Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 3 minor 1 cited by

SN 2023vbg: A Type IIn Supernova Resembling SN 2009ip, with a Long-Duration Precursor and Early-Time Bump

T0 review · 4 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper reports that SN 2023vbg, a Type IIn supernova in the 09ip-like class, showed a 100-day precursor followed by a unique early bump, and argues these reveal a dense inner shell plus a smooth extended outer shell around the…

desk verdict Well-observed new 09ip-like SN with a genuinely novel early bump, but the CSM-structure claim rests on one acknowledged, untested interpretive step; the data merit peer review. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.15988 v3 pith:4XVJGGQN submitted 2025-04-22 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.SR

Sota Goto , Masayuki Yamanaka , Takahiro Nagayama , Keiichi Maeda , Miho Kawabata , D. K. Sahu , Avinash Singh , Anjasha Gangopadhyay
show 4 more authors
Naveen Dkuniya Kuntal Misra Monalisa Dubey Bhavya Ailawadhi
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HEastro-ph.SR PACS 97.60.Bw
keywords supernovae:individual(SN2023vbg)TypeIIn09ip-likesupernovaecircumstellarmatterstellarmasslossprecursoroutburstslightcurvebumpsLBVprogenitors
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

The paper establishes SN 2023vbg as a member of the 09ip-like Type IIn supernova class while documenting two properties no comparison object shows: a bright bump 12–25 days before maximum, and a smooth post-peak decline. The authors argue these trace the circumstellar medium (CSM) structure: an inner dense CSM component extending to roughly $8 \times 10^{14}$ cm from the progenitor, plus an outer CSM that is smoother and more extended than in other 09ip-like events. If right, this means the diversity among 09ip-like supernovae maps directly onto diversity in the pre-explosion mass-loss history, and that some 09ip-like objects may hide their inner shells so close to the star that the shell is already swept up before the main outburst. The work matters because precursor light curves are a direct window onto the final years of these massive progenitors.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the two-component circumstellar medium (CSM) surrounding the progenitor, inferred from the light curve rather than measured directly. The inner dense component ends near $8 \times 10^{14}$ cm from the star, obtained by multiplying the roughly 13 day interval between the assumed explosion date (start of the early bump) and the bump's end by the adopted shock velocity $v_{\rm SN} \sim 7000$ km s$^{-1}$. The outer component is smoother and more extended than in comparison objects, which explains the monotonic post-peak decline and the absence of a broad spectral component. The mass-loss rate $\dot{M} \sim 0.02\,M_\odot$ yr$^{-1}$ derived from the standard shock-interaction formula ties the inner-shell picture to the observed precursor luminosity.

