Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 124 references

Linear spectropolarimetry of 35 Type Ia Supernovae with VLT/FORS: An analysis of the Si II line polarization

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims a linear relation between Si II line polarization and ejecta velocity in Type Ia supernovae.

desk verdict Largest uniform SN Ia spectropolarimetric sample to date, with a new but not airtight velocity–polarization relation; worth serious peer review. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.07526 v1 pith:GXLGPSAU submitted 2019-08-20 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.SR

Aleksandar Cikota , Ferdinando Patat , Lifan Wang , J. Craig Wheeler , Mattia Bulla , Dietrich Baade , Peter Höflich , Stefan Cikota
show 4 more authors
Alejandro Clocchiatti Justyn R. Maund Heloise F. Stevance Yi Yang
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HEastro-ph.SR
keywords TypeIasupernovaespectropolarimetrySiIIlinepolarizationejectaasymmetrydelayeddetonationdoubleq-uloopssupernovaexplosionmodels
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 compiles archival VLT/FORS spectropolarimetry of 35 Type Ia supernovae, 127 epochs in total, and measures the polarization of the Si II $\lambda 6355$ line after removing continuum polarization. It claims a statistically significant linear relation between the maximum Si II line polarization in the window $-11$ to $+1$ days and the Si II expansion velocity at $-5$ days: $p_{\mathrm{Si\,II}} = (6.40\times10^{-5} \pm 1.28\times10^{-5})\,v_{\mathrm{Si\,II},-5} - 0.484 \pm 0.147$ percent, with Pearson $\rho = 0.80$. If true, ejecta kinematics and geometric asymmetry are tightly connected, giving a new constraint on SN Ia explosion models. The paper also reproduces the known $\Delta m_{15}$--$p_{\mathrm{Si\,II}}$ relation with larger scatter, shows subluminous and transitional objects fall below it, reports a polarization dichotomy between Chandrasekhar and sub-Chandrasekhar candidates, and finds $q$--$u$ loop evolution suggesting the silicon distribution gets clumpier with depth.

What carries the argument

The central object is the peak polarization of the Si II $\lambda 6355$ absorption line measured on continuum-subtracted Stokes $q$ and $u$ spectra. Continuum polarization is removed by an \`a trous wavelet decomposition of the ordinary and extraordinary beams into continuum and line scales, followed by vector subtraction; peak values are read after bias correction from spectra binned at 100 \AA, with 25 and 50 \AA bins used for line-complex and $q$--$u$ analyses. Velocities are measured from the absorption minimum of Si II $\lambda 6355$ and interpolated to $-5$ days with a polynomial fit. The relation itself is the load-bearing element: it is tested across multiple epoch windows, holds only before maximum ($\rho \approx 0.8$ pre-peak, $\rho \approx 0.4$ post-peak), and is compared with synthetic polarization from delayed-detonation, double-detonation, and violent-merger simulations.

What would settle it

Re-measure the relation with a homogeneous data set where every supernova is observed at the same epochs relative to B-max, for example daily from $-10$ to $+1$ days, and take the polarization at a fixed epoch such as $-5$ days. If the slope against $v_{\mathrm{Si\,II},-5}$ vanishes or the Pearson coefficient drops well below 0.8, the reported relation is an artifact of sparse and uneven sampling rather than a physical connection.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the peak linear polarization of the Si II $\lambda 6355$ line, measured with 100 \AA binning and corrected for polarization bias, peaks a few days before B-band maximum at levels from about 0.1 to 1.7 per cent. Across the 23 objects with at least one epoch in $-11$ to $+1$ days, the maximum polarization is linearly related to the Si II blueshift velocity at $-5$ days with slope $(6.40\times10^{-5} \pm 1.28\times10^{-5})$ per cent per km s$^{-1}$, intercept $-0.484 \pm 0.147$ per cent, and $\rho = 0.80$; two outliers, SN 2004dt and SN 2003eh, are excluded. The interpretation is that an off-center delayed detonation naturally produces both higher silicon velocities and stronger line polarization, because the detonation front's offset controls how much silicon-rich material sits aspherically above the photosphere. Comparisons in the $\Delta m_{15}$--$v_{\mathrm{Si\,II}}$ plane split the sample into a low-polarization Chandrasekhar-like cluster and higher-polarization candidates above the sub-Chandrasekhar double-detonation predictions, tentatively supporting two explosion channels.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the maximum Si II polarization measured anywhere in the $-11$ to $+1$ day window is a comparable quantity across the 23 supernovae, even though observing cadence ranges from a single epoch to twelve, and no correction to a common epoch is applied.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the velocity--polarization relation is real, a single pre-maximum spectropolarimetric epoch gives a proxy for the ejecta's global asymmetry, not just its line-of-sight velocity.
  • The relation and the $\Delta m_{15}$--$p_{\mathrm{Si\,II}}$ relation together point to off-center delayed-detonation geometry, where the detonation offset sets both silicon speed and chemical clumpiness.
  • The polarization dichotomy between objects above and below the sub-Chandrasekhar double-detonation prediction supports two distinct explosion mechanisms, with average polarizations of $0.15 \pm 0.08$ per cent versus $0.41 \pm 0.16$ per cent.
  • Evolving $q$--$u$ loops imply the silicon distribution is not simply layered; it becomes clumpier with depth, a constraint that total-flux spectroscopy cannot provide.
  • Observed polarization levels match delayed-detonation and double-detonation model predictions, while only SN 2004dt matches the violent-merger predictions.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A dense, homogeneous high-cadence campaign that measures polarization at a common epoch such as $-5$ days for every object could decide whether the reported slope is a physical relation or a sampling-cadence artifact.
  • If the relation holds with a common epoch, the scatter around the fitted line may carry viewing-angle information, since polarization is orientation-dependent while velocity is roughly not.
  • The loop-area evolution could be turned into a quantitative test: three-dimensional explosion models that predict silicon plume structure as a function of depth can be compared with the measured loop areas and their time evolution.
  • The apparent polarization dichotomy in the $\Delta m_{15}$--$v_{\mathrm{Si\,II}}$ plane suggests that future large samples should stratify SN Ia analyses by both brightness decline and velocity, rather than by light-curve shape alone.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. This paper compiles archival VLT/FORS spectropolarimetry for 35 Type Ia supernovae at 127 epochs, measures the Si II λ6355 line polarization after wavelet-based continuum subtraction, and analyzes its time evolution, its relation to Si II velocity and Δm15, q–u loop behavior, and comparisons with DDT, double-detonation, and violent-merger model predictions. The central new claim is Eq. (11): a linear relation between the maximum Si II polarization in a −11 to +1 day window and the Si II velocity at −5 days, with slope (6.40 ± 1.28)×10⁻⁵ %/(km/s), intercept −0.484 ± 0.147, and Pearson ρ = 0.80. The paper also reports that subluminous and transitional objects lie below the Δm15–pSiII relation, finds a polarization dichotomy between objects above and below the Polin et al. double-detonation line in the Δm15–vSiII plane, documents q–u loop evolution in several well-sampled objects, and derives an upper limit on the intrinsic continuum polarization.

Significance. If Eq. (11) is robust, it is a new and interesting observational constraint connecting ejecta kinematics to the geometry of the Si II line-forming region, and it sharpens the comparison among SN Ia explosion models. The paper's strengths include the largest systematically reduced sample of SN Ia spectropolarimetry to date, explicit treatment of polarization bias correction and binning choices, a reproduction of the Δm15–pSiII relation with an independent and larger sample, new quantitative q–u loop area measurements, and quantitative model comparisons. The main weakness is that the headline v–p relation uses a maximum-within-window polarization without correcting for heterogeneous observing cadence, and the paper itself states that no common time-evolution pattern exists; this is load-bearing for the central claim. The two-population polarization dichotomy in Fig. 15b is also partly a corollary of Eq. (11), so it is not independent evidence for two explosion channels as currently presented.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 5.3, Eq. (11), Fig. 13, and Table 3] The central claim uses p_max, the maximum Si II polarization in a −11 to +1 day window, as a comparable quantity across objects whose cadence varies from one epoch to twelve. As the authors state in Sect. 5.2 that no common time-evolution pattern exists and therefore no correction to a common epoch is applied, p_max is not a comparable observable: a single-epoch object gives a lower limit on its true peak, while a twelve-epoch object is likely observed near its peak. If cadence density or epoch placement correlates with vSiII,−5, the fitted slope and ρ = 0.80 in Eq. (11) could be partly a sampling artifact. The sub-window tests in Table 3 use the same maximum-within-window definition and therefore do not remove this bias. I request a quantitative test: either fitting per-object p(t) curves (e.g., the nested-sampling fits introduced in Sect. 4.5) and using the fitted peak, restricting to objects with at least three pre-maximum epochs, or injecting synthetic p(t) curves at the actual observed cadences to estimate the bias in the slope and correlation coefficient.
  2. [Section 5.3.2, Fig. 15b] The claimed polarization dichotomy between 'Chandrasekhar-like' and 'sub-Chandrasekhar' groups is not independent evidence for two explosion channels, because the group assignment is made in the Δm15–vSiII plane and pSiII is strongly correlated with vSiII via Eq. (11). Objects above the Polin et al. line have systematically higher velocities, and Eq. (11) therefore predicts that they have higher polarization; Fig. 15b is largely a corollary of Eq. (11). To support the two-population claim, the polarization distributions should be compared after removing the Eq. (11) trend, or on a sample matched in vSiII. Without such a test, the dichotomy does not add independent support for the two-explosion-mechanism interpretation.
  3. [Section 4.4 and Eq. (11)] The velocity vSiII,−5 is derived from low-order polynomial fits to heterogeneous flux spectra, often extrapolated to −5 days when no spectrum is available near that epoch, but the reported Pearson p-values and the linear least-squares fit in Table 3 treat the velocity as error-free. The x-uncertainties are not propagated into the slope, intercept, or correlation coefficient. Please propagate the velocity fit uncertainties, for example by bootstrap resampling of the velocity fits or by using an orthogonal regression, and show that the slope and ρ in Eq. (11) remain statistically significant.
  4. [Section 5.2, Fig. 12] The Δm15–pSiII reproduction uses the maximum polarization in a −10 to 0 day window with no epoch correction, for the same reason stated in Sect. 5.2. Because the observed maximum in this window is a lower limit for sparsely sampled objects, the reported ρ = 0.63 (p = 0.005) should be presented as a qualitative confirmation of the Wang et al. relation rather than a quantitative reproduction. Please state this limitation explicitly in the text near Fig. 12 and in the conclusions, and consider a robustness test restricted to objects with at least two epochs in the window.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Table 3 header] The header says the slope α is 'in %/mag', but the independent variable vSiII is in km/s; the correct unit is %/(km/s) or % per km/s.
  2. [Section 5.6] The text refers to 'SN 20011iv' in the sentence listing the six low-reddening objects; this should be SN 2011iv.
  3. [Section 3.1] The text says the GG435 filter has a cut-off at ∼435 µm; this should be ∼435 nm.
  4. [Section 4.5] The criterion for manually choosing the lower and upper wavelength edges of the Si II line is not described quantitatively; please state how the edges were selected and whether the choice was checked for sensitivity to bin size.
  5. [Figure 15 caption] The caption would benefit from a sentence stating exactly how the orange and green diamond groups were assigned (i.e., by eye relative to the dashed Polin et al. line), since the group assignment is used in the quantitative polarization comparison in panel (b).

