according to the most popular progenitor model of long - duration gamma - ray bursts ( grbs ) , the collapsar model @xcite , a grb is the result of ultra - relativistic jets ejected by an accreting black hole formed by the core - collapse of a massive star ( most probably a wolf - rayet star ) .
this predicts a physical link between grbs and supernovae ( sne ) that has been spectroscopically confirmed in four cases so far : xrf 020903 @xcite , grb 021211/sn2002lt @xcite , grb 030329/sn2003dh ( e.g. , * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
* ) and grb 031203/sn2003lw .
further evidence comes from the observation of late - time bumps in grb afterglows that can be modelled very well by an underlying sn component @xcite , and which have led to the conclusion that in fact all long - duration grbs are physically related to sn explosions ( * ? ? ?
* paper i ) .
furthermore , the collapsar model implies that the progenitors of long - duration grbs are associated with regions of high - mass star formation @xcite , which might reveal themselves by a detectable extinction in the grb host galaxies along the lines of sight towards the burster .
this idea is further supported by the so - called dark bursts @xcite , for which no optical afterglow has been discovered despite rapid and deep searches in small error box regions . while most none - discoveries are the result of too shallow searches and too large error boxes ( e.g. , * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
* ) , a small percentile remains that require intrinsic extinction to dim the afterglow , e.g. , grb 970828 @xcite , 990506 @xcite and 020819 @xcite , while others might have been intrinsically underluminous ( for a discussion , see e.g. , * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
.    of particular interest within the dust extinction model is the statistical distribution of the amount of visual extinction in the grb host galaxies , as well as the nature of the corresponding dust .
given the fact that grbs and their afterglows can be observed up to high redshift , they offer the possibility to get insight into the nature of cosmic dust when the universe was much younger and galaxies were much less evolved . furthermore , since the optical properties of the dust grains trace the environmental conditions in the interstellar medium @xcite , they are to some degree an indicator for the physical conditions to make a grb progenitor .    the present paper is the third in a series of papers where we employ a large database of photometry gathered from the literature to reanalyze all optical afterglow light curves of grbs in the pre-_swift _ era in a consistent manner to derive a homogenous sample , which is then used to study afterglow properties in a statistical way . in paper
i and an update @xcite , the properties of the supernovae underlying nearby afterglow light curves were explored . in paper
ii @xcite the optical light curve parameters were derived for a large ( and basically complete ) sample of afterglows observed by the end of 2004 , up to the launch of the _ swift _ mission . in this paper , we extend this systematic analysis to the spectral energy distribution ( sed ) of grb afterglows in the optical / near - infrared bands in order to search for signals from extinction by dust in the grb host galaxies .    in  [ data ]
, we present the methods with which we analyzed the afterglow seds . among the 59 grbs studied in paper
ii , 30 had data quality sufficiently high to be included in a sample for an investigation of the seds .
we then further reduce this sample to a golden sample of 19 grb afterglows with parameters derived from specific dust model fits . in
[ rad ] we present the results derived from our analysis and discuss our findings in the context of the standard fireball model .
the fitting process allows us to derive the host galaxy extinction @xmath0 along the line of sight and the intrinsic , extinction - corrected spectral slope @xmath1 ( @xmath2 ) of the afterglow light in the optical / near - infrared bands .
the @xmath0-@xmath1 sample is then further analyzed statistically to derive conclusions about the environment of grbs and the dust properties of high - redshift galaxies .
in paper ii we presented the analysis of a complete list of optical / nir afterglow light curves for which sufficient public data was available , up to grb 041006 .
one parameter derived in these light curve fits is the normalization constant @xmath3 , the magnitude of the afterglow at a certain time , being one day after the grb trigger in the case of a light curve fit with a simple power - law ( @xmath4 ) , or the jet break time , @xmath5 , in case of a fit with a smoothly broken power - law with a pre - break decay slope @xmath6 and a post - break decay slope @xmath7 @xcite .
all data used to fit these light curves is corrected for galactic extinction with @xmath8 derived from the cobe maps @xcite employing the milky way extinction curve of @xcite . the contemporaneous afterglow brightness in different photometric bands is then transformed into a spectral energy distribution , using zero fluxes and median wavelengths taken from the literature .
the sed for grb 030329 is derived in an alternate way , see appendix [ litcomp ] .
the fits use a levenberg - marquardt @xmath9 minimization algorithm . unless stated otherwise , all errors in this paper are at the @xmath10 confidence level .
initially , we assume no extinction and the seds are fit with a simple power - law , @xmath2 . in the following ,
we label a slope derived from such a fit @xmath11 .
a steep @xmath11 combined with a non - linear ( curved ) @xmath12 is then indicative of extinction in the grb host galaxy .    in order to derive the visual extinction @xmath0 in the grb host galaxy along the line of sight
, we transform the wavelengths of the sed into the host galaxy frame following @xcite , using redshifts taken from the compilation of @xcite . in two cases redshift estimates
are used . for grb 980519
, we use a redshift of @xmath13 , following @xcite who state that @xmath14 due to the lack of a supernova bump . for xrf 030723
, we varied the redshift and fit the sed for each redshift , and find the best results in a redshift range of @xmath15 to 0.4 .
thus , we adopt @xmath16 .
@xcite find tentative evidence for a low redshift ( although the host galaxy would be very faint ) , and @xcite find a preferred @xmath17 from the amati relation @xcite . in both cases ,
the sed is fit well by a power - law with an additional small amount of source frame extinction .
the influence of intergalactic lyman absorption on the photometry was accounted for by excluding sed data points lying beyond @xmath18 hz in the host frame from the fit ) , the v band also had to be excluded as the host galaxy is a dla with a very wide lyman @xmath19 absorption line @xcite . ] .
the observed sed ( corrected for galactic extinction ) is then modeled by the function @xmath20 with @xmath21 here , @xmath1 is the intrinsic power - law slope of the sed , and @xmath22 a normalization constant ( we choose the unextinguished flux density at @xmath23 hz in the host galaxy frame ) .
the function @xmath24 is the extinction law assumed for the interstellar medium ( ism ) of the grb host galaxy .
we call this extinction source frame extinction .
it encompasses local extinction close to the site of the grb and host galaxy extinction further away in case the afterglow passes through a significant part of the host galaxy along the line of sight .
the extinction law for the milky way ( mw ) , the large magellanic cloud ( lmc ) , and the small magellanic cloud ( smc ) was taken from @xcite .
these three dust types differ strongly in the wavelength region we examine ( host frame uv / optical / nir ) , especially toward shorter wavelengths .
the sequence mw , lmc , smc is given by a decreasing strength of the 2175  bump , an increasing fuv extinction , and a decreasing reddening per h atom @xcite .
the former implies the absence of very small carbonaceous grains @xcite , while the latter is consistent with the trend observed for the metallicity in hii regions , with mw representing the highest metallicity and smc the lowest .
thus , smc dust traces the dust properties in low - metallicity environments .
as the wavelengths of the sed are shifted from the uv into the optical / nir , a distinction between the three dust types is easiest for grbs at high redshift , whereas for nearby grbs the three extinction curves are almost identical in the considered wavelength regime .
since the fit has three free parameters ( @xmath22 , @xmath1 and @xmath0 ) , the observed sed has to have at least four data points .
the one exception is grb 000131 ( appendix [ litcomp ] ) , which we include because of its very high redshift ( @xmath25 , * ? ? ?
the fitting process is very sensitive to slight variations in the sed , especially if the @xmath3 data points have small errors , so we did a careful check for each sed and removed outliers .
furthermore , we added a systematic error of 0.03 magnitudes to each data point of the sed ( with the exception of those small number of cases where @xmath3 is based on only one data point , as these almost always have much larger errors anyway ) to encompass uncertainties that may derive from the process of data reduction .
this results in a strong decrease of @xmath9 for the fits and reduces the importance of this measure for discerning among different models for sed fits .
our final sample ( table [ taball ] ) comprises 30 afterglows out of the 59 bursts included in the sample of paper ii , with fits to the three dust models for each afterglow .
figure [ seds ] shows all 30 seds and the associated best fits for each of the three dust models .
this figure contains all fit results that we obtain , including those with unphysical results , just in order to show the failure of certain extinction laws to reproduce the observational data .
table [ taball ] reveals that many of the fits are unsatisfactory .
first of all , some fits have very large error bars @xmath26 and @xmath27 . since the seds are fit by allowing all three free parameters ( incl .
@xmath22 ) to vary simultaneously , this creates a cross - sectional error , as the errors of @xmath1 and @xmath0 are correlated . the steepest spectral slope ( @xmath28 ) results in the smallest extinction ( @xmath29 ) and vice
secondly , many fits , especially when using the mw dust model , find _ negative _ extinction .
this would imply bright emission features , for which we have no evidence .
thirdly in some cases @xmath30 is found , while the standard fireball model implies @xmath31 in the timespans ( hours to days ) and wavelength bands that afterglows are typically observed in , and thus the timespan where we derive @xmath3 .
these afterglow seds ( e.g. grb 971214 ) are categorized by a relatively shallow unextinguished slope @xmath32 to 1 but a strong spectral curvature .
correction of this curvature results in @xmath30 .
one solution would be dust with an increased fuv extinction , but recent results on high redshift quasars @xcite do not support this idea .
we note that in these cases the data base is also sparse in photometric bands other than @xmath33 .    to derive a more homogenous sample , which we call the golden sample , we employ the following criteria :    1
.   the 1@xmath34 error in @xmath1 ( @xmath27 ) and the 1@xmath34 error in @xmath0 ( @xmath26 ) should both be @xmath35 .
2 .   @xmath36 .
3 .   we do not consider grbs where all fits ( mw , lmc , and smc ) find @xmath37 , even if the previous criterium is fulfilled .
4 .   @xmath38 ( although we do not reject cases with @xmath39 ) .
5 .   a known redshift .    as there is no case where lmc dust is clearly preferred compared to smc and mw dust ( table [ taball ] ) , in the following we
remove all lmc dust cases from further consideration .
after applying these criteria , for the remaining 19 grbs , in eight cases only one dust model remains . for grb 000131
no distinction can be made , as it is not fit with extinction .
the remaining ten grbs give ambiguous results when it comes to distinguishing between the two dust models . with the exception of grb 020813 and grb 030328 , where visual inspection of the fits shows that the inclusion of smc dust reproduces the observed sed better than mw dust , no true distinction can be made at all .
for these grbs , we do not claim any dust model preference , but for the sake of consistency , we choose the dust model result which produces smaller errors in the derived parameters .
this results in 19 @xmath1-@xmath0 pairs which we designate our golden sample ( table [ tabgold ] ) .
there are some grbs for which high visual source frame extinction has been deduced in the literature but which are not included in table [ taball ] . for grb 980329 ,
no redshift is known , although it is assumed to be high . @xcite
derive a bayesian photometric redshift of @xmath40 . the very steep observed spectral slope ( uncorrected for extinction )
has been noted by several authors .
@xcite use their own data combined with data from the literature and derive an @xmath41 for @xmath42 , corresponding to @xmath43 assuming a galactic dust - to - gas ratio .
this is concurrent with our result @xmath44 for smc dust and under the assumption of a redshift of @xmath40 .
however , this result also has @xmath30 , implying that the true host extinction is lower than @xmath45 .
two afterglows which have redshifts but viable data in only two colors , grb 990705 and grb 000418 , could not be fitted with the procedure outlined in
[ analysis ] .
@xcite find @xmath46 , in agreement with our result .
while they do discuss reddening by intrinsic dust , their lack of a redshift measurement does not allow them to find a definite result .
the steep initial decay suggests a wind environment with a cooling break blueward of the optical bands . using this case and smc dust
, we derive @xmath47 . for grb 000418 , assuming a wind ( ism ) environment with the cooling break blueward of the optical bands and the new derived light curve parameters from paper ii we fix @xmath1 via the @xmath19-@xmath1 relations and find @xmath48 ( @xmath49 ) .
the latter is slightly smaller than in @xcite ( who used an ism environment ) , while @xcite find @xmath50 for lmc dust . finally , there are indications of very high source frame extinction from the nir afterglows of grb 030528 @xcite and grb 040827 @xcite , but we were not able to perform any fits .
in the selection of our golden sample , there were eight bursts where application of our selection criteria yielded an unambiguous result .
smc dust is by far the most preferred model , with seven out of the eight cases ( table [ tabgold ] ) , only grb 970508 has evidence for mw dust .
this result is expected from studies of grb host galaxies , which indicate that most hosts are low - metallicity galaxies , as they are lyman @xmath19 emitters , blue , and subluminous ( e.g. , * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
thus we deduce that the ism in these galaxies is probably metal - poor .    while the preference of smc - like dust in grb environments
has already been found by many groups for several bursts , e.g. , grb 000301c @xcite , grb 000926 @xcite , grb 010222 @xcite , grb 020813 @xcite , grb 021004 @xcite , grb 030226 @xcite , grb 030429 @xcite , xrf 030723 @xcite , our study puts this conclusion on a statistical basis .
given the sparse knowledge we have so far on the dust properties in cosmologically remote galaxies we note however that this finding does not necessarily imply the requirement of low - metallicity environments for the creation of grb progenitors , as it might be indicated by smc - like dust .
the fact that at least some afterglows seds are fitted best assuming mw dust raises doubt on such a general requirement . even though one can not rule out the possibility that in such cases the line of sight passes through foreground material with different grain properties and ism metallicity . in any case
, it is clear from this study that grb afterglows can be used as a tool in order to explore the properties of cosmic dust in the cosmologically remote universe , in star - forming regions in particular and in galaxies in general .
but high quality photometric data are essential for building larger samples .      among the 19 grbs in our golden sample ( table [ tabgold ] ) , we find eleven with @xmath51 .
we note that almost all of these cases are also those with the highest quality data .
basically , this is not surprising , as more sed data reduces errors .
it is more speculative to state that , given high quality sed data , there will always be small amounts of source frame extinction detected in grb afterglows . in eight of these cases ,
the detection is significant at the 2@xmath34 level or higher , it is significant at more than 3@xmath34 in two cases and at 4@xmath34 in one case .
the distribution of derived intrinsic extinctions is given in figure [ a_vhist ] .
a strong clustering toward low extinctions ( @xmath52 ) is evident . zooming in with smaller bins
shows that values between @xmath53 and @xmath54 are preferred , with a non - error - weighted mean value of @xmath55 .
no afterglow is extinguished by more than 0.8 magnitudes . as a comparison , the prime example of a dark burst
is plotted , grb 970828 . for this burst , @xcite derive @xmath56 by interpolating between x - ray and radio data and comparing this with deep optical observations that found no afterglow @xcite .
the intervening space is free of examples , creating a potential dark burst desert . on the other hand , there are two afterglows in table [ taball ] that have mean @xmath0 values lying in this dark burst desert but are not included in the golden sample due to the large errors of their fits ( criterium ( 1 ) in   [ golden ] ) . for grb 010921 , mw dust is preferred , as smc dust finds @xmath57 .
we derive @xmath58 , in agreement with @xcite .
while this is a positive detection , the error encompasses most other bursts of the golden sample . for grb 980703
, no dust model preference can be derived , but even for the smc result with smaller extinction , we find @xmath59 .
how real is the non - existence of highly extinguished afterglows ?
a first argument against the reality of the dark burst desert is that our sample is biased toward afterglows with low source frame extinction , as we require viable photometric data in several wavebands and a known redshift .
intrinsic extinction complicates the gathering of photometry ( starting with the discovery of the afterglow ) and a spectroscopic redshift . in  [ others ] , we mentioned several probably highly extinguished afterglows that are not part of our sample due to the sparsity of their photometric data .
highly extinguished afterglows are not observed well enough to determine conclusively that they are highly extinguished and not just intrinsically faint @xcite .
figure [ a_vtoz ] shows the derived visual extinctions ( table [ tabgold ] ) plotted as a function of redshift @xmath60 ( values taken from * ? ? ?
* ) . with the exception of grb 030429
the amount of extinction drops sharply toward high redshifts .
most likely , this can be explained by an observational bias , at least in the pre-_swift _ era where only very few afterglows were already localized within minutes after a burst . in particular , due to the wavelength dependence of the dust opacity , the higher the redshift the more effective dust can dim an afterglow in the optical bands .
furthermore , the redshift measurement itself is biased toward bright and unextinguished afterglows , as many redshifts are determined from absorption spectra taken when the afterglow is much brighter than the underlying host galaxy .
finally , our data indicate that , on average , low-@xmath60 grbs have brighter afterglows ( cf .
figure [ bigpic1 ] ) , and thus have a greater chance of being detected through significant extinction .
unfortunately , the chances of detecting a `` rosetta stone dark burst '' at low redshift that is highly obscured by dust but still bright enough to yield viable data and a redshift might be small if the grb frequency is coupled with the star - formation rate ( e.g. , * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
* ) and low metallicities @xcite .
it is also visible that the the ability to discern between different dust models is coupled to the redshift , as the strongest deviations ( 2175  bump , fuv extinction ) appear in the uv region and the burst has to lie at a certain redshift to shift these features into the optical bands .
assuming that our database is not seriously affected by an observational bias ( dark bursts ) , figure [ submm ] shows that the standard grb afterglow is nearly unextinguished in its host galaxy .
since any long - lasting dust destruction by the intense fireball radiation should represent itself in a color evolution of the afterglow @xcite , which we do not find in our data , we conclude that on average there is not much evidence for dust in grb environments along the line of sight .
furthermore , any dust destruction could only affect the dust in the immediate grb environment , say , within 10 pc around the burster @xcite .
dust at larger distances will still produce extinction . additionally , the _ swift _ satellite has made observations of early grb afterglows routine , and a major result is the almost complete absence of reverse shock uv flashes @xcite .
it seems that in most cases the absence of large amounts of dust is not due to dust destruction but due to the fact that the standard grb progenitor ( seen pole - on along its rotational axis ) is not enshrouded by dust , globally and locally .
thus , if in those cases where significant extinction is found the extinction is not just produced in the immediate grb environment ( local extinction ) but prevails within the host galaxy ( global extinction ) , we would expect that grbs for which we find significant optical extinction are located in very dusty , submm - bright hosts .    in order to explore this possibility ,
we have taken from the literature all submm data for grb hosts with a flux density @xmath61 at the 1@xmath34 level that are also in our main sample of 30 afterglows @xcite and calculated the corresponding star formation rate ( sfr ) via the procedure developed by @xcite ( cf . * ? ? ?
