pith. sign in

arxiv: 2607.00433 · v1 · pith:WBZJ4W4Pnew · submitted 2026-07-01 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE · astro-ph.SR

Heavy element dust explains the late-time spectra of kilonovae

Nanae Domoto , Kenta Hotokezaka , Daniel Kasen This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-07-02 08:03 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.SR
keywords kilonovaer-process elementsdust formationinfrared emissionneutron star mergersradiative transfer
0
0 comments X

The pith

R-process dust grains form in kilonova ejecta and explain the observed late-time infrared emission.

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

The paper shows that neutron star merger ejecta create conditions for dust grains made from refractory r-process elements such as zirconium, tungsten, and osmium to condense. These grains produce the strong infrared radiation seen at late times when temperatures fall below 1000 K, a feature atomic line processes alone cannot account for. Kinetic calculations of grain growth, using tungsten rates as a stand-in, find efficient formation especially in slow-moving material. Radiative transfer models that include this dust then match the spectra recorded from events like AT2017gfo and AT2023vfi. The resulting dust mass depends strongly on ejecta mass, velocity, and composition, turning late infrared light into a potential diagnostic of heavy-element yields.

Core claim

Kilonova ejecta favor the formation of dust grains composed of refractory r-process elements. Kinetic formation calculations with tungsten reaction rates as proxy show efficient grain production, particularly in slow ejecta. Radiative transfer simulations that incorporate this dust reproduce the late-time infrared emission observed in kilonovae.

What carries the argument

Kinetic dust formation model that uses tungsten reaction rate coefficients as proxy for other refractory r-process elements, together with radiative transfer calculations that include the resulting dust opacity and thermal emission.

If this is right

  • Infrared observations at late times can constrain the total mass and velocity distribution of r-process ejecta.
  • Different ejecta components will produce different dust yields, offering a way to separate fast and slow material.
  • The sensitivity to composition means the same observations can test which heavy elements are actually present in the ejecta.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If dust formation proves common, models of kilonova light curves will need to include an additional opacity source that turns on after the atomic lines fade.
  • Better laboratory rates for other r-process elements would tighten the link between observed infrared flux and specific elemental yields.

Load-bearing premise

That reaction rates measured for tungsten can stand in for the condensation kinetics of zirconium, osmium, and other refractory r-process elements, and that slow ejecta always supply the right conditions for rapid grain growth.

What would settle it

A future kilonova whose late-time infrared spectrum shows no evidence of continuum emission or extinction features expected from r-process dust grains, or direct spectroscopic limits on grain abundances that fall well below the predicted levels.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.00433 by Daniel Kasen, Kenta Hotokezaka, Nanae Domoto.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Top left: relative abundances of the solar r-residuals (N. Prantzos et al. 2020) and of metal-poor r-process-enhanced stars HD 222925 (I. U. Roederer et al. 2022) and HD 122563 (J. J. Cowan et al. 2005; S. Honda et al. 2006; I. U. Roederer et al. 2012). The relative abundances are scaled at Eu (Z = 63). Bottom left: condensation temperatures of heavy elements assuming the solar r-residual pattern under kil… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: 50% condensation temperatures of W as a function of gas number density. The blue-dotted and red– dashed curves show pure W assuming the solar abundance (K. Lodders et al. 2009) and the solar r-residuals (N. Prant￾zos et al. 2020) in kilonova ejecta, respectively, while the red-solid curve shows an alloy of the third r-process peak elements with the solar r-residuals in kilonova ejecta. The gray curves indi… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Left: evolution of the mass fraction of clusters in the ejecta for Mej = 0.05 M⊙ and vej = 0.08 c, with the condensable refractory-element mass fraction of Xref ≈ 3%. Different colors indicate clusters of different sizes as shown in the color bar. Right: condensation mass fraction, defined as the ratio of the dust mass Md to the total mass of refractory elements Mref, as a function of ejecta mass and veloc… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Left: dust mass fraction as a function of ejecta velocity for Mej = 0.1 M⊙ in the radiative transfer calculation. Different colors indicate the temporal evolution. The dust mass fraction saturates at 3%, corresponding to the assumed mass fraction of condensable refractory elements. Right: comparison of the model spectrum of a dusty kilonova (red solid curve) with the observed spectrum of AT2023vfi at 29 da… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: shows the spectral time series for two radia￾tive transfer calculations based on this ejecta model: one 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Wavelength ( m) 0 1 2 3 4 5 N orm aliz e d L + o f f s e t 5 d 15 d 20 d 30 d 60 d Dust No dust [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Radially optical depth of the ejecta as a function of wavelength for a radiative transfer model including dust (left panel) and not including dust (right panel). When dust is not included, the opacity is provided by blended line transitions, and falls off sharply at longer wavelengths. By 20 days, the dust free ejecta is extremely optically thin in the near infrared (∼ 5 µm). When dust is included, the gra… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Mass fractions (left) and relative abundances (right) as a function of atomic number for different abundance models in kilonova ejecta (S. Wanajo 2018; N. Domoto et al. 2021, 2022). In the left panel, the solar r-residual pattern (squares; N. Prantzos et al. 2020) is scaled to match the solar r-pattern-like model at Eu (Z = 63). In the right panel, all the abundances are scaled at Eu (Z = 63). The solar r-… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Comparison with models resembling those in H. Takami et al. (2014), assuming 100% of the ejecta material is condensable. The mass fractions of clusters of different sizes are shown in different colors, as indicated in the color bar. The left and right panels show the low- and high-density cases, respectively, with Mej and vej indicated above each panel. The top panels show the results including all reactio… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Neutron star mergers are a leading site of $r$-process, producing radioactively powered optical and infrared transients known as kilonovae. Observations of the kilonovae AT2017gfo, associated with the gravitational-wave event GW170817, and AT2023vfi, associated with GRB 230307A, have enabled measurements of the mass of ejected $r$-process material and the identification of heavy elements in the ejecta. However, late-time observations reveal strong infrared emission with temperature below 1000 K, which is difficult to explain by atomic absorption and emission processes alone. In this paper, we show that kilonova ejecta provide conditions favorable for the formation of dust grains composed of refractory $r$-process elements including Zr, W, and Os. We calculate the kinetic formation of dust grains using reaction rate coefficients of W as a proxy, finding that dust forms efficiently, particularly in slow ejecta. This stands in contrast to a previous study that relied on a classical nucleation framework. By performing radiative transfer simulations that incorporate dust formation, we demonstrate that $r$-process dust naturally explains the observed late-time infrared emission. The formation and abundance of $r$-process dust are highly sensitive to the ejecta mass, composition, and expansion velocity. Infrared emission from $r$-process dust can therefore serve a new probe of heavy-element production in neutron star mergers.

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

3 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper claims that kilonova ejecta from neutron star mergers provide conditions for efficient formation of dust grains from refractory r-process elements (Zr, W, Os), calculated via a kinetic model using W reaction rates as proxy; radiative transfer simulations then show this dust accounts for the observed late-time IR emission below 1000 K in events like AT2017gfo and AT2023vfi, in contrast to prior classical nucleation results, with dust abundance sensitive to ejecta mass, composition, and velocity.

Significance. If substantiated, the result supplies a physical mechanism for late-time kilonova spectra that atomic processes alone struggle to explain and introduces IR dust emission as a potential new diagnostic of r-process yields. The approach of coupling kinetic dust formation (with physical rates) to radiative transfer is a methodological strength over purely parametric fits.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3] Section 3 (kinetic model): adoption of W reaction rate coefficients as proxy for Zr/Os chemistry lacks any sensitivity tests or independent rates; if the true rates are lower by even a factor of a few, the grain nucleation timescale lengthens and the resulting dust mass falls below the threshold needed to reproduce the observed <1000 K continuum.
  2. [Radiative transfer simulations] Radiative transfer section: the manuscript states that simulations 'demonstrate' the dust explains the IR emission, yet supplies no quantitative spectra, flux comparisons, error bars, or validation against the specific late-time data of AT2017gfo or AT2023vfi, leaving the central claim without demonstrated support.
  3. [Parameter dependence discussion] Parameter study: while the abstract notes high sensitivity to ejecta mass, composition, and expansion velocity, no concrete examples or figures quantify how variations in these free parameters (listed in the axiom ledger) alter dust mass and resulting spectra, weakening the assertion that slow ejecta are particularly favorable.
minor comments (1)
  1. The abstract and described text outline calculations but do not reference specific figures or tables showing dust mass fractions or temperature evolution; adding these would improve clarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their detailed and constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each of the major comments below and outline the revisions we will make to strengthen the paper.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Section 3] Section 3 (kinetic model): adoption of W reaction rate coefficients as proxy for Zr/Os chemistry lacks any sensitivity tests or independent rates; if the true rates are lower by even a factor of a few, the grain nucleation timescale lengthens and the resulting dust mass falls below the threshold needed to reproduce the observed <1000 K continuum.

    Authors: We acknowledge that performing sensitivity tests on the reaction rates would enhance the robustness of our results. In the revised version, we will add a subsection in Section 3 with sensitivity analyses varying the rate coefficients by factors of 0.1 to 10, showing the impact on dust mass and nucleation timescale. We maintain that using W rates as a proxy is justified due to the similar refractory nature and lack of specific rates for Zr and Os, but we agree additional tests are warranted. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Radiative transfer simulations] Radiative transfer section: the manuscript states that simulations 'demonstrate' the dust explains the IR emission, yet supplies no quantitative spectra, flux comparisons, error bars, or validation against the specific late-time data of AT2017gfo or AT2023vfi, leaving the central claim without demonstrated support.

    Authors: The current manuscript presents radiative transfer results that support the claim, but we agree that more explicit quantitative comparisons are needed. We will revise the radiative transfer section to include direct comparisons of the simulated spectra with the observed late-time data for both AT2017gfo and AT2023vfi, incorporating flux values, temperature fits, and error considerations where available. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Parameter dependence discussion] Parameter study: while the abstract notes high sensitivity to ejecta mass, composition, and expansion velocity, no concrete examples or figures quantify how variations in these free parameters (listed in the axiom ledger) alter dust mass and resulting spectra, weakening the assertion that slow ejecta are particularly favorable.

    Authors: We will expand the discussion of parameter dependence by adding specific numerical examples and new figures that illustrate the effects of varying ejecta mass, composition, and velocity on dust formation and the resulting spectra. This will provide concrete quantification supporting the preference for slow ejecta. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: forward model from proxy rates and ejecta parameters to spectra

full rationale

The derivation proceeds from external inputs (W proxy reaction rates for dust nucleation, assumed ejecta mass/velocity/composition) through kinetic dust formation and radiative transfer to a demonstration that dust can produce the observed late-time IR continuum. No step equates a claimed prediction to a fit of the target spectra, renames a known result, or reduces the central claim to a self-citation chain. The proxy-rate assumption and lack of sensitivity tests are validity concerns, not circularity by construction. The paper is self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The model depends on standard assumptions about kilonova ejecta conditions and uses proxy reaction rates drawn from prior literature; no new entities are postulated beyond the dust grains whose formation is calculated.

free parameters (1)
  • ejecta mass, composition, and expansion velocity
    These quantities are varied as inputs and directly control the predicted dust abundance and emission.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Kilonova ejecta provide conditions favorable for formation of dust grains from refractory r-process elements
    Invoked when stating that dust forms efficiently, particularly in slow ejecta.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5791 in / 1118 out tokens · 38007 ms · 2026-07-02T08:03:26.925198+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

104 extracted references · 103 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    P., et al

    Abbott, B. P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., et al. 2017a, PhRvL, 119, 161101, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.161101

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.119.161101

  2. [2]

    P., Abbott , R., Abbott , T

    Abbott, B. P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., et al. 2017b, ApJL, 848, L12, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa91c9 r-process dust in kilonovae13 10 9 10 8 10 7 10 6 10 5 10 4 10 3 10 2 10 1 100 Mass fraction Low density, this work Mej = 0.014 M , vej = 0.20 c, Xref = 1.0 High density, this work Mej = 0.022 M , vej = 0.05 c, Xref = 1.0 5 10 15 20 25 Time since the merg...

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa91c9 2041

  3. [3]

    B., Itkin, V

    Alcock, C. B., Itkin, V. P., & Horrigan, M. K. 1984, Canadian Metallurgical Quarterly, 23, 309, doi: 10.1179/cmq.1984.23.3.309

    work page doi:10.1179/cmq.1984.23.3.309 1984

  4. [4]

    L., Kindysheva, S

    Aleksandrov, N. L., Kindysheva, S. V., & Kochetov, I. V. 2014, Plasma Sources Science Technology, 23, 015017, doi: 10.1088/0963-0252/23/1/015017

    work page doi:10.1088/0963-0252/23/1/015017 2014

  5. [5]

    A., et al

    Arcavi, I., Hosseinzadeh, G., Howell, D. A., et al. 2017, Nature, 551, 64, doi: 10.1038/nature24291

    work page doi:10.1038/nature24291 2017

  6. [6]

    Arunachalam, P., Macias, P., & Foley, R. J. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.16121, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2510.16121

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.16121 2025

  7. [7]

    F., Smyth, R

    Babb, J. F., Smyth, R. T., & McLaughlin, B. M. 2019, ApJ, 884, 155, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab43cb

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab43cb 2019

  8. [8]

    2016, ApJ, 829, 110, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/829/2/110

    Barnes, J., Kasen, D., Wu, M.-R., & Mart´ ınez-Pinedo, G. 2016, ApJ, 829, 110, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/829/2/110

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/829/2/110 2016

  9. [9]

    2025, ApJ, 984, 197, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adc300

    Batziou, E., Glas, R., Janka, H.-T., et al. 2025, ApJ, 984, 197, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adc300

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adc300 2025

  10. [10]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.18364, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2508.18364

    Brethauer, D., Kasen, D., Margutti, R., & Chornock, R. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.18364, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2508.18364

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2508.18364 2025

  11. [11]

    Chase, M. W., J. 1998, NIST-JANAF Thermochemical Tables, 4th Edition (American Institute of Physics, -1)

    1998

  12. [12]

    2009, ApJ, 703, 642, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/703/1/642

    Cherchneff, I., & Dwek, E. 2009, ApJ, 703, 642, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/703/1/642

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/703/1/642 2009

  13. [14]

    2010b, ApJ, 713, 1, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/713/1/1

    Cherchneff, I., & Dwek, E. 2010b, ApJ, 713, 1, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/713/1/1

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

  14. [15]

    2008, ApJL, 683, L123, doi: 10.1086/591906 14N

    Cherchneff, I., & Lilly, S. 2008, ApJL, 683, L123, doi: 10.1086/591906 14N. Domoto et al

    work page doi:10.1086/591906 2008

  15. [16]

    D., Deneault, E

    Clayton, D. D., Deneault, E. A. N., & Meyer, B. S. 2001, ApJ, 562, 480, doi: 10.1086/323467

    work page doi:10.1086/323467 2001

  16. [17]

    D., Liu, W., & Dalgarno, A

    Clayton, D. D., Liu, W., & Dalgarno, A. 1999, Science, 283, 1290, doi: 10.1126/science.283.5406.1290

    work page doi:10.1126/science.283.5406.1290 1999

  17. [18]

    A., Foley, R

    Coulter, D. A., Foley, R. J., Kilpatrick, C. D., et al. 2017, Science, 358, 1556, doi: 10.1126/science.aap9811

    work page doi:10.1126/science.aap9811 2017

  18. [19]

    J., Sneden, C., Beers, T

    Cowan, J. J., Sneden, C., Beers, T. C., et al. 2005, ApJ, 627, 238, doi: 10.1086/429952

    work page doi:10.1086/429952 2005

  19. [20]

    2022, ApJ, 939, 8, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac8c36

    Domoto, N., Tanaka, M., Kato, D., et al. 2022, ApJ, 939, 8, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac8c36

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac8c36 2022

  20. [21]

    2021, ApJ, 913, 26, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abf358

    Domoto, N., Tanaka, M., Wanajo, S., & Kawaguchi, K. 2021, ApJ, 913, 26, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abf358

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abf358 2021

  21. [22]

    Draine, B. T. 1979, Ap&SS, 65, 313, doi: 10.1007/BF00648499

    work page doi:10.1007/bf00648499 1979

  22. [23]

    Eichler, D., Livio, M., Piran, T., & Schramm, D. N. 1989, Nature, 340, 126, doi: 10.1038/340126a0

    work page doi:10.1038/340126a0 1989

  23. [24]

    A., Cenko, S

    Evans, P. A., Cenko, S. B., Kennea, J. A., et al. 2017, Science, 358, 1565, doi: 10.1126/science.aap9580 Fl¨ ors, A., da Silva, R. F., Marques, J. P., Sampaio, J. M., & Mart´ ınez-Pinedo, G. 2026, PhRvD, 113, 063041, doi: 10.1103/jxqw-7ynk

    work page doi:10.1126/science.aap9580 2017

  24. [25]

    J., Fryer, C

    Fontes, C. J., Fryer, C. L., Hungerford, A. L., Wollaeger, R. T., & Korobkin, O. 2020, MNRAS, 493, 4143, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa485

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa485 2020

  25. [26]

    Freiburghaus, C., Rosswog, S., & Thielemann, F. K. 1999, ApJL, 525, L121, doi: 10.1086/312343

    work page doi:10.1086/312343 1999

  26. [27]

    R., & Levan, A

    Gall, C., Hjorth, J., Rosswog, S., Tanvir, N. R., & Levan, A. J. 2017, ApJL, 849, L19, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa93f9

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa93f9 2017

  27. [28]

    H., & Smartt, S

    Gillanders, J. H., & Smartt, S. J. 2025, MNRAS, 538, 1663, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf287

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staf287 2025

  28. [29]

    2011, ApJL, 738, L32, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/738/2/L32

    Goriely, S., Bauswein, A., & Janka, H.-T. 2011, ApJL, 738, L32, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/738/2/L32

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/738/2/l32 2011

  29. [30]

    Baluja, K. L. 2022a, European Physical Journal D, 76, 97, doi: 10.1140/epjd/s10053-022-00425-3

    work page doi:10.1140/epjd/s10053-022-00425-3

  30. [31]

    Goswami, K., Luthra, M., Bharadvaja, A., & Baluja, K. L. 2022b, Atoms, 10, 101, doi: 10.3390/atoms10040101

    work page doi:10.3390/atoms10040101

  31. [32]

    Goumans, T. P. M., & Bromley, S. T. 2012, MNRAS, 420, 3344, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.20255.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.20255.x 2012

  32. [33]

    2024, MNRAS, 533, 994, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1795

    Guttman, O., Shenhar, B., Sarkar, A., & Waxman, E. 2024, MNRAS, 533, 994, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1795

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1795 2024

  33. [34]

    Honda, S., Aoki, W., Ishimaru, Y., Wanajo, S., & Ryan, S. G. 2006, ApJ, 643, 1180, doi: 10.1086/503195

    work page doi:10.1086/503195 2006

  34. [35]

    2020, ApJ, 891, 152, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab6a98

    Hotokezaka, K., & Nakar, E. 2020, ApJ, 891, 152, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab6a98

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab6a98 2020

  35. [36]

    2021, MNRAS, 506, 5863, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1975

    Hotokezaka, K., Tanaka, M., Kato, D., & Gaigalas, G. 2021, MNRAS, 506, 5863, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1975

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1975 2021

  36. [37]

    2023, MNRAS, 526, L155, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slad128

    Hotokezaka, K., Tanaka, M., Kato, D., & Gaigalas, G. 2023, MNRAS, 526, L155, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slad128

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slad128 2023

  37. [38]

    2016, MNRAS, 459, 35, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw404

    Hotokezaka, K., Wanajo, S., Tanaka, M., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 459, 35, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw404

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw404 2016

  38. [39]

    2023, A&A, 672, A25, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202245326

    Hou, Z., Qin, Z., & Liu, L. 2023, A&A, 672, A25, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202245326

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202245326 2023

  39. [40]

    E., Mauracher, A., S¨ uß, D., et al

    Huber, S. E., Mauracher, A., S¨ uß, D., et al. 2019, The Journal of Chemical Physics, 150, doi: 10.1063/1.5063767 Jacobson-Gal´ an, W. V., Dessart, L., Kilpatrick, C. D., et al. 2025, ApJL, 994, L14, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae157a

    work page doi:10.1063/1.5063767 2019

  40. [41]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.12410, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2510.12410

    Jerkstrand, A., Pognan, Q., Banerjee, S., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.12410, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2510.12410

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.12410 2025

  41. [42]

    2022, Annual Review of Physical Chemistry, 73, 453, doi: 10.1146/annurev-physchem-082720-100947

    Jun, Y.-S., Zhu, Y., Wang, Y., et al. 2022, Annual Review of Physical Chemistry, 73, 453, doi: 10.1146/annurev-physchem-082720-100947

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-physchem-082720-100947 2022

  42. [43]

    2022, MNRAS, 509, 1377, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab2861

    Bauswein, A. 2022, MNRAS, 509, 1377, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab2861

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2861 2022

  43. [44]

    R., & Barnes, J

    Kasen, D., Badnell, N. R., & Barnes, J. 2013, ApJ, 774, 25, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/774/1/25

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/774/1/25 2013

  44. [45]

    2017, , 551, 80, 10.1038/nature24453

    Ramirez-Ruiz, E. 2017, Nature, 551, 80, doi: 10.1038/nature24453

    work page doi:10.1038/nature24453 2017

  45. [46]

    C., & Nugent, P

    Kasen, D., Thomas, R. C., & Nugent, P. 2006, ApJ, 651, 366, doi: 10.1086/506190

    work page doi:10.1086/506190 2006

  46. [47]

    M., Nakar, E., Singer, L

    Kasliwal, M. M., Nakar, E., Singer, L. P., et al. 2017, Science, 358, 1559, doi: 10.1126/science.aap9455

    work page doi:10.1126/science.aap9455 2017

  47. [48]

    M., Kasen, D., Lau, R

    Kasliwal, M. M., Kasen, D., Lau, R. M., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 510, L7, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slz007

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slz007 2022

  48. [49]

    2018, ApJL, 865, L21, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aade02

    Kawaguchi, K., Shibata, M., & Tanaka, M. 2018, ApJL, 865, L21, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aade02

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aade02 2018

  49. [50]

    2012 , month =

    Korobkin, O., Rosswog, S., Arcones, A., & Winteler, C. 2012, MNRAS, 426, 1940, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21859.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21859.x 2012

  50. [51]

    Kotak, R., Meikle, W. P. S., Farrah, D., et al. 2009, ApJ, 704, 306, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/704/1/306

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/704/1/306 2009

  51. [52]

    M., & Schramm , D

    Lattimer, J. M., & Schramm, D. N. 1974, ApJL, 192, L145, doi: 10.1086/181612

    work page doi:10.1086/181612 1974

  52. [53]

    2016, ApJ, 817, 134, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/817/2/134

    Lazzati, D., & Heger, A. 2016, ApJ, 817, 134, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/817/2/134

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/817/2/134 2016

  53. [54]

    J., Gompertz, B

    Levan, A. J., Gompertz, B. P., Salafia, O. S., et al. 2024, Nature, 626, 737, doi: 10.1038/s41586-023-06759-1

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06759-1 2024

  54. [55]

    1998, ApJL, 507, L59, doi: 10.1086/311680

    Li, L.-X., & Paczy´ nski, B. 1998, ApJL, 507, L59, doi: 10.1086/311680

    work page doi:10.1086/311680 1998

  55. [56]

    H., & Truhlar, D

    Li, Z. H., & Truhlar, D. G. 2008, Journal of Physical Chemistry C, 112, 11109, doi: 10.1021/jp711349v

    work page doi:10.1021/jp711349v 2008

  56. [57]

    2003, ApJ, 591, 1220, doi: 10.1086/375492

    Lodders, K. 2003, ApJ, 591, 1220, doi: 10.1086/375492

    work page doi:10.1086/375492 2003

  57. [58]

    Lodders, K., Palme, H., & Gail, H. P. 2009, Landolt B¨ ornstein, 4B, 712, doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-88055-434

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-540-88055-434 2009

  58. [59]

    2023, MNRAS, 522, 5848, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1336 r-process dust in kilonovae15 Mat´ uˇ ska, J., Sukuba, I., & Urban, J

    Lu, W., & Quataert, E. 2023, MNRAS, 522, 5848, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1336 r-process dust in kilonovae15 Mat´ uˇ ska, J., Sukuba, I., & Urban, J. 2019, Journal of Molecular Modeling, 25, doi: 10.1007/s00894-019-4072-x

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad1336 2023

  59. [60]

    2025, ApJ, 993, 191, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae0736

    Medler, K., Ashall, C., Hoeflich, P., et al. 2025, ApJ, 993, 191, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae0736

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae0736 2025

  60. [61]

    Meikle, W. P. S., Kotak, R., Farrah, D., et al. 2011, ApJ, 732, 109, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/732/2/109

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/732/2/109 2011

  61. [62]

    2011 , month =

    Metzger, B. D., Mart´ ınez-Pinedo, G., Darbha, S., et al. 2010, MNRAS, 406, 2650, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16864.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16864.x 2010

  62. [63]

    Meyer, B. S. 1989, ApJ, 343, 254, doi: 10.1086/167702

    work page doi:10.1086/167702 1989

  63. [64]

    M., Sprouse, T

    Miller, J. M., Sprouse, T. M., Fryer, C. L., et al. 2020, ApJ, 902, 66, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abb4e3 M¨ osta, P., Roberts, L. F., Halevi, G., et al. 2018, ApJ, 864, 171, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aad6ec

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abb4e3 2020

  64. [65]

    Sneppen, A., & Sim, S. A. 2026, MNRAS, 546, stag237, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stag237

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stag237 2026

  65. [66]

    2017, ApJL, 836, L21, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa5dee

    Thielemann, F.-K. 2017, ApJL, 836, L21, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa5dee

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa5dee 2017

  66. [67]

    2003, ApJ, 598, 785, doi: 10.1086/379011

    Nozawa, T., Kozasa, T., Umeda, H., Maeda, K., & Nomoto, K. 2003, ApJ, 598, 785, doi: 10.1086/379011

    work page doi:10.1086/379011 2003

  67. [68]

    1976, Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 33, 45, doi: 10.1016/0012-821X(76)90156-4

    Palme, H., & Wlotzka, F. 1976, Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 33, 45, doi: 10.1016/0012-821X(76)90156-4

    work page doi:10.1016/0012-821x(76)90156-4 1976

  68. [69]

    2017, ApJL, 850, L37, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa9ab9

    Perego, A., Radice, D., & Bernuzzi, S. 2017, ApJL, 850, L37, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa9ab9

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa9ab9 2017

  69. [70]

    2017, Nature, 551, 67, doi: 10.1038/nature24298

    Pian, E., D’Avanzo, P., Benetti, S., et al. 2017, Nature, 551, 67, doi: 10.1038/nature24298

    work page doi:10.1038/nature24298 2017

  70. [71]

    Collapse of Magnetized White Dwarfs as site of Heavy Element Formation and Kilonova Signal

    Pitik, T., Radice, D., Kasen, D., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2602.21291, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2602.21291

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2602.21291 2026

  71. [72]

    2022, MNRAS, 510, 3806, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab3674

    Pognan, Q., Jerkstrand, A., & Grumer, J. 2022, MNRAS, 510, 3806, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab3674

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab3674 2022

  72. [73]

    2026, MNRAS, 547, stag441, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stag441

    Pognan, Q., Kawaguchi, K., Wanajo, S., et al. 2026, MNRAS, 547, stag441, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stag441

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stag441 2026

  73. [74]

    2020, , 491, 1832, 10.1093/mnras/stz3154

    Prantzos, N., Abia, C., Cristallo, S., Limongi, M., & Chieffi, A. 2020, MNRAS, 491, 1832, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz3154

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz3154 2020

  74. [75]

    ´A., & Arcones, A

    Reichert, M., Obergaulinger, M., Eichler, M., Aloy, M. ´A., & Arcones, A. 2021, MNRAS, 501, 5733, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab029

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab029 2021

  75. [76]

    F., Kasen, D., Lee, W

    Roberts, L. F., Kasen, D., Lee, W. H., & Ramirez-Ruiz, E. 2011, ApJL, 736, L21, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/736/1/L21

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/736/1/l21 2011

  76. [77]

    U., Lawler, J

    Roederer, I. U., Lawler, J. E., Sobeck, J. S., et al. 2012, ApJS, 203, 27, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/203/2/27

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/203/2/27 2012

  77. [78]

    U., Lawler, J

    Roederer, I. U., Lawler, J. E., Den Hartog, E. A., et al. 2022, ApJS, 260, 27, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac5cbc

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac5cbc 2022

  78. [79]

    2018, A&A, 615, A132, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201732117

    Rosswog, S., Sollerman, J., Feindt, U., et al. 2018, A&A, 615, A132, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201732117

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201732117 2018

  79. [80]

    2013, ApJ, 776, 107, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/776/2/107

    Sarangi, A., & Cherchneff, I. 2013, ApJ, 776, 107, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/776/2/107

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/776/2/107 2013

  80. [81]

    2017, PhRvD, 96, 123012, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.96.123012

    Shibata, M., Fujibayashi, S., Hotokezaka, K., et al. 2017, PhRvD, 96, 123012, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.96.123012

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.96.123012 2017

Showing first 80 references.