adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: The Galaxy–Active Galactic Nucleus Scaling Relations over 13 Billion Years in SHARK v2.0. I. Supermassive Black Hole Masses
Authors: Matías Bravo, Claudia del P. Lagos, Katy L. Proctor, Ángel Chandro-Gómez, Chris Power
Figure caption: Similar to Figure 4, colored by the offset from the SFMS in SHARK v2.0 (﹩{{\rm{\Delta }}}_{{\rm{SMFS}}}^{}﹩). The three black lines indicate the running median for galaxies divided into ﹩{{\rm{\Delta }}}_{{\rm{SMFS}}}^{}﹩ terciles, with the lowest (highest) tercile, T1 (T3) being the one with the lowest (highest) ﹩{{\rm{\Delta }}}_{{\rm{SMFS}}}^{}﹩ values (i.e., T1 roughly corresponds to galaxies below the SFMS and T3 with galaxies above the SFMS).
Paper: The Galaxy–Active Galactic Nucleus Scaling Relations over 13 Billion Years in SHARK v2.0. I. Supermassive Black Hole Masses
Authors: Matías Bravo, Claudia del P. Lagos, Katy L. Proctor, Ángel Chandro-Gómez, Chris Power
Figure caption: Similar to Figure 8, colored by the fraction of the SMBH mass built through SMBH–SMBH mergers in SHARK v2.0 (﹩{f}_{{M}_{\bullet },{\rm{mergers}}}^{}﹩), and with two lines showing only the running medians for SMBHs built mostly by mergers (﹩{f}_{{M}_{\bullet },{\rm{mergers}}}^{}\gt 0.5﹩, shown with triangle markers pointing upward) and those built mostly by gas accretion (﹩{f}_{{M}_{\bullet },{\rm{mergers}}}^{}\lt 0.5﹩, shown with triangle markers pointing downward).
Paper: The Galaxy–Active Galactic Nucleus Scaling Relations over 13 Billion Years in SHARK v2.0. I. Supermassive Black Hole Masses
Authors: Matías Bravo, Claudia del P. Lagos, Katy L. Proctor, Ángel Chandro-Gómez, Chris Power
Figure caption: Fraction of galaxies with M• > 105 M⊙ as a function of M⋆ at different redshifts. Lines are colored by redshift, with darker lines for higher redshifts. We note that almost all galaxies (>99.999%) above M⋆ = 108 M⊙ have an SMBH in the 0 ≤ z ≤ 9 range. The inferred SMBH occupation fractions at z ∼ 0 from observations show are shown with shaded areas: from X-ray data (B. P. Miller et al. 2015) in light gray, from dynamical SMBH masses (D. D. Nguyen et al. 2019) in gray, from nuclear cluster occupation fractions in the Virgo Cluster (R. Sánchez-Janssen et al. 2019) in slate gray, and from nuclear cluster occupation fractions in the Local Volume (N. Hoyer et al. 2021) in dark gray.
Paper: The Galaxy–Active Galactic Nucleus Scaling Relations over 13 Billion Years in SHARK v2.0. I. Supermassive Black Hole Masses
Authors: Matías Bravo, Claudia del P. Lagos, Katy L. Proctor, Ángel Chandro-Gómez, Chris Power
Figure caption: Similar to Figure 3, colored by the median bulge-to-total mass ratio (M⋆,bulge/M⋆) of the galaxies in each cell, and with two lines showing only the running medians for early-type (M⋆,bulge/M⋆ > 0.8, shown with triangle markers pointing upward) and late-type galaxies (M⋆,bulge/M⋆ < 0.3, shown with triangle markers pointing downward). Observational data shown are from V. N. Bennert et al. (2011) with squares and A. W. Graham & N. Sahu (2023a) with circles, both colored according to the M⋆,bulge/M⋆ of each galaxy (with the same color scale used for our SHARK v2.0 data).
