Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Including microscopic β-decay rates magnifies the pre-bounce antineutrino luminosity of a core-collapse supernova by a factor of roughly a thousand, with the spectrum reaching about 11 MeV.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 19:57 UTC pith:S6MWTBIX

load-bearing objection First global microscopic beta-decay table in a CCSN simulation; qualitative effect is credible, but the headline enhancement factors are not yet trustworthy because the rates are unbenchmarked and the paper's own numbers disagree internally. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2511.21567 v2 pith:S6MWTBIX submitted 2025-11-26 astro-ph.HE nucl-th

Enhanced antineutrino emission from β decay in core-collapse supernovae with self-consistent weak decay rates

T. Dasher , A. Ravli\'c , S. Lalit , E. O'Connor , K. Godbey This is my paper
classification astro-ph.HE nucl-th
keywords core-collapse supernovaeantineutrino emissionbeta decayweak-interaction ratesfinite-temperature QRPAenergy density functionalN=50 nucleipre-supernova neutrinos
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper claims that β decay on neutron-rich nuclei—not just positron capture on free neutrons—produces the dominant electron-antineutrino emission in the seconds before a core-collapse supernova's bounce. Using a microscopic nuclear model (relativistic energy-density functional plus finite-temperature quasiparticle random-phase approximation), the authors compute β-decay rates for 902 nuclei and feed them into supernova simulations. They report that the pre-bounce antineutrino emissivity rises by more than four orders of magnitude and the luminosity by about three orders of magnitude compared with the standard baseline, with the spectrum extending to roughly 11 MeV. If correct, this makes the presupernova antineutrino signal a far stronger target for neutrino detectors and gives β decay a potential role in late-stage stellar evolution, even though the collapse dynamics themselves are unchanged.

Core claim

The discovery is that β decay, included self-consistently via FT-QRPA rates, enhances the pre-bounce antineutrino emissivity by more than four orders of magnitude and the luminosity by more than three orders relative to positron-capture-only estimates. The enhancement peaks at about 3 MeV and extends to about 11 MeV, with neutron-rich nuclei near N=50 contributing most of the high-energy tail. This is the first core-collapse supernova simulation to incorporate global β-decay rates from a microscopic theory, and it leaves the electron-neutrino channel and the collapse dynamics essentially unchanged.

What carries the argument

The central object is the FT-QRPA β-decay rate table: β-decay and antineutrino-energy-loss rates for 902 nuclei from calcium to zirconium, computed at temperatures 1–30 GK and densities ρYe = 10^5–10^12 g/cm^3. It combines relativistic energy-density-functional theory (D3C* interaction) for the nuclear ground state with the finite-temperature quasiparticle random-phase approximation for transitions to excited states, including first-forbidden transitions and de-excitations from highly excited parent states. Coupled with the NSE composition and the neutrino-transport library, this table replaces the usual assumption of only positron capture on free neutrons as an antineutrino source.

Load-bearing premise

The premise that the FT-QRPA β-decay rate table, especially the de-excitation contributions from highly excited parent states, is quantitatively accurate; if those rates are overstated, the orders-of-magnitude enhancement shrinks to the much smaller shell-model level.

What would settle it

Measure the β-decay half-lives (or Gamow-Teller strength) of the neutron-rich N≈50 nuclei that dominate the emissivity—around zinc–germanium isotopes—and compare with FT-QRPA predictions; a systematic overprediction of the size seen in the shell-model comparison (~10^3) would falsify the enhancement. Alternatively, a Galactic pre-supernova antineutrino burst whose flux matches the shell-model expectation rather than the FT-QRPA one.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Pre-bounce antineutrino luminosity is roughly 10^3 times the positron-capture-only value, bringing it within about two orders of magnitude of the electron-neutrino luminosity.
  • The antineutrino spectrum extends to about 11 MeV, in the efficient detection window of water-Cherenkov and scintillator detectors, so a Galactic pre-supernova could yield a much larger burst than previously expected.
  • Reliable antineutrino predictions require rate tables covering medium-heavy neutron-rich nuclei (N≈50), beyond the pf-shell region accessible to shell-model calculations.
  • Although the new rates do not alter the collapse trajectory in these simulations, they set the stage for changes in presupernova stellar evolution, which could feed back into collapse initial conditions.
  • The same FT-QRPA framework gives, for the first time, average antineutrino and neutrino energies from a consistent rate set, enabling direct channel-by-channel comparison.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The FT-QRPA rates exceed shell-model rates by up to three orders of magnitude in the overlap region (supplementary Fig. S2); a conservative reading would treat the shell-model result as a lower bound and the FT-QRPA result as an upper bound on the true enhancement.
  • If the de-excitation contributions are verified, the same mechanism could also enhance electron-neutrino emission at even higher densities and alter the presupernova antineutrino background relevant to early-warning systems.
  • A direct test is to compare FT-QRPA β-decay half-lives or Gamow-Teller strengths against terrestrial measurements on N≈50 nuclei (e.g., zinc and germanium isotopes); a systematic discrepancy on the scale seen in the shell-model comparison would overturn the enhancement claim.
  • The paper focuses on pre-bounce signals; extending these rates to post-bounce or to rotating/3D models could reveal larger dynamical effects than the spherical, non-rotating case considered here.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. This Letter presents, to the authors' knowledge, the first core-collapse supernova (CCSNe) simulation that incorporates global β-decay rates from a microscopic theory. The rates are computed with a relativistic energy density functional (D3C*) and finite-temperature quasiparticle random-phase approximation (FT-QRPA) for 902 nuclei from Z=20 to 40, including allowed Gamow-Teller and first-forbidden transitions, with full temperature and density coverage. The antineutrino spectral function is parameterized with an effective Q-value ansatz (Eq. 3), and the rates are implemented in the open-source code GR1D using NSE composition from the SFHo equation of state. The authors compare models with only positron capture on free neutrons (e+ + n baseline), with shell-model rates (limited to the pf-shell), and with the new FT-QRPA rates. They report that β decay enhances the pre-bounce antineutrino emissivity by more than four orders of magnitude and the luminosity by about three orders of magnitude relative to the e+ + n baseline, extending the antineutrino spectrum to about 11 MeV, while leaving the collapse dynamics essentially unchanged.

