Coasting external shock in wind medium: an origin for the X-ray plateau decay component in Swift GRB afterglows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The plateaus observed in about one half of the early X-ray afterglows are the most puzzling feature in gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) detected by Swift. By analyzing the temporal and spectral indices of a large X-ray plateau sample, we find that 55% can be explained by external, forward shock synchrotron emission produced by a relativistic ejecta coasting in a ρ~ r^{-2}, wind-like medium; no energy injection into the shock is needed. After the ejecta collects enough medium and transitions to the adiabatic, decelerating blastwave phase, it produces the post-plateau decay. For those bursts consistent with this model, we find an upper limit for the initial Lorentz factor of the ejecta, Γ_0 \leq 46 (ε_e/0.1)^{-0.24} (ε_B/0.01)^{0.17}; the isotropic equivalent total ejecta energy is E_{iso} ~ 10^{53} (ε_e/0.1)^{-1.3} (ε_B/0.01)^{-0.09} (t_b/10^4 s) erg, where ε_e and ε_B are the fractions of the total energy at the shock downstream that are carried by electrons and the magnetic field, respectively, and t_b is the end of the plateau. Our finding supports Wolf-Rayet stars as the progenitor stars of some GRBs. It raises intriguing questions about the origin of an intermediate-Γ_0 ejecta, which we speculate is connected to the GRB jet emergence from its host star. For the remaining 45% of the sample, the post-plateau decline is too rapid to be explained in the coasting-in-wind model, and energy injection appears to be required.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".