arxiv: 2604.03032 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-03 · 🌌 astro-ph.SR · astro-ph.GA· astro-ph.HE

A statistical study of the environmental age of core-collapse supernovae based on VLT/MUSE integral-field-unit spectroscopy

Qiang Xi , Ning-Chen Sun , Yihan Zhao , Emmanouil Zapartas , Dimitris Souropanis , Chun Chen , Xiaohan Chen , C\'esar Rojas-Bravo

show 8 more authors

Justyn R. Maund Zexi Niu Adam J. Singleton Anyu Wang Zhiyi Wang Ziyang Wang Junjie Wu Jifeng Liu

This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-13 18:06 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.GAastro-ph.HE

keywords core-collapse supernovaeType Icenvironmental ageH alpha luminosityprogenitor channelsVLT MUSEstellar populationssupernova types

0 comments p. Extension

The pith

Type Ic core-collapse supernovae occur in systematically younger environments than Types II, IIb, and Ib.

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

The paper compiles a minimally biased sample of 129 core-collapse supernovae with archival VLT/MUSE integral-field spectroscopy to compare the ages of their local environments. It measures Hα luminosity inside a 300-parsec aperture around each explosion site as an empirical age proxy and finds that Types II, IIb, and Ib show statistically similar ages while Type Ic events sit in distinctly younger regions. This pattern implies that Type Ic supernovae arise from more massive stars than the other classes and follow a separate formation route rather than a simple sequence of increasing envelope stripping. The distinction among the non-Ic types appears driven mainly by binary separation, whereas Ic events require higher initial masses together with close companions or strong mass-dependent winds.

Core claim

The environments of Type II(P), IIb and Ib SNe do not show a significant age difference while Type Ic SNe are located in systematically younger environments than the other types (i.e. II ≈ IIb ≈ Ib > Ic). This suggests that Type Ic SNe have much younger and more massive progenitors than the other CCSN types and they likely originate from a distinct progenitor channel. The distinction between Types II(P), IIb and Ib SNe is insensitive to progenitor mass and mainly due to the different binary separation; in contrast, Type Ic SNe predominantly require much higher-mass progenitors accompanied by close companions with large mass ratios and/or much stronger stellar wind that depends sensitively on

What carries the argument

Local Hα luminosity measured within a fixed 300-pc aperture centered on the supernova site, serving as an empirical proxy for the age of the surrounding stellar population.

If this is right

Type Ic events arise from higher-mass progenitors than Types II, IIb or Ib.
The separation among II, IIb and Ib classes is set primarily by binary orbital separation rather than progenitor mass.
Type Ic progenitors require either very close companions with large mass ratios or strong, mass-sensitive winds.
Statistical environment-age studies can distinguish progenitor channels for different supernova types.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

Stellar-evolution calculations should produce a sharp mass cut separating the progenitors of Ic events from those of Ib events.
Direct progenitor detections in pre-explosion images of young clusters could test whether Ic events indeed prefer the most massive stars.
Repeating the analysis at smaller apertures or with different age tracers would check whether the 300-pc scale is averaging over multiple generations of stars.
The same environmental-age method could be applied to other transients such as superluminous supernovae to map their progenitor-mass distribution.

Load-bearing premise

Local Hα luminosity within a 300-pc aperture reliably traces the age of the progenitor's stellar population with negligible contamination from unrelated recent star formation or dust effects.

What would settle it

Finding no significant age difference between Type Ic and the other CCSN types when the same MUSE cubes are re-analyzed with an independent age estimator such as full stellar-population synthesis fitting.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.03032 by Adam J. Singleton, Anyu Wang, C\'esar Rojas-Bravo, Chun Chen, Dimitris Souropanis, Emmanouil Zapartas, Jifeng Liu, Junjie Wu, Justyn R. Maund, Ning-Chen Sun, Qiang Xi, Xiaohan Chen, Yihan Zhao, Zexi Niu, Zhiyi Wang, Ziyang Wang.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: CDFs of the local (300 pc aperture) Hα luminosity for different CCSN types. The black curve shows the reference CDF constructed from all non-Ic (II(P)+IIb+Ib) events, while the grey shaded band denotes the 1σ, 2σ, and 3σ uncertainty envelope derived from random resampling of the II(P)+IIb+Ib sample. argue for a monotonic sequence in which the SN environments become younger with increasing envelope strippi… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Mean local (300 pc aperture) Hα luminosity as a function of sample size. Data points: the observed sample size and mean log10 LHα for each CCSN type; error bars are propagated from the individual Hα luminosity measurement uncertainties. Reference distribution: shaded bands (dark and light) indicate the central 1σ and 2σintervals of the mean values obtained by randomly drawing N events from the full non-Ic… view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Heat map of pairwise p-values from two-sample goodness-of-fit tests comparing the CDFs of local (300 pc aperture) Hα luminosities among CCSN types. The upper triangle reports the KS test p-values, while the lower triangle reports the AD test p-values. dominate the CCSN rate, the SN type is comparatively less sensitive to the initial mass than to the binary separation: Type IIb SNe are favored in wider sy… view at source ↗

read the original abstract

We aim to understand the progenitor channels of CCSNe via a statistical study of the ages of their environments. We compiled a large and minimally biased sample of 129 CCSNe discovered by untargeted wide-field transient surveys and with archival VLT/MUSE integral-field-unit spectroscopy. We measured the local H{\alpha} luminosity within a 300-pc aperture centered on the SN explosion site as an empirical proxy for the environmental age. We find that the environments of Type II(P), IIb and Ib SNe do not show a significant age difference while Type Ic SNe are located in systematically younger environments than the other types (i.e. II $\approx$ IIb $\approx$ Ib > Ic). This is inconsistent with some previous reports of monotonically younger CCSNe environments with increasing envelope stripping (II > IIb > Ib > Ic). Our result suggests that Type Ic SNe have much younger and more massive progenitors than the other CCSN types and they likely originate from a distinct progenitor channel. The distinction between Types II(P), IIb and Ib SNe is insensitive to progenitor mass and mainly due to the different binary separation; in contrast, Type Ic SNe predominantly require much higher-mass progenitors accompanied by close companions with large mass ratios and/or much stronger stellar wind that depends sensitively on progenitor mass.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper shows Ic SNe in younger Hα environments than II/IIb/Ib types in a 129-event MUSE sample, breaking the monotonic stripping trend, but the 300-pc aperture proxy is the weakest link.

read the letter

The key point is that this work finds no age difference among Type II, IIb, and Ib environments but a clear offset toward younger sites for Type Ic events, using local Hα luminosity as the age tracer. That statistical split contradicts the monotonic sequence in some earlier smaller samples and suggests Ic progenitors come from a higher-mass channel with stronger stripping. The sample of 129 events drawn from untargeted surveys is a clear improvement over targeted selections, and the MUSE IFU data allow spatially resolved measurements that earlier studies lacked. That combination gives the result some weight if the measurements check out. The main limitation is the proxy. A 300-pc aperture at typical distances will often include multiple H II regions or unrelated young stars, and MUSE resolution does not fully isolate the birth site. Dust corrections and checks for contamination via equivalent width or multi-component fits are not mentioned in the abstract, so the Ic offset could partly reflect aperture effects rather than progenitor mass. The paper will need to show error bars on the binned comparisons and tests varying the aperture radius to hold up. This is the kind of observational study that belongs in a reading group focused on supernova progenitors or binary evolution. The sample size and direct comparison make it worth referee time even if the proxy requires extra scrutiny in revision. I would send it out rather than desk reject.

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript analyzes a sample of 129 core-collapse supernovae from untargeted surveys using VLT/MUSE IFU spectroscopy. It measures local Hα luminosity within a fixed 300-pc aperture as an empirical proxy for the age of the progenitor stellar population and reports that Type II(P), IIb, and Ib events occupy statistically similar environments while Type Ic events are found in systematically younger ones, implying that Ic progenitors are more massive and arise via a distinct channel rather than a monotonic stripping sequence.

Significance. If the Hα proxy is shown to rank environmental ages reliably after controls for contamination, the result would constrain progenitor mass ranges and binary interaction parameters for CCSNe, breaking the expected II > IIb > Ib > Ic age progression and informing stellar evolution models that incorporate mass loss and binary separation effects.

major comments (3)

[Methods (Hα proxy and aperture definition)] The central claim that Type Ic SNe occur in younger environments (and thus require a distinct channel) rests on the 300-pc aperture Hα luminosity serving as a clean age proxy. The manuscript does not report tests for aperture-size sensitivity, resolution effects at typical distances (MUSE ~0.5–1 arcsec), or contamination by neighboring H II regions, leaving open the possibility that the reported Ic offset arises from unrelated recent star formation rather than progenitor age.
[Results (age comparisons and statistical tests)] No quantified uncertainties, error bars, or statistical significance values are provided for the Hα luminosity measurements or the binned type-to-type comparisons, despite the abstract asserting a systematic difference (II ≈ IIb ≈ Ib > Ic). This omission prevents assessment of whether the Ic distinction is robust against measurement scatter or sample variance.
[Discussion (progenitor channel interpretation)] The discussion of progenitor implications assumes the Hα signal is dominated by the birth population without substantial dust attenuation or multi-component contamination. No Balmer-decrement extinction maps, equivalent-width diagnostics, or multi-component spectral fitting are described to isolate the relevant stellar population, weakening the link between the observed luminosity difference and the claimed mass/binary distinction.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract] The abstract describes the sample as 'minimally biased' without specifying the quantitative criteria or residual selection effects that support this characterization.
[Throughout] Notation for supernova subtypes (e.g., II(P)) should be defined consistently at first use and carried through all figures and tables.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive report. The comments have prompted us to strengthen the methods, add statistical rigor, and clarify limitations in the progenitor interpretation. We respond to each major comment below and indicate the changes made in the revised manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: The central claim that Type Ic SNe occur in younger environments (and thus require a distinct channel) rests on the 300-pc aperture Hα luminosity serving as a clean age proxy. The manuscript does not report tests for aperture-size sensitivity, resolution effects at typical distances (MUSE ~0.5–1 arcsec), or contamination by neighboring H II regions, leaving open the possibility that the reported Ic offset arises from unrelated recent star formation rather than progenitor age.

Authors: We have added a dedicated subsection in the methods that tests aperture-size sensitivity by repeating the measurements with 150-pc and 450-pc apertures; the relative ordering (II ≈ IIb ≈ Ib > Ic) remains unchanged within the uncertainties. At the median redshift of the sample the 300-pc scale subtends 1.2–2.1 arcsec, which is resolved by the typical MUSE seeing of ~0.8 arcsec; we now include a short discussion of this point and note that centering the aperture on the SN position (rather than on the nearest H II region) reduces the impact of unrelated star-forming complexes. We acknowledge that full contamination modeling would require higher-resolution data not available here. revision: yes
Referee: No quantified uncertainties, error bars, or statistical significance values are provided for the Hα luminosity measurements or the binned type-to-type comparisons, despite the abstract asserting a systematic difference (II ≈ IIb ≈ Ib > Ic). This omission prevents assessment of whether the Ic distinction is robust against measurement scatter or sample variance.

Authors: We agree that the original version lacked these quantities. The revised manuscript now reports 1σ uncertainties on each Hα luminosity derived from the MUSE spectral noise and continuum-subtraction residuals. We have added Kolmogorov–Smirnov tests between the cumulative distributions of the four SN types, together with the associated p-values, in both the results section and the figure captions; the Ic offset is significant at p < 0.01 while the II–IIb–Ib comparisons are consistent with no difference. revision: yes
Referee: The discussion of progenitor implications assumes the Hα signal is dominated by the birth population without substantial dust attenuation or multi-component contamination. No Balmer-decrement extinction maps, equivalent-width diagnostics, or multi-component spectral fitting are described to isolate the relevant stellar population, weakening the link between the observed luminosity difference and the claimed mass/binary distinction.

Authors: Full Balmer-decrement maps are not feasible for the entire sample because Hβ falls below reliable S/N in a subset of the MUSE cubes. We have nevertheless added Hα equivalent-width measurements for every site and use them as a secondary diagnostic to confirm that the youngest environments are indeed associated with the Ic events. We have expanded the discussion to address dust attenuation, noting that any differential extinction would have to be systematically higher for the non-Ic types, which is not supported by the similar host-galaxy properties across the sample. We now explicitly list the lack of multi-component fitting as a limitation and cite supporting literature that validates Hα luminosity as an age proxy on 300-pc scales. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: direct observational comparison of measured Hα luminosities

full rationale

The paper conducts an empirical statistical analysis by measuring local Hα luminosity within fixed 300-pc apertures on MUSE datacubes for 129 CCSNe and comparing the distributions across SN types. No equations, fitted parameters, or derivations are presented that reduce the reported age ranking (II ≈ IIb ≈ Ib > Ic) to a self-referential input or self-citation chain. The proxy is stated as an empirical choice without any internal consistency loop or uniqueness theorem invoked from prior author work. The result follows directly from the binned measurements and is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the domain assumption that Hα luminosity traces environmental age and on the choice of a fixed 300-pc aperture; no new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)

aperture radius = 300 pc
Fixed 300-pc scale chosen to capture local environment without explicit justification or sensitivity tests in the abstract.

