Paper detail

Testing time evolution of the mass distribution of the black hole mergers

The detection of gravitational-wave events revealed that there are numerous populations of black hole (BH) binaries that can merge within the age of the Universe. Although several formation channels of such binaries are known, considerable theoretical uncertainties associated with each channel defeat the robust prediction of how much each channel contributes to the total merger rate density. Given that the time evolution of the merger rate density in some channels is (exactly or nearly) independent of BH masses, clarifying this feature from observational data will shed some light on the nature of BH binaries. On the basis of this motivation, we formulate a methodology to perform a statistical test of whether the mass distribution of BH mergers evolves over time by hypothesis testing. Our statistical test requires neither a priori specification of the mass distribution, which is largely uncertain, nor that of the time dependence of merger rate. We then apply it to mock data for some concrete shapes of the merger rate density and show that the proposed method rejects/(does not reject) the null hypothesis correctly for a large sample size. After this verification, the method is applied to a catalog of the gravitational-wave events obtained during the LIGO-Virgo's third observing run. We find that the selection bias degrades the effectiveness of our method for the O3 catalog owing to the reduction in the number of and the maximum redshifts of the merger events that we can explore. Within the range where the method can be applied, there is no indication of the time evolution of the mass distribution of merger rate density. This limitation will be eased in future observations containing more events, and our hypothesis testing will help determine whether the merger rate density evolves over time independently of BH masses.

preprint2023arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 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.