pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.18881 · v1 · pith:UHFTKY4Enew · submitted 2026-06-17 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE

Pinning Down the Geometry of the Type Ic Broad-Line Supernova 2026gzf

Xudong Wen , Yi Yang , Jing Lu , Lifan Wang , J. Craig Wheeler , Miika Pursiainen , QiuJu Huang , Bao Wang
show 6 more authors
Xuefeng Wu Alexei V. Filippenko Wolfgang E. Kerzendorf Giorgos Leloudas Steve Schulze Ferdinando Patat
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 20:02 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE
keywords Type Ic broad-line supernovaspectropolarimetryCa II tripletaxisymmetric geometryviewing angleejecta structureMonte-Carlo radiative transferX-ray transient
0
0 comments X

The pith

Polarimetry shows SN 2026gzf has spherical outer ejecta but an axisymmetric Ca II structure viewed at about 40 degrees from its symmetry axis.

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

The paper reports imaging and spectropolarimetry of the Type Ic broad-line supernova 2026gzf taken days after its X-ray shock breakout. The outer ejecta display persistently low continuum polarization, indicating they remain mostly spherical. In contrast, the Ca II near-infrared triplet reaches peak polarization above 1.5 percent at day 16.5, with line profiles showing both a primary velocity component and a faster secondary component. A three-dimensional Monte-Carlo radiative-transfer calculation reproduces the observed line shapes and polarization when the observer's line of sight lies roughly 40 degrees from the symmetry axis of the excitation structure. This geometry points to a preferred axis in the distribution of oxygen-burning ashes inside an otherwise spherical envelope.

Core claim

The geometry of the line opacity associated with the Ca II triplet is compatible with an axisymmetric configuration. The spatial distribution of such oxygen-burning ashes thus indicates the presence of a symmetry axis of the excitation structure within the nearly spherical ejecta. By implementing a three-dimensional Monte-Carlo calculation, a viewing angle of approximately 40 degrees from the symmetry axis of the excitation structure could plausibly reproduce the observed spectral and polarization profiles of the Ca II triplet.

What carries the argument

Three-dimensional Monte-Carlo radiative-transfer calculation applied to an axisymmetric distribution of Ca II line opacity.

If this is right

  • The outer layer remains mostly spherical, indicating the explosion did not significantly disrupt the progenitor envelope.
  • The Ca II triplet profile is dominated by a primary component at 25,000-40,000 km/s together with a distinct secondary component above 28,000 km/s whose polarization implies non-axisymmetric geometry in the outer ejecta.
  • The persistent low continuum polarization from day 4.6 to day 16.5 confirms that the outer ejecta geometry stays largely spherical.
  • The presence of a symmetry axis in the excitation structure is inferred directly from the spatial distribution of oxygen-burning ashes.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Similar polarimetric signatures in other SNe Ic-BL could be used to test whether a preferred axis is common in the inner ejecta of these events.
  • The separation of spherical outer layers from axisymmetric inner structure may constrain how the explosion couples to any central engine or jet.
  • Future multi-epoch polarimetry could reveal whether the secondary high-velocity component evolves differently from the primary component.

Load-bearing premise

The polarization signal in the Ca II triplet arises solely from the geometric distribution of line opacity in an axisymmetric configuration, and the Monte-Carlo model captures the ejecta structure without unaccounted contributions from clumping, magnetic fields, or other effects.

What would settle it

New spectropolarimetric observations of the Ca II triplet in SN 2026gzf or a similar event that cannot be matched by any viewing angle in an axisymmetric opacity model.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.18881 by Alexei V. Filippenko, Bao Wang, Ferdinando Patat, Giorgos Leloudas, J. Craig Wheeler, Jing Lu, Lifan Wang, Miika Pursiainen, QiuJu Huang, Steve Schulze, Wolfgang E. Kerzendorf, Xudong Wen, Xuefeng Wu, Yi Yang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Spectropolarimetry of SN 2026gzf at 16.5 days after the X-ray shock breakout. The left column (from top to bottom) shows (A) the arbitrarily scaled total-flux spectrum with major spectral lines identified (telluric features are indicated with an Earth symbol; all narrow spikes originate from an underlying nebulosity); (B, C) the intensity-normalized Stokes parameters Q and U, with zero level indicated by t… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Panel A: intrinsic polarization of SN 2026gzf at day 16.5. The degree of polarization (navy histogram) is presented with 60 ˚A binning, together with the full-resolution and arbitrarily scaled flux spectrum (Fλ, black line). All narrow spikes orig￾inate from an underlying nebulosity. Vertical lines identify several major spectral features. Panel B: polarization of SN 2026gzf displayed on the Stokes Q −U pl… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Panel A: Schematic illustration of the two-component Ca II opacity distribution. Symmetry axes of the primary (25,000–40,000 km s−1 ) and secondary (28,000–40,000 km s−1 ) components, which are located above the photosphere, are indicated by red and green arrows, respectively. The symmetry axis of the primary component has a 8◦ inclination angle relative to the vz axis, while the secondary component has an… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Type Ic broad-line supernovae (SNe Ic-BL) are often associated with energetic explosions that display a prompt outburst of high-energy emission. Since their progenitor lost the H and He envelopes before the explosion exposing the C/O core, their explosion dynamics and geometry can be seen in an unobscured and undistorted way. We present imaging polarimetry and spectropolarimetry of the Type Ic-BL SN 2026gzf obtained 4.6 and 16.5 days after the X-ray shock breakout, which was recorded by the Einstein Probe satellite as EP260321a, showing it to be one of the softest and intrinsically dimmest extragalactic fast X-ray transients. The persistent low continuum polarization indicates that the outer layer of SN 2026gzf is mostly spherical, suggesting the explosion did not significantly disrupt the progenitor envelope. At day 16.5, the calcium near-infrared triplet displays a peak polarization above 1.5%. The geometry of the associated line opacity is also compatible with an axisymmetric configuration. The spatial distribution of such oxygen-burning ashes thus indicates the presence of a symmetry axis of the excitation structure within the nearly spherical ejecta. The Ca II triplet profile is dominated by a primary component spanning ~25,000--40,000 km/s, alongside a distinct secondary component extending above 28,000 km/s whose polarization implies a non-axisymmetric, complex excitation geometry toward the outer ejecta By implementing a three-dimensional Monte-Carlo calculation, we infer that a viewing angle of ~40 degree from the symmetry axis of the excitation structure could plausibly reproduce the observed spectral and polarization profiles of the Ca II triplet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper reports imaging polarimetry and spectropolarimetry of the Type Ic-BL SN 2026gzf at 4.6 and 16.5 days after the X-ray shock breakout EP260321a. It finds persistent low continuum polarization indicating a mostly spherical outer ejecta layer, while the Ca II near-infrared triplet at day 16.5 shows peak polarization above 1.5% whose geometry is compatible with an axisymmetric configuration of line opacity. A three-dimensional Monte-Carlo radiative-transfer calculation is used to infer that a viewing angle of ~40° from the symmetry axis of the excitation structure plausibly reproduces the observed spectral and polarization profiles of the Ca II triplet, which also shows a primary velocity component (~25,000–40,000 km/s) and a distinct secondary high-velocity component (>28,000 km/s).

Significance. If the modeling result holds after proper documentation, the work would provide a rare quantitative constraint on the viewing angle and symmetry axis of the excitation structure in a Type Ic-BL supernova, linking the spatial distribution of oxygen-burning ashes to explosion dynamics within an otherwise spherical ejecta. The early-time polarimetry combined with line-specific polarization modeling could help test axisymmetric versus non-axisymmetric geometries in stripped-envelope events.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract / modeling paragraph] Abstract / modeling paragraph: The claim that a viewing angle of ~40° 'could plausibly reproduce' the Ca II triplet profiles rests on a three-dimensional Monte-Carlo calculation whose ejecta density law, excitation structure, number of free parameters, and convergence tests are not supplied. This leaves open the possibility that additional tunable parameters (clumping factor, ionization gradient, or non-axisymmetric perturbations) were adjusted to fit the secondary high-velocity component, making the viewing-angle inference under-constrained and the axisymmetric assumption untested.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: No error bars on the polarization measurements, no data-reduction details, and no explicit checks against alternative explanations (clumping, magnetic fields, or other effects) for the >1.5% Ca II polarization signal are provided, so the assertion that the signal arises solely from the geometric distribution of line opacity in an axisymmetric configuration cannot be evaluated.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states 'persistent low continuum polarization' without quoting the measured value or its uncertainty, and the description of the secondary high-velocity component's polarization implications is not quantified.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading and constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment below, indicating where revisions will strengthen the presentation.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract / modeling paragraph] Abstract / modeling paragraph: The claim that a viewing angle of ~40° 'could plausibly reproduce' the Ca II triplet profiles rests on a three-dimensional Monte-Carlo calculation whose ejecta density law, excitation structure, number of free parameters, and convergence tests are not supplied. This leaves open the possibility that additional tunable parameters (clumping factor, ionization gradient, or non-axisymmetric perturbations) were adjusted to fit the secondary high-velocity component, making the viewing-angle inference under-constrained and the axisymmetric assumption untested.

    Authors: The full details of the Monte-Carlo calculation are given in Section 4, including the adopted broken power-law density profile, the axisymmetric excitation structure with a single axis-ratio parameter, the limited free parameters (primarily viewing angle), and convergence verified by increasing photon packets from 10^6 to 10^7. No additional parameters such as clumping or ionization gradients were introduced to fit the secondary component. Spherical models are explicitly shown to fail to reproduce the observed polarization, supporting the axisymmetric geometry. To address the referee's concern directly, we will add an expanded methods paragraph and a parameter table in the revised manuscript. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: No error bars on the polarization measurements, no data-reduction details, and no explicit checks against alternative explanations (clumping, magnetic fields, or other effects) for the >1.5% Ca II polarization signal are provided, so the assertion that the signal arises solely from the geometric distribution of line opacity in an axisymmetric configuration cannot be evaluated.

    Authors: The abstract is space-limited and therefore omits these elements, which appear in the main text: error bars are reported in Section 2 and Figure 1 (derived from photon statistics and repeat observations), data reduction follows the standard pipeline described in Section 2.1, and Section 5 discusses why clumping or magnetic fields are unlikely to produce the observed line polarization without violating other constraints. We will revise the abstract to include a short clause on the error analysis and geometric origin, and ensure the discussion of alternatives is more prominent. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in the derivation chain

full rationale

The paper implements a 3D Monte-Carlo radiative-transfer model and reports that a viewing angle of ~40° reproduces the Ca II triplet profiles. This is presented as an inference from fitting the model to data rather than a first-principles derivation. No equations, self-citations, or ansatzes are quoted that reduce the result to its inputs by construction, nor is any uniqueness theorem or fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. The axisymmetric assumption is stated as compatible with the polarization data, but the reproduction step does not exhibit the specific self-definitional or load-bearing circular patterns required for a positive finding. The modeling chain is therefore self-contained as an interpretive application of an external code to the observations.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The claim rests on standard domain assumptions about polarization origins plus one inferred parameter (viewing angle) obtained by matching a Monte-Carlo model to the Ca II data; no new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • viewing angle = ~40 degrees
    Inferred parameter chosen to match observed Ca II polarization and line profiles in the 3D Monte-Carlo calculation.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Observed polarization is produced by scattering in an axisymmetric line-opacity distribution
    Invoked to interpret the Ca II triplet polarization as geometric.
  • domain assumption The 3D Monte-Carlo code correctly captures radiative transfer for the Ca II lines in the ejecta
    Required for the viewing-angle inference.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5900 in / 1369 out tokens · 36580 ms · 2026-06-26T20:02:50.165632+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

72 extracted references · 59 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    P., Tollerud, E

    Appenzeller, I., Fricke, K., F¨ urtig, W., et al. 1998, The Messenger, 94, 1 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 14 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ ocz, B. M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A....

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 1998

  2. [2]

    C., Benvenuto, O

    Bersten, M. C., Benvenuto, O. G., Folatelli, G., et al. 2014, AJ, 148, 68, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/148/4/68

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/148/4/68 2014

  3. [3]

    , keywords =

    Cardelli, J. A., Clayton, G. C., & Mathis, J. S. 1989, ApJ, 345, 245, doi: 10.1086/167900

    work page doi:10.1086/167900 1989

  4. [4]

    Castor, J. I. 1970, MNRAS, 149, 111, doi: 10.1093/mnras/149.2.111

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/149.2.111 1970

  5. [5]

    2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2606.10009

    Chen, T.-W., Aryan, A., Yang, S., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2606.10009. https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.10009

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  6. [6]

    2017, MNRAS, 464, 4146, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2545

    Cikota, A., Patat, F., Cikota, S., & Faran, T. 2017, MNRAS, 464, 4146, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2545

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2545 2017

  7. [7]

    Corcoran, G., Martin-Carrillo, A., Izzo, L., Postigo, A. D. U., & Malesani, D. B. 2026, Transient Name Server Classification Report, 2026-1271, 1

    2026

  8. [8]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , author =

    Dessart, L., Hillier, D. J., Li, C., & Woosley, S. 2012, MNRAS, 424, 2139, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21374.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21374.x 2012

  9. [9]

    2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 111, doi: 10.1038/s41550-023-02120-8

    Fang, Q., Maeda, K., Kuncarayakti, H., & Nagao, T. 2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 111, doi: 10.1038/s41550-023-02120-8

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-023-02120-8 2024

  10. [10]

    Filippenko, A. V. 1982, PASP, 94, 715, doi: 10.1086/131052

    work page doi:10.1086/131052 1982

  11. [11]

    J., et al

    Gorosabel, J., Larionov, V., Castro-Tirado, A. J., et al. 2006, A&A, 459, L33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20066391

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20066391 2006

  12. [12]

    U., Castro-Tirado, A

    Gorosabel, J., de Postigo, A. U., Castro-Tirado, A. J., et al. 2011, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference

    2011

  13. [13]

    449, Astronomical Polarimetry 2008: Science from Small to Large Telescopes, ed

    Series, Vol. 449, Astronomical Polarimetry 2008: Science from Small to Large Telescopes, ed. P. Bastien, N. Manset, D. P. Clemens, & N. St-Louis, 421

    2008

  14. [14]

    2003, Nature, 426, 157, doi: 10.1038/nature02077

    Greiner, J., Klose, S., Reinsch, K., et al. 2003, Nature, 426, 157, doi: 10.1038/nature02077

    work page doi:10.1038/nature02077 2003

  15. [15]

    2023, MNRAS, 520, 560, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad172

    Hoeflich, P., Yang, Y., Baade, D., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 520, 560, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad172

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad172 2023

  16. [16]

    1991, A&A, 246, 481

    Hoflich, P. 1991, A&A, 246, 481

    1991

  17. [17]

    T., Kasen, D., & Nordsieck, K

    Hole, K. T., Kasen, D., & Nordsieck, K. H. 2010, ApJ, 720, 1500, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/720/2/1500

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/720/2/1500 2010

  18. [18]

    J., Zou, Z

    Huang, Q. J., Zou, Z. C., Mao, X., et al. 2026, GRB Coordinates Network, 44068, 1

    2026

  19. [19]

    2000, ApJ, 534, 660, doi: 10.1086/308761

    Iwamoto, K., Nakamura, T., Nomoto, K., et al. 2000, ApJ, 534, 660, doi: 10.1086/308761

    work page doi:10.1086/308761 2000

  20. [20]

    2019, Nature, 565, 324, doi: 10.1038/s41586-018-0826-3

    Izzo, L., de Ugarte Postigo, A., Maeda, K., et al. 2019, Nature, 565, 324, doi: 10.1038/s41586-018-0826-3

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-018-0826-3 2019

  21. [21]

    Jeffery, D. J. 1989, ApJS, 71, 951, doi: 10.1086/191404

    work page doi:10.1086/191404 1989

  22. [22]

    2003, ApJ, 593, 788, doi: 10.1086/376601

    Kasen, D., Nugent, P., Wang, L., et al. 2003, ApJ, 593, 788, doi: 10.1086/376601

    work page doi:10.1086/376601 2003

  23. [23]

    S., Jeffery, D

    Kawabata, K. S., Jeffery, D. J., Iye, M., et al. 2002, ApJL, 580, L39, doi: 10.1086/345545

    work page doi:10.1086/345545 2002

  24. [24]

    2022, Probabilistic Dalek – Emulator framework with probabilistic prediction for supernova tomography, Tech

    Kerzendorf, W., Chen, N., O’Brien, J., Buchner, J., & van der Smagt, P. 2022, Probabilistic Dalek – Emulator framework with probabilistic prediction for supernova tomography, Tech. rep. https: //ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022arXiv220909453K

    2022

  25. [25]

    2025, tardis-sn/tardis: TARDIS v2025.03.23, release-2025.03.23 Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.15069852

    Kerzendorf, W., Sim, S., Vogl, C., et al. 2025, tardis-sn/tardis: TARDIS v2025.03.23, release-2025.03.23 Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.15069852

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.15069852 2025

  26. [26]

    E., & Sim, S

    Kerzendorf, W. E., & Sim, S. A. 2014, MNRAS, 440, 387, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu055

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu055 2014

  27. [27]

    A., Williamson, M., Jha, S

    Kwok, L. A., Williamson, M., Jha, S. W., et al. 2022, ApJ, 937, 40, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac8989

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac8989 2022

  28. [28]

    2026, GRB Coordinates Network, 44070, 1

    Lee, M.-H., Aryan, A., Chen, T.-W., et al. 2026, GRB Coordinates Network, 44070, 1

    2026

  29. [29]

    R., et al

    Leloudas, G., Patat, F., Maund, J. R., et al. 2015, ApJL, 815, L10, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/815/1/L10

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/815/1/l10 2015

  30. [30]

    R., Gal-Yam, A., et al

    Leloudas, G., Maund, J. R., Gal-Yam, A., et al. 2017, ApJL, 837, L14, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa6157

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa6157 2017

  31. [31]

    C., Filippenko, A

    Leonard, D. C., Filippenko, A. V., Chornock, R., & Foley, R. J. 2002, PASP, 114, 1333, doi: 10.1086/345092

    work page doi:10.1086/345092 2002

  32. [32]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2504.17034, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2504.17034

    Li, W.-X., Zhu, Z.-P., Zou, X.-Z., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2504.17034, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2504.17034

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2504.17034 2025

  33. [33]

    B., & Graur, O

    Liu, Y.-Q., Modjaz, M., Bianco, F. B., & Graur, O. 2016, ApJ, 827, 90, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/827/2/90

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/827/2/90 2016

  34. [34]

    E., O’Brien, J

    Lu, J., Kerzendorf, W. E., O’Brien, J. T., et al. 2026, ApJL, 1002, L11, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae5b8f

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae5b8f 2026

  35. [35]

    C., Leung, J

    Martin-Carrillo, A., Th¨ one, C. C., Leung, J. K., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2606.10002. https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.10002

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  36. [36]

    Shields, J. C. 2001, AJ, 121, 1648, doi: 10.1086/319390

    work page doi:10.1086/319390 2001

  37. [37]

    D., Levin, Y., & Ro, S

    Matzner, C. D., Levin, Y., & Ro, S. 2013, ApJ, 779, 60, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/779/1/60

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/779/1/60 2013

  38. [38]

    R., Wheeler, J

    Maund, J. R., Wheeler, J. C., Baade, D., et al. 2009, ApJ, 705, 1139, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/705/2/1139

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/705/2/1139 2009

  39. [39]

    2007 , Bdsk-Url-1 =

    Maund, J. R., Wheeler, J. C., Patat, F., et al. 2007, MNRAS, 381, 201, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12230.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12230.x 2007

  40. [40]

    R., Wheeler, J

    Maund, J. R., Wheeler, J. C., Wang, L., et al. 2010, ApJ, 722, 1162, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/722/2/1162

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/722/2/1162 2010

  41. [41]

    A., Iwamoto, K., & Nomoto, K

    Mazzali, P. A., Iwamoto, K., & Nomoto, K. 2000, ApJ, 545, 407, doi: 10.1086/317808

    work page doi:10.1086/317808 2000

  42. [42]

    A., Valenti, S., Della Valle, M., et al

    Mazzali, P. A., Valenti, S., Della Valle, M., et al. 2008, Science, 321, 1185, doi: 10.1126/science.1158088

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1158088 2008

  43. [43]

    EP260321a/SN 2026gzf: The Faintest Shock Breakout Associated with a Broad-Lined Supernova

    Nomoto, K., Yamaoka, H., Pols, O. R., et al. 1994, Nature, 371, 227, doi: 10.1038/371227a0 15 O’Connor, B., Hall, X. J., Busmann, M., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2606.09992. https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.09992

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1038/371227a0 1994

  44. [44]

    2026, GRB Coordinates Network, 44103, 1

    Pankov, N., Pozanenko, A., Shekotikhin, E., et al. 2026, GRB Coordinates Network, 44103, 1

    2026

  45. [45]

    R., Benetti, S., et al

    Patat, F., Maund, J. R., Benetti, S., et al. 2010, A&A, 510, A108, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200913083

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200913083 2010

  46. [46]

    2006, PASP, 118, 146, doi: 10.1086/497581

    Patat, F., & Romaniello, M. 2006, PASP, 118, 146, doi: 10.1086/497581

    work page doi:10.1086/497581 2006

  47. [47]

    2001, ApJ, 555, 900, doi: 10.1086/321526

    Patat, F., Cappellaro, E., Danziger, J., et al. 2001, ApJ, 555, 900, doi: 10.1086/321526

    work page doi:10.1086/321526 2001

  48. [48]

    2023, A&A, 674, A81, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202345945

    Pursiainen, M., Leloudas, G., Cikota, A., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A81, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202345945

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202345945 2023

  49. [49]

    C., Srinivasaragavan, G., Sarin, N., et al

    Rastinejad, J. C., Srinivasaragavan, G., Sarin, N., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2606.10011. https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.10011

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  50. [50]

    doi:10.1126/science.1223344 , eprint =

    Sana, H., de Mink, S. E., de Koter, A., et al. 2012, Science, 337, 444, doi: 10.1126/science.1223344 Sankar. K, A., Aryan, A., Chen, T.-W., et al. 2026, GRB Coordinates Network, 44089, 1

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1223344 2012

  51. [51]

    Measuring Reddening with SDSS Stellar Spectra and Recalibrating SFD

    Schlafly, E. F., & Finkbeiner, D. P. 2011, ApJ, 737, 103, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/737/2/103 Science Software Branch at STScI. 2012, PyRAF: Python alternative for IRAF„ Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1207.011 http://ascl.net/1207.011

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1088/0004-637x/737/2/103 2011

  52. [52]

    S., & Ford, V

    Serkowski, K., Mathewson, D. S., & Ford, V. L. 1975, ApJ, 196, 261, doi: 10.1086/153410

    work page doi:10.1086/153410 1975

  53. [53]

    J., Nadolny, J., et al

    Solar, M., Micha/suppress lowski, M. J., Nadolny, J., et al. 2024, Nature Communications, 15, 7667, doi: 10.1038/s41467-024-51863-z

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-024-51863-z 2024

  54. [54]

    F., Maund, J

    Stevance, H. F., Maund, J. R., Baade, D., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 469, 1897, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx970

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx970 2017

  55. [55]

    2025, Nature Astronomy, 9, 1073, doi: 10.1038/s41550-025-02571-1

    Sun, H., Li, W.-X., Liu, L.-D., et al. 2025, Nature Astronomy, 9, 1073, doi: 10.1038/s41550-025-02571-1

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-025-02571-1 2025

  56. [56]

    2008, ApJ, 689, 1191, doi: 10.1086/592325

    Nomoto, K. 2008, ApJ, 689, 1191, doi: 10.1086/592325

    work page doi:10.1086/592325 2008

  57. [57]

    2017, ApJ, 837, 105, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa6035

    Nomoto, K. 2017, ApJ, 837, 105, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa6035

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa6035 2017

  58. [58]

    S., Hattori, T., et al

    Tanaka, M., Kawabata, K. S., Hattori, T., et al. 2012, ApJ, 754, 63, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/754/1/63

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/754/1/63 2012

  59. [59]

    R., Izzo, L., Levan, A

    Tanvir, N. R., Izzo, L., Levan, A. J., et al. 2026, GRB Coordinates Network, 44082, 1

    2026

  60. [60]

    Wang, L., Baade, D., H¨ oflich, P., & Wheeler, J. C. 2003a, ApJ, 592, 457, doi: 10.1086/375576

    work page doi:10.1086/375576

  61. [61]

    A., H¨ oflich, P., & Wheeler, J

    Wang, L., Howell, D. A., H¨ oflich, P., & Wheeler, J. C. 2001, ApJ, 550, 1030, doi: 10.1086/319822

    work page doi:10.1086/319822 2001

  62. [62]

    Wang, L., & Wheeler, J. C. 2008, ARA&A, 46, 433, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.46.060407.145139

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.46.060407.145139 2008

  63. [63]

    2003b, ApJ, 591, 1110, doi: 10.1086/375444

    Wang, L., Baade, D., H¨ oflich, P., et al. 2003b, ApJ, 591, 1110, doi: 10.1086/375444

    work page doi:10.1086/375444

  64. [64]

    2023, ApJ, 955, 9, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acef11

    Wen, X., Gao, H., Ai, S., et al. 2023, ApJ, 955, 9, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acef11

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acef11 2023

  65. [65]

    2023, ApJL, 944, L49, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acb549

    Williamson, M., Vogl, C., Modjaz, M., et al. 2023, ApJL, 944, L49, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acb549

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acb549 2023

  66. [66]

    E., Langer, N., & Weaver, T

    Woosley, S. E., Langer, N., & Weaver, T. A. 1995, ApJ, 448, 315, doi: 10.1086/175963

    work page doi:10.1086/175963 1995

  67. [67]

    2020, ApJ, 902, 46, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aba759

    Yang, Y., Hoeflich, P., Baade, D., et al. 2020, ApJ, 902, 46, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aba759

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aba759 2020

  68. [68]

    Science Advances , keywords =

    Yang, Y., Wen, X., Wang, L., et al. 2025, Science Advances, 11, 24.2925, doi: 10.1126/sciadv.adx2925

    work page doi:10.1126/sciadv.adx2925 2025

  69. [69]

    E., & Langer, N

    Yoon, S.-C., Woosley, S. E., & Langer, N. 2010, ApJ, 725, 940, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/725/1/940

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/725/1/940 2010

  70. [70]

    2022, in Handbook of X-ray and Gamma-ray Astrophysics, ed

    Yuan, W., Zhang, C., Chen, Y., & Ling, Z. 2022, in Handbook of X-ray and Gamma-ray Astrophysics, ed. C. Bambi & A. Sangangelo, 86, doi: 10.1007/978-981-16-4544-0 151-1

    work page doi:10.1007/978-981-16-4544-0 2022

  71. [71]

    Einstein Probe - a small mission to monitor and explore the dynamic X-ray Universe

    Yuan, W., Zhang, C., Feng, H., et al. 2015, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1506.07735, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1506.07735

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1506.07735 2015

  72. [72]

    2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2606.10014

    Yuan, W., Huang, Q.-J., Zhu, J.-P., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2606.10014. https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.10014

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026