Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 2 cited by

MUSEQuBES: Connecting HI absorption with Ly$\alpha$ emitters at $z \approx 3.3$

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read At z≈3.3, galaxies with a companion always show neutral-hydrogen absorption within about 250 kpc, while isolated galaxies show it only about 80% of the time.

desk verdict Solid IGM-enhancement result and useful HI catalog, but the environment headline needs group-level reanalysis because group sightlines share absorbers. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.11959 v2 pith:MVYO3LOT submitted 2024-11-18 astro-ph.GA

Eshita Banerjee , Sowgat Muzahid , Joop Schaye , Jérémy Blaizot , Nicolas Bouché , Sebastiano Cantalupo , Sean D. Johnson , Jorryt Matthee
show 1 more author
Anne Verhamme
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords circumgalacticmediumneutralhydrogenabsorptionLyman-alphaemitterscoveringfractiongalaxyenvironmentquasarabsorption-linespectroscopyhigh-redshiftgalaxiesz≈3.3
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 sets out to measure how much neutral hydrogen surrounds typical low-mass galaxies at $z\approx 3.3$, using 96 Ly$\alpha$ emitters (LAEs) found inside eight MUSE fields centered on bright background quasars and selected purely from their emission, with no prior knowledge of whether absorbing gas lies along the line of sight. By fitting Voigt profiles to every H i absorber within $\pm 500\ \mathrm{km\,s^{-1}}$ of each LAE, it builds an 800-component catalog and finds that H i absorption is elevated near the LAEs compared with the intergalactic medium. Its central result is environmental: at the column-density threshold $\log N(\mathrm{H\,i}) = 15$, the 33 LAEs that belong to pairs or groups show a 100\% H i covering fraction out to $\approx 250$ pkpc, while the isolated LAEs show a consistently lower $\approx 80\%$, with the same contrast visible in line-of-sight velocity bins out to $\approx 300\ \mathrm{km\,s^{-1}}$. The paper also reports an anti-correlation between covering fraction and Ly$\alpha$ rest-frame equivalent width, which the Ly$\alpha$ shell model reads as either gas-rich galaxies living in gas-rich environments or LAEs with high $\mathrm{EW}_0$ ionizing their surroundings more efficiently. If the environmental result holds, the neutral-gas content around typical high-redshift galaxies is set more by the galaxy's surroundings than by its own mass or star-formation rate.

What carries the argument

Three linked elements carry the argument. (1) An absorption-blind sample: 96 LAEs selected purely from their Ly$\alpha$ emission in eight $1'\times 1'$ MUSE fields centered on UV-bright quasars, with systemic redshifts derived from the empirical offset relation $V_{\mathrm{offset}} = 0.89\,\mathrm{FWHM} - 58\ \mathrm{km\,s^{-1}}$. (2) The covering fraction $f_c(\mathrm{H\,i}) = n_{\mathrm{hit}}/n_{\mathrm{total}}$, measured at a fixed column-density threshold after removing LAEs for which the quasar spectra are not sensitive enough, with the random-IGM expectation from the Kim et al. (2021) column-density distribution function serving as the null comparison. (3) The environment label: an LAE is a pair/group member if at least one other LAE lies within $\pm 500\ \mathrm{km\,s^{-1}}$ inside the same 1-arcminute MUSE field, and isolated otherwise, with the 33 pair/group LAEs carrying the headline 100\%-versus-80\% contrast. Underneath all three sits the Voigt profile decomposition itself: simultaneous fitting of the full Lyman series together with contaminating metal lines using VPFIT, which converts blended quasar spectra into a reliable 800-component catalog that separates saturated lower limits from well-constrained column densities.

What would settle it

Re-observe the fields of the 59 'isolated' LAEs with deeper and wider integral-field observations reaching Ly$\alpha$ luminosities below the current survey limit and covering beyond the 1-arcminute field, then recompute the covering fractions after re-classifying every LAE that gains a newly found companion. If undetected companions are common, the 100% versus 80% contrast should weaken or vanish, marking it a classification artifact; if the contrast sharpens, the environmental signal is real. Independently, the literal 100% claim is falsified by any single pair/group LAE whose sensitive quasar spectrum rules out $\log N(\mathrm{H\,i}) \ge 15$ within $\pm 500\ \mathrm{km\,s^{-1}}$.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, this work claims that the circumgalactic medium of typical $z \approx 3.3$ galaxies is rich in neutral gas and that its covering fraction is modulated by environment rather than by galaxy mass or star formation. From 800 Voigt-profile-fitted H i components gathered within $\pm 500\ \mathrm{km\,s^{-1}}$ of 96 MUSEQuBES LAEs (median Ly$\alpha$ luminosity $\approx 10^{42}\ \mathrm{erg\,s^{-1}}$, median stellar mass $\approx 10^{8.9}\,M_\odot$), the overall H i covering fraction at the threshold $\log N(\mathrm{H\,i}) = 15$ is $\approx 88\%$ out to 320 pkpc, above the IGM expectation at every threshold from 14 to 16. The headline result is that all 33 pairs/group LAEs show $\log N(\mathrm{H\,i}) \ge 15$ absorption out to $\approx 250$ pkpc, whereas the isolated LAEs show $\approx 80\%$, a contrast that persists in differential velocity bins up to $\approx 300\ \mathrm{km\,s^{-1}}$. The paper further argues that the flat $N(\mathrm{H\,i})$--impact-parameter relation, with every Lyman-limit-system-associated LAE at an impact parameter $> 50$ pkpc, indicates that the true hosts of strong absorbers are fainter than the survey's detection limit, and it interprets the $\approx 2\sigma$ anti-correlation between $f_c(\mathrm{H\,i})$ and Ly$\alpha$ rest-frame equivalent width as evidence that either gas-rich galaxies sit in gas-rich environments or LAEs with high $\mathrm{EW}_0$ ionize their surrounding medium more efficiently.

Load-bearing premise

The 100% versus 80% contrast rests entirely on the labels 'isolated' and 'pair/group', and those labels are only as good as the companion search: a galaxy counts as isolated when no other Ly$\alpha$-emitting galaxy is seen within $\pm 500\ \mathrm{km\,s^{-1}}$ inside the one-arcminute survey field, so fainter companions, companions hidden in the quasar's glare, or companions just outside the field are silently missed with no completeness correction, while unrelated galaxies aligned by chance along the line of sight can be counted as partners.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the environmental contrast is real, the chance of intercepting $\log N(\mathrm{H\,i}) \ge 15$ gas within roughly 250 pkpc of a typical $z\approx 3.3$ galaxy is essentially unity when that galaxy has a companion, so neutral gas traces group-scale structure rather than individual halos alone.
  • Because $f_c(\mathrm{H\,i})$ near LAEs exceeds the IGM expectation at every threshold and the fractional enhancement grows with threshold column density, typical star-forming galaxies at this epoch sit in gas overdensities well above the cosmic mean out to several virial radii.
  • The flat $N(\mathrm{H\,i})$--impact-parameter relation, together with all Lyman-limit-system hosts appearing beyond 50 pkpc, implies that absorption-selected surveys miss the faint true hosts of strong absorbers, so quasar-absorber--galaxy pairs give an incomplete census of where neutral gas resides.
  • The $f_c(\mathrm{H\,i})$--$\mathrm{EW}_0$ anti-correlation, read through the Ly$\alpha$ shell model, connects the neutral-gas content of a galaxy's circumgalactic medium to the neutral-gas content of its interstellar medium.
  • Compared with lower-redshift samples, the outskirts of these $z\approx 3.3$ LAEs are about as H i-rich as the inner circumgalactic medium of $L^\ast$ galaxies at $z \approx 0.2$, suggesting the neutral-gas content of the circumgalactic medium was higher in the early universe.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A testable corollary the paper leaves implicit: if environment drives the covering fraction, $f_c(\mathrm{H\,i})$ should correlate with local galaxy number density measured over volumes much larger than the 1-arcminute MUSE field, not merely with the binary pair/group label.
  • The scatter in the $V_{\mathrm{offset}}$ relation is not propagated into the absorber-LAE association; obtaining rest-optical spectroscopic redshifts for a subsample would test whether the $\pm 500\ \mathrm{km\,s^{-1}}$ matching window is correct and whether the environmental contrast survives with exact systemic redshifts.
  • If the $\mathrm{EW}_0$ anti-correlation reflects ionizing radiation from high-EW$_0$ LAEs, an extension the paper does not make is that $f_c(\mathrm{H\,i})$ should also anti-correlate with local ionizing-photon output, for example UV luminosity at fixed environment, which the same dataset could test.
  • The planned ionization modeling of these absorbers could turn covering fractions into gas densities and metallicities; a natural prediction of the environmental result is that pair/group LAEs have higher gas densities, and possibly higher metallicities, than isolated LAEs at fixed stellar mass.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

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. The paper presents an absorption-blind study of neutral hydrogen around 96 Lyα emitters (LAEs) at z ≈ 3.3, using high-resolution quasar spectra behind 8 MUSE fields from the MUSEQuBES survey. The authors perform a detailed Voigt profile decomposition of all HI absorbers within ±500 km/s of the LAEs, yielding a catalog of 800 components, and use this catalog to measure total HI column densities, HI covering fractions fc(HI), and their dependence on impact parameter, environment (pairs/groups versus isolated LAEs), Lyα equivalent width, and star formation rate. The central observational claims are that HI absorption is enhanced near LAEs relative to the IGM, that pairs/group LAEs show a 100% HI covering fraction at log N(HI) = 15 out to ≈250 pkpc while isolated LAEs show ≈80%, and that fc(HI) anti-correlates with rest-frame Lyα equivalent width. The paper also reports a lack of correlation between total HI column density and impact parameter, and that all LAEs associated with optically thick absorbers lie at impact parameters >50 pkpc.

Significance. If the headline environmental contrast is correct, this is an important result: it would demonstrate that the neutral gas content of the circumgalactic medium around typical low-mass, high-redshift galaxies is strongly modulated by the galaxy environment, with pairs/groups being gas-rich out to ~250 pkpc. The paper has genuine strengths: the absorber catalog is built from simultaneous fitting of Lyman-series lines, 66 saturated components are explicitly treated as lower limits, LAEs with sensitivity limits below the threshold are excluded from fc(HI) estimates, and the enhancement relative to the IGM is benchmarked against the independent Kim et al. (2021) column density distribution function. The robustness checks with a ±250 km/s velocity window are also valuable. However, the key environmental claim rests on a statistical comparison whose independence assumptions are not met as presented, and the group classification has unresolved completeness issues. The IGM-enhancement result (Fig. 4) is well supported; the environmental result (Fig. 5) requires a group-level reanalysis before it can be accepted as stated in the abstract.

major comments (4)
  1. [§3.3] The central claim that pairs/group LAEs have fc(HI) = 100% versus ≈80% for isolated LAEs is computed from Eq. (1) using individual LAEs as independent measurements, but the LAEs within a group are not independent: Section 2.2 explicitly states that a given absorber may be associated with multiple LAEs. Because both the group definition and the absorption window use ±500 km/s, one strong HI absorber can be counted as a hit for every group member whose velocity window contains it, inflating both the numerator and the denominator in a correlated way. The Fisher exact test reported for 33/33 versus 48/59 treats the 33 group LAEs as independent, which overstates the significance. The paper does not report the number of independent groups, the group size distribution, or how many group hits are attributable to a single shared absorber. A group-level analysis, where each group contributes one measurement (or the correlation is otherwise modeled), is required before the 100% versus 80% contrast can be accepted.
  2. [§3.3] The isolated versus pairs/groups classification is incomplete by construction. An LAE is classified as isolated only if no companion is detected within ±500 km/s inside the 1 arcminute MUSE field (≈320×320 pkpc), so companions outside the field, below the flux limit, or hidden in the quasar PSF are missed, with no completeness correction. Conversely, the ±500 km/s window corresponds to roughly 3.6 cMpc comoving, so it can pair LAEs that are chance line-of-sight coincidences rather than physically bound structures. The first effect would dilute the isolated fc(HI) and reduce the contrast, while the second could inflate the group fc(HI). The paper should quantify the expected contamination rate, for example using the observed field-galaxy correlation function or by varying the group-finding velocity window, and should state how the conclusions change under a stricter grouping criterion.
  3. [§2.1] The systemic redshifts are derived from the empirical relation Voffset = 0.89×FWHM − 58 km/s (Muzahid et al. 2020), but the scatter in this relation is not propagated into any of the subsequent measurements. This is consequential because the ±500 km/s association window, the group membership, and the differential velocity binning in Fig. 5 all depend on systemic redshifts. A scatter of even ~100 km/s can move an absorber across a velocity-bin boundary or move an LAE between the isolated and group classes. The authors should either propagate the relation's uncertainty through the fc(HI) calculation or demonstrate that their conclusions are robust to a Monte Carlo resampling of the Voffset relation.
  4. [§3.4] The claimed anti-correlation between fc(HI) and EW0 rests on an asymmetric treatment of EW0 limits. The text states that lower limits on EW0 are excluded from the lower EW0 bin but are retained when they fall in the upper EW0 bin. Since lower limits are, by definition, values that could lie below the median, keeping them in the upper bin while removing them from the lower bin can artificially raise the covering fraction in the low-EW0 bin and lower it in the high-EW0 bin, creating or strengthening the apparent anti-correlation. The paper should report the number of lower limits in each bin and redo the split with a consistent treatment (for example, treating all lower limits as upper-limit constraints or using survival-analysis methods).
minor comments (5)
  1. [§3.2] The definition of the IGM comparison in Eq. (2) uses the Kim et al. (2021) CDDF with a fixed Δz for ±500 km/s; the paper should explicitly state whether the IGM covering fraction was evaluated at the same median redshift as the LAE sample, since the CDDF evolves rapidly at z ≈ 3.
  2. [§3.1] The statement that the non-detection of LAEs at small impact parameters is not due to quasar PSF issues is supported by comparing the detected number (3) with the expected number (≈2) within 42 pkpc, but this is a very small-number test; the authors should report the Poisson uncertainty on this expectation.
  3. [§2.2] The sentence 'hence, they were excluded from our catalogue' starts with a lowercase letter and should be capitalized; several other typographical issues exist (e.g., 'an rightward arrow' in Fig. 2 caption).
  4. [§4.4] In the definition of δT and the conversion of Δv to r∥, the paper uses a single median redshift z = 3.3 and a single median impact parameter r⊥ ≈ 0.7 cMpc; this should be stated as an approximation in the text, since the LAEs span z = 2.9–3.8.
  5. [§4.2] The comparison of fc(HI) with literature values uses different velocity windows and impact parameter cuts (as shown on the x-axis of Fig. 8); it would help to tabulate the exact cuts for each literature sample in the caption or text, because the differences in window definition affect the interpretation.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the HI covering fractions are direct Voigt-profile measurements benchmarked against external CDDF samples, and the self-citations are calibrations of the same survey rather than load-bearing derivations of the central claim.

