Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 149 references

GRACE is a new open-source, GPU-portable code that evolves magnetized fluid and dynamical spacetime together and passes standard compact-binary tests.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · grok-4.5

2026-07-14 15:01 UTC pith:WLZAZ66D

load-bearing objection Solid open GPU NR/GRMHD release with real validation and competitive numbers; methods paper that does what it claims. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.09854 v1 pith:WLZAZ66D submitted 2026-07-10 gr-qc astro-ph.HE

GRACE: An Open-Source Framework for GPU-Accelerated Numerical Relativity

Carlo Musolino , Christian Ecker , Konrad Topolski , Marie Cassing , Keneth Miler , Harry Ho-Yin Ng , Khalil Pierre , Elias R. Most
show 1 more author
Luciano Rezzolla
This is my paper
classification gr-qc astro-ph.HE
keywords numerical relativitygeneral relativistic magnetohydrodynamicsGPU computingadaptive mesh refinementbinary neutron starsZ4c formulationconstrained transportopen-source software
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.

Numerical relativity needs codes that can run on modern GPU-heavy machines without being rewritten for every chip. This paper introduces GRACE, built from scratch on open libraries so the same source runs on CPUs and GPUs, and that solves ideal general-relativistic magnetohydrodynamics with constrained-transport magnetic fields, fully coupled to the Einstein equations in the Z4c formulation, on fixed or adaptively refined grids. The authors validate it from simple shock tubes and Bondi accretion through neutron-star oscillations, binary black-hole merger, and two binary neutron-star mergers—one magnetized with a tabulated nuclear equation of state—whose inspiral dynamics match an independent code. They also report competitive single-device throughput and strong- and weak-scaling numbers. The result is a publicly released tool, with a companion analysis package, intended for realistic multiphysics simulations of compact objects on heterogeneous supercomputers.

Core claim

GRACE correctly evolves ideal GRMHD with divergence-free magnetic fields maintained by constrained transport, self-consistently coupled to the Z4c Einstein equations on fixed or adaptively refined grids; it passes a full suite of standard tests including two binary neutron-star mergers whose inspirals agree with an independent code, and it delivers competitive GPU and CPU performance while remaining fully open source.

What carries the argument

The portable Kokkos parallel layer plus p4est forest-of-octrees adaptive mesh refinement, together with constrained-transport magnetic-field evolution and a task-based ghost-zone update, let the same source tree run the coupled Z4c–GRMHD system efficiently on CPUs and GPUs.

Load-bearing premise

That a standard battery of tests plus one cross-code inspiral comparison is enough to guarantee the coupled spacetime-plus-magnetized-fluid system is correct in every regime the code will be used for, including under-resolved post-merger dynamos and tabulated-EOS atmosphere treatment.

What would settle it

A third independent GRMHD–NR code run on the same unequal-mass magnetized SFHo binary at matched resolution that produces a statistically significant phase or magnetic-energy discrepancy with GRACE during the clean inspiral window.

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

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

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents GRACE, a new open-source GPU-accelerated numerical-relativity framework that evolves ideal GRMHD with constrained-transport magnetic fields, self-consistently coupled to the Einstein equations in the Z4c formulation, on fixed or adaptively refined grids managed by p4est and made performance-portable via Kokkos. The authors validate the code against a standard suite spanning flat-spacetime MHD (shock tubes, magnetic rotor), fixed-background GRMHD (magnetized Bondi), vacuum Z4c (perturbed spinning puncture ringdown and binary black holes), neutron-star oscillations in Cowling and dynamical spacetimes, and two binary neutron-star mergers (equal-mass unmagnetized ideal-gas and unequal-mass magnetized SFHo). Inspiral dynamics of the latter are compared to the independent FIL code. Single-device throughput and strong/weak scaling on MI300A, A100, and CPU architectures are reported, and the code is released with GRACEpy.

Significance. If the validation holds, GRACE is a useful addition to the small set of open, performance-portable NR codes that couple dynamical spacetime, ideal GRMHD with constrained transport, and AMR on modern GPU platforms. The public release, the FIL cross-check on vacuum ringdown and BNS inspiral, the quantified round-off-level discrete div-B and rest-mass conservation, and the multi-architecture scaling data are concrete strengths that make the work reproducible and usable by the community. The paper is methods-scope rather than a claim of production-converged post-merger MHD; within that scope the contribution is solid and timely.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. V H 2, Fig. 16] Sec. V H 2 and Fig. 16: the GRACE–FIL phase comparison is a central validation pillar, but the two codes differ in MHD discretization (second-order FV+CT vs fourth-order conservative FD + vector potential), mesh infrastructure, SFHo table format (CompOSE vs stellarcollapse crust), and Gamma-driver advection. The residual ~0.01–0.1 rad is attributed to truncation, yet no controlled isolation of these systematic differences is given. A short quantitative statement—e.g., a matched-resolution GRACE run with the FIL shift prescription or a note that residual size is unchanged under those swaps—would make the “common continuum waveform” claim more robust.
  2. [Secs. III D, V G–H; Figs. 11, 17] Secs. V G–H and Figs. 11, 17: rest-mass conservation is excellent through inspiral but degrades once shock-heated material interacts with atmosphere floors and outflow leaves the domain; the tabulated-EOS BNS reaches ~10^{-6} before collapse. The manuscript correctly flags atmosphere injection (citing Daszuta et al.) but does not state whether the relaxed-floor option used in the SFHo run (Sec. III D) was essential to avoid nonconservative heating, nor how sensitive merger time / f_GW|mer are to rho_atmo and delta_atmo. A brief sensitivity check or explicit parameter table for the production BNS runs would close a load-bearing gap for users reproducing the tabulated-EOS results.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Sec. II A] Eqs. (5)–(10): the conformal factor is written fW throughout; a single sentence defining the relation to the more common W or chi notation would help readers coming from BSSN/Z4c literature.
  2. [Sec. V A, Fig. 1] Fig. 1: small-amplitude oscillations near contacts in setup C are attributed to WENO-Z; stating whether FOFC or DMP was active in these 1D tests would clarify whether the fallback is exercised on discontinuous flows.
  3. [Sec. V F, Fig. 8] Fig. 8 bottom: the rescaled HR–MR phase difference is said to “broadly agree” with MR–LR under C_6; a short note on the time window used for the visual comparison (and any phase alignment beyond t_max) would make the sixth-order claim easier to audit.
  4. [Sec. VI A, Table III] Sec. VI A / Table III: A100 FMR uses five levels while MI300A/CPU use six “to fit on a single GPU.” State the resulting finest spacing or total cell count so the throughput comparison is apples-to-apples.
  5. Throughout: a few typographical inconsistencies (e.g., “V olkoff”, “att=0.4”, mixed “ms” spacing) and the arXiv date line “July 14, 2026” should be cleaned in production.
  6. [Secs. III C, V H] Sec. III C: both UCT and CT-contact are implemented, but all Sec. V tests use CT-contact “unless stated otherwise.” Explicitly state which scheme was used for the magnetized SFHo BNS so that CT diagnostics in Fig. 18 are unambiguous.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: methods/validation paper whose claims rest on external exact solutions, literature frequencies, and cross-code comparison, not on self-fitted predictions or load-bearing self-citation chains.

full rationale

GRACE is a code-methods paper. Its central claim is correct implementation of ideal GRMHD (CT) coupled to Z4c on p4est AMR, demonstrated by a standard test suite (shock tubes vs exact Riemann solvers of Refs. [106,107]; magnetic rotor; magnetized Bondi vs semi-analytic solution; TOV F/H1 modes vs perturbation theory [119]; spinning-puncture ringdown and BBH vs FIL; two BNS inspirals with self-convergence of GW phase in the expected 2–4 band and rest-mass/divergence diagnostics at round-off). No free parameter is fitted to data and then re-presented as a prediction. Formulations (Z4c, CT-contact, WENO-Z, Kastaun C2P, FOFC) are standard published methods, not uniqueness theorems imported from the authors to forbid alternatives. The FIL comparison (same co-author Most) is an independent implementation with different MHD (vector-potential 4th-order FD vs CT 2nd-order FV) and mesh infrastructure; residual phase differences are reported as consistent with truncation error, not forced agreement. Performance numbers are direct measurements. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks; score 0 with empty steps is the correct outcome.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

6 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

As a numerical-methods paper the load-bearing content is algorithmic correctness and performance, not new physics. The axioms are the standard continuum equations and well-known discretizations; free parameters are the usual tunable numerical coefficients (dissipation amplitude, atmosphere floors, CFL, damping rates) that every NR code carries. No new physical entities are postulated.

free parameters (6)
  • Kreiss-Oliger dissipation amplitude epsilon_diss = 0.25–0.5
    Hand-chosen (typically 0.25–0.5) to control high-frequency noise without spoiling formal order; appears in every production run.
  • Z4c constraint-damping kappa_1, kappa_2 = kappa_1=0.02, kappa_2=0
    Standard free parameters of the Z4c system; set to 0.02 and 0 unless noted.
  • Gamma-driver eta and radial damping = eta ~ 0.72–2/M
    Gauge damping parameter (typically 2/M or 0.72–1.0) with 1/r fall-off; chosen for stability.
  • Atmosphere density/temperature floors and delta_atmo = rho_atmo=1e-14 (code units), delta_atmo=0.1
    rho_atmo, T_atmo, delta_atmo control the artificial floor; affect mass conservation and low-density dynamics.
  • CFL factor and RK order = CFL 0.2–0.5
    Global time-step limiter (0.2–0.5) and choice of SSPRK3/RK4; standard but free.
  • FOFC and DMP thresholds
    First-order flux correction and discrete-maximum-principle flags that switch to low-order fluxes near floors or extrema.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Ideal GRMHD (infinite conductivity, perfect fluid, no heat conduction or viscosity) is an adequate continuum model for the targeted tests and BNS applications.
    Stated in Sec. II B; radiation reaction and non-ideal terms are set to zero throughout.
  • domain assumption Z4c formulation with 1+log / Gamma-driver puncture gauge is a well-posed, constraint-damping evolution system for the Einstein equations.
    Adopted from the literature (Hilditch et al.); equations (5)–(18).
  • domain assumption Constrained-transport (CT-contact or UCT) plus EMF recirculation preserves discrete div B = 0 to round-off across AMR interfaces.
    Standard numerical MHD result; verified empirically in Fig. 18.
  • domain assumption Fifth-order WENO-Z reconstruction + HLLE/LLF + Kastaun C2P + FOFC yields a stable, convergent high-resolution shock-capturing scheme for GRMHD.
    Combination of published methods; validated on shock tubes and BNS.
  • ad hoc to paper p4est 2:1 balanced forest-of-octrees plus custom device kernels correctly implement prolongation/restriction (including divergence-preserving magnetic prolongation) and task-based ghost exchange.
    Core implementation claim of Sec. IV; correctness is supported by the test suite rather than a formal proof.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 50578 in / 3233 out tokens · 30797 ms · 2026-07-14T15:01:39.232895+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We present GRACE, a new GPU-accelerated numerical-relativity framework designed to run efficiently on heterogeneous high-performance computing platforms. Developed from scratch and built exclusively on open-source libraries, GRACE employs Kokkos for performance portability across CPU and GPU architectures and p4est for adaptive mesh refinement. The code evolves the equations of ideal GRMHD -- with divergence-free magnetic fields maintained by constrained transport -- self-consistently coupled to the Einstein equations in the Z4c formulation, on fixed or adaptively refined grids. We validate the implementation against a suite of standard tests, ranging from magnetized shock tubes and the magnetic rotor in flat spacetime, through (magnetized) Bondi accretion onto a Schwarzschild black hole and the ringdown of a perturbed spinning puncture, to neutron-star oscillation spectra in fixed and dynamical spacetimes and the merger of binary black holes. As more demanding applications, we evolve two binary neutron-star mergers -- an equal-mass, unmagnetized system with an ideal-gas equation of state and an unequal-mass, magnetized system with a finite-temperature tabulated equation of state -- finding the inspiral dynamics to agree well with the FIL code. We also report single-device throughput together with strong- and weak-scaling results on multiple GPU and CPU architectures. GRACE is publicly released together with GRACEpy, a basic post-processing and data-analysis environment.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.09854 by Carlo Musolino, Christian Ecker, Elias R. Most, Harry Ho-Yin Ng, Keneth Miler, Khalil Pierre, Konrad Topolski, Luciano Rezzolla, Marie Cassing.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Top to bottom: solutions of the shock-tube problems A, B, and C from Tab. I at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Numerical solution for the magnetic rotor test at time [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: shows with orange dots a one-dimensional cut of the rest-mass density profile along the x−axis at the end of the simulation obtained by GRACE and compares to the fidu￾cial solution, shown as a blue line. The code is clearly able to preserve the solution accurately despite the excision treatment inside the horizon (the excision radius is shown as a vertical dotted line). The bottom panel of the same figure … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Numerical solution for the rest-mass density in the equatorial [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Central-density oscillations in the TOV test (top panels) and their Fourier transform (bottom panels), where vertical lines indicate [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Snapshot of the conformal factor at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Absolute value of the real part of the dominant ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Gravitational-wave signal from the unmagnetized [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Self-convergence of the GW phase for the unmagnetized [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. Rest-mass conservation in the unmagnetized binary neutron [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. Snapshot of rest-mass density during the inspiral in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: FIG. 15. Self-convergence of the dominant [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: FIG. 16. Phase of the dominant [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_16.png] view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: FIG. 17. Rest-mass conservation in the magnetized SFHo BNS [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_17.png] view at source ↗
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: FIG. 19. Strong scaling of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_19.png] view at source ↗
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: FIG. 20. Weak scaling of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_20.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

149 extracted references · 81 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    toroidal

    Qualitative dynamics and GW emission We start our analysis by discussing the orbital dynamics of the binary. Using the high-resolution simulation fromGRACE, and the locations of the stars defined in Eq. (67), we follow the procedure outlined in [140] and estimate the eccentricity of the initial data. From fitting ˙Ω(t), we measure a residual eccentricitye...

  2. [2]

    Since the two codes use different numer- ical methods, this comparison provides a meaningful and in- dependent check of the correctness ofGRACE

    Self-convergence and cross-code comparison We will now discuss the self-convergence properties of the GRACEinspiral waveforms and compare the results with those obtained withFIL. Since the two codes use different numer- ical methods, this comparison provides a meaningful and in- dependent check of the correctness ofGRACE. Furthermore, due to the low resol...

  3. [3]

    Strong-interaction mat- ter under extreme conditions

    Mass and divergence-free constraint conservation In Fig. 17 we report the absolute value of the relative vari- ation of the rest-mass given by Eq. (64), with respect to its initial value for the three resolutions considered. Through- out the inspiral, merger, and early post-merger, that is, up to t≈18 ms, the rest-mass is conserved with a relative error o...

  4. [4]

    R. L. Arnowitt, S. Deser, and C. W. Misner, The Dynamics of general relativity, Gen. Rel. Grav.40, 1997 (2008), arXiv:gr- qc/0405109

    arXiv 1997

  5. [5]

    Shibata and K

    M. Shibata and K. Uryu, Simulation of merging binary neutron stars in full general relativity: Gamma = two case, Phys. Rev. D61, 064001 (2000), arXiv:gr-qc/9911058

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  6. [6]

    Pretorius, Evolution of binary black hole spacetimes, Phys

    F. Pretorius, Evolution of binary black hole spacetimes, Phys. Rev. Lett.95, 121101 (2005), arXiv:gr-qc/0507014

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  7. [7]

    Alcubierreet al., Dynamical evolution of quasi-circular binary black hole data, Phys

    M. Alcubierreet al., Dynamical evolution of quasi-circular binary black hole data, Phys. Rev. D72, 044004 (2005), arXiv:gr-qc/0411149

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  8. [8]

    Campanelli, C

    M. Campanelli, C. O. Lousto, P. Marronetti, and Y . Zlochower, Accurate evolutions of orbiting black-hole binaries with- out excision, Phys. Rev. Lett.96, 111101 (2006), arXiv:gr- qc/0511048

    arXiv 2006

  9. [9]

    J. G. Baker, J. Centrella, D.-I. Choi, M. Koppitz, and J. van Meter, Gravitational-wave extraction from an inspiraling con- figuration of merging black holes, Physical Review Letters96, 10.1103/physrevlett.96.111102 (2006)

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.96.111102 2006

  10. [10]

    Sekiguchi, K

    Y . Sekiguchi, K. Kiuchi, K. Kyutoku, and M. Shibata, Grav- itational waves and neutrino emission from the merger of binary neutron stars, Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 051102 (2011), arXiv:1105.2125 [gr-qc]. 28

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  11. [11]

    Dietrich, D

    T. Dietrich, D. Radice, S. Bernuzzi, F. Zappa, A. Perego, B. Br¨ugmann, S. V . Chaurasia, R. Dudi, W. Tichy, and M. Uje- vic, CoRe database of binary neutron star merger waveforms, Class. Quant. Grav.35, 24LT01 (2018), arXiv:1806.01625 [gr- qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  12. [12]

    Kiuchi, K

    K. Kiuchi, K. Kawaguchi, K. Kyutoku, Y . Sekiguchi, and M. Shibata, Sub-radian-accuracy gravitational waves from co- alescing binary neutron stars in numerical relativity. ii. sys- tematic study on the equation of state, binary mass, and mass ratio, Physical Review D101, 10.1103/physrevd.101.084006 (2020)

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.101.084006 2020

  13. [13]

    Foucartet al., High-accuracy waveforms for black hole- neutron star systems with spinning black holes, Phys

    F. Foucartet al., High-accuracy waveforms for black hole- neutron star systems with spinning black holes, Phys. Rev. D 103, 064007 (2021), arXiv:2010.14518 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  14. [14]

    M. A. Scheelet al., The SXS collaboration’s third catalog of binary black hole simulations, Class. Quant. Grav.42, 195017 (2025), arXiv:2505.13378 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2025

  15. [15]

    Baiotti and L

    L. Baiotti and L. Rezzolla, Binary neutron star mergers: a review of Einstein’s richest laboratory, Rept. Prog. Phys.80, 096901 (2017), arXiv:1607.03540 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  16. [16]

    Radice, S

    D. Radice, S. Bernuzzi, and A. Perego, The Dynamics of Bi- nary Neutron Star Mergers and GW170817, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.70, 95 (2020), arXiv:2002.03863 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  17. [17]

