Observation of Gravitational Waves from Two Neutron Star–Black Hole Coalescences

By The Ligo Scientific Collaboration, The Virgo Collaboration, T. Abbott, T. Abbott, S. Abraham, F. Acernese, K. Ackley, A. Adams, C. Adams, Rana X. Adhikari and 1,587 more. 2021

657 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We report the observation of gravitational waves from two compact binary coalescences in LIGO’s and Virgo’s third observing run with properties consistent with neutron star–black hole (NSBH) binaries. The two events are named GW200105_162426 and GW200115_042309, abbreviated as GW200105 and GW200115; the first was observed by LIGO Livingston and Virgo and the second by all three LIGO–Virgo detectors. The source of GW200105 has component masses 8.9−1.5+1.2 and 1.9−0.2+0.3M⊙ , whereas the source of GW200115 has component masses 5.7−2.1+1.8 and 1.5−0.3+0.7M⊙ (all measurements quoted at the 90% credible level). The probability that the secondary’s mass is below the maximal mass of a neutron star is 89%–96% and 87%–98%, respectively, for GW200105 and GW200115, with the ranges arising from different astrophysical assumptions. The source luminosity distances are 280−110+110 and 300−100+150Mpc , respectively. The magnitude of the primary spin of GW200105 is less than 0.23 at the 90% credible level, and its orientation is unconstrained. For GW200115, the primary spin has a negative spin projection onto the orbital angular momentum at 88% probability. We are unable to constrain the spin or tidal deformation of the secondary component for either event. We infer an NSBH merger rate density of 45−33+75Gpc−3yr−1 when assuming that GW200105 and GW200115 are representative of the NSBH population or 130−69+112Gpc−3yr−1 under the assumption of a broader distribution of component masses.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d2ed496970331053f26b341e7bfeda434f45d8fe

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

Observation of Gravitational Waves from the Coalescence of a 2.5–4.5 M ⊙ Compact Object and a Neutron Star (2024, methodology): “IMRPhenomNSBH uses the BBH models IMRPhenomC (Santamaria et al. 2010) and IMRPhenomD (Husa et al. 2016; Khan et al. 2016) as baselines for the amplitude and phase, respectively, incorporating corrections to the phase due to tidal effects following the NRTidal model (Dietrich et al. 2017, 2019b,a) an”
Rates of compact object coalescences (2021, methodology): “Similarly, the NS-BH merger rate estimate relies on two events, GW200105 and GW200115, and is sensitive to assumptions regarding the mass distribution of such sources as well as low-number statistics (Abbott et al., 2021a).”
The 4D Einstein–Gauss–Bonnet theory of gravity: a review (2022, neutral): “GW150914 ∼109 [282] GW170608 ∼108 [283] GW190814 ∼107 [284] GW200115 ∼108 [285]”
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): “The BH masses in BBHs and NSBHs are distributed between 3 M ⊙ and 300 M ⊙ with aligned component spins distributed in the range ½ − 0 .”
Constraints on the Cosmic Expansion History from GWTC–3 (2021, methodology): “…BBH detections, 2 are the BNS events GW170817 (Abbott et al. 2017a) and GW190425 (Abbott et al. 2020a), 2 are the NSBH Constraints on the cosmic expansion history from GWTC–3 5 events GW200105 and GW200115 (Abbott et al. 2021) and one is the asymmetric mass binary GW190814 (Abbott et al. 2020b).”
Open Data from the Third Observing Run of LIGO, Virgo, KAGRA, and GEO (2023, methodology): “The various instrument upgrades realized between the science runs O2 and O3 for the LIGO and Virgo detectors are described in Buikema et al. ( 2020 ) , Abbott et al. ( 2021a, 2021c ) , and Acernese et al. ( 2022a ) .”
4-OGC: Catalog of Gravitational Waves from Compact Binary Mergers (2021, methodology): “For example, we allow the maximum mass parameter mmax to vary up to 150Me compared to 100Me in the GWTC- 3 analysis (Abbott et al. 2021h).”