pith. sign in

arxiv: 2512.02391 · v3 · submitted 2025-12-02 · 🌌 astro-ph.CO · astro-ph.GA

"SNe Ia twins" in the Hubble flow, and the determination of H0

Pilar Ruiz-Lapuente , Antonio Quintana-Estell\'es , Jonay I. Gonz\'alez Hern\'andez , Andrea Pastorello This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-17 03:06 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.CO astro-ph.GA
keywords Type Ia supernovaeHubble constantHubble tensiondistance ladderCepheidsJAGB starsreddening correctionSNe Ia twins
0
0 comments X

The pith

A sample of twelve SNe Ia twins in the Hubble flow yields H0 of 72.38 km s^{-1} Mpc^{-1} and confirms the tension is real.

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

The paper selects a dozen Type Ia supernovae at redshifts above 0.015 that match the light-curve and color properties of well-observed nearby events, then uses them as distance indicators directly in the Hubble flow. Anchoring these distances to galaxies with both Cepheid and JAGB measurements produces consistent H0 values whether the anchors come from Cepheids or from JAGB stars. The resulting average of 72.38 km s^{-1} Mpc^{-1} differs from the value inferred from the cosmic microwave background, and the authors attribute discrepant results in larger compilations to undercorrected dust reddening or imprecise light-curve decline rates. A reader would care because this single-step route from local calibrators to the flow tests whether the classical distance ladder is reliable or whether unrecognized systematics have inflated the apparent tension.

Core claim

The authors identify twelve SNe Ia in the Hubble flow whose colors and light-curve declines have been accurately corrected so that they function as twins of nearby events such as SN 1989B. Anchoring to Cepheid distances gives H0 = 72.56 ± 1.54 (stat) ± 1.33 (sys) km s^{-1} Mpc^{-1}; anchoring to JAGB distances gives H0 = 72.20 ± 1.53 (stat) ± 1.33 (sys) km s^{-1} Mpc^{-1}. The mean of the two anchors is H0 = 72.38 ± 1.54 (stat) ± 1.33 (sys) km s^{-1} Mpc^{-1}. This result validates the classical three-rung ladder while showing that some entries in Pantheon+ and CCHP compilations contain inaccurate color or decline values, and it confirms that the Hubble tension is real.

What carries the argument

The SNe Ia twins method, which matches supernovae on light-curve shape and color after explicit reddening and decline corrections to serve as standardized distance indicators one step into the Hubble flow.

If this is right

  • The classical three-rung distance ladder is validated by this direct single-step measurement from local anchors into the Hubble flow.
  • Inaccurate color corrections for reddening or imprecise light-curve decline parameters in broader compilations produce inconsistent individual H0 values from single supernovae.
  • Distances to NGC 7250 and NGC 5643 agree between Cepheid and JAGB methods, supporting their use as reliable anchors.
  • Three broad-line SNe Ia in the sample align with SN 1989B in M66, where both Cepheid and TRGB distances converge.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the twin-matching criteria remain stable when applied to future larger samples, the method could reduce the statistical uncertainty on local H0 below 1 percent.
  • The same twin selection could be tested on SNe Ia at still higher redshifts to check whether the current H0 value persists or changes with look-back time.
  • Discrepancies traced to reddening in existing catalogs suggest that re-processing those catalogs with stricter twin criteria might bring other cosmological probes into better agreement.

Load-bearing premise

The dozen selected SNe Ia are genuine twins whose colors and light-curve declines have been accurately corrected, and the Cepheid and JAGB anchor distances contain no significant unrecognized systematics.

What would settle it

An independent distance to any of the twelve sample SNe Ia or to one of the anchor galaxies such as NGC 7250 that differs by more than the quoted systematic error from both the Cepheid and JAGB values would falsify the derived H0.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2512.02391 by Andrea Pastorello, Antonio Quintana-Estell\'es, Jonay I. Gonz\'alez Hern\'andez, Pilar Ruiz-Lapuente.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: It is remarkable that with this method we can [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Top: Comparison of the spectrum at 14 days past maximum of SN 2012bo with that of SN 2013dy at the same phase. Middle below top: Comparison of the spectrum of SN 2012bo at 26 days past maximum of SN 2012bo with that of SN 2013dy at the same phase. Middle above bottom: Corner plot with the posterior probability at 1σ, 2σ, 3σ of distance and relative intrinsic reddening of supernova SN 2012bo in relation to … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Top: Comparison of the spectrum at 0 days past maximim of SN 2008bq with that of SN 2013dy at the same phase. Middle below top: Comparison of the spectrum at 5 days past maximum of SN 2008bq with that of SN 2013dy at the same phase. Middle above bottom: Corner plot with the posterior probability at 1σ, 2σ, 3σ of distance and rela￾tive intrinsic reddening of supernova SN 2008bq in relation to SN 2013dy. Bot… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Top: Comparison of the spectrum of LSQ12fxd at 2 days before maximum with that of SN 2013dy in the same phase. Middle below top: Comparison of the spec￾trum of LSQ12fxd at 3.7 days past maximum with that of SN 2013dy. Middle above bottom: Corner plot with the posterior probability at 1σ, 2σ, 3σ of distance and relative intrinsic reddening of supernova LSQ12fxd in relation to SN 2013dy. Bottom: Corner plot … view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Top: Comparison of the spectrum at 2 days be￾fore maximum of SN 2007A with that of SN 2013aa at the same phase. Middle below top: Comparison of the spec￾trum at 42 days past maximum of SN 2007A with that of SN 2013aa at the same phase. Middle above bottom: Corner plot with the posterior probability at 1σ, 2σ, 3σ of distance and relative intrinsic reddening of supernova SN 2007A in relation to SN 2013aa. Bo… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Top: Comparison of the spectrum at 3 days past maximum of ASASSN-15db with that of SN 2011fe at the same phase. Middle below top: Comparison of the spectrum of ASASSN-15db at 4 days past maximum with that of SN 2011fe at the same phase. Middle above bottom: Corner plot with the posterior probability at 1σ, 2σ, 3σ of distance and relative intrinsic reddening of supernova ASASSN-15db in relation to SN 2011fe… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Top: Comparison of the spectrum at 2 days past maximum of SN2007ca with that of SN 2013dy at the same phase. Middle below top: Comparison of the spectrum at 4 days past m´aximum with that of of SN 2013aa at asimilar phase. Middle above bottom: Corner plot with the posterior probability at 1σ, 2σ, 3σ of distance and relative intrinsic reddening of supernova SN2007ca in relation to SN 2013dy. Bottom: Corner … view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Top: Comparison of the spectrum at 3 days past maximum of SN 1999ek with that of SN 1989B at the same phase. Middle below top: Comparison of the spectrum at 9 days past maximum of SN 1999ek with that of SN 18989B at about the same time. Middle above bottom: Middle above bottom: Corner plot with the posterior probability at 1σ, 2σ, 3σ of distance and relative intrinsic reddening of supernova SN 1999ek in r… view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: ), as we will discuss in the next subsection. To obtain the error in the ”SNe Ia twins” distance mod￾ulus we add the various uncertainty terms. The most important one is the systematic error due to different values in the distance of the anchor of the very nearby twin supernovae. As previously said, these anchors con￾verge in value. In the above calculations, errors are of the order of 0–0.04 mag. For bro… view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Top panel: Distance moduli in this work a versus those of Pantheon+. The distances span a range from 60 Mpc to 400 Mpc. Here we can see how for the Pantheon+ SN 2007A, SN 2007ca stand out due to a too low color ’c’ estimation. The Pantheon+ light curves are parameterized through the SALT2 light–curve fitting (Tripp 1998; Brout et al. 2022). In this approach the distance modulus is defined as: µ = mB + αx1… view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Top panel: Distance moduli in this work a versus those by the CCHP (Cepheids). The distances span a range from 60 Mpc to 400 Mpc. Here we can see how SN 2007ca stands out due to a too low correction by BV in relation to E(B-V) estimation. There is an error in the SN 2012bo parameters for the light curve–rate of decline correction. The reddening correction is simply a constant, β, multi￾plied by the observ… view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Hubble diagram with the distances obtained in this work. The slope corresponds to H0 =72.833 km s−1 Mpc−1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_16.png] view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: B light curves of the core-normal SNe Ia twins SN 2007A/SN 2013aa (top) and SN 2008bf/SN 2013aa (bot￾tom) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_17.png] view at source ↗
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_18.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We have applied our approach of using ''SNe Ia twins''in the Hubble flow to obtain distances to SNe Ia at z $>$ 0.015 and derive H$_{0}$. Our results, taking a single step between the low z domain and the Hubble flow, validate the three rung classical method. We find, however, that the full compilation of distances, both in Pantheon+ and in the Carnegie-Chicago Hubble Program (CCHP), contain some inaccurate values in the colors due to an underestimate of reddening by dust, or due to the adoption of not well--defined light curve declines.This produces odd individual values for H$_{0}$ from single Type Ia SNe (SNe Ia). Our sample of carefully addressed SNe Ia in the Hubble flow contains a dozen supernovae, for which the distances are determined with high accuracy. Three of these SNe Ia are of the Broad Line subtype and can be compared with SN 1989B in M66, a host galaxy with a unique convergence of the Cepheid distance determination and the Tip of the Red Giant Branch stars (TRGB) determination by the CCHP group. There is, as well, a very good agreement on the distances to NGC 7250 and NGC 5643 between those derived with Cepheids by SH0ES and those derived with the use of J-Asymptotic Giant Branch stars(JAGB stars) by the CCHP, which makes them very good anchors. The sample of 12 SNe Ia gives a value of H$_{0}$ $=$ 72.56 $\pm$ 1.54 (stat) $\pm$ 1.33(sys) km s$^{-1}$ Mpc $^{-1}$,when anchored in Cepheids, and of H$_{0}$ $=$ 72.20 $\pm$ 1.53 (stat) $\pm$ 1.33 (sys) km s$^{-1}$ Mpc $^{-1}$,when anchored in JAGBs by the CCHP.We take a mean of the two values of H$_{0}$ as derived by the Cepheids and by JAGB (from the CCHP) and obtain H$_{0}$ $=$ 72.38 $\pm$ 1.54(stat) $\pm$ 1.33(sys) km s$^{-1}$ Mpc $^{-1}$. Our findings confirm that the Hubble tension is real.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript applies an approach using 'SNe Ia twins' in the Hubble flow (z > 0.015) to derive distances and obtain H0 in a single step. From a sample of 12 carefully selected supernovae with corrections for colors and light-curve declines, anchored to Cepheid distances (SH0ES) and JAGB distances (CCHP), the authors report H0 = 72.38 ± 1.54 (stat) ± 1.33 (sys) km s^{-1} Mpc^{-1} and conclude that the Hubble tension is real. The work also identifies inaccuracies in reddening and light-curve parameters in prior compilations such as Pantheon+ and CCHP.

Significance. If the twin selection and corrections hold, the result would offer a useful cross-check on the distance ladder with reduced reliance on intermediate rungs. Explicit use of both Cepheid and JAGB anchors, plus noted agreement for hosts such as NGC 7250, NGC 5643, and the M66 comparison with SN 1989B, strengthens the anchoring. The small sample size and dependence on internal corrections limit robustness, but the reporting of separate statistical and systematic uncertainties is a clear positive.

major comments (2)
  1. [§ on sample] § on sample: The central H0 result rests on the claim that the 12 SNe Ia are true twins whose colors and light-curve declines have been accurately corrected, yet the manuscript provides no quantitative twin-matching metric, no table of per-object corrections, and no direct comparison of the resulting distance moduli to independent indicators such as TRGB for the same events. This omission prevents confirmation that the reported small statistical error reflects genuine reduction in scatter rather than selection or residual bias.
  2. [Abstract and anchoring discussion] Abstract and anchoring discussion: The derived H0 values (72.56 from Cepheids, 72.20 from JAGB) are averaged to 72.38, but the paper does not demonstrate that any residual color-term bias after twin corrections is smaller than the quoted 1.33 km s^{-1} Mpc^{-1} systematic uncertainty; without such a test the tension confirmation remains sensitive to the reddening assumptions flagged in Pantheon+ and CCHP.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The phrasing 'J-Asymptotic Giant Branch stars(JAGB stars)' should be standardized and the acronym defined at first use for clarity.
  2. [General] General: A table listing the 12 SNe Ia, their host galaxies, observed parameters, applied corrections, and individual distance moduli would greatly improve reproducibility and allow readers to assess the twin selection.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments. We address the major comments point by point below, providing clarifications and indicating planned revisions to improve the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central H0 result rests on the claim that the 12 SNe Ia are true twins whose colors and light-curve declines have been accurately corrected, yet the manuscript provides no quantitative twin-matching metric, no table of per-object corrections, and no direct comparison of the resulting distance moduli to independent indicators such as TRGB for the same events. This omission prevents confirmation that the reported small statistical error reflects genuine reduction in scatter rather than selection or residual bias.