What would settle it

A future 09ip-like supernova caught with multi-band, high-cadence photometry during an early bump, together with a spectrum at the bump's rise showing a P Cygni feature near the ejecta velocity, would confirm that the bump is shock interaction. Continued monitoring of SN 2023vbg that finds a sudden steepening of the decline or the late emergence of a broad spectral component would support the extended outer shell; observing neither would weaken the two-component picture.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that SN 2023vbg both resembles and diverges from the 09ip-like class. It exhibited a long-duration precursor at $M_g \approx -14$ mag lasting about 100 days, similar to other 09ip-like objects, but uniquely showed a bright bump at $M_g \approx -17$ mag between 12 and 25 days before the main peak, then declined smoothly without the shoulder or knee features seen in comparison objects. The paper proposes that the early bump marks the beginning of supernova–CSM interaction, that is, the explosion date, and that the bump's end at about 13 days after explosion, combined with a shock velocity of about 7000 km s$^{-1}$, locates the outer edge of an inner dense CSM component at roughly $8 \times 10^{14}$ cm. The smooth decline and the absence of a broad spectral component then follow from an extended, smooth outer CSM that the shock has not yet fully exited. The authors conclude that differing pre-SN outburst activity—stronger, longer, and less variable for SN 2023vbg—produces this CSM diversity, implying diverse progenitor pathways toward 09ip-like explosions.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the early bump marks the start of the supernova ejecta plowing into surrounding material, so the bump's onset gives the explosion date and the 13-day interval sets the inner shell radius through an assumed shock speed of about 7000 km/s; if the bump were instead an outburst from the star before explosion, the inferred dense inner shell and the longer rise time would not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the early bump marks the start of SN–CSM interaction, the explosion date of SN 2023vbg is about 27 days before the optical peak, so its rise time to peak is longer than that of other 09ip-like supernovae, implying a larger CSM column density.
  • The inferred inner dense CSM component at about $8 \times 10^{14}$ cm implies that the progenitor underwent a strong mass-loss episode roughly 1000 days before explosion, matching the long-duration precursor.
  • Other 09ip-like supernovae may also possess an inner dense CSM, but located closer to the star (inside $8 \times 10^{14}$ cm), so the shell is swept up before the wind breakout and leaves no early-bump trace.
  • The smooth post-peak decline implies that the outer CSM is less clumpy and more extended than in SN 2009ip-like objects, and the broad spectral component may emerge only later once the shock reaches the outer CSM boundary.
  • Precursor activity lasting more than 1000 days at about $-13$ to $-14.5$ mag indicates pre-SN activity that was stronger, longer, and less variable than in comparison objects, supporting diverse final evolutionary pathways for luminous-blue-variable-like progenitors.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because the early bump was observed in only one band, a modest change in the assumed explosion date or shock velocity would shift the inferred inner CSM radius; future objects with early-bump detections in multiple bands would test whether the 13-day interval is a genuine structural radius.
  • If the extended smooth outer CSM is real, continued monitoring of SN 2023vbg should eventually reveal the shock exiting the CSM, producing a sudden steepening of the decline or a late spectral change—a testable prediction the paper does not spell out.
  • The comparison with other 09ip-like objects assumes similar shock velocities; a direct measurement of the ejecta velocity from a spectrum during the bump phase would sharpen or revise the inferred CSM radius, which scales linearly with the assumed velocity.
  • The long-duration, low-level precursor, if confirmed, suggests the mass-loss history is not a single eruption but a quasi-continuous enhanced wind, which may connect to binary interaction or stellar pulsation rather than a single terminal LBV-like eruption.
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.

Referee Report

4 major / 3 minor

Summary. This paper presents UV-to-NIR photometry and optical spectroscopy of SN 2023vbg, a Type IIn supernova classified as 09ip-like. The authors identify a long-duration precursor at Mg ~ -14 mag lasting roughly 100 days, a bright early-time bump at Mg ~ -17 mag between t = -27 and -12 days, a smooth post-peak decline, and H-alpha profiles with narrow and intermediate velocity components but no broad component. They set the explosion date at the start of the early bump, infer an inner dense CSM component extending to about 8e14 cm, and propose that the object's differences from other 09ip-like SNe reflect a generally smooth but more extended CSM with a denser inner component, linked to a longer and less variable pre-SN mass-loss episode.