Significance. If the FT-QRPA rate table is reliable, the paper is a substantial step forward: it provides a global microscopic β-decay rate library for CCSNe simulations extending to neutron-rich nuclei near N=50, and it quantifies a potentially observable pre-bounce antineutrino signal. The qualitative direction—that β decay enhances antineutrino emission—is supported by both the FT-QRPA and the shell-model rates, and the use of a self-consistent framework for electron capture and β decay is a strength. However, the quantitative enhancement factors are not stable (the abstract, introduction, and conclusions disagree by up to two orders of magnitude) and rest on FT-QRPA de-excitation strength that exceeds shell-model rates by up to three orders of magnitude without experimental validation. The paper is clearly written and uses open-source tools (GR1D, NuLib), but the central numerical claims require additional benchmarking and reconciliation before they can be accepted.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract vs. Introduction vs. Conclusions] The enhancement factors are internally inconsistent. The abstract reports antineutrino emissivity enhancement 'more than two orders of magnitude' and luminosity 'by a factor of 50'; the introduction reports 'more than 4 orders of magnitude' for emissivity and '3 orders of magnitude' for luminosity; the conclusions state '~10^3 times' luminosity. Since these are the paper's headline quantitative claims, the authors must reconcile them and specify the exact thermodynamic epoch and baseline (e+ + n) used for each ratio. This inconsistency suggests the headline numbers are not yet stable.
  2. [Supplemental Fig. S2; Methods; Eq. (4)] The central quantitative enhancement is driven by FT-QRPA β-decay rates that are not benchmarked to experiment. Fig. S2 shows FT-QRPA rates exceed shell-model rates by up to three orders of magnitude for pf-shell nuclei, attributed to de-excitations from highly excited parent states (Ref. [42]). No measured β-decay half-lives or β-strength functions are presented to validate this de-excitation component. Since the emissivity in Eq. (4) is linear in the rates, an overcount of de-excitation strength would propagate directly into the claimed 4-order enhancement. The authors should provide experimental validation (e.g., half-lives at low T) and/or isolate the de-excitation contribution to demonstrate that it is not an artifact. Until then, the specific enhancement factors should be treated as conditional.
  3. [Eq. (3) and Fig. 1] The antineutrino spectrum n_i(E) is a one-parameter ansatz with effective Q-value q_i fitted to reproduce the average energy. While the total luminosity is independent of the shape because Eq. (2) defines λ̄ν = ∫ E n_i dE, the differential emissivity and the claimed spectral extension to ~11 MeV (Fig. 1(a)) are not derived from the microscopic calculation. The authors should validate the shape against a microscopic spectral function for representative nuclei, or soften the high-energy-tail claim.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Data availability] The β-decay rate table is only available 'upon request.' For reproducibility and to enable community use, the table should be deposited in a public repository (e.g., Zenodo) or included as supplementary material.
  2. [Abstract] The abstract describes the baseline as 'thermal emission alone,' but the baseline model is positron capture on free neutrons (e+ + n), not thermal emission. Please correct the wording.
  3. [Methods, Eq. (3)] The effective Q-value q_i is chosen to reproduce the average antineutrino energy; this is a fit parameter. The authors should state how many parameters are in the spectral model and whether results are sensitive to the chosen ansatz.
  4. [Methods] The notation D3C* should be defined (it is the relativistic EDF parametrization). Also, the paper would benefit from a sentence explaining the de-excitation treatment in FT-QRPA, since Fig. S2 shows it is the main source of rate differences.
  5. [Fig. 3] The dotted curve in Fig. 3 is labeled 'FT-QRPA νe' in the legend and 'FT-QRPA antineutrinos' in the caption; check that all labels are consistent.
  6. [Supplemental Material, Fig. S3] The label 'log10(¯ν emissivity)' in Fig. S3 is ambiguous; the text refers to antineutrino energy loss rate. Please unify the terminology.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

No significant circularity; the emissivity enhancement follows from the computed FT-QRPA rate table, with only a minor spectral-shape self-consistency fit.

specific steps
  1. fitted input called prediction [Methods, Eq. (3); Abstract; Results Fig. 3(b),(d)]
    "with effective Q-value, qi, determined by reproducing the average antineutrino energy ⟨E¯νe ⟩ = λ¯νe /λβ, and Ni the overall normalization constant."

    The spectral function n_i(E) is parameterized by fitting q_i so that each nucleus' mean antineutrino energy equals the rate-table ratio λ̄ν/λβ. The later statement that the total average antineutrino energy increases by about 0.5 MeV is therefore a weighted average of these input means—forced by construction—rather than an independent emergent prediction. The order-of-magnitude emissivity/luminosity enhancement, however, is not fitted; it comes directly from summing the rate table over NSE abundances.

full rationale

The paper's central claim—that including beta decay enhances pre-bounce antineutrino emissivity and luminosity—is obtained by substituting a newly computed FT-QRPA rate table (Eqs. 1–2) into the standard NuLib emissivity sum (Eq. 4) with NSE abundances. No parameter is fitted to the final supernova observable. The only internal tuning is the effective Q-value q_i in Eq. (3), which is transparently set to reproduce the rate-table average energy; this makes the reported average-energy increase definitional rather than emergent, but it does not generate the multi-order-of-magnitude enhancement. The self-citations (Refs. [38], [42], [45]) are methodological and overlap with the present authors, but the load-bearing input is the rate table computed here; the de-excitation contribution is a model-validity concern, not a circular derivation. The lack of public rate-table archiving and the absence of half-life benchmarks are correctness/verifiability risks, not circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central prediction is only as strong as the nuclear-model input. The two free parameters listed are inherited or fitted; the five axioms are standard astrophysical assumptions plus the unvalidated FT-QRPA rate hypothesis. No new particles or forces are introduced.

