adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: Candidate Dark Galaxy-2: Validation and Analysis of an Almost Dark Galaxy in the Perseus Cluster
Authors: Dayi (David) Li, 大一 李, Qing Liu, 青 刘, Gwendolyn M. Eadie, Roberto G. Abraham, Francine R. Marleau, William E. Harris, Pieter van Dokkum, Aaron J. Romanowsky, Shany Danieli, Patrick E. Brown, Alex Stringer
Figure caption: Galaxy total luminosity (MV) as a function of GC system total luminosity (MV,GC) for various galaxies: Harris Normal Galaxies (W. E. Harris et al. 2013); Coma UDGs (E. W. Peng & S. Lim 2016; P. van Dokkum et al. 2017; S. Lim et al. 2018); Virgo UDGs (S. Lim et al. 2020); NGC 5846-UDG1 (S. Danieli et al. 2022); VLSB-B (S. Lim et al. 2020; E. Toloba et al. 2023; J. S. Gannon et al. 2024); UGC 9050-Dw1 (C. E. Fielder et al. 2023); and Eri-II (D. Crnojević et al. 2016). Lines indicate various values of GC stellar light ratios. Note that the measurements for two dwarf spheroidal galaxies (KKs 55 and IKN) in the W. E. Harris et al. (2013) catalog are updated based on S. Okamoto et al. (2019) and O. Müller et al. (2021). Values for CDG-1 are taken from P. van Dokkum et al. (2024) assuming fL,GC ≥ 50%. Among all (confirmed) galaxies with GC populations, CDG-2 has one of the highest GC stellar light ratios while also being one of the faintest.
Paper: Candidate Dark Galaxy-2: Validation and Analysis of an Almost Dark Galaxy in the Perseus Cluster
Authors: Dayi (David) Li, 大一 李, Qing Liu, 青 刘, Gwendolyn M. Eadie, Roberto G. Abraham, Francine R. Marleau, William E. Harris, Pieter van Dokkum, Aaron J. Romanowsky, Shany Danieli, Patrick E. Brown, Alex Stringer
Figure caption: Injection test on the Euclid data with a mock UDG. The purple dashed circle indicates the isophote range of the injected mock UDG. The orange dashed circle indicates the isophote fitting range of CDG-2. Left: original Euclid data. Middle left: data with injected mock UDG. Middle right: mock UDG model. Right: radial profiles of CDG-2 with GCs masked, the mock UDG model, and the injected UDG. The black dashed line indicates the 1σ depth of Euclid data on 10″ × 10″ scales. The orange dashed line indicates the range of isophote fitting.
Paper: Candidate Dark Galaxy-2: Validation and Analysis of an Almost Dark Galaxy in the Perseus Cluster
Authors: Dayi (David) Li, 大一 李, Qing Liu, 青 刘, Gwendolyn M. Eadie, Roberto G. Abraham, Francine R. Marleau, William E. Harris, Pieter van Dokkum, Aaron J. Romanowsky, Shany Danieli, Patrick E. Brown, Alex Stringer
Figure caption: GCLF-corrected GC stellar light (fL,GC) and mass (fM,GC) ratios as a function of distance to CDG-2. The ratios here are corrected for potentially unobserved faint GCs by assuming a canonical GCLF adjusted for the possible distance to CDG-2. For example, if the true distance to CDG-2 is ∼20 Mpc, the canonical GCLF would be similar to the magnitude distribution of the four observed GCs, and the GCLF-corrected ratios are the same as the calculated ratios based on the four GCs. Blue vertical dashed line indicates the distance of 75 Mpc assumed for Perseus.
Paper: A Tale of Dynamical Instabilities and Giant Impacts in the Exoplanet Radius Valley
Authors: Sho Shibata, Andre Izidoro
Figure caption: Eccentricity of planets as a function of their adjusted planetary radius. The gray plots show the raw data (individual planets) obtained in our simulations, and the white plots show the mean eccentricity of the planets. The grid size is the same as G. J. Gilbert et al. (2025), where 15 bins are taken between 1R⊕ and 4R⊕ in logarithmic scale. The error bar shows the standard deviation 1σ. We also plot the mean eccentricity of rocky and icy planets with red and blue points. The gray area is the radius gap. The top four panels show the results obtained in each parameter set, and the bottom panel shows the results combining all simulations. pr represents the p-value of KS tests comparing the eccentricity distribution of rocky planets inside and outside the radius gap. We also show the number of rocky planets inside Nr,in and outside Nr,out the radius gap.
Paper: A Tale of Dynamical Instabilities and Giant Impacts in the Exoplanet Radius Valley
Authors: Sho Shibata, Andre Izidoro
Figure caption: Same as Figure 3, but showing the simulations obtained in M6T2_45.
Paper: A Tale of Dynamical Instabilities and Giant Impacts in the Exoplanet Radius Valley
Authors: Sho Shibata, Andre Izidoro
Figure caption: Top: eccentricity of rocky planets as a function of the size of the primordial rocky protoplanetary system, Nsize,rock. Gray dots represent individual planets, and white markers indicate the mean eccentricity in each bin. The dashed line shows a linear fit to the distribution. Bottom: cumulative distribution of the size of primordial rocky protoplanetary systems, Nsize,rock. Each color corresponds to a different scenario.
Paper: A Tale of Dynamical Instabilities and Giant Impacts in the Exoplanet Radius Valley
Authors: Sho Shibata, Andre Izidoro
Figure caption: Radius vs. eccentricity of planets obtained in our additional simulations. The blue crosses show the mean eccentricity of planets without external protoplanets (e.p.). The bins have 1M⊕ width in the mass coordinate. The green circles show the mean eccentricity of planets with external protoplanets. The gray plots show the raw data.
Paper: A Tale of Dynamical Instabilities and Giant Impacts in the Exoplanet Radius Valley
Authors: Sho Shibata, Andre Izidoro
Figure caption: Eccentricity of planets at the end of the simulations as a function of the number of late giant impacts that each planet had. The gray plots show the raw data. The white plots are the mean eccentricity, and the error bars show 1σ standard deviation. The dashed lines show the linear fitting to the raw data.
Paper: A Tale of Dynamical Instabilities and Giant Impacts in the Exoplanet Radius Valley
Authors: Sho Shibata, Andre Izidoro
Figure caption: Mean number of late giant impacts as a function of the adjusted radius. The white plots show the mean number of late giant impacts. The red and blue plots show those for the rocky and icy planets, respectively.
Paper: A Tale of Dynamical Instabilities and Giant Impacts in the Exoplanet Radius Valley
Authors: Sho Shibata, Andre Izidoro
Figure caption: The structure of planetary systems at the end of the simulations.
Paper: A Tale of Dynamical Instabilities and Giant Impacts in the Exoplanet Radius Valley
Authors: Sho Shibata, Andre Izidoro
Figure caption: The structure of planetary systems at the disk dissipation time.
Paper: Intermittency in Interplanetary Coronal Mass Ejections Observed by Parker Solar Probe and Solar Orbiter
Authors: Julia Ruohotie, Simon Good, Christian Möstl, Emilia Kilpua
Figure caption: Kurtosis as a function of kdi for all 49 events. The colored line in each panel corresponds to the mean across all events. In the upper-right panel means of all four intervals have been plotted with their interquartile ranges. The lower-right panel shows the average of event-wise kurtosis scaling exponents at different scales. The bars shown in the panel correspond to the standard deviation of the distributions.
Paper: Intermittency in Interplanetary Coronal Mass Ejections Observed by Parker Solar Probe and Solar Orbiter
Authors: Julia Ruohotie, Simon Good, Christian Möstl, Emilia Kilpua
Figure caption: ακ in range 10−2.5 < kdi < 10−1.5 as a function of R (top row) and σr (bottom row) for each interval type. The events have been colored based on αPSD and ∣σc∣ for the top and bottom panels, respectively. Black lines show five-point moving averages.
Paper: Intermittency in Interplanetary Coronal Mass Ejections Observed by Parker Solar Probe and Solar Orbiter
Authors: Julia Ruohotie, Simon Good, Christian Möstl, Emilia Kilpua
Figure caption: The four panels on the left show distributions of δBR for the example ICME event at different scales. Different colored lines correspond to different intervals (upstream, sheath, ICME, downstream), and the dashed line corresponds to a Gaussian distribution. The right panel shows κ and ﹩{\kappa }_{{\rm{LIM}}}﹩ (dashed lines) as a function of spacecraft frequencies. The black horizontal line corresponds to κ = 3.
Paper: Intermittency in Interplanetary Coronal Mass Ejections Observed by Parker Solar Probe and Solar Orbiter
Authors: Julia Ruohotie, Simon Good, Christian Möstl, Emilia Kilpua
Figure caption: An example ICME observed by SolO on 2023 October 17 at 0.37 au. From top to bottom, the panels show magnetic field magnitude and its RTN components, 30 minute average of the magnetic field longitude angle in RTN coordinates, wavelet PSD of magnetic field, LIM, σr, and σc. The ICME interval is located between the two vertical black lines.
Paper: Intermittency in Interplanetary Coronal Mass Ejections Observed by Parker Solar Probe and Solar Orbiter
Authors: Julia Ruohotie, Simon Good, Christian Möstl, Emilia Kilpua
Figure caption: 〈κ〉 in range 10−2.5 < kdi < 10−1.5 as a function of σr for the sheath and ICME intervals. The events have been colored based on αPSD. Black lines show five-point moving averages.
Paper: EP240414a: A Gamma-Ray Burst Jet Weakened by an Extended Circumstellar Material
Authors: Hamid Hamidani, Yuri Sato, Kazumi Kashiyama, Masaomi Tanaka, Kunihito Ioka, Shigeo S. Kimura
Figure caption: Multiband observations of EP240414a’s counterparts and the theoretical interpretation. Observed fluxes in the X-ray, g band, r band, i band, z band, and radio are shown (black, purple, blue, green, orange, and red, respectively; circles for detections and downward triangles for upper limits) in the observer-frame (bottom) and rest-frame (top) time (for z = 0.401). Estimated total flux contributions (solid lines) along with individual components are shown: afterglow emission from the mildly relativistic jet (dashed) and the inner cocoon (dashed–dotted; see Section 3.4.2), cooling emission from the nonrelativistic outer cocoon (dotted; see Section 3.4.1), and the SN component (spaced–dotted; see Section 3.4.3). The three phases are indicated with the corresponding dominant contributions (as in H. Sun et al. 2024). Photometric data are taken from H. Sun et al. (2024), S. Srivastav et al. (2025), and J. N. D. van Dalen et al. (2025) and have been corrected for Galactic extinction (E(B − V) = 0.032). In addition, moderate host extinction (E(B − V) = 0.15) is assumed based on the analysis of the SN color and the X-ray column density (see Appendix A). The X-ray data are taken from Table 4 in H. Sun et al. (2024). Radio data are taken from Table 1 in J. S. Bright et al. (2025). A summary of the model parameters is given in Table 1 in Appendix B.
Paper: EP240414a: A Gamma-Ray Burst Jet Weakened by an Extended Circumstellar Material
Authors: Hamid Hamidani, Yuri Sato, Kazumi Kashiyama, Masaomi Tanaka, Kunihito Ioka, Shigeo S. Kimura
Figure caption: Schematic picture of our scenario for EP240414a and its counterparts. (A) We consider an LGRB progenitor (light green) surrounded by an extended CSM (dark green; as in E. Nakar 2015) supposedly caused by an intense mass-loss episode at the end of the progenitor star’s life. (B) After the jet (white) breaks out of the progenitor star, it propagates in the dense CSM, forming a shock head (yellow), where the jet/CSM are shocked into an inner cocoon (dark blue) and an outer cocoon (light blue). (C) By the time the jet is about to break out of the CSM, it has been significantly weakened (gray) energetically and relativistically, while an energetic cocoon is formed. Consequently, a weak prompt emission is produced. (D) The subenergetic and mildly relativistic jet and inner cocoon power afterglow emissions, and the shocked CSM (slower outer cocoon; light blue) powers cooling emission.
