pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.23784 · v1 · pith:H7PUA7A3new · submitted 2026-06-22 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE · astro-ph.GA· astro-ph.SR

First Results from the LSST Shadow Survey: The Restless Luminous Blue Variable AT2017des in the Virgo-Cluster Galaxy, NGC4532

Conor L. Ransome , Bhagya M. Subrayan , David J. Sand , Brian Hsu , Xander J. Hall , Jeniveve Pearson , K. Azalee Bostroem , Jennifer E. Andrews
show 61 more authors
Joszef Vinko J. Craig Wheeler Phillip Noel Lei Hu Tomas Cabrera Stefano Valenti Wynn V. Jacobson-Galan Nathan Smith Alexei V. Filippenko Mojgan Aghakhanloo Igor Andreoni Moira Andrews Iair Arcavi Raphael Baer-Way Emma R. Beasor Edo Berger Federica B. Bianco Peter Blanchard Thomas G. Brink Siddarth Chaini Adrian Crawford Yize Dong Joseph Farah Noah Franz Sebastian Gomez Melissa L. Graham Daichi Hiramatsu Agoston Horti-David Griffin Hosseinzadeh D. Andrew Howell Philip A. James Saurabh W. Jha Charles D. Kilpatrick Lindsey A. Kwok Gavin P. Lamb Amanda R. Lopes Michael Lundquist Clara E. Martinez-Vasquez Thomas Matheson Curtis McCully Maryam Modjaz Gregory S. H. Paek Antonella Palmese Avi Patel Joanne L. Pledger Aravind P. Ravi Jeonghee Rho Krisztian Sarneczky Manisha Shrestha Richard Smith Analia V. Smith Castelli Monika Soraisam Jay Strader Francisco Valdes Sergiy Vasylyev V. Ashley Villar A. Katherina Vivas Lifan Wang Samuel D. Wyatt Kathryn Wynn WeiKang Zheng
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 07:07 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.GAastro-ph.SR
keywords luminous blue variableAT2017dessupernova precursorLBV eruptionsVirgo clustertransient surveyDECam Shadow Survey
0
0 comments X

The pith

The LBV AT2017des shows outburst peaks brightening at an average 0.05 magnitudes per year, possibly approaching a terminal explosion.

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

The paper introduces the DECam Shadow Survey as a nightly-cadence program shadowing LSST observations of galaxy clusters to catch young transients. It presents multi-year photometry and spectroscopy of AT2017des, an LBV in NGC4532, whose short-timescale eruptions reach peaks around -12.5 mag and resemble those of extreme SN impostors. The combined light curve reveals that outburst peaks have increased, with 2026 values up to five times brighter than in 2023. This secular rise leads the authors to suggest the star may be ramping up toward a core-collapse event.

Core claim

AT2017des exhibits fitful LBV eruptions with variability on ~10-day timescales and spectral features typical of hot LBVs and SN impostors. Long-baseline photometry from multiple facilities shows the peaks of these outbursts are getting brighter over time at an average rate of ~0.05 mag yr^{-1}, reaching luminosities higher than most other LBVs and comparable only to bright precursors such as SN2009ip.

What carries the argument

The secular increase in peak outburst luminosity measured across 2023-2026 photometry from multiple observatories.

If this is right

  • If the brightening continues, AT2017des could explode as a supernova within years, enabling direct pre-explosion monitoring.
  • High-cadence Shadow Survey data combined with LSST will allow similar tracking of other LBV and SN-impostor candidates.
  • The light curve provides a concrete template for identifying stars whose activity is increasing toward terminal collapse.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Continued monitoring could test whether the brightening rate accelerates or plateaus before any explosion.
  • The pattern may link to other documented SN impostors whose activity also increased before core collapse.
  • The survey's nightly cadence on cluster fields offers a practical way to catch the earliest phases of such events across the local volume.

Load-bearing premise

The observed year-to-year rise in outburst peak brightness reflects real changes in the star rather than differences in calibration, sampling, or selection across facilities.

