Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Simulating a stellar contact binary merger -- II. Obtaining a light curve

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that the V1309 Sco outburst is reproduced by a 3D SPH merger simulation only when dust forms promptly in the cooling ejecta, and that dust-free models are ruled out.

desk verdict First 3D SPH merger light curve is a real step, but the 'rule out no dust' claim is oversold because the dimming is injected by hand in post-processing. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.06583 v1 pith:HXO52QG7 submitted 2024-12-09 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.GAastro-ph.HE

Roger Hatfull , Natalia Ivanova This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.SRastro-ph.GAastro-ph.HE
keywords luminousrednovaestellarmergerscommonenvelopeevolutionV1309Scosmoothedparticlehydrodynamicssyntheticlightcurvesdustformationradiativetransfer
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper aims to show that the observed outburst of V1309 Sco, the best-observed luminous red nova, can be reproduced by a three-dimensional smoothed-particle-hydrodynamics merger simulation only when the cooling ejecta quickly form dust. The authors model a candidate progenitor binary with a 1.52+0.16 $M_\odot$ configuration, evolve it through plunge-in and ejection with a new flux-limited emission-diffusion radiative transport scheme, and post-process the simulation with a line-of-sight imaging method that produces synthetic light curves and spectrum peak temperatures. Their simulated bolometric light curve passes through the same four stages seen in the real event, and matches the observed plateau and rapid dimming when dust opacity is switched on for material cooler than 1000 K. Runs without dust formation stay bright too long, so the paper concludes that dust-free models of V1309 Sco are ruled out. If correct, this makes prompt dust formation a central ingredient of luminous red nova light curves.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the flux-limited emission-diffusion (FLED) cooling scheme coupled to an observer imaging post-processor. Each SPH particle is treated as an isothermal cloud; its radiative cooling rate is the minimum of the emerging flux $dE_{\rm emerg}/dt$ (with the angular factor $Q(\tau_c)$ from the formal transfer solution), the diffusion-limited flux sampled along 12 icosahedron rays, and the maximum diffusion rate $E_{\rm int}/t_{\rm diff}$. A parallel grid of rays toward an infinitely distant observer attenuates each particle's emitted flux by the accumulated optical depth $e^{-\tau_{i,\rm cell}}$ and integrates the surviving contributions into the observed luminosity $L_{\rm obs}$, its spectral distribution, spectrum peak temperature, and photospheric radius. The dust switch is a post-processing opacity rule that makes particles with $100\,\mathrm{K}<T<1000\,\mathrm{K}$ opaque at $\kappa=1\,\mathrm{cm^2\,g^{-1}}$.

What would settle it

A dust-nucleation calculation applied to the simulated ejecta that shows grains cannot grow within ~20 days after plunge-in under the predicted densities and temperatures would falsify the dust-prescription version of the claim; alternatively, late-time observations of V1309 Sco revealing a bright merged remnant ($\gtrsim 1000\,L_\odot$) would support the dust-free transparency scenario.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a 1.52 $M_\odot$ donor with a 0.16 $M_\odot$ companion at an orbital period near 1.4 days, simulated with StarSmasher and the new FLED radiative transport, produces a bolometric light curve and spectrum peak temperature evolution in good agreement with V1309 Sco. The agreement requires an "aggressive dust formation regime" in the image post-processing: any particle with temperature between 100 K and 1000 K is assigned an opacity of $1\,\mathrm{cm^2\,g^{-1}}$, which makes the ejecta dim sharply about 25 days after plunge-in. Without that dust opacity, the simulated plateau persists and the luminosity declines only gradually to a bright ($\sim 1000\,L_\odot$) merged remnant, which is not what was observed. The paper therefore states that V1309 Sco models that do not assume dust formation are ruled out by the simulations.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is the post-processing dust rule: particles with $100\,\mathrm{K}<T<1000\,\mathrm{K}$ are assigned an opacity of $1\,\mathrm{cm^2\,g^{-1}}$, meaning dust is assumed to form immediately and completely. If dust forms more slowly, in a different temperature range, or with a different opacity, the predicted dimming would differ and the claim that dust-free models are ruled out would no longer be secure.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the central claim is right, dust formation in V1309 Sco must begin within a few weeks of the merger, fast enough to dim the ejecta at about 25 days after plunge-in.
  • Dust-free merger models predict a prolonged plateau and a luminous merged remnant; the absence of such a signal in V1309 Sco means the plateau cutoff is set by dust opacity rather than by the ejecta becoming transparent.
  • The plateau duration and the shape of the dimming are governed by low-temperature opacities, so reproducing LRN light curves requires realistic molecular and dust opacities, not just the gas opacity.
  • Across all simulated progenitor variations the same four stages appear: pre-plunge rise, hot peak, plateau, and dimming, so the method gives a common template for LRN light curves from contact binary mergers.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The paper does not model dust nucleation; extending it with a time-dependent dust formation model would test whether the "immediate dust" assumption is physically realizable in the simulated ejecta, and would predict the onset of the fast decline rather than impose it.
  • If dust formation is indeed the deciding factor, LRNe with hotter or more massive ejecta should show transparency dimming instead: a longer plateau, gradual decline, and a luminous merged remnant, which is an observable discriminator between the two regimes.
  • The imaging method's treatment of radiation as arriving instantly at the observer introduces timing errors of order 10 minutes; for slow transients this is negligible, but for faster ejecta a light-travel-time correction would become relevant.
  • The same FLED-plus-imaging pipeline could be applied to other proposed LRN progenitors to map which initial orbital configurations reproduce observed light curves, turning the V1309 Sco calibration into a general population test.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents a flux-limited emission-diffusion (FLED) radiative cooling implementation in the SPH code StarSmasher, an imaging post-processing method for constructing synthetic light curves, and a parameter study of a 1.52+0.16 Msun V1309 Sco-like merger. It reports that models in which dust opacity is imposed during image post-processing reproduce the observed bolometric light curve, spectrum peak temperature, and photospheric radius evolution, while no-dust models do not; this leads to the abstract claim that V1309 Sco models without dust formation are ruled out.

Significance. If the central claim were fully supported, the paper would provide strong evidence that dust forms in LRN ejecta on week timescales and would introduce a promising new method for producing light curves from 3D SPH merger simulations. The explicit derivations in Section 2, the verification tests (the stationary 15 Msun star, the dynamic ejecta particle, and the 1D comparison with FLD), and the public analysis package are genuine strengths. However, the central claim currently overreaches because the rapid luminosity decline is produced by an ad-hoc post-processing dust opacity rather than by a dust formation model; the paper is therefore best read at this stage as a methodological advance with a tentative, rather than definitive, physical conclusion.

major comments (3)
  1. [§5.2, §7, §9; Figs. 7, 13, 15] The abstract's claim that the simulations 'rule out V1309 Sco models that do not assume dust formation' is not supported by the dust treatment used in the paper. Dust opacity kappa_dust = 1 cm2/g is imposed only during image post-processing on particles with 100 K < T < 1000 K (§5.2); the dynamical simulations do not form dust, and §5.2 states 'It is not clear yet if dust would be able to form.' Section 7 confirms that the sharp dimming is 'purely driven by the dust opacity' and requires that dust form immediately once the temperature falls below 1000 K. This tests one extreme assumption rather than the class of no-dust models, and the conclusion is sensitive to the prescription: MainFP, which uses a dust-containing Planck opacity table in the dynamical run, does not show the sharp decline (Fig. 13). A slower dust-formation timescale, a lower opacity, or a different temperature window could produce a longer plateau or a gradual decline, so the 'rule out' claim needs either a parameter study over kappa_dust, the temperature threshold, and the formation delay, or a substantial softening of the claim.
  2. [§3.4, Eq. (43); §6, Figs. 6, 12] The observed luminosity used for comparison to V1309 Sco is Lobs = 4 Δx Δy Σ F_cell, where the factor 4 assumes the flux measured from one viewing angle equals that from all other directions. The paper itself demonstrates substantial viewing-angle dependence: the flux images at the dimming stage (Fig. 6) are very different among i = 0°, 45°, and 90°, and the flux-weighted expansion velocity differs by roughly a factor of two between edge-on and top-down views (Fig. 12). The comparison in §9 should therefore state which inclination angle is used for the bolometric luminosity and should propagate the inclination spread as a systematic uncertainty; as written, the quantitative agreement with V1309 Sco is partly built on an isotropy assumption that the simulations themselves contradict.
  3. [§4.4, Fig. 5] The one-dimensional verification reports that the FLED escaping flux is 133% of the exact solution in the adopted static profile, while FLD is 62%. Because the comparison to V1309 Sco depends on the absolute luminosity level during the plateau and dimming stages, this potential over-luminosity should be propagated into the uncertainty of the synthetic light curves. As written, the method verification is encouraging, but the possible systematic is not quantified in the final comparison, which matters for the strength of the agreement claimed in §9.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§5.1, Table 3] The opacity comparison text appears garbled: 'MainFP, with Rosseland opacities excluded (PO); MainFR, with Planck opacities excluded (RO); and MainF, with Planck opacities excluded (MAIN)' should be checked; MAIN is the no-dust table, not 'Planck excluded.'
  2. [§3.3, Fig. 2 caption] The typo 'Plank' appears in the text and in the Figure 2 caption and should be 'Planck.'
  3. [Fig. 7 caption] The identification of line styles for the three inclination angles is confusing; please label the curves directly in the figure.
  4. [§5.2, §9] The comparison with V1309 Sco uses a free time shift that aligns the observed maximum with the MainF hot peak; a brief justification of the phase alignment would be useful, since the shifted pre-plunge portion has no direct observational counterpart.
  5. [§5.2] The dust mass estimate sums m_i Z_i over particles with 100 K < T < 1000 K, which implicitly assumes that all metals are locked into dust; this is an upper limit and should be stated explicitly when comparing with the observed dust mass of V1309 Sco.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 5.0 of 10

Partial circularity: the claimed V1309 Sco dimming is imposed by the post-processing dust opacity (kappa_dust=1 cm2/g for 100<T<1000 K), so the dust-necessity conclusion is partly an input; the no-dust exclusion is genuine.

  1. fitted input called prediction [§5.2 (dust opacity input), §7 (role of opacities), §9 (V1309 Sco comparison)]
    "In MainF, some of the outermost particles have cooled to T_i < 1000 K, which is where we use our post processing dust opacities kappa_dust = 1 cm2 g^-1 ... This drop in luminosity is purely driven by the dust opacity and can only be present when dust is formed immediately once the temperature falls below the 1000 K threshold."

    The sharp decline in L_obs that is compared to V1309 Sco is not an emergent prediction of dust formation; it is produced by assigning kappa_dust = 1 cm2/g to particles with 100 K < T < 1000 K during image post-processing, while the dynamical simulation uses a dust-free opacity table (MAIN). The paper explicitly states the drop is 'purely driven by the dust opacity'. The abstract then elevates the scenario comparison to 'Our simulations rule out V1309 Sco models that do not assume dust formation' and the conclusions infer that 'some degree of dust formation is likely necessary'.

full rationale

The central negative claim—that no-dust models are ruled out—rests on genuinely simulated no-dust light curves (opacity table MAIN, kappa=1e-4 for T<3000 K) that fail to reproduce V1309 Sco's rapid decline; this is independent, externally benchmarked content and not circular. However, the positive agreement used to infer that dust formation is necessary is partly constructed: the sharp dimming is generated by assigning kappa_dust=1 cm2/g to particles with 100<T<1000 K only in image post-processing, while the dynamics are run with a dust-free opacity. The paper itself says the drop is 'purely driven by the dust opacity' and can occur only if dust forms immediately at the 1000 K threshold. Thus the key light-curve feature is an input assumption rather than a first-principles prediction, and the strength of the 'rule out' statement exceeds what the single, aggressive dust prescription can support. No load-bearing self-citation or uniqueness-theorem chain is present; the FLED implementation and the no-dust comparisons are independently developed. Overall circularity is partial: score 5.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central light-curve result depends on several choices: the dust opacity applied during image construction, the time shift used to align observations, and the low-temperature opacity tables. The dust prescription is the most important because it produces the dimming that is used to conclude dust is necessary. The initial binary configuration is taken from the literature, not varied.

free parameters (5)
  • Dust opacity kappa_dust = 1 cm2/g
    Applied in post-processing to particles with 100 K < T < 1000 K (Sections 5.2 and 7). The value and temperature window are chosen by hand, not derived from dust physics, and they directly control the sharpness of the dimming.
  • Time shift for V1309 Sco observations = Not stated; varies per simulation
    Observed L and Teff are shifted so the observed maximum L coincides with the simulated hot peak (Figure 7 caption). This is a fitted alignment chosen to make the comparison.
  • Number of cooling rays Nrays = 12 (icosahedron, d=0)
    Controls angular sampling of the radiation field for each particle (Section 2.2). Larger N would be more accurate but more costly.
  • Low-temperature opacity table behavior = MAIN: kappa = 1e-4 cm2/g for T <= 3000 K; PO: Planck; RO: Rosseland
    The dust/no-dust regimes are encoded in these tables (Section 3.3). The key result is sensitive to this choice (Section 7).
  • Cooling update threshold = Delta t/t_diff = 1e-12
    Adopted cutoff below which radiative cooling is ignored (Section 2.3). Affects the energy budget of barely-cooling particles.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Each SPH particle is treated as an isothermal cloud with uniform radiation energy density over its kernel ('fluffy') or over its local radius ('dense').
    Foundation of the cooling-rate derivation in Sections 2.1-3.1; similar to assigning one temperature per mesh cell.
  • domain assumption Local thermodynamic equilibrium, so the source function is the Planck function at the local gas temperature.
    Used in Eq. (3) and throughout; the paper acknowledges limits in optically thin regions (Section 4.4).
  • domain assumption Radiative acceleration is negligible for the dynamics (not included in the momentum equation).
    Post-run check gives radiation acceleration about 1e-4 of gravitational acceleration (Section 10); this may not hold for all mergers.
  • domain assumption Time-independent radiative transfer with v/c << 1; each cooling update uses a quasi-stationary solution.
    Justified by slow ejecta (Section 4.4); leads to ~10 minute light-travel errors.
  • domain assumption The V1309 Sco progenitor is a 1.52 + 0.16 Msun binary at P ~ 1.4 days (Stepień 2011).
    Adopted candidate; donor mass is not varied, so all conclusions are conditional on this configuration (Section 5).
  • ad hoc to paper Dust forms immediately when particles cool to 100-1000 K, with kappa = 1 cm2/g (post-processing only).
    This prescription produces the dimming used to claim dust is required; no dust nucleation/growth is modeled (Sections 5.2, 7, 10).
  • domain assumption The observed flux is the same from all viewing angles (isotropic assumption, factor 4 in Eq. 43).
    Used to convert the single-view image into total luminosity, despite the paper showing angular dependence (Figures 6-7).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Simulating a stellar contact binary merger -- II. Obtaining a light curve." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HXO52QG7

@misc{pith2026241206583,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Simulating a stellar contact binary merger -- II. Obtaining a light curve},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HXO52QG7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.06583}
}
read the original abstract

Luminous Red Novae (LRNe) are enigmatic transient events distinguished by a rapid rise in luminosity, a plateau in luminosity, and spectra which become redder with time. The best-observed system before, during, and after the outburst is V1309 Sco. We model a candidate V1309 Sco progenitor binary configuration (1.52+0.16Msun) using the Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics (SPH) code StarSmasher with a modified energy equation that implements flux-limited emission-diffusion radiative transport in a Lagrangian case. We developed an imaging technique allowing us to capture the flux an observer would measure. In this novel method, the outgoing radiative flux of each SPH particle in the observer's direction is attenuated by other particles along the path to the observer. We investigated how the light curve is affected in various models: with and without dust formation; constant, Planck, or Rosseland mean opacities; different donor star sizes; different companion star masses and types; radiative heating included in our modified energy equation; and different SPH simulation resolutions. The resulting evolution in bolometric luminosity and spectrum peak temperature is in good agreement with V1309 Sco observations. Our simulations rule out V1309 Sco models that do not assume dust formation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.06583 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. A 2D sketch of an SPH particle 𝑖 (red) and another nearby particle 𝑗 (black) separated by distance |®𝑟𝑗 − ®𝑟𝑖 |. We show a ray (black arrow) emerging from particle 𝑖 along direction 𝑅® 𝑠. In the “fluffy” case (solid lines), position 𝑅® 𝑠, 𝑓 is encapsulated by the kernel of particle 𝑗, which has size 2ℎ 𝑗 . However, in the “dense” case (dotted lines), the position 𝑅® 𝑠,𝑑 is not encapsulated, as the particle sizes are… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The three opacity tables (top panels) used in our dynamical simulations are shown in log𝑇, log 𝑅 space. We show how each of our opacity tables are constructed following §3.3 (bottom panel): “10−4 ” is the manually set 10−4 cm2 g −1 region (blue); S03P are Plank opacities from S03 for 𝑇 < 3 000 K (orange); S03R are Rosseland opacities from S03 for 𝑇 < 3 000 K (green); and GS98 (red). We also show the 3.75 < log𝑇 < 4 … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The minimum number of SPH particles 𝑁min in a close￾packed hexagonal lattice required to resolve the photosphere of a star with some radius, given the photospheric depth (equation 34 of Hatfull et al. 2021). All our simulations have 10 ≲ 𝑁nb ≲ 100 and ∼ 105 particles (dashed black line), and thus we expect to be able to resolve the photosphere once the depth is larger than ∼ 0.1 times the radius. 𝑅-band luminosity i… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (14 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: We show the luminosity of an ejecta particle from simu￾lation Polytrope during its transition from the optically thick regime (𝜏 ≫ 1) to the optically thin (𝜏 ≪ 1). Each data point represents a time iteration in the code at which cooling quantities are updated, which h…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The comparison of radiative fluxes obtained using the ex￾act numerical solution of the radiative transfer equation near 𝜏 = 1, the FLD method with a 𝜆-limiter, and the FLED method described in this paper. The radiative fluxes are computed for the following sim￾plified …
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: We show for MainF the observed flux 𝐹cell from our imaging method in §3.4 at various times 𝑡 after the plunge-in at 𝑡plunge from an inclination angle 𝑖 = 90◦ (left; “top down” view on the orbital plane), 𝑖 = 45◦ (middle), and 𝑖 = 0 ◦ (right; “edge on” view). Each image…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The luminosity 𝐿obs as measured by an infinitely far away observer for simulation MainF using the method described in §3.4. In the top panel, dust opacities 𝜅dust = 1 cm2 g −1 are used for particles with 100 < 𝑇𝑖 < 1 000 K. Our standard 𝜅dust = 10−4 cm2 g −1 dust opaci…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: We show the spectral distribution in observed flux from our imaging method in §3.4 at various times 𝑡 − 𝑡plunge in simulation MainF from an inclination angle 𝑖 = 90◦ compared to the blackbody (left panel) and for three inclination angles (right panel). In the left pane…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: We show observed luminosities 𝐿obs,𝑉 (blue), 𝐿obs,𝑅 (orange), and 𝐿obs,𝐼 (green) in the 𝑉-band, 𝑅-band, and 𝐼-band re￾spectively for simulation MainF, as described in §3.4 (Equation 51). In the top panel we use dust opacities 𝜅dust = 1 cm2 g −1 and in the bottom panel …
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: We show the radiative energy losses of ejected SPH particles during the pre-plunge stage in simulation MainF with distance from the companion’s center of mass. The center of mass is obtained using only the SPH particles which are bound to the system and which were bou…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: The “effective" photospheric radius 𝑅ph ≡ (𝐿obs/4𝜋𝜎⟨𝑇sp⟩ 4 ) 1/2 in MainF using dust opacities 𝜅dust = 1 cm2 g −1 as described in §5.2 (top panel) and dustless opacities 𝜅dust = 10−4 cm2 g −1 (bottom panel). We show the V1309 Sco (cyan crosses) photospheric radius 𝑅ph…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: We show the light curves of observed luminosity 𝐿obs (top panel) and total radiative losses into empty space 𝐿cool (bottom panel) for our simulations MainF, MainFP and MainFR. We separate timescales with a vertical axis, where 𝑡 − 𝑡plunge ≤ 50 days is on the left and …
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: We show the image cell flux 𝐹cell as described in Equation (40) for simulations MainF (left), MainFP (middle), and MainFR (right) at 𝑡 − 𝑡plunge ≈ 22 days in “screen space” coordinates 𝑥𝑦, with the observer located at viewing angle 𝑖 = 90◦ (“top down” view on the orbi…
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: We show the spectrum peak temperatures 𝑇sp for simu￾lations MainF, MainFP and MainFR after the plunge-in. Post pro￾cessing dust opacities 𝜅dust = 1 cm2 g −1 are used for MainF only. We exclude from the plot data for which 𝐿obs < 1 𝐿⊙. We show the V1309 Sco (cyan cross…
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: For each of our simulation comparisons in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_16.png]
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: We show the time evolution of the ejected mass 𝑀ej in 𝑀⊙. Each panel corresponds to one of the comparisons in §5. The MainF evolutionary stages are shown as light blue for pre-plunge, light green for hot peak, light orange for plateau, and light red for dimming. The 𝐿…
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: We show the 𝐿obs light curve (top) and spectrum peak temperature 𝑇sp evolution (bottom) for our simulations MainF (blue) and MainF Grand (orange) with dust opacities 𝜅dust = 1 cm2 g −1 used in the post processed images. We omit data from both panels where 𝐿obs < 1 𝐿⊙.…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Hyperaccreting Magnetised Neutron Stars inside Rotating Massive Envelopes: Low-Power Jets and Precursor Flares

    astro-ph.HE 2026-08 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    In 2D GRMHD simulations, magnetised neutron stars hyperaccreting inside massive envelopes can halt accretion above B_surf ~2.3e13 G and launch ~1e46 erg/s precursor jets that still cannot unbind the envelope.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

61 extracted references · 8 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Dust formation in common envelope binary interactions -- II: 3D simulations with self-consistent dust formation

    Addison, H., Blagorodnova, N., Groot, P. J., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 517, 1884, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2685 Bermúdez-Bustamante, L. C., De Marco, O., Siess, L., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2401.03644, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2401.03644

    work page Pith review arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2401.03644 2022

  2. [2]

    2017, ApJ, 834, 107, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/834/2/107

    Blagorodnova, N., Kotak, R., Polshaw, J., et al. 2017, ApJ, 834, 107, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/834/2/107

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/834/2/107 2017

  3. [3]

    2021, A&A, 653, A134, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202140525

    Blagorodnova, N., Klencki, J., Pejcha, O., et al. 2021, A&A, 653, A134, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202140525

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202140525 2021

  4. [4]

    Bond, H. E. 2011, ApJ, 737, 17, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/737/1/17

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/737/1/17 2011

  5. [5]

    E., Bedin, L

    Bond, H. E., Bedin, L. R., Bonanos, A. Z., et al. 2009, ApJL, 695, L154, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/695/2/L154

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/695/2/l154 2009

  6. [6]

    E., Henden, A., Levay, Z

    Bond, H. E., Henden, A., Levay, Z. G., et al. 2003, Nature, 422, 405, doi: 10.1038/nature01508

    doi:10.1038/nature01508 2003

  7. [7]

    1985, PASA, 6, 207, doi: 10.1017/S1323358000018117

    Brookshaw, L. 1985, PASA, 6, 207, doi: 10.1017/S1323358000018117

    doi:10.1017/s1323358000018117 1985

  8. [8]

    2022a, Universe, 8, 493, doi: 10.3390/universe8100493

    Cai, Y., Reguitti, A., Valerin, G., & Wang, X. 2022a, Universe, 8, 493, doi: 10.3390/universe8100493

    doi:10.3390/universe8100493

Show all 61 references
  1. [9]

    Z., Pastorello, A., Fraser, M., et al

    Cai, Y. Z., Pastorello, A., Fraser, M., et al. 2019, A&A, 632, L6, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936749 —. 2022b, A&A, 667, A4, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244393

    2019 doi

  2. [10]

    2024, ApJL, 963, L35, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad2a47

    Chen, Z., & Ivanova, N. 2024, ApJL, 963, L35, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad2a47

    2024 doi

  3. [11]

    Elsender, D., & Bate, M. R. 2024, MNRAS, 529, 4455, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae722

    2024 doi

  4. [12]

    2009, MNRAS, 394, 882, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14373.x

    Forgan, D., Rice, K., Stamatellos, D., & Whitworth, A. 2009, MNRAS, 394, 882, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14373.x

    2009

  5. [13]

    L., Rockefeller, G., & Warren, M

    Fryer, C. L., Rockefeller, G., & Warren, M. S. 2006, ApJ, 643, 292, doi: 10.1086/501493

    2006 doi

  6. [14]

    2010, MNRAS, 402, 105, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15900.x

    Gaburov, E., Lombardi, James C., J., & Portegies Zwart, S. 2010, MNRAS, 402, 105, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15900.x

    2010

  7. [15]

    Gaburov, E., Lombardi, James C., J., Portegies Zwart, S., & Rasio, F. A. 2018, StarSmasher: Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics code for smashing stars and planets, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1805.010

    2018

  8. [16]

    A., & Monaghan, J

    Gingold, R. A., & Monaghan, J. J. 1977, MNRAS, 181, 375, doi: 10.1093/mnras/181.3.375

    1977 doi

  9. [17]

    Grevesse, N., & Sauval, A. J. 1998, SSRv, 85, 161, doi: 10.1023/A:1005161325181

    1998 doi

  10. [18]

    2002, MNRAS, 336, 449, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05752.x

    Ivanova, N. 2002, MNRAS, 336, 449, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05752.x

    2002

  11. [19]

    Hatfull, R. W. M., Ivanova, N., & Lombardi, J. C. 2021, MNRAS, 507, 385, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab2140

    2021 doi

  12. [20]

    R., Fryer, C

    Herant, M., Benz, W., Hix, W. R., Fryer, C. L., & Colgate, S. A. 1994, ApJ, 435, 339, doi: 10.1086/174817

    1994 doi

  13. [21]

    1993, PASP, 105, 1373, doi: 10.1086/133321

    Iben, Jr., I., & Livio, M. 1993, PASP, 105, 1373, doi: 10.1086/133321

    1993 doi

  14. [22]

    L., & Lombardi, J

    Ivanova, N., Justham, S., Avendano Nandez, J. L., & Lombardi, J. C. 2013, Science, 339, 433, doi: 10.1126/science.1225540

    2013 doi

  15. [23]

    Ivanova, N., & Nandez, J. L. A. 2016, MNRAS, 462, 362, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw1676

    2016 doi

  16. [24]

    S., Bauer, E

    Jermyn, A. S., Bauer, E. B., Schwab, J., et al. 2023, ApJS, 265, 15, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/acae8d Kamiński, T., Mason, E., Tylenda, R., & Schmidt, M. R. 2015, A&A, 580, A34, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201526212

    2023 doi

  17. [25]

    Kasliwal, M. M. 2012, PASA, 29, 482, doi: 10.1071/AS11061

    2012 doi

  18. [26]

    M., Kulkarni, S

    Kasliwal, M. M., Kulkarni, S. R., Arcavi, I., et al. 2011, ApJ, 730, 134, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/730/2/134

    2011 doi

  19. [27]

    2000, MNRAS, 315, 713, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2000.03451.x

    Kessel-Deynet, O., & Burkert, A. 2000, MNRAS, 315, 713, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2000.03451.x

    2000

  20. [28]

    2013, Stellar Structure and Evolution, doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-30304-3

    Kippenhahn, R., Weigert, A., & Weiss, A. 2013, Stellar Structure and Evolution, doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-30304-3

    2013 doi

  21. [29]

    R., Klein, R

    Krumholz, M. R., Klein, R. I., McKee, C. F., & Bolstad, J. 2007, ApJ, 667, 626, doi: 10.1086/520791

    2007 doi

  22. [30]

    R., Ofek, E

    Kulkarni, S. R., Ofek, E. O., Rau, A., et al. 2007, Nature, 447, 458, doi: 10.1038/nature05822

    2007 doi

  23. [31]

    A., Pessev, P., Tomov, T., et al

    Kurtenkov, A. A., Pessev, P., Tomov, T., et al. 2015, A&A, 578, L10, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201526564

    2015 doi

  24. [32]

    D., & Pomraning, G

    Levermore, C. D., & Pomraning, G. C. 1981, ApJ, 248, 321, doi: 10.1086/159157

    1981 doi

  25. [33]

    C., McInally, W

    Lombardi, J. C., McInally, W. G., & Faber, J. A. 2015, MNRAS, 447, 25, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu2432

    2015 doi

  26. [34]

    Lucy, L. B. 1977, AJ, 82, 1013, doi: 10.1086/112164 Obtaining a light curve 29

    1977 doi

  27. [35]

    M., Tomaney, A., et al

    Martini, P., Wagner, R. M., Tomaney, A., et al. 1999, AJ, 118, 1034, doi: 10.1086/300951

    1999 doi

  28. [36]

    Matsumoto, T., & Metzger, B. D. 2022, ApJ, 938, 5, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac6269

    2022 doi

  29. [37]

    2007, ApJL, 661, L77, doi: 10.1086/518433

    Mayer, L., Lufkin, G., Quinn, T., & Wadsley, J. 2007, ApJL, 661, L77, doi: 10.1086/518433

    2007 doi

  30. [38]

    1998, in Saas-Fee Advanced Course 27: Computational Methods for Astrophysical Fluid Flow., ed

    Mihalas, D. 1998, in Saas-Fee Advanced Course 27: Computational Methods for Astrophysical Fluid Flow., ed. O. Steiner & A. Gautschy, 161

    1998

  31. [39]

    R., et al

    Mould, J., Cohen, J., Graham, J. R., et al. 1990, ApJL, 353, L35, doi: 10.1086/185702

    1990 doi

  32. [40]

    P., Melis, C., Soszynski, I., et al

    Nicholls, C. P., Melis, C., Soszynski, I., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 431, L33, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slt003

    2013 doi

  33. [41]

