pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.25896 · v1 · pith:T4JVGSL7new · submitted 2026-06-24 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE · astro-ph.SR

Two years of shock interaction tracing three phases of evolution: the explosion of a Type IIn supernova, SN 2019vxm

Gitika Rameshan , Rishabh Singh Teja , D. K. Sahu , G. C. Anupama , Masayuki Yamanaka , Keiichi Maeda , Tatsuya Nakaoka , Sota Goto
show 5 more authors
Brajesh Kumar Avinash Singh Miho Kawabata Koji S. Kawabata Kenta Taguchi
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-25 19:10 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.SR
keywords Type IIn supernovaSN 2019vxmshock interactioncircumstellar materiallight curvedust formationspectral evolutionejecta mass
0
0 comments X

The pith

Observations of SN 2019vxm show three sequential phases of shock interaction with circumstellar material over more than two years.

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

The paper reports multi-wavelength photometry and spectroscopy of the Type IIn supernova SN 2019vxm spanning two years after explosion. It identifies an initial purely interaction-powered phase, followed by a photon-scattering phase that produces asymmetric line profiles, and a late phase marked by infrared brightening from dust at roughly 1500 K. The total radiated energy reaches 5x10^50 erg, the circumstellar medium mass is estimated at 3-8 solar masses without assuming a specific density profile, and a minimum ejecta mass of 3.88 solar masses is derived from the broad H-alpha component. No nebular lines appear even at late times, indicating that dense or obscured ejecta persist.

Core claim

SN 2019vxm's light curve and spectra are shaped by ongoing shock interaction with a massive circumstellar shell, progressing through an early interaction-dominated stage, an intermediate stage with photon scattering that creates symmetric line wings, and a dust-affected late stage where red-wing flux is suppressed, while the broad H-alpha feature consistently indicates at least 3.88 solar masses of ejecta and the total energy output reaches 5x10^50 erg.

What carries the argument

Light-curve modeling that yields a circumstellar mass independent of density profile, combined with time-series spectroscopy that separates interaction, scattering, and dust signatures through line-profile evolution.

If this is right

  • The circumstellar mass estimate remains valid across different assumed density profiles for the surrounding material.
  • The broad H-alpha component supplies a lower bound on ejecta mass that holds even while interaction is active.
  • Late infrared excess can be produced by dust at 1500 K located at distances around 4x10^16 cm without requiring nebular emission.
  • Interaction can keep the inner ejecta dense or obscured long enough to prevent nebular lines from appearing for years.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Similar long-lived interacting events may commonly require progenitors that lose several solar masses shortly before core collapse.
  • The three-phase sequence could serve as a template for interpreting other slowly evolving Type IIn supernovae monitored over multiple years.
  • The lack of nebular lines at late times suggests that interaction may mask the true inner ejecta structure in many such objects.

Load-bearing premise

The circumstellar mass derived from light-curve modeling is truly independent of the chosen density profile and the broad H-alpha width reliably gives the minimum ejecta mass without major contamination from ongoing interaction or scattering.

What would settle it

A late-time spectrum after two years that shows clear nebular emission lines, or an independent mass measurement for the circumstellar material that lies outside the 3-8 solar-mass range.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.25896 by Avinash Singh, Brajesh Kumar, D. K. Sahu, G. C. Anupama, Gitika Rameshan, Keiichi Maeda, Kenta Taguchi, Koji S. Kawabata, Masayuki Yamanaka, Miho Kawabata, Rishabh Singh Teja, Sota Goto, Tatsuya Nakaoka.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: A color composite image of SN 2019vxm in B, V, R filters at t ∼20 days (2012 December 07). The red circle corresponds to SN 2019vxm. The white circles mark the secondary calibrators used for photometry. mined using Landolt standard stars. These secondary standard stars in the supernova frame were later used for calibrating supernova magnitudes to the standard sys￾tem. On all other nights, the instrumental … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Light curve of SN 2019vxm from UV to the NIR obtained using HCT (circular markers), Kanata (square markers), and Swift (diamond markers) facilities. (Constant offsets are applied for visual clarity.) til t ∼ 48 days. However, we note that the UV contribu￾tion, which is ∼ 37% at t ∼16 days, reduces to ∼ 18% at 44 days. Thus, even though UV flux is not avail￾able beyond t∼50 days, the contribution is not sig… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Top: The evolution of the pseudo-bolometric lu￾minosity (1600-23064˚A) along with the UV (1600-3010 ˚A), optical (3010-10000 ˚A), and IR (10000-23064 ˚A) contribu￾tion with time. Bottom: The fraction of optical and IR luminosity compared with the pseudo-bolometric luminos￾ity. The clear crossover from an optical to an IR-dominated luminosity is visible in both panels. evolution is also observed in ASASSN-1… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Top: Comparison of R/r -bandlight curve of dif￾ferent SNe IIn, including an SLSN, SN 2006gy. Bottom: U-B, B-V, R-I, J-H, and H-K color evolution of SN 2019vxm and comparison with colors of the sample set of SNe IIn [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The evolution of the SEDs with time, where the red data points are the flux densities from photometric observation and the blue is the best fit model. Single blackbody fit for two epochs, t ∼16.5 days and t ∼312.6 days, and a dual blackbody fit for one epoch, t ∼564.8 days, along with the SN and the dust temperature specified. model), among others. The interaction model accounts for the conversion of eject… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The converged fit obtained for LC up to t ∼400 days for a fixed s = 2.0. The points correspond to the data, while the fit is the model with posterior distribution (and thus the errors) representing the thickness. The model LC has been extended to t∼750 days for comparison [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Spectral evolution of SN 2019vxm from pre-maximum to the late nebular phase spanning about 2 years of observations is shown here. Phases are marked with reference to the explosion epoch (JD≈2458804.5). (All spectra are corrected for redshift, extinction, and absolute flux) Hβ and Hγ lines as seen in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The evolution of Hα and Hβ. Panel 1: Evolution from t ∼16.5 to 130 days, where initially the profile was symmetric, and the ejecta starts becoming visible at the last epoch. Panel 2: Evolution from t ∼130 days to 334 days. The line asymmetry starts to set in with prominent symmetric wings at ∼8000 km s−1 (as marked by the vertical lines). Panel 3: Profile evolution from t ∼362 to 715 days, where the clear … view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Spectrum of SN 2019vxm compared with other Type IIn SNe around peak. metric, the wings, however, are symmetric on either side of the profile (see Appendix B). The spectra from t ∼183 days also show weak emission from Ca NIR triplet around 8500 ˚A; the emission lines are blended into a single broad feature. Hints of Fe and Si are also seen in the spectra, but are not well distinguished because of the proxim… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Spectrum of SN 2019vxm compared with other Type IIn SNe during the late phase decline. 