., & Faber, S

    Lauer, T. R., Tremaine, S., Richstone, D., & Faber, S. M. 2007, ApJ, 670, 249

    2007

  55. [55]

    J., Almaini, O., et al

    Lawrence, A., Warren, S. J., Almaini, O., et al. 2007, MNRAS, 379, 1599

    2007

  56. [56]

    D., Izumi, T., et al

    Li, J., Silverman, J. D., Izumi, T., et al. 2022, ApJ, 931, L11

    2022

  57. [57]

    2026, ApJ, 996, 93

    Lin, X., Fan, X., Wang, F., et al. 2026, ApJ, 996, 93

    2026

  58. [58]

    2024, ApJ, 974, 147

    Lin, X., Wang, F., Fan, X., et al. 2024, ApJ, 974, 147

    2024

  59. [59]

    2024, A&A, 691, A145

    Maiolino, R., Scholtz, J., Curtis-Lake, E., et al. 2024, A&A, 691, A145

    2024

  60. [60]

    2022, MNRAS, 517, 2972

    Marques-Chaves, R., Schaerer, D., Álvarez-Márquez, J., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 517, 2972

    2022

  61. [61]

    2025, A&A, submitted, arXiv:2510.12411 Martínez-Ramírez, L

    Marques-Chaves, R., Schaerer, D., Dessauges-Zavadsky, M., et al. 2025, A&A, submitted, arXiv:2510.12411 Martínez-Ramírez, L. N., Wolf, J., Belladitta, S., et al. 2026, A&A, 708, A117

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  62. [62]

    2022, ApJS, 259, 18

    Matsuoka, Y ., Iwasawa, K., Onoue, M., et al. 2022, ApJS, 259, 18

    2022

  63. [63]

    2025, ApJS, 280, 68

    Matsuoka, Y ., Iwasawa, K., Onoue, M., et al. 2025, ApJS, 280, 68

    2025

  64. [64]

    2023, ApJ, 949, L42

    Matsuoka, Y ., Onoue, M., Iwasawa, K., et al. 2023, ApJ, 949, L42

    2023

  65. [65]

    2016, ApJ, 828, 26

    Matsuoka, Y ., Onoue, M., Kashikawa, N., et al. 2016, ApJ, 828, 26

    2016

  66. [66]

    P., Brammer, G., et al

    Matthee, J., Naidu, R. P., Brammer, G., et al. 2024, ApJ, 963, 129

    2024

  67. [67]

    C., Matuszewski, M., Neill, J

    McGurk, R. C., Matuszewski, M., Neill, J. D., et al. 2024, in Society of Photo- Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol. 13096, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy X, ed. J. J

    2024

  68. [68]

    S., Steidel, C

    McLean, I. S., Steidel, C. C., Epps, H. W., et al. 2012, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol. 8446, Ground- based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy IV , ed. I. S. McLean, S. K. Ramsay, & H. Takami, 84460J

    2012

  69. [69]

    G., Banerji, M., Gonzalez, E., et al

    McMahon, R. G., Banerji, M., Gonzalez, E., et al. 2013, The Messenger, 154, 35

    2013

  70. [70]

    2018, PASJ, 70, S1

    Miyazaki, S., Komiyama, Y ., Kawanomoto, S., et al. 2018, PASJ, 70, S1

    2018

  71. [71]

    C., et al

    Morrissey, P., Matuszewski, M., Martin, D. C., et al. 2018, ApJ, 864, 93

    2018

  72. [72]

    J., Patel, M., Warren, S

    Mortlock, D. J., Patel, M., Warren, S. J., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 419, 390

    2012

  73. [73]

    J., Warren, S

    Mortlock, D. J., Warren, S. J., Venemans, B. P., et al. 2011, Nature, 474, 616

    2011

  74. [74]

    F., Wang, F., et al

    Nanni, R., Hennawi, J. F., Wang, F., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 515, 3224

    2022

  75. [75]

    P., et al

    Neeleman, M., Novak, M., Venemans, B. P., et al. 2021, ApJ, 911, 141

    2021

  76. [76]

    B., Cohen, J

    Oke, J. B., Cohen, J. G., Carr, M., et al. 1995, PASP, 107, 375

    1995

  77. [77]

    Oke, J. B. & Gunn, J. E. 1983, ApJ, 266, 713

    1983

  78. [78]

    F., Pizzati, E., Venemans, B

    Onorato, S., Hennawi, J. F., Pizzati, E., Venemans, B. P., & Eilers, A.-C. 2026, MNRAS, 547, stag388

    2026

  79. [79]

    F., Schindler, J.-T., et al

    Onorato, S., Hennawi, J. F., Schindler, J.-T., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 540, 1308

    2025

  80. [80]

    D., et al

    Onoue, M., Ding, X., Silverman, J. D., et al. 2025, Nature Astronomy, 9, 1541

    2025

Showing first 80 references.