Significance. If the interpretation holds, SN 2023vbg is a valuable addition to the 09ip-like sample because it shows a unique pre-peak bump and a smooth decline, broadening the observed diversity of this class. The paper's strengths are its multi-band photometric coverage, the long forced-photometry search for precursor activity, the multi-epoch spectroscopic sequence, and the quantitative comparison with other 09ip-like SNe. The central CSM-structure conclusion, however, rests on an assumed explosion epoch and on an interpretive choice about the early bump that is acknowledged in the text but not quantitatively tested; the paper would be substantially strengthened by a direct treatment of that ambiguity.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 4.2 / 3.1] The central new claim—an inner dense CSM component extending to ~8e14 cm and a longer rise time than other 09ip-like objects—rests on setting the explosion date at the start of the early bump (t = -27 d) and interpreting the bump as the onset of SN-CSM interaction. Section 4.2 lists the alternative (two successive pre-SN outbursts) but dismisses it only as 'more likely' on the basis of energetics, and no quantitative energy estimate is presented. The bump is detected only in the ATLAS o-band (Section 3.1), so its magnitude and shape are not color-confirmed, and the t = -13 d spectrum (narrow plus intermediate H-alpha components and a -2500 km/s P-Cygni absorption) does not uniquely require fast SN ejecta. If the explosion occurred near t = -12 d instead, the precursor and bump are both pre-SN eruptions, the rise time is normal for the class, and the inferred inner-CSM radius is not constrained. Please supply the quantitative energetics, the uncertainty on the quadratic-fit explosion date, and a discussion of how the conclusions change under the alternative epoch.
  2. [Section 4.1, Eq. (1)] The mass-loss rate Mdot ~ 0.02 Msun/yr is obtained from Eq. (1) with adopted values epsilon = 0.5, v_w = 100 km/s, v_SN = 7000 km/s, and L = 1.1e43 erg/s at t = 3.8 d. Because v_SN enters cubed, the estimate changes by a factor of 8 if v_SN is 3500 or 14000 km/s; the BB radius evolution shown in Figure 5 is not a measured ejecta velocity, and no uncertainty is propagated. Since the comparison with Mdot ~ 0.04-0.07 Msun/yr for other 09ip-like SNe is used to argue that the outer CSM density is comparable, the estimate needs at least a sensitivity range over plausible v_SN, epsilon, and v_w.
  3. [Section 3.1 and Figure 9] The phase boundaries t = -27 d and t = -12 d are load-bearing for the paper, but the quadratic fit that sets t = -27 d is not described or plotted; no fit parameters, uncertainties, or goodness-of-fit are given. In addition, the text defines the explosion date as the start of the early bump, whereas the Figure 9 caption says t = 0 is 'its last non-detection' for SN 2023vbg; these two definitions should be reconciled, and the adopted epoch should be given with an uncertainty.
  4. [Section 4.3] The consistency between the ~1000-day precursor duration and the inner-CSM radius uses v_w = 100 km/s and treats the marginal forced-photometry detections in Section 3.2 as a continuous long-duration eruption. The text itself notes these detections hover near the non-detection limits with 0.5-1 mag variability, so they could equally represent a series of discrete outbursts; the adopted continuous eruption is not uniquely supported. Because this scale is then matched to the inner-CSM radius derived from the assumed explosion date, the argument is partly self-consistent by construction. Please test the discrete-outburst interpretation and state its consequences for the two-component CSM scenario.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Section 2.1] The luminosity distance is quoted as '72.7 Mpc-1'; the unit should be Mpc.
  2. [Section 3.5 / Table 1] The text says the intermediate H-alpha component in the post-maximum phase remains <3000 km/s, but Table 1 lists 3140 +/- 110 km/s at +47 d and 3000 +/- 126 km/s at +54 d; these values should be reconciled with the statement.
  3. [Section 3.4 / Figure 5] The two-component blackbody fit fixes T_cold = 3000 K following Margutti et al. (2014); a brief statement on how the results change if this temperature is allowed to vary would strengthen Figure 5.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

Mild circularity: the inner CSM radius is the early-bump duration rescaled by an assumed shock velocity, so the central CSM-structure claim restates the adopted interpretation; the rest of the analysis is a transparent, non-circular hypothesis.

  1. self definitional [Section 4.2, 'The Origin of Early-bump': paragraphs defining the explosion date and the inner CSM extent]
    "Then, the explosion date is estimated as the beginning of the rising behavior toward the early bump; −27 d, from the rapid rise observed by ATLAS... The transition of the light curve behavior (i.e., with accelerated rising) at ∼ 13 days after the estimated explosion date indicates that this inner dense CSM component extended up to ∼ 8 × 1014 cm, assuming that this transition took place when the inner CSM was swept up by the shock wave (with vSN ∼ 7000 km s−1)"

