Core-collapse, superluminous, and gamma-ray burst supernova host galaxy populations at low redshift: the importance of dwarf and starbursting galaxies
read more
Citations
2MASS large galaxy atlas
Binary star progenitors of long gamma-ray bursts
Models for the Type Ic Hypernova SN 2003lw associated with GRB 031203
Host Galaxy Properties and Offset Distributions of Fast Radio Bursts: Implications for their Progenitors
References
The Most Luminous Supernovae
Superluminous Light Curves from Supernovae Exploding in a Dense Wind
Spatially resolved properties of the grb 060505 host: implications for the nature of the progenitor
Models for the type Ic hypernova SN 2003lw associated with GRB 031203
Fourstar: The near-infrared imager for the 6.5 m baade telescope at las campanas observatory
Related Papers (5)
Measuring Reddening with Sloan Digital Sky Survey Stellar Spectra and Recalibrating SFD
Measuring Reddening with SDSS Stellar Spectra and Recalibrating SFD
Hydrogen-poor superluminous supernovae and long-duration gamma-ray bursts have similar host galaxies
Planck 2015 results - XIII. Cosmological parameters
Frequently Asked Questions (12)
Q2. What is the primary motivation for this exercise?
While their primary motivation for this exercise will be to compare this sample to ‘exotic’ supernova types (SLSNe and LGRBs) in order to constrain their progenitors, their CCSN sample is also useful for studying the nature of star formation at low-redshift: few galaxy surveys are complete beyond the dwarfgalaxy 109 M limit, with those that are typically confined to small volumes.
Q3. How many times did the authors run the SED fit on each photometry?
The authors sampled from the distribution 1000 times and then ran the SED fit on each set of ‘noisy’ photometry and used the 16-to-84th percentile of each parameter as an estimate of its uncertainty.
Q4. How many supernovae were removed from the sample?
In addition, the authors imposed a minimum distance cut out to 10 Mpc, meaning that one supernova (AT 2014ge) was removed from their sample.
Q5. What was the contribution of emission lines to the modelled spectra?
The contribution of emission lines to the modelled spectra was based on the Kennicutt (1998) relations between SFR and UV luminosity.
Q6. What was the contribution of H and [O II] lines to the photometry?
The contribution of Hα and [O II] lines to the photometry was included for galaxies with dust free colour bluer than (NUV–r)ABS ≤ 4 and the intensity of the emission lines was scaled according to the intrinsic UV luminosity of the galaxy.
Q7. What law was used to determine the emission of dust in the galaxy?
Dust attenuation in the galaxy was applied to the SED models using the Calzetti et al. (2000) extinction law for starburst galaxies.
Q8. How did the authors remove the galaxy on the west of the image?
The authors used the programme GALFIT (Peng et al. 2002) to model and subtract any contaminating objects from the image and then used the procedure outlined in Section 3.2 to perform aperture photometry on the galaxy.
Q9. What did the authors do to check for a clear nuclear point source?
Since the authors did not have spectra for every galaxy in their sample, the authors also inspected the images of each host (see Fig. 1) to check for a clear nuclear point source.
Q10. Why did the authors limit their sample to a declination greater than 30?
The authors limited their sample to a declination greater than −30◦ because uniform, public, deep optical survey data is not available across the entire Southern hemisphere.
Q11. What was the effect of the Monte Carlo sampling on the photometry?
If the reduced chi-squared 1 (before the Monte Carlo sampling) and the SED photometry was well-sampled in the UV, optical and IR, the authors applied the additional uncertainty to the photometry.
Q12. How do the authors rescale the relative rate of SLSNe-I?
The authors use the same confidence intervals derived from the univariate bootstrap procedure and rescale them using the same factor to the weighted relative rate.