Inspiral-merger-ringdown waveforms of spinning, precessing black-hole binaries in the effective-one-body formalism

By Yi Pan, A. Buonanno, A. Taracchini, Lawrence E. Kidder, A. Mroué, Harald P. Pfeiffer, Mark A. Scheel, Béla Szilágyi. 2013

239 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We describe a general procedure to generate spinning, precessing waveforms that include inspiral, merger and ringdown stages in the effective-one-body (EOB) approach. The procedure uses a precessing frame in which precession-induced amplitude and phase modulations are minimized, and an inertial frame, aligned with the spin of the final black hole, in which we carry out the matching of the inspiral-plunge to merger-ringdown waveforms. As a first application, we build spinning, precessing EOB waveforms for the gravitational modes l = 2 such that in the nonprecessing limit those waveforms agree with the EOB waveforms recently calibrated to numerical-relativity waveforms. Without recalibrating the EOB model, we then compare EOB and post-Newtonian precessing waveforms to two numerical-relativity waveforms produced by the Caltech-Cornell-CITA collaboration. The numerical waveforms are strongly precessing and have 35 and 65 gravitationalwave cycles. We find a remarkable agreement between EOB and numerical-relativity precessing waveforms and spins’ evolutions. The phase difference is � 0.2 rad at merger, while the mismatches, computed using the advanced-LIGO noise spectral density, are below 2% when maximizing only on the time and phase at coalescence and on the polarization angle.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/417c146b9884e98b25c191fd07e870727e062535

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Astronomy and Astrophysics

Citations in the corpus

Binary Black Hole Population Properties Inferred from the First and Second Observing Runs of Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo (2018, methodology): “Waveform Systematics In Abbott et al. (2018a), two waveform families are used to extract the parameters of individual events: SEOBNRv3(Pan et al. 2014; Babak et al. 2017) and IMRPhenomPv2(Hannam et al. 2014; Husa et al. 2016; Khan et al. 2016).”
GWTC-2: Compact Binary Coalescences Observed by LIGO and Virgo During the First Half of the Third Observing Run (2020, unknown): “SEOBNRv4PHM ✓ (2, 2), (2, 1), (3, 3), (4, 4), (5, 5) [199,209,227]”
Prospects for Observing and Localizing Gravitational-Wave Transients with Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo (2013, background): “For systems containing black holes, or in which the component spin is significant, uncertainties in the waveform model can reduce the sensitivity of the search [81, 62, 45, 103, 85, 95, 68].”
The effect of the metallicity-specific star formation history on double compact object mergers (2019, methodology): “To evaluate the SNR for a given DCO system, we compute the waveforms for the appropriate masses using a combination of IMRPhenomPv2 (Hannam et al. 2014; Husa et al. 2016; Khan et al. 2016) and SEOBNRv3 (Pan et al. 2014; Babak, Taracchini & Buonanno 2017).”
GWTC-2.1: Deep extended catalog of compact binary coalescences observed by LIGO and Virgo during the first half of the third observing run (2021, methodology): “It features full twospin treatment of the precession equations and relies on a twisting-up procedure to map aligned spin waveforms in the co-precessing frame to the precessing waveforms in the inertial frame [62, 63].”
Search for Gravitational Lensing Signatures in LIGO-Virgo Binary Black Hole Events (2019, methodology): “We have also repeated the same calculation employing the waveform family SEOBNRV3 (Pan et al. 2014; Taracchini et al. 2014; Babak et al. 2017).”