text:
\section{Introduction}

Type IIb supernovae (SNe) belong to the class of hydrogen-poor
core-collapse SNe.  They appear as a Type II SN initially but gradually turn
into a Type Ib SN days to weeks after the explosion.  This property can be best
explained by a progenitor star having a small amount of hydrogen
($M_\mathrm{H,env} \approx 0.01 - 1.0~ \mathrm{M_\odot}$) in the envelope.

The inferred pre-explosion masses of Type IIb SN (hereafter, SN IIb) progenitors are typically about 3
- 6~$\mathrm{M_\odot}$ (e.g., SN 1993J, \citealt{Woosley94, Shigeyama94},
  \citealt{Blinnikov98}; SN 2008ax, \citealt{Taubenberger11, Folatelli15}; SN 2011dh,
\citealt{Bersten12, Ergon15}; SN 2011fu, \citealt{Kumar13};  SN 2011ei,
\citealt{Milisavljevic13}; SN 2011hs, \citealt{Bufano14}; SN 2013df, \citealt{Szalai16}).
This implies that their
immediate progenitors are not massive Wolf-Rayet (WR) stars of WNh type, which
are more massive than 8 - 10~$M_\odot$, and that the initial mass of a SN
IIb progenitor is in the range of 10 - 18~$\mathrm{M_\odot}$.  It is therefore
most likely that SN IIb progenitors have their hydrogen envelope
mainly removed by Roche-lobe overflow rather than by stellar wind mass
loss~\citep{Ensman88, Podsiadlowski93, Stancliffe09,Claeys11,Dessart11,
Bersten12,  Benvenuto13, Dessart15, Folatelli15, Dessart16}.

The progenitors of a few SNe IIb have been directly identified in pre-SN images
as supergiants with a radius $\gtrsim$ 200~$\mathrm{R_\odot}$  (i.e., SN 1993J,
SN 2011dh, and SN 2013df; \citealt{Aldering94, Maund04, Maund11, VanDyk11,
VanDyk14}).  Comparison with stellar evolution and supernova models implies
that these progenitors had an inflated hydrogen envelope of a small mass.   The
luminosities of these progenitors are in the range of $\log L/\mathrm{L_\odot}
= 4.92 - 5.12$. The corresponding intial mass is in the range of 11 -
17~$\mathrm{M_\odot}$, which is consistent with the inferred pre-explosion
masses of 3 - 6~$\mathrm{M_\odot}$.  The inflated hydrogen envelope of supergiant
  progenitors significantly influences the early-time light curves of SNe IIb
during the shock-cooling phase. In particular, several studies conclude that
the sustained high luminosity at early times observed in some SNe IIb is
related to this inflated hydrogen envelope \citep[e.g., SN 1993J, SN 2011hs, SN
2011fu \& SN 2013df;][]{Bersten12, Nakar14, Morozova15}.

However, observations indicate that not all SNe IIb have a supergiant
progenitor. For example, very weak or no sign of sustained brightness at early
times before the rise to the $^{56}$Ni-powered peak in the light curve is found
for SN  1996cb and 2008ax~\citep{Qiu99,Pastorello08}, which implies their
progenitors were fairly compact.  The analysis of SN 2008ax by
\citet{Folatelli15} indicates that its progenitor had a radius of $R \lesssim
50~\mathrm{R_\odot}$ and a pre-explosion mass of about 4 --
5~$\mathrm{M_\odot}$.  Evolutionary models with initial masses of 13 -
18~$\mathrm{M}_\odot$ also indicate that solutions for compact SN IIb
progenitors ($R \lesssim 50 ~\mathrm{M_\odot}$) can be obtained with binary
systems of relatively short initial periods ($P_\mathrm{init} \lesssim \sim
10~\mathrm{d}$; \citealt{Yoon10, Folatelli15}), while red-supergiant
progenitors can be produced with much longer initial periods ($P_\mathrm{init}
= \sim 1000~\mathrm{d}$; \citealt{Podsiadlowski93, Stancliffe09,Claeys11}).  A
yellow supergiant progenitor could be obtained with an initial period of $\sim
100$~d~\citep{Stancliffe09, Bersten12, Benvenuto13}.  The
observational diversity of the signatures of interaction with circumstellar
matter for some SNe IIb may also reflect different histories of mass loss due
to different progenitor properties \citep[e.g.,][]{Chevalier10, BenAmi15,
Maeda15,Kramble16}.

The stellar evolution studies quoted above mostly focused on explaining
specific cases for SN IIb progenitors.  The purpose of this study is to have a
more comprehensive view on the properties of SN IIb progenitors and to discuss
the observational diversity of SNe IIb.  For this purpose, we present a new
grid of binary star evolution covering a range of initial primary-star mass (10
-- 18~$\mathrm{M_\odot}$) and a range of initial period ($\sim$~10 -- 3000~d)
for two different metallicities (solar and Large Magellanic Cloud values).
Although our discussion is focused on SN IIb progenitors, SNe IIb and Ib form a
continuous sequence of the increasing loss of the hydrogen-rich envelope and
therefore represent a unique family (distinct from SNe Ic).  In this context,
our model grid includes SNe Ib progenitor models for which no hydrogen is left
in the envelope.   We compare their properties at the final stage with those of
SN IIb progenitors. This complements our previous work on the properties of SN
Ib/c progenitors~\citep{Yoon10, Yoon12, Kim15}.

This paper is organized as follows.  We present the numerical method and
physical assumptions adopted for our evolutionary models in
Section~\ref{sect:method}. The main results are presented in
Section~\ref{sect:results}, The properties of SN IIb and SN Ib progenitors at
the final stage are discussed in Sections~\ref{sect:snIIb} and~\ref{sect:snIb},
respectively.  The effect of metallicity on progenitor properties is addressed
in Section~\ref{sect:metallicity}.  We conclude our study in
Section~\ref{sect:conclusions}.

\section{Numerical method and physical assumptions}\label{sect:method}

The model grid presented in this study has been calculated with the MESA
code~~\citep{Paxton11, Paxton13, Paxton15}. We adopt  the Schwarzschild
criterion for convection. We consider convective overshoot using a step
function over a layer of thickness $l_\mathrm{OV} = 0.3~H_P$ above the hydrogen
burning convective core,  where $H_P$ is the pressure scale height at the outer
boundary of the core.  We use the Dutch scheme in MESA for both hot and cool
wind mass loss rates, with the Dutch scaling factor of 1.0.

The energy transport efficiency by convection is usually parameterized by the
mixing length $l_\mathrm{m}$ in units of $H_P$.  We
adopt the default value of mesa ($l_\mathrm{m} = 1.5 H_P$).  We do not employ
the artificial boost of convective energy transport using an excessive
temperature gradient in the convective envelope that was introduced by
~\citet{Paxton13}.

We employ the optically thick mass transfer prescription by \citet{Kolb90}
for calculating the mass transfer rate. This is well suited for the case of
mass transfer from a supergiant star whose pressure scale height in the outer
layers may become comparable to the size of the star~\citep{Pastetter89}.
The standard Ritter scheme~\citep{Ritter88} can be applied only if
the pressure scale height at the stellar surface is much smaller than
the stellar radius ($H_P \ll R$).

We do not consider rotation in this study, but assume  non-conservative mass
transfer as predicted by previous binary models including the effects of
rotation~\citep{Petrovic05, Yoon10, Langer12}.  In these studies, the mass
accretor is quickly spun up to critical rotation during a mass transfer
phase, and the stellar wind mass loss rate from the accretor dramatically
increases accordingly, which effectively results in highly non-conservative
mass transfer.  In our calculation, therefore, we assume the ratio of the
accreted mass to the transferred mass (i.e., the mass accretion efficiency
$\beta$) is 0.2.  In this picture, the non-accreted matter is blown away from
the binary system as a fast wind from the mass accretor, and the corresponding
angular momentum loss from the orbit is calculated accordingly.

We considered four different
primary star masses and two different metallicities: $M_1=$ 11, 13, 16, and
18~$\mathrm{M_\odot}$, and $Z =$ 0.02 and 0.007, which roughly correspond to
solar and Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC) metallicities respectively.   The mass
ratio is fixed to $q = 0.9$ for all models in our grid.  To make a robust
prediction on the event rates of SNe Ib and IIb from binary systems, we would need to
consider a wider range of mass ratio~\citep{Claeys11}, but it is beyond the
scope of this paper.

\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width = 0.98\columnwidth]{change.eps}
\caption{Evolution of the luminosity (solid line) and surface temperature (dashed line)
of the primary star in Sm13p50 (blue), Sm13p1700 (red) and Lm11p300 (green),
as a function of temperature at the center. The luminosity and surface temperature
remain almost constant after $T_\mathrm{c}$ increases beyond $10^9$~K.
}\label{fig:change}
\end{center}
\end{figure}

The properties of the primary star at the end of the calculation for each
sequence are summarized in Tables~\ref{tab1},~\ref{tab2}, and~\ref{tab3}.  LMC
and solar metallicity models have reference names starting with L and S,
respectively (Lm11p100, Sm13p500, etc.). Names starting with T refer to
test models with a reduced mass loss rate at solar metallicity (e.g., Tm11p20; see Section~\ref{sect:massloss}).
Each name also contains the information of the initial mass of the primary
star and the initial period.  For example, Lm11p100 refers to the sequence with
$M_\mathrm{1, init} = 11~\mathrm{M_\odot}$ and $P_\mathrm{init} = 100$~d at LMC
metallicity.

The model evolution is halted when the central temperature $T_\mathrm{c}$
reaches $10^9$~K in most cases.  The evolution of Lm11p300, Sm13p50 and Sm13p1700
is calculated to the pre-SN stage to check if there would be any
significant change in the surface properties (i.e., $L$ and $T_\mathrm{eff}$)
from this point.  As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:change}, the envelope structure
remains almost unchanged, because of very short evolutionary time from
$T_\mathrm{c} = 10^9$~K until core-collapse ($\sim 10$~yr).  In the sequences
Sm10p50 and Sm10p200, the carbon-oxygen core becomes electron-degenerate as its
mass approaches 1.4~$\mathrm{M_\odot}$.  Off-center oxygen burning starts in
these models before reaching $T_\mathrm{c} = 10^9$~K, and we stopped the
calculation at this point because the time step becomes extremely small. It is
likely that these models result in SN Ib progenitors, but we leave their final
fate open in the present study.

\section{Results}\label{sect:results}

\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width = 0.5\textwidth, angle=-90]{gridlmc_color.eps}
\vskip   0.5cm
\includegraphics[width = 0.5\textwidth, angle=-90]{gridzsol_color.eps}
\caption{Grid points of the calculated binary sequences for LMC (upper panel) and solar (lower panel) metallicities
on the plane spanned by the initial orbital period and the initial mass of the primary star.
The predicted final fates of the primary stars are marked by different symbols.
Triangle and square symbols denote SN Ib and SN IIb, respectively. Blue, orange and red colors for the square symbol
indicate SN IIb progenitors of blue (SN IIb-B), yellow (SN IIb-Y) and red (SN IIb-R) colors, respectively (see the text).
Sequences where the binary system becomes a contact binary are marked by a black cross. The black star symbols correspond
to the models whose evolution was stopped before reaching $T_\mathrm{c} = 10^9$~K.
}\label{fig:result}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}

Within the parameter space we considered in the present study,
the primary star undergoes Case B mass transfer: Roche-lobe overflow after core hydrogen exhaustion
and before core helium exhaustion.
For our discussion, we further distinguish Case B as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item Case EB (early Case B):  mass transfer while the primary star crosses the Hertzsprung gap on the HR diagram.
\item Case LB (late Case B): mass transfer after the hydrogen envelope of the primary star becomes fully convective.
\end{itemize}
After Case EB/LB mass transfer, a second mass transfer from the primary star may occur after core helium exhaustion.
This case is referred to as Case EBB/LBB.

We can roughly predict the resultant SN type from our models based on their
structures.  A SN IIb progenitor must contain some hydrogen in the envelope but
the hydrogen envelope mass ($M_\mathrm{H, env}$) should not exceed a certain
limit as otherwise the resultant supernova would appear as a SN IIL or IIP.
This upper limit of $M_\mathrm{H, env}$  would depend on the supernova
parameters including supernova energy, total ejecta mass, and chemical composition.
In the present study, we assume the condition of $M_\mathrm{H, env} \le
1.0~\mathrm{M_\odot}$  for SN IIb progenitors.

In addition, we categorize our SN IIb progenitor models into three groups
according to their surface temperatures at the final stage as the following:
\begin{itemize}
\item SN IIb-B: blue progenitors ($\log T_\mathrm{eff}/\mathrm{K} > 3.875$; e.g. SN 2008ax and SN 2016gkg)
\footnote{Some of SN IIb-B models in our grid are too compact ($R < \sim 10~\mathrm{R_\odot}$) to be called a giant star,
and therefore we do not refer our blue progenitor models to blue supergiant progenitors.}
\item SN IIb-Y: yellow supergiant (YSG) progenitors ($3.681 \le \log T_\mathrm{eff}/\mathrm{K} \le 3.875$; e.g., SN 2011dh)
\item SN IIb-R: red supergiant (RSG) progenitors ($\log T_\mathrm{eff}/\mathrm{K} < 3.681$; e.g., SN 1993J and SN 2013df)
\end{itemize}
Our temperature criterion for YSGs is adopted from~\citet{Drout09}.  Note that
in the literature, there is ambiguity about the definition of YSGs: some
authors consider progenitors of SN 1993J and 2013df as
YSGs~\citep[e.g.,][]{Bersten12}, which are RSGs according to our definition.
In the case where no hydrogen is left, we assume that a SN Ib would occur.  The
remaining helium mass in this case is higher than about
$1.5~\mathrm{M_\odot}$, for which helium cannot be easily hidden in supernova
spectra for the final mass range of our SN Ib models
($3.0~\mathrm{M_\odot}\lesssim M \lesssim 6.6~\mathrm{M_\odot}$;
\citealt{Hachinger12, Dessart15}).

We summarize the result of our calculations in Fig.~\ref{fig:result},
where  the predicted final fate of the primary star is indicated
in the plane spanned by the initial period and initial mass.
As shown in the figure, SN IIb progenitors are expected for a larger
parameter space at LMC metallicity than at solar metallicity.  The
figure also shows the dependence of the progenitor type on the initial orbital
period ($P_\mathrm{init}$) and the initial mass of the primary star
($M_\mathrm{init}$), as explained below in greater detail.

\subsection{LMC metallicity models}

\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width =0.98\columnwidth]{hr_Lm11p10.eps}
\includegraphics[width =0.98\columnwidth]{hr_Lm11p100.eps}
\includegraphics[width =0.98\columnwidth]{hr_Lm11p700.eps}
\includegraphics[width =0.98\columnwidth]{hr_Lm11p1000.eps}
\caption{
HR diagrams for systems with a primary star of  $M_\mathrm{init} = 11~\mathrm{M_\odot}$ at LMC metallicity.
The secondary mass is 9.9~$\mathrm{M_\odot}$. The adopted mass accretion efficiency is 0.2.
The mass transfer phases are marked by green color on each evolutionary track.
The initial periods of the systems are 10 (top left), 100 (top right), 700 (bottom left), and 1000 (bottom right)~days, as indicated
on top of each figure. The labels with dotted contour lines indicate $\log R/\mathrm{R_\odot}$.
The vertical dashed lines give the boundary values for yellow supergiants ($3.681 \le \log T_\mathrm{eff}/\mathrm{K} \le 3.875$).
The light green, yellow and red circles denote core hydrogen exhaustion, onset of core helium burning and core helium exhaustion, respectively.
}\label{fig:hr11lmc}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}

It is well known that an initially tighter orbit leads to a deeper stripping of
the hydrogen envelope via mass transfer.  This effect of the initial separation
can be observed in Fig.~\ref{fig:hr11lmc}, as an example with $M_\mathrm{init}
= 11~\mathrm{M_\odot}$.

With relatively short initial orbits ($P_\mathrm{init} =$ 10~d and 100~d), Case
EB mass transfer occurs.  In this case, most of the hydrogen envelope remains
radiative at the onset of mass transfer, and strong mass loss leads to thermal
disequilibrium of the envelope.  The luminosity of the primary star rapidly
drops accordingly~\citep[e.g., see][]{DeLoore92, Eggleton11}
until the total mass decreases  to about 7~$\mathrm{M_\odot}$
and 8~$\mathrm{M_\odot}$ for $P_\mathrm{init} =$~10~d and 100~d, respectively.
The star gradually becomes brighter thereafter as the surface mass fraction of
hydrogen decreases.  Once the mass transfer stops, both the radius and the
luminosity of the star decrease until thermal equilibrium is
restored.

After core helium
exhaustion, the envelope expands again until the end point.  The surface
temperature at the end point is $\log T_\mathrm{eff}/\mathrm{K} = 4.44$ and 3.79 for
$P_\mathrm{init} =$~10 and 100~d, respectively. As discussed in
Section~\ref{sect:mhenv} below in more detail, the final surface temperature
tends to be lower for a higher hydrogen envelope mass that remains until the
end, which is in turn determined by the initial orbital separation.

In the sequences with  $P_\mathrm{init} =$700~d and 1000~d, mass transfer
occurs when the hydrogen envelope of the primary star is fully convective (Case
LB). The response to mass loss of a convective envelope is very different from
that of a radiative envelope~\citep{DeLoore92, Eggleton11}. As shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:hr11lmc}, the radius initially increases once the primary star
begins to transfer mass to its companion.  In the sequence of $P_\mathrm{init}
=$~700~d, after the mass transfer stops, the star undergoes a blueward evolution
on the HR diagram.  The star turns to the red again and becomes a RSG at the final
stage.  On the other hand, the HR diagram of the sequence with $P_\mathrm{init}
=$~1000~d does not show the blue loop.  This is because the hydrogen envelope
mass remains sufficiently large to preserve the RSG structure.

In Fig.~\ref{fig:mdotlmc}, the evolution of the mass transfer rate from the
11~$\mathrm{M_\odot}$ and 18~$\mathrm{M_\odot}$ primary stars is presented for
three different initial periods. We note that  Case EB mass transfer
($P_\mathrm{init} =$~100~d for 11~$\mathrm{M_\odot}$ and $P_\mathrm{init}
=$~300~d for 18~$\mathrm{M_\odot}$) lasts longer than Case LB mass transfer,
which explains the deeper stripping of the hydrogen envelope with  Case EB. With
Case LB mass transfer, the duration and mass transfer rate become smaller with a
longer initial period.  There are two mass transfer phases for the
11~$\mathrm{M_\odot}$ model.  The
first one is responsible for most of
the stripping of the hydrogen envelope.  The second one is a brief phase
with a lower mass transfer rate, which occurs after core helium exhaustion as
the primary star tends to expand during the final evolutionary stages.

This second mass transfer is less favored in more massive systems
(Fig.~\ref{fig:mdotlmc}; see also Tables~\ref{tab1},~\ref{tab2},
and~\ref{tab3}).  This is because of the following two factors. 1) The Case EBB
mass transfer (i.e., the second mass transfer after the Case EB mass transfer)
is commonly observed for relatively low-mass stars~\citep[e.g.,][]{Yoon10}.
The envelope expansion after core helium exhaustion is more
prominent with a more compact stellar core.  On the other hand, higher mass
stars ($M_\mathrm{init} \gtrsim 13~\mathrm{M_\odot}$) tend to remain more
compact provided $M_\mathrm{H,env} <
0.15~\mathrm{M_\odot}$ after the Case EB mass transfer.  2) The Case LBB mass
transfer (i.e., the second mass transfer after the Case LB mass transfer) is
also driven by the expansion of the remaining hydrogen envelope.  For more
massive systems, however, stronger stellar winds tend to make the orbit
wider, preventing the primary star from undergoing further mass transfer.

Although mass transfer is the main determining factor for the final envelope
structure of SN progenitors in binary systems, the effect of wind mass loss
can also play an important role.  As discussed by \citet{Yoon10},  mass
transfer cannot completely remove hydrogen from the primary star even with
Case EB.  Whether the progenitor can retain some hydrogen until core collapse
depends on the subsequent history of mass loss by stellar winds.  Stellar winds
are stronger for higher masses, and no hydrogen is left in Case EB systems with
$M_\mathrm{init} \ge 16~\mathrm{M_\odot}$ at $Z = Z_\mathrm{LMC}$
(Fig.~\ref{fig:result}; Table~\ref{tab1}).

With our assumption of $\beta = 0.2$, the Case EB
and Case LB regimes are separated by the contact regime  for the sequences with
$M\ge13~\mathrm{M_\odot}$ (Fig.~\ref{fig:result}). With a larger value of
$\beta$, the regime for contact would be enlarged.

In terms of the final fate (Fig.~\ref{fig:result}), solutions for SN IIb-B and
SN IIb-Y progenitors are found only for $M\le13~\mathrm{M_\odot}$ in our
considered parameter space.  SN IIb-R solutions are found for all the considered
mass range.  The tendency that the surface temperature gradually decreases with increasing
$P_\mathrm{init}$ for a given initial mass can be explained by the fact that
less hydrogen is removed in the case of a wider orbit.

\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width =0.95\columnwidth]{mdot_lmc11.eps}
\includegraphics[width =0.95\columnwidth]{mdot_lmc18.eps}
\caption{The mass transfer rates as a function of the total mass of the primary star, for systems
with $M_\mathrm{1, init} = 11~~\mathrm{M_\odot}$ (upper panel) and  $M_\mathrm{1, init} = 18~~\mathrm{M_\odot}$
(lower panel) at LMC metallicity. The initial periods are indicated by different colors.
}\label{fig:mdotlmc}
\end{center}
\end{figure}

\subsection{Solar metallicity models}

The mass transfer history of solar metallicity models is qualitatively similar
to that of LMC metallicity models. A shorter initial orbit leads to more
significant stripping of the hydrogen envelope, and vice versa.  However, the
role of stellar winds becomes more important, compared to the LMC case.

The most notable difference between solar and LMC metallicity models is
observed in the outcome of Case EB mass transfer.  As shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:result}, hydrogen is completely removed via stellar winds during
the post Case EB mass transfer phase (see also Table~\ref{tab2}). The solutions
of SN IIb-B and SN IIb-Y that are found with LMC metallicity with $M \le
13~\mathrm{M_\odot}$ are replaced by SN Ib solutions.

Strong winds also significantly affect the evolution with Case LB mass
transfer.  Narrow regimes for SN IIb-B solutions  appear with $M =
16~\mathrm{M_\odot}$ and 18~$\mathrm{M_\odot}$, which are not found at LMC
metallicity. This is because the primary star loses a significant amount of
hydrogen during the blue loop phase where the WR mass loss rate of
\citet{Nugis00} is applied (see Section~\ref{sect:massloss} below) after Case LB
mass transfer  (Fig.~\ref{fig:hr16zsol}). At $M_\mathrm{init} =
 16~\mathrm{M_\odot}$, a SN IIb-Y solution is also found in-between SN IIb-B and
SN IIb-R regimes (Figs.~\ref{fig:result} and~\ref{fig:hr16zsol}).

In general, RSG solutions are dominant for SN IIb progenitors at solar
metallicity. However, many of the SN IIb-R progenitor models have higher surface
temperatures ($\log T_\mathrm{eff}/\mathrm{K} > 3.6$) than those of ordinary RSGs observed
in the local universe (see Table~\ref{tab2}).  This  is  consistent with
the progenitor properties of SN 1993J and SN 2013df, for which $\log
T_\mathrm{eff}/\mathrm{K} \simeq 3.63$ was inferred observationally~\citep{Maund04,
VanDyk14}.

\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width =1.0\columnwidth]{hr_Sm16p1700.eps}
\includegraphics[width= 1.0\columnwidth]{hr_Sm16p1900.eps}
\includegraphics[width= 1.0\columnwidth]{hr_Sm16p2600.eps}
\caption{
HR diagrams for systems with a primary star of $M_\mathrm{init} = 16~\mathrm{M_\odot}$ at solar metallicity.
The secondary mass is 14.4~$\mathrm{M_\odot}$.
The initial periods of the systems are 1700 (top), 1900 (middle), and 2600 (bottom)~days.
The mass transfer phases are marked by green color on each evolutionary track.
The labels with dotted contour lines indicate $\log R/\mathrm{R_\odot}$.
The vertical dashed lines give the boundary values for yellow supergiants ($3.681 \le \log T_\mathrm{eff}/\mathrm{K} \le 3.875$).
The light green, yellow and red circles denote core hydrogen exhaustion, onset of core helium burning and core helium exhaustion, respectively.
}\label{fig:hr16zsol}
\end{center}
\end{figure}

\subsection{Effect of WR winds}\label{sect:massloss}

As discussed above, the evolution of the primary star after the major mass
transfer phase is critically affected by stellar wind mass loss. In particular,
the primary star spends most of the remaining evolutionary time on the helium
main sequence as a hydrogen-poor star after Case EB mass transfer.  The WR mass
loss rate by \citet{Nugis00} (hereafter, the NL rate) is applied for this case.
However, the NL rate was inferred from Galactic WR stars, which are much more
massive ($M \gtrsim 10~\mathrm{M_\odot}$) and therefore much more luminous than
our primary star models during the post mass transfer phase ($
3~\mathrm{M_\odot} \lesssim M \lesssim 7~\mathrm{M_\odot}$).  The validity of
the NL rate for these relatively low-mass hydrogen-poor hot stars has hardly
been investigated previously (see the discussion by \citealt{Yoon15}).

For their SN Ib progenitor models in binary systems, \citet{Yoon10} have applied
a lower mass loss rate than the NL rate, if $\log
L/\mathrm{L}_\odot < 4.5$ during the post mass transfer phase.  As a
result, a small amount of hydrogen is left in many of their SN Ib progenitor
models, which can be considered as SN IIb-B progenitors according to our
definition.

To investigate further the effect of wind mass loss, we made a model grid with
a reduced mass loss rate using the scaling factor $\eta$ = 0.48 on
the Dutch mass loss rate recipe in the MESA code,
at solar metallicity (Table~\ref{tab3}). The mass loss rate with this reduction
factor becomes comparable to that of LMC metallicity with the fiducial value of
$\eta = 1.0$.  As shown in Table~\ref{tab3}, this reduction of the mass loss
rate gives a result similar to that of the LMC metallicity models.  Solutions
for SN IIb progenitors are found with the sequences with $M_\mathrm{init} =
11~\mathrm{M_\odot}$ and 13~$\mathrm{M_\odot}$ for $P_\mathrm{init} \le 400$~d,
for which SN Ib solutions are obtained with our fiducial mass loss rate.  With
$M_\mathrm{init} = 11~\mathrm{M_\odot}$, solutions for SN IIb-B, SN IIb-Y, and
SN IIb-R can be found in the order of increasing initial periods. With
$M_\mathrm{init} = 13~\mathrm{M_\odot}$, only SN IIb-B is predicted. This
result is also consistent with those of \citet{Benvenuto13} and
\citet{Folatelli15}, who found a SN IIb-Y solution for SN 2011dh and a SN
IIb-B solution for SN 2008ax, respectively, at solar metallicity.  Apparently,
these authors did not apply WR mass loss in their binary models.

This consideration should be taken as a caveat when we discuss the metallicity
dependence of the predicted SN type (see Section~\ref{sect:metallicity})

\section{Properties of SN II\lowercase{b} progenitors}\label{sect:snIIb}

\subsection{Final mass - luminosity relation}

\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width =1.0\columnwidth]{mf_L.eps}
\caption{The final mass-luminosity relation of SN IIb progenitors.
The initial primary mass is marked by different symbols: circle, square, inverted triangle, triange, and star
denote 10, 11, 13, 16 and 18~$\mathrm{M_\odot}$, respectively.
Purple and blue indicate
solar and LMC metallicities, respectively. Green gives the result with
a reduced mass loss rate (i.e., $\eta = 0.48$) at solar metallicity.
The dashed line is the best fit of the data with a second order polynomial.
}\label{fig:mfL}
\end{center}
\end{figure}

A few SN IIb progenitors have been directly identified in pre-SN images,
including those of SN 1993J, SN 2008ax, SN 2011dh, SN 2013bf and SN
2016gkg~\citep{Aldering94, Maund04, Maund11, VanDyk11, VanDyk14, Kilpatrick16,
Tartaglia16}.  Their properties are summarized in Table~\ref{tab4}.  In these
studies, the progenitor masses at the pre-SN stage were inferred from their
bolometric luminosities.

In Fig.~\ref{fig:mfL}, we present the final mass-luminosity relation of our SN IIb
progenitor models. The luminosity at the pre-SN stage correlates with
the initial and final masses.   For a given final luminosity, however,
the scatter of the final mass can be as large as 1.0~$\mathrm{M_\odot}$. The
bolometric luminosity at the pre-SN stage is mainly determined by helium shell
burning, which is in turn largely determined by the CO core mass. As shown in
Tables~\ref{tab1},~\ref{tab2} and~\ref{tab3}, different final CO core masses
may result from different initial orbits for a given initial mass. This explains
the scatter of the final masses for a given luminosity. Likewise,
for a given initial mass, the final luminosity may vary by up to 0.2~dex in
terms of  $\log L/\mathrm{L_\odot}$.

The final mass-luminosity relation shown in  Fig.~\ref{fig:mfL} roughly gives $M_f
\simeq$ 6.0, 5.0, and 4.9~$\mathrm{M_\odot}$ for SN 1993J, SN 2011dh and SN
2013df, respectively, for which the progenitor luminosity is fairly well
constrained.  The corresponding initial masses are about 16~$\mathrm{M_\odot}$
for SN 1993J and 13~$\mathrm{M_\odot}$ for SN 2011dh and SN 2013df, in
agreement with previous work.

\subsection{Final position on the HR diagram and optical brightness}\label{sect:finalHR}

\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width =1.0\columnwidth]{hr.eps}
\includegraphics[width =1.0\columnwidth]{teff_mv.eps}
\caption{\emph{Upper panel:} The final positions of our SN IIb models on the HR diagram.
The initial primary mass is marked by different symbols: circle, square, inverted triangle, triangle, and star
denote 10, 11, 13, 16 and 18~$\mathrm{M_\odot}$, respectively.
Purple and blue indicate
solar and LMC metallicities, respectively. Green gives the result with
a reduced mass loss rate (i.e., $\eta = 0.48$) at solar metallicity.
The orange dotted lines mark the boundaries for yellow supergiants:
$3.681 \le \log T_\mathrm{eff}/\mathrm{K} \le 3.875$.
The black dashed line roughly gives the dividing line of SN IIb-B solutions
for different metallicities, mass loss rates and/or initial masses (see the text
for details). The open circles mark the positions of
four observed SN IIb progenitors (SN 1993J, SN 2011dh, SN 2013df, and SN 2016gkg; see Table~\ref{tab4}).
\emph{Lower panel:} Corresponding V-band magnitudes with black-body approximation.
}\label{fig:hr}
\end{center}
\end{figure}

The positions on the HR diagram of our SN IIb progenitor models are shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:hr}. Given the limited number of our models, this figure cannot
properly reflect the real population of SN IIb progenitors.  However, a few
important features can be found here.

Note that RSG progenitors (SN IIb-R) like SN 1993J and SN 2013bf can exist for
a wide range of luminosities (i.e, for a wide range of initial masses)
regardless of metallicity, and can be relatively easily explained by Case LB
mass transfer.

On the other hand,  SN IIb-B and SN IIb-Y progenitors would be preferentially
produced from relatively low-mass progenitors,  as also implied by
Fig.~\ref{fig:result}.  For $\log L_f/\mathrm{L_\odot} < 5.0$, which corresponds to
$M_\mathrm{1,init} \lesssim 13~\mathrm{M_\odot}$ solutions for SN IIb-B and
SN IIb-Y can be obtained only with LMC metallicity or with a reduced mass loss
rate ($\eta = 0.48$) at solar metallicity. These solutions are obtained mostly
with Case EB mass transfer.  SN IIb-B and IIb-Y solutions  for  $\log
L_f/\mathrm{L_\odot} > 5.0$ ($M_\mathrm{1,init} \gtrsim 16~\mathrm{M_\odot}$)
result from strong mass loss after Case LB mass transfer, and are rarely
achieved with $\eta = 1.0$ at solar metallicity, as implied by
Fig.~\ref{fig:result}.

The host galaxies of SN 2011dh and SN 2016gkg (M51 and NGC 613,
respectively), for which the progenitors belong to SN IIb-B or SN IIb-Y type,
are not particularly metal poor. This might imply a lower mass loss rate from the
progenitors than the fiducial mass loss rate adopted in our
study~\citep[cf.][]{Benvenuto13}.  However, the parameter space of our models
is limited to stable mass transfer systems.  In reality, multiple binary
channels may exist (e.g., common envelope ejection) for SN IIb-B/IIb-Y
progenitors, and this issue deserves a more detailed future study.

Fig.~\ref{fig:hr} also shows the V-band magnitudes of our SN IIb progenitor
models, which were calculated with the black-body approximation.   In general, our
models predict that SN IIb progenitors are much brighter ( $M_\mathrm{V} < -6.0$ for
most cases)  than  hydrogen-free SN Ib/Ic progenitors ($M_\mathrm{V} > -4.5$;
\citealt{Yoon12};  see Section~\ref{sect:snIb} below) in the optical. Therefore, it is not
surprising that  SN IIb progenitors have be more commonly identified
than SN Ib/Ic progenitors so far~\citep[see][for a recent review]{Smartt15},
despite the fact that the SN Ib event rate is comparable to the SN IIb
rate~\citep[e.g.,][]{Smith11, Eldridge13, Shivvers16}.

Note also that the optical brightness of SN IIb progenitors gradually decreases
as the surface temperature increases for $\log T_\mathrm{eff}/\mathrm{K} \gtrsim 3.9$.
This is mainly because a larger bolometric correction is needed for a higher
$T_\mathrm{eff}$. In particular,  SN IIb-B progenitors with $\log
T_\mathrm{eff}/\mathrm{K} \gtrsim 4.5$ have $M_\mathrm{V} > -5$ and would be relatively
difficult to detect in pre-SN images, compared to SN IIb-Y and IIb-R
progenitors.

\subsection{Final hydrogen mass - surface temperature relation}\label{sect:mhenv}

\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width =1.0\columnwidth]{mhenv_teff.eps}
\caption{
The final surface temperatures as a function of the hydrogen envelope mass ($M_\mathrm{H,env}$)
of our SN IIb progenitor models.
The initial primary mass is marked by different symbols: circle, square, inverted triangle, triangle, and star
denote 10, 11, 13, 16 and 18~$\mathrm{M_\odot}$, respectively.
Purple and blue indicate
solar and LMC metallicities, respectively. Green gives the result with
a reduced mass loss rate (i.e., $\eta = 0.48$) at solar metallicity.
The orange dotted lines mark the boundaries for yellow supergiants:
$3.681 \le \log T_\mathrm{eff}/\mathrm{K} \le 3.875$.
The back dotted vertical line roughly defines the boundary between extended progenitors (SN IIb-R),
and relatively compact progenitors (SN IIb-Y and SN IIb-B), in terms of the hydrogen envelope mass.
}\label{fig:mhteff}
\end{center}
\end{figure}

One of the dominant factors that determine the final size and surface
temperature of a SN IIb progenitor is the hydrogen envelope mass
($M_\mathrm{H,env}$) at the pre-SN stage. We find that SN IIb-R solutions are
dominant if $M_\mathrm{H,env} > 0.15~\mathrm{M_\odot}$, while SN IIb-Y and SN IIb-B
solutions are more common with a smaller hydrogen envelope mass
(Fig.~\ref{fig:mhteff}). This is in good agreement with the previous estimates
for the SNe IIb in Table~\ref{tab4}: $M_\mathrm{H,env} = 0.2 - 0.4~\mathrm{M_\odot}$
for SN 1993J and SN 2013df (RSG progenitor), $M_\mathrm{H,env} \approx
0.1~\mathrm{M_\odot}$ for SN 2011dh (YSG progenitor) and $M_\mathrm{H,env} \approx
0.06~\mathrm{M_\odot}$ for SN 2008ax (BSG progenitor).

This result is also generally consistent with the finding of \citet{Meynet15},
who discussed single star SN progenitors at solar metallicity  with enhanced RSG mass
loss rates.  A few notable differences are also found as the following:
\begin{enumerate}
\item In Meynet et al., SN progenitors with $\log T_\mathrm{eff,f}/\mathrm{K} > 3.6$ were found only with $M_\mathrm{H,env} < 0.4~\mathrm{M_\odot}$,
but in our grid, this upper limit extends to $M_\mathrm{H,env} = 0.6~\mathrm{M_\odot}$.
\item Meynet et al. find SN progenitors with  $\log T_\mathrm{eff,f}/\mathrm{K} < 3.6$ only for $M_\mathrm{H,env} > 0.9~\mathrm{M_\odot}$,
but in our study, solutions with  $\log T_\mathrm{eff,f}/\mathrm{K} < 3.6$ are  obtained even for smaller hydrogen masses  ($M_\mathrm{H,env} \gtrsim 0.2~\mathrm{M_\odot}$).
\item In Meynet et al.,  no models with
$M_\mathrm{H,env} > 0.1~\mathrm{M_\odot}$ have a surface temperature higher than $\log T_\mathrm{eff,f}/\mathrm{K} = 4.3$.
By contrast, many of our LMC metallicity models  have $\log T_\mathrm{eff,f}/\mathrm{K} >
4.3$ with $M_\mathrm{H,env}  = 0.1 -0.14~\mathrm{M_\odot}$.
\item Our models include SN IIb-B progenitors with $\log T_\mathrm{eff,f}/\mathrm{K} \ge 4.8$ at solar metallicity,
which was not found in Meynet at al..
\end{enumerate}
These differences can be explained by the fact that our models cover a wider parameter space than in Meynet et al.,
in terms of mass loss histories and metallicities.

\subsection{Asymmetry of the progenitor envelope and winds}\label{sect:asymmetry}

\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width =1.0\columnwidth]{fRL.eps}
\caption{The Roch-lobe filling factor for the last computed models of primary stars,
defined by $f_\mathrm{RL} = (R - R_\mathrm{RL})/R_\mathrm{RL}$
where $R$ and $R_\mathrm{RL}$ denote the radius of the star and the Roche lobe radius, respectively.
The orange dotted lines mark the boundaries for yellow supergiants:
$3.681 \le \log T_\mathrm{eff}/\mathrm{K} \le 3.875$.
}\label{fig:fRL}
\end{center}
\end{figure}

Compared to single stars, the outermost layers of SN progenitors in binary
systems can have an asymmetric structure at the pre-SN stage if they are
filling or almost filling the Roche lobe. Mass transfer and interaction between
stellar winds and transferred mass may also create complex, non-spherical
circumstellar  structures. These factors might be related to some polarization
features observed at early times in SNe IIb when the photosphere is
still located at the outermost ejecta layers (\citealt{Hoeflich95}; \citealt{Tran97};
\citealt{Maund07}; \citealt{Chornock11}; \citealt{Dessart11a}; \citealt{Mauerhan15};
\citealt{Stevance16}; cf. \citealt{Reilly16} for the SN Ib iPTF13bvn).

We present the Roche lobe filling factor $f_\mathrm{RL}$ for our SN IIb
progenitor models in Fig.~\ref{fig:fRL}, which is defined as $f_\mathrm{RL} =
(R - R_\mathrm{RL})/R_\mathrm{RL}$, where $R_\mathrm{RL}$ is the Roche lobe
radius. Note that mass transfer becomes significant ($\dot{M}_\mathrm{tr}
\gtrsim 10^{-6}~\mathrm{M_\odot~yr^{-1}}$) if $f_\mathrm{RL} \gtrsim -0.12$,
according to the adopted mass transfer scheme in our calculations (see
Section~\ref{sect:method}).  Many of our SN IIb progenitor models end their lives
as a detached binary, but not a small fraction of the sequences have
$f_\mathrm{RL} > -0.12$ at the final stage, in particular for SN IIb-Y
progenitors with $M_\mathrm{1, init}  \le  11~\mathrm{M_\odot}$.  On the other
hand, all SN IIb-B progenitors with $\log T_\mathrm{eff}/\mathrm{K} \gtrsim 4.0$ are
detached from the Roche lobe because they are compact.  SN IIb-R progenitors
tend to be more detached with a higher mass  and no progenitors with
$M_\mathrm{1, init} = 18~\mathrm{M_\odot}$ fills the Roche lobe at the pre-SN stage.
This is because stronger wind mass loss from a more massive progenitor tends to make the
orbit wider than the corresponding case with a less massive progenitor.

Whether or not the Roche lobe filling envelope at the pre-SN stage can explain
some features of polarization during an early SN epoch is an important subject
of future work.  Previous spectropolarimetry studies on core collapse SNe imply
that polarisation features are strongly connected to asymmetric
explosion ~\citep[e.g.,][]{Wang08}.  Although signatures of asymmetric
explosions are more prominent in late-time observations, its impact on shock
heating of the envelope and/or asymmetric distribution of nickel may also play
an important role in the early-time SN evolution~\citep{Mauerhan15}.
Therefore, the distorted shape of the envelope would not be the only
possible explanation for early-time polarisation.

The wind mass loss rates from SN IIb progenitors range from $\log
\dot{M}_\mathrm{w} [\mathrm{M_\odot~yr^{-1}}]  \simeq -6.5 $ to  $\log
\dot{M}_\mathrm{w} [\mathrm{M_\odot~yr^{-1}}]  \simeq -4.8$, and increase with
final mass and radius (see Tables~\ref{tab1},~\ref{tab2}
and~\ref{tab3}).  These mass loss rates are largely consistent with the values
inferred from observations of SN IIb interactions with circumstellar
medium~\citep[e.g.,][]{Maeda14, Maeda15}.

The mass transfer rates from the Roche-lobe filling progenitors
largely depend on $f_\mathrm{RL}$ at the final
stage, rather than on the final mass (see Tables~\ref{tab1}, \ref{tab2} and
\ref{tab3}).  In our assumption of non-conservative mass transfer, the
transferred material that is not accreted onto the secondary star is supposed to
be blown away from the binary system as a fast wind from the secondary star. On
the other hand,  the winds from Roche-lobe filling progenitors would be much
slower than the winds from secondary stars.  Even if the primary star is not
filling the Roche lobe, slow and fast winds are expected from a SN IIb-Y/IIb-R
progenitor and its dwarf companion, respectively.  The resultant wind-wind
collisions would make a complicated, clumpy circumstellar structure.  This
possibility and its observational signatures deserve future numerical
studies.

\section{Properties of SN I\lowercase{b} progenitors}\label{sect:snIb}

\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width =1.0\columnwidth]{snIb_hr.eps}
\includegraphics[width =1.0\columnwidth]{snIb_mf_radius.eps}
\includegraphics[width =1.0\columnwidth]{snIb_mf_L.eps}
\includegraphics[width =1.0\columnwidth]{snIb_mf_mv.eps}
\caption{\emph{Top left:} The final positions of our SN Ib progenitor models on the HR diagram. The different symbols
indicate the corresponding initial masses, as indicated by the associated numbers. LMC and solar metallicity models
are marked by blue and purple colors, respectively. \emph{Top right:} The final
mass-radius relation of our SN Ib progenitor models. \emph{Bottom left:} The final mass-luminosity relation of
our SN Ib progenitor models.  \emph{Bottom right:} The predicted optical magnitude in V-band of SN Ib progenitors
as a function of the final mass.
}\label{fig:snIb}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}

Many of our considered systems produce SN Ib progenitors (mostly via Case EB
mass transfer).   All of our models contain a fairly large amount of helium in
the envelope ($m_\mathrm{He} > 1.5~\mathrm{M_\odot}$;
Tables~\ref{tab1},~\ref{tab2} and~\ref{tab3}), and the final masses of our
models are not large enough to hide this amount of helium in the
spectra~\citep[cf.][]{Hachinger12, Dessart12}.   Therefore no SN Ic is robustly
predicted within our grid.  The final mass ranges from 3.0~$\mathrm{M_\odot}$
to 6.6~$\mathrm{M_\odot}$, which can explain well the ejecta masses of most SNe
Ib ($M_\mathrm{ejecta} \simeq 1.0 - 5.0~\mathrm{M_\odot}$) inferred from
observations~\citep[e.g.,][]{Drout11, Taddia15, Lyman16} \footnote{Note,
however, that these ejecta masses have been inferred using a simplified model
based on \citet{Arnett82}, which is not very suitable for SNe
Ibc~\citep[see][]{Dessart16}.}.

We present the final positions of our SN Ib progenitor models on the HR
diagram, in Fig.~\ref{fig:snIb}.  The final mass-radius and  mass-luminosity
relations are also shown in this figure.  Unlike SN IIb progenitors, there
exists a clear correlation between the final luminosity and the final
surface temperature.  More luminous (hence more massive) SN Ib progenitors have
higher surface temperatures.

This correlation between the final luminosity and surface temperature is
reflected by the final mass-radius relation shown in the top-right panel of the
figure.  The expansion of the helium envelope during the final evolutionary
stages becomes more significant for a more compact carbon-oxygen core (the
so-called mirror effect). This property of SN Ib/c progenitors was first
reported by \citet{Yoon10}, and our new models confirm their result, even
though we adopted a different mass loss rate prescription as discussed in
Section~\ref{sect:massloss} above.   This leads to the following
counter-intuitive result that was also discussed by \citet{Yoon12} in more
detail: the brightness in the optical increases as the progenitor mass
decreases, while the bolometric luminosity behaves in the opposite way.
This is because the bolometric correction increases with increasing
$T_\mathrm{eff}$ (in this $T_\mathrm{eff}$ range).

The expansion of the helium envelope is particularly strong when $M_\mathrm{f}
\lesssim 3.2~\mathrm{M_\odot}$.  The predicted optical brightness can reach
$M_\mathrm{V} = -5.4 \cdots -6.5$ for $M_\mathrm{f} \approx
3.0~\mathrm{M_\odot}$ (Fig.~\ref{fig:snIb}).  This may well explain the optical
brightness of the progenitor of iPTF13bvn, which was identified
by~\citet{Cao13}, even without a contribution from its companion, in good
agreement with the conclusion of previous studies~\citep{Kim15, Folatelli16,
Eldridge16}.  However, we need fine-tuned initial masses ($M_\mathrm{init} \sim
11~\mathrm{M_\odot}$) to get this bright progenitor in the optical.  More
massive progenitors are relatively faint  ($M_\mathrm{V} > - 5.0$), and would
be more difficult to detect unless they have a brighter companion star.  The
initial masses of these SN Ib progenitor models are in the range of $11 -
18~\mathrm{M_\odot}$.  In our assumption of $\beta = 0.2$ and $q=0.9$, the
companion star mass  does not exceed  about 18~$\mathrm{M_\odot}$, which cannot
be much brighter than $M_\mathrm{V} = -5.0$ at the pre-SN stage~\citep{Kim15}.
Therefore, a sufficiently nearby target would be needed
to detect a SN Ib progenitor with $3.5~\mathrm{M_\odot} \lesssim
M_\mathrm{f} \lesssim 7.0~\mathrm{M_\odot}$, unless the mass transfer is nearly
conservative.

\section{Metallicity effect}\label{sect:metallicity}

As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:result}, the parameter space for SN Ib progenitors
broadens as the metallicity increases. This is because strong winds at a
high metallicity during the post mass transfer phase can completely remove the
remaining hydrogen layer, for sufficiently short initial orbits.  This implies
that the SN Ib to SN IIb event rate ratio  would increase with increasing
metallicity. This prediction seems to be supported by recent analyses on SN
host galaxies~(see Figs. A1 and A2 of \citealt{Graur16}; cf.\citealt{Arcavi10}), but
observational studies still suffer from low-statistics on SNe from metal poor
environments. The recent analysis on SN IIP by \citet{Dessart14} indicates
that most SN events occur at around solar metallicity.

A few remarks should be made here.
First, given that we still do
not have a good constraint on the mass loss rate of stars with stripped envelopes of
the relevant mass range as discussed in Section~\ref{sect:massloss},  our prediction
on the metallicity effect is qualitatively sound but quantitatively uncertain.
Second,  our considered parameter
space is limited by  certain assumptions chosen for the present study that
focuses on stable mass transfer systems (i.e., a fixed mass ratio of $q=0.9$
and a rather low mass accretion efficiency of $\beta = 0.2$). Although the
binary channel with stable mass transfer is the most important path toward SN
Ib and SN IIb~\citep{Podsiadlowski93}, the role of non-stable mass transfer
needs to be investigated for completeness. Contribution from single
stars might also be significant, especially at super-solar
metallicity~\citep[cf.][]{Meynet15, Yoon15}.

We emphasize that this metallicity effect on the SN Ib/SN IIb ratio is
largely limited to the case of relatively compact progenitors (SN IIb-B and SN
IIb-Y), as clearly implied by Fig.~\ref{fig:result}. The regime for SN IIb-R is
not significantly affected by metallicity.  Therefore, a proper investigation
on the metallicity effect should distinguish sub-classes of SN IIb.

More specifically, the following predictions on SN binary progenitors can be made with our result of Fig.~\ref{fig:result}.
\begin{itemize}
\item The SN Ib/SN IIb-B and SN Ib/SN IIb-Y ratios would increase more rapidly than the SN Ib/SN IIb-R ratio, with
increasing metallicity.
\item  The SN IIb-B/SN IIb-R and SN IIb-Y/SN IIb-R ratios would decrease with increasing metallicity.
\item In  sufficiently metal-poor environments ($Z \approx 0.35Z_\odot$ with our fiducial mass loss rate), SN Ib
progenitors would be systematically more massive than SN IIb-B/SN IIb-Y
progenitors.  They would be also more massive than SN Ib progenitors from metal-rich environments, on average.
\end{itemize}

\section{Conclusions}\label{sect:conclusions}

We have presented a new grid of models for SN Ib/IIb progenitors in binary systems.
We considered two different metallicities (solar and LMC metallicities) and the
initial masses of 10 -- 18~$\mathrm{M_\odot}$, which correspond to the final
masses of about 3.0 -- 8.0~$\mathrm{M_\odot}$. The initial mass ratio and mass
accretion efficiency were fixed to 0.9 and 0.2, respectively.

Our investigation leads to the following conclusions.
\begin{enumerate}
\item In general, a tighter initial orbit leads to stronger stripping of the hydrogen envelope
from the primary star. As a result, SN IIb progenitors
from Case EB mass transfer in a relatively tight orbit are expected to have
compact sizes like SN 2008ax and SN 2011dh progenitors (blue and
yellow supergiants; SN IIb-B and SN IIb-Y), while Case LB mass transfer in a wider orbit usually
leads to red supergiant progenitors as in the case of SN 1993J and SN 2013df (SN
IIb-R; Fig.~\ref{fig:result}).
\item SN IIb progenitors from Case EB mass transfer can be
produced only if mass loss during the post-mass transfer phase is sufficiently
weak (Section~\ref{sect:massloss}; Fig.~\ref{fig:result}).  This means that SN IIb-B and SN IIb-Y
progenitors are favored by relatively low initial masses and/or low
metallicities. SN IIb-R progenitors are expected for all initial masses and
metallicities considered in our study (Fig.~\ref{fig:result}).
\item The
hydrogen envelope mass at the final stage is predicted to be higher than about
$M_\mathrm{H,env} = 0.15~\mathrm{M_\odot}$ in SN IIb-R progenitors, while  SN IIb-Y
and SN IIb-B progenitors would have a lower $M_\mathrm{H,env}$ (Fig.~\ref{fig:mhteff}). This prediction is
in good agreement with the previous estimates of $M_\mathrm{H,env} \simeq
0.1~\mathrm{M_\odot}$ for SN 2011dh (SN IIb-Y), and $M_\mathrm{H,env} \simeq 0.2 -
0.4~\mathrm{M_\odot}$ for SN 1993J and SN 2013df (SN IIb-R).
\item In our
considered mass range, SN IIb-R progenitors would have $\log L/\mathrm{L_\odot}
\simeq 4.50 - 5.30$.  The luminosity range of SN IIb-B/IIb-Y progenitors is
somewhat narrower ($\log L/\mathrm{L_\odot} \simeq 4.51 - 5.15$),  and most of
them (i.e., SN IIb-B/II-Y from Case EB mass transfer) would have $\log
L/\mathrm{L_\odot} < 5.0$.
\item The optical brightness of SN IIb progenitors
($M_\mathrm{V} < -5.0$ for most cases; Fig.~\ref{fig:hr}) would be systematically much higher than
SN Ib progenitors ($M_\mathrm{V} > -5.0$ for most cases; Fig.~\ref{fig:snIb}).
For a given initial mass,  SN Ib progenitors have
higher surface temperatures and lower final
masses than SN IIb progenitors.
\item SN
Ib progenitors in binary systems are systematically hotter for higher masses.
As a result,  SN Ib progenitors become brighter in the optical for lower
masses, even though the bolometric luminosity increases with increasing mass
(Fig.~\ref{fig:snIb}).  The optically bright progenitor of SN Ib iPTF13bvn
($M_\mathrm{V} \sim -6$) may be well explained by a progenitor with a final
mass of about 3.0~$\mathrm{M_\odot}$ (Section~\ref{sect:snIb}).
\item The impact of  wind mass loss after the mass transfer phase
becomes more significant at higher metallicity. As a result,
the  SN Ib to SN IIb event rate ratio would increase with metallicity, while
the SN IIb-B/SN IIb-R and SN IIb-Y/SN IIb-R ratios would decrease (Section~\ref{sect:metallicity}).
By contrast, the parameter space for SN IIb-R progenitors is not significantly affected by metallicity
for our considered mass range.
\end{enumerate}

\clearpage

\begin{deluxetable*}{l|ccrrrrrrrrrrrcc}
\tabletypesize{\footnotesize}
\tablewidth{0pt}
\tablecaption{Physical properties of the final models of the primary star at $Z=0.007$.}\label{tab1}
\tablehead{
\colhead{Name} & \colhead{$M_\mathrm{f}$} & \colhead{$L_\mathrm{f}$}  &  \colhead{$R_\mathrm{f}$} &   \colhead{$T_\mathrm{eff, f}$}
& \colhead{He} &  \colhead{CO} &  \colhead{H$\mathrm{env}$}  & \colhead{$m_\mathrm{H}$} &
\colhead{$m_\mathrm{He}$} & \colhead{$Y_\mathrm{s, f}$} &  \colhead{$\dot{M}_\mathrm{tr}$} &
\colhead{$\dot{M}_\mathrm{w}$} & \colhead{$f_\mathrm{RL}$}  & \colhead{Case} &  \colhead{SN}
}
\startdata
Lm10p20  & 2.99 & 4.58 & 66.6 & 4.00 &   2.944  &  1.509 &  0.046 & 0.005  & 1.440 & 0.78 & -12.67  & -6.75 &    -0.15  & EBB & IIb-B \\
Lm10p50  & 3.01 & 4.61 & 143.1 & 3.84 &   2.955  &  1.511 &  0.055 & 0.007  & 1.448 & 0.76 & -5.51  & -6.44 &    -0.01  & EBB & IIb-Y \\
Lm10p150 & 3.07 & 4.61 & 278.8 & 3.69 &   2.979  &  1.527 &  0.090 & 0.015  & 1.486 & 0.73 & -5.33  & -6.19 &   -0.04  & EBB & IIb-Y\\
Lm10p300 & 3.33 & 4.65 & 387.4 & 3.63 &   3.147  &  1.602 &  0.182 & 0.048  & 1.622 & 0.57 & -6.44  & -6.02 &   -0.09  & EBB & IIb-Y\\
Lm10p700 & 3.70 & 4.69 & 529.6 & 3.57 &   3.311  &  1.676 &  0.392 & 0.205  & 1.745 & 0.38 & -6.04  & -5.85 &   -0.11  & LBB & IIb-R\\
Lm10p800 & 3.90 & 4.69 & 560.9 & 3.56 &   3.320  &  1.681 &  0.579 & 0.336  & 1.802 & 0.34 & -5.86  & -5.83 &   -0.11  & LBB & IIb-R\\
Lm10p900 & 4.18 & 4.69 & 583.2 & 3.55 &   3.335  &  1.686 &  0.843 & 0.526  & 1.889 & 0.31 & -5.71  & -5.81 &   -0.11  & LBB & IIb-R\\
Lm10p1000& 4.81 & 4.70 & 603.2 & 3.55 &   3.378  &  1.701 &  1.432 & 0.951  & 2.070 & 0.29 & -5.45  & -5.79 &  -0.09  & LBB & IIb-R\\
\tableline
Lm11p10   & 3.53 & 4.72 & 10.0 & 4.44 &   3.417  &  1.748 &  0.110 & 0.010  & 1.683 & 0.85 & -99.00  & -6.11 &    -0.79  & EB & IIb-B\\
Lm11p20  & 3.56 & 4.73 & 61.1 & 4.05 &   3.444  &  1.762 &  0.119 & 0.017  & 1.697 & 0.67 & -11.13  & -6.28 &    -0.17  & EB & IIb-B \\
Lm11p30  & 3.57 & 4.73 & 99.3 & 3.95 &   3.452  &  1.766 &  0.122 & 0.019  & 1.700 & 0.67 & -5.36  & -6.40 &      0.03  & EBB & IIb-B \\
Lm11p50  & 3.59 & 4.73 & 135.9 & 3.88 &   3.466  &  1.772 &  0.120 & 0.021  & 1.702 & 0.67 & -5.39  & -6.29 &     0.01  & EBB & IIb-B\\
Lm11p100  & 3.60 & 4.73 & 206.3 & 3.79 &   3.475  &  1.778 &  0.124 & 0.024  & 1.706 & 0.67 & -5.87  & -6.13 &   -0.02  & EBB & IIb-Y\\
Lm11p200  & 3.62 & 4.74 & 290.9 & 3.71 &   3.489  &  1.784 &  0.131 & 0.028  & 1.717 & 0.67 & -10.39  & -6.01 &  -0.12  & EB  & IIb-Y\\
Lm11p300  & 3.67 & 4.74 & 334.7 & 3.68 &   3.526  &  1.802 &  0.141 & 0.035  & 1.738 & 0.67 & -15.88  & -5.95 &  -0.22  & EB  & IIb-Y\\
Lm11p500  & 3.93 & 4.77 & 487.8 & 3.61 &   3.664  &  1.880 &  0.263 & 0.089  & 1.848 & 0.49 & -7.13  & -5.77 &   -0.12  & LBB & IIb-R \\
Lm11p700  & 4.08 & 4.79 & 561.6 & 3.58 &   3.741  &  1.919 &  0.341 & 0.160  & 1.888 & 0.40 & -5.92  & -5.70 &   -0.11  & LBB & IIb-R\\
Lm11p1000 & 4.45 & 4.79 & 630.6 & 3.56 &   3.787  &  1.988 &  0.660 & 0.388  & 1.991 & 0.33 & -5.66  & -5.65 &  -0.11  & LBB & IIb-R\\
Lm11p1200 & 5.03 & 4.80 & 668.6 & 3.55 &   3.811  &  1.957 &  1.220 & 0.793  & 2.146 & 0.29 & -5.36  & -5.62 &  -0.09  & LBB & IIL/IIP\\
\tableline
Lm13p20 &  4.42 & 4.90 & 12.6 & 4.44 &   4.295  &  2.273 &  0.123 & 0.017  & 1.958 & 0.72 & -99.00  & -6.00 &    -0.82  & EB & IIb-B\\
Lm13p50 &  4.42 & 4.90 & 13.8 & 4.42 &   4.299  &  2.276 &  0.124 & 0.017  & 1.972 & 0.72 & -99.00  & -6.01 &    -0.89  & EB & IIb-B\\
Lm13p100&  4.43 & 4.90 & 14.6 & 4.41 &   4.303  &  2.278 &  0.125 & 0.018  & 1.972 & 0.71 & -99.00  & -6.01 &   -0.93  & EB & IIb-B\\
Lm13p300&  4.46 & 4.91 & 19.1 & 4.35 &   4.329  &  2.295 &  0.131 & 0.021  & 1.981 & 0.71 & -99.00  & -6.00 &   -0.96  & EB & IIb-B\\
Lm13p400&  4.56 & 4.92 & 31.0 & 4.25 &   4.409  &  2.348 &  0.149 & 0.029  & 2.010 & 0.71 & -99.00  & -5.99 &   -0.94  & EB & IIb-B\\
Lm13p500&  4.80 & 4.94 & 350.6 & 3.72 &   4.521  &  2.415 &  0.275 & 0.066  & 2.128 & 0.70 & -37.90  & -5.66 &  -0.39  & EB & IIb-Y\\
Lm13p600&   contact \\
Lm13p900&   contact \\
Lm13p1000& 5.06 & 4.97 & 637.4 & 3.60 &   4.691  &  2.524 &  0.370 & 0.141  & 2.191 & 0.47 & -7.33  & -5.41 &  -0.13  & LBB & IIb-R \\
Lm13p1100& 5.20 & 4.97 & 690.3 & 3.58 &   4.723  &  2.543 &  0.479 & 0.223  & 2.231 & 0.42 & -5.21  & -5.38 &  -0.08  & LBB & IIb-R\\
Lm13p1300& 5.35 & 4.97 & 726.7 & 3.57 &   4.750  &  2.563 &  0.599 & 0.311  & 2.279 & 0.38 & -5.02  & -5.35 &  -0.08  & LBB & IIb-R\\
Lm13p1500& 5.87 & 4.98 & 794.0 & 3.56 &   4.774  &  2.578 &  1.097 & 0.667  & 2.417 & 0.32 & -4.72  & -5.31 &  -0.08  & LBB & IIb-R\\
\tableline
Lm16p50 &   5.37 & 5.07 & 4.4 & 4.71 &   5.368  &  3.143 &  0.000 & 0.000  & 2.041 & 0.99 & -99.00  & -5.55 &     -0.97  & EB & Ib\\
Lm16p100&   5.38 & 5.08 & 4.2 & 4.72 &   5.383  &  3.173 &  0.000 & 0.000  & 2.023 & 0.99 & -99.00  & -5.54 &    -0.98  & EB & Ib\\
Lm16p200&    contact\\
Lm16p500&     contact\\
Lm16p1800&    contact\\
Lm16p1900&    contact\\
Lm16p2000&  6.35 & 5.15 & 713.3 & 3.62 &   6.056  &  3.774 &  0.292 & 0.074  & 2.277 & 0.57 & -24.51  & -5.12 &    -0.37 & LB  & IIb-R \\
Lm16p2400&  6.48 & 5.15 & 865.3 & 3.58 &   6.086  &  3.657 &  0.389 & 0.129  & 2.491 & 0.52 & -13.10  & -5.05 &    -0.25 & LB  & IIb-R\\
Lm16p2600&  7.12 & 5.16 & 1098.3 & 3.53 &   6.116  &  3.679 &  1.005 & 0.553  & 2.678 & 0.37 & -4.51  & -4.95 &    -0.07 & LBB & IIL/IIP \\
\tableline
Lm18p50 &   6.51 & 5.22 & 1.8 & 4.93 &   6.508  &  4.221 &  0.000 & 0.000  & 2.116 & 0.99 & -99.00  & -5.36 &    -0.99   & EB & Ib \\
Lm18p300 &  6.61 & 5.23 & 1.9 & 4.93 &   6.614  &  4.276 &  0.000 & 0.000  & 2.172 & 0.99 & -99.00  & -5.35 &    -1.00  & EB & Ib \\
Lm18p400 &   contact \\
Lm18p1700&    contact \\
Lm18p1900&     contact \\
Lm18p2000&  7.73 & 5.29 & 710.8 & 3.66 &   7.311  &  4.707 &  0.415 & 0.111  & 2.707 & 0.59 & -26.18  & -4.93 &    -0.36  & LB & IIb-R  \\
Lm18p2100&  7.76 & 5.29 & 744.4 & 3.65 &   7.328  &  4.722 &  0.432 & 0.120  & 2.718 & 0.59 & -23.33  & -4.91 &    -0.34  & LB & IIb-R  \\
Lm18p2200&  7.79 & 5.29 & 769.8 & 3.64 &   7.348  &  4.738 &  0.443 & 0.127  & 2.731 & 0.59 & -21.32  & -4.90 &    -0.32  & LB & IIb-R  \\
Lm18p2300&  7.81 & 5.30 & 787.0 & 3.64 &   7.363  &  4.749 &  0.449 & 0.131  & 2.730 & 0.59 & -20.02  & -4.89 &    -0.30  & LB &  IIb-R  \\
Lm18p2400&  7.84 & 5.30 & 806.4 & 3.63 &   7.380  &  4.761 &  0.462 & 0.138  & 2.747 & 0.59 & -18.70  & -4.87 &    -0.29  & LB &  IIb-R \\
Lm18p2500&  8.46 & 5.30 & 1039.8 & 3.58 &   7.411  &  4.784 &  1.047 & 0.528  & 2.935 & 0.39 & -4.84  & -4.78 &    -0.07  & LBB & IIL/IIP \\
\enddata
\tablecomments{$M_\mathrm{f}$: total mass in units of $\mathrm{M}_\odot$, $L_\mathrm{f}$: luminosity in units of $\mathrm{L_\odot}$ in logarithmic scale, $R_\mathrm{f}$: radius in units of $\mathrm{R_\odot}$, $T_\mathrm{eff}$: surface temperature in units of K in logarithmic scale, He: He core mass, CO : carbon-oxygen core mass, H$_\mathrm{env}$ : mass of the hydrogen envelope, $m_\mathrm{H}$: total mass
of hydrogen (i.e., $m_\mathrm{H} = \int X_\mathrm{H} dM_r$), $m_\mathrm{He}$ : total mass of helium, $Y_\mathrm{s,f}$: mass fraction of helium
at the surface, $\dot{M}_\mathrm{tr}$: mass transfer rate in units of $\mathrm{M_\odot~yr^{-1}}$ in logarithmic scale,
$\dot{M}_w$: wind mass loss rate in units of $\mathrm{M_\odot~yr^{-1}}$ in logarithmic scale, $f_\mathrm{RL}$: Roche-lobe filling factor.}
\end{deluxetable*}

\begin{deluxetable*}{l|ccrrrrrrrrrrrcc}
\tabletypesize{\footnotesize}
\tablewidth{0pt}
\tablecaption{Physical properties of the final models of the primary star at $Z=0.02$.}\label{tab2}
\tablehead{
\colhead{Name} & \colhead{$M_\mathrm{f}$} & \colhead{$L_\mathrm{f}$}  &  \colhead{$R_\mathrm{f}$} &   \colhead{$T_\mathrm{eff, f}$}
& \colhead{He} &  \colhead{CO} &  \colhead{H$\mathrm{env}$}  & \colhead{$m_\mathrm{H}$} &
\colhead{$m_\mathrm{He}$} & \colhead{$Y_\mathrm{s, f}$} &  \colhead{$\dot{M}_\mathrm{tr}$} &
\colhead{$\dot{M}_\mathrm{w}$} & \colhead{$f_\mathrm{RL}$}  & \colhead{Case} &  \colhead{SN}
}
\startdata
Sm10p50  & 2.04 & 4.66 & 258.5 & 3.72 &   2.041  &  1.360 &  0.000 & 0.000  & 0.660 & 0.97 & -1.52  & -6.16 &      0.12  & EBB &  --  \\
Sm10p200 & 2.73 & 4.43 & 139.0 & 3.80 &   2.726  &  1.391 &  0.000 & 0.000  & 1.294 & 0.98 & -99.00  & -6.69 &   -0.64  & EB  &  --   \\
Sm10p400 & 3.12 & 4.52 & 429.0 & 3.57 &   2.976  &  1.501 &  0.142 & 0.047  & 1.507 & 0.54 & -11.29  & -6.16 &   -0.20  & LB  & IIb-R \\
Sm10p600 & 3.29 & 4.59 & 532.2 & 3.55 &   3.084  &  1.541 &  0.211 & 0.110  & 1.573 & 0.40 & -7.51  & -5.98 &    -0.15  & LB  & IIb-R \\
Sm10p800 & 3.55 & 4.61 & 598.5 & 3.53 &   3.105  &  1.554 &  0.444 & 0.262  & 1.656 & 0.34 & -6.54  & -5.91 &    -0.14  & LB  & IIb-R \\
Sm10p1000& 4.04 & 4.61 & 633.9 & 3.51 &   3.116  &  1.560 &  0.926 & 0.588  & 1.808 & 0.31 & -6.33  & -5.89 &   -0.13   \\
\tableline
Sm11p20 &  2.98 & 4.57 & 73.0 & 3.97 &   2.978  &  1.528 &  0.000 & 0.000  & 1.391 & 0.98 & -35.55  & -6.73 &    -0.15  & EB & Ib  \\
Sm11p50 &  3.01 & 4.59 & 56.3 & 4.03 &   3.005  &  1.539 &  0.000 & 0.000  & 1.404 & 0.98 & -99.00  & -6.04 &    -0.64  & EB & Ib\\
Sm11p200&  3.07 & 4.60 & 32.5 & 4.16 &   3.069  &  1.563 &  0.000 & 0.000  & 1.438 & 0.98 & -99.00  & -5.94 &    -0.92  & EB & Ib\\
Sm11p300&  3.16 & 4.63 & 19.2 & 4.28 &   3.158  &  1.598 &  0.000 & 0.000  & 1.487 & 0.98 & -99.00  & -5.90 &    -0.96  & EB & Ib\\
Sm11p400&  3.47 & 4.68 & 458.4 & 3.60 &   3.330  &  1.679 &  0.141 & 0.033  & 1.664 & 0.67 & -11.29  & -5.92 &   -0.17  & LB & IIb-R \\
Sm11p500&  3.55 & 4.69 & 511.9 & 3.58 &   3.387  &  1.709 &  0.166 & 0.052  & 1.689 & 0.53 & -8.58  & -5.86 &    -0.15  & LB & IIb-R\\
Sm11p600&  3.66 & 4.70 & 565.4 & 3.56 &   3.459  &  1.743 &  0.198 & 0.082  & 1.719 & 0.46 & -6.76  & -5.81 &    -0.12  & LB & IIb-R\\
Sm11p700&  3.71 & 4.71 & 586.9 & 3.56 &   3.497  &  1.765 &  0.212 & 0.096  & 1.732 & 0.41 & -6.57  & -5.78 &    -0.13  & LB & IIb-R\\
Sm11p800&  3.79 & 4.75 & 642.2 & 3.55 &   3.544  &  1.888 &  0.246 & 0.127  & 1.636 & 0.37 & -5.79  & -5.69 &    -0.11  & LBB & IIb-R \\
Sm11p1000& 4.04 & 4.72 & 675.4 & 3.53 &   3.547  &  1.790 &  0.495 & 0.285  & 1.840 & 0.34 & -6.08  & -5.72 &   -0.12  & LBB & IIb-R\\
Sm11p1200& 4.39 & 4.76 & 743.2 & 3.52 &   3.575  &  1.903 &  0.818 & 0.507  & 1.831 & 0.31 & -5.30  & -5.63 &   -0.10  & LBB & IIb-R\\
Sm11p1400& 5.62 & 4.73 & 732.9 & 3.51 &   3.606  &  1.816 &  2.018 & 1.316  & 2.323 & 0.30 & -5.75  & -5.67 &   -0.09  & LBB & IIL/IIP\\
\tableline
Sm13p50  &  3.88 & 4.82 & 6.5 & 4.56 &   3.878  &  2.095 &  0.000 & 0.000  & 1.627 & 0.98 & -99.00  & -5.65 &      -0.95 & EB & Ib  \\
Sm13p500 &  3.96 & 4.84 & 6.2 & 4.58 &   3.957  &  2.144 &  0.000 & 0.000  & 1.645 & 0.98 & -99.00  & -5.63 &     -0.99  & EB & Ib \\
Sm13p600 &     contact \\
Sm13p700 &       contact  \\
Sm13p1100&       contact  \\
Sm13p1150&       contact  \\
Sm13p1200&  4.86 & 4.93 & 743.2 & 3.56 &   4.567  &  2.419 &  0.288 & 0.133  & 2.078 & 0.38 & -8.04  & -5.40 &   -0.17  & LB & IIb-R \\
Sm13p1500 & 5.12 & 4.94 & 828.3 & 3.54 &   4.618  &  2.461 &  0.505 & 0.278  & 2.152 & 0.34 & -5.67  & -5.35 &   -0.11  & LB & IIb-R\\
Sm13p1700 & 5.33 & 4.94 & 866.6 & 3.53 &   4.629  &  2.461 &  0.699 & 0.407  & 2.225 & 0.33 & -5.28  & -5.33 &   -0.10  & LB & IIb-R \\
Sm13p2000 & 6.08 & 4.95 & 933.4 & 3.51 &   4.666  &  2.487 &  1.411 & 0.890  & 2.447 & 0.30 & -4.85  & -5.29 &   -0.09  & LB & IIL/IIP\\
\tableline
Sm16p50 &  4.99 & 5.05 & 4.9 & 4.68 &   4.994  &  3.182 &  0.000 & 0.000  & 1.659 & 0.98 & -99.00  & -5.35 &      -0.96 & EB & Ib \\
Sm16p300&  5.01 & 5.06 & 5.1 & 4.67 &   5.009  &  3.208 &  0.000 & 0.000  & 1.649 & 0.98 & -99.00  & -5.34 &     -0.99 & EB & Ib \\
Sm16p400&         contact \\
Sm16p1400&        contact \\
Sm16p1600&        contact \\
Sm16p1700& 6.08 & 5.14 & 3.2 & 4.79 &   6.056  &  3.644 &  0.024 & 0.001  & 2.250 & 0.94 & -99.00  & -5.27 &    -1.00  & LB & IIb-B  \\
Sm16p1800& 6.19 & 5.16 & 27.5 & 4.33 &   6.098  &  3.678 &  0.096 & 0.011  & 2.293 & 0.76 & -99.00  & -5.40 &   -0.98  & LB & IIb-B  \\
Sm16p1900& 6.43 & 5.12 & 364.4 & 3.76 &   6.157  &  3.700 &  0.273 & 0.073  & 2.496 & 0.62 & -99.00  & -5.39 &   -0.67 & LB & IIb-Y  \\
Sm16p2000& 6.42 & 5.18 & 748.1 & 3.62 &   6.189  &  3.725 &  0.231 & 0.059  & 2.418 & 0.62 & -24.11  & -5.07 &   -0.35 & LB & IIb-R  \\
Sm16p2200& 6.48 & 5.15 & 717.3 & 3.62 &   6.214  &  3.746 &  0.262 & 0.074  & 2.470 & 0.62 & -28.71  & -5.12 &   -0.39 & LB & IIb-R  \\
Sm16p2400& 6.53 & 5.18 & 822.2 & 3.60 &   6.267  &  3.893 &  0.262 & 0.078  & 2.300 & 0.62 & -19.33  & -5.03 &   -0.31 & LB & IIb-R  \\
Sm16p2600& 6.76 & 5.18 & 974.9 & 3.56 &   6.285  &  3.805 &  0.479 & 0.204  & 2.531 & 0.46 & -8.91  & -4.97 &    -0.18 & LB & IIb-R  \\
Sm16p2700& 7.33 & 5.18 & 1121.5 & 3.53 &   6.307  &  3.815 &  1.021 & 0.575  & 2.693 & 0.36 & -4.42  & -4.91 &   -0.07 & LBB& IIL/IIP  \\
\tableline
Sm18p50 & 5.44 & 5.10 & 2.1 & 4.88 &   5.440  &  3.478 &  0.000 & 0.000  & 1.571 & 0.98 & -99.00  & -5.29 &    -0.98 & EB & Ib   \\
Sm18p500& 5.55 & 5.10 & 1.9 & 4.90 &   5.548  &  3.536 &  0.000 & 0.000  & 1.613 & 0.98 & -99.00  & -5.29 &   -1.00 & EB & Ib  \\
Sm18p600&        contact \\
Sm18p1000&       contact \\
Sm18p1900&       contact \\
Sm18p2000&6.62 & 5.19 & 1.7 & 4.94 &   6.624  &  4.330 &  0.000 & 0.000  & 2.158 & 0.98 & -99.00  & -5.18 &    -1.00  & LB & Ib \\
Sm18p2200&7.04 & 5.16 & 1.7 & 4.93 &   6.953  &  4.411 &  0.084 & 0.007  & 2.526 & 0.81 & -99.00  & -5.36 &    -1.00  & LB & IIb-B \\
Sm18p2400&7.28 & 5.26 & 710.3 & 3.65 &   7.047  &  4.458 &  0.231 & 0.050  & 2.565 & 0.67 & -41.32  & -4.97 &    -0.46 & LB & IIb-R  \\
Sm18p2800&7.37 & 5.27 & 794.0 & 3.63 &   7.126  &  4.623 &  0.243 & 0.058  & 2.475 & 0.67 & -32.79  & -4.92 &    -0.41 & LB & IIb-R \\
Sm18p3000&7.43 & 5.27 & 818.4 & 3.62 &   7.170  &  4.594 &  0.264 & 0.066  & 2.561 & 0.67 & -30.71  & -4.91 &    -0.39 & LB & IIb-R  \\
Sm18p3100&7.92 & 5.27 & 1140.1 & 3.55 &   7.203  &  4.585 &  0.720 & 0.349  & 2.767 & 0.37 & -7.41  & -4.79 &    -0.15 & LB & IIb-R  \\
\enddata
\end{deluxetable*}

\begin{deluxetable*}{l|ccrrrrrrrrrrrcc}
\tabletypesize{\footnotesize}
\tablewidth{0pt}
\tablecaption{Physical properties of the final models of the primary star at $Z = 0.02$ with a reduced mass loss rate ($\eta = 0.48$)}\label{tab3}
\tablehead{
\colhead{Name} & \colhead{$M_\mathrm{f}$} & \colhead{$L_\mathrm{f}$}  &  \colhead{$R_\mathrm{f}$} &   \colhead{$T_\mathrm{eff, f}$}
& \colhead{He} &  \colhead{CO} &  \colhead{H$\mathrm{env}$}  & \colhead{$m_\mathrm{H}$} &
\colhead{$m_\mathrm{He}$} & \colhead{$Y_\mathrm{s, f}$} &  \colhead{$\dot{M}_\mathrm{tr}$} &
\colhead{$\dot{M}_\mathrm{w}$} & \colhead{$f_\mathrm{RL}$}  & \colhead{Case} &  \colhead{SN}
}
\startdata
Tm11p20&   3.21 & 4.63 & 87.4 & 3.95 &   3.161  &  1.591 &  0.044 & 0.004  & 1.534 & 0.81 & -5.27  & -6.91 &     0.02   & EBB & IIb-B    \\
Tm11p100&  3.27 & 4.64 & 237.4 & 3.73 &   3.195  &  1.611 &  0.074 & 0.009  & 1.567 & 0.77 & -5.62  & -6.53 &    -0.03 & EBB & IIb-Y  \\
Tm11p200&  3.33 & 4.65 & 314.9 & 3.67 &   3.231  &  1.629 &  0.097 & 0.015  & 1.603 & 0.76 & -14.33  & -6.42 &    -0.17 & EB & IIb-R \\
Tm11p300&  3.40 & 4.67 & 395.7 & 3.63 &   3.290  &  1.661 &  0.110 & 0.021  & 1.628 & 0.71 & -12.72  & -6.31 &    -0.18 & LB & IIb-R \\
Tm11p400&  3.58 & 4.70 & 503.0 & 3.59 &   3.408  &  1.720 &  0.173 & 0.049  & 1.707 & 0.59 & -6.76  & -6.18 &    -0.10  & LBB & IIb-R \\
Tm11p500&   contact \\
\tableline
Tm13p20 &  4.26 & 4.87 & 8.6 & 4.51 &   4.218  &  2.183 &  0.044 & 0.002  & 1.887 & 0.87 & -99.00  & -5.99 &    -0.89  & EB & IIb-B  \\
Tm13p50 &  4.27 & 4.87 & 8.6 & 4.51 &   4.230  &  2.191 &  0.043 & 0.002  & 1.888 & 0.87 & -99.00  & -5.99 &    -0.94  & EB & IIb-B \\
Tm13p100&  4.28 & 4.87 & 8.7 & 4.51 &   4.234  &  2.193 &  0.044 & 0.002  & 1.895 & 0.87 & -99.00  & -5.99 &    -0.96 & EB & IIb-B  \\
Tm13p300&  4.32 & 4.88 & 8.8 & 4.51 &   4.270  &  2.218 &  0.047 & 0.003  & 1.908 & 0.86 & -99.00  & -5.99 &    -0.98 & EB & IIb-B   \\
Tm13p500&   contact \\
\tableline
Tm16p50 &  5.55 & 5.09 & 4.6 & 4.71 &   5.548  &  3.242 &  0.000 & 0.000  & 2.095 & 0.98 & -99.00  & -5.62 &    -0.97  & EB & Ib  \\
Tm16p100&  5.57 & 5.09 & 4.6 & 4.70 &   5.572  &  3.253 &  0.000 & 0.000  & 2.110 & 0.98 & -99.00  & -5.62 &    -0.98 & EB & Ib  \\
\enddata
\end{deluxetable*}

\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption{Properties of the identified SN IIb progenitors}\label{tab4}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c l}
\hline
          &   $\log L/\mathrm{L_\odot}$ & $\log T_\mathrm{eff}$ & $M_\mathrm{H,env}/\mathrm{M_\odot}$  & Ref.  \\
\hline
SN 1993J  &       5.1$\pm$0.3           & 3.63$\pm$0.05         & 0.2 -- 0.4             & (1)  \\
SN 2008ax &      4.41 --  5.30          & 3.88 -- 4.30          & 0.06                   & (2)  \\
SN 2011dh &      4.90 -- 4.99           & 3.779$\pm$0.02        & 0.1                    & (3) \\
SN 2013df &      4.94$\pm$0.06          & 3.628$\pm$0.01        & 0.2 -- 0.4              & (4)  \\
SN 2016gkg &     4.65 -- 5.32           & 3.978$^{+0.215}_{-0.158}$  &    -             & (5)  \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
{(1)\citet{Aldering94, Maund04},  (2)\citet{Folatelli15},  (3)\citet{Maund11, VanDyk11, Bersten12},  (4)\citet{VanDyk14}, (5)\citet{Kilpatrick16, Tartaglia16} }
\end{table}

\section*{Acknowledgements}
This work was supported by the Korea Astronomy and Space Science Institute
under the R\&D program (Project No. 3348- 20160002) supervised by the Ministry
of Science, ICT and Future Planning.  AC acknowledges support from the Ministry
of Economy, Development, and Tourism's Millennium Science Initiative through
grant IC120009, awarded to The Millennium Institute of Astrophysics, MAS, and
from grant Basal CATA PFB 06/09.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaArXiv


It comes from Annarita Cuomo who asserted that sugo alla puttanesca was invented in the 1950s by Sandro Petti, co-owner of Rancio Fellone, a famous Ischian restaurant and nightspot. According to Cuomo, Petti's moment of inspiration came when being near closing one evening, Petti found a group of customers sitting at one of his tables. He was low on ingredients and so told them he didn't have enough to make them a meal. They complained that it was late and they were hungry. "Facci una puttanata qualsiasi," which translates in "Make any kind of garbage,". Petti had nothing more than four tomatoes, two olives and some capers, some of the basic ingredients for sugo (tomato sauce), So he used them to make the sauce for the spaghetti. And, with that, spaghetti alla puttanesca were born.
Two classic versions exist, one from Napoli (Naples) without anchovies and one from Lazio with anchovies. My preference goes to the Neapolitan version as I do not like the fishy taste of anchovies in the sauce.
Cooking time around 20 minutes.


Please choose a secret question What is your father's middle name? What is your favorite pet's name? What is your favorite sports team? What is your mother's middle name? What is your spouse's middle name? What town were you born in?


text:
Валентин Иванович Татарчук (род. 28 сентября 1937, Днепропетровск Украинская ССР) — член политсовета партии «Демократический выбор России», депутат Государственной Думы Первого созыва (1993—1995), ответственный депутат «Выбор России».

Первый этап биографии
Родился 28 сентября 1937 года в Днепропетровске, украинец.

С 1955 года — откатчик на шахте «Макеевская южная». В 1961 году окончил Ленинградскую лесотехническую академию по специальности «инженер-технолог». Затем с 1961 по 1969 работал на Кондопожском целлюлозно-бумажном комбинате (Карелия) накатчиком, сушильщиком, мастером, заместителем начальника цеха, начальником целлюлозного завода, заместителем начальника производственно-технического отдела, главным технологом комбината.

В 1969-август 1991 — член КПСС. С 1969 по 1975 год был главным инженером, затем директором Ляскельского комбината в Карелии. В период 1975-1989 гг. — директором Соликамского целлюлозно-бумажного комбината им. 60-летия Союза ССР (Пермская область).

Политическая деятельность
В 1989 году стал народным депутатом СССР по квоте КПСС (так называемая «красная сотня»).

В Верховном Совете СССР был заместителем председателя Комиссии Совета Союза по вопросам развития промышленности, а затем председателем подкомитета по вопросам экономической безопасности. Входил в Межрегиональную депутатскую группу. Если первоначально по его словам «была эйфория: "Сейчас все решим!"», но потом, «когда несколько раз столкнулись с непрошибаемостью вопросов — энтузиазм стал снижаться… расстояние между межрегиональной группой и остальным составом росло».

В 1992-1993 годах вице-президент акционерного общества-корпорации «Российские лесопромышленники».

В 1993 году избран депутатом Государственной думы Федерального Собрания Российской Федерации первого созыва по федеральному списку блока «Выбор России» и вошёл в одноимённую «фракцию». Был замом председателя комитета по промышленности, строительству, транспорту и энергетике. Позднее в целом характеризовал работу этого комитета как неудачную, связывая это, в том числе, с личностью его председателя (В. К. Гусев, представитель ЛДПР). Так В. И. Татарчук отмечал: «В целом, контакты с правительством по промышленности я бы назвал неудовлетворительными. Даже весьма неудовлетворительными. В комитете было несколько человек — мы старались те экономические вопросы, которые считали наиболее важными, продвигать. Но получали мощное сопротивление со стороны других членов комитета, в первую очередь от членов фракции ЛДПР».

С марта 1994 года до истечения полномочий Государственной Думы первого созыва — ответственный секретарь фракции «Выбор России» .  В марте 1994 года член инициативной группы по созданию партии Демократический выбор России (ДВР). На учредительном съезде партии Демократический выбор России (ДВР), избран членом Политсовета и заместителем председателя исполкома.

В марте 1995 года после отставки председателя исполкома ДВР Олега Бойко был утвержден пленумом Совета ДВР и. о. председателя исполкома ДВР. С июня 1995 года — председатель исполкома.

В 1995 баллотировался в Государственную Думу II созыва от блока «Демократический выбор России — объединённые демократы» (ДВР-ОД), который не преодолел 5%-ный барьер.
В сентябре 1996 года на съезде ДВР был переизбран членом Политсовета и избран одним из двух заместителей председателя партии.

Не участвовал в формировании коалиции «Правое дело» и не вступил во вновь образовавшийся Союз правых сил.

Личная жизнь
Женат, имеет двоих детей.

См. также
 Демократический выбор России
 Выбор России (фракция)
 Гайдар, Егор Тимурович
 Выбор России (блок)
 Союз правых сил

Примечания

Ссылки
 Федеральное Собрание России (Совет Федерации. Государственная Дума). Биографический справочник. М., 1995.

Депутаты Государственной думы Российской Федерации I созыва
Выпускники Санкт-Петербургского лесотехнического университета
Члены КПСС
Депутаты Пермского областного совета
Члены Пермского обкома КПСС

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
Q: How can I parse specific info from html source code using Java I know there is lots of topics for my question but I couldnt find helpful solution for my answer. I could connect to website and read line by line in Java, now here is my problem. I want to parse a specific info from a html page. This page includes 5-day weather forecast. for example the date of forecast tag is like this ;
//date of forecast
< th id="ctl00_mpBody_thmGun1" class="arkaTrh">19 April< /th >

//Min weather:
< td id="ctl00_mpBody_thmMin1" class="minS">8< /td>

//Max weather
 < td id="ctl00_mpBody_thmMax1" class="maxS">17< /td>

second day and others tags continue like this,
< th id="ctl00_mpBody_thmGun2" class="arkaTrh">20 April< /th >
.
.
.

according these tags, I need to parse 19 April, 17 and 8.

A: FOR THE LOVE OF GOD DO NOT USE A REGEX. I don't know how many times this has to be repeated on SO. You'll end up in a world of pain. Use a parser, there are loads available in java. Here are some of them:
Jericho
Dom4j
htmlparser
But there are dozens more. Just Google "html parser java" or "java dom parser" or something. Please.

A: you could craft some regex like this:
id="ctl00_mpBody_thmGun1"[^>]*?>(.*?)<

But if you want a more robust solution it would be better to sanitize the HTML and select the data with XPath:
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/x-javaxpathapi.html

A: You can use HtmlUnit. It was designed for unit testing web pages but you can use it to parse HTML code. You can get your forecast data using something like this:
final WebClient webClient = new WebClient();
final HtmlPage page = webClient.getPage("http://url.to.your.data");

//get temperatures
HtmlTableDataCell minTemp = page.getByXPath("//td[@class='minS']").get(0);
HtmlTableDataCell maxTemp = page.getByXPath("//td[@class='maxS']").get(0);
HtmlTableHeaderCell date = page.getByXPath("//th[@class='arkaTrh']").get(0);

System.out.println("Forecast for " + date.asText() + " - Min: " + minTemp.asText() + ", Max: " + maxTemp.asText());

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
Jana Riess: How religious are Gen Z Latter-day Saints in the U.S.? The results are mixed.
Young members are attending church and youth activities, but many say they have been personally harmed by religion.
(The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) A aerial view of a For the Strength of Youth conference in Brazil in 2016. A new survey shows young Latter-day Saints are attending church and youth activities, but many say they have been personally harmed by religion.
By Jana Riess | The Salt Lake Tribune
| Dec. 28, 2021, 12:41 a.m.
A new study of Americans ages 13 to 25 shows teenage and young adult Latter-day Saints to be traditionally religious … and also not. And in that, they are similar to other Americans who still consider themselves religious but are in many ways disengaged from their faith traditions.
"The State of Religion and Young People 2021: Navigating Uncertainty," conducted throughout 2021 by the Springtide Research Institute, argues that "for a large and growing segment of young people, religiosity is increasingly decoupled from institutions, even as they express high levels of religious belief, practice, and identity."
During the year, more than 10,000 young people were surveyed, including a total of 470 who self-identified as Latter-day Saints or Mormons. Of that group, 134 also received an additional set of questions about their experiences and views.
So, as always when interpreting data about Mormons, keep in mind that when the sample size is small, the margin of error is high. For each finding discussed below, I'll indicate the n, or sample size, for that particular question.
Let's start with the positive findings — what many stalwart members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints would consider to be good news.
• Mormons reported the highest participation rate in what the study called "youth group" activities, at 43%.
This indicates that even in a time when many young people are disengaging from organized religion, programs like Young Men and Young Women, seminary and institute are still a factor in the lives of many young Latter-day Saints.
When attending services and gatherings, which do you attend? (Youth group?) (n = 396)
Mormon 43%
Protestant 36%
Just Christian 33%
Orthodox Christian 32%
Jewish 31%
Buddhist 29%
Roman Catholic 28%
Unitarian Universalist 25%
Muslim 24%
Hindu 24%
Agnostic 16%
Nothing in particular 14%
Atheist 12%
(Jeremy Harmon | The Salt Lake Tribune) Jana Riess speaks at a recording of the 100th episode of the "Mormon Land" podcast in 2019.
• These Mormons also report higher attendance at religious services than the national average.
Only 1 in 10 say they never attend, compared to more than 1 in 4 nationally. And more than a third (36%) of the Mormon young people say they go to church nearly every week or more often, compared to 23% in the sample as a whole.
How often do you attend religious services, for example, at a church, synagogue, mosque, temple, or any other religious place?
Mormons (n = 396); all Respondents (n = 10,274)
Never 10%; 27%
Once a year or less 25%; 25%
1 to 3 times a month 25%; 19%
Weekly or nearly every week 28%; 18%
More than once a week 8%; 5%
I don't know, or not applicable 6%; 7%
Note: Percentages may not add up to 100% due to rounding.
• They show somewhat greater trust in organized religion.
Some 57% of the Latter-day Saint respondents said they trust organized religion "completely" or "a lot," compared to 35% in the national sample.
How much do you trust organized religion?
Do not trust at all 7%; 19%
Trust somewhat 31%; 33%
Trust a lot 34%; 21%
Trust completely 23%; 14%
Not applicable 5%; 13%
On the other hand, the research also showed a number of findings that will give Latter-day Saint parents and leaders pause. Before I get into that, let me try to provide a bit of context. In most data about religion in the U.S., two things are consistently true about Mormons: They aren't immune from national trends toward disaffiliation and decreased orthodoxy, but they're still more religious than other Americans. They generally report stronger belief in God, higher attendance at religious services and a greater sense that religion is important in their lives.
In fact, last month when I reported on longitudinal data from the Cooperative Election Study about the drop-off in Mormons' religiosity, some readers complained that I didn't give enough context about the declines that are happening in other religions, too.
But with the Springtide data, it's not necessarily the case that Generation Z Mormons are holding to the line I've been using for years when I talk about millennial Mormons: "They're less religious than their parents but still noticeably more religious than their peers." The picture is murkier here, especially in the smaller subsample of Mormon respondents who were asked a battery of additional questions about their faith.
• Their belief in God is about average.
(The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) The history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was displayed by 17,000 Young Women and Young Men during the cultural celebration marking the completion of the Jordan River Temple. The celebration was held in the Conference Center on May 19, 2018.
I found this very surprising. While few young Mormons surveyed were flat-out atheists (only 7% compared to 16%), they expressed a significant level of agnosticism, with most falling somewhere in the middle. Only 1 in 5 said they had no doubts at all about the existence of a higher power, on par with Gen Zers nationally.
"Which statement comes closest to expressing what you believe about a higher power—whether it be God, gods, or some other divine source of universal energy?"
I don't believe in a higher power. 7%; 16%
I don't know whether there is a higher power, and I don't believe there is any way to find out. 24%; 18%
I doubt a higher power's existence more than I believe. 22%; 13%
I believe in a higher power's existence more than I doubt. 23%; 24%
I know a higher power exists and I have no doubts about it. 20%; 23%
I don't know. 5%; 7%
• Mormons rank highest of all faith groups in saying they personally have been harmed by religion, faith, or a religious leader.
For me, this was a jaw-dropping finding, and a potentially disturbing one. (Remember, the n here is 134 people, so I am taking all of this with a grain of salt, as I'll explain at the end.)
I have been harmed by religion, faith, or a religious leader in the past.
Group % agree
Mormons 59%
Atheists 52%
Jews 45%
Muslims 45%
Orthodox Christians 45%
Buddhists 43%
Hindus 35%
Protestant Christians 39%
Agnostics 38%
Roman Catholics 38%
Unitarian Universalists 28%
Nationally, 39% of respondents said they had been harmed by religion. For Latter-day Saints, it's a full 20 points higher. It's hard to digest that number, frankly: More than half of young Mormons say they've been harmed by religion? On a similar question, 60% of Mormons said they don't feel safe within religious or faith institutions.
This is particularly confusing when you juxtapose these findings side by side with the trust results reported above: A majority of young Mormons say they have been harmed by religion or religious leaders (59%), but an almost identical percentage (57%) say they have a lot of trust in religion. It's a head-scratcher.
• Young Mormons don't feel like they can bring their whole selves to church.
Mormons ranked fifth overall on this question, so, on the one hand, you might see them as occupying the middle of the pack in the table below. But compared to other Christian groups, they are markedly more likely to say they can't be themselves in a religious organization.
I don't feel like I can be my full self in a religious organization.
Of course, one possibility is that these respondents are reflecting on the idea that they can't be themselves in any religious organization, not just their own. The question doesn't specify. But in any case, it demonstrates a discomfort, a worry that the community might not be expansive enough to hold whoever they are behind the facade.
• Half of Mormons don't think religious leaders care about their concerns.
I don't think religious leaders will care about the things I want to talk about during times of uncertainty.
The question doesn't spell out what kind of leaders, so it's hard to know if these Mormon respondents were thinking of apostles in Salt Lake City or a bishop closer to home.
So there's good news and bad news, potentially. I think we should exercise a lot of caution in interpreting the results from the small subsample, and also be aware that post-survey weights that are applied to make data represent the national population in terms of gender, race, and region can skew the results somewhat for Mormons. The nation is more racially and geographically diverse than Mormons are, and this can make a difference. For example, Utah Mormons are more religiously orthodox in both belief and practice than Latter-day Saints elsewhere in the U.S., and they make up about 30% of Mormons throughout the country. But in a national survey that is weighted to reflect the total population of each state, Utah accounts for only 1% of the U.S. population, which means the post-survey weights may be deflating responses from some of the most orthodox respondents and artificially inflating the responses of Midwestern heretics like me. However, that's true of every national survey that includes Mormons, not just this one.
Despite the data's limitations, I also think that the Springtide data is particularly valuable for people who care about Latter-day Saint young people, because it's able to harness something that studies that only include adults often miss. By targeting people ages 13 to 25, Springtide is unconsciously including some Mormons who will probably leave the church later.
Think about it this way: Some of these respondents are still living at home, maybe attending church with their parents (or not). They still consider themselves Mormon, and will self-identify as Mormon on a survey, but they're not strong believers. Some years down the road if they've been inactive in the church for a long period, they may be less likely to still identify themselves on a survey as being LDS.
I think that's a major part of why Springtide's data looks different from what we're used to seeing from outlets like Pew and PRRI, which focus only on adults older than 18. Since the median age for leaving the LDS Church is in late adolescence (19 in The Next Mormons Survey, and apparently 18 in internal data from the church itself), the Springtide data gives us a glimpse of young adults who may have one foot out the door but not yet both.
We need to learn from what they have to say.
Jana Riess: Why do people leave the LDS Church? Let's drill down further and find out.
Jana Riess: My new way of paying LDS tithing has given me a new perspective
Jana Riess: For U.S. Latter-day Saints, religiosity has declined over time
Jana Riess: The battle lines around the word 'Mormon'
Jana Riess: New Y.A. novel explores faith, feminism — and astronomy — in early Mormonism

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Q: How to enable Facebook authentication for Codename One on Android I have been struggling with this for a few hours. Here's the steps I take:

*

*Create a new bare bones Codename One app with main package com.recipes.auth and main class FacebookAuth

*Create facebook app for android, setting package name to com.recipes.auth and setting the main class name to FacebookAuthSub

*Then, generate hash and paste it. The hash is created using:
keytool -exportcert -alias (your_keystore_alias) -keystore (path_to_your_keystore) | openssl sha1 -binary | openssl base64

*Add build hint in Codename One facebook.appId

*Write the following code in the main form:
String clientId = "xxxxx";
String redirectURI = "{server}/auth/facebook";
String clientSecret = "xxx";
Login fb = FacebookConnect.getInstance();
fb.setClientId(clientId);
fb.setRedirectURI(redirectURI);
fb.setClientSecret(clientSecret);
//Sets a LoginCallback listener
fb.setCallback(new LoginCallback() {
    @Override
    public void loginSuccessful() {
        ConnectionRequest connectionRequest = new ConnectionRequest();
        connectionRequest.setPost(false);
        connectionRequest.setUrl(
                "{server}/auth/facebook/callback?access_token="
        + fb.getAccessToken().getToken());
        connectionRequest.addResponseListener(event -> {
            Log.p(new String(connectionRequest.getResponseData()));
        });
        NetworkManager.getInstance().addToQueue(connectionRequest);
    }

    @Override
    public void loginFailed(String errorMessage) {
        Dialog.show("No!", "it did not work!", "sad", null);
    }
});

Form hi = new Form("Hi World");
Button loginWithFacebook = new Button("Fb Auth");
loginWithFacebook.addActionListener(event -> {
    //trigger the login if not already logged in
    if(!fb.isUserLoggedIn()){
        fb.doLogin();
    }else{
        //get the token and now you can query the facebook API
        String token = fb.getAccessToken().getToken();
    }
});
hi.add(loginWithFacebook);
hi.show();

where {server} is my server's uri. The auth path of my server is {server}/auth/facebook, and the callback URL is {server}/auth/facebook/callback and the success redirect is {server}/api/Users/me.

*Add web client to the Facebook app, to enable the simulator

*On facebook app page in products, add product, and then add Facebook Login with my server entered in Valid OAuth redirect URIs.

*Now when I try from the device, I get an error about invalid hash.
In one of these answers, it is suggested that this could be because

Android Key hash will change if you build apk from another device(PC)

Which in fact is correct since I am using Codename One cloud builds.  I followed the following guides:
Facebook Login - Codename One, Social Chat Part 3 - Codename One
and could not find an answer. But how to setup everything related to Facebook authentication with my own server? I am looking for a simple, step by step approach that actually works.

A: Don't believe all the stuff you read on stackoverflow...
Different computers will produce the same SHA1 otherwise encryption and digital signing wouldn't work!
Just to be sure I tried this with my Mac and Linux machines and got the exact same result. Facebook is flaky though with the SHA1 and it's possible that the JVM differences (JCA installs etc.) cause something. We sometimes connect the device to get the actual SHA1 values from the error logs but once we get the correct values they never change despite building with multiple servers.


text:
SHEEP BREEDERS FROM SOUTH AFRICA, AUSTRALIA, and NEW ZEALAND VISIT SANTA CRUZ (ARGENTINA) MERINO DOHNE STUDS
A representative of INTA participated in the International Conference of the Merino Dohne sheep breed, held in Uruguay. The meeting included a tour of the southern area of the Province of Santa Cruz and Chile. Emilio Rivera, of the Rio Gallegos Rural Extension Agency, stressed that "Merino Dohne allows to maintain good production rates of wool and meat in places of low forage value".
The meeting was attended by producers and technicians from locally, Uruguay, Chile, New Zealand, Australia and South Africa.
A representative of INTA participated in the International Conference of Merino Dohne, which took place last week in Durazno, Eastern Republic of Uruguay. The Tec. Emilio Rivera, of the Rural Extension Agency Rio Gallegos made a presentation on the situation of the breed in Argentina and participated in a tour that included a tour of Uruguayan studs and research centres. In addition, he was part of the organization of a tour of the southern area of Santa Cruz and Chile.
The meeting was attended by producers and technicians from locally, Uruguay, Chile, New Zealand, Australia and South Africa, while representatives from Peru who could not attend participated through written work. The theoretical presentations and meetings were held at the headquarters of the Rural Society of Durazno, one of the most important in the host country.
Rivera commented that "in the presentations and exchanges it was found that the Merino Dohne productively has the capacity to improve the income by the fine tuning of the wool and the high production of meat from the flocks". "The outlook was very positive, the breed is a good tool in places where forage potential is high, but all the exhibitors stressed that it has a great performance in arid environments such as those of Southern Patagonia," he said.
Before the start of the Conference in Uruguay, participants toured the region for three days. They visited the establishment Nambí Guasu, in Lavalleja, and the industry Engraw Export Import, producer and exporter of micronajes wool tops in the range of 19.9 to 34.0 microns and the only supplier in the country of tops with Superwash treatment. Later they were at the Experimental Centre of the Uruguayan Lana Secretariat (SUL), where representatives of the organization made a presentation on agricultural production in Uruguay, lines of work in sheep research, selection results for genetic resistance to internal parasites and work in Merino Dohne, they also observed the flock Merino Dohne of the Research Centre. At the end of the tour they visited the studs La Empastada and La Pastoral.
The lectures on the current status of the breed, recent evolution and perspectives in the participating countries were held in the Prediction Site of the Rural Society of Durazno. Among the more than twenty presentations made in two intense days of work can be mentioned Research on ovine genetic resources, first 15 years with Merino Dohne in Uruguay, Main results of SUL work with the Merino Dohne race, The future of Dohne in the industry Australian sheep, The demand for wool and sheep meat: a look at the demographic and economic determinants, Merino Dohne wool markets and – as a closing – a presentation by the World Federation of Merino Dohne Breeders.
Subsequently, South African, Australian, New Zealand, Uruguayan, Chilean and local producers and technicians visited sheep ranches in the southern area of the province of Santa Cruz. On Sunday, April 22, they visited the Estancia Laguna Colorada, where they appreciated different batches of animals; the next day they went to Estancia and Cabaña Coy Aike where they were internalized on the Puro de Pedigree (PDP) campus and attended technical presentations by the head of the ranch and technicians from the Rio Gallegos Rural Extension Agency. On Tuesday, April 24, the tour of our country ended with visits to Cabaña Las Vegas and Estancia and Cabaña Morro Chico, pioneers in the introduction of Merino Dohne in the south of Santa Cruz. The tour continued in Chilean livestock establishments in the Magallanes region.
Rivera commented that "the tour was held at the request of the participants of the conference, who expressed their interest in knowing our region" and stressed that "it was very interesting, because they could internalize the work and see the schools in our region." "Among the visitors there were many breeders from Australia, a reference country for the import of genetics for South America. Therefore, for us it is essential that they understand our environment and see how their bloodlines perform, "he said. In this regard, he said that it is important that those who sell us their genetics "emphasize rusticity and other aspects that are important for us."


Get Your style going the right right the first time by wearing Steven Land dress shirts in bold patterns. Steven Land dress shirts feature the absolute cutting edge colors and patterns that will show off your knowledge of style. This black dot pattern dress shirt features a spread style collar with mini dot cuffs and spread collar. Made of pure cotton.


text:
Q: Stone Cech compactification construction via Special Adjoint Functor Theorem in Riehl $\newcommand{\chaus}{\textbf{cHaus}}\newcommand{\ctop}{\textbf{Top}}$
Emily Riehl's "Category theory in Context", Section 4.6 "Existence of adjoint functors" uses the "Special Adjoint Functor theorem" on the inclusion functor, which includes the category of compact Hausdorff spaces ($\chaus$) into the category of topological spaces ($\ctop$). This gives us the Stone Cech compactification functor $\beta: \ctop \to \chaus$. I'm trying to understand certain topological assertions made. I'll run through the proof as given, and point out topological facts which I don't understand.
Proof sketch
We start by seeing that $I \equiv [0, 1]$ is a coseparating object for $\chaus$. This means that if $f, g: X \to Y$ such that $f \neq g$,  then there is a function $h: Y \to [0, 1]$ such that $h \circ f \neq h \circ g$. See that $f \neq g$ implies there is an $x_0 \in X$ such that $f(x_0) \neq g(x_0)$. Now we apply the Urysohn Lemma, which states that for Normal (eg. compact Hausdorff) spaces, we can define a continuous function $h: Y \to I$ such that $h(f(x_0)) = 0$ and $h(g(x_0)) = 1$. Since $Y$ is compact Haussdorf and thus normal, we obtain a function $h$ such that $h \circ f \neq h \circ g$.
Next, we consider the set of all maps $X \to I$. We take the product of these maps, giving us the map:
$$
X \xrightarrow{\hat \eta} \prod_{\hom(X, I)} I
$$
The claim is that this map is initial amongst the collection of all maps in $X \downarrow \chaus$ --- that is, any other map from $X$ into a compact Hausdorff space $Y$ must factor through $\hat \eta$. (1: I don't see why this claim is true).
Finally, we say because the full product space $\prod_{\hom(X, I)} I$ is compact Haussdorf, a subspace is compact iff it is closed. Why does this imply that the intersection of all subobjects of $\hat \eta: X \to \prod_{\hom(X, I)} I$ is the closure of the image of $\hat \eta$? (2: I don't see why this claim is true either).
So I don't understand why this process as described in Riehl constructs the Stone Cech compactification. I'd appreciate clarification of the topological facts I seem to be missing to make this go through.
Example 4.6.12