Cosmological Evolution of Long Gamma-Ray Bursts and the Star Formation Rate

Petrosian, V.; Kitanidis, Ellie; Kocevski, D.

doi:10.1088/0004-637x/806/1/44

Cited by 91 publications

(114 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…LGRBs in the Swift sample that includes both the observed estimated redshifts and jet opening angles, they obtained a GRB burst rate functional form that gives acceptable fits to the preSwift and Swift redshift and jet opening angle distributions with a GRB density rate, SFR9, that is similar to the Hopkins & Beacom (2006) observed star formation history (SFR7) and as extended by Li (2008). However, the LT17 redshift model distribution indicates an excess of LGRBs at low redshift below z ∼ 2 in the Swift sample, consistent with Petrosian et al (2015), Yu et al (2015), and Lloyd-Ronning et al (2019a). However, the reason for this excess is either unclear, incomplete sample size, or that GRBs formation rate does not trace SFR at low redshift less than z ≤ 1.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 55%

Resolving the excess of long GRB’s at low redshift in the Swift era

Ratke

Mehta

2020

Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Utilizing more than 100 long gamma-ray bursts (LGRBs) in the Swift -Ryan-2012 sample that includes the observed redshifts and jet angles, Le & Mehta performed a timely study of the rate density of LGRBs with an assumed broken power-law GRB spectrum and obtained a GRB-burst-rate functional form that gives acceptable fits to the preSwift and Swift redshift, and jet angle distributions. The results indicated an excess of LGRBs at redshift below z ∼ 2 in the Swift sample. In this work, we are investigating if the excess is caused by the cosmological Hubble constant H 0 , the gamma-ray energy released E * γ , the low-and high-energy indices (α, β) of the Band function, the minimum and maximum jet angles θ j,min and θ j,max , or that the excess is due to a bias in the Swift -Ryan-2012 sample. Our analyses indicate that none of the above physical parameters resolved the excess problem, but suggesting that the Swift -Ryan-2012 sample is biased with possible afterglow selection effect. The following model physical parameter values provide the best fit to the Swift -Ryan-2012 and preSwift samples: the Hubble constant H 0 = 72 kms −1 Mpc −1 , the energy released E * γ ∼ 4.47 × 10 51 erg, the energy indices α ∼ 0.9 and β ∼ −2.13, the jet angles of θ j,max ∼ 0.8 rad, and θ j,min ∼ 0.065 and ∼ 0.04 rad for preSwift and Swift, respectively, s ∼ −1.55 the jet angle power-law index, and a GRB formation rate that is similar to the Hopkins & Beacom observed star formation history and as extended by Li. Using the Swift Gamma-Ray Burst Host Galaxy Legacy Survey (SHOALS) Swift -Perley LGRB sample and applying the same physical parameter values as above, however, our model provides consistent results with this data set and indicating no excess of LGRBs at any redshift.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 55%

Resolving the excess of long GRB’s at low redshift in the Swift era

Ratke

Mehta

2020

Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This method is based on the assumption that the luminosity is independent of the redshift. However, as discussed in Petrosian et al (2015), a strong luminosity evolution could be present in the GRB population. Efron & Petrosian (1992) proposed a non-parametric test to estimate the degree of correlation of the luminosity with redshift induced by the flux in a fluxlimited sample.…”

Section: Luminosity Function and Grb Formation Ratementioning

confidence: 92%

“…This is also the case of the BAT6ext sample and the first step is to quantify the degree of correlation. Indeed Yu et al (2015) and Petrosian et al (2015) find that the luminosity 2.3±0.8 (P15). We applied the same method of Y15 and P15 (also used in Yonetoku et al 2004Yonetoku et al , 2014 to the BAT6ext sample: we define the luminosity evolution…”

Section: Luminosity Function and Grb Formation Ratementioning

confidence: 99%

“…They use GRBs detected by Swift with measured redshifts. However, while Yu et al (2015) work with the bolometric luminosity of GRBs, Petrosian et al (2015) adopt the luminosity in the Swift/BAT (15-150 keV) energy band. Y15 use all GRBs detected by Swift with a measured redshift and well constrained spectral parameters; despite their relatively large number of objects (∼130), this is an incomplete sample.…”

Section: φ(L) and ψ(Z) Of Long Grbsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The rate and luminosity function of long gamma ray bursts

Pescalli

Ghirlanda

Salvaterra

et al. 2016

A&A

100

121

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We derive, adopting a direct method, the luminosity function and the formation rate of long Gamma Ray Bursts through a complete, flux-limited, sample of Swift bursts which has a high level of completeness in redshift z (∼82%). We parametrise the redshift evolution of the GRB luminosity as L = L 0 (1 + z) k and we derive k = 2.5, consistently with recent estimates. The de-evolved luminosity function φ(L 0 ) of GRBs can be represented by a broken power law with slopes a = −1.32 ± 0.21 and b = −1.84 ± 0.24 below and above, respectively, a break luminosity L 0,b = 10 51.45±0.15 erg/s. Under the hypothesis of luminosity evolution we find that the GRB formation rate increases with redshift up to z ∼ 2, where it peaks, and then decreases in agreement with the shape of the cosmic star formation rate. We test the direct method through numerical simulations and we show that if it is applied to incomplete (both in redshift and/or flux) GRB samples it can misleadingly result in an excess of the GRB formation rate at low redshifts.

show abstract

“…Recently, however, there has been a revived interest in GRB cosmology mainly due to the increased availability of high caliber data. For instance, a recent study explored the cosmological evolution of 200 Swift GRBs and used the results to put limits on the star formation rate [37].…”

Section: Robustness and Cosmological Prospectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Brief Review of the Amati Relation for GRBs

Azzam¹

2016

IJAA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) are the most powerful explosions in the universe. Although the exact mechanism behind these explosions remains elusive, GRBs hold great promise as cosmological probes for two main reasons: they have been observed up to very high redshift (z > 9), and their gamma-ray emission is unencumbered by any intervening dust. Several GRB energy and luminosity indicators have been discovered. These indicators correlate an observable quantity, like the intrinsic peak energy, E p,i , in the νF ν spectrum of a burst to an unobservable parameter like the equivalent isotropic energy, E iso , or the isotropic peak luminosity, L p,iso . This paper provides a brief review of one of these energy and luminosity indicators, the Amati relation, and discusses its potential use as a cosmological probe.

show abstract

Cosmological Evolution of Long Gamma-Ray Bursts and the Star Formation Rate

Cited by 91 publications

References 54 publications

Resolving the excess of long GRB’s at low redshift in the Swift era

Resolving the excess of long GRB’s at low redshift in the Swift era

The rate and luminosity function of long gamma ray bursts

A Brief Review of the Amati Relation for GRBs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About