4.7 Article

Gamma-Ray Burst Constraints on Cosmological Models from the Improved Amati Correlation

Journal

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
Volume 935, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

IOP Publishing Ltd
DOI: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7de5

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NSFC [12075084, 11690034, 11805063, 11775077, 12073069]
  2. Science and Technology Innovation Plan of Hunan province [2017XK2019]
  3. Guizhou Provincial Science and Technology Foundation [QKHJC-ZK[2021] Key 020]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

An improved Amati correlation was constructed and used to study constraints on ACDM and wCDM models. The results obtained from the improved Amati correlation are consistent with those from other observational data.
An improved Amati correlation was constructed in ApJ 931 (2022) 50 by us recently. In this paper, we further study constraints on the ACDM and wCDM models from the gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) standardized with the standard and improved Amati correlations, respectively. By using the Pantheon Type Ia supernova sample to calibrate the latest A220 GRB data set, the GRB Hubble diagram is obtained model-independently. We find that at the high-redshift region (z > 1.4) the GRB distance modulus from the improved Amati correlation is larger apparently than that from the standard Amati one. The GRB data from the standard Amati correlation only give a lower bound limit on the present matter density parameter Omega(m0), while the GRBs from the improved Amati correlation constrain the Omega(m0) with the 68% confidence level to be 0.308(-0.230)(+0.066) and 0.307(-0.290)(+0.057) in the ACDM and wCDM models, respectively, which are very consistent with those given by other current popular observational data including baryon acoustic oscillation, cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation, and so on. Once the H(z) data are added in our analysis, the constraint on the Hubble constant H-0 can be achieved. We find that two different correlations provide slightly different H(0 )results but the marginalized mean values seem to be close to that from the Planck 2018 CMB radiation observations.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available