MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4221138356 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202243225

A blast from the infant Universe: The very high-<i>z</i>GRB 210905A

2022· article· en· W4221138356 on OpenAlexfundno aff
A. Rossi, D. Frederiks, Д. А. Канн, M. de Pasquale, Gavin P. Lamb, P. D’Avanzo, L. Izzo, A. J. Levan, D. Malesani, A. Melandri, A. Nicuesa Guelbenzu, S. Schulze, R. Strausbaugh, N. R. Tanvir, L. Amati, S. Campana, Antonino Cucchiara, G. Ghirlanda, M. Della Valle, S. Klose, R. Salvaterra, R. Starling, G. Stratta, A. Tsvetkova, S. D. Vergani, A. D’Aì, D. Burgarella, S. Covino, V. D’Elia, A. de Ugarte Postigo, H. Fausey, J. P. U. Fynbo, F. Frontera, C. Guidorzi, K. E. Heintz, N. Masetti, E. Maiorano, C. G. Mundell, S. R. Oates, M. J. Page, E. Palazzi, J. T. Palmerio, G. Pugliese, A. Rau, A. Saccardi, B. Sbarufatti, D. Svinkin, G. Tagliaferri, A. J. van der Horst, D. Watson, M. Ulanov, K. Wiersema, D. Xu, Jielai Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGamma-ray bursts and supernovae
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitut sur la Nutrition et les Aliments FonctionnelsRussian Science FoundationMinistero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della RicercaLeibniz-GemeinschaftDanmarks GrundforskningsfondDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftNational Research FoundationScience and Technology Facilities CouncilEuropean CommissionUniversity of LeicesterVillum Fonden
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsGamma-ray burstAstronomyUniverse

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a detailed follow-up of the very energetic GRB 210905A at a high redshift ofz = 6.312 and its luminous X-ray and optical afterglow. Following the detection bySwiftand Konus-Wind, we obtained a photometric and spectroscopic follow-up in the optical and near-infrared (NIR), covering both the prompt and afterglow emission from a few minutes up to 20 Ms after burst. With an isotropic gamma-ray energy release ofEiso= 1.27−0.19+0.20× 1054erg, GRB 210905A lies in the top ∼7% of gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) in the Konus-Windcatalogue in terms of energy released. Its afterglow is among the most luminous ever observed, and, in particular, it is one of the most luminous in the optical att ≳ 0.5 d in the rest frame. The afterglow starts with a shallow evolution that can be explained by energy injection, and it is followed by a steeper decay, while the spectral energy distribution is in agreement with slow cooling in a constant-density environment within the standard fireball theory. A jet break at ∼46.2 ± 16.3 d (6.3 ± 2.2 d rest-frame) has been observed in the X-ray light curve; however, it is hidden in theHband due to a constant contribution from the host galaxy and potentially from a foreground intervening galaxy. In particular, the host galaxy is only the fourth GRB host atz > 6 known to date. By assuming a number densityn = 1 cm−3and an efficiencyη = 0.2, we derived a half-opening angle of 8.4 ° ±1.0°, which is the highest ever measured for az ≳ 6 burst, but within the range covered by closer events. The resulting collimation-corrected gamma-ray energy release of ≃1 × 1052erg is also among the highest ever measured. The moderately large half-opening angle argues against recent claims of an inverse dependence of the half-opening angle on the redshift. The total jet energy is likely too large to be sustained by a standard magnetar, and it suggests that the central engine of this burst was a newly formed black hole. Despite the outstanding energetics and luminosity of both GRB 210905A and its afterglow, we demonstrate that they are consistent within 2σwith those of less distant bursts, indicating that the powering mechanisms and progenitors do not evolve significantly with redshift.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.176
Teacher spread0.171 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomy and AstrophysicsSame topicGamma-ray bursts and supernovaeFrench-language works237,207