Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 7 minor 4 cited by

New Regimes in the Observation of Core-Collapse Supernovae

T0 review · 1 major / 7 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 Wide-field surveys and rapid-response follow-up now provide two new observational tools—large statistical samples and very early post-explosion observations—that are beginning to answer which massive stars produce which supernovae and how.

desk verdict Solid, honest short review of CCSN observing strategies; the main soft spot is an under-caveated preference for cooling-envelope fits to early stripped-SN light curves. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.02476 v1 pith:M3UMWM3A submitted 2019-08-07 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.SR

Maryam Modjaz , Claudia P. Gutierrez , Iair Arcavi This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HEastro-ph.SR
keywords core-collapsesupernovaesupernovaclassificationshockbreakoutcoolingenvelopeemissionflashspectroscopycircumstellarmediumwide-fieldsurveysprogenitors
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

Core-collapse supernovae—the explosions of stars more massive than about eight solar masses—are common but poorly understood in their most basic particulars: which progenitor stars produce which explosion types, and whether the observed classes are distinct or one continuous population. This review argues that two new observational regimes are now breaking the impasse. Wide-field surveys provide large statistical samples that reveal both the demographics of ordinary events and rare outliers that challenge standard explosion models. Rapid-response follow-up catches supernovae hours after explosion, where shock-breakout flashes, cooling-envelope emission, and narrow 'flash spectroscopy' lines carry direct signatures of the progenitor's radius, density structure, and mass-loss history. If the review's reading is right, these observations turn supernovae into probes of the final years of massive-star evolution.

What carries the argument

The central mechanisms are (1) shock breakout and cooling-envelope emission—the early thermal radiation released as the explosion shock exits the star and the heated envelope expands and cools—which encodes progenitor radius and density structure; and (2) flash spectroscopy, the detection of narrow emission lines from confined circumstellar material ionized by the early flash, which maps the progenitor's mass-loss history. A third diagnostic, the rise-time versus peak-luminosity phase space, relates ejected mass and power source.

What would settle it

Run an independent reduction of the high-cadence space photometry of KSN 2011d: if the early excess is not statistically significant, the cleanest claimed optical shock-breakout detection is removed. More generally, obtain early spectra and photometry for a sample of Type II supernovae and test whether the narrow flash-spectroscopy lines and the early light-curve excesses track the same confined circumstellar material; if early excesses appear without narrow lines, the cooling-envelope and circumstellar-interpretation would need revision.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that CCSN diversity is becoming interpretable. Large samples have turned the old split between plateau (IIP) and linearly declining (IIL) Type II supernovae into a continuum of decline rates, and stripped-envelope subclasses into a sequence of stripping degrees best separated about two weeks after peak; progenitor studies increasingly favor interacting binaries as the dominant channel for stripped SNe. In parallel, very early observations show double-peaked light curves and early blue excesses consistent with cooling-envelope emission from low-mass extended envelopes around compact cores, and flash spectroscopy reveals narrow lines from confined circumstellar material in most hydrogen-rich SNe. The review reads these early signals as encoding the radius and density structure of the star just before explosion and its mass-loss history in the months to years before collapse—information that previously was inaccessible and now constrains late-stage stellar evolution models.

Load-bearing premise

The early-observation regime stands on the assumption that the early flashes and bumps seen in supernova light curves are genuinely shock breakout and cooling-envelope emission, not some other process; the review itself notes that the first claimed optical shock breakout is disputed by a re-analysis.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Single well-observed early light curves can now constrain the radius and internal density structure of a supernova progenitor immediately before explosion, turning individual events into stellar-structure probes.
  • Flash spectroscopy on many events will map the mass-loss history of massive stars in the months to years before core collapse and correlate it with parameters such as metallicity.
  • Large statistical samples settle the old classification debate: Type II plateau and linear supernovae form a continuum in decline rate, and stripped-envelope subtypes are best distinguished about two weeks after peak, guiding follow-up strategy.
  • Rare events uncovered by wide-field surveys force new power sources, such as magnetars, fallback accretion, jets, or hidden circumstellar interaction, into the standard picture of CCSN explosions.
  • Dedicated wide-field ultraviolet surveys would make shock-breakout detections routine rather than serendipitous, allowing progenitor properties to be measured for samples across types and environments.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If early narrow-line emission is as common as flash spectroscopy suggests, standard single-star red supergiant models with quiescent mass loss may need an extra pre-explosion eruption phase for most Type II progenitors—an inference the review gestures toward but does not itself draw.
  • The rise-time versus peak-luminosity plane could be turned from a classification map into a quantitative power-source discriminator: placing nickel-powered, magnetar-powered, and circumstellar-interaction models on the same axes would let rare fast and slow events be assigned to physical mechanisms rather than morphological outliers.
  • A testable extension of the double-peaked light-curve interpretation is that archival surveys with sparse cadence have systematically missed first peaks, biasing measured explosion times and rise times; stacking early light curves from high-cadence surveys would quantify this bias.
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

1 major / 7 minor

Summary. This paper is a short invited review of core-collapse supernova (CCSN) observations, centered on two claimed recent developments: (1) large statistical samples from wide-field surveys that enable population studies of common SNe and reveal rare peculiar events, and (2) early-time observations that the authors argue carry direct signatures of progenitor structure and mass-loss history via shock breakout, cooling-envelope emission, CSM interaction, and flash spectroscopy. The review also covers the CCSN classification landscape, the IIL/IIP continuum debate, stripped-envelope SN diversity, new phase-space representations such as rise time versus peak luminosity, and future facilities including ZTF, LSST, and proposed UV space missions. The central claim is that these two new observational regimes are materially accelerating progress on CCSN classification and progenitor physics.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the paper provides a timely and useful synthesis of a fast-moving field. The review is balanced in several important places: it explicitly presents the dispute over the claimed optical shock breakout in KSN 2011d ([118] vs. [119]) and it notes alternative explanations for SN 2008D and GRB 060218. The reference list is extensive and current, and Figure 3 offers a compact phase-space summary that will be useful to practitioners. The main risk to the central claim is not the accuracy of individual citations but the strength of the inference from early-time light curves to progenitor structure; the review underweights the known cooling-envelope/CSM degeneracy for stripped-envelope SNe, which bears directly on the abstract's second 'new tool.'

major comments (1)
  1. [Very Early Observations / Shock Breakout and Cooling Envelope Emission] The review's second 'new tool' is weakened by an unaddressed degeneracy. The text states that cooling-envelope emission 'depends most strongly on the radius and internal density structure of the progenitor' and then lists the double-peaked SNe IIb in Fig. 4 as cases of cooling-envelope emission, without noting that early-time excesses in stripped-envelope SNe can also be reproduced by interaction with dense CSM. The review itself invokes CSM to explain early light curves of some SNe IIP/IIL (refs [138,139]), but it does not apply the same caution to the SNe IIb objects in Fig. 4. Because the abstract's second tool rests on the claim that early emission 'carries signatures of the progenitor structure and mass loss history,' the manuscript should explicitly state that the cooling-envelope interpretation is not unique for at least some stripped SNe, and it should cite quantitative model-comparison work demonstrating the degeneracy. This is a load-bearing caveat rather than a cosmetic addition.
minor comments (7)
  1. [Circumstellar Material] The sentence 'Sequences of early spectra can show the narrow CSM lines slowly broadening as the confined CSM is accelerated by the SN ejecta (Figure 5), many or which also show enhanced shock cooling emission from their photometry [138, 139]' is duplicated in the following paragraph, and the phrase 'many or which' should read 'many of which.' Please remove the duplicate.
  2. [Figure 4 caption] The label 'SN 2006aj/GRB060219' is a typographical error; the correct GRB is GRB 060218, as used in the text.
  3. [The Future: Bright, Fast, and Abundant] The citation [119] attached to 'the accuracy with which their progenitor parameters can be determined' appears to be incorrect: [119] is the Rubin & Gal-Yam re-analysis of Kepler SNe, not a paper about ultraviolet imagers. Please check and replace with the intended reference (e.g., the UV mission science papers [148,149] or relevant shock-cooling model papers).
  4. [Shock Breakout and Cooling Envelope Emission] The sentence 'In all cases the envelope cooling emission is seen as a peak or early excess of the light curves in the bluer filters before the main light curve peak (Fig. 4)' is too strong given the immediately following parenthetical that two SNe Ic-bl with GRBs may be powered by a cooling jet cocoon rather than a cooling stellar envelope. Rephrase to 'in most of the plotted cases' and specify which objects are considered secure cooling-envelope detections.
  5. [Shock Breakout and Cooling Envelope Emission] The parenthetical 'though the latter suggest that the emission is from a cooling jet cocoon, not a cooling stellar envelope' is ambiguous. The cooling-jet-cocoon interpretation is associated with [99] (Izzo et al. 2019), not with [115] (Campana et al. 2006); please rephrase to attribute the interpretation clearly.
  6. [The CCSN Classification Landscape] There is a typo in 'with the SNe IIb, Ib, Ic and Ic-bl subytpes due to different amounts of stripping': 'subytpes' should be 'subtypes.'
  7. [References] References [45] and [50] are incomplete: they lack titles and article numbers and appear only as 'Jha, A., Maguire, K. & Sullivan, M. . Nat. Astron. (2019)' and 'Inserra, C. . Nat. Astron. (2019).' Full bibliographic details should be provided.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: a synthesis review whose central claims rest on external observations and models, not on self-derived predictions.

full rationale

This paper is a review, not a derivation, so the standard circularity tests do not bite. Its central claim is that wide-field surveys and rapid-response follow-up provide two new observational tools: large statistical samples and early-time observations. That claim is supported by external data sets and modeling papers (e.g., Nakar & Piro 2014, Piro 2015, Rabinak & Waxman 2011, Morozova et al. 2017), and by observational results from groups other than the authors. The review explicitly acknowledges the contested shock-breakout detection in KSN 2011d (refs. [118] vs [119]), so it does not hide the weakness of one of its examples. The authors do cite their own work heavily (Modjaz et al. 2014, Arcavi et al. 2012/2017, Gutierrez et al. 2014/2017, Liu et al. 2016, Williamson et al. 2019), but these are data papers, classification analyses, or submitted methodology papers; none is used as the sole justification for the review's central claims, and none reduces a target result to an input by construction. In particular, the statement that early emission 'carries signatures of the progenitor structure and mass loss history' is not a derived prediction from a fitted model; it is a summary of published light-curve and flash-spectroscopy results, with the relevant external citations provided. No equation in the text is fitted to a subset of data and then relabeled as a prediction, and no 'uniqueness theorem' from the authors' prior work is invoked to force a choice. The acknowledged cooling-envelope/CSM interpretation degeneracy is a legitimate scientific caveat about model dependence, but that is a correctness or robustness concern, not a circularity. The review is therefore self-contained as a synthesis: its claims are checkable against the cited literature and against future observations, and its reasoning does not presuppose its conclusions.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

Since this is a review, the ledger contains no free parameters or invented entities; the load-bearing premises are the standard assumptions of the field plus the reliability of the cited literature.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Core-collapse supernovae mark the deaths of stars more massive than about eight solar masses.
    Standard astrophysical assumption that anchors the review's scope; no new evidence is provided.
  • domain assumption The classical spectral classification (Type I vs Type II) and its subclasses correspond to meaningful physical differences.
    The review's whole discussion of classification rests on this; debates about continuum vs distinct classes are framed within this scheme.
  • domain assumption The standard theory of shock breakout and cooling envelope emission is correct.
    The review interprets early-time light curves and claims of shock breakout using models such as Nakar & Sari 2010 and Rabinak & Waxman 2011.
  • domain assumption Large survey samples are representative enough to support population-level conclusions.
    Population studies discussed in the review assume that selection effects are understood or at least acknowledged; the review does not quantify them.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of New Regimes in the Observation of Core-Collapse Supernovae." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/M3UMWM3A

@misc{pith2026190802476,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: New Regimes in the Observation of Core-Collapse Supernovae},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/M3UMWM3A}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.02476}
}
read the original abstract

Core-collapse Supernovae (CCSNe) mark the deaths of stars more massive than about eight times the mass of the sun and are intrinsically the most common kind of catastrophic cosmic explosions. They can teach us about many important physical processes, such as nucleosynthesis and stellar evolution, and thus, they have been studied extensively for decades. However, many crucial questions remain unanswered, including the most basic ones regarding which kinds of massive stars achieve which kind of explosions and how. Observationally, this question is related to the open puzzles of whether CCSNe can be divided into distinct types or whether they are drawn from a population with a continuous set of properties, and of what progenitor characteristics drive the diversity of observed explosions. Recent developments in wide-field surveys and rapid-response followup facilities are helping us answer these questions by providing two new tools: (1) large statistical samples which enable population studies of the most common SNe, and reveal rare (but extremely informative) events that question our standard understanding of the explosion physics involved, and (2) observations of early SNe emission taken shortly after explosion which carries signatures of the progenitor structure and mass loss history. Future facilities will increase our capabilities and allow us to answer many open questions related to these extremely energetic phenomena of the Universe.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. How Low Can We Go? Minimum Spectroscopic Requirements For Supernova Subtype Classification

    astro-ph.IM 2026-07 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    ABC-SN classifies ten supernova subtypes with no performance loss down to R_λ=50 and SNR=5, and only minimal loss at R_λ=25.

  2. Exploring the multi-wavelength properties of the high energetic event ZTF20abbiixp/GRB 200524A: from prompt emission to afterglow

    astro-ph.HE 2026-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A multi-wavelength study of GRB 200524A reports a dense ISM environment with a high kinetic energy and a large magnetic-field energy fraction, inferred from forward plus reverse shock modeling.

  3. SN 2025aico: Early observations of a faint Type IIb supernova with a low-mass envelope

    astro-ph.SR 2026-07 accept novelty 4.0 of 10

    SN 2025aico is a low-luminosity Type IIb from a compact He star (M_env≈0.01 M⊙, R_env≈6–10 R⊙) with M_Ni≈0.033 M⊙, M_ej≈2.8 M⊙ and weak-to-moderate 56Ni mixing.

  4. Insights from Modeling Magnetar-driven Light Curves of Stripped-envelope Supernovae

    astro-ph.HE 2024-12 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A unified magnetar spin-down model reproduces the bolometric light curves of 11 stripped-envelope supernovae, but several reported correlations follow from the fitting formulas rather than from independent physics.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

152 extracted references · 77 canonical work pages · cited by 4 Pith papers

  1. [118]

    Irwin, C. M. & Chevalier, R. A. Jet or shock breakout? The low-luminosity GRB 060218. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 460, 1680–1704 (2016)

    work page 2016

  2. [119]

    Garnavich, P. M. et al. Shock Breakout and Early Light Curves of Type II-P Supernovae Observed with Kepler.As- trophys. J. 820, 23 (2016)

    work page 2016

  3. [1]

    Alsabti, A. W. & Murdin, P. Handbook of Supernovae (2017)

    2017

  4. [2]

    Spectra of Supernovae

    Minkowski, R. Spectra of Supernovae. Publ. As- tron. Soc. Pacif.53, 224 (1941)

    1941

  5. [3]

    Filippenko, A. V . Optical Spectra of Supernovae. Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys.35, 309–355 (1997)

    1997

  6. [4]

    Observational and physical classification of supernovae

    Gal-Yam, A. Observational and physical classification of supernovae. In Handbook of Supernovae, 1–43 (Springer International Publishing, 2016). URL https://doi. org/10.1007/978-3-319-20794-0_35-1

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-319-20794-0_35-1 2016

  7. [5]

    Inserra, C. et al. The Type IIP SN 2007od in UGC 12846: from a bright maximum to dust formation in the nebular phase. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 417, 261–279 (2011)

    2011

  8. [6]

    Guti ´errez, C. P. et al. Type II Supernova Spectral Diver- sity. I. Observations, Sample Characterization, and Spec- tral Line Evolution. Astrophys. J. 850, 89 (2017)

    2017

Show all 152 references
  1. [7]

    Smith, N., Li, W., Filippenko, A. V . & Chornock, R. Observed fractions of core-collapse supernova types and initial masses of their single and binary progenitor stars. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 412, 1522–1538 (2011)

    2011

  2. [8]

    Bufano, F. et al. SN 2011hs: a fast and faint Type IIb supernova from a supergiant progenitor. Mon. Not. R. As- tron. Soc. 439, 1807–1828 (2014)

    2014

  3. [9]

    Modjaz, M. et al. Optical Spectra of 73 Stripped-envelope Core-collapse Supernovae. Astron. J. 147, 99 (2014)

    2014

  4. [10]

    Pastorello, A. et al. Massive stars exploding in a He- rich circumstellar medium - I. Type Ibn (SN 2006jc-like) events. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 389, 113–130 (2008)

    2008

  5. [11]

    Patat, F. et al. The Metamorphosis of SN 1998bw. Astro- phys. J. 555, 900–917 (2001)

    2001

  6. [12]

    Chen, T. W. et al. SN 2017ens: The Metamorphosis of a Luminous Broadlined Type Ic Supernova into an SN IIn. Astrophys. J. 867, L31 (2018)

    2018

  7. [13]

    & Rosino, L

    Barbon, R., Ciatti, F. & Rosino, L. Photometric proper- ties of type II supernovae. Astron. Astrophys. 72, 287–292 (1979)

    1979

  8. [14]

    Schlegel, E. M. On the Early Spectroscopic Distinction of Type II Supernovae. Astron. J. 111, 1660 (1996)

    1996

  9. [15]

    Guti ´errez, C. P. et al. Halpha Spectral Diversity of Type II Supernovae: Correlations with Photometric Properties. Astrophys. J. 786, L15 (2014)

    2014

  10. [16]

    Guti ´errez, C. P. et al. Type II Supernova Spectral Diver- sity. II. Spectroscopic and Photometric Correlations. As- trophys. J. 850, 90 (2017)

    2017

  11. [17]

    Blanco, V . M. et al. Supernova 1987A in the Large Mag- ellanic Cloud - Initial observations at Cerro Tololo. Astro- phys. J. 320, 589–596 (1987)

    1987

  12. [18]

    B., Gonzalez, R

    Hamuy, M., Suntzeff, N. B., Gonzalez, R. & Martin, G. SN 1987A in the LMC - UBVRI photometry at Cerro Tololo. Astron. J. 95, 63–83 (1988). 8

    1988

  13. [19]

    Chevalier, R. A. The interaction of the radiation from a type II supernova with a circumstellar shell. Astrophys. J. 251, 259–265 (1981)

    1981

  14. [20]

    X-ray and UV-emission from supernova shock waves in stellar winds.Astron

    Fransson, C. X-ray and UV-emission from supernova shock waves in stellar winds.Astron. Astrophys.111, 140– 150 (1982)

    1982

  15. [21]

    Schlegel, E. M. A new subclass of Type II supernovae? Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 244, 269–271 (1990)

    1990

  16. [22]

    Clocchiatti, A. et al. A Study of SN 1992H in NGC 5377. Astron. J. 111, 1286 (1996)

    1996

  17. [23]

    & Turatto, M

    Patat, F., Barbon, R., Cappellaro, E. & Turatto, M. Light curves of type II supernovae. 2: The analysis. Astron. As- trophys. 282, 731–741 (1994)

    1994

  18. [24]

    Arcavi, I. et al. Caltech Core-Collapse Project (CCCP) Observations of Type II Supernovae: Evidence for Three Distinct Photometric Subtypes. Astrophys. J. 756, L30 (2012)

    2012

  19. [25]

    Faran, T. et al. A sample of Type II-L supernovae. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 445, 554–569 (2014)

    2014

  20. [26]

    Anderson, J. P. et al. Characterizing the V-band Light- curves of Hydrogen-rich Type II Supernovae.Astrophys. J. 786, 67 (2014)

    2014

  21. [27]

    Sanders, N. E. et al. Toward Characterization of the Type IIP Supernova Progenitor Population: A Statistical Sample of Light Curves from Pan-STARRS1. Astrophys. J. 799, 208 (2015)

    2015

  22. [28]

    Valenti, S. et al. The diversity of Type II supernova ver- sus the similarity in their progenitors. Mon. Not. R. As- tron. Soc. 459, 3939–3962 (2016)

    2016

  23. [29]

    Galbany, L. et al. UBVRIz Light Curves of 51 Type II Supernovae. Astron. J. 151, 33 (2016)

    2016

  24. [30]

    Rubin, A. et al. Type II Supernova Energetics and Com- parison of Light Curves to Shock-cooling Models. Astro- phys. J. 820, 33 (2016)

    2016

  25. [31]

    Valenti, S. et al. Supernova 2013by: a Type IIL supernova with a IIP-like light-curve drop. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 448, 2608–2616 (2015)

    2015

  26. [32]

    Smartt, S. J. Observational Constraints on the Progenitors of Core-Collapse Supernovae: The Case for Missing High- Mass Stars. Publ. Astron. Soc. Austr.32, e016 (2015)

    2015

  27. [33]

    Elias-Rosa, N. et al. The Massive Progenitor of the Type II-linear Supernova 2009kr. Astrophys. J.714, L254–L259 (2010)

    2010

  28. [34]

    Terreran, G. et al. Hydrogen-rich supernovae beyond the neutrino-driven core-collapse paradigm. Nature Astron- omy 1, 713–720 (2017)

    2017

  29. [35]

    Arcavi, I. et al. Energetic eruptions leading to a peculiar hydrogen-rich explosion of a massive star. Nature 551, 210–213 (2017)

    2017

  30. [36]

    Stritzinger, M. D. et al. The Carnegie Supernova Project I. Photometry data release of low-redshift stripped-envelope supernovae. Astron. Astrophys. 609, A134 (2018)

    2018

  31. [37]

    Taddia, F. et al. The Carnegie Supernova Project I. Anal- ysis of stripped-envelope supernova light curves. As- tron. Astrophys. 609, A136 (2018)

    2018

  32. [38]

    Tominaga, N. et al. The Unique Type Ib Supernova 2005bf: A WN Star Explosion Model for Peculiar Light Curves and Spectra. Astrophys. J. 633, L97–L100 (2005)

    2005

  33. [39]

    Folatelli, G. et al. SN 2005bf: A Possible Transition Event between Type Ib/c Supernovae and Gamma-Ray Bursts. Astrophys. J. 641, 1039–1050 (2006)

    2006

  34. [40]

    Maeda, K. et al. The Unique Type Ib Supernova 2005bf at Nebular Phases: A Possible Birth Event of a Strongly Magnetized Neutron Star. Astrophys. J. 666, 1069–1082 (2007)

