## Merging White Dwarf Binaries Produce Type Ia Supernovae in Elliptical Galaxies

Michael A. Tucker 1,2, ∗

- 1 Center for Cosmology and AstroParticle Physics, 191 W Woodruff Ave, Columbus, OH 43210
- 2 Department of Astronomy, The Ohio State University, 140 W 18th Ave, Columbus, OH 43210

## Submitted to MNRAS

## ABSTRACT

I find that Type Ia supernovae (SNe Ia) with bimodal nebular emission profiles occur almost exclusively in massive (M ⋆ ≳ 10 11 M ) galaxies with low star-formation rates (SFR ⊙ ≲ 0 5 M . ⊙ /yr). The bimodal profiles are likely produced by two white dwarfs that exploded during a merger or collision, supported by a correlation between the peak-to-peak velocity separation ( v sep ) and the SN Ia peak luminosity ( M V ) which arises naturally from more massive white dwarf binaries synthesizing more 56 Ni during the explosion. The distributions of SNe Ia with and without bimodal nebular lines differ in host mass, SFR, and specific SFR with K-S test probabilities of 3 1%, 0 03%, and 0 02%, respectively. . . . Viewing angle effects can fully explain the SNe Ia in quiescent hosts without bimodal emission profiles and the dearth of merger/collision driven SNe Ia in star-forming hosts requires at least two distinct progenitor channels for normal SNe Ia. 30 -40% of all SNe Ia originate from mergers or collisions depending on how cleanly host environment distinguishes progenitor scenarios. Existing models for white dwarf mergers and collisions broadly reproduce the v sep -M V correlation and future analyses may be able to infer the masses/mass-ratios of merging white dwarfs in external galaxies.

Keywords: transients: supernovae - binaries: close - white dwarfs - galaxies: stellar content

## 1. INTRODUCTION

Type Ia supernovae (SNe Ia) are the thermonuclear explosion of white dwarf (WD) stars (Hoyle &amp; Fowler 1960). Since WDs do not spontaneously ignite, donation of matter from a companion is needed to destabilize the WD. The nature of the companion has been the source of extensive debate (see Maoz et al. 2014 and Jha et al. 2019 for reviews). SNe Ia also produce the majority of iron-group elements in the Universe (Iwamoto et al. 1999; Kobayashi et al. 2020) and the exact nucleosynthetic yields depend sensitively on the density and chemical composition of the core (e.g., Seitenzahl et al. 2013; Boos et al. 2021; Gronow et al. 2021), which in turns depends on how the WD explodes as a SN Ia.

degenerate (DD) scenario has a second WD as the companion star (e.g., Tutukov &amp; Yungelson 1979; Iben &amp; Tutukov 1984). The SD scenario predicts several observational signatures from the SN ejecta interacting with the companion (e.g., Wheeler et al. 1975; Marietta et al. 2000; Kasen 2010; Boehner et al. 2017) or its wind (e.g., Panagia et al. 2006; Margutti et al. 2012). Searches for these signatures consistently produce null results (e.g., Mattila et al. 2005; Leonard 2007; Schaefer &amp; Pagnotta 2012; Shappee et al. 2013; Chomiuk et al. 2016; Maguire et al. 2016; Dubay et al. 2022; Tucker &amp; Shappee 2024, see Liu et al. 2023b for a review). Tucker et al. (2020), for example, limit the fraction of SD SNe Ia to ≲ 10%.

Progenitors are generally divided into 2 categories depending on the nature of the companion. The singledegenerate (SD) scenario invokes a non-degenerate companion such as a main-sequence or red giant star (Whelan &amp; Iben 1973; Nomoto 1982), whereas the double-

∗ CCAPP Fellow

The non-detections of SD companions implies that double-WD binaries produce most SNe Ia. The question becomes how the two WDs evolve to a detonation. Gravitational-wave emission and tidal forces can slowly reduce the orbital separation until mass-transfer or disruption occurs (e.g., Carvalho et al. 2022). Mergers can explode during coalescence ('violent' mergers; e.g., Guillochon et al. 2010; Pakmor et al. 2010, 2012, 2013) or after some time delay spanning ∼ 10 2 -10 6 years

(e.g., Ji et al. 2013; Becerra et al. 2018; Neopane et al. 2022). Dynamics in triple- and quadruple-star systems can induce mergers or even direct collisions (Thompson 2011; Katz &amp; Dong 2012; Kushnir et al. 2013; Shappee &amp; Thompson 2013; Pejcha et al. 2013; Antognini et al. 2014; Fang et al. 2018; Hamers et al. 2022) but these scenarios struggle to reproduce the total SN Ia rate (e.g., Toonen et al. 2018; Hamers 2018). Double detonations in double-WD binaries (e.g., Livne 1990; Shen &amp; Moore 2014) show promise for reproducing normal SNe Ia (e.g., Shen et al. 2018; Polin et al. 2019), but current models over-predict the diversity of SN Ia light curves (e.g., Shen et al. 2021; Collins et al. 2022).

Host-galaxy and environmental analyses, which indirectly trace SN Ia progenitors, consistently find a diversity of explosion sites (e.g., Hakobyan et al. 2020; Cronin et al. 2021). There are correlations between the local environment and SN properties (Childress et al. 2013; Pan et al. 2015; Meng et al. 2023) but the underlying origin is unknown. Accounting for these effects in cosmological analyses remains empirical (e.g., the 'mass-step' correction, Kelly et al. 2010; Sullivan et al. 2010) and recent analyses suggest distinct progenitors in young and old stellar populations (e.g., Wang et al. 2013; Rigault et al. 2020) with a ∼ 0 1 . -0 2 mag intrinsic luminosity differ-. ence (Briday et al. 2022).

Yet connecting these environmental correlations to intrinsic ignition conditions or progenitor systems has proven difficult, primarily due to the explosion physics inherent to SNe Ia. Exploding a ∼ 1 M ⊙ star comprised of carbon and oxygen naturally produces a bright transient and layered ejecta with iron-group elements in the core surrounded by intermediate-mass elements from incomplete Si-burning (Seitenzahl &amp; Townsley 2017). Sky surveys and follow-up programs have obtained light curves and spectra for hundreds of SNe Ia in the weeks around maximum light (e.g., Blondin et al. 2012; Silverman et al. 2012a; Morrell et al. 2024) but these observations only probe the outer ejecta (e.g., Mazzali et al. 2014).

Nebular-phase spectra, obtained ≳ 200 days after explosion when the ejecta becomes optically thin, provide a direct view to the central regions of the explosion. These spectra are dominated by high-velocity forbidden emission lines from iron-group elements (Co, Ni, Fe; e.g., Wilk et al. 2020; Kwok et al. 2023) heated by radioactive-decay energy (Seitenzahl et al. 2009). Most nebular spectra show smooth emission-line profiles (e.g., Maguire et al. 2018) with correlations between early-time and late-time ejecta velocities suggesting minor ejecta asymmetries (e.g., Maeda et al. 2010; Liu et al. 2023a). Yet Dong et al. (2015) discovered a subset of SNe Ia that show significantly asymmetric, even bimodal or double-peaked, nebular emission lines. Vallely et al. (2020) later used an expanded sample to show that the SNe Ia with bimodal profiles have below-average luminosities but otherwise resemble spectroscopicallynormal SNe Ia.

