pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.03589 · v1 · pith:ERIKKD6Enew · submitted 2026-06-02 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA · astro-ph.CO

An analysis of the Type Ia SN 2024gy and a comparison of different host extinction estimation techniques

Jacco H. Terwel , Kate Maguire , Cillian O'Donnell , Miika Pursiainen , Alba Casasbuenas , Julie Thiim Gadeberg , Ben Godson , Luke Harvey
show 33 more authors
Benjamin Nobre Hauptmann Niilo Koivisto Chang Liu Shravya Shenoy Samuel Grund S{\o}rensen Mar\'ia Alejandra D\'iaz Teodori Astrid Guldberg Theil Mikael Turkki Alaa Alburai Joe Anderson Thomas de Boer Tom\'as M\"uller Bravo Umut Burgaz Kenneth C. Chambers Ting-Wan Chen Jo\~ao Duarte Lluis Galbany Mariusz Gromadzki Cosimo Inserra Joel Johansson Young-Lo Kim Thomas Lowe Eugene Magnier Rita P. Santos Jesper Sollerman Richard Wainscoat David R. Young Tracy X. Chen Matthew J. Graham Mansi M. Kasliwal Frank J. Masci Josiah N. Purdum Ines Belkhodja
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-28 09:15 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA astro-ph.CO
keywords Type Ia supernovaehost galaxy extinctionSN 2024gyLira lawinterstellar absorption linespolarimetryTARDIS modelinghigh-velocity features
0
0 comments X

The pith

Host extinction estimates for SN 2024gy range from 0.12 to 0.24 magnitudes depending on the method used.

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

The paper analyzes optical and near-infrared data for the Type Ia supernova SN 2024gy and applies multiple techniques to estimate extinction from dust in its host galaxy. These techniques draw on narrow interstellar absorption lines, the Lira law from light-curve colors, photometric color comparisons, and polarimetry. The resulting E(B-V)host values spread from 0.12 plus or minus 0.02 magnitudes using narrow lines to 0.24 plus or minus 0.06 magnitudes using the Lira law, averaging 0.22 plus or minus 0.04 magnitudes under an RV of 3.1. A sympathetic reader cares because Type Ia supernovae serve as standard candles only after accurate extinction corrections, and the observed spread shows that the correction itself depends on which estimator is chosen. The work also notes that TARDIS modeling matches a double-detonation scenario better for the strong high-velocity Ca II feature while the nickel-to-iron ratio favors delayed detonation.

Core claim

SN 2024gy is a normal Type Ia supernova that displays high-velocity components in Si II at early phases and an especially strong high-velocity feature in the Ca II near-infrared triplet. TARDIS spectral modeling reproduces the Ca II high-velocity component more closely under a double-detonation explosion model, yet the measured stable nickel-to-iron ratio points instead to a delayed-detonation origin. When the same photometric and spectroscopic data are used to estimate host-galaxy extinction, narrow interstellar lines give E(B-V)host equal to 0.12 plus or minus 0.02 magnitudes while the Lira law returns 0.24 plus or minus 0.06 magnitudes; the mean across methods is 0.22 plus or minus 0.04 m

What carries the argument

Comparison of host extinction estimators (narrow absorption lines, Lira law, photometric colors, polarimetry) applied to the same SN 2024gy data set.

If this is right

  • The mean extinction value of 0.22 magnitudes supplies a practical correction for distance estimates to the host galaxy of SN 2024gy.
  • Spectral modeling with TARDIS can favor one explosion scenario on the basis of the Ca II high-velocity feature while another indicator favors the opposite scenario.
  • Polarimetric measurements can be combined with line and color-based methods to constrain host extinction.
  • Using any single estimator risks a systematic offset of up to 0.12 magnitudes in the derived extinction.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If similar spreads appear in other well-observed supernovae, cosmological analyses should propagate method-dependent uncertainties rather than adopt a single extinction value.
  • A weighted average across techniques may reduce random error only if the dominant biases are not shared across all methods.
  • Multi-method extinction campaigns on additional supernovae would test whether the observed spread is typical of host galaxies or particular to SN 2024gy.

Load-bearing premise

The extinction estimators draw on sufficiently independent information and do not share systematic biases introduced by the common data reduction steps.

