downflows bend and flow laterally. This process triggers bubble disruption, and results in their shredding or displacement to the opposite hemisphere (Figure \[f:shock\_entropy\_snapshots\]). Accretion is then able to proceed through the whole hemisphere previously occupied by the bubble, and the shock executes a sloshing (c.f. Figure \[f:shock\_entropy\_sasi\]d,f in the range $t\in[150,200]t_{\rm ff0}$, also Figure \[f:shock\_entropy\_snapshots\]d). The shock retractions are related to a decrease in pressure support triggered by an increase in cooling. The buoyancy of high-entropy bubbles blocks the flow of gas to the cooling region, resulting in a lower amount of cooling per SASI cycle and a loss of periodicity in the shock oscillations.

The key difference between exploding and non-exploding models appears to be whether the system can form entropy perturbations of sufficient size and amplitude. Model p0B10L1 displays such an entropy enhancement at time $t\sim 115t_{\rm ff0}$. This enhancement is perturbed and displaced around time $t\simeq 175t_{\rm ff0}$, triggering a large sloshing of the shock that transitions into runaway expansion. In contrast, model p0B08L1 fails to develop a long-lived structure with entropy higher than $s>1.5$. The transition to explosion for a large enough bubble results from the relative importance of buoyancy and drag forces [@thompson00].

The characteristic 