Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 4 minor 42 references

Non-conservation of linear momentum in widely used hierarchical methods in gravitational gas dynamics

T0 review · 5 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-09 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read PHANTOM's fast multipole method conserves momentum pairwise but not globally, causing neutron-star centers of mass to drift by up to about 1.75 stellar radii.

desk verdict Plausible, potentially important diagnosis of PHANTOM's FMM momentum drift, but the key traversal claim is unverified. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.01496 v1 pith:V2FYKMYZ submitted 2025-02-03 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.HEphysics.comp-ph

M. Sh. Potashov , A. V. Yudin This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.SRastro-ph.HEphysics.comp-ph
keywords fastmultipolemethodPHANTOMcodekd-treemomentumconservationself-gravityneutronstartreeopeningparameterrandomwalk
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper argues that the fast multipole method (FMM) as implemented in the PHANTOM code for self-gravitating gas dynamics fails to conserve total linear momentum, even though Newton's third law holds for every pair of kd-tree cells engaged in mutual interaction. The cause is a one-sided tree traversal: PHANTOM computes long-range forces only for "leaf cell ← super-cell" pairs, never the reverse pairs, so the forces acting on a super-cell's children are not balanced by forces acting on the leaf cell. The resulting uncompensated force acts like a random kick applied at every time step, producing a center-of-mass migration that grows as $T^{3/2}$ in time. For neutron-star-scale objects, the displacement becomes comparable to the stellar radius within a few tens of Keplerian revolutions, and for tree opening parameter $\theta \gtrsim 0.2$ it cannot be reduced by increasing particle number. The paper therefore calls for replacing PHANTOM's traversal with a symmetric tree-walk scheme.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the asymmetric pair "leaf cell ← super-cell" in the kd-tree traversal. For a leaf cell $\alpha$ and a supercell $\beta$ made of leaf children $\beta_1,\beta_2$, the total force on the system is taken as $F^{\beta\to\alpha}$ plus $F^{\alpha\to\beta_1}+F^{\alpha\to\beta_2}$, with no reciprocal $F^{\alpha\to\beta}$ to balance $F^{\beta\to\alpha}$. Expanding the multipole forces in the displacement $x$ between the supercell's center of mass and its children gives a leading residual force $F\simeq \frac{4}{r^5} M_\alpha M_\beta \frac{M_{\beta_1}}{M_{\beta_2}}\left(1-\frac{M_{\beta_1}}{M_{\beta_2}}\right) l^3$, independent of internal quadrupole moments. This residual force is a random variable whose kicks accumulate as a "random memory walk", yielding $\sqrt{\langle r^2\rangle}\propto T^{3/2}$.

What would settle it

Instrument the PHANTOM force loop to accumulate the net force on every kd-tree cell pair that interacts in a single time step; if the sum over all pairs is zero to round-off, the paper's claimed residual-force mechanism is absent. Alternatively, run the same neutron-star relaxation at $\theta=0.5$ with a version of the traversal that adds reverse "super-cell → leaf cell" pairs; if the center-of-mass displacement persists at the same level, the explanation would need revision.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central discovery is that the FMM force calculation in PHANTOM, although pairwise symmetric between any two cells, is not symmetric at the system level. In PHANTOM's traversal, a leaf cell receives long-range acceleration from a supercell, but the supercell does not receive the reciprocal acceleration; instead, the leaf children of the supercell receive their own accelerations from the leaf cell. Because the supercell's children are displaced from the supercell's center of mass, these two sets of forces do not cancel. Section 4 derives the residual force $F \simeq \frac{4}{r^5} M_\alpha M_\beta \frac{M_{\beta_1}}{M_{\beta_2}}\left(1-\frac{M_{\beta_1}}{M_{\beta_2}}\right) l^3$ for the elementary asymmetric pair, independent of the cells' quadrupole moments. The net effect is a random "kick" on the whole system, whose mean-square displacement satisfies $\sqrt{\langle r^2\rangle} = \frac{F}{M}\sqrt{\frac{\Delta t}{3}}\,T^{3/2}$. Numerical relaxation of a single neutron star with $N=5000$ to $150000$ particles at $\theta=0.5$ shows center-of-mass displacements up to about $1.75$ stellar radii in $4\times 10^4$ time units, while direct summation at $\theta=0$ produces no such drift. The paper concludes that the code must be corrected, for example by adopting the symmetric tree-walk scheme of [9;10].

