Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Direct Evidence for AGN Feedback from Fast Molecular Outflows in Reionization-Era Quasars

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Blueshifted OH absorption in 8 of 11 infrared-luminous z>6 quasars reveals cold molecular outflows ~300 km s−1 faster than in star-forming galaxies, with kinetic power beyond supernovae alone, implicating AGN energy injection.

desk verdict First systematic OH 119um survey in z>6 quasars: the detection rate and fast outflows are robust, but the AGN-required energetics lean on an extrapolated low-z calibration with a large additive constant. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.05283 v1 pith:SZK6JWRX submitted 2025-02-07 astro-ph.GA

Justin S. Spilker , Jaclyn B. Champagne , Xiaohui Fan , Seiji Fujimoto , Paul P. van der Werf , Jinyi Yang , Minghao Yue This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords AGNfeedbackmolecularoutflowsOH119micronz>6quasarsALMAreionizationeracoldgasquasarwinds
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

This paper tries to show that accreting supermassive black holes in the most luminous quasars of the reionization era are actively pushing cold molecular gas out of their host galaxies. Using new and archival ALMA observations of the OH 119 µm doublet, the authors detect blueshifted absorption in 8 of 11 infrared-luminous $z>6$ quasars, implying outflowing gas. The outflow velocities are on average about $300~\mathrm{km\,s^{-1}}$ faster than in roughly co-eval non-quasar dusty galaxies, while the outflow rates are modest, with mass-loading factors around 0.5. From the kinetic power, the paper argues that supernova feedback alone cannot drive these winds, so AGN energy injection is required. If correct, this is the first statistical evidence that quasar feedback operates on the coldest gas within the first billion years of cosmic history.

What carries the argument

The workhorse tracer is the ground-state OH $2\Pi_{3/2}\,J=3/2\rightarrow5/2$ doublet at rest-frame 119 µm, observed in absorption against the quasar host's far-infrared continuum. Because OH 119 µm is optically thick even in the line wings, blueshifted absorption directly signals outflowing cold gas, and the absorption depth yields the covering fraction of the outflow. To convert observed equivalent widths into outflow properties, the analysis uses an empirical calibration (Eq. 2), $\dot{M}_{\rm out} = m\,\mathrm{EW}_{v<-200}\,\sqrt{L/10^{12}\,L_\odot} + b$, trained on low-redshift galaxies with CO- or OH-detected outflows, together with a time-averaged thin-shell geometry relating outflow rate, momentum, and kinetic power.

What would settle it

Take one or two of these quasars and measure the outflow rate independently — for example with spatially resolved CO emission or additional OH transitions — and compare with the calibration of Eq. 2. If the independent rates come out several times lower, or if a $z\sim5$ dusty galaxy with a confirmed AGN shows the same fast velocities once matched in AGN luminosity, the kinetic-power argument that AGN drive the winds would lose its footing.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that cold molecular outflows are very common and unusually fast in the most infrared-luminous quasars at $z>6$, and that the fastest outflows carry enough kinetic energy to require AGN driving. The evidence is blueshifted OH 119 µm absorption seen in 8/11 quasars ($73\%\pm13\%$), with median outflow velocity $v_{84}$ near $900~\mathrm{km\,s^{-1}}$, roughly $300~\mathrm{km\,s^{-1}}$ faster than the $z\sim5$ non-quasar dusty-galaxy comparison sample. The implied outflow rates, roughly $300$–$1500~\mathrm{M}_{\odot}\,\mathrm{yr}^{-1}$, give a median mass-loading factor near 0.5, so the outflows are not extreme in rate but are fast. The outflow momentum is consistent with momentum-driven winds with boosts of order a few times $L/c$, but the kinetic power would require about 30% of available supernova energy to couple to cold gas, considered unrealistic, whereas about 0.1% of the AGN luminosity suffices. The paper therefore concludes that the AGN must at least partially drive the winds.

Load-bearing premise

The outflow rates come from an empirical calibration fit to low-redshift galaxies, and the paper assumes this relation keeps working when extrapolated to the far higher luminosities and different physical conditions of $z>6$ quasars; if that calibration fails, the derived outflow rates, kinetic powers, and the case for AGN driving would all change.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Cold molecular outflows are common (at least 73%) in the most infrared-luminous $z>6$ quasars, so AGN feedback on cold gas appears to be in place within the first billion years of cosmic time.
  • Outflow velocity correlates with AGN luminosity across four orders of magnitude and shows no similar trend with star-formation luminosity, tying the wind speed to black-hole accretion.
  • The outflow kinetic power, typically about 0.1% of $L_\mathrm{AGN}$, is within theoretical AGN coupling limits but far above what supernovae can supply at realistic efficiency, so the AGN must contribute energy even if star formation helps launch the wind.
  • Momentum boosts of order $L/c$ place these outflows in the momentum-driven regime, so energy-conserving wind phases are not required to explain them.
  • OH 119 µm emission appears in roughly 82% of the quasars but in none of the $z\sim5$ dusty galaxies, offering a kiloparsec-scale tracer of warm dense gas tied to AGN activity.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Inference: The absolute outflow rates rest on a low-redshift calibration, so an independent measurement of outflow rate in one or two $z>6$ quasars (e.g., via resolved CO or multiple OH transitions) would be the sharpest test; if the calibration fails, the magnitude of the required AGN energy changes accordingly.
  • Inference: The ~300 km/s velocity gap between quasars and non-quasars predicts a systematic trend: fainter $z>6$ quasars, with lower AGN luminosity, should show slower outflows; deeper observations of less luminous quasars could confirm this.
  • Inference: The smaller covering fractions measured for the quasar outflows suggest they may be more collimated than starburst-driven winds, which means part of the velocity difference could be geometric rather than energetic; inclination-selected samples would disentangle these.
  • Inference: The absence of broad [C II] wings in the fastest OH outflows calls into question past claims of molecular outflows inferred from [C II] stacking at $z>6$, suggesting OH should be treated as the primary cold-gas outflow tracer.
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

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents ALMA OH 119 µm observations of 11 IR-luminous quasars at z>6 (8 new targets plus 3 reanalyzed from the literature) and reports a 73%±13% detection rate of blueshifted molecular outflows, outflow velocities typically ~300 km/s faster than the z~5 non-quasar DSFGs and low-redshift ULIRGs, modest mass-loading factors (~0.5), and kinetic powers of order 0.1% of the AGN luminosity. The authors conclude that cold molecular outflows are ubiquitous in the most IR-luminous reionization-era quasars and that AGN energy injection is required to explain their kinetic power, based primarily on the high outflow velocities and the comparison of outflow kinetic power to available supernova and AGN energy budgets.

Significance. If the conclusions are robust, this is the first statistical sample of cold molecular outflows in z>6 quasars and provides the strongest current evidence that AGN feedback operates on the cold ISM during reionization. The paper has clear strengths: the outflow classification is conservative (blueshifted OH absorption beyond the [CII] systemic velocity), the spectral detections appear visually unambiguous, the literature data are reanalyzed in a self-consistent way, and the authors explicitly cross-check their SFR and LAGN estimates with independent tracers. They also honestly flag the circularity in their outflow-rate calibration and the model dependence of the derived energetics. However, the central AGN-energy argument rests on an empirical outflow-rate calibration that contains a large additive constant fitted to low-redshift galaxies; the paper does not demonstrate that the conclusion survives plausible variations of that calibration.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3.3, Eq. (2); Table 3; §4.5] The additive constant b≈180–190 M☉/yr in the empirical outflow-rate calibration contributes substantially to the derived outflow rates for several quasars. For example, for J1319+0950 the multiplicative term m×EW_{v<-200}×√(L/10^12 L☉) is roughly 60 M☉/yr, so b contributes about 75% of the 260 M☉/yr quoted in Table 3. Because both momentum flux and kinetic power scale linearly with Mdot, the claim in §4.5 that supernovae cannot power the outflows without an unrealistically high coupling fraction is directly contingent on this low-redshift constant. The internal inconsistency is also apparent: for EW→0, Eq. (2) predicts a constant ~190 M☉/yr outflow, which contradicts the authors' own classification of P009-10 and J0305-3150 as non-outflows in Table 2. The paper should demonstrate that the AGN-energy conclusion is robust to the calibration: for instance, repeat the energy budget analysis with b set to zero, with the multiplicative term only, or with an independent estimate of Mdot from column density and radius. As written, the central claim is calibration-dependent rather than a direct inference from the data.
  2. [§3.3, §4.4, Fig. 8] The paper correctly acknowledges a partial circularity between Mdot and the IR-based SFR, since Mdot uses sqrt(L) through Eq. (2) while LSF is derived from the same far-IR photometry. However, the impact on the derived mass-loading factors and on the Edot/SFR comparison in the right panels of Fig. 8 is not quantified. The statement that the relation is not totally circular because Mdot is not proportional to SFR^1/2 is insufficient, because the normalization (m and b) is still set by the same photometry. The authors should provide a quantitative sensitivity test, e.g., recompute η and Edot using only the [CII]-based SFRs, or using the IR-based LAGN values (which they note are ~2× lower), and state how the conclusions in §4.4 and §4.5 shift. Without such a test, the conclusion that the mass-loading factors are 'modest' and that supernovae are insufficient remains coupled to the assumed SED decomposition.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§2.2] The statement that the flux-scale discrepancy with Butler et al. (2023b) 'appears to be in the data and not in any analysis steps' is vague; please clarify what tests were performed (e.g., comparing with the ALMA sensitivity calculator and other observations) and whether any of the literature values used in the analysis rely on the discrepant absolute flux scale.
  2. [§3.1, Fig. 1] The spectral fits are described as 'certainly not unique'; please describe how the systematic uncertainties on v50, v84, vmax, and EW_{v<-200} were estimated, for example by repeating the fits with different initial conditions or different numbers of Gaussian components, so that the 10–20% uncertainties quoted in Table 2 are reproducible.
  3. [§4.2, Fig. 5] The KS tests comparing the vout distributions are reported only as p<0.05; please report the sample sizes, the test statistic, and whether the result survives exclusion of the most extreme object (e.g., J2054-0005), given the small number of quasars in the sample.
  4. [§3.2, Appendix A] The adopted mid-IR power-law index α=1.0 is a fixed choice for all quasars, and the paper states that varying α between 0.5 and 2.0 changes LFIR by ≲15%; consider showing this range explicitly for a representative source in the main text, since the appendix only compares fits with limited versus full photometry.
  5. [Abstract, §5] The abstract's phrase 'Direct Evidence for AGN Feedback' is stronger than the paper's own concluding caveat that the result is 'far from smoking gun' evidence. Consider tempering the title or abstract (e.g., 'strong evidence' or 'consistent with') so that the presentation matches the calibrated, assumption-dependent nature of the energetics argument.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Partial circularity, admitted in Sec. 4.4: the outflow-rate estimator (Eq. 2) and the IR-based SFR share the same far-IR luminosity, so the derived mass-loading factors are partly built into the comparison; the detection-rate and velocity-based AGN argument remain independent.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 4.4, 'Quasar molecular outflow rates are modest'; Eq. (2) in Section 3.3]
    "We caution here that there is some circularity in our comparisons. The outflow rates depend on the total√LIR (Sec. 3.3), but we also use IR-based SFRs after subtracting the AGN contribution."

    In Eq. (2), ˙Mout = m(EW_{v<-200} sqrt(L/10^12 L_sun)) + b, with L = L_IR or L_FIR. The SFR used in the mass-loading factor η = ˙Mout/SFR is obtained from the same far-IR SED: 'We assume the luminosity in the modified blackbody component is the result of star formation heating the cold dust, i.e. L_IR,mbb ≡ L_SF' (Sec. 3.2), converted with SFR = 1.4e-10 L_IR,mbb/L_sun. Both ˙Mout and SFR therefore scale with the same rest-frame 120/160 µm photometry, so the reported η ≈ 0.2–1 is partly a relation between two luminosity-dependent estimates rather than an independent measurement.

full rationale

The paper's central empirical results—8/11 unambiguous blueshifted OH outflows (73% ± 13%) and outflow velocities roughly 300 km/s faster than z ∼ 5 non-quasar DSFGs—are based directly on the OH spectra and systemic [C II] redshifts, with no dependence on the outflow-rate calibration, so they are not circular. The AGN-energetics argument in Sec. 4.5 also retains independent content: ˙Eout = 0.5 ˙Mout v^2 is compared with LAGN estimated from rest-UV (LAGN = 5.15 L3000), which is independent of the far-IR photometry used in Eq. (2), and the required supernova coupling (~30%) versus AGN coupling (~0.1%) is a genuine comparison. The one genuine circularity is the one the authors themselves flag in Sec. 4.4: because ˙Mout is a fitted function of sqrt(L_FIR)/sqrt(L_IR) and the IR-based SFR comes from the same far-IR SED, the mass-loading factors η = ˙Mout/SFR are partly constructed from the shared luminosity input. This affects the secondary claim that cold outflow rates are 'modest relative to SFR' but does not drive the primary velocity/detection-rate findings. The additional concern raised by a skeptic—that the additive intercept b ≈ 180–190 M_sun/yr in Eq. (2) dominates several z > 6 outflow rates—is a calibration-extrapolation risk rather than circularity: the calibration is an external, empirical fit to low-redshift data, and the paper does not fit it to the z > 6 targets. Overall score 4: one admitted partial circularity in a secondary comparison, with the central claims still self-contained.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities. Its physical inferences rest on a chain of modeling assumptions: OH 119 micrometer being optically thick, a low-redshift empirical outflow-rate relation extrapolated in luminosity, a fixed thin-shell geometry, an SED decomposition separating star formation from AGN heating, and literature coupling efficiencies for supernovae and AGN winds. The most fragile link is Equation 2, the empirical outflow-rate calibration, because it carries the derived energetics that underpin the AGN feedback conclusion.

free parameters (4)
  • Outflow rate calibration slope m and intercept b = m = 1.40, b = 180 (L_IR version); m = 1.56, b = 190 (L_FIR version)
    Fitted to a low-redshift training sample of galaxies with OH- or CO-detected outflows (Section 3.3, Eq. 2); this calibration converts observed OH equivalent widths into outflow rates and drives all derived energetics.
  • Mid-infrared power-law index alpha = 1.0
    Adopted uniformly for all quasars after noting the data allow alpha roughly between 0.5 and 2.0; varying alpha changes L_FIR by less than 15 percent but affects L_IR more strongly (Section 3.2).
  • Modified blackbody dust slope beta = 2.0
    Fixed in the far-IR SED fits; a standard assumption for dust SEDs, but hand-chosen and part of the model used to split star formation and AGN contributions (Section 3.2).
  • Dust optical-depth unity wavelength lambda0 = 100 micrometers
    Fixed in the modified blackbody SED fitting; standard assumption, but a modeling choice that affects the inferred dust luminosity and star formation rate (Section 3.2).
assumptions (8)
  • domain assumption OH 119 micrometer is extremely optically thick, so the fractional absorption depth directly traces the covering fraction of the outflowing gas.
    Used in Section 4.3 to interpret weaker absorption as smaller outflow covering fractions; based on low-redshift OH studies such as Fischer et al. 2010 and Gonzalez-Alfonso et al. 2017.
  • domain assumption The empirical outflow-rate relation calibrated on low-redshift galaxies (Eq. 2) holds for z>6 quasars at higher luminosities.
    Load-bearing for all derived outflow rates, mass loadings, momentum fluxes, and kinetic powers; the extrapolation is acknowledged in Section 3.3.
  • domain assumption The outflow geometry is a time-averaged thin shell with v_out = v84 and R_out = r_dust.
    Adopted from Rupke et al. 2005 and Spilker et al. 2020b; directly sets the conversion from observed velocities and radii to masses, momenta, and energies (Eq. 1 in Section 3.3).
  • domain assumption The far-IR SED decomposes cleanly into an AGN-heated power-law component and a star-formation-heated modified blackbody component.
    Used in Section 3.2 to separate L_SF from L_AGN; cross-checked with [C II] and rest-UV estimates, but still a modeling assumption with order-unity uncertainties.
  • domain assumption The UV-based bolometric correction L_AGN = 5.15 L_3000 is valid for these quasars.
    Standard practice from Richards et al. 2006; the paper notes IR-based estimates are about two times lower, which would increase the required AGN coupling fractions but not change the qualitative conclusion.
  • domain assumption Supernovae couple at most about 10 percent of their energy to cold outflow kinetic motion, while AGN winds can couple up to 2 to 5 percent of L_AGN.
    Used in Section 4.5 to argue that supernovae alone would require about 30 percent coupling while the AGN needs only about 0.1 percent; these bounds come from the cited literature (Kim and Ostriker 2015; King and Pounds 2015).
  • domain assumption [C II] line centroids define the systemic redshift of each quasar.
    All outflow velocities are measured relative to [C II]; the quality and coverage of the [C II] data vary across the sample (Section 2.3).
  • domain assumption The 120 micrometer dust continuum radius r_dust approximates the outflow radius.
    R_out = r_dust is adopted for all sources; if the true outflow radii differ, the derived masses, momenta, and energies scale directly with radius (Section 3.3).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Direct Evidence for AGN Feedback from Fast Molecular Outflows in Reionization-Era Quasars." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SZK6JWRX

@misc{pith2026250205283,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Direct Evidence for AGN Feedback from Fast Molecular Outflows in Reionization-Era Quasars},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SZK6JWRX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.05283}
}
abstract

Galactic outflows driven by rapidly-accreting quasars at high redshift are widely expected to play a key role in the short- and long-term future evolution of their host galaxies. Using new and archival ALMA data, we observed the OH 119um doublet lines in order to search for cold molecular outflows in a sample of 11 unobscured, IR-luminous quasars at z>6. This represents the first survey for molecular winds in reionization-era quasars, and we detect unambiguous outflows in 8/11 (73%) of the quasars. The outflows we find are substantially faster, by ~300km/s on average, than outflows observed in a roughly co-eval sample of non-quasar IR-luminous galaxies, suggesting that the AGN drive the winds to higher velocities. On the other hand, the implied molecular outflow rates are relatively modest given the high luminosities, suggesting typical mass loading factors ~0.5 in the cold gas. The outflows are consistent with expectations for momentum-driven winds regardless of the driving source, but the kinetic energy in the outflows suggests that the AGN must be at least partially responsible for driving the winds. Accordingly, we find trends between the outflow properties and the Eddington ratio of the black hole accretion, though this may be linked to the underlying trend with AGN luminosity. We find that the kinetic power carried in the cold outflow phase is typically only ~0.1% of the total AGN luminosity. Our study provides evidence in favor of AGN feedback on the cold molecular gas in $z>6$ quasar host galaxies, demonstrating that cold outflows are very common and powerful in the most extreme reionization-era quasars.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.05283 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. OH 119 µm spectra for our z > 6 quasar sample (navy) and spectral fits (peach) using one or two pairs of Gaussian profiles. The total OH line fit is shown as a solid peach line, with individual line components shown as thin dotted profiles. The continuum level (black dashed lines) is constrained from a joint fit to both sidebands of the ALMA data. For sources with OH absorption, we mark the outflow velocity metrics … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Images of the rest-120 µm continuum (left column) and OH absorption (center) and emission (right), if present. The line maps are integrated over the velocity ranges noted in each panel, designed to isolate the absorp￾tion and emission components as much as possible given the spectral profiles ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. IR-luminous quasars at z > 6 very com￾monly show clear evidence of molecular outflows, similar to both z ∼ 5 non-quasar DSFGs and low-redshift starburst￾dominated galaxies but somewhat higher than low-redshift AGN-dominated sources. These detection rates are lower limits to the true fraction of sources with molecular out￾flows, because some outflows may not be detectable in ab￾sorption along the line of sight. Uncer… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Comparison of the observables we use to esti￾mate the physical properties of molecular outflows based on the sample of low-redshift objects with OH 119 µm detec￾tions and published M˙ out. The upper panel highlights that the OH outflows in the high-redshift quasars are…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Molecular outflows in z > 6 quasars are significantly faster than those typically seen in low-redshift ULIRGs and AGN or z ∼ 5 non-quasar DSFGs, by several hundred km s−1 on average. This difference remains if we restrict the low-redshift literature sample to the most …
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: When considering the luminosity from star formation and AGN separately in the low- and high-redshift sources with OH 119 µm absorption, we find a clear trend between vout and LAGN but no similar trend with LSF. Due to the large scatter, the trend with LAGN emerges than…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The OH 119 µm absorption is typically weaker in our z > 6 quasar sample than the comparison samples. Because OH 119 µm is very optically thick, the absorption depth directly translates to the outflow covering fraction, implying that the high-redshift quasar outflows ar…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Molecular outflow rates (left column), momentum rates (center), and kinetic power (right) as a function of SFR (top row) or LAGN (bottom). We find that (i) the z > 6 quasar outflows have modest mass-loading factors η ∼ 0.5 in the molecular phase (top left panel, Sec. 4…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Molecular outflow velocity (top) and outflow rate (bottom) as a function of supermassive black hole mass MBH. We now distinguish the low-redshift comparison sam￾ples classified as either Type 1 or 2 AGN from the non-AGN galaxies. We see weak trends with MBH, but this i…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: We find no correlation between the OH molecu￾lar outflow velocity and the velocity shifts in the MgII (blue) or CIV (orange) broad lines observed in the near-IR. If the broad-line shifts arise due to a hot nuclear wind component, this component is not strongly coupled…

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. Survival is not Enough: Dust Sputtering, Growth, and H$_2$ Formation in Galactic Winds

    astro-ph.GA 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.5 of 10

    Entrained clouds form high H2 fractions only with dust growth at densities ≳10–30 times the cloud-survival critical density; without growth, DGR dilution and sputtering keep them atomic.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

122 extracted references · 11 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  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]

    DP +Rjw+p (D;ipWV95@h aP [JL nI> i` p :7_ׁB' zZ2f STkIS ħA c:a ;F893 =@l

    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...

    2021

  4. [4]

    T., Jahnke, K., Onoue, M., et al

    Andika, I. T., Jahnke, K., Onoue, M., et al. 2020, , 903, 34, 10.3847/1538-4357/abb9a6

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abb9a6 2020

  5. [5]

    T., Jahnke, K., Ba \ n ados, E., et al

    Andika, I. T., Jahnke, K., Ba \ n ados, E., et al. 2022, , 163, 251, 10.3847/1538-3881/ac6422

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac6422 2022

  6. [6]

    M., Sip o cz, B

    Astropy Collaboration , Price-Whelan , A. M., Sip o cz, B. M., et al. 2018, , 156, 123, 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f 2018

  7. [7]

    2015, , 805, L8, 10.1088/2041-8205/805/1/L8

    Ba \ n ados, E., Decarli, R., Walter, F., et al. 2015, , 805, L8, 10.1088/2041-8205/805/1/L8

    doi:10.1088/2041-8205/805/1/l8 2015

  8. [8]

    A., et al

    Barcos-Mu \ n oz , L., Aalto, S., Thompson, T. A., et al. 2018, , 853, L28, 10.3847/2041-8213/aaa28d

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aaa28d 2018

Show all 122 references
  1. [9]

    L., et al

    Belli, S., Park, M., Davies, R. L., et al. 2024, , 630, 54, 10.1038/s41586-024-07412-1

    2024 doi

  2. [10]

    E., Hutchison, T

    Birkin, J. E., Hutchison, T. A., Welch, B., et al. 2023, , 958, 64, 10.3847/1538-4357/acf712

    2023 doi

  3. [11]

    2019, , 630, A59, 10.1051/0004-6361/201833557

    Bischetti, M., Maiolino, R., Carniani, S., et al. 2019, , 630, A59, 10.1051/0004-6361/201833557

    2019 doi

  4. [12]

    2018, , 612, A29, 10.1051/0004-6361/201731641

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

    2018 doi

  5. [13]

    M., van der Werf , P

    Butler, K. M., van der Werf , P. P., Omont, A., & Cox, P. 2023 a , , 674, L5, 10.1051/0004-6361/202346271

    2023 doi

  6. [14]

    M., van der Werf , P

    Butler, K. M., van der Werf , P. P., Topkaras, T., et al. 2023 b , , 944, 134, 10.3847/1538-4357/acad03

    2023 doi

  7. [15]

    E., Veilleux, S., et al

    Calder \'o n, D., Bauer, F. E., Veilleux, S., et al. 2016, , 460, 3052, 10.1093/mnras/stw1210

    2016 doi

  8. [16]

    2019, , 489, 3939, 10.1093/mnras/stz2410

    Carniani, S., Gallerani, S., Vallini, L., et al. 2019, , 489, 3939, 10.1093/mnras/stz2410

    2019 doi

  9. [17]

    2024, , 685, A99, 10.1051/0004-6361/202347230

    Carniani, S., Venturi, G., Parlanti, E., et al. 2024, , 685, A99, 10.1051/0004-6361/202347230

    2024 doi

  10. [18]

    Casey, C. M. 2012, , 425, 3094, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21455.x

    2012

  11. [19]

    2003, , 115, 763, 10.1086/376392

    Chabrier, G. 2003, , 115, 763, 10.1086/376392

    2003 doi

  12. [20]

    2015, , 574, A14, 10.1051/0004-6361/201424980

    Cicone, C., Maiolino, R., Gallerani, S., et al. 2015, , 574, A14, 10.1051/0004-6361/201424980

    2015 doi

  13. [21]

    2018, , 620, A82, 10.1051/0004-6361/201833520

    Circosta, C., Mainieri, V., Padovani, P., et al. 2018, , 620, A82, 10.1051/0004-6361/201833520

    2018 doi

  14. [22]

    Costa, T., Rosdahl, J., Sijacki, D., & Haehnelt, M. G. 2018, , 479, 2079, 10.1093/mnras/sty1514

    2018 doi

  15. [23]

    2014, , 568, A62, 10.1051/0004-6361/201322489

    De Looze, I., Cormier, D., Lebouteiller, V., et al. 2014, , 568, A62, 10.1051/0004-6361/201322489

    2014 doi

  16. [24]

    P., et al

    Decarli, R., Walter, F., Venemans, B. P., et al. 2017, , 545, 457, 10.1038/nature22358

    2017 doi

  17. [25]

    2018, , 854, 97, 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa5aa

    ---. 2018, , 854, 97, 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa5aa

    2018 doi

  18. [26]

    2022, , 662, A60, 10.1051/0004-6361/202142871

    Decarli, R., Pensabene, A., Venemans, B., et al. 2022, , 662, A60, 10.1051/0004-6361/202142871

    2022 doi

  19. [27]

    2023, , 673, A157, 10.1051/0004-6361/202245674

    Decarli, R., Pensabene, A., Diaz-Santos , T., et al. 2023, , 673, A157, 10.1051/0004-6361/202245674

    2023 doi

  20. [28]

    M., & Casey, C

    Drew, P. M., & Casey, C. M. 2022, , 930, 142, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac6270

    2022 doi

  21. [29]

    Fan, X., Ba \ n ados, E., & Simcoe, R. A. 2023, , 61, 373, 10.1146/annurev-astro-052920-102455

    2023 doi

  22. [30]

    2019, , 870, L11, 10.3847/2041-8213/aaeffe

    Fan, X., Wang, F., Yang, J., et al. 2019, , 870, L11, 10.3847/2041-8213/aaeffe

    2019 doi

  23. [31]

    P., Schindler, J.-T., Walter, F., et al

    Farina, E. P., Schindler, J.-T., Walter, F., et al. 2022, , 941, 106, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac9626

    2022 doi

  24. [32]

    2017, , 601, A143, 10.1051/0004-6361/201629478

    Fiore, F., Feruglio, C., Shankar, F., et al. 2017, , 601, A143, 10.1051/0004-6361/201629478

    2017 doi

  25. [33]

    2010, , 518, L41, 10.1051/0004-6361/201014676

    Fischer, J., Sturm, E., Gonz \'a lez-Alfonso , E., et al. 2010, , 518, L41, 10.1051/0004-6361/201014676

    2010 doi

  26. [34]

    2019, , 483, 4586, 10.1093/mnras/sty3449

    Fluetsch, A., Maiolino, R., Carniani, S., et al. 2019, , 483, 4586, 10.1093/mnras/sty3449

    2019 doi

  27. [35]

    2012, , 543, A114, 10.1051/0004-6361/201118705

    Gallerani, S., Neri, R., Maiolino, R., et al. 2012, , 543, A114, 10.1051/0004-6361/201118705

    2012 doi

  28. [36]

    Gaskell, C. M. 1982, , 263, 79, 10.1086/160481

    1982 doi

  29. [37]

    S., Krumholz, M

    Gentry, E. S., Krumholz, M. R., Dekel, A., & Madau, P. 2017, , 465, 2471, 10.1093/mnras/stw2746

    2017 doi

  30. [38]

    Gonz \'a lez-Alfonso , E., Fischer, J., Spoon, H. W. W., et al. 2017, , 836, 11, 10.3847/1538-4357/836/1/11

    2017 doi

  31. [39]

    M., & Ramos Almeida, C

    Harrison, C. M., & Ramos Almeida, C. 2024, Galaxies, 12, 17, 10.3390/galaxies12020017

    2024 doi

  32. [40]

    K., Mawatari, K., et al

    Hashimoto, T., Inoue, A. K., Mawatari, K., et al. 2019, , 71, 71, 10.1093/pasj/psz049

    2019 doi

  33. [41]

    M., Armus, L., & Miley, G

    Heckman, T. M., Armus, L., & Miley, G. K. 1990, , 74, 833, 10.1086/191522

    1990 doi

  34. [42]

    2020, , 633, L4, 10.1051/0004-6361/201937109

    Herrera-Camus , R., Sturm, E., Graci \'a -Carpio , J., et al. 2020, , 633, L4, 10.1051/0004-6361/201937109

    2020 doi

  35. [43]

    2021, , 649, A31, 10.1051/0004-6361/202039704

    Herrera-Camus , R., F \"o rster Schreiber, N., Genzel, R., et al. 2021, , 649, A31, 10.1051/0004-6361/202039704

    2021 doi

  36. [44]

    F., Hernquist, L., Cox, T

    Hopkins, P. F., Hernquist, L., Cox, T. J., & Kere s , D. 2008, , 175, 356, 10.1086/524362

    2008 doi

  37. [45]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science and Engineering, 9, 90, 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55

    2007 doi

  38. [46]

    Ishibashi, W., & Fabian, A. C. 2022, , 516, 4963, 10.1093/mnras/stac2614

    2022 doi

  39. [47]

    C., & Maiolino, R

    Ishibashi, W., Fabian, A. C., & Maiolino, R. 2018, , 476, 512, 10.1093/mnras/sty236

    2018 doi

  40. [48]

    Kim, C.-G., & Ostriker, E. C. 2015, , 802, 99, 10.1088/0004-637X/802/2/99

    2015 doi

  41. [49]

    2015, , 53, 115, 10.1146/annurev-astro-082214-122316

    King, A., & Pounds, K. 2015, , 53, 115, 10.1146/annurev-astro-082214-122316

    2015 doi

  42. [50]

    2022, , 668, A45, 10.1051/0004-6361/202244054

    Lamperti, I., Pereira-Santaella , M., Perna, M., et al. 2022, , 668, A45, 10.1051/0004-6361/202244054

    2022 doi

  43. [51]

    2014, , 785, 154, 10.1088/0004-637X/785/2/154

    Leipski, C., Meisenheimer, K., Walter, F., et al. 2014, , 785, 154, 10.1088/0004-637X/785/2/154

    2014 doi

  44. [52]

    D., et al

    Leitherer, C., Schaerer, D., Goldader, J. D., et al. 1999, , 123, 3, 10.1086/313233

    1999 doi

  45. [53]

    P., Walter, F., et al

    Li, J., Venemans, B. P., Walter, F., et al. 2022, , 930, 27, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac61d7

    2022 doi

  46. [54]

    2016, , 591, A136, 10.1051/0004-6361/201527706

    Lutz, D., Berta, S., Contursi, A., et al. 2016, , 591, A136, 10.1051/0004-6361/201527706

    2016 doi

  47. [55]

    2020, , 633, A134, 10.1051/0004-6361/201936803

    Lutz, D., Sturm, E., Janssen, A., et al. 2020, , 633, A134, 10.1051/0004-6361/201936803

    2020 doi

  48. [56]

    H., & Alberts, S

    Lyu, J., Rieke, G. H., & Alberts, S. 2016, , 816, 85, 10.3847/0004-637X/816/2/85

    2016 doi

  49. [57]

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

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

    2012

  50. [58]

    2023, , 676, A71, 10.1051/0004-6361/202346317

    Mazzucchelli, C., Bischetti, M., D'Odorico, V., et al. 2023, , 676, A71, 10.1051/0004-6361/202346317

    2023 doi

  51. [59]

    P., Waters, B., Schiebel, D., Young, W., & Golap, K

    McMullin, J. P., Waters, B., Schiebel, D., Young, W., & Golap, K. 2007, 376, 127. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ASPC..376..127M

    2007

  52. [60]

    2015, , 804, 46, 10.1088/0004-637X/804/1/46

    Mel \'e ndez, M., Veilleux, S., Martin, C., et al. 2015, , 804, 46, 10.1088/0004-637X/804/1/46

    2015 doi

  53. [61]

    A., Walter, F., Cicone, C., et al

    Meyer, R. A., Walter, F., Cicone, C., et al. 2022, , 927, 152, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac4e94

    2022 doi

  54. [62]

    2017, Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences, 4, 42, 10.3389/fspas.2017.00042

    Morganti, R. 2017, Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences, 4, 42, 10.3389/fspas.2017.00042

    2017

  55. [63]

    A., & Voit, G

    Murray, N., Chiang, J., Grossman, S. A., & Voit, G. M. 1995, , 451, 498, 10.1086/176238

    1995 doi

  56. [64]

    Nesvadba, N. P. H., Lehnert, M. D., De Breuck, C., Gilbert, A. M., & van Breugel , W. 2008, , 491, 407, 10.1051/0004-6361:200810346

    2008 doi

  57. [65]

    Nesvadba, N. P. H., Polletta, M., Lehnert, M. D., et al. 2011, , 415, 2359, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18862.x

    2011

  58. [66]

    P., Walter, F., et al

    Novak, M., Venemans, B. P., Walter, F., et al. 2020, , 904, 131, 10.3847/1538-4357/abc33f

    2020 doi

  59. [67]

    J., Bianchi, S., et al

    Pappalardo, C., Bendo, G. J., Bianchi, S., et al. 2015, , 573, A129, 10.1051/0004-6361/201424549

    2015 doi

  60. [68]

    2024, Widespread Rapid Quenching at Cosmic Noon Revealed by JWST Deep Spectroscopy, 10.48550/arXiv.2404.17945

    Park, M., Belli, S., Conroy, C., et al. 2024, Widespread Rapid Quenching at Cosmic Noon Revealed by JWST Deep Spectroscopy, 10.48550/arXiv.2404.17945

    2024 doi arXiv

  61. [69]

    2021, , 652, A66, 10.1051/0004-6361/202039696

    Pensabene, A., Decarli, R., Ba \ n ados, E., et al. 2021, , 652, A66, 10.1051/0004-6361/202039696

    2021 doi

  62. [70]

    2015, , 574, A82, 10.1051/0004-6361/201425035

    Perna, M., Brusa, M., Cresci, G., et al. 2015, , 574, A82, 10.1051/0004-6361/201425035

    2015 doi

  63. [71]

    Planck Collaboration , Ade, P. A. R., Aghanim, N., et al. 2016, , 594, A13, 10.1051/0004-6361/201525830

    2016 doi

  64. [72]

    T., Lacy, M., Storrie-Lombardi , L

    Richards, G. T., Lacy, M., Storrie-Lombardi , L. J., et al. 2006, , 166, 470, 10.1086/506525

    2006 doi

  65. [73]

    T., Kruczek, N

    Richards, G. T., Kruczek, N. E., Gallagher, S. C., et al. 2011, , 141, 167, 10.1088/0004-6256/141/5/167

    2011 doi

  66. [74]

    N., Malkan, M

    Runco, J. N., Malkan, M. A., Fern \'a ndez-Ontiveros , J. A., Spinoglio, L., & Pereira-Santaella , M. 2020, , 905, 57, 10.3847/1538-4357/abb8e0

    2020 doi

  67. [75]

    S., Veilleux, S., & Sanders, D

    Rupke, D. S., Veilleux, S., & Sanders, D. B. 2005, , 632, 751, 10.1086/444451

    2005 doi

  68. [76]

    Rupke, D. S. N., G \"u ltekin, K., & Veilleux, S. 2017, , 850, 40, 10.3847/1538-4357/aa94d1

    2017 doi

  69. [77]

    Rupke, D. S. N., & Veilleux, S. 2013, , 775, L15, 10.1088/2041-8205/775/1/L15

    2013 doi

  70. [78]

    K., et al

    Salak, D., Hashimoto, T., Inoue, A. K., et al. 2024, , 962, 1, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad0df5

    2024 doi

  71. [79]

    Schawinski, K., Koss, M., Berney, S., & Sartori, L. F. 2015, , 451, 2517, 10.1093/mnras/stv1136

    2015 doi

  72. [80]

    P., Ba \ n ados, E., et al

    Schindler, J.-T., Farina, E. P., Ba \ n ados, E., et al. 2020, , 905, 51, 10.3847/1538-4357/abc2d7

    2020 doi

  73. [81]

    E., Robertson, B

    Schneider, E. E., Robertson, B. E., & Thompson, T. A. 2018, , 862, 56, 10.3847/1538-4357/aacce1

    2018 doi

  74. [82]

    M., Rosario, D

    Scholtz, J., Harrison, C. M., Rosario, D. J., et al. 2020, , 492, 3194, 10.1093/mnras/staa030

    2020 doi

  75. [83]

    S., & Dav \'e , R

    Somerville, R. S., & Dav \'e , R. 2015, , 53, 51, 10.1146/annurev-astro-082812-140951

    2015 doi

  76. [84]

    S., Marrone, D

    Spilker, J. S., Marrone, D. P., Aravena, M., et al. 2016, , 826, 112, 10.3847/0004-637X/826/2/112

    2016 doi

  77. [85]

    S., Aravena, M., B \'e thermin, M., et al

    Spilker, J. S., Aravena, M., B \'e thermin, M., et al. 2018, Science, 361, 1016, 10.1126/science.aap8900

    2018 doi

  78. [86]

    S., Phadke, K

    Spilker, J. S., Phadke, K. A., Aravena, M., et al. 2020 a , , 905, 85, 10.3847/1538-4357/abc47f

    2020 doi

  79. [87]

    S., Aravena, M., Phadke, K

    Spilker, J. S., Aravena, M., Phadke, K. A., et al. 2020 b , , 905, 86, 10.3847/1538-4357/abc4e6

    2020 doi

  80. [88]

    S., Phadke, K

    Spilker, J. S., Phadke, K. A., Aravena, M., et al. 2023, , 618, 708, 10.1038/s41586-023-05998-6

    2023 doi

  81. [89]

    A., Smith, H

    Spinoglio, L., Malkan, M. A., Smith, H. A., Gonz \'a lez-Alfonso , E., & Fischer, J. 2005, , 623, 123, 10.1086/428495

    2005 doi

  82. [90]

    Spoon, H. W. W., Farrah, D., Lebouteiller, V., et al. 2013, , 775, 127, 10.1088/0004-637X/775/2/127

    2013 doi

  83. [91]

    R., Costa, T., McKean, J

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

    2022 doi

  84. [92]

    B., K \"o nig, S., & Knudsen, K

    Stanley, F., Jolly, J. B., K \"o nig, S., & Knudsen, K. K. 2019, , 631, A78, 10.1051/0004-6361/201834530

    2019 doi

  85. [93]

    2016, , 826, 111, 10.3847/0004-637X/826/2/111

    Stone, M., Veilleux, S., Mel \'e ndez, M., et al. 2016, , 826, 111, 10.3847/0004-637X/826/2/111

    2016 doi

  86. [94]

    2011, , 733, L16, 10.1088/2041-8205/733/1/L16

    Sturm, E., Gonz \'a lez-Alfonso , E., Veilleux, S., et al. 2011, , 733, L16, 10.1088/2041-8205/733/1/L16

    2011 doi

  87. [95]

    A., Fabian, A

    Thompson, T. A., Fabian, A. C., Quataert, E., & Murray, N. 2015, , 449, 147, 10.1093/mnras/stv246

    2015 doi

  88. [96]

    A., & Heckman, T

    Thompson, T. A., & Heckman, T. M. 2024, Theory and Observation of Winds from Star-Forming Galaxies , 10.48550/arXiv.2406.08561

    2024 doi arXiv

  89. [97]

    2022, , 665, A107, 10.1051/0004-6361/202243920

    Tripodi, R., Feruglio, C., Fiore, F., et al. 2022, , 665, A107, 10.1051/0004-6361/202243920

    2022 doi

  90. [98]

    2024, HYPERION

    ---. 2024, HYPERION . Coevolution of Supermassive Black Holes and Galaxies at \ z > 6\ and the Build-up of Massive Galaxies, 10.48550/arXiv.2401.04211

    2024 doi arXiv

  91. [99]

    E., Richards, G

    Vanden Berk, D. E., Richards, G. T., Bauer, A., et al. 2001, , 122, 549, 10.1086/321167

    2001 doi

  92. [100]

    A., et al

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

    2021 doi

  93. [101]

    L., Riffel, R

    Vayner, A., Zakamska, N. L., Riffel, R. A., et al. 2021 b , , 504, 4445, 10.1093/mnras/stab1176

    2021 doi

  94. [102]

    L., Ishikawa, Y., et al

    Vayner, A., Zakamska, N. L., Ishikawa, Y., et al. 2024, , 960, 126, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad0be9

    2024 doi

  95. [103]

    2005, , 43, 769, 10.1146/annurev.astro.43.072103.150610

    Veilleux, S., Cecil, G., & Bland-Hawthorn , J. 2005, , 43, 769, 10.1146/annurev.astro.43.072103.150610

    2005 arXiv

  96. [104]

    D., & Aalto, S

    Veilleux, S., Maiolino, R., Bolatto, A. D., & Aalto, S. 2020, , 28, 2, 10.1007/s00159-019-0121-9

    2020 doi

  97. [105]

    Veilleux, S., Rupke, D. S. N., Kim, D. C., et al. 2009 a , , 182, 628, 10.1088/0067-0049/182/2/628

    2009 doi

  98. [106]

    C., Rupke, D

    Veilleux, S., Kim, D. C., Rupke, D. S. N., et al. 2009 b , , 701, 587, 10.1088/0004-637X/701/1/587

    2009 doi

  99. [107]

    2013, , 776, 27, 10.1088/0004-637X/776/1/27

    Veilleux, S., Mel \'e ndez, M., Sturm, E., et al. 2013, , 776, 27, 10.1088/0004-637X/776/1/27

    2013 doi

  100. [108]

    P., Neeleman, M., Walter, F., et al

    Venemans, B. P., Neeleman, M., Walter, F., et al. 2019, , 874, L30, 10.3847/2041-8213/ab11cc

    2019 doi

  101. [109]

    P., Decarli, R., Walter, F., et al

    Venemans, B. P., Decarli, R., Walter, F., et al. 2018, , 866, 159, 10.3847/1538-4357/aadf35

    2018 doi

  102. [110]

    P., Walter, F., Neeleman, M., et al

    Venemans, B. P., Walter, F., Neeleman, M., et al. 2020, , 904, 130, 10.3847/1538-4357/abc563

    2020 doi

  103. [111]

    2014, , 509, 177, 10.1038/nature13316

    Vogelsberger, M., Genel, S., Springel, V., et al. 2014, , 509, 177, 10.1038/nature13316

    2014 doi

  104. [112]

    L., et al

    Wang, B., de Graaff , A., Davies, R. L., et al. 2024, RUBIES : JWST / NIRSpec Confirmation of an Infrared-luminous , Broad-line Little Red Dot with an Ionized Outflow , 10.48550/arXiv.2403.02304

    2024 doi arXiv

  105. [113]

    L., Wagg, J., et al

    Wang, R., Carilli, C. L., Wagg, J., et al. 2008, , 687, 848, 10.1086/591076

    2008 doi

  106. [114]

    L., et al

    Wang, R., Wagg, J., Carilli, C. L., et al. 2011, , 142, 101, 10.1088/0004-6256/142/4/101

    2011 doi

  107. [115]

    2013, , 773, 44, 10.1088/0004-637X/773/1/44

    ---. 2013, , 773, 44, 10.1088/0004-637X/773/1/44

    2013 doi

  108. [116]

    2016, , 830, 53, 10.3847/0004-637X/830/1/53

    Wang, R., Wu, X.-B., Neri, R., et al. 2016, , 830, 53, 10.3847/0004-637X/830/1/53

    2016 doi

  109. [117]

    J., Coil, A

    Weiner, B. J., Coil, A. L., Prochaska, J. X., et al. 2009, , 692, 187, 10.1088/0004-637X/692/1/187

    2009 doi

  110. [118]

    2019, , 880, 153, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab2a02

    Yang, J., Venemans, B., Wang, F., et al. 2019, , 880, 153, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab2a02

    2019 doi

  111. [119]

    2021, , 923, 262, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac2b32

    Yang, J., Wang, F., Fan, X., et al. 2021, , 923, 262, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac2b32

    2021 doi

  112. [120]

    2023, , 951, L5, 10.3847/2041-8213/acc9c8

    ---. 2023, , 951, L5, 10.3847/2041-8213/acc9c8

    2023 doi

  113. [121]

    2021, , 917, 99, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac0af4

    Yue, M., Yang, J., Fan, X., et al. 2021, , 917, 99, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac0af4

    2021 doi

  114. [122]

    L., Hamann, F., P \^a ris, I., et al

    Zakamska, N. L., Hamann, F., P \^a ris, I., et al. 2016, , 459, 3144, 10.1093/mnras/stw718

    2016 doi

Pith tools

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