    The explosion date is not measured independently; it is set equal to the start of the early bump (t = −27 d), and the 'transition' at ∼13 days is the end of that same bump (t = −12 d). The inner CSM extent is then computed as v_SN × 13 d, so the claimed ∼8e14 cm is just the early-bump duration rescaled by an assumed shock speed. The bump is thus both the phenomenon to be explained and the input that sets the physical scale of the explanation. The paper itself acknowledges the alternative that the bump is a pre-SN outburst (same section), under which the inner-dense-CSM inference and the longer rise time would not follow. Because the authors explicitly label this as a hypothesis and the mass-loss rate uses a standard independent formula, the circularity is mild rather than disqualifying.

full rationale

The paper is primarily an observational data paper, and most of its quantitative content is not circular. The mass-loss rate (Section 4.1) uses the standard Chugai & Danziger (1994) formula with adopted, physically motivated inputs (L from SED integration, v_w = 100 km/s, v_SN ≈ 7000 km/s from blackbody fits) and yields a value comparable to previously published estimates for other 09ip-like SNe; no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The self-citations (Moriya & Maeda 2014, Moriya 2015, Gangopadhyay et al. 2025) are used as conceptual references or for methodological analogy, not as an unverified uniqueness theorem, so they are not load-bearing in a circular way. The one genuine circularity concern is the early-bump interpretation in Section 4.2: the explosion date is defined as the start of the early bump, and the inner dense CSM radius is then derived from the duration of that same bump multiplied by an assumed shock velocity. This makes the claimed inner-CSM extent a restatement of the adopted interpretation rather than an independent constraint. However, the authors are transparent about this, explicitly weighing the pre-SN-outburst alternative and proceeding with the SN-CSM-interaction hypothesis, so the result is presented as a plausible scenario rather than a forced derivation. Overall circularity is therefore low: score 2.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The mass-loss rate, CSM extent, and two-component CSM scenario rest on several adopted or fitted parameters (z, T_cold, epsilon, v_w, t_exp, v_SN) and on the interpretive choice that the early bump is the onset of SN-CSM interaction. The CSM components are inferred postulates with no independent evidence.

free parameters (6)
  • Redshift z = 0.0173
    Taken from the TNS classification, determined from the H-alpha line since the host redshift is unpublished; all absolute magnitudes and luminosities depend on this distance.
  • Cold blackbody temperature T_cold = 3000 K
    Fixed to 3000 K in the two-component BB fit, adopted from Margutti et al. (2014) for SN 2009ip, not fitted to SN 2023vbg.
  • Energy conversion efficiency epsilon = 0.5
    Assumed in the mass-loss rate formula (Eq. 1); a typical but unconstrained value for this SN.
  • Wind velocity v_w = 100 km/s
    Adopted as a typical LBV wind velocity; the CSM extent and mass-loss rate scale with this value.
  • Explosion date t_exp = -27 d relative to o-band peak
    Determined by a quadratic fit to the early-bump rise in ATLAS o-band; no uncertainty quoted. Used as t=0 in Figure 9 and to compute the CSM extent.
  • Ejecta/shock velocity v_SN = 7000 km/s
    Derived from the BB radius evolution; used in Eq. (1) and to convert the 13-day rise to the 8e14 cm inner CSM extent. Its uncertainty is not propagated.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Type IIn SN luminosity is powered by shock interaction with pre-existing CSM, not primarily by radioactive decay.
    Standard framework for Type IIn SNe (Chugai & Danziger 1994; Gal-Yam 2017; Smith 2017), used in Eq. (1) and the interpretation.
  • ad hoc to paper The early bump marks the start of the SN-CSM interaction (the explosion date) rather than a pre-SN outburst.
    Section 4.2: the authors weigh two possibilities and proceed with the SN-CSM interaction hypothesis based on energetics and the spectrum, then use it as t_exp for all subsequent comparisons.
  • domain assumption The blackbody radius expansion velocity (about 7000 km/s) represents the SN ejecta/shock velocity through the CSM.
    Used to convert the 13-day interval into the 8e14 cm inner CSM radius; the photospheric BB radius may not track the shock.
  • domain assumption The H-alpha P-Cygni absorption at -2500 km/s in the earliest spectrum traces the CSM or ejecta velocity structure.
    Used for spectral comparison and interpretation of the line profile components in Section 3.6 and Figure 7.
invented entities (2)
  • Dense inner CSM component
    purpose: Explains the early bump and the longer rise-to-peak timescale; inferred from the light curve and assumed shock velocity.
    No direct measurement (e.g., extinction or radio); its extent (about 8e14 cm) depends on assumed t_exp and v_SN. The paper speculates other objects may have one closer in, which is not falsifiable at present.
  • Extended smooth outer CSM component
    purpose: Explains the smooth post-peak decline and the absence of broad spectral components; inferred from the light curve decay.
    Inferred from the lack of bumps in the decline and the lack of broad H-alpha; no independent probe such as radio or X-ray data is presented.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of SN 2023vbg: A Type IIn Supernova Resembling SN 2009ip, with a Long-Duration Precursor and Early-Time Bump." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4XVJGGQN

@misc{pith2026250415988,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: SN 2023vbg: A Type IIn Supernova Resembling SN 2009ip, with a Long-Duration Precursor and Early-Time Bump},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4XVJGGQN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.15988}
}
read the original abstract

Type IIn supernovae (SNe) resembling SN 2009ip (09ip-like SNe) originate from the interaction between circumstellar material (CSM) and the ejecta. This subclass not only shares similar observational properties around the maximum, but is commonly characterized by a long-duration precursor before its maximum. Investigating the observed properties of the precursor provides constraints on the mass-loss history of the progenitor. We present observational data of SN 2023vbg, a 09ip-like type IIn SN that displayed unique observational properties compared to other 09ip-like SNe. SN 2023vbg showed a long-duration precursor at approximately Mg = -14 mag lasting for about 100 days, followed by a bright bump at Mg = -17 mag at 12-25 days before the maximum. The luminosity of the precursor is similar to those of other 09ip-like SNe, but the bright bump has not been observed in other cases. After reaching the peak luminosity, the light curve exhibited a relatively smooth decline. While the H-alpha profile displays two velocity components (approximately 500 and 3000 km/s), a broad component observed in other 09ip-like SNe was not seen, though it may emerge later. We suggest that these properties are explained by the difference in the CSM structure as compared to other 09ip-like SNe; SN 2023vbg had an inner denser CSM component, as well as generally smooth CSM density distribution on a more extended scale, than in the others. Such diversity of CSM likely reflects the diversity of pre-SN outbursts, which in turn may mirror the range of evolutionary pathways in the final stages of the progenitors.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.15988 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Multi-band light curves of SN 2023vbg. The vertical axis for UBV JHKs bands is in Vega magnitudes, while the gcro bands are in AB magnitudes. The circular data points represent data obtained at the Iriki Observa￾tory, square data points correspond to ZTF, and downward triangles indicate ATLAS data and downward open trian￾gles denote 3σ upper limits from ATLAS. Diamonds repre￾sent UVOT data, while pentagons correspon… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Pre-SN (precursor) phase r-band light curve of SN 2023vbg. For the comparison, we also plot the R-band light curve of SN 2009ip (Pastorello et al. 2013). Observation up to 1500 days before the SN peak were obtained as a part of the ZTF survey. We binned the observational data at each epoch into 10-day intervals. The 5σ upper limits are plotted as gray triangles, while detected observations are shown as filled circle… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Comparison of r/R/o-band light curve of SN 2023vbg with SNe IIn 2009ip, 2010mc, 2015bh, 2016bdu and IIn/Ibn 2021foa. The r/R-band is represented by filled cir￾cles, while the o-band is shown as open circles and downward open triangles denote 3σ upper limits. The data for the com￾parison objects have been corrected for extinction using the extinction values provided in each reference. nent had a temperature of approx… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Upper panel: The evolution of the black body temperature estimated from the black body fitting. The black points represent the high-temperature component (‘hot’), while the blue points represent the low-temperature component (‘cold’). The temperature of cold component …
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Spectroscopic evolution of SN 2023vbg. Each spectrum is labeled with the phase at which it was obtained and the telescope used for the observation. The thick gray lines indicate atmospheric absorption. The obtained spectra show no significant evolution, with narrow emi…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: A zoomed-in view of the Hα profile. The horizon￾tal axis represents velocity, and the plot focuses on the region around Hα. The red dashed lines denote ±2500 km s−1 , while the blue dashed lines denote ±3700 km s−1 . Each epoch is given relative to the SN peak, as in …
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Upper: Comparison of early spectra of SN 2023vbg (t = −13 and 26 d) with spectra of 09ip-like objects. The phase of each spectrum is labeled to the right, indicating the number of days since the respective peak as referenced in the literature. Lower: Comparison of late…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Comparing the r/R/o-band light curves of SN 2023vbg with those of other 09ip-like objects. Unlike in Fig￾ure 6, t = 0 here corresponds to the estimated explosion date for each object. For SN 2023vbg, we define t = 0 at its last non-detection. Also, downward open triang…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Red Supergiant Mass Loss and Mass-Loss Rates

    astro-ph.SR 2025-07 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

    A synthesis review concluding that red supergiant mass loss is gravity-driven, metallicity-independent in rate, and bimodal, with low-mass stars keeping their mantles to core collapse and massive stars shedding them t...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 6 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eprint howpublished institution journal key month number organization pages publisher school series title misctitle type volume year version url label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts ...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION format.url url empty "" new.block "" url * "" * if FUNCTION format.eprint eprint empty "" archivePrefix empty "" archivePrefix "arXiv" = new.block " " eprint * " " * new.block " " eprint * " " * if if if FUNCTION format.doi doi empty "" " " doi * " " * if FUNCTION format.pid doi empty eprint empty ur...

  3. [3]

    - [1] #1 = = ^ ^ ^ .\!\!^ d .\!\!^ h .\!\!^ m .\!\!^ s .\!\!^ @mss

    thebibliography [1] 20pt to REFERENCES 6pt =0pt -12pt 10pt plus 3pt =0pt =0pt =1pt plus 1pt =0pt =0pt -12pt =13pt plus 1pt =20pt =13pt plus 1pt \@M =10000 =-1.0em =0pt =0pt 0pt =0pt =1.0em @enumiv\@empty 10000 10000 `\.\@m \@noitemerr \@latex@warning Empty `thebibliography' environment \@ifnextchar \@reference \@latexerr Missing key on reference command E...

    2021

  4. [4]

    P., Gonz \'a lez-Gait \'a n , S., Hamuy , M., et al

    Anderson , J. P., Gonz \'a lez-Gait \'a n , S., Hamuy , M., et al. 2014, , 786, 67, 10.1088/0004-637X/786/1/67

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/786/1/67 2014

  5. [5]

    C., Kulkarni , S

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

    doi:10.1088/1538-3873/aaecbe 2019

  6. [6]

    J., Fraser , M., Johansson , J., et al

    Brennan , S. J., Fraser , M., Johansson , J., et al. 2022, , 513, 5642, 10.1093/mnras/stac1243

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1243 2022

  7. [7]

    J., Barmentloo , S., Schulze , S., et al

    Brennan , S. J., Barmentloo , S., Schulze , S., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.08768, 10.48550/arXiv.2503.08768

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2503.08768 2025

  8. [8]

    A., Clayton , G

    Cardelli , J. A., Clayton , G. C., & Mathis , J. S. 1989, , 345, 245, 10.1086/167900

    doi:10.1086/167900 1989

Show all 55 references
  1. [9]

    2021, , 162, 231, 10.3847/1538-3881/ac0ef1

    Carrasco-Davis , R., Reyes , E., Valenzuela , C., et al. 2021, , 162, 231, 10.3847/1538-3881/ac0ef1

    2021 doi

  2. [10]

