pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.18951 · v1 · pith:AQBJX4W4new · submitted 2026-05-18 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE · astro-ph.SR

Mapping 3-D Explosive Nucleosynthesis with Type II Supernova Infrared Emission Lines

W. V. Jacobson-Gal\'an , L. Dessart , D. Vartanyan This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-20 08:26 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.SR
keywords Type II supernovaeinfrared spectroscopynickel mixing3D explosion modelsnucleosynthesisSN 2024ggiJWST observations
0
0 comments X

The pith

Infrared emission lines from SN 2024ggi reveal nickel mixing that only energetic three-dimensional explosion models of high-mass progenitors can reproduce.

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

This paper examines late-phase optical and infrared spectra of the Type II supernova 2024ggi, including new James Webb Space Telescope data, and identifies double-peaked profiles in several nickel, iron, and cobalt lines alongside Gaussian profiles in others. These shapes indicate chemical inhomogeneity and aspherical ionization within the ejecta, consistent with a nickel bubble effect during the explosion. The authors demonstrate that a straightforward mapping from elemental mass distributions to projected velocities accurately reproduces line profiles generated by full non-LTE radiative transfer calculations. Applying this mapping to three-dimensional neutrino-driven explosion simulations shows that only high-energy models from high-mass stars match the observed extent of nickel mixing. This result stands in tension with lower progenitor mass estimates obtained from radiative transfer modeling of the same event.

Core claim

The paper shows that a simple mapping between elemental mass distribution and projected velocity reproduces the infrared line profiles produced by detailed CMFGEN radiative transfer calculations. When this mapping is used on three-dimensional neutrino-driven explosion models, only energetic simulations of high-mass progenitors generate the observed nickel mixing extent traced by double-peaked [Ni I], [Fe II], and [Co I] profiles in SN 2024ggi. This conflicts with the 12 to 15.2 solar mass progenitor range favored by non-LTE modeling of the spectra.

What carries the argument

the simple mapping between elemental mass distribution and projected velocity that reproduces full radiative transfer line profiles

Load-bearing premise

The assumption that a simple mapping of elemental mass to projected velocity accurately reproduces line profiles from detailed radiative transfer calculations without significant effects from optical depth variations or ionization structure.

What would settle it

A three-dimensional explosion simulation of a lower-mass progenitor that, when mapped to velocity space, produces double-peaked nickel infrared line profiles matching the observed shapes in SN 2024ggi would falsify the requirement for high-mass energetic models.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.18951 by D. Vartanyan, L. Dessart, W. V. Jacobson-Gal\'an.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Nebular optical/IR emission line velocities of SN 2024ggi at 𝛿𝑡 = 265 − 291 days (black) and 𝛿𝑡 = 386 − 417 days (gray), compared to s15p2 CMFGEN model (red; Dessart et al. 2025). Shown in blue are the individual element contributions within the s15p2 model. The mid-IR coverage with JWST enables quantification of emission line profile shapes across varying ionization states and different iron-group and int… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: SN 2024ggi nebular infrared emission line velocities of Nickel (Left), Cobalt (Middle), and Iron (Right) ions. A prominent double￾peaked line profile morphology is observed in Ni i,Co i and Fe ii transitions. However, some neutral and ionized Ni and Co transitions exhibit a Gaussian-like profile, peaked at red-ward velocities. be correlated, they have a distinct spatial distribution within the inner ejecta… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Illustrative 2-D velocity-space emissivity model (top) corresponding to a double-Gaussian decomposition of Ni/Co/Fe line profiles (bottom). The two components are placed at (𝑣𝑥, 𝑣𝑦)=(𝑣cen, 0) with dispersions 𝜎 = FWHM/2.35 and amplitudes proportional to the fitted integrated fluxes. Integration of this distribution along the line of sight yields the observed double-peaked spectrum. The orientation within t… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Emission line velocity comparison of [Ni i] 𝜆3.119 𝜇m to IGEs (top left) and IMEs (bottom left). Corresponding cross-correlation coefficient functions (CCFs) shown in top/bottom right panels. All selected IGE and IME emission lines are show a peak correlation with [Ni i] 𝜆3.119 𝜇m at ∼0 km s−1 with the exception of [Ni i] 𝜆11.304 𝜇m and [Ca ii] 𝜆0.729 𝜇m, both of which peak at ∼1000 km s−1 bluewards. 𝑁𝑢 = … view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Emission line provide versus Doppler velocities of [Ni i] 𝜆3.1199 𝜇m (left), [Ne ii] 𝜆12.8101 𝜇m (middle), and [Mg i] 𝜆1.50202 𝜇m (right), all normalized to peak flux. SN 2024ggi shown in black compared to model density profiles with spherical (blue) and bipolar (red) density profiles, as discussed in §3.1.2. [Ni i] requires the most significant polar enhancement (𝑎2 = 7) compared to IME profiles. ratio of… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Left: Measured, multi-epoch emission line luminosities of [Ni ii] 𝜆1.939 𝜇m (yellow stars), [Ni i] 𝜆3.119 𝜇m (green circles), [Ni ii] 𝜆6.634 𝜇m (blue squares), [Ni i] 𝜆7.505 𝜇m (magenta plus signs), [Ni i] 𝜆11.304 𝜇m (orange polygons), and [Ni i] 𝜆11.998 𝜇m (red triangles) in the nebular IR spectra of SN 2024ggi compared to s12 (𝑀ZAMS = 12 M⊙), s15p2 (𝑀ZAMS = 15.2 M⊙), and s18p5 (𝑀ZAMS = 18.5 M⊙) models sh… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Emission line provide versus Doppler velocities of [Ni i] 𝜆3.119 𝜇m (left), [Ne ii] 𝜆12.810 𝜇m (middle), and [Mg i] 𝜆1.502 𝜇m (right), all normalized to peak flux. SN 2024ggi shown in black compared to model predictions from CMFGEN radiative transfer calculation (red) and the summing of ejecta mass per unit projected velocity (𝑑𝑚/𝑑𝑣; blue). Intriguingly, the latter can reproduce almost exactly the emission… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: SN 2024ggi emission line velocities of [Ni ii] 𝜆11.304 𝜇m (gray) and [Ni i] 𝜆3.119 𝜇m (black) compared to the projected 56Ni distributions from 3-D neutrino-driven explosion models of 9−25 M⊙ RSGs from Vartanyan et al. (2025a) computed along +𝑥 (red), +𝑦 (blue), and +𝑧 (yellow) directions. Kinetic energy, initial radius and ZAMS mass per model shown in red. Only some of the viewing angles from the 11, 17, … view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Left: Observed [Ni i] 𝜆3.119 𝜇m and [O i] 𝜆0.630 𝜇m emission line velocities in SN 2024ggi (red), modeled with multiple Gaussian profiles (black dashed lines). The [O i] doublet cannot be modeled with two Gaussians of the same FWHM, suggesting a more asymmetric ejecta distribution. Shown in dotted lines are the velocities corresponding to the peak of Ni/Co/Fe distributions at 10 days post-shock breakout fo… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present analysis and modeling of optical and infrared (IR) spectroscopy of the Type II supernova (SN II) 2024ggi obtained with ground-based instruments and the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) at phases of ~265 - 400 days. The near- and mid-IR spectra reveal diverse iron-group emission-line morphologies, including double-peaked profiles in [Ni I] 3.119 and 11.998 $\mu$m, [Fe II] 1.644 and 17.931 $\mu$m, and [Co I] 12.255 $\mu$m, alongside Gaussian profiles in [Ni II] 1.939 $\mu$m, [Co II] 10.520 $\mu$m, and [Ni I] 7.505 and 11.304 $\mu$m. These differences imply both chemical inhomogeneity and aspherical ionization of inner ejecta, consistent with expectations from the $^{56}$Ni bubble effect. Modeling of double-peaked profiles supports an ejecta distribution with polar enhancements as large as ~7 for Ni/Co/Fe-rich material and ~2 for intermediate-mass elements. LTE estimates imply a stable Ni mass of $M_{\rm Ni}\approx1.3\times10^{-3}$ M$_{\odot}$, but electron densities near critical values indicate departures from LTE. Comparisons to non-LTE radiative transfer models favor a progenitor mass of ~12 - 15.2 M$_{\odot}$. We show that a simple mapping between elemental mass distribution and projected velocity reproduces line profiles produced in a CMFGEN radiative transfer calculation. We apply this property to 3-D neutrino-driven explosion simulations and predict Ni emission profiles for varying viewing angles. We find that only energetic 3-D explosion models of high-mass progenitors reproduce the observed extent of Ni mixing in SN 2024ggi, conflicting with progenitor masses inferred from radiative transfer models. These results demonstrate the utility of resolved nebular IR lines as direct probes of the 3-D distribution of explosively synthesized material in core-collapse SNe.

