Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 81 references

Forecast of gravitationally lensed Type Ia supernovae time delay measurement by Muztage-Ata 1.93m Synergy Telescope

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read With a 2-day cadence, the Muztagh-Ata 1.93m Synergy Telescope can measure gravitationally lensed Type Ia supernova time delays to within a few hours, with bias typically below one hour.

desk verdict Useful forecast for MOST glSNe Ia, but the early-detection assumption clashes with the quoted CSST cadence and the few-hour errors come from two hand-picked systems; worth refereeing. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.05303 v1 pith:OQH7PZ22 submitted 2025-01-09 astro-ph.GA

Guanhua Rui , Wenwen Zheng , Zizhao He , Yiping Shu , Xinzhong Er , Guoliang Li , Bin Hu This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GA PACS 97.60.Bw98.62.Sb95.75.De
keywords stronggravitationallensingtypeIasupernovaetimedelayHubbleconstantMuztagh-Ata1.93mtelescopemicrolensinglightcurvefittingCSSTsurvey
topics The Hubble Tension
open problems The Hubble Tension
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 forecasts how precisely the Muztagh-Ata 1.93m Synergy Telescope (MOST) can measure the gravitational time delay between multiple images of strongly lensed Type Ia supernovae (glSNe Ia). It simulates the whole chain—SNe Ia spectra from a standard explosion model, a lens population based on CSST survey forecasts, microlensing magnification maps, realistic MOST photometry, and SALT2 template fitting—and finds that with a 2-day cadence the time delay error is only a few hours, with bias typically below one hour. Because glSNe Ia have smooth, well-understood light curves, they avoid the variability and microlensing problems that hamper lensed-quasar delays, so hour-level precision on even a handful of systems would provide an independent check in the Hubble-tension debate. The paper concludes that MOST is well suited to deliver such measurements, complementing quasar-based H0 programs.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by a simulated observation pipeline. The W7 Chandrasekhar-mass explosion model, processed by the SEDONA Monte Carlo radiative-transfer code, produces time-dependent SN Ia spectra; these are projected onto microlensing magnification maps built from a singular-isothermal-ellipsoid strong-lens population (calibrated to CSST forecasts) plus a stellar field following a standard stellar initial mass function, using a GPU ray-shooting code. The microlensed light curves are sampled with realistic MOST photometry (300s times 9 exposures per epoch, 2-day cadence, 0.82 arcsecond seeing) and fit with the SALT2 template using SNTD. The load-bearing element is the achromatic phase of SN Ia color curves: near peak brightness the band-to-band specific-intensity ratio is roughly constant across the projected supernova disk, so microlensing changes total flux but not color, letting fits of the early light curves return time delays with hour-level errors and sub-hour bias.

What would settle it

Compare the CSST observing schedule (or a fiducial simulation of it) against the 1-3 day early-detection criterion: if the probability of catching a lensed SN Ia's first image within that window is near zero, the simulated sample does not represent what CSST will actually deliver and the hour-level error forecast would not transfer to a real MOST campaign.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that MOST can measure the relative time delays of glSNe Ia discovered by CSST with hour-level accuracy despite microlensing contamination. Building on the fact that the specific-intensity profile of a Type Ia supernova near peak is nearly constant across its projected disk, so that color curves stay achromatic until roughly day 50, the simulations show microlensing scatters the measured delays by only a few tenths of a day. In the two worked examples, one quadruple-image and one double-image system, the fitting errors across image pairs are typically a few hours and the biases are below one hour. The same population model predicts about 2 quadruple and 14 double systems per year over 4000 square degrees observable by MOST. On the paper's own terms, glSNe Ia time delays measured this way are precise and accurate enough to support independent cosmography and to help adjudicate the Hubble tension.

Load-bearing premise

The forecast assumes that the first image of each lensed supernova is discovered within 1 to 3 days of explosion, but the planned CSST survey revisits a given field only about every 80 days and no other early-trigger mechanism is supplied.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • With 2-day cadence, MOST achieves time-delay errors of only a few hours on glSNe Ia, so no denser monitoring is needed for this precision.
  • Microlensing-induced bias stays below one hour, so systematic accuracy of glSNe Ia time-delay cosmography is not limited by microlensing.
  • The forecast rate of about 2 quadruple and 14 double systems per year gives a concrete target list for a dedicated MOST monitoring program.
  • The method extends to brighter core-collapse lensed supernovae and to systems discovered by ZTF or WFST, broadening the sample beyond CSST.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The forecast depends on catching the first image within 1-3 days of explosion, while CSST's roughly 80-day revisit cadence makes such early detection far from guaranteed; a realistic early-warning or target-of-opportunity scheme is a testable prerequisite.
  • Because the achromatic phase lasts roughly 50 days, the 2-day cadence could probably be relaxed or traded for more epochs per night without losing hour-level precision, freeing telescope time for other programs.
  • Hour-level delays, combined with lens modeling, suggest that a handful of MOST-monitored glSNe Ia could move time-delay cosmography toward the 1% H0 goal, though the paper itself stops at the time-delay measurement rather than the full cosmological inference.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper forecasts the precision with which the Muztagh-Ata 1.93m Synergy Telescope (MOST) can measure strong-lensing time delays of gravitationally lensed Type Ia supernovae discovered by CSST. The simulation chain combines an SIE strong-lensing population model, W7/SEDONA supernova spectral time series, microlensing magnification maps computed with a GPU ray-shooting code, and light-curve fitting with SNTD/SALT2. For one quadruple-image system and one double-image system, the authors report time-delay fitting errors of a few hours and biases typically below one hour with a 2-day cadence, and they extrapolate an annual detection rate of 2 quadruple and 14 double systems over 4000 square degrees. The paper frames these results as demonstrating MOST's capability to support independent cosmography via glSNe Ia.

