Paper detail

Challenging a binary neutron star merger interpretation of GW230529

GW230529_181500 represented the first gravitational-wave detection with one of the component objects' mass inferred to lie in the previously hypothesized mass gap between the heaviest neutron stars and the lightest observed black holes. Given the expected maximum mass values for neutron stars, this object was identified as a black hole, and, with the secondary component being a neutron star, the detection was classified as a neutron star-black hole merger. However, due to the low signal-to-noise ratio and the known waveform degeneracy between the spin and mass ratio in the employed gravitational-wave models, GW230529_181500 could also be interpreted as a merger of two heavy ($\gtrsim 2 \mathrm{M}_\odot$) neutron stars with high spins. We investigate the distinguishability of these scenarios by performing parameter estimation on simulated signals obtained from numerical-relativity waveforms for both neutron star-black hole and binary neutron star systems, with parameters consistent with GW230529_181500, and comparing them to the analysis of the real event data. We find that GW230529_181500 is more likely to have originated from a neutron star-black hole merger, though the possibility of a binary neutron star origin can not be ruled out. Moreover, we use the simulation data to estimate the signatures of potential electromagnetic counterparts emitted by the systems. We find them to be too dim to be located by current wide-field surveys if only the dynamical ejecta is considered, and detectable by the Vera C. Rubin Observatory during the first two days after merger if one accounts for additional disk wind ejecta.

preprint2026arXivOpen 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.

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 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.