pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.10002 · v1 · pith:QSRCGT2Vnew · submitted 2026-06-08 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE

Failed jet breakout in the metal-poor broad-lined type Ic supernova 2026gzf

Antonio Martin-Carrillo , Christina C. Th\"one , James K. Leung , Gregory Corcoran , Antonio de Ugarte Postigo , Peter G. Jonker , Luca Izzo , Andrew J. Levan
show 98 more authors
Benjamin P. Gompertz St\'ephane Basa Nikhil Sarin Jonathan Quirola-V\'asquez Rob A. J. Eyles-Ferris Riccardo Brivio Alan M. Watson Laura Cotter Jennifer Alexandra Chac\'on Andrea Rossi Andrea Melandri Piramon Kumnurdmanee Nial R. Tanvir Anshika Gupta Franz E. Bauer Jean-Gr\'egoire Ducoin Andrea Reguitti Kuntal Misra Dong Xu Susanna D. Vergani Wen-fai Fong Kendall Ackley Edilberto Aguilar-Ruiz Dalya Akl Miguel \'Angel Aloy Jie An Camila Angulo-Valdez Sarah Antier Jean-Luc Atteia Rosa L. Becerra Rene P. Breton Nathaniel R. Butler Sergio Campana Francesco Carotenuto Jorge Casares Vel\'azquez Ashley A. Chrimes Valerio D'Elia Joyce N. D. van Dalen Fabio De Colle Massimiliano De Pasquale Vik S. Dhillon Damien Dornic Martin J. Dyer Matteo Ferro Morgan Fraser Andrew S. Fruchter Francis Fortin Duncan K. Galloway Leonardo Garc\'ia-Garc\'ia Stefan Geier Ramandeep Gill No\'emie Globus Roberto Gualandi Marion Guelfand Francesco Guidolin Dieter H. Hartmann Agnes P. C. van Hoof Pall Jakobsson Divyanshu Janghel Tom L. Killestein Sylvio Klose Shiho Kobayashi Rubina Kotak Amit Kumar Asuka Kuwata Tanmoy Laskar William H. Lee Massimiliano Lincetto Gianluca Lombardi Diego L\'opez-C\'amara Joseph D. Lyman Elisabetta Maiorano Keiichi Maeda Nikos Mandarakas Francesco Magnani Jirong Mao Enrique Moreno M\'endez Ana Mar\'ia Nicuesa Guelbenzu Kanthanakorn Noysena Laura K. Nuttall Paul T. O'Brien David O'Neill Paolo Ochner Margarita Pereyra Giovanna Pugliese Gavin Ramsay Lauren Rhodes Andrea Saccardi Ruben Salvaterra Fredd S\'anchez \'Alvarez Benjamin Schneider Steve Schulze Rhaana L. C. Starling Danny Steeghs Kzrysztof Ulaczyk Chiara Ventura Tayyaba Zafar Zi-Pei Zhu
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-27 15:26 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE
keywords supernovabroad-lined Icchoked jetshock breakoutcircumstellar materialradio non-detectiongamma-ray burst associationrelativistic jet
0
0 comments X

The pith

SN 2026gzf shows a relativistic jet choked inside its circumstellar shell.

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

The paper examines supernova 2026gzf, which was linked to an X-ray shock-breakout detection at low redshift. Despite initial expansion speeds near 30,000 km/s and a detected circumstellar shell of about 0.07 solar masses, there is no clear radio or shocked cocoon emission through 54 days. These observations favor the interpretation that a jet formed but stalled before escaping the star. This marks the first Ic-BL supernova with prompt high-energy emission yet without jet breakout signatures, offering a direct probe into why some massive star explosions produce observable jets while others do not.

Core claim

The absence of compelling shocked cocoon and radio emission up to 54 days, combined with initial expansion velocities of ~30,000 km/s and a circumstellar shell of ~0.07 M⊙, favour a scenario for SN 2026gzf in which a jet was choked in the circumstellar shell. The progenitor occurred in a low-metallicity environment between two star-forming regions, providing the first case of an Ic-BL SN associated with high-energy prompt emission without jet signatures.

What carries the argument

The choked-jet scenario in the circumstellar shell, inferred from non-detection of radio and cocoon emission together with measured high velocities and shell mass.

If this is right

  • Some Ic-BL supernovae can launch jets that fail to emerge without requiring off-axis geometry.
  • Circumstellar shells of order 0.07 solar masses can quench jet propagation in massive star deaths.
  • Low-metallicity environments may still permit jet formation even if breakout fails.
  • Prompt high-energy emission can occur without producing the usual long-term jet signatures in supernovae.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Choked jets could contribute to the observed mismatch between gamma-ray burst rates and broad-lined Ic supernova rates.
  • Targeted radio follow-up of future shock-breakout events could identify additional choked-jet cases.
  • The low-metallicity location raises the possibility that progenitor metallicity influences jet choking probability.

Load-bearing premise

Non-detections of radio and cocoon emission up to 54 days can be attributed specifically to a choked jet rather than an off-axis view or a baryon-loaded jet.

What would settle it

Quantitative modeling that predicts detectable radio or cocoon emission levels for an off-axis or baryon-loaded jet at the observed epochs, or later detection of such emission, would rule out the choked-jet interpretation.

read the original abstract

A long-standing question in the death of massive stars is the role of relativistic jets. While many gamma-ray bursts and some fast X-ray transients seem to be associated with broad-lined type Ic supernovae, the opposite is not true. The lack of observable jet emission in those Ic-BL SNe can be explained by invoking off-axis jets, choked jets that inject all their energy into the stellar envelope, baryon-loaded jets for which the prompt high-energy emission is strongly suppressed, or non-jetted SNe. The lack of exact explosion time in the majority of SNe presents an obstacle to distinguish between these scenarios. Here we report the properties of SN 2026gzf associated with the X-ray thermal Einstein Probe shock-breakout EP260321a at z=0.0343. The absence of compelling shocked cocoon and radio emission up to 54 days, combined with initial expansion velocities of ~30,000 km/s and a circumstellar shell of ~0.07 M$_\odot$, favour a scenario for SN 2026gzf in which a jet was choked in the circumstellar shell. Our high-spatial resolution images of the SN environment show that the progenitor was located between two highly star-forming regions with a metallicity lower than any previously known Ic-BL SN. As the first case of a Ic-BL SN associated with high-energy prompt emission without the signature of a jet, SN 2026gzf provides a unique perspective to understand the successful launch of relativistic jets during the deaths of massive stars.

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

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports observations of the broad-lined type Ic supernova 2026gzf at z=0.0343, associated with the X-ray thermal shock-breakout EP260321a. It measures initial expansion velocities of ~30,000 km/s and infers a circumstellar shell of ~0.07 M⊙, while noting the absence of compelling shocked cocoon or radio emission through 54 days. The authors interpret this combination as favoring a choked jet scenario inside the circumstellar shell, rather than off-axis, baryon-loaded, or non-jetted alternatives, and highlight the low-metallicity progenitor environment between star-forming regions as the first such Ic-BL case with prompt emission but no jet signature.

Significance. If the central interpretation is substantiated, the result would add a valuable observational anchor for distinguishing jet outcomes in core-collapse events, particularly in metal-poor environments, and constrain the parameter space for successful relativistic jet breakout. The association with prompt high-energy emission without subsequent jet signatures is potentially distinctive, though the significance is limited by the current lack of quantitative discrimination among scenarios.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The claim that non-detections of radio and cocoon emission up to 54 days, combined with v~30,000 km/s and a 0.07 M⊙ shell, favor a choked jet over off-axis or baryon-loaded alternatives is not supported by any forward modeling of expected emission levels (radio light curves, X-ray fluxes, or cocoon signatures) for those alternatives at the observed parameters. Without such comparisons, the attribution remains qualitative.
  2. [Abstract / observational results] The manuscript provides no error analysis, model grids, or quantitative upper limits on emission for the non-detections (as noted in the observational summary), which are required to assess whether the data actually rule out the enumerated alternatives rather than merely being consistent with a choked jet.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states the shell mass as ~0.07 M⊙ without referencing the section or method (e.g., light-curve modeling or spectral fitting) used to derive it.
  2. [Abstract] High-spatial-resolution imaging of the environment is mentioned but lacks details on the instrument, resolution achieved, or how the metallicity was quantified relative to prior Ic-BL samples.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thorough review and constructive comments. We address each major comment below and will revise the manuscript to strengthen the quantitative aspects of the interpretation.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The claim that non-detections of radio and cocoon emission up to 54 days, combined with v~30,000 km/s and a 0.07 M⊙ shell, favor a choked jet over off-axis or baryon-loaded alternatives is not supported by any forward modeling of expected emission levels (radio light curves, X-ray fluxes, or cocoon signatures) for those alternatives at the observed parameters. Without such comparisons, the attribution remains qualitative.

    Authors: We agree that the current argument is qualitative and would benefit from quantitative support. In the revised manuscript we will add forward modeling of expected radio light curves, X-ray fluxes, and cocoon emission signatures for the off-axis, baryon-loaded, and non-jetted scenarios using the observed expansion velocity and circumstellar shell mass to enable direct comparison with the 54-day non-detections. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract / observational results] The manuscript provides no error analysis, model grids, or quantitative upper limits on emission for the non-detections (as noted in the observational summary), which are required to assess whether the data actually rule out the enumerated alternatives rather than merely being consistent with a choked jet.

    Authors: We acknowledge that quantitative upper limits and error analysis are needed to rigorously discriminate among scenarios. The revised version will incorporate error analysis on the non-detections, explicit quantitative upper limits on radio and X-ray fluxes, and model grids where feasible to evaluate the alternative models against the observations. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: purely observational interpretation of measured quantities against external models

full rationale

The paper reports direct observations (non-detections of radio/cocoon emission to 54 days, expansion velocity ~30,000 km/s, circumstellar shell mass ~0.07 M⊙) and compares them qualitatively to existing scenarios for jet behavior in Ic-BL SNe. No derivation chain, equations, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, or self-citation load-bearing steps are present. The central claim is an interpretive preference based on absence of expected signatures, not a reduction to the paper's own inputs by construction. This is self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard domain models of jet propagation and emission in supernovae plus measured parameters from the new observations; no new entities are postulated.

free parameters (1)
  • circumstellar shell mass = ~0.07 M_sun
    Value of ~0.07 solar masses is derived from the data to support the choked-jet interpretation.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Established models for radio and cocoon emission from successful, off-axis, and choked jets are sufficiently distinct that non-detection up to 54 days selects the choked-jet case.
    The paper invokes these models to interpret the absence of emission as evidence for a choked jet.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 6400 in / 1297 out tokens · 33450 ms · 2026-06-27T15:26:44.736812+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Pinning Down the Geometry of the Type Ic Broad-Line Supernova 2026gzf

    astro-ph.HE 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Spectropolarimetry of SN 2026gzf indicates mostly spherical ejecta with axisymmetric Ca distribution viewed at ~40° from symmetry axis.

  2. Discovery of a Supernova Following the Einstein Probe Transient EP250302a at z = 1.131

    astro-ph.HE 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    The paper identifies supernova emission matching a scaled SN 1998bw template in the late-time light curve of EP250302a at z=1.131, with early data constraining the jet Lorentz factor above 25.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

126 extracted references · 3 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    & Wu, X.-F

    Cano, Z., Wang, S.-Q., Dai, Z.-G. & Wu, X.-F. The Observer’s Guide to the Gamma-Ray Burst Supernova Connection.Advances in Astronomy2017, 8929054 (2017)

    2017

  2. [2]

    & Martin-Carrillo, A

    Finneran, G., Cotter, L. & Martin-Carrillo, A. The GRBSN webtool: An open- source repository for gamma-ray burst-supernova associations.Astronomy and Computing52, 100954 (2025)

    2025

  3. [3]

    van Dalen, J. N. D.et al.The Einstein Probe Transient EP240414a: Linking Fast X-Ray Transients, Gamma-Ray Bursts, and Luminous Fast Blue Optical Transients.Astrophys. J. Lett.982, L47 (2025)

    2025

  4. [4]

    URL https: //doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/acd3f2

    Corsi, A.et al.A search for relativistic ejecta in a sample of ztf broad-lined type ic supernovae.The Astrophysical Journal953, 179 (2023). URL https: //doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/acd3f2

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acd3f2 2023

  5. [5]

    J.995, 61 (2025)

    Schroeder, G.et al.A Late-time Radio Search for Highly Off-axis Jets from PTF Broad-lined Ic Supernovae in GRB-like Host Galaxy Environments.Astrophys. J.995, 61 (2025)

    2025

  6. [6]

    & Pian, E

    Piran, T., Nakar, E., Mazzali, P. & Pian, E. Relativistic Jets in Core-collapse Supernovae.Astrophys. J. Lett.871, L25 (2019)

    2019

  7. [7]

    & Tanaka, M

    Hamidani, H., Ioka, K., Kashiyama, K. & Tanaka, M. Gamma-Ray Burst Jets in Circumstellar Material: Dynamics, Breakout, and Diversity of Transients. Astrophys. J.988, 30 (2025)

    2025

  8. [8]

    F., Dai, Z

    Huang, Y. F., Dai, Z. G. & Lu, T. Failed gamma-ray bursts and orphan afterglows.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.332, 735–740 (2002)

    2002

  9. [9]

    J.et al.An unusual supernova in the error box of theγ-ray burst of 25 April 1998.Nature395, 670–672 (1998)

    Galama, T. J.et al.An unusual supernova in the error box of theγ-ray burst of 25 April 1998.Nature395, 670–672 (1998)

    1998

  10. [10]

    Campana, S.et al.The association of GRB 060218 with a supernova and the evolution of the shock wave.Nature442, 1008–1010 (2006)

    2006

  11. [11]

    Starling, R. L. C.et al.Discovery of the nearby long, soft GRB 100316D with an associated supernova.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.411, 2792–2803 (2011)

    2011

  12. [12]

    Izzo,L.et al.Signaturesofajetcocooninearlyspectraofasupernovaassociated with aγ-ray burst.Nature565, 324–327 (2019)

    2019

  13. [13]

    Srivastav, S.et al.Identification of the Optical Counterpart of the Fast X-Ray Transient EP240414a.Astrophys. J. Lett.978, L21 (2025). 44

    2025

  14. [14]

    Sun, H.et al.A fast X-ray transient from a weak relativistic jet associated with a type Ic-BL supernova.Nature Astronomy9, 1073–1085 (2025)

    2025

  15. [15]

    Eyles-Ferris, R. A. J.et al.The Kangaroo’s First Hop: The Early Fast Cooling Phase of EP250108a/SN 2025kg.Astrophys. J. Lett.988, L14 (2025)

    2025

  16. [16]

    C.et al.EP 250108a/SN 2025kg: Observations of the Most Nearby Broad-line Type Ic Supernova Following an Einstein Probe Fast X-Ray Transient.Astrophys

    Rastinejad, J. C.et al.EP 250108a/SN 2025kg: Observations of the Most Nearby Broad-line Type Ic Supernova Following an Einstein Probe Fast X-Ray Transient.Astrophys. J. Lett.988, L13 (2025)

    2025

  17. [17]

    P.et al.EP250108a/SN 2025kg: A Jet-driven Stellar Explosion Interacting with Circumstellar Material.Astrophys

    Srinivasaragavan, G. P.et al.EP250108a/SN 2025kg: A Jet-driven Stellar Explosion Interacting with Circumstellar Material.Astrophys. J. Lett.988, L60 (2025)

    2025

  18. [18]

    URL https://arxiv.org/abs/ 2606.06213

    Cotter, L.et al.Probing a new subclass of llgrb-sn transients: Insights from ep250304a and its associated supernova (2026). URL https://arxiv.org/abs/ 2606.06213. arXiv:2606.06213

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  19. [19]

    P.et al.EP250827b/SN 2025wkm: An X-ray Flash- Supernova Powered by a Central Engine and Circumstellar Interaction.arXiv e-printsarXiv:2512.10239 (2025)

    Srinivasaragavan, G. P.et al.EP250827b/SN 2025wkm: An X-ray Flash- Supernova Powered by a Central Engine and Circumstellar Interaction.arXiv e-printsarXiv:2512.10239 (2025)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  20. [20]

    M.et al.Relativistic ejecta from X-ray flash XRF 060218 and the rate of cosmic explosions.Nature442, 1014–1017 (2006)

    Soderberg, A. M.et al.Relativistic ejecta from X-ray flash XRF 060218 and the rate of cosmic explosions.Nature442, 1014–1017 (2006)

    2006

  21. [21]

    A.et al.The Metamorphosis of Supernova SN 2008D/XRF 080109: A Link Between Supernovae and GRBs/Hypernovae.Science321, 1185 (2008)

    Mazzali, P. A.et al.The Metamorphosis of Supernova SN 2008D/XRF 080109: A Link Between Supernovae and GRBs/Hypernovae.Science321, 1185 (2008)

    2008

  22. [22]

    J.702, 226–248 (2009)

    Modjaz,M.et al.FromShockBreakouttoPeakandBeyond:ExtensivePanchro- matic Observations of the Type Ib Supernova 2008D Associated with Swift X-ray Transient 080109.Astrophys. J.702, 226–248 (2009)

    2009

  23. [23]

    M.et al.An extremely luminous X-ray outburst at the birth of a supernova.Nature453, 469–474 (2008)

    Soderberg, A. M.et al.An extremely luminous X-ray outburst at the birth of a supernova.Nature453, 469–474 (2008)

    2008

  24. [24]

    Q., Bianco, F

    Modjaz, M., Liu, Y. Q., Bianco, F. B. & Graur, O. The Spectral SN-GRB Connection: Systematic Spectral Comparisons between Type Ic Supernovae and Broad-lined Type Ic Supernovae with and without Gamma-Ray Bursts. Astrophys. J.832, 108 (2016)

    2016

  25. [25]

    P.et al.Optical and Radio Analysis of Systematically Classified Broad-lined Type Ic Supernovae from the Zwicky Transient Facility

    Srinivasaragavan, G. P.et al.Optical and Radio Analysis of Systematically Classified Broad-lined Type Ic Supernovae from the Zwicky Transient Facility. Astrophys. J.976, 71 (2024)

    2024

  26. [26]

    & Martin-Carrillo, A

    Finneran, G., Cotter, L. & Martin-Carrillo, A. Velocity evolution of broad-lined type-Ic supernovae with and without gamma-ray bursts.Astron. Astrophys. 700, A200 (2025). 45

    2025

  27. [27]

    Astrophys.639, L11 (2020)

    Izzo,L.et al.Broad-linetypeIcSN2020bvc.Signaturesofanoff-axisgamma-ray burst afterglow.Astron. Astrophys.639, L11 (2020)

    2020

  28. [28]

    & Zhang, B

    Zheng, J.-H., Zhu, J.-P., Lu, W. & Zhang, B. EP240414a: Off-axis View of a Jet-cocoon System from an Expanded Progenitor Star.Astrophys. J.985, 21 (2025)

    2025

  29. [29]

    Zheng, J.-H. & Lu, W. Fast X-Ray Transients Produced by Off-axis Jet Cocoons from Long Gamma-Ray Bursts.Astrophys. J. Lett.1003, L19 (2026)

    2026

  30. [30]

    J.et al.EP260321a: Einstein Probe detection of an X-ray transient

    Huang, Q. J.et al.EP260321a: Einstein Probe detection of an X-ray transient. GRB Coordinates Network44068, 1 (2026)

    2026

  31. [31]

    J.et al.EP260321a: refined analysis of the EP-WXT and EP-FXT observations, implying a possible supernova shock breakout candidate.GRB Coordinates Network44075, 1 (2026)

    Huang, Q. J.et al.EP260321a: refined analysis of the EP-WXT and EP-FXT observations, implying a possible supernova shock breakout candidate.GRB Coordinates Network44075, 1 (2026)

    2026

  32. [32]

    Yuan, W. & et al. Thermal X-rays breaking out from pre-explosion ejecta of a dying massive star.submitted(2026)

    2026

  33. [33]

    Lee, M.-H.et al.EP260321a: Kinder observations detect a blue variable star and set limits on a source from the z =0.034 galaxy within the error circle.GRB Coordinates Network44070, 1 (2026)

    2026

  34. [34]

    Transient Name Server Discovery Report2026-1247, 1 (2026)

    Chambers,K.C.et al.Pan-STARRSTransientDiscoveryReportfor2026-03-23. Transient Name Server Discovery Report2026-1247, 1 (2026)

    2026

  35. [35]

    EP260321a: ZTF and Rubin detections of the candidate optical counterpart to EP260321a

    Ahumada,T.,Hall,X.J.,Perley,D.A.&ZwickyTransientFacility. EP260321a: ZTF and Rubin detections of the candidate optical counterpart to EP260321a. GRB Coordinates Network44084, 1 (2026)

    2026

  36. [36]

    Chen, T.-W. & et al. Precursor activity and early circumstellar interaction in an Ic-BL supernova.submitted(2026)

    2026

  37. [37]

    Ho, A. Y. Q.et al.Evidence for Late-stage Eruptive Mass Loss in the Progen- itor to SN2018gep, a Broad-lined Ic Supernova: Pre-explosion Emission and a Rapidly Rising Luminous Transient.Astrophys. J.887, 169 (2019)

    2019

  38. [38]

    Astrophys

    Pignata, G.et al.SN 2009bb: A Peculiar Broad-lined Type Ic Supernova. Astrophys. J.728, 14 (2011)

    2011

  39. [39]

    Astrophys

    Yamanaka, M.et al.Broad-lined Supernova 2016coi with a Helium Envelope. Astrophys. J.837, 1 (2017)

    2017

  40. [40]

    Astrophys

    Terreran, G.et al.SN 2016coi (ASASSN-16fp): An Energetic H-stripped Core- collapse Supernova from a Massive Stellar Progenitor with Large Mass Loss. Astrophys. J.883, 147 (2019). 46

    2019

  41. [41]

    J.814, 1 (2015)

    Laskar, T.et al.Energy Injection in Gamma-Ray Burst Afterglows.Astrophys. J.814, 1 (2015)

    2015

  42. [42]

    A.et al.The O3N2 and N2 abundance indicators revisited: improved calibrations based on CALIFA and Te-based literature data.Astron

    Marino, R. A.et al.The O3N2 and N2 abundance indicators revisited: improved calibrations based on CALIFA and Te-based literature data.Astron. Astrophys. 559, A114 (2013)

    2013

  43. [43]

    & Aguilera-Dena, D

    De Colle, F., Kumar, P. & Aguilera-Dena, D. R. Radio Emission from the Cocoon of a GRB Jet: Implications for Relativistic Supernovae and Off-axis GRB Emission.Astrophys. J.863, 32 (2018)

    2018

  44. [44]

    D.et al.The broad-lined type Ic supernova 2020lao experienced an energetic explosion with no central-engine signatures.Astron

    Stritzinger, M. D.et al.The broad-lined type Ic supernova 2020lao experienced an energetic explosion with no central-engine signatures.Astron. Astrophys. 708, A305 (2026)

    2026

  45. [45]

    Astrophys.621, A71 (2019)

    Taddia, F.et al.Analysis of broad-lined Type Ic supernovae from the (intermediate) Palomar Transient Factory.Astron. Astrophys.621, A71 (2019)

    2019

  46. [46]

    E., Heger, A

    Woosley, S. E., Heger, A. & Weaver, T. A. The evolution and explosion of massive stars.Reviews of Modern Physics74, 1015–1071 (2002)

    2002

  47. [47]

    Fryer, C. L. Mass Limits For Black Hole Formation.Astrophys. J.522, 413–418 (1999)

    1999

  48. [48]

    Mass Loss: Its Effect on the Evolution and Fate of High-Mass Stars

    Smith, N. Mass Loss: Its Effect on the Evolution and Fate of High-Mass Stars. Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys.52, 487–528 (2014)

    2014

  49. [49]

    P., Grassitelli, L

    Gräfener, G., Owocki, S. P., Grassitelli, L. & Langer, N. On the optically thick winds of Wolf-Rayet stars.Astron. Astrophys.608, A34 (2017)

    2017

  50. [50]

    J.892, 153 (2020)

    Modjaz, M.et al.Host Galaxies of Type Ic and Broad-lined Type Ic Supernovae fromthePalomarTransientFactory:ImplicationsforJetProduction.Astrophys. J.892, 153 (2020)

    2020

  51. [51]

    & Fruchter, A

    Kangas, T. & Fruchter, A. S. The Late-time Radio Behavior of Gamma-ray Burst Afterglows: Testing the Standard Model.Astrophys. J.911, 14 (2021)

    2021

  52. [52]

    Aihara, H.et al.The Hyper Suprime-Cam SSP Survey: Overview and survey design.Publ. Astron. Soc. Jpn70, S4 (2018)

    2018

  53. [53]

    F.et al.The SAMI galaxy survey: exploring the gas-phase mass- metallicity relation.Mon

    Sánchez, S. F.et al.The SAMI galaxy survey: exploring the gas-phase mass- metallicity relation.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.484, 3042–3070 (2019)

    2019

  54. [54]

    VLT/X-Shooter emission- line spectroscopy of 96γ-ray-burst-selected galaxies at 0.1 <z < 3.6.Astron

    Krühler, T.et al.GRB hosts through cosmic time. VLT/X-Shooter emission- line spectroscopy of 96γ-ray-burst-selected galaxies at 0.1 <z < 3.6.Astron. Astrophys.581, A125 (2015). 47

    2015

  55. [55]

    H.et al.The Wolf-Rayet features and mass-metallicity relation of long-duration gamma-ray burst host galaxies.Astron

    Han, X. H.et al.The Wolf-Rayet features and mass-metallicity relation of long-duration gamma-ray burst host galaxies.Astron. Astrophys.514, A24 (2010)

    2010

  56. [56]

    Della Valle, M.et al.An enigmatic long-lastingγ-ray burst not accompanied by a bright supernova.Nature444, 1050–1052 (2006)

    2006

  57. [57]

    Astrophys.490, 45–59 (2008)

    Christensen, L.et al.IFU observations of the GRB 980425/SN 1998bw host galaxy: emission line ratios in GRB regions.Astron. Astrophys.490, 45–59 (2008)

    2008

  58. [58]

    L., Filippenko, A

    Kelly, P. L., Filippenko, A. V., Fox, O. D., Zheng, W. & Clubb, K. I. Evidence that Gamma-Ray Burst 130702A Exploded in a Dwarf Satellite of a Massive Galaxy.Astrophys. J. Lett.775, L5 (2013)

    2013

  59. [59]

    Astrophys.566, A102 (2014)

    Schulze, S.et al.GRB 120422A/SN 2012bz: Bridging the gap between low- and high-luminosity gamma-ray bursts.Astron. Astrophys.566, A102 (2014)

    2014

  60. [60]

    C.et al.The host of the SN-less GRB 060505 in high resolution

    Thöne, C. C.et al.The host of the SN-less GRB 060505 in high resolution. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.441, 2034–2048 (2014)

    2034

  61. [61]

    Izzo, L.et al.The MUSE view of the host galaxy of GRB 100316D.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.472, 4480–4496 (2017)

    2017

  62. [62]

    E.et al.The luminous, massive and solar metallicity galaxy hosting the Swiftγ-ray burst GRB 160804A at z = 0.737.Mon

    Heintz, K. E.et al.The luminous, massive and solar metallicity galaxy hosting the Swiftγ-ray burst GRB 160804A at z = 0.737.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 474, 2738–2749 (2018)

    2018

  63. [63]

    Astrophys.605,A107(2017)

    Cano, Z.et al.GRB 161219B/SN 2016jca: A low-redshift gamma-ray burst supernovapoweredbyradioactiveheating.Astron. Astrophys.605,A107(2017)

    2017

  64. [64]

    Astrophys.620, A190 (2018)

    de Ugarte Postigo, A.et al.The luminous host galaxy, faint supernova and rapid afterglow rebrightening of GRB 100418A.Astron. Astrophys.620, A190 (2018)

    2018

  65. [65]

    Melandri, A.et al.GRB 171010A/SN 2017htp: a GRB-SN at z = 0.33.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.490, 5366–5374 (2019)

    2019

  66. [66]

    A detailed host analysis using ALMA, the HST, and the VLT.Astron

    de Ugarte Postigo, A.et al.GRB 190114C in the nuclear region of an interacting galaxy. A detailed host analysis using ALMA, the HST, and the VLT.Astron. Astrophys.633, A68 (2020)

    2020

  67. [67]

    C.et al.The host of GRB 171205A in 3D: A resolved multiwavelength study of a rare grand-design spiral GRB host.Astron

    Thöne, C. C.et al.The host of GRB 171205A in 3D: A resolved multiwavelength study of a rare grand-design spiral GRB host.Astron. Astrophys.690, A66 (2024)

    2024

  68. [68]

    T.et al.Are long gamma-ray bursts biased tracers of star for- mation? Clues from the host galaxies of the Swift/BAT6 complete sample of bright LGRBs

    Palmerio, J. T.et al.Are long gamma-ray bursts biased tracers of star for- mation? Clues from the host galaxies of the Swift/BAT6 complete sample of bright LGRBs. III. Stellar masses, star formation rates, and metallicities at z > 48 1.Astron. Astrophys.623, A26 (2019)

    2019

  69. [69]

    A preference of hydrogen-poor events for extreme emission line galaxies.Mon

    Leloudas, G.et al.Spectroscopy of superluminous supernova host galaxies. A preference of hydrogen-poor events for extreme emission line galaxies.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.449, 917–932 (2015)

    2015

  70. [70]

    A.et al.Host-galaxy Properties of 32 Low-redshift Superluminous Supernovae from the Palomar Transient Factory.Astrophys

    Perley, D. A.et al.Host-galaxy Properties of 32 Low-redshift Superluminous Supernovae from the Palomar Transient Factory.Astrophys. J.830, 13 (2016)

    2016

  71. [71]

    Schulze, S.et al.Cosmic evolution and metal aversion in superluminous supernova host galaxies.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.473, 1258–1285 (2018)

    2018

  72. [72]

    & others

    Corcoran, G. & others. EP250827b.Astrophys. J.(2026)

    2026

  73. [73]

    Ahumada, R.et al.The 16th Data Release of the Sloan Digital Sky Surveys: First Release from the APOGEE-2 Southern Survey and Full Release of eBOSS Spectra.Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser.249, 3 (2020)

    2020

  74. [74]

    Planck Collaborationet al.Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters. Astron. Astrophys.641, A6 (2020)

    2018

  75. [75]

    Steeghs, D.et al.The Gravitational-wave Optical Transient Observer (GOTO): prototypeperformanceandprospectsfortransientscience.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.511, 2405–2422 (2022)

    2022

  76. [76]

    J.et al.Marshall, H

    Dyer, M. J.et al.Marshall, H. K., Spyromilio, J. & Usuda, T. (eds)The Gravitational-wave Optical Transient Observer (GOTO). (eds Marshall, H. K., Spyromilio, J. & Usuda, T.)Ground-based and Airborne Telescopes X, Vol. 13094ofSociety of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, 130941X (2024). arXiv:2407.17176

    arXiv 2024

  77. [77]

    P.et al.Searching for electromagnetic counterparts to gravitational-wave merger events with the prototype Gravitational-Wave Opti- cal Transient Observer (GOTO-4).Mon

    Gompertz, B. P.et al.Searching for electromagnetic counterparts to gravitational-wave merger events with the prototype Gravitational-Wave Opti- cal Transient Observer (GOTO-4).Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.497, 726–738 (2020)

    2020

  78. [78]

    Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society8, 6 (2024)

    Belkin, S.et al.GRB 230911A: The First Discovery of a Fermi GRB Optical Counterpart with the Gravitational-wave Optical Transient Observer (GOTO). Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society8, 6 (2024)

    2024

  79. [79]

    Kumar, A.et al.Discovery and analysis of afterglows from poorly localized GRBs with the Gravitational-wave Optical Transient Observer (GOTO) All-sky Survey.Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.544, 1541–1587 (2025)

    2025

  80. [80]

    D.et al.The Gravitational-wave Optical Transient Observer (GOTO) data pipeline and workflow for transient discovery.arXiv e-prints arXiv:2603.02330 (2026)

    Lyman, J. D.et al.The Gravitational-wave Optical Transient Observer (GOTO) data pipeline and workflow for transient discovery.arXiv e-prints arXiv:2603.02330 (2026). 49

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

Showing first 80 references.