Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 438

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

No supernovae associated with two long-duration γ-ray bursts

Open access
Fynbo, Johan P. U., Watson, Darach, Thöne, Christina C., Sollerman, Jesper, Bloom, Joshua S., Davis, Tamara M., Hjorth, Jens, Jakobsson, Páll, Jørgensen, Uffe G., Graham, John F., Fruchter, Andrew S., Bersier, David, Kewley, Lisa, Cassan, Arnaud, Cerón, José María Castro, Foley, Suzanne, Gorosabel, Javier, Hinse, Tobias C., Horne, Keith D., Jensen, Brian L., Klose, Sylvio, Kocevski, Daniel, Marquette, Jean-Baptiste, Perley, Daniel, Ramirez-Ruiz, Enrico, Stritzinger, Maximilian D., Vreeswijk, Paul M., Wijers, Ralph A. M., Woller, Kristian G., Xu, Dong, Zub, Marta·2006·Nature

Abstract

It is now accepted that long-duration γ-ray bursts (GRBs) are produced during the collapse of a massive star1,2. The standard ‘collapsar’ model3 predicts that a broad-lined and luminous type Ic core-collapse supernova accompanies every long-duration GRB4. This association has been confirmed in observations of several nearby GRBs5–9. Here we report that GRB 060505 (ref. 10) and GRB 060614 (ref. 11) were not accompanied by supernova emission down to limits hundreds of times fainter than the archetypal supernova SN 1998bw that accompanied GRB 980425, and fainter than any type Ic supernova ever observed12. Multi-band observations of the early afterglows, as well as spectroscopy of the host galaxies, exclude the possibility of significant dust obscuration and show that the bursts originated in actively star-forming regions. The absence of a supernova to such deep limits is qualitatively different from all previous nearby long-duration GRBs and suggests a new phenomenological type of massive stellar death.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nature05375

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 29 references

Cited by

See all 438

Metadata

Authors
Fynbo, J. P. U., Watson, D., Thöne, C. C., Sollerman, J., Bloom, J. S., Davis, T. M., Hjorth, J., Jakobsson, P., Jørgensen, U. G., Graham, J. F., Fruchter, A. S., Bersier, D., Kewley, L., Cassan, A., Cerón, J. M. C., Foley, S., Gorosabel, J., Hinse, T. C., Horne, K. D., Jensen, B. L., Klose, S., Kocevski, D., Marquette, J.-B., Perley, D., Ramirez-Ruiz, E., Stritzinger, M. D., Vreeswijk, P. M., Wijers, R. A. M., Woller, K. G., Xu, D., & Zub, M.
Venue
Nature
Published
2006-12
Volume
444
Issue
7122
Pages
1047-1049
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W2054582333
Cited by
438
References
29
FWCI
22.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: No supernovae associated with two long-duration γ-ray bursts. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/nature05375
The paper
Fynbo, J. P. U., Watson, D., Thöne, C. C., Sollerman, J., Bloom, J. S., Davis, T. M., Hjorth, J., Jakobsson, P., Jørgensen, U. G., Graham, J. F., Fruchter, A. S., Bersier, D., Kewley, L., Cassan, A., Cerón, J. M. C., Foley, S., Gorosabel, J., Hinse, T. C., Horne, K. D., . . . Zub, M. (2006). No supernovae associated with two long-duration γ-ray bursts. Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature05375

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.