MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060879513 · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/781/1/45

BLACK HOLE TRIPLE DYNAMICS: A BREAKDOWN OF THE ORBIT AVERAGE APPROXIMATION AND IMPLICATIONS FOR GRAVITATIONAL WAVE DETECTIONS

2014· article· en· W2060879513 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGravitational waveBinary black holeBinary numberEccentricity (behavior)Orbit (dynamics)Black hole (networking)LIGOChirpOrbital decay

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Coalescing black hole (BH) binaries forming in the dense core of globular clusters (GCs) are expected to be one of the brightest sources of gravitational wave (GW) radiation for the next generation of ground-based laser interferometers. Favorable conditions for a merger are initiated by the Kozai resonance in which the gravitational interaction with a third distant object, typically another BH, induces quasi-periodic variations of the inner BH binary eccentricity. In this article we perform high precision three-body simulations of the long-term evolution of hierarchical BH triples and investigate the conditions that lead to the merging of the BH binary and the way it might become an observable source of GW radiation. We find that the secular orbit average treatment, which was adopted in previous works, does not reliably describe the dynamics of these systems if the binary is orbited by the outer BH on a highly inclined orbit at a moderate distance. We show that 50% of coalescing BH binaries driven by the Kozai mechanism in GCs will have eccentricities larger than 0.1, with 10% of them being extremely eccentric, (1 − e ) ≲ 10 −4 , when they first chirp in the frequency band of ground-based laser interferometers. This implies that a large fraction of such GW sources could be missed if conventional quasi-circular templates are used for analysis of GW detector data. The efficient detection of all coalescing BH binaries in GCs will therefore require template banks of eccentric inspiral waveforms for matched-filtering and dedicated search strategies.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.274 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations212
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves ResearchFrench-language works237,207