adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: Constraining the Dense Matter Equation of State with New NICER Mass–Radius Measurements and New Chiral Effective Field Theory Inputs
Authors: Nathan Rutherford, Melissa Mendes, Isak Svensson, Achim Schwenk, Anna L. Watts, Kai Hebeler, Jonas Keller, Chanda Prescod-Weinstein, Devarshi Choudhury, Geert Raaijmakers, Tuomo Salmi, Patrick Timmerman, Serena Vinciguerra, Sebastien Guillot, James M. Lattimer
Figure caption: Mass–radius posterior distributions for the “Baseline” (upper panels) and “New” (lower panels) scenarios using the PP model (left panels) and the CS model (right panels). The dark (light) green regions and the inner (outer) red curves encompass the 68% (95%) credible regions using the N3LO χEFT band up to 1.5n 0 and 1.1n 0, respectively.
Paper: Constraining the Dense Matter Equation of State with New NICER Mass–Radius Measurements and New Chiral Effective Field Theory Inputs
Authors: Nathan Rutherford, Melissa Mendes, Isak Svensson, Achim Schwenk, Anna L. Watts, Kai Hebeler, Jonas Keller, Chanda Prescod-Weinstein, Devarshi Choudhury, Geert Raaijmakers, Tuomo Salmi, Patrick Timmerman, Serena Vinciguerra, Sebastien Guillot, James M. Lattimer
Figure caption: Pressure–energy density posterior distributions for the “Baseline” (upper panels) and “New” (lower panels) scenarios using the PP model (left panels) and the CS model (right panels). The dark (light) green regions encompass the 68% (95%) credible regions, while the dotted red lines represent the corresponding prior distributions using the N3LO χEFT band up to 1.5n 0. The vertical thin lines mark the transition density to the high-density PP and CS extensions.
Paper: Constraining the Dense Matter Equation of State with New NICER Mass–Radius Measurements and New Chiral Effective Field Theory Inputs
Authors: Nathan Rutherford, Melissa Mendes, Isak Svensson, Achim Schwenk, Anna L. Watts, Kai Hebeler, Jonas Keller, Chanda Prescod-Weinstein, Devarshi Choudhury, Geert Raaijmakers, Tuomo Salmi, Patrick Timmerman, Serena Vinciguerra, Sebastien Guillot, James M. Lattimer
Figure caption: Overview of NICER sources (68% and 95% credible regions for mass–radius) for the “Baseline” scenario (J0740 results from Salmi et al. 2022 and J0030 NICER-only results from Vinciguerra et al. 2024) and the “New” scenario (J0437 results from Choudhury et al. 2024, J0740 results from Salmi et al. 2024, and the ST+PDT solution for J0030, including background constraints, from Vinciguerra et al. 2024). For the “Baseline” scenario, we show for comparison the 68% (95%) credible regions from Riley et al. (2021) and Riley et al. (2019) as dotted (dashed) lines, which were used in Raaijmakers et al. (2021a).
Paper: Constraining the Dense Matter Equation of State with New NICER Mass–Radius Measurements and New Chiral Effective Field Theory Inputs
Authors: Nathan Rutherford, Melissa Mendes, Isak Svensson, Achim Schwenk, Anna L. Watts, Kai Hebeler, Jonas Keller, Chanda Prescod-Weinstein, Devarshi Choudhury, Geert Raaijmakers, Tuomo Salmi, Patrick Timmerman, Serena Vinciguerra, Sebastien Guillot, James M. Lattimer
Figure caption: Overview of NICER sources (68% and 95% credible regions for mass–radius), for details see Table 2, with the “Baseline” scenario and the three new scenarios with the new J0437 and J0740 NICER results (Choudhury et al. 2024; Salmi et al. 2024) and exploring the three possible solutions for J0030 from Vinciguerra et al. (2024). For the “Baseline” scenario, we show for comparison the 68% (95%) credible regions from Riley et al. (2019, 2021) as dotted (dashed) lines, which were used in Raaijmakers et al. (2021a).
Paper: Constraining the Dense Matter Equation of State with New NICER Mass–Radius Measurements and New Chiral Effective Field Theory Inputs
Authors: Nathan Rutherford, Melissa Mendes, Isak Svensson, Achim Schwenk, Anna L. Watts, Kai Hebeler, Jonas Keller, Chanda Prescod-Weinstein, Devarshi Choudhury, Geert Raaijmakers, Tuomo Salmi, Patrick Timmerman, Serena Vinciguerra, Sebastien Guillot, James M. Lattimer
Figure caption: Mass–radius posterior distributions showing the 2D histogram for the “New” scenario using the N3LO χEFT band up to 1.5n 0. The dark shaded hexagons indicate a lower number of mass–radius samples, while the lighter shaded hexagons indicate a higher number of mass–radius samples. The insets show the radius distribution for a 1.4 M ⊙ star, indicated by the black dashed lines.
Paper: Constraining the Dense Matter Equation of State with New NICER Mass–Radius Measurements and New Chiral Effective Field Theory Inputs
Authors: Nathan Rutherford, Melissa Mendes, Isak Svensson, Achim Schwenk, Anna L. Watts, Kai Hebeler, Jonas Keller, Chanda Prescod-Weinstein, Devarshi Choudhury, Geert Raaijmakers, Tuomo Salmi, Patrick Timmerman, Serena Vinciguerra, Sebastien Guillot, James M. Lattimer
Figure caption: The same as Figure 9, but for the maximum mass M TOV vs. ΔR = R 2.0 − R 1.4.
Paper: TOI-1408: Discovery and Photodynamical Modeling of a Small Inner Companion to a Hot Jupiter Revealed by Transit Timing Variations
Authors: Judith Korth, Priyanka Chaturvedi, Hannu Parviainen, Ilaria Carleo, Michael Endl, Eike W. Guenther, Grzegorz Nowak, Carina M. Persson, Phillip J. MacQueen, Alexander J. Mustill, Juan Cabrera, William D. Cochran, Jorge Lillo-Box, David Hobbs, Felipe Murgas, Michael Greklek-McKeon, Hanna Kellermann, Guillaume Hébrard, Akihiko Fukui, Enric Pallé, Jon M. Jenkins, Joseph D. Twicken, Karen A. Collins, Samuel N. Quinn, Ján Šubjak, Paul G. Beck, Davide Gandolfi, Savita Mathur, Hans J. Deeg, David W. Latham, Simon Albrecht, David Barrado, Isabelle Boisse, Hervé Bouy, Xavier Delfosse, Olivier Demangeon, Rafael A. García, Artie P. Hatzes, Neda Heidari, Kai Ikuta, Petr Kabáth, Heather A. Knutson, John Livingston, Eder Martioli, María Morales-Calderón, Giuseppe Morello, Norio Narita, Jaume Orell-Miquel, Hanna L. M. Osborne, Dinil B. Palakkatharappil, Viktoria Pinter, Seth Redfield, Howard M. Relles, Richard P. Schwarz, Sara Seager, Avi Shporer, Marek Skarka, Gregor Srdoc, Monika Stangret, Luis Thomas, Vincent Van Eylen, Noriharu Watanabe, Joshua N. Winn
Figure caption: Photometry from TESS (top) and the RV measurements from different instruments (bottom) with the posterior models from the photodynamical analysis. The photometry is centered around the transit centers, with light gray points showing the raw photometry and black points with error bars showing the photometry binned to 7 minutes. The RV figure shows the RV observations as black symbols with error bars, the photodynamical RV model as a green line, and the quadratic trend as a black dashed line. The gray symbols mark observations with uncertainties >25 m s−1, and the black symbols observations with uncertainties <25 m s−1. See Figure 5 in Appendix A for the ground-based photometry of TOI-1408 b and Figure 6 in Appendix B for a detailed illustration of the RV observations and the RV model.
