Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Little Red Dots are Tidal Disruption Events in Runaway-Collapsing Clusters

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

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

Pith's one-line read Little Red Dots may be black hole seeds feeding on shredded stars.

desk verdict A genuinely new and testable synthesis, but the TDE-rate consistency rests on the optimistic rate prescription and the red SED remains unexplained; still deserves a serious referee. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.03309 v2 pith:SICUX63R submitted 2025-01-06 astro-ph.GA astro-ph.HE

Jillian Bellovary This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GAastro-ph.HE
keywords LittleRedDotstidaldisruptioneventsintermediate-massblackholesrunawaycollapseholeseedsJWSThigh-redshiftgalaxiesstellarinitialmassfunctiongalaxyformation
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 proposes that the 'Little Red Dots' found by the James Webb Space Telescope are not a new kind of galaxy or ordinary active galactic nuclei, but the birth sites of the first black holes: very dense star clusters undergoing runaway collapse, in which an intermediate-mass black hole repeatedly tears apart and accretes nearby stars. Predicted number densities of runaway-collapse seeds exceed observed LRD number densities by about four orders of magnitude, and the paper turns that excess into a concrete requirement: a tidal disruption event rate of about $10^{-4}$ per year per system. The paper argues that this rate is reachable for seed black holes of $10^3$--$10^5\,M_\odot$ in clusters with stellar densities near $10^8\,M_\odot\,\mathrm{pc}^{-3}$, and that the resulting emission--compact, UV-bright, broad H$\alpha$, X-ray weak--matches LRD observations. A top-heavy initial mass function could resolve the apparent violation of the $\Lambda$CDM stellar mass function. If the hypothesis is right, LRDs give a direct, live view of supermassive black hole seed formation in the early universe.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by the ratio between the predicted number density of runaway-collapse seeds and the observed number density of LRDs, which sets the required TDE rate, and by two TDE rate prescriptions used to test whether that rate is physically attainable. The analytic rate is $\dot{N}=n_\star\Sigma v_{\mathrm{rel}}$ with $\Sigma=\pi R_t^2(1+2GM_{\mathrm{tot}}/(R_t v_{\mathrm{rel}}^2))$, valid in the full-loss-cone regime; the numerical rate is $\dot{N}=1.1\,F f_b \ln(0.22 M_{\mathrm{BH}}/M_\star)(M_{\mathrm{BH}}/10^3M_\odot)(\rho/10^7M_\odot\mathrm{pc}^{-3})(100\,\mathrm{km\,s}^{-1}/\sigma)^3\,\mathrm{Myr}^{-1}$, matching direct N-body simulations. The paper uses these to map where the required $10^{-4}\,\mathrm{yr}^{-1}$ rate falls in black-hole-mass and velocity-dispersion space, choosing fiducial values of $\rho=10^8M_\odot\mathrm{pc}^{-3}$, $\sigma=40\,\mathrm{km\,s}^{-1}$, and $M_\star=1M_\odot$, then bracketing with lower density and higher dispersion. The transition from full to empty loss cone, with the rate scaling as $M_{\mathrm{BH}}^{-11/12}$ below a critical mass, is included to show where the required rate becomes unattainable.

What would settle it

Monitor several dozen LRDs in the rest-frame ultraviolet for two to three observed years (about six to eight rest-frame years at $z\approx5$--$8$): the hypothesis predicts frequent $t^{-5/3}$ flare decays and coronal-line fading, so a complete absence of such variability would rule out a dominant TDE contribution. Independently, direct measurements of LRD velocity dispersions below roughly 100 km/s would push the predicted rate below $10^{-4}$ per year and weaken the explanation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that Little Red Dots are the observable signature of intermediate-mass black hole seeds growing inside runaway-collapsing clusters. The author argues that the factor $10^4$ gap between the predicted comoving number density of such seeds and the observed LRD number density implies each system must produce a tidal disruption event roughly once every $10^4$ years ($\dot{N}\sim10^{-4}\,\mathrm{yr}^{-1}$). Using two independent TDE rate estimates--an analytic tidal-capture/full-loss-cone rate and a numerical rate calibrated to direct N-body simulations--the paper shows this rate is plausible for black hole masses $10^3$--$10^5\,M_\odot$ and velocity dispersions of 100--150 km/s, even though direct constraints on LRD velocity dispersions are absent. The accompanying properties of TDEs--steep UV emission, broad H$\alpha$ decoupled from black hole mass, soft or absent X-rays, and $t^{-5/3}$ luminosity decays--account for several otherwise puzzling LRD features, including the suggestion of overmassive black holes and the difficulty of modeling the SEDs as either pure star formation or pure AGN. The paper does not claim to explain all LRDs, only that this channel plausibly explains a substantial subset, with the rest possibly powered by more conventional AGN.

