pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2601.08931 · v2 · submitted 2026-01-13 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE · astro-ph.SR

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

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

Ori D. Fox (STSc) , Armin Rest (STScI , JHU) , Justin D. R. Pierel (STScI) , David A. Coulter (STScI) , Caitlin M. Casey (UCSB , DAWN) , Jeyhan S. Kartaltepe (Rochester)
show 51 more authors
Hollis B. Akins (UT Austin) Maximilien Franco (CEA-Paris) Mike Engesser (STScI) Conor Larison (STScI) Takashi J. Moriya (NAOJ SOKENDAI Monash) Robert M. Quimby (SDSU Kavli-Tokyo) Marko Shuntov (Niels Bohr Institute Geneva Matthew R. Siebert (STScI) Christa DeCoursey (Steward) Rodrigo Angulo (JHU) James M. DerKacy (STScI) Nicole E. Drakos (Hawaii) Eiichi Egami (Steward) Steven L. Finkelstein (UT Austin) Carter Flayhart (Rochester) Seiji Fujimoto (Toronto) Estefania Padilla Gonzalez (STScI) Massimo Griggio (STScI) Santosh Harish (Rochester) Olivier Ilbert (Marseille) Kohei Inayoshi (Kavli-Beijing) Anton M. Koekemoer (STScI) Vasily Kokorev (UT Austin) Clotilde Laigle (IAP) Erini Lambrides (NASA Goddard) Rebecca L. Larson (STScI) Xiaolong Li (JHU) Daizhong Liu (Purple Mountain Observatory) Georgios E. Magdis (DTU-Space Jacqueline E. McCleary (Northeastern) Henry J. McCracken (IAP) Nicolas McMahon (Rochester) Jed McKinney (UT Austin) Thomas Moore (STScI) Louise Paquereau (IAP) Jason Rhodes (JPL) Brant E. Robertson (UCSC) David B. Sanders (Hawaii) Sogol Sanjaripour (UC Riverside) Koji Shukawa (JHU) Louis-Gregory Strolger (STScI) Sune Toft (Hawaii DAWN Niels Bohr Institute) Qinan Wang (MIT) Robert E. Williams (STScI) Yossef Zenati (Open University
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 14:14 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.SR
keywords high-redshift supernovaeJWST transientsCOSMOS-WebPRIMER surveydifference imagingearly universecore-collapse supernovaetype Ia supernovae
0
0 comments X

The pith

Combining PRIMER and COSMOS-Web JWST images uncovers 68 supernovae with hosts at redshifts up to nearly 5.

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

The paper demonstrates that difference images formed from two existing wide-area JWST surveys taken roughly one year apart can reveal supernovae even though neither program was built for time-domain work. Over an area of about 133 square arcminutes the search finds 68 candidates whose host galaxies have photometric redshifts reaching z less than 5. Two stand-out objects include a bright blue core-collapse supernova at z greater than 3 and a normal type Ia supernova at z greater than 2. The distribution of the sample suggests that larger, dedicated JWST transient surveys could measure supernova rates and populations deep into the early universe.

Core claim

By forming difference images from PRIMER and COSMOS-Web data separated by roughly one year across 133 arcmin squared, the search identifies 68 supernovae whose host photometric redshifts reach z less than 5. For most events only a single epoch is available, yet host redshift, color, and magnitude together allow prioritization for follow-up. The sample includes SN 2023aeab, a relatively bright blue core-collapse supernova at z greater than 3, and SN 2023aeax, a young normal type Ia supernova at z greater than 2.

What carries the argument

Difference images formed between PRIMER and COSMOS-Web epochs, combined with host photometric redshifts, colors, and magnitudes for candidate classification and prioritization.

If this is right

  • Wide-area JWST programs increase the chance of detecting younger, bluer, and more extreme explosions than narrower surveys.
  • Dedicated JWST time-domain surveys can deliver the sample sizes required to measure supernova rates at z greater than 2.
  • High-redshift transients give direct access to early-universe stellar populations and the evolution of supernova properties over cosmic time.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same differencing approach could be applied to other overlapping JWST fields to enlarge the high-redshift supernova sample without new observations.
  • The blue color of the z greater than 3 core-collapse event hints that rest-frame ultraviolet properties may differ from local analogs and warrant targeted follow-up.
  • Rate measurements from such searches would test whether the fraction of core-collapse versus type Ia events changes with redshift.

