Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Dissecting the massive pristine, neutral gas reservoir of a remarkably bright galaxy at z = 14.179

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

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

Pith's one-line read GS-z14, the most distant spectroscopically confirmed galaxy, is dominated by a massive pristine neutral-hydrogen gas reservoir with gas fraction exceeding 0.9.

desk verdict Solid DLA detection on an important target, but the DLA-to-gas-mass conversion doesn't add up and the paper's own gas mass quotes disagree; worth refereeing after revision. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.06016 v1 pith:XO7THSCZ submitted 2025-02-09 astro-ph.GA astro-ph.CO

Kasper E. Heintz , Clara Pollock , Joris Witstok , Stefano Carniani , Kevin N. Hainline , Francesco D'Eugenio , Chamilla Terp , Aayush Saxena
show 1 more author
Darach Watson
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GAastro-ph.CO
keywords high-redshiftgalaxiesdampedLyman-alphaabsorbersneutralhydrogengasfractionJWSTALMAcosmicdawnreionization
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 argues that GS-z14, the most distant spectroscopically confirmed galaxy at redshift 14.179, is gas-dominated rather than gas-poor. From the damped Lyman-$\alpha$ absorption profile seen in its JWST/NIRSpec spectrum, the authors measure a neutral hydrogen column density of log(N_HI/$cm^{-2}$)=22.27. They then combine three independent routes—the star-formation surface density through the Kennicutt-Schmidt relation, the metal mass implied by the [OIII]-88um detection, and the upper limit from the [CII]-158um non-detection—to converge on a total gas mass log(M_gas/Msun)=9.8±0.3. This implies a gas fraction f_gas>0.9, with most of the galaxy's baryons in neutral atomic hydrogen. The low dust-to-gas ratio along the line of sight further indicates that this reservoir is more pristine than the central star-forming gas, so the galaxy appears to be a young system still embedded in its primordial accretion supply.

What carries the argument

The central object is the damped Lyman-$\alpha$ (DLA) absorption profile in the JWST/NIRSpec prism spectrum: a broad Voigt-profile damping wing imprinted by a high neutral-hydrogen column, log(N_HI/$cm^{-2}$)=22.27, at the systemic redshift of GS-z14. This single measurement anchors the HI mass estimate. The corroborating machinery is a set of scaling relations: the Kennicutt-Schmidt relation connecting star-formation surface density to total gas surface density; an [OIII]-88um-to-metal-mass calibration built from local dwarf galaxy observations and cosmological zoom-in simulations; and a metallicity-dependent [CII]-158um-to-HI scaling derived from gamma-ray burst sightlines, used to show that the [CII] non-detection still permits a large neutral reservoir. The paper also uses the measured UV spectral slope and the SED-derived attenuation to compute a line-of-sight dust-to-gas ratio, A_V/N_HI=(1.3±0.6)×$10^{-23}$ mag $cm^{2}$, which places the absorbing gas among the most metal-poor (pristine) sightlines.

What would settle it

A deep ALMA observation that detects [CII]-158um emission at a luminosity corresponding to a gas mass well below $10^{9}$.5 Msun, or a higher-resolution NIRSpec grating spectrum that resolves OI λ1302 or CII λ1334 absorption with a metallicity matching the central star-forming regions rather than pristine gas, would test the claim directly. A spatially resolved measurement of the HI covering factor or a dynamical mass from a more extended tracer would also settle whether the assumed spherical geometry is warranted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that GS-z14 contains about 6×$10^{9}$ Msun of gas (log(M_gas/Msun)=9.8±0.3) and that more than 90% of its baryons are in neutral atomic hydrogen, not in stars. The anchor is a damped Lyman-$\alpha$ (DLA) absorption wing in the rest-frame UV, modeled with a Voigt profile at the [OIII]-derived systemic redshift, giving log(N_HI/$cm^{-2}$)=22.$27^{{+0.08}}$_{-0.09}. Assuming a spherical gas distribution whose half-mass radius is about three times the rest-frame UV half-light radius (0.26 kpc), this column corresponds to M_HI≈5×$10^{9}$ Msun. The authors argue that this mass is consistent with the Kennicutt-Schmidt prediction from the star-formation surface density, with the gas mass derived from the [OIII]-88um metal-mass calibration and the assumed metallicity (Z/Z_sun≈0.17), and with the [CII]-158um non-detection once the low metallicity is accounted for. Earlier dynamical estimates that suggested f_gas≲0.7 are criticized because the [OIII]-88um line traces only the compact central star-forming region, not the extended neutral gas that dominates the baryon budget.

Load-bearing premise

The argument assumes that the line-of-sight neutral-hydrogen column can be converted to a total gas mass by taking the gas to be distributed spherically with a half-mass radius about three times the ultraviolet size of the galaxy; if the neutral gas is actually much more compact or clumpy, the inferred HI mass and gas fraction could be too high by a large factor.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the gas mass is ~10^9.8 Msun, then GS-z14's baryonic content is overwhelmingly neutral atomic gas, meaning the galaxy is still in an early assembly phase with most baryons not yet turned into stars.
  • The [OIII]-88um line remains a reliable redshift tracer for z>10 galaxies, but it should not be used to estimate dynamical masses, since it traces only the compact star-forming core.
  • The [CII]-158um non-detection in GS-z14 is not evidence of a low gas fraction; it is expected for a low-metallicity, HI-dominated galaxy, so future ALMA searches should not interpret [CII] limits as gas-mass limits without a metallicity-dependent scaling.
  • The low dust-to-gas ratio along the DLA sightline implies that the neutral gas is more pristine than the central regions, supporting a picture where cosmic-dawn galaxies are embedded in infalling, near-primordial gas.
  • The frequent occurrence of DLAs in z>10 JWST spectra means that far-infrared line scans should start from emission-line redshifts (e.g., [OIII]) rather than the Ly-alpha break redshift.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the gas is more compact than the assumed three-times-UV radius, the absolute HI mass could fall by a factor of a few, but the independent Kennicutt-Schmidt and metal-mass estimates would still put f_gas at roughly 0.7 or higher, so the gas-dominated picture is likely robust even if the exact mass shifts.
  • The paper's framework predicts that other bright z>10 galaxies with [OIII] redshifts will show similarly high HI columns and weak [CII], which future ALMA surveys can check statistically.
  • A direct observational test of the pristine-gas claim: deep NIRSpec grating spectroscopy should detect OI λ1302 or CII λ1334 absorption with a gas-phase metallicity below [M/H]≈-1.2, matching the dust-to-gas ratio rather than the emission-line metallicity.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. This Letter reanalyzes the JWST/NIRSpec prism spectrum of JADES-GS-z14-0 at z=14.179 together with ALMA far-infrared measurements. By fitting a Voigt-profile DLA model to the Lyman-alpha break, the authors derive log N_HI = 22.27^{+0.08}_{-0.09} and a strong statistical preference over an IGM-only model (ΔBIC = 82). They then combine three routes—an assumed spherical geometry for the HI, the Kennicutt-Schmidt relation applied to the UV-derived SFR surface density, and an [OIII]-88 μm based metal-mass estimate—to claim a total gas mass log(M_gas/M_sun) = 9.8 ± 0.3, a gas fraction f_gas ≳ 0.9, and a pristine neutral HI reservoir. The paper also derives a dust-to-gas ratio A_V/N_HI and argues the [CII] non-detection is consistent with the inferred gas mass.

Significance. If correct, this would be the first direct absorption-based measurement of a massive, largely neutral gas reservoir in a spectroscopically confirmed galaxy at z ≈ 14, with strong implications for baryon budgets at cosmic dawn and for ALMA line searches. The paper's strengths include the use of public JWST and ALMA data, a clear model comparison with quantified ΔBIC, and an explicit attempt to cross-check the gas mass with multiple estimators. However, the central quantitative claim currently rests on an apparent arithmetic error in the DLA-to-mass conversion, an internal inconsistency in the reported gas mass, and empirical calibrations extrapolated far beyond their native redshift range. These issues are load-bearing for the paper's main conclusion.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 3, DLA geometry] The conversion from the measured column density to a total HI mass is not supported by the stated geometry. With R_UV = 0.26 kpc, a half-mass radius of 3×R_UV = 0.78 kpc, and log N_HI = 22.27, a uniform sphere gives M_HI ≈ 2×10^8 M_sun and a thin shell gives M_HI ≈ 1.2×10^9 M_sun, not 5×10^9 M_sun. Reproducing 5×10^9 M_sun would require a gas radius of roughly 1.6–4 kpc, i.e., 6–15×R_UV depending on the assumed density profile. The paper should either provide the explicit formula and geometry used or correct the quoted M_HI; as written, the claimed DLA-based corroboration of the 10^10 M_sun gas reservoir does not follow from the measured N_HI.
  2. [Abstract and Sections 3–4] The paper is internally inconsistent about the headline gas mass. The abstract and Section 3 state log(M_gas/M_sun) = 9.8 ± 0.3 and f_gas ≳ 0.9, while Section 4 concludes log(M_gas/M_sun) = 9.5 ± 0.3 and f_gas ∼ 0.7–0.9. These differ by a factor of two in gas mass and imply materially different baryon fractions. The authors must harmonize these numbers and state which value is the central claim, with the associated error budget.
  3. [Section 3, Kennicutt-Schmidt route] The Kennicutt-Schmidt estimate uses Σ_SFR = SFR/2πR_UV² and then applies the globally calibrated KS relation to infer a total gas mass within the star-forming region. This involves at least two extrapolations: the KS relation itself is calibrated largely at lower redshift and lower gas surface densities, and the conversion assumes that the gas responsible for the DLA and the gas captured by the KS relation share the same effective radius. The scatter in the KS relation and the uncertainty in the SFR normalization are not propagated into the quoted log(M_gas/M_sun) = 9.8 ± 0.3. Given that the DLA-geometry route appears to overestimate M_HI by a large factor, this extrapolated KS route becomes the primary support for the central claim, so its systematics need to be quantified explicitly.
  4. [Section 3, metallicity route] The metal-mass route converts the [OIII]-88 μm luminosity to M_Z using a calibration from local dwarf galaxies and cosmological zoom-in simulations, then divides by Z/Z_sun = 0.17 to obtain M_gas. The quoted log(O/H) = 7.92 is adopted without an uncertainty, yet a 0.3 dex error in the oxygen abundance changes the inferred gas mass by roughly a factor of two. The authors should propagate the metallicity uncertainty and the calibration scatter into the final gas mass, especially because the resulting value agrees with the KS estimate only to within the broad error bars.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract] The phrase 'far-infrared line-detection searchers' should read 'far-infrared line-detection searches'.
  2. [Section 3, KS paragraph] The sentence 'M_HI = M_gas − M_H2 = 5×10^9 M_sun, M_HI ≈ 3 × M_H2' appears to conflate the DLA-geometric M_HI estimate with the KS-derived total gas mass; this formulation should be clarified, particularly because the geometric estimate is later acknowledged to be geometry-dependent.
  3. [Section 2] The text says the prism spectrum has R = 30–300 and adds that the Ly-alpha region has R ∼ 60; it would be helpful to state whether the quoted resolving power is the nominal instrument value or the measured value for this observation.
  4. [Figure 2 caption] The y-axis label 'AV/NHI' uses plain subscripts while the text uses A_V/N_HI; unify the notation for clarity.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the gas mass claim rests on independent external calibrations; the quoted DLA-based HI mass shows an arithmetic discrepancy that is a correctness risk, not a circular step.

full rationale

The paper's central claim, log(Mgas/Msun) ≈ 9.8, is supported by three routes. The DLA route converts a fitted NHI to M_HI via an assumed spherical geometry and a radius scaled from R_UV; this is an assumed physical model, not a parameter fitted to the target gas mass. The Kennicutt-Schmidt route uses the external calibration of Kennicutt & Evans (2012) with the measured SFR and R_UV, and the metallicity route uses the [OIII]-to-M_Z calibrations of Cormier et al. (2015) and Olsen et al. (2017) with an independently measured oxygen abundance. The [CII] non-detection is applied only as an upper-limit consistency check through the GRB-based scaling of Heintz et al. (2021). Self-citations are present (Heintz et al. 2021, 2024a,b, 2025), but they are not load-bearing uniqueness arguments; they refer to externally calibrated relations or previously published DLA modeling and sample statistics. The internal inconsistency between the abstract's log(Mgas/Msun)=9.8±0.3 and Section 4's log(Mgas/Msun)=9.5±0.3, and the apparent difficulty in recovering M_HI=5e9 Msun from N_HI=10^22.27 cm^-2 and R_gas=3xR_UV=0.78 kpc under a uniform-sphere conversion, are substantive correctness concerns. They do not, however, make any predicted quantity equivalent to an input by construction, so they do not constitute circularity under the stated criteria.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central gas mass estimate depends on several empirical calibrations and one ad hoc geometry assumption. The only fitted quantities in the DLA model are NHI, beta_UV, and xHI; the gas mass claims add geometry and scaling relations.

free parameters (5)
  • beta_UV = -1.93 +/- 0.08
    Power-law slope of the rest-frame UV continuum fitted simultaneously with NHI; not central to the gas mass claim.
  • xHI = >0.41 (1 sigma)
    Neutral hydrogen fraction of the IGM in the DLA fit; included to capture covariance, not a target claim.
  • geometry_factor = 3x R_UV
    Half-mass radius of the neutral gas assumed to be three times the rest-frame UV half-light radius; directly sets M_HI = 5e9 Msun.
  • intrinsic_beta = -3
    Assumed intrinsic UV slope used to estimate the maximum visual extinction AV = 0.3 mag; affects the AV/NHI dust-to-gas ratio.
  • AV = 0.25 +/- 0.10 mag
    Adopted from Carniani et al. 2024b SED modeling to compute AV/NHI; not derived in this paper.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Voigt profile approximation for DLA damping wing (Tepper-Garcia 2006)
    Used to model the Ly-alpha absorption; assumes the absorbing gas is a single DLA at z=14.1796.
  • domain assumption Rest-frame UV continuum is a smooth power law
    Assumed in the DLA fit; alternative two-photon continuum is rejected (chi2_nu=1.53), but power-law shape may not capture all complexity.
  • domain assumption IGM is largely neutral at z=14
    Expected from reionization models (Miralda-Escude 1998; Inoue et al. 2014); the paper treats xHI as a parameter with xHI > 0.41.
  • domain assumption Kennicutt-Schmidt relation holds at z=14
    The global-galaxy KS relation (Kennicutt & Evans 2012) is applied to derive gas surface density from SFR surface density; extrapolated from lower redshift.
  • domain assumption [OIII]-to-metal-mass calibration applies at high redshift
    Uses local Herschel dwarf galaxies and simulations (Cormier et al. 2015; Olsen et al. 2017) to convert [OIII] luminosity to total metal mass.
  • domain assumption Galaxy metallicity Z/Zsun = 0.17 from emission lines represents the bulk ISM
    Metallicity from Carniani et al. 2024b is used to convert metal mass to gas mass; if the gas is more metal-poor or patchy, the gas mass changes.
  • ad hoc to paper Spherical geometry and half-mass radius 3x R_UV
    Central to the DLA-based HI mass estimate; no direct measurement of the HI extent.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dissecting the massive pristine, neutral gas reservoir of a remarkably bright galaxy at z = 14.179." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XO7THSCZ

@misc{pith2026250206016,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dissecting the massive pristine, neutral gas reservoir of a remarkably bright galaxy at z = 14.179},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XO7THSCZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.06016}
}
abstract

At cosmic dawn, the first stars and galaxies are believed to form from and be deeply embedded in clouds of dense, pristine gas. Here we present a study of the JWST/NIRSpec data of the most distant, spectroscopically confirmed galaxy observed to date, JADES-GS-z14-0 (GS-z14 for short), at $z=14.179$, combined with recent far-infrared measurements of the [OIII]-$88\mu$m and [CII]-$158\mu$m line transitions and underlying dust-continuum emission. Based on the observed prominent damped Lyman-$\alpha$ (DLA) absorption profile, we determine a substantial neutral atomic hydrogen (HI) column density, $\log (N_{\rm HI} / {\rm cm^{-2}}) = 22.27^{+0.08}_{-0.09}$, consistent with previous estimates though seemingly at odds with the dynamical and gas mass of the galaxy. Using various independent but complementary approaches, considering the implied neutral gas mass from the DLA measurement, the star-formation rate surface density, and the metal abundance, we demonstrate that the total gas mass of GS-z14 is of the order $\log (M_{\rm gas} / M_\odot) = 9.8\pm 0.3$. This implies a substantial gas mass fraction, $f_{\rm gas} \gtrsim 0.9$ and that the bulk of the interstellar medium (ISM) is in the form of HI. We show that the derived gas mass is fully consistent with the non-detection of [CII]-$158\mu$m, assuming an appropriate scaling to the neutral gas. The low dust-to-gas ratio, $A_V/N_{\rm HI} = (1.3\pm 0.6)\times 10^{-23}$\,mag\,cm$^2$, derived in the line-of-sight through the DLA further indicates that the absorbing gas is more pristine than the central, star-forming regions probed by the [OIII]-$88\mu$m emission. These results highlight the implications for far-infrared line-detection searchers attainable with ALMA and demonstrate that the bright, relatively massive galaxy GS-z14 at $z=14.179$ is deeply embedded in a substantial, pristine HI gas reservoir dominating its baryonic matter content.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.06016 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (Left): JWST/NIRSpec Prism 1D spectrum of GS-z14. The photometrically-corrected flux density is shown by the black curve, and the associated uncertainty is shown by the grey-shaded region. In the inset is shown a zoom-in on the rest-frame UV part of the spectrum, with the best-fit DLA model overplotted (red solid curve), an IGM-only model (blue dot-dashed), and predictions for a 2γ nebular continuum emission (orange… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Dust-to-gas ratio, AV /NHI, as a function of gas￾phase metallicity, [M/H]. GS-z14 is shown by the red star symbol, and the high-redshift γ-ray burst sightlines through star-forming galaxies at z = 1.7 − 6.3 as the blue circles (measurements) or triangles (upper limits). The best-fit relation for the γ-ray burst sample is shown by the black solid line, with the 1σ and 2σ uncertainty indicated by the dark- and light-g… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Schematic of the gas com￾ponents seen in absorption and emis￾sion for GS-z14. The central star￾forming H ii regions also emit most of the rest-frame UV and [O iii] emission. The more extended neutral gas region likely dominates the observed H i col￾umn density, and more diffuse [C ii] emission due to the lower metallicity of the gas. The compact size of the young stellar population increases the ioniza￾tion paramete… 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. A Promise for the JWST era: Massive black holes directly collapsed from wave dark matter haloes, and Star formation in and around their accretion flows

    astro-ph.GA 2025-08 reject novelty 6.0 of 10

    Wave dark matter haloes could collapse directly into massive black holes before galaxies formed, explaining JWST-observed over-massive black holes, early massive galaxies, and rapid metal enrichment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

79 extracted references · 16 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.10508, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2501.10508

    Algera, H., Rowland, L., Stefanon, M., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.10508, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2501.10508

    doi:10.48550/arxiv.2501.10508 2025

  2. [2]

    2024, A&A, 682, A24, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347281 Arellano-C´ ordova, K

    Aravena, M., Heintz, K., Dessauges-Zavadsky, M., et al. 2024, A&A, 682, A24, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347281 Arellano-C´ ordova, K. Z., Berg, D. A., Chisholm, J., et al. 2022, ApJL, 940, L23, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac9ab2 Arrabal Haro, P., Dickinson, M., Finkelstein, S. L., et al. 2023, Nature, 622, 707, doi: 10.1038/s41586-023-06521-7

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347281 2024

  3. [3]

    J., et al

    Asada, Y., Desprez, G., Willott, C. J., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2410.21543, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2410.21543

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2410.21543 2024

  4. [4]

    J., & Scott, P

    Asplund, M., Grevesse, N., Sauval, A. J., & Scott, P. 2009, ARA&A, 47, 481, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.46.060407.145222 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068

    arXiv 2009

  5. [5]

    J., et al

    Atek, H., Shuntov, M., Furtak, L. J., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 519, 1201, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3144

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3144 2023

  6. [6]

    J., Adams, N

    Austin, D., Conselice, C. J., Adams, N. J., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2404.10751, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2404.10751

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2404.10751 2024

  7. [7]

    M., Tacchella, S., Johnson, B

    Baker, W. M., Tacchella, S., Johnson, B. D., et al. 2025, Nature Astronomy, 9, 141, doi: 10.1038/s41550-024-02384-8

    doi:10.1038/s41550-024-02384-8 2025

  8. [8]

    Bate, M. R. 2023, MNRAS, 519, 688, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3481 —. 2025, MNRAS, 537, 752, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf059

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3481 2023

Show all 79 references
  1. [9]

    J., Smit, R., Schouws, S., et al

    Bouwens, R. J., Smit, R., Schouws, S., et al. 2022, ApJ, 931, 160, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac5a4a

    2022 doi

  2. [10]

    J., Stefanon, M., Brammer, G., et al

    Bouwens, R. J., Stefanon, M., Brammer, G., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 523, 1036, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1145

    2023 doi

  3. [11]

    J., Saxena, A., Cameron, A

    Bunker, A. J., Saxena, A., Cameron, A. J., et al. 2023, A&A, 677, A88, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346159 8

    2023 doi

  4. [12]

    2020, MNRAS, 499, 5136, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3178

    Carniani, S., Ferrara, A., Maiolino, R., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 499, 5136, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3178

    2020 doi

  5. [13]

    2024a, Nature, 633, 318, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07860-9

    Carniani, S., Hainline, K., D’Eugenio, F., et al. 2024a, Nature, 633, 318, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07860-9

    doi

  6. [14]

    2024b, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2409.20533, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2409.20533

    Carniani, S., D’Eugenio, F., Ji, X., et al. 2024b, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2409.20533, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2409.20533

    doi arXiv

  7. [15]

    2022, ApJL, 938, L15, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac94d0 —

    Castellano, M., Fontana, A., Treu, T., et al. 2022, ApJL, 938, L15, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac94d0 —. 2023, ApJL, 948, L14, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/accea5

    2022 doi

  8. [16]

    2024, ApJ, 972, 143, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad5f88

    Castellano, M., Napolitano, L., Fontana, A., et al. 2024, ApJ, 972, 143, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad5f88

    2024 doi

  9. [17]

    2003, PASP, 115, 763, doi: 10.1086/376392

    Chabrier, G. 2003, PASP, 115, 763, doi: 10.1086/376392

    2003 doi

  10. [18]

    C., Lebouteiller, V., et al

    Cormier, D., Madden, S. C., Lebouteiller, V., et al. 2015, A&A, 578, A53, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201425207

    2015 doi

  11. [19]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2407.02575, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2407.02575

    Curti, M., Witstok, J., Jakobsen, P., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2407.02575, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2407.02575

    2024 doi arXiv

  12. [20]

    2023, Nature Astronomy, 7, 622, doi: 10.1038/s41550-023-01918-w D’Eugenio, F., Maiolino, R., Carniani, S., et al

    Curtis-Lake, E., Carniani, S., Cameron, A., et al. 2023, Nature Astronomy, 7, 622, doi: 10.1038/s41550-023-01918-w D’Eugenio, F., Maiolino, R., Carniani, S., et al. 2024, A&A, 689, A152, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348636

    2023 doi

  13. [21]

    T., McLeod, D

    Donnan, C. T., McLeod, D. J., Dunlop, J. S., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 518, 6011, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3472

    2023 doi

  14. [22]

    J., Willott, C., Alberts, S., et al

    Eisenstein, D. J., Willott, C., Alberts, S., et al. 2023a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2306.02465, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2306.02465

    doi arXiv

  15. [23]

    J., Johnson, B

    Eisenstein, D. J., Johnson, B. D., Robertson, B., et al. 2023b, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2310.12340, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2310.12340

    doi

  16. [24]

    2024, A&A, 689, A310, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450944

    Ferrara, A. 2024, A&A, 689, A310, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450944

    2024 doi

  17. [25]

    2022, A&A, 661, A81, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142673

    Ferruit, P., Jakobsen, P., Giardino, G., et al. 2022, A&A, 661, A81, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142673

    2022 doi

  18. [26]

    L., Leung, G

    Finkelstein, S. L., Leung, G. C. K., Bagley, M. B., et al. 2024, ApJL, 969, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad4495

    2024 doi

  19. [27]

    Fudamoto, Y., Smit, R., Bowler, R. A. A., et al. 2022, ApJ, 934, 144, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7a47

    2022 doi

  20. [28]

    D., Bethermin, M., et al

    Fujimoto, S., Silverman, J. D., Bethermin, M., et al. 2020, ApJ, 900, 1, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab94b3

    2020 doi

  21. [29]

    2023a, ApJL, 949, L25, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acd2d9

    Fujimoto, S., Arrabal Haro, P., Dickinson, M., et al. 2023a, ApJL, 949, L25, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acd2d9

    doi

  22. [30]

    L., Burgarella, D., et al

    Fujimoto, S., Finkelstein, S. L., Burgarella, D., et al. 2023b, ApJ, 955, 130, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aceb67

    doi

  23. [31]

    D., Clayton, G

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

    2003 doi

  24. [32]

    N., D’Eugenio, F., Jakobsen, P., et al

    Hainline, K. N., D’Eugenio, F., Jakobsen, P., et al. 2024a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2404.04325, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2404.04325

    doi arXiv

  25. [33]

    N., Johnson, B

    Hainline, K. N., Johnson, B. D., Robertson, B., et al. 2024b, ApJ, 964, 71, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1ee4

    doi

  26. [34]

    K., et al

    Harikane, Y., Ouchi, M., Inoue, A. K., et al. 2020, ApJ, 896, 93, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab94bd

    2020 doi

  27. [35]

    2023, ApJS, 265, 5, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/acaaa9

    Harikane, Y., Ouchi, M., Oguri, M., et al. 2023, ApJS, 265, 5, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/acaaa9

    2023 doi

  28. [36]

    R., Millman, K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2

    2020 doi

  29. [37]

    Madden, S. C. 2021, ApJ, 922, 147, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac2231

    2021 doi

  30. [38]

    E., Oesch, P

    Heintz, K. E., Oesch, P. A., Aravena, M., et al. 2022, ApJL, 934, L27, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac8057

    2022 doi

  31. [39]

    E., Gim´ enez-Arteaga, C., Fujimoto, S., et al

    Heintz, K. E., Gim´ enez-Arteaga, C., Fujimoto, S., et al. 2023a, ApJL, 944, L30, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acb2cf

    doi

  32. [40]

    E., Shapley, A

    Heintz, K. E., Shapley, A. E., Sanders, R. L., et al. 2023b, A&A, 678, A30, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346573

    doi

  33. [41]

    E., De Cia, A., Th¨ one, C

    Heintz, K. E., De Cia, A., Th¨ one, C. C., et al. 2023c, A&A, 679, A91, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347418

    doi

  34. [42]

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

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

    doi

  35. [43]

    E., Bennett, J

    Heintz, K. E., Bennett, J. S., Oesch, P. A., et al. 2024b, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2407.06287, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2407.06287

    doi arXiv

  36. [44]

    E., Brammer, G

    Heintz, K. E., Brammer, G. B., Watson, D., et al. 2025, A&A, 693, A60, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450243

    2025 doi

  37. [45]

    M., Rieke, G

    Helton, J. M., Rieke, G. H., Alberts, S., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2405.18462, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2405.18462

    2024 doi arXiv

  38. [46]

    2021, A&A, 649, A31, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039704

    Herrera-Camus, R., F¨ orster Schreiber, N., Genzel, R., et al. 2021, A&A, 649, A31, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039704

    2021 doi

  39. [47]

    Y.-Y., Abdurro’uf, Coe, D., et al

    Hsiao, T. Y.-Y., Abdurro’uf, Coe, D., et al. 2024a, ApJ, 973, 8, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad5da8

    doi

  40. [48]

    Y.-Y., ´Alvarez-M´ arquez, J., Coe, D., et al

    Hsiao, T. Y.-Y., ´Alvarez-M´ arquez, J., Coe, D., et al. 2024b, ApJ, 973, 81, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad6562

    doi

  41. [49]

    J., & Gazagnes, S

    Huberty, M., Scarlata, C., Hayes, M. J., & Gazagnes, S. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.13899, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2501.13899

    2025 doi arXiv

  42. [50]

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

    2007 doi

  43. [51]

    K., Shimizu, I., Iwata, I., & Tanaka, M

    Inoue, A. K., Shimizu, I., Iwata, I., & Tanaka, M. 2014, MNRAS, 442, 1805, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu936

    2014 doi

  44. [52]

    2022, A&A, 661, A80, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142663

    Jakobsen, P., Ferruit, P., Alves de Oliveira, C., et al. 2022, A&A, 661, A80, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142663

    2022 doi

  45. [53]

    D., Leja, J., Conroy, C., & Speagle, J

    Johnson, B. D., Leja, J., Conroy, C., & Speagle, J. S. 2021, ApJS, 254, 22, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/abef67 9

    2021 doi

  46. [54]

    2023, ApJL, 951, L17, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acd938

    Jones, T., Sanders, R., Chen, Y., et al. 2023, ApJL, 951, L17, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acd938

    2023 doi

  47. [55]

    2022, MNRAS, 510, 5603, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac028

    Katz, H., Rosdahl, J., Kimm, T., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 510, 5603, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac028

    2022 doi

  48. [56]

    J., Saxena, A., et al

    Katz, H., Cameron, A. J., Saxena, A., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2408.03189, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2408.03189

    2024 doi arXiv

  49. [57]

    C., & Evans, N

    Kennicutt, R. C., & Evans, N. J. 2012, ARA&A, 50, 531, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125610

    2012 doi

  50. [58]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.13640, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2411.13640

    Kokorev, V., Atek, H., Chisholm, J., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.13640, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2411.13640

    2024 doi arXiv

  51. [59]

    2024, A&A, 681, A64, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347171

    Konstantopoulou, C., De Cia, A., Ledoux, C., et al. 2024, A&A, 681, A64, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347171

    2024 doi

  52. [60]

    C., Geis, N., Genzel, R., et al

    Madden, S. C., Geis, N., Genzel, R., et al. 1993, ApJ, 407, 579, doi: 10.1086/172539 Miralda-Escud´ e, J. 1998, ApJ, 501, 15, doi: 10.1086/305799

    1993 doi

  53. [61]

    H., Arendt, R

    Moseley, S. H., Arendt, R. G., Fixsen, D. J., et al. 2010, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 7742, High Energy, Optical, and Infrared Detectors for Astronomy IV, ed. A. D. Holland & D. A. Dorn, 77421B, doi: 10.1117/12.866773

    2010 doi

  54. [62]

    P., Oesch, P

    Naidu, R. P., Oesch, P. A., Setton, D. J., et al. 2022, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2208.02794, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2208.02794

    2022 doi arXiv

  55. [63]

    C., Sutherland, R

    Nicholls, D. C., Sutherland, R. S., Dopita, M. A., Kewley, L. J., & Groves, B. A. 2017, MNRAS, 466, 4403, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw3235

    2017 doi

  56. [64]

    A., Brammer, G., Naidu, R

    Oesch, P. A., Brammer, G., Naidu, R. P., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 525, 2864, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad2411

    2023 doi

  57. [65]

    R., Narayanan, D., et al

    Olsen, K., Greve, T. R., Narayanan, D., et al. 2017, ApJ, 846, 105, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa86b4 Planck Collaboration, Aghanim, N., Akrami, Y., et al. 2020, A&A, 641, A6, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833910

    2017 doi

  58. [66]

    J., Arendt, R

    Rauscher, B. J., Arendt, R. G., Fixsen, D. J., et al. 2017, PASP, 129, 105003, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aa83fd

    2017 doi

  59. [67]

    J., Robertson, B., Tacchella, S., et al

    Rieke, M. J., Robertson, B., Tacchella, S., et al. 2023, ApJS, 269, 16, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/acf44d

    2023 doi

  60. [68]

    D., Tacchella, S., et al

    Robertson, B., Johnson, B. D., Tacchella, S., et al. 2024, ApJ, 970, 31, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad463d

    2024 doi

  61. [69]

    Robertson, B. E. 2022, ARA&A, 60, 121, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-120221-044656

    2022 doi

  62. [70]

    2016, PASP, 128, 114001, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/128/969/114001

    Schirmer, M. 2016, PASP, 128, 114001, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/128/969/114001

    2016 doi

  63. [71]

    J., Ormerod, K., et al

    Schouws, S., Bouwens, R. J., Ormerod, K., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2409.20549, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2409.20549

    2024 doi arXiv

  64. [72]

    J., Algera, H., et al

    Schouws, S., Bouwens, R. J., Algera, H., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2502.01610. https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.01610

    2025 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Speagle, J. S. 2020, MNRAS, 493, 3132, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa278 Tepper-Garc ´ ıa, T. 2006, MNRAS, 369, 2025, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10450.x

    2020

  66. [74]

    2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2306.00487, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2306.00487

    Umeda, H., Ouchi, M., Nakajima, K., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2306.00487, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2306.00487

    2023 doi arXiv

  67. [75]

    2011, A&A, 533, A16, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201117120

    Watson, D. 2011, A&A, 533, A16, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201117120

    2011 doi

  68. [76]

    P., Topping, M

    Whitler, L., Stark, D. P., Topping, M. W., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.00984, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2501.00984

    2025 doi

  69. [77]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2408.16608, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2408.16608

    Witstok, J., Jakobsen, P., Maiolino, R., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2408.16608, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2408.16608

    2024 doi arXiv

  70. [78]

    A., Bakx, T., Mitsuhashi, I., et al

    Zavala, J. A., Bakx, T., Mitsuhashi, I., et al. 2024, ApJL, 977, L9, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad8f38

    2024 doi

  71. [79]

    A., Castellano, M., Akins, H

    Zavala, J. A., Castellano, M., Akins, H. B., et al. 2025, Nature Astronomy, 9, 155, doi: 10.1038/s41550-024-02397-3

    2025 doi

Pith tools

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