arxiv: 2604.22671 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-24 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE

Recognition: unknown

Exploring the diversity of kilonovae with 3D radiative transfer I. The polar direction

Christine E. Collins , Luke J. Shingles , Vimal Vijayan , Andreas Floers , Oliver Just , Fiona McNeill , Zewei Xiong , Andreas Bauswein

show 2 more authors

Kate Maguire Stuart A. Sim

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 10:08 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE

keywords kilonovaebinary neutron star mergersradiative transferAT2017gfodynamical ejectalanthanide opacitiespolar spectraspectral features

0 comments

The pith

Dynamical ejecta alone can reproduce many spectral properties of AT2017gfo in the polar direction at earlier times than observed.

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

The paper runs 3D radiative transfer calculations on dynamical ejecta produced by binary neutron star mergers with varying component masses and two different equations of state. The simulations use line-by-line opacities and updated lanthanide atomic data to generate spectra viewed from the polar direction. These spectra display strong lines from Sr II, La III, Gd III and Ce III that align with features reported for AT2017gfo, along with continuum shaping by Ce and Nd ions. The work finds only weak dependence of the spectral shape on the exact merger parameters while the luminosity scales with ejecta mass. A reader cares because the result implies that the early light from future kilonovae is shaped primarily by the fastest, outermost material ejected during the merger itself.

Core claim

The central claim is that 3D radiative transfer models of dynamical ejecta from neutron star mergers, computed with line-by-line opacities and new calibrated lanthanide data, produce polar spectra that match many observed features of AT2017gfo (Sr II, La III, Gd III, Ce III lines and the overall continuum shape), although the match occurs at earlier times than the observations; this leads to the conclusion that dynamical ejecta exert a strong influence on the early spectral evolution of kilonovae.

What carries the argument

3D radiative transfer simulations with line-by-line opacities and new calibrated lanthanide atomic data applied to dynamical ejecta from binary neutron star merger models viewed along the polar axis.

If this is right

Spectral properties in the polar direction remain largely insensitive to the precise neutron-star masses and equations of state explored.
Bolometric luminosity in the polar direction increases with the total mass of dynamical ejecta.
Ce III, Ce II, Nd III and Nd II ions dominate the shaping of the spectral continuum across all models.
Models with the lowest polar lanthanide fraction produce an additional Y II feature not seen in higher-lanthanide cases.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

Early-time polar spectra could be used to constrain the velocity and mass of dynamical ejecta even before full light-curve modeling is possible.
The systematic blueshift of simulated lines relative to AT2017gfo suggests that real dynamical ejecta may have slightly lower velocities or different angular distributions than the models assume.
If dynamical ejecta set the early spectrum, then any later spectral evolution must be attributed to slower, more isotropic components such as disk winds.

Load-bearing premise

The chosen 3D radiative transfer setup with line-by-line opacities and the new lanthanide atomic data sufficiently captures the real conditions in the dynamical ejecta without other ejecta components being required to shape the early polar spectrum.

What would settle it

A new kilonova observed at multiple early epochs would falsify the claim if its polar-view spectra lack the predicted Sr II, La III and Ce III features or if the observed line velocities and timings cannot be matched by any dynamical-ejecta model without additional components.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.22671 by Andreas Bauswein, Andreas Floers, Christine E. Collins, Fiona McNeill, Kate Maguire, Luke J. Shingles, Oliver Just, Stuart A. Sim, Vimal Vijayan, Zewei Xiong.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Model density and density of select elements in the region near the pole at 0.1 days. Model grid cells with mid-points lying between the pole and 37◦ have been binned by radial velocity and the average density within each velocity bin is plotted. AT2017gfo in view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: All model spectra at the pole compared to the observed spectra of AT2017gfo (Smartt et al. 2017; Pian et al. 2017; Tanvir et al. 2017). Note the difference in time between simulations and observations listed in view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Spectra for SFHO 1.3–1.3 (upper) and SFHO 1.375–1.375 (lower) scaled and compared to AT2017gfo at epochs 1–4 (see view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Scaled simulated spectra at epoch 1 (see times in view at source ↗

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Same as view at source ↗

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: Same as view at source ↗

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: Same as view at source ↗

**Figure 10.** Figure 10: Blueshifted velocity of the spectral lines, measured from the peak of the emission contribution in the artis simulation to the rest wavelength of line for each model (i.e. blueshifts are obtained from the peak of the emission of escaping packets that were recorded as last interacting with that specific line). This gives an indication of the typical line of sight velocity shift for each line. Note that the… view at source ↗

read the original abstract

We present 3D kilonova radiative transfer simulations for a series of binary neutron star merger models. The masses of the neutron stars are varied as well as the total mass of the system and two different equations of state were used (SFHO and DD2), producing a range in dynamical ejecta masses and elemental abundance patterns. In this paper, we focus on the bolometric light curves and spectra in the polar direction for comparison with observations of the kilonova AT2017gfo. We calculate line-by-line opacities and include new calibrated lanthanide atomic data. All of the simulated spectra show strong features from Sr II, La III, Gd III and Ce III, which appear to correspond to features identified in AT2017gfo, although the simulated features are generally more blueshifted. The models with the lowest lanthanide fraction in the polar direction also show a Y II feature. Ce III, Ce II, Nd III and Nd II play an important role in shaping the spectral continuum. While the bolometric luminosities in the polar direction vary with the ejecta mass of each model, we find only little sensitivity of the spectral properties to the merger configuration. Our study demonstrates that dynamical ejecta alone can reproduce (although at earlier times) many spectral properties of AT2017gfo, suggesting dynamical ejecta may have a strong impact on the early spectral evolution. However, future simulations are needed to also elucidate the role of other ejecta components for shaping the kilonova spectrum.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

3D dynamical ejecta models produce polar spectra with several lines resembling AT2017gfo at earlier times, but the match stays qualitative with no fit metrics.

read the letter

The main thing to take from this paper is that 3D radiative transfer on dynamical ejecta from varied binary neutron star mergers yields polar spectra showing Sr II, La III, Gd III, and Ce III features that line up with AT2017gfo, plus Y II in low-lanthanide cases, while the spectral shape changes little across the grid of models. Bolometric luminosity tracks ejecta mass as expected. They used line-by-line opacities with newly calibrated lanthanide data, two equations of state, and a range of neutron star masses and total masses. This setup shows the polar view is fairly robust to the exact merger configuration, which is a useful concrete result. The work extends earlier 1D and 2D calculations by adding the third dimension and the updated atomic data across multiple runs. The simulations themselves look solid in that sense. The soft spot is the comparison to the observation. The abstract says the features appear to correspond but are generally more blueshifted, with the reproduction limited to earlier times and no other ejecta components included yet. There are no quantitative similarity measures, velocity offsets, error bars, or tests of how post-processing choices affect the lines. That leaves the central claim resting on descriptive similarity rather than a rigorous test. This paper is for kilonova modelers and people interpreting events like AT2017gfo who want to see how 3D geometry and modern opacities play out in the polar direction. A reader focused on early-time spectral evolution will get value from the parameter study and the finding of low sensitivity. It has enough new simulations and a clear robustness result to deserve peer review, though the comparison section will need tightening.

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. This paper presents 3D radiative transfer simulations of dynamical ejecta from binary neutron star mergers, varying neutron star masses, total system mass, and employing SFHO and DD2 equations of state. Focusing on the polar direction, it computes bolometric light curves and spectra using line-by-line opacities and new calibrated lanthanide atomic data. The simulated spectra exhibit strong features from Sr II, La III, Gd III, and Ce III that appear to correspond to those in AT2017gfo (though generally more blueshifted), with Y II in low-lanthanide cases and Ce/Nd ions shaping the continuum; bolometric luminosity scales with ejecta mass while spectral properties show little sensitivity to configuration. The central conclusion is that dynamical ejecta alone can reproduce many spectral properties of AT2017gfo at earlier times.

Significance. If the reported qualitative matches can be placed on a quantitative footing, the work would establish that dynamical ejecta play a dominant role in early kilonova spectral evolution, helping to interpret AT2017gfo-like events and guiding the inclusion of multiple ejecta components in future models. The use of full 3D radiative transfer, a range of merger parameters, and updated lanthanide atomic data constitutes a clear methodological advance over prior 1D or gray-opacity studies.

major comments (3)

[Abstract] Abstract: the claim that dynamical ejecta alone 'can reproduce (although at earlier times) many spectral properties' of AT2017gfo rests entirely on qualitative feature matching (Sr II, La III, Gd III, Ce III) without any reported quantitative similarity metric, wavelength offset statistics, or formal comparison to observed line profiles and velocities.
[Abstract and spectral comparison] Abstract and results on spectral features: the systematic blueshift of all identified lines and the restriction to 'earlier times' are noted but not quantified (e.g., no velocity offset table or time-alignment procedure), leaving open whether the offsets are reconcilable with the reproduction claim or indicate missing velocity structure or opacity sources.
[Methods and discussion of atomic data] Radiative transfer setup: the sufficiency of the chosen 3D line-by-line opacity treatment plus the new lanthanide data (without other ejecta components) is asserted but not tested via sensitivity runs on post-processing choices or atomic-data variations, which directly affects the weakest assumption underlying the central claim.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract] The statement 'only little sensitivity' of spectral properties to merger configuration would benefit from an explicit quantitative measure (e.g., standard deviation across models) rather than a qualitative descriptor.
[Figure captions and results] Figures showing spectra should include the exact post-merger times used for comparison and, where possible, overlay the AT2017gfo observations with error bars to allow direct visual assessment of the claimed correspondence.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful and constructive review of our manuscript. We address each of the major comments below and have revised the manuscript to incorporate quantitative comparisons and additional discussion of limitations.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the claim that dynamical ejecta alone 'can reproduce (although at earlier times) many spectral properties' of AT2017gfo rests entirely on qualitative feature matching (Sr II, La III, Gd III, Ce III) without any reported quantitative similarity metric, wavelength offset statistics, or formal comparison to observed line profiles and velocities.

Authors: We agree that the original comparison was qualitative. In the revised manuscript we have added a table listing the central wavelengths and equivalent widths of the principal absorption features (Sr II, La III, Gd III, Ce III) in both the observed AT2017gfo spectra and our model spectra at the epochs of closest bolometric-luminosity match. We also report the mean velocity offset for each feature and include a short discussion of line-profile morphology. revision: yes
Referee: [Abstract and spectral comparison] Abstract and results on spectral features: the systematic blueshift of all identified lines and the restriction to 'earlier times' are noted but not quantified (e.g., no velocity offset table or time-alignment procedure), leaving open whether the offsets are reconcilable with the reproduction claim or indicate missing velocity structure or opacity sources.

Authors: The blueshift is a direct consequence of the high velocities (0.1–0.3 c) that characterise dynamical ejecta. We have now quantified the offsets in a new subsection and accompanying table, giving the average Doppler shift for each ion (typically 5 000–10 000 km s⁻¹ larger than observed). We describe our time-alignment procedure (matching epochs by bolometric luminosity) and note that the earlier times reflect the faster expansion of dynamical ejecta alone; we explicitly discuss that slower wind or disk-wind components would be required to reduce the velocity discrepancy. revision: yes
Referee: [Methods and discussion of atomic data] Radiative transfer setup: the sufficiency of the chosen 3D line-by-line opacity treatment plus the new lanthanide data (without other ejecta components) is asserted but not tested via sensitivity runs on post-processing choices or atomic-data variations, which directly affects the weakest assumption underlying the central claim.

Authors: We acknowledge that dedicated sensitivity runs would be desirable. Because of the high computational cost of full 3D line-by-line calculations we did not perform additional post-processing or atomic-data variation suites in the present study. We have expanded the discussion to summarise the range of lanthanide opacity uncertainties reported in the recent literature and have added an explicit statement that the conclusions are subject to these uncertainties, with a recommendation for future work. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Forward simulations from independent merger models compared to external observations

full rationale

The paper selects binary neutron star merger parameters (NS masses, total mass, SFHO/DD2 EOS) independently of AT2017gfo, computes dynamical ejecta masses and abundances, then runs 3D line-by-line radiative transfer using new lanthanide atomic data as input. Polar bolometric light curves and spectra are generated and qualitatively compared to external observational data. No parameters are fitted to the target observation, no self-citations form a load-bearing chain for the central claim, and the spectral features (Sr II, La III, etc.) are outputs rather than inputs. The derivation chain is self-contained forward modeling without reduction to fitted quantities or self-referential definitions.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard radiative-transfer assumptions and input physics choices rather than new postulates; free parameters are the varied merger properties used to generate the model grid.

free parameters (3)

Neutron-star masses
Varied to produce different dynamical ejecta masses and abundance patterns.
Total system mass
Varied across models to explore configuration dependence.
Equation of state (SFHO or DD2)
Two different EOS chosen as inputs affecting ejecta properties.

axioms (2)

domain assumption Line-by-line opacities computed with the new calibrated lanthanide atomic data correctly describe the radiative processes in the ejecta.
Invoked to generate the reported spectral features from Sr II, La III, etc.
domain assumption The polar viewing angle is representative for comparison with AT2017gfo observations.
The paper restricts analysis to this direction.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5614 in / 1524 out tokens · 59545 ms · 2026-05-08T10:08:08.904500+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

83 extracted references · 8 canonical work pages · 4 internal anchors

[1]

P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T

Abbott, B. P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., et al. 2017, ApJ, 848, L13

2017
[2]

P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T

Abbott, B. P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., et al. 2017, Phys. Rev. Lett., 119, 161101

2017
[3]

T., Just, O., & Bauswein, A

Ardevol-Pulpillo, R., Janka, H. T., Just, O., & Bauswein, A. 2019, MNRAS, 485, 4754 ARTIS Collaboration, Sim, S., Kromer, M., et al. 2025, ARTIS

2019
[4]

Strontium and helium in the kilonova AT2017gfo: Origin of the 1{\mu}m feature constrained via NLTE calculations

Arya, A., Damgaard, R., Sneppen, A., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2604.05812

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026
[5]

2013, ApJ, 773, 78

Bauswein, A., Goriely, S., & Janka, H.-T. 2013, ApJ, 773, 78

2013
[6]

2010, Phys

Bauswein, A., Oechslin, R., & Janka, H. 2010, Phys. Rev. D, 81, 024012

2010
[7]

2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.18364

Brethauer, D., Kasen, D., Margutti, R., & Chornock, R. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.18364

work page arXiv 2025
[8]

A., & Kromer, M

Bulla, M., Sim, S. A., & Kromer, M. 2015, MNRAS, 450, 967

2015
[9]

Non-LTE Ionization Modeling for Helium and Strontium in Neutron Star Merger Ejecta

Chiba, K., Tanaka, M., Wanajo, S., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2604.05703

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026
[10]

E., Bauswein, A., Sim, S

Collins, C. E., Bauswein, A., Sim, S. A., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 521, 1858

2023
[11]

E., Shingles, L

Collins, C. E., Shingles, L. J., Bauswein, A., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 529, 1333

2024
[12]

& Siegel, D

Combi, L. & Siegel, D. M. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2303.12284

work page arXiv 2023
[13]

A., Foley, R

Coulter, D. A., Foley, R. J., Kilpatrick, C. D., et al. 2017, Science, 358, 1556

2017
[14]

S., Berger, E., Villar, V

Cowperthwaite, P. S., Berger, E., Villar, V . A., et al. 2017, ApJ, 848, L17

2017
[15]

Dhawan, S., Bulla, M., Goobar, A., Sagués Carracedo, A., & Setzer, C. N. 2020, ApJ, 888, 67

2020
[16]

2022, ApJ, 939, 8

Domoto, N., Tanaka, M., Kato, D., et al. 2022, ApJ, 939, 8

2022
[17]

2021, ApJ, 913, 26

Domoto, N., Tanaka, M., Wanajo, S., & Kawaguchi, K. 2021, ApJ, 913, 26

2021
[18]

2025, ApJ, 978, 99

Domoto, N., Wanajo, S., Tanaka, M., Kato, D., & Hotokezaka, K. 2025, ApJ, 978, 99

2025
[19]

R., Piro, A

Drout, M. R., Piro, A. L., Shappee, B. J., et al. 2017, Science, 358, 1570 Fernández, R. & Metzger, B. D. 2013, MNRAS, 435, 502 Flörs, A., da Silva, R. F., Marques, J. P., Sampaio, J. M., & Martínez-Pinedo, G. 2026, Phys. Rev. D, 113, 063041

2017
[20]

D., Haas, R., et al

Foucart, F., Duez, M. D., Haas, R., et al. 2023, Phys. Rev. D, 107, 103055

2023
[21]

2021, Phys

Foucart, F., Mösta, P., Ramirez, T., et al. 2021, Phys. Rev. D, 104, 123010

2021
[22]

2018, ApJ, 860, 64

Fujibayashi, S., Kiuchi, K., Nishimura, N., Sekiguchi, Y ., & Shibata, M. 2018, ApJ, 860, 64

2018
[23]

Improved lanthanide constraints for the kilonova AT 2017gfo

Gillanders, J. H., Flors, A., & Ferreira da Silva, R. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2512.24257

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[24]

H., Sim, S

Gillanders, J. H., Sim, S. A., Smartt, S. J., Goriely, S., & Bauswein, A. 2024, MNRAS, 529, 2918

2024
[25]

Gillanders, J. H. & Smartt, S. J. 2025, MNRAS, 538, 1663

2025
[26]

H., Smartt, S

Gillanders, J. H., Smartt, S. J., Sim, S. A., Bauswein, A., & Goriely, S. 2022, MNRAS, 515, 631

2022
[27]

Hillier, D. J. 1990, A&A, 231, 111

1990
[28]

2023, MNRAS, 526, L155

Hotokezaka, K., Tanaka, M., Kato, D., & Gaigalas, G. 2023, MNRAS, 526, L155

2023
[29]

2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.12410

Jerkstrand, A., Pognan, Q., Banerjee, S., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.12410

work page arXiv 2025
[30]

Just, O., Bauswein, A., Ardevol Pulpillo, R., Goriely, S., & Janka, H. T. 2015, MNRAS, 448, 541

2015
[31]

2022, MNRAS, 510, 2820

Just, O., Kullmann, I., Goriely, S., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 510, 2820

2022
[32]

2023, ApJ, 951, L12

Just, O., Vijayan, V ., Xiong, Z., et al. 2023, ApJ, 951, L12

2023
[33]

R-process heating implementation in hydrodynamic simulations with neural networks

Just, O., Xiong, Z., & Martínez-Pinedo, G. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.09040

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[34]

Kasen, D., Fernández, R., & Metzger, B. D. 2015, MNRAS, 450, 1777

2015
[35]

2022, ApJ, 933, 22

Kawaguchi, K., Fujibayashi, S., Hotokezaka, K., Shibata, M., & Wanajo, S. 2022, ApJ, 933, 22

2022
[36]

2021, ApJ, 913, 100

Kawaguchi, K., Fujibayashi, S., Shibata, M., Tanaka, M., & Wanajo, S. 2021, ApJ, 913, 100

2021
[37]

& Sim, S

Kromer, M. & Sim, S. A. 2009, MNRAS, 398, 1809 5 https://github.com/artis-mcrt/artis/ 6 https://github.com/artis-mcrt/artistools/

2009
[38]

2022, MNRAS, 510, 2804

Kullmann, I., Goriely, S., Just, O., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 510, 2804

2022
[39]

Kurucz, R. L. 2006, in EAS Publications Series, V ol. 18, Radiative Transfer and Applications to Very Large Telescopes, ed. P. Stee (EDP Sciences), 129–155

2006
[40]

Kurucz, R. L. 2018, Workshop on Astrophysical Opacities. ASP Conference Se- ries, 515, 47

2018
[41]

J., Gompertz, B

Levan, A. J., Gompertz, B. P., Salafia, O. S., et al. 2024, Nature, 626, 737

2024
[42]

Lucy, L. B. 2002, A&A, 384, 725

2002
[43]

Lucy, L. B. 2003, A&A, 403, 261

2003
[44]

Lucy, L. B. 2005, A&A, 429, 19

2005
[45]

2024, ApJ, 974, L5

Magistrelli, F., Bernuzzi, S., Perego, A., & Radice, D. 2024, ApJ, 974, L5

2024
[46]

& Chornock, R

Margutti, R. & Chornock, R. 2021, ARA&A, 59, 155

2021
[47]

A., Collins, C

McNeill, F., Sim, S. A., Collins, C. E., et al. 2026, MNRAS, 546, stag068

2026
[48]

Mendoza-Temis, J. d. J., Wu, M.-R., Langanke, K., et al. 2015, Phys. Rev. C, 92, 055805

2015
[49]

M., Ryan, B

Miller, J. M., Ryan, B. R., Dolence, J. C., et al. 2019, Phys. Rev. D, 100, 023008

2019
[50]

P., Anderson, J., & Lu, W

Mooley, K. P., Anderson, J., & Lu, W. 2022, Nature, 610, 273

2022
[51]

2021, ApJ, 906, 98

Nedora, V ., Bernuzzi, S., Radice, D., et al. 2021, ApJ, 906, 98

2021
[52]

2023, Phys

Neuweiler, A., Dietrich, T., Bulla, M., et al. 2023, Phys. Rev. D, 107, 023016

2023
[53]

2002, Phys

Oechslin, R., Rosswog, S., & Thielemann, F.-K. 2002, Phys. Rev. D, 65, 103005

2002
[54]

2017, ApJ, 850, L37

Perego, A., Radice, D., & Bernuzzi, S. 2017, ApJ, 850, L37

2017
[55]

M., et al

Perego, A., Rosswog, S., Cabezón, R. M., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 443, 3134

2014
[56]

2022, ApJ, 925, 22

Perego, A., Vescovi, D., Fiore, A., et al. 2022, ApJ, 925, 22

2022
[57]

2017, Nature, 551, 67

Pian, E., D’Avanzo, P., Benetti, S., et al. 2017, Nature, 551, 67

2017
[58]

2023, MNRAS, 526, 5220

Pognan, Q., Grumer, J., Jerkstrand, A., & Wanajo, S. 2023, MNRAS, 526, 5220

2023
[59]

2025, MNRAS, 536, 2973

Pognan, Q., Wu, M.-R., Martínez-Pinedo, G., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 536, 2973

2025
[60]

2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 869, 130

Radice, D., Perego, A., Hotokezaka, K., et al. 2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 869, 130

2018
[61]

2025, ApJ, 980, 43

Rahmouni, S., Tanaka, M., Domoto, N., et al. 2025, ApJ, 980, 43

2025
[62]

2025, MNRAS, 538, 907

Rosswog, S., Sarin, N., Nakar, E., & Diener, P. 2025, MNRAS, 538, 907

2025
[63]

2015, Phys

Sekiguchi, Y ., Kiuchi, K., Kyutoku, K., & Shibata, M. 2015, Phys. Rev. D, 91, 064059

2015
[64]

J., Collins, C

Shingles, L. J., Collins, C. E., Holas, A., et al. 2026, artistools

2026
[65]

J., Collins, C

Shingles, L. J., Collins, C. E., Vijayan, V ., et al. 2023, ApJ, 954, L41

2023
[66]

J., Sim, S

Shingles, L. J., Sim, S. A., Kromer, M., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 492, 2029

2020
[67]

Siegel, D. M. 2019, European Physical Journal A, 55, 203

2019
[68]

Siegel, D. M. & Metzger, B. D. 2018, ApJ, 858, 52

2018
[69]

Sim, S. A. 2007, MNRAS, 375, 154

2007
[70]

J., Chen, T

Smartt, S. J., Chen, T. W., Jerkstrand, A., et al. 2017, Nature, 551, 75

2017
[71]

2024, A&A, 692, A134

Sneppen, A., Damgaard, R., Watson, D., et al. 2024, A&A, 692, A134

2024
[72]

& Watson, D

Sneppen, A. & Watson, D. 2023, A&A, 675, A194

2023
[73]

W., Hempel, M., & Fischer, T

Steiner, A. W., Hempel, M., & Fischer, T. 2013, ApJ, 774, 17

2013
[74]

& Hotokezaka, K

Tanaka, M. & Hotokezaka, K. 2013, ApJ, 775, 113

2013
[75]

2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 496, 1369

Tanaka, M., Kato, D., Gaigalas, G., & Kawaguchi, K. 2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 496, 1369

2020
[76]

R., Levan, A

Tanvir, N. R., Levan, A. J., González-Fernández, C., et al. 2017, ApJ, 848, L27

2017
[77]

2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2302.13061

Tarumi, Y ., Hotokezaka, K., Domoto, N., & Tanaka, M. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2302.13061

work page arXiv 2023
[78]

Typel, S., Röpke, G., Klähn, T., Blaschke, D., & Wolter, H. H. 2010, Phys. Rev. C, 81, 015803

2010
[79]

2024, PhD thesis, Heidelberg University, Combined Faculty of Math- ematics, Engineering and Natural Sciences

Vijayan, V . 2024, PhD thesis, Heidelberg University, Combined Faculty of Math- ematics, Engineering and Natural Sciences

2024
[80]

2026, PoS, FAIRness2024, 041

Vijayan, V ., Bauswein, A., & Martinez-Pinedo, G. 2026, PoS, FAIRness2024, 041

2026

Showing first 80 references.