* ) to take the different redshifts into account .
since the sfr is a direct measure of the far - infrared luminosity of a galaxy @xcite , it traces its total amount of radiating dust . for grb 980703
, we conservatively used the result for smc dust , which has the lowest extinction , and took the sfr from @xcite .
we added grb 000418 ( @xmath48 ,  [ others ] ) , arbitrarily assuming a 1  @xmath34 error of 0.5 mag , and transformed the @xmath0 result for grb 011211 ( smc dust ) into an upper limit , as we find @xmath30 , making @xmath0 unsure .
the resulting relation of sfr ( @xmath62 per year ) versus @xmath0 is shown in figure [ submm ] .
a trend is visible , a rising sfr is coupled to a rising intrinsic visual extinction along the line of sight , with the exception of grb 010222 .
a linear fit to the data ( excepting grb 010222 relation is grb 010222 . a hubble space telescope image of the grb 010222 host galaxy reveals the location of the grb being offset by a small margin from the center of the galaxy @xcite .
we find a low extinction value along the line of sight , whereas persistent submillimeter flux indicates that this is a dusty starburst galaxy @xcite .
the discrepancy is resolved if the grb happened toward the edge of the galaxy , but our line of sight places it in front of the galaxy . ] ) gives @xmath63 .
we conclude that , on average , grb afterglows that show significant extinction along the line of sight in their host are located in galaxies with a substantial star formation rate and , hence , a globally acting extinction by large amounts of dust .
if this interpretation is correct , then the trend seen in the data indicates that the line - of - sight can pass through a significant extent of the host galaxy .
since the sample is still very small and the error bars on both the sfr and the extinction @xmath0 are very large , it is clear that more and better data are required in order to verify this result .
figure [ betahist ] displays the distribution of the intrinsic spectral slopes , @xmath1 , for the bursts from table [ tabgold ] .
the distribution is broad , ranging from 0.2 to 1.2 , and features a peak around @xmath64 .
we find a non - error - weighted mean value of @xmath65 .
this result of a broad @xmath1 distribution of the intrinsic sed of the afterglows is probably robust , since ( 1 ) our light curve fits of the individual afterglows usually include many data points covering several days , so that we are not much sensitive to individual measurement errors and ( 2 ) these fits do not include the very early phase of an afterglow when its spectral properties might develop much faster than at later times .
in fact , with the exception of the early afterglows of grb 021004 and grb 030329 , we have never found clear evidence for color variations of the genuine afterglow light in our data .    while it is not the goal of the present paper to find reliable explanations for the observed width of the distribution of spectral slopes @xmath1 of the afterglows in the optical / nir bands , we note that the mean of this distribution gives a value for the power - law index of the electron distribution ( @xmath66 ) of @xmath67 , assuming a wind environment and the cooling frequency blueward of the optical bands ( * ? ? ? * and references therin ) and the peak of the histogram ( figure [ betahist ] ) .
this is in general agreement with theoretical predictions for ultra - relativistic shocks @xcite .
the maximum values we find for @xmath1 ( figure [ betahist ] ) could then be explained by those afterglows which had the cooling frequency redward of the optical bands during the entire time span when they were observed , provided that @xmath68 is a universal number . on the other hand
, a universality of @xmath68 seems to be difficult to reconcile with those afterglows which have @xmath69 . assuming the standard afterglow models @xcite , these afterglows require @xmath70 , provided that the basic model assumptions are indeed fulfilled in these cases . note that in paper ii we also found afterglows that require
@xmath70 based on their light curve shapes alone .
the fact that some afterglows require @xmath70 has already been reported and in detail explored by others ( cf . * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
based on our sed fits three of 19 afterglows have @xmath71 within their 1@xmath34 error bar ( grb 970508 , grb 991216 and grb 030429 ) which implies @xmath70 , while a very shallow afterglow decay slope @xmath7 brings grb 990123 , grb 991216 , grb 010222 , grb 030328 and grb 041006 into this sample ( paper ii ) .
obviously , only a minority of afterglows require @xmath70 .
it is not obvious why these afterglows are specific in some sense .
the afterglow of grb 991216 is one of the brightest afterglow for redshifts @xmath72 . on the other hand ,
the afterglow of grb 041006 is one of the less luminous afterglows (  [ redshifting ] ) .
thus , @xmath70 is not a question of luminosity .
note that both afterglows have only small intrinsic extinction ( @xmath73 ) , so these low values for @xmath1 are not just an artifact of the fitting process . for grb 991216
, the unextinguished slope is @xmath74 , for grb 041006 it is @xmath75 .
we also note that all these afterglow light curves are sampled fairly ( grb 990123 ) to very well ( grb 010222 ) , implying that the finding of a flat spectral slope is not a question of data quality either .
x - ray observations or the modeling of lyman @xmath19 absorption allow the determination of the hydrogen column density @xmath76 along the line of sight to the grb in its host galaxy after correcting for the column density in our galaxy @xcite .
in figure [ nhtoa_v ] we present a sample of afterglows for which we have derived @xmath0 and for which @xmath76 values are reported in the literature ( table [ xraydata ] ) .
this is an update of the plot first presented in @xcite and expanded in @xcite .
, leading to a linear depiction of the dust model curves . ]
the results reinforce our findings presented in  [ smcchapter ] . with two exceptions ,
all points in the plot lie on the theoretical prediction for smc dust or even above it .
the two exceptions are grb 021004 and 030329 , where only upper limits for @xmath76 are given in the literature , leading to dust - to - gas ratios higher than even for the milky way .
on the other hand , both afterglow seds are best fit with smc dust ( although the preference is only weak for grb 030329 ) , implying that the three dust models we use are not applicable in all cases . incidentally , grb 021004 and grb 030329 have the two best observed afterglow light curves with the most pronounced substructure ( paper ii ) .
the strongest outlier in figure [ xraydata ] is grb 990123 , for which we find a very low source frame extinction . the extremely bright uv flash of this burst @xcite may have burned significant amounts of dust along the line of sight ( cf .
* ; * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
* ) , reducing the dust - to - gas ratio .
no early multicolor data exists to probe the color variations that are expected in the early light curve .
knowledge of the intrinsic spectral slope of the afterglows allows us to determine their luminosity distribution ( appendix [ math ] ) .    at first , in figure
[ bigpic1 ] , we show the @xmath33-band light curves of all 30 afterglows of the sed sample ( table [ taball ] ) plotted with smoothed splines connecting the data points to guide the eye ( for reasons of clarity , error bars on the photometry have been omitted ) .
the data have been corrected for galactic extinction and host contribution . for the light curve of grb 030329 ,
the supernova contribution has also been subtracted , using the data from @xcite .
a very large spread of magnitudes is seen , the range at one day after the trigger is 7.5 magnitudes between the afterglows of grb 021211 and grb 030329 .
further bright afterglows are those of grb 991208 and grb 991216 , other faint afterglows are grb 040924 , grb 030227 and grb 971214 .
figure [ bigpic2 ] displays the afterglow light curves of the golden sample ( table [ tabgold ] ) after applying the cosmological @xmath77-correction ( the second term of eq .
[ delta1 ] ) ( table [ tabzcorr ] ) and after the time shifting to a common redshift of @xmath78 ( the first term of eq .
[ delta1 ] ) .
in other words , figure [ bigpic2 ] is a measure of the absolute @xmath33 band magnitudes of the afterglows up to a constant .
compared to figure [ bigpic1 ] the magnitude range has decreased , now being 5.7 magnitudes at one day after the burst .
nine of the 16 afterglows that have data one day after the burst lie in a range only two magnitudes wide , approximately clustered around the afterglow of grb 030329 . in other words , this afterglow is now seen to be quite typical .
the two afterglows above this range are those of grb 021004 and grb 991208 ( assuming for the latter burst an extrapolation of the decay with @xmath79 to one day after the burst in the host rest frame , paper ii ) .
the six afterglows beneath this range are grb 030226 , grb 020405 , grb 030328 , grb 011121 , grb 041006 and grb 040924 . of these six afterglows ,
only two ( grb 030226 and grb 030328 ) lie at @xmath80 .
grb 021004 is the most luminous afterglow at all times , although it is possible that the afterglow of grb 991208 was brighter at earlier times when it was not yet discovered @xcite .
knowledge of the unextinguished light curves allows us to determine the luminosity distribution of our afterglow sample .
based on fig .
[ bigpic2 ] we derive the @xmath33 band magnitudes at one and four days ( corresponding to half a day and two days after the burst in the host frame at @xmath60=1 ) and transform them into absolute magnitudes @xmath81 .
we do not extrapolate the afterglow light curves , except for grb 030429 and grb 020813 , which both have their final data points close to 4 days and are post - break .
thus , not all light curves are included ( e.g. , grb 991208 is not yet detected at one day , grb 030328 is not detected any more at four days if at @xmath82 ) .
the sample then contains 16 grbs at both one day and at four days , the results are given in table [ tabmb ] .
thereby , we computed the luminosity errors in a conservative fashion . given that the errors of @xmath1 and @xmath0 are correlated ( the result @xmath83 is coupled to @xmath84 and the other way around ) , we calculate three values of @xmath81 for the pairs @xmath85 , @xmath86 , and @xmath87 . the pair @xmath88 results in a lower luminosity , and the pair @xmath87 in a higher luminosity .
the difference between these luminosities and the luminosity derived from the pair ( @xmath89 ) is a conservative upper limit for the error of @xmath81 .
in addition , we impose limits @xmath90 and @xmath91 . if @xmath92 or @xmath93 , we set @xmath94 or @xmath95 , respectively , when computing @xmath81 .
the resulting luminosity distributions are given in figures [ mb1 ] and [ mb4 ] .
in addition , in order to search for a potential evolutionary effect or an observational bias , we distinguish grbs with @xmath96 and @xmath97 , this being the median of the redshift distribution of our sample .
a bimodal distribution of the afterglow luminosities is evident in figures [ mb1z ] and [ mb4z ] .
afterglows at @xmath96 tend to be less luminous , which might be explainable by an observational bias : the chances to detect intrinsically faint afterglows are higher for a lower @xmath60 .
at one day after the grb at @xmath82 , the complete distribution has a two peaks , the mean lying at @xmath98 , with the most luminous afterglow , grb 021004 , having @xmath99 , and the faintest , grb 040924 , having @xmath100 .
the means for the distributions of the @xmath96 and @xmath97 grbs are @xmath101 and @xmath102 , respectively .
the difference between the mean values is @xmath103 mag , indicating a bimodality .    at four days
after the burst at @xmath82 , a single broad peak remains , for the complete distribution , the mean value is @xmath104 .
now , the brightest afterglow ( grb 021004 ) has @xmath105 and the faintest afterglow ( grb 041006 ) has @xmath106 .
once again , the bimodal distribution for nearby ( @xmath96 ) and distant ( @xmath97 ) grb afterglows is evident .
the means for the distributions of the @xmath96 and @xmath97 grbs are @xmath107 and @xmath108 , respectively .
the difference between the mean values is @xmath109 mag , the significance of the bimodality has been strongly reduced .
@xcite analysed the x - ray afterglow light curves of grbs and shifted them to @xmath82 in an analog process , finding a bimodal flux distribution .
there are eight grbs in their sample ( grb 970508 , grb 990123 , grb 991216 , grb 000926 , grb 010222 , grb 011121 , grb 030226 , and grb 030329 ) that are also among the afterglows we have plotted in figure [ bigpic2 ] .
grb 990123 , grb 991216 , grb 000926 , and grb 010222 are in _ group i _ of @xcite , while grb 970508 , grb 011121 , grb 030226 , and grb 030329 are in their _
group ii_. we note that for @xmath82 , @xmath110 day lies at the end of the initial plateau phase of the light curve of grb 970508 .
the afterglow brightens by 1.5 magnitudes shortly afterward .
a comparison reveals that while the two groups mix in the optical ( the afterglow of grb 030329 being more luminous than those of grb 990123 and grb 010222 at one day after the burst at @xmath82 ) , the mean absolute magnitude of _ group i _ afterglows is @xmath111 , while it is @xmath112 for _ group ii _
afterglows , with the difference being @xmath113 mag . while this finding is intriguing , the sample is too small to draw any conclusions .
knowledge of the extinction corrected afterglow magnitudes allows us to compare the luminosities of the afterglows at a common point in the evolution of the jet , the jet break time . ignoring any fine structure in the light curves , for all bursts in our golden sample with a jet break ( paper ii ) we computed the apparent @xmath33-band afterglow magnitudes at the time of the jet break from the beuermann equation @xcite .
we included the fit around the jet break of grb 030329 but excluded grb 021004 , as the reality of the late break we found in paper ii is unclear due to the many rebrightening episodes .
these magnitudes were then converted to luminosities and normalized to the luminosity of the afterglow of grb 990123 at the time of its jet break .
we use these luminosity ratios to search for correlations between afterglow luminosity and parameters of the prompt @xmath114 emission of the grbs .
we take the isotropic energy release @xmath115 and the source frame peak energy @xmath116 from @xcite , and the collimation corrected energies @xmath117 from paper ii .
we do not find any correlations between the afterglow luminosity during the break time and these three parameters , with the absolute value of the correlation coefficient being smaller than 0.25 in all cases .
we have presented a sample of 30 grb afterglow spectral energy distributions in the optical / nir bands which have been modeled with various dust extinction curves ( milky way , large magellanic cloud and small magellanic cloud ) to derive the source frame extinction , @xmath0 , intrinsic to the host galaxies and the spectral slope , @xmath1 , of the afterglows unaffected by any dust extinction .
as all afterglows have been analyzed in a systematic way , the results are fully comparable , making this sample unique in terms of both size and consistency . for the further statistical study
, we selected 19 afterglows , our golden sample , which have physically reasonable results and small error bars .
the preferred dust models we find (  [ smcchapter ] ) as well as the deduced source frame dust - to - gas ratios (  [ nh ] ) based on the inclusion of data taken from the literature , both indicate that the majority of grbs we have investigated , covering the redshift range from 0.1 to 4.5 , occur in low - metallicity environments . the @xmath0 distribution that we have derived from these data (  [ avchapter ] )
highlights a sparsity of strongly extinguished afterglows , creating a dark burst desert , even though it is unclear if the preference of low extinctions is more than an observational and sample selection bias .
our finding that most afterglows suffer from only low extinction in their hosts could indicate that afterglows are usually not obscured by dust close to the burster .
one would then expect that the most extinguished afterglows are in fact located in globally dusty hosts .
indeed , we find weak evidence for a correlation between the submm flux of grb host galaxies and the source frame extinction @xmath0 .
although the statistical significance is low due to the small sample size and the large errors , this finding calls for a more thorough investigation .
knowledge of @xmath1 and @xmath0 allowed us then to correct the afterglow light curves for intrinsic extinction and to derive the true luminosity distribution of our afterglow sample at chosen times in the host galaxy frame (  [ redshifting ] ) .
we find that , on average , low-@xmath60 afterglows are less luminous than high-@xmath60 afterglows .
the most likely explanation we have at hand for this finding is an observational bias against intrinsically faint afterglows at high redshifts .
a bimodal distribution found by @xcite in similarly corrected x - ray afterglows is not clearly seen in the optical although , on average , grbs with fainter x - ray afterglows also have fainter optical afterglows .
unfortunately , the available sample size is still too small to reach definite conclusions .
a search for correlations between prompt emission parameters and the luminosity of the optical afterglows at jet break time has come up empty .    since our sample
is exclusively composed of grbs from the pre-_swift _ era , a similar study in a few years time on _ swift_-discovered grb afterglows will shed light on the dark burst desert and the true afterglow luminosity distribution by removing observational bias factors via rapid and highly precise grb localizations . already , _
swift _ has lead to the discovery of very faint afterglows including what may be the `` darkest '' burst ever , grb 050412 @xcite .
the recent discovery of the first afterglows of short grbs @xcite opens the possibility of finally making a comparison of the environment of the two different classes of grbs .
we thank the anonymous referee for helpful comments that improved this paper .
d.a.k . and s.k .
acknowledge financial support by dfg grant kl 766/13 - 2 .
a.z . and s.k .
acknowledge financial support by dfg grant kl 766/11 - 1 .
we wish to thank s. covino , j. gorosabel , t. kawabata , b. c. lee , k. lindsay , e. maiorano , n. masetti , r. sato , m. uemura , p. m. vreeswijk and k. wiersema for contributing unpublished or otherwise unavailable data to the database , and s. cortes ( clemson university ) for reducing additional data .
d.a.k . wishes to thank n. masetti and d. malesani for enlightening discussions .
furthermore , we wish to thank scott barthelmy , nasa for the upkeep of the gcn circulars and jochen greiner , garching , for the `` grb big list '' .
in the following , we consider the proper afterglow , i.e. , cleaned from any underlying host component as well as corrected for galactic extinction and extinction in the host galaxy . in cases where the late - time light curve is dominated by a supernova component , the data was removed due to a lack of knowledge concerning the supernova sed .
we start with the expression for the flux density per unit frequency , @xmath118 , of a time - dependent source that is shifted to a redshift @xmath119 , which was originally observed at a redshift @xmath120 @xcite :    @xmath121    here , @xmath122 and @xmath123 are measured in the observers frame , @xmath124 is the luminosity distance .
the exponential function corrects for a postulated extinction in the host galaxy at redshift @xmath120 , where @xmath125 is the optical depth in the host at the observed frequency .    when shifting an afterglow to a redshift @xmath119 , its apparent magnitude changes by an amount @xmath126 , with @xmath127 where @xmath128 is the wavelength - dependent filter response function for the given photometric band .
for an unabsorbed afterglow    @xmath129    we assume @xmath1 = const . since the light curve shape can be affected by a jet break and by rebrightening episodes ( which are achromatic according to our present data base ) , we do not specify @xmath130 . using eq .
( [ ag ] ) , it follows that in eq .
( [ dado ] )    @xmath131    with @xmath132 .
any extinction correction is included in @xmath133 in eq .
( [ dado ] ) .    after transforming flux density per unit frequency into flux density per unit wavelength and inserting eqs .
( [ dado ] , [ ag ] , [ f1 ] ) into eq .
( [ dm ] ) , we obtain @xmath134^{1-\beta}\                  \frac{d_l(z_0)^2}{d_l(z_1)^2}\,\frac{\int_0^\infty s(\lambda )   \ , \lambda^{\beta-2 }                         \exp\{\tau(\lambda/(1+z_0))\}\ , d\lambda }                  { \int_0^\infty s(\lambda ) \ , \lambda^{\beta-2 }
\,d\lambda}\right ) \label{delta1}\ ] ] in a logarithmic plot ( apparent magnitude vs. log time ) the first term in eq .
( [ delta1 ] ) represents a shift of the observed light curve in time . the second term in eq .
( [ delta1 ] ) shifts the light curve along the magnitude axis ; the light curve shape is not affected .    in our calculations we assumed a flat universe with matter density @xmath135 , cosmological constant @xmath136 , and hubble constant @xmath137 km s@xmath138 mpc@xmath138 @xcite .
for @xmath128 we used the filter functions of the vlt / fors1 bessel filters ( see http://www.eso.org/instruments/fors1/filters.html ) .
we have searched the literature for publications that also derive the source frame extinction toward the gamma - ray - bursts listed in table  [ taball ] . in most cases , these results are in good agreement with our findings .    _ grb 970508 _ to our knowledge , @xcite was the first who discussed the extinction in a grb host galaxy derived via a fit of the observed sed in the optical bands .
analysing collected data from the literature , he finds for grb 970508 @xmath139 ( albeit for a slightly higher @xmath60 , having left the redshift as a free parameter ) , concurrent with our result @xmath140 for the preferred mw dust extinction model .    _
grb 971214 _ @xcite find a strong spectral curvature in their data and infer a large @xmath141 for an assumed redshift of @xmath142 . as a fixed value for the spectral slope
, they took the @xmath143 color of the afterglow of grb 970508 .
this strong spectral curvature is mirrored in our sed fit which finds a large extinction and @xmath30 .
fits with a fixed @xmath1 derived from the @xmath19-@xmath1 relations @xcite are strongly rejected .    _
grb 980519 _ we have found no references to intrinsic extinction in the literature .
this makes our preferred smc dust result of @xmath144 , derived under the assumption of a redshift of @xmath13 , a novel result .    _
grb 980703 _ this burst has the highest extinction in our sample ( table [ taball ] ) .
this result is not unprecedented , however . while finding different values , several authors reported on a high extinction at different times after the burst : @xcite find @xmath145 0.9 days post - burst , @xcite find @xmath146 at 1.2 days , and @xcite derive @xmath147 at 5.3 days .
our achromatic fit gives @xmath148 for the mw dust model , close to the result from @xcite , while smc dust gives @xmath59 .
the light curves are not sampled well enough to check if the discrepancies between the various authors are the result of chromatic changes of the sed , a bumpy structure , or a true decrease of line - of - sight extinction with time .    _
grb 990123 _ @xcite find a negative extinction for this burst and therefore fix it to zero , consistent with the low value we derive : @xmath149 for the preferred smc dust model .
on the other hand , @xcite derive a very high extinction of @xmath150 from metal column abundances . given the high quality of the optical photometry
, we can not reproduce such a high extinction .
_ grb 990510 _ both , @xcite and @xcite find a slight curvature in the sed .
removing the @xmath151-band data point , @xcite find @xmath152 , comparable to our result , @xmath153 for smc dust .
neither publication fits the sed with a dust model to derive the host extinction .
_ grb 991208 _ almost all data on this afterglow ( in @xmath154 ) is from @xcite .
they do not discuss intrinsic extinction in the host galaxy .
together with additional @xmath155-band data from @xcite and @xcite , we find a high extinction of @xmath156 for mw dust , the weakly preferred model , and an excellent fit ( @xmath9/dof=0.20 ) .
_ grb 991216 _ after correcting for significant galactic foreground extinction , both @xcite and @xcite find a sed well approximated by a power - law , concurrent with no dust reddening , although these authors do not discuss intrinsic reddening . with a larger database and more colors , we find @xmath157 for the weakly preferred mw dust , still a low value .
this is consistent with the value @xmath158 that @xcite find from a low - resolution spectrum .
they also detect a broad absorption feature centered at 2360  , which can be interpreted as a redshifted 2715  bump , giving credence to our choice of mw dust as the preferred model .
_ grb 000131 _ for an smc dust model , @xcite find @xmath159 .
we are not able to perform a free fit as the sed has only three colors ( @xmath33 and @xmath160 are affected by lyman dampening ) , but fitting a straight power - law shows the sed is consistent with no extinction ( i.e. , no sed curvature is seen ) .
_ grb 000301c _
@xcite find very low host extinction ( @xmath161 ) for this burst using an smc dust curve , and no solution for mw and lmc dust .
@xcite derive a best fit result of @xmath162 for smc dust , find a slightly worse fit for lmc dust and a much worse fit for mw dust .
we also find negative extinction for mw dust , and also low values for lmc and smc dust ( @xmath163 for smc dust ) , completely in concordance with the results of the other authors .
_ grb 000911 _ comparing their host galaxy sed with synthetic spectra of extinguished galaxies , @xcite find @xmath164 for smc dust , consistent with our result of @xmath165 . the lmc result ( @xmath166 compared to @xmath167 ) is also in agreement .
_ grb 000926 _ for smc dust , we find @xmath168 , in good agreement with @xcite who find @xmath169 for smc dust .
several other analyses @xcite disagree more with our results , but @xcite employ a @xmath170 spectral energy distribution as we do , while the other studies have shorter baselines . based on metal column abundances from high - resolution spectra , @xcite find a large @xmath171 , which we can not confirm via the broad band photometry .    _
grb 010222 _ working with five - color sdss photometry , @xcite find low extinction ( @xmath172 for @xmath173 fixed ) for this burst with an smc dust curve , which is less than what we derive ( @xmath174 for @xmath175 and smc dust ) .
our result is consistent with that of @xcite , who find @xmath176 .
@xcite find a higher extinction of @xmath177 based on metal column abundances .
_ grb 010921 _ not finding a supernova bump in this nearby grb , @xcite invoke @xmath41 . while @xcite do find a weak sn bump and we derive the sed from this fit , we also find significant extinction of @xmath58 for mw dust , the preferred model , thus validating the analysis in @xcite .
_ grb 011121 _
@xcite deduce a galactic visual extinction of @xmath178 along the line of sight by fitting the uncorrected data points with a mw extinction law at @xmath179 , which translates into a galactic @xmath180 , assuming @xmath1813.1 .
they could not constrain the host extinction , however .
@xcite find a galactic @xmath182 and a spectral slope of @xmath183 between about 0.4 and 1.5 days after the burst ; a possible extinction in the host galaxy is not considered .
@xcite adopt @xmath184 based on the cobe data @xcite , find no evidence for host extinction , and @xmath185 at 2.5 days after the burst .
they note , however , that the hi maps of @xcite favor a lower galactic extinction of @xmath171 mag , i.e. @xmath186 ( assuming @xmath181 3.1 ) .
we refitted the combined data set taken from @xcite , adding carefully selected ( early and hst data ) data from @xcite and @xcite .
in addition , we have now used @xmath186 deduced via the hi data @xcite , in order to overcome the potential mixture of an unknown source frame extinction and an uncertain galactic extinction along the line of sight .
we omitted the @xmath187-band data @xcite , however , since they worsen the fit .
in doing so , we now derive a moderate host extinction of @xmath188 mag ( smc dust ) . the mw dust model is not preferred , although the low redshift of the grb makes a differentiation among the three dust models hard .
_ grb 011211 _ both @xcite and @xcite find very low extinction for this burst .
@xcite rule out mw dust and find that smc dust gives the best fit with @xmath189 .
our result is that mw dust is ruled out , lmc dust gives a low @xmath0 with a very bad fit , and smc dust gives a moderate @xmath190 but with @xmath191 .
thus the results are comparable in principle .
_ grb 020124 _ @xcite find @xmath52 by fixing @xmath192 for smc dust , deeming @xmath69 unrealistic .
their sed is consistent with ours , showing a strong curvature .
they additionally employ a synthetic @xmath151-band point derived from extrapolating the spectrum and find @xmath193 from a free fit of smc dust , still higher than what we derive ( excluding the @xmath151 band , as it is affected by lyman dampening ) , although the results are identical within the large errors .
@xcite find @xmath95 to 0.9 .
_ grb 020405 _ working with almost the same data set as we do , and including x - ray observations , @xcite find negligible ( though unspecified ) dust extinction in this afterglow . on the other hand , @xcite , comparing the x - ray and the optical brightness , invoke a gray extinction curve with a very high @xmath194 .
we find moderate extinction @xmath195 for all three dust models .
_ grb 020813 _
@xcite performed a very stringent analysis of an early high - resolution spectrum of this afterglow and , via analysis of metal column densities , derive @xmath196 , @xmath197 and @xmath198 for mw , lmc , and smc dust , respectively .
our analysis gives a very good match , with definite results : @xmath199 , @xmath200 and @xmath201 , respectively .
furthermore , we also come to the conclusion that smc dust is the preferred model . to make their unextincted spectral slope more compatible with standard models , @xcite invoke @xmath202 ( which converts to @xmath203 ) . @xcite
deduce @xmath204 , but for the galactic extinction curve of @xcite .
_ grb 021004 _ for an smc dust curve , @xcite derive @xmath205 , coupled with @xmath206 .
this work finds a lower @xmath207 coupled with a higher @xmath208 .
this is for the free fit , a wind model with the cooling break blueward of the optical gives @xmath209 fixed and @xmath210 , which is comparable . fitting an sed derived on october 11.67 , @xcite find exactly this result ( @xmath210 ) for smc dust , associated with @xmath211 .
they find higher extinction for lmc dust and a worse fit , and negative extinction for mw dust , just as we do .
_ grb 021211 _
@xcite derive extinction values for this grb by fixing @xmath1 .
as our light curve fitting finds a very blue afterglow with @xmath212 ( i.e. , almost flat ) , these values can not be compared adequately .
@xcite find up to @xmath213 , while we only derive small negative extinction for all dust models .
since these authors have derived their spectral slope @xmath214 from an early @xmath215 color , this may imply color evolution ( cf . * ? ? ?
@xcite derive an unextincted slope of @xmath216 at 0.87 days after the burst in the observer frame and an upper limit on the source frame extinction of @xmath196 .
_ grb 030226 _ @xcite find negligible extinction for this afterglow based on their multicolor data set , in contrast to @xcite who , on theoretical grounds , argue for a fixed @xmath217 and thus derive small extinction from their @xmath218 .
we utilize both data sets , and find a result concurrent with @xcite , mw and lmc dust are ruled out , and the reddening using smc dust ( @xmath219 ) is negligible within errors .
_ grb 030227 _ @xcite were not able to conclusively fit their sed .
their @xmath220 is in perfect agreement with the result we find , @xmath221 . while the data set is sparse , it is , with the exception of one data point , from @xcite exclusively .
the steep @xmath11 supports dust reddening , and the unextinguished @xmath222 , a reasonable value , further supports our findings of @xmath223 , which could explain the faintness of this not too distant ( @xmath224 , * ? ? ?
* ) afterglow .
the sparse data points of the sed and their large errors lead to very large errors in @xmath1 and @xmath0 , however .
_ grb 030323 _ the sed of this burst is unusual .
the @xmath151 band can not be included due to lyman dampening , and the spectrum ( a strong dla ) shows that the @xmath160 band is also unreliable . with the exception of the @xmath155 band ,
the sed shows a strong curvature without being very steep .
as there is no reason to remove the @xmath155 band point ( based on three photometric points , and not two each as in @xmath225 and @xmath187 ) , we tried to fit the sed with it ( removing it results in very good fits that have @xmath30 ) .
as the data points have small errors , the result is a very bad fit ( @xmath226 for two degrees of freedom ) .
@xcite do not fit the light curves , but analyse the sed at different post - burst times from observations at near - identical epochs .
they fix @xmath227 , derived from the @xmath19-@xmath1 relations . using this value , they find @xmath228 , @xmath229 and @xmath230 for mw , lmc and smc dust curves , respectively .
fixing @xmath1 to this value and fitting our sed yields @xmath231 , @xmath232 and @xmath233 for mw , lmc and smc dust curves , respectively . while these values are higher than those in @xcite , they are comparable if conservative errors are assumed . however , the @xmath155-band data is a strong outlier in these fits .
_ grb 030328 _ after paper ii went into press , @xcite presented a large amount of @xmath234 data on this burst that was not available to us before .
we refitted the optical light curves and derive the following parameters which supersede those presented in table 1 of paper ii : @xmath235 ( 1.34 in paper ii ) , dof = 81 ( 18 in paper ii ) , @xmath236 mag ( @xmath237 in paper ii ) , @xmath238 ( @xmath239 in paper ii ) , @xmath240 ( @xmath241 in paper ii ) , @xmath242 days after the burst ( @xmath243 in paper ii ) , @xmath244 ( fixed to 10 in paper ii ) .
the host galaxy magnitude remains unchanged .
( see paper ii for the definitions of these values . )
these changes do not influence the conclusions of paper ii .
we note that the value for the break smoothness parameter @xmath245 is fully in agreement with the possible correlation between @xmath6 and @xmath245 ( figure 8 of paper ii ) , and is almost identical to the value pair derived for grb 010222 .      _
grb 030329 _ the sed of this burst was derived in an alternate way compared to all other seds .
the rebrightening episodes starting at one day are found to be achromatic over several days .
the high data quality makes it possible to shift the light curves to a common magnitude , the amount of shift is used to construct the sed , assuming conservative errors .
this method is independent of the light curve fit , which is very complicated in the case of grb 030329 ( cf .
paper ii ) .
@xcite find @xmath248 , coupled with @xmath249 , for mw dust .
our result is : @xmath250 , coupled with @xmath251 , which is comparable within errors . for @xmath252 fixed , @xcite derive @xmath253 , comparable to @xmath254 which we derive when fixing @xmath1 at this value .    _ grb 030429 _
@xcite rule out mw dust ( as do we ) and find @xmath255 for smc dust at 0.548 days after the burst , slightly lower than our value of @xmath256 .
they also find higher extinction for lmc dust , but the fit is much worse , contrary in part to our result .
we find much lower source frame extinction for lmc dust , but here also the quality of the fit is bad .      _
grb 040924 _ @xcite use their own data and data from the gcn archives to derive @xmath259 , slightly lower than the value we find ( @xmath260 ) .
they do not fit the sed with a dust model . @xcite derive @xmath261 and argue that for the standard blastwave model , @xmath262 and thus @xmath263 mag .
this is in agreement with our result @xmath264 mag .    _
grb 041006 _ @xcite find @xmath265 and , to keep @xmath266 , assume negligible host galaxy extinction .
this is in agreement with our result @xmath267 , but we note that the shape of the sed is indicative of a slight amount of dust .
the derived @xmath268 and the shallow post - break light curve decay slope @xmath269 ( paper ii ) are both indicative of a hard electron spectrum with @xmath270 .
achterberg , a. , gallant , y. a. , kirk , j. g. , & guthmann , a. w. 2001 , , 328 , 393 akerlof , c. , et al .
1999 , , 398 , 400 amati , l. , et al .
2002 , , 390 , 81 andersen , m. i. , et al .
2000 , , 364 , l54 ballantyne , d. r. , et al .
2002 , , 389 , l74 berger , e. , et al . 2001a , , 556 , 556 berger , e. , et al . 2001b , , 560 , 652 berger , e. , et al .
2002 , , 581 , 981 berger , e. , et al . 2003a , , 588 , 99 berger , e. , et al . 2003b , , 426 , 154 berger , e. , et al .
2005a , , 629 , 328 berger , e. , et al . 2005b , , 438 , 988 beuermann , k. , et al .
1999 , , 352 , l26 bloom , j. s. , et al .
1998 , , 508 , l21 bloom , j. s. , et al .
1999 , , 401 , 453 bloom , j. s. , et al .
1999 , gcn circ .
480 , http://gcn.gsfc.nasa.gov/gcn/gcn3/480.gcn3 bloom , j. s. , et al .
2004 , , 572 , l45 bloom , j. s. , et al .
2004 , , 127 , 252 bohlin , r. c. , et al . 1978 , , 224 , 132 bradley , j. , et al .
2005 , science , 307 , 244 butler , n. r. , et al .
2005a , , 621 , 884 butler , n. r. , et al .
2005b , , 629 , 908 cardelli , j. a. , clayton , g. c. , & mathis , j. s. 1989 , , 345 , 245 castro - tirado , a. j. , et al .
1999 , , 511 , l85 castro - tirado , a. j. , et al .
2001 , , 370 , 398 castro - tirado , a. j. , et al .
2003 , , 411 , l315 chary , r. , et al .
2002 , , 566 , 229 chevalier , r. a. , & li , z .- y .
1999 , , 520 , l29 covino , s. , et al .
2003 , , 404 , l5 covino , s. , et al .
2005 , , in press ( astro - ph/0509144 ) dado , s. , dar , a. , & de rjula , a. 2002 , , 388 , 1079 della valle , m. , et al .
2003 , , 406 , l33 de luca , a. , et al .
2005 , , 440 , 85 dickey & lockman 1990 , , 28 , 215 djorgovski , s. g. , et al .
2001 , , 562 , 654 draine , b. t. 2000 , , 532 , 273 draine , b. t. , & hao , l. 2002 , , 569 , 780 firmani , c. et al .
2004 , , 611 , 1033 fitzpatrick , e. l. , & massa , d. 1986 , , 307 , 286 fox , d. w. , et al .
2003 , , 586 , l5 fox , d. w. , et al . 2005 , , 437 , 845 frail , d. a. , et al .
2002 , , 565 , 829 friedman , a. s. , & bloom , j. s. 2005 , , 627 , 1 fruchter , a. 2001 , gcn circ .
1087 , http://gcn.gsfc.nasa.gov/gcn/gcn3/1087.gcn3 fynbo , j. p. u. , et al . 2001a , , 369 , 373 fynbo , j. p. u. , et al .
2001b , , 373 , 796 fynbo , j. p. u. , et al .
2003 , , 406 , l63 fynbo , j. p. u. , et al .
2004 , , 609 , 962 fynbo , j. p. u. , et al .
2005 , , 633 , 317 galama , t. j. , & wijers , r. a. j. m. 2001 , , 549 , l209 galama , t. j. , et al .
1999 , , 398 , 394 galama , t. j. , et al .
2003 , , 587 , 135 garnavich , p. m. , loeb , a. , & stanek , k. z. 2000 , , 544 , l11 garnavich , p. m. , et al .
2000 , , 543 , 61 garnavich , p. m. , et al .
2003 , , 582 , 924 gendre , b. , & bor , m. 2005 , , 430 , 465 greiner , j. , et al .
2003 , , 599 , 1223 groot , p. j. , et al .
1998 , , 493 , l27 halpern , j. p. , et al .
1998 , , 393 , 41 halpern , j. p. , et al .
2000 , , 543 , 697 hjorth , j. , et al .
2003 , , 423 , 847 hjorth , j. , et al .
2003 , , 597 , 699 hjorth , j. , et al .
2005 , , 437 , 859 holland , s. t. , et al .
2002 , , 124 , 639 holland , s. t. , et al .
2003 , , 125 , 2291 holland , s. t. , et al .
2004 , , 128 , 1955 hopkins , p. f. , et al .
2004 , , 128 , 1112 jakobsson , p. , et al .
2003 , , 408 , 941 jakobsson , p. , et al . 2004a , , 427 , 785 jakobsson , p. , et al .
2004b , , 617 , l21 jakobsson , p. , et al .
2005 , , 629 , 45 jakobsson , p. , et al . 2005 , , 362 , 245 jaunsen , a. o. , et al .
2001 , , 546 , 127 jaunsen , a. o. , et al .
2003 , , 402 , 125 jensen , b. l. , et al .
2001 , , 370 , 909 kennicutt , r. c. , jr .
1998 , , 498 , 541 kirk , j. g. , guthmann , a. w. , gallant , y. a. , & achterberg , a.  2000 , , 542 , 235 klose , s. , et al .
2000 , , 545 , 271 klose , s. , et al . 2003 , , 592 , 1025 klose , s. , et al .
2004 , , 128 , 1942 kosugi , g. , et al .
2005 , gcn circ .
3263 , http://gcn.gsfc.nasa.gov/gcn/gcn3/3263.gcn3 lazzati , d. , covino , s. , & ghisellini , g. 2002 , , 330 , 583 le floch , e. , et al . 2003 , , 400 , 499 lee , b. c. , et al .
2001 , , 561 , 183 li , w. , et al .
2003 , , 115 , 844 liang , e. , & zhang , b. 2005 , , submitted ( astro - ph/0508510 ) lloyd - ronning , n. m. , et al .
2002 , , 574 , 554 macfadyen , a. i. , & woosley , s. e. 1999 , , 524 , 262 malesani , d. , et al .
2004 , , 609 , l5 maiolino , r. , et al .
2004 , , 431 , 533 maiorano , e. , et al .
2006 , , submitted masetti , n. , et al .
2000 , , 354 , 473 masetti , n. , et al .
2003 , , 404 , 465 masetti , n. , et al .
2005 , , 438 , 841 mirabal , n. , et al .
2003 , , 587 , 128 mller , p. , et al .
2002 , , 396 , l21 nardini , m. , et al .
2005 , , submitted ( astro - ph/0508447 ) nysewander , m. c. , et al .
2005 , , submitted ( astro - ph/0505474 ) owens , a. , et al .
1998 , , 339 , l37 paczyski , b. 1998 , , 494 , l45 panaitescu , a. , & kumar , p. 2000
, , 543 , 66 panaitescu , a. , & kumar , p. 2001
, , 556 , 1002 panaitescu , a. 2005 , , 362 , 921 pandey , s. b. , et al .
2004 , , 417 , 919 pei , y. c. 1992 , , 395 , 130 perna , r. , lazzati , d. & fiore , f. 2003 , , 585 , 775 piro , l. , et al .
2001 , , 558 , 442 predehl , p. , & schmitt , j. h. m. m. 1995 , , 293 , 889 price , p. a. , et al .
2001 , , 549 , l7 price , p. a. , et al .
2002 , , 572 , l51 price , p. a. , et al .
2003 , , 584 , 931 rau , a. , et al .
2004 , , 427 , 815 reichart , d. e. 1998 , , 495 , l99 rhoads , j. e. 2005 , gcn circ .
3527 , http://gcn.gsfc.nasa.gov/gcn/gcn3/3527.gcn3 rhoads , j. e. , & fruchter , a. s. 2001 , , 546 , 117 rol , e. , et al .
2005 , , 624 , 868 roming , p. w. a. , et al .
2005 , , submitted ( astro - ph/0509273 ) sagar , r. , et al .
2001 , basi 29 , 1 sari , r. , piran , t. , & halpern , j. p. 1999
, , 519 , l17 sari , r. , piran , t. , & narayan , r. 1998 , , 497 , l17 savaglio , s. , & fall , s. m. 2004 , , 614 , 293 savaglio , s. , et al .
2003 , , 585 , 638 schlegel , d. j. , finkbeiner , d. p. , & davis , m. 1998 , , 500 , 525 schneider , d. p. , et al .
2005 , , 130 , 367 silvey , j. , et al .
2004 , gcn circ .
2833 , http://gcn.gsfc.nasa.gov/gcn/gcn3/2833.gcn3 soderberg , a. m. , et al .
2005 , , 627 , 877 soderberg , a. m. , et al .
2006 , , 636 , 391 soderberg , a. m. , & berger , e. 2005 , gcn circ .
4375 , http://gcn.gsfc.nasa.gov/gcn/gcn3/4375.gcn3 spergel , d. n. , et al .
2003 , , 148 , 175 stanek , k. z. , et al .
1999 , , 522 , l39 stanek , k. z. , et al .
2003 , , 563 , 592 stanek , k. z. , et al .
2003 , , 591 , l17 stratta , g. , et al .
2004 , , 608 , 846 stratta , g. , et al .
2005 , , 441 , 83 tanvir , n. , et al .
2004 , , 352 , 1073 taylor , g. b. , et al .
2000 , , 537 , l17 tiengo , a. , et al .
2004 , , 423 , 861 vreeswijk , p. m. , et al .
1999 , , 523 , 171 vreeswijk , p. m. , et al .
2004 , , 419 , 927 vreeswijk , p. m. , et al .
2005 , , in press ( astro - ph/0510404 ) watson , d. , et al .
2003 , , 595 , l29 waxman , e. , & draine , b. t. 2000 , , 537 , 796 weingartner , j. c. , & draine , b. t. 2001 , , 548 , 296 woosley , s. e. 1993 , , 405 , 273 yost , s. a. , et al .
2002 , , 577 , 155 yun , m. s. , & carilli , c. l. 2002 , , 568 , 88 zeh , a. , klose , s. , & hartmann , d. h. 2004 , , 609 , 952 ( paper i ) zeh , a. , klose , s. , & hartmann , d. h. 2005 , in proceedings of the 22nd texas symposium on relativistic astrophysics , ed .
p. chen , e. bloom , g. madejski ( slac ) , & v. patrosian ( stanford university ) , preprint ( astro - ph/0503311 ) zeh , a. , klose , s. , & kann , d. a. 2006 , , in press ( astro - ph/0509299 ) ( paper ii ) zhang , b. , & mszros , p. 2004 , int.j.mod.phys .
a19 ( 2004 ) 2385    l r c | c c c | c c c | c c c 970508 & & @xmath271 & 2.73 & @xmath272 & @xmath273 & 2.00 & @xmath274 & @xmath275 & 1.14 & @xmath276 & @xmath277 + 971214 & & @xmath278 & 0.32 & @xmath279 & @xmath280 & 0.14 & @xmath281 & @xmath282 & 0.09 & @xmath283 & @xmath284 + 980519 & 1 & @xmath234 & 0.61 & @xmath285 & @xmath286 & 0.73 & @xmath287 & @xmath288 & 0.01 & @xmath289 & @xmath290 + 980703 & & @xmath291 & 2.28 & @xmath292 & @xmath293 & 2.10 & @xmath294 & @xmath295 & 2.33 & @xmath296 & @xmath297 + 990123 & 2 & @xmath298 & 0.21 & @xmath299 & @xmath300 & 0.35 & @xmath301 & @xmath302 & 0.20 & @xmath303 & @xmath304 + 990510 & 3 & @xmath154 & 0.03 & @xmath305 & @xmath306 & 0.01 & @xmath307 & @xmath308 & 0.58 & @xmath309 & @xmath310 + 991208 & & @xmath311 & 0.20 & @xmath312 & @xmath313 & 0.17 & @xmath314 & @xmath315 & 0.26 & @xmath316 & @xmath317 + 991216 & 4 & @xmath291 & 0.12 & @xmath273 & @xmath318 & 0.16 & @xmath272 & @xmath319 & 0.29 & @xmath320 & @xmath321 + 000131 & & @xmath322 & @xmath3230.01&@xmath324 & 0 & @xmath3230.01 & @xmath324 & 0 & @xmath3230.01 & @xmath324 & 0 + 000301c & 5 & @xmath325 & 2.48 & @xmath326 & @xmath286 & 2.03 & @xmath327 & @xmath328 & 1.14 & @xmath329 & @xmath330 + 000911 & & @xmath331 & 0.26 & @xmath332 & @xmath333 & 0.28 & @xmath334 & @xmath335 & 0.33 & @xmath336 & @xmath337 + 000926 & 6 & @xmath291 & 1.02 & @xmath338 & @xmath339&1.67 & @xmath340 & @xmath341 & 0.37 & @xmath342 & @xmath343 + 010222 & 7 & @xmath344 & 1.35 & @xmath345 & @xmath346 & 1.36 & @xmath347 & @xmath348 & 0.58 & @xmath349 & @xmath350 + 010921 & & @xmath351 & 0.07 & @xmath352 & @xmath353 & 0.06 & @xmath354 & @xmath355 & 0.03 & @xmath356 & @xmath357 + 011121 & 8 & @xmath344 & 0.55 & @xmath275 & @xmath358 & 0.54 & @xmath275 & @xmath359 & 0.49 & @xmath360 & @xmath361 + 011211 & 9 & @xmath325 & 2.03 & @xmath362 & @xmath363 & 7.12 & @xmath364 & @xmath365 & 1.89 & @xmath366 & @xmath367 + 020124 & 10&@xmath368 & 0.14 & @xmath369 & @xmath370 & 0.15 & @xmath371 & @xmath372 & 0.01 & @xmath373 & @xmath374 + 020405 & 11&@xmath375 & 1.82 & @xmath376 & @xmath377 & 1.75 & @xmath378 & @xmath379 & 1.75 & @xmath380 & @xmath381 + 020813 & 12&@xmath170 & 1.62 & @xmath382 & @xmath383 & 1.10 & @xmath384 & @xmath385 & 0.95 & @xmath386 & @xmath387 + 021004 & & @xmath375 & 1.62 & @xmath388 & @xmath389 & 1.57 & @xmath390 & @xmath391 & 0.69 & @xmath392 & @xmath393 + 021211 & & @xmath375 & 1.16 & @xmath394 & @xmath395 & 1.13 & @xmath396 & @xmath397 & 1.05 & @xmath398 & @xmath399 + 030226 & 13&@xmath291 & 0.15 & @xmath400 & @xmath401 & 0.57 & @xmath402 & @xmath403 & 0.32 & @xmath404 & @xmath405 + 030227 & & @xmath406 & 1.41 & @xmath407 & @xmath408 & 0.74 & @xmath409 & @xmath410 & 0.48 & @xmath411 & @xmath412 + 030323 & & @xmath413 & 5.91 & @xmath414 & @xmath415 & 6.35 & @xmath416 & @xmath417 & 6.41 & @xmath418 & @xmath419 + 030328 & 14&@xmath234 & 0.23 & @xmath420 & @xmath421 & 0.22 & @xmath422 & @xmath423 & 0.18 & @xmath424 & @xmath425 + 030329 & & @xmath426 & 0.10 & @xmath427 & @xmath428 & 0.09 & @xmath429 & @xmath301 & 0.06 & @xmath430 & @xmath431 + 030429 & 15&@xmath432 & 2.60 & @xmath433 & @xmath434 & 7.72 & @xmath435 & @xmath436 & 1.79 & @xmath437 & @xmath438 + 030723 & & @xmath439 & 0.16 & @xmath440 & @xmath441 & 0.15 & @xmath442 & @xmath443 & 0.19 & @xmath444 & @xmath445 + 040924 & & @xmath446 & 0.10 & @xmath447 & @xmath448 & 0.10 & @xmath449 & @xmath450 & 0.09 & @xmath451 & @xmath452 + 041006 & 16&@xmath453 & 0.06 & @xmath454 & @xmath455 & 0.05 & @xmath456 & @xmath457 & 0.05 & @xmath458 & @xmath459 + [ taball ]    l c c c c 970508 & * _ m _ & 2.73 & @xmath272 & @xmath273 + 990123 & * _ s _ & 0.20 & @xmath303 & @xmath304 + 991208 & m & 0.20 & @xmath312 & @xmath313 + 991216 & m & 0.12 & @xmath273 & @xmath318 + 000131 & @xmath460 & @xmath3230.01 & @xmath324 & 0 + 000301c & * _ s _ & 1.14 & @xmath329 & @xmath330 + 000911 & m & 0.26 & @xmath332 & @xmath333 + 000926 & * _ s _ & 0.37 & @xmath342 & @xmath343 + 010222 & * _ s _ & 0.58 & @xmath349 & @xmath350 + 011121 & s & 0.49 & @xmath360 & @xmath361 + 020405 & s & 1.75 & @xmath380 & @xmath381 + 020813 & s & 0.95 & @xmath386 & @xmath387 + 021004 & * _ s _ & 0.69 & @xmath392 & @xmath393 + 030226 & * _
s _ & 0.32 & @xmath404 & @xmath405 + 030328 & s & 0.18 & @xmath424 & @xmath425 + 030329 & s & 0.06 & @xmath430 & @xmath431 + 030429 & * _ s _ & 1.79 & @xmath437 & @xmath438 + 040924 & s & 0.09 & @xmath451 & @xmath452 + 041006 & m & 0.06 & @xmath454 & @xmath455 + [ tabgold ] * * * * * * * *