Formation pathway for lonely stripped-envelope supernova progenitors: implications for Cassiopeia A
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT We explore a new scenario for producing stripped-envelope supernova progenitors. In our scenario, the stripped-envelope supernova is the second supernova of the binary, in which the envelope of the secondary was removed during its red supergiant phase by the impact of the first supernova. Through 2D hydrodynamical simulations, we find that ∼50–90 ${{\ \rm per\ cent}}$ of the envelope can be unbound as long as the pre-supernova orbital separation is ≲5 times the stellar radius. Recombination energy plays a significant role in the unbinding, especially for relatively high mass systems (≳18 M⊙). We predict that more than half of the unbound mass should be distributed as a one-sided shell at about ∼10–100 pc away from the second supernova site. We discuss possible applications to known supernova remnants such as Cassiopeia A, RX J1713.7−3946, G11.2−0.3, and find promising agreements. The predicted rate is ∼0.35–1${{\ \rm per\ cent}}$ of the core-collapse population. This new scenario could be a major channel for the subclass of stripped-envelope or type IIL supernovae that lack companion detections like Cassiopeia A.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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".