Prompt and Afterglow Constraints on the Central Engine of GRB 240825A

Daban Mohammed Saeed, R. Moradi, Chen-Wei Wang, Brwa Shukur Ismael, Marco Muccino

The Astrophysical Journal, 2026

Full text Open access: Gold Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.3847/1538-4357/aea138
Data confidence 85 high
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

Abstract GRB 240825A shows unprecedented temporal and spectral features that constrain the properties of its inner engine: (1) a prompt emission three-component spectrum consisting of a Band function continuum, a quasi-thermal bump, and a hard MeV tail; and (2) an X-ray afterglow fitted by a power-law decay with index 1.29 ± 0.02; and (3) a 6.37 ± 0.05 Hz quasi-periodic oscillation (QPO) identified in the 100–300 keV band during the 2.07–3.25 s time interval, coinciding with the photospheric radiation phase. We compare two central-engine candidates: (a) a newborn millisecond magnetar undergoing multipolar spin-down, free precession, and global magnetoelastic oscillations of its interior; and (b) a Kerr black hole powering a Blandford–Znajek jet subject to Lense–Thirring disk precession. In principle, both channels can reproduce the observed QPO frequency but impose different constraints on the energetics, temporal evolution, and the origin of the oscillation. We first demonstrate that the X-ray afterglow is quantitatively reproduced by a hexapolar magnetar spin-down model with an initial spin period of P 0 ≃ 1.38 ms and a surface field of B hexa ≃ 2.04 × 10 16 G. The decay index measures a braking index rather than the field multipolarity, does not exclude a fallback-regulated flow, and leaves P 0 and B hexa uncertain by a factor of a few. In this scenario, magnetic or magnetoinertial dynamics of the star interior provide a plausible explanation of the QPO without invoking extreme stellar deformations. Although a black hole engine cannot be firmly excluded, the combined prompt and afterglow observational properties of GRB 240825A favor a long-lived magnetar central engine.