adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: Evidence for Low-power Radio Jet–ISM Interaction at 10 pc in the Dwarf AGN Host NGC 4395
Authors: Payel Nandi, C. S. Stalin, D. J. Saikia, Rogemar A. Riffel, Arijit Manna, Sabyasachi Pal, O. L. Dors, Dominika Wylezalek, Vaidehi S. Paliya, Payaswini Saikia, Pratik Dabhade, Markus-Kissler Patig, Ram Sagar
Figure caption: A comprehensive picture of the jet−ISM interaction in the central ∼10 pc region of NGC 4395. In the center is the image of NGC 4395 in the near-UV filter observed with UVIT (Nandi et al. 2023). This image has a size of 30″ × 30″. Also, shown in the same image are two square boxes one of size 5″ × 5″ (black color) and the other of 1″ × 1″ (white color). On the top panels are the 4.8 GHz image from the VLA, the 237 GHz image from ALMA, the CO(2-1) image from ALMA, and the X-ray image in the 0.5–7 keV from Chandra. These images have a size of 5″ × 5″. The bottom panels show the 15 GHz image from the VLA, the molecular H2λ2.4085 image from Gemini, and the [O III]λ5007 image from HST over a 1″ × 1″ region. In each of these images, the core of NGC 4395 taken as the Gaia position, is shown as a cross.
Paper: Linking Circumstellar Disk Lifetimes to the Rotational Evolution of Low-mass Stars
Authors: K. Monsch, J. J. Drake, C. Garraffo, G. Picogna, B. Ercolano
Figure caption: Time evolution of the stellar rotation periods assuming constant and variable inner disk lifetimes for the ONC (left) and Taurus (right), which are compared to OCs of various ages. First row: model starting with a constant disk-locking time of 13 Myr. Second row: the same model assuming a shorter disk-locking time of 5 Myr. Third row: the same model assuming variable disk-locking times that are calculated based on the stellar L X and M ⋆. In this model, all stars are assumed to host a disk. Fourth row: the same as the previous model, but now the observed disk fractions, as shown in Figure 3, are taken into account. Diskless stars are free to spin up immediately at 2 Myr, which is the mean age of the ONC and Taurus that is assumed in our study, while the rotation of disk-bearing stars is braked and kept constant as long as they are surrounded by disks.
Paper: Linking Circumstellar Disk Lifetimes to the Rotational Evolution of Low-mass Stars
Authors: K. Monsch, J. J. Drake, C. Garraffo, G. Picogna, B. Ercolano
Figure caption: Comparison of observed rotation period distributions of the ONC and Taurus with model outcomes assuming a synthetic initial rotation period in order to match h Per. The colored histograms show the P rot distributions of the ONC, Taurus, and h Per in linear (top row) and logarithmic space (bottom row). The dashed blue and dotted gray lines in the right column represent the models described in Section 3.3 (last row of Figure 5) for variable disk lifetimes, including the disk fraction for the ONC and Taurus, for which a mean age of 2 Myr was assumed. These models have been evolved to the age of h Per. The solid orange line shows a synthetic P rot distribution with two Gaussian-shaped peaks centered on 2.2 ± 1.5 days and 10 ± 4 days. The model tracks were each evaluated at the age of the corresponding region, i.e., at 2 Myr for the ONC and Taurus and at 13 Myr for h Per.
Paper: Linking Circumstellar Disk Lifetimes to the Rotational Evolution of Low-mass Stars
Authors: K. Monsch, J. J. Drake, C. Garraffo, G. Picogna, B. Ercolano
Figure caption: Top: grid of inner disk lifetimes as a function of M ⋆ and L X, where the color-coding reflects the corresponding logarithmic inner disk lifetime t disk(M ⋆, L X). The black line shows the disk lifetime for the median L X for given M ⋆ calculated using Equation (A9). Bottom: inner disk lifetime as a function of M ⋆ determined from our model as described in Section 2.1 (blue line) compared to observed disk fractions from Bayo et al. (2012) that were converted to disk lifetimes using the method described in Komaki et al. (2021) and Picogna et al. (2021). The shading encompasses the ±3σ range determined using the XLF for Taurus.
Paper: Linking Circumstellar Disk Lifetimes to the Rotational Evolution of Low-mass Stars
Authors: K. Monsch, J. J. Drake, C. Garraffo, G. Picogna, B. Ercolano
Figure caption: Grid of rotational evolution models as a function of age for different stellar masses and disk-locking times. The columns show the models for 0.4, 0.7, and 1 M ⊙, respectively, while the rows show the models for disk-locking timescales of 1, 7, and 13 Myr. The light-blue lines reflect the evolutionary tracks in which the stars would exceed their corresponding breakup velocity, which is overplotted as a black line for each stellar mass.
Paper: Linking Circumstellar Disk Lifetimes to the Rotational Evolution of Low-mass Stars
Authors: K. Monsch, J. J. Drake, C. Garraffo, G. Picogna, B. Ercolano
Figure caption: Calibration vs. resampled data sets used as input parameters for the rotation evolution model. The different panels show the logarithmic rotation period, stellar mass, X-ray luminosity, and disk fraction. The blue histograms show the observed data, and the red lines reflect the conditional probability density functions ﹩P(\mathrm{log}{P}_{\mathrm{rot}})﹩, ﹩P(\mathrm{log}{M}_{\star }| \mathrm{log}{P}_{\mathrm{rot}})﹩, ﹩P(\mathrm{log}{L}_{{\rm{X}}}| \mathrm{log}{P}_{\mathrm{rot}})﹩, and ﹩P({f}_{\mathrm{disk}}| \mathrm{log}{P}_{\mathrm{rot}})﹩, from which in total 300 data points were resampled, and whose distributions are shown as orange histograms.
Paper: Linking Circumstellar Disk Lifetimes to the Rotational Evolution of Low-mass Stars
Authors: K. Monsch, J. J. Drake, C. Garraffo, G. Picogna, B. Ercolano
Figure caption: Stellar mass distributions of the observed data (black circles), as well as the resampled distributions for the ONC (top row) and Taurus (bottom row), which were used for the here-presented rotational evolution model. For the resampled data sets, the color coding reflects the X-ray luminosity of each star. The first column additionally shows the X-ray luminosity functions for the ONC (Preibisch et al. 2005) and Taurus (see Equation (A9)), with their respective uncertainties shown as black lines.
Paper: Linking Circumstellar Disk Lifetimes to the Rotational Evolution of Low-mass Stars
Authors: K. Monsch, J. J. Drake, C. Garraffo, G. Picogna, B. Ercolano
Figure caption: Comparison of stellar mass vs. rotation period distributions from our model evaluated at the ages of various OCs. The model outputs shown here correspond to the variable disk lifetimes case including circumstellar disk fractions, shown in the last row of Figure 5. Small blue circles correspond to Orion, and black circles to Taurus.
Paper: Linking Circumstellar Disk Lifetimes to the Rotational Evolution of Low-mass Stars
Authors: K. Monsch, J. J. Drake, C. Garraffo, G. Picogna, B. Ercolano
Figure caption: Distribution of calculated inner disk lifetimes for the ONC (blue) and Taurus (black). These were inferred based on the approach outlined in Section 2.1 using M ⋆ and L X of each individual star. The dashed and dotted lines show the median inner disk lifetimes from the full stellar population of the ONC and Taurus investigated in our study.
Paper: On the Parameters of the Spherically Symmetric Parameterized Rezzolla–Zhidenko Spacetime through Solar System Tests, the Orbit of the S2 Star about Sgr A*, and Quasiperiodic Oscillations
Authors: Sanjar Shaymatov, Bobomurat Ahmedov, Mariafelicia De Laurentis, Mubasher Jamil, Qiang Wu, Anzhong Wang, Mustapha Azreg-Aïnou
Figure caption: Curve fit to the data of the XTE J1550-564 Galactic microquasar (see Equation (79)). The black curves represent ν  U  = ν  θ  + ν  r , the magenta curves represent ν  L  = ν  θ , and the blue lines represent the uncertainty on the mass of the XTE J1550-564 microquasar. For these plots, we took γ = 1 + 2.3 × 10−5, β = 1 + 2.3 × 10−4, λ = 0.06, and α = 0.05. Observing the new constraint, panels (a), (b), and (c) correspond to (ν  U  = 278 Hz and ν  L  = 181 Hz), (ν  U  = 277 Hz, ν  L  = 183 Hz), and (ν  U  = 276 Hz, ν  L  = 184 Hz), respectively.
Paper: On the Parameters of the Spherically Symmetric Parameterized Rezzolla–Zhidenko Spacetime through Solar System Tests, the Orbit of the S2 Star about Sgr A*, and Quasiperiodic Oscillations
Authors: Sanjar Shaymatov, Bobomurat Ahmedov, Mariafelicia De Laurentis, Mubasher Jamil, Qiang Wu, Anzhong Wang, Mustapha Azreg-Aïnou
Figure caption: Curve fit to the data of the GRO J1655-40 Galactic microquasar (see Equation (76)). The black curves represent ν  U  = ν  θ  + ν  r , the magenta curves represent ν  L  = ν  θ , and the blue lines represent the uncertainty on the mass of the GRO J1655-40 microquasar. For these plots, we took γ = 1 + 2.3 × 10−5, β = 1 + 2.3 × 10−4, λ = 0.06, and the values of α are shown in the plots.
Paper: Rotational Components of the Sun’s Mean Field
Authors: Neil R. Sheeley
Figure caption: Top: wavelet scaleogram of the WSO mean-field measurements, showing power as a function of time t in years and period T in days expressed logarithmically as ﹩{\mathrm{log}}_{2}(T/27)+5.75﹩. Here ﹩\gamma =\pi \sqrt{2/\mathrm{ln}2}\,\approx \,5.33﹩, corresponding to a Morlet wavelet. Bottom: monthly averaged sunspot number from the Royal Observatory of Belgium (SILSO).
Paper: On the Parameters of the Spherically Symmetric Parameterized Rezzolla–Zhidenko Spacetime through Solar System Tests, the Orbit of the S2 Star about Sgr A*, and Quasiperiodic Oscillations
Authors: Sanjar Shaymatov, Bobomurat Ahmedov, Mariafelicia De Laurentis, Mubasher Jamil, Qiang Wu, Anzhong Wang, Mustapha Azreg-Aïnou
Figure caption: Observed orbit of star S2 around Sgr A⋆. Note that we obtained the orbit of star S2 around Sgr A⋆ as a model fitting with PRZ spacetime geometry by applying the observational data.
Paper: On the Parameters of the Spherically Symmetric Parameterized Rezzolla–Zhidenko Spacetime through Solar System Tests, the Orbit of the S2 Star about Sgr A*, and Quasiperiodic Oscillations
Authors: Sanjar Shaymatov, Bobomurat Ahmedov, Mariafelicia De Laurentis, Mubasher Jamil, Qiang Wu, Anzhong Wang, Mustapha Azreg-Aïnou
Figure caption: The dataset of the radial velocities of star S2 used in our analysis and the fitting curve by PRZ spacetime.
Paper: On the Parameters of the Spherically Symmetric Parameterized Rezzolla–Zhidenko Spacetime through Solar System Tests, the Orbit of the S2 Star about Sgr A*, and Quasiperiodic Oscillations
Authors: Sanjar Shaymatov, Bobomurat Ahmedov, Mariafelicia De Laurentis, Mubasher Jamil, Qiang Wu, Anzhong Wang, Mustapha Azreg-Aïnou
Figure caption: Posterior distribution of the orbital parameters of star S2 and the expansion parameters of PRZ spacetime associated with the uniform priors for these orbital parameters of star S2.
Paper: Formation of Massive and Wide First-star Binaries in Radiation Hydrodynamic Simulations
Authors: Kazuyuki Sugimura, Tomoaki Matsumoto, Takashi Hosokawa, Shingo Hirano, Kazuyuki Omukai
Figure caption: Evolution of protostars, i.e., sink particles, in the three clouds: from left to right columns, low-, intermediate- and high-﹩\dot{M}﹩ (right) clouds. From top to bottom, the masses, accretion rates (averaged over 300 yr), and distances between selected pairs are plotted. In the top two panels, the same color is used for the same protostar, whose ID is indicated in the top panel, while a combination of the two colors of the member stars is used to indicate the pair in the bottom panel. The black-dashed line in the bottom panel indicates the distance below which two sink particles are assumed to merge. In the intermediate-﹩\dot{M}﹩ case, we do not follow the individual dynamics of the mini-triplet after t = 5.5 × 104 yr (dashed, see Paper I). In the high-﹩\dot{M}﹩ case, the second sink particle does not appear in the plot as it merges with the first one at Δt = 100 yr, before the beginning of the plot.
Paper: Formation of Massive and Wide First-star Binaries in Radiation Hydrodynamic Simulations
Authors: Kazuyuki Sugimura, Tomoaki Matsumoto, Takashi Hosokawa, Shingo Hirano, Kazuyuki Omukai
Figure caption: Face-on slice density in the low-﹩\dot{M}﹩ (top), intermediate-﹩\dot{M}﹩ (middle), and high-﹩\dot{M}﹩ (bottom) cases at Δt = 3000 yr (left), 10,000 yr (middle), and 30,000 yr (right) since the first protostar formation. The projected positions of the sink particles are shown as open circles, with their masses indicated in M ⊙. Note that the size of the sink particles shown is larger than the actual size for better visibility. In the right column, we show the trajectories of the most and second most massive protostars.
Paper: Formation of Massive and Wide First-star Binaries in Radiation Hydrodynamic Simulations
Authors: Kazuyuki Sugimura, Tomoaki Matsumoto, Takashi Hosokawa, Shingo Hirano, Kazuyuki Omukai
Figure caption: The radial profiles of physical quantities just before the first protostar formation for the three clouds (low-﹩\dot{M}﹩, green dotted; intermediate-﹩\dot{M}﹩, orange dashed; and high-﹩\dot{M}﹩, blue solid). From top to bottom, the density n H, temperature T, inflow rate ﹩\dot{M}﹩, degree of rotational support f Kepler, and turbulent Mach number ﹩{{ \mathcal M }}_{\mathrm{turb}}﹩ are plotted.
Paper: Formation of Massive and Wide First-star Binaries in Radiation Hydrodynamic Simulations
Authors: Kazuyuki Sugimura, Tomoaki Matsumoto, Takashi Hosokawa, Shingo Hirano, Kazuyuki Omukai
Figure caption: Same as Figure 3 but for the edge-on slice temperature. The bipolar photoionization and photodissociation fronts are demarcated with solid and dashed lines. The gas velocity is indicated by arrows whose length is proportional to its amplitude.
Paper: Formation of Massive and Wide First-star Binaries in Radiation Hydrodynamic Simulations
Authors: Kazuyuki Sugimura, Tomoaki Matsumoto, Takashi Hosokawa, Shingo Hirano, Kazuyuki Omukai
Figure caption: The state of the cloud cores just before the formation of the first protostars. We show the density rendered image for the low-﹩\dot{M}﹩ (left), intermediate-﹩\dot{M}﹩ (middle), and high-﹩\dot{M}﹩ (right) clouds.
Paper: How to Detect an Astrophysical Nanohertz Gravitational Wave Background
Authors: Bence Bécsy, Neil J. Cornish, Patrick M. Meyers, Luke Zoltan Kelley, Gabriella Agazie, Akash Anumarlapudi, Anne M. Archibald, Zaven Arzoumanian, Paul T. Baker, Laura Blecha, Adam Brazier, Paul R. Brook, Sarah Burke-Spolaor, J. Andrew Casey-Clyde, Maria Charisi, Shami Chatterjee, Katerina Chatziioannou, Tyler Cohen, James M. Cordes, Fronefield Crawford, H. Thankful Cromartie, Kathryn Crowter, Megan E. DeCesar, Paul B. Demorest, Timothy Dolch, Elizabeth C. Ferrara, William Fiore, Emmanuel Fonseca, Gabriel E. Freedman, Nate Garver-Daniels, Peter A. Gentile, Joseph Glaser, Deborah C. Good, Kayhan Gültekin, Jeffrey S. Hazboun, Sophie Hourihane, Ross J. Jennings, Aaron D. Johnson, Megan L. Jones, Andrew R. Kaiser, David L. Kaplan, Matthew Kerr, Joey S. Key, Nima Laal, Michael T. Lam, William G. Lamb, T. Joseph W. Lazio, Natalia Lewandowska, Tyson B. Littenberg, Tingting Liu, Duncan R. Lorimer, Jing Luo, Ryan S. Lynch, Chung-Pei Ma, Dustin R. Madison, Alexander McEwen, James W. McKee, Maura A. McLaughlin, Natasha McMann, Bradley W. Meyers, Chiara M. F. Mingarelli, Andrea Mitridate, Cherry Ng, David J. Nice, Stella Koch Ocker, Ken D. Olum, Timothy T. Pennucci, Benetge B. P. Perera, Nihan S. Pol, Henri A. Radovan, Scott M. Ransom, Paul S. Ray, Joseph D. Romano, Shashwat C. Sardesai, Ann Schmiedekamp, Carl Schmiedekamp, Kai Schmitz, Brent J. Shapiro-Albert, Xavier Siemens, Joseph Simon, Magdalena S. Siwek, Sophia V. Sosa Fiscella, Ingrid H. Stairs, Daniel R. Stinebring, Kevin Stovall, Abhimanyu Susobhanan, Joseph K. Swiggum, Stephen R. Taylor, Jacob E. Turner, Caner Unal, Michele Vallisneri, Rutger van Haasteren, Sarah J. Vigeland, Haley M. Wahl, Caitlin A. Witt, Olivia Young
Figure caption: Distribution of recovered median ﹩{\mathrm{log}}_{10}{A}_{0.1{\mathrm{yr}}^{-1}}﹩ and γ GWB values from a 14-frequency CURN analysis of 773 realizations (blue). Also shown are the values we obtain from a simple least-squares fit to the first five (orange) and first 14 (green) frequency bins of the simulated spectra, and the parameters reported in Agazie et al. (2023a) based on the NANOGrav 15 yr data set (red). The contours represent 99.7% levels (3σ), and the dots show the medians. The one-dimensional marginal distributions are also shown, and the 95.4% intervals (2σ) are highlighted for some of the distributions. While the NANOGrav results show a γ GWB value lower than the 13/3 value expected from circular GW-driven GWB (gray), it is well within the spread of γ GWB values found in our simulated data sets.
Paper: How to Detect an Astrophysical Nanohertz Gravitational Wave Background
Authors: Bence Bécsy, Neil J. Cornish, Patrick M. Meyers, Luke Zoltan Kelley, Gabriella Agazie, Akash Anumarlapudi, Anne M. Archibald, Zaven Arzoumanian, Paul T. Baker, Laura Blecha, Adam Brazier, Paul R. Brook, Sarah Burke-Spolaor, J. Andrew Casey-Clyde, Maria Charisi, Shami Chatterjee, Katerina Chatziioannou, Tyler Cohen, James M. Cordes, Fronefield Crawford, H. Thankful Cromartie, Kathryn Crowter, Megan E. DeCesar, Paul B. Demorest, Timothy Dolch, Elizabeth C. Ferrara, William Fiore, Emmanuel Fonseca, Gabriel E. Freedman, Nate Garver-Daniels, Peter A. Gentile, Joseph Glaser, Deborah C. Good, Kayhan Gültekin, Jeffrey S. Hazboun, Sophie Hourihane, Ross J. Jennings, Aaron D. Johnson, Megan L. Jones, Andrew R. Kaiser, David L. Kaplan, Matthew Kerr, Joey S. Key, Nima Laal, Michael T. Lam, William G. Lamb, T. Joseph W. Lazio, Natalia Lewandowska, Tyson B. Littenberg, Tingting Liu, Duncan R. Lorimer, Jing Luo, Ryan S. Lynch, Chung-Pei Ma, Dustin R. Madison, Alexander McEwen, James W. McKee, Maura A. McLaughlin, Natasha McMann, Bradley W. Meyers, Chiara M. F. Mingarelli, Andrea Mitridate, Cherry Ng, David J. Nice, Stella Koch Ocker, Ken D. Olum, Timothy T. Pennucci, Benetge B. P. Perera, Nihan S. Pol, Henri A. Radovan, Scott M. Ransom, Paul S. Ray, Joseph D. Romano, Shashwat C. Sardesai, Ann Schmiedekamp, Carl Schmiedekamp, Kai Schmitz, Brent J. Shapiro-Albert, Xavier Siemens, Joseph Simon, Magdalena S. Siwek, Sophia V. Sosa Fiscella, Ingrid H. Stairs, Daniel R. Stinebring, Kevin Stovall, Abhimanyu Susobhanan, Joseph K. Swiggum, Stephen R. Taylor, Jacob E. Turner, Caner Unal, Michele Vallisneri, Rutger van Haasteren, Sarah J. Vigeland, Haley M. Wahl, Caitlin A. Witt, Olivia Young
Figure caption: Distribution of HD vs. CURN BFs for all 773 realizations (blue) and for 14 realizations with a recovered amplitude consistent with the amplitude recovered in the NANOGrav 15 yr analysis at the 90% confidence level (purple). Also shown are the means of these distributions (dashed vertical lines) and the BF reported in Agazie et al. (2023a) based on the NANOGrav 15 yr data set (red). While this particular astrophysical model predicts amplitudes and BFs that tend to be lower than the one found in the NANOGrav 15 yr data set, if we select a subset of these that produce a consistent amplitude, they also show good consistency in terms of BF.
Paper: How to Detect an Astrophysical Nanohertz Gravitational Wave Background
Authors: Bence Bécsy, Neil J. Cornish, Patrick M. Meyers, Luke Zoltan Kelley, Gabriella Agazie, Akash Anumarlapudi, Anne M. Archibald, Zaven Arzoumanian, Paul T. Baker, Laura Blecha, Adam Brazier, Paul R. Brook, Sarah Burke-Spolaor, J. Andrew Casey-Clyde, Maria Charisi, Shami Chatterjee, Katerina Chatziioannou, Tyler Cohen, James M. Cordes, Fronefield Crawford, H. Thankful Cromartie, Kathryn Crowter, Megan E. DeCesar, Paul B. Demorest, Timothy Dolch, Elizabeth C. Ferrara, William Fiore, Emmanuel Fonseca, Gabriel E. Freedman, Nate Garver-Daniels, Peter A. Gentile, Joseph Glaser, Deborah C. Good, Kayhan Gültekin, Jeffrey S. Hazboun, Sophie Hourihane, Ross J. Jennings, Aaron D. Johnson, Megan L. Jones, Andrew R. Kaiser, David L. Kaplan, Matthew Kerr, Joey S. Key, Nima Laal, Michael T. Lam, William G. Lamb, T. Joseph W. Lazio, Natalia Lewandowska, Tyson B. Littenberg, Tingting Liu, Duncan R. Lorimer, Jing Luo, Ryan S. Lynch, Chung-Pei Ma, Dustin R. Madison, Alexander McEwen, James W. McKee, Maura A. McLaughlin, Natasha McMann, Bradley W. Meyers, Chiara M. F. Mingarelli, Andrea Mitridate, Cherry Ng, David J. Nice, Stella Koch Ocker, Ken D. Olum, Timothy T. Pennucci, Benetge B. P. Perera, Nihan S. Pol, Henri A. Radovan, Scott M. Ransom, Paul S. Ray, Joseph D. Romano, Shashwat C. Sardesai, Ann Schmiedekamp, Carl Schmiedekamp, Kai Schmitz, Brent J. Shapiro-Albert, Xavier Siemens, Joseph Simon, Magdalena S. Siwek, Sophia V. Sosa Fiscella, Ingrid H. Stairs, Daniel R. Stinebring, Kevin Stovall, Abhimanyu Susobhanan, Joseph K. Swiggum, Stephen R. Taylor, Jacob E. Turner, Caner Unal, Michele Vallisneri, Rutger van Haasteren, Sarah J. Vigeland, Haley M. Wahl, Caitlin A. Witt, Olivia Young
Figure caption: HD vs. CURN BFs as a function of the recovered GWB amplitude referenced at f = 0.1yr−1 (blue dots). While there is a correlation between the amplitude and the BF, the BFs show significant variance even at a given amplitude. Also shown is the BF and amplitude reported in Agazie et al. (2023a) based on the NANOGrav 15 yr data set (red).
Paper: How to Detect an Astrophysical Nanohertz Gravitational Wave Background
Authors: Bence Bécsy, Neil J. Cornish, Patrick M. Meyers, Luke Zoltan Kelley, Gabriella Agazie, Akash Anumarlapudi, Anne M. Archibald, Zaven Arzoumanian, Paul T. Baker, Laura Blecha, Adam Brazier, Paul R. Brook, Sarah Burke-Spolaor, J. Andrew Casey-Clyde, Maria Charisi, Shami Chatterjee, Katerina Chatziioannou, Tyler Cohen, James M. Cordes, Fronefield Crawford, H. Thankful Cromartie, Kathryn Crowter, Megan E. DeCesar, Paul B. Demorest, Timothy Dolch, Elizabeth C. Ferrara, William Fiore, Emmanuel Fonseca, Gabriel E. Freedman, Nate Garver-Daniels, Peter A. Gentile, Joseph Glaser, Deborah C. Good, Kayhan Gültekin, Jeffrey S. Hazboun, Sophie Hourihane, Ross J. Jennings, Aaron D. Johnson, Megan L. Jones, Andrew R. Kaiser, David L. Kaplan, Matthew Kerr, Joey S. Key, Nima Laal, Michael T. Lam, William G. Lamb, T. Joseph W. Lazio, Natalia Lewandowska, Tyson B. Littenberg, Tingting Liu, Duncan R. Lorimer, Jing Luo, Ryan S. Lynch, Chung-Pei Ma, Dustin R. Madison, Alexander McEwen, James W. McKee, Maura A. McLaughlin, Natasha McMann, Bradley W. Meyers, Chiara M. F. Mingarelli, Andrea Mitridate, Cherry Ng, David J. Nice, Stella Koch Ocker, Ken D. Olum, Timothy T. Pennucci, Benetge B. P. Perera, Nihan S. Pol, Henri A. Radovan, Scott M. Ransom, Paul S. Ray, Joseph D. Romano, Shashwat C. Sardesai, Ann Schmiedekamp, Carl Schmiedekamp, Kai Schmitz, Brent J. Shapiro-Albert, Xavier Siemens, Joseph Simon, Magdalena S. Siwek, Sophia V. Sosa Fiscella, Ingrid H. Stairs, Daniel R. Stinebring, Kevin Stovall, Abhimanyu Susobhanan, Joseph K. Swiggum, Stephen R. Taylor, Jacob E. Turner, Caner Unal, Michele Vallisneri, Rutger van Haasteren, Sarah J. Vigeland, Haley M. Wahl, Caitlin A. Witt, Olivia Young
Figure caption: Mean and median GWB spectra over 773 realizations. Also shown is the spectrum after removing the contribution of the brightest binary in each frequency bin. The shaded regions show the range of spectra between the 5th and 95th percentile. We also show a power-law spectrum with a canonical 13/3 slope as a reference.