pith. sign in

arxiv: 2601.15959 · v2 · pith:MJG4COFEnew · submitted 2026-01-22 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

JWST Advanced Deep Extragalactic Survey (JADES) Data Release 5: Photometrically Selected Galaxy Candidates at z > 8

Kevin N. Hainline , Daniel J. Eisenstein , Lily Whitler , Brant Robertson , Benjamin D. Johnson , Peter Jakobsen , David Puskas , Sandro Tacchella
show 29 more authors
Jakob M. Helton Zihao Wu Santiago Arribas William M. Baker Andrew J. Bunker Alex J. Cameron Stefano Carniani Courtney Carreira Stephane Charlot Jacopo Chevallard Emma Curtis-Lake Francesco D'Eugenio Qiao Duan Eiichi Egami Ryan Hausen Zhiyuan Ji Tobias J. Looser Roberto Maiolino Petra Mengistu Pablo G. Perez-Gonzalez Marcia Rieke Pierluigi Rinaldi Fengwu Sun James A. A. Trussler Hannah Ubler Christina C. Williams Christopher N. A. Willmer Chris Willott Joris Witstok
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-21 15:28 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA
keywords high-redshift galaxiesphotometric redshiftsJWST observationsUV continuum slopesgalaxy morphologycosmic dawnJADES survey
0
0 comments X

The pith

JADES DR5 catalogs 2081 galaxy candidates at photometric redshifts above 8

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

The paper assembles a catalog of 2081 sources with photometric redshifts greater than 8 from JWST observations covering 469 square arcminutes in the GOODS fields. These candidates span UV magnitudes from -22 to -16 and include 19 objects potentially at redshifts above 14. Analysis of the UV continuum slopes reveals a steepening trend toward higher redshifts compared to brighter samples. More than a quarter of the sources show signs of being extended with clumpy structures, suggesting ongoing galaxy assembly at early times. A spectroscopic subsample of 123 objects helps refine the photometric redshift methods using different templates and accounting for Ly-alpha absorption.

Core claim

We present a sample of 2081 sources selected at photometric redshift z_phot > 8 across the JADES DR5 data release in GOODS-S and GOODS-N over a total area of 469 square arcmin. These sources range from M_UV = -22 to M_UV = -16, with 19 objects at z_phot > 14. We estimate the UV slopes for the full sample from fits to the photometry and find evidence for a steepening of the relationship between the UV continuum slope and M_UV to higher redshifts, a result that differs from prior analyses of brighter samples in the literature. We provide evidence that over one quarter of our sources have evidence for being morphologically extended, with many galaxies showing multiple bright knots or clumps.

What carries the argument

The z_phot > 8 selection from broadband photometry fits that identifies high-redshift galaxy candidates and enables analysis of their UV slopes and morphologies.

If this is right

  • The steepening UV slope relation indicates evolving galaxy dust or stellar populations at the highest redshifts.
  • Clumpy extended morphologies point to assembly processes like mergers or in-situ star formation in early galaxies.
  • Improved fitting templates and Ly-alpha damping prescriptions enhance photometric redshift reliability for future samples.
  • The 19 candidates at z_phot > 14 serve as priority targets for spectroscopic confirmation of the earliest galaxies.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • This sample size could tighten constraints on the UV luminosity function at z > 8 and its contribution to reionization.
  • Clumpy features may connect to theoretical models of how the first galaxies built up their stellar mass.
  • Deeper or wider JWST imaging could test whether the extended sources remain candidates or show signs of gravitational lensing.

Load-bearing premise

Photometric redshifts accurately select true high-redshift galaxies without significant contamination from lower-redshift sources.

