GWTC-4 data analysis yields a pair-instability mass gap lower edge at 44.3^{+5.9}_{-3.5} M_⊙, an S-factor of 268^{+195}_{-116} keV b for ^{12}C(α,γ)^{16}O, and two populations supporting both direct formation and hierarchical mergers.
Title resolution pending
3 Pith papers cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.
3
Pith papers citing it
citation-role summary
background 1
citation-polarity summary
verdicts
UNVERDICTED 3roles
background 1polarities
background 1representative citing papers
Introduces a frequentist p-value approach to falsify models of binary black hole formation for events such as GW190521, showing some models are adequate while others are not.
Stellar models show that the 12C(alpha,gamma)16O rate uncertainty moves the black hole mass gap, constraining its S300 to 137.6-263.4 keV barn when matched to the observed gap from gravitational waves.
citing papers explorer
-
Gravitational-wave constraints on the pair-instability mass gap and nuclear burning in massive stars
GWTC-4 data analysis yields a pair-instability mass gap lower edge at 44.3^{+5.9}_{-3.5} M_⊙, an S-factor of 268^{+195}_{-116} keV b for ^{12}C(α,γ)^{16}O, and two populations supporting both direct formation and hierarchical mergers.
-
Are all models wrong? Falsifying binary formation models in gravitational-wave astronomy
Introduces a frequentist p-value approach to falsify models of binary black hole formation for events such as GW190521, showing some models are adequate while others are not.
-
Constraints on the $^{12}$C$(\alpha, \gamma)^{16}$O and $^{16}$O+$^{16}$O Reaction Rates from Binary Black Holes Detected via Gravitational Wave Signals
Stellar models show that the 12C(alpha,gamma)16O rate uncertainty moves the black hole mass gap, constraining its S300 to 137.6-263.4 keV barn when matched to the observed gap from gravitational waves.