1: % Long lag in GRB 060505
2: %
3: % %
4: %-------------------------------------------------------
5: %-------------------------------------------------------
6: %\documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
7: \documentclass{emulateapj}
8:
9:
10: %\usepackage{natbib}
11: \bibpunct[, ]{(}{)}{;}{a}{}{,}
12: %\citestyle{aa}
13:
14:
15:
16: \newcommand{\sect}{\S\,}
17:
18: \begin{document}
19:
20: \title
21: {The spectral lag of GRB\,060505: a likely member of the long duration class}
22:
23: \shorttitle{The spectral lag of GRB\,060505}
24: \shortauthors{McBreen et al.}
25:
26:
27:
28: \author{
29: S.~McBreen\altaffilmark{1},
30: S.~Foley\altaffilmark{2},
31: D.~Watson\altaffilmark{3},
32: L.~Hanlon\altaffilmark{2},
33: D.~Malesani\altaffilmark{3},
34: J.~P.~U.~Fynbo\altaffilmark{3},
35: D.~A.~Kann\altaffilmark{4},
36: N.~Gehrels\altaffilmark{5},
37: S.~McGlynn\altaffilmark{2},
38: D.~Palmer\altaffilmark{6} }
39:
40: \altaffiltext{1}{Max-Planck-Institut f\"{u}r extraterrestrische Physik, 85748 Garching, Germany; smcbreen@mpe.mpg.de}
41: \altaffiltext{2}{School of Physics, University College Dublin, Dublin 4, Ireland; sfoley, smcglynn@bermuda.ucd.ie, lorraine.hanlon@ucd.ie}
42: \altaffiltext{3}{Dark Cosmology Centre, Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, Juliane Maries Vej 30, DK-2100 Copenhagen \O, Denmark; darach, malesani, jfynbo@dark-cosmology.dk}
43: \altaffiltext{4}{Th\"uringer Landessternwarte Tautenburg, Sternwarte 5, D-07778 Tautenburg, Germany; kann@tls-tautenburg.de}
44: \altaffiltext{5}{NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland 20771, USA; gehrels@milkyway.gsfc.nasa.gov}
45: \altaffiltext{6}{Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico 87545, USA; palmer@lanl.gov
46: }
47:
48:
49:
50: \begin{abstract}
51: Two long $\gamma$-ray bursts,
52: GRB\,060505 and GRB\,060614, occurred in nearby galaxies at
53: redshifts of 0.089 and 0.125 respectively. Due to their proximity and durations,
54: deep follow-up campaigns to search for
55: supernovae (SNe) were initiated.
56: However none were found in either case, to limits more than
57: two orders of magnitude fainter than the prototypical GRB-associated SN,
58: 1998bw. It was suggested that the bursts, in spite of their durations
59: ($\sim4$ and 102\,s), belonged to the population of
60: \textit{short} GRBs
61: which has been shown to be unrelated to SNe.
62: In the case of GRB\,060614 this
63: argument was based on a number of indicators, including the negligible spectral lag,
64: which is consistent with that of short
65: bursts. GRB\,060505 has a shorter duration, but no spectral lag was
66: measured. We present the spectral lag measurements of GRB\,060505
67: using $\emph{Suzaku}$'s Wide Area Monitor and the $\emph{Swift}$ Burst
68: Alert Telescope.
69: We find that the lag is $0.36\pm0.05$\,s, inconsistent with the lags of short bursts and
70: consistent with the properties of long bursts and SN-GRBs.
71: These results support the association of GRB\,060505 with
72: other low-luminosity GRBs also found in star-forming galaxies
73: and indicates that
74: at least
75: some massive stars may die without bright SNe.%}
76: \end{abstract}
77: \keywords{ gamma rays: bursts}
78:
79: % \maketitle
80:
81: %
82: %--------INTRODUCTION---------
83: %
84:
85:
86: \section{Introduction\label{introduction}}
87:
88: The existence of two classes of gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) differing in
89: observed durations and spectral properties has been established for some
90: time
91: \citep[e.g.][]{1981Ap&SS..80..119M,1984Natur.308..434N,1992AIPC..265....3H}.
92: These populations were quantified using the Burst and Transient Source
93: Experiment (BATSE), which showed a bimodal distribution in the
94: durations of GRBs well fit by two lognormal functions
95: \citep{1994MNRAS.271..662M}, with the divide at $\sim2\,$s
96: \citep{1993ApJ...413L.101K}.
97: In addition, there is also contamination in the short burst class from soft gamma-ray repearters \citep[e.g.][]{2008arXiv0802.0008C}.
98: It is generally accepted that long GRBs
99: have their origins in massive star progenitors because of their association with core-collapse supernovae
100: \citep[SNe,][]{1998Natur.395..670G,2003Natur.423..847H,2003ApJ...591L..17S,2004ApJ...609L...5M,2006Natur.442.1011P,2006ARA&A..44..507W}
101: and
102: occurrence in star-forming galaxies \citep{2002AJ....123.1111B} and in
103: highly star-forming regions therein \citep{2006Natur.441..463F}.
104: The origin of short GRBs is still open, with mergers of compact
105: objects being the leading concept
106: \citep[e.g.][]{2005Natur.437..851G,2005Natur.437..859H,2005Natur.437..845F}.
107:
108: The detection of
109: the spectroscopic signatures of SNe in the 4 nearest GRBs and the detection of
110: bumps consistent with SNe in the lightcurves of most low-redshift bursts
111: seemed to confirm the paradigm that all long GRBs would be associated with
112: SNe \citep{2004ApJ...609..952Z,2006ARA&A..44..507W}, as predicted by the
113: collapsar model of long GRBs \citep{1999A&AS..138..499W}.
114: Doubts were cast on
115: this paradigm
116: by the non-detection of SNe in
117: two nearby GRBs, GRB\,060505 at $z=0.089$ \citep{2006GCN..5123....1O}
118: and
119: GRB\,060614 at $z=0.125$ \citep{Price06_GCN5275}
120: discovered by the \emph{Swift} \citep{gehrels:2004} Burst Alert Telescope
121: \citep[BAT,][]{2005SSRv..120..143B}. Due to their long durations, $T_{90}$ of $4\pm1$\,s and $102\pm5$\,s respectively
122: \citep{2006GCN..5142....1H,Barthelmy06_GCN5256},
123: SN searches were initiated.
124: Although a supernova $\sim$100
125: times fainter than SN1998bw would have been detected, none was found in
126: either case
127: \citep{2006Natur.444.1047F,2006Natur.444.1053G,2006Natur.444.1050D,2007ApJ...662.1129O}.
128: It was suggested that they were short bursts where
129: the lack of SNe would not be surprising, as short GRBs
130: have not shown
131: SN emission %\textbf{
132: \citep{2005Natur.437..859H,2005Natur.437..845F,2006ApJ...638..354B,2006A&A...447L...5C}.% }
133:
134: The classification of GRBs with durations close to the
135: long/short division is problematic. The argument that GRB\,060614 was a
136: ``short GRB" rests on its extended soft emission component
137: and on its negligible spectral lag
138: \citep{2006Natur.444.1044G,2007ApJ...655L..25Z}. When the latter is combined with its
139: relatively low luminosity, it violates the lag-luminosity relation found by
140: \citet{2000ApJ...534..248N} for long GRBs.
141: If the lack of a SN in GRB\,060505 is to be attributed to it being a short burst, it should also have a negligible lag.
142: We present the spectral lag analysis of the prompt emission of
143: GRB\,060505 using data from the \emph{Suzaku} Wide Area
144: Monitor (WAM) and \emph{Swift}-BAT.
145:
146:
147: \section{Observations and data reduction}
148:
149:
150: \begin{figure}[t]
151: \begin{centering}
152: \epsscale{1}
153: \plotone{f1.eps}
154: \caption{The lightcurves of GRB\,060505 with the BAT instrument on
155: $\emph{Swift}$ (a) and from the WAM0 detector on $\emph{Suzaku}$ (b-e), all at 100\,ms resolution.
156: Time is relative to the BAT trigger.
157: A precursor is visible in the lowest energy WAM channel.}% }
158: \label{fig:BATlightcurves}\label{fig:WAWlightcurves}
159: \end{centering}
160: \end{figure}
161:
162: GRB\,060505 was detected by the BAT instrument on \emph{Swift}.
163: %\textbf{
164: The fluence
165: is (6.2$\pm$1.1)$\times 10^{-7}$ ergs cm$^{-2}$ (15-150\,keV) and the spectrum is fit by a power law with index 1.3$\pm0.3$
166: \citep{2006GCN..5142....1H}. The trigger fell below the
167: 6.5$\sigma$ threshold for an automatic slew but
168: ground analysis found a 8.5$\sigma$ excess \citep{2006GCN..5076....1P}.
169: \emph{Swift} was
170: repointed at T$_0$+0.6~days and a weak fading X-ray source was identified
171: \citep{2006GCN..5114....1C}.
172: We obtained the publicly available data for GRB\,060505 from
173: the $\emph{Swift}$
174: archive\footnote{http://swift.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/swift/archive/}. A mask
175: weighted lightcurve was generated using the BAT data analysis
176: tools. The available data contained only 10\,s of event data and the
177: lightcurve is presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:BATlightcurves}.
178: $\emph{Swift}$ was approaching the South Atlantic Anomaly when the burst occurred and was subject to a higher than normal background level. Additionally, the partial
179: coding was only 11\% \citep{2006GCN..5142....1H} meaning that the off-axis
180: angle with respect to the $\emph{Swift}$ axis was almost 50$\degr$,
181: substantially reducing the effective area of the instrument. Splitting the
182: data into energy channels for spectral lag analysis
183: further
184: reduces the weak signal.
185:
186: The WAM is the anti-coincidence shield (ACS) of the Hard X-ray Detector on $\emph{Suzaku}$
187: \citep{2006SPIE.6266E.122Y} and it also triggered on GRB\,060505.
188: The WAM consists of four identical walls which act as
189: individual detectors (WAM0 to WAM3). The detectors have a large effective
190: area \citep{2006SPIE.6266E.122Y}. They are sensitive in the
191: energy range 50--5000\,keV, and although its primary role is to act as
192: an ACS, WAM is also used as an all-sky monitor for
193: GRBs. An automated triggering system operates on board
194: \citep{2006AIPC..836..201Y} and the lightcurves are publicly available at
195: 15.6\,ms resolution in 4 rough energy bands 50--110, 110--240, 240--520,
196: 520--5000\,keV\footnote{http://www.astro.isas.ac.jp/suzaku/HXD-WAM/WAM/}.
197: The lightcurves in the four energy channels from the WAM0 detector
198: at 100\,ms resolution are presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:WAWlightcurves}. The T$_{\rm 90}$ of
199: GRB\,060505 was $\sim$4.8~s in the
200: 50--5000\,keV band$^{8}$.
201: The burst struck the WAM detector at an angle
202: such that principally WAM0, but also to a lesser extent WAM3, detected the burst.
203: The on-axis effective area of the BAT and WAM instruments are shown in Fig.~2 of
204: \citet{2006SPIE.6266E.122Y} and the effective area of WAM only exceeds that
205: of BAT above 300\,keV. However, it should be remembered that GRB\,060505
206: occurred $\sim50\degr$ off-axis in BAT
207: and that the effective area of BAT also drops rapidly above 100\,keV.
208: These factors result in a more significant detection
209: GRB\,060505
210: by WAM than BAT and therefore we rely primarily on the WAM data for our
211: analysis. However, we show that the results are consistent with those obtained
212: from the BAT data.
213:
214:
215: \section{Data Analysis and Results}
216:
217: The spectral lag was calculated by
218: cross-correlating the lightcurves in different energy channels
219: \citep[e.g.][]{1997ApJ...486..928B,2000ApJ...534..248N,Foley2007}. The
220: cross-correlation function (CCF) was fit with a fourth order polynomial and
221: the quoted lag value is the peak of this function. Statistical errors were
222: calculated using a bootstrap method as described in
223: \citet{2000ApJ...534..248N}. %\textbf{
224: This involves adding
225: Poissonian noise based on the observed counts to the
226: lightcurves in the different energy channels and re-computing
227: the CCF in 100 realisations for each burst.
228: The
229: 50th ranked value is the mean lag and the 16th and 84th
230: ranked values represent $\pm1\sigma$.% }
231:
232: The spectral lag was determined between the 50--110 and 110--240\,keV ($\tau_{110-240,50-110}$)
233: energy bands for the $\emph{Suzaku}$ WAM detectors over a range of temporal resolutions
234: (15.6, 31.2, 46.8, 62.4, 78 and 100\,ms). The lightcurves were correlated from $-$4 to +4\,s and
235: the CCF was fit over a range of $\sim$5\,s.
236: A lightcurve threshold of 10\% (30\%) is
237: applied, which means that only data with at least one-tenth (three-tenths) of the peak
238: count rate is used to calculate the lag, thus reducing the background.
239: The spectral lag values obtained from WAM0 at the six time resolutions specified above at 10\% threshold agree within the uncertainties and the average value is $0.36\pm{0.05}$\,s. %}
240: Applying the 30\% threshold to the same lightcurves, increases the average value to 0.44$\pm{0.06}$\,s and all values are within $1\sigma$ of those obtained at the 10\% threshold except at 60\,ms and 78\,ms, which are consistent at the $2\sigma$ level.
241: Above the 50\% threshold the results are unreliable
242: and the lag is not accurately reproduced.
243: The burst is detected with lower significance in WAM3 and does not allow an accurate
244: determination of the lag. We add the signal from WAM3 to that of WAM0 to
245: test if this gives a consistent result.
246: The results are consistent with WAM0 alone within $\sim1\sigma$, except at 100\,ms
247: resolution where the WAM0+3 lag is larger but is consistent at
248: $\sim3\sigma$ with the WAM0 results (10\% threshold).
249: The average value obtained from the sum of the WAM0 and WAM3 lightcurves
250: is 0.42$\pm$0.05\,s and 0.47$^{+0.05}_{-0.06}$\,s at 10\% and 30\% thresholds respectively.
251: The cross correlation data and fit for WAM0 at 100\,ms is presented in
252: Fig.~\ref{fig:ccfsWAM}\,a and is inconsistent with the negligible lag expected for
253: a short burst.
254: A precursor is evident in the WAM data at $-$8\,s and including it in the lag analysis over a wider time range results in a consistent lag measurement of 0.47$\pm0.06$\,s.
255: We note that precursors are not normally detected in short bursts.
256:
257:
258: \begin{figure}
259: \begin{centering}
260: \epsscale{1}
261: \plotone{f2.eps}
262: \caption{The cross-correlation data and fit
263: for a)
264: the WAM0 data at 100\,ms between the 110-240 and 50-110\,keV energy bands
265: and b)
266: the BAT data at 100\,ms
267: between the 50--100 and 25--50\,keV bands. A 4$^{\rm th}$
268: order polynomial fit to the data is shown. The vertical lines
269: denote zero lag. GRB\,060505 is clearly inconsistent with zero
270: lag.} \label{fig:ccfsWAM}
271: \end{centering}
272: \end{figure}
273:
274: The lag was also measured between the 25--50\,keV and 50--100\,keV energy
275: bands ($\tau_{50-100,25-50}$) at 100\,ms using the BAT data with the techniques outlined above (Fig.~\ref{fig:ccfsWAM}\,b). The
276: lightcurve was too weak to determine the lag at finer time resolution. The
277: spectral lag value of 0.4$\pm$0.1\,s measured using the BAT data is
278: consistent within $1\,\sigma$ with that obtained from the WAM0 and WAM0+3.
279:
280:
281: In order to establish the robustness of our result, we determined the lag for 16 additional
282: GRBs detected by both BAT and WAM, for which the lightcurve data were sufficient for lag analysis in both instruments.
283: The analysis was performed in a similar manner to GRB\,060505. The derived lags ranged from $-$\,3\,ms to 0.94\,s in the WAM and 0 to 0.86\,s in the BAT.
284: The lags are compatible considering the differing instruments and off-axis angles, energy ranges and the spectra of the bursts, except in 2 cases where the BAT lag was significantly longer. The sample consisted of 12 long and 4 short bursts.
285: Crucially, the short bursts were always found to have negligible lag in both instruments. This shows that
286: our analysis is sensitive to short lags.
287:
288: \section{Discussion}
289:
290:
291: \subsection{Spectral lags}
292:
293: \begin{figure}[t]
294: \epsscale{1}
295: \plotone{f3.eps}
296: \caption{
297: The lag-luminosity relation using data (diamonds) and fit from \citet{2000ApJ...534..248N}.
298: In addition, GRB\,060505 (open circle), GRB\,060614 \citep[filled square:][]{2006Natur.444.1044G}, short GRBs (open squares)
299: and 3 GRBs associated with SNe (filled-circles) are included. The lag values are from the following: GRB\,060218: \citet{2006ApJ...653L..81L},
300: GRB\,031203: \citet{Foley2007}, GRB\,980425: \citet{2002ApJ...579..386N}.
301: The spectral lag of GRB 060505 is significantly longer than those measured for short GRBs, and it falls on the lag-luminosity plot in a position similar to that of some SN-GRBs.
302: The diamond and filled-circle lag values are determined between the 25--50 and 100--300\,keV energy ranges. Lags for GRB\,060614 and the short bursts are measured between the 15--25 and 50--100\,keV ranges. No $k$-correction is applied. }
303: \label{fig:lag-lum}%}
304: \end{figure}
305:
306: The spectral lags in GRBs have been discussed by many authors
307: \citep[e.g.][]{1997ApJ...486..928B,2000ApJ...534..248N,2000HEAD....5.3402N,2006ApJ...643..266N,2006ApJ...646.1086H,2007ApJS..169...62H,Foley2007}.
308:
309: Using BATSE data, \citet{2002ApJ...579..386N} and
310: \citet{2006ApJ...643..266N} found that long duration GRBs had both
311: measurable and zero lags but that short GRBs had lags around zero.
312: \citet{2006ApJ...643..266N} calculated the lags of 260 short GRBs using
313: BATSE data and found that 90--95\% of the values were consistent with zero
314: and suggest that bursts with positive lag may result from contamination by the
315: long GRB class.
316: It was also argued that if short GRBs had lags proportionally as large as
317: long GRBs, such lags would be detectable, i.e.\ that this result was not
318: simply an effect of the duration of short bursts. This is not to say
319: that bursts with short lags are necessarily in the short GRB class. In the
320: sample of published lags of BATSE data by \citet{2007ApJS..169...62H}, 1427
321: bursts have $T_{\rm 90}\geq2$\,s and a measured lag ($\tau_{100-50,20-50}$).
322: Of these bursts 214
323: have lags in the range from $-10$ to $+10$\,ms (79 with uncertainties of $\pm10$\,ms) and 348 have lags in the range from $-20$ to $+20$\,ms (217 with
324: uncertainties of $\pm20$\,ms), showing that there are many
325: long GRBs with very short lag.
326: In summary,
327: long bursts are expected to have predominantly positive lags ranging from zero to several seconds.
328: Short GRBs have almost exclusively negligible lags.
329: However, it is not possible to exclude that GRB\,060505 could be an outlier: i.e. a short duration GRB with a positive lag
330: or due to a process which does not fit into the lag classification scheme.
331:
332: There have been
333: difficulties in classifying a number of bursts
334: and the lag has been used to discriminate
335: in a
336: number of cases \citep[e.g.][]{2006astro.ph..5570D}. For example, GRB\,060912A has a T$_{\rm 90}$ of $\sim6$\,s and
337: was initially thought to have occurred
338: in a nearby elliptical galaxy, however \citet{2007MNRAS.378.1439L} recently
339: found that it was more likely to come from a star forming galaxy at
340: $z=0.937$ and report a lag ($\tau_{100-350,25-50}$) of $83\pm43$\,ms.
341: Various strategies have been proposed to distinguish bursts more effectively
342: than the duration alone
343: \citep[e.g.][]{2000ApJ...534..248N,2006astro.ph..5570D,2007ApJ...655L..25Z}.
344: However, none have seen widespread adoption.
345:
346:
347:
348:
349:
350: \subsection{What was the progenitor of GRB\,060505?}
351:
352: It was argued that GRB\,060505 was probably part of the tail of the short
353: burst population and connected to mergers of compact objects.
354: At a redshift of $z$=0.089, GRB\,060505 has an isotropic peak
355: luminosity of $\sim9\times10^{47}\,\rm{erg}\,\rm{s}^{-1}$ (50-300\,keV).
356: Having a low luminosity and relatively long lag of 0.36$\pm{0.05}$\,s, GRB\,060505 falls
357: below the lag-luminosity relation of~\citet{2000ApJ...534..248N}
358: as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:lag-lum}.
359: The spectral lag of GRB 060505 is significantly longer than those measured for short GRBs and GRB\,060614
360: and it falls on the lag-luminosity plot in a position similar to that of some (but not all) SN-GRBs (e.g. GRB\,031203).
361:
362: \citet{2007ApJ...662.1129O} argue that the simplest interpretation for GRB\,060505
363: is that it is
364: related to a merger event rather than a short-lived massive star and point out
365: that the maximum allowable distance of GRB\,060505
366: from a star-forming knot is consistent with the shortest merger timescales.
367: \citet{2007astro.ph..3407T} claim that GRB060505 occurred in a star forming region of the host galaxy which resembles long GRB host galaxies and argue for a massive star origin for this event. It has
368: also been argued that the host galaxy of GRB\,060505 is more
369: similar a short burst host in terms of metallicity and ionisation state
370: \citep{2007ApJ...667L.121L}.
371: However, their short GRB host region in the emission line ratio
372: diagram is based on only two burst host galaxies, one of which is the
373: GRB 050416A, which has photometric evidence for an associated SN
374: \citep{2007ApJ...661..982S} and is argued to be a long GRB due its spectral
375: softness and location on the Amati plot \citep{2006ApJ...636L..73S}.
376: The host galaxy studies alone do not resolve the classification issue for
377: GRB\,060505.
378: The optical luminosity at 12 hours in the source frame is similar to
379: those of short GRB afterglows, but optical luminosity alone is also
380: not a valid classification tool \citep{Kann2008}.
381: In our opinion, the lag measurement suggests that this burst is similar to long GRBs implying a massive star progenitor, despite the lack of a SN detection.
382:
383: It has been argued that the absence of a SN signature in GRB\,060505
384: is evidence of a new, quiet endpoint for some massive
385: stars \citep{2006Natur.444.1047F,2007astro.ph..3678W}.
386: The existence of a SN was a feature of the early collapsar model. However,
387: the complete absence of a SN may be expected where the $^{56}$Ni does not
388: have sufficient impetus to escape the black hole
389: \citep{2003ApJ...591..288H,2006ApJ...650.1028F} or
390: in jet-induced explosions with narrow jets when the deposited energy is small
391: \citep{2007astro.ph..2472N,2007ApJ...657L..77T}.
392: Progenitor stars with
393: relatively low angular momentum could also produce GRBs without supernovae
394: \citep{2003AIPC..662..202M}.
395: These seem attractive
396: explanations at least for GRB\,060505.
397: In the absence of a GRB explosion, the detection of such quiet-death massive stars, if they exist,
398: is a challenge for current instrumentation \citep[e.g.][]{2008arXiv0802.0456K}.% }
399:
400:
401: \acknowledgements
402: SMB acknowledges an EU % European Union
403: Marie Curie Fellowship in Framework 6.
404: The Dark Cosmology Centre is funded by the DNRF. DM acknowledges IDA for support.
405:
406:
407:
408:
409:
410:
411:
412: \begin{thebibliography}{59}
413: \expandafter\ifx\csname natexlab\endcsname\relax\def\natexlab#1{#1}\fi
414:
415: \bibitem[{{Band}(1997)}]{1997ApJ...486..928B}
416: {Band}, D.~L. 1997, \apj, 486, 928
417:
418: \bibitem[{{Barthelmy} {et~al.}(2006)}]{Barthelmy06_GCN5256}
419: {Barthelmy}, S. {et~al.} 2006, {GCN 5256}
420:
421: \bibitem[{{Barthelmy}(2005)}]{2005SSRv..120..143B}
422: {Barthelmy}, S.~D.~o. 2005, Space Science Reviews, 120, 143
423:
424: \bibitem[{{Bloom} {et~al.}(2002){Bloom}, {Kulkarni}, \&
425: {Djorgovski}}]{2002AJ....123.1111B}
426: {Bloom}, J.~S., {Kulkarni}, S.~R., \& {Djorgovski}, S.~G. 2002, \aj, 123, 1111
427:
428: \bibitem[{{Bloom} {et~al.}(2006)}]{2006ApJ...638..354B}
429: {Bloom}, J.~S. {et~al.} 2006, \apj, 638, 354
430:
431: \bibitem[{{Chapman} {et~al.}(2008){Chapman}, {Priddey}, \&
432: {Tanvir}}]{2008arXiv0802.0008C}
433: {Chapman}, R.{et~al.}. 2008, {astro-ph/0802.0008}
434:
435: \bibitem[{{Conciatore} {et~al.}(2006)}]{2006GCN..5114....1C}
436: {Conciatore}, M.~L. {et~al.} 2006, GCN, 5114
437:
438: \bibitem[{{Covino} {et~al.}(2006){Covino}, {Malesani}, {Israel},
439: {et~al.}}]{2006A&A...447L...5C}
440: {Covino}, S., {Malesani}, D., {Israel}, G.~L., {et~al.} 2006, \aap, 447, L5
441:
442: \bibitem[{{Della Valle} {et~al.}(2006)}]{2006Natur.444.1050D}
443: {Della Valle}, M. {et~al.} 2006, \nat, 444, 1050
444:
445: \bibitem[{{Donaghy} {et~al.}(2006)}]{2006astro.ph..5570D}
446: {Donaghy}, T.~Q. {et~al.} 2006, astro-ph/0605570
447:
448: \bibitem[{{Foley} {et~al.}(2007)}]{Foley2007}
449: {Foley}, S. {et~al.} 2007, {A\&A, in press. astro-ph/0803.1821}
450:
451: \bibitem[{{Fox} {et~al.}(2005)}]{2005Natur.437..845F}
452: {Fox}, D.~B. {et~al.} 2005, \nat, 437, 845
453:
454: \bibitem[{{Fruchter} {et~al.}(2006)}]{2006Natur.441..463F}
455: {Fruchter}, A.~S. {et~al.} 2006, \nat, 441, 463
456:
457: \bibitem[{{Fryer} {et~al.}(2006){Fryer}, {Young}, \&
458: {Hungerford}}]{2006ApJ...650.1028F}
459: {Fryer}, C.~L., {Young}, P.~A., \& {Hungerford}, A.~L. 2006, \apj, 650, 1028
460:
461: \bibitem[{{Fynbo} {et~al.}(2006)}]{2006Natur.444.1047F}
462: {Fynbo}, J.~P.~U. {et~al.} 2006, \nat, 444, 1047
463:
464: \bibitem[{{Gal-Yam} {et~al.}(2006)}]{2006Natur.444.1053G}
465: {Gal-Yam}, A. {et~al.} 2006, \nat, 444, 1053
466:
467: \bibitem[{{Galama} {et~al.}(1998)}]{1998Natur.395..670G}
468: {Galama}, T.~J. {et~al.} 1998, \nat, 395, 670
469:
470: \bibitem[{{Gehrels} {et~al.}(2004)}]{gehrels:2004}
471: {Gehrels}, N. {et~al.} 2004, \apj, 611, 1005
472:
473: \bibitem[{{Gehrels} {et~al.}(2005)}]{2005Natur.437..851G}
474: ---. 2005, \nat, 437, 851
475:
476: \bibitem[{{Gehrels} {et~al.}(2006)}]{2006Natur.444.1044G}
477: ---. 2006, \nat, 444, 1044
478:
479: \bibitem[{{Hakkila} \& {Giblin}(2006)}]{2006ApJ...646.1086H}
480: {Hakkila}, J. \& {Giblin}, T.~W. 2006, \apj, 646, 1086
481:
482: \bibitem[{{Hakkila} {et~al.}(2007)}]{2007ApJS..169...62H}
483: {Hakkila}, J. {et~al.} 2007, \apjs, 169, 62
484:
485: \bibitem[{{Heger} {et~al.}(2003){Heger}, {Fryer}, {Woosley}, {Langer}, \&
486: {Hartmann}}]{2003ApJ...591..288H}
487: {Heger}, A., {Fryer}, C.~L., {Woosley}, S.~E., {Langer}, N., \& {Hartmann},
488: D.~H. 2003, \apj, 591, 288
489:
490: \bibitem[{{Hjorth} {et~al.}(2003)}]{2003Natur.423..847H}
491: {Hjorth}, J. {et~al.} 2003, \nat, 423, 847
492:
493: \bibitem[{{Hjorth} {et~al.}(2005)}]{2005Natur.437..859H}
494: ---. 2005, \nat, 437, 859
495:
496: \bibitem[{{Hullinger} {et~al.}(2006)}]{2006GCN..5142....1H}
497: {Hullinger}, D. {et~al.} 2006, GCN, 5142
498:
499: \bibitem[Kann et al.(2008)]{Kann2008}Kann, D. A., et al. 2008, in
500: preparation
501:
502: \bibitem[{{Hurley}(1992)}]{1992AIPC..265....3H}
503: {Hurley}, K. 1992, in AIP, ed. {W.S. Paciesas} \& {G.J. Fishman}, Vol. 265, 3
504:
505: \bibitem[{{Kochanek} {et~al.}(2008)}]{2008arXiv0802.0456K}
506: {Kochanek}, C.~S. {et~al.} 2008, 802, {astro-ph/0802.0456}
507:
508: \bibitem[{{Kouveliotou} {et~al.}(1993)}]{1993ApJ...413L.101K}
509: {Kouveliotou}, C. {et~al.} 1993, \apjl, 413, L101
510:
511: \bibitem[{{Levan} {et~al.}(2007)}]{2007MNRAS.378.1439L}
512: {Levan}, A.~J. {et~al.} 2007, \mnras, 378, 1439
513:
514: \bibitem[{{Levesque} \& {Kewley}(2007)}]{2007ApJ...667L.121L}
515: {Levesque}, E.~M. \& {Kewley}, L.~J. 2007, \apjl, 667, L121
516:
517: \bibitem[{{Liang} {et~al.}(2006)}]{2006ApJ...653L..81L}
518: {Liang}, E.-W. {et~al.} 2006, \apjl, 653, L81
519:
520: \bibitem[{{MacFadyen}(2003)}]{2003AIPC..662..202M}
521: {MacFadyen}, A. 2003, in AIP, Vol. 662, A Workshop Celebrating the HETE
522: Mission, ed. {G.R. Ricker} \& {R.K Vanderspek}, 202--205
523:
524: \bibitem[{{Malesani} {et~al.}(2004)}]{2004ApJ...609L...5M}
525: {Malesani}, D. {et~al.} 2004, \apjl, 609, L5
526:
527: \bibitem[{{Mazets} {et~al.}(1981)}]{1981Ap&SS..80..119M}
528: {Mazets}, E.~P. {et~al.} 1981, \apss, 80, 119
529:
530: \bibitem[{{McBreen} {et~al.}(1994)}]{1994MNRAS.271..662M}
531: {McBreen}, B. {et~al.} 1994, \mnras, 271, 662
532:
533: \bibitem[{{Nomoto} {et~al.}(2007)}]{2007astro.ph..2472N}
534: {Nomoto}, K. {et~al.} 2007, in Societa Italiana di Fisica, Vol. 662, Swift and
535: GRBs: Unveiling the Relativistic Universe, ed. S.~{Campana}, G.~{Chincarini},
536: S.~{Covino}, \& G.~{Tagliaferri}, 1207
537:
538: \bibitem[{{Norris}(2002)}]{2002ApJ...579..386N}
539: {Norris}, J.~P. 2002, \apj, 579, 386
540:
541: \bibitem[{{Norris} \& {Bonnell}(2006)}]{2006ApJ...643..266N}
542: {Norris}, J.~P. \& {Bonnell}, J.~T. 2006, \apj, 643, 266
543:
544: \bibitem[{{Norris} {et~al.}(1984){Norris}, {Cline, T.L.}, {Desai, U.D.},
545: {et~al.}}]{1984Natur.308..434N}
546: {Norris}, J.~P., {Cline, T.L.}, {Desai, U.D.}, {et~al.} 1984, \nat, 308, 434
547:
548: \bibitem[{{Norris} {et~al.}(2000{\natexlab{a}}){Norris}, {Marani}, \&
549: {Bonnell}}]{2000ApJ...534..248N}
550: {Norris}, J.~P., {Marani}, G.~F., \& {Bonnell}, J.~T. 2000{\natexlab{a}}, \apj,
551: 534, 248
552:
553: \bibitem[{{Norris} {et~al.}(2000{\natexlab{b}}){Norris}, {Scargle}, \&
554: {Bonnell}}]{2000HEAD....5.3402N}
555: {Norris}, J.~P., {Scargle}, J.~D., \& {Bonnell}, J.~T. 2000{\natexlab{b}}, in
556: BAAS, Vol.~32, 1244
557:
558: \bibitem[{{Ofek} {et~al.}(2006)}]{2006GCN..5123....1O}
559: {Ofek}, E.~O. {et~al.} 2006, GCN, 5123
560:
561: \bibitem[{{Ofek} {et~al.}(2007)}]{2007ApJ...662.1129O}
562: ---. 2007, \apj, 662, 1129
563:
564: \bibitem[{{Palmer} {et~al.}(2006)}]{2006GCN..5076....1P}
565: {Palmer}, D. {et~al.} 2006, GCN, 5076
566:
567: \bibitem[{{Pian} {et~al.}(2006)}]{2006Natur.442.1011P}
568: {Pian}, E. {et~al.} 2006, \nat, 442, 1011
569:
570: \bibitem[{{Price} {et~al.}(2006){Price}, {Berger}, \& {Fox}}]{Price06_GCN5275}
571: {Price}, P.~A., {Berger}, E., \& {Fox}, D.~B. 2006, {GCN} 5275
572:
573: \bibitem[{{Sakamoto} {et~al.}(2006)}]{2006ApJ...636L..73S}
574: {Sakamoto}, T. {et~al.} 2006, \apjl, 636, L73
575:
576: \bibitem[{{Soderberg} {et~al.}(2007)}]{2007ApJ...661..982S}
577: {Soderberg}, A.~M. {et~al.} 2007, \apj, 661, 982
578:
579: \bibitem[{{Stanek} {et~al.}(2003)}]{2003ApJ...591L..17S}
580: {Stanek}, K.~Z. {et~al.} 2003, \apjl, 591, L17
581:
582: \bibitem[{{Th\"one} {et~al.}(2008)}]{2007astro.ph..3407T}
583: {Th\"one}, C.~C. {et~al.} 2008, {ApJ in press}
584:
585: \bibitem[{{Tominaga} {et~al.}(2007)}]{2007ApJ...657L..77T}
586: {Tominaga}, N. {et~al.} 2007, \apjl, 657, L77
587:
588: \bibitem[{{Watson} {et~al.}(2007){Watson}, {Fynbo}, {Th{\"o}ne}, \&
589: {Sollerman}}]{2007astro.ph..3678W}
590: {Watson}, D., {Fynbo}, J.~P.~U., {Th{\"o}ne}, C.~C., \& {Sollerman}, J. 2007,
591: Phyl Trans Roy Soc A, 365, 1269
592:
593: \bibitem[{{Woosley} \& {Bloom}(2006)}]{2006ARA&A..44..507W}
594: {Woosley}, S.~E. \& {Bloom}, J.~S. 2006, \araa, 44, 507
595:
596: \bibitem[{{Woosley} \& {MacFadyen}(1999)}]{1999A&AS..138..499W}
597: {Woosley}, S.~E. \& {MacFadyen}, A.~I. 1999, \aaps, 138, 499
598:
599: \bibitem[{{Yamaoka} {et~al.}(2006{\natexlab{a}})}]{2006SPIE.6266E.122Y}
600: {Yamaoka}, K. {et~al.} 2006{\natexlab{a}}, in Space Telescopes and
601: Instrumentation II: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray. Proceedings of the SPIE,, ed.
602: G.~{M. J. L. Turner}and {Hasinger}, Vol. 6266
603:
604: \bibitem[{{Yamaoka} {et~al.}(2006{\natexlab{b}})}]{2006AIPC..836..201Y}
605: {Yamaoka}, K. {et~al.} 2006{\natexlab{b}}, in AIP, Vol. 836, Gamma-Ray Bursts
606: in the Swift Era, ed. {S.S. Holt}, N.~{Gehrels}, \& {J.A. Nousek}, 201--204
607:
608: \bibitem[{{Zeh} {et~al.}(2004){Zeh}, {Klose}, \&
609: {Hartmann}}]{2004ApJ...609..952Z}
610: {Zeh}, A., {Klose}, S., \& {Hartmann}, D.~H. 2004, \apj, 609, 952
611:
612: \bibitem[{{Zhang} {et~al.}(2007){Zhang}, {Zhang}, {Liang}, {Gehrels},
613: {Burrows}, \& {M{\'e}sz{\'a}ros}}]{2007ApJ...655L..25Z}
614: {Zhang}, B., {Zhang}, B.-B., {Liang}, E.-W., {Gehrels}, N., {Burrows}, D.~N.,
615: \& {M{\'e}sz{\'a}ros}, P. 2007, \apjl, 655, L25
616:
617: \end{thebibliography}
618:
619: %\clearpage
620:
621:
622:
623:
624:
625:
626:
627:
628:
629: \end{document}
630:
631:
632: \bibliographystyle{apj}
633: \bibliography{refs}
634: %\bibliography{060505refs}
635:
636: \end{document}
637:
638: \
639:
640: