Draft version July 19, 2024

Typeset using LATEX twocolumn style in AASTeX631

SN 2021wvw: A core-collapse supernova at the sub-luminous, slower, and shorter end of Type IIPs
Rishabh Singh Teja,1, 2 Jared A. Goldberg,3 D. K. Sahu,1 G. C. Anupama,1 Avinash Singh,4, 5 Vishwajeet Swain,6
and Varun Bhalerao6
1 Indian Institute of Astrophysics, II Block, Koramangala, Bengaluru-560034, Karnataka, India
2 Pondicherry University, R.V. Nagar, Kalapet, Pondicherry-605014, UT of Puducherry, India
3 Center for Computational Astrophysics, Flatiron Institute, 162 5th Ave, New York, NY 10010, USA
arXiv:2407.13207v1 [astro-ph.HE] 18 Jul 2024

4 Oskar Klein Centre, Department of Astronomy, Stockholm University, Albanova University Centre, SE-106 91 Stockholm, Sweden
5 Hiroshima Astrophysical Science Center, Hiroshima University, Higashi-Hiroshima, Hiroshima 739-8526, Japan
6 Department of Physics, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Powai, Mumbai 400076

ABSTRACT
We present detailed multi-band photometric and spectroscopic observations and analysis of a rare
core-collapse supernova SN 2021wvw, that includes photometric evolution up to 250 d and spectroscopic
coverage up to 100 d post-explosion. A unique event that does not fit well within the general trends
observed for Type II-P supernovae, SN 2021wvw shows an intermediate luminosity with a short plateau
phase of just about 75 d, followed by a very sharp (∼10 d) transition to the tail phase. Even in the
velocity space, it lies at a lower velocity compared to a larger Type II sample. The observed peak
absolute magnitude is −16.1 mag in r-band, and the nickel mass is well constrained to 0.020±0.006 M⊙ .
Detailed hydrodynamical modeling using MESA+STELLA suggests a radially compact, low-metallicity,
high-mass Red Supergiant progenitor (MZAM S = 18 M⊙ ), which exploded with ∼ 0.2 × 1051 erg s−1
leaving an ejecta mass of Mej ≈ 5 M⊙ . Significant late-time fallback during the shock propagation
phase is also seen in progenitor+explosion models consistent with the light curve properties. As the
faintest short-plateau supernova characterized to date, this event adds to the growing diversity of
transitional events between the canonical ∼100 d plateau Type IIP and stripped-envelope events.

Keywords: Core-collapse supernovae (304); Type II supernovae(1731); Supernova dynamics (1664);

Red supergiant stars(1375); Supernovae (1668); Observational astronomy(1145)

1. INTRODUCTION distinct, it is becoming increasingly evident that there

Stars with mass ≳ 8 M⊙ end their lives as energetic is no clear boundary between the IIP and IIL subclasses,
cosmic explosions called core-collapse supernovae (CC- and these are merely a continuous sequence of the Type
SNe). Depending on factors such as the initial mass, ro- II class (Anderson et al. 2014; Pessi et al. 2019).
tation, evolutionary track, retained envelope, immediate Within the Type IIP subclass, there appears to be a
surroundings, and explosion energy, their light curves certain amount of inhomogeneity concerning the plateau
come in various shapes and brightness, and there are length. In most cases, the plateau length is, on an aver-
differences in their spectral features as well. Persistent age, 100 d. However, recent observations have shown
hydrogen features in the spectra indicate a Type II class several events that deviate from this 100 d plateau
SN; otherwise, a Type I SN (Filippenko 1997). There is length on either side, from the shorter end of the plateau
a further distinction in the light curve evolution of the (∼ 4%, Eldridge et al. 2018; Hiramatsu et al. 2021)
Type IIs, with either a linear decline (Type IIL) or with to the long plateau phase (∼ 0.35% for > 140 d, El-
a slow, plateau-like decline (Type IIP) followed by a lin- dridge et al. 2018). A few examples of the short plateau
ear decline (Barbon et al. 1979). Although appearing SNe are SN 2006Y (55 d), SN 2006ai (60 d) (Hiramatsu
et al. 2021), SN 2020jfo (65 d) (Sollerman et al. 2021;
Teja et al. 2022), and SN 2018gj (70 d) (Teja et al.
Corresponding author: Rishabh Singh Teja 2023a), while SN 2005cs (110 d) (Tsvetkov et al. 2006;
rishabh.teja@iiap.res.in, rsteja001@gmail.com Pastorello et al. 2009), SN 2018hwm (130 d) (Regui-
2 Teja et al.

tti et al. 2021), and SN 2020cxd (120 d), SN 2021aai a distinctive short plateau Type IIP supernova.
(140 d), (Valerin et al. 2022) had a longer plateau dura- SN 2021wvw (other names: PS21jnb, ZTF21abvcxel,
tion. In addition, there is also a very heterogeneous ATLAS21bgtz, Gaia21eqm) was discovered on August
distribution in the brightness space for this subclass 24, 2021 14:32.6UT (JD=2459451.1) in UGC 02605
(Valenti et al. 2016). With more discoveries and exten- (Jones et al. 2021) with 17.93 ABMag in the i − P 1
sive follow-up in recent times, many events are found to filter. Subsequently, it was classified as Type II with
be intrinsically fainter compared to typical Type II SNe a strong blue continuum having P-Cygni Hα and Hβ
(mean MVmax ∼ −16.7, Anderson et al. 2014) and are emissions (Hinkle 2021). The first detection in ZTF-g
termed as low (MV ≥ −15 mag) or intermediate (MV ≈ filter (19.34 mag) was on JD 2459449.95 and the last
−16 mag) luminosity SNe. These low/intermediate lu- non-detection in ZTF-r filter (19.15 mag) was on JD
minosity SNe also predominantly show a plateau length 2459449.91. Using this, we obtain JD 2459449.93 ± 0.02
of 100 d or more (for instance ≥ 140 d in SN 2016bkv, as the explosion epoch. A similar epoch, shifted by
Nakaoka et al. 2018; Valerin et al. 2022; Fang et al. +0.2 d, is obtained using data from ATLAS forced pho-
2024). Current understanding attributes these SNe to tometry server with 5-σ last non-detection (>18.89 mag)
originate from weak explosions of the lower mass end on JD 2459449.1 and first detection (18.10±0.08 mag)
of the red supergiant (RSG) stars, typically less than on JD 2459451.1 both in ATLAS-o filter. The non-
15 M⊙ with low 56 Ni mass production (Pumo et al. 2017; detections in both ZTF-r and ATLAS-o are at a similar
Lisakov et al. 2018). epoch, hence we consider this as the last non-detection,
On the other hand, several short-plateau SNe (50 - and the first detection in ZTF-g band. Using this we
80 d) studies show these to be brighter than the typ- obtain texp = 2459449.9 ± 0.3 as the explosion epoch
ical Type IIP SNe (Hiramatsu et al. 2021; Teja et al. and use this throughout. The location of SN 2021wvw
2022), with the low-luminosity, short plateau events be- in its host galaxy is marked in Figure 1.
ing infrequent. Type II SNe with short plateau also The structure of this paper is as follows: Section 2
tend to decline faster during their plateau phase (Hira- provides details of various data sources utilized. The
matsu et al. 2021). The favored mechanism for these light curves and spectra are analyzed and compared
short plateau SNe is still debated. A common trend is in Section 3 and 4 respectively along with estimating
56
that the lightcurve properties require a small but non- Ni mass and expansion velocities. Section 5 explores
negligible H-rich envelope (≈ a few M⊙ ) at the time of the probable progenitor using various models, including
explosion (Hiramatsu et al. 2021). Single-star evolution- complete hydrodynamical modeling, followed by a gen-
ary scenarios tend to favor moderate to high initial mass eral discussion in Section 6. Eventually, we summarize
RSGs, as stronger winds in more massive progenitors this work in Section 7.
provide a channel for stars to lose the majority but not 40°14' RGB composite using Bessell-BVR bands
the entirety of their H-rich envelope (see, e.g. Dessart
et al. 2010; Sukhbold et al. 2016; Curtis et al. 2021).
Other theoretical works remain agnostic to the mass-
loss mechanism or directly link low envelope mass with
15'
binary interaction (e.g. Morozova et al. 2015; Paxton
et al. 2018; Dessart et al. 2024), and a growing body of
Declination (J2000)

observational works investigate potential low-mass RSG

origins as well (Teja et al. 2022, 2023a; Utrobin & Chugai SN 2021wvw
2024) with one being a direct detection (Sollerman et al. 16'
2021). In both progenitor-mass regimes, the envelope
mass lost by the progenitor is high.
The occurrence of the short plateau events is relatively
low. While the low luminosity ones might suffer from an 17'
observational bias, this cannot be said about most short
plateau events since they are usually bright. Even taking
binarity into account, population-focused studies (e.g. 3h15m00s 14m55s 50s 45s 40s
Eldridge et al. 2018; Ercolino et al. 2024) nonetheless Right Ascension (J2000)
indicate their rates are expected to be low (∼ 4%). Figure 1. RGB color composite finder chart for SN2021wvw
This work presents comprehensive optical spectro- utilizing Bessell-BV R filters from HCT.
scopic and photometric observations of SN 2021wvw,
 SN 2021wvw: A sub-luminous SN with a short plateau 3

2. PHOTOMETRY AND SPECTROSCOPY: DATA SDSS photometry1 in the regions around the host center
SOURCES and near the SN position. Standard photometric data
reduction procedures have been adopted utilizing IRAF
and pyraf, the details of which can be found in Teja
Table 1. Log of spectroscopic observations of SN 2021wvw et al. (2023a). The photometric data are tabulated in
obtained from HCT.
the Appendix of this work.
We obtained low-resolution (R ∼ 800) optical spec-
Date JD Phase† Range tra with the HFOSC instrument available on HCT us-
(yyyy-mm-dd) (2459000+) (d) (Å) ing 167l slit (1.′′ 92 width and 11′ length). The spec-
2021-08-28 455.4 5.5 4000-7700 tra observed with grisms Gr7 and Gr8 were combined
2021-09-13 471.3 21.4 4000-8900 to obtain spectra covering a wavelength range of 4000
2021-09-18 476.3 26.3 4000-8900 to 9000 Å. The optical spectra were obtained during
2021-09-19 477.4 27.4 4000-7700 5 - 95 d post-explosion. Beyond 95 d, the SN faded
2021-09-29 487.3 37.3 4000-8900 considerably, and spectroscopy with HCT was not feasi-
2021-10-02 490.2 40.3 4000-8900 ble. The observed 2-D spectra were bias corrected using
2021-10-09 497.2 47.3 4000-8900 nightly bias frames, and the 1-D spectra were optimally
2021-10-10 498.2 48.3 4000-8900 extracted. The wavelength correction was performed
2021-10-14 502.2 52.2 4000-8900 using the dispersion solutions obtained from several arc
2021-10-19 507.2 57.3 4000-8900 lamps (FeNe, FeAr) spectra. The night-sky emission
2021-10-21 509.1 59.2 4000-8900 lines (5577, 6300, 6363 Å) in the background spectra
2021-10-22 510.2 60.3 5300-8900 were used to perform the accurate wavelength calibra-
2021-10-26 514.2 64.2 4000-8900 tions, applying small shifts wherever required. Spec-
2021-10-30 518.2 68.3 4000-8900 trophotometric standards were observed periodically to
2021-11-08 527.1 77.2 4000-8900
correct the instrumental response and finalize the spec-
tra in the flux scale. Eventually, a single flux-calibrated
2021-11-15 534.3 84.4 4000-8900
spectrum was obtained after combining spectra from in-
2021-11-26 545.1 95.1 4000-7700
† Phase dividual grisms. All these steps were performed using
given for texp = 2459449.9 JD
various tasks in IRAF.
The host redshift (z=0.0099, Schneider et al. (1992))
and line of sight extinction (E(B − V ) = 0.24 mag,
We began photometry of SN 2021wvw in the opti-
Schlafly & Finkbeiner (2011)) are taken from NED
cal since +8.4 d past explosion using the 0.7-m robotic
and IRSA, respectively. The redshift corresponds to
GROWTH-India Telescope (GIT, Kumar et al. 2022)
a distance of 41.51 ± 2.91 Mpc or µ = 33.09 ±
and the 2.0-m Himalayan Chandra Telescope (HCT),
0.15 mag, assuming the ΛCDM cosmology with H0 =
both situated at the Indian Astronomical Observa-
72.5 km s−1 Mpc−1 (Riess et al. 2022). We used Cardelli
tory (IAO, Prabhu 2014), Hanle, India. GIT covered
et al. (1989) extinction law with RV = 3.1 to correct
dense multi-band photometry in SDSS-g ′ r′ i′ z ′ filters,
for Galactic reddening. We do not find any discernible
and HCT covered photometry in Bessell-V and -R fil-
Na ID features at redshift of the host galaxy in SN spec-
ters. We supplemented our observations with photome-
tra, and hence assume no extinction due to the host
try from the Asteroid Terrestrial-impact Last Alert Sys-
galaxy.
tem (ATLAS, Tonry et al. 2018; Smith et al. 2020) forced
photometry server (Shingles et al. 2021) in c and o fil-
ters. We also obtained ZTF (Bellm et al. 2019) -g and 3. LIGHT CURVE EVOLUTION
-r filter apparent magnitudes from ALeRCE (Förster We present the panchromatic light curve evolution of
et al. 2021). The ATLAS photometry, being noisy, has SN 2021wvw in Figure 2. The light curve evolution
been binned for 2 d intervals in the late phase using spans roughly 220 d post-explosion. Other than the
Young (2020) python script. During the late phase, bluer bands such as g-band, the light curves evolution
we took multiple exposures using GIT and HCT and in different filters show a very flat evolution up to 70
summed them for a better signal-to-noise ratio in re- to 80 d before transitioning sharply into the tail phase.
spective filters. The SN being far away from the host The plateau and transition phases are very densely sam-
nucleus (∼ 31′′ ) and at the periphery, we do not perform
any template subtraction. The last detected photomet-
1 https://skyserver.sdss.org/dr18/
ric points are significantly brighter (1.5-3 mag) than the
 4 Teja et al.

14
GIT 18
15 z - 3.0 ZTF [Alerce]
ATLAS [FPS]
16 HCT 16

Mr/R [mag]
17
i - 2.0 14
m [ABmag]

18

100 d
o + 0.5

75 d
19 12
20 r/R 2006Y 2021wvw 2023ixf (R) 2005cs
10 2006ai 2018gj (R) 2020jfo (R) 2021gmj
21 c - 1.0
2016egz 2023ixf 2020jfo
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200
22 g + 1.0 Phase [Days Post Explosion]
V + 1.0
23 Figure 3. SN 2021wvw r band light curve evolution is com-
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 pared with the r/R band light curves of other short plateau
Phase [Days After Explosion] SNe. We also show the archetypal low-luminosity SN 2005cs
and an intermediate-luminosity SN 2021gmj.
Figure 2. Light curve evolution of SN 2021wvw for various
filters from GIT and HCT is shown. The light curves also
include data from ZTF and ATLAS surveys. The constants inspection, the g- and r- bands show a gradual de-
added to the individual light curves are for visual clarity. cline in the post-peak evolution. We find this to be
2.52+0.52
−0.53 mag 100 d
−1
and 0.34+0.19
−0.19 mag 100 d
−1

pled in most filters. In R and V filters, the tail phase is in g- and r- band, respectively, whereas the de-
sampled up to 220 d. We estimate a plateau length of cline is much steeper in other objects: for example,
around 75 d (OPTd, Anderson et al. 2014) and a sharp SN 2006Y and SN 2006ai have 4.62+0.51 −0.52 mag 100 d
−1
+0.05
transition period of about 10 d. and 4.44−0.05 mag 100 d−1 respectively in g-band. We
The mid-plateau absolute magnitude is ≈ −16.0 ± also estimated the decline rates of the plateau phase
0.1 mag in r-band. It puts SN 2021wvw in the in- (s2) and tail phase (s3). The estimated values of vari-
termediate luminosity regime for Type IIP SNe. The ous slopes and the mid-plateau absolute magnitudes are
duration of the plateau phase is also shorter (∼ 75 d), shown in Table 2. Interestingly, the plateau phase in the
whereas the typical plateau lengths for Type IIP SNe are i− band for SN 2021wvw is almost non-declining with
∼100 d and even longer in the case of under-luminous s2 = 0.10 ± 0.13 mag 100 d−1 , whereas for other SNe,
SNe (SN 2005cs, SN 2016bkv, SN 2021gmj). In Fig- both with lower luminosity and shorter-plateau SNe, it
ure 3, SN 2021wvw r-band light curve is compared with is around an order of magnitude higher. Evidently, the
r/R-band light curves of other intermediate/low lumi- tail phase decline (s3 = 0.64 ± 0.28mag 100 d−1 ) of
nosity and short plateau SNe, respectively. We com- SN 2021wvw in the r-band is close to the values ob-
pare with the archetypal SN 2005cs (Pastorello et al. tained for other lower luminosity SNe (SN 2021gmj,
2006) and SN 2021gmj (Murai et al. 2024) for low lu- SN 2005cs). At a similar phase, slope s3 in the i-
minosity SNe. Although short plateaus are very rare band is non-differentiable for both low-luminosity and
in the overall Type II SNe, we compare with other short-plateau SNe with values ranging from 1.1 to
well-studied short plateau SNe in literature such as SN 1.5 mag 100 d−1 .
2006Y, SN 2006ai, SN 2016egz (Hiramatsu et al. 2021), Comparing the mid-plateau luminosity (Mtp1/2 ) in
SN 2018gj (Teja et al. 2023a), SN 2020jfo (Teja et al. r/R-band with other SNe, we find that SN 2021wvw
2022) and SN 2023ixf Teja et al. (2023b); Singh et al. has a similar magnitude as of SN 2021gmj (−15.9 mag),
(2024). and about 1 mag higher than the Mtp1/2 of SN 2005cs
The photospheric phase light curve evolution of (−15.2 mag). Mtp1/2 of a majority of other short-
SN 2021wvw, particularly for r- and i- bands, is grad- plateau SNe is higher than −17 mag except for
ual, which is atypical for short plateau SNe, for which SN 2018gj (−16.7 mag) as shown in Figure 3.
the decline is generally rapid (Hiramatsu et al. 2021).
Although the early (s1) phase after maximum is not
56
evident in the multi-band light curves, upon closer 3.1. Radioactive Ni
 SN 2021wvw: A sub-luminous SN with a short plateau 5

Table 2. Various slopes obtained for different phases of light curves are presented. Slopes and absolute magnitude for other
SNe are also compared. The absolute magnitudes (Mr/R ) are reported from the middle of the plateau.

SN g [mag (100 d)−1 ] r/R [mag (100 d)−1 ] i [mag (100 d)−1 ] Mr/R
s1 s2 s1 s2 s3 s2 s3 [mag]
2021wvw 2.52 ± 0.53 1.25 ± 0.16 0.34 ± 0.19 0.78 ± 0.17 0.64 ± 0.28 0.10 ± 0.13 1.09 ± 0.25 −16.0
2005cs - - - −0.53 ± 0.01 0.60 ± 0.02 - - −15.2
2006Y 4.62 ± 0.51 3.28 ± 0.10 4.75 ± 0.13 0.29 ± 0.20 - 1.22 ± 0.10 - −17.3
2006ai 4.44 ± 0.05 2.86 ± 0.06 4.01 ± 0.10 0.96 ± 0.04 1.03 ± 0.13 1.01 ± 0.04 1.53 ± 0.19 −17.5
2016egz - 2.83 ± 0.19 - 0.89 ± 0.13 1.11 ± 0.04 1.51 ± 0.17 1.10 ± 0.10 −17.6
2021gmj - - - 0.25 ± 0.01 0.51 ± 0.11 1.28 ± 0.02 1.27 ± 0.03 −15.9

The late-time evolution is primarily powered by the to constrain the nickel mass and other parameters more
radioactive decay of 56 Ni formed during explosive nu- robustly.
cleosynthesis. It is the ultimate powering source in the
4. SPECTRA
Type II SNe during the nebular phase. Hence, the late-
time bolometric light curve can provide tight constraints We present a complete spectral evolution of
on estimating the 56 Ni mass. We use SuperBol (Nicholl SN 2021wvw covering the plateau and transition phases
2018) to estimate the pseudo-bolometric light curve and in Figure 4. The spectra have been calibrated with the
a complete bolometric light curve evolution from extrap- corresponding multi-band fluxes, corrected for the host
olated blackbody estimates. The extinction-corrected redshift, and de-reddened with the estimated extinction.
multi-band light curves were used as input, taking well- The phases mentioned are with respect to the estimated
sampled r-band as the reference light curve. The filters explosion epoch. All the well-identified lines are marked
utilized for the pseudo-bolometric curves were groiz. for clarity in the figure.
We estimate the 56 Ni using the following equation 4.1. Evolution and comparisons
given in Yuan et al. (2016) which also takes into account
The first spectrum was obtained at +5.5 d. The spec-
the γ−ray leakage in case of an stripped envelope:
trum comprises a blue continuum with broad Balmer
features and He I λ 5876 superposed on it. After that,
i  t2

c )
h
−( t∆t ) −( t∆t ) (− (∆t) there is a gap of around 15 d; the following spectrum is
Lobs (t) = L0 ×MN i × e Co − e N i × 1 − e 2

on +21 d. Thereafter, the spectral evolution is densely

sampled until the supernova enters the nebular phase.
where, ∆t = t − texp , L0 , tCo , and tNi are 1.41 × Qualitatively, absorption features appear relatively nar-
1043 erg s−1 , 111.4 d and 8.8 d, respectively. Here, row at first glance compared to typical IIP SNe, indicat-
tc is the characteristic time when the optical depth for ing relatively low velocities, and they become narrower
γ−rays approaches unity (Yuan et al. 2016). We use with time. Although there are some hints of Fe II in the
scipy and emcee packages to fit and estimate errors in bluer region at +21 d, these features do not evolve much
the values. Using the pseudo-bolometric light curve, we till +37 d, after which we start to see Fe II lines con-
estimate 56 Ni mass as 0.011 ± 0.001 M⊙ . This provides spicuously. Around +21 d, we also observe the appear-
a lower limit on the 56 Ni mass. In addition, considering ance of Ca NIR triplet feature in the red-ward region,
the blackbody fitted luminosity as bolometric luminos- strengthening as the SN ejecta evolves further in the
ity, we obtain M56 Ni = 0.023 ± 0.003 M⊙ , which we photospheric phase. Interestingly, the region between
consider as an upper limit for the estimated values. The Fe II lines and Hα is devoid of any lines except a weak
latter value is more than twice what was obtained us- appearance of Na ID from +37 d onward. Similarly, the
ing the pseudo-bolometric light curve, but, synonymous region between Hα and Ca triplet lacks any discernible
with a ∼ 50% NIR contribution seen in the nebular phase features until the end of the observed evolution. We
of SN 2023ixf (Singh et al. 2024). We lack NIR data to observe a band of emission lines between Hβ and Hγ,
provide more information about the accuracy of the con- usually attributed to Fe lines.
tribution in the late phase. Nevertheless, the 56 Ni mass The mid-plateau and end-plateau spectra are modeled
estimated implies a significant NIR flux contribution at using SYNAPPS/Syn++ (Thomas et al. 2011) to better
late phases. Hence, NIR observations for such objects in ascertain the minimum number of species required to
the nebular phase are crucial for a better understanding. explain the observed spectra. SYNAPPS/Syn++ is a di-
In subsequent sections, we perform light curve modeling rect implementation of parameterized spectral synthesis
 6 Teja et al.

Sky line
Model (+ 37 d)

Na ID
Fe II
Fe II

Ca II
Ca II
Model (+ 77 d)
??
H

H
H

H + 37 d
+ 5.5 d
+ 77 d
+ 21.4 d

Scaled Flux (erg s 1 cm 2) + Const.

+ 26.3 d
+ 27.4 d HI
+ 37.3 d
NaI
Scaled f [erg s 1 cm 2 Å 1] + Constant

+ 40.3 d
+ 47.3 d CaII
+ 48.3 d
ScII
+ 52.2 d
+ 57.3 d FeII
+ 59.2 d
OI
+ 60.3 d
FeI
+ 64.2 d
BaII
+ 68.3 d 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000
+ 77.2 d
Wavelength (Å)
Figure 5. SYNAPPS model fitting to the observed spectra
+ 84.4 d around the mid and end plateau phases. The lower small
panels show the model spectra of individual species when
+ 95.1 d the contribution from rest of the species is turned off.

4000 4500 5000 5500 6000 6500 7000 7500 8000 8500 synthetic spectra thus obtained are compared with the
Rest Wavelength [Å] observed spectra for each iteration. The procedure is au-
tomated and requires only initial input parameters with
Figure 4. Spectral sequence for SN 2021wvw. The spectra
user-defined ranges for each parameter to constrain the
have been corrected for absolute flux using corresponding
photometry and also de-reddened using MW LOS extinction.
parameter space physically. SYNAPPS has been predom-
inantly used to model stripped-envelope and thermonu-
clear SNe spectra but has been successfully utilized in
code SYNOW (Parrent et al. 2010). It assumes a spheri-
a number of hydrogen-rich SNe cases as well (Takáts
cal symmetry with homologous expansion of the ejecta.
& Vinkó 2012; Sahu et al. 2013; Bostroem et al. 2019;
The emission of photons is from a sharp photosphere,
Dastidar et al. 2021).
with the optical depth taken as an exponential function
For the first setup to model the +37 d spectrum, we
of velocity.
include only five species namely H I, Ca II, Na I, Sc II

vref − v
 and Fe II. The overall best-fit spectra and various species
τref (v) = τref (vref ) exp contributions are shown in Figure 5. The individual
ve
species contributions are obtained by utilizing the best-
where vref is reference velocity for parameterization and fit output as input in syn++ by turning on one species at
ve is the maximum velocity allowed at the outer edge a time in the input file. No warping function is applied,
of the line-forming region (Thomas et al. 2011). For a i.e., a1=a2=0. Only a0 is varied, which signifies the flux
particular optical depth, the reference line profile is esti- level. Photospheric velocity obtained on the day +37 d
mated for a given ion with the remaining lines following is 3830 km s−1 .
Boltzmann statistics (Parrent et al. 2010). SYNAPPS iter- For end-plateau spectra at +77 d, in addition to the
atively generates synthetic spectra based on a provided previously included species, we add three more metal
input file with parameters such as ions list, blackbody species, namely Ba II, Fe I, and O I. Further, we find
temperature, expansion velocities, and opacities. The
 SN 2021wvw: A sub-luminous SN with a short plateau 7

and Ba II. The photospheric velocity obtained from

these fits around +77 d is 2170 km s−1 .
In Figure 6, we compare the SN 2021wvw spectra
with a few other short-plateau SNe along with the
SN 2021wvw + 20 d
low-luminosity SN 2005cs and intermediate luminosity
SN 2005cs + 18.0 d [L]
Normalized f [erg s 1 cm 2 Å 1] + Const.

SN 2021gmj. Firstly, in the top panel of Figure 6,

we compare the spectra around 20 d when the metal
SN 2006Y + 26.2 d [S]
features are well developed. We clearly observe that
there are similarities as well as dissimilarities in the
SN 2006ai + 20.3 d [S] spectral features. At first glance, the features appear
similar to SN 2005cs and SN 2021gmj, i.e., narrow and
strong absorption. The Hα absorption appears shal-
SN 2016egz + 18.5 d [S]
SN 2018gj + 24 d [S] low, which seems to be the general trend for the short-
plateau SNe and is completely indiscernible in some of
SN 2020jfo + 28 d [S] the brighter and fast-declining short-plateau SNe, for
SN 2021gmj + 23 d [L] example, SN 2006Y, SN 2006ai, and SN 2016egz. At
similar epochs, other SNe have well-developed metal fea-
tures such as Fe II lines toward the blue end, whereas we
only see a hint of these lines in SN 2021wvw. In the bot-
SN 2021wvw + 25 d
tom panel of the same figure, we compare SN 2021wvw
4000 4500 5000 5500 6000 6500 7000 7500 8000 8500 9000 spectra during the end plateau phase, where we find the
0 [Å] appearance of the strongest metallic features. Compar-
ison spectra for other SNe are taken at similar epochs.
The SN 2021wvw spectra show similar features to other
sub-luminous SNe, but the absorption depths are shal-
SN 2021wvw + 77 d
low. However, SN 2021wvw has well-developed P-Cygni
SN 2005cs + 92 d [L]
(more representative of a typical Type IIP) profiles com-
pared to much shallower absorption depths in short-
Normalized f [erg s 1 cm 2 Å 1] + Const.

SN 2006Y + 56.0 d [S] plateau SNe SN 2006Y, SN 2006ai, and SN 2016egz.

SN 2006ai + 67.3 d [S]
4.2. Velocities
SN 2018gj + 68 d [S]

H 8 FeII 4924Å
12 H FeII 5018Å
Velocity [1000 km s 1]

Velocity [1000 km s 1]

SN 2016egz + 75.1 d [S]

10 H 6 FeII 5169Å
SN 2020jfo + 70 d [S]

8 4
SN 2021gmj + 95 d [L]
6
SN 2021wvw + 84 d 2
4

20 40 60 80 20 40 60 80
Time Since Explosion [Days]
4000 4500 5000 5500 6000 6500 7000 7500 8000 8500
0 [Å]
Figure 7. Expansion velocity evolution estimated from sev-
Figure 6. Spectral comparisons at the early and late plateau eral prominent metallic features (including Balmer lines) ob-
phase with short-plateau SNe and with other sub-luminous served in the spectra. The velocities have been compared
SNe. with a large sample taken from Gutiérrez et al. (2017). The
shaded region gives the corresponding 1-σ scatter around the
sample mean.
that the broad emission band around 4800 Å is a blend
of multiple metal lines originating from neutral Fe, Sc II,
We utilize some of the well-resolved absorption fea-
tures to estimate expansion velocities of the ejecta. We
8 Teja et al.

iteratively measure the absorption minimum of these 42.25 Shell Shell + Core Variations Lbol
lines using IRAF by fitting an inverted Gaussian assum- 42.00
ing a multitude of continuum points. The absorption
Core Parameters
minima are corrected for redshift and eventually con- 41.75 (R0 = 500 R )

)
log10 L [erg s 1]
verted to the expansion velocities using the central rest Mej = 6.20+0.20
0.05 M
wavelengths of the corresponding features. We have esti- 41.50 MNi = 0.020+0.004
0.005 M
Eth = 0.165+0.035
0.035 foe
mated these velocities for six lines as shown in Figure 7. 41.25 EKin = 0.93+0.03
0.02 foe

(
The errors in velocity estimates are much smaller than
the instrumental resolution; hence, the latter has been 41.00
quoted as the errors in the velocities.
For the first epoch (+5.5 d), we could identify the
40.75
absorption dips blueward of Hα and Hβ rest wave- 40.50
lengths corresponding to ∼ 9, 100 km s−1 and ∼ 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200
10, 600 km s−1 line velocity respectively. At +21 d, Phase [Days Since Explosion]
apart from Balmer features, we could measure the ve-
Figure 8. Semi-analytical fit for fixed radii of 500 R⊙ . The
locity from Fe II 5169 Å. Up to +85 d, the velocities are
values provided in the inset are for the best-matching models.
measured, and their time evolution is shown in Figure 7.
Around +40 d, which is proximal to the mid-plateau
mark, we measure the Hα and Fe II 5169 Å velocities as of this semi-analytical formulation with subsequent ad-
∼ 5, 700 km s−1 and ∼ 2, 800 km s−1 , respectively. The ditions by Blinnikov & Popov (1993); Nagy et al. (2014)
SYNAPPS modeling around similar phase gives a value to obtain approximate ejecta mass (Mej ), progenitor ra-
which is between these two values (∼ 3830 km s−1 ). dius (R0 ), energy (Etot ), and 56 Ni mass (MNi ) estimates.
As the ejecta evolves, the expansion velocities keep de- The total energy Etot comprises ejecta kinetic energy
creasing until we can confidently resolve the absorp- (Ek ) and initial thermal energy (Eth ) deposited by the
tion minimum. Towards the end of the plateau phase, shock (Etot = Ek + Esh ). In this analytical formulation,
around +75 d, we find the expansion velocities to be the SN ejecta, which is spherically symmetric, is divided
∼ 2, 000 km s−1 from Fe lines and ∼ 5, 100 km s−1 into two components: a) an interior core with a constant
from Hα. The model spectrum around a similar phase (or flat) density; b) an outer less dense shell with an
gives ∼ 2, 170 km s−1 as the photospheric velocity, which exponential (n=2) density profile (Nagy & Vinkó 2016).
is much closer to the values obtained from the metallic These components have independent sets of physical pa-
features. rameters, with the origin of the radius being the same.
We further compare these velocities with the mean The contribution from each component to the light curve
expansion velocities obtained from a larger sample of is estimated independently.
Type II SNe (Gutiérrez et al. 2017). The mean velocities There is a degeneracy among various parameters
and 1-σ scatter in these are overplotted in Figure 7. We (Nagy & Vinkó 2016). In a similar analysis for two
see that the SN 2021wvw velocities lie at the lower 1-σ other short plateau SNe, SN 2018gj and SN 2020jfo,
end of the sample, implying that this is a slowly evolving the progenitor radii did not match well with the results
ejecta. For metal lines, the velocities are even smaller obtained using detailed hydrodynamical modeling (Teja
than the lower 1-σ edge from the sample. Around mid- et al. 2023a, 2022). So, in this work, we do not attempt
plateau, the difference between the mean velocities of to constrain the radius of the progenitor; instead, we fix
the sample and SN 2021wvw observed velocities is ∼ the radius to multiple values beforehand. We take three
1, 500 km s−1 . cases: a fairly compact progenitor (300 R⊙ ), a typical
RSG radius (700 R⊙ ), and a radius in between (500 R⊙ ).
5. PLAUSIBLE PROGENITOR We vary other parameters to get a light curve matching
the observed light curve. Another caveat to consider is
5.1. Semi-analytical models the lack of early UV and U -band data, which, in mod-
We attempt to model the bolometric light curve of els, is usually governed by the shell part. This outer
SN 2021wvw using a two-component progenitor model envelope could also act as proximal CSM around the
(Nagy & Vinkó 2016) to roughly constrain a few param- RSG progenitor (Nagy & Vinkó 2016). Due to lack of
eters and motivate detailed modeling. This formulation data, no attempts were made to estimate CSM. Instead,
comprises of a dense ‘core’ and an extended ‘envelope,’ we fixed the shell values (to a negligible contribution)
representing the bulk of the ejecta and the near-surface so that they do not affect the early light curve. Since
layers, respectively. Arnett & Fu (1989) form the basis
 SN 2021wvw: A sub-luminous SN with a short plateau 9

Table 3. Core parameters for best matching semi-analytical from 8 − 12 M⊙ (Sollerman et al. 2021; Teja et al. 2022;
models Utrobin & Chugai 2024) and reaching up to 20 − 30 M⊙
(Dessart et al. 2010; Hiramatsu et al. 2021). Therefore,
Parameters∗ R=300 M⊙ R=500 M⊙ R=700 M⊙ to ascertain the properties of the plausible progenitor of
Mej (M⊙ ) 6.50+0.20
−0.20 6.20+0.20
−0.05 6.60+0.10
−0.10 SN 2021wvw, its evolutionary scenario, mass loss before
Eth (1051 erg) 0.27+0.13
−0.05 0.17+0.04
−0.04 0.12+0.03
−0.02 the explosion, explosion energy, and ejecta mass, we per-
Ekin (1051 erg) 1.00+0.20
−0.12 0.93+0.03
−0.02 1.05+0.01
−0.01 form the hydrodynamical modeling by evolving progeni-
MNi (M⊙ ) 0.020+0.004
−0.006 0.020 +0.004
−0.005 0.020 +0.004
−0.005
tors for both the lower and higher end of RSGs, allowing
∗ 10 2
Trec ≈ 6000 K, Ag = 6.5 × 10 d arbitrarily enhanced winds to mimic the impact of prior
mass loss (due to binary interaction Laplace et al. e.g.
2021; Ercolino et al. e.g. 2024 or eruptive mass loss dur-
the models are analytical, the errors are estimated by
ing the star’s life Cheng et al. e.g. 2024) on the mass of
first obtaining a match to the observed light curve data,
the H-rich ejecta.
followed by varying the parameters to fit the upper and
We use the 1-D stellar evolution code MESA (Paxton
lower error bars associated with the observed light curve.
et al. 2011, 2013, 2015, 2018, 2019; Jermyn et al. 2023)
The best parameters obtained for the fixed radii values
revision 15140 to evolve the progenitor and hydrody-
are presented in Table 3. We could find that the model
namical explosion and STELLA (Blinnikov & Sorokina
fits equally well with very similar parameters within er-
2004; Baklanov et al. 2005; Blinnikov et al. 2006) to
ror bars for each radii value. The case for 500 R⊙ is
obtain synthetic observables, specifically light curves
shown in Figure 8.
and expansion velocity. Most of the parameters in
The best-fit values of the parameters Mej and MNi do
MESA were kept the same as provided in the inlists
not vary much for the different radii considered here.
make pre ccsn IIp and ccsn IIp and described in de-
The only considerable changes are in the energy values.
tail in Farmer et al. (2016) and Paxton et al. (2018);
From these models, we find the Mej to be ∼ 6.5 M⊙ ,
additional detailed descriptions of the setup and key
MNi = 0.020 ± 0.005 M⊙ , and a total energy between
parameters are mentioned in (Teja et al. 2022, 2023a).
1.1 to 1.3 foe. The Mej values for SN 2021wvw are sim-
We use the binding-energy fallback scheme introduced in
ilar to those obtained in other short plateau cases (for
Paxton et al. (2019); Goldberg et al. (2019) to quantify
example, SN 2018gj, SN 2020jfo) but with lower explo-
late-time fallback during the shock propagation phase.
sion energy. The lower energy values are expected for
In this work, we mainly focus on the following parame-
SN 2021wvw, considering its sub-luminous nature. The
ters: zero-age main-sequence (ZAMS) mass, metallicity
total energy contribution from the core in the case of
(z), wind scaling factor (αwsf ), mixing length (αM LT ),
low-luminosity SN 2005cs is ∼ 0.5 foe (Nagy & Vinkó
explosion energy, nickel mass, and explosive mixing via
2016) with Mej = 8.0 M⊙ . Considering the intermedi-
the Duffell Rayleigh Taylor Instability (RTI) (Duffell
ate brightness of SN 2021wvw and a shorter plateau
2016) 1D implementation by varying the ratio of RTI pa-
length, the estimated parameters are reasonably well
rameter ηR,e and diffusion parameter ηR (Paxton et al.
constrained with tight bounds on the 56 Ni mass. Us-
2018). The progenitor models are exploded in MESA via
ing these values as our reference point, we delve into
a thermal energy injection to a specified total explosion
more details about the progenitor and its origins using
energy, and the ejecta evolution is followed to just be-
complete hydrodynamical modeling.
fore shock breakout following Paxton et al. (2018) as dis-
5.2. Hydrodynamical Modeling cussed in Teja et al. (2022, 2023a) making use of the Duf-
fell (2016) implementation for mixing via the Rayleigh-
In the previous section, we obtained rough estimates
Taylor Instability. The models are then handed off to
of the progenitor parameters. Unfortunately, we lack
STELLA when the shock reaches an overhead mass coor-
the nebular phase spectra, which could also be utilized
dinate of 0.05 M⊙ . Before evolving a new set of pro-
to constrain the progenitor’s C/O core mass. Initially,
genitors, we first try the short-plateau models from pre-
we looked for models representative of SN 2021wvw evo-
vious works, namely SN 2020jfo (Teja et al. 2022) and
lution in other previous studies. However, none of the
SN 2018gj (Teja et al. 2023a). Exploding these with
grids of model light curves or individual models available
lower energies to match the plateau luminosities makes
in the literature could provide a short plateau length
the plateau length longer, leaving these models infruc-
with low luminosity (Dessart et al. 2010; Eldridge et al.
tuous. We then proceed to evolve additional models.
2018; Moriya et al. 2023). For the case of short-plateau
Firstly, we evolve 13 M⊙ ZAMS mass models with so-
SNe, it has been noticed that a wide range of plausi-
lar metallicity for the lower mass end. We change the
ble RSG masses could give rise to these SNe ranging
 10 Teja et al.
42.5
SN 2021wvw exactly with models due to lack of relevant observa-
Eexp = 0.17 foe, R, e/ R = 1 tions. We find that the velocities, plateau luminosity,
Eexp = 0.18 foe, R, e/ R = 20
Other 13 M models and nickel tail match reasonably well for low-mass RSG
42.0
models. However, these models could not reproduce the
observed slow decline during the plateau phase and the
Other Parameters sharp transition from the plateau to the tail phase. A
)
log10 Lbol[erg s 1]

41.5 (MZAMS = 13 M )
MNi = 0.020 M (with different mixing), sharp decline for SN 2005cs was obtained by increas-
wsf = 6.0 6.6,
MLT = 2.0 3.0 ing the strength of RTI mixing, as shown in (Paxton
et al. 2018). As a more thoroughly mixed ejecta is ex-
(

41.0
pected to cause a steeper plateau drop due to a more
[103 km s 1]

5
4 even distribution of H throughout the entire ejecta, we
3 also attempt to vary the RTI mixing via ηR,e /ηR , which
40.5
5169

2 directly changes the density structure as well as the

vFe II

120 30 40 50 60 70 80 abundance structure of the progenitor and the varied

Phase [Days Since Explosion]
degree of mixing of species. Even for a value as high
40.0 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200
Phase [Days Since Explosion] as ηR,e /ηR = 20, we only observe slight changes in the
model light curves, but not significant enough to satisfy
Figure 9. Observed and modeled bolometric evolution of the observed transition (refer Figure 9).
SN 2021wvw for 13 M⊙ ZAMS models with different sets of We proceed further to explore and explode the higher
parameters. The inset in the left bottom shows the corre- ZAMS mass models in the range 18-20 M⊙ which plausi-
sponding modeled and observed Fe II 5169 velocities.
bly lie on the upper mass limit for the directly detected
progenitors of Type II SNe (Smartt et al. 2009; Davies
& Beasor 2020). The resulting models are shown in Fig-
42.5
SN 2021wvw ure 10 with colored lines representing the best match
Eexp = 0.25 foe, R, e/ R = 1
Eexp = 0.22 foe, R, e/ R = 1
to the observations (other models are in gray color).
Eexp = 0.22 foe, R, e/ R = 8 Owing to their large progenitor radii (∼ 1000 R⊙ ) at
42.0 Other 18 & 20 M models the mixing length αMLT = 2, the initial models were
too bright to fit the plateau luminosities even with very
low explosion energies. Hence, we evolved slightly com-
)
log10 Lbol[erg s 1]

41.5 Other Parameters

(MZAMS = 18 M ) pact progenitors to match the plateau decline and lu-
MNi = 0.020 M , wsf = 3.0,
MLT = 4.0 & z = 0.01 (0.6Z ) minosities by varying the αM LT and metallicity z. For
αMLT = 4.0 & z = 0.6Z⊙ , we could obtain a consid-
(

41.0
erable match with the observed light curves for explo-
[103 km s 1]

5
4 sion energies of ≈0.22 to 0.25 foe with Mej = 4.7 M⊙ .
3 This value of αMLT is on the higher end of typically-
40.5
5169

2 considered values (see, e.g. Goldberg & Bildsten 2020),

vFe II

120 30 40 50 60 70 80 and is consistent with 3D simulations of convective RSG

Phase [Days Since Explosion]
40.0 0
envelopes (Goldberg et al. 2022). The transition to the
25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 end of the plateau obtained for these models is inher-
Phase [Days Since Explosion]
ently sharp, which is further matched well by varying
Figure 10. Observed and modeled bolometric evolution of the RTI parameter. We could replicate the observed
SN 2021wvw for 18 M⊙ ZAMS models with different sets of transition profile for ηR,e /ηR = 8. The mass of 56 Ni
parameters. The solid red curve gives the best description required to fit the observed light curve is similar to the
of the model. The inset in the bottom left shows the corre-
earlier estimates with MNi ≈ 0.020 M⊙ . The ejecta
sponding modeled and observed Fe II 5169 velocities.
mass and explosion energies obtained through hydro-
dynamical modeling are lower than that obtained from
wind scaling (αwsf ) in steps and explode each progen-
the semi-analytical approach. However, such discrep-
itor with various explosion energies until we match the
ancies between semi-analytic and detailed modeling are
plateau luminosity and its duration. Some of the result-
fairly common in the literature (see for example, Szalai
ing bolometric light curves and corresponding Fe II 5169
et al. (2019); Teja et al. (2023a)). This could be due to
velocities are presented in Figure 9, which are compared
various simplified approximations in the semi-analytical
with the observed values. As stated earlier, we do not
work, including the assumed density and velocity profile
attempt to match the initial 10-20 days of observations
 SN 2021wvw: A sub-luminous SN with a short plateau 11

of the ejecta, as well as the assumption of a simple two- M⊙ of material is falling onto the core in 13 M⊙ pro-
zone ejecta with a grey opacity treatment independent genitor case, whereas it is much larger for high mass
of metallicity (Nagy & Vinkó 2016). scenarios reaching up to 2-3 M⊙ (owing to the larger
core binding energy of the high-mass progenitors). Ap-
1.0 H1 C12 Fe54 Ni56 Pre SB ( R, e/ R = 1)
proximately 1 M⊙ of fallback was also present in the
He4 O16 Fe56 After Infall Pre SB ( R, e/ R = 8) SN 2005cs models (Paxton et al. 2018) even for an ini-
tial low mass progenitor (13 M⊙ ).
0.8
6. DISCUSSION
Mass Fraction (X)

0.6 6.1. Scaling relation degeneracies and model

differences for short-plateau SNe
Excised Core

0.4
8 (Models MEje)
MZAMS = 13
0.2 7 MZAMS = 18
MZAMS = 20
6
Best Model (MZAMS = 18 M )

Mej [M ]
0.0 5
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 4
Mass [M ]
3
Figure 11. MESA+STELLA structures for different cases
of 18 M⊙ ZAMS models with different RTI parameter. A few 2
species out of the 22 species network used in the modeling are 1 Best Model (MZAMS = 13 M )
shown here. Solid lines present the mass fraction just after 0.45
0.40
Eexp [1051 erg s 1]

we inject the explosion energy. The other two dashed lines

show the final ejecta structure before the shock breakout 0.35
0.30
(SB) for different ηR,e /ηR values. The final ejecta profiles 0.25
suffer from significant fallback during the shock-propagation 0.20
0.15 Eexp for SN 2021wvw models
phase, which we discuss in Section 6.2. 0.10
0.05
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
We show the structural differences in the various mod- Radius [R ]
els considering the effect of the RTI parameter in Fig-
Figure 12. Plausible Eexp and Mej ranges plotted from
ure 11 using a few species out of the 22 species net-
the scaling relations obtained in Goldberg et al. (2019). The
work used in the modeling. Solid lines represent the scatter points represent the ejecta masses obtained for var-
mass fraction just after we inject the explosion energy. ious models utilized in this work. The energy values for all
The other two dashed lines show the final ejecta struc- the evolved models are between 0.1 to 0.3 foe. The shaded
ture before the shock breakout (SB) for different ηR,e /ηR regions include the values obtained considering the errors in
values. The figure shows that the higher η ratio weak- the observables.
ens the RTI mixing with increasing species concentra-
tion towards the inner layers. At the boundary in- Many works have highlighted the non-uniqueness of
terface, the gradient is steeper for a higher η ratio. hydrodynamical modeling of SN-IIP lightcurves and
Due to the small explosion energies, the models expe- plateau velocities (Goldberg et al. 2019; Dessart &
rience significant fallback during the shock-propagation Hillier 2019; Martinez & Bersten 2019; Goldberg & Bild-
phase as reverse shocks off the steep density gradients sten 2020). Semi-analytical scalings between luminosity
at various compositional boundaries sweep marginally- and plateau duration with progenitor properties thus
unbound material back onto the inner boundary. This entail families of explosions which may produce quali-
is also evident in Figure 11, where the inner boundary tatively similar lightcurves, with higher Mej and Eexp
of the final pre-SB structure is at a significantly higher at lower R being comparable to smaller Mej and Eexp at
mass co-ordinate (≈ 4.5 M⊙ ) than what was initially ex- higher R (Popov 1993; Kasen & Woosley 2009; Sukhbold
cised as a core remnant mass (≈ 1.7 M⊙ ). The detailed et al. 2016; Goldberg et al. 2019; Goldberg & Bildsten
fallback treatment in MESA is described in Goldberg et al. 2020). We compare a selection of our MESA models (from
(2019). Due to the relatively low core binding energy in Section 5) to the scaling relations obtained by Goldberg
the suite of 13M⊙ progenitors, we find only 0.2 to 0.4 et al. (2019) to estimate a comprehensive set of ejecta
12 Teja et al.

mass and explosion energies, shown in Fig 12. We note cretion of material to the central remnant (Gutiérrez
that these scaling relations were calibrated to higher Ni et al. 2020). For many of these objects, the 56 Ni mass
masses and more typical (i.e., less-stripped) events. We obtained is an order of magnitude or even much lesser
do not take these scaling relations as the absolute truth than the 56 Ni mass obtained for SN 2021wvw. Further,
in this regime, but rather, show them as representative the velocity obtained for these cases is much less than
of the degeneracies characteristic of SNe IIP (Dessart the usual Type II expansion velocities.
& Hillier 2019; Goldberg et al. 2019; Goldberg & Bild- Interestingly, the short plateau and a sharp transi-
sten 2020), and use them to motivate and contextualize tion to the plateau phase are remarkable features for
our hydrodynamical modeling efforts. For radii between SN 2021wvw, which are unusual for low to intermediate
400-1000 R⊙ , we find the explosion energy varies from luminosity SNe. Given the low inferred Eexp , the short
≈ 2.5 × 1050 erg s−1 to much lower 5 × 1049 erg s−1 . plateau length requires a low H-rich ejecta mass for both
For the given radii range, the predicted ejecta masses low-mass and high-mass progenitors, which could be the
are less than 3 M⊙ . The modeled ejecta masses lie some- result of a higher mass loss during evolution. Such high
what above the values obtained utilizing scaling rela- mass loss might be consistent with the notion that the
tions for all the progenitors, possibly due to the smaller sharp drop from the plateau is actually excess luminos-
ratio of core mass to envelope mass in the sample used to ity during the plateau drop driven by late-time interac-
calibrate the scalings compared to the models presented tion with previously ejected material. But, as observed
here. The explosion energy provides good matching val- in the spectral evolution (Section 4), there are no dis-
ues. These relations tend to give similar values obtained cernible CSM signatures in the spectra. On the other
by semi-analytical modeling for the much more compact hand, if there is an actual fallback (as occurs during
radii (< 400 R⊙ ), also seen in the case of another short hydrodynamical modeling in Section 5) of the inner lay-
plateau SN 2018gj (Teja et al. 2023a). ers onto the core, the inward receding photosphere may
In both the low and high mass cases for SN 2021wvw, reach earlier to the base of the H-rich ejecta, giving a
we find apparent differences in the early phase (< 40 d) short plateau with a sharp transition. This may mani-
modeled and observed velocities. The differences are fest in late-time signatures of accretion if such accretion
significant in the 13 M⊙ models. This tension is further persists (see, e.g. Dexter & Kasen 2013; Moriya et al.
increased in low-mass models when we try to match the 2019). However, the lack of late time light curve (be-
observed plateau luminosity by increasing their progen- yond 300 d) and spectral information restricts us from
itor radius. In other modeling works, it has been noted saying anything about further observational signatures
that the MESA+STELLA models provide an excellent veloc- of fallback accretion.
ity match with typical Type IIP SNe observed velocities While the short plateau and its sharp transition could
from the early phase until the photospheric phase, which be due to fallback, further discussion of the physical con-
is not the case for the short plateau events. sequences of this fallback and ascertaining its influence
on the sharp transition from plateau requires further
6.2. Fallback during the shock propagation phase detailed modeling, which is beyond the scope of this
work. We nonetheless encourage follow-up observations
In a majority of the modeled sub-luminous SNe that
searching for any signatures of continued accretion or
are the result of low-energy explosions, whether they
very late-time circumstellar interaction from this unique
come from low to moderate mass (8-18 M⊙ ) RSGs
event.
(Chugai & Utrobin 2000; Pumo et al. 2017; Lisakov et al.
2018; Valerin et al. 2022) or high-mass RSG explosions
(> 20 M⊙ Zampieri et al. 2003), there are discussions 6.3. SN 2021wvw in the Type II domain
related to fallback material onto the core. Namely, when We compare SN 2021wvw with a large sample of nor-
the total explosion energy is positive but only compa- mal Type IIP SNe (Hamuy 2003) and low-luminosity
rable in magnitude to the total binding energy of the Type II SNe (Spiro et al. 2014) as shown in Fig 13.
progenitor star, late-time fallback from reverse shocks SN 2021wvw fits well in the established tight correlation
during the pre-SBO phase may sweep marginally un- between expansion velocity and luminosity for Type II
bound material back onto the central remnant (Colgate SNe at 50 d. Moreover, we find it bifurcating the two
see, e.g. 1971; Perna et al. see, e.g. 2014. In some cases, populations in both luminosity and expansion velocities.
the central remnant has been speculated to turn into In this space, it is a bridging object between the normal
a black hole post-accretion, but with no observational Type IIP SNe and under luminous ones. Apart from
evidence (Zampieri et al. 2003). In other cases, very this expected behavior, SN 2021wvw is unique due to its
late-time enhanced luminosity is associated with the ac- short plateau and low luminosity. Considering existing
 SN 2021wvw: A sub-luminous SN with a short plateau 13
N = 45, r = 0.922, p = 2.525e 19
short plateau subclass of Type IIP SNe presented in the
Best Fit
Type IIP [Hamuy (2003)] sample and, presumably, in the literature.
Low Luminosity Type II [Spiro+2014]
3.8 2021wvw 7. SUMMARY
This work provides a comprehensive set of multi-band
photometric and optical spectroscopic observations of an
Log(V50[103 km s 1])

3.6 under-luminous, short-plateau supernova SN 2021wvw.

We have presented detailed light curves and spectral
comparisons with other short-plateau SNe. The light
3.4 curves and spectra are modeled to obtain the physical
parameters of the explosion. Some of the key findings
are summarized as follows:

3.2 • SN 2021wvw is fainter (at Mr ≈ −16 mag) com-

pared with other short-plateau SNe and shows the
shortest plateau (≈ 75 d) among the intermediate
luminosity SNe, with a sharp transition period of
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
M50
V [mag]
∼ 10 d from plateau to tail phase.

• The ejecta expansion velocities are slowly evolving

and lie below the 1-σ lower bound compared to a
large sample of Type II SNe.
150

140
• Early spectra show fewer metallic features as com-
pared to other short-plateau and sub-luminous
130
SNe. The lack of metal features is evident till the
120 last spectrum (+95 d) presented here.
110
• Detailed MESA+STELLA hydrodynamical modeling
tp [d]

100 disfavors the lower mass RSG models and is more

90 inclined towards the higher mass end of RSGs. A
compact progenitor with 18 M⊙ ZAMS mass, ra-
80
tp = 80 d dius of 650-700 R⊙ and a final H-rich ejecta mass
70 of ≈ 5 M⊙ is seen to provide a good fit to the
60 Type II (Fang+2024) observed properties.
tp 80 d
50 SN 2021wvw MV = 16.0 mag
14.0 14.5 15.0 15.5 16.0 16.5 17.0 17.5 18.0
• Modeling also suggests a low explosion energy
MV [mag, Mid-plateau] (≈ 0.23 × 1051 erg) with an estimated 0.020 M⊙
of radioactive 56 Ni.
Figure 13. Top: Correlation between plateau brightness at
50 d, M50V and expansion velocities at 50 d after explosion. With the increasing number of short-plateau SNe, we
Bottom: Mid-plateau brightness, MV versus plateau dura-
find that these events have varied luminosities, synthe-
tion (tp ) for a large sample including a wide range of Type
II SNe obtained from Fang et al. (2024). sized 56 Ni masses, and expansion velocities. It is evident
that these are not restricted to moderate to luminous
events, as seen previously. With the upcoming large
works (e.g., refer Fig 17 in Valenti et al. 2016) showing
surveys such as LSST, this number would only increase
a correlation between plateau luminosity and plateau
and possibly make the Type IIP class or subclasses more
duration, SN 2021wvw clearly is an outlier. Even for
homogenous in different parameter spaces.
a larger sample for all Type II subclasses (Fang et al.
2024), SN 2021wvw stands apart, as is evident in the 8. SOFTWARE AND THIRD PARTY DATA
bottom panel of Fig 13. SN 2021wvw has the shortest REPOSITORY CITATIONS
plateau among all the intermediate and low-luminosity
SNe. In contrast, it is the faintest SN among all the
Facilities: HCT: 2-m, GIT: 0.7-m, ZTF, ATLAS
14 Teja et al.

Software: astropy (Astropy Collaboration et al. We thank the staff of IAO, Hanle, CREST, and
2013, 2018, 2022), ds9 (Smithsonian Astrophysical Ob- Hosakote, who made these observations possible. The
servatory 2000), emcee (Foreman-Mackey et al. 2013), facilities at IAO and CREST are operated by the In-
IRAF (Tody 1993), Jupyter-notebook (Kluyver et al. dian Institute of Astrophysics, Bangalore.
2016), matplotlib (Hunter 2007), MESA, numpy (Harris This research has made use of the High Perfor-
et al. 2020), pandas (Wes McKinney 2010; pandas devel- mance Computing (HPC) resources https://www.iiap.
opment team 2020), plot atlas fp.py (Young 2020) scipy res.in/?q=facilities/computing/nova made available by
(Virtanen et al. 2020), STELLA, SYNAPPS the Computer Center of the Indian Institute of Astro-
physics, Bangalore.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This work has made use of data from the As-
We are grateful to the anonymous referee for thor- teroid Terrestrial-impact Last Alert System (AT-
oughly evaluating the manuscript, which helped improve LAS) project. The Asteroid Terrestrial-impact Last
it. Alert System (ATLAS) project is primarily funded to
RST would like to acknowledge Dr. Takashi J. Moriya search for near earth asteroids through NASA grants
for his insights and helpful discussions on this supernova. NN12AR55G, 80NSSC18K0284, and 80NSSC18K1575;
RST and JAG thank Dr. Daichi Hiramatsu for read- byproducts of the NEO search include images and cat-
ily providing observational data for a few short-plateau alogs from the survey area. This work was partially
SNe, as well as for valuable discussions. funded by Kepler/K2 grant J1944/80NSSC19K0112 and
DKS acknowledges the support provided by DST- HST GO-15889, and STFC grants ST/T000198/1 and
JSPS under grant number DST/INT/JSPS/P 363/2022. ST/S006109/1. The ATLAS science products have been
GCA thanks the Indian National Science Academy for made possible through the contributions of the Univer-
support under the INSA Senior Scientist Programme. sity of Hawaii Institute for Astronomy, the Queen’s Uni-
The Flatiron Institute is supported by the Simons versity Belfast, the Space Telescope Science Institute,
Foundation. the South African Astronomical Observatory, and The
The GROWTH India Telescope (GIT) is a 70-cm tele- Millennium Institute of Astrophysics (MAS), Chile.
scope with a 0.7-degree field of view, set up by the Indian This research has made use of the NASA/IPAC Ex-
Institute of Astrophysics (IIA) and the Indian Institute tragalactic Database (NED), which is funded by the Na-
of Technology Bombay (IITB) with funding from Indo- tional Aeronautics and Space Administration and oper-
US Science and Technology Forum and the Science and ated by the California Institute of Technology.
Engineering Research Board, Department of Science and This research has made use of the NASA/IPAC In-
Technology, Government of India. It is located at the frared Science Archive, which is funded by the National
Indian Astronomical Observatory (IAO, Hanle). We ac- Aeronautics and Space Administration and operated by
knowledge funding by the IITB alumni batch of 1994, the California Institute of Technology
which partially supports the operation of the telescope.

APPENDIX

A. DATA
The following section provides the apparent magnitudes obtained for SN 2021wvw. The magnitudes are given in
Table 4.

Table 4. Photometric observations of SN 2021wvw from GIT and HCT.

JD (2459000+) Phase† (d) g (mag) V (mag) r (mag) R (mag) i (mag) z (mag)

458.3 8.4 18.07 ± 0.18 - 17.68 ± 0.09 - 17.72 ± 0.11 -

459.3 9.4 18.10 ± 0.12 - 17.68 ± 0.08 - 17.65 ± 0.11 17.45 ± 0.11
460.2 10.3 18.11 ± 0.15 - 17.65 ± 0.10 - 17.64 ± 0.14 -
462.3 12.4 - - 17.66 ± 0.05 - 17.63 ± 0.06 -
463.3 13.4 18.12 ± 0.10 - 17.67 ± 0.05 - - 17.36 ± 0.13

Table 4 continued
 SN 2021wvw: A sub-luminous SN with a short plateau 15
Table 4 (continued)

JD (2459000+) Phase† (d) g (mag) V (mag) r (mag) R (mag) i (mag) z (mag)

465.3 15.4 18.17 ± 0.10 - - - - -

471.3 21.4 - - - - - 17.40 ± 0.18
474.3 24.4 18.30 ± 0.16 - 17.69 ± 0.08 - 17.66 ± 0.07 17.44 ± 0.10
476.3 26.4 18.40 ± 0.12 18.06 ± 0.01 17.81 ± 0.05 17.56 ± 0.01 17.64 ± 0.06 -
477.3 27.4 - 18.05 ± 0.01 17.79 ± 0.06 17.55 ± 0.02 17.64 ± 0.07 17.49 ± 0.09
478.2 28.3 - - - - 17.62 ± 0.12 -
479.3 29.4 - - 17.80 ± 0.06 - 17.70 ± 0.08 -
485.3 35.4 - - 17.76 ± 0.05 - 17.66 ± 0.06 -
486.3 36.4 18.49 ± 0.11 - 17.65 ± 0.05 - 17.63 ± 0.08 17.56 ± 0.12
487.3 37.4 - - 17.75 ± 0.06 - 17.69 ± 0.07 17.51 ± 0.11
488.4 38.5 18.53 ± 0.15 - 17.75 ± 0.09 - 17.67 ± 0.08 -
489.2 39.3 18.51 ± 0.14 - 17.76 ± 0.09 - 17.61 ± 0.11 -
490.2 40.3 18.55 ± 0.14 18.07 ± 0.01 17.78 ± 0.06 17.56 ± 0.01 17.66 ± 0.09 -
491.3 41.4 18.58 ± 0.16 - 17.79 ± 0.08 - 17.61 ± 0.09 17.52 ± 0.11
492.2 42.3 18.62 ± 0.14 - 17.81 ± 0.11 - 17.68 ± 0.10 17.46 ± 0.11
493.3 43.4 18.62 ± 0.15 - 17.78 ± 0.09 - 17.72 ± 0.09 17.55 ± 0.12
494.2 44.3 18.54 ± 0.14 - 17.78 ± 0.09 - 17.66 ± 0.14 -
495.4 45.5 18.57 ± 0.15 - 17.81 ± 0.09 - 17.64 ± 0.11 17.56 ± 0.14
497.3 47.4 18.60 ± 0.15 - 17.83 ± 0.12 - 17.67 ± 0.13 17.53 ± 0.16
498.2 48.3 18.58 ± 0.12 - 17.81 ± 0.12 - 17.72 ± 0.09 -
501.3 51.4 18.72 ± 0.20 - 17.77 ± 0.12 - - 17.61 ± 0.14
502.2 52.3 18.60 ± 0.14 - 17.84 ± 0.07 - 17.67 ± 0.08 -
503.2 53.3 18.51 ± 0.24 - - - - -
504.1 54.2 18.75 ± 0.13 - 17.92 ± 0.06 - 17.66 ± 0.07 17.56 ± 0.08
507.1 57.2 - - 17.89 ± 0.08 - 17.63 ± 0.10 17.60 ± 0.12
508.3 58.4 - - 17.75 ± 0.08 - 17.73 ± 0.10 17.66 ± 0.15
514.4 64.5 - - 17.94 ± 0.13 - - 17.69 ± 0.14
515.4 65.5 18.83 ± 0.16 - 18.05 ± 0.10 - 17.83 ± 0.11 -
516.3 66.4 - - 17.93 ± 0.14 - - 17.65 ± 0.21
517.2 67.3 - - 18.04 ± 0.07 - 17.87 ± 0.08 -
518.3 68.4 18.89 ± 0.23 - 18.01 ± 0.16 - - -
519.1 69.2 - - 18.06 ± 0.08 - 17.89 ± 0.08 -
521.2 71.3 18.85 ± 0.19 - 18.13 ± 0.11 - - -
522.2 72.3 18.94 ± 0.20 - 18.13 ± 0.11 - 17.98 ± 0.11 17.72 ± 0.13
523.2 73.3 - - 18.21 ± 0.13 - - -
524.2 74.3 18.99 ± 0.16 - 18.12 ± 0.07 - 17.99 ± 0.10 17.81 ± 0.12
525.1 75.2 19.02 ± 0.18 - 18.13 ± 0.08 - 18.00 ± 0.09 -
526.2 76.3 19.03 ± 0.22 - 18.21 ± 0.13 - - 17.84 ± 0.16
527.1 77.2 19.28 ± 0.19 - 18.29 ± 0.10 - - -
528.2 78.3 19.38 ± 0.24 - 18.29 ± 0.13 - 18.12 ± 0.14 17.94 ± 0.16
529.2 79.3 - - 18.45 ± 0.14 - 18.18 ± 0.14 18.33 ± 0.20
530.1 80.2 19.70 ± 0.16 - 18.57 ± 0.09 - 18.35 ± 0.08 -
531.1 81.2 19.90 ± 0.11 - 18.79 ± 0.04 - 18.68 ± 0.06 -
532.1 82.2 - - 19.04 ± 0.05 - - -
533.1 83.2 - - - - 18.86 ± 0.07 -
534.1 84.2 - - 19.38 ± 0.14 - 19.31 ± 0.11 -
535.1 85.2 - - 19.52 ± 0.05 - 19.42 ± 0.08 -
536.1 86.2 - - 19.73 ± 0.06 - - -
541.1 91.2 - - 19.69 ± 0.08 - - -
542.1 92.2 - - 19.85 ± 0.08 - - -
543.1 93.2 - - 19.75 ± 0.07 - 19.50 ± 0.07 -
544.1 94.2 - - 19.77 ± 0.07 - - -
548.2 98.3 - - 19.78 ± 0.15 - - -
555.1 105.2 - - - - 19.59 ± 0.17 -

Table 4 continued
16 Teja et al.
Table 4 (continued)

JD (2459000+) Phase† (d) g (mag) V (mag) r (mag) R (mag) i (mag) z (mag)

563.1 113.2 - - - - 19.64 ± 0.12 -

568.2 118.3 - - 19.67 ± 0.08 - - -
575.0 125.1 - 20.95 ± 0.10 - 19.81 ± 0.05 - -
580.0 130.1 - 21.17 ± 0.28 - - - -
597.3 147.4 - - 19.91 ± 0.10 - - -
600.2 150.3 - - 20.21 ± 0.19 - - -
605.0 155.1 - 21.15 ± 0.26 - 20.19 ± 0.12 - -
610.2 160.3 - - 20.01 ± 0.24 - - -
625.0 175.1 - 21.19 ± 0.27 - 20.08 ± 0.10 - -
626.2 176.3 20.97 ± 0.19 - - - - -
628.0 178.1 - 21.09 ± 0.12 - 20.44 ± 0.06 - -
629.2 179.3 - - - - 20.50 ± 0.23 -
636.0 186.1 - 21.03 ± 0.15 - - - -
650.1 200.2 - - 20.63 ± 0.12 - - -
665.0 215.1 - 21.65 ± 0.11 - 20.91 ± 0.10 - -
† Phase given for texp = 2459449.9 JD

REFERENCES
Anderson, J. P., González-Gaitán, S., Hamuy, M., et al. Chugai, N. N., & Utrobin, V. P. 2000, A&A, 354, 557,
2014, ApJ, 786, 67, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/786/1/67 doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9906190
Arnett, W. D., & Fu, A. 1989, ApJ, 340, 396, Colgate, S. A. 1971, ApJ, 163, 221, doi: 10.1086/150760
doi: 10.1086/167402 Curtis, S., Wolfe, N., Fröhlich, C., et al. 2021, ApJ, 921,
Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., 143, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac0dc5
et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, Dastidar, R., Misra, K., Singh, M., et al. 2021, MNRAS,
doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 504, 1009, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab831
Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sipőcz, B. M., Davies, B., & Beasor, E. R. 2020, MNRAS, 496, L142,
et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slaa102
Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Lim, P. L., Dessart, L., Gutiérrez, C. P., Ercolino, A., Jin, H., &
et al. 2022, apj, 935, 167, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c74 Langer, N. 2024, A&A, 685, A169,
Baklanov, P. V., Blinnikov, S. I., & Pavlyuk, N. N. 2005, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202349066
Astronomy Letters, 31, 429, doi: 10.1134/1.1958107 Dessart, L., & Hillier, D. J. 2019, A&A, 625, A9,
Barbon, R., Ciatti, F., & Rosino, L. 1979, A&A, 72, 287 doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201834732
Bellm, E. C., Kulkarni, S. R., Graham, M. J., et al. 2019, Dessart, L., Livne, E., & Waldman, R. 2010, MNRAS, 408,
PASP, 131, 018002, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aaecbe 827, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17190.x
Blinnikov, S., & Sorokina, E. 2004, Ap&SS, 290, 13, Dexter, J., & Kasen, D. 2013, ApJ, 772, 30,
doi: 10.1023/B:ASTR.0000022161.03559.42 doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/772/1/30
Blinnikov, S. I., & Popov, D. V. 1993, A&A, 274, 775 Duffell, P. C. 2016, ApJ, 821, 76,
Blinnikov, S. I., Röpke, F. K., Sorokina, E. I., et al. 2006, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/821/2/76
A&A, 453, 229, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20054594 Eldridge, J. J., Xiao, L., Stanway, E. R., Rodrigues, N., &
Bostroem, K. A., Valenti, S., Horesh, A., et al. 2019, Guo, N. Y. 2018, PASA, 35, e049,
MNRAS, 485, 5120, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz570 doi: 10.1017/pasa.2018.47
Cardelli, J. A., Clayton, G. C., & Mathis, J. S. 1989, ApJ, Ercolino, A., Jin, H., Langer, N., & Dessart, L. 2024, A&A,
345, 245, doi: 10.1086/167900 685, A58, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347646
Cheng, S. J., Goldberg, J. A., Cantiello, M., et al. 2024, Fang, Q., Maeda, K., Ye, H., Moriya, T., & Matsumoto, T.
arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2405.12274, 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2404.01776,
doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2405.12274 doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2404.01776
 SN 2021wvw: A sub-luminous SN with a short plateau 17

Farmer, R., Fields, C. E., Petermann, I., et al. 2016, ApJS, Moriya, T. J., Subrayan, B. M., Milisavljevic, D., &
227, 22, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/227/2/22 Blinnikov, S. I. 2023, PASJ, 75, 634,
Filippenko, A. V. 1997, ARA&A, 35, 309, doi: 10.1093/pasj/psad024
doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.35.1.309 Morozova, V., Piro, A. L., Renzo, M., et al. 2015, ApJ, 814,
Foreman-Mackey, D., Hogg, D. W., Lang, D., & Goodman, 63, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/814/1/63
J. 2013, PASP, 125, 306, doi: 10.1086/670067 Murai, Y., Tanaka, M., Kawabata, M., et al. 2024,
Förster, F., Cabrera-Vives, G., Castillo-Navarrete, E., et al. MNRAS, 528, 4209, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae170
2021, AJ, 161, 242, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/abe9bc Nagy, A. P., Ordasi, A., Vinkó, J., & Wheeler, J. C. 2014,
Goldberg, J. A., & Bildsten, L. 2020, ApJL, 895, L45, A&A, 571, A77, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201424237
doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab9300 Nagy, A. P., & Vinkó, J. 2016, A&A, 589, A53,
Goldberg, J. A., Bildsten, L., & Paxton, B. 2019, ApJ, 879, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201527931
3, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab22b6 Nakaoka, T., Kawabata, K. S., Maeda, K., et al. 2018, ApJ,
Goldberg, J. A., Jiang, Y.-F., & Bildsten, L. 2022, ApJ, 859, 78, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aabee7
933, 164, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac75e3 Nicholl, M. 2018, Research Notes of the American
Gutiérrez, C. P., Anderson, J. P., Hamuy, M., et al. 2017, Astronomical Society, 2, 230,
ApJ, 850, 89, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa8f52 doi: 10.3847/2515-5172/aaf799
Gutiérrez, C. P., Sullivan, M., Martinez, L., et al. 2020, pandas development team, T. 2020, pandas-dev/pandas:
Pandas, latest, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.3509134
MNRAS, 496, 95, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1452
Parrent, J., Branch, D., & Jeffery, D. 2010, SYNOW: A
Hamuy, M. 2003, ApJ, 582, 905, doi: 10.1086/344689
Highly Parameterized Spectrum Synthesis Code for
Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al.
Direct Analysis of SN Spectra, Astrophysics Source Code
2020, Nature, 585, 357, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2
Library, record ascl:1010.055
Hinkle, J. 2021, Transient Name Server Classification
Pastorello, A., Sauer, D., Taubenberger, S., et al. 2006,
Report, 2021-2941, 1
MNRAS, 370, 1752,
Hiramatsu, D., Howell, D. A., Moriya, T. J., et al. 2021,
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10587.x
ApJ, 913, 55, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abf6d6
Pastorello, A., Valenti, S., Zampieri, L., et al. 2009,
Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science & Engineering, 9,
MNRAS, 394, 2266,
90, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14505.x
Jermyn, A. S., Bauer, E. B., Schwab, J., et al. 2023, ApJS,
Paxton, B., Bildsten, L., Dotter, A., et al. 2011, ApJS, 192,
265, 15, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/acae8d
3, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/192/1/3
Jones, D. O., French, K. D., Agnello, A., et al. 2021,
Paxton, B., Cantiello, M., Arras, P., et al. 2013, ApJS, 208,
Transient Name Server Discovery Report, 2021-2917, 1
4, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/208/1/4
Kasen, D., & Woosley, S. E. 2009, ApJ, 703, 2205, Paxton, B., Marchant, P., Schwab, J., et al. 2015, ApJS,
doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/703/2/2205 220, 15, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/220/1/15
Kluyver, T., Ragan-Kelley, B., Pérez, F., et al. 2016, in Paxton, B., Schwab, J., Bauer, E. B., et al. 2018, ApJS,
Positioning and Power in Academic Publishing: Players, 234, 34, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aaa5a8
Agents and Agendas, ed. F. Loizides & B. Scmidt Paxton, B., Smolec, R., Schwab, J., et al. 2019, ApJS, 243,
(Netherlands: IOS Press), 87–90. 10, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab2241
https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/403913/ Perna, R., Duffell, P., Cantiello, M., & MacFadyen, A. I.
Kumar, H., Bhalerao, V., Anupama, G. C., et al. 2022, AJ, 2014, ApJ, 781, 119, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/781/2/119
164, 90, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac7bea Pessi, P. J., Folatelli, G., Anderson, J. P., et al. 2019,
Laplace, E., Justham, S., Renzo, M., et al. 2021, A&A, 656, MNRAS, 488, 4239, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1855
A58, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202140506 Popov, D. V. 1993, ApJ, 414, 712, doi: 10.1086/173117
Lisakov, S. M., Dessart, L., Hillier, D. J., Waldman, R., & Prabhu, T. P. 2014, Proceedings of the Indian National
Livne, E. 2018, MNRAS, 473, 3863, Science Academy Part A, 80, 887,
doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2521 doi: 10.16943/ptinsa/2014/v80i4/55174
Martinez, L., & Bersten, M. C. 2019, A&A, 629, A124, Pumo, M. L., Zampieri, L., Spiro, S., et al. 2017, MNRAS,
doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201834818 464, 3013, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2625
Moriya, T. J., Müller, B., Chan, C., Heger, A., & Blinnikov, Reguitti, A., Pumo, M. L., Mazzali, P. A., et al. 2021,
S. I. 2019, ApJ, 880, 21, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab2643 MNRAS, 501, 1059, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3730
18 Teja et al.

Riess, A. G., Yuan, W., Macri, L. M., et al. 2022, ApJL, Teja, R. S., Singh, A., Sahu, D. K., et al. 2022, ApJ, 930,
934, L7, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac5c5b 34, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac610b
Sahu, D. K., Anupama, G. C., & Chakradhari, N. K. 2013, —. 2023a, ApJ, 954, 155, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acdf5e
MNRAS, 433, 2, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt647 Teja, R. S., Singh, A., Basu, J., et al. 2023b, ApJL, 954,
Schlafly, E. F., & Finkbeiner, D. P. 2011, ApJ, 737, 103, L12, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acef20
doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/737/2/103 Thomas, R. C., Nugent, P. E., & Meza, J. C. 2011, PASP,
Schneider, S. E., Thuan, T. X., Mangum, J. G., & Miller, J. 123, 237, doi: 10.1086/658673
1992, ApJS, 81, 5, doi: 10.1086/191684 Tody, D. 1993, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific
Shingles, L., Smith, K. W., Young, D. R., et al. 2021, Conference Series, Vol. 52, Astronomical Data Analysis
Transient Name Server AstroNote, 7, 1 Software and Systems II, ed. R. J. Hanisch, R. J. V.
Singh, A., Teja, R. S., Moriya, T. J., et al. 2024, arXiv Brissenden, & J. Barnes, 173
e-prints, arXiv:2405.20989, Tonry, J. L., Denneau, L., Heinze, A. N., et al. 2018, PASP,
doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2405.20989 130, 064505, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aabadf
Smartt, S. J., Eldridge, J. J., Crockett, R. M., & Maund, Tsvetkov, D. Y., Volnova, A. A., Shulga, A. P., et al. 2006,
J. R. 2009, MNRAS, 395, 1409, A&A, 460, 769, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20065704
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14506.x Utrobin, V. P., & Chugai, N. N. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 6227,
Smith, K. W., Smartt, S. J., Young, D. R., et al. 2020, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3633
PASP, 132, 085002, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ab936e Valenti, S., Howell, D. A., Stritzinger, M. D., et al. 2016,
Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory. 2000, SAOImage
MNRAS, 459, 3939, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw870
DS9: A utility for displaying astronomical images in the
Valerin, G., Pumo, M. L., Pastorello, A., et al. 2022,
X11 window environment, Astrophysics Source Code
MNRAS, 513, 4983, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1182
Library, record ascl:0003.002
Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020,
Sollerman, J., Yang, S., Schulze, S., et al. 2021, A&A, 655,
Nature Methods, 17, 261, doi: 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2
A105, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202141374
Wes McKinney. 2010, in Proceedings of the 9th Python in
Spiro, S., Pastorello, A., Pumo, M. L., et al. 2014, MNRAS,
Science Conference, ed. Stéfan van der Walt & Jarrod
439, 2873, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu156
Millman, 56 – 61, doi: 10.25080/Majora-92bf1922-00a
Sukhbold, T., Ertl, T., Woosley, S. E., Brown, J. M., &
Young, D. R. 2020, plot atlas fp.py,
Janka, H. T. 2016, ApJ, 821, 38,
doi: 10.5281/zenodo.10978968
doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/821/1/38
Yuan, F., Jerkstrand, A., Valenti, S., et al. 2016, MNRAS,
Szalai, T., Vinkó, J., Könyves-Tóth, R., et al. 2019, ApJ,
461, 2003, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw1419
876, 19, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab12d0
Zampieri, L., Pastorello, A., Turatto, M., et al. 2003,
Takáts, K., & Vinkó, J. 2012, MNRAS, 419, 2783,
MNRAS, 338, 711, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06082.x
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19921.x