adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: A Repeating Fast Radio Burst Source in a Low-luminosity Dwarf Galaxy
Authors: Danté M. Hewitt, Mohit Bhardwaj, Alexa C. Gordon, Aida Kirichenko, Kenzie Nimmo, Shivani Bhandari, Ismaël Cognard, Wen-fai Fong, Armando Gil de Paz, Akshatha Gopinath, Jason W. T. Hessels, Franz Kirsten, Benito Marcote, Vladislavs Bezrukovs, Richard Blaauw, Justin D. Bray, Salvatore Buttaccio, Tomas Cassanelli, Pragya Chawla, Alessandro Corongiu, William Deng, Hannah N. Didehbani, Yuxin Dong, Marcin P. Gawroński, Marcello Giroletti, Lucas Guillemot, Jeff Huang, Dmitriy V. Ivanov, Ronniy C. Joseph, Victoria M. Kaspi, Mikhail A. Kharinov, Mattias Lazda, Michael Lindqvist, Giuseppe Maccaferri, Lluis Mas-Ribas, Kiyoshi W. Masui, Ryan Mckinven, Alexey Melnikov, Daniele Michilli, Andrey G. Mikhailov, Anya E. Nugent, Omar S. Ould-Boukattine, Zsolt Paragi, Aaron B. Pearlman, Ue-Li Pen, Ziggy Pleunis, Ketan R. Sand, Vishwangi Shah, Kaitlyn Shin, Mark P. Snelders, Tiziana Venturi, Na Wang, David R. A. Williams-Baldwin, Jun Yang, Jianping P. Yuan
Figure caption: DM determination by S/N optimization for bursts B1 (left) and B2 (right). The gray data points denote the peak S/N at various DM trials. A Gaussian fit to the data is shown in black. The center of the Gaussian and its 3σ error are indicated by the vertical dashed purple lines and the shaded orange regions, respectively.
Paper: A Repeating Fast Radio Burst Source in a Low-luminosity Dwarf Galaxy
Authors: Danté M. Hewitt, Mohit Bhardwaj, Alexa C. Gordon, Aida Kirichenko, Kenzie Nimmo, Shivani Bhandari, Ismaël Cognard, Wen-fai Fong, Armando Gil de Paz, Akshatha Gopinath, Jason W. T. Hessels, Franz Kirsten, Benito Marcote, Vladislavs Bezrukovs, Richard Blaauw, Justin D. Bray, Salvatore Buttaccio, Tomas Cassanelli, Pragya Chawla, Alessandro Corongiu, William Deng, Hannah N. Didehbani, Yuxin Dong, Marcin P. Gawroński, Marcello Giroletti, Lucas Guillemot, Jeff Huang, Dmitriy V. Ivanov, Ronniy C. Joseph, Victoria M. Kaspi, Mikhail A. Kharinov, Mattias Lazda, Michael Lindqvist, Giuseppe Maccaferri, Lluis Mas-Ribas, Kiyoshi W. Masui, Ryan Mckinven, Alexey Melnikov, Daniele Michilli, Andrey G. Mikhailov, Anya E. Nugent, Omar S. Ould-Boukattine, Zsolt Paragi, Aaron B. Pearlman, Ue-Li Pen, Ziggy Pleunis, Ketan R. Sand, Vishwangi Shah, Kaitlyn Shin, Mark P. Snelders, Tiziana Venturi, Na Wang, David R. A. Williams-Baldwin, Jun Yang, Jianping P. Yuan
Figure caption: The RM spectra of FRB 20190208A (top) and PSR B2255+58 (bottom) as a function of instrumental delay. The color map has been saturated at the normalized 90% power level. The horizontal dashed line in the bottom panel indicates the known RM of the pulsar, and the vertical line is the corresponding delay value. In the top panel, the shaded white region shows the range of delays corresponding to a 2 rad m−2 deviation in pulsar RM.
Paper: A Repeating Fast Radio Burst Source in a Low-luminosity Dwarf Galaxy
Authors: Danté M. Hewitt, Mohit Bhardwaj, Alexa C. Gordon, Aida Kirichenko, Kenzie Nimmo, Shivani Bhandari, Ismaël Cognard, Wen-fai Fong, Armando Gil de Paz, Akshatha Gopinath, Jason W. T. Hessels, Franz Kirsten, Benito Marcote, Vladislavs Bezrukovs, Richard Blaauw, Justin D. Bray, Salvatore Buttaccio, Tomas Cassanelli, Pragya Chawla, Alessandro Corongiu, William Deng, Hannah N. Didehbani, Yuxin Dong, Marcin P. Gawroński, Marcello Giroletti, Lucas Guillemot, Jeff Huang, Dmitriy V. Ivanov, Ronniy C. Joseph, Victoria M. Kaspi, Mikhail A. Kharinov, Mattias Lazda, Michael Lindqvist, Giuseppe Maccaferri, Lluis Mas-Ribas, Kiyoshi W. Masui, Ryan Mckinven, Alexey Melnikov, Daniele Michilli, Andrey G. Mikhailov, Anya E. Nugent, Omar S. Ould-Boukattine, Zsolt Paragi, Aaron B. Pearlman, Ue-Li Pen, Ziggy Pleunis, Ketan R. Sand, Vishwangi Shah, Kaitlyn Shin, Mark P. Snelders, Tiziana Venturi, Na Wang, David R. A. Williams-Baldwin, Jun Yang, Jianping P. Yuan
Figure caption: The time-averaged spectral ACF of B1 at different frequency resolutions (quoted in each panel). Lorentzian fits have been overplotted in colored lines, while the vertical gray line in each panel indicates the measured scintillation bandwidth for that frequency resolution.
Paper: A Repeating Fast Radio Burst Source in a Low-luminosity Dwarf Galaxy
Authors: Danté M. Hewitt, Mohit Bhardwaj, Alexa C. Gordon, Aida Kirichenko, Kenzie Nimmo, Shivani Bhandari, Ismaël Cognard, Wen-fai Fong, Armando Gil de Paz, Akshatha Gopinath, Jason W. T. Hessels, Franz Kirsten, Benito Marcote, Vladislavs Bezrukovs, Richard Blaauw, Justin D. Bray, Salvatore Buttaccio, Tomas Cassanelli, Pragya Chawla, Alessandro Corongiu, William Deng, Hannah N. Didehbani, Yuxin Dong, Marcin P. Gawroński, Marcello Giroletti, Lucas Guillemot, Jeff Huang, Dmitriy V. Ivanov, Ronniy C. Joseph, Victoria M. Kaspi, Mikhail A. Kharinov, Mattias Lazda, Michael Lindqvist, Giuseppe Maccaferri, Lluis Mas-Ribas, Kiyoshi W. Masui, Ryan Mckinven, Alexey Melnikov, Daniele Michilli, Andrey G. Mikhailov, Anya E. Nugent, Omar S. Ould-Boukattine, Zsolt Paragi, Aaron B. Pearlman, Ue-Li Pen, Ziggy Pleunis, Ketan R. Sand, Vishwangi Shah, Kaitlyn Shin, Mark P. Snelders, Tiziana Venturi, Na Wang, David R. A. Williams-Baldwin, Jun Yang, Jianping P. Yuan
Figure caption: The frequency-averaged time profile of B1 at different time resolutions. In each case, the burst has been coherently dedispersed to a DM of 580.1 pc cm−3.
Paper: The Classification and Formation Rate of Swift/BAT Gamma-Ray Bursts
Authors: Juan-Juan Luo, Liang Zhang, Li-Yun Zhang, Yong-Feng Huang, Jia-Quan Lin, Jun-Wang Lu, Xiao-Fei Dong
Figure caption: Different features of the three subclasses of GRBs. Panels (a1), (a2), and (a3) plot the test statistic τ vs. k for sGRBs, mGRBs, and lGRBs, respectively. Panels (b1), (b2), and (b3) plot the de-evolved luminosity (L0) vs. the redshift (z) for the three samples. The solid lines represent the lower luminosity limits calculated from the two flux limits of Flimit,1 and Flimit,2, where Flimit,1 is adopted for sGRBs and Flimit,2 is adopted for mGRBs and lGRBs. Panel (c) shows the cumulative luminosity function ψ(L0) of three samples, which is normalized to unity at the lowest luminosity. The dashed lines illustrate the best fit to the luminosity function by using a broken power-law function. Panel (d) shows the normalized cumulative redshift distribution of the three samples. Note that the standard EP-L method is applicable only when the truncation boundary is monotonically rising or ﬂat. In the case of a steep declining truncation boundary, one would need to use a more complicated calculation procedure. In our panel (b1), the truncation boundary deviates from flat only slightly so that the result is still OK.
Paper: The Classification and Formation Rate of Swift/BAT Gamma-Ray Bursts
Authors: Juan-Juan Luo, Liang Zhang, Li-Yun Zhang, Yong-Feng Huang, Jia-Quan Lin, Jun-Wang Lu, Xiao-Fei Dong
Figure caption: Fitting Samples I and II by using the GMM models. The upper panels show the T90 distribution of Sample I fitted with the 2-G and 3-G models, together with the AIC/BIC values. In (a1) and (a2) panels, the solid curves show the superposed total PDF of the 2-G model and 3-G model, while the dashed curves show the contribution of different components. The lower panels illustrate the joint distribution of T90—HR for Sample II, fitted with the 2-G and 3-G models. Both the x- and y-axis are in logarithmic coordinates. The (b1) panel shows the FWHM of each component in the framework of the 2-G model, and the (b2) panel correspondingly shows the 3-G model fitting results. The dotted vertical lines represent T90 = 2 s. In (a3) and (b3) panels, it can be seen that both AIC and BIC support the 3-G model for Samples I and II.
Paper: The Classification and Formation Rate of Swift/BAT Gamma-Ray Bursts
Authors: Juan-Juan Luo, Liang Zhang, Li-Yun Zhang, Yong-Feng Huang, Jia-Quan Lin, Jun-Wang Lu, Xiao-Fei Dong
Figure caption: The formation rate of GRBs (ρ(z)) vs. redshift for sGRBs (heavy pink stepped line), mGRBs (blue stepped line), and lGRBs (green stepped line). The rate is normalized to unity at the first data point. A simple power-law function is adopted to fit ρ(z). The resultant slopes are −3.58 ± 0.61, −1.54 ± 0.19, and −0.79 ± 0.12, for sGRBs, mGRBs, and lGRBs, respectively. For comparison, the observed SFRs are also plotted, with the data taken from A. M. Hopkins (2004; gray dots), R. I. Thompson et al. (2006; black dots), F. Mannucci et al. (2007; triangles), K. Ota et al. (2008; crosses), R. J. Bouwens et al. (2008; inverted triangles), and R. J. Bouwens et al. (2011; orange pentagons).
Paper: Information-theory-based System-level Babcock–Leighton Flux Transport Model–Data Comparisons
Authors: Simon Wing, Jay R. Johnson, Mausumi Dikpati, Yosia I. Nurhan
Figure caption: (a) Solid (dashed) contours of positive (negative) toroidal field strength denote the proxy of sunspot belts migrating equatorward, whereas the colors show polar field evolution; red–yellow (blue–green) indicates positive (negative) polar fields. Correct phase relationship of polar fields changing sign during sunspot maxima and changing sign in such a way as to go from positive to negative when subsurface toroidal field has already been negative, i.e., polar fields lagging the sunspot fields is evident. BLFT20 model meridional flow with 20% variation about 16.5 m s−1 (red), polar field (green), and toroidal field (blue) are plotted for the southern hemisphere and northern hemisphere in panels (b) and (c), respectively. The simulation data span 1050 yr, but only the first 666.7 yr (8000 months) are plotted.
Paper: Information-theory-based System-level Babcock–Leighton Flux Transport Model–Data Comparisons
Authors: Simon Wing, Jay R. Johnson, Mausumi Dikpati, Yosia I. Nurhan
Figure caption: The blue curve shows the time-shifted information transfer from the polar field to the toroidal field, while the red curve shows the information transfer from the toroidal field to the polar field in BLFT20 (panel (a)), BLFT50 (panel (b)), and observations (panel (c)). The mean noise and 3σ from the noise are indicated by the solid and dashed green curves, respectively. Note the maximum τ on the x-axis is 140 months in panel (c) but 800 months in panels (a) and (b) for better comparisons with Figure 2.
Paper: Information-theory-based System-level Babcock–Leighton Flux Transport Model–Data Comparisons
Authors: Simon Wing, Jay R. Johnson, Mausumi Dikpati, Yosia I. Nurhan
Figure caption: Time-shifted correlations between (pf and ﹩\mathrm{ssn}﹩), (mf and ﹩\mathrm{ssn}﹩), and (mf and pf) are plotted in panels (a), (b), and (c), respectively, for the southern hemisphere for BLFT20. Panels (d)–(f) show the corresponding correlations for the northern hemisphere.
Paper: Information-theory-based System-level Babcock–Leighton Flux Transport Model–Data Comparisons
Authors: Simon Wing, Jay R. Johnson, Mausumi Dikpati, Yosia I. Nurhan
Figure caption: The blue curve shows the time-shifted information transfer from the meridional flow to the toroidal field, while the red curve shows the information transfer from the toroidal field to the meridional flow in BLFT20 (panel (a)), BLFT50 (panel (b)), and observations (panel (c)). The mean noise and 3σ from the noise are indicated by the solid and dashed green curves, respectively. Note that the maximum τ on the x-axis is 140 months in panel (c) but 800 months in panels (a) and (b).
Paper: Information-theory-based System-level Babcock–Leighton Flux Transport Model–Data Comparisons
Authors: Simon Wing, Jay R. Johnson, Mausumi Dikpati, Yosia I. Nurhan
Figure caption: Contrasting correlation and TE for sinusoidal variables. (a) Sinusoidal variables x and y are plotted as blue and red curves, respectively. (b) corr(x → y) (τ) and corr(y → x) (τ) are plotted as blue and red curves, respectively. (c) TE(x → y) (τ) and TE(y → x) (τ) are plotted as blue and red curves, respectively. The mean noise and 3σ from the noise are indicated by the solid and dashed green curves, respectively, in panel (c).
Paper: Information-theory-based System-level Babcock–Leighton Flux Transport Model–Data Comparisons
Authors: Simon Wing, Jay R. Johnson, Mausumi Dikpati, Yosia I. Nurhan
Figure caption: The blue curve shows the time-shifted information transfer from the meridional flow to the polar field, while the red curve shows the information transfer from the polar field to the meridional flow in BLFT20 (panel (a)), BLFT50 (panel (b)), and observations (panel (c)). The mean noise and 3σ from the noise are indicated by the solid and dashed green curves, respectively. Note that the maximum τ on the x-axis is 140 months in panel (c) but 800 months in panels (a) and (b).
Paper: Information-theory-based System-level Babcock–Leighton Flux Transport Model–Data Comparisons
Authors: Simon Wing, Jay R. Johnson, Mausumi Dikpati, Yosia I. Nurhan
Figure caption: Information flows between (pf and ﹩\mathrm{ssn}﹩), (mf and ﹩\mathrm{ssn}﹩), and (mf and pf) are plotted in panels (a), (b), and (c), respectively, for the southern hemisphere for BLFT20. The mean noise and 3σ from the noise are indicated by the solid and dashed green curves, respectively. Panels (d)–(f) show the corresponding information flows for the northern hemisphere.
Paper: Ultra-High-Energy Cosmic Rays Accelerated by Magnetically Dominated Turbulence
Authors: Luca Comisso, Glennys R. Farrar, Marco S. Muzio
Figure caption: (a) Particle distribution in terms of Wtot and W⊥/Wtot obtained from tracked particles in the reference turbulence simulation (σ = 16, lc/di = 133). (b) Energy diffusion coefficient DE (blue circles) and stochastic acceleration timescale tacc = E2/4DE (red squares), evaluated at ct*/lc = 3 with a time interval cΔt/lc = 1.75. A reference power law DE ∝ Eq with a slope of q = 2 is also shown. (c) Escape timescale tesc as a function of particle energy (green squares), evaluated starting at ct*/lc = 3. A power law tesc ∝ E−δ with slope δ = 1/3 is provided for reference.
Paper: Ultra-High-Energy Cosmic Rays Accelerated by Magnetically Dominated Turbulence
Authors: Luca Comisso, Glennys R. Farrar, Marco S. Muzio
Figure caption: Cosmic-ray energy spectrum (top panel) and the first two moments of the ﹩\mathrm{ln}A﹩ distribution (bottom panels) at Earth based on the turbulence acceleration model. In this model, the individual element spectra at the source are given by ﹩{\phi }_{A}{(E)={f}_{A}{\phi }_{\mathrm{ref}}(E/{E}_{\mathrm{ref}})}^{-s}{\rm{sech}} \left[{(E/{Ze}{{ \mathcal R }}_{\mathrm{cut}})}^{2}\right]﹩. The best fit to the data is given by the spectral index ﹩s={2.1}_{-0.13}^{+0.06}﹩ and the cutoff rigidity ﹩{\mathrm{log}}_{10}({{ \mathcal R }}_{\mathrm{cut}}/{\rm{V}})={18.8}_{-0.02}^{+0.02}﹩. Data points are the Pierre Auger Observatory’s 2021 spectrum (P. Abreu et al. 2021) and composition based on surface detector data (Pierre Auger Collaboration 2024c). Error bars denote the statistical uncertainties (1σ statistical errors), and the shaded boxes illustrate the experimental systematic uncertainties (1σ systematic errors) of the composition. The composition data are interpreted via the hadronic interaction model SIBYLL2.3D (F. Riehn et al. 2020).
Paper: Ultra-High-Energy Cosmic Rays Accelerated by Magnetically Dominated Turbulence
Authors: Luca Comisso, Glennys R. Farrar, Marco S. Muzio
Figure caption: (a) Time evolution of the ion energy spectrum dN/dE, multiplied by E3, for the reference turbulence simulation (σ = 16, lc/di = 133). At late times, when the particle energy spectrum ceases to evolve, it exhibits a power-law distribution with a sharp cutoff. The spectrum is well fitted by the function ﹩{N}_{0}{E}^{-p}{\rm{sech}} \left[{(E/{E}_{\mathrm{cut}})}^{2}\right]﹩, where p = 2.4, N0 is a normalization factor, and Ecut is the cutoff energy given by Equation (3), with κ = 0.65. (b) ﹩{E}^{3}{dN}/{dE}﹩ at saturation, with t = 12lc/c (solid red line), overlaid with the functional forms ﹩{E}^{-p}\exp \left(-E/{E}_{\mathrm{cut}}\right)﹩ (dotted–dashed black line), ﹩{E}^{-p}\exp {\left[-(E/{E}_{\mathrm{cut}}\right)}^{2}]﹩ (triple dotted–dashed black line), and ﹩{E}^{-p}{\rm{sech}} \left[{(E/{E}_{\mathrm{cut}})}^{2}\right]﹩ (dashed black line).
Paper: Ultra-High-Energy Cosmic Rays Accelerated by Magnetically Dominated Turbulence
Authors: Luca Comisso, Glennys R. Farrar, Marco S. Muzio
Figure caption: (a) Ion energy spectra at saturation (t = 12lc/c) for turbulence simulations with varying magnetization σ = (8, 16, 32, 64, 128) and fixed lc/di = 133. In all cases, the particle energy spectrum exhibits a cutoff at Ecut as given by Equation (3). (b) ﹩{E}^{3}{dN}/{dE}﹩ for simulations with varying lc/di = (83, 133, 213) and fixed σ = 16, overlaid with ﹩{dN}/{dE}\propto {E}^{-p}{\rm{sech}} \left[{(E/{E}_{\mathrm{cut}})}^{2}\right]﹩, where p = 2.4 (dashed black line). (c) Fraction of dissipated magnetic energy, EB,diss, converted to ion energy at t = 12lc/c across the different simulations in our study.
Paper: Ultra-High-Energy Cosmic Rays Accelerated by Magnetically Dominated Turbulence
Authors: Luca Comisso, Glennys R. Farrar, Marco S. Muzio
Figure caption: Volume rendering of (a) ∣∇ × B∣ and (b) ∣∇ × ΓV∣ (normalized to their respective rms values) taken at t = 2.5lc/c from the reference turbulence simulation (σ = 16, lc/di = 133). (c) One-dimensional spectra of the turbulent magnetic field (red) and fluid four-velocity (blue) at t = 2.5lc/c. Each spectrum is normalized so that ﹩{\sum }_{{k}_{\perp }}P({k}_{\perp })=1﹩. A power-law slope of ﹩{k}_{\perp }^{-5/3}﹩ (dashed black line) is shown for reference.
Paper: Ultra-High-Energy Cosmic Rays Accelerated by Magnetically Dominated Turbulence
Authors: Luca Comisso, Glennys R. Farrar, Marco S. Muzio
Figure caption:  ﹩\sqrt{{\chi }^{2}-{\chi }_{\min }^{2}}﹩ as a function of the source spectral index s for the turbulence acceleration model, where the individual element spectra from the accelerator are given by Equation (9) with ﹩{E}_{\mathrm{cut}}={Ze}{{ \mathcal R }}_{\mathrm{cut}}﹩.
Paper: Double “acct”: A Distinct Double-peaked Supernova Matching Pulsational Pair Instability Models
Authors: C. R. Angus, S. E. Woosley, R. J. Foley, M. Nicholl, V. A. Villar, K. Taggart, M. Pursiainen, P. Ramsden, S. Srivastav, H. F. Stevance, T. Moore, K. Auchettl, W. B. Hoogendam, N. Khetan, S. K. Yadavalli, G. Dimitriadis, A. Gagliano, M. R. Siebert, A. Aamer, T. de Boer, K. C. Chambers, A. Clocchiatti, D. A. Coulter, M. R. Drout, D. Farias, M. D. Fulton, C. Gall, H. Gao, L. Izzo, D. O. Jones, C.-C. Lin, E. A. Magnier, G. Narayan, E. Ramirez-Ruiz, C. L. Ransome, A. Rest, S. J. Smartt, K. W. Smith
Figure caption: Top: the light curve of SN 2020acct. The phase is given in the rest frame with respect to the maxima of the second peak (MJD 59254.4). The two peaks are distinct, separated by 58 days in the rest frame (maximum to maximum). The inset shows that between the peaks, the SN does not completely fade to zero flux. Bottom: photometric comparison of SN 2020acct with other notable double-peaked SESNe (C. P. Gutiérrez et al. 2021; A. Aamer et al. 2024; K. K. Das et al. 2024; H. Kuncarayakti et al. 2023; T. Kangas et al. 2024; Y. Sharma et al. 2024), including the PPISN candidates SN 2016eit, SN 2019stc, and SN 2019szu (S. Gomez et al. 2019, 2021; A. Aamer et al. 2024). We also show the G. Hosseinzadeh et al. (2017) SN Ibn template light curve and a template light curve for SN impostors (derived using the light curves of M. Fraser et al. 2015; N. Elias-Rosa et al. 2016; L. Tartaglia et al. 2016; A. Pastorello et al. 2018; S. J. Brennan et al. 2022).
Paper: Double “acct”: A Distinct Double-peaked Supernova Matching Pulsational Pair Instability Models
Authors: C. R. Angus, S. E. Woosley, R. J. Foley, M. Nicholl, V. A. Villar, K. Taggart, M. Pursiainen, P. Ramsden, S. Srivastav, H. F. Stevance, T. Moore, K. Auchettl, W. B. Hoogendam, N. Khetan, S. K. Yadavalli, G. Dimitriadis, A. Gagliano, M. R. Siebert, A. Aamer, T. de Boer, K. C. Chambers, A. Clocchiatti, D. A. Coulter, M. R. Drout, D. Farias, M. D. Fulton, C. Gall, H. Gao, L. Izzo, D. O. Jones, C.-C. Lin, E. A. Magnier, G. Narayan, E. Ramirez-Ruiz, C. L. Ransome, A. Rest, S. J. Smartt, K. W. Smith
Figure caption: Top: spectroscopic comparison of the −58 day spectrum of SN 2020acct with “flash-ionization” spectra of young Type II CCSNe (O. Yaron et al. 2017; G. Terreran et al. 2022), early spectra of SNe Ibn (A. Pastorello et al. 2015; A. Gangopadhyay et al. 2020), SN impostors (M. Fraser et al. 2013; S. J. Brennan et al. 2022), and the SC phase of an SN IIb (L. Tartaglia et al. 2017). Key spectral features are marked. Bottom: spectroscopic comparison of SN 2020acct around its second maximum (+3 days) against double-peaked SESNe SN 2023aew (here the phase of the SN is set with respect to its second peak; T. Kangas et al. 2024; Y. Sharma et al. 2024), SN 2019stc (S. Gomez et al. 2021), and SN 2019szu (A. Aamer et al. 2024); the superluminous SN 2015bn (M. Nicholl et al. 2016); and the normal SESNe SN 2007gr (J. Chen et al. 2014) and SN 2004gq (M. Modjaz et al. 2014).
Paper: Double “acct”: A Distinct Double-peaked Supernova Matching Pulsational Pair Instability Models
Authors: C. R. Angus, S. E. Woosley, R. J. Foley, M. Nicholl, V. A. Villar, K. Taggart, M. Pursiainen, P. Ramsden, S. Srivastav, H. F. Stevance, T. Moore, K. Auchettl, W. B. Hoogendam, N. Khetan, S. K. Yadavalli, G. Dimitriadis, A. Gagliano, M. R. Siebert, A. Aamer, T. de Boer, K. C. Chambers, A. Clocchiatti, D. A. Coulter, M. R. Drout, D. Farias, M. D. Fulton, C. Gall, H. Gao, L. Izzo, D. O. Jones, C.-C. Lin, E. A. Magnier, G. Narayan, E. Ramirez-Ruiz, C. L. Ransome, A. Rest, S. J. Smartt, K. W. Smith
Figure caption: Helium profiles in the first peak of SN 2020acct. Left: strong asymmetric absorption features are present in all helium lines, which align in velocity space. The solid line indicates zero velocity in the rest frame, while the dotted lines indicate the minima of the inferred absorbing material from fitting He II profiles. The λ4471 line is affected by the SN continuum. Top right: fitting the He II λ4868 line with a single Gaussian profile, with a width of ∼3000 km s−1. Two absorbing components are required, with velocities of ∼−900 km s−1 and ∼−1600 km s−1. Bottom right: the same fit to the He II λ4100 line.
Paper: Double “acct”: A Distinct Double-peaked Supernova Matching Pulsational Pair Instability Models
Authors: C. R. Angus, S. E. Woosley, R. J. Foley, M. Nicholl, V. A. Villar, K. Taggart, M. Pursiainen, P. Ramsden, S. Srivastav, H. F. Stevance, T. Moore, K. Auchettl, W. B. Hoogendam, N. Khetan, S. K. Yadavalli, G. Dimitriadis, A. Gagliano, M. R. Siebert, A. Aamer, T. de Boer, K. C. Chambers, A. Clocchiatti, D. A. Coulter, M. R. Drout, D. Farias, M. D. Fulton, C. Gall, H. Gao, L. Izzo, D. O. Jones, C.-C. Lin, E. A. Magnier, G. Narayan, E. Ramirez-Ruiz, C. L. Ransome, A. Rest, S. J. Smartt, K. W. Smith
Figure caption: Spectroscopic time series of SN 2020acct. Key spectral features are highlighted. Top panel: spectra obtained during the first peak. Middle panel: spectra obtained during the second peak. The phases of all spectra are given with respect to the second peak. The two peaks are spectroscopically distinct, with the first showing swiftly evolving narrow lines and the second showing absorption features similar to SESNe. Bottom panel: a host galaxy spectrum from the explosion site of SN 2020acct.(The data used to create this figure are available in the online article.)(The data used to create this figure are available.)
Paper: Robust Detection of Hot Intragroup Medium in Optically Selected, Poor Galaxy Groups by eROSITA
Authors: Dawei Li, Taotao Fang, Chong Ge, Teng Liu, Lin He, Zhiyuan Li, Fabrizio Nicastro, Xiaohu Yang, Xiaoxia Zhang, Yun-Liang Zheng
Figure caption: Background-subtracted surface brightness images for two control subsamples in the 0.2–2.3 keV band. Both images correspond to the redshift range of 0.1–0.2, with the left panel corresponding to the halo mass range of 11.5–12.0 and the right panel corresponding to the halo mass range of 12.0–12.5. The annulus represents the region used for background computation. The unit of halo mass (Mhalo) is h−1 M⊙.