# A common-envelope wind model for Type Ia supernovae (I): binary evolution and birth rate

## TL;DR

This paper introduces a new single-degenerate supernova progenitor model where a common envelope wind allows white dwarfs to grow in mass, increasing the predicted supernova rate and better aligning with observations.

## Contribution

The paper proposes a novel common envelope wind model for Type Ia supernova progenitors, extending the parameter space and increasing the predicted galactic birth rate compared to previous models.

## Key findings

- The CEW model predicts a 30% higher supernova birth rate than the OTW model.
- It allows more massive companions and less massive white dwarfs to produce SNe Ia.
- Binary evolution calculations were performed for over 1100 systems.

## Abstract

The single-degenerate (SD) model is one of the principal models for the progenitors of type Ia supernovae (SNe Ia), but some of the predictions in the most widely studied version of the SD model, i.e. the optically thick wind (OTW) model, have not been confirmed by observations. Here, we propose a new version of the SD model in which a common envelope (CE) is assumed to form when the mass-transfer rate between a carbon-oxygen white dwarf (CO WD) and its companion exceeds a critical accretion rate. The WD may gradually increase its mass at the base of the CE. Due to the large nuclear luminosity for stable hydrogen burning, the CE may expand to giant dimensions and will lose mass from the surface of the CE by a CE wind (CEW). Because of the low CE density, the binary system will avoid a fast spiral-in phase and finally re-emerge from the CE phase. Our model may share the virtues of the OTW model but avoid some of its shortcomings. We performed binary stellar evolution calculations for more than 1100 close WD + MS binaries. Compared with the OTW model, the parameter space for SNe Ia from our CEW model extends to more massive companions and less massive WDs. Correspondingly, the Galactic birth rate from the CEW model is higher than that from the OTW model by $\sim$30\%. Finally, we discuss the uncertainties of the CEW model and the differences between our CEW model and the OTW model.