Wakes from Companion Interactions in Type Ia Supernovae Nebular Emission Line Profiles

Kathlynn Simotas; Lars Bildsten; Logan J. Prust

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 3 cited by

Wakes from Companion Interactions in Type Ia Supernovae Nebular Emission Line Profiles

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A surviving companion's wake shapes Type Ia supernova spectra into horns and notches that vary with viewing angle.

desk verdict A solid, honest paper that converts companion-wake density perturbations into concrete JWST-era predictions for [Co III] and [Ar III] line shapes; the main caveat is the unseen polar cap, which mostly affects quantitative moment slopes rather than the qualitative horns. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.06412 v1 pith:3BVTIOOO submitted 2025-07-08 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.SR

Kathlynn Simotas , Lars Bildsten , Logan J. Prust This is my paper · ORCID

classification astro-ph.HEastro-ph.SR

keywords TypeIasupernovaewhitedwarfstarsnebularphasespectroscopycompanioninteractionejectawakeforbiddenemissionlinesdouble-detonationprogenitorsJWSTmid-infrared

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper argues that the surviving companion star in a double-degenerate Type Ia supernova leaves a permanent scar on the exploding ejecta: a low-density wake flanked by a bow-shock overdensity. The authors simulate this ejecta-companion collision and then compute nebular-phase forbidden line profiles for the innermost iron-group material and for a shell of intermediate-mass elements. They find that the wake removes high-velocity material along the companion axis and piles up emitting material at the shock edge, producing strong peaks, single horns, and double-horned profiles whose shape changes with the viewing angle. If correct, these predicted morphologies give JWST a direct way to identify which Type Ia supernovae had a Roche-lobe-filling companion and to constrain the binary orientation at the time of explosion.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the shock-heated low-density wake and its flanking bow-shock overdensity left behind when the ejecta runs into the Roche-lobe-filling donor. On top of that density field the paper builds a fast line-shape code that slices the homologous ejecta into planes perpendicular to the line of sight, assigns each plane a projected velocity, and integrates a density-based emissivity. The emissivity is sampled in three regimes: linearly in density when the electron density is far below the transition's critical density $n_{\rm crit}$, quadratically when far above, and through the full expression $j \propto \rho\, n_e/(1+n_e/n_{\rm crit})$ when the ejecta density is near threshold, which is the case for [Co III] at 270 days. This critical-density sampling is what makes the predicted horns and notches angle-dependent rather than a simple rescaling of the spherically symmetric profile.

What would settle it

Search a sample of a dozen nebular-phase JWST spectra of Type Ia supernovae at $t > 200$ days for the [Ar III] 8.99 micron line: if none of them shows the predicted single-horned or double-horned morphology, and the [Co III] 11.89 micron first velocity moments show no correlation with line morphology, the companion-wake signatures would fail to appear. A more direct test would measure the predicted linear slope of the first velocity moment versus $\cos \theta$ across randomly oriented objects; a flat distribution with no such trend would rule out the wake as the source of the predicted asymmetries.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that companion interaction permanently modifies the density, velocity, and composition structure of Type Ia ejecta in a way that survives to homologous expansion and shapes forbidden emission lines. In the simulation, the fastest-moving ejecta is trapped behind the donor and ends up as the slowest material inside the wake, inverting the usual velocity-composition ordering, while the bow shock creates an overdensity at roughly 40 degrees from the symmetry axis. When line emission is computed with the electron density tracked against the critical density of the transition, the [Co III] 11.89 micron line (tracing 56Ni in the innermost ejecta) loses high-velocity flux along the wake axis and gains a central bump viewed perpendicular to it, and the shell-like [Ar III] 8.99 micron line develops single-horned profiles along the axis and double-horned profiles perpendicular to it. The authors conclude that these angle-dependent asymmetries are distinctive enough to be identified in JWST nebular-phase spectra.

Load-bearing premise

The whole-sphere line profiles assume that the ejecta beyond a polar angle of about 80 degrees looks exactly like the ejecta at 80 degrees, because the simulation only extends to 80.2 degrees and the rest of the sphere is filled by extrapolating that density-radius relation; if the true outer ejecta geometry differs, every predicted full-sphere line shape and viewing-angle trend changes.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Late-time JWST spectra of Type Ia supernovae should show wake signatures: an axis-on view of [Co III] 11.89 microns missing high-velocity emission, and an edge-on view of [Ar III] 8.99 microns showing a double-horned shape.
The first velocity moment of the wake-perturbed lines follows a linear trend with $\cos\theta$, so a measured pattern of blueshifts and redshifts can be used to infer the binary orientation along the line of sight.
Monitoring a forbidden line across the epoch when the electron density passes $n_{\rm crit}$ should reveal a measurable change in line shape, because the emissivity shifts from roughly $\rho^2$ to linear in $\rho$.
The same wake physics extends to other progenitor channels with surviving companions, including thick helium-shell and quadruple-detonation scenarios, widening the applicability beyond the double-degenerate case.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

If the predicted horned profiles are found and are correlated with hypervelocity runaway white dwarfs, the line-shape test would connect individual supernovae to the double-detonation channel rather than only to the progenitor population as a whole.
The angle-dependent first-velocity-moment slope offers a statistical way to measure the orbital axis orientation of the progenitor binary from a sample of nebular spectra, without resolving the system.
The same plane-slicing tool could be applied to other 3D asymmetries, such as off-center ignition, large-scale 56Ni clumping, or circumstellar interaction, to separate their line-shape fingerprints from the companion wake.
Extending the simulation beyond 80 degrees with a self-consistent global ejecta model would test whether the predicted full-sphere line profiles survive; until that is done, the horned morphologies should be treated as a robust but not final prediction.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

This is a genuinely useful paper. Its core contribution is explicit: it takes the low-density wake and bow-shock overdensity that companion interaction leaves in a D6 double-detonation ejecta and computes what those do to mid-IR nebular line profiles as a function of viewing angle. Prior work had noted wakes or studied ejecta structure, but not turned them into line-shape predictions for the specific JWST lines. The predicted horns, double-horned profiles, and first-moment shifts are new and testable.

The paper earns credit for being careful and honest. The emissivity derivation is standard physics, the code is validated against analytic Gaussian and thin-shell profiles and against the 1D non-LTE output of Blondin et al. (2023), and the comparison to SN 2021aefx gives a real sanity check. The authors also flag their own limitations in the appendix: the low-velocity interior is not modeled, and they show the effect of alternative inner-density choices. That is the right way to handle a known boundary of the model.

The soft spots are real but proportionate. The full-sphere extrapolation at 80.2 degrees is an assumption, not a result, and the stress-test note is correct that the first-moment slopes and the normalized baseline profiles inherit that uncertainty. I do not think it sinks the qualitative claim: the horns and the double-horned shape are local features of the wake region, which the simulation does resolve, so those should survive changes in the polar cap. What changes is the quantitative strength of the features and the slope of the moment-versus-angle curves. The paper is upfront about the extrapolation, but a referee should push for a short sensitivity test (e.g., symmetric vs. asymmetric polar-cap density) before publication. The hard-sphere donor is a separate approximation, but the authors justify it with prior work and discuss stripping in the appendix; I would not treat that as a fatal flaw. The code itself is not public, which is a minor disappointment given the paper advertises it as a tool, but the method is described well enough to reproduce.

Who is this for? People working on Type Ia progenitor constraints with nebular spectroscopy, especially mid-IR JWST follow-up. They will get a concrete set of predictions and a fast way to test other density fields. This deserves a serious referee and, assuming the sensitivity test is added or the caveat is framed more carefully, should be published. I would take it to a reading group only if we were doing a session on SN Ia observables; otherwise it is a cite-and-move-on paper.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper simulates the interaction of Type Ia supernova ejecta with a surviving Roche-lobe-filling companion in the D6 double-degenerate double-detonation scenario using Athena++, showing that the companion leaves a low-density wake and a bow-shock overdensity. The authors introduce a lightweight line-shape code based on Jerkstrand (2017) that computes optically thin nebular line profiles from arbitrary 3D density fields, using an emissivity that interpolates between j proportional to rho and j proportional to rho^2 according to ne/ncrit. They validate the wake-free limit against analytic profiles and the 1D non-LTE calculations of Blondin et al. (2023), and reproduce the [Co III] 11.89 micron line of SN 2021aefx with an electron-density-sampled Gaussian model. With the simulated wake density structure, they predict viewing-angle-dependent horns and double-horned profiles for [Co III] and [Ar III] and compute first-velocity-moment versus cos(theta) trends, concluding that these features are distinctive enough to be identified in JWST observations.

Significance. This is a timely and useful contribution. If the predictions hold, the wake signatures provide a new, physically motivated observational diagnostic for surviving-companion SNe Ia in the JWST era, complementing the hypervelocity-WD evidence for the D6 channel. The line-shape code is simple, fast, and validated against analytic and 1D non-LTE benchmarks; the comparison to SN 2021aefx is a genuine non-calibrated test. The treatment of the critical-density transition with ne*rho sampling is a nice improvement over pure rho or rho^2 scalings. The main caveats are the unconstrained polar-cap extrapolation and the absence of a quantitative detectability threshold.

major comments (3)

[Section 4, first paragraph; Section 2.1] The full-sphere line profiles and moment trends rely on the assumption stated in Section 4: 'We span the full sphere by extrapolating our empirical density-radius relation at our largest simulated angle of approximately 80 degrees around the rest of the sphere.' Since the simulation domain extends only to a maximum polar angle of 80.2 degrees, every profile in Figure 5 and every first-moment curve in Figure 6 is computed on a sphere whose unobserved polar cap is assumed to be identical to the density at 80.2 degrees. The wake-free validation in Section 3.4 uses a spherically symmetric Gaussian model and therefore provides no constraint on this polar cap. I request an explicit statement of the empirical density-radius relation and a robustness test in which the polar cap is filled with at least one alternative prescription (for example, the undisturbed Gaussian density profile, or the 80-degree profile with a mild large-scale density gradient). The test should show whether the horn/double-horn features and the slope of the first-moment curve survive plausible variations of the cap; without such a test, the Section 5 claim that the features are 'distinctive enough to be identified in JWST observations' is not yet established.
[Section 5 and Figure 5] The central claim of JWST detectability is stated without a quantitative detection criterion. The profiles in Figure 5 are normalized and shown without a noise model, spectral resolution, or exposure-time/sensitivity estimate, and the text does not specify how large the wake-induced deviations must be relative to the observational uncertainty to be identified. I request either a more cautious wording of the detectability claim or a simple estimate of the required S/N and spectral resolution, for example by convolving the synthetic profiles with a JWST-like line-spread function and adding representative noise. This would also help separate the intrinsic wake signature from the unconstrained polar-cap contribution discussed in the previous comment.
[Sections 2.2, 3.1, 3.2] The emissivity model in Eq. (8) assumes a density-only dependence with a uniform isothermal, constant-ionization conversion ne proportional to rho, following the spherically averaged D6 model of Blondin et al. (2023). However, Section 2.2 and Figure 1 show that the wake is shock-heated and radiation-pressure dominated, with thermodynamic properties that differ from the ambient ejecta. If the temperature or ionization state in the wake differs from the surrounding ejecta at nebular epochs, the density contrasts may not translate directly into emissivity contrasts, and the predicted horns could be suppressed or enhanced. I request a sensitivity test that assigns to the wake region a plausible temperature or ionization offset (for example, a factor of two change in the effective emissivity normalization) and recomputes the [Co III] and [Ar III] profiles, or, alternatively, a discussion of why the uniform-ionization assumption remains valid inside the wake.

minor comments (5)

[Section 3.3, Eq. (7)] The notation in Eq. (7) is ambiguous: the integral Vmax to V(nu) is not clearly connected to the discrete sum over j, and the quantities dA and V(nu) are not fully defined. Please clarify the mapping between velocity bins and planar slices and state whether the profiles are normalized before comparison.
[Section 3.4] The observed peak flux ratio of approximately 7.3 is quoted without uncertainties or a description of the continuum subtraction and epoch choice, and it is compared with a predicted ratio of approximately 6.6; the discussion would benefit from error bars on the observed ratio and a note on how the result depends on the assumed density scaling.
[Section 4.3 and Figure 6] The statement that the first-moment behavior shows a 'strong dipolar asymmetry' should be qualified because the sign of the slope flips for rho^2 sampling and because the calculation inherits the polar-cap extrapolation uncertainty; including error bars or a band showing the sensitivity to the cap prescription would strengthen the figure.
[Abstract and Section 3.3] The abstract says the paper presents a tool to quickly calculate line shapes, but no code repository or availability statement is provided. For reproducibility, please include a link to the code or a statement of availability.
[Appendix A] The low-velocity extrapolation test in Figure 7 is shown only for the [Co III] line at 270 days with the ne*rho sampling scheme; a brief statement on whether the conclusion holds for the other sampling schemes and for [Ar III] would be useful.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the nebular line shapes are forward-modeled from a simulated wake density field, and the JWST comparison is used as validation rather than calibration.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is a forward calculation: a 3D hydrodynamic simulation of ejecta passing a Roche-lobe-filling donor produces a density/velocity/composition field with a low-density wake and bow-shock overdensity; the line-profile code then integrates that density field along line-of-sight planes using the standard two-level-atom emissivity formula with critical densities taken from atomic data (Storey & Sochi 2016; Yan & Babb 2024). No parameter of the line-formation model is fitted to the observed [Co III] or [Ar III] profiles; the SN 2021aefx comparison is explicitly a test of the wake-free Gaussian benchmark, not a calibration of the wake model. The self-citations to Prust et al. (2025) and Wong et al. (2024) are used to inherit simulation setup and a Gaussian ejecta parameterization, and these inputs are validated independently against the 1D non-LTE code of Blondin et al. (2023) and against JWST data. The admitted extrapolation of the density beyond the simulated polar angle of 80.2° is a modeling assumption about the unperturbed background, not a circular reduction of the predicted line asymmetries to the assumed input: the wake-induced horns, gaps, and first-moment slopes are direct consequences of the simulated density perturbation rather than imposed by construction. Thus no circular step meeting the required evidentiary standard is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The predicted line shapes depend on a chain of upstream inputs: the D6 ejecta profile and energetics, the hard-sphere treatment of the donor, the passive-scalar composition mapping, the assumption that electron density is proportional to mass density with two free electrons per atom, and the full-sphere extrapolation. None of these are fitted to the target line profiles; they are inherited from prior simulations or chosen by hand, which keeps the circularity burden low but makes the quantitative predictions uncertain.

free parameters (3)

velocity tracer bin edges = 7000, 9000, 11000, 14000 km/s
Hand-chosen boundaries from D6 composition in Boos et al. (2021); decide which ejecta produces the Co III versus Ar III lines.
full-sphere extrapolation base angle = 80.2 degrees
Simulation domain maximum polar angle; density at this angle assumed to represent all larger angles when wrapping to the full sphere.
low-velocity interior cutoff = 1500 km/s
Inner ejecta below the donor escape speed is not modeled; Appendix A tests three treatments and shows weak sensitivity.

