REVIEW 2 cited by
Do gamma-ray burst measurements provide a useful test of cosmological models?
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Do gamma-ray burst measurements provide a useful test of cosmological models?
read the original abstract
We study eight different gamma-ray burst (GRB) data sets to examine whether current GRB measurements -- that probe a largely unexplored part of cosmological redshift ($z$) space -- can be used to reliably constrain cosmological model parameters. We use three Amati-correlation samples and five Combo-correlation samples to simultaneously derive correlation and cosmological model parameter constraints. The intrinsic dispersion of each GRB data set is taken as a goodness measurement. We examine the consistency between the cosmological bounds from GRBs with those determined from better-established cosmological probes, such as baryonic acoustic oscillation (BAO) and Hubble parameter $H(z)$ measurements. We use the Markov chain Monte Carlo method implemented in \textsc{MontePython} to find best-fit correlation and cosmological parameters, in six different cosmological models, for the eight GRB samples, alone or in conjunction with BAO and $H(z)$ data. For the Amati correlation case, we compile a data set of 118 bursts, the A118 sample, which is the largest -- about half of the total Amati-correlation GRBs -- current collection of GRBs suitable for constraining cosmological parameters. This updated GRB compilation has the smallest intrinsic dispersion of the three Amati-correlation GRB data sets we examined. We are unable to define a collection of reliable bursts for current Combo-correlation GRB data. Cosmological constraints determined from the A118 sample are consistent with -- but significantly weaker than -- those from BAO and $H(z)$ data. They also are consistent with the spatially-flat $\Lambda$CDM model as well as with dynamical dark energy models and non-spatially-flat models. Since GRBs probe a largely unexplored region of $z$, it is well worth acquiring more and better-quality burst data which will give a more definitive answer to the question of the title.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Model-independent test of the cosmic distance duality relation with recent observational data
Two model-independent methods applied to latest SN and BAO data find the cosmic distance duality relation consistent with observations within 1 sigma and no evidence of violation.
-
Mapping the redshift drift at various redshifts through cosmography
Cosmographic Taylor and Padé models fitted to Pantheon+SH0ES+GRB+DESI BAO data yield redshift drift predictions compatible with ΛCDM and ω0ω1CDM at 1-2σ, with mock drift data tightening q0 and j0 bounds.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.