pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.16526 · v2 · pith:BE4X5K4Znew · submitted 2026-05-15 · 🌌 astro-ph.SR · astro-ph.HE

SN 2023fyq: direct detection of a Type Ibn supernova progenitor and its multi-wavelength environmental constraints

Xinyi Hong , Ning-Chen Sun , Yali Shao , Ke Wang , Junjie Wu , Qiang Xi , Yi-Han Zhao , Justyn Maund
show 4 more authors
Xiaohan Chen Anyu Wang Linxi Zhang Jifeng Liu
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-25 06:23 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.HE
keywords Type Ibn supernovasupernova progenitorbinary evolutionSN 2023fyqpre-explosion imagingcircumstellar mediumHST observationsJWST observations
2
0 comments X

The pith

Pre-explosion images detect the progenitor of Type Ibn supernova SN 2023fyq as a hot luminous source that later vanished.

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

The paper identifies a source visible before the explosion of SN 2023fyq that matches the expected position and brightness of its progenitor star. This source is hot with temperature above 15000 K and luminous with log(L/Lsun) at least 5.5, and it is absent in post-explosion images. Multi-wavelength data from the surrounding region give the progenitor an age of roughly 12 to 16 million years. These facts together rule out a very massive single star and instead favor a low-mass helium star in a binary system with a compact companion, where the visible light comes from interaction that started at least 12 years earlier.

Core claim

We discover a pre-explosion source at the SN position, which is consistent with a hot (T>15000 K) and luminous (log(L/L⊙)≳5.5) SN progenitor and a possible host star cluster. The progenitor is confirmed to have disappeared after explosion. Analysis of the SN environment implies that the progenitor likely has an age of log(t/yr) = 7.1--7.2. These phenomena disfavor a very massive single-star progenitor and instead support a binary scenario involving a low-mass helium star and a compact object; the observed progenitor emission likely arises from binary interaction that began at least ∼12 yr before the explosion.

What carries the argument

Pre- and post-explosion HST and JWST imaging to detect the vanishing source, combined with multi-wavelength mapping of stars, dust, ionized gas and molecular gas using VLT/MUSE and ALMA to constrain the progenitor age.

If this is right

  • The progenitor's visible emission is produced by binary interaction that began at least 12 years before explosion.
  • A very massive single-star channel is disfavored for SN 2023fyq.
  • Type Ibn supernovae can form through at least two distinct channels: massive Wolf-Rayet stars and lower-mass helium stars in binaries.
  • The event is the first Type Ibn supernova with both a directly detected progenitor and a candidate host star cluster.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Similar pre-explosion searches for other Type Ibn events may need to account for possible binary-interaction signatures lasting a decade or more.
  • Deeper imaging of the candidate cluster could test whether the age estimate holds when individual stars are resolved.
  • If binary interaction is common, some Type Ibn light curves may show early-time signatures of pre-explosion mass transfer.

Load-bearing premise

The detected pre-explosion source is the progenitor itself rather than a chance alignment or unrelated object, which requires accurate astrometric registration between images.

What would settle it

High-precision astrometry showing the pre-explosion source is offset from the supernova position by more than the measurement uncertainty, or future images showing the source reappearing at the same location.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.16526 by Anyu Wang, Jifeng Liu, Junjie Wu, Justyn Maund, Ke Wang, Linxi Zhang, Ning-Chen Sun, Qiang Xi, Xiaohan Chen, Xinyi Hong, Yali Shao, Yi-Han Zhao.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: (a) shows the HST F336W/F438W/F814W three-color composite image of the host galaxy NGC 4388. SN 2023fyq is located on one of the spiral arms at ∼10 arcsec away from the galaxy center. The local SN environment is a very dense field with a large number of bright blue stars/clusters [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: (a) F336W/F438W/F814W three-colour composite im￾age of the host galaxy by HST observations. The black circle shows the SN site. (b, c) JWST/MIRI/F1800W images of the SN site during the outburst phase and after the SN explosion. (d, e) Pre-explosion and late-time images taken by HST/WFC3/UVIS in the F336W band. The crosshairs mark the SN position. All images are aligned with North up and East to the left. d… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Observed and model pre-explosion SEDs (red) of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Observed and model pre-explosion SEDs (red) of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The pre- and post-explosion evolution of the (a) mag [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Position of SN 2023fyq’s progenitor on the HR diagram [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Maps of SN 2023fyq’s host galaxy NGC 4388. (a) The F336W/ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: CMDs of all stellar sources in the local environment of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Top: molecular line emission of CO (2–1) at the posi￾tion of SN 2023fyq as observed by ALMA; the host galaxy’s redshift has been corrected and the blueshift of the line center reflects the galaxy’s disk motion toward the observer. Bottom: VLT/MUSE spectrum at the SN position with the stellar con￾tinuum subtracted; the host galaxy’s redshift and Galactic fore￾ground reddening have been corrected [PITH_FULL… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: A schematic diagram illustrating the structure of SN 2023fyq’s host galaxy, NGC 4388, as viewed face-on. The grey arrows [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Context. Type Ibn supernovae (SNe) are characterized by narrow helium emission lines arising from ejecta-circumstellar medium interaction, yet their progenitors remain debated, with both massive Wolf-Rayet stars and low-mass helium stars in binaries proposed. Aims. We aim to directly identify the progenitor of the Type Ibn SN 2023fyq and to characterize its environment in order to constrain the progenitor's nature and evolutionary channel. Methods. We search for the SN progenitor based on pre-explosion and late-time HST and JWST images and derive its properties by fitting the spectral energy distribution. We investigate the SN environment by probing the stars, dust, ionized gas and molecular gas with a multi-wavelength dataset including HST and JWST imaging, VLT/MUSE integral-field-unit spectroscopy and ALMA CO (2--1) radio interferometry. Results. We discover a pre-explosion source at the SN position, which is consistent with a hot ($T>$15000 K) and luminous (log($L$/$L_\odot$) $\gtrsim$ 5.5) SN progenitor and a possible host star cluster. The progenitor is confirmed to have disappeared after explosion. Analysis of the SN environment implies that the progenitor likely has an age of log($t$/yr) = 7.1--7.2. These phenomena disfavor a very massive single-star progenitor and instead support a binary scenario involving a low-mass helium star and a compact object; the observed progenitor emission likely arises from binary interaction that began at least $\sim$12 yr before the explosion. Conclusions. SN 2023fyq is the first Type Ibn SN with a directly detected progenitor and a possible host star cluster. It adds to the diversity of Type Ibn SNe in terms of their progenitor channels and mass-loss mechanisms.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper reports the first direct detection of a progenitor for a Type Ibn supernova, SN 2023fyq. Using pre-explosion HST and JWST imaging, the authors identify a source at the SN position that is consistent with a hot (T > 15000 K) and luminous (log(L/L⊙) ≳ 5.5) object, confirm its disappearance in late-time images, and use multi-wavelength data (HST/JWST imaging, VLT/MUSE spectroscopy, ALMA CO interferometry) to derive an environmental age of log(t/yr) = 7.1–7.2. These results are interpreted as favoring a binary progenitor channel involving a low-mass helium star and compact object, with the observed emission arising from binary interaction beginning at least ~12 yr prior to explosion, rather than a very massive single Wolf-Rayet star.

Significance. If the source identification and environmental constraints hold, this would represent a major advance as the first direct progenitor detection for any Type Ibn SN, providing concrete observational constraints on progenitor mass, evolutionary channel, and mass-loss mechanisms for this rare class. The combination of disappearance confirmation with multi-wavelength population analysis strengthens the case for binary-driven scenarios and adds to the known diversity of Ibn progenitors.

major comments (3)
  1. [Results] Results section (pre-explosion source identification): The manuscript does not report quantitative astrometric registration metrics (e.g., RMS alignment error, number of reference sources, or transformation residuals) between pre- and post-explosion HST/JWST frames, nor a chance-alignment probability calculation. These are load-bearing for the central claim that the detected source is the progenitor rather than a chance coincidence or unresolved cluster member.
  2. [Methods and Results] Methods/Results (SED fitting): No details are provided on the SED fitting procedure, including the specific models used, χ² values, parameter uncertainties, or explicit comparison (e.g., via Bayesian evidence or residual analysis) between a single hot source and a possible host star cluster. This omission prevents assessment of whether the T > 15000 K, log(L/L⊙) ≳ 5.5 solution is uniquely favored.
  3. [Environmental analysis] Environmental analysis (age derivation): The reported age range log(t/yr) = 7.1–7.2 lacks reported uncertainties, discussion of data exclusion criteria for the multi-wavelength dataset (HST/JWST/MUSE/ALMA), or quantitative treatment of potential population mixing or selection biases that could decouple the local stellar population age from the progenitor's formation time.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and Results] Abstract and Results: The phrase 'possible host star cluster' is used without a clear definition or quantitative criterion for when the source is treated as a single star versus a cluster; this should be clarified for consistency.
  2. [Figures] Figure captions: Several figures showing pre- and post-explosion images would benefit from explicit scale bars, north-east orientation arrows, and reported positional offsets with uncertainties.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their detailed and constructive report. We address each major comment below and will incorporate the requested details into a revised manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Results] Results section (pre-explosion source identification): The manuscript does not report quantitative astrometric registration metrics (e.g., RMS alignment error, number of reference sources, or transformation residuals) between pre- and post-explosion HST/JWST frames, nor a chance-alignment probability calculation. These are load-bearing for the central claim that the detected source is the progenitor rather than a chance coincidence or unresolved cluster member.

    Authors: We agree these quantitative metrics strengthen the identification. In revision we will add the RMS alignment error, number of reference sources, transformation residuals, and a formal chance-alignment probability calculated from the local source density. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Methods and Results] Methods/Results (SED fitting): No details are provided on the SED fitting procedure, including the specific models used, χ² values, parameter uncertainties, or explicit comparison (e.g., via Bayesian evidence or residual analysis) between a single hot source and a possible host star cluster. This omission prevents assessment of whether the T > 15000 K, log(L/L⊙) ≳ 5.5 solution is uniquely favored.

    Authors: We will expand the methods and results sections to describe the SED models employed, report χ² values and parameter uncertainties, and include a direct statistical comparison (residuals and evidence ratio) between the single hot source and a cluster model. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Environmental analysis] Environmental analysis (age derivation): The reported age range log(t/yr) = 7.1–7.2 lacks reported uncertainties, discussion of data exclusion criteria for the multi-wavelength dataset (HST/JWST/MUSE/ALMA), or quantitative treatment of potential population mixing or selection biases that could decouple the local stellar population age from the progenitor's formation time.

    Authors: We will revise the environmental analysis to quote uncertainties on the age, list explicit data-inclusion/exclusion criteria, and add a quantitative discussion of population mixing and selection biases with supporting metrics from the multi-wavelength data. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; results from direct multi-wavelength observations and standard data analysis

full rationale

The paper's core claims rest on pre- and post-explosion HST/JWST imaging for source detection and disappearance, SED fitting to observed photometry, astrometric registration, and environmental constraints from MUSE spectroscopy plus ALMA CO data. These steps use empirical measurements and standard stellar population synthesis models applied to the data; no load-bearing step reduces by the paper's own equations or self-citations to a fitted input renamed as a prediction. The binary-channel inference is an interpretation of the observed properties rather than a tautological derivation. This is the expected outcome for an observational discovery paper whose central result is falsifiable against the imaging frames themselves.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard domain assumptions in progenitor searches and environmental dating rather than new theoretical entities or heavily fitted parameters beyond typical SED modeling.

free parameters (2)
  • SED-derived temperature and luminosity = T>15000 K, log(L/Lsun)≳5.5
    Fitted to match pre-explosion photometry; values reported as T>15000 K and log L ≳5.5.
  • Environmental age = 7.1-7.2
    Derived from multi-wavelength stellar population analysis; reported as log(t/yr)=7.1-7.2.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Positional coincidence plus post-explosion disappearance identifies the source as the progenitor
    Invoked when stating the discovery and confirmation of disappearance.
  • domain assumption The measured environmental stellar population age accurately reflects the progenitor's age
    Used to constrain log(t/yr) and disfavor very massive single-star models.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5915 in / 1754 out tokens · 61610 ms · 2026-05-25T06:23:13.659345+00:00 · methodology

Review history (2 revisions) →

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 43 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    2020, MNRAS, 496, 2,

    Abdeen, S., Kennefick, D., Kennefick, J., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 496, 2,

    work page 2020

  2. [2]

    J., et al

    doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1596 Asplund, M., Grevesse, N., Sauval, A. J., et al. 2009, ARA&A, 47, 1,

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1596 2009

  3. [3]

    J., Scott P., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.astro.46.060407.145222 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ARA

    doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.46.060407.145222 Baer-Way, R., A. J., N., Jacobson-Galán, W., et al. 2025, ApJ, 995, 2, L49. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae1cb8 Baldwin, J. A., Phillips, M. M., & Terlevich, R. 1981, PASP, 93,

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.46.060407.145222 2025

  4. [4]

    A., Phillips M

    doi:10.1086/130766 Brennan, S. J., Sollerman, J., Irani, I., et al. 2024, A&A, 684, L18. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202449350 Bressan, A., Marigo, P., Girardi, L., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 427, 1,

    work page doi:10.1086/130766 2024

  5. [5]

    and Shibahashi , H

    doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21948.x Bruzual, G. & Charlot, S. 2003, MNRAS, 344, 4,

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21948.x 2012

  6. [6]

    M., Stanway, E

    doi:10.1046/j.1365- 8711.2003.06897.x Byrne, C. M., Stanway, E. R., Eldridge, J. J., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 512, 4,

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365- 2003

  7. [7]

    2026, A&A, 707, A157

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stac807 Cai, Y .-Z., Pastorello, A., Maeda, K., et al. 2026, A&A, 707, A157. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202558014 Cardelli, J. A., Clayton, G. C., & Mathis, J. S. 1989, ApJ, 345,

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac807 2026

  8. [8]

    A., Clayton G

    doi:10.1086/167900 Cid Fernandes, R., Mateus, A., Sodré, L., et al. 2005, MNRAS, 358, 2,

    work page doi:10.1086/167900 2005

  9. [9]

    A., okas E

    doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.08752.x Crowther, P. A., Schnurr, O., Hirschi, R., et al. 2010, MNRAS, 408, 2,

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.08752.x 2005

  10. [10]

    J., Reeves J

    doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17167.x Damas-Segovia, A., Beck, R., V ollmer, B., et al. 2016, ApJ, 824, 1,

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17167.x 2010

  11. [11]

    2023, Transient Name Server Discovery Report, 2023-825,

    doi:10.3847/0004-637X/824/1/30 De, K. 2023, Transient Name Server Discovery Report, 2023-825,

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/824/1/30 2023

  12. [12]

    J., & Kuncarayakti, H

    Dessart, L., Hillier, D. J., & Kuncarayakti, H. 2022, A&A, 658, A130. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202142436 Dolphin, A. E. 2000, PASP, 112, 776,

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202142436 2022

  13. [13]

    2016, Astrophysics Source Code Library

    doi:10.1086/316630 Dolphin, A. 2016, Astrophysics Source Code Library. ascl:1608.013 Dong, Y ., Tsuna, D., Valenti, S., et al. 2024, ApJ, 977, 2,

    work page doi:10.1086/316630 2016

  14. [15]

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

    doi:10.48550/arXiv.astro- ph/0401344 Foley, R. J., Smith, N., Ganeshalingam, M., et al. 2007, ApJ, 657, 2, L105. doi:10.1086/513145 Font, J., Beckman, J. E., Querejeta, M., et al. 2014, ApJS, 210, 1,

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.astro- 2007

  15. [16]

    2026, arXiv:2603.29043

    doi:10.1088/0067-0049/210/1/2 Fremling, C., Covarrubias, S., Sollerman, J., et al. 2026, arXiv:2603.29043. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2603.29043 Fujiwara, K., Ueda, Y ., Ogawa, S., et al. 2026, arXiv:2604.06719. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2604.06719 Guérou, A., Krajnovi ´c, D., Epinat, B., et al. 2017, A&A, 608, A5. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201730905 Hong, X., Sun, N.-C., N...

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/210/1/2 2026

  16. [17]

    I., et al

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/836/2/158 Hosseinzadeh, G., McCully, C., Zabludoff, A. I., et al. 2019, ApJ, 871, 1, L9. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aafc61 Hou, L. G. & Han, J. L. 2015, MNRAS, 454, 1,

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/836/2/158 2019

  17. [18]

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1904 Humphreys, R. M. & Davidson, K. 1979, ApJ, 232,

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1904 1979

  18. [19]

    2017, A&A, 602, A93

    doi:10.1086/157301 Karamehmetoglu, E., Taddia, F., Sollerman, J., et al. 2017, A&A, 602, A93. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629619 Kewley, L. J., Heisler, C. A., Dopita, M. A., et al. 2001, ApJS, 132, 1,

    work page doi:10.1086/157301 2017

  19. [20]

    S., Marchuk, A

    doi:10.1086/318944 Kostiuk, V . S., Marchuk, A. A., & Gusev, A. S. 2024, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 24, 7, 075007. doi:10.1088/1674-4527/ad4d3b Kostiuk, V ., Marchuk, A., Gusev, A., et al. 2025, Galaxies, 13, 2,

    work page doi:10.1086/318944 2024

  20. [21]

    doi:10.3390/galaxies13020027 Marchuk, A. A. 2024, A&A, 686, L14. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450602 Marino, R. A., Rosales-Ortega, F. F., Sánchez, S. F., et al. 2013, A&A, 559, A114. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201321956 Matheson, T., Filippenko, A. V ., Chornock, R., et al. 2000, AJ, 119, 5,

    work page doi:10.3390/galaxies13020027 2024

  21. [22]

    aa_example Maund, J

    doi:10.1086/301352 Article number, page 9 A&A proofs:manuscript no. aa_example Maund, J. R. & Ramirez-Ruiz, E. 2016, MNRAS, 456, 3,

    work page doi:10.1086/301352 2016

  22. [23]

    J., Müller, B., Blinnikov, S

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2760 Moriya, T. J., Müller, B., Blinnikov, S. I., et al. 2025, PASJ, 77, 6,

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2760 2025

  23. [24]

    R., et al

    doi:10.1093/pasj/psaf119 Niu, Z., Sun, N.-C., Maund, J. R., et al. 2023, ApJ, 955, 1, L15. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acf4e3 Niu, Z., Sun, N.-C., Zapartas, E., et al. 2026, ApJ, 1001, 1,

    work page doi:10.1093/pasj/psaf119 2023

  24. [25]

    doi:10.3847/1538- 4357/ae4bd6 Osterbrock, D. E. & Ferland, G. J. 2006, . Pastorello, A., Smartt, S. J., Mattila, S., et al. 2007, Nature, 447, 7146,

    work page doi:10.3847/1538- 2006

  25. [26]

    2008, MNRAS, 389, 1,

    doi:10.1038/nature05825 Pastorello, A., Mattila, S., Zampieri, L., et al. 2008, MNRAS, 389, 1,

    work page doi:10.1038/nature05825 2008

  26. [27]

    doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13602.x Salpeter, E. E. 1955, ApJ, 121,

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13602.x 2008

  27. [28]

    doi:10.1086/145971 Schlafly, E. F. & Finkbeiner, D. P. 2011, ApJ, 737, 2,

    work page doi:10.1086/145971 2011

  28. [29]

    V., et al., 2011, Constraints on cosmic ray propagation models from a global Bayesian analysis , Astrophys

    doi:10.1088/0004- 637X/737/2/103 Shivvers, I., Zheng, W., Van Dyk, S. D., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 471, 4,

    work page doi:10.1088/0004- 2017

  29. [30]

    2017, Handbook of Supernovae,

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1885 Smith, N. 2017, Handbook of Supernovae,

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1885 2017

  30. [31]

    R., Hirai, R., et al

    doi:10.1007/978-3-319-21846- 5_38 Sun, N.-C., Maund, J. R., Hirai, R., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 491, 4,

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-319-21846- 2020

  31. [32]

    R., Crowther, P

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stz3431 Sun, N.-C., Maund, J. R., Crowther, P. A., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 504, 2,

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz3431 2021

  32. [33]

    R., Crowther, P

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stab994 Sun, N.-C., Maund, J. R., Crowther, P. A., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 510, 3,

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab994 2022

  33. [34]

    R., Shao, Y ., et al

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stab3768 Sun, N.-C., Maund, J. R., Shao, Y ., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 519, 3,

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab3768 2023

  34. [35]

    R., & Crowther, P

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3773 Sun, N.-C., Maund, J. R., & Crowther, P. A. 2023, MNRAS, 521, 2,

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3773 2023

  35. [36]

    C., Fuller, J., et al

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stad690 Tsuna, D., Wu, S. C., Fuller, J., et al. 2024, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 7,

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad690 2024

  36. [37]

    B., Courtois, H

    doi:10.33232/001c.123897 Tully, R. B., Courtois, H. M., & Sorce, J. G. 2016, AJ, 152, 2,

    work page doi:10.33232/001c.123897 2016

  37. [38]

    2023, Transient Name Server Clas- sification Report, 2023-1777,

    doi:10.3847/0004-6256/152/2/50 Valerin, G., Benetti, S., Elias-Rosa, N., et al. 2023, Transient Name Server Clas- sification Report, 2023-1777,

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-6256/152/2/50 2023

  38. [39]

    1999, ApJ, 520, 1,

    Veilleux, S., Bland-Hawthorn, J., Cecil, G., et al. 1999, ApJ, 520, 1,

    work page 1999

  39. [40]

    J., Eldridge, J

    doi:10.1086/307453 Walmswell, J. J., Eldridge, J. J., Brewer, B. J., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 435, 3,

    work page doi:10.1086/307453 2013

  40. [41]

    2024, A&A, 691, A156

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stt1444 Wang, Z.-Y ., Pastorello, A., Maeda, K., et al. 2024, A&A, 691, A156. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451131 Wang, Z.-Y ., Pastorello, A., Cai, Y .-Z., et al. 2025, A&A, 700, A156. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202554768 Xi, Q., Sun, N.-C., Zhao, Y .-H., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 542, 3,

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt1444 2024

  41. [42]

    A statistical study of the environmental age of core-collapse supernovae based on VLT/MUSE integral-field-unit spectroscopy

    doi:10.1093/mnras/staf1275 Xi, Q., Sun, N.-C., Zhao, Y ., et al. 2026, arXiv:2604.03032. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2604.03032 Article number, page 10 Hong et al.: SN 2023fyq: direct detection of a Type Ibn supernova progenitor and its multi-wavelength environmental constraints Appendix A: Decontamination of neighboring sources Since the HST/WFC3/IR images have a...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/staf1275 2026

  42. [43]

    with the maximum starburst line defined by Kewley et al. (2001). The BPT diagram is a powerful optical diagnostic tool to distinguish the dominant ionization mechanism of ionized gas. With this diagram, we found that the spiral arms are ionized by star formation while the nuclear region is ionized by AGN. Article number, page 11 A&A proofs:manuscript no. ...

    work page 2001

  43. [44]

    The black line is the maximum starburst line defined by Kewley et al. (2001). Article number, page 12

    work page 2001