Reveals distinct dynamics of supernova remnants from single and binary progenitors, indicating vital implications for stellar evolution theories.
Core-collapse supernova remnants (CCSNRs) are crucial for understanding the final stages of massive star evolution, as they reflect the imprints of their progenitors’ preexplosion activities. However, the evolution of CCSNRs, particularly those originating from progenitors with high mass-loss rates—known as stripped-envelope supernova remnants (SESNRs)—remains poorly understood. This is largely due to the lack of comprehensive numerical models connecting progenitor stars to their remnants, especially in the context of binarity. In this study, we perform self-consistent simulations of CCSNRs from both single and binary progenitors, utilizing mass-loss histories and supernova ejecta profiles directly derived from stellar evolution and explosion calculations. Our models reveal significant differences in the circumstellar medium (CSM) structures between single and binary progenitors, which drive distinct SNR dynamics and spectral characteristics. We find that binary stripped-envelope progenitors tend to produce SNRs with more monotonic CSM profiles, resulting in smoother shock dynamics and less pronounced X-ray luminosity peaks compared to their single-star counterparts. Additionally, we introduce a new characteristic timescale, t _CSM , defined by the total mass lost by the progenitor. This timescale effectively scales the evolutionary phases of CCSNRs in complex CSM environments, thereby facilitating comparison of SESNRs. Given that observed elemental abundances in SNRs reflect the nucleosynthetic yields of the progenitor, our results highlight the importance of considering the dynamical state of SNRs when interpreting these abundances. This work provides a fiducial framework for future observational and theoretical studies of CCSNRs, particularly with regard to the impact of binary evolution.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kawashima et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: