Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 2 cited by

Environmental Dependence of Type Ia Supernova Luminosities from the YONSEI Supernova Catalog

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Type Ia supernovae in low-mass, star-forming host galaxies are intrinsically fainter by $0.06$-$0.08$ mag after standard light-curve corrections, and this offset most plausibly reflects progenitor age and hence luminosity evolution with…

desk verdict Careful large-sample confirmation of the known SN Ia host-mass step; the 'local-environment' result is a global-property proxy and the abstract oversells it. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.10375 v1 pith:DB4YKO2X submitted 2019-08-27 astro-ph.CO astro-ph.GA

Young-Lo Kim (1 , 2) , Yijung Kang (2) , Young-Wook Lee (2) ((1) CNRS/IN2P3/IPNL , (2) Yonsei University) This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.COastro-ph.GA
keywords TypeIasupernovaehostgalaxystellarmassspecificstarformationrateHubbleresidualsluminosityevolutionSALT2MLCS2k2YONSEIcatalog
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper builds a large, combined catalog of 1231 spectroscopically confirmed Type Ia supernovae and their host galaxies, fitted with two independent light-curve codes, and uses it to ask whether the supernovae's corrected brightness still depends on where they explode. It finds that supernovae in low-mass, star-forming host galaxies are $0.062\pm0.009$ mag fainter (SALT2) and $0.057\pm0.010$ mag fainter (MLCS2k2) than those in high-mass, passive hosts after standard shape and color corrections. When the comparison is restricted to the supernova's local environment rather than the whole galaxy, the offset grows to about $0.08$ mag. Because these environments differ sharply in stellar age, the paper takes this as evidence that the remaining offset is an intrinsic, age-driven luminosity evolution of Type Ia supernovae with redshift, not a correctable nuisance. The claim matters because if it is right, standard light-curve standardization leaves a systematic bias in supernova distances that must be understood before supernovae can anchor cosmology.

What carries the argument

The engine of the measurement is the Hubble residual, $\mathrm{HR}\equiv\mu_{\mathrm{SN}}-\mu_{\mathrm{model}}(z)$, the difference between the distance modulus a supernova implies and the distance its redshift predicts in the best-fit cosmological model; a positive residual means the supernova is fainter than the model expects. The paper bins these residuals by host stellar mass (split at $\log M_\star = 10.0$) and by specific star-formation rate (split at $\log\mathrm{sSFR}=-10.4$), with the same light-curve fits run through both SALT2 and MLCS2k2. To extend local-environment information to high redshift, it uses an empirical proxy: locally star-forming sites are selected as supernovae whose hosts are globally star-forming and low-mass, while globally passive hosts are assumed to be locally passive. The age interpretation rests on the known contrast in mean stellar population age between these bins.

What would settle it

Take a sample of low-redshift Type Ia supernovae with directly measured local star-formation activity at the explosion site (e.g., H-alpha or UV flux in a few-kiloparsec aperture) and compare the Hubble-residual offset for locally star-forming versus locally passive sites with the offset predicted by the global-host proxy; if the directly measured local offset is not larger than the global-host offset, the paper's central environmental claim loses its local-enhancement component, and if age-matched hosts show no residual offset, the age-evolution interpretation loses its basis.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper's discovery is that the standardized peak luminosity of a Type Ia supernova still carries a memory of its host environment: after fitting with SALT2 and MLCS2k2, the Hubble residual (the difference between the supernova's distance and the distance its redshift predicts) is larger, meaning the supernova is fainter, in low-mass and star-forming hosts than in high-mass and passive hosts. The catalog yields a global-host difference of $0.062\pm0.009$ mag (SALT2) and $0.057\pm0.010$ mag (MLCS2k2); using the inferred local environment at the explosion site raises these to $0.081\pm0.018$ mag and $0.072\pm0.018$ mag. The authors interpret the larger local offset, together with known stellar-age differences between the environments, as evidence that progenitor age, not merely dust or calibration, drives the effect, so that the mean intrinsic luminosity of Type Ia supernovae evolves over cosmic time as host populations age.

Load-bearing premise

The inference that the enlarged local-environment offsets are real depends on the assumption that a supernova's immediate explosion-site environment can be inferred from its host galaxy's total mass and star-formation rate, with locally star-forming sites identified only in low-mass, globally star-forming hosts and globally passive hosts taken as locally passive.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the offset is real, standard SALT2 and MLCS2k2 distances are systematically biased by about $0.05$-$0.08$ mag depending on host environment, a shift that is not removed by the usual shape and color corrections.
  • Cosmological fits that ignore environment absorb this as altered nuisance parameters; the paper shows $\beta$ and $\sigma_{\mathrm{int}}$ shift between environment-binned fits, and previous work it cites translates this into a roughly 10% shift in $w$ and a 3.3% correction to $H_0$.
  • Supernovae in low-mass, star-forming hosts show smaller rms scatter (up to about 18% smaller) and smaller intrinsic scatter, meaning environment-selected subsamples are more homogeneous distance indicators.
  • If age is the origin, the mean standardized luminosity of Type Ia supernovae should drift with redshift as the universe's host population ages, adding a systematic component to dark-energy measurements that is strongest at $z>1$.
  • The agreement between a high-redshift-trained fitter (SALT2) and a low-redshift-trained fitter (MLCS2k2) indicates the effect is not an artifact of the fitter's training-set redshift mixing.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the age interpretation is right, high-redshift supernova samples should appear systematically fainter after standardization by roughly this $0.06$-$0.08$ mag offset, which could partially mimic dark energy; a clean test would compare Hubble residuals of supernovae at fixed redshift whose hosts have spectroscopically measured Balmer ages.
  • Because the paper's offset is measured on a sample spanning redshifts up to $0.85$, applying it to the low-redshift distance-ladder anchors would shift $H_0$ by a few percent, a change comparable in size to the current Hubble tension; the paper does not perform that application.
  • Because the local-environment proxy uses only global host properties, direct measurement of local star-formation activity at the explosion site (for example H-alpha flux in a few-kiloparsec aperture) for a subset of the sample would determine whether the $0.08$ mag local offset is a real environmental effect or a global-host selection effect.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. Kim, Kang, and Lee construct the YONSEI Type Ia supernova catalog from 1521 light curves (1231 spectroscopically confirmed SNe Ia after cuts) fitted with both SALT2 and MLCS2k2, match 674 hosts to the stellar mass and specific star formation rate data of Kim et al. (2018), and study Hubble residuals as a function of host stellar mass, global sSFR, morphology, and an inferred local environment. They report that SNe Ia in low-mass, star-forming hosts are about 0.06 mag fainter than those in high-mass, passive hosts, and that this difference grows to about 0.08 mag when using their local-environment classification. They interpret the result as evidence that the environmental dependence has a stellar-population-age origin and therefore implies luminosity evolution of SNe Ia with redshift.

Significance. If the global host-mass step is taken at face value, the paper provides a useful independent confirmation of the well-known environmental dependence using a combined low-, intermediate-, and high-redshift sample with two independent light-curve fitters. The rms-scatter results (Table 7), which suggest that SNe Ia in low-mass and star-forming environments are more homogeneous standard candles, are interesting and worth reporting. The catalog itself is a community resource. However, the headline local-environment numbers are not direct measurements of the SN explosion site: they are a re-labelling of global host properties, as the authors state in Section 2.5.1. Until actual local environment indicators (e.g., H-alpha, local sSFR, or local U-V) are used, the 0.08 mag local step and the age/luminosity-evolution conclusion are not separately established beyond the global step. The analysis is traceable to public packages (SNANA and the JLA likelihood), but no machine-checked code is released with the paper.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 2.5.1 and Table 7] The 'local environment' classification is an empirical proxy, not a measurement at the SN site. A SN is assigned to a locally star-forming environment only if its host is globally star-forming and low-mass (log M_stellar < 10), and every globally passive host is assigned to the locally passive class. No local star-formation indicator (H-alpha, local sSFR, or local U-V) is used in this paper. Therefore the quoted differences of 0.081 +/- 0.018 mag (SALT2) and 0.072 +/- 0.018 mag (MLCS2k2) in Table 7 are not direct measurements of the explosion-site conditions; they effectively compare a low-mass, globally star-forming sample with a high-mass-dominated passive sample. The abstract's claim that these are obtained 'when only local environments of SNe Ia are considered' is not supported by the analysis, and the Section 5.1 argument that the local result is 'more directly linked to the SN progenitor' does not follow from these data. Please either use actual local environment measurements or explicitly present the result as a global-property proxy with an associated systematic uncertainty.
  2. [Section 2.2.3, Eq. (2)] The error budget uses only statistical uncertainties, as stated in Section 2.2.3. Systematic uncertainties from photometric calibration, light-curve model training, host-galaxy SED fitting, Malmquist bias corrections, and the adopted classification boundaries (log M = 10.0 and log sSFR = -10.4) are not propagated into the reported HR differences. The 3-5 sigma significances in Tables 7 and 8 are therefore optimistic; a systematic error of even 0.02-0.03 mag on the step would substantially reduce the significance of the sSFR split. Please provide a systematic error budget for the main HR differences, or state explicitly in the abstract and conclusions that the quoted significances are statistical-only.
  3. [Section 2.4.1 and Eq. (1)] The Hubble residuals are computed with alpha, beta, M_B, and Omega_M fitted to the same YONSEI sample, so the light-curve standardization is partly self-referential. This does not force a residual host-mass step, and the authors are careful to note that the residual dependence is not an artifact of the fit. However, the uncertainties on alpha, beta, and M_B are not propagated into the HR differences, and if an environmental step exists, the simultaneous fit of alpha and beta can partially absorb it. As a robustness test, please re-fit alpha and beta on a low-redshift subsample or with an explicit host-mass step term in the distance model, and show that the reported HR differences and significances are stable.
  4. [Table 8 and Section 3.2.1] The LOWZ subsample shows no host-mass step for SALT2 (0.002 +/- 0.072 mag) and only a 1.8-sigma step for MLCS2k2, with a heavily mass-targeted sample (12 low-mass versus 76 high-mass hosts). The claim that the dependence is a 'global phenomenon over the whole redshift range' therefore rests almost entirely on the SDSS and SNLS panels. Please either add a joint statistical test with survey-by-survey offsets or soften the claim to state that the step is robust at intermediate and high redshift but unconstrained in this particular low-redshift sample.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract and Section 5] The abstract and Section 5 quote 0.062 +/- 0.009 mag (SALT2) and 0.057 +/- 0.010 mag (MLCS2k2) for low-mass and star-forming hosts, but Table 7 gives 0.057 +/- 0.014 and 0.065 +/- 0.015 for the mass split, and 0.049 +/- 0.015 and 0.033 +/- 0.016 for the sSFR split; please clarify how the abstract values are derived.
  2. [Tables 5 and 7] The sample counts for the combined host sample do not match between Table 5 (657 for SALT2 mass and sSFR, 373 for local environment) and Table 7 (648 for mass, 649 for sSFR, 368 for local); please reconcile the definitions and counts.
  3. [Section 3.2.1 and Figure 11 caption] There are several typos: 'wih' and 'establisehd' in Section 3.2.1, and 'blaek dashed lines' in the Figure 11 caption.
  4. [First page] The dates 'Received February 30, 2019; accepted February 31, 2019' are not valid calendar dates; please correct them.
  5. [Section 2.4.1] The MLCS2k2 fit reports H0 = 63; since the analysis uses distance moduli, the meaning and role of this H0 value should be stated explicitly or removed.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Local-environment result is a re-labeled global host-property split: §2.5.1 defines 'locally star-forming' by global mass+sSFR cuts and 'locally passive' as all globally passive hosts, so the 0.081 mag 'local' difference reduces by construction to the global split; the age-origin conclusion then leans on same-group Kang et al. (2016).

  1. renaming known result [Section 2.5.1 (Kim et al. 2018 method); Table 7 rows 'sSFR Globally Passive', 'sSFR Locally Passive', and 'sSFR Locally Star-Forming']
    "Kim et al. (2018) introduced an empirical method to infer the local environments, only based on the global properties of host galaxies, such as Mstellar and global sSFR. The main idea is that SNe Ia in locally star-forming environments can be selected when their hosts are globally star-forming and low-mass galaxies. For the SNe Ia exploding in globally passive host galaxies, all of them are also in locally passive environments, which is demonstrated by Rigault et al. (2013)."

    By construction, 'locally star-forming' means the intersection of the global cuts (low log Mstellar < 10 and high global sSFR > -10.4), while 'locally passive' is the entire globally passive sample. Table 7 shows the identity: Globally Passive has N=194 and HR = -0.043, Locally Passive has N=194 and HR = -0.043, while Locally Star-Forming has N=174 and HR = 0.038, giving the quoted 0.081 mag difference. The 'local' result is therefore not a measurement at the SN site; it is a re-labeled subset contrast of the global host-property split. Presenting it as 'when only local environments are considered' and as 'more directly linked to the SN progenitor' imports the authors' prior proxy as if it were local information, and footnote 6 explicitly sends the detailed local analysis to Kim et al.

  2. self citation load bearing [Section 5.1, 'On the Origin of the Environmental Dependence of SN Ia Luminosity']
    "In the recent study of Kang et al. (2016), they employed Balmer absorption lines to determine more reliable population ages and metallicities for 27 early-type host galaxies. From high signal-to-noise observed spectra (≥100 per pixel), they suggested that the stellar population age is mainly responsible for the relation between SN Ia luminosities and host properties at the ∼3.9σ level."

    The abstract's concluding claim—that the origin of the environmental dependence is 'most likely the luminosity evolution of SNe Ia with redshift'—rests on a 'significant difference in the mean stellar population age between the two environments'. That age difference is not measured in the present paper; it is imported from Kang et al. (2016), a same-group study (Kang, Kim, and Lee), and it is combined with the Kim et al. (2018) local-environment proxy. The origin conclusion is therefore supported by a chain of self-citations rather than by an independent test performed on the YONSEI sample, and this citation is load-bearing because the abstract presents luminosity evolution as the main physical conclusion.

full rationale

The global host-mass dependence (0.057-0.065 mag) is an independent empirical result: it is reproduced with two light-curve fitters and agrees with many external studies listed in Table 9, so fitting alpha, beta, and MB to the sample does not force that residual. The circularity is concentrated in the 'local environment' step. Section 2.5.1 defines local environment entirely from global stellar mass and global sSFR, with all globally passive hosts assigned to the locally passive class; hence the 0.081/0.072 mag 'local' differences in Table 7 are a re-labeled subset of the global property split rather than a measurement at the explosion site. The age-based luminosity-evolution conclusion then leans on Kang et al. (2016), another same-group result, making the physical-origin argument partly self-referential. No H-alpha, local sSFR, or local U-V measurements are presented in this paper. Because the central global correlation has independent content but the local interpretation and the origin claim reduce to same-group proxies and citations, a score of 6 is appropriate.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities. It depends on several fitted or literature-fixed parameters (alpha, beta, MB, Omega_M, and the mass/sSFR thresholds) and on prior models for host properties, local environments, and selection bias corrections. These are standard tools in SN cosmology, but they are not independently re-derived here.

free parameters (6)
  • SALT2 alpha = 0.15 (Section 2.4.1, Table 10)
    Light-curve stretch coefficient fitted to the YONSEI cosmology sample; used in the distance modulus (Eq. 1) to compute Hubble residuals and hence the reported luminosity differences.
  • SALT2 beta = 3.69 (Section 2.4.1), 3.07 (Table 10)
    Color coefficient fitted to the sample; directly affects the corrected magnitude and the derived host-dependent HR differences.
  • Absolute magnitude MB = -19.06
    SN absolute magnitude fitted with the JLA likelihood; zero-point shifts alter Hubble residuals.
  • Omega_M = 0.30 (SALT2), 0.43 (MLCS2k2)
    Matter density fitted for the flat LCDM model used to compute the model distance modulus and Hubble residuals.
  • log(Mstellar) split = 10.0
    Host mass threshold taken from Sullivan et al. (2010) and others; directly defines the high-mass versus low-mass groups used in the main result.
  • log(sSFR) split = -10.4
    Specific star formation rate threshold taken from prior literature; defines passive versus star-forming host groups.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Type Ia supernova luminosities follow the Tripp relation (Eq. 1) and can be standardized with light-curve shape and color parameters.
    The entire analysis assumes SALT2 and MLCS2k2 provide unbiased standardization; if the light-curve models are wrong, the residual trends are not meaningful.
  • domain assumption Host galaxy stellar masses and sSFRs from PEGASE.2 SED fitting in Kim et al. (2018) are accurate.
    The host property splits and all host-dependent results rely on these measurements, which are taken from a prior paper by the same group without re-derivation.
  • domain assumption The empirical local environment inference from global host properties (Kim et al. 2018, Section 2.5.1) correctly identifies locally star-forming and locally passive environments.
    This proxy is used for the local environment results; it is only partially validated by Rigault et al. (2013) and is not tested on the full sample.
  • domain assumption Flat Lambda CDM is the correct background cosmology for computing Hubble residuals.
    The model distance modulus used in HRs assumes flat LCDM; if the true cosmology differs, HRs shift, although the relative host differences are less affected.
  • domain assumption External Malmquist bias corrections from Betoule et al. (2014), Rest et al. (2014), and Wood-Vasey et al. (2007) are applicable to the combined YONSEI sample.
    Bias corrections are interpolated from other surveys; any mismatch in selection function would alter the HRs and potentially the host-dependent differences.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Environmental Dependence of Type Ia Supernova Luminosities from the YONSEI Supernova Catalog." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DB4YKO2X

@misc{pith2026190810375,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Environmental Dependence of Type Ia Supernova Luminosities from the YONSEI Supernova Catalog},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DB4YKO2X}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.10375}
}
abstract

There is growing evidence for the dependence of Type Ia supernova (SN Ia) luminosities on their environments. While the impact of this trend on estimating cosmological parameters is widely acknowledged, the origin of this correlation is still under debate. In order to explore this problem, we first construct the YONSEI (YOnsei Nearby Supernova Evolution Investigation) SN catalog. The catalog consists of 1231 spectroscopically confirmed SNe Ia over a wide redshift range (0.01 < z < 1.37) from various SN surveys and includes the light-curve fit data from two independent light-curve fitters of SALT2 and MLCS2k2. For a sample of 674 host galaxies, we use the stellar mass and the star formation rate data in Kim et al. (2018). We find that SNe Ia in low-mass and star-forming host galaxies are $0.062\pm0.009$ mag and $0.057\pm0.010$ mag fainter than those in high-mass and passive hosts, after light-curve corrections with SALT2 and MLCS2k2, respectively. When only local environments of SNe Ia (e.g., locally star-forming and locally passive) are considered, this luminosity difference increases to $0.081\pm0.018$ mag for SALT2 and $0.072\pm0.018$ mag for MLCS2k2. Considering the significant difference in the mean stellar population age between the two environments, this result suggests that the origin of environmental dependence is most likely the luminosity evolution of SNe Ia with redshift.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.10375 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Bias correction for each SN in the YONSEI SN Catalog as a function of redshift. We subtracted this value from all of the rest-frame peak magnitudes in B-band for SALT2 and all of the distance modulus for MLCS2k2 in our sample. and stay longer above the detection threshold than in￾trinsically fainter and fast declining SNe, and hence be easier to observe. This leads to creating a false result of increasing luminosity… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Distribution of SALT2 fit parameters in the YON￾SEI All sample: X1 (left panel) and C (right panel) versus redshift. Faint (low X1) and red (high C) SNe Ia are not found at the higher redshift range. SNe are colored by sur￾veys. The dashed lines indicate our cosmology cut criteria we employed for SALT2 (−3 < X1 < 3 and −0.3 < C < 0.3). -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 ∆ Redshift MLCS2k2 -1.5 -1 -0.5… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (14 more)
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Distribution of shape and color or host extinc￾tion values for SALT2 (upper panel) and MLCS2k2 (lower panel). We expect that peculiar SNe Ia are mostly placed in the scattered region. The dashed lines indicate our cos￾mology cut criteria, and most of peculiar SNe are r…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: YONSEI Hubble–Lemˆaitre diagram and residuals for the SALT2 sample. The solid line represents the best-fit flat ΛCDM cosmology parameters for SNe Ia alone. The values we obtained are ΩM = 0.30, α = 0.15, β = 3.69, and MB = -19.06. HRs from the best-fit are shown in the…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Correlation between HRs obtained from SALT2 and MLCS2k2. They show a good agreement with a mean offset of 0.02 mag, and the value of the correlation coeffi￾cient is 0.86. 718 SNe Ia are cross-matched on SALT2 and MLCS2k2. There is an outlier, 06D2cb in the SNLS sample,…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: SALT2 HRs versus SALT2 C split by SN data. Negative trends are observed in every sample (blue lines with ±1σ ranges). We have also investigated the distribution of our host galaxies in the Mstellar–sSF R plane in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Distribution of the YONSEI host sample in the host galaxy morphology. Only LOWZ (blue histogram) and SDSS (red histogram) samples have host morphological in￾formation (see text). The upper panel shows the distribu￾tion of those samples when we divide hosts as early- a…
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: SALT2 light-curve fit parameters, X1 (top pan￾els) and C (bottom panels), as a function of host galaxy properties for the YONSEI host sample. The red squares represent the weighted means of each light-curve fit param￾eter in bins of host galaxy information. MLCS2k2 -0…
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: Sames as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_18.png]
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: HRs for SALT2 (upper panel) and MLCS2k2 (lower panel) versus host Mstellar. We find that SNe Ia in the low-mass hosts are ∼0.06 mag fainter than those in the high-mass hosts. The red squares represent the weighted means of HRs in bins of host Mstellar. The vertical do…
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: SALT2 HRs versus Mstellar of host galaxies ob￾served by surveys. Each subsample in the different redshift range follows the trend as we found with the YONSEI sam￾ple. 3.2.2. Host Global Specific Star Formation Rate We plot the dependence of SN Ia luminosity on the hos…
Figure 22
Figure 22. Figure 22: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_22.png]
Figure 25
Figure 25. Figure 25: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_25.png]
Figure 26
Figure 26. Figure 26: Comparison of HR differences between previous studies. We find that our results are consistent with the results reported by many previous studies. See [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_26.png]
Figure 27
Figure 27. Figure 27: Luminosity evolution of SNe Ia with respect to the redshift. Each data point is the weighted-mean of HRs in each redshift bin from the YONSEI Cosmology sample for SALT2 (red) and MLCS2k2 (blue). Filled circles are the values with the light-curve corrections, while ope…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. A Simulation Based Inference Approach to Modelling of Type Ia Supernova Populations

    astro-ph.CO 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A simulation-based inference pipeline (Stjörnumál) fits SN Ia dust and intrinsic scatter models to DES 5-year data, enabling fast Bayesian model comparison across seven SN Ia population models.

  2. Reconstructing the redshift evolution of Type Ia supernovae absolute magnitude

    astro-ph.CO 2025-04 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    A Gaussian Process reconstruction finds the Type Ia supernova absolute magnitude is consistent with a constant value, with a redshift-averaged M = -19.456 ± 0.059 that is 3.2 sigma below the SH0ES local calibration.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

102 extracted references · 77 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    W., & Peletier, R

    Balcells, M., Graham, A. W., & Peletier, R. F. 2007, Galac- tic Bulges from Hubble Space Telescope NICMOS Obser- vations: Global Scaling Relations, ApJ, 665, 1104

    2007

  2. [2]

    2009, The ESO/VLT 3rd Year Type Ia Supernova Data Set from the Supernova Legacy Survey, A&A, 507, 85

    Balland, C., Baumont, S., Basa, S., et al. 2009, The ESO/VLT 3rd Year Type Ia Supernova Data Set from the Supernova Legacy Survey, A&A, 507, 85

    2009

  3. [3]

    C., Kulkarni, S

    Bellm, E. C., Kulkarni, S. R., Graham, M. J., et al. 2019, The Zwicky Transient Facility: System Overview, Perfor- mance, and First Results, PASP, 131, 018002

    2019

  4. [4]

    2014, Systematic Effects on the Size-Luminosity Relations of Early- and Late-Type Galaxies: Dependence on Model Fitting and

    Bernardi, M., Meert, A., Vikram, V., et al. 2014, Systematic Effects on the Size-Luminosity Relations of Early- and Late-Type Galaxies: Dependence on Model Fitting and

    2014

  5. [5]

    2014, Improved Cosmological Constraints from a Joint Analysis of the SDSS-II and SNLS Supernova Samples, A&A, 568, A22

    Betoule, M., Kessler, R., Guy, J., et al. 2014, Improved Cosmological Constraints from a Joint Analysis of the SDSS-II and SNLS Supernova Samples, A&A, 568, A22

    2014

  6. [6]

    G., Schaye, J., Frenk, C

    Bower, R. G., Schaye, J., Frenk, C. S., et al. 2017, The Dark Nemesis of Galaxy Formation: Why Hot Haloes Trigger Black Hole Growth and Bring Star Formation to an End, MNRAS, 465, 32

    2017

  7. [7]

    J., Hook, I

    Bronder, T. J., Hook, I. M., Astier, P., et al. 2008, SNLS Spectroscopy: Testing for Evolution in Type Ia Super- novae, A&A, 477, 717

    2008

  8. [8]

    B., Nichol, R

    Campbell, H., D’Andrea, C. B., Nichol, R. C., et al. 2013, Cosmology with Photometrically Classified Type Ia Su- pernovae from the SDSS-II Supernova Survey, ApJ, 763, 88

    2013

Show all 102 references
  1. [9]

    2016, How SN Ia Host-Galaxy Properties Affect Cosmological Parameters, MNRAS, 457, 3470 Environmental Dependence of Type Ia Supernova Luminositie s from the YONSEI SN Catalog 23

    Campbell, H., Fraser, M., & Gilmore, G. 2016, How SN Ia Host-Galaxy Properties Affect Cosmological Parameters, MNRAS, 457, 3470 Environmental Dependence of Type Ia Supernova Luminositie s from the YONSEI SN Catalog 23

    2016

  2. [10]

    M., Alatalo, K., et al

    Cappellari, M., McDermid, R. M., Alatalo, K., et al. 2013, The ATLAS3D Project - XX. Mass-Size and Mass- σ Dis- tributions of Early-Type Galaxies: Bulge Fraction Drives

    2013

  3. [11]

    2013, Hos t Galaxy Properties and Hubble Residuals of Type Ia Su- pernovae from the Nearby Supernova Factory, ApJ, 770, 108

    Childress, M., Aldering, G., Antilogus, P., et al. 2013, Hos t Galaxy Properties and Hubble Residuals of Type Ia Su- pernovae from the Nearby Supernova Factory, ApJ, 770, 108

    2013

  4. [12]

    J., Wolf, C., & Zahid, H

    Childress, M. J., Wolf, C., & Zahid, H. J. 2014, Ages of Type Ia Supernovae over Cosmic Time, MNRAS, 445, 1898

    2014

  5. [13]

    Choi, Y.-Y., Han, D.-H., & Kim, S. S. 2010, Korea Institute for Advanced Study Value-Added Galaxy Catalog, JKAS, 43, 191

    2010

  6. [14]

    2011, Supernova Constraints and Systematic Uncertainties from the First Three Years of the Supernova Legacy Survey, ApJS, 192, 1

    Conley, A., Guy, J., Sullivan, M., et al. 2011, Supernova Constraints and Systematic Uncertainties from the First Three Years of the Supernova Legacy Survey, ApJS, 192, 1

    2011

  7. [15]

    Conroy, C., & Gunn, J. E. 2010, The Propagation of Un- certainties in Stellar Population Synthesis Modeling. III . Model Calibration, Comparison, and Evaluation, ApJ, 712, 833

    2010

  8. [16]

    M., et al

    Contreras, C., Hamuy, M., Phillips, M. M., et al. 2010, The Carnegie Supernova Project: First Photometry Data Re- lease of Low-Redshift Type Ia Supernovae, AJ, 139, 519

    2010

  9. [17]

    A., Schaye, J., Bower, R

    Crain, R. A., Schaye, J., Bower, R. G., et al. 2015, The EAGLE Simulations of Galaxy Formation: Calibration of Subgrid Physics and Model Variations, MNRAS, 450, 1937 D’Andrea, C. B., Gupta, R. R., Sako, M., et al. 2011, Spec- troscopic Properties of Star-forming Host Galaxies ...

    2015

  10. [18]

    S., Loredo, T

    Drell, P. S., Loredo, T. J., & Wasserman, I. 2000, Type IA

    2000

  11. [19]

    P., Andrews, S

    Driver, S. P., Andrews, S. K., da Cunha, E., et al. 2018, GAMA/G10-COSMOS/3D-HST: the 0 < z < 5 Cos- mic Star Formation History, Stellar-Mass, and Dust-Mass

    2018

  12. [20]

    M., Worthey, G., & Gonzales, J

    Faber, S. M., Worthey, G., & Gonzales, J. J. 1992, Absorption-Line Spectra of Elliptical Galaxies and Their Relation to Elliptical Formation, The Stellar Populations of Galaxies, 149, 255

    1992

  13. [21]

    Filippenko, A. V. 1989, Type IA Supernovae in Elliptical and Spiral Galaxies - Possible Differences in Photometric

    1989

  14. [22]

    1997, PEGASE: a UV to NIR Spectral Evolution Model of Galaxies

    Fioc, M., & Rocca-Volmerange, B. 1997, PEGASE: a UV to NIR Spectral Evolution Model of Galaxies. Application to the Calibration of Bright Galaxy Counts., A&A, 326, 950

    1997

  15. [23]

    T., Honscheid, K., et al

    Flaugher, B., Diehl, H. T., Honscheid, K., et al. 2015, The Dark Energy Camera, AJ, 150, 150

    2015

  16. [24]

    J., Filippenko, A

    Foley, R. J., Filippenko, A. V., Aguilera, C., et al. 2008, Constraining Cosmic Evolution of Type Ia Supernovae, ApJ, 684, 68

    2008

  17. [25]

    J., Scolnic, D., Rest, A., et al

    Foley, R. J., Scolnic, D., Rest, A., et al. 2018, The Founda- tion Supernova Survey: Motivation, Design, Implementa- tion, and First Data Release, MNRAS, 475, 193

    2018

  18. [26]

    S., Garnavich, P

    Gallagher, J. S., Garnavich, P. M., Berlind, P., et al. 2005, Chemistry and Star Formation in the Host Galaxies of Type Ia Supernovae, ApJ, 634, 210

    2005

  19. [27]

    S., Garnavich, P

    Gallagher, J. S., Garnavich, P. M., Caldwell, N., et al. 2008 , Supernovae in Early-Type Galaxies: Directly Connecting Age and Metallicity with Type Ia Luminosity, ApJ, 685, 752

    2008

  20. [28]

    Gallazzi, A., Charlot, S., Brinchmann, J., White, S. D. M., & Tremonti, C. A. 2005, The Ages and Metallicities of Galaxies in the Local Universe, MNRAS, 362, 41

    2005

  21. [29]

    J., Kulkarni, S

    Graham, M. J., Kulkarni, S. R., Bellm, E. C., et al. 2019, The Zwicky Transient Facility: Science Objectives, arXiv:1902.01945

    2019 arXiv

  22. [30]

    J., Faber, S

    Graves, G. J., Faber, S. M., Schiavon, R. P., & Yan, R. 2007, Ages and Abundances of Red Sequence Galaxies as a Function of LINER Emission-Line Strength, ApJ, 671, 243

    2007

  23. [31]

    J., Faber, S

    Graves, G. J., Faber, S. M., & Schiavon, R. P. 2009, Dissecting the Red Sequence. II. Star Formation Histo- ries of Early-Type Galaxies Throughout the Fundamental

    2009

  24. [32]

    R., D’Andrea, C

    Gupta, R. R., D’Andrea, C. B., Sako, M., et al. 2011, Im- proved Constraints on Type Ia Supernova Host Galaxy Properties Using Multi-Wavelength Photometry and Their Correlations with Supernova Properties, ApJ, 740, 92

    2011

  25. [33]

    2007, SALT2: Us- ing Distant Supernovae to Improve the Use of Type Ia Supernovae as Distance Indicators, A&A, 466, 11

    Guy, J., Astier, P., Baumont, S., et al. 2007, SALT2: Us- ing Distant Supernovae to Improve the Use of Type Ia Supernovae as Distance Indicators, A&A, 466, 11

    2007

  26. [34]

    2010, The Supernova Legacy Survey 3-Year Sample: Type Ia Supernovae Pho- tometric Distances and Cosmological Constraints, A&A, 523, A7

    Guy, J., Sullivan, M., Conley, A., et al. 2010, The Supernova Legacy Survey 3-Year Sample: Type Ia Supernovae Pho- tometric Distances and Cosmological Constraints, A&A, 523, A7

    2010

  27. [35]

    M., Maza, J., et al

    Hamuy, M., Phillips, M. M., Maza, J., et al. 1995, A Hubble Diagram of Distant Type IA Supernovae, AJ, 109, 1

    1995

  28. [36]

    C., Pinto, P

    Hamuy, M., Trager, S. C., Pinto, P. A., et al. 2000, A Search for Environmental Effects on Type IA Supernovae, AJ, 120, 1479

    2000

  29. [37]

    2010, The Properties of Type Ia Supernova Host Galaxies from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey, ApJ, 724, 502

    Han, D.-H., Park, C., Choi, Y.-Y., & Park, M.-G. 2010, The Properties of Type Ia Supernova Host Galaxies from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey, ApJ, 724, 502

    2010

  30. [38]

    P., et al

    Hicken, M., Challis, P., Kirshner, R. P., et al. 2012, CfA4: Light Curves for 94 Type Ia Supernovae, ApJS, 200, 12 H¨ oflich, P., Wheeler, J. C., & Thielemann, F. K. 1998, Type Ia Supernovae: Influence of the Initial Composition on the Nucleosynthesis, Light Curves, and Spectra ...

    2012

  31. [39]

    F., Somerville, R

    Hopkins, P. F., Somerville, R. S., Cox, T. J., et al. 2009, The Effects of Gas on Morphological Transformation in Mergers: Implications for Bulge and Disc Demographics, MNRAS, 397, 802

    2009

  32. [40]

    A., Sullivan, M., Brown, E

    Howell, D. A., Sullivan, M., Brown, E. F., et al. 2009, The Effect of Progenitor Age and Metallicity on Luminosity and 56Ni Yield in Type Ia Supernovae, ApJ, 691, 661

    2009

  33. [41]

    P., Challis, P., et al

    Jha, S., Kirshner, R. P., Challis, P., et al. 2006, UBVRI Light Curves of 44 Type Ia Supernovae, AJ, 131, 527 24 Y.-L. Kim

    2006

  34. [42]

    G., & Kirshner, R

    Jha, S., Riess, A. G., & Kirshner, R. P. 2007, Improved Distances to Type Ia Supernovae with Multicolor Light- Curve Shapes: MLCS2k2, ApJ, 659, 122

    2007

  35. [43]

    2013, SN Ia Host Galaxy Properties from Sloan Digital Sky Survey-II

    Johansson, J., Thomas, D., Pforr, J., et al. 2013, SN Ia Host Galaxy Properties from Sloan Digital Sky Survey-II

    2013

  36. [44]

    O., Riess, A

    Jones, D. O., Riess, A. G., & Scolnic, D. M. 2015, ApJ, Re- considering the Effects of Local Star Formation on Type Ia Supernova Cosmology, 812, 31

    2015

  37. [45]

    O., Riess, A

    Jones, D. O., Riess, A. G., Scolnic, D. M., et al. 2018b, Should Type Ia Supernova Distances Be Corrected for Their Local Environments?, ApJ, 867, 108 J¨ onsson, J., Sullivan, M., Hook, I., et al. 2010, Constrain - ing Dark Matter Halo Properties Using Lensed Supernova Legacy ...

    2010

  38. [46]

    2016, Early-Type Host Galaxies of Type Ia Supernovae

    Kang, Y., Kim, Y.-L., Lim, D., Chung, C., & Lee, Y.-W. 2016, Early-Type Host Galaxies of Type Ia Supernovae. I. Evidence for Downsizing, ApJS, 223, 7

    2016

  39. [47]

    K., & Woosley, S

    Kasen, D., R¨ opke, F. K., & Woosley, S. E. 2009, The Di- versity of Type Ia Supernovae from Broken Symmetries, Nature, 460, 869 Kauffmann, G., Heckman, T. M., White, S. D. M., et al. 2003, The Dependence of Star Formation History and Internal Structure on Stellar Mass for 10 5...

    2009

  40. [48]

    Kirshner, R. P. 2010, Hubble Residuals of Nearby Type Ia Supernovae are Correlated with Host Galaxy Masses, ApJ, 715, 743

    2010

  41. [49]

    L., Filippenko, A

    Kelly, P. L., Filippenko, A. V., Burke, D. L., et al. 2015, Distances with <4% Precision from Type Ia Supernovae in Young Star-Forming Environments, Science, 347, 1459

    2015

  42. [50]

    2017, Correcting Type Ia Super- nova Distances for Selection Biases and Contamination in Photometrically Identified Samples, ApJ, 836, 56

    Kessler, R., & Scolnic, D. 2017, Correcting Type Ia Super- nova Distances for Selection Biases and Contamination in Photometrically Identified Samples, ApJ, 836, 56

    2017

  43. [51]

    2016, KMTNET: A Network of 1.6 m Wide-Field Optical Telescopes In- stalled at Three Southern Observatories, JKAS, 49, 37

    Kim, S.-L., Lee, C.-U., Park, B.-G., et al. 2016, KMTNET: A Network of 1.6 m Wide-Field Optical Telescopes In- stalled at Three Southern Observatories, JKAS, 49, 37

    2016

  44. [52]

    2015, Yonsei Nearby Supernova Evolution Investigation (YONSEI) Supernova

    Kim, Y.-L., Kang, Y., & Lee, Y.-W. 2015, Yonsei Nearby Supernova Evolution Investigation (YONSEI) Supernova

    2015

  45. [53]

    2018, Environmental Dependence of Type Ia Supernova Lumi- nosities from a Sample without a Local-Global Difference in Host Star Formation, ApJ, 854, 24

    Kim, Y.-L., Smith, M., Sullivan, M., & Lee, Y.-W. 2018, Environmental Dependence of Type Ia Supernova Lumi- nosities from a Sample without a Local-Global Difference in Host Star Formation, ApJ, 854, 24

    2018

  46. [54]

    2006, The SAURON Project - VI

    Kuntschner, H., Emsellem, E., Bacon, R., et al. 2006, The SAURON Project - VI. Line Strength Maps of 48 Ellipti- cal and Lenticular Galaxies, MNRAS, 369, 497

    2006

  47. [55]

    C., et al

    Lampeitl, H., Smith, M., Nichol, R. C., et al. 2010, The Effect of Host Galaxies on Type Ia Supernovae in the SDSS-II Supernova Survey, ApJ, 722, 566 Le Borgne, D., & Rocca-Volmerange, B. 2002, Photomet- ric Redshifts from Evolutionary Synthesis with P ´EGASE: The Code Z-PEG an...

    2010

  48. [56]

    2009, Cosmological Parameter Extraction and Biases from Type Ia Supernova Magnitude Evolution, A&A, 506, 1095

    Linden, S., Virey, J.-M., & Tilquin, A. 2009, Cosmological Parameter Extraction and Biases from Type Ia Supernova Magnitude Evolution, A&A, 506, 1095

    2009

  49. [57]

    2014, Cosmic Star-Formation

    Madau, P., & Dickinson, M. 2014, Cosmic Star-Formation

    2014

  50. [58]

    2014, HyperLEDA

    Vauglin, I. 2014, HyperLEDA. III. The Catalogue of Ex- tragalactic Distances, A&A, 570, A13

    2014

  51. [59]

    Malmquist, K. G. 1936, The Effect of an Absorption of Light in Space upon Some Relations in Stellar Statistics, Stock- holmes Obs. Medd., 26 Mart ´ ın-Navarro, I., & Mezcua, M. 2018, Exploring the Lim- its of AGN Feedback: Black Holes and the Star Formation Histories of Low-Mas...

    1936

  52. [60]

    2012, The Hub- ble Space Telescope Cluster Supernova Survey

    Meyers, J., Aldering, G., Barbary, K., et al. 2012, The Hub- ble Space Telescope Cluster Supernova Survey. III. Corre- lated Properties of Type Ia Supernovae and Their Hosts at 0.9 < Z < 1.46, ApJ, 750, 1

    2012

  53. [61]

    2007, The ESSENCE Supernova Survey: Survey Optimization, Ob- servations, and Supernova Photometry, ApJ, 666, 674

    Miknaitis, G., Pignata, G., Rest, A., et al. 2007, The ESSENCE Supernova Survey: Survey Optimization, Ob- servations, and Supernova Photometry, ApJ, 666, 674

    2007

  54. [62]

    D., Sullivan, M., Howell, D

    Neill, J. D., Sullivan, M., Howell, D. A., et al. 2009, ApJ, The Local Hosts of Type Ia Supernovae, 707, 1449

    2009

  55. [63]

    2014, The Host Galaxies of Type Ia Supernovae Discovered by the Palo- mar Transient Factory, MNRAS, 438, 1391

    Pan, Y.-C., Sullivan, M., Maguire, K., et al. 2014, The Host Galaxies of Type Ia Supernovae Discovered by the Palo- mar Transient Factory, MNRAS, 438, 1391

    2014

  56. [64]

    2005, Morphology Segregation of Galaxies in Color-Color Gradient Space, ApJL, 635, L29

    Park, C., & Choi, Y.-Y. 2005, Morphology Segregation of Galaxies in Color-Color Gradient Space, ApJL, 635, L29

    2005

  57. [65]

    1999, Measurements of Ω and Λ from 42 High-Redshift Super- novae, ApJ, 517, 565

    Perlmutter, S., Aldering, G., Goldhaber, G., et al. 1999, Measurements of Ω and Λ from 42 High-Redshift Super- novae, ApJ, 517, 565

    1999

  58. [66]

    Phillips, M. M. 1993, The Absolute Magnitudes of Type IA

    1993

  59. [67]

    J., et al

    Rest, A., Scolnic, D., Foley, R. J., et al. 2014, Cosmologica l Constraints from Measurements of Type Ia Supernovae Discovered during the First 1.5 yr of the Pan-STARRS1

    2014

  60. [68]

    G., Filippenko, A

    Riess, A. G., Filippenko, A. V., Challis, P., et al. 1998, Ob- servational Evidence from Supernovae for an Accelerating Universe and a Cosmological Constant, AJ, 116, 1009

    1998

  61. [69]

    G., Strolger, L.-G., Tonry, J., et al

    Riess, A. G., Strolger, L.-G., Tonry, J., et al. 2004, Type Ia Supernova Discoveries at z > 1 from the Hubble Space Telescope: Evidence for Past Deceleration and Constraints on Dark Energy Evolution, ApJ, 607, 665

    2004

  62. [70]

    G., Strolger, L.-G., Casertano, S., et al

    Riess, A. G., Strolger, L.-G., Casertano, S., et al. 2007, New Hubble Space Telescope Discoveries of Type Ia Su- pernovae at z ≥ 1: Narrowing Constraints on the Early Behavior of Dark Energy, ApJ, 659, 98

    2007

  63. [71]

    Rigault, M., Copin, Y., Aldering, G., et al. 2013, Evidence of Environmental Dependencies of Type Ia Supernovae from the Nearby Supernova Factory Indicated by Local Hα , A&A, 560, A66 Environmental Dependence of Type Ia Supernova Luminositie s from the YONSEI SN Catalog 25

    2013

  64. [72]

    2015, Con- firmation of a Star Formation Bias in Type Ia Supernova Distances and Its Effect on the Measurement of the Hub- ble Constant, ApJ, 802, 20

    Rigault, M., Aldering, G., Kowalski, M., et al. 2015, Con- firmation of a Star Formation Bias in Type Ia Supernova Distances and Its Effect on the Measurement of the Hub- ble Constant, ApJ, 802, 20

    2015

  65. [73]

    2018, Strong Dependence of Type Ia Supernova Standardization on the Local Specific Star Formation Rate, arXiv:1806.03849

    Rigault, M., Brinnel, V., Aldering, G., et al. 2018, Strong Dependence of Type Ia Supernova Standardization on the Local Specific Star Formation Rate, arXiv:1806.03849

    2018 arXiv

  66. [74]

    2018, Depen- dence of Type Ia Supernova Luminosities on Their Local

    Roman, M., Hardin, D., Betoule, M., et al. 2018, Depen- dence of Type Ia Supernova Luminosities on Their Local

    2018

  67. [75]

    C., et al

    Sako, M., Bassett, B., Becker, A. C., et al. 2018, The Data Release of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey-II Supernova Sur- vey, PASP, 130, 064002

    2018

  68. [76]

    P., Suntzeff, N

    Schmidt, B. P., Suntzeff, N. B., Phillips, M. M., et al. 1998, The High-Z Supernova Search: Measuring Cosmic Decel- eration and Global Curvature of the Universe Using Type IA Supernovae, ApJ, 507, 46

    1998

  69. [77]

    2014, Systematic Un- certainties Associated with the Cosmological Analysis of the First Pan-STARRS1 Type Ia Supernova Sample, ApJ, 795, 45

    Scolnic, D., Rest, A., Riess, A., et al. 2014, Systematic Un- certainties Associated with the Cosmological Analysis of the First Pan-STARRS1 Type Ia Supernova Sample, ApJ, 795, 45

    2014

  70. [78]

    2016, Measuring Type Ia Super- nova Populations of Stretch and Color and Predicting Dis- tance Biases, ApJL, 822, L35

    Scolnic, D., & Kessler, R. 2016, Measuring Type Ia Super- nova Populations of Stretch and Color and Predicting Dis- tance Biases, ApJL, 822, L35

    2016

  71. [79]

    M., Jones, D

    Scolnic, D. M., Jones, D. O., Rest, A., et al. 2018, The Complete Light-Curve Sample of Spectroscopically Con- firmed SNe Ia from Pan-STARRS1 and Cosmological Constraints from the Combined Pantheon Sample, ApJ, 859, 101

    2018

  72. [80]

    C., Dilday, B., et al

    Smith, M., Nichol, R. C., Dilday, B., et al. 2012, The SDSS- II Supernova Survey: Parameterizing the Type Ia Super- nova Rate as a Function of Host Galaxy Properties, ApJ, 755, 61

    2012

  73. [81]

    D., Phillips, M

    Stritzinger, M. D., Phillips, M. M., Boldt, L. N., et al. 2011, The Carnegie Supernova Project: Second Photom- etry Data Release of Low-Redshift Type Ia Supernovae, AJ, 142, 156

    2011

  74. [82]

    G., Dahlen, T., et al

    Strolger, L.-G., Riess, A. G., Dahlen, T., et al. 2004, The Hubble Higher z Supernova Search: Supernovae to z ∼ 1.6 and Constraints on Type Ia Progenitor Models, ApJ, 613, 200

    2004

  75. [83]

    J., et al

    Sullivan, M., Le Borgne, D., Pritchet, C. J., et al. 2006, Rates and Properties of Type Ia Supernovae as a Function of Mass and Star Formation in Their Host Galaxies, ApJ, 648, 868

    2006

  76. [84]

    S., Howell, D

    Sullivan, M., Ellis, R. S., Howell, D. A., et al. 2009, The Mean Type Ia Supernova Spectrum Over the Past Nine

    2009

  77. [85]

    A., et al

    Sullivan, M., Conley, A., Howell, D. A., et al. 2010, The Dependence of Type Ia Supernovae Luminosities on Their Host Galaxies, MNRAS, 406, 782

    2010

  78. [86]

    2011, ApJ, SNLS3: Constraints on Dark Energy Combining the Supernova Legacy Survey Three-Year Data with Other Probes, 737, 102

    Sullivan, M., Guy, J., Conley, A., et al. 2011, ApJ, SNLS3: Constraints on Dark Energy Combining the Supernova Legacy Survey Three-Year Data with Other Probes, 737, 102

    2011

  79. [87]

    2012, The Hubble Space Telescope Cluster Supernova Survey

    Suzuki, N., Rubin, D., Lidman, C., et al. 2012, The Hubble Space Telescope Cluster Supernova Survey. V. Improving the Dark-Energy Constraints above z > 1 and Building an Early-Type-Hosted Supernova Sample, ApJ, 746, 85

    2012

  80. [88]

    1997, Introduction to Error Analysis (2nd ed.: Mill Valley, CA: University Science Books)

    Taylor, J. 1997, Introduction to Error Analysis (2nd ed.: Mill Valley, CA: University Science Books)

    1997

  81. [89]

    2017, Star For- mation in Simulated Galaxies: Understanding the Tran- sition to Quiescence at 3 × 1010M⊙, MNRAS, 469, 4249

    Taylor, P., Federrath, C., & Kobayashi, C. 2017, Star For- mation in Simulated Galaxies: Understanding the Tran- sition to Quiescence at 3 × 1010M⊙, MNRAS, 469, 4249

    2017

  82. [90]

    2005, The Epochs of Early-Type Galaxy For- mation as a Function of Environment, ApJ, 621, 673

    Oliveira, C. 2005, The Epochs of Early-Type Galaxy For- mation as a Function of Environment, ApJ, 621, 673

    2005

  83. [91]

    X., Brown, E

    Timmes, F. X., Brown, E. F., & Truran, J. W. 2003, On Variations in the Peak Luminosity of Type Ia Supernovae, ApJL, 590, L83

    2003

  84. [92]

    C., Faber, S

    Trager, S. C., Faber, S. M., Worthey, G., & Gonz´ alez, J. J. 2000, The Stellar Population Histories of Local Early- Type Galaxies. I. Population Parameters, AJ, 119, 1645

    2000

  85. [93]

    A., Heckman, T

    Tremonti, C. A., Heckman, T. M., Kauffmann, G., et al. 2004, The Origin of the Mass-Metallicity Relation: In- sights from 53,000 Star-Forming Galaxies in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey, ApJ, 613, 898

    2004

  86. [94]

    1998, A Two-Parameter Luminosity Correction for Type IA Supernovae, A&A, 331, 815

    Tripp, R. 1998, A Two-Parameter Luminosity Correction for Type IA Supernovae, A&A, 331, 815

    1998

  87. [95]

    2017, Is Cosmic Acceleration Proven by Local Cosmo- logical Probes?, A&A, 602, A73

    Tutusaus, I., Lamine, B., Dupays, A., & Blanchard, A. 2017, Is Cosmic Acceleration Proven by Local Cosmo- logical Probes?, A&A, 602, A73

    2017

  88. [96]

    2018, Model- Iindependent Cosmic Acceleration and Type Ia Su- pernovae Intrinsic Luminosity Redshift Dependence, arXiv:1803.06197

    Tutusaus, I., Lamine, B., & Blanchard, A. 2018, Model- Iindependent Cosmic Acceleration and Type Ia Su- pernovae Intrinsic Luminosity Redshift Dependence, arXiv:1803.06197

    2018 arXiv

  89. [97]

    A., Mould, J., Lidman, C., Ruhlmann-Kleider, V., & Zhang, B

    Uddin, S. A., Mould, J., Lidman, C., Ruhlmann-Kleider, V., & Zhang, B. R. 2017, The Influence of Host Galaxies in Type Ia Supernova Cosmology, ApJ, 848, 56

    2017

  90. [98]

    2011, Fitting the Integrated Spectral Energy Distributions of

    Walcher, J., Groves, B., Budav´ ari, T., & Dale, D. 2011, Fitting the Integrated Spectral Energy Distributions of

    2011

  91. [99]

    C., D’Andrea, C

    Wolf, R. C., D’Andrea, C. B., Gupta, R. R., et al. 2016, SDSS-II Supernova Survey: An Analysis of the Largest Sample of Type Ia Supernovae and Correlations with Host-Galaxy Spectral Properties, ApJ, 821, 115

    2016

  92. [100]

    M., Miknaitis, G., Stubbs, C

    Wood-Vasey, W. M., Miknaitis, G., Stubbs, C. W., et al. 2007, Observational Constraints on the Nature of Dark Energy: First Cosmological Results from the ESSENCE Supernova Survey, ApJ, 666, 694

    2007

  93. [101]

    M., Gonzalez, J

    Worthey, G., Faber, S. M., Gonzalez, J. J., & Burstein, D. 1994, Old Stellar Populations. 5: Absorption Feature In- dices for the Complete LICK/IDS Sample of Stars, ApJS, 94, 687

    1994

  94. [102]

    1998, Abundance Ratio Trends and Nucleosyn- thesis in Elliptical Galaxies and Spheroids, PASP, 110, 888

    Worthey, G. 1998, Abundance Ratio Trends and Nucleosyn- thesis in Elliptical Galaxies and Spheroids, PASP, 110, 888

    1998

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.