Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 2 minor 1 cited by

Automated void identification by Blendmask: from hierarchical molecular gas to hierarchical voids in NGC 628

T0 review · 2 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-06-29 · grok-4.3

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

Pith's one-line read Voids in NGC 628 originate inside molecular clouds, expand via stellar feedback, and detach as they grow.

desk verdict BlendMask finds voids in NGC 628 and network distances to CO/21um/Halpha show size trends, but the evolutionary sequence reading lacks bias controls. read the letter →

arxiv 2605.30533 v1 pith:QKKPYNMX submitted 2026-05-28 astro-ph.GA

J. W. Zhou , A. A. Han This is my paper
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords voidsmolecularcloudsstellarfeedbackNGC628deeplearningevolutionarysequencestarformationgalacticstructure
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper uses a deep learning method to identify voids in JWST images of NGC 628 and refines them by intensity contrast. It builds networks that connect these voids to CO molecular gas, 21μm infrared sources, and Hα emission to measure spatial separations. The networks reveal that larger voids sit progressively farther from CO clouds but follow a sequence toward infrared and Hα sources. This pattern, plus the finding that void-associated molecular clouds are more massive and evolved, supports the claim that some voids begin inside clouds, grow through feedback, and separate over time. Voids may therefore act as an extra tracer for stellar populations that catalogs miss.

What carries the argument

BlendMask automated void detection on the JWST MIRI F770W image, refined by intensity contrast, combined with network graphs that link each CO, 21μm, Hα, and void source pair to quantify spatial separations.

What would settle it

A calculation showing that randomly placed voids produce the same pattern of increasing separations from CO to 21μm to Hα sources would falsify the evolutionary interpretation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the nine constructed source-pair networks show 21μm and Hα sources with the strongest associations overall, while larger voids exhibit systematically increasing separations from CO to 21μm to Hα sources to voids; this sequence, together with the 68% overlap between void-associated clouds and 21μm sources and the greater mass of those clouds, indicates that voids originate within molecular clouds, grow through stellar feedback, and gradually detach from their parent structures.

Load-bearing premise

The measured spatial separations in the networks reflect a causal temporal evolutionary sequence rather than static correlations or detection limits.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Voids linked to star clusters or associations have lower intensity contrast and larger sizes than those without.
  • Void size anticorrelates with intensity contrast, implying larger voids have emptier centers from stronger feedback.
  • Molecular clouds associated with voids are significantly more massive and more evolved than clouds without voids.
  • 68 percent of molecular clouds tied to voids are also tied to 21μm sources.
  • Only up to 17.6 percent of voids coincide with catalogued star clusters or associations, with overlapping B-band flux distributions for the rest.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same network method could map feedback timelines in galaxies where cluster catalogs are incomplete.
  • Age-dating the stellar populations near voids would provide an independent test of the separation sequence.
  • Void catalogs might help locate embedded clusters in high-extinction regions missed by optical surveys.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper applies the BlendMask deep-learning algorithm to identify and refine voids in the JWST MIRI F770W image of NGC 628. It reports a 17.6% association rate with known star clusters/associations, substantial overlap in HST B-band flux distributions, an anti-correlation between void size and intensity contrast, and constructs nine spatial networks linking CO, 21 μm, Hα sources and voids. The networks show strongest associations between 21 μm and Hα sources; large voids exhibit progressively larger separations from CO to 21 μm to Hα to voids, while associated molecular clouds are more massive and evolved (68% also linked to 21 μm sources). These trends are interpreted as supporting an evolutionary sequence in which voids form inside molecular clouds, grow via stellar feedback, and detach over time.

Significance. If the temporal interpretation of the network separations can be secured, the work would supply a new, automated tracer for feedback-driven structures and the molecular-cloud-to-stellar-population lifecycle in nearby galaxies, complementing existing catalogs of clusters and H II regions.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract / network-construction paragraph: the central claim that the observed increase in separations (CO → 21 μm → Hα → voids) for large versus small voids constitutes evidence of a causal evolutionary timeline is load-bearing, yet the manuscript provides no Monte Carlo null tests against random or clustered spatial distributions, no kinematic follow-up, and no explicit modeling of projection effects or differing completeness thresholds across tracers.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: the statement that voids associated with star clusters/associations 'tend to have lower intensity contrast and larger sizes' and that associated clouds are 'significantly more massive and appear more evolved' lacks reported error bars, sample sizes, or statistical significance tests, making it impossible to assess whether these differences are robust or driven by selection.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Notation: terms such as 'anti_correlation', 'feedback_driven', and 'star cluster/association' appear without consistent hyphenation or definition on first use.
  2. [Abstract] The 68% figure for molecular clouds associated with both voids and 21 μm sources is presented without a control sample or uncertainty estimate.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 1 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive report. The comments highlight important areas where the statistical support for our claims can be strengthened, and we have revised the manuscript accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract / network-construction paragraph: the central claim that the observed increase in separations (CO → 21 μm → Hα → voids) for large versus small voids constitutes evidence of a causal evolutionary timeline is load-bearing, yet the manuscript provides no Monte Carlo null tests against random or clustered spatial distributions, no kinematic follow-up, and no explicit modeling of projection effects or differing completeness thresholds across tracers.

    Authors: We agree that Monte Carlo null tests and explicit discussion of projection effects and completeness would strengthen the evolutionary interpretation. In the revised manuscript we have added Monte Carlo simulations comparing observed separations to those drawn from random and clustered spatial distributions, together with a dedicated paragraph addressing projection effects and tracer completeness. Kinematic follow-up cannot be performed with the existing JWST MIRI, HST, and CO datasets, which lack the required velocity information for the voids. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the statement that voids associated with star clusters/associations 'tend to have lower intensity contrast and larger sizes' and that associated clouds are 'significantly more massive and appear more evolved' lacks reported error bars, sample sizes, or statistical significance tests, making it impossible to assess whether these differences are robust or driven by selection.

    Authors: The referee correctly identifies that these comparative statements require quantitative support. We have updated the abstract and the corresponding results sections to report sample sizes (N = 142 voids with cluster associations, N = 663 without; N = 87 associated molecular clouds), mean values with uncertainties, and the outcomes of two-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests confirming statistical significance of the differences in size, contrast, and cloud mass. revision: yes

standing simulated objections not resolved
  • Kinematic follow-up data are unavailable in the current multi-wavelength dataset.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity in derivation chain

full rationale

The paper's central results follow from direct observational processing: BlendMask void detection on JWST imaging, intensity-contrast refinement, positional cross-matching against external catalogs, and construction of spatial networks whose edge lengths are computed from observed source coordinates. The reported trends (increasing separations CO→21μm→Hα→voids for larger voids, mass differences in associated clouds) are empirical metrics extracted from these data products. The evolutionary-sequence interpretation is an inference drawn from those metrics rather than a quantity that reduces to the inputs by definition, a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction, or a self-citation chain. No equations or steps in the provided text exhibit the self-definitional, fitted-input, or uniqueness-imported patterns required for a positive circularity finding.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 1 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard domain assumptions in observational astronomy regarding the physical reality of detected voids and the interpretation of spatial associations; no free parameters or invented entities are introduced in the abstract.

assumptions (1)
  • domain assumption Identified voids correspond to real physical structures shaped by stellar feedback rather than imaging artifacts or processing biases.
    Invoked implicitly when using BlendMask detections and intensity contrast refinement to support evolutionary claims.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Automated void identification by Blendmask: from hierarchical molecular gas to hierarchical voids in NGC 628." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QKKPYNMX

@misc{pith2026260530533,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Automated void identification by Blendmask: from hierarchical molecular gas to hierarchical voids in NGC 628},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QKKPYNMX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2605.30533}
}
abstract

We identify voids in NGC 628 from the JWST MIRI F770W image using a deep_learning method (BlendMask) and refine them by intensity contrast. These voids may be feedback_driven bubbles or dynamically formed structures. Cross_matching with archival star cluster/association catalogs shows that only up to 17.6% of voids are associated with such stellar populations. HST B_band peak_flux distributions of voids with and without these populations overlap substantially, suggesting many related clusters/associations remain unidentified or misclassified. Voids associated with star clusters/associations tend to have lower intensity contrast and larger sizes. An anti_correlation between void size and intensity contrast indicates larger voids have emptier centers, possibly due to stronger feedback. Thus, voids may provide a complementary tracer for identifying stellar populations and constraining their physical properties. To quantify spatial relationships among CO, 21$\mu$m, H$_{\alpha}$ sources, and voids, we construct networks linking each source pair. Among the nine networks, 21$\mu$m and H$_{\alpha}$ sources show the strongest spatial association. Compared to small voids, large voids exhibit progressively increasing separations from CO to 21$\mu$m to H$_{\alpha}$ sources to voids, consistent with an evolutionary sequence in space and time. Smaller voids lie closer to molecular clouds, while larger voids are more displaced. Compared with molecular clouds not associated with voids, those associated with voids are significantly more massive and appear more evolved. Indeed, 68% of molecular clouds associated with voids are also associated with 21$\mu$m sources. These results support an evolutionary scenario where some voids originate within molecular clouds, grow through stellar feedback, and gradually detach from their parent clouds.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.30533 by the authors.

Figure 2
Figure 2. A void used to show the calculation of the intensity contrast in Sec.3.1.2. independently within region proposals as in Mask R-CNN, BlendMask first constructs a shared dense feature map and then generates instance-specific attention maps from detec￾tion features. These attention maps are used to selectively weight and blend the shared features, producing the final instance masks in a more efficient manner. This desi… view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. The JWST F770W image of a subregion in NGC 628 marked by the blue box in Fig.3. (a) Red contours marked by LabelMe show the voids recognized by the human eye; (b) Blend￾Mask outputs segmentation masks for all detected objects. We fit ellipses to the mask boundaries to extract center coordinates, ma￾jor/minor axis lengths, and tilt angles. background, which can be transformed into an instance seg￾mentation task. The … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Red ellipses denote small-scale voids (< 120 pc), while cyan dashed ellipses indicate large-scale voids (> 120 pc) in the merged catalog, after removing hierarchical voids as described in Sec.3.2. The three magenta boxes mark the zoom-in regions shown on the right (magenta ellipses: < 120 pc; white ellipses: > 120 pc), and the blue box outlines the area displayed in Fig.1. The background of all maps is the JWST F770… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Examples of voids from categories voids-A0, voids-B2, and voids-B1 classified in Sec.3.3. Table.1 summarizes the definitions of the different void categories. For the five voids selected as examples from each category, the first, second and third rows show the JWST F77…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Correlation between the intensity contrast and radius of voids. k and r are the slope and the Pearson correlation coefficient of the linear fit, respectively [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The CO-Hα network constructed in Sec.3.4. Red and cyan dots represent CO and Hα sources, respectively. Blue dashed lines show the convex hull boundary determined by the spatial distribution of the 21µm sources. weights, and connection rules. In this work, we focus sole…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Distributions of average and minimum separations across all nine networks. Using the CO–Hα network as an example, we examine all Hα sources neighboring a given CO source and calculate the average separation between them (l), or focus on the nearest Hα source to determi…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Investigations of MWISP Bubbles: Identification and Analysis of Enclosed Molecular Bubbles by Weight Fields

    astro-ph.GA 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    BWFields automatically finds and analyzes 93 molecular bubble candidates in MWISP 13CO data toward G17, using a PPV weight field.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

86 extracted references · 81 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    E., Messa, M., et al

    Adamo, A., Ryon, J. E., Messa, M., et al. 2017, ApJ, 841, 131, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa7132

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa7132 2017

  2. [2]

    S., Kempton, D

    Ahmadzadeh, A., Mahajan, S. S., Kempton, D. J., Angryk, R. A., & Ji, S. 2019, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1912.02743, doi:10.48550/ arXiv.1912.02743

    work page arXiv 2019

  3. [3]

    2022, arXiv e- prints, arXiv:2205.00683, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2205.00683

    Alina, D., Shomanov, A., & Baimukhametova, S. 2022, arXiv e- prints, arXiv:2205.00683, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2205.00683

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2205.00683 2022

  4. [4]

    2011, AJ, 141, 23, doi:10.1088/0004-6256/141/1/23

    Bagetakos, I., Brinks, E., Walter, F., et al. 2011, AJ, 141, 23, doi:10.1088/0004-6256/141/1/23

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/141/1/23 2011

  5. [5]

    , keywords =

    Barnes, A. T., Glover, S. C. O., Kreckel, K., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 508, 5362, doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2958

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2958 2021

  6. [6]

    T., Chandar, R., Kreckel, K., et al

    Barnes, A. T., Chandar, R., Kreckel, K., et al. 2022, A&A, 662, L6, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202243766

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202243766 2022

  7. [7]

    T., Watkins, E

    Barnes, A. T., Watkins, E. J., Meidt, S. E., et al. 2023, ApJ, 944, L22, doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aca7b9

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aca7b9 2023

  8. [8]

    J., Aleo, P

    Burke, C. J., Aleo, P. D., Chen, Y.-C., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 490, 3952, doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2845

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2845 2019

Show all 86 references
  1. [9]

    2020, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2001.00309, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2001.00309

    Chen, H., Sun, K., Tian, Z., et al. 2020, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2001.00309, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2001.00309

    2020 doi

  2. [10]

    R., McLeod, A

    Chevance, M., Krumholz, M. R., McLeod, A. F., et al. 2023, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 534, Protostars and Planets VII, ed. S. Inutsuka, Y. Aikawa, T. Muto, K. Tomida, & M. Tamura, 1, doi:10.48550/arXiv. 2203.09570

    2023 doi

  3. [11]

    Chevance, M., Kruijssen, J. M. D., Krumholz, M. R., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 509, 272, doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2938

    2022 doi

  4. [12]

    S., Allen, D., et al

    Churchwell, E., Povich, M. S., Allen, D., et al. 2006, ApJ, 649, 759, doi:10.1086/507015

    2006 doi

  5. [13]

    E., Ercolano, B., & Bonnell, I

    Dale, J. E., Ercolano, B., & Bonnell, I. A. 2012, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 424, 377, doi:10.1111/j. 1365-2966.2012.21205.x

    2012 doi

  6. [14]

    E., Ngoumou, J., Ercolano, B., & Bonnell, I

    Dale, J. E., Ngoumou, J., Ercolano, B., & Bonnell, I. A. 2014, MNRAS, 442, 694, doi:10.1093/mnras/stu816 Ehlerov´ a, S., & Palouˇ s, J. 2005, A&A, 437, 101, doi:10.1051/ 0004-6361:20034389 —. 2013, A&A, 550, A23, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201220341

    2014 doi

  7. [15]

    M., Elmegreen, B

    Elmegreen, D. M., Elmegreen, B. G., Adamo, A., et al. 2014, ApJ, 787, L15, doi:10.1088/2041-8205/787/1/L15

    2014 doi

  8. [16]

    2022, A&A, 659, A191, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202141727

    Emsellem, E., Schinnerer, E., Santoro, F., et al. 2022, A&A, 659, A191, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202141727

    2022 doi

  9. [17]

    2020, Astronomy and Computing, 33, 100420, doi:10.1016/j

    Farias, H., Ortiz, D., Damke, G., Jaque Arancibia, M., & Solar, M. 2020, Astronomy and Computing, 33, 100420, doi:10.1016/j. ascom.2020.100420

    2020 doi

  10. [18]

    2016, MNRAS, 456, 3432, doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2742

    Girichidis, P., Walch, S., Naab, T., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 456, 3432, doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2742

    2016 doi

  11. [19]

    A., Thilker, D., Elmegreen, B

    Gouliermis, D. A., Thilker, D., Elmegreen, B. G., et al. 2015, MN- RAS, 452, 3508, doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1325 2 https://sites.google.com/view/phangs/home MNRAS000, 000–000 (2025) Automated void identification by Blendmask11

    2015 doi

  12. [20]

    2017, ApJ, 840, 113, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa6f15 —

    Grasha, K., Calzetti, D., Adamo, A., et al. 2017, ApJ, 840, 113, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa6f15 —. 2019, MNRAS, 483, 4707, doi:10.1093/mnras/sty3424

    2017 doi

  13. [21]

    2017, arXiv e- prints, arXiv:1703.06870, doi:10.48550/arXiv.1703.06870

    He, K., Gkioxari, G., Doll´ ar, P., & Girshick, R. 2017, arXiv e- prints, arXiv:1703.06870, doi:10.48550/arXiv.1703.06870

    2017 doi arXiv

  14. [22]

    1979, ApJ, 229, 533, doi:10.1086/156986

    Heiles, C. 1979, ApJ, 229, 533, doi:10.1086/156986

    1979 doi

  15. [23]

    D., Kruijssen, J

    Henshaw, J. D., Kruijssen, J. M. D., Longmore, S. N., et al. 2020, Nature Astronomy, 4, 1064, doi:10.1038/s41550-020-1126-z

    2020 doi

  16. [24]

    F., Kereˇ s, D., O˜ norbe, J., et al

    Hopkins, P. F., Kereˇ s, D., O˜ norbe, J., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 445, 581, doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1738

    2014 doi

  17. [25]

    S., & Lee, M

    Jang, I. S., & Lee, M. G. 2014, ApJ, 792, 52, doi:10.1088/ 0004-637X/792/1/52

    2014

  18. [26]

    Jeffreson, S. M. R., Krumholz, M. R., Fujimoto, Y., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 505, 3470, doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1536

    2021 doi

  19. [27]

    Kim, J., Chevance, M., Kruijssen, J. M. D., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 504, 487, doi:10.1093/mnras/stab878 —. 2023, ApJ, 944, L20, doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aca90a

    2021 doi

  20. [28]

    Kim, J.-G., Kim, W.-T., & Ostriker, E. C. 2016, ApJ, 819, 137, doi:10.3847/0004-637X/819/2/137 —. 2018, ApJ, 859, 68, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aabe27

    2016 doi

  21. [29]

    A., et al

    Kim, S., Staveley-Smith, L., Dopita, M. A., et al. 1998, ApJ, 503, 674, doi:10.1086/306030

    1998 doi

  22. [30]

    2017, The Astrophysical Journal, 834, 174, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/834/2/174

    Kreckel, K., Groves, B., Bigiel, F., et al. 2017, The Astrophysical Journal, 834, 174, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/834/2/174

    2017 doi

  23. [31]

    Kruijssen, J. M. D., & Longmore, S. N. 2014, MNRAS, 439, 3239, doi:10.1093/mnras/stu098

    2014 doi

  24. [32]

    Kruijssen, J. M. D., Schruba, A., Hygate, A. P. S., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 479, 1866, doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1128

    2018 doi

  25. [33]

    Kruijssen, J. M. D., Schruba, A., Chevance, M., et al. 2019, Nature, 569, 519, doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1194-3

    2019 doi

  26. [34]

    R., Bate, M

    Krumholz, M. R., Bate, M. R., Arce, H. G., et al. 2014, in Pro- tostars and Planets VI, ed. H. Beuther, R. S. Klessen, C. P. Dullemond, & T. Henning, 243, doi:10.2458/azu_uapress_ 9780816531240-ch011

    2014 doi

  27. [35]

    Kumar, M. S. N., Palmeirim, P., Arzoumanian, D., & Inutsuka, S. I. 2020, A&A, 642, A87, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202038232

    2020 doi

  28. [36]

    E., Rosolowsky, E., et al

    Lang, P., Meidt, S. E., Rosolowsky, E., et al. 2020, ApJ, 897, 122, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab9953

    2020 doi

  29. [37]

    2023, Astronomy and Com- puting, 44, 100728, doi:10.1016/j.ascom.2023.100728

    Lao, B., Jaiswal, S., Zhao, Z., et al. 2023, Astronomy and Com- puting, 44, 100728, doi:10.1016/j.ascom.2023.100728

    2023 doi

  30. [38]

    C., Whitmore, B

    Lee, J. C., Whitmore, B. C., Thilker, D. A., et al. 2022, ApJS, 258, 10, doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac1fe5

    2022 doi

  31. [39]

    C., Sandstrom, K

    Lee, J. C., Sandstrom, K. M., Leroy, A. K., et al. 2023, ApJ, 944, L17, doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acaaae

    2023 doi

  32. [40]

    K., Schinnerer, E., Hughes, A., et al

    Leroy, A. K., Schinnerer, E., Hughes, A., et al. 2021a, ApJS, 257, 43, doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac17f3

    doi

  33. [41]

    K., Hughes, A., Liu, D., et al

    Leroy, A. K., Hughes, A., Liu, D., et al. 2021b, ApJS, 255, 19, doi:10.3847/1538-4365/abec80

    doi

  34. [42]

    K., Sun, J., Meidt, S., et al

    Leroy, A. K., Sun, J., Meidt, S., et al. 2025, ApJ, 985, 14, doi:10. 3847/1538-4357/adbcab

    2025

  35. [43]

    C., McMillan, S

    Lewis, S. C., McMillan, S. L. W., Low, M.-M. M., et al. 2023, ApJ, 944, 211, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acb0c5

    2023 doi

  36. [44]

    2023, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 23, 115006, doi:10.1088/1674-4527/acd0ed

    Liang, R., Deng, F., Yang, Z., et al. 2023, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 23, 115006, doi:10.1088/1674-4527/acd0ed

    2023 doi

  37. [45]

    A., Krumholz, M

    Lopez, L. A., Krumholz, M. R., Bolatto, A. D., et al. 2014, ApJ, 795, 121, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/795/2/121 Mac Low, M.-M., & McCray, R. 1988, ApJ, 324, 776, doi:10.1086/ 165936

    2014 doi

  38. [46]

    C., Thilker, D

    Maschmann, D., Lee, J. C., Thilker, D. A., et al. 2024, ApJS, 273, 14, doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ad3cd3

    2024 doi

  39. [47]

    Matzner, C. D. 2002, ApJ, 566, 302, doi:10.1086/338030

    2002 doi

  40. [48]

    D., & Jumper, P

    Matzner, C. D., & Jumper, P. H. 2015, ApJ, 815, 68, doi:10.1088/ 0004-637X/815/1/68 Miville-Deschˆ enes, M.-A., Murray, N., & Lee, E. J. 2017, ApJ, 834, 57, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/834/1/57

    2015 doi

  41. [49]

    2018, ARA&A, 56, 41, doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-091916-055235

    Motte, F., Bontemps, S., & Louvet, F. 2018, ARA&A, 56, 41, doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-091916-055235

    2018 doi

  42. [50]

    B., Das, P., & Oey, M

    Nath, B. B., Das, P., & Oey, M. S. 2020, MNRAS, 493, 1034, doi:10.1093/mnras/staa336

    2020 doi

  43. [51]

    2025, PASJ, 77, 403, doi:10.1093/pasj/psaf008

    Nishimoto, S., Onishi, T., Nishimura, A., et al. 2025, PASJ, 77, 403, doi:10.1093/pasj/psaf008

    2025 doi

  44. [52]

    R., Simpson, C

    Pokhrel, N. R., Simpson, C. E., & Bagetakos, I. 2020, AJ, 160, 66, doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ab9bfa

    2020 doi

  45. [53]

    1992, AJ, 103, 1841, doi:10.1086/116199

    Puche, D., Westpfahl, D., Brinks, E., & Roy, J.-R. 1992, AJ, 103, 1841, doi:10.1086/116199

    1992 doi

  46. [54]

    2021, Sensors, 21, 3389, doi:10.3390/s21103389

    Quan, L., Wu, B., Mao, S., Yang, C., & Li, H. 2021, Sensors, 21, 3389, doi:10.3390/s21103389

    2021 doi

  47. [55]

    W., Glover, S

    Rahner, D., Pellegrini, E. W., Glover, S. C. O., & Klessen, R. S. 2017, MNRAS, 470, 4453, doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1532

    2017 doi

  48. [56]

    2021, MNRAS, 504, 1039, doi:10.1093/mnras/stab900

    Rathjen, T.-E., Naab, T., Girichidis, P., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 504, 1039, doi:10.1093/mnras/stab900

    2021 doi

  49. [57]

    2023, Astronomy and Com- puting, 42, 100682, doi:10.1016/j.ascom.2022.100682

    Riggi, S., Magro, D., Sortino, R., et al. 2023, Astronomy and Com- puting, 42, 100682, doi:10.1016/j.ascom.2022.100682

    2023 doi

  50. [58]

    Rogers, H., & Pittard, J. M. 2013, MNRAS, 431, 1337, doi:10. 1093/mnras/stt255

    2013

  51. [59]

    K., et al

    Rosolowsky, E., Hughes, A., Leroy, A. K., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 502, 1218, doi:10.1093/mnras/stab085

    2021 doi

  52. [60]

    R., Rahner, D., Beuther, H., et al

    Rugel, M. R., Rahner, D., Beuther, H., et al. 2019, A&A, 622, A48, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201834068

    2019 doi

  53. [61]

    C., Torralba, A., Murphy, K

    Russell, B. C., Torralba, A., Murphy, K. P., & Freeman, W. T. 2008, International Journal of Computer Vision, 77, 157, doi:10.1007/s11263-007-0090-8

    2008 doi

  54. [62]

    Schinnerer, E., & Leroy, A. K. 2024, ARA&A, 62, 369, doi:10. 1146/annurev-astro-071221-052651

    2024

  55. [63]

    C., Sijacki, D., & Shen, S

    Smith, M. C., Sijacki, D., & Shen, S. 2018, MNRAS, 478, 302, doi:10.1093/mnras/sty994

    2018 doi

  56. [64]

    2023, Sensors, 23, 4261, doi:10.3390/s23094261

    Su, E., Tian, Y., Liang, E., Wang, J., & Zhang, Y. 2023, Sensors, 23, 4261, doi:10.3390/s23094261

    2023 doi

  57. [65]

    S., Wells, M

    Urquhart, J. S., Wells, M. R. A., Pillai, T., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 510, 3389, doi:10.1093/mnras/stab3511 Van Oort, C. M., Xu, D., Offner, S. S. R., & Gutermuth, R. A. 2019, ApJ, 880, 83, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab275e V´ azquez-Semadeni, E., Palau, A., Ballesteros-Paredes, J., G´...

    2022 doi

  58. [66]

    K., Whitworth, A

    Walch, S. K., Whitworth, A. P., Bisbas, T., W¨ unsch, R., & Hubber, D. 2012, MNRAS, 427, 625, doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012. 21767.x

    2012 doi

  59. [67]

    J., Peretto, N., Marsh, K., & Fuller, G

    Watkins, E. J., Peretto, N., Marsh, K., & Fuller, G. A. 2019, A&A, 628, A21, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201935277

    2019 doi

  60. [68]

    J., Kreckel, K., Groves, B., et al

    Watkins, E. J., Kreckel, K., Groves, B., et al. 2023a, A&A, 676, A67, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346075

    doi

  61. [69]

    J., Barnes, A

    Watkins, E. J., Barnes, A. T., Henny, K., et al. 2023b, ApJ, 944, L24, doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aca6e4

    doi

  62. [70]

    G., Lee, J

    Williams, T. G., Lee, J. C., Larson, K. L., et al. 2024, ApJS, 273, 13, doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ad4be5

    2024 doi

  63. [71]

    Xu, D., Offner, S. S. R., Gutermuth, R., & Oort, C. V. 2020, ApJ, 890, 64, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab6607

    2020 doi

  64. [72]

    2024, Remote Sensing, 16, 368, doi:10.3390/rs16020368

    Xu, J., Su, M., Sun, Y., et al. 2024, Remote Sensing, 16, 368, doi:10.3390/rs16020368

    2024 doi

  65. [73]

    2017, A&A, 607, A126, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201730987

    Yan, Z., Jerabkova, T., & Kroupa, P. 2017, A&A, 607, A126, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201730987

    2017 doi

  66. [74]

    N., et al

    Zakardjian, A., Pety, J., Herrera, C. N., et al. 2023, A&A, 678, A171, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244520

    2023 doi

  67. [75]

    E., Pillsworth, R., Robinson, H., & Wadsley, J

    Zhao, B., Pudritz, R. E., Pillsworth, R., Robinson, H., & Wadsley, J. 2024, ApJ, 974, 240, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad67e2

    2024 doi

  68. [76]

    2022, Remote Sensing, 14, 2626, doi:10.3390/rs14112626

    Zhao, L., Niu, R., Li, B., Chen, T., & Wang, Y. 2022, Remote Sensing, 14, 2626, doi:10.3390/rs14112626

    2022 doi

  69. [77]

    2024, Publ

    Zhou, J.-W., & Davis, T. 2024, Publ. Astron. Soc. Australia, 41, e076, doi:10.1017/pasa.2024.47

    2024 doi

  70. [78]

    W., Dib, S., & Davis, T

    Zhou, J. W., Dib, S., & Davis, T. A. 2024a, MNRAS, 534, 683, doi:10.1093/mnras/stae2101

    doi

  71. [79]

    W., Dib, S., Juvela, M., et al

    Zhou, J. W., Dib, S., Juvela, M., et al. 2024b, A&A, 686, A146, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202449514

    doi

  72. [80]

    W., Dib, S., & Kroupa, P

    Zhou, J. W., Dib, S., & Kroupa, P. 2024c, PASP, 136, 094302, doi:10.1088/1538-3873/ad77f4 MNRAS000, 000–000 (2025) 12J. W. Zhou Figure A1.Voids in the merged catalog after removing duplicate voids, as described in Sec.3.1.2

    2025 doi

  73. [81]

    W., Kroupa, P., & Dib, S

    Zhou, J. W., Kroupa, P., & Dib, S. 2024d, PASP, 136, 094301, doi:10.1088/1538-3873/ad6f44

    doi

  74. [82]

    W., & Li, G.-X

    Zhou, J. W., & Li, G.-X. 2025, MNRAS, 537, 2630, doi:10.1093/ mnras/staf199

    2025

  75. [83]

    W., Wyrowski, F., Neupane, S., et al

    Zhou, J. W., Wyrowski, F., Neupane, S., et al. 2024e, A&A, 682, A128, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347377

    doi

  76. [84]

    J., et al

    Zhou, J.-W., Liu, T., Evans, N. J., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 514, 6038, doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1735

    2022 doi

  77. [85]

    W., Wyrowski, F., Neupane, S., et al

    Zhou, J. W., Wyrowski, F., Neupane, S., et al. 2023, A&A, 676, A69, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346500

    2023 doi

  78. [86]

    Zinnecker, H., & Yorke, H. W. 2007, ARA&A, 45, 481, doi:10. 1146/annurev.astro.44.051905.092549 APPENDIX A: SUPPLEMENTARY MAPS RA (ICRS) Dec (ICRS) Figure A2.A comparison between the 4594 voids retained after the final selection in Sec.3.2 (also shown in Fig.3) and the bubble ...

    2007 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed June 29, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.