Significance. If the central forecast holds, the paper makes a useful contribution by showing that a relatively small ground-based telescope can reach the few-hour time-delay precision needed for glSNe Ia cosmography, complementing the glQSO-based H0 measurements. The main strengths are the realistic end-to-end simulation: the use of the W7 model with SEDONA, explicit microlensing magnification maps, the achromatic-phase analysis following Goldstein et al., and the use of the actual MOST site parameters. The treatment of microlensing-induced color scatter and the recommendation to choose reference images with minimal chromatic contamination are well motivated. However, the headline precision numbers rest on only two example systems, and the selection criteria include a strong assumption about early detection that is not reconciled with the quoted CSST cadence. The significance is therefore currently conditional on those assumptions being quantified and relaxed.

major comments (4)
  1. [§2.3 (selection criterion 1) and §2 (CSST cadence)] The forecast requires that each glSNe Ia be detected within 1 to 3 days of explosion, but the paper itself quotes the CSST cadence as approximately 80 days, with each WFS sightline visited only about twice in a decade. Since CSST is the stated discovery survey, this makes detection within 1–3 days effectively impossible for most systems. The paper does not show how the time-delay error and bias degrade when the first image is discovered at day 5, 10, or 20 after explosion, when the rising part of the light curve is partially or entirely missed. Because the fitted reference time t0 is anchored by the light-curve rise, later discovery directly widens the inferred delay uncertainty and could change the conclusion from hours to days. This is a load-bearing assumption and must be addressed, either by modeling realistic CSST discovery epochs or by explicitly restricting the forecast to alternative discovery surveys and showing the corresponding precision.
  2. [§4 and Table 2] The central claim that 'the time delay errors are typically around a few hours, with biases generally being under one hour' is based on fits to only one quadruple-image system and one double-image system. The paper does not quote the distribution of errors or biases across the 14 double and 2 quadruple systems that it predicts per year, nor does it show how the quoted values depend on image magnification, microlensing realization, or source/lens redshift. Given that the abstract and conclusion generalize these two examples to a capability claim, the authors should provide a population-level error and bias distribution, ideally from a bootstrap over their simulated catalog, and report the median and scatter rather than a single example.
  3. [§4 and §3.1] The paper attributes the reported sub-hour biases to microlensing, but there is no control run without microlensing. To establish that the bias is caused by microlensing and to quantify its magnitude, the authors should fit the same light curves with the microlensing magnification set to unity and compare the resulting time-delay offsets. Without this control, the statement that 'the time delay bias caused by microlensing will not significantly impact the systematic accuracy' is not directly supported by the presented comparisons.
  4. [§2.3 (detection rate)] The annual detection rate of 2 quadruple and 14 double systems is derived under the early-detection selection criterion, and the paper explicitly states that it 'omits actual weather, observing strategies, and other potential influencing factors.' This limitation is acknowledged, but the rate is quoted in the abstract and conclusion without the caveat. Since the rate is a secondary result and not the main forecast, this should be reworded to make the conditional nature of the rate explicit wherever it is cited.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Title and abstract] The telescope name is spelled inconsistently: 'Muztage-Ata' in the title and abstract versus 'Muztagh-Ata' throughout the body. The spelling should be unified.
  2. [Figure 2 caption] The caption lists the bands as 'Sloan u, g, i, r, and z' but the text then refers to 'z, i, r, g, and u' offsets. Please reorder the band names for consistency with the plotted curves and offsets.
  3. [§2.3, Eq. (9)] The supernova rate normalization is described as yielding 'approximately 1,105 normal Type Ia supernovae' per square degree per year, but the text does not define the units of the integrand in Eq. (9) clearly. A brief statement of how this number is obtained from the stated parameters would help reproducibility.
  4. [§4, Eq. (13)] The notation Δt_{i-r} = t_i - t_r is used for image pairs, but in Table 2 the pairs are labeled as '1-2', '1-3', etc. It would be clearer to define r as a fixed reference image and then list the delays relative to that reference, or to define the pair notation explicitly.
  5. [§5] The statement that 'CCSNe are brighter than SNe Ia' is too broad: while some core-collapse supernovae (e.g., Type IIP at peak) can be brighter than SNe Ia, others are fainter. This generalization should be qualified or rephrased.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the central forecast is a forward simulation whose outputs are not defined in terms of its inputs.

full rationale

The paper's central claim, that MOST with a 2-day cadence can measure glSNe Ia time delays to a few hours with sub-hour bias, is produced by a forward simulation chain: W7/SEDONA generates SNe Ia spectra and light curves; strong-lensing and microlensing simulations produce multiple images; photometric noise is added using MOST's exposure time, seeing, and sky brightness; and time delays are then fit independently with the SALT2 template via the SNTD code. No fitted constant is renamed as a prediction: the cadence, exposure time, SNR threshold, and reference-image choice are hand-set inputs, while the time-delay errors and biases are measured outputs of the fitting procedure. Self-citations to the Purple Mountain Observatory microlensing code and to earlier MOST glQSO forecasts are tool citations, not load-bearing uniqueness theorems or ansatz smuggled in through citation; those codes were published separately and are used as computational instruments. The early-detection selection criterion in Section 2.3, requiring detection within 1–3 days of explosion, is difficult to reconcile with the quoted CSST cadence of roughly 80 days, but this is a modeling assumption and correctness risk, not circularity: the forecast would degrade if the assumption were relaxed, which is exactly how a non-circular prediction behaves. The analysis is self-contained against external benchmarks, including the comparison of simulated spectra and light curves to SN 2011fe and the use of the standard SALT2 model, so no circular step is identifiable.

Assumptions & free parameters 9 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The forecast rests on a large set of adopted models and hand-set observation choices. None are fitted to the target result, but uncertainties on most of them are not propagated into the final error estimates.

free parameters (9)
  • CSST+MOST monitoring cadence = 2 days
    Chosen by hand in Section 3.2; no cadence optimization scan is presented, so the hour-level error claim is tied to this cadence.
  • Exposure time per epoch = 45 min (9 x 300 s)
    Set in Section 3.2 to reach SNR goals; no trade-off study is shown.
  • SNe Ia rate normalization = eta = 0.04, k_Ia = 0.021 M_sun^-1
    Adopted in Section 2.3 from prior SN rate studies; these values set the predicted annual detection rate.
  • Velocity dispersion function parameters = [phi*, sigma*, a, b] = [6.92e-3(1+z)^-1.18, 172.2(1+z)^0.18, -0.15, 2.35]
    Eq. (8) in Section 2.3, from Ref. [35]; determines the lens galaxy population in the mock catalog.
  • Lens galaxy ellipticity distribution = mean 0.3, sigma 0.16, range [0, 0.9]
    Section 2.3; affects image configurations and magnification statistics.
  • External shear distribution = log10 gamma_ext: mean -1.3, sigma 0.2
    Section 2.3, from N-body based models; affects microlensing maps and macro image properties.
  • Microlensing stellar mass function = Salpeter IMF, 0.1 to 10 M_sun, mean 0.3 M_sun
    Section 2.1; sets the statistics of microlensing magnification.
  • W7-to-SN2011fe scaling factors = 2.5, 1.1, 0.9, 0.9, 0.9
    Used only to compare spectra in Fig. 1, not for light-curve fitting; included for completeness.
  • Cosmological parameters = H0=72, Omega_m=0.26, Omega_Lambda=0.74
    Adopted from Ref. [42] in Section 1; fixed throughout, not fitted.
assumptions (8)
  • domain assumption Thin-lens approximation and singular isothermal ellipsoid (SIE) mass model for lens galaxies
    Eqs. (2)-(3) in Section 2.1; standard for strong lensing but ignores complex mass distributions and line-of-sight effects.
  • domain assumption W7 Chandrasekhar-mass deflagration model is representative of normal SNe Ia
    Section 2.2; validated against SN 2011fe data, but only one normal SN template is used.
  • domain assumption SALT2 template with four parameters (t0, x0, x1, c) can recover time delays from simulated SNe Ia light curves
    Section 4, Eq. (12); template mismatch between the W7 model and SALT2 is not corrected for.
  • domain assumption Microlensing can be modeled by random point masses following a Salpeter IMF plus a smooth dark-matter component
    Eq. (4) and Section 2.1; standard in the field, but the stellar fraction f* is estimated with a simplified profile.
  • domain assumption Supernova atmospheric expansion dominates the relative source-lens motion
    Section 3.1; justifies neglecting transverse motion in the microlensing light-curve realizations.
  • domain assumption Flat Lambda-CDM cosmology with stated parameters
    Section 2; standard cosmology used for distances.
  • ad hoc to paper Early detection within 1 to 3 days after explosion is achievable for CSST-discovered systems
    Section 2.3 selection criterion 1; not reconciled with the stated CSST cadence of about 80 days, and it is load-bearing for the light-curve coverage.
  • domain assumption The 4000 deg^2 mock catalog is statistically representative without weather, observing-strategy, or scheduling losses
    The paper states in Section 2.3 that this is an initial prediction that omits actual weather, observing strategies, and other potential influencing factors.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Forecast of gravitationally lensed Type Ia supernovae time delay measurement by Muztage-Ata 1.93m Synergy Telescope." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/OQH7PZ22

@misc{pith2026250105303,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Forecast of gravitationally lensed Type Ia supernovae time delay measurement by Muztage-Ata 1.93m Synergy Telescope},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/OQH7PZ22}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.05303}
}
abstract

Strong lensing time delay measurement is a promising method to address the Hubble tension, offering a completely independent approach compared to both the cosmic microwave background analysis and the local distance ladder. As a third-party examination of the Hubble tension, this method provides a unique perspective. Strongly lensed quasar (glQSO) systems have demonstrated significant potential in tackling this issue, achieving an impressive \(2\%\) accuracy level. However, advancing to \(1\%\) or sub-percent accuracy is challenging due to several intrinsic limitations of glQSOs. Fortunately, strongly lensed supernovae (glSNe) offer a more robust solution, thanks to their characteristic light curve, significant brightness variations, and additional advantages. The Muztagh-Ata 1.93m Synergy Telescope (MOST) is an exceptional instrument for monitoring strong lensing time delays. In this study, we simulate the follow-up multi-band light curve monitoring for glSNe Ia systems, which are expected to be firstly discovered by the Chinese Survey Space Telescope (CSST). Our results show that with \(300s \times 9\) exposures in each epoch, MOST can achieve a signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of approximately 50 for the brightest images of glSNe Ia, while even the faintest images maintain an SNR of at least 7. Using a standard SNe Ia light curve template for fitting, we measured the time delays. With a 2-day cadence, MOST achieves a time delay error of only a few hours, with the bias typically remaining below one hour. This study highlights the capability of MOST to significantly advance the precision of time delay measurements, offering a promising path toward resolving the Hubble tension.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

81 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A Comprehensive Measurement of the Local Value of the Hubble Constant with 1 km s−1 Mpc−1 Uncertainty from the Hubble Space Tele- scope and the SH0ES Team

    Adam G. Riess et al. “A Comprehensive Measurement of the Local Value of the Hubble Constant with 1 km s−1 Mpc−1 Uncertainty from the Hubble Space Tele- scope and the SH0ES Team”. In: ApJ 934.1, L7 (July 2022), p. L7. doi: 10.3847/2041-8213 /ac5c5b. arXiv: 2112.04510 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv 2022

  2. [2]

    Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters

    Planck Collaboration et al. “Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters”. In: A&A 641, A6 (Sept. 2020), A6. doi: 10 . 1051 / 0004 - 6361 / 201833910. arXiv: 1807.06209 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv 2018

  3. [3]

    On the possibility of determining Hub- ble’s parameter and the masses of galaxies from the gravitational lens effect

    S. Refsdal. “On the possibility of determining Hub- ble’s parameter and the masses of galaxies from the gravitational lens effect”. In: MNRAS 128 (Jan. 1964), p. 307. doi: 10.1093/mnras/128.4.307

    doi:10.1093/mnras/128.4.307 1964

  4. [4]

    H0LiCOW - I. H 0 Lenses in COS- MOGRAIL’s Wellspring: program overview

    S. H. Suyu et al. “H0LiCOW - I. H 0 Lenses in COS- MOGRAIL’s Wellspring: program overview”. In: MN- RAS 468.3 (July 2017), pp. 2590–2604. doi: 10.1093/ mnras/stx483. arXiv: 1607.00017 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv 2017

  5. [5]

    H0LiCOW - XIII. A 2.4 per cent measurement of H 0 from lensed quasars: 5.3 σ tension between early- and late-Universe probes

    Kenneth C. Wong et al. “H0LiCOW - XIII. A 2.4 per cent measurement of H 0 from lensed quasars: 5.3 σ tension between early- and late-Universe probes”. In: MNRAS 498.1 (Oct. 2020), pp. 1420–1439. doi: 10 . 1093 / mnras / stz3094. arXiv: 1907 . 04869 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020

  6. [6]

    A 2.4% Determination of the Local Value of the Hubble Constant

    Adam G. Riess et al. “A 2.4% Determination of the Local Value of the Hubble Constant”. In: ApJ 826.1, 56 (July 2016), p. 56. doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/826/1/

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/826/1/ 2016

  7. [7]

    Large Magellanic Cloud Cepheid Standards Provide a 1% Foundation for the Determination of the Hubble Constant and Stronger Evidence for Physics beyond ΛCDM

    Adam G. Riess et al. “Large Magellanic Cloud Cepheid Standards Provide a 1% Foundation for the Determination of the Hubble Constant and Stronger Evidence for Physics beyond ΛCDM”. In: ApJ 876.1, 85 (May 2019), p. 85. doi: 10 . 3847 / 1538 - 4357 / ab1422. arXiv: 1903.07603 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv 2019

  8. [8]

    The Space Dis- tribution of Quasars

    F. D. A. Hartwick and David Schade. “The Space Dis- tribution of Quasars”. In: Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics 28.V olume 28, 1990 (1990), pp. 437–

    work page 1990

Show all 81 references
  1. [9]

    Strong Lens Time Delay Challenge. II. Results of TDC1

    Kai Liao et al. “Strong Lens Time Delay Challenge. II. Results of TDC1”. In: ApJ 800.1, 11 (Feb. 2015), p. 11. doi: 10 . 1088/ 0004 - 637X/ 800 / 1 / 11. arXiv: 1409.1254 [astro-ph.IM]

    2015 arXiv

  2. [10]

    H0LiCOW - IX. Cosmographic analy- sis of the doubly imaged quasar SDSS 1206+4332 and a new measurement of the Hubble constant

    S. Birrer et al. “H0LiCOW - IX. Cosmographic analy- sis of the doubly imaged quasar SDSS 1206+4332 and a new measurement of the Hubble constant”. In: MN- RAS 484.4 (Apr. 2019), pp. 4726–4753. doi: 10.1093/ mnras/stz200. arXiv: 1809.01274 [astro-ph.CO]. Guanhua Rui, et al. Sci....

    2025 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Obser- vational selection biases in time-delay strong lensing and their impact on cosmography

    Thomas E. Collett and Steven D. Cunnington. “Obser- vational selection biases in time-delay strong lensing and their impact on cosmography”. In: MNRAS 462.3 (Nov. 2016), pp. 3255–3264. doi: 10 . 1093 / mnras / stw1856. arXiv: 1605.08341 [astro-ph.CO]

    2016 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Two-dimensional kinematics of SLACS lenses - III. Mass structure and dynam- ics of early-type lens galaxies beyond z ≃ 0.1

    Matteo Barnab `e et al. “Two-dimensional kinematics of SLACS lenses - III. Mass structure and dynam- ics of early-type lens galaxies beyond z ≃ 0.1”. In: MNRAS 415.3 (Aug. 2011), pp. 2215–2232. doi: 10. 1111/j.1365- 2966.2011.18842.x. arXiv: 1102.2261 [astro-ph.CO]

    2011

  5. [13]

    The structural and dynamical properties of compact elliptical galaxies

    Akın Yıldırım et al. “The structural and dynamical properties of compact elliptical galaxies”. In: MN- RAS 468.4 (July 2017), pp. 4216–4245. doi: 10.1093/ mnras/stx732. arXiv: 1701.05898 [astro-ph.GA]

    2017 arXiv

  6. [14]

    STRIDES: a 3.9 per cent mea- surement of the Hubble constant from the strong lens system DES J0408-5354

    A. J. Shajib et al. “STRIDES: a 3.9 per cent mea- surement of the Hubble constant from the strong lens system DES J0408-5354”. In: MNRAS 494.4 (June 2020), pp. 6072–6102. doi: 10.1093 /mnras/staa828. arXiv: 1910.06306 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Time-delay cosmographic forecasts with strong lens- ing and JWST stellar kinematics

    Akın Yıldırım, Sherry H. Suyu, and Aleksi Halkola. “Time-delay cosmographic forecasts with strong lens- ing and JWST stellar kinematics”. In: MNRAS 493.4 (Apr. 2020), pp. 4783–4807. doi: 10 . 1093 / mnras / staa498. arXiv: 1904.07237 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

  8. [16]

    TDCOSMO. IV . Hierarchical time- delay cosmography - joint inference of the Hubble constant and galaxy density profiles

    S. Birrer et al. “TDCOSMO. IV . Hierarchical time- delay cosmography - joint inference of the Hubble constant and galaxy density profiles”. In: A&A 643, A165 (Nov. 2020), A165. doi: 10.1051 /0004- 6361/ 202038861. arXiv: 2007.02941 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

  9. [17]

    iPTF16geu: A multiply imaged, gravitationally lensed type Ia supernova

    A. Goobar et al. “iPTF16geu: A multiply imaged, gravitationally lensed type Ia supernova”. In: Science 356.6335 (Apr. 2017), pp. 291–295. doi: 10 . 1126 / science.aal2729. arXiv: 1611.00014 [astro-ph.CO]

    2017 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Gravitational lens time delays for distant supernovae: breaking the degeneracy between radial mass profiles and the Hubble constant

    Masamune Oguri and Yozo Kawano. “Gravitational lens time delays for distant supernovae: breaking the degeneracy between radial mass profiles and the Hubble constant”. In: MNRAS 338.4 (Feb. 2003), pp. L25–L29. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06290. x. arXiv: astro-ph/0211499 [astro-ph]

    2003

  11. [19]

    Seeing the Collision of a Supernova with Its Companion Star

    Daniel Kasen. “Seeing the Collision of a Supernova with Its Companion Star”. In: ApJ 708.2 (Jan. 2010), pp. 1025–1031. doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/708/2/1025. arXiv: 0909.0275 [astro-ph.HE]

    2010 arXiv

  12. [20]

    ZTF Early Observations of Type Ia Supernovae. III. Early-time Colors As a Test for Explosion Models and Multiple Populations

    Mattia Bulla et al. “ZTF Early Observations of Type Ia Supernovae. III. Early-time Colors As a Test for Explosion Models and Multiple Populations”. In: ApJ 902.1, 48 (Oct. 2020), p. 48. doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ abb13c. arXiv: 2001.00587 [astro-ph.HE]

    2020 arXiv

  13. [21]

    A shock flash breaking out of a dusty red supergiant

    Gaici Li et al. “A shock flash breaking out of a dusty red supergiant”. In: Nature 627.8005 (Mar. 2024), pp. 754–758. doi: 10 . 1038 / s41586 - 023 - 06843 - 6. arXiv: 2311.14409 [astro-ph.HE]

    2024

  14. [22]

    PS1-10afx at z = 1.388: Pan- STARRS1 Discovery of a New Type of Superluminous Supernova

    R. Chornock et al. “PS1-10afx at z = 1.388: Pan- STARRS1 Discovery of a New Type of Superluminous Supernova”. In: ApJ 767.2, 162 (Apr. 2013), p. 162. doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/767/2/162. arXiv: 1302.0009 [astro-ph.CO]

    2013 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Multiple images of a highly magnified supernova formed by an early-type clus- ter galaxy lens

    Patrick L. Kelly et al. “Multiple images of a highly magnified supernova formed by an early-type clus- ter galaxy lens”. In: Science 347.6226 (Mar. 2015), pp. 1123–1126. doi: 10.1126/science.aaa3350. arXiv: 1411.6009 [astro-ph.CO]

    2015 arXiv

  16. [24]

    A gravitationally lensed su- pernova with an observable two-decade time delay

    Steven A. Rodney et al. “A gravitationally lensed su- pernova with an observable two-decade time delay”. In: Nature Astronomy 5 (Nov. 2021), pp. 1118–1125. doi: 10 . 1038 / s41550 - 021 - 01450 - 9. arXiv: 2106 . 08935 [astro-ph.CO]

    2021

  17. [25]

    Strongly Lensed SN in MACS 2129 Galaxy-Cluster Field

    P. Kelly et al. “Strongly Lensed SN in MACS 2129 Galaxy-Cluster Field”. In: Transient Name Server As- troNote 169 (Aug. 2022), p. 1

    2022

  18. [26]

    Shock cooling of a red-supergiant supernova at redshift 3 in lensed images

    Wenlei Chen et al. “Shock cooling of a red-supergiant supernova at redshift 3 in lensed images”. In: Na- ture 611.7935 (Nov. 2022), pp. 256–259. doi: 10 . 1038 / s41586 - 022 - 05252 - 5. arXiv: 2306 . 12985 [astro-ph.GA]

    2022

  19. [27]

    SN Zwicky (SN2022qmx): a Strongly Lensed Type Ia at z =0.35 discovered by ZTF

    A. A. Goobar et al. “SN Zwicky (SN2022qmx): a Strongly Lensed Type Ia at z =0.35 discovered by ZTF”. In: Transient Name Server AstroNote 180 (Aug. 2022), p. 1

    2022

  20. [28]

    JWST Photometric Time-delay and Magnification Measurements for the Triply Im- aged Type Ia “SN H0pe

    J. D. R. Pierel et al. “JWST Photometric Time-delay and Magnification Measurements for the Triply Im- aged Type Ia “SN H0pe” at z = 1.78”. In: ApJ 967.1, 50 (May 2024), p. 50. doi: 10 . 3847 / 1538 - 4357 / ad3c43. arXiv: 2403.18954 [astro-ph.CO]

    2024 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Lensed Type Ia Supernova “En- core

    J. D. R. Pierel et al. “Lensed Type Ia Supernova “En- core” at z = 2: The First Instance of Two Multiply Im- aged Supernovae in the Same Host Galaxy”. In: ApJ 967.2, L37 (June 2024), p. L37. doi: 10.3847 /2041- 8213/ad4648. arXiv: 2404.02139 [astro-ph.CO]

    2024 arXiv

  22. [30]

    SN H0pe: The First Mea- surement of H0 from a Multiply-Imaged Type Ia Su- pernova, Discovered by JWST

    Massimo Pascale et al. “SN H0pe: The First Mea- surement of H0 from a Multiply-Imaged Type Ia Su- pernova, Discovered by JWST”. In: arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2403.18902 (Mar. 2024), arXiv:2403.18902. doi: 10.48550 /arXiv.2403.18902. arXiv: 2403.18902 [astro-ph.CO]. Guanhua Rui, e...

    2025 doi arXiv

  23. [31]

    The Magnificent Five Images of Supernova Refsdal: Time Delay and Magnification Measurements

    Patrick L. Kelly et al. “The Magnificent Five Images of Supernova Refsdal: Time Delay and Magnification Measurements”. In: ApJ 948.2, 93 (May 2023), p. 93. doi: 10.3847 /1538- 4357/ac4ccb. arXiv: 2305.06377 [astro-ph.CO]

    2023 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Constraints on the Hubble constant from supernova Refsdal’s reappearance

    Patrick L. Kelly et al. “Constraints on the Hubble constant from supernova Refsdal’s reappearance”. In: Science 380.6649, abh1322 (June 2023), abh1322. doi: 10 . 1126/ science . abh1322. arXiv: 2305 . 06367 [astro-ph.CO]

    2023

  25. [33]

    Cosmography with supernova Refsdal through time-delay cluster lensing: Independent mea- surements of the Hubble constant and geometry of the Universe

    C. Grillo et al. “Cosmography with supernova Refsdal through time-delay cluster lensing: Independent mea- surements of the Hubble constant and geometry of the Universe”. In: A&A 684, L23 (Apr. 2024), p. L23.doi: 10.1051 /0004- 6361/202449278. arXiv: 2401.10980 [astro-ph.CO]

    2024 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Gravitation- ally lensed quasars and supernovae in future wide-field optical imaging surveys

    Masamune Oguri and Philip J. Marshall. “Gravitation- ally lensed quasars and supernovae in future wide-field optical imaging surveys”. In: MNRAS 405.4 (July 2010), pp. 2579–2593. doi: 10 . 1111/ j . 1365 - 2966 . 2010.16639.x. arXiv: 1001.2037 [astro-ph.CO]

    2010

  27. [35]

    Forecast of strongly lensed super- novae rates in the China Space Station Telescope sur- veys

    Jiang Dong et al. “Forecast of strongly lensed super- novae rates in the China Space Station Telescope sur- veys”. In: A&A 689, A192 (Sept. 2024), A192. doi: 10.1051 /0004- 6361/202450838. arXiv: 2407.10470 [astro-ph.CO]

    2024 arXiv

  28. [36]

    The wide-field multiband imaging and slit- less spectroscopy survey to be carried out by the Sur- vey Space Telescope of China Manned Space Pro- gram

    Zhan Hu. “The wide-field multiband imaging and slit- less spectroscopy survey to be carried out by the Sur- vey Space Telescope of China Manned Space Pro- gram”. In: Chinese Science Bulletin 66.11 (2021), pp. 1290–1298. doi: https : / /doi . org/ 10 . 1360/ TB - 2021-0016. url...

    2021 doi

  29. [37]

    Site testing at Muztagh-ata site II: seeing statistics

    Jing Xu et al. “Site testing at Muztagh-ata site II: seeing statistics”. In: Research in Astronomy and As- trophysics 20.6, 087 (June 2020), p. 087. doi: 10 . 1088 / 1674 - 4527 / 20 / 6 / 87. arXiv: 2003 . 13998 [astro-ph.IM]

    2020

  30. [38]

    Site-testing at Muztagh-ata site I: ground meteorology and sky brightness

    Jing Xu et al. “Site-testing at Muztagh-ata site I: ground meteorology and sky brightness”. In: Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics 20.6, 086 (June 2020), p. 086. doi: 10 . 1088 / 1674 - 4527/ 20 / 6 / 86. arXiv: 2003.14079 [astro-ph.IM]

    2020 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Forecast of Observing Time De- lay of Strongly Lensed Quasars with the Muztagh-Ata 1.93 m Telescope

    Shanhao Zhu et al. “Forecast of Observing Time De- lay of Strongly Lensed Quasars with the Muztagh-Ata 1.93 m Telescope”. In:Research in Astronomy and As- trophysics 23.3, 035001 (Mar. 2023), p. 035001. doi: 10 . 1088 / 1674 - 4527 / acaf4e. arXiv: 2203 . 15680 [astro-ph.CO]

    2023

  32. [40]

    Flux variations of QSO 0957 + 561 A, B and image splitting by stars near the light path

    K. Chang and S. Refsdal. “Flux variations of QSO 0957 + 561 A, B and image splitting by stars near the light path”. In: Nature 282.5739 (Dec. 1979), pp. 561–

    1979

  33. [41]

    Strong Gravitational Lensing and Microlensing of Supernovae

    Sherry H. Suyu et al. “Strong Gravitational Lensing and Microlensing of Supernovae”. In: Space Sci. Rev. 220.1, 13 (Feb. 2024), p. 13. doi: 10 . 1007/ s11214 - 024-01044-7. arXiv: 2301.07729 [astro-ph.CO]

    2024 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Precise Time Delays from Strongly Gravitationally Lensed Type Ia Supernovae with Chromatically Microlensed Images

    Daniel A. Goldstein et al. “Precise Time Delays from Strongly Gravitationally Lensed Type Ia Supernovae with Chromatically Microlensed Images”. In: ApJ 855.1, 22 (Mar. 2018), p. 22. doi: 10 . 3847 / 1538 - 4357/aaa975. arXiv: 1708.00003 [astro-ph.CO]

    2018 arXiv

  35. [43]

    HOLISMOKES. I. Highly Op- timised Lensing Investigations of Supernovae, Mi- crolensing Objects, and Kinematics of Ellipticals and Spirals

    S. H. Suyu et al. “HOLISMOKES. I. Highly Op- timised Lensing Investigations of Supernovae, Mi- crolensing Objects, and Kinematics of Ellipticals and Spirals”. In: A&A 644, A162 (Dec. 2020), A162. doi: 10.1051 /0004- 6361/202037757. arXiv: 2002.08378 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

  36. [44]

    HOLISMOKES. III. Achromatic phase of strongly lensed Type Ia supernovae

    S. Huber et al. “HOLISMOKES. III. Achromatic phase of strongly lensed Type Ia supernovae”. In: A&A 646, A110 (Feb. 2021), A110. doi: 10 . 1051 / 0004 - 6361 / 202039218. arXiv: 2008 . 10393 [astro-ph.HE]

    2021

  37. [45]

    Ac- creting white dwarf models for type I supernovae. III. Carbon deflagration supernovae

    K. Nomoto, F. -K. Thielemann, and K. Yokoi. “Ac- creting white dwarf models for type I supernovae. III. Carbon deflagration supernovae.” In: ApJ 286 (Nov. 1984), pp. 644–658. doi: 10.1086/162639

    1984 doi

  38. [46]

    Secondary Maximum in the Near- Infrared Light Curves of Type Ia Supernovae

    Daniel Kasen. “Secondary Maximum in the Near- Infrared Light Curves of Type Ia Supernovae”. In: ApJ 649.2 (Oct. 2006), pp. 939–953. doi: 10.1086/506588. arXiv: astro-ph/0606449 [astro-ph]

    2006 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Monte Carlo Radiation-Hydrodynamics With Implicit Methods

    Nathaniel Roth and Daniel Kasen. “Monte Carlo Radiation-Hydrodynamics With Implicit Methods”. In: ApJS 217.1, 9 (Mar. 2015), p. 9. doi: 10 . 1088 / 0067 - 0049 / 217 / 1 / 9. arXiv: 1404 . 4652 [astro-ph.IM]

    2015

  40. [48]

    The BOSS Emission-line Lens Survey. IV . Smooth Lens Models for the BELLS GALLERY Sample

    Yiping Shu et al. “The BOSS Emission-line Lens Survey. IV . Smooth Lens Models for the BELLS GALLERY Sample”. In: ApJ 833.2, 264 (Dec. 2016), p. 264. doi: 10.3847 /1538- 4357/833/2/264. arXiv: 1608.08707 [astro-ph.GA]

    2016 arXiv

  41. [49]

    An Improved GPU-based Ray-shooting Code for Gravitational Microlensing

    Wenwen Zheng et al. “An Improved GPU-based Ray-shooting Code for Gravitational Microlensing”. In: ApJ 931.2, 114 (June 2022), p. 114. doi: 10 . 3847 / 1538 - 4357 / ac68ea. arXiv: 2204 . 10871 [astro-ph.IM]. Guanhua Rui, et al. Sci. China-Phys. Mech. Astron. January (2025) V o...

    2025

  42. [50]

    Theoretical Analysis of Ran- dom Scattering Induced by Microlensing

    Wenwen Zheng et al. “Theoretical Analysis of Ran- dom Scattering Induced by Microlensing”. In: Re- search in Astronomy and Astrophysics 23.8, 085011 (Aug. 2023), p. 085011. doi: 10 . 1088/ 1674 - 4527/ acd67f. arXiv: 2308.15073 [astro-ph.GA]

    2023 arXiv

  43. [52]

    Lectures on Gravitational Lensing

    Ramesh Narayan and Matthias Bartelmann. “Lectures on Gravitational Lensing”. In: arXiv e-prints , astro- ph/9606001 (June 1996), astro–ph /9606001. doi: 10 . 48550 / arXiv . astro - ph/ 9606001. arXiv: astro - ph / 9606001 [astro-ph]

    1996

  44. [53]

    Isothermal elliptical gravitational lens models

    R. Kormann, P. Schneider, and M. Bartelmann. “Isothermal elliptical gravitational lens models.” In: A&A 284 (Apr. 1994), pp. 285–299

    1994

  45. [54]

    Microlensing of Lensed Supernovae

    Gregory Dobler and Charles R. Keeton. “Microlensing of Lensed Supernovae”. In: ApJ 653.2 (Dec. 2006), pp. 1391–1399. doi: 10 . 1086/ 508769. arXiv: astro - ph/0608391 [astro-ph]

    2006

  46. [56]

    arXiv: 1604.01424 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv

  47. [57]

    Strongly lensed SNe Ia in the era of LSST: observing cadence for lens discoveries and time-delay measurements

    S. Huber et al. “Strongly lensed SNe Ia in the era of LSST: observing cadence for lens discoveries and time-delay measurements”. In: A&A 631, A161 (Nov. 2019), A161. doi: 10 . 1051/ 0004 - 6361/ 201935370. arXiv: 1903.00510 [astro-ph.IM]

    2019 arXiv

  48. [58]

    An expansion opacity formalism for the Sobolev method

    D. J. Je ffery. “An expansion opacity formalism for the Sobolev method.” In: A&A 299 (July 1995), p. 770

    1995

  49. [59]

    Introduction to IMF@50

    Edwin E. Salpeter. “Introduction to IMF@50”. In: The Initial Mass Function 50 Years Later . Ed. by E. Corbelli, F. Palla, and H. Zinnecker. V ol. 327. Astro- physics and Space Science Library. Jan. 2005, p. 3. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4020-3407-7 1

    2005 doi

  50. [60]

    Spectral Modeling of SNe Ia Near Maximum Light: Probing the Characteristics of Hy- drodynamical Models

    E. Baron et al. “Spectral Modeling of SNe Ia Near Maximum Light: Probing the Characteristics of Hy- drodynamical Models”. In: ApJ 645.1 (July 2006), pp. 480–487. doi: 10.1086 /504101. arXiv: astro- ph / 0603101 [astro-ph]

    2006

  51. [61]

    Atomic Line Data

    Robert Kurucz and B. Bell. “Atomic Line Data”. In: Robert Kurucz CD-ROM 23 (Jan. 1995)

    1995

  52. [62]

    Synthetic Spectra of Hydrody- namic Models of Type Ia Supernovae

    Peter Nugent et al. “Synthetic Spectra of Hydrody- namic Models of Type Ia Supernovae”. In: ApJ 485.2 (Aug. 1997), pp. 812–819. doi: 10 . 1086 / 304459. arXiv: astro-ph/9612044 [astro-ph]

    1997 arXiv

  53. [63]

    The Cosmic Lens All-Sky Sur- vey: statistical strong lensing, cosmological parame- ters, and global properties of galaxy populations

    Kyu-Hyun Chae. “The Cosmic Lens All-Sky Sur- vey: statistical strong lensing, cosmological parame- ters, and global properties of galaxy populations”. In: MNRAS 346.3 (Dec. 2003), pp. 746–772. doi: 10 . 1111/j.1365- 2966.2003.07092.x. arXiv: astro- ph / 0211244 [astro-ph]

    2003

  54. [64]

    The velocity dispersion func- tion of early-type galaxies and its redshift evolution: the newest results from lens redshift test

    Shuaibo Geng et al. “The velocity dispersion func- tion of early-type galaxies and its redshift evolution: the newest results from lens redshift test”. In: MN- RAS 503.1 (May 2021), pp. 1319–1326. doi: 10.1093/ mnras/stab519. arXiv: 2102.12140 [astro-ph.GA]

    2021 arXiv

  55. [65]

    Spectrophotometric time series of SN 2011fe from the Nearby Supernova Factory

    R. Pereira et al. “Spectrophotometric time series of SN 2011fe from the Nearby Supernova Factory”. In: A&A 554, A27 (June 2013), A27. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/ 201221008. arXiv: 1302.1292 [astro-ph.CO]

    2013 arXiv

  56. [66]

    External Shear in Quadruply Imaged Lens Systems

    Gilbert P. Holder and Paul L. Schechter. “External Shear in Quadruply Imaged Lens Systems”. In: ApJ 589.2 (June 2003), pp. 688–692. doi: 10.1086/374688. arXiv: astro-ph/0209532 [astro-ph]

    2003 arXiv

  57. [67]

    The delay-time distribution of Type Ia supernovae from Sloan II

    Dan Maoz, Filippo Mannucci, and Timothy D. Brandt. “The delay-time distribution of Type Ia supernovae from Sloan II”. In: MNRAS 426.4 (Nov. 2012), pp. 3282–3294. doi: 10 . 1111 / j . 1365 - 2966 . 2012 . 21871.x. arXiv: 1206.0465 [astro-ph.CO]

