Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Minutes-duration optical flares with supernova luminosities

Nature volume 623, pages 927–931 (2023)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

In recent years, certain luminous extragalactic optical transients have been observed to last only a few days1. Their short observed duration implies a different powering mechanism from the most common luminous extragalactic transients (supernovae), whose timescale is weeks2. Some short-duration transients, most notably AT2018cow (ref. 3), show blue optical colours and bright radio and X-ray emission4. Several AT2018cow-like transients have shown hints of a long-lived embedded energy source5, such as X-ray variability6,7, prolonged ultraviolet emission8, a tentative X-ray quasiperiodic oscillation9,10 and large energies coupled to fast (but subrelativistic) radio-emitting ejecta11,12. Here we report observations of minutes-duration optical flares in the aftermath of an AT2018cow-like transient, AT2022tsd (the ‘Tasmanian Devil’). The flares occur over a period of months, are highly energetic and are probably nonthermal, implying that they arise from a near-relativistic outflow or jet. Our observations confirm that, in some AT2018cow-like transients, the embedded energy source is a compact object, either a magnetar or an accreting black hole.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Learn more

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: AT2022tsd is a fast and luminous extragalactic optical transient with rapid flares.
Fig. 2: AT2022tsd showed luminous emission across the electromagnetic spectrum.
Fig. 3: AT2022tsd exhibited luminous flares lasting tens of minutes.

Data availability

The reduced optical photometric data of AT2022tsd are provided in Supplementary Tables 1 and 2. Spectroscopy of AT2022tsd will be made available through the WISeREP public database. Facilities that make all their data available in public archives, either promptly or after a proprietary period, include the VLA, the LT, the W. M. Keck Observatory, the Palomar 48-inch/ZTF, the Neil Gehrels Swift Observatory, Chandra and ALMA. Furthermore, all of the data required to reproduce the figures are available in a public GitHub repository (www.github.com/annayqho/AT2022tsd).

Code availability

The code used to perform the calculations and produce the figures for this paper is available in a public GitHub repository (www.github.com/annayqho/AT2022tsd).

References

  1. Drout, M. R. et al. Rapidly evolving and luminous transients from Pan-STARRS1. Astrophys. J. 794, 23 (2014).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  2. Kasen, D. in Handbook of Supernovae (eds Alsabti, A. & Murdin, P.) 939–965 (Springer, 2017).

  3. Prentice, S. J. et al. The Cow: discovery of a luminous, hot, and rapidly evolving transient. Astrophys. J. Lett. 865, L3 (2018).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  4. Ho, A. Y. Q. et al. A search for extragalactic fast blue optical transients in ZTF and the rate of AT2018cow-like transients. Astrophys. J. 949, 120 (2023).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  5. Margutti, R. et al. An embedded X-ray source shines through the aspherical AT 2018cow: revealing the inner workings of the most luminous fast-evolving optical transients. Astrophys. J. 872, 18 (2019).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Rivera Sandoval, L. E. et al. X-ray Swift observations of SN 2018cow. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 480, L146–L150 (2018).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  7. Yao, Y. et al. The X-ray and radio loud fast blue optical transient AT2020mrf: implications for an emerging class of engine-driven massive star explosions. Astrophys. J. 934, 104 (2022).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  8. Chen, Y. et al. Late-time HST observations of AT 2018cow II: evolution of a UV-bright underlying source 2-4 years post-explosion. Astrophys. J. 955, 43 (2023).

  9. Pasham, D. R. et al. Evidence for a compact object in the aftermath of the extragalactic transient AT2018cow. Nat. Astron. 6, 249–258 (2021).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  10. Zhang, W. et al. A possible 250 s X-ray quasi-periodicity in the fast blue optical transient AT2018cow. Res. Astron. Astrophys. 22, 125016 (2022).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  11. Ho, A. Y. Q. et al. The Koala: a fast blue optical transient with luminous radio emission from a starburst dwarf galaxy at z = 0.27. Astrophys. J. 895, 49 (2020).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Coppejans, D. L. et al. A mildly relativistic outflow from the energetic, fast-rising blue optical transient CSS161010 in a dwarf galaxy. Astrophys. J. Lett. 895, L23 (2020).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Munoz-Arancibia, A. et al. ALeRCE/ZTF Transient Discovery Report for 2022-09-07. Transient Name Server Discovery Report, No. 2022–2602 (2022).

  14. Förster, F. et al. The Automatic Learning for the Rapid Classification of Events (ALeRCE) alert broker. Astron. J. 161, 242 (2021).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  15. Ho, A. Y. Q. et al. Keck/LRIS observations of AT2022tsd, a fast-rising optical transient coincident with a z=0.256 galaxy. Transient Name Server AstroNote 2022-199 (2022).

  16. Planck Collaboration. Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters. Astron. Astrophys. 641, A6 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Ho, A. Y. Q. & Perley, D. A. VLA Ku-band detection of AT2022tsd. Transient Name Server AstroNote 2022-205 (2022).

  18. Schulze, S., Ho, A. Y. Q., Perley, D. A., Yan, L. & Fremling, C. Swift X-ray detection of AT2022tsd. Transient Name Server AstroNote 2022-207 (2022).

  19. Metzger, B. D. Luminous fast blue optical transients and type Ibn/Icn SNe from Wolf-Rayet/Black Hole mergers. Astrophys. J. 932, 84 (2022).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  20. Ho, A. Y. Q. et al. Discovery of minute-timescale optical flares with supernova-like luminosities at the position of the luminous fast blue optical transient AT2022tsd (the “Tasmanian Devil”). Transient Name Server AstroNote 2022-267 (2022).

  21. Matthews, D. et al. Chandra-NuSTAR detection of X-ray emission at the location of FBOT AT2022tsd. Transient Name Server AstroNote 2022-218 (2022).

  22. Perley, D. A. et al. The fast, luminous ultraviolet transient AT2018cow: extreme supernova, or disruption of a star by an intermediate-mass black hole?. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 484, 1031–1049 (2019).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Quataert, E., Lecoanet, D. & Coughlin, E. R. Black hole accretion discs and luminous transients in failed supernovae from non-rotating supergiants. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. Lett. 485, L83–L88 (2019).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Kuin, N. P. M. et al. Swift spectra of AT2018cow: a white dwarf tidal disruption event?. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 487, 2505–2521 (2019).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Beck, R. et al. PS1-STRM: neural network source classification and photometric redshift catalogue for PS1 3π DR1. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 500, 1633–1644 (2021).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  26. Oke, J. B. & Gunn, J. E. Secondary standard stars for absolute spectrophotometry. Astrophys. J. 266, 713–717 (1983).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Finkbeiner, D. P., Davis, M. & Schlegel, D. J. Extrapolation of galactic dust emission at 100 microns to cosmic microwave background radiation frequencies using FIRAS. Astrophys. J. 524, 867 (1999).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Schlegel, D. J., Finkbeiner, D. P. & Davis, M. Maps of dust infrared emission for use in estimation of reddening and cosmic microwave background radiation foregrounds. Astrophys. J. 500, 525 (1998).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  29. Schlafly, E. F. & Finkbeiner, D. P. Measuring reddening with Sloan Digital Sky Survey stellar spectra and recalibrating SFD. Astrophys. J. 737, 103 (2011).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  30. van der Walt, S. J., Crellin-Quick, A. & Bloom, J. S. SkyPortal: an astronomical data platform. J. Open Source Softw. 4, 1247 (2019).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  31. Coughlin, M. W. et al. A data science platform to enable time-domain astronomy. Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 267, 31 (2023).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  32. Perley, D. A. et al. Real-time discovery of AT2020xnd: a fast, luminous ultraviolet transient with minimal radioactive ejecta. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 508, 5138–5147 (2021).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Jiang, J. A. et al. MUSSES2020J: the earliest discovery of a fast blue ultraluminous transient at redshift 1.063. Astrophys. J. Lett. 933, L36 (2022).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  34. Pursiainen, M. et al. Rapidly evolving transients in the Dark Energy Survey. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 481, 894–917 (2018).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Arcavi, I. et al. Rapidly rising transients in the supernova—superluminous supernova gap. Astrophys. J. 819, 35 (2016).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  36. Gal-Yam, A. in Handbook of Supernovae (eds Alsabti, A. & Murdin, P.) 1–43 (Springer, 2016).

  37. Ho, A. Y. Q. et al. AT2018cow: a luminous millimeter transient. Astrophys. J. 871, 73 (2019).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Ho, A. Y. Q. et al. Luminous millimeter, radio, and X-ray emission from ZTF 20acigmel (AT 2020xnd). Astrophys. J. 932, 116 (2022).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  39. Bright, J. S. et al. Radio and X-ray observations of the luminous fast blue optical transient AT 2020xnd. Astrophys. J. 926, 112 (2022).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  40. Phinney, E. S. in Symposium - International Astronomical Union, Volume 136: The Galactic Center 543–553 (Kluwer, 1989).

  41. Levan, A. J. et al. An extremely luminous panchromatic outburst from the nucleus of a distant galaxy. Science 333, 199–202 (2011).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Burrows, D. N. et al. Relativistic jet activity from the tidal disruption of a star by a massive black hole. Nature 476, 421–424 (2011).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Cenko, S. B. et al. Swift J2058.4+0516: discovery of a possible second relativistic tidal disruption flare? Astrophys. J. 753, 77 (2012).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  44. Matthews, D. et al. Unprecedented X-ray emission from the fast blue optical transient AT2022tsd. Res. Not. AAS 7, 126 (2023).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  45. Rybicki, G. B. & Lightman, A. P. Radiative Processes in Astrophysics (Wiley, 1986).

  46. Nayana, A. J. & Chandra, P. uGMRT observations of a fast and blue optical transient—AT 2018cow. Astrophys. J. Lett. 912, L9 (2021).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  47. Fender, R. P. et al. Spectral evidence for a powerful compact jet from XTE J1118+480. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 322, L23–L27 (2001).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  48. Tetarenko, A. J. et al. Measuring fundamental jet properties with multiwavelength fast timing of the black hole X-ray binary MAXI J1820+070. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 504, 3862–3883 (2021).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Fender, R. P. et al. Comprehensive coverage of particle acceleration and kinetic feedback from the stellar mass black hole V404 Cygni. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 518, 1243–1259 (2023).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  50. Falcke, H. et al. The simultaneous spectrum of Sagittarius A* from 20 centimeters to 1 millimeter and the nature of the millimeter excess. Astrophys. J. 499, 731 (1998).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  51. Chevalier, R. A. Synchrotron self-absorption in radio supernovae. Astrophys. J. 499, 810 (1998).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  52. Blandford, R. D. & Königl, A. Relativistic jets as compact radio sources. Astrophys. J. 232, 34–48 (1979).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Fulton, M. et al. Pan-STARRS observations of AT2022tsd. Transient Name Server AstroNote 2022-206 (2022).

  54. Chomiuk, L., Metzger, B. D. & Shen, K. J. New insights into classical novae. Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 59, 391–444 (2021).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  55. Fremling, C. et al. The Zwicky Transient Facility Bright Transient Survey. I. Spectroscopic classification and the redshift completeness of local galaxy catalogs. Astrophys. J. 895, 32 (2020).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Perley, D. A. et al. The Zwicky Transient Facility Bright Transient Survey. II. A public statistical sample for exploring supernova demographics. Astrophys. J. 904, 35 (2020).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Szkody, P. et al. Cataclysmic variables in the second year of the Zwicky Transient Facility. Astron. J. 162, 94 (2021).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Polzin, A. et al. The luminosity phase space of galactic and extragalactic X-ray transients out to intermediate redshifts. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.01232 (2023).

  59. Coppejans, D. L. & Knigge, C. The case for jets in cataclysmic variables. New Astron. Rev. 89, 101540 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Morales-Rueda, L. & Marsh, T. R. Spectral atlas of dwarf novae in outburst. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 332, 814–826 (2002).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Han, Z. et al. Spectroscopic properties of the dwarf nova-type cataclysmic variables observed by LAMOST. Publ. Astron. Soc. Jpn. 72, 76 (2020).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  62. Fertig, D., Mukai, K., Nelson, T. & Cannizzo, J. K. The fall and the rise of X-rays from dwarf novae in outburst: RXTE observations of VW Hydri and WW Ceti. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. 123, 1054 (2011).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  63. Bruch, A. A comparative study of the strength of flickering in cataclysmic variables. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 503, 953–971 (2021).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  64. Ilbert, O. et al. in Panoramic Views of Galaxy Formation and Evolution ASP Conference Series Vol. 399 169 (Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 2008).

  65. Lomb, N. R. Least-squares frequency analysis of unequally spaced data. Astrophys. Space Sci. 39, 447–462 (1976).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  66. Scargle, J. D. Studies in astronomical time series analysis. II. Statistical aspects of spectral analysis of unevenly spaced data. Astrophys. J. 263, 835–853 (1982).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  67. Tsvetkova, A. et al. The Konus–Wind Catalog of Gamma-Ray Bursts with Known Redshifts. II. Waiting-mode bursts simultaneously detected by Swift/BAT. Astrophys. J. 908, 83 (2021).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  68. Cano, Z., Wang, S.-Q., Dai, Z.-G. & Wu, X.-F. The Observer’s Guide to the Gamma-Ray Burst Supernova Connection. Adv. Astron. 2017, 8929054 (2017).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  69. Ho, A. Y. Q. et al. Gemini, Swift, and VLA observations of AT2022abfc, a radio-loud fast optical transient coincident with a z=0.212 galaxy. Transient Name Server AstroNote 2022-275 (2022).

  70. Readhead, A. C. S. Equipartition brightness temperature and the inverse Compton catastrophe. Astrophys. J. 426, 51–59 (1994).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  71. Longair, M. S. High Energy Astrophysics (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2011).

  72. Moffet, A. T. in Galaxies and the Universe (eds Sandage, A., Sandage, M. & Kristian, J.) (Univ. Chicago Press, 1975).

  73. Chen, Y. et al. Late-time HST observations of AT 2018cow I: further constraints on the fading prompt emission and thermal properties 50-60 days post-explosion. Astrophys. J. 955, 42 (2023).