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the v–p relation is measured from independent observables and the model comparisons use external simulations.

full rationale

The paper's central new result, Eq. 11, is an empirical regression between the maximum Si II 6355 line polarization in a fixed −11 to +1 day window and the Si II velocity at −5 days. These are independently measured quantities: polarization is derived from continuum-subtracted VLT/FORS spectropolarimetry (Sect. 4.5), while velocities come from absorption minima of flux spectra (Sect. 4.4). Neither quantity is defined in terms of the other, and no model parameter is fitted and then renamed as a prediction. The comparisons to Bulla et al. (2016a,b) and Polin et al. (2019) use external simulations with stated assumptions. Self-citations (e.g., Wang et al. 2007 for the Δm15–p relation and the pre-maximum epoch choice; Höflich et al. 2006 for the delayed-detonation interpretation) motivate choices and interpretations but are not load-bearing for the v–p fit. The statistical caveat that p_max is taken over a heterogeneous cadence window with no common-epoch correction (Sect. 5.2) is a validity threat, not a circular reduction: it concerns whether p_max is a comparable observable, not whether the derivation assumes its conclusion. The Fig. 15b polarization dichotomy is presented as tentative and depends on the external Polin grouping; while it is consistent with Eq. 11, the paper does not use the dichotomy to derive Eq. 11, so no by-construction circularity is exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central empirical relations rest on fitted regression coefficients and on the standard physical interpretation of line polarization as scattering asymmetry. No new particles or forces are introduced. The main burden is the model-dependent grouping of supernovae in the Delta m15-vSiII plane.

free parameters (3)
  • pSiII-vSiII slope alpha = 6.40e-5 +/- 1.28e-5 (% per km/s)
    Free parameter of the linear least-squares fit in Eq. 11; the value is fitted to 23 SNe and carries the reported correlation.
  • pSiII-vSiII intercept beta = -0.484 +/- 0.147 (%)
    Intercept of the same fit; the paper notes it is unphysical for velocities below ~7500 km/s, so the linear relation is not a derived law but an empirical fit.
  • Priors in nested-sampling p(t) fit = a in [-1,0], pmax in [0,5]%, tmax in [-10,0] d
    Uniform priors chosen by hand in Sect. 4.5; they bound the individual polarization evolution fits but do not enter the central v-p correlation directly.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Measured line polarization after wavelet continuum subtraction represents intrinsic SN line polarization (ISP is additive in Stokes q,u for weak incoming polarization)
    Sect. 4.2; the continuum subtraction assumes the ISP/circumstellar polarization is smooth across the line and removed by the wavelet decomposition.
  • domain assumption Electron scattering in an aspherical photosphere is the dominant source of intrinsic continuum and line polarization
    Sect. 2.1-2.2; this is the standard physical framework used to interpret pSiII as a geometric asymmetry measure.
  • domain assumption The Polin et al. (2019) Delta m15-vSiII relation for sub-Chandrasekhar double-detonations with a thin He shell is the correct separator of two SN Ia populations
    Sect. 5.3.2 and Figs. 14-15; the 'cluster' vs 'sub-Chandrasekhar' grouping is defined by this model line, so the dichotomy claim inherits the model's validity.
  • domain assumption Wavelet decomposition scales 9+10+11 approximate the continuum and scales 4-8 contain line features
    Sect. 4.2; a conventional but arbitrary choice of decomposition scales; results depend mildly on this choice.
  • domain assumption Type Ia supernovae are standardizable candles and Delta m15 traces 56Ni production
    Sect. 5.2 and 5.3.1; the interpretation of the Delta m15-p relation assumes that decline rate is correlated with the amount of 56Ni and with burning completeness.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Linear spectropolarimetry of 35 Type Ia Supernovae with VLT/FORS: An analysis of the Si II line polarization." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GXLGPSAU

@misc{pith2026190807526,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Linear spectropolarimetry of 35 Type Ia Supernovae with VLT/FORS: An analysis of the Si II line polarization},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GXLGPSAU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.07526}
}
abstract

Spectropolarimetry enables us to measure the geometry and chemical structure of the ejecta in supernova explosions, which is fundamental for the understanding of their explosion mechanism(s) and progenitor systems. We collected archival data of 35 Type Ia Supernovae (SNe Ia), observed with FORS on the Very Large Telescope at 127 epochs in total. We examined the polarization of the Si II $\lambda$6355 $\AA$ line (p$_{\rm Si II}$) as a function of time which is seen to peak at a range of various polarization degrees and epochs relative to maximum brightness. We reproduced the $\Delta$m$_{15}$-p$_{\rm Si II}$ relationship identified in a previous study, and show that subluminous and transitional objects display polarization values below the $\Delta$m$_{15}$-p$_{\rm Si II}$ relationship for normal SNe Ia. We found a statistically significant linear relationship between the polarization of the Si II $\lambda$6355 $\AA$ line before maximum brightness and the Si II line velocity and suggest that this, along with the $\Delta$m$_{15}$-p$_{\rm Si II}$ relationship, may be explained in the context of a delayed-detonation model. In contrast, we compared our observations to numerical predictions in the $\Delta$m$_{15}$-v$_{\rm Si II}$ plane and found a dichotomy in the polarization properties between Chandrasekhar and sub-Chandrasekhar mass explosions, which supports the possibility of two distinct explosion mechanisms. A subsample of SNe display evolution of loops in the $q$-$u$ plane that suggests a more complex Si structure with depth. This insight, which could not be gleaned from total flux spectra, presents a new constraint on explosion models. Finally, we compared our statistical sample of the Si II polarization to quantitative predictions of the polarization levels for the double-detonation, delayed-detonation, and violent-merger models.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.07526 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. shows a very simplified illustration of the mechanism by which polarization arises from the electron￾scattering dominated photosphere. In the case of a spherical photosphere, there will be an equal amount of polarized light coming from all directions (Figure 1a), and therefore, we will observe a net polarization of p=0. However, if there is as￾pherically distributed material in front of the photosphere, it will obsc… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Left panel: Distribution of number of epochs per SN. For example, SN 2001el, SN 2004dt and SN 2008fl have been observed at 5 epochs. Right panel: Distribution of observed epochs. For example, SN 2007if, SN 2012fr and SN 2015ak have been observed between 20 and 25 days past peak brightness. The dark blue color is the number of unique supernovae observed per epoch bin (note that some SNe were observed at multiple epoc… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Example of an a` trous wavelet decomposition. The black line is an original spectrum, blue, orange, and green curves are the sum of the last three (9+10+11), first three (1+2+3) and middle 5 wavelet scales (4+5+6+7+8), respectively. contrast to unnormalized Stokes Q and U). However, the ISP cannot be expressed as a regular Stokes vector (I,Q,U,V), because the ISP does not carry any intensity, IISP. When a beam of ra… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (17 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Example of continuum subtraction from a polariza￾tion spectrum of SN 2002bo at −1 day relative to peak brightness. The top panel shows the total degree of polarization (black curve) and the middle panels are Stokes q and u. The blue curves dis￾play the continuum polari…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The linear polarization of the Si ii λ6355 ˚A line in SN 2002bo at −1 day relative to peak brightness. The three pan￾els show the polarization degree derived with bin sizes of 25 ˚A (left), 50 ˚A (middle) and 100 ˚A (right). The error bars represent 1σ uncertainties. T…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Peak polarization of the Si ii λ6355 ˚A line in SN 2006X, as a function of time, for three different bin sizes, compared to the measurements in Patat et al. (2009), who binned their data in ∼26 ˚A wide bins. The error bars represent 1σ uncertainties. Note that the time…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Evolution of the Si ii λ6355 ˚A line polarization in the q–u plane for SN 2005df. The bin size of the used data is 50 ˚A, and the wavelengths are color coded. The error bars represent 1σ uncertainties. The panels show different epochs relative to peak brightness (indic…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Time evolution of the peak polarization of the Si ii λ6355 ˚A line, for a sample of SNe Ia. For comparison, the dotted line shows the pSi ii–epoch fit from Wang et al. (2007). Note that our polarization measurements are systematically lower compared to the time depend…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Time evolution of the peak polarization of the high velocity (blue symbols) and photospheric (red symbols) Si ii λ6355 ˚A component, for SN 2002bo (left panel) and SN 2005df (right panel). The peak polarization of the two components was measured on polarization spectr…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Peak polarization of the Si ii λ6355 ˚A line, measured at 50 ˚A binned data, between epochs −10 and 0, as a function of ∆m15 (blue dots). The red full line is the ∆m15–pSi ii relationship determined by Wang et al. (2007), and the red dashed lines indicate the 1σ level…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Maximum linear polarization of the Si ii λ6355 ˚A line between −11 and 1 days relative to peak brightness (measured on polarization spectra of 100˚A bin size), as a function of the Si ii λ6355 ˚A velocity at 5 days before peak brightness. The error bars represent 1σ u…
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Supernovae Ia in the ∆m15 − vSi ii plane. The Si ii velocity corresponds to the velocity at peak brightness. The colored dots represent the VLT sample. The color of the dots and circles indicates the maximum polarization degree of the Si ii λ6355 ˚A line measured betw…
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: The area contained in q–u loops as a function of epoch. Shown are all SNe that have been observed on at least four epochs (SN 2004dt is off scale in area). The lines connect measurements of SNe that have been observed on five epochs or more. The error bars represent t…
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Panel a: SNe Ia in the ∆m15 −vSi ii plane. The orange and green diamonds represent the VLT sample, which is divided in Chandrasekhar-like (orange diamonds), and sub-Chandrasekhar SNe (green diamonds). The sample from Zheng et al. (2018) (black dots) is consistent with…
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Simulations of polarization induced by clumps, for four different scenarios. The upper panels illustrate the size and distribution of clumps (filled orange circles) in front of the photosphere (large circle), while the bottom panels show the resulting polarization in …
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: Polarization of the Si ii λ6355 ˚A line in the q–u plane for SN 2002bo (upper panels) and SN 2005df (bottom panels) at two selected epochs. The color of the dots indicates the wave￾length. The orange (dotted) and blue (solid) lines connect the dots that correspond to …
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: compares our observations to the delayed￾detonation (DDT), violent merger, and double-detonation (DDET) models. The simulations show that the polar￾ization degree of the Si ii line in the violent merger ob￾servations is higher compared to the delayed-detonation and do…
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: The observed maximum polarization of the Si ii λ6355 ˚A line between −11 and 1 days relative to peak bright￾ness (black dots, measured on polarization spectra of 25 ˚A bin size), versus the Si ii velocity at 5 days before the peak bright￾ness, compared to simulations.…
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: Continuum polarization as function of E(B − V). The black and red dots depict normal SNe and subluminous/transitional SNe from our VLT sample, respectively. Milky Way stars from Serkowski et al. (1975) are included for comparison (grey squares). The dashed line marks …

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

124 extracted references · 27 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Altavilla G., et al., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20077487 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007A

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20077487 2007

  2. [2]

    Amanullah R., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/716/1/712 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...716..712A 716, 712

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/716/1/712 2010

  3. [3]

    Andersson B.-G., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/775/2/84 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...775...84A 775, 84

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/775/2/84 2013

  4. [4]

    Appenzeller I., et al., 1998, The Messenger, http://esoads.eso.org/abs/1998Msngr..94....1A 94, 1

    1998

  5. [5]

    Ashall C., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty632 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.tmp..611A

    doi:10.1093/mnras/sty632 2018

  6. [6]

    B., Dobkin D

    Barber C. B., Dobkin D. P., Huhdanpaa H., 1996, ACM TRANSACTIONS ON MATHEMATICAL SOFTWARE, 22, 469

    1996

  7. [7]

    L., Cameron A

    Benz W., Bowers R. L., Cameron A. G. W., Press W. H. ., 1990, @doi [ ] 10.1086/168273 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1990ApJ...348..647B 348, 647

    doi:10.1086/168273 1990

  8. [8]

    L., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/520494 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...666.1024B 666, 1024

    Blondin S., Tonry J. L., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/520494 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...666.1024B 666, 1024

    doi:10.1086/520494 2007

Show all 124 references
  1. [9]

    Blondin S., Kirshner R., Challis P., Calkins M., 2007, Central Bureau Electronic Telegrams, http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007CBET.1048....2B 1048

    2007

  2. [10]

    Blondin S., et al., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/143/5/126 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012AJ....143..126B 143, 126

    2012 doi

  3. [11]

    Braden B., 1986, The College Mathematics Journal, 17, 326

    1986

  4. [12]

    C., 2017, Supernova Explosions , @doi 10.1007/978-3-662-55054-0

    Branch D., Wheeler J. C., 2017, Supernova Explosions , @doi 10.1007/978-3-662-55054-0

    2017 doi

  5. [13]

    Branch D., Baron E., Hall N., Melakayil M., Parrent J., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1086/430135 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005PASP..117..545B 117, 545

    2005 doi

  6. [14]

    Buil C., 2012, Central Bureau Electronic Telegrams, http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012CBET.3277....3B 3277, 3

    2012

  7. [15]

    Bulla M., 2017, PhD thesis, Astrophysics Research Centre, School of Mathematics and Physics, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast BT7 1NN, UK, @doi 10.5281/zenodo.321286

    2017 doi

  8. [16]

    A., Kromer M., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv657 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.450..967B 450, 967

    Bulla M., Sim S. A., Kromer M., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv657 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.450..967B 450, 967

    2015 doi

  9. [17]

    A., Pakmor R., Kromer M., Taubenberger S., R \"o pke F

    Bulla M., Sim S. A., Pakmor R., Kromer M., Taubenberger S., R \"o pke F. K., Hillebrandt W., Seitenzahl I. R., 2016a, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv2402 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.455.1060B 455, 1060

    doi

  10. [18]

    Bulla M., et al., 2016b, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw1733 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.462.1039B 462, 1039

    doi

  11. [19]

    R., et al., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/141/1/19 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011AJ....141...19B 141, 19

    Burns C. R., et al., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/141/1/19 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011AJ....141...19B 141, 19

    2011 doi

  12. [20]

    R., et al., 2015, SNooPy: TypeIa supernovae analysis tools , Astrophysics Source Code Library ( @eprint ascl 1505.023 )

    Burns C. R., et al., 2015, SNooPy: TypeIa supernovae analysis tools , Astrophysics Source Code Library ( @eprint ascl 1505.023 )

    2015

  13. [21]

    Chandrasekhar S., 1960, Radiative transfer

    1960

  14. [22]

    Chomiuk L., et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-637X/821/2/119 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...821..119C 821, 119

    2016 doi

  15. [23]

    V., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/136/6/2227 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008AJ....136.2227C 136, 2227

    Chornock R., Filippenko A. V., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/136/6/2227 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008AJ....136.2227C 136, 2227

    2008 doi

  16. [24]

    Cikota A., Patat F., Cikota S., Faran T., 2017a, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw2545 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.464.4146C 464, 4146

    doi

  17. [25]

    Cikota A., Patat F., Cikota S., Spyromilio J., Rau G., 2017b, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx1734 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.471.2111C 471, 2111

    doi

  18. [26]

    Cikota A., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201731395 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018A

    2018 doi

  19. [27]

    Dhawan S., Leibundgut B., Spyromilio J., Maguire K., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu2716 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.448.1345D 448, 1345

    2015 doi

  20. [28]

    European Southern Observatory

    ESO 2015, FORS2 User Manual, issue 96.0, VLT-MAN-ESO-13100-1543. European Southern Observatory

    2015

  21. [29]

    A., 2004, Morphology of supernova remnants

    Fesen R. A., 2004, Morphology of supernova remnants. Cambridge University Press, p. 64–73, @doi 10.1017/CBO9780511536236.007

    2004 doi

  22. [30]

    K., Hillebrandt W., Seitenzahl I

    Fink M., R \"o pke F. K., Hillebrandt W., Seitenzahl I. R., Sim S. A., Kromer M., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/200913892 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010A

    2010 doi

  23. [31]

    Folatelli G., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/773/1/53 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...773...53F 773, 53

    2013 doi

  24. [32]

    364, The Future of Photometric, Spectrophotometric and Polarimetric Standardization

    Fossati L., Bagnulo S., Mason E., Landi Degl'Innocenti E., 2007, in Sterken C., ed., Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series Vol. 364, The Future of Photometric, Spectrophotometric and Polarimetric Standardization. p. 503

    2007

  25. [33]

    S., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/220/1/9 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJS..220....9F 220, 9

    Friedman A. S., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/220/1/9 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJS..220....9F 220, 9

    2015 doi

  26. [34]

    Gall C., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201730886 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018A

    2018 doi

  27. [35]

    Ganeshalingam M., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/190/2/418 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJS..190..418G 190, 418

    2010 doi

  28. [36]

    V., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt893 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.433.2240G 433, 2240

    Ganeshalingam M., Li W., Filippenko A. V., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt893 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.433.2240G 433, 2240

    2013 doi

  29. [37]

    A., Kasen D., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aaa409 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...852L..33G 852, L33

    Goldstein D. A., Kasen D., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aaa409 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...852L..33G 852, L33

    2018 doi

  30. [38]

    Z., Margutti R., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/835/1/64 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...835...64G 835, 64

    Guillochon J., Parrent J., Kelley L. Z., Margutti R., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/835/1/64 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...835...64G 835, 64

    2017 doi

  31. [39]

    P., et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201527228 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016A

    Guti \'e rrez C. P., et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201527228 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016A

    2016 doi

  32. [40]

    Hicken M., et al., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/700/1/331 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...700..331H 700, 331

    2009 doi

  33. [41]

    Hoang T., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/836/1/13 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...836...13H 836, 13

    2017 doi

  34. [42]

    N., Lee H., Ahn S.-H., 2019, @doi [Nature Astronomy] 10.1038/s41550-019-0763-6 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019NatAs.tmp..319H p

    Hoang T., Tram L. N., Lee H., Ahn S.-H., 2019, @doi [Nature Astronomy] 10.1038/s41550-019-0763-6 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019NatAs.tmp..319H p. 319

    2019 doi

  35. [43]

    H \"o flich P., 1991, , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1991A

    1991

  36. [44]

    L., Fesen R

    H \"o flich P., Gerardy C. L., Fesen R. A., Sakai S., 2002, @doi [ ] 10.1086/339063 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002ApJ...568..791H 568, 791

    2002 doi

  37. [45]

    L., Marion H., Quimby R., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1016/j.newar.2006.06.074 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006NewAR..50..470H 50, 470

    H \"o flich P., Gerardy C. L., Marion H., Quimby R., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1016/j.newar.2006.06.074 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006NewAR..50..470H 50, 470

    2006 doi

  38. [46]

    Time-Frequency Methods and Phase Space

    Holschneider M., Kronland-Martinet R., Morlet J., Tchamitchian P., 1989, in Combes J.-M., Grossmann A., Tchamitchian P., eds, Wavelets. Time-Frequency Methods and Phase Space. p. 286

    1989

  39. [47]

    M., 2013, @doi [Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A] 10.1098/rsta.2012.0282 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013RSPTA.37120282H 371, 20120282

    Hook I. M., 2013, @doi [Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A] 10.1098/rsta.2012.0282 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013RSPTA.37120282H 371, 20120282

    2013

  40. [48]

    A., H \"o flich P., Wang L., Wheeler J

    Howell D. A., H \"o flich P., Wang L., Wheeler J. C., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1086/321584 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001ApJ...556..302H 556, 302

    2001 doi

  41. [49]

    Kasen D., et al., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1086/376601 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ApJ...593..788K 593, 788

    2003 doi

  42. [50]

    Kashi A., Soker N., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19361.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.417.1466K 417, 1466

    2011

  43. [51]

    M., 1991, , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1991A

    Khokhlov A. M., 1991, , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1991A

    1991

  44. [52]

    Krisciunas K., Suntzeff N. B., Espinoza J., Gonzalez D., Miranda A., Sanhueza P., 2017a, @doi [Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society] 10.3847/2515-5172/aa9f18 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017RNAAS...1...36K 1, 36

    doi

  45. [53]

    Krisciunas K., et al., 2017b, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aa8df0 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017AJ....154..211K 154, 211

    doi

  46. [54]

    arXiv:0912.0201

    LSST Science Collaboration et al., 2009, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2009arXiv0912.0201L p. arXiv:0912.0201

    2009 arXiv

  47. [55]

    C., Filippenko A

    Leonard D. C., Filippenko A. V., Chornock R., Li W., 2002, @doi [ ] 10.1086/343772 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002AJ....124.2506L 124, 2506

    2002 doi

  48. [56]

    Leonini S., Brimacombe J., 2010, Central Bureau Electronic Telegrams, http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010CBET.2569....1L 2569, 1

    2010

  49. [57]

    Livio M., Mazzali P., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1016/j.physrep.2018.02.002 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018PhR...736....1L 736, 1

    2018 doi

  50. [58]

    A., Ramirez-Ruiz E., Badenes C., Huppenkothen D., Jeltema T

    Lopez L. A., Ramirez-Ruiz E., Badenes C., Huppenkothen D., Jeltema T. E., Pooley D. A., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/706/1/L106 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...706L.106L 706, L106

    2009 doi

  51. [59]

    S., Narayan G., Kirshner R

    Mandel K. S., Narayan G., Kirshner R. P., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/731/2/120 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...731..120M 731, 120

    2011 doi

  52. [60]

    G., 1974, @doi [ ] 10.1086/152655 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1974ApJ...187..461M 187, 461

    Martin P. G., 1974, @doi [ ] 10.1086/152655 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1974ApJ...187..461M 187, 461

    1974 doi

  53. [61]

    Matheson T., Challis P., Kirshner R., Calkins M., 2003, , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003IAUC.8134....2M 8134

    2003

  54. [62]

    R., Wheeler J

    Maund J. R., Wheeler J. C., Baade D., Patat F., H \"o flich P., Wang L., Clocchiatti A., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/705/2/1139 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...705.1139M 705, 1139

    2009 doi

  55. [63]

    R., et al., 2010a, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/722/2/1162 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...722.1162M 722, 1162

    Maund J. R., et al., 2010a, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/722/2/1162 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...722.1162M 722, 1162

    doi

  56. [64]

    R., et al., 2010b, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/725/2/L167 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...725L.167M 725, L167

    Maund J. R., et al., 2010b, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/725/2/L167 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...725L.167M 725, L167

    doi

  57. [65]

    A., et al., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1086/429874 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005ApJ...623L..37M 623, L37

    Mazzali P. A., et al., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1086/429874 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005ApJ...623L..37M 623, L37

    2005 doi

  58. [66]

    A., Ashall C., Pian E., Stritzinger M

    Mazzali P. A., Ashall C., Pian E., Stritzinger M. D., Gall C., Phillips M. M., H \"o flich P., Hsiao E., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty434 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.476.2905M 476, 2905

    2018 doi

  59. [67]

    K., Anupama G

    Misra K., Sahu D. K., Anupama G. C., Pandey K., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13398.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008MNRAS.389..706M 389, 706

    2008

  60. [68]

    Nagao T., Maeda K., Tanaka M., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aac94e , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...861....1N 861, 1

    2018 doi

  61. [69]

    A., R \"o pke F

    Pakmor R., Kromer M., Taubenberger S., Sim S. A., R \"o pke F. K., Hillebrandt W., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/747/1/L10 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...747L..10P 747, L10

    2012 doi

  62. [70]

    Pastorello A., et al., 2007, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.11700.x , 377, 1531

    2007

  63. [71]

    Patat F., Romaniello M., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/497581 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006PASP..118..146P 118, 146

    2006 doi

  64. [72]

    R., Wang L., Wheeler J

    Patat F., Baade D., H \"o flich P., Maund J. R., Wang L., Wheeler J. C., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/200810651 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A

    2009 doi

  65. [73]

    R., Benetti S., Botticella M

    Patat F., Maund J. R., Benetti S., Botticella M. T., Cappellaro E., Harutyunyan A., Turatto M., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/200913083 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010A

    2010 doi

  66. [74]

    R., Wang L., Wheeler J

    Patat F., H \"o flich P., Baade D., Maund J. R., Wang L., Wheeler J. C., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201219146 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012A

    2012 doi

  67. [75]

    Patat F., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201424507 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015A

    2015 doi

  68. [76]

    Perlmutter S., et al., 1999, @doi [ ] 10.1086/307221 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999ApJ...517..565P 517, 565

    1999 doi

  69. [77]

    M., 1993, @doi [ ] 10.1086/186970 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993ApJ...413L.105P 413, L105

    Phillips M. M., 1993, @doi [ ] 10.1086/186970 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993ApJ...413L.105P 413, L105

    1993 doi

  70. [78]

    Pignata G., et al., 2008, Central Bureau Electronic Telegrams, http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008CBET.1498....1P 1498

    2008

  71. [79]

    A., Eastman R

    Pinto P. A., Eastman R. G., 2000, @doi [ ] 10.1086/308380 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000ApJ...530..757P 530, 757

    2000 doi

  72. [80]

    Planck Collaboration et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201525830 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016A

    2016 doi

  73. [81]

    Polin A., Nugent P., Kasen D., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aafb6a , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...873...84P 873, 84

    2019 doi

  74. [82]

    L., et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-637X/828/1/24 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...828...24P 828, 24

    Porter A. L., et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-637X/828/1/24 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...828...24P 828, 24

    2016 doi

  75. [83]

    L., Rest A., Suntzeff N

    Prieto J. L., Rest A., Suntzeff N. B., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/504307 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006ApJ...647..501P 647, 501

    2006 doi

  76. [84]

    L., Stanek K

    Prieto J. L., Stanek K. Z., Beacom J. F., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1086/524654 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJ...673..999P 673, 999

    2008 doi

  77. [85]

    P., 1977, , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1977AZh....54.1188P 54, 1188

    Pskovskii I. P., 1977, , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1977AZh....54.1188P 54, 1188

    1977

  78. [86]

    G., Livio M., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/504791 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006ApJ...648..884R 648, 884

    Riess A. G., Livio M., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/504791 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006ApJ...648..884R 648, 884

    2006 doi

  79. [87]

    G., et al., 1998, @doi [ ] 10.1086/300499 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998AJ....116.1009R 116, 1009

    Riess A. G., et al., 1998, @doi [ ] 10.1086/300499 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998AJ....116.1009R 116, 1009

    1998 doi

  80. [88]

    Rosswog S., Kasen D., Guillochon J., Ramirez-Ruiz E., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/705/2/L128 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...705L.128R 705, L128

    2009 doi

  81. [89]

    F., Finkbeiner D

    Schlafly E. F., Finkbeiner D. P., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/737/2/103 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...737..103S 737, 103

    2011 doi

  82. [90]

    R., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sts402 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.429.1156S 429, 1156

    Seitenzahl I. R., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sts402 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.429.1156S 429, 1156

    2013 doi

  83. [91]

    S., Ford V

    Serkowski K., Mathewson D. S., Ford V. L., 1975, @doi [ ] 10.1086/153410 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1975ApJ...196..261S 196, 261

    1975 doi

  84. [92]

    R., 1975, @doi [ ] 10.1086/153868 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1975ApJ...201..151S 201, 151

    Shapiro P. R., 1975, @doi [ ] 10.1086/153868 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1975ApJ...201..151S 201, 151

    1975 doi

  85. [93]

    R., Sutherland P

    Shapiro P. R., Sutherland P. G., 1982, @doi [ ] 10.1086/160559 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1982ApJ...263..902S 263, 902

    1982 doi

  86. [94]

    M., et al., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21270.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012MNRAS.425.1789S 425, 1789

    Silverman J. M., et al., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21270.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012MNRAS.425.1789S 425, 1789

    2012

  87. [95]

    M., Vink \'o J., Marion G

    Silverman J. M., Vink \'o J., Marion G. H., Wheeler J. C., Barna B., Szalai T., Mulligan B. W., Filippenko A. V., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv1011 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.451.1973S 451, 1973

    2015 doi

  88. [96]

    V., eds, American Institute of Physics Conference Series Vol

    Skilling J., 2004, in Fischer R., Preuss R., Toussaint U. V., eds, American Institute of Physics Conference Series Vol. 735, American Institute of Physics Conference Series. pp 395--405, @doi 10.1063/1.1835238

    2004 doi

  89. [97]

    arXiv:1503.03757

    Spergel D., et al., 2015, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2015arXiv150303757S p. arXiv:1503.03757

    2015 arXiv

  90. [98]

    Spyromilio J., Bailey J., 1993, @doi [Proceedings of the Astronomical Society of Australia] 10.1017/S1323358000025819 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993PASAu..10..263S 10, 263

    1993 doi

  91. [99]

    G., 2008, Central Bureau Electronic Telegrams, http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008CBET.1488....1T 1488

    Tan T. G., 2008, Central Bureau Electronic Telegrams, http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008CBET.1488....1T 1488

    2008

  92. [100]

    A., Kawabata K

    Tanaka M., Maeda K., Mazzali P. A., Kawabata K. S., Nomoto K., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aa6035 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...837..105T 837, 105

    2017 doi

  93. [101]

    Taubenberger S., 2017, The Extremes of Thermonuclear Supernovae . p. 317, @doi 10.1007/978-3-319-21846-5_37

    2017 doi

  94. [102]

    L., ed., Vol

    Tody D., 1986, in Crawford D. L., ed., Vol. 627, Instrumentation in astronomy VI. p. 733, @doi 10.1117/12.968154

    1986 doi

  95. [103]

    R., Hines D

    Trammell S. R., Hines D. C., Wheeler J. C., 1993, @doi [ ] 10.1086/186986 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993ApJ...414L..21T 414, L21

    1993 doi

  96. [104]

    Wagers A., Wang L., Asztalos S., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/711/2/711 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...711..711W 711, 711

    2010 doi

  97. [105]

    C., 1996, @doi [ ] 10.1086/310026 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996ApJ...462L..27W 462, L27

    Wang L., Wheeler J. C., 1996, @doi [ ] 10.1086/310026 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996ApJ...462L..27W 462, L27

    1996 doi

  98. [106]

    C., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.astro.46.060407.145139 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ARA

    Wang L., Wheeler J. C., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.astro.46.060407.145139 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ARA

    2008

  99. [107]

    C., Li Z., Clocchiatti A., 1996, @doi [ ] 10.1086/177617 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996ApJ...467..435W 467, 435

    Wang L., Wheeler J. C., Li Z., Clocchiatti A., 1996, @doi [ ] 10.1086/177617 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996ApJ...467..435W 467, 435

    1996 doi

  100. [108]

    C., H \"o flich P., 1997, @doi [ ] 10.1086/310495 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997ApJ...476L..27W 476, L27

    Wang L., Wheeler J. C., H \"o flich P., 1997, @doi [ ] 10.1086/310495 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997ApJ...476L..27W 476, L27

    1997 doi

  101. [109]

    A., H \"o flich P., Wheeler J

    Wang L., Howell D. A., H \"o flich P., Wheeler J. C., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1086/319822 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001ApJ...550.1030W 550, 1030

    2001 doi

  102. [110]

    Wang L., et al., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1086/375444 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ApJ...591.1110W 591, 1110

    2003 doi

  103. [111]

    C., Kawabata K., Khokhlov A., Nomoto K., Patat F., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/508250 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006ApJ...653..490W 653, 490

    Wang L., Baade D., H \"o flich P., Wheeler J. C., Kawabata K., Khokhlov A., Nomoto K., Patat F., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/508250 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006ApJ...653..490W 653, 490

    2006 doi

  104. [112]

    Wang L., Baade D., Patat F., 2007, @doi [Science] 10.1126/science.1121656 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007Sci...315..212W 315, 212

    2007 doi

  105. [113]

    Wang X., et al., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/699/2/L139 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2009ApJ...699L.139W 699, L139

    2009 doi

  106. [114]

    arXiv:1710.07005

    Wang L., et al., 2017, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017arXiv171007005W p. arXiv:1710.07005

    2017 arXiv

  107. [115]

    L., 1979a, @doi [ ] 10.1086/157029 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1979ApJ...229..954W 229, 954

    White R. L., 1979a, @doi [ ] 10.1086/157029 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1979ApJ...229..954W 229, 954

    doi

  108. [116]

    L., 1979b, @doi [ ] 10.1086/157067 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1979ApJ...230..116W 230, 116

    White R. L., 1979b, @doi [ ] 10.1086/157067 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1979ApJ...230..116W 230, 116

    doi

  109. [117]

    Whittet D. C. B., Martin P. G., Hough J. H., Rouse M. F., Bailey J. A., Axon D. J., 1992, @doi [ ] 10.1086/171039 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1992ApJ...386..562W 386, 562

    1992 doi

  110. [118]

    A., Lebofsky M

    Wilking B. A., Lebofsky M. J., Martin P. G., Rieke G. H., Kemp J. C., 1980, @doi [ ] 10.1086/157694 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1980ApJ...235..905W 235, 905

    1980 doi

  111. [119]

    A., Lebofsky M

    Wilking B. A., Lebofsky M. J., Rieke G. H., 1982, @doi [ ] 10.1086/113147 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1982AJ.....87..695W 87, 695

    1982 doi

  112. [120]

    Yaron O., Gal-Yam A., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1086/666656 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012PASP..124..668Y 124, 668

    2012 doi

  113. [121]

    Zelaya P., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/836/1/88 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...836...88Z 836, 88

    2017 doi

  114. [122]

    L., Filippenko A

    Zheng W., Kelly P. L., Filippenko A. V., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aabaeb , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...858..104Z 858, 104

    2018 doi

  115. [123]

    G., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1086/323894 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001PASP..113.1420V 113, 1420

    van Dokkum P. G., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1086/323894 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001PASP..113.1420V 113, 1420

    2001 doi

  116. [124]

    C., 1957, Light Scattering by Small Particles

    van de Hulst H. C., 1957, Light Scattering by Small Particles

    1957

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.