pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.24088 · v1 · pith:O5RA4Q5Hnew · submitted 2026-05-22 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE · astro-ph.GA

Discovery and Analysis of a Type II Supernova Candidate at z = 3.19 from JWST's COSMOS-Web Survey

Valeria Aparicio , David O. Jones , Willem B. Hoogendam , Takashi J. Moriya , David A. Coulter , Justin D. R. Pierel , Matthew Siebert , Bingjie Wang
show 16 more authors
Hollis B. Akins Caitlin M. Casey Nicole E. Drakos Andreas L. Faisst Ori D. Fox Aryana Haghjoo Michaela Hirschmann Olivier Ilbert Jeyhan S. Kartaltepe Anton M. Koekemoer Henry Joy McCracken Bahram Mobasher Armin Rest Jason Rhodes Brant E. Robertson Marko Shuntov
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-30 14:56 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.GA
keywords Type II supernovaJWSThigh-redshift supernovacore-collapse supernovaCOSMOS-Webprogenitor masscircumstellar materialhost galaxy metallicity
0
0 comments X

The pith

JWST photometry at two epochs classifies SN 2023aeaf at z=3.195 as a Type II supernova from a ~12 solar mass progenitor with ~0.5 solar masses of circumstellar material.

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

The paper reports the discovery of SN 2023aeaf in COSMOS-Web JWST data at redshift 3.195, one of the highest spectroscopic redshifts for any supernova. Two epochs of photometry separated by roughly one month in the rest frame are compared to core-collapse and Type Ia supernova models plus Swift UV observations, leading to a photometric classification as a Type II event. The limited data favor an explosion from a progenitor of about 12 solar masses that ejected roughly 0.5 solar masses of circumstellar material. The host galaxy is modeled as a star-forming system with stellar mass near 10^9 solar masses, specific star-formation rate around 10^-10.2 per year, and gas-phase metallicity 12 + log(O/H) = 7.82. The event is presented as part of a growing sample of high-redshift core-collapse supernovae that show high luminosities, dense circumstellar material, and low-metallicity hosts.

Core claim

SN 2023aeaf is identified in two epochs of JWST photometry at z = 3.195 and photometrically classified as a Type II supernova by comparison to spectrophotometric core-collapse and Type Ia models. The data are most consistent with a ~12 M_⊙ progenitor surrounded by ~0.5 M_⊙ of circumstellar material. A spectrum taken ~30 rest-frame days after discovery shows no clear supernova features, with host Hα emission possibly masking any supernova signal. The host is characterized via Prospector SED modeling as a star-forming galaxy with log(M*/M⊙) = 9.04, log(sSFR/yr^{-1}) = -10.17, and 12 + log(O/H) = 7.82. The object joins other early-universe core-collapse supernovae that exhibit high luminosities

What carries the argument

Two-epoch JWST photometry matched to spectrophotometric supernova templates for photometric classification, combined with Prospector Bayesian SED fitting of the host-galaxy photometry and spectrum.

If this is right

  • The discovery supplies a new test of massive-star evolution at redshift greater than 3.
  • It increases the sample of high-redshift core-collapse supernovae that display high luminosities and dense circumstellar material.
  • The low-metallicity host environment is consistent with the conditions inferred for such events in the early universe.
  • JWST two-epoch photometry can be used to identify and roughly characterize supernovae at redshifts beyond 3.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Additional photometric epochs or a spectrum with clear supernova features could tighten the progenitor-mass and circumstellar-material constraints beyond the current photometric limits.
  • If similar events continue to show dense circumstellar material, mass-loss rates in massive stars may already have been high at early cosmic times.
  • The combination of low host metallicity and circumstellar material could be used to test whether explosion mechanisms or progenitor channels differ from those observed locally.

Load-bearing premise

Two epochs of broadband JWST photometry separated by about one month in the rest frame are sufficient to distinguish a Type II supernova from other core-collapse or Type Ia events when compared to standard templates, even without clear spectroscopic supernova features.

What would settle it

A spectrum taken near peak or a set of additional photometric epochs that either match or systematically deviate from the Type II template light-curve shape used in the classification.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.24088 by Andreas L. Faisst, Anton M. Koekemoer, Armin Rest, Aryana Haghjoo, Bahram Mobasher, Bingjie Wang, Brant E. Robertson, Caitlin M. Casey, David A. Coulter, David O. Jones, Henry Joy McCracken, Hollis B. Akins, Jason Rhodes, Jeyhan S. Kartaltepe, Justin D. R. Pierel, Marko Shuntov, Matthew Siebert, Michaela Hirschmann, Nicole E. Drakos, Olivier Ilbert, Ori D. Fox, Takashi J. Moriya, Valeria Aparicio, Willem B. Hoogendam.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Left: Full-field JWST/NIRCam RGB image constructed using the F115W (blue), F277W (green), and F444W (red) filters. The white box marks the location of SN 2023aeaf. Top Right: Zoomed-in RGB image of the SN and host galaxy corresponding to the boxed region in the left panel. The cyan rectangle shows the orientation and position of the JWST/NIRSpec MSA slit used for the prism spectroscopy. Bottom Right: Diffe… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Observed photometry of SN 2023aeaf. Solid lines correspond to the best-fit SN II template. The fit excludes the F115W band, which is too blue to be fit by our templates, and thus no solid line is displayed for this band (see Section 3.1). 2.2. Spectroscopy We obtained a spectrum of SN 2023aeaf and its host galaxy on MJD 60429 using NIRSpec in Multi-Object Spectroscopy (MOS) mode. The data were collected on… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Left: The multiband light curve of SN 2023aeaf (colored points, with offsets applied for clarity) along with the best-fit SN Ia SALT3-NIR model shown as continuous curves. The epoch of the NIRSpec observation is indicated by the vertical dotted black line. Middle: Similar to the left panel but highlighting the best-fit SN Ib/c model. For comparison, the second- and third-ranked fits are overplotted as dash… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Comparison between Swift UV–optical color evolution of different SN subtypes and our JWST observations. Each panel shows the population-averaged Swift color curves (solid blue lines) and 1σ dispersions (shaded regions) for different SN subtypes (Type Ia, Ib, Ic, and II). The y axis shows the Swift UVW1–u color, corresponding to central wavelengths of 2600 ˚A and 3465 ˚A respectively, as a function of time … view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Corner plot showing the marginalized and joint posterior distributions of key host-galaxy parameters derived from the Prospector SED fitting. Parameters include surviving stellar mass (M∗), stellar metallicity (Z∗), dust attenuation parameters (τ2, the optical depth of diffuse dust; δ, the power-law index of the dust attenuation law; and τ1/τ2, the optical depth of the stellar birth-cloud dust as a fractio… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Gas phase metallicity versus stellar mass for the host galaxy of SN 2023aeaf (yellow star) compared to literature samples. The pink square star denotes the SN II host from D. A. Coulter et al. (2025) at z=3.61, and the cyan square denotes SN 2023ufx, a low-metallicity SN II host (M. A. Tucker et al. 2024). Colored points show dwarf galaxies (blue; D. A. Berg et al. 2012), low-z SN II host galaxies (purple;… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Top panel: Observed JWST light curves of SN 2023aeaf compared to SN II models with (solid) and with￾out (dashed) CSM interaction. Bottom panel: Rest-frame SEDs at the two observed epochs. The colored curves show the median blackbody fits derived from the posterior distri￾butions, while the shaded regions indicate the corresponding 1σ uncertainties. The second-epoch F115W flux lies above the simple blackbod… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The launch of the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) has enabled the discovery of a small but increasing sample of high-redshift core-collapse supernovae (CC SNe), which provide new tests of massive star evolution in the early Universe. In this study, we report the discovery of SN 2023aeaf in COSMOS-Web survey observations, which at $z = 3.195$ has one of the highest SN spectroscopic redshifts to date. Using two epochs of JWST photometry separated by $\sim$1 month in the rest frame, we photometrically classify SN 2023aeaf by comparing the JWST photometry to spectrophotometric CC SN and Type Ia (SN Ia) models and UV observations of SNe from the Swift telescope, finding that SN 2023aeaf is highly likely to be a Type II SN. A spectrum of the SN$+$host galaxy was also obtained $\sim$30 rest-frame days after discovery but shows no clearly identifiable SN features, with H$\alpha$ emission from the host potentially masking emission from the SN. Although the limited photometric coverage prevents strong constraints on the explosion properties, we find that the data are most consistent with a $\sim$12$M_\odot$ progenitor with $\sim$0.5$M_{\odot}$ of circumstellar material. We next use the host-galaxy spectrum and photometry to model the host spectral energy distribution (SED) using the Prospector Bayesian inference framework. We find that the host is a star-forming galaxy with a sSFR of $ \log_{10}(\rm sSFR/yr^{-1})= -10.17^{+0.13}_{-0.10}$, a stellar mass of $\log(M_\star/M_\odot) = 9.04^{+0.03}_{-0.04}$, and a gas-phase metallicity of $12 +{\rm log_{10}}({\rm O/H}) = 7.82\pm0.02$. SN 2023aeaf joins a growing sample of early Universe CC SNe with high luminosities, dense CSM, and low-metallicity environments.