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

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript analyzes optical and IR spectra of SN 2024ggi at phases ~265-400 days, identifying double-peaked profiles in lines such as [Ni I] 3.119 μm, [Fe II] 1.644 μm, and [Co I] 12.255 μm alongside Gaussian profiles in others. These are modeled to infer polar enhancements of ~7 for Ni/Co/Fe-rich material and ~2 for intermediate-mass elements, with an LTE stable Ni mass of ~1.3×10^{-3} M_⊙ (noting departures from LTE). Non-LTE RT models favor a progenitor mass of 12-15.2 M_⊙. A simple mapping from elemental mass distribution to projected velocity is shown to reproduce CMFGEN line profiles and is applied to 3D neutrino-driven explosion simulations, leading to the claim that only energetic high-mass progenitor models match the observed Ni mixing extent, in tension with the RT-inferred masses.

Significance. If the velocity mapping is robust, the work offers a promising method to directly constrain 3D explosive nucleosynthesis using resolved nebular IR lines, potentially resolving or highlighting inconsistencies between progenitor masses derived from radiative transfer versus explosion simulations. The explicit treatment of asphericity via the 56Ni bubble effect and the reproduction of CMFGEN profiles with a simplified mapping are strengths that could make IR line morphology a standard diagnostic for core-collapse SN geometry.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section describing the simple mapping and its validation against CMFGEN] The central claim that only energetic 3-D high-mass progenitor models reproduce the observed Ni mixing (abstract and simulation comparison section) rests on the simple mass-to-projected-velocity mapping. However, the manuscript reports electron densities near critical values, explicit LTE departures, and aspherical ionization from the 56Ni bubble effect; these raise the possibility that optical-depth variations and ionization gradients contribute to the double-peaked profiles and intensity ratios, which the mapping does not explicitly include. A direct test against additional CMFGEN models with varied ionization structure would be needed to confirm the mapping's accuracy for the inferred polar enhancements of ~7.
  2. [Discussion of progenitor mass estimates and 3D model comparisons] The reported tension between the high-mass progenitor requirement from the 3D simulation comparison and the 12-15.2 M_⊙ range from non-LTE radiative transfer models is load-bearing for the paper's interpretation. The manuscript should quantify how uncertainties in the polar enhancement factors and viewing-angle predictions propagate into the mixing extent, and whether adjustments within the RT modeling uncertainties could reconcile the two mass estimates.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Abstract and observational data section] Specify the precise observation epochs for each spectrum and line profile shown in the figures, rather than the broad ~265-400 day range.
  2. [Modeling of double-peaked profiles] Include uncertainty estimates or sensitivity tests on the derived polar enhancement factors (~7 and ~2) and the LTE Ni mass.
  3. [Mapping validation subsection] Clarify whether the mapping assumes optically thin conditions throughout or includes any correction for the reported near-critical densities.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thorough and constructive review. We address each major comment point by point below, providing our strongest honest defense while indicating revisions where the manuscript can be improved.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central claim that only energetic 3-D high-mass progenitor models reproduce the observed Ni mixing rests on the simple mass-to-projected-velocity mapping. However, the manuscript reports electron densities near critical values, explicit LTE departures, and aspherical ionization from the 56Ni bubble effect; these raise the possibility that optical-depth variations and ionization gradients contribute to the double-peaked profiles and intensity ratios, which the mapping does not explicitly include. A direct test against additional CMFGEN models with varied ionization structure would be needed to confirm the mapping's accuracy for the inferred polar enhancements of ~7.

    Authors: We thank the referee for this careful observation. The mapping is a simplified representation of the dominant velocity projection effect, but its validity is demonstrated by direct reproduction of the full CMFGEN line profiles, which already incorporate optical-depth variations, non-LTE effects, and the aspherical ionization structure arising from the 56Ni bubble. Because the CMFGEN calculation includes these physics and the mapping matches its output, the approximation effectively captures the net impact on the observed morphologies for the reported polar enhancements. We agree that additional CMFGEN tests with varied ionization would further strengthen the result. In revision we will expand the relevant section with an explicit discussion of these limitations and the implicit inclusion of the effects via the validation, and we will add one supplementary comparison if feasible. revision: partial

  2. Referee: The reported tension between the high-mass progenitor requirement from the 3D simulation comparison and the 12-15.2 M_⊙ range from non-LTE radiative transfer models is load-bearing for the paper's interpretation. The manuscript should quantify how uncertainties in the polar enhancement factors and viewing-angle predictions propagate into the mixing extent, and whether adjustments within the RT modeling uncertainties could reconcile the two mass estimates.

    Authors: We agree that quantifying these uncertainties is important for assessing the robustness of the reported tension. In the revised manuscript we will add a sensitivity study that varies the polar enhancement factors over a plausible range (approximately 4–10) and explores multiple viewing angles to determine how these choices affect the minimum mixing extent required in the 3D models to match the data. We will also discuss how uncertainties in the RT modeling (e.g., assumptions about spherical averaging or ionization balance) could shift the inferred progenitor mass range. While such adjustments might narrow the apparent discrepancy, the direct geometric information encoded in the resolved IR line shapes remains a complementary and independent constraint; we will present the tension as a key finding while clearly stating the quantified uncertainties. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation remains self-contained

full rationale

The paper's core chain begins with independent JWST and ground-based IR spectra of SN 2024ggi, proceeds to LTE and non-LTE modeling of observed line profiles to infer polar enhancements, validates a simple mass-to-velocity mapping against separate CMFGEN radiative-transfer calculations, and then applies that mapping to external 3-D neutrino-driven explosion grids. None of these steps reduces by construction to a prior fit or self-citation; the 3-D simulations and the full CMFGEN runs are distinct inputs, the observed line profiles are external data, and the mapping is presented as an empirical check rather than a tautology. No uniqueness theorem, ansatz smuggling, or renaming of known results is invoked in a load-bearing way. The derivation is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on LTE for initial Ni mass, a simplified velocity-to-mass mapping calibrated to match CMFGEN output, and the assumption that observed line shapes directly trace the 3D distribution of synthesized material without dominant optical-depth or ionization corrections.

free parameters (2)
  • polar enhancement factor for Ni/Co/Fe-rich material = ~7
    Value of ~7 chosen to reproduce double-peaked profiles in multiple lines
  • polar enhancement factor for intermediate-mass elements = ~2
    Value of ~2 chosen to reproduce observed line shapes
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption LTE conditions hold sufficiently for stable Ni mass estimate of 1.3e-3 solar masses
    Used to derive M_Ni but immediately qualified by note that electron densities are near critical values indicating non-LTE effects
  • domain assumption Simple projected-velocity mapping reproduces full radiative-transfer line profiles
    Invoked to apply the mapping to 3D simulation outputs and predict viewing-angle dependence

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5927 in / 1603 out tokens · 31552 ms · 2026-05-20T08:26:51.841157+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

71 extracted references · 71 canonical work pages · 5 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    J., Indebetouw, R., Marcaide, J

    Abell´an, F. J., Indebetouw, R., Marcaide, J. M., et al. 2017, ApJl, 842, L24, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa784c

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa784c 2017

  2. [2]

    Arnett, W. D. 1989, Astrophysical Journal Letters, 341, L63, doi: 10.1086/185468 14Jacobson-Gal ´an et al. Table 1.SN 2024ggi Emission Line Properties Ion𝜆Δ𝐸 𝐴 𝑢𝑙 Temp. Sensitivity𝑛 𝑎 crit Profile Shape Line Lum. Phase𝑓 𝑏 𝐵 𝑓 𝑐 𝑅 (𝜇m) (eV) (s −1) (cm −3) (10 37 erg s−1) (days) Ni I 3.120 0.397 7.8×10 −2 Medium 4.5×10 6 Double-peaked 2.23±0.12 286 0.51±0.0...

    work page doi:10.1086/185468 1989

  3. [3]

    2025, ApJ, 994, 266, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae1d69

    Aryan, A., Higgins, E., Nicholl, M., Chen, T.-W., & Liu, Y.-H. 2025, ApJ, 994, 266, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae1d69

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae1d69 2025

  4. [4]

    2024, MNRAS, 533, 1251, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1811

    Barmentloo, S., Jerkstrand, A., Iwamoto, K., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 533, 1251, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1811

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1811 2024

  5. [5]

    M., et al

    Baron, E., Ashall, C., DerKacy, J. M., et al. 2025, ApJ, 994, 249, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae0e15

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae0e15 2025

  6. [6]

    Storey, P. J. 2023, A&A, 678, A170, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347147

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347147 2023

  7. [7]

    A., Valenti, S., Sand, D

    Bostroem, K. A., Valenti, S., Sand, D. J., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.11756, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2508.11756

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2508.11756 2025

  8. [8]

    2021, Nature, 589, 29, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-03059-w

    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

  9. [9]

    2025, ApJ, 983, 86, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adb428

    Chen, T.-W., Yang, S., Srivastav, S., et al. 2025, ApJ, 983, 86, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adb428

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adb428 2025

  10. [10]

    L., Forrest, D

    Chupp, E. L., Forrest, D. J., Ryan, J. M., et al. 1989, Astrophysical Journal Letters, 341, L1, doi: 10.1086/185450

    work page doi:10.1086/185450 1989

  11. [11]

    M., Ashall, C., Hoeflich, P., et al

    DerKacy, J. M., Ashall, C., Hoeflich, P., et al. 2023, ApJl, 945, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acb8a8

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acb8a8 2023

  12. [12]

    M., Ashall, C., Baron, E., et al

    DerKacy, J. M., Ashall, C., Baron, E., et al. 2026, ApJ, 997, 179, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae1f87

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae1f87 2026

  13. [13]

    2025, A&A, 703, A287, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202555664

    Dessart, L. 2025, A&A, 703, A287, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202555664

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202555664 2025

  14. [14]

    Filippenko, A. V. 2023, A&A, 675, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202345969 Supernova Infrared Emission Lines15

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202345969 2023

  15. [15]

    Dessart, L., & Hillier, D. J. 2011, MNRAS, 410, 1739, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17557.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17557.x 2011

  16. [16]

    J., Sukhbold, T., Woosley, S

    Dessart, L., Hillier, D. J., Sukhbold, T., Woosley, S. E., & Janka, H.-T. 2021, A&A, 652, A64, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202140839

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202140839 2021

  17. [17]

    2025, A&A, 704, L6, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202556304

    Dessart, L., Kotak, R., Jacobson-Gal´an, W., et al. 2025, A&A, 704, L6, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202556304

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202556304 2025

  18. [18]

    A., Ferrari, L., et al

    Ertini, K., Regna, T. A., Ferrari, L., et al. 2025, A&A, 699, A60, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202554333

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202554333 2025

  19. [19]

    J., & Maeda, K

    Fang, Q., Moriya, T. J., & Maeda, K. 2025, ApJ, 986, 39, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adceae

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adceae 2025

  20. [20]

    Zimmerman, E. A. 2026, ApJ, 1001, 26, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae4ec6

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae4ec6 2026

  21. [21]

    2025, A&A, 703, A12, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202556652

    Ferrari, L., Folatelli, G., Ertini, K., et al. 2025, A&A, 703, A12, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202556652

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202556652 2025

  22. [22]

    2021, MNRAS, 502, 3264, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab116

    Gabler, M., Wongwathanarat, A., & Janka, H.-T. 2021, MNRAS, 502, 3264, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab116

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab116 2021

  23. [23]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2511.11796, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2511.11796

    Giudici, B., Gabler, M., & Janka, H.-T. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2511.11796, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2511.11796

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2511.11796 2025

  24. [24]

    W., Harrison, F

    Grefenstette, B. W., Harrison, F. A., Boggs, S. E., et al. 2014, Nature, 506, 339, doi: 10.1038/nature12997

    work page doi:10.1038/nature12997 2014

  25. [25]

    W., Thimm, G., & Dachs, J

    Hanuschik, R. W., Thimm, G., & Dachs, J. 1988, MNRAS, 234, 41P, doi: 10.1093/mnras/234.1.41P Hueichap´an, E., Cartier, R., Prieto, J. L., et al. 2026, ApJ, 1000, 80, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae4500 Jacobson-Gal´an, W. V., Davis, K. W., Kilpatrick, C. D., et al. 2024, ApJ, 972, 177, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad5c64 Jacobson-Gal´an, W. V., Dessart, L., Kilpatric...

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/234.1.41p 1988

  26. [26]

    2012, Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science, 62, 407, doi: 10.1146/annurev-nucl-102711-094901

    Janka, H.-T. 2012, Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science, 62, 407, doi: 10.1146/annurev-nucl-102711-094901

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-nucl-102711-094901 2012

  27. [27]

    2016, Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science, 66, 341, doi: 10.1146/annurev-nucl-102115-044747

    Janka, H.-T., Melson, T., & Summa, A. 2016, Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science, 66, 341, doi: 10.1146/annurev-nucl-102115-044747

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-nucl-102115-044747 2016

  28. [28]

    2017, in Handbook of Supernovae, ed

    Jerkstrand, A. 2017, in Handbook of Supernovae, ed. A. W. Alsabti & P. Murdin, 795, doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-21846-5 29 —. 2025, Living Reviews in Computational Astrophysics, 11, 1, doi: 10.1007/s41115-025-00022-2

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-319-21846-5 2017

  29. [29]

    2012, A&A, 546, A28, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201219528

    Jerkstrand, A., Fransson, C., Maguire, K., et al. 2012, A&A, 546, A28, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201219528

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201219528 2012

  30. [30]

    J., Fraser, M., et al

    Jerkstrand, A., Smartt, S. J., Fraser, M., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 439, 3694, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu221

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu221 2014

  31. [31]

    X., Magkotsios, G., et al

    Jerkstrand, A., Timmes, F. X., Magkotsios, G., et al. 2015, ApJ, 807, 110, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/807/1/110

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/807/1/110 2015

  32. [32]

    C., Kavanagh, P

    Jones, O. C., Kavanagh, P. J., Barlow, M. J., et al. 2023, ApJ, 958, 95, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad0036

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad0036 2023

  33. [33]

    C., & Nugent, P

    Kasen, D., Thomas, R. C., & Nugent, P. 2006, ApJ, 651, 366, doi: 10.1086/506190

    work page doi:10.1086/506190 2006

  34. [34]

    The evolution of the mid-infrared spectrum of SN 1987A observed with the JWST/MIRI-MRS

    Kavanagh, P. J., Barlow, M. J., Fransson, C., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2604.09211, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2604.09211

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2604.09211 2026

  35. [35]

    2000, ApJL, 531, L123, doi: 10.1086/312541

    Kifonidis, K., Plewa, T., Janka, H.-T., & M¨ uller, E. 2000, ApJL, 531, L123, doi: 10.1086/312541

    work page doi:10.1086/312541 2000

  36. [36]

    2003, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 408, 621, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20030863

    Kifonidis, T., Plewa, T., Janka, H.-T., & M¨ uller, E. 2003, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 408, 621, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20030863

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20030863 2003

  37. [37]

    2006, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 453, 661, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20054512

    Kifonidis, T., Plewa, T., Scheck, L., Janka, H.-T., & M¨ uller, E. 2006, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 453, 661, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20054512

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20054512 2006

  38. [38]

    Kotak, R., Meikle, W. P. S., Farrah, D., et al. 2009, ApJ, 704, 306, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/704/1/306

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/704/1/306 2009

  39. [39]

    A., Jha, S

    Kwok, L. A., Jha, S. W., Temim, T., et al. 2023, ApJl, 944, L3, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acb4ec

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acb4ec 2023

  40. [40]

    A., Siebert, M

    Kwok, L. A., Siebert, M. R., Johansson, J., et al. 2024, ApJ, 966, 135, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad2c0d

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad2c0d 2024

  41. [41]

    Exploring the central region of SNR 0540-69.3 with JWST I: 3D morphology

    Larsson, J., Tegkelidis, C., Fransson, C., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2604.19367, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2604.19367

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2604.19367 2026

  42. [42]

    2023, ApJL, 949, L27, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acd555

    Larsson, J., Fransson, C., Sargent, B., et al. 2023, ApJL, 949, L27, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acd555

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acd555 2023

  43. [43]

    Li, H., McCray, R., & Sunyaev, R. A. 1993, ApJ, 419, 824, doi: 10.1086/173534

    work page doi:10.1086/173534 1993

  44. [44]

    M., Langer, N., & Kramer, M

    Maguire, K., Jerkstrand, A., Smartt, S. J., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 420, 3451, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.20276.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.20276.x 2012

  45. [45]

    M., Share, G

    Matz, S. M., Share, G. H., Leising, M. D., et al. 1988, Nature, 331, 416, doi: 10.1038/331416a0

    work page doi:10.1038/331416a0 1988

  46. [46]

    1993, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 31, 175, doi: 10.1146/annurev.aa.31.090193.001135

    McCray, R. 1993, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 31, 175, doi: 10.1146/annurev.aa.31.090193.001135

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.aa.31.090193.001135 1993

  47. [47]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.19727

    Medler, K., Ashall, C., Hoeflich, P., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.19727. https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.19727

    work page arXiv 2025

  48. [48]

    2026, ApJ, 997, 330, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae317e

    Mera, T., Ashall, C., Hoeflich, P., et al. 2026, ApJ, 997, 330, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae317e

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae317e 2026

  49. [49]

    Milisavljevic, D., & Fesen, R. A. 2015, Science, 347, 526, doi: 10.1126/science.1261949

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1261949 2015

  50. [50]

    2024, ApJL, 965, L27, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad324b M¨ uller, E., Fryxell, B., & Arnett, D

    Milisavljevic, D., Temim, T., De Looze, I., et al. 2024, ApJL, 965, L27, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad324b M¨ uller, E., Fryxell, B., & Arnett, D. 1991, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 251, 505

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad324b 2024

  51. [51]

    E., & Ferland, G

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

    work page 2006

  52. [52]

    H., Rho, J., Yoon, S.-C., et al

    Park, S. H., Rho, J., Yoon, S.-C., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.11877, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2507.11877

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2507.11877 2025

  53. [53]

    2024, A&A, 688, L28, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450608

    Pessi, T., Cartier, R., Hueichapan, E., et al. 2024, A&A, 688, L28, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450608

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450608 2024

  54. [54]

    A., Reindl, B., & Sandage, A

    Saha, A., Thim, F., Tammann, G. A., Reindl, B., & Sandage, A. 2006, ApJS, 165, 108, doi: 10.1086/503800

    work page doi:10.1086/503800 2006

  55. [55]

    R., Timmes, F

    Seitenzahl, I. R., Timmes, F. X., & Magkotsios, G. 2014, ApJ, 792, 10, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/792/1/10 16Jacobson-Gal ´an et al

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/792/1/10 2014

  56. [56]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2401.14474, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2401.14474

    Shahbandeh, M., Ashall, C., Hoeflich, P., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2401.14474, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2401.14474

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2401.14474 2024

  57. [57]

    1988, Astrophysical Journal Letters, 334, L73, doi: 10.1086/185323

    Shigeyama, T., Nomoto, K., Hashimoto, M., & Sugimoto, D. 1988, Astrophysical Journal Letters, 334, L73, doi: 10.1086/185323

    work page doi:10.1086/185323 1988

  58. [58]

    A., Sand, D

    Shrestha, M., Bostroem, K. A., Sand, D. J., et al. 2024, ApJL, 972, L15, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad6907

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad6907 2024

  59. [59]

    Core-Collapse Supernovae from 9 to 120 Solar Masses Based on Neutrino-powered Explosions

    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 internal anchor Pith review doi:10.3847/0004-637x/821/1/38 2016

  60. [60]

    ExTraSS: a Domain Decomposed 3D NLTE Radiative Transfer spectral synthesis code for nebular phase transients

    Utrobin, V. P., Chugai, N. N., & Andronova, A. A. 1995, A&A, 295, 129 van Baal, B. F. A., & Jerkstrand, A. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2511.07539, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2511.07539 van Baal, B. F. A., Jerkstrand, A., Wongwathanarat, A., & Janka, H.-T. 2023, MNRAS, 523, 954, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1488

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2511.07539 1995

  61. [61]

    2025a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.16314, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2509.16314

    Vartanyan, D., Burrows, A., Teryoshin, L., et al. 2025a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.16314, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2509.16314

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2509.16314

  62. [62]

    T.-H., Kasen, D., et al

    Vartanyan, D., Tsang, B. T.-H., Kasen, D., et al. 2025b, ApJ, 982, 9, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adb1e4

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adb1e4

  63. [63]

    C., H¨oflich, P., et al

    Wang, L., Wheeler, J. C., H¨oflich, P., et al. 2002, ApJ, 579, 671, doi: 10.1086/342824

    work page doi:10.1086/342824 2002

  64. [64]

    2026, MNRAS, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stag325

    Wesson, R., Gabler, M., Lyons, M., et al. 2026, MNRAS, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stag325

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stag325 2026

  65. [65]

    Three-Dimensional Simulations of Core-Collapse Supernovae: From Shock Revival to Shock Breakout

    Wongwathanarat, A., Mueller, E., & Janka, H.-T. 2015, A&A, 577, A48. https://arxiv.org/abs/1409.5431

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  66. [66]

    H., Rank, D

    Wooden, D. H., Rank, D. M., Bregman, J. D., et al. 1993, ApJs, 88, 477, doi: 10.1086/191830

    work page doi:10.1086/191830 1993

  67. [67]

    2005, Nature Physics, 1, 147, doi: 10.1038/nphys172

    Woosley, S., & Janka, T. 2005, Nature Physics, 1, 147, doi: 10.1038/nphys172

    work page doi:10.1038/nphys172 2005

  68. [68]

    E., Heger, A., & Weaver, T

    Woosley, S. E., Heger, A., & Weaver, T. A. 2002, Reviews of Modern Physics, 74, 1015, doi: 10.1103/RevModPhys.74.1015

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.74.1015 2002

  69. [69]

    2024, ApJL, 969, L15, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad54b3

    Xiang, D., Mo, J., Wang, X., et al. 2024, ApJL, 969, L15, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad54b3

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad54b3 2024

  70. [70]

    2025, Science Advances, 11, 24.2925, doi: 10.1126/sciadv.adx2925

    Yang, Y., Wen, X., Wang, L., et al. 2025, Science Advances, 11, 24.2925, doi: 10.1126/sciadv.adx2925

    work page doi:10.1126/sciadv.adx2925 2025

  71. [71]

    2024, ApJL, 970, L18, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad5da4

    Zhang, J., Dessart, L., Wang, X., et al. 2024, ApJL, 970, L18, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad5da4

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad5da4 2024