1: \documentclass[

2:     ,final            % use final for the camera ready runs

3: %%  ,draft            % use draft while you are working on the paper

4: %%  ,numberedheadings % uncomment this option for numbered sections

5: %%  ,                 % add further options here if necessary

6:   ]

7:   {aipproc}

8: 

9: \layoutstyle{6x9}

10: 

11: \begin{document}

12: 

13: \title{Swift X-ray Afterglows and the Missing Jet Break Problem}

14: 

15: \classification{98.70.Rz,95.85.Nv,95.55.Ka}

16: %<Replace this text with PACS numbers; choose from this list:

17: %                \texttt{http://www.aip.org/pacs/index.html}>}

18: \keywords      {$\gamma$-ray bursts, X-rays}

19: 

20: \author{J. L. Racusin}{

21:   address={Department of Astronomy \& Astrophysics, The Pennsylvania State

22:   University, 525 Davey Lab, University Park, PA 16802}

23: }

24: 

25: \author{E.-W. Liang}{

26:   address={Department of Physics, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV 89154},

27:   altaddress={Department of Physics, Guangxi University, Nanning 530004, China}

28: }

29: 

30: \author{D. N. Burrows}{

31:   address={Department of Astronomy \& Astrophysics, The Pennsylvania State

32:   University, 525 Davey Lab, University Park, PA 16802}

33: }

34: 

35: \author{A. Falcone}{

36:   address={Department of Astronomy \& Astrophysics, The Pennsylvania State

37:   University, 525 Davey Lab, University Park, PA 16802}

38: }

39: 

40: \author{D. C. Morris}{

41:   address={Department of Astronomy \& Astrophysics, The Pennsylvania State

42:   University, 525 Davey Lab, University Park, PA 16802}

43: }

44: 

45: \author{B. B. Zhang}{

46:   address={Department of Physics, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV 89154}

47: }

48: 

49: \author{B. Zhang}{

50:   address={Department of Physics, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV 89154}

51: }

52: 

53: 

54: \begin{abstract}

55: We present a systematic survey of the temporal and spectral properties of

56: all GRB X-ray afterglows observed by Swift-XRT between January 2005 and July

57: 2007.  We have constructed a catalog of all light curves and spectra and

58: investigate the physical origin of each afterglow segment in the

59: framework of the forward shock models by comparing the data with the

60: closure relations.  We search for possible jet-like breaks in the

61: lightcurves and try to explain some of the "missing" X-ray jet breaks in

62: the lightcurves.

63: \end{abstract}

64: 

65: \maketitle

66: 

67: \section{Introduction}

68: 

69: Studies of the presence or absence of jet breaks in GRB X-ray afterglows

70: have  

71: been recently undertaken with several different approaches yielding differing

72: results \citep{burrows07,liang07b,panaitescu07,kocevski07}.  The importance of

73: this work lies in that the results have

74: vital implications on the energetics, geometry, and frequency of GRBs.  The fact

75: that they do not behave as expected from pre-{\it Swift} observations is not

76: surprising in the context of how much we do not understand and have only

77: recently learned about all of the aspects of X-ray afterglows.  To understand

78: the jet break phenomena we must understand it in the global context of GRB and

79: afterglow properties.  Therefore, the goal of our study is to do a census of

80: X-ray afterglow properties by fitting a variety of physical models to each

81: component of the afterglows and understand how the jet breaks fit in as one

82: component in the larger coherent picture of this phenomenon.

83: 

84: \section{Analysis}

85: Our sample consists of all GRBs observed by {\it Swift}-XRT between January

86: 2005 and July 2007 with enough counts to make and fit light curves and spectra. Our

87: resulting sample contains 212 X-ray afterglows, 14 of which were not originally

88: discovered by Swift-BAT, and 80 of which have redshifts.  We created light curves

89: for each afterglow using the Penn State XRT light curve tools, removing all

90: significant flares, and fit them to power-laws and (multiply-) broken power-laws.

91: 

92: We attempt to categorize these light curves in the context of the canonical

93: model \citep{zhang06,nousek06}.  The canonical model contains 5 segments; I:

94: the initial steep decay often referred to as the high-latitude emission or 

95: curvature effect \citep{zhang07a}

96: ; II: the plateau 

97: which is believed to be due to continuous energy injection from the central

98: engine \citep{liang07a}

99: ; III: the normal decay due to adiabatic evolution of the forward shock

100: \citep{meszaros02}

101: ; IV: the post-jet break phase

102: \citep{rhoads99,sari99}

103: ; V: flares, which are 

104: seen in $\sim 1/3$ of all {\it Swift} GRB X-ray afterglows and are believed to be

105: caused by continuous sporadic emission from the central engine

106: \citep{chincarini07,falcone07}.  We classify the light curves depending 

107: upon criteria of the number of segments and their relative decay indices,

108: leading to unambiguous categories of segments I-II-III-IV and II-III-IV that

109: contain jet breaks in IV, segments I-II and I-II-III that are apparently

110: pre-jet break with some ambiguity in the segments III, the ambiguous segments

111: II-III/III-IV, and single power-laws. The ambiguous groups may well contain many

112: of the missing jet breaks and require further distinguishing criteria.

113: 

114: To further investigate the properties of the straightforward jet breaks and the

115: ambiguous cases, we created spectra for each of these segments of the light

116: curves and fit them to absorbed power-laws.  These temporal and spectral

117: properties are used in conjunction to characterize the afterglows.

118: 

119: %\section{Closure Relations}

120: The closure relations describe the temporal and spectral evolution of the

121: afterglows with dependence on the physical mechanisms at work in the GRB

122: and its environment.  We assembled many permutations of the closure relations

123: that depend on the circum-GRB environment, the frequency regime, slow or fast

124: cooling, electron spectral index regime, presence of energy injection,

125: isotropic or collimated emission, and 

126: jet structure from the literature

127: \citep{zhang04,zhang06,dai01,panaitescu06a,panaitescu05b}.  We applied these

128: relations to each light curve 

129: segment, where appropriate, using the compiled temporal and spectral indices.  The

130: resulting fits allowed us to distinguish those light curves with potential jet

131: breaks that are consistent with the post-jet break closure relations and those

132: that are not.  We require closure relation consistency between the segments of

133: each light curve and use the corresponding information to eliminate models

134: that cannot appropriately be applied throughout.  Unfortunately, due to the large

135: number of possible models, often many relations were consistent and further

136: distinguishing criteria were required.

137: 

138: %\section{Jet Break Classification}

139: \section{Results}

140: Using the temporal fit criteria and the closure relations fits, we classified

141: our sample into several categories of potential jet breaks based upon their

142: likelihood of containing jet breaks.  Those afterglow light curves that

143: distinctly contain a segment IV that is consistent with at least one post-jet

144: break closure relations are categorized as Prominent jet breaks and constitute

145: $\sim 13\%$ of our total sample.  GRB 050315 (shown in the left panel of Figure

146: \ref{fig:examples}) is an example of a burst in this category.  Those

147: ambiguous light curves (segments I-II-III, II-III, single power-laws) that are

148: consistent with only post-jet break and not pre-jet break closure relations are

149: categorized as Hidden jet breaks, which constitute $\sim 3\%$ or our total sample.

150: The remaining temporally ambiguous light 

151: curves that are consistent with both pre- and post-jet break closure relations

152: require further distinction.

153: 

154: To further distinguish post-jet break from pre-jet break light curves we compare

155: the relative decay slopes of the apparent II-III transition of the ambiguous

156: sample to the Prominent jet break sample.  Though this technique we find that an

157: additional $25\%$ of our sample contain apparent jet break transitions like that

158: of GRB 051008 shown in the right panel of Figure \ref{fig:examples}.

159: 

160: For those ambiguous light curves that do not contain even the apparent II-III

161: transition, namely the single power-laws, we 

162: evaluate their temporal decay slopes and start and stop times relative to the

163: Prominent jet breaks, finding that most of those with steep decays begin during

164: the time frame where we would expect to find jet breaks.  Therefore, those that

165: start late and are steep are probably post-jet break and those that start early

166: and end early are probably pre-jet break.  Through these criteria we suggest

167: that an

168: additional $\sim 3\%$ of our sample contain jet breaks or are post-jet break.

169: 

170: \begin{figure}

171:   \includegraphics[height=.35\textheight,angle=90]{grb050315_lc.ps}

172:   \includegraphics[height=.35\textheight,angle=90]{grb051008_lc.ps}

173:   \caption{{\it Left} - Example of Prominent jet break in GRB 050315 with fit

174:     showing all 4 segments. {\it Right} - Example of ambiguous 2 segment light

175:     curve for GRB 051008 with a Probable jet

176:     break classified using $\alpha$ comparison technique. \label{fig:examples}}

177: \end{figure}

178: 

179: %\section{Missed Jet Breaks}

180: The other logical explanation for not seeing jet breaks for every GRB is that

181: the observations simply end too early.  We evaluate this by calculating the

182: last time for which a break could occur and be buried within the errors.  If

183: this time is inside the time interval for which we expect a jet break to occur

184: based upon the behavior the Prominent sample, then it is feasible that a jet

185: break occurred around or after this time and would still be consistent with

186: expectations.  We compare these distributions in Figure \ref{fig:tlastdet}, and

187: find that these criteria are met for $\sim 80\%$ of the remaining afterglows.

188: 

189: \begin{figure}

190:   \includegraphics[height=.35\textheight,angle=90]{tlastdet_dist.ps}

191:   \includegraphics[height=.35\textheight,angle=90]{tlastdet_dist2.ps}

192:   \caption{Distributions of potential jet break times, time of last detection,

193:   and time of last possible break for our categories of light curves with

194:   potential jet breaks and non-jet breaks in the observed and rest frame for

195:   those with redshifts. 

196:   \label{fig:tlastdet}}

197: \end{figure}

198: 

199: 

200: \section{Conclusions}

201: 

202: Although the jet break phenomena is not fully understood, we are beginning to

203: be able to better explain the paucity of expected observations of them.  We are

204: able to identify a sizeable group of afterglows that likely contain jet breaks or

205: post-jet break data even though they do not present themselves in the classical

206: context of the full canonical model.  Due to observational limitations and

207: additional possible physical model variations, even more afterglows may be

208: consistent with the expectations from those that do contain confident jet

209: breaks, but are currently indistinguishable. While we are beginning to

210: understand or at least be able to explain the majority of our sample, we are

211: also finding an interesting small subset of outliers that confidently do not

212: contain jet breaks during the time interval in which we would expect to see

213: them.  These afterglows require further investigation and perhaps are somehow

214: fundamentally different in their jet and afterglow properties.

215: %We will present

216: %further analysis and discussion of energetics in \citet{racusin08}.

217: 

218: 

219: \begin{theacknowledgments}

220: JLR, DNB, DCM, and AF acknowledge support under NASA contract NAS5-00136.

221: \end{theacknowledgments}

222: 

223: \bibliographystyle{aipproc}   % if natbib is available

224: %\bibliographystyle{aipprocl} % if natbib is missing

225: 

226: \bibliography{ms}

227: 

228: \end{document}

229: 

230: