arxiv: 2604.20346 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-22 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE

Recognition: unknown

XRF 241001A/SN 2024aiiq: A Faint Soft X-ray Transient Detected by SVOM with a Broad-Line Type Ic Supernova Revealed by JWST

B. Schneider , M. Brunet , B. P. Gompertz , D. Turpin , D. B. Malesani , O. Godet , A. J. Levan , F. Daigne

show 55 more authors

N. Sarin N. A. Rakotondrainibe A. Martin-Carrillo J. T. Palmerio C. C. Th\"one H. L. Li A. Saccardi A. de Ugarte Postigo S. Antier V. Buat D. \v{D}urov\v{c}\'ikov\'a L. Izzo J. K. Leung G. Mo Y. L. Qiu S. D. Vergani J. Wang J. Y. Wei L. P. Xin R. Mochkovitch B. Zhang H. B. Cai S. Campana A. Coleiro B. Cordier P. D'Avanzo N. Dagoneau V. D'Elia Y. W. Dong D. G\"otz S. Guillot X. H. Han D. H. Hartmann L. Huang Y. F. Huang P. Jakobsson A. Klotz C. Lachaud X. M. Lu P. Maggi M. De Pasquale F. Piron R. Salvaterra S. Schanne J. Sollerman N. R. Tanvir Z. Vidadi P. Wang C. Wu S. L. Xiong Y. Xu T. Zafar P. P. Zhang S. N. Zhang S. J. Zheng

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-09 23:50 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE

keywords X-ray flashesgamma-ray burstscollapsarrelativistic jetType Ic supernovaSVOMJWSTafterglow modeling

0 comments

The pith

XRF 241001A is a soft low-luminosity collapsar event from a weak relativistic jet viewed on-axis, forming the low-energy tail of the long GRB population.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper reports SVOM detection of a soft X-ray flash with prompt emission below 20 keV and low isotropic energy, followed by multi-wavelength afterglow and JWST spectroscopy of an associated supernova. Modeling shows the afterglow arises from a relativistic jet seen directly on-axis and identifies the supernova as a broad-line Type Ic event similar to known GRB-associated cases. This places the transient in the collapsar category and links it to the faint end of long gamma-ray bursts. A reader would care because it unifies XRFs with the GRB population and illustrates how new wide-field X-ray instruments can access previously missed soft events.

Core claim

XRF 241001A at redshift 0.573 shows T90 of 3.14 seconds with Epeak below 10 keV and Eiso of about 8 times 10 to the 49 erg; its X-ray to radio afterglow is consistent with an on-axis relativistic jet, while JWST/NIRSpec spectra reveal a broad-line Type Ic supernova matching events like SN 1998bw, confirming the collapsar origin.

What carries the argument

Afterglow modeling from X-ray to radio that favors an on-axis relativistic jet, together with the broad-line Type Ic supernova spectrum from JWST that establishes the collapsing-star progenitor.

If this is right

XRFs occupy the low-energy extension of the long GRB population rather than forming a fully separate class.
SVOM's ECLAIRs instrument can systematically detect the soft, sub-luminous end of collapsar events.
Weak relativistic jets in collapsing stars can still produce observable X-ray flashes accompanied by broad-line Type Ic supernovae.
The Amati relation continues to hold for these low-energy events, extending its validity into the faint regime.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Jet power in collapsars may vary continuously rather than in discrete on/off states, with weaker jets naturally producing softer XRFs.
Complete GRB population statistics will require counting XRFs to avoid underestimating the total rate of jet-producing collapses.
Similar events found in future SVOM data could test whether all soft XRFs carry broad-line Type Ic supernovae.

Load-bearing premise

The faint afterglow is produced by a relativistic jet viewed directly on-axis instead of off-axis geometry or a non-relativistic outflow.

What would settle it

An afterglow light curve or spectrum that cannot be fit by any on-axis jet model, or a supernova spectrum lacking the broad lines and instead matching a different type, would disprove the claimed origin.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.20346 by A. Coleiro, A. de Ugarte Postigo, A. J. Levan, A. Klotz, A. Martin-Carrillo, A. Saccardi, B. Cordier, B. P. Gompertz, B. Schneider, B. Zhang, C. C. Th\"one, C. Lachaud, C. Wu, D. B. Malesani, D. G\"otz, D. H. Hartmann, D. Turpin, D. \v{D}urov\v{c}\'ikov\'a, F. Daigne, F. Piron, G. Mo, H. B. Cai, H. L. Li, J. K. Leung, J. Sollerman, J. T. Palmerio, J. Wang, J. Y. Wei, L. Huang, L. Izzo, L. P. Xin, M. Brunet, M. De Pasquale, N. A. Rakotondrainibe, N. Dagoneau, N. R. Tanvir, N. Sarin, O. Godet, P. D'Avanzo, P. Jakobsson, P. Maggi, P. P. Zhang, P. Wang, R. Mochkovitch, R. Salvaterra, S. Antier, S. Campana, S. D. Vergani, S. Guillot, S. J. Zheng, S. L. Xiong, S. N. Zhang, S. Schanne, T. Zafar, V. Buat, V. D'Elia, X. H. Han, X. M. Lu, Y. F. Huang, Y. L. Qiu, Y. W. Dong, Y. Xu, Z. Vidadi.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Prompt emission spectrum of XRF 241001A observed [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: VLT/X-shooter spectra of XRF 241001A (z = 0.5728 ± 0.0001) obtained at 0.58 days after the trigger. The UVB, VIS, and NIR arms are displayed from top to bottom panels. In each panel, the upper sub-panel shows the 2D spectrum, while the lower sub-panel presents the 1D extracted spectrum. Absorption and emission lines are highlighted and labeled as blue dashed and black dotted vertical lines, respectively. T… view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Prompt emission properties of XRF 241001A compared to the GRB sample in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Comparison of the XRF 241001A afterglow light curve with those of previously detected long GRBs. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: UV/optical spectrum of XRF 241001A at 0.58 days (red) compared to EP240414a (0.6 days, blue), AT2018cow (6.9 days, black), and the best-fit model (black dashed line) combining a blackbody (dotted blue line) and a power law (dash-dotted green line). Spectra of EP240414a and AT2018cow are shifted to z = 0.5728. compiled by Kann et al. (2010, 2011). All light curves were shifted to a common redshift of z = 1 … view at source ↗

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Multi-wavelength afterglow and SN modeling of XRF 241001A and SN 2024aiiq for scenario 2 (thermal component sub [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: X-ray–to–NIR SED modeling of XRF 241001A at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: Left panel: JWST/NIRSpec spectrum of XRF 241001A/SN 2024aiiq (red) compared with the archetypal GRB/SN Ic-BL GRB 980425/SN 1998bw (grey) and EP 250108a/SN 2025kg (black), observed at a similar rest-frame epoch. The Fe II λ5169 and Si II λ6355 features are marked with dashed horizontal lines, and the broad features near 1 and 2 µm are indicated with vertical lines. Right panel: Two-dimensional (top) and ext… view at source ↗

**Figure 10.** Figure 10: Temporal evolution of expansion velocities in GRB-SNe. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_10.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 11.** Figure 11: One second peak flux as a function of fluence in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_11.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

X-ray flashes (XRFs) are a type of gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) with prompt emission predominantly below 30 keV poorly detected by previous missions. The advent of the SVOM mission, with its wide-field instrument ECLAIRs, provides a new way to detect soft X-ray transients such as XRFs. We present photometric and spectroscopic observations of XRF 241001A detected by SVOM, a soft, sub-luminous, and low-energetic burst located in a poorly populated region of the Amati relation. We investigate the origin of its faint, soft high-energy emission to assess its connection to the long GRB population. We analyze the SVOM/ECLAIRs prompt emission and model its afterglow emission from X-ray to-radio. We present JWST/NIRSpec and SVOM/VT observations of the associated supernova (SN 2024aiiq), which we model with an Arnett radioactive decay component and compare its properties with previously detected GRB/SNe. XRF 241001A is located at z = 0.573 and has a prompt emission dominated by photons below 20 keV with a duration of T90 = 3.14 seconds. Its spectrum can be modeled by non-thermal or thermal models, all pointing towards a low Epeak < 10 keV and Eiso ~ 8x10^49 erg. The X-ray-to-radio afterglow modeling favors an origin from a relativistic jet viewed on-axis. In the optical, XRF 241001A exhibits an early blue emission, similar to that detected in some fast X-ray transients and inconsistent with synchrotron emission. The JWST/NIRSpec observations firmly established its collapsar origin by revealing a SN Type Ic with broad lines, comparable to SN 1998bw and SN 2025kg-like events. XRF 241001A is a soft, low-luminosity collapsar event produced by a weak relativistic jet observed on-axis, supporting the view that part of the XRF population forms the low-energy tail of the long GRB population. It demonstrates the potential of SVOM/ECLAIRs to probe the soft regime of the high-energy transient population.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

This reports a new SVOM soft XRF at z=0.57 with JWST spectroscopy confirming a broad-line Ic supernova, adding a low-energy data point to the collapsar picture.

read the letter

The main point is a clean observational detection: SVOM caught XRF 241001A with soft prompt emission (Epeak below 10 keV, Eiso around 8e49 erg), and JWST/NIRSpec plus optical data tie it to SN 2024aiiq, a broad-line Type Ic comparable to 1998bw. The paper walks through the prompt spectrum, X-ray to radio afterglow, and an Arnett fit to the supernova light curve. That combination is genuinely new for SVOM and gives a concrete example at the faint end of these events.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports the SVOM/ECLAIRs detection of the soft X-ray flash XRF 241001A at z=0.573, with T90=3.14 s, prompt spectrum yielding Epeak <10 keV and Eiso ~8e49 erg, X-ray-to-radio afterglow data modeled as arising from an on-axis relativistic jet, early blue optical emission noted as inconsistent with synchrotron, and JWST/NIRSpec plus SVOM/VT data revealing an associated broad-line Type Ic supernova SN 2024aiiq whose light curve is fit with an Arnett radioactive-decay model and compared to events like SN 1998bw. The central claim is that XRF 241001A is a low-luminosity collapsar event powered by a weak relativistic jet, placing part of the XRF population on the low-energy tail of long GRBs.

Significance. If the afterglow modeling is robust, the result adds a well-observed example supporting the continuity between XRFs and long GRBs from collapsars, with the low Eiso and soft spectrum filling a sparsely populated region of the Amati relation. The JWST spectroscopic confirmation of the broad-line Ic supernova provides a rare multi-wavelength anchor for the collapsar interpretation. The work also demonstrates SVOM/ECLAIRs' ability to detect and localize soft transients missed by prior missions.

major comments (2)

[Abstract and afterglow modeling] Abstract and afterglow modeling section: the statement that 'X-ray-to-radio afterglow modeling favors an origin from a relativistic jet viewed on-axis' is load-bearing for the central claim linking XRF 241001A to the low-energy tail of long GRBs. However, the same paragraph reports early blue optical emission 'inconsistent with synchrotron emission' from such a jet. This tension requires explicit resolution: either the forward-shock model (with on-axis viewing angle and standard microphysical parameters) simultaneously reproduces the X-ray, optical, and radio data at Eiso ~8e49 erg, or an additional component (e.g., cocoon) is needed. Quantitative fit statistics (reduced chi-squared, best-fit parameters with uncertainties, and comparison to alternative models) must be provided to demonstrate that the on-axis jet interpretation is preferred over non-relativistic or off-axis alternatives.
[SN 2024aiiq observations and modeling] SN 2024aiiq section: the classification as a broad-line Type Ic supernova and the Arnett-model fit are used to establish the collapsar origin. The manuscript states the spectrum is 'comparable to SN 1998bw and SN 2025kg-like events' but does not report the specific light-curve fit parameters, reduced chi-squared, or exclusion of alternative supernova templates. These details are needed to quantify how firmly the spectroscopic and photometric data support the collapsar interpretation at the reported redshift.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract] The abstract would benefit from including at least one quantitative measure of afterglow fit quality (e.g., reduced chi-squared or degrees of freedom) alongside the statement that modeling 'favors' the jet origin.
[Prompt emission analysis] Notation for Epeak and Eiso should be defined on first use with units and the precise energy range over which Eiso is integrated.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed comments, which have helped us strengthen the presentation of our results. We address each major comment point by point below. Where the referee correctly identifies gaps in quantitative details, we have revised the manuscript to incorporate the requested information.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract and afterglow modeling] Abstract and afterglow modeling section: the statement that 'X-ray-to-radio afterglow modeling favors an origin from a relativistic jet viewed on-axis' is load-bearing for the central claim linking XRF 241001A to the low-energy tail of long GRBs. However, the same paragraph reports early blue optical emission 'inconsistent with synchrotron emission' from such a jet. This tension requires explicit resolution: either the forward-shock model (with on-axis viewing angle and standard microphysical parameters) simultaneously reproduces the X-ray, optical, and radio data at Eiso ~8e49 erg, or an additional component (e.g., cocoon) is needed. Quantitative fit statistics (reduced chi-squared, best-fit parameters with uncertainties, and comparison to alternative models) must be provided to demonstrate that the on-axis jet interpretation is preferred over non-relat

Authors: We agree that the early blue optical emission creates a clear tension with a pure synchrotron forward-shock model from an on-axis jet, and the manuscript already flags this inconsistency. We interpret the blue excess as likely arising from an additional component (e.g., cocoon or shock-breakout emission) while the X-ray-to-radio afterglow remains well-described by the on-axis relativistic jet. In the revised manuscript we have added the requested quantitative details: reduced chi-squared values for the best-fit on-axis jet model, best-fit microphysical parameters with uncertainties, and explicit comparisons to off-axis and non-relativistic alternatives. These show that the on-axis jet is statistically preferred for the X-ray, late optical, and radio data once the early blue excess is excluded from the fit. revision: yes
Referee: [SN 2024aiiq observations and modeling] SN 2024aiiq section: the classification as a broad-line Type Ic supernova and the Arnett-model fit are used to establish the collapsar origin. The manuscript states the spectrum is 'comparable to SN 1998bw and SN 2025kg-like events' but does not report the specific light-curve fit parameters, reduced chi-squared, or exclusion of alternative supernova templates. These details are needed to quantify how firmly the spectroscopic and photometric data support the collapsar interpretation at the reported redshift.

Authors: We accept that the original text lacked the numerical fit details. The revised manuscript now reports the Arnett-model parameters (nickel mass, ejecta mass, and kinetic energy) with 1-sigma uncertainties, the reduced chi-squared of the fit, and a brief discussion of why Type II or Ib templates are ruled out by the absence of H/He lines and the broad-line spectroscopic features. These additions quantify the strength of the broad-line Ic classification and the collapsar interpretation at z=0.573. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: observational data and standard modeling

full rationale

This is an observational astronomy paper reporting detection, photometry, spectroscopy, and afterglow/SN modeling of a transient. The central claim (weak on-axis jet + collapsar origin) follows from fitting observed light curves and spectra to standard synchrotron and Arnett models; no equation or result is shown to reduce by construction to a fitted parameter renamed as prediction, nor to any self-citation chain. The provided text contains no load-bearing self-citations, uniqueness theorems, or ansatzes imported from prior author work. Early blue emission is noted as inconsistent with pure synchrotron but does not create a definitional loop. Score 0 is the expected outcome for such reports.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard redshift measurement, spectral template matching for SN classification, and afterglow jet modeling with several fitted quantities; no new entities are postulated.

free parameters (2)

Epeak = <10 keV
Peak energy of the prompt spectrum fitted to be below 10 keV from ECLAIRs data.
Eiso = ~8e49 erg
Isotropic-equivalent energy derived from fluence and redshift.

axioms (2)

domain assumption Redshift z=0.573 from spectroscopic observations
Standard cosmological distance indicator used to convert observed quantities to rest-frame energies.
domain assumption Afterglow arises from synchrotron emission in a relativistic jet
Standard GRB afterglow framework invoked to interpret X-ray to radio data.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 6100 in / 1468 out tokens · 48252 ms · 2026-05-09T23:50:00.016118+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

Magnetar Engines in Broad-lined Type Ic Supernovae and a Unified Picture for Magnetar-powered Stripped-envelope Supernovae
astro-ph.HE 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

Broad-lined Type Ic supernovae are powered by magnetar engines, showing a universal ejecta-mass versus initial-spin correlation across stripped-envelope supernova types that supports a common progenitor framework.
ECLAIRs: the SVOM high-energy transient trigger camera
astro-ph.HE 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 3.0

ECLAIRs is the autonomous trigger and localization camera for high-energy transients on the SVOM satellite, with reported design details and early science performance through March 2025.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

172 extracted references · 5 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers · 3 internal anchors

[1]

P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T

Abbott, B. P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., et al. 2017, ApJ, 848, L13

2017
[2]

2002, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol

Aldering, G., Adam, G., Antilogus, P., et al. 2002, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol. 4836, Survey and Other Telescope Technologies and Discoveries, ed. J. A. Tyson & S. Wolff, 61–72

2002
[3]

2002, A&A, 390, 81

Amati, L., Frontera, F., Tavani, M., et al. 2002, A&A, 390, 81

2002
[4]

2020, MNRAS, 497, 5518

Antier, S., Agayeva, S., Almualla, M., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 497, 5518

2020
[5]

L., Frederiks, D

Aptekar, R. L., Frederiks, D. D., Golenetskii, S. V ., et al. 1995, Space Sci. Rev., 71, 265

1995
[6]

1999, Astrophysics Source Code Library

Arnaud, K., Dorman, B., & Gordon, C. 1999, Astrophysics Source Code Library

1999
[7]

Arnett, W. D. 1980, ApJ, 237, 541

1980
[8]

Arnett, W. D. 1982, ApJ, 253, 785

1982
[9]

D., et al

Ashton, G., Hübner, M., Lasky, P. D., et al. 2019, ApJS, 241, 27

2019
[10]

B., Abdo, A

Atwood, W. B., Abdo, A. A., Ackermann, M., et al. 2009, ApJ, 697, 1071

2009
[11]

Barraud, C., Daigne, F., Mochkovitch, R., & Atteia, J. L. 2005, A&A, 440, 809

2005
[12]

P., et al

Barraud, C., Olive, J.-F., Lestrade, J. P., et al. 2003, A&A, 400, 1021

2003
[13]

C., Kulkarni, S

Bellm, E. C., Kulkarni, S. R., Graham, M. J., et al. 2019, PASP, 131, 018002

2019
[14]

2010, Astrophysics Source Code Library

Bertin, E. 2010, Astrophysics Source Code Library

2010
[15]

2018, ApJ, 866, 97

Bi, X., Mao, J., Liu, C., & Bai, J.-M. 2018, ApJ, 866, 97

2018
[16]

& Tonry, J

Blondin, S. & Tonry, J. L. 2007, ApJ, 666, 1024

2007
[17]

C., Perola, G

Boella, G., Butler, R. C., Perola, G. C., et al. 1997, A&AS, 122, 299

1997
[18]

A., Caputo, R., & Team, S

Breeveld, A. A., Caputo, R., & Team, S. 2024, GRB Coordinates Network, Cir- cular Service, No. 37678, 37678, 37678

2024
[19]

A., Landsman, W., Holland, S

Breeveld, A. A., Landsman, W., Holland, S. T., et al. 2011, in American Institute of Physics Conference Series, V ol. 1358, Gamma Ray Bursts 2010, ed. J. E

2011
[20]

M., Baliber, N., Bianco, F

Brown, T. M., Baliber, N., Bianco, F. B., et al. 2013, PASP, 125, 1031

2013
[21]

2014, A&A, 564, A125

Buchner, J., Georgakakis, A., Nandra, K., et al. 2014, A&A, 564, A125

2014
[22]

N., Hill, J

Burrows, D. N., Hill, J. E., Nousek, J. A., et al. 2005, Space Sci. Rev., 120, 165

2005
[23]

2023, JWST Calibration Pipeline

Bushouse, H., Eisenhamer, J., Dencheva, N., et al. 2023, JWST Calibration Pipeline

2023
[24]

R., Sakamoto, T., Suzuki, M., et al

Butler, N. R., Sakamoto, T., Suzuki, M., et al. 2005, ApJ, 621, 884

2005
[25]

J., et al

Campana, S., Mangano, V ., Blustin, A. J., et al. 2006, Nature, 442, 1008

2006
[26]

2017, Advances in Astronomy, 2017, 8929054

Cano, Z., Wang, S.-Q., Dai, Z.-G., & Wu, X.-F. 2017, Advances in Astronomy, 2017, 8929054

2017
[27]

2003, PASP, 115, 763

Chabrier, G. 2003, PASP, 115, 763

2003
[28]

2025, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumenta- tion Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol

Chen, Y ., Han, D., Cui, W., et al. 2025, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumenta- tion Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol. 13531, EUV and X-ray Optics: Synergy between Laboratory and Space IX, ed. R. Hudec & L. Pina, 1353102

2025
[29]

Chevalier, R. A. & Fransson, C. 2008, ApJ, 683, L135

2008
[30]

A., Gompertz, B

Chrimes, A. A., Gompertz, B. P., Kann, D. A., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 515, 2591

2022
[31]

Clark, B. G. 1980, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 89, 89

1980
[32]

Cleveland, W. S. 1979, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74, 74

1979
[33]

2024, GRB Coordinates Network, 37655, 37655

Coleiro, A., Cangemi, F., Maiolino, T., et al. 2024, GRB Coordinates Network, 37655, 37655

2024
[34]

Y ., Tanvir, N

Cordier, B., Wei, J. Y ., Tanvir, N. R., et al. 2025, A&A, 704, L7

2025
[35]

2024, GRB Coordinates Network, 37655, 37655 de Pasquale, M., Piro, L., Gendre, B., et al

Dagoneau, N., Schanne, S., Chateau, F., et al. 2024, GRB Coordinates Network, 37655, 37655 de Pasquale, M., Piro, L., Gendre, B., et al. 2006, A&A, 455, 813

2024
[36]

J., Lang, D., et al

Dey, A., Schlegel, D. J., Lang, D., et al. 2019, AJ, 157, 168 Article number, page 15 of 24 A&A proofs:manuscript no. main

2019
[37]

2010, Science China Physics, Mechanics, and Astronomy, 53, 40

Dong, Y ., Wu, B., Li, Y ., Zhang, Y ., & Zhang, S. 2010, Science China Physics, Mechanics, and Astronomy, 53, 40

2010
[38]

Eichler, D., Livio, M., Piran, T., & Schramm, D. N. 1989, Nature, 340, 126

1989
[39]

A., Beardmore, A

Evans, P. A., Beardmore, A. P., Page, K. L., et al. 2009, MNRAS, 397, 1177

2009
[40]

A., Beardmore, A

Evans, P. A., Beardmore, A. P., Page, K. L., et al. 2007, A&A, 469, 379

2007
[41]

A., Willingale, R., Osborne, J

Evans, P. A., Willingale, R., Osborne, J. P., et al. 2010, A&A, 519, A102

2010
[42]

Eyles-Ferris, R. A. J., Jonker, P. G., Levan, A. J., et al. 2025, ApJ, 988, L14

2025
[43]

M., Willmer, C

Faber, S. M., Willmer, C. N. A., Wolf, C., et al. 2007, ApJ, 665, 265

2007
[44]

2020, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumenta- tion Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol

Fan, X., Zou, G., Wei, J., et al. 2020, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumenta- tion Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol. 11443, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2020: Optical, Infrared, and Millimeter Wave, ed. M. Lystrup & M. D. Perrin, 114430Q

2020
[45]

P., & Bridges, M

Feroz, F., Hobson, M. P., & Bridges, M. 2009, MNRAS, 398, 1601

2009
[46]

H., Brooks, J

Frater, R. H., Brooks, J. W., & Whiteoak, J. B. 1992, Journal of Electrical and Electronics Engineering Australia, 12, 12

1992
[47]

S., Levan, A

Fruchter, A. S., Levan, A. J., Strolger, L., et al. 2006, Nature, 441, 463

2006
[48]

Fynbo, J. P. U., Sollerman, J., Hjorth, J., et al. 2004, ApJ, 609, 962

2004
[49]

P., Mather, J

Gardner, J. P., Mather, J. C., Clampin, M., et al. 2006, Space Sci. Rev., 123, 485

2006
[50]

2004, ApJ, 611, 1005

Gehrels, N., Chincarini, G., Giommi, P., et al. 2004, ApJ, 611, 1005

2004
[51]

2004, ApJ, 616, 331

Ghirlanda, G., Ghisellini, G., & Lazzati, D. 2004, ApJ, 616, 331

2004
[52]

2014, in Society of Photo-Optical Instru- mentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol

Godet, O., Nasser, G., Atteia, J.-., et al. 2014, in Society of Photo-Optical Instru- mentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol. 9144, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2014: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray, ed. T. Takahashi, J.- W. A. den Herder, & M. Bautz, 914424

2014
[53]

2006, in Society of Photo-Optical In- strumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol

Goldoni, P., Royer, F., François, P., et al. 2006, in Society of Photo-Optical In- strumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol. 6269, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy, ed. I. S. McLean & M. Iye, 62692K

2006
[54]

P., Levan, A

Gompertz, B. P., Levan, A. J., Malesani, D. B., et al. 2024, GRB Coordinates Network, 37867, 37867

2024
[55]

P., Ravasio, M

Gompertz, B. P., Ravasio, M. E., Nicholl, M., et al. 2023, Nature Astronomy, 7, 67

2023
[56]

2009, A&A, 499, 439

Guidorzi, C., Clemens, C., Kobayashi, S., et al. 2009, A&A, 499, 439

2009
[57]

2025, ApJ, 986, L4

Hamidani, H., Sato, Y ., Kashiyama, K., et al. 2025, ApJ, 986, L4

2025
[58]

I., Kippen, R

Heise, J., Zand, J. I., Kippen, R. M., & Woods, P. M. 2001, in Gamma-ray Bursts in the Afterglow Era, ed. E. Costa, F. Frontera, & J. Hjorth, 16 HI4PI Collaboration, Ben Bekhti, N., Flöer, L., et al. 2016, A&A, 594, A116

2001
[59]

2012, ApJ, 756, 187

Hjorth, J., Malesani, D., Jakobsson, P., et al. 2012, ApJ, 756, 187

2012
[60]

2003, Nature, 423, 847

Hjorth, J., Sollerman, J., Møller, P., et al. 2003, Nature, 423, 847

2003
[61]

Ho, A. Y . Q., Perley, D. A., Beniamini, P., et al. 2020, ApJ, 905, 98

2020
[62]

Ho, A. Y . Q., Perley, D. A., Yao, Y ., et al. 2022, ApJ, 938, 85

2022
[63]

Ho, A. Y . Q., Phinney, E. S., Ravi, V ., et al. 2019, ApJ, 871, 73 Högbom, J. A. 1974, Astronomy and Astrophysics Supplement Series, 15, 15

2019
[64]

T., Boyd, P

Holland, S. T., Boyd, P. T., Gorosabel, J., et al. 2007, AJ, 133, 122 Ivezi´c, Ž., Kahn, S. M., Tyson, J. A., et al. 2019, ApJ, 873, 111

2007
[65]

2019, Nature, 565, 324

Izzo, L., de Ugarte Postigo, A., Maeda, K., et al. 2019, Nature, 565, 324

2019
[66]

& Malesani, D

Izzo, L. & Malesani, D. B. 2024, GRB Coordinates Network, 37667, 37667

2024
[67]

2022, A&A, 661, A80

Jakobsen, P., Ferruit, P., Alves de Oliveira, C., et al. 2022, A&A, 661, A80

2022
[68]

Jiang, S.-Q., Xu, D., van Hoof, A. P. C., et al. 2025, ApJ, 988, L34

2025
[69]

2013, A&A, 560, A91

Jones, A., Noll, S., Kausch, W., Szyszka, C., & Kimeswenger, S. 2013, A&A, 560, A91

2013
[70]

2007, ApJ, 654, 385

Kaneko, Y ., Ramirez-Ruiz, E., Granot, J., et al. 2007, ApJ, 654, 385

2007
[71]

A., Klose, S., & Zeh, A

Kann, D. A., Klose, S., & Zeh, A. 2006, ApJ, 641, 993

2006
[72]

A., Klose, S., Zhang, B., et al

Kann, D. A., Klose, S., Zhang, B., et al. 2011, ApJ, 734, 96

2011
[73]

A., Klose, S., Zhang, B., et al

Kann, D. A., Klose, S., Zhang, B., et al. 2010, ApJ, 720, 1513

2010
[74]

2025, Acta Polytechnica, 65, 50

Karpov, S. 2025, Acta Polytechnica, 65, 50

2025
[75]

Kennicutt, Jr., R. C. 1998, ARA&A, 36, 189

1998
[76]

M., Woods, P

Kippen, R. M., Woods, P. M., Heise, J., et al. 2001, in Gamma-ray Bursts in the Afterglow Era, ed. E. Costa, F. Frontera, & J. Hjorth, 22

2001
[77]

& Thierry, P

Klotz, A. & Thierry, P. 2019, Experimental Astronomy, 48, 121

2019
[78]

A., Fishman, G

Kouveliotou, C., Meegan, C. A., Fishman, G. J., et al. 1993, ApJ, 413, L101

1993
[79]

2018, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1803.01187 Krühler, T., Malesani, D., Fynbo, J

Krogager, J.-K. 2018, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1803.01187 Krühler, T., Malesani, D., Fynbo, J. P. U., et al. 2015, A&A, 581, A125

work page arXiv 2018
[80]

& Zhang, B

Kumar, P. & Zhang, B. 2015, Phys. Rep., 561, 1

2015

Showing first 80 references.