All five NSBH events are consistent with zero line-of-sight acceleration; the joint posterior for GW200105_162426 disfavors both zero LOSA and zero eccentricity at 90% credibility.
Mixed citations
Title resolution pending
Mixed citation behavior. Most common role is background (40%).
10
Pith papers citing it
Background
40% of classified citations
citation-role summary
background 2
method 2
baseline 1
citation-polarity summary
representative citing papers
SEOBNRv6EHM is a multipolar EOB model for eccentric planar-orbit BBHs calibrated to NR simulations, showing low waveform mismatches up to eccentricity 0.9.
The gwNRHME framework constructs a multi-modal non-spinning eccentric gravitational waveform surrogate by modulating quasi-circular models with universal eccentric functions, achieving median mismatches of ~9e-5 against 156 NR waveforms.
Near-identity averaging transformations applied to osculating orbital elements reduce the computational cost of eccentric EOB inspirals by up to two orders of magnitude while maintaining accuracy for moderate to large eccentricities at NNLO.
SEOBNRv6EHM reduces parameter biases for eccentric binaries versus prior models and shows mild support for eccentricity in five catalog events plus comparable unbound fits for three high-mass events.
pyEFPEHM extends prior PN models to include higher-order quasi-circular phasing, generalized precession solutions, and eccentric corrections up to 1PN in selected multipoles for eccentric precessing binaries with matter effects.
Dual-model analysis of 162 GW sources disfavors eccentricity for most events but finds potential evidence in GW200129, GW231001, and GW231123.
Reanalysis of GW231123 shows no significant eccentricity, with parameter estimate differences explained by waveform model disagreements at strong spin precession.
Eccentric BBH signals recovered with quasi-circular precessing models show biases in chirp mass and χ_p; Bayes factors favor eccentric aligned-spin models when both eccentricity and precession are present.
Reanalysis finds GW190521 prefers hyperbolic waveforms over quasi-circular precessing ones with ln Bayes factor 3.71, while other high-mass events and GW231123 favor the latter; mock signals indicate distinguishability challenges for high-mass precessing cases.
citing papers explorer
-
Measuring Eccentricity and Addressing Waveform Systematics in GW231123
Reanalysis of GW231123 shows no significant eccentricity, with parameter estimate differences explained by waveform model disagreements at strong spin precession.
-
Biased parameter inference of eccentric, spin-precessing binary black holes
Eccentric BBH signals recovered with quasi-circular precessing models show biases in chirp mass and χ_p; Bayes factors favor eccentric aligned-spin models when both eccentricity and precession are present.