1: \documentclass[12pt, preprint]{aastex}
2: \shorttitle{The Dark Side of ROTSE-III Prompt GRB Observations}
3: \shortauthors{Yost {\it et al.}}
4:
5: \def\lsim{\mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$}}
6: \raise1pt\hbox{$<$}}} % less than or approx. symbol
7: \def\gsim{\mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$}}
8: \raise1pt\hbox{$>$}}} % greater than or approx. symbol
9: \begin{document}
10:
11: \title{The Dark Side of ROTSE-III Prompt GRB Observations}
12:
13: \author{
14: Yost,~S.~A.\altaffilmark{1},
15: Aharonian,~F.\altaffilmark{2},
16: Akerlof,~C.~W.\altaffilmark{1},
17: Ashley,~M.~C.~B.\altaffilmark{3},
18: Barthelmy, S.\altaffilmark{4},
19: Gehrels, N.\altaffilmark{4},
20: G\"o\u{g}\"u\c{s},~E.\altaffilmark{5},
21: G\"{u}ver, T.\altaffilmark{6},
22: Horns,~D.\altaffilmark{2},
23: K{\i}z{\i}lo\v{g}lu,~\"{U}.\altaffilmark{7},
24: Krimm, H. A.\altaffilmark{4,8}
25: McKay,~T.~A.\altaffilmark{1},
26: \"{O}zel,~M.\altaffilmark{9},
27: Phillips,~A.\altaffilmark{3},
28: Quimby,~R.~M.\altaffilmark{10},
29: Rowell, G.\altaffilmark{2,11},
30: Rujopakarn,~W.\altaffilmark{12},
31: Rykoff,~E.~S.\altaffilmark{1},
32: Schaefer,~B.~E.\altaffilmark{13},
33: Smith,~D.~A.\altaffilmark{1,14},
34: Swan,~H.~F.\altaffilmark{1},
35: Vestrand,~W.~T.\altaffilmark{15},
36: Wheeler,~J.~C.\altaffilmark{10},
37: Wren,~J.\altaffilmark{15},
38: Yuan,~F.\altaffilmark{1}
39: }
40:
41: \altaffiltext{1}{University of Michigan, 2477 Randall Laboratory, 450
42: Church St., Ann Arbor, MI, 48104, sayost@umich.edu,
43: akerlof@umich.edu,
44: tamckay@umich.edu, erykoff@umich.edu, donaldas@umich.edu,hswan@umich.edu,
45: yuanfang@umich.edu}
46: \altaffiltext{2}{Max-Planck-Institut f\"{u}r Kernphysik, Saupfercheckweg 1,
47: 69117 Heidelberg, Germany, Felix.Aharonian@mpi-hd.mpg.de,
48: horns@mpi-hd.mpg.de, rowell@mpi-hd.mpg.de}
49: \altaffiltext{3}{School of Physics, Department of Astrophysics and Optics,
50: University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia,
51: mcba@phys.unsw.edu.au, a.phillips@unsw.edu.au}
52: \altaffiltext{4}{NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771, scott@lheamail.gsfc.nasa.gov, gehrels@gsfc.nasa.gov, krimm@milkyway.gsfc.nasa.gov}
53: \altaffiltext{5}{Sabanc{\i} University, Orhanl{\i}-Tuzla 34956 Istanbul, Turkey, ersing@sabanciuniv.edu}
54: \altaffiltext{6}{Istanbul University Science Faculty, Department of Astronomy
55: and Space Sciences, 34119, University-Istanbul, Turkey,
56: tolga@istanbul.edu.tr}
57: \altaffiltext{7}{Middle East Technical University, 06531 Ankara, Turkey,
58: umk@astroa.physics.metu.edu.tr}
59: \altaffiltext{8}{Universities Space Research Association, 10211 Wincopin Circle, Suite 500, Columbia, MD 21044-3432, krimm@milkyway.gsfc.nasa.gov}
60: \altaffiltext{9}{\c{C}anakkale Onsekiz Mart \"{U}niversitesi, Terzio\v{g}lu
61: 17020, \c{C}anakkale, Turkey, m.e.ozel@comu.edu.tr}
62: \altaffiltext{10}{Department of Astronomy, University of Texas, Austin, TX
63: 78712, quimby@astro.as.utexas.edu, wheel@astro.as.utexas.edu}
64: \altaffiltext{11}{School of Chemistry \& Physics, University of Adelaide, Adelaide 5005, Australia,rowell@mpi-hd.mpg.de}
65: \altaffiltext{12}{Steward Observatory
66: Tucson, AZ, 85721, wiphu@as.arizona.edu }
67: \altaffiltext{13}{Department of Physics and Astronomy, Louisiana State
68: University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, schaefer@lsu.edu}
69: \altaffiltext{14}{Guilford College, 5800 West Friendly Ave., Greensboro, NC 27410, dsmith4@guilford.edu}
70: \altaffiltext{15}{Los Alamos National Laboratory, NIS-2 MS D436, Los Alamos, NM 87545, vestrand@lanl.gov, jwren@nis.lanl.gov}
71:
72:
73: \begin{abstract}
74:
75: We present several cases of optical observations during $\gamma$-ray
76: bursts (GRBs) which resulted in prompt limits but no detection of
77: optical emission. These limits constrain the prompt optical flux
78: densities and the optical brightness relative to the $\gamma$-ray
79: emission. The derived constraints fall within the range of properties
80: observed in GRBs with prompt optical detections, though at the faint
81: end of optical/$\gamma$ flux ratios. The presently accessible prompt
82: optical limits do not require a different set of intrinsic or
83: environmental GRB properties, relative to the events with prompt
84: optical detections.
85:
86: \end{abstract}
87: \keywords{gamma rays:bursts}
88:
89: \section{Introduction}
90:
91: Since the launch of the {\it Swift} satellite \citep{gcgmn04}, early
92: long-wavelength observations of $\gamma$-ray bursts (GRBs) have become
93: routine. {\it Swift} has provided prompt triggers to events since
94: early 2005, for which ``prompt'' signifies ``during $\gamma$-ray
95: emission''. There is a growing number of optical lightcurves that
96: begin during, or within seconds after, the $\gamma$-ray
97: emission. There are also several cases with prompt optical
98: non-detections which constrain the optical brightness during the GRB.
99:
100: Prompt and very early broadband emission has been the major advance in
101: {\it Swift}-era GRB studies, opening serious investigations of
102: important physical questions. One example is the nature of the
103: relativistic outflow, generally thought of as baryonic with energy
104: released by internal shocks. The proposed alternatives include
105: magnetized flows which release energy via magnetic reconnection
106: \citep{mrp94,thompson94,usov94}. The early broadband detections at
107: X-ray and optical wavelengths are now being used to test these models
108: \citep[e.g.,][]{kmpwo07}.
109:
110: From the beginning of the afterglow discovery era, optical
111: counterparts have been found to have a large range in
112: brightness. Despite good observations, a significant fraction
113: ($\sim$\,50\%) of events do not have detected optical
114: afterglows. These ``optically dark'' GRBs have produced questions
115: regarding GRB physics and environment \citep[see pre- and post-{\it
116: Swift} reviews, such as][respectively]{p05,Zhang07}.
117:
118: Nondetections during prompt optical observations are not precisely the
119: same as these optically dark GRBs. In a few events deeper post-GRB
120: observations detect the optical transient. This raises the question as
121: to whether prompt limits are ``promptly dark''; are the limiting
122: fluxes consistent with the brightness range observed in prompt optical
123: detections, or do prompt nondetections require a separate population
124: of optical properties? Such properties could be due to either
125: intrinsic (faint events, or faint optical--to--$\gamma$-ray flux
126: ratios) or extrinsic (local dust absorption, or the Lyman-$\alpha$
127: forest absorption from high $z$) causes.
128:
129: ``Excessively'' faint prompt optical emission would therefore have
130: interesting implications for the GRB spectral shape or
131: environment. While the peak frequency of the GRB has often been
132: constrained \citep[$\nu$$f_{\nu}$ peaking near a few 100 keV, see the
133: review by][]{p05}, the shape of the prompt emission's low-energy tail
134: is not well known, with self-absorption frequency estimates from the
135: optical to X-ray \citep[e.g.,][]{pw04,wei07}. As well, indications of
136: high redshift would be important. While there are suggested redshift
137: indicators from GRB $\gamma$-ray properties alone, these are not
138: proven, as discussed critically by \citet{bkbc07}.
139:
140: The ROTSE-III project has provided some of the earliest optical
141: observations of GRB triggers, with a number of detections. To date, there
142: has been no consistent correlation between prompt optical fluxes
143: and the contemporaneous $\gamma$-rays \citep[e.g., see the discussions
144: in][]{rykaa05,ysraa07}. This paper discusses prompt ROTSE-III
145: observations under good sky conditions which did not yield
146: detections. The limits placed upon the ratio of optical emission to
147: the higher energy emission are discussed in comparison with the
148: behavior associated with prompt detections.
149:
150: In the following discussion, the spectral flux density is
151: characterized by the spectral index $\beta$, with $f_{\nu} \propto
152: \nu^{\beta}$. This convention relates $\beta$ to the $\gamma$-ray
153: photon index $\Gamma$ by $\beta = 1 - \Gamma$. To designate a
154: spectral region, subscripts ``OPT'', ``X'', and ``$\gamma$'' for
155: $\beta$ indicate an index for the optical, X-ray, and $\gamma$-ray
156: bands respectively. A spectral index spanning two regions is
157: designated with both, e.g., $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$ for the
158: spectral index interpolating between the optical and $\gamma$-ray
159: frequencies.
160:
161: We note briefly that the overall spectral and temporal shape of
162: afterglows typically suggests synchrotron emission from a fireball whose
163: accelerated electrons have a Lorentz factor distribution
164: $N(\gamma_e) \propto \gamma_e^{-p}$ \citep[this is reviewed, e.g.,
165: by][]{m06}. The afterglow spectrum has spectral breaks: principally
166: $\nu_m$, due to the minimum Lorentz factor $\gamma_e$, and $\nu_c$,
167: the cooling frequency. These provide predictions for the spectral
168: shape of a single synchrotron component. The index $\beta = 1/3$ at
169: frequencies below the peak in $f_{\nu}$ ($\nu < \nu_m$), $\beta =
170: (1-p)/2$ for $\nu_m < \nu < \nu_c$, and $\beta = -p/2$ for the case
171: when $\nu > \nu_c$ and $\nu > \nu_m$. (When $\nu_c < \nu_m$, the
172: spectral shape is $\nu^{-1/2}$ for frequencies between them.) These
173: predictions, with $\beta$ from $1/3$ to $-3/2$ for $p = 2$ -- $3$,
174: can be compared to the constraints upon
175: $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$.
176:
177: Figure \ref{fig:schema} shows some possible combinations of
178: $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$ and $\beta_{\gamma}$. The $\gamma$-ray
179: spectrum may predict the optical flux ($\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma} =
180: \beta_{\gamma}$), indicating that a single power-law
181: (synchrotron-like) component could account for the broadband
182: spectrum. When $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma} < \beta_{\gamma}$, the
183: $\gamma$-ray spectrum underpredicts the optical flux, implying a
184: separate low-energy emission component. When
185: $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma} > \beta_{\gamma}$, the $\gamma$-ray
186: spectrum overpredicts the optical flux, indicating a spectral rollover
187: between the optical and high frequencies. When there are only prompt
188: optical upper limits in flux density, one can nevertheless
189: discriminate between cases where $\beta_{\gamma}$ either predicts or
190: overpredicts the optical flux limit from those where $\beta_{\gamma}$
191: could underpredict the optical flux.
192:
193:
194: \section{Optical Observations}
195:
196: The ROTSE-III array is a worldwide network of 0.45~m robotic, automated
197: telescopes, built for fast ($\sim 6$ s) responses to GRB triggers from
198: satellites such as {\it Swift}. They have a wide ($1\fdg85 \times 1\fdg85$) field
199: of view imaged onto a Marconi $2048\times2048$ back-illuminated thinned CCD,
200: and operate without filters. The ROTSE-III systems are described in detail in
201: \citet{akmrs03}.
202:
203: ROTSE-III images were reduced and processed using the RPHOT pipeline,
204: with routines based upon DAOPHOT \citep{stetson87}. Objects were
205: identified via SExtractor \citep{ba96} and calibrated astrometrically
206: and photometrically with the USNOB1.0 catalog. They are tied to the
207: $R$ band, and these unfiltered ``$R$-equivalent'' magnitudes are
208: designated as ``$C_R$''. The method is fully described in
209: \citet{qryaa05}. The final result yields limiting magnitudes in the
210: GRB error box from the PSF-fit photometric data. These are presented
211: in Table \ref{tab:optlim}.
212:
213:
214: \subsection{Sources of Prompt Detection Data}\label{sec:detdata}
215:
216: Table \ref{tab:optgam1} presents spectral index information for
217: several GRBs with prompt optical detections. These are used to provide
218: a comparison for prompt limit results. The table is similar to Table 5
219: of \citet{ysraa07}, which is also used for comparison.
220:
221: Most of the prompt optical detections used for this table are from
222: ROTSE-III observations. These include GRB\,060111B \citep{GCN4488},
223: GRB\,060729 \citep{GCN5366}, GRB\,060904B \citep{GCN5504} and
224: GRB\,061007 \citep{GCN5706} which are discussed in a comprehensive
225: analysis paper (Rykoff {\it et al.}, in prep.). GRB\,061121 was
226: promptly detected by ROTSE; these data are presented in
227: \citet{page07}. GRB\,060927 was a high-redshift event
228: \citep{GCN5651}. The prompt ROTSE detection is converted to a flux
229: density at a wavelength near $i$-band, as described in Ruiz-Velasco
230: {\it et al.}, in prep. GRB\,060218 was detected by ROTSE (Table
231: \ref{tab:optgam1}: line with a $C_R$ observation of GRB\,060218)
232: \citep{GCN4782} and by the {\it Swift} UVOT (Table \ref{tab:optgam1}:
233: line with a $V$ observation of GRB\,060218) \citep{cmbbb06}. Finally,
234: GRB\,050820A and GRB\,061126 were promptly detected by RAPTOR. For the
235: former, we determine optical and $\gamma$-ray flux densities from
236: \citet{vwwag06}. For the latter, we take the optical flux densities of
237: \citet{pbbph07}, correcting for Galactic extinction.
238:
239:
240: \subsection{Prompt Nondetections with Later Detections}\label{latedet}
241:
242: One case of a prompt limit with a later detection is the first ROTSE
243: observation of GRB\,060729. The OT flux was rising, and the second
244: 5-second image was the first to yield a detection (Tables
245: \ref{tab:optgam1} and \ref{tab:optgam2} show that the flux rises from
246: $\sim$ 1/2 to 2 mJy over the first few images).
247:
248: In GRB\,060614, the ROTSE limits at 29 seconds post-trigger were
249: obtained before the subsequent UVOT afterglow detection at 100 seconds
250: post-trigger. This initial UVOT V-band detection \citep{GCN5252} had
251: notable flux uncertainty (18.4$\pm$0.5 mag) but is significantly
252: (nearly 3 mag) fainter than the ROTSE limits. The ROTSE limit values
253: are fully consistent with the later detection, and constrain the flux
254: decay to have been no more rapid than $\sim t^{-2}$ from a half minute
255: to two minutes post-trigger.
256:
257: Optical detections indicate that the GRB cannot be at high $z$, as the
258: Lyman-$\alpha$ forest would absorb the optical flux. Indeed,
259: GRB\,060729 has $z = 0.54$ \citep{GCN5373}, and the host of
260: GRB\,060614 is at $z = 0.125$ \citep{GCN5275}, \citep[although there
261: is some controversy, with an estimate of $z \approx 1.5$,][]{sx06}.
262: There are further GRBs with prompt limits followed by optical
263: detections at $t \gsim$\,1\,hr: GRB\,050306 \citep{GCN3089},
264: GRB\,050713A \citep{GCN3582}, and GRB\,061110 \citep{GCN5797}. The
265: prompt nondetections of these three events cannot be attributed to
266: high $z$.
267:
268:
269:
270: \section{High Energy Data}\label{sec:hidata}
271:
272: BAT data were used for $\gamma$-ray comparisons in these {\it Swift}
273: bursts. For the $\gamma$-ray data, the event files from the public
274: archives were analyzed with the BATTOOLS and XSPEC11 software
275: packages\footnote{{\tt
276: http://swift.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/swift/analysis/}} . The result is
277: unabsorbed flux values in the 15--150~keV range. When there is
278: sufficient signal (for $\approx$\,30\% of the data points), these are
279: determined directly along with $\beta_{\gamma}$ during the precise
280: time interval of each optical observation. For the remainder of the
281: data where the signal is insufficient, the count rate during the
282: interval is converted to fluxes using the BAT spectrum during a
283: longer, overlapping interval. The analyses are the same as described
284: for the GRB\,051109A and GRB\,051111 events, in \citet{ysraa07}.
285:
286: In addition, a few events have prompt X-ray data (in the $1-10$ keV
287: band, with an effective frequency $\nu < 10^{18}$\,Hz) as well. Table
288: \ref{tab:optgam1} lists results with simultaneous optical, X-ray, and
289: $\gamma$-ray detections for GRB\,060729, GRB\,060904B, and
290: GRB\,061007. The XRT analyses are fully discussed in an upcoming ROTSE
291: paper treating multiband lightcurves (Rykoff {\it et al.}, in
292: prep.). In brief, the {\tt xrtpipeline} tool calibrates and performs
293: standard filtering and screening. This is followed by count
294: extractions from appropriate regions for the source and background,
295: the generation of response files with the FTOOLS task {\tt xrtmkarf},
296: and spectral fits to yield fluxes. For GRB\,061121, the XRT data is
297: taken directly from the flux densities in \citet{page07}; the
298: reductions were similar and compensate for the significant pileup
299: effects, as discussed there in detail.
300:
301: There are two cases with optical nondetections and X-ray prompt
302: detections within the sample presented, GRB\,050713A and
303: GRB\,060614. A limit upon $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-X}$ adds little to the
304: information from the $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$ limit; the events
305: are compatible with an interpretation of the prompt $t \approx
306: 100$~sec X-ray flux as an extension of the contemporaneous
307: $\gamma$-rays. This was seen in a quick analysis of the GRB\,060614
308: archive data \citep[as well as the spectral information given in
309: ][]{GCN5254, GCN5256}, and by the \citet{owogpv06} analysis of
310: GRB\,050713A XRT and BAT data. Further detailed comparisons are beyond
311: the scope of this paper.
312:
313:
314: \section{Determining $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$ and $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-X}$}
315:
316: The spectral index (or its limit) was determined between the optical
317: and higher-energy bands in the same manner as those presented in
318: \citet{ysraa07}. In brief, the optical data was corrected for Galactic extinction
319: and converted to flux densities as if the $C_R$ magnitudes were $R$,
320: using the zeropoints of \citet{b79}. These data are in Tables
321: \ref{tab:optgam1}, \ref{tab:optgam2}, along with the flux densities of
322: the $\gamma$-ray detections (and X-ray, where applicable). The flux
323: densities and effective frequencies of the bands are then used to
324: calculate $\beta$. When the optical is not detected, the optical limit
325: is used with the lower (1\,$\sigma$) estimate of the high-energy
326: emission to estimate the softest spectral index
327: $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$ (or $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-X}$) possible.
328:
329: The Galactic extinction corrections are taken from
330: \citet{sfd98}. $C_R$ limits are treated as $R$-equivalent and adjusted
331: for the $R$ band's extinction. Table \ref{tab:optgam1} gives the flux
332: and $\beta$ results for cases with prompt optical detections, in the
333: same manner as \citet{ysraa07}. Table \ref{tab:optgam2} gives flux and
334: $\beta$ constraints for events with prompt optical limits.
335:
336: \section{Discussion}
337:
338: We consider 27 GRBs with prompt optical observations, the data
339: presented in Tables \ref{tab:optgam1} and \ref{tab:optgam2}, as well
340: as Table 5 in \citet{ysraa07}. 11 of these GRBs only had prompt
341: optical limits, while 14 were consistently promptly detected in the
342: optical, and a further 2 events had both prompt limits and
343: detections. The data includes a total of 43 distinct prompt optical
344: detections, and 55 prompt optical limits.
345:
346: \subsection{Diverse Prompt Properties}
347:
348: GRBs show diversity in their prompt optical and $\gamma$-ray
349: brightnesses. Optical flux densities span 100 $\mu$Jy to 3 Jy while
350: contemporaneous $\gamma$-ray flux densities take values from 6 $\mu$Jy
351: to 4 mJy. This results in a range of possible prompt spectral indices
352: $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$ and $\beta_{\gamma}$, which are plotted
353: as $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$ against $\beta_{\gamma}$ in Figure
354: \ref{fig:betas}.
355:
356: In this dataset, all relations between $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$
357: and $\beta_{\gamma}$ are observed ($\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma} >
358: \beta_{\gamma}$, $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma} < \beta_{\gamma}$, or
359: $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma} = \beta_{\gamma}$). The values of
360: $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$ and $\beta_{\gamma}$ vary widely, from
361: $-0.9$ to $0.03$ for $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$ and from $-1.5$ to
362: 0.4 for $\beta_{\gamma}$. These are within or quite close to the range
363: of $\beta = 1/3$ to $-3/2$ for the synchrotron spectral shape
364: (discussed in the Introduction) and electron energy distribution
365: indices of $p = 2$ -- $3$.
366:
367:
368: In addition, observations of some events show both
369: $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$ and $\beta_{\gamma}$ changing
370: significantly during a burst. $\beta_{\gamma}$ generally evolves from
371: hard to soft. This is a previously known characteristic of many GRBs
372: \citep[e.g., as reviewed by][]{fm95}, now considered in models of
373: prompt emission \citep[such as ``jitter'' radiation;][]{medved06}. The
374: changes in $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$ indicate that optical prompt
375: fluxes are generally not correlated with the $\gamma$-ray emission.
376:
377: There has been discussion in the literature concerning whether prompt
378: optical emission is an extension of the $\gamma$-rays, or is a
379: separate component. \citet{vwwfs05} indicates an optical component
380: correlated to the GRB in GRB\,041219A, while \citet{vwwag06} and
381: \citet{ysraa07} discuss the apparent blend of $\gamma$-ray--correlated
382: and uncorrelated components in the prompt optical lightcurves of GRBs
383: 050820A and 051111 respectively. The correlated component of
384: GRB\,051111 is one of the few cases where the indices allow
385: $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma} = \beta_{\gamma}$. Several events had
386: prompt optical behavior distinct from that of the GRB, and apparently
387: connected to the afterglow; the prompt optical lightcurves of
388: GRB\,050401, GRB\,051109A and GRB\,061126 are decaying \citep{rykaa05,
389: ysraa07, pbbph07}, and that of GRB\,060729 is rising
390: \citep{GCN5377}. There are also events where the optical flux does not
391: rise until after the GRB \citep[e.g., GRB\,030418, GRB\,060605, GRB
392: 060607A, ][ respectively]{rspaa04,srsq06,GCN5236}.
393:
394:
395: As seen by the variety of $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$, there is no
396: universal ratio $f_{\nu}$(OPT)/$f_{\nu}$($\gamma$). There is no common
397: $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$ / $\beta_{\gamma}$ connection in all
398: events, but in most cases, $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$ is harder
399: than $\beta_{\gamma}$. For these, $\beta_{\gamma}$ overpredicts the
400: optical, requiring a rollover in the spectrum between the $\gamma$-ray and
401: optical frequencies, whether or not there are separate emission components
402: at optical and $\gamma$-ray energies. Nearly all the limits give
403: $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$ versus $\beta_{\gamma}$ falling into
404: this category.
405:
406: In some prompt detections, $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma} <
407: \beta_{\gamma}$ and $\beta_{\gamma}$ underpredicts the optical
408: \citep[e.g., see][for GRB\,051111 and GRB061126 respectively]{ysraa07,
409: pbbph07}. This implies a separate low-energy emission component. All
410: the prompt limits presented exclude this possibility, except for
411: GRB\,060515. Its constraints are insufficient and allow either
412: $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma} < \beta_{\gamma}$ or
413: $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma} > \beta_{\gamma}$.
414:
415:
416: \subsection{Properties of Limits vs Detections}
417:
418:
419: The optical limits are not demonstrably the result of abnormally faint
420: prompt optical flux. The prompt flux limits are typically 16th or 17th
421: magnitude ($< 1$~mJy). Prompt detections have been recorded from small
422: fractions of a mJy to a few Jy. As well, the $\gamma$-ray flux
423: densities of GRBs with prompt optical limits are similar to the lower
424: values of $f_{\nu}$($\gamma$) from GRBs with optical detections; both
425: sets of events have $f_{\nu}$($\gamma$) ranging from several $\mu$Jy
426: to over a mJy. The prompt limits require neither intrinsically fainter
427: emission nor excess absorption from dust or (high-$z$)
428: Lyman-$\alpha$. High redshifts are not a general solution for the
429: prompt optical limits, as some events are detected later (\S\ref{latedet}).
430:
431: The values of GRB $\beta_{\gamma}$ contemporaneous with prompt optical
432: limits are similar to the $\beta_{\gamma}$ when prompt observations
433: gave optical detections. The $\beta_{\gamma}$ of optical nondetections
434: are on average softer than the $\beta_{\gamma}$ of detections, ranging
435: from $-1.6$ to 0, as compared to $-1.5$ to $0.4$. However, the data
436: are not consistently sampled, leading to no strong conclusions other
437: than that prompt observations of the few GRBs with the hardest
438: $\beta_{\gamma}$ have yielded detections rather than limits.
439:
440: Similarly, the limits on $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$ for
441: nondetections ($> -0.7$) are in the range of most of the
442: $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$ from the prompt detections (from $-0.9$
443: to $0.03$). The prompt nondetections are consistent with coming from
444: the harder end of the $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$ distribution, as
445: all of the $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$ limits are harder than the
446: softest $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$ value calculated from prompt
447: detections. However, there is no evidence of bimodality of
448: $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$. It is only in one event (GRB\,061007)
449: that the $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$ of optical detections is softer
450: than the softest allowed $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$ from a prompt
451: limit. This was for epochs at the end of the event, which may be the
452: beginning of the afterglow, as $\gamma$-ray, X-ray and optical
453: frequencies lie on a single spectral powerlaw. There is not one set of
454: $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$ for the optically detected and another
455: for the nondetected cases. These overlaps in
456: $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$ and $\beta_{\gamma}$ are readily seen in
457: Figure \ref{fig:betas}.
458:
459:
460: \subsection{Cases with Prompt X-ray Data}
461:
462: For GRB\,061121, the comparisons of $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$ and
463: $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}- X}$ require a peak in the broadband $f_{\nu}$
464: spectrum. This is discussed in detail by \citet{page07}, where it can
465: be inferred to be near 1 keV initially and to subsequently drop in
466: frequency. GRB\,060729 also implies a peak between the optical and
467: X-ray during the epoch with optical, X-ray and $\gamma$-ray data. In
468: that case, $\beta_{\gamma}$ appears to be harder than $\beta_{X}$, but
469: this may be due to the general softening trend of $\beta_{\gamma}$ and
470: the measurement of $\beta_{\gamma}$ over the X-ray epoch using data
471: beginning well before the X-ray observations. A ``convex'' overall
472: X-ray--$\gamma$-ray spectral shape cannot be inferred from the weak
473: $\gamma$-ray detection.
474:
475: In contrast, the GRB\,061007 prompt X-ray epochs do not demonstrate
476: such a peak. From the first GRB\,061007 epoch with X-ray data, the
477: spectral indices show that the $\gamma$-ray and X-ray bands are in a
478: single spectral segment. This is not unusual; \S\ref{sec:hidata}
479: indicates that in the two prompt optical limit cases, the X-ray and
480: $\gamma$-ray data could be from the same spectral segment. In
481: GRB\,061007, allowing for local extinction corrections, the entire
482: broadband spectrum (optical, X-ray, $\gamma$-ray) forms a single
483: spectral segment \citep[see ][Figure 2, which fits an absorbed
484: $\nu^{-1}$ spectrum]{mmgks07}. This would be expected for an early
485: afterglow where the high-energy emission from the forward shock
486: extends above the X-rays.
487:
488: \section{Conclusion}
489:
490:
491: Prompt optical limits fall within the range of optical fluxes and
492: optical--to--$\gamma$-ray flux ratios observed from prompt optical
493: detections. The prompt limits yield constraints upon
494: optical--to--$\gamma$-ray flux ratios at the faint end of the ratios
495: measured from prompt detections. This does not imply a different set
496: of intrinsic or environmental properties for events with detections
497: and nondetections; there is wide overlap in fluxes and flux ratios
498: between the limits and detections. Moreover, prompt detections show
499: great variety, and demonstrate diverse connections (or lack thereof)
500: with the contemporaneous $\gamma$-rays.
501:
502: The most economical explanation for prompt optical nondetections is
503: that they are events drawn from the faint end of the range of prompt
504: optical emission. These faint counterparts are not always accessible
505: with the sensitivities of the small telescopes providing the bulk of
506: prompt responses.
507:
508:
509:
510: \acknowledgements{ This work has been supported by NASA grants
511: NNG-04WC41G and F006794, NSF grants AST-0119685, 0105221 and 0407061,
512: the Australian Research Council, the University of New South Wales,
513: and the University of Michigan. JCW is supported by NSF Grant
514: AST-0406740. Work performed at LANL is supported through internal
515: LDRD funding.}
516:
517:
518: \newcommand{\noopsort}[1]{} \newcommand{\printfirst}[2]{#1}
519: \newcommand{\singleletter}[1]{#1} \newcommand{\switchargs}[2]{#2#1}
520: \begin{thebibliography}{}
521:
522: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Akerlof} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2003}]{akmrs03}
523: {Akerlof}, C.~W., et~al.
524: \newblock Jan. 2003, \pasp, 115, 132
525:
526: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Barthelmy} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2006}]{GCN5256}
527: {Barthelmy}, S., et~al.
528: \newblock 2006, GCN Circ. No. 5256
529:
530: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Bertin} \& {Arnouts}}{1996}]{ba96}
531: {Bertin}, E. \& {Arnouts}, S.
532: \newblock June 1996, \aaps, 117, 393
533:
534: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Bessell}}{1979}]{b79}
535: {Bessell}, M.~S.
536: \newblock Oct. 1979, \pasp, 91, 589
537:
538: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Butler} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2007}]{bkbc07}
539: {Butler}, N.~R., {Kocevski}, D., {Bloom}, J.~S., \& {Curtis}, J.~L.
540: \newblock June 2007, astro-ph/0706.1275
541:
542: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Campana} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2006}]{cmbbb06}
543: {Campana}, S., et~al.
544: \newblock Aug. 2006, \nat, 442, 1008
545:
546: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Chen} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2006}]{GCN5797}
547: {Chen}, Y.~C., {Lee}, Y.~H., {Huang}, K.~Y., {Ip}, W.~H., \& {Urata}, Y.
548: \newblock 2006, GCN Circ. No. 5797
549:
550: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{D'Avanzo} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2005}]{GCN3089}
551: {D'Avanzo}, P., {Fugazza}, D., {Covino}, S., {Malesani}, D., {Masetti}, N.,
552: {Palazzi}, E., {Antonelli}, L.~A., {Israel}, G.~L., \& {Andreuzzi}, G.
553: \newblock 2005, GCN Circ. No. 3089
554:
555: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Fishman} \& {Meegan}}{1995}]{fm95}
556: {Fishman}, G.~J. \& {Meegan}, C.~A.
557: \newblock 1995, \araa, 33, 415
558:
559: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Fynbo} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2006}]{GCN5651}
560: {Fynbo}, J.~P.~U., {Jakobsson}, P., {Jensen}, B.~L., {Hjorth}, J., {Sollerman},
561: J., {Watson}, D., {Cerón}, J.~M.~C., {Vreeswijk}, P., \& {Andersen}, M.~I.
562: \newblock 2006, GCN Circ. No. 5651
563:
564: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Gehrels} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2004}]{gcgmn04}
565: {Gehrels}, N., et~al.
566: \newblock Aug. 2004, \apj, 611, 1005
567:
568: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Kumar} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2007}]{kmpwo07}
569: {Kumar}, P., et~al.
570: \newblock Mar. 2007, \mnras, 376, L57
571:
572: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Malesani} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2005}]{GCN3582}
573: {Malesani}, D., {D'Avanzo}, P., {Palazzi}, E., {Israel}, G.~L., {Chincarini},
574: G., {Stella}, L., \& {Pedani}, M.
575: \newblock 2005, GCN Circ. No. 3582
576:
577: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Mangano} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2006}]{GCN5254}
578: {Mangano}, V., {Parola}, V.~L., {Troja}, E., {Cusumano}, G., {Mineo}, T.,
579: {Parsons}, A., \& {Kennea}, J.
580: \newblock 2006, GCN Circ. No. 5254
581:
582: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Medvedev}}{2006}]{medved06}
583: {Medvedev}, M.~V.
584: \newblock Feb. 2006, \apj, 637, 869
585:
586: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Meszaros}}{2006}]{m06}
587: {Meszaros}, P.
588: \newblock 2006, Reports of Progress in Physics, 69, 2259
589:
590: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Meszaros} {\rm et~al.\/}}{1994}]{mrp94}
591: {Meszaros}, P., {Rees}, M.~J., \& {Papathanassiou}, H.
592: \newblock Sept. 1994, \apj, 432, 181
593:
594: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Mundell} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2007}]{mmgks07}
595: {Mundell}, C.~G., et~al.
596: \newblock May 2007, \apj, 660, 489
597:
598: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Nousek} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2006}]{nkgpg06}
599: {Nousek}, J.~A., et~al.
600: \newblock May 2006, \apj, 642, 389
601:
602: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Nysewander} \& {Haislip}}{2006}]{GCN5236}
603: {Nysewander}, M. \& {Haislip}, J.
604: \newblock 2006, GCN Circ. No. 5236
605:
606: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{O'Brien} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2006}]{owogpv06}
607: {O'Brien}, P.~T., et~al.
608: \newblock Aug. 2006, \apj, 647, 1213
609:
610: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Page} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2007}]{page07}
611: {Page}, K.~L., et~al.
612: \newblock 2007, submitted to ApJ
613:
614: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Parsons} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2006}]{GCN5252}
615: {Parsons}, A.~M., et~al.
616: \newblock 2006, GCN Circ. No. 5252
617:
618: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Pe'er} \& {Waxman}}{2004}]{pw04}
619: {Pe'er}, A. \& {Waxman}, E.
620: \newblock Sept. 2004, \apj, 613, 448
621:
622: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Perley} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2007}]{pbbph07}
623: {Perley}, D.~A., et~al.
624: \newblock Mar. 2007, ApJ submitted, astro-ph/0703538
625:
626: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Piran}}{2005}]{p05}
627: {Piran}, T.
628: \newblock 2005, Reviews of Modern Physics, 76, 1143
629:
630: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Price} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2006}]{GCN5275}
631: {Price}, P.~A., {Berger}, E., \& {Fox}, D.~B.
632: \newblock 2006, GCN Circ. No. 5275
633:
634: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Quimby} \& {Rykoff}}{2006}]{GCN5377}
635: {Quimby}, R. \& {Rykoff}, E.~S.
636: \newblock 2006, GCN Circ. No. 5377
637:
638: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Quimby} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2006a}]{qryaa05}
639: {Quimby}, R.~M., et~al.
640: \newblock 2006a, \apj, 640, 402
641:
642: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Quimby} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2006b}]{GCN5366}
643: {Quimby}, R., {Swan}, H., {Rujopakarn}, W., \& {Smith}, D.~A.
644: \newblock 2006b, GCN Circ. No. 5366
645:
646: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Quimby} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2006c}]{GCN4782}
647: {Quimby}, R., {Schaefer}, B.~E., \& {Swan}, H.
648: \newblock 2006c, GCN Circ. No. 4782
649:
650: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Rykoff} \& {Rujopakarn}}{2006}]{GCN5706}
651: {Rykoff}, E.~S. \& {Rujopakarn}, W.
652: \newblock 2006, GCN Circ. No. 5706
653:
654: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Rykoff} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2006}]{GCN5504}
655: {Rykoff}, E.~S., {Rujopakarn}, W., \& {Yuan}, F.
656: \newblock 2006, GCN Circ. No. 5504
657:
658: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Rykoff} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2004}]{rspaa04}
659: {Rykoff}, E.~S., et~al.
660: \newblock Feb. 2004, \apj, 601, 1013
661:
662: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Rykoff} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2005}]{rykaa05}
663: {Rykoff}, E.~S., et~al.
664: \newblock Oct. 2005, \apjl, 631, L121
665:
666: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Schaefer} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2006}]{srsq06}
667: {Schaefer}, B.~E., {Rykoff}, E.~S., {Smith}, D.~A., \& {Quimby}, R.
668: \newblock 2006, GCN Circ. No. 5222
669:
670: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Schaefer} \& {Xiao}}{2006}]{sx06}
671: {Schaefer}, B.~E. \& {Xiao}, L.
672: \newblock Aug. 2006, ApJL submitted, astro-ph/0608441
673:
674: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Schlegel} {\rm et~al.\/}}{1998}]{sfd98}
675: {Schlegel}, D.~J., {Finkbeiner}, D.~P., \& {Davis}, M.
676: \newblock June 1998, \apj, 500, 525
677:
678: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Stetson}}{1987}]{stetson87}
679: {Stetson}, P.~B.
680: \newblock Mar. 1987, \pasp, 99, 191
681:
682: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Thoene} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2006}]{GCN5373}
683: {Thoene}, C.~C., {Levan}, A., {Jakobsson}, P., {Rol}, E., {Gorosabel}, J.,
684: {Jensen}, B.~L., {Hjorth}, J., \& {Vreeswijk}, P.
685: \newblock 2006, GCN Circ. No. 5373
686:
687: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Thompson}}{1994}]{thompson94}
688: {Thompson}, C.
689: \newblock Oct. 1994, \mnras, 270, 480
690:
691: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Usov}}{1994}]{usov94}
692: {Usov}, V.~V.
693: \newblock Apr, 1994, \mnras, 267, 1035
694:
695: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Vestrand} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2005}]{vwwfs05}
696: {Vestrand}, W.~T., et~al.
697: \newblock May 2005, \nat, 435, 178
698:
699: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Vestrand} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2006}]{vwwag06}
700: {Vestrand}, W.~T., et~al.
701: \newblock July 2006, \nat, 442, 172
702:
703: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Wei}}{2007}]{wei07}
704: {Wei}, D.~M.
705: \newblock Jan. 2007, \mnras, 374, 525
706:
707: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Yost} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2007}]{ysraa07}
708: {Yost}, S.~A., et~al.
709: \newblock 2007, \apj, 657, 925
710:
711: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Yost} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2006}]{GCN4488}
712: {Yost}, S.~A., {Yuan}, F., {Swan}, H., \& {Akerlof}, C.
713: \newblock 2006, GCN Circ. No. 4488
714:
715: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Zhang}}{2007}]{Zhang07}
716: {Zhang}, B.
717: \newblock Feb. 2007, ChJAA, 7, 1
718:
719: \end{thebibliography}
720:
721:
722: \begin{deluxetable}{lccc}
723: \tablewidth{0pt}
724: \tablecaption{Prompt Optical Limits\label{tab:optlim}}
725: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
726: \tablehead{
727: \colhead{GRB} &
728: \colhead{$t_{\mathrm{start}}$ (s)} &
729: \colhead{$t_{\mathrm{end}}$ (s)} &
730: \colhead{Magnitude}
731: }
732: \startdata
733: 050306 & 64.8 & 69.8 & $>$ 15.5 \\
734: 050306 & 78.9 & 83.9 & $>$ 15.8 \\
735: 050306 & 93.5 & 98.5 & $>$ 15.8 \\
736: 050306 & 108.3 & 113.3 & $>$ 15.7 \\
737: 050306 & 122.7 & 127.7 & $>$ 15.7 \\
738: 050306 & 137.2 & 142.2 & $>$ 15.8 \\
739: 050306 & 151.8 & 156.8 & $>$ 15.8 \\
740: 050306 & 166.1 & 171.1 & $>$ 15.7 \\
741: 050306 & 180.4 & 185.4 & $>$ 15.8 \\
742: \hline
743: 050713A & 72.1 & 77.1 & $> 16.5$ \\
744: 050713A & 104.7 & 124.7 & $> 17.2$ \\
745: \hline
746: 050822 & 31.8 & 36.8 & $>$15.6 \\
747: 050822 & 39.8 & 44.8 & $>$15.5 \\
748: 050822 & 47.8 & 52.8 & $>$15.5 \\
749: 050822 & 55.9 & 60.9 & $>$15.5 \\
750: 050822 & 63.9 & 68.9 & $>$15.5 \\
751: 050822 & 95.9 & 100.9 & $>$15.6 \\
752: \hline
753: 050915A & 42.9 & 47.9 & $> 17.0$ \\
754: \hline
755: 050922B & 258.6 & 263.6 & $> 16.4$ \\
756: 050922B & 273.3 & 278.3 & $> 16.5$ \\
757: \hline
758: 051001 & 85.7 & 90.7 & $> 16.3$ \\
759: 051001 & 100.1 & 105.1 & $> 16.3$ \\
760: 051001 & 114.3 & 119.3 & $> 16.2$ \\
761: 051001 & 128.6 & 133.6 & $> 16.3$ \\
762: 051001 & 143.1 & 148.1 & $> 16.3$ \\
763: 051001 & 157.6 & 162.6 & $> 16.2$ \\
764: 051001 & 172.3 & 177.3 & $> 16.1$ \\
765: 051001 & 186.9 & 191.9 & $> 16.2$ \\
766: \hline
767: 060312 & 20.3 & 25.3 & $> 14.1$ \\
768: 060312 & 27.4 & 32.4 & $> 14.1$ \\
769: 060312 & 34.4 & 39.4 & $> 14.2$ \\
770: 060312 & 41.5 & 46.5 & $> 14.3$ \\
771: 060312 & 48.7 & 53.7 & $> 14.3$ \\
772: \hline
773: 060515 & 58.5 & 63.8 & $> 14.5$ \\
774: \hline
775: 060614 & 26.8 & 31.8 & $> 15.7$ \\
776: 060614 & 40.6 & 45.6 & $> 15.6$ \\
777: 060614 & 55.2 & 60.2 & $> 15.6$ \\
778: 060614 & 69.6 & 74.6 & $> 15.6$ \\
779: 060614 & 83.9 & 88.9 & $> 15.6$ \\
780: 060614 & 98.3 & 103.3 & $> 15.6$ \\
781: 060614\tablenotemark{a} & 112.6 & 117.6 & $> 15.6$ \\
782: 060614\tablenotemark{a} & 126.8 & 131.8 & $> 15.6$ \\
783: 060614\tablenotemark{a} & 140.7 & 145.7 & $> 15.6$ \\
784: 060614\tablenotemark{a} & 155.2 & 160.2 & $> 15.6$ \\
785: 060614\tablenotemark{a} & 169.2 & 189.2 & $> 16.2$ \\
786: \hline
787: 060729\tablenotemark{b} & 64.3 & 69.3 & $> 16.6$ \\
788: \hline
789: 061110 & 43.5 & 48.5 & $>16.4$ \\
790: \hline
791: 061222 & 47.2 & 52.2 & $> 17.0$ \\
792: 061222 & 54.2 & 59.2 & $> 16.9$ \\
793: 061222 & 61.2 & 66.2 & $> 17.0$ \\
794: 061222 & 68.2 & 73.2 & $> 16.9$ \\
795: 061222 & 75.2 & 80.2 & $> 16.9$ \\
796: 061222 & 82.2 & 87.2 & $> 16.9$ \\
797: 061222 & 89.2 & 94.2 & $> 17.0$ \\
798: 061222 & 96.2 & 101.2 & $> 16.9$ \\
799: 061222 & 103.2 & 108.2 & $> 16.9$ \\
800: 061222 & 110.1 & 115.1 & $> 17.0$ \\
801: \enddata
802: \tablecomments{All times are in seconds since the burst onset, which are (UT): 03:33:12 UT (GRB\,050306), 04:29:02.4 (GRB\,050713A), 03:49:29 (GRB\,050822), 11:22:42 (GRB\,050915A), 15:02:00 (GRB\,050922B), 11:11:36.2 (GRB\,051001), 01:36:12.8 (GRB\,060312), 02:27:52 (GRB\,060515), 12:43:48.5 (GRB\,060614), 19:12:29.2 (GRB\,060729), 11:47:21.3 (GRB\,061110), 03:28:52.1 (GRB\,061222). Magnitudes are quoted without correction for local or Galactic extinction, and are $R$-equivalent unfiltered values. The extinction corrections are (in $A_R$ magnitudes): 1.817
803: (GRB\,050306), 1.107 (GRB\,050713A), 0.04 (GRB\,050822), 0.07
804: (GRB\,050915A), 0.098 (GRB\,050922B), 0.04 (GRB\,051001), 0.472
805: (GRB\,060312), 0.073 (GRB\,060515), 0.058 (GRB\,060614), 0.145
806: (GRB\,060729), 0.242 (GRB\,061110) and 0.266 (GRB\,061222).}
807: \tablenotetext{a}{The {\it Swift} UVOT detected the OT in this event during an exposure from 102--202 sec post-trigger \citep{GCN5252}. The ROTSE limits are consistent with the more sensitive UVOT detection.}
808: \tablenotetext{b}{GRB\,060729 was promptly detected, however, the {\em first} 5 sec observation only yielded a limit for the OT.}
809: \end{deluxetable}
810:
811:
812: \begin{deluxetable}{lcccccccc}
813: \tablewidth{0pt}
814: \tablecaption{Spectral Indices $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$ (or $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-X}$) from Prompt Optical Detections\label{tab:optgam1}}
815: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
816: \tablehead{
817: \colhead{GRB} &
818: \colhead{$t_{\mathrm{start}}$} &
819: \colhead{$t_{\mathrm{end}}$} &
820: \colhead{Band} &
821: \colhead{$f_{\nu}\mathrm{(OPT)}$} &
822: \colhead{$\nu_{\gamma}$ [or $\nu_{X}$]} &
823: \colhead{$f_{\nu}$($\gamma$) [or $f_{\nu}$($X$)]} &
824: \colhead{$\beta_{\gamma}$ [or $\beta_{X}$]} &
825: \colhead{$\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$}\\
826: \colhead{ } &
827: \colhead{(s)} &
828: \colhead{(s)} &
829: \colhead{} &
830: \colhead{(mJy)} &
831: \colhead{($10^{18}$Hz)} &
832: \colhead{($\mu$Jy)} &
833: \colhead{} &
834: \colhead{[or $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-X}$]}
835: }
836: \startdata
837: 050820A & 252 & 282 & $C_{R}$ & 2.612 $\pm$ 0.058 & 25 & 453 $\pm$ 17 & -0.371 $\pm$ 0.061 & -0.161 $\pm$ 0.004 \\
838: 050820A & 402 & 432 & $C_{R}$ & 4.814 $\pm$ 0.084 & 25 & 314 $\pm$ 16 & -0.415 $\pm$ 0.078 & -0.251 $\pm$ 0.005 \\
839: 050820A & 515 & 545 & $C_{R}$ & 4.452 $\pm$ 0.077 & 27 & 138 $\pm$ 15 & -0.707 $\pm$ 0.143 & -0.32 $\pm$ 0.01 \\
840: 060111B & 58.0 & 63.0 & $C_{R}$ & 5.97 $\pm$ 0.66 & 14 & 89 $\pm$ 14 & -1.02 $\pm$ 0.20 & -0.41 $\pm$ 0.02 \\
841: 060218 & 691 & 1027 & $C_{R}$ & 0.254 $\pm$ 0.026 & 11 & 91.3 $\pm$ 7.4 & -1.5 $\pm$ 0.1 & -0.10 $\pm$ 0.01 \\
842: 060218 & 700 & 1000 & $V$ & 0.106 $\pm$ 0.020 & 11 & 91.3 $\pm$ 7.4 & -1.5 $\pm$ 0.1 & -0.02 $\pm$ 0.02 \\
843: 060729 & 73.4 & 83.4 & $C_{R}$ & 0.68 $\pm$ 0.19 & 16 & 203 $\pm$ 20 & -0.611 $\pm$ 0.093 & -0.11 $\pm$ 0.04 \\
844: 060729 & 92.9 & 97.9 & $C_{R}$ & 1.90 $\pm$ 0.18 & 14 & 173 $\pm$ 15 & -0.986 $\pm$ 0.087 & -0.23 $\pm$ 0.02 \\
845: 060729 & 114.8 & 119.8 & $C_{R}$ & 0.74 $\pm$ 0.18 & 15 & 35.4 $\pm$ 6.9 & -0.896 $\pm$ 0.065 & -0.29 $\pm$ 0.04 \\
846: 060729 & 128.8 & 133.8 & $C_{R}$ & 0.61 $\pm$ 0.18 & 15 & 20.0 $\pm$ 6.3 & -0.896 $\pm$ 0.065 & -0.33 $\pm$ 0.04 \\
847: 060729 & .. & .. & .. & .. & 0.67 & 1527 $\pm$ 34 & -2.004 $\pm$ 0.029 & 0.13 $\pm$ 0.04 \\
848: 060904B & 18.5 & 31.5 & $C_{R}$ & 0.278 $\pm$ 0.055 & 18 & 20.52 $\pm$ 6.3 & -0.416 $\pm$ 0.081 & -0.288 $\pm$ 0.035 \\
849: 060904B & 146.4 & 166.4 & $C_{R}$ & 0.370 $\pm$ 0.072 & 13 & 36.2 $\pm$ 7.5 & -1.30 $\pm$ 0.18 & -0.270 $\pm$ 0.046 \\
850: 060904B & .. & .. & .. & .. & 0.67 & 1011 $\pm$ 29 & -1.26 $\pm$ 0.03 & 0.080 $\pm$ 0.027 \\
851: 060927 & 16.8 & 21.8 & $C_{i}$\tablenotemark{a} & 6.1 $\pm$ 1.1 & 16 & 125 $\pm$ 16 & -0.77 $\pm$ 0.13 & -0.365 $\pm$ 0.030 \\
852: 061007 & 27.2 & 32.2. & $C_{R}$ & 10.83 $\pm$ 0.69 & 21 & 3198 $\pm$ 54 & 0.163 $\pm$ 0.028 & -0.114 $\pm$ 0.008 \\
853: 061007 & 41.0 & 46.0 & $C_{R}$ & 286.9 $\pm$ 4.9 & 20 & 1849 $\pm$ 29 & 0.103 $\pm$ 0.026 & -0.472 $\pm$ 0.003 \\
854: 061007 & 55.4 & 60.4 & $C_{R}$ & 481.0 $\pm$ 9.2 & 20 & 2776 $\pm$ 31 & 0.054 $\pm$ 0.020 & -0.483 $\pm$ 0.003 \\
855: 061007 & 77.8 & 82.8 & $C_{R}$ & 407.4 $\pm$ 5.7 & 16 & 215.9 $\pm$ 12 & -0.673 $\pm$ 0.072 & -0.72 $\pm$ 0.01 \\
856: 061007 & 92.0 & 97.0 & $C_{R}$ & 500.5 $\pm$ 7.8 & 0.67 & 1400.4 $\pm$ 8.2 & -0.906 $\pm$ 0.013 & -0.810 $\pm$ 0.002 \\
857: 061007 & .. & .. & .. & .. & 15 & 92 $\pm$ 12 & -0.824 $\pm$ 0.093 & -0.828 $\pm$ 0.013 \\
858: 061007 & 106 & 111 & $C_{R}$ & 449.0 $\pm$ 6.4 & 0.67 & 1118.0 $\pm$ 6.0 & -0.906 $\pm$ 0.013 & -0.826 $\pm$ 0.002 \\
859: 061007 & .. & .. & .. & .. & 15 & 33.4 $\pm$ 7.6 & -0.824 $\pm$ 0.093 & -0.916 $\pm$ 0.025 \\
860: 061007 & 120 & 125 & $C_{R}$ & 376.6 $\pm$ 9.5 & 0.67 & 909.9 $\pm$ 4.5 & -0.906 $\pm$ 0.013 & -0.830 $\pm$ 0.004 \\
861: 061007 & .. & .. & .. & .. & 15 & 39.6 $\pm$ 7.8 & -0.824 $\pm$ 0.093 & -0.882 $\pm$ 0.023 \\
862: 061007 & 135 & 140 & $C_{R}$ & 333.7 $\pm$ 5.0 & 0.67 & 760.5 $\pm$ 3.5 & -0.906 $\pm$ 0.013 & -0.838 $\pm$ 0.002 \\
863: 061007 & .. & .. & .. & .. & 15 & 26.0 $\pm$ 7.2 & -0.824 $\pm$ 0.093 & -0.911 $\pm$ 0.030 \\
864: 061007 & 149 & 154 & $C_{R}$ & 280.9 $\pm$ 4.9 & 0.67 & 644.8 $\pm$ 2.8 & -0.906 $\pm$ 0.013 & -0.837 $\pm$ 0.002 \\
865: 061007 & .. & .. & .. & .. & 15 & 24.9 $\pm$ 7.1 & -0.824 $\pm$ 0.093 & -0.899 $\pm$ 0.031 \\
866: 061007 & 164 & 169 & $C_{R}$ & 233.5 $\pm$ 4.7 & 0.67 & 554.0 $\pm$ 2.3 & -0.906 $\pm$ 0.013 & -0.832 $\pm$ 0.003 \\
867: 061007 & .. & .. & .. & .. & 15 & 21.6 $\pm$ 2.6 & -0.824 $\pm$ 0.093 & -0.895 $\pm$ 0.014 \\
868: 061007 & 178 & 198 & $C_{R}$ & 183.4 $\pm$ 3.6 & 0.67 & 452.6 $\pm$ 1.8 & -0.906 $\pm$ 0.013 & -0.827 $\pm$ 0.003 \\
869: 061007 & .. & .. & .. & .. & 15 & 13.6 $\pm$ 3.6 & -0.824 $\pm$ 0.093 & -0.916 $\pm$ 0.029 \\
870: 061007 & 207 & 227 & $C_{R}$ & 149.4 $\pm$ 2.4 & 0.67 & 357.0 $\pm$ 1.4 & -0.906 $\pm$ 0.013 & -0.831 $\pm$ 0.002 \\
871: 061007 & .. & .. & .. & .. & 15 & 13.0 $\pm$ 3.5 & -0.824 $\pm$ 0.093 & -0.901 $\pm$ 0.030 \\
872: 061007 & 237 & 257 & $C_{R}$ & 127.7 $\pm$ 1.6 & 0.67 & 289.9 $\pm$ 1.1 & -0.906 $\pm$ 0.013 & -0.839 $\pm$ 0.002 \\
873: 061007 & .. & .. & .. & .. & 15 & 10.4 $\pm$ 1.8 & -0.824 $\pm$ 0.093 & -0.906 $\pm$ 0.019 \\
874: 061121 & 21.7 & 69.5 & $C_{R}$ & 0.86 $\pm$ 0.54 & 18 & 263.2 $\pm$ 4.3 & -0.403 $\pm$ 0.027 & -0.11 $\pm$ 0.06 \\
875: 061121 & 78.3 & 83.3 & $C_{R}$ & 3.33 $\pm$ 0.94 & 16 & 328 $\pm$ 13 & -0.668 $\pm$ 0.053 & -0.22 $\pm$ 0.03 \\
876: 061121 & .. & .. & .. & .. & 0.24 & 6930 $\pm$ 320 & -0.07 $\pm$ 0.08\tablenotemark{b} & 0.118 $\pm$ 0.046 \\
877: 061121 & 92.5 & 126 & $C_{R}$ & 1.04 $\pm$ 0.51 & 15 & 49.3 $\pm$ 5.0 & -0.83 $\pm$ 0.10 & -0.29 $\pm$ 0.05 \\
878: 061121 & .. & .. & .. & .. & 0.24 & 2024 $\pm$ 74 & -\tablenotemark{c} & 0.079 $\pm$ 0.091 \\
879: 061126 & 20.9 & 25.9 & $C_{R}$ & 60.65 $\pm$ 0.55 & 19 & 473 $\pm$ 16 & -0.262 $\pm$ 0.059 & -0.459 $\pm$ 0.007 \\
880: 061126 & 29.8 & 34.8 & $C_{R}$ & 41.96 $\pm$ 0.77 & 19 & 65.9 $\pm$ 9.2 & .. & -0.61 $\pm$ 0.02 \\
881: 061126 & 38.6 & 43.6 & $C_{R}$ & 28.50 $\pm$ 0.78 & 19 & 47 $\pm$ 12 & .. & -0.60 $\pm$ 0.03 \\
882: \enddata
883: \tablecomments{Optical and $\gamma$-ray flux densities and spectral indices correspond to the time intervals $t_{\mathrm{start}}$ -- $t_{\mathrm{end}}$ from the GRB trigger. The sources of the data are discussed in \S\ref{sec:detdata}, and the optical data are corrected for Galactic extinction.}
884: \tablenotetext{a}{Filterless observations of this high-{\it z} event were calibrated to the flux density at 819 nm, approximately {\it i}-band, see Ruiz-Velasco
885: {\it et al.}, in prep.}
886: \tablenotetext{b}{Taken from the spread in spectral indices with different extinction models, see \citet{page07}, Table 4.}
887: \tablenotetext{c}{There is no value given by \citet{page07} for the spectral shape during the steep decline from the peak. For many cases, the steep X-ray phase has been reported as spectrally indistinguishable from the later shallow decay, but in some cases $\beta_{X}$ is softer during the initial rapid decay \citep{nkgpg06}.}
888: \end{deluxetable}
889:
890: \begin{deluxetable}{lcccccccccc}
891: \tablewidth{0pt}
892: \tablecaption{Spectral Index $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$ Limits from Prompt Optical Limits\label{tab:optgam2}}
893: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
894: \tablehead{
895: \colhead{GRB} &
896: \colhead{$t_{\mathrm{start}}$} &
897: \colhead{$t_{\mathrm{end}}$} &
898: \colhead{Band} &
899: \colhead{$f_{\nu}$(OPT)} &
900: \colhead{$\nu_{\gamma}$} &
901: \colhead{$f_{\nu}$($\gamma$)} &
902: \colhead{$\beta_{\gamma}$} &
903: \colhead{$\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$} \\
904: \colhead{} &
905: \colhead{(s)} &
906: \colhead{(s)} &
907: \colhead{} &
908: \colhead{(mJy, Limit)} &
909: \colhead{10$^{18}$Hz} &
910: \colhead{$\mu$Jy} &
911: \colhead{} &
912: \colhead{(Limit)}
913: }
914: \startdata
915: 050306 & 64.8 & 69.8 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,10.6 & 17 & 136 $\pm$ 24 & -0.477 $\pm$ 0.042 & $>$\,-0.435 \\
916: 050306 & 78.9 & 83.9 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,7.6 & 17 & 416 $\pm$ 27 & -0.477 $\pm$ 0.042 & $>$\,-0.284 \\
917: 050306 & 93.5 & 98.5 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,7.8 & 17 & 259 $\pm$ 25 & -0.477 $\pm$ 0.042 & $>$\,-0.336 \\
918: 050306 & 108.3 & 113.3 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,8.7 & 17 & 347 $\pm$ 27 & -0.477 $\pm$ 0.042 & $>$\,-0.316 \\
919: 050306 & 122.7 & 127.7 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,8.7 & 17 & 115 $\pm$ 23 & -0.477 $\pm$ 0.042 & $>$\,-0.434 \\
920: 050306 & 180.4 & 185.4 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,8.0 & 17 & 176 $\pm$ 25 & -0.477 $\pm$ 0.042 & $>$\,-0.379 \\
921: 050713A & 72.1 & 77.1 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,2.1 & 15 & 19.2$^{+4.8}_{-8.7}$ & -0.85 $\pm$ 0.16 & $>$\,-0.51 \\
922: %050713A\tablenotemark{a} & .. & .. & .. & .. & 0.5 & 300 & 220 & 380 & -1.30 & 0.07 & $>$ \\
923: 050713A & 104.7 & 124.7 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,1.2 & 15 & 18.5$^{+2.2}_{-6.4}$ & -0.85 $\pm$ 0.16 & $>$\,-0.44 \\
924: %050713A\tablenotemark{a} & .. & .. & .. & .. & 0.5 & 1000 & 750 & 1250 & -1.30 & 0.07 & $>$ \\
925: 050822 & 31.8 & 36.8 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,1.9 & 12 & 42 $\pm$ 16 & -1.32 $\pm$ 0.09 & $>$\,-0.43 \\
926: 050822 & 39.8 & 44.8 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,1.9 & 11 & 178$^{+19}_{-67}$ & -1.61 $\pm$ 0.20 & $>$\,-0.28 \\
927: 050822 & 47.8 & 52.8 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,2.0 & 13 & 194$^{+12}_{-45}$ & -1.28 $\pm$ 0.13 & $>$\,-0.25 \\
928: 050822 & 55.9 & 60.9 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,1.9 & 12 & 181$^{+12}_{-41}$ & -1.41 $\pm$ 0.13 & $>$\,-0.26 \\
929: 050822 & 63.9 & 68.9 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,2.1 & 12 & 38.4 $\pm$ 9.9 & -1.32 $\pm$ 0.09 & $>$\,-0.43 \\
930: 050822 & 95.9 & 100.9 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,1.9 & 12 & 23.2 $\pm$ 8.9 & -1.32 $\pm$ 0.09 & $>$\,-0.48 \\
931: 050915A & 42.9 & 47.9 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,0.54 & 18 & 32.2$^{+6.2}_{-10.7}$ & -0.38 $\pm$ 0.10 & $>$\,-0.31 \\
932: 050922B & 258.4 & 263.4 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,0.94 & 14 & 39.5$^{+6.7}_{-12.0}$ & -0.99 $\pm$ 0.12 & $>$\,-0.34 \\
933: 050922B & 273.0 & 278.0 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,0.87 & 14 & 19.7 $\pm$ 7.5 & -0.99 $\pm$ 0.12 & $>$\,-0.42 \\
934: 051001 & 85.7 & 90.7 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,1.0 & 14 & 17.4$^{+2.5}_{-4.1}$ & -1.06 $\pm$ 0.10 & $>$\,-0.42 \\
935: 051001 & 100.1 & 105.1 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,0.98 & 14 & 27.5$^{+3.2}_{-5.8}$ & -1.06 $\pm$ 0.10 & $>$\,-0.37 \\
936: 051001 & 114.3 & 119.3 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,1.0 & 14 & 28.5 $\pm$ 7.2 & -1.06 $\pm$ 0.10 & $>$\,-0.38 \\
937: 051001 & 128.6 & 133.6 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,0.98 & 14 & 58.2$^{+6.1}_{-11.6}$ & -1.06 $\pm$ 0.10 & $>$\,-0.30 \\
938: 051001 & 143.1 & 148.1 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,0.99 & 14 & 57.0$^{+6.0}_{-11.5}$ & -1.06 $\pm$ 0.10 & $>$\,-0.30 \\
939: 051001 & 157.6 & 162.6 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,1.0 & 14 & 48.4 $\pm$ 8.4 & -1.06 $\pm$ 0.10 & $>$\,-0.32 \\
940: 051001 & 172.3 & 177.3 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,1.1 & 14 & 17.8 $\pm$ 3.6 & -1.06 $\pm$ 0.10 & $>$\,-0.43 \\
941: 051001 & 186.9 & 191.9 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,1.1 & 14 & 18.5 $\pm$ 6.7 & -1.06 $\pm$ 0.10 & $>$\,-0.45 \\
942: 060312 & 20.3 & 25.3 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,11.2 & 16 & 27.2 $\pm$ 7.1 & -0.772 $\pm$ 0.054 & $>$\,-0.610 \\
943: 060312 & 27.4 & 32.4 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,11.0 & 16 & 20.7 $\pm$ 3.4 & -0.772 $\pm$ 0.054 & $>$\,-0.622 \\
944: 060312 & 34.4 & 39.4 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,10.0 & 16 & 14.3 $\pm$ 1.3 & -0.772 $\pm$ 0.054 & $>$\,-0.653 \\
945: 060312 & 41.5 & 46.5 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,9.2 & 16 & 21.7 $\pm$ 7.0 & -0.772 $\pm$ 0.054 & $>$\,-0.621 \\
946: 060312 & 48.7 & 53.7 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,9.1 & 16 & 12.0 $\pm$ 3.4 & -0.772 $\pm$ 0.054 & $>$\,-0.671 \\
947: 060515 & 58.8 & 63.8 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,5.1 & 19 & 30.5$^{+3.6}_{-8.8}$ & -0.26 $\pm$ 0.14 & $>$\,-0.52 \\
948: 060614 & 26.8 & 31.8 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,1.7 & 14 & 849 $\pm$ 25 & -1.103 $\pm$ 0.026 & $>$\,-0.068 \\
949: 060614 & 40.6 & 45.6 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,1.8 & 14 & 913 $\pm$ 22 & -1.103 $\pm$ 0.026 & $>$\,-0.071 \\
950: 060614 & 55.2 & 60.2 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,1.8 & 14 & 423 $\pm$ 12 & -1.103 $\pm$ 0.026 & $>$\,-0.144 \\
951: 060614 & 69.6 & 74.6 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,1.9 & 13 & 300 $\pm$ 13 & -1.254 $\pm$ 0.045 & $>$\,-0.184 \\
952: 060614 & 83.9 & 88.9 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,1.8 & 13 & 256 $\pm$ 12 & -1.254 $\pm$ 0.045 & $>$\,-0.197 \\
953: 060614 & 98.3 & 103.3 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,1.8 & 13 & 197 $\pm$ 10 & -1.254 $\pm$ 0.045 & $>$\,-0.225 \\
954: 060614 & 112.6 & 117.6 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,1.8 & 13 & 73.6 $\pm$ 6.9 & -1.254 $\pm$ 0.045 & $>$\,-0.326 \\
955: 060614 & 126.8 & 131.8 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,1.8 & 13 & 37.8 $\pm$ 6.2 & -1.254 $\pm$ 0.045 & $>$\,-0.399 \\
956: 060614 & 140.7 & 145.7 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,1.8 & 13 & 51.0 $\pm$ 6.4 & -1.254 $\pm$ 0.045 & $>$\,-0.364 \\
957: 060614 & 155.2 & 160.2 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,1.9 & 13 & 34.4 $\pm$ 6.1 & -1.254 $\pm$ 0.045 & $>$\,-0.411 \\
958: 060614 & 169.2 & 189.2 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,1.0 & 13 & 12.3 $\pm$ 3.0 & -1.254 $\pm$ 0.045 & $>$\,-0.463 \\
959: 060729 & 64.3 & 69.3 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,0.81 & 17 & 43 $\pm$ 15 & -0.517 $\pm$ 0.095 & $>$\,-0.254 \\
960: 061110 & 43.5 & 48.5 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,1.11 & 16 & 22.9 $\pm$ 7.6 & -0.654 $\pm$ 0.087 & $>$\,-0.416 \\
961: 061222 & 47.2 & 52.2 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,0.65 & 17 & 38.5 $\pm$ 9.4 & -0.487 $\pm$ 0.095 & $>$\,-0.303 \\
962: 061222 & 54.2 & 59.2 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,0.67 & 18 & 181.4$^{+5.3}_{-28.0}$ & -0.365 $\pm$ 0.093 & $>$\,-0.139 \\
963: 061222 & 61.2 & 66.2 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,0.63 & 16 & 147.221$^{+5.0}_{-23.8}$ & -0.76 $\pm$ 0.10 & $>$\,-0.157 \\
964: 061222 & 68.2 & 73.2 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,0.65 & 18 & 196.9$^{+5.4}_{-24.1}$ & -0.280 $\pm$ 0.079 & $>$\,-0.126 \\
965: 061222 & 75.2 & 80.2 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,0.70 & 17 & 227.7$^{+4.6}_{-18.6}$ & -0.537 $\pm$ 0.065 & $>$\,-0.115 \\
966: 061222 & 82.2 & 87.2 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,0.70 & 20 & 1309 $\pm$ 25 & -0.002 $\pm$ 0.025 & $>$\,0.058 \\
967: 061222 & 89.2 & 94.2 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,0.63 & 17 & 580.8$^{+8.6}_{-19.7}$ & -0.446 $\pm$ 0.035 & $>$\,-0.011 \\
968: 061222 & 96.2 & 101.2 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,0.66 & 15 & 91.1$^{+5.3}_{-17.7}$ & -0.84 $\pm$ 0.11 & $>$\,-0.212 \\
969: 061222 & 103.2 & 108.2 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,0.68 & 15 & 47.8$^{+5.5}_{-11.8}$ & -0.84 $\pm$ 0.11 & $>$\,-0.284 \\
970: 061222 & 110.1 & 115.1 & $C_{R}$ & $<$\,0.65 & 15 & 25.1 $\pm$ 7.1 & -0.84 $\pm$ 0.11 & $>$\,-0.354 \\
971: \enddata
972: \tablecomments{Optical flux limits and $\gamma$-ray flux densities $f_{\nu}$ and their spectral indices, corresponding to the time intervals $t_{\mathrm{start}}$ -- $t_{\mathrm{end}}$ from the GRB trigger. $\gamma$-ray count rates were all detected at the 3\,$\sigma$ level or better, although the spectral fits for some cases result in $f_{\nu}$ with signal-to-noise formally $< 3$. The optical limits are from Table \ref{tab:optlim}, corrected for Galactic extinction.}
973: %\tablenotetext{a}{X-ray estimates read from \reft{owogpv06}. Not further analyzed, simply used for context with the $\gamma$-ray results.}
974: \end{deluxetable}
975:
976: \begin{figure}
977: \epsscale{0.8}
978: \plotone{f1.eps}
979: \caption{Diagrams representing some possible optical--to--$\gamma$-ray
980: spectra. These illustrate information available from the spectral
981: indices $\beta_{\gamma}$ (solid lines) and
982: $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$ (dashed lines). In nearly all observed
983: GRBs, the spectrum at the lower-energy $\gamma$-rays (BAT band) has
984: $\beta_{\gamma} < 0$, as in the two upper panels. Rarely,
985: $\beta_{\gamma} > 0$ (lower panels). The comparison of the two $\beta$
986: constrains whether the $\gamma$-ray spectrum over- (left, with
987: $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma} > \beta_{\gamma}$) or under- (right, with
988: $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma} < \beta_{\gamma}$) predicts the optical
989: flux. With optical limits, an underprediction by $\beta_{\gamma}$
990: (optical excess) cannot be inferred, but an overprediction can be
991: deduced; spectra allowing (B) or (A) can be differentiated from cases
992: which only allow (A), and those congruent with (D) or (C) from those
993: which only permit (C).}\label{fig:schema}
994: \end{figure}
995:
996:
997: \begin{figure}
998: \epsscale{1.0}
999: \plotone{f2.eps}
1000:
1001: \caption{
1002: Optical-to-$\gamma$ spectral indices ($\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$)
1003: plotted against $\gamma$-ray spectral indices ($\beta_{\gamma}$). Data
1004: are from Tables \ref{tab:optgam1} and \ref{tab:optgam2}, as well as
1005: Table 5 in \citet{ysraa07}. Optical detections have black points, and
1006: cases with optical limits are grey triangles. The latter indicate the
1007: {\it softest} possible $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma}$; the triangles
1008: are used to point upwards instead of arrows. When several optical
1009: detections occur in a single GRB event, the points are connected by a
1010: (colored in online version) line. Where legible, an arrow points from
1011: earlier to later observations.\newline
1012: \newline
1013: Most cases are above the $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma} =
1014: \beta_{\gamma}$ line, with $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma} >
1015: \beta_{\gamma}$. The $\gamma$-ray spectrum overpredicts the optical
1016: flux; this indicates a spectral rollover between the optical and high
1017: frequencies, whether or not there are separate emission components at
1018: optical and $\gamma$-ray energies. Sometimes
1019: $\beta_{\mathrm{OPT}-\gamma} < \beta_{\gamma}$. The $\gamma$-ray
1020: spectrum underpredicts the optical flux, implying a separate
1021: low-energy emission component. A few cases have consistent indices,
1022: which, as discussed for GRB\,051111 \citep{ysraa07}, could indicate a
1023: single spectral shape extending from $\gamma$-ray to optical
1024: energies. The optical limits are consistent with
1025: $f_{\nu}$(OPT)/$f_{\nu}$($\gamma$) ratios from optical detections and
1026: do not imply a separate population whose prompt optical emission is
1027: fainter relative to the $\gamma$-rays.
1028: }\label{fig:betas}
1029:
1030: \end{figure}
1031:
1032: \end{document}
1033:
1034:
1035: