MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4221167645 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac75f0

Weak Mass Loss from the Red Supergiant Progenitor of the Type II SN 2021yja

2022· article· en· W4221167645 on OpenAlexaff
G. Hosseinzadeh, C. D. Kilpatrick, Yize Dong, David J. Sand, Jennifer E. Andrews, K. Azalee Bostroem, Daryl Janzen, J. Jencson, M. Lundquist, Jeniveve Pearson, S. Valenti, S. Wyatt, J. Burke, D. Hiramatsu, D. A. Howell, C. McCully, Megan Newsome, Estefania Padilla Gonzalez, C. Pellegrino, G. Terreran, Katie Auchettl, Kyle W. Davis, R. J. Foley, Hao-Yu Miao, Y. C. Pan, A. Rest, M. R. Siebert, K. Taggart, B. Tucker, Feng Lin Cyrus Leung, Jonathan Swift, J. P. Anderson, C. Ashall, S. Benetti, P. J. Brown, R. Cartier, T. W. Chen, M. Della Valle, L. Galbany, Sebastián Gómez, M. Gromadzki, J. Haislip, E. Y. Hsiao, C. Inserra, Saurabh W. Jha, T. Killestein, Vladimir Kouprianov, Alexandra Kozyreva, T. E. Müller-Bravo, M. Nicholl, E. Paraskeva, D. Reichart, S. D. Ryder, Melissa Shahbandeh, B. J. Shappee, Nathan Smith, D. R. Young

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGamma-ray bursts and supernovae
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersCollege of Engineering, Michigan State UniversityJet Propulsion LaboratoryMinistério da Ciência, Tecnologia, Inovações e ComunicaçõesKorea Astronomy and Space Science InstituteNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationMinistério da Ciência, Tecnologia e InovaçãoNASA Exoplanet Science InstituteW. M. Keck FoundationSpace Telescope Science InstituteNational Science FoundationUniversity of WashingtonScience and Technology Facilities CouncilMichigan State UniversityAgencia Nacional de Investigación y DesarrolloWashington Research FoundationNuclear Safety and Security CommissionGordon and Betty Moore FoundationUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel HillCalifornia Institute of Technology
KeywordsSupernovaRed supergiantPhysicsAstrophysicsSupergiantLight curveProgenitorLuminosityPair-instability supernovaGalaxyAstronomyEjectaStarsProgenitor cell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present high-cadence optical, ultraviolet (UV), and near-infrared data of the nearby ( D ≈ 23 Mpc) Type II supernova (SN) 2021yja. Many Type II SNe show signs of interaction with circumstellar material (CSM) during the first few days after explosion, implying that their red supergiant (RSG) progenitors experience episodic or eruptive mass loss. However, because it is difficult to discover SNe early, the diversity of CSM configurations in RSGs has not been fully mapped. SN 2021yja, first detected within ≈ 5.4 hours of explosion, shows some signatures of CSM interaction (high UV luminosity and radio and x-ray emission) but without the narrow emission lines or early light-curve peak that can accompany CSM. Here we analyze the densely sampled early light curve and spectral series of this nearby SN to infer the properties of its progenitor and CSM. We find that the most likely progenitor was an RSG with an extended envelope, encompassed by low-density CSM. We also present archival Hubble Space Telescope imaging of the host galaxy of SN 2021yja, which allows us to place a stringent upper limit of ≲ 9 M ☉ on the progenitor mass. However, this is in tension with some aspects of the SN evolution, which point to a more massive progenitor. Our analysis highlights the need to consider progenitor structure when making inferences about CSM properties, and that a comprehensive view of CSM tracers should be made to give a fuller view of the last years of RSG evolution.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.204 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicGamma-ray bursts and supernovae→French-language works237,207→