Supernova hosts for gamma-ray burst jets: dynamical constraints
Bibliographic record
Abstract
I constrain a possible supernova origin for gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) by modelling the dynamical interaction between a relativistic jet and a stellar envelope surrounding it. The delay in observer time introduced by the jet traversing the envelope should not be long compared with the duration of gamma-ray emission; also, the jet should not be swallowed by the spherical explosion it powers. The only stellar progenitors that comfortably satisfy these constraints, if one assumes that jets move ballistically within their host stars, are compact carbon–oxygen or helium post-Wolf–Rayet stars (type Ic or Ib supernovae); type II supernovae are ruled out. Notably, very massive stars do not appear to be capable of producing the observed bursts at any redshift unless the stellar envelope is stripped prior to collapse. The presence of a dense stellar wind places an upper limit on the Lorentz factor of the jet in the internal shock model; however, this constraint may be evaded if the wind is swept forward by a photon precursor. Shock breakout and cocoon blowout are considered individually; neither presents a likely source of precursors for cosmological GRBs. These envelope constraints could conceivably be circumvented if jets are laterally pressure-confined while traversing the outer stellar envelope. If so, jets responsible for observed GRBs must have been launched from a region several hundred kilometres wide, have been crossed by strong shocks, or have mixed with envelope material as they travel. A phase of pressure confinement and mixing would imprint correlations among jets that may explain observed GRB variability–luminosity and lag–luminosity correlations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".