Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 2 minor 2 cited by

The first radio view of a type Ibn supernova in SN 2023fyq: Understanding the mass-loss history in the last decade before the explosion

T0 review · 2 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-05-18 · grok-4.3

Challenge this review Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Radio observations of SN 2023fyq detect dense circumstellar material ejected 0.7 to 3 years before explosion.

desk verdict The first radio detection of a Type Ibn supernova adds a new quantitative constraint on its pre-explosion CSM, but the mass-loss rate inference rests on the optical wind velocity applying at radio radii. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.07080 v3 submitted 2025-09-08 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.GAastro-ph.SR

Raphael Baer-Way , A.J. Nayana , Wynn Jacobson-Galan , Poonam Chandra , Maryam Modjaz , Samantha C.Wu , Daichi Tsuna , Raffaella Margutti
show 8 more authors
Ryan Chornock Craig Pellegrino Yize Dong Maria R. Drout Charles D. Kilpatrick Dan Milisavljevic Daniel Patnaude Candice Stauffer
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.HEastro-ph.GAastro-ph.SR
keywords TypeIbnsupernovaradioemissioncircumstellarmaterialmasslossSN2023fyqsynchrotronfree-freeabsorptionstellarmerger
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper presents the first radio detection of a Type Ibn supernova, SN 2023fyq. It models the emission between 58 and 185 days as synchrotron radiation from the forward shock, absorbed by free-free processes in a dense helium-rich circumstellar medium. This yields a mass-loss rate of roughly 4 times 10 to the minus 3 solar masses per year at radii around 10 to the 16 cm. Late-time non-detections at 525 days imply a drop in density at larger radii, pointing to a finite shell rather than a steady wind. The timing and density match pre-explosion optical outbursts and favor a stellar merger origin for the material.

What carries the argument

Synchrotron radiation attenuated by free-free absorption in a wind or shell-like circumstellar medium whose density is fitted to the radio light curve.

What would settle it

A radio detection at 525 days or later with flux above the reported upper limits would require either higher density at large radii or a different absorption mechanism, falsifying the finite shell interpretation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The radio light curve of SN 2023fyq is produced by synchrotron emission from the supernova shock interacting with a circumstellar shell of density about 10 to the minus 18 grams per cubic centimeter at 10 to the 16 centimeters. This corresponds to a mass-loss rate of 4 times 10 to the minus 3 solar masses per year for a 1700 km/s wind between 0.7 and 3 years before explosion. Non-detections at later times and in X-rays require lower density beyond 2 times 10 to the 16 centimeters, consistent with a shell-like structure whose properties align with merger-driven mass loss.

Load-bearing premise

The observed radio light curve arises from a spherically symmetric circumstellar medium whose density can be described by a steady wind or finite shell, with the wind speed measured in optical spectra applying at radio-emitting radii.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Mass loss at the inferred rate occurred in the same 0.7-to-3-year window as the pre-explosion optical outbursts.
  • The circumstellar material forms a shell extending from roughly 4 times 10 to the 15 to 2 times 10 to the 16 centimeters rather than extending indefinitely as a steady wind.
  • The shell density and extent are roughly consistent with numerical predictions for a binary merger progenitor.
  • Similar radio monitoring of additional Type Ibn events can map the radial extent and total mass of their helium-rich envelopes.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the shell is merger ejecta, then the same progenitor channel may operate in other stripped-envelope supernovae that show brief pre-explosion activity.
  • Multi-frequency radio campaigns starting within weeks of explosion could resolve whether the inner boundary of the shell is sharply defined or smoothed by earlier winds.
  • X-ray and radio non-detections together already limit any ongoing wind beyond the shell; continued monitoring would tighten the upper bound on residual mass loss.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

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

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports the first radio detection of the Type Ibn supernova SN 2023fyq. Radio observations from 58 to 185 days post-explosion are modeled as synchrotron emission attenuated by free-free absorption in a CSM with density ~10^{-18} g cm^{-3} at a radius of 10^{16} cm. This yields a mass-loss rate of ~4 x 10^{-3} M_sun yr^{-1} (assuming v_wind = 1700 km/s from optical spectra) over 0.7-3 years pre-explosion. Late-time non-detections at 525 days, combined with an X-ray non-detection, imply lower CSM density at ~2 x 10^{16} cm with Mdot < 2.5 x 10^{-3} M_sun yr^{-1}, suggesting a shell-like structure consistent with a merger origin.

Significance. If the modeling is robust, this provides the first radio-derived constraints on the mass-loss history of a SN Ibn progenitor in the years before explosion. The inferred dense, shell-like CSM and elevated mass-loss rate offer quantitative support for merger-driven scenarios and demonstrate the diagnostic power of radio observations for probing pre-explosion outbursts in helium-rich environments.

major comments (2)
  1. [Radio modeling and mass-loss derivation (abstract and associated sections)] The conversion of fitted CSM density to mass-loss rate uses Mdot = 4 pi r^2 rho v_wind with v_wind = 1700 km/s taken from optical spectroscopy. For the shell-like CSM structure proposed in the paper (from a merger or outburst), the ejection velocity at radio radii (~10^{16} cm) could be substantially lower, which would scale the inferred Mdot proportionally and weaken the claimed consistency with merger models. This assumption is load-bearing for the quantitative central claim and the interpretation of late-time upper limits.
  2. [Late-time observations and upper-limit analysis] The 3 sigma upper limits from the 525-day non-detection are used to infer a density drop and Mdot < 2.5 x 10^{-3} M_sun yr^{-1} at 2 x 10^{16} cm. The manuscript should explicitly detail the statistical procedure for these limits, including how uncertainties in synchrotron parameters, free-free absorption, and possible deviations from spherical symmetry are propagated.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract and text use slightly inconsistent notation for density units (g/cm^3 vs g cm^{-3}); standardize for clarity.
  2. [Observations section] Add a brief description of the radio data reduction, calibration, and any systematic checks performed, to support reproducibility of the light-curve points used in the fit.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading and constructive comments, which have prompted us to clarify key aspects of our analysis. Below we respond point by point to the major comments. We have revised the manuscript to incorporate additional discussion and methodological details where appropriate.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Radio modeling and mass-loss derivation (abstract and associated sections)] The conversion of fitted CSM density to mass-loss rate uses Mdot = 4 pi r^2 rho v_wind with v_wind = 1700 km/s taken from optical spectroscopy. For the shell-like CSM structure proposed in the paper (from a merger or outburst), the ejection velocity at radio radii (~10^{16} cm) could be substantially lower, which would scale the inferred Mdot proportionally and weaken the claimed consistency with merger models. This assumption is load-bearing for the quantitative central claim and the interpretation of late-time upper limits.

    Authors: The 1700 km/s value is taken directly from the narrow-line velocities measured in the optical spectra, which trace the kinematics of the CSM at the radii where the supernova shock is interacting. For a discrete shell ejected during a pre-explosion outburst, this velocity corresponds to the shell's expansion speed, and the radio-emitting region at ~10^{16} cm is consistent with the time since ejection when this speed is adopted. We acknowledge that a lower ejection velocity would proportionally reduce the derived Mdot and shift the inferred ejection epoch earlier. In the revised manuscript we add an explicit paragraph discussing the velocity uncertainty, the range of plausible values consistent with both optical data and merger models, and the resulting factor-of-a-few uncertainty on Mdot. The central conclusion of a dense, shell-like CSM remains unchanged, but the quantitative comparison to merger predictions is now presented with this caveat. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Late-time observations and upper-limit analysis] The 3 sigma upper limits from the 525-day non-detection are used to infer a density drop and Mdot < 2.5 x 10^{-3} M_sun yr^{-1} at 2 x 10^{16} cm. The manuscript should explicitly detail the statistical procedure for these limits, including how uncertainties in synchrotron parameters, free-free absorption, and possible deviations from spherical symmetry are propagated.

    Authors: We agree that the statistical basis for the late-time upper limits should be stated more explicitly. In the revised manuscript we expand the relevant methods and results section to describe: (i) the 3σ flux upper-limit calculation from the non-detection, (ii) the forward-modeling approach used to convert this limit into a CSM density constraint while marginalizing over the synchrotron spectral index and normalization within their posterior ranges, and (iii) the treatment of free-free absorption optical depth. We also add a short paragraph noting that deviations from spherical symmetry would primarily affect the absolute normalization rather than the relative density drop between the early and late epochs. The combined radio and X-ray non-detections still robustly indicate a lower-density region beyond ~2×10^{16} cm. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: mass-loss rate uses independent optical velocity

full rationale

The paper fits CSM density from synchrotron plus free-free absorption modeling of the radio light curve at 58-185 days, then computes mass-loss rate via the standard relation Mdot = 4 pi r^2 rho v_wind using v_wind = 1700 km/s measured independently from optical spectra. This is a direct application of an external measurement rather than a self-definition, fitted parameter renamed as prediction, or self-citation chain. Late-time upper limits are interpreted as a density drop without reducing to the same inputs by construction. The central claim remains independent of its own fitted values and does not invoke author-specific uniqueness theorems or smuggled ansatzes.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 2 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The analysis rests on standard radio-supernova emission models and a small number of fitted parameters; no new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (2)
  • CSM density at 10^16 cm = ~10^{-18} g cm^{-3}
    Fitted to match the observed radio flux and absorption in the synchrotron model.
  • Mass-loss rate = ~4 x 10^{-3} M_sun yr^{-1}
    Derived from the fitted density using the adopted wind velocity.
assumptions (2)
  • domain assumption Radio emission arises from synchrotron radiation produced by electrons accelerated at the supernova shock front.
    Standard assumption in radio studies of interacting supernovae.
  • domain assumption Free-free absorption is the dominant mechanism attenuating the radio emission at early times.
    Used to model the time-dependent radio light curve shape.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The first radio view of a type Ibn supernova in SN 2023fyq: Understanding the mass-loss history in the last decade before the explosion." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2509.07080

@misc{pith2026250907080,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The first radio view of a type Ibn supernova in SN 2023fyq: Understanding the mass-loss history in the last decade before the explosion},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2509.07080}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.07080}
}
abstract

Supernovae that interact with hydrogen-poor, helium-rich circumstellar material (CSM), known as Type Ibn supernovae (SNe Ibn), present a unique opportunity to probe mass-loss processes in massive stars. In this work, we report the first radio detection of a SN Ibn, SN 2023fyq, and characterize the mass-loss history of its stellar progenitor using the radio and X-ray observations obtained over 18 months post-explosion. We find that the radio emission from 58--185 days is best modeled by synchrotron radiation attenuated by free-free absorption from a CSM of density $\sim$ $10^{-18}$ g/$\rm{cm^{3}}$ ($\sim 10^{6} \mathrm{\rho_{ISM}}$) at a radius of $10^{16}$ cm, corresponding to a mass-loss rate of $\sim$ $4 \times 10^{-3} \ \mathrm{M_{\odot} \ yr^{-1}}$ (for a wind velocity of 1700 km/s from optical spectroscopy) from 0.7 to 3 years before the explosion. This timescale is consistent with the time frame over which pre-explosion optical outbursts were observed. However, our late-time observations at 525 days post-explosion yield non-detections, and the 3$\sigma$ upper limits (along with an X-ray non-detection) allow us to infer lower-density CSM at $2\times 10^{16}$ cm with $\rm{\dot{M}}$ $< 2.5\times 10^{-3} \ \mathrm{M_{\odot} \ yr^{-1}}$. These results suggest a shell-like CSM from at most $4 \times 10^{15}$ to $2 \times 10^{16}$ cm ($\sim 10^{5} R_{\rm{\odot}}$) with an elevated CSM density (0.004 $\mathrm{M_{\odot} \ yr^{-1}}$) that is roughly consistent with predictions from a merger model for this object. Future radio observations of a larger sample of SNe Ibn will provide key details on the extent and density of their helium-rich CSM.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.07080 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Radio SEDs of SN 2023fyq at VLA frequencies (3–35 GHz) spanning 58–525 days post explosion. We show the best-fit extrapolated single-epoch FFA models for each epoch as described in section 3. Downward-facing triangles denote 3σ flux density upper limits. The parameters for these fits are in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The unabsorbed X-ray light curves of detected SNe Ibn, along with the non-detections of SN 2023fyq. Swift Data on SN 2006jc, SN 2010al and SN 2022ablq are from Immler et al. (2008); Ofek et al. (2013); Pellegrino et al. (2024). Downward triangles represent 3σ upper limits from Chandra and Swift for SN 2023fyq. Deeper, earlier observa￾tions would be vital to constrain the subclass better at X-ray wavelengths. The Cha… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Radio SEDs of SN 2023fyq at ∆t ≈ 58 − 525 days. Downward triangles represent 3σ flux density upper limits. Solid black lines denote the overall SSA+ external FFA model we derive self-consistently (see section 3.1). Solid green lines denote the intrinsic SSA model using the calculated Fp/νp from equation 5. The values of the best-fit parameters are displayed in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The mass-loss picture of SN 2023fyq that we derive based on our radio modeling. Lef t : Derived effective mass-loss rate as a function of days after explosion, as well as years before explosion, assuming the observed CSM speed of 1700 km/s. We denote the period over wh…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The peak spectral luminosity vs. peak time for SN 2023fyq (taken at 10 GHz) in context with a variety of other radio-detected SNe (Nayana et al. (2025) and refer￾ences therein). The speeds noted on diagonal lines are shock velocities for pure SSA. 2023fyq is distinct f…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: A view of all previous radio-observed type Ibn SNe and the upper limits on luminosities, including 10 GHz detections and non-detections for SN 2023fyq. Non￾detections are shown with downward-facing triangles, and are all 3σ limits. SNe 2006jc, 2019qav, 2019aajs and 202…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

  • IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear
    ?
    unclear

    Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

    radio emission ... best modeled by synchrotron radiation attenuated by free-free absorption from a CSM of density ~10^{-18} g cm^{-3} ... mass-loss rate of ~4 x 10^{-3} M_sun yr^{-1} (for v_wind = 1700 km/s)

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. JWST Reveals Large Reservoirs of Dust and Ongoing Circumstellar Interaction in SN Ibn/Icn 2023xgo over a Year Post-Explosion

    astro-ph.HE 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    Late-time JWST spectra of SN 2023xgo detect cool silicate or carbonaceous dust masses of order 0.01-0.03 solar masses plus narrow He I emission indicating ongoing circumstellar interaction at +377 days.

  2. A multiwavelength view of the nearby Calcium-Strong Transient SN 2025coe in the X-Ray, Near-Infrared, and Radio Wavebands

    astro-ph.HE 2026-01 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    SN 2025coe's near-infrared spectra match helium-rich Type Ib supernovae, and its early X-ray emission implies ~0.1 solar masses of nearby circumstellar material, favoring a stripped massive-star origin for calcium-str...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

71 extracted references · 71 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Arnaud, K. A. 1996, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 101, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems V, ed. G. H. Jacoby & J. Barnes, 17 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 14 T able 2.The radio dataset obtained of SN 2023fyq. Telescope D...

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 1996

  2. [2]

    2025, The Astrophysical Journal, 983, 101, 10.3847/1538-4357/adc00a

    Baer-Way, R., Chandra, P., Modjaz, M., et al. 2025, ApJ, 983, 101, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adc00a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adc00a 2025

  3. [3]

    , keywords =

    Bietenholz, M. F., Bartel, N., Argo, M., et al. 2021, ApJ, 908, 75, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abccd9

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abccd9 2021

  4. [4]

    2015, MNRAS, 450, 246, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv566

    Bilinski, C., Smith, N., Li, W., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 450, 246, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv566

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv566 2015

  5. [5]

    , keywords =

    Brennan, S. J., Sollerman, J., Irani, I., et al. 2024, A&A, 684, L18, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202449350

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202449350 2024

  6. [6]

    , keywords =

    Brethauer, D., Margutti, R., Milisavljevic, D., et al. 2022, ApJ, 939, 105, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac8b14

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac8b14 2022

  7. [7]

    2018, SSRv, 214, 27, doi: 10.1007/s11214-017-0461-6

    Chandra, P. 2018, SSRv, 214, 27, doi: 10.1007/s11214-017-0461-6

    work page doi:10.1007/s11214-017-0461-6 2018

  8. [8]

    A., Chugai, N., Milisavljevic, D., & Fransson, C

    Chandra, P., Chevalier, R. A., Chugai, N., Milisavljevic, D., & Fransson, C. 2020, ApJ, 902, 55, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abb460

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abb460 2020

Show all 71 references
  1. [9]

    Chevalier, R. A. 1982, ApJ, 259, 302, doi: 10.1086/160167 —. 1998, ApJ, 499, 810, doi: 10.1086/305676

    1982 doi

  2. [11]

    1986, ARA&A, 24, 329, doi: 10.1146/annurev.aa.24.090186.001553

    Chiosi, C., & Maeder, A. 1986, ARA&A, 24, 329, doi: 10.1146/annurev.aa.24.090186.001553

    1986 doi

  3. [12]

    2024, ApJ, 977, 254, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad8de6

    Dong, Y., Tsuna, D., Valenti, S., et al. 2024, ApJ, 977, 254, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad8de6

    2024 doi

  4. [13]

    Dwarkadas, V. V. 2025, Universe, 11, 161, doi: 10.3390/universe11050161

    2025 doi

  5. [14]

    2016, MNRAS, 463, 3894, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2253

    Elias-Rosa, N., Pastorello, A., Benetti, S., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 463, 3894, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2253

    2016 doi

  6. [15]

    J., Smith, N., Ganeshalingam, M., et al

    Foley, R. J., Smith, N., Ganeshalingam, M., et al. 2007, ApJL, 657, L105, doi: 10.1086/513145

    2007 doi

  7. [16]

    W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J

    Foreman-Mackey, D., Hogg, D. W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J. 2013, PASP, 125, 306, doi: 10.1086/670067

    2013 doi

  8. [17]

    Fransson, C., Lundqvist, P., & Chevalier, R. A. 1996, ApJ, 461, 993, doi: 10.1086/177119

    1996 doi

  9. [18]

    C., Allen, G

    Fruscione, A., McDowell, J. C., Allen, G. E., et al. 2006, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 6270, Observatory Operations: Strategies, Processes, and Systems, ed. D. R. Silva & R. E. Doxsey, 62701V, doi: 10.1117/12.671760

    2006 doi

  10. [19]

    A., et al

    Gagliano, A., Berger, E., Villar, V. A., et al. 2025, ApJ, 978, 110, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad9748 Gaia Collaboration, Vallenari, A., Brown, A. G. A., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243940

    2025 doi

  11. [21]

    2020, ApJ, 889, 170, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab6328

    Gangopadhyay, A., Misra, K., Hiramatsu, D., et al. 2020, ApJ, 889, 170, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab6328

    2020 doi

  12. [22]

    M., Zoghbi, A., et al

    Gediman, B., Miller, J. M., Zoghbi, A., et al. 2024, ApJ, 966, 57, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad2fa3

    2024 doi

  13. [23]

    2004, ApJ, 611, 1005, doi: 10.1086/422091

    Gehrels, N., Chincarini, G., Giommi, P., et al. 2004, ApJ, 611, 1005, doi: 10.1086/422091

    2004 doi

  14. [24]

    2024, ApJ, 976, 10, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad7c4c G¨ uver, T., &¨Ozel, F

    Gupta, S., Caprioli, D., & Spitkovsky, A. 2024, ApJ, 976, 10, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad7c4c G¨ uver, T., &¨Ozel, F. 2009, MNRAS, 400, 2050, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15598.x

    2024 doi

  15. [25]

    Ho, A. Y. Q., Perley, D. A., Gal-Yam, A., et al. 2023, ApJ, 949, 120, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acc533

    2023 doi

  16. [26]

    2017, ApJ, 836, 158, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/836/2/158

    Hosseinzadeh, G., Arcavi, I., Valenti, S., et al. 2017, ApJ, 836, 158, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/836/2/158

    2017 doi

  17. [27]

    2008, ApJL, 674, L85, doi: 10.1086/529373 Jacobson-Gal´ an, W

    Immler, S., Modjaz, M., Landsman, W., et al. 2008, ApJL, 674, L85, doi: 10.1086/529373 Jacobson-Gal´ an, W. V., Dessart, L., Jones, D. O., et al. 2022, ApJ, 924, 15, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac3f3a Jacobson-Gal´ an, W. V., Dessart, L., Davis, K. W., et al. 2024, ApJ, 970, 189, d...

    2008 doi

  18. [28]

    Kale, R., & Ishwara-Chandra, C. H. 2021, Experimental Astronomy, 51, 95, doi: 10.1007/s10686-020-09677-6

    2021 doi

  19. [29]

    B., Modjaz, M., et al

    Khakpash, S., Bianco, F. B., Modjaz, M., et al. 2024, ApJS, 275, 37, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad7eaa

    2024 doi

  20. [30]

    C., Karamehmetoglu, E., Sollerman, J., et al

    Kool, E. C., Karamehmetoglu, E., Sollerman, J., et al. 2021, A&A, 652, A136, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039137

    2021 doi

  21. [31]

    2012, ARA&A, 50, 107, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125534

    Langer, N. 2012, ARA&A, 50, 107, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125534

    2012 doi

  22. [32]

    1991, ApJ, 380, 575, doi: 10.1086/170615

    Lundqvist, P., & Fransson, C. 1991, ApJ, 380, 575, doi: 10.1086/170615

    1991 doi

  23. [33]

    Maeda, K., & Moriya, T. J. 2022, ApJ, 927, 25, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac4672

    2022 doi

  24. [34]

    K., et al

    Maeda, K., Nozawa, T., Sahu, D. K., et al. 2013, ApJ, 776, 5, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/776/1/5

    2013 doi

  25. [35]

    2017, ApJ, 835, 140, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/835/2/140

    Margutti, R., Kamble, A., Milisavljevic, D., et al. 2017, ApJ, 835, 140, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/835/2/140

    2017 doi

  26. [36]

    V., Chornock, R., Leonard, D

    Matheson, T., Filippenko, A. V., Chornock, R., Leonard, D. C., & Li, W. 2000, AJ, 119, 2303, doi: 10.1086/301352

    2000 doi

  27. [37]

    2007, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

    Golap, K. 2007, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 376, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XVI, ed. R. A. Shaw, F. Hill, & D. J. Bell, 127

    2007

  28. [38]

    P., & Arcavi, I

    Modjaz, M., Guti´ errez, C. P., & Arcavi, I. 2019, Nature Astronomy, 3, 717, doi: 10.1038/s41550-019-0856-2

    2019 doi

  29. [39]

    J., & Maeda, K

    Moriya, T. J., & Maeda, K. 2016, ApJ, 824, 100, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/824/2/100 16 Nasa High Energy Astrophysics Science Archive Research Center (Heasarc). 2014, HEAsoft: Unified Release of FTOOLS and XANADU, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1408.004

    2016 doi

  30. [40]

    J., Margutti, R., Wiston, E., et al

    Nayana, A. J., Margutti, R., Wiston, E., et al. 2025, ApJ, 985, 51, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adc2fb

    2025 doi

  31. [41]

    O., Sullivan, M., Cenko, S

    Ofek, E. O., Sullivan, M., Cenko, S. B., et al. 2013, Nature, 494, 65, doi: 10.1038/nature11877

    2013 doi

  32. [42]

    O., Sullivan, M., Shaviv, N

    Ofek, E. O., Sullivan, M., Shaviv, N. J., et al. 2014, ApJ, 789, 104, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/789/2/104

    2014 doi

  33. [43]

    Pacholczyk, A. G. 1970, Radio astrophysics. Nonthermal processes in galactic and extragalactic sources

    1970

  34. [44]

    2015, Phys

    Park, J., Caprioli, D., & Spitkovsky, A. 2015, Phys. Rev. Lett., 114, 085003, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.085003

    2015 doi

  35. [45]

    2008, MNRAS, 389, 113, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13602.x

    Pastorello, A., Mattila, S., Zampieri, L., et al. 2008, MNRAS, 389, 113, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13602.x

    2008 doi

  36. [46]

    T., Trundle, C., et al

    Pastorello, A., Botticella, M. T., Trundle, C., et al. 2010, MNRAS, 408, 181, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17142.x

    2010 doi

  37. [47]

    2013, ApJ, 767, 1, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/767/1/1

    Pastorello, A., Cappellaro, E., Inserra, C., et al. 2013, ApJ, 767, 1, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/767/1/1

    2013 doi

  38. [48]

    F., Ciabattari, F., et al

    Pastorello, A., Wang, X. F., Ciabattari, F., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 456, 853, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv2634

    2016 doi

  39. [49]

    A., Vink´ o, J., et al

    Pellegrino, C., Howell, D. A., Vink´ o, J., et al. 2022, ApJ, 926, 125, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac3e63

    2022 doi

  40. [50]

    2024, ApJ, 977, 2, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad8bc5

    Pellegrino, C., Modjaz, M., Takei, Y., et al. 2024, ApJ, 977, 2, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad8bc5

    2024 doi

  41. [51]

    A., Fremling, C., Sollerman, J., et al

    Perley, D. A., Fremling, C., Sollerman, J., et al. 2020, ApJ, 904, 35, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abbd98

