pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.19428 · v1 · pith:NEIQU3FZnew · submitted 2026-05-19 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

Formation of a nuclear star cluster through the inspiral of globular clusters: A case study of the dwarf elliptical galaxy UGC 7346

Ismael Khan , Fazeel Mahmood Khan , Andrea V. Macci\`o , Kelly Holley-Bockelmann , Peter Berczik This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-20 04:34 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA
keywords nuclear star clustersglobular cluster inspiraldwarf elliptical galaxiesUGC 7346dynamical frictionN-body simulationsgalactic nucleistellar dynamics
0
0 comments X

The pith

N-body simulations show globular cluster inspiral forms a nuclear star cluster of 4.1-4.5 x 10^5 solar masses in UGC 7346 within 1.5 Gyr.

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

The authors run direct N-body simulations of the nine globular clusters in the dwarf elliptical galaxy UGC 7346 to test if their inspiral can build a nuclear star cluster. The simulations show that dynamical friction causes the clusters to fall to the center, creating a central stellar over-density with a mass of 4.1 to 4.5 times 10 to the 5 solar masses in about 1.5 billion years. The structural properties of this over-density, such as its Sersic index and effective radius, fall within the observed range for nuclear star clusters. Testing a case with some more massive clusters produces an even larger NSC that better matches some observations. The results indicate that this process is a viable way to form nuclear star clusters in dwarf galaxies and that UGC 7346 should develop one in the next couple of billion years.

Core claim

Our simulations indicate that GC inspiral leads to the formation of a central stellar over-density relative to the background profile of the host galaxy within ∼1.5 Gyr, corresponding to a NSC with a typical mass of (4.1-4.5)×10^5 M⊙. Several key structural parameters of the newly formed NSC, including the Sérsic index, effective radius, and central stellar density, lie well within the range observed for NSCs. We also test a hypothetical scenario in which some of the infalling GCs have larger masses (M ∼ 10^6 M⊙), resulting in the formation of a more massive NSC whose mass and size are more consistent with observations. Our results suggest that inspiral of GCs is a viable channel for assemb

What carries the argument

Direct N-body simulations tracking the inspiral of multiple globular clusters under dynamical friction in a fixed galactic potential.

Load-bearing premise

The modeling assumes that the nine globular clusters have initial conditions consistent with the observed system near the photometric center and that the galactic potential remains static and unperturbed during the inspiral process.

What would settle it

If high-resolution imaging of UGC 7346 in the next few Gyr shows no development of a central stellar over-density or nuclear star cluster, this would contradict the simulation predictions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.19428 by Andrea V. Macci\`o, Fazeel Mahmood Khan, Ismael Khan, Kelly Holley-Bockelmann, Peter Berczik.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Top panel: Orbital decay of GC 5 in runs with low, intermediate and high resolution. In all cases the GCs reach the center almost at the same time irrespective of the mass resolution used in GC 5 model. Bottom panel: Mass loss of GC 5 in our test runs. Solid lines indicate mass within tidal radius and dashed lines indicate mass within 5 𝑅𝑒. were calculated using the following equation: 𝑅𝑡 = 𝑅  𝑀𝑔𝑐 2𝑀𝑔𝑎𝑙(𝑅… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Projected surface density of UGC 7346 and GC system on xy-plane at various times from start till end of our simulation for the case of IC1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Twin axis plot of orbital decay and mass loss of GCs in IC1. Dark and light gray lines represent total mass within tidal radius and 5𝑅𝑒 (equivalent to half-mass radius). Vertical dashed lines represent the time each GC merged at the center. density center of the galaxy. All GCs managed to reach the center within 3.5 Gyr. However, as evident from mass loss in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Top panel: Time evolution of NSC1 total mass (solid black line), and individual contribution to the total mass of NSC1 by each GC within 50 pc. Bottom panel: Cumulative mass profile of the NSC1 immediately after each GC merger. sess a certain scatter (see table 2) and do not show a clear pattern. NSC1 and NSC2 possess similar mass and yet their Sérsic indices differ. NSC3 despite being the most massive NSC… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Twin axis plot of orbital decay and mass loss of GCs in IC2. Dark and light gray lines represent total mass within tidal radius and 5𝑅𝑒 (equivalent to half-mass radius). Vertical dashed lines represent the time each GC merged at the center. ever, doing so leads to degenerate components (many different combinations of 𝑛 and 𝑅𝑒 that fit to the same surface bright￾ness profile). Therefore, we choose to keep t… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Top panel: Time evolution of NSC2 total mass (black solid line), and individual contribution to the total mass of NSC2 by each GC within 50 pc. Bottom panel: Cumulative mass profile of the NSC2 immediately after each GC merger. 4.5. NSC Kinematics [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Twin axis plot of orbital decay and mass loss of GCs in IC3. Dark and light gray lines represent total mass within tidal radius and 5 𝑅𝑒 (equivalent to half-mass radius). Dash-dotted line indicates merger time of C1 and C2, whereas dotted lines indicate time when each GC merged with their respective cluster [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Comparison of our obtained NSC masses with NSCs in literature. The sample from Sánchez-Janssen et al. (2019) and Spengler et al. (2017) represent Virgo Cluster NSCs. The samples from Georgiev et al. (2016), Erwin & Gadotti (2012) represent late type field spirals, and Pechetti et al. (2020) represents local volume galaxies. The dashed black line represents the 𝑀𝑔𝑎𝑙 − 𝑀𝑛𝑠𝑐 scaling relation presented by Neum… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Velocity dispersion (top panel) and 𝑣/𝜎 (bottom panel) profiles of all the NSCs and galaxy as a function of distance from the center. This research has used NASA’s Astrophysics Data Sys￾tem. This research was carried out on the high-performance computing resources at SARL-NCGSA, ACCRE Vanderbilt University, and New York University Abu Dhabi. 7. DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT The data underlying this article … view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Nuclear star clusters (NSCs) are dense stellar environments located in the center of most galaxies. NSCs are thought to form through two primary methods; through the inspiral of globular clusters (GCs) to the galactic center due to dynamical friction, and through in-situ star formation. Recent observations of dwarf elliptical galaxy UGC 7346 suggest that it might be undergoing NSC formation due to the presence of multiple GCs near its photometric center. We perform direct N-body simulations of nine GCs belonging to UGC 7346's GC system to investigate whether their eventual infall to the galactic center would result in the formation of a NSC. Our simulations indicate that GC inspiral leads to the formation of a central stellar over-density relative to the background profile of the host galaxy within $\sim$1.5 Gyr, corresponding to a NSC with a typical mass of $(4.1\text{-}4.5)\times 10^5 M_{\odot}$. Several key structural parameters of the newly formed NSC, including the S\'ersic index, effective radius, and central stellar density, lie well within the range observed for NSCs. We also test a hypothetical scenario in which some of the infalling GCs have larger masses ($M \sim 10^6 M_{\odot}$), resulting in the formation of a more massive NSC whose mass and size are more consistent with observations. Our results suggest that inspiral of GCs is a viable channel for assembling a significant mass in the shape of NSC in the center of dwarf galaxies and that UGC 7346 will host a NSC at its center in about 2-3 Gyr.

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

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports direct N-body simulations of the nine observed globular clusters in the dwarf elliptical galaxy UGC 7346. The simulations demonstrate that dynamical-friction-driven inspiral assembles a central stellar overdensity with mass (4.1–4.5)×10^5 M⊙ within ∼1.5 Gyr; the resulting structure has Sérsic index, effective radius, and central density consistent with observed nuclear star clusters. A secondary experiment with more massive clusters is also presented, and the authors conclude that UGC 7346 will host a NSC within 2–3 Gyr.

Significance. If the numerical results survive relaxation of the static-potential assumption, the work supplies concrete, forward-modeling evidence that the globular-cluster inspiral channel can build a substantial fraction of an NSC in a low-mass dwarf galaxy on a Gyr timescale. The use of observationally motivated initial conditions and direct N-body integration (rather than analytic or semi-analytic approximations) constitutes a clear methodological strength and yields falsifiable predictions for the future state of UGC 7346.

major comments (1)
  1. [Methods (galactic potential and N-body setup)] The simulations adopt a fixed, analytic galactic potential that is neither perturbed nor heated by the infalling clusters (Methods section on galactic potential and initial conditions). In a dwarf elliptical the total GC mass is comparable to the enclosed stellar mass within the GC orbits; a live stellar component would absorb orbital energy, modify the local density gradient, and likely lengthen the inspiral time or reduce the final central density contrast. Because only the static case is reported, it is unclear whether the quoted NSC mass and 1.5 Gyr formation timescale remain robust when this load-bearing assumption is relaxed.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Results] The abstract and results section would benefit from an explicit statement of the number of particles per GC and the softening length used, to allow readers to assess two-body relaxation effects.
  2. [Figures] Figure captions should clarify whether the plotted density profiles are time-averaged or instantaneous at t = 1.5 Gyr.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 1 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed review of our manuscript. We address the major comment point by point below, acknowledging the limitations of our modeling approach while defending the robustness of our qualitative conclusions where supported by the simulations.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The simulations adopt a fixed, analytic galactic potential that is neither perturbed nor heated by the infalling clusters (Methods section on galactic potential and initial conditions). In a dwarf elliptical the total GC mass is comparable to the enclosed stellar mass within the GC orbits; a live stellar component would absorb orbital energy, modify the local density gradient, and likely lengthen the inspiral time or reduce the final central density contrast. Because only the static case is reported, it is unclear whether the quoted NSC mass and 1.5 Gyr formation timescale remain robust when this load-bearing assumption is relaxed.

    Authors: We agree that the static analytic potential is a significant simplifying assumption that neglects the dynamical response of the host galaxy's stars to the infalling clusters. This choice was made to enable direct N-body integration of the nine observed GCs while isolating the role of dynamical friction, as detailed in the Methods. The combined GC mass in our models is approximately 4.5×10^5 M⊙, which is indeed comparable to the enclosed stellar mass in the inner regions of this low-mass dwarf. A live potential would allow energy transfer to the background stars, likely moderating the central density buildup. In the revised manuscript we have added explicit discussion of this limitation in the Methods section and a new paragraph in the Discussion, framing the reported 1.5 Gyr timescale as a lower limit and noting that the actual inspiral could be modestly longer while still occurring within a few Gyr. The structural parameters of the resulting overdensity remain consistent with observed NSCs even under this caveat. revision: partial

standing simulated objections not resolved
  • Quantitative assessment of the precise changes to inspiral timescale and final NSC mass and density contrast that would arise in a fully live galactic potential.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity detected in simulation-based results

full rationale

The paper reports forward N-body simulation outcomes for GC inspiral under observed initial conditions and a static analytic potential. The central result (central over-density forming a NSC of mass (4.1-4.5)×10^5 M⊙ within ~1.5 Gyr) is produced by numerical integration of the equations of motion; it is not obtained by fitting parameters to a subset of data and then predicting a related quantity, nor by any self-definitional equation, self-citation chain, or imported uniqueness theorem. No equations or ansatzes in the abstract or described setup reduce the output to the inputs by construction. This is a standard simulation study whose results are independent of the circularity patterns listed.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on numerical integration of stellar dynamics with initial conditions drawn from observations of UGC 7346 and standard assumptions in galactic dynamics.

free parameters (2)
  • Masses, positions, and velocities of the nine GCs
    Selected to match the observed globular cluster system of UGC 7346
  • Parameters of the host galaxy potential
    Assumed based on the photometric profile of the dwarf elliptical galaxy
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Dynamical friction drives the inspiral of globular clusters toward the galactic center
    Invoked as the physical mechanism in the simulation setup for the central claim
  • domain assumption The galactic potential is static and approximately spherical over the simulation timescale
    Implicit in standard N-body models for GC inspiral in dwarf galaxies

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5866 in / 1522 out tokens · 54425 ms · 2026-05-20T04:34:30.196213+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

58 extracted references · 58 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Living Reviews in Relativity , keywords =

    Amaro-Seoane, P., Andrews, J., Arca Sedda, M., et al. 2023, Living Reviews in Relativity, 26, 2, doi: 10.1007/s41114-022-00041-y

    work page doi:10.1007/s41114-022-00041-y 2023

  2. [2]

    2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 763, 62, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/763/1/62

    Antonini, F. 2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 763, 62, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/763/1/62

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/763/1/62 2013

  3. [3]

    2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 812, 72, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/812/1/72

    Antonini, F., Barausse, E., & Silk, J. 2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 812, 72, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/812/1/72

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/812/1/72 2015

  4. [4]

    2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 750, 111, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/750/2/111

    Merritt, D. 2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 750, 111, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/750/2/111

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/750/2/111 2012

  5. [5]

    2017, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 464, 3060, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2483

    Arca-Sedda, M., & Capuzzo-Dolcetta, R. 2017, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 464, 3060, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2483

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2483 2017

  6. [6]

    2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 806, 220, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/806/2/220

    Arca-Sedda, M., Capuzzo-Dolcetta, R., Antonini, F., & Seth, A. 2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 806, 220, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/806/2/220

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/806/2/220 2015

  7. [7]

    2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 958, 100, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ace341

    Ashok, A., Seth, A., Erwin, P., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 958, 100, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ace341

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ace341 2023

  8. [8]

    F., & Mezcua, M

    Askar, A., Baldassare, V. F., & Mezcua, M. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2311.12118, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2311.12118

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2311.12118 2023

  9. [9]

    2020, Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia, 37, e046, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2020.38 Benítez-Llambay, A., Navarro, J

    Baumgardt, H., Sollima, A., & Hilker, M. 2020, Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia, 37, e046, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2020.38 Benítez-Llambay, A., Navarro, J. F., Abadi, M. G., et al. 2016, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 456, 1185, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv2722 Berczik,P.,Spurzem, R.,Zhong,S.,etal. 2013,inLectureNotes in Compu...

    work page doi:10.1017/pasa.2020.38 2020

  10. [10]

    2011, in International conference on High Performance Computing, Kyiv, Ukraine, October 8-10, 2011., p

    Berczik, P., Nitadori, K., Zhong, S., et al. 2011, in International conference on High Performance Computing, Kyiv, Ukraine, October 8-10, 2011., p. 8-18, 8–18

    work page 2011

  11. [11]

    LISA Definition Study Report

    Colpi, M., Danzmann, K., Hewitson, M., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2402.07571, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2402.07571 Côté, P., Piatek, S., Ferrarese, L., et al. 2006, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 165, 57, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0603252 Di Cintio, A., Brook, C. B., Dutton, A. A., et al. 2014, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical ...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2402.07571 2024

  12. [12]

    Erwin, P., & Gadotti, D. A. 2012, Advances in Astronomy, 2012, 946368, doi: 10.1155/2012/946368

    work page doi:10.1155/2012/946368 2012

  13. [13]

    2022, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 658, A172, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039778

    Fahrion, K., Leaman, R., Lyubenova, M., & van de Ven, G. 2022, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 658, A172, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039778

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039778 2022

  14. [14]

    2020, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 634, A53, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201937120

    Fahrion, K., Müller, O., Rejkuba, M., et al. 2020, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 634, A53, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201937120

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201937120 2020

  15. [15]

    2021, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 650, A137, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202140644

    Fahrion, K., Lyubenova, M., Van De Ven, G., et al. 2021, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 650, A137, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202140644

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202140644 2021

  16. [16]

    C., & Sandage, A

    Ferguson, H. C., & Sandage, A. 1989, Astrophysical Journal, Part 2-Letters (ISSN 0004-637X), vol. 346, Nov. 15, 1989, p. L53-L56., 346, L53

    work page 1989

  17. [17]

    Y., & Böker, T

    Georgiev, I. Y., & Böker, T. 2014, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 441, 3570, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu797

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu797 2014

  18. [18]

    Y., Böker, T., Leigh, N., Lützgendorf, N., & Neumayer, N

    Georgiev, I. Y., Böker, T., Leigh, N., Lützgendorf, N., & Neumayer, N. 2016, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 457, 2122, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw093

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw093 2016

  19. [19]

    , keywords =

    Georgiev, I. Y., Hilker, M., Puzia, T. H., Goudfrooij, P., & Baumgardt,H.2009,MonthlyNoticesoftheRoyalAstronomical Society, 396, 1075, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14776.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14776.x 2009

  20. [20]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , author =

    Gieles, M., & Zocchi, A. 2015, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 454, 576, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv1848

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1848 2015

  21. [21]

    W., & Guzmán, R

    Graham, A. W., & Guzmán, R. 2003, AJ, 125, 2936, doi: 10.1086/374992

    work page doi:10.1086/374992 2003

  22. [22]

