You are an expert at summarizing long articles. Proceed to summarize the following text: 
to understand the inner workings of gamma - ray burst ( grb ) central engines , it is necessary to constrain their true energy release . if a redshift is known , the isotropic energy release in gamma - rays , @xmath4 , is a readily measurable quantity . the `` energy crisis '' brought on by implied energy releases of @xmath5 erg ( e.g. , * ? ? ? * ; * ? ? ? * ) was resolved when it was realized that grb blast waves are collimated with opening angles @xmath6 of 2 - 30@xmath7 @xcite . thus the beaming - corrected gamma - ray energy release , @xmath8 , is smaller than @xmath9 by a factor @xmath10 . whatever energy is not released in the prompt emission powers a relativistic blast wave that plows into the circumburst medium ( cbm ) . measuring the kinetic energy of this outflow , @xmath11 , is challenging because only a fraction of this energy is radiated . several methods have been used in this endeavor ( see * ? ? ? * ) . the simplest method , using only the x - ray afterglow light curve , was suggested by @xcite , @xcite , and @xcite . provided that the x - rays are predominately synchrotron and the electrons radiate in the cooling regime , this method yields the energy per unit solid angle and the fraction of the shock energy carried by electrons @xmath12 . for those afterglows with high quality multiwavelength data sets , a fit of the data can be made using models that describe the dynamics of jet / circumburst interaction and that calculate the expected synchrotron and inverse compton emission ( e.g. , * ? ? ? * ; * ? ? ? * ) . finally , for bright , long - lived afterglows , @xmath11 can be measured more robustly using the late - time radio light curve . months or in some cases years after the burst , the blast wave becomes sub - relativistic ( i.e. sedov self - similar evolution ) and the outflow is expected to be quasi - spherical ( e.g. , * ? ? ? * ; * ? ? ? * ; * ? ? ? early studies , based on these methods , suggested that the energy release of long - duration grbs lies within a narrow range with a mean of @xmath13 erg ( e.g. * ? ? ? * ; * ? ? ? * ) . there are several problems with this simple picture , however , and the true situation is likely more complicated . for example , energy input into the blast wave now appears to extend beyond the prompt emission and into the afterglow phase . this could be due either to a long - lived central engine or slow - moving ejecta that take a long time to reach the shock front @xcite . the simple pictures of collimated explosions has been challenged by _ swift _  detected grbs . kocevski & butler ( 2007 ) give an excellent summary of the difficulties and their implications for collimation - corrected energy release @xmath14 . if ( for whatever reason ) the _ swift _  sample of bursts has no jet breaks then we are faced with a growing number of grbs that ( by virtue of inferred isotropic energy release ) are hyper - energetic i.e.  well in excess of the canonical 10@xmath15 erg ( e.g. , * ? ? ? * ; * ? ? ? * ; * ? ? ? if accepted , these events would provide stringent tests of existing progenitor models .    in this paper , we present multiwavelength observations of grb070125 . its bright afterglow has allowed us to follow the grb until day 350 and obtain the most extensive radio data in the _ swift _  era , coupled with well - sampled x - ray and optical light curves indicative of a jet break . together with the well characterized prompt emission extending beyond 1 mev @xcite , grb070125 is truly a rare event .    in  [ sec : observation ] we provide details of observations for grb070125 . in  [ sec : result ] we describe our results , and find evidence for a jet break in the optical and x - ray data . the radio spectra show evidence for evolution from an optically thick to an optically thin phase , while the radio light curves show short timescale variability that we ascribe to scintillation . we carry out a straightforward analytic modeling and derive some physical parameters of the shock and the circumburst medium . finally , we carry out a detailed model fit of the entire broadband dataset and summarize our results in  [ sec : multiwave ] . we discuss the energetics , environment , relevance of reverse shock emission , efficiency of the grb and the inverse compton scattering effects for grb 070125  in  [ sec : discussion ] . the main conclusions are listed in  [ sec : conclusion ] . in this section , we present multiwavelength observations of grb070125 . we supplement our data set with the measurements reported in literature ( mostly notices from the gamma - ray burst circulars network ) . grb070125 was discovered by the inter planetary network ( ipn ) of grb detectors at 07:20:45 ut 25 january 2007 @xcite . mars odyssey ( hend and grs ) , suzaku ( wam ) , integral ( spi - acs ) , rhessi and konus - wind , all observed this intense , @xmath16 s long , event ( fig . [ fig : high ] ) . the burst was not in the field of view of _ swift_. four minutes later the burst fell into the burst alert telescope ( bat ) field of view @xcite . the _ swift _  bat position was consistent with the position of the grb as triangulated by ipn . the small @xmath17 error circle from the bat enabled follow - up observations to identify the bright x - ray (  [ sec : xray ] ) and optical (  [ sec : optical ] ) afterglow . because of the high - energy ( up to 1 mev ) coverage provided by rhessi , konus - wind , and suzaku , tight constraints can be made on the prompt emission spectrum of grb070125 . in particular , the gamma - ray fluence was much more accurately measured than a typical _ swift _  grb ( with coverage of only @xmath18kev ) . a detailed analysis of the high - energy properties of grb070125 has been performed by @xcite , who found that the spectrum is well fit by a band model @xcite with a peak energy @xmath19 kev and the power - law photon indices ( as defined in band model ) of @xmath20 and @xmath21 below and above the peak energy , respectively . the resulting fluence in the 20 kev  10 mev band was @xmath22 erg @xmath23 . the x - ray telescope ( xrt ; @xcite ) on board _ swift _  began observing the field of grb 070125  46 ks after the burst trigger @xcite . due to the relatively low source flux , observations were conducted exclusively in photon counting ( pc ) mode , and so the effects of photon pile - up were negligible . during the first five orbits , the x - ray spectrum is well - fit by a power - law model with a photon index @xmath24 ( @xmath25 , where @xmath26 is the photon flux density , * ? ? ? the inferred absorption is consistent with the galactic absorption value of @xmath27@xmath23 @xcite . the xrt continued to monitor the x - ray afterglow of grb 070125  over the course of the next two weeks , until the source faded below the xrt sensitivity threshold . motivated by the proposed lack of x - ray jet breaks observed in the _ swift _  era @xcite , we obtained director s discretionary time on the _ chandra x - ray observatory _ to observe the x - ray afterglow of grb 070125  at very late times . we obtained a 30 ks exposure using the advanced ccd imaging spectrometer on board @xcite beginning at 21:28 ut 2007 march 5 ( @xmath28d after the burst trigger ) . no source was detected at the position of the x - ray afterglow at this time . formally , using a circular aperture with a one - arcsecond diameter , we detect @xmath29 photons in the energy range from @xmath30kev at the location of grb 070125(a @xmath31 upper limit ) . the log of x - ray observations and the measured fluxes are summarized in table  [ tab : xray ] . the _ swift _  xrt light curve is obtained from the on - line repository @xcite . we converted counts to flux using spectral parameters derived from the first five xrt orbits , ranging from @xmath32 ks . there is no evidence for spectral evolution in the x - ray light curve , implying the derived conversion factor is applicable at all times @xcite . we then converted the @xmath33 kev flux to a flux density ( @xmath34 , where @xmath35 ) at @xmath36kev ( @xmath37hz ) . this value was so chosen that the flux was equally divided below and above this cutoff .      in response to the ipn-_swift _ localization , we began observing the field of grb 070125  with the automated palomar 60-inch telescope ( p60 ; @xcite ) on the night of 2007 january 26 . inspection of the first images revealed a bright , stationary source at @xmath38 , @xmath39 ( j2000.0 ) , not present in the sloan digital sky survey ( sdss ) images of the field @xcite . this position was promptly reported as the afterglow of grb 070125@xcite , allowing several groups to obtain spectroscopy of the afterglow while still quite bright ( @xmath40mag ) . the optical afterglow of grb070125 was observed by a variety of facilities worldwide , as it turned out to be one of the brightest optical afterglows ever detected for a grb ( updike _ et al . _ , in prep . ) we continued to monitor the afterglow of grb 070125  with the p60 in the kron @xmath41 and sloan @xmath42 filters for the following four nights , until the afterglow faded below our sensitivity limit . all p60 data were reduced using our custom software pipeline ( see @xcite for details ) using iraf routines . in addition to our p60 monitoring , we obtained three epochs of late - time optical photometry with the gemini multi - object spectrograph and imager ( gmos ; @xcite ) mounted on the 8-m gemini north telescope . all three epochs consisted of either single @xmath43 or @xmath42 exposures obtained as acquisition images for spectroscopic observations . all gmos images were reduced using the iraf ` gemini ` package . finally , we obtained a single epoch of simultaneous @xmath44- and @xmath41-band imaging on the night of 2007 february 16 with the low - resolution imaging spectrometer ( lris : @xcite ) mounted on the 10-m keck telescope . individual images were bias - subtracted and flat - fielded using standard iraf routines . co - addition was performed using swarp . photometric calibration for all of our optical imaging was performed relative to the sdss , with empirical filter transformations from @xcite applied where necessary . typical rms photometric uncertainties were @xmath45 mag in all of our images . @xcite imaged the position of the grb 070125 afterglow with the lbc - blue ccd camera and 8.4-m sx mirror on the lbt on 2007 february 21.1 ( ut ) in r - band . a faint source is detected at the position of the afterglow with brightness r=@xmath46 mag . since the source may be contaminated by the host galaxy , this observation represents an upper - limit on the magnitude of the afterglow 26.8 days after the grb .    to convert magnitudes to flux densities , we used zeropoint measurements from @xcite . we have incorporated a modest amount of galactic extinction ( @xmath47 ; @xcite ) into these results . the results of our optical monitoring of grb 070125 , together with measurements reported by other observatories via the gcn , are shown in table  [ tab : opt ] . we obtained director s discretionary time for observations in the 1.2-mm band ( 250 ghz ) at the max - planck millimeter bolometer array ( mambo ) , installed at the iram 30 m telescope on pico veleta , spain . we used the mambo-2 version with 117 channels . the bandwidth used was @xmath48 ghz half power . our first observations took place on 2007 january 30 and we detected the afterglow of grb 070125  at a flux density of @xmath49 mjy . we monitored the afterglow regularly until it had dropped below the instrumental sensitivity . observations were also obtained at 95 ghz using the combined array for research in millimeter - wave astronomy ( carma ) , in good weather on 2007 february 5 , 9 , 12 , and 18 . individual observations were between @xmath50 hours in length . system temperatures ranged from 200 to 400 k , scaled to outside the atmosphere . a single linear polarization was received in a bandwidth of @xmath51 ghz per sideband , depending on the antenna . carma was in the c configuration , with baselines @xmath52 m.    the bright quasar 0748 + 240 was observed as a phase calibrator at 20-minute intervals . a fainter source nearer grb070125 , 0741 + 312 ( 2  distant ) , was observed for 30 seconds after each observation of the grb . the flux density of this source when self - calibrated was compared to the flux density when calibrated with 0748 + 240 . the ratio of these measurements provides an estimate of the atmospheric decorrelation affecting the observations . the measured flux densities of grb 070125 were corrected by this factor , which ranged from 9 to 14% . the absolute flux density scale was derived from observations of uranus on february 2 and 19 , and transferred by reference to the quasar 3c84 , which was observed on those dates and near the beginning of each observation of grb 070125 . images were made for each observation using the miriad software package ( @xcite ) . the quoted uncertainty in the measurement is dominated by the sensitivity of the map , but also includes an estimate for the flux density scale uncertainty of 15% . we detected the afterglow in the first three observations . the flux density of the mean observation time 2007 february 5 , 0700 ut was 2.3 mjy the log and flux densities of the mambo and carma observations can be found in table  [ tab : radio ] . the earliest measurement of the radio flux density was taken from the westerbork synthesis radio telescope ( wsrt ) in 5 ghz band by @xcite ) , just 1.5 days after the burst . a 2@xmath53 upper limit on the 5 ghz flux density of @xmath54@xmath55jy was obtained . shortly thereafter , we triggered very large array ( vla ) observations of the field . our first measurement at 8.46ghz , four days after the explosion , resulted in a strong detection ( @xmath56@xmath55jy ; * ? ? ? encouraged by this detection , we triggered observations with the giant meterwave radio telescope ( gmrt ) in the 610 mhz band on 2007 january 31 . however , we did not detect the afterglow with the gmrt to a 2@xmath53 limiting flux density of @xmath57@xmath55jy @xcite . we continued the followup observations of grb 070125   with the vla from 2007 january 29th until 2007 february 2nd at 8.46 ghz and 4.86 ghz . after 2007 february 5 , we undertook observations in the 1.46 , 4.86 , 8.46 , 14.94 and 22.5 ghz bands . we followed the grb until day 342 since explosion . each observation at a single frequency was from 30 minutes to one hour duration . the bright radio quasar 3c48 ( 0137 + 331 ) was used as a flux calibrator . we used phase calibrators 0745 + 317 and 0741 + 312 to track the instrumental and/or atmospheric gain and phase variations , as well as to monitor the quality and the sensitivity of the data . a bandwidth of @xmath58 mhz was used for all the observations . the data were analyzed using standard data reduction procedures within the astronomical image processing system ( aips ) . during initial observations , the vla was in `` c@xmath59d '' and `` d '' array configuration for early observations ; because of the short baselines , there were many sources in the field of view at lower frequencies . for such cases at 4.86 and 1.43 ghz , we did 3-d cleaning with several rounds of self - calibration inside aips . on 2007 february 7 , 8 and 14 , we made longer observations for durations of @xmath60 , @xmath61 , and @xmath62 hours , respectively , in order to search for variability due to interstellar scintillation ( iss ) ( see  [ sec : scintillation ] ) . we combined every 20 minutes of the data and imaged the afterglow field of view to measure short timescale scintillations . the results of our radio monitoring of the afterglow of grb070125 can be found in table  [ tab : radio ] . in this section , we carry out a simple analysis with minimum model assumptions to derive robust conclusions . we find strong evidence for a jet break in the combined fitting of the x - ray and the optical light curves (  [ sec : tjet ] ) . in  [ sec : scintillation ] we use the radio scintillation data to constrain the size of the emitting region . together , the jet break time and the inferred radius allow us to constrain the prompt energy release (  [ sec : energetics ] ) and the density of the circumburst medium (  [ sec : density ] ) . in the next section (  [ sec : multiwave ] ) , we undertake a detailed analysis utilizing the full machinery of afterglow models . we performed a joint fit on the @xmath41 , @xmath42 , and x - ray light curves of grb 070125  using both a single power - law ( spl ) and a broken power - law ( bpl ) model . the results of these two fits are shown in figure  [ fig : jet ] and table  [ tab : jet ] . we also perform the spl and the bpl fits letting the x - ray and optical pre - break indices vary independently . the results are consistent with the previous fits in which we constrained both the indices to be the same . altogether , the broken power - law model , indicating a jet break at @xmath63d , is strongly favored ( @xmath64 for 97 d.o.f .  vs.  @xmath65 for 99 d.o.f . ) . we note , however , that the distinction between the two models is significantly more pronounced in the optical ( @xmath66 for 52 d.o.f .  vs.  @xmath67 for 52 d.o.f . ; and @xmath68 for 25 d.o.f .  vs.  @xmath69 for 52 d.o.f . ) than the x - rays . as first noted by @xcite , without the late - time _ chandra _ data , the x - ray light curve can not distinguish between the spl and bpl models . formally , we find the single power - law model is actually favored in the x - rays ( @xmath70 for 22 d.o.f .  vs.  @xmath71 for 20 d.o.f . ) . this could perhaps be due to the denser sampling at early times . we also perform independent optical and x - ray fitting . the optical fits are consistent with our joint fits . however , when we fit the x - ray light curve independently of the optical , the jet break appears much later , @xmath72d ( fig . [ fig : jet ] ) . while not formally required by our simple analysis , we consider the possibility that this break may in fact be _ we discuss this further in  [ sec : discussion ] .      as can be seen in fig . [ fig : refscint ] and table [ tab : radio ] , there are significant day - to - day deviations in the low frequency radio light curves . these modulations are likely due to scintillation caused by interstellar propagation effects . we obtained long - duration observations of the afterglow of grb070125 at 8.5 ghz on three separate occasions : february 7 ( 5.5 hour duration ) , february 8 ( 4 hour duration ) , and february 14 ( 8 hour duration ) . the data were split into 20minute blocks and imaged in order to extract information on the fast variability of the source . grb070125 exhibits flux density variations with a significance exceeding 99.8% on each of the three epochs ( see fig .  [ fig : scint ] ) . the reduced @xmath73 values for the hypothesis of no variability are 2.31 ( with 17 degrees of freedom ) , 4.42 ( 10 d.o.f . ) and 2.84 ( 23 d.o.f . ) for the three dates , respectively . we used intensity structure functions to determine the variability timescale on each date . while the short baseline hindered a definitive determination , we tentatively identify breaks with @xmath74% accuracy at @xmath75 and @xmath76 s , in the three structure functions . the breaks are marginally significant in the data from 7 february and 8 february , but not so prominent in the 14 february images . this can be explained by quenching of the scintillation as the source expands at late times . these measurements are congruent with the timescales of the peaks and troughs apparent in the corresponding centimeter - wavelength lightcurves ( fig . [ fig : refscint ] ) . the interpretation of the variability depends on whether the scintillation occurs in the weak or strong regime . strong scintillations require that the so - called fried parameter ( coherence length scale , @xmath77 ) be smaller than the fresnel size ( @xmath78 ) . strong chromatic scintillations is possible only for sources smaller than @xmath79 . these lead to the following two conditions @xcite :    @xmath80    @xmath81    where sm is the scattering measure and @xmath82 is the effective distance to the scattering material , which is essentially the galactic ionized medium @xcite . to determine this , we first estimate the scattering distance and the scattering measure using the formulation of @xcite . given the galactic coordinates of grb 070125 , @xmath83 , the expected sm is @xmath84m@xmath85kpc and the effective distance to the scattering material is @xmath86kpc . for these parameters , the critical frequency obtained from eq . [ scint1 ] is 12.7 ghz . these parameters also satisfy the condition of eq . [ scint2 ] . hence , the grb is likely to be in the strong scintillation regime . however , given the paucity of our knowledge of the distribution of scattering material off the galactic plane , these estimates should be taken with caution . strong scintillation can be diffractive as well refractive in nature . diffractive scintillation of a point - like source is characterized by variations with a modulation index ( @xmath87 ) close to unity , where the modulation index is a measure of how much the modulated flux varies around its intrinsic flux density level . the size limit for a source to exhibit diffractive scintillation ( @xmath88 ) is @xcite : @xmath89 for actual size of the source , @xmath90 , @xmath91 . diffractive scintillation occurs when @xmath92 , which is indeed the case for grb 070125  using the parameters discussed above . we now attempt to limit the size of the emitting region using the formulation of diffractive scintillation @xcite , but with more robust estimates of @xmath82 and sm . the timescale of diffractive scintillation can be expressed as : @xmath93 where @xmath94 is the speed of the scattering material transverse to the line of sight . the decorrelation bandwidth ( @xmath95 ) for diffractive scintillation is then @xcite : @xmath96    using the variability timescale of @xmath97s measured on 8 february , along with @xmath98kms@xmath99 , we infer a scattering measure of @xmath100 . in eq . [ eq : nu ] we take the decorrelation bandwidth to be roughly half of the frequency of observation , i.e.  @xmath101 , because at the boundary of strong and weak scintillation @xmath102 @xcite . this yields a distance to the scattering screen of @xmath103 kpc . knowing these two parameters , we can put an upper limit on the angular size of the emitting region of @xmath104 . here the error in angular size corresponds to 20% error in the determination of @xmath105 . at @xmath106 @xcite , the angular size translates , @xmath107 and @xmath108 . ] to a linear size of @xmath109 cm or a radius of @xmath1 cm . variability due to refractive scintillation is expected at late stages , even after the source has expanded sufficiently . refractive scintillations are expected to be broadband in nature and start dominating once diffractive scintillations are quenched . the source exhibited refractive scintillation during the two months subsequent to 2007 february 8 , as can be seen from the first 70days of the 8.46ghz data plotted in figure  [ fig : refscint ] .    in a standard grb afterglow model , the jet starts to spread sideways after the jet break @xcite . during this stage , the fireball size remain constant . once the jet has become spherical , it reaches the non - relativistic regime . in this regime , the equations of motion follow self - similar sedov - taylor solutions . thus , this estimate represents the size of the fireball in the post jet break regime until the expansion becomes sub - relativistic , which occurs between days 30 and 50 . the isotropic gamma ray energy of a grb can be written as : @xmath110 where @xmath111 is the luminosity distance of the grb and @xmath112 is total fluence . the fluence in the 20 kev  10 mev energy range is @xmath113 erg @xmath23 @xcite , yielding @xmath114 erg . this is one of the largest isotropic energy releases ( top 1% ) ever reported for a grb @xcite .    to determine the true prompt energy release , this isotropic value needs to be corrected for collimation . the combined fit to the optical and x - ray data gave a jet break at @xmath115 day (  [ sec : tjet ] ) . the collimation correction depends on the density profile of the circumburst medium . we derive corrections for a uniform density ( ism ; @xmath116 constant ) medium and a wind - like ( wind ; @xmath117 ) medium ( * ? ? ? * and references therein ) . the collimation angle for a radiative afterglow can be written as @xcite : @xmath118 where @xmath119 is the break in the optical light curve in days , and @xmath120 is the isotropic kinetic energy of the fireball in units of @xmath121 erg . the term @xmath122 is the initial lorentz factor of the fireball . similarly , the size of the spherical fireball can be expressed in the ism and wind media as @xcite : @xmath123 which after jet break in grb 070125  translates to : @xmath124 using the emission radius derived from scintillation studies ( @xmath125 ) , we find an opening angle of @xmath126 rad ( @xmath127 ) for the ism model and @xmath128 rad ( @xmath129 ) for the wind model . the lorentz factor of the shocked ejecta at the time of jet break is @xmath130 in the ism model and @xmath131 in the wind model .      from eq . ( [ eq : r_jet1 ] ) and ( [ eq : r_jet ] ) , the circumstellar density can be written in terms of the kinetic energy of the afterglow as @xmath132 @xmath133 and @xmath134 for the ism and the wind models , respectively . let @xmath135 be the efficiency factor for converting the fireball energy into the radiation energy , i.e.  @xmath136 . for an empirical value of @xmath137 @xcite , the number density of grb 070125  is @xmath138 in the ism model and @xmath139 in the wind model . this value is quite high , even for grbs , and indicates that the afterglow of grb070125 is expanding into a dense medium . a natural consequence of a high circumburst density is a high synchrotron self - absorption frequency . to this end , we plot broadband radio spectra ( figure  [ fig : radio_spectra ] ) . to improve the signal - to - noise ratio , we binned the spectra into 4 groups ( @xmath140 d , @xmath141 d , @xmath142 d , and @xmath143 d ) . the division was initially done on the basis of similarly - looking spectra , but later in this section we justify it by demonstrating that the spectral evolution has a weak time dependence . as can be seen , there is a clear turnover in the spectra in the first three epochs . moreover , there is some indication that the turnover frequency evolves to lower frequencies with time . at the last epoch , no turnover frequency is discernible and the spectrum is inverted . this spectral behavior has been seen in many previously well - studied grb afterglows . we interpret this behavior in terms of the evolution of the afterglow from an optically thick to optically thin phase , parametrized by a single unknown , the synchrotron self - absorption frequency @xmath144 . we can measure the value of @xmath144 from the radio spectra using a very simple formulation given below : @xmath145 the above relation is a broken power - law with a break at @xmath144 . we used the following smooth approximation of eq . ( [ eqn : nua ] ) : @xmath146^{-1}\ ] ] we fit this function to the first three radio spectra and obtain the following values of synchrotron self - absorption frequency : + @xmath147 ghz in the range @xmath148 days , + @xmath149 ghz in the range @xmath150 days , + @xmath151 ghz in the range @xmath152 days . + our approximation of a constant @xmath144 within each epoch is justified because of the slow evolution of @xmath144 . the best fit time dependence to the values given above is @xmath153 , which agrees well with the time dependence predicted in the fireball model ( @xmath154 , @xcite ) . the spectrum in the final epoch was well into the optically thin phase so we could not determine @xmath144 at this epoch . we also plot the multiwaveband spectra on day 10.7 and day 23.4 ( fig . [ fig : analytic ] ) , the two epochs at which we had observations in all the bands simultaneously . this shows radio data points to be on the optically thick part of the spectra . the afterglow peaks at 3-mm band and the optical and x - ray data fall in the optically thin regime . this gives a rough estimate of the break frequencies , @xmath155 , corresponding to the minimum electron lorentz factor , and @xmath156 , the cooling frequency . we also plot @xmath157 , a measure of energy , against @xmath158 . the curve peaks at the cooling frequency @xmath156 ( fig . [ fig : analytic ] ) . in the previous section , we used simple analytical techniques to estimate four fundamental physical properties of the explosion : the opening angle ( @xmath159  0.25 radian ) , the size of the emitting region ( @xmath160 cm ) , the collimation - corrected prompt energy release ( @xmath161erg ) , and the circumburst density ( @xmath162@xmath133 ; @xmath163 ) . here we combine _ all _ our observations of the grb 070125  afterglow in an attempt to derive a comprehensive model of the entire afterglow evolution . our modeling software assumes a standard synchrotron forward shock formulation , with possible contributions from inverse compton ( ic ) emission and radiative losses also included . this model also includes scintillation uncertainties , and hence gives realistic estimates of various parameters . further details can be found in @xcite and @xcite .    as in  [ sec : tjet ] , we ignore all data before @xmath164d due to the possibility of late - time energy injection . based on our results in [ sec : scintillation ] , we have incorporated scintillation effects into the radio regime . we used an lmc - like extinction model for the optical data @xcite ; however , the extremely small host contribution to the extinction makes the effects of differing extinction laws negligible .      results of the best fit wind model parameters are tabulated in table [ tab : models ] . in terms of @xmath73 and the model - fit statisticconstant , here @xmath165 is the probability function and @xmath166 is standard deviation ] , the wind model does a slightly better job than the ism model . however , the resulting best - fit parameters for the wind model are either unphysical ( i.e.  @xmath167 , the fractional energy imparted to electrons in the shock , approaching unity ) or quite different from the values we derived in  [ sec : result ] . the extremely small isotropic afterglow kinetic energy ( @xmath168 ) compared to the @xmath0-ray isotropic energy is also troubling ( the same is true in the ism case , but to a lesser extent ) . we also notice that the wind model is less stable to small changes in the parameter space . we fit the wind model with and without the inverse compton effects . the model without inverse compton effect gives even more unphysical values with many of the parameters asymptotically reaching very high values . the magnetic field fraction required reaches 100% in this model .    apparently allowing @xmath12 to be a free parameter is problematic . microphysics evolution has been considered by @xcite . it makes everything unconstrained . we fixed @xmath12 to be 0.4 and obtained a good fit ( see table [ tab : models ] ) . this exercise demonstrates that microphysical parameters are not constrained by our observations , at least for wind model . the best - fit results for the ism model are also provided in table [ tab : models ] . the ism model gives values of various parameters closer to the ones obtained from our simple analytical models . the jet break time , density scale , and collimation angle are in good agreement with our previous results .    the energy quoted in table [ tab : models ] is the isotropic blastwave energy at the time when @xmath169 , i.e.  at the time of the transition from fast cooling to slow cooling ( @xmath170d in our model ) . this isotropic kinetic energy is much smaller than the isotropic gamma - ray energy obtained from the konus - wind / rhessi fluence (  [ sec : energetics ] ) . this may indicate that either there are high radiative losses at early times or the prompt emission is rather efficient with an extremely high value of @xmath135 . we plot the results of our broadband modeling in figures [ fig : radio ] , [ fig : bbspec ] , and [ fig : xray ] . it is difficult to differentiate between the wind and the ism models purely on the basis of these plots . both models represent the optical data fairly well at early times ( fig . [ fig : radio ] ) . at late times ( @xmath171d ) , both models over - predict the @xmath41-band flux , though with significantly less discrepancy in the constant density medium . ic effects are negligible in optical bands .    in the radio bands , none of the models fit particularly well , especially at early times ( @xmath172 days ) . this is likely caused partly by the diffractive scintillation (  [ sec : scintillation ] ) . ic scattering has no influence in this band . the most puzzling behavior is revealed in the 4.8 ghz band . an early detection at @xmath173d , both in our data and the wsrt @xcite , is followed by almost two weeks of non - detections . summing all these non - detections , we can put very strict limits on the 4.8 ghz flux at this time : @xmath174 @xmath55jy . the reason for this drop in flux is unclear , for it can not be due to scintillation . we consider the possibility that the early detection is due to the reverse shock emission , in [ sec : discussion ] .    in figure [ fig : bbspec ] , we plot the broadband spectra from radio to x - ray at various times of the afterglow evolution . they are represented well with our models . both the wind and ism environments seem to do an equally good job . we plot the x - ray light curve of grb070125 in figure  [ fig : xray ] . this is the only band affected by ic emission . in the upper panel of figure  [ fig : xray ] , we plot the model assuming only synchrotron radiation , while the lower panel incorporates ic scattering as well . the wind model in a pure synchrotron fit has very unphysical parameters ( table  [ tab : models ] ) ; hence we do not consider it further . in the ism model , the observations at @xmath175d do not fit the data very well without any ic emission . the fit improves significantly for both environments when we incorporate ic effects . the ic component seems to raise the x - ray flux roughly almost the same time the jet break becomes visible in the optical bands . this could well explain the jet break at a later stage in the x - rays . we will discuss this further in  [ sec : discussion ] . with our comprehensive broadband models in hand , we now turn to some of the questions raised in the previous sections .      here we examine the ic scattering effect on the grb afterglow lightcurve in the x - ray band . we adapt an approach in which we use only the synchrotron model for the grb afterglow and derive various parameters such as @xmath176 , density etc from the broadband data fitting . in this approach , we force the broadband jet break to be fixed on the day of the optical jet break from our analytical fits i.e. on day 3.7 . we then use these parameters to derive the light curve purely due to ic effect . for reasons noted earlier we confine our discussion to the ism model . here , we assume that the spectrum due to ic scattering has the same shape as that of the synchrotron model . hence , ic spectrum in the x - ray band is @xmath177 here @xmath178 is ic peak flux , @xmath179 is ic cooling frequency and @xmath180 is ic peak frequency . the best fit parameters from the synchrotron broadband model fit are : @xmath181 . here @xmath182 is the transition time from the fast cooling to the slow cooling state . @xmath120 is the isotropic - equivalent kinetic energ at @xmath183 . ic scattering delays the cooling time by a fraction @xmath184 @xcite , i.e. the cooling time in presence of the ic effect is @xmath185d . thus , for the time span of our observations , the afterglow remains in the fast cooling state and we will use formulation in this regime .    using the formulation described in @xcite and @xcite , we estimate the time ( @xmath186 ) when ic scattering starts becoming important at 1.486 kev ( the x - ray light curve frequency ) . using above best fit parameter values , we obtain @xmath187 day . the ic light curve will satisfy the pre - jet break condition in the timerange of @xmath188 , i.e. between day @xmath189 . the light curve will follow post - jet break formulation from day 3.7 onwards . the flux density , size , lorentz factor and cooling frequencies derived on day 2.8 are : @xmath190 . hence , the derived ic parameters on day 2.8 are : @xmath191 . here @xmath192 and @xmath193 parameters are defined in @xcite . the time dependences of various parameters in the pre - jet break epoch are : @xmath194 . our frequency of observation ( @xmath195 hz ) satisfies @xmath196 condition at @xmath197d . therefore , using eq . [ eq : ic ] , the 1.5 kev light curve for ic scattering between day @xmath198 becomes @xmath199    from day 3.7 onwards , we use the post - jet break formulation and derive the ic light curve . the time dependences of various parameters in the post - jet break regime are : @xmath200 . on the jet break day , we find @xmath201 hz and @xmath202 hz , which still satisfies @xmath196 condition . therefore , we derive the light curve from day 3.7 onwards using eq . [ eq : ic ] as @xmath203 the ic frequency @xmath204 reaches the x - ray observation frequency of @xmath205 hz on day 5.7 . hence , the above light curve is valid until day 5.7 . after day 5.7 , the ic flux density in the @xmath180 regime ( eq . [ eq : ic ] ) , which gives the light curve in this regime as follows : + @xmath206    combining eqs . ( [ iclc1 ] ) , ( [ iclc2 ] ) and ( [ iclc3 ] ) , we plot the total ic light curve in fig . [ fig : ic ] . the figure clearly shows that ic scattering flattens the light curve and delays the jet break to later time . what happens after day @xmath207 is unknown due to the lack of x - ray detection of the afterglow . while we have strong evidence that ic effects delay the x - ray jet break in grb070125 , we would like to know if this effect could be seen in other grbs as well . in the pre-_swift _  era , the x - ray data were not sufficiently well sampled to search for jet breaks , and so collimation corrections were almost exclusively calculated in the optical bands . in the _ swift _  era , with a plethora of well - sampled xrt light curves , we may be missing the jet break due to ic effects in many grbs . the radio afterglow is not useful in determining the jet break , since grbs most likely scintillate in radio bands at such early times . this makes the optical the unique bandpass in which the real jet break can be determined unambiguously . the inverse compton effect is most prominent in a dense medium . our radio observations have already shown that grb070125 resides in a very dense medium . it has been shown by @xcite that ic is important in relativistic ejecta and even in non - relativistic ejecta in high density . harrison et al . ( 2001 ) found good evidence for ic production of x - rays in grb 000926 and derived a high circumburst density , @xmath208 @xmath133 , comparable to the density we find for grb 070125 . @xcite have shown that the late time flattening in the x - ray light curve of xrf050406 can be explained as an effect of ic scattering . for inverse compton scattering to play an important role , the electron energy density fraction ( @xmath12 ) must be larger than the magnetic energy density fraction ( @xmath209 ) . recently , @xcite has discussed chromatic breaks occurring due to scattering of the forward - shock synchrotron emission by a relativistic outflow located behind the leading blast - wave . this model may have x - ray jet breaks showing up at later times than the optical breaks . however , this model requires a long - lived central engine , which may not be the case with most of the grbs .      with grb070125 , we now have found three _ swift _  events with total energy release in excess of @xmath121erg : grb050904 @xcite and grb050820a @xcite . while both grb050904 and grb050820a appear to have exploded in an dense circum - burst medium , the lack of a bright radio afterglow from grb050820a indicates a more typical environment . moreover , with the exception of the total energy release , other parameters derived from broadband modeling are in line with previous studies of less energetic grbs @xcite . it seems likely , therefore , that some factor intrinsic to the progenitor system is responsible for the large energy release .    at first blush , it seems surprising that _ swift _  has detected three of the most energetic grbs ever . with its increase high - energy sensitivity , _ swift_should preferentially select grbs at the low end of the fluence distribution . we note , however , that a strong selection bias exists . as first noted by @xcite , in many _ swift _ x - ray light curves , the last xrt measurement is not sufficient to rule out a collimation - corrected prompt energy release of @xmath13erg . similarly , in the optical bandpass , @xcite have shown that at least some jet breaks occur at late times beyond the sensitivity of medium aperture facilities .    while a detailed discussion of the relative rates of hyper - energetic events is still premature , it is clear at this point that , at the very least , the prompt @xmath0-ray energy distribution is significantly broader than previously believed @xcite . coupled with the recent controversy surrounding the validity of the many high - energy correlations ( e.g.  @xcite ) , we believe the future utility of grbs as cosmological probes is significantly lessened . even more importantly , however , hyper - energetic grbs have important consequences for progenitor models . sustained engine activity has been seen now in many grbs @xcite . this poses a problem for the collapsar model , as the duration of the central engine should not significantly exceed the accretion time scale onto the remnant black hole @xcite . late - time engine activity is naturally accommodates by models in which the central object is a magnetar @xcite . the existence of hyper - energetic grbs , however , is a direct and severe challenge to the magnetar model .    with the current rate of hyper - energetic events ( @xmath211yr@xmath99 ) , coupled with the difficulty in measuring late jet breaks for more typical _ swift_events , future prospects look grim . however , the impending launch of _ glast _ offers a new hope in the study of grb energetics . much like blazars , those grbs capable of producing gev photons detectable by the large area telescope should be the most energetic and narrowly beamed events . together , synergistic _ glast _ and _ swift _  observations in the coming years should be able to shed light on the opening angles and energy release of a large sample of grbs . our observations presented here , particularly the bright , self - absorbed radio afterglow , indicate grb070125 exploded in a dense circum - burst medium . in a separate work , however , @xcite have reported spectroscopic observations indicating an environment almost completely devoid of absorbing material . @xcite furthermore find no evidence of an underlying host galaxy to deep ( @xmath212mag ) limits . we briefly reiterate here the resolution of this apparent paradox . the key to understanding the environment of grb070125 is to note that the broadband afterglow emission and the super - posed spectroscopic absorption features derive from distinct physical regions . afterglow emission is caused by electrons in the circum - burst medium accelerated by the outgoing blastwave ( e.g.  @xcite ) . these electrons reside relatively close to the explosion center , typically at radii @xmath213pc . we have strong evidence , however , that the absorption features seen super - posed on grb afterglow spectra derive from material at significantly larger distances from the explosion site : @xmath214kpc , or within the host galaxy ism . evidence in support of this large distance comes primarily from two lines of argument . first , the presence of indicates a large distance from the explosion site , as the first ionization energy of mg falls below 1 ryd , and thus any mg near the grb would be ionized to at least @xcite . second , @xcite have reported the detection of variability in the fine structure levels of from uv pumping for grb060418 . by modeling the variability over time , they were able to measure the grb - absorber distance : @xmath215kpc .    while this explains the apparent density paradox , we are still left to explain how a dense circum - burst medium could be embedded in such a tenuous ism . taking a clue from the lack of an underlying host detection , we suggested grb070125 may have exploded in a dense stellar cluster enriched by galaxy interactions . star formation in such extreme environments can be seen in the local universe ( e.g.  tadpole galaxy ; @xcite ) , and under our hierarchical picture of galaxy formation , such interactions should have occurred more frequently at @xmath216 . the report of the detection of a faint source at the afterglow location at late times @xcite may call this interpretation into question , although it is unclear whether this emission is attributable to the fading afterglow or an underlying host ( or some combination thereof ) . regardless , future high - resolution imaging ( i.e.  _ hst _ ) seems worthwhile to pin down the environment of this truly unique event . grb 070125  was not detected at @xmath217 d with the wsrt , and then was detected by both the vla and the wsrt around day 5 . it remained below detection level for the next 15 days , before rebrightening on day 22 . we explore the possibility that the flux from the grb at @xmath218d could be emission from a reverse shock . we first consider the possibility that the non - detection was caused by modulations due to scintillation . the modulation in flux density due to the refractive scintillation can decrease the flux density at the most up to @xmath219jy . to check for this possibility , we combined all the eight observations taken during the 15 day non - detection phase . this vastly improved the signal - to - noise ratio . the flux density we obtained at the grb position is @xmath220 @xmath55jy , much lower than scintillation can explain .    according to the internal - external shock model for grbs , the prompt emission is produced by internal shocks within a relativistic outflow , while the afterglow is produced by external shocks with the interstellar medium . the reverse shock has a much lower temperature than that of the forward shock so it radiates at considerably lower frequencies . in this scenario using the ism model , the reverse shock emission peaks in the optical band at @xcite : @xmath221 for grb 070125 we calculate @xmath222 sec . this corresponds to the time of peak in the radio band to be : @xmath223 here @xmath224 is the synchrotron self - absorption frequency , which can be written as @xcite : @xmath225^{2/(p+4)}.\ ] ] for values obtained from our multiwavelength analysis , we calculate @xmath226 hz and @xmath227 2.25 days . hence , the reverse shock emission peaks in the radio bands around @xmath228d . we now estimate the peak radio flux density for the reverse shock . this can be written as : @xmath229 where @xmath230 is the peak optical flux density expressed as @xcite : @xmath231 for our best fit parameters , this value is @xmath211 mjy , which a gives the peak radio flux density to be @xmath232jy , which is two orders on magnitude than the observed one . this shows that a reverse shock is not strong enough to explain the detection on day 5 . we can not explain this strange behavior . one of the major concerns for grb 070125  is the difference between the isotropic @xmath0-ray energy obtained from the high - energy fluence and the isotropic - equivalent blastwave energy obtained from our best fit model on the day when @xmath169 . the isotropic - equivalent kinetic energy is an order of magnitude smaller than the isotropic @xmath0-ray energy ( @xmath233 erg ,  [ sec : energetics ] ) . however , at very early times , the afterglow is in the fast cooling regime , where it undergoes significant loss of the energy because it is highly radiative . the fireball may lose as much as 80% of its energy during this phase @xcite . if we incorporate radiative corrections , we may derive a more accurate estimate of the actual isotropic blastwave energy . from @xcite we find : @xmath234 for the ism model and @xmath235 for the wind model . for the broadband modeling parameters , the isotropic kinetic energy one hour after the explosion is @xmath236 and @xmath237 erg for the ism and the wind models , respectively . here , the energy for the wind model is rather unphysical . the efficiency @xmath135 for the ism model is 0.67 .      in terms of reduced @xmath73 for best fit , wind model is slightly better . however , the wind model requires an electron energy density fraction close to 1 , which is very unlikely . the best fit parameters in the wind model are rather unphysical , with less constrained boundaries . however , fixing the electron energy fraction to be 0.4 also gives reasonable fits . evidence favoring the ism model comes from the fireball size estimation from the scintillation data . however , the uncertainties in the diffraction scintillation time estimates may bring large uncertainties in the size estimates . based on the energetics arguments stated above , the ism model is favored over the wind model , but we can by no means definitely dismiss the latter . grb 070125  is one of the brightest grbs ever detected , both in terms of its prompt high - energy fluence and its optical and radio afterglows . the isotropic equivalent energy for the grb is @xmath238 erg . this is the most extensively followed grb in multiwavebands in the _ swift _  era . the richness of the data allowed us to derive many important properties of the grb and place useful constraints on many parameters . grb 070125  was one of the few grbs with sub - mm observations at various epochs . our 95 ghz and 250 ghz observations with carma and iram , respectively , gave a robust determination of the peak flux density and @xmath155 , and constrained the power ( @xmath239 ) ( fig . [ fig : analytic ] ) . simultaneous fitting to optical and x - ray data favors a jet break at day 3.78 than the single powerlaw model . the evidence for the jet break is indisputable in the optical @xmath41 and @xmath240 bands with pre - break and post - break slopes being 1.73 and 2.49 respectively . however , the jet break is not very prominent in the x - ray band . when we do the independent fit to optical and x - ray bands , the optical best fit is consistent with our joint fit . however , the jet break in the x - ray band is shifted to day @xmath241 . using the best fit parameters of the model , we show that the inverse compton effects will dominate throughout our observations with pronounced effects in x - ray frequencies . these effects delay the jet break in the x - ray band . we had long observations of the grb at three epochs in the 8 ghz band . these data gave evidence for diffractive scintillations , which gave an upper limit on the size of the fireball after the jet break , until the sedov - taylor phase started . this estimate of the fireball size is consistent with the one obtained from the broadband modeling in a constant density medium . we obtained synchrotron self absorption frequency estimates at various epochs from the vla radio data . the evolution of the synchrotron self absorption frequency is @xmath242 , which is consistent with the one expected ( @xmath243 ) in the standard afterglow model . synchrotron self absorption frequency estimates indicate that the grb afterglow is moving in a dense medium . our model fits could not distinguish between the ism density profile and the wind - like density profile . the @xmath73 fits were marginally better for the wind model but it needed an unphysically high electron energy fraction ( @xmath211 ) . when we fixed the electron energy density fraction to 0.4 in the wind model , it did give decent fits and physical parameter values . however , the parameter values in the ism model are more robust and change little with little change in the input values , unlike the wind model which is rather unstable . in both the ism and the wind models , the radiative efficiency of the grb is very high ( @xmath244 ) . we suggest that ic scattering is a potential candidate in flattening the light curve and delay the jet break in other _ swift _  events and explain the absence of a jet break in x - ray light curves of some of the _ swift _  bursts . ic effects are more prominent in high density medium . frequent radio measurements are necessary to measure the circumburst density of the medium . hence , in absence of good radio data , one can not determine the importance of ic scattering . grb 070125 is unique because this has the richest radio data in _ swift _  era , having closely spaced x - ray light curve . even though grb 070125  has rich multiwaveband data , we could not nail down some of the lingering issues , such as wind vs ism density profile . one reason for this is that much of the evolution is in the jet break phase , when the ism and wind models have similar properties . very dense samples of sensitive radio , x - ray , @xmath0-ray and optical data from the very beginning until the grb fades below the detection limit are needed . in the future , a combination of _ swift _ glast , alma , evla , and various optical telescopes will provide this opportunity . pc thanks the vla staff for making radio observations , without which this work was not possible . pc is a jansky fellow at national radio astronomy observatory . the national radio astronomy observatory is a facility of the national science foundation operated under cooperative agreement by associated universities , inc . we thank sarah yost for providing us the grb broadband modeling code and helping out in running the code . pc used the fussy calculator ( http://fussy.googlecode.com ) for error propagation calculations and wish to thank its author , sanjay bhantagar . rac was supported in part by nasa grant nng06gj33 g .          , d. , matteson , j. , ford , l. , schaefer , b. , palmer , d. , teegarden , b. , cline , t. , briggs , m. , paciesas , w. , pendleton , g. , fishman , g. , kouveliotou , c. , meegan , c. , wilson , r. , & lestrade , p. 1993 , , 413 , 281    , e.  c. , hurley , k. , palshin , v. , yamaoka , k. , bandstra , m.  e. , boggs , s.  e. , hong , s. , kodaka , n. , kozyrev , a.  s. , litvak , m.  l. , mitrofanov , i.  g. , nakagawa , y.  e. , ohno , m. , onda , k. , sanin , a.  b. , sugita , s. , tashiro , m. , tretyakov , v.  i. , urata , y. , & wigger , c. 2007 , arxiv e - prints , 710          , d.  n. , hill , j.  e. , nousek , j.  a. , kennea , j.  a. , wells , a. , osborne , j.  p. , abbey , a.  f. , beardmore , a. , mukerjee , k. , short , a.  d.  t. , chincarini , g. , campana , s. , citterio , o. , moretti , a. , pagani , c. , tagliaferri , g. , giommi , p. , capalbi , m. , tamburelli , f. , angelini , l. , cusumano , g. , bruninger , h.  w. , burkert , w. , & hartner , g.  d. 2005 , space science reviews , 120 , 165        , d.  n. , romano , p. , falcone , a. , kobayashi , s. , zhang , b. , moretti , a. , obrien , p.  t. , goad , m.  r. , campana , s. , page , k.  l. , angelini , l. , barthelmy , s. , beardmore , a.  p. , capalbi , m. , chincarini , g. , cummings , j. , cusumano , g. , fox , d. , giommi , p. , hill , j.  e. , kennea , j.  a. , krimm , h. , mangano , v. , marshall , f. , mszros , p. , morris , d.  c. , nousek , j.  a. , osborne , j.  p. , pagani , c. , perri , m. , tagliaferri , g. , wells , a.  a. , woosley , s. , & gehrels , n. 2005 , science , 309 , 1833        , s.  b. , fox , d.  b. , moon , d .- s . , harrison , f.  a. , kulkarni , s.  r. , henning , j.  r. , guzman , c.  d. , bonati , m. , smith , r.  m. , thicksten , r.  p. , doyle , m.  w. , petrie , h.  l. , gal - yam , a. , soderberg , a.  m. , anagnostou , n.  l. , & laity , a.  c. 2006 , , 118 , 1396    , s.  b. , kasliwal , m. , harrison , f.  a. , palshin , v. , frail , d.  a. , cameron , p.  b. , berger , e. , fox , d.  b. , gal - yam , a. , kulkarni , s.  r. , moon , d .- s . , nakar , e. , ofek , e.  o. , penprase , b.  e. , price , p.  a. , sari , r. , schmidt , b.  p. , soderberg , a.  m. , aptekar , r. , frederiks , d. , golenetskii , s. , burrows , d.  n. , chevalier , r.  a. , gehrels , n. , mccarthy , p.  j. , nousek , j.  a. , & piran , t. 2006 , , 652 , 490                , x. , garnavich , p.  m. , prieto , j.  l. , stanek , k.  z. , kochanek , c.  s. , bechtold , j. , bouche , n. , buschkamp , p. , diolaiti , e. , fan , x. , giallongo , e. , gredel , r. , hill , j.  m. , jiang , l. , mcclellend , c. , milne , p. , pedichini , f. , pogge , r.  w. , ragazzoni , r. , rhoads , j. , smareglia , r. , thompson , d. , & wagner , r.  m. 2007 , arxiv e - prints , 712      , p.  a. , beardmore , a.  p. , page , k.  l. , tyler , l.  g. , osborne , j.  p. , goad , m.  r. , obrien , p.  t. , vetere , l. , racusin , j. , morris , d. , burrows , d.  n. , capalbi , m. , perri , m. , gehrels , n. , & romano , p. 2007 , , 469 , 379      , d.  a. , kulkarni , s.  r. , sari , r. , djorgovski , s.  g. , bloom , j.  s. , galama , t.  j. , reichart , d.  e. , berger , e. , harrison , f.  a. , price , p.  a. , yost , s.  a. , diercks , a. , goodrich , r.  w. , & chaffee , f. 2001 , , 562 , l55            , a.  s. , thorsett , s.  e. , metzger , m.  r. , sahu , k.  c. , petro , l. , livio , m. , ferguson , h. , pian , e. , hogg , d.  w. , galama , t. , gull , t.  r. , kouveliotou , c. , macchetto , d. , van paradijs , j. , pedersen , h. , & smette , a. 1999 , 519 , l13      , g.  p. , bautz , m.  w. , ford , p.  g. , nousek , j.  a. , & ricker , jr . , g.  r. 2003 , in presented at the society of photo - optical instrumentation engineers ( spie ) conference , vol . 4851 , x - ray and gamma - ray telescopes and instruments for astronomy . edited by joachim e. truemper , harvey d. tananbaum . proceedings of the spie , volume 4851 , pp . 28 - 44 ( 2003 ) . , j.  e. truemper & h.  d. tananbaum , 2844    , p. , fan , x. , jiang , l. , dai , x. , kuhn , o. , bouche , n. , buschkamp , p. , smith , p. , milne , p. , bechtold , j. , stanek , k.  z. , prieto , j. , wagner , r.  m. , rhoads , j. , hill , j. , baruffolo , a. , desantis , c. , diolaiti , e. , dipaola , a. , farinato , j. , fontana , a. , gallozzi , s. , gasparo , f. , giallongo , e. , grazian , a. , pasian , f. , pedichini , f. , ragazzoni , r. , smareglia , r. , speziali , r. , testa , v. , & vernet , e. 2007 , grb coordinates network , 6165 , 1        , f.  a. , bloom , j.  s. , frail , d.  a. , sari , r. , kulkarni , s.  r. , djorgovski , s.  g. , axelrod , t. , mould , j. , schmidt , b.  p. , wieringa , m.  h. , wark , r.  m. , subrahmanyan , r. , mcconnell , d. , mccarthy , p.  j. , schaefer , b.  e. , mcmahon , r.  g. , markze , r.  o. , firth , e. , soffitta , p. , & amati , l. 1999 , 523 , l121    , f.  a. , yost , s.  a. , sari , r. , berger , e. , galama , t.  j. , holtzman , j. , axelrod , t. , bloom , j.  s. , chevalier , r. , costa , e. , diercks , a. , djorgovski , s.  g. , frail , d.  a. , frontera , f. , hurley , k. , kulkarni , s.  r. , mccarthy , p. , piro , l. , pooley , g.  g. , price , p.  a. , reichart , d. , ricker , g.  r. , shepherd , d. , schmidt , b. , walter , f. , & wheeler , c. 2001 , , 559 , 123    , i. , allington - smith , j.  r. , beard , s.  m. , crampton , d. , davies , r.  l. , dickson , c.  g. , ebbers , a.  w. , fletcher , j.  m. , jorgensen , i. , jean , i. , juneau , s. , murowinski , r.  g. , nolan , r. , laidlaw , k. , leckie , b. , marshall , g.  e. , purkins , t. , richardson , i.  m. , roberts , s.  c. , simons , d.  a. , smith , m.  j. , stilburn , j.  r. , szeto , k. , tierney , c. , wolff , r.  j. , & wooff , r. 2003 , in instrument design and performance for optical / infrared ground - based telescopes . edited by iye , masanori ; moorwood , alan f. m. proceedings of the spie , volume 4841 , pp . 1645 - 1656 ( 2003 ) . , m.  iye & a.  f.  m. moorwood , 16451656    , k. , cline , t. , mitrofanov , i. , kozyrev , a. , litvak , m. , sanin , a. , tretyakov , v. , parshukov , a. , boynton , w. , fellows , c. , harshman , k. , shinohara , c. , starr , r. , yamaoka , k. , ohno , m. , fukazawa , y. , takahashi , t. , tashiro , m. , terada , y. , murakami , t. , makishima , k. , smith , d.  m. , lin , r.  p. , mctiernan , j. , schwartz , r. , wigger , c. , hajdas , w. , zehnder , a. , von kienlin , a. , lichti , g. , rau , a. , cummings , j. , krimm , h. , barthelmy , s. , & gehrels , n. 2007 , grb coordinates network , 6024 , 1    , t.  h. , polletta , m. , fournon , i.  p. , stacey , g. , xu , k. , siana , b. , farrah , d. , berta , s. , hatziminaoglou , e. , rodighiero , g. , surace , j. , domingue , d. , shupe , d. , fang , f. , lonsdale , c. , oliver , s. , rowan - robinson , m. , smith , g. , babbedge , t. , gonzalez - solares , e. , masci , f. , franceschini , a. , & padgett , d. 2006 , , 131 , 261        , s.  r. , djorgovski , s.  g. , odewahn , s.  c. , bloom , j.  s. , gal , r.  r. , koresko , c.  d. , harrison , f.  a. , lubin , l.  m. , armus , l. , sari , r. , illingworth , g.  d. , kelson , d.  d. , magee , d.  k. , dokkum , p.  g.  v. , frail , d.  a. , mulchaey , j.  s. , malkan , m.  a. , mcclean , i.  s. , teplitz , h.  i. , koerner , d. , kirkpatrick , d. , kobayashi , n. , yadigaroglu , i .- a . , halpern , j. , piran , t. , goodrich , r.  w. , chaffee , f.  h. , feroci , m. , & costa , e. 1999 , , 398 , 389                                          , r.  j. , teuben , p.  j. , & wright , m.  c.  h. 1995 , in astronomical society of the pacific conference series , vol .  77 , astronomical data analysis software and systems iv , ed . r.  a. shaw , h.  e. payne , & j.  j.  e. hayes , 433+              , p.  m. , ledoux , c. , smette , a. , ellison , s.  l. , jaunsen , a.  o. , andersen , m.  i. , fruchter , a.  s. , fynbo , j.  p.  u. , hjorth , j. , kaufer , a. , mller , p. , petitjean , p. , savaglio , s. , & wijers , r.  a.  m.  j. 2007 , , 468 , 83                        llll 0.54203 & @xmath245 & @xmath246 & @xmath247 + 0.54468 & @xmath248 & @xmath249 & @xmath250 + 0.54630 & @xmath251 & @xmath252 & @xmath253 + 0.54868 & @xmath254 & @xmath255 & @xmath256 + 0.55235 & @xmath257 & @xmath258 & @xmath259 + 0.55447 & @xmath260 & @xmath261 & @xmath262 + 0.55787 & @xmath263 & @xmath264 & @xmath265 + 0.60723 & @xmath266 & @xmath267 & @xmath268 + 0.60991 & @xmath269 & @xmath270 & @xmath271 + 0.61257 & @xmath272 & @xmath273 & @xmath274 + 0.61587 & @xmath275 & @xmath276 & @xmath277 + 0.61921 & @xmath278 & @xmath279 & @xmath280 + 0.62327 & @xmath281 & @xmath282 & @xmath283 + 0.67575 & @xmath284 & @xmath285 & @xmath286 + 0.67845 & @xmath287 & @xmath288 & @xmath289 + 0.68217 & @xmath290 & @xmath291 & @xmath292 + 0.68565 & @xmath293 & @xmath294 & @xmath295 + 0.68898 & @xmath296 & @xmath297 & @xmath298 + 0.69205 & @xmath299 & @xmath300 & @xmath301 + 0.73354 & @xmath302 & @xmath303 & @xmath304 + 0.73787 & @xmath305 & @xmath306 & @xmath307 + 1.34534 & @xmath308 & @xmath309 & @xmath310 + 1.35747 & @xmath311 & @xmath312 & @xmath313 + 1.41052 & @xmath314 & @xmath315 & @xmath316 + 1.42675 & @xmath317 & @xmath318 & @xmath319 + 1.47713 & @xmath320 & @xmath321 & @xmath322 + 1.48861 & @xmath323 & @xmath324 & @xmath325 + 1.78359 & @xmath326 & @xmath327 & @xmath328 + 1.89040 & @xmath329 & @xmath330 & @xmath331 + 1.94946 & @xmath332 & @xmath333 & @xmath334 + 2.05462 & @xmath335 & @xmath336 & @xmath337 + 2.18650 & @xmath338 & @xmath339 & @xmath340 + 2.30888 & @xmath341 & @xmath342 & @xmath343 + 2.47372 & @xmath344 & @xmath345 & @xmath346 + 2.68019 & @xmath347 & @xmath348 & @xmath349 + 2.83975 & @xmath350 & @xmath351 & @xmath352 + 3.07971 & @xmath353 & @xmath354 & @xmath355 + 3.38860 & @xmath356 & @xmath357 & @xmath358 + 3.59126 & @xmath359 & @xmath360 & @xmath361 + 4.04549 & @xmath362 & @xmath363 & @xmath364 + 5.97272 & @xmath365 & @xmath366 & @xmath367 + 9.08277 & @xmath368 & @xmath369 & @xmath370 + 10.5438 & @xmath371 & @xmath372 & @xmath373 + 14.5620 & @xmath374 & @xmath375 & @xmath376 + 39.6190 & @xmath377 & @xmath378 & @xmath379 +    cccclccll 0.54034 & v & 0.55 & 3590 & @xmath380 & 0.17 & 18.37 & @xmath381 & gcn6041 , 6036 + 0.55035 & b & 0.45 & 4020 & @xmath382 & 0.23 & 18.69 & @xmath383 & gcn6036 , 6041 + 0.67441 & v & 0.55 & 3590 & @xmath384 & 0.17 & 18.57 & @xmath385 & gcn6036 , 6041 + 0.68433 & b & 0.45 & 4020 & @xmath386 & 0.23 & 18.80 & @xmath387 & gcn6036 , 6041 + 0.79149 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath388 & 0.14 & 18.45 & @xmath389 & p60 + 0.79379 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath390 & 0.14 & 18.37 & @xmath391 & p60 + 0.79609 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath392 & 0.14 & 18.43 & @xmath393 & p60 + 0.79848 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath394 & 0.14 & 18.47 & @xmath395 & p60 + 0.80087 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath396 & 0.14 & 18.39 & @xmath397 & p60 + 0.80229 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath398 & 0.14 & 18.46 & @xmath399 & gcn6028 + 0.80326 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath400 & 0.14 & 18.41 & @xmath401 & p60 + 0.89965 & r & 0.63 & 3631 & @xmath402 & 0.14 & 18.89 & @xmath403 & gmos + 0.90833 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath404 & 0.14 & 18.66 & @xmath405 & gcn6044 + 1.08990 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath406 & 0.14 & 18.56 & @xmath407 & p60 + 1.09277 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath408 & 0.14 & 18.49 & @xmath409 & p60 + 1.09564 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath410 & 0.14 & 18.55 & @xmath411 & p60 + 1.10146 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath412 & 0.14 & 18.52 & @xmath413 & p60 + 1.10450 & i & 0.77 & 3631 & @xmath394 & 0.10 & 18.51 & @xmath414 & p60 + 1.10742 & i & 0.77 & 3631 & @xmath394 & 0.10 & 18.51 & @xmath415 & p60 + 1.11337 & i & 0.77 & 3631 & @xmath416 & 0.10 & 18.43 & @xmath417 & p60 + 1.11630 & i & 0.77 & 3631 & @xmath388 & 0.10 & 18.49 & @xmath418 & p60 + 1.11929 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath419 & 0.14 & 18.46 & @xmath420 & p60 + 1.12222 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath419 & 0.14 & 18.46 & @xmath421 & p60 + 1.12516 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath422 & 0.14 & 18.50 & @xmath423 & p60 + 1.12811 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath419 & 0.14 & 18.46 & @xmath420 & p60 + 1.13108 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath424 & 0.14 & 18.48 & @xmath425 & p60 + 1.13405 & i & 0.77 & 3631 & @xmath422 & 0.10 & 18.54 & @xmath426 & p60 + 1.13698 & i & 0.77 & 3631 & @xmath427 & 0.10 & 18.52 & @xmath428 & p60 + 1.14743 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath429 & 0.14 & 18.59 & @xmath430 & gcn6035 + 1.15466 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath431 & 0.14 & 18.49 & @xmath432 & p60 + 1.15705 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath433 & 0.14 & 18.50 & @xmath434 & p60 + 1.16182 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath435 & 0.14 & 18.49 & @xmath436 & p60 + 1.16421 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath437 & 0.14 & 18.52 & @xmath438 & p60 + 1.16661 & i & 0.77 & 3631 & @xmath439 & 0.10 & 18.55 & @xmath440 & p60 + 1.16900 & i & 0.77 & 3631 & @xmath433 & 0.10 & 18.54 & @xmath441 & p60 + 1.17378 & i & 0.77 & 3631 & @xmath412 & 0.10 & 18.56 & @xmath442 & p60 + 1.17617 & i & 0.77 & 3631 & @xmath443 & 0.10 & 18.58 & @xmath444 & p60 + 1.17857 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath439 & 0.14 & 18.51 & @xmath445 & p60 + 1.18096 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath412 & 0.14 & 18.52 & @xmath446 & p60 + 1.18336 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath422 & 0.14 & 18.50 & @xmath447 & p60 + 1.18576 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath448 & 0.14 & 18.58 & @xmath449 & p60 + 1.18815 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath450 & 0.14 & 18.52 & @xmath451 & p60 + 1.19060 & i & 0.77 & 3631 & @xmath452 & 0.10 & 18.61 & @xmath453 & p60 + 1.19300 & i & 0.77 & 3631 & @xmath454 & 0.10 & 18.59 & @xmath455 & p60 + 1.19539 & i & 0.77 & 3631 & @xmath456 & 0.10 & 18.57 & @xmath457 & p60 + 1.20019 & i & 0.77 & 3631 & @xmath458 & 0.10 & 18.60 & @xmath459 & p60 + 1.20261 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath460 & 0.14 & 18.53 & @xmath461 & p60 + 1.20500 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath439 & 0.14 & 18.51 & @xmath462 & p60 + 1.20740 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath463 & 0.14 & 18.51 & @xmath464 & p60 + 1.20980 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath452 & 0.14 & 18.57 & @xmath465 & p60 + 1.21220 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath448 & 0.14 & 18.58 & @xmath466 & p60 + 1.21464 & i & 0.77 & 3631 & @xmath467 & 0.10 & 18.61 & @xmath468 & p60 + 1.21704 & i & 0.77 & 3631 & @xmath469 & 0.10 & 18.58 & @xmath470 & p60 + 1.21944 & i & 0.77 & 3631 & @xmath452 & 0.10 & 18.61 & @xmath471 & p60 + 1.22185 & i & 0.77 & 3631 & @xmath472 & 0.10 & 18.64 & @xmath473 & p60 + 1.22425 & i & 0.77 & 3631 & @xmath456 & 0.10 & 18.57 & @xmath457 & p60 + 1.22521 & rc & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath474 & 0.14 & 18.76 & @xmath475 & gcn6050 + 1.22910 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath467 & 0.14 & 18.57 & @xmath476 & p60 + 1.23151 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath477 & 0.14 & 18.56 & @xmath478 & p60 + 1.23391 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath479 & 0.14 & 18.61 & @xmath480 & p60 + 1.23632 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath481 & 0.14 & 18.62 & @xmath482 & p60 + 1.27104 & rc & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath483 & 0.14 & 18.86 & @xmath484&gcn6050 + 1.31410 & ic & 0.81 & 2380 & @xmath485 & 0.10 & 17.90 & @xmath486 & gcn6050 + 1.31410 & g & 0.49 & 3631 & @xmath487 & 0.06 & 19.54 & @xmath488 & gcn6050 + 1.31410 & rc & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath489 & 0.14 & 18.66 & @xmath490 & gcn6050 + 1.35377 & v & 0.55 & 3590 & @xmath491 & 0.17 & 19.09 & @xmath492 & gcn6041 + 1.37590 & rc & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath493 & 0.14 & 18.56 & @xmath494 & gcn6050 + 1.37605 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath495 & 0.14 & 18.95 & @xmath496 & gcn6039 + 1.40437 & rc & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath497 & 0.14 & 19.26 & @xmath498 & gcn6050 + 1.79844 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath499 & 0.14 & 19.29 & @xmath500 & p60 + 1.81062 & i & 0.77 & 3631 & @xmath501 & 0.10 & 19.39 & @xmath502 & p60 + 1.84702 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath503 & 0.14 & 19.37 & @xmath504 & p60 + 1.85907 & i & 0.77 & 3631 & @xmath505 & 0.10 & 19.42 & @xmath506 & p60 + 1.90324 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath507 & 0.14 & 19.45 & @xmath508 & p60 + 1.91542 & i & 0.77 & 3631 & @xmath509 & 0.10 & 19.48 & @xmath510 & p60 + 1.96396 & rc & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath511 & 0.14 & 19.57 & @xmath512 & gcn6096 + 1.97868 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath513 & 0.14 & 19.48 & @xmath514 & p60 + 1.99132 & i & 0.77 & 3631 & @xmath515 & 0.10 & 19.59 & @xmath516 & p60 + 2.64396 & rc & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath517 & 0.14 & 20.09 & @xmath518 & gcn6047 + 2.65995 & rc & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath519 & 0.14 & 20.12 & @xmath520 & gcn6047 + 2.67696 & rc & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath521 & 0.14 & 20.07 & @xmath522&gcn6047 + 2.78096 & rc & 0.64 & 3020 & @xmath523 & 0.14 & 20.11 & @xmath524&gcn6047 + 2.79596 & rc & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath525 & 0.14 & 20.21 & @xmath526&gcn6047 + 2.81479 & ks & 2.22 & 670 & @xmath527 & 0.02 & 17.84 & @xmath528 & gcn6054 + 2.81479 & j & 1.26 & 1600 & @xmath529 & 0.05 & 18.77 & @xmath530 & gcn6054 + 2.81479 & h & 1.66 & 1024 & @xmath531 & 0.01 & 18.32 & @xmath532 & gcn6054 + 2.99296 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath533 & 0.14 & 20.30 & @xmath534&gcn6096 + 3.02006 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath535 & 0.14 & 20.30 & @xmath536 & p60 + 3.03328 & i & 0.77 & 3631 & @xmath537 & 0.10 & 20.37 & @xmath538 & p60 + 3.62096 & rc & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath539 & 0.14 & 20.66 & @xmath540 & gcn6064 + 3.91797 & r & 0.63 & 3631 & @xmath541 & 0.14 & 21.08 & @xmath542 & gmos + 4.03995 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath543 & 0.14 & 20.93 & @xmath544&gcn6096 + 4.07106 & i & 0.77 & 3631 & @xmath545 & 0.10 & 20.93 & @xmath546 & p60 + 4.08226 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath547 & 0.14 & @xmath548 & @xmath549 & p60 + 8.85767 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath550 & 0.14 & @xmath551 & @xmath552 & p60 + 10.0099 & i & 0.77 & 3631 & @xmath553 & 0.10 & 23.65 & @xmath554 & gmos + 11.82110 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath555 & 0.14 & @xmath556 & @xmath557 & p60 + 12.00096 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath558 & 0.14 & @xmath559 & @xmath560 & gcn6096 + 21.99400 & r & 0.66 & 3020 & @xmath561 & 0.14 & @xmath562 & @xmath563 & lris + 21.99400 & g & 0.49 & 3631 & @xmath564 & 0.06 & @xmath565 & @xmath563 & lris + 26.79396 & r & 0.67 & 3631 & @xmath566 & 0.14 & 26.16 & @xmath567 & gcn6165 +    cccccc 2007 jan 26.82 & 1.51 & wsrt & 4.86 & @xmath568 & 87 + 2007 jan 29.32 & 4.01 & vla & 8.46 & 360 & 42 + 2007 jan 30.24 & 4.93 & vla & 8.46 & 454 & 38 + 2007 jan 30.95 & 5.64 & wsrt & 4.86 & 102 & 26 + 2007 jan 31.07 & 5.76 & vla & 4.86 & < 141 & 58 + 2007 jan 31.11 & 5.80 & vla & 8.46 & 382 & 52 + 2007 jan 31.76 & 6.45 & gmrt & 0.61 & @xmath569 & 150 + 2007 jan 31.83 & 6.52 & mambo2 & 250 & 3140 & 590 + 2007 feb 01.92 & 7.61 & mambo2 & 250 & 1910 & 720 + 2007 feb 02.06 & 7.75 & vla & 8.46 & 563 & 62 + 2007 feb 04.92 & 10.61 & mambo2 & 250 & @xmath570 & 710 + 2007 feb 05.03 & 10.72 & vla & 8.46 & 482 & 52 + 2007 feb 05.04 & 10.73 & vla & 22.50 & 1594 & 70 + 2007 feb 05.07 & 10.76 & vla & 4.86 & @xmath571 & 42 + 2007 feb 05.29 & 10.98 & carma & 95 & 2300 & 700 + 2007 feb 06.24 & 11.93 & vla & 8.46 & 489 & 43 + 2007 feb 06.26 & 11.95 & vla & 4.86 & @xmath572 & 34 + 2007 feb 07.11 & 12.80 & vla & 22.50 & 1603 & 235 + 2007 feb 07.12 & 12.81 & vla & 8.46 & 405 & 20 + 2007 feb 07.38 & 13.07 & vla&14.94 & 1159 & 234 + 2007 feb 08.21 & 13.90 & vla & 14.94 & 917 & 293 + 2007 feb 08.23 & 13.92 & vla & 4.86 & @xmath573 & 50 + 2007 feb 08.24 & 13.93 & vla & 8.46 & 559 & 26 + 2007 feb 08.40 & 14.09 & vla & 22.50 & 1621 & 151 + 2007 feb 09.21 & 14.90 & vla & 4.86 & @xmath574 & 49 + 2007 feb 09.25 & 14.94 & vla & 8.46 & 399 & 69 + 2007 feb 09.27 & 14.96 & vla & 22.50 & 1343 & 162 + 2007 feb 09.27 & 14.96 & carma & 95 & 2300 & 800 + 2007 feb 09.28 & 14.97 & vla & 14.94 & 891 & 129 + 2007 feb 10.37 & 16.06 & vla & 14.94 & 1410 & 137 + 2007 feb 10.79 & 16.48 & mambo2 & 250 & 2670 & 930 + 2007 feb 11.08 & 16.77 & vla & 8.46 & 385 & 42 + 2007 feb 11.12 & 16.81 & vla & 22.50 & 1367 & 104 + 2007 feb 11.16 & 16.85 & vla & 4.86 & @xmath575 & 71 + 2007 feb 12.08 & 17.77 & vla & 1.46 & @xmath576 & 460 + 2007 feb 12.16 & 17.85 & vla & 8.46 & 596 & 109 + 2007 feb 12.20 & 17.89 & vla & 14.94 & 1226 & 155 + 2007 feb 12.21 & 17.90 & carma & 95 & 2100 & 700 + 2007 feb 12.26 & 17.95 & vla & 22.50 & 1222 & 167 + 2007 feb 12.79 & 18.48 & mambo2 & 250 & @xmath577 & 930 + 2007 feb 13.07 & 18.76 & vla&1.46 & @xmath578 & 600 + 2007 feb 13.11 & 18.80 & vla & 4.86 & @xmath579 & 52 + 2007 feb 13.17 & 18.86 & vla & 8.46 & 660 & 39 + 2007 feb 13.21 & 18.90 & vla & 14.94 & 1217 & 197 + 2007 feb 13.25 & 18.94 & vla & 22.50 & 1248 & 83 + 2007 feb 14.18 & 19.87 & vla & 8.46 & 581 & 14 + 2007 feb 16.17 & 21.86 & vla & 1.46 & @xmath580 & 540 + 2007 feb 16.19 & 21.88 & vla & 4.86 & @xmath581 & 47 + 2007 feb 17.02 & 22.71 & vla & 1.46 & @xmath582 & 766 + 2007 feb 17.04 & 22.73 & vla & 4.86 & @xmath583 & 64 + 2007 feb 18.16 & 23.85 & vla & 22.50 & 1168 & 118 + 2007 feb 18.18 & 23.87 & vla & 8.46 & 303 & 63 + 2007 feb 18.21 & 23.90 & vla & 14.94 & 798 & 182 + 2007 feb 18.27 & 23.96 & carma & 95 & 2400 & 700 + 2007 feb 21.05 & 26.74 & vla & 14.94 & 1101 & 148 + 2007 feb 22.21 & 27.90 & vla & 4.86 & @xmath584 & 78 + 2007 feb 23.07 & 28.76 & vla & 1.46 & @xmath585 & 804 + 2007 feb 25.16 & 30.85 & vla & 22.50 & 839 & 73 + 2007 feb 27.20 & 32.89 & vla & 1.46 & @xmath586 & 639 + 2007 mar 01.22 & 34.91 & vla & 4.86 & @xmath587 & 95 + 2007 mar 01.24 & 34.93 & vla & 14.94 & 432 & 149 + 2007 mar 01.28 & 34.97 & vla & 8.46 & 414 & 66 + 2007 mar 01.30 & 34.99 & vla & 22.50 & 788 & 74 + 2007 mar 13.18 & 46.87 & vla & 1.46 & @xmath588 & 739 + 2007 mar 15.20 & 48.89 & vla & 4.86 & 229 & 49 + 2007 mar 15.22 & 48.91 & vla & 8.46 & 443 & 59 + 2007 mar 21.22 & 54.91 & vla & 4.86 & 262 & 52 + 2007 mar 21.26 & 54.95 & vla & 8.46 & 473 & 44 + 2007 mar 23.08 & 56.77 & vla & 22.50 & 559 & 161 + 2007 mar 25.15 & 58.84 & vla & 1.46 & @xmath589 & 280 + 2007 apr 02.08 & 66.77 & vla & 4.86 & 226 & 57 + 2007 apr 02.12 & 66.81 & vla & 8.46 & 345 & 48 + 2007 apr 02.16 & 66.85 & vla & 1.46 & @xmath590 & 480 + 2007 apr 02.20 & 66.89 & vla & 14.94 & 530 & 137 + 2007 apr 02.24 & 66.93 & vla & 22.50 & 568 & 137 + 2007 apr 21.13 & 85.82 & vla & 1.46 & @xmath591 & 570 + 2007 apr 21.18 & 85.87 & vla & 4.86 & 302 & 55 + 2007 apr 22.18 & 86.87 & vla & 8.46 & 403 & 56 + 2007 apr 22.99 & 87.68 & vla & 22.50 & 615 & 167 + 2007 apr 23.02 & 87.71 & vla & 14.94 & @xmath592 & 226 + 2007 may 15.03 & 109.72 & vla & 8.46 & 267 & 42 + 2007 may 17.00 & 111.69 & vla & 1.46 & @xmath593 & 278 + 2007 may 18.81 & 113.50 & vla & 4.86 & @xmath594 & 145 + 2007 may 19.91 & 114.60 & vla & 14.94 & @xmath595 & 720 + 2007 may 20.04 & 114.73 & vla & 22.50 & @xmath596 & 88 + 2007 jul 04.76 & 160.45 & vla&8.46 & 145 & 33 + 2007 jul 04.80 & 160.49 & vla&4.86 & 174 & 45 + 2007 jul 04.85 & 160.54 & vla & 1.46 & @xmath597 & 160 + 2007 aug 03.87 & 190.56 & vla & 22.50 & @xmath598 & 223 + 2007 aug 11.68 & 198.37 & vla & 4.86 & @xmath599 & 42 + 2007 aug 11.72 & 198.41 & vla & 8.46 & 166 & 46 + 2007 aug 13.71 & 200.40 & vla & 14.94 & @xmath600 & 169 + 2007 sep 08.64 & 226.33 & vla & 4.86 & @xmath601 & 57 + 2007 oct 04.52 & 252.21 & vla & 8.46 & 148 & 60 + 2007 oct 04.60 & 252.29 & vla & 4.86 & 203 & 34 + 2007 nov 18.39 & 297.08 & vla & 8.46 & 111 & 19 + 2007 nov 18.48 & 297.17 & vla & 4.86 & 161 & 23 + 2008 jan 02.27 & 341.96 & vla & 8.46 & 64 & 18 + 2008 jan 02.35 & 342.04 & vla & 4.86 & 133 & 21 +    lcc|cc & 1.80 & @xmath602 , @xmath603 & @xmath604 & @xmath605 , @xmath606 + &  &  & @xmath607 & @xmath608 + &  &  & @xmath609 & @xmath609 + & 2.23 ( 99 d.o.f . ) & 2.25 ( 98 d.o.f . ) & 1.30 ( 97 d.o.f . ) & 1.31 ( 96 d.o.f . ) + & 0.88 ( 22 d.o.f . ) & 0.87 ( 22 d.o.f . ) & 1.32 ( 20 d.o.f . ) & 1.31 ( 20 d.o.f . ) + & 2.22 ( 52 d.o.f . ) & 2.21 ( 52 d.o.f . ) & 1.54 ( 52 d.o.f . ) & 1.54 ( 52 d.o.f . ) + & 3.43 ( 25 d.o.f . ) & 3.59 ( 24 d.o.f . ) & 0.77 ( 25 d.o.f . ) & 0.81 ( 24 d.o.f . ) + [ tab : jet ]    l|ll|ll|ll @xmath610(@xmath121erg ) & @xmath611 & @xmath612 & @xmath613 & @xmath614 & @xmath615 & @xmath616 + @xmath6 ( rad ) & @xmath617 & @xmath618 & @xmath619 & @xmath620 & @xmath621 & @xmath622 + @xmath623 & @xmath624 & @xmath625 & @xmath626 & @xmath627 & @xmath628 & @xmath629 + @xmath12 & @xmath630 & @xmath631 & @xmath632 & @xmath633 & 0.4 & 0.4 + @xmath209(% ) & @xmath634 & @xmath635 & @xmath636 & @xmath637 & @xmath638 & @xmath639 + @xmath640 or @xmath641 & @xmath642 & @xmath643 & @xmath644 & @xmath645 & @xmath646 & @xmath647 + @xmath648 ( days ) & @xmath649 & @xmath650 & @xmath651 & @xmath652 & @xmath653 & @xmath654 + @xmath655 ( days ) & @xmath656 & @xmath657 & @xmath658 & @xmath659 & @xmath660 & @xmath661 + @xmath662(days ) & @xmath663 & @xmath664 & @xmath665 & @xmath666 & @xmath667 & @xmath668 + @xmath669 & @xmath670 & 0.06 & @xmath671 & 0.11 & @xmath672 & 0.08 + fit statistic & 592.02 & 633.02 & 556.26 & 575.36 & 584.85 & 588.96 + @xmath673 & @xmath674 & @xmath675 & @xmath676 & @xmath677 & @xmath678 & @xmath679 +      - and @xmath42-band ) light curves of grb 070125as a result of joint optical and x - ray fits . best - fit single power - law models are shown with dashed lines , while the broken power - law models are shown in solid lines . it is clear that in the optical bands , a broken power - law ( indicating a jet break ) is strongly favored . _ bottom _ : x - ray light curve of grb 070125 , the the joint fit to optical and x - ray data . again the single power - law model is shown as a dashed line , while the broken power - law model is shown as a solid line . grey solid line indicates the independent fit to x - ray data . the independent fit is consistent with the joint fit in the optical bands but shifts the jet break to @xmath680 @xmath207 days . we discuss this in  [ sec : tjet ] and  [ sec : discussion ] . , title="fig:",scaledwidth=70.0% ] - and @xmath42-band ) light curves of grb 070125as a result of joint optical and x - ray fits . best - fit single power - law models are shown with dashed lines , while the broken power - law models are shown in solid lines . it is clear that in the optical bands , a broken power - law ( indicating a jet break ) is strongly favored . _ bottom _ : x - ray light curve of grb 070125 , the the joint fit to optical and x - ray data . again the single power - law model is shown as a dashed line , while the broken power - law model is shown as a solid line . grey solid line indicates the independent fit to x - ray data . the independent fit is consistent with the joint fit in the optical bands but shifts the jet break to @xmath680 @xmath207 days . we discuss this in  [ sec : tjet ] and  [ sec : discussion ] . , title="fig:",scaledwidth=70.0% ]                     , @xmath681 , @xmath152 and @xmath682 and extracted the best fit @xmath144 . between day @xmath682 the spectrum is in the optically thin phase , @xmath144 is below the observed frequencies . the grey area indicates the uncertainity region for the powerlaw index slope . , title="fig:",scaledwidth=49.0% ] , @xmath681 , @xmath152 and @xmath682 and extracted the best fit @xmath144 . between day @xmath682 the spectrum is in the optically thin phase , @xmath144 is below the observed frequencies . the grey area indicates the uncertainity region for the powerlaw index slope . , title="fig:",scaledwidth=49.0% ] , @xmath681 , @xmath152 and @xmath682 and extracted the best fit @xmath144 . between day @xmath682 the spectrum is in the optically thin phase , @xmath144 is below the observed frequencies . the grey area indicates the uncertainity region for the powerlaw index slope . , title="fig:",scaledwidth=49.0% ] , @xmath681 , @xmath152 and @xmath682 and extracted the best fit @xmath144 . between day @xmath682 the spectrum is in the optically thin phase , @xmath144 is below the observed frequencies . the grey area indicates the uncertainity region for the powerlaw index slope . , title="fig:",scaledwidth=49.0% ]    , @xmath144 , @xmath155 , and @xmath156 parameters . the plots at the bottom are @xmath683 plots . for slow cooling the flux should peak at @xmath155 and the total power ( @xmath683 ) should peak at @xmath156 . , title="fig:",scaledwidth=49.0% ] , @xmath144 , @xmath155 , and @xmath156 parameters . the plots at the bottom are @xmath683 plots . for slow cooling the flux should peak at @xmath155 and the total power ( @xmath683 ) should peak at @xmath156 . , title="fig:",scaledwidth=49.0% ] , @xmath144 , @xmath155 , and @xmath156 parameters . the plots at the bottom are @xmath683 plots . for slow cooling the flux should peak at @xmath155 and the total power ( @xmath683 ) should peak at @xmath156 . , title="fig:",scaledwidth=49.0% ] , @xmath144 , @xmath155 , and @xmath156 parameters . the plots at the bottom are @xmath683 plots . for slow cooling the flux should peak at @xmath155 and the total power ( @xmath683 ) should peak at @xmath156 . , title="fig:",scaledwidth=49.0% ]     band , and @xmath240 band dataset . the darker line is for the ism model and the wind model is plotted with a thin line . the fits in the radio bands are not good , probably because of scintillation effects.,title="fig:",scaledwidth=49.0% ]   band , and @xmath240 band dataset . the darker line is for the ism model and the wind model is plotted with a thin line . the fits in the radio bands are not good , probably because of scintillation effects.,title="fig:",scaledwidth=49.0% ]   band , and @xmath240 band dataset . the darker line is for the ism model and the wind model is plotted with a thin line . the fits in the radio bands are not good , probably because of scintillation effects.,title="fig:",scaledwidth=49.0% ]   band , and @xmath240 band dataset . the darker line is for the ism model and the wind model is plotted with a thin line . the fits in the radio bands are not good , probably because of scintillation effects.,title="fig:",scaledwidth=49.0% ]   band , and @xmath240 band dataset . the darker line is for the ism model and the wind model is plotted with a thin line . the fits in the radio bands are not good , probably because of scintillation effects.,title="fig:",scaledwidth=49.0% ]   band , and @xmath240 band dataset . the darker line is for the ism model and the wind model is plotted with a thin line . the fits in the radio bands are not good , probably because of scintillation effects.,title="fig:",scaledwidth=49.0% ]
we present a comprehensive multiwavelength analysis of the bright , long duration gamma - ray burst grb 070125 , comprised of observations in @xmath0-ray , x - ray , optical , millimeter and centimeter wavebands . 
 simultaneous fits to the optical and x - ray light curves favor a break on day 3.78 , which we interpret as the jet break from a collimated outflow . 
 independent fits to optical and x - ray bands give similar results in the optical bands but shift the jet break to around day 10 in the x - ray light curve . 
 we show that for the physical parameters derived for grb 070125 , inverse compton scattering effects are important throughout the afterglow evolution . 
 while inverse compton scattering does not affect radio and optical bands , it may be a promising candidate to delay the jet break in the x - ray band . 
 radio light curves show rapid flux variations , which are interpreted as due to interstellar scintillation , and are used to derive an upper limit of @xmath1 cm on the radius of the fireball in the lateral expansion phase of the jet . 
 radio light curves and spectra suggest a high synchrotron self absorption frequency indicative of the afterglow shock wave moving in a dense medium . 
 our broadband modeling favors a constant density profile for the circumburst medium over a wind - like profile ( @xmath2 ) . 
 however , keeping in mind the uncertainty of the parameters , it is difficult to unambiguously distinguish between the two density profiles . 
 our broadband fits suggest that grb 070125   is a burst with high radiative efficiency ( @xmath3 ) .