Paper detail

Inspiral-merger-ringdown multipolar waveforms of nonspinning black-hole binaries using the effective-one-body formalism

We calibrate an effective-one-body (EOB) model to numerical-relativity simulations of mass ratios 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6, by maximizing phase and amplitude agreement of the leading (2,2) mode and of the subleading modes (2,1), (3,3), (4,4) and (5,5). Aligning the calibrated EOB waveforms and the numerical waveforms at low frequency, the phase difference of the (2,2) mode between model and numerical simulation remains below 0.1 rad throughout the evolution for all mass ratios considered. The fractional amplitude difference at peak amplitude of the (2,2) mode is 2% and grows to 12% during the ringdown. Using the Advanced LIGO noise curve we study the effectualness and measurement accuracy of the EOB model, and stress the relevance of modeling the higher-order modes for parameter estimation. We find that the effectualness, measured by the mismatch, between the EOB and numerical-relativity polarizations which include only the (2,2) mode is smaller than 0.2% for binaries with total mass 20-200 Msun and mass ratios 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6. When numerical-relativity polarizations contain the strongest seven modes, and stellar-mass black holes with masses less than 50Msun are considered, the mismatch for mass ratio 6 (1) can be as high as 5% (0.2%) when only the EOB (2,2) mode is included, and an upper bound of the mismatch is 0.5% (0.07%) when all the four subleading EOB modes calibrated in this paper are taken into account. For binaries with intermediate-mass black holes with masses greater than 50Msun the mismatches are larger. We also determine for which signal-to-noise ratios the EOB model developed here can be used to measure binary parameters with systematic biases smaller than statistical errors due to detector noise.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access7 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.