    2007

  35. [41]

    Hosseinzadeh, G. et al. Type Ibn Supernovae Show Photo- metric Ho mogeneity and Spectral Diversity at Maximum Light. Astrophys. J. 836, 158 (2017)

    2017

  36. [42]

    & Ya- maoka, H

    Okyudo, M., Kato, T., Ishida, T., Tokimasa, N. & Ya- maoka, H. A V-Band Light Curve of SN 1993J during the First 50 Days. Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan 45, L63–L65 (1993)

    1993

  37. [43]

    Benson, P. J. et al. Light Curves of SN 1993J From The Keck Northeast Astronomy Consortium. Astron. J. 107, 1453 (1994)

    1994

  38. [44]

    W., Treffers, R

    Richmond, M. W., Treffers, R. R., Filippenko, A. V . & Paik, Y . UBVRI Photometry of SN 1993J in M81: Days 3 to 365. Astron. J. 112, 732 (1996)

    1996

  39. [45]

    & Sullivan, M

    Jha, A., Maguire, K. & Sullivan, M. . Nat. Astron. (2019)

    2019

  40. [46]

    Stellar forensics with the Supernova-GRB connection

    Modjaz, M. Stellar forensics with the Supernova-GRB connection. Astronomische Nachrichten 332, 434–447 (2011)

    2011

  41. [47]

    & Wu, X.-F

    Cano, Z., Wang, S.-Q., Dai, Z.-G. & Wu, X.-F. The ob- server’s guide to the gamma-ray burst supernova connec- tion. Advances in Astronomy 2017, 1–41 (2017). URL https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/8929054

    2017 doi

  42. [48]

    & Bianco, F

    Liu, Y .-Q., Modjaz, M. & Bianco, F. B. Analyzing the Largest Spectroscopic Data Set of Hydrogen-poor Super- luminous Supernovae. Astrophys. J. 845, 85 (2017)

    2017

  43. [49]

    Jerkstrand, A. et al. Long-duration Superluminous Super- novae at Late Times. Astrophys. J. 835, 13 (2017)

    2017

  44. [50]

    Inserra, C. . Nat. Astron. (2019). 9

    2019

  45. [51]

    Pastorello, A. et al. Massive stars exploding in a He-rich circumstellar medium - IX. SN 2014av, and characteriza- tion of Type Ibn SNe. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.456, 853– 869 (2016)

    2016

  46. [52]

    Kiewe, M. et al. Caltech Core-Collapse Project (CCCP) Observations of Type IIn Supernovae: Typical Properties and Implications for Their Progenitor Stars. Astrophys. J. 744, 10 (2012)

    2012

  47. [53]

    Hosseinzadeh, G. et al. Type Ibn Supernovae May not all Come from Massive Stars. Astrophys. J. 871, L9 (2019)

    2019

  48. [54]

    Irani, I. et al. SN 2016hil– a Type II supernova in the re- mote outskirts of an elliptical host and its origin.submitted to Astrophys. J.(arXiv:1904.01425) (2019)

    2019 arXiv

  49. [55]

    Clocchiatti, A. et al. SN 1983V in NGC 1365 and the Nature of Stripped Envelope Core-Collapse Supernovae. Astrophys. J. 483, 675–+ (1997)

    1997

  50. [56]

    Liu, Y .-Q., Modjaz, M., Bianco, F. B. & Graur, O. Analyz- ing the Largest Spectroscopic Data Set of Stripped Super- novae to Improve Their Identifications and Constrain Their Progenitors. Astrophys. J. 827, 90 (2016)

    2016

  51. [57]

    Prentice, S. J. & Mazzali, P. A. A physically mo- tivated classification of stripped-envelope supernovae. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 469, 2672–2694 (2017)

    2017

  52. [58]

    & Gal-Yam, A

    Sun, F. & Gal-Yam, A. Quantitative Classification of Type I Supernovae Using Spectroscopic Features at Maximum Brightness. arXiv e-prints (2017)

    2017

  53. [59]

    cooling envelope emis- sion

    is the first quantitative one, fulfilling all the needs laid out above, and addressing the aforementioned time-dependent na- ture of classification. They find that ∼2 weeks after peak bright- ness is the optimal time to differentiate between the different sub classes of Stripped S...

    2014

  54. [60]

    & Bianco, F

    Williamson, M., Modjaz, M. & Bianco, F. Optimal Classi- fication and Outlier Detection for Stripped-Envelope Core- Collapse Supernovae. ApJ, submitted (arXiv:1903.06815) (2019)

    2019 arXiv

  55. [61]

    Andrews, J. E. & Smith, N. Strong late-time circum- stellar interaction in the peculiar supernova iPTF14hls. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 477, 74–79 (2018)

    2018

  56. [62]

    A magnetar model for the hydrogen-rich super- luminous supernova iPTF14hls

    Dessart, L. A magnetar model for the hydrogen-rich super- luminous supernova iPTF14hls. Astron. Astrophys. 610, L10 (2018)

    2018

  57. [63]

    & Gilkis, A

    Soker, N. & Gilkis, A. Explaining iPTF14hls as a common-envelope jets supernova. Mon. Not. R. As- tron. Soc. 475, 1198–1202 (2018)

    2018

  58. [64]

    Wang, L. J. et al. A Fallback Accretion Model for the Un- usual Type II-P Supernova iPTF14hls. Astrophys. J. 865, 95 (2018)

    2018

  59. [65]

    Woosley, S. E. Models for the Unusual Supernova iPTF14hls. Astrophys. J. 863, 105 (2018)

    2018

  60. [66]

    Kasliwal, M. M. Bridging the gap : elusive explosions in the local universe . Ph.D. thesis, California Institute of Technology (2011)

    2011

  61. [67]

    Poznanski, D. et al. An Unusually Fast-Evolving Super- nova. Science 327, 58 (2010)

    2010

  62. [68]

    Kasliwal, M. M. et al. Discovery of a New Photometric Sub-class of Faint and Fast Classical Novae. Astrophys. J. 735, 94 (2011)

    2011

  63. [69]

    Vink ´o, J. et al. A Luminous, Fast Rising UV-transient Discovered by ROTSE: A Tidal Disruption Event? As- trophys. J. 798, 12 (2015)

    2015

  64. [70]

    Greiner, J. et al. A very luminous magnetar-powered su- pernova associated with an ultra-long γ-ray burst. Nature 523, 189–192 (2015)

    2015

  65. [71]

    Rest, A. et al. A fast-evolving luminous transient discov- ered by K2/Kepler. Nature Astronomy 2, 307–311 (2018)

    2018

  66. [72]

    Ho, A. Y . Q. et al. The Death Throes of a Stripped Mas- sive Star: An Eruptive Mass-Loss History Encoded in Pre- Explosion Emission, a Rapidly Rising Luminous Tran- sient, and a Broad-Lined Ic Supernova SN2018gep. arXiv e-prints arXiv:1904.11009 (2019)

    2019 arXiv

  67. [73]

    Drout, M. R. et al. Rapidly Evolving and Luminous Tran- sients from Pan-STARRS1. Astrophys. J. 794, 23 (2014)

    2014

  68. [74]

    Taddia, F. et al. Early-time light curves of Type Ib/c super- novae from the SDSS-II Supernova Survey. Astron. Astro- phys. 574, A60 (2015)

    2015

  69. [75]

    Gall, E. E. E. et al. A comparative study of Type II-P and II-L supernova rise times as exemplified by the case of LSQ13cuw. Astron. Astrophys. 582, A3 (2015)

    2015

  70. [76]

    Taddia, F. et al. Long-rising Type II supernovae from Palo- mar Transient Factory and Caltech Core-Collapse Project. Astron. Astrophys. 588, A5 (2016)

    2016

  71. [77]

    Arcavi, I. et al. Rapidly Rising Transients in the Super- nova—Superluminous Supernova Gap. Astrophys. J. 819, 35 (2016)

    2016

  72. [78]

    Taddia, F. et al. Analysis of broad-lined Type Ic super- novae from the (intermediate) Palomar Transient Factory. Astron. Astrophys. 621, A71 (2019)

    2019

  73. [79]

    Pursiainen, M. et al. Rapidly evolving transients in the Dark Energy Survey. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 481, 894– 917 (2018)

    2018

  74. [80]

    Drout, M. R. et al. The First Systematic Study of Type Ibc Supernova Multi-band Light Curves. Astrophys. J. 741, 97–117 (2011)

    2011

  75. [81]

    Bianco, F. B. et al. Multi-color Optical and Near-infrared Light Curves of 64 Stripped-envelope Core-Collapse Su- pernovae. Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser.213, 19 (2014)

    2014

  76. [82]

    Fremling, C. et al. Oxygen and helium in stripped- envelope supernovae. Astron. Astrophys. 618, A37 (2018). 10

    2018

  77. [83]

    Shivvers, I. et al. The Berkeley sample of stripped- envelope supernovae. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 482, 1545–1556 (2019)

    2019

  78. [84]

    Prentice, S. J. et al. Investigating the properties of stripped- envelope supernovae; what are the implications for their progenitors? Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 485, 1559–1578 (2019)

    2019

  79. [85]

    Lyman, J. D. et al. Bolometric light curves and explo- sion parameters of 38 stripped-envelope core-collapse su- pernovae. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 457, 328–350 (2016)

    2016

  80. [86]

    Graur, O. et al. LOSS Revisited. I. Unraveling Correla- tions Between Supernova Rates and Galaxy Properties, as Measured in a Reanalysis of the Lick Observatory Super- nova Search. Astrophys. J. 837, 120 (2017)

    2017

  81. [87]

    Kerzendorf, W. E. et al. No surviving non-compact stellar companion to Cassiopeia A. Astron. Astrophys. 623, A34 (2019)

    2019

  82. [88]

    Krause, O. et al. The Cassiopeia A Supernova Was of Type IIb. Science 320, 1195 (2008)

    2008

  83. [89]

    Rest, A. et al. Scattered-Light Echoes from the Historical Galactic Supernovae Cassiopeia A and Tycho (SN 1572). Astrophys. J. 681, L81 (2008)

    2008

  84. [90]

    Arnett, W. D. Type I supernovae. I - Analytic solutions for the early part of the light curve.Astrophys. J.253, 785–797 (1982)

    1982

  85. [91]

    Modjaz, M. et al. Early-Time Photometry and Spec- troscopy of the Fast Evolving SN 2006aj Associated with GRB 060218. Astrophys. J. 645, L21–L24 (2006)

    2006

  86. [92]

    J., Breeveld, A

    Brown, P. J., Breeveld, A. A., Holland, S., Kuin, P. & Pritchard, T. SOUSA: the Swift Optical/Ultraviolet Su- pernova Archive. Astro.Spac.Scie 354, 89–96 (2014)

    2014

  87. [93]

    Mazzali, P. A. et al. The Metamorphosis of Supernova SN 2008D/XRF 080109: A Link Between Supernovae and GRBs/Hypernovae. Science 321, 1185 (2008)

    2008

  88. [94]

    Modjaz, M. et al. From Shock Breakout to Peak and Be- yond: Extensive Panchromatic Observations of the Type Ib Supernova 2008D Associated with Swift X-ray Transient 080109. Astrophys. J. 702, 226–248 (2009)

    2009

  89. [95]

    Arcavi, I. et al. SN 2011dh: Discovery of a Type IIb Su- pernova from a Compact Progenitor in the Nearby Galaxy M51. Astrophys. J. 742, L18 (2011)

    2011

  90. [96]

    Kumar, B. et al. Light curve and spectral evolution of the Type IIb supernova 2011fu.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.431, 308–321 (2013)

    2013

  91. [97]

    Morales-Garoffolo, A. et al. SN 2013df, a double-peaked IIb supernova from a compact progenitor and an extended H envelope. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 445, 1647–1662 (2014)

    2014

  92. [98]

    Arcavi, I. et al. Constraints on the Progenitor of SN 2016gkg from Its Shock-cooling Light Curve. Astro- phys. J. 837, L2 (2017)

    2017

  93. [99]

    Bersten, M. C. et al. A surge of light at the birth of a supernova. Nature 554, 497–499 (2018)

    2018

  94. [100]

    Izzo, L. et al. Signatures of a jet cocoon in early spectra of a supernova associated with a γ-ray burst. Nature 565, 324–327 (2019)

    2019

  95. [102]

    Colgate, S. A. & McKee, C. Early Supernova Luminosity. Astrophys. J. 157, 623 (1969)

    1969

  96. [103]

    Weaver, T. A. The structure of supernova shock waves. Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser.32, 233–282 (1976)

    1976

  97. [104]

    Klein, R. I. & Chevalier, R. A. X-ray bursts from Type II supernovae. Astrophys. J. 223, L109–L112 (1978)

    1978

  98. [105]

    Falk, S. W. Shock steepening and prompt thermal emission in supernovae. Astrophys. J. 225, L133–L136 (1978)

    1978

  99. [106]

    Matzner, C. D. & McKee, C. F. The Expulsion of Stel- lar Envelopes in Core-Collapse Supernovae. Astrophys. J. 510, 379–403 (1999)

    1999

  100. [107]

    & Sari, R

    Nakar, E. & Sari, R. Early Supernovae Light Curves Fol- lowing the Shock Breakout. Astrophys. J. 725, 904–921 (2010)

    2010

  101. [108]

    & Waxman, E

    Rabinak, I. & Waxman, E. The Early UV/Optical Emis- sion from Core-collapse Supernovae. Astrophys. J. 728, 63 (2011)

    2011

  102. [109]

    & Katz, B

    Waxman, E. & Katz, B. Shock Breakout Theory , 967 (2017)

    2017

  103. [110]

    Tominaga, N. et al. Shock Breakout in Type II Plateau Supernovae: Prospects for High-Redshift Supernova Sur- veys. Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser.193, 20 (2011)

    2011

  104. [111]

    Schawinski, K. et al. Supernova Shock Breakout from a Red Supergiant. Science 321, 223–226 (2008)

    2008

  105. [112]

    Soderberg, A. M. et al. An extremely luminous X-ray out- burst at the birth of a supernova. Nature 453, 469–474 (2008)

    2008

  106. [113]

    Gezari, S. et al. GALEX Detection of Shock Breakout in Type IIP Supernova PS1-13arp: Implications for the Pro- genitor Star Wind. Astrophys. J. 804, 28 (2015)

    2015

  107. [114]

    M., Pooley, D., Wheeler, J

    Couch, S. M., Pooley, D., Wheeler, J. C. & Milosavljevi ´c, M. Aspherical Supernova Shock Breakout and the Ob- servations of Supernova 2008D. Astrophys. J. 727, 104 (2011). 11

    2011

  108. [115]

    & Nakar, E

    Svirski, G. & Nakar, E. SN 2008D: A Wolf-Rayet Ex- plosion Through a Thick Wind. Astrophys. J. 788, L14 (2014)

    2014

  109. [116]

    Campana, S. et al. The association of GRB 060218 with a supernova and the evolution of the shock wave. Nature 442, 1008–1010 (2006)

    2006

  110. [117]

    & Sari, R

    Nakar, E. & Sari, R. Relativistic Shock Breakouts - A Vari- ety of Gamma-Ray Flares: From Low-luminosity Gamma- Ray Bursts to Type Ia Supernovae. Astrophys. J. 747, 88 (2012)

    2012

  111. [120]

    & Gal-Yam, A

    Rubin, A. & Gal-Yam, A. Exploring the Efficacy and Lim- itations of Shock-cooling Models: New Analysis of Type II Supernovae Observed by the Kepler Mission. Astro- phys. J. 848, 8 (2017)

    2017

  112. [121]

    Ofek, E. O. et al. Supernova PTF 09UJ: A Possible Shock Breakout from a Dense Circumstellar Wind. Astrophys. J. 724, 1396–1401 (2010)

    2010

  113. [122]

    Chevalier, R. A. & Irwin, C. M. Shock Breakout in Dense Mass Loss: Luminous Supernovae. Astrophys. J. 729, L6 (2011)

    2011

  114. [123]

    & Loeb, A

    Balberg, S. & Loeb, A. Supernova shock breakout through a wind. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 414, 1715–1720 (2011)

    2011

  115. [124]

    & Sari, R

    Svirski, G., Nakar, E. & Sari, R. Optical to X-Ray Su- pernova Light Curves Following Shock Breakout through a Thick Wind. Astrophys. J. 759, 108 (2012)

    2012

  116. [125]

    & Balberg, S

    Ginzburg, S. & Balberg, S. Light Curves from Supernova Shock Breakout through an Extended Wind. Astrophys. J. 780, 18 (2014)

    2014

  117. [126]

    J., Yoon, S.-C., Gr ¨afener, G

    Moriya, T. J., Yoon, S.-C., Gr ¨afener, G. & Blinnikov, S. I. Immediate dense circumstellar environment of supernova progenitors caused by wind acceleration: its effect on su- pernova light curves.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.469, L108– L112 (2017)

    2017

  118. [127]

    Forster, F. et al. The delay of shock breakout due to cir- cumstellar material evident in most type II supernovae. Nature Astronomy 2, 808–818 (2018)

    2018

  119. [128]

    Chevalier, R. A. & Fransson, C. Shock Breakout Emission from a Type Ib/c Supernova: XRT 080109/SN 2008D.As- trophys. J. 683, L135 (2008)

    2008

  120. [129]

    & Piro, A

    Nakar, E. & Piro, A. L. Supernovae with Two Peaks in the Optical Light Curve and the Signature of Progenitors with Low-mass Extended Envelopes. Astrophys. J. 788, 193 (2014)

    2014

  121. [130]

    Piro, A. L. Using Double-peaked Supernova Light Curves to Study Extended Material.Astrophys. J.808, L51 (2015)

    2015

  122. [131]

    & Waxman, E

    Sapir, N. & Waxman, E. UV/Optical Emission from the Expanding Envelopes of Type II Supernovae.Astrophys. J. 838, 130 (2017)

    2017

  123. [132]

    Stritzinger, M. et al. Optical Photometry of the Type Ia Supernova 1999ee and the Type Ib/c Supernova 1999ex in IC 5179. Astron. J. 124, 2100–2117 (2002)

    2002

  124. [133]

    & Duschinger, M

    Hoflich, P., Langer, N. & Duschinger, M. Supernova 1993J - Explosion of a Massive Cool Supergiant with a Small Envelope Mass. Astron. Astrophys. 275, L29 (1993)

    1993

  125. [134]

    Bersten, M. C. et al. The Type IIb Supernova 2011dh from a Supergiant Progenitor. Astrophys. J. 757, 31 (2012)

    2012

  126. [135]

    G., Bersten, M

    Benvenuto, O. G., Bersten, M. C. & Nomoto, K. A Binary Progenitor for the Type IIb Supernova 2011dh in M51.As- trophys. J. 762, 74 (2013)

    2013

  127. [136]

    Gal-Yam, A. et al. A Wolf-Rayet-like progenitor of SN 2013cu from spectral observations of a stellar wind. Na- ture 509, 471–474 (2014)

    2014

  128. [137]

    Shivvers, I. et al. Early Emission from the Type IIn Su- pernova 1998S at High Resolution. Astrophys. J. 806, 213 (2015)

    2015

  129. [138]

    Yaron, O. et al. Confined dense circumstellar material sur- rounding a regular type II supernova. Nature Physics 13, 510–517 (2017)

    2017

  130. [139]

    Morozova, V ., Piro, A. L. & Valenti, S. Unifying Type II Supernova Light Curves with Dense Circumstellar Mate- rial. Astrophys. J. 838, 28 (2017)

    2017

  131. [140]

    Morozova, V ., Piro, A. L. & Valenti, S. Measuring the Pro- genitor Masses and Dense Circumstellar Material of Type II Supernovae. Astrophys. J. 858, 15 (2018)

    2018

  132. [141]

    Khazov, D. et al. Flash Spectroscopy: Emission Lines from the Ionized Circumstellar Material around ¡10-day- old Type II Supernovae. Astrophys. J. 818, 3 (2016)

    2016

  133. [142]

    Bellm, E. C. et al. The Zwicky Transient Facility: Sys- tem Overview, Performance, and First Results. Publ. As- tron. Soc. Pacif.131, 018002 (2019)

    2019

  134. [143]

    Ivezic, Z. et al. Large Synoptic Survey Telescope: From Science Drivers To Reference Design. Serbian Astronom- ical Journal 176, 1–13 (2008)

    2008

  135. [144]

    Tartaglia, L. et al. The Early Detection and Follow-up of the Highly Obscured Type II Supernova 2016ija/DLT16am. Astrophys. J. 853, 62 (2018). 12

    2018

  136. [145]

    Kochanek, C. S. et al. The All-Sky Automated Sur- vey for Supernovae (ASAS-SN) Light Curve Server v1.0. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pacif.129, 104502 (2017)

    2017

  137. [146]

    Blagorodnova, N. et al. The SED Machine: A Robotic Spectrograph for Fast Transient Classification. Publi- cations of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific 130, 035003 (2018)

    2018

  138. [147]

    Brown, T. M. et al. Las Cumbres Observatory Global Tele- scope Network. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pacif.125, 1031 (2013)

    2013

  139. [148]

    Gehrels, N. et al. The Swift Gamma-Ray Burst Mission. Astrophys. J. 611, 1005–1020 (2004)

    2004

  140. [149]

    Sagiv, I. et al. Science with a Wide-field UV Transient Explorer. Astron. J. 147, 79 (2014)

    2014

  141. [150]

    Cenko, S. B. et al. CUTIE: Cubesat Ultraviolet Transient Imaging Experiment. In American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts #229, vol. 229 of American Astronomi- cal Society Meeting Abstracts, 328.04 (2017)

    2017

  142. [151]

    & Gal-Yam, A

    Yaron, O. & Gal-Yam, A. WISeREP - An Interactive Su- pernova Data Repository. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pacif. 124, 668 (2012)

    2012

  143. [152]

    Guillochon, J., Parrent, J., Kelley, L. Z. & Margutti, R. An Open Catalog for Supernova Data. Astrophys. J. 835, 64 (2017)

    2017

  144. [153]

    A., Bowman, M., Saunders, E

    Street, R. A., Bowman, M., Saunders, E. S. & Boroson, T. General-purpose software for managing astronomical observing programs in the LSST era. In Software and Cy- berinfrastructure for Astronomy V , vol. 10707 of Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Con- ...

    2018 arXiv

Pith tools

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