REVIEW 4 cited by
What's in a binary black hole's mass parameter?
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
What's in a binary black hole's mass parameter?
read the original abstract
The black hole masses measured from gravitational wave observations appear to cluster around specific mass values. Consequently, the primary~(and chirp) mass distribution of binary black holes inferred using these measurements shows four emerging peaks. These peaks are approximately located at a primary~(chirp) mass value of 10$M_\odot$~(8$M_\odot$), 20$M_\odot$~(14$M_\odot$), 35$M_\odot$~(28$M_\odot$) and 63$M_\odot$~(49$M_\odot$). Although the presence of the first and third peaks has been attributed to binary black hole formation in star clusters or due to the evolution of stellar binaries in isolation, the second peak has received relatively less attention because it lacks significance in the primary mass distribution. In this article, we report that confidence in the second peak depends on the mass parameter we choose to model the population on. Unlike primary mass, this peak is significant when modelled on the chirp mass. We discuss the disparity as a consequence of mass asymmetry in the observations that cluster at the second peak. Finally, we report this asymmetry as part of a potential trend in the mass ratio distribution manifested as a function of the chirp mass, but not as a function of primary mass, when we include the observation GW190814 in our modelling. The chirp mass is not a parameter of astrophysical relevance. Features present in the chirp mass, but not in the primary mass, are relatively difficult to explain and expected to garner significant interest.
Forward citations
Cited by 4 Pith papers
-
Uncovering Hierarchical Sub-Population of Binary Black Holes
A flexible six-component fit to 259 LIGO/Virgo/KAGRA black-hole mergers finds a roughly geometric sequence of mass peaks but no aligned-spin signal except in the lowest-mass component.
-
How do the LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA's Heavy Black Holes Form? No evidence for core-collapse Intermediate-mass black holes in GWTC-4
No evidence for core-collapse IMBHs in GWTC-4; heavy BHs from hierarchical mergers, with low-spin mass distribution truncating at ~65 solar masses and PIMG upper edge estimated at 150 solar masses.
-
How do the LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA's Heavy Black Holes Form? No evidence for core-collapse Intermediate-mass black holes in GWTC-4
No evidence for core-collapse formed low-spin IMBHs in GWTC-4, with 90% upper limit on merger rate of 0.077 Gpc^{-3} yr^{-1}, low-spin BH mass truncation at 65 solar masses consistent with pair-instability gap lower e...
-
Evidence for additional structure in the effective spin distribution hints at multiple formation pathways in GWTC-5.0
GWTC-5.0 analysis finds evidence for structure beyond a non-skewed Gaussian bulk in χ_eff, with suggestive mass-dependent excess of positive over negative spins outside the bulk at 13:1 odds in one mass bin.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.