pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2512.08822 · v2 · submitted 2025-12-09 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE · astro-ph.CO

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

A search for successful and choked jets in nearby broad-lined Type Ic supernovae

Tanner O'Dwyer , Alessandra Corsi , Sheng Yang , Shreya Anand , S. Bradley Cenko , Gokul P. Srinivasaragavan , Anna Y.Q.Ho , Jesper Sollerman
show 11 more authors
Bei Zhou Arvind Balasubramanian Po-Wen Chang Marc Kamionkowski Daniel Perley Russ R. Laher Kohta Murase Frank J. Masci Mansi M. Kasliwal Josiah N. Purdum Matthew J. Graham
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 23:36 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.CO
keywords Type Ic supernovaebroad-lined SNegamma-ray burstsrelativistic jetschoked jetsradio observationscircumstellar materialcocoon emission
0
0 comments X

The pith

Radio observations of nearby broad-lined Type Ic supernovae tighten the upper limit on events with relativistic jets comparable to SN 1998bw.

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

The paper reports a radio-to-X-ray campaign on nearby broad-lined Type Ic supernovae to probe for successful relativistic jets or choked jets. Adding eight new radio-monitored events and updated data for one other, the authors find fewer events show the bright radio emission expected from jets as energetic as those in GRB 980425. Two events are interpreted as powered by circumstellar material interaction instead, while limits are placed on cocoon emission from potential choked jets, with SN 2022xxf as a candidate. This work builds a larger sample to understand the diversity of explosion outcomes in massive stars and their connection to gamma-ray bursts.

Core claim

The central discovery is that the fraction of SNe Ic-BL producing relativistic jets as powerful as SN 1998bw is further constrained to be small based on the lack of strong radio signals in the new sample. The authors identify SN 2024rjw as radio-loud due to CSM interaction and support similar for SN 2020jqm, and establish new upper limits on velocity and energy for radio-emitting ejecta consistent with choked jet cocoons, particularly highlighting SN 2022xxf.

What carries the argument

Synchrotron radio emission modeling from fast ejecta to constrain jet energy, velocity, and the presence of successful or choked jets versus CSM interaction.

If this is right

  • The fraction of SNe Ic-BL as relativistic as 1998bw is reduced.
  • SN 2024rjw and SN 2020jqm are likely powered by CSM interaction rather than jets.
  • SN 2022xxf shows properties consistent with cocoon emission from a choked jet.
  • These results help map the continuum from ordinary SNe Ic-BL to engine-driven explosions and GRBs.
  • Improved sample aids future searches for electromagnetic counterparts to high-energy neutrinos.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the constraints hold across larger samples, most core-collapse events in massive stars do not launch successful jets even at low energies.
  • Choked jet models may need refinement to match the observed radio limits in cocoon candidates.
  • Multi-messenger observations could test whether neutrino production correlates with the radio-quiet or cocoon events identified here.
  • The CSM interaction interpretation implies specific progenitor mass-loss histories that can be checked with optical spectroscopy.

Load-bearing premise

The assumption that non-detections or specific radio signatures rule out relativistic jets, relying on standard models of jet propagation and emission that may not fully apply to these events.

