Electromagnetic Counterparts Powered by Kicked Remnants of Black Hole Binary Mergers in AGN Disks
Extracted source text · arXiv 2311.10518
\documentclass[ ]{aastex631}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{appendix}
\newcommand{\vdag}{(v)^\dagger}
\newcommand\aastex{AAS\TeX}
\newcommand\latex{La\TeX}
\newcommand{\K}{\text{ K}}
\newcommand{\eV}{\text{ eV}}
\newcommand{\erg}{\text{ erg}}
\newcommand{\cm}{\text{ cm}}
\newcommand{\g}{\text{ g}}
\newcommand{\s}{\text{ s}}
\newcommand{\ERGS}{\text{ erg s}^{-1}}
\makeatletter
\newcommand{\rmnum}[1]{\romannumeral #1}
\newcommand{\Rmnum}[1]{\expandafter\@slowromancap\romannumeral #1@}
\makeatother
\shortauthors{Chen $\&$ Dai}
\shorttitle{EM Counterparts of BBH mergers in AGN disk}
\begin{document}
\title{Electromagnetic Counterparts Powered by Kicked Remnants of Black Hole Binary Mergers in AGN Disks}
\author[0000-0001-8955-0452]{Ken Chen}
\affiliation{School of Astronomy and Space Science, Nanjing University,
Nanjing 210023, China}
\author[0000-0002-7835-8585]{Zi-Gao Dai}
\affiliation{Department of Astronomy, School of Physical Sciences,
University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, China; daizg@ustc.edu.cn}
\begin{abstract}
The disk of an active galactic nucleus (AGN) is widely
regarded as a prominent formation channel
of binary black hole (BBH) mergers that can
be detected through gravitational waves (GWs).
Besides, the presence of dense environmental gas
offers the potential for an embedded BBH merger
to produce electromagnetic (EM) counterparts.
In this paper, we investigate EM emission
powered by the kicked remnant of a BBH merger
occurring within the AGN disk. The remnant BH will
launch a jet via accreting magnetized medium
as it traverses the disk. The resulting jet
will decelerate and dissipate energy into a
lateral cocoon during its propagation.
We explore three radiation mechanisms
of the jet-cocoon system: jet breakout emission,
disk cocoon cooling emission, and jet cocoon cooling
emission, and find that the jet cocoon cooling
emission is more likely to be detected in its own
frequency bands. We predict a soft X-ray transient,
lasting for $O(10^3)\s$, to serve as an EM counterpart,
of which the time delay $O(10)~days$ after the GW trigger
contributes to follow-up observations. Consequently,
BBH mergers in the AGN disk represent a novel multimessenger
source. In the future, enhanced precision in
measuring and localizing GWs, coupled with diligent
searches for such associated EM signal, will effectively
validate or restrict the origin of BBH mergers in the AGN disk.
\end{abstract}
\keywords{Active galactic nuclei (16); Accretion (14); Black holes (162);
Gravitational wave sources (677); Jets (870)}
\section{Introduction}
Since the first observation of gravitational
wave (GW) by the advanced
LIGO/Virgo GW detectors \citep{Abbott16},
binary black hole (BBH) mergers are emerging
as a predominant category of GW sources
\citep{Abbott19, LIGO21a, LIGO21b}. Future GW detectors
are expected to detect a substantial number (e.g.,
$\sim 10^4-10^5$ events per year) of BBH mergers
\citep{Baibhav19, Saini23}.
Various formation channels have been proposed to
account for BBH mergers
(\citealt{Mapelli21, Mandel22};
see \citealt{Tagawa20b} for a list).
Among these channels, the disk of an
active galactic nucleus (AGN)
is garnering significant attention in
recent studies, as the BBH merger event GW190521
\citep{Abbott20a}, along with a plausible
electromagnetic (EM) counterpart ZTF19abanrhr
\citep{Graham20}, indicates an AGN disk
environment origin.
Black hole binaries are expected to widely exist
in the AGN disk \citep[e.g.][]{Bartos17, Stone17, McKernan20a,
McKernan20b, Tagawa20a, LiJ22, LiJ23, DeLaurentiis23}.
Several mechanisms, e.g.,
gas torque \citep[e.g.][]{LiY21, LiY22, LiR22, LiR23, Rowan23},
binary-single interaction
\citep[e.g.][]{Leigh18, Tagawa20a, Samsing22}, and
GW radiation \citep{Shapiro83}, can induce
orbital hardening, ultimately leading to BBH
mergers. Due to the unique nature of an AGN (strong
gravity from a central supermassive black hole,
high stellar density in the nuclear cluster, and
the presence of an accretion disk), BBH mergers in
the AGN disk exhibits several peculiarities, such
as hierarchical mergers \citep[e.g.][]{Yang19a,Tagawa21b} or
eccentric mergers \citep[e.g.][]{Tagawa21a, Samsing22}. The
merger rate of BBH with an AGN disk origin
ranges from $O(10^{-3})$ to
$O(10^2)~\rm{Gpc}^{-3}~\rm{yr}^{-1}$
(see Table 1 in \citealt{Arca Sedda23}). Despite
significant uncertainty, these mergers
can make a substantial contribution to
the overall population with the inferred
redshift-dependent merger rate
$17.9-44~\rm{Gpc}^{-3}~\rm{yr}^{-1}$
\citep{Abbott23}. Therefore, the AGN disk formation
channel demonstrates great importance in the era
of GW astronomy.
In addition to the distinctive GW signals, the
gas-rich environment of AGN disk provides an
opportunity for the embedded BBHs to generate
electromagnetic (EM) emission, elevating these
BBHs to multimessenger sources. In turn, the
identification of an EM counterpart would
strongly support the AGN disk formation channel
\citep[e.g.][]{Veronesi22, Veronesi23}.
Preliminarily, in terms of energy, EM emission
from the binaries is potentially observable,
as the total power of energy release during
the BBH accretion process exceeds the AGN
background luminosity \citep{Stone17, Bartos17}. Various
specific emission processes have been proposed
to predict the EM counterparts \citep{McKernan19,
Graham20, Kimura21, Wang21b, Tagawa23a, Tagawa23b,
Rodriguez-Ramirez23}, with diverse emission
properties across different models. Though
several candidates are reported \citep{Graham23},
no EM counterpart to BBH mergers in the AGN
disk has been confirmed so far, thus preventing a
test of existing models and leaving room
for new ones.
In this paper, we investigate a plausible
emission process by concretely considering the
accretion of BHs both during the inspiral phase
and post-merger. In our model, a jet launched
by the kicked merger remnant BH acts as an
emission source. We study the propagation
of the jet within AGN disk and the subsequent
emergence of resulting emission, with
a specific focus on its detectability.\footnote
{Note that after the submission of this
paper, \cite{Tagawa23b} was posted online, which
also investigates the cocoon cooling emission resulting
from a jet produced by the BBH merger remnant embedded
in an AGN disk. The differences lie in the treatment of
mass rate accreted onto the merger remnant and the
time delay between GW trigger and EM emission. In
\cite{Tagawa23b}, a jet launch occurs immediately after
the merger; in our study, a jet would be launched
following a sufficient accumulation of magnetic
field around the kicked remnant BH during its traversal
through AGN environment. By combining emissions with various
time delays, a more distinctive EM counterpart can be
identified.}
This paper is organized as follows. In Section
\ref{section2}, we discuss the circum-binary
environment of an embedded BBH merger and the
properties of GW recoil kick impacted on the
remnant. We investigate the formation and
propagation of a jet driven by the kicked
remnant in Section \ref{section3}. We next
explore three emission processes of the
jet-cocoon system in Section \ref{section4}.
Several discussions are presented in Section
\ref{section5}, particularly involving the
detectability of associated EM counterparts
in Section \ref{Detectability}. We summarize
our conclusions in Section \ref{section6}.
Symbols $c$ and $G$ in this paper denotes
the speed of light and the gravitational
constant, respectively.
\section{BBH merges and kicked in AGN disk environment}
\label{section2}
The AGN disk can be described as a viscous accretion
disk with three parameters, i.e., the SMBH mass $M$,
the mass inflow rate $\dot{M}$, and the viscosity
parameter $\alpha$ \citep{Shakura73}; meanwhile, the outer region
of the AGN disk is gravitationally unstable to impact the disk
structure \citep{Goodman03}. Many plausible theoretical models have
been proposed to construct a quasi-stationary
self-gravitating accretion disk \citep[e.g.][et al.]
{Sirko03,Thompson05, Mishra20, Gilbaum22}, among which
we adopt the widely used SG \citep{Sirko03} model and
TQM \citep{Thompson05} model in this work, and we refer to
Equation (26)-(29) of \citep{Pan21a} for disk equations.
\subsection{Circum-binary environment of a BBH merger}
As the gas in an AGN disk is differentially rotating and
its density is high, a circularized disk would form around the
embedded BH with initial mass inflow rate greatly exceeding
the Eddington accretion rate,
$\dot{M}_{\rm{Edd}}=L_{\rm{Edd}} c^2 / \eta$, where
we set the radiation efficiency $\eta=0.1$ and
$L_{\rm{Edd}}=4\pi G m m_pc/\sigma_T=1.26\times10^{40}m_2\
\rm{erg\,s}^{-1}$ \citep[e.g.][]{Wang21a, Pan21b, ChenD23}.
Similarly, a circum-binary disk would form
around the embedded binary black hole. In addition, two
circum-BH disks severally form around the two components (the
accreting structure is visible in recent numerical
simulations, e.g. \citealt{LiY21, Dempsey22, Kaaz23a}).
We employ the Bondi-Holye-Lyttleton (BHL) formulation
\citep[e.g.][]{Edgar04},
$\dot{M}_{\rm{BHL}}=4 \pi G^2 m_{\rm{bin}}^2
\rho_{\rm{AGN}} /(v_{\rm{rel}}^{2}+c_{\rm{s,AGN}}^{2} )^{3/2}$,
where $m_{\rm{bin}}$ is the total mass of the BBH,
$\rho_{\rm{AGN}}$ and
$c_{\rm{s,AGN}}$ are the density and sound speed
of AGN disk, $v_{\rm{rel}}$ is the relative velocity between
the BBH center of mass and the ambient gas, to estimate the mass
captured rate of the BBH system and the initial mass inflow
rate of the circum-binary disk. For the case of the binary
separation $a_{\rm{bin}}$ being much smaller than the outer
boundary of the circum-binary disk $r_{\rm{obd}}$,
the BBH can be approximated as a
point source and the circum-binary disk would evolve akin to a
circum-single disk \citep{Kimura21},
though the mass rate would be reduced
and evolve over time in the BBH system \citep[e.g.][]{LiR22}.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{fig1-1.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{fig1-2.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Properties of binary accretion and merger. The left panel
shows the outer boundary radius of circum-binary disk $r_{\rm{obd}}$,
of which the calculations adopt \cite{ChenD23}, considering both
the circularization due to angular momentum conservation of
the BBH-captured AGN disk gas
and the disk truncation by the heated outflow, and
the critical binary separation $a_{\rm{bin,cr}}$ as a function of
AGN radius $R$, scaled by gravitational radius
$R_{\rm{g}}=G M/c^2$; the fiducial parameters are
$m_{\rm{bin}}=100\rm{M}_{\odot}$, $M=10^{8}\rm{M}_{\odot}$,
$\dot{M}=0.1 \dot{\rm{M}}_{\rm{Edd}}$, $\alpha=0.1$, $s=0.5$,
where $s$ is the power-law index of the radius-dependent
circum-binary disk mass inflow rate. The blue and golden
lines represent the AGN disk adopting SG and TQM model,
respectively.
We change all these parameters and find
that the relative size between $r_{\rm{obd}}$
and $a_{\rm{bin,cr}}$ are preserved,
i.e., $a_{\rm{bin,cr}} \ll r_{\rm{obd}}$;
so, for simplicity, only the fiducial case is shown.
