CONSTRAINING TYPE Ia SUPERNOVAE PROGENITORS FROM THREE YEARS OF SUPERNOVA LEGACY SURVEY DATA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While it is generally accepted that Type Ia supernovae are the result of the explosion of a carbon–oxygen white dwarf accreting mass in a binary system, the details of their genesis still elude us, and the nature of the binary companion is uncertain. Kasen points out that the presence of a non-degenerate companion in the progenitor system could leave an observable trace: a flux excess in the early rise portion of the light curve caused by the ejecta impact with the companion itself. This excess would be observable only under favorable viewing angles, and its intensity depends on the nature of the companion. We searched for the signature of a non-degenerate companion in three years of Supernova Legacy Survey data by generating synthetic light curves accounting for the effects of shocking and comparing true and synthetic time series with Kolmogorov–Smirnov tests. Our most constraining result comes from noting that the shocking effect is more prominent in the rest-frame B than V band: we rule out a contribution from white dwarf–red giant binary systems to Type Ia supernova explosions greater than 10% at the 2σ, and greater than 20% at the 3σ level.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".