pith. sign in

arxiv: 2607.00081 · v1 · pith:PNUQ4KJ5new · submitted 2026-06-30 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE · astro-ph.IM

Decoding the Early-Time Light Curves of Type Ia Supernovae. II. Population Parameters of One Thousand ZTF Supernovae

Chang Liu , Adam A. Miller , Nikhil Sarin , Kate Maguire , Tom\'as E. M\"uller-Bravo , Ping Chen , L. Galbany , Young-Lo Kim
show 8 more authors
Jesper Sollerman Eric C. Bellm Joahan Castaneda Jaimes Tracy X. Chen Matthew J. Graham David Hale Mansi M. Kasliwal Josiah Purdum
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-07-02 17:53 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.IM
keywords Type Ia supernovaeearly light curvesrise timepower-law fitsZTF surveypopulation parametersnickel mixingSALT2 stretch
0
0 comments X

The pith

Type Ia supernovae exhibit a bifurcated rise morphology versus stretch relation, with high-stretch events showing shallower rises and persistent early blue colors.

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

This paper measures the early rise of 972 Type Ia supernovae from a volume-complete ZTF sample using power-law fits restricted to data before 30 percent of peak flux. It reports population averages for rise time of 18.55 days, rise index of 2.10 in r-band, and g-r color difference of 0.20, all with quantified scatter. The central finding is that the link between rise shape and overall light-curve width splits into two regimes: high-stretch supernovae display clear correlations with shallower rises and longer-lasting blue colors, while low-stretch events show no such trends. A reader would care because these measurements directly constrain the distribution of nickel in the outer ejecta and therefore the explosion mechanism.

Core claim

Power-law modeling of early light curves for 972 ZTF SNe Ia yields population parameters t_rise of 18.55 plus or minus 0.08 days with sigma 1.42 days, alpha of 2.10 plus or minus 0.04 with sigma 0.48 in ZTF r, and alpha_g minus alpha_r of 0.20 plus or minus 0.02 with sigma 0.17. The relation between rise morphology and SALT2 x1 stretch bifurcates into two regimes where high-stretch events correlate higher x1 with shallower rises and more persistent blue colors while low-stretch events lack these trends; long-duration flux excesses around 5 days are common in the high-stretch population and tied to those features, indicating widespread outward 56Ni mixing.

What carries the argument

Hierarchical Bayesian power-law fits applied to light curves truncated at 30 percent of peak flux across a volume-complete sample of 972 events.

If this is right

  • High-stretch SNe Ia commonly display long-duration flux excesses linked to shallow rises and early blue colors.
  • The dichotomy between high- and low-stretch populations in rise morphology must be reproduced by multi-dimensional explosion models that include realistic progenitor setups.
  • Several normal SNe Ia display unusually long rise times that may include short-duration flux excesses over a smooth rise.
  • Rise times correlate positively with x1 overall, but this relation flattens within the high-stretch population.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The two-regime behavior could serve as an observable to separate different progenitor channels for Type Ia supernovae.
  • Early-time photometry from future wide-field surveys could be used to assign individual events to one regime or the other before peak.
  • If the regimes also differ in peak luminosity or color at maximum, the bifurcation would affect how these events are standardized for cosmology.

Load-bearing premise

The power-law model remains an adequate description of the light curves when the fit is restricted to data up to 30 percent of peak flux.