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that PHANTOM's actual tree traversal applies long-range forces in only one direction, "leaf cell ← super-cell", and never the reverse; if the code in fact symmetrizes those interactions, the derived residual-force formulas and the predicted drift would not describe its real momentum error.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Current PHANTOM FMM results for neutron-star-scale objects carry a center-of-mass drift on the order of the stellar radius over tens of Keplerian orbits at $\theta=0.5$.
  • Increasing the number of particles does not reduce the drift for $\theta \gtrsim 0.2$; the displacement scales with particle number as $N^{\sigma-1/6}$, with $\sigma\approx 0.55$ at $\theta=0.5$.
  • For smaller $\theta\lesssim 0.2$ the drift decreases only as $N^{-1/6}$, so cutting the error by a factor of ten would require six orders of magnitude more particles, and the increased short-range region makes the calculation significantly slower.
  • White dwarfs, hot stars, and nebulae are largely unaffected over the same timescale, but white-dwarf binaries on very long runs would accumulate a comparable error.
  • The proposed correction is a symmetric tree-walk that considers all well-separated cell pairs with a symmetric opening criterion, while noting that FMM schemes in general still have known angular-momentum non-conservation.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Inference: The same residual-force mechanism should also make the reported angular-momentum non-conservation grow with time; an isolated star with zero initial velocities would acquire a slow net spin, which could masquerade as physical rotation in merger studies.
  • Inference: Because the kick magnitude depends on cell geometry through the mass imbalance $M_{\beta_1}/M_{\beta_2}$, the drift is configuration-dependent, so unequal-mass or offset-density binaries would drift at different rates and binary orbital elements inferred from PHANTOM relaxation runs may carry a systematic bias.
  • Inference: The equal-time-step assumption in the random-walk model is an idealization; with PHANTOM's adaptive CFL timesteps the $\Delta t$ entering (35) varies, so the clean $T^{3/2}$ scaling is a limiting law rather than an exact prediction. Runs with artificially fixed timesteps could test how strongly the scaling changes.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

5 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper examines the fast multipole method (FMM) implementation in the PHANTOM smoothed particle hydrodynamics code for self-gravity. The authors prove that for any pair of well-separated kd-tree cells, the force computed from PHANTOM's multipole acceleration formulas satisfies Newton's third law. They then argue that, despite this pair-level symmetry, the global linear momentum is not conserved because PHANTOM's tree traversal only considers 'leaf cell←super-cell' pairs in one direction and never the reverse pairs. This asymmetric treatment is modeled as generating an uncompensated random force on the system, leading to a center-of-mass displacement that grows as T^{3/2} (a 'random memory walk'). Numerical simulations of a single neutron star with N from 5000 to 150000 at tree opening parameter θ=0.5 show a displacement of up to ~1.75 stellar radii over 4×10^4 time units, while a θ=0 (direct summation) control shows no such drift. The authors derive scaling laws for the displacement as a function of mass, radius, particle number, and time, and conclude that for θ≳0.2 increasing N does not reduce the error for neutron-star-scale objects.

Significance. If the premise about PHANTOM's traversal asymmetry is correct, this paper identifies a serious and actionable issue for a widely used astrophysics code: spurious center-of-mass migration in neutron-star simulations, with the error growing with time and not decreasing with particle number for typical opening angles. The pair-level Newton's-third-law proof is a clean analytical result, and the θ=0 control convincingly ties the observed drift to the tree-based long-range force rather than to SPH discretization. The scaling formulas provide a practical guide for error estimation in other objects (white dwarfs, stars). However, the central claim rests on an unverified assertion about the internal traversal logic of a specific code, and the abstract overstates the evidence by referring to a binary-neutron-star simulation that was not performed. The paper therefore has the potential to be an important warning to the PHANTOM user community, but the key premise and supporting models need to be substantiated before publication.

major comments (5)
  1. [Section 4, Eq. (30)] The premise that PHANTOM's gravity tree walk only considers 'leaf cell←super-cell' pairs and never the reverse pairs is asserted in the text but not demonstrated against the actual code. The entire residual-force model in Eq. (30) and the scaling relation (47) depend on this one-sided traversal. The authors should cite the specific PHANTOM version and quote or inspect the relevant tree-walk routine (or provide a simple instrumented test that counts interaction pairs). Without this verification, the mechanism remains a hypothesis about the code's behavior, and the simulated drift could have an alternative cause, such as truncation error in the multipole expansion.
  2. [Abstract and Section 7] The abstract and conclusion state that for a pair of neutron stars the center-of-mass displacement is comparable to the object radii within a few tens of Keplerian revolutions, but no binary simulation is presented. The reported simulations are of a single neutron star. The extrapolation from a single star to a binary system requires justification (e.g., showing that the spurious force on a binary's center of mass has the same statistics), or the abstract should be rephrased to state explicitly that the effect is demonstrated for an isolated star and expected to be similar in a binary.
  3. [Section 3, Eqs. (27)-(29)] The proof that PHANTOM's acceleration formula (8) is equivalent to a symmetric second-order Taylor expansion relies on the claim that the added terms (n,m)=(1,2),(2,1),(2,2) lie inside the residual term R_3(r,x) of the p=3 expansion. No explicit bound for R_3 is provided. Without such a bound, the pair-level conservation proof is incomplete, and the alternative explanation that the observed momentum drift originates from the truncation of the multipole expansion is not ruled out. The authors should either supply a rigorous error estimate or validate the equivalence numerically for the cell configurations used in the simulations.
  4. [Section 5, Eq. (35)] The random-walk model assumes that the uncompensated force at each step is isotropic, independent of previous steps, and uniformly distributed in modulus up to F. These assumptions are not tested. Because the kd-tree is rebuilt deterministically as the particles move, successive residual forces may be correlated, which would invalidate the T^{3/2} scaling. The authors should measure the autocorrelation of the force sequence and compare the predicted displacement distribution to the simulations without fitting F from the same data (e.g., by estimating F from a separate calibration run and then predicting the drift).
  5. [Section 6, Fig. 8 and Eq. (51)] The exponent sigma, which controls the N-dependence of the displacement through N^{sigma-1/6}, is fitted from the same set of runs that exhibit the drift. The conclusion that 'for theta ≳ 0.2, no changes in N can eliminate the error' hinges on this fit. The paper should report fit uncertainties and, ideally, validate the predicted scaling by comparing the N^{sigma-1/6} prediction directly against the measured displacement amplitudes in Fig. 4, or by running additional N values. The direct observation in Fig. 4 shows no improvement over the limited range 5000-150000, but that does not justify the strong claim 'for any N'.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Throughout] The PHANTOM version and configuration used for the simulations are not stated; this information is essential for reproducibility of the claim about the tree traversal.
  2. [Section 2, Eq. (8)] The notation 'a^{β→α,i}(r,x)' conflates the acceleration of a particle with the acceleration of a cell; consider renaming the cell-level force or clarifying the distinction in the text.
  3. [Section 6, Fig. 4] The curves for the six N values are not labeled with distinct markers in the text description; a table of final displacements (or a legend with markers) would help the reader evaluate the N-dependence directly.
  4. [References] Reference [24] is a preprint; if it has appeared in a peer-reviewed venue, it should be updated.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the core non-conservation analysis is self-contained, with only a fitted exponent and an asserted code-traversal premise as caveats.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is supported by a direct multipole-force accounting (Eqs. 30-33), a random-walk derivation (Eq. 35), and PHANTOM simulations (Figs. 4-7), none of which assumes the conclusion. Section 3 independently proves pairwise symmetry of the PHANTOM acceleration formula (8), and Section 4 then computes the net force under the stated traversal assumption. The main vulnerability is factual rather than circular: the assertion that PHANTOM considers only 'leaf cell←super-cell' pairs and never reverse pairs is stated without code inspection, so if the actual traversal symmetrizes interactions, the model would not describe the real code. But that is an unverified premise, not a self-referential reduction. The self-citation to the earlier preprint [24] is not load-bearing because the derivation is reproduced in the present paper. The exponent sigma in Eq. (47) is fitted from the same runs shown in Fig. 8, making the 'no improvement for theta > 0.2' statement empirical calibration rather than an independent prediction; however, this does not make the result circular by construction. No equation is shown to be equivalent to its inputs by definition, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The core non-conservation claim rests on two kinds of inputs: standard multipole and Green's function mathematics, and code-behavior assumptions about PHANTOM's tree traversal. The mathematics is standard and low risk; the code-behavior and random-walk assumptions are the fragile parts. The only fitted quantity is sigma, which controls the headline N-scaling conclusion.

