MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3081078266 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2203

Outliers in the LIGO black hole mass function from coagulation in dense clusters

2021· preprint· en· W3081078266 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jordan Flitter, Julián B. Muñoz, Ely D. Kovetz

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSmithsonian Astrophysical ObservatoryAzrieli FoundationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsLIGORedshiftOutlierAstrophysicsPhysicsCluster (spacecraft)Globular clusterBlack hole (networking)Mass ratioEvent (particle physics)BroachingMass segregationStarsStatisticsComputer scienceGravitational waveMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The advanced LIGO O3a run catalogue has been recently published, and it includes several events with unexpected mass properties, including mergers with individual masses in the lower and upper mass gaps, as well as mergers with unusually small mass ratios between the binary components. Here, we entertain the possibility that these outliers are the outcome of hierarchical mergers of black holes or neutron stars in the dense environments of globular clusters. We use the coagulation equation to study the evolution of the black hole mass function within a typical cluster. Our prescription allows us to monitor how various global quantities change with time, such as the total mass and number of compact objects in the cluster, its overall merger rate, and the probability to form intermediate-mass black holes via a runaway process. By accounting for the LIGO observational bias, we predict the merger event distributions with respect to various variables such as the individual masses M1 and M2, their ratio q, and redshift z, and we compare our predictions with the published O3a data. We study how these distributions depend on the merger-rate and ejections parameters and produce forecasts for the (tight) constraints that can be placed on our model parameters using the future data set of the O5 run. Finally, we also consider the presence of a static channel with no coagulation producing merger events alongside the dynamic channel, finding that the two can be distinguished based solely on the merger mass distribution with future O5 data.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society→Same topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research→French-language works237,207→