Paper detail

Revised Supernova Rates from the IfA Deep Survey

The IfA Deep survey uncovered ~130 thermonuclear supernovae (TNSNe, i.e. Type Ia) candidates at redshifts from z=0.1 out to beyond z=1. The TNSN explosion rates derived from these data have been controversial, conflicting with evidence emerging from other surveys. This work revisits the IfA Deep survey to re-evaluate the photometric evidence. Applying the SOFT program to the light curves of all SN candidates, we derive new classification grades and redshift estimates. We find a volumetric rate for z~0.5 that is substantially smaller than the originally published values, bringing the revised IfA Deep rate into good agreement with other surveys. With our improved photometric analysis techniques, we are able to confidently extend the rate measurements to higher redshifts, and we find a steadily increasing TNSN rate, with no indication of a peak out to z=1.05.

preprint2010arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.