    Authors: We agree that explicit documentation of the twin selection strengthens the presentation. The 12 events were chosen by matching corrected B-V colors and decline rates (Δm15) to within the observed intrinsic dispersion of well-observed SNe Ia. In the revision we will add a quantitative description of these matching tolerances together with a table of the per-object color and light-curve corrections applied. Direct TRGB comparisons are possible only for a subset of hosts; we already note the convergence for M66/SN 1989B and the Cepheid–JAGB agreement for NGC 7250 and NGC 5643. TRGB distances are not yet available for the remaining hosts, which is an observational limitation rather than a flaw in the twin approach. The reduced statistical uncertainty is justified by the low scatter of the twin Hubble diagram relative to broader samples. revision: yes

  2. Referee: The derived H0 values (72.56 from Cepheids, 72.20 from JAGB) are averaged to 72.38, but the paper does not demonstrate that any residual color-term bias after twin corrections is smaller than the quoted 1.33 km s^{-1} Mpc^{-1} systematic uncertainty; without such a test the tension confirmation remains sensitive to the reddening assumptions flagged in Pantheon+ and CCHP.

    Authors: The close numerical agreement between the independently anchored results (72.56 from Cepheids and 72.20 from JAGB) already indicates that residual color-term bias after twin corrections does not exceed the quoted systematic floor. The 1.33 km s^{-1} Mpc^{-1} systematic uncertainty explicitly incorporates the reddening discrepancies we identified in Pantheon+ and CCHP. In the revised manuscript we will add a short sensitivity discussion that quantifies how plausible variations in residual reddening propagate into H0 and remain within the adopted systematic term. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: H0 derived from external anchors and twin matching applied to independent Hubble-flow sample

full rationale

The derivation chain selects 12 Hubble-flow SNe Ia, applies twin identification and color/light-curve corrections to obtain relative distances, then anchors the absolute scale to external Cepheid (SH0ES) and JAGB (CCHP) distance moduli for host galaxies such as M66, NGC 7250 and NGC 5643. These anchors are independent of the present sample and of any internal fit performed here. No equation or step equates the final H0 to a parameter fitted from the same 12 objects, nor does any prediction reduce by construction to the input data. Self-reference to 'our approach' describes the twin-matching procedure but does not substitute for the external calibration that sets the zero-point. The result therefore remains falsifiable against other distance indicators and does not collapse into its own inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the accuracy of twin matching for distance determination and the reliability of external anchor distances; no new physical entities are introduced.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption SNe Ia twins have identical intrinsic luminosities once light-curve shape and color corrections are applied
    Invoked to justify high-accuracy distances from the selected sample.
  • domain assumption Cepheid and JAGB distances provide unbiased zero-point anchors
    Used to convert relative distances to absolute H0.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5809 in / 1366 out tokens · 42655 ms · 2026-05-17T03:06:59.739651+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. (An)Isotropy in Pantheon+ and Type Ia supernova samples: intrinsic limits of directional tests

    astro-ph.CO 2026-05 accept novelty 5.0

    Directional tests for H0 anisotropy on Pantheon+ and CSP samples cannot robustly determine anisotropy directions because of intrinsic limits in the SN Ia lightcurve method.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

71 extracted references · 71 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    2016, AAS Meeting, 227, 237.101

    Boone, K., Fakhouri, H., Aldering, G.A., et al. 2016, AAS Meeting, 227, 237.101

    work page 2016

  2. [2]

    2006, PASP, 118, 560

    Branch, D., Dang, L.C., Hall, N., et al. 2006, PASP, 118, 560

    work page 2006

  3. [3]

    2025, ApJ, 991, 151

    Bresolin, F., Kudritzki, R.P., Urbaneja, M.A., Sextl, E., & Riess, A.G. 2025, ApJ, 991, 151

    work page 2025

  4. [4]

    2022, ApJ, 938, 111

    Brout, D., Taylor, G., Scolnic, D., et al. 2022, ApJ, 938, 111

    work page 2022

  5. [5]

    2011, AJ, 141, 19

    Burns, C.R., Stritzinger, M., & Phillips, M.M. 2011, AJ, 141, 19

    work page 2011

  6. [6]

    2014, ApJ, 789, 32

    Burns, C.R., Stritzinger, M., Phillips, M.M., et al. 2014, ApJ, 789, 32

    work page 2014

  7. [7]

    2020, ApJ, 895, 11J8

    Burns, C.R., Ashall, C., Contreras, C., et al. 2020, ApJ, 895, 11J8

    work page 2020

  8. [8]

    2020, ApJ, 901, 154

    Burrow, A., Baron,, E., Ashall, et al. 2020, ApJ, 901, 154

    work page 2020

  9. [9]

    2013, CBET, 3588

    Casper, C., Zheng, W., Li, W., et al. 2013, CBET, 3588

    work page 2013

  10. [10]

    2011, ATel, 3583, 1

    Cenko, S.B., Thomas, R.C., Nugent, P.E., et al. 2011, ATel, 3583, 1

    work page 2011

  11. [11]

    and Saridakis, E.N., 2025

    Chassagne, R., & Santallo, R. 2001, IAUC, 7643 Di Valentino, E., Mena, O., Pan, S., et al. 2021a, CQ- Gra, 38, 153001 Di Valentino, E., Melchiorri, A., & Silk, J. 2021b, ApJL, 908, L9 Di Valentino, E., Levi Said, J., & Sandakis, E.N. 2025a, arXiv:2509.25288 Di Valentino, E., Said, J.L., Riess, A.G., et al.. 2025b, PDU, 49, 101965

    work page arXiv 2001

  12. [12]

    2014, ATel, 6859

    Ducroft, M., Leget, P.F., Chotard, N., et al. 2014, ATel, 6859

    work page 2014

  13. [13]

    2015, ApJ, 815, 58

    Fakhouri, H.K., Boone, K., Aldering, G., et al. 2015, ApJ, 815, 58

    work page 2015

  14. [14]

    2013, ApJ, 773, 53

    Folatelli, G., Morrell, N., Phillips, M.M., et al. 2013, ApJ, 773, 53

    work page 2013

  15. [15]

    2013, PASP, 125, 300

    Foreman-Mackey, D., Hoog, D.W., Lang, D., & Goood- man, J. 2013, PASP, 125, 300

    work page 2013

  16. [16]

    2019, ApJ, 882, 34

    Freedman, W.L., Madore, B.F., Hatt, D., et al. 2019, ApJ, 882, 34

    work page 2019

  17. [17]

    L., Madore, B

    Lee, A.J., & Owens, K.A. 2024, arXiv:2408.06153

    work page arXiv 2024

  18. [18]

    2025, ApJ, 985, 203

    Lee, A.J., & Owens, K.A. 2025, ApJ, 985, 203

    work page 2025

  19. [19]

    2023, ApJ, 953, 35

    Garnavich, P., Wood, C.M., Milne, P., et al. 2023, ApJ, 953, 35

    work page 2023

  20. [20]

    1996, Bayesian

    Gelman, A., Roberts, G.O., & Gilks, W. 1996, Bayesian

    work page 1996

  21. [21]

    2010, Communications in Applied Mathematics and Computational Science, 5, 65

    Goodman, J., & Weare, J. 2010, Communications in Applied Mathematics and Computational Science, 5, 65

    work page 2010

  22. [22]

    2008, CBET, 1553

    Griffith, C., Li, W., Cenko, S.B., & Filippenko, A.V. 2008, CBET, 1553

    work page 2008

  23. [23]

    2015, ATel, 7078

    Holoien, T.W.S., Stanek, K.Z., Kochanek, C.S., et al. 2015, ATel, 7078

    work page 2015

  24. [24]

    2024, ApJ, 963, 83

    Huang, C.D., Yuan, W., Riess, A.G., et al. 2024, ApJ, 963, 83

    work page 2024

  25. [25]

    2007, IAUC, 8843

    Itagaki, K., Nakano, S., Quimby, R., et al. 2007, IAUC, 8843

    work page 2007

  26. [26]

    2012, CBET, 3079

    Itagaki, K., Yusa, T., Noguchi, T., et al. 2012, CBET, 3079

    work page 2012

  27. [27]

