4.6 Article

Fast radio burst distributions consistent with the first CHIME/FRB catalog

出版社

IOP Publishing Ltd
DOI: 10.1088/1475-7516/2022/01/040

关键词

cosmological simulations; intergalactic media; neutron stars; star formation

资金

  1. NSFC [11975046, 11575022]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The origin of fast radio bursts (FRBs) is still unknown, making it an active field of research. The recently released CHIME/FRB catalog provides a valuable sample for testing FRB distribution models. It was found that the FRB distribution model tracking the cosmic star formation history (SFH) is rejected, while other models with suitable parameters are consistent with the observational data. These results shed light on the origin of FRBs and their cosmology.
Currently, fast radio bursts (FRBs) have become a very active field in astronomy and cosmology. However, the origin of FRBs is still unknown to date. The studies on the intrinsic FRB distributions might help us to reveal the possible origins of FRBs, and improve the simulations for FRB cosmology. Recently, the first CHIME/FRB catalog of 536 events was released. Such a large uniform sample of FRBs detected by a single telescope is very valuable to test the FRB distributions. Later, it has been claimed that the FRB distribution model tracking the cosmic star formation history (SFH) was rejected by the first CHIME/FRB catalog. In the present work, we consider some empirical FRB distribution models, and find that many of them can be fully consistent with the CHIME/FRB observational data for some suitable model parameters. Notice that a suppressed evolution with respect to SFH is commonly found for FRBs. In particular, we independently confirm that the FRB distribution model tracking SFH can be rejected at very high confidence. On the other hand, all the successful models effectively require a certain degree of delay with respect to SFH. These results might shed light on the origin of FRBs and FRB cosmology.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据