pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.22407 · v1 · pith:N4NADGVPnew · submitted 2026-05-21 · 🌌 astro-ph.IM · astro-ph.CO

Hostless extragalactic transients in Fink: Results from the ELEPHANT pipeline

R. Durgesh , P. J. Pessi , E. E. O. Ishida , J. Peloton This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-22 02:07 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.IM astro-ph.CO
keywords hostless transientsextragalactic transientssupernovaealert brokersFinkELEPHANT pipelineZTF
0
0 comments X

The pith

The ELEPHANT pipeline identifies 67 confirmed hostless extragalactic transients from 877 flagged events in Fink alerts with 0.84 accuracy.

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

The ELEPHANT pipeline filters for hostless candidates in real-time astronomical alert systems by examining image stamps with minimal additional data. Analysis of flagged events from September 2023 through December 2025 shows that 67 of 877 candidates have no detectable host galaxy in catalogs or archival images, forming a high-purity set of intrinsically faint or hostless events. Upper limits on the absolute magnitudes of these hosts fall below the typical range for dwarf galaxies. The pipeline achieves an overall accuracy of 0.84 and has been extended to handle alerts from the Rubin observatory.

Core claim

The ELEPHANT pipeline successfully identifies a high-purity sample of 67 genuinely hostless extragalactic transients out of 877 flagged events in the Fink broker. These events show no host galaxy in existing catalogs or imaging, with inferred host absolute magnitudes extending below typical dwarf galaxy luminosities. The pipeline, which relies on stamps and light-curve and astrometric checks, has an accuracy of 0.84 and primarily detects Type Ia supernovae.

What carries the argument

The ELEPHANT pipeline, which processes image stamps to flag hostless candidates and refines classifications using catalog cross-matches, archival imaging, light-curve evolution, and astrometric consistency.

If this is right

  • Most confirmed hostless events are Type Ia supernovae, with superluminous supernovae as the next most common.
  • 51 additional events show visually identifiable hosts missing from catalogs and stamps.
  • The sample enables study of transients with very faint or absent hosts.
  • The pipeline has been adapted to process the Rubin alert stream since February 2026.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • This approach could reveal transients occurring in low-luminosity or isolated environments not captured by standard catalogs.
  • Extending such filters to future large surveys may improve real-time identification of unusual transients.
  • Further deep imaging of the confirmed sample could test if any hosts are detectable with more sensitive observations.

Load-bearing premise

That the combination of catalog cross-matching, archival imaging, light-curve behavior, and astrometric consistency is enough to confirm events as truly hostless rather than having undetected faint hosts or being contaminants.

What would settle it

Deep follow-up imaging that reveals host galaxies for a substantial portion of the 67 confirmed hostless candidates would indicate that the classification overestimates true hostlessness.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.22407 by E. E. O. Ishida, J. Peloton, P. J. Pessi, R. Durgesh.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: SN 2025kkb / ZTF25aaofttb5 : Example of hostless tem￾plate stamp. differ significantly, the original image is considered to contain a source. The KS-test thresholds were determined by running the pipeline on a test set of images, with known labels (host￾less vs. containing structure), obtained through visual inspection. ELEPHANT has been integrated as a hostless detection science module in the Fink alert b… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Fraction of the BTS SN sample flagged as hostless by [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Number of classified hostless candidates and their red [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: AT 2025swd (ZTF25abgkgdu), an example of a spec [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Pröst (top) and Sherlock (bottom) host association counts. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: High proper motion stars identified within flagged host [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Catalogued host r-band magnitude distribution. The ZTF r-band magnitude limit is shown as a dashed vertical red line. 4.3. Host magnitude distribution The lack of host detection can be associated to the depth of the survey. In this section we compare the host magnitudes reported in the corresponding catalogues (see Section 4.2) to the ZTF limiting magnitude. We consider the r-band, as it tends to be bet￾te… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Examples of candidates without host association after [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Light curves of truly hostless-candidates with an spectroscopic classification available on TNS. Each subplot shows the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Light curves of truly hostless-candidates without an [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Screen shot from the Fink Rubin Portal, showing two of the reported Rubin transients from our pipeline: the top panel [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_11.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The ExtragaLactic alErt Pipeline for Hostless AstroNomical Transients (ELEPHANT), has been developed as a framework for filtering hostless candidates, in real time alert systems, and implemented as a filter in the Fink broker. ELEPHANT works on stamps and requires minimal information, thus allowing for fast identification of extragalactic transient events. In this work we evaluate the performance of the ELEPHANT pipeline by systematically analyzing flagged hostless candidates identified between 1 September 2023 and 31 December 2025. Our goal is to quantifying its accuracy and identify dominant sources of contamination. For each flagged candidate we collected additional information from multiple catalogues and archival repositories. We further examined their light-curve evolution and astrometric consistency (coordinate dispersion over time) to refine source classification. Results. Out of 877 flagged events, 67 are confidently confirmed as genuinely hostless candidates, with no detectable host galaxy in either existing catalogues or archival imaging, representing a high-purity sample of intrinsically faint or absent hosts. Additional 51 events are linked to visually identifiable hosts that are entirely absent from both catalogues and ZTF stamps. For the confirmed hostless subset, the inferred upper limits on host-galaxy absolute magnitudes extend well below the luminosity range of typical dwarf galaxies. The pipeline showed an overall accuracy of 0.84, with the majority of the classified flagged events being Type Ia supernovae, and the second most detected class being Type I superluminous supernova. ELEPHANT has been adapted to deal with the Rubin alert stream and has been processing its alerts since February 2026.

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 / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces the ELEPHANT pipeline, implemented as a real-time filter in the Fink broker, for identifying hostless extragalactic transients from alert stamps with minimal information. It reports a systematic analysis of 877 flagged candidates observed between 1 September 2023 and 31 December 2025, confirming 67 as genuinely hostless (no detectable host in catalogs or archival imaging) after cross-matching, light-curve evolution, and astrometric consistency checks; an additional 51 events show visually identifiable but uncatalogued hosts. The work claims an overall classification accuracy of 0.84, identifies Type Ia supernovae as the dominant class among flagged events, and notes adaptation of the pipeline to the Rubin alert stream since February 2026.

Significance. If the non-detection classifications and purity claims hold, the work delivers a practical, low-information filter for hostless transients that could be valuable for upcoming wide-field surveys such as LSST. The reported sample of 67 high-purity candidates with absolute-magnitude upper limits below typical dwarf-galaxy luminosities would provide a useful resource for studying rare or intrinsically faint-host populations, and the explicit adaptation to Rubin data strengthens its operational relevance.

major comments (2)
  1. [Results section, paragraph on confirmed hostless candidates] Results section (analysis of the 67 confirmed hostless candidates): the claim that inferred upper limits on host-galaxy absolute magnitudes 'extend well below the luminosity range of typical dwarf galaxies' requires explicit verification against the actual limiting magnitudes, depth, and footprint of the specific archival datasets (ZTF, Pan-STARRS, etc.) at the redshifts of each transient. Without a quantitative depth assessment or coverage map per candidate, the distinction between truly hostless events and low-luminosity hosts below the imaging threshold remains unverified and directly affects the purity interpretation.
  2. [Validation and accuracy subsection] Methods or validation subsection describing the accuracy metric: the reported overall accuracy of 0.84 is presented without error bars, a clear definition of the validation procedure (e.g., fraction of events with spectroscopic confirmation versus visual classification), or a breakdown by contaminant class. This makes it difficult to assess whether the figure robustly supports the pipeline's performance claims for the full 877-event sample.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and introduction] The abstract states the time range as '1 September 2023 and 31 December 2025' but the full text should confirm whether this is inclusive and note any data gaps or alert-stream changes during the period.
  2. [Results] Notation for the 51 events with visually identifiable but uncatalogued hosts should be made consistent with the 67 confirmed hostless sample to avoid reader confusion between the two categories.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed review of our manuscript. Their comments have helped us identify areas where additional clarification and quantitative support will strengthen the presentation of our results. We address each major comment below and indicate the revisions we will make.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Results section, paragraph on confirmed hostless candidates] Results section (analysis of the 67 confirmed hostless candidates): the claim that inferred upper limits on host-galaxy absolute magnitudes 'extend well below the luminosity range of typical dwarf galaxies' requires explicit verification against the actual limiting magnitudes, depth, and footprint of the specific archival datasets (ZTF, Pan-STARRS, etc.) at the redshifts of each transient. Without a quantitative depth assessment or coverage map per candidate, the distinction between truly hostless events and low-luminosity hosts below the imaging threshold remains unverified and directly affects the purity interpretation.

    Authors: We agree that a more explicit quantitative assessment of the imaging depths is needed to support this claim robustly. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated paragraph (and, if space permits, a supplementary table) that reports the 5-sigma limiting magnitudes of the archival datasets (ZTF, Pan-STARRS, and any other surveys consulted) at the positions and approximate redshifts of the 67 confirmed hostless candidates. We will also summarise the sky-coverage fraction and note any regions where shallower data may affect the limits. These additions will allow readers to verify that the derived absolute-magnitude upper limits indeed lie below the typical dwarf-galaxy luminosity range (M_r ≳ −14 to −15) and will clarify the distinction from undetected low-luminosity hosts. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Validation and accuracy subsection] Methods or validation subsection describing the accuracy metric: the reported overall accuracy of 0.84 is presented without error bars, a clear definition of the validation procedure (e.g., fraction of events with spectroscopic confirmation versus visual classification), or a breakdown by contaminant class. This makes it difficult to assess whether the figure robustly supports the pipeline's performance claims for the full 877-event sample.

    Authors: We thank the referee for pointing out the lack of supporting detail for the accuracy figure. In the revised Methods section we will explicitly define the validation procedure: the 0.84 accuracy was obtained by combining spectroscopic classifications (available for approximately 25 % of the 877 events) with visual classification by the team for the remainder, using light-curve shape, colour evolution, and astrometric consistency as additional discriminants. We will report binomial or bootstrap-derived error bars on the overall accuracy and will include a per-class breakdown (e.g., accuracy for Type Ia supernovae versus other classes) together with a small confusion-matrix summary. These additions will be placed in a new validation subsection and will be accompanied by a short discussion of the dominant sources of contamination. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: classification rests on external catalogs and imaging

full rationale

The paper describes an observational pipeline that flags candidates and then verifies hostless status via cross-matches to independent catalogs, archival imaging from ZTF/Pan-STARRS/etc., light-curve evolution, and astrometric dispersion. No equations, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, self-definitional loops, or load-bearing self-citations appear in the reported chain. The 67 confirmed hostless events and 0.84 accuracy are direct empirical outcomes from external data sources rather than reductions to the pipeline inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central performance claims rest on assumptions about catalog completeness and the reliability of visual/archival checks to confirm absence of hosts; no free parameters or invented entities are introduced.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Absence from catalogs and ZTF stamps combined with light-curve and astrometric analysis suffices to confirm genuine hostless nature.
    Invoked when classifying the 67 events as confidently hostless and when setting upper limits on host magnitudes.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5846 in / 1187 out tokens · 41850 ms · 2026-05-22T02:07:32.973032+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

70 extracted references · 70 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    D., Allende Prieto, C., et al

    Alam, S., Albareti, F. D., Allende Prieto, C., et al. 2015, ApJS, 219, 12

    work page 2015

  2. [2]

    P., James, P

    Anderson, J. P., James, P. A., Habergham, S. M., Galbany, L., & Kuncarayakti, H. 2015, Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia, 32, e019

    work page 2015

  3. [3]

    C., Kulkarni, S

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

    work page 2019

  4. [4]

    2011, New Astronomy Reviews, 55, 1

    Berger, E. 2011, New Astronomy Reviews, 55, 1

    work page 2011

  5. [5]

    B., Ivezi´c, Ž., Jones, R

    Bianco, F. B., Ivezi´c, Ž., Jones, R. L., et al. 2022, ApJS, 258, 1

    work page 2022

  6. [6]

    2024, A&A, 689, A289

    Cabrera-Vives, G., Moreno-Cartagena, D., Astorga, N., et al. 2024, A&A, 689, A289

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    2024, ApJ, 969, 80

    Chakraborty, S., Sadler, B., Hoeflich, P., et al. 2024, ApJ, 969, 80

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    The Pan-STARRS1 Surveys

    Chambers, K. C., Magnier, E. A., Metcalfe, N., et al. 2016, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1612.05560

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  9. [9]

    H., Yan, L., Kangas, T., et al

    Chen, Z. H., Yan, L., Kangas, T., et al. 2023, ApJ, 943, 41

    work page 2023

  10. [10]

    2011, ApJ, 733, 3

    Childress, M., Aldering, G., Aragon, C., et al. 2011, ApJ, 733, 3

    work page 2011

  11. [11]

    & Bullock, J

    Conroy, C. & Bullock, J. S. 2015, ApJ, 805, L2 Dálya, G., Díaz, R., Bouchet, F. R., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 514, 1403 de Soto, K. M., Villar, V . A., Berger, E., et al. 2024, ApJ, 974, 169 Della Valle, M. & Izzo, L. 2020, A&A Rev., 28, 3

    work page 2015

  12. [12]

    J., Lang, D., et al

    Dey, A., Schlegel, D. J., Lang, D., et al. 2019, AJ, 157, 168

    work page 2019

  13. [13]

    Duncan, K. J. 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 512, 3662

    work page 2022

  14. [14]

    Durgesh, R., Pessi, P., Ishida, E. E. O., et al. 2025, Transient Name Server As- troNote, 159, 1

    work page 2025

  15. [15]

    Durgesh, R., Pessi, P., Ishida, E. E. O., & Peloton, J. 2026, Transient Name Server AstroNote, 49, 1

    work page 2026

  16. [16]

    Fitzpatrick, E. L. 1999, PASP, 111, 63 Förster, F., Cabrera-Vives, G., Castillo-Navarrete, E., et al. 2021, AJ, 161, 242

    work page 1999

  17. [17]

    A., Sharma, Y ., et al

    Fremling, C., Miller, A. A., Sharma, Y ., et al. 2020, ApJ, 895, 32

    work page 2020

  18. [18]

    Gagliano, A., de Soto, K., Boesky, A., & Manning, T. A. 2025, alexander- gagliano/Prost: v1.2.11 Gaia Collaboration, Brown, A. G. A., Vallenari, A., et al. 2018, A&A, 616, A1 Gaia Collaboration, Prusti, T., de Bruijne, J. H. J., et al. 2016, A&A, 595, A1

    work page 2025

  19. [19]

    Gal-Yam, A., Maoz, D., Guhathakurta, P., & Filippenko, A. V . 2003, AJ, 125, 1087

    work page 2003

  20. [20]

    2024, MNRAS, 535, 471

    Gomez, S., Nicholl, M., Berger, E., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 535, 471

    work page 2024

  21. [21]

    L., Sand, D

    Graham, M. L., Sand, D. J., Zaritsky, D., & Pritchet, C. J. 2015, ApJ, 807, 83

    work page 2015

  22. [22]

    Greenstein, J. L. & Arp, H. 1969, Astrophys. Lett., 3, 149

    work page 1969

  23. [23]

    2026, Transient Name Server Classification Report, 2026- 1048, 1

    Jacobson-Galan, W. 2026, Transient Name Server Classification Report, 2026- 1048, 1

    work page 2026

  24. [24]

    2024, Transient Name Server Classification Report, 2024-732, 1

    Johansson, J., Hammerstein, E., Covarrubias, S., et al. 2024, Transient Name Server Classification Report, 2024-732, 1

    work page 2024

  25. [25]

    O., McGill, P., Manning, T

    Jones, D. O., McGill, P., Manning, T. A., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2410.17322

    work page arXiv 2024

  26. [26]

    Z., Stoll, R., & Prieto, J

    Khan, R., Stanek, K. Z., Stoll, R., & Prieto, J. L. 2011, ApJ, 737, L24

    work page 2011

  27. [27]

    A., de Souza, R., Castro-Ginard, A., et al

    Kuhn, M. A., de Souza, R., Castro-Ginard, A., et al. 2021, in American Astro- nomical Society Meeting Abstracts, V ol. 237, American Astronomical Soci- ety Meeting Abstracts #237, 329.01

    work page 2021

  28. [28]

    M., Lattanzi, M

    Lasker, B. M., Lattanzi, M. G., McLean, B. J., et al. 2008, AJ, 136, 735

    work page 2008

  29. [29]

    Leoni, M., Ishida, E. E. O., Peloton, J., & Möller, A. 2022, A&A, 663, A13 Article number, page 10 of 13 Durgesh et al.: Hostless extragalactic transients in Fink Fig. 11: Screen shot from the Fink Rubin Portal, showing two of the reported Rubin transients from our pipeline: the top panel shows 31383145835292266420and the bottom one, 313928194567700757 21...

    work page 2022

  30. [30]

    LSST Science Book, Version 2.0

    Lin, C.-L., Huang, L.-C., Hou, W.-J., Hsiao, H.-Y ., & Ip, W.-H. 2025, AJ, 170, 297 LSST Science Collaboration, Abell, P. A., Allison, J., et al. 2009, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:0912.0201

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  31. [31]

    2014, ApJ, 787, 138

    Lunnan, R., Chornock, R., Berger, E., et al. 2014, ApJ, 787, 138

    work page 2014

  32. [32]

    A., Wise, J., et al

    Lunnan, R., Perley, D. A., Wise, J., et al. 2025, Transient Name Server As- troNote, 179, 1

    work page 2025

  33. [33]

    2003, A&A, 405, 23 Möller, A., Peloton, J., Ishida, E

    Matteucci, F., Renda, A., Pipino, A., & Della Valle, M. 2003, A&A, 405, 23 Möller, A., Peloton, J., Ishida, E. E. O., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 501, 3272

    work page 2003

  34. [34]

    A., Wolf, C., Bessell, M

    Onken, C. A., Wolf, C., Bessell, M. S., et al. 2024, PASA, 41, e061

    work page 2024

  35. [35]

    Perets, H. B. & Šubr, L. 2012, ApJ, 751, 133

    work page 2012

  36. [36]

    Perley, D., Fremling, C., & Laz, T. D. 2025, Transient Name Server Discovery Report, 2025-1783, 1

    work page 2025

  37. [37]

    A., Fremling, C., Sollerman, J., et al

    Perley, D. A., Fremling, C., Sollerman, J., et al. 2020, ApJ, 904, 35

    work page 2020

  38. [38]

    J., Durgesh, R., Nakazono, L., et al

    Pessi, P. J., Durgesh, R., Nakazono, L., et al. 2024, A&A, 691, A181

    work page 2024

  39. [39]

    M., Ashall, C., Burns, C

    Phillips, M. M., Ashall, C., Burns, C. R., et al. 2022, ApJ, 938, 47

    work page 2022

  40. [40]

    1990, The Best of Both Worlds, Part II, Television episode,Star Trek: The Next Generation, season 4, episode 1, production code 175, original air date 24 September 1990

    Piller, M. 1990, The Best of Both Worlds, Part II, Television episode,Star Trek: The Next Generation, season 4, episode 1, production code 175, original air date 24 September 1990

    work page 1990

  41. [41]

    V ., Novinskaya, A

    Pruzhinskaya, M. V ., Novinskaya, A. K., Pauna, N., & Rosnet, P. 2020, MNRAS, 499, 5121

    work page 2020

  42. [42]

    V ., Pauna, N., Novinskaya, A

    Pruzhinskaya, M. V ., Pauna, N., Novinskaya, A. K., & Rosnet, P. 2021, Astron- omy Reports, 65, 1015

    work page 2021

  43. [43]

    2008, ApJ, 684, L103

    Przybilla, N., Fernanda Nieva, M., Heber, U., & Butler, K. 2008, ApJ, 684, L103

    work page 2008

  44. [44]

    2024, MNRAS, 530, 4695

    Qin, Y .-J., Zabludoff, A., Arcavi, I., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 530, 4695

    work page 2024

  45. [45]

    2022, The Astrophysical Journal Sup- plement Series, 259, 13

    Qin, Y .-J., Zabludoff, A., Kisley, M., et al. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal Sup- plement Series, 259, 13

    work page 2022

  46. [46]

    A., Jegou Du Laz, T., et al

    Rehemtulla, N., Miller, A. A., Jegou Du Laz, T., et al. 2024, ApJ, 972, 7

    work page 2024

  47. [47]

    L., Wright, J., & Maddox, L

    Richardson, D., Jenkins, III, R. L., Wright, J., & Maddox, L. 2014, AJ, 147, 118

    work page 2014

  48. [48]

    V ., Wetzel, A., & Fattahi, A

    Sales, L. V ., Wetzel, A., & Fattahi, A. 2022, Nature Astronomy, 6, 897 Sánchez-Sáez, P., Reyes, I., Valenzuela, C., et al. 2021, AJ, 161, 141

    work page 2022

  49. [49]

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

    work page 2011

  50. [50]

    J., Finkbeiner, D

    Schlegel, D. J., Finkbeiner, D. P., & Davis, M. 1998, ApJ, 500, 525

    work page 1998

  51. [51]

    Scholz, R.-D., Lodieu, N., & McCaughrean, M. J. 2004, A&A, 428, L25

    work page 2004

  52. [52]

    2023, Transient Name Server As- troNote, 352, 1

    Schweyer, T., Barmentloo, S., Pessi, P., et al. 2023, Transient Name Server As- troNote, 352, 1

    work page 2023

  53. [53]

    Shara, M. M. 2000, New A Rev., 44, 87

    work page 2000

  54. [54]

    D., et al

    Shirley, R., Roehlly, Y ., Hurley, P. D., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 490, 634

    work page 2019

  55. [55]

    C., et al

    Smith, M., Sullivan, M., Nichol, R. C., et al. 2018, ApJ, 854, 37

    work page 2018

  56. [56]

    C., Chu, M., & Fremling, C

    Sollerman, J., Jaimes, J. C., Chu, M., & Fremling, C. 2026, Transient Name Server Classification Report, 2026-115, 1

    work page 2026

  57. [57]

    D., Dong, Y ., Nugent, A., et al

    Soto, K. D., Dong, Y ., Nugent, A., et al. 2026, Transient Name Server AstroNote, 50, 1

    work page 2026

  58. [58]

    S., Perlman, E., et al

    Strolger, L.-G., Bovill, M. S., Perlman, E., et al. 2025, ApJ, 988, 278

    work page 2025

  59. [59]

    D., Bersten, M., et al

    Taddia, F., Stritzinger, M. D., Bersten, M., et al. 2018, A&A, 609, A136

    work page 2018

  60. [60]

    2021, A&A, 649, A10

    Torra, F., Castañeda, J., Fabricius, C., et al. 2021, A&A, 649, A10

    work page 2021

  61. [61]

    A., Burns, C

    Uddin, S. A., Burns, C. R., Phillips, M. M., et al. 2020, ApJ, 901, 143

    work page 2020

  62. [62]

    A., Davis, K

    Villar, V . A., Davis, K. W., Dong, Y ., & Foley, R. J. 2026, Transient Name Server AstroNote, 72, 1

    work page 2026

  63. [63]

    G., Young, D

    Weston, J. G., Young, D. R., Smartt, S. J., et al. 2026, ApJ, 1000, 289

    work page 2026

  64. [64]

    J., Daw, E

    White, D. J., Daw, E. J., & Dhillon, V . S. 2011, Class. Quant. Grav., 28, 085016

    work page 2011

  65. [65]

    2025, Transient Name Server Classification Report, 2025-3816, 1

    Wise, J., Perley, D., Hinds, K., et al. 2025, Transient Name Server Classification Report, 2025-3816, 1

    work page 2025

  66. [66]

    2024, Transient Name Server Discovery Report, 2024-2899, 1

    Xu, J., Zhang, M., & Gao, X. 2024, Transient Name Server Discovery Report, 2024-2899, 1

    work page 2024

  67. [67]

    2023, Sherlock

    Young, D. 2023, Sherlock. Contextual classification of astronomical transient sources

    work page 2023

  68. [68]

    2024, Transient Name Server Discovery Re- port, 2024-56, 1

    Zhang, M., Gao, X., Sun, G., et al. 2024, Transient Name Server Discovery Re- port, 2024-56, 1

    work page 2024

  69. [69]

    Zinn, P.-C., Grunden, P., & Bomans, D. J. 2011, A&A, 536, A103

    work page 2011

  70. [70]

    Zinn, P.-C., Stritzinger, M., Braithwaite, J., et al. 2012, A&A, 538, A30 Article number, page 12 of 13 Durgesh et al.: Hostless extragalactic transients in Fink Appendix A: Fink alert filters The ELEPHANT pipeline processes alerts that have any of the following classifications, which are added within the Fink bro- ker. Fink classifiers are added using ma...

    work page 2012