The right panel represents the timescale of a kicked merger
remnant crossing the cavity, $t_{\rm{kick}}$,
under various system parameters (as shown in
the inset); the fiducial case is the same, with
$v_{\rm{rel}} \sim v_{\rm{k}} = 10^{2.5}\rm{~km~s}^{-1}$
($\rm{cm~s}^{-1}$ in graph legend) adopting SG model.
The blue dashed line represents the time equaling to
one day. }
\label{Fig:abin}
\end{figure*}
As shown by \cite{ChenD23}, a hyper-Eddington circum-BH disk would launch
powerful outflow to push out the surrounding gas, generating
a low-density cavity to intermittently choke the
effective accretion; in the same way, the embedded BBH would go
through similar accretion processes. Meanwhile, the binary
separation hardens due to GW radiation within the inspiral
timescale \citep[e.g.][]{Shapiro83},
\begin{equation}
t_{\rm{GW}}=\frac{5}{128} \frac{c^{5}
a_{\rm{bin}}^{4}}{G^{3} m_{\rm{bin}}^{3}}.
\end{equation}
We compare $t_{\rm{GW}}$ with the cavity
persistence timescale $\sim t_{\rm{ref}}$,
Equation (32) in \cite{ChenD23},
of each recurrent accretion process. For a BH binary system with
an initial separation $a_{\rm{bin}}$ satisfying
$t_{\rm{GW}}(a_{\rm{bin}})>t_{\rm{ref}}$,
the BBH would not merge within one
accretion episode, but continuously hardens via various
mechanisms \citep[e.g.][]{Tagawa20a}; then, when
$a_{\rm{bin}}<a_{\rm{bin,cr}}$, where
$t_{\rm{GW}}(a_{\rm{bin,cr}})=t_{\rm{ref}}$, the BBH
would undergo inspiral to merger just within
one recurrent accretion process.
As shown in Figure \ref{Fig:abin}, the critical binary
separation $a_{\rm{bin,cr}}$ is much smaller than $r_{\rm{obd}}$,
thus, the binary can be treated as a single object and the whole
accretion-feedback process is valid. Also, since
$a_{\rm{bin,cr}}\lesssim O(10^{11})\cm$, the BBH hardening
is dominated by GW radiation, the other mechanisms,
e.g., gas dynamical friction, binary–single interaction
and torque from the circum-binary disk,
can be ignored \citep{Tagawa20a}.
For a BBH merger occurring within one recurrent
accretion process, the cavity persistence timescale
is much longer than the timescale of outflow formation to
open a cavity, which
is estimated by the viscous timescale of the circularized
circum-binary disk, $t_{\rm{vis}}$, where
$t_{\rm{vis}}\lesssim0.1t_{\rm{ref}}$ \citep{ChenD23}.
Consequently, it is more probable for the
merging BBH to reside in a low-density cavity
rather than being surrounded by AGN disk gas. However, prior to
the GW dominates over BBH hardening, binary-single interactions
are frequent \citep{Tagawa20a}, leading to an appreciable
probability of the BH binary undergoing a 3-body merger
\citep{Samsing22}, i.e., the temporary BH binary merges in
the chaotic 3-body system due to high binary orbital
eccentricity decreasing the inspiral time.
No work has been done to investigate the
accretion process of such 3-body system. Although unproven, we
propose that a stable circum-binary disk and outflow would not
persist under the perturbation of a chaotic third companion,
preventing the formation of a large-scale cavity in the
3-body system, and thereby the merger remnant would be
encompassed by the AGN disk gas.
Moreover, the study of accretion-induced
outflow feedback relies on BH (BBH) systems that are co-rotating
with the AGN disk \citep[e.g.][]{Kimura21, Tagawa22, ChenD23},
if the BH binary has a large velocity relative to the
ambient gas, it remains unclear whether a stable circum-binary
disk can form to open a cavity. Therefore, further exploration
is required to elucidate the specific feedback mechanism.
In brief, at the time of a BBH merger
via GW radiation in the AGN disk, the circum-binary
environment could be either the AGN disk or the cavity,
depending on whether a stable disk forms
around the inspiral BH binary and an accretion-induced
strong outflow is successfully generated.
\subsection{GW kick on a BBH merger remnant}
For a BBH binary with asymmetric components, the merger remnant
would receive a recoil kick via anisotropic gravitational
radiation during the final inspiral stage, where the
kick velocity $v_{\rm{k}}$ depends
on the binary mass ratio and the BHs' spin
\citep[e.g.][et al.]{Gonzalez07,
Campanelli07a, Baker07, Herrmann07}. The velocity
component caused by the mass unequal is \citep{Campanelli07b}
\begin{equation}
v_{\rm{m}}=A \frac{q^{2}(1-q)}{(1+q)^{5}}\left[1+B \frac{q}{(1+q)^{2}}\right],
\end{equation}
where $q$ is the mass ratio of the lighter to the heavier BH, and
$A=1.2 \times 10^4 \rm{~km~s}^{-1}$, $B=-0.93$. For the
LIGO/Virgo detected events \citep{Abbott19, LIGO21a, LIGO21b},
$v_{\rm{m}}$ of BBH mergers ranges from $43\rm{~km~s}^{-1}$ to
$175\rm{~km~s}^{-1}$, with an average value $109\rm{~km~s}^{-1}$.
Also, the amplitude of $v_{\rm{k}}$ demonstrates remarkable
sensitivity to the BH spin and can scale up to
$O(10^3)\rm{~km~s}^{-1}$ \citep{Campanelli07b}, e.g., for the
event GW190521 \citep{Abbott20a}, $v_{m}\sim 70 \rm{~km~s}^{-1}$ but
$v_{\rm{k}} > 200 \rm{~km~s}^{-1}$ when taking the effects
of BH spin into account \citep{Abbott20b}.
Since the components of the embedded BBH would inherently
possess low spin \citep{Chen23}, or spin rapidly, but of
which the individual spin directions are misaligned with
the binary orbital angular momentum \citep{Tagawa20b},
we set three values of $v_{\rm{k}}= 10^2, 10^{2.5},
10^3\rm{~km~s}^{-1}$ to study the kicked merger remnants of
BBH with various mass ratio, spin magnitude and direction.
As demonstrated above, a BBH merger would take place
in a low-density cavity provided that a stable
circum-binary accretion disk exists during the binary inspiral
phase; subsequently, the kicked merger remnant need traverse
the cavity to re-enter the AGN disk environment. The radius
of the cavity, $r_{\rm{cav}}$, is determined by the
specific properties of the accretion-induced outflow, which
is about the order of BBH gravity radius
\citep{Kimura21, ChenD23}, i.e.,
min$\left\lbrace r_{\rm{BHL}},r_{\rm{Hill}}\right\rbrace$,
where $r_{\rm{BHL}}\simeq G m_{\rm{bin}}/(v_{\rm{rel}}^{2}+c_{\rm{s,AGN}}^{2})$
is the BHL radius, and $r_{\rm{Hill}}=(m_{\rm{bin}}/3M)^{1/3}R$
is the Hill radius, or is approximated to $0.6H$ \citep{Tagawa22},
where $H$ denotes the vertical scale height of the disk. We
estimate the timescale of a kicked remnant crossing the cavity
as
\begin{equation}
t_{\rm{kick}}=r_{\rm{cav}}/v_{\rm{k}}\simeq 37~days
\left(\frac{r_{\rm{cav}}}{10^{14}\cm}\right)
\left(\frac{v_{\rm{k}}}{10^{7.5}\cm\s^{-1}}\right)^{-1}.
\end{equation}
As shown in Figure \ref{Fig:abin},
$t_{\rm{kick}}$ increases with the binary location $R$, which
would enlarge the time delay between a BH merger and its
associated EM emission, since the BH needs to interact with the
dense AGN disk gas to efficiently release energy (see below).
However, given the uncertain existence and size of a cavity
surrounding the merging BBH, we assume that the remnant
is directly kicked into the AGN disk environment, and discuss
the potential time delay caused by cavity in Section \ref{4.4}.
\section{Interaction between kicked remnant and AGN disk environment --- jet and cocoon }
\label{section3}
\subsection{Formation and power of BH-driven jet}
After the embedded BBH merger, the kicked remnant moving through
the AGN disk with $v_{\rm{k}}$ would accrete the ambient gas with a
mass inflow rate $\dot{M}_{\rm{BHL,k}}$,
\begin{equation}
\dot{M}_{\rm{BHL,k}}=\frac{4 \pi G^2 m_{\rm{bin}}^2
\rho_{\rm{AGN}}} {(v_{\rm{k}}^{2}+c_{\rm{s,AGN}}^{2} )^{3/2}}
\simeq1.6 \times 10^7 \dot{M}_{\rm{Edd}}
\left(\frac{m_{\rm{bin}}}{100 M_\odot}\right)
\left(\frac{\rho_{\rm{AGN}}}{10^{-10}\,{\rm g\,cm^{-3}}}\right)
\left(\frac{v_{\rm{k}}}{10^{7}\,{\cm \s^{-1}}}\right)^{-3}.
\end{equation}
where in the second equality, only $v_{\rm{k}}$ is considered
for an intuitive order of magnitude estimation, while in the subsequent
specific calculation of $\dot{M}_{\rm{BHL,k}}$, both
$v_{\rm{k}}$ and $c_{\rm{s,AGN}}$ are taken into account.
The hyper-Eddington accretion is realizable, since for BHL
accretion, the inflow is highly
quasi-spherical \citep[e.g.][]{El Mellah15} and
the released gravitational energy is advected inward with gas
\citep{Begelman79}. Meanwhile, the AGN disk would be magnetized,
of which the ratio of ambient gas to magnetic
pressure $\beta \lesssim 10-100$
\citep{King07, Salvesen16, Kaaz23b}.
Recent numerical simulations indicate that the
ambient magnetic fields are frozen and flow inward
with gas, resulting in their accumulation
to saturation near the BH \citep{Kwan23,Kaaz23b}. Due to a
large spin of the merger remnant \citep[e.g.][]{Tichy08, McKernan23},
a jet would be generated via the Blandford-Znajek (BZ) mechanism
\citep{Blandford77}, of which the power can be estimated as
\begin{equation}
L_{\rm{jet}}=f \dot{M}_{\rm{BHL,k}} c^2,
\end{equation}
where $f \sim 0.1$ for $\beta \lesssim 10-100$ (according to
Figure 3 in \citealt{Kaaz23b}), containing effects of both
the jet efficiency and the reduction of accretion rate.
As shown in Figure \ref{Fig:Ljet}, overall, the power of
the BH-driven jet surpasses the bolometric luminosity
of AGN disks, $L_{\rm{bol,AGN}}$, across an
extensive range of $R$,
thereby rendering the jet potentially observable
for efficient specific radiation
processes. Some cases possess weak jets with
$L_{\rm{jet}}<L_{\rm{bol,AGN}}$,
thus unfavorable for observations, e.g., the
$v_{\rm{k}} = 10^{3}\rm{~km~s}^{-1}$ and
$m_{\rm{bin}}=10\rm{M}_{\odot}$ case due to a lower
$\dot{M}_{\rm{BHL,k}}$, and the $\rm{TQM}$ case due to a lower disk
density compared with the SG model. Also,
we reduce $f$ to $0.01$ on account of the captured AGN disk
gas likely carrying non-negligible angular momentum, which
would potentially reduce the mass rate
accreted onto BH, and find that
though contracted, there is still a range of $R$ for
$L_{\rm{jet}}>L_{\rm{bol,AGN}}$.
In addition, since the embedded BBH would undergo binary-single
interaction to alter its direction of orbital angular momentum
\citep[e.g.][]{Tagawa20a, Samsing22, Valtonen06},
and given that the direction of
GW kick strongly relies on spin orientations
\citep[e.g.][]{Campanelli07a},
$\vec{v}_{\rm{k}}$ may be randomized. Consequently,
the minimum timescale for a
merger remnant to exit the AGN disk is estimated as
$t_{\rm{k}}=H/v_{\rm{k}}$.
Meanwhile, the jet formation requires at least a few accretion
timescales $t_{\rm{BHL}}\simeq r_{\rm{BHL}}/v_{\rm{k}}
\sim G m_{\rm{bin}}/v_{\rm{k}}^3$ \citep{Kaaz23b}.
So the merger remnant is
more feasible to launch jet within AGN disk when
$t_{\rm{BHL}}<t_{\rm{k}}$, which holds over large
$R$ regions, as shown in Figure \ref{Fig:Ljet}.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{fig2.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Power of a jet launched by a kicked merger
remnant moving through the magnetized AGN disk
environment with different system parameters
(the inset shows these parameters).
The blue, orange, and purple dashed lines represent the bolometric
luminosity of AGN disk $L_{\rm{bol,AGN}}=0.1 \dot{M} c^2$ with
$M=10^{8}, 10^{7}, 4\times10^{6}~\rm{M}_{\odot}$, respectively.
The point laid on each
curve represents $t_{\rm{BHL}}=t_{\rm{k}}$ with the right side
$t_{\rm{BHL}}<t_{\rm{k}}$.}
\label{Fig:Ljet}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{fig3.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Schematic diagram illustrating
the evolution of a jet and a cocoon
driven by a kicked BBH merger
remnant traversing the AGN disk.
(a) The kicked remnant accretes ambient
magnetized gas and launches a jet, which
propagates through and interacts with
the AGN disk to generate a two-component
cocoon; at the jet breakout, photons can
diffuse out from the jet head to produce
emission. (b) After the jet breakout,
the jet cocoon and disk cocoon severally
expands, cools, and produces emission.}
\label{Fig:sketch}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Propagation and breakout of a jet within the AGN disk}
\label{sec-jet-propagation}
We consider a representative scenario where a BBH merger occurs
at the midplane of the AGN disk,
and the remnant is kicked along the disk plane.
Additionally, we assume that a jet driven by the BZ mechanism
propagates vertically to the disk plane.
A schematic diagram illustrating the evolution of a
kicked BH and its associated jet is depicted in
Figure \ref{Fig:sketch}. The jet interacts with the
dense ambient medium during its propagation,
forming a shocked structure at its head position
and a lateral hot cocoon, which would in
turn collimate the jet \citep[e.g.][]
{Begelman89, Matzner03, Lazzati05, Bromberg11}.
The jet is initially Poynting flux dominated, but
would behave as a baryon dominant one at large scale
due to the early dissipation of magnetic fields
\citep[e.g.][]{Bromberg16, Nakar17, Gottlieb22}.
For simplicity, therefore, we consider
a hydrodynamic jet and investigate its propagation
through the AGN disk.
We calculate the evolution of the jet and cocoon following the
descriptions in \cite{Bromberg11}. Collision of the jet with
the ambient AGN disk gas at its head generates a
forward shock and a reverse shock, where the ram pressure
balance sets the velocity of jet head as
\begin{equation}\label{vh}
\beta_{\rm{h}}=\frac{\beta_{\rm{j}}}{1+\tilde L^{-1/2}},
\end{equation}
where the jet velocity $\beta_{\rm{j}} \sim 1$, and the collimation
parameter is
\begin{equation}\label{Lcol}
\tilde L\equiv\frac{\rho_{\rm{j}}
h_{\rm{j}}\Gamma_{\rm{j}}^2}{\rho_{\rm{AGN}}}\simeq\frac{L_{\rm{jet}}}{\Sigma_{\rm{j}}\rho_{\rm{AGN}}c^3},
\end{equation}
where $\rho_{\rm{j}}$, $h_{\rm{j}}$ and $\Gamma_{\rm{j}}$ are density, specific
enthalpy and Lorentz factor of the jet; the second
equation holds as the total jet energy density
$\rho_{\rm{j}}h_{\rm{j}}\Gamma_{\rm{j}}^2-\rho_{\rm{j}}\Gamma_{\rm{j}}-p_{\rm{j}} \sim \rho_{\rm{j}}h_{\rm{j}}\Gamma_{\rm{j}}^2
=L_{\rm{jet}}/\Sigma_{\rm{j}}c^3$ \citep{Matzner03}, where $p_{\rm{j}}$ and
$\Sigma_{\rm{j}}$ are pressure and cross-section of the jet.
The gas flowing into the jet head through the
shocks would then flows laterally to the
cocoon, transferring energy from the head.
Assuming the radiation loss is negligible since
the AGN disk is highly opaque (see Appendix
\ref{Appendix-opacity}),
the energy deposited into the cocoon is
$E_{\rm{c}} \simeq L_{\rm{jet}}(t-z_{\rm{h}}/c)$,
where $t$ is the duration of the
jet propagation and $z_{\rm{h}}= \beta_{\rm{h}} c t$
is the height of the jet head. Besides,
a high $\beta_{\rm{h}}$ would cause the shock
and the energy flux being radiation dominated
\citep{Yalinewich19}, so the cocoon's pressure can be
estimated as
\begin{equation}\label{Pc}
P_{\rm{c}}=\frac{E_{\rm{c}}}{3V_{\rm{c}}}\simeq\frac{L_{\rm{jet}}(1-\beta_{\rm{h}})}{3\pi c^3\beta_{\rm{h}}\beta_{\rm{c}}^2t^2},
\end{equation}
where the cocoon is set as a cylinder with height $z_{\rm{h}}$
and radius $r_{\rm{c}}=\beta_{\rm{c}}t$, of which
$\beta_{\rm{c}} \sim \sqrt{P_{\rm{c}}/(\rho_{\rm{AGN}}c^2)}$ is its
lateral expansion velocity. For a high $P_{\rm{c}}$, the
cocoon would collimate the jet, of which the cross-section
is constrained to
\begin{equation}\label{sigma}
\Sigma_{\rm{j}}\simeq\frac{L_{\rm{jet}}\theta_0^2}{4cP_{\rm{c}}},
\end{equation}
where $\theta_0$ is the initial opening angle of the jet,
which is set by a fiducial value of $0.17 ~(10^\circ)$.
Combining Equation (\ref{vh})-(\ref{sigma}), $\tilde{L}$
can be expressed by
\begin{equation}\label{Lcol2}
\tilde L = \left(\frac{L_{\rm{jet}}}
{\rho_{\rm{AGN}}t^2\theta_0^4c^5}\right)^{2/5}.
\end{equation}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{fig4-1.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{fig4-2.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{fig4-3.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Various properties of the jet at its breakout, consisting of
the jet collimation parameter $\tilde{L}$, the thickness between
the jet head and the AGN disk surface $d_{\rm{bre}}$, and the time of
jet propagation before the breakout $t_{\rm{bre}}$. The
blue and orange dot-dash lines in the $\tilde{L}$ panel severally
represents the criterion of collimation, of which the jet is
uncollimated when $\tilde{L}>\theta_0^{-4/3}$ \citep{Bromberg11}, and the
head's motion being relativistic. The blue dashed line in the
$t_{\rm{bre}}$ panel represents the time equaling to one day.}
\label{Fig:Bre}
\end{figure*}
As the jet approaches the AGN disk surface, photons behind the
shock would diffuse faster than the jet head propagation,
leading to the shock breakout. We set the distance between
the jet head and the disk surface at breakout as
$d_{\rm{bre}}$, where the photon diffusion time,
$t_{\rm{diff,h}}\sim d_{\rm{bre}}^2\kappa_{\rm{AGN}}\rho_{\rm{AGN}}/c$,
equals to the head dynamical timescale
$t_{\rm{dyn}}\sim d_{\rm{bre}}/\beta_{\rm{h}}c$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}\label{dbre}
d_{\rm{bre}}=\frac{1}{\kappa_{\rm{AGN}}\rho_{\rm{AGN}}\beta_{\rm{h}}},
\end{equation}
where we assume $\kappa_{\rm{AGN}}=0.34\cm^2\g^{-1}$ for
the Thompson scattering of ionized gas (a detailed discussion
is shown in Appendix \ref{Appendix-opacity}). We
calculate $\tilde{L}$ (i.e. $\beta_{\rm{h}}$) at the time of breakout
$t_{\rm{bre}}=(H-d_{\rm{bre}})/\beta_{\rm{h}}c$
via Equation (\ref{vh}),
(\ref{Lcol2}) and (\ref{dbre}), where we ignore the case of the
AGN disk being initially optically thin, i.e.,
$\kappa_{\rm{AGN}}\rho_{\rm{AGN}} H<1$; the results are shown in
Figure \ref{Fig:Bre}. First, for various system parameters,
almost all jets are Newtonian and possess
$\tilde{L}<\theta_0^{-4/3}$, thereby are collimated by
cocoons \citep{Bromberg11}; also, the head velocities are
large enough to generate radiation-dominated shocks \citep{Yalinewich19}.
So, our calculations under the premise of collimation and
radiation-domination are valid. Second, except for the
outer AGN disk regions, the thickness $d_{\rm{bre}}\ll H$, indicating
that the jets adequately interact with the environment and the
radiation just starts to escape near the disk surface.
Conversely, in regions with large $R$, the diffusion
of photons from the shock at early stage can
significantly impact the propagation of jets;
fortunately, the jet's power is weak at these radii,
as shown in Figure \ref{Fig:Ljet},
allowing us to disregard the resulting inaccuracies.
Third, the values of $t_{\rm{bre}}$ are distributed over
a large range, depending mainly on the properties of
AGN disk rather than the kick velocity $v_{\rm{k}}$ and the
feedback efficiency $f$.
In addition, we can derive the cocoon's properties at
the jet breakout, i.e., the total energy in the cocoon
\begin{equation}\label{Ec}
E_{\rm{c}} \simeq L_{\rm{jet}} t_{\rm{bre}} (1-\beta_{\rm{h}}(t_{\rm{bre}})),
\end{equation}
and the volume of the cocoon
\begin{equation}\label{Vc}
V_{\rm{c}} \simeq \pi \beta_{\rm{h}}(t_{\rm{bre}}) \beta_{\rm{c}}(t_{\rm{bre}})^2 c^3 t_{\rm{bre}}^3.
\end{equation}
At the jet breakout, radiation losses at the head shock
come into play, impeding effective energy transfer
to the cocoon. Subsequently, the cocoon undergoes
independent evolution driven by its initial energy
and volume of Equation (\ref{Ec}) and (\ref{Vc}).
\section{EM emission powered by a kicked remnant-driven jet}
\label{section4}
During the jet breakout phase with
$t_{\rm{diff,h}}<t_{\rm{dyn}}$,
photons would escape from the head shock, thereby
having the potential to produce detectable emission.
Besides, during the propagation within the AGN disk,
the jet deposits a huge amount of energy to the
cocoon, which would thus be a competent emission
source as well. The cocoon comprises two components
(see panel (a) of Figure \ref{Fig:sketch}):
the so-called disk and jet cocoon, composed of the
AGN disk medium and the jet material crossing the
head's shock, respectively, separated by a contact
discontinuity \citep[e.g.][]{Bromberg11}. Both components
are expected to generate emission during their
expansion following breakout
(see panel (b) of Figure \ref{Fig:sketch}).
Therefore, in what follows, we investigate
the emission during jet breakout,
as well as the cooling emission from both
disk cocoon and jet cocoon, focusing
on the observed properties, comprising luminosity,
duration, and temperature, of the emission.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{fig5-1-1.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{fig5-1-2.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{fig5-1-3.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{fig5-2-1.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{fig5-2-2.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{fig5-2-3.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{fig5-3-1.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{fig5-3-2.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{fig5-3-3.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{fig5-4-1.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{fig5-4-2.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{fig5-4-3.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Observed properties of the emission during
jet breakout (the first column), from cooling
disk cocoon (the second column), and cooling jet
cocoon (the third column), including luminosity,
temperature, duration timescale, and time delay.
The blue, orange, and purple dashed
lines in the first row represent the bolometric
luminosity of the AGN disk
$L_{\rm{bol,AGN}}=0.1 \dot{M} c^2$.
The blue dashed lines in the third
and forth row represent the
time equaling to one day. The dot dash lines in the second
and third columns show the $R$ regions where photons can
escape from the cocoons before the jet breakout, and thereby
the jet evolution is inaccurate. In addition, in panels of
$T_{\rm{cj}}$ and $t_{\rm{diff,cj}}$, the dotted lines
represent the properties of emission with
$L_{\rm{cj}}=L_{\rm{bol,AGN}}$, i.e., nearly equaling to the
AGN disk background radiation. In the third column we
additionally consider the case with parameters
$M=10^{7}\rm{M}_{\odot}$ and $\beta_{\rm{cj}}=5v_{\rm{c}}/c$,
indicating the cooling emission of a jet cocoon, which
is specifically mixed with the disk cocoon.}
\label{Fig:rad}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Emission during jet breakout}
During jet breakout, the head continuously shocks the AGN
disk medium, but at the moment, photons behind the
radiation-dominant shock can diffuse out and take away
most of the energy. Thus, the luminosity of the emission
can be estimated as \citep[e.g.][]{Tagawa23a}
\begin{equation}
L_{\rm{h,bre}} \simeq \Sigma_{\rm{j}} \rho_{\rm{AGN}} \beta_{\rm{h}}^3 c^3,
\end{equation}
and the duration can be estimated as the diffusion timescale,
\begin{equation}
t_{\rm{h,bre}} \simeq t_{\rm{diff,h}} =
\frac{1}{\kappa_{\rm{AGN}}\rho_{\rm{AGN}}\beta_{\rm{h}}^2c}.
\end{equation}
We focus on the thermal emission. The thermal equilibrium
temperature behind the shock can be calculated via the jumping
condition for gas with the adiabatic index $\gamma=4/3$
\citep[e.g.][]{Zhang18}, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
T_{\rm{BB,hbre}} =
\left(\frac{18}{7a}\rho_{\rm{AGN}}\beta_{\rm{h}}^2c^2\right)^{0.25},
\end{equation}
where $a$ is the radiation constant. However, because the
jet head's velocity is high, as shown in Figure \ref{Fig:Bre},
radiation behind the shock may deviate from thermal equilibrium
if an insufficient number of photons are generated by
gas via free-free emission. In such a case, the shock would attain
a thermal Compton equilibrium at
temperature $>T_{\rm{BB,hbre}}$. Moreover,
for even higher temperatures, pair production processes
will be invoked to restrict the temperature
\citep[e.g.][]{Budnik10, Katz10, Nakar10, Nakar12}.
To determine the radiation temperature, we
employ the methodology described in \cite{Nakar10}.
A thermal coupling coefficient can be utilized
as an indicator of thermal equilibrium, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
\eta \equiv \frac{n_{\rm{BB}}\left(T_{\rm{BB,hbre}}\right)}
{t_{\rm{h,bre}} \dot{n}_{\rm{ph},\rm{ff}}\left(T_{\rm{BB,hbre}}\right)},
\end{equation}
where $n_{\rm{BB}}\sim aT_{\rm{BB}}^4/3kT_{\rm{BB}}$
is the photon number density required for
thermal equilibrium, $k$ is the Boltzmann constant,
and $\dot{n}_{\rm{ph},\rm{ff}} \approx
3.5\times 10^{36}\s^{-1}\cm^{-3} \rho_{\rm{AGN}}^2 T^{-1/2}$.
For $\eta<1$, the radiation can achieve thermal equilibrium
with temperature $T_{\rm{BB,hbre}}$. For $\eta>1$,
photons are starved to reach the blackbody, and electrons
would be in Compton equilibrium with radiation at
$T \xi(T)^2=T_{\rm{BB}}\eta^2$, of which the
Comptonization correction factor is
\begin{equation}
\xi(T) \approx \max\left\{1,\frac{1}{2}\ln\left(y_{max}\right)
\left[1.6+\ln\left(y_{max}\right)\right]\right\},
\end{equation}
where $y_{max}=3~(\rho/10^{-9}\g\cm^{-3})^{-1/2}
(T/100\eV)^{\rm{9/4}}$. Moreover, pair
production process limits the highest temperature,
for which we set $\sim 100~\rm{keV}$ \citep[e.g.][]{Nakar17}.
Combining these analyses, the radiation temperature
during the jet breakout can be determined by
\begin{equation}\label{Thbre}
T_{\rm{h,bre}}=\min\left\{T_{\rm{h,Comp}}, 100~\rm{keV} \right\},
\end{equation}
where the Comptonization modified temperature is
\begin{equation}
T_{\rm{h,Comp}}=T_{\rm{BB,hbre}}
\begin{cases}
\eta^2/\xi(T_{\rm{h,Comp}})^2 & \eta>1 \\
1 & \eta<1.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
The observed properties of the emission are shown
in the first column of Figure \ref{Fig:rad}. There
exists a wide range of $R$ that satisfies
$L_{\rm{h,bre}}>L_{\rm{bol,AGN}}$, with $T_{\rm{h,bre}}$
generally exceeding $O(10^6)\rm{K}$ at these regions, and
consequently, the breakout emission can outshine the AGN disk
background in X-ray bands. However, the observed emission
typically exhibits a short duration with
$t_{\rm{h,bre}}<O(10^2)\s$, which is significantly shortened
for a lighter AGN case, making the flare slightly hard
to be detected. In addition, changing the system parameters,
we find that the observable regions enlarge for the
case with a smaller SMBH mass $M$ or a
lower kick velocity $v_{\rm{k}}$, and the emission becomes
more intense in the case of a smaller $\alpha$ or
a lower $v_{\rm{k}}$, all of which facilitate the
observation.
\subsection{Emission from cooling disk cocoon}
Given the resemblance, we investigate the
emission produced by the expanding cocoon
through an analogy with the cocoon's radiation
subsequent to the breakout of a gamma-ray burst
jet from the star \citep{Nakar17}.
The energy deposited in the disk cocoon is
$E_{\rm{cd}} \approx E_{\rm{c}}/2$, primarily
in the form of radiation.
Same as the jet, the cocoon also undergoes a
breakout from the AGN disk.
For an opaque cocoon, following the breakout,
the initial radiation energy is converted into
the gas kinetic energy to drive its expansion.
The terminal velocity of the
disk cocoon material with mass,
$m_{\rm{c}}\simeq \rho_{\rm{AGN}} V_{\rm{c}}$,
can be estimated as
$v_{\rm{c}}\simeq \sqrt{2 E_{\rm{cd}}/m_{\rm{c}}}$.
Simplifying the expanding cocoon as a spherical
shell with radius
$r_{\rm{c}}=V_{\rm{c}}^{1/3}+v_{\rm{c}}t_{\rm{exp}}$ at
time $t_{\rm{exp}}$ after the breakout, photons
would diffuse out from the shell when its optical depth,
$\tau_{\rm{c}} \simeq \kappa m_{\rm{c}}/4 \pi r_{\rm{c}}^2$,
roughly equals to $c/v_{\rm{c}}$, the diffusion
timescale is then given by
\begin{equation}\label{tdiffc}
t_{\rm{diff,c}} \simeq \tau_{\rm{c}} \frac{r_{\rm{c}}}{c}
=\left(\frac{\kappa m_{\rm{c}} }{4\pi v_{\rm{c}} c}\right)^{1/2},
\end{equation}
where $\kappa=0.34$ for the ionized gas. Prior to
photon effective diffusion, the cocoon undergoes adiabatic
cooling, resulting in a reduction of internal
radiation energy to
$E_{\rm{r,c}}\sim E_{\rm{cd}}V_{\rm{c}}^{\frac{1}{3}}/r_{\rm{c}}$,
which is subsequently released over $t_{\rm{diff,c}}$.
Thereby, the luminosity of the disk cocoon cooling emission
is
\begin{equation}\label{Lc}
L_{\rm{c}}=\frac{E_{\rm{r,c}}}{t_{\rm{diff,c}}}
\simeq\frac{2\pi c E_{\rm{c}}V_{\rm{c}}^{1/3}}{\kappa m_{\rm{c}}}.
\end{equation}
The temperature of the disk cocoon at the
breakout, $T_{\rm{c,bre}}$, can be estimated
similarly to Equation (\ref{Thbre}), where the
thermal equilibrium temperature is modified to
\begin{equation}
T_{\rm{BB,c}} =
\left(\frac{E_{\rm{c}}}{2 a V_{\rm{c}}}\right)^{0.25},
\end{equation}
and the thermal coupling coefficient is changed to
\begin{equation}
\eta_{\rm{c}} \equiv \frac{n_{\rm{BB}}\left(T_{\rm{BB,c}}\right)}
{t_{\rm{bre}} \dot{n}_{\rm{ph},\rm{ff}}\left(T_{\rm{BB,c}}\right)} .
\end{equation}
After adiabatic cooling of radiation
during the cocoon expansion, the temperature becomes
\begin{equation}\label{Tc}
T_{\rm{c}}=T_{\rm{c,bre}}\frac{V_{\rm{c}}^{1/3}}{r_{\rm{c}}},
\end{equation}
which is, namely, the temperature of the disk cocoon
cooling emission.
The above calculations are based on the assumption that
$\tau_{\rm{c}} \gg c/v_{\rm{c}}$ at the jet breakout,
indicating that photons initially remain trapped
within the disk cocoon. Conversely,
when $\tau_{\rm{c,bre}}\sim
\kappa m_{\rm{c}}/4 \pi V_{\rm{c}}^{2/3} < c/v_{\rm{c}}$,
photons would escape from
the cocoon during the jet propagation within the AGN disk.
In such a case, the failure of assuming an adiabatic
cocoon leads to inaccuracies in the calculation of
jet propagation and collimation
in Section \ref{sec-jet-propagation},
and the intricate cooling process should be
considered to investigate the concrete evolution of
both jet and cocoon. For completeness, keeping the
inaccuracy in mind, we estimate the observed
properties of the disk cocoon cooling
emission as follows: when
$\tau_{\rm{c,bre}} < c/v_{\rm{c}}$,
the luminosity of emission
is set as the jet power,
$L_{\rm{c}} \simeq 0.5 L_{\rm{jet}}$,
i.e., photons escape after
being spilled from the jet head;
the duration of emission is set as
$t_{\rm{c}} \simeq t_{\rm{bre}} + t_{\rm{h,bre}} $,
i.e., the duration of the jet releasing energy
into the disk plus the time of radiation diffusing
out from the disk. And the temperature is set as
$T_{\rm{c,bre}}$ at the jet breakout.
The observed properties of the
emission are shown in the second column
of Figure \ref{Fig:rad}, where
the dot dash lines indicate $R$ regions with
$\tau_{\rm{c,bre}} < c/v_{\rm{c}}$, for which
the radiation properties are inaccurate.
First, from the perspective of total
luminosity, $L_{\rm{c}}$ is generally lower than
$L_{\rm{bol,AGN}}$, rendering the observation of
the disk cocoon cooling emission challenging.
Second, the radiation temperatures
predominantly fall within UV bands except for
the TQM model case, of which
the temperature is higher because of the lower
disk density resulting in an inefficient thermalization.
Furthermore, the temperature primarily relies on the AGN disk
properties rather than the specific BH accretion processes.
Third, the emission duration, or the
radiation diffusion timescale, primarily relies
on the AGN disk properties, and typically spans less
than one day.
Additionally, our artificial setup for the emission
properties in regions where
$\tau_{\rm{c,bre}} < c/v_{\rm{c}}$
has a negligible impact on the observation, because,
in general, $L_{\rm{c}}$ is significantly less than
$L_{\rm{bol,AGN}}$, thereby, the emission is unable
to outshine the AGN background radiation and
remain undetectable.
\subsection{Emission from cooling jet cocoon}
Similar to the disk cocoon, the internal energy of
the jet cocoon is radiation dominated with a total
deposited energy $\sim E_{\rm{c}}/2$, which
subsequently accelerates the rarer shocked materials
after the jet breakout.
Numerical simulations show that, during the jet
propagation within dense medium, partial material
mixing would take place between the two cocoon
components \citep[e.g.][]{Morsony07, Nakar17,
Gottlieb20, Gottlieb21}.
The mixed jet cocoon exhibits stratification, where
the material near the base of jet is more mixed,
thus colder and heavier; conversely, the material closer to
the jet head experiences less mixing, thus hotter and
lighter \citep{Eisenberg22}.
Additionally, the energy of the jet cocoon
exhibits a roughly flat distribution per logarithmic scale of
terminal proper velocity, corresponding to the energy
per baryon of the shocked materials
\citep[e.g.][]{Gottlieb20, Gottlieb21}.
So we estimate the fraction of the cocoon's
energy deposited in material with a specific
$\Gamma_{\rm{cj}} \beta_{\rm{cj}}$
as $f_{\Gamma \beta} \sim 0.1$ following \cite{Nakar17}, with
the Newtonian shocked jet material considered as
a representative emission source due to its longer
duration compared to the shorter-lived
emission from the relativistic material. Though,
in actuality, radiation is continuously emitted early
from the relativistic material and later from
the Newtonian material \citep{Nakar17}.
The mass of the jet cocoon material with a terminal velocity
$\Gamma_{\rm{cj}} \beta_{\rm{cj}} < 1$ $(\beta_{\rm{cj}} \lesssim 0.7)$
is estimated as
\begin{equation}
m_{\rm{cj}} \simeq \frac{f_{\Gamma \beta} E_{\rm{c}}}{\beta_{\rm{cj}}^2 c^2},
\end{equation}
and the volume of the jet cocoon at the breakout is
\begin{equation}
V_{\rm{cj}} \simeq \Sigma_{\rm{j}} (H-d_{\rm{bre}}).
\end{equation}
We define a critical velocity $\beta_{\rm{cj,cr}}$
to represent the case of which photons begin to escape
from the jet cocoon roughly at the jet breakout, i.e.,
$\tau_{\rm{cj,bre}} \simeq \kappa m_{\rm{cj}}/V_{\rm{cj}}^{2/3} =1/\beta_{\rm{cj,cr}}$,
and then
\begin{equation}
\beta_{\rm{cj,cr}}= \frac{\kappa f_{\Gamma \beta} E_{\rm{c}}}
{V_{\rm{cj}}^{2/3} c^2},
\end{equation}
where still we set $\kappa = 0.34$ for an ionized medium.
The photon is coupled with the jet cocoon material with
$\beta_{\rm{cj}}<\beta_{\rm{cj,cr}}$ at the jet breakout.
Subsequently, the cocoon with
mass $m_{\rm{cj}}$ undergoes expansion and
adiabatic cooling before eventually allowing for
photon escape. This process remains largely unaffected
by the faster material with $\beta_{\rm{cj}}>\beta_{\rm{cj,cr}}$,
due to the stratified jet cocoon exhibits preferential
escape of the upper hotter material followed
by the lower colder material \citep{Eisenberg22}.
Similar to Equation (\ref{Lc}), the luminosity of the
jet cocoon cooling emission is estimated as
\begin{equation}\label{Lcj}
L_{\rm{cj}}
=\frac{2\pi c f_{\Gamma \beta} E_{\rm{c}}V_{\rm{cj}}^{1/3}}
{\kappa m_{\rm{cj}}}
=\frac{2 \pi \beta_{\rm{cj}}^2 c^3 V_{\rm{cj}}^{1/3}}{\kappa},
\end{equation}
which is in proportion to $\beta_{\rm{cj}}^2$. Considering
only the Newtonian part of the shocked jet cocoon, we set
$\beta_{\rm{cj}}=0.7$ for cases with
$\beta_{\rm{cj,cr}}>0.7$,
and set $\beta_{\rm{cj}}=\beta_{\rm{cj,cr}}$ for cases with
$0.7>\beta_{\rm{cj,cr}}>v_{\rm{c}}/c$,
to calculate the peak luminosity. And similar to
Equation (\ref{tdiffc}), the emission duration is
estimated as the photon diffusion timescale,
\begin{equation}
t_{\rm{diff,cj}} \simeq
\left(\frac{\kappa m_{\rm{cj}} }{4\pi \beta_{\rm{cj}} c^2}\right)^{1/2}
= \left(\frac{\kappa f_{\Gamma \beta} E_{\rm{c}} }
{4\pi \beta_{\rm{cj}}^3 c^4}\right)^{1/2}.
\end{equation}
The radiation temperature $T_{\rm{cj}}$ can be calculated
similarly as Equation (\ref{Thbre}) and (\ref{Tc}), by
substituting the initial energy, mass, and volume to
$f_{\Gamma \beta} E_{\rm{c}}/2$, $m_{\rm{cj}}$, and $V_{\rm{cj}}$.
Moreover, for emission with
$L_{\rm{cj,peak}}>L_{\rm{bol,AGN}}$,
we also calculate $t_{\rm{diff,cj}}$
and $T_{\rm{cj}}$ at
$L_{\rm{cj}}=L_{\rm{bol,AGN}}$,
adopting $f_{\Gamma \beta} = 0.1$,
to estimate the maximum
duration for observation and the temperature evolution,
since the energy and mass distribution
of the jet cocoon, which can be described as
$dE/dv\propto v^{-n}$ and $m(>v)\propto v^{-(n+1)}$
\citep[e.g.][]{Nakar17,Piro18}, result in a luminosity
evolution after the peak following
$L_{\rm{cj}} \propto t^{-4/(n+2)}$.
In the above we focus on the opaque part of the
partial mixing jet cocoon, but when
$\beta_{\rm{cj,cr}}<v_{\rm{c}}/c$, the entire jet cocoon
is transparent even though being fully mixed with
the disk cocoon to possess a minimum velocity
$v_{\rm{c}}$. In these cases, in rough,
we artificially set the luminosity,
the emission duration, and the temperature as
$L_{\rm{cj}}=0.5L_{\rm{jet}}$,
$t_{\rm{cj}} \simeq t_{\rm{h,bre}} + t_{\rm{bre}}$,
and $T_{\rm{cj,bre}}$ for the
material with velocity $v_{\rm{c}}$.
The observed properties of the emission are shown
in the third column of Figure \ref{Fig:rad}.
First, $L_{\rm{cj}}$ surpasses $L_{\rm{bol,AGN}}$
across a wide range of $R$, thereby rendering the
emission potentially detectable.
The observation of systems with lower mass AGNs
or slower kicked remnant BHs is more promising,
owing to the dimmer AGN background radiation or
the augmented jet power. Second, the
temperatures of emission typically range
$O(10^6)-O(10^8)\rm{K}$, hence being observable in
X-ray bands. Third, the duration of
emission is generally less than one day, which
is comparatively shorter than the disk
cocoon cooling emission due to the higher
velocity and lower mass of the jet
cocoon material. Fourth, in the case of emission
outshining the AGN background, since the energy
distribution brings about radiation
evolution, we find that at $L_{\rm{cj}}=L_{\rm{bol,AGN}}$
(dotted lines in panels of $T_{\rm{cj}}$
and $t_{\rm{diff,cj}}$ in Figure \ref{Fig:rad}),
whereafter the source tends to become fainter than
the AGN, the total duration of the observed emission
ranges from a few $O(10^2)\rm{s}$ to $O(10^3)\rm{s}$,
accompanied by a decrease in temperature
making for softer radiation.
Note that, in this subsection, we explore the
jet cocoon cooling emission in analogy with the
gamma-ray burst jet breaking a collapsing star,
of which the breakout time, $t_{\rm{bre}}\lesssim
10\s$ \citep[e.g.][]{Nakar17}, is much less than that of
a jet breaking the AGN disk studied here. The
prolongation of the propagation time would
result in a more efficient mixing
between the two cocoon components, thereby the
maximum velocity of the jet cocoon material may be
less than $0.7c$ as set in gamma-ray burst jet system,
causing a significant decline of the emission
luminosity due to
$L_{\rm{cj}} \propto \beta_{\rm{cj}}^2$ demonstrated
by Equation (\ref{Lcj}). To investigate the
impact of a reduced $\beta_{\rm{cj}}$,
we consider a case of efficient mixing,
where only $10\%$ of the jet cocoon energy
is deposited into a mixed Newtonian material with
the maximum velocity
$\beta_{\rm{cj}}=5v_{\rm{c}}/c$, the relevant
properties of the emission are shown in the
third column of Figure \ref{Fig:rad}. We find
that the emission is still observable though
the mixing leading to a weaker radiation
with lower temperature.
\subsection{Time delay between BBH merger and EM emission}
\label{4.4}
Given that the EM radiation arises from the jet triggered
by the kicked remnant BH, the time delay between a BBH
merger event and its associated EM emission can be
attributed to four factors: the potential remnant kick time
$t_{\rm{kick}}$, the jet formation time,
which is approximately a few $t_{\rm{BHL}}$ \citep{Kaaz23b},
the jet breakout time, denoted as $t_{\rm{bre}}$,
and the time before photons diffusing out effectively,
taken as $t_{\rm{diff,c}}$ and $t_{\rm{diff,cj}}$,
for the disk and jet cocoon cooling emission.
Therefore, the time delay is estimated by
\begin{equation}
t_{\rm{delay}} \simeq (t_{\rm{kick}}) +
t_{\rm{BHL}} + t_{\rm{bre}} + t_{\rm{diff}},
\end{equation}
of which the values are shown in the last
row of Figure \ref{Fig:rad}, where we ignore
$t_{\rm{kick}}$ (values are shown in Figure
\ref{Fig:abin}). The dominant
term of $t_{\rm{delay}}$ for all of the three
emission components shifts from $t_{\rm{BHL}}$
to $t_{\rm{bre}}$ as $R$ increases,
while the contribution from $t_{\rm{diff}}$
of the disk and jet cocoon
is found to be negligible. Moreover,
in regions of $L>L_{\rm{AGN,bol}}$,
where the emission would
outshine the AGN background,
$t_{\rm{delay}} \simeq t_{\rm{BHL}}$
is basically satisfied, indicating that
the time delay between the emergence of
the observed emission and the BBH merger
is primarily determined by the jet
formation timescale.
For example, $t_{\rm{delay}}$ is
approximately $154$, $5$,
and $0.2~days$ for a
$100M_\odot$ remnant BH with kick velocity
$10^2$, $10^{2.5}$, and $10^3~\rm{km}\s^{-1}$,
respectively. Alternatively, considering the
cavity environment and incorporating $t_{\rm{kick}}$,
$t_{\rm{delay}}$ is about $8.8$, $42.8$, and
$371.8~days$ for a $100M_\odot$ remnant BH
kicked with velocity
$10^{2.5}~\rm{km}\s^{-1}$ at $100$, $10^3$,
and $10^4R_{\rm{g}}$ of the AGN disk
with a $10^8M_\odot$ SMBH, respectively.
\section{Discussion}
\label{section5}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{fig6-1.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{fig6-2.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Spectra for emission from the breakout jet-head
(green line), the cooling disk cocoon (golden line),
and the cooling jet cocoon (navy-blue line). To
express the AGN background, of which the spectra
are shown by the red and blue dotted lines,
we take the mean spectral
energy distribution of radio loud and radio quiet
quasars from \cite{Shang11}, with the use of a scaling law
$\zeta(3000\mathring{A})=5.2$ in the correlation of
$L_{\rm{AGN,bol}}=\zeta\lambda L_{\lambda}$ \citep{Runnoe12}.
The solid and dashed lines in $M=10^8M_\odot$
panel represent a $100M_\odot$ BBH merger occurring at
$700$ and $10^4R_{\rm{g}}$, generating a
kicked remnant with velocity
$10^{2.5}$ and $10^{2}~\rm{km}\s^{-1}$,
respectively. The solid line in $M=10^7M_\odot$
panel represents a $100M_\odot$ BBH merger occurring at
$10^4R_{\rm{g}}$ with the remnant kicked to
$10^{2.5}~\rm{km}\s^{-1}$, and the dashed line
shows the spectra of jet cocoon cooling emission
at $L_{\rm{cj}}=L_{\rm{bol,AGN}}$.
}
\label{Fig:example}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Detectability}
\label{Detectability}
As demonstrated above, BBH mergers occurring within
the AGN disk have the potential to generate
observable EM counterparts, such as emission during
the jet breakout, disk cocoon cooling
emission, and jet cocoon cooling emission,
which are powerful to outshine
the AGN background radiation. Meanwhile, the emission
exhibits significant variations with respect to $R$
(see Figure \ref{Fig:rad}), namely,
the particular locations of BBH mergers,
which are likely at migration traps
around $\sim 500-700 R_{\rm{g}}$
\citep[e.g.][]{Bellovary16, Yang19a},
or alternatively at more distant radii of
$\sim 0.01~\rm{pc}$ for a $4\times10^6M_\odot$
SMBH, corresponding to
$\sim 5\times 10^4 R_{\rm{g}}$ \citep{Tagawa20a}.
Hence, to predict the detectability of
EM counterparts, we give illustrative examples,
which depict the feasible BBH mergers in the AGN disk
along with a successful emergence of powerful jet,
the emblematic spectra for emission are shown in
Figure \ref{Fig:example}.
As indicated by the three examples, i.e.,
a $100M_\odot$ BBH merger occurring at $700$, $10^4$,
and $10^4R_{\rm{g}}$ in the AGN disk with a SMBH
of $10^8$, $10^8$, and $10^7M_\odot$, generating a
kicked remnant with velocity $10^{2.5}$,
$10^{2}$, and $10^{2.5}~\rm{km}\s^{-1}$: First,
the jet breakout emission exhibits a peak in
hard X-ray bands $\sim 100~\rm{keV}$, which could
be detected by X-ray telescopes such as
Swift BAT \citep{Barthelmy05}
and Fermi GBM \citep{Meegan09}
\footnote{Properties of various telescopes, e.g.,
detection bandpass, sensitivity, and field of view,
are summarized in Table 3 of \cite{Tagawa23a}.}.
The duration of the emission is $0.21$, $395$, and
$0.69\s$, respectively, suggesting a preference
for the observation of mergers with a
weakly kicked remnant at large radii in the disk
of heavier SMBH.
Second, the disk cocoon cooling
emission peaks in EUV bands, the duration
of which is $3.0\times10^4$,
$3.0\times10^5$, $2.2\times10^4\s$, much
longer than the two other emission components.
But the emission is unlikely to be
observed because the EUV photons would be
absorbed by gas and dust in the host galaxy,
meanwhile, the optical/UV radiation is
greatly covered by the more prominent AGN
background. Third, the jet cocoon cooling emission
peaks in soft X-ray band
at $\sim 1-10~\rm{keV}$, of which the duration is
$574$, $7561$, $374\s$. Moreover, the energy and
mass distribution of jet cocoon material causes
an extension of the observable
duration, e.g., to $1314\s$ for
the third example (dashed line in the second panel
of Figure \ref{Fig:example}),
and an evolution of spectra to
softer X-ray band, both of which are beneficial
to observations via soft X-ray telescopes, e.g.,
Chandra \citep{Weisskopf00}, XMM-Newton \citep{Jansen01},
Swift XRT \citep{Burrows05}, Einstein Probe \citep{Yuan15},
and to the identification of EM counterparts.
Additionally, the time delay for
the three examples is approximately $5$,
$154$, $5~days$ ($31$, $1314$, $80~days$ if the
kicked remnant is initially in a cavity),
respectively, disfavoring
follow-up observations and identification
of EM counterparts for merger systems which produce
remnants with low kick velocity.
To conclude, a BBH merger event occurring within
the AGN disk can produce a detectable soft X-ray
counterpart deriving from the cooling jet cocoon,
which persists for a period $O(10^3)\s$ and
appears after $O(10)~days$ following the GW trigger.
Observations prefer to systems leaving
over BHs with larger kick velocity, which possess
relatively short time delay; conversely,
though a more weakly kicked remnant BH can
generate more powerful emission,
the large time delay makes it difficult to
be identified as EM counterparts.
In the future, with a more precise constraint
on kick velocity through an accurate measurement
of GW \citep[e.g.][]{Mahapatra23},
we will be able to predict the EM counterparts
more accurately, thereby providing better
guidance for observations.
\subsection{Jet direction, kick direction, and merger height}
During the above calculations, we have adopted
a typical system, of which the BBH merger
occurs at the midplane of an AGN disk,
generating a remnant BH kicked along the
disk plane which drives a jet perpendicular
to the disk plane. In this subsection,
we discuss implications of varying the
jet direction, the kick direction, and the
merger height.
The jet driven by the BZ mechanism propagates along
the BH spin direction, which may be random for
mergers taking place in the AGN disk \citep{Tagawa20b}.
For a jet which is inclined at an angle
$\theta$ with respect to the AGN disk
angular momentum direction, the propagation
distance before its breakout is
extended from $\sim H$ to $\sim H/\cos\theta$.
Compared to the vertical case, at the jet breakout,
we find approximately
$t_{\rm{bre}} \propto \cos\theta^{-5/3}$,
$\tilde{L} \propto \cos\theta^{4/3}$, and
$\beta_{\rm{h}} \propto \cos\theta^{2/3}$,
indicating that the inclined jet spends more
time to propagate within the AGN disk, and is
more significantly collimated with a lower
head's velocity. Also, as
$E_{\rm{c}}\propto \cos\theta^{-5/3}$, more jet
energy is deposited into the cocoon.
Assuming that the jet breaking out from the head
\citep{Tagawa23a}, we investigate the properties
of associated emission. For jet breakout
emission, the luminosity would decrease as
$L_{\rm{h,bre}}\propto \cos\theta^{2/3}$, and
the duration is extended to
$t_{\rm{h,bre}}\propto \cos\theta^{-4/3}$.
The typical radiation temperature undergoes
a reduction and a more effective thermalization,
with $T_{\rm{BB,hbre}}\propto \cos\theta^{1/3}$
and $\eta \propto \cos\theta^{5/2}$.
The other two emission components exhibit similar
properties. For disk cocoon cooling emission,
we have $L_{\rm{c}}\propto \cos\theta^{1/3}$,
$t_{\rm{diff,c}}\propto \cos\theta^{-11/6}$, and
$T_{\rm{BB,c}}\propto \cos\theta^{1/3}$,
$\eta \propto \cos\theta^{17/6}$. Besides,
radiation temperature after cocoon adiabatic
cooling varies as
$T_{\rm{c}}\propto T_{\rm{c,bre}} \cos\theta^{1/6}$.
For jet cocoon cooling emission from the material
with a specific $\beta_{\rm{cj}}$, related
properties are $L_{\rm{cj}}\propto \cos\theta^{-7/9}$,
$t_{\rm{diff,cj}}\propto \cos\theta^{-5/6}$, and
$T_{\rm{BB,cj}}\propto \cos\theta^{1/6}$,
$\eta \propto \cos\theta^{9/4}$,
$T_{\rm{cj}}\propto T_{\rm{cj,bre}} \cos\theta^{1/18}$,
respectively. In fact, \cite{Rodriguez-Ramirez23}
investigated a limiting case of a jet propagating
quasi-parallel to the AGN disk plane with
$\theta=82^\circ$; an optical flare lasting for
$O(100)~days$ is produced by the disk cocoon,
of which the temperature is lower and the duration
is longer than the perpendicular case we studied,
as expected.
The kick direction of the remnant BH could be
random because of an isotropic distribution of
the orbital plane direction of merging BBHs
(\citealt{Tagawa20b}, but when binary-single interaction
is 2D and confined roughly to the AGN disk midplane,
the kick direction is almost along the disk,
see e.g. \citealt{Samsing22}). For a kick inclined to the
AGN disk plane, the remnant BH would have moved to a
high altitude when a jet forms after a
few $t_{\rm{BHL}}$. Likewise, for the merger of a
BH binary whose orbit around SMBH is misaligned
with the AGN disk, the starting point of the BH-driven
jet would be located away from the midplane.
At the side of the AGN disk where the kicked
BH is closer to the disk surface,
an off-midplane jet would break out of the AGN disk
more easily with a shorter propagation distance,
and may generate brighter and shorter-duration
radiation with higher temperature; on the contrary,
the same jet needs to propagate a longer distance to
break out of the other side of the AGN disk, generating
dimmer and lower-temperature emission with longer duration.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{fig7.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Criterion $\Lambda$ from Equation
(\ref{kink}) as a function of $R$ for
different system parameters. The dashed
line represents $\Lambda=2$, above
which the jet propagation is stable,
unaffected by the magnetically driven
external kink instability.}
\label{Fig:kink}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Stability of jet during propagation}
As mentioned above, the jet driven by a kicked
remnant BH is magnetized. Even though the jet
behaves as a hot, hydrodynamic one during its
propagation, the magnetic effects would still
bring about an external kink instability,
which generates helical motions of the entire
jet, increasing its effective cross-section and
reducing its propagation velocity, even
causing it to stall \citep{Bromberg16}. We employ a
criterion proposed by \cite{Bromberg16}, which describes
a comparison between the instability
development timescale and the dynamic timescale,
to examine the instability,
\begin{equation}\label{kink}
\Lambda \simeq 20\sqrt{\frac{2\pi}{9}}
\left(\frac{L_{\rm{jet}}}{\rho_{\rm{AGN}}
(H-d_{\rm{bre}})^2\gamma_{\rm{j}}^2c^3}\right)^{1/6},
\end{equation}
where $\gamma_{\rm{j}}=\theta_0^{-1}$ is set.
For $\Lambda>2$, as suggested by \cite{Bromberg16},
the external kink is weak and the jet
propagates similarly to a hydrodynamic one;
on the contrary, the jet is markedly deformed,
which would be stalled and fail to break out
the AGN disk.
Values of $\Lambda$ as a function of $R$ are
shown in Figure \ref{Fig:kink}. $\Lambda$
decreases as $R$ increases because of the
thickening of the AGN disk, and jets are more
unstable for larger SMBH mass or less jet
power cases. At relatively large radii,
where $\Lambda<2$, jets would experience
significant deceleration or disruption
caused by the external kink instability.
Consequently, our calculations of the jet
propagation and the associated EM emission
may be inaccurate in these regions. However,
jets with $L_{\rm{jet}}>L_{\rm{AGN,bol}}$,
which can produce observable emission,
generally possess $\Lambda>2$, and hence are
stable to the external kink. Therefore, our
prediction for the EM counterparts should
be acceptable.
\section{Summary}
\label{section6}
In this work, we have explored the EM counterparts
to BBH mergers occurring within the AGN disk.
The merger remnant BH, which undergoes a natal
kick due to asymmetric GW radiation, would
traverse the magnetized AGN disk environment and
launch a jet via the BZ mechanism. Interaction
between the jet and the AGN disk during its
propagation leads to jet collimation and energy
dissipation, thereby driving various EM emissions.
We have investigated three specific processes
as sources of radiation, namely, the jet breakout,
the disk cocoon cooling, and the jet cocoon cooling.
Among these processes, only the emission from the
cooling jet cocoon exhibits a higher potential for
detection. Accordingly, a soft X-ray transient that
outshines the AGN background can be identified as
an EM counterpart, exhibiting a duration of
$O(10^3)\s$ and emerging after a time delay of
$O(10)~days$ following the GW trigger.
We have found that the EM emission properties,
including luminosity, temperature, duration,
and time delay, are significantly influenced by
the GW kick. Therefore, in the future, with improved
GW measurements, a more precise constraint on kick
velocity can facilitate the prediction of
EM counterparts to BBH mergers in the AGN disk
and guide subsequent follow-up
observations. If such multimessenger signals are
indeed detected, it would confirm the formation
of binary mergers in the AGN disk, and
provide valuable insights into the evolution of
compact objects and binaries embedded in AGN disks.
It should be noted that a key assumption
has been made in this work, namely the
successful launch of a powerful jet by the
kicked remnant BH, which necessitates a strongly
magnetized environment. However, the magnetization
properties of the AGN disk, or even the disk itself,
have not been well studied.
For instance, the uncertain degree of ionization
in the disk outer region may lead to decoupling
between gas and magnetic field, thereby suppressing
magnetorotational instability and magnetic field
amplification, which hinders the jet formation.
So we suggest that a more comprehensive
understanding of AGN disks is imperative for
investigating the EM counterparts associated with
the embedded BBH merger events.
\begin{acknowledgements}
We would like to thank the referee for valuable comments and
helpful suggestions. This work was supported by
the National SKA Program of China (grant No. 2020SKA0120300),
and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant No. 11833003).
\end{acknowledgements}
\begin{appendix}
\section{Opacity and Optical Depth of AGN Disk in Propagation Path of jet}
\label{Appendix-opacity}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{fig8-1.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{fig8-2.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Dependence of opacity and optical depth on $R$ for
various AGN disk models and parameters
(the inset shows these parameters), of which
the fiducial values are $M=10^{8}\rm{M}_{\odot}$,
$\alpha=0.1$, $\dot{M}=0.1 \dot{M}_{\rm{Edd}}$
adopting SG model. The dashed line in the right
panel represents the threshold $\tau=1$. }
\label{Fig:op}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{fig9-1.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{fig9-2.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Comparison of the Strömgren radius with the AGN disk height
and the thickness of the jet-head breakout shell for various system
parameters. The left and right panel shows
$R_{\rm{S}}/H$ and $R_{\rm{S}}/d_{\rm{bre}}$, respectively.}
\label{Fig:rs}
\end{figure*}
When calculating the structures of AGN disks,
we have employed the approximate
expression for the opacity proposed in \cite{Yang19b};
the opacity and optical depth properties
of AGN disks are shown in
Figure \ref{Fig:op}. $\kappa_{\rm{AGN}}$
and $\tau_{\rm{AGN}}$
drop sharply at $O(10^3)R_{\rm{g}}$ and
$>O(10^4)R_{\rm{g}}$ for TQM and SG
models, by reason of the gas recombination
at disk temperature
ranging $10^3-10^4\K$ \citep[e.g.][]{Thompson05}.
Thus, the AGN disk is optically thin to its
own radiation at these regions, but it
would still be opaque to photons with
energy $>13.6 ~\rm{eV}$ (the ionization energy
of Hydrogen atom) because of
the absorption by neutral gas \citep{Gilbaum22}.
As shown in Figure \ref{Fig:rad}, photons
generated by the BH-driven jet-cocoon
systems always have characteristic temperatures
$>10^5\K$, which would thereby ionize
the neutral gas and cannot directly escape the
initially \textquotedblleft optically
thin\textquotedblright AGN disk.
To specifically analyze the propagation of jet
photons, we estimate the maximum ionization
distance for the jet-head shock photons with temperature of
Equation (\ref{Thbre}), via
the Strömgren radius \citep{Dyson97},
\begin{equation}
R_{\rm{S}}=\left(\frac{3}{4 \pi}
\frac{S}{n_{\rm{AGN}}^{2} \beta_{2}}\right)^{1 / 3},
\end{equation}
where $S=L_{\rm{h,bre}}/(k T_{\rm{h,bre}})$
is the photon emission rate,
$n_{\rm{AGN}}=\rho_{\rm{AGN}}/m_{\rm{p}}$,
and $\beta_{2}=2 \times
10^{-10}T_{\rm{h,bre}}^{-3 / 4}\rm{~cm}^{3}\rm{~s}^{-1}$.
As shown in Figure \ref{Fig:rs}, we find that
$R_{\rm{S}}<H$, which means that
the environment exhibits high opacity and
photons cannot escape from the jet-cocoon system,
maintaining the radiation-dominated jet head
and cocoon; we also find that
$R_{\rm{S}}>d_{\rm{bre}}$, thereby the ambient
gas above the jet head has been ionized at
its breakout and our assumption of
$\kappa_{\rm{AGN}}=0.34\cm^2\g^{-1}$ holds except
for the very outer AGN disk regions, where the
BH-driven jet is too weak to ionize the medium.
\end{appendix}
\begin{thebibliography}{63}
\bibitem[Abbott et al.(2016)]{Abbott16} Abbott, B.~P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T.~D., et al.\ 2016, \prl, 116, 061102. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.061102
\bibitem[Abbott et al.(2019)]{Abbott19} Abbott, B.~P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T.~D., et al.\ 2019, Physical Review X, 9, 031040. doi:10.1103/PhysRevX.9.031040
\bibitem[Abbott et al.(2020a)]{Abbott20a} Abbott, R., Abbott, T.~D., Abraham, S., et al.\ 2020, \prl, 125, 101102. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.101102
\bibitem[Abbott et al.(2020b)]{Abbott20b} Abbott, R., Abbott, T.~D., Abraham, S., et al.\ 2020, \apjl, 900, L13. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aba493
\bibitem[Abbott et al.(2023)]{Abbott23} Abbott, R., Abbott, T.~D., Acernese, F., et al.\ 2023, Physical Review X, 13, 011048. doi:10.1103/PhysRevX.13.011048
\bibitem[Arca Sedda et al.(2023)]{Arca Sedda23} Arca Sedda, M., Naoz, S., \& Kocsis, B.\ 2023, Universe, 9, 138. doi:10.3390/universe9030138
\bibitem[Baibhav et al.(2019)]{Baibhav19} Baibhav, V., Berti, E., Gerosa, D., et al.\ 2019, \prd, 100, 064060. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.100.064060
\bibitem[Baker et al.(2007)]{Baker07} Baker, J.~G., Boggs, W.~D., Centrella, J., et al.\ 2007, \apj, 668, 1140. doi:10.1086/521330
\bibitem[Barthelmy et al.(2005)]{Barthelmy05} Barthelmy, S.~D., Barbier, L.~M., Cummings, J.~R., et al.\ 2005, \ssr, 120, 143. doi:10.1007/s11214-005-5096-3
\bibitem[Bartos et al.(2017)]{Bartos17} Bartos, I., Kocsis, B., Haiman, Z., et al.\ 2017, \apj, 835, 165. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/835/2/165
\bibitem[Bauer et al.(2017)]{Bauer17} Bauer, F.~E., Treister, E., Schawinski, K., et al.\ 2017, \mnras, 467, 4841. doi:10.1093/mnras/stx417
\bibitem[Begelman(1979)]{Begelman79} Begelman, M.~C.\ 1979, \mnras, 187, 237. doi:10.1093/mnras/187.2.237
\bibitem[Begelman \& Cioffi(1989)]{Begelman89} Begelman, M.~C. \& Cioffi, D.~F.\ 1989, \apjl, 345, L21. doi:10.1086/185542
\bibitem[Bellovary et al.(2016)]{Bellovary16} Bellovary, J.~M., Mac Low, M.-M., McKernan, B., et al.\ 2016, \apjl, 819, L17. doi:10.3847/2041-8205/819/2/L17
\bibitem[Blandford \& Znajek(1977)]{Blandford77} Blandford, R.~D. \& Znajek, R.~L.\ 1977, \mnras, 179, 433. doi:10.1093/mnras/179.3.433
\bibitem[Bromberg et al.(2011)]{Bromberg11} Bromberg, O., Nakar, E., Piran, T., et al.\ 2011, \apj, 740, 100. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/740/2/100
\bibitem[Bromberg \& Tchekhovskoy(2016)]{Bromberg16} Bromberg, O. \& Tchekhovskoy, A.\ 2016, \mnras, 456, 1739. doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2591
\bibitem[Budnik et al.(2010)]{Budnik10} Budnik, R., Katz, B., Sagiv, A., et al.\ 2010, \apj, 725, 63. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/725/1/63
\bibitem[Burrows et al.(2005)]{Burrows05} Burrows, D.~N., Hill, J.~E., Nousek, J.~A., et al.\ 2005, \ssr, 120, 165. doi:10.1007/s11214-005-5097-2
\bibitem[Campanelli et al.(2007a)]{Campanelli07a} Campanelli, M., Lousto, C.~O., Zlochower, Y., et al.\ 2007, \prl, 98, 231102. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.231102
\bibitem[Campanelli et al.(2007b)]{Campanelli07b} Campanelli, M., Lousto, C., Zlochower, Y., et al.\ 2007, \apjl, 659, L5. doi:10.1086/516712
\bibitem[Chen \& Lin(2023)]{Chen23} Chen, Y.-X. \& Lin, D.~N.~C.\ 2023, \mnras, 522, 319. doi:10.1093/mnras/stad992
\bibitem[Chen et al.(2023)]{ChenD23} Chen, K., Ren, J., \& Dai, Z.-G.\ 2023, \apj, 948, 136. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acc45f
\bibitem[DeLaurentiis et al.(2023)]{DeLaurentiis23} DeLaurentiis, S., Epstein-Martin, M., \& Haiman, Z.\ 2023, \mnras, 523, 1126. doi:10.1093/mnras/stad1412
\bibitem[Dempsey et al.(2022)]{Dempsey22} Dempsey, A.~M., Li, H., Mishra, B., et al.\ 2022, \apj, 940, 155. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac9d92
\bibitem[Dyson \& Williams(1997)]{Dyson97} Dyson, J.~E. \& Williams, D.~A.\ 1997, The physics of the interstellar medium. Edition: 2nd ed. Publisher: Bristol: Institute of Physics Publishing, 1997. Edited by J. E. Dyson and D. A. Williams. Series: The graduate series in astronomy. ISBN: 0750303069. doi:10.1201/9780585368115
\bibitem[Edgar(2004)]{Edgar04} Edgar, R.\ 2004, \nar, 48, 843. doi:10.1016/j.newar.2004.06.001
\bibitem[Eisenberg et al.(2022)]{Eisenberg22} Eisenberg, M., Gottlieb, O., \& Nakar, E.\ 2022, \mnras, 517, 582. doi:10.1093/mnras/stac2184
\bibitem[El Mellah \& Casse(2015)]{El Mellah15} El Mellah, I. \& Casse, F.\ 2015, \mnras, 454, 2657. doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2184
\bibitem[Gilbaum \& Stone(2022)]{Gilbaum22} Gilbaum, S. \& Stone, N.~C.\ 2022, \apj, 928, 191. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac4ded
\bibitem[Gonz{\'a}lez et al.(2007)]{Gonzalez07} Gonz{\'a}lez, J.~A., Sperhake, U., Br{\"u}gmann, B., et al.\ 2007, \prl, 98, 091101. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.091101
\bibitem[Goodman(2003)]{Goodman03} Goodman, J.\ 2003, \mnras, 339, 937. doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06241.x
\bibitem[Gottlieb et al.(2020)]{Gottlieb20} Gottlieb, O., Bromberg, O., Singh, C.~B., et al.\ 2020, \mnras, 498, 3320. doi:10.1093/mnras/staa2567
\bibitem[Gottlieb et al.(2021)]{Gottlieb21} Gottlieb, O., Nakar, E., \& Bromberg, O.\ 2021, \mnras, 500, 3511. doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3501
\bibitem[Gottlieb et al.(2022)]{Gottlieb22} Gottlieb, O., Lalakos, A., Bromberg, O., et al.\ 2022, \mnras, 510, 4962. doi:10.1093/mnras/stab3784
\bibitem[Graham et al.(2020)]{Graham20} Graham, M.~J., Ford, K.~E.~S., McKernan, B., et al.\ 2020, \prl, 124, 251102. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.251102
\bibitem[Graham et al.(2023)]{Graham23} Graham, M.~J., McKernan, B., Ford, K.~E.~S., et al.\ 2023, \apj, 942, 99. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aca480
\bibitem[Herrmann et al.(2007)]{Herrmann07} Herrmann, F., Hinder, I., Shoemaker, D.~M., et al.\ 2007, \prd, 76, 084032. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.76.084032
\bibitem[Jansen et al.(2001)]{Jansen01} Jansen, F., Lumb, D., Altieri, B., et al.\ 2001, \aap, 365, L1. doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20000036
\bibitem[Kaaz et al.(2023a)]{Kaaz23a} Kaaz, N., Schr{\o}der, S.~L., Andrews, J.~J., et al.\ 2023, \apj, 944, 44. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aca967
\bibitem[Kaaz et al.(2023b)]{Kaaz23b} Kaaz, N., Murguia-Berthier, A., Chatterjee, K., et al.\ 2023, \apj, 950, 31. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acc7a1
\bibitem[Katz et al.(2010)]{Katz10} Katz, B., Budnik, R., \& Waxman, E.\ 2010, \apj, 716, 781. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/716/1/781
\bibitem[Kimura et al.(2021)]{Kimura21} Kimura, S.~S., Murase, K., \& Bartos, I.\ 2021, \apj, 916, 111. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac0535
\bibitem[King et al.(2007)]{King07} King, A.~R., Pringle, J.~E., \& Livio, M.\ 2007, \mnras, 376, 1740. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.11556.x
\bibitem[Kwan et al.(2023)]{Kwan23} Kwan, T.~M., Dai, L., \& Tchekhovskoy, A.\ 2023, \apjl, 946, L42. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acc334
\bibitem[Lazzati \& Begelman(2005)]{Lazzati05} Lazzati, D. \& Begelman, M.~C.\ 2005, \apj, 629, 903. doi:10.1086/430877
\bibitem[Leigh et al.(2018)]{Leigh18} Leigh, N.~W.~C., Geller, A.~M., McKernan, B., et al.\ 2018, \mnras, 474, 5672. doi:10.1093/mnras/stx3134
\bibitem[Li et al.(2022)]{LiJ22} Li, J., Lai, D., \& Rodet, L.\ 2022, \apj, 934, 154. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c0d
\bibitem[Li et al.(2023)]{LiJ23} Li, J., Dempsey, A.~M., Li, H., et al.\ 2023, \apjl, 944, L42. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acb934
\bibitem[Li \& Lai(2022)]{LiR22} Li, R. \& Lai, D.\ 2022, \mnras, 517, 1602. doi:10.1093/mnras/stac2577
\bibitem[Li \& Lai(2023)]{LiR23} Li, R. \& Lai, D.\ 2023, \mnras, 522, 1881. doi:10.1093/mnras/stad1117
\bibitem[Li et al.(2021)]{LiY21} Li, Y.-P., Dempsey, A.~M., Li, S., et al.\ 2021, \apj, 911, 124. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abed48
\bibitem[Li et al.(2022)]{LiY22} Li, Y.-P., Dempsey, A.~M., Li, H., et al.\ 2022, \apjl, 928, L19. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac60fd
\bibitem[Mahapatra et al.(2023)]{Mahapatra23} Mahapatra, P., Favata, M., \& Arun, K.~G.\ 2023, arXiv:2308.08319. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2308.08319
\bibitem[Mandel \& Farmer(2022)]{Mandel22} Mandel, I. \& Farmer, A.\ 2022, \physrep, 955, 1. doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2022.01.003
\bibitem[Mapelli(2021)]{Mapelli21} Mapelli, M.\ 2021, Handbook of Gravitational Wave Astronomy, 16. doi:10.1007/978-981-15-4702-7\_16-1
\bibitem[Matzner(2003)]{Matzner03} Matzner, C.~D.\ 2003, \mnras, 345, 575. doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06969.x
\bibitem[McKernan et al.(2019)]{McKernan19} McKernan, B., Ford, K.~E.~S., Bartos, I., et al.\ 2019, \apjl, 884, L50. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab4886
\bibitem[McKernan et al.(2020a)]{McKernan20a} McKernan, B., Ford, K.~E.~S., O'Shaugnessy, R., et al.\ 2020, \mnras, 494, 1203. doi:10.1093/mnras/staa740
\bibitem[McKernan et al.(2020b)]{McKernan20b} McKernan, B., Ford, K.~E.~S., \& O'Shaughnessy, R.\ 2020, \mnras, 498, 4088. doi:10.1093/mnras/staa2681
\bibitem[McKernan \& Ford(2023)]{McKernan23} McKernan, B. \& Ford, K.~E.~S.\ 2023, arXiv:2309.15213. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2309.15213
\bibitem[Meegan et al.(2009)]{Meegan09} Meegan, C., Lichti, G., Bhat, P.~N., et al.\ 2009, \apj, 702, 791. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/702/1/791
\bibitem[Mishra et al.(2020)]{Mishra20} Mishra, B., Begelman, M.~C., Armitage, P.~J., et al.\ 2020, \mnras, 492, 1855. doi:10.1093/mnras/stz3572
\bibitem[Morsony et al.(2007)]{Morsony07} Morsony, B.~J., Lazzati, D., \& Begelman, M.~C.\ 2007, \apj, 665, 569. doi:10.1086/519483
\bibitem[Nakar \& Sari(2010)]{Nakar10} Nakar, E. \& Sari, R.\ 2010, \apj, 725, 904. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/725/1/904
\bibitem[Nakar \& Sari(2012)]{Nakar12} Nakar, E. \& Sari, R.\ 2012, \apj, 747, 88. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/747/2/88
\bibitem[Nakar \& Piran(2017)]{Nakar17} Nakar, E. \& Piran, T.\ 2017, \apj, 834, 28. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/834/1/28
\bibitem[Pan \& Yang(2021a)]{Pan21a} Pan, Z. \& Yang, H.\ 2021, \prd, 103, 103018. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.103.103018
\bibitem[Pan \& Yang(2021b)]{Pan21b} Pan, Z. \& Yang, H.\ 2021, \apj, 923, 173. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac249c
\bibitem[Piro \& Kollmeier(2018)]{Piro18} Piro, A.~L. \& Kollmeier, J.~A.\ 2018, \apj, 855, 103. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaaab3
\bibitem[Rodr{\'\i}guez-Ram{\'\i}rez et al.(2023)]{Rodriguez-Ramirez23} Rodr{\'\i}guez-Ram{\'\i}rez, J.~C., Bom, C.~R., Fraga, B., et al.\ 2023, arXiv:2304.10567. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2304.10567
\bibitem[Rowan et al.(2023)]{Rowan23} Rowan, C., Boekholt, T., Kocsis, B., et al.\ 2023, \mnras, 524, 2770. doi:10.1093/mnras/stad1926
\bibitem[Runnoe et al.(2012)]{Runnoe12} Runnoe, J.~C., Brotherton, M.~S., \& Shang, Z.\ 2012, \mnras, 422, 478. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20620.x
\bibitem[Saini(2023)]{Saini23} Saini, P.\ 2023, arXiv:2308.07565. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2308.07565
\bibitem[Salvesen et al.(2016)]{Salvesen16} Salvesen, G., Simon, J.~B., Armitage, P.~J., et al.\ 2016, \mnras, 457, 857. doi:10.1093/mnras/stw029
\bibitem[Samsing et al.(2022)]{Samsing22} Samsing, J., Bartos, I., D'Orazio, D.~J., et al.\ 2022, \nat, 603, 237. doi:10.1038/s41586-021-04333-1
\bibitem[Shakura \& Sunyaev(1973)]{Shakura73} Shakura, N.~I. \& Sunyaev, R.~A.\ 1973, \aap, 24, 337
\bibitem[Shang et al.(2011)]{Shang11} Shang, Z., Brotherton, M.~S., Wills, B.~J., et al.\ 2011, \apjs, 196, 2. doi:10.1088/0067-0049/196/1/2
\bibitem[Shapiro \& Teukolsky(1983)]{Shapiro83} Shapiro, S.~L. \& Teukolsky, S.~A.\ 1983, A Wiley-Interscience Publication, New York: Wiley, 1983. doi:10.1002/9783527617661
\bibitem[Sirko \& Goodman(2003)]{Sirko03} Sirko, E. \& Goodman, J.\ 2003, \mnras, 341, 501. doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06431.x
\bibitem[Stone et al.(2017)]{Stone17} Stone, N.~C., Metzger, B.~D., \& Haiman, Z.\ 2017, \mnras, 464, 946. doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2260
\bibitem[Tagawa et al.(2020a)]{Tagawa20a} Tagawa, H., Haiman, Z., \& Kocsis, B.\ 2020, \apj, 898, 25. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab9b8c
\bibitem[Tagawa et al.(2020b)]{Tagawa20b} Tagawa, H., Haiman, Z., Bartos, I., et al.\ 2020, \apj, 899, 26. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aba2cc
\bibitem[Tagawa et al.(2021a)]{Tagawa21a} Tagawa, H., Kocsis, B., Haiman, Z., et al.\ 2021, \apjl, 907, L20. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/abd4d3
\bibitem[Tagawa et al.(2021b)]{Tagawa21b} Tagawa, H., Kocsis, B., Haiman, Z., et al.\ 2021, \apj, 908, 194. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abd555
\bibitem[Tagawa et al.(2022)]{Tagawa22} Tagawa, H., Kimura, S.~S., Haiman, Z., et al.\ 2022, \apj, 927, 41. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac45f8
\bibitem[Tagawa et al.(2023a)]{Tagawa23a} Tagawa, H., Kimura, S.~S., Haiman, Z., et al.\ 2023, \apj, 950, 13. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acc4bb
\bibitem[Tagawa et al.(2023b)]{Tagawa23b} Tagawa, H., Kimura, S.~S., Haiman, Z., et al.\ 2023, arXiv:2310.18392. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2310.18392
\bibitem[The LIGO Scientific Collaboration et al.(2021a)]{LIGO21a} The LIGO Scientific Collaboration, the Virgo Collaboration, Abbott, R., et al.\ 2021, arXiv:2108.01045. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2108.01045
\bibitem[The LIGO Scientific Collaboration et al.(2021b)]{LIGO21b} The LIGO Scientific Collaboration, the Virgo Collaboration, the KAGRA Collaboration, et al.\ 2021, arXiv:2111.03606. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2111.03606
\bibitem[Thompson et al.(2005)]{Thompson05} Thompson, T.~A., Quataert, E., \& Murray, N.\ 2005, \apj, 630, 167. doi:10.1086/431923
\bibitem[Tichy \& Marronetti(2008)]{Tichy08} Tichy, W. \& Marronetti, P.\ 2008, \prd, 78, 081501. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.78.081501
\bibitem[Veronesi et al.(2022)]{Veronesi22} Veronesi, N., Rossi, E.~M., van Velzen, S., et al.\ 2022, \mnras, 514, 2092. doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1346
\bibitem[Valtonen \& Karttunen(2006)]{Valtonen06} Valtonen, M. \& Karttunen, H.\ 2006, The Three-Body Problem, by Mauri Valtonen and Hannu Karttunen, pp. . ISBN 0521852242. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
\bibitem[Veronesi et al.(2023)]{Veronesi23} Veronesi, N., Rossi, E.~M., \& van Velzen, S.\ 2023, arXiv:2306.09415. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2306.09415
\bibitem[Wang et al.(2021a)]{Wang21a} Wang, J.-M., Liu, J.-R., Ho, L.~C., et al.\ 2021, \apjl, 911, L14. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/abee81
\bibitem[Wang et al.(2021b)]{Wang21b} Wang, J.-M., Liu, J.-R., Ho, L.~C., et al.\ 2021, \apjl, 916, L17. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac0b46
\bibitem[Weisskopf et al.(2000)]{Weisskopf00} Weisskopf, M.~C., Tananbaum, H.~D., Van Speybroeck, L.~P., et al.\ 2000, \procspie, 4012, 2. doi:10.1117/12.391545
\bibitem[Yalinewich \& Matzner(2019)]{Yalinewich19} Yalinewich, A. \& Matzner, C.~D.\ 2019, \mnras, 490, 312. doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2590
\bibitem[Yang et al.(2019a)]{Yang19a} Yang, Y., Bartos, I., Gayathri, V., et al.\ 2019, \prl, 123, 181101. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.181101
\bibitem[Yang et al.(2019b)]{Yang19b} Yang, Y., Bartos, I., Haiman, Z., et al.\ 2019, \apj, 876, 122. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab16e3
\bibitem[Yuan et al.(2015)]{Yuan15} Yuan, W., Zhang, C., Feng, H., et al.\ 2015, arXiv:1506.07735. doi:10.48550/arXiv.1506.07735
\bibitem[Zhang(2018)]{Zhang18} Zhang, B.\ 2018, The Physics of Gamma-Ray Bursts by Bing Zhang. ISBN: 978-1-139-22653-0. Cambridge Univeristy Press, 2018. doi:10.1017/9781139226530
\end{thebibliography}
\end{document}