{"paper":{"title":"Core-Collapse Supernova Rates in the Dark Energy Survey","arxiv_id":"2610.27328","primary_cat":"astro-ph.HE","submitted_at":"2026-10-19T21:44:48+00:00","version_compiled":"v1"},"notice":"Every quoted sentence is the authors' text from the arXiv listing abstract. Labels and probabilities are the outputs of classifier-1.13.0 on the question bank abstract-p1-20260923, exactly as returned. No sentence in this record was written by a language model.","schema":"pith.compiled-record/v0","status":"compiled","abstract":{"source":"arXiv listing abstract v1","sentences":[{"i":0,"p":0.82,"id":"s0","own":true,"role":"method","text":"Over its five-year campaign (2013-2017), the Dark Energy Survey (DES) supernova (SN) survey recorded 31,636 light curves.","hedge":{"p":1.0,"label":"asserted"},"own_p":0.88,"main_claim_p":0.02,"quantitative":true,"quantitative_p":0.99,"role_probabilities":{"gap":0.0,"method":0.82,"result":0.01,"background":0.1,"limitation":0.0,"future_work":0.0,"contribution":0.07,"interpretation":0.0}},{"i":1,"p":0.86,"id":"s1","own":true,"role":"method","text":"Using a custom-built, two-stage random forest classifier, we identified 2,445 likely core-collapse SNe (CC SNe) within the survey rate analysis footprint.","hedge":{"p":0.94,"label":"asserted"},"own_p":0.97,"main_claim_p":0.05,"quantitative":true,"quantitative_p":0.98,"role_probabilities":{"gap":0.0,"method":0.86,"result":0.02,"background":0.0,"limitation":0.0,"future_work":0.0,"contribution":0.12,"interpretation":0.0}},{"i":2,"p":0.74,"id":"s2","own":true,"role":"contribution","text":"With this sample, we measure the volumetric CC SN rate from redshift z = 0 to 1.3 in 11 redshift bins, representing the most detailed single-survey coverage to date across nine billion years of lookback time.","hedge":{"p":1.0,"label":"asserted"},"own_p":0.96,"main_claim_p":0.15,"quantitative":true,"quantitative_p":0.98,"role_probabilities":{"gap":0.0,"method":0.01,"result":0.25,"background":0.0,"limitation":0.0,"future_work":0.0,"contribution":0.74,"interpretation":0.0}},{"i":3,"p":1.0,"id":"s3","own":true,"role":"result","text":"Over this interval, the CC SN rates are well fit by a power law R_CC(z) = R_0 (1 + z)^\\alpha, with R_0 = 1.58 \\pm 0.17 \\times 10^{-4} \\text{ yr}^{-1} \\text{ Mpc}^{-3} and \\alpha = 2.85 \\pm 0.25.","hedge":{"p":1.0,"label":"asserted"},"own_p":0.96,"main_claim_p":0.34,"quantitative":true,"quantitative_p":0.99,"role_probabilities":{"gap":0.0,"method":0.0,"result":1.0,"background":0.0,"limitation":0.0,"future_work":0.0,"contribution":0.0,"interpretation":0.0}},{"i":4,"p":0.93,"id":"s4","own":true,"role":"result","text":"The rate turnover, expected at cosmic noon, is not yet apparent.","hedge":{"p":0.99,"label":"asserted"},"own_p":0.81,"main_claim_p":0.06,"quantitative":false,"quantitative_p":0.07,"role_probabilities":{"gap":0.0,"method":0.0,"result":0.93,"background":0.0,"limitation":0.03,"future_work":0.0,"contribution":0.0,"interpretation":0.04}},{"i":5,"p":0.41,"id":"s5","own":true,"role":"method","text":"Because CC SNe trace recent star formation, we compare our measurements with recent cosmic star-formation history (CSFH) models.","hedge":{"p":0.92,"label":"asserted"},"own_p":0.67,"main_claim_p":0.03,"quantitative":false,"quantitative_p":0.09,"role_probabilities":{"gap":0.0,"method":0.41,"result":0.0,"background":0.09,"limitation":0.0,"future_work":0.0,"contribution":0.41,"interpretation":0.09}},{"i":6,"p":0.97,"id":"s6","own":true,"role":"result","text":"Our measurements are ~70 per cent higher than CSFH models using a Salpeter initial mass function (IMF) to predict CC SN rates.","hedge":{"p":1.0,"label":"asserted"},"own_p":0.87,"main_claim_p":0.18,"quantitative":true,"quantitative_p":0.99,"role_probabilities":{"gap":0.0,"method":0.0,"result":0.97,"background":0.0,"limitation":0.0,"future_work":0.0,"contribution":0.0,"interpretation":0.03}},{"i":7,"p":0.82,"id":"s7","own":true,"role":"interpretation","text":"Replacing the Salpeter IMF with a Baldry and Glazebrook IMF and a CC SN progenitor mass range of 8-40 M_\\odot bridges the gap.","hedge":{"p":0.89,"label":"asserted"},"own_p":0.63,"main_claim_p":0.14,"quantitative":true,"quantitative_p":0.89,"role_probabilities":{"gap":0.0,"method":0.02,"result":0.15,"background":0.0,"limitation":0.0,"future_work":0.0,"contribution":0.01,"interpretation":0.82}},{"i":8,"p":0.99,"id":"s8","own":false,"role":"interpretation","text":"Alternatively, CSFHs may miss a hitherto unidentified population of low-luminosity galaxies.","hedge":{"p":1.0,"label":"hedged_possibility"},"own_p":0.11,"main_claim_p":0.05,"quantitative":false,"quantitative_p":0.04,"role_probabilities":{"gap":0.01,"method":0.0,"result":0.0,"background":0.0,"limitation":0.0,"future_work":0.0,"contribution":0.0,"interpretation":0.99}},{"i":9,"p":1.0,"id":"s9","own":true,"role":"result","text":"We further find that the local ratio of stripped-envelope (SE) SNe to all CC SNe is 31 \\pm 5 per cent, remaining constant from z = 0 to 1.3.","hedge":{"p":1.0,"label":"asserted"},"own_p":0.97,"main_claim_p":0.09,"quantitative":true,"quantitative_p":0.99,"role_probabilities":{"gap":0.0,"method":0.0,"result":1.0,"background":0.0,"limitation":0.0,"future_work":0.0,"contribution":0.0,"interpretation":0.0}},{"i":10,"p":0.99,"id":"s10","own":true,"role":"interpretation","text":"Combined with an IMF analysis accounting for the \"missing progenitor problem\" of hydrogen-rich SNe, our results favour a mixture of single massive stars and binaries as SE SN progenitors, with the redshift-invariant ratio favouring binary channels.","hedge":{"p":0.67,"label":"hedged_possibility"},"own_p":0.89,"main_claim_p":0.38,"quantitative":false,"quantitative_p":0.13,"role_probabilities":{"gap":0.0,"method":0.0,"result":0.01,"background":0.0,"limitation":0.0,"future_work":0.0,"contribution":0.0,"interpretation":0.99}}]},"compiled":{"main_claim":{"p":0.87,"text":"Combined with an IMF analysis accounting for the \"missing progenitor problem\" of hydrogen-rich SNe, our results favour a mixture of single massive stars and binaries as SE SN progenitors, with the redshift-invariant ratio favouring binary channels.","location":"abstract s10","hedge_strength":{"p":0.67,"label":"hedged possibility"}},"provenance":{"route":{"via":"TypeSafe API","model":"classifier-1.13.0","endpoint":"https://api.typesafe.ai/v1/systemone","provider":"TypeSafe"},"packing":"one request per paper","requests":1,"input_tokens":8607,"cost_usd_reported":0.0},"compiled_at":"2026-10-21","bank_version":"abstract-p1-20260923","model_version":"classifier-1.13.0","abstract_states":{"claims_first":0.34,"states_limitation":0.77,"human_participants":0.02,"controlled_comparison":0.35,"randomized_assignment":0.02,"states_quantitative_result":0.99,"compares_with_prior_results":0.96,"mentions_code_or_data_availability":0.03},"evidential_basis":{"p":0.51,"value":"analysis of existing data","probabilities":{"argument":0.0,"literature":0.0,"proof_or_derivation":0.0,"analysis_of_existing_data":0.51,"observation_or_experiment":0.49,"simulation_or_computation":0.0}},"contribution_type":{"p":1.0,"value":"empirical study","probabilities":{"review":0.0,"method_or_tool":0.0,"empirical_study":1.0,"simulation_study":0.0,"theoretical_result":0.0,"dataset_or_benchmark":0.0,"position_or_commentary":0.0}},"contribution_statement":{"p":0.99,"text":"With this sample, we measure the volumetric CC SN rate from redshift z = 0 to 1.3 in 11 redshift bins, representing the most detailed single-survey coverage to date across nine billion years of lookback time.","location":"abstract s2"}},"coverage":{"tier":"abstract","levels_run":["P abstract"],"not_examined":["full text","figures and tables","references and citing sentences","relations to other papers"],"sources_read":["arXiv listing abstract v1"],"levels_not_run":["S sections","T body sentences","C citations","R cross-paper relations"],"sentences_examined":11,"sentences_in_abstract":11},"measured_accuracy":{"url":"https://pith.science/accuracy","measured_on":"2026-10-02","method":"two independent model families labelled a fresh random sample blind; the figure is how often the published label matches their consensus","sentence_role_agreement":0.92,"main_claim_agreement":0.908,"typed_citation_agreement":0.933,"typed_citation_agreement_95_interval":[0.917,0.945],"review_comments_accurate":0.758,"review_comments_accurate_95_interval":[0.684,0.82],"review_caught_admitted_error_found_or_related":0.448}}