What would settle it

Spectroscopic redshifts for a large fraction of the sample that either confirm z > 8 for most candidates or reveal many as lower-redshift interlopers.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2601.15959 by Alex J. Cameron, Andrew J. Bunker, Benjamin D. Johnson, Brant Robertson, Christina C. Williams, Christopher N. A. Willmer, Chris Willott, Courtney Carreira, Daniel J. Eisenstein, David Puskas, Eiichi Egami, Emma Curtis-Lake, Fengwu Sun, Francesco D'Eugenio, Hannah Ubler, Jacopo Chevallard, Jakob M. Helton, James A. A. Trussler, Joris Witstok, Kevin N. Hainline, Lily Whitler, Marcia Rieke, Pablo G. Perez-Gonzalez, Peter Jakobsen, Petra Mengistu, Pierluigi Rinaldi, Qiao Duan, Roberto Maiolino, Ryan Hausen, Sandro Tacchella, Santiago Arribas, Stefano Carniani, Stephane Charlot, Tobias J. Looser, William M. Baker, Zhiyuan Ji, Zihao Wu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Footprint showing the 1597 GOODS-S galaxies and candidates at z > 8 in our sample. We show a 5′ scale bar in each panel, and in blue, the JADES-specific survey area, while we plot ancillary JWST/NIRCam data that we search over as part of JADES DR5 with a grey outline. The points are colored by their redshift, as shown in the legend in each panel. The highest density of sources are found in regions with inc… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Footprint showing the 484 GOODS-N galaxies and candidates at z > 8 in our sample, with colors and lines as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: UV magnitude plotted against photometric (solid color points) and spectroscopic (black outlined points) for our 1597 GOODS-S (blue) and 484 GOODS-N (red) sources. We highlight some of the brighter source IDs along the top of the Figure. The UV magnitudes were estimated using convolved CIRC1 photometry, as described in Section 4. The observed lack of sources at z ∼ 10 and z ∼ 13 is primarily due to the impa… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: SEDs, EAZY χ 2 surfaces, and JWST/NIRCam thumbnails for the GOODS-S galaxies at za > 14 in our sample. For each source, we show the HST and NIRCam photometry in the top left panel with pink and red points respectively, and the EAZY fit in blue. In the top right panel, we plot EAZY χ 2 as a function of redshift with an orange line, the za value with a vertical blue line, and the 1σ (2σ) redshift uncertainty… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: GOODS-N galaxies at za > 14 in our sample. The colors, lines, and symbols are as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: (Left) The SED of GOODS-N ID 1019411, the highest-redshift candidate in H24, with the colors, lines, and symbols the same as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: SEDs, EAZY χ 2 surfaces, and JWST/NIRCam thumbnails for the GOODS-S and GOODS-N sources that were rejected from the primary sample, but have notable SEDs. The panels and lines are the same as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Evolution of the UV slope β vs. MUV for our high-redshift sources in three bins, (Left) z = 8 − 9, (Middle) z = 9 − 11, and (Right) z > 11. We measure β following the method outlined in Topping et al. (2024), and present the individual measurements with grey points, with the median uncertainty on β shown in grey in the bottom panel for each plot. We plot a binned median with larger colored points, and a li… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Thumbnails for a set of 14 example extended sources at z > 10. Each thumbnail is 1.5 ′′ × 1.5 ′′, which at z = 10 (12) corresponds to 6.4 kpc (5.6 kpc). For each galaxy, we plot, in the left-most column, a 1.5 ′′ × 1.5 ′′ RGB thumbnail, constructed using multiple combined filters: in GOODS-S, the blue image is composed of the F090W through F182M NIRCam filters, the green image is composed of F200W and F210… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: EAZY photometric redshift plotted against spectroscopic redshift for 123 sources in our sample. (Left) Raw photometric redshifts derived from our fits. (Right) Photometric redshifts estimated using the Asada et al. (2025) CGM evolution prescription. In both panels we provide statistics for the fits: Noutliers, the number of catastrophic outliers with |za − zspec|/(1 + zspec) > 0.15 (and the outlier fracti… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: A comparison between EAZY photometric redshifts and spectroscopic redshifts, with statistics as shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_11.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present a sample of 2081 sources selected at photometric redshift $z_{\mathrm{phot}} > 8$ across the JADES DR5 data release in GOODS-S and GOODS-N over a total area of 469 square arcmin. These sources range from $M_{\mathrm{UV}} = -22$ to $M_{\mathrm{UV}} = -16$, with 19 objects at $z_{\mathrm{phot}} > 14$. We estimate the UV slopes for the full sample from fits to the photometry and find evidence for a steepening of the relationship between the UV continuum slope and $M_{\mathrm{UV}}$ to higher redshifts, a result that differs from prior analyses of brighter samples in the literature. We provide evidence that over one quarter of our sources have evidence for being morphologically extended, with many galaxies showing multiple bright knots or clumps even out to $z \sim 13 - 14$, an indication of how galaxies at Cosmic Dawn are growing and evolving. We discuss JADES-GN+189.15982+62.28899, a GOODS-N F200W dropout galaxy at $z_{\mathrm{phot}} \sim 15 - 18$ which has been observed spectroscopically with JWST/NIRSpec in prism mode, resulting in a very low signal-to-noise spectrum that is consistent with the photometry and rules out a number of low-redshift solutions for the source. Finally, we use a subsample of 123 objects in our sample with spectroscopic redshifts to explore the usage of alternate fitting templates and a prescription for Ly-$\alpha$ damping wing absorption, finding that both produce significant improvements to the estimated photometric redshifts.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper presents a catalog of 2081 photometrically selected galaxy candidates at z_phot > 8 from JADES DR5 in the GOODS-S and GOODS-N fields over 469 arcmin², spanning M_UV from -22 to -16 with 19 sources at z_phot > 14. It reports evidence for steepening of the UV continuum slope versus M_UV relation at higher redshifts, morphological extension and clumpy structures in over one quarter of the sample up to z ~ 13-14, discusses a specific F200W dropout at z_phot ~15-18 with supporting low-S/N NIRSpec prism spectroscopy, and demonstrates photo-z improvements from alternate templates and Ly-α damping wing prescriptions on a 123-object spectroscopic subsample.

