pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.25147 · v1 · pith:UVLKCKGMnew · submitted 2026-05-24 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE

Shear Particle Acceleration in Structured Gamma-Ray Burst Jets: IV. Thermal {em vs.} Non-thermal Emission of the Jet Cocoon

Zi-Qi Wang , Xiao-Li Huang , Hai-Ming Zhang , En-Wei Liang This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-29 23:41 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE
keywords gamma-ray burstsstructured jetsjet cocoonquasi-thermal emissionshear accelerationGRB 090902Bnon-thermal synchrotron
0
0 comments X

The pith

A structured jet model reproduces the quasi-thermal keV-MeV component and broadband non-thermal spectrum of GRB 090902B from cocoon heating plus core synchrotron.

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

The paper examines the origin of occasional quasi-thermal spectral features in GRB prompt emission by modeling a jet with an ultra-relativistic core and surrounding structured cocoon. In the weak-scattering regime, electrons heated in the mixed jet-cocoon region develop a quasi-thermal distribution when shear acceleration remains inefficient. Parameterizing the radial electron temperature profile as a power law with index q_T allows the model to match both the thermal peak width and flux in the keV-MeV band and the non-thermal emission from shock-accelerated electrons in the core. The same framework applied to GRB 240825A in the strong-scattering limit shows broader spectra from shear-accelerated electrons. The results imply that observed GRB spectral variety stems from differing physical conditions in the mixed cocoon region.

Core claim

In the weak-scattering regime with inefficient shear acceleration, electrons pre-energized in the thin jet-cocoon interaction layer are further heated in the mixed jet-cocoon region, forming a quasi-thermal electron distribution. With the radial temperature profile parameterized as a power law of index q_T, the peak flux and spectral width of the resulting thermal component prove sensitive to the maximum temperature T_max and to q_T. When this component is added to synchrotron radiation from shock-accelerated electrons in the jet core, the combined spectrum matches both the time-integrated and time-resolved observations of GRB 090902B.

What carries the argument

The mixed jet-cocoon (MJC) region, where pre-energized electrons form a quasi-thermal distribution under weak scattering and inefficient shear acceleration, parameterized by radial temperature power-law index q_T.

If this is right

  • The thermal component's peak flux and width vary directly with maximum temperature T_max and the temperature power-law index q_T.
  • Shear-accelerated electrons in the strong-scattering regime produce broader spectra than thermalized electrons in the weak-scattering regime.
  • GRB spectral diversity arises from the additional emission component originating in the mixed jet-cocoon region under different physical conditions.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same MJC heating mechanism could be tested on other GRBs that display clear quasi-thermal components to check whether a narrow range of q_T values consistently fits.
  • Time-resolved polarization or high-energy cutoff measurements could distinguish weak-scattering thermalization from strong-scattering shear acceleration without relying solely on spectral fitting.
  • If the radial temperature profile deviates from a simple power law in real jets, the model would require an additional degree of freedom to maintain fits to the observed thermal width.

Load-bearing premise

Electrons pre-energized in the thin interaction layer form a quasi-thermal distribution when further heated in the mixed jet-cocoon region under weak scattering with inefficient shear acceleration.

What would settle it

Failure to reproduce the observed keV-MeV quasi-thermal peak shape and flux in GRB 090902B time-resolved spectra for any choice of T_max and q_T while holding jet-core parameters fixed.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.25147 by En-Wei Liang, Hai-Ming Zhang, Xiao-Li Huang, Zi-Qi Wang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Temperature profiles of electrons in the MJC region for different parameter sets (Left panel) and the corresponding emission spectra (Right panel). The gray dashed line indicates the Fermi/GBM flux threshold. 3. CASE STUDY: GRB 090902B GRB 090902B is the most prominent representative event with the detection of a distinctive thermal emission component. The burst was observed by the Fermi mission. We retrie… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Observed time-integrated and time-resolved spectra of GRB 090902B and the best-fit model spectra (left and middle panels). Dashed and dotted lines denote the jet-core and MJC emission components, and the solid line shows the total emission. The right panel illustrates the posterior distributions of the model parameters derived from the MCMC fit to the time-integrated spectrum [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Similar to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Spectral profiles of emission in the MJC region of GRB 090902B (thermalized dominated) and GRB 240825A (shear-accelerated dominated). Thick and thin lines denote time-integrated and time-resolved spectra, respectively. structured cocoon, we investigate the emission properties of the thermalized electrons in the MJC region under the weak-scattering regime. The radial temperature profile of the MJC electron … view at source ↗
read the original abstract

A distinct thermal or quasi-thermal spectral component is occasionally observed in gamma-ray burst (GRB) prompt emission spectra. Taking GRB 090902B as a case study, we investigate its origin within a structured jet framework, in which the outflow consists of an ultra-relativistic uniform core surrounded by a structured cocoon. In the weak-scattering regime with inefficient shear acceleration, electrons pre-energized in the thin jet-cocoon interaction layer are further heated in the mixed jet-cocoon (MJC) region, forming a quasi-thermal electron distribution. Parameterizing the radial temperature profile of electrons as a power law with index $q_T$, we demonstrate that both the peak flux and spectral width of the thermal component are sensitive to maximum temperature $T_{\max}$ and $q_T$. Combined with the synchrotron emission of shock-accelerated electrons in the jet core, our model reproduces both the quasi-thermal component in the keV-MeV range and the broadband non-thermal emission observed in the time-integrated and time-resolved spectra of GRB 090902B. A comparative analysis of GRB 240825A within a shear-acceleration dominated (strong-scattering) scenario shows that shear-accelerated electrons produce broader spectra than thermalized electrons in the weak-scattering regime. These results indicate that GRB spectral diversity likely arises from the additional emission component originating in the MJC region under different physical conditions.

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.

Referee Report

2 major / 0 minor

Summary. The manuscript investigates the origin of quasi-thermal spectral components in GRB prompt emission within a structured jet model consisting of an ultra-relativistic uniform core surrounded by a cocoon. Focusing on GRB 090902B in the weak-scattering regime with inefficient shear acceleration, electrons pre-energized in the thin jet-cocoon interaction layer are further heated in the mixed jet-cocoon (MJC) region to form a quasi-thermal distribution. The radial electron temperature profile is parameterized as a power law with index q_T; by selecting T_max and q_T, the model matches the keV-MeV quasi-thermal component and broadband non-thermal emission in both time-integrated and time-resolved spectra when combined with core synchrotron emission. A comparison to GRB 240825A in the strong-scattering regime is also presented, suggesting that spectral diversity arises from different MJC conditions.

Significance. If the quasi-thermal form and the index q_T could be derived from the shear-acceleration and mixing equations rather than introduced via parameterization and adjusted to fit data, the framework would offer a physical mechanism linking jet structure to observed GRB spectral features and diversity. As presented, the reproduction of GRB 090902B spectra depends on fitting T_max and q_T, which limits the result to a demonstration of sensitivity rather than an independent prediction.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The central claim that the model reproduces both the quasi-thermal keV-MeV component and broadband non-thermal emission of GRB 090902B rests on parameterizing the radial temperature profile as T(r) ~ r^{-q_T} and choosing values of T_max and q_T to match the observed peak flux and spectral width. No derivation of the quasi-thermal distribution function or of the specific index q_T is provided from the weak-scattering shear-acceleration equations in the MJC region; the match is therefore achieved by construction through fitting rather than from the underlying physics.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract (paragraph on parameterization and regime): The assumption that electrons pre-energized in the thin interaction layer form a quasi-thermal distribution when further heated in the MJC region under inefficient shear acceleration is introduced without supporting calculation or reference to prior papers in the series establishing this outcome from the steady-state kinetic equation. If the actual distribution deviates from quasi-thermal or if q_T cannot be independently constrained, the spectral reproduction is not guaranteed by the model physics.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 1 unresolved

We thank the referee for the thorough review and constructive feedback on our manuscript. We address the major comments point by point below. While we maintain that the parameterized approach provides useful insight into spectral diversity arising from MJC conditions, we agree that greater clarity on the role of parameterization and references to prior work in the series will strengthen the presentation. We will make corresponding revisions.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The central claim that the model reproduces both the quasi-thermal keV-MeV component and broadband non-thermal emission of GRB 090902B rests on parameterizing the radial temperature profile as T(r) ~ r^{-q_T} and choosing values of T_max and q_T to match the observed peak flux and spectral width. No derivation of the quasi-thermal distribution function or of the specific index q_T is provided from the weak-scattering shear-acceleration equations in the MJC region; the match is therefore achieved by construction through fitting rather than from the underlying physics.

    Authors: We agree that the radial temperature profile is introduced as a power-law parameterization and that T_max and q_T are selected to reproduce the observed spectral features. This choice is motivated by the expected radial dependence of heating in the mixed region under weak scattering, but a first-principles derivation of the exact index from the full kinetic equations is not provided here. The manuscript's focus is to demonstrate the sensitivity of the quasi-thermal and non-thermal components to these physically plausible parameters when combined with core synchrotron emission. We will revise the abstract to state explicitly that the profile is parameterized and that the reproduction illustrates the potential of the MJC component rather than constituting an ab initio prediction. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract (paragraph on parameterization and regime): The assumption that electrons pre-energized in the thin interaction layer form a quasi-thermal distribution when further heated in the MJC region under inefficient shear acceleration is introduced without supporting calculation or reference to prior papers in the series establishing this outcome from the steady-state kinetic equation. If the actual distribution deviates from quasi-thermal or if q_T cannot be independently constrained, the spectral reproduction is not guaranteed by the model physics.

    Authors: The formation of a quasi-thermal distribution under inefficient shear acceleration in the weak-scattering regime follows from the heating and mixing processes analyzed in Papers I–III of this series. We will add explicit citations to those works in the revised abstract and introduction to support the assumption. While a complete numerical solution of the steady-state kinetic equation for the precise distribution function lies outside the present scope, the parameterization enables exploration of the resulting emission. Should future calculations reveal significant deviations, the model framework can accommodate them. revision: yes

standing simulated objections not resolved
  • Derivation of the precise functional form of the quasi-thermal electron distribution and the exact value of the index q_T directly from the steady-state kinetic equations in the MJC region without introducing any parameterization.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

Spectral reproduction of GRB 090902B achieved by fitting T_max and q_T rather than deriving quasi-thermal distribution from shear equations

specific steps
  1. fitted input called prediction [Abstract]
    "Parameterizing the radial temperature profile of electrons as a power law with index q_T, we demonstrate that both the peak flux and spectral width of the thermal component are sensitive to maximum temperature T_max and q_T. Combined with the synchrotron emission of shock-accelerated electrons in the jet core, our model reproduces both the quasi-thermal component in the keV-MeV range and the broadband non-thermal emission observed in the time-integrated and time-resolved spectra of GRB 090902B."

    The reproduction is presented as a model outcome, yet it is obtained by choosing the free parameters T_max and q_T to fit the GRB 090902B data. The quasi-thermal distribution itself is asserted rather than derived from the shear-acceleration or mixing equations, so the spectral match is statistically forced by the parameterization and fit rather than an independent first-principles result.

full rationale

The paper's central result is that the model reproduces the observed quasi-thermal and non-thermal spectra of GRB 090902B. This reproduction is obtained after explicitly parameterizing the electron temperature profile as a power law with free index q_T and selecting T_max and q_T to match peak flux and width. No equation in the provided text derives the quasi-thermal form or the value of q_T from the underlying mixing or shear-acceleration dynamics; the match is therefore a fitted outcome. The structured-jet framework and weak-scattering regime retain independent content, preventing a higher score, but the load-bearing spectral claim reduces to parameter adjustment.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The model rests on the weak-scattering regime assumption and the power-law temperature profile parameterization; these are introduced to produce the quasi-thermal distribution without independent evidence supplied in the abstract.

free parameters (2)
  • q_T
    Power-law index of the radial electron temperature profile in the MJC region, chosen to control spectral width and peak flux.
  • T_max
    Maximum temperature of electrons in the MJC region, adjusted to match the observed thermal component peak.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Electrons pre-energized in the thin jet-cocoon interaction layer form a quasi-thermal distribution when further heated in the mixed jet-cocoon region under weak-scattering conditions.
    Invoked to justify the thermal component origin; stated in the abstract description of the regime.
  • ad hoc to paper The radial temperature profile of electrons can be parameterized as a power law with index q_T.
    Introduced explicitly to demonstrate sensitivity of peak flux and spectral width.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5808 in / 1699 out tokens · 28820 ms · 2026-06-29T23:41:06.668542+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

