REVIEW 1 cited by
Accurate numerical simulations of inspiralling binary neutron stars and their comparison with effective-one-body analytical models
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
Binary neutron-star systems represent one of the most promising sources of gravitational waves. In order to be able to extract important information, notably about the equation of state of matter at nuclear density, it is necessary to have in hands an accurate analytical model of the expected waveforms. Following our recent work, we here analyze more in detail two general-relativistic simulations spanning about 20 gravitational-wave cycles of the inspiral of equal-mass binary neutron stars with different compactnesses, and compare them with a tidal extension of the effective-one-body (EOB) analytical model. The latter tidally extended EOB model is analytically complete up to the 1.5 post-Newtonian level, and contains an analytically undetermined parameter representing a higher-order amplification of tidal effects. We find that, by calibrating this single parameter, the EOB model can reproduce, within the numerical error, the two numerical waveforms essentially up to the merger. By contrast, analytical models (either EOB, or Taylor-T4) that do not incorporate such a higher-order amplification of tidal effects, build a dephasing with respect to the numerical waveforms of several radians.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
The error budget of binary neutron star merger simulations for configurations with high spin
For highly spinning (chi=0.5) binary neutron stars, evolution code choice is the largest numerical waveform error, and current analytical models disagree with numerical relativity beyond that error after the stars touch.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.