Load-bearing premise

The argument hinges on unmeasured cluster conditions: the stellar density must be high enough (near $10^8\,M_\odot\,\mathrm{pc}^{-3}$) and the velocity dispersion large enough (roughly 100--150 km/s) that each seed black hole destroys a star about once every $10^4$ years.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • LRD number densities no longer force a near-100% AGN fraction at $z\sim7$; the same abundance is naturally explained by a shorter-lived TDE phase in common seed-forming clusters.
  • The broad H$\alpha$ in LRDs being unrelated to black hole mass would resolve the 'overmassive black hole' problem inferred for these objects.
  • A top-heavy IMF in these clusters would lower stellar mass estimates and remove the apparent violation of the $\Lambda$CDM stellar mass function, while also making the TDEs brighter.
  • If TDEs power LRDs, rest-frame UV monitoring should reveal characteristic $t^{-5/3}$ decays and coronal-line fading, stretched by a factor $(1+z)$, providing a direct observational test.
  • The model predicts that some LRDs will show strong variability while others--dominated by canonical AGN--will not, making a diverse LRD taxonomy consistent.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the required rate of $10^{-4}\,\mathrm{yr}^{-1}$ holds, the cumulative energy injection from repeated TDEs over $10^7$--$10^8$ years is modest compared with a steadily accreting AGN, so the observed brightness of LRDs may be dominated by the surrounding stellar cluster; this favours searches that compare UV excess against photospheric continuum rather than looking for AGN-like bolometric output
  • The hypothesis implies a direct link between the LRD space density and the seed-formation rate; combining the observed LRD density with an independent estimate of the TDE phase duration would yield the first observational constraint on the rate of runaway-collapse seed formation.
  • A testable extension is to measure LRD velocity dispersions via high-resolution H$\alpha$ or other broad emission lines; dispersions consistently below roughly 100 km/s would push the predicted TDE rate below $10^{-4}\,\mathrm{yr}^{-1}$ and weaken the explanation.
  • If future surveys find LRD abundance evolving strongly with redshift in the way seed-formation models predict, that would support the runaway-collapse channel over a channel tied to host galaxy assembly.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes that Little Red Dots (LRDs) are tidal disruption events occurring in dense star clusters undergoing runaway collapse to form intermediate-mass black hole seeds. It derives a required TDE rate of approximately 10^-4 per year from the roughly 10^4 gap between predicted seed number densities and observed LRD number densities (Section 2), and argues that this rate is plausible for cluster densities of 10^6-10^8 M_sun pc^-3 and velocity dispersions of 40-150 km/s (Section 3). The paper suggests that a top-heavy stellar initial mass function could address the red colors and the apparent overmassive/stellar-mass problems (Section 4).

Significance. If the hypothesis is correct, LRDs would be direct evidence of intermediate-mass black hole seed formation in progress, providing a new observational window on supermassive black hole formation. The paper is one of the first to link LRDs to a specific seed-formation channel and offers a concrete, testable prediction: TDE-like variability in the rest-frame UV. It uses publicly available observational data and simple analytic estimates, and it is candid about its limitations. However, the quantitative support is currently fragile: the required TDE rate depends on unconstrained cluster parameters, the two cited rate estimators differ by an order of magnitude at the fiducial seed mass, and the proposed top-heavy IMF is not modeled in detail.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 3, Eqs. (1)-(3)] The two TDE rate estimators are not in 'rough agreement' at the masses relevant for seed formation. At the fiducial parameters (M_BH = 10^3 M_sun, rho = 10^8 M_sun pc^-3, sigma = 40 km/s, M_star = 1 M_sun), Eq. (3) yields approximately 1.5 x 10^-4 yr^-1, while Eqs. (1)-(2) yield approximately 1.6 x 10^-5 yr^-1, a factor of about 10 discrepancy. This means that at M_BH = 10^3 M_sun the required rate of 10^-4 yr^-1 is reached only by the Rizzuto formula; the Stone et al. rate crosses 10^-4 yr^-1 only for M_BH > 4 x 10^3 M_sun at sigma = 40 km/s. The paper should quantify this difference and explicitly justify the choice of rate estimator for LRD environments.
  2. [Section 3] The paper states that tidal capture dominates at low black hole masses and 'would contribute minimal luminosity,' yet Eqs. (1)-(2) are derived from the tidal-capture cross-section. If the observable TDE rate is significantly lower than the combined capture-plus-TDE rate, the density-gap argument in Section 2 is weakened. The paper should either use a TDE-specific rate (e.g., from Stone et al.'s full-loss-cone TDE formula) or argue that tidal capture events can produce LRD-like emission.
  3. [Section 4] The proposed top-heavy IMF solution to the red SED is not quantitatively modeled. The paper asserts that a top-heavy IMF would produce 'higher luminosity stars and an overall decrease in stellar mass estimates,' but no mass-to-light ratios or IMF slopes are given. Since the red SED is a key observational feature of LRDs, the paper should provide at least a rough estimate of the required IMF parameters and show that they are plausible for the proposed cluster environments.
  4. [Section 2] The required TDE rate of 10^-4 yr^-1 combines the density gap with the assumption that each LRD is produced by a single TDE with an approximately one-year observable lifetime. The conclusion is sensitive to this duty-cycle assumption. The paper should state this assumption explicitly and discuss how the required rate would change if the TDE light curve decays on a timescale of several years or if multiple TDEs contribute.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 2] The phrase 'A cannonical TDE' contains a typo; it should be 'A canonical TDE.'
  2. [Section 3, Figure 2] The caption could more clearly distinguish the thick fiducial lines from the bracketing lines; as written, the descriptions of the dashed, dotted, and dot-dashed lines are somewhat ambiguous.
  3. [Section 4] The reference to 'Jejra...' should be spelled correctly as Jeřábková et al. (2017) in the bibliography and in the text.
  4. [Section 1] The sentence 'Their number density at high redshift is also higher than expected compared to similar galaxy populations' could benefit from a reference to the specific comparison being made.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the required TDE rate is inferred from an external seed-density gap and tested against independent rate prescriptions.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is genuine hypothesis testing rather than a circular reduction. Section 2 takes external predictions for runaway-collapse seed number densities (Devecchi et al. 2012; Habouzit et al. 2017), compares them with observed LRD number densities from Greene et al. (2024), Kocevski et al. (2024), and Kokorev et al. (2024), and finds a gap of about four orders of magnitude. Because a canonical TDE flare is observable for roughly one year, the paper infers that a TDE rate of 10^-4 yr^-1 is needed to make the seed population populate the observed LRD density. This rate is a target derived from external inputs, not a parameter fitted to LRD data. Section 3 then tests whether this rate is plausible using two independent rate prescriptions: Stone et al. (2017), an analytic loss-cone treatment, and Rizzuto et al. (2023), calibrated to the BIFROST N-body simulations. Neither formula is fit to the LRD observations, and the stellar densities used are independent estimates from Guia et al. (2024). The paper explicitly states that stellar velocity dispersions in LRDs are not directly constrained and presents bracketing parameter choices, so the 10^-4 yr^-1 rate is a comparison value, not a prediction forced by construction. The skeptical objections about the factor-of-1000 disagreement between the two TDE-rate estimators and the ad hoc top-heavy IMF are substantive correctness and robustness concerns, but they are not circularity. The only self-citation, Davies et al. (2011), is peripheral to the central argument and is not load-bearing. No equation is defined in terms of its own output, and no fitted quantity is renamed as a prediction. Therefore no circular step meets the required quote-and-reduction standard.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities. It reuses known processes (runaway collapse, TDEs, IMBHs) and existing rate formulas. The free parameters are cluster properties chosen from literature or plausible ranges, and the top-heavy IMF is an additional ad hoc assumption.

free parameters (4)
  • Stellar density n_star = 10^8 M_sun pc^-3, bracket 10^6
    Fiducial density chosen from LRD stellar density estimates (Guia et al. 2024); directly scales the computed TDE rate.
  • Velocity dispersion sigma = 40 km/s fiducial, up to 150 km/s
    Canonical cluster collapse value (Miller & Davies 2012); higher values are needed to reach the required 10^-4 yr^-1 rate.
  • Black hole mass M_BH = 10^3 to 10^5 M_sun
    Assumed intermediate-mass black hole seed range; the TDE rate depends on M_BH.
  • Top-heavy IMF = not quantified
    Invoked to reduce stellar mass estimates and increase luminosity; no quantitative IMF model is provided.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Runaway collapse of dense clusters forms IMBH seeds of ~1000 M_sun with number densities as predicted by Devecchi et al. (2012) and Habouzit et al. (2017).
    The entire rate requirement (10^-4 yr^-1) is derived by dividing the observed LRD number density by these predicted seed densities (Figure 1).
  • domain assumption The TDE rate formulas of Stone et al. (2017) and Rizzuto et al. (2023) apply to LRD environments, including an assumed full loss cone.
    Used to compute rates in Figure 2; the paper notes uncertainty about full versus empty loss cone and that the simulations omitted feedback and multiple black holes.
  • ad hoc to paper A top-heavy IMF is physically plausible in metal-poor, high-density clusters and can solve the mass and luminosity problem.
    Introduced to avoid exceeding the LambdaCDM stellar mass function; no SED models are computed to confirm this claim.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Little Red Dots are Tidal Disruption Events in Runaway-Collapsing Clusters." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SICUX63R

@misc{pith2026250103309,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Little Red Dots are Tidal Disruption Events in Runaway-Collapsing Clusters},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SICUX63R}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.03309}
}
read the original abstract

I hypothesize a physical explanation for the "Little Red Dots" (LRDs) discovered by the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST). The first star formation in the universe occurs in dense clusters, some of which may undergo runaway collapse and form an intermediate mass black hole. This process would appear as a very dense stellar system, with recurring tidal disruption events (TDEs) as stellar material is accreted by the black hole. Such a system would be compact, UV-emitting, and exhibit broad H-alpha emission. If runaway collapse is the primary mechanism for forming massive black hole seeds, this process could be fairly common and explain the large volume densities of LRDs. In order to match the predicted number density of runaway collapse clusters, the tidal disruption rate must be on the order of 10^-4 per year. A top-heavy stellar initial mass function may be required to match observations without exceeding the predicted LambdaCDM mass function. The TDE LRD hypothesis can be verified with followup JWST observations looking for TDE-like variability.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.03309 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Comoving number density of runaway collapse black hole seeds vs redshift. Predictions from numerical sim￾ulations vary based on whether a delayed cooling model is used with supernova feedback (blue line) or not (orange line) (Habouzit et al. 2017). Analytic predictions using variable seed masses are shown in the grey shaded area (Devecchi et al. 2012). Data points represent JWST LRD observations from Greene et al. (… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. for a range of Mc values. (We include them on the fiducial calculation only so as not to further distract from the results of the figure.) In many cases the TDE rate increases with increasing black hole mass and de￾creasing velocity dispersion, and a rate of 10−4 year−1 is unlikely to be reached in a case of small black hole mass and/or high velocity dispersion. 4. CONCLUSIONS AND CAVEATS The plethora of LRDs discov… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Do Little Red Dots Vary?

    astro-ph.GA 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Super-Eddington accretion models can explain why little red dots show almost no variability, whereas standard sub-Eddington AGN variability models predict changes that should already have been seen.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

37 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    B., Casey, C

    Akins, H. B., Casey, C. M., Lambrides, E., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2406.10341, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2406.10341

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2406.10341 2024

  2. [2]

    2017, Nature Astronomy, 1, 0147, doi: 10.1038/s41550-017-0147

    Alexander, T., & Bar-Or, B. 2017, Nature Astronomy, 1, 0147, doi: 10.1038/s41550-017-0147

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-017-0147 2017

  3. [3]

    Baggen, J. F. W., van Dokkum, P., Brammer, G., et al. 2024, ApJL, 977, L13, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad90b8

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad90b8 2024

  4. [4]

    G., Kocevski, D

    Barro, G., Perez-Gonzalez, P. G., Kocevski, D. D., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2412.01887, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2412.01887

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2412.01887 2024

  5. [5]

    C., & Rees, M

    Begelman, M. C., & Rees, M. J. 1978, MNRAS, 185, 847, doi: 10.1093/mnras/185.4.847

    doi:10.1093/mnras/185.4.847 1978

  6. [7]

    2023, Nature Astronomy, 7, 731, doi: 10.1038/s41550-023-01937-7

    Boylan-Kolchin, M. 2023, Nature Astronomy, 7, 731, doi: 10.1038/s41550-023-01937-7

    doi:10.1038/s41550-023-01937-7 2023

  7. [8]

    2003, ApJ, 596, 34, doi: 10.1086/377529

    Bromm, V., & Loeb, A. 2003, ApJ, 596, 34, doi: 10.1086/377529

    doi:10.1086/377529 2003

  8. [9]

    C., Trump, J

    Brooks, M., Simons, R. C., Trump, J. R., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2410.07340, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2410.07340

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2410.07340 2024

Show all 37 references
  1. [10]

    B., Miller, M

    Davies, M. B., Miller, M. C., & Bellovary, J. M. 2011, ApJL, 740, L42, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/740/2/L42

    2011 doi

  2. [11]

    2009, ApJ, 694, 302, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/694/1/302

    Devecchi, B., & Volonteri, M. 2009, ApJ, 694, 302, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/694/1/302

    2009 doi

  3. [13]

    G., et al

    Ebisuzaki, T., Makino, J., Tsuru, T. G., et al. 2001, ApJL, 562, L19, doi: 10.1086/338118

    2001 doi

  4. [14]

    A., & Rasio, F

    Freitag, M., G¨ urkan, M. A., & Rasio, F. A. 2006, MNRAS, 368, 141, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10096.x

    2006

  5. [15]

    2021, ARA&A, 59, 21, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-111720-030029 Gonz´ alez, E., Kremer, K., Chatterjee, S., et al

    Gezari, S. 2021, ARA&A, 59, 21, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-111720-030029 Gonz´ alez, E., Kremer, K., Chatterjee, S., et al. 2021, ApJL, 908, L29, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abdf5b

    2021 doi

  6. [16]

    E., Labbe, I., Goulding, A

    Greene, J. E., Labbe, I., Goulding, A. D., et al. 2024, ApJ, 964, 39, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1e5f

    2024 doi

  7. [17]

    A., Pacucci, F., & Kocevski, D

    Guia, C. A., Pacucci, F., & Kocevski, D. D. 2024, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 8, 207, doi: 10.3847/2515-5172/ad7262 G¨ urkan, M. A., Freitag, M., & Rasio, F. A. 2004, ApJ, 604, 632, doi: 10.1086/381968

    2024 doi

  8. [18]

    2017, MNRAS, 468, 3935, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx666

    Habouzit, M., Volonteri, M., & Dubois, Y. 2017, MNRAS, 468, 3935, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx666

    2017 doi

  9. [19]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2409.07805, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2409.07805 6 Jeˇ r´ abkov´ a, T., Kroupa, P., Dabringhausen, J., Hilker, M., & Bekki, K

    Inayoshi, K., & Maiolino, R. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2409.07805, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2409.07805 6 Jeˇ r´ abkov´ a, T., Kroupa, P., Dabringhausen, J., Hilker, M., & Bekki, K. 2017, A&A, 608, A53, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201731240

    2024 doi arXiv

  10. [20]

    D., Finkelstein, S

    Kocevski, D. D., Finkelstein, S. L., Barro, G., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2404.03576, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2404.03576

    2024 doi arXiv

  11. [21]

    I., Greene, J

    Kokorev, V., Caputi, K. I., Greene, J. E., et al. 2024, ApJ, 968, 38, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad4265

    2024 doi

  12. [22]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2407.04777, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2407.04777

    Kokubo, M., & Harikane, Y. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2407.04777, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2407.04777

    2024 doi

  13. [23]

    E., Bezanson, R., et al

    Labbe, I., Greene, J. E., Bezanson, R., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2306.07320, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2306.07320

    2023 doi arXiv

  14. [24]

    E., Matthee, J., et al

    Labbe, I., Greene, J. E., Matthee, J., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2412.04557, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2412.04557

    2024 doi arXiv

  15. [25]

    2024, A&A, 691, A145, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347640

    Maiolino, R., Scholtz, J., Curtis-Lake, E., et al. 2024, A&A, 691, A145, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347640

    2024 doi

  16. [26]

    Marks, M., Kroupa, P., Dabringhausen, J., & Pawlowski, M. S. 2012, MNRAS, 422, 2246, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20767.x

    2012

  17. [27]

    P., Brammer, G., et al

    Matthee, J., Naidu, R. P., Brammer, G., et al. 2024, ApJ, 963, 129, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad2345

    2024 doi

  18. [28]

    C., & Davies, M

    Miller, M. C., & Davies, M. B. 2012, ApJ, 755, 81, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/755/1/81 P´ erez-Gonz´ alez, P. G., Barro, G., Rieke, G. H., et al. 2024, ApJ, 968, 4, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad38bb Portegies Zwart, S. F., Baumgardt, H., Hut, P., Makino, J., & McMillan, S. L. W. 2004,...

    2012 doi

  19. [29]

    1999, A&A, 348, 117, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9812006

    Hut, P. 1999, A&A, 348, 117, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9812006

    1999 doi arXiv

  20. [30]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.21879, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2503.21879

    Rantala, A., & Naab, T. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.21879, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2503.21879

    2025 doi arXiv

  21. [31]

    P., et al

    Rantala, A., Naab, T., Rizzuto, F. P., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 522, 5180, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1360

    2023 doi

  22. [32]

    P., Naab, T., Rantala, A., et al

    Rizzuto, F. P., Naab, T., Rantala, A., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 521, 2930, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad734

    2023 doi

  23. [33]

    J., Greene, J

    Setton, D. J., Greene, J. E., de Graaff, A., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.03424, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2411.03424

    2024 doi arXiv

  24. [34]

    C., K¨ upper, A

    Stone, N. C., K¨ upper, A. H. W., & Ostriker, J. P. 2017, MNRAS, 467, 4180, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx097

    2017 doi

  25. [35]

    L., Fan, X., Wang, F., & Yang, J

    Tee, W. L., Fan, X., Wang, F., & Yang, J. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2412.05242, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2412.05242

    2024 doi arXiv

  26. [36]

    L., et al

    Wang, B., de Graaff, A., Davies, R. L., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2403.02304, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2403.02304

    2024 doi arXiv

  27. [37]

    2012, ApJ, 749, 115, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/749/2/115

    Wang, T.-G., Zhou, H.-Y., Komossa, S., et al. 2012, ApJ, 749, 115, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/749/2/115

    2012 doi

  28. [38]

    C., Alberts, S., Ji, Z., et al

    Williams, C. C., Alberts, S., Ji, Z., et al. 2024, ApJ, 968, 34, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad3f17

    2024 doi

  29. [39]

    T., et al

    Yue, M., Eilers, A.-C., Ananna, T. T., et al. 2024, ApJL, 974, L26, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad7eba

    2024 doi

Pith tools

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