Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 3 cited by

The Jetted Tidal Disruption Event AT2022cmc: Investigating Connections to the Optical Tidal Disruption Event Population and Spectral Subclasses Through Late-Time Follow-up

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Jetted TDE's thermal glow joins the featureless class

desk verdict Honest, useful late-time study of AT2022cmc; the featureless-TDE link is plausible but rests on a decomposition that deserves a closer look. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.08250 v1 pith:D4FJ33MA submitted 2025-06-09 astro-ph.HE

Erica Hammerstein , S. Bradley Cenko , Igor Andreoni , Panos Charalampopoulos , Ryan Chornock , Raffaella Margutti , Brendan O'Connor , Steve Schulze
show 9 more authors
Jesper Sollerman Sudhanshu Barway Varun Bhalerao Anupama G.C. Harsh Kumar Ester Marini. Diego Paris Daniel A. Perley Andrea Rossi Yuhan Yao
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords tidaldisruptioneventsrelativisticjetsAT2022cmcfeaturelessTDEsopticaltransientsblackbodySEDdecompositionsupermassiveblackholes
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 uses late-time optical imaging and spectroscopy of AT2022cmc, the first jetted tidal disruption event discovered at optical wavelengths, to test whether its thermal emission belongs to the same family as ordinary, non-jetted TDEs. After subtracting the jet's non-thermal power-law component, the residual blackbody component has a luminosity and temperature that sit within the correlations established for optically selected TDEs, and it aligns specifically with the luminous, line-free 'featureless' subclass. The optical spectra of AT2022cmc remain featureless across all epochs, resembling the spectra of known featureless TDEs. If the match is genuine, featureless TDEs could be off-axis jets, and prompt multi-wavelength follow-up of such flares may reveal more hidden jets.

What carries the argument

The central tool is a two-component decomposition of the UV/optical SED: a time-dependent power-law (the non-thermal jet emission, fitted with a fixed spectral index) plus a blackbody (the thermal emission). The paper fits three variants of this model to the light curve (a static blackbody, a time-dependent blackbody with constant temperature, and a non-parametric temperature evolution) and also fits blackbody and power-law continua to individual optical spectra. The comparison set is the 30 optically selected thermal TDEs of Hammerstein et al. (2023a), including the four 'featureless' TDEs that show no emission lines.

What would settle it

Deep imaging or spectroscopy that detects the host galaxy and shows it contributes substantially to the $r$-band light after about 60 days (where the photometry already drops below the $m_r > 24.54$ mag host limit) would break the decomposition; alternatively, ultraviolet coverage that constrains the blackbody peak would test whether the apparent temperature decline is real.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the thermal (blackbody) component of AT2022cmc's UV/optical light curve, once the non-thermal power-law is accounted for, has the same properties as the thermal flares of ordinary TDEs, and specifically matches the featureless subclass. In the model fits, the blackbody luminosity at the reference frequency is around $10^{44.5}\,\mathrm{erg\,s^{-1}\,Hz^{-1}}$ and the mean temperature is around $10^{4.5}\,\mathrm{K}$; the power-law component (spectral index about $-1.3$) dominates early and fades within about 6 days, after which the thermal component takes over. The spectra, from 1.8 to 21.9 rest-frame days, stay featureless and look like the spectra of the four featureless TDEs. The paper also shows that the $r$- and $g$-band light curves steepen at about 52 rest-frame days, roughly 46 days before the X-ray jet shut-off, which it reads as evidence that the optical emission tracks the accretion flow rather than the jet.

Load-bearing premise

The late-time reddening and steep decline of the light curve after about 50 days are interpreted as intrinsic to the transient, not dominated by the still-undetected host galaxy; if the host contributes significantly, the extracted blackbody parameters and the comparison to TDE correlations could change.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The thermal component of AT2022cmc is comparable to thermal-only TDEs, and its parameters match the featureless subclass, implying that jetted and featureless flares share a common thermal engine.
  • The optical light curve breaks at about 52 rest-frame days, roughly 46 days before the X-ray jet shut-off, so the optical emission is tied to the accretion flow rather than the jet itself.
  • Featureless TDEs may be off-axis jetted events, and the paper motivates prompt radio and multi-wavelength follow-up of featureless TDEs to test this possibility.
  • The rate of overluminous TDEs is roughly consistent with the estimate that about 1% of all TDEs produce relativistic jets, so hidden jets could account for the featureless class.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the match is real, a systematic radio survey of featureless TDEs at late times could reveal off-axis jets, turning the roughly 1% jet-production estimate into a directly measured rate.
  • The roughly 46-day gap between the optical break and the X-ray shut-off may be a general signature of jet shut-off; tracking it in more events could measure how quickly the accretion flow responds when the jet ceases.
  • Detecting AT2022cmc's host galaxy and measuring its stellar mass would directly test whether jetted events live in the same massive, red hosts as featureless TDEs.
  • The temperature decline seen in AT2022cmc, unlike the mostly constant or rising temperatures of thermal TDEs, might be a distinguishing feature of jetted events; ultraviolet observations of future jetted TDEs could test this.
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

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. This paper presents new late-time optical photometry and spectroscopy of AT2022cmc, the first optically discovered on-axis jetted tidal disruption event, extending coverage to roughly 160 rest-frame days. The authors fit the UV/optical light curve with three two-component models (power-law plus blackbody) and fit the optical spectra with power-law and blackbody continua. After accounting for the non-thermal power-law component, they find that the thermal component has a peak bolometric blackbody luminosity and temperature that are consistent with correlations among optically selected thermal TDEs and that place AT2022cmc near the TDE-featureless subclass of Hammerstein et al. (2023a). They interpret this as support for a connection between jetted and featureless TDEs.

