Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 96 references

Is Earendel a Star Cluster?: Metal Poor Globular Cluster Progenitors at $z\sim6$

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper argues that Earendel, previously the most distant single-star candidate ever found, is instead a compact, evolved, metal-poor star cluster — a plausible globular-cluster progenitor at z ≈ 6 — and that continuum spectroscopy can…

desk verdict Solid SSP reanalysis of Earendel that opens the cluster hypothesis but never tests the star/binary alternative on the same spectrum, so the reclassification is plausible, not established. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.05483 v1 pith:VKVNROXR submitted 2025-07-07 astro-ph.GA

Massimo Pascale , Liang Dai , Brenda L. Frye , Aliza G. Beverage This is my paper
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords EarendelSunrisegalaxystarclusterglobularprogenitorssimplestellarpopulationsJWSTNIRSpecPRISMstronggravitationallensinghigh-redshiftformation
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

Against the widely reported reading of Earendel as the most distant individual star ever seen, this paper tries to establish that Earendel is instead a compact, evolved, metal-poor star cluster sitting in the z ≈ 5.93 Sunrise galaxy. Using archival JWST NIRSpec PRISM spectra, the authors fit the object's rest-frame ultraviolet-to-optical continuum with three independent simple-stellar-population libraries and find the fit is as good as the fit for a neighboring source, 1b, that is already accepted as a star cluster. The inferred age is intermediate (30–150 Myr) and the metallicity is below about 10% of the Sun's, placing both objects on the formation age-metallicity trend followed by local globular clusters. If correct, the result turns a famous single-star candidate into a globular-cluster progenitor and opens a new window: continuum spectroscopy can characterize evolved star clusters in the early universe.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is simple stellar population (SSP) synthesis: the observed NIRSpec PRISM continuum is compared to grids of instantaneous-burst models from three libraries (BPASS, BC03, FSPS), each convolved to PRISM resolution and including a flexible dust law, a nebular component, and a noise-scaling term. The decisive observable is the shape of the continuum, particularly the ultraviolet-to-optical slope and the hydrogen Balmer break, the jump in the continuum at rest-frame 3646 Å, since absorption lines are too weak at these metallicities to constrain the fit. The paper demonstrates that masking everything blueward of the Balmer break leaves metallicity unconstrained, while the break itself preserves the inference, which is what carries the argument.

What would settle it

A medium-resolution JWST spectrum of Earendel that shows strong stellar-wind P-Cygni features, such as C IV λ1550 or N IV λ1240, would rule out a 30–150 Myr evolved cluster and support a young massive star or binary. Conversely, multi-epoch JWST photometry detecting microlensing-induced variability, which an evolved cluster should not produce, would shift the interpretation back toward a compact stellar source.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, Earendel's rest-UV to optical continuum is well described by a single, instantaneous burst of star formation, with a quality of fit nearly indistinguishable from that of the neighboring cluster 1b. Fits with BPASS, BC03, and FSPS agree that the population is intermediate-aged, t_age ~ 30–150 Myr (with some library-to-library spread), metal-poor, Z/Zsun ≲ 10%, lightly reddened (AV < 0.1 mag), and magnified to ~$10^{9}$ Msun, with inferred surface densities that can exceed the local cluster ceiling. The clear Balmer break in the spectrum is the main lever that breaks age-dust-metallicity degeneracies. The authors therefore conclude that Earendel is most naturally a compact star cluster — a plausible globular-cluster progenitor at z ~ 6 — rather than a single star or binary, and that the earlier size constraint that forced the star interpretation is relaxed once invisible low-mass dark-matter subhalos and alternative lens models are considered.

Load-bearing premise

The cluster conclusion rests on the assumption that the model continua from the three stellar-population libraries can distinguish a 30–150 Myr metal-poor cluster from a single star or binary at NIRSpec PRISM resolution; if the predicted ultraviolet-to-optical slope or Balmer break is biased, the inferred age and metallicity — and hence the cluster verdict — could be wrong.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If Earendel is a cluster, the claim that it is an individual star or binary at z ≈ 6 is replaced by a globular-cluster progenitor; the lack of detected microlensing variability over two years becomes expected rather than puzzling.
  • Evolved clusters of 30–150 Myr at these redshifts can be characterized from continuum spectroscopy alone, without relying on nebular emission lines that only trace younger systems.
  • Both Earendel and 1b fall on the age-metallicity sequence of local globular clusters, supporting the idea that at least some high-redshift compact clusters are direct globular-cluster precursors.
  • The inferred stellar surface densities, up to roughly a million solar masses per square parsec, suggest star formation efficient enough to approach or exceed the local density ceiling, with consequences for how such clusters stay bound.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A decisive check the authors do not perform is fitting single-star and binary models to the same NIRSpec spectrum; if a binary-star SED matches the continuum as well as the SSP does, the cluster conclusion would be weakened.
  • The roughly 0.8 dex metallicity offset seen when FSPS fits a mock BPASS spectrum hints that library systematics could bias continuum-only metallicities; applying this procedure to other lensed compact sources would calibrate the effect.
  • If microlensing-induced variability is eventually detected in Earendel across longer JWST baselines, it would shift the interpretation back toward a compact stellar source, since an evolved cluster lacks the massive stars needed for large fluctuations.
  • A natural extension is to use MIRI photometry targeting the broad 1.6 μm H− opacity feature to independently age-date such clusters beyond what the PRISM continuum alone can deliver.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper uses archival JWST NIRSpec PRISM spectroscopy of the strongly lensed z~6 Sunrise galaxy to test whether Earendel, previously proposed as a single star or binary, is instead a compact star cluster. The authors measure a spectroscopic redshift z=5.926±0.013 and fit simple stellar population (SSP) models from three libraries (BC03, BPASS, FSPS) to the rest-UV-to-optical continuum of Earendel and of the neighboring clump 1b, plus the counterimage 1a. They report that the continuum is well described by an SSP, with inferred ages t_age~30-160 Myr and metallicities Z≲10% Z_sun, and argue that Earendel is likely an evolved, metal-poor globular-cluster progenitor consistent with the local globular cluster age-metallicity relation. The paper also evaluates systematic effects, including dust reddening, nebular emission, star-formation history, and mock recovery tests.

Significance. If the cluster interpretation is correct, this would be a significant result: Earendel would become a rare, spectroscopically studied intermediate-age globular-cluster progenitor at z~6, complementing photometric studies of high-redshift cluster candidates and connecting them to local globular clusters. The paper has clear strengths: it uses public archival data, fits three independent SSP libraries, and includes careful robustness tests such as iterative wavelength masking, mock noise realizations, and an exponential-SFH comparison. The analysis is transparent about the reduced chi-square before error rescaling and about the disagreement among SSP libraries. However, the central question posed by the title is not answered by a controlled comparison: the paper never fits single-star or binary SEDs to the same spectrum, and it explicitly concedes that such a fit may be difficult to distinguish from a cluster. The conclusion that Earendel is 'very likely' a star cluster therefore goes beyond what the current analysis demonstrates; the paper would establish a more modest but solid claim of consistency with an SSP.

major comments (4)
  1. [§4.3] The central conclusion that Earendel is a star cluster rather than a single star or binary lacks the necessary control. Only SSP models are fit to the NIRSpec PRISM continuum; no single-star or binary SED is fit to the same data. The paper itself states in §4.3 that 'it may be difficult to confirm a binary or single-star scenario based on the spectrum alone,' which concedes that the data may not discriminate between the hypotheses. The previously proposed binary model of Welch et al. (2022b), with Teff~34,000 K and ~9,000 K, was built from NIRCam photometry that this work discards in §3.2 because of an F115W tension, and that model is never tested against the spectrum. At PRISM resolution (R~100), the distinguishing features (e.g., C IV wind lines) are below resolution, and Balmer absorption from a cool supergiant is shared with an evolved SSP. A concrete and necessary addition is to fit the published binary SED and representative single-star models (e.g., TLUSTY, PoWR, or CMFGEN) to the same continuum mask with the same noise model and to report a model-comparison statistic such as Δχ², AIC, or a Bayes factor. Without this control, the good SSP fits show internal consistency of the SSP family, not exclusion of stellar systems.
  2. [Table 1 and §4.1] The age inference is substantially more uncertain than the abstract suggests. For 1b, the three SSP libraries give ages of ~30 Myr (BC03), ~45 Myr (BPASS), and ~160 Myr (FSPS), a factor-of-five spread, and the abstract's range 30-150 Myr excludes the FSPS value of 162 Myr. The reduced chi-square is ~1.7 for 397 degrees of freedom before a free white-noise scaling α~1.3 is applied; this is a formally poor fit that is only brought to χ²ν=1 by rescaling uncertainties. Because the white-noise term also weakens the statistical power of any comparison, the paper should report the fit quality without the rescaling, treat the SSP age systematics as part of the uncertainty on the central age claim, and recalculate the age-metallicity comparison using the full spread of SSP ages.
  3. [§3.2 and Fig. 2] The decision to fit only the NIRSpec spectrum, after finding a ≳20% disagreement with the Welch et al. (2022b) photometry and an F115W enhancement not seen in the spectrum, places the entire cluster-versus-star conclusion on the spectrum alone. This makes it important to establish that the photometric tension is not a symptom of a spectroscopic calibration or extraction problem (e.g., slit loss or PSF mismatch) that could also alter the continuum shape. The candidate nebular lines [O III] and Hα are masked because of their low significance (2.5σ and 1.6σ) and possible arc contamination; the paper says including them did not change the posterior, but a quantitative before/after comparison of the inferred parameters and the goodness of fit should be shown. A joint fit to the spectrum plus the Welch et al. (2022b) photometry with F115W excluded would also provide an important consistency check.
  4. [Appendix B] The mock recovery test shows a sizable systematic in the metallicity inference: when fitting a mock BPASS spectrum with log(Z/Zsun)=-2.15, FSPS recovers a metallicity ~0.8 dex higher than the input, while BPASS and BC03 recover the truth. This offset is comparable to or larger than the quoted metallicity precision and is directly relevant to the paper's central claim that Earendel and 1b have Z≲10% Z_sun. The paper mentions this offset but does not propagate it into the reported metallicities or the age-metallicity figure. The authors should either quantify this systematic in the quoted metallicities and confidence levels or restrict the metallicity claim to the libraries that pass the mock test.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§2] There is a typo: 'nomencalture' should be 'nomenclature.'
  2. [Abstract and §5] The stated age range of 30-150 Myr is inconsistent with the FSPS best-fit age for 1b of 10^8.21 yr ~ 162 Myr in Table 1; the range should be adjusted or the discrepancy explained.
  3. [§3.1 and Abstract] The redshift is given as z=5.926+0.013/-0.012 in the text and z=5.926±0.013 in the abstract; these should be unified.
  4. [Fig. 2 caption] The caption refers to 'smoothed zoom-ins' but does not specify the smoothing kernel or scale; please add this detail.
  5. [§4.1.2] The sentence 'the Balmer break strength, are not in always in strong agreement' is grammatically unclear; please rephrase.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No definitional or constructed-input circularity; the spectral inference is external-data-driven and the independent SSP libraries carry the argument.

full rationale

The central derivation is an SED fit of archival NIRSpec PRISM spectra to three independent SSP libraries (BC03, BPASS, FSPS) with free age, metallicity, dust, nebular, and white-noise parameters; the inferred parameters are not fixed by construction, and the same fitting procedure applied to the independent 1a spectrum reproduces 1b, providing an external consistency check. The conclusion that Earendel's continuum is well-described by an SSP is a goodness-of-fit result against data, not a restatement of an input. The cluster interpretation is conditioned on prior size-constraint relaxation from Ji & Dai (2024) and Scofield et al. (2025); Ji & Dai shares a coauthor, but it is cited as prior external work with its own simulations, and the paper's spectroscopic evidence does not reduce to that citation. The explicit concession in Sec. 4.3 that 'it may be difficult to confirm a binary or single-star scenario based on the spectrum alone' is a missing-control and underdetermination limitation, not circularity: no equation equates the SSP fit to the cluster label, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. Systematic uncertainties (e.g., the FSPS 0.8 dex mock offset in Appendix B and the SSP disagreement in Balmer break strength noted in Sec. 4.1.2) are honesty about precision, not circular assumptions. Accordingly, no circular step is exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 11 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central inference is a multi-parameter fit: 10 free parameters per object, including age, metallicity, mass normalization, dust slope and amplitude, nebular parameters, velocity dispersion, and a white noise scaling. The result depends on the adopted SSP libraries and the assumption that an instantaneous burst is the right star-formation history. The lensing size relaxation that makes a cluster plausible comes partly from the authors' own prior papers. No new physical entity is introduced; Earendel as a cluster is a reclassification of an observed source, and the globular progenitor interpretation is an application of existing models.

free parameters (11)
  • Burst age log(t_age/yr) = 7.50 to 8.05 (Earendel), 7.47 to 8.21 (1b), depending on SSP
    Free parameter in the SED fit; central to the cluster interpretation and poorly constrained across libraries.
  • Stellar metallicity log(Z/Zsun) = -1.67 to -2.28 (Earendel), -2.12 to -2.41 (1b)
    Free parameter; drives the metal-poor conclusion, with systematic offsets between libraries.
  • Magnified stellar mass log(mu M*/Msun) = 8.87 to 9.24 (Earendel), 9.21 to 9.73 (1b)
    Normalization scaled to F200W photometry; not an intrinsic mass unless the magnification is known.
  • V-band extinction A_V = 0.02 to 0.05 mag
    Free parameter; inferred to be very small.
  • Reddening law slope delta = -1.44 to -0.09
    Free parameter following Salim et al.; poorly constrained but affects age-metallicity tradeoffs.
  • 2175 A bump strength B = 0.73 to 1.57
    Free parameter; weakly constrained.
  • Ionization parameter log U = unconstrained
    Free nebular parameter; posteriors match priors.
  • Nebular covering factor x = unconstrained
    Free parameter; not constrained by the evolved-cluster continuum.
  • Velocity dispersion sigma = unconstrained (prior 1-100 km/s)
    Free parameter; no significant absorption features to constrain it.
  • White noise scaling alpha = ~1.3
    Inflates spectral uncertainties to reach reduced chi-squared of unity; can absorb model misspecification.
  • SFH e-folding timescale tau (Appendix A) = log(tau/Gyr) ~ -2.2 to -2.6 (few Myr)
    Free in the exponential-SFH test; converges to an instantaneous burst, but the paper's central fits assume a delta-function SFH.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption An instantaneous burst (single stellar population) is an appropriate description for Earendel and 1b.
    Invoked in Sec. 3.2; tested in Appendix A for 1b but not for Earendel, and the mass and age inference is SSP-based.
  • domain assumption The BPASS, BC03, and FSPS libraries provide sufficiently accurate continuum and Balmer break predictions at 10-100 Myr in the metal-poor regime.
    The paper treats these libraries as truth; it notes disagreement in Balmer break strength and a 0.8 dex FSPS metallicity offset in mock tests (Appendix B), so library systematics are load-bearing.
  • domain assumption The NIRSpec PRISM spectra after DJA reduction and master sky subtraction are reliable continuum measurements for these faint sources.
    The analysis fits only the spectra; the paper finds more than 20% tension with published photometry (Sec. 3.2) and masks candidate lines, so spectral calibration is a premise.
  • domain assumption The strong-lensing size constraint can be relaxed to about 1-3 pc via dark matter subhalos or lower magnification, permitting a star cluster.
    Relies on prior lensing analyses, including one by coauthor Dai (Ji & Dai 2024) and Scofield et al. (2025); if these are wrong, the cluster hypothesis loses its main motivation.
  • domain assumption The Salim et al. dust reddening parameterization with free slope and bump spans plausible dust laws for this galaxy.
    Used in Sec. 3.2; dust affects age and metallicity through degeneracies, and the dust slope is poorly constrained.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Is Earendel a Star Cluster?: Metal Poor Globular Cluster Progenitors at $z\sim6$." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VKVNROXR

@misc{pith2026250705483,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Is Earendel a Star Cluster?: Metal Poor Globular Cluster Progenitors at $z\sim6$},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VKVNROXR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.05483}
}
abstract

The strongly-lensed $z\sim 6$ Sunrise galaxy offers an incredible opportunity to investigate star formation in the early universe on parsec or smaller scales. The highly magnified object Earendel within the Sunrise was previously identified as a candidate star or binary due to size constraints placed by the lensing magnification, however recent works have suggested this constraint may be relaxed to even the size of star clusters. Here, we explore the hypothesis that Earendel may actually be a star cluster, and simultaneously evaluate other star clusters within the host galaxy. Leveraging deep, archival James Webb Space Telescope NIRSpec PRISM spectroscopy, we determine a spectroscopic redshift for the Sunrise galaxy $z=5.926 \pm 0.013$, and we fit simple stellar population (SSP) models from three premier libraries to evaluate the physical parameters of Earendel and another distinct star cluster in the Sunrise dubbed `$1b$'. We find the rest-UV through optical continuum of Earendel to be well-described by an SSP, nearly equivalently to $1b$ which is confidently a star cluster. We infer they have intermediate ages $t_{\rm age}\sim 30$--$150\,$Myr, are metal poor ($Z_\star\lesssim10\%\,Z_\odot$), and are consistent with the formation age-metallicity trend seen in local globular clusters. Such intermediate age clusters are seldom probed spectroscopically in the high redshift universe, and we explore the extent to which these clusters can be characterized via the spectroscopic continuum.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.05483 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. JWST NIRCam F090W+F200W+F444W false color image of the Sunrise galaxy at z ≈ 5.93. The multiple images shown sweep out an angular extent of ∼ 16 arcsec. At the redshift of Sunrise, the compass 2′′ corresponds to ∼ 11.8 kpc. Labeled are multiply-imaged clumps of interest within the galaxy: Earendel, image 1, image 6, and the so-called ‘star-forming complex’, or SFC, consisting of images 3, 4, 5, and 6. We note the JW… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. NIRSpec PRISM spectra of Earendel and 1b with the best fit BPASS model from SED fitting overplotted. We omit the BC03 and FSPS best fit SEDs for clarity, as they appear similar to the result from BPASS. Spectra are taken from version 3 of the DJA (Heintz et al. 2024). Both Earendel and 1b have similar spectra indicative of stellar continuum from an evolved simple stellar population. The fit is influenced by the shap… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Posterior distributions for the Earendel (left), 1b (right purple), and 1a (right black) physical parameters from fitting with the BPASS SSP library, which generally yielded the largest age and metallicity uncertainties. We omit the ionization parameter, covering factor and velocity dispersion as they go unconstrained. We also omit the white noise scaling, which is ≲ 1.3 in all cases. 2D contours enclose 50% and 90%… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Massive star cluster age-metallicity relation pre￾dicted for MW, LMC, and SMC mass host galaxies predicted by the E-MOSAICS cosmological simulation (Kruijssen et al. 2019; Horta et al. 2021) compared to measurements from LMC and SMC clusters (see Table A1 of Horta et a…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Metallicites and ages posteriors from fitting the BPASS SSPs to 10 mock spectra constructed using a BPASS model of log(Z/Z⊙) = −2.15, log(tage/yr) = 7.7 and AV = 0 with noise realizations applied which approximate the wavelength-dependent noise of the 1b NIRSpec PRISM …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Top: Metallicites inferred from the 1b NIRSpec PRISM spectrum using the BPASS SSPs (black error bars) with an iterative masking of wavelengths from the rest-FUV to the rest-Optical. Masking the FUV through NUV does not appear to significantly affect the inferred metall…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

96 extracted references · 9 canonical work pages

  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]

    ""HHH!W IDAT i 999ooolll bbb KKKfffiLv IDAT ZZZeee ʪ IDAT :::ooo @@@```___ AAA888&&& ggg @@@HHHhhhJJJ ͉ IDAT <<<nnn :::XXX :::::: ((( eeeddd ]L IDAT ///aaa nnn555 000///YYY

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

    arXiv 2021

  4. [4]

    2023, , 525, L6, 10.1093/mnrasl/slad084

    Adamo , A., Usher , C., Pfeffer , J., & Claeyssens , A. 2023, , 525, L6, 10.1093/mnrasl/slad084

    doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slad084 2023

  5. [5]

    D., Vanzella , E., et al

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

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

  6. [6]

    M., & Grevesse , N

    Asplund , M., Amarsi , A. M., & Grevesse , N. 2021, , 653, A141, 10.1051/0004-6361/202140445

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202140445 2021

  7. [7]

    2022, msaexp: NIRSpec analyis tools , 0.4, Zenodo, 10.5281/zenodo.7579050

    Brammer , G. 2022, msaexp: NIRSpec analyis tools , 0.4, Zenodo, 10.5281/zenodo.7579050

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.7579050 2022

  8. [8]

    2003, , 344, 1000, 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06897.x

    Bruzual , G., & Charlot , S. 2003, , 344, 1000, 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06897.x

    arXiv 2003

Show all 96 references
  1. [9]

    G., Romano , D., & D'Ercole , A

    Calura , F., Few , C. G., Romano , D., & D'Ercole , A. 2015, , 814, L14, 10.1088/2041-8205/814/1/L14

    2015 doi

  2. [10]

    2001, , 113, 1449, 10.1086/324269

    Calzetti , D. 2001, , 113, 1449, 10.1086/324269

    2001 doi

  3. [11]

    A., Clayton , G

    Cardelli , J. A., Clayton , G. C., & Mathis , J. S. 1989, , 345, 245, 10.1086/167900

    1989 doi

  4. [12]

    C., McLure , R

    Carnall , A. C., McLure , R. J., Dunlop , J. S., & Dav \'e , R. 2018, , 480, 4379, 10.1093/mnras/sty2169

    2018 doi

  5. [13]

    C., McLure , R

    Carnall , A. C., McLure , R. J., Dunlop , J. S., et al. 2019, , 490, 417, 10.1093/mnras/stz2544

    2019 doi

  6. [14]

    Cezario , E., Coelho , P. R. T., Alves-Brito , A., Forbes , D. A., & Brodie , J. P. 2013, , 549, A60, 10.1051/0004-6361/201220336

    2013 doi

  7. [15]

    L., Diego , J

    Chen , W., Kelly , P. L., Diego , J. M., et al. 2019, , 881, 8, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab297d

    2019 doi

  8. [16]

    2016, , 462, 1415, 10.1093/mnras/stw1756

    Chevallard , J., & Charlot , S. 2016, , 462, 1415, 10.1093/mnras/stw1756

    2016 doi

  9. [17]

    2016, , 823, 102, 10.3847/0004-637X/823/2/102

    Choi , J., Dotter , A., Conroy , C., et al. 2016, , 823, 102, 10.3847/0004-637X/823/2/102

    2016 doi

  10. [18]

    2019, , 884, 85, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab412b

    Coe , D., Salmon , B., Brada c , M., et al. 2019, , 884, 85, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab412b

    2019 doi

  11. [19]

    Conroy , C., & Gunn , J. E. 2010, FSPS: Flexible Stellar Population Synthesis , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1010.043

    2010

  12. [20]

    2021, , 501, 5538, 10.1093/mnras/stab017

    Dai , L. 2021, , 501, 5538, 10.1093/mnras/stab017

    2021 doi

  13. [21]

    A., & Miralda-Escud , J

    Dai , L., Venumadhav , T., Kaurov , A. A., & Miralda-Escud , J. 2018, , 867, 24, 10.3847/1538-4357/aae478

    2018 doi

  14. [22]

    A., Sharon , K., et al

    Dai , L., Kaurov , A. A., Sharon , K., et al. 2020, , 495, 3192, 10.1093/mnras/staa1355

    2020 doi

  15. [23]

    2024, , 684, A87, 10.1051/0004-6361/202347755

    de Graaff , A., Rix , H.-W., Carniani , S., et al. 2024, , 684, A87, 10.1051/0004-6361/202347755

    2024 doi

  16. [24]

    2025, , 697, A189, 10.1051/0004-6361/202452186

    de Graaff , A., Brammer , G., Weibel , A., et al. 2025, , 697, A189, 10.1051/0004-6361/202452186

    2025 doi

  17. [25]

    C., Birnboim , Y., Mandelker , N., & Li , Z

    Dekel , A., Sarkar , K. C., Birnboim , Y., Mandelker , N., & Li , Z. 2023, , 523, 3201, 10.1093/mnras/stad1557

    2023 doi

  18. [26]

    Diego , J. M. 2019, , 625, A84, 10.1051/0004-6361/201833670

    2019 doi

  19. [27]

    M., Kaiser , N., Broadhurst , T., et al

    Diego , J. M., Kaiser , N., Broadhurst , T., et al. 2018, , 857, 25, 10.3847/1538-4357/aab617

    2018 doi

  20. [28]

    M., Sun , B., Yan , H., et al

    Diego , J. M., Sun , B., Yan , H., et al. 2023, , 679, A31, 10.1051/0004-6361/202347556

    2023 doi

  21. [29]

    A., Kewley , L

    Dopita , M. A., Kewley , L. J., Heisler , C. A., & Sutherland , R. S. 2000, , 542, 224, 10.1086/309538

    2000 doi

  22. [30]

    R., Massey , P., Meynet , G., Tokarz , S., & Caldwell , N

    Drout , M. R., Massey , P., Meynet , G., Tokarz , S., & Caldwell , N. 2009, , 703, 441, 10.1088/0004-637X/703/1/441

    2009 doi

  23. [31]

    J., Beasor , E

    Eldridge , J. J., Beasor , E. R., & Britavskiy , N. 2020, , 495, L102, 10.1093/mnrasl/slaa067

    2020 doi

  24. [32]

    J., Chatzikos , M., Guzm \'a n , F., et al

    Ferland , G. J., Chatzikos , M., Guzm \'a n , F., et al. 2017, , 53, 385. 1705.10877

    2017 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Fisher , R., Bowler , R. A. A., Stefanon , M., et al. 2025, , 539, 109, 10.1093/mnras/staf485

    2025 doi

  26. [34]

    A., & Bridges , T

    Forbes , D. A., & Bridges , T. 2010, , 404, 1203, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16373.x

    2010

  27. [35]

    L., Pascale , M., Pierel , J., et al

    Frye , B. L., Pascale , M., Pierel , J., et al. 2024, , 961, 171, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1034

    2024 doi

  28. [36]

    M., et al

    Fudamoto , Y., Sun , F., Diego , J. M., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2404.08045, 10.48550/arXiv.2404.08045

    2024 doi arXiv

  29. [37]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2402.18543, 10.48550/arXiv.2402.18543

    Fujimoto , S., Ouchi , M., Kohno , K., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2402.18543, 10.48550/arXiv.2402.18543

    2024 doi arXiv

  30. [38]

    J., Meena , A

    Furtak , L. J., Meena , A. K., Zackrisson , E., et al. 2024, , 527, L7, 10.1093/mnrasl/slad135

    2024 doi

  31. [39]

    D., Clayton , G

    Gordon , K. D., Clayton , G. C., Misselt , K. A., Landolt , A. U., & Wolff , M. J. 2003, , 594, 279, 10.1086/376774

    2003 doi

  32. [40]

    E., Groh , J

    G \"o tberg , Y., de Mink , S. E., Groh , J. H., Leitherer , C., & Norman , C. 2019, , 629, A134, 10.1051/0004-6361/201834525

    2019 doi

  33. [41]

    Y., Hafen , Z., Rodriguez , C

    Grudi \'c , M. Y., Hafen , Z., Rodriguez , C. L., et al. 2023, , 519, 1366, 10.1093/mnras/stac3573

    2023 doi

  34. [42]

    Y., Hopkins , P

    Grudi \'c , M. Y., Hopkins , P. F., Quataert , E., & Murray , N. 2019, , 483, 5548, 10.1093/mnras/sty3386

    2019 doi

  35. [43]

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

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

    2024 doi

  36. [44]

    F., Murray , N., Quataert , E., & Thompson , T

    Hopkins , P. F., Murray , N., Quataert , E., & Thompson , T. A. 2010, , 401, L19, 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2009.00777.x

    2010

  37. [45]

    E., Pfeffer , J

    Horta , D., Hughes , M. E., Pfeffer , J. L., et al. 2021, , 500, 4768, 10.1093/mnras/staa3522

    2021 doi

  38. [46]

    W., Lu , J

    Hosek , Jr., M. W., Lu , J. R., Anderson , J., et al. 2015, , 813, 27, 10.1088/0004-637X/813/1/27

    2015 doi

  39. [47]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2407.09594, 10.48550/arXiv.2407.09594

    Ji , L., & Dai , L. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2407.09594, 10.48550/arXiv.2407.09594

    2024 doi arXiv

  40. [48]

    A., Dai , L., Venumadhav , T., Miralda-Escud \'e , J., & Frye , B

    Kaurov , A. A., Dai , L., Venumadhav , T., Miralda-Escud \'e , J., & Frye , B. 2019, , 880, 58, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab2888

    2019 doi

  41. [49]

    L., Diego , J

    Kelly , P. L., Diego , J. M., Rodney , S., et al. 2018, Nature Astronomy, 2, 334, 10.1038/s41550-018-0430-3

    2018 doi

  42. [50]

    I., & Lugaro , M

    Kobayashi , C., Karakas , A. I., & Lugaro , M. 2020, , 900, 179, 10.3847/1538-4357/abae65

    2020 doi

  43. [51]

    2001, , 322, 231, 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04022.x

    Kroupa , P. 2001, , 322, 231, 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04022.x

    2001

  44. [52]

    Kruijssen , J. M. D., Pfeffer , J. L., Crain , R. A., & Bastian , N. 2019, , 486, 3134, 10.1093/mnras/stz968

    2019 doi

  45. [53]

    R., McKee , C

    Krumholz , M. R., McKee , C. F., & Bland-Hawthorn , J. 2019, , 57, 227, 10.1146/annurev-astro-091918-104430

    2019 doi

  46. [54]

    J., & Lada , E

    Lada , C. J., & Lada , E. A. 2003, , 41, 57, 10.1146/annurev.astro.41.011802.094844

    2003 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Y., Naoz , S., et al

    Lake , W., Grudi \'c , M. Y., Naoz , S., et al. 2025, , 985, L6, 10.3847/2041-8213/add347

    2025 doi

  48. [56]

    Lange , J. U. 2023, , 525, 3181, 10.1093/mnras/stad2441

    2023 doi

  49. [57]

    2014, , 212, 14, 10.1088/0067-0049/212/1/14

    Leitherer , C., Ekstr \"o m , S., Meynet , G., et al. 2014, , 212, 14, 10.1088/0067-0049/212/1/14

    2014 doi

  50. [58]

    K., Zitrin , A., Jim \'e nez-Teja , Y., et al

    Meena , A. K., Zitrin , A., Jim \'e nez-Teja , Y., et al. 2023, , 944, L6, 10.3847/2041-8213/acb645

    2023 doi

  51. [59]

    H., Lancaster , L., Burkhart , B., et al

    Menon , S. H., Lancaster , L., Burkhart , B., et al. 2024, , 967, L28, 10.3847/2041-8213/ad462d

    2024 doi

  52. [60]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2407.20331, 10.48550/arXiv.2407.20331

    Messa , M., Vanzella , E., Loiacono , F., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2407.20331, 10.48550/arXiv.2407.20331

    2024 doi arXiv

  53. [61]

    2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2301.04672

    Mestric , U., Vanzella , E., Upadhyaya , A., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2301.04672. 2301.04672

    2023 arXiv

  54. [62]

    1991, , 379, 94, 10.1086/170486

    Miralda-Escud\' e , J. 1991, , 379, 94, 10.1086/170486

    1991 doi

  55. [63]

    G., Desprez , G., et al

    Mowla , L., Iyer , K. G., Desprez , G., et al. 2022, , 937, L35, 10.3847/2041-8213/ac90ca

    2022 doi

  56. [64]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2402.08696, 10.48550/arXiv.2402.08696

    Mowla , L., Iyer , K., Asada , Y., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2402.08696, 10.48550/arXiv.2402.08696

    2024 doi arXiv

  57. [65]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2406.12607, 10.48550/arXiv.2406.12607

    Nabizadeh , A., Zackrisson , E., Lundqvist , E., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2406.12607, 10.48550/arXiv.2406.12607

    2024 doi arXiv

  58. [66]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.11457, 10.48550/arXiv.2503.11457

    Nakane , M., Ouchi , M., Nakajima , K., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.11457, 10.48550/arXiv.2503.11457

    2025 doi arXiv

  59. [67]

    M., Kaiser , N., Kelly , P

    Oguri , M., Diego , J. M., Kaiser , N., Kelly , P. L., & Broadhurst , T. 2018, , 97, 023518, 10.1103/PhysRevD.97.023518

    2018 doi

  60. [68]

    2024, , 976, 166, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad7732

    Pascale , M., & Dai , L. 2024, , 976, 166, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad7732

    2024 doi

  61. [69]

    F., & Tsang , B

    Pascale , M., Dai , L., McKee , C. F., & Tsang , B. T. H. 2023, , 957, 77, 10.3847/1538-4357/acf75c

    2023 doi

  62. [70]

    L., Dai , L., et al

    Pascale , M., Frye , B. L., Dai , L., et al. 2022, , 932, 85, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac6ce9

    2022 doi

  63. [71]

    L., Pierel , J

    Pascale , M., Frye , B. L., Pierel , J. D. R., et al. 2025, , 979, 13, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad9928

    2025 doi

  64. [72]

    Pfeffer , J., Kruijssen , J. M. D., Crain , R. A., & Bastian , N. 2018, , 475, 4309, 10.1093/mnras/stx3124

    2018 doi

  65. [73]

    A., Balestra , I., Bradac , M., et al

    Rodney , S. A., Balestra , I., Bradac , M., et al. 2018, Nature Astronomy, 2, 324, 10.1038/s41550-018-0405-4

    2018 doi

  66. [74]

    Salim , S., Boquien , M., & Lee , J. C. 2018, , 859, 11, 10.3847/1538-4357/aabf3c

    2018 doi

  67. [75]

    2020, , 889, 189, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5a8b

    Salmon , B., Coe , D., Bradley , L., et al. 2020, , 889, 189, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5a8b

    2020 doi

  68. [76]

    L., Shapley , A

    Sanders , R. L., Shapley , A. E., Topping , M. W., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2408.05273, 10.48550/arXiv.2408.05273

    2024 doi arXiv

  69. [77]

    2002, , 124, 3050, 10.1086/344682

    Sawicki , M. 2002, , 124, 3050, 10.1086/344682

    2002 doi

  70. [78]

    2024, , 32, 2, 10.1007/s00159-024-00151-2

    Schneider , R., & Maiolino , R. 2024, , 32, 2, 10.1007/s00159-024-00151-2

    2024 doi

  71. [79]

    P., Jee , M

    Scofield , Z. P., Jee , M. J., Cha , S., & Park , H. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2504.08879, 10.48550/arXiv.2504.08879

    2025 doi arXiv

  72. [80]

    R., Eldridge , J

    Stanway , E. R., Eldridge , J. J., & Becker , G. D. 2016, , 456, 485, 10.1093/mnras/stv2661

    2016 doi

  73. [81]

    G., Chisholm , J., Sander , A

    Telford , O. G., Chisholm , J., Sander , A. A. C., et al. 2024, , 974, 85, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad697e

    2024 doi

  74. [82]

    P., Forbes , D

    Usher , C., Brodie , J. P., Forbes , D. A., et al. 2019, , 490, 491, 10.1093/mnras/stz2596

    2019 doi

  75. [83]

    2017, , 467, 4304, 10.1093/mnras/stx351

    Vanzella , E., Calura , F., Meneghetti , M., et al. 2017, , 467, 4304, 10.1093/mnras/stx351

    2017 doi

  76. [84]

    2023, , 945, 53, 10.3847/1538-4357/acb59a

    Vanzella , E., Claeyssens , A., Welch , B., et al. 2023, , 945, 53, 10.3847/1538-4357/acb59a

    2023 doi

  77. [85]

    A., & Leitherer , C

    V \'a zquez , G. A., & Leitherer , C. 2005, , 621, 695, 10.1086/427866

    2005 doi

  78. [86]

    2017, , 850, 49, 10.3847/1538-4357/aa9575

    Venumadhav , T., Dai , L., & Miralda-Escud \'e , J. 2017, , 850, 49, 10.3847/1538-4357/aa9575

    2017 doi

  79. [87]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2404.08094, 10.48550/arXiv.2404.08094

    Weisenbach , L., Anguita , T., Miralda-Escud \'e , J., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2404.08094, 10.48550/arXiv.2404.08094

    2024 doi arXiv

  80. [88]

    R., Dolphin , A

    Weisz , D. R., Dolphin , A. E., Skillman , E. D., et al. 2013, , 431, 364, 10.1093/mnras/stt165

    2013 doi

  81. [89]

    2022 a , , 940, L1, 10.3847/2041-8213/ac9d39

    Welch , B., Coe , D., Zackrisson , E., et al. 2022 a , , 940, L1, 10.3847/2041-8213/ac9d39

    2022 doi

  82. [90]

    M., et al

    Welch , B., Coe , D., Diego , J. M., et al. 2022 b , , 603, 815, 10.1038/s41586-022-04449-y

    2022 doi

  83. [91]

    E., Cutler , S

    Whitaker , K. E., Cutler , S. E., Chandar , R., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.07627. 2501.07627

    2025

  84. [92]

    E., Naoz , S., Lake , W., et al

    Williams , C. E., Naoz , S., Lake , W., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2502.17561, 10.48550/arXiv.2502.17561

    2025 doi arXiv

  85. [93]

    Williams , L. L. R., Kelly , P. L., Treu , T., et al. 2024, , 961, 200, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1660

    2024 doi

  86. [94]

    A., Timmes , F

    Windhorst , R. A., Timmes , F. X., Wyithe , J. S. B., et al. 2018, , 234, 41, 10.3847/1538-4365/aaa760

    2018 doi

  87. [95]

    2016, , 457, 4296, 10.1093/mnras/stw150

    Wofford , A., Charlot , S., Bruzual , G., et al. 2016, , 457, 4296, 10.1093/mnras/stw150

    2016 doi

  88. [96]

    Z., Jiang , B., et al

    Yang , M., Bonanos , A. Z., Jiang , B., et al. 2021, , 647, A167, 10.1051/0004-6361/202039596

    2021 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.