The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Wind Interaction Models for Gamma‐Ray Burst Afterglows: The Case for Two Types of Progenitors
Open accessAbstract
Beginning with the γ-ray bursts GRB 970228 and GRB 970508, a standard model for the interpretation of gamma-ray burst (GRB) afterglows emerged involving synchrotron emission from a constant-energy blast wave expanding into a constant-density, "interstellar" medium. However, a massive star origin for GRBs implies a stellar wind environment, probably a Wolf-Rayet star, and we have previously suggested wind interaction models for the afterglows of GRBs 980326, 980519, and 980425/SN 1998bw. Here, we extend the theory of afterglows in winds, considering strong cooling phases, the transition to nonrelativistic motion, jets, and prompt reverse-shock emission. We find that, compared to the interstellar case, the optical prompt emission in the wind case could have a comparable magnitude but would die off faster. We examine the afterglows of other well-observed GRBs in the context of wind interaction models and find that GRBs 970228 and 970508 are likely wind interactors. The revision in the nonthermal afterglow emission from GRB 970228 caused by the recognition of late supernova emission favors wind interaction. The radio evolution of GRB 970508 provides especially strong evidence for wind interaction. For GRB 970508, the observations suggest a density that is compatible with that expected in a Wolf-Rayet star wind. Finally, observations of the afterglow evolution of GRBs 990123 and 990510 and the prompt optical emission from GRB 990123 favor interstellar interaction models, which would suggest compact star merger progenitors for these objects.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Fluid dynamics of relativistic blast waves
Blandford, R. D., & McKee, C. F. (1976) · The Physics of Fluids · doi:10.1063/1.861619 · Cited by 1,215
Cited by
The Supernova–Gamma-Ray Burst Connection
Woosley, S. E., & Bloom, J. S. (2006) · Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics · doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.43.072103.150558 · Cited by 1,766
Zhang, B., Fan, Y. Z., Dyks, J., Kobayashi, S., Meszaros, P., Burrows, D. N., Nousek, J. A., & Gehrels, N. (2006) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1086/500723 · Cited by 1,079
“The wind model (e.g., Chevalier & Li 2000).”
BackgroundMethodThe physics of gamma-ray bursts & relativistic jets
Kumar, P., & Zhang, B. (2015) · Physics Reports · doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2014.09.008 · Cited by 952
GAMMA-RAY BURSTS: PROGRESS, PROBLEMS & PROSPECTS
ZHANG, B., & MÉSZÁROS, P. (2004) · International Journal of Modern Physics A · doi:10.1142/s0217751x0401746x · Cited by 783
The VIIth catalogue of galactic Wolf–Rayet stars
van der Hucht, K. A. (2001) · New Astronomy Reviews · doi:10.1016/s1387-6473(00)00112-3 · Cited by 718
Metadata
- Authors
- Chevalier, R. A., & Li, Z.
- Venue
- The Astrophysical Journal
- Publisher
- American Astronomical Society
- Published
- 2000-06-10
- Volume
- 536
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 195-212
- ISSN
- 0004-637X (ISSN-L)
- 1538-4357
- OpenAlex
- W2039365614
- Cited by
- 581
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 30.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Wind Interaction Models for Gamma‐Ray Burst Afterglows: The Case for Two Types of Progenitors. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/308914
- The paper
- Chevalier, R. A., & Li, Z. (2000). Wind Interaction Models for Gamma‐Ray Burst Afterglows: The Case for Two Types of Progenitors. The Astrophysical Journal. https://doi.org/10.1086/308914
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.