full rationale

The central quantities are measured, not fitted to a target value: fc(HI) in Eq. 1 is computed from the Voigt-profile catalog in Table 1, and the IGM comparison in Eq. 2 uses the external Kim et al. (2021) CDDF, with additional checks against Rudie et al. (2012), Lofthouse et al. (2023), and other published samples. The environmental split in Section 3.3 is defined by the presence of a companion LAE within ±500 km/s in the MUSE field, which is logically independent of the absorber measurement; the 100% versus 80% contrast is the arithmetic outcome of nHit/nTotal and is reported with the raw counts in Tables 2 and 3, so it does not reduce to a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. The self-citations (Muzahid et al. 2020 for the Voffset relation, Muzahid et al. 2021 for sample construction and stacking, Banerjee et al. 2023 for CIV) are prior calibrations and characterizations of the same survey; they are load-bearing for systemic redshifts and sample context but not for the fc(HI) result itself, which is a new decomposition of the absorption spectra. The real caveat, noted in Section 2.2, is that 'a given absorber may be associated with multiple LAEs'; this means group-member fc(HI) measurements are not statistically independent, and the 33/33 group value could represent fewer than 33 independent CGM sightlines. That is a statistical-independence and interpretation concern, not a circular derivation: the group definition and the fc definition are not tautologically linked, and the paper's raw counts allow a group-level reanalysis. Overall, the central claims have independent content, so the circularity score is low.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claims rest mainly on the redshift calibration, the IGM baseline, and the vpfit catalog, each reasonable but not independently verified here. The four free parameters are standard choices or fits from prior or companion papers; none was introduced ad hoc to force the headline results, but the Voffset relation and the assumed b=35 km/s enter every covering fraction. No new physical entity is required; the ultra-faint host population is invoked from the literature as an explanation for the null N-rho trend and is not directly detected in this dataset.

free parameters (4)
  • Voffset-FWHM relation coefficients = 0.89, -58 km/s
    From Muzahid et al. (2020), fit to the same MUSEQuBES sample; the systemic redshift of every LAE derives from this relation (Section 2.1), so its unpropagated scatter sets the zero point of every velocity window and group definition.
  • Assumed Doppler parameter b for sensitivity limits = 35 km/s
    Section 3.2: the 3σ limiting column densities (Hellsten et al. 1998) assume b=35 km/s, the median of detected components; these limits decide which LAEs enter nTot in the covering fraction.
  • UV continuum slope beta_UV for EW0 = -2.0
    Section 3.4: EW0 is computed by extrapolating the 1500 Å continuum with beta_UV=-2.0 (Bouwens et al. 2014); this choice propagates into the EW0 bins that drive the anti-correlation result.
  • Mean transmission polynomial coefficients = -1.30, 1.34, -0.23
    Section 4.4: the polynomial for <Tz> is fit to the authors' quasar spectra ('the polynomial function that best fits our data') and is the baseline of the excess Ly-alpha transmission analysis.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The Voffset-FWHM relation accurately estimates systemic redshifts of the sample LAEs
    Invoked in Section 2.1; all velocity windows and the pair/group classification are centered on these redshifts. The relation is empirical with unpropagated scatter (order 100 km/s), small relative to the ±500 km/s window.
  • domain assumption The Kim et al. (2021) CDDF (and similar CDDFs) describe the IGM at z≈3.3
    Used in Eqn. 2 and Fig. 4 to compute the random-region covering fraction baseline; the enhancement claims rest on this comparison.
  • domain assumption Voigt profile fitting with vpfit recovers the true HI column density structure
    Section 2.2: fitted z, b, N for 800 components; saturated/blended components are treated as lower limits (ID=1). The catalog and all fc values inherit this assumption.
  • domain assumption Schaye (2001) density-column density relation maps NHi to overdensity at z≈3
    Section 3.1 uses it to interpret the enhancement of NHi near LAEs (overdensity lines in Fig. 3).
  • domain assumption Hellsten et al. (1998) relation gives valid 3σ limiting column densities
    Section 3.2 uses it to determine which LAEs have sufficient SNR to be counted in nTot for each threshold.
  • domain assumption The Ly-alpha shell model (Verhamme et al. 2006, 2015, 2017) predicts low EW0 for high N(HI) ISM
    Section 4.3: the EW0-fc anti-correlation is interpreted through this model, which has author overlap (Verhamme is a coauthor); it is used for interpretation, not for computing fc.
invented entities (1)
  • Undetected ultra-faint absorber-host galaxies
    purpose: Explains why all LLS/sub-DLA/DLA-associated LAEs lie at impact parameters >50 pkpc and why no NHi-rho trend is seen (Section 4.1).
    The paper invokes hosts too faint for the MUSE exposures (drawing on Bacon et al. 2021 ultra-low-luminosity LAEs and Rahmati & Schaye 2014 simulations), but does not detect this population directly; the explanation is plausible but currently unfalsified by this dataset.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of MUSEQuBES: Connecting HI absorption with Ly$\alpha$ emitters at $z \approx 3.3$." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MVYO3LOT

@misc{pith2026241111959,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: MUSEQuBES: Connecting HI absorption with Ly$\alpha$ emitters at $z \approx 3.3$},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MVYO3LOT}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.11959}
}
abstract

We present a comprehensive analysis of HI absorption around 96 lya emitters (LAEs) at $z\approx3.3$ (median lya luminosity $\approx10^{42}$ erg.s$^{-1}$). These LAEs were identified within 8 MUSE fields, each $1'\times1'$ on the sky and centered on a bright background quasar, as part of the MUSEQuBES survey. Using Voigt profile fitting for all HI absorbers detected within $\pm500$ km.$s^{-1}$ of these LAEs, we compiled a catalog of 800 HI absorption components. Our analysis shows that HI absorption is enhanced near the LAEs compared to the IGM. However, no trend is found between the column densities of HI absorbers and their impact parameters from the LAEs (spanning $\approx54$ to 260 pkpc). Additionally, all galaxies associated with Lyman-limit systems have impact parameters $>50$ pkpc from the quasar sightlines, suggesting that true absorber-hosts may be too faint to detect. The LAEs show an overall HI covering fraction (fc(HI)) of $\approx88\%$ for a threshold logN(HI)$=15$. Notably, at the same threshold, the pairs/group LAEs exhibit a $100\%$ HI covering fraction out to $\approx 250$ pkpc. In contrast, isolated LAEs consistently show a lower fc(HI) of $\approx80\%$. This environmental influence on fc(HI) is also evident up to $\approx 300$ km.$s^{-1}$ in differential bins of line-of-sight velocity. We find an anti-correlation between fc(HI) and the rest-frame lya-emission equivalent width (ew). Based on the lya-shell model, this could imply that gas-rich galaxies tend to reside in gas-rich environments or that the higher EW LAEs are more efficient at ionizing their surrounding medium.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. MUSEQuBES: Unveiling Cosmic Web Filaments at $z\approx3.6$ through Dual Absorption and Emission Line Analysis

    astro-ph.GA 2024-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Detection of an extremely metal-poor, low-density gas absorber, an aligned overdensity of seven Lyman-alpha galaxies, and a 260 pkpc Lyman-alpha nebula, interpreted as a cosmic filament at z≈3.6.

  2. The connection between high-redshift galaxies and Lyman ${\alpha}$ transmission in the Sherwood-Relics simulations of patchy reionisation

    astro-ph.CO 2025-02 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Sherwood-Relics simulations reproduce the observed excess Lyman-alpha transmission around z~6 galaxies, but the implied neutral fraction at z~5.2 conflicts with Lyman-alpha forest data, suggesting the C IV tracers are...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

93 extracted references · 8 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eprint howpublished institution journal key month number organization pages publisher school series title misctitle type volume year version url label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts ...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION format.url url empty "" new.block "" url * "" * if FUNCTION format.eprint eprint empty "" archivePrefix empty "" archivePrefix "arXiv" = new.block " " eprint * " " * new.block " " eprint * " " * if if if FUNCTION format.doi doi empty "" " " doi * " " * if FUNCTION format.pid doi empty eprint empty ur...

  3. [3]

    PeF> 9T 6Gnd 1W9A> 9T 6Gkh. |s.l Kq!

    thebibliography [1] 20pt to REFERENCES 6pt =0pt -12pt 10pt plus 3pt =0pt =0pt =1pt plus 1pt =0pt =0pt -12pt =13pt plus 1pt =20pt =13pt plus 1pt \@M =10000 =-1.0em =0pt =0pt 0pt =0pt =1.0em @enumiv\@empty 10000 10000 `\.\@m \@noitemerr \@latex@warning Empty `thebibliography' environment \@ifnextchar \@reference \@latexerr Missing key on reference command E...

    arXiv 2021

  4. [4]

    L., Shapley A

    Adelberger K. L., Shapley A. E., Steidel C. C., Pettini M., Erb D. K., Reddy N. A., 2005, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/431753 , 629, 636

    doi:10.1086/431753 2005

  5. [5]

    Altay G., Theuns T., Schaye J., Crighton N. H. M., Dalla Vecchia C., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/737/2/L37 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...737L..37A 737, L37

    doi:10.1088/2041-8205/737/2/l37 2011

  6. [6]

    F., Prochaska J

    Arrigoni Battaia F., Hennawi J. F., Prochaska J. X., O \ n orbe J., Farina E. P., Cantalupo S., Lusso E., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty2827 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.482.3162A 482, 3162

    doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2827 2019

  7. [7]

    Astropy Collaboration et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013A&A...558A..33A 558, A33

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 2013

  8. [8]

    Astropy Collaboration et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018AJ....156..123A 156, 123

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f 2018

Show all 93 references
  1. [9]

    S., Ramsay S

    Bacon R., et al., 2010, in McLean I. S., Ramsay S. K., Takami H., eds, Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series Vol. 7735, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy III. p. 773508 ( @eprint arXiv 2211.16795 ), @doi 10.1117/12.856027

    2010 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Bacon R., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202039887 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021A&A...647A.107B 647, A107

    2021 doi

  3. [11]

    D., Cantalupo S., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad2022 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.524.5148B 524, 5148

    Banerjee E., Muzahid S., Schaye J., Johnson S. D., Cantalupo S., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad2022 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.524.5148B 524, 5148

    2023 doi

  4. [12]

    D., Bolton J

    Becker G. D., Bolton J. S., Lidz A., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1017/pasa.2015.45 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015PASA...32...45B 32, e045

    2015 doi

  5. [13]

    H., Hearin A

    Behroozi P., Wechsler R. H., Hearin A. P., Conroy C., 2019, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stz1182 , 488, 3143

    2019 doi

  6. [14]

    Borisova E., et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-637X/831/1/39 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...831...39B 831, 39

    2016 doi

  7. [15]

    J., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/793/2/115 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...793..115B 793, 115

    Bouwens R. J., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/793/2/115 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...793..115B 793, 115

    2014 doi

  8. [16]

    X., Hennawi J

    Cantalupo S., Arrigoni-Battaia F., Prochaska J. X., Hennawi J. F., Madau P., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1038/nature12898 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014Natur.506...63C 506, 63

    2014 doi

  9. [17]

    F., Webb J

    Carswell R. F., Webb J. K., 2014, VPFIT: Voigt profile fitting program , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1408.015 ( @eprint ascl 1408.015 )

    2014

  10. [18]

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

    2003 doi

  11. [19]

    M., Webb J

    Chen H.-W., Lanzetta K. M., Webb J. K., 2001a, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/321537 , 556, 158

    doi

  12. [20]

    M., Webb J

    Chen H.-W., Lanzetta K. M., Webb J. K., Barcons X., 2001b, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/322414 , 559, 654

    doi

  13. [21]

    Chen Y., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa2808 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.499.1721C 499, 1721

    2020 doi

  14. [22]

    M., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/812/2/L27 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...812L..27C 812, L27

    Cooke J., O'Meara J. M., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/812/2/L27 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...812L..27C 812, L27

    2015 doi

  15. [24]

    W., Stocke J

    Danforth C. W., Stocke J. T., Shull J. M., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/710/1/613 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...710..613D 710, 613

    2010 doi

  16. [25]

    H., 1999, @doi [ ] 10.1086/306722 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999ApJ...511..521D 511, 521

    Dav \'e R., Hernquist L., Katz N., Weinberg D. H., 1999, @doi [ ] 10.1086/306722 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999ApJ...511..521D 511, 521

    1999 doi

  17. [26]

    Dutta R., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad1002 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.522..535D 522, 535

    2023 doi

  18. [27]

    Dutta S., Muzahid S., Schaye J., Mishra S., Chen H.-W., Johnson S., Wisotzki L., Cantalupo S., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae206 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.528.3745D 528, 3745

    2024 doi

  19. [28]

    K., Steidel C

    Erb D. K., Steidel C. C., Chen Y., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aacff6 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...862L..10E 862, L10

    2018 doi

  20. [29]

    Fynbo J. P. U., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17294.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010MNRAS.408.2128F 408, 2128

    2010

  21. [30]

    Guo Y., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1038/s41586-023-06718-w , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023Natur.624...53G 624, 53

    2023 doi

  22. [31]

    Guo Y., et al., 2024a, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202347658 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...688A..37G 688, A37

    doi

  23. [32]

    Guo Y., et al., 2024b, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202347958 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...691A..66G 691, A66

    doi

  24. [33]

    R., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020Natur.585..357H 585, 357

    Harris C. R., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020Natur.585..357H 585, 357

    2020 doi

  25. [34]

    H., 1998, @doi [ ] 10.1086/305622 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998ApJ...499..172H 499, 172

    Hellsten U., Hernquist L., Katz N., Weinberg D. H., 1998, @doi [ ] 10.1086/305622 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998ApJ...499..172H 499, 172

    1998 doi

  26. [35]

    Herrero Alonso Y., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202141226 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021A&A...653A.136H 653, A136

    2021 doi

  27. [36]

    D., 2007, @doi [Computing in Science and Engineering] 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007CSE.....9...90H 9, 90

    Hunter J. D., 2007, @doi [Computing in Science and Engineering] 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007CSE.....9...90H 9, 90

    2007 doi

  28. [37]

    D., Chen H.-W., Mulchaey J

    Johnson S. D., Chen H.-W., Mulchaey J. S., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv553 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.449.3263J 449, 3263

    2015 doi

  29. [38]

    D., et al., 2022, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022arXiv220904245J p

    Johnson S. D., et al., 2022, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022arXiv220904245J p. arXiv:2209.04245

    2022 arXiv

  30. [39]

    D., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad3911 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...966..218J 966, 218

    Johnson S. D., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad3911 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...966..218J 966, 218

    2024 doi

  31. [40]

    J., 1998, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.astro.36.1.189 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998ARA&A..36..189K 36, 189

    Kennicutt Robert C. J., 1998, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.astro.36.1.189 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998ARA&A..36..189K 36, 189

    1998 doi

  32. [41]

    H., Dav \'e R., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09451.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005MNRAS.363....2K 363, 2

    Kere s D., Katz N., Weinberg D. H., Dav \'e R., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09451.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005MNRAS.363....2K 363, 2

    2005

  33. [42]

    Kim T.-S., et al., 2021, @doi [Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.] 10.1093/mnras/staa3844 , 501, 5811

    2021 doi

  34. [43]

    K., M ller P., Fynbo J

    Krogager J. K., M ller P., Fynbo J. P. U., Noterdaeme P., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx1011 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.469.2959K 469, 2959

    2017 doi

  35. [44]

    Kusakabe H., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201937340 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020A&A...638A..12K 638, A12

    2020 doi

  36. [45]

    Leclercq F., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202142179 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022A&A...663A..11L 663, A11

    2022 doi

  37. [46]

    Ledoux C., Petitjean P., Fynbo J. P. U., M ller P., Srianand R., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20054242 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006A&A...457...71L 457, 71

    2006 doi

  38. [47]

    Liu Z., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad3364 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.527.5429L 527, 5429

    2024 doi

  39. [48]

    K., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac3089 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.518..305L 518, 305

    Lofthouse E. K., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac3089 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.518..305L 518, 305

    2023 doi

  40. [49]

    Mackenzie R., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz1501 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.487.5070M 487, 5070

    2019 doi

  41. [50]

    Madau P., Dickinson M., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125615 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ARA&A..52..415M 52, 415

    2014 doi

  42. [51]

    Matthee J., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac801 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.512.5960M 512, 5960

    2022 doi

  43. [52]

    Matthee J., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae673 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.tmp..720M

    2024 doi

  44. [53]

    Morrissey P., et al., 2018, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/aad597 , 864, 93

    2018 doi

  45. [54]

    P., Naab T., White S

    Moster B. P., Naab T., White S. D. M., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sts261 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.428.3121M 428, 3121

    2013 doi

  46. [55]

    Muzahid S., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa1347 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.496.1013M 496, 1013

    2020 doi

  47. [56]

    Muzahid S., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab2933 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.508.5612M 508, 5612

    2021 doi

  48. [57]

    M., Prochaska J

    Neeleman M., Wolfe A. M., Prochaska J. X., Rafelski M., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/769/1/54 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...769...54N 769, 54

    2013 doi

  49. [58]

    X., Rafelski M., Carilli C

    Neeleman M., Kanekar N., Prochaska J. X., Rafelski M., Carilli C. L., Wolfe A. M., 2017, @doi [Science] 10.1126/science.aal1737 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017Sci...355.1285N 355, 1285

    2017 doi

  50. [59]

    X., Rafelski M

    Neeleman M., Kanekar N., Prochaska J. X., Rafelski M. A., Carilli C. L., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aaf871 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...870L..19N 870, L19

    2019 doi

  51. [60]

    Noterdaeme P., Petitjean P., Ledoux C., Srianand R., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/200912768 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A&A...505.1087N 505, 1087

    2009 doi

  52. [61]

    Noterdaeme P., et al., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201220259 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012A&A...547L...1N 547, L1

    2012 doi

  53. [62]

    Ono Y., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.16034.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010MNRAS.402.1580O 402, 1580

    2010

  54. [63]

    C., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev-astro-021820-120014 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ARA&A..58..363P 58, 363

    P \'e roux C., Howk J. C., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev-astro-021820-120014 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ARA&A..58..363P 58, 363

    2020 doi

  55. [65]

    X., Weiner B., Chen H.-W., Mulchaey J., Cooksey K., 2011, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637x/740/2/91 , 740, 91

    Prochaska J. X., Weiner B., Chen H.-W., Mulchaey J., Cooksey K., 2011, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637x/740/2/91 , 740, 91

    2011 doi

  56. [66]

    X., O'Meara J

    Prochaska J. X., O'Meara J. M., Fumagalli M., Bernstein R. A., Burles S. M., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/221/1/2 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJS..221....2P 221, 2

    2015 doi

  57. [67]

    Rahmani H., et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw1965 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.463..980R 463, 980

    2016 doi

  58. [68]

    Rahmati A., Schaye J., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt2235 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.438..529R 438, 529

    2014 doi

  59. [70]

