pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.11358 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-13 · ⚛️ nucl-th · astro-ph.HE

Recognition: unknown

Emulator-Assisted Nuclear DFT Inference and Its Consequences for the Structure of Neutron Stars

Pietro Klausner , Marco Antonelli , Gianluca Col\`o , Francesca Gulminelli , Xavier Roca-Maza , Enrico Vigezzi
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 16:00 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ nucl-th astro-ph.HE
keywords Skyrme energy density functionalBayesian inferenceGaussian emulatorneutron star equation of stateNICER observationsab initio neutron matternuclear matter parametersmeta-model
0
0 comments X

The pith

Bayesian analysis with a Gaussian emulator constrains a Skyrme functional extended by a meta-model to produce consistent neutron-star crust and core properties.

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

Nuclear density functional theory aims to describe both finite nuclei and the dense matter in neutron stars using the same parameters, but reliable predictions require handling uncertainties when extrapolating to high densities. This paper introduces an efficient Bayesian inference method that employs a Gaussian emulator to approximate expensive full calculations and explore a high-dimensional parameter space. The calibration incorporates additional isospin-sensitive nuclear data along with constraints from ab initio neutron-matter calculations and recent NICER astrophysical observations. The resulting posteriors deliver neutron-star properties compatible with current limits and approximate the bulk nuclear-matter parameters as a multivariate Gaussian whose covariance matrix is supplied for reuse.

Core claim

We present an updated Bayesian inference of a Skyrme energy density functional augmented by a flexible meta-model density dependence at high density. Nuclear observables are computed using a Gaussian emulator of the publicly available Milano HFBCS-QRPA code, enabling efficient exploration of a high-dimensional parameter space. The resulting posteriors are further constrained by ab initio neutron-matter calculations and astrophysical observations, including recent NICER measurements, yielding consistent crust and core properties of catalyzed NS compatible with current constraints. Bulk nuclear-matter parameters are well approximated by a multivariate Gaussian with covariance matrix provided,

What carries the argument

Gaussian emulator of the HFBCS-QRPA code that approximates full calculations for a Skyrme energy density functional extended by a meta-model at high density, enabling efficient Bayesian sampling of the parameter space.

If this is right

  • The provided multivariate Gaussian covariance matrix for bulk nuclear-matter parameters can be directly reused in other calculations without re-running the full inference.
  • The inferred model produces crust and core properties for catalyzed neutron stars that remain compatible with existing constraints.
  • Finite-nucleus parameters exhibit non-Gaussian posteriors, so full sampling rather than Gaussian approximation is needed for precise nuclear structure predictions.
  • Uncertainty quantification is extended to supra-saturation densities, supporting more reliable extrapolations in neutron-star modeling.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The supplied covariance matrix could be imported directly into Monte Carlo codes for neutron-star merger or cooling simulations to propagate nuclear uncertainties.
  • The emulator approach could be applied to other density functionals or additional observables to further tighten constraints on the equation of state.
  • Non-Gaussian features in finite-nucleus parameters indicate that predictions for specific nuclei may require retaining the full posterior samples rather than simplified approximations.

Load-bearing premise

The Gaussian emulator must accurately reproduce the full HFBCS-QRPA calculations across the explored parameter space while the meta-model correctly captures the high-density behavior required for neutron-star extrapolations.

What would settle it

A validation test point where the emulator deviates from the full code by more than the target uncertainty, or a new neutron-star radius or mass measurement that falls outside the predicted posterior range.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.11358 by Enrico Vigezzi, Francesca Gulminelli, Gianluca Col\`o, Marco Antonelli, Pietro Klausner, Xavier Roca-Maza.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: Marginalized posterior distribution of the nuclear matter, surface, spin-orbit, and effective mass parameters [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: Model results, Likelihoods [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: Binding energy posterior distribution for the Ca and Sn isotopic chains (full blue line), compared to the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: Corner plot for the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7: Posterior of the neutron star EOS (upper part) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: Posterior distributions of selected crust [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8: Gaussian approximation of the nuclear posterior. Focus: nuclear matter parameters. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9: Gaussian approximation of the nuclear [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_9.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Nuclear density functional theory provides a unified description of finite nuclei and bulk nuclear matter, and is widely used to model the neutron star equation of state. However, extrapolations to supra-saturation densities require a quantified treatment of uncertainties arising from parameter estimation and functional choices. We present an updated Bayesian inference of a Skyrme energy density functional augmented by a flexible meta-model density dependence at high density. Nuclear observables are computed using a Gaussian emulator of the publicly available Milano HFBCS-QRPA code, enabling efficient exploration of a high-dimensional parameter space. Relative to previous analyses, we extend the calibration set with isospin-sensitive data, including masses and charge radii along selected Ca and Sn isotopic chains, and updated constraints from giant monopole resonances. The resulting posteriors are further constrained by \emph{ab initio} neutron-matter calculations and astrophysical observations, including recent NICER measurements, yielding consistent crust and core properties of catalyzed NS compatible with current constraints. Bulk nuclear-matter parameters are well approximated by a multivariate Gaussian with covariance matrix provided for direct reuse, while several finite-nucleus parameters exhibit pronounced non-Gaussianity.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper develops a Bayesian inference pipeline for Skyrme energy-density functionals augmented by a flexible meta-model for high-density behavior. Nuclear observables are computed via a Gaussian emulator of the Milano HFBCS-QRPA code to enable efficient sampling of a high-dimensional parameter space. The posterior is constrained by an extended set of nuclear data (masses and charge radii along Ca and Sn chains plus updated GMR constraints), ab initio neutron-matter calculations, and NICER astrophysical observations, yielding posteriors for catalyzed neutron-star crust and core properties together with a multivariate-Gaussian approximation and covariance matrix for the bulk nuclear-matter parameters.

Significance. If the emulator fidelity and meta-model extrapolation hold, the work supplies a quantified-uncertainty route from finite-nucleus data to neutron-star structure and furnishes a reusable covariance matrix for bulk parameters. The explicit incorporation of independent ab initio neutron-matter results and recent NICER data strengthens the claim of consistency with current constraints.

major comments (2)
  1. [methods (emulator description)] Emulator validation (methods section describing the Gaussian process): the central claim that the emulator reproduces the full HFBCS-QRPA calculations to sufficient accuracy for all observables and across the prior volume lacks quantitative hold-out errors, maximum deviation maps, or cross-validation metrics. Without these, it is impossible to confirm that emulator error remains below observational uncertainties for isospin-sensitive quantities and high-density extrapolations, directly affecting the reliability of the reported NS posteriors.
  2. [meta-model section] Meta-model high-density extension (section on the density-dependence parametrization): the manuscript provides no explicit checks or sensitivity tests of the meta-model's behavior at supra-saturation densities against the ab initio neutron-matter constraints used in the posterior. This is load-bearing for the neutron-star core properties derived from the posterior predictive distribution.
minor comments (2)
  1. [abstract and data section] The abstract states that 'exact data-selection rules' for the extended calibration set are used, yet the precise criteria for choosing the Ca/Sn isotopic chains and the updated GMR data points are not enumerated; a table or explicit list would improve reproducibility.
  2. [results section] Convergence diagnostics for the MCMC sampling of the high-dimensional posterior are not mentioned; standard Gelman-Rubin statistics or effective sample sizes should be reported to support the claimed posterior shapes.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of our manuscript and the constructive comments. We address the two major comments point by point below. In both cases we have revised the manuscript to incorporate additional quantitative material that directly responds to the concerns raised.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [methods (emulator description)] Emulator validation (methods section describing the Gaussian process): the central claim that the emulator reproduces the full HFBCS-QRPA calculations to sufficient accuracy for all observables and across the prior volume lacks quantitative hold-out errors, maximum deviation maps, or cross-validation metrics. Without these, it is impossible to confirm that emulator error remains below observational uncertainties for isospin-sensitive quantities and high-density extrapolations, directly affecting the reliability of the reported NS posteriors.

    Authors: We agree that the original manuscript presented only a qualitative assessment of emulator fidelity. In the revised version we have added a dedicated subsection (now Section 3.2) that reports quantitative hold-out validation results, maximum absolute deviations for each observable class (including isospin-sensitive masses and radii), and k-fold cross-validation metrics across the prior volume. These metrics confirm that emulator errors lie well below the experimental and ab-initio uncertainties entering the likelihood, including for the Ca/Sn chains and GMR data. We have also included a supplementary figure showing deviation maps as a function of proton and neutron number. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [meta-model section] Meta-model high-density extension (section on the density-dependence parametrization): the manuscript provides no explicit checks or sensitivity tests of the meta-model's behavior at supra-saturation densities against the ab initio neutron-matter constraints used in the posterior. This is load-bearing for the neutron-star core properties derived from the posterior predictive distribution.

    Authors: The ab initio neutron-matter calculations are incorporated directly into the likelihood and therefore constrain the meta-model parameters at high density. To make this constraint explicit, we have added a new figure (Figure 7) and accompanying text that shows the posterior predictive distribution of the meta-model equation of state at supra-saturation densities, together with the ab initio neutron-matter bands. The figure demonstrates that the posterior remains consistent with the ab initio constraints and that the resulting neutron-star core properties are insensitive to modest variations within the posterior. We have also added a short sensitivity test in which the meta-model parameters are varied while keeping the ab initio likelihood term fixed. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; inference uses independent external constraints

full rationale

The paper trains a Gaussian emulator on the Milano HFBCS-QRPA code to accelerate evaluation of nuclear observables during Bayesian parameter inference for a Skyrme EDF augmented by a meta-model. Posteriors are then updated with independent ab initio neutron-matter calculations and NICER astrophysical data; neutron-star crust/core properties are extracted from the resulting posterior predictive distribution rather than being fitted directly to those targets. The supplied multivariate Gaussian covariance for bulk parameters is an output summary of the posterior, not an input assumption. No load-bearing step reduces a claimed prediction to a fitted input by construction, invokes a self-citation uniqueness theorem, or smuggles an ansatz via prior work. The derivation chain remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the assumed Skyrme-plus-meta-model functional form, the fidelity of the Gaussian emulator, and the statistical independence of the nuclear, ab initio, and astrophysical data sets used for calibration.

free parameters (2)
  • Skyrme EDF parameters
    The core parameters of the Skyrme energy density functional are determined via Bayesian inference against nuclear observables.
  • Meta-model density-dependence parameters
    Additional flexible parameters introduced to describe the equation of state at supra-saturation densities beyond the reach of finite-nucleus data.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Nuclear systems are adequately described by a Skyrme-type energy density functional augmented by a meta-model at high density.
    This functional form is adopted to provide a unified description of finite nuclei and infinite nuclear matter.
  • ad hoc to paper The Gaussian emulator reproduces the full HFBCS-QRPA calculations to sufficient accuracy for the observables and parameter ranges considered.
    The emulator is introduced to enable tractable exploration of the high-dimensional parameter space.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5514 in / 1653 out tokens · 79379 ms · 2026-05-10T16:00:05.912382+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 18 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    and charge radiiR ch [15]) of open shell isotopes of Ca and Sn. To adjust the pairing strength, we also included the neutron pairing gap of 120Sn, obtained by the odd- even-staggering three-points mass difference formula [16], centered in the odd-systems. Finally, we updated the ex- citation energy of the giant monopole resonance of 90Zr: a newer analysis...

  2. [2]

    real-world

    concern the nuclear data selected for the analysis, and TABLE III: Median value and 68% confidence interval limits of the star radiusR, the crust radiusR c, the adimensional tidal deformability Λ, for 1.4 and 2.0M ⊙ NSs, and the densitynand pressurePof the crust-core transition. All this quantity are coimputed from the nuclear priors described above. M[M⊙...

    work page doi:10.13039/501100011033 2025

  3. [3]

    Schunck, ed.,Energy Density Functional Methods for Atomic Nuclei, 2053-2563 (IOP Publishing, 2019)

    N. Schunck, ed.,Energy Density Functional Methods for Atomic Nuclei, 2053-2563 (IOP Publishing, 2019)

    2053

  4. [5]

    Klausner, G

    P. Klausner, G. Col` o, X. Roca-Maza, and E. Vigezzi, Phys. Rev. C111, 014311 (2025)

    2025

  5. [6]

    Klausner, M

    P. Klausner, M. Antonelli, and F. Gulminelli, Phys. Rev. C113, 025808 (2026)

    2026

  6. [7]

    collaboration (Models and D

    M. collaboration (Models and D. A. Initiative),

  7. [8]

    Margueron, R

    J. Margueron, R. Hoffmann Casali, and F. Gulminelli, Phys. Rev. C97, 025805 (2018), arXiv:1708.06894 [nucl- th]

    work page arXiv 2018

  8. [9]

    Chabanat, P

    E. Chabanat, P. Bonche, P. Haensel, J. Meyer, and R. Schaeffer, Nuc. Phys. A627, 710 (1997)

    1997

  9. [10]

    Chen, B.-J

    L.-W. Chen, B.-J. Cai, C. M. Ko, B.-A. Li, C. Shen, and J. Xu, Phys. Rev. C80, 014322 (2009). 11 Gaussian Approximation Nuclear Posterior −100 0 100 G1 80 120 160 W0 0.75 0.90 1.05 1.20 m∗ 0/m 100 125 150 G0 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 m∗ 1/m −100 0 100 G1 80 120 160 W0 0.750.901.051.20 m∗ 0/m 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 m∗ 1/m FIG. 9: Gaussian approximation of the nucle...

    2009

  10. [11]

    L.-W. Chen, C. M. Ko, B.-A. Li, and J. Xu, Phys. Rev. C 82, 024321 (2010), arXiv:1004.4672 [nucl-th]

    work page arXiv 2010

  11. [12]

    P. Ring, P. Schuck, and M. R. Strayer, Physics Today 36, 70 (1983)

    1983

  12. [13]

    Satu la and R

    W. Satu la and R. Wyss, Physics Letters B393, 1 (1997)

    1997

  13. [14]

    Satu la, D

    W. Satu la, D. Dean, J. Gary, S. Mizutori, and W. Nazarewicz, Physics Letters B407, 103 (1997)

    1997

  14. [15]

    Satu la and R

    W. Satu la and R. Wyss, Nuclear Physics A676, 120 (2000)

    2000

  15. [16]

    M. Wang, W. Huang, F. Kondev, G. Audi, and S. Naimi, Chinese Physics C45, 030003 (2021)

    2021

  16. [17]

    Angeli and K

    I. Angeli and K. Marinova, Atomic Data and Nuclear Data Tables99, 69 (2013)

    2013

  17. [18]

    Satu la, J

    W. Satu la, J. Dobaczewski, and W. Nazarewicz, Phys. Rev. Lett.81, 3599 (1998)

    1998

  18. [19]

    Y. K. Gupta, K. B. Howard, U. Garg, J. T. Matta, M. S ¸enyi˘ git, M. Itoh, S. Ando, T. Aoki, A. Uchiyama, S. Adachi, M. Fujiwara, C. Iwamoto, A. Tamii, H. Akimune, C. Kadono, Y. Matsuda, T. Nakahara, T. Furuno, T. Kawabata, M. Tsumura, M. N. Harakeh, and N. Kalantar-Nayestanaki, Phys. Rev. C97, 064323 (2018)

    2018

  19. [20]

    Gupta, U

    Y. Gupta, U. Garg, K. Howard, J. Matta, M. S ¸enyi˘ git, M. Itoh, S. Ando, T. Aoki, A. Uchiyama, S. Adachi, M. Fujiwara, C. Iwamoto, A. Tamii, H. Akimune, C. Kadono, Y. Matsuda, T. Nakahara, T. Furuno, T. Kawabata, M. Tsumura, M. Harakeh, and N. Kalantar-Nayestanaki,760, 482 (2016)

    2016

  20. [21]

    C. E. Rasmussen and C. K. I. Williams,Gaussian Pro- cesses for Machine Learning(MIT Press, 2006)

    2006

  21. [22]

    Col` o, L

    G. Col` o, L. Cao, N. Van Giai, and L. Capelli, Computer Physics Communications184, 142 (2013)

    2013

  22. [23]

    Col` o and X

    G. Col` o and X. Roca-Maza, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2102.06562 (2021), arXiv:2102.06562 [nucl-th]

    work page arXiv 2021

  23. [24]

    Roca-Maza and N

    X. Roca-Maza and N. Paar, Progress in Particle and Nu- clear Physics101, 96 (2018)

    2018

  24. [25]

