Paper detail

An aligned-spin neutron-star--black-hole waveform model based on the effective-one-body approach and numerical-relativity simulations

After the discovery of gravitational waves from binary black holes (BBHs) and binary neutron stars (BNSs) with the LIGO and Virgo detectors, neutron-star--black-holes (NSBHs) are the natural next class of binary systems to be observed. In this work, we develop a waveform model for aligned-spin neutron-star--black-holes (NSBHs) combining a BBH baseline waveform (available in the effective-one-body approach) with a phenomenological description of tidal effects (extracted from numerical-relativity simulations), and correcting the amplitude during the late inspiral, merger and ringdown to account for the NS tidal disruption. We calibrate the amplitude corrections using NSBH waveforms obtained with the SpEC and the SACRA codes. The model was calibrated using simulations with NS masses in the range $1.2-1.4 M_\odot$, tidal deformabilities up to $4200$ (for a 1.2 $M_\odot$ NS), and dimensionless BH spin magnitude up to 0.9. Based on the simulations used, and on checking that sensible waveforms are produced, we recommend our model to be employed with NS mass in the range $1\mbox{--}3 M_\odot$, tidal deformability $0\mbox{--}5000$, and BH spin magnitude up to $0.9$. We also validate our model against two new, highly accurate NSBH waveforms with BH spin 0.9 and mass ratios 3 and 4, characterized by tidal disruption, produced with SpEC, and find very good agreement. We find that it will be challenging for the advanced LIGO-Virgo--detector network at design sensitivity to distinguish different source classes. We perform parameter-estimation on a synthetic numerical-relativity signal in zero noise to study parameter biases. Finally, we reanalyze GW170817, with the hypothesis that it is a NSBH. We do not find evidence to distinguish the BNS and NSBH hypotheses, however the posterior for the mass ratio is shifted to less equal masses under the NSBH hypothesis. [Abstract abridged for arxiv].

preprint2021arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.