Significance. If the decomposition is robust, the result is a valuable first step in placing jetted TDEs in the parameter space of the optical TDE population and directly connects an on-axis jet to the proposed featureless off-axis population. The paper is generally careful, provides a new late-time dataset, and explicitly acknowledges the main observational limitations (sparse UV coverage, non-detected host). The comparison is not circular, since it places a new object on previously published correlation planes rather than deriving correlations from the same data. However, the blackbody parameters entering that placement are subject to degeneracies in the two-component decomposition that are not fully resolved, so the central claim requires additional robustness tests.

major comments (4)
  1. [§3.2, Table 2; §4.1, Table 3] The light-curve fits in Models 2 and 3 assume a single, time-independent power-law spectral index and set the prior to α ∈ [−10, 0] in Table 2. However, the spectral continuum fits in Table 3 show α evolving from −0.74 at 1.8 days to +0.44 and +0.46 at 6.4 and 9.1 days, and +0.04 at 21.9 days. With α constrained to be negative, any blue non-thermal component at later epochs cannot be represented by the power-law term and will be absorbed into the blackbody component, directly biasing the log(L_BB,ν0) and log(T0) values that are plotted in Figure 10. The posterior α ≈ −1.1 in Table 4 is inconsistent with the spectroscopically measured positive values at the same epochs. I request a test in which the power-law index is time-dependent, or at least free over a symmetric range (e.g., α ∈ [−5, 5]) for Models 2 and 3, with the resulting blackbody parameters and Figure 10 placement reported.
  2. [§4.2, Figure 9; §5, Figure 10] The paper states that UV observations are very limited and that the late-time blackbody temperature is not well constrained without them. Since the featureless-class comparison in Figure 10 uses the mean temperature T0 and the peak bolometric luminosity from Model 2, the authors should quantify how the sparse UV sampling and the assumed temperature model affect the uncertainty on these quantities. As it stands, the overlap with the TDE-featureless region in the temperature and luminosity panels of Figure 10 could partly reflect the adopted model priors rather than the data; a quantitative sensitivity test (e.g., re-fitting with the temperature free per epoch and with different UV weightings) is needed to support the central claim.
  3. [§2.1, Figure 1 caption; §3.2] Figure 1 states that the magnitudes are not corrected for Galactic extinction, while Section 3.1 states that the spectra are corrected for Galactic extinction prior to fitting. The light-curve fitting in Section 3.2 does not mention any dereddening of the photometry. If the UV/optical light-curve fits use uncorrected magnitudes, the derived blackbody temperature and luminosity in Table 4, and hence the placement in Figure 10, will be systematically biased by extinction. Please state the adopted E(B−V) value and either correct the photometry before fitting or demonstrate that the extinction is negligible for the bands used.
  4. [§2.1, Figure 2 caption; §5] The manuscript acknowledges in the Figure 2 caption that the late-time reddening may be due to a larger host contribution and that the r-band light curve drops below the host limit (m_r > 24.54 mag) around 60 days, making host contamination plausible. Section 5 also notes that it is difficult to discern whether the late-time evolution is intrinsic or host-related. This affects the broken power-law fits in Table 5 and the late-time portions of the Model 2 and 3 fits used for the decay timescale and temperature evolution. I recommend including a host-galaxy template or constant-flux component in the light-curve fits, or explicitly restricting the thermal-parameter comparison to epochs before host contamination becomes significant, to demonstrate that the decay timescale and temperature evolution are robust.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Table 3] The entry for Keck+LRIS at 21.9 days lists log(F_pl/erg s−1 Hz−1) = 8.896 ± 0.002, while the text and the other entries are around 29.6; this appears to be a typo for 28.896, and should be corrected.
  2. [Figure 10 caption; §5 text] The Figure 10 caption says the parameters are from Model 1, but the text in Section 5 says they are from Model 2. Since Model 1 has no rise or decay times for the blackbody component, the caption should refer to Model 2.
  3. [Table 6] The g-band observation at MJD 59767.91 has eMag = 99.0; the manuscript does not state how this value is treated in the light-curve fits (e.g., excluded, clipped, or downweighted), and this should be clarified.
  4. [Throughout] The paper repeatedly compares AT2022cmc with the Hammerstein et al. (2023a) sample, and several authors are co-authors on both works. A short sentence stating that the comparison uses the published sample and definitions without modification would help avoid any appearance of circularity.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: AT2022cmc's thermal parameters are fitted and then compared to a published external sample; the featureless-class self-citation is context, not a construction.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation is: (i) new late-time photometry and spectroscopy of AT2022cmc; (ii) two-component light-curve fits (time-dependent power-law plus blackbody) that produce thermal parameters; and (iii) comparison of those parameters with the published ZTF TDE sample and the TDE-featureless subclass. Step (iii) is a placement against external data, not a prediction derived from the correlations: the correlations from Hammerstein et al. (2023a) serve as a reference frame and are not fed back into the light-curve fits. The featureless class was defined in a same-first-author paper, but its definition is independent of AT2022cmc and is corroborated by other works cited here (e.g., Yao et al. 2023; Mummery et al. 2024); the present paper's new spectrum and fits do not re-derive the class from AT2022cmc. The main threats to the thermal-component extraction are model dependence and data limitations, which the paper explicitly acknowledges: the light-curve power-law index is held fixed with a prior alpha in [-10,0] (Table 2), the temperature grid is poorly constrained without UV coverage (Section 4.2 and Figure 9 caption), and the late-time reddening may include an undetected host (Figure 2 caption). These are correctness and robustness concerns, not cases where a claimed result equals an input by construction. No equation in the paper reduces to another by definition, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. Therefore no concrete circular step meets the quoted-equation standard; the only mild issue is the recurring self-citation to the defining featureless-TDE sample, which is not load-bearing in a circular sense.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities. Its central claim depends on the assumed two-component spectral decomposition, the assumption that host light is negligible at most epochs, and the accuracy of the comparison sample's published parameters. The main free parameters are the blackbody and power-law fit parameters, which are fitted to the data.

free parameters (5)
  • Power-law spectral index alpha (in light curve fits) = -1.30 to -1.11 depending on model
    Fixed in some fits, fitted in others; it is a free parameter that controls the non-thermal component shape. The early-time spectral index is needed to separate the power-law from the blackbody.
  • Blackbody temperature T0 (mean temperature in Models 1 and 2) = log T0/K = 4.53 to 4.57
    A free parameter in the fits; the comparison to the featureless class relies on this value. It is not derived from first principles.
  • Peak blackbody luminosity L_BB,nu0 = log L_BB,nu0/erg/s = 44.41 to 44.46
    A free parameter in all three light curve models; it is compared to the TDE sample correlations.
  • Rise and decay timescales (sigma_BB, tau_BB, beta_rise, beta_decay) = sigma_BB ~ 10^1.06 days, tau_BB ~ 10^1.48-1.53 days, beta_rise and beta_decay vary
    These are free parameters in the light curve fits, with broad priors. The rise time is poorly constrained due to sparse data.
  • Broken power-law indices and break time for late-time light curve = t_break ~ 52 days, alpha_1 ~ 0.9-1.0, alpha_2 ~ 5.1-5.4
    Fit to the r- and g-band light curves at t >= 20 days; alpha_2 is only constrained by a few points and has large uncertainties.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The UV/optical emission can be decomposed into a power-law (non-thermal) component plus a blackbody (thermal) component.
    This decomposition is introduced in Section 3.2 (Equations 2 and 3) and is central to extracting the thermal properties. The paper acknowledges it cannot fully capture the continuum (Section 4.1), but the comparison to the TDE sample relies on it.
  • domain assumption The host galaxy contribution is negligible for the majority of the light curve.
    Section 2.1 and Figure 2 caption note the host is not detected (m_r > 24.54) and the r-band drops below this limit around 60 days; the late-time reddening may be host contamination. The extracted thermal parameters at late times depend on this assumption.
  • standard math The comparison sample light curve parameters from Hammerstein et al. (2023a) are accurate and applicable.
    The paper draws the comparison sample and light curve fits from Hammerstein et al. (2023a). Any systematic errors in that sample propagate into the comparison.
  • domain assumption The redshift z=1.193 is correct.
    All rest-frame quantities and absolute luminosities depend on the redshift, taken from Tanvir et al. (2022), as stated in Section 1.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The Jetted Tidal Disruption Event AT2022cmc: Investigating Connections to the Optical Tidal Disruption Event Population and Spectral Subclasses Through Late-Time Follow-up." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/D4FJ33MA

@misc{pith2026250608250,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The Jetted Tidal Disruption Event AT2022cmc: Investigating Connections to the Optical Tidal Disruption Event Population and Spectral Subclasses Through Late-Time Follow-up},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/D4FJ33MA}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.08250}
}
abstract

AT2022cmc is the first on-axis jetted tidal disruption event (TDE) to be discovered at optical wavelengths. The optically bright nature of AT2022cmc presents an unprecedented opportunity to place this jetted TDE in the context of the larger optically selected thermal TDE population and explore potential connections to optical TDE subclasses, particularly the class of luminous TDEs that lack optical spectral features. In this work we present late-time optical observations of AT2022cmc, both imaging and spectroscopy, that extend the optical dataset to $\sim 160$ days from the first detection in the observed frame. The light curve clearly evolves from red to blue, which we interpret as a transition from a non-thermally dominated spectral energy distribution (SED) to thermally dominated SED. By accounting for the non-thermal emission evident in the optical SED at early times, we extract the properties of the thermal emission and compare to a sample of optically selected thermal TDEs. We find that the properties of AT2022cmc are consistent with previous correlations found for the evolution and properties of thermal TDEs, with the thermal properties of AT2022cmc aligning with the class of featureless and luminous TDEs. The confirmation of this similarity motivates the importance of prompt and multi-wavelength follow-up of featureless and luminous TDEs in order to further explore the connection they have with jetted TDEs.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.08250 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. UV and optical light curve of AT 2022cmc in the observed-frame. The original discovery light curve published in I. Andreoni et al. (2022) covers the first ∼35 days since discovery (observed frame) and is indicated by the gray shading. Here we present additional observations that extend the light curve up to ∼160 days since first detection. We show the 1-σ band for a Gaussian process regression for the r-band data. M… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The g − r light curve estimated from Gaussian process regression for both the g- and r-bands. The shaded region represents the 1-σ band and we mark g − r = 0 with the dashed line. The light curve evolves from red to blue (i.e., g − r ≲ 0) rapidly and remains fairly blue until ∼ 50 days, after which the light curve significantly reddens. This may be due to a larger host contribution relative to the fad￾ing thermal TD… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Left: Optical spectra of AT 2022cmc from I. Andreoni et al. (2022) with an additional spectrum from Keck/LRIS at ∆t = 21.9 days (rest-frame), presented here for the first time. The spectra cover both the red and blue phases of the light curve, with the red component dominating until ∼ 5 days rest-frame, but remain featureless despite the clear evolution in the continuum. The absorption line near 3500 ˚A in the AT 20… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The blackbody (orange line) and power-law (blue line) fits for AT 2022cmc described in Section 3.1. The early-time (∆t ≲ 2 days) AT 2022cmc spectra are well-described by a red power-law continuum, consistent with the red phase of the light curve, while the late-time (∆…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The blackbody (orange line) and power-law (blue line) fits for the featureless TDEs from E. Hammerstein et al. (2023a), including contribution from the host SED. The power-law fits are mostly inconsistent with the non-thermal emission that is seen for AT 2022cmc, in th…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The evolution of the blackbody temperature TBB and the power-law spectral index α from the spectrum con￾tinuum fits (circles). We also show the results from fitting the SED derived from the photometry (squares) There is a clear evolution in the power-law spectral index…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: In [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_7.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Evolution of the blackbody temperature from Model 3 with AT 2022cmc represented by the solid blue line, the featureless TDEs represented by the dashed black lines, and other thermal TDEs as the gray solid lines. The thermal TDEs and the featureless TDEs show a variety …
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Evolution of the SED starting from peak (t = tpeak) until the ∼last epoch of observations (rest-frame) in order of Model 1 (top), Model 2 (middle), and Model 3 (bottom). For each panel, we show light curve data points for t − tpeak ≈ 1, 3, 11, 60 days. All SEDs are in …
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Selected light curve parameters from Model 1 for the 30 TDEs from ZTF (gray circles, black diamonds indicate TDE-featurless; E. Hammerstein et al. 2023a) and AT 2022cmc (blue triangle). The rise and decay times for the blackbody component are much shorter for AT 2022c…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. The day-long, repeating GRB 250702BDE / EP250702a: A unique extragalactic transient

    astro-ph.HE 2025-07 conditional novelty 8.0 of 10

    GRB 250702BDE is the first extragalactic gamma-ray burst observed to repeat, with three triggers spaced by a near-integer interval and a likely low-redshift host galaxy.

  2. AT2019ijn: a fast-rising, slow-decaying blue optical transient with exceptionally bright radio emission

    astro-ph.HE 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    AT2019ijn combines LFBOT-like fast optical rise and blue color with slow decay and radio luminosity peaking late at 2e31 erg/s/Hz, best fit as an off-axis jetted IMBH TDE.

  3. Optically Overluminous Tidal Disruption Events: Outflow Properties and Implications for Extremely Relativistic Disruptions

    astro-ph.HE 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Radio observations of eight overluminous tidal disruption events find no off-axis jets, and a 2.1 sigma hint that such events are brighter in radio than fainter TDEs.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

68 extracted references · 8 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eprint howpublished institution journal key month number organization pages publisher school series title misctitle type volume year version url label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts ...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION format.url url empty "" new.block "" url * "" * if FUNCTION format.eprint eprint empty "" archivePrefix empty "" archivePrefix "arXiv" = new.block " " eprint * " " * new.block " " eprint * " " * if if if FUNCTION format.doi doi empty "" " " doi * " " * if FUNCTION format.pid doi empty eprint empty ur...

