Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Assistant
AI Research Assistant
Well-researched responses based on relevant abstracts and paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses.
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 98 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 58 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 25 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 23 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 112 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 165 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 460 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4 29 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

Blind spots and biases: the dangers of ignoring eccentricity in gravitational-wave signals from binary black holes (2309.16638v3)

Published 28 Sep 2023 in gr-qc

Abstract: Most gravitational wave (GW) events observed by the LIGO and Virgo detectors are consistent with mergers of binary black holes (BBHs) on quasi-circular orbits. However, some events are also consistent with non-zero orbital eccentricity, which can indicate that the binary formed via dynamical interactions. Active GW search pipelines using quasi-circular waveform templates are inefficient for detecting eccentric mergers. Also, analysing eccentric GW signals with waveform models neglecting eccentricity can lead to biases in the recovered parameters. We explore the detectability and characterisation of eccentric signals when searches and analyses rely on quasi-circular waveform models. We find that for a reference eccentric population, the fraction of events having fitting factor (FF) $< 0.95$ can be up to $\approx 2.2\%$ compared to $\approx 0.4\%$ for the baseline population. This leads to the loss in signal recovery fraction for up to $6\%$ for parameter space with non-negligible eccentricity ($e_{10} > 0.01$) and high mass ratio ($q > 3$). We perform parameter estimation (PE) for non-spinning and aligned-spin eccentric GW injections from BBHs with a total mass $M=35 M_\odot$, based on numerical relativity simulations and an EOB based inspiral-merger-ringdown model (TEOBResumS). We recover these injections using both quasi-circular and eccentric waveform models. For cases with $e_{20} \sim 0.1$, quasi-circular models fail to estimate chirp mass within the 90% credible interval accurately. Further, for these low-mass injections, spin-induced precession does not mimic eccentricity. For injections of $e_{20}\sim 0.1$, PE conducted with an inspiral-only eccentric waveform model correctly characterises the injected signal to within 90% confidence, and recovers the injected eccentricities, suggesting that such models are sufficient for characterisation of low-mass eccentric BBH. (abridged)

Citations (5)

Summary

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

Lightbulb Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Tweets

This paper has been mentioned in 1 post and received 1 like.

Don't miss out on important new AI/ML research

See which papers are being discussed right now on X, Reddit, and more:

“Emergent Mind helps me see which AI papers have caught fire online.”

Philip

Philip

Creator, AI Explained on YouTube