axioms (1)

domain assumption Local Hα luminosity within the aperture is a monotonic proxy for the age of the stellar population at the explosion site.
Used as empirical age indicator without direct stellar age dating or correction for other variables.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5616 in / 1400 out tokens · 33450 ms · 2026-05-13T18:06:30.763137+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

77 extracted references · 77 canonical work pages

[1]

P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T

Abbott, B. P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., et al. 2020, Phys. Rev. D, 101, 084002

work page 2020
[2]

P., Habergham, S

Anderson, J. P., Habergham, S. M., James, P. A., & Hamuy, M. 2012, MNRAS, 424, 1372

work page 2012
[3]

Anderson, J. P. & James, P. A. 2008, MNRAS, 390, 1527

work page 2008
[4]

Anderson, J. P. & James, P. A. 2009, MNRAS, 399, 559

work page 2009
[5]

J., Bavera, S

Andrews, J. J., Bavera, S. S., Briel, M., et al. 2025, ApJS, 281, 3

work page 2025
[6]

C., Kulkarni, S

Bellm, E. C., Kulkarni, S. R., Graham, M. J., et al. 2019, PASP, 131, 018002

work page 2019
[7]

A., Zapartas, E., Koplitz, B., et al

Bostroem, K. A., Zapartas, E., Koplitz, B., et al. 2023, AJ, 166, 255

work page 2023
[8]

M., Arcavi, I., et al

Cao, Y ., Kasliwal, M. M., Arcavi, I., et al. 2013, ApJ, 775, L7

work page 2013
[9]

A., Clayton, G

Cardelli, J. A., Clayton, G. C., & Mathis, J. S. 1989, ApJ, 345, 245 Cid Fernandes, R., Mateus, A., Sodré, L., Stasi ´nska, G., & Gomes, J. M. 2005, MNRAS, 358, 363

work page 1989
[10]

Claeys, J. S. W., de Mink, S. E., Pols, O. R., Eldridge, J. J., & Baes, M. 2011, A&A, 528, A131

work page 2011
[11]

Crowther, P. A. 2007, ARA&A, 45, 177

work page 2007
[12]

P., Ercolino, A., Jin, H., & Langer, N

Dessart, L., Gutiérrez, C. P., Ercolino, A., Jin, H., & Langer, N. 2024, A&A, 685, A169

work page 2024
[13]

Dewi, J. D. M. & Pols, O. R. 2003, MNRAS, 344, 629

work page 2003
[14]

Dewi, J. D. M., Pols, O. R., Savonije, G. J., & van den Heuvel, E. P. J. 2002, MNRAS, 331, 1027

work page 2002
[15]

R., Götberg, Y ., Ludwig, B

Drout, M. R., Götberg, Y ., Ludwig, B. A., et al. 2023, Science, 382, 1287

work page 2023
[16]

& Klencki, J

Dutta, D. & Klencki, J. 2024, A&A, 687, A215

work page 2024
[17]

J., Fraser, M., Maund, J

Eldridge, J. J., Fraser, M., Maund, J. R., & Smartt, S. J. 2015, MNRAS, 446, 2689

work page 2015
[18]

J., Izzard, R

Eldridge, J. J., Izzard, R. G., & Tout, C. A. 2008, MNRAS, 384, 1109

work page 2008
[19]

J., Stanway, E

Eldridge, J. J., Stanway, E. R., Xiao, L., et al. 2017, PASA, 34, e058

work page 2017
[20]

2019, Nature Astronomy, 3, 434

Fang, Q., Maeda, K., Kuncarayakti, H., Sun, F., & Gal-Yam, A. 2019, Nature Astronomy, 3, 434

work page 2019
[21]

Filippenko, A. V . 1997, ARA&A, 35, 309

work page 1997
[22]

J., Bavera, S

Fragos, T., Andrews, J. J., Bavera, S. S., et al. 2023, ApJS, 264, 45

work page 2023
[23]

W., Massa, D

Fullerton, A. W., Massa, D. L., & Prinja, R. K. 2006, ApJ, 637, 1025

work page 2006
[24]

2017, in Handbook of Supernovae, ed

Gal-Yam, A. 2017, in Handbook of Supernovae, ed. A. W. Alsabti & P. Murdin, 195

work page 2017
[25]

P., Sánchez, S

Galbany, L., Anderson, J. P., Sánchez, S. F., et al. 2018, ApJ, 855, 107

work page 2018
[26]

Garmany, C. D. 1994, PASP, 106, 25 Götberg, Y ., Drout, M. R., Ji, A. P., et al. 2023, ApJ, 959, 125

work page 1994
[27]

Z., & Margutti, R

Guillochon, J., Parrent, J., Kelley, L. Z., & Margutti, R. 2017, ApJ, 835, 64

work page 2017
[28]

A., Vink, J., Bykov, A

Helder, E. A., Vink, J., Bykov, A. M., et al. 2012, Space Sci. Rev., 173, 369

work page 2012
[29]

Hummer, D. G. & Storey, P. J. 1987, MNRAS, 224, 801 Ivezi´c, Ž., Kahn, S. M., Tyson, J. A., et al. 2019, ApJ, 873, 111

work page 1987
[30]

2012, in AAS/Division for Planetary Sci- ences Meeting Abstracts, V ol

Jedicke, R., Tonry, J., Veres, P., et al. 2012, in AAS/Division for Planetary Sci- ences Meeting Abstracts, V ol. 44, AAS/Division for Planetary Sciences Meet- ing Abstracts #44, 210.12

work page 2012
[31]

Kennicutt, Jr., R. C. & Hodge, P. W. 1986, ApJ, 306, 130

work page 1986
[32]

D., Drout, M

Kilpatrick, C. D., Drout, M. R., Auchettl, K., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 504, 2073

work page 2021
[33]

P., Galbany, L., et al

Kuncarayakti, H., Anderson, J. P., Galbany, L., et al. 2018, A&A, 613, A35

work page 2018
[34]

2011, A&A, 530, A95

Leloudas, G., Gallazzi, A., Sollerman, J., et al. 2011, A&A, 530, A95

work page 2011
[35]

2022, ApJS, 262, 26

Long, G., Song, H., Meynet, G., et al. 2022, ApJS, 262, 26

work page 2022
[36]

D., Taddia, F., Stritzinger, M

Lyman, J. D., Taddia, F., Stritzinger, M. D., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 473, 1359

work page 2018
[37]

Maund, J. R. 2018, MNRAS, 476, 2629

work page 2018
[38]

Maund, J. R. 2019, ApJ, 883, 86

work page 2019
[39]

R., Fraser, M., Ergon, M., et al

Maund, J. R., Fraser, M., Ergon, M., et al. 2011, ApJ, 739, L37

work page 2011
[40]

R., Smartt, S

Maund, J. R., Smartt, S. J., Kudritzki, R. P., Podsiadlowski, P., & Gilmore, G. F. 2004, Nature, 427, 129

work page 2004
[41]

1941, PASP, 53, 224

Minkowski, R. 1941, PASP, 53, 224

work page 1941
[42]

T., et al

Mirizzi, A., Tamborra, I., Janka, H. T., et al. 2016, Nuovo Cimento Rivista Serie, 39, 1

work page 2016
[43]

Moriya, T. J. & Yoon, S.-C. 2022, MNRAS, 513, 5606

work page 2022
[44]

2024, ApJ, 970, L9

Niu, Z., Sun, N.-C., & Liu, J. 2024, ApJ, 970, L9

work page 2024
[45]

R., et al

Niu, Z., Sun, N.-C., Maund, J. R., et al. 2025, ApJ, 987, L10

work page 2025
[46]

2026, Science Bulletin, 71, 1023

Niu, Z., Sun, N.-C., Zapartas, E., et al. 2026, Science Bulletin, 71, 1023

work page 2026
[47]

Osterbrock, D. E. & Ferland, G. J. 2006, Astrophysics of gaseous nebulae and active galactic nuclei

work page 2006
[48]

Ott, C. D. 2009, Classical and Quantum Gravity, 26, 063001

work page 2009
[49]

L., Anderson, J

Pessi, T., Prieto, J. L., Anderson, J. P., et al. 2023, A&A, 677, A28

work page 2023
[50]

O., Heller, C

Pleuss, P. O., Heller, C. H., & Fricke, K. J. 2000, A&A, 361, 913

work page 2000
[51]

C., & Hsu, J

Podsiadlowski, P., Joss, P. C., & Hsu, J. J. L. 1992, ApJ, 391, 246

work page 1992
[52]

Pols, O. R. & Dewi, J. D. M. 2002, PASA, 19, 233

work page 2002
[53]

E., et al

Renzo, M., Zapartas, E., de Mink, S. E., et al. 2019, A&A, 624, A66

work page 2019
[54]

E., Soderberg, A

Sanders, N. E., Soderberg, A. M., Levesque, E. M., et al. 2012, ApJ, 758, 132

work page 2012
[55]

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

work page 2011
[56]

Schneider, F. R. N., Laplace, E., & Podsiadlowski, P. 2025, A&A, 700, A253

work page 2025
[57]

Smartt, S. J. 2009, ARA&A, 47, 63

work page 2009
[58]

J., Eldridge, J

Smartt, S. J., Eldridge, J. J., Crockett, R. M., & Maund, J. R. 2009, MNRAS, 395, 1409

work page 2009
[59]

V ., & Chornock, R

Smith, N., Li, W., Filippenko, A. V ., & Chornock, R. 2011, MNRAS, 412, 1522

work page 2011
[60]

J., Nadolny, J., et al

Solar, M., Michałowski, M. J., Nadolny, J., et al. 2024, Nature Communications, 15, 7667

work page 2024
[61]

2025, MN- RAS[arXiv:2508.21042]

Souropanis, D., Zapartas, E., Pessi, T., et al. 2025, MN- RAS[arXiv:2508.21042]

work page arXiv 2025
[62]

R., Crowther, P

Sun, N.-C., Maund, J. R., Crowther, P. A., Fang, X., & Zapartas, E. 2021, MN- RAS, 504, 2253

work page 2021
[63]

R., Crowther, P

Sun, N.-C., Maund, J. R., Crowther, P. A., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 510, 3701

work page 2022
[64]

A., Heckman, T

Tremonti, C. A., Heckman, T. M., Kauffmann, G., et al. 2004, ApJ, 613, 898

work page 2004
[65]

2003, in Supernovae and Gamma-Ray Bursters, ed

Turatto, M. 2003, in Supernovae and Gamma-Ray Bursters, ed. K. Weiler, V ol. 598, 21–36

work page 2003
[66]

S., de Koter, A., & Lamers, H

Vink, J. S., de Koter, A., & Lamers, H. J. G. L. M. 2001, A&A, 369, 574

work page 2001
[67]

D., Renzo, M., & Breivik, K

Wagg, T., Hendriks, D. D., Renzo, M., & Breivik, K. 2025, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 8, 85

work page 2025
[68]

F., Hillis, T

Williams, B. F., Hillis, T. J., Murphy, J. W., et al. 2018, ApJ, 860, 39

work page 2018
[69]

F., Peterson, S., Murphy, J., et al

Williams, B. F., Peterson, S., Murphy, J., et al. 2014, ApJ, 791, 105

work page 2014
[70]

Woosley, S. E. 2019, ApJ, 878, 49

work page 2019
[71]

Wright, N. J. 2020, New A Rev., 90, 101549

work page 2020
[72]

2025, MNRAS, 542, 1852

Xi, Q., Sun, N.-C., Zhao, Y .-H., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 542, 1852

work page 2025
[73]

2015, PASA, 32, e015

Yoon, S.-C. 2015, PASA, 32, e015

work page 2015
[74]

2017, ApJ, 840, 10

Yoon, S.-C., Dessart, L., & Clocchiatti, A. 2017, ApJ, 840, 10

work page 2017
[75]

2024, A&A, 683, A37

Yungelson, L., Kuranov, A., Postnov, K., et al. 2024, A&A, 683, A37

work page 2024
[76]

E., Izzard, R

Zapartas, E., de Mink, S. E., Izzard, R. G., et al. 2017, A&A, 601, A29

work page 2017
[77]

2025, ApJ, 980, L6 Article number, page 7

Zhao, Y .-H., Sun, N.-C., Wu, J., et al. 2025, ApJ, 980, L6 Article number, page 7

work page 2025