Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

What triggers type Ia supernovae: Prompt detonations from primordial black holes or companion stars?

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that collisions between white dwarfs and asteroid-mass primordial black holes reproduce all major rate distributions of normal type Ia supernovae, and that this dark-matter ignition channel is favored over binary double…

desk verdict Real forward-modeling step, but the 21-sigma headline is not supported by the paper's own statistics. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.21256 v2 pith:GD7ZZJK3 submitted 2025-05-27 astro-ph.CO astro-ph.HEgr-qchep-phhep-th

Heinrich Steigerwald This is my paper
classification astro-ph.COastro-ph.HEgr-qchep-phhep-th
keywords typeIasupernovaeprimordialblackholeswhitedwarfdetonationdarkmatternickel-56massdistributiondelaytimeasteroid-massSNprogenitors
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 normal type Ia supernovae are ignited not by a binary companion but by the passage of an asteroid-mass primordial black hole through a white dwarf. The author builds collision-rate simulations spanning white-dwarf masses, host galaxy stellar masses, galactocentric offsets, and cosmic time, and compares the predicted rate distributions with literature observations. The central result is that a two-parameter log-normal black-hole mass function centered near $\log m_c = 21.13$ (with $m_c$ in grams) reproduces the observed nickel-56 mass distribution, delay-time distribution, volumetric rate history, host-offset distributions, and host-mass distribution simultaneously. The same data disfavor the standard double-detonation binary scenario at more than $21\sigma$ under all eight modeling-assumption combinations tested. If the paper is right, the long-standing progenitor problem is resolved by making SN Ia ignition a dark-matter phenomenon, at the price of a black-hole mass scale that is not predicted from first principles.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the primordial-black-hole--white-dwarf prompt-detonation ignition cross section, a radius $R_m(m_w, m_\bullet, X_C)$ inside which the shock from the infalling compact object exceeds the quasi-nuclear statistical equilibrium detonation velocity of degenerate carbon-oxygen matter. This cross section enters a rate equation for the number of white dwarfs per mass and galactocentric shell, so the collision rate scales with the local dark-matter density and with the log-normal black-hole mass function $\phi(m_\bullet)$. The same rate machinery, using a literature double-detonation delay-time distribution, generates the comparison scenario. The ignition efficiency is fixed at $\alpha = 5$ by matching the deflagration ignition cross section in massive white dwarfs.

What would settle it

Run a multidimensional hydrodynamical simulation of a $\sim 10^{21}$ g black hole crossing a $\sim 1\,M_\odot$ carbon-oxygen white dwarf and resolve the shocked region: a quenched deflagration would invalidate the central mechanism. Independently, a gamma-ray burst lensing parallax survey sensitive to $\sim 10^{21}$ g objects would directly test whether the inferred dark-matter population exists.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that the long-unexplained distribution of peak brightnesses of normal type Ia supernovae, together with their delay-time distribution, cosmic rate history, host-offset distributions, and host-mass distribution, can all be reproduced by one mechanism: a white dwarf in a dark-matter halo is struck by a compact object of roughly $10^{21}$ grams, and the resulting shock crosses the detonation threshold so the star burns supersonically. The mass function that does this work is log-normal, with $\log m_c = 21.13 \pm 0.12\,(\mathrm{sys}) \pm 0.05\,(\mathrm{stat})$ and width $\sigma_c = 0.40 \pm 0.20\,(\mathrm{sys}) \pm 0.10\,(\mathrm{stat})$. The same machinery, fed with the literature double-detonation delay-time distribution, fits the observations far worse; across eight combinations of star-formation history, initial mass function, initial-final mass relation, Iax contamination, and nickel-mass dispersion, the primordial-black-hole scenario is preferred at more than $21\sigma$. The paper identifies its main result as the consistency of the rate distributions with observations, with the only severe contradiction being that the inferred black-hole mass scale is unpredicted from first principles.

Load-bearing premise

The entire rate prediction inherits the prompt-detonation ignition cross section from the author's earlier work, including the adopted ignition efficiency $\alpha = 5$; if the burning actually stalls as a quenched subsonic deflagration rather than detonating supersonically, the fitted black-hole masses and the $21\sigma$ preference lose their basis.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the paper is right, normal type Ia supernovae need no binary companion at all, explaining the absence of companion ejecta interaction signatures in observations.
  • Supernova rate surveys become a probe of the asteroid-mass primordial black hole mass function and of dark-matter density inside galaxies, because the predicted rate is proportional to the local dark-matter density.
  • The width-luminosity relation and the skewed nickel-56 mass distribution follow from white-dwarf mass and ignition-threshold physics rather than from binary population statistics, removing the need for fine tuning.
  • All known binary ignition channels, represented here by the double-detonation scenario, are disfavored by the rate-distribution data at more than $21\sigma$ across the modeling assumptions tested.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Not in the paper: if the fitted mass function is taken at face value, SN Ia catalogs could be cross-correlated with dark-matter halos to map halo density profiles, because the host-offset distributions computed here are exactly the observable that carries that signal.
  • Not in the paper: the paper's interpretation of the low-mass tail of the nickel distribution as lighter white dwarfs needing heavier black holes predicts a measurable anti-correlation between SN Ia brightness and local dark-matter density that volumetric samples could test.
  • Not in the paper: the best-fit width $\sigma_c = 0.40$ brackets the critical-collapse value 0.26, so a sharper measurement of the nickel-distribution shape could distinguish inflationary log-normal production from critical collapse.
  • Not in the paper: since the inferred peak mass shifts by 0.18 dex per unit change in the ignition efficiency $\alpha$, an independent multidimensional hydrodynamical determination of $\alpha$ would either tighten or dissolve the claimed statistical preference.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes that collisions between white dwarfs (WDs) and asteroid-mass primordial black holes (PBHs), which trigger prompt detonations, can explain the observed rate distributions of normal type Ia supernovae (SNe Ia). The author builds a forward model that convolves WD populations, galactic dark-matter densities, and PBH mass functions to predict the 56Ni-mass distribution, cluster delay-time distribution, volumetric rate history, host-offset distributions, and host-mass distribution. These predictions are compared with literature data for eight combinations of modeling assumptions, and the PBH scenario is compared with a double-degenerate (DD) scenario using chi-square minimization and the Akaike information criterion. The paper claims that the PBH rate distributions are consistent with observations and that PBH ignition is favored over DD ignition at more than 21 sigma confidence, with a best-fit log-normal PBH mass function peaking at log mc = 21.13 +/- 0.12 g and width sigma_c = 0.40 +/- 0.20.

Significance. If the central claims were fully supported, the paper would be highly significant: it would identify a dark-matter mechanism for SN Ia ignition, populate the asteroid-mass PBH window, and resolve a long-standing progenitor problem. The modeling framework is ambitious and physically transparent: it covers WD mass, host stellar mass, galactocentric offset, and cosmic time in a single simulation, and it tests eight systematic variations of star formation history, IMF, IFMR, Iax contribution, and 56Ni dispersion. The use of a wide set of literature rate distributions as benchmarks is a strength. However, the significance is conditional: the two headline claims rest on an unverified ignition cross-section from the author's prior work, and the absolute quality of the fits is poor even for the best PBH models. The paper is therefore better viewed as a proof-of-concept for a PBH-trigger scenario than as a demonstrated resolution of the SN Ia progenitor problem.

major comments (4)
  1. [Supplemental Material, Table SII] The claim in the Summary and discussion that 'rate distributions are consistent with observations' is not supported by the reported fits. For the restricted sample, the best PBH model (PBH2d) has total chi-square 204.1 for 47 bins, i.e. reduced chi-square about 4.4 after accounting for two fitted parameters. Per-distribution values are also poor: HOD contributes 32.2 for 8 bins, HND 15.1 for 5 bins, and HMD 43.6 for 13 bins. The AIC comparison therefore shows only that the PBH model is less bad than the DD model, not that the model is an adequate description of the data. The wording 'consistent' should be replaced by a quantitative statement of goodness-of-fit, and the main result should be reframed accordingly.
  2. [Eq. (2) and Supplemental Material SI] The entire rate prediction and the fitted parameters (log mc, sigma_c in Eq. 15) flow through the ignition cross-section radius Rm(mw, m_bh, XC) inherited from the author's prior PRL [15]. The Supplemental Material verifies only the scaling xi_perp proportional to XC^-2 (Fig. S4) and justifies alpha = 5 by matching the deflagration ignition cross-section (Fig. S2); it does not demonstrate that a self-sustained prompt detonation actually occurs. The mechanism is contested by Montero-Camacho et al. [14], and the paper itself cites Kushnir et al. [21] for tension with the observed t0-MNi56 relation. If Rm is incorrect, the fitted parameters, the predicted distributions, and the 21-sigma preference all lose their quantitative meaning. The paper should either provide independent verification of the cross-section or explicitly present all results as conditional on this unverified assumption, with a sensitivity study treating detonation and deflagration as separate cases.
  3. [Abstract and Eq. (S7)] The abstract's claim that the brightness distribution 'comes out without finetuning' is not supported, because the 56Ni-mass distribution is one of the six distributions entering the joint chi-square in Eq. (S7), and the two PBH parameters (log mc, sigma_c) are fitted to all six distributions simultaneously. The NMD is therefore a fitted output, not an a priori prediction. A genuine test would fix the PBH parameters using, for example, the VRH, DTD, HOD, HND, and HMD data and then compare the predicted NMD. In addition, the mNi(mw) relation used in Eq. (5) is itself a fit to hydrodynamical simulation results (Fig. S5), adding a further fitted ingredient. The 'without finetuning' phrasing should be removed or explicitly qualified.
  4. [Parameter fitting and scenario comparison] The conversion from AIC differences to 'more than 21 sigma' via p = exp(Delta AIC / 2) conflates relative model comparison with absolute goodness of fit. With best-fit reduced chi-square near 4, the very large Delta AIC is driven primarily by the DD model being catastrophically bad, not by the PBH model being statistically acceptable. The reported significance also does not incorporate systematic uncertainties in the data binning, survey selection, or the modeling assumptions, despite the large spread of chi-square values across the eight models in Table SII. The authors should report absolute goodness-of-fit statistics and use a model-comparison framework that accounts for model inadequacy, or at minimum state clearly that the significance is a relative likelihood under the assumed models.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Simulation setup] In the cosmology line, 'H0 = 70 km s^-1 Mpc^-3' should read 'H0 = 70 km s^-1 Mpc^-1'.
  2. [Simulation setup] The phrase 'the evolution equation maybe setup as' should be 'the evolution equation may be set up as'.
  3. [Fig. 1b] The legend label 'Friedman+18' is inconsistent with reference [6], which is 'Friedmann and Maoz'; please standardize.
  4. [Supplemental Material, Data analysis] In the HOD section, 'Palomer Transient Facility' should be 'Palomar Transient Facility'.
  5. [Supplemental Material, Fig. S5 caption] The caption contains the typo 'white dwar mass'; it should be 'white dwarf mass'.
  6. [Acknowledgments] The funding agency name appears as 'F APES/CAPES'; this should be 'FAPES/CAPES'.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

