Table 4.
Summary of how ΔY depends on perturbations from the main analysis.
| Choice | ΔY [mag] | Number of SNe |
|---|---|---|
| Remove c > 0.2 | 0.164 ± 0.029 | 136 |
| Add peculiar SNe | 0.148 ± 0.030 | 148 |
| Untargeted search only | 0.169 ± 0.031 | 114 |
| 40% with LsSFR > LsSFRcut | 0.142 ± 0.030 | 141 |
| 45% with LsSFR > LsSFRcut | 0.157 ± 0.029 | 141 |
| 55% with LsSFR > LsSFRcut | 0.161 ± 0.029 | 141 |
| 60% with LsSFR > LsSFRcut | 0.157 ± 0.029 | 141 |
Notes. Our baseline analysis is the simultaneous fit of ΔY with SALT2.4 given in Table 3. That followed the same choices made in Rigault et al. (2013, 2015), for example, splitting the sample in half, removing 91T-like SNe Ia and not imposing a cut on c. The results here explore variants from that baseline.
Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.
Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.
Initial download of the metrics may take a while.