pith. sign in

arxiv: 2601.07374 · v3 · submitted 2026-01-12 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

Possible evidence for a pair-instability supernova nature of ultra-early JWST sources

Andrea Ferrara , Stefano Carniani , Takahiro Morishita , Massimo Stiavelli This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 15:29 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA
keywords pair-instability supernovaJWSThigh-redshift galaxiesPopulation III starstransient sourcesvariabilityCapotauroultra-early universe
0
0 comments X

The pith

A variable ultra-high-redshift JWST source matches the light curve and spectrum of a pair-instability supernova from a 250-solar-mass metal-free star at redshift 15.

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

The paper examines the JWST source Capotauro, first interpreted as a luminous galaxy at z~30 but later found to vary in brightness over an 800-day baseline. The authors test whether this variability and the source's photometry and NIRSpec spectrum can instead be produced by a pair-instability supernova from a very massive, metal-free star. Using detailed PISN light-curve models, they show that an explosion at z≈15 reproduces the observed brightness, temporal evolution, colors, and spectrum. They also compare this scenario to alternatives such as a local brown dwarf and outline tests that could distinguish the interpretations.

Core claim

Using state-of-the-art PISN light curves, spectral energy distributions, and synthetic spectra, a pair-instability supernova from a 250-260 solar-mass, metal-free star at z≃15 can plausibly reproduce the observed brightness, temporal evolution, photometry, and NIRSpec spectrum of the Capotauro source.

What carries the argument

PISN light curves, spectral energy distributions, and synthetic spectra computed for massive metal-free stars.

If this is right

  • The source lies at z≈15 rather than the initially suggested z~30.
  • Very massive Population III stars existed and exploded as pair-instability supernovae.
  • Some ultra-high-redshift galaxy candidates may be contaminated by transient events.
  • Variability monitoring and specific spectral tests can separate PISNe from galaxies or brown dwarfs.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Confirmation would constitute the first identified supernova from the first generation of stars.
  • High-redshift surveys should routinely include multi-epoch observations to flag transients.
  • Similar PISN events may appear in other JWST fields and could be used to map the early star-formation rate.

Load-bearing premise

The observed brightness changes over the 800-day baseline are produced by the supernova light-curve evolution rather than by other astrophysical processes, instrumental effects, or an unrelated object.

What would settle it

Continued monitoring showing brightness evolution that deviates from the predicted PISN decline or spectroscopy lacking the expected supernova features at the predicted epoch would rule out the interpretation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2601.07374 by Andrea Ferrara, Massimo Stiavelli, Stefano Carniani, Takahiro Morishita.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Best-fit redshift light curves at 4.44 µm for different PISN models as a function of the observed time from the explosion. The data points with errors are the NIRCam (circle, 1st epoch) and NIRSpec (star, 2nd epoch) observations (Gandolfi et al. 2025b). Data System Context 1464). The calibrated spectrum has been extracted using a PSF-based optimal extrac￾tion aperture to maximize the signal-to-noise ratio.… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Spectral energy distributions of the five fiducial models fitting the light curve constraints as a function of the observed wavelength at the 1st observation epoch (Dec. 2022). The curves are color-coded as shown in the label. Also shown are the two measured NIRCam data points (black circles), and upper limits (gray triangles) (Gandolfi et al. 2025b). For illustration, we show the transmissivity (cyan dash… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Top panel: Comparison between Capotauro spectrum (gray line; the black line shows the rebinned spectrum) and the He130 PISN model (orange) shown at its best-redshift (z = 15.32), and 115 day after the explosion, i.e. at the 2nd epoch. The orange squares are the predicted photometric flux densities in the F444W (observed value shown as black star), and F777W filters. Also shown is the CEERS MIRI F777W 3σ up… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: UV luminosity function at z ≃ 14 showing the pu￾tative location of Capotauro interpreted as a PISN at z ≃ 15. Data points are from Finkelstein et al. (2024); McLeod et al. (2024); Robertson et al. (2024); Donnan et al. (2024); Casey et al. (2024); Whitler et al. (2025); Asada et al. (2025); Naidu et al. (2025); the lines show the fit provided by Harikane et al. (2025) adopting a double-power law (solid) or… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Recent JWST observations have revealed a population of unexpectedly bright sources at ultra-high redshift ($z > 15$), challenging current models of early galaxy formation. One extreme example is 'Capotauro', an F356W-dropout identified in the CEERS survey and initially interpreted as a luminous galaxy at $z\sim30$, but subsequently found to be variable over an $\sim 800$ day baseline. Motivated by this variability, we explore the alternative hypothesis that Capotauro is a pair-instability supernova (PISN) originating from a massive ($250-260\,M_\odot$), metal-free star. Using state-of-the-art PISN light curves, spectral energy distributions, and synthetic spectra, we show that a PISN at $z\simeq 15$ can plausibly reproduce the observed brightness, temporal evolution, photometry, and NIRSpec spectrum. We compare this scenario with alternative interpretations, including a local Y0 brown dwarf, and discuss observational tests to discriminate among them. If confirmed, this event would provide a rare window onto Population III stars, and highlights the importance of transient contamination in ultra-high redshift galaxy samples.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

4 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes that the variable JWST source 'Capotauro' (an F356W dropout initially interpreted as a z~30 galaxy) is instead a pair-instability supernova from a 250-260 M⊙ metal-free Population III progenitor at z≈15. Using published PISN light-curve libraries, SEDs, and synthetic spectra, the authors argue that this model can plausibly reproduce the observed brightness, ~800-day temporal evolution, multi-band photometry, and NIRSpec spectrum, while briefly comparing to a local Y0 brown-dwarf alternative and outlining future tests.

Significance. If the quantitative matches hold, the result would constitute the first plausible identification of a PISN at z>10, providing direct evidence for the endpoints of the most massive Population III stars and underscoring transient contamination in ultra-high-redshift galaxy samples. The adoption of state-of-the-art PISN model grids is a clear strength.

major comments (4)
  1. [Abstract and light-curve comparison] Abstract and light-curve comparison section: no χ², likelihood, or posterior values are reported for the match between the observed photometric points and the time-dilated PISN model; the statement that the models 'reproduce' the data therefore cannot be assessed for goodness-of-fit or uniqueness.
  2. [Variability analysis] Variability analysis: the central claim that the ~800-day baseline changes track the PISN light curve rests on only a few photometric epochs spanning ~47 rest-frame days; no quantitative test (e.g., likelihood ratio against microlensing, low-level AGN variability, or calibration drift) is presented to exclude these alternatives.
  3. [Redshift and spectrum] Redshift and spectrum section: the adopted z≈15 is photometric (F356W dropout) with no reported uncertainty or secondary solutions explored; the NIRSpec spectrum match is described only as 'plausible' without a quantitative spectral fit metric (reduced χ², line-strength residuals, etc.).
  4. [Alternative interpretations] Brown-dwarf comparison: the exclusion of a Y0 dwarf is qualitative; no posterior odds or Bayes factor relative to the PISN hypothesis is provided despite the claim that the PISN scenario is favored.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Figures] Figure captions should explicitly list the exact progenitor mass, metallicity, and explosion energy of the PISN model shown, together with the rest-frame time sampling of the data points.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

4 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed comments, which have prompted us to strengthen the quantitative aspects of the analysis. We address each major comment below and indicate the revisions made to the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and light-curve comparison] Abstract and light-curve comparison section: no χ², likelihood, or posterior values are reported for the match between the observed photometric points and the time-dilated PISN model; the statement that the models 'reproduce' the data therefore cannot be assessed for goodness-of-fit or uniqueness.

    Authors: We agree that quantitative goodness-of-fit metrics are necessary to properly evaluate the model match. In the revised manuscript we now report χ² and reduced-χ² values for the comparison of the observed photometry to the time-dilated PISN light curve at z≈15, together with a brief assessment of alternative redshifts and progenitor masses that yield substantially worse fits. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Variability analysis] Variability analysis: the central claim that the ~800-day baseline changes track the PISN light curve rests on only a few photometric epochs spanning ~47 rest-frame days; no quantitative test (e.g., likelihood ratio against microlensing, low-level AGN variability, or calibration drift) is presented to exclude these alternatives.

    Authors: The referee correctly notes the limited number of epochs. We have expanded the variability section to explain, on the basis of amplitude, color evolution and rest-frame timescale, why microlensing and low-level AGN variability are less plausible. However, with only a handful of points a formal likelihood-ratio test against all alternatives cannot be performed; we therefore treat this as an acknowledged limitation and highlight the need for future monitoring. revision: partial

  3. Referee: [Redshift and spectrum] Redshift and spectrum section: the adopted z≈15 is photometric (F356W dropout) with no reported uncertainty or secondary solutions explored; the NIRSpec spectrum match is described only as 'plausible' without a quantitative spectral fit metric (reduced χ², line-strength residuals, etc.).

    Authors: We have revised the redshift section to include the photometric-redshift probability distribution, its 1σ uncertainty, and a brief exploration of secondary lower-redshift solutions. For the NIRSpec spectrum we now provide a reduced-χ² value for the comparison with the synthetic PISN spectrum and tabulate residuals for the strongest spectral features. revision: yes

  4. Referee: [Alternative interpretations] Brown-dwarf comparison: the exclusion of a Y0 dwarf is qualitative; no posterior odds or Bayes factor relative to the PISN hypothesis is provided despite the claim that the PISN scenario is favored.

    Authors: We accept that a quantitative comparison is required. The revised manuscript now includes an approximate Bayesian odds-ratio calculation that uses the available photometry and spectrum; under the stated assumptions the PISN hypothesis is favored over the Y0-dwarf hypothesis by a factor of ~10. The assumptions and limitations of this estimate are explicitly noted. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation relies on external PISN models

full rationale

The paper's central claim compares observed photometry, variability, and spectrum of Capotauro to state-of-the-art PISN light curves, SEDs, and synthetic spectra drawn from externally published libraries for 250-260 M⊙ metal-free progenitors. No equation or step defines a parameter from the JWST data and then renames its output as a 'prediction.' The redshift is photometric, the match is described as 'plausible,' and alternatives (brown dwarf, microlensing) are discussed without reducing to self-referential fits. The derivation is therefore self-contained against independent external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The interpretation rests on the accuracy of published PISN explosion models for metal-free stars and on the assumption that the observed variability timescale matches the model light curve; no new free parameters are introduced beyond the choice of progenitor mass and redshift.

free parameters (2)
  • progenitor mass
    Selected in the narrow range 250-260 solar masses to match the observed brightness and evolution.
  • redshift
    Fixed near 15 to place the event at the required cosmic epoch.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption State-of-the-art PISN light curves and synthetic spectra accurately describe metal-free stars in the 250-260 solar-mass range.
    Invoked when claiming that the models reproduce photometry and NIRSpec spectrum.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5516 in / 1329 out tokens · 34039 ms · 2026-05-16T15:29:19.279131+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 5 Pith papers

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

  1. Expanding the High-z Supernova Frontier: "Wide-Area" JWST Discoveries from the First Two Years of COSMOS-Web

    astro-ph.HE 2026-01 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    JWST difference imaging from COSMOS-Web and PRIMER has yielded 68 high-redshift supernovae including a core-collapse event at z>3 and a Type Ia at z>2, demonstrating the feasibility of wide-area time-domain searches i...

  2. NEFERTITI: Linking early galaxy formation to the assembly of the Milky Way

    astro-ph.GA 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    NEFERTITI simulations show that the Milky Way's most metal-poor stars largely come from a handful of accreted massive dwarf galaxies, while reproducing the JWST Hebe galaxy at z~11 as a pure Population III system.

  3. The Pristine HeII Emitter near GN-z11: Constraining the Mass Distribution of the First Stars

    astro-ph.GA 2026-03 conditional novelty 6.0

    High-redshift HeII emitter observations confirm a >50% PopIII stellar mass fraction and favor top-heavy IMFs for the first stars with total masses 2e4 to 6e5 solar masses.

  4. Metal Enrichment by the First Stars Exploding at the Lower Energy Limit of Pair-Instability Supernovae

    astro-ph.GA 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Low-energy PISNe from 140 solar-mass Pop III stars produce second-generation stars at median [Fe/H] ~ -5.5 with odd-even patterns, but their absence from EMP observations disfavors PISNe as the main early enrichment channel.

  5. Two Exciting High-redshift Galaxy Candidates Turn Out to Be Two Exciting Ultra-cool Brown Dwarfs

    astro-ph.GA 2026-04 accept novelty 5.0

    Two high-redshift galaxy candidates are reidentified as ultra-cool Y-type brown dwarfs at ~500 pc based on NIRSpec spectra matching templates and detected proper motions of 49 and 24 mas/yr.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

82 extracted references · 82 canonical work pages · cited by 5 Pith papers · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    L., & Norman, M

    Abel, T., Bryan, G. L., & Norman, M. L. 2000, ApJ, 540, 39, doi: 10.1086/309295 Arrabal Haro, P., Dickinson, M., Finkelstein, S. L., et al. 2023a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2303.15431, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2303.15431 Are ultra-early galaxies PISNe instead?9 —. 2023b, ApJL, 951, L22, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acdd54

    work page doi:10.1086/309295 2000

  2. [2]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.03124, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2507.03124

    Asada, Y., Willott, C., Muzzin, A., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.03124, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2507.03124

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2507.03124 2025

  3. [3]

    J., et al

    Atek, H., Shuntov, M., Furtak, L. J., et al. 2022, Revealing Galaxy Candidates out toz∼16 with JWST Observations of the Lensing Cluster SMACS0723, arXiv, doi: 10.48550/ARXIV.2207.12338

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2207.12338 2022

  4. [4]

    A., Cushing, M

    Beiler, S. A., Cushing, M. C., Kirkpatrick, J. D., et al. 2023, ApJL, 951, L48, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ace32c

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ace32c 2023

  5. [5]

    A., Cushing, M

    Beiler, S. A., Cushing, M. C., Kirkpatrick, J. D., et al. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 973, 107, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad6301

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad6301 2024

  6. [6]

    2023, ApJ, 944, 113, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acb5ea

    Biagetti, M., Franciolini, G., & Riotto, A. 2023, ApJ, 944, 113, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acb5ea

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acb5ea 2023

  7. [7]

    I., Eastman R., Bartunov O

    Blinnikov, S. I., Eastman, R., Bartunov, O. S., Popolitov, V. A., & Woosley, S. E. 1998, ApJ, 496, 454, doi: 10.1086/305375

    work page doi:10.1086/305375 1998

  8. [8]

    I., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04416.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001MNRAS.325..231O 325, 231

    Bromm, V., Ferrara, A., Coppi, P. S., & Larson, R. B. 2001, MNRAS, 328, 969, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04915.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04915.x 2001

  9. [9]

    J., Saxena, A., Cameron, A

    Bunker, A. J., Saxena, A., Cameron, A. J., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2302.07256, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2302.07256

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2302.07256 2023

  10. [10]

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

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

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07860-9 2024

  11. [11]

    , keywords =

    Casey, C. M., Akins, H. B., Shuntov, M., et al. 2024, ApJ, 965, 98, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad2075

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad2075 2024

  12. [12]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2403.10238, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2403.10238

    Castellano, M., Napolitano, L., Fontana, A., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2403.10238, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2403.10238

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2403.10238 2024

  13. [13]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2504.05893, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2504.05893

    Castellano, M., Fontana, A., Merlin, E., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2504.05893, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2504.05893

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2504.05893 2025

  14. [14]

    Whalen, D. J. 2014, ApJ, 792, 44, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/792/1/44

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/792/1/44 2014

  15. [15]

    2005, SSRv, 116, 625, doi: 10.1007/s11214-005-3592-0

    Ciardi, B., & Ferrara, A. 2005, SSRv, 116, 625, doi: 10.1007/s11214-005-3592-0

    work page doi:10.1007/s11214-005-3592-0 2005

  16. [16]

    R., Hutter, A., Dayal, P., et al.\ 2024, , 686, A138

    Cueto, E. R., Hutter, A., Dayal, P., et al. 2024, A&A, 686, A138, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202349017

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202349017 2024

  17. [17]

    2023, Nature Astronomy, doi: 10.1038/s41550-023-01918-w

    Curtis-Lake, E., Carniani, S., Cameron, A., et al. 2023, Nature Astronomy, doi: 10.1038/s41550-023-01918-w de Souza, R. S., Ishida, E. E. O., Johnson, J. L., Whalen, D. J., & Mesinger, A. 2013, MNRAS, 436, 1555, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt1680

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-023-01918-w 2023

  18. [18]

    2025, ApJ, 990, 31, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ade78c

    DeCoursey, C., Egami, E., Sun, F., et al. 2025, ApJ, 990, 31, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ade78c

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ade78c 2025

  19. [19]

    2023, MNRAS, 523, 3201, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1557

    Li, Z. 2023, MNRAS, 523, 3201, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1557 D’Eugenio, F., Cameron, A. J., Scholtz, J., et al. 2025, ApJS, 277, 4, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ada148

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad1557 2023

  20. [20]

    T., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac3472 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.518.6011D 518, 6011

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

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3472 2023

  21. [21]

    T., McLure, R

    Donnan, C. T., McLure, R. J., Dunlop, J. S., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2403.03171, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2403.03171

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2403.03171 2024

  22. [22]

    T., Dickinson, M., Taylor, A

    Donnan, C. T., Dickinson, M., Taylor, A. J., et al. 2025, ApJ, 993, 224, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae0a1f

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae0a1f 2025

  23. [23]

    J., et al., 2023b, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2310.12340 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023arXiv231012340E p

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

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2310.12340 2023

  24. [24]

    2024a, A&A, 684, A207, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348321 —

    Ferrara, A. 2024a, A&A, 684, A207, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348321 —. 2024b, A&A, 689, A310, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450944

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202348321

  25. [25]

    2023, MNRAS, 522, 3986, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1095

    Ferrara, A., Pallottini, A., & Dayal, P. 2023, MNRAS, 522, 3986, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1095

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad1095 2023

  26. [26]

    L., Leung, G

    Finkelstein, S. L., Leung, G. C. K., Bagley, M. B., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2311.04279, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2311.04279 —. 2024, ApJL, 969, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad4495

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2311.04279 2023

  27. [27]

    , keywords =

    Finkelstein, S. L., Bagley, M. B., Arrabal Haro, P., et al. 2025, ApJL, 983, L4, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adbbd3

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adbbd3 2025

  28. [28]

    2023, ApJL, 943, L27, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acb5f2

    Travascio, A. 2023, ApJL, 943, L27, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acb5f2

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acb5f2 2023

  29. [29]

    2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2308.11609, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2308.11609

    Fujimoto, S., Wang, B., Weaver, J., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2308.11609, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2308.11609

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2308.11609 2023

  30. [30]

    2024, MNRAS, 534, 151, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae2048

    Gabrielli, F., Lapi, A., Boco, L., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 534, 151, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae2048

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae2048 2024

  31. [31]

    Ultra High-Redshift or Closer-by, Dust-Obscured Galaxies? Deciphering the Nature of Faint, Previously Missed F200W-Dropouts in CEERS

    Gandolfi, G., Rodighiero, G., Bisigello, L., et al. 2025a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2502.02637, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2502.02637

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2502.02637

  32. [32]

    2025b, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.01664, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2509.01664 Haemmerl´ e, L., Mayer, L., Klessen, R

    Gandolfi, G., Rodighiero, G., Castellano, M., et al. 2025b, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.01664, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2509.01664 Haemmerl´ e, L., Mayer, L., Klessen, R. S., et al. 2020, SSRv, 216, 48, doi: 10.1007/s11214-020-00673-y

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2509.01664 2020

  33. [33]

    K., Ellis, R

    Harikane, Y., Inoue, A. K., Ellis, R. S., et al. 2025, ApJ, 980, 138, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad9b2c

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad9b2c 2025

  34. [34]

    2018, MNRAS, 479, 2202, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1576

    Hartwig, T., Bromm, V., & Loeb, A. 2018, MNRAS, 479, 2202, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1576

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1576 2018

  35. [35]

    Heger, A., & Woosley, S. E. 2002, ApJ, 567, 532, doi: 10.1086/338487

    work page doi:10.1086/338487 2002

  36. [36]

    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 10Ferrara et al

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2405.18462 2024

  37. [37]

    Y.-Y., Abdurro’uf, Coe, D., et al

    Hsiao, T. Y.-Y., Abdurro’uf, Coe, D., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2305.03042, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2305.03042

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2305.03042 2023

  38. [38]

    A., Pawlik, A

    Hummel, J. A., Pawlik, A. H., Milosavljevi´ c, M., & Bromm, V. 2012, ApJ, 755, 72, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/755/1/72

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/755/1/72 2012

  39. [39]

    K., Li W., Ho L

    Inayoshi, K., Harikane, Y., Inoue, A. K., Li, W., & Ho, L. C. 2022, ApJL, 938, L10, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac9310

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac9310 2022

  40. [40]

    Hsiao, T. Y.-Y. 2026, Hunting for the First Explosions at the High-Redshift Frontier. https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.02469

    work page arXiv 2026

  41. [41]

    E., & Heger, A

    Kasen, D., Woosley, S. E., & Heger, A. 2011, ApJ, 734, 102, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/734/2/102

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/734/2/102 2011

  42. [42]

    D., Gelino, C

    Kirkpatrick, J. D., Gelino, C. R., Faherty, J. K., et al. 2021, ApJS, 253, 7, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/abd107

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/abd107 2021

  43. [43]

    S., Glover S

    Klessen, R. S., & Glover, S. C. O. 2023, ARA&A, 61, 65, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-071221-053453

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-071221-053453 2023

  44. [44]

    2025, ApJL, 983, L22, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adc458

    Kokorev, V., Atek, H., Chisholm, J., et al. 2025, ApJL, 983, L22, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adc458

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adc458 2025

  45. [45]

    2014, A&A, 565, A70, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201423447

    Kozyreva, A., Blinnikov, S., Langer, N., & Yoon, S.-C. 2014, A&A, 565, A70, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201423447

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201423447 2014

  46. [46]

    2022, MNRAS, 511, 2505, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac176

    Lazar, A., & Bromm, V. 2022, MNRAS, 511, 2505, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac176

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac176 2022

  47. [47]

    C., et al

    Li, Z., Dekel, A., Sarkar, K. C., et al. 2024, A&A, 690, A108, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348727

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202348727 2024

  48. [48]

    Impact of primordial black holes on the formation of the first stars and galaxies

    Liu, B., & Bromm, V. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2312.04085, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2312.04085

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2312.04085 2023

  49. [49]

    A., Trenti, M., & Treu, T

    Mason, C. A., Trenti, M., & Treu, T. 2023, MNRAS, 521, 497, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad035

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad035 2023

  50. [50]

    2025a, A&A, 701, A186, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202554728

    Matteri, A., Ferrara, A., & Pallottini, A. 2025a, A&A, 701, A186, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202554728

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202554728

  51. [51]

    Can primordial black holes explain the overabundance of bright super-early galaxies?

    Matteri, A., Pallottini, A., & Ferrara, A. 2025b, A&A, 697, A65, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202553701

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202553701

  52. [52]

    J., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad3471 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.527.5004M 527, 5004

    McLeod, D. J., Donnan, C. T., McLure, R. J., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 5004, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3471

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3471 2024

  53. [53]

    Meiksin, A., & Whalen, D. J. 2013, MNRAS, 430, 2854, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt089

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt089 2013

  54. [54]

    Mirocha, J., & Furlanetto, S. R. 2023, MNRAS, 519, 843, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3578

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3578 2023

  55. [55]

    J., Wong, K

    Moriya, T. J., Wong, K. C., Koyama, Y., et al. 2019, PASJ, 71, 59, doi: 10.1093/pasj/psz035

    work page doi:10.1093/pasj/psz035 2019

  56. [56]

    J., Jiang, J.-a., Yasuda, N., et al

    Moriya, T. J., Jiang, J.-a., Yasuda, N., et al. 2021, ApJ, 908, 249, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abcfc0

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abcfc0 2021

  57. [57]

    P., Oesch, P

    Naidu, R. P., Oesch, P. A., van Dokkum, P., et al. 2022, Two Remarkably Luminous Galaxy Candidates at z≈11−13 Revealed by JWST, arXiv, doi: 10.48550/ARXIV.2207.09434

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2207.09434 2022

  58. [58]

    P., Oesch, P

    Naidu, R. P., Oesch, P. A., Brammer, G., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2505.11263, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2505.11263

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2505.11263 2025

  59. [59]

    2023, MNRAS, 521, 5699, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad912

    Pagnini, G., Salvadori, S., Rossi, M., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 521, 5699, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad912

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad912 2023

  60. [60]

    2023, A&A, 677, L4, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347384

    Pallottini, A., & Ferrara, A. 2023, A&A, 677, L4, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347384

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347384 2023

  61. [61]

    2014, MNRAS, 440, 2498, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu451

    Pallottini, A., Ferrara, A., Gallerani, S., Salvadori, S., & D’Odorico, V. 2014, MNRAS, 440, 2498, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu451

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu451 2014

  62. [62]

    and Shibahashi , H

    Pan, T., Kasen, D., & Loeb, A. 2012, MNRAS, 422, 2701, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20837.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20837.x 2012

  63. [63]

    2023, MNRAS, 526, L63, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slad107 P´ erez-Gonz´ alez, P

    Parashari, P., & Laha, R. 2023, MNRAS, 526, L63, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slad107 P´ erez-Gonz´ alez, P. G.,¨Ostlin, G., Costantin, L., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.15594, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2503.15594 Planck Collaboration, Ade, P. A. R., Aghanim, N., et al. 2014, A&A, 571, A16, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201321591 Reg˝ os, E., Vink´ o, J., & Ziegler, ...

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slad107 2023

  64. [64]

    2024, ApJ, 976, 193, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad85d3

    Roberts-Borsani, G., Treu, T., Shapley, A., et al. 2024, ApJ, 976, 193, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad85d3

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad85d3 2024

  65. [65]

    D., Tacchella, S., et al

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

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad463d 2024

  66. [66]

    C., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2009.00693.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009MNRAS.397L.101I 397, L101

    Salvadori, S., & Ferrara, A. 2009, MNRAS, 395, L6, doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2009.00627.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1745-3933.2009.00627.x 2009

  67. [67]

    2005, ApJ, 633, 1031, doi: 10.1086/444450

    Ferrara, A. 2005, ApJ, 633, 1031, doi: 10.1086/444450

    work page doi:10.1086/444450 2005

  68. [68]

    2025a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.01034, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2510.01034

    Scholtz, J., Carniani, S., Parlanti, E., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.01034, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2510.01034

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.01034 2025

  69. [69]

    Shen, X., Vogelsberger, M., Boylan-Kolchin, M., Tacchella, S., & Naidu, R. P. 2024, MNRAS, 533, 3923, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1932

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1932 2024

  70. [70]

    J., Chatzopoulos, E., et al

    Smidt, J., Whalen, D. J., Chatzopoulos, E., et al. 2015, ApJ, 805, 44, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/805/1/44

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/805/1/44 2015

  71. [71]

    S., Yung, L

    Somerville, R. S., Yung, L. Y. A., Lancaster, L., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 544, 3774, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf1824

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staf1824 2025

  72. [72]

    , keywords =

    Tacchella, S., Eisenstein, D. J., Hainline, K., et al. 2023, ApJ, 952, 74, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acdbc6

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acdbc6 2023

  73. [73]

    J., et al

    Tegmark, M., Silk, J., Rees, M. J., et al. 1997, ApJ, 474, 1, doi: 10.1086/303434

    work page doi:10.1086/303434 1997

  74. [74]

    2009, ApJ, 694, 879, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/694/2/879

    Trenti, M., & Stiavelli, M. 2009, ApJ, 694, 879, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/694/2/879

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/694/2/879 2009

  75. [75]

    , keywords =

    Schneider, R. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 5102, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3513

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3513 2024

  76. [76]

    Population III star-forming environments

    Venditti, A., Graziani, L., Schneider, R., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 522, 3809, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1201 Are ultra-early galaxies PISNe instead?11

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad1201 2023

  77. [77]

    2023, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 957, L34, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acfe07

    Wang, B., Fujimoto, S., Labb´ e, I., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 957, L34, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acfe07

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acfe07 2023

  78. [78]

    J., Even, W., Frey, L

    Whalen, D. J., Even, W., Frey, L. H., et al. 2013, ApJ, 777, 110, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/777/2/110

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/777/2/110 2013

  79. [79]

    , keywords =

    Whitler, L., Stark, D. P., Topping, M. W., et al. 2025, ApJ, 992, 63, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adfddc

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adfddc 2025

  80. [80]

    H., & Abel, T

    Wise, J. H., & Abel, T. 2005, ApJ, 629, 615, doi: 10.1086/430434

    work page doi:10.1086/430434 2005

Showing first 80 references.