In this Letter I connect these bimodal SNe Ia to exclusively old stellar populations. Moreover, the peakto-peak velocity separation of the nebular profiles correlates with peak luminosity, a key prediction for WD mergers or collisions because total binary mass M tot corresponds to faster orbital velocities and more synthesized 56 Ni. I outline the sample of SNe Ia searched for bimodality in § 2. Bimodal nebular profiles are connected to host-galaxy mass and star-formation rate (SFR) in § 3 and I discuss these findings in the context of SNe Ia and their progenitors in § 4.

## 2. THE SAMPLE

Dong et al. (2015) and Vallely et al. (2020) conducted dedicated searches for SNe Ia with bimodal nebular profiles which I use as an initial sample. Those works searched for bimodality in 48 SNe Ia using new and archival nebular spectra. The SNe Ia are classified as 'bimodal' if the two velocity components are separated by more than their combined width (cf. Table 4 in Vallely et al. 2020). Table 1 provides the basic SN and host-galaxy properties for the sample.

There are 6 SNe Ia in this sample that show bimodality in all three spectral features considered: the [Fe II ] blend at ≈ 5300 ˚ , the isolated [Co A III ] λ 5891 line, and the [Fe II ] +[Co III ] blend at ≈ 6600 ˚ . A Fig. 1 shows the nebular spectrum of SN 2007on (Gall et al. 2018; Mazzali et al. 2018) with bimodality in all three features. Included for comparison is the nebular spectrum of SN 2012cg (Silverman et al. 2012b; Shappee et al. 2018; Chakradhari et al. 2019) at a similar phase which is classified as 'not bimodal'. The narrow host-galaxy Na I absorption feature has been subtracted from the spectrum of SN 2012cg and the spectra are aligned using the velocity shifts derived by Vallely et al. (2020) to ease visual comparisons.

There are 3 additional SNe Ia for which I retain the 'tentative bimodal' classification from Vallely et al. (2020). Two of these SNe Ia (2002er and 2016iuh) only show bimodal signatures in the [Co III ] λ 5891 feature. The spectra for these SNe Ia were obtained earlier in the nebular phase (+214 and +164 days, respectively) compared to the SNe Ia with bimodality detected in all three features (phases ∼ 250 -350 days). 56 Co decays to 56 Fe with a half-life of ≈ 77 days so these differences may simply trace the conversion of Co into Fe.

Figure 1. Example nebular spectra for SNe Ia with (SN 2007on, red) and without (SN 2012cg, blue) bimodal profiles. The dotted box marks the isolated [Co III ] λ 5891 feature shown in velocity space in the right panels.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/2408.00840v3-figure-624fcaa0-e2b7-4086-bfa3-c40f6cd55b8d.jpg)

The third 'tentative bimodal' SN Ia, 1986G, is more likely to be a contamination artifact than SNe 2002er and 2016iuh. This explosion suffered from significant host-galaxy extinction and the host Na I absorption doublet falls atop the [Co III ] λ 5891 feature. The redder [Fe II ] +[Co III ] feature also shows a strong absorption feature that might be due to over-subtraction of hostgalaxy H α emission. Yet SN 1986G has similar properties to the other bimodal SNe Ia so I retain the 'tentative bimodal' classification. All three of these SNe Ia have open markers in the corresponding figures.

Finally, I add the 5 SNe Ia with nebular spectra from Graham et al. (2022) who searched for bimodality but did not find any detections. The combined sample from these 3 sources consists of 53 SNe Ia, 6 of which are confidently bimodal, three are tentatively bimodal, and the remaining 44 SNe Ia show no evidence for bimodal line profiles.

The full sample spans a wide range of near-peak photometric and spectroscopic properties (cf. Fig. 7 in Vallely et al. 2020). Most of them are spectroscopically normal but there are 5 underluminous 91bg-like (Filippenko et al. 1992a; Leibundgut et al. 1993) and 5 overluminous 91T/99aa-like (Filippenko et al. 1992b; Phillips et al. 1992; Garavini et al. 2004), denoted with specific symbols in the corresponding figures. The 02cx-like/Iax SNe Ia (Li et al. 2003; Foley et al. 2013) are excluded as they likely originate from a different progenitor class and appear to never enter a true nebular phase (e.g., Foley et al. 2016; Camacho-Neves et al. 2023).

## 3. HOST GALAXIES

I compare the SNe Ia with and without bimodality to the stellar masses (M ⋆ ), star-formation rates (SFR), and specific SFR (sSFR ≡ SFR M ) of their hosts. / ⋆ Most hosts have M ⋆ and SFR measurements in the ' z = 0 Multi-wavelength Galaxy Synthesis' (z0MGS; Leroy et al. 2019) catalog anchored to ∼ 700 000 , galaxies in the GALEX-SDSS-WISE Legacy Catalog (GSWLC; Salim et al. 2016). Hosts for 4 of the SNe Ia in my sample are not included in z0MGS so we apply the same calibrations from Leroy et al. (2019) to the GALEX and WISE photometry for these hosts to ensure consistency. Simply excluding these 4 SNe Ia, all of which are classified as 'not bimodal' and explode in star-forming hosts, does not affect the conclusions.

Fig. 2 shows the galaxy masses and SFRs for the SN Ia hosts color-coded by bimodality, The bimodal SNe Ia occur almost exclusively in massive (log 10 M ⋆ ≃ 11 dex), quiescent (log 10 SFR ≲ -0 5 dex) galaxies. . The excep-

Figure 2. The host-galaxy masses and SFRs of bimodal SNe Ia (red) are compared to SNe Ia without bimodal nebular lines (blue). One host, NGC 1404, had 2 bimodal SNe Ia (2007on and 2011iv). Small grey points show a subset of galaxies from the z0MGS catalog (Leroy et al. 2019) for reference. The bimodal SNe Ia strongly prefer massive quiescent hosts.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/2408.00840v3-figure-6d08bd40-38d9-4345-952e-b2884f44fd4f.jpg)

tion is the tentatively bimodal SN 2002er which occurs in a star-forming host. Two of the bimodal SNe Ia, SNe 2007on and 2011iv, share the same host galaxy NGC 1404.

ies would further separate the bimodal SNe Ia from the majority of SN Ia hosts.

I use the Kolmogorov-Smirnov (K-S) test to quantify whether the host properties of bimodal and nonbimodal SNe Ia differ. Fig. 3 shows the cumulative distribution functions (CDFs) for log 10 M , log ⋆ 10 SFR, and log 10 sSFR including the corresponding K-S p -values. The SFR and sSFR distributions in particular show that the null hypotheses of no correlation between hostgalaxy property and bimodality can be rejected at &gt; 99 9% confidence. . Leroy et al. (2019) note that their calibrations for SFR (and thus sSFR) likely overestimate the true values for passive galaxies (log 10 sSFR ≲ -11 dex) because star-forming galaxies dominate their calibration sample. Reducing the SFR for these galax-

The presence of SNe Ia without bimodal profiles in these massive ellipticals agrees with viewing-angle effects obscuring asymmetry in some systems. If I just consider SNe Ia with hosts with log 10 sSFR ≤ -10 8 dex . (Rigault et al. 2020), P bim = 8 15 (53%) of these SNe Ia / show bimodal profiles. The observed fraction of bimodal SNe Ia P bim is related to the critical viewing angle by

$$\theta _ { c } = 9 0 ^ { \circ } - \cos ^ { - 1 } ( P _ { \text{bim} } / f ), \text{ \quad \ \ } ( 1 )$$

where f is the 'true' fraction of bimodal SNe Ia. Explosions from violent mergers and collisions are expected to exhibit strong asymmetries, especially in the inner ejecta probed by the nebular Fe and Co features (e.g., Pakmor et al. 2013; Dong et al. 2015). For f ≡ 1,

Figure 3. Cumulative distribution functions (CDFs) for SNe Ia with (red) and without (blue) bimodal nebular profiles. I show M (left), SFR (middle), and sSFR (right) including the ⋆ p -value from the K-S test. The null hypotheses (the distributions are drawn from the same parent populations) can be rejected at the 99.9% level for SFR and sSFR.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/2408.00840v3-figure-6f8e58ec-3c14-4473-ba30-5a690855ce47.jpg)

θ c ≃ 35 , ◦ and this requires that most, if not all, SNe Ia in log 10 sSFR ≲ -11 dex galaxies are intrinsically bimodal.

The dearth of bimodal events in star-forming hosts is intriguing because these galaxies have a mixture of young and old stellar populations. SN 2002er is the sole (tentative) bimodal SN Ia in a star-forming host in Fig. 2 and viewing-angle effects likely obscures bimodality in an additional 1 -2 events (cf. Eq. 1). This implies (2 ± 1) / 38 ∼ 5% (95-percentile confidence interval 1 -16%) of SNe Ia in star-forming hosts are produced by mergers, using the same sSFR cutoff from Rigault et al. (2020).

The separation by host sSFR allows a relatively clean estimate of the true fraction of all SNe Ia originating from merging WD binaries. Of the SNe Ia in my sample, 9/53 ( ≃ 17%) show evidence for bimodality and accounting for the ∼ half that will not be classified as bimodal due to viewing-angle effects raises this fraction to ∼ 34%. SNe Ia in quiescent galaxies, including bimodal SNe Ia, are systematically fainter (e.g., Kelly et al. 2010; Sullivan et al. 2010; Gupta et al. 2011; Rigault et al. 2013) so there is likely some bias against late-time spectra for these events. For comparison, ∼ 35 -40% of the SN Ia hosts analyzed by Rigault et al. (2020) have log 10 sSFR ≲ -11 dex although stellar population does not perfectly separate the two populations (Briday et al. 2022). With these considerations in mind, the intrinsic fraction of bimodal SNe Ia relative to all SNe Ia is probably 30-40%.

̸

Finally, I do not find an unambiguous connection to the spectroscopic 91bg-like subclass of SNe Ia (diamonds in Fig. 2), which also have below-average peak luminosities (e.g., Filippenko et al. 1992a; Taubenberger et al. 2008; Hachinger et al. 2009) and a strong preference for passive hosts (e.g., Barkhudaryan et al. 2019). If 91bg-like classification is inclination dependent similar to bimodality, we would expect consistency between the bimodal and 91bg-like classifications. Common symmetry axes would produce correlated outcomes (bimodal ⇔ 91bg-like) whereas orthogonal axes would produce an anti-correlation (bimodal=91bg-like). Neither of these are observed, as Fig. 2 shows all 4 possible combinations of these categories. Either there are different axes of symmetry between the inner and outer ejecta or different physical processes divide these empirical categories (e.g., Dhawan et al. 2017).

## 4. IMPLICATIONS FOR SN IA PROGENITORS

The dependence on sSFR explains correlations between SNe Ia and their hosts discovered over the past decade including the 'step-correction' parameterized by host mass, SFR, or sSFR (e.g., Kelly et al. 2010; Sullivan et al. 2010; Lampeitl et al. 2010; Smith et al. 2012; Wang et al. 2013; Pan et al. 2014; Roman et al. 2018; Rigault et al. 2020; Kang et al. 2020; Kelsey et al. 2021; Briday et al. 2022; Wiseman et al. 2022, 2023; Larison et al. 2024; Ginolin et al. 2024). Vallely et al. (2020) find that bimodal SNe Ia are δm ∼ 0 3 . mag fainter than the population average, slightly higher than the δm ∼ 0 2 . mag offset inferred by Briday et al. (2022)

Figure 4. Correlation between the bimodal peak-to-peak velocity separation v sep and peak V -band magnitude. Observations have the same markers and colors as in Fig. 2. The top axis shows the total binary mass if v orb ∼ 1 1 . × v sep corresponding to an average inclination of i ≃ 65 . ◦ I use the synthesized M 56Ni to estimate M V for models where two WDs explode, including collisions (purple, Rosswog et al. 2009; Raskin et al. 2009, 2010; Hawley et al. 2012; Kushnir et al. 2013; Garc´ ıa-Senz et al. 2013; Aznar-Sigu´n et al. 2013; Papish &amp; Perets 2016), mergers (blue; Pakmor et al. 2012; Raskin et al. 2014; Dan et al. 2015; a Fenn et al. 2016; van Rossum et al. 2016; Perets et al. 2019), and triple- or quadruple-detonations (gray, Tanikawa et al. 2019; Pakmor et al. 2022; Boos et al. 2024). See § 4 for details.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/2408.00840v3-figure-3a29f564-c13e-432c-9187-232d85bd3c2e.jpg)

from a large sample of SNe Ia and host-galaxy properties. Yet the bimodal SNe Ia already have at least one axis of asymmetry so viewing-angle effects may account for the slightly larger δm calculated by Vallely et al. (2020) if luminosity and inclination are correlated.

The peak-to-peak velocity separations v sep in bimodal SNe Ia exceed pre-explosion turbulent motions in the WD ( ∼ 100 km s -1 ; H¨ oflich &amp; Stein 2002; Kim et al. 2013) and the preference for roughly equal-height peaks in the bimodal profiles also disfavors internal explosive asymmetries such as deflagration plumes (e.g., Seitenzahl et al. 2013) or off-center detonations (e.g., Chamulak et al. 2012). Instead, multi-dimensional simulations of violent mergers (Pakmor et al. 2013) and collisions (Rosswog et al. 2009) show the highly-asymmetric 56 Ni distributions required by the bimodal line profiles.

two velocity components in the nebular spectra and M V is a reliable proxy for the bolometric luminosity (e.g., Arnett 1982). The Spearman correlation coefficient for v sep and M V in Fig. 4 is r = -0 75 with a statistically . significant p -value of p = 0 020. . The negative correlation coefficient corresponds to a positive correlation between v sep and peak luminosity because the photometric magnitude system is inverted. This correlation is naturally produced if more massive WD binaries with faster orbits synthesize more 56 Ni during the explosion, producing more radioactive decay power and brighter light curves.

The correlation between v sep and the peak V -band magnitude M V shown in Fig. 4 further suggests a merger origin, where v sep measures the separation between the

The old stellar populations, bimodal nebular profiles, and v sep -M V correlation are all consistent with the explosion of merging double-WD binaries. The top axis of Fig. 4 converts v sep into an estimate for the total binary mass M tot assuming equal-mass WDs. The inclination angle i is unknown so I assume v orb ≃ 1 1 . × v sep corresponding to i ≈ 90 -θ c ≃ 65 . There is likely a slight ob-◦

servational bias towards identifying edge-on/high inclination systems. Equal(-ish) WD masses are supported by the bimodal [Co III ] emission lines having similar fluxes, where the [Co III ] line flux F [Co III] ∝ M 56Ni (Childress et al. 2015) and M 56Ni ∝ WD mass (e.g., Shen et al. 2018).

I use the WD cooling tracks of B´ edard et al. (2020) to estimate WD radii ( R WD ) from their masses assuming thick H layers and a cooling age of 5 Gyr, although adopting anywhere between 1 -10 Gyr produces similar results. To estimate M V from M 56Ni (a readily-provided quantity from most simulations), I combine the relation between the light curve 'stretch' parameter s BV (Burns et al. 2011) and M 56Ni from Scalzo et al. (2019) with the s BV -M V calibration derived by Burns et al. (2018). This allows for direct comparison between models and observations even for simulations lacking radiative transfer computations.

Overall the collision and merger models agree well with the data in Fig. 4 assuming the separation at explosion is R sep ≃ ( R 1 + R 2 ) / 2 (i.e., partially merged). This agrees with the bimodal Co and Fe emission lines overlapping in velocity (cf. Fig. 1) yet retaining distinct cores (e.g., Pakmor et al. 2013; Mazzali et al. 2018). Relating v sep to the pre-explosion orbital velocities assumes the binary is immediately unbound during explosion, but in reality these velocities are lower limits because self-gravitation from the ejecta reduces v sep by ∼ 10 -20% (e.g., Braudo &amp; Soker 2024), depending on the explosion energy and ejecta mass. Adopting different orbital separations at explosion moves the models horizontally in Fig. 4 and different viewing angles will likely shift the models along both axes because simulations suggest inclination-dependent light curves and spectra (e.g., Rosswog et al. 2009; Pakmor et al. 2012). Mergers must ignite during or soon after coalescence to produce the 56 Ni asymmetries, and any merger scenario must also reproduce the non-explosive merger remnants (e.g., Cheng et al. 2020; Kilic et al. 2021; Wu et al. 2022).

Collisions depend on the impact parameter b where off-axis or grazing collisions reduce M 56Ni or potentially prevent ignition altogether (e.g., Glanz et al. 2023). Direct collisions are too rare to reproduce the SN Ia rate by a factor of ≳ 100 (e.g., Hamers et al. 2013; Toonen et al. 2018), so they are unlikely to produce a significant fraction of the bimodal SNe Ia. Triple systems more broadly may play an important role in driving WD mergers (e.g., Hamers et al. 2022).

The triple- and quadruple-detonation models (Papish et al. 2015) use a double-detonation on the primary to compress and ignite the secondary (triple detonations) or ignite a second double-detonation (quadruple detonations). These models have too low v sep to match the data in Fig. 4 because they explode at larger separations and thus lower orbital velocities. However, this may depend on how the model binary is driven to explosion (Burmester et al. 2023), when the He accretion layer ignites, or if a kick is imparted to the primary's ejecta by the detonation of the secondary.

This rare electromagnetic observable to merging compact objects constrains key aspects of binary population synthesis models (e.g., Yungelson &amp; Kuranov 2017; Shen et al. 2017), delay-time distributions (e.g., Maoz et al. 2010; Meng &amp; Yang 2012), and the stochastic gravitational-wave background (e.g., Yu et al. 2020; Zou et al. 2020; Yoshida 2021). Many questions remain about how exactly the double WD binary is driven to explosion but these results confirm that merging doubleWD binaries can and do produce spectroscopicallynormal SNe Ia around maximum light. Moreover, this requires at least 2 separate progenitor channels for producing SNe Ia. The connection to host-galaxy sSFR allows for early identification of likely bimodal SNe Ia for detailed study.

Software: astropy (Astropy Collaboration et al. 2022); numpy (van der Walt et al. 2011; Harris et al. 2020); matplotlib (Hunter 2007); lmfit (Newville et al. 2014); scipy (Virtanen et al. 2020); spectres (Carnall 2017); emcee (Foreman-Mackey et al. 2013); pandas (The pandas development Team 2024)

## DATA AVAILABILITY

All data are taken from the literature. Host properties for the SN Ia sample are included in Table 1 for reference.

## ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Many thanks to Adam Leroy, Chris Kochanek, Ben Shappee, Kris Stanek, Todd Thompson, Ken Shen, and Noam Soker for useful discussions. I thank the referee for their constructive suggestions.

M. A. Tucker

| Name                    | Bimodal?   | Subtype   | Host                 | log 10 M ⋆ [dex]                | log 10 SFR [dex]                    |
|-------------------------|------------|-----------|----------------------|---------------------------------|-------------------------------------|
| 1981B                   | N          | norm      | NGC 4536             | 10 . 19 ± 0 . 10                | 0 . 47 ± 0 . 20                     |
| 1986G                   | T          | 91bg      | NGC 5128             | 10 . 92 ± 0 . 10                | 0 . 04 ± 0 . 20                     |
| 1989B                   | N          | norm      | M 66                 | 10 . 67 ± 0 . 10                | 0 . 50 ± 0 . 20                     |
| 1990N                   | N          | norm      | NGC 4639             | 10 . 21 ± 0 . 10                | - 0 . 29 ± 0 . 20                   |
| 1991T                   | N          | 91T       | NGC 4527             | 10 . 66 ± 0 . 10                | 0 . 54 ± 0 . 20                     |
| 1998aq                  | N          | norm      | NGC 3982             | 9 . 90 ± 0 . 10                 | 0 . 14 ± 0 . 20                     |
| 1998bu                  | N          | norm      | M 96                 | 10 . 67 ± 0 . 10                | - 0 . 29 ± 0 . 20                   |
| 1999aa                  | N          | 91T       | NGC 2595             | 10 . 97 ± 0 . 14                | 0 . 57 ± 0 . 20                     |
| 1999by                  | N          | 91bg      | NGC 2841             | 10 . 93 ± 0 . 10                | - 0 . 07 ± 0 . 20                   |
| 2000cx                  | N          | norm      | NGC 0524             | 10 . 99 ± 0 . 10                | - 0 . 56 ± 0 . 20                   |
| 2002dj                  | N          | norm      | NGC 5018             | 10 . 95 ± 0 . 10                | - 0 . 63 ± 0 . 20                   |
| 2002er                  | T          | norm      | UGC 10743            | 9 . 51 ± 0 . 10                 | - 0 . 24 ± 0 . 20                   |
| 2003du                  | N          | norm      | UGC 9391             | 8 . 73 ± 0 . 10                 | - 0 . 99 ± 0 . 20                   |
| 2003hv                  | Y          | norm      | NGC 1201             | 10 . 40 ± 0 . 20                | - 1 . 46 ± 0 . 20                   |
| 2003gs                  | Y          | 91bg      | NGC 0936             | 10 . 99 ± 0 . 10                | - 0 . 70 ± 0 . 20                   |
| 2004bv                  | N          | norm      | NGC 6907             | 10 . 69 ± 0 . 11                | 0 . 92 ± 0 . 20                     |
| 2004eo                  | N          | norm      | NGC 6928             | 11 . 18 ± 0 . 10                | 0 . 45 ± 0 . 20                     |
| 2005am                  | Y          | norm      | NGC 2811             | 10 . 76 ± 0 . 10                | - 0 . 78 ± 0 . 20                   |
| 2005cf                  | N          | norm      | MCG -01-39-003       | 9 . 40 ± 0 . 15                 | - 0 . 50 ± 0 . 20                   |
| 2007af                  | N          | norm      | NGC 5584             | 9 . 85 ± 0 . 13                 | 0 . 02 ± 0 . 20                     |
| 2007le                  | N          | norm      | NGC 7721             | 10 . 11 ± 0 . 10                | - 0 . 04 ± 0 . 20                   |
| 2007on                  | Y          | norm      | NGC 1404             | 11 . 01 ± 0 . 10                | - 0 . 73 ± 0 . 20                   |
| 2008Q                   | N          | norm      | NGC 0524             | 10 . 99 ± 0 . 10                | - 0 . 56 ± 0 . 20                   |
| 2011by                  | N          | norm      | NGC 3972             | 9 . 71 ± 0 . 10                 | - 0 . 68 ± 0 . 20                   |
| 2011fe                  | N          | norm      | M 101                | 10 . 39 ± 0 . 10                | 0 . 54 ± 0 . 20                     |
| 2011iv                  | Y          | norm      | NGC 1404             | 11 . 01 ± 0 . 10                | - 0 . 73 ± 0 . 20                   |
| 2012cg                  | N          | norm      | NGC 4424             | 9 . 89 ± 0 . 10                 | - 0 . 52 ± 0 . 20                   |
| 2012fr                  | N          | norm      | NGC 1365             | 10 . 75 ± 0 . 10                | 1 . 15 ± 0 . 20                     |
| 2012hr                  | N          | norm      | ESO 121-G026         | 10 . 52 ± 0 . 10                | 0 . 23 ± 0 . 20                     |
| 2013aa                  | N          | norm      | NGC 5643             | 10 . 06 ± 0 . 10                | 0 . 33 ± 0 . 20                     |
| 2013dy                  | N          | norm      | NGC 7250             | 8 . 97 ± 0 . 12                 | - 0 . 40 ± 0 . 20                   |
| 2013gy                  | N          | norm      | NGC 1418             | 10 . 21 ± 0 . 10                | - 0 . 36 ± 0 . 20                   |
| 2014J                   | N          | norm      | M 82                 | 10 . 01 ± 0 . 10                | 0 . 85 ± 0 . 20                     |
| 2014bv                  | Y          | norm      | NGC 4386             | 10 . 52 ± 0 . 10                | - 1 . 16 ± 0 . 20                   |
| 2015F                   | N          | norm      | NGC 2442             | 10 . 84 ± 0 . 10                | 0 . 64 ± 0 . 20                     |
| 2015I                   | N          | norm      | NGC 2357             | 10 . 06 ± 0 . 10                | - 0 . 27 ± 0 . 20                   |
| 2016coj                 | N          | norm      | NGC 4125             | 11 . 13 ± 0 . 10                | - 0 . 90 ± 0 . 20                   |
| 2016fnr                 | N          | norm      | UGC 10502            | 10 . 70 ± 0 . 10                | 0 . 34 ± 0 . 20                     |
| 2016iuh                 | T          | 91bg      | UGC 07367            | 10 . 82 ± 0 . 10                | - 0 . 74 ± 0 . 20                   |
| 2016gxp                 | N          | 91T       | NGC 0051             | 9 . 70 ± 0 . 40                 | - 0 . 20 ± 0 . 40                   |
| 2017hjw                 | N          | norm      | UGC 03245            | 10 . 28 ± 0 . 10                | 0 . 08 ± 0 . 20                     |
| 2017cbv                 | N          | 91T       | NGC 5643             | 10 . 06 ± 0 . 10                | 0 . 33 ± 0 . 20                     |
| 2017ckq                 | N          | norm      | ESO 437-G056         | 10 . 21 ± 0 . 10                | - 0 . 31 ± 0 . 20                   |
| 2017erp                 | N          | norm      | NGC 5861             | 10 . 27 ± 0 . 10                | 0 . 55 ± 0 . 20                     |
| 2017fzw                 | N          | 91bg      | NGC 2217             | 10 . 96 ± 0 . 10                | - 0 . 15 ± 0 . 20                   |
| 2018gv                  | N          | norm      | NGC 2525             | 9 . 87 ± 0 . 12                 | - 0 . 04 ± 0 . 20                   |
| 2018oh                  | N          | norm      | UGC 04780            | 9 . 32 ± 0 . 11                 | - 0 . 44 ± 0 . 20                   |
| 2018yu                  | N          | norm      | NGC 1888             | 11 . 01 ± 0 . 10                | 0 . 41 ± 0 . 20                     |
| ASASSN-14jg             | N          | norm      | J2333-6034 a         | 9 . 80 ± 0 . 10                 | - 0 . 29 ± 0 . 20                   |
| ASASSN-15uh             | N          | 91T       | KUG 0925+693         | 7 . 90 ± 0 . 35                 | - 1 . 10 ± 0 . 35                   |
| ASASSN-16lx ASASSN-17cz | N N        | norm norm | IC 0607 J1750-0148 b | 9 . 00 ± 0 . 35 9 . 30 ± 0 . 30 | - 0 . 60 ± 0 . 35 - 0 . 50 ± 0 . 30 |
| ASASSN-17pg             | N          | norm      | NGC 3901             | 9 . 40 ± 0 . 10                 | - 0 . 60 ± 0 . 20                   |

Table 1. SN and host properties for the sample. Entries in the 'Bimodal?' column are one of: (Y)es, (N)o, or (T)entative. q WISEA J233312.25-603420.6. b WISEA J175030.58-014802.8.