What would settle it

An independent measurement of the host dust column, for instance through far-infrared dust emission maps or high-resolution spectroscopy of background sources, that falls clearly outside the reported 0.12 to 0.24 magnitude range.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.03589 by Alaa Alburai, Alba Casasbuenas, Astrid Guldberg Theil, Ben Godson, Benjamin Nobre Hauptmann, Chang Liu, Cillian O'Donnell, Cosimo Inserra, David R. Young, Eugene Magnier, Frank J. Masci, Ines Belkhodja, Jacco H. Terwel, Jesper Sollerman, Jo\~ao Duarte, Joe Anderson, Joel Johansson, Josiah N. Purdum, Julie Thiim Gadeberg, Kate Maguire, Kenneth C. Chambers, Lluis Galbany, Luke Harvey, Mansi M. Kasliwal, Mar\'ia Alejandra D\'iaz Teodori, Mariusz Gromadzki, Matthew J. Graham, Miika Pursiainen, Mikael Turkki, Niilo Koivisto, Richard Wainscoat, Rita P. Santos, Samuel Grund S{\o}rensen, Shravya Shenoy, Thomas de Boer, Thomas Lowe, Ting-Wan Chen, Tom\'as M\"uller Bravo, Tracy X. Chen, Umut Burgaz, Young-Lo Kim.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Colour image of NGC 4216 and SN 2024gy, taken with the NOT using the B, V, and R filters. The SN is marked with a green circle. 2. Observations and Data Reduction On 4 Jan 2024, the discovery of a new transient was reported to the Transient Name Server (TNS)1 by Koichi Itagaki (Itagaki 2024). Located at R.A., Dec. = 12:15:51.289, +13:06:56.13, in NGC 4216, it was reported to have a Vega magnitude of m = 16… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Light curves of the first 50 days of SN 2024gy, corrected for MW extinction but not for host galaxy extinction. The discovery is marked with a black circle. Four surveys observed SN 2024gy during this part of its evolution: ATLAS (squares, c and o bands are cyan and yellow, respectively), GOTO (L band, lime inverted triangles), ZTF (circles, g, r, i bands are green, orange, and red, respectively), and ASAS… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Full light curves of SN 2024gy, corrected for MW extinction but not for host galaxy extinction. The markers and colours are the same as for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Optical spectra of SN 2024gy at four different phases of its evolution. Spectra of SN 2011fe, SN 2014J, and SN 2019ein at similar phases are shown with a vertical offset for comparison. All spectra are corrected for MW and host extinction, assuming AV = 0.04 mag and RV = 3.1 for the host extinction in SN 2024gy. Absorption and emission features are marked with vertical lines, with different line styles sho… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Measured line parameters in the pre-peak spectra. The HV com￾ponents are plotted separately to increase readability. In the line velocity plot (top left) we also show in a lighter shade the Si ii λ6355 (crosses) and Ca ii (downward triangles) line velocities of SN 2011fe (grey; Par￾rent et al. 2012), SN 2014J (red; Marion et al. 2015), and SN 2019ein (magenta; Pellegrino et al. 2020) for comparison. For SN… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The fitted [Ni ii]/[Fe ii] complex and its separate components. The 1σ uncertainty on the fit is shown as a grey band around the fit. We fit the feature with a similar procedure as before, allow￾ing each element to have different parameters. However, instead of fixing all amplitudes to be the same (as we did for the absorp￾tion lines in the pre-peak spectra) we use the relative strengths from Jerkstrand et… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Profile in velocity space of the total density of calcium in m09_05, m09_10 and N100, showing the higher abundance of Ca at high velocities in the double-detonation models. files for various elements, SNe Ia are expected to show some model-dependent polarisation in different line features. Indeed, this has been found in a few cases such as SN 1996X (Wang et al. 1997), SN 1997dt (Leonard et al. 2005), SN 20… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Stokes Q and U plane characterising the broadband polarisa￾tion of SN 2024gy at different phases. The g, r, and i bands are shown in green, orange, and red, respectively. The filled stars mark the weighted mean of the total polarisation for each band, and the open stars mark the polarisation after correcting for MW polarisation. The other coloured markers show the values at each measured phase. The red sh… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: K-corrections at late phases for SN 2024gy at different red￾shifts. The y-axis is plotted as the difference in g and r K-correction, such that the corrected and observed colours are related as (g − r)cor = (g − r)obs − (Kg − Kr). At 50 days we plot the K-corrections that are cal￾culated with the salt2 model. The other points use late-time SN 2024gy spectra shifted to different redshifts. Some of these spe… view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: The first cloud has z < 0, meaning that this is a MW cloud at v ≈ −25±1 km s−1 . The other two clouds have redshifts similar to that of SN 2024gy, showing that these clouds are in NGC 4216 but are offset with respect to the SN. One cloud is blueshifted by v = 24 ± 1 km s−1 compared to the SN, while the other is redshifted by v = 35 ± 1 km s−1 . The equivalent width (EW) of each line is shown in Table B.3,… view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: The Ca ii H&K and Na i D regions in the − 5 d FIES and in the three X-Shooter spectra. The pre-peak X-Shooter spectra have a vertical offsets for readability purposes. The fitted model is shown as a solid line with 3σ uncertainties shown as a gray band. The FIES model consists of three sets (one MW, two host) of four Gaussian functions (two for the Ca ii H&K doublet and two for the Na i D doublet) to mode… view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: The continuum subtracted K i and DIB regions in the three X-Shooter spectra are shown in the paler histograms. The fitted models are shown as solid lines with 3σ uncertainties as gray bands on each model fit. Each feature is labelled with a dashed vertical line. Only for the K i1 line we recovered multiple components at different velocities. Article number, page 13 of 23 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Type Ia supernovae (SNe Ia) are well-known standardisable candles, and are one of the main ways to measure the distance to their host galaxies. However, extinction due to interstellar dust causes objects to appear fainter and redder. Correcting for this requires estimating the amount of intervening material and how the extinction changes as a function of wavelength. We present and analyse optical and near-infrared data of the well-observed SN 2024gy and use these to compare different extinction estimation techniques, making use of photometric, spectroscopic, and polarimetric data. SN 2024gy is a normal SN Ia with high velocity (HV) components in Si II $\lambda6355$ (phase $<-10$ days) and a particularly strong HV feature in the Ca II near-infrared triplet (up to peak). Modelling SN 2024gy with TARDIS shows better matches with a double-detonation scenario compared to a delayed-detonation scenario due to a better match to the Ca II HV component. A measurement of the stable Ni/Fe ratio however favours a delayed-detonation scenario. Host extinction estimates range from $E(B-V)_{host}=0.12\pm0.02$ mag (narrow interstellar absorption lines) to $E(B-V)_{host}=0.24\pm0.06$ mag (Lira law) with a mean of $E(B-V)_{host}=0.22\pm0.04$ mag, assuming $R_V=3.1$. The spread between different methods highlights the challenge of accurately estimating the amount of extinction light suffers before being observed.

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 / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents optical and NIR observations of the normal Type Ia SN 2024gy, which exhibits high-velocity Si II and especially strong HV Ca II features. TARDIS spectral modeling is used to compare double-detonation versus delayed-detonation explosion scenarios, with the former providing a better match to the Ca II HV component while the stable Ni/Fe ratio favors the latter. Multiple host-extinction estimators (narrow interstellar lines, Lira law, photometric colors, polarimetry) are applied to the same dataset, yielding E(B-V)_host values ranging from 0.12±0.02 mag to 0.24±0.06 mag (mean 0.22±0.04 mag for R_V=3.1); the spread is presented as evidence of the difficulty in accurately determining host extinction.

Significance. If the reported spread is shown to be free of shared systematics, the work would usefully illustrate the practical uncertainties that remain when correcting SNe Ia for host extinction, a key systematic for cosmological applications. The explicit TARDIS modeling and direct comparison of two explosion scenarios constitute a concrete, falsifiable contribution that can be tested with future data.

major comments (1)
  1. [Extinction estimation section (abstract and main text)] Extinction estimation section (abstract and main text): all quoted methods ultimately rely on the same optical/NIR photometry and spectra. No quantitative test (e.g., jackknife over reduction pipelines, comparison of independent flux-calibration choices, or telluric-removal variants) is presented to demonstrate that the methods are effectively independent; correlated errors from common data-reduction steps could therefore narrow the true uncertainty on the reported spread, which is load-bearing for the central claim that the range “highlights the challenge.”
minor comments (2)
  1. [TARDIS modeling paragraph] The TARDIS modeling paragraph should explicitly state the wavelength range, phase coverage, and number of free parameters used in each scenario comparison so that the goodness-of-fit statements can be reproduced.
  2. Table or figure presenting the individual E(B-V) values should include the exact data subsets (e.g., which filters or lines) entering each estimator to allow readers to assess possible shared systematics.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for highlighting an important methodological point regarding the extinction estimates. We address the major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: Extinction estimation section (abstract and main text): all quoted methods ultimately rely on the same optical/NIR photometry and spectra. No quantitative test (e.g., jackknife over reduction pipelines, comparison of independent flux-calibration choices, or telluric-removal variants) is presented to demonstrate that the methods are effectively independent; correlated errors from common data-reduction steps could therefore narrow the true uncertainty on the reported spread, which is load-bearing for the central claim that the range “highlights the challenge.”

    Authors: We agree that the methods are applied to the same underlying dataset and that no explicit quantitative test of independence across reduction variants has been included. The techniques nevertheless draw on distinct observables and physical assumptions (narrow-line column densities, color-evolution uniformity in the Lira relation, broadband SED fitting, and polarization properties), which limits the degree of correlation. We nevertheless accept that shared reduction steps could reduce the effective independence of the spread. In the revised manuscript we will insert a new paragraph in the extinction section that explicitly discusses this caveat, qualifies the interpretation of the reported range as a measure of uncertainty, and notes the absence of a formal jackknife or sensitivity test. If the available data permit, we will also add a brief sensitivity check by perturbing flux-calibration and telluric corrections within their estimated uncertainties and re-deriving the E(B-V) values. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: observational measurements from independent standard techniques

full rationale

The paper reports direct measurements of host extinction E(B-V) using several established methods (narrow absorption lines, Lira law, photometric colors, polarimetry) applied to the SN 2024gy dataset, along with TARDIS spectral modeling for explosion scenario comparison. None of the reported values are obtained by fitting a parameter to a subset and then relabeling it as a prediction, nor do any derivations reduce to self-definitional equations or load-bearing self-citations. The spread in estimates is presented as an empirical observation highlighting methodological differences, with all steps anchored to external codes and standard assumptions (RV=3.1) rather than internal redefinitions. The work is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The analysis rests on the assumption that standard extinction laws and supernova atmosphere codes apply without major modification to this event; the quoted RV=3.1 is an external input rather than a fitted parameter of the present work.

free parameters (1)
  • RV = 3.1
    Fixed at the conventional Milky-Way value of 3.1 when converting E(B-V) to extinction in other bands.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Standard interstellar extinction curves and the Lira relation hold for host-galaxy dust around Type Ia supernovae.
    Invoked when comparing the numerical outputs of the different estimation techniques.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 6047 in / 1382 out tokens · 25916 ms · 2026-06-28T09:15:06.813498+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

187 extracted references · 4 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    M., Aspin, C., Sorensen, A

    Abbott, T. M., Aspin, C., Sorensen, A. N., et al. 2000, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol. 4008, Optical and IR Telescope Instrumentation and Detectors, ed. M. Iye & A. F. Moorwood, 714–719

    2000

  2. [2]

    D., Allende Prieto, C., Almeida, A., et al

    Albareti, F. D., Allende Prieto, C., Almeida, A., et al. 2017, ApJS, 233, 25

    2017

  3. [3]

    2014, ApJ, 788, L21

    Amanullah, R., Goobar, A., Johansson, J., et al. 2014, ApJ, 788, L21

    2014

  4. [4]

    2015, MNRAS, 453, 3300

    Amanullah, R., Johansson, J., Goobar, A., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 453, 3300

    2015

  5. [5]

    Baron, D., Poznanski, D., Watson, D., Yao, Y ., & Prochaska, J. X. 2015, MN- RAS, 447, 545

    2015

  6. [6]

    Bellm, E. C. & Sesar, B. 2016, pyraf-dbsp: Reduction pipeline for the Palo- mar Double Beam Spectrograph, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1602.002

    2016

  7. [7]

    D., Walters, R., et al

    Blagorodnova, N., Neill, J. D., Walters, R., et al. 2018, PASP, 130, 035003

    2018

  8. [8]

    R., Bershady, M

    Blanton, M. R., Bershady, M. A., Abolfathi, B., et al. 2017, AJ, 154, 28

    2017

  9. [9]

    L., Patat, F., et al

    Blondin, S., Prieto, J. L., Patat, F., et al. 2009, ApJ, 693, 207

    2009

  10. [10]

    J., Townsley, D

    Boos, S. J., Townsley, D. M., & Shen, K. J. 2024, ApJ, 972, 200

    2024

  11. [11]

    A., Hachinger, S., & Kerzendorf, W

    Boyle, A., Sim, S. A., Hachinger, S., & Kerzendorf, W. 2017, A&A, 599, A46

    2017

  12. [12]

    Brennan, S. J. & Fraser, M. 2022, A&A, 667, A62

    2022

  13. [13]

    & Scolnic, D

    Brout, D. & Scolnic, D. 2021, ApJ, 909, 26

    2021

  14. [14]

    J., Hosseinzadeh, G., Jha, S

    Brown, P. J., Hosseinzadeh, G., Jha, S. W., et al. 2019, ApJ, 877, 152

    2019

  15. [15]

    M., Baliber, N., Bianco, F

    Brown, T. M., Baliber, N., Bianco, F. B., et al. 2013, PASP, 125, 1031

    2013

  16. [16]

    2025, A&A, 694, A9

    Burgaz, U., Maguire, K., Dimitriadis, G., et al. 2025, A&A, 694, A9

    2025

  17. [17]

    1984, The Messenger, 38, 9

    Buzzoni, B., Delabre, B., Dekker, H., et al. 1984, The Messenger, 38, 9

    1984

  18. [18]

    P., Collins, C

    Callan, F. P., Collins, C. E., Sim, S. A., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 539, 1404 Article number, page 17 of 23 A&A proofs:manuscript no. aa59568-26

    2025

  19. [19]

    A., Clayton, G

    Cardelli, J. A., Clayton, G. C., & Mathis, J. S. 1989, ApJ, 345, 245

    1989

  20. [20]

    B., Fox, D

    Cenko, S. B., Fox, D. B., Moon, D.-S., et al. 2006, PASP, 118, 1396

    2006

  21. [21]

    The Pan-STARRS1 Surveys

    Chambers, K. C., Magnier, E. A., Metcalfe, N., et al. 2016, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1612.05560

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  22. [22]

    1931, The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science, 11, 592

    Chandrasekhar, S. 1931, The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science, 11, 592

    1931

  23. [23]

    J., Scalzo, R

    Childress, M. J., Scalzo, R. A., Sim, S. A., et al. 2013, ApJ, 770, 29

    2013

  24. [24]

    H., Kenney, J

    Chung, A., van Gorkom, J. H., Kenney, J. D. P., Crowl, H., & V ollmer, B. 2009, AJ, 138, 1741

    2009

  25. [25]

    2016, ApJ, 819, 152

    Cikota, A., Deustua, S., & Marleau, F. 2016, ApJ, 819, 152

    2016

  26. [26]

    E., Gronow, S., Sim, S

    Collins, C. E., Gronow, S., Sim, S. A., & Röpke, F. K. 2022, MNRAS, 517, 5289

    2022

  27. [27]

    E., Sim, S

    Collins, C. E., Sim, S. A., Shingles, L. J., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 524, 4447

    2023

  28. [28]

    W., Bloom, J

    Coughlin, M. W., Bloom, J. S., Nir, G., et al. 2023, ApJS, 267, 31

    2023

  29. [29]

    1959, ZAp, 47, 59

    Davis, Jr., L. 1959, ZAp, 47, 59

    1959

  30. [30]

    & Greenstein, J

    Davis, Jr., L. & Greenstein, J. L. 1951, ApJ, 114, 206 de Vaucouleurs, G., de Vaucouleurs, A., Corwin, Jr., H. G., et al. 1991, Third Reference Catalogue of Bright Galaxies

    1951

  31. [31]

    2025, A&A, 694, A12

    Deckers, M., Maguire, K., Shingles, L., et al. 2025, A&A, 694, A12

    2025

  32. [32]

    M., Riddle, R., et al

    Dekany, R., Smith, R. M., Riddle, R., et al. 2020, PASP, 132, 038001

    2020

  33. [33]

    & Hillier, D

    Dessart, L. & Hillier, D. J. 2015, MNRAS, 447, 1370

    2015

  34. [34]

    2015, MNRAS, 448, 1345

    Dhawan, S., Leibundgut, B., Spyromilio, J., & Maguire, K. 2015, MNRAS, 448, 1345

    2015

  35. [35]

    2017, MNRAS, 468, 3798 Domínguez, A., Siana, B., Henry, A

    Dimitriadis, G., Sullivan, M., Kerzendorf, W., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 468, 3798 Domínguez, A., Siana, B., Henry, A. L., et al. 2013, ApJ, 763, 145

    2017

  36. [36]

    2024, ApJ, 974, 316

    Dong, Y ., Valenti, S., Ashall, C., et al. 2024, ApJ, 974, 316

    2024

  37. [37]

    J., Ackley, K., Jiménez-Ibarra, F., et al

    Dyer, M. J., Ackley, K., Jiménez-Ibarra, F., et al. 2024, in Society of Photo- Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol. 13094, Ground-based and Airborne Telescopes X, ed. H. K. Marshall, J. Spyromilio, & T. Usuda, 130941X

    2024

  38. [38]

    M., Dahlstrom, J

    Fan, H., Hobbs, L. M., Dahlstrom, J. A., et al. 2019, ApJ, 878, 151

    2019

  39. [39]

    K., Hillebrandt, W., et al

    Fink, M., Röpke, F. K., Hillebrandt, W., et al. 2010, A&A, 514, A53

    2010

  40. [40]

    Fitzpatrick, E. L. 1999, PASP, 111, 63

    1999

  41. [41]

    Fitzpatrick, E. L. 2004, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, V ol. 309, Astrophysics of Dust, ed. A. N. Witt, G. C. Clayton, & B. T. Draine, 33

    2004

  42. [42]

    Fitzpatrick, E. L. & Massa, D. 2007, ApJ, 663, 320 Flörs, A., Spyromilio, J., Taubenberger, S., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 491, 2902

    2007

  43. [43]

    L., Madore, B

    Freedman, W. L., Madore, B. F., Gibson, B. K., et al. 2001, ApJ, 553, 47

    2001

  44. [44]

    L., Madore, B

    Freedman, W. L., Madore, B. F., Scowcroft, V ., et al. 2012, ApJ, 758, 24 González-Gaitán, S., de Jaeger, T., Galbany, L., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 508, 4656 González-Gaitán, S., Gutiérrez, C. P., Anderson, J. P., et al. 2024, A&A, 687, A108

    2012

  45. [45]

    2014, ApJ, 784, L12

    Goobar, A., Johansson, J., Amanullah, R., et al. 2014, ApJ, 784, L12

    2014

  46. [46]

    J., Kulkarni, S

    Graham, M. J., Kulkarni, S. R., Bellm, E. C., et al. 2019, PASP, 131, 078001

    2019

  47. [47]

    L., Valenti, S., Fulton, B

    Graham, M. L., Valenti, S., Fulton, B. J., et al. 2015, ApJ, 801, 136

    2015

  48. [48]

    S., et al

    Grayling, M., Thorp, S., Mandel, K. S., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 531, 953

    2024

  49. [49]

    E., Sim, S

    Gronow, S., Collins, C. E., Sim, S. A., & Röpke, F. K. 2021, A&A, 649, A155

    2021

  50. [50]

    & Hosseinzadeh, G

    Guevel, D. & Hosseinzadeh, G. 2017, dguevel/PyZOGY: Initial release

    2017

  51. [51]

    Z., & Margutti, R

    Guillochon, J., Parrent, J., Kelley, L. Z., & Margutti, R. 2017, ApJ, 835, 64

    2017

  52. [52]

    E., Siegmund, W

    Gunn, J. E., Siegmund, W. A., Mannery, E. J., et al. 2006, AJ, 131, 2332

    2006

  53. [53]

    R., Kuhlmann, S., Kovacs, E., et al

    Gupta, R. R., Kuhlmann, S., Kovacs, E., et al. 2016, AJ, 152, 154

    2016

  54. [54]

    2007, A&A, 466, 11

    Guy, J., Astier, P., Baumont, S., et al. 2007, A&A, 466, 11

    2007

  55. [55]

    J., Hey, D., et al

    Hart, K., Shappee, B. J., Hey, D., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2304.03791

    work page arXiv 2023

  56. [56]

    2025, A&A, 695, A264

    Harvey, L., Maguire, K., Burgaz, U., et al. 2025, A&A, 695, A264

    2025

  57. [57]

    T., Garnavich, P

    Hayden, B. T., Garnavich, P. M., Kessler, R., et al. 2010, ApJ, 712, 350

    2010

  58. [58]

    Herbig, G. H. 1995, ARA&A, 33, 19

    1995

  59. [59]

    Hobbs, L. M. 1974, ApJ, 191, 381

    1974

  60. [60]

    B., Ashall, C., Jones, D

    Hoogendam, W. B., Ashall, C., Jones, D. O., et al. 2025, ApJ, 988, 209

    2025

  61. [61]

    2017, ApJ, 836, 157

    Huang, X., Raha, Z., Aldering, G., et al. 2017, ApJ, 836, 157

    2017

  62. [62]

    & Tutukov, A

    Iben, I., J. & Tutukov, A. V . 1984, ApJS, 54, 335

    1984

  63. [63]

    2024, Transient Name Server Discovery Report, 2024-39, 1 Jacobson-Galán, W

    Itagaki, K. 2024, Transient Name Server Discovery Report, 2024-39, 1 Jacobson-Galán, W. V ., Dessart, L., Jones, D. O., et al. 2022, ApJ, 924, 15

    2024

  64. [64]

    J., Sollerman, J., et al

    Jerkstrand, A., Smartt, S. J., Sollerman, J., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 448, 2482

    2015

  65. [65]

    G., & Kirshner, R

    Jha, S., Riess, A. G., & Kirshner, R. P. 2007, ApJ, 659, 122

    2007

  66. [66]

    B., Fox, O

    Johansson, J., Cenko, S. B., Fox, O. D., et al. 2021, ApJ, 923, 237

    2021

  67. [67]

    & Woosley, S

    Kasen, D. & Woosley, S. E. 2007, ApJ, 656, 661

    2007

  68. [68]

    2015, A&A, 576, A78

    Kausch, W., Noll, S., Smette, A., et al. 2015, A&A, 576, A78

    2015

  69. [69]

    2020, ApJ, 893, 143

    Kawabata, M., Maeda, K., Yamanaka, M., et al. 2020, ApJ, 893, 143

    2020

  70. [70]

    2025, tardis-sn/tardis: TARDIS v2025.12.28

    Kerzendorf, W., Sim, S., V ogl, C., et al. 2025, tardis-sn/tardis: TARDIS v2025.12.28

    2025

  71. [71]

    Khokhlov, A. M. 1991, A&A, 245, L25

    1991

  72. [72]

    D., et al

    Kim, Y .-L., Rigault, M., Neill, J. D., et al. 2022, PASP, 134, 024505

    2022

  73. [73]

    S., Shappee, B

    Kochanek, C. S., Shappee, B. J., Stanek, K. Z., et al. 2017, PASP, 129, 104502

    2017

  74. [74]

    Kromer, M., Ohlmann, S., & Röpke, F. K. 2017, Mem. Soc. Astron. Italiana, 88, 312

    2017

  75. [75]

    JWST Spectroscopy of SN Ia 2022aaiq and 2024gy: Evidence for Enhanced Central Stable Ni Abundance and a Deflagration-to-Detonation Transition

    Kwok, L. A., Liu, C., Jha, S. W., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.09760 Léget, P.-F., Gangler, E., Mondon, F., et al. 2020, A&A, 636, A46

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  76. [76]

    C., Li, W., Filippenko, A

    Leonard, D. C., Li, W., Filippenko, A. V ., Foley, R. J., & Chornock, R. 2005, ApJ, 632, 450

    2005

  77. [77]

    2026, ApJ, 996, 10

    Li, L., Wang, Z., Liu, J., et al. 2026, ApJ, 996, 10

    2026

  78. [78]

    S., Podsiadlowski, P., et al

    Li, W., Bloom, J. S., Podsiadlowski, P., et al. 2011, Nature, 480, 348

    2011

  79. [79]

    1995, Masters thesis (Univ

    Lira, P. 1995, Masters thesis (Univ. Chile)

    1995

  80. [80]

    & Miller, A

    Liu, C. & Miller, A. A. 2026, PASP, 138, 024503

    2026

Showing first 80 references.