pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2601.20133 · v2 · submitted 2026-01-27 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE · astro-ph.SR

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Asymmetrical thermonuclear supernovae triggered by the tidal disruption of white dwarfs

Pavan Vynatheya , Luc Dessart , Taeho Ryu , R\"udiger Pakmor
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 10:18 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.SR
keywords tidal disruption eventswhite dwarfsthermonuclear supernovaeasymmetryviewing angle dependenceintermediate-mass black holesnickel-56 productionnebular spectra
0
0 comments X

The pith

Tidal disruptions of white dwarfs by intermediate-mass black holes can produce thermonuclear supernovae that appear highly asymmetrical depending on the viewing angle.

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

The paper simulates the tidal disruption of a carbon-oxygen white dwarf by an intermediate-mass black hole, showing that sufficiently close encounters compress the white dwarf enough to trigger partial nuclear burning and a thermonuclear explosion. These events produce light curves and spectra that match the rise times and peak luminosities of Type Ia supernovae but exhibit extreme variations with observer viewing angle. At late times, strong emission lines can appear shifted and distorted by thousands of kilometers per second due to the asymmetry. A sympathetic reader would care because this offers a new formation channel for supernova-like transients that could explain some observed peculiarities in supernova populations.

Core claim

Simulations of white dwarf tidal disruptions by a 500 solar mass black hole show that for impact parameters below about 0.2, the tidal compression induces runaway fusion, converting up to 82% of the material into nickel-56 for the closest encounters, while leaving outer material unburnt. Radiative transfer calculations reveal that the resulting transients have typical Type Ia supernova rise times and luminosities but with strong dependence on viewing angle, and nebular spectra featuring displaced and skewed calcium lines offset by many thousands of km/s.

What carries the argument

High-resolution hydrodynamical simulations with a 55-isotope nuclear network in the AREPO code, combined with 1D and 2D radiative transfer using CMFGEN and LONGPOL, tracking the dependence on the scaled impact parameter b.

Load-bearing premise

The simulations' hydrodynamics and nuclear reaction network fully capture the tidal compression, heating, and burning processes without significant influence from omitted physics such as magnetic fields or general relativity.

What would settle it

A spectroscopic observation at nebular phases showing calcium emission lines displaced and skewed by several thousand km/s in a transient consistent with a white dwarf tidal disruption event, or the absence of such signatures in a large sample of similar events.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2601.20133 by Luc Dessart, Pavan Vynatheya, R\"udiger Pakmor, Taeho Ryu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Snapshots of TDEs of 0.6 M⊙ WDs, due to 500 M⊙ IMBHs (white points) for eight different values of impact param￾eter b at ∼ 500 s. The top two (bottom two) panels show slices of densities and temperatures for b = 0.20, 0.19, 0.18, 0.17 (b = 0.16, 0.15, 0.12, 0.10), respectively. As b decreases, the ejecta are more spread out and increasingly unlike a standard TDE, indicating runaway nuclear burning, e.g., t… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Isotope mass fractions (those with abundances [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Snapshots of slices of 16O, 28Si and 56Ni densities, respectively, similar to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Polar plots of plane-projected masses within wedges of opening angle 10 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Polar plots of mproj,10◦ similar to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Snapshots of slices of density of a WD TDE with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Velocity versus ‘spherical’ mass (i.e., R 4πr 2ρdr) ob￾tained with the radiation-hydrodynamics code V1D for the b = 0.15 case at multiple times up to one day (top) and for our full model set at one day (bottom). 4.1. Preparation of inputs at 1 d For the last snapshot at ∼ 500 s of each AREPO simulation, we performed spherical shell-averaging around the IMBH to obtain the 1D radial profiles of density, temp… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Composition profiles for models b = 0.10 (top left), b = 0.15 (top right), and b = 0.19 (bottom left) as well as the density profiles for the whole model set (bottom right), all at about 1 d and used as initial conditions for the 1D radiative transfer calculations. We show a few of the dominant species in the ejecta. The Ni profile accounts for radioactive decay (essentially all Ni is due to 56Ni). in the … view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Radiative properties of the 1D counterpart calculated with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Montage of spectra at 1.5, 5, 10, 20, and 45 d for the 1D models when b = 0.15, 0.17, 0.18, and 0.19. These epochs cover the high-brightness optically thick phase. For line identifications, see the other figures. for the innermost layers which are effectively bare. In our post￾treatment of the 1D CMFGEN simulations with LONG_POL, we ig￾nored this aspect and thus overestimate the temperature and ion￾izatio… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Montage of spectra for the D-equivalent of the 3D mod [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Photometric properties of SNe Ia TDE models computed with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Spectral evolution in the optical for the 2D [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Optical spectra for models b = 0.10 (top), b = 0.16 (middle), and b = 0.19 (bottom) at 100 d and for viewing angles of 0, 90, and 180 deg. photospheric epochs. At nebular times, our method and its pre￾dictions are more robust. Still, our enforcement of homogeneity within radial shells when computing both the 1D and 2D radia￾tive transfer compromises the accuracy of the prediction. The reason is that such … view at source ↗
read the original abstract

In a dense star cluster core, a tidal disruption event (TDE) of a white dwarf (WD) can occur if the WD passes within the tidal radius of an intermediate-mass black hole (IMBH). Very close encounters cause extreme tidal compression in the WD, raising temperatures enough to induce runaway fusion and produce a thermonuclear supernova (SN). Using the hydrodynamics code AREPO augmented with a 55-isotope nuclear reaction network, we performed high-resolution simulations of the TDE of a $0.6$ Msun C/O WD by a $500$ Msun IMBH for different values of the scaled impact parameter $b$ (i.e., the ratio of periapsis distance to tidal radius). Closer encounters produce combined TDE+SN events, with a partial burning of $^{12}$C and $^{16}$O into heavier isotopes -- the $^{56}$Ni fractions of the disrupted WD material vary from 1% at $b = 0.19$ to 82% at $b = 0.10$, while wider ones ($b \gtrsim 0.20$) lead to standard TDEs. In all cases, the material away from the denser regions remains unburnt, spanning a wide range of radial velocities. Such WD TDEs also exhibit a central cavity, wherein little material is found below a radial velocity of several $1000 \,\mathrm{km s}^{-1}$. We also performed 1D and 2D radiative-transfer calculations for these WD-TDEs using the codes CMFGEN and LONGPOL, respectively, covering epochs from a few days to one hundred days. We recover the typical rise times and peak luminosities of SNe Ia, but with an extremely strong viewing-angle dependence of both light curves and spectra. At nebular times, isolated strong emission lines like [Ca ii] {\lambda}{\lambda} 7291, 7323 may appear both displaced and skewed by many $1000 \,\mathrm{km s}^{-1}$ -- such extreme offsets are harder to identify at earlier times due to optical depth effects and line overlap. WD TDEs may produce a diverse set of transients with extreme asymmetry and peculiar composition.

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 paper presents AREPO hydrodynamical simulations (with a 55-isotope network) of the tidal disruption of a 0.6 Msun C/O white dwarf by a 500 Msun IMBH at varying scaled impact parameters b. Close encounters (b = 0.10–0.19) produce partial thermonuclear burning yielding 56Ni mass fractions from 82% down to 1%, with unburnt material at high velocities and a central low-velocity cavity; wider encounters produce standard TDEs. 1D (CMFGEN) and 2D (LONGPOL) radiative-transfer calculations then predict SN Ia-like rise times and peak luminosities, but with extreme viewing-angle dependence in light curves and spectra, including nebular [Ca II] lines displaced and skewed by thousands of km/s.

Significance. If the numerical results hold, the work identifies a new channel for highly asymmetric thermonuclear transients that could explain certain peculiar SNe Ia or cluster transients. The strong predicted viewing-angle effects and extreme nebular line offsets constitute falsifiable, observationally testable signatures.

major comments (1)
  1. [§3] §3 (hydrodynamical simulations): No resolution study, convergence tests, or sensitivity analysis to numerical parameters such as cell refinement criteria, artificial viscosity, or mixing is reported. The 56Ni fractions (1% at b=0.19 to 82% at b=0.10) and radial-velocity structure are load-bearing inputs to the CMFGEN/LONGPOL calculations; without demonstrated numerical convergence in the compressive tidal regime, the robustness of the claimed yields, asymmetry, and subsequent light-curve/spectral predictions cannot be verified.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and §4] Abstract and §4: The transition from 3D hydro outputs to 1D/2D radiative transfer is described only briefly; explicit statements on how the 3D asymmetry is mapped onto the RT grids and any symmetry assumptions would improve clarity.
  2. [§5] §5: A short discussion of possible missing physics (magnetic fields, general relativity, neutrino losses) and their potential impact on the 56Ni yields would help contextualize the results.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for highlighting its potential significance as a new channel for asymmetric thermonuclear transients. We address the single major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§3] §3 (hydrodynamical simulations): No resolution study, convergence tests, or sensitivity analysis to numerical parameters such as cell refinement criteria, artificial viscosity, or mixing is reported. The 56Ni fractions (1% at b=0.19 to 82% at b=0.10) and radial-velocity structure are load-bearing inputs to the CMFGEN/LONGPOL calculations; without demonstrated numerical convergence in the compressive tidal regime, the robustness of the claimed yields, asymmetry, and subsequent light-curve/spectral predictions cannot be verified.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit resolution study and convergence tests are important for establishing the robustness of the 56Ni yields and velocity structure, especially since these quantities feed directly into the radiative-transfer calculations. The current manuscript does not report such tests. In the revised version we will add a dedicated subsection (or appendix) presenting results from additional AREPO runs at doubled and quadrupled resolution (both in terms of cell count and refinement criteria) for the critical impact parameters b=0.10 and b=0.19. We will quantify convergence of the 56Ni mass fraction, the radial-velocity distribution, and the presence of the central low-velocity cavity. Where relevant we will also comment on sensitivity to the artificial viscosity settings used in AREPO. These additions will directly address the referee’s concern and strengthen the reliability of the subsequent light-curve and spectral predictions. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in numerical simulation chain

full rationale

The paper performs direct numerical simulations of WD TDEs using the AREPO hydrodynamics code with a 55-isotope nuclear network for chosen input impact parameters b. Outputs such as 56Ni mass fractions (emergent from 1% to 82% depending on b), velocity structures, and central cavities are computed results rather than inputs. These feed into separate radiative-transfer calculations with CMFGEN and LONGPOL to produce light curves and spectra. No analytical derivations, self-definitional equations, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citations appear in the provided text. The central claims (viewing-angle dependence, nebular line offsets) follow from forward modeling of the simulated profiles without reduction to the inputs by construction. This is a standard self-contained numerical study.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard hydrodynamic equations and nuclear reaction rates implemented in named codes, with input masses and impact parameters chosen to explore the scenario; no new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • scaled impact parameter b
    Explored in range 0.10 to 0.20 to sample different encounter strengths; values chosen to bracket transition from burning to non-burning cases.
  • white dwarf mass 0.6 Msun
    Fixed as representative carbon-oxygen white dwarf; not varied in reported runs.
  • IMBH mass 500 Msun
    Fixed intermediate-mass black hole mass for the tidal disruption setup.
axioms (2)
  • standard math Hydrodynamic equations solved by AREPO code
    Standard Euler equations with self-gravity for fluid dynamics in astrophysical contexts.
  • domain assumption 55-isotope nuclear reaction network rates
    Standard nuclear physics inputs for carbon-oxygen burning under high-temperature conditions.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5727 in / 1606 out tokens · 40402 ms · 2026-05-16T10:18:47.007120+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.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references · 63 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    G., Córsico, A

    Althaus, L. G., Córsico, A. H., Isern, J., & García-Berro, E. 2010, A&A Rev., 18, 471

    work page 2010

  2. [2]

    G., Miller Bertolami, M

    Althaus, L. G., Miller Bertolami, M. M., & Córsico, A. H. 2013, A&A, 557, A19

    work page 2013

  3. [3]

    2004, MNRAS, 348, 261

    Benetti, S., Meikle, P., Stehle, M., et al. 2004, MNRAS, 348, 261

    work page 2004

  4. [4]

    Blondin, S., Dessart, L., & Hillier, D. J. 2015, MNRAS, 448, 2766

    work page 2015

  5. [5]

    J., & Khokhlov, A

    Blondin, S., Dessart, L., Hillier, D. J., & Khokhlov, A. M. 2013, MNRAS, 429, 2127

    work page 2013

  6. [6]

    J., & Khokhlov, A

    Blondin, S., Dessart, L., Hillier, D. J., & Khokhlov, A. M. 2017, MNRAS, 470, 157

    work page 2017

  7. [7]

    J., Ramsbottom, C

    Blondin, S., Dessart, L., Hillier, D. J., Ramsbottom, C. A., & Storey, P. J. 2023, A&A, 678, A170

    work page 2023

  8. [8]

    J., Dessart, L., Townsley, D

    Boos, S. J., Dessart, L., Townsley, D. M., & Shen, K. J. 2025, ApJ, 987, 54

    work page 2025

  9. [9]

    & Gomboc, A

    Bricman, K. & Gomboc, A. 2020, ApJ, 890, 73

    work page 2020

  10. [10]

    Chang, J. N. Y ., Dai, L., Pfister, H., Kar Chowdhury, R., & Natarajan, P. 2025, ApJ, 980, L22

    work page 2025

  11. [11]

    & Eracleous, M

    Clausen, D. & Eracleous, M. 2011, ApJ, 726, 34

    work page 2011

  12. [12]

    H., Amthor, A

    Cyburt, R. H., Amthor, A. M., Ferguson, R., et al. 2010, ApJS, 189, 240

    work page 2010

  13. [13]

    J., & Khokhlov, A

    Dessart, L., Blondin, S., Hillier, D. J., & Khokhlov, A. 2014, MNRAS, 441, 532

    work page 2014

  14. [14]

    & Hillier, D

    Dessart, L. & Hillier, D. J. 2011, MNRAS, 415, 3497

    work page 2011

  15. [15]

    & Hillier, D

    Dessart, L. & Hillier, D. J. 2020, A&A, 642, A33

    work page 2020

  16. [16]

    C., Hillier, D

    Dessart, L., Leonard, D. C., Hillier, D. J., & Pignata, G. 2021, A&A, 651, A19

    work page 2021

  17. [17]

    C., Vasylyev, S

    Dessart, L., Leonard, D. C., Vasylyev, S. S., & Hillier, D. J. 2025, A&A, 696, L12

    work page 2025

  18. [18]

    2010, MNRAS, 405, 2113

    Dessart, L., Livne, E., & Waldman, R. 2010, MNRAS, 405, 2113

    work page 2010

  19. [19]

    L., Gil-Pons, P., Siess, L., Lattanzio, J

    Doherty, C. L., Gil-Pons, P., Siess, L., Lattanzio, J. C., & Lau, H. H. B. 2015, MNRAS, 446, 2599

    work page 2015

  20. [20]

    Eyles-Ferris, R. A. J., King, A., Starling, R. L. C., et al. 2026, MN- RAS[arXiv:2509.22843]

    work page arXiv 2026

  21. [21]

    & Chevalier, R

    Fransson, C. & Chevalier, R. A. 1989, ApJ, 343, 323

    work page 1989

  22. [22]

    & Gezari, S

    Gomez, S. & Gezari, S. 2023, ApJ, 955, 46 Górski, K. M., Hivon, E., Banday, A. J., et al. 2005, ApJ, 622, 759

    work page 2023

  23. [23]

    E., Strader, J., & Ho, L

    Greene, J. E., Strader, J., & Ho, L. C. 2020, ARA&A, 58, 257 Gutiérrez, C. P., Mattila, S., Lundqvist, P., et al. 2024, ApJ, 977, 162 Häberle, M., Neumayer, N., Seth, A., et al. 2024, Nature, 631, 285

    work page 2020

  24. [24]

    Hillier, D. J. 1994, A&A, 289, 492

    work page 1994

  25. [25]

    Hillier, D. J. 1996, A&A, 308, 521

    work page 1996

  26. [26]

    Hillier, D. J. & Dessart, L. 2012, MNRAS, 424, 252

    work page 2012

  27. [27]

    Hillier, D. J. & Miller, D. L. 1998, ApJ, 496, 407

    work page 1998

  28. [28]

    Hills, J. G. 1988, Nature, 331, 687

    work page 1988

  29. [29]

    & Khokhlov, A

    Hoeflich, P. & Khokhlov, A. 1996, ApJ, 457, 500 Ivezi´c, Ž., Kahn, S. M., Tyson, J. A., et al. 2019, ApJ, 873, 111

    work page 1996

  30. [30]

    G., Glennie, A., Heida, M., et al

    Jonker, P. G., Glennie, A., Heida, M., et al. 2013, ApJ, 779, 14

    work page 2013

  31. [31]

    C., & Nugent, P

    Kasen, D., Thomas, R. C., & Nugent, P. 2006, ApJ, 651, 366 Article number, page 15 A&A proofs:manuscript no. TDE_SNe

    work page 2006

  32. [32]

    O., Kleinman, S

    Kepler, S. O., Kleinman, S. J., Nitta, A., et al. 2007, MNRAS, 375, 1315

    work page 2007

  33. [33]

    J., Kepler, S

    Kleinman, S. J., Kepler, S. O., Koester, D., et al. 2013, ApJS, 204, 5

    work page 2013

  34. [34]

    Kuin, N. P. M., Wu, K., Oates, S., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 487, 2505

    work page 2019

  35. [35]

    & Martínez-Pinedo, G

    Langanke, K. & Martínez-Pinedo, G. 2001, Atomic Data and Nuclear Data Ta- bles, 79, 1

    work page 2001

  36. [36]

    2017, ApJ, 841, 132

    Law-Smith, J., MacLeod, M., Guillochon, J., Macias, P., & Ramirez-Ruiz, E. 2017, ApJ, 841, 132

    work page 2017

  37. [37]

    N., Feroci, M., et al

    Li, D., Zhang, W., Yang, J., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.25877

    work page arXiv 2025

  38. [38]

    2016, ApJ, 819, 3

    MacLeod, M., Guillochon, J., Ramirez-Ruiz, E., Kasen, D., & Rosswog, S. 2016, ApJ, 819, 3

    work page 2016

  39. [39]

    G., MacLeod, M., & Rosswog, S

    Maguire, K., Eracleous, M., Jonker, P. G., MacLeod, M., & Rosswog, S. 2020, Space Sci. Rev., 216, 39

    work page 2020

  40. [40]

    Tidal disruptions of close white dwarf binaries by intermediate mass black holes

    Mahapatra, A., Pandey, A., Banerjee, P., & Sarkar, T. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.03463

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  41. [41]

    H., et al

    Mamuzic, E., Ryu, T., Suyu, S. H., et al. 2025, A&A, 701, A142 Morán-Fraile, J., Holas, A., Röpke, F. K., Pakmor, R., & Schneider, F. R. N. 2024, A&A, 683, A44

    work page 2025

  42. [42]

    R., et al

    Nomoto, K., Yamaoka, H., Pols, O. R., et al. 1994, Nature, 371, 227

    work page 1994

  43. [43]

    T., Röpke, F

    Ohlmann, S. T., Röpke, F. K., Pakmor, R., & Springel, V . 2017, A&A, 599, A5

    work page 2017

  44. [44]

    K., & Hillebrandt, W

    Pakmor, R., Edelmann, P., Röpke, F. K., & Hillebrandt, W. 2012, MNRAS, 424, 2222

    work page 2012

  45. [45]

    2013, ApJ, 770, L8

    Pakmor, R., Kromer, M., Taubenberger, S., & Springel, V . 2013, ApJ, 770, L8

    work page 2013

  46. [46]

    2016, MNRAS, 455, 1134

    Pakmor, R., Springel, V ., Bauer, A., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 455, 1134

    work page 2016

  47. [47]

    B., Li, Z., Lombardi, Jr., J

    Perets, H. B., Li, Z., Lombardi, Jr., J. C., & Milcarek, Jr., S. R. 2016, ApJ, 823, 113

    work page 2016

  48. [48]

    M., Ashall, C., Brown, P

    Phillips, M. M., Ashall, C., Brown, P. J., et al. 2024, ApJS, 273, 16

    work page 2024

  49. [49]

    Rees, M. J. 1988, Nature, 333, 523

    work page 1988

  50. [50]

    Rosswog, S., Ramirez-Ruiz, E., & Hix, W. R. 2009, ApJ, 695, 404

    work page 2009

  51. [51]

    P., Kirshner, R

    Schmidt, B. P., Kirshner, R. P., Leibundgut, B., et al. 1994, ApJ, 434, L19

    work page 1994

  52. [52]

    R., Ciaraldi-Schoolmann, F., Röpke, F

    Seitenzahl, I. R., Ciaraldi-Schoolmann, F., Röpke, F. K., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 429, 1156

    work page 2013

  53. [53]

    A., Röpke, F

    Sim, S. A., Röpke, F. K., Hillebrandt, W., et al. 2010, ApJ, 714, L52

    work page 2010

  54. [54]

    2005, MNRAS, 364, 1105

    Springel, V . 2005, MNRAS, 364, 1105

    work page 2005

  55. [55]

    2010, MNRAS, 401, 791

    Springel, V . 2010, MNRAS, 401, 791

    work page 2010

  56. [56]

    H., et al

    Szekerczes, K., Ryu, T., Suyu, S. H., et al. 2024, A&A, 690, A384

    work page 2024

  57. [57]

    Timmes, F. X. & Swesty, F. D. 2000, ApJS, 126, 501

    work page 2000

  58. [58]

    E., Bergeron, P., & Gianninas, A

    Tremblay, P. E., Bergeron, P., & Gianninas, A. 2011, ApJ, 730, 128

    work page 2011

  59. [59]

    E., & Perets, H

    Vynatheya, P., Ryu, T., Pakmor, R., de Mink, S. E., & Perets, H. B. 2024, A&A, 685, A45

    work page 2024

  60. [60]

    & Wheeler, J

    Wang, L. & Wheeler, J. C. 2008, ARA&A, 46, 433

    work page 2008

  61. [61]

    2020, ApJS, 248, 32

    Weinberger, R., Springel, V ., & Pakmor, R. 2020, ApJS, 248, 32

    work page 2020

  62. [62]

    & Ryu, T

    Wevers, T. & Ryu, T. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2310.16879

    work page arXiv 2023

  63. [63]

    S., Fragione, G., & Perna, R

    Ye, C. S., Fragione, G., & Perna, R. 2023, ApJ, 953, 141 Article number, page 16

    work page 2023