MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4403640581 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.110.083527

Impact of a primordial gravitational wave background on LISA resolvable sources

2024· article· en· W4403640581 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Matteo Braglia, Mauro Pieroni

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersImperial College LondonYork University
KeywordsGravitational wavePhysicsGravitational wave backgroundAstronomyAstrophysicsQuantum electrodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The existence of a primordial stochastic gravitational wave background (SGWB) is a common prediction in various models of the early Universe. Despite constraints at different frequency ranges and claims of detection in the nHz range by pulsar timing arrays, the amplitude and spectral dependence of the SGWB in the mHz range remain largely unknown. Plausible models of early Universe physics predict a wide range of SGWB amplitudes, from undetectable to exceeding the constraints from big bang nucleosynthesis. This paper explores the potential impact of a prominent primordial SGWB on LISA's main scientific targets. Our main analyses focuses on massive black hole binaries (MBHBs). By employing publicly available MBHB population models and state-of-the-art LISA's forecasting pipeline, we analyze the effects of the SGWB on MBHB detections. We find that the decrease in the signal-to-noise ratio induced by a strong primordial GWB can significantly reduce the number of detectable events, compromise the precision of constraints, and even hinder sky localization for some events. We also examine the impact of the SGWB on stellar origin black hole binaries (SOBHBs) and galactic binaries (GBs), which are fainter sources than MBHBs. Depending on the spectral properties of the SGWB, we conclude that these sources could be either marginally affected or rendered completely undetectable. This largely unexplored aspect raises critical questions about the potential challenges posed by a prominent SGWB to LISA's astrophysical objectives, including MBHBs, SOBHBs, and GBs.

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)0.008
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.498
Teacher spread0.466 · 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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