Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 284

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

GRB Radiative Efficiencies Derived from the Swift Data: GRBs versus XRFs, Long versus Short

Open access
Zhang, Bing, Liang, Enwei, Page, Kim L., Grupe, Dirk, Zhang, Bin‐Bin, Barthelmy, Scott D., Burrows, David N., Campana, Sergio, Chincarini, Guido, Gehrels, Neil, Kobayashi, Shiho, Meszaros, Peter, Moretti, Alberto, Nousek, John A., O’Brien, Paul T., Osborne, Julian P., Roming, Peter W. A., Sakamoto, Takanori, Schady, Patricia, Willingale, Richard·2007·The Astrophysical Journal

Abstract

We systematically analyze the prompt emission and the early afterglow data of a sample of 31 GRBs detected by Swift before 2005 September and estimate the GRB radiative efficiency. BAT's narrow band inhibits a precise determination of the GRB spectral parameters, and we have developed a method to estimate these parameters with the hardness ratio information. The shallow decay component commonly existing in early X-ray afterglows, if interpreted as continuous energy injection in the external shock, suggests that the GRB efficiencies previously derived from the late-time X-ray data were not reliable. We calculate two radiative efficiencies using the afterglow kinetic energy E K derived at the putative deceleration time ( t dec ) and at the break time ( t b ), when the energy injection phase ends, respectively. At t b XRFs appear to be less efficient than normal GRBs. However, when we analyze the data at t dec , XRFs are found to be as efficient as GRBs. Short GRBs have similar radiative efficiencies to long GRBs despite of their different progenitors. Twenty-two bursts in the sample are identified to have the afterglow cooling frequency below the X-ray band. Assuming e = 0.1, we find η γ ( t b ) usually <10% and η γ ( t dec ) varying from a few percent to >90%. Nine GRBs in the sample have the afterglow cooling frequency above the X-ray band for a very long time. This suggests a very small B and/or a very low ambient density n .

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 · 10.1086/510110

Cites

1 of 1 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 1 references

Cited by

See all 284

Metadata

Authors
Zhang, B., Liang, E., Page, K. L., Grupe, D., Zhang, B., Barthelmy, S. D., Burrows, D. N., Campana, S., Chincarini, G., Gehrels, N., Kobayashi, S., Meszaros, P., Moretti, A., Nousek, J. A., O’Brien, P. T., Osborne, J. P., Roming, P. W. A., Sakamoto, T., Schady, P., & Willingale, R.
Venue
The Astrophysical Journal
Published
2007-02
Volume
655
Issue
2
Pages
989-1001
ISSN
  • 0004-637X (ISSN-L)
  • 1538-4357
OpenAlex
W1997480321
Cited by
284
References
1
FWCI
12.28
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: GRB Radiative Efficiencies Derived from the Swift Data: GRBs versus XRFs, Long versus Short. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/510110
The paper
Zhang, B., Liang, E., Page, K. L., Grupe, D., Zhang, B., Barthelmy, S. D., Burrows, D. N., Campana, S., Chincarini, G., Gehrels, N., Kobayashi, S., Meszaros, P., Moretti, A., Nousek, J. A., O’Brien, P. T., Osborne, J. P., Roming, P. W. A., Sakamoto, T., Schady, P., & Willingale, R. (2007). GRB Radiative Efficiencies Derived from the Swift Data: GRBs versus XRFs, Long versus Short. The Astrophysical Journal. https://doi.org/10.1086/510110

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.