    2018, ApJ, 857, 88

    Kirpatrick, C.D. 2018, ApJ, 857, 88

    work page 2018

  28. [28]

    2025, ApJ, 987, 87

    Jensen, J.B., Blakeslee, J.P., Cantiello, M., et al. 2025, ApJ, 987, 87

    work page 2025

  29. [29]

    1999, IAUC, 7286

    Johnson, R., & Li, W. 1999, IAUC, 7286

    work page 1999

  30. [30]

    2023, ARNPS, 73, 153

    Kamionkowski, M,, & Riess, A.G. 2023, ARNPS, 73, 153

    work page 2023

  31. [31]

    2004, AJ, 128, 3034

    Krisciunas, K., Suntzeff, N.B., Phillips, M.M., et al. 2004, AJ, 128, 3034

    work page 2004

  32. [32]

    2017, AJ, 154, 211

    Krisciunas, K., Contreras, C., Burns, C.R., et al. 2017, AJ, 154, 211

    work page 2017

  33. [33]

    & Hoyt, T.J

    Owens, K.A. & Hoyt, T.J. 2025, ApJ, 985, 182

    work page 2025

  34. [34]

    2025, ApJ, 988, 97

    Li, S., Riess, A.G., Casertano, S., et al. 2025, ApJ, 988, 97

    work page 2025

  35. [35]

    2008, CBET, 1328

    Luckas, P., Trondal, O., & Schwartz, M. 2008, CBET, 1328

    work page 2008

  36. [36]

    2024, ApJ, 967, 20 M¨ ortsell, E., & Dhawan, S

    Morrell, N., Phillips, M.M., Folatelli, G., et al. 2024, ApJ, 967, 20 M¨ ortsell, E., & Dhawan, S. 2018, JCAP, 1809, 025

    work page 2024

  37. [37]

    2023, JCAP, 11, 046

    Murakami, Y.S., Riess, A.G., Stahl, B.E., et al. 2023, JCAP, 11, 046

    work page 2023

  38. [38]

    2011, Natur, 480, 344

    Nugent, P.E., Sullivan, M., Cenko, S.B., et al. 2011, Natur, 480, 344

    work page 2011

  39. [39]

    2007, CSE, 9, 10

    Oliphant, T.E. 2007, CSE, 9, 10

    work page 2007

  40. [40]

    2015, MN- RAS, 452, 4307

    Pan, Y.C., Foley, R.J., Kromer, M., et al. 2015, MN- RAS, 452, 4307

    work page 2015

  41. [41]

    2008, CBET, 1307

    Pansky, X., Li, W., & Filippenko, A.V. 2008, CBET, 1307

    work page 2008

  42. [42]

    2013, ATel, 4817, 1

    Howell, D.A. 2013, ATel, 4817, 1

    work page 2013

  43. [43]

    1999, ApJ, 517, 565

    Perlmutter, S., Aldering, G., Goldhaber, G., et al. 1999, ApJ, 517, 565

    work page 1999

  44. [44]

    1993, ApJL, 413, L105 Planck Collaboration 2020, A&A, 641, A6

    Phillips, M.M. 1993, ApJL, 413, L105 Planck Collaboration 2020, A&A, 641, A6

    work page 1993

  45. [45]

    2021, ApJ, 913, 49

    Popovic, B., Brout, D., Kessler, R., Scolnic, D., & Lu, L. 2021, ApJ, 913, 49

    work page 2021

  46. [46]

    2025, PhRvD, 111, 083552

    Poulin, V., Smith, T.L., Calder´ on, R., & Simon, T. 2025, PhRvD, 111, 083552

    work page 2025

  47. [47]

    2018, AJ, 156, 123 27

    Price-Whelan, A.M., Sip˜ ocz, B.M., G¨ unther, H.M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123 27

    work page 2018

  48. [48]

    2007, CBET, 795

    Puckett, T., Orff, T., Newton, J., Madison, D., & Li, W. 2007, CBET, 795

    work page 2007

  49. [49]

    2012, JAVSO, 40, 872

    Richmond, M.W., & Smith, H.A. 2012, JAVSO, 40, 872

    work page 2012

  50. [50]

    1998, AJ, 116, 1009

    Riess, A.G., Filippenko, A.V., Challis, P., et al. 1998, AJ, 116, 1009

    work page 1998

  51. [51]

    2022, ApJ, 934, L7

    Riess, A.G., Yuan, W., Macri, L.M., et al. 2022, ApJ, 934, L7

    work page 2022

  52. [52]

    Riess, A.G., Li, S., Anand, G. et al. 2025, ApJL, 922, L34

    work page 2025

  53. [53]

    2025, ApJ, 977, 120

    Riess, A.G., Scolnic, D., Gagandeep, S., et al. 2025, ApJ, 977, 120

    work page 2025

  54. [54]

    Union Through UNITY: Cosmology with 2,000 SNe Using a Unified Bayesian Framework

    Rubin, D., Aldering, G., Betoule, M., et al. 2023, arXiv:2311.12098

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  55. [55]

    2024, ApJ, 977, 180

    Ruiz-Lapuente, P., & Gonz´ alez Hern´ andez, J.I. 2024, ApJ, 977, 180

    work page 2024

  56. [56]

    1989, IAUC, 4730

    Ryan, S., & Visvanathan, R. 1989, IAUC, 4730

    work page 1989

  57. [57]

    1999, ApJ, 522, 802 Sch¨ oneberg, N., Franco Abell´ an, G., P´ erez S´ anchez, A.,

    Machetto, F.D., & Panagia, N. 1999, ApJ, 522, 802 Sch¨ oneberg, N., Franco Abell´ an, G., P´ erez S´ anchez, A.,

    work page 1999

  58. [58]

    2022, PhR, 984, 1

    Witte, S.J., Poulin, V., & Lesgourges, J. 2022, PhR, 984, 1

    work page 2022

  59. [59]

    2022, ApJ, 938, 113

    Scolnic, D., Brout, D., Carr, A., et al. 2022, ApJ, 938, 113

    work page 2022

  60. [60]

    2011, ApJ, 737, 103

    Schlafly, E.F., & Finkbeiner, D.P. 2011, ApJ, 737, 103

    work page 2011

  61. [61]

    1992, ApJS, 81, 5

    Schneider, S.E., Thuan, T.X., Mangum, J.G., & Miller, J. 1992, ApJS, 81, 5

    work page 1992

  62. [62]

    2020, MN- RAS, 492, 4325

    Stahl, B.E., Zheng, W., de Jaeger, T., et al. 2020, MN- RAS, 492, 4325

    work page 2020

  63. [63]

    2017, ATel, 4158, 1

    Tartaglia, R., Sand, D., Wyatt, S., et al. 2017, ATel, 4158, 1

    work page 2017

  64. [64]

    2020, ApJ, 901, 143

    Uddin, S.A., Burns, C.R., Phillips, M.M., et al. 2020, ApJ, 901, 143

    work page 2020

  65. [65]

    2024, ApJ, 970, 72 Van Der Walt, S., Colbert, S.C., & Varoquaux, G

    Uddin, S.A., Burns, C.R., Phillips, M.M., et al. 2024, ApJ, 970, 72 Van Der Walt, S., Colbert, S.C., & Varoquaux, G. 2011, CSE, 13, 22

    work page 2024

  66. [66]

    2025, A&A, 702, A41

    Vogl, C., Taubenberger, S., Cs´ omier, G., et al. 2025, A&A, 702, A41

    work page 2025

  67. [67]

    2013, AAN, 479, 1

    Waagen, E.O. 2013, AAN, 479, 1

    work page 2013

  68. [68]

    1994, AJ, 108, 2233

    Wells, L.A., Phillips, M.M., Suntzeff, B., et al. 1994, AJ, 108, 2233

    work page 1994

  69. [69]

    2020, ApJ, 902, 46

    Yang, Y., Hoeflich, P., Baade, D., et al. 2020, ApJ, 902, 46

    work page 2020

  70. [70]

    2008, CBET, 1353

    Yuan, F., Quimby, R., Chamarro, D., et al. 2008, CBET, 1353

    work page 2008

  71. [71]

    Zheng, W., Silverman, J.M., Filippenko, A.V., et al. 2013, ApJL, 788, L15 9.APPENDIX: LIGHT CURVES OF SNE IA IN THE HUBBLE FLOW, COMPARED WITH THOSE OF THEIR LOW-REDSHIFT TWINS In this Appendix, we show how the light curves of the SNe Ia in the Hubble flow from the CSP I coincide with those of our twins of reference, once these last ones are placed in the...

    work page 2013