SIMBAD references

2017ApJ...848....8R - Astrophys. J., 848, 8-8 (2017/October-2)

Exploring the efficacy and limitations of shock-cooling models: new analysis of Type II supernovae observed by the Kepler mission.

RUBIN A. and GAL-YAM A.

Abstract (from CDS):

Modern transient surveys have begun discovering and following supernovae (SNe) shortly after first light-providing systematic measurements of the rise of Type II SNe. We explore how analytic models of early shock-cooling emission from core-collapse SNe can constrain the progenitor's radius, explosion velocity, and local host extinction. We simulate synthetic photometry in several realistic observing scenarios; assuming the models describe the typical explosions well, we find that ultraviolet observations can constrain the progenitor's radius to a statistical uncertainty of ±10%-15%, with a systematic uncertainty of ±20%. With these observations the local host extinction (AV) can be constrained to a factor of two and the shock velocity to ±5% with a systematic uncertainty of ±10%. We also reanalyze the SN light curves presented by Garnavich et al. (2016) and find that KSN 2011a can be fit by a blue supergiant model with a progenitor radius of Rs 7.7+8.8(stat)+1.9(sys) R☉, while KSN 2011d can be fit with a red supergiant model with a progenitor radius of Rs=111–21(stat)–1(sys)+89(stat)+49(sys) R☉. Our results do not agree with those of Garnavich et al. Moreover, we re-evaluate their claims and find that there is no statistically significant evidence for a shock-breakout flare in the light curve of KSN 2011d.

Abstract Copyright: © 2017. The American Astronomical Society. All rights reserved.

Journal keyword(s): supernovae: general - supernovae: general

Simbad objects: 5

goto Full paper

goto View the references in ADS

To bookmark this query, right click on this link: simbad:2017ApJ...848....8R and select 'bookmark this link' or equivalent in the popup menu