Pith. sign in

REVIEW 6 minor 75 references

From Atomic Gas to Star Formation

T0 review · 0 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-07-12 · grok-4.5

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

Pith's one-line read Only the full SKA-Mid array can map cold atomic gas at 100-pc scales across hundreds of nearby galaxies out to Virgo, closing the missing link in the star-formation cycle.

desk verdict Solid SKA science-case chapter that correctly flags the atomic-gas gap left by ALMA/JWST-era work and shows, with pathfinder maps and standard interferometric scalings, why only full AA4 reaches a statistical sample at 100 pc out to Virgo. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.03592 v1 pith:7U5QGQ7Q submitted 2026-07-03 astro-ph.GA

Erik Rosolowsky , Eric Koch , Sambit Roychowdhury , Luca Cortese , Filippo M. Maccagni , Barbara Catinella , Nushkia Chamba , Timothy A. Davis
show 4 more authors
Cosima Eibensteiner Eric Murphy Mamta Pandey-Pommier Amidou Sorgho
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords atomicgasstarformationinterstellarmediumSKAHI21-cmnearbygalaxiesmoleculartransitiongalaxyevolution
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

Molecular gas and star formation have been mapped at 100-pc resolution across large galaxy samples, but the cold atomic gas that dominates the interstellar mass budget and feeds those molecular clouds has been studied at that resolution only in the Milky Way and Magellanic Clouds. This chapter argues that the Square Kilometre Array is the sole instrument able to deliver wide-area, high-resolution 21-cm maps of a statistically useful sample of galaxies, including those in clusters, because only its final configuration supplies enough collecting area on the long baselines needed for 1-arcsecond resolution. Local Group pathfinder maps already show that atomic gas co-locates with molecular clouds, traces feedback shells, and obeys a steeper star-formation relation below the molecular saturation threshold; repeating those maps for hundreds of systems out to 20 Mpc would therefore reveal how galactic environment regulates the atomic-to-molecular transition. Without that capability the gas cycle remains incomplete outside the solar neighbourhood.

What carries the argument

Surface-brightness sensitivity scaling (observing time ∝ D^4) together with the AA4 collecting-area distribution on 20–70 km baselines; this combination is what makes 1-arcsecond, N_HI ≈ 10^20 cm^-2 maps feasible at 20 Mpc.

What would settle it

A completed SKA-Mid AA4 survey of Virgo or Fornax galaxies that fails to reach column-density sensitivity of order 10^20 cm^-2 at 1-arcsecond resolution in the planned integration times would falsify the central claim that such maps are uniquely feasible with the full array.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The SKA is the only facility that can make wide-area surveys of atomic gas across a statistical sample of galaxies at high (<100 pc) spatial resolution, thereby directly addressing the open questions of how cold atomic gas condenses into molecular gas and how that process depends on local environment and star-formation activity.

Load-bearing premise

That the final SKA-Mid array will actually deliver the needed long-baseline collecting area and that 100-hour integrations remain practical for the most distant cluster targets.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Atomic-to-molecular transition physics can be measured as a function of galactocentric radius, spiral arms, bars and cluster environment across a representative galaxy sample.
  • Feedback energy and momentum budgets can be read directly from expanding shells in the atomic gas and compared with the stellar populations that drive them.
  • Star-formation laws in atomic-dominated regimes (outer disks, dwarfs) can be placed on the same physical footing as molecular-gas laws.
  • Quenching mechanisms that act primarily on the atomic reservoir become observable inside clusters and groups.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the atomic phase truly sets the star-formation rate outside molecule-rich centres, then multi-wavelength surveys that omit high-resolution HI will systematically mis-estimate gas depletion times in the majority of the local galaxy population.
  • The same long-baseline sensitivity that enables 100-pc HI maps will also open absorption-line tomography of the cold neutral medium against background continuum sources, giving a direct thermal-phase census.
  • Once the atomic maps exist, existing ALMA, JWST and MUSE data sets on the same galaxies become complete baryon-cycle inventories rather than molecular-only snapshots.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

0 major / 6 minor

Summary. This SKA science-case chapter argues that, despite transformative multi-wavelength progress on molecular gas and star formation at ≲100 pc scales, the cold atomic ISM—the dominant mass reservoir—remains poorly constrained outside the Milky Way and Magellanic Clouds. The authors claim that only SKA-Mid in the full AA4 configuration can deliver wide-area HI surveys at <100 pc resolution and N_HI ~ 10^20 cm^-2 sensitivity out to ~20 Mpc (Virgo/Fornax), thereby enabling statistical studies of atomic-to-molecular conversion, warm/cold atomic balance, and environmental dependence. They support this with standard interferometric surface-brightness scaling (t ∝ D^4), AA4 vs AA* collecting-area curves, simulated 1-arcsec maps of Local Group data placed at 20 Mpc, and illustrative Local Group pathfinder results (co-location of HI/CO, feedback shells, atomic Kennicutt–Schmidt relations).

Significance. If the technical premise holds, the chapter correctly identifies a genuine observational gap: atomic gas is the missing phase for a complete, multi-phase view of the star-forming ISM across galaxy types and environments. The case for AA4 long-baseline collecting area is concrete and falsifiable via the published sensitivity curves and the NGC 6822-at-Virgo simulation. The Local Group illustrations (LGLBS, atomic KS relations) give a clear preview of the science return. As a community science case rather than a new empirical result, its value lies in setting survey priorities and motivating complementary multi-wavelength investments; that role is well served.

minor comments (6)
  1. Throughout the manuscript (including the abstract and §1), HI is written inconsistently as “H i”, “HI”, and “H i” with varying spacing. Standardize to a single form (e.g., H I or HI) for readability.
  2. Figure 3 caption and surrounding text state that AA* noise is 13× higher than AA4 for the same 100 h integration. A brief parenthetical note on the weighting scheme and the precise baseline range driving that factor would help readers reproduce the comparison.
  3. §4 sketches a tiered survey (core sample within 10 Mpc at ~6 h per target; deeper 100 h investments for selected Virgo/Fornax systems). A short table or paragraph estimating total on-source time for a realistic statistical sample (e.g., ~100 massive galaxies + selected dwarfs + a few cluster deep fields) would make the feasibility claim more transparent.
  4. Several key illustrative results (Eibensteiner et al. in prep.; Pingel et al. in prep.; Roychowdhury et al. in prep.) underpin Figures 5–6 and the atomic KS discussion. Where possible, cite the public LGLBS data release or note the expected publication timeline so readers can assess the maturity of the supporting evidence.
  5. The uniqueness claim (“only facility”) is framed relative to current arrays and AA*. A one-sentence acknowledgment of other planned long-baseline facilities (e.g., ngVLA) and why SKA-Mid AA4 remains uniquely suited for wide-area HI surveys would strengthen the comparative argument without diluting the SKA focus.
  6. Minor typographical/spacing artifacts appear in the extracted text (e.g., concatenated words in the abstract and section headers). A final copy-edit pass should catch any residual PDF-extraction or typesetting issues before publication.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: science-case chapter with technical scalings and illustrative precursor maps, not a closed derivation.

full rationale

This is an SKA science-case chapter, not a first-principles derivation or empirical fit paper. Its central claim (only SKA-Mid AA4 enables wide-area <100 pc, N_HI ~ 10^20 cm^-2 HI surveys out to Virgo/Fornax) rests on standard interferometric surface-brightness scaling (t ∝ D^4 from beam solid angle and thermal noise), the published AA4 vs AA* collecting-area curves (Fig. 2), and a straightforward noise simulation of existing LGLBS data placed at 20 Mpc (Fig. 3). These are external geometric/instrumental facts, not quantities fitted to the target result. Local Group maps (LGLBS, GASKAP, etc.) and resolved KS relations are presented as independent precursor illustrations of the science questions; self-citations to Koch et al. (2025), de Blok et al. (2024), Roychowdhury et al., and Maccagni & de Blok (2024) supply examples and survey context, not load-bearing uniqueness theorems or fitted parameters renamed as predictions. No equation reduces to its own input by construction, no ansatz is smuggled via self-citation, and no uniqueness claim is imported from the authors’ prior work. The tiered survey strategy in §4 is consistent with the same D^4 scaling. Score 0 is therefore the correct, proportionate finding.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

As a science-case paper the load-bearing content is almost entirely domain knowledge and facility parameters drawn from the literature or simple geometric arguments. No new free parameters are fitted to produce a scientific result; the numerical targets (resolution, column density, integration time) are design goals, not fitted constants. Invented entities are absent.