Paper: The Galaxy–Active Galactic Nucleus Scaling Relations over 13 Billion Years in SHARK v2.0. I. Supermassive Black Hole Masses
Authors: Matías Bravo, Claudia del P. Lagos, Katy L. Proctor, Ángel Chandro-Gómez, Chris Power
Figure caption: Similar to Figure 5, showing the M⋆–M• relation for central and satellite galaxies. We have omitted the observational measurements shown in Figure 5 for clarity.
Paper: The Galaxy–Active Galactic Nucleus Scaling Relations over 13 Billion Years in SHARK v2.0. I. Supermassive Black Hole Masses
Authors: Matías Bravo, Claudia del P. Lagos, Katy L. Proctor, Ángel Chandro-Gómez, Chris Power
Figure caption: Similar to Figure 5, colored by the median M⋆,bulge/M⋆ of the galaxies in each cell, as in Figure 4. Observational data shown are from V. N. Bennert et al. (2011) with squares and A. W. Graham & N. Sahu (2023a) with circles (including the G. Chabrier 2003 IMF correction from A. W. Graham & N. Sahu 2024).
Paper: The Galaxy–Active Galactic Nucleus Scaling Relations over 13 Billion Years in SHARK v2.0. I. Supermassive Black Hole Masses
Authors: Matías Bravo, Claudia del P. Lagos, Katy L. Proctor, Ángel Chandro-Gómez, Chris Power
Figure caption: Fraction of the SMBH mass built through SMBH–SMBH mergers, ﹩{f}_{{M}_{\bullet },{\rm{mergers}}}^{}﹩, as a function of M• and redshift. Thick lines indicate the running medians, and the thin lines show the running 84th percentiles (running 16th percentiles not shown for clarity). Lines are colored by redshift as in Figure 2.
Paper: Binary Stars Approaching Supermassive Black Holes: Hydrodynamics of Stellar Collisions, Mass Fallback, and Partial Tidal Disruption Events
Authors: Fangyuan Yu, Dong Lai
Figure caption: The density distribution plots of Run 1a at different times for the z = 0 slice (the orbital plane). The density values in the plot are in visualization code units. Note that the maximum value of the color bar does not represent the actual maximum value in the plot, but is instead chosen for better visualization of the debris stream’s overall structure. In the bottom row, the small inset square shows a zoomed-in version of the region inside the dashed box from the larger plot, with the color bar adjusted for better display of the central merger remnant. The white “×” marks the position of the SMBH. Here, t = 0 approximately corresponds to the moment of collision.
Paper: The Galaxy–Active Galactic Nucleus Scaling Relations over 13 Billion Years in SHARK v2.0. I. Supermassive Black Hole Masses
Authors: Matías Bravo, Claudia del P. Lagos, Katy L. Proctor, Ángel Chandro-Gómez, Chris Power
Figure caption: Comparison of the M⋆,bulge–M• (top row) and M⋆–M• (bottom row) relations predicted by SHARK v2.0 at z = 0 to those measured by A. W. Graham & N. Sahu (2023a), including the G. Chabrier (2003) IMF correction from A. W. Graham & N. Sahu (2024). The solid lines indicated the running median in SHARK v2.0 with the shaded areas indicating the 16th–84th percentile range. The dashed and dotted lines indicate the linear fits to the relations from A. W. Graham & N. Sahu (2023a), and the corresponding shaded areas indicate the errors in the fit. The left column shows the relations for late-type galaxies, and the right column for early-type galaxies. The dashed lines indicate the fits from A. W. Graham & N. Sahu (2023a), which only include each morphological type, while the dotted lines indicate those that also include ES and S0 galaxies (for the precise morphological definitions of ES and S0, see A. W. Graham & N. Sahu 2023a).
Paper: The Galaxy–Active Galactic Nucleus Scaling Relations over 13 Billion Years in SHARK v2.0. I. Supermassive Black Hole Masses
Authors: Matías Bravo, Claudia del P. Lagos, Katy L. Proctor, Ángel Chandro-Gómez, Chris Power
Figure caption: Relative importance of different galaxy properties in explaining the offset from the M⋆,bulge–M• (left column) and M⋆–M• (right column) relations as a function of redshift, measured as the feature importance from applying random forest regressions to the data at each snapshot. The lines (shaded areas) show the relative importance (standard deviation of the importance) of each galaxy property: M⋆,bulge or M⋆ (left and right columns, respectively, in blue), central or satellite classification (orange), M⋆,bulge/M⋆ (red), offset from the SFMS (﹩{{\rm{\Delta }}}_{{\rm{SMFS}}}^{}﹩, magenta), offset from the SMSR (﹩{{\rm{\Delta }}}_{{\rm{SMSR}}}^{}﹩, gray) , and the fraction of the SMBH mass built through SMBH–SMBH mergers (﹩{f}_{{M}_{\bullet },{\rm{mergers}}}^{}﹩, dashed purple).
Paper: The Galaxy–Active Galactic Nucleus Scaling Relations over 13 Billion Years in SHARK v2.0. I. Supermassive Black Hole Masses
Authors: Matías Bravo, Claudia del P. Lagos, Katy L. Proctor, Ángel Chandro-Gómez, Chris Power
Figure caption: The scatter around the M⋆,bulge–M• and M⋆–M• relations (left and right panels, respectively), as a function of redshift and stellar mass. The scatter is measured as the difference in log scale of the running 16th and 84th percentiles. Each line indicates a different redshift, colored as in Figure 2.
Paper: The Galaxy–Active Galactic Nucleus Scaling Relations over 13 Billion Years in SHARK v2.0. I. Supermassive Black Hole Masses
Authors: Matías Bravo, Claudia del P. Lagos, Katy L. Proctor, Ángel Chandro-Gómez, Chris Power
Figure caption: Fit to the M⋆–M• relation used to measure ﹩{{\rm{\Delta }}}_{{\rm{SBHMR}}}^{}﹩ in Figure 11. Each panel show the M⋆–M• relation in SHARK v2.0 as a function of redshift, with the colored histograms in the background showing the overall distribution of SHARK v2.0 galaxies at each redshift, cross markers showing the running median, and the solid line showing the fit to the relation.
Paper: Binary Stars Approaching Supermassive Black Holes: Hydrodynamics of Stellar Collisions, Mass Fallback, and Partial Tidal Disruption Events
Authors: Fangyuan Yu, Dong Lai
Figure caption: The same as Figure 3, but for Run 4.
Paper: Binary Stars Approaching Supermassive Black Holes: Hydrodynamics of Stellar Collisions, Mass Fallback, and Partial Tidal Disruption Events
Authors: Fangyuan Yu, Dong Lai
Figure caption: The same as Figure 1, but for Run 3.
Paper: Binary Stars Approaching Supermassive Black Holes: Hydrodynamics of Stellar Collisions, Mass Fallback, and Partial Tidal Disruption Events
Authors: Fangyuan Yu, Dong Lai
Figure caption: The same as Figure 1, but for Run 2.
Paper: Binary Stars Approaching Supermassive Black Holes: Hydrodynamics of Stellar Collisions, Mass Fallback, and Partial Tidal Disruption Events
Authors: Fangyuan Yu, Dong Lai
Figure caption: Fallback accretion rate, ﹩\dot{M}(t)﹩, onto the SMBH. The different colored lines in the upper-left panel represent the results for different particle numbers (N = 5 × 105 and 105 per star for Runs 1a and 1b, respectively). To convert to physical units, we have set MBH = 106 M⊙, M⋆ = 1 M⊙, and R⋆ = 1 R⊙. The black dashed line shows the standard mass fallback rate for a 1 M⊙ star undergoing a TDE, while the red dashed line represents a power-law curve that matches the late-time fallback rate. The dotted horizontal line indicates the Eddington limit for a 106 M⊙ black hole, assuming an accretion efficiency of ϵ = 0.1. The blue dotted vertical line in the upper-right panel marks the moment when the merger remnant returns to the pericenter of its orbit around the SMBH. Here, t = 0 corresponds to the moment of stellar collision.