What would settle it

Future photometry showing that the peak luminosities stop increasing or begin to decline would indicate the brightening trend is not a sustained precursor to explosion.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.23784 by Adrian Crawford, Agoston Horti-David, A. Katherina Vivas, Alexei V. Filippenko, Amanda R. Lopes, Analia V. Smith Castelli, Antonella Palmese, Aravind P. Ravi, Avi Patel, Bhagya M. Subrayan, Brian Hsu, Charles D. Kilpatrick, Clara E. Martinez-Vasquez, Conor L. Ransome, Curtis McCully, Daichi Hiramatsu, D. Andrew Howell, David J. Sand, Edo Berger, Emma R. Beasor, Federica B. Bianco, Francisco Valdes, Gavin P. Lamb, Gregory S. H. Paek, Griffin Hosseinzadeh, Iair Arcavi, Igor Andreoni, Jay Strader, J. Craig Wheeler, Jeniveve Pearson, Jennifer E. Andrews, Jeonghee Rho, Joanne L. Pledger, Joseph Farah, Joszef Vinko, Kathryn Wynn, K. Azalee Bostroem, Krisztian Sarneczky, Lei Hu, Lifan Wang, Lindsey A. Kwok, Manisha Shrestha, Maryam Modjaz, Melissa L. Graham, Michael Lundquist, Moira Andrews, Mojgan Aghakhanloo, Monika Soraisam, Nathan Smith, Noah Franz, Peter Blanchard, Philip A. James, Phillip Noel, Raphael Baer-Way, Richard Smith, Samuel D. Wyatt, Saurabh W. Jha, Sebastian Gomez, Sergiy Vasylyev, Siddarth Chaini, Stefano Valenti, Thomas G. Brink, Thomas Matheson, Tomas Cabrera, V. Ashley Villar, Weikang Zheng, Wynn V. Jacobson-Galan, Xander J. Hall, Yize Dong.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The depths that can be reached by LSST and DE￾Cam, demonstrating that early discoveries from LSST can be capitalized upon by the Shadow observing strategy. The blue lines show the approximate representative distances of the clusters that Shadow is targeting, which are outlined in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Schematic of the DECam Shadow survey observing strategy, filling in the cadence of LSST. We also show our plans for discovery reporting to the TNS and follow-up spectroscopy [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Top: Color-composite cutouts of AT 2017des us￾ing our DECam g and r images at three different epochs within an 8 day timespan, along with the corresponding r-band difference images (bottom). These data show the rapid variability of AT 2017des. All cutouts are 15′′ squares centered on AT 2017des, and are oriented with north being up and east to the left. sures. The images were then zeropoint calibrated usin… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The combined light curve of AT 2017des with DECam and ZTF gr, LCO griz, Konkoly r, and Binospec ri data. We show the full 9 yr baseline, starting with the initial PS1 discovery (orange vertical line), with a zoom-in on the recent epoch covered by Shadow. This inset displays a rough estimate of the quasiperiodicity seen in AT 2017des with gray bars spaced out by 14 days and 2 days thick. We indicate the gra… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The g- and r-band light curves of AT 2017des in flux space relative to the median flux level of the transient in daily bins (with all photometry sources combined). We truncate the date range of this light curve to where most of the ZTF data were taken. The outbursts are getting brighter over time [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The spectral time-series of AT 2017des. We record the date each spectrum was taken and by which instrument. Also shown are spectra of comparison objects SN 1997bs (which is scaled for legibility S. D. Van Dyk et al. 2000), SN 2000ch (R. M. Wagner et al. 2004; S. D. Van Dyk et al. 2013; M. Aghakhanloo et al. 2023a), AT 2016blu (M. Aghakhanloo et al. 2023b, 2025), and pre-2012 SN 2009ip (N. Smith et al. 2010… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The r-band light curve of AT 2017des com￾pared with other LBV eruptions/SN impostors (R or r band). These comparison objects include SN 2000ch (M. Aghakhanloo et al. 2023a), SN 2002kg (K. Weis & D. J. Bo￾mans 2005), SN 2009ip (N. Smith et al. 2010b; J. C. Mauer￾han et al. 2013), and AT 2016blu (M. Aghakhanloo et al. 2023b). The high-cadence observations of the combined ZTF+DECam+LCO+Konkoly dataset for AT … view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Top: Lorentzian fits to the Hα profiles in our spectral time-series. We do not include the spectrum from 2017 as it is host-dominated. Bottom: The evolution of the Hα FWHM and EW from our Lorentzian fits. Here it can be seen that as the FWHM decreases, the EW increases. seems to be more variable than some of the compari￾son objects, the higher cadence (every few days) of the AT 2017des data means that this… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The Legacy Survey of Space and Time (LSST) will start in late-summer 2026, revolutionizing transient astronomy. Here, we present the Dark Energy Camera (DECam) Shadow Survey, which is designed to maximize the science potential of LSST by shadowing LSST observations of local galaxy-cluster fields, producing a nightly cadence of these fields. The Shadow Survey will discover extremely young supernovae (SNe), SN precursors, as well as other explosive transients and exotic phenomena, helping to characterize such transients at unprecedented cadence and depth when combined with LSST. We describe our workflow, pipeline, public data releases, and candidate vetting. As an early result of Shadow, we present the fitful luminous blue variable (LBV) eruptions of AT2017des in the Virgo-Cluster galaxy NGC4532. AT2017des has short-timescale variability (of order 10 days), peaking at around $M_r=-12.5$mag, brighter than normal LBVs, and similar to the more extreme flaring of hot LBVs/SN impostors such as SN2000ch, AT2016blu, and the precursor activity of SN2009ip. Our spectral time-series reveals features typical of these hot LBVs and SN impostors/precursors. Combining our data with long-baseline photometry from additional observatories, we find that the peaks of the outbursts of AT2017des are getting brighter over time, with 2026 peak fluxes being up to 5 times greater than in 2023 and an average brightening of $\sim0.05$ mag yr$^{-1}$. The peaks of AT2017des are more luminous than those of most other LBVs, only being fainter than bright precursors such as SN2009ip, and extreme SN impostors such as AT2016blu. AT2017des may therefore be ``ramping up'' to a terminal explosion.

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 / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces the DECam Shadow Survey, a nightly-cadence program shadowing LSST observations of local galaxy-cluster fields to enable early discovery of young supernovae, precursors, and other transients. As an early result, it presents multi-epoch photometry and spectroscopy of the luminous blue variable AT2017des in NGC4532, noting short-timescale (~10 day) variability with peaks around M_r = -12.5 mag, spectral features typical of hot LBVs and SN impostors, and a secular increase in outburst peak luminosity of ~0.05 mag yr^{-1} (2026 peaks up to 5 times brighter than 2023) when combining DECam data with long-baseline photometry from other facilities; the authors suggest this indicates the object may be ramping up to a terminal explosion.

Significance. If the reported secular brightening trend is shown to be intrinsic rather than systematic, the result would add a well-observed case to the small sample of LBVs with apparently increasing pre-explosion activity (comparable to SN2009ip and AT2016blu), with implications for massive-star evolution and the connection between LBV outbursts and core-collapse supernovae. The survey concept itself is a practical bridge to LSST-era transient science in cluster environments.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and photometry description] Abstract and photometry description: The central claim of an intrinsic secular brightening trend (~0.05 mag yr^{-1}) rests on combining DECam Shadow Survey data with long-baseline photometry from additional observatories, yet no information is supplied on filter transformations, zero-point consistency across facilities, or whether all historical peaks were sampled with comparable completeness. If cross-calibration systematics or incomplete peak sampling dominate, the trend is not necessarily stellar evolution and the 'ramping up' inference does not follow.
  2. [Results section on AT2017des] Results section on AT2017des: No error analysis, uncertainty budgets, or data tables for the light-curve peaks are presented, preventing assessment of whether the reported brightening rate is robust to calibration choices or sampling cadence, which directly affects the load-bearing assumption that the observed increase reflects intrinsic evolution.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract refers to 'fitful' variability without a quantitative definition or reference to the light-curve figure that would clarify the term.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful and constructive review. The comments highlight important areas where additional detail is required to support the central claims regarding the secular brightening of AT2017des. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and photometry description] Abstract and photometry description: The central claim of an intrinsic secular brightening trend (~0.05 mag yr^{-1}) rests on combining DECam Shadow Survey data with long-baseline photometry from additional observatories, yet no information is supplied on filter transformations, zero-point consistency across facilities, or whether all historical peaks were sampled with comparable completeness. If cross-calibration systematics or incomplete peak sampling dominate, the trend is not necessarily stellar evolution and the 'ramping up' inference does not follow.

    Authors: We agree that the original manuscript lacked sufficient detail on cross-calibration. In the revised version we have added a new subsection in the photometry description that details the filter transformations applied between facilities (including color-term corrections derived from standard stars), zero-point consistency checks using overlapping observations of field stars, and an assessment of peak sampling completeness across the multi-year baseline. We also quantify the impact of potential systematics on the derived brightening rate and argue that the trend remains significant after these considerations. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results section on AT2017des] Results section on AT2017des: No error analysis, uncertainty budgets, or data tables for the light-curve peaks are presented, preventing assessment of whether the reported brightening rate is robust to calibration choices or sampling cadence, which directly affects the load-bearing assumption that the observed increase reflects intrinsic evolution.

    Authors: We acknowledge this omission. The revised Results section now includes a full uncertainty budget for the outburst peaks that incorporates photometric measurement errors, zero-point uncertainties from each facility, and sampling-cadence effects. We have also added a data table (new Table 2) listing every identified peak magnitude, its uncertainty, the facility and filter, and the observation date. This allows direct evaluation of the robustness of the ~0.05 mag yr^{-1} trend. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: purely observational photometry with no derivations or fitted predictions

full rationale

The manuscript reports direct observations of AT2017des outbursts using DECam Shadow Survey data combined with external photometry. The secular brightening trend (~0.05 mag yr^{-1}) is presented as a measured empirical result, not derived from any model, equation, or self-referential fit. No self-definitional steps, fitted-input predictions, uniqueness theorems, or ansatzes appear. The central claim rests on the data themselves rather than reducing to its own inputs by construction. This is the expected outcome for an observational transient report.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

This is an observational discovery report with no mathematical model, no free parameters fitted to data, and no new physical entities postulated.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Standard assumptions of photometric calibration and distance to NGC4532 are valid.
    Required to convert apparent magnitudes to absolute magnitudes and luminosities.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 6256 in / 1127 out tokens · 17864 ms · 2026-06-26T07:07:51.939556+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

211 extracted references · 180 canonical work pages · 8 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    2023a, MNRAS, 521, 1941, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad630

    Aghakhanloo, M., Smith, N., Milne, P., et al. 2023a, MNRAS, 521, 1941, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad630

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad630 1941

  2. [2]

    2023b, MNRAS, 526, 456, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad2702

    Aghakhanloo, M., Smith, N., Milne, P., et al. 2023b, MNRAS, 526, 456, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad2702

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad2702

  3. [3]

    E., et al

    Aghakhanloo, M., Smith, N., Andrews, J. E., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 539, 1317, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf568

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staf568 2025

  4. [4]

    D., Prieto, C

    Alam, S., Albareti, F. D., Prieto, C. A., et al. 2015, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 219, 12, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/219/1/12

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/219/1/12 2015

  5. [5]

    Angel, J. R. P., Hilliard, R. L., & Weymann, R. J. 1979, in The MMT and the Future of Ground-Based Astronomy, ed. T. C. Weekes, Vol. 385, 87

    1979

  6. [7]

    2021, MNRAS, 500, 1633, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa2587

    Beck, R., Szapudi, I., Flewelling, H., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 500, 1633, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa2587

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa2587 2021

  7. [8]