free parameters (2)
  • target N_HI sensitivity = 10^20 cm^-2
    Chosen design goal of 10^20 cm^-2 in a 10 km s^-1 channel; not fitted but sets the entire time-scaling argument.
  • extreme-case integration time = 100 h
    100 h on-source used to illustrate AA4 vs AA★ performance at 20 Mpc; a hand-chosen benchmark rather than a derived optimum.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Molecular gas forms from cold neutral atomic gas and is short-lived under stellar feedback
    Stated in Introduction and §3.1; taken from McKee & Ostriker, Schinnerer & Leroy and Local Group observations.
  • standard math Surface-brightness sensitivity for fixed physical resolution scales as observing time ∝ D^4
    Derived in §2 from the conversion σ_T ∝ σ_S / Ω and Ω ∝ D^-2; standard radio-astronomy result.
  • domain assumption 100-pc scales resolve the vertical scale height of galaxy disks and therefore volumetric quantities
    Central motivation in §2; standard in the PHANGS and related literature.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of From Atomic Gas to Star Formation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7U5QGQ7Q

@misc{pith2026260703592,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: From Atomic Gas to Star Formation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7U5QGQ7Q}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.03592}
}
read the original abstract

Since the 2015 SKA Chapters, the advent of panchromatic observations of nearby galaxies, capable of resolving the interstellar medium (ISM) into individual star-forming regions and molecular clouds, has revolutionized our understanding of the star formation cycle in galaxies. Despite these advances, our understanding of the gas cycle in galaxies remains limited because we know little about how the cold atomic phase of the ISM, which dominates its mass budget, participates in the cycle. Specifically, the processes regulating the condensation of atomic gas into molecular gas, the balance between warm and cold atomic gas, and their dependence on local environment and star formation activity have been explored only in the Milky Way and the Magellanic Clouds. The SKA presents a new opportunity to observe the atomic ISM within nearby galaxies at comparable resolution to other facilities and is the only facility that can make wide-area surveys of atomic gas across a statistical sample of galaxies at high (<100 pc) spatial resolution. Such observations will directly address the open questions about the evolution of the star-forming ISM. We present recent results from SKA-like observations of the Local Group made with SKA pathfinders and the Jansky VLA to illustrate the promise of replicating those observations for hundreds of nearby galaxies, reaching out to the Virgo cluster.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.03592 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Massive galaxies from the z0MGS sample (Leroy et al., 2019, complete to M★ > 108 M⊙ within 𝑑 = 50 Mpc) showing the available populations of galaxies where current radio interferometers can reach 100 pc resolution (𝐷 < 4 Mpc) and the vastly larger and representative 𝑧 = 0 population that 1 ′′ HI mapping with SKA-Mid AA4 can reach (𝐷 < 20 Mpc), including a representative dwarf galaxy populations (M★ < 108 M⊙). By reac… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Comparison of the collecting area by baseline length between AA★ and AA4 for SKA-Mid. The top shows the equivalent angular resolution at 1.42 GHz for the 21-cm HI line. Achieving 1 ′′ HI mapping, equivalent to 100 pc in the Virgo Cluster (20 Mpc), is uniquely suited to reaching the full AA4 configuration for SKA-MID. especially from the cold phases of the ISM so tightly linked to star formation. Ambitiously, we prop… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Simulated 1 ′′ SKA-MID 21-cm HI observations of NGC 6822 placed at the distance to Virgo (20 Mpc) using high-resolution VLA mapping from LGLBS (Koch et al., 2025, Pingel et al. in preparation). Both simulations use noise levels derived from a channel width of 10 km/s and 100 hr on source with AA★ (left) and AA4 (right) configurations with varying weighting schemes to reach the target 1 ′′ beam size. The AA4 simulate… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The Local Group galaxy M33 shows the integrate intensity for H i 21-cm emission from the LGLBS (yellow; Koch et al., 2025), far ultraviolet emission from GALEX (cyan; Gil de Paz et al., 2007) and CO(2-1) emission (magenta and contours; Gratier et al., 2010). The atomic…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Resolved star formation law on 120 pc in scales in Local Group Galaxies (Eibensteiner et al., in preparation). This figure shows the star formation rate as a function of the atomic phase surface density (including helium). Star formation rates are derived from far ultr…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The resolved atomic gas Kennicutt-Schmidt (K–S) relations as measured using the mean SFR surface densities in H i column density bins, for H i-domiated ISMs of dwarf galaxies and outer disks of massive spirals colour coded by median distance to the samples, contrasted …
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: HI column density sensitivity of current surveys compared to SKA-Mid predictions for a galaxy at 20 Mpc in the Virgo cluster (adapted from Maccagni and de Blok, 2024; Koch et al., 2025) The predicted SKA-Mid values use show AA4 and AA★ with integration times of 10 and …

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

75 extracted references · 7 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    C.Bacchini,F.Fraternali,G.Pezzulli,andA.Marasco.A&A,644:A125,Dec.2020

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab518. C.Bacchini,F.Fraternali,G.Pezzulli,andA.Marasco.A&A,644:A125,Dec.2020. doi: 10.1051/ 0004-6361/202038962. I. Bagetakos et al.AJ, 141(1):23, Jan

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stab518 2020

  2. [2]

    doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/141/1/23. A. Begum et al.MNRAS, 386(3):1667–1682, May

    doi:10.1088/0004-6256/141/1/23

  3. [3]

    doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13150.x. F. Bigiel et al.AJ, 136(6):2846–2871, Dec

    doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13150.x 2008

  4. [4]

    doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/136/6/2846. F. Bigiel et al.AJ, 140(5):1194–1213, Nov

    doi:10.1088/0004-6256/136/6/2846

  5. [5]

    doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/140/5/1194. L. Blitz and E. Rosolowsky.ApJL, 612(1):L29–L32, Sept

    doi:10.1088/0004-6256/140/5/1194

  6. [6]

    doi: 10.1086/424661. A. D. Bolatto, M. Wolfire, and A. K. Leroy.ARA&A, 51(1):207–268, Aug

    doi:10.1086/424661

  7. [7]

    doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201423518. A. Boselli et al.A&A, 676:A92, Aug

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201423518

  8. [8]

    T.Bourkeetal

    doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346812. T.Bourkeetal. InAdvancingAstrophysicswiththeSquareKilometreArray(AASKA14),page174, Apr

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346812

Show all 75 references
  1. [9]

    doi: 10.22323/1.215.0174. R. Braun, D. A. Thilker, R. A. M. Walterbos, and E. Corbelli.ApJ, 695(2):937–953, Apr

    doi

  2. [10]

    doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/695/2/937. T. Brown et al.MNRAS, 466(2):1275–1289, Apr

    doi

  3. [11]

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2991. B. Burkhart.ApJ, 863(2):118, Aug

    doi

  4. [12]

    doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aad002. H. Chen et al.AJ, 169(5):284, May

    doi

  5. [13]

    doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/adc67c. A. Chung et al.AJ, 138(6):1741–1816, Dec

    doi

  6. [14]

    doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/138/6/1741. L. Cortese, B. Catinella, and R. Smith.PASA, 38:e035, Aug

    doi

  7. [15]

    doi: 10.1017/pasa.2021.18. R. L. da Silva, M. Fumagalli, and M. Krumholz.ApJ, 745(2):145, Feb

    2021 doi

  8. [16]

    doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348297. F. de Gasperin et al.A&A, 693:A189, Jan

    doi

  9. [17]

    17 H iand Star Formation Rosolowsky et al

    doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452060. 17 H iand Star Formation Rosolowsky et al. M.A.C.delosReyesandR.C.Kennicutt,Jr.ApJ,872(1):16,Feb.2019. doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ aafa82. J. Dempsey et al.PASA, 39:e034, Aug

    2019 doi

  10. [18]

    doi: 10.1017/pasa.2022.18. J. M. Dickey and E. Brinks.ApJ, 405:153, Mar

    2022 doi

  11. [19]

    J.M.Dickey,U.Mebold,S.Stanimirovic,andL.Staveley-Smith.ApJ,536(2):756–772,June2000

    doi: 10.1086/172348. J.M.Dickey,U.Mebold,S.Stanimirovic,andL.Staveley-Smith.ApJ,536(2):756–772,June2000. doi: 10.1086/308953. B. T. Draine.Physics of the Interstellar and Intergalactic Medium

    doi

  12. [20]

    C.Eibensteineretal

    doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202449944. C.Eibensteineretal. Lglbs: Starformationscalingrelationsinlocalgroupgalaxies,inpreparation. C. Federrath and R. S. Klessen.ApJ, 761(2):156, Dec

    doi

  13. [21]

    G.B.Field,D.W.Goldsmith,andH.J.Habing.ApJL,155:L149,Mar.1969

    doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/761/2/156. G.B.Field,D.W.Goldsmith,andH.J.Habing.ApJL,155:L149,Mar.1969. doi: 10.1086/180324. M. Fumagalli et al.ApJ, 697(2):1811–1821, June

    1969 doi

  14. [22]

    doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/697/2/1811. G. Gavazzi.ApJ, 346:59, Nov

    doi

  15. [23]

    doi: 10.1086/167985. A. Gil de Paz et al.ApJSS, 173(2):185–255, Dec

    doi

  16. [24]

    doi: 10.1086/516636. P. Gratier et al.A&A, 522:A3, Nov

    doi

  17. [25]

    doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201014441. M. Y. Grudić and P. F. Hopkins.MNRAS, 488(2):2970–2975, Sept

    doi

  18. [26]

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/ stz1820. N. Gupta et al.A&A, 698:A120, June

    doi

  19. [27]

    doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452407. G. Heald et al.A&A, 526:A118, Feb

    doi

  20. [28]

    doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201015938. C. Heiles and T. H. Troland.ApJ, 586(2):1067–1093, Apr

    doi

  21. [29]

    doi: 10.1086/367828. D. A. Hunter et al.AJ, 144(5):134, Nov

    doi

  22. [30]

    doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/144/5/134. D. A. Hunter, B. G. Elmegreen, and S. C. Madden.ARA&A, 62(1):113–155, Sept

    doi

  23. [31]

    N.Kanekar, R.Braun, andN.Roy.ApJL,737(2):L33, Aug.2011

    doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-052722-104109. N.Kanekar, R.Braun, andN.Roy.ApJL,737(2):L33, Aug.2011. doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/737/2/ L33. J. D. P. Kenney, J. H. van Gorkom, and B. Vollmer.AJ, 127(6):3361–3374, June

    2011 doi

  24. [32]

    doi: 10.1086/420805. R. C. Kennicutt and N. J. Evans.ARA&A, 50:531–608, Sept

    doi

  25. [33]

    18 H iand Star Formation Rosolowsky et al

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1674. 18 H iand Star Formation Rosolowsky et al. E. W. Koch et al.ApJSS, 279(2):35, Aug

    doi

  26. [34]

    doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ade0ad. B. S. Koribalski et al.MNRAS, 478(2):1611–1648, Aug

    doi

  27. [35]

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty479. J. M. D. Kruijssen and S. N. Longmore.MNRAS, 439(4):3239–3252, Apr

    doi

  28. [36]

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt1780. M. R. Krumholz and C. F. McKee.ApJ, 630(1):250–268, Sept

    doi

  29. [37]

    doi: 10.1086/431734. M. R. Krumholz, C. F. McKee, and J. Tumlinson.ApJ, 693(1):216–235, Mar

    doi

  30. [38]

    doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450265. A. K. Leroy et al.AJ, 146(2):19, Aug

    doi

  31. [39]

    doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/146/2/19. A. K. Leroy et al.ApJSS, 244(2):24, Oct

    doi

  32. [40]

    doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab3925. A. K. Leroy et al.ApJSS, 257(2):43, Dec

    doi

  33. [41]

    doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac17f3. A. K. Leroy et al.ApJ, 985(1):14, May

    doi

  34. [42]

    doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adbcab. F. M. Maccagni and W. J. G. de Blok.arXiv e-prints, art. arXiv:2407.03166, July

    doi arXiv

  35. [43]

    doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2407.03166. N. Maddox et al.A&A, 646:A35, Feb

    doi arXiv

  36. [44]

    doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039655. C. F. McKee and E. C. Ostriker.ARA&A, 45(1):565–687, Sept

    doi

  37. [45]