6.4. Evolution of Hα line profile The Hα component was modeled using primarily three components. The first spectrum, taken at t∼16.5 days, was modeled with a narrow Lorentzian and an interme￾diate Gaussian, indicating emission from the CSM and the CDS. The narrow component corresponding to the CSM is not resolvable, and… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Spectrum of SN 2019vxm compared with other Type IIn SNe before the linear decline. 6.3. Late spectra The optical spectra from t∼377 days until t∼716 lines are dominated by Hα and weak Hβ lines. No other prominent line profiles are observed at these epochs; thus, we can conclude that the ejecta remains dense or is significantly obscured. The Hγ line, which is visible until t∼500 days, is enshrouded in the … view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Left: Evolution of Hα line profile as time evolves. The grey spectrum is the observed one. The flux at the blueshifted velocities is mirrored at the redder end to indicate the degree of flux excess and deficit in blue. The later epochs also indicate a prominent blueshift of the emission line, as the blue excess, when mirrored, appears as two peaks. The Lorentzian and Gaussian line profiles used for modeli… view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Comparison of SN 2019vxm (red) with results of radiative transfer models given by L. Dessart et al. (2015), details of which are mentioned in the text. ejecta mass, density, and R0. Moreover, IR brightening is prominent at late phases; thus, the estimates we ob￾tain with MOSFiT are lower. Therefore, we compare the bolometric luminosity we obtained with the theoretical bolometric luminosity evolution prese… view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: The evolution of Ca NIR triplets at t∼373, 378, 497 and 529 days. and SN 2015da increased steadily (N. Dukiya et al. 2024; C. Fransson et al. 2014)), in contrast with SN 2019vxm, where the Balmer decrement shows little or no varia￾tion from t ∼150 to 400 days, after which it steadily increases. The sudden increase in Balmer decrement as well as asymmetry ratio indicates that there is a change in propertie… view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Corner plot till t∼400 days for s=2.0 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: LC obtained by MOSFiT csm model for s=0 (red),s=2 (blue), and s= 1.4 (green) 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 lo g M ej(M ) 8 9 10 11 n 17 18 19 20 lo g n H, host 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 lo g R 0 11.6 11.4 11.2 lo g 3.705 3.720 3.735 3.750 lo g Tmin (K) 0.765 0.750 0.735 0.720 0.705 lo g 0.60 0.75 0.90 1.05 log MCSM 3.875 3.900 3.925 3.950 lo g v ej(k m s 1 ) 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 log Mej(M ) 8 9 10 11 n 17 18 19 20 log nH, hos… view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Posteriors obtained by MOSFiT csm model for s=0 (red),s=2 (blue), s=1.4 (green) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_17.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present multi-wavelength photometric and optical spectroscopic observations of the long-lived interacting supernova SN 2019vxm, spanning more than two years after the explosion. SN 2019vxm is a slowly rising (rise time ~ 45.9 days in the R-band), slowly declining supernova reaching an R-band peak absolute magnitude of ~-20.3 mag. The SN light curve post-maximum shows a shallow decline, followed by a secondary, steeper decline in the optical (0.01 mag/day), with late-time IR brightening. The total radiated luminosity is 5x10^50 erg, placing it among the energetic class of its type. We estimated a CSM mass of 3-8 M_sun through light-curve modeling (independent of the CSM density profile) and by comparison with theoretical models. We estimate a minimum ejecta mass of ~ 3.88 M_sun from the broad H-alpha component, consistent with the ejecta mass obtained from the light curve models. The solely interaction-dominated initial epochs are later accompanied by photon-scattering signatures, leading to asymmetric line profiles with symmetric wings. The late phase, characterized by enhanced brightness at longer wavelengths and a stronger asymmetric line profile with the red side flux strongly suppressed, indicates the influence of pre-existing or newly formed dust with temperatures ~ 1500 K at ~4x10^16 cm. Even in the late phases, no nebular lines are present in the spectra, indicating dense or obscured ejecta.

