Paper detail

Binary neutron-star mergers with Whisky and SACRA: First quantitative comparison of results from independent general-relativistic hydrodynamics codes

We present the first quantitative comparison of two independent general-relativistic hydrodynamics codes, the Whisky code and the SACRA code. We compare the output of simulations starting from the same initial data and carried out with the configuration (numerical methods, grid setup, resolution, gauges) which for each code has been found to give consistent and sufficiently accurate results, in particular in terms of cleanness of gravitational waveforms. We focus on the quantities that should be conserved during the evolution (rest mass, total mass energy, and total angular momentum) and on the gravitational-wave amplitude and frequency. We find that the results produced by the two codes agree at a reasonable level, with variations in the different quantities but always at better than about 10%.

preprint2010arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors2 topics

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.

Institutions

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 map preview

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.