Paper: EP240414a: A Gamma-Ray Burst Jet Weakened by an Extended Circumstellar Material
Authors: Hamid Hamidani, Yuri Sato, Kazumi Kashiyama, Masaomi Tanaka, Kunihito Ioka, Shigeo S. Kimura
Figure caption: The typical proper velocity of the jet-cocoon system after propagating through various CSM environments, characterized by their mass (MCSM) and radius (RCSM). Different outcomes are indicated: (a) LGRBs, powered by highly relativistic jets (﹩\overline{{\rm{\Gamma }}\beta }\sim 10-100﹩); (c) LLGRBs, originating from shock breakouts of failed jets (﹩\overline{{\rm{\Gamma }}\beta }\sim 0.1﹩); (b) intermediate LGRBs, arising from “barely failed” jets (﹩\overline{{\rm{\Gamma }}\beta }\sim 1﹩); and (d) cases where no GRB is produced, resulting only in aspherical or quasi-spherical cocoon-driven explosions (﹩\overline{{\rm{\Gamma }}\beta }\lesssim 0.1﹩). The gray region indicates where luminous FBOTs from outer-cocoon cooling emission are expected. The star symbol marks the CSM conditions adopted here for EP240414a (as modeled in Figure 2), emphasizing its intermediate nature between LGRBs and LLGRBs. A conventional LGRB jet is assumed (see title). For further details, refer to H. Hamidani et al. (2025).
Paper: EP240414a: A Gamma-Ray Burst Jet Weakened by an Extended Circumstellar Material
Authors: Hamid Hamidani, Yuri Sato, Kazumi Kashiyama, Masaomi Tanaka, Kunihito Ioka, Shigeo S. Kimura
Figure caption: Spectral energy distribution as a function of wavelength, in the optical range, showing the contributions from the jet afterglow (dashed), cocoon afterglow (dashed–dotted), cocoon cooling emission (dotted), and the sum of all contributions (shaded). The spectral energy distribution is shown at 0.62 day during phase I (first blue peak; blue) and at 4.84 days during phase II (second red peak; red). No correction for Galactic or host-galaxy extinction has been applied. The spectral energy distribution is scaled to the observed spectra (reported in Figure 2 of J. N. D. van Dalen et al. 2025) and shows good agreement.
Paper: Candidate Dark Galaxy-2: Validation and Analysis of an Almost Dark Galaxy in the Perseus Cluster
Authors: Dayi (David) Li, 大一 李, Qing Liu, 青 刘, Gwendolyn M. Eadie, Roberto G. Abraham, Francine R. Marleau, William E. Harris, Pieter van Dokkum, Aaron J. Romanowsky, Shany Danieli, Patrick E. Brown, Alex Stringer
Figure caption: Spatial distributions of GC candidates in the F814W images V12-ACS (left) and V14-ACS (right). Red circles are GC candidates from DOLPHOT while blue diamonds are from DAOPHOT. The GC candidates that constitute CDG-2 from the two images are enlarged and annotated on the side.
Paper: Candidate Dark Galaxy-2: Validation and Analysis of an Almost Dark Galaxy in the Perseus Cluster
Authors: Dayi (David) Li, 大一 李, Qing Liu, 青 刘, Gwendolyn M. Eadie, Roberto G. Abraham, Francine R. Marleau, William E. Harris, Pieter van Dokkum, Aaron J. Romanowsky, Shany Danieli, Patrick E. Brown, Alex Stringer
Figure caption: Scaled posterior probability (posterior/prior probability) of the potential locations of UDGs/dark galaxies in the images V12-ACS (left) and V14-ACS (right) obtained using the detection method in D. Li et al. (2025a) based on the DOLPHOT GC data (W. E. Harris et al. 2020). Purple circles are the locations of CDG-2 in both images. Gray points are the locations of GC candidates.
Paper: A Tale of Dynamical Instabilities and Giant Impacts in the Exoplanet Radius Valley
Authors: Sho Shibata, Andre Izidoro
Figure caption: An example of the evolution of planets in the “breaking-the-chain” model. Here, we show one of the simulations obtained in M3T2_6. Panel (a) shows the time evolution of the semimajor axis of planets. We plot protoplanets that grow larger than 0.1M⊕. The colored lines show the planets that survive at t = 50 Myr. The thin lines show the pericenter and apocenter of the planets. The vertical dotted black line is the time when the protoplanetary disk dissipates. The red and blue plots show that the protoplanet’s composition is rocky and icy, respectively. Panel (b) shows the time evolution of the planetary core’s radius. The orange area shows the radius valley at P = 53 days, the final orbital period of EM70. We show the eccentricity at the end of the simulation eend in the legend box.
Paper: A Tale of Dynamical Instabilities and Giant Impacts in the Exoplanet Radius Valley
Authors: Sho Shibata, Andre Izidoro
Figure caption: Eccentricity distribution of close-in super-Earths and mini-Neptunes. The data are extracted from Figure 4 in G. J. Gilbert et al. (2025) through visual inspection using PlotDigitizer (https://plotdigitizer.com/app). The blue points show the mean eccentricity for Kepler planets observed as single planets, and the green points for those observed as multiple planets.
Paper: A Tale of Dynamical Instabilities and Giant Impacts in the Exoplanet Radius Valley
Authors: Sho Shibata, Andre Izidoro
Figure caption: Planet adjusted radius distribution of S. Shibata & A. Izidoro (2025), combining different sets of simulations. The red and blue lines show the distribution of rocky and icy planets, respectively. The black line shows the distribution of all planets. The gray area is the radius gap (1.59R⊕ < Rp,adj < 1.90R⊕). We use the adjusted radius to account for the shift of the radius valley along the orbital period. Note that we show the raw data, and the observational bias is not included.
Paper: Measuring Scaling Relations: Fitting Technique Matters
Authors: Bryanne McDonough, Olivia Curtis, Tereasa G. Brainerd
Figure caption: Comparison of the modes of spaxels in the star-forming portion of the Σ*−ΣSFR diagram derived from maps with different spatial resolutions (left) and different smoothing scales (right). Points represent the ridges identified in each bin of Σ*, and lines of the same color represent the fit to those ridges. The uncertainties are approximated as the KDE bandwidth estimated via Scott’s rule.
Paper: Measuring Scaling Relations: Fitting Technique Matters
Authors: Bryanne McDonough, Olivia Curtis, Tereasa G. Brainerd
Figure caption: Maps of Σ* (left) and ΣSFR (right) for TNG100-99-540858. Each row contains maps generated at different spaxel resolutions, as indicated on the left.
Paper: Measuring Scaling Relations: Fitting Technique Matters
Authors: Bryanne McDonough, Olivia Curtis, Tereasa G. Brainerd
Figure caption: Maps of Σ* (left) and ΣSFR (right) for TNG100-99-540858. Each row contains maps generated with different values of N, as indicated on the left.
Paper: Spectroscopic Observations of Supra-arcade Downflows
Authors: Ryan J. French, Maria D. Kazachenko, Teodora Mihailescu, Katharine K. Reeves
Figure caption: Panel (A): EIS Fe XXIV 192.02 Å intensity sit-and-stare maps for full time range plotted in Figure 1 (bottom), along the full EIS slit. The cyan box marks the subrange FOV presented in subsequent panels. The vertical red dashed lines mark the location of AIA snapshots in Figure 1. Panels (B)–(D): EIS Fe XXIV 192.02 Å intensity running percentage difference, Doppler velocity, and nonthermal velocity, respectively. The cyan contours mark the location of our individual SADs identified from the running difference map in panel (B). The four primary SADs analyzed in further detail are labeled i–iv in panel (B). The horizontal red line in panel (C) marks the boundary between north/south SADs explored in Figure 3. The location of example “stealth SADs” is plotted in panel (C).
Paper: Spectroscopic Observations of Supra-arcade Downflows
Authors: Ryan J. French, Maria D. Kazachenko, Teodora Mihailescu, Katharine K. Reeves
Figure caption: Panels (A)–(C): spectroscopic line profiles for key SADs i–iv, in Fe XXIV 192.02 Å (left), Fe XXIV 255.11 Å (center), and Fe XXIII 263.41 Å (right). Panels (D)–(E): histograms for Fe XXIV 192.02 Å Doppler velocity and nonthermal velocity, comparing values between all SAD and non-SAD pixels, as per contours in Figure 2. Panel (F): comparison of Doppler velocities between northern and southern SADs, defined by their position above/below the orange horizontal line in Figure 2.
Paper: Spectroscopic Observations of Supra-arcade Downflows
Authors: Ryan J. French, Maria D. Kazachenko, Teodora Mihailescu, Katharine K. Reeves
Figure caption: Panel (A): AIA 131 Å emission along the EIS slit subrange, creating a pseudo-raster. Our key SADs of interest are labeled i–iv. Yellow horizontal lines show the projection across the slit position of the north and south SAD path cross section slices plotted in Figure 1, for the duration of the cross sections plotted in the bottom panels of this current figure. Panel (B): difference imaging (as a percentage) of panel (A), subtracting each column from the one prior, and dividing by the original value, at the full AIA cadence of 12 s. Panels (C) and (D): stack plots showing AIA 131 Å emission along the north (C) and south (D) cross section slices presented in Figure 1. We capture the downflows of key SADs i–iv, and track their velocity across the EIS slit position (red lines).
Paper: Spectroscopic Observations of Supra-arcade Downflows
Authors: Ryan J. French, Maria D. Kazachenko, Teodora Mihailescu, Katharine K. Reeves
Figure caption: A cartoon depicting the simplified geometry of the 2022 April 2 M-class solar flare and SADs, relative to the suspected location of the higher altitude reconnection site and possible termination shock. The viewing geometry explains the observed distinction in Doppler velocities between the northern and southern SADs.
Paper: Observations of a New Form of Partial Filament Eruption
Authors: Abril Sahade, Judith T. Karpen, Spiro K. Antiochos
Figure caption: Height vs. time for the three events. Black and green dots indicate the position of the confined and eruptive segments of the filament, respectively, as obtained with the scc_measure3 tool. Superimposed dots representing the confined and eruptive segments refer to their presplitting time. The green diamond markers indicate the height of the center of the cross section of the CME modeled with GCS.
Paper: ODIN: Star Formation Histories Reveal Formative Starbursts Experienced by Lyα-emitting Galaxies at Cosmic Noon
Authors: Nicole M. Firestone, Eric Gawiser, Kartheik G. Iyer, Kyoung-Soo Lee, Vandana Ramakrishnan, Francisco Valdes, Changbom Park, Yujin Yang, Anahita Alavi, Robin Ciardullo, Norman Grogin, Caryl Gronwall, Lucia Guaita, Sungryong Hong, Ho Seong Hwang, Sang Hyeok Im, Woong-Seob Jeong, Seongjae Kim, Anton M. Koekemoer, Ankit Kumar, Jaehyun Lee, Vihang Mehta, Gautam Nagaraj, Julie Nantais, Laura Prichard, Marc Rafelski, Hyunmi Song, Ben Sunnquist, Harry I. Teplitz, Xin Wang
Figure caption: Histograms showing the percentage of stellar mass created at the time of observation for LAEs compared to LBGs. The x-axis represents the percentage of stellar mass created at the time of observation (the last 200 Myr) M*‘NOW’/M*. The y-axis represents the normalized frequency of each type of galaxy. The blue histograms represent the LAE samples, and the pink histograms represent the control LBG samples. The vertical dashed lines represent the corresponding median fraction of stellar mass created at the time of observation for each population. These plots demonstrate that the median fraction of stellar mass created at the time of observation is consistently larger for LAEs than LBGs, although the difference becomes insignificant at z = 2.4.