Paper: Binary Stars Approaching Supermassive Black Holes: Hydrodynamics of Stellar Collisions, Mass Fallback, and Partial Tidal Disruption Events
Authors: Fangyuan Yu, Dong Lai
Figure caption: The density profile of the merger remnant (left column) and the fraction of the total mass enclosed within a given radius relative to the total mass of the merger remnant (right column) are shown for Run 1a (upper row) and Run 3 (lower row). The solid lines represent the profiles at different times after the collision, while the dashed line corresponds to a 2 M⊙ γ = 5/3 polytrope with radius determined by the mass–radius relation ﹩{R}_{\star }\propto {M}_{\star }^{0.8}﹩, which also approximates the structure of an MS star. The insets in the right panels highlight the mass distribution at the outskirts of the remnant.
Paper: Binary Stars Approaching Supermassive Black Holes: Hydrodynamics of Stellar Collisions, Mass Fallback, and Partial Tidal Disruption Events
Authors: Fangyuan Yu, Dong Lai
Figure caption: Mass-loss fraction as a function of time for Runs 1–4. The lines with the “•” markers of different colors represent results with different particle numbers (N = 5, 1, and 10 × 105 per star, for Runs 1a, 1b, and 1c, respectively). Note that t = 0 roughly indicates the moment of the (first) collision. Mtot represents the total mass of the initial binary.
Paper: Binary Stars Approaching Supermassive Black Holes: Hydrodynamics of Stellar Collisions, Mass Fallback, and Partial Tidal Disruption Events
Authors: Fangyuan Yu, Dong Lai
Figure caption: Probability density function (PDF) of the orbital energy of the mass-loss debris relative to the SMBH after collisions. The results are scaled by εcol, as defined in Equation (16).
Paper: Binary Stars Approaching Supermassive Black Holes: Hydrodynamics of Stellar Collisions, Mass Fallback, and Partial Tidal Disruption Events
Authors: Fangyuan Yu, Dong Lai
Figure caption: Same as Figure 5, but for Runs 5 and 6.
Paper: Binary Stars Approaching Supermassive Black Holes: Hydrodynamics of Stellar Collisions, Mass Fallback, and Partial Tidal Disruption Events
Authors: Fangyuan Yu, Dong Lai
Figure caption: Separation between the two stars in Run 4 as a function of time, where t = 0 marks the starting point of the simulation. The orange dashed line indicates the Hill radius rHill of the star.
Paper: Binary Stars Approaching Supermassive Black Holes: Hydrodynamics of Stellar Collisions, Mass Fallback, and Partial Tidal Disruption Events
Authors: Fangyuan Yu, Dong Lai
Figure caption: PDF of the pericenter distance (rp) of the mass-loss debris relative to the SMBH in Runs 1a and 3. The results are scaled by the initial pericenter distance of the binary orbit relative to the SMBH (rp0). The orange line represents all mass-loss debris, while the blue line represents the subset of debris that will fall back onto the SMBH.
Paper: Binary Stars Approaching Supermassive Black Holes: Hydrodynamics of Stellar Collisions, Mass Fallback, and Partial Tidal Disruption Events
Authors: Fangyuan Yu, Dong Lai
Figure caption: Same as Figure 6, but for Runs 2 and 4. Note that the “bump” in the blue line in the upper-left panel represents the other remnant.
Paper: Binary Stars Approaching Supermassive Black Holes: Hydrodynamics of Stellar Collisions, Mass Fallback, and Partial Tidal Disruption Events
Authors: Fangyuan Yu, Dong Lai
Figure caption: Energy of the merger remnant in Run 1a as a function of time. The different solid lines represent the kinetic energy Ek,rem (relative to the remnant’s center of mass), gravitational potential energy Ep,rem, internal energy Urem, and total energy Etot,rem.