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

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents multi-wavelength photometric and spectroscopic observations of the Type IIn supernova SN 2019vxm spanning more than two years post-explosion. It identifies three distinct phases of shock interaction evolution, reports a total radiated luminosity of 5×10^50 erg, estimates a CSM mass of 3-8 M_⊙ via light-curve modeling claimed to be independent of the density profile (and by comparison with theoretical models), derives a minimum ejecta mass of ~3.88 M_⊙ from the broad Hα component, and notes late-time IR brightening consistent with dust at ~1500 K at ~4×10^16 cm with no nebular lines present.

Significance. If the mass estimates and phase sequence hold, the work supplies a detailed, long-baseline case study of an energetic, long-lived Type IIn event that traces the transition from interaction-dominated to dust-influenced phases. The multi-epoch data and consistency check between CSM and ejecta masses add to the observational sample used to constrain progenitor mass-loss histories.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract / light-curve modeling] Abstract and light-curve modeling section: The assertion that the CSM mass of 3-8 M_⊙ is obtained independently of the density profile (ρ ∝ r^{-s}) is load-bearing for the three-phase evolutionary claim and the ejecta-mass consistency check. Standard semi-analytic interaction models couple the observed 45.9-day rise time, shallow-then-steep decline, and total radiated energy to both mass and s; the radiated energy alone does not yield mass without an efficiency or velocity factor that itself depends on s. The manuscript must show explicitly whether s is fixed, marginalized, or eliminated by the fitting procedure, as this directly affects the robustness of the reported mass range.
minor comments (2)
  1. Clarify in the text or a table how the broad Hα component is isolated from ongoing interaction or scattering contributions when deriving the ~3.88 M_⊙ minimum ejecta mass.
  2. Add explicit references or citations for the theoretical models used to cross-check the CSM mass estimate.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful and constructive review. We address the single major comment below and will revise the manuscript accordingly to strengthen the presentation of the light-curve modeling.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract / light-curve modeling] Abstract and light-curve modeling section: The assertion that the CSM mass of 3-8 M_⊙ is obtained independently of the density profile (ρ ∝ r^{-s}) is load-bearing for the three-phase evolutionary claim and the ejecta-mass consistency check. Standard semi-analytic interaction models couple the observed 45.9-day rise time, shallow-then-steep decline, and total radiated energy to both mass and s; the radiated energy alone does not yield mass without an efficiency or velocity factor that itself depends on s. The manuscript must show explicitly whether s is fixed, marginalized, or eliminated by the fitting procedure, as this directly affects the robustness of the reported mass range.

    Authors: We agree that the claim of independence from the density-profile index s requires explicit demonstration rather than assertion. Our CSM mass range of 3–8 M_⊙ was obtained by (i) fitting the multi-band light curve with the semi-analytic interaction model of Chugai et al. (or equivalent) while allowing s to vary between 0 and 2 and (ii) cross-checking the resulting mass against published grids of interacting-SN models that span a range of density profiles. The mass interval remained stable across the explored s values, which is why we described the result as “independent of the CSM density profile.” Nevertheless, the referee is correct that the manuscript does not presently display the fitting procedure, the explored parameter space, or any marginalized posteriors. We will therefore add a dedicated subsection (or appendix) that (a) states the exact model employed, (b) shows the χ² or likelihood surfaces in the (M_CSM, s) plane, and (c) reports the mass range obtained when s is fixed versus when it is marginalized. This revision will make the robustness of the 3–8 M_⊙ interval transparent and will also clarify how the same modeling yields the ejecta-mass consistency check. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: masses derived from new data via standard modeling

full rationale

The paper applies light-curve modeling and H-alpha line-width analysis directly to its own multi-epoch photometry and spectra of SN 2019vxm. The CSM mass (3-8 M_sun) and minimum ejecta mass (~3.88 M_sun) are outputs of fitting observed rise time, decline phases, and line profiles; they do not reduce by the paper's equations to any prior fitted quantities or self-citations. The independence claim for the density-profile result is presented as a modeling outcome rather than a definitional identity. No load-bearing step matches any enumerated circularity pattern.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

Central claims rest on standard domain assumptions about supernova interaction physics and the interpretation of line profiles and infrared excess; no new entities are postulated. The mass estimates function as derived outputs rather than free parameters input to the claim.

free parameters (2)
  • CSM mass = 3-8 M_sun
    Estimated range 3-8 M_sun from light-curve modeling stated as independent of density profile.
  • Ejecta mass lower limit = ~3.88 M_sun
    Derived from broad H-alpha component width and strength.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Initial epochs are solely interaction-dominated
    Used to define the first evolutionary phase.
  • domain assumption Late-time IR excess traces pre-existing or newly formed dust at ~1500 K
    Invoked to explain asymmetric line profiles and wavelength-dependent brightening.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5885 in / 1531 out tokens · 38804 ms · 2026-06-25T19:10:37.899064+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

82 extracted references · 75 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    2014, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol

    Akitaya, H., Moritani, Y., Ui, T., et al. 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, 91474O, doi: 10.1117/12.2054577

    work page doi:10.1117/12.2054577 2014

  2. [2]

    E., Smith, N., McCully, C., et al

    Andrews, J. E., Smith, N., McCully, C., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 471, 4047, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1844

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1844 2017

  3. [3]

    and Pastoriza, M

    Anupama, G. C., Sahu, D. K., Gurugubelli, U. K., et al. 2009, MNRAS, 392, 894, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14129.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14129.x 2009

  4. [4]

    2025, ApJ, 983, 101, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adc00a

    Baer-Way, R., Chandra, P., Modjaz, M., et al. 2025, ApJ, 983, 101, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adc00a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adc00a 2025

  5. [5]

    M., Krafton, K., Wesson, R., et al

    Bevan, A. M., Krafton, K., Wesson, R., et al. 2020, ApJ, 894, 111, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab86a2

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab86a2 2020

  6. [6]

    J., Schulze, S., Lunnan, R., et al

    Brennan, S. J., Schulze, S., Lunnan, R., et al. 2024, A&A, 690, A259, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202349036

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202349036 2024

  7. [7]

    C., & Vinko, J

    Chatzopoulos, E., Wheeler, J. C., & Vinko, J. 2012, ApJ, 746, 121, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/746/2/121

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/746/2/121 2012

  8. [8]

    C., Vinko, J., Horvath, Z

    Chatzopoulos, E., Wheeler, J. C., Vinko, J., Horvath, Z. L., & Nagy, A. 2013, ApJ, 773, 76, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/773/1/76

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/773/1/76 2013

  9. [9]

    Chevalier, R. A. 1976, ApJ, 207, 872, doi: 10.1086/154557

    work page doi:10.1086/154557 1976

  10. [10]

    Chugai, N. N. 1997, Ap&SS, 252, 225, doi: 10.1023/A:1000847125928

    work page doi:10.1023/a:1000847125928 1997

  11. [11]

    Chugai, N. N. 2001, MNRAS, 326, 1448, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2001.04717.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2001.04717.x 2001

  12. [12]

    N., & Danziger, I

    Chugai, N. N., & Danziger, I. J. 1994, MNRAS, 268, 173, doi: 10.1093/mnras/268.1.173

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/268.1.173 1994

  13. [13]

    2023, A&A, 670, A48, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244867

    Cold, C., & Hjorth, J. 2023, A&A, 670, A48, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244867

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244867 2023

  14. [14]

    M., Skrutskie, M

    Cutri, R. M., Skrutskie, M. F., van Dyk, S., et al. 2003, VizieR Online Data Catalog: 2MASS All-Sky Catalog of Point Sources (Cutri+ 2003),, VizieR On-line Data Catalog: II/246. Originally published in: University of Massachusetts and Infrared Processing and Analysis Center, (IPAC/California Institute of Technology) (2003)

    2003

  15. [15]

    K., Kasliwal, M

    Das, K. K., Kasliwal, M. M., Sollerman, J., et al. 2026, PASP, 138, 024204, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ae33f5

    work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/ae33f5 2026

  16. [16]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2405.04259, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2405.04259

    Dessart, L. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2405.04259, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2405.04259

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2405.04259 2024

  17. [17]

    Dessart, L., Audit, E., & Hillier, D. J. 2015, MNRAS, 449, 4304, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv609

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv609 2015

  18. [18]

    , keywords =

    Draine, B. T., & Salpeter, E. E. 1979, ApJ, 231, 438, doi: 10.1086/157206

    work page doi:10.1086/157206 1979

  19. [19]

    , keywords =

    Drake, S. A., & Ulrich, R. K. 1980, ApJS, 42, 351, doi: 10.1086/190654

    work page doi:10.1086/190654 1980

  20. [20]

    2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 976, 86, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad7e11

    Dukiya, N., Gangopadhyay, A., Misra, K., et al. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 976, 86, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad7e11

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad7e11 2024

  21. [21]

    G., et al

    Dwek, E., Sarangi, A., Arendt, R. G., et al. 2021, ApJ, 917, 84, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac09ea

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac09ea 2021

  22. [22]

    2026, A&A, 706, A169, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202557572

    Ercolino, A., Jin, H., Langer, N., et al. 2026, A&A, 706, A169, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202557572

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202557572 2026

  23. [23]

    Evans, A., Banerjee, D. P. K., Gehrz, R. D., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 466, 4221, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw3334

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw3334 2017

  24. [24]

    2024, ApJ, 977, 152, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad8cd3

    Farias, D., Gall, C., Narayan, G., et al. 2024, ApJ, 977, 152, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad8cd3

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad8cd3 2024

  25. [25]

    Filippenko, A. V. 1997, ARA&A, 35, 309, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.35.1.309 SN 2019vxm: Long lived Type IIn SN25

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

  26. [26]

    L., & Massa, D

    Fitzpatrick, E. L., & Massa, D. 2007, ApJ, 663, 320, doi: 10.1086/518158

    work page doi:10.1086/518158 2007

  27. [27]

    J., Berger, E., Fox, O., et al

    Foley, R. J., Berger, E., Fox, O., et al. 2011, ApJ, 732, 32, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/732/1/32

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/732/1/32 2011

  28. [28]

    J., Smith, N., Ganeshalingam, M., et al

    Foley, R. J., Smith, N., Ganeshalingam, M., et al. 2007, ApJL, 657, L105, doi: 10.1086/513145

    work page doi:10.1086/513145 2007

  29. [29]

    F., Chevalier, R

    Fox, O., Skrutskie, M. F., Chevalier, R. A., et al. 2009, ApJ, 691, 650, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/691/1/650

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/691/1/650 2009

  30. [30]

    D., & Smith, N

    Fox, O. D., & Smith, N. 2019, MNRAS, 488, 3772, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1925

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz1925 2019

  31. [31]

    D., Chevalier, R

    Fox, O. D., Chevalier, R. A., Skrutskie, M. F., et al. 2011, ApJ, 741, 7, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/741/1/7

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/741/1/7 2011

  32. [32]

    J., et al

    Fransson, C., Ergon, M., Challis, P. J., et al. 2014, ApJ, 797, 118, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/797/2/118

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/797/2/118 2014

  33. [33]

    2020, Royal Society Open Science, 7, 200467, doi: 10.1098/rsos.200467

    Fraser, M. 2020, Royal Society Open Science, 7, 200467, doi: 10.1098/rsos.200467

    work page doi:10.1098/rsos.200467 2020

  34. [34]

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

    work page doi:10.1038/nature07934 2009

  35. [35]

    2004, ApJ, 611, 1005, doi: 10.1086/422091

    Gehrels, N., Chincarini, G., Giommi, P., et al. 2004, ApJ, 611, 1005, doi: 10.1086/422091

    work page doi:10.1086/422091 2004

  36. [36]

    A., et al

    Guillochon, J., Nicholl, M., Villar, V. A., et al. 2018, ApJS, 236, 6, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aab761

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/aab761 2018

  37. [37]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.07287, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2411.07287 Ivezi´ c,ˇZ., Kahn, S

    Hiramatsu, D., Berger, E., Gomez, S., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.07287, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2411.07287

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2411.07287 2024

  38. [38]

    A., Moriya, T

    Hiramatsu, D., Howell, D. A., Moriya, T. J., et al. 2021, ApJ, 913, 55, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abf6d6

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abf6d6 2021

  39. [39]

    Case B calculations for H I and He II

    Hummer, D. G., & Storey, P. J. 1987, MNRAS, 224, 801, doi: 10.1093/mnras/224.3.801

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/224.3.801 1987

  40. [40]

    K., & Kasen, D

    Khatami, D. K., & Kasen, D. N. 2024, ApJ, 972, 140, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad60c0

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad60c0 2024

  41. [41]

    Lamers, H. J. G. L. M., & Cassinelli, J. P. 1999, Introduction to Stellar Winds

    1999

  42. [42]

    Landolt, A. U. 1992, AJ, 104, 340, doi: 10.1086/116242

    work page doi:10.1086/116242 1992

  43. [43]

    G., Ridden-Harper, R., Rest, S., et al

    Lane, Z. G., Ridden-Harper, R., Rest, S., et al. 2026, The Astrophysical Journal, 1003, 19, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae6245

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae6245 2026

  44. [44]

    2019, Transient Name Server Classification Report, 2019-2506, 1

    Leadbeater, R. 2019, Transient Name Server Classification Report, 2019-2506, 1

    2019

  45. [45]

    2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2605.23637

    Lelkes, K., Moln´ ar, L., Vink´ o, J., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2605.23637. https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.23637

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  46. [46]

    2022, ApJ, 933, 238, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac771a

    Margalit, B. 2022, ApJ, 933, 238, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac771a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac771a 2022

  47. [47]

    C., Smith, N., Filippenko, A

    Mauerhan, J. C., Smith, N., Filippenko, A. V., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 430, 1801, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt009

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt009 2013

  48. [48]

    2023, A&A, 669, A51, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244565

    Moran, S., Fraser, M., Kotak, R., et al. 2023, A&A, 669, A51, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244565

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244565 2023

  49. [49]

    2020, A&A, 637, A73, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936097

    Nyholm, A., Sollerman, J., Tartaglia, L., et al. 2020, A&A, 637, A73, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936097

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936097 2020

  50. [50]

    O., Sullivan, M., Shaviv, N

    Ofek, E. O., Sullivan, M., Shaviv, N. J., et al. 2014, ApJ, 789, 104, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/789/2/104

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/789/2/104 2014

  51. [51]

    Osterbrock, D. E. 1989, Astrophysics of gaseous nebulae and active galactic nuclei

    1989

  52. [52]

    2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 767, 1, doi: 10.1088/0004-637x/767/1/1

    Pastorello, A., Cappellaro, E., Inserra, C., et al. 2013, ApJ, 767, 1, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/767/1/1

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/767/1/1 2013

  53. [53]

    Prabhu, T. P. 2014, Proceedings of the Indian National Science Academy Part A, 80, 887, doi: 10.16943/ptinsa/2014/v80i4/55174

    work page doi:10.16943/ptinsa/2014/v80i4/55174 2014

  54. [54]

    , archivePrefix = "arXiv", eprint =

    Quataert, E., & Shiode, J. 2012, MNRAS, 423, L92, doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2012.01264.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1745-3933.2012.01264.x 2012

  55. [55]

    L., & Villar, V

    Ransome, C. L., & Villar, V. A. 2025, ApJ, 987, 13, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adce03

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adce03 2025

  56. [56]

    M., Nagao, T., Maeda, K., et al

    Reynolds, T. M., Nagao, T., Maeda, K., et al. 2025, A&A, 702, A213, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202553793

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202553793 2025

  57. [57]

    Roming, P. W. A., Kennedy, T. E., Mason, K. O., et al. 2005, SSRv, 120, 95, doi: 10.1007/s11214-005-5095-4

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1007/s11214-005-5095-4 2005

  58. [58]

    doi:10.1126/science.1223344 , eprint =

    Sana, H., de Mink, S. E., de Koter, A., et al. 2012, Science, 337, 444, doi: 10.1126/science.1223344

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1223344 2012

  59. [59]

    Measuring Reddening with SDSS Stellar Spectra and Recalibrating SFD

    Schlafly, E. F., & Finkbeiner, D. P. 2011, ApJ, 737, 103, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/737/2/103

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1088/0004-637x/737/2/103 2011

  60. [60]

    Schlegel, E. M. 1990, MNRAS, 244, 269

    1990

  61. [61]

    K., Sharma, R., & Ray, A

    Sethulakshmi, V., Sutaria, F. K., Sharma, R., & Ray, A. 2026, ApJ, 1001, 169, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae47f6

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae47f6 2026

  62. [62]

    D., Temim, T., et al

    Shahbandeh, M., Fox, O. D., Temim, T., et al. 2025, ApJ, 985, 262, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adce77

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adce77 2025

  63. [63]

    Shaviv, N. J. 2001, MNRAS, 326, 126, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04574.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04574.x 2001

  64. [64]

    2014, ARA&A, 52, 487, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081913-040025

    Smith, N. 2014, ARA&A, 52, 487, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081913-040025

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081913-040025 2014

  65. [65]

    2017, in Handbook of Supernovae, ed

    Smith, N. 2017, in Handbook of Supernovae, ed. A. W. Alsabti & P. Murdin, 403, doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-21846-5 38

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

  66. [66]

    Smith, N., & Andrews, J. E. 2020, MNRAS, 499, 3544, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3047

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3047 2020

  67. [67]

    E., Milne, P., et al

    Smith, N., Andrews, J. E., Milne, P., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 530, 405, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae726

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae726 2024

  68. [68]

    J., et al

    Smith, N., Li, W., Foley, R. J., et al. 2007, ApJ, 666, 1116, doi: 10.1086/519949

    work page doi:10.1086/519949 2007

  69. [69]

    M., Chornock, R., et al

    Smith, N., Silverman, J. M., Chornock, R., et al. 2009, ApJ, 695, 1334, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/695/2/1334

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/695/2/1334 2009

  70. [70]

    A., et al

    Smith, N., Li, W., Miller, A. A., et al. 2011, ApJ, 732, 63, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/732/2/63

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/732/2/63 2011

  71. [71]

    Speagle, J. S. 2020, MNRAS, 493, 3132, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa278

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa278 2020

  72. [72]

    Stanek, K. Z. 2019, Transient Name Server Discovery Report, 2019-2492, 1

    2019

  73. [73]

    L., Ofek, E

    Strotjohann, N. L., Ofek, E. O., Gal-Yam, A., et al. 2021, ApJ, 907, 99, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abd032 26Gitika R. et al

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abd032 2021

  74. [74]

    J., & Takiwaki, T

    Suzuki, A., Nicholl, M., Moriya, T. J., & Takiwaki, T. 2021, ApJ, 908, 99, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abd6ce

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abd6ce 2021

  75. [75]

    2020, A&A, 635, A39, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936553

    Tartaglia, L., Pastorello, A., Sollerman, J., et al. 2020, A&A, 635, A39, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936553

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936553 2020

  76. [76]

    S., Singh, A., Sahu, D

    Teja, R. S., Singh, A., Sahu, D. K., et al. 2022, ApJ, 930, 34, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac610b

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac610b 2022

  77. [77]

    IN: Instrumentation in astronomy VI; Proceedings of the Meeting, Tucson, AZ, Mar

    Tody, D. 1986, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 627, Instrumentation in astronomy VI, ed. D. L. Crawford, 733, doi: 10.1117/12.968154

    work page doi:10.1117/12.968154 1986

  78. [78]

    L., Denneau, L., Heinze, A

    Tonry, J. L., Denneau, L., Heinze, A. N., et al. 2018, PASP, 130, 064505, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aabadf

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1088/1538-3873/aabadf 2018

  79. [79]

    Y., Pavlyuk, N

    Tsvetkov, D. Y., Pavlyuk, N. N., Dodin, A. V., et al. 2024, Astronomische Nachrichten, 345, e20230166, doi: 10.1002/asna.20230166

    work page doi:10.1002/asna.20230166 2024

  80. [80]

    P., & Chugai, N

    Utrobin, V. P., & Chugai, N. N. 2024, Ap&SS, 369, 49, doi: 10.1007/s10509-024-04311-9

    work page doi:10.1007/s10509-024-04311-9 2024

Showing first 80 references.