    2020 doi

  42. [52]

    S., & Najarro, F

    Puls, J., Vink, J. S., & Najarro, F. 2008, A&A Rv, 16, 209, doi: 10.1007/s00159-008-0015-8

    2008 doi

  43. [53]

    2020, A&A, 640, A56, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202037710

    Renzo, M., Farmer, R., Justham, S., et al. 2020, A&A, 640, A56, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202037710

    2020 doi

  44. [54]

    B., & Lightman, A

    Rybicki, G. B., & Lightman, A. P. 1979, Radiative processes in astrophysics

    1979

  45. [55]

    E., Soderberg, A

    Sanders, N. E., Soderberg, A. M., Foley, R. J., et al. 2013, ApJ, 769, 39, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/769/1/39

    2013 doi

  46. [56]

    J., Fischer, T

    Sargent, A. J., Fischer, T. C., Johnson, M. C., et al. 2024, ApJ, 961, 230, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad11d4 Schrøder, S. L., MacLeod, M., Loeb, A., Vigna-G´ omez, A., & Mandel, I. 2020, ApJ, 892, 13, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab7014

    2024 doi

  47. [57]

    D., et al

    Shivvers, I., Zheng, W., Van Dyk, S. D., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 471, 4381, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1885

    2017 doi

  48. [58]

    2014, ARA&A, 52, 487, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081913-040025

    Smith, N. 2014, ARA&A, 52, 487, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081913-040025

    2014 doi

  49. [59]

    2017, Interacting Supernovae: Types IIn and Ibn (Springer International Publishing), 403–429, doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-21846-5 38

    Smith, N. 2017, Interacting Supernovae: Types IIn and Ibn (Springer International Publishing), 403–429, doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-21846-5 38

    2017 doi

  50. [60]

    J., & Filippenko, A

    Smith, N., Foley, R. J., & Filippenko, A. V. 2008, ApJ, 680, 568, doi: 10.1086/587860

    2008 doi

  51. [61]

    M., Chornock, R., et al

    Smith, N., Silverman, J. M., Chornock, R., et al. 2009, ApJ, 695, 1334, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/695/2/1334

    2009 doi

  52. [62]

    2006, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 917, 1

    Soderberg, A. 2006, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 917, 1

    2006

  53. [63]

    Frail, D. A. 2006, ApJ, 651, 1005, doi: 10.1086/507571

    2006 doi

  54. [64]

    L., Ofek, E

    Strotjohann, N. L., Ofek, E. O., Gal-Yam, A., et al. 2021, ApJ, 907, 99, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abd032

    2021 doi

  55. [65]

    2008, ApJ, 687, 1208, doi: 10.1086/591782

    Tominaga, N., Limongi, M., Suzuki, T., et al. 2008, ApJ, 687, 1208, doi: 10.1086/591782

    2008 doi

  56. [66]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.21116, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2508.21116

    Tsuna, D., Fuller, J., & Lu, W. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.21116, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2508.21116

    2025 doi

  57. [67]

    C., Fuller, J., Dong, Y., & Piro, A

    Tsuna, D., Wu, S. C., Fuller, J., Dong, Y., & Piro, A. L. 2024, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 7, 82, doi: 10.33232/001c.123897

    2024 doi

  58. [68]

    W., Panagia, N., Montes, M

    Weiler, K. W., Panagia, N., Montes, M. J., & Sramek, R. A. 2002, ARA&A, 40, 387, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.40.060401.093744

    2002 doi

  59. [69]

    W., Sramek, R

    Weiler, K. W., Sramek, R. A., Panagia, N., van der Hulst, J. M., & Salvati, M. 1986, ApJ, 301, 790, doi: 10.1086/163944

    1986 doi

  60. [70]

    Woosley, S. E. 2017, ApJ, 836, 244, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/836/2/244

    2017 doi

  61. [71]

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

    Woosley, S. E., Langer, N., & Weaver, T. A. 1993, ApJ, 411, 823, doi: 10.1086/172886

    1993 doi

  62. [72]

    C., & Fuller, J

    Wu, S. C., & Fuller, J. 2022, ApJL, 940, L27, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac9b3d

    2022 doi

  63. [73]

    C., & Tsuna, D

    Wu, S. C., & Tsuna, D. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.19613, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2507.19613

    2025 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed May 18, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.