## REFERENCES

| Antognini, J. M., Shappee, B. J., Thompson, T. A., & Amaro-Seoane, P. 2014, MNRAS, 439, 1079, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu039                 |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Arnett, W. D. 1982, ApJ, 253, 785, doi: 10.1086/159681                                                                                  |
| Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Lim, P. L., et al. 2022, ApJ, 935, 167, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c74                       |
| Aznar-Sigu´n, a G., Garc´a-Berro, ı E., Lor´n-Aguilar, e P., Jos´, e J., & Isern, J. 2013, MNRAS, 434, 2539, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt1198 |
| Barkhudaryan, L. V., Hakobyan, A. A., Karapetyan, A. G., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 490, 718,                                                  |
| Becerra, L., Rueda, J. A., Lor´n-Aguilar, e P., & Garc´a-Berro, ı E. 2018, ApJ, 857, 134, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aabc12                 |
| B´dard, e A., Bergeron, P., Brassard, P., & Fontaine, G. 2020, ApJ, 901, 93, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abafbe                              |
| Blondin, S., Matheson, T., Kirshner, R. P., et al. 2012, AJ, 143, 126, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/143/5/126                                 |
| Boehner, P., Plewa, T., & Langer, N. 2017, MNRAS, 465, 2060, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2737                                                 |
| Boos, S. J., Townsley, D. M., & Shen, K. J. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2401.08011, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2401.08011                      |
| Boos, S. J., Townsley, D. M., Shen, K. J., Caldwell, S., & Miles, B. J. 2021, ApJ, 919, 126,                                            |
| Braudo, J., & Soker, N. 2024, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 7, 7, doi: 10.21105/astro.2310.16554                                    |
| Briday, M., Rigault, M., Graziani, R., et al. 2022, A&A, 657, A22, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202141160                                     |
| Burmester, U. P., Ferrario, L., Pakmor, R., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 523, 527, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1394                                   |
| Burns, C. R., Stritzinger, M., Phillips, M. M., et al. 2011, AJ, 141, 19, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/141/1/19                               |
| Burns, C. R., Parent, E., Phillips, M. M., et al. 2018, ApJ, 869, 56, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aae51c                                     |
| Camacho-Neves, Y., Jha, S. W., Barna, B., et al. 2023, ApJ, 951, 67, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acd558                                      |
| Carnall, A. C. 2017, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1705.05165, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1705.05165                                                   |
| Carvalho, G. A., Anjos, R. C. d., Coelho, J. G., et al. 2022, ApJ, 940, 90, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac9841                               |
| Chakradhari, N. K., Sahu, D. K., & Anupama, G. C. 2019, MNRAS, 487, 1886, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1358                                    |
| Chamulak, D. A., Meakin, C. A., Seitenzahl, I. R., & Truran, J. W. 2012, ApJ, 744, 27, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/744/1/27                  |

| Cheng, S., Cummings, J. D., M´nard, e B., & Toonen, S. 2020, ApJ, 891, 160, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab733c                              |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Childress, M., Aldering, G., Antilogus, P., et al. 2013, ApJ, 770, 108, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/770/2/108                               |
| Childress, M. J., Hillier, D. J., Seitenzahl, I., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 454, 3816, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv2173                            |
| Chomiuk, L., Soderberg, A. M., Chevalier, R. A., et al. 2016, ApJ, 821, 119, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/821/2/119                          |
| Collins, C. E., Gronow, S., Sim, S. A., & R¨pke, o F. K. 2022, MNRAS, 517, 5289, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2665                           |
| Cronin, S. A., Utomo, D., Leroy, A. K., et al. 2021, ApJ, 923, 86, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac28a2                                       |
| Dan, M., Guillochon, J., Br¨ggen, u M., Ramirez-Ruiz, E., & Rosswog, S. 2015, MNRAS, 454, 4411, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv2289             |
| Dhawan, S., Leibundgut, B., Spyromilio, J., & Blondin, S. 2017, A&A, 602, A118, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629793                       |
| Dong, S., Katz, B., Kushnir, D., & Prieto, J. L. 2015, MNRAS, 454, L61, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slv129                                     |
| Dubay, L. O., Tucker, M. A., Do, A., Shappee, B. J., & Anand, G. S. 2022, ApJ, 926, 98, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac3bb4                  |
| Fang, X., Thompson, T. A., & Hirata, C. M. 2018, MNRAS, 476, 4234, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty472                                           |
| Fenn, D., Plewa, T., & Gawryszczak, A. 2016, MNRAS, 462, 2486, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw1831                                              |
| Filippenko, A. V., Richmond, M. W., Branch, D., et al. 1992a, AJ, 104, 1543, doi: 10.1086/116339                                       |
| Filippenko, A. V., Richmond, M. W., Matheson, T., et al. 1992b, ApJL, 384, L15, doi: 10.1086/186252                                    |
| Foley, R. J., Jha, S. W., Pan, Y.-C., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 461, 433, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw1320                                         |
| Foley, R. J., Challis, P. J., Chornock, R., et al. 2013, ApJ, 767, 57, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/767/1/57                                 |
| Foreman-Mackey, D., Hogg, D. W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J. 2013, PASP, 125, 306, doi: 10.1086/670067                                     |
| Gall, C., Stritzinger, M. D., Ashall, C., et al. 2018, A&A, 611, A58, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201730886                                 |
| Garavini, G., Folatelli, G., Goobar, A., et al. 2004, AJ, 128, 387, doi: 10.1086/421747                                                |
| Garc´a-Senz, ı D., Cabez´n, o R. M., Arcones, A., Rela˜o, n A., & Thielemann, F. K. 2013, MNRAS, 436, 3413, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt1821 |
| Ginolin, M., Rigault, M., Copin, Y., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2406.02072, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2406.02072                     |
| Glanz, H., Perets, H. B., & Pakmor, R. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2309.03300, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2309.03300                          |

| Graham, M. L., Kennedy, T. D., Kumar, S., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 511, 3682, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac192                                          |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Gronow, S., Cˆt´, o e B., Lach, F., et al. 2021, A&A, 656, A94, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202140881                                             |
| Guillochon, J., Dan, M., Ramirez-Ruiz, E., & Rosswog, S. 2010, ApJL, 709, L64, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/709/1/L64                              |
| Gupta, R. R., D'Andrea, C. B., Sako, M., et al. 2011, ApJ, 740, 92, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/740/2/92                                          |
| Hachinger, S., Mazzali, P. A., Taubenberger, S., Pakmor, R., & Hillebrandt, W. 2009, MNRAS, 399, 1238, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15403.x |
| Hakobyan, A. A., Barkhudaryan, L. V., Karapetyan, A. G., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 499, 1424, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa2940                          |
| Hamers, A. S. 2018, MNRAS, 478, 620, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty985                                                                               |
| Hamers, A. S., Perets, H. B., Thompson, T. A., & Neunteufel, P. 2022, ApJ, 925, 178, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac400b                           |
| Hamers, A. S., Pols, O. R., Claeys, J. S. W., & Nelemans, G. 2013, MNRAS, 430, 2262, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt046                               |
| Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2                            |
| Hawley, W. P., Athanassiadou, T., & Timmes, F. X. 2012, ApJ, 759, 39, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/759/1/39                                        |
| H¨flich, o P., & Stein, J. 2002, ApJ, 568, 779, doi: 10.1086/338981                                                                          |
| Hoyle, F., & Fowler, W. A. 1960, ApJ, 132, 565, doi: 10.1086/146963                                                                          |
| Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science and Engineering, 9, 90, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55                                                   |
| Iben, I., J., & Tutukov, A. V. 1984, ApJS, 54, 335, doi: 10.1086/190932                                                                      |
| Iwamoto, K., Brachwitz, F., Nomoto, K., et al. 1999, ApJS, 125, 439, doi: 10.1086/313278                                                     |
| Jha, S. W., Maguire, K., & Sullivan, M. 2019, Nature Astronomy, 3, 706, doi: 10.1038/s41550-019-0858-0                                       |
| Ji, S., Fisher, R. T., Garc´a-Berro, ı E., et al. 2013, ApJ, 773, 136, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/773/2/136                                      |
| Kang, Y., Lee, Y.-W., Kim, Y.-L., Chung, C., & Ree, C. H. 2020, ApJ, 889, 8, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5afc                                   |
| Kasen, D. 2010, ApJ, 708, 1025, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/708/2/1025                                                                            |
| Katz, B., & Dong, S. 2012, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1211.4584, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1211.4584                                                    |
| Kelly, P. L., Hicken, M., Burke, D. L., Mandel, K. S., & Kirshner, R. P. 2010, ApJ, 715, 743,                                                |
| Kelsey, L., Sullivan, M., Smith, M., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 501, 4861, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3924                                              |

| Kilic, M., Bergeron, P., Blouin, S., & B´dard, e A. 2021, MNRAS, 503, 5397, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab767                                               |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Kim, Y., Jordan, G. C., I., Graziani, C., et al. 2013, ApJ, 771, 55, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/771/1/55                                                 |
| Kobayashi, C., Leung, S.-C., & Nomoto, K. 2020, ApJ, 895, 138, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab8e44                                                         |
| Kushnir, D., Katz, B., Dong, S., Livne, E., & Fern´ndez, a R. 2013, ApJL, 778, L37, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/778/2/L37                                 |
| Kwok, L. A., Jha, S. W., Temim, T., et al. 2023, ApJL, 944, L3, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acb4ec                                                        |
| Lampeitl, H., Smith, M., Nichol, R. C., et al. 2010, ApJ, 722, 566, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/722/1/566                                                 |
| Larison, C., Jha, S. W., Kwok, L. A., & Camacho-Neves, Y. 2024, ApJ, 961, 185, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad0e0f                                         |
| Leibundgut, B., Kirshner, R. P., Phillips, M. M., et al. 1993, AJ, 105, 301, doi: 10.1086/116427                                                     |
| Leonard, D. C. 2007, ApJ, 670, 1275, doi: 10.1086/522367                                                                                             |
| Leroy, A. K., Sandstrom, K. M., Lang, D., et al. 2019, ApJS, 244, 24, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab3925                                                  |
| Li, W., Filippenko, A. V., Chornock, R., et al. 2003, PASP, 115, 453, doi: 10.1086/374200 Liu, J., Wang, X., Filippenko, A. V., et al. 2023a, MNRAS, |
| Liu, Z.-W., R¨pke, o F. K., & Han, Z. 2023b, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 23, 082001,                                                     |
| doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/acd89e Livne, E. 1990, ApJL, 354, L53, doi: 10.1086/185721                                                                    |
| Maeda, K., Taubenberger, S., Sollerman, J., et al. 2010, ApJ, 708, 1703, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/708/2/1703                                           |
| Maguire, K., Taubenberger, S., Sullivan, M., & Mazzali, P. A. 2016, MNRAS, 457, 3254, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv2991                                     |
| Maguire, K., Sim, S. A., Shingles, L., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 477, 3567, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty820                                                      |
| Maoz, D., Mannucci, F., & Nelemans, G. 2014, ARA&A, 52, 107, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-082812-141031                                                |
| Maoz, D., Sharon, K., & Gal-Yam, A. 2010, ApJ, 722, 1879, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/722/2/1879                                                          |
| Margutti, R., Soderberg, A. M., Chomiuk, L., et al. 2012, ApJ, 751, 134, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/751/2/134                                            |
| Marietta, E., Burrows, A., & Fryxell, B. 2000, ApJS, 128, 615, doi: 10.1086/313392                                                                   |
| Mattila, S., Lundqvist, P., Sollerman, J., et al. 2005, A&A, 443, 649, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20052731                                               |
| Mazzali, P. A., Ashall, C., Pian, E., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 476, 2905, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty434                                                       |
| Mazzali, P. A., Sullivan, M., Hachinger, S., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 439, 1959, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu077                                                |
| Meng, X., & Yang, W. 2012, A&A, 543, A137,                                                                                                           |

| Meng, X.-C., Zhang, J.-J., Zhao, X., Li, L.-P., & Wang, X.-F. 2023, ApJ, 943, 159, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acad77                                                                      |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Morrell, N., Phillips, M. M., Folatelli, G., et al. 2024, ApJ, 967, 20, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad38af                                                                                 |
| Neopane, S., Bhargava, K., Fisher, R., et al. 2022, ApJ, 925, 92, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac3b52                                                                                       |
| Newville, M., Stensitzki, T., Allen, D. B., & Ingargiola, A. 2014, LMFIT: Non-Linear Least-Square Minimization and Curve-Fitting for Python, 0.8.0, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.11813 |
| Nomoto, K. 1982, ApJ, 253, 798, doi: 10.1086/159682                                                                                                                                   |
| Pakmor, R., Kromer, M., R¨pke, o F. K., et al. 2010, Nature, 463, 61, doi: 10.1038/nature08642                                                                                        |
| Pakmor, R., Kromer, M., Taubenberger, S., et al. 2012, ApJL, 747, L10, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/747/1/L10                                                                               |
| Pakmor, R., Kromer, M., Taubenberger, S., & Springel, V. 2013, ApJL, 770, L8, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/770/1/L8                                                                         |
| Pakmor, R., Callan, F. P., Collins, C. E., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 517, 5260, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3107                                                                                 |
| Pan, Y. C., Sullivan, M., Maguire, K., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 446, 354, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu2121 -. 2014, MNRAS, 438, 1391, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt2287                                 |
| Panagia, N., Van Dyk, S. D., Weiler, K. W., et al. 2006, ApJ, 646, 369, doi: 10.1086/504710                                                                                           |
| Papish, O., & Perets, H. B. 2016, ApJ, 822, 19, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/822/1/19                                                                                                       |
| Papish, O., Soker, N., Garc´a-Berro, ı E., & Aznar-Sigu´n, a G. 2015, MNRAS, 449, 942, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv337                                                                      |
| Pejcha, O., Antognini, J. M., Shappee, B. J., & Thompson, T. A. 2013, MNRAS, 435, 943, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt1281                                                                     |
| Perets, H. B., Zenati, Y., Toonen, S., & Bobrick, A. 2019, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1910.07532, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1910.07532                                                           |
| Phillips, M. M., Wells, L. A., Suntzeff, N. B., et al. 1992, AJ, 103, 1632, doi: 10.1086/116177                                                                                       |
| Polin, A., Nugent, P., & Kasen, D. 2019, ApJ, 873, 84, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aafb6a                                                                                                  |
| Raskin, C., Kasen, D., Moll, R., Schwab, J., & Woosley, S. 2014, ApJ, 788, 75, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/788/1/75                                                                        |
| Raskin, C., Scannapieco, E., Rockefeller, G., et al. 2010, ApJ, 724, 111, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/724/1/111                                                                            |
| Raskin, C., Timmes, F. X., Scannapieco, E., Diehl, S., & Fryer, C. 2009, MNRAS, 399, L156, doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2009.00743.x                                                      |
| Rigault, M., Copin, Y., Aldering, G., et al. 2013, A&A, 560, A66, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322104                                                                                    |
| Rigault, M., Brinnel, V., Aldering, G., et al. 2020, A&A, 644, A176, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201730404                                                                                 |

| Roman, M., Hardin, D., Betoule, M., et al. 2018, A&A, 615, A68, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201731425                                             |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Rosswog, S., Kasen, D., Guillochon, J., & Ramirez-Ruiz, E. 2009, ApJL, 705, L128, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/705/2/L128                          |
| Salim, S., Lee, J. C., Janowiecki, S., et al. 2016, ApJS, 227, 2, doi: 10.3847/0067-0049/227/1/2                                             |
| Scalzo, R. A., Parent, E., Burns, C., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 483, 628, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty3178                                               |
| Schaefer, B. E., & Pagnotta, A. 2012, Nature, 481, 164, doi: 10.1038/nature10692                                                             |
| Seitenzahl, I. R., Meakin, C. A., Townsley, D. M., Lamb, D. Q., & Truran, J. W. 2009, ApJ, 696, 515, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/696/1/515        |
| Seitenzahl, I. R., & Townsley, D. M. 2017, in Handbook of Supernovae, ed. A. W. Alsabti & P. Murdin, 1955, doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-21846-5 87 |
| Seitenzahl, I. R., Ciaraldi-Schoolmann, F., R¨pke, o F. K., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 429, 1156, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sts402                         |
| Shappee, B. J., Piro, A. L., Stanek, K. Z., et al. 2018, ApJ, 855, 6, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa1e9                                          |
| Shappee, B. J., Stanek, K. Z., Pogge, R. W., & Garnavich, P. M. 2013, ApJL, 762, L5, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/762/1/L5                         |
| Shappee, B. J., & Thompson, T. A. 2013, ApJ, 766, 64, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/766/1/64                                                        |
| Shen, K. J., Boos, S. J., Townsley, D. M., & Kasen, D. 2021, ApJ, 922, 68, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac2304                                     |
| Shen, K. J., & Moore, K. 2014, ApJ, 797, 46, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/797/1/46                                                                 |
| Shen, K. J., Toonen, S., & Graur, O. 2017, ApJL, 851, L50, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aaa015                                                     |
| Shen, K. J., Boubert, D., G¨nsicke, a B. T., et al. 2018, ApJ, 865, 15, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aad55b                                        |
| Silverman, J. M., Foley, R. J., Filippenko, A. V., et al. 2012a, MNRAS, 425, 1789, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21270.x                     |
| Silverman, J. M., Ganeshalingam, M., Cenko, S. B., et al. 2012b, ApJL, 756, L7, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/756/1/L7                              |
| Smith, M., Nichol, R. C., Dilday, B., et al. 2012, ApJ, 755, 61, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/755/1/61                                             |
| Sullivan, M., Conley, A., Howell, D. A., et al. 2010, MNRAS, 406, 782, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16731.x                                 |
| Tanikawa, A., Nomoto, K., Nakasato, N., & Maeda, K. 2019, ApJ, 885, 103, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab46b6                                       |
| Taubenberger, S., Hachinger, S., Pignata, G., et al. 2008, MNRAS, 385, 75, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.12843.x                             |
| The pandas development Team. 2024, pandas-dev/pandas: Pandas, v2.2.2, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.3509134                                    |

| Thompson, T. A. 2011, ApJ, 741, 82, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/741/2/82                                                             |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Toonen, S., Perets, H. B., & Hamers, A. S. 2018, A&A, 610, A22, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201731874                                |
| Tucker, M. A., & Shappee, B. J. 2024, ApJ, 962, 74, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1b4e                                               |
| Tucker, M. A., Shappee, B. J., Vallely, P. J., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 493, 1044, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz3390                        |
| Tutukov, A. V., & Yungelson, L. R. 1979, AcA, 29, 665                                                                           |
| Vallely, P. J., Tucker, M. A., Shappee, B. J., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 492, 3553, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa003                        |
| van der Walt, S., Colbert, S. C., & Varoquaux, G. 2011, Computing in Science and Engineering, 13, 22, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2011.37 |
| van Rossum, D. R., Kashyap, R., Fisher, R., et al. 2016, ApJ, 827, 128, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/827/2/128                        |
| Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261, doi: 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2                |
| Wang, X., Wang, L., Filippenko, A. V., Zhang, T., & Zhao, X. 2013, Science, 340, 170, doi: 10.1126/science.1231502              |
| Wheeler, J. C., Lecar, M., & McKee, C. F. 1975, ApJ, 200, 145, doi: 10.1086/153771                                              |

| Whelan, J., & Iben, Icko, J. 1973, ApJ, 186, 1007, doi: 10.1086/152565                                                         |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Wilk, K. D., Hillier, D. J., & Dessart, L. 2020, MNRAS, 494, 2221, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa640                                  |
| Wiseman, P., Sullivan, M., Smith, M., & Popovic, B. 2023, MNRAS, 520, 6214, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad488                         |
| Wiseman, P., Vincenzi, M., Sullivan, M., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 515, 4587, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1984                            |
| Wu, C., Xiong, H., & Wang, X. 2022, MNRAS, 512, 2972, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac273                                               |
| Yoshida, S. 2021, ApJ, 906, 29, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abc7bd                                                                  |
| Yu, H., Weinberg, N. N., & Fuller, J. 2020, MNRAS, 496, 5482, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1858                                      |
| Yungelson, L. R., & Kuranov, A. G. 2017, MNRAS, 464, 1607, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2432                                          |
| Zou, Z.-C., Zhou, X.-L., & Huang, Y.-F. 2020, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 20, 137, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/20/9/137 |
Michael A. Tucker
Merging White Dwarf Binaries Produce Type Ia Supernovae in Elliptical Galaxies
I find that Type Ia supernovae (SNe Ia) with bimodal nebular emission
profiles occur almost exclusively in massive ($M_\star \gtrsim
10^{11}~M_\odot$) galaxies with low star-formation rates (SFR~$\lesssim
0.5~M_\odot$/yr). The bimodal profiles are likely produced by two white dwarfs
that exploded during a merger or collision, supported by a correlation between
the peak-to-peak velocity separation ($v_{\rm sep}$) and the SN Ia peak
luminosity ($M_V$) which arises naturally from more massive white dwarf
binaries synthesizing more $^{56}$Ni during the explosion. The quiescent hosts
are consistent with the long delay times required to form double white dwarf
binaries. The distributions of SNe Ia with and without bimodal nebular lines
differ in host mass, SFR, and specific SFR with K-S test probabilities of
$3.1\%$, $0.03\%$, and $0.02\%$, respectively. Viewing angle effects can fully
explain the SNe Ia in quiescent hosts without bimodal emission profiles and the
dearth of merger/collision driven SNe Ia in star-forming hosts requires at
least two distinct progenitor channels for normal SNe Ia. $30-40\%$ of all SNe
Ia originate from mergers or collisions depending on how cleanly host
environment distinguishes progenitor scenarios. The bimodal SNe Ia share some
characteristics with the underluminous 91bg-like SNe Ia that also prefer older
populations, but there is no unambiguous connection between the two
classifications. This may suggest separate processes or multiple axes of ejecta
(a)symmetry. Existing models for white dwarf mergers and collisions broadly
reproduce the $v_{\rm sep} - M_V$ correlation and future analyses may be able
to infer the masses/mass-ratios of merging white dwarfs in external galaxies.