The Interplanetary Network Supplement to the Fermi GBM Catalog of Cosmic Gamma-Ray Bursts

TL;DR

This paper enhances the localization of gamma-ray bursts detected by Fermi GBM using Interplanetary Network triangulation, significantly reducing uncertainty areas and identifying additional bursts not in the original catalog.

Contribution

It provides improved localization techniques for Fermi GBM bursts through IPN triangulation, and offers a detailed analysis of localization accuracy and systematic uncertainties.

Findings

IPN localizations are on average 180 times smaller than GBM localizations.

Triangulation can refine burst positions, reducing error regions.

Two bursts were identified in the IPN/GBM sample that were absent from the original catalog.

Abstract

We present Interplanetary Network (IPN) data for the gamma-ray bursts in the first Fermi Gamma-Ray Burst Monitor (GBM) catalog. Of the 491 bursts in that catalog, covering 2008 July 12 to 2010 July 11, 427 were observed by at least one other instrument in the 9-spacecraft IPN. Of the 427, the localizations of 149 could be improved by arrival time analysis (or triangulation). For any given burst observed by the GBM and one other distant spacecraft, triangulation gives an annulus of possible arrival directions whose half-width varies between about 0.4' and 32 degrees, depending on the intensity, time history, and arrival direction of the burst, as well as the distance between the spacecraft. We find that the IPN localizations intersect the 1 sigma GBM error circles in only 52% of the cases, if no systematic uncertainty is assumed for the latter. If a 6 degree systematic uncertainty is assumed and added in quadrature, the two localization samples agree about 87% of the time, as would be expected. If we then multiply the resulting error radii by a factor of 3, the two samples agree in slightly over 98% of the cases, providing a good estimate of the GBM 3 sigma error radius. The IPN 3 sigma error boxes have areas between about 1 square arcminute and 110 square degrees, and are, on the average, a factor of 180 smaller than the corresponding GBM localizations. We identify two bursts in the IPN/GBM sample that did not appear in the GBM catalog. In one case, the GBM triggered on a terrestrial gamma flash, and in the other, its origin was given as uncertain. We also discuss the sensitivity and calibration of the IPN.