    C., Rudie G

    Rakic O., Schaye J., Steidel C. C., Rudie G. C., 2012, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637x/751/2/94 , 751, 94

    2012 doi

  60. [71]

    Rubin K. H. R., Hennawi J. F., Prochaska J. X., Simcoe R. A., Myers A., Lau M. W., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/808/1/38 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...808...38R 808, 38

    2015 doi

  61. [72]

    C., et al., 2012, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637x/750/1/67 , 750, 67

    Rudie G. C., et al., 2012, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637x/750/1/67 , 750, 67

    2012 doi

  62. [73]

    C., Steidel C

    Rudie G. C., Steidel C. C., Shapley A. E., Pettini M., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/769/2/146 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...769..146R 769, 146

    2013 doi

  63. [74]

    C., Steidel C

    Rudie G. C., Steidel C. C., Pettini M., Trainor R. F., Strom A. L., Hummels C. B., Reddy N. A., Shapley A. E., 2019, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab4255 , 885, 61

    2019 doi

  64. [75]

    Schaye J., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1086/322421 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001ApJ...559..507S 559, 507

    2001 doi

  65. [76]

    Shibuya T., et al., 2014, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637x/788/1/74 , 788, 74

    2014 doi

  66. [77]

    M., et al., 2000, @doi [ ] 10.1086/312781 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000ApJ...538L..13S 538, L13

    Shull J. M., et al., 2000, @doi [ ] 10.1086/312781 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000ApJ...538L..13S 538, L13

    2000 doi

  67. [78]

    Songaila A., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1086/324761 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001ApJ...561L.153S 561, L153

    2001 doi

  68. [79]

    C., Erb D

    Steidel C. C., Erb D. K., Shapley A. E., Pettini M., Reddy N., Bogosavljevi \' c M., Rudie G. C., Rakic O., 2010, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637x/717/1/289 , 717, 289

    2010 doi

  69. [80]

    C., Bogosavljevi \'c M., Shapley A

    Steidel C. C., Bogosavljevi \'c M., Shapley A. E., Kollmeier J. A., Reddy N. A., Erb D. K., Pettini M., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/736/2/160 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...736..160S 736, 160

    2011 doi

  70. [81]

    Theuns T., Leonard A., Efstathiou G., 1998, @doi [ ] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.1998.01740.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998MNRAS.297L..49T 297, L49

    1998

  71. [82]

    F., Steidel C

    Trainor R. F., Steidel C. C., Strom A. L., Rudie G. C., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/809/1/89 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...809...89T 809, 89

    2015 doi

  72. [83]

    Tumlinson J., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/777/1/59 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...777...59T 777, 59

    2013 doi

  73. [84]

    Tumlinson J., Peeples M., Werk J., 2017, @doi [Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics] 10.1146/annurev-astro-091916-055240 , 55

    2017 doi

  74. [85]

    L., Schaye J., Steidel C

    Turner M. L., Schaye J., Steidel C. C., Rudie G. C., Strom A. L., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu1801 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.445..794T 445, 794

    2014 doi

  75. [86]

    Verhamme A., Schaerer D., Maselli A., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20065554 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006A&A...460..397V 460, 397

    2006 doi

  76. [87]

    Verhamme A., Orlitov \'a I., Schaerer D., Hayes M., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201423978 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015A&A...578A...7V 578, A7

    2015 doi

  77. [88]

    X., Guseva N., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201629264 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017A&A...597A..13V 597, A13

    Verhamme A., Orlitov \'a I., Schaerer D., Izotov Y., Worseck G., Thuan T. X., Guseva N., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201629264 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017A&A...597A..13V 597, A13

    2017 doi

  78. [89]

    Verhamme A., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnrasl/sly058 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.478L..60V 478, L60

    2018 doi

  79. [90]

    Virtanen P., et al., 2020, @doi [Nature Methods] 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020NatMe..17..261V 17, 261

    2020 doi

  80. [91]

    P., Savage B

    Wakker B. P., Savage B. D., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/182/1/378 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJS..182..378W 182, 378

    2009 doi

  81. [92]

    C., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/abea14 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...912....9W 912, 9

    Wilde M. C., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/abea14 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...912....9W 912, 9

    2021 doi

  82. [93]

    Wisotzki L., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1038/s41586-018-0664-3 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018Natur.563E..31W 563, E31

    2018 doi

  83. [94]

    Zabl J., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab2165 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.507.4294Z 507, 4294

    2021 doi

  84. [95]

    M., Frank S., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201321154 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013A&A...556A.141Z 556, A141

    Zafar T., P \'e roux C., Popping A., Milliard B., Deharveng J. M., Frank S., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201321154 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013A&A...556A.141Z 556, A141

    2013 doi

  85. [97]

    M., Dalla Vecchia C., 2011b, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18896.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.415.2782V 415, 2782

    van de Voort F., Schaye J., Booth C. M., Dalla Vecchia C., 2011b, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18896.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.415.2782V 415, 2782

    2011

Pith tools

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