assumptions (7)

domain assumption Ejecta reaches homologous expansion by about 500 s, so density-velocity structure is frozen.
Invoked throughout Sections 2.2 and 3.3; required to map simulated density to velocity-space line profiles.
domain assumption The Gaussian ejecta model of Wong et al. (2024) with Eej = 0.97e51 erg and Mej = 0.9 solar masses represents the D6 ejecta.
Injected at the inner boundary in Section 2.1; the central wake geometry depends on this density profile.
domain assumption The donor acts as a hard reflective sphere with no gravity, tidal stripping, or mass loss.
Section 2.1; motivated by Prust et al. (2025) and Wong et al. (2024), but strips donor material and affects the innermost ejecta.
domain assumption Electron density is proportional to mass density with two free electrons per atom throughout the emitting region.
Section 3.2; tested against Blondin et al. (2023) 1D non-LTE model and found consistent below 10,000 km/s.
ad hoc to paper The density at the largest simulated polar angle (80.2 degrees) is representative of all undisturbed ejecta.
Section 4; the full sphere is reconstructed from this one profile, and all full-sphere line shapes inherit this.
domain assumption Local heating at t > 200 days: positrons from Co-56 decay deposit energy locally and the line emissivity depends only on local T, ionization, and ne.
Abstract and Section 3.1; underlies the use of the critical-density emissivity formula at late times.
domain assumption Ionization fractions and temperature are nearly spatially uniform, as in the Blondin et al. (2023) D6 model.
Section 3.1; allows mapping density to emissivity without full 3D non-LTE calculations.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Wakes from Companion Interactions in Type Ia Supernovae Nebular Emission Line Profiles." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/3BVTIOOO

@misc{pith2026250706412,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Wakes from Companion Interactions in Type Ia Supernovae Nebular Emission Line Profiles},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/3BVTIOOO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.06412}
}

abstract

Thermonuclear supernovae (SNe) are the result of the nuclear transformation of carbon/oxygen (C/O) white dwarfs (WDs) to the radioactive element $^{56}\mathrm{Ni}$ and intermediate mass elements (IMEs) like Ca, Ar, etc. Most progenitor scenarios involve a companion star which donates matter to the exploding white dwarf, implying a fundamental prediction: the formation of a wake in the explosive ejecta as it runs into and moves past the companion star. This wake leaves an indelible imprint on the ejecta's density, velocity, and composition structure that remains fixed as the ejecta reaches homologous expansion. We simulate the interaction of the ejecta and Roche-lobe filling donor in a double degenerate double detonation Type Ia progenitor scenario and explore the detectability of this imprint in late-time nebular phase spectroscopy of Type Ia SNe under the assumption of local heating ($t > 200$ days). At these times, the velocity profiles of forbidden emission lines reflect the velocity distribution of all of the ejecta and the critical electron density for that forbidden line. We explicitly calculate line shapes for the [Co III] $11.89 \mu\mathrm{m}$ line that traces the initial $^{56}\mathrm{Ni}$ distribution and the [Ar III] $8.99 \mu\mathrm{m}$ line, which traces a typical intermediate mass element. We predict the viewing angle dependence of the line shape, present a tool to quickly calculate optically thin line shapes for various 3D density-velocity profiles and discuss JWST observations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.06412 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** The ejecta properties of the simulation at ϕ = 0 which is representative of the average ejecta properties. The top color bar and half of the polar plot display the density at 500s post-explosion. The bottom color bar and lower half of the polar plot shows the log of the ratio of radiation and gas pressure. The low density wake is present in both density and pressure space, and the bow shock is clearly visible as an … view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Composition profiles of passive scalars in velocity space at an angle of 10◦ relative to the explosion axis. The red line indicates the element group that was initially moving at the highest velocities, which is now highest in the innermost region moving at < 4, 000km/s. All other groups remain in the order if not the exact velocity range of their initial distribution. emission to estimate the occupation nu of the u… view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Comparison of the [Co III] 11.89µm line shape from DerKacy et al. (2023), Blondin 1D nLTE radiative transfer code output (Blondin et al. 2023), and our 3 sampling methods with an input of a spherically symmetric Gaussian density profile with equivalent ejecta mass and energy values as the model in Blondin et al. (2023) and Gronow et al. (2021). used in Blondin et al. (2023) as the primary ‘DBLEDT’ model and found ve… view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (3 more)

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Modeled emission line profiles for [Co III] 11.89µm (or the innermost velocity tracer as displayed in the top of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: The intensity-weighted velocity as a function of viewing angle. The blue line corresponds with the lowest velocity tracer and the orange line corresponds to the first shell like tracer. ity moment for our other sampling methods beyond just linear density sampling, wher…

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Demonstrating the impact of 3 choices of innermost velocity scheme for electron density sampled [Co III] line. The gray line shows the most extreme case where all material at ≤ 1, 500km/s is replaced with a hole. The blue line shows the case where a hole is cutout only…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

JWST Spectroscopy of SN Ia 2022aaiq and 2024gy: Evidence for Enhanced Central Stable Ni Abundance and a Deflagration-to-Detonation Transition
astro-ph.HE 2025-10 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

A JWST study of two Type Ia supernovae finds central stable-nickel enhancements and broken-slope [Ni III] lines, favoring near-Chandrasekhar-mass delayed-detonation explosions.
Late-time emission-line profiles from kilonova models
astro-ph.HE 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Late-time optically-thin kilonova line profiles computed from 2D long-term merger ejecta are complex, orientation-dependent and broadened by r-process heating, encoding ejecta structure.
A double-degenerate scenario with a merger to explosion delay time to explain type Ia supernova SN 2020aeuh
astro-ph.HE 2025-07 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

The author proposes that SN 2020aeuh's early carbon-oxygen circumstellar interaction is the delayed explosion of a merged white dwarf, about one to two years after the merger.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

36 extracted references · 31 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

[1]

2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 975, 203 Astropy Collaboration, et al

Ashall, C., Hoeflich, P., Baron, E., et al. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 975, 203 Astropy Collaboration, et al. 2013, AA, 558, A33 —. 2018, AJ, 156, 123

work page 2024
[2]

B., White, C

Bauer, E. B., White, C. J., & Bildsten, L. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 887, 68

work page 2019
[3]

J., Ramsbottom, C

Blondin, S., Dessart, L., Hillier, D. J., Ramsbottom, C. A., & Storey, P. J. 2023, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 678, A170 13

work page 2023
[4]

J., Townsley, D

Boos, S. J., Townsley, D. M., & Shen, K. J. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 972, 200

work page 2024
[5]

Miles, B. J. 2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 919, 126

work page 2021
[6]

M., Polin, A., et al

De, K., Kasliwal, M. M., Polin, A., et al. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 873, L18

work page 2019
[7]

M., Tzanidakis, A., et al

De, K., Kasliwal, M. M., Tzanidakis, A., et al. 2020, The Astrophysical Journal, 905, 58

work page 2020
[8]

2023, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 945, L2

DerKacy, J., Ashall, C., Hoeflich, P., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 945, L2

work page 2023

Show all 36 references

[9]

D., Haggerty, C

Desai, D. D., Haggerty, C. C., Shappee, B. J., et al. 2025, arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.15335

2025 arXiv
[10]

J., Chandra, V., et al

El-Badry, K., Shen, K. J., Chandra, V., et al. 2023, arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.03914

2023 arXiv
[11]

L., Meikle, W., Kotak, R., et al

Gerardy, C. L., Meikle, W., Kotak, R., et al. 2007, The Astrophysical Journal, 661, 995

2007
[12]

E., Sim, S

Gronow, S., Collins, C. E., Sim, S. A., & R¨ opke, F. K. 2021, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 649, A155

2021
[13]

R., et al

Harris, C. R., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357–362

2020
[14]

2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 922, 186

Hoeflich, P., Ashall, C., Bose, S., et al. 2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 922, 186

2021
[15]

2017, Spectra of Supernovae in the Nebular Phase (Springer International Publishing), 795–842, doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-21846-5 29

Jerkstrand, A. 2017, Spectra of Supernovae in the Nebular Phase (Springer International Publishing), 795–842, doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-21846-5 29

2017 doi
[16]

2004, The Astrophysical Journal, 610, 876

Kasen, D., Nugent, P., Thomas, R., & Wang, L. 2004, The Astrophysical Journal, 610, 876

2004
[17]

A., Jha, S

Kwok, L. A., Jha, S. W., Temim, T., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 944, L3

2023
[18]

A., Siebert, M

Kwok, L. A., Siebert, M. R., Johansson, J., et al. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 966, 135

2024
[19]

A., Singh, M., Jha, S

Kwok, L. A., Singh, M., Jha, S. W., et al. 2025, arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.02944

2025
[20]

K., & Han, Z

Liu, Z.-W., R¨ opke, F. K., & Han, Z. 2023, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 23, 082001

2023
[21]

2000, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 128, 615

Marietta, E., Burrows, A., & Fryxell, B. 2000, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 128, 615

2000
[22]

1999, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 124, 503

Milne, P., Leising, M., et al. 1999, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 124, 503

1999
[23]

2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 906, 65

Polin, A., Nugent, P., & Kasen, D. 2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 906, 65

2021
[24]

2024, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 533, 3036

Pollin, J., Sim, S., Pakmor, R., et al. 2024, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 533, 3036

2024
[25]

J., Kumar, G., & Bildsten, L

Prust, L. J., Kumar, G., & Bildsten, L. 2025, The Astrophysical Journal, 982, 60

2025
[26]

J., Blondin, S., Kasen, D., et al

Shen, K. J., Blondin, S., Kasen, D., et al. 2021, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 909, L18

2021
[27]

J., Boubert, D., G¨ ansicke, B

Shen, K. J., Boubert, D., G¨ ansicke, B. T., et al. 2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 865, 15

2018
[28]

1957, Soviet Astronomy, Vol

Sobolev, V. 1957, Soviet Astronomy, Vol. 1, p. 678, 1, 678

1957
[29]

M., Tomida, K., White, C

Stone, J. M., Tomida, K., White, C. J., & Felker, K. G. 2020a, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 249, 4, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab929b —. 2020b, The Athena++ Adaptive Mesh Refinement Framework. https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.06651

arXiv
[30]

2016, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 459, 2558

Storey, P., & Sochi, T. 2016, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 459, 2558

2016
[31]

2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 885, 103

Tanikawa, A., Nomoto, K., Nakasato, N., & Maeda, K. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 885, 103

2019
[32]

Tucker, M. A. 2025, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters, 538, L1

2025
[33]

2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261–272

Virtanen, P., et al. 2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261–272

2020
[34]

Wong, T. L. S., & Bildsten, L. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 951, 28

2023
[35]

Wong, T. L. S., White, C. J., & Bildsten, L. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 973, 65

2024
[36]

Yan, P.-G., & Babb, J. F. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 961, 43

2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 975, 203 Astropy Collaboration, et al

Ashall, C., Hoeflich, P., Baron, E., et al. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 975, 203 Astropy Collaboration, et al. 2013, AA, 558, A33 —. 2018, AJ, 156, 123

work page 2024

[2] [2]

B., White, C

Bauer, E. B., White, C. J., & Bildsten, L. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 887, 68

work page 2019

[3] [3]

J., Ramsbottom, C

Blondin, S., Dessart, L., Hillier, D. J., Ramsbottom, C. A., & Storey, P. J. 2023, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 678, A170 13

work page 2023

[4] [4]

J., Townsley, D

Boos, S. J., Townsley, D. M., & Shen, K. J. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 972, 200

work page 2024

[5] [5]

Miles, B. J. 2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 919, 126

work page 2021

[6] [6]

M., Polin, A., et al

De, K., Kasliwal, M. M., Polin, A., et al. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 873, L18

work page 2019

[7] [7]

M., Tzanidakis, A., et al

De, K., Kasliwal, M. M., Tzanidakis, A., et al. 2020, The Astrophysical Journal, 905, 58

work page 2020

[8] [8]

2023, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 945, L2

DerKacy, J., Ashall, C., Hoeflich, P., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 945, L2

work page 2023