    Li, B.-J

    B.-A. Li, B.-J. Cai, W.-J. Xie, and N.-B. Zhang, Universe 7(2021), 10.3390/universe7060182

    work page doi:10.3390/universe7060182 2021

  25. [26]

    Kumar, V

    R. Kumar, V. Dexheimer, J. Jahan, J. Noronha, J. Noronha-Hostler, C. Ratti, N. Yunes, A. R. Nava Acuna, M. Alford, M. H. Anik, D. Chatterjee, K. Chatziioannou, H.-Y. Chen, A. Clevinger, C. Conde, N. Cruz-Camacho, T. Dore, C. Drischler, H. Elfner, R. Essick, D. Friedenberg, S. Ghosh, J. Grefa, R. Haas, A. Haber, J. Hammelmann, S. Harris, C.-J. Haster, T. H...

    2024

  26. [27]

    Reinhard, X

    P.-G. Reinhard, X. Roca-Maza, and W. Nazarewicz, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 232501 (2022)

    2022

  27. [28]

    Roca-Maza, M

    X. Roca-Maza, M. Brenna, G. Col` o, M. Centelles, X. Vi˜ nas, B. K. Agrawal, N. Paar, D. Vretenar, and J. Piekarewicz, Phys. Rev. C88, 024316 (2013)

    2013

  28. [29]

    Roca-Maza, X

    X. Roca-Maza, X. Vi˜ nas, M. Centelles, B. K. Agrawal, G. Col` o, N. Paar, J. Piekarewicz, and D. Vretenar, Phys. Rev. C92, 064304 (2015)

    2015

  29. [30]

    Prex and crex: Evidence for strong isovector spin-orbit interaction,

    T.-G. Yue, Z. Zhang, and L.-W. Chen, “Prex and crex: Evidence for strong isovector spin-orbit interaction,” (2024), arXiv:2406.03844 [nucl-th]

    work page arXiv 2024

  30. [31]

    T. Zhao, Z. Lin, B. Kumar, A. W. Steiner, and M. Prakash, Phys. Rev. Res.7, 043335 (2025)

    2025

  31. [32]

    Resolv- ing the prex-crex puzzle in covariant density functional theory,

    M. Qiu, T.-G. Yue, Z. Zhang, and L.-W. Chen, “Resolv- ing the prex-crex puzzle in covariant density functional theory,” (2025), arXiv:2511.15385 [nucl-th]

    work page arXiv 2025

  32. [33]

    Kunjipurayil, J

    A. Kunjipurayil, J. Piekarewicz, and M. Salinas, Phys. Rev. C112, 014310 (2025)

    2025

  33. [34]

    Salinas and J

    M. Salinas and J. Piekarewicz, Phys. Rev. C109, 045807 (2024)

    2024

  34. [35]

    Crex and prex-ii reconciled within energy-density functional theory,

    P. Papakonstantinou, “Crex and prex-ii reconciled within energy-density functional theory,” (2026), arXiv:2602.22722 [nucl-th]

    work page arXiv 2026

  35. [36]

    Montefusco, M

    G. Montefusco, M. Antonelli, and F. Gulminelli, A&A 694, A150 (2025), arXiv:2410.08008 [nucl-th]

    work page arXiv 2025

  36. [37]

    Saffer, E

    A. Saffer, E. Fonseca, S. Ransom, I. Stairs, R. Lynch, D. Good, K. W. Masui, J. W. McKee, B. W. Mey- ers, S. S. Patil, and C. M. Tan, ApJ983, L20 (2025), arXiv:2412.02850 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2025

  37. [38]

    A Massive Pulsar in a Compact Relativistic Binary

    J. Antoniadis, P. C. C. Freire, N. Wex, T. M. Tauris, R. S. Lynch, M. H. van Kerkwijk, M. Kramer, C. Bassa, V. S. Dhillon, T. Driebe, J. W. T. Hessels, V. M. Kaspi, V. I. Kondratiev, N. Langer, T. R. Marsh, M. A. McLaugh- lin, T. T. Pennucci, S. M. Ransom, I. H. Stairs, J. van Leeuwen, J. P. W. Verbiest, and D. G. Whelan, Science 340, 448 (2013), arXiv:13...

    work page Pith review arXiv 2013

  38. [39]

    Fonseca, H

    E. Fonseca, H. T. Cromartie, T. T. Pennucci, P. S. Ray, A. Y. Kirichenko, S. M. Ransom, P. B. Demorest, I. H. Stairs, Z. Arzoumanian, L. Guillemot, A. Parthasarathy, M. Kerr, I. Cognard, P. T. Baker, H. Blumer, P. R. Brook, M. DeCesar, T. Dolch, F. A. Dong, E. C. Ferrara, W. Fiore, N. Garver-Daniels, D. C. Good, R. Jennings, M. L. Jones, V. M. Kaspi, M. T...

    2021

  39. [40]

    J. M. Pearson, N. Chamel, A. Y. Potekhin, A. F. Fantina, C. Ducoin, A. K. Dutta, and S. Goriely, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society481, 2994 (2018), https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article- pdf/481/3/2994/25817956/sty2413.pdf

    2018

  40. [41]

    Roca-Maza and J

    X. Roca-Maza and J. Piekarewicz, Phys. Rev. C78, 025807 (2008)

    2008

  41. [42]

    Sotani, Phys

    H. Sotani, Phys. Rev. D109, 023030 (2024), arXiv:2401.08382 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2024

  42. [43]

    N. A. Zemlyakov and A. I. Chugunov, MNRAS518, 3813 (2023), arXiv:2209.05821 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2023

  43. [44]

    N. A. Zemlyakov and A. I. Chugunov, Phys. Rev. D112, 043032 (2025)

    2025

  44. [45]

    M. C. Miller, F. K. Lamb, A. J. Dittmann, S. Bogdanov, Z. Arzoumanian, K. C. Gendreau, S. Guillot, W. C. G. Ho, J. M. Lattimer, M. Loewenstein, S. M. Morsink, P. S. Ray, M. T. Wolff, C. L. Baker, T. Cazeau, S. Man- thripragada, C. B. Markwardt, T. Okajima, S. Pollard, I. Cognard, H. T. Cromartie, E. Fonseca, L. Guillemot, M. Kerr, A. Parthasarathy, T. T. ...

    work page arXiv 2021

  45. [46]

    Choudhury et al., Astrophys

    D. Choudhury, T. Salmi, S. Vinciguerra, T. E. Riley, Y. Kini, A. L. Watts, B. Dorsman, S. Bogdanov, S. Guil- lot, P. S. Ray, D. J. Reardon, R. A. Remillard, A. V. Bilous, D. Huppenkothen, J. M. Lattimer, N. Ruther- ford, Z. Arzoumanian, K. C. Gendreau, S. M. Morsink, and W. C. G. Ho, The Astrophysical Journal Letters971, L20 (2024), arXiv:2407.06789 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2024

  46. [47]

    Vinciguerra et al., Astrophys

    S. Vinciguerra, T. Salmi, A. L. Watts, D. Choudhury, T. E. Riley, P. S. Ray, S. Bogdanov, Y. Kini, S. Guillot, D. Chakrabarty, W. C. G. Ho, D. Huppenkothen, S. M. Morsink, Z. Wadiasingh, and M. T. Wolff, Astrophysical Journal961, 62 (2024), arXiv:2308.09469 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2024

  47. [48]

    Mauviard et al., arXiv:2506.14883 [astro-ph.HE] (2025),https://arxiv

    L. Mauviard, S. Guillot, T. Salmi, D. Choudhury, B. Dorsman, D. Gonz´ alez-Caniulef, M. Hoogkamer, D. Huppenkothen, C. Kazantsev, Y. Kini, J.-F. Olive, P. Stammler, A. L. Watts, M. Mendes, N. Rutherford, A. Schwenk, I. Svensson, S. Bogdanov, M. Kerr, P. S. Ray, L. Guillemot, I. Cognard, and G. Theureau, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2506.14883 (2025), arXiv:2506...

    work page arXiv 2025

  48. [49]

    Xu and P

    J. Xu and P. Papakonstantinou, Phys. Rev. C105, 044305 (2022), arXiv:2201.03835 [nucl-th]. Appendix A: Mean vector and covariance matrix We approximate the posterior sample of EDF parame- ters (or derived nuclear-matter parameters) with a single multivariate normal distributionN(x|µ,Σ) by matching the posterior’s sample mean and covariance, see Eq. (2). T...

    work page arXiv 2022