Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 81 references

VODKA: Complex molecular gas dynamics in a kpc-separation z=2.17 dual quasar with ALMA

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Resolved CO kinematics show that J0749+2255 is a true dual quasar, with the apparent Einstein ring dissolved by per-pixel spectral decomposition.

desk verdict First ALMA CO kinematics for a kpc-scale dual quasar candidate, with a clever but under-validated two-component decomposition carrying the 'ring is an artifact' argument. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.05327 v1 pith:HTA4J2O2 submitted 2025-02-07 astro-ph.GA

Yuzo Ishikawa , Nadia L. Zakamska , Yu-Ching Chen , Yue Shen , Xin Liu , Andrey Vayner , Hsiang-Chih Hwang , Swetha Sankar
show 1 more author
Arran Gross
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords dualquasarsgalaxymergersmoleculargasCO(4-3)ALMAgravitationallensingactivegalacticnucleisubmillimeterastronomy
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

ALMA observations of J0749+2255, a pair of quasars separated by 3.8 kiloparsecs at redshift 2.17, reveal that the bright CO(4-3) ring seen in integrated light is a kinematic artifact. When the line profile in each pixel is decomposed into a narrow and a broad Gaussian component, the ring dissolves into two spatially and dynamically distinct gas phases: an extended, slowly moving component and a compact, blueshifted, turbulent component. Because the two components are not mirror-symmetric in velocity and the spectra at the two quasar positions are clearly different, the authors conclude that the system is a genuine dual quasar rather than a single quasar seen twice through a gravitational lens. The result matters because the apparent Einstein-ring morphology had revived the lensing hypothesis, and this study shows that resolved molecular-gas kinematics can settle such debates.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing method is a per-spaxel kinematic decomposition in which each CO spectrum is fit with one or two Gaussian components, and components are separated purely by line width: narrow ($\sigma < 100$ km s$^{-1}$, 'c1') versus broad ($\sigma > 100$ km s$^{-1}$, 'c2'). Comparing the resulting moment maps against the lensing prediction of a mirror-symmetric red/blue velocity gradient along an Einstein ring is what eliminates the ring and breaks the lensing hypothesis.

What would settle it

Refit the ALMA datacube with a three-Gaussian or non-parametric per-spaxel decomposition using formal model selection; if a ring-like structure persists in the flux map of any individual fitted component under that alternative decomposition, the claim that the ring is a pure kinematic blending artifact is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that J0749+2255 is a dual quasar, not a lensed image pair. The authors detect CO(4-3) and 455 GHz continuum with ALMA at 0.2-0.3 arcsecond resolution. The integrated CO map shows a compact ring-like structure connecting the two quasars, reminiscent of an Einstein ring. However, per-spaxel fits with one or two Gaussian components, sorted by velocity dispersion below and above 100 km/s, show that the ring is a superposition of kinematically independent components: a narrow component (mean w80 about 150 km/s) that is spatially extended with complex velocity structure, and a broad component (mean w80 about 320 km/s) that is compact and mostly blueshifted. No single component traces a ring, and the velocity field lacks the mirror symmetry a lensed disk would produce. These kinematic findings, combined with previously known extended ionized gas and spectral differences between the two nuclei, lead the authors to argue the dual-quasar interpretation.

Load-bearing premise

The central conclusion rests on the assumption that every pixel's CO emission is well described by one or two Gaussian components cleanly separated at a width threshold of $\sigma = 100$ km s$^{-1}$; if the true profiles have additional components or non-Gaussian shapes, the ring could reappear and the lensing contradiction could vanish.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The lensing debate for J0749+2255 is effectively closed in favor of a physical dual quasar, subject to the decomposition's validity.
  • Integrated-intensity CO maps of close quasar pairs can produce ring morphologies that are blends of independent velocity components; kinematic decomposition should precede any Einstein-ring interpretation.
  • The two-component gas structure implies an ongoing merger with a dynamically settled narrow component and a compact turbulent component, with no evidence for quasar-driven molecular outflows.
  • The molecular gas mass of roughly 10^10 solar masses cannot sustain the inferred starburst for long, suggesting merger-triggered rapid conversion of gas into stars.
  • The 455 GHz continuum is not explained by the starburst or by standard synchrotron models, pointing to extra nuclear emission that future far-infrared observations could constrain.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The fixed 100 km/s width threshold may map onto a physical dichotomy (a cold disk vs. a merger-shocked turbulent phase), but the paper does not demonstrate this; a continuity analysis or a two-phase physical model would test that mapping.
  • If other close-separation dual quasar candidates show similar ring-plus-blend morphologies, single-dish or low-resolution CO observations of such systems may systematically misestimate gas masses and merger stages.
  • The JWST result of a large rotating ionized-gas disk and the ALMA result of disturbed molecular kinematics could be reconciled if the ionized gas traces a large-scale disk while the CO traces circumnuclear gas driven by the merger; a hydrodynamical simulation of a 3.8 kpc-separation merger at z~2 would make this concrete.
  • A decisive lens test would build a full lens model from the HST image positions and the CO velocity field; if such a model can reproduce the observed asymmetry, the dual-quasar conclusion would need revisiting.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. This paper presents ALMA Band 4 observations of CO(4-3) and 455 GHz continuum in J0749+2255, a z=2.17 candidate dual quasar with 3.8 kpc separation. The integrated CO map shows a ring-like structure that the authors argue is a superposition of two kinematically distinct gas components: a spatially extended narrow-line component (c1, sigma < 100 km/s) and a compact broad-line component (c2, sigma > 100 km/s). After per-spaxel two-Gaussian fitting and sigma-based sorting, the ring disappears from the component maps. The authors combine this with the non-mirror-symmetric kinematics, spectral differences between the two nuclei, and extended multi-phase emission to argue that J0749+2255 is a dual quasar rather than a lensed quasar. They also derive molecular gas masses under different excitation and conversion assumptions, discuss the extreme starburst efficiency, and attribute an excess 455 GHz continuum to synchrotron and possibly cold dust contributions.

Significance. If correct, the conclusion that the CO ring is a kinematic artifact rather than an Einstein ring, and that the resolved ALMA kinematics favor the dual-quasar interpretation, would strengthen the case that at least some VODKA-selected kpc-scale pairs are genuine dual quasars despite lensing-like morphology. The paper uses a high-quality ALMA dataset with standard reduction and clear presentation, and the authors are admirably explicit about residual ambiguities in the dynamical interpretation and about the dependence of the molecular mass on R41 and alpha_CO. The main scientific claim, however, rests on the validity and uniqueness of the per-spaxel two-Gaussian decomposition and on the adopted sigma=100 km/s boundary; these are not validated with model selection, residual maps, or stability tests. Because the paper's central table (Table 4) assigns decisive weight to 'CO ring eliminated with kinematic decomposition' and 'kinematic maps contradict lensing', the current support for the headline conclusion is not yet fully secure.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 3.3, Figure 6, Table 4] The central claim that the CO ring is eliminated by kinematic decomposition depends entirely on the per-spaxel two-Gaussian fits and the sigma < 100 km/s versus sigma > 100 km/s sorting, but the paper provides no quantitative model selection, no residual maps, and no stability tests against initial conditions or against the choice of the width threshold. Section 3.2 itself states that adding further Gaussian components to the integrated spectrum improves the fit but makes parameters degenerate, which raises the possibility that the two-component per-spaxel decomposition is not unique and could partly be an artifact of the fitting procedure. In particular, the disappearance of the ring could arise because the two-Gaussian model absorbs line wings that produce large w80 in the single-Gaussian maps (Figure 5), rather than because two physically distinct components exist. Please report BIC/AIC or equivalent model selection, show residual maps for the one- and two-Gaussian fits, vary the starting conditions, and demonstrate that the c1/c2 separation and the ring elimination are robust to the sigma=100 km/s boundary, including accounting for the uncertainty in sigma at each spaxel.
  2. [Section 3.3, paragraph on aperture spectra] The aperture-spectra analysis that motivates the two-component interpretation assumes, without stated justification, a single broad Gaussian for the large-aperture extractions ('Due to the large aperture extraction, it is unclear whether the broadening is due to fast-moving gas or is a blend of multiple narrow line components. In this step, we assume a single broad line.'). This assumption is then used to support the claim that the two quasars have different CO spectra, which is a key piece of evidence against lensing in Section 4.1. The authors should test whether the SW and NE aperture spectra can also be described by multiple narrow components, and they should quantify how the inferred c1/c2 decomposition changes when the number of components is allowed to vary in a data-driven way.
  3. [Section 4.1, Table 4] The lensing hypothesis is rejected partly because the v50 maps of the decomposed components do not show the mirror-symmetric red/blue pattern expected for a lensed disk. However, this argument is load-bearing only if the decomposed components are physically meaningful. If the two-Gaussian fit merely separates narrow and broad wings of the same underlying gas distribution, then the resulting c1 and c2 moment maps are not independent kinematic tracers and the comparison with lensing predictions is not decisive. As a concrete test, the authors should compare the single-Gaussian v50 and w80 maps against the two-component maps in regions where the ring is claimed to disappear, and they should show that the non-mirror-symmetric pattern persists when the decomposition is performed with a different method (e.g., fitting a fixed number of components with a physically motivated line profile or using a non-parametric decomposition).
  4. [Section 3.3, 'Line fits with poor chi2 goodness-of-fit were excluded'] The exclusion criterion for spaxel fits is not defined, and no information is given about how many spaxels were excluded or whether the exclusion is spatially correlated with the regions that define the ring or the extended components. If the excluded spaxels are concentrated near the ring or near the nuclei, the apparent elimination of the ring could be affected by the masking. Please specify the chi2 threshold, report the fraction and spatial distribution of excluded spaxels, and check that the c1/c2 moment maps are not sensitive to this choice.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Figure 1 caption] The caption states that the extended continuum component stretches 'towards the southeast', while the text in Section 3.1 and the summary say 'to the southwest'; please correct the direction so that the figure, text, and abstract agree.
  2. [Figures 5 and 6 captions] The phrase 'solid lack scale line' should read 'solid black scale line'.
  3. [Section 4.3] The word 'hyperlumious' should be 'hyperluminous'.
  4. [Table 3 caption] The caption says 'w80 corresponds to the 80th-percentile line width of a non-parameteric three Gaussian component fit'; 'non-parameteric' should be 'non-parametric'.
  5. [Section 3.2] The statement that the integrated spectrum 'is fit with three Gaussian components' should specify whether the fit is performed on the line-only spectrum after continuum subtraction and provide the reduced chi2 or equivalent goodness-of-fit, especially because the subsequent two-component spaxel fits are justified by comparison with this global fit.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the ALMA kinematic claims are new data products, and the lensing comparison uses external predictions.

full rationale

The paper's central claims—that the CO ring disappears under kinematic decomposition, that there are two kinematically distinct gas components, and that the kinematics contradict the lensing hypothesis—are derived from new ALMA observations via per-spaxel one- or two-Gaussian fitting. The c1/c2 sorting by a sigma threshold is an analysis convention, not a parameter fitted to the conclusion; the disappearance of the ring in the c1/c2 integrated-flux maps is an empirical outcome of the fits rather than a consequence guaranteed by the decomposition. The adopted redshift and quasar positions come from earlier observations (Ishikawa et al. 2024; Chen et al. 2023b) that are external data anchors, and the same-team citations (VODKA, JWST studies) provide independently obtained measurements rather than unverified premises that the ALMA analysis presupposes. The lensing hypothesis is tested against external predictions (mirror-symmetric velocity gradients, confinement of emission to a thin Einstein ring) rather than against a model constructed from the ALMA fit itself. The absence of formal model selection (BIC/AIC) or stability tests is a robustness and correctness concern, not a circularity: the dual-quasar conclusion could be insecure if the decomposition is non-unique, but it is not equivalent by construction to the input assumptions.

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

The paper introduces no new physical entities. The c1/c2 components are fitting constructs, not independently confirmed structures, and the continuum excess is an observed flux density, not a new source. The free parameters are standard conversion factors and line-fit parameters whose values materially affect the mass and star-formation-efficiency interpretations.

free parameters (3)
  • CO excitation correction R41 = L'_CO(4-3)/L'_CO(1-0) = 0.37, 0.87, 1.0 (assumed, from literature)
    Adopted from literature (Kirkpatrick et al. 2019; Carilli & Walter 2013; Vayner et al. 2021) to convert CO(4-3) luminosity to CO(1-0). The molecular gas mass estimate varies by a factor of about 3 across these choices, and the comparison with the Kennicutt-Schmidt relation changes qualitatively.
  • CO-to-H2 conversion factor alpha_CO = 0.8 and 3.2 M_sun (K km/s pc2)^-1 (assumed, from literature)
    Adopted from local quasar/ULIRG and main-sequence galaxy calibrations. The upper-limit mass estimate is about 10 times the baseline, so the 'starburst exceeds fuel' conclusion is sensitive to this choice.
  • Gaussian component parameters in per-spaxel fits = not tabulated
    Each spaxel is fit with one or two Gaussians with variable centroid, sigma, and amplitude; the c1/c2 classification (sigma<100 vs sigma>100 km/s) is a modeling choice that determines the ring-artifact conclusion. These are fit parameters, not physical constants.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Lambda-CDM cosmology with h=0.7, Omega_M=0.3, Omega_Lambda=0.7
    Stated in Section 1. Used to convert angular separations and luminosities to physical scales; uncertainty in cosmology is small relative to other systematics.
  • domain assumption CO(4-3) luminosity traces total molecular gas via the standard Solomon & Vanden Bout conversion
    Equation (1); underlies the L'_CO and M_H2 estimates. The line is assumed thermalized and optically thick for the R41~1 case.
  • domain assumption Lensing predictions: Einstein ring geometry, mirror-symmetric image pairs, and near-identical nuclear spectra
    Used in Section 4.1 and Table 4 to evaluate the lensed-quasar hypothesis. The validity of these predictions for this specific system (cusp configurations, source structure) is not modeled quantitatively.
  • ad hoc to paper The two-component Gaussian decomposition of each spaxel spectrum captures physically distinct gas components (c1, c2)
    Section 3.3. The conclusion that the CO ring is an artifact rests on this decomposition. Component sorting by sigma is arbitrary; no model-selection statistics are provided.
  • domain assumption Kennicutt-Schmidt relation from Kennicutt (1998) applies at z~2 for this system
    Section 4.3. The 'starburst exceeds available fuel' claim uses this relation; deviations could also stem from conversion-factor uncertainties or high-z evolution rather than exceptional star formation efficiency.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of VODKA: Complex molecular gas dynamics in a kpc-separation z=2.17 dual quasar with ALMA." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HTA4J2O2

@misc{pith2026250205327,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: VODKA: Complex molecular gas dynamics in a kpc-separation z=2.17 dual quasar with ALMA},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HTA4J2O2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.05327}
}
abstract

In galaxy mergers, dual quasars - two actively accreting supermassive black holes (SMBHs) - provide a unique opportunity to study the interplay between galaxy dynamics and quasar activity. However, very little is known about their molecular gas, which fuels star formation and quasar activity. In this study, we map the kinematics of the cold molecular gas in J0749+2255, a 3.8 kpc separation dual quasar at z=2.17 using the Atacama Large Millimeter Array (ALMA) Band 4. We detect CO(4-3)650um, which shows remarkably complex morphological and kinematic structures. While the integrated CO map suggested a lens-like ring, this feature disappears with kinematic decomposition. The kinematic analysis with ALMA resolves the ambiguities introduced by previous observations, further supporting the dual quasar interpretation of J0749+2255. We find two kinematically distinct molecular gas components: spatially extended, yet dynamically complex slow-moving gas (FWHM~130 km/s), and a compact, blueshifted, fast-moving, turbulent gas (FWHM~300 km/s). The disturbed kinematics, likely driven by the merger, show hints of rotation but no molecular outflows, suggesting circumnuclear flows. We estimate a large molecular gas reservoir ($M_{H2}\sim10^{10} M_{\odot}$), yet the starburst activity appears to exceed the available fuel. We detect an extended continuum in excess at rest-frame 455 GHz. The kinematic complexity of CO implicates the connection of mergers on the starburst and quasar activity in J0749+2255, yet whether J0749+2255 represents the dual quasar population remains unclear. Targeted kinematic studies of larger dual quasar samples will be essential to disentangling the nature of dual quasars.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.05327 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The continuum image centered at the observed frequency 143.538 GHz. The cyan stars indicate the known quasar positions. There are two components to the contin￾uum: the two bright cores corresponding to J0749+2255- SW and J0749+2255-NE and a faint, extended component stretching towards the southeast. We also show the beam size. of the semi-major and semi-minor axes are 0.3 ′′ × 0.2 ′′ (1.656 kpc × 2.483 kpc) oriented… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (Left) The continuum-subtracted, velocity-integrated CO(4−3) line intensity over ∼ 0.39 GHz (∼ 800 km s−1 ). The integrated intensity map is shown in logscale. The cyan stars indicate the known quasar positions. The CO-emitting gas has an extended component out a radius of ∼ 0.6 ′′ and a bright, compact CO ring concentrated within a radius of ∼ 0.3 ′′. The white contour lines are set at 0.12, 0.20, 0.32, and 0.35 Jy… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The velocity channel map of the observed CO(4 − 3). We calculate the velocity offset with respect to the rest-frame frequency, assuming z = 2.169. Each slice corresponds to the channel width of ∆v ∼ 32 km s−1 . We see different velocity￾dependent structures. A clumpy, CO ring is notable around ∆v ∼ 0 km s−1 . Extended blue-/red-shifted features are prominent at ∆v ∼ ±200 km s−1 that appear to be associated with J074… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (Top left) Zoom-in of the integrated CO intensity from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: CO(4−3) moment maps assuming single-component Gaussian emission line fits for each spaxel. (Left) Fint integrated line intensity; (Center) v50 velocity shift, and (Right) w80 line width. The CO v50 distribution roughly matches the kinematics of the ionized gas as seen …
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: CO(4 − 3) moment maps for two-component (c1, c2) Gaussian line fits. We sort the components by line widths, in which c1 has σ < 100 km s−1 and c2 has σ > 100 km s−1 . (Top left/center/right) Fint, v50, and w80 moment maps for the c1 component. (Bottom left/center/right…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: We show the v50/σ ratio of the two-component fits from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: (Left) Map of the CO/continuum emission ratio. The red contours outline the clumpy structure of the CO emission at SNR > 2. We can see that the light-green regions, dominated by the nuclear synchrotron emission, have an elevated continuum despite the presence of CO(4 −…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: An updated SED of J0749+2255 adapted from Chen et al. (2023b, 2024) with the new ALMA measurements of the rest-frame 455 GHz continuum, optical and near-infrared spectroscopy (Ishikawa et al. 2024). The circles distinguish each quasar by color: J0749+2255-SW (red), J07…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

