MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2751467253 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.98.044015

Eccentric binary black hole inspiral-merger-ringdown gravitational waveform model from numerical relativity and post-Newtonian theory

2018· article· en· W2751467253 on OpenAlexafffund
Ian Hinder, Harald Pfeiffer

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of Toronto
FundersSherman Fairchild FoundationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsLIGOWaveformEccentricity (behavior)Numerical relativityGravitational waveMass ratioBinary black holeBinary numberGeneral relativityAstrophysicsParameter spaceGravitationMathematical physicsQuantum mechanicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a prescription for computing gravitational waveforms for the inspiral, merger and ringdown of nonspinning moderately eccentric binary black hole systems. The inspiral waveform is computed using the post-Newtonian expansion and the merger waveform is computed by interpolating a small number of quasicircular NR waveforms. The use of circular merger waveforms is possible because binaries with moderate eccentricity circularize in the last few cycles before the merger, which we demonstrate up to mass ratio $q={m}_{1}/{m}_{2}=3$. The complete model is calibrated to 23 numerical relativity (NR) simulations starting $\ensuremath{\approx}20$ cycles before the merger with eccentricities ${e}_{\mathrm{ref}}\ensuremath{\le}0.1$ and mass ratios $q\ensuremath{\le}3$, where ${e}_{\mathrm{ref}}$ is the eccentricity $\ensuremath{\approx}7$ cycles before the merger. The NR waveforms are long enough that they start below 30 Hz (10 Hz) for BBH systems with total mass $M\ensuremath{\ge}80\text{ }\text{ }{M}_{\ensuremath{\bigodot}}$ ($230\text{ }\text{ }{M}_{\ensuremath{\bigodot}}$). We find that, for the sensitivity of advanced LIGO at the time of its first observing run, the eccentric model has a faithfulness with NR of over 97% for systems with total mass $M\ensuremath{\ge}85{M}_{\ensuremath{\bigodot}}$ across the parameter space (${e}_{\mathrm{ref}}\ensuremath{\le}0.1$, $q\ensuremath{\le}3$). For systems with total mass $M\ensuremath{\ge}70{M}_{\ensuremath{\bigodot}}$, the faithfulness is over 97% for ${e}_{\mathrm{ref}}\ensuremath{\lesssim}0.05$ and $q\ensuremath{\le}3$. The NR waveforms and the Mathematica code for the model are publicly available.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.406 · 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

Citations136
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D.Same topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves ResearchFrench-language works237,207