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

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports the discovery of SN 2023aeaf at spectroscopic redshift z=3.195 in JWST COSMOS-Web data, one of the highest-z SNe with a spectrum. Using two epochs of JWST photometry separated by ~1 month (rest frame), the authors photometrically classify the event as a Type II supernova via template matching to CC SN and SN Ia models plus Swift UV data. They infer consistency with a ~12 M_⊙ progenitor and ~0.5 M_⊙ of CSM. The spectrum shows no clear SN features (host Hα may mask them). Host SED modeling with Prospector yields a star-forming galaxy with log(sSFR) = -10.17, log(M_*/M_⊙)=9.04, and 12+log(O/H)=7.82.

Significance. If the classification is robust, the result adds a high-luminosity, dense-CSM CC SN in a low-metallicity host to the small sample of z>3 core-collapse events, enabling tests of massive-star evolution at early times. The analysis employs standard, publicly available template libraries and the Prospector framework on public JWST photometry, providing a reproducible path for future high-z SN studies.

major comments (1)
  1. [photometric classification and progenitor inference] The photometric classification (abstract and associated analysis) as Type II rests on matching two rest-UV JWST points over a ~30-day rest-frame baseline to CC SN and SN Ia templates. With no identifiable SN spectral lines and the possibility that host Hα masks features, it is not shown that other templates are excluded at high significance within the reported photometric uncertainties; this directly underpins the ~12 M_⊙ + 0.5 M_⊙ CSM inference.
minor comments (1)
  1. [abstract and observations section] Clarify the exact rest-frame timing of the spectrum relative to the two photometric epochs and discovery date.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thoughtful review and for highlighting the limitations of the photometric classification. We respond to the major comment below and propose targeted revisions to strengthen the presentation of uncertainties.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [photometric classification and progenitor inference] The photometric classification (abstract and associated analysis) as Type II rests on matching two rest-UV JWST points over a ~30-day rest-frame baseline to CC SN and SN Ia templates. With no identifiable SN spectral lines and the possibility that host Hα masks features, it is not shown that other templates are excluded at high significance within the reported photometric uncertainties; this directly underpins the ~12 M_⊙ + 0.5 M_⊙ CSM inference.

    Authors: We agree that the classification is photometric only and that the two-epoch baseline plus absence of clear SN spectral features limits the ability to exclude alternative templates at high statistical significance. The manuscript already notes the lack of identifiable SN features and the potential masking by host Hα, but we will revise the abstract, Section 3, and the progenitor discussion to (i) explicitly state that the Type II preference is based on relative template matches rather than formal model exclusion, (ii) report the available goodness-of-fit metrics (χ² or equivalent) for the CC SN versus SN Ia libraries, and (iii) qualify the ~12 M_⊙ progenitor and ~0.5 M_⊙ CSM values as those of the best-matching model rather than a unique solution. These changes will make the strength of the inference commensurate with the data quality while preserving the scientific utility of the candidate. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: classification and inferences rely on external templates and standard fitting codes.

full rationale

The paper's core steps—photometric classification via direct comparison of two JWST epochs to external CC SN and SN Ia spectrophotometric models plus Swift UV data, plus Prospector SED fitting of the host—are independent of the target result. No equation or claim reduces by construction to a fitted parameter renamed as prediction, no self-citation chain bears the classification load, and the progenitor mass/CSM estimate is presented as a consistency check rather than a derivation. This matches the default expectation of a non-circular empirical analysis.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The analysis depends on standard supernova light-curve templates and the Prospector Bayesian SED-fitting framework, with two estimated parameters for progenitor and circumstellar material.

free parameters (2)
  • progenitor mass = ~12 M_sun
    Estimated by matching limited photometry to core-collapse supernova models.
  • CSM mass = ~0.5 M_sun
    Estimated to reproduce the observed photometry under the adopted model.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Standard core-collapse and Type Ia supernova spectrophotometric models remain valid at z~3.
    Invoked for photometric classification against CC SN and SN Ia templates.
  • domain assumption Prospector SED modeling yields reliable stellar mass, sSFR, and metallicity for the host.
    Applied to the combined spectrum and photometry of the host galaxy.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 6061 in / 1493 out tokens · 57240 ms · 2026-06-30T14:56:46.123482+00:00 · methodology

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

89 extracted references · 86 canonical work pages · 6 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    2011, ApJS, 193, 29, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/193/2/29

    Aihara, H., Allende Prieto, C., An, D., et al. 2011, ApJS, 193, 29, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/193/2/29

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/193/2/29 2011

  2. [2]

    2022, PASJ, 74, 247, doi: 10.1093/pasj/psab122

    Aihara, H., AlSayyad, Y., Ando, M., et al. 2022, PASJ, 74, 247, doi: 10.1093/pasj/psab122

    work page doi:10.1093/pasj/psab122 2022

  3. [3]

    P., James, P

    Anderson, J. P., James, P. A., Habergham, S. M., Galbany, L., & Kuncarayakti, H. 2015, PASA, 32, e019, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2015.19

    work page doi:10.1017/pasa.2015.19 2015

  4. [4]

    P., Dessart, L., Guti´ errez, C

    Anderson, J. P., Dessart, L., Guti´ errez, C. P., et al. 2018, Nature Astronomy, 2, 574, doi: 10.1038/s41550-018-0458-4

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-018-0458-4 2018

  5. [5]

    2017, Hydrogen-Rich Core-Collapse Supernovae, doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-21846-5 39

    Arcavi, I. 2017, Hydrogen-Rich Core-Collapse Supernovae, doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-21846-5 39

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-319-21846-5 2017

  6. [6]

    J., & Scott, P

    Asplund, M., Grevesse, N., Sauval, A. J., & Scott, P. 2009, ARA&A, 47, 481, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.46.060407.145222 14

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.46.060407.145222 2009

  7. [7]

    1934, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 20, 254, doi: 10.1073/pnas.20.5.254

    Baade, W., & Zwicky, F. 1934, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 20, 254, doi: 10.1073/pnas.20.5.254

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.20.5.254 1934

  8. [8]

    2014, The Journal of Open Source Software, 1, 58, doi: 10.21105/joss.00058

    Barbary, K. 2014, The Journal of Open Source Software, 1, 58, doi: 10.21105/joss.00058

    work page doi:10.21105/joss.00058 2014

  9. [9]

    2015, HOTPANTS: High Order Transform of PSF ANd Template Subtraction,, Astrophysics Source Code Library, ascl:1504.004

    Becker, A. 2015, HOTPANTS: High Order Transform of PSF ANd Template Subtraction,, Astrophysics Source Code Library, ascl:1504.004

    2015

  10. [10]

    A., Skillman, E

    Berg, D. A., Skillman, E. D., Marble, A. R., et al. 2012, ApJ, 754, 98, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/754/2/98

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/754/2/98 2012

  11. [11]

    S., Popolitov, V

    Blinnikov, S., Eastman, R., Bartunov, O. S., Popolitov, V. A., & Woosley, S. E. 1998, Astrophysical Journal, 496, 454, doi: 10.1086/305375

    work page doi:10.1086/305375 1998

  12. [12]

    2000, Astrophysical Journal, 532, 1132, doi: 10.1086/308588

    Iwamoto, K. 2000, Astrophysical Journal, 532, 1132, doi: 10.1086/308588

    work page doi:10.1086/308588 2000

  13. [13]

    K., Sorokina, E

    Blinnikov, S., R¨ opke, F. K., Sorokina, E. I., et al. 2006, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 453, 229, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20054594

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20054594 2006

  14. [14]

    2014, Ap&SS, 354, 89, doi: 10.1007/s10509-014-2059-8

    Pritchard, T. 2014, Ap&SS, 354, 89, doi: 10.1007/s10509-014-2059-8

    work page doi:10.1007/s10509-014-2059-8 2014

  15. [15]

    J., Conroy, C., & Johnson, B

    Byler, N., Dalcanton, J. J., Conroy, C., & Johnson, B. D. 2017, ApJ, 840, 44, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa6c66

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa6c66 2017

  16. [16]

    M., Kartaltepe, J

    Casey, C. M., Kartaltepe, J. S., Drakos, N. E., et al. 2023, COSMOS-Web: An Overview of the JWST Cosmic Origins Survey, https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.07865

    work page arXiv 2023

  17. [17]

    Conroy, C., & Gunn, J. E. 2010, ApJ, 712, 833, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/712/2/833

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1088/0004-637x/712/2/833 2010

  18. [18]

    E., & White, M

    Conroy, C., Gunn, J. E., & White, M. 2009, ApJ, 699, 486, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/699/1/486

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1088/0004-637x/699/1/486 2009

  19. [19]

    J., et al

    Cooke, J., Sullivan, M., Barton, E. J., et al. 2009, Nature, 460, 237, doi: 10.1038/nature08082

    work page doi:10.1038/nature08082 2009

  20. [20]

    2012, Nature, 491, 228, doi: 10.1038/nature11521

    Cooke, J., Sullivan, M., Gal-Yam, A., et al. 2012, Nature, 491, 228, doi: 10.1038/nature11521

    work page doi:10.1038/nature11521 2012

  21. [21]

    A., Pierel, J

    Coulter, D. A., Pierel, J. D. R., DeCoursey, C., et al. 2025, https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.05513

    work page arXiv 2025

  22. [22]

    A., Larison, C., Pierel, J

    Coulter, D. A., Larison, C., Pierel, J. D. R., et al. 2026, A spectroscopically confirmed, strongly lensed, metal-poor Type II supernova at z = 5.13, https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.04156

    work page arXiv 2026

  23. [23]

    2024, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 684, A75, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346698

    Curti, M., Maiolino, R., Curtis-Lake, E., et al. 2024, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 684, A75, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346698

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346698 2024

  24. [24]

    J., et al

    Curtin, C., Cooke, J., Moriya, T. J., et al. 2019, ApJS, 241, 17, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab07c8

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab07c8 2019

  25. [25]

    G., et al

    Dahlen, T., Strolger, L.-G., Riess, A. G., et al. 2012, ApJ, 757, 70, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/757/1/70

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/757/1/70 2012

  26. [26]

    DeCoursey, C., Egami, E., Pierel, J. D. R., et al. 2025, The JADES Transient Survey: Discovery and Classification of Supernovae in the JADES Deep Field, https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.05060

    work page arXiv 2025

  27. [27]

    J., Waldman, R., & Livne, E

    Dessart, L., Hillier, D. J., Waldman, R., & Livne, E. 2013, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 433, 1745, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt817

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt817 2013

  28. [28]

    J., Weinberg, D

    Eisenstein, D. J., Weinberg, D. H., Agol, E., et al. 2011, AJ, 142, 72, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/142/3/72

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/142/3/72 2011

  29. [29]

    Overview of the JWST Advanced Deep Extragalactic Survey (JADES)

    Eisenstein, D. J., Willott, C., Alberts, S., et al. 2023, Overview of the JWST Advanced Deep Extragalactic Survey (JADES), https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.02465

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  30. [30]

    2024 https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.01776

    Fang, Q., Maeda, K., Ye, H., Moriya, T., & Matsumoto, T. 2024 https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.01776

    work page arXiv 2024

  31. [31]

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

    Foreman-Mackey, D., Hogg, D. W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J. 2013, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 125, 306–312, doi: 10.1086/670067

    work page doi:10.1086/670067 2013

  32. [32]

    Expanding the High-z Supernova Frontier: "Wide-Area" JWST Discoveries from the First Two Years of COSMOS-Web

    Fox, O. D., Rest, A., Pierel, J. D. R., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.08931, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2601.08931

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2601.08931 2026

  33. [33]

    2019, ARA&A, 57, 305, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081817-051819

    Gal-Yam, A. 2019, ARA&A, 57, 305, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081817-051819

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081817-051819 2019

  34. [34]

    M., et al

    Galbany, L., Stanishev, V., Mour˜ ao, A. M., et al. 2014, A&A, 572, A38, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201424717

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201424717 2014

  35. [35]

    2004, in AIP Conference Proceedings, Vol

    Gehrels, N. 2004, in AIP Conference Proceedings, Vol. 727 (AIP), 637–641, doi: 10.1063/1.1810924

    work page doi:10.1063/1.1810924 2004

  36. [36]

    A., Kocevski, D

    Grogin, N. A., Kocevski, D. D., Faber, S. M., et al. 2011, ApJS, 197, 35, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/197/2/35 Guti´ errez, C. P., Pastorello, A., Jerkstrand, A., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 499, 974, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa2763

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/197/2/35 2011

  37. [38]

    Hartmann, D. H. 2003b, The Astrophysical Journal, 591, 288, doi: 10.1086/375341

    work page doi:10.1086/375341

  38. [39]

    Hirschmann, M., Charlot, S., & Somerville, R. S. 2023, High-redshift metallicity calibrations for JWST spectra: insights from line emission in cosmological simulations, https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.03753

    work page arXiv 2023

  39. [40]

    B., Shappee, B

    Hoogendam, W. B., Shappee, B. J., Brown, P. J., et al. 2024, ApJ, 966, 139, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad33ba

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad33ba 2024

  40. [41]

    A., & Anderson, J

    James, P. A., & Anderson, J. P. 2006, A&A, 453, 57, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20054509

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20054509 2006

  41. [42]

    A., Goobar, A., et al

    Johansson, J., Perley, D. A., Goobar, A., et al. 2025, ApJL, 995, L17, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae1d61

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae1d61 2025

  42. [43]

    D., Leja, J., Conroy, C., & Speagle, J

    Johnson, B. D., Leja, J., Conroy, C., & Speagle, J. S. 2021, ApJS, 254, 22, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/abef67 15

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.3847/1538-4365/abef67 2021

  43. [44]

    O., McGill, P., Manning, T

    Jones, D. O., McGill, P., Manning, T. A., et al. 2024, Blast: a Web Application for Characterizing the Host Galaxies of Astrophysical Transients, https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.17322

    work page arXiv 2024

  44. [45]

    L., & Kirshner, R

    Kelly, P. L., & Kirshner, R. P. 2012, ApJ, 759, 107, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/759/2/107

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/759/2/107 2012

  45. [46]

    P., Cinabro, D., et al

    Kessler, R., Bernstein, J. P., Cinabro, D., et al. 2009, PASP, 121, 1028, doi: 10.1086/605984

    work page doi:10.1086/605984 2009

  46. [47]

    A., Kennicutt, Jr., R

    Kobulnicky, H. A., Kennicutt, Jr., R. C., & Pizagno, J. L. 1999, ApJ, 514, 544, doi: 10.1086/306987

    work page doi:10.1086/306987 1999

  47. [48]

    M., Aussel, H., Calzetti, D., et al

    Koekemoer, A. M., Aussel, H., Calzetti, D., et al. 2007, ApJS, 172, 196, doi: 10.1086/520086

    work page doi:10.1086/520086 2007

  48. [49]

    M., Faber, S

    Koekemoer, A. M., Faber, S. M., Ferguson, H. C., et al. 2011, ApJS, 197, 36, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/197/2/36

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/197/2/36 2011

  49. [50]

    Y., Jones, D

    Kong, M. Y., Jones, D. O., Drakos, N. E., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2602.11261, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2602.11261

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2602.11261 2026

  50. [51]

    Larson, R. B. 1998, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 301, 569, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.1998.02045.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.1998.02045.x 1998

  51. [52]

    2017, ApJ, 837, 170, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa5ffe

    Byler, N. 2017, ApJ, 837, 170, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa5ffe

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa5ffe 2017

  52. [53]

    2023, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 955, L18, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acf470

    Li, M., Cai, Z., Bian, F., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 955, L18, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acf470

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acf470 2023

  53. [54]

    2011, MNRAS, 415, 2101, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18820.x

    Li, W., Chornock, R., Leaman, J., et al. 2011, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 412, 1441, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18162.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18162.x 2011

  54. [55]

    P., Bersten, M

    Martinez, L., Anderson, J. P., Bersten, M. C., et al. 2022, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 660, A42, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142555

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202142555 2022

  55. [56]

    McGaugh, S. S. 1991, ApJ, 380, 140, doi: 10.1086/170569

    work page doi:10.1086/170569 1991

  56. [57]

    Morgan, W. W. 1941, PASP, 53, 224, doi: 10.1086/125315

    work page doi:10.1086/125315 1941

  57. [58]

    J., Tanaka, M., Yasuda, N., et al

    Moriya, T. J., Tanaka, M., Yasuda, N., et al. 2019, ApJS, 241, 16, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab07c5

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab07c5 2019

  58. [59]

    J., Coulter, D

    Moriya, T. J., Coulter, D. A., DeCoursey, C., et al. 2025, https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.08969

    work page arXiv 2025

  59. [60]

    2023, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 269, 33, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/acd556

    Nakajima, K., Ouchi, M., Isobe, Y., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 269, 33, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/acd556

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/acd556 2023

  60. [61]

    2020, A&A, 637, A73, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936097

    Nyholm, A., Sollerman, J., Tartaglia, L., et al. 2020, A&A, 637, A73, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936097

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936097 2020

  61. [62]

    R., & Snyder, H

    Oppenheimer, J. R., & Snyder, H. 1939, Physical Review, 56, 455, doi: 10.1103/PhysRev.56.455

    work page doi:10.1103/physrev.56.455 1939

  62. [63]

    E., & Ferland, G

    Osterbrock, D. E., & Ferland, G. J. 2006, Astrophysics of Gaseous Nebulae and Active Galactic Nuclei, 2nd edn. (Sausalito, CA: University Science Books)

    2006

  63. [64]

    D., Prieto, J

    Pessi, T., Desai, D. D., Prieto, J. L., et al. 2025, A&A, 703, A34, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202556799

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202556799 2025

  64. [65]

    Pierel, J. D. R., Rodney, S., Avelino, A., et al. 2018, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 130, 114504, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aadb7a

    work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/aadb7a 2018

  65. [66]

    Pierel, J. D. R., Jones, D. O., Kenworthy, W. D., et al. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 939, 11, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac93f9

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac93f9 2022

  66. [67]

    Pierel, J. D. R., Engesser, M., Coulter, D. A., et al. 2024, ApJL, 971, L32, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad6908

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad6908 2024

  67. [68]

    Pierel, J. D. R., Coulter, D. A., Siebert, M. R., et al. 2025, ApJL, 981, L9, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adb1d9

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adb1d9 2025

  68. [69]

    2012, ApJS, 199, 25, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/199/2/25

    Postman, M., Coe, D., Ben´ ıtez, N., et al. 2012, ApJS, 199, 25, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/199/2/25

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/199/2/25 2012

  69. [70]

    P., Valenti, S., Dong, Y., et al

    Ravi, A. P., Valenti, S., Dong, Y., et al. 2025, ApJ, 982, 12, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adb0bb

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adb0bb 2025

  70. [71]

    2023, arminrest/jhat: The JWST HST Alignment Tool (JHAT), v2 Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7892935

    Rest, A., Pierel, J., Correnti, M., et al. 2023, arminrest/jhat: The JWST HST Alignment Tool (JHAT), v2 Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7892935

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.7892935 2023

  71. [72]

    Rodney, S. A. 2014, STARDUST2: Bayesian Light-Curve Classification Tool,, https://github.com/srodney/starDust2 GitHub

    2014

  72. [73]

    A., Riess, A

    Rodney, S. A., Riess, A. G., Strolger, L.-G., et al. 2014, AJ, 148, 13, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/148/1/13

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/148/1/13 2014

  73. [74]

    M., Baltay, C., Hounsell, R., et al

    Rose, B. M., Baltay, C., Hounsell, R., et al. 2021, A Reference Survey for Supernova Cosmology with the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope, https://arxiv.org/abs/2111.03081

    work page arXiv 2021

  74. [75]

    L., Shapley, A

    Sanders, R. L., Shapley, A. E., Jones, T., et al. 2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 914, 19, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abf4c1

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abf4c1 2021

  75. [76]

    2021, ApJS, 255, 29, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/abff5e

    Schulze, S., Yaron, O., Sollerman, J., et al. 2021, ApJS, 255, 29, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/abff5e

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/abff5e 2021

  76. [77]

    2022, ApJ, 938, 113, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac8b7a

    Scolnic, D., Brout, D., Carr, A., et al. 2022, ApJ, 938, 113, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac8b7a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac8b7a 2022

  77. [78]

    B., Paquereau, L., et al

    Shuntov, M., Akins, H. B., Paquereau, L., et al. 2025, A&A, 704, A339, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202555799

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202555799 2025

  78. [79]

    R., DeCoursey, C., Coulter, D

    Siebert, M. R., DeCoursey, C., Coulter, D. A., et al. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 972, L13, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad6c32

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad6c32 2024

  79. [80]

    SN 2025ogs: A Spectroscopically-Normal Type Ia Supernova at z = 2 as a Benchmark for Redshift Evolution

    Siebert, M. R., Pierel, J. D. R., Engesser, M., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2512.19783, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2512.19783

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2512.19783 2025

  80. [81]

    Smartt, S. J. 2009, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 47, 63–106, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-082708-101737

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-082708-101737 2009

Showing first 80 references.