pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.21156 · v1 · pith:52MZU7GUnew · submitted 2026-05-20 · 🌌 astro-ph.SR

The benefit of a multi-band high resolution spectroscopic monitoring for studying stellar transients: the NGC 300 OT2008-1 UVES spectrum as a test case

Elena Mason , Steven N. Shore , Andrea Pastorello , Paolo Di Marcantonio This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-21 01:55 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.SR
keywords stellar transientshigh-resolution spectroscopylow-resolution spectroscopyejecta dynamicsemission line profilesspectroscopic monitoringNGC 300 OT2008-1
0
0 comments X

The pith

High-resolution spectra of stellar transients reveal complex ejecta geometry and dynamics that low-resolution data cannot detect.

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

This paper argues that high-resolution spectroscopic monitoring is necessary to properly characterize the physical conditions and motions in the ejecta of stellar transients. It uses the optical transient NGC 300 OT2008-1 as an example by comparing a low-resolution spectrum and a high-resolution spectrum taken one day apart with no apparent changes between them. The low-resolution data allow secure identification of only a few lines and leave the ejecta energetics at the level of speculation. In contrast, the high-resolution data identify many more emission lines and permit analysis of their profiles, which point to complex geometry and ejecta dynamics that cannot be inferred from low-resolution spectra alone. Line profile studies are impossible with low-resolution spectra and can produce misleading measures, while high-resolution monitoring serves to disentangle components, constrain parameters, and track evolution over time.

Core claim

The central claim is that analysis of the high-resolution spectrum identifies a larger sample of emission lines whose profiles are suggestive of complex geometry and ejecta dynamics, inferences that remain impossible from the low-resolution spectrum. Low-resolution data compromise interpretation by limiting information to bolometric-like studies of the spectral energy distribution and major transitions, while high-resolution data enable precise physical characterization and realistic physical scenarios rather than parameter fitting to oversimplified models. Only one epoch was available in this case, so the new scenario cannot be confirmed without high-resolution spectroscopic monitoring.

What carries the argument

Comparison of emission line identification and profile analysis between a low-resolution spectrum and a high-resolution spectrum of the same stellar transient taken one day apart.

If this is right

  • High-resolution spectra enable secure identification of many more lines than low-resolution spectra.
  • Line profile analysis from high-resolution data can constrain ejecta geometry and dynamics.
  • Low-resolution spectra remain useful for tracking overall spectral energy distribution changes but not for detailed dynamics.
  • Multi-epoch high-resolution monitoring is required to follow transient evolution and test physical scenarios.
  • Without high-resolution data, interpretations favor oversimplified models and leave energetics speculative.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The approach could be extended to other classes of transients to test whether high-resolution monitoring consistently reveals overlooked components.
  • This highlights a broader need for allocating high-resolution telescope time to transient follow-up rather than relying solely on survey-mode low-resolution observations.
  • Single-epoch high-resolution data still leave open questions about time variability that only repeated observations can address.

Load-bearing premise

That the shapes of emission line profiles in a single-epoch high-resolution spectrum can be directly interpreted as evidence of complex geometry and ejecta dynamics without multi-epoch observations or detailed modeling to rule out alternatives.

What would settle it

A later high-resolution spectrum of the same transient that shows no evolution in the line profiles or a detailed radiative transfer model of a simple spherical geometry that reproduces the observed profiles would challenge the inferred complex dynamics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.21156 by Andrea Pastorello, Elena Mason, Paolo Di Marcantonio, Steven N. Shore.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: "Smear-out" effect and inaccurate wavelength solution of the LR spectroscopy (blue line, FORS spectrum) compared to the HR one (black line, UVES spectrum). See Section 3 for more details. In the bottom panel, the FORS spectrum has been offset by the constant +2E￾15 erg/cm2 /s/Å for clarity. flux calibration. The color dependent part is probably ascribed to the fact that FORS uses the telescope LADC (longit… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Line profiles comparison between the transient’s Hβ and [Ca II]λ7291 and the sky emission [O I]λ5577, in the FORS (left panel) and UVES (right panel) spectra. In the left panel, the [O I] sky emission has been scaled to the Hβ (blue solid line) and the [Ca II] emission lines (blue dashed line), to better show that the Hβ wings are resolved, while those of the [Ca II] emission are not. In addition, the Hβ a… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Selection of transitions showing the narrow absorption compo￾nent mirrored by the [Ca II] and [O I] emissions (see text for more de￾tails). The spectrum has been smoothed with a boxcar smoothing func￾tion of width 15 points. Y-axis unit is Flux in erg/cm2 /s/Å. The vertical dotted line marks the +200 km/s velocity roughly matching the mini￾mum of all the observed absorptions. sity -in the narrow component-… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Left Panel: H Balmer and Paschen ε line profiles. Hε of the Balmer series has been omitted since is severely blended with the Ca IIλ3968 line (which is dominating). Right panel: the line ratio of the H lines over Hβ in velocity space. Note the different velocity range adopted for the the left and the right panels, due to the noise in the line ratio at large velocities. The blue and red shaded area, togethe… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Scaled profiles (broad component) of the H Balmer (top) and the Fe II (bottom) lines to the Hα profile. Left panels: the 300OT case showing weak evidence of electron scattering. Right panels: the sym￾biotic nova V1413 Aql (ARAS database, observer: Francois Teyssier), whose wings are indicative of electron scattering. See text for more de￾tails. -500 0 500 1000 -500 0 500 1000 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Examples of line profile evolution in the case of an ejecta ex￾panding in a medium and producing shock emission in the symbiotic recurrent nova RS Oph (left panel), and of ejecta in free expansion as in the classical nova V378 Ser (right panel). The two sequences were obtained at the 2.2+FEROS (R∼48000). Further, the persistence of any CSM absorbing component constrains its distance from the transient and … view at source ↗
read the original abstract

This work advocates the benefit of high resolution spectroscopic monitoring in the study of transients (local group transients given the available collecting power). As an exemplary analysis, we focus on the optical transient NGC300OT2008-1. Searching the ESO archives, we found a low resolution (LR, FORS) and a high resolution (HR, UVES) spectrum that were separated by only one day with no changes between them. The independent analysis of the FORS and UVES spectra show that in the LR spectrum we can securely identify only a small sample of lines and miss the correct characterization of the ejecta energetics which remain at the level of speculation. In the HR data, we identify a larger sample of emission lines and analyze their profiles suggestive of a complex geometry and ejecta dynamics whose inferences are simply impossible in LR spectra. Line profile studies are not possible with LR spectra, and may lead to potentially misleading measures. The limited information available from LR data compromises the interpretation and prevents formulating realistic physical scenarios, favoring parameter fitting to oversimplified, biased, standard models. In this occasion only one epoch was available, but monitoring is fundamental to characterize the transient evolution. The new scenario derived from the analysis of the HR spectrum cannot be confirmed or dismissed lacking a HR spectroscopic monitoring. LR and HR spectra serve different but complementary purposes. With LR one does bolometric-like studies (SED, strengthening or weakening of the major transitions), while with HR one does dynamics and precise physical characterization. HR spectroscopic monitoring on different types of transient has already shown how it serves to disentangle the various components, constrain their physical parameters, the involved energy source, and derive the ejecta dynamics.

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 manuscript advocates for high-resolution spectroscopic monitoring of stellar transients, using NGC 300 OT2008-1 as a test case. It compares an archival low-resolution FORS spectrum with a high-resolution UVES spectrum taken one day later (with no reported changes), showing that LR data permit only limited secure line identifications and leave ejecta energetics speculative, while HR data reveal more emission lines whose profiles suggest complex geometry and dynamics that cannot be inferred from LR spectra. LR and HR are presented as complementary, with HR enabling dynamics studies and the work stressing that multi-epoch HR monitoring is needed to confirm scenarios.

Significance. If substantiated, the work provides a concrete observational demonstration of the additional physical information (larger line sample, profile shapes) accessible only with HR spectra for transients, supporting targeted monitoring strategies with current facilities. The explicit note that the derived scenario requires further HR epochs for confirmation is a positive aspect of the presentation.

major comments (2)
  1. [UVES spectrum analysis] UVES spectrum analysis: The interpretation of line profile shapes (asymmetries, multiple components) as direct evidence for complex geometry and ejecta dynamics is presented without radiative transfer modeling or tests against simpler alternatives such as spherical ejecta with optical-depth or velocity-gradient effects. This is load-bearing for the central claim that such inferences are impossible in LR spectra.
  2. [Discussion section] Discussion section: While the text correctly notes that monitoring is required to confirm the scenario, the headline inferences about complex dynamics and energetics are drawn from this single-epoch comparison without quantitative error analysis on fitted profile parameters or alternative model comparisons.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The time separation (one day) and lack of variability between the FORS and UVES spectra could be stated more explicitly to strengthen the direct comparison.
  2. [Figures] Figure presentation: Spectra comparison figures should include explicit labels for resolution, instrument, and any smoothing applied to aid reader assessment of line identification differences.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments and positive assessment of the manuscript's significance. We address each major comment below, revising the text to better reflect the observational nature of the study and its limitations while maintaining the core demonstration of HR spectroscopy benefits.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: UVES spectrum analysis: The interpretation of line profile shapes (asymmetries, multiple components) as direct evidence for complex geometry and ejecta dynamics is presented without radiative transfer modeling or tests against simpler alternatives such as spherical ejecta with optical-depth or velocity-gradient effects. This is load-bearing for the central claim that such inferences are impossible in LR spectra.

    Authors: We agree that full radiative transfer modeling would strengthen the physical interpretation. However, the manuscript's primary aim is to show that HR spectra reveal profile features (asymmetries, multiple components) unresolved in LR data, making profile-based dynamical inferences impossible from LR spectra regardless of the underlying model. We have revised the relevant sections to qualify the language as 'suggestive of complex geometry' rather than direct evidence, added discussion of possible alternative explanations including optical-depth effects in spherical geometries, and clarified that detailed modeling lies beyond the current observational comparison but is enabled by HR data. revision: partial

  2. Referee: Discussion section: While the text correctly notes that monitoring is required to confirm the scenario, the headline inferences about complex dynamics and energetics are drawn from this single-epoch comparison without quantitative error analysis on fitted profile parameters or alternative model comparisons.

    Authors: We accept that quantitative error analysis improves rigor. The revised manuscript now includes formal uncertainties on fitted velocities and profile parameters from the UVES spectrum. We have also expanded the discussion to explicitly compare with simpler alternatives (e.g., spherical ejecta with velocity gradients) and explain why the observed multi-component profiles are difficult to reconcile with them. The headline claims have been moderated to emphasize the suggestive character of the single-epoch results and the necessity of multi-epoch HR monitoring for confirmation. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: claims rest on direct archival spectral comparison

full rationale

The paper's central argument derives from comparing one LR FORS spectrum and one HR UVES spectrum of NGC 300 OT2008-1 taken one day apart. Larger line sample and profile features are reported as observed facts in the HR data; no equations, fitted parameters, or predictions are constructed that reduce to the inputs by definition. No self-citation load-bearing steps, ansatz smuggling, or renaming of known results appear in the provided text. The derivation is self-contained observational analysis against external archival data.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The analysis rests on standard spectroscopic interpretation techniques and the assumption of no spectral evolution over one day; no new free parameters or invented entities are introduced.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The LR and HR spectra show no changes between them despite being separated by one day.
    Invoked to justify direct comparison of the two datasets as equivalent snapshots.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5861 in / 1294 out tokens · 33244 ms · 2026-05-21T01:55:04.537907+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

88 extracted references · 88 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    M.; Kochanek, C

    Adams, S. M.; Kochanek, C. S.; Prieto, J. L.; et al., 2016, MNRAS, 460, 1645

    work page 2016

  2. [2]

    Akimoto, H.; Itoh, Y., 2019, IJAA, 9, 321,

    work page 2019

  3. [3]

    1997, SPIE, 2871.1135A

    Avila, G.; Rupprecht G.; Beckers, J.M.. 1997, SPIE, 2871.1135A

    work page arXiv 1997

  4. [4]

    F.; Batalha, N

    Batalha, C.; Lopes, D. F.; Batalha, N. M., 2001, ApJ, 548, 377

    work page 2001

  5. [5]

    M.; Chevalier, R

    Berger, E.; Soderberg, A. M.; Chevalier, R. A.; et al., 2009, ApJ, 699, 1850

    work page 2009

  6. [6]

    E.; Bedin, L

    Bond, H. E.; Bedin, L. R.; Bonanos, A. Z.; et al., 2009, ApJ, 695, L154

    work page 2009

  7. [7]

    T.; Pastorello, A.; Smartt, S

    Botticella, M. T.; Pastorello, A.; Smartt, S. J.; et al., 2009, MNRAS 398, 1041

    work page 2009

  8. [8]

    Cai, Y.-Z.; Pastorello, A.; Fraser, M.; et al., 2018 MNRAS, 480, 3424

    work page 2018

  9. [9]

    et al., 2021, A&A, 654, A157

    Cai, Y.-Z.; Pastorello, A.; Fraser, M. ; et al., 2021, A&A, 654, A157

    work page 2021

  10. [10]

    Cassatella, A.; Lamers, H. J. G. L. M.; Rossi, C., 2004, A&A, 420, 571

    work page 2004

  11. [11]

    W.; Johns-Krull, C

    Cauley, P. W.; Johns-Krull, C. M., ApJ, 810, 5

    work page

  12. [12]

    Shore, S

    De Gennaro Aquino, I. ; Shore, S. N. ; Schwarz, G. J.; et al., 2014, A&A, 562, A28

    work page 2014

  13. [13]

    Desidera, S.; Giro, E.; Munari, U.; et al., 2004, A&A, 414, 591

    work page 2004

  14. [14]

    D., 2020, A&A, 642, A33

    Dessart, L.; Hillier, J. D., 2020, A&A, 642, A33

    work page 2020

  15. [15]

    E., 1992, ApJ, 387, 551

    Dwek, E.; Felten, J. E., 1992, ApJ, 387, 551

    work page 1992

  16. [16]

    Ederoclite, A.; Mason, E.; Della Valle, M.; et al., 2006, A&A, 459, 875

    work page 2006

  17. [17]

    F.; Schneider, P

    Erkal, J.; Manara, C. F.; Schneider, P. C.; et al., 2022, A&A, 666, 188

    work page 2022

  18. [18]

    Folha, D. F. M.; Emerson, J. P., 2001, A&A, 365, 90

    work page 2001

  19. [19]

    Friedjung, M., 1966, MNRAS, 132, 317

    work page 1966

  20. [20]

    Friedjung, M., 1987, A&A, 179, 164

    work page 1987

  21. [21]

    Friedjung, M., 1992, A&A, 262, 487

    work page 1992

  22. [22]

    Friedjung, M., 2011, A&A, 536, 97

    work page 2011

  23. [23]

    M.; Dalcanton, J

    Gogarten, S. M.; Dalcanton, J. J.; Murphy, J. W.; et. al, 2009, ApJ, 703, 300

    work page 2009

  24. [24]

    P.; The, P

    Grinin, V. P.; The, P. S.; de Winter, D.; et al., 1994, A&A, 292, 165

    work page 1994

  25. [25]

    Hamilton, Catrina M.; Johns-Krull, Christopher M.; Mundt, Reinhard; et al., 2012, ApJ, 751, 147

    work page 2012

  26. [26]

    M.; Wirstrom, E

    Hajigholi, M.; Persson, C. M.; Wirstrom, E. S.; et al., 2016, A&A, 585, 158

    work page 2016

  27. [27]

    M.; Bond, H E.; Bedin, L

    Humphreys, R. M.; Bond, H E.; Bedin, L. R.; et al., 2011, ApJ, 743, 118

    work page 2011

  28. [28]

    Izzo, L.; Molaro, P.; Mason, E.; et al., 2018a, ATel 11468

    work page

  29. [29]

    Izzo, L.; Molaro, P.; Bonifacio, P.; et al.; 2018b, MNRAS, 478, 1601

    work page

  30. [30]

    E.; Adams, S

    Jencson, J. E.; Adams, S. M.; Bond, H. E.; et al., 2019, ApJ, 880, L20

    work page 2019

  31. [31]

    C.; et al., 2018, MNRAS, 480, 1973

    Kacharov, N.; Neumayer, N.; Seth, A. C.; et al., 2018, MNRAS, 480, 1973

    work page 2018

  32. [32]

    Kaminski, T.; Schmidt, M.; Tylenda, R.; et al., 2009, ApJS, 182, 33

    work page 2009

  33. [33]

    R.; Kasliwal, M

    Karambelkar, V. R.; Kasliwal, M. M.; Blagorodnova, N.; et al., 2023, ApJ, 948, 137

    work page 2023

  34. [34]

    Kashi, A.; Frankowski, A.; Soker, N., 2010, ApJ, 709, L11

    work page 2010

  35. [35]

    S., 2011, ApJ, 741, 37

    Kochanek, C. S., 2011, ApJ, 741, 37

    work page 2011

  36. [36]

    C.; Filippenko, A

    Leonard, D. C.; Filippenko, A. V.; Barth, Aaron J.; Matheson, T., 2000, ApJ, 536, 239

    work page 2000

  37. [37]

    B.; Danziger, I

    Lucy, L. B.; Danziger, I. J.; Gouiffes, C.; Bouchet, P., 1989, LNP, 350, 164

    work page 1989

  38. [38]

    Marconi, A.; Abreu, M.; Adibekyan, V.; et al., 2024, SPIE, 13096, 13

    work page 2024

  39. [39]

    E.; et al

    Mason, E.; Diaz, M.; Williams, R. E.; et al. 2010; A&A, 516, 108

    work page 2010

  40. [40]

    Mason, E.; Munari, U., 2014, A&A, 569, 84

    work page 2014

  41. [41]

    N.; De Gennaro Aquino, I.; et al., 2018, ApJ, 853, 27

    Mason, E.; Shore, S. N.; De Gennaro Aquino, I.; et al., 2018, ApJ, 853, 27

    work page 2018

  42. [42]

    Mason, E.; Shore, S. N. ; Kuin, P. ; Bohlsen, T., 2020, A&A, 635, A115

    work page 2020

  43. [43]

    N., 2022, A&A, 664, A12

    Mason, E.; Shore, S. N., 2022, A&A, 664, A12

    work page 2022

  44. [44]

    Molaro, P.; Izzo, L.; Mason, E.; et al., 2016, MNRAS, 463, L117

    work page 2016

  45. [45]

    Molaro, P.; Izzo, L.; Bonifacio, P.; et al., 2020, MNRAS, 492, 4975

    work page 2020

  46. [46]

    Monard, B., 2022, TNSCR, 463, 1

    work page 2022

  47. [47]

    Moran, S.; Kotak, R.; Fraser, M.; et al., 2024, A&A, 688, A161

    work page 2024

  48. [48]

    R.; McCollum, B.; van den Ancker, M

    Perez, M. R.; McCollum, B.; van den Ancker, M. E.; et al., 2008, A&A, 486, 533

    work page 2008

  49. [49]

    J.; Laming, J

    Orlando, S.; Drake, J. J.; Laming, J. M., 2009, A&A, 493. 1049

    work page 2009

  50. [50]

    Ohsawa, R.; Sakon, I.; Onaka, T.; et al., 2010, ApJ, 718, 1456

    work page 2010

  51. [51]

    Palle, E.; Biazzo, K.; Bolmont, E.; et al.; 2025, ExA, 59, 29

    work page 2025

  52. [52]

    Pastorello A.; Fraser, M., 2019, Nat. Astr. 3, 676

    work page 2019

  53. [53]

    R.; Benetti, S.; et al., 2010, A&A, 510, 108

    Patat, F.; Maund, J. R.; Benetti, S.; et al., 2010, A&A, 510, 108

    work page 2010

  54. [54]

    Pavana, M.; Raj, A.; Bohlsen, T.; et al., 2020, MNRAS, 495, 2075

    work page 2020

  55. [55]

    Pessi, T.; Cartier, R.; Hueichapan, E.; et al., 2024, A&A, 688, L28

    work page 2024

  56. [56]

    L.; Kistler, M

    Prieto, J. L.; Kistler, M. D.; Thompson, T. A.; et al., 2008, ApJ, 681, L9

    work page 2008

  57. [57]

    L.; Sellgren, K.; Thompson, T

    Prieto, J. L.; Sellgren, K.; Thompson, T. A.; Kochanek, C. S., 2009, ApJ, 705, 1425

    work page 2009

  58. [58]

    Roederer, I. U. ; Alvarado-Gómez, J. D.; Allende Prieto, C.; et al.; 2024, ExA, 57, 17

    work page 2024

  59. [59]

    Schipani, P.; Campana, S.; Claudi, R.; et al., 2018, SPIE, 10702E0FS

    work page 2018

  60. [60]

    Shore, S. N. ; Augusteijn, T. ; Ederoclite, A. ; Uthas, H., 2011b, A&A, 533L, 8

    work page

  61. [61]

    Shore, S. N. ; Wahlgren, G. M. ; Augusteijn, T. ; et al., 2011a, A&A, 527A, 98

    work page

  62. [62]

    N.; Wahlgren, G

    Shore, S. N.; Wahlgren, G. M.; Augusteijn, T.; et al., 2012a, A&A, 540A, 55

    work page

  63. [63]

    N., 2012b, BASI, 40, 185

    Shore, S. N., 2012b, BASI, 40, 185

    work page

  64. [64]

    N.; De Gennaro Aquino, I.; Schwarz, G

    Shore, S. N.; De Gennaro Aquino, I.; Schwarz, G. J.; et al., 2013, A&A, 553A, 123

    work page 2013

  65. [65]

    N.; De Gennaro Aquino, I.; Scaringi, S.; et al., 2014, A&A, 570L, 4

    Shore, S. N.; De Gennaro Aquino, I.; Scaringi, S.; et al., 2014, A&A, 570L, 4

    work page 2014

  66. [66]

    N.; Mason, E.; Schwarz, G

    Shore, S. N.; Mason, E.; Schwarz, G. J.; et al., 2016, A&A, 590A, 123

    work page 2016

  67. [67]

    N.; Kuin, N

    Shore, S. N.; Kuin, N. P.; Mason, E.; De Gennaro Aquino, I., 2018, A&A, 619A, 104

    work page 2018

  68. [68]

    J.; et al., 2025, ApJ, 982, L32

    Shrestha, M.; DeSoto, S.; Sand, D. J.; et al., 2025, ApJ, 982, L32

    work page 2025

  69. [69]

    Smith, N.; Ganeshalingam, M.; Chornock, R.; et al., 2009, ApJ, 697, L49

    work page 2009

  70. [70]

    W., Murdin P

    Smith, N., 2017, in Handbook of Supernovae , Alsabti A. W., Murdin P. editors, p. 403

    work page 2017

  71. [71]

    E., 2020, MNRAS, 499, 3544

    Smith, N.; Andrews, J. E., 2020, MNRAS, 499, 3544

    work page 2020

  72. [72]

    J.; et al., 2023, ApJ, 956, 46

    Smith, N.; Pearson, J.; Sand, D. J.; et al., 2023, ApJ, 956, 46

    work page 2023

  73. [73]

    S.; Moriya, T

    Singh, A.; Teja, R. S.; Moriya, T. J.; et al., 2024, ApJ, 975, 132

    work page 2024

  74. [74]

    Soker, N.; Kashi, A., 2012, ApJ, 746, 100

    work page 2012

  75. [75]

    W.-S.; et al., 2018, ATel 11456

    Strader, J.; Chomiuk, L.; Holoien, T. W.-S.; et al., 2018, ATel 11456

    work page 2018

  76. [76]

    D.; Taddia, F.; Fraser, M.; et al., 2020, A&A, 639, A103

    Stritzinger, M. D.; Taddia, F.; Fraser, M.; et al., 2020, A&A, 639, A103

    work page 2020

  77. [77]

    M.; Kochanek, C

    Szczygiel, D. M.; Kochanek, C. S.; Dai, X., 2012, ApJ, 760, 20

    work page 2012

  78. [78]

    A.; Prieto, J

    Thompson, T. A.; Prieto, J. L.; Stanek, K. Z.; et al., 2009, ApJ, 705, 1364

    work page 2009

  79. [79]

    Tylenda, R.; Kamiński, T.; Schmidt, M.; et al., 2011, A&A, 532, 138

    work page 2011

  80. [80]

    K.; Kamiński, T.; Schmidt, M., 2015, A&A, 578, 75

    Tylenda, R.; Górny, S. K.; Kamiński, T.; Schmidt, M., 2015, A&A, 578, 75

    work page 2015

Showing first 80 references.