Black hole spectroscopy for precessing binary black hole coalescences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The spectroscopic study of black hole quasinormal modes in gravitational-wave ringdown observations is hindered by our ignorance of which modes should dominate astrophysical signals for different binary configurations, limiting tests of general relativity and astrophysics. In this work, we present a description of the quasinormal modes that are excited in the ringdowns of comparable mass, quasicircular precessing binary black hole coalescences---a key region of parameter space that has yet to be fully explored within the framework of black hole spectroscopy. We suggest that the remnant perturbation for precessing and nonprecessing systems is approximately the same up to a rotation, which implies that the relative amplitudes of the quasinormal modes in both systems are also related by a rotation. We present evidence for this by analyzing an extensive catalog of numerical relativity simulations. Additional structure in the amplitudes is connected to the system's kick velocity and other asymmetries in the orbital dynamics. We find that the ringdowns of precessing systems need not be dominated by the $(\ensuremath{\ell},m,n)=(2,\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}2,0)$ quasinormal modes, and that instead the $(2,\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}1,0)$ or (2, 0,0) quasinormal modes can dominate. Our results are consistent with a ringdown analysis of the LIGO-Virgo gravitational wave signal GW190521, and may also help in understanding phenomenological inspiral-merger-ringdown waveform model systematics.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".