    I., Read, J

    Gray, E. I., Read, J. I., Taylor, E., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 539, 1167, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf521

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staf521 2025

  23. [23]

    2018, ApJ, 855, 129, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aab0a5

    Hayasaki, K., Zhong, S., Li, S., Berczik, P., & Spurzem, R. 2018, ApJ, 855, 129, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aab0a5

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aab0a5 2018

  24. [24]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.14253, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2508.14253

    Holley-Bockelmann, K., Khan, F., Williams, I., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.14253, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2508.14253

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2508.14253 2025

  25. [25]

    C., Georgiev, I

    Hoyer, N., Neumayer, N., Seth, A. C., Georgiev, I. Y., & Greene, J. E. 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 520, 4664 Jordán, A., Côté, P., Blakeslee, J. P., et al. 2005, The Astrophysical Journal, 634, 1002, doi: 10.1086/497092

    work page doi:10.1086/497092 2023

  26. [26]

    C., et al

    Kacharov, N., Neumayer, N., Seth, A. C., et al. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 480, 1973, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1985

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1985 2018

  27. [27]

    2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 868, 134, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaeacf

    Kaur, K., & Sridhar, S. 2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 868, 134, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaeacf

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaeacf 2018

  28. [28]

    M., Berczik, P., & Just, A

    Khan, F. M., Berczik, P., & Just, A. 2018, A&A, 615, A71, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201730489

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201730489 2018

  29. [29]

    M., Berczik, P., Sobolenko, M., et al

    Khan, F. M., Berczik, P., Sobolenko, M., et al. 2025a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2512.11038, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2512.11038

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2512.11038

  30. [30]

    M., Davis, B

    Khan, F. M., Davis, B. L., Macciò, A. V., & Holley-Bockelmann, K. 2025b, ApJL, 986, L1, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adda4c

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adda4c 2041

  31. [31]

    M., & Holley-Bockelmann, K

    Khan, F. M., & Holley-Bockelmann, K. 2021, MNRAS, 508, 1174, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab2646

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2646 2021

  32. [32]

    M., Preto, M., Berczik, P., et al

    Khan, F. M., Preto, M., Berczik, P., et al. 2012, ApJ, 749, 147, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/749/2/147

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/749/2/147 2012

  33. [33]

    King, I. R. 1966, Astronomical Journal, Vol. 71, p. 64 (1966), 71, 64

    work page 1966

  34. [34]

    Li, B., Holley-Bockelmann, K., & Khan, F. M. 2015, ApJ, 811, 25, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/811/1/25 15

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/811/1/25 2015

  35. [35]

    K., Berczik, P., Chen, X., & Spurzem, R

    Li, S., Liu, F. K., Berczik, P., Chen, X., & Spurzem, R. 2012, ApJ, 748, 65, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/748/1/65

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/748/1/65 2012

  36. [36]

    Lisker, T., Glatt, K., Westera, P., & Grebel, E. K. 2006, The Astronomical Journal, 132, 2432, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0608294

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/0608294 2006

  37. [37]

    K., Binggeli, B., & Glatt, K

    Lisker, T., Grebel, E. K., Binggeli, B., & Glatt, K. 2007, The Astrophysical Journal, 660, 1186, doi: 10.1086/513090

    work page doi:10.1086/513090 2007

  38. [38]

    1982, Astronomy and Astrophysics, vol

    Loose, H., Kruegel, E., & Tutukov, A. 1982, Astronomy and Astrophysics, vol. 105, no. 2, Jan. 1982, p. 342-350. Research supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft., 105, 342

    work page 1982

  39. [39]

    Ultraluminous Starbursts in Major Mergers

    Mihos, C., & Hernquist, L. 1994, arXiv preprint astro-ph/9405039, doi: 10.1086/187460

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1086/187460 1994

  40. [41]

    A., Li, H., Souza, S

    Moreno-Hilario, E., Martinez-Medina, L. A., Li, H., Souza, S. O., & Pérez-Villegas, A. 2024, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 527, 2765, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3306

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3306 2024

  41. [42]

    2020, The Astronomy and Astrophysics Review, 28, 4, doi: 10.1007/s00159-020-00125-0

    Neumayer, N., Seth, A., & Böker, T. 2020, The Astronomy and Astrophysics Review, 28, 4, doi: 10.1007/s00159-020-00125-0

    work page doi:10.1007/s00159-020-00125-0 2020

  42. [43]

    D., Seth, A

    Nguyen, D. D., Seth, A. C., den Brok, M., et al. 2017, ApJ, 836, 237, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa5cb4

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa5cb4 2017

  43. [44]

    The Astrophysical Journal , author =

    Nguyen, D. D., Seth, A. C., Neumayer, N., et al. 2019, ApJ, 872, 104, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aafe7a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aafe7a 2019

  44. [45]

    2000, The Astrophysical Journal, 543, 620, doi: 10.1086/317118

    Oh, K., & Lin, D. 2000, The Astrophysical Journal, 543, 620, doi: 10.1086/317118

    work page doi:10.1086/317118 2000

  45. [46]

    A., Brinks, E., et al

    Oh, S.-H., Hunter, D. A., Brinks, E., et al. 2015, The Astronomical Journal, 149, 180, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/149/6/180 Ordenes-Briceño, Y., Puzia, T. H., Eigenthaler, P., et al. 2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 860, 4, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aac1b8

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/149/6/180 2015

  46. [47]

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

    Paudel, S., Sabiu, C. G., Yoon, S.-J., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2511.21010, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2511.21010

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2511.21010 2025

  47. [48]

    2020, The Astrophysical Journal, 900, 32, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abaaa7

    Pechetti, R., Seth, A., Neumayer, N., et al. 2020, The Astrophysical Journal, 900, 32, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abaaa7

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abaaa7 2020

  48. [49]

    1997, Astronomy and Astrophysics, v

    Prugniel, P., & Simien, F. 1997, Astronomy and Astrophysics, v. 321, p. 111-122, 321, 111

    work page 1997

  49. [50]

    I., Agertz, O., & Collins, M

    Read, J. I., Agertz, O., & Collins, M. L. M. 2016, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 459, 2573, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw713 Román, J., Sánchez-Alarcón, P., Knapen, J., & Peletier, R. 2023, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 671, L7, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202345928 Sánchez-Janssen, R., Côté, P., Ferrarese, L., et al. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal,...

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw713 2016

  50. [51]

    2007, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 462, L27, doi: https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361:20066711

    Schinnerer, E., Böker, T., Emsellem, E., & Downes, D. 2007, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 462, L27, doi: https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361:20066711

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20066711 2007

  51. [52]

    Scott, N., & Graham, A. W. 2013, ApJ, 763, 76, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/763/2/76

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/763/2/76 2013

  52. [53]

    2017, The Astrophysical Journal, 849, 55, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa8a78 Terzić, B., & Graham, A

    Spengler, C., Côté, P., Roediger, J., et al. 2017, The Astrophysical Journal, 849, 55, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa8a78 Terzić, B., & Graham, A. W. 2005, MNRAS, 362, 197, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09269.x Tollet, É., Macciò, A. V., Dutton, A. A., et al. 2016, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 456, 3542, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv2856

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa8a78 2017

  53. [54]

    D., Ostriker, J., & Spitzer Jr, L

    Tremaine, S. D., Ostriker, J., & Spitzer Jr, L. 1975, Astrophysical Journal, vol. 196, Mar. 1, 1975, pt. 1, p. 407-411., 196, 407

    work page 1975

  54. [55]

    2017, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 606, A135, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201730897

    Urich, L., Lisker, T., Janz, J., et al. 2017, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 606, A135, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201730897

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201730897 2017

  55. [56]

    2019, MNRAS, 482, 1525, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2672

    Vasiliev, E. 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 482, 1525, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2672

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2672 2019

  56. [57]

    2021, MNRAS, 505, 5978, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1475

    Vasiliev, E., & Baumgardt, H. 2021, MNRAS, 505, 5978, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1475

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1475 2021

  57. [58]

    Vitral, E., & Mamon, G. A. 2020, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 635, A20, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201937202 Walcher,C.J.,VanDerMarel,R.,McLaughlin,D.,etal.2005,The Astrophysical Journal, 618, 237, doi: 10.1086/425977

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201937202 2020

  58. [59]

    Wang, L., Berczik, P., Spurzem, R., & Kouwenhoven, M. B. N. 2014, ApJ, 780, 164, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/780/2/164

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/780/2/164 2014