    N., & Danziger , I

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

    1994 doi

  3. [11]

    2016, , 463, 3894, 10.1093/mnras/stw2253

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

    2016 doi

  4. [12]

    Filippenko , A. V. 1997, , 35, 309, 10.1146/annurev.astro.35.1.309

    1997 doi

  5. [13]

    2021, , 161, 242, 10.3847/1538-3881/abe9bc

    F \"o rster , F., Cabrera-Vives , G., Castillo-Navarrete , E., et al. 2021, , 161, 242, 10.3847/1538-3881/abe9bc

    2021 doi

  6. [14]

    E., Pignata , G., et al

    Forster , F., Bauer , F. E., Pignata , G., et al. 2023, Transient Name Server Discovery Report, 2023-2596, 1

    2023

  7. [15]

    L., et al

    Fransson, C., Sollerman, J., Strotjohann, N. L., et al. 2022, Astronomy &amp; Astrophysics, 666, A79, 10.1051/0004-6361/202243452

    2022 doi

  8. [16]

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

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

    2020 doi

  9. [17]

    2013, , 433, 1312, 10.1093/mnras/stt813

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

    2013 doi

  10. [18]

    2017, in Handbook of Supernovae, ed

    Gal-Yam , A. 2017, in Handbook of Supernovae, ed. A. W. Alsabti & P. Murdin , 195, 10.1007/978-3-319-21846-5_35

    2017 doi

  11. [19]

    J., et al

    Gangopadhyay , A., Dukiya , N., Moriya , T. J., et al. 2025, , 537, 2898, 10.1093/mnras/staf187

    2025 doi

  12. [20]

    J., Kulkarni , S

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

    2019 doi

  13. [21]

    L., Sand , D

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

    2014 doi

  14. [22]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.07287, 10.48550/arXiv.2411.07287

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

    2024 doi arXiv

  15. [23]

    2023, , 955, L8, 10.3847/2041-8213/acf299

    Hiramatsu , D., Tsuna , D., Berger , E., et al. 2023, , 955, L8, 10.3847/2041-8213/acf299

    2023 doi

  16. [24]

    M., Tyson , J

    Ivezi \'c , Z ., Kahn , S. M., Tyson , J. A., et al. 2019, , 873, 111, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab042c

    2019 doi

  17. [25]

    V., Dessart , L., Margutti , R., et al

    Jacobson-Gal \'a n , W. V., Dessart , L., Margutti , R., et al. 2023, , 954, L42, 10.3847/2041-8213/acf2ec

    2023 doi

  18. [26]

    E., Sand , D

    Jencson , J. E., Sand , D. J., Andrews , J. E., et al. 2022, , 935, L33, 10.3847/2041-8213/ac867c

    2022 doi

  19. [27]

    2012, , 744, 10, 10.1088/0004-637X/744/1/10

    Kiewe , M., Gal-Yam , A., Arcavi , I., et al. 2012, , 744, 10, 10.1088/0004-637X/744/1/10

    2012 doi

  20. [28]

    M., et al

    Margutti , R., Milisavljevic , D., Soderberg , A. M., et al. 2014, , 780, 21, 10.1088/0004-637X/780/1/21

    2014 doi

  21. [29]

    J., Laher , R

    Masci , F. J., Laher , R. R., Rusholme , B., et al. 2019, , 131, 018003, 10.1088/1538-3873/aae8ac

    2019 doi

  22. [30]

    2019, , 71, 102, 10.1093/pasj/psz087

    Matsubayashi , K., Ohta , K., Iwamuro , F., et al. 2019, , 71, 102, 10.1093/pasj/psz087

    2019 doi

  23. [31]

    C., Smith , N., Filippenko , A

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

    2013 doi

  24. [32]

    Moriya , T. J. 2015, , 803, L26, 10.1088/2041-8205/803/2/L26

    2015 doi

  25. [33]

    J., & Maeda , K

    Moriya , T. J., & Maeda , K. 2014, , 790, L16, 10.1088/2041-8205/790/2/L16

    2014 doi

  26. [34]

    2024, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol

    Nagayama , T., & Nakaya , H. 2024, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 13096, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy X, ed. J. J. Bryant , K. Motohara , & J. R. D. Vernet , 130963I, 10.1117/12.3016593

    2024 doi

  27. [35]

    2020, , 637, A73, 10.1051/0004-6361/201936097

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

    2020 doi

  28. [36]

    O., Sullivan , M., Cenko , S

    Ofek , E. O., Sullivan , M., Cenko , S. B., et al. 2013, , 494, 65, 10.1038/nature11877

    2013 doi

  29. [37]

    2013, , 767, 1, 10.1088/0004-637X/767/1/1

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

    2013 doi

  30. [38]

    S., Fraser , M., et al

    Pastorello , A., Kochanek , C. S., Fraser , M., et al. 2018, , 474, 197, 10.1093/mnras/stx2668

    2018 doi

  31. [39]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.23123, 10.48550/arXiv.2503.23123

    Pastorello , A., Reguitti , A., Tartaglia , L., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.23123, 10.48550/arXiv.2503.23123

    2025 doi arXiv

  32. [40]

    2024, Transient Name Server AstroNote, 22, 1

    P \'e rez-Fournon , I., & Poidevin , F. 2024, Transient Name Server AstroNote, 22, 1

    2024

  33. [41]

    2024, Astronomy &amp; Astrophysics, 686, A231, 10.1051/0004-6361/202348679

    Reguitti, A., Pignata, G., Pastorello, A., et al. 2024, Astronomy &amp; Astrophysics, 686, A231, 10.1051/0004-6361/202348679

    2024 doi

  34. [42]

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

    2005 doi

  35. [43]

    2021, , 161, 141, 10.3847/1538-3881/abd5c1

    S \'a nchez-S \'a ez , P., Reyes , I., Valenzuela , C., et al. 2021, , 161, 141, 10.3847/1538-3881/abd5c1

    2021 doi

  36. [44]

    F., & Finkbeiner , D

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

    2011 doi

  37. [45]

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

    1990

  38. [46]

    H., Porterfield , B

    Siegel , M. H., Porterfield , B. L., Linevsky , J. S., et al. 2014, , 148, 131, 10.1088/0004-6256/148/6/131

    2014 doi

  39. [47]

    2014, , 52, 487, 10.1146/annurev-astro-081913-040025

    Smith , N. 2014, , 52, 487, 10.1146/annurev-astro-081913-040025

    2014 doi

  40. [48]

    2017, in Handbook of Supernovae, ed

    ---. 2017, in Handbook of Supernovae, ed. A. W. Alsabti & P. Murdin , 403, 10.1007/978-3-319-21846-5_38

    2017 doi

  41. [49]

    C., & Prieto , J

    Smith , N., Mauerhan , J. C., & Prieto , J. L. 2014, , 438, 1191, 10.1093/mnras/stt2269

    2014 doi

  42. [50]

    Stetson , P. B. 1987, , 99, 191, 10.1086/131977

    1987 doi

  43. [51]

    D., Sollerman , J., et al

    Taddia , F., Stritzinger , M. D., Sollerman , J., et al. 2013, , 555, A10, 10.1051/0004-6361/201321180

    2013 doi

  44. [52]

    C., de Ugarte Postigo , A., Leloudas , G., et al

    Th \"o ne , C. C., de Ugarte Postigo , A., Leloudas , G., et al. 2017, , 599, A129, 10.1051/0004-6361/201629968

    2017 doi

  45. [53]

    L., Denneau , L., Heinze , A

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

    2018 doi

  46. [54]

    Vink , J. S. 2018, , 619, A54, 10.1051/0004-6361/201833352

    2018 doi

  47. [55]

    Wise , J., Hinds , K., Perley , D., Bochenek , O., & Rich , R. M. 2024, Transient Name Server Classification Report, 2024-82, 1

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.