The supernova–gamma-ray burst–jet connection

Downloaded from http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/ on July 7, 2015
The supernova–gamma-ray
burst–jet connection
Jens Hjorth
rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org
Research
Cite this article: Hjorth J. 2013 The
supernova–gamma-ray burst–jet connection.
Phil Trans R Soc A 371: 20120275.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2012.0275
One contribution of 15 to a Discussion Meeting
Issue ‘New windows on transients across the
Universe’.
Subject Areas:
astrophysics, observational astronomy
Keywords:
supernovae, gamma-ray bursts, jets
Author for correspondence:
Jens Hjorth
e-mail: jens@dark-cosmology.dk
Dark Cosmology Centre, Niels Bohr Institute, University of
Copenhagen, Juliane Maries Vej 30, 2100 Copenhagen Ø, Denmark
The observed association between supernovae and
gamma-ray bursts represents a cornerstone in our
understanding of the nature of gamma-ray bursts.
The collapsar model provides a theoretical framework
for this connection. A key element is the launch
of a bipolar jet (seen as a gamma-ray burst). The
resulting hot cocoon disrupts the star, whereas the
56 Ni produced gives rise to radioactive heating of the
ejecta, seen as a supernova. In this discussion paper, I
summarize the observational status of the supernova–
gamma-ray burst connection in the context of
the ‘engine’ picture of jet-driven supernovae and
highlight SN 2012bz/GRB 120422A—with its luminous
supernova but intermediate high-energy luminosity—
as a possible transition object between low-luminosity
and jet gamma-ray bursts. The jet channel for
supernova explosions may provide new insights into
supernova explosions in general.
1. Introduction
SN 1998bw [1,2], coincident in space and time with GRB
980425, remains the prototype radio-bright, broad-lined
(BL) type Ic supernova, against which other supernova–
gamma-ray bursts are measured up. GRB 980425,
however, was peculiar, with an isotropic equivalent
energy release in gamma rays of only Eγ ,iso ∼ 1048 erg.
The optical lightcurve of SN 1998bw, depicted in
figure 1, exhibited a characteristic rise to peak of about
MV = −19.2 mag in about 16 days, similar to a Ia
supernova. MacFadyen & Woosley [5, p. 288] predicted
that ‘all gamma-ray bursts produced by the collapsar
model will also make supernovae like SN 1998bw’. In this
model, the progenitor star is a Wolf–Rayet star [6,7], i.e. a
massive star that has shed its envelope of hydrogen and
helium, possibly through eruptions [8].
2013 The Author(s) Published by the Royal Society. All rights reserved.
Downloaded from http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/ on July 7, 2015
GRB 030329/SN 2003dh
GRB 980425/SN 1998bw
GRB 031203/SN 2003lw
GRB 060218/SN 2006aj
GRB 100316D/SN 2010bh
MV (mag)
–14
–12
0
GRB 050509B
GRB 050709
GRB 060505
GRB 060614
20
40
60
80
time since gamma-ray burst (days)
100
Figure 1. Optical lightcurves for the grade A [3] spectroscopic supernovae associated with gamma-ray bursts (excluding SN
2012bz). The olive points are supernovae from low-luminosity gamma-ray bursts, whereas the orchid data points are for SN
2003dh, associated with the jet gamma-ray burst GRB 030329. There is considerable diversity in the light curves, regarding
time to peak and peak magnitude. The 56 Co decay slope is shown for reference (dashed line). Also shown are upper limits on
supernova emission from long gamma-ray bursts (blue) and short gamma-ray bursts (red). Adapted from Hjorth & Bloom [3].
A recent compilation of lightcurves of other supernovae associated with gamma-ray bursts is available in Cano et al. [4]. (Online
version in colour.)
The ultimate proof of a SN 1998bw-like supernova associated with a ‘normal’ cosmological
gamma-ray burst with Eγ ,iso ∼ 1052 erg came with the spectroscopic identification of SN 2003dh
associated with GRB 030329, as a supernova spatially and temporally coincident with the gammaray burst, and with lightcurve properties and spectroscopic broad-line evolution very similar to
that of SN 1998bw [9,10].
The night before the Royal Society Discussion Meeting on ‘New windows on transients across
the Universe’, GRB 120422A was observed by Swift and subsequently by ground-based telescopes
at a redshift of 0.28. An accompanying supernova was predicted at the meeting and indeed
reported soon after as SN 2012bz [11,12].
In this paper, I focus on ‘jet-driven’ supernovae and their relation (or lack thereof) to
the different classes of gamma-ray bursts and highlight the importance of SN 2012bz/GRB
120422A. More comprehensive (and less speculative) reviews of the supernova–gamma-ray burst
connection can be found in Woosley & Bloom [13] and Hjorth & Bloom [3].
2. Supernovae associated with long-duration gamma-ray bursts
There seem to be two types of long-duration gamma-ray bursts. The exact division is unclear but
we will discuss them, in turn, in the following sections.
(a) Low-luminosity gamma-ray bursts
Low-luminosity gamma-ray bursts (also termed ‘sub-energetic’ or ‘nearby’ bursts) seem to be
about 100 times as common as the other class discussed below [14], but because of their low
......................................................
–16
rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org Phil Trans R Soc A 371: 20120275
–18
2
Downloaded from http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/ on July 7, 2015
–24
3
MV (mag)
afterglow
–18
supernova
–16
–14
0
10
20
30
40
time since explosion (days)
50
Figure 2. Schematic diagram illustrating the challenges in detecting supernova light on the background of the gamma-ray
burst afterglow and the host galaxy. The supernova region (olive) reflects the range in lightcurves shown in figure 1. The
afterglow is assumed to decay as t −1.5 ; the afterglow region reflects the range in afterglow brightness reported by Kann et al.
[19]. The range in host galaxy magnitudes reflect those detected in the TOUGH survey [20]. The diagram shows that observed
lightcurves may either be supernova, afterglow or host galaxy dominated. All situations are encountered in nature. (Online
version in colour.)
luminosities they are primarily found at low redshifts as rare events (one every approx. 3 years).
They typically have single-peak high-energy prompt lightcurves, soft high-energy spectra and are
often found to be X-ray flashes, i.e. gamma-ray bursts with peak energies below approximately
50 keV. Observational evidence suggests that the radio and high-energy emission is due to
the breakout of a relativistic shock from the surrounding massive wind of the progenitor star
[2,15–18]. Apart from SN 2003dh (and possibly SN 2012bz), the best-studied supernovae related
to gamma-ray bursts are all members of this class. Their lightcurves are shown in figure 1.
(b) Jet gamma-ray bursts
These are also known as ‘normal’ or ‘cosmological’ gamma-ray bursts (or ‘collapsar’ bursts,
although this is a somewhat theory-laden term) and are characterized by more complex prompt
emission lightcurves and higher energies, luminosities and peak energies. They are believed to
arise from emission from a relativistic jet at large distances from the progenitor star.
Observing a supernova related to a gamma-ray burst at higher redshift is challenging because
of possible contamination by the host galaxy (which often appears unresolved in ground-based
observations) and the afterglow. This is illustrated in figure 2. Indeed, as shown by Lipkin et al.
[21], the lightcurve of GRB 0303029 did not exhibit a conspicuous lightcurve bump from SN
2003dh because it was afterglow dominated. Besides 2003dh (shown in figure 1), the best example
of a supernova related to a gamma-ray burst in this class is SN 2010ma [22] (and possibly SN
2012bz).
(c) Statistical properties of supernovae associated with gamma-ray bursts
Inferring statistical properties of supernovae associated with gamma-ray bursts requires a welldefined sample. For this purpose, Hjorth & Bloom [3] devised a grading scheme for each
supernova claimed in the literature to be related to a gamma-ray burst. The evidence for a
supernova was graded A–E.1 Based on supernovae with grades A–C, we plot in figure 3 the
1
We have created a website (http://www.dark-cosmology.dk/GRBSN) dedicated to providing updates to the list of
supernovae related to gamma-ray bursts, the grading of the observational evidence for a supernova, and supplementary
information on the supernovae and the associated gamma-ray bursts.
......................................................
host galaxy
–20
rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org Phil Trans R Soc A 371: 20120275
–22
Downloaded from http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/ on July 7, 2015
–20
low-luminosity GRBs
MV,peak (mag)
–19
–18
–17
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
log Lg,iso (erg s–1)
Figure 3. Supernova optical peak brightness versus gamma-ray burst (GRB) isotropic luminosity [23,24] for grade A–C systems
[3]. Low-luminosity gamma-ray burst supernovae (Eγ ,iso < 1048.5 erg, olive) and supernovae from jet gamma-ray bursts
(Eγ ,iso > 1049.5 erg, orchid) have similar distributions of peak brightness. SN 2012bz/GRB 120422A is highlighted (orange) as
a possible transition object in the grey area: 1048.5 erg < Eγ ,iso < 1049.5 erg [25]. (Online version in colour.)
distribution of peak supernova magnitudes as a function of isotropic equivalent luminosity in
−1
(1 + z), we have tentatively identified low-luminosity
gamma rays. Defining Lγ ,iso = Eγ ,iso T90
gamma-ray bursts as having Lγ ,iso < 1048.5 erg s−1 and jet gamma-ray bursts as having Lγ ,iso >
1049.5 erg s−1 . There is a real dispersion in the peak magnitudes; supernovae related to gammaray bursts are evidently not standard candles. It remains an open question whether they
are standardizable similar to type Ia supernovae [4,26]. It is evident that the lightcurves of
the subsample of supernovae shown in figure 1 exhibit a clear correlation between the peak
magnitude and the width of the peak.
We note that beaming and viewing angle can significantly affect the inferred high-energy
luminosity [27]. For example, GRB 091127, which appears in the high-luminosity (jet) part of
figure 3, has been suggested to be a sub-energetic burst [28] owing to a beaming correction.
Nevertheless, it is evident that there appears to be a parabola-shaped upper envelope to
the brightness of supernovae as a function of high-energy luminosity. By the time of the
meeting, there were no gamma-ray bursts with convincing supernovae in the range 1048.5 erg <
Eγ ,iso < 1049.5 erg. This changed with SN 2012bz/GRB 120422A, which fills this gap in highenergy luminosity as one of the brightest supernovae associated with a gamma-ray burst ever
detected [29].
How do these peak magnitudes compare with other similar supernovae, i.e. type Ic
supernovae, with no hydrogen or helium in their spectra? Using the well-defined sample
of normal Ic supernovae from Drout et al. [30] and a more heterogeneous sample of BL Ic
supernovae from a variety of sources, we plot cumulative histograms of their peak magnitudes
in figure 4. Type Ic supernovae seem to be fainter than supernovae related to gamma-ray bursts,
whereas the situation is less clear-cut for Ic-BL supernovae with no gamma-ray bursts. We note
that strong observational evidence (grade A–C) quite naturally will bias our sample against
fainter supernovae.
A comparison with Ic-BL is interesting because the rates of low-luminosity gamma-ray
bursts and Ic-BL are comparable, suggesting perhaps a common origin and indicates that
low-luminosity gamma-ray bursts, as expected, may not be strongly beamed [31].
......................................................
GRB 030329
GRB 980425
rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org Phil Trans R Soc A 371: 20120275
GRB 120422A
4
jet GRBs
Downloaded from http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/ on July 7, 2015
1.0
5
fraction (>MV)
GRB SNe
0.4
Ic-BL SNe
Ic SNe
0.2
0
–16
–17
–18
–19
MV (mag)
–20
–21
Figure 4. Cumulative distributions of the brightness of different kinds of Ic supernovae. The supernovae associated with
gamma-ray bursts graded A, B or C are from Hjorth & Bloom [3]. The normal Ic supernovae are from Drout et al. [30]. The Ic-BL
distribution comes from a variety of sources and as such represents a more ill-defined sample. The gamma-ray burst supernovae
generally appear brighter than normal Ic supernovae, although it should be noted that they are likely biased against faint
systems. The brightness distribution of Ic-BL is probably consistent with that of gamma-ray burst supernovae although there
may be a lack of very bright gamma-ray burst supernovae. (Online version in colour.)
3. Supernova-less gamma-ray bursts
Two classes of gamma-ray bursts are not accompanied by bright supernovae.
(a) Short gamma-ray bursts
Short-duration, hard-spectrum gamma-ray bursts [32], with durations T90 < 2 s, are known not to
lead to supernovae. In figure 1, we have plotted the upper limits on the existence of supernovae
accompanying GRB 050509B [33] and GRB 050709 [34]. These constrain any supernova to be about
100 times fainter than SN 1998bw at peak. This is consistent with short gamma-ray bursts being
the results of compact object mergers.
The data also rule out the existence of an early rebrightning in GRB 050509B [33] at 1.5
days in the restframe. Bright transient emission, dubbed a ‘mini SN’ [35,36], ‘kilonova’ [37] or
‘macronova’ [38], is expected to peak around the optical–UV range within a day or so with a
semi-thermal spectrum [35]. GRB 050509B sets very strong constraints on such emission [33,39,40].
(b) Long supernova-less gamma-ray bursts
Perhaps surprisingly, some long-duration gamma-ray bursts are not accompanied by bright
supernovae. As shown in figure 1, the constraints on GRB 060505 and GRB 060614 are about as
constraining as the those related to the short gamma-ray bursts discussed earlier. These puzzling
systems may be related to non-56 Ni-producing supernovae or they may be merger gamma-ray
bursts with longer durations than usually found [41–45].
(c) Mind the gap
It is quite remarkable that current observations reveal a clear gap between the brightnesses of
gamma-ray burst supernovae, at around absolute magnitude −17 to −19, and the upper limits on
long supernova-less gamma-ray bursts at around −12 to −14 mag. Finding faint supernovae is of
course difficult and fainter supernovae will likely be detected but the current factor of 100 may
indicate that there is not a simple continuum of events.
......................................................
0.6
rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org Phil Trans R Soc A 371: 20120275
0.8
Downloaded from http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/ on July 7, 2015
Table 1. The supernova–gamma-ray burst–jet connection.
gamma-ray bursts
fall-back supernovae?
(GRB 060505)
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................
type IIn? (SN 2010jp)
jet GRBs (SN 2003dh–GRB 030329)
mergers
(GRB 050509B)
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................
4. Engine-driven supernovae
The collapsar model [5] operates with two time scales, the duration of the active ‘engine’ (jet), tE ,
and the time for shock breakout, tS . A successful gamma-ray burst requires the engine to be active
for longer than the shock-breakout time. Bromberg et al. [46] and Lazzati et al. [47] have used this
picture to explore the consequences of the relative durations for the resulting supernovae and
gamma-ray bursts (an alternative jet scenario is presented by Papish & Soker [48]):
— tE > tS : a normal jet gamma-ray burst accompanied by a Ic-BL is produced;
— tE ≈ tS : a low-luminosity gamma-ray burst accompanied by a Ic-BL or a relativistic Ic-BL
with no gamma-ray burst is produced; and
— tE < tS : a non-relativistic supernova but no gamma-ray burst is produced.
In this picture, relativistic supernovae, such as SN 2009bb [49,50], are jet-driven supernovae,
similar to low-luminosity gamma-ray bursts. It is worth noting that a low luminosity is not
necessarily synonymous with a short engine duration, i.e. it may be possible to have lowluminosity jet gamma-ray bursts, such as possibly GRB 120422A.
In the collapsar model, one could also imagine that the engine does not occur in a strippedenvelope core-supernova but in a type II supernova with a hydrogen and/or helium layer
that would prevent the escape of the jet (see also [51]). Such massive stars may have a dense
circumstellar medium that would make them appear as type IIn supernovae, as suggested by, for
example, Nomoto et al. [52] and Chevalier [53]. Recently, a possible jet-powered IIn (SN 2010jp)
was reported [54], albeit not a relativistic one.
The picture regarding jet-driven supernovae and gamma-ray bursts that emerges from the
discussion in this paper is summarized in table 1. SN 2012bz/GRB 120422A, which may be a
transition object between the low-luminosity and jet gamma-ray bursts, reminds us that this fairly
simple picture could easily be more complex.
I acknowledge discussions with Andrew MacFadyen, Paul Crowther, Davide Lazzati, Enrico Ramirez-Ruiz,
Darach Watson and Tsvi Piran. I thank the anonymous referees for helpful comments. The Dark Cosmology
Centre is supported by the Danish National Research Foundation.
References
1. Galama TJ et al. 1998 An unusual supernova in the error box of the γ-ray burst of 25 April
1998. Nature 395, 670–672. (doi:10.1038/27150)
2. Kulkarni SR, Frail DA, Wieringa MH, Ekers RD, Sadler EM, Wark RM, Higdon JL, Phinney
ES, Bloom JS. 1998 Radio emission from the unusual supernova 1998bw and its association
with the γ-ray burst of 25 April 1998. Nature 395, 663–669. (doi:10.1038/27139)
3. Hjorth J, Bloom JS. 2012 The gamma-ray burst–supernova connection. In Gamma-ray bursts
(eds C Kouveliotou, RAMJ Wijers, S Woosley). Cambridge Astrophysics Series, no. 51,
pp. 169–190. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. (http://arxiv. org/abs/1104.2274)
4. Cano Z et al. 2011 XRF 100316D/SN 2010bh and the nature of gamma-ray burst supernovae.
Astrophys. J. 740, 41. (doi:10.1088/0004-637X/740/1/41)
......................................................
supernova–gamma-ray bursts
low-luminosity GRBs (SN 1998bw–GRB 980425)
rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org Phil Trans R Soc A 371: 20120275
core-collapse supernovae
relativistic Ic-BL (SN 2009bb)
6
Downloaded from http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/ on July 7, 2015
7
......................................................
rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org Phil Trans R Soc A 371: 20120275
5. MacFadyen AI, Woosley SE. 1999 Collapsars: gamma-ray bursts and explosions in ‘failed
supernovae’. Astrophys. J. 524, 262–289. (doi:10.1086/307790)
6. Crowther PA. 2007 Physical properties of Wolf–Rayet stars. Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 45,
177–219. (doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.45.051806.110615)
7. Langer N. 2012 Presupernova evolution of massive single and binary stars. Annu. Rev. Astron.
Astrophys. 50, 107–164. (doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125534)
8. Smith N, Owocki SP. 2006 On the role of continuum-driven eruptions in the evolution of very
massive stars and population III stars. Astrophys. J. 645, L45–L48. (doi:10.1086/506523)
9. Stanek KZ et al. 2003 Spectroscopic discovery of the supernova 2003dh associated with GRB
030329. Astrophys. J. 591, L17–L20. (doi:10.1086/376976)
10. Hjorth J et al. 2003 A very energetic supernova associated with the γ-ray burst of 29 March
2003. Nature 423, 847–850. (doi:10.1038/nature01750)
11. Wiersema K, Cucchiara A, Levan AJ, Rapoport S, Schmidt BP, Bersier D, Perley D, Cenko SB,
Tanvir NR. 2012 GRB 120422A: Gemini-N detection of a supernova. GCN circular no. 13276.
See http://gcn.gsfc.nasa.gov/gcn/gcn3/13276.gcn3.
12. Malesani D et al. 2012 GRB 120422A: VLT/X-shooter spectroscopic evidence for a SN. GCN
circular no. 13277. See http://gcn.gsfc.nasa.gov/gcn/gcn3/13277.gcn3.
13. Woosley SE, Bloom JS. 2006 The supernova–gamma-ray burst connection. Annu. Rev. Astron.
Astrophys. 44, 507–556. (doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.43.072103.150558)
14. Pian E et al. 2006 An optical supernova associated with the X-ray flash XRF 060218. Nature
442, 1011–1013. (doi:10.1038/nature05082)
15. Colgate SA. 1968 Prompt gamma rays and X rays from supernovae. Can. J. Phys. 46, 476–480.
(doi:10.1139/p68-274)
16. Campana S et al. 2006 The association of GRB 060218 with a supernova and the evolution of
the shock wave. Nature 442, 1008–1010. (doi:10.1038/nature04892)
17. Soderberg AM et al. 2006 Relativistic ejecta from X-ray flash XRF 060218 and the rate of cosmic
explosions. Nature 442, 1014–1017. (doi:10.1038/nature05087)
18. Nakar E, Sari R. 2012 Relativistic shock breakouts: a variety of gamma-ray flares:
from low-luminosity gamma-ray bursts to type Ia supernovae. Astrophys. J. 747, 88.
(doi:10.1088/0004-637X/747/2/88)
19. Kann DA et al. 2010 The afterglows of Swift-era gamma-ray bursts. I. Comparing preSwift and Swift-era long/soft (type II) GRB optical afterglows. Astrophys. J. 720, 1513–1558.
(doi:10.1088/0004-637X/720/2/1513)
20. Hjorth J et al. 2012 The optically unbiased gamma-ray burst host (TOUGH) survey. I. Survey
design and catalogs. Astrophys. J. 756, 187. (doi:10.1088/0004-637X/756/2/187)
21. Lipkin YM et al. 2004 The detailed optical light curve of GRB 030329. Astrophys. J. 606, 381–394.
(doi:10.1086/383000)
22. Sparre M et al. 2011 Spectroscopic evidence for SN 2010ma associated with GRB 101219B.
Astrophys. J. 735, L24. (doi:10.1088/2041-8205/735/1/L24)
23. Amati L, Guidorzi C, Frontera F, Della Valle M, Finelli F, Landi R, Montanari E. 2008
Measuring the cosmological parameters with the Ep,i − Eiso correlation of gamma-ray bursts.
Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 391, 577–584. (doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13943.x)
24. Amati L, Frontera F, Guidorzi C. 2009 Extremely energetic Fermi gamma-ray bursts
obey spectral energy correlations. Astron. Astrophys. 508, 173–180. (doi:10.1051/0004-6361/
200912788)
25. Zhang B-B, Fan Y-Z, Shen R-F, Xu D, Zhang F-W, Wei D-M, Burrows DN, Zhang B, Gehrels N.
2012 GRB 120422A: a low-luminosity gamma-ray burst driven by a central engine. Astrophys.
J. 756, 190. (doi:10.1088/0004-637X/756/2/190)
26. Stanek KZ et al. 2005 Deep photometry of GRB 041006 afterglow: hypernova bump at redshift
z = 0.716. Astrophys. J. 626, L5–L9. (doi:10.1086/431361)
27. Granot J, Ramirez-Ruiz E. 2010 Jets and gamma-ray burst unification schemes
(http://arxiv.org/abs/1012.5101)
28. Troja E et al. 2012 Broadband study of GRB 091127: a sub-energetic burst at higher redshift?
Astrophys. J. 761, 50. (doi:10.1088/0004-637X/761/1/50)
29. Melandri A et al. 2012 The optical SN 2012bz associated with the long GRB 120422A. Astron.
Astrophys. 547, A82. (doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201219879)
30. Drout MR et al. 2011 The first systematic study of type Ibc supernova multi-band light curves.
Astrophys. J. 741, 97. (doi:10.1088/0004-637X/741/2/97)
Downloaded from http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/ on July 7, 2015
8
......................................................
rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org Phil Trans R Soc A 371: 20120275
31. Podsiadlowski P, Mazzali PA, Nomoto K, Lazzati D, Cappellaro E. 2004 The rates of
hypernovae and gamma-ray bursts: implications for their progenitors. Astrophys. J. 607,
L17–L20. (doi:10.1086/421347)
32. Kouveliotou C, Meegan CA, Fishman GJ, Bhat NP, Briggs MS, Koshut TM, Paciesas WS,
Pendleton GN. 1993 Identification of two classes of gamma-ray bursts. Astrophys. J. 413,
L101–L104. (doi:10.1086/186969)
33. Hjorth J et al. 2005 GRB 050509B: constraints on short gamma-ray burst models. Astrophys. J.
630, L117–L120. (doi:10.1086/491733)
34. Hjorth J et al. 2005 The optical afterglow of the short γ-ray burst GRB 050709. Nature 437,
859–861. (doi:10.1038/nature04174)
35. Li L-X, Paczynski
´
B. 1998 Transient events from neutron star mergers. Astrophys. J. 507, L59–
L62. (doi:10.1086/311680)
36. Rosswog S, Ramirez-Ruiz E. 2002 Jets, winds and bursts from coalescing neutron stars. Mon.
Not. R. Astron. Soc. 336, L7–L11. (doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05898.x)
37. Metzger BD et al. 2010 Electromagnetic counterparts of compact object mergers powered
by the radioactive decay of r-process nuclei. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 406, 2650–2662.
(doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16864.x)
38. Kulkarni SR. 2005 Modeling supernova-like explosions associated with gamma-ray bursts
with short durations. (http://arxiv.org/abs/astroph/0510256)
39. Kocevski D et al. 2010 Limits on radioactive powered emission associated with a shorthard GRB 070724A in a star-forming galaxy. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 404, 963–974.
(doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16327.x)
40. Roberts LF, Kasen D, Lee WH, Ramirez-Ruiz E. 2011 Electromagnetic transients powered
by nuclear decay in the tidal tails of coalescing compact binaries. Astrophys. J. 736, L21.
(doi:10.1088/2041-8205/736/1/L21)
41. Gehrels N et al. 2006 A new γ-ray burst classification scheme from GRB060614. Nature 444,
1044–1046. (doi:10.1038/nature05376)
42. Fynbo JPU et al. 2006 No supernovae associated with two long-duration γ-ray bursts. Nature
444, 1047–1049. (doi:10.1038/nature05375)
43. Della Valle M et al. 2006 An enigmatic long-lasting γ-ray burst not accompanied by a bright
supernova. Nature 444, 1050–1052. (doi:10.1038/nature05374)
44. Gal-Yam A et al. 2006 A novel explosive process is required for the γ-ray burst GRB 060614.
Nature 444, 1053–1055. (doi:10.1038/nature05373)
45. Ofek EO et al. 2007 GRB 060505: a possible short-duration gamma-ray burst in a star-forming
region at a redshift of 0.09. Astrophys. J. 662, 1129–1135. (doi:10.1086/518082)
46. Bromberg O, Nakar E, Piran T. 2011 Are low-luminosity gamma-ray bursts generated by
relativistic jets? Astrophys. J. 739, L55. (doi:10.1088/2041-8205/739/2/L55)
47. Lazzati D, Morsony BJ, Blackwell CH, Begelman MC. 2012 Unifying the zoo of jet-driven
stellar explosions. Astrophys. J. 750, 68. (doi:10.1088/0004-637X/750/1/68)
48. Papish O, Soker N. 2011 Exploding core collapse supernovae with jittering jets. Mon. Not. R.
Astron. Soc. 416, 1697–1702. (doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18671.x)
49. Soderberg AM et al. 2010 A relativistic type Ibc supernova without a detected γ-ray burst.
Nature 463, 513–515. (doi:10.1038/nature08714)
50. Pignata G et al. 2011 SN 2009bb: a peculiar broad-lined type Ic supernova. Astrophys. J. 728,
14. (doi:10.1088/0004-637X/728/1/14)
51. Heger A, Fryer CL, Woosley SE, Langer N, Hartmann DH. 2003 How massive single stars end
their life. Astrophys. J. 591, 288–300. (doi:10.1086/375341)
52. Nomoto K, Maeda K, Mazzali PA, Umeda H, Deng J, Iwamoto K. 2003 Hypernovae and other
black-hole-forming supernovae. (http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0308136)
53. Chevalier RA. 2012 Common envelope evolution leading to supernovae with dense
interaction. Astrophys. J. 752, L2. (doi:10.1088/2041-8205/752/1/L2)
54. Smith N et al. 2012 SN 2010jp (PTF10aaxi): a jet in a type II supernova. Mon. Not. R. Astron.
Soc. 420, 1135–1144. (doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.20104.x)