Pith. sign in

REVIEW

The properties of prompt emission in short GRBs with extended emission observed by {\em Fermi}/GBM

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2001.01150 v2 pith:C3GP4ASJ submitted 2020-01-05 astro-ph.HE

classification astro-ph.HE
keywords grbsshorthardpropertiesemissionfindspikeavailable
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
abstract

Short GRBs with extended emission (EE) that are composed initially of a short-hard spike and followed by a long-lasting EE, are thought to be classified as a subsection of short GRBs. The narrow energy band available during the {\em Swift} era combined with a lack of spectral information prevented discovery of the intrinsic properties of those events. In this paper, we performed a systematic search of short GRBs with EE by using all available {\em Fermi}/GBM data. The search identified 26 GBM-detected short GRBs with EE that are similar to GRB 060614 observed by {\em Swift}/BAT. We focus on investigating the spectral and temporal properties for both the hard spike and the EE components of all 26 GRBs, and explore differences and possible correlations between them. We find that while the peak energy ($E_{\rm p}$) of the hard spikes is a little bit harder than that of the EE, but their fluences are comparable. The harder $E_{\rm p}$ seems to correspond to a larger fluence and peak flux with a large scatter for both the hard spike and EE components. Moreover, the $E_{\rm p}$ of both the hard spikes and EE are compared to other short GRBs. Finally, we also compare the properties of GRB 170817A with those short GRBs with EE and find no significant statistical differences between them. We find that GRB 170817A has the lowest $E_{\rm p}$, likely because it was off-axis.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Pith tools