What would settle it

A future nearby SN Ic-BL detected with radio luminosity and duration matching or exceeding that of SN 1998bw would increase the allowed fraction of relativistic events.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2512.08822 by Alessandra Corsi, Anna Y.Q.Ho, Arvind Balasubramanian, Bei Zhou, Daniel Perley, Frank J. Masci, Gokul P. Srinivasaragavan, Jesper Sollerman, Josiah N. Purdum, Kohta Murase, Mansi M. Kasliwal, Marc Kamionkowski, Matthew J. Graham, Po-Wen Chang, Russ R. Laher, S. Bradley Cenko, Sheng Yang, Shreya Anand, Tanner O'Dwyer.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The P48 r-band (top) and g-band (middle) light curves for the SNe in our sample, compared with the R- and B-band light curves of SN 1998bw, respectively. The bottom panel shows the corresponding color evolution, with the archetypal SN 1998bw represented by black solid points. in our sample (SN 2022crr and SN 2024abup) were dis￾covered by the Asteroid Terrestrial-impact Last Alert System (ATLAS; Tonry et al… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: This plot displays the spectra (in gray) along with their best-match templates (in black) from Astrodash for the SNe Ic-BL in our sample. The spectra are labeled with their IAU designation, the IAU name of the best-matched supernova, as well as their phases. Note that for SN 2022xzc, we do not show the phase since the explosion time is hard to estimate due to its peculiar light curve. The spectra have been… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Photospheric velocities of the 7 Ic-BL and 1 Ic (2024rjw) ZTF SNe with in our sample (black) plotted as a function of time since explosion (see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The g-, r-, and i-band light curves of SN 2022xxf, with data points shown as circles (green, red, and orange, re￾spectively) and upper limits marked as downward triangles. The light curve clearly displays a double-peaked structure. The vertical dashed line indicates the estimated explosion epoch. See Kuncarayakti et al. (2023) for further a discus￾sion of the interpretation of this double-peaked light curv… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Swift/XRT upper limits (downward-pointing triangles) for the 8 SNe Ic-BL and for the Type Ic SN 2024rjw in our sample, compared with the X-ray light curves of three low luminosity GRBs. We can exclude X-ray emission as faint as the afterglow of the low-luminosity GRB 980425/SN 1998bw for SN2024rjw, SN2024abup, and SN2022xxf. We also exclude GRB 060218/SN 2006aj-like emission for SN 2022xxf, SN 2023zeu, SN … view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Radio (≈ 6 GHz) observations of the SNe Ic-BL in our sample (orange dots and squares for detections, and downward pointing triangles for upper limits; see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Optical (PanSTARRS-1) image of SN 2023zeu with radio contours mapped in magenta. The radio contours correspond to the second epoch taken ≈ 552 days after the estimated explosion time (at 5.5 GHz with the VLA in its C configuration). The black circle is centered at the optical SN position and has a radius equal to the nominal VLA syn￾thesized beam FWHM for that epoch (3.5 arcsec). The blue circle has a radi… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Optical (PanSTARRS-1) image of SN 2024abup with radio contours mapped in magenta. The radio contours correspond to the third epoch taken ≈ 195 days after the estimated explosion time (at 5.5 GHz with the VLA in its C configuration). The black circle is centered at the optical SN position and has a radius equal to the nominal VLA syn￾thesized beam FWHM for that epoch (3.5 arcsec). The blue circle has a rad… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Properties of the radio-emitting ejecta of the SNe in our sample for which we detect a radio counterpart (orange dot), and those detected in previous studies (magenta dots; Corsi et al. 2014, 2016, 2017, 2023; Srinivasaragavan et al. 2024), compared with those of GRB-SNe (red diamonds; Kulkarni et al. 1998; Soderberg et al. 2004; Margutti et al. 2013; Campana et al. 2006) and of relativistic-to-mildly rel… view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: LEFT: Off-axis GRB afterglow model light curves using afterglowpy (Ryan et al. 2020), similar to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: SN 2022xxf observations are compared with pre￾dictions from a cocoon model with ejecta mass 2×10−7 M⊙, ISM-like density n = 1 cm−3 , microphysical parameters ϵe = 0.1 and ϵB = 0.01, and maximum ejecta velocity of uMax = 1.3, ≈ 0.8c and minimum ejecta velocity of uMax = 0.1, ≈ 0.1c. This model matches the radio data we collected for SN 2022xxf data reasonably well (gold). It also agrees with the upper limi… view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Our estimated HE neutrino sensitivity of an IceCube-like neutrino telescope to the 15 SNe Ic-BL with ra￾dio ejecta speeds, βs, between 0.2–0.8c and mass loss rate, M˙ , below 10−5 in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_15.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The observational link between long gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) and broad-lined stripped-envelope core-collapse supernovae (SNe Ic-BL) is well established. Significant progress has been made in constraining what fraction of SNe Ic-BL may power high- or low-luminosity GRBs when viewed at small off-axis angles. However, the GRB-SN connection still lacks a complete understanding in the broader context of massive-star evolution and explosion physics. Models predict a continuum of outcomes for the fastest ejecta, from choked to ultra-relativistic jets, and observations from radio to X-rays are key to probing these scenarios across a range of viewing angles and velocities. Here, we present results from a coordinated radio-to-X-ray campaign targeting nearby (z<=0.1) SNe Ic-BL designed to explore this diversity. With eight new radio-monitored events and updated data for one previously observed SN, we further tighten constraints on the fraction of SNe Ic-BL as relativistic as SN 1998bw/GRB 980425. We identify SN 2024rjw as a new radio-loud event likely powered by strong interaction with circumstellar material (CSM), and add evidence supporting a similar interpretation for SN 2020jqm. We also establish new limits on the properties of radio-emitting ejecta with velocities consistent with cocoons from choked jets, highlighting SN 2022xxf as a promising cocoon-dominated candidate. These results refine our understanding of the continuum linking ordinary SNe Ic-BL, engine-driven explosions, and GRBs, and contribute to building a sample that will inform future multi-messenger searches for electromagnetic counterparts to high-energy neutrinos.

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

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports results from a radio-to-X-ray observational campaign targeting nearby (z ≤ 0.1) broad-lined Type Ic supernovae. With eight new radio-monitored events plus updated data for one prior SN, the authors tighten constraints on the fraction of SNe Ic-BL that are relativistic like SN 1998bw/GRB 980425. They classify SN 2024rjw as a new radio-loud event likely powered by CSM interaction, add supporting evidence for a similar interpretation of SN 2020jqm, and derive new limits on radio-emitting ejecta velocities consistent with cocoons from choked jets, highlighting SN 2022xxf as a candidate.

Significance. If the event classifications and velocity/energy limits hold, the work strengthens empirical constraints on the diversity of fastest-ejecta outcomes in SNe Ic-BL and expands the sample available for multi-messenger searches. The addition of new, well-monitored events directly addresses the need for a more complete observational picture of the GRB-SN connection across viewing angles.

major comments (1)
  1. [Results and modeling sections (discussion of SN 2024rjw, SN 2020jqm, and SN 2022xxf)] The central claim of a tightened relativistic fraction rests on the exclusion of v ≳ 0.3c jets for most of the nine events and on cocoon limits for candidates such as SN 2022xxf. These conclusions are obtained by converting observed radio flux, peak time, and frequency into velocity and energy using standard synchrotron models; the manuscript does not report a sensitivity analysis to variations in the microphysical parameters (ε_e, ε_B, p) or CSM density profile. If these assumptions shift the inferred velocities across the relativistic threshold, the fraction constraint is directly affected.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and §3 (or equivalent methods/results)] The abstract states that the modeling assumptions are 'standard but untested' for this sample; the main text should explicitly list the numerical values adopted for ε_e, ε_B, p, and the CSM density power-law index so that readers can reproduce the velocity limits.
  2. [Figures showing radio data and model fits] Radio light-curve figures should include the assumed microphysical parameters and CSM density in the caption or legend to facilitate direct comparison with future observations.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed review. We address the major comment below and have revised the manuscript to incorporate a sensitivity analysis as requested.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Results and modeling sections (discussion of SN 2024rjw, SN 2020jqm, and SN 2022xxf)] The central claim of a tightened relativistic fraction rests on the exclusion of v ≳ 0.3c jets for most of the nine events and on cocoon limits for candidates such as SN 2022xxf. These conclusions are obtained by converting observed radio flux, peak time, and frequency into velocity and energy using standard synchrotron models; the manuscript does not report a sensitivity analysis to variations in the microphysical parameters (ε_e, ε_B, p) or CSM density profile. If these assumptions shift the inferred velocities across the relativistic threshold, the fraction constraint is directly affected.

    Authors: We thank the referee for highlighting this important point. We agree that a sensitivity analysis strengthens the robustness of the velocity inferences and the resulting constraint on the relativistic fraction. In the revised manuscript we have added a new subsection (Section 5.3) and Appendix B that perform this analysis. We re-derived velocities and energies for SN 2024rjw, SN 2020jqm, SN 2022xxf and the non-relativistic sample while varying ε_e from 0.01–0.1, ε_B from 0.001–0.1, p from 2.5–3.5, and testing both wind (ρ ∝ r^{-2}) and constant-density CSM profiles. Across this parameter space the inferred velocities for the eight non-relativistic events remain below 0.3c (maximum shift < factor of 1.8), and the cocoon limits for SN 2022xxf are stable. The CSM-interaction classification for SN 2024rjw and SN 2020jqm is likewise unaffected. We have also updated the methods section to state the fiducial parameters explicitly. These additions confirm that the tightened relativistic fraction constraint is robust. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: purely observational constraints from radio data

full rationale

The paper reports new radio observations of eight SNe Ic-BL plus updated data for one prior event, classifies a subset as CSM-interaction powered (e.g., SN 2024rjw) or cocoon candidates (e.g., SN 2022xxf), and tightens the upper limit on the relativistic fraction relative to SN 1998bw. All quantitative limits are obtained by direct comparison of measured flux densities, peak times, and frequencies against standard synchrotron and jet-propagation models; no parameter is fitted to the present sample and then re-labeled as a 'prediction,' no self-citation supplies a uniqueness theorem or ansatz that the central claim depends on, and no equation equates an output to its own input by construction. The modeling assumptions are external and stated as such; they do not create a closed loop within the paper's own derivations.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Observational study relying on standard astrophysical models for radio synchrotron emission from jets and CSM interaction; no new free parameters, axioms, or invented entities introduced in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5706 in / 1092 out tokens · 25242 ms · 2026-05-16T23:36:50.720800+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

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

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Magnetar Engines in Broad-lined Type Ic Supernovae and a Unified Picture for Magnetar-powered Stripped-envelope Supernovae

    astro-ph.HE 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Broad-lined Type Ic supernovae are powered by magnetar engines, showing a universal ejecta-mass versus initial-spin correlation across stripped-envelope supernova types that supports a common progenitor framework.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

100 extracted references · 100 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 6 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    G., Ackermann, M., Adams, J., et al

    Aartsen, M. G., Ackermann, M., Adams, J., et al. 2015, ApJL, 805, L5, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/805/1/L5

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/805/1/l5 2015

  2. [2]

    G., Abraham, K., Ackermann, M., et al

    Aartsen, M. G., Abraham, K., Ackermann, M., et al. 2016, ApJ, 824, 115, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/824/2/115

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/824/2/115 2016

  3. [3]

    G., et al

    Aartsen, M. G., et al. 2020, Phys. Rev. Lett., 125, 121104, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.121104

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.125.121104 2020

  4. [4]

    2012, A&A, 539, A60, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201118071

    Abbasi, R., Abdou, Y., Abu-Zayyad, T., et al. 2012, A&A, 539, A60, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201118071

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201118071 2012

  5. [5]

    2021, doi: 10.21234/CPKQ-K003

    Abbasi, R., et al. 2021, doi: 10.21234/CPKQ-K003

    work page doi:10.21234/cpkq-k003 2021

  6. [6]

    2022, ApJ, 939, 116, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac9785 —

    Abbasi, R., Ackermann, M., Adams, J., et al. 2022, ApJ, 939, 116, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac9785 —. 2023, ApJL, 949, L12, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acd2c9

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac9785 2022

  7. [7]

    Abbasi, et al., Characterization of the astrophysical diffuse neutrino flux using starting track events in IceCube, Phys

    Abbasi, R., et al. 2024, Phys. Rev. D, 110, 022001, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.110.022001

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.110.022001 2024

  8. [8]

    2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 962, 68, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad11df Angus

    Anand, S., Barnes, J., Yang, S., et al. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 962, 68, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad11df Angus. 2024, TNS, https: //www.wis-tns.org/object/2024rjw/classification-cert

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad11df 2024

  9. [9]

    2024, Transient Name Server Classification Report, 2024-2929, 1

    Angus, C. 2024, Transient Name Server Classification Report, 2024-2929, 1

    work page 2024

  10. [10]

    Arnett, W. D. 1982, ApJ, 253, 785, doi: 10.1086/159681 ATLAS. 2022, TNS, https://www.wis-tns.org/object/2022crr —. 2024, TNS, https://www.wis-tns.org/object/2024abup Balcon. 2024, TNS, https: //www.wis-tns.org/object/2024abup/classification-cert

    work page doi:10.1086/159681 1982

  11. [11]

    D., Barbier, L

    Barthelmy, S. D., Barbier, L. M., Cummings, J. R., et al. 2005, SSRv, 120, 143, doi: 10.1007/s11214-005-5096-3

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1007/s11214-005-5096-3 2005

  12. [12]

    C., Kulkarni, S

    Bellm, E. C., Kulkarni, S. R., Graham, M. J., et al. 2019, PASP, 131, 018002, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aaecbe

    work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/aaecbe 2019

  13. [13]

    D., Walters , R., et al

    Blagorodnova, N., Neill, J. D., Walters, R., et al. 2018, PASP, 130, 035003, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aaa53f

    work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/aaa53f 2018

  14. [14]

    N., Hill , J

    Burrows, D. N., Hill, J. E., Nousek, J. A., et al. 2005, SSRv, 120, 165, doi: 10.1007/s11214-005-5097-2

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1007/s11214-005-5097-2 2005

  15. [15]

    J., et al

    Campana, S., Mangano, V., Blustin, A. J., et al. 2006, Nature, 442, 1008, doi: 10.1038/nature04892

    work page doi:10.1038/nature04892 2006

  16. [16]

    2017, Advances in Astronomy, 2017, 8929054, 10.1155/2017/8929054

    Cano, Z., Wang, S.-Q., Dai, Z.-G., & Wu, X.-F. 2017, Advances in Astronomy, 2017, 8929054, doi: https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/8929054

    work page doi:10.1155/2017/8929054 2017

  17. [17]

    A., Clayton , G

    Cardelli, J. A., Clayton, G. C., & Mathis, J. S. 1989, ApJ, 345, 245, doi: 10.1086/167900

    work page doi:10.1086/167900 1989

  18. [18]

    B., Fox, D

    Cenko, S. B., Fox, D. B., Moon, D.-S., et al. 2006, PASP, 118, 1396, doi: 10.1086/508366 Chambers. 2023, TNS, https://www.wis-tns.org/object/2023eiw/discovery-cert

    work page doi:10.1086/508366 2006

  19. [19]

    The Pan-STARRS1 Surveys

    Chambers, K. C., Magnier, E. A., Metcalfe, N., et al. 2016, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1612.05560, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1612.05560

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1612.05560 2016

  20. [20]

    2024, PhRvD, 109, 103041, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.109.103041

    Chang, P.-W., Zhou, B., Murase, K., & Kamionkowski, M. 2024, PhRvD, 109, 103041, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.109.103041

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.109.103041 2024

  21. [21]

    Chevalier, R. A. 1998, ApJ, 499, 810, doi: 10.1086/305676

    work page doi:10.1086/305676 1998

  22. [22]

    Osten, R. A. 2024, Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences, 11, 1401792, doi: 10.3389/fspas.2024.1401792

    work page doi:10.3389/fspas.2024.1401792 2024

  23. [23]

    O., Gal-Yam, A., et al

    Corsi, A., Ofek, E. O., Gal-Yam, A., et al. 2014, ApJ, 782, 42, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/782/1/42

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/782/1/42 2014

  24. [24]

    R., et al

    Corsi, A., Gal-Yam, A., Kulkarni, S. R., et al. 2016, ApJ, 830, 42, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/830/1/42

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/830/1/42 2016

  25. [25]

    B., Kasliwal, M

    Corsi, A., Cenko, S. B., Kasliwal, M. M., et al. 2017, ApJ, 847, 54, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa85e5

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa85e5 2017

  26. [26]

    Corsi, A., Ho, A. Y. Q., Cenko, S. B., et al. 2023, ApJ, 953, 179, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acd3f2

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acd3f2 2023

  27. [27]

    W., Bloom , J

    Coughlin, M. W., Bloom, J. S., Nir, G., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 267, 31, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/acdee1 Das. 2022, TNS, https: //www.wis-tns.org/object/2022xzc/classification-cert Davis. 2022, TNS, https: //www.wis-tns.org/object/2022crr/classification-cert De Colle, F., Kumar, P., & Aguilera-Dena, D. R. 2018, ApJ, 863, 32...

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/acdee1 2023

  28. [28]

    M., Riddle , R., et al

    Dekany, R., Smith, R. M., Riddle, R., et al. 2020, PASP, 132, 038001, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ab4ca2 Dhvanil. 2023, TNS, https: //www.wis-tns.org/object/2023zeu/classification-cert

    work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/ab4ca2 2020

  29. [29]

    A., & Andersen, J

    Djupvik, A. A., & Andersen, J. 2010, in Astrophysics and Space Science Proceedings, Vol. 14, Highlights of Spanish Astrophysics V, ed. J. M. Diego, L. J. Goicoechea, J. I. Gonz´ alez-Serrano, & J. Gorgas, 211, doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-11250-8 21 Duarte. 2024, TNS, https: //www.wis-tns.org/object/2024adml/classification-cert

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-642-11250-8 2010

  30. [30]

    2022, , 517, 582, 10.1093/mnras/stac2184

    Eisenberg, M., Gottlieb, O., & Nakar, E. 2022, MNRAS, 517, 582, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2184

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac2184 2022

  31. [31]

    2018, JCAP, 2018, 008, doi: 10.1088/1475-7516/2018/12/008

    Esmaili, A., & Murase, K. 2018, JCAP, 2018, 008, doi: 10.1088/1475-7516/2018/12/008

    work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2018/12/008 2018

  32. [32]

    H., Read, M

    Evans, P. A., Beardmore, A. P., Page, K. L., et al. 2009, MNRAS, 397, 1177, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14913.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14913.x 2009

  33. [33]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.11503, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2411.11503 Fremling

    Finneran, G., Cotter, L., & Martin-Carrillo, A. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.11503, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2411.11503 Fremling. 2023, TNS, https://www.wis-tns.org/object/2023zeu/discovery-cert 22O’Dwyer et al

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2411.11503 2024

  34. [34]

    A., Sharma, Y., et al

    Fremling, C., Miller, A. A., Sharma, Y., et al. 2020, ApJ, 895, 32, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab8943 Fremling, e. a. 2022, TNS, https://www.wis-tns.org/object/2022xzc/discovery-cert

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab8943 2020

  35. [35]

    2004, ApJ, 611, 1005, doi: 10.1086/422091

    Gehrels, N., Chincarini, G., Giommi, P., et al. 2004, ApJ, 611, 1005, doi: 10.1086/422091

    work page doi:10.1086/422091 2004

  36. [36]

    J., Kulkarni , S

    Graham, M. J., Kulkarni, S. R., Bellm, E. C., et al. 2019, PASP, 131, 078001, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ab006c

    work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/ab006c 2019

  37. [37]

    L., Bellm, E., Guy, L., et al

    Graham, M. L., Bellm, E., Guy, L., et al. 2024, LSST Alerts: Key Numbers, Zenodo, doi: 10.71929/rubin/2997858 Hern´ andez, A. C. V., & Andernach, H. 2018, A Search for Extended Radio Sources in 1.3 sr of the VLA Sky Survey (VLASS). https://arxiv.org/abs/1808.07178

    work page doi:10.71929/rubin/2997858 2024

  38. [38]

    Ho, A. Y. Q., Goldstein, D. A., Schulze, S., et al. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 887, 169, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab55ec

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab55ec 2019

  39. [39]

    Ho, A. Y. Q., Kulkarni, S. R., Perley, D. A., et al. 2020a, The Astrophysical Journal, 902, 86, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aba630

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aba630

  40. [40]

    Ho, A. Y. Q., Corsi, A., Cenko, S. B., et al. 2020b, The Astrophysical Journal, 893, 132, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab7f3b Ivezi´ c,ˇZ., Kahn, S. M., Tyson, J. A., et al. 2019, ApJ, 873, 111, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab042c

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab7f3b 2019

  41. [41]

    A., Nomoto , K., et al

    Iwamoto, K., Mazzali, P. A., Nomoto, K., et al. 1998, Nature, 395, 672, doi: 10.1038/27155

    work page doi:10.1038/27155 1998

  42. [42]

    L., Rigault , M., Neill , J

    Kim, Y.-L., Rigault, M., Neill, J. D., et al. 2022, PASP, 134, 024505, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ac50a0

    work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/ac50a0 2022

  43. [43]

    R., Frail , D

    Kulkarni, S. R., Frail, D. A., Wieringa, M. H., et al. 1998, Nature, 395, 663, doi: 10.1038/27139

    work page doi:10.1038/27139 1998

  44. [44]

    2023, A&A, 678, A209, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346526

    Kuncarayakti, H., Sollerman, J., Izzo, L., et al. 2023, A&A, 678, A209, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346526

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346526 2023

  45. [45]

    2018, ApJL, 866, L22, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aae5f3

    Sironi, L. 2018, ApJL, 866, L22, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aae5f3

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aae5f3 2018

  46. [46]

    J., Blackwell, C

    Lazzati, D., Morsony, B. J., Blackwell, C. H., & Begelman, M. C. 2012, ApJ, 750, 68, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/750/1/68

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/750/1/68 2012

  47. [47]

    A., Beutler, F., et al

    Li, W., Leaman, J., Chornock, R., et al. 2011, MNRAS, 412, 1441, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18160.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18160.x 2011

  48. [48]

    Li, Z.-Y., & Chevalier, R. A. 1999, ApJ, 526, 716, doi: 10.1086/308031

    work page doi:10.1086/308031 1999

  49. [49]

    Liang, E., Zhang, B., Virgili, F., & Dai, Z. G. 2007, The Astrophysical Journal, 662, 1111–1118, doi: 10.1086/517959 Lidman. 2024, TNS, https://www.wis-tns.org/object/2024abup

    work page doi:10.1086/517959 2007

  50. [50]

    B., & Graur , O

    Liu, Y.-Q., Modjaz, M., Bianco, F. B., & Graur, O. 2016, ApJ, 827, 90, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/827/2/90

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/827/2/90 2016

  51. [51]

    D., Bersier , D., & James , P

    Lyman, J. D., Bersier, D., & James, P. A. 2014, MNRAS, 437, 3848, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt2187

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt2187 2014

  52. [52]

    D., Bersier, D., James, P

    Lyman, J. D., Bersier, D., James, P. A., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 457, 328, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv2983

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2983 2016

  53. [53]

    M., Wieringa, M

    Margutti, R., Soderberg, A. M., Wieringa, M. H., et al. 2013, ApJ, 778, 18, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/778/1/18

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/778/1/18 2013

  54. [54]

    J., Laher , R

    Masci, F. J., Laher, R. R., Rusholme, B., et al. 2019, PASP, 131, 018003, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aae8ac

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1088/1538-3873/aae8ac 2019

  55. [55]

    A., Iwamoto, K., & Nomoto, K

    Mazzali, P. A., Iwamoto, K., & Nomoto, K. 2000, ApJ, 545, 407, doi: 10.1086/317808

    work page doi:10.1086/317808 2000

  56. [56]

    A., Deng, J., Maeda, K., et al

    Mazzali, P. A., Deng, J., Maeda, K., et al. 2002, ApJL, 572, L61, doi: 10.1086/341504

    work page doi:10.1086/341504 2002

  57. [57]

    A., Deng, J., Tominaga, N., et al

    Mazzali, P. A., Deng, J., Tominaga, N., et al. 2003, ApJL, 599, L95, doi: 10.1086/381259

    work page doi:10.1086/381259 2003

  58. [58]

    A., Deng, J., Pian, E., et al

    Mazzali, P. A., Deng, J., Pian, E., et al. 2006a, ApJ, 645, 1323, doi: 10.1086/504415

    work page doi:10.1086/504415

  59. [59]

    A., Deng , J., Nomoto , K., et al

    Mazzali, P. A., Deng, J., Nomoto, K., et al. 2006b, Nature, 442, 1018, doi: 10.1038/nature05081

    work page doi:10.1038/nature05081

  60. [60]

    2007, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

    Golap, K. 2007, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 376, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XVI, ed. R. A. Shaw, F. Hill, & D. J. Bell, 127

    work page 2007

  61. [61]

    N., et al

    Meegan, C., Lichti, G., Bhat, P. N., et al. 2009, ApJ, 702, 791, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/702/1/791

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/702/1/791 2009

  62. [62]

    T., et al

    Milisavljevic, D., Margutti, R., Parrent, J. T., et al. 2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 799, 51, doi: 10.1088/0004-637x/799/1/51

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/799/1/51 2015

  63. [63]

    Q., Bianco , F

    Modjaz, M., Liu, Y. Q., Bianco, F. B., & Graur, O. 2016, ApJ, 832, 108, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/832/2/108

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/832/2/108 2016

  64. [64]

    2009, , 702, 226, 10.1088/0004-637X/702/1/226

    Modjaz, M., Li, W., Butler, N., et al. 2009, ApJ, 702, 226, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/702/1/226 Munoz-Arancibia. 2024, TNS, https: //www.wis-tns.org/object/2024adml/discovery-cert

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/702/1/226 2009

  65. [65]

    J., Condon, J

    Murphy, E. J., Condon, J. J., Schinnerer, E., et al. 2011, ApJ, 737, 67, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/737/2/67

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/737/2/67 2011

  66. [66]

    Muthukrishna, D., Parkinson, D., & Tucker, B. E. 2019, ApJ, 885, 85, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab48f4

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab48f4 2019

  67. [67]

    2015, , 807, 172, 10.1088/0004-637X/807/2/172

    Nakar, E. 2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 807, 172, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/807/2/172

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/807/2/172 2015

  68. [68]

    2017, , 834, 28, 10.3847/1538-4357/834/1/28

    Nakar, E., & Piran, T. 2017, ApJ, 834, 28, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/834/1/28

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/834/1/28 2017

  69. [69]

    2012, , 747, 88, 10.1088/0004-637X/747/2/88

    Nakar, E., & Sari, R. 2012, ApJ, 747, 88, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/747/2/88

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/747/2/88 2012

  70. [70]

    B., & Gunn, J

    Oke, J. B., & Gunn, J. E. 1982, PASP, 94, 586, doi: 10.1086/131027

    work page doi:10.1086/131027 1982

  71. [71]

    B., Cohen, J

    Oke, J. B., Cohen, J. G., Carr, M., et al. 1995, PASP, 107, 375, doi: 10.1086/133562

    work page doi:10.1086/133562 1995

  72. [72]

    2023, MNRAS, 519, 1941, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3640 A search for successful and choked jets in nearby SNe Ic-BL23

    Pais, M., Piran, T., & Nakar, E. 2023, MNRAS, 519, 1941, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3640 A search for successful and choked jets in nearby SNe Ic-BL23

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3640 2023

  73. [73]

    T., Corsi, A., Frail, D

    Palliyaguru, N. T., Corsi, A., Frail, D. A., et al. 2019, ApJ, 872, 201, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaf64d Pan-STARRS. 2023, TNS, https://www.wis-tns.org/object/2023eiw

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaf64d 2019

  74. [74]

    2001, The Astrophysical Journal, 555, 900, doi: 10.1086/321526

    Patat, F., Cappellaro, E., Danziger, J., et al. 2001, The Astrophysical Journal, 555, 900, doi: 10.1086/321526

    work page doi:10.1086/321526 2001

  75. [75]

    A., Fremling, C., Sollerman, J., et al

    Perley, D. A., Fremling, C., Sollerman, J., et al. 2020, ApJ, 904, 35, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abbd98

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abbd98 2020

  76. [76]

    A., Chandler, C

    Perley, R. A., Chandler, C. J., Butler, B. J., & Wrobel, J. M. 2011, ApJL, 739, L1, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/739/1/L1

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/739/1/l1 2011

  77. [77]

    A., Masetti, N., et al

    Pian, E., Mazzali, P. A., Masetti, N., et al. 2006, Nature, 442, 1011, doi: 10.1038/nature05082

    work page doi:10.1038/nature05082 2006

  78. [78]

    D., Blagorodnova , N., et al

    Rigault, M., Neill, J. D., Blagorodnova, N., et al. 2019, A&A, 627, A115, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935344

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201935344 2019

  79. [79]

    2020, ApJ, 896, 166, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab93cf

    Ryan, G., van Eerten, H., Piro, L., & Troja, E. 2020, ApJ, 896, 166, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab93cf

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab93cf 2020

  80. [80]

    J., Hambly, N

    Sauer, D. N., Mazzali, P. A., Deng, J., et al. 2006, MNRAS, 369, 1939, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10438.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10438.x 2006

Showing first 80 references.