73 extracted references · 70 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    P., et al., 2017a, @doi [Physical Review Letters] 10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.161101 , 119, 161101

    Abbott, B. P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., et al. 2017, PhRvL, 119, 161101, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.161101

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.119.161101 2017

  2. [2]

    A., Ackermann, M., Arimoto, M., et al

    Abdo, A. A., Ackermann, M., Arimoto, M., et al. 2009a, Science, 323, 1688, doi: 10.1126/science.1169101

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1169101

  3. [3]

    A., Ackermann, M., Ajello, M., et al

    Abdo, A. A., Ackermann, M., Ajello, M., et al. 2009b, ApJL, 706, L138, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/706/1/L138

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/706/1/l138

  4. [4]

    B., et al

    Ackermann, M., Asano, K., Atwood, W. B., et al. 2010, ApJ, 716, 1178, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/716/2/1178

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/716/2/1178 2010

  5. [5]

    2011, ApJ, 729, 114, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/729/2/114

    Ackermann, M., Ajello, M., Asano, K., et al. 2011, ApJ, 729, 114, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/729/2/114

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/729/2/114 2011

  6. [6]

    2013, ApJ, 763, 71, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/763/2/71

    Ackermann, M., Ajello, M., Asano, K., et al. 2013, ApJ, 763, 71, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/763/2/71

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/763/2/71 2013

  7. [7]

    2014, Science, 343, 42, doi: 10.1126/science.1242353

    Ackermann, M., Ajello, M., Asano, K., et al. 2014, Science, 343, 42, doi: 10.1126/science.1242353

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1242353 2014

  8. [8]

    P., Grismayer, T., Fonseca, R

    Alves, E. P., Grismayer, T., Fonseca, R. A., & Silva, L. O. 2014, New Journal of Physics, 16, 035007, doi: 10.1088/1367-2630/16/3/035007

    work page doi:10.1088/1367-2630/16/3/035007 2014

  9. [9]

    P., Zrake, J., & Fiuza, F

    Alves, E. P., Zrake, J., & Fiuza, F. 2018, PhRvL, 121, 245101, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.245101 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ ocz, B. M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f Astropy Collaboratio...

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.121.245101 2018

  10. [10]

    1993, ApJ, 413, 281, doi: 10.1086/172995

    Band, D., Matteson, J., Ford, L., et al. 1993, ApJ, 413, 281, doi: 10.1086/172995

    work page doi:10.1086/172995 1993

  11. [11]

    2003, Magnetohydrodynamic Turbulence

    Biskamp, D. 2003, Magnetohydrodynamic Turbulence

    2003

  12. [12]

    2013, SSRv, 178, 163, doi: 10.1007/s11214-013-0009-3

    Brandenburg, A., & Lazarian, A. 2013, SSRv, 178, 163, doi: 10.1007/s11214-013-0009-3

    work page doi:10.1007/s11214-013-0009-3 2013

  13. [13]

    2016, MNRAS, 456, 1739, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv2591

    Bromberg, O., & Tchekhovskoy, A. 2016, MNRAS, 456, 1739, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv2591

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2591 2016

  14. [14]

    2017, ApJ, 837, 33, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/837/1/33

    Bustamante, M., Heinze, J., Murase, K., & Winter, W. 2017, ApJ, 837, 33, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/837/1/33

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/837/1/33 2017

  15. [15]

    A method for image analysis

    Cho, J., & Lazarian, A. 2003, MNRAS, 345, 325, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06941.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06941.x 2003

  16. [16]

    2018, ApJ, 854, 103, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaac83

    Bhattacharjee, A. 2018, ApJ, 854, 103, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaac83

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaac83 2018

  17. [17]

    A., Bromberg, O., & Singh, C

    Davelaar, J., Philippov, A. A., Bromberg, O., & Singh, C. B. 2020, ApJL, 896, L31, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab95a2

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab95a2 2020

  18. [18]

    Drenkhahn, G., & Spruit, H. C. 2002, A&A, 391, 1141, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20020839

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20020839 2002

  19. [19]

    Eichler, D., Livio, M., Piran, T., & Schramm, D. N. 1989, Nature, 340, 126, doi: 10.1038/340126a0

    work page doi:10.1038/340126a0 1989

  20. [20]

    W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J

    Foreman-Mackey, D., Hogg, D. W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J. 2013, PASP, 125, 306, doi: 10.1086/670067

    work page doi:10.1086/670067 2013

  21. [21]

    2018, A&A, 609, A112, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201731598

    Ghirlanda, G., Nappo, F., Ghisellini, G., et al. 2018, A&A, 609, A112, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201731598

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201731598 2018

  22. [22]

    2019, Magnetohydrodynamics of Laboratory and Astrophysical Plasmas, doi: 10.1017/9781316403679

    Goedbloed, H., Keppens, R., & Poedts, S. 2019, Magnetohydrodynamics of Laboratory and Astrophysical Plasmas, doi: 10.1017/9781316403679

    work page doi:10.1017/9781316403679 2019

  23. [23]

    H., & Kocevski, D

    Goldstein, A., Cleveland, W. H., & Kocevski, D. 2022, https://fermi.gsfc.nasa.gov/ssc/data/analysis/gbm

    2022

  24. [24]

    1986, ApJL, 308, L47, doi: 10.1086/184741

    Goodman, J. 1986, ApJL, 308, L47, doi: 10.1086/184741

    work page doi:10.1086/184741 1986

  25. [25]

    2022a, MNRAS, 510, 4962, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab3784

    Tchekhovskoy, A. 2022a, MNRAS, 510, 4962, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab3784

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab3784

  26. [26]

    2022b, ApJL, 933, L9, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac7530

    Gottlieb, O., Liska, M., Tchekhovskoy, A., et al. 2022b, ApJL, 933, L9, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac7530

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac7530 2041

  27. [27]

    2022c, ApJL, 933, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac7728

    Gottlieb, O., Moseley, S., Ramirez-Aguilar, T., et al. 2022c, ApJL, 933, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac7728

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac7728 2041

  28. [28]

    S., et al

    Guiriec, S., Connaughton, V., Briggs, M. S., et al. 2011, ApJL, 727, L33, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/727/2/L33

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/727/2/l33 2011

  29. [29]

    2018, MNRAS, 477, 2128, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty760

    Harrison, R., Gottlieb, O., & Nakar, E. 2018, MNRAS, 477, 2128, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty760

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty760 2018

  30. [30]

    2018, ApJ, 866, 13, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aadc07

    Hou, S.-J., Zhang, B.-B., Meng, Y.-Z., et al. 2018, ApJ, 866, 13, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aadc07

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aadc07 2018

  31. [31]

    D., Briggs, M

    Kaneko, Y., Preece, R. D., Briggs, M. S., et al. 2006, ApJS, 166, 298, doi: 10.1086/505911

    work page doi:10.1086/505911 2006

  32. [32]

    1997, ApJ, 490, 92, doi: 10.1086/512791

    Kobayashi, S., Piran, T., & Sari, R. 1997, ApJ, 490, 92, doi: 10.1086/512791

    work page doi:10.1086/512791 1997

  33. [33]

    2012, SSRv, 173, 557, doi: 10.1007/s11214-012-9936-7

    Lazarian, A., Vlahos, L., Kowal, G., et al. 2012, SSRv, 173, 557, doi: 10.1007/s11214-012-9936-7

    work page doi:10.1007/s11214-012-9936-7 2012

  34. [34]

    2013, ApJL, 766, L19, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/766/2/L19

    Liang, E., Boettcher, M., & Smith, I. 2013, ApJL, 766, L19, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/766/2/L19

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/766/2/l19 2013

  35. [35]

    M., & Aharonian, F

    Liu, R.-Y., Rieger, F. M., & Aharonian, F. A. 2017, ApJ, 842, 39, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa7410 L´ opez-C´ amara, D., Morsony, B. J., Begelman, M. C., &

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa7410 2017

  36. [36]

    2013, ApJ, 767, 19, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/767/1/19

    Lazzati, D. 2013, ApJ, 767, 19, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/767/1/19

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/767/1/19 2013

  37. [37]

    F., & Boldyrev, S

    Loureiro, N. F., & Boldyrev, S. 2017, PhRvL, 118, 245101, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.245101

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.118.245101 2017

  38. [38]

    I., & Woosley, S

    MacFadyen, A. I., & Woosley, S. E. 1999, ApJ, 524, 262, doi: 10.1086/307790

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1086/307790 1999

  39. [39]

    I., Woosley, S

    MacFadyen, A. I., Woosley, S. E., & Heger, A. 2001, ApJ, 550, 410, doi: 10.1086/319698

    work page doi:10.1086/319698 2001

  40. [40]

    2019, MNRAS, 490, 4271, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2821 M´ esz´ aros, P., Ramirez-Ruiz, E., Rees, M

    Matsumoto, J., & Masada, Y. 2019, MNRAS, 490, 4271, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2821 M´ esz´ aros, P., Ramirez-Ruiz, E., Rees, M. J., & Zhang, B. 2002, ApJ, 578, 812, doi: 10.1086/342611 M´ esz´ aros, P., & Rees, M. J. 2000, ApJ, 530, 292, doi: 10.1086/308371 9

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2821 2019

  41. [41]

    P., Nakar, E., Hotokezaka, K., et al

    Mooley, K. P., Nakar, E., Hotokezaka, K., et al. 2018, Nature, 554, 207, doi: 10.1038/nature25452

    work page doi:10.1038/nature25452 2018

  42. [42]

    1992, ApJL, 395, L83, doi: 10.1086/186493

    Narayan, R., Paczynski, B., & Piran, T. 1992, ApJL, 395, L83, doi: 10.1086/186493

    work page doi:10.1086/186493 1992

  43. [43]

    1986, ApJL, 308, L43, doi: 10.1086/184740 Pe’Er, A., Zhang, B.-B., Ryde, F., et al

    Paczynski, B. 1986, ApJL, 308, L43, doi: 10.1086/184740 Pe’Er, A., Zhang, B.-B., Ryde, F., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 420, 468, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.20052.x

    work page doi:10.1086/184740 1986

  44. [44]

    2014, ApJ, 795, 155, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/795/2/155

    Peng, F.-K., Liang, E.-W., Wang, X.-Y., et al. 2014, ApJ, 795, 155, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/795/2/155

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/795/2/155 2014

  45. [45]

    J., & Meszaros, P

    Rees, M. J., & Meszaros, P. 1994, ApJL, 430, L93, doi: 10.1086/187446

    work page doi:10.1086/187446 1994

  46. [46]

    Rieger, F. M. 2019, Galaxies, 7, 78, doi: 10.3390/galaxies7030078

    work page doi:10.3390/galaxies7030078 2019

  47. [47]

    M., & Duffy, P

    Rieger, F. M., & Duffy, P. 2004, ApJ, 617, 155, doi: 10.1086/425167

    work page doi:10.1086/425167 2004

  48. [48]

    M., & Duffy, P

    Rieger, F. M., & Duffy, P. 2006, ApJ, 652, 1044, doi: 10.1086/508056

    work page doi:10.1086/508056 2006

  49. [49]

    M., & Duffy, P

    Rieger, F. M., & Duffy, P. 2019, ApJL, 886, L26, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab563f

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab563f 2019

  50. [50]

    M., & Mannheim, K

    Rieger, F. M., & Mannheim, K. 2002, A&A, 396, 833, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20021457

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20021457 2002

  51. [51]

    B., & Lightman, A

    Rybicki, G. B., & Lightman, A. P. 1979, Radiative processes in astrophysics

    1979

  52. [52]

    2009, ApJ, 702, 1211, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/702/2/1211

    Ryde, F., & Pe’er, A. 2009, ApJ, 702, 1211, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/702/2/1211

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/702/2/1211 2009

  53. [53]

    B., et al

    Ryde, F., Axelsson, M., Zhang, B. B., et al. 2010, ApJL, 709, L172, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/709/2/L172

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/709/2/l172 2010

  54. [54]

    E., & Narayan, R

    Sironi, L., Rowan, M. E., & Narayan, R. 2021, ApJL, 907, L44, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abd9bc

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/abd9bc 2021

  55. [55]

    2014, ApJL, 783, L21, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/783/1/L21

    Sironi, L., & Spitkovsky, A. 2014, ApJL, 783, L21, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/783/1/L21

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/783/1/l21 2014

  56. [56]

    A., & Giannios, D

    Sironi, L., Uzdensky, D. A., & Giannios, D. 2025, ARA&A, 63, 127, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-020325-115713

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-020325-115713 2025

  57. [57]

    C., Daigne, F., & Drenkhahn, G

    Spruit, H. C., Daigne, F., & Drenkhahn, G. 2001, A&A, 369, 694, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20010131

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20010131 2001

  58. [58]

    , keywords =

    Toma, K., Wu, X.-F., & M´ esz´ aros, P. 2011, MNRAS, 415, 1663, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18807.x Van Der Walt, S., Colbert, S. C., & Varoquaux, G. 2011, Computing in Science and Engineering, 13, 22, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2011.37

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18807.x 2011

  59. [59]

    2018, ApJ, 864, 163, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aad6ea

    Vianello, G., Gill, R., Granot, J., et al. 2018, ApJ, 864, 163, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aad6ea

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aad6ea 2018

  60. [60]

    and Haberland, Matt and Reddy, Tyler and Cournapeau, David and Burovski, Evgeni and Peterson, Pearu and Weckesser, Warren and Bright, Jonathan and

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020, Nature Medicine, 17, 261, doi: 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2

    work page doi:10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2 2020

  61. [61]

    2009, ApJ, 698, 293, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/698/1/293

    Vurm, I., & Poutanen, J. 2009, ApJ, 698, 293, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/698/1/293

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/698/1/293 2009

  62. [62]

    2024, ApJ, 977, 182, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad93cb

    Wang, Z.-Q., Huang, X.-L., & Liang, E.-W. 2024, ApJ, 977, 182, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad93cb

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad93cb 2024

  63. [63]

    2025a, ApJ, 981, 196, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adb722

    Wang, Z.-Q., Huang, X.-L., & Liang, E.-W. 2025a, ApJ, 981, 196, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adb722

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adb722

  64. [64]

    2025b, ApJ, 990, 157, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adfa1b

    Wang, Z.-Q., Huang, X.-L., & Liang, E.-W. 2025b, ApJ, 990, 157, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adfa1b

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adfa1b

  65. [65]

    Webb, G. M. 1989, ApJ, 340, 1112, doi: 10.1086/167462

    work page doi:10.1086/167462 1989

  66. [66]

    M., Barghouty, A

    Webb, G. M., Barghouty, A. F., Hu, Q., & le Roux, J. A. 2018, ApJ, 855, 31, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaae6c

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaae6c 2018

  67. [67]

    M., Xu, Y., Biermann, P

    Webb, G. M., Xu, Y., Biermann, P. L., et al. 2023, ApJ, 958, 169, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acfda9

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acfda9 2023

  68. [68]

    Woosley, S. E. 1993, ApJ, 405, 273, doi: 10.1086/172359

    work page doi:10.1086/172359 1993

  69. [69]

    2011, ApJ, 726, 90, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/726/2/90

    Zhang, B., & Yan, H. 2011, ApJ, 726, 90, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/726/2/90

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/726/2/90 2011

  70. [70]

    2025, ApJL, 984, L45, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adcf1a

    Zhang, H.-M., Wang, Z.-Q., Dai, C.-Y., et al. 2025, ApJL, 984, L45, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adcf1a

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adcf1a 2025

  71. [71]

    A., Perez, J

    Zhdankin, V., Uzdensky, D. A., Perez, J. C., & Boldyrev, S. 2013, ApJ, 771, 124, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/771/2/124

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/771/2/124 2013

  72. [72]

    2017, PhR, 720, 1, doi: 10.1016/j.physrep.2017.07.005

    Zhou, Y. 2017, PhR, 720, 1, doi: 10.1016/j.physrep.2017.07.005

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2017.07.005 2017

  73. [73]

    Zrake, J., & MacFadyen, A. I. 2012, ApJ, 744, 32, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/744/1/32

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/744/1/32 2012