pith. sign in

arxiv: 2511.00158 · v2 · pith:C6YQTKBInew · submitted 2025-10-31 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

FOGGIE: Figuring Out Gas & Galaxies In Enzo XII. The Formation and Evolution of Extended HI Galactic Disks and Warps with a Dynamic Circumgalactic medium

Cameron W. Trapp , Molly S. Peeples , Jason Tumlinson , Brian W. O'Shea , Cassandra Lochhaas , Anna C. Wright , Britton D. Smith , Vida Saeedzadeh
show 3 more authors
Ayan Acharyya Ramona Augustin Raymond C. Simons
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-22 11:47 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA
keywords extended HI diskscircumgalactic mediumgalactic warpsdisk morphologycosmological simulationsMilky Way-mass galaxiesgas evolutionenvironmental factors
0
0 comments X

The pith

Extended HI galactic disks form thin coherent structures when their circumgalactic medium has less neutral hydrogen.

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

The paper examines six cosmological zoom-in simulations of Milky Way-mass galaxies to track the formation and evolution of their extended atomic hydrogen disks. It shows that disk morphologies vary systematically with the relative amount of HI present in the surrounding circumgalactic medium, sorting the systems along a continuum. Galaxies with less populated CGMs develop thin, extended, coherently rotating disks, while those with more HI in the CGM exhibit more irregular or disturbed structures. This pattern holds independent of disk or halo mass and instead points to local environmental conditions. All six systems develop warps or polar rings at some stage yet reach similar kinematic settling by the present day.

Core claim

The morphologies of the FOGGIE disks are correlated with properties of their Circumgalactic Medium (CGM). We place these systems along a continuum based on how populated their CGMs are with HI relative to their central disk. The less populated systems tend to form coherently rotating, thin, extended disks while the more populated systems do not. Location on this continuum is independent of disk and halo mass. All systems have significant misaligned features (warps or polar rings) at some point in their evolution; however, their frequencies, lifetimes, and origins vary significantly. All systems kinematically settle similarly by z=0.

What carries the argument

A continuum of CGM HI population relative to the central disk that sorts galaxies by whether they form thin coherent extended disks or disturbed morphologies.

If this is right

  • Disk morphology can be predicted from local CGM HI content rather than from galaxy mass.
  • Warps and misaligned gas features arise commonly but with lifetimes and origins that depend on CGM population level.
  • Kinematic settling of the HI disk occurs by z=0 in all cases regardless of CGM density.
  • Local environmental factors control extended disk structure more strongly than global mass does.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Measuring CGM HI content around observed galaxies could help interpret the coherence of their outer disks.
  • The continuum may reflect differences in accretion or feedback history that could be tested with varied initial conditions.
  • This sorting suggests environmental density influences gas disk stability in ways worth checking against larger observed samples.

Load-bearing premise

The six zoom-in simulations accurately capture real CGM-disk interactions and gas dynamics at the relevant scales without dominant numerical artifacts.

What would settle it

Observing no correlation between CGM HI column density population and disk coherence in a larger sample of real galaxies or in higher-resolution runs with altered subgrid physics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.00158 by Anna C. Wright, Ayan Acharyya, Brian W. O'Shea, Britton D. Smith, Cameron W. Trapp, Cassandra Lochhaas, Jason Tumlinson, Molly S. Peeples, Ramona Augustin, Raymond C. Simons, Vida Saeedzadeh.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Satellite mass within 2Rvir relative to the main halo virial mass, versus the H I mass in the CGM relative to the H I mass of the disk over the last ∼200 Myr. There is a clear correlation between the relative amount of H I in the CGM with the nearby satellite mass at that time (red-dashed line, slope = 5.3, intercept = 0.06). Systems on the bottom left of this plot are in Less Populated local environments,… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Face- and edge-on H I column densities within Rvir for the six halos considered in this study at redshift z = 0. We subdivide our halos into two distinct categories (Less Populated and More Populated) based on the amount of H I in the CGM. The top row of each category shows the H I column densities for all gas, while the bottom row shows the projections only including gas in our disk definition (see Sec. 3… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Radial profiles for face-on H I column density maps at redshift z = 0 (see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Evolution of the maximum radial extent of each disk, based on our disk definition. All systems grow simi￾larly over cosmological time, despite classification (denoted by line type). Tempest and Maelstrom grow more or less monotonically, while the other systems go through periods of rapid growth and contractions. There is no obvious sig￾nal in disk growth that could be associated with the Less Populated or … view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Evolution of the gas mass of each disk, based on our disk definition. Although overall baryon content in￾creases more or less monotonically in all cases, some systems lose large amounts of gas, particularly at higher redshift. Overall trends seem uncorrelated with classification (denoted by line type). Curves were smoothed using a moving average filter (270 Myr) to improve readability. the other halos. Her… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Disk aspect ratio (thickness divided by disk radius) as a function of galactocentric radius. The three Less Populated systems (top) form thin central disks at z = 0, while the More Populated systems (bottom) do not. Disk radius was defined by the cell at the maximum radius of our disk definition. Disk thickness was defined as the difference between the extrema of the height above the disk plane at a given … view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Mass-weighted mean temperature of the CGM normalized to the halo virial temperature Tvir as a function of galactocentric radius, normalized by the disk radius (Rdisk corresponds to ∼0.1–0.15 R200, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Several key properties of Tempest as a function of time, highlighting the precession of the polar ring formed at t ∼ 6 Gyr to a warped outer disk. The first two panels show ring-averaged values for key properties of the disk as identified by our disk selection criteria. Inclination (left) shows the average tilt of the gas with respect to the disk plane. Nonzero values correspond to some degree of misalignm… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The precession of the polar ring in Tempest into a warp. The black-solid and red-dashed lines shows the mean inclination and position angle of the polar ring, respec￾tively. Letters (A-D) correspond to events shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Evolution of Tempest’s misaligned outer disk. The blue and red arrows show the angular momentum of the aligned and misaligned components, respectively. The left column shows the misaligned component edge-on, while the right column shows it face-on. At t = 7, the outer disk is a distinct polar ring. At t = 10 Gyr, it begins to transition to a warp. At t = 13 Gyr, it is a fully contiguous warp. where L is t… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Orientation evolution of the angular momen￾tum vector of the aligned (inner, blue) and misaligned (outer, red) disks in Tempest between t = 6 − 13.7 Gyr. Text val￾ues show the times in Gyr and corresponding events (A-D) shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_16.png] view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: The H I covering fraction for Tempest as a function of impact parameter in face-on projections. The solid lines show the covering fractions at various column den￾sity cutoffs for the fiducial runs. The dashed lines show the same covering fraction profiles for the same runs without cooling or forced refinement. In the fiducial runs, the disks are larger by about 10 kpc, show a more gradual drop off as a fu… view at source ↗
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_20.png] view at source ↗
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: Face on projections for gas in the refinement box of Tempest at z = 0, color-coded by the refinement cri￾teria introduced in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_19.png] view at source ↗
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: Average cell masses within our disk definition (black) and the CGM (green) for Tempest. The solid lines show median values and the dashed lines show mean values. Cell masses within the disk are large, but the median values in the extended disk are approaching 104 M⊙(red, dash-dot￾ted line), a value typical of other cosmological hydrodynam￾ical galaxy simulations that are not focused on resolving the CGM. … view at source ↗
Figure 22
Figure 22. Figure 22: Median cell masses within 0.274 kpc (1 cell) thick shells around the disk definition. Shells were identified by a binary dilation from the disk surface. Each shell only includes cells outside the definition of the previous shell (and disk). Median cell mass drops below 100 M⊙ within a few shells. hydrodynamical simulations that are not focused on re￾solving the CGM (e.g., P. F. Hopkins et al. 2018; A. Pil… view at source ↗
Figure 23
Figure 23. Figure 23: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_23.png] view at source ↗
Figure 24
Figure 24. Figure 24: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_24.png] view at source ↗
Figure 25
Figure 25. Figure 25: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_25.png] view at source ↗
Figure 26
Figure 26. Figure 26: H I column density projections for the disk def￾inition of Tempest at z = 0 before (left) and after (right) the hole filling steps described in Sec. 3. In brief, this pro￾cess fills any true topological holes (fully enclosed) through a binary fill operation, and any “donut” holes that pierce the disk through a binary closing operation. lation/erosion operations are, and thus, the size of the holes that ar… view at source ↗
Figure 28
Figure 28. Figure 28: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_28.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Atomic hydrogen (HI) is an important component of gas in and around galaxies and forms extended disk-like structures well beyond the extent of starlight. Here we investigate the properties and evolution of extended HI disks that emerge in six Milky Way-mass galaxies using cosmological zoom-in simulations from the Figuring Out Gas & Galaxies in Enzo (FOGGIE) suite. We focus on the formation, evolution, and morphology of extended gaseous disks that emerge in all six systems. We find that median HI column densities drop sharply at the disk edge, with mean column densities outside the disk dominated by dense (N_HI~10^{19} cm^{-2}), clumpy structures. All systems have significant misaligned features (warps or polar rings) at some point in their evolution; however, their frequencies, lifetimes, and origins vary significantly. We find that the morphologies of the FOGGIE disks are correlated with properties of their Circumgalactic Medium (CGM). We place these systems along a continuum based on how populated their CGMs are with HI relative to their central disk. All systems kinematically settle similarly by z=0. The less populated systems tend to form coherently rotating, thin, extended disks while the more populated systems do not. Location on this continuum is independent of disk and halo mass, implying a relation to local environmental factors.

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

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript analyzes extended HI disks and warps in six Milky Way-mass galaxies from the FOGGIE cosmological zoom-in simulations run with Enzo. It reports that median HI column densities drop sharply at the disk edge with clumpy structures (N_HI ~10^19 cm^{-2}) dominating outside the disk, that all systems develop misaligned features (warps or polar rings) at some point, and that disk morphologies correlate with CGM HI population along a continuum: less-populated CGMs produce thin, coherently rotating extended disks while more-populated ones do not. The location on this continuum is stated to be independent of disk and halo mass, with all systems kinematically settling similarly by z=0.

Significance. If the reported correlation holds after robustness checks, the work would demonstrate that local CGM HI content can shape galactic disk morphology independently of mass, offering a useful framework for interpreting environmental influences on disk structure in galaxy formation simulations. The multi-simulation approach allows direct comparison of trends across systems and highlights the ubiquity of warps.

major comments (2)
  1. [Simulation methods and results sections] The central claim that CGM HI population controls disk morphology along a mass-independent continuum rests on the measured HI column densities and kinematic properties in the simulations. However, no CGM-specific refinement levels, resolution convergence tests, or checks against variations in subgrid physics are reported, leaving open the possibility that numerical diffusion or mixing in the Enzo AMR runs artificially affects the clumpy HI structures at N_HI ~10^19 cm^{-2} and thereby the reported trend.
  2. [Results on continuum and mass independence] The assertion that continuum location is independent of disk and halo mass is load-bearing for the environmental interpretation. With only six systems, this independence requires quantitative support (e.g., explicit correlation coefficients between morphology metrics and mass or a figure showing morphology vs. mass with no trend); the current presentation leaves the statistical basis for the claim unclear.
minor comments (2)
  1. Clarify the exact metric used to quantify 'how populated' the CGM is with HI relative to the central disk, including any thresholds or normalizations applied when placing systems on the continuum.
  2. The statement that 'all systems kinematically settle similarly by z=0' would benefit from a specific quantitative measure (e.g., rotational support parameter or velocity dispersion) and reference to the relevant figure or table.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their detailed and constructive report on our manuscript. Their comments have prompted us to clarify several aspects of our analysis and strengthen the presentation of our results. Below we address each major comment in turn.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Simulation methods and results sections] The central claim that CGM HI population controls disk morphology along a mass-independent continuum rests on the measured HI column densities and kinematic properties in the simulations. However, no CGM-specific refinement levels, resolution convergence tests, or checks against variations in subgrid physics are reported, leaving open the possibility that numerical diffusion or mixing in the Enzo AMR runs artificially affects the clumpy HI structures at N_HI ~10^19 cm^{-2} and thereby the reported trend.

    Authors: We agree that the manuscript would benefit from additional discussion of the numerical setup. The FOGGIE simulations use a uniform refinement strategy and subgrid physics package that have been documented and tested for convergence in earlier papers from the suite. The clumpy HI features at these column densities appear consistently across all six independent zoom-in runs despite their differing merger histories, which argues against a purely numerical origin tied to a single simulation. In the revised manuscript we will expand the methods section to specify the CGM refinement levels employed and add explicit references to prior resolution and subgrid-physics convergence studies performed with the same Enzo configuration. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Results on continuum and mass independence] The assertion that continuum location is independent of disk and halo mass is load-bearing for the environmental interpretation. With only six systems, this independence requires quantitative support (e.g., explicit correlation coefficients between morphology metrics and mass or a figure showing morphology vs. mass with no trend); the current presentation leaves the statistical basis for the claim unclear.

    Authors: We accept that the current text does not present the mass-independence claim with sufficient quantitative rigor. Although the sample comprises only six systems, visual inspection of the data shows no systematic trend with either halo or disk mass. To address the referee’s request directly, the revised manuscript will include a new figure plotting the key morphology and CGM-population metrics against both halo mass and disk mass, together with the corresponding Spearman rank correlation coefficients. These additions will make the statistical basis for mass independence explicit and thereby strengthen the environmental interpretation. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in simulation-derived HI disk-CGM correlations

full rationale

The paper's central claims emerge directly from post-processing of six Enzo AMR zoom-in simulation snapshots: HI column density profiles, kinematic settling, warp frequencies, and morphological classifications are measured quantities, not parameters fitted to enforce a continuum or mass-independence result. The placement of systems along a CGM-HI-population continuum is an observational grouping of those measured outputs, and the reported trend (thin extended disks in less-populated CGMs) is a correlation found in the data rather than a definitional or self-referential loop. No equations or sections reduce a prediction to a fitted input by construction, and no load-bearing uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported via self-citation. The analysis remains self-contained against the simulation data and external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Central claims depend on the validity of Enzo hydrodynamics, subgrid star formation and feedback prescriptions, and Lambda-CDM initial conditions used in the FOGGIE zoom-ins; no new free parameters are introduced in the reported analysis.

axioms (1)
  • standard math Standard Lambda-CDM cosmology and Enzo simulation physics govern the gas dynamics and galaxy formation in the zoom-in runs.
    Invoked throughout the simulation setup and analysis of disk and CGM properties.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5844 in / 1304 out tokens · 58969 ms · 2026-05-22T11:47:34.098339+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

78 extracted references · 78 canonical work pages · 5 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    S., Tumlinson, J., et al

    Acharyya, A., Peeples, M. S., Tumlinson, J., et al. 2025, ApJ, 979, 129, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad9dd8

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad9dd8 2025

  2. [2]

    M., Christensen, C

    Applebaum, E., Brooks, A. M., Christensen, C. R., et al. 2021, ApJ, 906, 96, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abcafa Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ ocz, B. M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f Astropy Coll...

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abcafa 2021

  3. [3]

    S., et al

    Augustin, R., Tumlinson, J., Peeples, M. S., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.06551, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2501.06551

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2501.06551 2025

  4. [4]

    The Rockstar Phase-Space Temporal Halo Finder and the Velocity Offsets of Cluster Cores

    Behroozi, P. S., Wechsler, R. H., & Wu, H.-Y. 2013, 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 2013

  5. [5]

    S., Wechsler, R

    Behroozi, P. S., Wechsler, R. H., Wu, H.-Y., et al. 2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 763, 18, doi: 10.1088/0004-637x/763/1/18

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/763/1/18 2012

  6. [6]

    1997, ApJL, 490, L37, doi: 10.1086/311008 Blue Bird, J., Davis, J., Luber, N., et al

    Bekki, K. 1997, ApJL, 490, L37, doi: 10.1086/311008 Blue Bird, J., Davis, J., Luber, N., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 492, 153, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz3357

    work page doi:10.1086/311008 1997

  7. [7]

    2003, A&A, 401, 817, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20030150

    Bournaud, F., & Combes, F. 2003, A&A, 401, 817, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20030150

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20030150 2003

  8. [8]

    2019, The Journal of Open Source Software, 4, 1636, doi: 10.21105/joss.01636

    Brummel-Smith, C., Bryan, G., Butsky, I., et al. 2019, The Journal of Open Source Software, 4, 1636, doi: 10.21105/joss.01636

    work page doi:10.21105/joss.01636 2019

  9. [9]

    Statistical Properties of X-ray Clusters: Analytic and Numerical Comparisons

    Bryan, G. L., & Norman, M. L. 1998, ApJ, 495, 80, doi: 10.1086/305262

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1086/305262 1998

  10. [10]

    L., Norman, M

    Bryan, G. L., Norman, M. L., O’Shea, B. W., et al. 2014, ApJS, 211, 19, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/211/2/19

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/211/2/19 2014

  11. [11]

    Burke, B. F. 1957, AJ, 62, 90, doi: 10.1086/107463

    work page doi:10.1086/107463 1957

  12. [12]

    K., Kereˇ s, D., Gurvich, A

    Chan, T. K., Kereˇ s, D., Gurvich, A. B., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 517, 597, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2236

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac2236 2022

  13. [13]

    S., Tumlinson, J., et al

    Corlies, L., Peeples, M. S., Tumlinson, J., et al. 2020, ApJ, 896, 125, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab9310 de Blok, W. J. G., Healy, J., Maccagni, F. M., et al. 2024, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 688, A109, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348297

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab9310 2020

  14. [14]

    2023, MNRAS, 525, 4663, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad2312

    Deg, N., Palleske, R., Spekkens, K., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 525, 4663, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad2312

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad2312 2023

  15. [15]

    Diemer, B., Stevens, A. R. H., Lagos, C. d. P., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 487, 1529, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1323

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz1323 2019

  16. [16]

    1995, ApJ, 442, 492, doi: 10.1086/175456

    Dubinski, J., & Kuijken, K. 1995, ApJ, 442, 492, doi: 10.1086/175456

    work page doi:10.1086/175456 1995

  17. [17]

    Fielding, D., Quataert, E., McCourt, M., & Thompson, T. A. 2017, MNRAS, 466, 3810, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw3326

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw3326 2017

  18. [18]

    B., Ostriker, E

    Fielding, D. B., Ostriker, E. C., Bryan, G. L., & Jermyn, A. S. 2020, ApJL, 894, L24, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab8d2c

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab8d2c 2020

  19. [19]

    T., Chitre, S

    Finkelman, I., Funes, J. G., & Brosch, N. 2012, MNRAS, 422, 2386, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20790.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20790.x 2012

  20. [20]

    R., Mirocha J., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac310 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.511.3895F 511, 3895

    Furlanetto, S. R., & Mirocha, J. 2022, MNRAS, 511, 3895, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac310 G´ omez, F. A., White, S. D. M., Grand, R. J. J., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 465, 3446, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2957

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac310 2022

  21. [21]

    B., Stern, J., Faucher-Gigure, C.-A., et al

    Gurvich, A. B., Stern, J., Faucher-Gigure, C.-A., et al. 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 519, 25982614, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3712

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3712 2022

  22. [22]

    2022, MNRAS, 514, 5056, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1603

    Hafen, Z., Stern, J., Bullock, J., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 514, 5056, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1603

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1603 2022

  23. [23]

    2018, MNRAS, 475, 1160, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx3252

    Vogelsberger, M. 2018, MNRAS, 475, 1160, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx3252

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx3252 2018

  24. [24]

    Harrison, C. M. 2017, Nature Astronomy, 1, 0165, doi: 10.1038/s41550-017-0165

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-017-0165 2017

  25. [25]

    Healy, J., de Blok, W. J. G., Maccagni, F. M., et al. 2024, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 687, A254, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347475

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347475 2024

  26. [26]

    F., Chan, T

    Hopkins, P. F., Chan, T. K., Ji, S., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 501, 3640, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3690

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3690 2021

  27. [27]

    F., Wetzel, A., Kereˇ s, D., et al

    Hopkins, P. F., Wetzel, A., Kereˇ s, D., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 480, 800, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1690

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

  28. [28]

    F., Gurvich, A

    Hopkins, P. F., Gurvich, A. B., Shen, X., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 525, 2241, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1902

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad1902 2023

  29. [29]

    B., Smith, B

    Hummels, C. B., Smith, B. D., Hopkins, P. F., et al. 2019, ApJ, 882, 156, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab378f

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab378f 2019

  30. [30]

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

    work page doi:10.1109/mcse.2007.55 2007

  31. [31]

    P., & Masterson, P

    Ji, S., Oh, S. P., & Masterson, P. 2019, MNRAS, 487, 737, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1248

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz1248 2019

  32. [32]

    P., & McCourt, M

    Ji, S., Oh, S. P., & McCourt, M. 2018, MNRAS, 476, 852, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty293 Kereˇ s, D., Katz, N., Weinberg, D. H., & Dav´ e, R. 2005, MNRAS, 363, 2, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09451.x

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty293 2018

  33. [33]

    H., Peirani, S., Kim, S., et al

    Kim, J. H., Peirani, S., Kim, S., et al. 2014, ApJ, 789, 90, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/789/1/90

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/789/1/90 2014

  34. [34]

    2025, ApJ, 982, 151, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adb718

    Lin, X., Wang, J., Staveley-Smith, L., et al. 2025, ApJ, 982, 151, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adb718

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adb718 2025

  35. [35]

    W., et al

    Lochhaas, C., Tumlinson, J., O’Shea, B. W., et al. 2021, ApJ, 922, 121, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac2496

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac2496 2021

  36. [36]

    S., et al

    Lochhaas, C., Tumlinson, J., Peeples, M. S., et al. 2023, ApJ, 948, 43, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acbb06

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acbb06 2023

  37. [37]

    S., O’Shea, B

    Lochhaas, C., Peeples, M. S., O’Shea, B. W., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.25844. https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.25844 Evolution of HI Disks in FOGGIE29

    work page arXiv 2025

  38. [38]

    1987, Optical Engineering, 26, 267623, doi: 10.1117/12.7974127

    Maragos, P. 1987, Optical Engineering, 26, 267623, doi: 10.1117/12.7974127

    work page doi:10.1117/12.7974127 1987

  39. [39]

    W., et al

    Mina, M., Shen, S., Keller, B. W., et al. 2021, A&A, 655, A22, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039420

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039420 2021

  40. [40]

    L., Kereˇ s, D., Faucher-Gigu` ere, C.-A., et al

    Muratov, A. L., Kereˇ s, D., Faucher-Gigu` ere, C.-A., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 454, 2691, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv2126

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2126 2015

  41. [41]

    2016, MNRAS, 460, 2881, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw1191

    Nelson, D., Genel, S., Pillepich, A., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 460, 2881, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw1191

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw1191 2016

  42. [42]

    S., Corlies, L., Tumlinson, J., et al

    Peeples, M. S., Corlies, L., Tumlinson, J., et al. 2019, ApJ, 873, 129, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab0654

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab0654 2019

  43. [43]

    R., Brooks, A

    Piacitelli, D. R., Brooks, A. M., Christensen, C., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2505.08861, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2505.08861

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2505.08861 2025

  44. [44]

    2019, MNRAS, 490, 3196, 10.1093/mnras/stz2338

    Pillepich, A., Nelson, D., Springel, V., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 490, 3196, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2338

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2338 2019

  45. [45]

    2018, ApJS, 237, 23, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aac832

    Pontzen, A., & Tremmel, M. 2018, ApJS, 237, 23, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aac832

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/aac832 2018

  46. [47]

    2023b, MNRAS, 518, 5754, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3524

    Ramesh, R., Nelson, D., & Pillepich, A. 2023b, MNRAS, 518, 5754, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3524

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3524

  47. [48]

    Statistics of optical warps in spiral disks

    Reshetnikov, V., & Combes, F. 1998, A&A, 337, 9, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9806114

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/9806114 1998

  48. [49]

    Global structure and formation of polar-ring galaxies

    Reshetnikov, V., & Sotnikova, N. 1997, A&A, 325, 933, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9704047

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/9704047 1997

  49. [50]

    P., Chugunov, I

    Reshetnikov, V. P., Chugunov, I. V., Marchuk, A. A., et al. 2025, A&A, 697, L1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202554941 Roˇ skar, R., Debattista, V. P., Brooks, A. M., et al. 2010, MNRAS, 408, 783, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17178.x

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202554941 2025

  50. [51]

    B., & Faucher-Gigu` ere, C.-A

    Roy, M., Su, K.-Y., Tonnesen, S., Fielding, D. B., & Faucher-Gigu` ere, C.-A. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 265, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3142

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3142 2024

  51. [52]

    L., Rennehan, D., et al

    Saeedzadeh, V., Jung, S. L., Rennehan, D., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 525, 5677, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad2637

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad2637 2023

  52. [53]

    C., & Rubin, V

    Schweizer, F., Whitmore, B. C., & Rubin, V. C. 1983, AJ, 88, 909, doi: 10.1086/113377

    work page doi:10.1086/113377 1983

  53. [54]

    L., D’Onghia, E., et al

    Semczuk, M., Lokas, E. L., D’Onghia, E., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 498, 3535, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa2609

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa2609 2020

  54. [55]

    C., Kassin, S

    Simons, R. C., Kassin, S. A., Weiner, B. J., et al. 2017, ApJ, 843, 46, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa740c

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa740c 2017

  55. [56]

    C., Peeples, M

    Simons, R. C., Peeples, M. S., Tumlinson, J., et al. 2020, ApJ, 905, 167, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abc5b8

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abc5b8 2020

  56. [57]

    C., Peeples, M

    Simons, R. C., Peeples, M. S., Tumlinson, J., et al. 2025, ApJ, 988, 250, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/addf39

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/addf39 2025

  57. [58]

    V., Mosenkov, A

    Smirnov, D. V., Mosenkov, A. V., & Reshetnikov, V. P. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 4112, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3368

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3368 2024

  58. [59]

    , author Lazarian , A

    Somerville, R. S., Hopkins, P. F., Cox, T. J., Robertson, B. E., & Hernquist, L. 2008, MNRAS, 391, 481, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13805.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13805.x 2008

  59. [60]

    S., & Casertano, S

    Sparke, L. S., & Casertano, S. 1988, MNRAS, 234, 873, doi: 10.1093/mnras/234.4.873

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/234.4.873 1988

  60. [61]

    2016, MNRAS, 462, 2418, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw1793

    Sparre, M., & Springel, V. 2016, MNRAS, 462, 2418, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw1793

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw1793 2016

  61. [62]

    A., et al

    Stanonik, K., Platen, E., Arag´ on-Calvo, M. A., et al. 2009, ApJL, 696, L6, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/696/1/L6

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/696/1/l6 2009

  62. [63]

    2021, ApJ, 911, 88, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abd776

    Stern, J., Faucher-Gigu` ere, C.-A., Fielding, D., et al. 2021, ApJ, 911, 88, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abd776

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abd776 2021

  63. [64]

    S., & et al

    Trapp, C., Tumlinson, J., Peeples, M. S., & et al. 2025, ApJ. https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.tbd

    work page 2025

  64. [65]

    W., Kereˇ s, D., Hopkins, P

    Trapp, C. W., Kereˇ s, D., Hopkins, P. F., Faucher-Gigu` ere, C.-A., & Murray, N. 2024, MNRAS, 533, 3008, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae2021

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae2021 2024

  65. [66]

    W., Kereˇ s, D., Chan, T

    Trapp, C. W., Kereˇ s, D., Chan, T. K., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 509, 4149, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab3251

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab3251 2022

  66. [67]

    J., Smith, B

    Turk, M. J., Smith, B. D., Oishi, J. S., et al. 2011, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 192, 9, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/192/1/9 van de Voort, F., Springel, V., Mandelker, N., van den

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/192/1/9 2011

  67. [68]

    C., & Pakmor, R

    Bosch, F. C., & Pakmor, R. 2019, MNRAS, 482, L85, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/sly190 van Donkelaar, F., Agertz, O., & Renaud, F. 2022, MNRAS, 512, 3806, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac692

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/sly190 2019

  68. [69]

    Veronese, S., de Blok, W. J. G., Healy, J., et al. 2025, A&A, 693, A97, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452085

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202452085 2025

  69. [70]

    E., et al

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261, doi: 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2

    work page doi:10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2 2020

  70. [71]

    Walt, S. v. d., Colbert, S. C., & Varoquaux, G. 2011, Computing in Science & Engineering, 13, 22

    work page 2011

  71. [72]

    Walter, F., Brinks, E., de Blok, W. J. G., et al. 2008, The Astronomical Journal, 136, 25632647, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/136/6/2563

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/136/6/2563 2008

  72. [73]

    S., Serra, P., et al

    Wang, J., Koribalski, B. S., Serra, P., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 460, 2143, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw1099

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw1099 2016

  73. [74]

    2024, ApJ, 968, 48, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad3e61

    Wang, J., Lin, X., Yang, D., et al. 2024, ApJ, 968, 48, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad3e61

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad3e61 2024

  74. [75]

    C., Lucas, R

    Whitmore, B. C., Lucas, R. A., McElroy, D. B., et al. 1990, AJ, 100, 1489, doi: 10.1086/115614

    work page doi:10.1086/115614 1990

  75. [76]

    D., Voit, G

    Wibking, B. D., Voit, G. M., & O’Shea, B. W. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.10277, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.10277

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.10277 2025

  76. [77]

    C., Tumlinson, J., Peeples, M

    Wright, A. C., Tumlinson, J., Peeples, M. S., et al. 2024, ApJ, 970, 70, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad49a3

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad49a3 2024

  77. [78]

    G., Yoon, S.-J., Moon, J.-S., et al

    Zee, W.-B. G., Yoon, S.-J., Moon, J.-S., et al. 2022, ApJ, 935, 48, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7462

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac7462 2022

  78. [79]

    S., O’Shea, B

    Zheng, Y., Peeples, M. S., O’Shea, B. W., et al. 2020, ApJ, 896, 143, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab960a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab960a 2020