pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.18353 · v1 · pith:WVTHITXCnew · submitted 2026-06-16 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE · astro-ph.SR

Late-time JWST/NIRCam Observations of the Extremely Long-duration GRB 250702B/EP 250702a and Its Host Galaxy

Huei Sears , Jean J. Somalwar , Ryan Chornock , Tanmoy Laskar , Andrew Levan , Raffaella Margutti , Brendan O'Connor , Nayana A. J.
show 17 more authors
Tomas Ahumada Kate D. Alexander Igor Andreoni Akash Anumarlapudi Jonathan Carney James Freeburn Llu\'is Galbany Benjamin P. Gompertz Or Graur Saarah Hall Xander J. Hall Erica Hammerstein Saurabh W. Jha Mansi M. Kasliwal Dheeraj Pasham Itai Sfaradi Yuhan Yao
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 22:46 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.SR
keywords gamma-ray burstJWSThost galaxytidal disruption eventafterglowsupernovalight curve
0
0 comments X

The pith

Late-time JWST observations of GRB 250702B yield marginal detections in F150W and F200W that would indicate light-curve flattening if real.

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

The paper presents JWST/NIRCam imaging of an extremely long-duration gamma-ray burst taken 95 days after the event. The host galaxy is modeled as a high-mass system with substantial dust viewed nearly edge-on, making it unusually luminous and massive among GRB hosts at comparable redshifts. Forced photometry returns possible 3-sigma signals only in the two shortest-wavelength filters, with no detection in the longer bands. If genuine, these signals imply the transient has stopped fading as steeply as a pure afterglow power law. The same behavior can be produced by a jetted tidal disruption event or by the rise of an underlying supernova component.

Core claim

If the ~3 sigma detections in F150W (~27.9 AB) and F200W (~27.4 AB) are secure, they indicate late-time light curve flattening consistent with jetted TDEs or a supernova plus GRB afterglow model.

What carries the argument

Forced photometry performed on the JWST/NIRCam images in the F150W and F200W bands at the transient position near the host dust lane.

If this is right

  • The detections would favor models in which the transient is a jetted tidal disruption event rather than a standard collapsar-driven GRB.
  • The host would stand as the most massive and luminous GRB host known at similar redshift under a collapsar interpretation.
  • If the signals are instead upper limits they remain consistent with an unbroken power-law afterglow decline.
  • Template imaging is required to remove the ambiguity between transient emission and host light.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Confirmation of flattening would require re-examination of other ultra-long GRBs for possible TDE contributions.
  • The marginal nature of the signals illustrates that even deep infrared observations can leave the physical origin of extreme transients unresolved without repeated epochs.

Load-bearing premise

The ~3 sigma signals in F150W and F200W represent real transient emission rather than noise, host contamination, or reduction artifacts.

What would settle it

Late-time template observations with JWST/NIRCam that either recover the same flux levels or show the source has faded below the reported magnitudes.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.18353 by Akash Anumarlapudi, Andrew Levan, Benjamin P. Gompertz, Brendan O'Connor, Dheeraj Pasham, Erica Hammerstein, Huei Sears, Igor Andreoni, Itai Sfaradi, James Freeburn, Jean J. Somalwar, Jonathan Carney, Kate D. Alexander, Llu\'is Galbany, Mansi M. Kasliwal, Nayana A. J., Or Graur, Raffaella Margutti, Ryan Chornock, Saarah Hall, Saurabh W. Jha, Tanmoy Laskar, Tomas Ahumada, Xander J. Hall, Yuhan Yao.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: A multi-color JWST/NIRCam composite image of the field and host galaxy of GRB 250702B. The zoomed inset shows the host galaxy of GRB 250702B, which shows a large, dusty, spiral galaxy. The transient is marked with white cross hairs in the zoomed inset, and it is offset by ∼ 0.67′′ (∼ 5.5 kpc at z = 1.036) from the nucleus of the host galaxy. The contaminating star and the subtraction star are marked with r… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Steps showing the subtraction of the diffraction spike contaminating the host galaxy in F150W. The pixel scale is the same across panels. Panel a) shows the original field around the host galaxy of GRB 250702B. Panel b) shows another diffraction spike in the image which is used for subtraction. Panel c) shows the subtraction of panel b) from panel a). The blue ellipse shows the extraction region used for h… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: 1 ′′ crops of the field around the transient location. The top row shows the Level 3 data products, and the bottom row shows the GALFIT residual after galaxy and sky subtraction. The cross hairs show the location of the transient. The scale and colorbar have been adjusted to see fine details. the limited range of wavelengths covered by our data, and in particular a lack of ultraviolet and far-infrared cons… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Steps showing the subtraction of the JWST/F150W image from the HST/F160W image. The left panel shows the original field around the host galaxy of GRB 250702B in HST/F160W. The pixel scale is the same across all panels. The middle panel shows the same field in the JWST/F150W image. The image has been rescaled to the pixel scale of the HST image and has also been convolved with the HST/F160W point-spread fun… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Top: Prospector fit to the JWST host photom￾etry, assuming a parametric star-formation history. The ob￾servations are shown in light blue, while the model photome￾try is shown as black squares. The full model spectral energy distribution is shown as a pink line. A sample of draws from the posterior are shown as light pink lines. We additionally plot in lime green the JWST/NIRSpec spectrum taken at the tran… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Similar to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Left: Observed transient upper limits (blue triangles) and forced photometry (pink and green triangles) compared to a forward shock model (FS, dashed red, A. J. Levan et al. 2025a; B. P. Gompertz et al. 2026), SN (1998bw, dot-dashed blue) model, and the sum of the two models (solid purple). The SN model used here does not extend beyond observer-frame K, which is the origin of the artificial sharp red cut o… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Cumulative histograms (shaded regions) and eCDFs (solid lines) for a subsample of GRB host galaxies at 0.8 < z < 1.3. In clockwise order starting at the top left are the fractional flux, host normalized offset, stellar mass, host absolute magnitude in observed-frame 3.6 µm (≈ rest-frame H), half-light radius in arcseconds, and the host absolute magni￾tude in the filter closest to rest-frame r. For both abs… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The full corner plot showing the posterior distributions from the model. Variables are as defined in Section 4.2. APPENDIX A. ADDENDUM FOR PROSPECTOR MODELING In [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_10.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present JWST/NIRCam observations of the extremely long-duration gamma-ray burst (GRB) 250702B taken at ~ 95 days post-GRB (observer frame). The observations of the host galaxy reveal a single galaxy with a prominent dust lane observed nearly edge-on. Prospector modeling of the host galaxy photometry finds a high stellar mass (log(M_*/M_Sun) = 11.0 +0.2/-0.3) and large dust column (A_V = 2.8 +/- 0.3 mag), in agreement with previous results. If GRB 250702B is a collapsar-driven GRB, the host galaxy is the brightest (in rest-frame r and rest-frame H) and most massive compared to GRB hosts at similar redshifts. The transient localization is near the dust lane, and while we find no evidence for transient emission in F277W, F356W, and F444W, forced photometry in F150W and F200W reveals possible ~ 3 sigma detections of the transient at m_{F150W} ~ 27.9 AB mag and m_{F200W} ~ 27.4 AB mag. If these are secure detections, they are indicative of a late-time light curve flattening. This behavior is consistent with that of jetted tidal disruption events (TDEs); however, it is also consistent with a supernova plus GRB afterglow model. Alternatively, if these are upper limits, they are consistent with, but do not further constrain, the extrapolated power-law decline of the afterglow. The ambiguity of the possible detection of the transient in F150W and F200W highlights the need for late-time template observations with JWST/NIRCam.

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 / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports JWST/NIRCam observations of GRB 250702B at ~95 days post-burst. The host is a single galaxy with a prominent dust lane viewed nearly edge-on; Prospector modeling yields log(M*/M⊙) = 11.0 +0.2/-0.3 and AV = 2.8 ± 0.3 mag, making it the brightest and most massive GRB host at similar redshifts if the event is a collapsar. Forced photometry shows no transient in F277W/F356W/F444W but possible ~3σ signals at mF150W ~27.9 AB and mF200W ~27.4 AB near the dust lane. If secure, these indicate late-time flattening consistent with jetted TDEs or SN+GRB afterglow; if upper limits, they remain consistent with afterglow decline. The paper stresses the ambiguity and need for template imaging.

Significance. If the marginal detections are real, the result would be significant for linking extreme long-duration GRBs to alternative channels such as jetted TDEs and for characterizing unusually massive GRB hosts. The manuscript's standard host photometry and modeling, together with its explicit conditional framing of the transient signals, constitute a strength. The work supplies useful late-time data on a rare event while correctly identifying the requirement for follow-up observations.

minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the description of the forced photometry in F150W and F200W would be strengthened by a brief statement on the error treatment and any checks against reduction artifacts, even if only to reiterate the ~3σ and ambiguous status already noted.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive and constructive report on our manuscript. We appreciate the recommendation for minor revision and the recognition of the work's strengths in host modeling and conditional framing of the transient signals. Since no specific major comments were raised, we provide no point-by-point responses below.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; purely observational report

full rationale

The manuscript is an observational report presenting JWST/NIRCam photometry of GRB 250702B and its host, with standard Prospector SED fitting applied to the host photometry to derive stellar mass and dust attenuation. No derivations, predictions, or model outputs are claimed that reduce by construction to fitted parameters or self-citations; the central statements remain conditional on the security of the ~3σ F150W/F200W signals and explicitly flag ambiguity requiring future template imaging. No load-bearing steps match any of the enumerated circularity patterns.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Host properties are obtained by fitting standard stellar-population models to broadband photometry; no new entities or ad-hoc constants are introduced beyond the usual Prospector parameters.

free parameters (2)
  • log stellar mass = 11.0
    Fitted to host photometry via Prospector
  • A_V dust extinction = 2.8
    Fitted to host photometry via Prospector
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Prospector stellar population synthesis models accurately recover mass and dust for edge-on dusty galaxies at the relevant redshift
    Invoked when interpreting the photometry fit results

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5998 in / 1404 out tokens · 30903 ms · 2026-06-26T22:46:49.351150+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

105 extracted references · 97 canonical work pages · 7 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    P., Anand, S., et al

    Ahumada, T., Singer, L. P., Anand, S., et al. 2021, Nature Astronomy, 5, 917, doi: 10.1038/s41550-021-01428-7

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-021-01428-7 2021

  2. [2]

    W., Perley, D

    Andreoni, I., Coughlin, M. W., Perley, D. A., et al. 2022, Nature, 612, 430, doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-05465-8 GRB250702B with JWST/NIRCam15

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-022-05465-8 2022

  3. [3]

    2015,, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1504.004 http://ascl.net/1504.004

    Becker, A. 2015,, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1504.004 http://ascl.net/1504.004

    2015

  4. [4]

    B., & Granot, J

    Beniamini, P., Perets, H. B., & Granot, J. 2026, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 9, 57985, doi: 10.33232/001c.157985

    work page doi:10.33232/001c.157985 2026

  5. [5]

    1996 , note =

    Bertin, E., & Arnouts, S. 1996, A&AS, 117, 393, doi: 10.1051/aas:1996164

    work page doi:10.1051/aas:1996164 1996

  6. [6]

    2002, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

    Bertin, E., Mellier, Y., Radovich, M., et al. 2002, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 281, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XI, ed. D. A. Bohlender, D. Durand, & T. H. Handley, 228

    2002

  7. [7]

    K., Berger, E., & Fong, W.-f

    Blanchard, P. K., Berger, E., & Fong, W.-f. 2016, ApJ, 817, 144, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/817/2/144

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/817/2/144 2016

  8. [8]

    S., Giannios, D., Metzger, B

    Bloom, J. S., Giannios, D., Metzger, B. D., et al. 2011, Science, 333, 203, doi: 10.1126/science.1207150

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1207150 2011

  9. [9]

    2025,, 2.2.0 Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.14889440

    Bradley, L., Sip˝ ocz, B., Robitaille, T., et al. 2025,, 2.2.0 Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.14889440

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.14889440 2025

  10. [10]

    C., Levan, A

    Brown, G. C., Levan, A. J., Stanway, E. R., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 452, 4297, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv1520

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1520 2015

  11. [11]

    C., Levan, A

    Brown, G. C., Levan, A. J., Stanway, E. R., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 472, 4469, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2193

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2193 2017

  12. [12]

    2011, Astronomische Nachrichten, 332, 262, doi: 10.1002/asna.201111531

    Bufano, F., Benetti, S., Sollerman, J., Pian, E., & Cupani, G. 2011, Astronomische Nachrichten, 332, 262, doi: 10.1002/asna.201111531

    work page doi:10.1002/asna.201111531 2011

  13. [13]

    2012, ApJ, 753, 67, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/753/1/67

    Bufano, F., Pian, E., Sollerman, J., et al. 2012, ApJ, 753, 67, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/753/1/67

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/753/1/67 2012

  14. [14]

    2023, ApJL, 946, L31, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acc39c

    Burns, E., Svinkin, D., Fenimore, E., et al. 2023, ApJL, 946, L31, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acc39c

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acc39c 2023

  15. [15]

    N., Kennea, J

    Burrows, D. N., Kennea, J. A., Ghisellini, G., et al. 2011, Nature, 476, 421, doi: 10.1038/nature10374

    work page doi:10.1038/nature10374 2011

  16. [16]

    The Dust Content and Opacity of Actively Star-Forming Galaxies

    Calzetti, D., Armus, L., Bohlin, R. C., et al. 2000, The Astrophysical Journal, 533, 682, doi: 10.1086/308692

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1086/308692 2000

  17. [17]

    J., et al

    Campana, S., Mangano, V., Blustin, A. J., et al. 2006, Nature, 442, 1008, doi: 10.1038/nature04892

    work page doi:10.1038/nature04892 2006

  18. [18]

    2011, ApJ, 740, 41, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/740/1/41

    Cano, Z., Bersier, D., Guidorzi, C., et al. 2011, ApJ, 740, 41, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/740/1/41

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/740/1/41 2011

  19. [19]

    2025, ApJL, 994, L46, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae1d67

    Carney, J., Andreoni, I., O’Connor, B., et al. 2025, ApJL, 994, L46, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae1d67

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae1d67 2025

  20. [20]

    B., Krimm, H

    Cenko, S. B., Krimm, H. A., Horesh, A., et al. 2012, ApJ, 753, 77, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/753/1/77

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/753/1/77 2012

  21. [21]

    2006, ApJL, 645, L113, doi: 10.1086/506271

    Natarajan, P. 2006, ApJL, 645, L113, doi: 10.1086/506271

    work page doi:10.1086/506271 2006

  22. [22]

    E., Conroy, C., & Gunn, J

    Conroy, C., Gunn, J. E., Conroy, C., & Gunn, J. E. 2010, ascl, ascl:1010.043. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/ 2010ascl.soft10043C/abstract

    2010

  23. [23]

    D., Andrews, J

    Decleir, M., Gordon, K. D., Andrews, J. E., et al. 2022, ApJ, 930, 15, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac5dbe Della Valle, M., Chincarini, G., Panagia, N., et al. 2006, Nature, 444, 1050, doi: 10.1038/nature05374

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac5dbe 2022

  24. [24]

    D., et al

    Eftekhari, T., Tchekhovskoy, A., Alexander, K. D., et al. 2024, ApJ, 974, 149, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad72ea

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad72ea 2024

  25. [25]

    Eyles-Ferris, R. A. J., King, A., Starling, R. L. C., et al. 2026, MNRAS, 546, stag005, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stag005

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stag005 2026

  26. [26]

    Clayton, G. C. 2019, ApJ, 886, 108, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab4c3a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab4c3a 2019

  27. [27]

    2024, ApJ, 977, 197, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad8886

    Fu, S.-Y., Xu, D., Lei, W.-H., et al. 2024, ApJ, 977, 197, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad8886

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad8886 2024

  28. [28]

    Fynbo, J. P. U., Watson, D., Th¨ one, C. C., et al. 2006, Nature, 444, 1047, doi: 10.1038/nature05375

    work page doi:10.1038/nature05375 2006

  29. [29]

    B., Price, P

    Gal-Yam, A., Fox, D. B., Price, P. A., et al. 2006, Nature, 444, 1053, doi: 10.1038/nature05373

    work page doi:10.1038/nature05373 2006

  30. [30]

    Tremonti, C. A. 2005, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 362, 41, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09321.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09321.x 2005

  31. [31]

    P., Barthelmy, S

    Gehrels, N., Norris, J. P., Barthelmy, S. D., et al. 2006, Nature, 444, 1044, doi: 10.1038/nature05376

    work page doi:10.1038/nature05376 2006

  32. [32]

    R., Page, K

    Goad, M. R., Page, K. L., Godet, O., et al. 2007, A&A, 468, 103, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20066874

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20066874 2007

  33. [33]

    P., Levan, A

    Gompertz, B. P., Levan, A. J., Laskar, T., et al. 2026, ApJL, 997, L4, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae2ed9

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae2ed9 2026

  34. [34]

    Gordon, K. D. 2024, Journal of Open Source Software, 9, 7023, doi: 10.21105/joss.07023

    work page doi:10.21105/joss.07023 2024

  35. [35]

    D., Cartledge, S., & Clayton, G

    Gordon, K. D., Cartledge, S., & Clayton, G. C. 2009, ApJ, 705, 1320, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/705/2/1320

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/705/2/1320 2009

  36. [36]

    D., Clayton, G

    Gordon, K. D., Clayton, G. C., Decleir, M., et al. 2023, ApJ, 950, 86, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/accb59

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/accb59 2023

  37. [37]

    D., Misselt, K

    Gordon, K. D., Misselt, K. A., Bouwman, J., et al. 2021, ApJ, 916, 33, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac00b7

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac00b7 2021

  38. [38]

    B., Gill, R., Beniamini, P., & O’Connor, B

    Granot, J., Perets, H. B., Gill, R., Beniamini, P., & O’Connor, B. 2026, MNRAS, 547, stag328, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stag328

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stag328 2026

  39. [39]

    A., Kann, D

    Greiner, J., Mazzali, P. A., Kann, D. A., et al. 2015, Nature, 523, 189, doi: 10.1038/nature14579

    work page doi:10.1038/nature14579 2015

  40. [40]

    2025, A&A, 703, A101, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202556663

    Guidorzi, C., Maccary, R., Maistrello, M., et al. 2025, A&A, 703, A101, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202556663

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202556663 2025

  41. [41]

    B., Andreoni, I., et al

    Hammerstein, E., Cenko, S. B., Andreoni, I., et al. 2026, ApJ, 996, 143, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae1838

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae1838 2026

  42. [42]

    2013, ApJS, 208, 19, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/208/2/19

    Hinshaw, G., Larson, D., Komatsu, E., et al. 2013, ApJS, 208, 19, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/208/2/19

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1088/0067-0049/208/2/19 2013

  43. [43]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.09580, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2501.09580

    Jin, C.-C., Li, D.-Y., Jiang, N., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.09580, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2501.09580

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2501.09580 2025

  44. [44]

    2024, doi: 10.5281/ZENODO.12447779

    Johnson, B., Foreman-Mackey, D., Sick, J., et al. 2024, doi: 10.5281/ZENODO.12447779

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.12447779 2024

  45. [45]

    D., Leja, J., Conroy, C., & Speagle, J

    Johnson, B. D., Leja, J., Conroy, C., & Speagle, J. S. 2021, ApJS, 254, 22, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/abef67 16Sears et al

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.3847/1538-4365/abef67 2021

  46. [46]

    D., Leja, J

    Johnson, B. D., Leja, J. L., Conroy, C., & Speagle, J. S. 2019,, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1905.025 http://ascl.net/1905.025

    2019

  47. [47]

    A., Schady, P., Olivares, E

    Kann, D. A., Schady, P., Olivares, E. F., et al. 2018, A&A, 617, A122, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201731292

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201731292 2018

  48. [48]

    A., Schady, P., Olivares E., F., et al

    Kann, D. A., Schady, P., Olivares E., F., et al. 2019, A&A, 624, A143, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629162

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629162 2019

  49. [49]

    MNRAS , author =

    Lazzati, D. 2005, MNRAS, 357, 722, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.08687.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.08687.x 2005

  50. [50]

    Speagle, J. S. 2019a, The Astrophysical Journal, 876, 3, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/AB133C

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab133c

  51. [51]

    2017, ApJ, 837, 170, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa5ffe

    Byler, N. 2017, ApJ, 837, 170, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa5ffe

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa5ffe 2017

  52. [52]

    D., Conroy, C., et al

    Leja, J., Johnson, B. D., Conroy, C., et al. 2019b, The Astrophysical Journal, 877, 140, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/AB1D5A

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab1d5a

  53. [53]

    K., Salafia, O

    Leung, J. K., Salafia, O. S., Spingola, C., et al. 2026, ApJ, 996, 22, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae1956

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae1956 2026

  54. [54]

    Levan, A. J. 2015, Journal of High Energy Astrophysics, 7, 44, doi: 10.1016/j.jheap.2015.05.004

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jheap.2015.05.004 2015

  55. [55]

    J., Tanvir, N

    Levan, A. J., Tanvir, N. R., Cenko, S. B., et al. 2011, Science, 333, 199, doi: 10.1126/science.1207143

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1207143 2011

  56. [56]

    J., Tanvir, N

    Levan, A. J., Tanvir, N. R., Starling, R. L. C., et al. 2014, ApJ, 781, 13, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/781/1/13

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/781/1/13 2014

  57. [57]

    J., Tanvir, N

    Levan, A. J., Tanvir, N. R., Brown, G. C., et al. 2016, ApJ, 819, 51, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/819/1/51

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/819/1/51 2016

  58. [58]

    J., Gompertz, B

    Levan, A. J., Gompertz, B. P., Salafia, O. S., et al. 2024, Nature, 626, 737, doi: 10.1038/s41586-023-06759-1

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06759-1 2024

  59. [59]

    J., Martin-Carrillo, A., Laskar, T., et al

    Levan, A. J., Martin-Carrillo, A., Laskar, T., et al. 2025a, ApJL, 990, L28, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adf8e1

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adf8e1 2041

  60. [60]

    2026, Science Bulletin, 71, 538, doi: 10.1016/j.scib.2025.12.050

    Li, D., Zhang, W., Yang, J., et al. 2026, Science Bulletin, 71, 538, doi: 10.1016/j.scib.2025.12.050

    work page doi:10.1016/j.scib.2025.12.050 2026

  61. [61]

    T., Alexander, K

    Li, W., Christy, C. T., Alexander, K. D., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2606.06595. https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.06595

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  62. [62]

    R., et al

    Lin, D., Strader, J., Carrasco, E. R., et al. 2018, Nature Astronomy, 2, 656, doi: 10.1038/s41550-018-0493-1

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-018-0493-1 2018

  63. [63]

    2021, ARA&A, 59, 155, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-112420-030742 Micha lowskI, M

    Margutti, R., & Chornock, R. 2021, ARA&A, 59, 155, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-112420-030742 Micha lowskI, M. J., Xu, D., Stevens, J., et al. 2018, A&A, 616, A169, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629942

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-112420-030742 2021

  64. [64]

    Z., Garnavich, P

    Modjaz, M., Stanek, K. Z., Garnavich, P. M., et al. 2006, ApJL, 645, L21, doi: 10.1086/505906

    work page doi:10.1086/505906 2006

  65. [65]

    2024, MNRAS, 527, 2452, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3001

    Mummery, A., van Velzen, S., Nathan, E., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 2452, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3001

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3001 2024

  66. [66]

    Fenimore, E. E. 1991, Nature, 350, 592, doi: 10.1038/350592a0

    work page doi:10.1038/350592a0 1991

  67. [67]

    L., et al

    Neights, E., Burns, E., Fryer, C. L., et al. 2026, MNRAS, 545, staf2019, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf2019 O’Connor, B., Gill, R., DeLaunay, J., et al. 2025, ApJL, 994, L17, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae1741

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staf2019 2026

  68. [68]

    O., Cenko, S

    Ofek, E. O., Cenko, S. B., Gal-Yam, A., et al. 2007, ApJ, 662, 1129, doi: 10.1086/518082 Olivares E., F., Greiner, J., Schady, P., et al. 2012, A&A, 539, A76, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201117929

    work page doi:10.1086/518082 2007

  69. [69]

    R., Cenko, S

    Pasham, D. R., Cenko, S. B., Levan, A. J., et al. 2015, ApJ, 805, 68, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/805/1/68

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/805/1/68 2015

  70. [70]

    Y., Ho, L

    Peng, C. Y., Ho, L. C., Impey, C. D., & Rix, H.-W. 2010, AJ, 139, 2097, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/139/6/2097

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1088/0004-6256/139/6/2097 2010

  71. [71]

    A., Kr¨ uhler, T., Schulze, S., et al

    Perley, D. A., Kr¨ uhler, T., Schulze, S., et al. 2016a, ApJ, 817, 7, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/817/1/7

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/817/1/7

  72. [72]

    A., Tanvir, N

    Perley, D. A., Tanvir, N. R., Hjorth, J., et al. 2016b, ApJ, 817, 8, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/817/1/8

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/817/1/8

  73. [73]

    A., Masetti, N., et al

    Pian, E., Mazzali, P. A., Masetti, N., et al. 2006, Nature, 442, 1011, doi: 10.1038/nature05082

    work page doi:10.1038/nature05082 2006

  74. [74]

    C., Gompertz, B

    Rastinejad, J. C., Gompertz, B. P., Levan, A. J., et al. 2022, Nature, 612, 223, doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-05390-w

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-022-05390-w 2022

  75. [75]

    S., Fender, R., et al

    Rhodes, L., Bright, J. S., Fender, R., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 521, 389, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad344

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad344 2023

  76. [76]

    2021, ApJL, 916, L18, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac1170

    Ricarte, A., Tremmel, M., Natarajan, P., & Quinn, T. 2021, ApJL, 916, L18, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac1170

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac1170 2021

  77. [77]

    2020, in XIV.0 Scientific Meeting (virtual) of the Spanish Astronomical Society, 182

    Rodrigo, C., & Solano, E. 2020, in XIV.0 Scientific Meeting (virtual) of the Spanish Astronomical Society, 182

    2020

  78. [78]

    2012,, IVOA Working Draft 15 October 2012 doi: 10.5479/ADS/bib/2012ivoa.rept.1015R

    Rodrigo, C., Solano, E., & Bayo, A. 2012,, IVOA Working Draft 15 October 2012 doi: 10.5479/ADS/bib/2012ivoa.rept.1015R

    work page doi:10.5479/ads/bib/2012ivoa.rept.1015r 2012

  79. [79]

    F., et al

    Rodrigo, C., Cruz, P., Aguilar, J. F., et al. 2024, A&A, 689, A93, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202449998

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202449998 2024

  80. [80]

    2024,, 3.4 https://web.eecs.utk.edu/ ∼dcostine/ personal/PowerDeviceLib/DigiTest/index.html

    Rohatgi, A. 2024,, 3.4 https://web.eecs.utk.edu/ ∼dcostine/ personal/PowerDeviceLib/DigiTest/index.html

    2024

Showing first 80 references.