Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
144 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
8 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
46 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Tests of General Relativity with Gravitational-Wave Observations using a Flexible--Theory-Independent Method (2203.13937v1)

Published 25 Mar 2022 in gr-qc

Abstract: We perform tests of General Relativity (GR) with gravitational waves (GWs) from the inspiral stage of compact binaries using a theory-independent framework, which adds generic phase corrections to each multipole of a GR waveform model in frequency domain. This method has been demonstrated on LIGO-Virgo observations to provide stringent constraints on post-Newtonian predictions of the inspiral and to assess systematic biases that may arise in such parameterized tests. Here, we detail the anatomy of our framework for aligned-spin waveform models. We explore the effects of higher modes in the underlying signal on tests of GR through analyses of two unequal-mass, simulated binary signals similar to GW190412 and GW190814. We show that the inclusion of higher modes improves both the precision and the accuracy of the measurement of the deviation parameters. Our testing framework also allows us to vary the underlying baseline GR waveform model and the frequency at which the non-GR inspiral corrections are tapered off. We find that to optimize the GR test of high-mass binaries, comprehensive studies would need to be done to determine the best choice of the tapering frequency as a function of the binary's properties. We also carry out an analysis on the binary neutron-star event GW170817 to set bounds on the coupling constant $\alpha_0$ of Jordan-Fierz-Brans-Dicke gravity. We take two plausible approaches; in the first \emph{theory-agnostic} approach we find a bound $\alpha_0 \lesssim 2\times 10{-1}$ from measuring the dipole-radiation for different neutron-star equations of state, while in the second \emph{theory-specific} approach we obtain $\alpha_0 \lesssim 4\times 10{-1}$, both at $68\%$ credible level. These differences arise mainly due to different statistical hypotheses used for the analysis.

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.