  3. [3]

    i&Fߜ VYZS?=e obd1c E ( G]Ũ b 1ʴ!( q a #^ /CA [fw O[= o: :w,?8 V r|ѝyF LaNrO Q/D?9 E7h)af( 6>

    thebibliography [1] 20pt to REFERENCES 6pt =0pt \@twocolumntrue 12pt -12pt 10pt plus 3pt =0pt =0pt =1pt plus 1pt =0pt =0pt -12pt =13pt plus 1pt =20pt =13pt plus 1pt \@M =10000 =-1.0em =0pt =0pt 0pt =0pt =1.0em @enumiv\@empty 10000 10000 `\.\@m \@noitemerr \@latex@warning Empty `thebibliography' environment \@ifnextchar \@reference \@latexerr Missing key o...

    arXiv 2012

  4. [4]

    W., Perley , D

    Andreoni , I., Coughlin , M. W., Perley , D. A., et al. 2022, title A very luminous jet from the disruption of a star by a massive black hole , , 612, 430, 10.1038/s41586-022-05465-8

    doi:10.1038/s41586-022-05465-8 2022

  5. [5]

    D., Barbier , L

    Barthelmy , S. D., Barbier , L. M., Cummings , J. R., et al. 2005, title The Burst Alert Telescope (BAT) on the SWIFT Midex Mission , , 120, 143, 10.1007/s11214-005-5096-3

    doi:10.1007/s11214-005-5096-3 2005

  6. [6]

    C., Kulkarni , S

    Bellm , E. C., Kulkarni , S. R., Graham , M. J., et al. 2019, title The Zwicky Transient Facility: System Overview, Performance, and First Results , , 131, 018002, 10.1088/1538-3873/aaecbe

    doi:10.1088/1538-3873/aaecbe 2019

  7. [7]

    2011, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

    Bertin , E. 2011, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 442, Automated Morphometry with SExtractor and PSFEx , 435

    work page 2011

  8. [8]

    1996, title SExtractor: Software for source extraction

    Bertin , E., & Arnouts , S. 1996, title SExtractor: Software for source extraction. , , 117, 393, 10.1051/aas:1996164

    doi:10.1051/aas:1996164 1996

Show all 68 references
  1. [9]

    2002, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

    Bertin , E., Mellier , Y., Radovich , M., et al. 2002, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 281, The TERAPIX Pipeline , 228

    2002

  2. [10]

    S., Giannios , D., Metzger , B

    Bloom , J. S., Giannios , D., Metzger , B. D., et al. 2011, title A Possible Relativistic Jetted Outburst from a Massive Black Hole Fed by a Tidally Disrupted Star , Science, 333, 203, 10.1126/science.1207150

    2011 doi

  3. [11]

    C., Levan , A

    Brown , G. C., Levan , A. J., Stanway , E. R., et al. 2015, title Swift J1112.2-8238: a candidate relativistic tidal disruption flare , , 452, 4297, 10.1093/mnras/stv1520

    2015 doi

  4. [12]

    C., Levan , A

    Brown , G. C., Levan , A. J., Stanway , E. R., et al. 2017, title Late-time observations of the relativistic tidal disruption flare candidate Swift J1112.2-8238 , , 472, 4469, 10.1093/mnras/stx2193

    2017 doi

  5. [13]

    N., Kennea , J

    Burrows , D. N., Kennea , J. A., Ghisellini , G., et al. 2011, title Relativistic jet activity from the tidal disruption of a star by a massive black hole , , 476, 421, 10.1038/nature10374

    2011 doi

  6. [14]

    D., et al

    Cendes , Y., Berger , E., Alexander , K. D., et al. 2023, title Ubiquitous Late Radio Emission from Tidal Disruption Events , arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2308.13595, 10.48550/arXiv.2308.13595

    2023 doi arXiv

  7. [15]

    B., Krimm , H

    Cenko , S. B., Krimm , H. A., Horesh , A., et al. 2012, title Swift J2058.4+0516: Discovery of a Possible Second Relativistic Tidal Disruption Flare? , , 753, 77, 10.1088/0004-637X/753/1/77

    2012 doi

  8. [16]

    C., Magnier , E

    Chambers , K. C., Magnier , E. A., Metcalfe , N., et al. 2016, title The Pan-STARRS1 Surveys , ArXiv e-prints. 1612.05560

    2016 arXiv

  9. [17]

    B., et al

    Charalampopoulos , P., Leloudas , G., Malesani , D. B., et al. 2022, title A detailed spectroscopic study of tidal disruption events , , 659, A34, 10.1051/0004-6361/202142122

    2022 doi

  10. [18]

    C., Roth , N., Ramirez-Ruiz , E., & Miller , M

    Dai , L., McKinney , J. C., Roth , N., Ramirez-Ruiz , E., & Miller , M. C. 2018, title A Unified Model for Tidal Disruption Events , , 859, L20, 10.3847/2041-8213/aab429

    2018 doi

  11. [19]

    2020, title Jets from Tidal Disruption Events , , 89, 101538, 10.1016/j.newar.2020.101538

    De Colle , F., & Lu , W. 2020, title Jets from Tidal Disruption Events , , 89, 101538, 10.1016/j.newar.2020.101538

    2020

  12. [20]

    D., et al

    Eftekhari , T., Tchekhovskoy , A., Alexander , K. D., et al. 2024, title Late-time X-Ray Observations of the Jetted Tidal Disruption Event AT2022cmc: The Relativistic Jet Shuts Off , , 974, 149, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad72ea

    2024 doi

  13. [21]

    S., Paris , D., et al

    Fontana , A., Dunlop , J. S., Paris , D., et al. 2014, title The Hawk-I UDS and GOODS Survey (HUGS): Survey design and deep K-band number counts , , 570, A11, 10.1051/0004-6361/201423543

    2014 doi

  14. [22]

    W., Lang , D., & Goodman , J

    Foreman-Mackey , D., Hogg , D. W., Lang , D., & Goodman , J. 2013, title emcee: The MCMC Hammer , , 125, 306, 10.1086/670067

    2013 doi

  15. [23]

    Frank , J., & Rees , M. J. 1976, title Effects of massive black holes on dense stellar systems. , , 176, 633, 10.1093/mnras/176.3.633

    1976 doi

  16. [24]

    2004, title The Swift Gamma-Ray Burst Mission , , 611, 1005, 10.1086/422091

    Gehrels , N., Chincarini , G., Giommi , P., et al. 2004, title The Swift Gamma-Ray Burst Mission , , 611, 1005, 10.1086/422091

    2004 doi

  17. [25]

    2021, title Tidal Disruption Events , arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2104.14580

    Gezari , S. 2021, title Tidal Disruption Events , arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2104.14580. 2104.14580

    2021 arXiv

  18. [26]

    2012, title An ultraviolet-optical flare from the tidal disruption of a helium-rich stellar core , , 485, 217, 10.1038/nature10990

    Gezari , S., Chornock , R., Rest , A., et al. 2012, title An ultraviolet-optical flare from the tidal disruption of a helium-rich stellar core , , 485, 217, 10.1038/nature10990

    2012 doi

  19. [27]

    J., Kulkarni , S

    Graham , M. J., Kulkarni , S. R., Bellm , E. C., et al. 2019, title The Zwicky Transient Facility: Science Objectives , , 131, 078001, 10.1088/1538-3873/ab006c

    2019 doi

  20. [28]

    2014, title PS1-10jh: The Disruption of a Main-sequence Star of Near-solar Composition , , 783, 23, 10.1088/0004-637X/783/1/23

    Guillochon , J., Manukian , H., & Ramirez-Ruiz , E. 2014, title PS1-10jh: The Disruption of a Main-sequence Star of Near-solar Composition , , 783, 23, 10.1088/0004-637X/783/1/23

    2014 doi

  21. [29]

    Guolo , M., Gezari , S., Yao , Y., et al. 2023, title A systematic analysis of the X-ray emission in optically selected tidal disruption events: observational evidence for the unification of the optically and X-ray selected populations , arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2308.13019, 10.48...

    2023 doi arXiv

  22. [30]

    2021, title Tidal Disruption Event Hosts Are Green and Centrally Concentrated: Signatures of a Post-merger System , , 908, L20, 10.3847/2041-8213/abdcb4

    Hammerstein , E., Gezari , S., van Velzen , S., et al. 2021, title Tidal Disruption Event Hosts Are Green and Centrally Concentrated: Signatures of a Post-merger System , , 908, L20, 10.3847/2041-8213/abdcb4

    2021 doi

  23. [31]

    2023 a , title The Final Season Reimagined: 30 Tidal Disruption Events from the ZTF-I Survey , , 942, 9, 10.3847/1538-4357/aca283

    Hammerstein , E., van Velzen , S., Gezari , S., et al. 2023 a , title The Final Season Reimagined: 30 Tidal Disruption Events from the ZTF-I Survey , , 942, 9, 10.3847/1538-4357/aca283

    2023 doi

  24. [32]

    B., Gezari , S., et al

    Hammerstein , E., Cenko , S. B., Gezari , S., et al. 2023 b , title Integral Field Spectroscopy of 13 Tidal Disruption Event Hosts from the Zwicky Transient Facility Survey , , 957, 86, 10.3847/1538-4357/acfb84

    2023 doi

  25. [33]

    M., Green , R

    Hill , J. M., Green , R. F., Slagle , J. H., et al. 2008, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 7012, Ground-based and Airborne Telescopes II, ed. L. M. Stepp & R. Gilmozzi , 701203, 10.1117/12.790065

    2008 doi

  26. [34]

    Hills , J. G. 1975, title Possible power source of Seyfert galaxies and QSOs , , 254, 295, 10.1038/254295a0

    1975 doi

  27. [35]

    T., Holoien , T

    Hinkle , J. T., Holoien , T. W. S., Shappee , B. J., et al. 2020, title Examining a Peak-luminosity/Decline-rate Relationship for Tidal Disruption Events , , 894, L10, 10.3847/2041-8213/ab89a2

    2020 doi

  28. [36]

    2016, title Prompt Radiation and Mass Outflows from the Stream-Stream Collisions of Tidal Disruption Events , , 830, 125, 10.3847/0004-637X/830/2/125

    Jiang , Y.-F., Guillochon , J., & Loeb , A. 2016, title Prompt Radiation and Mass Outflows from the Stream-Stream Collisions of Tidal Disruption Events , , 830, 125, 10.3847/0004-637X/830/2/125

    2016 doi

  29. [37]

    1999, title The giant X-ray outbursts in NGC 5905 and IC 3599:() hfill Follow-up observations and outburst scenarios , , 343, 775

    Komossa , S., & Bade , N. 1999, title The giant X-ray outbursts in NGC 5905 and IC 3599:() hfill Follow-up observations and outburst scenarios , , 343, 775. astro-ph/9901141

    1999 arXiv

  30. [38]

    C., et al

    Kumar , H., Bhalerao , V., Anupama , G. C., et al. 2022 a , title India's First Robotic Eye for Time-domain Astrophysics: The GROWTH-India Telescope , , 164, 90, 10.3847/1538-3881/ac7bea

    2022 doi

  31. [39]

    C., et al

    Kumar , H., Bhalerao , V., Anupama , G. C., et al. 2022 b , title GROWTH on S190426c II: GROWTH-India Telescope search for an optical counterpart with a custom image reduction and candidate vetting pipeline , , 516, 4517, 10.1093/mnras/stac2516

    2022 doi

  32. [40]

    L., & Foley , R

    Law-Smith , J., Ramirez-Ruiz , E., Ellison , S. L., & Foley , R. J. 2017, title Tidal Disruption Event Host Galaxies in the Context of the Local Galaxy Population , , 850, 22, 10.3847/1538-4357/aa94c7

    2017 doi

  33. [41]

    J., Tanvir , N

    Levan , A. J., Tanvir , N. R., Cenko , S. B., et al. 2011, title An Extremely Luminous Panchromatic Outburst from the Nucleus of a Distant Galaxy , Science, 333, 199, 10.1126/science.1207143

    2011 doi

  34. [42]

    J., Tanvir , N

    Levan , A. J., Tanvir , N. R., Brown , G. C., et al. 2016, title Late Time Multi-wavelength Observations of Swift J1644+5734: A Luminous Optical/IR Bump and Quiescent X-Ray Emission , , 819, 51, 10.3847/0004-637X/819/1/51

    2016 doi

  35. [43]

    1997, title Optical Appearance of the Debris of a Star Disrupted by a Massive Black Hole , , 489, 573

    Loeb , A., & Ulmer , A. 1997, title Optical Appearance of the Debris of a Star Disrupted by a Massive Black Hole , , 489, 573

    1997

  36. [44]

    2020, title Self-intersection of the fallback stream in tidal disruption events , , 492, 686, 10.1093/mnras/stz3405

    Lu , W., & Bonnerot , C. 2020, title Self-intersection of the fallback stream in tidal disruption events , , 492, 686, 10.1093/mnras/stz3405

    2020 doi

  37. [45]

    2012, title The Tidal Disruption of Giant Stars and their Contribution to the Flaring Supermassive Black Hole Population , , 757, 134, 10.1088/0004-637X/757/2/134

    MacLeod , M., Guillochon , J., & Ramirez-Ruiz , E. 2012, title The Tidal Disruption of Giant Stars and their Contribution to the Flaring Supermassive Black Hole Population , , 757, 134, 10.1088/0004-637X/757/2/134

    2012 doi

  38. [46]

    Masterson , M., De , K., Panagiotou , C., et al. 2024, title A New Population of Mid-infrared-selected Tidal Disruption Events: Implications for Tidal Disruption Event Rates and Host Galaxy Properties , , 961, 211, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad18bb

    2024 doi

  39. [47]

    2024, title Fundamental scaling relationships revealed in the optical light curves of tidal disruption events , , 527, 2452, 10.1093/mnras/stad3001

    Mummery , A., van Velzen , S., Nathan , E., et al. 2024, title Fundamental scaling relationships revealed in the optical light curves of tidal disruption events , , 527, 2452, 10.1093/mnras/stad3001

    2024 doi

  40. [48]

    B., Cohen , J

    Oke , J. B., Cohen , J. G., Carr , M., et al. 1995, title The Keck Low-Resolution Imaging Spectrometer , , 107, 375, 10.1086/133562

    1995 doi

  41. [49]

    2022, title ZTF22aaajecp/AT2022cmc: NICER X-ray detection , GRB Coordinates Network, 31601, 1

    Pasham , D., Gendreau , K., Arzoumanian , Z., & Cenko , B. 2022, title ZTF22aaajecp/AT2022cmc: NICER X-ray detection , GRB Coordinates Network, 31601, 1

    2022

  42. [50]

    R., Cenko , S

    Pasham , D. R., Cenko , S. B., Levan , A. J., et al. 2015, title A Multiwavelength Study of the Relativistic Tidal Disruption Candidate Swift J2058.4+0516 at Late Times , , 805, 68, 10.1088/0004-637X/805/1/68

    2015 doi

  43. [51]

    R., Lucchini , M., Laskar , T., et al

    Pasham , D. R., Lucchini , M., Laskar , T., et al. 2023, title The Birth of a Relativistic Jet Following the Disruption of a Star by a Cosmological Black Hole , Nature Astronomy, 7, 88, 10.1038/s41550-022-01820-x

    2023 doi

  44. [52]

    Perley , D. A. 2022, title ZTF22aaajecp/AT2022cmc: VLA radio detection , GRB Coordinates Network, 31592, 1

    2022

  45. [53]

    A., Ho , A

    Perley , D. A., Ho , A. Y. Q., Petitpas , G., & Keating , G. 2022, title ZTF22aaajecb/AT2022cmc: Submillimeter Array detection , GRB Coordinates Network, 31627, 1

    2022

  46. [54]

    M., & Shiokawa , H

    Piran , T., Svirski , G., Krolik , J., Cheng , R. M., & Shiokawa , H. 2015, title ‧Disk Formation Versus Disk Accretion What Powers Tidal Disruption Events? , , 806, 164, 10.1088/0004-637X/806/2/164

    2015 doi

  47. [55]

    S., Fender , R., et al

    Rhodes , L., Bright , J. S., Fender , R., et al. 2023, title Day-time-scale variability in the radio light curve of the Tidal Disruption Event AT2022cmc: confirmation of a highly relativistic outflow , , 521, 389, 10.1093/mnras/stad344

    2023 doi

  48. [56]

    2021, title First tidal disruption events discovered by SRG/eROSITA: X-ray/optical properties and X-ray luminosity function at z < 0.6 , , 508, 3820, 10.1093/mnras/stab2843

    Sazonov , S., Gilfanov , M., Medvedev , P., et al. 2021, title First tidal disruption events discovered by SRG/eROSITA: X-ray/optical properties and X-ray luminosity function at z < 0.6 , , 508, 3820, 10.1093/mnras/stab2843

    2021 doi

  49. [57]

    J., Prieto , J

    Shappee , B. J., Prieto , J. L., Grupe , D., et al. 2014, title The Man behind the Curtain: X-Rays Drive the UV through NIR Variability in the 2013 Active Galactic Nucleus Outburst in NGC 2617 , , 788, 48, 10.1088/0004-637X/788/1/48

    2014 doi

  50. [58]

    M., Foley , R

    Silverman , J. M., Foley , R. J., Filippenko , A. V., et al. 2012, title Berkeley Supernova Ia Program - I. Observations, data reduction and spectroscopic sample of 582 low-redshift Type Ia supernovae , , 425, 1789, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21270.x

    2012

  51. [59]

    J., Ravi , V., Dong , D

    Somalwar , J. J., Ravi , V., Dong , D. Z., et al. 2025, title VLASS Tidal Disruption Events with Optical Flares. I. The Sample and a Comparison to Optically Selected TDEs , , 982, 163, 10.3847/1538-4357/adba4f

    2025 doi

  52. [60]

    2008, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol

    Speziali , R., Di Paola , A., Giallongo , E., et al. 2008, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 7014, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy II, ed. I. S. McLean & M. M. Casali , 70144T, 10.1117/12.790132

    2008 doi

  53. [61]

    A., Smith , R

    Steele , I. A., Smith , R. J., Rees , P. C., et al. 2004, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 5489, Ground-based Telescopes, ed. J. Oschmann , Jacobus M., 679--692, 10.1117/12.551456

    2004 doi

  54. [62]

    R., de Ugarte Postigo , A., Izzo , L., et al

    Tanvir , N. R., de Ugarte Postigo , A., Izzo , L., et al. 2022, title ZTF22aaajecp/AT2022cmc: VLT/X-shooter redshift , GRB Coordinates Network, 31602, 1

    2022

  55. [63]

    D., Giannios , D., & Kelley , L

    Tchekhovskoy , A., Metzger , B. D., Giannios , D., & Kelley , L. Z. 2014, title Swift J1644+57 gone MAD: the case for dynamically important magnetic flux threading the black hole in a jetted tidal disruption event , , 437, 2744, 10.1093/mnras/stt2085

    2014 doi

  56. [64]

    2021, title Seventeen Tidal Disruption Events from the First Half of ZTF Survey Observations: Entering a New Era of Population Studies , , 908, 4, 10.3847/1538-4357/abc258

    van Velzen , S., Gezari , S., Hammerstein , E., et al. 2021, title Seventeen Tidal Disruption Events from the First Half of ZTF Survey Observations: Entering a New Era of Population Studies , , 908, 4, 10.3847/1538-4357/abc258

    2021 doi

  57. [65]

    2024 a , title The On-axis Jetted Tidal Disruption Event AT2022cmc: X-Ray Observations and Broadband Spectral Modeling , , 965, 39, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad2b6b

    Yao , Y., Lu , W., Harrison , F., et al. 2024 a , title The On-axis Jetted Tidal Disruption Event AT2022cmc: X-Ray Observations and Broadband Spectral Modeling , , 965, 39, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad2b6b

    2024 doi

  58. [66]

    Yao , Y., Ravi , V., Gezari , S., et al. 2023, title Tidal Disruption Event Demographics with the Zwicky Transient Facility: Volumetric Rates, Luminosity Function, and Implications for the Local Black Hole Mass Function , , 955, L6, 10.3847/2041-8213/acf216

    2023 doi

  59. [67]

    Yao , Y., Guolo , M., Tombesi , F., et al. 2024 b , title Subrelativistic Outflow and Hours-timescale Large-amplitude X-Ray Dips during Super-Eddington Accretion onto a Low-mass Massive Black Hole in the Tidal Disruption Event AT2022lri , , 976, 34, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad7d93

    2024 doi

  60. [68]

    A., Berger , E., Soderberg , A

    Zauderer , B. A., Berger , E., Soderberg , A. M., et al. 2011, title Birth of a relativistic outflow in the unusual -ray transient Swift J164449.3+573451 , , 476, 425, 10.1038/nature10366

    2011 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.