Paper detail

The Missing Link: Bayesian Detection and Measurement of Intermediate-Mass Black-Hole Binaries

We perform Bayesian analysis of gravitational-wave signals from non-spinning, intermediate-mass black-hole binaries (IMBHBs) with observed total mass, $M_{\mathrm{obs}}$, from $50\mathrm{M}_{\odot}$ to $500\mathrm{M}_{\odot}$ and mass ratio $1\mbox{--}4$ using advanced LIGO and Virgo detectors. We employ inspiral-merger-ringdown waveform models based on the effective-one-body formalism and include subleading modes of radiation beyond the leading $(2,2)$ mode. The presence of subleading modes increases signal power for inclined binaries and allows for improved accuracy and precision in measurements of the masses as well as breaking of extrinsic parameter degeneracies. For low total masses, $M_{\mathrm{obs}} \lesssim 50 \mathrm{M}_{\odot}$, the observed chirp mass $\mathcal{M}_{\rm obs} = M_{\mathrm{obs}}\,η^{3/5}$ ($η$ being the symmetric mass ratio) is better measured. In contrast, as increasing power comes from merger and ringdown, we find that the total mass $M_{\mathrm{obs}}$ has better relative precision than $\mathcal{M}_{\rm obs}$. Indeed, at high $M_{\mathrm{obs}}$ ($\geq 300 \mathrm{M}_{\odot}$), the signal resembles a burst and the measurement thus extracts the dominant frequency of the signal that depends on $M_{\mathrm{obs}}$. Depending on the binary's inclination, at signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of $12$, uncertainties in $M_{\mathrm{obs}}$ can be as large as $\sim 20 \mbox{--}25\%$ while uncertainties in $\mathcal{M}_{\rm obs}$ are $\sim 50 \mbox{--}60\%$ in binaries with unequal masses (those numbers become $\sim 17\%$ versus $\sim22\%$ in more symmetric binaries). Although large, those uncertainties will establish the existence of IMBHs. Our results show that gravitational-wave observations can offer a unique tool to observe and understand the formation, evolution and demographics of IMBHs, which are difficult to observe in the electromagnetic window. (abridged)

preprint2015arXivOpen 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.