Addressing the circularity problem in the <i>E</i>p−<i>E</i>iso correlation of gamma-ray bursts

Amati, L.; D’Agostino, Rocco; Luongo, Orlando; Muccino, M.; Tantalo, Maria

doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slz056

Cited by 112 publications

(137 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

124

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These GRB luminosity indicators have been widely used as standard candles for cosmology research (Schaefer 2007;Wang et al 2007;Amati et al 2008;Amati & Della Valle 2013;Wei et al 2013;Wang et al 2017;Amati et al 2019;Muccino et al 2021;Montiel et al 2021), and it has been shown that when combined with other probes, GRBs can indeed extend the Hubble diagram to higher redshifts and help to make better constraints on cosmological parameters (Amati & Della Valle 2013;Wang et al 2015, for a review). However, since the observed GRB rate falls off rapidly at low redshifts, it is very difficult to make a robust calibration for those GRB correlations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To avoid the circularity problem, it has been proposed to use SN Ia data in the same redshift range as GRBs to calibrate their luminosity correlations (Liang et al 2008;Vitagliano et al 2010;Gao et al 2012). Considering that objects at the same redshift should have the same luminosity distance in any cosmology, one can assign the distance moduli of SN Ia to GRBs at the same redshifts (Liang et al 2008;Demianski et al 2017a), or one can use the SN Ia data to fit the model-independent cosmography formula that reflects the Hubble relation between the luminosity distance and redshift, and then obtain the GRB luminosity distance (Gao et al 2012;Amati et al 2019). In this way, one can derive a cosmology-independent calibration for the GRB candles.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Redshift evolution of the Amati relation: Calibrated results from the Hubble diagram of quasars at high redshifts

Dai

Zheng

et al. 2021

A&A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) have long been proposed as a complementary probe to type Ia supernovae (SNe Ia) and the cosmic microwave background to explore the expansion history of the high-redshift universe, mainly because they are bright enough to be detected at greater distances. Although they lack definite physical explanations, many empirical correlations between GRB isotropic energy or luminosity and some directly detectable spectral or temporal properties have been proposed to make GRBs standard candles. Since the observed GRB rate falls off rapidly at low redshifts, this thus prevents a cosmology independent calibration of these correlations. In order to avoid the circularity problem, SN Ia data are usually used to calibrate the luminosity relations of GRBs in the low redshift region (limited by the redshift range for SN Ia sample), and then they are extrapolate the luminosity relations to the high redshift region. This approach is based on the assumption of no redshift evolution for GRB luminosity relations. In this work, we suggest the use of a complete quasar sample in the redshift range of 0.5 < z < 5.5 to test such an assumption. We divided the quasar sample into several subsamples with different redshift bins, and used each subsample to calibrate the isotropic γ-ray equivalent energy of GRBs in relevant redshift bins. By fitting the newly calibrated data, we find strong evidence that the most commonly used Amati relation between spectral peak energy and isotropic-equivalent radiated energy shows no, or marginal, evolution with redshift. Indeed, at different redshifts, the coefficients in the Amati relation could have a maximum variation of 0.93% at different redshifts, and there could be no coincidence in the range of 1σ.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Redshift evolution of the Amati relation: Calibrated results from the Hubble diagram of quasars at high redshifts

Dai

Zheng

et al. 2021

A&A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this range there are a handful of data sets. These include HIIG starburst galaxy data that reach to ∼ 2.4 (Siegel et al 2005;Plionis et al 2009;Mania & Ratra 2012;Chavez et al 2014;González-Morán et al 2019;Cao et al 2020a,b), quasar angular size measurements that reach to ∼ 2.7 (Gurvits et al 1999;Chen & Ratra 2003a;Cao et al 2017;Ryan et al 2019;Cao et al 2020a,b), and gamma-ray burst observations that reach to ∼ 8.2 (Lamb & Reichart 2000;Wang et al 2016;Demianski et al 2019;Amati et al 2019;Fana Dirirsa et al 2019;Muccino 2020;Luongo & Muccino 2020;Khadka & Ratra 2020c;Cao et al 2020b). Quasar (QSO) X-ray and UV flux measurements that reach to ∼ 7.5 provide another set of data that probe this intermediate redshift region (Risaliti & Lusso 2015Yang et al 2019;Velten & Gomes 2020;Wei & Melia 2020;Lindner et al 2020;Zheng et al 2020;Mehrabi & Basilakos 2020;Khadka & Ratra 2020a,b;Lusso et al 2020;Rezaei et al 2020;Speri et al 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using quasar X-ray and UV flux measurements to constrain cosmological model parameters

Khadka

Ratra

2020

Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Risaliti and Lusso have compiled X-ray and UV flux measurements of 1598 quasars (QSOs) in the redshift range 0.036 ≤ z ≤ 5.1003, part of which, z ∼ 2.4 − 5.1, is largely cosmologically unprobed. In this paper we use these QSO measurements, alone and in conjunction with baryon acoustic oscillation (BAO) and Hubble parameter [H(z)] measurements, to constrain cosmological parameters in six different cosmological models, each with two different Hubble constant priors. In most of these models, given the larger uncertainties, the QSO cosmological parameter constraints are mostly consistent with those from the BAO + H(z) data. A somewhat significant exception is the nonrelativistic matter density parameter Ωm0 where QSO data favor Ωm0 ∼ 0.5 − 0.6 in most models. As a result, in joint analyses of QSO data with H(z) + BAO data the one-dimensional Ωm0 distributions shift slightly toward larger values. A joint analysis of the QSO + BAO + H(z) data is consistent with the current standard model, spatially-flat ΛCDM, but mildly favors closed spatial hypersurfaces and dynamical dark energy. Since the higher Ωm0 values favored by QSO data appear to be associated with the z ∼ 2 − 5 part of these data, and conflict somewhat with strong indications for Ωm0 ∼ 0.3 from most z < 2.5 data as well as from the cosmic microwave background anisotropy data at z ∼ 1100, in most models, the larger QSO data Ωm0 is possibly more indicative of an issue with the z ∼ 2 − 5 QSO data than of an inadequacy of the standard flat ΛCDM model.

show abstract

“…But we want to use the observed properties of GRBs to derive the cosmological parameters. Several procedures to overcome this circular situation have been proposed (see for instance, Schaefer, 2007;Basilakos and Perivolaropoulos, 2008;Demianski et al, 2011;Amati et al, 2019).…”

Section: Gamma-ray Burst Hubble Diagrammentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating Dark Energy Equation of State With High Redshift Hubble Diagram

Demiański

Lusso

Paolillo

et al. 2020

Front. Astron. Space Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several independent cosmological data, collected within the last 20 years, revealed the accelerated expansion rate of the Universe, usually assumed to be driven by the so called dark energy, which, according to recent estimates, provides now about 70% of the total amount of matter-energy in the Universe. The nature of dark energy is yet unknown. Several models of dark energy have been proposed: a non-zero cosmological constant, a potential energy of some self interacting scalar field, effects related to the non-homogeneous distribution of matter, or effects due to alternative theories of gravity. Recently, it turned out that the standard flat CDM is disfavored (at 4 σ) when confronted with a high redshift Hubble diagram, consisting of supernovae of type Ia (SNIa), quasars (QSOs), and gamma ray-bursts (GRBs) (Lusso and Risaliti, 2016; Lusso et al., 2019; Risaliti and Lusso, 2019). Here we use the same data to investigate if this tension is confirmed, using a different approach: actually in Lusso and Risaliti (2016), Lusso et al. (2019), and Risaliti and Lusso (2019), the deviation between the best fit model and the CDM model was noticed by comparing cosmological parameters derived from cosmographic expansions of their theoretical predictions and observed high redshift Hubble diagram. In this paper we use a substantially different approach, based on a specific parametrization of the redshift dependent equation of state (EOS) of dark energy component w(z). Our statistical analysis is aimed to estimate the parameters characterizing the dark energy EOS: our results indicate (at > 3σ level) an evolving dark energy EOS, while the cosmological constant has a constant EOS, w = −1. This result not only confirms the tension previously detected but shows that it is not an artifact of cosmographic expansions.

show abstract

Addressing the circularity problem in the Ep−Eiso correlation of gamma-ray bursts

Cited by 112 publications

References 41 publications

Redshift evolution of the Amati relation: Calibrated results from the Hubble diagram of quasars at high redshifts

Redshift evolution of the Amati relation: Calibrated results from the Hubble diagram of quasars at high redshifts

Using quasar X-ray and UV flux measurements to constrain cosmological model parameters

Investigating Dark Energy Equation of State With High Redshift Hubble Diagram

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About