Paper detail

Black hole - neutron star mergers: The first mass gap and kilonovae

Observations of X-ray binaries indicate a dearth of compact objects in the mass range from $\sim 2-5 M_{\odot}$. The existence of this (first mass) gap has been used to discriminate between proposed engines behind core-collapse supernovae. From LIGO/Virgo observations of binary compact remnant masses, several candidate first mass gap objects (either neutron stars (NSs) or black holes (BHs)) were identified during the O3 science run. Motivated by these new observations, we study the formation of BH-NS mergers in the framework of isolated classical binary evolution, using population synthesis methods to evolve large populations of binary stars (Population I and II) across cosmic time. We present results on the NS to BH mass ratios ($q=M_{\rm NS}/M_{\rm BH}$) in merging systems, showing that although systems with a mass ratio as low as $q=0.02$ can exist, typically BH-NS systems form with moderate mass ratios $q=0.1-0.2$. If we adopt a delayed supernova engine, we conclude that $\sim 30\%$ of BH-NS mergers may host at least one compact object in the first mass gap (FMG$^\circ$). Even allowing for uncertainties in the processes behind compact object formation, we expect the fraction of BH-NS systems ejecting mass during the merger to be small (from $\sim 0.6-9\%$). In our reference model, we assume: (i) the formation of compact objects within the FMG, (ii) natal NS/BH kicks decreased by fallback, (iii) low BH spins due to Tayler-Spruit angular momentum transport in massive stars. We find that $\lesssim 1\%$ of BH-NS mergers will have any mass ejection and about the same percentage will produce kilonova bright enough to have a chance of being detected with a large (Subaru-class) $8$m telescope. Interestingly, all these mergers will have both a BH and an NS in the FMG.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 authors1 topic

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.