free parameters (2)
  • D3C* relativistic energy-density functional parameters = fit in Typel (2005) to nuclear ground-state properties
    The beta-decay transitions and FT-QRPA residual interaction inherit these fitted parameters; the paper does not re-fit them.
  • Effective Q-value q_i in spectral function Eq. (3) = set per nucleus/condition to reproduce ⟨E_ν̄⟩ = λ_ν̄/λ_β
    The one-parameter spectrum ansatz is tuned to the model's own average antineutrino energy; it is an ad hoc shape parameter rather than a derived quantity.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Nuclei are fully ionized and electrons/positrons obey a Fermi-Dirac distribution
    Used in Methods to evaluate beta-decay phase space; standard for CCSN conditions but not verified here.
  • domain assumption NSE abundances from the SFHo equation of state describe nuclear composition
    The total emissivity (Eq. 4) sums over NSE abundances; errors in composition directly change the predicted luminosity.
  • domain assumption FT-QRPA with D3C* correctly captures allowed and first-forbidden transitions, including de-excitation contributions
    Supplemental Fig. S2 shows rates up to 3 orders higher than shell-model; no experimental benchmark is presented, so the magnitude of the enhancement rests on this assumption.
  • ad hoc to paper The one-parameter spectral ansatz with effective Q-value q_i represents the true antineutrino spectrum
    Eq. (3) fixes only the mean energy; the shape above and below the mean is unconstrained.
  • domain assumption Electron capture rates from Ref. [38] are correct and consistent with the new beta-decay rates
    Simulations combine both rate sets; if the EC rates are wrong, the thermodynamic trajectory and comparison luminosities change.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 12336 in / 15606 out tokens · 124743 ms · 2026-08-03T19:57:18.509363+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Nuclear weak-interaction rates are known to exert a prominent effect in the late-stages of stellar collapse. Despite their importance, most studies to date on core-collapse supernovae (CCSNe) have focused primarily on the effects of electron captures, neglecting $\beta$~decay contributions. In this work, we present the first CCSNe simulation incorporating global $\beta$~decay rates from a microscopic theory. These are enabled by a large-scale evaluation of both electron capture and $\beta$~decay rates, obtained self-consistently utilizing the relativistic energy density functional theory and finite-temperature quasiparticle random-phase approximation. Including $\beta$ decay leads to a dramatic enhancement of the pre-bounce antineutrino signal as the antineutrino emissivity increases by more than two orders of magnitude and the luminosity by a factor of 50 relative to thermal emission alone, while the average antineutrino energy increases by over 1 MeV. It is expected that these new rates could help us constrain the model uncertainties related to weak-interaction processes, improving the prediction of antineutrino signal during the final stages of stellar death.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.21567 by A. Ravli\'c, E. O'Connor, K. Godbey, S. Lalit, T. Dasher.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. The antineutrino emissivity as a function of an [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Partial contribution of individual nuclei to the total [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Similar trends are observed irrespective of the pro [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Future directions in nuclear $\beta$ decay at FRIB and beyond

    nucl-th 2026-07 unverdicted

    A community white paper summarizing the current state and future directions of nuclear beta-decay studies at FRIB, with no new quantitative result.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 2 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Hirata, T

    K. Hirata, T. Kajita, M. Koshiba, M. Nakahata, et al. , Observation of a neutrino burst from the supernova SN1987A, Phys. Rev. Lett. 58, 1490 (1987)

    1987

  2. [2]

    R. M. Bionta, G. Blewitt, C. B. Bratton, D. Casper, A. Ciocio, R. Claus, B. Cortez, M. Crouch, S. T. Dye, S. Errede, G. W. Foster, W. Gajewski, K. S. Ganezer, M. Goldhaber, T. J. Haines, T. W. Jones, D. Kiel- czewska, W. R. Kropp, J. G. Learned, J. M. LoSecco, J. Matthews, R. Miller, M. S. Mudan, H. S. Park, L. R. Price, F. Reines, J. Schultz, S. Seidel, ...

    1987

  3. [3]

    Alexeyev, L

    E. Alexeyev, L. Alexeyeva, I. Krivosheina, and V. Volchenko, Detection of the neutrino signal from sn 1987a in the lmc using the inr baksan underground scin- tillation telescope, Physics Letters B 205, 209 (1988)

    1988

  4. [4]

    J. F. Beacom and M. R. Vagins, Antineutrino spec- troscopy with large water ˇCerenkov detectors, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 171101 (2004)

    2004

  5. [5]

    Odrzywolek, M

    A. Odrzywolek, M. Misiaszek, and M. Kutschera, Detec- tion possibility of the pair-annihilation neutrinos from the neutrino-cooled pre-supernova star, Astroparticle Physics 21, 303 (2004)

    2004

  6. [6]

    Odrzywolek, M

    A. Odrzywolek, M. Misiaszek, and M. Kutschera, Neu- trinos from Pre-Supernova Star, Acta Physica Polonica B 35, 1981 (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0405006 [astro-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1981

  7. [7]

    Asakura, A

    K. Asakura, A. Gando, Y. Gando, T. Hachiya, et al. , Kamland sensitivity to neutrinos from pre-supernova stars, The Astrophys. J. 818, 91 (2016)

    2016

  8. [8]

    Proto-Collaboration:, K

    H.-K. Proto-Collaboration:, K. Abe, K. Abe, H. Aihara, A. Aimi, et al. , Hyper-kamiokande design report (2018), arXiv:1805.04163 [physics.ins-det]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  9. [9]

    Antonioli, R

    P. Antonioli, R. T. Fienberg, F. Fleurot, Y. Fukuda, W. Fulgione, A. Habig, J. Heise, A. B. McDonald, C. Mills, T. Namba, L. J. Robinson, K. Scholberg, M. Schwendener, R. W. Sinnott, B. Stacey, Y. Suzuki, R. Tafirout, C. Vigorito, B. Viren, C. Virtue, and A. Zichichi, Snews: the supernova early warning system, New Journal of Physics 6, 114 (2004)

    2004

  10. [10]

    Al Kharusi, S

    S. Al Kharusi, S. Y. BenZvi, J. S. Bobowski, W. Bonivento, V. Brdar, T. Brunner, E. Caden, M. Clark, A. Coleiro, M. Colomer-Molla, J. I. Crespo- Anad´ on, A. Depoian, D. Dornic, V. Fischer, D. Franco, W. Fulgione, A. Gallo Rosso, M. Geske, S. Gris- wold, M. Gromov, D. Haggard, A. Habig, O. Halim, A. Higuera, R. Hill, S. Horiuchi, K. Ishidoshiro, C. Kato, ...

    2021

  11. [11]

    M. Kara, S. Torres-Lara, A. Baxter-Depoian, S. BenZvi, M. C. Molla, A. Habig, J. P. Kneller, M. Lai, R. F. Lang, M. Linvill, D. Milisavljevic, J. Migenda, C. Orr, K. Schol- berg, J. Smolsky, J. Tseng, C. D. Tunnell, J. Vasel, and A. Sheshukov, The snews 2.0 alert software for the coinci- dent detection of neutrinos from core-collapse supernovae (2024), ar...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  12. [12]

    J. R. Wilson, J. Centrella, J. LeBlanc, and R. Bowers, Numerical astrophysics, Jones and Bartlett, Boston , 422 (1985)

    1985

  13. [13]

    Langanke, G

    K. Langanke, G. Mart ´ ınez-Pinedo, and R. G. T. Zegers, Electron capture in stars, Reports on Progress in Physics 84, 066301 (2021)

    2021

  14. [14]

    Langanke and G

    K. Langanke and G. Mart ´ ınez-Pinedo, Nuclear weak- interaction processes in stars, Rev. Mod. Phys. 75, 819 (2003)

    2003

  15. [15]

    Suzuki, Nuclear weak rates and nuclear weak processes in stars, Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics 126, 103974 (2022)

    T. Suzuki, Nuclear weak rates and nuclear weak processes in stars, Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics 126, 103974 (2022)

    2022

  16. [16]

    Janka, K

    H.-T. Janka, K. Langanke, A. Marek, G. Mart ´ ınez- Pinedo, and B. M¨ uller, Theory of core-collapse super- novae, Phys. Rep. 442, 38 (2007), the Hans Bethe Cen- tennial Volume 1906-2006

    2007

  17. [17]

    Mart ´ ınez-Pinedo, K

    G. Mart ´ ınez-Pinedo, K. Langanke, and D. J. Dean, Com- petition of electron capture and beta-decay rates in su- pernova collapse, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series 126, 493 (2000)

    2000

  18. [18]

    H. A. Bethe, Supernova mechanisms, Rev. Mod. Phys. 62, 801 (1990)

    1990

  19. [19]

    G. M. Fuller, W. A. Fowler, and M. J. Newman, Stellar weak-interaction rates for sd-shell nuclei. I-Nuclear ma- trix element systematics with application to Al-26 and selected nuclei of importance to the supernova problem, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series 42, 447 (1980)

    1980

  20. [20]

    to zirconium ( Z = 40). The considered temperatures span a range from 1 to 30 GK, with a respective range in densities from ρYe = 10 5 to 10 12 g/cm3, enough to consider the CCSNe trajectories where β decays are of relevance. The β decay table includes a set of ( λβ, λ¯νe ) values at specific ( T, ρYe) conditions. We evaluate the antineutrino spectral func...

    2020

  21. [21]

    G. M. Fuller, W. A. Fowler, and M. J. Newman, Stellar weak interaction rates for intermediate mass nuclei. III- Rate tables for the free nucleons and nuclei with A= 21 to A= 60, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series 48, 279 (1982)

    1982

  22. [22]

    G. M. Fuller, W. A. Fowler, and M. J. Newman, Stellar weak interaction rates for intermediate-mass nuclei. II- A= 21 to A= 60, The Astrophysical Journal 252, 715 (1982)

    1982

  23. [23]

    Fuller, W

    G. Fuller, W. Fowler, and M. Newman, Stellar weak interaction rates for intermediate-mass nuclei. IV- Interpolation procedures for rapidly varying lepton cap- ture rates using effective log (ft)-values, The Astrophys- ical Journal 293, 1 (1985)

    1985

  24. [24]

    T. Oda, M. Hino, K. Muto, M. Takahara, and K. Sato, Rate tables for the weak processes of sd-shell nuclei in stellar matter, Atomic Data and Nuclear Data Tables 56, 231 (1994)

    1994

  25. [25]

    Langanke and G

    K. Langanke and G. Mart ´ ınez-Pinedo, Supernova elec- tron capture rates on odd-odd nuclei, Physics Letters B 453, 187 (1999)

    1999

  26. [26]

    Langanke and G

    K. Langanke and G. Mart ´ ınez-Pinedo, Shell-model cal- culations of stellar weak interaction rates: II. Weak rates for nuclei in the mass range A = 45 − 65 in supernovae environments, Nuclear Physics A 673, 481 (2000)

    2000

  27. [27]

    Zha, S.-C

    S. Zha, S.-C. Leung, T. Suzuki, and K. Nomoto, Evolu- tion of ONeMg core in super-AGB stars toward electron- capture supernovae: Effects of updated electron-capture rate, Astrophys. J. 886, 22 (2019)

    2019

  28. [28]

    K. M. Patton, C. Lunardini, and R. J. Farmer, Presuper- nova neutrinos: Realistic emissivities from stellar evolu- tion, The Astrophysical Journal 840, 2 (2017)

    2017

  29. [29]

    K. M. Patton, C. Lunardini, R. J. Farmer, and F. X. Timmes, Neutrinos from beta processes in a presuper- nova: Probing the isotopic evolution of a massive star, The Astrophysical Journal 851, 6 (2017)

    2017

  30. [30]

    Heger, K

    A. Heger, K. Langanke, G. Mart ´ ınez-Pinedo, and S. E. Woosley, Presupernova collapse models with improved weak-interaction rates, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 1678 (2001)

    2001

  31. [31]

    Heger, S

    A. Heger, S. E. Woosley, G. Mart ´ ınez-Pinedo, and K. Langanke, Presupernova evolution with improved rates for weak interactions, The Astrophysical Journal 560, 307 (2001)

    2001

  32. [32]

    N. Paar, D. Vretenar, E. Khan, and G. Col` o, Exotic modes of excitation in atomic nuclei far from stability, Reports on Progress in Physics 70, R02 (2007)

    2007

  33. [33]

    N. Paar, G. Col` o, E. Khan, and D. Vretenar, Calcula- tion of stellar electron-capture cross sections on nuclei based on microscopic skyrme functionals, Phys. Rev. C 80, 055801 (2009)

    2009

  34. [34]

    Ravli´ c, E

    A. Ravli´ c, E. Y¨ uksel, Y. F. Niu, G. Col` o, E. Khan, and N. Paar, Stellar electron-capture rates based on finite- temperature relativistic quasiparticle random-phase ap- proximation, Phys. Rev. C 102, 065804 (2020)

    2020

  35. [35]

    A. A. Dzhioev, A. V. Yudin, N. V. Dunina-Barkovskaya, and A. I. Vdovin, Pre-supernova (anti)neutrino emission due to weak-interaction reactions with hot nuclei, Parti- cles 8, 10.3390/particles8040084 (2025)

    work page doi:10.3390/particles8040084 2025

  36. [36]

    A. A. Dzhioev, A. V. Yudin, N. V. Dunina-Barkovskaya, and A. I. Vdovin, Neutrino Spectrum and Energy Loss Rates Due to Weak Processes on Hot 56Fe in Pre- Supernova Environment, Particles 6, 682 (2023)

    2023

  37. [37]

    A. A. Dzhioev, A. V. Yudin, N. V. Dunina- Barkovskaya, and A. I. Vdovin, Neutrinos from pre- supernova in the framework of TQRPA method, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 527, 7701 (2023), https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article- pdf/527/3/7701/54357526/stad3730.pdf

    2023

  38. [38]

    A. A. Dzhioev, A. V. Yudin, N. V. Dunina-Barkovskaya, and A. I. Vdovin, Neutrinos from pre-supernova: Effects of nuclear temperature on luminosities and spectra, In- ternational Journal of Modern Physics E 33, 2441014 (2024), https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218301324410143

    work page doi:10.1142/s0218301324410143 2024

  39. [39]

    Ravli´ c, S

    A. Ravli´ c, S. Giraud, N. Paar, and R. G. T. Zegers, Self- consistent microscopic calculations for electron captures on nuclei in core-collapse supernovae, Phys. Rev. C 112, L032801 (2025)

    2025

  40. [40]

    Giraud, R

    S. Giraud, R. G. T. Zegers, B. A. Brown, J.-M. Gabler, J. Lesniak, J. Rebenstock, E. M. Ney, J. Engel, A. Ravli´ c, and N. Paar, Finite-temperature electron-capture rates 7 for neutron-rich nuclei near n = 50 and effects on core-collapse supernova simulations, Phys. Rev. C 105, 055801 (2022)

    2022

  41. [41]

    Typel, Relativistic model for nuclear matter and atomic nuclei with momentum-dependent self-energies, Phys

    S. Typel, Relativistic model for nuclear matter and atomic nuclei with momentum-dependent self-energies, Phys. Rev. C 71, 064301 (2005)

    2005

  42. [42]

    Marketin, L

    T. Marketin, L. Huther, and G. Mart ´ ınez-Pinedo, Large- scale evaluation of β-decay rates of r-process nuclei with the inclusion of first-forbidden transitions, Phys. Rev. C 93, 025805 (2016)

    2016

  43. [43]

    Ravli´ c, E

    A. Ravli´ c, E. M. Ney, J. Engel, and N. Paar, Elucidating the finite temperature quasiparticle random phase ap- proximation, The European Physical Journal A 61, 37 (2025)

    2025

  44. [44]

    Y¨ uksel, G

    E. Y¨ uksel, G. Col` o, E. Khan, Y. F. Niu, and K. Bozkurt, Multipole excitations in hot nuclei within the finite temperature quasiparticle random phase approximation framework, Phys. Rev. C 96, 024303 (2017)

    2017

  45. [45]

    Y¨ uksel, N

    E. Y¨ uksel, N. Paar, G. Col` o, E. Khan, and Y. F. Niu, Gamow-teller excitations at finite temperature: Com- petition between pairing and temperature effects, Phys. Rev. C 101, 044305 (2020)

    2020

  46. [47]

    Langanke, G

    K. Langanke, G. Mart ´ ınez-Pinedo, and J. M. Sampaio, Neutrino spectra from stellar electron capture, Phys. Rev. C 64, 055801 (2001)

    2001

  47. [48]

    Langanke and G

    K. Langanke and G. Mart ´ ınez-Pinedo, Rate tables for the weak processes of pf-shell nuclei in stellar environments, Atomic Data and Nuclear Data Tables 79, 1 (2001)

    2001

  48. [49]

    O’Connor, An open-source neutrino radiation hydro- dynamics code for core-collapse supernovae, The Astro- physical Journal Supplement Series 219, 24 (2015)

    E. O’Connor, An open-source neutrino radiation hydro- dynamics code for core-collapse supernovae, The Astro- physical Journal Supplement Series 219, 24 (2015)

    2015

  49. [50]

    A. W. Steiner, M. Hempel, and T. Fischer, Core-collapse supernova equations of state based on neutron star ob- servations, The Astrophysical Journal 774, 17 (2013)

    2013

  50. [51]

    S. E. Woosley and T. A. Weaver, The Evolution and Ex- plosion of Massive Stars. II. Explosive Hydrodynamics and Nucleosynthesis, The Astrophysical Journal Supple- ment Series 101, 181 (1995)

    1995

  51. [52]

    competitive

    Supplemental material (2025), Supplemental Material shows comparisons between electron capture and β-decay rates calculated within our FT-QRPA framework, as well as the comparison between β-decay rates and antineu- trino energy loss between our model and the shell-model calculations from Ref. [26]. Contains Refs. [26, 38, 45]. Supplemental Material: Enhan...

    2025

  52. [53]

    Zha, S.-C

    S. Zha, S.-C. Leung, T. Suzuki, and K. Nomoto, Evolution o f ONeMg core in super-AGB stars toward electron-capture supernovae: Effects of updated electron-capture rate, Astrophys . J. 886, 22 (2019)

    2019

  53. [54]

    Ravli´ c, S

    A. Ravli´ c, S. Giraud, N. Paar, and R. G. T. Zegers, Self-consi stent microscopic calculations for electron captures on nuclei in core-collapse supernovae, Phys. Rev. C 112, L032801 (2025)

    2025

  54. [55]

    Ravli´ c, E

    A. Ravli´ c, E. Y¨ uksel, Y. F. Niu, and N. Paar, Evolution of β-decay half-lives in stellar environments, Phys. Rev. C 104, 054318 (2021)

    2021