    Oxley, S., & Woolfson, M. M. 2003, MNRAS, 343, 900, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06751.x

    2003

  34. [42]

    1976, in IAU Symposium, Vol

    Paczynski, B. 1976, in IAU Symposium, Vol. 73, Structure and Evolution of Close Binary Systems, ed. P. Eggleton, S. Mitton, & J. Whelan, 75

    1976

  35. [43]

    J., et al

    Pastorello, A., Della Valle, M., Smartt, S. J., et al. 2007, Nature, 449, 1, doi: 10.1038/nature06282

    2007 doi

  36. [44]

    2019, A&A, 630, A75, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935999

    Pastorello, A., Mason, E., Taubenberger, S., et al. 2019, A&A, 630, A75, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935999

    2019 doi

  37. [45]

    2021a, A&A, 646, A119, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039952

    Pastorello, A., Fraser, M., Valerin, G., et al. 2021a, A&A, 646, A119, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039952

    doi

  38. [46]

    2021b, A&A, 647, A93, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039953

    Pastorello, A., Valerin, G., Fraser, M., et al. 2021b, A&A, 647, A93, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039953

    doi

  39. [47]

    2011, ApJS, 192, 3, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/192/1/3

    Paxton, B., Bildsten, L., Dotter, A., et al. 2011, ApJS, 192, 3, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/192/1/3

    2011 doi

  40. [48]

    2013, ApJS, 208, 4, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/208/1/4

    Paxton, B., Cantiello, M., Arras, P., et al. 2013, ApJS, 208, 4, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/208/1/4

    2013 doi

  41. [49]

    2015, ApJS, 220, 15, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/220/1/15

    Paxton, B., Marchant, P., Schwab, J., et al. 2015, ApJS, 220, 15, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/220/1/15

    2015 doi

  42. [50]

    B., et al

    Paxton, B., Schwab, J., Bauer, E. B., et al. 2018, ApJS, 234, 34, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aaa5a8

    2018 doi

  43. [51]

    2019, ApJS, 243, 10, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab2241

    Paxton, B., Smolec, R., Schwab, J., et al. 2019, ApJS, 243, 10, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab2241

    2019 doi

  44. [52]

    2003, A&A, 410, 611, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20031279

    Semenov, D., Henning, T., Helling, C., Ilgner, M., & Sedlmayr, E. 2003, A&A, 410, 611, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20031279

    2003 doi

  45. [53]

    Siess, L., Homan, W., Toupin, S., & Price, D. J. 2022, A&A, 667, A75, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243540

    2022 doi

  46. [54]

    L., & Blandford, R

    Smarr, L. L., & Blandford, R. 1976, ApJ, 207, 574, doi: 10.1086/154524 Ste ¸pień, K. 2011, A&A, 531, A18, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201116689

    1976 doi

  47. [55]

    1979, in IAU Symposium, Vol

    Tutukov, A., & Yungelson, L. 1979, in IAU Symposium, Vol. 83, Mass Loss and Evolution of O-Type Stars, ed. P. S. Conti & C. W. H. De Loore, 401–406

    1979

  48. [56]

    2016, A&A, 592, A134, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201527700

    Tylenda, R., & Kamiński, T. 2016, A&A, 592, A134, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201527700

    2016 doi

  49. [57]

    2011, A&A, 528, A114, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201016221 van den Heuvel, E

    Tylenda, R., Hajduk, M., Kamiński, T., et al. 2011, A&A, 528, A114, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201016221 van den Heuvel, E. P. J. 1976, in Structure and Evolution of Close Binary Systems, ed. P. Eggleton, S. Mitton, & J. Whelan, Vol. 73, 35

    2011 doi

  50. [58]

    2006, ApJ, 639, 559, doi: 10.1086/499328

    Viau, S., Bastien, P., & Cha, S.-H. 2006, ApJ, 639, 559, doi: 10.1086/499328

    2006 doi

  51. [59]

    C., & Bate, M

    Whitehouse, S. C., & Bate, M. R. 2004, MNRAS, 353, 1078, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.08131.x

    2004

  52. [60]

    C., Bate, M

    Whitehouse, S. C., Bate, M. R., & Monaghan, J. J. 2005, MNRAS, 364, 1367, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09683.x

    2005

  53. [61]

    2013, ApJ, 777, 23, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/777/1/23

    Zhu, C., Lü, G., & Wang, Z. 2013, ApJ, 777, 23, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/777/1/23

    2013 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.