Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 2 cited by

AT 2019aalc: a Bowen Fluorescence Flare With a Precursor Flare in an Active Galactic Nucleus

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper establishes that AT 2019aalc is a Bowen fluorescence flare in a pre-existing active galactic nucleus, with high-ionization emission lines that vary alongside and slightly ahead of the optical rebrightenings in the second flare.

desk verdict A solid BFF monitoring paper whose genuinely new result—line–bump timing from 23 epochs—is credible but rests on a constant-[O iii] normalization and an X-ray error budget that need referee attention. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.00083 v1 pith:HK56UQW4 submitted 2025-04-30 astro-ph.HE

Marzena Śniegowska , Benny Trakhtenbrot , Lydia Makrygianni , Iair Arcavi , Claudio Ricci , Sarah Faris , Biswaraj Palit , D. Andrew Howell
show 5 more authors
Megan Newsome Joseph Farah Curtis McCully Estefania Padilla-Gonzalez Giacomo Terreran
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords BowenfluorescenceflaresactivegalacticnucleiaccretiondiskscoronalemissionlinesAGNvariabilitytidaldisruptioneventsradiationpressureinstabilitiesrecurringnucleartransients
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

This paper argues that the extreme nuclear transient AT 2019aalc, once suspected to be a tidal disruption event, is instead a Bowen fluorescence flare: an enhanced accretion event in a galaxy that was already an active galactic nucleus. The key new evidence comes from a dense optical spectroscopic campaign after the second of two flares, which shows that emission from helium, nitrogen, and highly ionized iron varies in step with, and slightly before, small rebrightenings in the optical light curve. Because these lines require extreme-ultraviolet photons, their timing means they are tracing the otherwise invisible EUV output of the flaring accretion flow on timescales of weeks to months. The result strengthens the distinction between Bowen fluorescence flares and tidal disruption events and gives the clearest temporal link yet between high-ionization line emission and the accretion flare that drives it.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is Bowen fluorescence, a fluorescence cascade in which He ii Ly$\alpha$ emission at 30.4 nm pumps O iii and produces the broad N iii $\lambda4640$ and enhanced He ii $\lambda4686$ lines, requiring an intense EUV continuum above 50 eV. The paper converts this into a measurement tool: the time series of the blended He ii + N iii flux and the $[\mathrm{Fe\,X}]\,\lambda6375$ coronal line, both normalized to the constant $[\mathrm{O\,III}]\,\lambda5007$ narrow-line flux, serve as proxies for the otherwise unobservable extreme-UV continuum. Comparing these line fluxes with the broadband optical light curve is what supports the lead-lag claim.

What would settle it

Take high-resolution spectra that resolve [O iii] λ5007 during one of the optical rebrightening bumps; if the [O iii] flux varies with the continuum rather than staying constant, the normalization that produces the reported line light curves and their lead-lag structure is invalid.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that AT 2019aalc is a Bowen fluorescence flare (BFF) produced by an enhanced accretion event in the already-active AGN SDSS J152416.66+045119.0, and that new dense spectroscopic monitoring resolves how the flare's high-energy radiation reaches the line-emitting gas. The blended $\mathrm{He\,II}\,\lambda4686 + \mathrm{N\,III}\,\lambda4640$ feature and the coronal $[\mathrm{Fe\,X}]\,\lambda6375$ line rise and fall roughly in step with the broadband optical light curve, and their peaks slightly precede the optical rebrightening bumps during the decline of the second flare. Because those lines require photons of $>54$ eV and $>235$ eV respectively, the paper reads their timing as a direct trace of the extreme-UV output of the flaring accretion flow, with the line-emitting gas sitting at broad-line-region scales close to the black hole. The paper also reports two fast soft X-ray flares during the dimming phase that show no corresponding line or optical brightening, which it treats as evidence that the X-ray and EUV/optical reprocessing components are not tightly coupled.

Load-bearing premise

Every spectrum is scaled to the pre-flare [O iii] λ5007 flux, which the analysis assumes stayed constant; if that narrow-line flux changed during the flares, the reported line variations and their timing relative to the optical bumps would be distorted.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The high-ionization line fluxes can be used to track the extreme-UV continuum of a flaring accretion flow on timescales that are otherwise inaccessible.
  • The source joins other BFFs occurring in previously active AGNs, supporting the picture of enhanced accretion events rather than tidal disruptions.
  • The slow, bumpy, second-flare-brighter light curve is hard to reconcile with canonical or partial tidal disruption event light curves, so BFFs need to be considered when classifying recurring nuclear transients.
  • The absence of line or optical brightening during the second soft X-ray flare indicates that the soft X-ray and EUV/optical reprocessing components are not tightly coupled.
  • If the slight lead of the high-ionization lines over the optical bumps is confirmed, monitoring these lines can provide advance warning of rebrightening in similar systems.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial extension: If this lead-lag pattern holds in other BFFs, optical spectroscopy of Bowen and coronal lines could serve as a ground-based timer for the EUV continuum of AGN accretion flares, sidestepping the need for simultaneous EUV satellites.
  • Editorial extension: The two soft X-ray flares that lack optical or line counterparts suggest the soft X-ray emission is not the same component that drives the Bowen fluorescence; searching for similar decoupled X-ray flares in archival BFF light curves would test whether this is a generic feature.
  • Editorial extension: The disk-instability models invoked here predict rises slower than decays, opposite to AT 2019aalc; catching the rise of a future flare in this source would directly discriminate between instability-driven and other accretion scenarios.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper presents a multi-epoch, multi-wavelength study of the nuclear transient AT 2019aalc in the broad-line AGN SDSS J152416.66+045119.0. It reports two optical/UV flares (2019 and 2023), high-cadence FLOYDS spectroscopy after the second flare showing Bowen fluorescence (He ii+N iii) and coronal ([Fe x], [Fe xiv]) lines, line light curves that track and possibly slightly precede optical rebrightening bumps, two soft X-ray flares not accompanied by strong line or UV variations, and MIR dust echoes lagging the optical flares. The authors classify AT 2019aalc as a Bowen fluorescence flare in a pre-existing AGN, argue against canonical and partial TDE interpretations, and explore radiation-pressure instability models with GLADIS, explicitly acknowledging the models' limitations.

Significance. The central claim is credible and valuable: it adds a well-observed member to the small BFF class, confirms that BFFs can occur in already-active AGNs, and provides the most detailed temporal link so far between Bowen/coronal lines and the EUV continuum variations during such flares. The paper is unusually candid: the poor power-law fits to the light curves and the shortcomings of the GLADIS models are stated explicitly, and the multi-wavelength dataset is largely public. If the timing result survives a more robust normalization test, it will be a genuinely new constraint on the location and response of the high-ionization gas.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3.3.1 and Table 2] All line fluxes in Table 2 are normalized to a constant [O iii] λ5007 flux derived from the 2008 SDSS spectrum. The new temporal conclusion in Section 4.2.3, that F(He ii+N iii) and [Fe x] peak before the optical bumps (e.g., MJD 60444 vs. 60450), is therefore relative to an assumed-fixed narrow-line reference. Because the same scaling is applied to every epoch and also fixes [O iii]/narrow Hβ, any drift in the intrinsic [O iii] flux or in the wavelength-dependent throughput of the FLOYDS spectra would be imprinted on all line light curves. The assumption is physically motivated, but it is load-bearing for the timing claim and is not tested. I ask for a direct test, such as allowing [O iii] to vary in the decomposition or renormalizing to an independent anchor, and for a statement of how sensitive the lead-lag features are to that choice.
  2. [Table 3 and Section 4.3] The reported 0.3–2 keV and 2–10 keV fluxes all carry formal fractional uncertainties of order 100% (e.g., F0.3−2 keV = 0.43±0.43, 1.18±1.18, 1.97±1.97 ×10−12 erg cm−2 s−1), yet Section 4.3 quotes X-ray luminosities and factors of 30, 80, and 20 relative to UV-based expectations without propagating these uncertainties. The qualitative conclusion that the source is UV-bright/X-ray weak may be robust to this, but the quantitative factors are not. Please recompute with error propagation, present upper limits where appropriate, and adjust the text accordingly.
  3. [Section 4.2.3 and Figure 8] The claimed temporal precedence at the second bump is inferred from the peak of F(He ii+N iii) at MJD 60444, [Fe x] at MJD 60426, and the g-band bump at MJD 60450. Given the 8–20 day spacing of the FLOYDS spectra and the lack of coverage of the rise to the first bump (acknowledged in Section 4.2.4), the data are consistent with simultaneous or slightly delayed variations, not only with lines leading the continuum. The statement in Section 6, finding 5, should be softened unless a cross-correlation or other quantitative test is provided.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Table 2 and Section 4.2.3] The column header and the text refer to 'F(He ii + He ii)' where 'F(He ii + N iii)' is clearly intended.
  2. [Section 4.2.3] The statement that the pre-flare He ii+N iii emission is 'already higher by a factor of ≳15×' than in typical AGNs is inconsistent with the measured ratios of 0.29–0.44 relative to Hβ and the typical value <0.05; the factor should be ≳6–9× unless another benchmark is intended.
  3. [Table 3] The units of the 'Norm' parameter for an absorbed power-law (phabs×po) model in XSPEC are not counts s−1; they are photons keV−1 cm−2 s−1 at 1 keV.
  4. [Section 4.2.3] The sentence 'may conclude that' is missing the subject 'we'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the BFF classification and line-timing results are empirical, externally benchmarked, and do not reduce to the [O iii] normalization or to self-citations.

full rationale

The paper's central claims rest on new LCO/FLOYDS spectroscopy, ZTF/ATLAS photometry, Swift XRT/UVOT data, and archival SDSS/Keck spectra. The classification of AT 2019aalc as a Bowen fluorescence flare (BFF) uses the class definition from Trakhtenbrot et al. (2019a), one of whose authors is also a coauthor here; however, the assignment is based on directly observed Bowen fluorescence features, BLR-like line widths, the slow multi-bump light-curve, and comparison to external benchmarks such as the TDE PS1-10jh and the Vanden Berk et al. (2001) quasar composite. No parameter is fitted to force the classification. The genuinely new temporal result—that the Bowen and coronal lines vary in tandem with, and slightly precede, the optical rebrightening bumps—is an empirical measurement from epoch-to-epoch spectral decomposition. The only strong assumption, the constant [O iii] lambda5007 normalization described in Section 3.3.1, is an explicit physical assumption about the slow variability of the narrow-line region; it is not a circular reduction because the measured line fluxes are ratios to this assumed reference, and a violation of the assumption would weaken the timing inference without making the inference equivalent to the input. The radiation-pressure-instability discussion in Section 5.3 is explicitly qualitative, uses the GLADIS code, and is accompanied by caveats (e.g., the model produces rise times longer than decline times, opposite to observations); it is not used to fit or predict the observed light-curves. No equation is defined in terms of the target result, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The self-citations to prior work by the same group are normal and not load-bearing for the central derivation.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper's observational claims rest on standard astrophysical scaling relations, extinction corrections, and a constant narrow-line reference, all of which are stated or standard. The model comparison in Section 5.3 introduces an exploratory grid of disk parameters with a fixed viscosity and no magnetic field, none of which is fitted to the data, and the model is candidly acknowledged to fail on the observed rise-decay shape. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (6)
  • Power-law decay index α = 0.23 ± 0.03 to 1.03 ± 0.23 (g/r bands, both flares, depending on t0 treatment)
    Fitted to ZTF declining light curves in Appendix A; used to argue the decline is slower than TDEs, but fits are poor and not central to the BFF classification.
  • Reference time t0 in power-law fits = fixed at flare detection (MJD 58652/60138) or free (MJD 58588/58578/60097/59973)
    Degenerate with α; the paper constrains it not to precede detection and reports the fits fail to describe the light curves.
  • X-ray photon index Γ = 2.46 ± 0.51 to 4.80 ± 0.14 across temporal stacks
    Fitted in XSPEC (Section 4.3); used to convert count rates into luminosities and to compare with the NUV-based expectation. The 2-10 keV fluxes carry ~100% fractional errors.
  • GLADIS accretion rate Ṁ = grid 0.05, 0.1, 0.15, 0.2 M⊙/yr
    Exploratory choices in Section 5.3; not fitted to the light curve and not used to support the central classification.
  • GLADIS outer unstable radius Rout = 30 and 50 RSchw
    Exploratory boundary choices in Section 5.3; chosen by hand to produce plausible timescales.
  • GLADIS viscosity parameter α = 0.01
    Fixed model input in Section 5.3, standard for α-disk models but chosen rather than measured.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Cosmological parameters H0=70 km/s/Mpc, ΩΛ=0.7, ΩM=0.3 are assumed for distance and luminosity calculations.
    Stated at the end of Section 1; standard but affects all luminosity scales.
  • domain assumption Foreground Galactic extinction follows Cardelli et al. (1989) with RV=3.1 and E(B-V)=0.042 from Schlafly & Finkbeiner (2011).
    Applied in Section 3.1 to all photometry; small correction, standard in the field.
  • domain assumption The narrow [O iii] λ5007 line flux is constant across all epochs and is used to normalize all spectra.
    Stated in Section 3.3.1; load-bearing for the line flux time series and temporal correlations.
  • domain assumption Single-epoch virial BH mass prescriptions (Trakhtenbrot & Netzer 2012; Mejía-Restrepo et al. 2022) yield the SMBH mass and Eddington ratios.
    Used in Section 4.2.1; standard but with 0.3-0.5 dex systematic uncertainties, which propagate into the disk model inputs.
  • domain assumption The Lusso & Risaliti (2016) relation between 2500 Å and 2 keV luminosity is used to assess X-ray weakness.
    Used in Section 4.3; the scaling relation has intrinsic scatter, which is not propagated into the claimed X-ray deficit factors.
  • domain assumption The Minezaki et al. (2019) reverberation relation estimates the dust sublimation radius from optical luminosity.
    Used in Section 4.1.3 to contextualize MIR lags; approximate but standard.
  • ad hoc to paper GLADIS disk instability models assume viscosity proportional to total pressure (αPtot), α=0.01, and no magnetic field.
    Used in Section 5.3 for exploratory comparison; the paper notes magnetic fields would alter timescales and stability.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of AT 2019aalc: a Bowen Fluorescence Flare With a Precursor Flare in an Active Galactic Nucleus." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HK56UQW4

@misc{pith2026250500083,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: AT 2019aalc: a Bowen Fluorescence Flare With a Precursor Flare in an Active Galactic Nucleus},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HK56UQW4}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.00083}
}
read the original abstract

AT 2019aalc is a peculiar sequence of highly variable emission events observed towards the nucleus of the broad-line AGN SDSS J152416.66+045119.0. The system exhibited two distinct UV/optical flares (the first detected in 2019, the second one in 2023). Spectra obtained following the detection of the second flare revealed prominent Bowen fluorescence and high-ionization coronal emission lines, which were much weaker, if at all detectable, in a spectrum taken following the first flare. We present and analyze a large set of multi-wavelength, multi-epoch data for this source, with particular emphasis on optical spectroscopic monitoring conducted with the Las Cumbres Observatory network. During the relatively slow dimming that followed the second optical flare, the UV/optical light-curve shows a sequence of minor rebrightening events, while the Bowen fluorescence and the coronal lines vary (roughly) in tandem with these "bumps" in the broad-band light-curve. Most of the observed behavior of AT 2019aalc links it to the growing class of Bowen fluorescence flares (BFFs) while setting it apart from canonical tidal disruption events. However, AT 2019aalc has some outstanding peculiarities, including two short flares seen in its soft X-ray light-curve during the dimming phase of the second optical flare, and which do not seem to be linked to the emission line variations. We discuss the optical and X-ray properties of the source and possible scenarios of the origin of the flare, in particular radiation pressure instabilities in the (pre-existing) AGN accretion disk.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.00083 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. An optical image of SDSS J152416.66+045119.0, the host galaxy of AT 2019aalc, based on SDSS gri bands. The im￾age was obtained on 2001 June 16. Circles with radii of 1.5′′and 3.75′′ represent the apertures used for the archival SDSS (fiber) spectroscopy and for the Swift/UVOT photometry. bands using the lcogtsnpipe pipeline3 (Valenti et al. 2016). The zeropoints were determined using field stars for which magnitudes… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Long-term light-curves of AT 2019aalc. Top: MIR NEOWISE-R photometry in the W1 and W2 bands (converted to AB magnitudes). Bottom: optical light-curves based on photometric measurements obtained from the CRTS (V-band), ZTF (g and r bands), and ATLAS (c and o bands) surveys. Red and green horizontal lines mark the brightness corresponding to the archival optical SDSS (PSF-fit) photometry. The vertical dotted black lin… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The multi-wavelength, broad-band light-curves of AT 2019aalc during the second main optical flare, including optical and NUV measurements (ZTF and Swift/UVOT; bottom panel) and X-ray measurements (Swift/XRT; top panel). The peak in optical emission, at MJD = 60138, is defined as t = 0. We mark observations with a > 3σ detection with points, while triangles mark 3σ upper limits. The blue horizontal line near the left… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (11 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The optical spectral sequence of AT 2019aalc, including the archival (pre-flare) SDSS spectrum (dark blue), the Keck spectrum obtained between the two main optical flares (purple), and our intensive Las Cumbres Observatory spectral monitoring (light blue). Dotted lines…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Spectral decomposition of the archival pre-flare SDSS spectrum of the AGN hosting AT 2019aalc, J1524+0451, performed with PyQSOFit. The observed spectrum is shown in black, and the best-fitting model is shown in blue. Top: The overall spectrum and best￾fit model. The m…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The optical color evolution of AT 2019aalc during the two major optical flares. The top and bottom panels cover the first and second optical flare, respectively The g − r color is calculated from publicly available ZTF photometry that covers both flares, while the B − …
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Comparison of several key optical spectra of AT 2019aalc, including the archival pre-flare SDSS spectrum (dark blue), the Keck/LRIS spectrum taken after the first optical flare has decayed (purple), and a few of the Las Cumbres spectra taken after the second flare (lig…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Time series of emission line (relative) strengths following the second optical flare of AT 2019aalc. Open circles represent measure￾ments based on direct integration of the line flux density, whereas filled circles represent measurements derived from the spectral model…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The X-ray spectral energy distribution (SED) of AT 2019aalc, obtained from the stacked Swift/XRT data (covering MJD = 60118 − 60575; black data points), and the best-fitting ab￾sorbed power-law model (red line). The bottom panel shows the fitting residuals. The best-fi…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Comparison of the optical spectrum of AT 2019aalc (light blue) with two other SMBH-powered transients: the BFF AT 2017bgt (dark blue Trakhtenbrot et al. 2019a) and the optically￾selected TDE PS1-10jh (pink Gezari et al. 2012; Charalampopou￾los et al. 2022). All plotte…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Comparison of the optical light-curves of some of the BFFs known so far, and other selected nuclear transients. For AT 2019aalc we show the light-curves of both main flares. In addition we show the BFFs AT 2017bgt (Trakhtenbrot et al. 2019a) and AT 2021loi (Makrygiann…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Model light-curves of radiation pressure driven instabil￾ities in a thin accretion disk, showing recurring flares and “bumps”, reminiscent of what is seen in AT 2019aalc. The two models shown assume a SMBH mass of MBH = 1.35 × 107 M⊙, as estimated for AT 2019aalc, the…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Power-law fits to the dimming optical light-curves of the two optical flares. The top and bottom panels show the light-curves of AT 2019aalc obtained with the ZTF (r and g bands) for the first flare (left panels) and second flare (right panels). For each flare and ban…
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Time evolution of the flux of the broad Balmer emission lines following the second main optical flare of AT 2019aalc. As in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_14.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Low-hard to high-soft spectral state transitions in the faintest early-X-ray-detected optical tidal disruption event TDE 2025aarm

    astro-ph.HE 2026-07 unverdicted novelty 7.0 of 10

    TDE 2025aarm is the faintest early-X-ray-detected optical TDE and the first thermal TDE reported to show a low-hard to high-soft X-ray state transition resembling black-hole X-ray binaries.

