Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 3 minor 288 references

Modern SPH now competes with grid codes on compact-object mergers

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

2026-08-02 00:57 UTC pith:Q4CTELCI

load-bearing objection A useful, sound review of SPH for compact-object mergers, but the claim that modern SPH is competitive runs ahead of the evidence; referee it and push on the framing. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.14828 v1 pith:Q4CTELCI submitted 2026-07-16 astro-ph.HE gr-qc

SPH methods in the modelling of compact objects

Stephan Rosswog This is my paper
classification astro-ph.HE gr-qc PACS 95.30.Lz04.25.D-97.60.Jd
keywords smoothed particle hydrodynamicscompact object mergersneutron star mergersnumerical relativitywhite dwarf mergersartificial viscositykernel methodshydrodynamics
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 review argues that smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH) has overcome its historical weaknesses—weak growth of fluid instabilities and excess dissipation—through a specific combination of improvements: high-order compact-support kernels with many neighbours, time-dependent dissipation triggers, slope-limited reconstruction borrowed from finite-volume methods, density-average (GDF-symmetric) equations, and linearly reproducing kernels. The review contends that modern versions 'obtain good results at essentially all the hard problems' and singles out slope-limited reconstruction as the most robust improvement. On the astrophysical side, it surveys white-dwarf, neutron-star and neutron-star/black-hole mergers and reports that a full general-relativistic SPH implementation reproduces the fundamental and first five harmonic oscillation frequencies of a 1.4-solar-mass neutron star to better than 1%. If the assessment is right, practitioners can adopt modern SPH for compact-object merger problems with confidence comparable to established grid codes, and the method's natural strengths—exact advection, exact conservation, and easy vacuum/ejecta handling—give it concrete practical advantages.

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the long-standing failures of SPH—suppressed Kelvin–Helmholtz growth, pressure blips at contact discontinuities, and excess dissipation that ruins vortex and instability tests—have been fixed by a specific combination of design choices. Using five configurations (V0–V4) that isolate one change at a time, the review shows that switching from a cubic-spline kernel with 50 neighbours to a high-order kernel with about 250 neighbours, then adding slope-limited reconstruction, then GDF symmetrization, then reproducing kernels, progressively recovers the growth of weakly triggered instabilities and the fine wave structure of challenging two-dimensional Riemann prob

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is slope-limited reconstruction inside the artificial-dissipation terms: velocities and internal energies are linearly reconstructed to the midpoint between each particle pair and passed through a slope limiter before the dissipation jumps are computed. This removes most unwanted dissipation while preserving shock capture; the review calls it 'the most robust improvement.' Supporting pieces: high-order compact-support kernels with about 250 neighbours; the GDF symmetrization that suppresses contact-discontinuity blips; linearly reproducing kernels that enforce exact first-order consistency; time-dependent dissipation triggers; and a pressure-based relaxation method

Load-bearing premise

The review's verdict that modern SPH 'obtains good results at essentially all the hard problems' rests on the assumption that the benchmark battery shown in Section 2.11 is a valid held-out test of the method, but the praised configurations combine exactly the ingredients calibrated in the author's earlier test campaigns on the same or closely related problems.

What would settle it

Run the most advanced SPH configuration (V4) on a standard vortex test or a three-dimensional subsonic-turbulence decay problem at the same resolution used in the review's benchmarks, and compare the resulting vortex shape or kinetic-energy power spectrum against a high-resolution Eulerian reference; the review itself notes that traditional SPH performed poorly on subsonic turbulence, so if V4 does not match the reference within the errors quoted for the blast-wave, Kelvin–Helmholtz, and Rayleigh–Taylor tests, the 'essentially all hard problems' claim is overbroad.

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

If this is right

  • Double white-dwarf mergers can be followed through dozens of orbital periods of mass transfer without artificial angular-momentum loss, making mass-transfer duration and stability predictions trustworthy (the review reports a 0.2+0.8 solar-mass system that lasted 84 orbital periods with carefully prepared initial conditions versus 2 with approximate ones).
  • Neutron-star and neutron-star/black-hole mergers can be simulated in full general relativity with sub-percent accuracy on stellar oscillation modes, opening the way to reliable merger-remnant and ejecta studies.
  • Ejecta tracking is essentially free in SPH because tracer properties are advected exactly with particles, so the roughly 1% of mass ejected in a neutron-star merger can be post-processed with nuclear networks to predict kilonova and electromagnetic counterparts.
  • The review's benchmark ladder V0→V4 gives a concrete recipe: adopt high-order kernels with at least 250 neighbours, slope-limited reconstruction, GDF form, and reproducing kernels to reach grid-code-level performance on shock and instability tests.
  • Slope-limited reconstruction is identified as the single most robust improvement, suggesting that Riemann-solver-based SPH variants will need to match it to remain competitive.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • A testable extension follows from the calibration concern: rerun the V0–V4 suite on problems the author's earlier tuning did not target (e.g., a standard vortex test or three-dimensional subsonic turbulence decay) and compare against a high-resolution Eulerian reference; the review itself notes traditional SPH struggled there, so success of V4 on those tests would extend the claim beyond the calib
  • The sub-percent oscillation frequencies are the strongest quantitative evidence for full-GR SPH; the natural next step is to compute a full inspiral-merger-postmerger gravitational waveform with the same method and compare phase errors against an independent grid-based numerical-relativity waveform, since the waveform is the directly observable quantity.
  • The review's parameter choices—the 0.1 factor in the dissipation switch-on, the entropy-trigger thresholds, and the decay timescale—are hand-tuned; perturbing them within plausible ranges in the same benchmarks would map the method's robustness to tuning and identify which ingredients are load-bearing.
  • If the method is as mature as claimed, a community-level blind test (several independent groups applying modern SPH to the same merger setup without knowledge of a reference solution) would convert the review's internal benchmarks into an external validation.

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 / 3 minor

Summary. This review surveys Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics (SPH) methods for compact-object simulations, from Newtonian fundamentals (kernel interpolation, conservative formulations, gradients, artificial dissipation, initial conditions) through special- and general-relativistic SPH, including full numerical relativity with the SPHINCS_BSSN code. It presents a battery of V0–V4 benchmark comparisons (Sedov, Kelvin–Helmholtz, Rayleigh–Taylor, Schulz-Rinne problems) to argue that modern SPH overcomes historical weaknesses, and it reviews applications to white-dwarf, neutron-star, and neutron-star–black-hole mergers. The paper is explicitly a revised and expanded version of the author's earlier Living Reviews article, with new material on dynamical spacetimes and updated astrophysical sections.

Significance. If its central evaluative claims are accepted, this review provides a useful, comprehensive reference for practitioners choosing numerical methods for compact-object mergers, particularly for ejecta tracking and full-GR problems. The pedagogical derivations in §§2–3 are careful and largely standard. The review benefits from several genuinely independent anchors: the GR oscillation frequencies in Table 3 are compared to independent linear perturbation results; the Kelvin–Helmholtz growth is compared to a PENCIL reference; exact solutions are used for Sedov and relativistic shock-tube tests. The coverage of recent methodological advances (Wendland kernels, GDF symmetrization, slope-limited reconstruction, accurate initial conditions) and of GR-SPH developments is timely and well organized. The main weaknesses are the absence of a sensitivity study for the V-configurations and a few overstrong evaluative statements.

major comments (2)
  1. [§1.2 and §2.11] The claim that modern SPH 'obtains good results at essentially all the hard problems' is supported in the shown V0–V4 battery, but the V2–V4 configurations combine ingredients calibrated by the author in earlier work on the same or closely related problems: Wendland C4 with ~250 neighbours, τa=30, the modified Cullen–Dehnen trigger with a hand-chosen 0.1 factor in Eq. (192), the entropy-trigger thresholds l0/l1, and APM-relaxed initial conditions. No sensitivity study is shown for these parameters, and no third-party reproduction of the specific V0–V4 comparisons is cited. The independent anchors (Table 3, PENCIL, exact solutions) are real, but they do not validate the tuned V-configurations. Please add an explicit caveat that the V0–V4 comparisons are illustrative of methodological choices rather than a held-out validation, or provide a brief sensitivity discussion.
  2. [§2.8.1] The statement that slope-limited reconstruction in the dissipative terms is 'the most robust improvement... we are not aware of any reasonable argument against it' overstates the evidence. There are reasonable caveats: the approach relies on accurate gradient estimates, the choice of limiter can affect results, and it adds implementation complexity. The claim is presented as a decisive conclusion rather than the author's assessment. Please soften this to something like 'in the author's experience and tests' and acknowledge possible caveats, including the known cost of gradient computation and the dependence on limiter choice.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Table 3] The frequency extraction uncertainties (the ± values) are not defined. Since the 'better than 1%' claim rests on these values, a brief description of how the peak frequencies and their uncertainties were estimated would strengthen the presentation.
  2. [§2.11.3] The notation 'N 2' is confusing; it appears to mean N² (a 2D test in a thin 3D slice). Please clarify the notation in the text.
  3. [§2.3 and elsewhere] There are minor typos, e.g. 'echanged' instead of 'exchanged' in §2.3, and some equation cross-references could be checked. A careful proofreading pass would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the review's evaluative claims about modern SPH are anchored in externally comparable benchmarks and exact/independent reference solutions, not in a self-referential derivation.

full rationale

This is a review paper, not a derivation whose output is fed back as input. The central claim that modern SPH versions 'obtain good results at essentially all the hard problems' is supported in the text by concrete numerical demonstrations in §2.11 and §3.3.3, several of which are checked against independent references: the Sedov test against the analytic strong-blast solution, the relativistic shock tube against the exact special-relativistic solution, the Kelvin–Helmholtz growth against a high-resolution PENCIL reference, and the NS oscillation frequencies against independently computed linear perturbation modes (Table 3, with reference frequencies attributed to external providers). The V0–V4 parameter sets are explicitly described, held fixed across the battery, and the paper does not present the tests as predictions derived from a fitted parameter. The one disclosed tuning choice—the factor 0.1 in Eq. (192) 'useful to damp post-shock oscillations in Schulz-Rinne tests'—is a numerical free parameter in a method-review context, not a fitted input renamed as a prediction. It does not make the later Schulz-Rinne demonstration a forced consequence by construction. Although the paper cites the author's own codes and previous papers extensively, those self-citations are not load-bearing for the quantitative validations just listed, which have external content. The concern that the benchmark configurations may be partly calibrated on the same tests is a robustness/validation concern, not circularity of the kind defined here. Accordingly, no circular steps are identified, and the score is 0.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

7 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

As a review, the paper contributes no new free parameters or entities, but it endorses methods whose free parameters (dissipation-steering constants, kernel choice, neighbour counts, smoothing-length factor) are calibrated rather than derived. The central evaluative claim rests on the domain assumption that benchmark results transfer to merger simulations. No invented physical entities: SPHINCS_BSSN is a computational tool, not a postulated entity.

free parameters (7)
  • Smoothing-length parameter η = 1.2–1.5 (Eq. 46)
    Chosen by hand; sets the resolution/neighbour-number balance of the method.
  • Artificial viscosity constants α, β = α ≈ 1, β ≈ 2 (Eq. 128)
    Calibrated in test batteries, not derived; the review itself notes free parameters need to be 'gauged in large test batteries' (§2.8.1).
  • Dissipation-steering parameters αmax, τa = τa = 30 used in V2 (§2.11)
    Tunable constants in the Morris–Monaghan/Cullen–Dehnen evolution of the dissipation parameter.
  • Entropy-trigger thresholds l0, l1 = log10(10⁻⁴) and log10(5×10⁻²) (Eq. 148)
    Tuned values steering the switch-on of dissipation; no derivation.
  • Factor 0.1 in modified Cullen–Dehnen trigger = 0.1 (Eq. 192)
    Hand-chosen to make dissipation switch on earlier in Schulz-Rinne tests.
  • Kernel choice and neighbour number = 50 (cubic spline) vs 250 (Wendland C4/C6)
    Presented as a methodological recommendation based on benchmark performance rather than derivation (§2.11, Appendix A).
  • Relativistic dissipation parameter Kv = not specified in text
    Free parameter in the SR/GR dissipation terms, Eqs. (230)–(231); the review does not give its value.
axioms (5)
  • standard math Kernel delta-property: as h → 0 the kernel approaches a Dirac delta, giving second-order interpolation for symmetric kernels
    §2.1.1, Eqs. (1)–(5); foundational to all SPH error estimates in the review.
  • standard math Euler–Lagrange variational principle applied to a discretized fluid Lagrangian yields the conservative SPH equations
    §2.5, Eq. (56); underpins the Lagrangian derivations and the conservation claims.
  • domain assumption Ideal-fluid stress-energy tensor and relativistic fluid Lagrangian (Fock 1964), plus local baryon-number conservation
    §3.1, Eqs. (204)–(212); the GR-SPH equations inherit this ideal-fluid framework.
  • domain assumption BSSN formulation with moving-puncture gauges is a valid, well-posed spacetime evolution for merger problems
    §3.3.1, Eqs. (248)–(267); standard numerical-relativity framework adopted without independent validation in the review.
  • domain assumption Performance on idealized benchmark batteries (Sedov, KH, RT, shocktubes, oscillation modes) transfers to real compact-object merger simulations
    The load-bearing premise of the review's comparative verdict (§2.11, §3.3.3, §4); never flagged or tested with held-out problems.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 59817 in / 20077 out tokens · 164678 ms · 2026-08-02T00:57:26.472994+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We review the current status of compact object simulations that are based on the Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics (SPH) method. The first section of this review is dedicated to SPH as a numerical method for Newtonian, ideal gas dynamics and it should be fairly self-contained. It begins with the basics of the method, but also describes recent advances including various meshless derivatives or methods for treating shocks. A separate chapter summarizes general relativistic SPH, including its special relativistic limit, and it explains in some detail the recent development of full numerical relativity in SPH where matter is evolved together with a dynamical spacetime. The remainder of the review has an astrophysical focus, here we discuss the status of the simulations of white dwarf--white dwarf, neutron star--neutron star and neutron star--black hole systems. For each type of system the emphasis is on gravitational-wave-driven mergers, but we also briefly summarize dynamical collisions that can occur in locations with large stellar densities.

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

288 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    arXiv , journal =:1111.3261 , pages =

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201117939 , eid =. arXiv , journal =:1111.3261 , pages =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  2. [2]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , year = 2024, month = mar, volume =

    SWIFT: A modern highly-parallel gravity and smoothed particle hydrodynamics solver for astrophysical and cosmological applications. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , year = 2024, month = mar, volume =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stae922 , archivePrefix =. 2305.13380 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  3. [3]

    Shen and H

    H. Shen and H. Toki and K. Oyamatsu and K. Sumiyoshi , title =. Nucl. Phys. A , year =

  4. [4]

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20011402 , eprint =

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20011402

  5. [5]

    Shen and H

    H. Shen and H. Toki and K. Oyamatsu and K. Sumiyoshi , title =. Prog. Theor. Phys. , year =

  6. [6]

    REMIX SPH - improving mixing in smoothed particle hydrodynamics simulations using a generalised, material-independent approach. J. Comput. Phys. , keywords =. doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2025.113907 , archivePrefix =. 2407.18587 , primaryClass =

    arXiv 2025

  7. [7]

    Simulating subsonic turbulence with Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics

    From particles to precision. Simulating subsonic turbulence with Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics. arXiv e-prints , keywords =. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2503.10273 , archivePrefix =. 2503.10273 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2503.10273

  8. [8]

    Computational Astrophysics and Cosmology , keywords =

    PKDGRAV3: beyond trillion particle cosmological simulations for the next era of galaxy surveys. Computational Astrophysics and Cosmology , keywords =. doi:10.1186/s40668-017-0021-1 , archivePrefix =. 1609.08621 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  9. [9]

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stt1821 , eprint =

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt1821

  10. [10]

    , keywords =

    A new general relativistic magnetohydrodynamics code for dynamical spacetimes. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361:200810086 , archivePrefix =. 0804.4572 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  11. [11]

    doi:10.1086/313257 , pages =

    , month = sep, year =. doi:10.1086/313257 , pages =

    doi:10.1086/313257

  12. [12]

    arXiv , journal =:1210.3616 , pages =

    doi:10.1088/0004-637X/767/2/164 , eid =. arXiv , journal =:1210.3616 , pages =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  13. [13]

    arXiv , journal =:2004.00102 , number =

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abe1b5 , eid =. arXiv , journal =:2004.00102 , number =

    arXiv 2004

  14. [15]

    arXiv , journal =:1508.03133 , number =

    doi:10.1088/0004-637X/815/2/82 , eid =. arXiv , journal =:1508.03133 , number =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  15. [16]

    doi:10.1086/345444 , eprint =

    , keywords =. doi:10.1086/345444 , eprint =

    doi:10.1086/345444

  16. [17]

    , month = aug, year =

  17. [19]

    doi:10.1086/378952 , pages =

    , keywords =. doi:10.1086/378952 , pages =

    doi:10.1086/378952

  18. [20]

    Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. A , month = mar, year =. doi:10.1098/rspa.1950.0049 , pages =

    arXiv 1950

  19. [21]

    arXiv , journal =:1304.4957 , pages =

    doi:10.1088/0004-637X/772/1/1 , eid =. arXiv , journal =:1304.4957 , pages =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  20. [23]

    arXiv , journal =:2004.06419 , number =

    doi:10.1007/s10714-020-02752-5 , eid =. arXiv , journal =:2004.06419 , number =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  21. [24]

    , month = sep, year =

  22. [25]

    doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.63.044012 , eprint =

    , month = feb, year =. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.63.044012 , eprint =

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.63.044012

  23. [26]

    A & A , keywords =

    Are heuristic switches necessary to control dissipation in modern smoothed particle hydrodynamics?. A & A , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202557800 , archivePrefix =. 2510.20534 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  24. [27]

    Computer Physics Communications , eprint =

    Hydromagnetic turbulence in computer simulations. Computer Physics Communications , eprint =. doi:10.1016/S0010-4655(02)00334-X , adsurl =

    work page doi:10.1016/s0010-4655(02)00334-x

  25. [28]

    arXiv , journal =:1710.05455 , pages =

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa90b6 , eid =. arXiv , journal =:1710.05455 , pages =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2041

  26. [29]

    doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.69.124036 , number =

    , month = jun, year =. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.69.124036 , number =

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.69.124036

  27. [30]

    arXiv , journal =:astro-ph/0307536 , pages =

    doi:10.12942/lrr-2003-5 , eid =. arXiv , journal =:astro-ph/0307536 , pages =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  28. [31]

    arXiv , journal =:1707.04966 , number =

    doi:10.1088/1361-6633/aaae14 , eid =. arXiv , journal =:1707.04966 , number =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  29. [32]

    doi:10.1086/504594 , eprint =

    , keywords =. doi:10.1086/504594 , eprint =

    doi:10.1086/504594

  30. [33]

    Lucy , title =

    L.B. Lucy , title =. , year =

  31. [35]

    Price and S

    D.J. Price and S. Rosswog , title =. Science , year =

  32. [36]

    doi:10.1016/S1384-1076(97)00019-5 , eprint =

    New Astronomy , keywords =. doi:10.1016/S1384-1076(97)00019-5 , eprint =

    work page doi:10.1016/s1384-1076(97)00019-5

  33. [37]

    doi:10.1146/annurev.aa.09.090171.001151 , pages =

    , year =. doi:10.1146/annurev.aa.09.090171.001151 , pages =

    arXiv

  34. [38]

    Morrison, P. J. , title =. Rev. Mod. Phys. , year =

  35. [39]

    arXiv , journal =:1312.3649 , adsnote =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  36. [40]

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stt037 , eprint =

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt037

  37. [41]

    doi:10.1086/309460 , eprint =

    , keywords =. doi:10.1086/309460 , eprint =

    work page doi:10.1086/309460

  38. [42]

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20066585 , eprint =

    , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20066585 , eprint =

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20066585

  39. [43]

    doi:10.1038/nature10365 , pages =

    Nature , month = oct, year =. doi:10.1038/nature10365 , pages =

    doi:10.1038/nature10365

  40. [44]

    doi:10.1016/0375-9474(96)00187-X , eprint =

    doi:10.1016/0375-9474(96)00187-x

  41. [45]

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1352 , pages =

    , keywords =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1352 , pages =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1352

  42. [46]

    doi:10.12942/lrr-2008-9 , eprint =

    work page doi:10.12942/lrr-2008-9 2008

  43. [47]

    doi:10.1016/S0010-4655(02)00847-0 , eprint =

    work page doi:10.1016/s0010-4655(02)00847-0

  44. [48]

    arXiv , journal =:2103.02616 , number =

    doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.251101 , eid =. arXiv , journal =:2103.02616 , number =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  45. [49]

    Sitzungsber. K. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. , year =

  46. [50]

    doi:10.22323/1.053.0155 , eprint =

    Proceedings of 10th Symposium on Nuclei in the Cosmos. doi:10.22323/1.053.0155 , eprint =

    work page doi:10.22323/1.053.0155

  47. [51]

    arXiv , journal =:2307.15194 , number =

    doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.108.103534 , eid =. arXiv , journal =:2307.15194 , number =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  48. [52]

    arXiv , journal =:gr-qc/0510072 , pages =

    doi:10.12942/lrr-2006-3 , eid =. arXiv , journal =:gr-qc/0510072 , pages =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  49. [53]

    , keywords =

    Recovery Schemes for Primitive Variables in General-relativistic Magnetohydrodynamics. , keywords =. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aabcc5 , archivePrefix =. 1712.07538 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  50. [54]

    arXiv:astro-ph/9504050 , pages =

    , keywords =. arXiv:astro-ph/9504050 , pages =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  51. [55]

    Nature , keywords =

    Collapsars as a major source of r-process elements. Nature , keywords =. doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1136-0 , archivePrefix =. 1810.00098 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  52. [56]

    Nature Rev. Phys. , month = apr, year =. doi:10.1038/s42254-022-00439-1 , number =

    doi:10.1038/s42254-022-00439-1

  53. [57]

    arXiv , journal =:2509.08054 , number =

    doi:10.1103/kw5g-d732 , eid =. arXiv , journal =:2509.08054 , number =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  54. [58]

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stv195 , eprint =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stv195

  55. [59]

    arXiv , journal =:2509.08099 , pages =

    doi:10.48550/arXiv.2509.08099 , eid =. arXiv , journal =:2509.08099 , pages =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2509.08099

  56. [60]

    doi:10.48550/arXiv.2503.12263 , eprint =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2503.12263

  57. [61]

    astro-ph/0409676 , pages =

    The Astrophysics of Cataclysmic Variables and Related Objects , title =. astro-ph/0409676 , pages =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  58. [62]

    arXiv , journal =:2508.18083 , pages =

    doi:10.48550/arXiv.2508.18083 , eid =. arXiv , journal =:2508.18083 , pages =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2508.18083

  59. [63]

    doi:10.48550/arXiv.2508.18082 , eprint =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2508.18082

  60. [64]

    arXiv , journal =:2007.10722 , number =

    doi:10.1088/1361-6471/abc534 , eid =. arXiv , journal =:2007.10722 , number =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  61. [65]

    doi:10.1086/167656 , pages =

    , keywords =. doi:10.1086/167656 , pages =

    doi:10.1086/167656

  62. [66]

    J. Comput. Phys. , month = mar, year =. doi:10.1016/0021-9991(77)90095-X , pages =

    doi:10.1016/0021-9991(77)90095-x

  63. [67]

    Fluids , year =

    Comput. Fluids , year =. doi:10.1016/0045-7930(94)90047-7 , pages =

    work page doi:10.1016/0045-7930(94)90047-7

  64. [68]

    Icarus , year = 1996, month = jun, volume = 121, pages =

    Size, Density, and Structure of Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 Inferred from the Physics of Tidal Breakup. Icarus , year = 1996, month = jun, volume = 121, pages =. doi:10.1006/icar.1996.0083 , adsurl =

    arXiv 1996

  65. [69]

    Nature , year = 2001, month = aug, volume =

    Origin of the Moon in a giant impact near the end of the Earth's formation. Nature , year = 2001, month = aug, volume =. doi:10.1038/35089010 , adsurl =

    doi:10.1038/35089010 2001

  66. [70]

    MNRAS , keywords =

    Numerical aspects of giant impact simulations. MNRAS , keywords =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stx322 , archivePrefix =. 1701.08296 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  67. [71]

    ApJ , keywords =

    Forming Mercury by Giant Impacts. ApJ , keywords =. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aad8b0 , archivePrefix =. 1808.02448 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  68. [72]

    Icarus , keywords =

    Coupling SPH and thermochemical models of planets: Methodology and example of a Mars-sized body. Icarus , keywords =. doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2017.10.003 , archivePrefix =. 1710.03250 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  69. [73]

    MNRAS , keywords =

    Bifurcation in the history of Uranus and Neptune: the role of giant impacts. MNRAS , keywords =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stz3271 , archivePrefix =. 1907.09809 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1907

  70. [74]

    A & A , keywords =

    A smooth particle hydrodynamics code to model collisions between solid, self-gravitating objects. A & A , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201528060 , archivePrefix =. 1604.03290 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  71. [75]

    Computational Astrophysics and Cosmology , keywords =

    Adaptive techniques for clustered N-body cosmological simulations. Computational Astrophysics and Cosmology , keywords =. doi:10.1186/s40668-015-0007-9 , archivePrefix =. 1409.1929 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1929

  72. [76]

    arXiv , journal =:2404.09381 , number =

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad6862 , eid =. arXiv , journal =:2404.09381 , number =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2041

  73. [77]

    arXiv , journal =:1211.0525 , volume =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  74. [78]

    arXiv , journal =:1112.1420 , pages =

    doi:10.1088/0004-637X/746/1/62 , eid =. arXiv , journal =:1112.1420 , pages =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  75. [79]

    doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1366 , eprint =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1366

  76. [80]

    astro-ph/9804332 , pages =

    Nuclear Astrophysics , title =. astro-ph/9804332 , pages =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  77. [81]

    Price and J.J

    D.J. Price and J.J. Monaghan , title =. , year =

  78. [82]

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20054703 , eprint =

    , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20054703 , eprint =

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20054703

  79. [83]

    Journal of Computational Physics , keywords =

    Special Relativistic Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics Based on Riemann Solver. Journal of Computational Physics , keywords =

  80. [84]

    Icarus , keywords =

    The origin of the moon and the single impact hypothesis IV. Icarus , keywords =. doi:10.1016/0019-1035(91)90046-V , adsurl =

    work page doi:10.1016/0019-1035(91)90046-v

Showing first 80 references.