    45.051806.110602

    doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro. 45.051806.110602. C. F. McKee and J. P. Ostriker.ApJ, 218:148–169, Nov

    doi arXiv

  38. [46]

    doi: 10.1086/155667. M. Mingozzi et al.A&A, 622:A146, Feb

    doi

  39. [47]

    doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201834372. D. C. Molnár et al.A&A, 659:A94, Mar

    doi

  40. [48]

    doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142614. C. E. Murray et al.ApJSS, 238(2):14, Oct

    doi

  41. [49]

    doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aad81a. P. M. Ogle et al.Astrophysical Journal, 724(2):1193–1209, Nov

    doi

  42. [50]

    doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/ 724/2/1193. S. Onodera et al.ApJL, 722(2):L127–L131, Oct

    doi

  43. [51]

    doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/722/2/L127. J. Ott et al.AJ, 144:123, Oct

    doi

  44. [52]

    P.Padoan,T.Haugbølle,andÅ.Nordlund.ApJL,759(2):L27,Nov.2012

    doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/144/4/123. P.Padoan,T.Haugbølle,andÅ.Nordlund.ApJL,759(2):L27,Nov.2012. doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/ 759/2/L27. I. Pessa et al.A&A, 650:A134, June

    2012 doi

  45. [53]

    doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202140733. J. Pety et al.ApJ, 779(1):43, Dec

    doi

  46. [54]

    doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/779/1/43. N. M. Pingel et al.PASA, 39:e005,

    doi

  47. [55]

    19 H iand Star Formation Rosolowsky et al

    doi: 10.1017/pasa.2021.59. 19 H iand Star Formation Rosolowsky et al. B. M. Poggianti et al.MNRAS, 482(4):4466–4502, Feb

    2021 doi

  48. [56]

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2999. N. Roy, N. Kanekar, and J. N. Chengalur.MNRAS, 436(3):2366–2385, Dec

    doi

  49. [57]

    doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14931.x. S. Roychowdhury et al.MNRAS, 414(1):L55–L59, June

    2009 doi

  50. [58]

    doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2011. 01055.x. S. Roychowdhury, J. N. Chengalur, S. S. Kaisin, and I. D. Karachentsev.MNRAS, 445(2):1392– 1402, Dec

    2011 doi

  51. [59]

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu1814. S. Roychowdhury et al.MNRAS, 449(4):3700–3709, Jun

    doi

  52. [60]

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv515. A. Saintonge and B. Catinella.ARA&A, 60:319–361, Aug

    doi

  53. [61]

    doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw1715. E. Schinnerer and A. K. Leroy.ARA&A, 62(1):369–436, Sept

    doi

  54. [62]

    doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/722/2/1699. A. Schruba et al.AJ, 142(2):37, Aug

    doi

  55. [63]

    doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/142/2/37. P. Serra et al.MNRAS, 422(3):1835–1862, May

    doi

  56. [64]

    doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20219.x. P. Serra et al.A&A, 673:A146, May

    2012 doi

  57. [65]

    doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346071. P. Serra et al.A&A, 690:A4, Oct

    doi

  58. [66]

    doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450114. S. Stanimirović and E. G. Zweibel.ARA&A, 56:489–540, Sept

    doi

  59. [67]

    doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/773/2/88. J. Sun et al.ApJ, 892(2):148, Apr

    doi

  60. [68]

    doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab781c. J. Sun et al.ApJL, 945(2):L19, Mar

    doi

  61. [69]

    doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acbd9c. R. A. Swaters, T. S. van Albada, J. M. van der Hulst, and R. Sancisi.A&A, 390:829–861, Aug

    doi

  62. [70]

    doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20011755. L. J. Tacconi, R. Genzel, and A. Sternberg.ARA&A, 58:157–203, Aug

    doi

  63. [71]

    doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1edf. F. Walter et al.AJ, 136(6):2563–2647, Dec

    doi

  64. [72]

    doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/136/6/2563. A. B. Watts et al.PASA, 40:e017, Apr

    doi

  65. [73]

    doi: 10.1017/pasa.2023.14. E. M. Wilcots and B. W. Miller.AJ, 116(5):2363–2394, Nov

    2023 doi

  66. [74]

    doi: 10.1086/300595. T. Wong and L. Blitz.ApJ, 569(1):157–183, Apr

    doi

  67. [75]

    doi: 10.1086/339287. 21

    doi

Pith tools

Reviewed July 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.