Magnetar-powered long gamma-ray bursts and connection to superluminous supernovae and fast radio bursts

Le résumé fourni par la source

Based on X-ray afterglow observations from the Swift satellite, we construct a sample of 169 long gamma-ray bursts (LGRBs) exhibiting the canonical magnetar plateau signature, i.e., a plateau followed by a $t^{-2}$ decay. We derive the plateau luminosity $L_0$ and break time $t_b$ for each burst by performing Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) fits to the light curves, and estimate pseudo-redshifts for bursts lacking known redshifts via the Amati relation. The fundamental magnetar parameters are subsequently inferred: the surface polar magnetic field strength $B_p \in [0.39,\ 23.08] \times 10^{15}$G and the initial spin period $P_0 \in [0.95,\ 13.79]$ms. Statistical analysis shows that both the known-redshift subsample and the full sample follow the Dainotti correlation between $L_0$ and $t_b$ with a slope close to $-1$, supporting a constant energy injection rate during the plateau phase. Furthermore, we identify a significant correlation between $B_p$ and $P_0$: $B_p \propto P_0^{0.83 \pm 0.09}$ for the full sample and $B_p \propto P_0^{0.80 \pm 0.16}$ for the known-redshift subsample, with both slopes consistent within uncertainties. Compared to magnetars powering superluminous supernovae (SLSNe), GRB magnetars possess systematically stronger magnetic fields (by approximately one order of magnitude), suggesting fundamental differences in their progenitor systems or collapse conditions; while their magnetic field strengths show no significant difference from those powering fast radio bursts (FRBs), suggesting a possible common evolutionary pathway. This study provides a physics-motivated, model-consistent sample of magnetar-candidate GRBs, offering a robust foundation for statistical investigations within the magnetar central engine model and placing new observational constraints on the birth properties of these extreme compact objects.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.