Paper: Search for Type IL Gamma-Ray Bursts: Criterion, Results, Verification, and Physical Implication
Authors: Wen-Jun Tan, Chen-Wei Wang, Peng Zhang, Wang-Chen Xue, Shao-Lin Xiong, Bo-Bing Wu, Jia-Cong Liu, Yue Wang, Sheng-Lun Xie, Zheng-Hang Yu, Jin-Peng Zhang, Wen-Long Zhang, Yan-Qiu Zhang, Chao Zheng
Figure caption: Position of Type IL GRB samples in various GRB classification schemes. (a) The Ep,z and Eiso correlation diagram. The best-fit for Type II and Type I GRBs are plotted (solid lines) with the 1σ boundary (dashed line) marked. The GRB sample is from the literature (L. Lan et al. 2023). (b) The logε vs. intrinsic duration diagram. The possibility contours for GRB clustering are marked with 1σ (yellow), 2σ (blue), and 3σ (purple) respectively. The GRB sample is from the literature (P. Y. Minaev & A. S. Pozanenko 2020). In (a)–(b) the yellow dashed line, red dashed–dotted line and brown solid line represent the evolution of the Ep,z and Eiso of GRB 200914A, GRB 200311A, and GRB 170228A as the redshift changes from 0.05 to 4, respectively. (c) The peak energy vs. duration diagram. The GRB sample is from the literature (R.-J. Lu et al. 2017; A. Tsvetkova et al. 2017a; S. Poolakkil et al. 2021). (d) The duration vs. lag diagram. The GRB sample is from the literature (N. Gehrels et al. 2006; M. G. Bernardini et al. 2015; A. Goldstein et al. 2017; S. Xiao et al. 2022). (e) The minimum variability timescale vs. duration diagram. The possibility contours for GRB clustering are marked with 1σ (yellow), 2σ (blue), and 3σ (purple) respectively. The GRB sample is from the literature (V. Z. Golkhou et al. 2015). (f) The fluence vs. duration diagram. The best-fit using a double-Gaussian function for the fluence and duration histogram, and the 1σ error bars are plotted. The dashed line, dotted line, and solid line represent 2 s, 1σ of the duration distribution (4 s), and 3σ of the duration distribution (52.8 s), respectively. All error bars on data points represent their 1σ confidence level.
Paper: Binary Stars Approaching Supermassive Black Holes: Hydrodynamics of Stellar Collisions, Mass Fallback, and Partial Tidal Disruption Events
Authors: Fangyuan Yu, Dong Lai
Figure caption: PDF of the relative orbital angular momentum (left panel) and impact parameter b12/r12 (right panel) when two stars contact each other. The blue and orange solid lines represent the results for two different values of βb: gentle encounter (βb = 0.6) and deep encounter (βb = 5), respectively. The red dashed line in the left panel represents the typical relative angular momentum for grazing collisions, where the contact velocity is the escape velocity ﹩{v}_{{\rm{esc}}}=\sqrt{2G{m}_{12}/{R}_{{\rm{col}}}}﹩ and the impact parameter is b12 = Rcol.
Paper: Search for Type IL Gamma-Ray Bursts: Criterion, Results, Verification, and Physical Implication
Authors: Wen-Jun Tan, Chen-Wei Wang, Peng Zhang, Wang-Chen Xue, Shao-Lin Xiong, Bo-Bing Wu, Jia-Cong Liu, Yue Wang, Sheng-Lun Xie, Zheng-Hang Yu, Jin-Peng Zhang, Wen-Long Zhang, Yan-Qiu Zhang, Chao Zheng
Figure caption: An example of identification of precursor, quiescent period, and extended emission of GRB 170228A based on the criterion. The upper panel is the light curve of GRB, and the bottom panel is the Li-Ma significance of each block partitioned by Bayesian Blocks. Precursor, quiescent period, fake extended emission, and genuine extended emission are shaded by cyan, gray, green, and tan, respectively.
Paper: Search for Type IL Gamma-Ray Bursts: Criterion, Results, Verification, and Physical Implication
Authors: Wen-Jun Tan, Chen-Wei Wang, Peng Zhang, Wang-Chen Xue, Shao-Lin Xiong, Bo-Bing Wu, Jia-Cong Liu, Yue Wang, Sheng-Lun Xie, Zheng-Hang Yu, Jin-Peng Zhang, Wen-Long Zhang, Yan-Qiu Zhang, Chao Zheng
Figure caption: The background subtracted light curves of GRB 230307A, GRB 211211A, GRB 170228A, GRB 200914A, and GRB 200311A. The light curve of GRB 230307A is obtained from GECAM with GRD01, GRD04, and GRD05 summed, the light curve of GRB 211211A is obtained from GBM with n2 and na summed, the light curve of GRB 170228A is obtained from GBM with n0, n1, n2, n9, and na summed, the light curve of GRB 200914A is obtained from GBM with n0, n1, n3, n4, and n5 summed, the light curve of GRB 200311A is obtained from GBM with n4, n7, and n8 summed. The shaded intervals represent precursor, main emission, dip, and extended emission of each light-curve structure.
Paper: Binary Stars Approaching Supermassive Black Holes: Hydrodynamics of Stellar Collisions, Mass Fallback, and Partial Tidal Disruption Events
Authors: Fangyuan Yu, Dong Lai
Figure caption: Same as Figure 6, but for Runs 5 and 6. The dashed line represents the initial 1 M⊙ MAMS profile obtained from MESA. The bump in the lower-left panel indicates the presence of the secondary star’s core during the final inspiral phase, just before the full merger.
Paper: Binary Stars Approaching Supermassive Black Holes: Hydrodynamics of Stellar Collisions, Mass Fallback, and Partial Tidal Disruption Events
Authors: Fangyuan Yu, Dong Lai
Figure caption: Same as Figure 11, but for Runs 5 and 6.
Paper: Search for Type IL Gamma-Ray Bursts: Criterion, Results, Verification, and Physical Implication
Authors: Wen-Jun Tan, Chen-Wei Wang, Peng Zhang, Wang-Chen Xue, Shao-Lin Xiong, Bo-Bing Wu, Jia-Cong Liu, Yue Wang, Sheng-Lun Xie, Zheng-Hang Yu, Jin-Peng Zhang, Wen-Long Zhang, Yan-Qiu Zhang, Chao Zheng
Figure caption: Identification of extended emission of GRB 140810A based on the criterion. The upper panel is the light curve of GRB, and the bottom panel is the Li-Ma significance of each block partitioned by Bayesian Blocks. The extended emission are shaded in cyan.
Paper: Search for Type IL Gamma-Ray Bursts: Criterion, Results, Verification, and Physical Implication
Authors: Wen-Jun Tan, Chen-Wei Wang, Peng Zhang, Wang-Chen Xue, Shao-Lin Xiong, Bo-Bing Wu, Jia-Cong Liu, Yue Wang, Sheng-Lun Xie, Zheng-Hang Yu, Jin-Peng Zhang, Wen-Long Zhang, Yan-Qiu Zhang, Chao Zheng
Figure caption: Flowchart of the entire criterion.
Paper: Search for Type IL Gamma-Ray Bursts: Criterion, Results, Verification, and Physical Implication
Authors: Wen-Jun Tan, Chen-Wei Wang, Peng Zhang, Wang-Chen Xue, Shao-Lin Xiong, Bo-Bing Wu, Jia-Cong Liu, Yue Wang, Sheng-Lun Xie, Zheng-Hang Yu, Jin-Peng Zhang, Wen-Long Zhang, Yan-Qiu Zhang, Chao Zheng
Figure caption: Comparison of Type IL GRBs with typical “long” sGRBs. (a) The ratio of photon fluence from 15 keV to 100 keV between the extended emission and the main emission (SEE/Smain) vs. the duration diagram. The red hollow circles represent the typical “long” short GRBs, GRB 060614, GRB 211227A, and GRB 110402A. (b) (SEE/Smain) vs. the ratio of photon fluence between precursor and extended emission Spre/SEE. The leftward arrows represent the 3σ upper limits of Spre/SEE of typical “long” sGRBs without obvious precursors.
