GRBs as standard candles: There is no "circularity problem" (and there never was)
Carlo Graziani

TL;DR
This paper argues that the perceived circularity problem in using GRBs as standard candles is a misconception caused by data variable choices, and proposes a model to incorporate diverse GRB data without this issue.
Contribution
It introduces a method to avoid the circularity problem by mapping empirical correlations to observable variables and presents a Gaussian Tube model for high-dimensional data analysis.
Findings
Circularity problem is not an actual obstacle when using source-variable correlations.
Proposed Gaussian Tube model effectively encodes correlations and intrinsic scatter.
Method allows inclusion of inhomogeneous GRB data sets in cosmological analyses.
Abstract
The 2002 discovery of the "Amati Relation" of GRB spectra created the possibility that this and other correlations of GRB phenomenology might be used to make GRBs into standard candles. One recurring apparent difficulty with this program has been that some of the primary observational quantities to be fit as "data" - the isotropic-equivalent prompt energy and the collimation-corrected "total" prompt energy energy - depend for their construction on the very cosmological models that they are supposed to help constrain. This is the so-called "circularity problem" of standard candle GRBs. This paper is intended to point out that the circularity problem is not in fact a problem at all, except to the extent that it amounts to a self-inflicted wound. It arises essentially because of an unfortunate choice of data variables, such as , which are unnecessarily…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