Paper: TOI-1408: Discovery and Photodynamical Modeling of a Small Inner Companion to a Hot Jupiter Revealed by Transit Timing Variations
Authors: Judith Korth, Priyanka Chaturvedi, Hannu Parviainen, Ilaria Carleo, Michael Endl, Eike W. Guenther, Grzegorz Nowak, Carina M. Persson, Phillip J. MacQueen, Alexander J. Mustill, Juan Cabrera, William D. Cochran, Jorge Lillo-Box, David Hobbs, Felipe Murgas, Michael Greklek-McKeon, Hanna Kellermann, Guillaume Hébrard, Akihiko Fukui, Enric Pallé, Jon M. Jenkins, Joseph D. Twicken, Karen A. Collins, Samuel N. Quinn, Ján Šubjak, Paul G. Beck, Davide Gandolfi, Savita Mathur, Hans J. Deeg, David W. Latham, Simon Albrecht, David Barrado, Isabelle Boisse, Hervé Bouy, Xavier Delfosse, Olivier Demangeon, Rafael A. García, Artie P. Hatzes, Neda Heidari, Kai Ikuta, Petr Kabáth, Heather A. Knutson, John Livingston, Eder Martioli, María Morales-Calderón, Giuseppe Morello, Norio Narita, Jaume Orell-Miquel, Hanna L. M. Osborne, Dinil B. Palakkatharappil, Viktoria Pinter, Seth Redfield, Howard M. Relles, Richard P. Schwarz, Sara Seager, Avi Shporer, Marek Skarka, Gregor Srdoc, Monika Stangret, Luis Thomas, Vincent Van Eylen, Noriharu Watanabe, Joshua N. Winn
Figure caption: Posterior TTV model from the photodynamical modeling of TOI-1408 c (upper panel) and TOI-1408 b (lower panel). The colored lines span the 0.5 to 99.5 percentiles of the TTV model posterior distribution from the photodynamical analysis, but the uncertainties are mostly smaller than the line width. The dashed lines mark the subtracted mean orbital periods and the TTVs with their individual uncertainties measured by fitting each transit center separately are shown as black (TESS) and gray (ground-based) points with error bars for comparison.
Paper: TOI-1408: Discovery and Photodynamical Modeling of a Small Inner Companion to a Hot Jupiter Revealed by Transit Timing Variations
Authors: Judith Korth, Priyanka Chaturvedi, Hannu Parviainen, Ilaria Carleo, Michael Endl, Eike W. Guenther, Grzegorz Nowak, Carina M. Persson, Phillip J. MacQueen, Alexander J. Mustill, Juan Cabrera, William D. Cochran, Jorge Lillo-Box, David Hobbs, Felipe Murgas, Michael Greklek-McKeon, Hanna Kellermann, Guillaume Hébrard, Akihiko Fukui, Enric Pallé, Jon M. Jenkins, Joseph D. Twicken, Karen A. Collins, Samuel N. Quinn, Ján Šubjak, Paul G. Beck, Davide Gandolfi, Savita Mathur, Hans J. Deeg, David W. Latham, Simon Albrecht, David Barrado, Isabelle Boisse, Hervé Bouy, Xavier Delfosse, Olivier Demangeon, Rafael A. García, Artie P. Hatzes, Neda Heidari, Kai Ikuta, Petr Kabáth, Heather A. Knutson, John Livingston, Eder Martioli, María Morales-Calderón, Giuseppe Morello, Norio Narita, Jaume Orell-Miquel, Hanna L. M. Osborne, Dinil B. Palakkatharappil, Viktoria Pinter, Seth Redfield, Howard M. Relles, Richard P. Schwarz, Sara Seager, Avi Shporer, Marek Skarka, Gregor Srdoc, Monika Stangret, Luis Thomas, Vincent Van Eylen, Noriharu Watanabe, Joshua N. Winn
Figure caption: Resonant behavior of the TOI-1408 b–c pair. Left: behavior of the single-planet resonant argument, θ c, from the photodynamical simulations, showing libration about zero. Right: the same solution, transformed to the canonical resonance model of Nesvorný & Vokrouhlický (2016), where Ψ is a function of both planets’ eccentricities, and ψ of both planets’ resonant arguments, although both are dominated by inner planet c. This numerical solution is marked in salmon, and ψ librates about π. However, a comparison to level curves of the Hamiltonian (gray, with black marking the analytical curve corresponding to the numerical solution) shows that no resonant separatrix exists for these system parameters.
Paper: TOI-1408: Discovery and Photodynamical Modeling of a Small Inner Companion to a Hot Jupiter Revealed by Transit Timing Variations
Authors: Judith Korth, Priyanka Chaturvedi, Hannu Parviainen, Ilaria Carleo, Michael Endl, Eike W. Guenther, Grzegorz Nowak, Carina M. Persson, Phillip J. MacQueen, Alexander J. Mustill, Juan Cabrera, William D. Cochran, Jorge Lillo-Box, David Hobbs, Felipe Murgas, Michael Greklek-McKeon, Hanna Kellermann, Guillaume Hébrard, Akihiko Fukui, Enric Pallé, Jon M. Jenkins, Joseph D. Twicken, Karen A. Collins, Samuel N. Quinn, Ján Šubjak, Paul G. Beck, Davide Gandolfi, Savita Mathur, Hans J. Deeg, David W. Latham, Simon Albrecht, David Barrado, Isabelle Boisse, Hervé Bouy, Xavier Delfosse, Olivier Demangeon, Rafael A. García, Artie P. Hatzes, Neda Heidari, Kai Ikuta, Petr Kabáth, Heather A. Knutson, John Livingston, Eder Martioli, María Morales-Calderón, Giuseppe Morello, Norio Narita, Jaume Orell-Miquel, Hanna L. M. Osborne, Dinil B. Palakkatharappil, Viktoria Pinter, Seth Redfield, Howard M. Relles, Richard P. Schwarz, Sara Seager, Avi Shporer, Marek Skarka, Gregor Srdoc, Monika Stangret, Luis Thomas, Vincent Van Eylen, Noriharu Watanabe, Joshua N. Winn
Figure caption: RV observations together with the model from the photodynamical analysis. One line covers 20 TOI-1408 b periods, after which the data and the model are offset down by 800 m s−1. The vertical bar at line 1 shows the scale, spanning the RV range from −400 to 400 m s−1. The light gray symbols mark RV observations with uncertainties larger than 25 m s−1, and the black symbols observations with uncertainties smaller than 25 m s−1.
Paper: TOI-1408: Discovery and Photodynamical Modeling of a Small Inner Companion to a Hot Jupiter Revealed by Transit Timing Variations
Authors: Judith Korth, Priyanka Chaturvedi, Hannu Parviainen, Ilaria Carleo, Michael Endl, Eike W. Guenther, Grzegorz Nowak, Carina M. Persson, Phillip J. MacQueen, Alexander J. Mustill, Juan Cabrera, William D. Cochran, Jorge Lillo-Box, David Hobbs, Felipe Murgas, Michael Greklek-McKeon, Hanna Kellermann, Guillaume Hébrard, Akihiko Fukui, Enric Pallé, Jon M. Jenkins, Joseph D. Twicken, Karen A. Collins, Samuel N. Quinn, Ján Šubjak, Paul G. Beck, Davide Gandolfi, Savita Mathur, Hans J. Deeg, David W. Latham, Simon Albrecht, David Barrado, Isabelle Boisse, Hervé Bouy, Xavier Delfosse, Olivier Demangeon, Rafael A. García, Artie P. Hatzes, Neda Heidari, Kai Ikuta, Petr Kabáth, Heather A. Knutson, John Livingston, Eder Martioli, María Morales-Calderón, Giuseppe Morello, Norio Narita, Jaume Orell-Miquel, Hanna L. M. Osborne, Dinil B. Palakkatharappil, Viktoria Pinter, Seth Redfield, Howard M. Relles, Richard P. Schwarz, Sara Seager, Avi Shporer, Marek Skarka, Gregor Srdoc, Monika Stangret, Luis Thomas, Vincent Van Eylen, Noriharu Watanabe, Joshua N. Winn
Figure caption: Two-dimensional MEGNO maps probing the stability near the posterior solution from the photodynamical analysis. The color indicates the orbital stability, and the dashed lines show the parameter posterior median values listed in Table 4.
Paper: TOI-1408: Discovery and Photodynamical Modeling of a Small Inner Companion to a Hot Jupiter Revealed by Transit Timing Variations
Authors: Judith Korth, Priyanka Chaturvedi, Hannu Parviainen, Ilaria Carleo, Michael Endl, Eike W. Guenther, Grzegorz Nowak, Carina M. Persson, Phillip J. MacQueen, Alexander J. Mustill, Juan Cabrera, William D. Cochran, Jorge Lillo-Box, David Hobbs, Felipe Murgas, Michael Greklek-McKeon, Hanna Kellermann, Guillaume Hébrard, Akihiko Fukui, Enric Pallé, Jon M. Jenkins, Joseph D. Twicken, Karen A. Collins, Samuel N. Quinn, Ján Šubjak, Paul G. Beck, Davide Gandolfi, Savita Mathur, Hans J. Deeg, David W. Latham, Simon Albrecht, David Barrado, Isabelle Boisse, Hervé Bouy, Xavier Delfosse, Olivier Demangeon, Rafael A. García, Artie P. Hatzes, Neda Heidari, Kai Ikuta, Petr Kabáth, Heather A. Knutson, John Livingston, Eder Martioli, María Morales-Calderón, Giuseppe Morello, Norio Narita, Jaume Orell-Miquel, Hanna L. M. Osborne, Dinil B. Palakkatharappil, Viktoria Pinter, Seth Redfield, Howard M. Relles, Richard P. Schwarz, Sara Seager, Avi Shporer, Marek Skarka, Gregor Srdoc, Monika Stangret, Luis Thomas, Vincent Van Eylen, Noriharu Watanabe, Joshua N. Winn
Figure caption: Ground-based transit measurements observed with the different facilities shown as gray points, the same points binned to 15 minutes as black points with error bars, and the photodynamical model in blue.
Paper: Star Formation by Supernova Implosion
Authors: Leonard E. C. Romano, Andreas Burkert, Manuel Behrendt
Figure caption: Star formation efficiency per freefall time as a function of density for various models in the cyclic scenario. In panels (a), (b), and (c) the star formation efficiency ϵ ⋆, cloud overdensity χ, and stellar-population lifetime t delay, respectively, are varied, while the remaining two parameters are kept at their respective fiducial values of ﹩\left({\epsilon }_{\star }^{\mathrm{fid}},{\chi }^{\mathrm{fid}},{t}_{\mathrm{delay}}^{\mathrm{fid}}\right)=(0.1,3,3\,\mathrm{Myr})﹩. Below the solid black line in panel (a) not enough stars are formed to reliably maintain cyclic star formation (Equation (15)). The dashed, dotted–dashed, and dotted black lines correspond to the lower limit for the density below which shock breakout is expected to affect the dynamics for various values of the ISM velocity dispersion σ 10 (Equation (18)). The blue line and shaded area correspond to the value of ϵ ff and its uncertainty derived from observations on scales of ∼100 pc (Schinnerer & Leroy 2024).
Paper: Star Formation by Supernova Implosion
Authors: Leonard E. C. Romano, Andreas Burkert, Manuel Behrendt
Figure caption: A schematic overview of SN-implosion-triggered star formation. In this process, an explosion from a central source drives a shock (I), which eventually implodes (II) and leads to the formation of a central cloud (III). The central cloud grows and eventually becomes gravitationally unstable, leading to star formation (IV). Depending on whether there are newly formed massive stars, this cycle can repeat. The arrows connecting the different stages are decorated with the corresponding transition timescales defined in Equations (5), (7), (10), and (12). The cloud formation time t cf is measured from the time of the explosion, so the time between implosion and cloud formation is t cf − t launch.
Paper: Star Formation by Supernova Implosion
Authors: Leonard E. C. Romano, Andreas Burkert, Manuel Behrendt
Figure caption: Same as Figure 2 but in the case of the single-burst scenario. Panel (c) shows the dependency of ϵ ff with respect to ﹩{N}_{\mathrm{SN}}﹩, with a fiducial value of ﹩{N}_{\mathrm{SN}}^{\mathrm{fid}}=1﹩. Here the dashed, dotted–dashed, and dotted black lines correspond to the upper limit of the density above which shock breakout is expected to affect the dynamics for various values of the ISM velocity dispersion σ 10 (Equation (17)).
Paper: Fragmentation in Gravitationally Unstable Collapsar Disks and Subsolar Neutron Star Mergers
Authors: Brian D. Metzger, Lam Hui, Matteo Cantiello
Figure caption: Properties of marginally Toomre-stable (Q = 1.5 ≈ Q 0) collapsar disks as a function of the radius of the disk annulus r = R d for an assumed central black hole mass M • = 10 M ⊙ and viscosity α = 0.03. Top panel: estimated electron fraction Y  e  after one accretion time (Equation (9); black solid) and equilibrium electron fraction Y  e,eq (Equation (8); black dashed); disk aspect ratio h/r (blue); midplane temperature T (brown); free nucleon mass-fraction X nuc (green); accretion rate ﹩\dot{M}﹩ (red). Middle panel: neutrino-cooling time t cool (black); dynamical/orbital time t dyn = 2π/Ω (brown); neutronization timescale ﹩{t}_{{\rm{n}}}={\lambda }_{{e}^{-}p}^{-1}﹩ (red); accretion time t acc (blue). Bottom panel: local disk mass ﹩{M}_{{\rm{d}}}=2\pi {R}_{{\rm{d}}}^{2}{\rm{\Sigma }}﹩ (red); characteristic mass of the gravitationally unstable region M clump = π h 2Σ (black); Chandrasekhar mass M Ch, shown separately for the estimated disk electron fraction Y  e  (solid brown) and for the equilibrium electron fraction Y  e,eq (dashed brown); gap opening mass M gap (blue), above which a bound clump is sufficiently massive to open a gap within the disk.
Paper: Fragmentation in Gravitationally Unstable Collapsar Disks and Subsolar Neutron Star Mergers
Authors: Brian D. Metzger, Lam Hui, Matteo Cantiello
Figure caption: Schematic illustration of the stages of the presented model: (1) core collapse of a massive rotating star, generating an accretion disk that feeds the central black hole at a high rate ﹩\dot{M}\gtrsim {M}_{\odot }﹩ s−1. Subsequent fragmentation of the disk at radii R d ≳ 100R g where Q ≲ Q 0 ∼ 1 leads to the collapse and formation of gravitationally bound compact objects, potentially including tight binaries containing subsolar-mass NSs; (2) binary mergers of the NSs formed within the disk lead to LIGO/Virgo-band gravitational-wave coalescence events, r-process mass ejection, and the creation of energetic compact merger remnants, potentially including accreting black holes and millisecond magnetars (the ordinarily discussed central engines of short GRBs). Along with the disk winds and relativistic jet associated with accretion onto the central black hole, these processes feed energy and r-process elements into the unbound ejecta shell from the exploding star; (3) the remaining compact remnant(s), potentially following a chain of hierarchical merging, inspiral into the central black hole, producing a final merger in the LIGO/Virgo band.
Paper: Detecting Gravitational-wave Bursts from Black Hole Binaries in the Galactic Center with LISA
Authors: Alan M. Knee, Jess McIver, Smadar Naoz, Isobel M. Romero-Shaw, Bao-Minh Hoang, Evgeni Grishin
Figure caption: Simulated LISA observations of a singular BHB source with component masses m 1 = 30 M ⊙ and m 2 = 20 M ⊙, orbiting around an M SMBH = 4 × 106 M ⊙ SMBH. The initial parameters of the inner (outer) orbits are semimajor axis a = 0.15 au (a out = 100 au), eccentricity e = 0.5 (e out = 0.01), argument of periastron ω = 0° (ω out = 0°), and inclination ι = 85° between the inner and outer orbits. The source is placed at a distance of D = 8 kpc with ecliptic latitude β = –5.°608 and longitude λ = 266.°852, corresponding to the Galactic center. The left panel shows the eccentricity evolution of the BHB over time. The inset focuses on a 1 yr interval centered on the time of maximum eccentricity (﹩{e}_{\max }\approx 0.9946﹩). The upper right panel shows the time-domain strain measured by LISA (in terms of the TDI-A channel) during this same 1 yr period, where the signal of interest is shown in blue and the total strain is in gray. The noise background is obtained from LDC-2b (Baghi 2022). The lower right panel is a spectrogram of the whitened strain, with the peak GW frequency (Equation (2)) represented by the dashed red curve.
Paper: Detecting Gravitational-wave Bursts from Black Hole Binaries in the Galactic Center with LISA
Authors: Alan M. Knee, Jess McIver, Smadar Naoz, Isobel M. Romero-Shaw, Bao-Minh Hoang, Evgeni Grishin
Figure caption: Time-frequency analysis of LISA data using the Q-transform. The data consist of simulated noise (LDC-2b; Baghi 2022) with added signals from three BHBs with masses m 1 = 30 M ⊙ and m 2 = 20 M ⊙ orbiting an M SMBH = 4 × 106 M ⊙ SMBH at the Galactic center. A fourth source located 50 kpc away is also shown. The initial BHB parameters are given in the legend. The initial outer orbit is specified by a out = 100 au and e out = 0.01 for each source. The left panel is a visualization of the raw Q-transform output (15% mismatch, SNR threshold 8) around a burst, where the time axis is given in minutes from the trigger time (t trig ≈ 54.02 days). The SNR of each tile is given by its color. The square in the center is the maximum-SNR trigger for this cluster. The right panel shows the time and SNR of all triggers (1% mismatch) with SNR above 8, each one corresponding to a detected burst.
Paper: Detecting Gravitational-wave Bursts from Black Hole Binaries in the Galactic Center with LISA
Authors: Alan M. Knee, Jess McIver, Smadar Naoz, Isobel M. Romero-Shaw, Bao-Minh Hoang, Evgeni Grishin
Figure caption: Recovered orbital period and eccentricity for three simulated BHBs with masses m 1 = 30 M ⊙ and m 2 = 20 M ⊙ orbiting an M SMBH = 4 × 106 M ⊙ SMBH at the Galactic center. The initial orbital parameters are repeated from Figure 3. The left panel shows periodograms of simulated LISA triggers over 0.5 (light red) and 1 yr (black) observing periods, calculated via Equation (5) with period step size ΔT = 500 s and jitter ϵ = 0.005. The right panel shows the reconstructed eccentricity evolution of each BHB inferred from the Q-transform triggers. The solid lines are the eccentricity calculated from the central frequencies of each trigger, and the shaded region represents the uncertainty due to the bandwidth of each trigger. The true eccentricities are shown by the dashed curves.