What would settle it

Re-fitting the same 972 events with data included up to 40 percent of peak flux and obtaining substantially different population means or scatters for rise time or index would show the truncation choice biases the results.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.00081 by Adam A. Miller, Chang Liu, David Hale, Eric C. Bellm, Jesper Sollerman, Joahan Castaneda Jaimes, Josiah Purdum, Kate Maguire, L. Galbany, Mansi M. Kasliwal, Matthew J. Graham, Nikhil Sarin, Ping Chen, Tom\'as E. M\"uller-Bravo, Tracy X. Chen, Young-Lo Kim.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Population-level mean and scatter of early-time parameters in the ZTF DR2 volume-complete sample inferred with the hierarchical Bayesian framework. The posterior distributions of the mean and scatter for the rise time (trise), the r-band rise index (αr), and the early-time color evolution index (αg − αr) are shown for three different truncation thresholds: 50%, 40%, and 30%. 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 ρ(trise, αr) De… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Population-level parameter correlations in the ZTF DR2 volume-complete sample. The posterior distributions of the correlation coefficients between early-time parameters are shown across different flux truncation thresholds. We recover a near-perfect correlation between the g- and r-band rise indices and a moderate positive correlation between trise and αr. No significant correlation is found between trise … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Additional early-time data-quality cuts may bias the sample towards higher-stretch SNe Ia. Top: the kernel density estimation of the x1 distribution for the volume-com￾plete sample (black), the Baseline sample (blue), and the Early sample (orange). Bottom: the cumulative distribution function of x1 for the three samples. The K-S test p-values comparing the Baseline and Early samples against the vol￾ume-com… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The inferred rise index (αr) exhibits a broken correlation with SALT2 x1, marked by a break at xbrk ≳ 0. The panels show results from fitting early-time light curves truncated at 50%, 40%, and 30% of peak flux. Dashed lines represent the median broken linear regression fits to the αr–x1 relation. Fifty random posterior draws from the broken linear model are overplotted to illustrate uncertainties in the br… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The early-time color evolution index (αg − αr) demonstrates a broken correlation with SALT2 x1, mirroring the behavior of the rise index seen in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The rise time, trise, exhibits a broken positive correlation with the full light-curve stretch (SALT2 x1) across ZTF SNe Ia. A break occurs near xbrk ≳ 0: for SNe Ia with x1 > xbrk, the rise time increases more slowly with x1 than for those with x1 < xbrk. Posterior predictive formatting follows [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The adjusted rise time reveals a continu￾ous, strongly correlated relationship with the full light-curve stretch x1, eliminating the break seen in the standard trise measurement. Top: The adjusted rise time, measured from the 2.5% and 10% peak flux epochs in the r-band, exhibits a tighter correlation with x1 than the traditional rise time from first light (trise). This is seen in the substantial increase i… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Early-time properties of spectroscopically pe￾culiar SNe Ia in the ZTF DR2 sample compared to the normal population (gray). Subluminous and fast-evolving 91bg-like (red) and 02cx-like (cyan) events generally exhibit shorter adjusted rise times than normal SNe Ia, whereas over￾luminous and slow-evolving 03fg-like events (green) display longer rise times. Furthermore, 02cx-like and 03fg-like events present n… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Light curve fitting results for SNe Ia consistent with an anomalously large trise −t2.5%,r compared to other SNe with similar x1 in ZTF DR2 and their location in the phase diagrams. Left: The blue and orange points represent the observed fluxes in ZTF g and r bands, respectively. The solid curves are the posterior predictive light curves from the hierarchical Bayesian model. The shaded regions indicate the… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Light curve fitting results for the four SNe Ia consistent with a linear rise (α ≃ 1) in the volume-limited sample of ZTF DR2. Plot formatting follows [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: The early-time parameter (trise, αr, αg − αr) correlations with SALT2 x1 are distinct for the sub-MCh (blue), near-MCh (green), and super-MCh (orange) populations defined in N. Sarin et al. (2026). The posterior medians and 16–84th percentile ranges of the correlation coefficients ρ are displayed for each relation. The sub-MCh population features the tightest posi￾tive correlation with trise (ρ ≃ 0.7), wh… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: The relation between the rise index αr and the adjusted rise time trise−t2.5%,r for the TURTLS models with double power-law (top) and exponential (bottom) density profiles. Each point represents a single synthetic light curve, color-coded by the progenitor parameters: total 56Ni mass (M56Ni), mixing scale factor, and kinetic energy (EK). Overplotted are the 68% and 95% contours of the predictive distribut… view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: The relation between the early-time color evolution index αg − αr and the adjusted rise time trise − t2.5%,r for the same TURTLS models as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: The relationship between the adjusted rise time trise − t2.5%,r with the rise index αr (left) and color evolution index αg −αr (right) for the sub-MCh double-detonation models from K. J. Shen et al. (2021). Each point represents the median value and 16th–84th percentile range of the inferred parameter mean for 100 synthetic light curves at a specific viewing angle, which is color-coded. Overplotted are th… view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Correlations between early-time parameters and the full light-curve stretch x1 for the same subset of 272 SNe Ia, where the individual parameter estimates are inferred using a custom population prior that retains the correlation structure for the nuisance parameter ln A but leaves trise and α uninformative. The overall trends remain consistent with those observed in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Early-time light curves of Type Ia Supernovae (SNe Ia) encode critical information about their progenitor systems. We characterize the rise of normal SNe Ia using a volume-complete sample of 972 events from the Zwicky Transient Facility Data Release 2, an order of magnitude larger than any previous dataset for similar analyses. Fitting light curves up to $30\%$ of peak flux with a power-law model under a hierarchical Bayesian framework, we provide robust population-level constraints on the rise time ($t_\mathrm{rise}$; $\mu=18.55\pm0.08$ days, $\sigma=1.42\pm0.07$ days), rise index ($\alpha$; $\mu=2.10\pm0.04$, $\sigma=0.48\pm0.03$ in ZTF $r$), and $g-r$ color evolution ($\alpha_g - \alpha_r$; $\mu=0.20\pm0.02$, $\sigma=0.17\pm0.02$). These power-law fits are sensitive to the chosen truncation epoch if data beyond $\sim$$40\%$ of peak flux are included, but generally converge when restricted to earlier epochs. The relation between rise morphology and light-curve width ($\texttt{SALT2}$ $x_1$ stretch) bifurcates into two distinct regimes: high-stretch SNe Ia show clear trends where a higher $x_1$ correlates with shallower rises and more persistent blue colors, whereas low-stretch SNe Ia lack such trends. While rise times correlate positively with $x_1$ overall, this relation flattens significantly within the high-stretch population. Searching for anomalies, we identify several normal SNe Ia with unusually long rise times, which potentially exhibit short-duration ($\lesssim$2 days) flux excesses over a smooth rise. Long-duration ($\sim$5 days) flux excesses appear common within the high-stretch population and are tied to the shallow rises and early blue colors, pointing to widespread outward $^{56}$Ni mixing. Multi-dimensional explosion models with more realistic progenitor setups are needed to fully reproduce the observed dichotomy in rise morphology and stretch.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper claims to derive robust population parameters for the early rise of 972 Type Ia supernovae using power-law fits to ZTF light curves truncated at 30% of peak flux within a hierarchical Bayesian model. Key results include t_rise with mean 18.55 days and dispersion 1.42 days, rise index α mean 2.10 and dispersion 0.48 in r-band, color evolution difference mean 0.20, and a bifurcation in the rise morphology versus SALT2 x1 relation, with implications for 56Ni mixing in high-stretch events.

Significance. The study benefits from an order-of-magnitude larger sample than previous work and employs a hierarchical framework that properly accounts for uncertainties, providing empirical benchmarks for SN Ia models. The identification of distinct regimes in rise behavior and potential flux excesses offers testable predictions for explosion physics. However, the significance is tempered by the need to confirm that the truncation choice does not introduce systematic biases in the reported means and dispersions.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The claim of robust constraints on t_rise, α, and the x1 bifurcation depends on the power-law model being adequate at the 30% peak flux truncation. The abstract acknowledges sensitivity when including data beyond ~40% but does not quantify whether the population hyperparameters (μ, σ) shift significantly when the cutoff is varied between 20-35%, which is necessary to support the 'robust' qualifier.
  2. [Results on bifurcation] The reported bifurcation where high-stretch SNe show trends with x1 but low-stretch do not is central to the interpretation of widespread outward 56Ni mixing. Without an explicit test of how this split behaves under different truncation epochs or alternative early-time models, it is unclear if the dichotomy is physical or influenced by the modeling cutoff.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Notation] The rise index is denoted α in r-band and the color difference as α_g - α_r; a clear definition early in the text would aid readability.
  2. [Sample description] Clarify how the 972 events were selected from the one thousand ZTF supernovae mentioned in the title to ensure reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading and constructive comments, which identify key areas where additional quantification would strengthen the manuscript's claims of robustness. We address each major comment below and will revise the paper to incorporate the suggested tests.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] The claim of robust constraints on t_rise, α, and the x1 bifurcation depends on the power-law model being adequate at the 30% peak flux truncation. The abstract acknowledges sensitivity when including data beyond ~40% but does not quantify whether the population hyperparameters (μ, σ) shift significantly when the cutoff is varied between 20-35%, which is necessary to support the 'robust' qualifier.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract's use of 'robust' would be better supported by an explicit demonstration that the population hyperparameters remain stable when the truncation epoch is varied between 20% and 35% of peak flux. The manuscript notes general convergence for earlier epochs but does not report the specific shifts in μ and σ across this range. In the revised version we will add a supplementary analysis (or figure) repeating the hierarchical fits at 20%, 25%, 30%, and 35% truncations and tabulating the resulting changes in the reported means and dispersions for t_rise, α, and color evolution. This will either confirm stability or allow us to qualify the robustness statement appropriately. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results on bifurcation] The reported bifurcation where high-stretch SNe show trends with x1 but low-stretch do not is central to the interpretation of widespread outward 56Ni mixing. Without an explicit test of how this split behaves under different truncation epochs or alternative early-time models, it is unclear if the dichotomy is physical or influenced by the modeling cutoff.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the bifurcation result is central to the physical interpretation and that its stability under changes in truncation has not been explicitly demonstrated. While the manuscript already flags sensitivity beyond ~40%, we have not tested the high- versus low-stretch split at other cutoffs within 20-35%. In revision we will repeat the bifurcation analysis at 25% and 35% truncations and report whether the two-regime behavior persists. We note that a full exploration of alternative early-time models (e.g., broken power laws or physically motivated templates) lies beyond the scope of the present power-law study but will be flagged as important future work; the truncation tests alone will clarify whether the reported dichotomy is robust to the specific modeling cutoff chosen. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: empirical population parameters are direct outputs of hierarchical Bayesian fit to observed data.

full rationale

The paper performs a hierarchical Bayesian fit of a power-law model to early-time ZTF light-curve data truncated at 30% of peak flux, directly yielding posterior means and dispersions for t_rise, alpha, and color evolution as reported quantities. No step claims a 'prediction' that reduces to a fitted input by the paper's own equations, no uniqueness theorem is imported via self-citation, and no ansatz is smuggled in; the truncation sensitivity is noted but does not create a definitional loop. The derivation chain is self-contained against external data.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper contributes empirical population statistics derived from data fitting. No new physical entities are introduced. The main modeling choices and statistical hyperparameters constitute the ledger entries.

free parameters (2)
  • population hyperparameters (mu and sigma for t_rise, alpha, color difference)
    These are the fitted values reported as the main results of the hierarchical model.
  • truncation epoch (30% of peak flux)
    Chosen cutoff for including data in the power-law fits; abstract notes results are sensitive to this choice.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Early-time supernova flux follows a power-law form
    Core assumption underlying all light-curve fits described in the abstract.
  • domain assumption The 972-event sample is volume-complete and representative of normal Type Ia supernovae
    Stated basis for deriving population-level constraints.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 6014 in / 1364 out tokens · 41354 ms · 2026-07-02T17:53:26.079900+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

109 extracted references · 106 canonical work pages · 5 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    2026, A&A, 707, A91, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202555976

    Alburai, A., Galbany, L., Burgaz, U., et al. 2026, A&A, 707, A91, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202555976

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202555976 2026

  2. [2]

    2025, A&A, 694, A3, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452134

    Amenouche, M., Rosnet, P., Smith, M., et al. 2025, A&A, 694, A3, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452134

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202452134 2025

  3. [3]

    Arnett, W. D. 1982, ApJ, 253, 785, doi: 10.1086/159681

    work page doi:10.1086/159681 1982

  4. [4]

    J., et al

    Ashall, C., Lu, J., Shappee, B. J., et al. 2022, ApJ, 932, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac7235

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac7235 2022

  5. [5]

    W., et al

    Barna, B., Szalai, T., Jha, S. W., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 501, 1078, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3543

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3543 2021

  6. [6]

    C., Kulkarni, S

    Bellm, E. C., Kulkarni, S. R., Graham, M. J., et al. 2018, PASP, 131, 018002, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aaecbe

    work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/aaecbe 2018

  7. [7]

    P., Jankowiak, M., et al

    Bingham, E., Chen, J. P., Jankowiak, M., et al. 2019, JMLR, 20, 1

    2019

  8. [8]

    J., Dessart, L., Townsley, D

    Boos, S. J., Dessart, L., Townsley, D. M., & Shen, K. J. 2025, ApJ, 987, 54, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/add400

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/add400 2025

  9. [9]

    Miles, B. J. 2021, ApJ, 919, 126, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac07a2

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac07a2 2021

  10. [10]

    2018, JAX: Composable Transformations of Python+NumPy

    Bradbury, J., Frostig, R., Hawkins, P., et al. 2018, JAX: Composable Transformations of Python+NumPy

    2018

  11. [11]

    A., Yao, Y., et al

    Bulla, M., Miller, A. A., Yao, Y., et al. 2020, ApJ, 902, 48, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abb13c

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abb13c 2020

  12. [12]

    A., et al

    Burke, J., Andrews, M., Howell, D. A., et al. 2025, ApJ, 994, 87, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae058b

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae058b 2025

  13. [13]

    A., Howes, A., et al

    Conley, A., Howell, D. A., Howes, A., et al. 2006, AJ, 132, 1707, doi: 10.1086/507788

    work page doi:10.1086/507788 2006

  14. [14]

    R., et al

    Deckers, M., Maguire, K., Magee, M. R., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 512, 1317, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac558

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac558 2022

  15. [15]

    M., Riddle, R., et al

    Dekany, R., Smith, R. M., Riddle, R., et al. 2020, PASP, 132, 038001, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ab4ca2 DES Collaboration, Abbott, T. M. C., Acevedo, M., et al. 2024, ApJ, 973, L14, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad6f9f

    work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/ab4ca2 2020

  16. [16]

    J., Rest, A., et al

    Dimitriadis, G., Foley, R. J., Rest, A., et al. 2018, ApJ, 870, L1, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aaedb0

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aaedb0 2018

  17. [17]

    R., et al

    Dimitriadis, G., Maguire, K., Karambelkar, V. R., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 521, 1162, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad536

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad536 2023

  18. [18]

    2025, A&A, 694, A10, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451852

    Dimitriadis, G., Burgaz, U., Deckers, M., et al. 2025, A&A, 694, A10, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451852

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451852 2025

  19. [19]

    M., Vallely, P

    Fausnaugh, M. M., Vallely, P. J., Tucker, M. A., et al. 2023, ApJ, 956, 108, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aceaef

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

  20. [20]

    V., Richmond, M

    Filippenko, A. V., Richmond, M. W., Matheson, T., et al. 1992a, ApJ, 384, L15, doi: 10.1086/186252

    work page doi:10.1086/186252

  21. [21]

    V., Richmond, M

    Filippenko, A. V., Richmond, M. W., Branch, D., et al. 1992b, AJ, 104, 1543, doi: 10.1086/116339

    work page doi:10.1086/116339

  22. [22]

    K., Hillebrandt, W., et al

    Fink, M., R¨ opke, F. K., Hillebrandt, W., et al. 2010, A&A, 514, A53, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200913892

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200913892 2010

  23. [23]

    R., et al

    Fink, M., Kromer, M., Seitenzahl, I. R., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 438, 1762, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt2315

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt2315 2014

  24. [24]

    E., Sullivan, M., Gal-Yam, A., et al

    Firth, R. E., Sullivan, M., Gal-Yam, A., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 446, 3895, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu2314

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu2314 2015

  25. [25]

    Ganeshalingam, M., Li, W., & Filippenko, A. V. 2011, MNRAS, 416, 2607, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19213.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19213.x 2011

  26. [26]

    2025, A&A, 695, A140, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450378

    Ginolin, M., Rigault, M., Smith, M., et al. 2025, A&A, 695, A140, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450378

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450378 2025

  27. [27]

    E., Kim, A., et al

    Goldhaber, G., Groom, D. E., Kim, A., et al. 2001, ApJ, 558, 359, doi: 10.1086/322460 26 Gonz´ alez-Gait´ an, S., Conley, A., Bianco, F. B., et al. 2011, ApJ, 745, 44, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/745/1/44

    work page doi:10.1086/322460 2001

  28. [28]

    2014, ApJ, 784, L12, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/784/1/L12

    Goobar, A., Johansson, J., Amanullah, R., et al. 2014, ApJ, 784, L12, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/784/1/L12

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/784/1/l12 2014

  29. [29]

    J., Kulkarni, S

    Graham, M. J., Kulkarni, S. R., Bellm, E. C., et al. 2019, PASP, 131, 078001, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ab006c

    work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/ab006c 2019

  30. [30]

    T., et al

    Gronow, S., Collins, C., Ohlmann, S. T., et al. 2020, A&A, 635, A169, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936494

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936494 2020

  31. [31]

    E., Sim, S

    Gronow, S., Collins, C. E., Sim, S. A., & R¨ opke, F. K. 2021, A&A, 649, A155, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039954

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039954 2021

  32. [32]

    2007, A&A, 466, 11, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20066930

    Guy, J., Astier, P., Baumont, S., et al. 2007, A&A, 466, 11, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20066930

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20066930 2007

  33. [33]

    T., Garnavich, P

    Hayden, B. T., Garnavich, P. M., Kasen, D., et al. 2010a, ApJ, 722, 1691, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/722/2/1691

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/722/2/1691

  34. [34]

    T., Garnavich, P

    Hayden, B. T., Garnavich, P. M., Kessler, R., et al. 2010b, ApJ, 712, 350, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/712/1/350

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/712/1/350

  35. [35]

    M., Prieto, J

    Hicken, M., Garnavich, P. M., Prieto, J. L., et al. 2007, ApJ, 669, L17, doi: 10.1086/523301

    work page doi:10.1086/523301 2007

  36. [36]

    D., & Gelman, A

    Hoffman, M. D., & Gelman, A. 2014, doi: 10.5555/2627435.2638586

    work page doi:10.5555/2627435.2638586 2014

  37. [37]

    B., Ashall, C., Jones, D

    Hoogendam, W. B., Ashall, C., Jones, D. O., et al. 2025, ApJ, 988, 209, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ade787

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ade787 2025

  38. [38]

    J., Valenti, S., et al

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

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

  39. [39]

    A., Sullivan, M., Nugent, P

    Howell, D. A., Sullivan, M., Nugent, P. E., et al. 2006, Nature, 443, 308, doi: 10.1038/nature05103

    work page doi:10.1038/nature05103 2006

  40. [40]

    2025, ApJ, 984, 160, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adb3a4

    Iskandar, A., Wang, X., Esamdin, A., et al. 2025, ApJ, 984, 160, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adb3a4 Ivezi´ c,ˇZ., Kahn, S. M., Tyson, J. A., et al. 2019, ApJ, 873, 111, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab042c

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adb3a4 2025

  41. [41]

    2018, ApJ, 865, 149, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aadb9a

    Jiang, J.-a., Doi, M., Maeda, K., & Shigeyama, T. 2018, ApJ, 865, 149, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aadb9a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aadb9a 2018

  42. [42]

    2020, ApJ, 892, 25, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab76cb

    Jiang, J.-a., Yasuda, N., Maeda, K., et al. 2020, ApJ, 892, 25, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab76cb

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab76cb 2020

  43. [43]

    2021, ApJ, 923, L8, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac375f

    Jiang, J.-a., Maeda, K., Kawabata, M., et al. 2021, ApJ, 923, L8, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac375f

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac375f 2021

  44. [44]

    2010, ApJ, 708, 1025, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/708/2/1025

    Kasen, D. 2010, ApJ, 708, 1025, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/708/2/1025

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/708/2/1025 2010

  45. [45]

    C., & Nugent, P

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

    work page doi:10.1086/506190 2006

  46. [46]

    K., & Kasen, D

    Khatami, D. K., & Kasen, D. N. 2019, ApJ, 878, 56, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab1f09

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab1f09 2019

  47. [47]

    A., Fink, M., et al

    Kromer, M., Sim, S. A., Fink, M., et al. 2010, ApJ, 719, 1067, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/719/2/1067

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/719/2/1067 2010

  48. [48]

    2013, MNRAS, 429, 2287, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sts498

    Kromer, M., Fink, M., Stanishev, V., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 429, 2287, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sts498

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sts498 2013

  49. [49]

    A., Siebert, M

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

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

  50. [50]

    W., Kwok, L

    Larison, C., Jha, S. W., Kwok, L. A., & Camacho-Neves, Y. 2024, ApJ, 961, 185, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad0e0f

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad0e0f 2024

  51. [51]

    V., Chornock, R., et al

    Li, W., Filippenko, A. V., Chornock, R., et al. 2003, PASP, 115, 453, doi: 10.1086/374200

    work page doi:10.1086/374200 2003

  52. [52]

    2018, ApJ, 870, 12, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaec74

    Li, W., Wang, X., Vink´ o, J., et al. 2018, ApJ, 870, 12, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaec74

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaec74 2018

  53. [53]

    Liu, C., & Miller, A. A. 2026, Submitted to ApJ

    2026

  54. [54]

    A., Boos, S

    Liu, C., Miller, A. A., Boos, S. J., et al. 2023, ApJ, 958, 178, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acffc9

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acffc9 2023

  55. [55]

    K., & Han, Z

    Liu, Z.-W., R¨ opke, F. K., & Han, Z. 2023, RAA, 23, 082001, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/acd89e

    work page doi:10.1088/1674-4527/acd89e 2023

  56. [56]

    R., Maguire, K., Kotak, R., et al

    Magee, M. R., Maguire, K., Kotak, R., et al. 2020, A&A, 634, A37, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936684

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936684 2020

  57. [57]

    R., Sim, S

    Magee, M. R., Sim, S. A., Kotak, R., & Kerzendorf, W. E. 2018, A&A, 614, A115, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201832675

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201832675 2018

  58. [58]

    R., Kotak, R., Sim, S

    Magee, M. R., Kotak, R., Sim, S. A., et al. 2016, A&A, 589, A89, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201528036

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201528036 2016

  59. [59]

    R., Cuddy, C., Maguire, K., et al

    Magee, M. R., Cuddy, C., Maguire, K., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 513, 3035, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1045

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1045 2022

  60. [60]

    R., Killestein, T

    Magee, M. R., Killestein, T. L., Pursiainen, M., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 543, 3731, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf1675

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staf1675 2025

  61. [61]

    R., Leloudas, G., et al

    Maguire, K., Magee, M. R., Leloudas, G., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 525, 1210, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad2316

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad2316 2023

  62. [62]

    H., Brown, P

    Marion, G. H., Brown, P. J., Vink´ o, J., et al. 2016, ApJ, 820, 92, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/820/2/92

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/820/2/92 2016

  63. [63]

    A., Abril-Pla, O., Deklerk, J., et al

    Martin, O. A., Abril-Pla, O., Deklerk, J., et al. 2026, J. Open Source Softw., 11, 9889, doi: 10.21105/joss.09889

    work page doi:10.21105/joss.09889 2026

  64. [64]

    J., Laher, R

    Masci, F. J., Laher, R. R., Rusholme, B., et al. 2018, PASP, 131, 018003, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aae8ac

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1088/1538-3873/aae8ac 2018

  65. [65]

    A., Cao, Y., Piro, A

    Miller, A. A., Cao, Y., Piro, A. L., et al. 2018, ApJ, 852, 100, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa01f

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaa01f 2018

  66. [66]

    A., Yao, Y., Bulla, M., et al

    Miller, A. A., Yao, Y., Bulla, M., et al. 2020, ApJ, 902, 47, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abb13b

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abb13b 2020

  67. [67]

    A., Abrams, N

    Miller, A. A., Abrams, N. S., Aldering, G., et al. 2025, PASP, 137, 094204, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ae02c5 M¨ uller-Bravo, T. E., Maguire, K., Alburai, A., et al. 2026, Submitted to A&A

    work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/ae02c5 2025

  68. [68]

    Q., Moon, D.-S., Drout, M

    Ni, Y. Q., Moon, D.-S., Drout, M. R., et al. 2025, ApJ, 983, 3, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adbbb7

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adbbb7 2025

  69. [69]

    2021, A&A, 649, A74, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038447

    Nicolas, N., Rigault, M., Copin, Y., et al. 2021, A&A, 649, A74, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038447

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202038447 2021

  70. [70]

    M., Kromer, M., Taubenberger, S., et al

    Noebauer, U. M., Kromer, M., Taubenberger, S., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 472, 2787, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2093

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2093 2017

  71. [71]

    M., Taubenberger, S., Blinnikov, S., Sorokina, E., & Hillebrandt, W

    Noebauer, U. M., Taubenberger, S., Blinnikov, S., Sorokina, E., & Hillebrandt, W. 2016, MNRAS, 463, 2972, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2197 O’Brien, J. T., Kerzendorf, W. E., Fullard, A., et al. 2024, ApJ, 964, 137, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad2358

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2197 2016

  72. [72]

    P., Mushotzky, R., Shaya, E

    Olling, R. P., Mushotzky, R., Shaya, E. J., et al. 2015, Nature, 521, 332, doi: 10.1038/nature14455 27

    work page doi:10.1038/nature14455 2015

  73. [73]

    2012, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 747, L10, 10.1088/2041-8205/747/1/L10

    Pakmor, R., Kromer, M., Taubenberger, S., et al. 2012, ApJ, 747, L10, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/747/1/L10

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/747/1/l10 2012

  74. [74]

    C., Aldering, G., et al

    Pereira, R., Thomas, R. C., Aldering, G., et al. 2013, A&A, 554, A27, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201221008

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201221008 2013

  75. [75]

    Measurements of Omega and Lambda from 42 High-Redshift Supernovae

    Perlmutter, S., Aldering, G., Goldhaber, G., et al. 1999, ApJ, 517, 565, doi: 10.1086/307221

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1086/307221 1999

  76. [76]

    Composable Effects for Flexible and Accelerated Probabilistic Programming in NumPyro

    Phan, D., Pradhan, N., & Jankowiak, M. 2019, Composable Effects for Flexible and Accelerated Probabilistic Programming in NumPyro, arXiv, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1912.11554

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1912.11554 2019

  77. [77]

    Piro, A. L. 2015, ApJ, 808, L51, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/808/2/L51

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/808/2/l51 2015

  78. [78]

    L., & Morozova, V

    Piro, A. L., & Morozova, V. S. 2016, ApJ, 826, 96, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/826/1/96

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/826/1/96 2016

  79. [79]

    L., & Nakar, E

    Piro, A. L., & Nakar, E. 2013, ApJ, 769, 67, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/769/1/67

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/769/1/67 2013

  80. [80]

    L., & Nakar, E

    Piro, A. L., & Nakar, E. 2014, ApJ, 784, 85, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/784/1/85

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/784/1/85 2014

Showing first 80 references.