Paper detail

Mapping the Likelihood of GW190521 with Diverse Mass and Spin Priors

We map the likelihood of GW190521, the heaviest detected binary black hole (BBH) merger, by sampling under different mass and spin priors designed to be uninformative. We find that a source-frame total mass of $\sim$$150 M_{\odot}$ is consistently supported, but posteriors in mass ratio and spin depend critically on the choice of priors. We confirm that the likelihood has a multi-modal structure with peaks in regions of mass ratio representing very different astrophysical scenarios. The unequal-mass region ($m_2 / m_1 < 0.3$) has an average likelihood $\sim$$e^6$ times larger than the equal-mass region and a maximum likelihood $\sim$$e^2$ larger. Using ensembles of samples across priors, we examine the implications of qualitatively different BBH sources that fit the data. We find that the equal-mass solution has poorly constrained spins and at least one black hole mass that is difficult to form via stellar collapse due to (pulsational) pair instability. The unequal-mass solution can avoid this mass gap entirely but requires a negative effective spin and a precessing primary. Both of these scenarios are more easily produced by dynamical formation channels than field binary co-evolution. Drawing representative samples from each region of the likelihood map, we find a sensitive comoving volume-time $\mathcal{O}(10)$ times larger in the mass gap region than the gap-avoiding region. Accounting for this distance effect, the likelihood still reverses the advantage to favor the gap-avoiding scenario by a factor of $\mathcal{O}(100)$ before including mass and spin priors. Posterior samplers can be driven away from this high-likelihood region by common prior choices meant to be uninformative, making GW190521 parameter inference sensitive to the choice of mass and spin priors. This may be a generic issue for similarly heavy events given current detector sensitivity and waveform degeneracies.

preprint2023arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access7 authors4 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.