Clustering of binary black hole mergers: a detailed analysis of the <scp>eagle</scp> + <scp>mobse</scp> simulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT We perform a detailed study of the cosmological bias of gravitational wave (GW) events produced by stellar binary black hole mergers (BBHM). We start from a BBHM distribution modelled inside the eagle hydrodynamical simulation using the population synthesis code mobse. We then compare our findings with predictions from different halo occupation distribution (HOD) prescriptions and find overall agreement, provided that the modelled properties of host galaxies and haloes in the semi-analytical treatment match those in the simulations. By highlighting the sources of these discrepancies, we provide the stepping stone to build future more robust models that prevent the shortcoming of both simulation-based and analytical models. Finally, we train a neural network to build a simulation-based HOD and perform feature importance analysis to gain intuition on which host halo/galaxy parameters are the most relevant in determining the actual distribution and power spectrum of BBHM. We find that the distribution of BBHM in a galaxy does not only depend on its size, star formation rate and metallicity, but also by its kinetic state, namely its total energy and velocity dispersion.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".