Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 85 references

Binary neutron star mergers will not yield neutrinos to current or near-future detectors; only a megaton-scale water Cherenkov detector over several decades could see a single event, and the gravitational-wave–neutrino time delay from that

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 · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 21:05 UTC pith:HRJJ3KAV

load-bearing objection A transparent, useful update on BNS-neutrino detectability; the 35–60 yr and ~0.1 eV numbers are conditional on a luminosity choice that could easily be a factor of 3–10 off. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2511.16658 v2 pith:HRJJ3KAV submitted 2025-11-20 hep-ph astro-ph.HEhep-ex

Prospects for Neutrino Observation and Mass Measurement from Binary Neutron Star Mergers

Vedran Brdar , Dibya S. Chattopadhyay , Samiur R. Mir , Tousif Raza , Marc S. Romanowski This is my paper
classification hep-ph astro-ph.HEhep-ex
keywords binary neutron star mergersneutrino detectionneutrino masstime-of-flight delaymulti-messenger astronomywater Cherenkov detectorgravitational wavesdiffuse supernova neutrino background
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 argues that binary neutron star mergers will not be seen in neutrinos by any detector now operating or under construction: even the largest approved kiloton-scale detector registers less than one event in twenty years. A proposed megaton-scale water Cherenkov detector could catch a single neutrino, but only after 35–60 years of operation, because the most recent gravitational-wave surveys lowered the merger-rate upper limit and the neutrino's nonzero mass delays it by seconds, widening the background window. If that single neutrino is ever seen in coincidence with its gravitational-wave signal, the measured time delay can constrain the lightest neutrino mass at the O(0.1) eV level — better than the current terrestrial tritium-decay limit and better than projections from a galactic supernova. The paper's method is to vary the maximum allowed merger distance per neutrino-energy bin so that background contamination stays below 10 percent.

Core claim

The central claim is a quantitative scaling: with the updated merger-rate upper limit and realistic neutrino emission, no current or near-future neutrino detector can observe binary neutron star mergers; a 5-megaton water Cherenkov detector would need 35–60 years at 90% confidence to record a single background-free neutrino. Once that single neutrino is recorded in timing coincidence with the gravitational wave, its delay — dominated by time-of-flight from a representative source at 250 Mpc — yields a 90% CL upper limit on the lightest neutrino mass of order 0.1 eV, surpassing both the present terrestrial bound and galactic-supernova projections. The paper is explicit that this sensitivity i

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the per-energy-bin maximum redshift z_cut. For each neutrino energy interval, the paper solves for the largest merger distance such that the probability that no background event falls inside the timing window following the gravitational-wave trigger is 90%. The window itself is the sum of the mass-induced time-of-flight delay, Δt = ∫ dz' / [H0 sqrt(Ωm(1+z')^3+ΩΛ)] times mν²/(2Eν(z')²), and the assumed neutrino emission duration (6 s or 0.6 s). This ties background rejection directly to neutrino mass. The signal spectrum is a pinched Fermi–Dirac-like distribution with the adopted electron-antineutrino luminosity, a 20 MeV average energy, and a merger rate normalized

Load-bearing premise

Everything scales linearly with the electron-antineutrino luminosity adopted from one set of merger simulations (approximated as one-sixth of the all-flavor luminosity with a 20 MeV average energy); if the true luminosity sits at the low end of the published spread, the required exposure grows by about an order of magnitude and the mass-sensitivity scenario moves out of reach.

What would settle it

Detect a single inverse-beta-decay neutrino within about 30 seconds of a binary neutron star merger at ~100 Mpc in any operating kiloton-scale water Cherenkov detector before a megaton detector exists — the paper predicts less than one such event per 20 years across all current detectors.

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

If this is right

  • A kiloton-scale neutrino detector alone cannot discover binary-neutron-star-merger neutrinos; any serious program needs a megaton-scale water Cherenkov detector.
  • The required runtime of roughly 35–60 years makes a discovery a multi-generation effort, and a 50% background reduction (e.g., gadolinium loading) improves it by about 30%.
  • A single coincident neutrino can produce a neutrino-mass limit competitive with or better than the current terrestrial bound, provided the merger distance is near 250 Mpc and the energy near 20 MeV.
  • The analysis yields both lower and upper limits on the lightest neutrino mass, though the lower limit is strongly tied to the unknown neutrino emission profile.
  • If the neutrino-mass upper limit improves (for instance via Project 8), the required runtime could shrink to 20–30 years by narrowing the allowed timing window.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If real binary neutron star mergers are an order of magnitude dimmer in neutrinos than the adopted simulations, the 35–60 year runtime becomes roughly 350–600 years — effectively unobservable; the paper's 'several decades' is thus an optimistic reading of the simulation spread.
  • The timing technique transfers directly to any other multi-messenger transient with a precisely known coalescence time; a prompt neutrino burst from a ~100 Mpc source would give a similar mass probe with far less exposure.
  • A future 20-megaton or gadolinium-doped detector could cut the runtime to a single decade, making binary-neutron-star neutrino astronomy a realistic mid-century science rather than a century-scale project.
  • The z_cut method effectively prioritizes the closest and most luminous mergers, so the mass sensitivity is driven by only O(100–1000) events; a precise measurement of the local merger rate matters more than the global rate for this science.

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 / 4 minor

Summary. The paper evaluates the detectability of neutrinos from binary neutron star mergers using updated merger-rate limits (LVK O4a) and recent simulation luminosities, and it assesses whether the GW-neutrino time delay can measure the lightest neutrino mass. It finds that JUNO, DUNE, and Hyper-Kamiokande will record less than one event in 20 years, that a 5 Mt water-Cherenkov detector is needed, and that the required observation time for a single background-tagged neutrino is 35-60 years at 90% confidence. Conditional on such a detection, the paper argues that the time-of-flight delay can constrain the lightest neutrino mass below the current KATRIN bound. The core derivation (Eqs. 1-7) is straightforward and internally consistent, and the paper is transparent about the luminosity rescaling in Fig. 2.

Significance. If the adopted luminosity and rate inputs are representative, this is a useful, more conservative update of earlier BNS-neutrino forecasts. The energy-dependent time-window search, the explicit inclusion of the neutrino-mass delay as a background-widening effect, and the scaling chart in Fig. 2 are valuable contributions. The central quantitative claims, however, are only as robust as the adopted external inputs, and the paper would be strengthened by propagating those uncertainties into the headline runtime and mass-sensitivity statements.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. II, Eq. (2) / Fig. 2; Sec. III, Fig. 6] All quantitative outputs (event counts, required runtime, z_cut) scale linearly with the adopted electron-antineutrino luminosity and local BNS rate. The paper adopts L_total/6 from the three simulations of Ref. [48] and R_BNS(0)=250 Gpc^-3 yr^-1, the O4a upper limit. The text itself notes that published luminosities differ by up to an order of magnitude and that some models (e.g., Ref. [50]) give much smaller values. A factor 3 lower luminosity and/or a true rate below the upper limit shifts the 35-60 yr range to roughly 100-600 yr and makes the mass-measurement program in Sec. IV impractical. Please propagate these uncertainties into the headline numbers, e.g., as a band in Fig. 6 or a table using the low/high simulation cases.
  2. [Sec. III, Eq. (6) and Fig. 6] The quantity labeled 'necessary observation time for ... 90% confidence' is the time at which the expected signal is one and the expected background in the search windows is -ln(0.9) ~ 0.1. This does not give a 90% probability of recording a neutrino; the Poisson probability of at least one signal is 1-e^-1 ~ 63%. If '90% confidence discovery' is intended in the usual sense, the required exposure is about 2.3 times larger (roughly 80-140 yr). Please clarify the statistical meaning and, if needed, correct the quoted runtimes.
  3. [Sec. IV, Figs. 7-8] The mass-sensitivity statement is conditional on a favorable observed time delay Δt_d. For the fiducial 6 s emission model, the emission-time spread is larger than the mass-induced delay for m_lightest ≲ 0.3 eV, so the probability of drawing a Δt_d that yields a strong limit is not reflected in Fig. 8. The abstract and conclusions say 'expected upper limits' and 'sensitivity ... exceeds KATRIN', but no marginalization over the single-event Δt_d distribution is performed. Please present an expected reach (e.g., the median or 90% quantile of the upper limit over the signal distribution) or soften the claim.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. II vs Sec. III] The event-rate wording is inconsistent: Sec. II says 'a couple of neutrino events ... during a 20-year period' for 5 Mt WCD, while Sec. III says 'a handful of neutrino events ... within 10 years'. Please harmonize or clarify the figure reading.
  2. [Fig. 5] The z_cut axis starts at 0.01, and the values at low energies are difficult to read. A log scale or a zoomed inset would help.
  3. [Sec. IV] Only normal mass ordering is shown; the statement that inverted ordering 'differ[s] only marginally' would be more convincing with a quantitative comparison or a sentence explaining why.
  4. [General] There are several typos, including 'luminsoity' in Sec. II and the colloquial 'vanilla case' in Sec. III. A careful proofread is recommended.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: all quantitative results are convolutions of external simulation, rate, background, and cross-section inputs, with no fitted parameter renamed as a prediction.

full rationale

The paper's event rate (Eqs. (1)-(4)) is built from externally published merger-simulation luminosities (Ref. [48]), the LVK O4a merger-rate upper limit (Ref. [39]), literature cross sections and detection efficiencies, and standard cosmology. The background-mitigation quantity z_cut is obtained by solving Eq. (6) for P_safe=0.9 using these inputs plus the independent time-of-flight formula Eq. (5); it is not defined in terms of the paper's own predictions. The neutrino-mass sensitivity in Sec. IV is a Monte Carlo over assumed distance/emission-time distributions and the same external luminosities, not a fit to the target quantity. No step in the derivation defines its output in terms of its output, and no fitted parameter is subsequently relabeled as a prediction. The paper explicitly discloses the linear dependence of event counts on the adopted luminosity and provides Fig. 2 so the reader can rescale; the resulting fragility to simulation spread is a robustness concern, not circularity. The only author-overlapping citation (Ref. [63]) appears among three references for the standard pinching-factor parametrization, and the paper states the results are insensitive to the pinching parameter over the range 0-5, so this citation is not load-bearing. The central conclusions therefore reduce to external inputs and assumptions, not to themselves.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

6 free parameters · 6 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper's quantitative outputs are computed by convolving external inputs: neutrino luminosity and emission profiles from published GR-merger simulations (Refs. [48,50]), the LVK O4a merger-rate upper limit (Ref. [39]), Hyper-Kamiokande background spectra (Ref. [31]), and literature cross sections. The authors add modeling choices (all-flavor luminosity divided by 6; average energy 20 MeV; alpha = 2.3; P_safe = 0.9) that are declared but not derived. No new physical entities are postulated; the largest uncertainty is the luminosity, which the paper itself states varies by up to an order of magnitude across simulations. The technique of energy-dependent z_cut windows is an analysis procedure, not an invented entity.

free parameters (6)
  • Electron antineutrino luminosity fraction = L_nuebar = (total all-flavor luminosity from Ref. [48]) / 6
    Adopted by dividing the total luminosity of the Ref. [48] simulations by 6 to obtain a per-flavor luminosity; directly sets the event rate, the runtime estimates, and the mass-sensitivity scenario. The paper states other simulations differ by up to an order of magnitude (Section II, Fig. 2).
  • Average neutrino energy = 20 MeV
    Chosen as 'roughly the mean of the values considered in Refs. [30, 32]' (Section II); enters the flux shape in Eq. (1) and, quadratically, the time delay in Eq. (5).
  • Local BNS merger rate R_BNS(0) = 250 Gpc^-3 yr^-1
    Taken at the LVK O4a upper limit from Ref. [39]; all event counts scale linearly with this value, and a lower true rate would lengthen all quoted observation times.
  • Pinching parameter alpha = 2.3
    Set to the Fermi-Dirac value with zero chemical potential; the authors checked alpha in [0,5] and found event counts do not change significantly (Section II).
  • Neutrino emission duration/profile = 6 s (Ref. [48]) or 0.6 s (Ref. [50])
    Determines Delta_t_tot in the background mitigation and the width of the mass-sensitivity PDF; the paper shows the runtime changes by roughly a factor of 2-3 between the two profiles (Fig. 6).
  • Luminosity-distance uncertainty sigma = 10% (25 Mpc at 250 Mpc)
    Assumed for the mass-sensitivity Monte Carlo (Section IV); the paper notes that even with a precisely known neutrino mass, a 10% distance uncertainty dominates the predicted arrival time.
axioms (6)
  • domain assumption LCDM cosmology with H0, Omega_m = 0.3, Omega_Lambda = 0.7
    Used in Eq. (3) for dt/dz and in Eq. (5) for the redshift-integrated time delay (Section II). Variations in H0 are small for the low-redshift mergers that dominate the analysis.
  • standard math Time-of-flight delay formula Delta_t = integral of m_nu^2/(2E(z)^2) dz/H(z) (Stodolsky)
    Eq. (5), cited to Ref. [80]; assumes standard relativistic kinematics and that gravitational waves travel at c.
  • ad hoc to paper Merger rate redshift evolution follows the 'BNSOpt' curve from Ref. [32], rescaled to the local LVK O4a upper limit
    Section II: the local rate is fixed by Ref. [39] while the redshift dependence is imported from Ref. [32]; the combination is chosen for this analysis.
  • domain assumption Background events at a 5 Mt WCD scale from Hyper-Kamiokande design-report backgrounds by fiducial mass ratio and are uniformly distributed in time
    Underpins Eq. (6) and the P_safe construction in Section III; assumes no new background components appear at the 5 Mt scale and that backgrounds are uncorrelated with gravitational-wave triggers.
  • domain assumption Normal neutrino mass ordering with nu_1 lightest, weighted by |U_ei|^2
    Section IV; the paper states that the inverted ordering would differ only marginally.
  • domain assumption Electron antineutrinos dominate the detectable flux and inverse beta decay is the detection channel at 5 Mt WCD
    Section II: the all-flavor luminosity divided by 6 is treated as the nu_e_bar luminosity; cross sections and efficiencies are taken from Refs. [66,69-72].

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 17289 in / 22618 out tokens · 194605 ms · 2026-08-03T21:05:50.974812+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Over the next decade, $\mathcal{O}(100)$ diffuse supernova neutrino background (DSNB) events are expected in Hyper-Kamiokande. Another neutrino source that has received far less attention is binary neutron star mergers. Including the data from recent simulations, we find that detection in current and near-future neutrino experiments is not feasible, and a megaton-scale detector with $\mathcal{O}(10)$ MeV threshold, such as the proposed Deep-TITAND, MEMPHYS, or MICA, will be required. This is due to the updated binary neutron star merger rate and the time-of-flight delay caused by the nonzero neutrino mass. Regarding the former, recent results from LIGO, Virgo, and KAGRA has significantly lowered the upper limit on the neutron star merger rate. As for the latter, neutrino events from neutron star mergers are expected to be recorded shortly after the gravitational wave signal. Limiting the analysis to such short time windows can significantly reduce background rates. While this approach has been qualitatively discussed in the literature, the effect of the time delay caused by neutrino mass, which can substantially extend the observation windows, has been disregarded. We present a refined analysis employing energy-dependent time windows and luminosity distance cuts for the mergers and provide realistic estimates of the detector runtime required to record neutrinos from binary neutron star mergers with small background contamination. The relative timing between the neutrino and gravitational wave signals can also be employed to probe the scale of neutrino mass. We find that the sensitivity to the lightest neutrino mass exceeds both the most stringent terrestrial bounds from KATRIN and the projections based on galactic supernovae. This level of sensitivity may become particularly relevant in the future if terrestrial and supernova constraints are not significantly improved.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.16658 by Dibya S. Chattopadhyay, Marc S. Romanowski, Samiur R. Mir, Tousif Raza, Vedran Brdar.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Number of neutrino events from binary neutron [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. The number of expected neutrino events from binary [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Schematic illustration of the uniform distribution of background events over time, as well as the signal events contained [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Energy bin-dependent [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Values of the maximum merger redshift [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Required observation time for the discovery of a single [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Probability density function in the parameter space of ∆ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Expected 90% CL upper limit on the lightest neu [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.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

85 extracted references · 73 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Fukudaet al., Evidence for oscillation of atmospheric neutrinos,Phys

    Super-Kamiokande Collaboration, Y. Fukudaet al., Evidence for oscillation of atmospheric neutrinos,Phys. Rev. Lett.81(1998) 1562–1567, [hep-ex/9807003]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  2. [2]

    SNO Collaboration, Q. R. Ahmadet al.,Direct evidence for neutrino flavor transformation from neutral current interactions in the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory,Phys. Rev. Lett.89(2002) 011301, [nucl-ex/0204008]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  3. [3]

    Akeret al.,The design, construction, and commissioning of the KATRIN experiment,JINST16(2021), no

    KATRIN Collaboration, M. Akeret al.,The design, construction, and commissioning of the KATRIN experiment,JINST16(2021), no. 08 T08015, [2103.04755]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  4. [4]

    Akeret al.,Direct neutrino-mass measurement based on 259 days of KATRIN data,Science388(2025), no

    KATRIN Collaboration, M. Akeret al.,Direct neutrino-mass measurement based on 259 days of KATRIN data,Science388(2025), no. 6743 adq9592, [2406.13516]

    arXiv 2025

  5. [5]

    Shirai,Results and future plans for the KamLAND-Zen experiment,J

    KamLAND-Zen Collaboration, J. Shirai,Results and future plans for the KamLAND-Zen experiment,J. Phys. Conf. Ser.888(2017), no. 1 012031

    2017

  6. [6]

    Abeet al.,Search for Majorana Neutrinos with the Complete KamLAND-Zen Dataset,2406.11438

    KamLAND-Zen Collaboration, S. Abeet al.,Search for Majorana Neutrinos with the Complete KamLAND-Zen Dataset,2406.11438

    arXiv

  7. [7]

    Aghanimet al.,Planck 2018 results

    Planck Collaboration, N. Aghanimet al.,Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters,Astron. Astrophys.641(2020) A6, [1807.06209]. [Erratum: Astron.Astrophys. 652, C4 (2021)]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  8. [8]

    Aghamousaet al.,The DESI Experiment Part II: Instrument Design,1611.00037

    DESI Collaboration, A. Aghamousaet al.,The DESI Experiment Part II: Instrument Design,1611.00037

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  9. [9]

    Elberset al.,Constraints on Neutrino Physics from DESI DR2 BAO and DR1 Full Shape,2503.14744

    DESI Collaboration, W. Elberset al.,Constraints on Neutrino Physics from DESI DR2 BAO and DR1 Full Shape,2503.14744

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  10. [10]

    J. F. Beacom, N. F. Bell, and S. Dodelson,Neutrinoless universe,Phys. Rev. Lett.93(2004) 121302, [astro-ph/0404585]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  11. [11]

    Bellomo, E

    N. Bellomo, E. Bellini, B. Hu, R. Jimenez, C. Pena-Garay, and L. Verde,Hiding neutrino mass in modified gravity cosmologies,JCAP02(2017) 043, [1612.02598]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  12. [12]

    Esteban and J

    I. Esteban and J. Salvado,Long Range Interactions in Cosmology: Implications for Neutrinos,JCAP05 (2021) 036, [2101.05804]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  13. [13]

    Barenboim, J

    G. Barenboim, J. Z. Chen, S. Hannestad, I. M. Oldengott, T. Tram, and Y. Y. Y. Wong,Invisible neutrino decay in precision cosmology,JCAP03(2021) 087, [2011.01502]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  14. [14]

    Escudero, J

    M. Escudero, J. Lopez-Pavon, N. Rius, and S. Sandner, Relaxing Cosmological Neutrino Mass Bounds with Unstable Neutrinos,JHEP12(2020) 119, [2007.04994]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  15. [15]

    G. T. Zatsepin,On the possibility of determining the upper limit of the neutrino mass by means of the flight time,Pisma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz.8(1968) 333–334

    1968

  16. [16]

    T. J. Loredo and D. Q. Lamb,Bayesian analysis of neutrinos observed from supernova SN-1987A,Phys. Rev. D65(2002) 063002, [astro-ph/0107260]. 11

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  17. [17]

    Pagliaroli, F

    G. Pagliaroli, F. Rossi-Torres, and F. Vissani,Neutrino mass bound in the standard scenario for supernova electronic antineutrino emission,Astropart. Phys.33 (2010) 287–291, [1002.3349]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  18. [18]

    Totani,Electron neutrino mass measurement by supernova neutrino bursts and implications on hot dark matter,Phys

    T. Totani,Electron neutrino mass measurement by supernova neutrino bursts and implications on hot dark matter,Phys. Rev. Lett.80(1998) 2039–2042, [astro-ph/9801104]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  19. [19]

    J. F. Beacom, R. N. Boyd, and A. Mezzacappa, Technique for direct eV scale measurements of the mu and tau neutrino masses using supernova neutrinos, Phys. Rev. Lett.85(2000) 3568–3571, [hep-ph/0006015]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  20. [20]

    Nardi and J

    E. Nardi and J. I. Zuluaga,Exploring the sub-eV neutrino mass range with supernova neutrinos,Phys. Rev. D69(2004) 103002, [astro-ph/0306384]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  21. [21]

    Pompa, F

    F. Pompa, F. Capozzi, O. Mena, and M. Sorel,Absolute νMass Measurement with the DUNE Experiment,Phys. Rev. Lett.129(2022), no. 12 121802, [2203.00024]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  22. [22]

    G. A. Parker and M. Wurm,Constraining the absolute neutrino mass with black hole-forming supernovae and scintillation detectors,Phys. Rev. D109(2024), no. 8 083041, [2311.10682]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  23. [23]

    Szczepanczyket al.,Detecting and reconstructing gravitational waves from the next galactic core-collapse supernova in the advanced detector era,Phys

    M. Szczepanczyket al.,Detecting and reconstructing gravitational waves from the next galactic core-collapse supernova in the advanced detector era,Phys. Rev. D 104(2021), no. 10 102002, [2104.06462]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  24. [24]

    Arnaud, M

    N. Arnaud, M. Barsuglia, M. A. Bizouard, F. Cavalier, M. Davier, P. Hello, and T. Pradier,Gravity wave and neutrino bursts from stellar collapse: A Sensitive test of neutrino masses,Phys. Rev. D65(2002) 033010, [hep-ph/0109027]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  25. [25]

    R. S. L. Hansen, M. Lindner, and O. Scholer,Timing the neutrino signal of a Galactic supernova,Phys. Rev. D101(2020), no. 12 123018, [1904.11461]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  26. [26]

    Nishizawa and T

    A. Nishizawa and T. Nakamura,Measuring Speed of Gravitational Waves by Observations of Photons and Neutrinos from Compact Binary Mergers and Supernovae,Phys. Rev. D90(2014), no. 4 044048, [1406.5544]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  27. [27]

    Langæble, A

    K. Langæble, A. Meroni, and F. Sannino,Neutrino masses and ordering via multimessenger astronomy, Phys. Rev. D94(2016), no. 5 053013, [1603.00230]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  28. [28]

    LIGO Scientific, Virgo Collaboration, B. P. Abbott et al.,GW170817: Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Neutron Star Inspiral,Phys. Rev. Lett. 119(2017), no. 16 161101, [1710.05832]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  29. [29]

    LIGO Scientific, Virgo Collaboration, B. P. Abbott et al.,GW190425: Observation of a Compact Binary Coalescence with Total Mass∼3.4M ⊙,Astrophys. J. Lett.892(2020), no. 1 L3, [2001.01761]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  30. [30]

    Kyutoku and K

    K. Kyutoku and K. Kashiyama,Detectability of thermal neutrinos from binary-neutron-star mergers and implication to neutrino physics,Phys. Rev. D97 (2018), no. 10 103001, [1710.05922]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  31. [31]

    Abeet al., Hyper-Kamiokande Design Report,1805.04163

    Hyper-Kamiokande Collaboration, K. Abeet al., Hyper-Kamiokande Design Report,1805.04163

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  32. [32]

    Lin and C

    Z. Lin and C. Lunardini,Observing cosmological binary mergers with next generation neutrino and gravitational wave detectors,Phys. Rev. D101(2020), no. 2 023016, [1907.00034]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  33. [33]

    Reitzeet al.,Cosmic Explorer: The U.S

    D. Reitzeet al.,Cosmic Explorer: The U.S. Contribution to Gravitational-Wave Astronomy beyond LIGO,Bull. Am. Astron. Soc.51(2019), no. 7 035, [1907.04833]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  34. [34]

    Abacet al.,The Science of the Einstein Telescope, 2503.12263

    A. Abacet al.,The Science of the Einstein Telescope, 2503.12263

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  35. [35]

    Deguire, O

    P. Deguire, O. L. Caballero, and L. Lehner,Equation of state from relic binary neutron star mergers: Neutrinos and stochastic gravitational waves signatures,Phys. Rev. D112(2025), no. 4 043002

    2025

  36. [36]

    Foucart,Neutrino transport in general relativistic neutron star merger simulations,Liv

    F. Foucart,Neutrino transport in general relativistic neutron star merger simulations,Liv. Rev. Comput. Astrophys.9(2023), no. 1 1, [2209.02538]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  37. [37]

    Acerneseet al.,Advanced Virgo: a second-generation interferometric gravitational wave detector,Class

    VIRGO Collaboration, F. Acerneseet al.,Advanced Virgo: a second-generation interferometric gravitational wave detector,Class. Quant. Grav.32(2015), no. 2 024001, [1408.3978]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  38. [38]

    (L VK), reported to be 250 Gpc −3 yr−1 in Ref. [39]. This significant reduction of the upper limit compared to 1700 Gpc−3 yr−1, corresponding to the first three L VK runs [40], is crucial for the detection prospects at neu- trino experiments. Namely, we will show that Hyper- Kamiokande will not be able to achieve a successful de- tection of neutrinos from...

  39. [39]

    LIGO Scientific, VIRGO, KAGRA Collaboration, A. G. Abacet al.,GWTC-4.0: Population Properties of Merging Compact Binaries,2508.18083

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  40. [40]

    Akutsuet al.,Overview of KAGRA: Detector design and construction history, PTEP2021(2021), no

    KAGRA Collaboration, T. Akutsuet al.,Overview of KAGRA: Detector design and construction history, PTEP2021(2021), no. 5 05A101, [2005.05574]

    arXiv 2021

  41. [41]

    Sarin and P

    N. Sarin and P. D. Lasky,The evolution of binary neutron star post-merger remnants: a review,Gen. Rel. Grav.53(2021), no. 6 59, [2012.08172]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  42. [42]

    Abbottet al.,Population of Merging Compact Binaries Inferred Using Gravitational Waves through GWTC-3,Phys

    KAGRA, VIRGO, LIGO Scientific Collaboration, R. Abbottet al.,Population of Merging Compact Binaries Inferred Using Gravitational Waves through GWTC-3,Phys. Rev. X13(2023), no. 1 011048, [2111.03634]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  43. [43]

    Li, Z.-L

    Y.-P. Li, Z.-L. Chen, D.-B. Lin, and E.-W. Liang, Revisiting the Constraint on the Equation of State of Neutron Stars Based on Binary Neutron Star Mergers, Astrophys. J.968(2024), no. 2 104, [2404.19340]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  44. [44]

    H. Gao, B. Zhang, and H.-J. L¨ u,Constraints on binary neutron star merger product from short GRB observations,Phys. Rev. D93(2016), no. 4 044065, [1511.00753]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  45. [45]

    Beniamini and W

    P. Beniamini and W. Lu,Survival Times of Supramassive Neutron Stars Resulting from Binary Neutron Star Mergers,Astrophys. J.920(2021), no. 2 109, [2104.01181]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  46. [46]

    Margalit and B

    B. Margalit and B. D. Metzger,The Multi-Messenger Matrix: the Future of Neutron Star Merger Constraints on the Nuclear Equation of State,Astrophys. J. Lett. 880(2019), no. 1 L15, [1904.11995]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  47. [47]

    T. S. H. Schilbach, O. L. Caballero, and G. C. McLaughlin,Black Hole Accretion Disk Diffuse Neutrino Background,Phys. Rev. D100(2019), no. 4 043008, [1808.03627]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  48. [48]

    A. L. Piro, B. Giacomazzo, and R. Perna,The Fate of Neutron Star Binary Mergers,Astrophys. J. Lett.844 (2017), no. 2 L19, [1704.08697]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  49. [49]

    Fujibayashi, M

    S. Fujibayashi, M. Shibata, S. Wanajo, K. Kiuchi, K. Kyutoku, and Y. Sekiguchi,Viscous evolution of a massive disk surrounding stellar-mass black holes in full general relativity,Phys. Rev. D102(2020) 123014, [2009.03895]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  50. [50]

    Fujibayashi, S

    S. Fujibayashi, S. Wanajo, K. Kiuchi, K. Kyutoku, Y. Sekiguchi, and M. Shibata,Postmerger Mass Ejection of Low-mass Binary Neutron Stars,Astrophys. J.901(2020), no. 2 122, [2007.00474]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  51. [51]

    Srivastava, D

    V. Srivastava, D. Davis, K. Kuns, P. Landry, S. Ballmer, M. Evans, E. D. Hall, J. Read, and B. S. Sathyaprakash,Science-driven Tunable Design of Cosmic Explorer Detectors,Astrophys. J.931(2022), no. 1 22, [2201.10668]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  52. [52]

    Lippuner, R

    J. Lippuner, R. Fern´ andez, L. F. Roberts, F. Foucart, D. Kasen, B. D. Metzger, and C. D. Ott,Signatures of hypermassive neutron star lifetimes on r-process nucleosynthesis in the disc ejecta from neutron star 12 mergers,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.472(2017), no. 1 904–918, [1703.06216]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  53. [53]

    Topolski, S

    K. Topolski, S. D. Tootle, and L. Rezzolla,Post-merger Gravitational-wave Signal from Neutron-star Binaries: A New Look at an Old Problem,Astrophys. J.960 (2024), no. 1 86, [2310.10728]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  54. [54]

    L. R. Weih, M. Hanauske, and L. Rezzolla,Postmerger Gravitational-Wave Signatures of Phase Transitions in Binary Mergers,Phys. Rev. Lett.124(2020), no. 17 171103, [1912.09340]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  55. [55]

    Lehoucq, I

    L. Lehoucq, I. Dvorkin, and L. Rezzolla,Postmerger: a new and dominant contribution to the gravitational-wave background from binary neutron stars,2503.20877

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  56. [56]

    pinching factor

    expected in the latter case. Tagging only the subset of mergers that do not result in a promptly formed black hole implies that the average time between mergers of in- terest will be longer than if all mergers were considered. This results in a further mitigation of the background, without a significant reduction of the neutrino flux from the mergers; see...

  57. [57]

    Grace, K

    B. Grace, K. Wette, and S. M. Scott,Gravitational wave searches for postmerger remnants of GW170817 and GW190425,Phys. Rev. D110(2024), no. 8 083016, [2403.11392]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  58. [58]

    LIGO Scientific, Virgo, Fermi GBM, INTEGRAL, IceCube, AstroSat Cadmium Zinc Telluride Imager Team, IPN, Insight-Hxmt, ANTARES, Swift, AGILE Team, 1M2H Team, Dark Energy Camera GW-EM, DES, DLT40, GRA WITA, Fermi-LAT, ATCA, ASKAP, Las Cumbres Observatory Group, OzGrav, DWF (Deeper Wider Faster Program), AST3, CAASTRO, VINROUGE, MASTER, J-GEM, GROWTH, JAGW A...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  59. [59]

    Fujibayashi, Y

    S. Fujibayashi, Y. Sekiguchi, K. Kiuchi, and M. Shibata,Properties of Neutrino-driven Ejecta from the Remnant of a Binary Neutron Star Merger: Pure Radiation Hydrodynamics Case,Astrophys. J.846 (2017), no. 2 114, [1703.10191]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  60. [60]

    Sekiguchi, K

    Y. Sekiguchi, K. Kiuchi, K. Kyutoku, and M. Shibata, Gravitational waves and neutrino emission from the merger of binary neutron stars,Phys. Rev. Lett.107 (2011) 051102, [1105.2125]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  61. [61]

    Shibata, S

    M. Shibata, S. Fujibayashi, and Y. Sekiguchi, Long-term evolution of neutron-star merger remnants in general relativistic resistive magnetohydrodynamics with a mean-field dynamo term,Phys. Rev. D104(2021), no. 6 063026, [2109.08732]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  62. [62]

    Radice, S

    D. Radice, S. Bernuzzi, A. Perego, and R. Haas,A new moment-based general-relativistic neutrino-radiation transport code: Methods and first applications to neutron star mergers,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.512 (2022), no. 1 1499–1521, [2111.14858]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  63. [63]

    Y. Qiu, D. Radice, S. Richers, and M. Bhattacharyya, Neutrino Flavor Transformation in Neutron Star Mergers,Phys. Rev. Lett.135(2025), no. 9 091401, [2503.11758]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  64. [64]

    M. T. Keil, G. G. Raffelt, and H.-T. Janka,Monte Carlo study of supernova neutrino spectra formation, Astrophys. J.590(2003) 971–991, [astro-ph/0208035]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  65. [65]

    Brdar, M

    V. Brdar, M. Lindner, and X.-J. Xu,Neutrino astronomy with supernova neutrinos,JCAP04(2018) 025, [1802.02577]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  66. [66]

    Chauhan,Using supernova neutrinos to probe strange spin of proton with JUNO and THEIA,2211.08443

    B. Chauhan,Using supernova neutrinos to probe strange spin of proton with JUNO and THEIA,2211.08443

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  67. [67]

    Ando and K

    S. Ando and K. Sato,Relic neutrino background from cosmological supernovae,New J. Phys.6(2004) 170, [astro-ph/0410061]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  68. [68]

    J. F. Beacom,The Diffuse Supernova Neutrino Background,Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.60(2010) 439–462, [1004.3311]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  69. [69]

    Anet al.,Neutrino Physics with JUNO,J

    JUNO Collaboration, F. Anet al.,Neutrino Physics with JUNO,J. Phys. G43(2016), no. 3 030401, [1507.05613]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  70. [70]

    DUNE Collaboration, R. Acciarriet al.,Long-Baseline Neutrino Facility (LBNF) and Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment (DUNE): Conceptual Design Report, Volume 2: The Physics Program for DUNE at LBNF,1512.06148

    arXiv

  71. [71]

    Ricciardi, N

    G. Ricciardi, N. Vignaroli, and F. Vissani,An accurate evaluation of electron (anti-)neutrino scattering on nucleons,JHEP08(2022) 212, [2206.05567]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  72. [72]

    Scholberg,Supernova Neutrino Detection,Ann

    K. Scholberg,Supernova Neutrino Detection,Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.62(2012) 81–103, [1205.6003]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  73. [73]

    Abed Abudet al.,Impact of cross-section uncertainties on supernova neutrino spectral parameter fitting in the Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment,Phys

    DUNE Collaboration, A. Abed Abudet al.,Impact of cross-section uncertainties on supernova neutrino spectral parameter fitting in the Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment,Phys. Rev. D107(2023), no. 11 112012, [2303.17007]

    arXiv 2023

  74. [74]

    Tabrizi and S

    Z. Tabrizi and S. Horiuchi,Flavor Triangle of the Diffuse Supernova Neutrino Background,JCAP05 (2021) 011, [2011.10933]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  75. [75]

    Suzuki et al.,Multimegaton water Cherenkov detector for a proton decay search: TITAND (former name TITANIC), in11th International School on Particles and Cosmology, pp

    TITAND Working Group Collaboration, Y. Suzuki et al.,Multimegaton water Cherenkov detector for a proton decay search: TITAND (former name TITANIC), in11th International School on Particles and Cosmology, pp. 288–296, 10, 2001.hep-ex/0110005

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  76. [76]

    M. D. Kistler, H. Yuksel, S. Ando, J. F. Beacom, and Y. Suzuki,Core-Collapse Astrophysics with a Five-Megaton Neutrino Detector,Phys. Rev. D83 (2011) 123008, [0810.1959]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  77. [77]

    de Bellefonet al.,MEMPHYS: A Large scale water Cerenkov detector at Frejus,hep-ex/0607026

    A. de Bellefonet al.,MEMPHYS: A Large scale water Cerenkov detector at Frejus,hep-ex/0607026

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  78. [78]

    B¨ oser, M

    S. B¨ oser, M. Kowalski, L. Schulte, N. L. Strotjohann, and M. Voge,Detecting extra-galactic supernova neutrinos in the Antarctic ice,Astropart. Phys.62 (2015) 54–65, [1304.2553]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  79. [79]

    Evanset al.,A Horizon Study for Cosmic Explorer: Science, Observatories, and Community,2109.09882

    M. Evanset al.,A Horizon Study for Cosmic Explorer: Science, Observatories, and Community,2109.09882

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  80. [80]

    Abbottet al.,GWTC-3: Compact Binary Coalescences Observed by LIGO and Virgo during the Second Part of the Third Observing Run,Phys

    KAGRA, VIRGO, LIGO Scientific Collaboration, R. Abbottet al.,GWTC-3: Compact Binary Coalescences Observed by LIGO and Virgo during the Second Part of the Third Observing Run,Phys. Rev. X 13(2023), no. 4 041039, [2111.03606]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

Showing first 80 references.