Paper detail

Spectral evolution in gamma-ray bursts: predictions of the internal shock model and comparison to observations

Several trends have been identified in the prompt gamma-ray burst (GRB) emission: e.g. hard-to-soft evolution, pulse width evolution with energy, time lags, hardness-intensity/-fluence correlations. Recently Fermi has significantly extended the spectral coverage of GRB observations and improved the characterization of this spectral evolution. We study how internal shocks can reproduce these observations. In this model the emission comes from the synchrotron radiation of shock accelerated electrons, and the spectral evolution is governed by the evolution of the physical conditions in the shocked regions. We present a comprehensive set of simulations of a single pulse and investigate the impact of the model parameters, related to the shock microphysics and to the initial conditions in the ejecta. We find a general qualitative agreement between the model and the various observations used for the comparison. All these properties or relations are governed by the evolution of the peak energy and photon indices of the spectrum. In addition, we identify the conditions for a quantitative agreement. We find that the best agreement is obtained for (i) steep electron slopes (p>~2.7), (ii) microphysics parameters varying with shock conditions so that more electrons are accelerated in stronger shocks, (iii) steep variations of the initial Lorentz factor in the ejecta. When simulating short GRBs by contracting all timescales, all other parameters being unchanged, we show that the hardness-duration correlation is reproduced, as well as the evolution with duration of the pulse properties. Finally, we investigate the signature at high energy of these different scenarios and find distinct properties - delayed onset, longer emission, and flat spectrum in some cases - suggesting that internal shocks could have a significant contribution to the prompt LAT emission. [abridged]

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.