    C., Kulkarni, S

    Bellm, E. C., Kulkarni, S. R., Graham, M. J., et al. 2019, PASP, 131, 018002, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aaecbe

    work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/aaecbe 2019

  8. [9]

    2009, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 2184, 1

    Berger, E., Foley, R., & Ivans, I. 2009, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 2184, 1

    2009

  9. [10]

    doi:10.1051/aas:1996164 , author =

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

    work page doi:10.1051/aas:1996164 1996

  10. [11]

    B., Jones, R

    Bianco, F. B., Jones, R. L., Ivezi´ c,ˇZ., Ritz, S. M., & Rubin Observatory Project Science Team. 2025, Updated estimates of the Rubin system throughput and expected LSST image depth, Project Science Technical Note PSTN-054, NSF-DOE Vera C. Rubin Observatory, doi: 10.71929/rubin/2584366

    work page doi:10.71929/rubin/2584366 2025

  11. [12]

    B., Ivezi´ c,ˇZ., Jones, R

    Bianco, F. B., Ivezi´ c,ˇZ., Jones, R. L., et al. 2022, ApJS, 258, 1, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac3e72

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac3e72 2022

  12. [13]

    P., Jord´ an, A., Mei, S., et al

    Blakeslee, J. P., Jord´ an, A., Mei, S., et al. 2009, ApJ, 694, 556, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/694/1/556

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/694/1/556 2009

  13. [14]

    Boian, I., & Groh, J. H. 2018, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 617, A115, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201731794

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201731794 2018

  14. [15]

    A., Pearson, J., Shrestha, M., et al

    Bostroem, K. A., Pearson, J., Shrestha, M., et al. 2023, ApJL, 956, L5, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acf9a4

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acf9a4 2023

  15. [16]

    J., Elias-Rosa, N., Fraser, M., Van Dyk, S

    Brennan, S. J., Elias-Rosa, N., Fraser, M., Van Dyk, S. D., & Lyman, J. D. 2022, A&A, 664, L18, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244262

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244262 2022

  16. [17]

    M., Baliber, N., Bianco, F

    Brown, T. M., Baliber, N., Bianco, F. B., et al. 2013, PASP, 125, 1031, doi: 10.1086/673168

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1086/673168 2013

  17. [18]

    J., Gal-Yam, A., Schulze, S., et al

    Bruch, R. J., Gal-Yam, A., Schulze, S., et al. 2020, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2008.09986. https://arxiv.org/abs/2008.09986

    arXiv 2020

  18. [19]

    J., Gal-Yam, A., Yaron, O., et al

    Bruch, R. J., Gal-Yam, A., Yaron, O., et al. 2023, ApJ, 952, 119, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acd8be

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acd8be 2023

  19. [20]

    2024, PhRvD, 110, 123029, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.110.123029

    Cabrera, T., Palmese, A., Hu, L., et al. 2024, PhRvD, 110, 123029, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.110.123029

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.110.123029 2024

  20. [21]

    2017, The Astrophysical Journal, 836, 97, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/836/1/97

    Maureira, J.-C. 2017, The Astrophysical Journal, 836, 97, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/836/1/97

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/836/1/97 2017

  21. [22]

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

    Cai, Y. Z., Pastorello, A., Fraser, M., et al. 2021, A&A, 654, A157, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202141078

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202141078 2021

  22. [23]

    A., Clayton, G

    Cardelli, J. A., Clayton, G. C., & Mathis, J. S. 1989, ApJ, 345, 245, doi: 10.1086/167900 C´ ardenas, C., Khaulsay, J., K, A. S., et al. 2026, Transient Name Server Classification Report, 2026-1935, 1

    work page doi:10.1086/167900 1989

  23. [24]

    The Pan-STARRS1 Surveys

    Chambers, K. C., Magnier, E. A., Metcalfe, N., et al. 2016, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1612.05560, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1612.05560

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1612.05560 2016

  24. [25]

    C., Huber, M

    Chambers, K. C., Huber, M. E., Flewelling, H., et al. 2017, Transient Name Server Discovery Report, 2017-448, 1

    2017

  25. [26]

    S., Hill, G

    Chonis, T. S., Hill, G. J., Lee, H., Tuttle, S. E., & Vattiat, B. L. 2014, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 9147, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy V, ed. S. K. Ramsay, I. S. McLean, & H. Takami, 91470A, doi: 10.1117/12.2056005

    work page doi:10.1117/12.2056005 2014

  26. [27]

    S., Hill, G

    Chonis, T. S., Hill, G. J., Lee, H., et al. 2016, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 9908, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy VI, ed. C. J. Evans, L. Simard, & H. Takami, 99084C, doi: 10.1117/12.2232209

    work page doi:10.1117/12.2232209 2016

  27. [28]

    T., Jayasinghe, T., Stanek, K

    Christy, C. T., Jayasinghe, T., Stanek, K. Z., et al. 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 519, 5271, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3801

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3801 2023

  28. [29]

    S., Larionov, V

    Clark, J. S., Larionov, V. M., & Arkharov, A. 2005, A&A, 435, 239, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20042563

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20042563 2005

  29. [30]

    Conti, P. S. 1984, in IAU Symposium, Vol. 105, Observational Tests of the Stellar Evolution Theory, ed. A. Maeder & A. Renzini, 233

    1984

  30. [31]

    J., Hounsell, R., O’Brien, T

    Darnley, M. J., Hounsell, R., O’Brien, T. J., et al. 2019, Nature, 565, 460, doi: 10.1038/s41586-018-0825-4 DESI Collaboration, Adame, A. G., Aguilar, J., et al. 2024, The Astronomical Journal, 168, 58, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad3217

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-018-0825-4 2019

  31. [32]

    2017, A&A, 605, A83, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201730942

    Dessart, L., John Hillier, D., & Audit, E. 2017, A&A, 605, A83, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201730942

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201730942 2017

  32. [33]

    Dong, Y., & Villar, V. A. 2026, Transient Name Server Classification Report, 2026-1311, 1

    2026

  33. [34]

    J., Valenti, S., et al

    Dong, Y., Sand, D. J., Valenti, S., et al. 2023, ApJ, 957, 28, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acef18

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acef18 2023

  34. [35]

    K., et al

    Dong, Y., Nugent, A., Yadavalli, S. K., et al. 2026, Transient Name Server Classification Report, 2026-1740, 1

    2026

  35. [36]

    J., Ackley, K., Jim´ enez-Ibarra, F., et al

    Dyer, M. J., Ackley, K., Jim´ enez-Ibarra, F., et al. 2024, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 13094, Ground-based and Airborne Telescopes X, ed. H. K. Marshall, J. Spyromilio, & T. Usuda, 130941X, doi: 10.1117/12.3018305 D´ alya, G., D´ ıaz, R., Bouchet, F. R., et al. 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal As...

    work page doi:10.1117/12.3018305 2024

  36. [37]

    2016, MNRAS, 463, 3894, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2253

    Elias-Rosa, N., Pastorello, A., Benetti, S., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 463, 3894, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2253

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2253 2016

  37. [38]

    2019, PASP, 131, 075004, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ab1d78

    Fabricant, D., Fata, R., Epps, H., et al. 2019, PASP, 131, 075004, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ab1d78

    work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/ab1d78 2019

  38. [39]

    Filippenko, A. V. 1989, AJ, 97, 726, doi: 10.1086/115018 19

    work page doi:10.1086/115018 1989

  39. [40]

    Filippenko, A. V. 1997, ARA&A, 35, 309, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.35.1.309

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.35.1.309 1997

  40. [41]

    V., Barth, A

    Filippenko, A. V., Barth, A. J., Bower, G. C., et al. 1995, AJ, 110, 2261, doi: 10.1086/117687

    work page doi:10.1086/117687 1995

  41. [42]

    V., Chornock, R., Swift, B., et al

    Filippenko, A. V., Chornock, R., Swift, B., et al. 2003, IAUC, 8159, 2

    2003

  42. [43]

    V., Li, W

    Filippenko, A. V., Li, W. D., Treffers, R. R., & Modjaz, M. 2001, International Astronomical Union Colloquium, 183, 121–130, doi: 10.1017/S0252921100078738

    work page doi:10.1017/s0252921100078738 2001

  43. [44]

    T., Honscheid, K., et al

    Flaugher, B., Diehl, H. T., Honscheid, K., et al. 2015, AJ, 150, 150, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/150/5/150

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/150/5/150 2015

  44. [45]

    Flesch, E. W. 2023, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 6, 49, doi: 10.21105/astro.2308.01505

    work page doi:10.21105/astro.2308.01505 2023

  45. [46]

    A., Magnier, E

    Flewelling, H. A., Magnier, E. A., Chambers, K. C., et al. 2020, ApJS, 251, 7, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/abb82d

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/abb82d 2020

  46. [47]

    L., et al

    Fransson, C., Sollerman, J., Strotjohann, N. L., et al. 2022, A&A, 666, A79, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243452

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202243452 2022

  47. [48]

    D., et al

    Franz, N., Subrayan, B., Kilpatrick, C. D., et al. 2025, ApJL, 994, L45, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae17a8

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae17a8 2025

  48. [49]

    2013, MNRAS, 433, 1312, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt813

    Fraser, M., Inserra, C., Jerkstrand, A., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 433, 1312, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt813

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt813 2013

  49. [50]

    L., Madore, B

    Freedman, W. L., Madore, B. F., Mould, J. R., et al. 1994, Nature, 371, 757, doi: 10.1038/371757a0

    work page doi:10.1038/371757a0 1994

  50. [51]

    J., Smith, K

    Fulton, M., Smartt, S. J., Smith, K. W., et al. 2022, Transient Name Server AstroNote, 36, 1

    2022

  51. [52]

    D., Smartt, S

    Fulton, M. D., Smartt, S. J., Huber, M. E., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 542, 541, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf1165

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staf1165 2025

  52. [53]

    A., et al

    Gagliano, A., Berger, E., Villar, V. A., et al. 2025a, ApJ, 978, 110, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad9748

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad9748

  53. [54]

    A., Matsumoto, T., et al

    Gagliano, A., Villar, V. A., Matsumoto, T., et al. 2025b, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2502.19469, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2502.19469 Gaia Collaboration, Vallenari, A., Brown, A. G. A., et al. 2023, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 674, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243940

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2502.19469 2023

  54. [55]

    Gal-Yam, A., & Leonard, D. C. 2009, Nature, 458, 865, doi: 10.1038/nature07934

    work page doi:10.1038/nature07934 2009

  55. [56]

    C., Fox, D

    Gal-Yam, A., Leonard, D. C., Fox, D. B., et al. 2007, ApJ, 656, 372, doi: 10.1086/510523

    work page doi:10.1086/510523 2007

  56. [57]

    O., et al

    Gal-Yam, A., Arcavi, I., Ofek, E. O., et al. 2014, Nature, 509, 471, doi: 10.1038/nature13304

    work page doi:10.1038/nature13304 2014

  57. [58]

    Filippenko, A. V. 1989, ApJ, 342, 908, doi: 10.1086/167646

    work page doi:10.1086/167646 1989

  58. [59]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2504.15988, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2504.15988

    Goto, S., Yamanaka, M., Nagayama, T., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2504.15988, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2504.15988

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2504.15988 2025

  59. [60]

    L., Sand, D

    Graham, M. L., Sand, D. J., Valenti, S., et al. 2014, ApJ, 787, 163, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/787/2/163

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/787/2/163 2014

  60. [61]

    M., Schlafly, E

    Green, G. M., Schlafly, E. F., Finkbeiner, D., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 478, 651, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1008

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1008 2018

  61. [63]

    H., Hillier, D

    Groh, J. H., Hillier, D. J., & Damineli, A. 2011b, ApJ, 736, 46, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/736/1/46

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/736/1/46

  62. [64]

    H., Hillier, D

    Groh, J. H., Hillier, D. J., Damineli, A., et al. 2009, ApJ, 698, 1698, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/698/2/1698

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/698/2/1698 2009

  63. [65]

    P., Cartier, R., & Yaron, O

    Gutierrez, C. P., Cartier, R., & Yaron, O. 2017, Transient Name Server Classification Report, 2017-468, 1

    2017

  64. [66]

    P., Bechtol, K., Bellm, E

    Guy, L. P., AlSayyad, Y., Bechtol, K., et al. 2026, Rubin Observatory Plans for an Early Science Program, Technical Note RTN-011, NSF-DOE Vera C. Rubin Observatory, doi: 10.71929/rubin/2584021

    work page doi:10.71929/rubin/2584021 2026

  65. [67]

    J., Palmese, A., O’Connor, B., et al

    Hall, X. J., Palmese, A., O’Connor, B., et al. 2026a, ApJL, 1001, L20, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae4338

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae4338 2041

  66. [68]

    Electromagnetic Follow-up of the Sub-Solar Mass Gravitational Wave Candidate S251112cm: Kilonova Constraints and a Coincident IIb Supernova

    Hall, X. J., Ahumada, T., Gassert, J., et al. 2026b, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2605.10940, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2605.10940

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2605.10940

  67. [69]

    Hamuy, M., & Pinto, P. A. 1999, AJ, 117, 1185, doi: 10.1086/300759

    work page doi:10.1086/300759 1999

  68. [70]

    In: CVPR

    He, K., Zhang, X., Ren, S., & Sun, J. 2016, in 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops (CVPRW) (IEEE), 1, doi: 10.1109/CVPR.2016.90

    work page doi:10.1109/cvpr.2016.90 2016

  69. [71]

    T., Holoien, T

    Hinkle, J. T., Holoien, T. W.-S., Shappee, B. J., et al. 2022, ApJ, 930, 12, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac5f54

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac5f54 2022

  70. [72]

    2024, ApJ, 964, 181, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad2854

    Hiramatsu, D., Matsumoto, T., Berger, E., et al. 2024, ApJ, 964, 181, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad2854

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad2854 2024

  71. [73]

    Ho, A. Y. Q., Perley, D. A., Gal-Yam, A., et al. 2023, ApJ, 949, 120, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acc533

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acc533 2023

  72. [74]

    Honscheid, K., & DePoy, D. L. 2008, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:0810.3600, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.0810.3600

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.0810.3600 2008

  73. [75]

    J., Valenti, S., et al

    Hosseinzadeh, G., Sand, D. J., Valenti, S., et al. 2017, ApJL, 845, L11, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa8402

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa8402 2017

  74. [76]

    J., Lundqvist, P., et al

    Hosseinzadeh, G., Sand, D. J., Lundqvist, P., et al. 2022, ApJL, 933, L45, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac7cef

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac7cef 2022

  75. [77]

    2023a, ApJL, 953, L16, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ace4c4

    Hosseinzadeh, G., Farah, J., Shrestha, M., et al. 2023a, ApJL, 953, L16, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ace4c4

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ace4c4 2041

  76. [78]

    J., Sarbadhicary, S

    Hosseinzadeh, G., Sand, D. J., Sarbadhicary, S. K., et al. 2023b, ApJL, 953, L15, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ace7c0

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ace7c0 2041

  77. [79]

    C., et al

    Hosseinzadeh, G., Paterson, K., Rastinejad, J. C., et al. 2024, ApJ, 964, 35, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad2170

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad2170 2024

  78. [80]

    J., et al

    Hosseinzadeh, G., Andrews, J., Sand, D. J., et al. 2025, Transient Name Server AstroNote, 280, 1

    2025

  79. [81]

    2019, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, Vol

    Howell, D. 2019, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, Vol. 233, American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts #233, 258.16 20

    2019

  80. [83]

    2022, ApJ, 936, 157, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7394

    Hu, L., Wang, L., Chen, X., & Yang, J. 2022, ApJ, 936, 157, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7394

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac7394 2022

Showing first 80 references.