    2012 arXiv

  58. [68]

    Revisiting the Lensed Fraction of High-redshift Quasars

    Minghao Yue et al. “Revisiting the Lensed Fraction of High-redshift Quasars”. In: ApJ 925.2, 169 (Feb. 2022), p. 169. doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac409b. arXiv: 2112.02821 [astro-ph.GA]

    2022 arXiv

  59. [69]

    On the Normalization of the Cosmic Star Formation History

    Andrew M. Hopkins and John F. Beacom. “On the Normalization of the Cosmic Star Formation History”. In: ApJ 651.1 (Nov. 2006), pp. 142–154.doi: 10.1086/ 506610. arXiv: astro-ph/0601463 [astro-ph]

    2006 arXiv

  60. [70]

    The Luminosity Function and Stellar Evolution

    Edwin E. Salpeter. “The Luminosity Function and Stellar Evolution.” In: ApJ 121 (Jan. 1955), p. 161. doi: 10.1086/145971

    1955 doi

  61. [71]

    Cosmic Star- Formation History

    Piero Madau and Mark Dickinson. “Cosmic Star- Formation History”. In: ARA&A 52 (Aug. 2014), pp. 415–486. doi: 10 . 1146/ annurev - astro - 081811 - 125615. arXiv: 1403.0007 [astro-ph.CO]

    2014 arXiv

  62. [72]

    Projected Cosmological Con- straints from Strongly Lensed Supernovae with the Roman Space Telescope

    J. D. R. Pierel et al. “Projected Cosmological Con- straints from Strongly Lensed Supernovae with the Roman Space Telescope”. In: ApJ 908.2, 190 (Feb. 2021), p. 190. doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abd8d3. arXiv: 2010.12399 [astro-ph.CO]. Guanhua Rui, et al. Sci. China-Phys. Mech. Astr...

    2025 arXiv

  63. [73]

    Turning Gravitation- ally Lensed Supernovae into Cosmological Probes

    J. D. R. Pierel and S. Rodney. “Turning Gravitation- ally Lensed Supernovae into Cosmological Probes”. In: ApJ 876.2, 107 (May 2019), p. 107. doi: 10 . 3847 / 1538 - 4357 / ab164a. arXiv: 1902 . 01260 [astro-ph.CO]

    2019

  64. [74]

    On the Origin of the Type Ia Supernova Width-Luminosity Relation

    Daniel Kasen and S. E. Woosley. “On the Origin of the Type Ia Supernova Width-Luminosity Relation”. In: ApJ 656.2 (Feb. 2007), pp. 661–665. doi: 10.1086/ 510375. arXiv: astro-ph/0609540 [astro-ph]

    2007 arXiv

  65. [75]

    The Zwicky Transient Facil- ity: System Overview, Performance, and First Re- sults

    Eric C. Bellm et al. “The Zwicky Transient Facil- ity: System Overview, Performance, and First Re- sults”. In: PASP 131.995 (Jan. 2019), p. 018002. doi: 10 . 1088 / 1538 - 3873 / aaecbe. arXiv: 1902 . 01932 [astro-ph.IM]

    2019

  66. [76]

    Science with the 2.5-meter Wide Field Survey Telescope (WFST)

    Tinggui Wang et al. “Science with the 2.5-meter Wide Field Survey Telescope (WFST)”. In: Science China Physics, Mechanics, and Astronomy 66.10, 109512 (Oct. 2023), p. 109512. doi: 10 . 1007/ s11433 - 023 - 2197-5. arXiv: 2306.07590 [astro-ph.IM]

    2023 arXiv

  67. [77]

    SALT2: using distant supernovae to im- prove the use of type Ia supernovae as distance indica- tors

    J. Guy et al. “SALT2: using distant supernovae to im- prove the use of type Ia supernovae as distance indica- tors”. In: A&A 466.1 (Apr. 2007), pp. 11–21. doi: 10. 1051/0004-6361:20066930. arXiv: astro-ph /0701828 [astro-ph]

    2007

  68. [78]

    Monte Carlo techniques for time- dependent radiative transfer in 3-D supernovae

    L. B. Lucy. “Monte Carlo techniques for time- dependent radiative transfer in 3-D supernovae”. In: A&A 429 (Jan. 2005), pp. 19–30. doi: 10 . 1051 / 0004 - 6361 : 20041656. arXiv: astro - ph / 0409249 [astro-ph]

    2005

  69. [79]

    Mihalas and B

    D. Mihalas and B. W. Mihalas. F oundations of radia- tion hydrodynamics. 1984

    1984

  70. [80]

    Time- dependent Monte Carlo Radiative Transfer Calcula- tions for Three-dimensional Supernova Spectra, Light Curves, and Polarization

    Daniel Kasen, R. C. Thomas, and P. Nugent. “Time- dependent Monte Carlo Radiative Transfer Calcula- tions for Three-dimensional Supernova Spectra, Light Curves, and Polarization”. In: ApJ 651.1 (Nov. 2006), pp. 366–380. doi: 10.1086 /506190. arXiv: astro- ph / 0606111 [astro-ph]

    2006

  71. [83]

    Spectrophoto- metric Libraries, Revised Photonic Passbands, and Zero Points for UBVRI, Hipparcos, and Tycho Pho- tometry

    Michael Bessell and Simon Murphy. “Spectrophoto- metric Libraries, Revised Photonic Passbands, and Zero Points for UBVRI, Hipparcos, and Tycho Pho- tometry”. In: PASP 124.912 (Feb. 2012), p. 140. doi: 10.1086/664083. arXiv: 1112.2698 [astro-ph.SR]. Appendix In this appendix, w...

    2025 arXiv

  72. [489]

    doi: https: // doi.org /10.1146 / annurev

    issn: 1545-4282. doi: https: // doi.org /10.1146 / annurev. aa . 28 . 090190 . 002253.url: https : / /www. annualreviews.org/content/journals/10.1146/annurev. aa.28.090190.002253

  73. [564]

    doi: 10.1038/282561a0

    doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.