81 extracted references · 7 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    2017, MNRAS, 470, 4750, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1556

    Accurso, G., Saintonge, A., Catinella, B., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 470, 4750, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1556

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1556 2017

  2. [2]

    2018, MNRAS, 474, 3391, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2950 18 Ishikawa et al

    Agnello, A., Grillo, C., Jones, T., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 474, 3391, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2950 18 Ishikawa et al

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2950 2018

  3. [3]

    2018, PASJ, 70, S4, doi: 10.1093/pasj/psx066 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T

    Aihara, H., Arimoto, N., Armstrong, R., et al. 2018, PASJ, 70, S4, doi: 10.1093/pasj/psx066 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 Collaboration, Pric...

    doi:10.1093/pasj/psx066 2018

  4. [4]

    L., Jones, G., et al

    Banerji, M., Carilli, C. L., Jones, G., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 465, 4390, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw3019

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stw3019 2017

  5. [5]

    1980, Nature, 287, 307, doi: 10.1038/287307a0

    Begelman, M., Blandford, R., & Rees, M. 1980, Nature, 287, 307, doi: 10.1038/287307a0

    doi:10.1038/287307a0 1980

  6. [6]

    Bell, E. F. 2003, ApJ, 586, 794, doi: 10.1086/367829

    doi:10.1086/367829 2003

  7. [7]

    2024, A&A, 691, A178, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450420

    Bertola, E., Circosta, C., Ginolfi, M., et al. 2024, A&A, 691, A178, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450420

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450420 2024

  8. [8]

    2017, A&A, 598, A122, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629301

    Bischetti, M., Piconcelli, E., Vietri, G., et al. 2017, A&A, 598, A122, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629301

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629301 2017

Show all 81 references
  1. [9]

    2018, A&A, 617, A82, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833249

    Bischetti, M., Piconcelli, E., Feruglio, C., et al. 2018, A&A, 617, A82, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833249

    2018 doi

  2. [10]

    2021, A&A, 645, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039057

    Bischetti, M., Feruglio, C., Piconcelli, E., et al. 2021, A&A, 645, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039057

    2021 doi

  3. [11]

    H., & Socrates, A

    Blaes, O., Lee, M. H., & Socrates, A. 2002, ApJ, 578, 775, doi: 10.1086/342655

    2002 doi

  4. [12]

    D., Wolfire, M., & Leroy, A

    Bolatto, A. D., Wolfire, M., & Leroy, A. K. 2013, ARA&A, 51, 207, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-082812-140944

    2013 doi

  5. [13]

    2018, A&A, 612, A29, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201731641

    Brusa, M., Cresci, G., Daddi, E., et al. 2018, A&A, 612, A29, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201731641

    2018 doi

  6. [14]

    2013, ARA&A, 51, 105, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-082812-140953

    Carilli, C., & Walter, F. 2013, ARA&A, 51, 105, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-082812-140953

    2013 doi

  7. [15]

    D., Ni, Y., et al

    Chen, N., Matteo, T. D., Ni, Y., et al. 2023a, MNRAS, 522, 1895, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad834

    doi

  8. [16]

    2022, ApJ, 925, 162, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac401b

    Chen, Y.-C., Hwang, H.-C., Shen, Y., et al. 2022, ApJ, 925, 162, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac401b

    2022 doi

  9. [17]

    2023b, Nature, 616, 45, doi: 10.1038/s41586-023-05766-6

    Chen, Y.-C., Liu, X., Foord, A., et al. 2023b, Nature, 616, 45, doi: 10.1038/s41586-023-05766-6

    doi

  10. [18]

    L., et al

    Chen, Y.-C., Ishikawa, Y., Zakamska, N. L., et al. 2024, ApJ, 968, 92, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad4798

    2024 doi

  11. [19]

    2023, A&A, 671, L4, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202345853

    Ciurlo, A., Mannucci, F., Yeh, S., et al. 2023, A&A, 671, L4, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202345853

    2023 doi

  12. [20]

    D., Chen, N., et al

    Dadiani, E., Matteo, T. D., Chen, N., et al. 2024, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 7, 84, doi: 10.33232/001c.124451 D ´ ıaz-Santos, T., Assef, R. J., Blain, A. W., et al. 2016, ApJL, 816, L6, doi: 10.3847/2041-8205/816/1/L6

    2024 doi

  13. [21]

    Downes, D., & Solomon, P. M. 1998, ApJ, 507, 615, doi: 10.1086/306339

    1998 doi

  14. [22]

    2017, A&A, 604, A67, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201731052

    Duras, F., Bongiorno, A., Piconcelli, E., et al. 2017, A&A, 604, A67, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201731052

    2017 doi

  15. [23]

    2007, A&A, 468, 33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20077525

    Elbaz, D., Daddi, E., Le Borgne, D., et al. 2007, A&A, 468, 33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20077525

    2007 doi

  16. [24]

    K., Han, Y., & Tan, Q.-h

    Fan, L., Knudsen, K. K., Han, Y., & Tan, Q.-h. 2019, ApJ, 887, 74, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5059

    2019 doi

  17. [25]

    2018, A&A, 619, A39, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833174

    Feruglio, C., Fiore, F., Carniani, S., et al. 2018, A&A, 619, A39, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833174

    2018 doi

  18. [26]

    C., Chen, Y.-C., Foord, A., et al

    Gross, A. C., Chen, Y.-C., Foord, A., et al. 2023, ApJ, 956, 117, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acf469

    2023 doi

  19. [27]

    C., Yun, M

    Harrington, K. C., Yun, M. S., Magnelli, B., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 474, 3866, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx3043

    2018 doi

  20. [28]

    Hawkins, M. R. S., Clements, D., Fried, J. W., et al. 1997, MNRAS, 291, 811, doi: 10.1093/mnras/291.4.811

    1997 doi

  21. [29]

    2023, ApJ, 950, 56, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acca76

    He, H., Bottrell, C., Wilson, C., et al. 2023, ApJ, 950, 56, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acca76

    2023 doi

  22. [30]

    M., & Best, P

    Heckman, T. M., & Best, P. N. 2014, ARA&A, 52, 589, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081913-035722

    2014 doi

  23. [31]

    2016, A&A, 590, A56, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201525816

    Hermelo, I., Rela˜ no, M., Lisenfeld, U., et al. 2016, A&A, 590, A56, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201525816

    2016 doi

  24. [32]

    2019, ApJ, 871, 37, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaf6a7

    Herrera-Camus, R., Tacconi, L., Genzel, R., et al. 2019, ApJ, 871, 37, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaf6a7

    2019 doi

  25. [33]

    F., & Hernquist, L

    Hopkins, P. F., & Hernquist, L. 2009, ApJ, 694, 599, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/694/1/599

    2009 doi

  26. [34]

    2020, ApJ, 888, 73, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5c1a

    Hwang, H.-C., Shen, Y., Zakamska, N., & Liu, X. 2020, ApJ, 888, 73, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5c1a

    2020 doi

  27. [35]

    L., Shen, Y., et al

    Ishikawa, Y., Zakamska, N. L., Shen, Y., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2403.08098. http://arxiv.org/abs/2403.08098

    2024 arXiv

  28. [36]

    2024, ApJ, 972, 116, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad57c6

    Izumi, T., Matsuoka, Y., Onoue, M., et al. 2024, ApJ, 972, 116, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad57c6

    2024 doi

  29. [37]

    2017, MNRAS, 468, 4205, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx726

    Kakkad, D., Mainieri, V., Brusa, M., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 468, 4205, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx726

    2017 doi

  30. [38]

    Kennicutt, R. C. 1998, ARA&A, 36, 189, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.36.1.189

    1998 doi

  31. [39]

    2019, ApJ, 879, 41, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab223a

    Kirkpatrick, A., Sharon, C., Keller, E., & Pope, A. 2019, ApJ, 879, 41, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab223a

    2019 doi

  32. [40]

    2011, ApJ, 735, L42, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/735/2/L42

    Koss, M., Mushotzky, R., Veilleux, S., et al. 2011, ApJ, 735, L42, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/735/2/L42

    2011 doi

  33. [41]

    J., Blecha, L., Bernhard, P., et al

    Koss, M. J., Blecha, L., Bernhard, P., et al. 2018, Nature, 563, 214, doi: 10.1038/s41586-018-0652-7

    2018 doi

  34. [42]

    J., Treister, E., Kakkad, D., et al

    Koss, M. J., Treister, E., Kakkad, D., et al. 2023, ApJL, 942, L24, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aca8f0

    2023 doi

  35. [43]

    M., Mainieri, V., et al

    Lamperti, I., Harrison, C. M., Mainieri, V., et al. 2021, A&A, 654, A90, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202141363

    2021 doi

  36. [44]

    Liu, D., Schreiber, N. M. F., Harrington, K. C., et al. 2024, Nature Astronomy, doi: 10.1038/s41550-024-02296-7

    2024 doi

  37. [45]

    Lyu, J., & Rieke, G. H. 2017, ApJ, 841, 76, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa7051

    2017 doi

  38. [46]

    2012, MNRAS, 425, L66, doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2012.01303.x

    Maiolino, R., Gallerani, S., Neri, R., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 425, L66, doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2012.01303.x

    2012

  39. [47]

    2022, Nature Astronomy, 6, 1185, doi: 10.1038/s41550-022-01761-5 J0749+2255: Molecular gas feeding two quasars at cosmic noon 19

    Mannucci, F., Pancino, E., Belfiore, F., et al. 2022, Nature Astronomy, 6, 1185, doi: 10.1038/s41550-022-01761-5 J0749+2255: Molecular gas feeding two quasars at cosmic noon 19

    2022 doi

  40. [48]

    D., Springel, V., & Hernquist, L

    Matteo, T. D., Springel, V., & Hernquist, L. 2005, Nature, 433, 604, doi: 10.1038/nature03335 Mazzilli Ciraulo, B., Melchior, A.-L., Maschmann, D., et al. 2021, A&A, 653, A47, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202141319

    2005 doi

  41. [49]

    2016, ApJ, 830, 156, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/830/2/156 Milosavljevi´ c, M., & Merritt, D

    Mechtley, M., Jahnke, K., Windhorst, R., et al. 2016, ApJ, 830, 156, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/830/2/156 Milosavljevi´ c, M., & Merritt, D. 2001, ApJ, 563, 34, doi: 10.1086/323830

    2016 doi

  42. [50]

    H., Lira, P., Trakhtenbrot, B., et al

    Nguyen, N. H., Lira, P., Trakhtenbrot, B., et al. 2020, ApJ, 895, 74, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab8bd3

    2020 doi

  43. [51]

    G., Weiner, B

    Noeske, K. G., Weiner, B. J., Faber, S. M., et al. 2007, ApJL, 660, L43, doi: 10.1086/517926

    2007 doi

  44. [52]

    D., Laor, A., et al

    Panessa, F., Baldi, R. D., Laor, A., et al. 2019, Nature Astronomy, 3, 387, doi: 10.1038/s41550-019-0765-4

    2019 doi

  45. [53]

    2022, MNRAS, 515, 473, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1745

    Panessa, F., Chiaraluce, E., Bruni, G., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 515, 473, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1745

    2022 doi

  46. [54]

    P., Werf, P

    Papadopoulos, P. P., Werf, P. v. d., Xilouris, E., Isaak, K. G., & Gao, Y. 2012, ApJ, 751, 10, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/751/1/10

    2012 doi

  47. [55]

    2023, A&A, 679, A89, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346649

    Perna, M., Arribas, S., Marshall, M., et al. 2023, A&A, 679, A89, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346649

    2023 doi

  48. [56]

    Prusti, T., Bruijne, J. H. J. d., Brown, A. G. A., et al. 2016, A&A, 595, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629272

    2016 doi

  49. [57]

    A., Walter, F., Brewer, B

    Riechers, D. A., Walter, F., Brewer, B. J., et al. 2008, ApJ, 686, 851, doi: 10.1086/591434

    2008 doi

  50. [58]

    H., Alonso-Herrero, A., Weiner, B

    Rieke, G. H., Alonso-Herrero, A., Weiner, B. J., et al. 2009, ApJ, 692, 556, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/692/1/556

    2009 doi

  51. [59]

    2023, A&A, 679, A129, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346444

    Rizzo, F., Roman-Oliveira, F., Fraternali, F., et al. 2023, A&A, 679, A129, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346444

    2023 doi

  52. [60]

    M., et al

    Ruby, M., M¨ uller-S´ anchez, F., Comerford, J. M., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 535, 763, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae2320

    2024 doi

  53. [61]

    P., Richards, G

    Schneider, D. P., Richards, G. T., Hall, P. B., et al. 2010, AJ, 139, 2360, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/139/6/2360

    2010 doi

  54. [62]

    2024, A&A, 690, A57, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347242

    Scialpi, M., Mannucci, F., Marconcini, C., et al. 2024, A&A, 690, A57, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347242

    2024 doi

  55. [63]

    S., Wills, B

    Shang, Z., Brotherton, M. S., Wills, B. J., et al. 2011, ApJS, 196, 2, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/196/1/2

    2011 doi

  56. [64]

    B., Horne, K., et al

    Shen, Y., Hall, P. B., Horne, K., et al. 2019, ApJS, 241, 34, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab074f

    2019 doi

  57. [65]

    2021, Nature Astronomy, 5, 569, doi: 10.1038/s41550-021-01323-1

    Shen, Y., Chen, Y.-C., Hwang, H.-C., et al. 2021, Nature Astronomy, 5, 569, doi: 10.1038/s41550-021-01323-1

    2021 doi

  58. [66]

    Silk, J., & Rees, M. J. 1998, A&A, 331, L1. http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/9801013

    1998 arXiv

  59. [67]

    2012, A&A, 544, A62, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201219125

    Wambsganss, J. 2012, A&A, 544, A62, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201219125

    2012 doi

  60. [68]

    M., & Vanden Bout, P

    Solomon, P. M., & Vanden Bout, P. A. 2005, ARA&A, 43, 677, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.43.051804.102221

    2005 arXiv

  61. [69]

    R., Costa, T., McKean, J

    Stacey, H. R., Costa, T., McKean, J. P., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 517, 3377, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2765

    2022 doi

  62. [70]

    R., & McKean, J

    Stacey, H. R., & McKean, J. P. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters, 481, L40, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/sly153

    2018 doi

  63. [71]

    K., Schinnerer, E., Williams, T

    Stuber, S. K., Schinnerer, E., Williams, T. G., et al. 2023, A&A, 676, A113, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346318

    2023 doi

  64. [72]

    J., Genzel, R., Smail, I., et al

    Tacconi, L. J., Genzel, R., Smail, I., et al. 2008, ApJ, 680, 246, doi: 10.1086/587168

    2008 doi

  65. [73]

    D., Liu, Z., et al

    Tang, S., Silverman, J. D., Liu, Z., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2407.09399, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2407.09399 The CASA Team, Bean, B., Bhatnagar, S., et al. 2022, PASP, 134, 114501, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ac9642

    2024 doi arXiv

  66. [74]

    2017, ApJ, 836, 8, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/836/1/8

    Trakhtenbrot, B., Lira, P., Netzer, H., et al. 2017, ApJ, 836, 8, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/836/1/8

    2017 doi

  67. [75]

    C., Sartori, L

    Treister, E., Privon, G. C., Sartori, L. F., et al. 2018, ApJ, 854, 83, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa963 Tub ´ ın, D., Treister, E., D’Ago, G., et al. 2021, ApJ, 911, 100, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abedba

    2018 doi

  68. [76]

    2021, A&A, 654, A165, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202141417

    Valentino, F., Daddi, E., Puglisi, A., et al. 2021, A&A, 654, A165, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202141417

    2021 doi

  69. [77]

    A., et al

    Vayner, A., Zakamska, N., Wright, S. A., et al. 2021, ApJ, 923, 59, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac2b9e

    2021 doi

  70. [78]

    Wisnioski, E., Schreiber, N. M. F., Wuyts, S., et al. 2015, ApJ, 799, 209, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/799/2/209

    2015 doi

  71. [79]

    C., Zhuang, M.-Y., & Shangguan, J

    Xie, Y., Ho, L. C., Zhuang, M.-Y., & Shangguan, J. 2021, ApJ, 910, 124, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abe404

    2021 doi

  72. [80]

    2002, MNRAS, 331, 935, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05242.x

    Yu, Q. 2002, MNRAS, 331, 935, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05242.x

    2002

  73. [81]

    L., & Greene, J

    Zakamska, N. L., & Greene, J. E. 2014, MNRAS, 442, 784, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu842

    2014 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.