free parameters (2)
  • sigma (tree-asymmetry exponent) = approx. 0.55 for theta=0.5; approx. 0.15 for theta=0.2
    Fitted as F(N)=max_i f_i(T,N) proportional to N^sigma in Section 6; the conclusion that displacement grows with N for theta above 0.2 (sigma>1/6) depends on this fit.
  • tree opening parameter theta = 0.5 (main runs), 0.2 and 0 for comparisons
    Chosen by hand as standard values; the non-conservation magnitude and the sigma(theta) threshold depend on these choices.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math The Laplace Green's function is symmetric under the permutation (11), and the Taylor expansion (18) converges for well-separated kd-tree cells.
    Used in Eqs. (20)-(23) to derive the multipole expansion; standard and low risk.
  • domain assumption The SPH gravitational potential is represented by the symmetrized softening kernel in Eq. (13), and for well-separated cells the effective Green's function is -1/r_xy (Eq. 15).
    Section 3 uses this to prove pair-level Newton's third law; this is the standard PHANTOM/Monaghan formalism but is assumed rather than re-derived.
  • ad hoc to paper A multi-index Taylor expansion of the Green's function can be truncated at second order in x and y after discarding octopoles, and the added terms (n,m)=(1,2),(2,1),(2,2) lie inside the residual error.
    Section 3 reconstructs PHANTOM's acceleration formula (8) from the symmetric p=5 expansion by these discards; the claim that the omitted terms are below the residual is asserted, not quantified.
  • domain assumption PHANTOM's tree walk computes forces only from leaf cells to paired supercells, and the reverse forces appear on the supercell's child leaves as in Eq. (30).
    This is the load-bearing code-behavior premise for the uncompensated-force model in Section 4; if the real traversal differs, the residual formulas (31)-(33) do not apply.
  • domain assumption The residual force is an isotropic random vector with modulus uniformly distributed on [0,F] and statistically independent across time steps.
    Section 5 derives the T^{3/2} center-of-mass scaling from this model; isotropy and independence are not tested in the simulations.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Non-conservation of linear momentum in widely used hierarchical methods in gravitational gas dynamics." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/V2FYKMYZ

@misc{pith2026250201496,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Non-conservation of linear momentum in widely used hierarchical methods in gravitational gas dynamics},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/V2FYKMYZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.01496}
}
read the original abstract

The paper considers the implementation of the fast multipole method (FMM) in the PHANTOM code for the calculation of forces in a self-gravitating system. The gravitational interaction forces are divided into short-range and long-range interactions depending on the value of the tree opening parameter of the hierarchical kd-tree. It is demonstrated that Newton's third law holds for any pair of cells of the kd-tree engaged in mutual interaction. However, for the entire system a linear momentum is not conserved. As a result, there is an unphysical force that causes the center of mass to migrate. For example, for a pair of neutron stars, the displacement of the system's center of mass is found to be comparable to the radii of the objects at times of a few tens of Keplerian revolutions. This displacement cannot be reduced by increasing the number of particles for values of the tree opening parameter greater than 0.2. For smaller values, the time required for the calculation is significantly longer.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.01496 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Gravitational interaction of SPH-particles of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Non-symmetric gravitational interaction between SPH-particles of the leaf cell [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Flattening of the neutron star ellipsoid, calculated at SPH-particle number [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The displacement of the center of mass of a single neutron star normalized by its radius, calculated [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The linear momentum of a single neutron star, calculated for six different numbers of SPH-particles [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The angular momentum of a single neutron star, calculated for six different numbers of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The displacement of the center of mass of a single neutron star normalized by its radius, calculated [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The modulus of the uncompensated force acting on the center of mass of a single neutron star [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 27 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A Hierarchical O(N Log N) Force-Calculation Algorithm // Nature

    Barnes J., Hut P. A Hierarchical O(N Log N) Force-Calculation Algorithm // Nature. — 1986. — Dec. — Vol. 324, no. 6096. — P. 446–449. — DOI:10.1038/324446a0. — (Cit. on p. 1)

    doi:10.1038/324446a0 1986

  2. [2]

    A Fast Algorithm for Particle Simulations // Journal of Computational Physics

    Greengard L., Rokhlin V. A Fast Algorithm for Particle Simulations // Journal of Computational Physics. — 1997. — Aug. — Vol. 135, no. 2. — P. 280–292. — DOI:10.1006/jcph.1997.5706. — (Cit. on pp. 1, 3)

    work page arXiv 1997

  3. [3]

    A Comparison between the Fast Multipole Algorithm and the Tree- Code to Evaluate Gravitational Forces in 3-D // Journal of Computational Physics

    Capuzzo-Dolcetta R., Miocchi P. A Comparison between the Fast Multipole Algorithm and the Tree- Code to Evaluate Gravitational Forces in 3-D // Journal of Computational Physics. — 1998. — June. — Vol. 143, no. 1. — P. 29–48. — DOI:10.1006/jcph.1998.5949. — arXiv:astro-ph/9703122. — (Cit. on p. 1)

    arXiv 1998

  4. [4]

    A., Duraiswami R

    Gumerov N. A., Duraiswami R. Fast Multipole Methods for the Helmholtz Equation in Three Dimensions. — Amsterdam London : Elsevier, 2004. — (Elsevier Series in Electromagnetism). — (Cit. on p. 1)

    work page 2004

  5. [5]

    Fast Multipole Method // Vestn

    Gumerov N. Fast Multipole Method // Vestn. Akad. Nauk Resp. Bashkortostan. — 2013. — Vol. 18, no. 4. — P. 11–24. — (Cit. on p. 1)

    work page 2013

  6. [6]

    Computer Simulation Using Particles

    Hockney R., Eastwood J. Computer Simulation Using Particles. — CRC Press, 2021. — (Cit. on p. 1)

    work page 2021

  7. [7]

    Particle mesh multipole method: An efficient solver for gravitational/electrostatic forces based on multipole method and fast convolution over a uniform mesh

    Nitadori K. Particle Mesh Multipole Method: An Efficient Solver for Gravitational/Electrostatic Forces Based on Multipole Method and Fast Convolution over a Uniform Mesh. — 10/17/2014. — arXiv: 1409.5981 [astro-ph, physics:physics] . — URL:http://arxiv.org/abs/1409.5981 (visited on 06/11/2024). — preprint. — (Cit. on p. 1)

    work page Pith review arXiv 2014

  8. [8]

    A Hybrid Fast Multipole Method for Cosmological N-body Simulations // Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics

    Wang Q. A Hybrid Fast Multipole Method for Cosmological N-body Simulations // Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics. — 2021. — Jan. 1. — Vol. 21, no. 1. — P. 003. — DOI:10.1088/1674- 4527/21/1/3. — (Cit. on p. 1)

    doi:10.1088/1674- 2021

Show all 42 references
  1. [9]

    A Very Fast and Momentum-conserving Tree Code // The Astrophysical Journal

    Dehnen W. A Very Fast and Momentum-conserving Tree Code // The Astrophysical Journal. — 2000. — June 10. — Vol. 536, no. 1. — P. L39–l42. — DOI:10.1086/312724. — (Cit. on pp. 1, 2, 5–7, 15, 16)

    2000 doi

  2. [10]

    A Hierarchical (N) Force Calculation Algorithm // Journal of Computational Physics

    Dehnen W. A Hierarchical (N) Force Calculation Algorithm // Journal of Computational Physics. —

  3. [11]

    A Fast Recursive Coordinate Bisection Tree for Neighbour Search and Gravity // Mon

    Gafton E., Rosswog S. A Fast Recursive Coordinate Bisection Tree for Neighbour Search and Gravity // Mon. Notices Royal Astron. Soc. — 2011. — Sept. 15. — Vol. 418, no. 2. — P. 770–781. — DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19528.x. — (Cit. on pp. 1, 2)

    2011

  4. [12]

    A Fast Multipole Method for Stellar Dynamics // Comput

    Dehnen W. A Fast Multipole Method for Stellar Dynamics // Comput. Astrophys. — 2014. — Sept. — Vol. 1, no. 1. — P. 1. — DOI:10.1186/s40668-014-0001-7. — (Cit. on pp. 1, 3, 5)

    2014 doi

  5. [13]

    C., Shiber S., De Marco O., [et al.]

    Marcello D. C., Shiber S., De Marco O., [et al.]. octo-Tiger: A New, 3D Hydrodynamic Code for Stellar Mergers That Uses hpx Parallelization // Mon. Notices Royal Astron. Soc. — 2021. — Apr. 10. — Vol. 504, no. 4. — P. 5345–5382. — DOI:10.1093/mnras/stab937. — arXiv:2101.08226....

    2021 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Bentley J. L. Multidimensional Binary Search Trees Used for Associative Searching // Communications of the ACM. — 1975. — Sept. — Vol. 18, no. 9. — P. 509–517. — DOI:10.1145/361002.361007 . — (Cit. on p. 1)

    1975

  7. [15]

    PKDGRAV3: Beyond Trillion Particle Cosmological Simulations for the next Era of Galaxy Surveys // Computational Astrophysics and Cosmology

    Potter D., Stadel J., Teyssier R. PKDGRAV3: Beyond Trillion Particle Cosmological Simulations for the next Era of Galaxy Surveys // Computational Astrophysics and Cosmology. — 2017. — May 18. — Vol. 4, no. 1. — P. 2. — DOI:10.1186/s40668-017-0021-1. — (Cit. on p. 1)

    2017 doi

  8. [16]

    Price D. J. Smoothed particle hydrodynamics and magnetohydrodynamics // Journal of Computational Physics. — 2012. — Feb. — Vol. 231, no. 3. — P. 759–794. — DOI:10.1016/j.jcp.2010.12.011 . — arXiv: 1012.1885. — (Cit. on pp. 1, 2, 10). – 17 –

    2012 arXiv

  9. [17]

    J., Wurster J., Tricco T

    Price D. J., Wurster J., Tricco T. S., [et al.]. Phantom : A Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics and Magnetohydrodynamics Code for Astrophysics // Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia. — 2018. — Sept. — Vol. 35, no. 2018. — e031. — DOI:10.1017/pasa.2018.25 . — arX...

    2018 arXiv

  10. [18]

    J., M´ enard F., [et al.]

    Pinte C., Price D. J., M´ enard F., [et al.]. Kinematic Evidence for an Embedded Protoplanet in a CircumstellarDisk//TheAstrophysicalJournalLetters.—2018.—June.—Vol.860,no.1.—P.L13.— DOI: 10.3847/2041-8213/aac6dc. — arXiv:1805.10293 [astro-ph.SR]. — (Cit. on pp. 2, 15)

    2018 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Golightly E. C. A., Coughlin E. R., Nixon C. J. Tidal Disruption Events: The Role of Stellar Spin // The Astrophysical Journal. — 2019. — Feb. — Vol. 872, no. 2. — P. 163. — DOI:10 . 3847 / 1538 - 4357/aafd2f. — arXiv:1901.03717 [astro-ph.HE]. — (Cit. on pp. 2, 15)

    2019 arXiv

  12. [20]

    M., Nixon C

    Heath R. M., Nixon C. J. On the orbital evolution of binaries with circumbinary discs // Astronomy and Astrophysics. — 2020. — Sept. — Vol. 641. — A64. — DOI:10.1051/0004- 6361/202038548 . — arXiv: 2007.11592 [astro-ph.HE]. — (Cit. on pp. 2, 15)

    2020 arXiv

  13. [21]

    I., Yudin A

    Blinnikov S. I., Yudin A. V., Kramarev N., Potashov M. Stripping Model for Short Gamma-Ray Bursts in Neutron Star Mergers // Particles. — 2022. — June 16. — Vol. 5, no. 2. — P. 198–209. — DOI: 10.3390/particles5020018. — (Cit. on pp. 2, 15)

    2022 doi

  14. [22]

    S., Yudin A

    Potashov M. S., Yudin A. V. Algorithm for Taking into Account Back-Reaction of Gravitational Waves Emission during the Merger of Neutron Stars // Keldysh Institute Preprints. — 2023. — Vol. 2898, no. 40. — P. 1–17. — DOI:10.20948/prepr-2023-40. — (Cit. on pp. 2, 15)

    2023 doi

  15. [23]

    Merging and striping regimes in close pairs of relativistic stars: prospects for models of short gamma-bursts // Izvestiya VUSov (Radiophysics)

    Yudin A., Blinnikov S., Kramarev N., Potashov M. Merging and striping regimes in close pairs of relativistic stars: prospects for models of short gamma-bursts // Izvestiya VUSov (Radiophysics). —

  16. [24]

    Potashov M. S. Non-Conservation of Momentum in the FMM Method in the PHANTOM Code // Keldysh Institute Preprints. — 2024. — No. 43. — P. 1–25. — DOI:10.20948/prepr-2024-43. — (Cit. on p. 2)

    2024 doi

  17. [25]

    J., Monaghan J

    Price D. J., Monaghan J. J. An Energy-Conserving Formalism for Adaptive Gravitational Force Softening in Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics and N-body Codes // Mon. Notices Royal Astron. Soc. — 2007. — Feb. — Vol. 374, no. 4. — P. 1347–1358. — DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.11241. ...

    2007

  18. [26]

    Green’s Function of the Laplace Operator

    Bogolyubov A., Levashova N., Mogilevskiy I., [et al.]. Green’s Function of the Laplace Operator. —

  19. [27]

    Folland G. B. Advanced Calculus. — Upper Saddle River, NJ : Prentice Hall, 2002. — 461 p. — (Cit. on p. 5)

    2002

  20. [28]

    Lange M., Rump S. M. Error Estimates for the Summation of Real Numbers with Application to Floating-Point Summation // BIT Numerical Mathematics. — 2017. — May 3. — Vol. 57, no. 3. — P. 927–941. — DOI:10.1007/s10543-017-0658-9. — (Cit. on p. 7)

    2017 doi

  21. [29]

    Probabilistic Error Analysis For Sequential Summation of Real Floating Point Numbers

    Rhyne J. Probabilistic Error Analysis For Sequential Summation of Real Floating Point Numbers. — 05/28/2021. — arXiv:2101.11738 [cs, math] . — URL:http://arxiv.org/abs/2101.11738 (visited on 05/05/2024). — preprint. — (Cit. on p. 7)

    2021 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Hallman E., Ipsen I. C. F. Deterministic and Probabilistic Error Bounds for Floating Point Summation Algorithms. — 07/04/2021. — arXiv: 2107 . 01604 [cs, math] . — URL: http : / / arxiv . org / abs / 2107.01604 (visited on 05/05/2024). — preprint. — (Cit. on p. 7)

    2021 arXiv

  23. [31]

    A., [et al.]

    Loiseau J., Lim H., Kaltenborn M. A., [et al.]. FleCSPH: The next Generation FleCSIble Parallel Computational Infrastructure for Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics // SoftwareX. — 2020. — July. — Vol. 12. — P. 100602. — DOI:10.1016/j.softx.2020.100602. — (Cit. on p. 7)

    2020

  24. [32]

    Diffusion

    Popov P. Diffusion. — Moscow : Mipt, 2016. — (Cit. on p. 9)

    2016

  25. [33]

    C., Monaghan J

    Lattanzio J. C., Monaghan J. J., Pongracic H., Schwarz M. P. Controlling Penetration // SIAM Journal on Scientific and Statistical Computing. — 1986. — Apr. — Vol. 7, no. 2. — P. 591–598. — DOI: 10.1137/0907039. — (Cit. on p. 9)

    1986 doi

  26. [34]

    VonNeumann J., Richtmyer R. D. A Method for the Numerical Calculation of Hydrodynamic Shocks // Journal of Applied Physics. — 1950. — Mar. 1. — Vol. 21, no. 3. — P. 232–237. — DOI:10.1063/1. 1699639. — (Cit. on p. 10)

    1950 doi

  27. [35]

    K., Hebeler K., Lattimer J

    Greif S. K., Hebeler K., Lattimer J. M., [et al.]. Equation of State Constraints from Nuclear Physics, Neutron Star Masses, and Future Moment of Inertia Measurements // The Astrophysical Journal. —

  28. [36]

    B., Novikov I

    Zeldovich Y. B., Novikov I. D. Relativistic Astrophysics. — Moscow : Nauka, 1967. — (Cit. on p. 10)

    1967

  29. [37]

    Schoenberg I. J. Contributions to the Problem of Approximation of Equidistant Data by Analytic Functions. Part A. On the Problem of Smoothing or Graduation. A First Class of Analytic Approximation Formulae // Quarterly of Applied Mathematics. — 1946. — Vol. 4, no. 1. — P. 45–9...

    1946 doi

  30. [38]

    SPH Methods in the Modelling of Compact Objects // Living Reviews in Computational Astrophysics

    Rosswog S. SPH Methods in the Modelling of Compact Objects // Living Reviews in Computational Astrophysics. — 2015. — Oct. 19. — Vol. 1, no. 1. — P. 1. — DOI:10.1007/lrca-2015-1. — (Cit. on p. 10)

    2015 doi

  31. [39]

    Marcello D. C. A Very Fast and Angular Momentum Conserving Tree Code // The Astronomical Journal. — 2017. — Aug. — Vol. 154, no. 3. — P. 92. — DOI:10.3847/1538-3881/aa7b2f. — (Cit. on p. 16)

    2017 doi

  32. [2002]

    — June. — Vol. 179, no. 1. — P. 27–42. — DOI:10.1006/jcph.2002.7026 . — arXiv: astro- ph/0202512. — (Cit. on pp. 1, 2, 6, 15, 16)

    2002

  33. [2020]

    — Oct. 1. — Vol. 901, no. 2. — P. 155. — DOI:10.3847/1538-4357/abaf55. — (Cit. on p. 10). – 18 –

    doi

  34. [2023]

    — Apr. 18. — Vol. 66, no. 9. — P. 720–734. — DOI:10.52452/00213462_2023_66_09_720 . — (Cit. on pp. 2, 15)

    doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 9, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.