REVIEW 2 cited by
Do gamma-ray burst measurements provide a useful test of cosmological models?
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
Signed reviews
abstract
We study eight different gamma-ray burst (GRB) data sets to examine whether current GRB measurements -- that probe a largely unexplored part of cosmological redshift ($z$) space -- can be used to reliably constrain cosmological model parameters. We use three Amati-correlation samples and five Combo-correlation samples to simultaneously derive correlation and cosmological model parameter constraints. The intrinsic dispersion of each GRB data set is taken as a goodness measurement. We examine the consistency between the cosmological bounds from GRBs with those determined from better-established cosmological probes, such as baryonic acoustic oscillation (BAO) and Hubble parameter $H(z)$ measurements. We use the Markov chain Monte Carlo method implemented in \textsc{MontePython} to find best-fit correlation and cosmological parameters, in six different cosmological models, for the eight GRB samples, alone or in conjunction with BAO and $H(z)$ data. For the Amati correlation case, we compile a data set of 118 bursts, the A118 sample, which is the largest -- about half of the total Amati-correlation GRBs -- current collection of GRBs suitable for constraining cosmological parameters. This updated GRB compilation has the smallest intrinsic dispersion of the three Amati-correlation GRB data sets we examined. We are unable to define a collection of reliable bursts for current Combo-correlation GRB data. Cosmological constraints determined from the A118 sample are consistent with -- but significantly weaker than -- those from BAO and $H(z)$ data. They also are consistent with the spatially-flat $\Lambda$CDM model as well as with dynamical dark energy models and non-spatially-flat models. Since GRBs probe a largely unexplored region of $z$, it is well worth acquiring more and better-quality burst data which will give a more definitive answer to the question of the title.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Investigating the cosmic distance duality relation with gamma-ray bursts
Combined gamma-ray burst and multi-probe data show no significant violation of the cosmic distance duality relation and prefer a Planck-like Hubble constant.
-
Cosmic distance duality after DESI 2024 data release and dark energy evolution
Using DESI BAO, galaxy clusters, supernovae and Hubble data, the authors find no evidence for violation of the cosmic distance duality and favor flat ΛCDM.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.