  74. Gottlieb, O., Tchekhovskoy, A. & Margutti, R. Shocked jets in CCSNe can power the zoo of fast blue optical transients. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 513, 3810–3817 (2022).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  75. Margalit, B. & Quataert, E. Thermal electrons in mildly relativistic synchrotron blast waves. Astrophys. J. Lett. 923, L14 (2021).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. Wright, A. H. et al. Galaxy and mass assembly: accurate panchromatic photometry from optical priors using LAMBDAR. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 460, 765–801 (2016).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  77. Chambers, K. C. et al. The Pan-STARRS1 surveys. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1612.05560 (2019).

  78. Johnson, B. D., Leja, J., Conroy, C. & Speagle, J. S. Stellar population inference with Prospector. Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 254, 22 (2021).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  79. Conroy, C., Gunn, J. E. & White, M. The propagation of uncertainties in stellar population synthesis modeling. I. The relevance of uncertain aspects of stellar evolution and the initial mass function to the derived physical properties of galaxies. Astrophys. J. 699, 486 (2009).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  80. Foreman-Mackey, D., Hogg, D. W. & Morton, T. D. Exoplanet population inference and the abundance of Earth analogs from noisy, incomplete catalogs. Astrophys. J. 795, 64 (2014).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  81. Byler, N., Dalcanton, J. J., Conroy, C. & Johnson, B. D. Nebular continuum and line emission in stellar population synthesis models. Astrophys. J. 840, 44 (2017).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  82. Speagle, J. S. DYNESTY: a dynamic nested sampling package for estimating Bayesian posteriors and evidences. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 493, 3132–3158 (2020).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  83. Sánchez-Blázquez, P. et al. Medium-resolution Isaac Newton Telescope library of empirical spectra. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 371, 703–718 (2006).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  84. Schulze, S. et al. The Palomar Transient Factory core-collapse supernova host-galaxy sample. I. Host-galaxy distribution functions and environment dependence of core-collapse supernovae. Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 255, 29 (2021).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  85. Chabrier, G. Galactic stellar and substellar initial mass function. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. 115, 763 (2003).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  86. Calzetti, D. et al. The dust content and opacity of actively star-forming galaxies. Astrophys. J. 533, 682 (2000).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  87. Quataert, E. & Kasen, D. Swift 1644+57: the longest gamma-ray burst? Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 419, L1–L5 (2012).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  88. Woosley, S. E. Gamma-ray bursts from stellar mass accretion disks around black holes. Astrophys. J. 405, 273–277 (1993).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  89. Woosley, S. E. & Heger, A. Long gamma-ray transients from collapsars. Astrophys. J. 752, 32 (2012).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  90. Kashiyama, K. & Quataert, E. Fast luminous blue transients from newborn black holes. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 451, 2656–2662 (2015).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  91. Kumar, P. & Zhang, B. The physics of gamma-ray bursts & relativistic jets. Phys. Rep. 561, 1–109 (2015).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  92. Lyman, J. D. et al. Studying the environment of AT 2018cow with MUSE. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 495, 992–999 (2020).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  93. Maund, J. R. et al. A flash of polarized optical light points to an aspherical ‘cow’. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 521, 3323–3332 (2023).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  94. Racusin, J. L. et al. Broadband observations of the naked-eye γ-ray burst GRB 080319B. Nature 455, 183–188 (2008).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Kann, D. A. et al. The afterglows of Swift-era gamma-ray bursts. I. Comparing pre-Swift and Swift-era long/soft (type II) GRB optical afterglows. Astrophys. J. 720, 1513 (2010).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  96. Nesci, R. et al. Multiwavelength flare observations of the blazar S5 1803+784. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 502, 6177–6187 (2021).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  97. Kasliwal, M. M. et al. Illuminating gravitational waves: a concordant picture of photons from a neutron star merger. Science 358, 1559–1565 (2017).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Villar, V. A., Berger, E., Metzger, B. D. & Guillochon, J. Theoretical models of optical transients. I. A broad exploration of the duration–luminosity phase space. Astrophys. J. 849, 70 (2017).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  99. Cowperthwaite, P. S. et al. The electromagnetic counterpart of the binary neutron star merger LIGO/Virgo GW170817. II. UV, optical, and near-infrared light curves and comparison to kilonova models. Astrophys. J. Lett. 848, L17 (2017).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  100. Drout, M. R. et al. Light curves of the neutron star merger GW170817/SSS17a: implications for r-process nucleosynthesis. Science 358, 1570–1574 (2017).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Andreoni, I. et al. A very luminous jet from the disruption of a star by a massive black hole. Nature 612, 430–434 (2022).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. Galama, T. J. et al. An unusual supernova in the error box of the γ-ray burst of 25 April 1998. Nature 395, 670–672 (1998).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  103. Campana, S. et al. The association of GRB 060218 with a supernova and the evolution of the shock wave. Nature 442, 1008–1010 (2006).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. D’Elia, V. et al. GRB 171205A/SN 2017iuk: a local low-luminosity gamma-ray burst. Astron. Astrophys. 619, A66 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  105. Ho, A. Y. Q. et al. SN 2020bvc: a broad-line type Ic supernova with a double-peaked optical light curve and a luminous X-ray and radio counterpart. Astrophys. J. 902, 86 (2020).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  106. Zauderer, B. A. et al. Birth of a relativistic outflow in the unusual γ-ray transient Swift J164449.3+573451. Nature 476, 425–428 (2011).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  107. Yuan, Q., Wang, Q. D., Lei, W.-H., Gao, H. & Zhang, B. Catching jetted tidal disruption events early in millimetre. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 461, 3375–3384 (2016).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  108. Sheth, K. et al. Millimeter observations of GRB 030329: continued evidence for a two-component jet. Astrophys. J. Lett. 595, L33 (2003).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  109. Perley, D. A. et al. The afterglow of GRB 130427A from 1 to 1016 GHz. Astrophys. J. 781, 37 (2014).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  110. Laskar, T. et al. First ALMA light curve constrains refreshed reverse shocks and jet magnetization in GRB 161219B. Astrophys. J. 862, 94 (2018).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  111. Laskar, T. et al. A reverse shock in GRB 181201A. Astrophys. J. 884, 121 (2019).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  112. Kulkarni, S. R. et al. Radio emission from the unusual supernova 1998bw and its association with the γ-ray burst of 25 April 1998. Nature 395, 663–669 (1998).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  113. Perley, D. A., Schulze, S. & de Ugarte Postigo, A. GRB 171205A: ALMA observations. GRB Coordinates Network, Circular Service, No. 22252, #1 (2017).

  114. Weiler, K. W. et al. Long-term radio monitoring of SN 1993J. Astrophys. J. 671, 1959 (2007).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  115. Soderberg, A. M. et al. A relativistic type Ibc supernova without a detected γ-ray burst. Nature 463, 513–515 (2010).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  116. Horesh, A. et al. An early and comprehensive millimetre and centimetre wave and X-ray study of SN 2011dh: a non-equipartition blast wave expanding into a massive stellar wind. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 436, 1258–1267 (2013).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  117. Corsi, A. et al. A multi-wavelength investigation of the radio-loud supernova PTF11qcj and its circumstellar environment. Astrophys. J. 782, 42 (2014).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  118. Maeda, K. et al. The final months of massive star evolution from the circumstellar environment around SN Ic 2020oi. Astrophys. J. 918, 34 (2021).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  119. Mangano, V., Burrows, D. N., Sbarufatti, B. & Cannizzo, J. K. The definitive X-ray light curve of Swift J164449.3+573451. Astrophys. J. 817, 103 (2016).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  120. Kouveliotou, C. et al. Chandra observations of the X-ray environs of SN 1998bw/GRB 980425. Astrophys. J. 608, 872 (2004).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  121. Tiengo, A., Mereghetti, S., Ghisellini, G., Tavecchio, F. & Ghirlanda, G. Late evolution of the X-ray afterglow of GRB 030329. Astron. Astrophys. 423, 861–865 (2004).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  122. Soderberg, A. M., Chevalier, R. A., Kulkarni, S. R. & Frail, D. A. The radio and X-ray luminous SN 2003bg and the circumstellar density variations around radio supernovae. Astrophys. J. 651, 1005 (2006).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  123. Margutti, R. et al. The signature of the central engine in the weakest relativistic explosions: GRB 100316D. Astrophys. J. 778, 18 (2013).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  124. Dwarkadas, V. V. & Gruszko, J. What are published X-ray light curves telling us about young supernova expansion?. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 419, 1515–1524 (2012).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  125. Mucciarelli, P., Zampieri, L., Treves, A., Turolla, R. & Falomo, R. X-ray and optical variability of the ultraluminous X-ray source NGC 1313 X-2. Astrophys. J. 658, 999 (2007).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  126. Kasliwal, M. M. et al. GRB 070610: a curious galactic transient. Astrophys. J. 678, 1127 (2008).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  127. Stefanescu, A. et al. Very fast optical flaring from a possible new Galactic magnetar. Nature 455, 503–505 (2008).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  128. Castro-Tirado, A. J. et al. Flares from a candidate Galactic magnetar suggest a missing link to dim isolated neutron stars. Nature 455, 506–509 (2008).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  129. Svinkin, D. et al. A bright γ-ray flare interpreted as a giant magnetar flare in NGC 253. Nature 589, 211–213 (2021).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  130. Frederiks, D. et al. Giant flare in SGR 1806-20 and its Compton reflection from the Moon. Astron. Lett. 33, 1–18 (2007).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  131. Hankins, T. H., Kern, J. S., Weatherall, J. C. & Eilek, J. A. Nanosecond radio bursts from strong plasma turbulence in the Crab pulsar. Nature 422, 141–143 (2003).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  132. Fender, R. P., Pooley, G. G., Brocksopp, C. & Newell, S. J. Rapid infrared flares in GRS 1915+105: evidence for infrared synchrotron emission. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 290, L65–L69 (1997).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  133. van Velzen, S. et al. Seventeen tidal disruption events from the first half of ZTF survey observations: entering a new era of population studies. Astrophys. J. 908, 4 (2021).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  134. Payne, A. V. et al. Chandra, HST/STIS, NICER, Swift, and TESS detail the flare evolution of the repeating nuclear transient ASASSN-14ko. Astrophys. J. 951, 134 (2023).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  135. Marrone, D. P. et al. An X-ray, infrared, and submillimeter flare of Sagittarius A*. Astrophys. J. 682, 373 (2008).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  136. Abramowski, A. et al. The 2010 very high energy γ-ray flare and 10 years of multi-wavelength observations of M 87. Astrophys. J. 746, 151 (2012).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  137. Miniutti, G. et al. Repeating tidal disruptions in GSN 069: long-term evolution and constraints on quasi-periodic eruptions’ models. Astron. Astrophys. 670, A93 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  138. van Dyk, S. D., Weiler, K. W., Sramek, R. A. & Panagia, N. SN 1988Z: the most distant radio supernova. Astrophys. J. Lett. 419, L69 (1993).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  139. Weiler, K. W., Sramek, R. A., Panagia, N., van der Hulst, J. M. & Salvati, M. Radio supernovae. Astrophys. J. 301, 790–812 (1986).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  140. Soderberg, A. M. et al. The radio and X-ray-luminous type Ibc supernova 2003L. Astrophys. J. 621, 908 (2005).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  141. Salas, P., Bauer, F. E., Stockdale, C. & Prieto, J. L. SN 2007bg: the complex circumstellar medium around one of the most radio-luminous broad-lined Type Ic supernovae. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 428, 1207–1217 (2013).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  142. Alexander, K. D., Berger, E., Guillochon, J., Zauderer, B. A. & Williams, P. K. G. Discovery of an outflow from radio observations of the tidal disruption event ASASSN-14li. Astrophys. J. Lett. 819, L25 (2016).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  143. Laskar, T., Coppejans, D. L., Margutti, R. & Alexander, K. D. GRB 171205A: VLA detection. GRB Coordinates Network, Circular Service, No. 22216, #1 (2017).

  144. Dong, D. Z. et al. A transient radio source consistent with a merger-triggered core collapse supernova. Science 373, 1125–1129 (2021).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  145. Mooley, K. P. et al. Late-time evolution and modeling of the off-axis gamma-ray burst candidate FIRST J141918.9+394036. Astrophys. J. 924, 16 (2022).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  146. Graham, M. J. et al. The Zwicky Transient Facility: Science Objectives. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. 131, 078001 (2019).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  147. Bellm, E. C. et al. The Zwicky Transient Facility: system overview, performance, and first results. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. 131, 018002 (2019).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  148. Dekany, R. et al. The Zwicky Transient Facility: observing system. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. 132, 038001 (2020).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  149. Zackay, B., Ofek, E. O. & Gal-Yam, A. Proper image subtraction—optimal transient detection, photometry, and hypothesis testing. Astrophys. J. 830, 27 (2016).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  150. Masci, F. J. et al. The Zwicky Transient Facility: data processing, products, and archive. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. 131, 018003 (2019).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  151. Patterson, M. T. et al. The Zwicky Transient Facility alert distribution system. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. 131, 018001 (2019).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  152. Duev, D. A. et al. Real-bogus classification for the Zwicky Transient Facility using deep learning. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 489, 3582–3590 (2019).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  153. Tachibana, Y. & Miller, A. A. A morphological classification model to identify unresolved PanSTARRS1 sources: application in the ZTF real-time pipeline. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. 130, 128001 (2018).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  154. Tonry, J. L. et al. The Pan-STARRS1 photometric system. Astrophys. J. 750, 99 (2012).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  155. Flewelling, H. A. et al. The Pan-STARRS1 database and data products. Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 251, 7 (2020).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  156. Tonry, J. L. et al. ATLAS: a high-cadence all-sky survey system. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. 130, 064505 (2018).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  157. Smith, K. W. et al. Design and operation of the ATLAS transient science server. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. 132, 085002 (2020).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  158. Shingles, L. et al. Release of the ATLAS Forced Photometry server for public use. Transient Name Server AstroNote 2021-7 (2021).

  159. Steele, I. A. et al. The Liverpool Telescope: performance and first results. Proc. SPIE 5489, 679 (2004).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  160. Dhillon, V. S. et al. ULTRASPEC: a high-speed imaging photometer on the 2.4-m Thai National Telescope. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 444, 4009–4021 (2014).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  161. Kumar, H. et al. India’s first robotic eye for time-domain astrophysics: the GROWTH-India telescope. Astron. J. 164, 90 (2022).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  162. Dressler, A. et al. IMACS: the Inamori-Magellan Areal Camera and Spectrograph on Magellan-Baade. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. 123, 288 (2011).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  163. Harding, L. K. et al. CHIMERA: a wide-field, multi-colour, high-speed photometer at the prime focus of the Hale telescope. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 457, 3036–3049 (2016).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  164. Dhillon, V. S. et al. ULTRACAM: an ultrafast, triple-beam CCD camera for high-speed astrophysics. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 378, 825–840 (2007).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  165. Smartt, S. J. et al. PESSTO: survey description and products from the first data release by the Public ESO Spectroscopic Survey of Transient Objects. Astron. Astrophys. 579, A40 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  166. Buzzoni, B. et al. The ESO Faint Object Spectrograph and Camera (EFOSC). ESO Messenger 38, 9–13 (1984).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  167. Blagorodnova, N. et al. The SED Machine: a robotic spectrograph for fast transient classification. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. 130, 035003 (2018).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  168. Ofek, E. O. et al. The Large Array Survey Telescope—system overview and performances. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. 135, 065001 (2023).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  169. Ben-Ami, S. et al. The Large Array Survey Telescope—science goals. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. 135, 085002 (2023).

  170. Ofek, E. O. MAAT: MATLAB Astronomy and Astrophysics Toolbox. Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1407.005 (2014).

  171. Ofek, E. O. A code for robust astrometric solution of astronomical images. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. 131, 054504 (2019).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  172. Gaia Collaboration. Gaia Early Data Release 3. Summary of the contents and survey properties. Astron. Astrophys. 649, A1 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  173. Oke, J. B. et al. The Keck low-resolution imaging spectrometer. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. 107, 375 (1995).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  174. Perley, D. A. Fully automated reduction of longslit spectroscopy with the Low Resolution Imaging Spectrometer at the Keck Observatory. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. 131, 084503 (2019).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  175. Nayana, A. J. et al. 325 and 610 MHz radio counterparts of SNR G353.6-0.7 also known as HESS J1731-347. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 467, 155–163 (2017).

    ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  176. Greisen, E. W. in Information Handling in Astronomy - Historical Vistas (ed. Heck, A.) 109–125 (Springer, 2003).

  177. Perley, R. A., Chandler, C. J., Butler, B. J. & Wrobel, J. M. The Expanded Very Large Array: a new telescope for new science. Astrophys. J. Lett. 739, L1 (2011).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  178. McMullin, J. P., Waters, B., Schiebel, D., Young, W. & Golap, K. in Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XVI ASP Conference Series Vol. 376 127 (Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 2007).

  179. Gildas Team. GILDAS: Grenoble Image and Line Data Analysis Software. Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1305.010 (2013).

  180. Burrows, D. N. et al. The Swift X-ray telescope. Space Sci. Rev. 120, 165–195 (2005).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  181. Roming, P. W. A. et al. The Swift ultra-violet/optical telescope. Space Sci. Rev. 120, 95–142 (2005).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  182. Evans, P. A. et al. An online repository of Swift/XRT light curves of γ-ray bursts. Astron. Astrophys. 469, 379–385 (2007).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  183. Evans, P. A. et al. Methods and results of an automatic analysis of a complete sample of Swift-XRT observations of GRBs. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 397, 1177–1201 (2009).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  184. Willingale, R., Starling, R. L. C., Beardmore, A. P., Tanvir, N. R. & O’Brien, P. T. Calibration of X-ray absorption in our Galaxy. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 431, 394–404 (2013).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  185. Fruscione, A. et al. CIAO: Chandra’s data analysis system. Proc. SPIE 6270, 62701V (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  186. GROWTH India Telescope; https://sites.google.com/view/growthindia/.

  187. Taggart, K. & Perley, D. A. Core-collapse, superluminous, and gamma-ray burst supernova host galaxy populations at low redshift: the importance of dwarf and starbursting galaxies. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 503, 3931–3952 (2021).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

A.Y.Q.H. would like to thank E. Quataert, D. Lai, J. Cordes and E. S. Phinney for discussions on the physical origin of AT2022tsd and its flares; S. Chatterjee and D. Dong for advice on VLA calibration and imaging; B. Cenko for assistance with Swift observations; M. Brightman and B. Cenko for assistance with Chandra data reduction; K. Ward-Duong, K. Follette, S. Betti, J. Louison, J. Zhang, R. Margutti and R. Chornock for assistance with Keck ToO observations; I. Yoon for advice on ALMA calibration and imaging; and A. Miller for discussions about optical time-series analysis. P. Chen would like to thank Y. Beletsky for his assistance in remote observations with the Magellan telescope. S. Schulze acknowledges support from the G.R.E.A.T. research environment, funded by Vetenskapsrådet, the Swedish Research Council, project number 2016-06012. VSD, ULTRASPEC and ULTRACAM are funded by the UK’s Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC), grant ST/V000853/1. S.J.S. acknowledges funding from STFC grants ST/T000198/1 and ST/S006109/1. This work was funded by ANID, Millennium Science Initiative, ICN12_009. We thank Lulin staff H.-Y. Hsiao, C.-S. Lin, W.-J. Hou, H.-C. Lin and J.-K. Guo for observations and data management. M.W.C. acknowledges support from the US National Science Foundation (NSF) with grants PHY-2010970 and OAC-2117997. L.G., C.P.G. and T.E.M.-B. acknowledge financial support from the Spanish Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación (MCIN), the Agencia Estatal de Investigación (AEI) 10.13039/501100011033, the European Social Fund (ESF) ‘Investing in Your Future’, the European Union Next Generation EU/PRTR funds, the Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation programme of the European Union and by the Secretary of Universities and Research (Government of Catalonia), under the PID2020-115253GA-I00 HOSTFLOWS project, the 2019 Ramón y Cajal programme RYC2019-027683-I, the 2021 Juan de la Cierva programme FJC2021-047124-I, the Marie Skłodowska-Curie and the Beatriu de Pinós 2021 BP 00168 programme and from Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC) under the PIE project 20215AT016 and the programme Unidad de Excelencia María de Maeztu CEX2020-001058-M. A.G.-Y.’s research is supported by the EU through European Research Council (ERC) grant 725161, the ISF GW excellence centre, an IMOS space infrastructure grant, a GIF grant, as well as the André Deloro Institute for Advanced Research in Space and Optics, the Helen Kimmel Center for Planetary Science, the Schwartz/Reisman Collaborative Science Program and the Norman E. Alexander Family M Foundation ULTRASAT Data Center Fund, Minerva and Yeda-Sela; A.G.-Y. is the incumbent of the Arlyn Imberman Professorial Chair. N.A.J. would like to acknowledge the DST-INSPIRE Faculty Fellowship (IFA20-PH-259) for supporting this research. C.-C.N. is grateful for funding from the Ministry of Science and Technology (Taiwan) under contract 109-2112-M-008-014-MY3. M.N. is supported by the ERC under the EU’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation programme (grant agreement no. 948381) and by funding from the UK Space Agency. E.O.O. acknowledges grants from the ISF, IMOS and BSF. F.O. acknowledges support from MIUR, PRIN 2017 (grant 20179ZF5KS) ‘The new frontier of the Multi-Messenger Astrophysics: follow-up of electromagnetic transient counterparts of gravitational wave sources’. D.P. is grateful to the LAST Observatory staff. M.P. is supported by a research grant (19054) from VILLUM FONDEN. A.V.F.’s group at U.C. Berkeley received financial support from the Christopher R. Redlich Fund, G. and C. Bengier, A. Eustace, S. Robertson, C. and S. Winslow, B. and K. Wood and many other donors. The work of D.S. was carried out in the framework of the basic funding programme of the Ioffe Institute no. 0040-2019-0025. Based in part on observations obtained with the 48-inch Samuel Oschin Telescope and the 60-inch telescope at Palomar Observatory as part of the ZTF project. The ZTF is supported by NSF grants AST-1440341 and AST-2034437 and a collaboration including current partners Caltech, IPAC, the Weizmann Institute of Science, the Oskar Klein Center at Stockholm University, the University of Maryland, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron and Humboldt University, the TANGO Consortium of Taiwan, the University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee, Trinity College Dublin, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories, IN2P3, University of Warwick, Ruhr University Bochum, Northwestern University and former partners the University of Washington, Los Alamos National Laboratories and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratories. Operations are conducted by COO, IPAC and UW. The ZTF forced-photometry service was funded under Heising-Simons Foundation grant no. 12540303 (PI: M. Graham). The Pan-STARRS1 Surveys (PS1) and the PS1 public science archive have been made possible through contributions by the Institute for Astronomy, the University of Hawai‘i, the Pan-STARRS Project Office, the Max-Planck Society and its participating institutes, the Max Planck Institute for Astronomy, Heidelberg and the Max Planck Institute for Extraterrestrial Physics, Garching, the Johns Hopkins University, Durham University, the University of Edinburgh, the Queen’s University Belfast, the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, the Las Cumbres Observatory Global Telescope Network Incorporated, the National Central University of Taiwan, the Space Telescope Science Institute (STScI), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) under grant NNX08AR22G issued through the Planetary Science Division of the NASA Science Mission Directorate, NSF grant AST-1238877, the University of Maryland, Eotvos Lorand University (ELTE), the Los Alamos National Laboratory and the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation. This work has made use of data from the ATLAS project. The ATLAS project is primarily funded to search for near-Earth objects through NASA grants NN12AR55G, 80NSSC18K0284 and 80NSSC18K1575; by-products of the near-Earth object search include images and catalogues from the survey area. This work was partially funded by Kepler/K2 grant J1944/80NSSC19K0112 and HST GO-15889 and STFC grants ST/T000198/1 and ST/S006109/1. The ATLAS science products have been made possible through the contributions of the University of Hawai‘i Institute for Astronomy, the Queen’s University Belfast, the Space Telescope Science Institute, the South African Astronomical Observatory and the Millennium Institute of Astrophysics (MAS), Chile. The Liverpool Telescope is operated on the island of La Palma by Liverpool John Moores University in the Spanish Observatorio del Roque de los Muchachos of the Instituto de Astrofisica de Canarias with financial support from the UK STFC. Based in part on observations made with ULTRASPEC at the Thai National Observatory, which is operated by the National Astronomical Research Institute of Thailand (public organization). Based in part on observations obtained with the SEDM on the Kitt Peak 84-inch telescope (SEDM-KP). The SEDM-KP team thanks the NSF and the National Optical-Infrared Astronomy Research Laboratory for making the Kitt Peak 2.1-m telescope available. SEDM-KP is supported by the Heising Simons Foundation under grant 2021-2612 titled ‘The SEDM Kitt Peak Project’ and a collaboration including current partners Caltech, University of Minnesota, the University of Maryland, Northwestern University and STScI. This work made use of data from the GROWTH-India Telescope (GIT) set up by the Indian Institute of Astrophysics (IIA) and the Indian Institute of Technology Bombay (IITB). It is located at the Indian Astronomical Observatory (Hanle), operated by the IIA. We acknowledge funding by the IITB alumni batch of 1994, which partially supports operations of the telescope. Telescope technical details are available online186. We thank the staff of the Indian Astronomical Observatory (IAO), Hanle and CREST, Hosakote, that made these observations possible. The facilities at the IAO and CREST are operated by the IIA, Bangalore. This paper includes data gathered with the 6.5-m Magellan Telescopes located at Las Campanas Observatory, Chile. On the basis of observations made with the Nordic Optical Telescope, owned in collaboration by the University of Turku and Aarhus University, and operated jointly by Aarhus University, the University of Turku and the University of Oslo, representing Denmark, Finland and Norway, respectively, the University of Iceland and Stockholm University at the Observatorio del Roque de los Muchachos, La Palma, Spain, of the Instituto de Astrofisica de Canarias. This publication has made use of data collected at Lulin Observatory, partly supported by MoST grant 108-2112-M-008-001. Based partially on observations collected at the European Organisation for Astronomical Research in the Southern Hemisphere, Chile, as part of ePESSTO+ (the advanced Public ESO Spectroscopic Survey for Transient Objects Survey). ePESSTO+ observations were obtained under ESO programme 108.220C (PI: Inserra). Some of the data presented herein were obtained at the W. M. Keck Observatory, which is operated as a scientific partnership among the California Institute of Technology, the University of California and NASA. The Observatory was made possible by the generous financial support of the W. M. Keck Foundation. We wish to recognize and acknowledge the substantial cultural role and reverence that the summit of Maunakea has always had within the Indigenous Hawaiian community. We are most fortunate to have the opportunity to conduct observations from this mountain. The Giant Metrewave Radio Telescope (GMRT) is run by the National Centre for Radio Astrophysics of the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research. The Submillimeter Array is a joint project between the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory and the Academia Sinica Institute of Astronomy and Astrophysics and is funded by the Smithsonian Institution and the Academia Sinica. This paper makes use of the following ALMA data: ADS/JAO.ALMA#2022.A.00010.T. ALMA is a partnership of the ESO (representing its member states), NSF (USA) and NINS (Japan), together with NRC (Canada), MOST and ASIAA (Taiwan) and KASI (Republic of Korea), in cooperation with the Republic of Chile. The Joint ALMA Observatory is operated by the ESO, AUI/NRAO and NAOJ. The National Radio Astronomy Observatory is a facility of the NSF operated under cooperative agreement by Associated Universities, Inc. Based in part on observations carried out with the IRAM Interferometer NOEMA. IRAM is supported by INSU/CNRS (France), MPG (Germany) and IGN (Spain). This work made use of data supplied by the UK Swift Science Data Centre at the University of Leicester. The scientific results reported in this article are based in part on observations made by the Chandra X-ray Observatory. This research has made use of software provided by the Chandra X-ray Center (CXC) in the application packages CIAO and Sherpa.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Astronomy, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA

    Anna Y. Q. Ho

  2. Astrophysics Research Institute, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK

    Daniel A. Perley & K-Ryan Hinds

  3. Department of Particle Physics and Astrophysics, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel

    Ping Chen, Sagi Ben-Ami, Avishay Gal-Yam, Eran O. Ofek & Nora Linn Strotjohann

  4. The Oskar Klein Centre, Department of Physics, Stockholm University, Albanova University Center, Stockholm, Sweden

    Steve Schulze

  5. Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK

    Vik Dhillon

  6. Instituto de Astrofísica de Canarias, La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain

    Vik Dhillon

  7. Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Powai, Mumbai, India

    Harsh Kumar, Aswin Suresh, Vishwajeet Swain & Varun Bhalerao

  8. Institut de Radioastronomie Millimétrique (IRAM), Saint-Martin-d’Hères, France

    Michael Bremer

  9. Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

    Stephen J. Smartt

  10. Astrophysics Research Centre, School of Mathematics and Physics, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, UK

    Stephen J. Smartt, Michael D. Fulton, Thomas Moore, Matt Nicholl, Ken W. Smith, Shubham Srivastav & David R. Young

  11. European Southern Observatory, Santiago, Chile

    Joseph P. Anderson

  12. Millennium Institute of Astrophysics (MAS), Santiago, Chile

    Joseph P. Anderson

  13. Indian Institute of Astrophysics, Bengaluru, India

    G. C. Anupama, Sudhanshu Barway & Nayana A J

  14. National Astronomical Research Institute of Thailand, Chiang Mai, Thailand

    Supachai Awiphan & Saran Poshyachinda

  15. DiRAC Institute, Department of Astronomy, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA

    Eric C. Bellm

  16. Institute for Astronomy, University of Hawai‘i, Honolulu, HI, USA

    Thomas de Boer, Hua Gao & Eugene A. Magnier

  17. Department of Astronomy, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA

    Thomas G. Brink, Alexei V. Filippenko, Yi Yang & WeiKang Zheng

  18. Caltech Optical Observatories, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, USA

    Rick Burruss, Christoffer Fremling & Reed Riddle

  19. National Radio Astronomy Observatory, Charlottesville, VA, USA

    Poonam Chandra

  20. Physik-Department, TUM School of Natural Sciences, Technische Universität München, Garching, Germany

    Ting-Wan Chen

  21. Max-Planck-Institut für Astrophysik, Garching, Germany

    Ting-Wan Chen

  22. Graduate Institute of Astronomy, National Central University, Taoyuan, Taiwan

    Wen-Ping Chen, Chow-Choong Ngeow & Yen-Chen Pan

  23. Centre for Astrophysics and Supercomputing, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia

    Jeff Cooke, James Freeburn & Mark Suhr

  24. Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Gravitational Wave Discovery (OzGrav), Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia

    Jeff Cooke & James Freeburn

  25. Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for All Sky Astrophysics in 3 Dimensions (ASTRO 3D), Stromlo, Australian Capital Territory, Australia

    Jeff Cooke & Mark Suhr

  26. School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA

    Michael W. Coughlin

  27. Cahill Center for Astrophysics, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, USA

    Kaustav K. Das, Andrew J. Drake, Viraj Karambelkar, Mansi M. Kasliwal, Shri Kulkarni, Antonio C. Rodriguez, Yashvi Sharma & Yuhan Yao

  28. Division of Physics, Mathematics and Astronomy, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, USA

    Christoffer Fremling, Matthew J. Graham & Ashish A. Mahabal

  29. Institute of Space Sciences (ICE-CSIC), Barcelona, Spain

    Lluís Galbany, Claudia P. Gutiérrez & Tomás E. Müller-Bravo

  30. Institut d’Estudis Espacials de Catalunya (IEEC), Barcelona, Spain

    Lluís Galbany, Claudia P. Gutiérrez & Tomás E. Müller-Bravo

  31. Astronomical Observatory, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland

    Mariusz Gromadzki

  32. Cardiff Hub for Astrophysics Research and Technology, School of Physics & Astronomy, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK

    Cosimo Inserra

  33. Center for Data-Driven Discovery, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, USA

    Ashish A. Mahabal

  34. The Oskar Klein Centre, Department of Astronomy, Stockholm University, Albanova University Center, Stockholm, Sweden

    Conor M. B. Omand, Priscila J. Pessi & Jesper Sollerman

  35. INAF - Osservatorio Astronomico d’Abruzzo, Teramo, Italy

    Francesca Onori

  36. Kavli Institute for Astrophysics and Space Research, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA

    Glen Petitpas

  37. Harvard–Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, Cambridge, MA, USA

    Glen Petitpas

  38. Faculty of Physics, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel

    David Polishook

  39. DTU Space, National Space Institute, Technical University of Denmark, Kongens Lyngby, Denmark

    Miika Pursiainen

  40. Infrared Processing and Analysis Center (IPAC), California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, USA

    Ben Rusholme & Avery Wold

  41. Physics Core Facilities, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel

    Enrico Segre

  42. Ioffe Institute, St. Petersburg, Russia

    Dmitry Svinkin

  43. Key Laboratory of Optical Astronomy, National Astronomical Observatories, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China

    Yanan Wang

  44. School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK

    Yanan Wang & Philip Wiseman

  45. Henan Academy of Sciences, Zhengzhou, China

    Sheng Yang

Authors
  1. Anna Y. Q. Ho
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Daniel A. Perley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ping Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Steve Schulze
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Vik Dhillon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Harsh Kumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Aswin Suresh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Vishwajeet Swain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Michael Bremer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Stephen J. Smartt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Joseph P. Anderson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. G. C. Anupama
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Supachai Awiphan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Sudhanshu Barway
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Eric C. Bellm
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  16. Sagi Ben-Ami
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  17. Varun Bhalerao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  18. Thomas de Boer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  19. Thomas G. Brink
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  20. Rick Burruss
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  21. Poonam Chandra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  22. Ting-Wan Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  23. Wen-Ping Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  24. Jeff Cooke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  25. Michael W. Coughlin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  26. Kaustav K. Das
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  27. Andrew J. Drake
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  28. Alexei V. Filippenko
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  29. James Freeburn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  30. Christoffer Fremling
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  31. Michael D. Fulton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  32. Avishay Gal-Yam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  33. Lluís Galbany
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  34. Hua Gao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  35. Matthew J. Graham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  36. Mariusz Gromadzki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  37. Claudia P. Gutiérrez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  38. K-Ryan Hinds
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  39. Cosimo Inserra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  40. Nayana A J
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  41. Viraj Karambelkar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  42. Mansi M. Kasliwal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  43. Shri Kulkarni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  44. Tomás E. Müller-Bravo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  45. Eugene A. Magnier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  46. Ashish A. Mahabal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  47. Thomas Moore
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  48. Chow-Choong Ngeow
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  49. Matt Nicholl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  50. Eran O. Ofek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  51. Conor M. B. Omand
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  52. Francesca Onori
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  53. Yen-Chen Pan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  54. Priscila J. Pessi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  55. Glen Petitpas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  56. David Polishook
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  57. Saran Poshyachinda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  58. Miika Pursiainen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  59. Reed Riddle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  60. Antonio C. Rodriguez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  61. Ben Rusholme
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  62. Enrico Segre
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  63. Yashvi Sharma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  64. Ken W. Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  65. Jesper Sollerman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  66. Shubham Srivastav
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  67. Nora Linn Strotjohann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  68. Mark Suhr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  69. Dmitry Svinkin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  70. Yanan Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  71. Philip Wiseman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  72. Avery Wold
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  73. Sheng Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  74. Yi Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  75. Yuhan Yao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  76. David R. Young
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  77. WeiKang Zheng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors reviewed the manuscript and contributed to the source interpretation. A.Y.Q.H. identified the source; coordinated the follow-up observations; performed radio, X-ray and some optical data analysis; performed the source analysis and modelling; and wrote most of the manuscript. D.A.P. performed the optical image subtraction and photometry and contributed notably to the follow-up campaign, the source analysis and the manuscript. P. Chen observed the source with Magellan and LAST, made the first flare identification and assisted with follow-up observations and X-ray data analysis. S. Schulze performed the host-galaxy analysis, assisted with Swift data analysis and performed follow-up observations with the NOT. V.D. provided follow-up observations with ULTRACAM and ULTRASPEC. H.K., V.S., A.S. and V.B. performed follow-up observations and image reduction with the GIT and the HCT. M.B. performed NOEMA follow-up observations and data reduction. S.J.S. provided ATLAS and Pan-STARRS photometry. J.P.A., C.P.G., L.G., M.G., C.I., T.E.M.-B., F.O., M.P., P.J.P., P.W., Y.W. and D.R.Y. are ePESSTO+ builders. G.C.A. and S.B. are GIT builders. S.A. and S.P. enabled NARIT/Thai National Telescope observations. E.C.B., R.B., M.W.C., A.J.D., M.G., A.A.M., B.R., R.R. and A.W. are ZTF builders. S.B., D.P., E.S. and N.L.S. are LAST builders. T.d.B., M.D.F., H.G., E.A.M., M.N., K.W.S. and S.S. assisted with Pan-STARRS data analysis. T.G.B., J.C., C.F., J.F., S.K., M.M.K., V.K. and M.S. assisted with Keck follow-up observations. N.A.J. and P.C. performed uGMRT follow-up observations and data analysis. T.-W.C., W.-P.C., C.-C.N., Y.-C.P. and S.Y. assisted with Lulin observations and data reduction. K.K.D. observed with the P200. A.V.F. assisted with Keck follow-up observations and thoroughly reviewed the manuscript. A.G.-Y. assisted with LAST follow-up observations. K.-R.H. assisted with LT follow-up observations. T.M. contributed to Pan-STARRS and ePESSTO+ data analysis. E.O.O. assisted with LAST follow-up observations and performed LAST data reduction and photometry. C.M.B.O. contributed to the source analysis. G.P. performed SMA follow-up observations and data analysis. A.C.R. performed CHIMERA observations and data reduction. R.R. created the SEDM2 robotic observing software. Y.S. performed KP84 observations. J.S. assisted with NOT follow-up observations. D.S. performed the GRB search. Y.Y. helped write the transient scanning code and assisted with X-ray observations.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anna Y. Q. Ho.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature thanks Brian Metzger and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Peer reviewer reports are available.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Extended data figures and tables

Extended Data Fig. 1 Optical spectra of AT2022tsd obtained with Keck/LRIS.

Spectra are binned using 3-Å bins. Regions with identified narrow host-galaxy emission lines, used to measure the best-fit redshift of z = 0.2564 ± 0.0003, are marked. Regions used to search for z = 0 emission lines, as would be expected from a foreground Galactic transient, are also marked.

Extended Data Fig. 2 X-ray (0.3–10 keV) light curve of AT2022tsd.

a, Full light curve with best-fit power law of α = −1.81 ± 0.13, in which fν ∝ tα. Upper limits (3σ) are shown with open circles. b, Individual Chandra observations binned in time with 500-s bins. Diamonds show an optical (i-band) flare detected with LRIS during one of the Chandra observations. Error bars are 1σ confidence intervals.

Extended Data Fig. 3 Radio data of AT2022tsd.

a, Selected radio light curves and SEDs from the VLA (15–45 GHz), NOEMA (77–207 GHz) and ALMA (350 GHz). Open circles mark 5σ upper limits and dashed lines connect upper limits to detections. Vertical shaded regions mark epochs of rest-frame radio SEDs. Inset shows SED from late-time observations with the GMRT and VLA. Solid line marks the fν ∝ ν5/2 power law expected from synchrotron self-absorption and dotted line marks the shallower fν ∝ ν1. b, Peak frequency (νp) at a fixed time post-explosion (Δt) versus peak luminosity of extragalactic radio transients. Error bars are 1σ confidence intervals. See Methods section ‘Data for optical parameter space of different transient classes’ for further details and data sources.

Extended Data Fig. 4 Collage of AT2022tsd flares, corrected for Milky Way extinction.

For ULTRASPEC, ULTRACAM and KP84, open points are <5σ and filled points are ≥5σ. The insets of the ULTRASPEC and ULTRACAM light curves show 3-min and 1-min running averages, respectively. Error bars are 1σ confidence intervals.

Extended Data Fig. 5 Lomb–Scargle periodogram of the ULTRASPEC flares.

Each panel shows the periodogram for the flare itself, for a region of the light curve with no notable detections (‘noise’) and for the full light curve (‘all’). Horizontal dashed lines mark the power expected for a false-alarm peak (with false-alarm probability 2.5%) under the assumption that there is no periodicity present in the data, using a bootstrap simulation. The only peaks higher than this threshold are from the cadence of the observation (30 s, and an alias at half that value), from the overall flare width and from the duration of the observation.

Extended Data Fig. 6 Lomb–Scargle periodogram of X-ray observations.

Periodogram constructed using the first four epochs of Chandra X-ray data. The horizontal line shows the power expected for a false-alarm peak (with false-alarm probability 2.5%) under the assumption that there is no periodicity present in the data, using a bootstrap simulation. The observed peaks arise from the 500-s sampling and aliases (marked with vertical dotted lines).

Extended Data Fig. 7 The stellar mass and star-formation rate of the host galaxy of AT2022tsd.

For reference, we show the stellar mass and star-formation rate of other transient host galaxies187, including CC SNe187, LGRBs187 and LFBOTs7,11,12,22,32. Error bars are 1σ confidence intervals.

Extended Data Table 1 Summary of targeted flare searches
Full size table
Extended Data Table 2 Summary of AT2022tsd flare properties
Full size table
Extended Data Table 3 AT2022tsd flare duty cycle for different apparent-magnitude thresholds
Full size table

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

The file contains five tables and two figures. The material provides a comparison between the flares of AT2022tsd and those of literature objects; details of the host-galaxy spectral fitting and multiwavelength SED; and X-ray, optical and radio data.

Supplementary Table 1

The full set of optical photometry for AT2022tsd and its flares (excluding LAST) spanning 25 August 2022 (ZTF nondetections) to 27 January 2023 (P200/CHIMERA flare search).

Supplementary Table 2

The LAST photometry of AT2022tsd. Because, in many cases, we observed the transient location simultaneously with several LAST telescopes, the table provides a 2-min binning of the unsubtracted measurements.

Peer Review File

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ho, A.Y.Q., Perley, D.A., Chen, P. et al. Minutes-duration optical flares with supernova luminosities. Nature 623, 927–931 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06673-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06673-6

This article is cited by

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing