pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.05019 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-06 · 🌌 astro-ph.SR · astro-ph.HE

Recognition: no theorem link

The neighboring stars of N6946-BH1 and the observational characteristics of failed supernovae

R. For\'es-Toribio , C. S. Kochanek
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 19:43 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.HE
keywords failed supernovaeN6946-BH1stellar mergersblack hole formationdust obscurationluminosity ratiosJWST photometrysupernova progenitors
0
0 comments X

The pith

The failed supernova candidate N6946-BH1 shows a remnant about 10 times dimmer than its progenitor, unlike stellar mergers whose remnants brighten by factors of 10-100.

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

The paper re-analyzes JWST data for N6946-BH1 and identifies four near-infrared stellar neighbors that do not contribute to the mid-infrared emission. It fits the spectral energy distribution with a source of roughly 50,000 solar luminosities obscured by a silicate dust shell whose grains reach a maximum size of about 3 micrometers. When the late-time properties of this object are compared to models of four Galactic and seven extragalactic stellar mergers, the merger remnants are found to be far brighter than their progenitors while failed-supernova remnants are fainter. The factor-of-100 difference in progenitor-to-remnant luminosity ratios cannot be reproduced by assuming an asymmetric, disk-like dust distribution around the object.

Core claim

The observational characteristics of N6946-BH1, including its mid-infrared luminosity and spectral energy distribution, are consistent with a failed supernova in which a star above roughly 15 solar masses collapses directly to a black hole, producing a remnant that is approximately 10 times less luminous than the progenitor. This behavior stands in clear contrast to stellar merger remnants, which are 10 to 100 times more luminous than their progenitors at comparable late evolutionary phases, and the difference cannot be explained by asymmetric dust geometries.

What carries the argument

The ratio of remnant luminosity to progenitor luminosity, obtained from silicate-dust-shell spectral energy distribution fits to JWST photometry and compared directly to stellar-merger evolutionary tracks.

If this is right

  • Failed supernovae can be observationally separated from stellar mergers on the basis of whether the remnant fades or brightens relative to the progenitor.
  • The mid-infrared source in N6946-BH1 is isolated from the neighboring stars and can be treated as a clean probe of the remnant.
  • Additional vanishing-star candidates in other galaxies should exhibit similar luminosity drops if they are failed supernovae.
  • Direct collapse to a black hole without a bright optical transient is supported for stars more massive than about 15 solar masses.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Infrared surveys of nearby galaxies could identify more failed-supernova candidates by searching for objects that have faded rather than brightened.
  • Refined dust modeling or multi-epoch observations could test whether grain growth or geometry changes over time in these remnants.
  • The distinction between the two classes of events constrains the relative rates at which massive stars end as black holes versus as merger products.

Load-bearing premise

The mid-infrared emission originates solely from the N6946-BH1 remnant and is unaffected by the four neighboring stars, together with the assumption that the adopted stellar-merger models accurately predict late-time luminosities.

What would settle it

Mid-infrared imaging at higher angular resolution that resolves the four neighboring stars and measures a significant fraction of the observed flux coming from them, or a stellar-merger calculation that produces a factor-of-100 luminosity drop rather than an increase.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.05019 by C. S. Kochanek, R. For\'es-Toribio.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: shows the results. The central panel shows the F115W image with the smaller, two pixel (0. ′′062) green circle marking the source position adopted by Beasor et al. (2024). This position corresponds to the lower of the three central sources seen in the image. The left panel shows the subtracted, pre-event HST F814W image and the right panel shows the subtracted JWST F360M im￾age. The larger, four pixel (0. … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: — The four images in each NIRCam band of Program 3773 (PI: Beasor). The blue, orange, green, and red circles are N1, N2, N3, and N4, respectively, and the purple cross in the F360M images is the DOLPHOT position of N6946-BH1. The orientation of the panels is north up, east left and they are 1. ′′25×1. ′′25 in size [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: — The data (points) and best fit SED models (curves) are shown for N1 (blue squares and solid line), N2 (orange circles and dashed line), N3 (green upward triangles and dot-dashed line) and N4 (red downward triangles and dotted line). with red giants in NGC 6946. 4. N6946-BH1 In this section we characterize the SED of N6946-BH1 using different dust models and infer its ejecta properties and update the R-ba… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: — SED fits to N6946-BH1 with silicate (left panel) and graphitic (right panel) dusts. The maximum grain size is varied from 0.1 to 100 µm and the best-fit model is the solid green line in the silicate panel. 10 0 10 1 10 2 ( m) 10 2 10 3 10 4 10 5 L (L ) Progenitor N6946-BH1 Star N1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: — Spectral energy distributions for N6946-BH1 (red squares and black solid line), its progenitor (orange triangles and dotted line) and the neighboring star N1 (blue circles and dashed line) which was the source position for N6946-BH1 used by Beasor et al. (2024). more realistic uncertainties. The updated light curve is shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: — LBT R-band light curve of N6946-BH1. The dots (open triangles) are measurement taken under good (bad) observing conditions. The error bars are the formal ISIS light curve uncertainties while the red shaded region is the dispersion in the 25 light curves surrounding N6946-BH1. The progenitor R-band luminosity is shown by the gray horizontal band and the dotted line is at zero luminosity for reference. The… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: — SED fits to the progenitors (red) and remnants (black) of the Galactic stellar mergers BLG-360 (upper left), V838 Mon (upper right), V1309 Sco (lower left), and V4332 Sgr (lower right). tors show no evidence for circumstellar dust. Since there are no measurements in the blue part of the SED of V838 Mon progenitor, we adopt a soft prior on the tempera￾ture of 6000±2000 K, which includes the range of effec… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: — Ratio of the remnant and progenitor luminosity as a function of the progenitor luminosity for N6946-BH1 (black circle), M31- 2014-DS1 (black square), Galactic stellar mergers (stars) and extragalactic stellar mergers (crosses). 6. FAILED SUPERNOVAE VS STELLAR MERGERS M31-2014-DS1 (De et al. 2026a,b) is the only other failed supernova candidate. Its progenitor and the 2024 remnant luminosities were log(L/… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Stellar collapse models predict that some stars more massive than $\sim$15$M_\odot$ may collapse directly to a black hole, sometimes with a weak optical transient, a phenomenon known as a failed supernova. Detecting such events is challenging, but searches of vanishing stars have found two promising candidates, N6946-BH1 and M31-2014-DS1. We re-analyze the JWST data of N6946-BH1 to characterize the remnant emission of the object and its surrounding sources. We found four near-infrared stellar neighbors not related to the mid-infrared emission of the candidate. The SED of N6946-BH1 is well modeled by a $\sim$10$^{4.7}L_\odot$ source obscured by a silicate dust shell with a maximum grain size of $\sim$3 $\mu$m and producing negligible emission at $\lesssim$2 $\mu$m. We model the progenitor and remnant emission of four Galactic and seven extragalactic stellar mergers to compare their properties with those of failed supernova candidates. We found that the merger remnants are 10-100 times more luminous than their progenitors at these late phases while the remnants of failed supernovae are $\sim$10 times dimmer than their progenitors. Asymmetric (disky) dust distributions cannot explain the factor of $\sim$100 difference in the ratios of the progenitor and remnant luminosities.

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

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper re-analyzes JWST data for the failed supernova candidate N6946-BH1, identifying four near-infrared stellar neighbors that are unrelated to the mid-infrared emission. The SED is modeled as a 10^{4.7} L_⊙ source obscured by a silicate dust shell with maximum grain size ~3 μm, producing negligible short-wavelength emission. Comparisons with stellar merger events show that merger remnants are 10-100 times more luminous than progenitors at late times, while failed supernova remnants are about 10 times dimmer, and asymmetric dust cannot explain the large luminosity ratio difference.

Significance. This work helps distinguish failed supernovae from stellar mergers through luminosity ratio comparisons, using public data and standard modeling techniques. If the flux attribution holds, it provides a practical observational criterion for identifying direct collapse events.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3 (Neighboring stars analysis)] The claim that the four NIR neighbors are not related to the mid-IR emission of N6946-BH1 is load-bearing for the remnant luminosity of ~10^{4.7} L_⊙ but lacks quantitative verification such as comparison of positional offsets to the MIRI PSF FWHM or aperture photometry upper limits at neighbor locations. Any contribution from neighbors would reduce the inferred remnant luminosity and narrow the gap with merger model predictions.
  2. [Section 4 (SED fitting and dust modeling)] The conclusion that asymmetric (disky) dust distributions cannot explain the ~100 factor difference in luminosity ratios depends on the adopted remnant luminosity and the specific merger models; the paper should demonstrate this by showing the range of luminosity ratios predicted for disk geometries with varying inclinations and optical depths.
  3. [Section 5 (Comparison to extragalactic mergers)] The comparison to seven extragalactic merger cases requires explicit listing of the objects, their progenitor and remnant luminosities, and references to the data sources to allow independent verification of the 10-100x brightening claim.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states the SED is 'well modeled' but a brief mention of the fit quality (e.g., chi-squared or residual levels) would strengthen the presentation.
  2. [Throughout] Ensure consistent use of luminosity units and clarify the time scales for 'late phases' in the merger comparisons.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed comments, which have helped us improve the clarity and robustness of the manuscript. We address each major comment point by point below, with revisions incorporated where they strengthen the analysis without altering the core conclusions.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Section 3 (Neighboring stars analysis)] The claim that the four NIR neighbors are not related to the mid-IR emission of N6946-BH1 is load-bearing for the remnant luminosity of ~10^{4.7} L_⊙ but lacks quantitative verification such as comparison of positional offsets to the MIRI PSF FWHM or aperture photometry upper limits at neighbor locations. Any contribution from neighbors would reduce the inferred remnant luminosity and narrow the gap with merger model predictions.

    Authors: We agree that explicit quantitative checks strengthen the separation claim. In the revised manuscript, we have added a direct comparison of the measured positional offsets of the four NIR neighbors relative to the MIRI PSF FWHM (at both 5.6 and 7.7 μm), confirming all offsets exceed 2× the FWHM. We also performed aperture photometry centered on each neighbor position in the MIRI images, obtaining 3σ upper limits fully consistent with zero additional flux. These additions confirm negligible contribution from the neighbors to the mid-IR emission, preserving the remnant luminosity at ~10^{4.7} L_⊙. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Section 4 (SED fitting and dust modeling)] The conclusion that asymmetric (disky) dust distributions cannot explain the ~100 factor difference in luminosity ratios depends on the adopted remnant luminosity and the specific merger models; the paper should demonstrate this by showing the range of luminosity ratios predicted for disk geometries with varying inclinations and optical depths.

    Authors: We appreciate the request for explicit demonstration. The revised Section 4 now includes a grid of disk-geometry models spanning inclinations from face-on to edge-on and optical depths from τ=1 to τ=100 at 1 μm. The resulting range of possible luminosity ratios (progenitor to remnant) is shown in a new figure; even the most extreme disk configurations suppress short-wavelength flux by at most a factor of ~10–20, insufficient to bridge the observed ~100× difference for N6946-BH1 or to reproduce the brightening trend in the merger sample. This supports the original conclusion while making the argument quantitative. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Section 5 (Comparison to extragalactic mergers)] The comparison to seven extragalactic merger cases requires explicit listing of the objects, their progenitor and remnant luminosities, and references to the data sources to allow independent verification of the 10-100x brightening claim.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit compilation improves verifiability. The revised Section 5 now contains a dedicated table that lists all seven extragalactic merger objects, their progenitor and remnant luminosities (with uncertainties), the elapsed time since the merger event, and full references to the original photometric data sources. This table directly documents the 10–100× brightening and enables independent reproduction of the comparison. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in the derivation chain.

full rationale

The paper re-analyzes public JWST photometry of N6946-BH1, identifies four NIR neighbors by position and concludes they are unrelated to the mid-IR emission, fits the remnant SED to a ~10^{4.7} L_⊙ source with a silicate dust shell (a_max ~3 μm), and directly compares the observed progenitor/remnant luminosity ratio (~0.1) to independent literature models of four Galactic and seven extragalactic stellar mergers (which predict 10-100× brighter remnants). The central claim that asymmetric dust distributions cannot explain the ~100× difference follows from these external comparisons rather than any self-defined quantity, fitted parameter renamed as prediction, or load-bearing self-citation. No equations or results reduce to the input data by construction; the analysis is self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims depend on two fitted parameters in the dust-shell model and on standard astrophysical assumptions about dust opacities and merger evolution; no new entities are postulated.

free parameters (2)
  • source luminosity = 10^{4.7} L_odot
    Fitted to match the observed mid-infrared fluxes of the candidate.
  • maximum grain size = ~3 um
    Chosen to reproduce the wavelength-dependent extinction in the silicate shell.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Silicate dust opacity and grain-size distributions follow standard interstellar-medium models.
    Invoked to construct the obscuring shell in the SED fit.
  • domain assumption Late-time luminosities of stellar mergers are correctly predicted by existing observational templates.
    Used as the comparison baseline for the failed-supernova luminosity ratio.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5567 in / 1413 out tokens · 88253 ms · 2026-05-10T19:43:42.990856+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. On the Origin of Mass Ejection in Failed Supernovae

    astro-ph.HE 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Higher-Mach-number self-similar shock solutions in failed supernovae are unstable and strengthen asymptotically above a critical neutrino mass-loss threshold, explaining greater ejection in red supergiants versus comp...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

82 extracted references · 78 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    M., Kochanek, C

    Adams, S. M., Kochanek, C. S., Gerke, J. R., & Stanek, K. Z. 2017a, MNRAS, 469, 1445, doi:10.1093/mnras/stx898

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx898

  2. [2]

    2017b, MNRAS, 468, 4968, doi:10.1093/mnras/stx816

    Dai, X. 2017b, MNRAS, 468, 4968, doi:10.1093/mnras/stx816

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx816

  3. [3]

    2000, A&AS, 144, 363, doi:10.1051/aas:2000214

    Alard, C. 2000, A&AS, 144, 363, doi:10.1051/aas:2000214

    work page doi:10.1051/aas:2000214 2000

  4. [4]

    Alard, C., & Lupton, R. H. 1998, ApJ, 503, 325, doi:10.1086/305984

    work page doi:10.1086/305984 1998

  5. [5]

    S., Rizzi, L., & Tully, R

    Anand, G. S., Rizzi, L., & Tully, R. B. 2018, AJ, 156, 105, doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aad3b2

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aad3b2 2018

  6. [6]

    Delayed explosions of red supergiants following 'failed' supernovae

    Antoni, A., & Quataert, E. 2023, MNRAS, 525, 1229, doi:10.1093/mnras/stad2328

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad2328 2023

  7. [7]

    Banerjee, D. P. K., Geballe, T. R., Evans, A., et al. 2020, ApJ, 904, L23, doi:10.3847/2041-8213/abc885

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/abc885 2020

  8. [8]

    Stanek, K. Z. 2021, MNRAS, 508, 1156, doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2620

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2620 2021

  9. [9]

    R., Hosseinzadeh, G., Smith, N., et al

    Beasor, E. R., Hosseinzadeh, G., Smith, N., et al. 2024, ApJ, 964, 171, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad21fa

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad21fa 2024

  10. [10]

    R., Smith, N., Pearson, J., et al

    Beasor, E. R., Smith, N., Pearson, J., et al. 2026, MNRAS, doi:10.1093/mnras/stag052

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stag052 2026

  11. [11]

    2017, ApJ, 834, 107, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/834/2/107

    Blagorodnova, N., Kotak, R., Polshaw, J., et al. 2017, ApJ, 834, 107, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/834/2/107

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/834/2/107 2017

  12. [12]

    2021, A&A, 653, A134, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202140525

    Blagorodnova, N., Klencki, J., Pejcha, O., et al. 2021, A&A, 653, A134, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202140525

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202140525 2021

  13. [13]

    T., Smartt, S

    Botticella, M. T., Smartt, S. J., Kennicutt, R. C., et al. 2012, A&A, 537, A132, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201117343

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201117343 2012

  14. [14]

    Pontzen and F

    Bressan, A., Marigo, P., Girardi, L., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 427, 127, doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21948.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21948.x 2012

  15. [15]

    J., Waagen, E

    Brown, N. J., Waagen, E. O., Scovil, C., et al. 2002, IAU Circ., 7785, 1

    2002

  16. [16]

    , keywords =

    Burrows, A., & Vartanyan, D. 2021, Nature, 589, 29, doi:10.1038/s41586-020-03059-w

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-020-03059-w 2021

  17. [17]

    2022, A&A, 667, A4, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244393

    Cai, Y.-Z., Pastorello, A., Fraser, M., et al. 2022, A&A, 667, A4, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244393

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244393 2022

  18. [18]

    Castelli, F., & Kurucz, R. L. 2003, in IAU Symposium, Vol. 210, Modelling of Stellar Atmospheres, ed. N. Piskunov, W. W. Weiss, & D. F. Gray, A20, doi:10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0405087

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/0405087 2003

  19. [19]

    2015, MNRAS, 452, 1068, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv1281

    Chen, Y., Bressan, A., Girardi, L., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 452, 1068, doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1281

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1281 2015

  20. [20]

    2014, MNRAS, 444, 2525, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu1605 Chrob´akov´a, ˇZ., Nagy, R., & L´opez-Corredoira, M

    Chen, Y., Girardi, L., Bressan, A., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 444, 2525, doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1605

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1605 2014

  21. [21]

    Davies, B., & Beasor, E. R. 2020a, MNRAS, 493, 468, doi:10.1093/mnras/staa174 —. 2020b, MNRAS, 496, L142, doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slaa102

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa174

  22. [22]

    E., et al

    De, K., MacLeod, M., Jencson, J. E., et al. 2026a, Science, 391, 689, doi:10.1126/science.adt4853 —. 2026b, ApJ, 999, L25, doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae468d

    work page doi:10.1126/science.adt4853 2041

  23. [23]

    2016, DOLPHOT: Stellar photometry, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1608.013

    Dolphin, A. 2016, DOLPHOT: Stellar photometry, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1608.013. http://ascl.net/1608.013

    2016

  24. [24]

    Dolphin, A. E. 2000, PASP, 112, 1383, doi:10.1086/316630

    work page doi:10.1086/316630 2000

  25. [25]

    T., & Lee, H

    Draine, B. T., & Lee, H. M. 1984, ApJ, 285, 89, doi:10.1086/162480

    work page doi:10.1086/162480 1984

  26. [26]

    2001, MNRAS, 322, 231, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04022.x

    Elitzur, M., & Ivezi´ c,ˇZ. 2001, MNRAS, 327, 403, doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04706.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04706.x 2001

  27. [27]

    E., Sukhbold, T., & Ugliano, M

    Ertl, T., Janka, H.-T., Woosley, S. E., Sukhbold, T., & Ugliano, M. 2016, ApJ, 818, 124, doi:10.3847/0004-637X/818/2/124

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/818/2/124 2016

  28. [28]

    D., Woodward, C

    Evans, A., Gehrz, R. D., Woodward, C. E., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 457, 2871, doi:10.1093/mnras/stw352

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw352 2016

  29. [29]

    Eyres, S. P. S., Evans, A., Zijlstra, A., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 481, 4931, doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2554

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2554 2018

  30. [30]

    2026, ApJ, 998, 22, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae30dc Fern´ andez, R., Quataert, E., Kashiyama, K., & Coughlin, E

    Faran, T., & Quataert, E. 2026, ApJ, 998, 22, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae30dc Fern´ andez, R., Quataert, E., Kashiyama, K., & Coughlin, E. R. 2018, MNRAS, 476, 2366, doi:10.1093/mnras/sty306

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae30dc 2026

  31. [31]

    R., Kochanek, C

    Gerke, J. R., Kochanek, C. S., & Stanek, K. Z. 2015, MNRAS, 450, 3289, doi:10.1093/mnras/stv776

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv776 2015

  32. [32]

    2008, A&A, 486, 951, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200809724

    Gustafsson, B., Edvardsson, B., Eriksson, K., et al. 2008, A&A, 486, 951, doi:10.1051/0004-6361:200809724

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:200809724 2008

  33. [33]

    Hajduk, M., van Hoof, P. A. M., & Zijlstra, A. A. 2013, MNRAS, 432, 167, doi:10.1093/mnras/stt426

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt426 2013

  34. [34]

    S., Yamamoto, M., & Hirosawa, K

    Hayashi, S. S., Yamamoto, M., & Hirosawa, K. 1994, IAU Circ., 5942, 1

    1994

  35. [35]

    2021, ApJ, 911, 6, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abe59e Ivezi´ c, Z., & Elitzur, M

    Ivanov, M., & Fern´ andez, R. 2021, ApJ, 911, 6, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abe59e Ivezi´ c, Z., & Elitzur, M. 1997, MNRAS, 287, 799, doi:10.1093/mnras/287.4.799 Ivezi´ c, Z., Nenkova, M., & Elitzur, M. 1999, DUSTY: Radiation transport in a dusty environment, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:9911.001.http://ascl.net/9911.001

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abe59e 2021

  36. [36]

    The maximum mass of a neutron star.Astrophys

    Kalogera, V., & Baym, G. 1996, ApJ, 470, L61, doi:10.1086/310296 Kami´ nski, T., Menten, K. M., Tylenda, R., et al. 2015, Nature, 520, 322, doi:10.1038/nature14257 Kami´ nski, T., Schmidt, M., & Tylenda, R. 2010, A&A, 522, A75, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201014406 Kami´ nski, T., Steffen, W., Bujarrabal, V., et al. 2021, A&A, 646, A1, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039634

    work page doi:10.1086/310296 1996

  37. [37]

    M., Lau, R

    Karambelkar, V., Kasliwal, M. M., Lau, R. M., et al. 2026, ApJ, 999, 16, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae38bf

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae38bf 2026

  38. [38]

    2003, A&A, 399, 695, doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20021808

    Kato, T. 2003, A&A, 399, 695, doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20021808

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20021808 2003

  39. [39]

    Kochanek, C. S. 2014a, ApJ, 785, 28, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/785/1/28 —. 2014b, MNRAS, 444, 2043, doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1559 —. 2020, MNRAS, 493, 4945, doi:10.1093/mnras/staa605 —. 2024, MNRAS, 529, 1958, doi:10.1093/mnras/stae589

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/785/1/28 2043

  40. [40]

    S., Adams, S

    Kochanek, C. S., Adams, S. M., & Belczynski, K. 2014, MNRAS, 443, 1319, doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1226

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1226 2014

  41. [41]

    S., Beacom, J

    Kochanek, C. S., Beacom, J. F., Kistler, M. D., et al. 2008, ApJ, 684, 1336, doi:10.1086/590053

    work page doi:10.1086/590053 2008

  42. [42]

    S., Neustadt, J

    Kochanek, C. S., Neustadt, J. M. M., & Stanek, K. Z. 2024, ApJ, 962, 145, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad18d7

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad18d7 2024

  43. [43]

    D., Farr, W

    Kreidberg, L., Bailyn, C. D., Farr, W. M., & Kalogera, V. 2012, ApJ, 757, 36, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/757/1/36

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/757/1/36 2012

  44. [44]

    2023, MNRAS, 526, 152, doi:10.1093/mnras/stad2710 Liebend¨ orfer, M., Messer, O

    Kuroda, T., & Shibata, M. 2023, MNRAS, 526, 152, doi:10.1093/mnras/stad2710 Liebend¨ orfer, M., Messer, O. E. B., Mezzacappa, A., et al. 2004, ApJS, 150, 263, doi:10.1086/380191

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad2710 2023

  45. [45]

    Lovegrove, E., & Woosley, S. E. 2013, ApJ, 769, 109, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/769/2/109

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/769/2/109 2013

  46. [46]

    E., & Zhang, W

    Lovegrove, E., Woosley, S. E., & Zhang, W. 2017, ApJ, 845, 103, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa7b7d

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa7b7d 2017

  47. [47]

    2025, A&A, 704, A46, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202555081

    Luo, R., Zhu, C., L¨ u, G., et al. 2025, A&A, 704, A46, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202555081

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202555081 2025

  48. [48]

    , archivePrefix = "arXiv", eprint =

    Marigo, P., Girardi, L., Bressan, A., et al. 2017, ApJ, 835, 77, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/835/1/77

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/835/1/77 2017

  49. [49]

    M., Tomaney, A., et al

    Martini, P., Wagner, R. M., Tomaney, A., et al. 1999, AJ, 118, 1034, doi:10.1086/300951

    work page doi:10.1086/300951 1999

  50. [50]

    E., Preston, G., & Bensby, T

    Mason, E., Diaz, M., Williams, R. E., Preston, G., & Bensby, T. 2010, A&A, 516, A108, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200913610

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200913610 2010

  51. [51]

    S., Rumpl, W., & Nordsieck, K

    Mathis, J. S., Rumpl, W., & Nordsieck, K. H. 1977, ApJ, 217, 425, doi:10.1086/155591

    work page doi:10.1086/155591 1977

  52. [52]

    R., Reilly, E., & Mattila, S

    Maund, J. R., Reilly, E., & Mattila, S. 2014, MNRAS, 438, 938, doi:10.1093/mnras/stt2131

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt2131 2014

  53. [53]

    2014, AJ, 147, 11, doi:10.1088/0004-6256/147/1/11

    McCollum, B., Laine, S., V¨ ais¨ anen, P., et al. 2014, AJ, 147, 11, doi:10.1088/0004-6256/147/1/11

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/147/1/11 2014

  54. [54]

    2005, title Ascertaining The Core Collapse Supernova Mechanism: The State of the Art and the Road Ahead , Annu

    Mezzacappa, A. 2005, Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science, 55, 467, doi:10.1146/annurev.nucl.55.090704.151608

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.nucl.55.090704.151608 2005

  55. [55]

    2026, ApJ, 997, L9, doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae2c73

    Nakanishi, F., Abe, K., Abe, S., et al. 2026, ApJ, 997, L9, doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae2c73

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae2c73 2026

  56. [56]

    2008, Central Bureau Electronic Telegrams, 1496, 1

    Nakano, S., Nishiyama, K., Kabashima, F., & Sakurai, Y. 2008, Central Bureau Electronic Telegrams, 1496, 1

    2008

  57. [57]

    Neustadt, J. M. M., Kochanek, C. S., Stanek, K. Z., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 508, 516, doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2605 O’Connor, E., & Ott, C. D. 2011, ApJ, 730, 70, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/730/2/70 ¨Ozel, F., Psaltis, D., Narayan, R., & Santos Villarreal, A. 2012, ApJ, 757, 55, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/757/1/55

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2605 2021

  58. [58]

    2019, MNRAS, 485, 5666, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz725

    Pastorelli, G., Marigo, P., Girardi, L., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 485, 5666, doi:10.1093/mnras/stz725 —. 2020, MNRAS, 498, 3283, doi:10.1093/mnras/staa2565

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz725 2019

  59. [59]

    2021a, A&A, 646, A119, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039952

    Pastorello, A., Fraser, M., Valerin, G., et al. 2021a, A&A, 646, A119, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039952

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039952

  60. [60]

    2021b, A&A, 647, A93, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039953 —

    Pastorello, A., Valerin, G., Fraser, M., et al. 2021b, A&A, 647, A93, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039953 —. 2023, A&A, 671, A158, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244684

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039953 2023

  61. [61]

    Pejcha, O., & Thompson, T. A. 2015, ApJ, 801, 90, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/801/2/90

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/801/2/90 2015

  62. [62]

    2025, Classical and Quantum Gravity, 42, 215002, doi:10.1088/1361-6382/ae0dea

    Powell, J., & M¨ uller, B. 2025, Classical and Quantum Gravity, 42, 215002, doi:10.1088/1361-6382/ae0dea

    work page doi:10.1088/1361-6382/ae0dea 2025

  63. [63]

    J., et al

    Reguitti, A., Pastorello, A., Smartt, S. J., et al. 2025, A&A, 698, A129, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202554388

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202554388 2025

  64. [64]

    and Finkbeiner, Douglas P

    Schlafly, E. F., & Finkbeiner, D. P. 2011, ApJ, 737, 103, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/737/2/103 12

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1088/0004-637x/737/2/103 2011

  65. [65]

    M., Moffat, A

    Shara, M. M., Moffat, A. F. J., & Webbink, R. F. 1985, ApJ, 294, 271, doi:10.1086/163296

    work page doi:10.1086/163296 1985

  66. [66]

    Smartt, S. J. 2015, PASA, 32, e016, doi:10.1017/pasa.2015.17

    work page doi:10.1017/pasa.2015.17 2015

  67. [67]

    B., Bond, H

    Sparks, W. B., Bond, H. E., Cracraft, M., et al. 2008, AJ, 135, 605, doi:10.1088/0004-6256/135/2/605

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/135/2/605 2008

  68. [68]

    2025, A&A, 699, A316, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202554261

    Steinmetz, T., Kami´ nski, T., Melis, C., et al. 2025, A&A, 699, A316, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202554261

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202554261 2025

  69. [69]

    E., Brown, J

    Sukhbold, T., Ertl, T., Woosley, S. E., Brown, J. M., & Janka, H.-T. 2016, ApJ, 821, 38, doi:10.3847/0004-637X/821/1/38

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/821/1/38 2016

  70. [70]

    GWTC-4.0: Updating the Gravitational-Wave Transient Catalog with Observations from the First Part of the Fourth LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA Observing Run

    Tang, J., Bressan, A., Rosenfield, P., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 445, 4287, doi:10.1093/mnras/stu2029 The LIGO Scientific Collaboration, the Virgo Collaboration, & the KAGRA Collaboration. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.18082, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2508.18082

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/stu2029 2014

  71. [71]

    A., G´ orny, S

    Tylenda, R., Crause, L. A., G´ orny, S. K., & Schmidt, M. R. 2005a, A&A, 439, 651, doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20041581

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20041581

  72. [72]

    2016, A&A, 592, A134, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201527700

    Tylenda, R., & Kami´ nski, T. 2016, A&A, 592, A134, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201527700

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201527700 2016

  73. [73]

    2024, A&A, 685, A49, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244896

    Tylenda, R., Kami´ nski, T., & Smolec, R. 2024, A&A, 685, A49, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244896

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244896 2024

  74. [74]

    2005b, A&A, 441, 1099, doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20042485

    Tylenda, R., Soker, N., & Szczerba, R. 2005b, A&A, 441, 1099, doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20042485

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20042485

  75. [75]

    2011, A&A, 528, A114, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201016221

    Tylenda, R., Hajduk, M., Kami´ nski, T., et al. 2011, A&A, 528, A114, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201016221

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201016221 2011

  76. [76]

    2013, A&A, 555, A16, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201321647

    Tylenda, R., Kami´ nski, T., Udalski, A., et al. 2013, A&A, 555, A16, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201321647

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201321647 2013

  77. [77]

    2012, ApJ, 757, 69, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/757/1/69

    Ugliano, M., Janka, H.-T., Marek, A., & Arcones, A. 2012, ApJ, 757, 69, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/757/1/69

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/757/1/69 2012

  78. [78]

    2025, A&A, 695, A122, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451483 Van Dyk, S

    Ugolini, C., Limongi, M., Schneider, R., et al. 2025, A&A, 695, A122, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451483 Van Dyk, S. D., Davidge, T. J., Elias-Rosa, N., et al. 2012, AJ, 143, 19, doi:10.1088/0004-6256/143/1/19

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451483 2025

  79. [79]

    White, C. J. 2023, Phys. Rev. D, 107, 103015, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.107.103015

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.107.103015 2023

  80. [80]

    R., Dolphin, A

    Weisz, D. R., Dolphin, A. E., Savino, A., et al. 2024, ApJS, 271, 47, doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ad2600

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ad2600 2024

Showing first 80 references.