Paper detail

Influence of a mass transfer stability criterion on double white dwarf populations

Mass transfer stability is an essential issue in binary evolution. Ge et al. studied critical mass ratios for dynamically stable mass transfer by establishing adiabatic mass loss model and found that the donor stars on the giant branches tend to be more stable than that based on the composite polytropic stellar model. We would investigate the influence of mass transfer stability on the formation and properties of DWD populations. We performed a series of binary population synthesis, where the critical mass ratios from adiabatic mass loss model (Ge's model) and that from the composite polytropic model are adopted, respectively. For Ge's model, most of the DWDs are produced from the stable non-conservative Roche lobe overflow plus common envelope (CE) ejection channel (RL+CE channel) regardless of the CE ejection efficiency $α_{CE}$. While the results of the polytropic model strongly depend on the adopted value of $α_{ CE}$. We find DWDs produced from the RL+CE channel have comparable WD masses and the mass ratio distribution peaks at around 1. Based on the magnitude-limited sample of DWDs, the space densities for the detectable DWDs and those with extremely low-mass WD (ELM WD) companions in Ge's model is $1347$ and $473 kpc^{-3}$, respectively, close to observations. While the polytropic model overpredicts space density of DWDs by a factor of about $2-3$. We also find that the results of DWD merger rate distribution in Ge's model reproduce the observations better than that of the polytropic model, and the merger rate of DWDs with ELM WD companions in the Galaxy is about $1.8\times 10^{-3} yr^{-1}$ in Ge's model, which is comparable to the observation estimation. We confirm that the mass transfer stability plays important roles in the formation and properties of DWD populations, and then in the progenitors of SNe Ia and detectable GW sources.

preprint2023arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 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.