pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.12704 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-14 · 🌌 astro-ph.SR · astro-ph.GA

The undetectable fraction of core-collapse supernovae in luminous infrared galaxies -- II. GSAOI/GeMS dataset

I. M\"antynen , E. Kankare , S. Mattila , A. Efstathiou , S. D. Ryder , E. Kool , K. Matilainen , T. M. Reynolds
show 2 more authors
C. Vassallo P. V\"ais\"anen
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 14:33 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.GA
keywords core-collapse supernovaeluminous infrared galaxiesdust extinctionundetectable fractionadaptive opticssupernova surveysstar formation rate
0
0 comments X p. Extension

The pith

Near-infrared adaptive optics data show that 86 percent of core-collapse supernovae in local luminous infrared galaxies remain undetectable in optical surveys.

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

The paper measures the fraction of core-collapse supernovae hidden by dust in a sample of nine local luminous infrared galaxies using repeated K-band imaging with laser-guide-star adaptive optics. It runs Monte Carlo simulations that fold in each epoch's detection limits, the survey timing, the mix of supernova subtypes, and the range of their brightness evolution to find the probability that any given event would be caught. These probabilities are then compared to the galaxies' intrinsic supernova rates, which are derived from detailed modeling of their spectral energy distributions. The resulting numbers indicate that even surveys tolerant of substantial dust extinction still miss the majority of events. This matters because luminous infrared galaxies account for a large share of local star formation, so their hidden supernovae directly affect estimates of the cosmic supernova rate.

Core claim

Based on the GSAOI/GeMS near-infrared adaptive optics monitoring dataset, the total undetectable fraction of core-collapse supernovae reaches 86.0^{+4.7}_{-5.9} percent for optical surveys limited to A_V = 3 mag extinction and 53.6^{+15.6}_{-19.6} percent for near-infrared surveys limited to A_V = 16 mag. When the new results are combined with an earlier adaptive-optics LIRG monitoring sample, the fractions increase to 88.3^{+2.6}_{-3.2} percent and 61.4^{+8.5}_{-10.6} percent, respectively. These values are obtained by comparing simulated detection probabilities against intrinsic rates estimated from spectral energy distribution modeling of each galaxy.

What carries the argument

Monte Carlo simulations that combine measured limiting magnitudes from artificial-supernova injection tests, survey cadence, literature-based CCSN subtype distributions, and light-curve diversity to compute per-galaxy detection probabilities.

Load-bearing premise

The simulations rest on assumed distributions of supernova subtypes and light-curve shapes taken from the literature, plus the accuracy of the galaxies' intrinsic supernova rates derived from spectral energy distribution modeling.

What would settle it

A significantly larger number of core-collapse supernovae detected in a comparable sample of local LIRGs than the model predicts, or a measured extinction distribution that deviates strongly from the one used in the simulations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.12704 by A. Efstathiou, C. Vassallo, E. Kankare, E. Kool, I. M\"antynen, K. Matilainen, P. V\"ais\"anen, S. D. Ryder, S. Mattila, T. M. Reynolds.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Luminous infrared galaxies of the GSAOI/GeMS in 36" × 36" field of view (except NGC 3110 in 46" × 46"). North is up, and east is to the left. Due to the pointing of the observations, the target galaxy is not necessarily in the centre of the shown image subsection. regions, or high host extinction. Disentangling the effect of host extinction is not straightforward; however, we aimed to constrain this by sim… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Template K-band light curves of CCSN subtypes used in the Monte Carlo simulation. The light curves have been shifted vertically for clarity. The magnitudes are in the Vega system. et al. 2014; Kochanek et al. 2017), resulting in mean values of AV = 0.23 ± 0.18 and 0.30 ± 0.16 mag for Type II and stripped envelope subtypes, respectively. It is clear that especially the op￾tical observations are extremely bi… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Results of the SED modelling (solid black) of seven LIRGs of the GSAOI/GeMS dataset produced in this work. The model components are: either a spheroidal (dot-dashed orange) or a disc (dot-dashed green) galaxy, starburst contribution (dashed red), and an AGN (dotted blue). near-IR evolution of representative examples of H-rich and H￾poor SNe of the Type IIP SN 1999em (Krisciunas et al. 2009) and the Type II… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Absolute light curves of AT 2015cf (with detections as points and limits with downwards pointing arrows) compared to a selection of events (curves) including the ILRT AT 2019abn (left), the LRN AT 2021blu (centre), and the Type IIP SN 2023ixf (right). The extrapolated tail phase of SN 2023ixf is indicated with dotted lines. The intrinsic brightness of the events has not been adjusted and no host galaxy ext… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Number of expected CCSN detections over the survey period of the dataset as a function of the missing fraction. Left: The GSAOI/GeMS dataset. Right: The GSAOI/GeMS dataset combined with the ALTAIR/NIRI dataset from Paper I. Red line: The mean value. Shaded red areas: 1σ and 2σ confidence intervals. Poissonian upper and lower limits due to small number statistics and the cumulative effect of other error sou… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Core-collapse supernovae (CCSNe) in luminous infrared galaxies (LIRGs) can have extreme line-of-sight host galaxy dust extinctions, which leads to a large fraction of the events remaining undetected by optical and infrared surveys. This population of undetected CCSNe is important to constrain in order to determine the cosmic CCSN rates. Our aim is to confirm and refine our estimates for the undetectable fraction of CCSNe in LIRGs in the local Universe. Our study is based on the near-infrared K-band multi-epoch SUNBIRD survey monitoring dataset of a sample of nine LIRGs using the Gemini-South telescope with the multi-conjugate GSAOI/GeMS laser guide star adaptive optics system. We determined the limiting magnitudes for CCSN detection for each epoch in our dataset with artificial supernova injection and image subtraction methods. Subsequently, we used a Monte Carlo method to determine the combined effects of limiting magnitudes, survey cadence, CCSN subtype distribution, and their light curve evolution diversity. The intrinsic CCSN rates of the sample galaxies were estimated based on detailed modelling of their spectral energy distribution. Finally, we combined the resulting CCSN detection probabilities with the intrinsic CCSN rates for the dataset, and compared that against the real CCSN detections over the survey period. Based on our GSAOI/GeMS dataset, assuming optical or near-infrared example surveys with capabilities to detect CCSNe in local LIRGs with host extinctions of $A_V =$ 3 or 16 mag, respectively, the resulting total undetectable fractions are $86.0^{+4.7}_{-5.9}$ % and $53.6^{+15.6}_{-19.6}$ %. When folding in the results from our previous near-infrared adaptive optics assisted LIRG monitoring dataset, the corresponding total undetectable fractions are $88.3^{+2.6}_{-3.2}$ % and $61.4^{+8.5}_{-10.6}$ %, respectively.

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

0 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports on the second installment of the SUNBIRD survey, presenting new multi-epoch K-band GSAOI/GeMS adaptive-optics observations of nine local LIRGs. Artificial-supernova injection and image-subtraction techniques are used to measure epoch-specific limiting magnitudes. These empirical limits, together with survey cadence, literature CCSN subtype fractions, light-curve diversity, and SED-derived intrinsic rates, are propagated via Monte Carlo simulations to obtain CCSN detection probabilities. The resulting undetectable fractions for example optical (A_V=3 mag) and near-infrared (A_V=16 mag) surveys are 86.0^{+4.7}_{-5.9}% and 53.6^{+15.6}_{-19.6}% from the new data alone; when the previous AO dataset is folded in, the fractions become 88.3^{+2.6}_{-3.2}% and 61.4^{+8.5}_{-10.6}%. The simulated detection numbers are compared with the actual CCSNe found in the survey.

Significance. If the quoted fractions hold, the work supplies a quantitatively important constraint on the hidden CCSN population in dusty starbursts, directly relevant to cosmic CCSN rate determinations. The new GSAOI/GeMS dataset supplies direct empirical limiting-magnitude measurements that tighten the earlier estimates. The Monte Carlo framework is standard and well-suited; the transparent combination of two independent AO datasets and the consistency check against real detections are strengths. The approach avoids circularity by deriving intrinsic rates independently from SED modeling and detection probabilities from simulations benchmarked on the observations.

minor comments (4)
  1. §2.2: The text states that limiting magnitudes were determined for each epoch but does not tabulate the per-epoch values or their uncertainties; adding a supplementary table would allow readers to reproduce the Monte Carlo input distribution directly.
  2. Figure 4: The caption does not specify whether the plotted light-curve templates are in the observed K band or rest-frame; clarifying the bandpass and the exact references for each subtype template would remove ambiguity.
  3. §4.3: When the two datasets are combined, the procedure for merging the two independent Monte Carlo realizations (joint sampling versus weighted averaging of the separate fractions) is not stated explicitly; a short sentence or equation would make the 88.3% and 61.4% values fully reproducible.
  4. Table 3: The reported asymmetric uncertainties on the undetectable fractions are given to one decimal place, but the underlying Monte Carlo sample size used to derive them is not mentioned; stating the number of trials would indicate whether the quoted precision is limited by sampling noise.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive and constructive assessment of our manuscript. The recommendation for minor revision is appreciated, and we note that no specific major comments were raised in the report.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; central derivation uses independent inputs and simulations

full rationale

The undetectable fractions are obtained from Monte Carlo simulations that combine empirically measured limiting magnitudes (via artificial SN injections), survey cadence, literature CCSN subtype fractions and light-curve diversity, plus intrinsic rates from separate SED modeling of the galaxies. The GSAOI/GeMS dataset supplies direct observational constraints on detection thresholds. Folding in the authors' prior AO dataset constitutes dataset combination, not a load-bearing self-citation that collapses the result to an unverified premise. No equation reduces a prediction to a fitted parameter by construction, no uniqueness theorem is imported from self-citation, and the derivation remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The claim rests on standard astrophysical modeling assumptions rather than new free parameters fitted to this dataset; subtype fractions and light-curve templates are taken from the literature.

free parameters (2)
  • CCSN subtype distribution
    Weights for different core-collapse subtypes used in Monte Carlo sampling; taken from prior literature rather than fitted here.
  • Light-curve diversity parameters
    Assumed range of peak luminosities, durations, and evolution shapes for each subtype in the simulations.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Intrinsic CCSN rates can be reliably estimated from galaxy SED modeling combined with a standard initial mass function.
    Used to compute the expected number of events before applying detection probabilities.
  • domain assumption The combination of measured limiting magnitudes, survey cadence, and modeled light curves fully determines detection probability.
    Foundation of the Monte Carlo method described.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5721 in / 1694 out tokens · 34006 ms · 2026-05-10T14:33:31.645347+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

77 extracted references · 77 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    2000, A&AS, 144, 363

    Alard, C. 2000, A&AS, 144, 363

    work page 2000

  2. [2]

    & Lupton, R

    Alard, C. & Lupton, R. H. 1998, ApJ, 503, 325

    work page 1998

  3. [3]

    P ., González-Gaitán, S., Hamuy, M., et al

    Anderson, J. P ., González-Gaitán, S., Hamuy, M., et al. 2014, ApJ, 786, 67

    work page 2014

  4. [4]

    M., Evans, A

    Armus, L., Mazzarella, J. M., Evans, A. S., et al. 2009, PASP , 121, 559

    work page 2009

  5. [5]

    & Arnouts, S

    Bertin, E. & Arnouts, S. 1996, A&AS, 117, 393

    work page 1996

  6. [6]

    T., Pastorello, A., Smartt, S

    Botticella, M. T., Pastorello, A., Smartt, S. J., et al. 2009, MNRAS, 398, 1041

    work page 2009

  7. [7]

    T., Smartt, S

    Botticella, M. T., Smartt, S. J., Kennicutt, R. C., et al. 2012, A&A, 537, A132

    work page 2012

  8. [8]

    Stellar population synthesis at the resolution of 2003

    Bruzual, G. & Charlot, S. 2003, MNRAS, 344, 1000

    work page 2003

  9. [9]

    & Charlot, S

    Bruzual, A., G. & Charlot, S. 1993, ApJ, 405, 538

    work page 1993

  10. [10]

    Z., Pastorello, A., Fraser, M., et al

    Cai, Y . Z., Pastorello, A., Fraser, M., et al. 2021, A&A, 654, A157

    work page 2021

  11. [11]

    L., Teplitz, H

    Capak, P . L., Teplitz, H. I., Brooke, T. Y ., Laher, R., & Science Center, S. 2013, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, V ol. 221, American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts #221, 340.06

    work page 2013

  12. [12]

    T., Pignata, G., et al

    Cappellaro, E., Botticella, M. T., Pignata, G., et al. 2015, A&A, 584, A62

    work page 2015

  13. [13]

    1993, A&A, 268, 472

    Cappellaro, E., Turatto, M., Benetti, S., et al. 1993, A&A, 268, 472

    work page 1993

  14. [14]

    R., Edwards, M

    Carrasco, E. R., Edwards, M. L., McGregor, P . J., et al. 2012, in Adaptive Optics Systems III, ed. B. L. Ellerbroek, E. Marchetti, & J.-P . Véran, V ol. 8447, International Society for Optics and Photonics (SPIE), 84470N

    work page 2012

  15. [15]

    K., Sanders, D

    Chu, J. K., Sanders, D. B., Larson, K. L., et al. 2017, ApJS, 229, 25

    work page 2017

  16. [16]

    M., Wright, E

    Cutri, R. M., Wright, E. L., Conrow, T., et al. 2013, Explanatory Supplement to the AllWISE Data Release Products, Explanatory Supplement to the All- WISE Data Release Products, by R. M. Cutri et al

    work page 2013

  17. [17]

    G., et al

    Dahlen, T., Strolger, L.-G., Riess, A. G., et al. 2012, ApJ, 757, 70 de V aucouleurs, G., de V aucouleurs, A., Corwin, Jr., H. G., et al. 1991, Third Reference Catalogue of Bright Galaxies

    work page 2012

  18. [18]

    DeCoursey, C., Egami, E., Pierel, J. D. R., et al. 2025, ApJ, 979, 250

    work page 2025

  19. [19]

    Djupvik, A. A. & Andersen, J. 2010, in Astrophysics and Space Science Pro- ceedings, V ol. 14, Highlights of Spanish Astrophysics V , 211

    work page 2010

  20. [20]

    2000, MNRAS, 315, 115

    Dunne, L., Eales, S., Edmunds, M., et al. 2000, MNRAS, 315, 115

    work page 2000

  21. [21]

    2013, MNRAS, 436, 1873

    Efstathiou, A., Christopher, N., V erma, A., & Siebenmorgen, R. 2013, MNRAS, 436, 1873

    work page 2013

  22. [22]

    2022, MNRAS, 512, 5183

    Efstathiou, A., Farrah, D., Afonso, J., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 512, 5183

    work page 2022

  23. [23]

    2021, MNRAS, 503, L11

    Efstathiou, A., Małek, K., Burgarella, D., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 503, L11

    work page 2021

  24. [24]

    & Rowan-Robinson, M

    Efstathiou, A. & Rowan-Robinson, M. 1995, MNRAS, 273, 649

    work page 1995

  25. [25]

    2000, MNRAS, 313, 734

    Efstathiou, A., Rowan-Robinson, M., & Siebenmorgen, R. 2000, MNRAS, 313, 734

    work page 2000

  26. [26]

    & Siebenmorgen, R

    Efstathiou, A. & Siebenmorgen, R. 2009, A&A, 502, 541

    work page 2009

  27. [27]

    2015, A&A, 580, A142

    Ergon, M., Jerkstrand, A., Sollerman, J., et al. 2015, A&A, 580, A142

    work page 2015

  28. [28]

    2014, A&A, 562, A17

    Ergon, M., Sollerman, J., Fraser, M., et al. 2014, A&A, 562, A17

    work page 2014

  29. [29]

    D., Khandrika, H., Rubin, D., et al

    Fox, O. D., Khandrika, H., Rubin, D., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 506, 4199

    work page 2021

  30. [30]

    1986, ApJ, 303, 336

    Gehrels, N. 1986, ApJ, 303, 336

    work page 1986

  31. [31]

    2020, A&A, 643, A8

    Gruppioni, C., Béthermin, M., Loiacono, F., et al. 2020, A&A, 643, A8

    work page 2020

  32. [32]

    W., Jensen, J

    Hodapp, K. W., Jensen, J. B., Irwin, E. M., et al. 2003, PASP , 115, 1388

    work page 2003

  33. [33]

    F., Kochanek, C

    Horiuchi, S., Beacom, J. F., Kochanek, C. S., et al. 2011, ApJ, 738, 154

    work page 2011

  34. [34]

    James, P . A. & Anderson, J. P . 2006, A&A, 453, 57

    work page 2006

  35. [35]

    P ., Wilson, G

    Johnson, S. P ., Wilson, G. W., Tang, Y ., & Scott, K. S. 2013, MNRAS, 436, 2535

    work page 2013

  36. [36]

    2021, A&A, 649, A134

    Kankare, E., Efstathiou, A., Kotak, R., et al. 2021, A&A, 649, A134

    work page 2021

  37. [37]

    2014, MNRAS, 440, 1052

    Kankare, E., Mattila, S., Ryder, S., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 440, 1052

    work page 2014

  38. [38]

    2008, ApJ, 689, L97

    Kankare, E., Mattila, S., Ryder, S., et al. 2008, ApJ, 689, L97

    work page 2008

  39. [39]

    2012, ApJ, 744, L19

    Kankare, E., Mattila, S., Ryder, S., et al. 2012, ApJ, 744, L19

    work page 2012

  40. [40]

    Kennicutt, R. C. 1998, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 36, 189231

    work page 1998

  41. [41]

    S., Shappee, B

    Kochanek, C. S., Shappee, B. J., Stanek, K. Z., et al. 2017, PASP , 129, 104502

    work page 2017

  42. [42]

    C., Ryder, S., Kankare, E., et al

    Kool, E. C., Ryder, S., Kankare, E., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 473, 5641

    work page 2018

  43. [43]

    B., et al

    Krisciunas, K., Hamuy, M., Suntze ff, N. B., et al. 2009, AJ, 137, 34

    work page 2009

  44. [44]

    2023, Research Notes of the Amer- ican Astronomical Society, 7, 214

    Labrie, K., Simpson, C., Cardenes, R., et al. 2023, Research Notes of the Amer- ican Astronomical Society, 7, 214

    work page 2023

  45. [45]

    & V alentijn, E

    Lauberts, A. & V alentijn, E. A. 1989, The surface photometry catalogue of the ESO-Uppsala galaxies

    work page 1989

  46. [46]

    D., Filippenko, A

    Li, W. D., Filippenko, A. V ., Treffers, R. R., et al. 2000, in American Institute of Physics Conference Series, V ol. 522, Cosmic Explosions: Tenth AstroPhysics Conference, ed. S. S. Holt & W. W. Zhang (AIP), 103–106

    work page 2000

  47. [47]

    R., et al

    Magnelli, B., Elbaz, D., Chary, R. R., et al. 2009, A&A, 496, 57

    work page 2009

  48. [48]

    R., et al

    Magnelli, B., Elbaz, D., Chary, R. R., et al. 2011, A&A, 528, A35 Mäntynen, I., Kankare, E., Mattila, S., et al. 2025, A&A, 700, A199

    work page 2011

  49. [49]

    2012, ApJ, 756, 111

    Mattila, S., Dahlen, T., Efstathiou, A., et al. 2012, ApJ, 756, 111

    work page 2012

  50. [50]

    & Meikle, W

    Mattila, S. & Meikle, W. P . S. 2001, MNRAS, 324, 325

    work page 2001

  51. [51]

    2007, ApJ, 659, L9

    Mattila, S., Väisänen, P ., Farrah, D., et al. 2007, ApJ, 659, L9

    work page 2007

  52. [52]

    2004, in Ground-based Instrumen- tation for Astronomy, ed

    McGregor, P ., Hart, J., Stevanovic, D., et al. 2004, in Ground-based Instrumen- tation for Astronomy, ed. A. F. M. Moorwood & M. Iye, V ol. 5492, Interna- tional Society for Optics and Photonics (SPIE), 1033 – 1044

    work page 2004

  53. [53]

    2012, A&A, 545, A96

    Melinder, J., Dahlen, T., Mencía Trinchant, L., et al. 2012, A&A, 545, A96

    work page 2012

  54. [54]

    T., et al

    Miluzio, M., Cappellaro, E., Botticella, M. T., et al. 2013, A&A, 554, A127

    work page 2013

  55. [55]

    & Fraser, M

    Pastorello, A. & Fraser, M. 2019, Nature Astronomy, 3, 676

    work page 2019

  56. [56]

    2019, A&A, 630, A75

    Pastorello, A., Mason, E., Taubenberger, S., et al. 2019, A&A, 630, A75

    work page 2019

  57. [57]

    2023, A&A, 671, A158 Pérez-Torres, M., Mattila, S., Alonso-Herrero, A., Aalto, S., & Efstathiou, A

    Pastorello, A., V alerin, G., Fraser, M., et al. 2023, A&A, 671, A158 Pérez-Torres, M., Mattila, S., Alonso-Herrero, A., Aalto, S., & Efstathiou, A. 2021, A&A Rev., 29, 2

    work page 2023

  58. [58]

    L., Anderson, J

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

    work page 2023

  59. [59]

    Phillips, M. M. 1993, ApJ, 413, L105

    work page 1993

  60. [60]

    L., Kistler, M

    Prieto, J. L., Kistler, M. D., Thompson, T. A., et al. 2008, ApJ, 681, L9

    work page 2008

  61. [61]

    2022, MNRAS, 513, 4232

    Randriamanakoto, Z., Väisänen, P ., Ranaivomanana, P ., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 513, 4232

    work page 2022

  62. [62]

    2013, MNRAS, 431, 554

    Randriamanakoto, Z., Väisänen, P ., Ryder, S., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 431, 554

    work page 2013

  63. [63]

    D., & Ranaivomanana, P

    Randriamanakoto, Z., Väisänen, P ., Ryder, S. D., & Ranaivomanana, P . 2019, MNRAS, 482, 2530

    work page 2019

  64. [64]

    & Patat, F

    Riello, M. & Patat, F. 2005, MNRAS, 362, 671 Romero-Cañizales, C., Herrero-Illana, R., Pérez-Torres, M. A., et al. 2014, MN- RAS, 440, 1067

    work page 2005

  65. [65]

    B., Mazzarella, J

    Sanders, D. B., Mazzarella, J. M., Kim, D. C., Surace, J. A., & Soifer, B. T. 2003, AJ, 126, 1607 Schlafly, E. F. & Finkbeiner, D. P . 2011, ApJ, 737, 103

    work page 2003

  66. [66]

    2012, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, V ol

    Seibert, M., Wyder, T., Neill, J., et al. 2012, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, V ol. 219, American Astronomical Society Meeting Ab- stracts #219, 340.01

    work page 2012

  67. [67]

    J., Prieto, J

    Shappee, B. J., Prieto, J. L., Grupe, D., et al. 2014, ApJ, 788, 48

    work page 2014

  68. [68]

    2017, PASP , 129, 054201

    Shivvers, I., Modjaz, M., Zheng, W., et al. 2017, PASP , 129, 054201

    work page 2017

  69. [69]

    S., Moriya, T

    Singh, A., Teja, R. S., Moriya, T. J., et al. 2024, ApJ, 975, 132

    work page 2024

  70. [70]

    F., Cutri, R

    Skrutskie, M. F., Cutri, R. M., Stiening, R., et al. 2006, AJ, 131, 1163

    work page 2006

  71. [71]

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

    work page 2009

  72. [72]

    T., Neugebauer, G., Matthews, K., et al

    Soifer, B. T., Neugebauer, G., Matthews, K., et al. 2001, AJ, 122, 1213

    work page 2001

  73. [73]

    A., et al

    Strolger, L.-G., Dahlen, T., Rodney, S. A., et al. 2015, ApJ, 813, 93

    work page 2015

  74. [74]

    1986, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol

    Tody, D. 1986, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol. 627, Instrumentation in astronomy VI, ed. D. L. Crawford, 733

    work page 1986

  75. [75]

    2011, A&A, 528, A114 V alerin, G., Pastorello, A., Reguitti, A., et al

    Tylenda, R., Hajduk, M., Kami ´nski, T., et al. 2011, A&A, 528, A114 V alerin, G., Pastorello, A., Reguitti, A., et al. 2025, A&A, 695, A42 V arenius, E., Conway, J. E., Batejat, F., et al. 2019, A&A, 623, A173

    work page 2011

  76. [76]

    T., Kitaura, F

    Wanajo, S., Nomoto, K., Janka, H. T., Kitaura, F. S., & Müller, B. 2009, ApJ, 695, 208

    work page 2009

  77. [77]

    A., Casey, C

    Zavala, J. A., Casey, C. M., Manning, S. M., et al. 2021, ApJ, 909, 165 Article number, page 11 of 12 A&A proofs: manuscript no. aa58644-25 Appendix A: Additional tables Table A.1. Survey epochs and CTs of ESO 264-G036. MJD mlim ∆t IIb Ib Ic II 87A IIn Program ID (mag) (d) (d) (d) (d) (d) (d) 56671 20.80 105 112 120 146 185 667 2013B-Q-65 57005 20.89 334 ...

    work page 2021