The 'brightness distribution comes out without fine-tuning' headline is weakened because the NMD is one of the six distributions minimized in Eq. (S7); the broader framework is a forward model with self-cited but non-circular inputs.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Abstract; Eq. (5); Sec. SII Eqs. (S1) and (S7); Summary and discussion]
    "Most strikingly, the so far unexplained brightness distribution comes out without fine-tuning. [...] Finally, we define the total chi square function χ2_All ≡ χ2_NMD + χ2_DTD + χ2_VRH + χ2_HOD + χ2_HND + χ2_HMD. (S7) We minimize this function for both data compilation selections and all eight modeling assumptions to obtain the best-fit PBH models."

    The highlighted 'prediction' — the NMD/brightness distribution — is part of the target function used to fit the model. Equation (5) gives the model NMD; Eq. (S1) defines χ2_NMD against the ZTF NMD data; Eq. (S7) sums χ2_NMD with the other five distribution chi-squares, and this total is minimized over the two PBH parameters log mc and σc. Thus the Fig. 1a agreement is a fitted outcome, not a parameter-free 'comes out' result. The summary's 'rate distributions are consistent with observations (Fig. 1)—which is the main result' shares the same status: each of the six panels is an input to the minimized chi-square.

full rationale

The paper's construction is a forward convolution model: WD formation, radial SFHs, halo profiles, the ignition cross section, and a two-parameter log-normal PBH spectrum enter Eqs. (1)-(12) and are compared with external literature data. The best-fit parameters are then used in an AIC comparison with the DD scenario. This is a normal fitting-and-testing loop rather than a definitional identity. The main circularity-adjacent issue is the abstract and summary presenting the NMD as an unpredicted 'comes out' result when it is one of the six fitted data sets in Eq. (S7). The author's self-citations ([15], [23], [24]) are to prior published work and enter as model inputs, not as restatements of the present conclusions, so they do not make the derivation circular; their physical validity is a correctness risk, not a circularity. There is no imported uniqueness theorem, no ansatz smuggled in solely by self-citation, and no renaming of a known result. The comparison with DD is statistically strong but not circular. Overall, the central claim still has independent content, but the flagship 'brightness without fine-tuning' statement reduces to a fit to the same data, giving a partial circularity score of 4.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The rate framework is a physical forward model: eqs. (1)-(12) evolve WD populations, compute PBH collision rates, and map WD mass to 56Ni yield. What the reader does not pay for upstream: the contested ignition cross section from the author's own prior PRL [15] with the adopted alpha = 5, the radial SFH machinery from companion paper [23], the assumption fPBH = 1, and the fitted log-normal parameters (log mc, sigma_c) that are tuned on the same distributions quoted as predictions. These are the load-bearing inputs not independently established in this Letter.

free parameters (4)
  • log mc (PBH peak mass) = 21.13 +/- 0.12 sys +/- 0.05 stat [grams]
    Peak of the log-normal PBH mass function (eq. 3); fitted by chi-square minimization over the combined rate distributions (eq. S7).
  • sigma_c (log-normal width) = 0.40 +/- 0.20 sys +/- 0.10 stat
    Width of the log-normal PBH mass function; fitted simultaneously with log mc.
  • ignition efficiency alpha = 5 (adopted)
    Cut-off radius for detonation ignition in units of the accretion radius; justified by matching the deflagration cross section (Fig. S2), but alpha in [1,10] shifts log mc by about +/- 0.8 dex and lowers the significance to 5.4 sigma.
  • 56Ni dispersion sigma_Ni = 0.15 M_sun (models 1c/1d/2c/2d only)
    Quadrature sum of estimated 0.10 M_sun core-composition spread, 0.10 M_sun asymmetry/clumping, and 0.05 M_sun extinction; adopted to smear the predicted NMD.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Prompt detonation cross section Rm from [15] with quasi-NSE threshold and alpha = 5
    Eq. (2) depends on Rm; inherited from the author's own PRL, contested by [14] and [21]. Load-bearing for all rate predictions.
  • domain assumption fPBH = 1, all dark matter is asteroid-mass PBHs
    Eq. (2) uses the full DM density; a 0.05 dex change in normalization shifts best-fit log mc by 0.05 dex, so fPBH is degenerate with mc.
  • domain assumption Universal NFW halo profile with isotropic velocities
    Section 'Simulation setup'; cusp-core uncertainty on the volumetric rate cited as ~3% from [24], an author-tested prior.
  • domain assumption Negligible radial migration of WDs between zones
    Valid for typical environments (tau_Ia ~ 0.3 Gyr versus tau_mig ~ 8 Gyr), but the author states it breaks beyond a few half-mass radii, which motivates the 20 kpc data cut.
  • domain assumption mNi(mw) mapping fitted to Shen et al. [18] and Marquardt et al. [40] with XC = 0.3
    Eq. (5) converts WD mass to 56Ni yield; this mapping controls the predicted NMD shape and is taken from simulations, not measured.
  • domain assumption DD comparison baseline: Phi_Ia(tau) model A1 of Ruiter et al. [8], no fitted normalization, nu = 0
    The AIC comparison treats DD as parameter-free; its absolute rate normalization is not adjusted, while the PBH model's normalization is effectively free through mc, potentially biasing the comparison.
invented entities (1)
  • Asteroid-mass PBH population with log mc ~ 21 g and sigma_c ~ 0.4 constituting the dark matter independent evidence
    purpose: Triggers prompt detonations in white dwarfs to explain SN Ia ignition, rates, and brightness distributions
    The mass scale is inferred from the fit, not predicted from first principles (the author concedes this); the external falsifiable handle is GRB lensing parallax with planned missions Daksha and MoonBEAM, plus existing PBH bounds in [22].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of What triggers type Ia supernovae: Prompt detonations from primordial black holes or companion stars?." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GD7ZZJK3

@misc{pith2026250521256,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: What triggers type Ia supernovae: Prompt detonations from primordial black holes or companion stars?},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GD7ZZJK3}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.21256}
}
read the original abstract

We set up and perform collision rate simulations between dark matter in the form of asteroid-mass primordial black holes (PBHs) and white dwarf stars. These encounters trigger prompt detonations and could be the key to solving the ignition mystery of type Ia supernovae. Our framework is flexible enough to cover the full range of progenitor white dwarf masses, host galaxy stellar masses, galactocentric radial offsets, and cosmic time. The rate distribution pattern is consistent with exhaustive literature observational determinations for a slightly extended log-normal PBH mass spectrum. Most strikingly, the so far unexplained brightness distribution comes out without finetuning. We find no severe contradictions, except that the inferred PBH mass scale is unpredicted from first principles.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.21256 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. SN Ia rate distribution predictions for PBH ignition (red-orange curves) and for DD ignition (green curves) with possible [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Sign in 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. Dark-matter-induced transients over cosmic time: The role of star formation history profiles

    astro-ph.GA 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A closed-form formula for star formation histories in galactocentric radial shells is derived from empirical galaxy scaling relations and two star formation history models.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [15]

    Steigerwald and E

    H. Steigerwald and E. Tejeda, Bondi-Hoyle-Lyttleton Ac- cretion in a Reactive Medium: Detonation Ignition and a Mechanism for Type Ia Supernovae, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 011101 (2021), arXiv:2104.07066 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2021

  2. [14]

    Montero-Camacho, X

    P. Montero-Camacho, X. Fang, G. Vasquez, M. Silva, and C. M. Hirata, Revisiting constraints on asteroid- mass primordial black holes as dark matter candi- dates, J. Cosmo. Astropart. Phys. 2019, 031 (2019), arXiv:1906.05950 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv 2019

  3. [21]

    Sub-Chandrasekhar-mass detonations are in tension with the observed $t_0-M_\text{Ni56}$ relation of type Ia supernovae

    D. Kushnir, N. Wygoda, and A. Sharon, Sub- Chandrasekhar-mass detonations are in tension with the observed t 0-MN i56 relation of type Ia super- novae, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Sco. 499, 4725 (2020), arXiv:2008.08592 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2020

  4. [1]

    Hoyle and W

    F. Hoyle and W. A. Fowler, Nucleosynthesis in Super- novae., Astrophys. J. 132, 565 (1960); W. D. Arnett, A Possible Model of Supernovae: Detonation of 12C, Astro- phys. Space Sci. 5, 180 (1969)

    work page 1960

  5. [2]

    I. P. Pskovskii, Light curves, color curves, and expansion velocity of type I supernovae as functions of the rate of brightness decline, Sov. Astron. 21, 675 (1977); M. M. Phillips, The Absolute Magnitudes of Type IA Super- novae, Astrophys. J. Lett. 413, L105 (1993)

    work page 1977

  6. [3]

    A. G. Riess, A. V. Filippenko, P. Challis, A. Cloc- chiatti, A. Diercks, P. M. Garnavich, R. L. Gilliland, C. J. Hogan, S. Jha, R. P. Kirshner, et al., Observa- tional Evidence from Supernovae for an Accelerating Uni- verse and a Cosmological Constant, Astron. J. 116, 1009 (1998), arXiv:astro-ph/9805201 [astro-ph]; S. Perlmut- ter, G. Aldering, G. Goldhab...

    arXiv 1998

  7. [4]

    Z.-W. Liu, F. K. R¨ opke, and Z. Han, Type Ia Super- nova Explosions in Binary Systems: A Review, Re- search in Astronomy and Astrophysics23, 082001 (2023), arXiv:2305.13305 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2023

  8. [5]

    The supernova rate in local galaxy clusters

    F. Mannucci, D. Maoz, K. Sharon, M. T. Botticella, M. Della Valle, A. Gal-Yam, and N. Panagia, The su- pernova rate in local galaxy clusters, Mon. Not. R. As- tron. Sco. 383, 1121 (2008), arXiv:0710.1094 [astro-ph]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2008

Show all 60 references
  1. [6]

    Friedmann and D

    M. Friedmann and D. Maoz, The rate of Type-Ia super- novae in galaxy clusters and the delay-time distribution out to redshift 1.75, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Sco. 479, 3563 (2018), arXiv:1803.04421 [astro-ph.GA]

    2018 arXiv

  2. [7]

    Greiner, C

    J. Greiner, C. Maitra, F. Haberl, R. Willer, J. M. Burgess, N. Langer, J. Bodensteiner, D. A. H. Buck- ley, I. M. Monageng, A. Udalski, H. Ritter, K. Werner, P. Maggi, R. Jayaraman, and R. Vanderspek, A helium- burning white dwarf binary as a supersoft X-ray source, Nature (Lo...

    2023 arXiv

  3. [8]

    A. J. Ruiter, K. Belczynski, S. A. Sim, W. Hillebrandt, C. L. Fryer, M. Fink, and M. Kromer, Delay times and rates for Type Ia supernovae and thermonuclear explo- sions from double-detonation sub-Chandrasekhar mass models, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Sco. 417, 408 (2011), arXiv:1011....

    2011 arXiv

  4. [9]

    Toonen, G

    S. Toonen, G. Nelemans, and S. Portegies Zwart, Supernova Type Ia progenitors from merging double white dwarfs. Using a new population synthesis model, Astron. Astrophys. 546, A70 (2012), arXiv:1208.6446 [astro-ph.HE]

    2012 arXiv

  5. [10]

    Sharon and D

    A. Sharon and D. Kushnir, The ZTF-BTS Type Ia su- pernovae luminosity function is consistent with a single progenitor channel for the explosions, Mon. Not. R. As- tron. Sco. 509, 5275 (2022), arXiv:2109.06219 [astro- ph.HE]

    2022 arXiv

  6. [11]

    A. L. Piro, T. A. Thompson, and C. S. Kochanek, Recon- ciling 56Ni production in Type Ia supernovae with dou- ble degenerate scenarios, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Sco. 438, 3456 (2014), arXiv:1308.0334 [astro-ph.HE]

    2014 arXiv

  7. [12]

    Ghosh and D

    A. Ghosh and D. Kushnir, Confronting double- detonation sub-Chandrasekhar models with the low-luminosity suppression of Type Ia super- novae, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Sco. 515, 286 (2022), arXiv:2110.13169 [astro-ph.HE]

    2022 arXiv

  8. [13]

    P. W. Graham, S. Rajendran, and J. Varela, Dark matter triggers of supernovae, Phys. Rev. D 92, 063007 (2015), arXiv:1505.04444 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  9. [16]

    R. P. Olling, R. Mushotzky, E. J. Shaya, A. Rest, P. M. Garnavich, B. E. Tucker, D. Kasen, S. Margheim, and A. V. Filippenko, No signature of ejecta interaction with a stellar companion in three type Ia supernovae, Nature (London) 521, 332 (2015); J. V. Shields, W. Kerzendorf,...

    2015 arXiv

  10. [17]

    S. A. Sim, F. K. R¨ opke, W. Hillebrandt, M. Kromer, R. Pakmor, M. Fink, A. J. Ruiter, and I. R. Seiten- zahl, Detonations in Sub-Chandrasekhar-mass C+O White Dwarfs, Astrophys. J. Lett. 714, L52 (2010), arXiv:1003.2917 [astro-ph.HE]; S. Blondin, L. Dessart, D. J. Hillier, and...

    2010 arXiv

  11. [18]

    K. J. Shen, D. Kasen, B. J. Miles, and D. M. Townsley, Sub-Chandrasekhar-mass White Dwarf Detonations Re- visited, Astrophys. J. 854, 52 (2018), arXiv:1706.01898 [astro-ph.HE]

    2018 arXiv

  12. [19]

    K. J. Shen, S. Blondin, D. Kasen, L. Dessart, D. M. Townsley, S. Boos, and D. J. Hillier, Non-local Ther- modynamic Equilibrium Radiative Transfer Simulations of Sub-Chandrasekhar-mass White Dwarf Detonations, Astrophys. J. Lett. 909, L18 (2021), arXiv:2102.08238 [astro-ph.HE]

    2021 arXiv

  13. [20]

    Livneh and B

    R. Livneh and B. Katz, Polarization signatures of the head-on collision model for Type Ia supernovae: how much asymmetry is too much?, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Sco. 511, 2994 (2022), arXiv:2109.10371 [astro-ph.HE]

    2022 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Carr and F

    B. Carr and F. K¨ uhnel, Primordial Black Holes as Dark Matter: Recent Developments, Annual Re- view of Nuclear and Particle Science 70, 355 (2020), arXiv:2006.02838 [astro-ph.CO]; B. Carr, K. Kohri, Y. Sendouda, and J. Yokoyama, Constraints on pri- mordial black holes, Report...

    2020 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Steigerwald, Dark-matter-induced transients over cos- mic time: The role of star formation history profiles, Phys

    H. Steigerwald, Dark-matter-induced transients over cos- mic time: The role of star formation history profiles, Phys. Rev. D 111, 123543 (2025), arXiv:2505.21260 [astro-ph.GA]

    2025 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Steigerwald, D

    H. Steigerwald, D. Rodrigues, S. Profumo, and V. Marra, Type Ia supernova magnitude step from the local dark matter environment, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Sco. 510, 4779 (2022), arXiv:2112.09739 [astro-ph.CO]

    2022 arXiv

  17. [25]

    B. P. Moster, R. S. Somerville, C. Maulbetsch, F. C. van den Bosch, A. V. Macci` o, T. Naab, and L. Oser, Con- straints on the Relationship between Stellar Mass and Halo Mass at Low and High Redshift, Astrophys. J. 710, 903 (2010), arXiv:0903.4682 [astro-ph.CO]; G. Girelli, L....

    2010 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Let us briefly discuss systematic uncertainties on the overall rate normalization of eq

    for details). Let us briefly discuss systematic uncertainties on the overall rate normalization of eq. (2). The main uncer- tainty is the ignition efficiency, which was limited to 1 ≲ α ≲ 10 in [15]. Here we adopted α = 5 for theoret- ical reasons given in § SI of [26], nevert...

  19. [27]

    K. J. Shen and L. Bildsten, The Ignition of Carbon Det- onations via Converging Shock Waves in White Dwarfs, Astrophys. J. 785, 61 (2014), arXiv:1305.6925 [astro- ph.HE]

    2014 arXiv

  20. [28]

    F. X. Timmes and S. E. Woosley, The Conductive Prop- agation of Nuclear Flames. I. Degenerate C + O and O + NE + MG White Dwarfs, Astrophys. J. 396, 649 (1992)

    1992

  21. [29]

    A. D. Romero, S. O. Kepler, A. H. C´ orsico, L. G. Althaus, and L. Fraga, Asteroseismological Study of Massive ZZ Ceti Stars with Fully Evolutionary Models, Astrophys. J. 779, 58 (2013), arXiv:1310.4137 [astro-ph.SR]

    2013 arXiv

  22. [30]

    See Supplemental Material (after the bibliography)

  23. [31]

    E. B. Bauer, Carbon-Oxygen Phase Separation in Mod- ules for Experiments in Stellar Astrophysics (MESA) White Dwarf Models, Astrophys. J. 950, 115 (2023), arXiv:2303.10110 [astro-ph.SR]

    2023 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Dolgov and J

    A. Dolgov and J. Silk, Baryon isocurvature fluctuations at small scales and baryonic dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 47, 4244 (1993)

    1993

  25. [33]

    A. M. Green, Microlensing and dynamical constraints on primordial black hole dark matter with an ex- tended mass function, Phys. Rev. D 94, 063530 (2016), arXiv:1609.01143 [astro-ph.CO]; K. Kannike, L. Mar- zola, M. Raidal, and H. Veerm¨ ae, Single field dou- ble inflation and...

    2016 arXiv

  26. [34]

    G. R. Lauffer, A. D. Romero, and S. O. Kepler, New full evolutionary sequences of H- and He-atmosphere massive white dwarf stars using MESA, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Sco. 480, 1547 (2018), arXiv:1807.04774 [astro-ph.SR]

    2018 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Frankel, H.-W

    N. Frankel, H.-W. Rix, Y.-S. Ting, M. Ness, and D. W. Hogg, Measuring Radial Orbit Migration in the Galac- tic Disk, Astrophys. J. 865, 96 (2018), arXiv:1805.09198 [astro-ph.GA]

    2018 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Finally, a deeper understanding of the ignition mechanism [15] can be gained with multidimensional hy- drodynamical simulation; we commend such simulations to the community

    and contributions from dwarf satellite galaxies, which affect the small fraction of events at very large offsets. Finally, a deeper understanding of the ignition mechanism [15] can be gained with multidimensional hy- drodynamical simulation; we commend such simulations to the ...

    2014

  29. [37]

    Lunnan, M

    R. Lunnan, M. M. Kasliwal, Y. Cao, L. Hangard, O. Yaron, J. T. Parrent, C. McCully, A. Gal-Yam, J. S. Mulchaey, S. Ben-Ami, et al., Two New Calcium-rich Gap Transients in Group and Cluster Environments, Astrophys. J. 836, 60 (2017), arXiv:1612.00454 [astro- ph.HE]

    2017 arXiv

  30. [38]

    B. Carr, M. Raidal, T. Tenkanen, V. Vaskonen, and H. Veerm¨ ae, Primordial black hole constraints for ex- tended mass functions, Phys. Rev. D 96, 023514 (2017), arXiv:1705.05567 [astro-ph.CO]

    2017 arXiv

  31. [39]

    K. De, M. M. Kasliwal, A. Tzanidakis, U. C. Fremling, S. Adams, R. Aloisi, I. Andreoni, A. Bagdasaryan, E. C. Bellm, L. Bildsten, et al., The Zwicky Transient Facil- ity Census of the Local Universe. I. Systematic Search for Calcium-rich Gap Transients Reveals Three Related Sp...

    2020 arXiv

  32. [40]

    J. W. Johnson, D. H. Weinberg, F. Vincenzo, J. C. Bird, S. R. Loebman, A. M. Brooks, T. R. Quinn, C. R. Christensen, and E. J. Griffith, Stellar migration and chemical enrichment in the milky way disc: a hybrid model, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Sco. 508, 4484 (2021), arXiv:2103.0983...

    2021 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Strolger, S

    L.-G. Strolger, S. A. Rodney, C. Pacifici, G. Narayan, and O. Graur, Delay Time Distributions of Type Ia Su- pernovae from Galaxy and Cosmic Star Formation His- tories, Astrophys. J. 890, 140 (2020), arXiv:2001.05967 [astro-ph.GA]

    2020 arXiv

  34. [42]

    R. Hill, H. Shariff, R. Trotta, S. Ali-Khan, X. Jiao, Y. Liu, S. K. Moon, W. Parker, M. Paulus, D. A. van Dyk, and L. B. Lucy, Projected distances to host galaxy reduce SNIa dispersion, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Sco. 481, 2766 (2018), arXiv:1612.04417 [astro-ph.GA]

    2018 arXiv

  35. [43]

    P. S. Behroozi, R. H. Wechsler, and C. Conroy, The Aver- age Star Formation Histories of Galaxies in Dark Matter Halos from z = 0-8, Astrophys. J. 770, 57 (2013); On the Lack of Evolution in Galaxy Star Formation Efficiency, Astrophys. J. Lett. 762, L31 (2013), arXiv:1209.3013...

    2013 arXiv

  36. [44]

    We have decomposed these SFHs into radial shells as explained in [23]

    which has been used in the past to calculate SN Ia rates [45]. We have decomposed these SFHs into radial shells as explained in [23]. There are strong theoretical and empirical reasons to believe that the stellar initial mass function (IMF) is not universal, but depends on gas...

  37. [45]

    K. S. Marquardt, S. A. Sim, A. J. Ruiter, I. R. Seiten- zahl, S. T. Ohlmann, M. Kromer, R. Pakmor, and F. K. R¨ opke, Type Ia supernovae from exploding oxygen- neon white dwarfs, Astron. Astrophys. 580, A118 (2015), arXiv:1506.05809 [astro-ph.SR]

    2015 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Wiseman, M

    P. Wiseman, M. Smith, M. Childress, L. Kelsey, A. M¨ oller, R. R. Gupta, E. Swann, C. R. Angus, D. Brout, T. M. Davis, et al., Supernova host galaxies in the dark energy survey: I. Deep coadds, photometry, and stellar masses, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Sco. 495, 4040 (2020), arXiv:2...

    2020 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Kroupa and C

    P. Kroupa and C. Weidner, Galactic-Field Initial Mass Functions of Massive Stars, Astrophys. J. 598, 1076 (2003), arXiv:astro-ph/0308356 [astro-ph]; C. Weid- 8 ner, P. Kroupa, J. Pflamm-Altenburg, and A. Vazdekis, The galaxy-wide initial mass function of dwarf late- type to ma...

    2003 arXiv

  40. [48]

    S. N. Leitner and A. V. Kravtsov, Fuel Efficient Galaxies: Sustaining Star Formation with Stellar Mass Loss, Astro- phys. J. 734, 48 (2011), arXiv:1011.1252 [astro-ph.GA]

    2011 arXiv

  41. [49]

    M. J. Childress, C. Wolf, and H. J. Zahid, Ages of Type Ia supernovae over cosmic time, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Sco. 445, 1898 (2014), arXiv:1409.2951 [astro-ph.CO]

    2014 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Marks, P

    M. Marks, P. Kroupa, J. Dabringhausen, and M. S. Pawlowski, Evidence for top-heavy stellar initial mass functions with increasing density and decreasing metal- licity, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Sco. 422, 2246 (2012), arXiv:1202.4755 [astro-ph.GA]; Z. Yan, T. Jerabkova, and P. Kroup...

    2012 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Since the 56Ni mass inferred from observations [10] might differ from that predicted for given mw [17–19] from event to event for many different reasons (e.g

    of the total low-redshift volumetric rate rIa +rIax, as indicated in table I column 5. Since the 56Ni mass inferred from observations [10] might differ from that predicted for given mw [17–19] from event to event for many different reasons (e.g. core- compositional variations,...

  44. [52]

    We are not aware of published SFH models assuming non-universal IMFs

    We calculated the effects of non-universal IMFs on the WD mass function, but not yet on SFHs. We are not aware of published SFH models assuming non-universal IMFs

  45. [53]

    Umeda, K

    H. Umeda, K. Nomoto, H. Yamaoka, and S. Wanajo, Evolution of 3-9 M solar Stars for Z=0.001-0.03 and Metallicity Effects on Type Ia Supernovae, Astrophys. J. 513, 861 (1999), arXiv:astro-ph/9806336 [astro-ph]

    1999 arXiv

  46. [54]

    H. J. Zahid, G. I. Dima, R.-P. Kudritzki, L. J. Kew- ley, M. J. Geller, H. S. Hwang, J. D. Silverman, and D. Kashino, The Universal Relation of Galactic Chem- ical Evolution: The Origin of the Mass-Metallicity Re- lation, Astrophys. J. 791, 130 (2014), arXiv:1404.7526 [astro-ph.GA]

    2014 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Srivastav, S

    S. Srivastav, S. J. Smartt, M. E. Huber, K. C. Cham- bers, C. R. Angus, T. W. Chen, F. P. Callan, J. H. Gillanders, O. R. McBrien, S. A. Sim, et al., SN 2020kyg and the rates of faint Iax supernovae from ATLAS, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Sco. 511, 2708 (2022), arXiv:2111.09491 [astro-ph.HE]

    2022 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Takaro, R

    T. Takaro, R. J. Foley, C. McCully, W.-f. Fong, S. W. Jha, G. Narayan, A. Rest, M. Stritzinger, and K. McK- innon, Constraining Type Iax supernova progenitor sys- tems with stellar population age dating, Mon. Not. R. As- tron. Sco. 493, 986 (2020), arXiv:1901.05461 [astro- ph.HE]

    2020 arXiv

  49. [57]

    R. Moll, C. Raskin, D. Kasen, and S. E. Woosley, Type Ia Supernovae from Merging White Dwarfs. I. Prompt Det- onations, Astrophys. J. 785, 105 (2014), arXiv:1311.5008 [astro-ph.HE]

    2014 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Bhalerao, D

    V. Bhalerao, D. Sawant, A. Pai, S. Tendulkar, S. Vadawale, D. Bhattacharya, V. Rana, H. K. L. Adalja, G. C. Anupama, S. Bala, et al., Science with the Daksha High Energy Transients Mission, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2211.12052 (2022), arXiv:2211.12052 [astro-ph.HE]

    2022 arXiv

  51. [59]

    C. Hui and MoonBEAM Team, MoonBEAM: A Beyond Earth-orbit Gamma-ray Burst De- tector for Multi-Messenger Astronomy, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, Vol. 53 (2021) p. 315.02; M. Hui, Moon Burst Energetics All-s...

    2021

  52. [60]

    Jung and T

    S. Jung and T. Kim, Gamma-ray burst lensing paral- lax: Closing the primordial black hole dark matter mass window, Physical Review Research 2, 013113 (2020), arXiv:1908.00078 [astro-ph.CO]; P. Gawade, S. More, and V. Bhalerao, On the feasibility of primordial black hole abunda...

    2020 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.