Significance. If the photometric selection is robust, this large sample would represent a substantial addition to high-redshift galaxy studies, enabling statistical analyses of UV properties and morphologies during Cosmic Dawn. The template and damping tests provide practical guidance for future photo-z work, and the NIRSpec follow-up on one extreme candidate offers direct validation. These elements could inform galaxy formation models if contamination and completeness are properly quantified.

major comments (2)
  1. [sample selection section] § on sample selection and photometric redshifts: The central claim of 2081 sources at z_phot >8 rests on broadband template fits, yet no explicit contamination fraction, purity, or false-positive rate is reported for the full sample (beyond the 123-object spectroscopic subsample). This is load-bearing for the headline numbers and especially the 19 z_phot >14 candidates, where even modest interloper fractions would dominate; a selection-function model tied to the exact color cuts and depth is needed to support the trends.
  2. [UV slopes section] UV-slope analysis section: The reported steepening of the UV slope–M_UV relation lacks a quantitative error budget, propagation of photometric uncertainties, or assessment of how photo-z selection biases affect the slope measurements. Without these, it is unclear whether the difference from prior brighter samples is robust or driven by the unquantified contamination in the parent sample.
minor comments (2)
  1. [morphology section] Clarify the precise quantitative criteria used to classify sources as 'morphologically extended' and how clump detection is performed (e.g., surface-brightness thresholds or fitting methods).
  2. [data and fields section] Provide a table or explicit statement of the effective area and depth variations between GOODS-S and GOODS-N to allow readers to assess sample uniformity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed report. The comments highlight important aspects of robustness that we will strengthen in the revised manuscript. We address each major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [sample selection section] § on sample selection and photometric redshifts: The central claim of 2081 sources at z_phot >8 rests on broadband template fits, yet no explicit contamination fraction, purity, or false-positive rate is reported for the full sample (beyond the 123-object spectroscopic subsample). This is load-bearing for the headline numbers and especially the 19 z_phot >14 candidates, where even modest interloper fractions would dominate; a selection-function model tied to the exact color cuts and depth is needed to support the trends.

    Authors: We agree that explicit quantification of contamination and a selection function are necessary to support the headline sample size and especially the 19 z_phot >14 candidates. The manuscript already uses the 123-object spectroscopic subsample to validate the photo-z pipeline and demonstrate improvements from alternate templates and Ly-α damping-wing prescriptions, which indirectly constrains interloper rates. However, we did not provide a full-sample contamination estimate or selection-function model. In revision we will add a dedicated subsection that (i) derives an empirical contamination fraction by applying the identical color and photo-z cuts to the spectroscopic subsample and to lower-redshift control fields, (ii) discusses the robustness of the 19 z_phot >14 sources individually (including the F200W-dropout source with NIRSpec prism data that rules out several low-z solutions), and (iii) presents a basic selection-function model based on the survey depth, color cuts, and completeness simulations already performed for the JADES DR5 release. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [UV slopes section] UV-slope analysis section: The reported steepening of the UV slope–M_UV relation lacks a quantitative error budget, propagation of photometric uncertainties, or assessment of how photo-z selection biases affect the slope measurements. Without these, it is unclear whether the difference from prior brighter samples is robust or driven by the unquantified contamination in the parent sample.

    Authors: We concur that a quantitative error budget and bias assessment are required to substantiate the reported steepening of the UV-slope–M_UV relation. The present analysis fits β directly to the broadband photometry but does not propagate photometric uncertainties through to the slope measurements nor test the influence of photo-z selection. In the revised manuscript we will (i) implement Monte-Carlo resampling of the photometric errors and photo-z probability distributions to derive uncertainties on β and on the slope of the β–M_UV relation, (ii) repeat the fit on subsets with progressively stricter photo-z quality cuts to quantify selection bias, and (iii) compare the trend obtained from the full photometric sample with that from the 123 spectroscopic objects to assess the impact of any residual contamination. These additions will allow a direct statistical comparison with prior brighter samples. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in photometric catalog selection

full rationale

The paper presents a direct catalog of 2081 sources selected via standard photometric redshift template fits (EAZY or similar) applied to new JADES DR5 broadband photometry over 469 arcmin². The core result is simply the count of objects satisfying the z_phot > 8 cut, which follows immediately from running the fits on the observations. No quantity is derived by fitting a parameter to a subset and then renaming a closely related output as a 'prediction.' The 123-object spectroscopic subsample is used only for validation and template testing, not to construct the main sample or to close any self-referential loop. UV-slope and morphology trends are measured on the selected objects without reducing to prior fitted values or self-citation chains. The derivation is therefore self-contained against the external photometric data.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central results depend on standard assumptions in photometric redshift estimation and template fitting drawn from prior literature rather than new postulates.

free parameters (1)
  • Ly-alpha damping wing absorption parameters
    A prescription for damping-wing absorption is tested as an alternate fitting choice.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Broadband photometry can be used to estimate reliable photometric redshifts for z > 8 galaxy candidates.
    The entire sample selection and subsequent analyses rest on this standard assumption in high-redshift astronomy.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 6033 in / 1277 out tokens · 60936 ms · 2026-05-21T15:28:45.812480+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Intense and extended CIII] emission suggests a strong outflow in JADES-GS-z14-0

    astro-ph.GA 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Extended CIII] emission offset from the stars in a z=14.18 galaxy indicates outflows with mass outflow rate ~160 solar masses per year and mass-loading factor 4-15, constraining star-formation efficiency to below 0.08.

  2. Two Exciting High-redshift Galaxy Candidates Turn Out to Be Two Exciting Ultra-cool Brown Dwarfs

    astro-ph.GA 2026-04 accept novelty 5.0

    Two high-redshift galaxy candidates are reidentified as ultra-cool Y-type brown dwarfs at ~500 pc based on NIRSpec spectra matching templates and detected proper motions of 49 and 24 mas/yr.

  3. Strong Gravitational Lensing with the James Webb Space Telescope

    astro-ph.CO 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 2.0

    Strong gravitational lensing paired with JWST enables magnified high-resolution views of distant sources and improved constraints on dark matter.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

154 extracted references · 154 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers · 12 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    D., Vanzella, E., et al

    Adamo, A., Bradley, L. D., Vanzella, E., et al. 2024, Nature, 632, 513, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07703-7

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

  2. [2]

    J., Conselice, C

    Adams, N. J., Conselice, C. J., Ferreira, L., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 518, 4755, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3347

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3347 2023

  3. [3]

    J., Austin, D., Harvey, T., et al

    Adams, N. J., Austin, D., Harvey, T., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 542, 1705, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf1153

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staf1153 2025

  4. [4]

    C., Helton, J

    Alberts, S., Williams, C. C., Helton, J. M., et al. 2024, ApJ, 975, 85, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad66cc

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad66cc 2024

  5. [5]

    A., Toft, S., et al

    Allen, N., Oesch, P. A., Toft, S., et al. 2025, A&A, 698, A30, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452690 Arrabal Haro, P., Dickinson, M., Finkelstein, S. L., et al. 2023a, ApJL, 951, L22, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acdd54 —. 2023b, Nature, 622, 707, doi: 10.1038/s41586-023-06521-7

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202452690 2025

  6. [6]

    J., et al

    Asada, Y., Desprez, G., Willott, C. J., et al. 2025, ApJL, 983, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adc388 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

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adc388 2025

  7. [7]

    J., et al

    Atek, H., Shuntov, M., Furtak, L. J., et al. 2023a, MNRAS, 519, 1201, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3144

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3144

  8. [8]

    2023b, MNRAS, 524, 5486, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1998

    Atek, H., Chemerynska, I., Wang, B., et al. 2023b, MNRAS, 524, 5486, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1998

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad1998

  9. [9]

    J., et al

    Austin, D., Adams, N., Conselice, C. J., et al. 2023, ApJL, 952, L7, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ace18d

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ace18d 2023

  10. [10]

    B., Pirzkal, N., Finkelstein, S

    Bagley, M. B., Pirzkal, N., Finkelstein, S. L., et al. 2024, ApJL, 965, L6, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad2f31

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad2f31 2024

  11. [11]

    M., Ito, K., Valentino, F., et al

    Baker, W. M., Ito, K., Valentino, F., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.09761, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2509.09761

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2509.09761 2025

  12. [12]

    Z., Baggen, J

    Barrufet, L., Arellano Cordova, K. Z., Baggen, J. F. W., et al. 2024, Dead or alive? Unveiling the nature of massive galaxies in the early Universe, JWST Proposal. Cycle 3, ID. #5545

    work page 2024

  13. [13]

    J., Illingworth, G

    Bouwens, R. J., Illingworth, G. D., Labbe, I., et al. 2011, Nature, 469, 504, doi: 10.1038/nature09717

    work page doi:10.1038/nature09717 2011

  14. [14]

    J., Illingworth, G

    Bouwens, R. J., Illingworth, G. D., Oesch, P. A., et al. 2015, ApJ, 803, 34, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/803/1/34

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/803/1/34 2015

  15. [15]

    J., Oesch, P

    Bouwens, R. J., Oesch, P. A., Stefanon, M., et al. 2021, AJ, 162, 47, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/abf83e

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/abf83e 2021

  16. [16]

    B., van Dokkum, P

    Brammer, G. B., van Dokkum, P. G., & Coppi, P. 2008, ApJ, 686, 1503, doi: 10.1086/591786

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1086/591786 2008

  17. [17]

    A Matched Catalogue of z> 5.9 Galaxies in the WFC3 Hubble Ultra Deep Field

    Bunker, A., & Wilkins, S. 2009, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:0912.1351, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.0912.1351

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.0912.1351 2009

  18. [18]

    J., NIRSPEC Instrument Science Team, & JAESs Collaboration

    Bunker, A. J., NIRSPEC Instrument Science Team, & JAESs Collaboration. 2020, in IAU Symposium, Vol. 352, Uncovering Early Galaxy Evolution in the ALMA and JWST Era, ed. E. da Cunha, J. Hodge, J. Afonso, L. Pentericci, & D. Sobral, 342–346, doi: 10.1017/S1743921319009463

    work page doi:10.1017/s1743921319009463 2020

  19. [19]

    J., Cameron, A

    Bunker, A. J., Cameron, A. J., Curtis-Lake, E., et al. 2023a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2306.02467, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2306.02467

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2306.02467

  20. [20]

    J., Saxena, A., Cameron, A

    Bunker, A. J., Saxena, A., Cameron, A. J., et al. 2023b, A&A, 677, A88, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346159 27

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346159

  21. [21]

    L., & Storchi-Bergmann, T

    Calzetti, D., Kinney, A. L., & Storchi-Bergmann, T. 1994, ApJ, 429, 582, doi: 10.1086/174346

    work page doi:10.1086/174346 1994

  22. [22]

    J., Katz, H., Witten, C., et al

    Cameron, A. J., Katz, H., Witten, C., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 534, 523, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1547

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1547 2024

  23. [23]

    2024, Nature, 633, 318, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07860-9

    Carniani, S., Hainline, K., D’Eugenio, F., et al. 2024, Nature, 633, 318, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07860-9

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07860-9 2024

  24. [24]

    2025, A&A, 696, A87, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452451

    Carniani, S., D’Eugenio, F., Ji, X., et al. 2025, A&A, 696, A87, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452451

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202452451 2025

  25. [25]

    2022, ApJL, 938, L15, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac94d0

    Castellano, M., Fontana, A., Treu, T., et al. 2022, ApJL, 938, L15, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac94d0

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac94d0 2022

  26. [26]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2504.05893, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2504.05893

    Castellano, M., Fontana, A., Merlin, E., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2504.05893, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2504.05893

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2504.05893 2025

  27. [27]

    Glover, S. C. O. 2024, A&A, 689, A244, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450224

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450224 2024

  28. [28]

    2024, MNRAS, 528, L33, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slad171

    Chen, H. 2024, MNRAS, 528, L33, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slad171

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slad171 2024

  29. [29]

    P., Mason, C., et al

    Chen, Z., Stark, D. P., Mason, C., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 528, 7052, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae455

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae455 2024

  30. [30]

    2022, MNRAS, 517, 5104, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2874

    Chisholm, J., Saldana-Lopez, A., Flury, S., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 517, 5104, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2874

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac2874 2022

  31. [31]

    A., Endsley, R., et al

    Chisholm, J., Berg, D. A., Endsley, R., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 534, 2633, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae2199

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae2199 2024

  32. [32]

    L., Shao, A., & Senthil Kumar, G

    Clausen, T., Steinhardt, C. L., Shao, A., & Senthil Kumar, G. 2025, A&A, 697, A160, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202453247

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202453247 2025

  33. [33]

    J., McLeod, D

    Cullen, F., McLure, R. J., McLeod, D. J., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 520, 14, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad073

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad073 2023

  34. [34]

    J., McLure, R

    Cullen, F., McLeod, D. J., McLure, R. J., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 531, 997, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1211

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1211 2024

  35. [35]

    2023, Nature Astronomy, 7, 622, doi: 10.1038/s41550-023-01918-w

    Curtis-Lake, E., Carniani, S., Cameron, A., et al. 2023, Nature Astronomy, 7, 622, doi: 10.1038/s41550-023-01918-w

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-023-01918-w 2023

  36. [36]

    JADES Data Release 4 Paper I: Sample Selection, Observing Strategy and Redshifts of the complete spectroscopic sample

    Curtis-Lake, E., Cameron, A. J., Bunker, A. J., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.01033, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2510.01033 de Graaff, A., Brammer, G., Weibel, A., et al. 2025, A&A, 697, A189, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452186

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.01033 2025

  37. [37]

    DeCoursey, C., Egami, E., Pierel, J. D. R., et al. 2025, ApJ, 979, 250, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad8fab

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad8fab 2025

  38. [38]

    2009, ApJ, 703, 785, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/703/1/785

    Dekel, A., Sari, R., & Ceverino, D. 2009, ApJ, 703, 785, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/703/1/785

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/703/1/785 2009

  39. [39]

    2023, MNRAS, 523, 3201, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1557

    Li, Z. 2023, MNRAS, 523, 3201, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1557

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad1557 2023

  40. [40]

    2013, MNRAS, 435, 999, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt1338 D’Eugenio, F., Cameron, A

    Dekel, A., Zolotov, A., Tweed, D., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 435, 999, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt1338 D’Eugenio, F., Cameron, A. J., Scholtz, J., et al. 2024a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2404.06531, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2404.06531 D’Eugenio, F., Maiolino, R., Carniani, S., et al. 2024b, A&A, 689, A152, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348636 D’Eugenio, F., Nelson, E. J., Eisens...

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt1338 2013

  41. [41]

    T., McLeod, D

    Donnan, C. T., McLeod, D. J., McLure, R. J., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 520, 4554, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad471

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad471 2023

  42. [42]

    T., McLure, R

    Donnan, C. T., McLure, R. J., Dunlop, J. S., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 533, 3222, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae2037

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae2037 2024

  43. [43]

    T., Dickinson, M., Taylor, A

    Donnan, C. T., Dickinson, M., Taylor, A. J., et al. 2025, ApJ, 993, 224, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae0a1f

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae0a1f 2025

  44. [44]

    Spectroscopic confirmation of a large and luminous galaxy with weak emission lines at $\mathbf{z = 13.53}$

    Donnan, C. T., McLeod, D. J., McLure, R. J., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.11515. https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.11515

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  45. [45]

    2025, A&A, 698, A234, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202453267

    Dottorini, D., Calabr` o, A., Pentericci, L., et al. 2025, A&A, 698, A234, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202453267

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202453267 2025

  46. [46]

    2023, Complete NIRCam Grism Redshift Survey (CONGRESS), JWST Proposal

    Egami, E., Sun, F., Alberts, S., et al. 2023, Complete NIRCam Grism Redshift Survey (CONGRESS), JWST Proposal. Cycle 2, ID. #3577

    work page 2023

  47. [47]

    Overview of the JWST Advanced Deep Extragalactic Survey (JADES)

    Eisenstein, D. J., Willott, C., Alberts, S., et al. 2023a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2306.02465, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2306.02465

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2306.02465

  48. [48]

    J., Johnson, B

    Eisenstein, D. J., Johnson, B. D., Robertson, B., et al. 2023b, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2310.12340, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2310.12340

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2310.12340

  49. [49]

    J., Stanway, E

    Eldridge, J. J., Stanway, E. R., Xiao, L., et al. 2017, PASA, 34, e058, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2017.51

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1017/pasa.2017.51 2017

  50. [50]

    S., McLure, R

    Ellis, R. S., McLure, R. J., Dunlop, J. S., et al. 2013, ApJL, 763, L7, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/763/1/L7

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/763/1/l7 2013

  51. [51]

    S., et al

    Feldmann, R., Boylan-Kolchin, M., Bullock, J. S., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 536, 988, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae2633

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae2633 2025

  52. [52]

    J., Chatzikos, M., Guzm´ an, F., et al

    Ferland, G. J., Chatzikos, M., Guzm´ an, F., et al. 2017, RMxAA, 53, 385, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1705.10877

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.1705.10877 2017

  53. [53]

    L., Ryan, Russell E., J., Papovich, C., et al

    Finkelstein, S. L., Ryan, Russell E., J., Papovich, C., et al. 2015, ApJ, 810, 71, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/810/1/71

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/810/1/71 2015

  54. [54]

    L., Bagley, M

    Finkelstein, S. L., Bagley, M. B., Arrabal Haro, P., et al. 2022, ApJL, 940, L55, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac966e

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac966e 2022

  55. [55]

    L., Bagley, M

    Finkelstein, S. L., Bagley, M. B., Ferguson, H. C., et al. 2023, ApJL, 946, L13, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acade4

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acade4 2023

  56. [56]

    L., Leung, G

    Finkelstein, S. L., Leung, G. C. K., Bagley, M. B., et al. 2024, ApJL, 969, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad4495

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad4495 2024

  57. [57]

    2023, ApJL, 949, L25, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acd2d9

    Fujimoto, S., Arrabal Haro, P., Dickinson, M., et al. 2023, ApJL, 949, L25, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acd2d9

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acd2d9 2023

  58. [58]

    2025, Nature Astronomy, 9, 1553, doi: 10.1038/s41550-025-02592-w 28

    Fujimoto, S., Ouchi, M., Kohno, K., et al. 2025, Nature Astronomy, 9, 1553, doi: 10.1038/s41550-025-02592-w 28

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-025-02592-w 2025

  59. [59]

    2025, MNRAS, 540, 2331, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf768

    Gazagnes, S., Chisholm, J., Endsley, R., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 540, 2331, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf768

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staf768 2025

  60. [60]

    Gelli, V., Mason, C., & Hayward, C. C. 2024, ApJ, 975, 192, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad7b36

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad7b36 2024

  61. [61]

    C., Koekemoer, A

    Giavalisco, M., Ferguson, H. C., Koekemoer, A. M., et al. 2004, ApJL, 600, L93, doi: 10.1086/379232

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1086/379232 2004

  62. [62]

    N., Johnson, B

    Hainline, K. N., Johnson, B. D., Robertson, B., et al. 2024a, ApJ, 964, 71, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1ee4

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad1ee4

  63. [63]

    N., D’Eugenio, F., Jakobsen, P., et al

    Hainline, K. N., D’Eugenio, F., Jakobsen, P., et al. 2024b, ApJ, 976, 160, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad8447

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad8447

  64. [64]

    N., Helton, J

    Hainline, K. N., Helton, J. M., Johnson, B. D., et al. 2024c, ApJ, 964, 66, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad20d1

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad20d1

  65. [65]

    JADES: An Abundance of Ultra-Distant T- and Y-Dwarfs in Deep Extragalactic Data

    Hainline, K. N., Helton, J. M., Miles, B. E., et al. 2025a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.00111, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2510.00111

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.00111

  66. [66]

    N., Maiolino, R., Juodˇ zbalis, I., et al

    Hainline, K. N., Maiolino, R., Juodˇ zbalis, I., et al. 2025b, ApJ, 979, 138, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad9920

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad9920

  67. [67]

    2016, ApJ, 821, 123, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/821/2/123

    Harikane, Y., Ouchi, M., Ono, Y., et al. 2016, ApJ, 821, 123, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/821/2/123

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/821/2/123 2016

  68. [68]

    2023, ApJS, 265, 5, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/acaaa9

    Harikane, Y., Ouchi, M., Oguri, M., et al. 2023, ApJS, 265, 5, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/acaaa9

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/acaaa9 2023

  69. [69]

    K., Ellis, R

    Harikane, Y., Inoue, A. K., Ellis, R. S., et al. 2025, ApJ, 980, 138, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad9b2c

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad9b2c 2025

  70. [70]

    E., Watson, D., Brammer, G., et al

    Heintz, K. E., Watson, D., Brammer, G., et al. 2024, Science, 384, 890, doi: 10.1126/science.adj0343

    work page doi:10.1126/science.adj0343 2024

  71. [71]

    E., Brammer, G

    Heintz, K. E., Brammer, G. B., Watson, D., et al. 2025a, A&A, 693, A60, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450243

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450243

  72. [72]

    E., Pollock, C

    Heintz, K. E., Pollock, C. L., Witstok, J., et al. 2025b, ApJL, 987, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ade393

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ade393 2041

  73. [73]

    M., Sun, F., Woodrum, C., et al

    Helton, J. M., Sun, F., Woodrum, C., et al. 2024, ApJ, 974, 41, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad6867

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad6867 2024

  74. [74]

    M., Rieke, G

    Helton, J. M., Rieke, G. H., Alberts, S., et al. 2025a, Nature Astronomy, 9, 729, doi: 10.1038/s41550-025-02503-z

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-025-02503-z

  75. [75]

    M., Morrison, J

    Helton, J. M., Morrison, J. E., Hainline, K. N., et al. 2025b, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2512.19695, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2512.19695

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2512.19695

  76. [76]

    M., Alberts, S., Rieke, G

    Helton, J. M., Alberts, S., Rieke, G. H., et al. 2025c, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.02099, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.02099

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.02099

  77. [77]

    J., & Gazagnes, S

    Huberty, M., Scarlata, C., Hayes, M. J., & Gazagnes, S. 2025, ApJ, 987, 82, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/add5e7

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/add5e7 2025

  78. [78]

    2017, Completing the Legacy of Hubble’s Wide/Deep Fields: An Aligned Complete Dataset of 1220 Orbits on the GOODS-N/CANDELS-N Region, HST Proposal id.15027

    Illingworth, G. 2017, Completing the Legacy of Hubble’s Wide/Deep Fields: An Aligned Complete Dataset of 1220 Orbits on the GOODS-N/CANDELS-N Region, HST Proposal id.15027. Cycle 25

    work page 2017

  79. [79]

    D., Magee, D., Oesch, P

    Illingworth, G. D., Magee, D., Oesch, P. A., et al. 2013, ApJS, 209, 6, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/209/1/6

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/209/1/6 2013

  80. [80]

    2022, A&A, 661, A80, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142663

    Jakobsen, P., Ferruit, P., Alves de Oliveira, C., et al. 2022, A&A, 661, A80, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142663

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202142663 2022

Showing first 80 references.