High-energy neutrinos from choked-jet supernovae Searches and implications Po-Wen Chang 1 2Bei Zhou

2025-05-06 0 0 1.09MB 17 页 10玖币

侵权投诉

High-energy neutrinos from choked-jet supernovae: Searches and implications

Po-Wen Chang ,1, 2, ∗Bei Zhou ,3, †Kohta Murase ,4, 5, 6, 7, 8, ‡and Marc Kamionkowski 3, §

1Center for Cosmology and AstroParticle Physics (CCAPP),

Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210, USA

2Department of Physics, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210, USA

3William H. Miller III Department of Physics and Astronomy,

Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland 21218, USA

4Department of Physics, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802, USA

5Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802, USA

6Center for Multimessenger Astrophysics, Institute for Gravitation and the Cosmos,

The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802, USA

7School of Natural Sciences, Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, New Jersey 08540, USA

8Center for Gravitational Physics and Quantum Information,

Yukawa Institute for Theoretical Physics, Kyoto, Kyoto 606-8502 Japan

(Dated: June 4, 2024)

The origin of the high-energy astrophysical neutrinos discovered by IceCube remains largely un-

known. Multimessenger studies have indicated that the majority of these neutrinos come from

gamma-ray-dark sources. Choked-jet supernovae (cjSNe), which are supernovae powered by rela-

tivistic jets stalled in stellar materials, may lead to neutrino emission via photohadronic interactions

while the coproduced gamma rays are absorbed. In this paper, we perform an unbinned maximum-

likelihood analysis to search for correlations between IceCube’s ten-year muon-track events and our

SN Ib/c sample, collected from publicly available catalogs. In addition to the conventional power-law

models, we also consider the impacts of more realistic neutrino emission models for the ﬁrst time,

and we study the eﬀects of the jet beaming factor in the analyses. Our results show no signiﬁcant

correlation. Even so, the conservative upper limits we set to the contribution of cjSNe to the diﬀuse

astrophysical neutrino ﬂux still allow SNe Ib/c to be the dominant source of astrophysical neutrinos

observed by IceCube. We discuss implications to the cjSNe scenario from our results and the power

of future neutrino and supernova observations.

I. INTRODUCTION

The discovery of high-energy (HE) astrophysical neu-

trinos by the IceCube Neutrino Observatory [1,2] has

opened a new era of neutrino physics, astrophysics, and

multimessenger astronomy. These neutrinos are nearly

isotropic on the sky and have energies from 10 TeV to

above the PeV scale, suggesting their sources to be the

extragalactic populations of extreme cosmic accelerators.

Searching for HE neutrino sources is also crucial to iden-

tifying sources of their parent HE cosmic rays and it of-

fers unique opportunities to understand the acceleration

mechanisms of the sources.

Various astrophysical objects have been studied as the

sources of the HE neutrinos, such as gamma-ray bursts

(GRBs) [3–6], active galactic nuclei (AGN) [7–10], super-

novae (SNe) [11,12], tidal disruption events (TDEs) [13–

17], and so on. Motivated by multimessenger obser-

vations of electromagnetic and gravitational-wave sig-

nals, signiﬁcant eﬀorts have been put into searching for

the sources over the past decade. Compelling evidence

for a few point sources has been reported: blazar TXS

0506+056 [18,19], Seyfert II galaxy NGC 1068 [20],

∗chang.1750@osu.edu

†beizhou@fnal.gov

‡murase@psu.edu

§kamion@jhu.edu

jet

stellar

materials

her

core

𝝂

𝜸

𝝂

𝝂to observer

FIG. 1. Schematic view of a core-collapse supernova with its

jet choked inside the dense envelope of a progenitor star or

external circumstellar materials. While neutrinos and gamma

rays are both produced by the cosmic rays inside the jet, only

neutrinos can freely escape from the optically thick medium.

and the TDE candidates AT2019dsg, AT2019fdr, and

AT2019aalc [21–23]. However, stacking analyses show

that none of the aforementioned types of sources con-

tribute a major fraction of the all-sky neutrino ﬂux

(a possible exception might be the nonjetted AGN if

the observed 2.6σsigniﬁcance is interpreted as a sig-

arXiv:2210.03088v3 [astro-ph.HE] 31 May 2024

nal [24]). Furthermore, the measurement of the ex-

tragalactic gamma-ray background by the Fermi Large

Area Telescope (LAT) [25] has set robust constraints

on gamma-ray-bright sources as dominant HE neutrino

emitters, as a comparable ﬂux of gamma rays are ex-

pected to be coproduced with neutrinos following pp and

pγ interactions of cosmic rays [26]. Thus, it is likely that

there is a class of HE neutrino sources opaque to GeV–

TeV gamma rays, in which only neutrinos can freely es-

cape from the cosmic-ray accelerators [27–31].

Choked-jet supernovae (cjSNe) are promising as such

hidden neutrino sources [32–37]. Figure 1shows an illus-

tration: in this scenario, the jets are stalled or “choked”

inside the progenitor envelopes or circumstellar materials

as they are not powerful enough. Gamma rays produced

from cosmic rays accelerated in the choked jet are at-

tenuated through optically thick environments below the

stellar photosphere, leaving HE neutrinos as primary sig-

nals. Previous theoretical studies have shown that cjSNe

could even explain all the HE astrophysical neutrinos ob-

served by IceCube [36,38–41].

In addition, cjSNe provide a uniﬁed scenario for Type

Ib/c supernovae (SNe Ib/c), hypernovae, and the diﬀer-

ent types of GRBs, in which jet properties and shock-

breakout conditions are crucial in making the diﬀer-

ence [39,42]. The link to low-power (LP) GRBs such

as low-luminosity (LL) GRBs and ultralong (UL) GRBs

further strengthens the role of cjSNe as gamma-ray dark

factories of HE neutrinos [36,39,41]. From the observa-

tional side, many LP GRBs are missed by current GRB

surveys, so current stringent limits on HE neutrino emis-

sion from classical, high-luminosity GRBs do not apply.

From the theoretical side, the intrinsically weak jets as-

sociated with LP GRBs are more ideal for neutrino pro-

duction than classical GRBs, as powerful jets generally

lead to ineﬃcient cosmic-ray acceleration in radiation-

mediated shocks [36]. Therefore, HE neutrinos also pro-

vide us with an essential tool to study the cjSN scenario

and the observed GRB-SN connection [43–46].

In this paper, we search for HE neutrinos from cjSNe

and study the theoretical implications. Previous stud-

ies [47–51] have performed searches using early datasets

of IceCube and found no association of neutrinos with

supernovae. Here we use ten years of IceCube neutrino

data [52,53], in which high-quality events are recorded

and have never been analyzed for cjSNe. We perform

an unbinned maximum-likelihood analysis to search for

a statistical correlation between neutrinos and SNe Ib/c,

as cjSNe can in principle be observed as SNe Ib/c, where

progenitor stars are more massive and typically enclosed

by denser extended materials. Our analyses do not ﬁnd

any excess of neutrinos from SNe Ib/c with respect to

the background, from which we set upper limits on cjSN

models and their contribution to the total astrophysical

neutrino ﬂuxes observed by IceCube. Figure 2illustrates

how muon-neutrino signals from all SNe Ib/c in our ana-

lyzed sample would look in IceCube, assuming the high-

est cjSN ﬂux allowed by our analysis.

102103104105106

Eµ[GeV]

10−1

101

102

103

EµdNν/dEµ[Events]

Background (data)

Total signal

ECR = 2.5×1050 erg

fjet = 1

(20 days,9 deg2)

FIG. 2. A schematic prediction of the muon-track events pro-

duced by our ten-year SNe Ib/c sample as a function of the

reconstructed muon energy Eµin IceCube. Here, the signal

events are from the cjSN model with a E−2

νneutrino spec-

trum with parameters {ECR, fjet}(detailed in Sec. IV) de-

ﬁned by the upper limit from our analysis. In comparison, we

also show the eﬀective number of background events associ-

ated with the supernovae [within the eﬀective size of the time

(20 days) and spatial window (9 deg2); in our analyses, we

use more events than shown here (Sec. III B)]. The sensitiv-

ity of our analysis is mainly driven by the neutrino data with

energy above few tens of TeV, where the background becomes

negligible compared to the signal.

For the ﬁrst time, we take into account physical mod-

els of neutrino emission in LP GRBs, instead of simply

assuming HE neutrinos to follow power-law spectra. This

is important, as the astrophysical neutrino ﬂux may orig-

inate from multiple source populations with various neu-

trino spectra. Moreover, as the current LP GRB sample

is highly incomplete and model uncertainties of LP GRBs

are largely unconstrained, our survey in model parame-

ters using SNe Ib/c catalogs is meaningful. Finally, our

conservative limits show that, for most cjSN models we

consider, SNe Ib/c can still account for 100% of the Ice-

Cube diﬀuse neutrino ﬂux. Moreover, we ﬁnd that, even

with a very conservative approach, ten years of IceCube

data are probing almost all cjSN models, thus implying

cjSNe will be robustly tested as HE neutrino sources in

the near future.

This paper is organized as follows: In Sec. II, we de-

scribe the neutrino dataset and the supernova sample

we use and introduce the cjSN models we consider. In

Sec. III, we discuss our likelihood formalism and how

we obtain the correlation signiﬁcance from background

simulation. In Sec. IV, we detail the procedures of set-

ting upper limits, including how we simulate neutrino

signals from cjSNe and how we look for an excess of sig-

nals among background ﬂuctuations. In Sec. V, we show

our results from single-source and stacking analyses, and

we present constraints on cjSN models and their contri-

butions to the HE astrophysical neutrino ﬂuxes observed

by IceCube. We further discuss the implications of cjSNe

as the origin of HE neutrinos. We then comment on the

diﬀerence between our results and those in Ref. [51]. In

Sec. VI, we conclude our ﬁndings with a future roadmap.

II. DATA AND MODELS

A. Ten years of IceCube neutrino data

The IceCube Neutrino Observatory detects neutrinos

through the Cherenkov photons emitted by relativis-

tic charged particles produced from neutrino interac-

tions within (starting events) and outside (throughgo-

ing events) the detector [54,55]. The Cherenkov pho-

tons trigger the nearby digital optical modules and can

form two kinds of basic event topologies: elongated

tracks formed by muons, and showers, which look like

a round and big blob formed by electrons (electromag-

netic shower) or hadrons (hadronic shower). The track

events, which are dominated by throughgoing tracks,

have a much better angular resolution (as good as <1◦),

though worse energy resolution (∼200% at ∼100 TeV),

than the shower events (∼10◦–15◦and ∼15% above 100

TeV) [56]. Thus, track events are suited to searching for

point sources.

The data released by the IceCube Collaboration span

from April 2008 to July 2018 [52,53]. The same data have

been used in the ten-year time-integrated neutrino point-

source search by the IceCube collaboration [57], and in

searching for high-energy neutrino emission from radio-

bright AGN [58]. In total, there are 1,134,450 muon-track

events. The information for each track is provided, in-

cluding arrival time, angular direction, angular error, and

reconstructed energy. The arrival time is given with the

precision of 1×10−8days (8.6×10−4s). These ten years

of data are grouped into ﬁve samples corresponding to

diﬀerent construction phases of IceCube and instrumen-

tal response functions, including 1) IC40, 2) IC59, 3)

IC79, 4) IC86-I, and 5) IC86-II to IC86-VII. The num-

bers in the names represent the numbers of strings in the

detector on which digital optical modules are deployed.

Distributions of these events in the sky can be found in

Figs. 1 and 2 in Ref. [58]. We use the events with dec-

lination (Dec) between −10◦and 90◦for the following

reasons: First, the events from Dec <−10◦(the south-

ern sky with respect to IceCube) have much higher back-

grounds from atmospheric muons [52]. Second, we ﬁnd

that the given smearing matrices from simulations have

statistics that are too low to obtain good enough energy

PDFs for our analysis (Sec. III B).

We also process the 19 ×2 double-counted tracks in

the dataset found in Ref. [59] (listed in its Table III).

These events arise from an internal reconstruction er-

ror that identiﬁes some single muons crossing the dust

layer as two separate muons arriving at the same time

and closely matching in direction [59]. This would aﬀect

neutrino-source searches, especially transients, as ﬁnding

two associated events instead of one would be quite diﬀer-

ent. Thus, we combine the 19 misreconstructed pairs into

19 single events by averaging the directions and summing

up the reconstructed energies. We provide the corrected

IceCube neutrino dataset at this URL .

B. Supernova sample

The supernova sample we use for our analysis is from

combining SNe Ib/c from the Open Supernova Cat-

alog [60], the Weizmann Interactive Supernova Data

Repository (WISeREP) [61], and the All-Sky Automated

Survey for Supernovae (ASAS-SN) [62–65]. These cata-

logs have collected more than 36,000, 20,000, and 1,300

supernovae, respectively, from a variety of astronomi-

cal surveys and existing archives. We further compare

our combined supernova sample with the publicly avail-

able catalog of bright supernovae [66,67] and incorporate

those that are missed in the above.

Sometimes a supernova is independently discovered by

diﬀerent groups and thus has multiple aliases. This leads

to a small fraction of potentially duplicate sources in our

sample. To avoid double-counting, we ﬁrst search for the

supernovae with an angular distance smaller than 0.1◦.

We then merge these supernovae if they are classiﬁed

as the same type and the diﬀerences in their maximal

brightness time and redshift are less than 30 days and

10%, respectively. The examples of supernova pairs sat-

isfying our criteria are {SN 2010O, SN 2010P}and {SN

2016coi, ASASSN-16fp}. As these potentially duplicate

sources have very similar observational properties, we re-

move one of them from our sample.

Finally, we keep the supernovae in our sample only if

they were observed at Dec ≥ −10◦and have a time win-

dow (deﬁned in Sec. III B) overlapping with the uptime of

IceCube between April 2008 and July 2018 to match our

selected data (Sec. II A). In total, our ﬁnal sample con-

sists of 386 SNe Ib/c, including 30, 36, 36, 36, and 248 for

IC40, IC59, IC79, IC86-I, and IC86-II–VII, respectively.

We provide the details of our supernova sample at this

URL .

C. cjSN models for neutrino emission

We assume choked jets to be nearly calorimetric

sources (except for the suppression factor) so that neu-

trinos are produced by all available energy ECR in cosmic

rays. The all-ﬂavor neutrino spectrum from a single burst

of supernova is thus given by [69,70]

dNν(εν;ECR)

dενεν=0.05εp≈3

8fsup min[1, fpγ ]ECR

Rp(εp)ε−2

ν,

(1)

where the factor 3/8 is the fraction of energy taken away

by neutrinos from charged pions produced in the pγ inter-

𝛾 = 2.0

𝛾 = 2.5

LLGRB-PE

ULGRB-CS

LPGRB-𝜈-Attn

𝛾 = 3.0

FIG. 3. A comparison of single-burst neutrino spectra from the cjSN models we consider. Here, the LLGRB-PE model

involves prompt neutrino emission from low-luminosity GRBs [68]; the ULGRB-CS model involves neutrinos from cosmic

rays accelerated at the collimation shock of ultra-long-duration GRBs [36]; and the LPGRB-ν-Attn model involves neutrinos

attenuated in the progenitor star of low-power GRBs [41]. All spectra are normalized to have the same isotropic equivalent

cosmic-ray energy, ECR = 1051 erg. Both panels use the same line style for each model, while in the right panel each spectrum

is weighted by the IceCube eﬀective area (averaged over Dec ≥ −10◦). The realistic modeling of cjSNe takes into account a

variety of cooling mechanisms, leading to the suppression in the neutrino spectra and diﬀerent energy distributions of neutrino

events detected by IceCube.

actions; the energy-dependent suppression factor fsup(εp)

accounts for the meson and muon cooling processes that

depend on the detailed modeling of choked jets; and the

meson production eﬃciency min[1, fpγ ] is set to 1 for

the choked jets as long as the minimal cosmic-ray en-

ergy is larger than the pion production threshold. As

the average fraction of energy transferred from a par-

ent proton to each neutrino after an interaction is 1/20,

we have εν≈(1/20)εp.Rpdenotes the bolometric cor-

rection factor for the cosmic-ray spectrum. The cosmic

rays are expected to follow a power-law spectrum [71]

(i.e., dNp/dεp∝ε−γ

p), as they are typically accelerated

through the ﬁrst-order Fermi process [72] in the shock. In

this case, we have Rp(εp) = ln (εmax

p/εmin

p) for γ= 2 and

Rp(εp)=(γ−2)−1[1 −(εmax

p/εmin

p)2−γ](εp/εmin

p)γ−2for

γ̸= 2. When producing our results in Secs. V B and V C,

we take (εmin

p, εmax

p) = (2×103,2×1010) GeV as this leads

to eﬃcient neutrino production within (εmin

ν, εmax

ν)≈

(102,109) GeV, the energy range that could be detected

by IceCube.

We also consider two well-motivated cjSN models

[36,68]. Both models assume power-law parent cosmic-

ray spectra with γ= 2.0 but the neutrino spectra are

diﬀerent due to various processes of meson and muon

cooling in diﬀerent shocked regions of the jet. In reality,

fpγ in Eq. (1) is below unity at low energies, and fsup <1

is possible depending on cjSN parameters.

Our ﬁrst class of models assumes that the neutrino

spectrum follows a power law with the same spectral in-

dex (γ) as the parent proton spectrum. This neglects all

complicated mechanisms that could lead to a nontrivial

neutrino spectrum. We consider γ= 2.0, γ= 2.5, and

γ= 3.0 as three benchmark models, which match the

best ﬁts to the ten years of muon-track events [73], a

combination of track and shower events [74,75], and the

7.5 years of the high-energy starting events (HESEs) [76],

respectively.

Our second class of models takes into account more

realistic modeling that links cjSNe with LL GRBs and

UL GRBs. We consider three physical models from

diﬀerent detailed considerations of jet propagation in-

side the progenitor star and energy losses of particles:

1) the LLGRB-PE model (prompt νemission from LL

GRBs) [68], 2) the ULGRB-CS model (neutrinos from

cosmic rays accelerated at the collimation shock of UL

GRBs) [36], and 3) the LPGRB-ν-Attn model (attenu-

ated neutrinos from LP GRBs) [41]. Note that the model

spectrum used in this work takes into account the inverse-

Compton cooling of pions and muons, which slightly af-

fects the ﬂux above ∼0.1−1 PeV compared to the orig-

inal reference.

The left panel of Fig. 3shows that for the same ECR,

the all-ﬂavor neutrino spectra of a supernova burst from

文档加载中……请稍候！
如果长时间未打开，您也可以点击刷新试试。

下载文档到电脑，查找使用更方便

10 玖币 0人已下载

立即下载

摘要：

High-energyneutrinosfromchoked-jetsupernovae:SearchesandimplicationsPo-WenChang,1,2,∗BeiZhou,3,†KohtaMurase,4,5,6,7,8,‡andMarcKamionkowski3,§1CenterforCosmologyandAstroParticlePhysics(CCAPP),OhioStateUniversity,Columbus,Ohio43210,USA2DepartmentofPhysics,OhioStateUniversity,Columbus,Ohio43210,USA3Wil...

展开>> 收起<<

High-energy neutrinos from choked-jet supernovae Searches and implications Po-Wen Chang 1 2Bei Zhou.pdf

共17页,预览4页

还剩页未读，继续阅读

声明：本站为文档C2C交易模式，即用户上传的文档直接被用户下载，本站只是中间服务平台，本站所有文档下载所得的收益归上传人(含作者)所有。玖贝云文库仅提供信息存储空间，仅对用户上传内容的表现方式做保护处理，对上载内容本身不做任何修改或编辑。若文档所含内容侵犯了您的版权或隐私，请立即通知玖贝云文库，我们立即给予删除！

High-energy neutrinos from choked-jet supernovae Searches and implications Po-Wen Chang 1 2Bei Zhou

相关推荐

开通VIP享超值会员特权

作者详情

相关内容

热门标签

举报选择: