Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 7 minor 106 references

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge.

T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. The mark states how deep the mechanical check went, never who wrote it. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · glm-5.2

Ratio of two gravitational-wave frequencies cleanly separates strange stars from neutron stars

2026-07-09 03:00 UTC pith:6475SCDY

load-bearing objection First NR simulations of subsolar-mass binary strange star mergers; the f2/fcut discriminator is promising but the 'clean separation' claim rests on a case with non-monotonic convergence. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.07668 v1 pith:6475SCDY submitted 2026-07-08 astro-ph.HE gr-qchep-phnucl-th

Subsolar-mass binary mergers of strange stars and neutron stars: gravitational waves and ejecta

Yong Gao , Ming-Zhe Han , Kenta Kiuchi , Masaru Shibata , Enping Zhou , Kenta Hotokezaka This is my paper
classification astro-ph.HE gr-qchep-phnucl-th
keywords binarymergerssubsolar-massclassescontactfrequencymathrmneutron
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This paper presents the first full numerical-relativity simulations of subsolar-mass binary strange star mergers, comparing them head-to-head with binary neutron star mergers across a grid of equations of state, masses, and mass ratios. Strange stars are hypothesized compact objects made of deconfined quark matter, self-bound by the strong interaction rather than by gravity. Their self-bound nature makes them more compact and less tidally deformable than neutron stars of the same mass, and this structural difference drives qualitatively different merger dynamics. The strange star's sharp surface and compactness mean it stays intact until contact, then collides violently with strong shock heating and a large radial bounce; the neutron star, being more extended, develops tidal spiral arms and sheds mass before contact. These differing dynamics leave opposing imprints on two characteristic gravitational-wave frequencies: the cutoff frequency f_cut (where tidal effects accelerate the late inspiral) is higher for strange stars because they are more compact, while the dominant post-merger frequency f_2 is lower for strange stars because the violent bounce lowers the average density of the remnant. The paper shows that within each class, these frequencies follow quasi-universal power-law relations with the tidal deformability. The compounding of the two opposing shifts in the ratio f_2/f_cut produces a clean separation: strange stars cluster at 2.1-2.5, neutron stars at 2.65-2.97, with no overlap across the entire simulated grid. Both classes eject roughly 10^-2 solar masses of material, but of different composition — neutron-rich matter for neutron stars and decompressed quark matter for strange stars — offering a complementary electromagnetic test.

Core claim

The ratio f_2/f_cut of the post-merger peak frequency to the gravitational-wave cutoff frequency cleanly separates subsolar-mass binary strange star mergers (2.1-2.5) from binary neutron star mergers (2.65-2.97) with no overlap across the simulated grid of equations of state, masses, and mass ratios. This separation arises because the self-bound, compact strange star reaches a higher cutoff frequency (less tidal deformation during inspiral) but a lower post-merger frequency (violent shock and radial bounce lower the remnant's average density), and the two effects compound in the ratio. The paper establishes this by running the first numerical-relativity simulations of subsolar strange star二进

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the structural difference between self-bound strange stars (compact, sharp-surfaced, R ∝ M^{1/3}) and gravitationally bound neutron stars (extended, growing radius at low mass). This difference propagates through the merger in opposite directions for two frequencies: it raises f_cut for strange stars (less tidal deformation delays the inspiral breakdown to higher frequency) but lowers f_2 (the violent radial bounce and shock re-expansion lower the remnant density). The ratio f_2/f_cut compounds both shifts, producing the discriminant.

Load-bearing premise

The clean, non-overlapping separation rests on a grid of three strange-star equations of state and three neutron-star equations of state, with mass ratios up to 1.5 and no stellar rotation. Whether more extreme mass ratios, different equation-of-state parameterizations, or rapidly spinning configurations would bridge the gap between the two classes remains untested. The paper itself notes that the q=1.5 strange-star case already pushes f_2/f_cut to 2.48, approaching the NSs'

What would settle it

If a simulation with a different strange-star equation of state, a more extreme mass ratio, or rapidly spinning components produced f_2/f_cut above 2.5 — or if a neutron-star model produced it below 2.65 — the clean separation would break.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • If a subsolar-mass compact-binary merger is detected by third-generation gravitational-wave detectors, measuring f_2/f_cut would allow a direct classification as either a strange star or neutron star binary, testing the Bodmer-Witten conjecture that strange quark matter is the true ground state of baryonic matter.
  • The quasi-universal relations between characteristic frequencies and tidal deformability, if they hold beyond the simulated grid, could reduce the parameter space needed for waveform templates in subsolar-mass searches.
  • The different ejecta composition — neutron-rich matter versus decompressed quark matter — means an electromagnetic counterpart (or its absence) to a subsolar merger would provide an independent test of the strange-star hypothesis, complementary to the gravitational-wave discriminant.
  • The rapidly rotating remnant with ~10^52 erg of rotational energy could power a synchrotron transient from radio to X-ray, offering a third observational channel to distinguish the two classes.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The discriminant's robustness against rapid stellar rotation is untested. If either class can be spun up before merger, centrifugal flattening could alter the effective compactness and tidal deformability enough to shift f_cut and f_2 in ways that might narrow or bridge the gap.
  • If the f_2/f_cut separation holds for mixed binaries (one strange star, one neutron star), the ratio could also diagnose the composition of individual components, not just homogeneous binaries — though the paper does not simulate this case.
  • The detectability of f_2 requires high signal-to-noise in the post-merger signal, which for subsolar masses at realistic distances likely demands third-generation detectors. The practical utility of the discriminant may therefore be gated by detector sensitivity rather than physics.
  • If strange quark matter ejected from an SS merger does not fragment into electromagnetically dark nuggets but instead evaporates into neutron-rich nucleons, the kilonova signatures of the two classes could be more similar than expected, making the gravitational-wave discriminant the primary rather than complementary diagnostic.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 7 minor

Summary. This Letter presents the first numerical-relativity simulations of subsolar-mass binary strange star (SS) mergers, systematically comparing them with subsolar binary neutron star (NS) mergers across three equations of state (EOSs) per class, component masses 0.3–0.7 M⊙, and mass ratios q=1, 1.22, and 1.5. The simulations use established NR infrastructure (FUKA initial data, SACRA-K evolution, Z4c formulation, HLLC/HLLE solvers) with three grid resolutions per binary. The central claim is that the ratio f2/fcut of the post-merger peak frequency to the gravitational-wave cutoff frequency cleanly separates SS mergers (2.1–2.5) from NS mergers (2.65–2.97) with no overlap. The paper also reports ejecta properties and discusses electromagnetic counterpart prospects.

Significance. The paper is a genuine first: no prior NR simulations of subsolar-mass binary SS mergers exist. The f2/fcut discriminant is a falsifiable, parameter-free prediction derived from simulation dynamics rather than fitted to target frequencies. The quasi-universal relations are fitted to simulation outputs as functions of the tidal deformability Λ̃ computed from stellar models. The ejecta analysis, including the distinction between neutron-rich NS ejecta and decompressed quark-matter SS ejecta, adds astrophysical utility. The simulation grid spans a reasonable EOS range and multiple mass ratios, and the convergence assessment (half-spreads of 2.6–5% across resolutions) is reported transparently. These are substantial strengths for a Letter.

major comments (3)
  1. The central claim of 'clean' non-overlapping separation in f2/fcut rests disproportionately on the single extreme case SS1 0.4+0.6 (q=1.5), which yields f2/fcut = 2.48 at the finest resolution versus the NS minimum of 2.65 (WFF1 0.5+0.5). Table S1 reveals that this exact case shows strongly non-monotonic convergence: f2/fcut = 2.598, 2.567, and 2.484 from coarsest to finest. The finest-resolution value is the outlier on the low side, not a converged limit. If the true converged value lies closer to the coarser-resolution values (~2.57–2.60), the gap to the NS branch shrinks to ~0.05–0.08, comparable to the resolution-induced scatter the paper itself quotes (≲3.7% for f2/fcut). The paper uses the finest-resolution value as the headline number without Richardson extrapolation or a fourth resolution to confirm convergence direction. The authors should either (a) add a fourth resolution for,
  2. this case to establish convergence, or (b) reframe the claim from 'clean separation with no overlap' to 'suggestive separation with a thin margin whose convergence is uncertain for the most extreme case.' The current phrasing in the abstract ('cleanly separates') and the main text ('do not overlap across the numerical models') overstates what the data support given this single load-bearing data point.
  3. The quasi-universal relations and the f2/fcut discriminant are established on a grid of three SS EOSs and three NS EOSs. The paper itself notes that the q=1.5 SS case 'rises onto the NS relation' for f2, and the separation gap narrows to ~0.17 at the finest resolution (2.48 vs 2.65). Whether more extreme mass ratios (q>1.5), different SS EOS parameterizations (e.g., color-superconducting gaps, non-MIT-bag models), or rapidly spinning configurations would bridge this gap remains untested. The authors should explicitly acknowledge this limitation in the discussion of the discriminant's robustness, rather than stating it 'is a robust discriminant' without qualification. A brief statement that the claim is conditional on the simulated EOS and mass-ratio range would suffice.
minor comments (7)
  1. The abstract states f2/fcut 'cleanly separates the two classes'; given the convergence concern for the q=1.5 SS case, consider softening to 'separates the two classes across the simulated grid' or similar.
  2. In the description of Fig. 3 (lower panel), the shaded band is stated to be at f2/fcut = 2.5–2.6, but the q=1.5 SS data point at 2.48 falls below this band. Clarify whether the band represents the proposed classification threshold or simply marks the visual gap.
  3. The ejecta for the unequal-mass SS binaries (q=1.22 and 1.5) approaches the baryonic mass-conservation error level (M_ej < 2×10^{-4} M⊙), as noted in Fig. 4. Table S1 shows the Bernoulli-criterion ejecta for SS1 0.45+0.55 at the finest resolution is 1.50×10^{-2} M⊙, well above this floor, but the geodesic criterion gives 1.45×10^{-2}. The text should briefly comment on the consistency between the two criteria for the cases near the conservation floor.
  4. The thermal adiabatic indices differ between SS (Γ_th = 4/3) and NS (Γ_th = 1.75). A brief justification for these choices, or a reference to where they are validated, would help readers assess sensitivity.
  5. Reference [70] (SACRA-K) is listed as 'in preparation' (2026). If the code description is not yet available, the manuscript should provide enough detail in the Supplemental Material for reproducibility, which Table S2 partially addresses.
  6. The text mentions 'animations of the snapshots and corresponding GWs can be found at [42]' — ensure the linked URL is persistent and accessible at publication.
  7. Minor typographical issue: in the abstract and main text, 'cutofffrequencyfcut' appears to be missing a space (likely a LaTeX formatting artifact).

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for a careful and constructive report. The two major comments are well-taken and we will revise the manuscript accordingly. Below we address each point.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central claim of 'clean' non-overlapping separation in f2/fcut rests disproportionately on the single extreme case SS1 0.4+0.6 (q=1.5), which shows strongly non-monotonic convergence. The finest-resolution value is the outlier on the low side. The paper uses the finest-resolution value as the headline number without Richardson extrapolation or a fourth resolution.

    Authors: The referee is correct that the SS1 0.4+0.6 (q=1.5) case is the most marginal data point and that its convergence is non-monotonic. We have re-examined Table S1 carefully. The three-resolution sequence for f2/fcut is 2.598, 2.567, 2.484 (coarse to fine), so the finest value is indeed the lowest and the convergence direction is not established. We acknowledge that if the true converged value lies closer to the coarser-resolution values (~2.57–2.60), the gap to the NS minimum (2.65 at finest resolution for WFF1 0.5+0.5) narrows to ~0.05–0.08, which is comparable to the ~3.7% resolution half-spread we quote for f2/fcut. This is a fair concern. We do not currently have a fourth resolution for this case and cannot perform a reliable Richardson extrapolation given the non-monotonic trend. We will therefore revise the manuscript as follows: (1) We will soften the abstract from 'cleanly separates' to 'separates' and add a qualifier noting that the margin is thinnest for the most asymmetric SS case, whose convergence is not yet fully established. (2) In the main text, we will replace 'do not overlap across the numerical models' with a statement that the two branches are separated across our simulation grid, with the smallest margin (~0.16 at finest resolution, possibly as small as ~0.05 if the coarser-resolution values for the q=1.5 SS case are closer to convergence) occurring for the most asymmetric SS binary. (3) We will explicitly flag the non-monotonic convergence of the SS1 0.4+0.6 case in the text and note it as a limitation. We agree that 'clean separation with no overlap' overstates what the current data support for this single load-bearing data point. revision: yes

  2. Referee: The quasi-universal relations and the f2/fcut discriminant are established on a grid of three SS EOSs and three NS EOSs. More extreme mass ratios, different SS EOS parameterizations, or rapidly spinning configurations could bridge the gap. The authors should explicitly acknowledge this limitation.

    Authors: We agree. The claim of robustness is currently stated without sufficient qualification regarding the explored parameter space. We will add a sentence in the discussion of the discriminant explicitly noting that the separation is established within the simulated range of EOSs (three MIT-bag-family SS models and three nuclear NS models), mass ratios (q ≤ 1.5), and non-spinning configurations, and that its persistence under more extreme mass ratios, alternative SS EOS parameterizations (e.g., color-superconducting gap models or non-MIT-bag constructions), or rapidly spinning progenitors remains untested. We will also adjust the phrase 'is a robust discriminant' to 'is a promising discriminant within the simulated EOS and mass-ratio range.' This is an honest reflection of what the simulations cover. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity found. The f2/fcut discriminant is computed directly from simulation outputs, not forced by fits or self-citation.

full rationale

The paper's central claim — that f2/fcut cleanly separates SS from NS mergers — is derived directly from numerical relativity simulation outputs. The characteristic frequencies f_cut, f_merger, and f_2 are extracted from the GW spectrum (broken power-law fit for f_cut, amplitude peak for f_merger, post-merger spectral peak for f_2) and are independent measurements from the simulation dynamics. The ratio f2/fcut is then computed directly from these independently measured quantities. The quasi-universal relations (Mf = A·Λ̃^p) are descriptive power-law fits to the simulation data points, but they are not used as inputs to compute the f2/fcut ratio — the paper explicitly states 'Markers use the finest-resolution value' (Fig. 3 caption), meaning the plotted ratio uses raw simulation outputs, not fitted values. The tidal deformability Λ̃ is computed from the stellar models (EOS + mass → R, k2, Λ), not fitted to the target frequencies. Self-citations (e.g., [63], [66], [70], [87]) are for methodology (SACRA-K code, FUKA initial data, self-bound surface solver) and prior context, none of which are load-bearing for the discriminant claim itself. The separation emerges from the physics of self-bound vs. gravitationally bound stars producing different merger dynamics, not from any definitional or fitted input-output equivalence. The derivation is self-contained against the simulation data.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

5 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new particles, forces, or entities. Strange stars and strange quark matter are pre-existing concepts from the Bodmer-Witten conjecture. The MIT bag model is a standard framework. The SACRA-K code is a new implementation of established NR methods but is a tool, not a physical entity. No free parameters are fitted to force the central result (f2/fcut separation); the power-law fits are descriptive. The EOS parameters are inputs from prior literature.

free parameters (5)
  • SS EOS: bag constant B = 52.4, 75.0, 96.0 MeV/fm^3 (for SS1, SS2, SS3)
    Set from prior literature [68], not fitted to merger simulations. Determines SS surface density and compactness.
  • SS EOS: coupling parameter λ² = 0, 38.9, 157.3 MeV/fm^3 (for SS1, SS2, SS3)
    Set from prior literature [68]. Absorbs perturbative QCD correction, strange quark mass, and color-superconducting pairing.
  • Thermal Γ_th (SS) = 4/3
    Chosen for the SS thermal component; standard for radiation-dominated quark matter but stated without explicit justification in the main text.
  • Thermal Γ_th (NS) = 1.75
    Chosen for the NS thermal component; standard value but not derived in this paper.
  • Power-law fit parameters (A, p) = NS: (2.2,-0.307), (4.1,-0.313), (3.7,-0.262); SS: (1.5,-0.272), (3.4,-0.292), (4.4,-0.296) for f_cut, f_merger, f_2
    Fitted to simulation outputs. Descriptive fits, not inputs. The exponents agree between classes to within ~0.04.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption Strange quark matter may be the true ground state of baryonic matter (Bodmer-Witten conjecture)
    Invoked in the Introduction to motivate SS existence. Not proven; the paper's results are conditional on this hypothesis.
  • domain assumption The modified MIT bag model (Eq. S1) adequately describes cold, charge-neutral, beta-equilibrated three-flavor quark matter
    Used for all SS EOSs. The three parameter sets (SS1-SS3) span a range but do not cover all possible SS EOS families.
  • standard math Quasi-equilibrium initial data with iteratively reduced eccentricity (≲7×10^-4) adequately represents the late inspiral
    Standard NR practice; eccentricity is low enough that its effect on merger frequencies is negligible.
  • domain assumption The three NS EOSs (DD2, SFHo, WFF1) and three SS EOSs (SS1-SS3) span the relevant EOS diversity for establishing universal relations
    The claim of clean class separation depends on this. The paper does not test, e.g., hybrid stars with phase transitions or SS EOSs with different functional forms.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-glm · 20982 in / 3370 out tokens · 312657 ms · 2026-07-09T03:00:01.154839+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We present the first numerical-relativity simulations of subsolar-mass binary strange star (SS) mergers and compare with binary neutron star (NS) mergers across equations of state, masses, and mass ratios. The self-bound nature of SSs makes them less deformed during the inspiral and keeps a sharp surface up to contact, driving strong shock heating and a large radial bounce that are far weaker in the NS. The more compact SS thus reaches a higher gravitational-wave cutoff frequency $f_\mathrm{cut}$ before contact but a lower post-merger peak frequency $f_2$. Within each class these frequencies follow quasi-universal relations with the tidal deformability, and their ratio $f_2/f_\mathrm{cut}$ cleanly separates the two classes. Both classes can eject $\sim10^{-2}\,M_\odot$ of material, neutron-rich for the NS and decompressed quark matter for the SS, a potential source of an electromagnetic counterpart whose observation could test the SS and NS hypotheses for subsolar-mass events.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.07668 by Enping Zhou, Kenta Hotokezaka, Kenta Kiuchi, Masaru Shibata, Ming-Zhe Han, Yong Gao.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Equatorial-plane rest-mass density log [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Characteristic GW frequencies of all binaries in the grid, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Ejecta mass [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗

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

106 extracted references · 106 canonical work pages · 79 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    LIGO Scientific, Virgo, and KAGRA Collaborations, arXiv e- print (2026), arXiv:2605.27225 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  2. [2]

    A. G. Abacet al.(LIGO Scientific, VIRGO, KAGRA), (2025), arXiv:2508.18082 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  3. [3]

    B. P. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 161101 (2017), arXiv:1710.05832 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  4. [4]

    B. P. Abbottet al., Astrophys. J. Lett.848, L12 (2017), arXiv:1710.05833 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  5. [5]

    Observation of gravitational waves from two neutron star-black hole coalescences

    R. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific, KAGRA, VIRGO), As- trophys. J. Lett.915, L5 (2021), arXiv:2106.15163 [astro- ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  6. [6]

    A. G. Abacet al.(LIGO Scientific, KAGRA, VIRGO), As- trophys. J. Lett.970, L34 (2024), arXiv:2404.04248 [astro- ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  7. [7]

    GWTC-3: Compact Binary Coalescences Observed by LIGO and Virgo During the Second Part of the Third Observing Run

    R. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific, VIRGO, KAGRA), Phys. Rev. X13, 041039 (2023), arXiv:2111.03606 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  8. [8]

    A. H. Nitz and Y .-F. Wang, Phys. Rev. D106, 023024 (2022), arXiv:2202.11024 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  9. [9]

    Kacanja, K

    K. Kacanja, K. Soni, A. Aky ¨uz, and A. H. Nitz, arXiv e-print (2026), arXiv:2602.12115 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2026

  10. [10]

    A. G. Abacet al.(LIGO Scientific, VIRGO, KAGRA), arXiv e-print (2026), arXiv:2605.05444 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  11. [11]

    Niuet al., arXiv e-print (2025), arXiv:2509.09741 [astro- ph.HE]

    W. Niuet al., arXiv e-print (2025), arXiv:2509.09741 [astro- ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2025

  12. [12]

    GraceDB superevent S250818k,

    LIGO Scientific Collaboration, Virgo Collaboration, and KAGRA Collaboration, “GraceDB superevent S250818k,” (2025),https://gracedb.ligo.org/superevents/ S250818k/

    work page 2025

  13. [13]

    GraceDB superevent S251112cm,

    LIGO Scientific Collaboration, Virgo Collaboration, and KAGRA Collaboration, “GraceDB superevent S251112cm,” (2025),https://gracedb.ligo.org/superevents/ S251112cm/

    work page 2025

  14. [14]

    M. M. Kasliwalet al., Astrophys. J. Lett.995, L59 (2025), arXiv:2510.23732 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2025

  15. [15]

    X. J. Hallet al., arXiv e-print (2025), arXiv:2510.24620 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2025

  16. [16]

    ENGRAVE follow-up of a type IIb supernova spatially coincident with the sub-threshold gravitational wave trigger S250818k

    K. Ackleyet al., arXiv e-print (2026), arXiv:2605.02639 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  17. [17]

    Y . B. Zel’dovich and I. D. Novikov, Soviet Astronomy10, 602 (1967)

    work page 1967

  18. [18]

    B. J. Carr and S. W. Hawking, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 168, 399 (1974)

    work page 1974

  19. [19]

    Primordial Black Holes - Perspectives in Gravitational Wave Astronomy -

    M. Sasaki, T. Suyama, T. Tanaka, and S. Yokoyama, Class. Quant. Grav.35, 063001 (2018), arXiv:1801.05235 [astro- ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  20. [20]

    T. W. Baumgarte and S. L. Shapiro, Phys. Rev. D113, 083008 (2026), arXiv:2601.22220 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  21. [21]

    M. R. Haque, F. Iocco, and L. Visinelli, arXiv e-print (2026), arXiv:2603.25795 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2026

  22. [22]

    Can we identify primordial black holes? Tidal tests for subsolar-mass gravitational-wave observations

    F. Crescimbeni, G. Franciolini, P. Pani, and A. Riotto, Phys. Rev. D109, 124063 (2024), arXiv:2402.18656 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  23. [23]

    A. L. Miller, inPrimordial Black Holes, edited by C. Byrnes, G. Franciolini, T. Harada, P. Pani, and M. Sasaki (Springer,

    work page

  24. [24]

    arXiv:2404.11601 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  25. [25]

    Y . Suwa, T. Yoshida, M. Shibata, H. Umeda, and K. Taka- hashi, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.481, 3305 (2018), arXiv:1808.02328 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  26. [26]

    The minimum neutron star mass in neutrino-driven supernova explosions

    B. M ¨uller, A. Heger, and J. Powell, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 071403 (2025), arXiv:2407.08407 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  27. [27]

    J. G. Martinez, K. Stovall, P. C. C. Freire, J. S. Deneva, F. A. 6 Jenet, M. A. McLaughlin, M. Bagchi, S. D. Bates, and A. Ri- dolfi, Astrophys. J.812, 143 (2015), arXiv:1509.08805 [astro- ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  28. [28]

    T. M. Tauris and H.-T. Janka, Astrophys. J. Lett.886, L20 (2019), arXiv:1909.12318 [astro-ph.SR]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  29. [29]

    Doroshenko, V

    V . Doroshenko, V . Suleimanov, G. P¨uhlhofer, and A. Santan- gelo, Nature Astron.6, 1444 (2022)

    work page 2022

  30. [30]

    A. L. Piro and E. Pfahl, Astrophys. J.658, 1173 (2007), arXiv:astro-ph/0610696

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  31. [31]

    B. D. Metzger, L. Hui, and M. Cantiello, Astrophys. J. Lett. 971, L34 (2024), arXiv:2407.07955 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  32. [32]

    Gravitational Instability and Fragmentation in Collapsar Disks Supports the Formation of Sub-Solar Neutron Stars

    Y .-X. Chen and B. D. Metzger, Astrophys. J. Lett. (2025), 10.3847/2041-8213/ae045d, arXiv:2508.17183 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae045d 2025

  33. [33]

    J. Wu, E. R. Most, N. L. Vu, N. Deppe, L. E. Kidder, K. C. Nelli, and W. Throwe, Astrophys. J. Lett.1004, L19 (2026), arXiv:2604.26912 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  34. [34]

    Nakamura, Prog

    T. Nakamura, Prog. Theor. Phys.81, 1006 (1989)

    work page 1989

  35. [35]

    A. R. Bodmer, Phys. Rev. D4, 1601 (1971)

    work page 1971

  36. [36]

    Witten, Phys

    E. Witten, Phys. Rev. D30, 272 (1984)

    work page 1984

  37. [37]

    Farhi and R

    E. Farhi and R. L. Jaffe, Phys. Rev. D30, 2379 (1984)

    work page 1984

  38. [38]

    Alcock, E

    C. Alcock, E. Farhi, and A. Olinto, Astrophys. J.310, 261 (1986)

    work page 1986

  39. [39]

    Shao and M

    J. Shao and M. Huang, arXiv e-print (2025), arXiv:2510.06065 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  40. [40]

    Possible Formation Scenario of the Quark Star of Maximum Mass around 0.7 solar mass

    T. Nakamura, arXiv eprint (2002), arXiv:astro-ph/0205526

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  41. [41]

    R. X. Xu, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.356, 359 (2005), arXiv:astro-ph/0402659

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  42. [42]

    Di Clemente, A

    F. Di Clemente, A. Drago, P. Char, and G. Pagliara, Astron. Astrophys.678, L1 (2023), arXiv:2207.08704 [astro-ph.SR]. [42]https://gravyong.github.io/subsolar/

    work page arXiv 2023

  43. [43]

    Tidal Love numbers of neutron stars

    T. Hinderer, Astrophys. J.677, 1216 (2008), [Erratum: Astro- phys.J. 697, 964 (2009)], arXiv:0711.2420 [astro-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  44. [44]

    Relativistic tidal properties of neutron stars

    T. Damour and A. Nagar, Phys. Rev. D80, 084035 (2009), arXiv:0906.0096 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  45. [45]

    Transient Events from Neutron Star Mergers

    L.-X. Li and B. Paczynski, Astrophys. J. Lett.507, L59 (1998), arXiv:astro-ph/9807272

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  46. [46]

    B. D. Metzger, G. Martinez-Pinedo, S. Darbha, E. Quataert, A. Arcones, D. Kasen, R. Thomas, P. Nugent, I. V . Panov, and N. T. Zinner, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.406, 2650 (2010), arXiv:1001.5029 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  47. [47]

    Merger and Mass Ejection of Neutron-Star Binaries

    M. Shibata and K. Hotokezaka, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.69, 41 (2019), arXiv:1908.02350 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  48. [48]

    B. D. Metzger, Living Rev. Rel.23, 1 (2020), arXiv:1910.01617 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  49. [49]

    E. E. Flanagan and T. Hinderer, Phys. Rev. D77, 021502 (2008), arXiv:0709.1915 [astro-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  50. [50]

    Systematic parameter errors in inspiraling neutron star binaries

    M. Favata, Phys. Rev. Lett.112, 101101 (2014), arXiv:1310.8288 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  51. [51]

    L. Wade, J. D. E. Creighton, E. Ochsner, B. D. Lackey, B. F. Farr, T. B. Littenberg, and V . Raymond, Phys. Rev. D89, 103012 (2014), arXiv:1402.5156 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  52. [52]

    J. S. Read, L. Baiotti, J. D. E. Creighton, J. L. Friedman, B. Gi- acomazzo, K. Kyutoku, C. Markakis, L. Rezzolla, M. Shi- bata, and K. Taniguchi, Phys. Rev. D88, 044042 (2013), arXiv:1306.4065 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  53. [53]

    Measurability of the tidal deformability by gravitational waves from coalescing binary neutron stars

    K. Hotokezaka, K. Kyutoku, Y .-i. Sekiguchi, and M. Shibata, Phys. Rev. D93, 064082 (2016), arXiv:1603.01286 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  54. [54]

    Exploring tidal effects of coalescing binary neutron stars in numerical relativity

    K. Hotokezaka, K. Kyutoku, and M. Shibata, Phys. Rev. D 87, 044001 (2013), arXiv:1301.3555 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  55. [55]

    Tidal deformability of neutron stars with realistic equations of state and their gravitational wave signatures in binary inspiral

    T. Hinderer, B. D. Lackey, R. N. Lang, and J. S. Read, Phys. Rev. D81, 123016 (2010), arXiv:0911.3535 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  56. [56]

    H. O. Silva, H. Sotani, and E. Berti, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.459, 4378 (2016), arXiv:1601.03407 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  57. [57]

    Rotation and deformation of strangeon stars in the Lennard-Jones model

    Y . Gao, X.-Y . Lai, L. Shao, and R.-X. Xu, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.509, 2758 (2021), arXiv:2109.13234 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  58. [58]

    Detectability of Sub-Solar Mass Neutron Stars Through a Template Bank Search

    A. Bandopadhyay, B. Reed, S. Padamata, E. Leon, C. J. Horowitz, D. A. Brown, D. Radice, F. J. Fattoyev, and J. Piekarewicz, Phys. Rev. D107, 103012 (2023), arXiv:2212.03855 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  59. [59]

    Corman, W

    M. Corman, W. E. East, and J. S. Read, arXiv e-print (2026), arXiv:2603.25102 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2026

  60. [60]

    Cosmology and nuclear-physics implications of a subsolar gravitational-wave event

    F. Crescimbeni, G. Franciolini, P. Pani, and M. Vaglio, Phys. Rev. D111, 083538 (2025), arXiv:2408.14287 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  61. [61]

    Z. Wang, Y . Gao, D. Liang, J. Zhao, and L. Shao, JCAP11, 038 (2024), arXiv:2409.11103 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  62. [62]

    Discriminating Strange Star Mergers from Neutron Star Mergers by Gravitational-Wave Measurements

    A. Bauswein, R. Oechslin, and H. T. Janka, Phys. Rev. D81, 024012 (2010), arXiv:0910.5169 [astro-ph.SR]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  63. [63]

    E. Zhou, K. Kiuchi, M. Shibata, A. Tsokaros, and K. Uryu, Phys. Rev. D106, 103030 (2022), arXiv:2111.00958 [astro- ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  64. [64]

    Fully general-relativistic simulations of isolated and binary strange quark stars

    Z. Zhu and L. Rezzolla, Phys. Rev. D104, 083004 (2021), arXiv:2102.07721 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  65. [65]

    General relativistic hydrodynamic simulations of binary strange star mergers

    F. Grippa, A. Prakash, D. Logoteta, D. Radice, and I. Bom- baci, Phys. Rev. D111, 083009 (2025), arXiv:2407.11143 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  66. [66]

    E. Zhou, K. Kiuchi, M. Shibata, A. Tsokaros, and K. Uryu, Phys. Rev. D103, 123011 (2021), arXiv:2105.07498 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  67. [67]

    Fully general relativistic simulations of rapidly rotating quark stars: Oscillation modes and universal relations

    K. Chen and L.-M. Lin, Phys. Rev. D108, 064007 (2023), arXiv:2307.01598 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  68. [68]

    Unified Interacting Quark Matter and its Astrophysical Implications

    C. Zhang and R. B. Mann, Phys. Rev. D103, 063018 (2021), arXiv:2009.07182 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  69. [69]

    L. J. Papenfort, S. D. Tootle, P. Grandcl ´ement, E. R. Most, and L. Rezzolla, Phys. Rev. D104, 024057 (2021), arXiv:2103.09911 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  70. [70]

    M.-Z. Han, K. Kiuchi, and M. Shibata, (2026), in preparation

    work page 2026

  71. [71]

    Simulating coalescing compact binaries by a new code SACRA

    T. Yamamoto, M. Shibata, and K. Taniguchi, Phys. Rev. D78, 064054 (2008), arXiv:0806.4007 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  72. [72]

    Sub-radian-accuracy gravitational waveforms of coalescing binary neutron stars in numerical relativity

    K. Kiuchi, K. Kawaguchi, K. Kyutoku, Y . Sekiguchi, M. Shi- bata, and K. Taniguchi, Phys. Rev. D96, 084060 (2017), arXiv:1708.08926 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  73. [73]

    Implementation of advanced Riemann solvers in a neutrino-radiation magnetohydrodynamics code in numerical relativity and its application to a binary neutron star merger

    K. Kiuchi, L. E. Held, Y . Sekiguchi, and M. Shibata, Phys. Rev. D106, 124041 (2022), arXiv:2205.04487 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  74. [74]

    Shibata and T

    M. Shibata and T. Nakamura, Phys. Rev. D52, 5428 (1995)

    work page 1995

  75. [75]

    T. W. Baumgarte and S. L. Shapiro, Phys. Rev. D59, 024007 (1998), arXiv:gr-qc/9810065

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  76. [76]

    J. G. Baker, J. Centrella, D.-I. Choi, M. Koppitz, and J. van Meter, Phys. Rev. Lett.96, 111102 (2006), arXiv:gr- qc/0511103

    work page arXiv 2006

  77. [77]

    Campanelli, C

    M. Campanelli, C. O. Lousto, P. Marronetti, and Y . Zlo- chower, Phys. Rev. Lett.96, 111101 (2006), arXiv:gr- qc/0511048

    work page arXiv 2006

  78. [78]

    Compact binary evolutions with the Z4c formulation

    D. Hilditch, S. Bernuzzi, M. Thierfelder, Z. Cao, W. Tichy, and B. Bruegmann, Phys. Rev. D88, 084057 (2013), arXiv:1212.2901 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  79. [79]

    A magnetar formation in binary neutron star merger

    K. Kiuchi, A. Reboul-Salze, Y . Sekiguchi, and M. Shibata, “A magnetar formation in binary neutron star merger,” (2026), arXiv:2606.11299 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  80. [80]

    Exploring binary-neutron-star-merger scenario of short-gamma-ray bursts by gravitational-wave observation

    K. Kiuchi, Y . Sekiguchi, M. Shibata, and K. Taniguchi, Phys. Rev. Lett.104, 141101 (2010), arXiv:1002.2689 [astro- ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

Showing first 80 references.