Load-bearing premise

Single-epoch detections plus host photometric redshifts, colors, and magnitudes are sufficient to classify candidates as genuine supernovae with low contamination.

What would settle it

Follow-up spectroscopy or multi-epoch photometry of a substantial fraction of the 68 candidates showing they are not supernovae or have significantly incorrect redshifts.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2601.08931 by Anton M. Koekemoer (STScI), Armin Rest (STScI, Brant E. Robertson (UCSC), Caitlin M. Casey (UCSB, Carter Flayhart (Rochester), Christa DeCoursey (Steward), Clotilde Laigle (IAP), Conor Larison (STScI), Daizhong Liu (Purple Mountain Observatory), David A. Coulter (STScI), David B. Sanders (Hawaii), DAWN, DAWN), Eiichi Egami (Steward), Erini Lambrides (NASA Goddard), Estefania Padilla Gonzalez (STScI), Geneva, Georgios E. Magdis (DTU-Space, Henry J. McCracken (IAP), Hollis B. Akins (UT Austin), Jacqueline E. McCleary (Northeastern), James M. DerKacy (STScI), Jason Rhodes (JPL), Jed McKinney (UT Austin), Jeyhan S. Kartaltepe (Rochester), JHU), Justin D. R. Pierel (STScI), Kavli-Tokyo), Kohei Inayoshi (Kavli-Beijing), Koji Shukawa (JHU), Louise Paquereau (IAP), Louis-Gregory Strolger (STScI), Marko Shuntov (Niels Bohr Institute, Massimo Griggio (STScI), Matthew R. Siebert (STScI), Maximilien Franco (CEA-Paris), Mike Engesser (STScI), Monash), Nicolas McMahon (Rochester), Nicole E. Drakos (Hawaii), Niels Bohr Institute), Olivier Ilbert (Marseille), Ori D. Fox (STSc), Qinan Wang (MIT), Rebecca L. Larson (STScI), Robert E. Williams (STScI), Robert M. Quimby (SDSU, Rodrigo Angulo (JHU), Santosh Harish (Rochester), Seiji Fujimoto (Toronto), Sogol Sanjaripour (UC Riverside), SOKENDAI, Steven L. Finkelstein (UT Austin), Sune Toft (Hawaii, Takashi J. Moriya (NAOJ, Thomas Moore (STScI), Vasily Kokorev (UT Austin), Xiaolong Li (JHU), Yossef Zenati (Open University.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Total expected number of SNe derived from simulations of a corresponding 5-year survey: (left) Type Ia SNe at redshifts z > 3; (right) Pop-III PISNe. For simplicity, the simulated surveys all have a 6-month cadence in four JWST/NIRcam bands (F115W, F150W, F277W, and F444W), all with the same limiting magnitude per epoch. The SN yields correspond to the number of SNe detected in at least one band at any pha… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: JWST/NIRCam observations of the COS￾MOS-Web and PRIMER surveys as gray- and blue-shaded areas, respectively, with roughly ∼0.037 deg2 of overlap￾ping area. Grey squares and cyan circles indicate the po￾sitions of transients presented in this study with redshifts of z < 1.5 and z > 1.5, respectively. Over-plotted are footprints of NIRSpec/MSA (red square) and NIRCam (black square) from follow-up observation… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Cutouts for SN 2023aeab and SN 2023aeax (SN#1 and SN#4 in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Magnitude and photometric redshift distribution for the COSMOS sample of SNe ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Color-magnitude diagram of theoretical models of SNe Ia (blue), SNe II (purple), and PISNe (red) in four redshift bins (where redshifts are photometric redshifts in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Plot of redshifts derived spectroscopically ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Photometry for (top) SN 2023aeax and (bottom) SN 2023aeab (SNe #4 and #1, respectively in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: This figure shows the total charged time for a mosaic with Npointing pointings with filled circles for a given exposure time texp, calculated using the APT. The blue dashed line show the calculcated ttotal using Equ. A3 Angulo, R., Rest, A., Blair, W. P., et al. 2025, ApJS, 280, 29, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/adf05b Astier, P., Guy, J., Regnault, N., et al. 2006, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 447, 31, doi: 10.105… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Transient astronomy in the early Universe (z > 2) remains largely unexplored, lying beyond the rest-frame optical spectroscopic reach of most current observatories. Yet this regime promises transformative insights, with high-redshift transients providing direct access to the early Universe and enabling studies of how stellar populations and cosmology evolve over cosmic time. JWST is uniquely equipped to probe these redshifts efficiently in the rest-frame optical and near-IR. We present results from an initial pathfinder search, covering an area of ~133 arcmin^2 (~0.037 deg^2) independently imaged by the PRIMER and COSMOS-Web (hereafter COSMOS) extragalactic surveys. Although neither program was designed for time-domain astronomy, combining their data results in difference images separated by roughly one year, leading to the discovery of 68 supernovae (SNe) with host photometric redshifts reaching z < 5. For most SNe, only a single epoch is available, but the combination of host redshift, classification, color, and magnitude enables us to prioritize candidates for detailed photometric and spectroscopic follow-up. Among the most notable sources are a relatively bright, blue CCSN at z > 3 (SN 2023aeab) and a young, normal SN Ia at z > 2 (SN 2023aeax). The sample distribution highlights the increasing likelihood that a wide-area JWST program can uncover younger, bluer, and potentially more extreme explosions. While this pathfinder effort is limited in cadence and number of filters, it demonstrates the strong potential of a dedicated, well-planned time-domain survey with JWST to obtain the sample sizes and rate measurements needed to chart SN populations deep into the early Universe.

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

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports the discovery of 68 supernovae at photometric redshifts up to z < 5 from difference imaging in the PRIMER and COSMOS-Web JWST surveys over ~133 arcmin², with data separated by roughly one year. It highlights two examples—a relatively bright blue core-collapse supernova at z > 3 (SN 2023aeab) and a young normal Type Ia supernova at z > 2 (SN 2023aeax)—and frames the effort as a pathfinder demonstrating the potential of wide-area JWST time-domain observations despite the surveys not being designed for transients.

Significance. If the photometric classifications hold with low contamination, the result would meaningfully expand the high-redshift supernova sample and provide a concrete demonstration that JWST can access rest-frame optical transients at z > 2–3, enabling future studies of early stellar populations and cosmology. The work correctly notes the limitations of single-epoch data and positions the findings as candidates for follow-up rather than a definitive rate measurement.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract and the results section describing the sample: The central claim of 68 supernovae rests on single-epoch difference detections classified via host photometric redshifts, color, and magnitude. No quantitative false-positive rate or completeness estimate is provided, leaving open the possibility of significant contamination from AGN variability, slow variables, or subtraction residuals at z > 3, which directly affects the reliability of the reported sample size and the two highlighted objects.
  2. [Candidate selection and classification] Section on candidate selection and classification: The prioritization of candidates is described, but the manuscript does not detail how the selection cuts exclude non-SN contaminants given the ~1 yr baseline and sparse rest-frame UV sampling at high z; a Monte Carlo injection test or comparison to known contaminant populations would be required to support the headline numbers.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The phrasing 'discovery of 68 supernovae' could be softened to 'identification of 68 supernova candidates' to align more precisely with the photometric-only nature of the classifications and the call for follow-up.
  2. [Discussion] Discussion: The argument for future dedicated surveys would benefit from a short table or paragraph quantifying the minimum cadence, number of filters, and area needed to convert this pathfinder into statistically useful rate measurements.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 1 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed comments, which have helped us clarify the scope and limitations of this pathfinder study. We agree that the sample relies on photometric classification without quantitative contamination metrics and have revised the manuscript to more explicitly frame the 68 sources as candidates prioritized for follow-up, while expanding discussions of potential contaminants. We address each major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and the results section describing the sample: The central claim of 68 supernovae rests on single-epoch difference detections classified via host photometric redshifts, color, and magnitude. No quantitative false-positive rate or completeness estimate is provided, leaving open the possibility of significant contamination from AGN variability, slow variables, or subtraction residuals at z > 3, which directly affects the reliability of the reported sample size and the two highlighted objects.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the absence of quantitative false-positive rates leaves room for possible contamination. As a pathfinder using surveys not designed for transients, our work relies on qualitative prioritization via host photometric redshifts, color, magnitude, and visual inspection rather than claiming a definitive sample or rate. We have revised the abstract and results section to state that these are candidate supernovae requiring spectroscopic or multi-epoch confirmation, and added a new paragraph explicitly discussing risks from AGN variability, slow variables, and subtraction residuals at high z. The two highlighted objects (SN 2023aeab and SN 2023aeax) were selected for their brightness, blue colors, and consistency with expected SN properties, making them higher-priority targets. We note that a full quantitative assessment is a priority for future dedicated JWST time-domain programs. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Candidate selection and classification] Section on candidate selection and classification: The prioritization of candidates is described, but the manuscript does not detail how the selection cuts exclude non-SN contaminants given the ~1 yr baseline and sparse rest-frame UV sampling at high z; a Monte Carlo injection test or comparison to known contaminant populations would be required to support the headline numbers.

    Authors: The selection combines multi-filter detections in the difference images, color cuts informed by expected SN spectral energy distributions at the photometric redshift, magnitude limits consistent with SN luminosities, and visual vetting to reject obvious artifacts. We have expanded the candidate selection section to provide more explicit details on these cuts and added a comparison to literature estimates of AGN variability and variable star contamination in deep JWST fields. The ~1 yr baseline and rest-frame UV sampling limit our ability to fully exclude slow contaminants, which we now state more clearly as a limitation. A Monte Carlo injection-recovery test was not performed in this initial analysis due to the computational demands and the pathfinder nature of the work; we have added text noting this as an important step for future rate measurements. revision: partial

standing simulated objections not resolved
  • The request for a Monte Carlo injection test or quantitative false-positive rate estimates, which were not conducted in this pathfinder study and would require substantial new analysis beyond the current scope.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Pure observational discovery report with no derivations or self-referential elements

full rationale

The paper is a pathfinder observational report on supernova candidates identified via difference imaging from PRIMER and COSMOS-Web JWST data. It relies on direct imaging, host photometric redshifts, color, and magnitude for prioritization, with no equations, fitted models, predictions, or derivations presented. No self-citations are load-bearing for any central claim, and the 68 discoveries are framed as candidates for follow-up rather than outputs of a closed mathematical chain. This is a standard observational catalog paper with no circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard observational assumptions rather than new parameters or entities; the key untested premise is that photometric classification suffices for reliable high-z SN identification.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Host-galaxy photometric redshifts are accurate enough to assign reliable redshifts and types to single-epoch transients at z<5
    Invoked to reach z<5 and classify the sample

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 6101 in / 1334 out tokens · 40134 ms · 2026-05-16T14:14:36.814876+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

79 extracted references · 79 canonical work pages · 4 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    B., Casey, C

    Akins, H. B., Casey, C. M., Lambrides, E., et al. 2025, ApJ, 991, 37, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ade984 20 T able 4.NIRCam exposure setup texp [sec] ReadoutN group Nint 451 SHALLOW4 3 1 934 SHALLOW4 6 1 1868 MEDIUM8 6 1 3478 DEEP8 6 1 10500 DEEP8 6 3 T able 5.Straight line fit results oft total versusN pointing texp [sec]m 1 b1 451 3096.41 1636.29 934 4217.40...

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ade984 2025

  2. [2]

    P., et al

    Angulo, R., Rest, A., Blair, W. P., et al. 2025, ApJS, 280, 29, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/adf05b

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/adf05b 2025

  3. [3]

    2006, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 447, 31, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20054185 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A

    Astier, P., Guy, J., Regnault, N., et al. 2006, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 447, 31, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20054185 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Lim, P. L., et al. 2022, ApJ, 935, 167, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c74

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20054185 2006

  4. [4]

    B., Finkelstein, S

    Bagley, M. B., Finkelstein, S. L., Koekemoer, A. M., et al. 2023, ApJL, 946, L12, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acbb08

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acbb08 2023

  5. [5]

    2016, The Journal of Open Source Software, 1, 58, doi: 10.21105/joss.00058

    Barbary, K. 2016, Journal of Open Source Software, 1, 58, doi: 10.21105/joss.00058

    work page doi:10.21105/joss.00058 2016

  6. [6]

    E., Branch, D., & Hauschildt, P

    Baron, E., Nugent, P. E., Branch, D., & Hauschildt, P. H. 2004, ApJL, 616, L91, doi: 10.1086/426506

    work page doi:10.1086/426506 2004

  7. [7]

    2015, HOTPANTS: High Order Transform of PSF ANd Template Subtraction,, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1504.004 http://ascl.net/1504.004

    Becker, A. 2015, HOTPANTS: High Order Transform of PSF ANd Template Subtraction,, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1504.004 http://ascl.net/1504.004

    work page 2015

  8. [8]

    M., McCleary, J

    Berman, E. M., McCleary, J. E., Koekemoer, A. M., et al. 2024, AJ, 168, 174, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad6a0f

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad6a0f 2024

  9. [9]

    1996, , 117, 393, 10.1051/aas:1996164

    Bertin, E., & Arnouts, S. 1996, A&AS, 117, 393, doi: 10.1051/aas:1996164

    work page doi:10.1051/aas:1996164 1996

  10. [10]

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

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

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad1145 2023

  11. [11]

    L., Anderson, J., Gennaro, M., et al

    Boyer, M. L., Anderson, J., Gennaro, M., et al. 2022, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 6, 191, doi: 10.3847/2515-5172/ac923a

    work page doi:10.3847/2515-5172/ac923a 2022

  12. [12]

    2024, astropy/photutils: 1.12.0, 1.12.0 Zenodo

    Bradley, L., Sip˝ ocz, B., Robitaille, T., et al. 2024, astropy/photutils: 1.12.0, 1.12.0 Zenodo

    work page 2024

  13. [13]

    2025, astropy/photutils: 2.2.0, 2.2.0 Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.14889440

    Bradley, L., Sip˝ ocz, B., Robitaille, T., et al. 2025, astropy/photutils: 2.2.0, 2.2.0 Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.14889440

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.14889440 2025

  14. [14]

    B., van Dokkum, P

    Brammer, G. B., van Dokkum, P. G., & Coppi, P. 2008, ApJ, 686, 1503, doi: 10.1086/591786

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1086/591786 2008

  15. [15]

    2023, JWST Calibration Pipeline, 1.9.4 Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7577320

    Bushouse, H., Eisenhamer, J., Dencheva, N., et al. 2023, JWST Calibration Pipeline, 1.9.4 Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7577320

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.7577320 2023

  16. [16]

    The rate of Supernovae from the combined sample of five searches

    Cappellaro, E., Turatto, M., Tsvetkov, D. Y., et al. 1997, A&A, 322, 431, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9611191 21

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/9611191 1997

  17. [17]

    M., Kartaltepe, J

    Casey, C. M., Kartaltepe, J. S., Drakos, N. E., et al. 2023, ApJ, 954, 31, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acc2bc

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acc2bc 2023

  18. [18]

    M., Akins, H

    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

  19. [19]

    L., Frye, B

    Chen, W., Kelly, P. L., Frye, B. L., et al. 2024, ApJ, 970, 102, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad50a5

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad50a5 2024

  20. [20]

    Conroy, C., & Gunn, J. E. 2010, FSPS: Flexible Stellar Population Synthesis,, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1010.043 http://ascl.net/1010.043

    work page 2010

  21. [21]

    J., et al

    Cooke, J., Sullivan, M., Barton, E. J., et al. 2009, Nature, 460, 237, doi: 10.1038/nature08082

    work page doi:10.1038/nature08082 2009

  22. [22]

    2012, Nature, 491, 228, doi: 10.1038/nature11521

    Cooke, J., Sullivan, M., Gal-Yam, A., et al. 2012, Nature, 491, 228, doi: 10.1038/nature11521

    work page doi:10.1038/nature11521 2012

  23. [23]

    A., Pierel, J

    Coulter, D. A., Pierel, J. D. R., DeCoursey, C., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.05513, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2501.05513

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2501.05513 2025

  24. [24]

    A., Larison, C., Pierel, J

    Coulter, D. A., Larison, C., Pierel, J. D. R., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.04156, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2601.04156

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2601.04156 2026

  25. [25]

    F., Leistedt, B., Graham, M

    Crenshaw, J. F., Leistedt, B., Graham, M. L., et al. 2025, ApJS, 281, 54, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ae14f0

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ae14f0 2025

  26. [26]

    J., et al

    Curtin, C., Cooke, J., Moriya, T. J., et al. 2019, ApJS, 241, 17, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab07c8

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab07c8 2019

  27. [27]

    DeCoursey, C., Egami, E., Pierel, J. D. R., et al. 2025a, ApJ, 979, 250, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad8fab

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad8fab

  28. [28]

    2025b, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2504.17007, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2504.17007

    DeCoursey, C., Egami, E., Sun, F., et al. 2025b, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2504.17007, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2504.17007

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2504.17007

  29. [29]

    S., Abraham, R

    Dunlop, J. S., Abraham, R. G., Ashby, M. L. N., et al. 2021, PRIMER: Public Release IMaging for Extragalactic Research, D’Andrea, C. B., Sako, M., Dilday, B., et al. 2010, The Astrophysical Journal, 708, 661, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/708/1/661

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/708/1/661 2021

  30. [30]

    Overview of the JWST Advanced Deep Extragalactic Survey (JADES)

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

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.48550/arxiv.2306.02465 2023

  31. [31]

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

    Ferrara, A., Carniani, S., Morishita, T., & Stiavelli, M. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.07374. https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.07374

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  32. [32]

    M., Koekemoer, A

    Franco, M., Casey, C. M., Koekemoer, A. M., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.03256, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.03256

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.03256 2025

  33. [33]

    A., Bassett, B., Becker, A., et al

    Frieman, J. A., Bassett, B., Becker, A., et al. 2008, The Astronomical Journal, 135, 338, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/135/1/338 Gaia Collaboration, Brown, A. G. A., Vallenari, A., et al. 2021, A&A, 649, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039657

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/135/1/338 2008

  34. [34]

    2019, ARA&A, 57, 305, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081817-051819

    Gal-Yam, A. 2019, ARA&A, 57, 305, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081817-051819

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081817-051819 2019

  35. [35]

    L., Nugent, P

    Gilliland, R. L., Nugent, P. E., & Phillips, M. M. 1999, ApJ, 521, 30, doi: 10.1086/307549

    work page doi:10.1086/307549 1999

  36. [36]

    2023, MNRAS, 522, 4718, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1238

    Golubchik, M., Zitrin, A., Pierel, J., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 522, 4718, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1238

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad1238 2023

  37. [37]

    A., Kocevski, D

    Grogin, N. A., Kocevski, D. D., Faber, S. M., et al. 2011, ApJS, 197, 35, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/197/2/35

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/197/2/35 2011

  38. [38]

    2007, ApJL, 657, L73, doi: 10.1086/511417

    Guetta, D., & Della Valle, M. 2007, ApJL, 657, L73, doi: 10.1086/511417

    work page doi:10.1086/511417 2007

  39. [39]

    R., Kuhlmann, S., Kovacs, E., et al

    Gupta, R. R., Kuhlmann, S., Kovacs, E., et al. 2016, AJ, 152, 154, doi: 10.3847/0004-6256/152/6/154

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-6256/152/6/154 2016

  40. [40]

    2007, A&A, 466, 11, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20066930

    Guy, J., Astier, P., Baumont, S., et al. 2007, A&A, 466, 11, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20066930

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20066930 2007

  41. [41]

    2006, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 118, 2, doi: 10.1086/500228

    Hamuy, M., Folatelli, G., Morrell, N., et al. 2006, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 118, 2, doi: 10.1086/500228

    work page doi:10.1086/500228 2006

  42. [42]

    2023, ApJ, 959, 39, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad029e

    Harikane, Y., Zhang, Y., Nakajima, K., et al. 2023, ApJ, 959, 39, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad029e

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad029e 2023

  43. [43]

    Hsiao, T. Y.-Y. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.02469, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2601.02469

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2601.02469 2026

  44. [44]

    W., Casetti-Dinescu, D

    Jha, S. W., Casetti-Dinescu, D. I., Bernstein, G. M., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2405.12297, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2405.12297

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2405.12297 2024

  45. [45]

    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

  46. [46]

    D., Jones, D

    Kenworthy, W. D., Jones, D. O., Dai, M., et al. 2021, ApJ, 923, 265, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac30d8

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac30d8 2021

  47. [47]

    P., Cinabro, D., et al

    Kessler, R., Bernstein, J. P., Cinabro, D., et al. 2009, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 121, 1028, doi: 10.1086/605984

    work page doi:10.1086/605984 2009

  48. [48]

    M., Aussel, H., Calzetti, D., et al

    Koekemoer, A. M., Aussel, H., Calzetti, D., et al. 2007, ApJS, 172, 196, doi: 10.1086/520086

    work page doi:10.1086/520086 2007

  49. [49]

    M., Faber, S

    Koekemoer, A. M., Faber, S. M., Ferguson, H. C., et al. 2011, ApJS, 197, 36, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/197/2/36

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/197/2/36 2011

  50. [50]

    L., Hutchison, T

    Larson, R. L., Hutchison, T. A., Bagley, M., et al. 2023, ApJ, 958, 141, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acfed4

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acfed4 2023

  51. [51]

    H., & Rujopakarn, W

    Lyu, J., Alberts, S., Rieke, G. H., & Rujopakarn, W. 2022, ApJ, 941, 191, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac9e5d

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac9e5d 2022

  52. [52]

    J., Tanaka, M., Yasuda, N., et al

    Moriya, T. J., Tanaka, M., Yasuda, N., et al. 2019, ApJS, 241, 16, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab07c5

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab07c5 2019

  53. [53]

    J., Inserra, C., Tanaka, M., et al

    Moriya, T. J., Inserra, C., Tanaka, M., et al. 2022, A&A, 666, A157, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243810

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202243810 2022

  54. [54]

    J., Coulter, D

    Moriya, T. J., Coulter, D. A., DeCoursey, C., et al. 2025, PASJ, 77, 851, doi: 10.1093/pasj/psaf052

    work page doi:10.1093/pasj/psaf052 2025

  55. [55]

    Morrell, N. I. 2012, in IAU symposium, Vol. 279, Death of massive stars: Supernovae and gamma-ray bursts, ed. P. Roming, N. Kawai, & E. Pian, 361–362, doi: 10.1017/S174392131201335X

    work page doi:10.1017/s174392131201335x 2012

  56. [56]

    B., & Gunn, J

    Oke, J. B., & Gunn, J. E. 1983, ApJ, 266, 713, doi: 10.1086/160817 22

    work page doi:10.1086/160817 1983

  57. [57]

    D., Sivaramakrishnan, A., Lajoie, C.-P., et al

    Perrin, M. D., Sivaramakrishnan, A., Lajoie, C.-P., et al. 2014, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 9143, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2014: Optical, Infrared, and Millimeter Wave, ed. J. M. Oschmann, Jr., M. Clampin, G. G. Fazio, & H. A. MacEwen, 91433X, doi: 10.1117/12.2056689

    work page doi:10.1117/12.2056689 2014

  58. [58]

    2012, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol

    Sivaramakrishnan, A. 2012, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 8442, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2012:

    work page 2012

  59. [59]

    Oschmann, Jr., 84423D, doi: 10.1117/12.925230

    work page doi:10.1117/12.925230

  60. [60]

    2024, Space-Phot: Simple Python-Based Photometry for Space Telescopes, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.12100100

    Pierel, J. 2024, Space-Phot: Simple Python-Based Photometry for Space Telescopes, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.12100100

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.12100100 2024

  61. [61]

    Pierel, J. D. R., Rodney, S., Avelino, A., et al. 2018, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 130, 114504, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aadb7a

    work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/aadb7a 2018

  62. [62]

    Pierel, J. D. R., Jones, D. O., Kenworthy, W. D., et al. 2022, ApJ, 939, 11, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac93f9

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac93f9 2022

  63. [63]

    Pierel, J. D. R., Engesser, M., Coulter, D. A., et al. 2024, ApJL, 971, L32, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad6908

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad6908 2024

  64. [64]

    Pierel, J. D. R., Coulter, D. A., Siebert, M. R., et al. 2025, ApJL, 981, L9, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adb1d9

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adb1d9 2025

  65. [65]

    2025, The Journal of Open Source Software, 10, 8200, doi: 10.21105/joss.08200

    Polzin, A. 2025, The Journal of Open Source Software, 10, 8200, doi: 10.21105/joss.08200

    work page doi:10.21105/joss.08200 2025

  66. [66]

    2012, ApJS, 199, 25, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/199/2/25

    Postman, M., Coe, D., Ben´ ıtez, N., et al. 2012, ApJS, 199, 25, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/199/2/25

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/199/2/25 2012

  67. [68]

    2023, arminrest/jhat: The JWST HST Alignment Tool (JHAT), Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7892935

    Rest, A., Pierel, J., Correnti, M., et al. 2023, arminrest/jhat: The JWST HST Alignment Tool (JHAT), Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7892935

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.7892935 2023

  68. [69]

    J., et al

    Rest, A., Scolnic, D., Foley, R. J., et al. 2014, ApJ, 795, 44, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/795/1/44

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/795/1/44 2014

  69. [70]

    A., Riess, A

    Rodney, S. A., Riess, A. G., Strolger, L.-G., et al. 2014, AJ, 148, 13, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/148/1/13 Roman Observations Time Allocation Committee, & Core Community Survey Definition Committees. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2505.10574, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2505.10574

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/148/1/13 2014

  70. [71]

    2008, The Astronomical Journal, 135, 348, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/135/1/348

    Sako, M., Bassett, B., Becker, A., et al. 2008, The Astronomical Journal, 135, 348, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/135/1/348

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/135/1/348 2008

  71. [72]

    2007, ApJS, 172, 1, doi: 10.1086/516585

    Scoville, N., Aussel, H., Brusa, M., et al. 2007, ApJS, 172, 1, doi: 10.1086/516585

    work page doi:10.1086/516585 2007

  72. [73]

    B., Paquereau, L., et al

    Shuntov, M., Akins, H. B., Paquereau, L., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.03243, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.03243

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.03243 2025

  73. [74]

    R., DeCoursey, C., Coulter, D

    Siebert, M. R., DeCoursey, C., Coulter, D. A., et al. 2024, ApJL, 972, L13, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad6c32

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad6c32 2024

  74. [75]

    2004, in American institute of physics conference series, Vol

    Skilling, J. 2004, in American institute of physics conference series, Vol. 735, American institute of physics conference series, ed. R. Fischer, R. Preuss, & U. V. Toussaint, 395–405, doi: 10.1063/1.1835238

    work page doi:10.1063/1.1835238 2004

  75. [76]

    C., et al

    Smith, M., Sullivan, M., Nichol, R. C., et al. 2018, ApJ, 854, 37, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa126

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaa126 2018

  76. [77]

    Stetson, P. B. 1987, PASP, 99, 191

    work page 1987

  77. [78]

    M., et al

    Stritzinger, M., Mazzali, P., Phillips, M. M., et al. 2009, The Astrophysical Journal, 696, 713, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/696/1/713

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/696/1/713 2009

  78. [79]

    A., et al

    Strolger, L.-G., Dahlen, T., Rodney, S. A., et al. 2015, ApJ, 813, 93, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/813/2/93

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/813/2/93 2015

  79. [80]

    2023, ApJS, 269, 43, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad0298

    Yan, H., Ma, Z., Sun, B., et al. 2023, ApJS, 269, 43, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad0298

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ad0298 2023