energies when we terminated the simulation were typically on the order of $\sim 10^{49}$ erg and $\sim 10^{50}$ erg for our 3D and 2D models, respectively. It should be noted that this quantity is estimated at the end of simulation,$t_{\rm end}$. In order to compare the [*diagnostic*]{} energy with the observed kinetic explosion energy ($\sim 10^{51}$ erg), a much longer-term simulation including improved microphysics, general relativity, and nuclear burning would be needed.

![image](f4a.eps){width=".4\linewidth"} ![image](f4b.eps){width=".4\linewidth"}

Recently it is enthusiastically discussed which one between neutrino-driven convection and the SASI plays a more crucial role in facilitating neutrino-driven explosions [@thierry; @dolence12; @murphy13; @burrows12; @hanke12; @hanke13]. The left panel of Figure \[fig5\] shows the time evolution of the Foglizzo parameter $\chi$ [@thierry] As seen, $\chi$ continuously exceeds the critical number of $3$ [@thierry] rather shortly after bounce ($\sim 40$ ms), marking the transition to the non-linear phase. The earlier onset of the shock revival and the absence of clear features of the SASI in the linear phase (see discussion below) could indicate that neutrino-driven convection dominates over the SASI when the explosion sets in (e.g., at $t_{400}$ in Table 1).

The right panel of Figure \[fig5\] shows the evolution of normalized coefficient of spherical 