Paper: Search for Type IL Gamma-Ray Bursts: Criterion, Results, Verification, and Physical Implication
Authors: Wen-Jun Tan, Chen-Wei Wang, Peng Zhang, Wang-Chen Xue, Shao-Lin Xiong, Bo-Bing Wu, Jia-Cong Liu, Yue Wang, Sheng-Lun Xie, Zheng-Hang Yu, Jin-Peng Zhang, Wen-Long Zhang, Yan-Qiu Zhang, Chao Zheng
Figure caption: The temporal properties of Type IL GRB samples. (a) The T90 vs. T﹩{}_{\mathrm{pre}}﹩ diagram. (b) The T﹩{}_{\mathrm{pre}}﹩ vs. Twt diagram. (c) The T90 vs. Twt diagram. The dashed black line represents the power-law fitting and the 3σ error of the T90 and Twt. In (a)–(c) Type I and Type II GRBs are represented by cyan solid circles and gray solid diamonds, respectively. In (c) two typical Type II GRBs with extended emission, GRB 221009A and GRB 160625B, are highlighted by red diamonds. The GRB sample is obtained from the literature (Y.-D. Hu et al. 2014; J.-S. Wang et al. 2020).
Paper: Search for Type IL Gamma-Ray Bursts: Criterion, Results, Verification, and Physical Implication
Authors: Wen-Jun Tan, Chen-Wei Wang, Peng Zhang, Wang-Chen Xue, Shao-Lin Xiong, Bo-Bing Wu, Jia-Cong Liu, Yue Wang, Sheng-Lun Xie, Zheng-Hang Yu, Jin-Peng Zhang, Wen-Long Zhang, Yan-Qiu Zhang, Chao Zheng
Figure caption: The flux evolution of four GRBs and the curvature effect diagram. (a) The flux of main emission and extended emission of four GRBs. The extended emission are fitted by the SBPL model (red line). (b) The dashed lines represent the HLE slope index calculated by the flux slope and the dots represent the spectral index of extended emission.
Paper: Search for Type IL Gamma-Ray Bursts: Criterion, Results, Verification, and Physical Implication
Authors: Wen-Jun Tan, Chen-Wei Wang, Peng Zhang, Wang-Chen Xue, Shao-Lin Xiong, Bo-Bing Wu, Jia-Cong Liu, Yue Wang, Sheng-Lun Xie, Zheng-Hang Yu, Jin-Peng Zhang, Wen-Long Zhang, Yan-Qiu Zhang, Chao Zheng
Figure caption: The QPM of GRB 170228A and 200311A. (a)–(b) The left panel is the light curve of GRB 170228A in the 30–500 keV energy range, where the QPM episode is highlight by the light green region. The right panel is the LSP power of the light curve. (c)–(d) The left panel is the light curve of GRB 200311A in the 30–500 keV energy range, where the QPM episode is highlight by the light green region. The right panel is the LSP power of the light curve.
Paper: Search for Type IL Gamma-Ray Bursts: Criterion, Results, Verification, and Physical Implication
Authors: Wen-Jun Tan, Chen-Wei Wang, Peng Zhang, Wang-Chen Xue, Shao-Lin Xiong, Bo-Bing Wu, Jia-Cong Liu, Yue Wang, Sheng-Lun Xie, Zheng-Hang Yu, Jin-Peng Zhang, Wen-Long Zhang, Yan-Qiu Zhang, Chao Zheng
Figure caption: Spectra fitting results of the precursor of GRB 200914A. (a)–(b) The CPL model (left panel) and corner plot of the posterior probability distributions of the parameters (right panel). (c)–(d) The BB model (left panel) and corner plot of the posterior probability distributions of the parameters (right panel).