    Kiuchi, Y

    K. Kiuchi, Y . Sekiguchi, K. Kyutoku, M. Shibata, K. Taniguchi, and T. Wada, High resolution magnetohydro- dynamic simulation of black hole-neutron star merger: Mass ejection and short gamma ray bursts, Phys. Rev. D92, 064034 (2015), arXiv:1506.06811 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  18. [18]

    Kiuchi, General relativistic magnetohydrodynamics simu- lations for binary neutron star mergers, inNew Frontiers in GRMHD Simulations(Springer Nature Singapore, 2025) p

    K. Kiuchi, General relativistic magnetohydrodynamics simu- lations for binary neutron star mergers, inNew Frontiers in GRMHD Simulations(Springer Nature Singapore, 2025) p. 529–572

    2025

  19. [19]

    E. R. Most, L. J. Papenfort, V . Dexheimer, M. Hanauske, S. Schramm, H. St ¨ocker, and L. Rezzolla, Signatures of quark-hadron phase transitions in general-relativistic neutron-star mergers, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 061101 (2019), arXiv:1807.03684 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  20. [20]

    Bauswein, N.-U

    A. Bauswein, N.-U. F. Bastian, D. B. Blaschke, K. Chatzi- ioannou, J. A. Clark, T. Fischer, and M. Oertel, Identifying a first-order phase transition in neutron star mergers through gravitational waves, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 061102 (2019), arXiv:1809.01116 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  21. [21]

    Ecker, M

    C. Ecker, M. J ¨arvinen, G. Nijs, and W. van der Schee, Grav- itational waves from holographic neutron star mergers, Phys. Rev. D101, 103006 (2020), arXiv:1908.03213 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  22. [22]

    L. R. Weih, M. Hanauske, and L. Rezzolla, Postmerger Gravitational-Wave Signatures of Phase Transitions in Bi- nary Mergers, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 171103 (2020), arXiv:1912.09340 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  23. [23]

    Bauswein and S

    A. Bauswein and S. Blacker, Impact of quark deconfinement in neutron star mergers and hybrid star mergers, Eur. Phys. J. ST229, 3595 (2020), arXiv:2006.16183 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  24. [24]

    Blacker, N.-U

    S. Blacker, N.-U. F. Bastian, A. Bauswein, D. B. Blaschke, T. Fischer, M. Oertel, T. Soultanis, and S. Typel, Constraining the onset density of the hadron-quark phase transition with gravitational-wave observations, Phys. Rev. D102, 123023 (2020), arXiv:2006.03789 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  25. [25]

    Foucart, M

    F. Foucart, M. D. Duez, F. Hebert, L. E. Kidder, H. P. Pfeiffer, and M. A. Scheel, Monte-Carlo neutrino transport in neutron star merger simulations, Astrophys. J. Lett.902, L27 (2020), arXiv:2008.08089 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  26. [26]

    E. R. Most, S. P. Harris, C. Plumberg, M. G. Alford, J. Noronha, J. Noronha-Hostler, F. Pretorius, H. Witek, and N. Yunes, Projecting the likely importance of weak- interaction-driven bulk viscosity in neutron star mergers, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.509, 1096 (2021), arXiv:2107.05094 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  27. [27]

    Tootle, C

    S. Tootle, C. Ecker, K. Topolski, T. Demircik, M. J ¨arvinen, and L. Rezzolla, Quark formation and phenomenology in bi- nary neutron-star mergers using V-QCD, SciPost Phys.13, 109 (2022), arXiv:2205.05691 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  28. [28]

    Kiuchi, A

    K. Kiuchi, A. Reboul-Salze, M. Shibata, and Y . Sekiguchi, A large-scale magnetic field produced by a solar-like dynamo in binary neutron star mergers, Nature Astron.8, 298 (2024), arXiv:2306.15721 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  29. [29]

    Ecker, K

    C. Ecker, K. Topolski, M. J¨arvinen, and A. Stehr, Prompt black hole formation in binary neutron star mergers, Phys. Rev. D 111, 023001 (2025), arXiv:2402.11013 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  30. [30]

    Aguilera-Miret, J.-E

    R. Aguilera-Miret, J.-E. Christian, S. Rosswog, and C. Palen- zuela, Robustness of magnetic field amplification in neutron star mergers, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.542, 3067 (2025), arXiv:2504.10604 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2025

  31. [31]

    P. C. Fragile, O. M. Blaes, P. Anninois, and J. D. Salmonson, Global General Relativistic MHD Simulation of a Tilted Black-Hole Accretion Disk, Astrophys. J.668, 417 (2007), arXiv:0706.4303 [astro-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  32. [32]

    Porth, Y

    O. Porth, Y . Mizuno, Z. Younsi, and C. M. Fromm, Flares in the Galactic Centre – I. Orbiting flux tubes in magnetically arrested black hole accretion discs, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.502, 2023 (2021), arXiv:2006.03658 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  33. [33]

    P. C. Fragile, M. J. Middleton, D. A. Bollimpalli, and Z. Smith, Long timescale numerical simulations of large, super-critical accretion discs (2025), arXiv:2505.08859 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  34. [34]

    G. N. Wong, L. Medeiros, and J. M. Stone, Mass Transport, Turbulent Mixing, and Inflow in Black Hole Accretion, Astro- phys. J.995, 119 (2025), arXiv:2509.14202 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2025

  35. [35]

    Zhang, J

    L. Zhang, J. M. Stone, P. D. Mullen, S. W. Davis, Y .-F. Jiang, and C. J. White, Radiation GRMHD Models of Accretion onto Stellar-mass Black Holes. I. Survey of Eddington Ratios, As- trophys. J.995, 26 (2025), arXiv:2506.02289 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  36. [36]

    M. T. P. Liskaet al., H-AMR: A New GPU-accelerated GRMHD Code for Exascale Computing with 3D Adaptive Mesh Refinement and Local Adaptive Time Stepping, As- trophys. J. Suppl.263, 26 (2022), arXiv:1912.10192 [astro- ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  37. [37]

    Shankar, P

    S. Shankar, P. M ¨osta, S. R. Brandt, R. Haas, E. Schnetter, and Y . de Graaf, GRaM-X: a new GPU-accelerated dynam- ical spacetime GRMHD code for Exascale computing with the Einstein Toolkit, Class. Quant. Grav.40, 205009 (2023), arXiv:2210.17509 [astro-ph.IM]

    arXiv 2023

  38. [38]

    J. M. Stone, P. D. Mullen, D. Fielding, P. Grete, M. Guo, P. Kempski, E. R. Most, C. J. White, and G. N. Wong, Athenak: A performance-portable version of the athena++ amr framework (2024), arXiv:2409.16053 [astro-ph.IM]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  39. [39]

    J. V . Kalinaniet al., AsterX: a new open-source GPU- accelerated GRMHD code for dynamical spacetimes, Class. Quant. Grav.42, 025016 (2025), arXiv:2406.11669 [astro- ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  40. [40]

    H. Zhu, J. Fields, F. Zappa, D. Radice, J. M. Stone, A. Rashti, W. Cook, S. Bernuzzi, and B. Daszuta, Performance-portable Numerical Relativity with AthenaK, Astrophys. J. Suppl.278, 50 (2025), arXiv:2409.10383 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  41. [41]

    Palenzuelaet al., MHDuet: a high-order general relativistic radiation MHD code for CPU and GPU architectures, Class

    C. Palenzuelaet al., MHDuet: a high-order general relativistic radiation MHD code for CPU and GPU architectures, Class. Quant. Grav.42, 245005 (2025), arXiv:2510.13965 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2025

  42. [42]

    M.-Z. Han, K. Kiuchi, and M. Shibata, Sacra-k: A performance-portable numerical relativity code with kokkos (2026), arXiv:2607.08743 [astro-ph.HE]. 29

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  43. [43]

    Lalakos, A

    A. Lalakos, A. Tchekhovskoy, E. R. Most, B. Ripperda, K. Chatterjee, and M. Liska, Universal radial scaling of large-scale black hole accretion for magnetically arrested and rocking accretion disks, Phys. Rev. D112, 123044 (2025), arXiv:2505.23888 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  44. [44]

    H.-Y . Wang, E. R. Most, and P. F. Hopkins,BMAD- Circumbinary Magnetically Arrested Disks around Stellar or Black Hole Binaries: Hot Accretion Flows, Disk Properties, and Angular Momentum Transfer (2025), arXiv:2508.16855 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  45. [45]

    E. M. Guti ´errez, D. Radice, J. Fields, and J. M. Stone, Turbu- lent Dynamo Action in Binary Neutron Star Mergers (2026), arXiv:2601.20953 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2026

  46. [46]

    Radice, R

    D. Radice, R. Gamba, H. Zhu, and A. Rashti, AthenaK sim- ulations of the binary black hole merger GW150914, Class. Quant. Grav.42, 185003 (2025), arXiv:2506.06838 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  47. [47]

    Trott, L

    C. Trott, L. Berger-Vergiat, D. Poliakoff, S. Rajamanickam, D. Lebrun-Grandie, J. Madsen, N. Al Awar, M. Gligoric, G. Shipman, and G. Womeldorff, The kokkos ecosystem: Comprehensive performance portability for high performance computing, Computing in Science & Engineering23, 10 (2021)

    2021

  48. [48]

    C. R. Trott, D. Lebrun-Grandi ´e, D. Arndt, J. Ciesko, V . Dang, N. Ellingwood, R. Gayatri, E. Harvey, D. S. Hollman, D. Ibanez, N. Liber, J. Madsen, J. Miles, D. Poliakoff, A. Pow- ell, S. Rajamanickam, M. Simberg, D. Sunderland, B. Tur- cksin, and J. Wilke, Kokkos 3: Programming model exten- sions for the exascale era, IEEE Transactions on Parallel and ...

    2022

  49. [49]

    Burstedde, L

    C. Burstedde, L. C. Wilcox, and O. Ghattas, p4est: Scalable algorithms for parallel adaptive mesh refinement on forests of octrees, SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing33, 1103 (2011), https://doi.org/10.1137/100791634

    doi:10.1137/100791634 2011

  50. [50]

    Burstedde, T

    C. Burstedde, T. Griesbach, L. C. Wilcox, H. Brandt, M. Hirsch, P. Kestener, J. Rudi, E. A. Hereth, J. Holke, H. Lin, T. Isaac, M. Kirilin, L. Carlin, G. Seastream, B. Tur- cksin, J. Krasnansky, M. Schlottke-Lakemper, A. Fikl, H. Ra- nocha, H. Frank, G. Ghosh, S. Aiton, T. Heister, W. Bangerth, M. Ugolotti, P. Jolivet, M. Matveev, J. Kozdon, O. Iffrig, an...

    2024

  51. [51]

    E. R. Most, L. J. Papenfort, and L. Rezzolla, Beyond second- order convergence in simulations of magnetized binary neu- tron stars with realistic microphysics, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.490, 3588 (2019), arXiv:1907.10328 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  52. [52]

    J. A. Font, Numerical hydrodynamics in general relativity, Living Rev. Rel.3, 2 (2000), arXiv:gr-qc/0003101

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  53. [53]

    Anton, O

    L. Anton, O. Zanotti, J. A. Miralles, J. M. Marti, J. M. Ibanez, J. A. Font, and J. A. Pons, Numerical 3+1 general relativis- tic magnetohydrodynamics: A Local characteristic approach, Astrophys. J.637, 296 (2006), arXiv:astro-ph/0506063

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  54. [54]

    Gourgoulhon, 3+1 formalism and bases of numerical rela- tivity (2007), arXiv:gr-qc/0703035

    E. Gourgoulhon, 3+1 formalism and bases of numerical rela- tivity (2007), arXiv:gr-qc/0703035

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  55. [55]

    C. Bona, C. Palenzuela-Luque, and C. Bona-Casas,Ele- ments of Numerical Relativity and Relativistic Hydrodynam- ics: From Einstein’s Equations to Astrophysical Simulations, Lecture Notes in Physics, V ol. 783 (Springer Berlin Heidel- berg, 2009)

    2009

  56. [56]

    Rezzolla and O

    L. Rezzolla and O. Zanotti,Relativistic Hydrodynamics(Ox- ford University Press, 2013)

    2013

  57. [57]

    Lehner and F

    L. Lehner and F. Pretorius, Numerical Relativity and As- trophysics, Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys.52, 661 (2014), arXiv:1405.4840 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  58. [58]

    Shibata,Numerical Relativity, 100 Years of General Rela- tivity (World Scientific Publishing Co., Singapore, 2016)

    M. Shibata,Numerical Relativity, 100 Years of General Rela- tivity (World Scientific Publishing Co., Singapore, 2016)

    2016

  59. [59]

    Mewes, Y

    V . Mewes, Y . Zlochower, M. Campanelli, T. W. Baumgarte, Z. B. Etienne, F. G. Lopez Armengol, and F. Cipolletta, Nu- merical relativity in spherical coordinates: A new dynamical spacetime and general relativistic MHD evolution framework for the Einstein Toolkit, Phys. Rev. D101, 104007 (2020), arXiv:2002.06225 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  60. [60]

    T. W. Baumgarte and S. L. Shapiro,Numerical Relativity: Starting from Scratch(Cambridge University Press, 2021)

    2021

  61. [61]

    Bambi, Y

    C. Bambi, Y . Mizuno, S. Shashank, and F. Yuan, eds.,New Frontiers in GRMHD Simulations, Springer Series in Astro- physics and Cosmology (Springer, 2025)

    2025

  62. [62]

    C. Bona, T. Ledvinka, C. Palenzuela, and M. Z ´acek, General- covariant evolution formalism for numerical relativity, Phys. Rev. D67, 104005 (2003), gr-qc/0302083

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  63. [63]

    D. Alic, C. Bona-Casas, C. Bona, L. Rezzolla, and C. Palen- zuela, Conformal and covariant formulation of the Z4 system with constraint-violation damping, Phys. Rev. D85, 064040 (2012), arXiv:1106.2254 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  64. [64]

    Hilditch, S

    D. Hilditch, S. Bernuzzi, M. Thierfelder, Z. Cao, W. Tichy, and B. Bruegmann, Compact binary evolutions with the Z4c for- mulation, Phys. Rev. D88, 084057 (2013), arXiv:1212.2901 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  65. [65]

    C. Bona, J. Masso, E. Seidel, and P. Walker, Three- dimensional numerical relativity with a hyperbolic formula- tion (1998), arXiv:gr-qc/9804052

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  66. [66]

    Alcubierre, B

    M. Alcubierre, B. Bruegmann, P. Diener, M. Koppitz, D. Poll- ney, E. Seidel, and R. Takahashi, Gauge conditions for long term numerical black hole evolutions without excision, Phys. Rev. D67, 084023 (2003), arXiv:gr-qc/0206072

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  67. [67]

    J. R. van Meter, J. G. Baker, M. Koppitz, and D.-I. Choi, How to move a black hole without excision: Gauge conditions for the numerical evolution of a moving puncture, Phys. Rev. D 73, 124011 (2006), arXiv:gr-qc/0605030

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  68. [68]

    Bruegmann, J

    B. Bruegmann, J. A. Gonzalez, M. Hannam, S. Husa, U. Sper- hake, and W. Tichy, Calibration of Moving Puncture Simula- tions, Phys. Rev. D77, 024027 (2008), arXiv:gr-qc/0610128

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  69. [69]

    J. S. Read, B. D. Lackey, B. J. Owen, and J. L. Friedman, Constraints on a phenomenologically parameterized neutron- star equation of state, Phys. Rev. D79, 124032 (2009), arXiv:0812.2163 [astro-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  70. [70]

    Typel, M

    S. Typel, M. Oertel, and T. Kl ¨ahn, CompOSE CompStar on- line supernova equations of state harmonising the concert of nuclear physics and astrophysics compose.obspm.fr, Phys. Part. Nucl.46, 633 (2015), arXiv:1307.5715 [astro-ph.SR]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  71. [71]

    Oertel, M

    M. Oertel, M. Hempel, T. Kl ¨ahn, and S. Typel, Equations of state for supernovae and compact stars, Rev. Mod. Phys.89, 015007 (2017), arXiv:1610.03361 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  72. [72]

    Typelet al.(CompOSE Core Team), CompOSE Reference Manual, Eur

    S. Typelet al.(CompOSE Core Team), CompOSE Reference Manual, Eur. Phys. J. A58, 221 (2022), arXiv:2203.03209 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  73. [73]

    A. W. Steiner, M. Hempel, and T. Fischer, Core-collapse su- pernova equations of state based on neutron star observations, Astrophys. J.774, 17 (2013), arXiv:1207.2184 [astro-ph.SR]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  74. [74]

    J. G. Baker, M. Campanelli, and C. O. Lousto, The Lazarus project: A Pragmatic approach to binary black hole evolutions, Phys. Rev. D65, 044001 (2002), arXiv:gr-qc/0104063

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  75. [75]

    N. T. Bishop and L. Rezzolla, Extraction of gravitational waves in numerical relativity, Living Reviews in Relativity19, 2 (2016), arXiv:1606.02532 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  76. [76]

    Kreiss and J

    H.-O. Kreiss and J. Oliger,Methods for the Approximate So- lution of Time Dependent Problems, GARP Publication Se- ries No. 10 (International Council of Scientific Unions (ICSU) and World Meteorological Organization (WMO), Geneva, Switzerland, 1973) 107 pp. 30

    1973

  77. [77]

    S. Husa, J. A. Gonzalez, M. Hannam, B. Bruegmann, and U. Sperhake, Reducing phase error in long numerical bi- nary black hole evolutions with sixth order finite differencing, Class. Quant. Grav.25, 105006 (2008), arXiv:0706.0740 [gr- qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  78. [78]

    Harten, P

    A. Harten, P. D. Lax, and B. v. Leer, On upstream differencing and godunov-type schemes for hyper- bolic conservation laws, SIAM Review25, 35 (1983), https://doi.org/10.1137/1025002

    doi:10.1137/1025002 1983

  79. [79]

    Einfeldt, On godunov-type methods for gas dynam- ics, SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis25, 294 (1988), https://doi.org/10.1137/0725021

    B. Einfeldt, On godunov-type methods for gas dynam- ics, SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis25, 294 (1988), https://doi.org/10.1137/0725021

    doi:10.1137/0725021 1988

  80. [80]

    Rusanov, The calculation of the interaction of non- stationary shock waves and obstacles, USSR Computational Mathematics and Mathematical Physics1, 304 (1962)

    V . Rusanov, The calculation of the interaction of non- stationary shock waves and obstacles, USSR Computational Mathematics and Mathematical Physics1, 304 (1962)

    1962

Showing first 80 references.