  2. Delayed Launch of Ultrafast Outflows in the Tidal Disruption Event AT2020afhd

    astro-ph.HE 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    X-ray observations of the tidal disruption event AT2020afhd reveal an ultrafast outflow that appears after day 74, slows from 0.19c to 0.01c, and disappears after day 215.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

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

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eprint howpublished institution journal key month number organization pages publisher school series title misctitle type volume year version url label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts ...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION format.url url empty "" new.block "" url * "" * if FUNCTION format.eprint eprint empty "" archivePrefix empty "" archivePrefix "arXiv" = new.block " " eprint * " " * new.block " " eprint * " " * if if if FUNCTION format.doi doi empty "" " " doi * " " * if FUNCTION format.pid doi empty eprint empty ur...

  3. [3]

    Z[DQ r*^Re ԣ

    thebibliography [1] 20pt to REFERENCES 6pt =0pt -12pt 10pt plus 3pt =0pt =0pt =1pt plus 1pt =0pt =0pt -12pt =13pt plus 1pt =20pt =13pt plus 1pt \@M =10000 =-1.0em =0pt =0pt 0pt =0pt =1.0em @enumiv\@empty 10000 10000 `\.\@m \@noitemerr \@latex@warning Empty `thebibliography' environment \@ifnextchar \@reference \@latexerr Missing key on reference command E...

    2021

  4. [4]

    N., Adelman-McCarthy , J

    Abazajian , K. N., Adelman-McCarthy , J. K., Ag \"u eros , M. A., et al. 2009, , 182, 543, 10.1088/0067-0049/182/2/543

    doi:10.1088/0067-0049/182/2/543 2009

  5. [5]

    L., Georgakakis , A., et al

    Aird , J., Coil , A. L., Georgakakis , A., et al. 2015, , 451, 1892, 10.1093/mnras/stv1062

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1062 2015

  6. [6]

    D., van Velzen , S., Horesh , A., & Zauderer , B

    Alexander , K. D., van Velzen , S., Horesh , A., & Zauderer , B. A. 2020, , 216, 81, 10.1007/s11214-020-00702-w

    doi:10.1007/s11214-020-00702-w 2020

  7. [7]

    T., Weigel , A

    Ananna , T. T., Weigel , A. K., Trakhtenbrot , B., et al. 2022, , 261, 9, 10.3847/1538-4365/ac5b64

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac5b64 2022

  8. [8]

    2014, , 793, 38, 10.1088/0004-637X/793/1/38

    Arcavi , I., Gal-Yam , A., Sullivan , M., et al. 2014, , 793, 38, 10.1088/0004-637X/793/1/38

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/793/1/38 2014

Show all 152 references
  1. [9]

    2021, , 592, 704, 10.1038/s41586-021-03394-6

    Arcodia , R., Merloni , A., Nandra , K., et al. 2021, , 592, 704, 10.1038/s41586-021-03394-6

    2021 doi

  2. [10]

    2024, , 684, A64, 10.1051/0004-6361/202348881

    Arcodia , R., Liu , Z., Merloni , A., et al. 2024, , 684, A64, 10.1051/0004-6361/202348881

    2024 doi

  3. [11]

    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

    1996

  4. [12]

    P., Tollerud , E

    Astropy Collaboration , Robitaille , T. P., Tollerud , E. J., et al. 2013, , 558, A33, 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068

    2013 doi

  5. [13]

    M., Sip o cz , B

    Astropy Collaboration , Price-Whelan , A. M., Sip o cz , B. M., et al. 2018, , 156, 123, 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f

    2018 doi

  6. [14]

    M., Lim , P

    Astropy Collaboration , Price-Whelan , A. M., Lim , P. L., et al. 2022, apj, 935, 167, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c74

    2022 doi

  7. [15]

    H., White , R

    Becker , R. H., White , R. L., & Helfand , D. J. 1995, , 450, 559, 10.1086/176166

    1995 doi

  8. [16]

    J., et al

    Bierschenk , M., Ricci , C., Temple , M. J., et al. 2024, , 976, 257, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad844a

    2024 doi

  9. [17]

    K., Nicholl , M., Berger , E., et al

    Blanchard , P. K., Nicholl , M., Berger , E., et al. 2017, , 843, 106, 10.3847/1538-4357/aa77f7

    2017 doi

  10. [18]

    J., Tr \"u mper , J., et al

    Boller , T., Freyberg , M. J., Tr \"u mper , J., et al. 2016, , 588, A103, 10.1051/0004-6361/201525648

    2016 doi

  11. [19]

    A., & Green , R

    Boroson , T. A., & Green , R. F. 1992, , 80, 109, 10.1086/191661

    1992 doi

  12. [20]

    Bowen , I. S. 1928, , 67, 1, 10.1086/143091

    1928 doi

  13. [21]

    M., Baliber , N., Bianco , F

    Brown , T. M., Baliber , N., Bianco , F. B., et al. 2013, , 125, 1031, 10.1086/673168

    2013 doi

  14. [22]

    N., Hill , J

    Burrows , D. N., Hill , J. E., Nousek , J. A., et al. 2005, , 120, 165, 10.1007/s11214-005-5097-2

    2005 doi

  15. [23]

    J., & Trakhtenbrot , B

    Caplar , N., Lilly , S. J., & Trakhtenbrot , B. 2017, , 834, 111, 10.3847/1538-4357/834/2/111

    2017 doi

  16. [24]

    A., Clayton , G

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

    1989 doi

  17. [25]

    D., et al

    Cendes , Y., Berger , E., Alexander , K. D., et al. 2024, , 971, 185, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad5541

    2024 doi

  18. [26]

    H., & Saban , D

    Chan , C.-H., Piran , T., Krolik , J. H., & Saban , D. 2019, , 881, 113, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab2b40

    2019 doi

  19. [27]

    B., et al

    Charalampopoulos , P., Leloudas , G., Malesani , D. B., et al. 2022, , 659, A34, 10.1051/0004-6361/202142122

    2022 doi

  20. [28]

    R., & Nixon , C

    Coughlin , E. R., & Nixon , C. J. 2019, , 883, L17, 10.3847/2041-8213/ab412d

    2019 doi

  21. [29]

    C., Roth , N., Ramirez-Ruiz , E., & Miller , M

    Dai , L., McKinney , J. C., Roth , N., Ramirez-Ruiz , E., & Miller , M. C. 2018, , 859, L20, 10.3847/2041-8213/aab429

    2018 doi

  22. [30]

    S., Koss , M

    den Brok , J. S., Koss , M. J., Trakhtenbrot , B., et al. 2022, , 261, 7, 10.3847/1538-4365/ac5b66

    2022 doi

  23. [31]

    S., Popovi \'c , L

    Dimitrijevi \'c , M. S., Popovi \'c , L. C ., Kova c evi \'c , J., Da c i \'c , M., & Ili \'c , D. 2007, , 374, 1181, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.11238.x

    2007

  24. [32]

    J., Djorgovski , S

    Drake , A. J., Djorgovski , S. G., Mahabal , A., et al. 2009, , 696, 870, 10.1088/0004-637X/696/1/870

    2009 doi

  25. [33]

    2004, , 611, 1005, 10.1086/422091

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

    2004 doi

  26. [34]

    2021, , 59, 21, 10.1146/annurev-astro-111720-030029

    Gezari , S. 2021, , 59, 21, 10.1146/annurev-astro-111720-030029

    2021 doi

  27. [35]

    2012, , 485, 217, 10.1038/nature10990

    Gezari , S., Chornock , R., Rest , A., et al. 2012, , 485, 217, 10.1038/nature10990

    2012 doi

  28. [36]

    Giustini , M., Miniutti , G., & Saxton , R. D. 2020, , 636, L2, 10.1051/0004-6361/202037610

    2020 doi

  29. [37]

    J., Ross , N

    Graham , M. J., Ross , N. P., Stern , D., et al. 2020, , 491, 4925, 10.1093/mnras/stz3244

    2020 doi

  30. [38]

    J., Pulgarin-Duque , L., Anderson , S

    Green , P. J., Pulgarin-Duque , L., Anderson , S. F., et al. 2022, , 933, 180, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac743f

    2022 doi

  31. [39]

    2019, , 622, L2, 10.1051/0004-6361/201833682

    Gromadzki , M., Hamanowicz , A., Wyrzykowski , L., et al. 2019, , 622, L2, 10.1051/0004-6361/201833682

    2019 doi

  32. [40]

    J., Bloemen , S., Vreeswijk , P

    Groot , P. J., Bloemen , S., Vreeswijk , P. M., et al. 2024, , 136, 115003, 10.1088/1538-3873/ad8b6a

    2024 doi

  33. [41]

    2017, , 603, A110, 10.1051/0004-6361/201629672

    Grzedzielski , M., Janiuk , A., Czerny , B., & Wu , Q. 2017, , 603, A110, 10.1051/0004-6361/201629672

    2017 doi

  34. [42]

    2014, The Astrophysical Journal, 783, 23, 10.1088/0004-637x/783/1/23

    Guillochon, J., Manukian, H., & Ramirez-Ruiz, E. 2014, The Astrophysical Journal, 783, 23, 10.1088/0004-637x/783/1/23

    2014 doi

  35. [43]

    2018, PyQSOFit: Python code to fit the spectrum of quasars , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1809.008

    Guo , H., Shen , Y., & Wang , S. 2018, PyQSOFit: Python code to fit the spectrum of quasars , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1809.008. 1809.008

    2018

  36. [44]

    A., et al

    Guo , W.-J., Zou , H., Fawcett , V. A., et al. 2024, , 270, 26, 10.3847/1538-4365/ad118a

    2024 doi

  37. [45]

    2023, Transient Name Server AstroNote, 195, 1

    Guolo , M., & Gezari , S. 2023, Transient Name Server AstroNote, 195, 1

    2023

  38. [46]

    M., Viallet , M., & Lasota , J

    Hameury , J. M., Viallet , M., & Lasota , J. P. 2009, , 496, 413, 10.1051/0004-6361/200810928

    2009 doi

  39. [47]

    R., Millman, K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357, 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2

    2020 doi

  40. [48]

    J., White , R

    Helfand , D. J., White , R. L., & Becker , R. H. 2015, , 801, 26, 10.1088/0004-637X/801/1/26

    2015 doi

  41. [49]

    A., Welch , D

    Henden , A. A., Welch , D. L., Terrell , D., & Levine , S. E. 2009, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, Vol. 214, American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts \#214, 407.02

    2009

  42. [50]

    2016, , 594, A116, 10.1051/0004-6361/201629178

    HI4PI Collaboration , Ben Bekhti , N., Fl \"o er , L., et al. 2016, , 594, A116, 10.1051/0004-6361/201629178

    2016 doi

  43. [51]

    Holoien , T. W. S., Kochanek , C. S., Prieto , J. L., et al. 2016, , 455, 2918, 10.1093/mnras/stv2486

    2016 doi

  44. [52]

    Holoien , T. W. S., Huber , M. E., Shappee , B. J., et al. 2019, , 880, 120, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab2ae1

    2019 doi

  45. [53]

    M., Miller , C

    Hopkins , A. M., Miller , C. J., Nichol , R. C., et al. 2003, , 599, 971, 10.1086/379608

    2003 doi

  46. [54]

    B., & Arcavi , I

    Horesh , A., Cenko , S. B., & Arcavi , I. 2021, Nature Astronomy, 5, 491, 10.1038/s41550-021-01300-8

    2021 doi

  47. [55]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing In Science & Engineering, 9, 90, 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55

    2007 doi

  48. [56]

    2019, GRB Coordinates Network, 26258, 1

    IceCube Collaboration . 2019, GRB Coordinates Network, 26258, 1

    2019

  49. [57]

    M., Tyson , J

    Ivezi \'c , Z ., Kahn , S. M., Tyson , J. A., et al. 2019, , 873, 111, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab042c

    2019 doi

  50. [58]

    J., et al

    Jana , A., Ricci , C., Temple , M. J., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.08676, 10.48550/arXiv.2411.08676

    2024 doi arXiv

  51. [59]

    2020, in Multifrequency Behaviour of High Energy Cosmic Sources - XIII

    Janiuk , A. 2020, in Multifrequency Behaviour of High Energy Cosmic Sources - XIII. 3-8 June 2019. Palermo, 48, 10.22323/1.362.004810.48550/arXiv.1911.05357

    2020

  52. [60]

    2011, , 414, 2186, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18544.x

    Janiuk , A., & Czerny , B. 2011, , 414, 2186, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18544.x

    2011

  53. [61]

    Kaur , K., & Stone , N. C. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2405.18500, 10.48550/arXiv.2405.18500

    2024 doi arXiv

  54. [62]

    I., Sramek , R., Schmidt , M., Shaffer , D

    Kellermann , K. I., Sramek , R., Schmidt , M., Shaffer , D. B., & Green , R. 1989, , 98, 1195, 10.1086/115207

    1989 doi

  55. [63]

    2008, , 678, L13, 10.1086/588281

    Komossa , S., Zhou , H., Wang , T., et al. 2008, , 678, L13, 10.1086/588281

    2008 doi

  56. [64]

    B., P \'e rez-Hern \'a ndez , E., Popovi \'c , L

    Kova c evi \'c , A. B., P \'e rez-Hern \'a ndez , E., Popovi \'c , L. C ., et al. 2018, , 475, 2051, 10.1093/mnras/stx3137

    2018 doi

  57. [65]

    J., Steenbrugge , K

    Landt , H., Ward , M. J., Steenbrugge , K. C., & Ferland , G. J. 2015, , 449, 3795, 10.1093/mnras/stv062

    2015 doi

  58. [66]

    2019, , 887, 218, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5792

    Leloudas , G., Dai , L., Arcavi , I., et al. 2019, , 887, 218, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5792

    2019 doi

  59. [67]

    C., Ricci , C., & Trakhtenbrot , B

    Li , R., Ho , L. C., Ricci , C., & Trakhtenbrot , B. 2024, , 975, 50, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad77a5

    2024 doi

  60. [68]

    2024, , 971, L26, 10.3847/2041-8213/ad638e

    Lin , Z., Jiang , N., Wang , T., et al. 2024, , 971, L26, 10.3847/2041-8213/ad638e

    2024 doi

  61. [69]

    2023, , 524, 6247, 10.1093/mnras/stad2203

    Lu , W., & Quataert , E. 2023, , 524, 6247, 10.1093/mnras/stad2203

    2023 doi

  62. [70]

    2016, , 819, 154, 10.3847/0004-637X/819/2/154

    Lusso , E., & Risaliti , G. 2016, , 819, 154, 10.3847/0004-637X/819/2/154

    2016 doi

  63. [71]

    L., Ivezi \'c , Z ., Sesar , B., et al

    MacLeod , C. L., Ivezi \'c , Z ., Sesar , B., et al. 2012, , 753, 106, 10.1088/0004-637X/753/2/106

    2012 doi

  64. [72]

    L., Green , P

    MacLeod , C. L., Green , P. J., Anderson , S. F., et al. 2019, , 874, 8, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab05e2

    2019 doi

  65. [73]

    2011, , 731, 53, 10.1088/0004-637X/731/1/53

    Mainzer , A., Bauer , J., Grav , T., et al. 2011, , 731, 53, 10.1088/0004-637X/731/1/53

    2011 doi

  66. [74]

    M., et al

    Mainzer , A., Bauer , J., Cutri , R. M., et al. 2014, , 792, 30, 10.1088/0004-637X/792/1/30

    2014 doi

  67. [75]

    2023, , 953, 32, 10.3847/1538-4357/ace1ee

    Makrygianni , L., Trakhtenbrot , B., Arcavi , I., et al. 2023, , 953, 32, 10.3847/1538-4357/ace1ee

    2023 doi

  68. [76]

    2021, , 647, A9, 10.1051/0004-6361/202039681

    Malyali , A., Rau , A., Merloni , A., et al. 2021, , 647, A9, 10.1051/0004-6361/202039681

    2021 doi

  69. [77]

    2015, , 805, L4, 10.1088/2041-8205/805/1/L4

    Mandel , I., & Levin , Y. 2015, , 805, L4, 10.1088/2041-8205/805/1/L4

    2015 doi

  70. [78]

    2004, , 351, 169, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07765.x

    Marconi , A., Risaliti , G., Gilli , R., et al. 2004, , 351, 169, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07765.x

    2004

  71. [79]

    C., Fanson , J., Schiminovich , D., et al

    Martin , D. C., Fanson , J., Schiminovich , D., et al. 2005, , 619, L1, 10.1086/426387

    2005 doi

  72. [80]

    J., Laher , R

    Masci , F. J., Laher , R. R., Rusholme , B., et al. 2019, , 131, 018003, 10.1088/1538-3873/aae8ac

    2019 doi

  73. [81]

    2010, , 405, 1315, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16533.x

    Mazzalay , X., Rodr \' guez-Ardila , A., & Komossa , S. 2010, , 405, 1315, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16533.x

    2010

  74. [82]

    E., Trakhtenbrot , B., Koss , M

    Mej \' a-Restrepo , J. E., Trakhtenbrot , B., Koss , M. J., et al. 2022, , 261, 5, 10.3847/1538-4365/ac6602

    2022 doi

  75. [83]

    2015, , 452, 69, 10.1093/mnras/stv1095

    Merloni , A., Dwelly , T., Salvato , M., et al. 2015, , 452, 69, 10.1093/mnras/stv1095

    2015 doi

  76. [84]

    D., Stone , N

    Metzger , B. D., Stone , N. C., & Gilbaum , S. 2022, , 926, 101, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac3ee1

    2022 doi

  77. [85]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2408.17419, 10.48550/arXiv.2408.17419

    Mil \'a n Veres , P., Franckowiak , A., van Velzen , S., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2408.17419, 10.48550/arXiv.2408.17419

    2024 doi

  78. [86]

    A., Abrams , N

    Miller , A. A., Abrams , N. S., Aldering , G., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.14579, 10.48550/arXiv.2503.14579

    2025 doi arXiv

  79. [87]

    2019, , 886, 150, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab4f7b

    Minezaki , T., Yoshii , Y., Kobayashi , Y., et al. 2019, , 886, 150, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab4f7b

    2019 doi

  80. [88]

    D., Giustini , M., et al

    Miniutti , G., Saxton , R. D., Giustini , M., et al. 2019, , 573, 381, 10.1038/s41586-019-1556-x

    2019 doi

  81. [89]

    Netzer , H., Elitzur , M., & Ferland , G. J. 1985, , 299, 752, 10.1086/163741

    1985 doi

  82. [90]

    A., et al

    Newsome , M., Arcavi , I., Howell , D. A., et al. 2024, , 977, 258, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad8a69

    2024 doi

  83. [91]

    B., et al

    Newville , M., Stensitzki , T., Allen , D. B., et al. 2016, Lmfit: Non-Linear Least-Square Minimization and Curve-Fitting for Python , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1606.014

    2016

  84. [92]

    2018, , 480, 3898, 10.1093/mnras/sty2032

    Noda , H., & Done , C. 2018, , 480, 3898, 10.1093/mnras/sty2032

    2018 doi

  85. [93]

    B., Cohen , J

    Oke , J. B., Cohen , J. G., Carr , M., et al. 1995, , 107, 375, 10.1086/133562

    1995 doi

  86. [94]

    L., Winkler , H., Tsygankov , S

    Oknyansky , V. L., Winkler , H., Tsygankov , S. S., et al. 2019, , 483, 558, 10.1093/mnras/sty3133

    2019 doi

  87. [95]

    2021, , 910, 97, 10.3847/1538-4357/abe766

    Pan , X., Li , S.-L., & Cao , X. 2021, , 910, 97, 10.3847/1538-4357/abe766

    2021 doi

  88. [96]

    2023, The Astronomer's Telegram, 16118, 1

    Pasham , D. 2023, The Astronomer's Telegram, 16118, 1

    2023

  89. [97]

    M., & Wandel , A

    Peterson , B. M., & Wandel , A. 2000, , 540, L13, 10.1086/312862

    2000 doi

  90. [98]

    2023, , 669, A140, 10.1051/0004-6361/202244623

    Petrushevska , T., Leloudas , G., Ili \'c , D., et al. 2023, , 669, A140, 10.1051/0004-6361/202244623

    2023 doi

  91. [99]

    M., & Shiokawa , H

    Piran , T., Svirski , G., Krolik , J., Cheng , R. M., & Shiokawa , H. 2015, , 806, 164, 10.1088/0004-637X/806/2/164

    2015 doi

  92. [100]

    Raj , A., & Nixon , C. J. 2021, , 909, 82, 10.3847/1538-4357/abdc25

    2021 doi

  93. [101]

    Rees , M. J. 1988, , 333, 523, 10.1038/333523a0

    1988 doi

  94. [102]

    2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2307.00902, 10.48550/arXiv.2307.00902

    Reusch , S. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2307.00902, 10.48550/arXiv.2307.00902

    2023 doi arXiv

  95. [103]

    2023, Nature Astronomy, 7, 1282, 10.1038/s41550-023-02108-4

    Ricci , C., & Trakhtenbrot , B. 2023, Nature Astronomy, 7, 1282, 10.1038/s41550-023-02108-4

    2023 doi

  96. [104]

    J., et al

    Ricci , C., Trakhtenbrot , B., Koss , M. J., et al. 2017, , 233, 17, 10.3847/1538-4365/aa96ad

    2017 doi

  97. [105]

    2020, , 898, L1, 10.3847/2041-8213/ab91a1

    Ricci , C., Kara , E., Loewenstein , M., et al. 2020, , 898, L1, 10.3847/2041-8213/ab91a1

    2020 doi

  98. [106]

    2025, Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences, 12, 1548632, 10.3389/fspas.2025.1548632

    Rodr \' guez-Ardila , A., & Cerqueira-Campos , F. 2025, Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences, 12, 1548632, 10.3389/fspas.2025.1548632

    2025

  99. [107]

    2016, , 827, 3, 10.3847/0004-637X/827/1/3

    Roth , N., Kasen , D., Guillochon , J., & Ramirez-Ruiz , E. 2016, , 827, 3, 10.3847/0004-637X/827/1/3

    2016 doi

  100. [108]

    2018, , 854, 160, 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa9b6

    Rumbaugh , N., Shen , Y., Morganson , E., et al. 2018, , 854, 160, 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa9b6

    2018 doi

  101. [109]

    J., Brown , T., Haynes , R., & Dubberley , M

    Sand , D. J., Brown , T., Haynes , R., & Dubberley , M. 2011, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, Vol. 218, American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts \#218, 132.03

    2011

  102. [110]

    C., & Dexter , J

    Scepi , N., Begelman , M. C., & Dexter , J. 2021, , 502, L50, 10.1093/mnrasl/slab002

    2021 doi

  103. [111]

    F., & Finkbeiner , D

    Schlafly , E. F., & Finkbeiner , D. P. 2011, , 737, 103, 10.1088/0004-637X/737/2/103

    2011 doi

  104. [112]

    2022, , 933, 176, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac74bc

    Sfaradi , I., Horesh , A., Fender , R., et al. 2022, , 933, 176, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac74bc

    2022 doi

  105. [113]

    J., Prieto , J

    Shappee , B. J., Prieto , J. L., Grupe , D., et al. 2014, , 788, 48, 10.1088/0004-637X/788/1/48

    2014 doi

  106. [114]

    2013, Bulletin of the Astronomical Society of India, 41, 61

    Shen, Y. 2013, Bulletin of the Astronomical Society of India, 41, 61

    2013

  107. [115]

    2023, , 525, 1568, 10.1093/mnras/stad2270

    Short , P., Lawrence , A., Nicholl , M., et al. 2023, , 525, 1568, 10.1093/mnras/stad2270

    2023 doi

  108. [116]

    2024, , 964, 74, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad2704

    Shvartzvald , Y., Waxman , E., Gal-Yam , A., et al. 2024, , 964, 74, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad2704

    2024 doi

  109. [117]

    2020, , 641, A167, 10.1051/0004-6361/202038575

    \'S niegowska , M., Czerny , B., Bon , E., & Bon , N. 2020, , 641, A167, 10.1051/0004-6361/202038575

    2020 doi

  110. [118]

    2023, , 672, A19, 10.1051/0004-6361/202243828

    \'S niegowska , M., Grz e dzielski , M., Czerny , B., & Janiuk , A. 2023, , 672, A19, 10.1051/0004-6361/202243828

    2023 doi

  111. [119]

    J., Ravi , V., Yao , Y., et al

    Somalwar , J. J., Ravi , V., Yao , Y., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2310.03782, 10.48550/arXiv.2310.03782

    2023 doi arXiv

  112. [120]

    Steinberg , E., & Stone , N. C. 2024, , 625, 463, 10.1038/s41586-023-06875-y

    2024 doi

  113. [121]

    J., Benford , D

    Stern , D., Assef , R. J., Benford , D. J., et al. 2012, , 753, 30, 10.1088/0004-637X/753/1/30

    2012 doi

  114. [122]

    2020, stsynphot: synphot for HST and JWST , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:2010.003

    STScI Development Team . 2020, stsynphot: synphot for HST and JWST , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:2010.003. 2010.003

    2020

  115. [123]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.01824, 10.48550/arXiv.2501.01824

    Sun , J., Guo , H., Gu , M., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.01824, 10.48550/arXiv.2501.01824

    2025 doi arXiv

  116. [124]

    2021, , 504, 4377, 10.1093/mnras/stab1105

    Tadhunter , C., Patel , M., & Mullaney , J. 2021, , 504, 4377, 10.1093/mnras/stab1105

    2021 doi

  117. [125]

    2017, Nature Astronomy, 1, 0061, 10.1038/s41550-017-0061

    Tadhunter , C., Spence , R., Rose , M., Mullaney , J., & Crowther , P. 2017, Nature Astronomy, 1, 0061, 10.1038/s41550-017-0061

    2017 doi

  118. [126]

    L., Denneau , L., Heinze , A

    Tonry , J. L., Denneau , L., Heinze , A. N., et al. 2018, , 130, 064505, 10.1088/1538-3873/aabadf

    2018 doi

  119. [127]

    2012, , 427, 3081, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.22056.x

    Trakhtenbrot , B., & Netzer , H. 2012, , 427, 3081, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.22056.x

    2012

  120. [128]

    2019 a , Nature Astronomy, 3, 242, 10.1038/s41550-018-0661-3

    Trakhtenbrot , B., Arcavi , I., Ricci , C., et al. 2019 a , Nature Astronomy, 3, 242, 10.1038/s41550-018-0661-3

    2019 doi

  121. [129]

    L., et al

    Trakhtenbrot , B., Arcavi , I., MacLeod , C. L., et al. 2019 b , , 883, 94, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab39e4

    2019 doi

  122. [130]

    1993, Science, 260, 1769, 10.1126/science.260.5115.1769

    Truemper , J. 1993, Science, 260, 1769, 10.1126/science.260.5115.1769

    1993

  123. [131]

    2014, , 438, L101, 10.1093/mnrasl/slt171

    Valenti , S., Sand , D., Pastorello , A., et al. 2014, , 438, L101, 10.1093/mnrasl/slt171

    2014 doi

  124. [132]

    A., Stritzinger , M

    Valenti , S., Howell , D. A., Stritzinger , M. D., et al. 2016, , 459, 3939, 10.1093/mnras/stw870

    2016 doi

  125. [133]

    van Velzen , S., Holoien , T. W. S., Onori , F., Hung , T., & Arcavi , I. 2020, , 216, 124, 10.1007/s11214-020-00753-z

    2020 doi

  126. [134]

    R., Komossa , S., Yan , L., & Kara , E

    van Velzen , S., Pasham , D. R., Komossa , S., Yan , L., & Kara , E. A. 2021 a , , 217, 63, 10.1007/s11214-021-00835-6

    2021 doi

  127. [135]

    2021 b , , 908, 4, 10.3847/1538-4357/abc258

    van Velzen , S., Gezari , S., Hammerstein , E., et al. 2021 b , , 908, 4, 10.3847/1538-4357/abc258

    2021 doi

  128. [136]

    2024, , 529, 2559, 10.1093/mnras/stae610

    van Velzen , S., Stein , R., Gilfanov , M., et al. 2024, , 529, 2559, 10.1093/mnras/stae610

    2024 doi

  129. [137]

    E., Richards , G

    Vanden Berk , D. E., Richards , G. T., Bauer , A., et al. 2001, , 122, 549, 10.1086/321167

    2001 doi

  130. [138]

    E., Wilhite , B

    Vanden Berk , D. E., Wilhite , B. C., Kron , R. G., et al. 2004, , 601, 692, 10.1086/380563

    2004 doi

  131. [139]

    Velzen , S. V. 2021, Transient Name Server Discovery Report, 2021-3680, 1

    2021

  132. [140]

    M., Reusch , S., Stein , R., et al

    Veres , P. M., Reusch , S., Stein , R., et al. 2023, Transient Name Server AstroNote, 194, 1

    2023

  133. [141]

    E., et al

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261, 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2

    2020 doi

  134. [142]

    2025, , 981, 129, 10.3847/1538-4357/adadf3

    Wang , S., Woo , J.-H., Gallo , E., et al. 2025, , 981, 129, 10.3847/1538-4357/adadf3

    2025 doi

  135. [143]

    2020, , 903, 51, 10.3847/1538-4357/abb36d

    Wang , S., Shen , Y., Jiang , L., et al. 2020, , 903, 51, 10.3847/1538-4357/abb36d

    2020 doi

  136. [144]

    2012, , 749, 115, 10.1088/0004-637X/749/2/115

    Wang , T.-G., Zhou , H.-Y., Komossa , S., et al. 2012, , 749, 115, 10.1088/0004-637X/749/2/115

    2012 doi

  137. [145]

    D., Zabludoff , A

    Wevers , T., French , K. D., Zabludoff , A. I., et al. 2024, , 970, L23, 10.3847/2041-8213/ad5f1b

    2024 doi

  138. [146]

    2023, , 948, 42, 10.3847/1538-4357/acbe9e

    Winter , W., & Lunardini , C. 2023, , 948, 42, 10.3847/1538-4357/acbe9e

    2023 doi

  139. [147]

    2013, , 774, 46, 10.1088/0004-637X/774/1/46

    Yang , C.-W., Wang , T.-G., Ferland , G., et al. 2013, , 774, 46, 10.1088/0004-637X/774/1/46

    2013 doi

  140. [148]

    2012, , 124, 668, 10.1086/666656

    Yaron , O., & Gal-Yam , A. 2012, , 124, 668, 10.1086/666656

    2012 doi

  141. [149]

    G., Adelman , J., Anderson , John E., J., et al

    York , D. G., Adelman , J., Anderson , John E., J., et al. 2000, , 120, 1579, 10.1086/301513

    2000 doi

  142. [150]

    2022, , 939, L16, 10.3847/2041-8213/ac9a47

    Zeltyn , G., Trakhtenbrot , B., Eracleous , M., et al. 2022, , 939, L16, 10.3847/2041-8213/ac9a47

    2022 doi

  143. [151]

    2024, , 966, 85, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad2f30

    ---. 2024, , 966, 85, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad2f30

    2024 doi

  144. [152]

    2022, , 933, 96, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac71ad

    Zhong , S., Li , S., Berczik , P., & Spurzem , R. 2022, , 933, 96, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac71ad

    2022 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.