Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 151 references

Clumps as multiscale structures in cosmic noon galaxies

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper establishes that star-forming clumps in massive main-sequence galaxies at z~1.5 form a single hierarchical population spanning 0.1–1 kpc, with mass–size and mass-function scalings that connect unlensed and lensed observations.

desk verdict A genuinely new unlensed sub-kpc clump census at z~1.5 whose headline mass-size and mass-function slopes need one more validation pass—size recovery and a stricter size cut—before fully convincing. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.03328 v1 pith:FZSCVSAI submitted 2025-01-06 astro-ph.GA

Boris S Kalita , Tomoko L Suzuki , Daichi Kashino , John D Silverman , Emanuele Daddi , Luis C Ho , Xuheng Ding , Wilfried Mercier
show 26 more authors
Andreas L Faisst Kartik Sheth Francesco Valentino Annagrazia Puglisi Toshiki Saito Darshan Kakkad Olivier Ilbert Ali Ahmad Khostovan Zhaoxuan Liu Takumi Tanaka Georgios Magdis Jorge A Zavala Qinghua Tan Jeyhan S Kartaltepe Lilan Yang Anton M Koekemoer Jed McKinney Brant E Robertson Shuowen Jin Christopher C Hayward Michaela Hirschmann Maximilien Franco Marko Shuntov Ghassem Gozaliasl Aidan Kaminsky R Michael Rich
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords star-formingclumpsgalaxydeconstructionmass-sizerelationclumpstellarmassfunctioncosmicnoonJWST/NIRCamdiskinstabilitieshierarchicalstarformation
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

The paper tries to establish that the bright clumps seen in galaxies at cosmic noon are not a separate class of objects but a single hierarchy of star-forming structures, spanning sizes $0.1$–$1$ kpc and stellar masses $10^8$–$10^{9.5}\,M_\odot$. It reaches this by decomposing 32 massive main-sequence galaxies at $z\approx1.5$ into bulge, disk, and clumps using JWST/NIRCam images with roughly $0.3$ kpc resolution. The measured mass–size relation ($r_e \propto M_\star^{0.52\pm0.07}$) and clump stellar mass function (slope $\alpha=-1.85\pm0.19$) both match expectations for turbulence- and gravity-regulated fragmentation. If correct, the results close the observational gap between lensed studies, which see small clumps, and unlensed studies, which previously resolved only kpc-scale clumps, and imply that still smaller sub-clumps await higher resolution.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the two-stage forward-model 'deconstruction' of each galaxy: a bulge+disk model is fit to the F444W image, clumps are detected on contrast images from F150W and added as elliptical Gaussians until the Bayesian information criterion stops improving, and the fixed composite model is then used to deblend photometry in all four NIRCam bands and the ALMA 870 $\mu$m image. This yields the fluxes and sizes that feed the SED fits, which in turn produce the stellar masses and star formation rates. The argument for hierarchy is carried by Eq. (1), the mass–size relation $r_e \propto M_\star^{0.52\pm0.07}$, combined with the completeness limit of about $10^{8.7}\,M_\odot$ below which the mass function is not fitted.

What would settle it

An injection–recovery test that re-fits artificial clumps through the full pipeline and checks whether the recovered half-light radii and fluxes match the injected values at 0.1–0.4 kpc, or an independent high-resolution observation of the same galaxies that resolves the clumps and directly measures their sizes.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that star-forming clumps in massive main-sequence galaxies at $z\sim1.5$ are coherent, multiscale structures: a single population with half-light radii $r_e \sim 0.1$–$1$ kpc and stellar masses $\sim10^{8.0}$–$10^{9.5}\,M_\odot$. It derives an empirical mass–size relation $\log(r_e/\mathrm{kpc}) = 0.52(\pm0.07)\log(M_\star/M_\odot) - 4.98$ and a clump stellar mass function with slope $\alpha=-1.85\pm0.19$, both consistent with the hierarchical, instability-driven picture of star-forming regions in the local universe. The paper interprets the agreement as evidence that clumps at all scales are part of a cascade bounded by the Toomre length (the largest scale on which a disk can fragment, $\sim1$–$5$ kpc) and the Jeans length (the smallest self-gravitating scale, $\sim10$–$500$ pc), and that the apparent divide between lensed and unlensed clump samples is a resolution effect rather than a physical difference. It also reports that over 70% of clumps lie along spiral features seen in the residual near-IR images.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that clump sizes measured down to about 0.1 kpc in F150W, where the point-spread function is about 0.4 kpc, are true sizes and not artifacts of the Gaussian model or of blending with disk and spiral residuals.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Clump masses and sizes measured here overlap and extend the lensed clump population, so lensed and unlensed studies can be combined into one mass–size plane.
  • The mass–size slope above 0.5 means clump density decreases with size, consistent with gravity/turbulence-regulated structures rather than simple scaled-up star clusters.
  • The mass function slope near -2 matches the prediction for disk fragmentation, supporting an in-situ, instability-driven origin for the clump population.
  • With over 70% of clumps on spiral features, clump formation and spiral structure appear linked in these massive disks.
  • Clumps contribute only 1–20% of stellar mass and 1–30% of SFR per galaxy, bounding their direct role in bulge growth.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the hierarchy is real, lower-resolution HST-era samples likely blended several sub-clumps into one, overestimating clump masses and sizes; degrading these JWST images to HST resolution and rerunning the pipeline should reproduce the older distributions.
  • The similar mass–size scaling to giant molecular clouds suggests each massive clump may have a gas-cloud progenitor of comparable mass; ALMA CO or [CI] maps at matched resolution could test this link directly.
  • The inferred hierarchy implies the clump stellar mass function should continue with the same slope below about 10^8 solar masses; deep lensed-field JWST observations can test that continuity.
  • The preferential location on spiral arms raises the possibility that spiral-arm compression triggers or concentrates clump formation; resolved H-alpha kinematics could check whether clumps sit at predicted compression sites.
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

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper presents a two-stage spatial deconstruction of 32 massive (log M* > 10.5) main-sequence galaxies at z_spec ~ 1.5 using JWST/NIRCam (F115W, F150W, F277W, F444W) and ALMA 870 μm data. The authors fit a bulge+disk model in F444W, detect clumps in F150W contrast images, and then deblend all bands with a fixed-shape bulge+disk+clump model. They report clump stellar masses of 10^8.0–10^9.5 M_sun and half-light radii of 0.1–1 kpc, a mass–size relation r_e ∝ M_*^0.52±0.07 (Eq. 1), and a clump stellar mass function slope α = −1.85±0.19 (Fig. 15). They interpret these as evidence that high-redshift clumps are part of a hierarchical star-forming structure spanning from individual star clusters to kpc-scale complexes, and they find that clumps preferentially lie on residual spiral features. They also report that clumps contribute 1–30% of the host SFR and have elevated sSFR relative to the main sequence.

Significance. If the sub-PSF size measurements are reliable, this is an important step: it is among the first un-lensed studies to resolve clumps down to ~0.1 kpc at z ~ 1.5, bridging the gap between lensed and unlensed samples. The method of simultaneous bulge/disk/clump modeling in native-resolution filters is a genuine advance over aperture-based approaches, and the careful use of BIC for model selection and injection-based completeness is commendable. The mass–size relation and cSMF slope provide quantitative anchors for simulations of disk fragmentation and clump survival. However, the central quantitative claims rest on sizes measured well below the F150W PSF FWHM, and the current validation does not directly test size/flux recovery accuracy; this is the main load-bearing concern.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 2.4, Fig. 7] The completeness test in Sec. 2.4 (Fig. 7) determines detection completeness only. The text explicitly states that the artificial clumps are not re-fit after detection, so no information is provided on whether the fitted size and flux of recovered sub-PSF sources are accurate. Yet the paper claims in Sec. 2.4 that 'we can characterize sub-PSF scales' and that results are robust to inclusion/exclusion of sub-PSF clumps. Since Eq. (1) and the cSMF analysis (Sec. 3.4) use sizes in the range 0.2–1 kpc with F150W FWHM ≈ 0.4 kpc, a size–flux degeneracy or PSF mismatch could bias the slope 0.52±0.07 and the completeness-based mass cut of 10^8.7 M_sun. Please add an injection-recovery test that re-fits recovered clumps and reports bias and scatter in size and flux as a function of injected size, flux, and local background, or restrict the quantitative analysis to r_e ≳ 0.4 kpc and demonstrate that the conclusions are unchanged.
  2. [Sec. 2.2, Appendix A] The uncertainty procedure in Sec. 2.2 and Appendix A injects sources 'of the same size but varied flux' and then 'fixing the flux and varying the sizes.' This measures random uncertainty at the fitted parameter values but cannot detect a systematic bias in sub-PSF Gaussian sizes, which are degenerate with the local disk/spiral residual background and with errors in the PSF model. Because the validity of sizes below the PSF FWHM is a load-bearing premise for Eq. (1) and for the cSMF completeness cut, a direct validation of size recovery accuracy is required.
  3. [Sec. 3.3, Eq. (1)] The mass–size relation is fitted after discarding clumps with r_e < 0.2 kpc, but the range 0.2–0.4 kpc is still below the F150W PSF FWHM. The detection threshold in Fig. 7 is a strong function of size and flux, so the correlation between M* and r_e among detected clumps may be shaped by incompleteness even within the adopted cuts. The paper should test the stability of the fitted slope when using a size cut at the PSF FWHM (≈0.4 kpc), and/or apply an explicit completeness correction to the mass–size fit.
  4. [Appendix C, Sec. 3.2] The clump SEDs are fit with a constant star-formation history using only four JWST bands. In this setup, the SFR and sSFR are largely determined by the assumed SFH and the fitted age, and the reported Δlog sSFR offsets of 0–0.4 (Sec. 3.2, Fig. 11) may be partly an artifact of the SFH prior rather than an empirical measurement. The authors should test the sensitivity of the sSFR offsets to alternative SFH parameterizations (e.g., delayed-τ or two-component SFH), or explicitly state that the sSFR offsets are model-dependent.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Sec. 3.4] The cSMF fitting method is not fully specified; the text gives only 'log(dN/dM★)=α log(M★)−const'. Please state whether the fit is binned or a maximum-likelihood fit, the binning scheme, and how the uncertainty on α is obtained.
  2. [Sec. 2.1] The PSFs are described as created with PSFEx on the mosaic; please state the number of stars used and the estimated PSF model uncertainty, since PSF errors propagate directly into sub-PSF clump sizes.
  3. [Sec. 2.2] The phrase 'we use the major-axis value in order for projection effects to not influence our results' is unclear; if the clumps are assumed intrinsically round, the major axis is the deprojected size, but the text should spell this out.
  4. [Fig. 7] The top x-axis relates mass to size via the average mass-to-light ratio; the caption should note that this conversion carries the 0.5 dex uncertainty discussed in Sec. 2.4.
  5. [Sec. 3.2] The reduced-χ² cut of 4 is motivated by the behavior of the SED uncertainties; please show the distribution of reduced-χ² values or the uncertainty behavior in a figure, since this cut removes 65 of 167 detected clumps.
  6. [Sec. 4.2] There is a typo: 'contributution' should be 'contribution'.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Secondary SFR–stellar mass correlation is partly imposed by the constant-SFH SED model; the central mass–size and mass-function results remain independent empirical fits.

  1. self definitional [Appendix C (SED fitting using CIGALE); Sec. 3.2 (Clump properties); Fig. 8]
    "Star-formation history (SFH): Given that the galaxies are selected to be star-forming, with clumps particularly active, we adopt a constant SFR with varying duration (age of the main stellar population). ... We find that the SFR and stellar mass of the clumps are tightly correlated, consistent with the extrapolation of the star-forming main sequence (Fig. 8, with the main sequence from Schreiber et al. 2015)."

    In the constant-SFH CIGALE templates, the fitted age ties the two derived quantities together: the present stellar mass is approximately SFR times the population age (times a return fraction), so log SFR and log M* are locked with unit slope once the age is chosen. Reporting a 'tight correlation' between clump SFR and M*, and the accompanying Δlog sSFR offsets up to 0.4, is therefore a restatement of the fitted age differences (Δlog sSFR ≈ −Δlog age) under the adopted SFH rather than an independent empirical measurement. The same constant-SFH assumption is used for bulges and disks, so the clump-versus-host sSFR offset is likewise a ratio of fitted ages.

full rationale

The central quantitative claims — the mass–size relation r_e ∝ M_*^0.52±0.07 (Sec. 3.3, Eq. 1) and the clump stellar mass function slope α = −1.85±0.19 (Sec. 3.4) — are empirical fits to measured F150W sizes and SED-based stellar masses; neither reduces to a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. The completeness injection test (Sec. 2.4) measures detection only and does not re-fit recovered artificial clumps, so sub-PSF size accuracy remains a validation concern, but that is a robustness limitation rather than circularity. The comparison to lensed clump samples and to the theoretical α ≈ −2 expectation uses external data and theory, and the self-citations to Kalita et al. (2024a,b) enter mainly as methodology and comparison samples, not as the load-bearing justification for the central derivation. The one genuine circularity identified is secondary: the reported SFR–stellar mass correlation and the Δlog sSFR offsets are largely built into the constant-SFH CIGALE assumption, under which SFR and stellar mass are linked through the fitted age. Because the headline hierarchical conclusion rests on the mass–size relation and the mass-function slope rather than on this SFR result, the overall circularity score is moderate, not severe.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on SED-derived masses, model-based sizes, and completeness corrections. The free parameters are mostly reasonable modeling choices, but the constant-SFH age and the reduced-chi2 cutoff are the least externally constrained. No invented physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (5)
  • Fixed Sersic indices for bulge and disk = n=2, n=1
    Chosen for the F444W bulge+disk decomposition; the authors state results are unchanged for n=4, so it is a low-impact modeling choice.
  • Contrast-image smoothing kernel sigma = 3 pixels
    Gaussian smoothing scale in F150W contrast images; chosen by hand and affects which clumps are detected.
  • SED reduced-chi2 inclusion cutoff = 4
    Clumps with reduced chi2 >4 are excluded from the final sample; a post-hoc threshold chosen because stellar mass uncertainties increase beyond it.
  • F150W mass-to-light conversion slope and intercept = slope 0.78±0.21, intercept 10.74±1.94
    Fit to the sample's SED-derived clump masses; used only to convert completeness flux limits to mass limits, not for the mass-size relation itself.
  • Clump SFH age in constant star-formation model = up to ~700 Myr upper limits
    Each clump SED is fitted with a constant star-formation history; the fitted age sets the SFR-to-mass ratio and therefore imprints the reported SFR-mass correlation.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Rest-frame near-infrared light in F444W traces the same spatial distribution as ALMA 870 micron dust emission.
    Used to translate the F444W bulge+disk model into the UV plane for ALMA deblending (Sec. 2.3, Appendix B); supported by cited works but not directly tested for these 32 galaxies.
  • domain assumption Detected F150W clumps are coherent structures rather than projection blends of smaller unrelated sources.
    The hierarchical interpretation in Secs. 4.1 and 4.2 requires this; if clumps were random groupings, the size measurements and mass-size relation would not describe physical structures.
  • domain assumption Clump SEDs are well described by a constant star-formation history.
    Assumed in Appendix C for CIGALE fits and not independently tested. This assumption directly links stellar mass and SFR through the fitted age.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Clumps as multiscale structures in cosmic noon galaxies." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FZSCVSAI

@misc{pith2026250103328,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Clumps as multiscale structures in cosmic noon galaxies},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FZSCVSAI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.03328}
}
abstract

Star-forming clumps have been found to significantly influence the star formation of gas-rich $z>1$ galaxies. Using public data from JWST/NIRCam (COSMOS-Web) and ALMA (FMOS-COSMOS), we study a sample of 32 massive ($>10^{10.5}\,\rm M_{\odot}$) main-sequence galaxies at $z_{\rm spec}\sim1.5$ with $\sim0.3\,\rm kpc$ resolution. We create composite morphological models consisting of bulge, disk, and clumps to fully 'deconstruct' the galaxy images. With the resulting measurements of the flux and size of these components, we find the following: (I)The combined contribution of clumps is $1-30\%$ towards the net star formation rate (SFR) of the host while contributing $1-20\%$ to its stellar mass. The clumps show a correlation between their stellar mass and SFR, but have an increased specific-SFR (sSFR) relative to the star-forming main sequence, with offsets ranging from $0\lesssim\Delta\log\rm sSFR\lesssim 0.4$. They feature star formation surface densities of $10^{-2}-10^{2}\,\rm M_{\odot}/yr/kpc^{2}$, consistent with values observed in local star-forming and starburst galaxies. (II)The clumps span a large range of characteristic sizes ($r_{e}\sim0.1-1\,\rm kpc$) and stellar masses ($\sim 10^{8.0-9.5}\,\rm M_{\odot}$). We estimate a mass-size relation ($r_{e}\propto\rm M_{\star}^{\,0.52\pm0.07}$) along with a stellar mass function (slope, $\alpha=-1.85\pm 0.19$), both suggesting a hierarchical nature similar to that expected in star-forming regions in local galaxies. (III)Our measurements agree with the properties of stellar clumps in $z\gtrsim1$ lensed systems, bridging the gap between lensed and unlensed studies by detecting structures at sub-kpc scales.(IV)Clumps are found to be preferentially located along spiral features visible primarily in the residual rest-frame near-IR images. In conclusion, we present an observation-based, coherent picture of star-forming clumps at $z>1$.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.03328 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The RGB images (F150W, F277W, F444W) of the 32 galaxies used in this work have dimensions of 70 × 70 pixels, or 2.1 ′′ × 2.1 ′′. They are arranged in order of increasing RA and Dec. All are within a redshift range of 1.43 ≤ 𝑧 ≤ 1.74 and have stellar masses of 1010.5−11.4 M⊙. The FMOS ID for each galaxy is provided in the bottom-left corner, with their corresponding properties listed in Table C1 in the Appendix. The … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The contrast images created from the F150W images, by subtracting a smoothed version of themselves, for the 32 galaxies in our sample (RGB images shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The ‘deconstruction’ of two of the 32 galaxies in our sample. The RGB color image of each galaxy ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (14 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (Data-Bulge model) The F150W image of the clumpy disks, after the subtraction of the bulge model for 16/32 galaxies in our sample. (Disk+clumps model) The corresponding model image, that includes the disk and all initially found clumps, without the bulge. (Residual) Th…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The same images as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The surface brightness contrast between the clumps (detected in F150W) and the rest of the host disk in different filters as a function of their stellar mass. In some cases (termed ‘negative’), the surface brightness is lower than the disk’s average, which is possible …
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The completeness of our detection algorithm as a function of clump F150W flux (detection filter) is shown on the bottom x-axis, and clump size (𝑟𝑒). The corresponding clump mass is computed using the average mass-to￾light ratio of our clump sample and displayed on the …
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The SFR vs. stellar mass relation of the clumps in our sample, along with that of the host galaxies, is shown. For reference, the star-forming main sequence at 𝑧 = 1.5 (Schreiber et al. 2015), with a ±0.3 dex scatter region, is also provided. All clumps are found to li…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The distribution of stellar mass of the clumps in galaxies falls within the stellar mass range of our sample (1010.5−11.4 M⊙). For comparison, we also show the same for clumps from two previous studies that provide statistical assessments of clumps in stellar-mass comp…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The distribution of clump sizes within our sample. The ‘detected clumps’ refer to the clumps we include in our study, while ’all clumps’ also include those that have been removed due to a reduced-𝜒 2 > 4. accounts for the contribution of both the gas and the stellar m…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: (Left) The ratio of stellar mass within each clump to that of the host galaxy as a function of the host’s stellar mass. (Middle) The same ratio, but for SFR. (Right) The sSFR of the clumps vs. that of the host. The red line indicates where clumps would lie if they had…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: The clump SFR surface density (ΣSFR = SFR/𝜋 r 2 90) distribution for our sample. we agree on the limits, we find a relatively large number of clumps with stellar masses around ∼ 109 M⊙. However, we do not make any claims about the mass distribution due to our small sa…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: (Top) The ratio of the total stellar mass in the modeled clumps of a galaxy to that of the host galaxy. (Bottom) The same ratio for SFR. are found to be uniformly distributed over 0.5 − 20% and 1 − 30%, respectively ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_12.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: The clump stellar mass function in our sample is compared to previous studies (Kalita et al. 2024a; Dessauges-Zavadsky & Adamo 2018). This is further compared to the theoretical prediction for clumps formed from disk instabilities (𝛼 = −2 Elmegreen et al. 2006). A con…
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: The location of all clumps (including detected clumps as well as those rejected due to high 𝜒 2 ) on the rest-frame near-IR (F444W) residual im￾ages for 6/32 galaxies in our sample. The corresponding bulge+disk+clumps model has been subtracted to produce these images.…
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: The comparison of the stellar clumps in this work to those in the lensed galaxies. Clumps in the Cosmic snake (Cava et al. 2018) and A521- sys1 (Messa et al. 2022) are provided in orange and green. The GMCs within these systems are later presented in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE…
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: The comparison of the stellar clumps in this work to GMCs. These compiled datapoints have been taken from the work that contributes the values for the A521-sys1 GMCs (Dessauges-Zavadsky et al. 2023). The other values included here are from the Cosmic snake (Dessauges-…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

151 extracted references · 6 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.state := if if FUNCTION not #0 #1 if FUNCTION and 'skip pop #0 if FUNCTION or pop #1...

  2. [2]

    G., van den Bergh S., Glazebrook K., Ellis R

    Abraham R. G., van den Bergh S., Glazebrook K., Ellis R. S., Santiago B. X., Surma P., Griffiths R. E., 1996, @doi [ ] 10.1086/192352 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996ApJS..107....1A 107, 1

    doi:10.1086/192352 1996

  3. [3]

    C., Guaita L., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/766/2/105 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...766..105A 766, 105

    Adamo A., \"O stlin G., Bastian N., Zackrisson E., Livermore R. C., Guaita L., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/766/2/105 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...766..105A 766, 105

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/766/2/105 2013

  4. [4]

    Adamo A., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aa7132 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...841..131A 841, 131

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa7132 2017

  5. [5]

    Adamo A., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1038/s41586-024-07703-7 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024Natur.632..513A 632, 513

    doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07703-7 2024

  6. [6]

    Astropy Collaboration et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c74 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...935..167A 935, 167

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c74 2022

  7. [7]

    Behrendt M., Burkert A., Schartmann M., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8205/819/1/L2 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...819L...2B 819, L2

    doi:10.3847/2041-8205/819/1/l2 2016

  8. [8]

    Behrendt M., Schartmann M., Burkert A., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz1717 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.488..306B 488, 306

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stz1717 2019

Show all 151 references
  1. [9]

    A., Tafalla M., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.astro.45.071206.100404 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ARA&A..45..339B 45, 339

    Bergin E. A., Tafalla M., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.astro.45.071206.100404 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ARA&A..45..339B 45, 339

    2007

  2. [10]

    N., Accomazzi A., Mink D

    Bertin E., 2011, in Evans I. N., Accomazzi A., Mink D. J., Rots A. H., eds, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series Vol. 442, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XX. p. 435

    2011

  3. [11]

    B \'e thermin M., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201425031 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015A&A...573A.113B 573, A113

    2015 doi

  4. [12]

    Bigiel F., Leroy A., Walter F., Brinks E., de Blok W. J. G., Madore B., Thornley M. D., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/136/6/2846 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008AJ....136.2846B 136, 2846

    2008 doi

  5. [13]

    Birrer S., Amara A., 2018, @doi [Physics of the Dark Universe] 10.1016/j.dark.2018.11.002 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018PDU....22..189B 22, 189

    2018 doi

  6. [14]

    Birrer S., et al., 2021, @doi [The Journal of Open Source Software] 10.21105/joss.03283 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021JOSS....6.3283B 6, 3283

    2021 doi

  7. [15]

    K., Salas H., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201834156 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019A&A...622A.103B 622, A103

    Boquien M., Burgarella D., Roehlly Y., Buat V., Ciesla L., Corre D., Inoue A. K., Salas H., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201834156 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019A&A...622A.103B 622, A103

    2019 doi

  8. [16]

    418, Galactic Bulges

    Bournaud F., 2016, in Laurikainen E., Peletier R., Gadotti D., eds, Astrophysics and Space Science Library Vol. 418, Galactic Bulges. p. 355 ( @eprint arXiv 1503.07660 ), @doi 10.1007/978-3-319-19378-6_13

    2016 arXiv

  9. [17]

    G., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/694/2/L158 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...694L.158B 694, L158

    Bournaud F., Elmegreen B. G., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/694/2/L158 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...694L.158B 694, L158

    2009 doi

  10. [18]

    Y., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab2907 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.508.5935B 508, 5935

    Brown G., Gnedin O. Y., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab2907 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.508.5935B 508, 5935

    2021 doi

  11. [19]

    Bruzual G., Charlot S., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06897.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003MNRAS.344.1000B 344, 1000

    2003

  12. [20]

    V., Obreja A., Dutton A

    Buck T., Macci \`o A. V., Obreja A., Dutton A. A., Dom \' nguez-Tenreiro R., Granato G. L., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx685 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.468.3628B 468, 3628

    2017 doi

  13. [21]

    C., Kinney A

    Calzetti D., Armus L., Bohlin R. C., Kinney A. L., Koornneef J., Storchi-Bergmann T., 2000, @doi [ ] 10.1086/308692 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000ApJ...533..682C 533, 682

    2000 doi

  14. [22]

    M., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/acc2bc , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...954...31C 954, 31

    Casey C. M., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/acc2bc , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...954...31C 954, 31

    2023 doi

  15. [23]

    G., Dessauges-Zavadsky M., Mayer L., Tamburello V., 2018, @doi [Nature Astronomy] 10.1038/s41550-017-0295-x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018NatAs...2...76C 2, 76

    Cava A., Schaerer D., Richard J., P \'e rez-Gonz \'a lez P. G., Dessauges-Zavadsky M., Mayer L., Tamburello V., 2018, @doi [Nature Astronomy] 10.1038/s41550-017-0295-x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018NatAs...2...76C 2, 76

    2018 doi

  16. [25]

    Ceverino D., Dekel A., Mandelker N., Bournaud F., Burkert A., Genzel R., Primack J., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.20296.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012MNRAS.420.3490C 420, 3490

    2012

  17. [26]

    S., Trujillo-Gomez S., Churchill C

    Ceverino D., Klypin A., Klimek E. S., Trujillo-Gomez S., Churchill C. W., Primack J., Dekel A., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu956 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.442.1545C 442, 1545

    2014 doi

  18. [27]

    Chabrier G., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1086/376392 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003PASP..115..763C 115, 763

    2003 doi

  19. [28]

    C., Calzetti D., O'Connell R., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/787/1/17 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...787...17C 787, 17

    Chandar R., Whitmore B. C., Calzetti D., O'Connell R., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/787/1/17 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...787...17C 787, 17

    2014 doi

  20. [29]

    Chevance M., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz3525 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.493.2872C 493, 2872

    2020 doi

  21. [30]

    Claeyssens A., Adamo A., Richard J., Mahler G., Messa M., Dessauges-Zavadsky M., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac3791 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.520.2180C 520, 2180

    2023 doi

  22. [31]

    P., 2024, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2410.10974 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv241010974C p

    Claeyssens A., Adamo A., Messa M., Dessauges-Zavadsky M., Richard J., Kramarenko I., Matthee J., Naidu R. P., 2024, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2410.10974 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv241010974C p. arXiv:2410.10974

    2024 doi arXiv

  23. [32]

    O., Dale D

    Cook D. O., Dale D. A., Lee J. C., Thilker D., Calzetti D., Kennicutt R. C., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw1694 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.462.3766C 462, 3766

    2016 doi

  24. [33]

    L., Hu E

    Cowie L. L., Hu E. M., Songaila A., 1995, @doi [ ] 10.1086/117631 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995AJ....110.1576C 110, 1576

    1995 doi

  25. [34]

    Daddi E., Dannerbauer H., Elbaz D., Dickinson M., Morrison G., Stern D., Ravindranath S., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1086/527377 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJ...673L..21D 673, L21

    2008 doi

  26. [35]

    Daddi E., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/713/1/686 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...713..686D 713, 686

    2010 doi

  27. [36]

    Dekel A., Birnboim Y., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10145.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006MNRAS.368....2D 368, 2

    2006

  28. [37]

    Dessauges-Zavadsky M., Adamo A., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnrasl/sly112 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.479L.118D 479, L118

    2018 doi

  29. [38]

    Dessauges-Zavadsky M., Schaerer D., Cava A., Mayer L., Tamburello V., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aa5d52 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...836L..22D 836, L22

    2017 doi

  30. [39]

    Dessauges-Zavadsky M., et al., 2019, @doi [Nature Astronomy] 10.1038/s41550-019-0874-0 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019NatAs...3.1115D 3, 1115

    2019 doi

  31. [40]

    Dessauges-Zavadsky M., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad113 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.519.6222D 519, 6222

    2023 doi

  32. [41]

    D., Onoue M., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ac9c02 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...939L..28D 939, L28

    Ding X., Silverman J. D., Onoue M., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ac9c02 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...939L..28D 939, L28

    2022 doi

  33. [42]

    T., Li A., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/511055 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...657..810D 657, 810

    Draine B. T., Li A., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/511055 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...657..810D 657, 810

    2007 doi

  34. [43]

    Elbaz D., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201732370 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018A&A...616A.110E 616, A110

    2018 doi

  35. [44]

    G., Burkert A., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/712/1/294 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...712..294E 712, 294

    Elmegreen B. G., Burkert A., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/712/1/294 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...712..294E 712, 294

    2010 doi

  36. [46]

    G., Efremov Y

    Elmegreen B. G., Efremov Y. N., 1996b, @doi [ ] 10.1086/177554 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996ApJ...466..802E 466, 802

    doi

  37. [47]

    M., Elmegreen B

    Elmegreen D. M., Elmegreen B. G., 1987, @doi [ ] 10.1086/165034 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1987ApJ...314....3E 314, 3

    1987 doi

  38. [48]

    G., Elmegreen D

    Elmegreen B. G., Elmegreen D. M., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1086/430514 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005ApJ...627..632E 627, 632

    2005 doi

  39. [49]

    M., Elmegreen B

    Elmegreen D. M., Elmegreen B. G., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/781/1/11 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...781...11E 781, 11

    2014 doi

  40. [50]

    G., Scalo J., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.astro.41.011802.094859 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004ARA&A..42..211E 42, 211

    Elmegreen B. G., Scalo J., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.astro.41.011802.094859 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004ARA&A..42..211E 42, 211

    2004 arXiv

  41. [51]

    G., Elmegreen D

    Elmegreen B. G., Elmegreen D. M., Chandar R., Whitmore B., Regan M., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/503797 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006ApJ...644..879E 644, 879

    2006 doi

  42. [52]

    M., Elmegreen B

    Elmegreen D. M., Elmegreen B. G., Ravindranath S., Coe D. A., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/511667 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...658..763E 658, 763

    2007 doi

  43. [53]

    G., Bournaud F., Elmegreen D

    Elmegreen B. G., Bournaud F., Elmegreen D. M., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1086/592190 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJ...688...67E 688, 67

    2008 doi

  44. [54]

    M., Elmegreen B

    Elmegreen D. M., Elmegreen B. G., Marcus M. T., Shahinyan K., Yau A., Petersen M., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/701/1/306 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...701..306E 701, 306

    2009 doi

  45. [55]

    G., Elmegreen D

    Elmegreen B. G., Elmegreen D. M., S \'a nchez Almeida J., Mu \ n oz-Tu \ n \'o n C., Dewberry J., Putko J., Teich Y., Popinchalk M., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/774/1/86 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...774...86E 774, 86

    2013 doi

  46. [56]

    Epinat B., et al., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201117711 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012A&A...539A..92E 539, A92

    2012 doi

  47. [57]

    Faure B., Bournaud F., Fensch J., Daddi E., Behrendt M., Burkert A., Richard J., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab272 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.502.4641F 502, 4641

    2021 doi

  48. [58]

    B., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw2281 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.464..491F 464, 491

    Fisher D. B., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw2281 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.464..491F 464, 491

    2017 doi

  49. [59]

    M., et al., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/739/1/45 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...739...45F 739, 45

    F \"o rster Schreiber N. M., et al., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/739/1/45 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...739...45F 739, 45

    2011 doi

  50. [60]

    arXiv:2402.18543

    Fujimoto S., et al., 2024, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2402.18543 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240218543F p. arXiv:2402.18543

    2024 doi arXiv

  51. [61]

    E., Smail I., Moran S

    Geach J. E., Smail I., Moran S. M., MacArthur L. A., Lagos C. d. P., Edge A. C., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/730/2/L19 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...730L..19G 730, L19

    2011 doi

  52. [62]

    Genzel R., et al., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1038/nature05052 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006Natur.442..786G 442, 786

    2006 doi

  53. [63]

    Genzel R., et al., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/733/2/101 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...733..101G 733, 101

    2011 doi

  54. [64]

    Genzel R., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/acef1a , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...957...48G 957, 48

    2023 doi

  55. [65]

    G \'o mez-Guijarro C., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aab206 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...856..121G 856, 121

    2018 doi

  56. [66]

    Grasha K., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aa740b , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...842...25G 842, 25

    2017 doi

  57. [67]

    Guo Y., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/800/1/39 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...800...39G 800, 39

    2015 doi

  58. [68]

    Guo Y., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa018 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...853..108G 853, 108

    2018 doi

  59. [69]

    M., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev-astro-082214-122324 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ARA&A..53..583H 53, 583

    Heyer M., Dame T. M., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev-astro-082214-122324 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ARA&A..53..583H 53, 583

    2015 doi

  60. [70]

    Hinojosa-Go \ n i R., Mu \ n oz-Tu \ n \'o n C., M \'e ndez-Abreu J., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201527066 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016A&A...592A.122H 592, A122

    2016 doi

  61. [71]

    A., et al., 2024, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2407.15846 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240715846H p

    Hodge J. A., et al., 2024, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2407.15846 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240715846H p. arXiv:2407.15846

    2024 doi arXiv

  62. [73]

    F., Kere s D., O \ n orbe J., Faucher-Gigu \`e re C.-A., Quataert E., Murray N., Bullock J

    Hopkins P. F., Kere s D., O \ n orbe J., Faucher-Gigu \`e re C.-A., Quataert E., Murray N., Bullock J. S., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu1738 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.445..581H 445, 581

    2014 doi

  63. [74]

    F., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad1902 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.525.2241H 525, 2241

    Hopkins P. F., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad1902 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.525.2241H 525, 2241

    2023 doi

  64. [75]

    Huertas-Company M., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa2777 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.499..814H 499, 814

    2020 doi

  65. [76]

    Immeli A., Samland M., Gerhard O., Westera P., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20034282 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004A&A...413..547I 413, 547

    2004 doi

  66. [77]

    L., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aa7516 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...843L..21J 843, L21

    Johnson T. L., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aa7516 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...843L..21J 843, L21

    2017 doi

  67. [79]

    S., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202243100 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022A&A...666A..44K 666, A44

    Kalita B. S., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202243100 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022A&A...666A..44K 666, A44

    2022 doi

  68. [80]

    S., Silverman J

    Kalita B. S., Silverman J. D., Daddi E., Mercier W., Ho L. C., Ding X., 2024a, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2402.02679 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240202679K p. arXiv:2402.02679

    doi arXiv

  69. [81]

    S., Silverman J

    Kalita B. S., Silverman J. D., Daddi E., Bottrell C., Ho L. C., Ding X., Yang L., 2024b, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/acfee4 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...960...25K 960, 25

    doi

  70. [82]

    Kashino D., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/777/1/L8 , 777, L8

    2013 doi

  71. [83]

    Kashino D., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/ab06c4 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJS..241...10K 241, 10

    2019 doi

  72. [84]

    Kawamura A., et al., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/184/1/1 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJS..184....1K 184, 1

    2009 doi

  73. [85]

    , @doi 10.1109/ICNN.1995.488968

    Kennedy J., Eberhart R., 1995, in Proceedings of ICNN'95 - International Conference on Neural Networks. , @doi 10.1109/ICNN.1995.488968

    1995

  74. [86]

    J., De Los Reyes M

    Kennicutt Robert C. J., De Los Reyes M. A. C., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/abd3a2 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...908...61K 908, 61

    2021 doi

  75. [87]

    Khochfar S., Silk J., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/700/1/L21 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...700L..21K 700, L21

    2009 doi

  76. [88]

    C., Filippova N., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/abe934 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...911..128K 911, 128

    Kim J.-G., Ostriker E. C., Filippova N., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/abe934 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...911..128K 911, 128

    2021 doi

  77. [89]

    M., et al., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/520086 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJS..172..196K 172, 196

    Koekemoer A. M., et al., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/520086 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJS..172..196K 172, 196

    2007 doi

  78. [90]

    Kruijssen J. M. D., Pfeffer J. L., Reina-Campos M., Crain R. A., Bastian N., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty1609 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.486.3180K 486, 3180

    2019 doi

  79. [91]

    Krumholz M., Burkert A., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/724/2/895 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...724..895K 724, 895

    2010 doi

  80. [92]

    R., Dekel A., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16675.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010MNRAS.406..112K 406, 112

    Krumholz M. R., Dekel A., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16675.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010MNRAS.406..112K 406, 112

    2010

  81. [93]

    B., 1981, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/194.4.809 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981MNRAS.194..809L 194, 809

    Larson R. B., 1981, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/194.4.809 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981MNRAS.194..809L 194, 809

    1981 doi

  82. [94]

    L., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5dc3 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...888...92L 888, 92

    Larson K. L., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5dc3 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...888...92L 888, 92

    2020 doi

  83. [95]

    H., Calzetti D., Heckman T

    Leitherer C., Li I. H., Calzetti D., Heckman T. M., 2002, @doi [ ] 10.1086/342486 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002ApJS..140..303L 140, 303

    2002 doi

  84. [96]

    K., Walter F., Brinks E., Bigiel F., de Blok W

    Leroy A. K., Walter F., Brinks E., Bigiel F., de Blok W. J. G., Madore B., Thornley M. D., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/136/6/2782 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008AJ....136.2782L 136, 2782

    2008 doi

  85. [97]

    K., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/814/2/83 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...814...83L 814, 83

    Leroy A. K., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/814/2/83 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...814...83L 814, 83

    2015 doi

  86. [98]

    Liu Z., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad4096 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...968...15L 968, 15

    2024 doi

  87. [99]

    C., et al., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21900.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012MNRAS.427..688L 427, 688

    Livermore R. C., et al., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21900.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012MNRAS.427..688L 427, 688

    2012

  88. [100]

    C., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv686 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.450.1812L 450, 1812

    Livermore R. C., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv686 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.450.1812L 450, 1812

    2015 doi

  89. [101]

    E., et al., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/760/1/6 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...760....6M 760, 6

    Magdis G. E., et al., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/760/1/6 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...760....6M 760, 6

    2012 doi

  90. [102]

    E., Primack J., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu1340 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.443.3675M 443, 3675

    Mandelker N., Dekel A., Ceverino D., Tweed D., Moody C. E., Primack J., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu1340 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.443.3675M 443, 3675

    2014 doi

  91. [103]

    Mandelker N., Dekel A., Ceverino D., DeGraf C., Guo Y., Primack J., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw2358 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.464..635M 464, 635

    2017 doi

  92. [104]

    J., Haeussler B., Casteels K., Lintott C., Masters K., Simmons B., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac080 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.511.1502M 511, 1502

    Margalef-Bentabol B., Conselice C. J., Haeussler B., Casteels K., Lintott C., Masters K., Simmons B., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac080 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.511.1502M 511, 1502

    2022 doi

  93. [105]

    Martig M., Bournaud F., Teyssier R., Dekel A., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/707/1/250 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...707..250M 707, 250

    2009 doi

  94. [106]

    F., Ostriker E

    McKee C. F., Ostriker E. C., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.astro.45.051806.110602 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ARA&A..45..565M 45, 565

    2007 arXiv

  95. [107]

    Mehta V., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/abed5b , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...912...49M 912, 49

    2021 doi

  96. [108]

    E., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac86ce , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...937...88M 937, 88

    Meidt S. E., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac86ce , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...937...88M 937, 88

    2022 doi

  97. [109]

    E., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/acaaa8 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...944L..18M 944, L18

    Meidt S. E., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/acaaa8 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...944L..18M 944, L18

    2023 doi

  98. [110]

    S., Cannon J., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz1337 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.487.4238M 487, 4238

    Messa M., Adamo A., \"O stlin G., Melinder J., Hayes M., Bridge J. S., Cannon J., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz1337 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.487.4238M 487, 4238

    2019 doi

  99. [111]

    Messa M., Dessauges-Zavadsky M., Richard J., Adamo A., Nagy D., Combes F., Mayer L., Ebeling H., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac2189 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.516.2420M 516, 2420

    2022 doi

  100. [112]

    arXiv:2407.20331

    Messa M., et al., 2024a, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2407.20331 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240720331M p. arXiv:2407.20331

    doi arXiv

  101. [113]

    Messa M., Dessauges-Zavadsky M., Adamo A., Richard J., Claeyssens A., 2024b, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae565 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.529.2162M 529, 2162

    doi

  102. [114]

    Me s tri \'c U., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac2309 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.516.3532M 516, 3532

    2022 doi

  103. [115]

    arXiv:2402.08696

    Mowla L., et al., 2024, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2402.08696 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240208696M p. arXiv:2402.08696

    2024 doi arXiv

  104. [116]

    A., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/709/1/191 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...709..191M 709, 191

    Murray N., Quataert E., Thompson T. A., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/709/1/191 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...709..191M 709, 191

    2010 doi

  105. [117]

    F., Feldmann R., Kere s D., Faucher-Gigu \`e re C.-A., Murray N., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw2754 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.465..952O 465, 952

    Oklop c i \'c A., Hopkins P. F., Feldmann R., Kere s D., Faucher-Gigu \`e re C.-A., Murray N., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw2754 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.465..952O 465, 952

    2017 doi

  106. [118]

    Pan H.-A., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac474f , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...927....9P 927, 9

    2022 doi

  107. [119]

    C., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201322395 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014A&A...562A...1P 562, A1

    Perret V., Renaud F., Epinat B., Amram P., Bournaud F., Contini T., Teyssier R., Lambert J. C., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201322395 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014A&A...562A...1P 562, A1

    2014 doi

  108. [120]

    Puglisi A., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ab1f92 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...877L..23P 877, L23

    2019 doi

  109. [121]

    Rahman N., et al., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/745/2/183 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...745..183R 745, 183

    2012 doi

  110. [122]

    Reina-Campos M., Kruijssen J. M. D., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx790 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.469.1282R 469, 1282

    2017 doi

  111. [123]

    J., Baume G., Feinstein C., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202038970 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020A&A...644A.101R 644, A101

    Rodr \' guez M. J., Baume G., Feinstein C., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202038970 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020A&A...644A.101R 644, A101

    2020 doi

  112. [124]

    Rujopakarn W., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/accc82 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...948L...8R 948, L8

    2023 doi

  113. [125]

    K., 2024, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2403.19843 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240319843S p

    Schinnerer E., Leroy A. K., 2024, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2403.19843 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240319843S p. arXiv:2403.19843

    2024 doi arXiv

  114. [126]

    Schreiber C., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201425017 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015A&A...575A..74S 575, A74

    2015 doi

  115. [127]

    Scoville N., et al., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/516585 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJS..172....1S 172, 1

    2007 doi

  116. [128]

    M., Dye S., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty886 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.477.4380S 477, 4380

    Sharda P., Federrath C., da Cunha E., Swinbank A. M., Dye S., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty886 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.477.4380S 477, 4380

    2018 doi

  117. [129]

    Sheth K., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1086/657638 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010PASP..122.1397S 122, 1397

    2010 doi

  118. [130]

    Shibuya T., Ouchi M., Kubo M., Harikane Y., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-637X/821/2/72 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...821...72S 821, 72

    2016 doi

  119. [131]

    D., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/220/1/12 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJS..220...12S 220, 12

    Silverman J. D., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/220/1/12 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJS..220...12S 220, 12

    2015 doi

  120. [132]

    Soto E., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aa5da3 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...837....6S 837, 6

    2017 doi

  121. [133]

    N., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/191/1/58 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJS..191...58S 191, 58

    Spergel D. N., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/191/1/58 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJS..191...58S 191, 58

    2010 doi

  122. [134]

    J., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1038/nature08773 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010Natur.463..781T 463, 781

    Tacconi L. J., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1038/nature08773 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010Natur.463..781T 463, 781

    2010 doi

  123. [135]

    J., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/768/1/74 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...768...74T 768, 74

    Tacconi L. J., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/768/1/74 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...768...74T 768, 74

    2013 doi

  124. [136]

    Tamburello V., Mayer L., Shen S., Wadsley J., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv1695 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.453.2490T 453, 2490

    2015 doi

  125. [137]

    Tamburello V., Rahmati A., Mayer L., Cava A., Dessauges-Zavadsky M., Schaerer D., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx784 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.468.4792T 468, 4792

    2017 doi

  126. [138]

    arXiv:2407.16578

    Tan Q.-H., et al., 2024a, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2407.16578 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240716578T p. arXiv:2407.16578

    doi arXiv

  127. [139]

    Tan Q.-H., et al., 2024b, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202347255 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...684A..23T 684, A23

    doi

  128. [140]

    \"U bler H., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab27cc , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...880...48U 880, 48

    2019 doi

  129. [141]

    Vanzella E., et al., 2017a, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx351 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.467.4304V 467, 4304

    doi

  130. [142]

    Vanzella E., et al., 2017b, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aa74ae , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...842...47V 842, 47

    doi

  131. [143]

    Vanzella E., et al., 2022a, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202141590 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022A&A...659A...2V 659, A2

    doi

  132. [144]

    Vanzella E., et al., 2022b, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ac8c2d , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...940L..53V 940, L53

    doi

  133. [145]

    C., Zamora-Avil \'e s M., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz2736 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.490.3061V 490, 3061

    V \'a zquez-Semadeni E., Palau A., Ballesteros-Paredes J., G \'o mez G. C., Zamora-Avil \'e s M., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz2736 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.490.3061V 490, 3061

    2019 doi

  134. [146]

    V., Donkov S., Klessen R

    Veltchev T. V., Donkov S., Klessen R. S., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt699 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.432.3495V 432, 3495

    2013 doi

  135. [147]

    R., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/ac3078 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJS..258...11W 258, 11

    Weaver J. R., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/ac3078 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJS..258...11W 258, 11

    2022 doi

  136. [148]

    H., Keto E., Ho L

    Wei L. H., Keto E., Ho L. C., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/750/2/136 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...750..136W 750, 136

    2012 doi

  137. [149]

    Welch B., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ac9d39 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...940L...1W 940, L1

    2022 doi

  138. [150]

    Wuyts S., et al., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/753/2/114 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...753..114W 753, 114

    2012 doi

  139. [151]

    Zanella A., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1038/nature14409 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015Natur.521...54Z 521, 54

    2015 doi

  140. [152]

    Zhou J.-w., Kroupa P., Dib S., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202450412 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...688L..19Z 688, L19

    2024 doi

  141. [153]

    O., Weisz D

    Zick T. O., Weisz D. R., Ribeiro B., Kriek M. T., Johnson B. D., Ma X., Bouwens R., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa543 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.493.5653Z 493, 5653

    2020 doi

  142. [154]

    G., Ellis R

    van den Bergh S., Abraham R. G., Ellis R. S., Tanvir N. R., Santiago B. X., Glazebrook K. G., 1996, @doi [ ] 10.1086/118020 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996AJ....112..359V 112, 359

    1996 doi

  143. [155]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.stat...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.