Pith. Sign in

RECORD

Gravitational Wave Extraction in Simulations of Rotating Stellar Core Collapse

General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology · Submitted 2 Dec 2010

abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review

The authors' main claim We also find remarkably good agreement of the waveforms obtained from the QF with those obtained from CCE.

how it is stated · asserted 1.00 read the record →

Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗
Cite ▾
arXiv ID1012.0595 (version 2)
Pith ID2AQTXBPP, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review
CitationChristian D. Ott, Christian Reisswig, Erik Schnetter, Ulrich Sperhake. "Gravitational Wave Extraction in Simulations of Rotating Stellar Core Collapse." arXiv:1012.0595 (2010). https://pith.science/paper/2AQTXBPP
Claim paper

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Open the compiled record

Compiled by classifier-1.13-20260917 via OpenRouter, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 9,001 input tokens, $0.0004 reported.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.90 · states limitation 0.91 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.54 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.98 · compares with prior results 0.95 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v2. Results and the main claim are underlined; .

We perform simulations of general relativistic rotating stellar core collapse and compute the gravitational waves (GWs) emitted in the core bounce phase of three representative models via multiple techniques. The simplest technique, the quadrupole formula (QF), estimates the GW content in the spacetime from the mass quadrupole tensor. It is strictly valid only in the weak-field and slow-motion approximation. For the first time, we apply GW extraction methods in core collapse that are fully curvature-based and valid for strongly radiating and highly relativistic sources. We employ three extraction methods computing (i) the Newman-Penrose (NP) scalar Psi_4, (ii) Regge-Wheeler-Zerilli-Moncrief (RWZM) master functions, and (iii) Cauchy-Characteristic Extraction (CCE) allowing for the extraction of GWs at future null infinity, where the spacetime is asymptotically flat and the GW content is unambiguously defined. The latter technique is the only one not suffering from residual gauge and finite-radius effects. All curvature-based methods suffer from strong non-linear drifts. We employ the fixed-frequency integration technique as a high-pass waveform filter. Using the CCE results as a benchmark, we find that finite-radius NP extraction yields results that agree nearly perfectly in phase, but differ in amplitude by ~1-7% at core bounce, depending on the model. RWZM waveforms, while in general agreeing in phase, contain spurious high-frequency noise of comparable amplitudes to those of the relatively weak GWs emitted in core collapse. We also find remarkably good agreement of the waveforms obtained from the QF with those obtained from CCE. They agree very well in phase but systematically underpredict peak amplitudes by ~5-11% which is comparable to the NP results and is within the uncertainties associated with core collapse physics. (abridged)

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#sentencerolethe authors' own workstates the main conclusionstrength
s0 We perform simulations of general relativistic rotating stellar core collapse and compute the gravitational waves (GWs) emitted in the core bounce phase of three representative models via multiple techniques. contribution 0.85 0.98 0.05 asserted 1.00
s1 The simplest technique, the quadrupole formula (QF), estimates the GW content in the spacetime from the mass quadrupole tensor. method 0.66 0.21 0.02 asserted 1.00
s2 It is strictly valid only in the weak-field and slow-motion approximation. background 0.79 0.07 0.02 asserted 1.00
s3 For the first time, we apply GW extraction methods in core collapse that are fully curvature-based and valid for strongly radiating and highly relativistic sources. contribution 0.93 0.94 0.10 asserted 1.00
s4 We employ three extraction methods computing (i) the Newman-Penrose (NP) scalar Psi_4, (ii) Regge-Wheeler-Zerilli-Moncrief (RWZM) master functions, and (iii) Cauchy-Characteristic Extraction (CCE) allowing for the extraction of GWs at future null infinity, where the spacetime is asymptotically flat and the GW content is unambiguously defined. method 0.90 0.94 0.06 asserted 1.00
s5 The latter technique is the only one not suffering from residual gauge and finite-radius effects. method 0.43 0.37 0.08 asserted 1.00
s6 All curvature-based methods suffer from strong non-linear drifts. limitation 0.88 0.65 0.06 asserted 1.00
s7 We employ the fixed-frequency integration technique as a high-pass waveform filter. method 1.00 0.93 0.03 asserted 1.00
s8 Using the CCE results as a benchmark, we find that finite-radius NP extraction yields results that agree nearly perfectly in phase, but differ in amplitude by ~1-7% at core bounce, depending on the model. result 1.00 0.98 0.18 asserted 1.00
s9 RWZM waveforms, while in general agreeing in phase, contain spurious high-frequency noise of comparable amplitudes to those of the relatively weak GWs emitted in core collapse. result 0.99 0.94 0.08 asserted 1.00
s10 We also find remarkably good agreement of the waveforms obtained from the QF with those obtained from CCE. result 1.00 0.95 0.23 asserted 1.00
s11 They agree very well in phase but systematically underpredict peak amplitudes by ~5-11% which is comparable to the NP results and is within the uncertainties associated with core collapse physics. (abridged) result 0.96 0.95 0.29 asserted 1.00

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: simulation study 1.00 · evidence from simulation or computation 1.00.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read
  • arXiv listing abstract v2
not examined
  • full text
  • figures and tables
  • references and citing sentences
  • relations to other papers
levels run
  • P abstract
not run
  • S sections
  • T body sentences
  • C citations
  • R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

The paper
Original abstract

We perform simulations of general relativistic rotating stellar core collapse and compute the gravitational waves (GWs) emitted in the core bounce phase of three representative models via multiple techniques. The simplest technique, the quadrupole formula (QF), estimates the GW content in the spacetime from the mass quadrupole tensor. It is strictly valid only in the weak-field and slow-motion approximation. For the first time, we apply GW extraction methods in core collapse that are fully curvature-based and valid for strongly radiating and highly relativistic sources. We employ three extraction methods computing (i) the Newman-Penrose (NP) scalar Psi_4, (ii) Regge-Wheeler-Zerilli-Moncrief (RWZM) master functions, and (iii) Cauchy-Characteristic Extraction (CCE) allowing for the extraction of GWs at future null infinity, where the spacetime is asymptotically flat and the GW content is unambiguously defined. The latter technique is the only one not suffering from residual gauge and finite-radius effects. All curvature-based methods suffer from strong non-linear drifts. We employ the fixed-frequency integration technique as a high-pass waveform filter. Using the CCE results as a benchmark, we find that finite-radius NP extraction yields results that agree nearly perfectly in phase, but differ in amplitude by ~1-7% at core bounce, depending on the model. RWZM waveforms, while in general agreeing in phase, contain spurious high-frequency noise of comparable amplitudes to those of the relatively weak GWs emitted in core collapse. We also find remarkably good agreement of the waveforms obtained from the QF with those obtained from CCE. They agree very well in phase but systematically underpredict peak amplitudes by ~5-11% which is comparable to the NP results and is within the uncertainties associated with core collapse physics. (abridged)

Human review
References
How the literature uses it

14 arXiv papers cite this in 20 sentences

Each citing sentence is taken from the citing paper's LaTeX source and typed by Pith's classifier. A label appears at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), a contest at 0.7 or more; the quoted words are the citing authors'. How each label was checked · JSON

Papers citing it · 14 sentences without a confident label

Uses its method or tool 5 papers

What it cites · 8 sentences without a confident label

Uses the method or tool of 3 papers
  • In addition, and also for the first time in the present context, we utilize the Cauchy-Characteristic Extraction (CCE) approach [ref] that propagates the GW information to $^+$ for completely gauge independent and unambiguous GW extraction.

    A Characteristic Extraction Tool for Gravitational Waveforms · Introduction · 0.98

  • In order to reduce the contribution of these artificial low-frequency components, we first transform to the Fourier domain, multiply by $f$ in order to take the first time derivative, and then apply fixed FFI [ref] to obtain $h_+,e$.

    Notes on the integration of numerical relativity waveforms · Computing the Strain · 1.00

  • In our construction of an approximate tetrad, we follow common practice (e.g. [ref] ) and use a triad of spatial vectors $u, v, w$ obtained via a Gram-Schmidt orthonormalization starting from

    High accuracy binary black hole simulations with an extended wave zone · Newman-Penrose Scalars · 0.94

Cites as background 1 paper

Discussion

Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.